him that commands the government is upheld by a double obligation from the Citizens first that which is due to their fellow citizens next that which they owe to their Prince Wherefore no subjects how many soever they be â—an with any Right despoyle him who bears the chiefe Rule of his authority even without his own consent CHAP. VII Of the three kindes of Government Democraty Aristocraty Monarchie I. That there are three kindes of Government onely Democraty Ariristocraty Monarchie II. That Oligarchy is not a diverse form of government distinct from Aristocraty nor Anarchy any Forme at all III. That a Tyranny is not a diverse state from a legitimate Monarchy IV. That there cannot be a mixt state fashioned out of these severall species V. That Democraty except there be certain times and places of meeting prefixt is dissolv'd VI. In a Democraty the intervalls of the times of meeting must be short or the administration of Government during the intervall committed to some one VII In a Democraty particulars Contract with particulars to obey the People the People is oblig'd to no man VIII By what acts Aristocraty is constituted IX In an Aristocraty the Nobles make no Compact neither are they oblig'd to any Citizen or to the whole People X. The Nobles must necessarily have their set meetings XI By what acts Monarchy is constituted XII Monarchy is by Compact oblig'd to none for the Authority it hath receiv'd XIII Monarchy is ever in the readiest capacity to exercise all those acts which are requisite to good Government XIV What kind of sin that is and what sort of men are guilty of it when the City performes not its office towards the Citizens nor the Citizens towards the City XV. A Monarch made without limitation of time hath power to elect his successor XVI Of limited Monarchs XVII A Monarch retaining his Right of Government cannot by any promise whatsoever be conceived to have parted with his Right to the meanes necessary to the exercise of his Authority XVIII How a Citizen is freed from subjection I. VVE have already spoken of a City by institution in its Genus we will now say somewhat of its species As for the difference of Cities it is taken from the difference of the Persons to whom the Supreme Power is committed this power is committed either to one Man or Councell or some one Court consisting of many men Furthermore a Councell of many men consists either of all the Citizens insomuch as every man of them hath a Right to Vote and an interest in the ordering of the greatest affaires if he will himselfe or of a part onely from whence there arise three sorts of Government The one when the Power is in a Councell where every Citizen hath a right to Vote and it is call'd a DEMOCRATY The other when it is in a Councell where not all but some part onely have their suffrages and we call it an ARISTOCRATY The third is that when the Supreme Authority rests onely in one and it is stiled a MONARCHY In the first he that governes is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The PEOPLE In the second the NOBLES In the third the MONARCH II. Now although Ancient Writers of Politiques have introduc'd three other kindes of Government opposite to these to wit Anarchy or confusion to Democraty Oligarchy that is the command of some few to Aristocracy and Tyranny to Monarchy yet are not these three distinct formes of Government but three diverse Titles given by those who were either displeas'd with that present Government or those that bare Rule For men by giving names doe usually not onely signifie the things themselves but also their own affections as love hatred anger and the like whence it happens that what one man calls a Democraty another calls an Anarchy what one counts an Aristocraty another esteemes an Oligarchie and whom one titles a King another stiles him a Tyrant so as we see these names betoken not a diverse kinde of Government but the diverse opinions of the Subjects concerning him who hath the Supreme Power For first who sees not that Anarchy is equally opposite to all the forenam'd Formes For that word signifies that there is no Government at all that is not any City But how is it possible that no City should be the species of a City Farthermore what difference is there between an Oligarchie which signifies the Command of a few or Grandâ—â—s or an Aristocraty which is that of the Prime or Chief Heads more then that men differ so among themselves that the same things seeme not good to all men whence it happens that those persons who by some are look'd on as the best are dy others esteem'd to be the worst of all men III. But men by reason of their passions will very hardly be perswaded that a Kingdome and Tyranny are not diverse kindes of Cities who though they would rather have the City subject to one then many yet doe they not beleeve it to be well govern'd unlesse it accord with their judgements But we must discover by Reason and not by Passion what the difference is between a King and a Tyrant but first they differ not in this That a Tyrant hath the greater power for greater then the Supreme cannot be granted nor in this That one hath a limited power the other not for he whose authority is limited is no King but his Subject that limits him Lastly neither differ they in their manner of acquisition for if in a Democraticall or Aristocraticall Government some one Citizen should by force possesse himself of the Supreme Power if he gain the consent of all the Citizens he becomes a legitimate Monarch if not he is an Enemy not a Tyrant They differ therefore in the sole exercise of their command insomuch as he is said to be a King who governs wel and he aâ—… Tyrant that doth otherwise The case therefore is brought to this passe That a King legitimately constituted in his Government if he seeme to his Subjects to Rule well and to their liking they afford him the appellation of a King if not they count him a Tyrant Wherefore we see a Kingdome and Tyranny are not diverse Formes of Government but one and the self-same Monarch hath the name of a King given him in point of Honour and Reverence to him and of a Tyrant in way of contumely and reproach But what we frequently finde in bookes said against Tyrants took its originall from Greek and Roman Writers whose Government was partly Democraticall and partly Aristocraticall and therefore not Tyrants onely but even Kings were odious to them IV. There are who indeed doe think it necessarily That a Supremâ— Command should be somewhere extant in a City but if it should be in any one either Man or Councell it would follow they say that all the Citizens must be slaves Avoiding this condition they imagine that there may be a certaine Form of Government
compounded of those three kinds we have spoken of yet different from each particular which they call a mixt Monarchie or mixt Aristocraty or mixt Democraty according as any one of these three sorts shall be more eminent then the rest For example if the naming of Magistrates and the arbitration of War and Peace should belong to the King Judicature to the Lords and contribution of Monies to the People and the power of making Lawes too altogether this kind of State would they call a mixt Monarchie forsooth But if it were possible that there could be such a State it would no whit advantage the liberty of the subject for as long as they all agree each single Citizen is as much subject as possibly he can be but if they disagree the State returns to a Civill War and the Right of the private Sword which certainly is much worse then any subjection whatsoever * But that there can be no such kind of Government hath been sufficiently demonstrated in the foregoing Chapter Artic 6 7 8 9 10 11 12. But that there can be no such kinde of Government Most men grant That a Government ought not to be divided but they would have it moderated and bounded by some limits Truly it is very reasonable it should be so but if these men when they speak of moderating and limiting do understand dividing it they make a very fond distinction Truly for my part I wish that not onely Kings but all other Persons endued with Supreme Authority would so temper themselves as to commit no wrong and onely minding their charges contain themselves within the limits of the naturall and divine Lawes But they who distinguish thus they would have the chief power bounded and restrain'd by others which because it cannot be done but that they who doe set the limits must needs have some part of the power whereby they may be enabled to doe it the Government is properly divided not moderated V. Let us see a little now in the constituting of each Form of Government what the constitutours doe Those who met together with intention to erect a City were almost in the very act of meeting a Democraty for in that they willingly met they are suppos'd oblig'd to the observation of what shall be determin'd by the major part which while that convent lasts or is adjourn'd to some certain dayes and places is a clear Democraty for that convent whose will is the will of all the Citizens hath the Supreme Authority and because in this Convent every man is suppos'd to have a Right to give his voice it followes that it is a Democraty by the definition given in the first Article of this Chap. But if they depart and break up the Convent and appoint no time or place where and when they shall meet again the publick weal returns to Anarchy and the same state it stood in before their meeting that is to the state of all men warring against all the People therefore retains the supreme power no longer then there is a certain day and place publiquely appointed and known to which whosoever will may resort For except that be known and determined they may either meet at divers times and places that is in factions or not at all and then it is no longer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the People but a dissolute multitude to whom we can neither attribute any Action or Right Two things therefore frame a Democratie whereof one to wit the perpetuall prescription of Convents makes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the People the other which is a plurality of voyces 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the power VI. Furthermore it will not be sufficient for the People so as to maintain its supremacy to have some certain known times and places of meeting unlesse that either the intervals of the times be of lesse distance then that any thing may in the mean time happen whereby by reason of the defect of power the City may be brought into some danger or at least that the exercise of the supreme authority be during the intervall granted to some one man or Councell For unlesse this be done there is not that wary care and heed taken for the defence and Peace of single men which ought to be and therefore will not deserve the name of a City because that in it for want of security every mans Right of defending himselfe at his own pleasure returns to him again VII Democraty is not framed by contract of particular Persons with the People but by mutuall compacts of single men each with other But hence it appears in the first place that the Persons contracting must be in being before the contract it selfe but the People is not in being before the constitution of government as not being any Person but a multitude of single Persons wherefore there could then no contract passe between the People and the Subject Now if after that government is framed the subject make any contract with the People it is in vain because the People contains within its will the will of that subject to whom it is supposed to be obliged and therefore may at its own will and pleasure disengage it selfe and by consequence is now actually free But in the second place that single Persons doe contract each with other may be inferred from hence that in vain sure would the City have been constituted if the Citizens had been engaged by no contracts to doe or omit what the City should command to be done or omitted Because therefore such kind of compacts must be understood to passe as necessary to the making up of a City but none can be made as is already shewed between the Subject and the People it followes that they must be made between single Citizens namely that each man contract to submit his will to the will of the major part on condition that the rest also doe the like as if every one should say thus I give up my Right unto the People for your sake on condition that you also deliver up yours for mine VIII An Aristocraty or Councell of Nobles endued with supreme authoritie receives its originall from a Democraty which gives up its Right unto it where we must understand that certain men distinguisht from others either by eminence of title blood or some other Character are propounded to the People and by plurality of voyces are elected and being elected the whole Right of the People or City is conveighâ—d on them insomuch as whatsoever the People might doe before the same by Right may this Court of elected Nobles now doe which being done it is clear that the People considered as one Person its supreme authority being already transferred on these is no longer now in being IX As in Democraty the People so in an Aristocraty the Court of Nobles is free from all manner of obligation for seeing subjects not contracting with the People but by mutuall compacts among themselves were tyed
