are not restrained from injustice by any self interest but on the contrary tempted to rapine and perfidiousness are altogether unfit to manage the publick affairs of a Nation If they have power in their hands they are fit to squeese their neighbours or if they want power themselves through envy and hope of sharing in the prey ready to betray them to foreiners if an opportunity be offered Good nature excepteth some and Religion others in Christian Common-wealths from this rude and barbarous disposition but the Character which I have given fitteth the most of those who are indigent in every nation It necessarily followeth that they are unfit to be trusted with a Legislative power or offices of judicature and government or to Vote in the choice of those to whom such authority and power shall be committed It remaineth that only such as have an ingenuous subsistence in the Country to be governed have a title to vote in the dispencing of authority whether for the preserving of the whole body from forein invasions and homebred tumults or for the restraining of vice and encouraging of virtue Neither ought any so qualified to be debaried from that privilege unless they have discovered themselves to be malignantly affected towards the publick good Whereas those who choose State-officers and such also as by their votes immediately order the publick affairs of a City or Country are apt to be divided among themselves in that they differ in their judgments and in their ends the light of reason telleth us that the major part of the suffrages is equivalently the whole number It cannot be expected that all the members of a Societie should agree about the means which are most effectuall to the promoting of their publick welfare Neither can the lesser number of those who have equall authority be of more value than or of equall with the greater That strife may be avoided the number of those who suffrage must be odde or else some one of them have a casting voice granted him in case the numbers of those who are divided be equall and the major part of the suffrages must bear sway as if the rest concurred with them That Maxim Quod ad omnes spectat ab omnibus debet approbari What concerneth all ought to be approved by all is satisfied by a consent of the greater part which is equivalently the whole number If a lesser part of those who vote forcibly resist a greater unlesse that which is concluded by the prevailing number of votes be repugnant to the Law of God they infringe the Law of Nature and likewise the positive Law of God and so have no reason to expect that God should goe along with them in their enterprises More doubtfull it is whether those Inhabitants of a Citie which are upon due grounds debarred from bearing Office and from the choice of Officers be bound in conscience to submit to those who are invested in lawfull authority and to the wholesom Laws which are enacted by those who according to the Law of nature have a Legislative power either fundamentally or else derivatively residing in them Whereas Gods Law leaveth men indifferent to severall courses which may be taken for the preservation of their lives and liberties and livelihoods when they have once consented that one certain course not repugnant to the word of God and convenient for the obtaining of any of these ends shall be used and have compromitted to any person or persons the executing of their Law God requireth that they submit to the person or persons to whom they have betrusted authority till their grant expire so he or they transgresse not the bounds of the Commission but execute the agreement But the Question is whether those who are hindered from voting in the molding and forming of the government of the City which they inhabite be obliged likewise to subjection The truth of the negative part being supposed those who did not agree to a Law enacted neither directly nor yet virtually as included in the major part of those who voted should not be determined by God's Commandements to submit to that Law as it is the Law of man though they be obliged to observe the matter of it when it is contained likewise in the Law of God Men by virtue of the 8. precept are warranted to defend their estates according to their abilities were there no humane Law superadded and should have no further advantage according to the former supposition by superadding an humane law against such as were not permitted to vote in the enacting thereof but only that they agree to preserve their livelihoods answerably to the Law of God against all who shall invade them They might without any former Law or agreement warrantably vindicate one another from injuries as Abraham did Lot but moreover are by an agreement mutually ingaged But I conceive that such of the people as have title to vote in the choice of a Representative or of other Governors or by themselves immediately to establish Lawes have another advantage against those who by the meanness of their condition or by their misdemeanors are debarred from those privileges Forasmuch as the meanest Inhabitants of a City reap some benefit from the well-tempered government thereof most equall it is that they should submit unto those Laws which conduce to the preservation of publick safety And forasmuch as God hath exempted none who offend from humane censures Some are bound to be accomptable for their demeanors to the Magistrate who by divine providence or by their own delinquency were rendered unfit to have an influence into the choice of him God requireth that evill doers be punished but hath left unto men the specifying of the punishment whether it be capitall or more gentle Such then as are justly hindered from voting about the kinds of penalties that are used in the City which they inhabit when they offend must suffer in such a way as is agreed upon by others The will of God is that those who have done evill submit to lawfull punishment rather