ratio the most formal and compleat Eâ—â—ence of Government The third is Whether or not Sovereignty and Royalty be in a King by Conveyance of Trust fiduciary and conditionate issuing from the People by a Trust devolved upon him in that portion it pleaseth them to proportion In which will be evident that the Trust of Sovereignty and Government is by God devolved upon the King That all Sovereignty related to God is fiduciary and conditionate but related to the People is absolute The fourth is Whether or not by divine Institution any man or men some few or many have any co-ordinate co-equal or collateral Power with the Sovereignty of Royalty Or whether or not in any case or exigent a King can be subordinate In the Resolution of which Question fitly and conveniently will be discussed that In quo formale Imperii consistit that in which the essence of Sovereignty doth consist and without which it cannot subsist as that it is supreme perpetual and freed from all coercive and coactive Power which the Hebrews call Imperium majus the Politicks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The fifth and last is Whether or not in any case it is lawful for Subjects one any more or all to oppose a Prince Quaestio prima Whether or not the King be only and immediately dependent from God and independent from the Body of the People diffusive collective representative or vertual CHAP. I. The Affirmative is maintained the contrary Opinion is explained the Authors and Assertors some of them with their Differences are recited WE hold the Affirmative that the King is only and immediately dependent from Almighty God the King of Kings and Lord of Lords and independent in his Sovereignty and Power from the Community in what Notion soever you conceive it either as a diffusive collective representative or vertual Body The Jesuit and Puritan to depress Kings aver that all Power is originally radically and formally inherent in the People or Community and from thence is derived to the King In the explaining of this Proposition there is amongst those who lay this Foundation for the building of their Babel a great Latitude of Diversity Lately I read in one who is the Author of the Tract concerning Schism and Schismaticks pag. 29. We have believed him that hath told us that in Christ Iesus there is neither high nor low and that in giving Honour every man should be ready to prefer another before himself which saying cuts off all claim certainly of Superiority by Title of Christianity except men think that these things were spoken only to poor and private men Nature and Religion agree in this that neither of them hath an hand in this Herauldry of Secundùm sub supra all this comes from Composition and Agreement amongst themselves I have given you his words I should be glad to be mistaken and crave him Mercy But as I conceive him this Position is worse than any I know of the Jesuits or more moderate Sectaries both of them acknowledge a Necessity of Government is taught by Nature and Grace and that the Distinction of Superiority and Inferiority is the dictate of common Reason and Religion Otherwise neither Nature nor Religion may avoid Confusion or Destruction God who is the God of Order and not of Confusion is the Author of this Herauldry of Secundum sub supra in the whole Universe in Church in State Hath not God in the moral Law taught it Honora Patrem c. Honour thy Father c Do not St. Paul and St. Peter Rom. 13. 1. Pet. 2. 14. v. command this as the Will of God And did not our Saviour practise it and his Apostles after him and after them all the Christian Church You must take away humane Society in Church and State if you take away this Herauldry of Superiority and Inferiority Sure I am the Jesuits do hold that Government is ex jure naturae by the Law of Nature I hope our Sectaries think no worse in this point than the Jesuits I return to the Jesuit and Puritan who are very like-in this Tenet but give me Leave to say for as bad as the Jesuit is in my conceiving the Puritan is worse Let us make a parallel 1. First the Jesuit says that all Power civil is radically and originally seated in the Community or Multitude God having made it the Primum subjectum the first Subject in which it is seated The Puritan joyneth hands here with the Jesuit 2. Next both of them say it is from the Multitude by way of Collation and Donation to one as in Monarchy to some as in Aristocracy to many as in Democracy so that immediately it is from the People and mediately from God and not so much by Collation as by Approbation How the Jesuit and Puritan walk along in an unequal pace See Bellarmine l. de Laicis cap. 6. Suarez Defens Doctrinae Orthod contra Sectam Anglicanam l. 3. 3. Thirdly that the People may change Monarchy into Aristocracy or Democracy or an Aristocracy into a Monarchy or Democracy or è contrae which way you will for ought I know they differ not in this neither 4. But some of our new State-Divines do hold that this Power is derived to the King from the People Cumulativè or Communicativè non Privativè by way of Communication or Cumulation but not by way of Privation that is howsoever the People communicate this Sovereignty to the King by trust yet they denude not themselves of this Sovereignty To make it plain it is in their Opinion no otherwise than as when the King of England appoints a Lieutenant Deputy or High Commissioner of Ireland or Scotland he denudes not himself of his Royal Power but delegates them with Power and Trust for his Service If this be their mind for I cannot conjecture at any other and if they have any other Sense I wish they would make it plain the King is in a poor case by such a derived Power for then as the King of England giving to his Deputy or Deputies that power only cumulativè he cannot by Reason or Law seeing Potior est delegantis quam delegati authoritas that the Principal his Authority is more excellent than he delegate's nor can he be debarred from that right the Law of Nations giveth him Anticipatione concursu or evocatione by procognition his own proper entire Right or Evocation to determine or judge in any thing that concerneth that His Kingdom If they authorize the People so let any that hath common Sense judge in what Condition these new-state-divines do put Kings 4. They aver which maketh me the more inclinable to conceive that to be their mind which before we have expressed that the same Sovereign Power is Howsoever derived from the Community to the King in the people suppletivè that is that if the King be deficient in necessary Duties of Government for the good of the Church and State the People by their innate power may do
as true that they hold 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in specie that the specification of the Government or restraint to Monarchy Aristocracie Democracie or a mixed Government of these if it be imaginable or possible is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by humane constitution Some in these distempered Times have gone a little more wide in Errour than the Jesuit averring that a difference of Superiour and Inferiour is an Herauldry unknown to Nature and the Gospel solely and simply introduced by the constitution and composition of man We will therefore by God's Grace prove that Government is de jure Naturae necessary by God's established Ordinance in debate of which we are confident it will appear that Sovereign Authority whether it be fixed in one as in Monarchy or some few of the better sort as in Aristocracy or in many as in Democracy is derived from God immediately and referreth to him as its proper efficient and constituent That God is the Author of all Government amongst his Creatures and especially of the Government of mankind appeareth by reason 1. The same who is the Author of all Creatures in their Being and Existence must be the Author of their Subsistence and Preservation in that Being and Existence It is an infallible Maxim in the Schools in Nature in Scripture Qui dat esse dat conservare He that giveth Being is the same that preserveth the Being Creation 〈◊〉 begun Conservation and Conservation is a continued Creation we assume Things made existent by Creation cannot subsist and have continuance but by Order by Government from whence naturally it followeth God must be the Author of this Order and Government and consequently hath not left it arbitrary to man by composition and consent to do it Authority strengtheneth this reason Saint Augustine writing against Faustus saith Aeternâ lege juberi ut ordo naturalis conservetur It is not arbitrary in St. Austin's mind to man whether Government or not for what is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Humane Constitution if we will believe the Prince of Philosophers is arbitrary but in his judgment jubetur it is jussum a commanded a necessary thing and that aeternâ lege by an inevitable irrepealable Ordinance which nothing temporary can make void But what is this I pray you the holy Father telleth you Vt ordo natuâ—alis conservetur that the Order God in nature hath established be preserved and conserved If this come not home enough take it with a full Commentary from Anselme who lived long after him and in whose days this Tenet lived in Vigor upon 1 Cor. 15. he saith Omnibus notum sit nullum principum nullámque potestatem virtutem sive coelestium sive terrestrium per se habuisse aliquid principatus vel potestatis aut virtutis sed ab illo à quo sunt omnia non solâ—m ut sint sed etiam ut ordinata sint Be it known to all men saith the holy man that none invested with Sovereignty Dominion or Power hath either Principality or Dominion or Power by himself but solely from him by whom they have not only their Being in Nature but also to be so order'd for their better Being and Preservation by Order If Saint Austin's first Passage above cited be not clear enough full enough hear him speak for himself Lib. 3. Confess cap. 8. Generale pactum est societatis humanae obedire regibus suis It is a