his death then the Monarch being dead the authority is confirmed in the people not by any new acts of the subjects but by vertue of the former Right for all the supreme comâ—and as Dominion was in the People but the use and exercise of it was only in the temporary Monarch as in one that takes the benefit but hath not the Right But if the People after the election of a temporarie Monarch depart not from the Court before they have appointed certain times and places to convene during the time prescribed him as the Dictators in ancient times were made by the People of Rome such an one is not to be accounted a Monarch but the Prime Officer of the People and if it shall seem good the People may deprive him of his office even before that time as the People of Rome did when they conferred an equall power on Minutius Master of the horse with Quintus Fabius Maximus whom before they had made Dictator The reason whereof is that it is not to be imagined that whether Man or Counsell who hath the readiest and most immediate power to act should hold his command on such termes as not to be able actually to execuâ—e it for command is nothing else but a Right of commanding as oft as nature allowes it possible Lastly if the People having declared a temporary Monarch depart from the Court on such termes as it shall not be lawfull for them to meet without the command of the Monarch we must understand the People to be immediately dissolved and that his authority who is thus declared is absolute forasmuch as it is not in the power of all the subjects to frame the City a new unlesse he give consent who hath now alone the authority Nor matters it that he hath perhaps made any promise to assemble his Subjects on some certain times since there remains no Person now in being but at his discretion to whom the promise was made What we have spoken of these four cases of a People electing a Temporary Monarch will be more clearly explain'd by comparing them with an absolute Monarch who hath no heir apparent for the People is Lord of the subject in such a manner as there can be no Heir but whom it self doâ—h appoint Besides the spaces between the times of the subjects meeting may be fiâ—ly compar'd to those times wherein the Monarch sleepes for in either the Acts of commanding ceases the Power remaines Farthermore to dissolve the convent so as it cannot meet againe is the death of the People just as sleeping so as he can never wake more is the death of a man As therefore a King who hath no Heir going to his rest so as never to rise again i. e. dying if he commit the exercise of his Regall Authority to any one till he awake does by consequence give him the Succession the People also electing a Temporary Monarch and not reserving a power to convene delivers upto him the whole Dominion of the Country Furthermore as a King going to sleep for some season entrusts the administration of his Kingdome to some other and waking takes it again so the people having elected a Temporary Monarch and with all retaining a right to meet at a certain day and place at that day receives its supremacy again And as a King who hath committed the execution of his Authority to another himself in the mean while waking can recall this commission againe when he pleaseth so the People who during the time prescribed to the Temporary Monarch doth by Right convene may if they please deprive the Monarch of his Authority Lastly the King who commits his Authority to another while himself sleeps not being able to wake againe till he whom he entrusted give consent loses at once both his power and his life so the people who hath given the Supreme Power to a temporary Monarch in such sort as they cannot assemble without his command is absolutely dissolv'd and the power remaines with him whom they have chosen XVII If the Monarch promise ought to any one or many subjects together by consequence whereof the exercise of his power may suffer prejudice that Promise or Compact whether made by Oath or without it is null for all Compact is a conveyance of Right which by what hath been said in the fourth Article of the second Chapter requires meet and proper signes of the Will in the conveyer But he who sufficiently signifies his will of retaining the end doth also sufficiently declare that he quits not his Right to the means necessary to that end Now he who hath promis'd to part with somewhat necessary to the Supreme Power and yet retaines the Power it selfe gives sufficient tokens That he no otherwise promis'd it then so farre forth as the power might be retain'd without it Whensoever therefore it shall appear that what is promis'd cannot be perform'd without prejudice to the power the promise must be valued as not made i. e. of no effect XVIII We have seen how Subjects nature dictating have oblig'd themselves by mutuall Compacts to obey the Supreme Power We will see now by what meanes it comes to passe that they are releas'd from these bonds of obedience And first of aâ—l this happens by rejection namely if a man cast off or forsake but conveigh not the Right of his Command on some other for what is thus rejected is openly expos'd to all alike catch who catch can whence again by the Right of nature every subject may heed the preservation of himselfe according to his own judgement In the second place If the Kingdome fall into the power of the enemy so as there can no more opposition be made against them we must understand that he who before had the Supreme Authority hath now lost it For when the Subjects have done their full indeavour to prevent their falling into the enemies hands they have fulfill'd those Contracts of obedience which they made each with other and what being conâ—…uer'd they promise afterwards to avoid death they must with no lesse endeavour labour to performe Thirdly in a Monarchy for a Democraâ—y and Aristocraty cannot fail if there be no successour all the subjects are discharg'd from their obligations for no man is suppos'd to be tyed he knows not to whom for in such a case it were impossible to perform ought And by these three wayes all subjects are restor'd from their civill subjection to that liberty which all men have to all things to wit naturall and salvage for the naturall state hath the same proportion to the Civill I mean liberty to subjection which Passion hath to Reason or a Beast to a Man Furthermore each subject may lawfully be freed from his subjection by the will of him who hath the Supreme Power namely if he change his soile which may be done two wayes either by permission as he who gets license to dwell in another Country or Command as he who is Banisht
he lists on any Transgressions but that he may also in his wrath and sensuality slaughter his innocent Subjects and those who never offended against the Lawes And truly this is a very great grievance in any forme of Government wheresoever it happens for it is therefore a grievance because it is not because it may be done but it is the fault of the Ruler not of the Government For all the acts of Nero are not essentiall to Monarchie yet Subjects are lesse often undeservedly condemn'd under one Ruler then under the People For Kings are onely severe against those who either trouble them with impertinent Counsells or oppose them with reproachfull words or controule their Wills but they are the cause that that excesse of power which one Subject might have above another becomes harmlesse wherefore some Nero or Caligula reigning no men can undeservedly suffer but such as are known to him namely Courtiers and such as are remarkable for some eminent Charge and not all neither but they onely who are possessed of what he desires to enjoy for they that are offensive and contumelious are deservedly punisht whosoever therefore in a Monarchy will lead a retired life let him be what he will that Reignes he is out of danger for the ambitious onely suffer the rest are protected from the injuries of the more potent but in a popular Dominion there may be as mane Nero's as there are Oratours who sooth the People for each one of them can doe as much as the People and they mutually give way to each others appetite as it were by this secret pact Spare me to day and I le spare thee to morrow while they exempt those from punishment who to satisfie their lust and private hatred have undeservedly slain their fellow-subjects Furthermore there is a certain limit in private power which if it exceed it may prove pernicious to the Realme and by reason whereof it is necessary sometimes for Monarchs to have a care that the common-weale do thence receive no prejudice When therefore this power consisted in the multitude of Riches they lessened it by diminishing their heaps but if it were in popular applause the powerfull party without any other crime laid to his charge was taken from among them The same was usually practised in Democraties for the Athenians inflicted a punishment of ten yeares banishment on those that were powerfull meerly because of their powers without the guilt of any other crime and those who by liberall gifts did seek the favour of the common people were put to death at Rome as men ambitious of a Kingdome In this Democraty and Monarchy were eaven yet differ'd they much in same because fame derives from the People and what is done by many is commended by many and therefore what the Monarch does is said to be done out of envie to their vertues which if it were done by the People would be accounted Politie VIII There are some who therefore imagine Monarchy to bee more grievous then Democraty because there is lesse liberty in that then in this If by liberty they mean an exemption from that subjection which is due to the Lawes i e. the commands of the People neither in Democraty nor in any other state of government whatsoever is there any such kind of liberty If they suppose liberty to consist in this that there be few lawes few prohibitions and those too such that except they were forbidden there could be no Peace then I deny that there is more liberty in Democraty then Monarchy for the one as truly consisteth with such a liberty as the other for although the word liberty may in large and ample letters be written over the gates of any City whatsoever yet is it not meant the Subjects but the Cities liberty neither can that word with better Right be inscribed on a City which is governed by the people then that which is ruled by a Monarch but when private men or subjects demand liberty under the name of liberty they ask not for liberty but dominion which yet for want of understanding they little consider for if every man would grant the same liberty to another which he desires for himselfe as is commanded by the law of nature that same naturall state would return again in which all men may by Right doe all things which if they knew they would abhor as being worse then all kind of civill subjection whatsoever but if any man desire to have his single freedome the rest being bound what does he else demand but to have the Dominion for who so is freed from all bonds is Lord over all those that still continue bound Subjects therefore have no greater liberty in a Popular then in a Monarchicall State That which deceives them is the equall participation of command and publique places for where the Authority is in the People single subjects doe so far forth share in it as they are parts of the People ruling and they equally partake in publique Offices so far forth as they have equall voices in choosing Magistrates and publique Ministers And this is that which Aristotle aim'd at himself also through the custome of that time mis-calling Dominion liberty in his sixth Book and second Chapter of Poli. In a popular State there is liberty by supposition which is a speâ—ch of the vulgar as if no man were free out of this State From whence by the way we may collect That those Subjects who in a Monarchy deplore their lost liberty doe onely stomack this that they are not receiv'd to the steerage of the Common-weal IX But perhaps for this very reason some will say That a Popular State is much to be preferr'd before a Monarchicall because that where all men have a hand in publique businesses there all have an opportunity to shew their wisedome knowledge and eloquence in deliberating matters of the greatest difficulty and moment which by reason of that desire of praise which is bred in humane nature is to them who excell in such like faculties and seeme to themselves to exceed others the most delightfull of all things but in a Monarchy this same way to obtain praise and honour is shut up to the greatest part of Subjects and what is a grievance if this be none I le tell you To see his opinion whom we scorne preferr'd before ours to have our wisedome undervalued before our own faces by an uncertain tryall of a little vaine glory to undergoe most certaine enmities for this cannot be avoided whether we have the better or the worse to hate and to be hated by reason of the disagreement of opinions to lay open our secret Counsells and advises to all to no purpose and without any benefit to neglect the affaires of our own Family These I say are grievances But to be absent from a triall of wits although those trialls are pleasant to the Eloquent is not therefore a grievance to them unlesse we will say that it is a