than resist lawfull authority CHAP. 9. All Civill Authority unless God determin other wise by choosing out one or more to Rule over the rest which now a days we have no reason to expect is fundamentally and radically in the People WHereas some tell us of an absolute Monarchie before the Deluge I conceive with the best Historians that none can prove that there was any such Government in the World before Nimrods incroachment and usurpation We have no shadow thereof intimated in the written word of God nor in any humane writing of approved credit Had any one before Nimrod used Monarchicall authority it is probable the Scripture should have given us notice thereof as it doth of Nimrods Tyranny But clear enough it is that although there should have been Kings otherwise than as every man is a Prince over his own family to wit such as reign now a dayes before the deluge yea so soon as
make choice of others sufficiently accomplished 2 Because when the Monarch is wicked the Government of the State must needs be evill in that he is not divided against himself because he will not act against himself but when Authority is betrusted with many the good though fewer sometimes out-wit the rest Plato in his 9 de legibus perceived the weight and moment of this and the preceding reason telling us that it is necessary for men to appoynt Laws and to observe them unlesse they be mindid to differ nothing from the most savage Beasts And assigning this cause thereof 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. No man is by Nature so accomplished as that he may be able to discern what things conduce most to the publick good and when he knoweth what is best alwaies be able and willing to perform it Plato pointeth these reasons in his ensuing discourse 3 Because there is more reason to fear that one man then that a whole multitude should be malignantly affected Aristatle telleth me Polit. 3. c. 11. that as much water cannot so soon be viciated as a lesser quantity so neither are a multitude so easily as one man corrupted in their judgment by anger or any other passion His words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Obj. Here it may be objected that we have more reason also to hope that one man then that a multitude will be well-affected Ans 1. I answer The more authority and power any one hath in his hands by so much he is more tempted to acts of violence An absolute Monarch who hath no law but his own will may more easily miscarry then those who have onely their portions in the Government of a Nation Ans 2. There is far more danger from an ill-affected Monarch then when onely part of those who are in authority are vitiated 4. Because no one will dare to say unto an absolute Monarch what doest thou When Cambyses inquired of his Lawyers whether there was any Law which permited a man being willing to marry his Sifler they answered That they found no Law which permitted a Brother to marrie a Sister but that they found another Law v.z. that it was lawfull for the King of the Persians to do what he pleased See Herodo'us in his Thalia And one who never heareth that question from another it is much to be feared will forget to propound it to himself He will be ready to conceive that with Iupiter he hath Therius perpetually placed by him so that whatsoever he doth must needs be right and just Iezebel thought it a question unbeseeming a Princely spirit She concluded that Ahab drooped below himself when he boggled at the taking away of Naboth's vineyard Memento mihi omnia in omnes licere Thus Caius in Suet mius I may adde That a Monarchy set led in any one for term of life is more dangerous then if the time were limited Those who expect that their authority should expire before their lives will be restrained in some measure by a fear of their successors who may call them to an accompt in case they manage not their trust as it becometh them Those who are to give an accompt only to God are tempted to licentiousness in that men are not wont to be much awed by an invisible Magistrate Plato telleth us that when any one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not bound to give an accompt of his actions and omissions but governeth a City as he lifleth without any controller he cannot persist in such a mind throughout his life as to preferre the publick good before his private advantage * Plato 9. de leg CHAP. 4. That One man should have a larger share in the Government of a State then all the rest who are interested therein is not enjoyned by the Word of God A King is not a necessary ingredient of the Government of a State Were a true and visible King of absolute necessity the Israelites had sinned in that throughout so many ages after they came into the Promised-Land they set not a King over them We must taxe many other well-ordered States of a sin of omission in point of civill government if we underprop the Scepter by divine right As a King is not necessary by virtue of any divine precept so neither in order to the well-managing of civil affairs as the flourishing condition of many States which are without Kings assureth us CHAP. 5. The necessity of Tribunals is evinced I Shall in this Chapter that I may make way for my ensuing discourse explain the necessitie of Judges and Tribunals The Babylonian Gemara of the Tractate called Sanhedrin in the 7 Chapter telleth us That as God injoyned the Israelites to set up judiciary Courts in all their villages and cities so likewise he commanded the Sons of Noah to erect Tribunals in all their villages and cities The place is quoted by learned Selden in that incomparable work De jure Natural Gent. l. 7. c. 5. This Law they must needs affirm to be given to those who lived before the deluge as well as to Neah's posterity seeing they make it part of the Law of Nature The eating of flesh with the life thereof was as unlawfull for Adam and the rest of the old world as for those who