natural a general a universal Compact Covenant of humane Society to obey their Kings In the Fathers Dialect Generale pactum is the dictate of Nature and he that disclaimeth Ius naturae the dictate of Nature to be Ius divinum the Law and Ordinance of God hath made a Divorceâ—betwixt himself and Nature and Reason and sound Divinity It is observable that he saith this Generale pactum this Ordinance of Nature is obedire Regibus suis to obey their Kings I beg the Favour that our Sectaries will shew as much for Aristocracy or Democracy or any other imaginable Spece of Government The Strength of this Argument is more seen if you consider this If God Almighty be not as much the Author of the order of the Government of mankind as he is the Creator of man and mankind then Almighty God hath not perfected his good Work entirely to or towards man and mankind and hath left man in a worse Condition than all other his Creatures in the Vniverse besides The Consequence is necessary for it was not sufficient nor conformable to the Wisdom and Goodness of God to make man the little World the Abridgment of the Perfections of all Creatures except he provided by his Wisdom Power and Goodness how he should be continued and preserved in Being and Happiness but this without Order and Government is neither imaginable nor really possible These two are indivisibly inseparably given to God in Scripture He is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Creator of all things and Vpholder of all things Heb. 1. 2 3. As all things are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of him so all things are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by him Rom. 11. vers ult Gen. 2. 1. Thus the Heaven and the Earth were perfected and all the host of them Perfecti sunt coeli terra omnes exercitus eorum saith the old Interpreter This that all the Creatures were very good Gen. 1. 31. and that all were perfected Gen. 2. 1. importeth not only that all in the Bounty of God were created in their specific and individual Natures good in themselves but also that by the Decree and Ordinance of God were established to continue and to be preserved thus But no Subsistence no Continuance without Order and Government reason Sense Experience evidence it confirm it Nor is Authority wanting Greg. Nazianzen Orat. de moderat◠〈◊〉 disput serv. saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Order Government is the Mother the Nurse the Establisher of all things Saint Paul Philip 2. 5. â—ntimateth that without order the Stedâ—astness of Faith cannot be He rejoyced to behold their order and the Stedfastness of Faith First order then Stedfastness of Faith without order then no Stedfastness in Faith and consequently no Faith To return to our point that the Establishment of Order and Government is no less the immediate Work of God than the Creation of all See Psal. 148. where the Psalmist exhorting or exciting all the Creatures to serve God giveth the Reason vers 6 7. For he commanded and they were created He hath also established them for ever He hath made a Decree that shall not pass Do we not see all the Creatures established in a Subordination one to another See we not in the lifeless and senseless Creatures that the inferiour giveth a Tacite Reverence and silent Obedience to the Superiour See we not upon the other part that the superiour Creature hath a powerful and effectual Influence upon the Inferiour to its Good and Being without which it could neither
and supply it This our Rabbies have not only taught but practised here and elsewhere in his Majesties Dominions yet in my poor reading I have not found any Jesuit although I confess by Deduction out of their Principles this Consequent may be expressed so roundly and right down to say it It is true that Bellarmine saith in his Recognitions lib. 3. q. de Laicis populus nunquam ita suam potestatem in regem transfert quin illam sibi in habitu retineat ut in certis casibus etiam actu recipere possit that the People do never so transfer their power into the King but that they retain it to themselves habitually that in some certain Cases they may resume it I find a Tenet bad enough impious enough sacrilegious enough but he doth not say that this power is transferred only cumulatively Nor doth he talk of any Suppletivè actual supply Only he telleth of an habitual retaining in the People and that upon some cases they may resume it not in every ordinary case nor can they do it It is true Bellarmine expresseth not the case or Cases He knew it to be difficult or would have it it is like to be a reserved case for the Pope of Rome when it pleaseth him to determine or define it But if we may guess at his mind by his Brother Jesuit Suarez read him lib. 3. defens orthod fid c. 3. § 2 and three and there he telleth you that he will have it definite and constant in Law and that extant and evident vel antiquis certis instrumentis vel immutabili consuetudine either by ancient and faithful Records of Law or by unchangeable and not interrupted Custom If this cannot be produced the only case he assigns is Si Rex sua potestate in manifestam civitatis perniciem abutatur If the King evidently apparently abuse his Power and Sovereignty to the total Destruction of his Kingdom let none cavil that we English Civitas the whole Kingdom comprehending King and Kingdom for they that have but the Terms of Policy know that Civitas is the whole Kingdom and State with the King and Civis the true Latin word for a Subject He giveth his Reason why in such a case this is lawful quia potest populus naturali potestate ad se defendendum uti quia hac se nunquam privavit because the People may use that power of self-defence with which nature hath endowed them for they did not divest themselves of this power nor was it transferred upon the King The Result of Suarez's mind is that if there be not Authentical uncontrolable Records or immemorial and not interrupted Customs to determine the Cases the Judges the way of Procedure the Bounds and Extent Quos ultra citraque How far and no fartâ—er there is no case lawful or imaginable but in the abuse of Sovereignty to the total Destruction of King and Kingdom which case as we think howsoever imaginable yet in facto esse it is impossible as we will shew after in the last Question that this is not warrantable By Gods Institution nor doth the Charter of Nature entitle us to this Right of self-defence in this Case to make away nay to resist a King And observe how warily the Jesuit qualifies his case First it must not be a feared or conjectured case of Ruine and Destruction to King and Kingdom but manifest and clear as the Sun-shine Next That not any case of Injustice Oppression or Tyranny doth warrant them to do or act this but a manifest actual overthrowing of the whole Kingdom King and all Subjects Gerson and others of the Parisian Doctors qualifie the case thus 1. That it is necessary that he intend and Attempt the total overthrow and Destruction of the Kingdom 2. Next that a jealousie or conjectural Evidence is not sufficient I must be manifest as evident as it were written with a Ray of the Sun 2. To these two must be added invincible and insuperable Obâ—â—imacy which cannot by humble Reverence Deprecation Supplication or any other means else which becometh a Subject to use in all Reverence Prudence and Submission to a Prince be amended Let God and good men judge if our case this day be so circumstanced and qualified Thirdly it is worth our noting that he speaks not of resuming Sovereignty to the People as to it 's proper owner by which this Resistance or Censure is to be done but of a natural Power of self-defence of which the People and Community were never denuded nor divested That this is the Jesuits mind appeareth yet more clearly by what followeth for saith he it is not lawful to the People to restrain or limit the Power which they have once traâ—â—mitted and committed to the King Quia Lex justitiae non permittit quae docet Legitima pacta non esse rescindendâ— donationem semel absolute factam revocari non posse neque in totum ne ex parte maxime quando onerosa sunt The very Law of Common Equity alloweth not that Contracts and Covenants should be repealed and what is once transferred by Donation may not by the same Law be made void either in whole or in part nay not when the Condition is to the Prejudice of the Donor He adds more That Laws made by a Prince cannot be repealed or made void by the People or Community without the tacite or express Consent and Allowance of the Prince No he adds more that a Prince doth not pendere à populo in sua potestate etiamsi ab ipso eam acceperit quia poterit pendere in fieri non postea pendere in conservari Doth not depend from the People in his Sovereignty and power although he had it from them because saith he while he was a making or to be made King it was of them but to continue to be so it is not from them Let me add with this of Suarez another passage of Bellarmine where he contradicts that he speaketh which before we cited Becognit lib. 3. q. de laicis The Passage you have in his Tract against Padre Paulo where he grants that a People or Community may have some power of approving or rejecting of a Preacher over them while he is a chusing or to be instituted but not after he is chosen or appointed He proveth this thus Quemadmodum saith he exercitus poterat approbare aut reprobare personam quae in Imperatorem proponeretur ubi tamen Imperator factus esset illum judicare non poter at neque in illum ullam habeâ— potestatem As of old amongst the Romans when the Armies or Souldiers did choose the Emperour The Army might accept or reject him that was to be created Emperour but being made Emperour and invested in the Empire the Army was no more his Iudge neither had any Coercive or Coactive Power above him Whilst the Cardinal was not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wedded to the Conclusions of the Roman Sea Truth and Honesty fell from