he break forth upon them So Moyses went downe unto the people and spake unto them Exod. 19. 24 25. It is farther manifestly and expresly declar'd upon occasion given by the Rebellion of Core Dathan and Abiram and the two hundred and fifty Princes of the Assembly that neither private men nor the Congregation should pretend that God had spoken by them and by Consequence that they had the right of interpreting Gods Word for they contending that God spake no lesse by them then by Moyses arguâ— thus Yee take too much upon you seeing all the Congregation are holy every one of them and the Lord is among them wherefore then lift yee up your selves above the Congregation of the Lord Numb 16. ver 3. But how God determin'd this controversie is easily understood by the 33. and 35. verses of the same Chapter where Corah Dathan and Ahiram went downe alive into the Pit and there came out fire from the Lord and consumed the two hundred and fifty men that offer'd Incense Secondly that Aaron the high Priest had not this authority is manifest by the like controversie betweene him together with his Sister Miriam and Moyses For the Question was whether God spake by Moyses only or by them also that is to say whether Moyses alone or whether they also were interpreters of the Word of God For thus they said Hath the Lord indeed spoken onely by Moyses Hath he not also spoken by us Numb 12. ver 2. But God reprov'd them and made a distinction betweene Moyses and other Prophets saying If there be a Prophet among you I the Lord will make my selfâ— knowne unto him in a vision and will speake unto him in a dreame My Servant Moyses is not so c. For with him will I speake mouth to mouth even apparently and not in darke speecheâ— and the Similitude of the Lord shall he behold wherefore then were yee not afraid to speake against my Servant Moyses Ibid. ver 6 7 8. Lastly that the interpretation of the Word of God as long as Moses liv'd belong'd not to any other Prophets whatsoever is collected out of that place which we now cited concer-cerning his eminency above all others and out of naturall reason for as much as it belongs to the same Prophet who brings the Commands of God to unfold them too but there was then no other Word of God beside that which was declar'd by Moyses and out of this also that there was no other Prophet extant at that time who Prophesied to the people excepting the 70. Elders who Prophesied by the Spirit of Moyses and even that Joshuâ—h who was then Moyses his Servant his successour afterward beleev'd to be injuriously done till he know it was by Moyses his Consent which thing is manifest by Text of Scripture And the Lord came downe in a clowd c. and tooke of the spirit that was upon Moyses and gave it unto the 70. Elders Numb 11. ver 25. Now after it was told that they Prophesied Joshuah said unto Moyses Forbid them my Lord But Moyses answered Why enviest thou for my sake Seeing therefore Moyses alone was the Messenger of Gods Word and that the authority of interpreting it pertain'd neither to private men nor to the Synagogue nor to the High Priest nor to other Prophets it remaines that Moyses alone was the Interpreter of Gods Word who also had the supreme power in civill matters and that the conventions of Corah with thâ— rest of his complices against Moses and Aaron and of Aaron with his Sister against Moyses were rais'd not for the salvation of their soules but by reason of their ambition and desire of Dominion over the People XIV In Joshuahs time the interpretation of the Lawes and of the Word of God belong'd to Eleâ—zar the High Priest who was also under God their absolute King which is collected first of all out of the Covenant it selfe in which the Common-wealth of Israel is called a Priestly Kingdome or as it is recited in the 1 Pet. 2. 9. A Royall Priesthood which could in no wise be sayd unlesse by the institution and Covenant of the People the regall power were understood to belong to the High Priest Neither doth this repugne what hath beene said before where Moyses and not Aaren had the Kingdome under God since it is necessary that when one man institutes the forme of a future Common-wealth that one should governe the Kingdome which he institutes during his life whether it be Monarchie Aristocraty or Democraty and have all that power for the present which he is bestowing on others for the future Now that Eleazar the Priest had not onely the Priesthood but also the Soveraignty is expressely set downe in Joshuahs call to the administration for thus it is written Take thee Joshuah the Son of Nun a man in whom is the Spirit and lay thine hand upon him and set him before Eleazer the Priest and before all the Congregation and give him a charge in their sight and thou shalt put some of thine honour upon him that all the Congregation of the Children of Israel may be obedient and he shall stand before Eleazar the Priest who shall aske Counsell for him after the judgment of Urim before the Lord at his word shall they goe out and at his word shall they come in and all the Children of Israel with him even all the Congregation Nâ—m 27. vâ—r 18 19 20 21. where to aske Counsell of God for whatsoever is to be done that is to interpret Gods word and in the name of God to Command in all matters belongs to Eleazar and to goe out and to come in at his word that is to say to obey belongs both to Joshuaâ— and to all the People It s to be observ'd also that that speech Part of thy glory clearely denotes that Joshuah had not a power equall with that which Moyses had In the meane time it is manifest that even in Ioshuahs time the Supreme power and authority of interpreting the word of God were both in one Person XV. After Ioshuahs death follow the times of the Iudges untill King Saul in which it is manifest that the right of the Kingdome instituted by God remained with the High Priest for the Kingdome was by Covenant Priestly that is to say Gods government by Priests and such ought it to have been untill that form with Gods consent were changed by the people themselves which was not done before that requiring a King God consented unto them and said unto Samuel Hearken unto the voyce of the people in all that they say unto thee for they have not rejected thee but they have rejected me that I should not reign over them 1. Sam. 8. 7. The supreme civill power was therefore Rightly due by Gods own institution to the High-Priest but actually that power was in the Prophets to whom being raysed by God in an extraordinary manner the Israelites a people greedy of the Prophets
him 100â— next day and that I will doe no act whereby to apprehend and bring him to Justice whether I am tyed to keep promise or not but though such a Promise must sometimes be judged to be of no effect yet it is not to be accounted so because it proceeded from fear for then it would follow that those promises which reduc'd men to a civill life and by which Lawes were made might likewise be of none effect for it proceeds from fear of mutuall slaughter that one man submits himselfe to the Dominion of another And he should play the fool finely who should trust his captive covenanting with the price of his redemption It holds universally true that promises doe oblige when there is some benefit received and that to promise and the thing promised be lawfull But it is lawfull for the redemption of my life both to promise and to give what I will of mine owne to any man even to a Thief We are oblig'd therefore by promises proceeding from fear except the Civill Law forbid them by vertue whereof that which is promised becomes unlawfull XVII Whosoever shall contract with one to doe or omit somewhat and shall after Covenant the contrary with another he maketh not the former but the latter Contract unlawfull for he hath no longer Right to doe or to omit ought who by former Contracts hath conveyed it to another wherefore he can conveigh no Right by latter Contracts and what is promised is promis'd without Right He is therefore tyed onely to his first Contract to break which is unlawfull XVIII No man is oblig'd by any Contracts whatsoever not to resist him who shall offer to kill wound or any other way hurt his Body for there is in every man a certain high degree of fear through which he apprehends that evill which is done to him to be the greatest and therefore by naturall necessity he shuns it all he can and 't is suppos'd he can doe no otherwise When a man is arriv'd to this degree of fear we cannot expect but be will provide for himself either by slight or fight Since therefore no man is tyed to impossibilities they who are threatned either with death which is the greatest evill to nature or wounds or some other bodily hurts and are not stout enough to bear them are not obliged to endure them Farthermore he that is tâ—ed by Contâ—act is trusted for Faith only is the Bond of Contracts but they who are brought to punishment either Capitall or more gentle are fâ—ttered or strongly guarded which is a most certain signe that they seem'd not sufficiently bound from non resistance by thâ—ir Contracts It s one thing if I promise thus If I doe it not at the day appointed kill me Another thing if thus If I doe it not though you should offer to kill me I will not resist All men if need be contract the first way but there is need sometimes This second way none neither is it ever needfull for in the meer state of nature if you have a mind to kill that state it selfe affords you a Right insomuch as you need not first trust him if for breach of trust you will afterward kill him But in a Civill State where the Right of life and death and of all coâ—poâ—all punishment is with the Supreme that same Right of killing cannot be granted to any private person Neither need the Supreme himselfe contract with any man patiently to yeeld to his punishment but onely this that no man offer to defâ—nd others from him If in the state of nature as between two Realmes there should a Contract be made on condition of killing if it were not perform'd we must presuppose another Contract of not killing before the appointed day Wherefore on that day if there be no performance the right of Warre returnes that is an hostile state in which all things are lawfull and therefore resistance also Lastly by the contract of not resisting we are oblig'd of two Evills to make choice of that which seemes the greater for certaine Death is a greater evill then Fighting but of two Eviâ—ls it is impossible not to chuse the least By such a Compact therefore we should be tyed to impossibilities which is contrary to the very nature of compacts XIX Likewise no man is tyed by any Compacts whatsoever to accuse himself or any other by whose dammage he is like to procure himselfe a better life wherefore neither is a Father oblig'd to bear witnesse against his Sonne nor a Husband against his Wife nor a Sonne against his Father nor any man against any one by whose meanes he hath his subsistance for in vain is that testimony which is presum'd to be corrupted from nature but although no man be tyed to accuse himself by any compact yet in a publique tryall he may by torture be forc'd to make answer but such answers are no testimony of the fact but helps for the searching out of truth insomuch as whether the party torâ—uâ—'d his answer be true or false or whether he answer not at all whatsoever he doth he doth it by Right XX. Swearing is a speech joyned to a promise whereby the promiser declares his renouncing of Gods mercy unlesse he perform his word which definition is contained in the words themselves which have in them the very essence of an Oath to wit so God help me or other equivalent as with the Romans Doc thou Jupiter so destroy the deceiver as I slay this same Beast neither is this any let but that an Oath may as well sometimes be affirmatory as promissory for he that confirmes his affirmation with an Oath promiseth that he speaks truth But though in some places it was the fashion for Subjects to Swear by their Kings that custome took its Originall hence That those Kings took upon them Divine Honour for Oathes were therefore introduc'd that by Religion and consideration of the Divine Power men might have a greater dread of breaking their Faiths then that wherewith they fear men from whose eyes their actions may lie hid XXI Whence it followes that an Oath must be conceived in that forme which he useth who takes it for in vain is any man brought to Swear by a God whom he beleeves not and therefore neither feares him For though by the light of nature it may be known that there is a God yet no man thinks he is to Swear by him in any other fashion or by any other name then what is contain'd in the precepts of his own proper that is as he who Swears imagines the true Religion XXII By the definition of an Oath we may understand that a bare Contract obligeth no lesse then that to which we are Sworn for it is the contract which binds us the Oath relates to the Divine punishment which it could not provoke if the breach of contract were not in its selfe unlawfull but it could not be unlawfull if