lived since the Flood but needed not to be forbidden to them explicitly viva voce as Gen. 9.4 in that they were not permitted at all to eat flesh The setting apart of some time for Gods worship is injoyned by he law of nature and was in some degreee put into practice by Gods children from the Creation * See Seder Olam Rabba c. 5. Philo de vâ— tà Mesis l. 1. Tertull. adversus Judaeos A haeâ—s in Synopsi sacr Scrip. upon Exod. Euseb Demonstrat Evangel c. 6. Justin Hist lib. 36. though the Sabbath was not observed till the Israelites came into the Wilderness That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Houses of Iudgments or Tribunals should be constituted for all people is clearly part of the Law of Nature For otherwise that punishment which the Law of Nature demandeth for certain offences as murder c. could not be regularly executed Plato in his 9. book of Lawes in severall cases appointeth those that are naturally allied to the person that is murdered to inflict death upon the murderer and so likewise some of the kindred of the partie ravished to kill the ravisher But these constitutions border upon the making a man a Judge in his own cause If any one be killed by chance-medley those whose affections Nature hath engaged to the person that is slain will be tempted to misconstrue it into murder Jacob cursed the wrath of Simeon and Levi who revenged the ravishing of their Sister Dinah upon the Sechemites Gen. 49.7 Suppose also those who susteined the greatest losse in the partie murdered to neglect the executing of punishment the city or Country in which it was committed is exposed to Gods wrath for
Natures Dowrie OR THE PEOPLES NATIVE LIBERTY ASSERTED Art thou called being a servant care not for it but if thou mayest be made free use it rather 1 Cor. 7.21 Ovis non est propter pastorem sed pastor ovi inservit Warneri Proverb Pers 16. Quin et mortalem summum fortuna repentè Reddidit è summo ut regno famul optumus essit Fortune the low soon lifts to th' high'st degree That made great Kings they should good servants be Ennius VIII Annali By L. S. LONDON Printed for W. R. at the signe of the Vnicorn in Pauls Church-yard 1652. To the Reader Gentle Reader THis Treatise I assure thee is no more dipp'd in passion then the Sunne is drowned in the clouds which are so far below him The Author of it desired whilst he asserted other mens liberty himself to be ruled by reason bearing in mind that sentence Reges alios si ratio te rexerit Thou shalt govern others if reason guide thee It was occasioned by a question which a worthy Member both of the Parliament and Committee of State above three years since propounded to me Within short time after I provided this answer and at my first opportunity presented it unto him He judged that it deserved to be made of publick use and offered it to the Press yet Lucina was not so propitious as to bring it to light the Printer not daring to undertake it unles the Author had been present to superintend the work I publish this discourse after I have so long suppressed it because the usefulnesse thereof is still in date in that it explaneth many Scriptures which are still by many wrested into false senses and because there is now a more convenient opportunity then formerly Farewell L. S. Natures Dowrie OR The Peoples Native Liberty asserted c. CHAP. 1. Certain Theses concerning the freedom and authority of any Nation WHereas some have concluded that an absolute Monarchie is the best of Governments because it imitateth that by which God ruleth the Universe I conceive their reason is feeble and impotent and that they considered not that men may abuse their authority and power which liberty is impossible to God All authority unless God determine otherwise by chusing out one or more to rule over the rest which now a dayes we have no reason to expect is fundamentally and radically in the people A conquered people unless they be obliged to the Conquerour by consenting formerly to be subject to him in their own persons or in their Fore-fathers or after the conquest voluntarily took upon them his yoke without conditions or else upon stipulation are warranted by the light of naturall reason to endeavour the recovery of their liberty and likewise after a composition when the Conquerour in his own person or in his posterity neglecteth the terms upon which they submitted to him That Kings should be ex se uati as Tiberius said of Curtius Rufus That nature or conquest should be a sufficient title to dominion and that an illegall force may not by force be lawfully removed are opinions which the clear light of reason never smiled upon Should any one with * Tacitus Annal lib. 3. Tiberius be sine miseratione sine irâ obstinatus claususque ne quo adfectu perumperetur by a reserv'd and merciless obstinacy shut up and baracado'd against the lawes counsell and prayers I see not but a people may warrantably goe about to break such an one seeing he will not be bended by reason CHAP. 2. Monarchy is not by Divine right I Shall in the first place shew that Monarchicall Government is not of absolute necessity ' The Peravians have thus much notice of the generall deluge that the Country was overwhelmed with waters all men perished except seven The chief of these seven was Mangocaga whose posterity governed themselves for some time in Aristocr at icall state See Heylyn in his Description of Peruana I cannot assent to Diodorus Siculus telling us Biblioth Hist l. 2. that there were Kings in Asia long before Ninus especially if as some Authors conceive his Ninus be the same with Nimrod I mean not here a physicall necessity for to such a Monarchy cannot pretend nor a necessity of coaction seeing that excludeth choice but a morall necessity hinged upon the Law of God Most clear it is that neither the Law of Nature which is written upon the tables of mens minds by the finger of God nor yet any positive Law which God superadded