Part 6 out of 11
Against The Duty Of A Soveraign To Relinquish
Any Essentiall Right of Soveraignty:
Or Not To See The People Taught The Grounds Of Them
And because, if the essentiall Rights of Soveraignty (specified before
in the eighteenth Chapter) be taken away, the Common-wealth is
thereby dissolved, and every man returneth into the condition,
and calamity of a warre with every other man, (which is the greatest
evill that can happen in this life;) it is the Office of the Soveraign,
to maintain those Rights entire; and consequently against his duty,
First, to transferre to another, or to lay from himselfe any of them.
For he that deserteth the Means, deserteth the Ends; and he deserteth
the Means, that being the Soveraign, acknowledgeth himselfe subject
to the Civill Lawes; and renounceth the Power of Supreme Judicature;
or of making Warre, or Peace by his own Authority; or of Judging of
the Necessities of the Common-wealth; or of levying Mony, and Souldiers,
when, and as much as in his own conscience he shall judge necessary;
or of making Officers, and Ministers both of Warre, and Peace;
or of appointing Teachers, and examining what Doctrines are conformable,
or contrary to the Defence, Peace, and Good of the people.
Secondly, it is against his duty, to let the people be ignorant,
or mis-in-formed of the grounds, and reasons of those his essentiall
Rights; because thereby men are easie to be seduced, and drawn to
resist him, when the Common-wealth shall require their use and exercise.
And the grounds of these Rights, have the rather need to be diligently,
and truly taught; because they cannot be maintained by any
Civill Law, or terrour of legal punishment. For a Civill Law,
that shall forbid Rebellion, (and such is all resistance to the
essentiall Rights of Soveraignty,) is not (as a Civill Law)
any obligation, but by vertue onely of the Law of Nature, that
forbiddeth the violation of Faith; which naturall obligation if men
know not, they cannot know the Right of any Law the Soveraign maketh.
And for the Punishment, they take it but for an act of Hostility;
which when they think they have strength enough, they will endeavour
by acts of Hostility, to avoyd.
Objection Of Those That Say There Are No Principles
Of Reason For Absolute Soveraignty
As I have heard some say, that Justice is but a word, without substance;
and that whatsoever a man can by force, or art, acquire to himselfe,
(not onely in the condition of warre, but also in a Common-wealth,)
is his own, which I have already shewed to be false: So there be also
that maintain, that there are no grounds, nor Principles of Reason,
to sustain those essentiall Rights, which make Soveraignty absolute.
For if there were, they would have been found out in some place,
or other; whereas we see, there has not hitherto been any Common-wealth,
where those Rights have been acknowledged, or challenged.
Wherein they argue as ill, as if the Savage people of America,
should deny there were any grounds, or Principles of Reason,
so to build a house, as to last as long as the materials, because they
never yet saw any so well built. Time, and Industry, produce every day
new knowledge. And as the art of well building, is derived from
Principles of Reason, observed by industrious men, that had long studied the nature of materials, and the divers effects of figure, and proportion,
long after mankind began (though poorly) to build: So, long time
after men have begun to constitute Common-wealths, imperfect,
and apt to relapse into disorder, there may, Principles of Reason
be found out, by industrious meditation, to make use of them,
or be neglected by them, or not, concerneth my particular interest,
at this day, very little. But supposing that these of mine are not
such Principles of Reason; yet I am sure they are Principles
from Authority of Scripture; as I shall make it appear, when I shall
come to speak of the Kingdome of God, (administred by Moses,)
over the Jewes, his peculiar people by Covenant.
Objection From The Incapacity Of The Vulgar
But they say again, that though the Principles be right, yet Common
people are not of capacity enough to be made to understand them.
I should be glad, that the Rich, and Potent Subjects of a Kingdome,
or those that are accounted the most Learned, were no lesse
incapable than they. But all men know, that the obstructions
to this kind of doctrine, proceed not so much from the difficulty
of the matter, as from the interest of them that are to learn.