doe not so much care to destroy it as to conveigh it on others for removing this power they together take away Civill Society and a confusion of all things returnes There is so much obedience joyn'd to this absolute Right of the Chief Ruler as is necessarily requir'd for the Government of the City that is to say so much as that Right of his may not be granted in vaine Now this kind of obedience although for some reasons it may sometimes by Right be deny'd yet because a greater cannot be perform'd we will call it SIMPLE But the obligation to performe this growes not immediately from that Contract by which we have conveigh'd all our Right on the City but mediately from hence That without obedience the Cities Right would be frustrate and by consequence there would be no City constituted For it is one thing if I say I give you Right to Command what you will another if I say I will doe whatsoever you Command and the Command may be such as I would rather die then doe it forasmuch therefore as no man can be bound to will being kill'd much lesse is he tyed to that which to him is worse then death if therefore I be commanded to kill my self I am not bound to doe it for though I deny to doe it yet the Right of dominion is not frustrated since others may be found who being commanded will not refuse to doe it neither doe I refuse to doe that which I have contracted to doe In like manner if the Chief Ruler command any man to kill him he is not tyed to doe it because it cannot be conceiv'd that he made any such Covenant nor if he command to execute a Parent whether he be innocent or guilty and condemned by the Law since there are others who being commanded will doe that and a Son will rather die then live infamous and hated of all the world There are many other cases in which since the Commands are shamefull to be done by some and not by others Obedience may by Right be perform'd by these and refus'd by those and this without breach of that absolute Right which was given to the Chief Ruler For in no case is the Right taken away from him of slaying those who shall refuse to obey him But they who thus kill men although by Right given them from him that hath it yet if they use that Right otherwise then right Reason requires they sin against the Lawes of Nature that is against God Absolute A popular state openly challengeth absolute dominion and the Citizens oppose it not for in the gathering together of many men they acknowledge the face of a City and even the unskilfull understand that matters there are rul'd by Counsell Yet Monarchy is no lesse a City then Democraâ—y and absolute Kings have their Counsellours from whom they will take advice and suffer their power in matters of greater consequence to be guided but not recall'd But it appears not to most men how a City is contain'd in the Person of a King and therefore they object against Absolute Command First that if any man had such a Right the condition of the Citizens would be miserable For thus they think He will take all spoil all kill all and every man counts it his onely happinesse that he is not already spoil'd and kill'd But why should he doe thus not because he can for unlesse he have a mind to it he will not doe it Will he to please one or some few spoil all the rest First though by Right that is without injury to them he may doe it yet can he not doe it justly that is without breach of the Naturall Lawes and injury against God And therefore there is some security for Subjects in the Oaths which Princes take Next if he could justly doe it or that he made no account of his Oath yet appeares there no reason why he should desire it since he findes no good in it But it cannot be deny'd but a Prince may sometimes have an inclination to doe wickedly but grant then that thou hadst given him a power which were not absolute but so much onely as suffic'd to defend thee from the injuries of others which if thou wilt be safe is necessary for thee to give are not all the same things to be feared for he that hath strength enough to protect all wants not sufficiency to oppresse all Here is no other difficulty then but that humane affaires cannot be without some inconvenience And this inconvenience it self is in the Citizens not in the Government for if men could rule themselves every man by his own command that 's to say could they live according to the Lawes of Nature there would be no need at all of a City nor of a common coercive power Secondly they object That there is no Dominion in the Christian world Absolute which indeed is not true for all Monarchies and all other States are so for although they who have the chief Command doâ— not all those things they would and what they know profitable to the City the reason of that is not the defect of Right in them but the consideration of their Citizens who busied about their private interest and carelesse of what tends to the publique cannot sometimes be drawn to performe their duties without the hazard of the City Wherefore Princes sometimes forbear the exercise of their Right and prudently remit somewhat of the act but nothing of their Right XIV Neither can any man give somewhat to himselfe for he is already suppos'd to have what he can give himself nor can he be oblig'd to himselfe for the same Party being both the obliged and the Obliger and the Obliger having power to release the obliged it were meerly in vain for a man to be obliged to himselfe because he can release himself at his own pleasure and he that can doe this is already actually free Whence its plaine that the City is not tyed to the Civill Lawes for the Civill Lawes are the Lawes of the City by which if she were engag'd she should be engag'd to her selfe Neither can the City be oblig'd to her Citizen because if he will he can free her from her obligation and he will as oft as she wills for the will of every Citizen is in all things comprehended in the will of the City the City therefore is free when she pleaseth that is she is now actually free but the will of a Councell or one who hath the Supreme Authority given him is the will of the City he therefore containes the wills of all particular Citizens Therefore neither is he bound to the Civill Lawes for this is to be bound to himself nor to any of his Citizens XV. Now because as hath been shewn above before the constitution of a City all things belong'd to all men nor is there that thing which any man can so call his as any other may not by the same
when it was grown a custome because that custome was not contradicted and therefore the will of the Father unlesse some other custome or signe doe clearly repugne it is to be interpreted in favour of them XVII Now because the Sonnes are equall and the power cannot be divided the eldest shall succeed for if there be any difference by reason of age the eldest is supposed more worthy for nature being judge the most in years because usually it is so is the wisest But other judge there cannot be had But if the Brothers must be equally valued the succession shall be by lot but primogeniture is a naturall lot and by this the eldest is already prefer'd nor is there any that hath power to judge whether by this or any other kind of lots the matter is to be decided Now the same reason which contends thus for the first-born sonne doth no lesse for the first born daughter XVIII But if he have no children then the command shall pass to his Brothers Sisters for the same reason that the children should have succeeded if he had had them for those that are nearest to us in nature are supposed to be nearest in benevolence and to his brothers sooner then his sisters and to the elder sooner then the yonger for the reason is the same for these which it was for the children XIX Furthermore by the same reason that men succeed to the power doe they also succeed to the Right of succession for if the first-born dye before the Father it will be judged that he transferred his Right of suc cession unto his children unlesse the Father have otherwise decreed it and therefore the Nephewes will have a fairer pretence to the succession then the Uncles I say all these things will be thus if the custome of the place which the Father by not contradicting will be judged to have conâ—ented to doe not hinder them CHAP. X. A comparison between 3. kinds of government according to their severall inconveniences I. A comparison of the naturall state with the civill II. The conveniences and inconveniences of the Ruler and his Subjects are alike III. The praise of Monarchy IV. The Government under one cannot be said to be unreasonable in this respect namely because one hath more power then all the rest V. A Rejection of their opinion who say that a Lord with his Servants cannot make a City VI. Exactions are more grievous under a popular State then a Monarchy VII Innocent Subjects are lesse exposed to penalties under a Monarch then under the People VIII The liberty of single Subjects is not lesse under a Monarch then under a People IX It is no disadvantage to the Subiects that they are not all admitted to publick deliberations X. Civill deliberations are unadvisedly committed to great Assemblies by reason of the unskilfulnes of the most part of men XI In regard of eloquence XII In regard of faction XIII In regard of the unstablenes of the Lawes XIV In regard of the want of secrecy XV. That these inconveniences adhere to Democraty forasmuch as men are naturally delighted with the esteeme of wit XVI The inconveniencies of a City arising from a King that is a childe XVII The power of Generalls is an evident sign of the excellence of Monarchy XVIII The best state of a City is that where the Subiects are the Rulers inheritance XIX The nearer Aristocraty drawes to Monarchy the better it is the further it keeps from it the worse I. VVHat Democraty Aristocraty and Monarchy are hath already been spoken but which of them tends most to the preservation of the subjects Peace and procuring their advantages we must see by comparing them together but first let us set forth the advantages and disadvantages of a City in generall lest some perhaps should think it better that every man be left to live at his own will then to constitute any civill society at all Every man indeed out of the state of civill government hath a most entire but unfruitfull liberty because that he who by reason of his own liberty acts all at his own will must also by reason of the same liberty in others suffer al at anothers wil but in a constituted City every subject retains to himselfe as much freedom as suffices him to live well and quietly there is so much taken away from others as may make them not to be feared Out of this state every man hath such a Right to all as yet he can enjoy nothing in it each one securely enjoyes his limited Right Out of it any man may rightly spoyle or kill one another in it none but one Out of it we are protected by our own forces in it by the power of all Out of it no man is sure of the fruit of his labours in it all men are Lastly out of it there is a Dominion of Passions war fear poverty slovinlinesse solitude barbarisme ignorance cruelty In it the Dominion of reason peace security riches decency society elegancy sciences and benevolence II. Aristotle in his seventh book and fourteenth Chapter of his Politiques saith that there are two sorts of governments whereof the one relates to the benefit of the Ruler the other to that of the Subjects as if where Subjects are severely dealt wiâ—h there were one and where more mildly there were another form of government which opinion may by no means be subscribed to for all the profits and disprofits arising from government are the same and common both to the Ruler and the Subject The Dammages which befall some particular subjects through misfortune folly negligence sloth or his own luxury may very well be severed from those which concern the Ruler but those relate not to the government it selfe being such as may happer in any form of government whatsoever If these same happen from the first institution of the City they will then be truly called the inconveniencies of government but they will be common to the Ruler with his subjects as their benefits are common but the first and greatest benefit Peace and defence is common to both for both he that commands and he who is commanded to the end that he may defend his life makes use at once of all the forces of his fellow-subjects and in the greatest inconvenience that can befall a City namely the slaughter of subjects arising from Anarchy both the Commander and the Parties commanded are equally concerned Next if the Ruler levie such a summe of vast monies from his subjects as they are not able to maintain themselves and their families nor conserve their bodily strength and vigour the disadvantage is as much his as theirs who with never so great a stock or measure of riches is not able to keep his authority or his riches without the bodies of his subjects but if he raise no more then is sufficient for the due administration of his power that is a benefit equall to himselfe and his