to the Law of Nature determineth any Nation to that form of Government Turn over the Scripture which hath omitted none of Gods commandements that are now in force and shew me a precept for it None will be so impudent as to affirm that there is any expresse commandement for Monarchy in the written word of God neither is there so much as a shadow of any Virtuall or Consequentiall injunction thereof unless it be clear by natural reason that Monarchy is the best of Governments for all Nations at all times howsoever their circumstances varie It is clear I acknowledge both by the light of Naturall reason and by the Scripture that men are bound in Conscience to prefer that form of Government which they know to be the best for them but that Monarchy should by the light of naturall reason be discovered to be the best of Governments and that for all Nations and at all times I cannot consent because the world after the flood till Nimrods days * Nimrod was a mighty hunter before the Lord Gen. 10.9 For the understanding of that phrase compare with this Scripture Ier. 16.16 Lament 4.18 Mich. 7.2 Pro. 1.17 That of Arist. in the first of his Politicks is a good comment likewise upon Nimrod's hunting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. had no Monarch neither oeccumenicall nor provinciall and because Monarchy then came into the World not by choice * Diodorus Siculus informeth us that the Kings of Aegypt were in all their actions confined by their Lawes and particularly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Biblioth Histor l. 1. The same Historiographer speaking of the K. of the Aethiopians saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Biblioth Hist l. 3. but by intrusion usurpation by force conquest because the Israelites had a mixt Government and the most flourishing States amongst the Papists and all reformed Churches together with such Heathenish Commonwealths as have most abounded in perspicacitie and wisdom have ever preferred other forms of Government before it Aristotle likewise determineth Polit. 3. that a King ought to have power to protect the Lawes but not such power as may render him more potent than the Kingdom Obj. The main argument which opposeth what I have delivered in this Chapter is bottomed upon part of the 7th comma of the 4. Chapter of Gen. which in our translation saith Anà unto thee shall be his desire and thou shalt rule over him The Argument propounded in full dimensions hath this
time before the Flood passed a sentence of death upon any appertaining to his Family cannot be proved out of any monuments of antiquity now extant Neither doth it appear whether Iudah pronounced sentence of death upon Thamar by virtue of any authority which he had over her as belonging to his Family or by virtue of some Law consented to by his Fore-fathers or according to the Law and manner of the Countrey in which he lived or out of rashness Some of the Hebrew Doctors affirm that Iudah intended not that Thamar should be burned to death but only stigmatized in the forehead for an harlot What authority soever a Master of a Family may challenge by the Law of nature over his children and servants and those who by mariage are ingrafted into his Family whilst he is a sojourner among a Nation into which he is not incorporated clear it is that those who have their share in any Country and a setled abode among others have no title to such authority in that they are tempted to partiality and may expose their neighbors to divine justice by neglecting judgments or by giving unjust sentence of death and the same wayes weaken the Country in which they live and expose it to a common enemy Homer in the Iota of his Odyss maketh it a badge of rude and uncivill people to live together in the same Countrey and not to imbodie themselves into a Society nor have any publick jurisdiction saying of the Cyclopes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They give lawes every one of them to his Wives and children neither regard one another Most agreable it is to the light of Nature that those who inhabite the same Countrey and so nigh together that they are without inconveniencie capable of a common government so combine and associate the strengths of their minds and estates as that they may be * Herodotus saith of the Thracions who by some are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because every man wâ—â— a Law to himself that if they had either been all of one mind or under one K. they had been invincible in a positure of defence against a common Enemy and home-bred disturbances which cannot be effected without common lawes and publick execution of justice * Plato de Legibus l. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Men must of necessity establish lawes and observe them or not at all differ from the most savage beasts CHAP. 7. Magistracy standeth by divine right IT remaineth doubtfull whether people who live together may lawfully retain an Isocracie among them having all of them suffrages of equall value in the censuring of Delinquents and the managing of such affairs as conduce to their publick safety or be bound by the law of Nature or any of Gods positive lawes to set Governors and Magistrates over them We inquire not now of Magistracy fettered in the circumstances of hic and nunc determined to time and place for there is no doubt but among the Israelites not only Magistracy but also certain forms of Magistracy were by divine right moreover that certain persons also bare rule among them by divine right and that without the mediation of any humane choice nor yet of Magistracy during the time for which it is established by men that is of Magistracy with a presupposition of humane consent by which in some form or other it was erected and is for some time to be continued seeing that Gods Law requireth that men stand to their agreements and the Scripture saith * Rom. 13.1 The