Potent men, digest hardly any thing that setteth up a Power
to bridle their affections; and Learned men, any thing that
discovereth their errours, and thereby lesseneth their Authority:
whereas the Common-peoples minds, unlesse they be tainted with
dependance on the Potent, or scribbled over with the opinions
of their Doctors, are like clean paper, fit to receive whatsoever
by Publique Authority shall be imprinted in them. Shall whole Nations
be brought to Acquiesce in the great Mysteries of Christian Religion,
which are above Reason; and millions of men be made believe,
that the same Body may be in innumerable places, at one and the
same time, which is against Reason; and shall not men be able,
by their teaching, and preaching, protected by the Law, to make that
received, which is so consonant to Reason, that any unprejudicated man,
needs no more to learn it, than to hear it? I conclude therefore,
that in the instruction of the people in the Essentiall Rights
(which are the Naturall, and Fundamentall Lawes) of Soveraignty,
there is no difficulty, (whilest a Soveraign has his Power entire,)
but what proceeds from his own fault, or the fault of those whom
he trusteth in the administration of the Common-wealth; and consequently,
it is his Duty, to cause them so to be instructed; and not onely
his Duty, but his Benefit also, and Security, against the danger
that may arrive to himselfe in his naturall Person, from Rebellion.
Subjects Are To Be Taught,
Not To Affect Change Of Government:
And (to descend to particulars) the People are to be taught, First,
that they ought not to be in love with any forme of Government
they see in their neighbour Nations, more than with their own,
nor (whatsoever present prosperity they behold in Nations that are
otherwise governed than they,) to desire change. For the prosperity
of a People ruled by an Aristocraticall, or Democraticall assembly,
commeth not from Aristocracy, nor from Democracy, but from the Obedience,
and Concord of the Subjects; nor do the people flourish in a Monarchy,
because one man has the right to rule them, but because they obey him.
Take away in any kind of State, the Obedience, (and consequently the
Concord of the People,) and they shall not onely not flourish,
but in short time be dissolved. And they that go about by disobedience,
to doe no more than reforme the Common-wealth, shall find they do
thereby destroy it; like the foolish daughters of Peleus (in the fable;)
which desiring to renew the youth of their decrepit Father,
did by the Counsell of Medea, cut him in pieces, and boyle him,
together with strange herbs, but made not of him a new man.
This desire of change, is like the breach of the first of Gods
Commandements: For there God says, Non Habebis Deos Alienos;
Thou shalt not have the Gods of other Nations; and in another place
concerning Kings, that they are Gods.
Nor Adhere (Against The Soveraign) To Popular Men:
Secondly, they are to be taught, that they ought not to be led
with admiration of the vertue of any of their fellow Subjects,
how high soever he stand, nor how conspicuously soever he shine
in the Common-wealth; nor of any Assembly, (except the Soveraign
Assembly,) so as to deferre to them any obedience, or honour,
appropriate to the Soveraign onely, whom (in their particular stations)
they represent; nor to receive any influence from them, but such as is
conveighed by them from the Soveraign Authority. For that Soveraign,
cannot be imagined to love his People as he ought, that is not
Jealous of them, but suffers them by the flattery of Popular men,
to be seduced from their loyalty, as they have often been, not onely
secretly, but openly, so as to proclaime Marriage with them
In Facie Ecclesiae by Preachers; and by publishing the same
in the open streets: which may fitly be compared to the violation
of the second of the ten Commandements.
Nor To Dispute The Soveraign Power:
Thirdly, in consequence to this, they ought to be informed,
how great fault it is, to speak evill of the Soveraign Representative,
(whether One man, or an Assembly of men;) or to argue and dispute
his Power, or any way to use his Name irreverently, whereby he may
be brought into Contempt with his People, and their Obedience
(in which the safety of the Common-wealth consisteth) slackened.
Which doctrine the third Commandement by resemblance pointeth to.
And To Have Dayes Set Apart To Learn Their Duty:
Fourthly, seeing people cannot be taught this, nor when 'tis taught,
remember it, nor after one generation past, so much as know in whom
the Soveraign Power is placed, without setting a part from their
ordinary labour, some certain times, in which they may attend
those that are appointed to instruct them; It is necessary that
some such times be determined, wherein they may assemble together,
and (after prayers and praises given to God, the Soveraign of Soveraigns)
hear those their Duties told them, and the Positive Lawes, such as
generally concern them all, read and expounded, and be put in mind
of the Authority that maketh them Lawes. To this end had the Jewes
every seventh day, a Sabbath, in which the Law was read and expounded;
and in the solemnity whereof they were put in mind, that their
King was God; that having created the world in six days, he rested
the seventh day; and by their resting on it from their labour,
that that God was their King, which redeemed them from their servile,
and painfull labour in Egypt, and gave them a time, after they had
rejoyced in God, to take joy also in themselves, by lawfull recreation.