be a woman or youth or infant provided that they be fit for affaires who are endued with the publique Offices and charges And that which is said Woe to the land whose King is a childe doth not signifie the condition of a Monarchy to be inferiour to a Popular state but contrariwise that by accident it is the grievance of a Kingdome that the King being a childe it often happens that many by ambition and power intruding themselves into publique counsels the government comes to be administred in a Democraticall manner and that thence arise those infelicities which for the most part accompany the Dominion of the People XVII But it is a manifest sign that the most absolute Monarchy is the best state of government that not onely Kings but even those Cities which are subject to the people or to Nobles give the whole command of warre to one only and that so absolute as nothing can be more wherein by the way this must be noted also that no King can give a Generall greater authority over his army then he himselfe by Right may exercise over all his subjects Monarchy therefore is the best of all governments in the Camps But what else are many Common-wealths then so many Camps strengthened with armes and men against each other whose state because not restrained by any common power howsoever an uncertain peace like a short truce may passe between them is to be accounted for the state of nature which is the state of War XVIII Lastly since it was necessary for the preservation of our selves to be subject to some Man or Councell we cannot on better condition be subject to any then one whose interest depends upon our safety and welfare and this then comes to passe when we are the inheritance of the Ruler for every man of his own accord endeavours the preservation of his inheritance But the Lands and Monies of the Subjects are not onely the Princes Treasure but their bodies and wildy minds which will be easily granted by those who consider at how great rates the Dominion of lesser Countries is valued and how much easier it is for men to procure mony then money men nor doe we readily meet with any example that shewes us when any subject without any default of his own hath by his Prince been despoiled of his life or goods through the sole licenciousnesse of his Authority XIX Hitherto we have compared a Monarchicall with a Popular State we have said nothing of Aristocracy we may conclude of this by what hath been said of those that that which is hereditary and content with the election of Magistrates which transmits its deliberations to some few and those most able which simply imitates the government of Monarchs most and the People least of all is for the Subjects both better and more lasting then the rest CHAP. XI Places and Examples of Scripture of the Rights of Government agreeable to what hath beene said before I. The beginning of institutive Government from the consent of the People II. Judicature and Wars depend on the will of Supreme Commanders III. That they who have the Chief Authority are by Right unpunishable IV. That without a Supreme Power there is no Government but Anarchy V. That from Servants and Sons there is a simple obedience due to their Lords and Parents VI. Absolute Authority proved by most evident places as well of the New as the Old Testament I. VVE have in the 6. Chapter and the 2. Article so derived the Originall of institutive or politicall Government from the consent of the Multitude that it appears they must either all consent or be esteem'd as Enemies Such was the beginning of Gods Government over the Jewes instituted by Moses If ye will obey my voice induced c. Ye shall be unto me a Kingdome of Priests c. And Moses came and called the Elders of the People c. And all the people answered and said All that the Lord hath spoken we will do Exod. 19. ver 5 6 7 8. Such also was the beginning of Moyses his power under God or of his Vicegerency And all the people saw the thunderings and lightenings and the noyse of the Trumpet c. And they said unto Moyses speak thou unto us and we will hear Exod. 20. 18 19. The like beginning also had Sauls Kingdome When yee saw that Nahash King of the children of Ammon came out against you yee said unto me nay but a King shall raign over us when the Lord your God was your King Now therefore behold the King whom yee have chosen and whom yee have desired 1 Sam. 12. 12. But the major part only consenting and not all for there were certain Sons of Belial who said How shall this man save us and they dispised him 1 Sam. 10. 27. those who did not consent were put to death as Enemies And the people said unto Samuel Who is he that said shall Saul reign over us Bring the men that we may put them to death 1 Sam. 11. 22. II. In the same 6. Chapter the 6. and 7. Articles I have shewed that all Judgment and Wars depend upon the will and pleasure of him who beares the Supreme Authority that is to say in a Monarchy on a Monarch or King and this is confirmed by the Peoples owne judgement Wee also will be like all the Nations and our King shall JUDGE us and goe out before us and fight our BATTELS 1 Sam. 〈◊〉 20. And what pertaines to Judgements and all other matters whereof there is any controversie whether they be Good or Evill is confirmed by the testimony of King Solomon Give therefore thy Servant an understanding heart to JUDGE thy People that I may discerne between GOOD and EVILL 1. Kings 3. 9. And that of Absolom There is no man deputed of the King to heare thee 2. Sam. 15. 3. III. That Kings may not be punished by their subjects as hath been shewed above in the sixth Chapter and the twelfth Article King David also confirmes who though Saul sought to stay him did notwithstanding refrain his hand from killing him and forbad Abishai saying Destroy him not for who caâ—â— stretch forth his hand against the Lords Anointed and be innocent 1 Sam. 22. v. 9. And when he had cut off the skirt of his garment The Lord forbid saith he that I should doe this thing unto my Master the Lords Anointed to stretch forth mine hand against him 1 Sam. 24. 7. And commanded the Amalekiâ—e who for his sake had slain Saul to be put to death 2 Sam. 1. 15. IV. That which is said in the 17. Chapter of Judges at the 6. verse In those dayes there was no King in Israel but every man did that which was right in his own eyes as though where there were not a Monarchy there were an Anarchy or confusion of all things may be brought as a testimony to prove the exexcellency of Monarchy above all
other forms of government unlesse that by the word King may perhaps be understood not one man onely but also a Court provided that in it there reside a supreme power which if it be taken in this sense yet hence it may follow that without a supreme and absolute power which we have endeavoured to prove in the sixth Chapter there will be a liberty for every man to doe what hee hath a minde or whatsoever shall seem right to himselfe which cannot stand with the preservation of mankinde and therefore in all Government whatsoever there is ever a supreme power understood to be somewhere existent V. We have in the 8. Chapter the 7. and 8. Article said that Servants must yeeld a simple obedience to their Lords and in the 9. Chapter Article 7. that Sonnes owe the same obedience to their Parents Saint Paul sayes the same thing concerning Servants Servants obey in all things your Masters according to the flesh not with eye service as men-pleasers but in singlenesse of heart fearing God Colos 3. 22. Concerning Sonnes Children obey your Parents in all things for this is well pleasing unto the Lord. Colos 3. 20. Now as wee by simple obedience understand ALL THINGS which are not contrary to the Lawes of God so in those cited places of Saint Paul after the word ALL THINGS we must suppose excepting those which are contrary to the Lawes of God VI. But that I may not thus by peece meale prove the right of Princes I will now instance those testimonies which altogether establish the whole power namely that there is an absolute and simple obedience due to them from their subjects And first out of the new Testament The Scribes and Pharisâ—es sit in Moyses seat all therefore whatsoever they bid you observe that observe and doâ— Mat. 23. 2. Whatsoever they bid you sayes he observe that is to say obey simply Why Because they sit in Moyses seat namely the civill Magistrates not Aaron the Priests Leâ— every soule be subject to the higher powers for there is no power but of God the powers that be are ordained of God whosoever therefore resisteth the power resisteth the ordinance of God and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation Rom. 13. 1. Now because the powers that were in Saint Pauls time were ordained of God and all Kings did at that time require an absolute entire obedience from their subjects it followes that such a power was ordained of God Submit your selves unto every ordinance of man for the Lords sake whether it bee to the King as supreme or unto Governours as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of wicked doers and for the praise of them that doe well for so is the will of God 1 Pet. 2. 13. Again Saint Paul to Titus Put them mind to bee subject to Principalitiies and Powers to obey Magistrates c. Chap. 3. vers 1. What Principalities Was it not to the Principalities of those times which required an absolute obedience Furthermore that we may come to the example of Christ himselfe to whom the Kingdome of the Jewes belonged by hereditary Right derived from David himselfe He when he lived in the manner of a subject both paid tribute unto Caesar and pronounced it to be due to him Give unto Caesar saith he the things which are Caesars and unto God the things which are Gods Mat. 22. 21. When it pleased him to shew himselfe a King he required entire obedience Goe said he into the village over against you and straightway yee shall finde an Assetyed and a Colt with her loose them and bring them unto me and if any man say ought unto you yec shall say the Lord hath need of them Mat. 14. 2. This he did therefore by the right of being Lord or a King of the Jewes But to take away a subjects goods on this pretence onely because the Lord hath need of them is an absolute power The most evident places in the old Testament are these Goe thou near and heare ALL that the Lord our God shall say and speak thou unto us all that the Lord our God shall speak unto thee and we will hear it and doe it Deut. 5. 27. But under the word all is contained absolute obedience Again to Joshua And they answered Joshua saying ALL that thou commandest us we will doe and whithersoever thou sendest us we will goe according as we hearkened unto Moyses in ALL things so will we hearken unto thee onely the Lord thy God be with thee as he was with Moyses whosoever hee be that doth rebell against thy Commandement and will not hearken unto thy words in ALL that thou commandest him he shall be put to death Joshua 1. 16 17 18. And the Parable of the Bramble Then said all the trees unto the Bramble Come thou aâ—d reign over us And the Bramble said unto the trees If in truth yee anoint me King over you then come and put your trust in my shadow and if not let sire come out of the Bramble and devoure the Cedars of Lebanon Juages 9. vers 14 15. The sense of which words is that we must acquiese to their sayings whom we have truly constituted to be Kings over us unlesse we would chuse rather to be consumed by the fire of a civill warre But the Regall authority is more particularly described by God himselfe in the 1. Sam. 8. vers 9. c. Shew them the Right of the King that shall reign over them c. This shall be the Right of the King that shall reign over you he will take your Sons and appoint them for himself for his Chariots and to he his horsemen and some shall runne before his Chariots c. And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries c. And he will take your vineyards and give them to his Servants c. Is not this power absolute And yet it is by God himself styled the KINGS RIGHT neither was any man among the Jewes no not the High Priest himselfe exempted from this obedience For when the King namely Solomon said to Abiathar the Priest Get thee to Anathoth unto thine â—wn fields for thou art worthy of death but I will not at this time put thee to death because thou â—arest the Ark of the Lord God before David my father and because then hast been afflicted in all wherein my Father was afflicted So Solomon thrust out Abiathar from being Priest unto the Lord. 1 Kings 2. 26. It cannot by any argument be proved that this act of his displeased the Lord neither read we that either Solomon was reproved or that his Person at that time was any whit lesse acceptable to God CHAP. XII Of the internall causes tending to the dissolution of any Government I. That the judging of good and evill belongs to private Persons is a seditious opinion II. That subjects doâ— sinne by obeying their Princes is a seditious opinion III. That Tyrannicide is