powers that be are ordained of God and * 1 Pet. 2.13 Submit your selves to every ordinance of man for the Lords sake but whether God hath commanded all Nations at all times to have Magistrates Judges or State-Officers The question is that I may further explain the state of it whether Isoâ—rasie be lawfull or men be bound by the Law of God to set up a Magistracy to preferre some to bear rule over the rest The Scripture doth not extricate us in this controversie by any generall precept Nor yet if we search the History of the World before the Flood shall we find any foot-step of Magistracy or of humane censures We have much wickednesse mentioned in the gross Gen. 6.5 and some sins specified elsewhere but no intimation of any punishment inflicted by any humane judicature * The murdering of Abel Gen. 4.8 and according to some Interpreters murder committed by Lamech Gen. 4.23 and idolatry according to some of the Hebrew Doctors Gen. 4.26 I should otherwise interpret the two places last quoted but Lamech's rash speech deserved a censure We have Polygamie likewise mentioned v. 19. of the same chap. but which some deny to have been a sin in Lamech That of Cain It shall come to pass every one that findeth me shall slay me importeth not that he feared any judiciary sentence but only a rude and boystrous inflicting of punishment that it was permittted to every one to punish so hainous a delinquent and that he expected not any regular proceedings of justice against him But I take notice that in regard of the present he feared where no fear was departing from the presence of his Parents neither was likely to prophecie after what manner punishments should afterwards be dispenced I conceive he expressed a fear of men onely and not of beasts His speech was rash and inconsiderate having a tincture from his guilty conscience If we consult with the light of reason it will inform us that in large countryes Magistracie is necessary because in such the Inhabitants though all who are servile and indigent be excluded cannot convene so oft as virtue is to be rewarded and encouraged or as disorders are to be repressed and vice to be punished nor yet so oft as the preservation of their common safetie requireth It is clear also from the written word of God that all publick affairs ought to be managed in such a way as may conduce most to Gods glory and the publick good Moreover God appointed a few in his own peculiar people to govern the rest Such likewise at all times hath been the custom almost of all Nations CHAP. 8. The qualifications of those who ought to vote in the dispencing of Authority The major part of suffrages is equivalently the whole number Those who are uncapable of Voting are tied to subjection ARistotle well observeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Polic. 3. that all are not Citizens who inhabit the City seeing Strangers and Servants have their share in habitation He frequently excludeth those who are indigent from bearing sway in a Commonwealth Vnequall it is that Helots and those who have no estates should have equall authority with those who are wealthy in making Laws which concern mens estates in that by their private condition they are much tempted to favour theft and encroachment Seeing men are by an innate and hereditary distemper biased towards wicked practices indigent people who
us rather trust God for the backing of his vice-gerents here upon earth so long as they approve themselves to him than make a lye our refuge And though God may sometimes seem to sleep and not appear in his own cause to wit when due authority is opposed upon empty pretences Talera veritatem licit amara sit pick not quarrels with truth because it is bitter being wrested by mis application to countenance selfish designes and unjust proceedings What I have hitherto spoken touching the lawfulness of resisting Princes upon the occasion now mentioned is plentifully confirmed by some examples in Scripture and by the demenours of the Iews towards those who reigned over them without Gods immediate appointment and likewise by the practices of Christians I shall premise that if it be lawfull foâ— one subject or for one inconsiderable number to resist a Prince then much more for a whole state David should have troubled God with a needless and impertinent question asking whether the men of Keilah would deliver him up into Sauls hand unless he intended there to secure himself from Sauls mischievous practices and to offend him rather than not to defend himself Saul and his men might easily have sealled the walls of Keilah should David have used no resistance and in case he had resisted Sauls force an arrow or a stone would have made no distinction between Saul and his men Did not Azariah the Priest think it lawfull to resist King Uzziah in the defence of the Ceremoniall Law * 2 Chron. 26.17 when he followed him into the Temple attended with no fewer then 80 Priests and those valiant men Were not the 80 Priests which accompanied Uzziah of the same sense and judgement The Iewes themselves by their demeanors towards Alexander Iannaeus who together with his Predecessor and those who succeeded him are in the Talmud called Kings of Israel because they were not of the Family of David declare that they thought it lawfull for them not only to depose but also to inflict capitall punishment upon those who reigned over them without Gods immediate appointment Alexander Iannaeus was King over the Iewes Ioseph Antiq. Indaic l. 13. c. 20. Gem. Sanhed c. 2. He was convented by the Sanhedrim Gem. Sanhed c. 2. The Iewes raised warre against him neither would be satisfied with any terms without his death Ioseph Antiq. Iudaic. l. 13. c. 21 22. Schammai rebuked the rest of the Sanhedrin and King Hireanus shewing favour to Herod Ioseph Antiq. Iudaic. lib. 14. cap. 17. I shall now briefly explain how Gods people in the younger times of Christian Religion by their