did add nothing to Gods power which before was absolute and as high as could be yet it did encrease their Obligation That which he afterwards affirms That he finds the Kingdom of God to signifie in most places of Scripture a Kingdom properly so named constituted by the Votes of the people of Israel in a peculiar manner is very false For 1. That Kingdom of Israel was not constituted by the Votes of the people 2. Suppose it had been so constituted and the word Kingdom of God used in many places of Scripture to signifie that government yet in the most places its never found so taken neither can any man find it most frequently taken in that sense For this is remarkable that it hardly ever so signifies in the New Testament where we have the most frequent mention of the Kingdome of God and the Kingdom of Heaven signifying the spiritual not any temporal Kingdome of God Redeemer by Christ T. H. From the Creation besides his natural reign over all he had peculiar subjects whom he commanded by a voyoc c. This Kingdom was continued in Noahs family after this God made a Covenant with Abraham and for memorial ordained the Sacrament of Circumcision And this was called the Old Covenant or Testament c. This Covenant was afterwards renewed by Moses c. G. L. The Kingdom spiritual is two-fold the first by the Power and Law of Creation requiring perfect obedience without promise of any pardon or Redeemer to expiate sin if man made holy should transgress but this government lasted not long because Adam did violate it and so the second Kingdom and government of God Redeemer by promise succeeded This continued from Adam to Noah and was renewed to Abraham with the addition of the solemn Rite of Circumcision and the promise of the Land of Canaan It was continued from Moses to the exhibition of the Messias yet with an especial appropriation of it to the people of Israel All this is clear out of Scripture and received by the general consent of all the Orthodox Christians And here by the way observe 1. That he makes no difference between the Kingdom of strict justice according to the Law of Creation and of that of Mercy in Christ according to the Law of Redemption 2. That with him the Covenant and promise to Abraham was the Old Covenant whereas the Apostle Rom. 4. and Galat. 3. affirms the contrary and makes the promise 430 years before the Law of Moses to be altogether different from the Law 3. That the Old Covenant was that between God and Israel at Mount Sinai and the New was the Gospel as may appear Heb. 8. from vers 6. unto the end 4. This new Covenant of the Gospel was promised 430 years before the Law and the Law could not make the promise of none effect For it continued in force in the time of the Law which was annexed unto it for certain ends till the Son of God should be incarnate 5. This Kingdom is distinct from Gods special government over Israel and Judah which was subordinate unto it till the Word should be made flesh and assume humane nature from the House of David Therefore Mr. Hobbs his discourse of Gods Kingdom over the Jews is confused false and bewrays either his great ignorance or negligence or wickedness But he begins to act the Critick and sits as Judge to pass sentence upon the Translations of those words of Scripture Exod. 19.5 6. Thou shalt be a peculiar treasure above all people and a Kingdom of Priests For so the Hebrew expresseth the priviledge of this people But he curiously distinguisheth between a peculiar treasure above all people and a peculiar people yet these in sense are the same and also between a sacerdotal Kingdom and a Kingdom of Priests or Royal Priesthood yet these do not differ And whereas the words are a promise of God engaging himself upon condition they will obey him he makes them a promise of the peoples giving their consent that God shall be the Lord and Soveraign But to whom was this promise made onely unto the Priest or to the Prince No such matter but to the whole Nation and every several person that shall keep the Covenant and obey God And this promise doth include the Covenant made with Abraham concerning Christ by faith in whom to come this promise was fulfilled to the Saints of old and by faith in him already come not onely to the believing Jews but Gentiles it was made good And so that place of 1 Pet. 2.9 is to be understood Which Text is not to be taken of Kings and civil Magistrates but all Christians truly such indeed For Christ by one offering hath perfected or consecrated the sanctified for ever Heb. 10.14 And washing us in his blood hath made us Kings and Priests to God his Father Rev. 1.5 6. from that one place of Exod. 19.5 6. misinterpreted by two others one of Paul to Titus 2.14 the other of 1 Pet. 2.9 and all mis-applyed He concludes that the Kingdom of God is a civil government over the Israelites wherein God was King and the high Priest after Moses his death was his sole Viceroy or Lieutenant After all this done in this manner he endeavours to make his opinion good from two places Historical three Prophetical out of the old Testament and two others out of the New Testament The two first are properly to be understood of the special government of God over Israel The three Prophetical places are meant of the spiritual Kingdom of Christ and so are the two last which are most palpably abused For the first of them relates the Angels words unto the blessed Virgin signifying that her son Jesus Christ should sit on the Throne of David and should reign over the house of Jacob for ever and of his Kingdome there should be no end Luke 1.32 33. Which is meant directly of his Spiritual Heavenly and Eternal Kingdom whereof the Kingdom of David was a Type For Christ never reigned as a temporal King over Israel according to the flesh The second place is Matth. 6.10 Where our Saviour amongst other things directs his Disciples to pray Thy Kingdom come By which Kingdom is meant the Reign of Christ Incarnate and exalted at the Right hand of God which was then to come but now hath continued 1600 years and upward and yet all Christians pray for the continuance encrease and especially the consummation of the same when death the last enemy shall be destroyed and God shall be all in all and reign most perfectly without any enemy without any opposition Yet such is his intolerable boldness that from these places thus abused he confidently concludes that the Kingdom of God is a civil government managed by the Christian Civil Soveraigns of the world That Holy is the same with Publick per accidens sometimes is true But every thing that is holy is not publick nor every thing that is publick holy Therefore his