Cataline then whom there never waâ— a greater Artist in raising seditions is this That he had great eloquence and little wisdome he separates wisdome from eloquence attributing this as necessary to a man born for commotions adjudging that as an instructresse of Peace and quietnesse Now eloquence is twofold The one is an elegant and cleare expression of the conceptions of the mind and riseth partly from the contemplation of the things themselves partly from an understanding of words taken in their own proper and definite signification the other is a commotion of the Passions of the minde such as are hope fear anger pitty and derives from a metaphoricall use of words fitted to the Passions That forms a speech from true Principles this from opinions already received what nature soever they are of The art of that is Logick of this Rhetorick the end of that is truth of this victory Each hath its use that in deliberations this in exhortations for that is never disjoyned from wisdome but this almost ever But that this kind of powerfull eloquence separated from the true knowledge of things that is to say from wisdome is the true character of them who sollicite and stirre up the people to innovations may easily be gathered out of the work it selfe which they have to doe for they could not poyson the people with those absurd opinions contrary to Peace and civill society unlesse they held them themselves which sure is an ignorance greater then can well befall any wise man for he that knows not whence the Lawes derive their power which are the Rules of just and unjust honest and dishonest good and evill what makes and preserves Peace among men what destroyes it what is his and what anothers Lastly what he would have done to himselfe that he may doe the like to others is surely to be accounted but meanly wisâ— but that they can turn their Auditors out of fools into madmen that they can make things to them who are ill-affected seem worse to them who are well-affected seem evil that they can enlarge their hopes lessen their dangers beyond reason this they have from that sort of eloquence not which explains things as they are but from that other which by moving their mindes makes all things to appear to bee such as they in their mindes prepared before had already conceived them XIII Many men who are themselves very well affected to civill society doe through want of knowledge cooperate to the disposing of subjects mindes to sedition whilst they teach young men a doctrine conformable to the said opinions in their Schooles and all the people in their Pâ—lpits now they who desire to bring this disposition into Act place their whole endeavour in this First that they may joyn the ill affected together into faction and conspiracy next that themselves may have the greatest stroke in the faction They gather them into faction while they make themselves the relators and interpretors of the counsels and actions of single men and nominate the Persons and Places to assemble and deliberate of such things whereby the present government may be reformed according as it shall seem best to their interests Now to the end that they themselves may have the chief rule in the faction The faction must be kept in a faction that is to say they must have their secret meetings apart with a few where they may order what shall afterward be propounded in a general meeting and by whom and on what subject and in what order each of them shall speak and how they may draw the powerfullest and most popular men of the faction to their side and thus when they have gotten a faction big enough in which they may rule by their eloquence they move it to take upon it the managing of affaires and thus they sometimes oppresse the Common-wealth namely where there is no other faction to oppose them but for the most part they rend it and introduce a civill warre for folly and eloquence concurre in the subversion of government in the same manner as the â—able hath it as heretofore the daughters of Palias King of Thessaly conspired with Medea against their father They going to restore the decrepit old man to his youth again by the counsell of Medea they cut him into peeces and set him in the fire to boyle in vain expecting when he would live again So the common people through their folly like the daughters of Palias desiring to renew the ancient government being drawne away by the eloquence of ambitious men as it were by the witchcraft of Medea divided into faction they consume it rather by those flames then they reforme it CHAP. XIII Concerning the duties of them who bear Rule I. The Right of supreme authority is distinguished from its exercise II. The safety of the people is the supreme Law III. It behoves Princes to regard the common benefit of many not the propriety of this or that Man IV. That by safety is understood all manner of conveniencies V. A Querie Whether it be the duty of Kings to provide for the salvation of their Subjects soules as they shall judge best according to their owne consciences VI. Wherein the safety of the people consists VII That discoverers are necessary for the defence of the people VIII That to have souldiers armes garrisons and monies in a readinesse in time of Peace is also necessary for the defence of the People IX A right instruction of subjects in civill doctrines is necessary for the preserving of Peace X. Equall distributions of publick Offices conduces much to the preservation of Peace XI It is naturall equity that monies be taxt according to what every man spends not what he posaesses XII It conduceth to the preservation of Peace to keepe downe ambitious men XIII And to breake factions XIV Laws whereby thriving Arts are cherisht and great costs restrained conduce to the enriching of the Subiect XV. That more ought not to be defined by the Lawes then the benefit of the Prince and his Subiects requires XVI That greater punishments must not bee inflicted then are prescribed by the Lawes XVII Subiects must have Right done them against corrupt Judges I. BY what hath hitherto been said the duties of Citizens and Subjects in any kind of government whatsoever and the power of the supreme Ruler over them are apparent but we have as yet said nothing of the duties of Rulers and how they ought to behave themselves towards their Subjects We must then distinguish between the Right and the exercise of supreme authority for they can be divided as for exaâ—ple when he who hath the Right either cannot or will not be present in judging trespasses or deliberating of affaires For Kings sometimes by reason of their age cannot order their affaires sometimes also though they can doe it themselves yet they judge it fitter being satisfied in the choyce of their Officers and Counsellors to exercise their power by them
whether it be a sin or not when he hath freedome to forbear it is a contempt of the Lawes and therefore by the 28. Art of the third Chapter a sin against the Law of nature Vain therefore is that same distinction of obedience into Active and Passive as if that could be expiated by penalties constituted by humane decrees which is a sinne against the Law of nature which is the Law of God or as â—…though they sinned not who sinne at their own perill Integer vitae sceâ—erisque purâ—s Non eget Mauri jaculis nec areâ— Nec venenatis gravida sagittis Fusce pharetra Sive per Syrtes iter aestuosas Sive facturus per inhospitalâ—… Caucasum vel quae loca fabulosus Lambit Hidaspis RELIGION CHAP. XV. Of the Kingdome of God by Nature I. The Proposition of the following contents II. Over whom God is said to rule by nature III. The word of God three-fold Reason Revelation Prophesie IV. The Kingdome of God two-fold Naturall and Prophetique V. The Right whereby God reigns is seated in his omnipotence VI. The same proved from Scripture VII The obligation of yeelding obedience to God proceeds from humane infirmity VIII The Lawes of God in his naturall Kingdome are those which are recited above in the 2. and 3. Chapter IX What Honour and Worship is X. Worship consists either in attributes or in actions XI And there is one sort naturall another arbitrary XII One commanded another voluntary XIII What the end or scope of worship is XIV What the naturall Laws are concerning Gods attributes XV. What the actions are whereby naturally wee doe give worship XVI In Gods naturall Kingdome the City may appoint what worship of God it pleaseth XVII God ruling by nature only the City that is to say that man or Court who under God hath the soveraign authority of the Cioy is the Interpreter of all the Lawes XVIII Certaine doubts removed XIX What Sin is in the naturall Kingdom of God and what Treason against the divine Majesty I. WEE have already in the foregoing Chapters proved both by reason and testimonies of holy Writ that the estate of nature that is to say of absolute liberty such as is theirs who neither govern nor are governed is an Anarchy or hostile state that the precepts whereby to avoyd this state are the Lawes of nature that there can be no civill government without a Soveraigne and that they who have gotten this Soveraigne command must be obey'd simply that is to say in all things which repugne not the Commandments of God There is this one thing only wanting to the complete undestanding of all civill duty that is to know which are the Laws and Commandments of God for else we cannot tell whether that which the civill power commands us be against the Lawes of God or not whence it must necessarily happen that either by too much obedience to the civill authority we become stubborne against the divine Majesty or for feare of sinning against God we runne into disobeditnce against the civill power To avoid both these rocks its necessary to know the Divine Lawes now because the knowledge of the Lawes depends on the knowledge of the Kingdome we must in what followes speak somewhat concerning the Kingdome of God II. The Lord is King the earth may be glad thereof saith the Psalmist Psal 97. v. 1. And againe the same Psalmist Psal 99. v. 1. The Lord is King be the People never so unpatient he sâ—teth betweene the Cherubins â—e the Earth never so unquiet to wit whether men will or not God is THE King over all the Earth nor is he mov'd from his Throne if there be any who deny either his existence or his providence Now although God governe all men so by his power that none can doe any thing which he would not have done yet this to speake properly and accurately is not to reigne for he is sayed to reigne who rules not by acting but speaking that is to say by precepts and threatnings And therefore we account not inanimate nor irrationall bodies for Subjects in the Kingdome of God although they be subordinate to the Divine power because they understand not the commands and threats of God nor yet the Atheists because they beleeve not that there is a God nor yet those who beleeving there is a God doe not yet beleeeve that he rules these Inferiour things for even these although they be govern'd by the power of God yet doe they not acknowledge any of his Commands nor stand in awe of his threats Those onely therefore are suppos'd to belong to Gods Kingdome who acknowledge him to be the Governour of all things and that he hath given his Commands to men and appointed punishments for the transgressours The rest we must not call Subjects but Enemies of God III. But none are said to governe by commands but they who openly declare them to those who are govern'd by them for the Commands of the Rulers are the Lawes of the Rul'd but lawes they are not if not perspicuously publisht in so much as all excuse of Ignorance may be taken away Men indeed publish their Lawes by word or voice neither can they make their will universally knowne any other way But Gods lawes are declar'd after a threefold manner first by the tacit dictates of Right reason next by immediate revelation which is suppos'd to be done either by a supernaturall voice or by a vision or drcame or divine inspiration Thirdly by the voice of one man whom God recommends to the rest as worthy of beliefe by the working of â—rue miracles Now he whole voice God thus makes use of to signifie his will unto others is called a PROPHET These three manners may be term'd the threefold word of God to wit the Rationall word the sensible word and the word of Prophecy To which answer the three nanners whereby we are said to heare God Right reasoning sense and faith Gods sensible word hath come but to few neither hath God spoken to men by Revelation except particularly to some and to diverse diversely neither have any Lawes of his Kingdome beene publisht on this manner unto any people IV. And according to the difference which is between the Rationall word and the word of Prophecy we attribute a two-fold Kingdome unto God Naturall in which he reignes by the dictates of right reason and which is universall over all who acknowledge the Divine power by reason of that rationall nature which is common to all and Propheticall in which he rules also by the word of Prophecy which is peculiar because he hath not given positive Lawes to all men but to his peculiar people and some certaine men elected by him V. God in his naturall Kingdome hath a Right to rule and to punish those who break his Lawes from his sole irresistable power for all Right over others is either from nature or from Contract How the Right of governing