his Pen. These things I observe not to plead for Jesuits the bane of Christian Peace nor that I think that there is more Honesty in them than in a Puritan but only to put our Sectaries in mind that howsoever their Tenets by Deductions and Consequences are tant ' amount as theirs yet they are more wary and prudent than in their Expressions for I never see how their Communicative and Suppletive by the most benign Sense can suffer so favourable an Interpretation as the Jesuits Tenets do Besides our Sectaries have to consider by how much more they deteriorate and depress Kings committing or appropriating so extravagant a Power transcendent above them to the Community or people who are the weakest in Judgment the most instable in their Resolutions and Conclusions ready to cry to day Hosanna and to Morrow Crucifige ready to cry to Gideon now Reign thou and thy Son for ever over us and incontinent joyn with Sichem and his base Son Abimelech kill his seventy Sons all of them but Iotham who iniraculously by Gods Providence escaped who in Scripture are compared to the raging of the Sea for their Violence and Impetuosity and ever casting up dirt for their Corruption than doth the Jesuit who will not admit people shall do it till the Pope take notice of it as competent Judge by divine Appointment or made umpire by arbitrement For sure I am that the most solid and learned of the Roman Church do hold that Subjects cannot by any be loosed from the Oath of Allegiance till the Pope do it Again I pray you to consider what Encouragement it is for Kings and Monarchs to become Nurse-fathers of the Reformed Church when by our printing and practices we abase them so far as to make them the basest extract can be derived from the Community and that they are deposable and dethronable by the People upon any exigent they judge fitting Will not any understanding Prince chuse rather to submit and subject his Crown to the Popes Mitre than to the Fury and Violence of an untamed Beast Where Piety should be reason and Judgment may be and if all be deficient yet wrath may be sooner in one in him appeased than in a bellua multorum capitum His Avarice or Ambition sooner satisfied than is imaginable of that insatiable Beast of the Community Fifthly Our Gamaliels hold that as this Sovereign Power is originally formally radically inherent in the People so it is Reductive by way of Reduction theirs that is in case of total Defailance of a King and his Posterity or in case a King by just demerit excidat jure suo forfeit his Right This Right reverts and returns to the Community again And in this for ought I know both Jesuit and Puritan conspire only the Jesuit sworn to maintain the exorbitant Pride and Power of Pope reserveth the Interest extravagant of the Pope And as Papelings do it in ordine ad Spirtualia So Presbyterians come well nigh it who will have the King but Custos and Vindex and most put in Execution what the Presbytery or Assembly determines in Gods Case and Cause otherwise you know what they may do Excommunicate c. and what follows upon that you know by joyning the Law and the Gospel Mat. 18. It is Christs Command that an Excommunicate shall be unto thee as an Heathen or Publican and the Tenor of the Law runs Deut. 17. A Stranger shall in no wise reign over thee Because we are sure that our Adversaries in the Roman Church will the next day either strengthen their Tenet asserting it by the Testimony of our men such as they will have us to own without all reason or then that they disclaim this part of the Tenet by which such extravagant Power is given to the People which the Pope may do at Leisure and Pleasure for neither he nor any Council of theirs hath as yet determined it to be de fide and turn it home as a true Brood of reformed Religion which I most fear and with good Reason for when the Jesuits were of late in this our Blessed Kings Reign charged by a Church-man that their Doctrine was seditious and treacherous concerning Kings a Jesuit in Spain was bold to answer that the same Tenets were preached and printed by ours and practised before a Jesuit was or ever they did print gave a Paper with warrand of the Books as Goodman c. and it is well known here what was professed and protested by Father Knot in his Epistle Dedicatory to our Gracious Sovereign before his Book entituled Christianity maintained about the time of the Stirs and Distempers in Scotland Because I say our Enemies are so malicious and subtle to take all possible Advantages to wrong us and our good Cause I aver confidently that those and the like Tenets were never taught nor believed by the sound Protestants of the Reformed Churches but our Sectaries learned them of their Bouchier De justâ abdicatione Hen. 3. Rossaeus peregrinus his de justa reip in principem potestate Hottoman his Francogallia his de jure regn Gal. Mariana and others And for my part I probably conjecture by the Terms they use that they have borrowed their first main Tenet of the Sorbonists and others of that kind who to oppose the Pope his Infallibility in Judgment his unlimited Power and to subject him to a Council did dispute themselves almost out of breath to prove that potestas spiritualis summa was by Christ first and immediately given unitati or communitati fidelium that so the power might never perish the Truth might be ever preserved and that howsoever for the time it was virtually in the Pope yet he had it only from the Community of the faithful communicatively and in case of Defailance in them it was suppletive and in case that the power of the Church was abused to Heresie or Tyranny the Pope was deposable not only censurable by a Council This Question was acutely disputed before about and after the Councel of Constance In the like manner to vindicate the Sovereignty of Kings from subordination or subjection to the Sea of Rome in temporalibus they made the Community of the people the prime first proper and immediate subject of all civil Power intending at this time only to vindicate Princes from the sacrilegious and violent Invasion of the Pope of Rome who most impiously and tyrannically usurped upon them as Gregory Nazianzen says it may well be that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 like to a Cooper to right a bowed or crooked stick will bend it too much to the other side to rectifie it so these men to right Princes from the Tyranny of the Pope of Rome run upon the other extreme for the time not considering it as the Fathers to shun the Scylla of Manicheism who imposed an inevitable Fate and Necessity upon all the voluntary actions of man to vindicate mans Will and Freedom from inevitable Necessity and to assert to it it
the Laws of Society not only for Wrath but for Conscience sake not only whilst they enjoy Peace Plenty Justice and Protection by the Benefit of Governours but also whilst they do suffer under some Inconveniences or accidental Abuses The Reason of which Obligation they make to be this because we cannot enjoy nor reap the sweet Fruits of established Government unless by compact we submit our selves to some possible and accidental Inconveniences from which grounds they extract these Consequences and Consectanes 1. First That after a people have by Contract Compact or Covenant divested themselves of that Power which was primarily and natively in them they cannot without manifest violation and breach of inviolable divine Ordinance and without Breach of publick Faith resume that Authority which they have placed in a King that being united in one it may be enabled sufficiently to protect all and to exert and exercise all necessary acts of Government 2. The second is that it were high Sin to trench upon Sovereign Authority to rob it of its Essentials and native Constitutions 3. Thirdly this ordinance of God is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not without just and urgent Reasons 1. First for if that the primary and native Power which is in all and every one were not united entirely and sovereignly in one it could not have Strength enough to protect all and every one and to do all Acts and parts of necessary Government 2. Next this Ordinance of God is necessary to prevent those fatal and too too ordinary Divisions which attend Multitudes or many endued with equal Power where almost every one upon real or fancied Injuries undertaketh to right himself The Authors of this Opinion add That although before positive Constitution this is not absolutely unjust yet Reason informeth us that it must be fit by some Condition and Agreement to part with this native Right entirely for a greater good which will ensue and to prevent greater Evils which without this cannot be avoided and to restrain our selves from being our own Judges 3. Thirdly that either to resume any part of this Power of which the people have totally divested themselves or to entrench usurp upon or limit it contrary to its Nature is not only to disable Sovereignty from Government and Protection but also to loosen â—he Sinews of all Society no less than of Government by receding from that Compact which subtle disconâ—ented and disaffected men for their own private ends perswade others they might have made more to their own Advantage I was sometime in Love with this Opinion nor do I much condemn it for it enableth Sovereign Authority of a King with an entire and sufficient Power it maketh the Person and Office of the King sacred and inviolable it determineth that it is Sacriledge to denude or divest the King of any part of sacred Royalty and that the attempt or practise of any in this kind is a bad president nay a warrant for the Violation of all Contracts howsoever just upon any pretence whatsoever advantagious it reserveth Kings to the Tribunal of God only it preventeth by the law of Nature the Appointment of God all Seditions and Treasons declaring vim civium in Regem semper injustam all Opposition by force resisting of Kings by Arms whither in a defensive or offensive way to be against God and