Chrstianity but per accidens so far as the persons who are Christians are subject to the civil power And this care of the Magistrate may do much good not only in preventing all tumults and seditions about Religion as prejudicial to the peace of the State and suppress them but also protect the servants of Christ and promote Christianity very much And in this respect only I conceive Soveraigns to be in all Causes as well Ecclesiastical as Civil supreme Governors From the definition formerly given he concludes T. H. That because in all Common-wealths that assembly which is without warrant from the civil Soveraign is unlawful that Church also which is assembled in any Common-wealth that hath forbidden them to assemble is an unlawful assembly G. L. There is a diffecence between warrant permission and prohibition Acts 15. we read of a Church-assembly at Jerusalem yet without any warrant from the Roman Emperour and the same did debate determine engross and publish certain binding Canons yet I hope he dare not dictate it to be unlawful though it had been forbidden Permission perhaps they had warrant they had none There are actions and such as God commands and civil Governors forbid yet the prohibition of man cannot make void the command of God For we must obey God rather then man But he tells us T. H. That temporal and spiritual Government are but words brought into the world to make men see double and mistake their lawful Soveraign G. L. As Government the thing signified by the word is a real act so spiritual and temporal Government are two not words but things really different For there is a temporal Government which is not spiritual and spiritual which is not temporal And though he will not give us leave yet we will take it to distinguish between Church and State temporal and spiritual man and Christian For he knows and that certainly there be men who yet are no Christians States which are not Churches and temporal things which are not spiritual And those things which not only may be but actually are separated in existence must needs be really distinct The rule is infallible as its evident And he that will confound these may build a Babel but no orderly society And it s a fault to make that which is double to seem single as well as make that which is single appear to be double CAP. IX Of the third Part. The 40. of the Book Of the rights of the Kingdom of God in Abraham Moses the high Priests and the Kings of Judah HItherto Mr. Hobbs hath abused his Reader in the explication of certain words and terms used in Scripture and hath bewrayed his gross ignorance and abominable errours And as though he had laid a sure foundation whereon to ground his following discourse or at least made way for it he proceeds to prove out of the said holy writings of the Old Testament the absolute power of Christian Soveraigns and States both in matters of Religion and Civil Government And this is so done that there is little fear least any intelligent Reader should he deceived or perswaded by him because there is so great a distance between his premises and the conclusion that no wit of man is able to see the connexion or the illative force of them For he argues That because Abraham in his family Moses in Israel the high Priests after Moses in the times of Judges and the Kings from Saul to the captivity had the supreme power Civil and Ecclesiastical therefore all Christian Governors supreme have the same For this is the substance of this Chapter Yet 1. Abraham was but the Master of a family Moses a Mediator between Israel and God retaining the supreme power both temporal and spiritual in his own hands not only in his time but in the raign of Judges and the Kings The high Priests did only ask counsel of God by the Vrim and Thummim and declared it to the Rulers The Kings had no power Legislative at all but only executive according to the Laws of God they had no right unto the Sacerdotal power For Vzziah usurping that of offering Incense was smitten with leprosie Therefore his Assumption is notoriously false 2. Abraham Moses and some of the Kings were extraordinary Prophets and immediately inspired Such are not Christian Soveraigns Neither can they from God in difficult and perplexed cases receive counsel of God by Vrim and Thummim 3. Suppose all these had been invested with supreme power Civil and Ecclesiastical as they were not yet it doth not follow that therefore Christian Soveraigns are so His consequence therefore is no consequence but false 4. Here it s to be observed That no example can be drawn from the Government of Israel either under Moses or Judges or Kings because that Government all along was extraordinary And as no State Christian is bound to follow it so no State can parallel it And its in vain for Divines or any other writers to argue from that particular form of politie to any other in the world Some general Rules and practises therein may be made use of for the reproof or reformation of Government in other States His innovations and particular false glosses upon several texts are not worthy confutation CAP. X. Of the third part the 41 of his Book Of the office of our blessed Saviour THey who desire to obtain eternal salvation by Christ Jesus must know both who he is and what he hath both suffered and done for them Jesus Christ as Saviour and Redeemer for person is the eternal Son of God for Natures he is God and Man yet so that these two Natures remain distinct one from the other yet personally united For Office he is Prophet Priest and King and such he is made as man by Commission from his Heavenly Father He was Initiated at his Baptism after which time he began to exercise his three-fold power And 1. Of a Prophet to manifest that he was their Saviour and to perswade men to believe in him 2. He performed some acts of a King in making Laws and Officers 3. He acted as a Priest at his death by offering up himself that great sacrifice first by inffering and dying on earth secondly by entring the Holy place of Heaven and presenting himself as slain and so obtained eternal Redemption After his consecration finished upon the Resurrection he was made a compleat Priest for ever after the Order of Melchizedeck Upon his Resurrection he was more selemnly setled in his Throne as universal and eternal King And then in a more glorious manner began to act 1. As Prophet to teach not onely Jews but Gentiles and that not onely by his word but by his Spirit powred down from Heaven upon all flesh 2. As a Priest interceding by vertue of his blood 3. Of a King in all the acts of government in his Universal Kingdom By his sacrifice offered on earth and presented in Heaven he satisfied Gods justice offended by the