So that the first Table of the Commandements, is spent all,
in setting down the summe of Gods absolute Power; not onely as God,
but as King by pact, (in peculiar) of the Jewes; and may therefore
give light, to those that have the Soveraign Power conferred
on them by the consent of men, to see what doctrine they Ought
to teach their Subjects.
And To Honour Their Parents
And because the first instruction of Children, dependeth on
the care of their Parents; it is necessary that they should
be obedient to them, whilest they are under their tuition;
and not onely so, but that also afterwards (as gratitude requireth,)
they acknowledge the benefit of their education, by externall
signes of honour. To which end they are to be taught, that originally
the Father of every man was also his Soveraign Lord, with power over him
of life and death; and that the Fathers of families, when by
instituting a Common-wealth, they resigned that absolute Power,
yet it was never intended, they should lose the honour due
unto them for their education. For to relinquish such right,
was not necessary to the Institution of Soveraign Power; nor would
there be any reason, why any man should desire to have children,
or take the care to nourish, and instruct them, if they were
afterwards to have no other benefit from them, than from other men.
And this accordeth with the fifth Commandement.
And To Avoyd Doing Of Injury:
Again, every Soveraign Ought to cause Justice to be taught, which
(consisting in taking from no man what is his) is as much as to say,
to cause men to be taught not to deprive their Neighbour, by violence,
or fraud, of any thing which by the Soveraign Authority is theirs.
Of things held in propriety, those that are dearest to a man are
his own life, & limbs; and in the next degree, (in most men,)
those that concern conjugall affection; and after them riches
and means of living. Therefore the People are to be taught,
to abstain from violence to one anothers person, by private revenges;
from violation of conjugall honour; and from forcibly rapine,
and fraudulent surreption of one anothers goods. For which purpose
also it is necessary they be shewed the evill consequences
of false Judgement, by corruption either of Judges or Witnesses,
whereby the distinction of propriety is taken away, and Justice
becomes of no effect: all which things are intimated in the sixth,
seventh, eighth, and ninth Commandements.
And To Do All This Sincerely From The Heart
Lastly, they are to be taught, that not onely the unjust facts,
but the designes and intentions to do them, (though by accident hindred,)
are Injustice; which consisteth in the pravity of the will,
as well as in the irregularity of the act. And this is the intention
of the tenth Commandement, and the summe of the Second Table;
which is reduced all to this one Commandement of mutuall Charity,
"Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy selfe:" as the summe of the
first Table is reduced to "the love of God;" whom they had then
newly received as their King.
The Use Of Universities
As for the Means, and Conduits, by which the people may receive
this Instruction, wee are to search, by what means so may Opinions,
contrary to the peace of Man-kind, upon weak and false Principles,
have neverthelesse been so deeply rooted in them. I mean those,
which I have in the precedent Chapter specified: as That men shall Judge
of what is lawfull and unlawfull, not by the Law it selfe, but by
their own private Judgements; That Subjects sinne in obeying
the Commands of the Common-wealth, unlesse they themselves have
first judged them to be lawfull: That their Propriety in their riches
is such, as to exclude the Dominion, which the Common-wealth hath
over the same: That it is lawfull for Subjects to kill such,
as they call Tyrants: That the Soveraign Power may be divided,
and the like; which come to be instilled into the People by this means.
They whom necessity, or covetousnesse keepeth attent on their trades,
and labour; and they, on the other side, whom superfluity,
or sloth carrieth after their sensuall pleasures, (which two sorts
of men take up the greatest part of Man-kind,) being diverted from
the deep meditation, which the learning of truth, not onely in
the matter of Naturall Justice, but also of all other Sciences
necessarily requireth, receive the Notions of their duty,
chiefly from Divines in the Pulpit, and partly from such of
their Neighbours, or familiar acquaintance, as having the Faculty
of discoursing readily, and plausibly, seem wiser and better learned
in cases of Law, and Conscience, than themselves. And the Divines,
and such others as make shew of Learning, derive their knowledge from
the Universities, and from the Schooles of Law, or from the Books, which
by men eminent in those Schooles, and Universities have been published.