unlawful How fair soever this Opinion be yet I dare not to aver it nor maintain it for I can never see where holy Scripture or reverend and pious Antiquity hath seated this Sovereignty in the multitude or universitate civium originally or radically tanquam in subjecto primo as in its first Subject Scripture and Fathers speak it clearly frequently that Sovereignty refers to God as to its immediate Author and Donor but that it is underivedly primarily and natively in the Community from thence transferred to the Prince Ne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quidem Lucilianum not one syllable I wish from Scripture or Fathers they would make it appear that after the Peoples Constitution there is a supervenient accessory Ordinance to secure the Prince his Person and Function I leave this and come to prove by Scripture CHAP. II. That God is the immediate Author of Sovereignty in the King and that he is no Creature of the Peoples making WHen we say that Kings are constituted immediately by God and that Sovereignty is by immediate Donation and Collation from God and not from the People conceive us not to mean so grosly that this is by any special Ordinance sent from Heaven by the Ministry of Angels or Prophets The Observator if he conceive there is no other way but this whereby the Original of Royalty may be referred to God as the immediate Donor he will grant that there were but some few such as Moses Saul David c. But if he know not that some thing may immediately proceed from God and be his proper work without a Revelation or Manifestation extraordinary from Heaven he is as empty a Divine as I fear in the end he 'll prove a Politician I hope he will grant that howsoever the Designation of a person to Consecration for a sacred Function be by the Church and man yet the power of preaching administrating the Sacraments binding and loosing of Sins is immediately from Christ. To say this Power were derived from any other is not only unsound but blasphemous This Power in its nature is divine spiritual and supernatural and consequently cannot be but from such an efficient The designation of the Person to an holy Function is from man or men but the collation of the Power is immediately from God and Christ and yet this is not by any special Ordinance sent from Heaven by the Ministry of Angels and Prophets That the Apostles are of God and Christ's immediate Constitution none doth deny That Matthias was one Who will controvert That he was designed by men is clear Acts 1. Two were set apart the Decision was by Lots and yet I pray you was not Matthias an Apostle by immediate Constitution from Christ But where read you where find you any special Ordinance sent from Heaven by the Ministery of Angels or Prophets To come to Natural things If the Observator believe with the most part of Divines that the Soul of man is by Creation and Infusion not by propagation and traduction although Man and Nature begetteth the Body disposeth and prepareth it as a fit matter to be conjoyned with the Soul that the Father may well be said to have begotten the Son yet will he acknowledge that the Soul is immediately from God and believe it to be so without any special Ordinance sent from Heaven It were good for our Adversaries to consider that as the Schools see Iac. Almayn de Suprema potestate temporali quaest 2. c. 1. alibi See Gerson Ioannes Parisiensis and others and see St. Austin in re in effect saying the same although not in
not terrae filii Cadmus off-spring sprung out of the Earth Kings then are not made provided chosen found exalted anointed adopted by Saints by People by Pope by Presbytery by any diffusive collective representative virtual Body of the Community but by and of God alone for their Power their Sovereignty they are dii 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elohim the manner of Propagation Derivation Communication is by Filiation by Adoption they are filii Excelsi the Sons of the most High and for eminency above all they are the first born this is the Language of Canaan it is the Language of Ashdod to say that a King is minor universis singulis major Scripture Reason speak the contrary primogenitus the first-born is not above every Brother severally but if there were thousands millions numberless numbers he is above all in Dignity in Precedency in Power It is statuted by God in the beginning of the World that the younger Brother and Brethren all of them sub te erit appetitus ejus tu dominaberis illius Vnto thee or subject unto thee shall be his desire and thou shalt rule over him Gen. 4. 7. To return a little to the Practice of the Law in constituting David King you find it was not the diffusive the collective Body of Israel that found David chose him exalted him anointed him c. It was God alone it was not the Elders of Bethlehem his own City neither they nor the other knew of it 1 Sam. 16. 4. Nor were the Saints sharers in this work with God they knew nothing of it Psal. 89. 19. Nay not Samuel the Prophet had it been he it had not been King David but King Eliab It is worthy of our labour to take notice how the anointing of Kings is wholly attributed to God in Scripture and other Kings besides the Kings of Iudea are called The Lords Anointed Which is more than evident by what is before expressed the phrase of Scripture is very emphatical They are anointed with his holy Oyl the Act is his He anoints The holy Oyl is his He anoints with his Oyl this Oyl is sacred too it is not every Oyl but his Oyl and his sacred Oyl Sacred Oyl it is which how it can be so denominated and come from the People as its first subject and Seat its Origine and Source is not conceivable in Reason Sacred it is in three respects First from a sacred Fountain a sacred Efficient from God himself 2. Next for its sacred Influence upon the Person it makes the Person of the King Sacred 3. For its influence upon the Charge the Function his Power his Authority is Sacred too And both the Person and the Charge are Supreme which is most fitly resembled in the Sacramental Ceremony of Oyl put Oyl in whatsoever Liquor you will it swimmeth above in the surface Now all this is so intirely and solely given to God that neither Priest nor People Pope nor Presbytery have any part in it Psal. 89. 20. With mine holy Oyl have I anointed him God finds the Oyl and the hand to do it You will say Samuel's hand did it The Principle of the Law will take away this Scruple Quod quis facit per alium facit per se What one doth by another he doth that by himself Samuel was onely the Delegate God was the Principal and Delegant and in reason the Act must be referred to the Principal The Oyl was God's too not from the Apothecaries shop nor the Priest's Vial this Oyl descended from the Holy Ghost who is no less the true Olive than Christ is the true Vine Yet I pray you mistake it not to account it of the holy Oyl of Gratia gratum faciens Saving Grace as some Fanaticks and Fantasticks fondly imagine this is a sacred Oyl to make the Person and Function Sacred as we have said Our seventh Argument to prove that Sovereignty in a King is immediately from God and not from the diffusive collective representative or virtual Body of the Community is that all Royal Ensigns and Acts of Kings are ascribed to God If Kings were the Derivatives of the People and Community in whom is that fansied underived Majesty how comes it to pass that the holy Spirit hath not in any place or syllable of Scripture intimated it and how cometh it to pass that in such a particular way and enumeration all are given to God 1. Their Crown is of God by putting it on their head Isai 62. 3. The Royal Diadem is in the hand of the Lord. Psal. 21. 3. Thou puttest a Crown of pure Gold upon his head Hence it was that the Emperour's Coin of old was printed with an hand coming out of Heaven and putting it on their head The very Heathen did term them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as having and holding their Crowns from God Their Sword is God's and he girdeth them with it David Professeth so much Psal. 18. 39. For thou hast girded me with strength the Sword is the Emblem of strength unto the Battel See Iudges 7. 17. 3. Their Scepter is the Scepter of God Exod. 4. 20. and 17. 9. The Hebrew word Sebet signifieth no less Scepter than Rod. It is a miraculous one too We read onely of two miraculous Rods Moses's and Aaron's By Moses's rod what wonders were wrought in Egypt and what a Miracle was it that the rod of Aaron budded and none else of the twelve Tribes and for what purpose was it that God made both the one and the other miraculous Was it not to manifest to the World that the Sovereign Power of a King as Moses was King of Ieshurun and high Sacred Power of the High Priest and the Tribe of Levi were not by Derivation by Translation by Communication from the People but immediately independently from God himself He is well nigh out of his Wits that will make any thing miraculous the Work and Effect of the Multitude 4. Their judgment is the judgment of the Lord 2 Chron. 19. 6. Again 5. Their Throne is the Throne of God 1 Chron. 19. 21. The ancient Fathers and Councels used the same diction they called 1. Their Writings sacri apices 2. Their Presence sacra vestigia 3. Their Majesty sacra Majestas 4. Their Words their Commands divalis jussio The Law speaketh the same Language and whatsoever goods belonged to them they are called res sacrae See Brissonius his Lexicon lib. 7. in the Sacras Being that in Holy Scripture in reverend Antiquity and in the Law all their Ensigns all their Royal Acts their Persons their Right their Goods are denominated Sacred and given to God himself how can our new Statists against the expressions of the Holy Spirit of the Holy Fathers and of Jurists honour Kings no better but to call them Derivatives of the People Is this to ennoble them No truly it disgraces Kings it maketh them the basest Extract of the basest of Rational Creatures the Multitude the Community It is certainly untrue