in doubtful matters men should first debate and throughly examine the thing debated before they proceed to give their voices and this is most properly and conveniently done when after a diligent search no preponderant reason can be found for either part of the proposition Mens votes are inferiour to reason and superiour Laws and are not good because votes but because agreeable to reason And whereas he alledgeth two reasons 1. That to protest against a major part is injustice 2. It puts the party protesting out of protection the answer is easie 1. That a protestation is not unjust because it is against the major part except it be against reason and right and no man will be so mad as to assent unto a major against reason which is above all votes 2. It s true that the party protesting puts himself out of the protection of that Soveraign against whom he protests but this may be a misery but no injustice T. H. The Soveraigns actions cannot be accused of injustice by the subject because he hath made himself Author of all his actions And no man can do injustice to himself The Soveraign may do iniquity but not injustice G. L. 1. The Soveraigns actions are to punish the evil and protect the good as a Soveraign he can do no other actions and these cannot be justly accused 2. Neither can the consent of the people nor doth a Commission of God give him any power to act contrary to these 3. When he acts unjustly for so he may do and all iniquity is injustice neither God nor the people are authors of such actions for he was set up by them to do justly and no waies else 4. Civil justice and injustice as they consist in formalities differ much from moral and essential justice and injustice In this respect a Prince may be civilly just and morally unjust 5. To accuse may be judicial or extra judicial Judicially a Prince as a Prince cannot be accused by his subject as such Yet the subject may represent unto his soveraign his saults and by way of humble petition desire them to be reformed T H. Whatsoever the Soveraign doth is unpunishable by the subject because if the subject punish him he punisheth another for his own actions G. L. 1. A Soveraign as a Soveraign cannot be punished by his subject as his subject 2. Yet he that is supreme only for administration may be punished and put to death Thus the Ephori might punish the Lacedaemonian Kings and the Justice of Arragon the Kings of that Kingdom 3. Absolute Princes may cease to be such and then they differ not from other men And it will be an hard task to prove that any consent of man or humane title can free one from punishment with death who is guilty of a crime which God hath determined to be capital and commanded to be punished with death 4. Why should it be lawful for a forrein Prince warring and proving victorious upon a just quarrel to put a wicked Prince to death and not for those who have been his subjects when they have power to do it and tends to the publick good which cannot possibly without this act of justice be preserved Yet this cannot warrant any cursed Rebels or Traytors or the like to murther Princes though their pretences may be coloured with piety and justice The jura Majestatis or rights of higher-powers following are truly such Two things only I take notice of 1. That the Prince is only Judge of Doctrines taught so far as either the matter of right or manner of teaching may be prejudicial to the State or beneficial to the same as the Doctrine of the Gospel wisely taught alwaies is a blessing 2. Whereas he affirms that there is no propriety before a form of Government be established it s evidently false and civil Laws determine how every man may keep or recover that which is by justice his own According to his rules the institution of a Soveraign takes away all propriety of the subject That the rights of Soveraigns are indivisible and incommunicable is true if rightly understood To this purpose Authors distinguish these royalties into the greater and the less and say the latter may the former cannot be divided or communicated Others affirm That in a mixt State they of necessity must in a pure State they must not be either divisible or communicable This point may be made more clear if we understand 1. That these rights or jura are but so many branches of one and the same power supreme civil as it may act upon several objects And all these branches are reducible to three For supreme power civil is Legislative Judicial Executive as before and because it extends to these three acts therefore it may be said to be threefold And all these rights reckoned up by him which are such indeed are contained under these three though neither he nor other Authors have much observed it Amongst these the Legislative is the principal not only the first but the chiefest yet the other are necessary because without them it s in vain for what are Laws without Judgement and Execution yet even the Laws regulate both And to know who are Soveraign in any act the only infallible way is by the Legislation For in whomsoever the Legislative power originally is he or they are supreme for it is not the actual making of certain rules to order all things in a State but the giving of a binding force unto them which makes the Soveraign This power not only as it is a power but as supreme cannot be divided For if you take any essential part from it you destroy it so that its indivisible in it self 2. In respect of the subject For whether the subject be the Community or the Optimates they must be considered as one person morally though they be many physically and the reason is they must go all together otherwise there can be no first mover in a State for it is one supreme power in it self and must also be in one subject yet for the administration it may be divided because the Soveraign doth exercise this power and acts severally by several Officers which are but instruments animated and acted by him This power is also incommunicable within one and the same community and territory except you will constitute more States then one T. H. pag. 93. If there had not first been an opinion recieved of the greatest part of England that these powers were divided between the King and the Lords and the Commons the people had never been devided and fallen into these civil wars G. L. The cause moral of these wars was our sins the Political cause was the male-administration yet so that all sides have offended through want of wisdom and many other waies The ignorance of Politicks in general and of our own constitution in particular cannot be excused or excepted What the ancient constitution was we know not certainly though some reliques of the