increaseth Gods Honour among those who do so account of it Or if it be commanded to call God by a name which we know not what it signifies or how it can agree with this word God That also must be done for what we do for Honours sake and we know no better if it be taken for a signe of Honour it is a signe of Honour and therefore if we refuse to doe it we refuse the enlarging of Gods Honour The same judgement must be had of all the Attributes and Actions about the meerly rationall Worship of God which may be controverted and dispuâ—ed for though these kind of commands may be sometimes contrary to right reason and therefore sins in them who command them yet are they not against right reason nor sins in Subjects whose right reason in points of Controversie is that which submits its selfe to the reason of the City Lastly if that Man or Councell who hath the Supreme Power command himselfe to be Worshipt with the same Attributes and Actions where with God is to be Worshipt the question is whether we must obey There are many things which may be commonly attributed both to God and Men for even Men may be Praised and Magnified and there are many actions whereby God and Men may be Worshipt But the significations of the Attributes and Actions are onely to be regarded Those Attributes therefore whereby we signify our selves to be of an opinion that there is any man endued with a Soveraignty independent from God or that he is immortall or of inâ—inite power and the like though commanded by Princes yet must they be abstained from as also from those Actions signifying the same as Prayer to the absent to aske those things which God alone can give as Rain and Fair weather to offer him what God can onely accept as Oblations Holocausts or to give a Worship then which a greater cannot be given as Sacrifice for these things seeme to tend to this end that God may not be thought to rule contrary to what was supposed from the beginning but genuflection prostration or any other act of the body whatsoever may be lawfully used even in civill Worship for they may signifie an acknowledgment of the civill power onely for Divine Worship is distinguisht from civill not by the motion placing habit or gesture of the Body but by the declaration of our opinion of him whom we doe Worship as if we cast down our selves before any man with intention of declaring by that Signe that we esteeme him as God it is Divine Worship if we doe the same thing as a Signe of our acknowledgment of the civill Power it is civill Worship Neither is the Divine Worship distinguished from Civill by any action usually understood by by the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereof the former marking out the Duty of Servants the latter their Destiny they are words of the same action in degree Truly it is to be done We said in the 14. Article of this Chapter That they who attributed limits to God transgrest the naturall Law concerning Gods Worship now they who worship him in an Image assigne him limits wherefore they doe that which they ought not to doe and this place seemes to contradict the former We must therefore know first that they who are constrained by Authority doe not set God any boonds but they who command them for they who worship unwillingly doe worship in very deed but they either stand or fall there where they are commanded to stand or fall by a lawfull Soveraign Secondly I say it must be done not at all times and every where but on supposition that there is no other rule of worshipping God beside the dictates of humane reason for then the will of the City stands for Reason but in the Kingdome of God by way of Covenant whether old or new where idolatry is expressely forbid though the City commands us to worship thus yet must we not do it which if he shall consider who conceived some repugnancy between this and the 14. Article will surely cease to think so any longer XIX From what hath been said may be gathered that God reigning by the way of naturall reason onely Subjects doe sinne First if they break the morall Laws which are unfolded in the second and third Chapters Secondly if they break the Lawes or commands of the City in those things which pertain to Justice Thirdly if they worship not God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Fourthly if they confesse not before men both in words and deeds that there is one God most good most great most blessed the Supreme King of the World and of all worldly Kings that is to say if they doe not worship God This fourth sinne in the naturall Kingdome of God by what hath been said in the foregoing Chapter in the second Article is the sinne of Treason against the Divine Majesty for it is a denying of the Divine Power or Atheisme for sinnes proceed here just as if we should suppose some man to be the Soveraign King who being himselfe absent should rule by his Vice-Roy against whom sure they would transgresse who should not obey his Vice-Roy in all things except he usurpt the Kingdome to himself or would give it to some other but they who should so absolutely obey him as not to admit of this exception might be said to be guilty of Treason CHAP. XVI Of the Kingdome of God under the Old Covenant I. Superstition possessing Forrain Nations God institued the true Religion by the means of Abraham II. By the Covenant between God and Adam all dispute is forbidden concerning the Commands of Surâ—ours III. The manner of the Covenant between God and Abraham IV. In that Covenant is contained an acknowledgement of God not simply but of him who appeared unto Abraham V. The Lawes unto which Abraham was tyed were no other beside those of Nature and the Law of Circumcision VI. Abraham was the Interpreter of the Word of God and of all Lawes among those that belonged to him VII Abrahams subjects could not sinne by obeying him VIII Gods Covenant with the Hebrews at Mount Sinai IX From thence Gods Government took the name of a Kingdome X. What Lawes were by God given to the Jewes XI What the Word of God is and how to be known XII What was held the written Word of God among the Jewes XIII The power of interpreting the Word of God and the supreme civill power were united in Moises while he lived XIV They were also united in the High Priest during the life of Joshuah XV. They were united too in the High Priest untill King Sâ—uls time XVI They were also united in the Kings untill the captivity XVII They were so in the High Priests after the captivity XVIII Deniall of the Divine Providence and Idolatry were the onely Treasons against the Divine Majesty among the Jewes in all things else they ought to obey
c. shall enter into the Kingdome of God and of Christ Ephes 5. ver 5. And elsewhere I charge thee before God and the Lord Iesus Christ who shall judge the quick and dead at his appearing and his Kingdome c. 2 Tim. 4. ver 1. And the Lord shall deliver me from every evill worke and will preserve me unto his heavenly Kingdome ver 18. Nor is it to be marvelled at that the same Kingdome is atttibured to them both since both the Father and the Son are the same God and the new Covenant concerning Gods Kingdome is not propounded in the Name of the FATHER but in the name of the FATHER of the SON and of the HOLY-GHOST as of one God V. But the Kingdome of God for restitution whereof CHRIST was sent from God his Father takes not its beginning before his second comming to wit from the day of Judgement when he shall come in Majesty accompanied with his Angels For it is promis'd the Apostles that in the Kingdome of God they shall judge the twelve tribes of Israel Ye which have followed me in the regeneration when the Soune of man shall sit in the Throne of his glory ye also shall sit upon twelve Thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel Mat. 19. ver 28. which is not to be done till the day of judgement CHRIST therefore is not yet in the throne of his Majesty nor is that time when CHRIST was conversant here in the world call'd a Kingdome but a regeneration that is to say a renovation or restitution of the Kingdome of God and a calling of them who were hereafter to be receiv'd into his Kingdome And where it is said When the Son of man shall come in his glory and all the holy Angels with him then shall he set upon the throne of his glory and before him shall be gathered all Nations and he shall separate them one from another as a Shepheard divideth his Sheep from the Goates Mat. 25. ver 31. We may manifestly gather that there will be no locall separation of Gods Subjects from his Enemies but that they shall live mixt together untill CHRISTS second comming which is also confirm'd by the comparison of the Kingdome of heaven with wheat mingled with Darnell and with a net containing all sorts of fish But a multitude of men Enemies and Subjects living promisâ—uously together cannot properly be term'd a Kingdome Besides the Apostles when they askt our Saviour Whether he would at that time when he ascended into heaven restore the Kingdome unto Israel did openly testifie that they then when CHRIST ascended thought the Kingdome of God not to be yet come Farthermore the words of CHRIST My Kingdome is not of this world And I will not drinke c till the Kingdome of God come And God hath not sent his Son into the World to judge the World but that the World through him might be sav'd And If any man heare not my words and keepe them I judge him not for I came not to judge the World but to save the World And Man who made me a judge or divider betweene you And the very Appellation of the Kingdome of Heaven testifies as much The same thing is gathered out of the words of the Prophet Jeremiah speaking of the Kingdome of God by the new Covenant They shall teach no more every man his Neighboâ—r sayiâ—g 〈◊〉 the Lord for they shall all kâ—… me 〈◊〉 the least of them to the greatest of theâ— saith the Lord â—er â—…4 which cannot be understood of a Kingdome in this World The Kingdome of God therefore for the restoring whereof CHRIST came into the world of which the Prophets did Prophesie and of which praying wee say Thy Kingdome come if it must have Subjects locally separated from Enemies if judicature if Majesty according as hath beene foretold shall begin from that time wherein God shall separate the Sheep from the Goats wherein the Apostles shall judge the twelve Tribes of Israel wherein CHRIST shall come in Majesty and glory wherein lastly all men shall so know God that they shall not need to be taught that is to say aâ— CHRIST his second comming or the day of Judgement But if the Kingdome of God were now already restor'd no reason could be rendered why CHRIST having compleated the work for which he was sent should come againe or why we should pray Thy Kingdome come V I. Now although the Kingdome of God by CHRIST to be establisht with a new Covenant were Heavenly we must not therefore thinke that they who beleeving in CHRIST would make that Covenant were not so to be govern'd here on the Earth too as that they should persevere in their faith and obedience promsâ—'d by that Covenant For in vaine had the Kingdome of heaven beene promis'd if we were not to have been led into it but none can be led but those who are directed in the way Moyses when he had instituted the Priestly Kindome himselfe though he were no Priest yet rul'd and conducted the People all the time of their Pâ—regâ—ination untill their entrance into the promis'd Land In the same manner is it our Saviours office whom God in this thing would have like unto Moyses as he was sent from his Father so to governe the future Subjects of his heavenly Kingdome in this life that they might attaine to and enter into that although the Kingdome were not properly his but his Fathers But the government whereby CHRIST rules the faithfull ones in this life is not properly a Kingdome or Dominion but a Pastorall charge or the Right of teaching that is to say God the father gave him not a power to judge of Meâ—m and Tâ—â—m as he doth to the Kings of the Earth noâ— a Coercive power nor legislative but of shewing to the world and teaching them the way and knowledge of Salvation that is to say of Preaching and declaring what they were to doe who would enter into the Kingdome of Heaven That CHRIST had receiv'd no power from his father to judge in Questions of Meâ—m and Tâ—um that is to say in all Questions of Right among those who beleev'd noâ— those words above cited doe sufficiently declare Man who made me a judge or divider betweene you And it is confirm'd by reason for seeing CHRIST was sent to make a Covenant between God and men and no man is obâ—…'d to performe obedience before the â—…ontract be made if he should have judg'd 〈…〉 Questions of Right no man hâ—d been â—…ed to obey his sentence But that the disâ—…erning of Right was not committed to CHRIST in this world neither among the faithfull nor among infidels is apparent in this that that Right without all controversie belongs to Princes as long as it is not by God himselfe derogated from their authority But it is not derogated before the day of Judgement as appeares by the words of Saint Paul speaking of the day of Judgement Then commeth the end when