are to be ruled and governed If they would speak rationally there can no other Power be conceived to be inherent in the Community naturally and properly but only potestas passiva regâ—minis a Capacity or Susceptibility to be governed by one or by more This Capacity in the Community is attended with an appetitus naturalis and necessarius ad regimen a natural necessary and vehement Inclination and Desire to submit to Government by which it is to be stated into an happier and safer Posture and Condition Just so as Materia prima vaga appetit formam quâ actuatur perficitur as the first matter of which natural Philosophy speaketh hath a Desire to be united to some Form by which receiving a particular Determination to a specifick and individual Entity it is actuated and perfected or as Debilior seâ—â—s appetit naturaliter sexum nobiliorem quo perficitur This Capacity in the Community being natural and common to all and having from it issuing out a vehement desire to actual Government obliges all Ex vi naturâ—â— subesse imperio by the Law and Dictate of Nature to submit to actual Government which Desire or Propension if you reflect upon it praescindendo à communi as it is in every individual and particular Person of this Body is not meerly and properly voluntary because howsoever Nature dictates that Government is necessary for the maintenance of the Society for Happiness for Safety and Protection yet every singular and individual person by Corruption and self-love hath naturalem repugnantiam a natural Averseness and Repugnancy to submit to any Singuli râ—gâ—um in pectore gerâ—mus the lowest Bramble willingly will not submit to the tallest Cedar for this Cause Saint Hierom â—aith â—â—ex nolentibus prâ—est It is despair to attain at Government that makes the greatest and most part to submit to Government and that they see and feel that without Government none can enjoy Society or Safety this forceth that natural Repugnancy which is severally and singularly in every one to give way to that universal natural and necessary Propension of Nature to Government This appetitus 〈◊〉 salis and naturalis this vehement necessary Propension and desire to Government is not unlike to that act of the understanding by which it assenteth to the first Principles of undeniable of uncontroulable Truth which are evident ex vi terminorum by evident Appearance in the essential Connexion of the Terms or is not unlike to that first act of mans Will by which necessarily fertur in summum bonum it is carried to it's chief good both of these in sound Philosophy are not actus liberi free acts of the Understanding and Will but necessarii such as cannot otherwise be just so this Consent and Submission to Government which is the brood of that natural Propension to Government for the Reasons above specified is not liber not so free as it may chuse or reject but in some kind it is necessarius elicited by Force Constraint or Necessity that all and every one are necessitated to it by that Necessity of Obedience Nature hath layed upon them from what is said rationally and by necessary Consequence it followeth that this Consent in the Community and every individual is not purè activus purely and simply active but hath more Alliance with a consensus passivus a necessary necessitated Consent from this then it is more than apparent that by that our new Statists call the voluntary Consent of the People nothing is bestowed upon him or them in whom the Sovereignty is fixed nor can the Community be a Donor of any Right or Power but in Submission and Subjection It will puzzle infinitely our New-state-Philosophy to make any thing in it's kind passive really active and collative of positive Acts and Effects except that as they have changed Faith so they will overturn true Reason from hence it will follow necessarily that by Government established the People and Community are stated in a more perfect a more happy Condition Solomon knew it well Prov. 11. 14. Vâ—i non est gubernator populus corruit where there is no Governour the people perisheth It is not once but often repeated in the Book of the Judges when Idolatry Rapine and Rapt abounded In diebus illis non erit Rex in Israele in those dayes there was no King in Israel Saint Paul homologates this Doctrine 1 Tim. 2. 1 2. intimating that there can neither Peace nor quiet godliness nor honesty be where Kings are not This natural propension necessitated by these considerations over-ruleth and overcometh the natural repugnancy that is in every individual in every singular one Again this being the Dictate of Nature it cannot but refer to God as to its immediate Author for God is the Author of Nature Nature hath taught natural men this truth more shame it is for us who would be thought Christians to be ignorant of it or to oppose it Aristotle saith lib. 1. Polit. c. 1. 2. that Man is by Nature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 made and ordained for Society Plato in his fancied Republick telleth us that he must be God and not man that can imagine to have that All-sufficiency to live without Society and Society without Government is not conceivable is not imaginable The same Aristotle saith that Civitas est de natura that Government is not Arbitrary but necessary by the over-ruling command of Nature In brief the result of all this Argument is that Power to rule or act the Sovereign is not naturally inherent in the Community the collective or diffusive Body all the People have is a capacity to be governed with a vehement desire to be stated in a condition of Peace and Safety which cannot be effected without an union with an actual Government in some to which the Community submitteth and subjecteth passively more than actively every individual having within him by inbred corruption an actual repugnancy to submit to any is necessitated to admit of Government by force of that natural inclination to preserve himself in Peace Plenty and Safety this being most true in it self and verified by the experience and inward testimony of every one who hath not shaken off natural reason How can it be made appear that this Sovereignty this actual Power to rule is derived transferred from the Community all collectively considered or every one diffusively considered or from a representative body Feoffees of trust from them A Countrey Clown can tell you Nemo potest dare quod non habet It is impossible to give to another that we have not our selves and Jurists do tell us Nemo potest transferre in alium quod non habet in â—se What may be judged of their Extravagancies by what is said is more than apparent How dare they be so impertinent so impudent to say that in the People there is an underived Majesty It is right down contradictory to Scripture Dan. 2. 37. 5. 18. It is said God giveth
this forceth them to make Aristocracie which is the Government of more than one and Democracie which is of many that they must be considered as unum analogiâ— one by analogy not univocally and properâ—y so judgd then of the force of our Argument For any reason I yet apprâ—â—end or can guess at if Sovereignty were primtively fixed in a multitude and from thence derived to any or many I cannot judge but that Democracie is the onely spece of Government warranted by Divine Institution and that all other kinds of Government are unlawful and their Acts sinful or if any should attempt to change Democracie into Monarchy it were an high impiety which things how they may be admitted let our new State-Divines consider and declare Sure I am Saint Austin was of the opinion that a corrupted Democracie without sin might be changed into Monarchy See him lib. 1. de liber arbitr c. 6. where he saith Si depravatus populus rem privatam Reip. praeferat atque habeat vaenale suffragium corruptusque ab â—is qui honores amant regnum in se factiosis consceleratisque committat nonne item rectè si quis tunc extiterit vir bonus qui plurimum possit adimat huic populo potestatem dandi honores in paucorum bonorum vel etiam unius redigat arbitrium Euod Et ita rectè Saint Austin and Euodius agree in this that if they who bear Rule in Democracie do corrupt Justice and put the Government into corrupt mens hands and such as are factious a good powerful man upon such an exigent may mould the Government into an Aristocracie or Monarchy Good Saint Austin for all his Learning and Piety knew not the Jesuit and Puritans ground that all Sovereignty and Supremacy all Majesty underived was in the multitude and that in their Power it is to change the Government to what guise they will he knew not that this was to rob the People of their native and proper Right when one man should reduce Democracie without the consent of the People to Monarchy or Aristocracie nor knew he that it was an unjust and Sacrilegious intrusion upon God's Right in the People to do it without their Act their Consent their Compact To this you may add another Testimony of that Father which virtually implieth the same you may read it lib. 9. de Civ Dei c. 21. where speaking of the declination of the Government of Rome from the second Carthage War and the restoring of Rome to her glory by Augustus coming to the Empire he saith Hoc toto tempore usque ad Caesarem Augustum qui videtur non adhuc vel ipsorum opinione gloriosum sed contentiosum exitiosum planè jam enervem ac languidam libertatem omnimodo extorsisse Romanis ad regale arbitrium revocasse cuncta quasi morbidâ vetustate collapsum veluti instaurasse ac renovasse Rempublicam The Passage is very considerable The purpose of the Holy Father is to take off that foul aspersion which the Heathen put upon Christ and Christian Religion that all mischief came into the World since they were heard of He proveth by the Roman story that greater mischief before was upon the Romans and that from the second Carthaginian War the Roman Grandeur was in its declination and decaying and at and about the coming of Christ in the World was restored again to its Magnificence and