of 600. years was alone called Soveraign had the title of Majesty from every one of his subjects and was unquestionably taken by them for their King was notwithstanding never considered as their Representative that name without contradiction passing for the title of those men which at his command were sent up by the people to carry their petitions and give him if he permitted their advice G. L. This man deserves to be a perpetual slave his intention is to make men believe that the Kings of England were absolute Monarchs their subjects slaves without propriety of goods or liberty of person the Parliaments of England meerly nothing but shadows and the members thereof but so many carriers of letters and petitions between home and the Court What he means by subordinate Representatives I know not I think his intention is to oppose those who affirmed King Peers and Commons to be co-ordinate not subordinate powers and all of them joyntly to make up one supreme Subordinate Representatives or powers he may safely and must grant in all States The word Representative he either doth not understand or if he do he intolerably abuseth his unwary and unlearned Reader by that term A Representative in the Civil Law called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is one who by his presence supplies the place of another that is absent for some certain end as to act that which another should do but in his own person doth not yet with the consent of the person represented so far as that the thing is judged to be done by him And in this sense the person representing is Judged to be one with the person represented by fiction of Law And one may represent another as a Superiour who may represent another in any act so far as that other is in his power or as an inferiour by a power derived from his superiour or as an equal by consent so far as the person will undertake to act for him In all these representations the Representeé and the Representer are judged one person In a free-State a Parliament is a Representative of the whole body of the people this we call a general Representative The reason of this representation is because the whole body of a people cannot well act personally What kind of Representative the Parliament of England was is hard to know except we knew certainly the first institution which by tract of time and many abuses of that excellent Assembly is now unknown It was certainly trusted with the highest acts of Legislation Judgement Execution The whole body consisted of several orders and ranks of men as of King Peers Commons the Clergy Whether they might meddle with the constitution or no is not so clear it s conceived they could not alter it though they might declare it what it was Their power was great without all doubt yet not so great but that it was bounded and a later Parliament might alter and reform what a former had established which argues That the 40. Counties and the whole body of the people whence all Parliaments have their original and being as they are Parliaments were above them In this great assembly the Knights and Burgesses did represent the Connties and the Burroughs the Convocation the whole body of the Clergy the Peers by antient tenure their Families Vassals and Dependants But whom the King should represent is hard to determine If the Law did consider him as an infant and this according to the constitution he could represent no other person or persons And if this be so then there is plain reason why he never should have the title of Representative yet evident reason there is why the rest should be called a Representative and the people are not Representers as he fondly imagines but the persons represented It s affirmed by the Author 1. That our Government is a Monarchy 2. The King had the Soveraignty from a descent of 600. years 3. Was alone called Soveraign 4. Had the title of Majesty from every one of his Subjects 5. Was unquestionably taken by them for their King 1. Our Government is called a Monarchy is true and he himself in this Chapter confesseth that Elective limited Kings are called Monarchs and their Kingdoms Monarchies yet he saith they are not so Again Monarchy is Regal over free-men Despotical over slaves and servants not by a Legal but an Arbitrary power If he say its Regal then the King is no absolute Monarch as he would have him to be If he say its Despotical its false and we know it so to be false And the Doctrine of Dr. Sibthorp and Mannering or Martin affirming this was condemned by a whole Parliament and that by men who have been as great Zealots for the King in these civil wars as any other 2. The King of England had Soveraignty by a descent of 600. years But first what doth he mean by Soveraignty If he understand an absolute supreme power it s not true the Kings of England have no such thing It s true that many of them did challenge so much power as they could acquire and keep and as their sword was longer or shorter so their power in possession was more or less Yet by the constitution of Law and the best custom it was alwaies determined within certain bounds Secondly Whence will he commence the date of 600. years and how will he derive the Soveraignty If from the Conqueror the date of so many years is not yet expired the Succession is interrupted if not cut off by the sword upon a civil war If he derive this power from the Conqueror as Conqueror all free English men will deny it the Kings themselves durst not challenge it upon those terms and by consent they never had it Therefore the Soveraignty the time of the commencement the title it self doth vanish He saith something proves nothing that he was called Soveraign doth neither prove that he was really such nor that he was absolute and that by his own confession 3. The King had the title of Majesty from every one of his subjects The title or name doth not prove the thing for we know very well that the title is constantly given to divers Princes who have not the thing no more then our Kings had the Kingdom of France though they had the title of the Kings of France France was so civil as to grant the title and the word but never part with the thing The Dukes of Venice as Contarene tells us had insignia sed non potestatem regis Majestas is sometimes maxima dignitas and this no subject denyed to the King He had his Scepter and his Throne his Robe and Diadem but all these are far short of supreme power Majestas is Personalis aut Realis Real he had not Personal he might have Yet personal Majesty might be his either in respect of dignity as it was or in respect of power and that also two waies either in respect of the whole power and all the