practices testified that they thought it lawfull to resist those who were in authority over them when they went about to destroy or to deprave Religion or to impedite the advancement thereof Whereas the Christians in Constantinople who beleeved that the Son was con-substantiall to the Father after the death of Eusebius their Bishop made choice of one to succeed him who had been his Predecessor but was ejected by a Council which the Emperour convocated to that purpose Paul by name but the Arians of Constantinople at the same time elected Macedonius into the Patriarkship * Socrat. Hist Eccles l. 2. c. 12. And Constantius sent Hermogenes with a military force to expell Paul from the Church of Constantinople some who adhered to Paul fired the house in which Hermogenes quartered and haling him out slew him Socrat. Hist Eccles l. 2. c. 13. Sozomen Hist. Eccles l. 3. c. 6. The Constantinopolitans endeavoured to defend Paul their Patriark aforenamed against Philip President of Constantinople when they suspected somthing to be decreed against him by their Emperor Constantius Socrat. Hist Eccles l. 2. c. 16. The Romans by violence ejecting Felix out of the See of Rome Constantius against his mind restoreth unto them Liberius whom he had banished Socrat. Hist Eccles l. 2. c. 37. The Inhabitants of Mantinium out of their fervent zeal for Religion resisted four troops of Soldiers which were sent against them according to the Emperors order and were victorious Socrat Hist Eccles l. 2. c. 38. The Samosateans would by force have attempted to preserve their Bishop Eusebius from banishment to which Valens their Emperour had destinated him had they not been diswaded by the same Eusebius Theodorit Hist Eccles l. 4. c. 13. The Christians of Alexandria resisted the Emperour Martian and his military force Evagrius Hist Eccles l. 2. c. 5. It is sufficiently known how Ambrose Bishop of Millain opposed the Emperor See Niceph. Calistius l. 12. c. 42. It is observable that the Christians whom I have now mentioned when omnia Caesar erat and whilst the profession of Christian Religion was confirmed by no humane lawes but the Edicts of Emperours in the behalf of Religion resisted those who had the Posse of the world in their hands That in the elder times of Christian Religion the Papists and likewise many Protestants of the Church of Scotland have approved these practices of the primitive Christans and other of higher opposition against Princes for default in Government whether respecting Religion or civill affairs is sufficiently discovered by Lysimachus Nicanor in his Epistle congratulatory to the Covenanters in Scotland See especially p. 12. 40. 41. 54. Ridentem dicere verum Quid vetat The sense of our English Senators touching the liableness of Kings to forcible resistance and deposition is so clear from that Vote in the beginning of our Civill dissentions to wit That the King if he raised Forces against his Parliament forfeited his Trust and by some other Votes and Actions that it needeth no Comment to explain it He that desireth to read more touching the Peoples Libertie in point of resistance to be made against those that invade their right may see Plutarch in the Lives of the Gracehi CHAP. 11. Kings may render themselves obnoxious to the penalty of death according to the Law of God in some cases to be inflicted by publick authority in other by private men THat Law Gen. 9.6 Whose sheddeth mans blood by man shall his blood be shed reacheth all the Sons of Noah Princes themselves though they be taller than their Brethren by the head and shoulders Whoso sheddeth mans blood voluntarily and of his own accord not out of an error nor as an executioner of a penaltie nor yet in his own defence his blood shall be shed * See Oakelos his Chaldee Paraphrase and the Mauritanian Jewes Arabick translation set out by Erpenius by a judiciary sentence This is the meaning of that Law The Hebrew Doctors have some glosses here which destroy the Text. According to some of them he who by himself shedded mans blood was to be punished with death but if he hired another or imployed his servants to shed blood or exposed one bound to a Lion or other savage beasts he was to be esteemed an homicide and deserved death to be inflicted of God but was not necessarily
to be adjudged to death by the sentence of the Magistrate They leave to the King and likewise to the Sanhedrin a liberty to punish such with death or to exempt them Certainly he who committeth murder by a proxie is more guilty than if he had shed blood immediately in that he hath propagated the sin Some of them determine that if an Israelite slew a stranger though he was proselytus domicilis he was not to be condemned to death for it because he was not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his neighbour These considered not that strangers also bear the Image of God and that God was the Lord of all mankind The * Sanheds c. 9. Misna of the Talmud telleth us that when a homicide is mingled with others they are all free that is as I conceive when many men strike a man so that it cannot be known that what was done by any one of them killed him This exception hath no more warrant from the word of God than have the two former Who so sheddeth mans blood whether by himself immediately or by the ministery of some other whether a strangers or a neighbours whether alone or with the help of others is a son of death No Mortall is excused by his greatness Plato is very orthodox in this point * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And speaking of an homicide 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He urgeth afterwards the in flicting of this penalty especially upon such as shall kill any of their kindred An homicide as he determineth l. 9 de leg must be punished with death He passeth the same sentence upon a Sranger killing a Stranger and a Citizen killing a Stranger and a Stranger