Splendour by the happy Monarchy and Empire of Augustus Caesar which happy change Saint Austin commends he condemns it not and so do the Heathen Writers which the Father could never have done if he had been of the mind that no man cometh rightly by Sovereignty but by derivation from the People It is not onely Saint Austin's but other holy Fathers observation that God in his wise Providence disposed so of the Government of the World as to put the best and greatest part of the World under the Monarchy of one that thus he might facilitate the progress of the Gospel throughout the World It is foretold in Scripture that Kings shall be the Nurse-fathers of the Church our Opposites cannot shew the like of Aristocracies and Democracies nor this day do we see it or in Ancient storie find it recorded It is most like Foelicitas temporalis Happiness temporal under Augustus the sweetest of Emperours came into the World with Foelicitas aeterna and spiritualis with eternal happiness when our King and Saviour came into the World Of this more q. 2. Our fifth Argument to prove that Sovereignty in a King is not from the Community or multitude is this If this Sovereignty be natively inherent in the Multitude it must be proper to every individual of the Community if it be so and must be so according to their Tenet which is enforced by that other as groundless and false State-maxim which they hold and maintain that Quisque nascitur liber every one is born a Free-man in the Forrest then it will necessarily follow that the Generation and Posterity of those who have first contracted with their elected King are not bound to that covenant but upon their Native Right and Liberty may start aside appoint another King and that without breach of covenant or any just Title in the King of their Fathers to force or reduce them to his obedience an excellent way devised to preserve King and Kingdom in Peace and Safety Might not the Posterity of Ioshua and the Elders living in his time who contracted with the Gibeonites to incorporate them although in a serving condition have made void their Fore-fathers covenant And if this be true How cometh it to pass that the Progeny of Ionadab did hold themselves bound to keep the prescript and strict Rule of their Father The Rechabites it seemeth had not learned this point of Native Liberty CHAP. IX That Sovereignty is not derived to the King from the People communicativè by Communication so that they may resume it in some Cases is proved by reason ALthough we would give to our Sectaries which we will never grant that all Sovereignty in a King is derived from the people immediately yet we deny and with good reason that it is not by Communication so that they may at pleasure or upon some necessary exigent in certain cases resume it so that habitually they retain it and are not totally divested of it but in some case of Defailance suppletivè they may exercise it and supply thâ— Defects of Government in the King Erecting Tables authorizing Parliaments appointing close Commiitees making and sealing subscribing and swearing Covenants c. Their ground is because all Sovereignty is by voluntary Consent and Compact derived from the People to the King This we have sufficiently disproved to strengthen this they equivocate in a Maxim Constituens constituto potior est the constituent is above the constituted in Dignity and Power If they knew any thing in Law or were ruled by Reason they could know that there be two sorts of
competent Iudge Who is this Judge For my part I know none but Almighty God the King of Kings If you say that the Judge is the diffusive Body or the Collective or the representative which I see not how it can be conceived without the Head the King yet at this time I yield it to you in your own notion and virtual Body I oppose that cannot be are they not all Subjects Are they not all under his Protection Have they not all sworn or should swear Allegiance and Supremacy How then can they be imagined in any other capacity than of a Subject How in any other notion relation or consideration but as the other Party Contractor in this imaginary notional and fancied Contract How can it with Law with Justice with Reason subsist that you shall be in your own Cause in your own Case in a matter of so high a Concernment Judge Witness and Party The highest that any as yet have gone is to fancy a coordinate Power with the Sovereignty of a King which in effect is a very bull and is as much as to say Supreme and not Supreme Sovereign and not Sovereign King and no King I deny not but that it may be proved if that your Practice may interpret your Power that you have run farther and reach higher in your Sovereignty than any King any Monarch in Europe except you speak of the King of Spain's Power over all his Dominions without Europe Never any of them claimed more but paternum Imperium but with grief we see this new Doctrine hath erected Despoticum herile Imperium I say the most you have claimed to your representative Body and that maimed too is a coordinate Power which in Law in Reason runneth upon equal upon coequal terms Now in Law Par in parem non habet Imperium an Equal cannot Lord or Judge over an Equal much less an Inferiour may usurp it above a Superiour Amongst many other reasons why our Lord Ioh. 8. would not sentence the Adultress that was taken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this is not an unprobable one that although he knew her guilty as God and as Man gratiâ visionis yet he would not act the Judge and Witness Omnis Christi actio nostra instructio Learn of him to be meek and humble nay just too and challenge not to be Judges Accusers and Witnesses in your own cause Imperial Law and Ecclesiastical both condemn it nay the very Light of Nature made Africanus disclaim to be against the Defendant Judge Accuser and Witness The Casuits when they dispute and resolve the Case how a Judge shall proceed in Judgment when to his private knowledge he knoweth contrary to that is like to be adduced and the Judge tyed to determine secundum allegata probata that in such a case he may if another competent Judge may be found exuere personam publicam personam Iudicis and witness for Truth that Justice be not prejudiced Fie for shame that Iesuits Romanists and Casuists althey hold many of our puritanical Principles yet are not so impudent as our Puritans and Sectaries To hasten to more Proofs of the Truth we maintain give me leave to tell you that I think or fancy at least that this Opinion that Sovereignty is seated in the Community every individual having its share which by Derivation from all and every one is concentred in the Person of the King is not unlike that Dream of Democritus and other Philosophers who fancyed to themselves that the whole Vniverse was composed and diversified by a casual Concourse of what I know not fantastical and imaginary Atomes CHAP. X. Wherein the Truth of our Tenet is by more reasons asserted the contrary Error disproved and the Absurdities in the Sectaries paradox involved are discovered THis Tenet that a King hath his Sovereign Power communicativè not privativè from the people that he is so invested with it that the People have it habitually suppletively and may resume it in some exigent cases giveth nothing to the King but only an empty and void Title which is not only resumable at peoples Pleasure but so coarctated and bounded with Limits and Conditions of their own devising that simul semel at the same Instant and Moment he both receiveth Empire and Sovereignty and layeth down the Power to rule and determine in matters which concern either the private or publick good At the same Instant without prejudice or derogating from the honour of Royalty be it spoken a King becometh a Monster an Hermaphrodite composed of a Sovereign and a Subordinate of a King and a Subject Again by this they hold I see not how they can difference a King from a Magistrate which with all understanding and knowing Politicians are distinguished by their different specifick Entity and Being Nay a Magistrate is stated into a safer and better Condition than a King for the Magistrate is to exercise Judgment and Jurisdiction by known Statute and custom Law the King is censurable deposable at the Pleasure of the Multitude as they fancy him to have transgressed The Magistrate cannot be censured be punished but by Law the meanest the basest of Subjects may arrest cite convene the King before the undèrived Majesty of the Community he may be judged by the arbitrary Law that is in the Closet of their Hearts and that not only for real Misdemeanour for real male-administration but upon fansied apprehended Fears and Jealousies and these not evident by any apparent Act or Attempt but intended If this be not to seat themselves upon the Tribunal of God who hath reserved as peculiar to himself to judge and discover mens Hearts and Intentions I know not what else can be it except it be that those Seraphical Doctors make so bold with Almighty God to unfold the Secrets of Predestination and to define who are the Elect who the Reprobate Any man that hath nothing left but common Sense will chuse rather to live the most private and obscure Life than to expose and oppose himself with an idle nominal Title of Honour to the most corrupt and corrupted Judgments and Affections of an ignorant injust and indiscreet Multitude I pray you when neither the true Grandeur and Splendour of Majesty nor the sacred Power of Empire nor the highest Pitch of Reverence and Obedience due to so sacred a Function and so sacred a person can shelter and protect him who can be so demented as not only to embrace an empty Title Ixions cloud but run the hazzard of total Ruine and perpetual Disgrace I know what will be answered good Kings are in no Danger this Terrour is only a Terrour a Curb to bad Kings The contrary this day appears and ordinarily the best of Kings are most in danger Who knoweth not how ambitious factious and discontented Spirits are most ingenious and solicite where no real and just Challenge can be made against a good King by specious and spurious Pretexts to incense and inflame with Fury the