be their due and lest they should lose any of them he renews his Catalogue of them again These must be taught the people that they may know themselves to be absolute slaves And Princes must take heed of tranferring any of their Soveraign Rights unto another But this was needless for they have a desire of power before they do obtain it and after they are once possessed of it they not only keep that which is due but also usurp far more then either God or man hath given them Kings who are but trusted with a limited power endeavour to make themselves absolute Lords and Despotical Soveraigns must be petty Dieties The best Princes had always a greater care to exercise their power well then to enlarge it And by their Wisdom and Justice have governed more happily then any of these absolute Soveraigns who desire rather to be great then good and themselves more honourable then the people happy The Errours of this Author vented in this part as that Soveraign power Civil is absolute A civil Law against Rebellion is no Obligation A good Law is not a just Law because no Law can be unjust All his Rules of Government may be proved out of Scripture and other such like I will not here examine because some of them are ridiculous some of them have been formerly answered and his proof of these in his next part shall be discussed CAP. XV. Of the 2. part the 31. of the Book Of the Kingdom of God by nature THis Chapter is the conclusion of the second part the Leviathan and makes way for the third following The principal subject hereof is the Laws of nature as distinct to laws supernatural For he truly and wisely makes God the King and Law-giver both in the Kingdom of God by nature and above nature That God is the universal King by nature he seems to prove out of the Scripture T. H. God is King let the earth rejoyce saith the Psalmist Psal 96.1 And again God is King though the nations be angry and he that sitteth upon the Cherubins though the earth be moved Psal 98.1 Whether men will or not they must be subject always to the Divine Power G. L. In the Allegation of these two places he seems to follow the vulgar Latine and the Septuagint both for the number of the Psalms and the Translation For with us they are the words of the first verses of the 97. and 99. Psalms and are turned in another manner The translations though seemingly different may agree in the substance And it s agreed on all hands that the Psalmist speaks of the Kingdom of God yet seeing there is a kingdom of God as Creator and a kingdom of God as Redeemer it may be a question whether his kingdom in general be here meant or one of the former particular kingdoms Both ancient and Modern Divines for the most part understand both the Psalms of the kingdom of Christ and which is more the Apostle Heb. 1.6 so expounds the former Psalm which agrees with Psal 2. which speaks to the same purpose and undoubtedly intends the Kingdom of Christ The Kingdom and Government of God is most properly so called in respect of Angels and men as onely capable of Laws Punishments and Rewards no rational man will deny yet he by his wisdom doth direct and order all creatures T. H. God declareth his Laws three ways By natural reason Revelation and Prophecy From the difference of the natural and Prophetick Word of God there may be attributed to God a two-fold Kingdom Natural and Prophetick c. G. L. In the rest of this Chapter we may observe three things 1. The manner how God declares his Laws 2. The distinction of his Kingdom 3. The ground of his Dominion 1. God doth manifest himself both to Angels and men two wayes by his Works and his Word By his works in the Creation and Providence By his word immediately by Revelation mediately by Prophesie In the latter he maketh use of man to speak to man the same thing he hath spoken to man by Revelation and the word of prophesie to man is the word of Revelation from God and the matter of both is the same The word of Creation and Providence is received by natural reason the word of Revelation seems to be apprehended by reason supernaturally elevated and illuminated The Kingdom of God is natural or supernatural according to the natural or supernatural Laws The first Kingdom by the rules and dictates of natural reason directs man unto a temporal peace and prosperity on Earth The second by the Laws of Revelation orders him to a supernatural and eternal peace and felicity to be enjoyed fully in Heaven For the former end all civil Policies were instituted For the second the polity spiritual of the Church The declaration of the Laws of Gods Kingdom by nature were universally always declared even to all nations the Laws of his supernatural Kingdom were revealed universally at the first in the times of Adam and after in the dayes of Noah But after a general Apostacy Israel was trusted with the Oracles of life untill the exhibition of the Messias and after his Resurrection the Apostles received a Commission to teach all Nations and make these Laws known more generally So that this Author doth bewray his ignorance in divinity and pretending to the knowledge of the Scripture he little understands them and much abuseth those heavenly Writings For the Kingdom of God by Prophesie was in all times and confined in a more special manner for a time unto the people of Israel for a special reason And at the first election of them after their deliverance from the Egyptial bondage he immediately instituted not onely their spiritual but their civil Government In which respect their civil government might be called in a peculiar manner the Kingdom and Common-wealth of God and so the government of no Nation in the world could be accounted T. H. The right of Gods soveraignty is not derived from Creation but from his irresistible Power G. L. This is his great ignorance to think that Gods Soveraignty should be derived from the executive power of force and strength of his Godhead For Dominion in general is twofold Possessionis ant regiminis of possession or government That of possession we call propriety in which respect God is absolute Lord of all his creatures because he createth and preserveth them so that their very being is more his then theirs But his soveraign power over man ariseth not onely from propriety in general but from Gods propriety in him as a rational intellectual creature ordinable to an higher end then the inanimate and irrational creature is capable of For God created and preserved him a rational creature and both as a creature and as rational he is wholly his As he is rational he is capable of Laws Rewards Punishments and hath a power to become Gods subject by voluntary submission and donation of himself and also