killing a Citizen as upon one Citizen killing another and upon a man killing another with his own hand or otherwise He excepteth not any so offending from capitall punishment That it is not left arbitrary to the Magistrate to punish or pardon Murther is cleared by the 33. Section of Num. 35. where it is written that The Land cannot be clear sed from the blood that is shed therin but by the blood of him that shed it Vpon which place saith * More Nevochim Part. 3. cap. 41. Maimonides as he is construed by Buxtorf agreeably to the sence of the Hebrew Proptereà licet interfectus per horas vel dies aliquot adhuc vixerit locutus fuerit sanumque intellectum retinuerit testatusque fuerit se ei condonare remittere non auditur sed necessariò anima pro animâ danda est aequaliter pro parvo magno servo * F lio ingenuorum seu filio nobilium libero sapiente stulto Take notice from this gloss that the murderer ought necessarily to be put to death though the person murdered live some days after he receive the wound which is contrary to the sense of some other Hebrew Doctors God in divers places of Scripture requireth that capitall punishment be inflicted as for murder so for some other crimes neither are Kings excepted from those Laws in any part of the written word which is now extant Princes in some other cases are liable to capitall punishment to be inflicted by private men When a Prince attempteth to murder another the person invaded may lawfully kill him in his own defence and is bound by the 6. Commandement to doe it rather than suffer himself to be murdered Davids great guard intimateth that he would rather have killed Saul than have suffered himself to be killed by him * Lib. 9 de leg Plato maketh it lawfull for a man to kill a Thief who by night entereth his house to steal * That is when he pursaeth a young woman betrothed to defile her saith R. Schem Tof The wifes nâ—kedness is the husbands nakedness but Maimonides his words are more comprehensive than that Interpreter maketh them That place in Plato's Lawes before quoted provideth for the chastity of both Sexes whether mariedor single Maimonides his words are capable of the same constiuction adam sometimes being of as large a Signification as bomo That testimony which have added out of the Misua prevaileth with me to think that Maimonid under adam comprehended both Sexes or one that attempteth at any time after what manner soever to spoil him of his goods or one who invadeth his chastitie or hath defiled some other related to him Maimonides saith It is unlawfull to kill a man who hath purposed to commit any wickedness before he hath done it unlesse in these 2 cases 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when he pursueth a man to kill him and when he pursueth a mans nakedness to uncover it The Misna in Sanbedr c. 8. paragr 7. to the same purpose These are they whom they hinder from sinne by the loss of their life him that pursueth another with an intention to kill him and him that pursueth a maid and him that pusueth a young woman that is betrothed Should one pursue another to kill him all Israel according to the sense of our Hebrew Doctors was bound to rescue the person who was pursued if it could not be effected otherwise by the death of the pursuer Should any one deliver an Israelite or his goods into the power of the Heathen it was lawfull say * See Maimonid and Moses Mikotsi quoted by Mr. Selden De Jur. Natur. Gent. juxta Discipl Hebr. li. 4. c. 3. the same Writers for any one to kill the Traytor It is as great a fault to betray the goods and lives of Christians into the hands of Papists CHAP. 12. The injunction of subjection to the higher powers is but a brittle Argument for the impunity of Tyrants CHrysostome taketh notice that the Apostle Rom. 13.1 doth not say there is no ruler but of God but that he spake of the office saying there is no power but of God all the powers that be are ordained of God According to this Doctor the scope of the Apostle is not to inhibit men from resisting Tyrants but to bridle-in unruly spirits which are altogether impatient of any authority I may adde that this Scripture likewise opposeth those who could be contented to submit unto such Magistrates as will countenance their licentious courses but cannot endure such as goe about to restrain sin and to encourage religion If by powers be meant such as are invested in authority the trope used will chastise all such as resist Magistrates who are duely called to the exercise of authority neither abuse the authority wherewith they are betrusted and so discover themselves to be enemies to authority it self but the peoples hands are not tyed when authority is usurped or the ends thereof neglected What we read Rom. 13.1 2 3 4 5. according to Mr. Calvin and Buchanan bindeth us onely to submit our selves to the Edicts of Princes when they enjoyn us what is agreeable to the Law of God And indeed the reasons which inforce our subjection to the higher powers and the motives which incite us to our
the honour of the Family might be preserved entire and not be shattered into pieces and that the people should be subject to one Lord rather than to many The Israelites as * Hal. Mcl. c. Sect. 10. Marmamides witnesseth ought to have refused him that in regard to his birthright had the next title to the Crown unless he was pious and feared the Lord. Omnis potestas omne officium in Israel haereditarium est ad filies nepotes in aeternum modò filius impleat locum patris sui cum sapientiâ pietate Quòd si pietate tantum non sapientiâ ipsi par sit perficiunt nihilominùs officio paterno docent id quid deest At penes quem nulla est pietas quamvis saptentissimus esset non promovetur tamen ad ullum officierum in universo Israel Thus the Hebrew Doctor before-quoted as he is taught to speak Latine by a learned Writer whose translation I use because it cannot be bettered If this Doctor speak truth it will unavoidably follow that the wicked Kings of Judah used deep dissimulation before they were inaugurated or that the great Sanhedrin neglected their duty or that they wanted power to execute it This knot is somewhat morose and will not easily be untied The publick influence of Kingly authority might be a just ground of some exceptions from the usuall way of hereditary propagation The Eldest Sonne with the Israelites though he were grossely wicked inherited a double portion of his Fathers estate we cannot hence conclude that the Kingdom perpetually descended upon the Eldest Sonne howsoever he was qualified because it respected not so much one mans private benefit as the welfare of the people The case of Solomon who was preferred before Adonijah his Elder Brother will not extricate us in that the choice was made by God himself 1 Chron. 