sometimes false either of which apart is called thinking and also beleeving both together doubting But when our reasons for which we assent to some Proposition derive not from the Proposition it selfe but from the person Propounding whom we esteeme so learned that he is not deceiv'd and we see no reason why he should deceive us our assent because it growes not from any confidence of our owne but from another mans knowledge is called Faith And by the confidence of whom we doe beleeve we are said to trust them or to trust in them By what hath been said the difference appeares first betweene Faith and Profession for that is alwaies joyn'd with inward asseâ—… this not alwayes 〈◊〉 That is an inward perswasion of the minde this an outward obedience Next betweene Faith and Opinion for this depends on our ownâ— reason that on the good esteeme we have of another Lastly betweene Faith and Knowledge for this deliberately takes a proposition broken and chewed that swallowes downe whole and entiâ—â— The explication of words whereby the matter enquir'd after is propounded is conducible to knowledge â—ay the onely way to 〈◊〉 is by deâ—… but this is prejudiciall to Faith for those things which exceede humane capacity and are propounded to beleev'd are never more evident by explication but on the contrary more obscure and harder to be credited And the same thing befalls a man who endeavours to demonstraâ—â— the mysteries of Faith by naturall reason which happens to a sick man who will needs chew before he will swallow his wholsome but biâ—…r Pillâ— whence it comes to passe that he presently brings them up againe which perhaps would otherwise if he had taken them well downe have prov'd his remedy V. We have seene therefore what it is to beleeve But what is it to beleeve in CHRIST Or what Proposition is that which is the object of our Faith in CHRIST For when we say I beleeve in CHRIST we signifie indeed Whom but not What we beleeve Now to beleeve in CHRIST is nothing else but to beleeve that JESUS IS THE CHRIST namely Hee who according to the Prophesies of Moyses and the Prophets of Israel was to come into this world to institute the Kingdome of God And this sufficiently appeares out of the words of CHRIST himselfe to Martha I am saith he the Resurrection and the life HE THAT BELEEVETH IN ME though he were dead yet he shall live and WHOSOEVER LIVETH AND BELEEVETH IN ME shall never dye Beleevest thou this She saith unto him Yea Lord I beleeve that THOU ART THE CHRIST the Soâ— of God which should come into the world John 11. ver 25 26 27. In which words we see that the question BELEEVEST THOU IN ME is expounded by the answer THOU ART THE CHRIST To beleeve in CHRIST therefore is nothing else but to beleeve JESUS HIMSELFE saying that he is THE CHRIST VI. Faith and Obedience both necessarity concurring to Salvation what kinde of Obedience that same is and to whom due hath beene shewed above in the 3. Article But now we must enâ—â—iâ—e what articles of Faith are requisite And * I say that to a Christian there is no other article of Faith requisite as necessary to Salvation but only this THAT JESUS IS THE CHRIST But we must distinguish as we have already done before in the 4. Article betweene Faith and Profession A Profession therefore of more articles if they be commanded may be necessary for it is a part of our obedience due to the Lawes but we enquire not now what Obedience but what Faith is necessary to salvation And this is prov'd first out of the scope of the Evangelists which was by the description of our Saviours life to establish this one Article and we shall know that such was the scope and counsell of the Evangelists if we observe but the History it selfe Saint Matthew beginning at his Genealogy shewes that JESUS was of the linage of David borne of a Virgin Chap. 1. that He was adored by the Wise men as King of the Jewes that Herod for the same cause sought to slay him Chap. 2. That his Kingdome was Preacht both by John the Baptist and Himselfe Chap. 3 4. That He taught the Lawes not as the Scribes but as one having authority Chap. 5 6 7. That he cur'd diseases miraculously Chap. 8 9. That He sent his Apostles the Preachers of his Kingdome throughout all the parts of Judea to proclame his Kingdome Chap. 10. That He commanded the Messengers sent from John to enquire whether he were the CHRIST or not to tell him what they had seene namely the miracles which were onely competible with CHRIST Chap. 11. That he prov'd and declar'd his Kingdome to the Pharisees and others by arguments parables and signes Chap. 12. and the following Chapters to the 21. That He maintain'd himselfe to be the Christ against the Pharisees That He was saluted with the title of King when he entred into Jerusalem Chap. 21. That he forewarn'd others of false Christs and That He shewed in Parables what manner of Kingdome his should be Chap. 22 23 24 25. That He was taken and accused for this reason because He said He was a King and that a Title was written on his Crosse THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWES Chap. 26 27. Lastly that after his resurrection He told his Apostles that all power was given unto Him both in Heaven and in Earth Chap. 28. All which tends to this end That we should beleeve Jesus to be the Christ Such therefore was the Scope of Saint Matthew in describing his Gospell but such as his was such also was the rest of the Evangelists which Saint Iohn sets down expresly in the end of his Gospel These things saith He are written that ye may know that Jesus is the Christ the Sonne of the living God Iohn 29. vers 31. I say that to a Christian Although I conceive this assertion to be sufficiently proved by the following reasons yet I thought it worth my labour to make a more aâ—…ple explication of it because I perceive that being somewhat new it may possibly be distastfull to many Divines First therefore when I say this Article That Jesus is the Christ is necessary to salvation I say not that Faith onely is necessary but I require Justice also or that Obedience which is due to the Lawes of God that is to say a Will to live righteously Secondly I deny not but the profession of many Articles provided that that profession be commanded by the Church is also necessary to salvation but seeing Faith is internall Profession externall I say that the former onely is properly Faith the latter a part of Obedience insomuch as that Article alone sufficeth for inward beleefe but is 〈◊〉 sufficient for the outward profession of a Christian Laâ—â—ly even as if I â—ad said that true and inward Râ—pentance of â—innes was onely necessary to salvation yet were it not to be held
an Aristocraty the Nobles make no contract nor are they obliged to any citizen or to the whole People The Nobles must necessarily have their set meetings By what acts a Monarchy is framed That the Monarch is by compact obliged to none for the authoritie he hath received A Monarch is ever in the readier capacity to exercise all those acts which are requisite to well governing What kind of sin that is and what sort of men are guilty of it when the City performs not its office to the Citizens not the Citizens towards the City A Monarch made without limitation of time may elect his successors Of limited Monarchs A Monarch retaining his Right of Government cannot by any promise whatsoever be conceiv'd to have parted with his Right to the means necessary to the exercise of his Authority my what Beanes a Subject is freed from his subjection What Lord and Servant are The distinction of Servants unto such as upon trust enjoy their naturall liberty or Slaves and such as serve being imprison'd or settered The obligation of a Servant ariseth from that freedome which is granted him by his Lord. Servants that are bound are not obliged to their Lord by any Contract Servants have no propriety in their goods against their Lord. The Lord may sell his Servant or alienate him by Testament The Lord cannot be injurious to his Servant He that iâ— Lord of the Lord is Lord also of the Servants By what meanes servants are freed The Dominion over beasts is by the Right of nature Paternact Dominion riseth not from generation Dominion over Infants belongs to him who who first hath theâ— in his power Dominion over Infants is originally the Mothers The exposed Infant is his that preserves him The sonne of a Subject and chiefe is his that commands In such a conjunction of male and female as neither hath the commanding power over the other the children are the Mothers except by pact or civill law it be otherwise determined Children are no lesse subject to their Parents then servants to their Lords and subjects to their City Of the honour due to Parents and Lords Wherein liberty doth consist and the difference between subjects and servants There is the same Right in an hereditary which there is in an institutive government The question concerning the Right of succession belongs onely to Monarchy A Monarch may dispose of the command of his government by Testament Or give it away or sell it A Monarch dying without Testament is ever understood to will that a Monarch should succeed him And some one of his 〈…〉 children And a male rather then female And of the males the eldest rather then the yonger And his Brother if he want issue before all others In the same manner that men succeed to the power doe they also succeed to the Right of Succession A comparing the state of nature with the civill The gains and losses of the The praise of Monarchy Annotation The government of one cannot be said to be evill in this respect namely because one hath more power then all the rest Rejection of their opinion who say that a Lord with his servants cannot make a City The exactions are more grievous under command of the people then under the Monarch Innocent Subjects are lesse obnoxious to punishment under a Monarch then under the People Single Persons have no lesse liberty under a Monarch then under the People It is no disadvantage to the Subjects that they are not all admitted to the publique deliberations Civill deliberations are unadvisedly committed to many by reason of the unskilfulnesse of most men By reason of their Eloquence By reason of Faction By reason of the unsetlednesse of the Laws For want of secrecy These inconveniences do adhere to Democraty forasmuch as men are naturally delighted with an opinion of wit The inco nveniences of government proceeding from a King who is a childe The power of Generalls is an argument of the excellency of Monarchy The best state of a Common-weale is that where the subjects are the Rulers inheritance Aristocraty is so much better by how much it approaches nearer to Monarchie the worse by how much it is more distant from it The beginning of institutive Government from the consent of the People The power of judicature and determination of warres depend on the will of the supreme Officer They who have the supreme authority are by Right unpunishable That without a supreme power there is no government â—ut confusion That servants and sonnes owe their Lords and Parents simple obedience The absolute power of Princes proved by most evident testimonies of the Scripture as wâ—ll new as old That the judgement of good and evill belongs to private Persons is a seditious opinion That subjects doe sin in obeying their Princes is a seditious opinion That Tyrannicide is lawfull is a seditious opinion That even they who have the Supreme power are subject to the Civill Lawes is a seditious Opinion That the Supreme Power may be divided is a seditious opinion That faith and holiness are not acquired by study and reason but are ever supernaturally infused and inspired is a seditious Opinion That single Subjects have any propriety or absolute Dominion over their own goods is a seditious Opinion Not to know the difference between a People and a Multitude prepares to Sedition Too great a Tax of Money though never so just and necessary disposeth men to Sedition Ambition disposeth men to Sedition So doth the hope of successe Eloquence alone without wisdom is the onely faculty needfull to raise seditions How the folly of the common people and the eloquence of ambitious men concurre to the dissolution of a Common-weale The Right of supreme authority is distinguisht from its exâ—râ—ise The safety of the People is the supreme Law It is the duty of Princes to respect the common benefit of many not the peculiar interest of this or that man By safety is understood all manner of benefits Query Whether it be the duty of Kings to provide for the salvation of their subjects soules as they shall judge best in their own câ—nsciences Wherein the safety of the People consists That discoverers are necessary for the defence of the People To have Souldiers Armes Garrisons and Money in readiness in times of Peace is necessary for the Peoples defence A right instruction of Subjects in civill doctrines is necessary for the preserving of Peace Equall distribution of publique burthens conduceth much to the preservation of peace It s naturall equity that Monies be â—axt according to what every man speuds not to what â—e posseseth It conduces to the preservation of peace to depresse the ambitious And to dissolve factious Lawes whereby gaining arts are cherisht and great expences restrained doâ— conduce much to the enriching of the subject That more ought not to be determined by the Lawes then the benefit of Prince and Subjects require That greater punishments must not be inflicted then are prescribed