to obey his Lord and Maker This no irrational being hath or can have So that Gods Dominion over man ariseth from Gods propriety in man as a rational being and from the voluntary submission of man as a rational creature unto his God who made him such Gods propriety in man is derived from creation and preservation and both these were not onely from Gods power as Mr. Hobs imagineth but also from his Understanding and Will For God by his wisdom made the world as well as by his power and worketh all things according to the Counsel of his Will Dominion of government is not onely from power nor by power alone for understanding will and power must all concur to Government Therefore how absurd is that assertion of his which followeth If there had been any man of irresistible power there had been no reason why by that power he should not have ruled If this were true a Leviathan a Dragon an Elephant hath more power then man and why should not brutes being stronger rule over men who are weaker By this rule the strongest man in a Kingdom should be King and he that hath the strength of Goliah or Sampson should rule over others though they have strength without wisdom and integrity T. H. The Kingdom over men and the right of afflicting them at his pleasure belongeth naturally to God Almighty not as Creatour and gracious but as omnipotent G. L. Obedience is due to God not meerly as gratitude to a benefactor but as a duty unto him as a Law-giver For as a Creatour he may have a right to command because by Creation he hath an absolute propriety in his being which is such as he is capable of a Law And Creation is not to be considered as any kind of benefit but such a benefit as his rational being was wholly derived from it and also wholly and perpetually depends upon his preservation and his eternal happiness upon his legislation and judgement And though he may afflict at pleasure as omnipotent because as such he can do it yet he never afflicted any but as a legislatour and Judge according to his just Laws Because God is omnipotent he can afflict but it doth not hence follow that he will afflict But he instanceth in Job and the man born blind both afflicted by God as omnipotent yet Job was upright indeed but not altogether innocent and though God did manifest unto him his glorious Majesty and Almighty power in his great works yet this was not done to shew him the cause why God did afflict Job but to humble him And being humbled he did not plead his integrity but repented of his infirmity in dust and ashes For though he was no hypocrite yet he was a sinner Job 42.6 And though the blind man John 9. was born blind as we might justly be yet he was conceived and born in sin as we are But neither he nor his parents were guilty of any such notorious crime as God doth usually recompence with exemplary punishment even in this life T. H. Honour consisteth in the inward thought and opinion of the power and goodness of another and therefore to honour God is to think as highly of his power and goodness as is possible And of that opinion the external signs in words and actions of men are called worship G. L. This is the first Law of Gods Kingdom by nature in respect of God that he is to be worshipped Worship is sometimes an act of the soul terminated upon his Divine excellency and dignity it s called Reverence and sometimes Adoration Sometimes it s an act terminated upon his supreme and universal Power And so it is submission to him as Supreme Lord and Law-giver Sometime for obedience and in this respect even the performance of our duty to our neighbours as done in obedience to him as our supreme Lord is an act of worship And all acts of the soul terminated upon the Deity immediately are called worship The worship of Reverence and Adoration is given unto God as most glorious and excellent in himself yet so manifested and apprehended The worship of submission and obedience is given and ascribed to him as Supreme Lord and the object of worship is some excellency apprehended in the party worshipped And because the excellency of the Deity is Infinite and Eternal therefore the highest degree of worship is due unto him even to the annihilation of our selves the resigning of our very being wholly unto him and the emptying of our selves into the Ocean of his most blessed Being God deserves and is worthy of all honour glory and worship as excellent in himself They may justly be required of the creature as depending solely and wholly upon him as Lord Creator Preserver And the creature is bound to worship him by vertue of his Law and Covenant By performance of this dutie we are capable of Eternal bliss in and from him and by his promise we come to have a right unto Eternal life The Excellency of God is his most perfect and blessed Essence which cannot be known by man as it is in it self yet it s manifested to us by several distinct attributes whereof some may be known by the light of Reason in some measure but more perfectly by the Revelation of the Scriptures These Attributes are many and distinct and so given to God by himself because by one act of Reason we cannot conceive of or understand his Essence which is but one in it self but represented to us as different and many and so apprehended And by our faith we believe the Divine perfections to be far greater then our Reason can apprehend them to be They are in himself one infinite being manifested by his works and more fully by his Word And our worship must ascend above our Reason and must be performed according to our faith which is a divine and supernatural light For the distinct knowledge of this worship with the several acts thereof and the several names we must not follow the Schoolmen but search into the Scripture diligently observe the use of the words as they are there applied to signifie the same How far Mr. Hobs is from the true understanding of worship in general and of the worship of God in particular may easily appear from this that he makes worship to be nothing else but the outward signification by words and actions of internal honour which with him is nothing else but the inward thought and opinion of the power and goodness of another But neither is worship nor honour any such thing as he hath defined them And his discourse of worship with the distinctions will be found very poor upon examination except we allow him a soveraign power over words to impose what signification upon them he pleaseth and the same different from that wherein they are used in Classical Authors Thus he hath finished his Politicks set forth under the name of Leviathan in the Frontispiece And though many have in