inferred from hence This made Buchanan ingeniously maintain that Orders and Laws in Parliament were only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Precognitions till the whole People gave their Consent and had their Influence authoritativè upon the Statutes and Acts of Parliament By this you may know where he put the Legislative Power in the Community and this is with more shew of reason than the Observator's Tenet who holdeth that the Legislative Power is in the Parliament and yet Buchanan is more justifiable for this reason because where Majesty is there is Legislative Power but according to the Observator's mind in the People is the underived Majesty let him then come home to the Scotish Tenet and make it an Article of their new Covenant or new Creed if they will that the Legislative Power is in the People and the Parliaments Orders and Statutes are only preparatory precognitions I know the Observator thinks to salve all this that the whole Power of the Gentry and Commons is entirely transferred from the collective Body to the representative the Parliament To this we answer two things 1. The first is ye and your Brother-assistants the Scots are not of one mind for in the beginning of the Scottish Troubles when the Subjects there were preferring Petitions by their Declarations and Protestations they put all the Power in the collective Body and kept their distinct Tables 2. Next speak ingeniously and candidly Observator shew us the reason of the Difference of the Disparity why the whole entire Power of the Community if any they have should not be totally and entirely derived from the People to the King when they devest themselves of their underived Majesty and invest the King with it no less than the whole entire Power of the whole Kingdom is devolved upon the two Houses and that irrevocably too to hold in the King as in your Knights and Burgesses you are not able to shew it but what with one hand you take unjustly from the King with another but a wrong hand you ascribe to the Parliament It is like in times succeeding and after-ages our wise Kings will learn to know what is their Power Place and Prerogative by that the Parliament hath assumed to them but we are hopeful they will never exercise it with such Cruelty and Tyranny I many times think upon it that as the extravagant Ambition and Usurpation of the Pope of Rome robbing Kings of their sacred Right and assuming to himself such superlative Transcendent Power for himself and his See both in Spirituals and Temporals hath wakened Christian Kings to consider better of their sacred Prerogative and by what he unlawfully and antichristianly assumed to himself in temporalibus to know what Trust God Almighty hath given to his Vicegerents his Kings so I am hopeful if God hath mercy reserved for these Kingdoms and Church right Bounds and Limits will be set to Subjects which will produce happier and sweeter Fruits of Government than we see or feel from these corrival co-equal co-ordinate fansied Powers and Sovereignty and Royalty be better rooted which God of his Mercy grant for the good of his Church the happy estate of the Kingdom and honour and right of our King If what is said be not enough to shew the Weakness of these popular Sophisms I come nearer to the Observator and put it home in a case where I dare promise he will say it is Sophistry By this way of reasoning I will prove there is no better way for the Observator to improve his Wealth than to make over the Right of all he hath to me the Argument will hold good Quod efficit tale est magis tale he that maketh me rich by giving me all his goods moveable and immovable maketh himself richer but the Observator by giving of all his goods my assumption should have been hypothetical for positively I know the Gentleman will not do it to me maketh me rich Ergo he maketh himself more rich This Logick I conceive is not so powerful as to cheat him out of his natural rational Faculty and so cheat him out of all his Lands Chattels and Revenues yet it may be by an order of the House that in some case this Logick may serve to good purpose that the People giving the twentieth the tenth the fifth part or the Moity of their Moneys and Revenues and all their Plate to strengthen the Parliament to advance the good Cause to cherish if we will speak truly and foment this present Rebellion it will not lessen their Wealth but enrich them more because quod efficit tale est magis tale it maketh some rich and consequently the Donors much more rich Certainly if this Logick hold it must be in great request for if this Logick do it not few can see how the Publick Faith can be kept Divinity and Church-rents if you sacrilegiously rob God which God forbid will not do it it must be some Sophism like this some Sophism in this kind that must answer for Publick Faith refund the Moneys borrowed from just Creditors and repay the wise Undertakers qui spem pretio emerunt who have brought their Hogs to a good Market To apply this shortly in few words If I remember rightly this Maxim quod efficit tale est magis tale I learned in the University to be understood de principio formali effectivo of such an Agent as is formally such in it self as is the Effect produced Next that it is such as is effective and productive of it self as when the Fire heateth cold Water it is hot formally in it self and maketh Water hot likewise By which it is necessary that the Quality inherent in the Effect be formally inherent in the Agent for this reason it is that Wine cannot be said to be drunk because drunkenness is no wayes inherent in Wine nor can Wine be capable of it and this made Aristotle qualifie his Maxim quod efficit tale est magis tale modò utrique insit And this insit utrique that it be in both maketh that the Maxim holds not in such Agents who operate by donation for he that is the Donor denudeth himself of the Right and Power of that he giveth to the Donee So here this condition faileth too And consequently if the Right of the King were transferred by Derivation and Donation from the People the Donation devests them totally of it except the King have it by way of loan which to my thinking never any yet spoke Next it is required that there be a Latitude and that that is effected be capable of a Latitude of more and less as when as I said before Fire heateth Water the heat of the Fire is more than the heat of the Water Lastly some add too that the Maxim must be understood ante effectum productum Now all the Argument falleth to the ground for Sovereignty never was nor can be in the Community Sovereignty hath power of Life and Death which none hath over himself and
their proper and peculiar and yet several and distinct Rights What Law what Right what Reason is it that the King may or should part with his sacred Right and yet warrants the People to preserve their Rights nay to invade and challenge the King 's Right It feareth me that high Sacrilege robbing God his Anointed and Holy Church is not the least crying sin that hath brought upon us these Miseries and many good men fear that Kings giving too much way to Harpyes to rob God and his Church have made a furious multitude to invade the Sovereignty of Kings to teach Kings to be more zealous and careful to preserve Christ and his Churches Rights Let us remember that God and true Policy have so inseparably united and conjoyned the Interest of King and People that they be almost altogether the same upon which necessarily it followeth that the people ought not to account it a game or strength to them which they obtain and acquire by a Loss and wast of his Prerogative nor ought they to think that perished to them which is gained to him and by which his Prerogative is strengthened he more enabled to protect and they the more secured in safety to enjoy Liberty and Propriety with peace and plenty To reason à salute populi from the Good and Gain of the people to the weakning or destroying of Royalty and Sovereignty is sophistical it is that Sophism they call à dicto secundum quid or à limitato ad absolutum to reason from one end of Government to the Destruction of the other which is more excellent and which effecteth and worketh the other is totally to overthrow Royalty and Government The compleat and adequate end of Monarchical Government is as we have said to preserve the Kings Prerogative entire and the Liberty and Good of the Subject too If any man reason after this Form in the case betwixt the head and the body the Wife and the Husband he will soon discover the Fallacy of this Sophism It is right just necessary and honourable for a King to proportion his Laws and Government for the Good and Safety of his People and on the other part it is as just as necessary for the people to hold that Salus Regis suprema lex esto the safety of the King of his Sovereignty and Right ought to be the paramont Law without which no safety can be to the publick State nor to any private mans well-being If such Sophisms as these were confined within School-walls for the exercise of Wits it were no great matter but such abused Principles clogged with such paradoxal Consequences have a mighty Influence upon the multitude and will make them assume to themselves or commit to their Representatives an arbitrary Power which placed in a wrong hand cannot chuse but produce monstrous Mischiefs These Maxims with their absurd Consectaries embolden them authorize them to pull his Crown from his Head wrest his Sword out of his hands seize his Ships Forts Magazines Ammunitions and Revenues if they apprehend it fit for their own good It will make them break thorow all inferiour Laws that no more shall we have or know for Law but what it shall please them to unfold at pleasure out of the Closet of their Breasts And if this power be in some few or in many who are back't by the greater part