28.5 6 7. Gods dispencing with any of his positive Lawes conferreth not the like privilege upon his creatures Though we are left in the dark in that Quaere to wit whether the Sanhedrin had authority to reject the heir apparent of the Kingdom from reigning over them for his want of religion yet I shall make it clear that the Kings afore-mentioned were more established in their authority against humane opposition by their call to it then any can be by a violent invasion thereof or by the meer choice of men David and Solomon were expresly called to be Kings and the Kingdom was setled upon Solomons posterity be Gods immediate appointment 1 Chron. 28.7 When God gave unto Ieroboam ten Tribes he confirmed unto Solomons posterity the Kingdom of Iudah 1 Kings 11.36 If the Sandhedrin could lawfully hinder their Kings first-born Sonne from reigning over them when he was not an heir of his Fathers virtues that autority was given them by Gods Commandement or permission and it should remain that they were determined by God himself to preferre to the Kingdom him that had the next title by discent being duely qualified and one of Solomons posterity though all of them were egregiously wicked God secured the Kingdom for Solomons posterity against those iniquities wherewith they should provoke his divine Majestie 2 Sam. 7.14.15.16 That the grant of the Kingdom was not conditionall as to Saul is cleared by that Scripture and by 1 King 11.36 The History of the Kings of Judah informeth us that some of them provoked God as deeply as did Saul from whom he took away the Kingdom God did not preserve them from provoking him as did Saul but shewed them more visible favour by continuing the Kingdom in their posterity That condition which is expressed in 1 Chron. 28.7 in those words I will establish his Kingdom for ever if he be constant to doe my Commandements and my judgments as at this day had respect unto the Kingdom as it was entire over the 12 Tribes but not to every part of it as we may gather from what hath been spoken and by comparing it with 1 King 11. v. 12 13. That of the Psalmist Psal 132.12 If thy children will keep my Covenant and my testimony c. importeth that Davids posteritie unlesse they revolted from God as did Solomon should reigne over the 12 Tribes but moreover that their Line and Succession should not be interrupted as it was for the King of Manasseh and some other of their Kings by captivity untill the coming of Shiloh Here it may be inquired how the establishing of Davids Kingdom for ever which is promised 2 Sam. 7.16 can consist with those events which have befaln his posterity as the Babylonian captivity and the bereaving of them of all outward and visible Dominion That I may not confine the promise to Christs spirituall Kingdom the word Olam which is there used doth not alwayes denote eternity or a duration till the end of the World but in generall a duration hidden from man whether infinite or finite * See Munster de side Christinorum Part of the Ceremoniall Law is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an ordinance for ever Numb 10.8 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for ever Exod. 21.6 is till the next Jubilee according to Rasi Aben-Ezra Bechai and Abarbinel upon those words and the Talmud in Kidushin Abarbinel telleth us that because 50 yeers were counted one Age or Generation the fiftieth yeer which is the yeer of Jubilee is called Olam According to his construction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall supply the place of * See Psal 18.50 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and indeed it is wont to signifie ad which is thence derived But I should rather conceive that for ever there according to the gramaticall accompt is the same that for the present generation The Servant whose Ear was bored thorow when the generation was renewed as Aben-Ezra speaketh to wit in the year of Jubilee was to be set at liberty 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For ever in 2 Chron. 23.7 seemeth to signifie the time in which the Ceremoniall Law should continue in force 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For evermore is untill Shiloh come Psal 132.12 We cannot determine out of those Scriptures before-quoted to wit 2 Sam. 7.16 Psal 89.31 32 33 1 King 11.36 Whether David and Solomon and the Kings of Iudah were liable to deposition and capitall punishment by their Subjects for tyranny murder and other gross delinquencies without an expresse permission or injunction from God God might punish their persons in such sort yet not cause his mercy to depart from them as he took it away from Saul whose posterity he secluded from succeeding in the Kingdom But it is clear that those Kings had a large advantage as I shewed before concerning Saul being compared with such as came to a Kingdom meerly by Conquest or by humane choice in that they were not liable to deposition so long as their carriage was worthy of their office Abarbinel expresseth the same sense in his Preface to his Comment upon 2 Sam. 15. Absalom saith