because God hath said it That the place is not this earth we have some reason to think because our Saviour ascended into heaven and whilest he was on earth made intercession for us saying Father I will that they also whom thou hast given me be with me where I am John 17.14 And to comfort the hearts of his Disciples sad and troubled because he said he must leave them he useth these words In my Fathers house are many mansions if it were not so I would have told you I go to prepare a place for you And if I go and prepare a place for you I will come again and receive you to my self that where I am there ye may be also John 14.23 If eternal life shall be enjoyed on earth why need Christ ascend to heaven there to prepare a place for us and when he shall return from thence why will he not stay here and leave us on the earth and never trouble himself with any translation of us into any other place where he shall ever abide and we be ever with him Hell in Scripture and as we understand God in that Book to teach us is an estate directly contrary to eternal life And we believe that it is a most miserable condition of such as shall suffer eternal punishments and that in some certain place and our chiefest imployment in this life is to use all means whereby we may be freed from that condition and enjoy the contrary Concerning the particular ubi and distinct place we do not as we need not much trouble our selves To prove that both eternal rewards are to be enjoyed and eternal torments to be suffered perpetually on earth he doth most wofully wrest and abuse several places of Gods Book and with so little solidity of judgement that children may answer him And because this eternal life is prepared by God for such as are by reason of their sin in danger of hell and eternal death therefore in Scripture it s sometime called salvation and also redemption which is a freedom and deliverance from all the evil consequents and effects of sin one and the principal whereof is to be deprived of eternal bliss which consists in full communion with our God Yet the consummation of both these conditions is reserved by God for the world to come which will follow the universal resurrection The times of the Gospel in respect of the Law may be called the world to come and so some understand the words of the Apostle to the Hebrews 2.5 where we read that God hath not unto Angels subjected the world to come c. This is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sometimes it s taken for the time following the resurrection and final judgement as Mark 10.39 Luke 18.30 This is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Redemption is taken in another sense for the expiation of sin upon satisfaction made by Christ unto his heavenly Father as supreme Judge who accepted his death as a sufficient penalty to avert his wrath and procure his mercy for all such as should believe on him In this Chapter he hath imposed upon many places of Scripture a sense never intended and this may be evident to any that can and will examine the places according to the originals and the context And he drives at this to deprive Christ of his regal power which at the right hand of God he now doth exercise and to invest civil powers with it till such time as he hath brought Christ from heaven that he may here on earth begin his personal raign Sr. Thomas Mores Vtopia is somewhat rational this discourse is void of reason and so much the more unsufferable as the matter is so sublime and this sacred Book of God so much profaned by him CAP. VIII Of the third Part And the 39. of the Book Of the significations of the word Church in Scripture IN the former Chapter he turned heaven and hell into the earth and in this he hath transformed the Church which is a spiritual politie into a civil State and that will easily appear from his definition of this excellent and divine Society T. H. A Church is a company of men professing Christian Religion united in the person of one Soveraign at whose command they ought to assemble and without whose authority they ought not to assemble G. L. Many are the significations of the word Ecclesia in the Scriptures of the New Testament as it is applyed to Christians which he hath in part yet not fully observed Yet amongst them all from the beginning to the end of the New Testament its never found to be taken in this sense for as he hath not so he cannot alledge one place where it so signifies This definition is such as never any gave before you can read it in no Author neither can you prove it out of Scripture Only the first words seem to have something of a description but it s no perfect explication of the quiddity and nature of the Church Christian For that is a society or community of persons who believe in Jesus Christ and subject themselves unto him as their Lord and King A bare profession will not make a man a subject of this spiritual Kingdom A sincere profession of that faith which is seated and rooted in the heart comes up higher and is more fit to express the being of a Member of this Church This Church as Catholick or Universal subject unto Christ is like a similar body and therefore the parts may bear the name of the whole as the Church of Corinth the Church of Ephesus and the Church in such an house Some part of this Church is under a form of discipline to be exercised in foro exteriori as the School-men and Casuists use to speak some parts are not so happy For this is not of the Essence of a Church It s not of the being though it tends to the well-being of the same Some of these are subject unto a civil Soveraign who is a Christian some are not For as a Christian State may have Heathen or Mahumetan subjects so Christians may be under the civil power of an Heathen or Mahumetan Prince Both these therefore to be under a form of discipline and subject to a Christian civil power are but accidental and these accidents are separable and often actually separated and therefore I know no reason why they should be part of a perfect desiâ—â—tion or so much as mentioned in it This may be sufficient for to discover the vanity of the man and the absurdity of the definition Yet notwithstanding his definition be faulty I for my part do grant that Jus religionis ordinandae doth belong to all Civil Governors and powers But with limitation 1. That no Soveraign hath power to order maintain and promote any Religion but that which is instituted from heaven 2. That they must not intermeddle with it for to order it further then its ordinable by the sword which cannot reach Religion and