of the people having a domineering power over the Judgment and Affections of the people gulled with fair and false promises and vain expectation of a glorious Reformation in Church and State What person how innocent how well-deserving soever can be secured in the Liberty of his Person and Propriety of Life and Goods Shall it not be a sufficient and just warrant to commit innocent men to Ieremiah's Dungeon to prove them guilty at Leisure because they are disaffected to the Good Cause Shall it not be just to take from men what Portion what Moity of their State and Revenues they will and sequestrate them for the publick because they cannot confide in them and the Good Cause must be maintained upon the Estates of Bishops Malignants and Delinquents God forgive you Remember there is a God in Heaven will call Ahab to an account for Naboth's Vineyard repent in time and make Satisfaction before the evil day come upon you May they not by the same Grounds disarm whom they will to weaken Gods Enemies Those Maxims and Sophisms will make way to Rebellion to murther the most innocent the most deserving men It will at last come at that except God and Sovereignty right it that it will be a crime to have Wealth and Treason to be faithful and loyal to King Church and State This Maxim with the annexed Sophisms is enough to destroy King and Kingdom Church and State and at last send the Authors and those are set on by them packing to Hell from which good Lord deliver them and all of us But what may be the proper natural and innocent sense of the words Salus populi suprema lex esto No doubt they have a good and just sense if they be not â—acked upon Tentures beyond their just Extent It was as we have said and as it appeareth by Cicero de Legibus one of the Laws of the twelve Tables and 〈◊〉 paramount Law too But it is only tant ' amount as Salus publica suprema lex esto let the publick Safety of 〈◊〉 be the paramount Law It is transcendent in this Respect that Government first and principally regardâ—th the common Good and Safety of the whole and 〈◊〉 the next place it intendeth the private Good of eveâ—y private singular one subordinately Conservatio speâ—â—ei est potior conservatione individui the Preservation 〈◊〉 the spece and whole is intended more by Nature 〈◊〉 the preservation of any individual The word Populus in classical Authors and its ordinary use is more than â—leâ—s Plebs is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a derivative from many but Populus is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est à mulâ—â—pluribus Plebs comprehends only the vulgar and bafâ—eâ— sort of the Society but Populus omnes ordines hominum complectâ—tur comprehends in its extent all men in the Kingdom of what Condition or Quality soever SS Plebiâ—scitum de jure â—atural apud Iustinianum Nicholaus Porretus ad 2. Epigramma Martial in Cornâ—copia By which it is easily conceived that in this Salus populi in this Salus publica Salus Regiâ— is necessarily involved The word Publicum as Latin Authors well observe is a populo and 〈…〉 that it may sound the better in our Ears we pronounce iâ— Publicum 〈…〉 so that publick and popular in their originaâ— Sense are equivalent Popularâ—s actiones in the Diction of Law are the same that 〈…〉 de popular action actio P. L. 〈…〉 de 〈◊〉 P. and 〈◊〉 sacra if we will trust Festus and Labeo were those solemn Festivities 〈…〉 kept by all the People Governour and governed different from those
up a state upon the Ruines of the Church or better a prior estate they care not although Levites usurp upon Priests Presbyters upon Bishops and Christ and his Patrimony be both put out of the World Ten shekels of Silver and a Sute of Apparel Micah's allowance Iudges 17. 10. is enough and too much for the best of God and Christ's Servants All in the end will prove Aurum Tholosanum like the collop the Eagle brought from the Altar to feed her young ones so much Fire came with it that it consumed the Nest and the young ones too When the Church of God is in this distress it is not onely sin to be accessary to these Counsels and Courses but such as may and are able to prevent these mischiefs and do it not God will charge them with it Some there be who profess that they like not the course against the Church but for reason of State way must be given to the current of the stream and a fit opportunity waited to right what was amiss I will not search the hearts of such men I leave them to him who trieth the reins and knoweth our thoughts afar off onely let me put them in mind that sins of Omission of necessary Duties are high sins in the balance of the Sanctuary Meroz is cursed that came not out to help the Lord and Matth. 25. They are to be condemned in the last Day who fed not Christ when he was hungry no less than those who robbed him of his Food It is the highest Service to God with the Church of Thyatira not to deny the Faith where Satan's seat is where Antipas sufereth for the truth Rev. 11. 13. If God hath endowed any with Wisdom Power and Trust by Princes and in such time they withdraw their help from God and his Church it is like they will call to him in the day of their trouble and God will not hear them Remember after the reducing of the People from the Captivity the Prophets did charge the re-building of the House of God the Princes of Iudah answered The time is not come the time wherein the Lord's House should be built None was so impudent to come directly contrary to this Charge but they meant we are poor newly come out of Captivity we have strong Enemies about us we must wait a better opportunity a more seasonable time a jugling trick it is to cross good Works and crush them substantially by opposing them onely circumstantially Notwithstanding all this the Prophet chargeth them Is it time for you O yee this compellation is very emphatical to dwell in your cieled Houses and this House lie waste Read the Judgments I cease to repeat it I love not to apply it and wish it be not the Judgment of our Times See Hag. 1. vers 1 2 3. Ã vers 6. ad vers 12. Do not deceive your selves with that imposture that you will wait upon an opportunity to right all that is disjoynted in Church you are not to tempt God to put him to extraordinary Providence when he has put you in the ordinary way to serve him and to prevent these mischiefs Is it lawful and warrantable to you to do Evil or give way to Evil and to wait opportunity to do good afterward to salve all this Or can you expect that God will honour you to make you fit instruments to repair again what is wrong Certainly you neither deserve it nor can lay any claim or interest to it If these men fear Covenants and Associations I desire them to remember that as in Scripture the first and happiest Covenant is the Covenant of Mercy and Grace so in the next place we have in Holy Writ mentioned A Covenant of Levi which is the means ordinary God hath appointed to preserve the other The Scripture telleth us that it is an high impiety to corrupt the Covenant of Levi Mal. 11. 8. Both the one and the other Covenant are Covenants of Salt that is of everlasting durance from which it followeth necessarily that whatsoever Covenant destroyeth the Ordinance of God in the necessary Government of the Church the Ordinances of the Worship and its Solemnities cannot be from God from whence then it comes you may easily guess Of all impieties in this kind there is no higher transgression than if the Tribe of Levi for some subsistence to themselves and theirs and to gain popular applause and credit with the Faction assure Kings they may give way to a popular current and flood to suffer God's Ordinances to be destroyed the Solemnity of the Worship defaced till a better opportunity offer I beg pardon to speak truth in humility and reverence and first to Kings that although Church-men advise Kings upon such exigents to do such unwarrantable Acts yet it will not excuse them in the Day of their Accounts no more than it excused Achab that had the warrant of Zedekiah 1 Kings 22. 11. Nor did it excuse Pilate who had the representative Body of Priests and State to warrant him they had a Law and by their Law Christ was a Malefactor and worthy to dye Next let me tell the Tribe of Levi who for their own good and popular applause do comply with a popular Eaction and set their brains on work to make specious shews of Reason and inducements to perswade or warrant Kings by permission and giving way or by actual concurrence with their Authority to permit and do Acts destructive to Christ's Ordinances or derogatory to the Worship are near to the sin of Apostacy and another of an higher degree which I fear to name But of all Levites those are the most miserable who being advanced to the highest of Sacred Orders having enriched themselves by the Patrimony of the Church to keep their purchase have abjured that Sacred Order as Antichristian and yet make not restitution of what they have purchased I wonder how such mens Repentance could be admitted for in such cases they cannot truly repent without Restitution Non dimittetur peccatum nisi restituetur ablatum These men come short of Iudas this Repentance who was not onely contrite for betraying his Master but restored the Money which unjustly he had purchased by his Villany By the detention of their purchase their Converts declare themselves Mercenary and their Fathers by receiving them into their Communion publish to the World they care not what they lose in truth if they can deceive the People to make them think by such a goodly access their evil Cause is strengthened I refer these Apostate Bishops to read the story of Ecebolus I wish them not to be in like condition and cease to apply the story I thank God there is no rancour in my heart against them nor their Fathers Converters my imprecations are no other but to pray Almighty God to give them true Repentance and to forgive them The sum of what we have said is this that neither King nor Kingdom can be happy if Kings fear not