sin of man and merited for himself eternal power and glory and for us eternal life and all effectual means for the certain attainment thereof All the rest of his acts performed by him as King Priest and Prophet tended unto the application of his sacrifice that we by faith might be partakers of the benefit thereof This is the sum of that Doctrine of Redemption delivered clearly and more fully in several places of the Scripture especially of the New Testament Yet this Innovatour hath obscured the same several ways and determines the Kingdom of Christ to begin when the world doth end because Christ said to Pilate My Kingdom is not of this world Joh. 18.36 From whence he concludes T. H. That the Kingdom of Christ is not to begin before the general Resurrection G. L. This is a gross mistake and mis-interpretation of a place which is clear in it self For by his gloss he makes the Scripture to contradict it self Christ was then Candidatus imperii and was King when he gave this answer unto Pilate yet he began to reign and exercise his Royal power more eminently when he was set at the Right hand of the Father yet his Kingdom was not of this world that is not civil but spiritual and as Austin upon the place It was Hic non hinc in the world not of the world in the world yet not worldly but divine and far more excellent then the Kingdoms of the world This is the genuine sense of the words That Christ doth reign now and hath reigned since his ascension and sitting at the right hand of God is evident Before his Ascension he lets his Apostles know that all power in heaven and earth was given him and according unto and by vertue of that power he gave Commission to his Apostles to teach and baptize and perswade men to the obedience of his commands Mat. 28.18 19 20. He that hath an universal power in heaven and earth who makes officers and gives them power who makes Laws Institutes Sacraments and sends down the Holy Ghost must needs reign and his Kingdom is begun already We read that Christ must reign till he hath put all enemies under his feet and the last enemy that shall be destroyed is death And when all things shall be subdued unto him then shall also the Son of man be subject unto him that put all things under him that God may be all in all 1 Cor. 15.25 26 28. Where first from Psal 110.1 The Apostle tels us That Christs Kingdom did Commence at the time of Christs sitting at the right hand of God 2. That with him to sit at the right hand of God is to reign 3. That he must reign by Word Sacraments Spirit Ministry till all enemies whereof death is the last be destroyed 4. That when death is destroyed he shall deliver up his Commission and kingdom in respect of this administration by Ordinances 5. That at the Resurrection this manner of reign shall end when Mr. Hobbs saith it shall begin 6. That then God shall be all in all that is reign perfectly in his Saints without any enemy without opposition without Ordinances and more immediately Before that time indeed he will not proceed to the final and universal sentence and execution of the same Yet there are many acts of government besides judgement and many acts of judgement be sides those of the general Assizes and last Sessions To make Laws reduce men to subjection appoint Officers pass sentence and execute the same in the very souls of men are acts of one that reigns as likewise to subdue enemies Sin Satan and the world to protect the Church And in this manner Christ hath reigned since his Ascension And many Millions do adore him subject themselves unto him and obey him to this day Yet with this man Christ doth not yet reign Let him read Psalm 2. throughout It began to be fulfilled upon his Resurrection and Ascension as appears out of the Acts of the Apostles and their Epistles And if he or any other shall deny the present reign of Christ they must expect with his Iron Scepter to be dasht in pieces like a Potters Vessel CAP XI Of the third Part the 42. of the Book Of Ecclesiastical Power AFter he had enthroned Civil Soveraigns cap. 40. Dethroned Christ in the former Chapter In this he takes away all power from the Church and invests the Christian civil powers with it And herein it may be a question whether his ignorance or presumption is the greater for he is highly guilty of both He that will determine the controversie concerning the power of the Church must distinguist the universal power of God the spiritual power of Christ incarnate and exalted to the Throne of glory and the power deligated from Christ unto the Church universal here on earth as subject unto Christ as Lord and Monarch and also that which every particular Independent association of Christians is trusted withal for to preserve the Society and the Ordinances of God from profanation This he hath not done and therefore little or rather nothing can be expected from him This last power of particular Churches is called the power of the keys in foro exteriori in the particular government of their several combinations for there is no supreme universal Independent judicatory on earth to which all Churches in the world are bound to appeal in this outward visible administration General Counsels can be no such thing Neither was there ever any Oecumenical Synod in proper sense since the Gospel was preached to all Nations This power of outward Discipline is challenged by the Pope by the Clergy by the people Christian and by the States civil and Soveraigns of the world And in this last party is the Author deeply engaged but upon what reason I know not except he intends to side with the strongest for such are they which bear the sword The power of ordaining Ministers preaching the Word administring the Sacraments was in the universal Church since the time of the Apostles And in every particular Church reduced to a form of outward discipline there is a power of making Canons of jurisdiction of making Officers so far as shall conduce unto the better ordination of Ministers the preservation of the purity of Doctrine and the right administration of the Sacraments least they be profaned and Christ offended by the admission of ignorant scandalous and unworthy persons There is a power also of disposing and dispensing of those goods which are given to the Church for the maintenance of Christian Religion Civil Christian States may and ought to make civil Laws to confirm the just Canons and jurisdictions of the Church And those Laws may be a fence unto it against these who shall oppose or persecute Yet when all this is done those Laws are but Civil though the object of them be Ecclesiastical matters This might suffice for to confute and make void the main body and break in pieces