It is therefore manifest, that the Instruction of the people,
dependeth wholly, on the right teaching of Youth in the Universities.
But are not (may some men say) the Universities of England learned
enough already to do that? or is it you will undertake to teach
the Universities? Hard questions. Yet to the first, I doubt not
to answer; that till towards the later end of Henry the Eighth,
the Power of the Pope, was alwayes upheld against the Power of
the Common-wealth, principally by the Universities; and that
the doctrines maintained by so many Preachers, against the
Soveraign Power of the King, and by so many Lawyers, and others,
that had their education there, is a sufficient argument,
that though the Universities were not authors of those false doctrines,
yet they knew not how to plant the true. For in such a contradiction
of Opinions, it is most certain, that they have not been sufficiently
instructed; and 'tis no wonder, if they yet retain a relish of that
subtile liquor, wherewith they were first seasoned, against
the Civill Authority. But to the later question, it is not fit,
nor needfull for me to say either I, or No: for any man that sees
what I am doing, may easily perceive what I think.
The safety of the People, requireth further, from him, or them that
have the Soveraign Power, that Justice be equally administred
to all degrees of People; that is, that as well the rich, and mighty,
as poor and obscure persons, may be righted of the injuries done them;
so as the great, may have no greater hope of impunity, when they
doe violence, dishonour, or any Injury to the meaner sort,
than when one of these, does the like to one of them: For in this
consisteth Equity; to which, as being a Precept of the Law of Nature,
a Soveraign is as much subject, as any of the meanest of his People.
All breaches of the Law, are offences against the Common-wealth:
but there be some, that are also against private Persons.
Those that concern the Common-wealth onely, may without breach
of Equity be pardoned; for every man may pardon what is done
against himselfe, according to his own discretion. But an offence
against a private man, cannot in Equity be pardoned, without the
consent of him that is injured; or reasonable satisfaction.
The Inequality of Subjects, proceedeth from the Acts of Soveraign Power;
and therefore has no more place in the presence of the Soveraign;
that is to say, in a Court of Justice, then the Inequality between
Kings, and their Subjects, in the presence of the King of Kings.
The honour of great Persons, is to be valued for their beneficence,
and the aydes they give to men of inferiour rank, or not at all.
And the violences, oppressions, and injuries they do, are not
extenuated, but aggravated by the greatnesse of their persons;
because they have least need to commit them. The consequences
of this partiality towards the great, proceed in this manner.
Impunity maketh Insolence; Insolence Hatred; and Hatred,
an Endeavour to pull down all oppressing and contumelious
greatnesse, though with the ruine of the Common-wealth.
To Equall Justice, appertaineth also the Equall imposition of Taxes;
the equality whereof dependeth not on the Equality of riches,
but on the Equality of the debt, that every man oweth to the
Common-wealth for his defence. It is not enough, for a man
to labour for the maintenance of his life; but also to fight,
(if need be,) for the securing of his labour. They must either do
as the Jewes did after their return from captivity, in re-edifying
the Temple, build with one hand, and hold the Sword in the other;
or else they must hire others to fight for them. For the Impositions
that are layd on the People by the Soveraign Power, are nothing else
but the Wages, due to them that hold the publique Sword, to defend
private men in the exercise of severall Trades, and Callings.
Seeing then the benefit that every one receiveth thereby, is the
enjoyment of life, which is equally dear to poor, and rich;
the debt which a poor man oweth them that defend his life,
is the same which a rich man oweth for the defence of his;
saving that the rich, who have the service of the poor, may be debtors
not onely for their own persons, but for many more. Which considered,
the Equality of Imposition, consisteth rather in the Equality
of that which is consumed, than of the riches of the persons
that consume the same. For what reason is there, that he which
laboureth much, and sparing the fruits of his labour, consumeth little,
should be more charged, then he that living idlely, getteth little,
and spendeth all he gets; seeing the one hath no more protection
from the Common-wealth, then the other? But when the Impositions,
are layd upon those things which men consume, every man payeth Equally
for what he useth: Nor is the Common-wealth defrauded, by the
luxurious waste of private men.
And whereas many men, by accident unevitable, become unable
to maintain themselves by their labour; they ought not to be left
to the Charity of private persons; but to be provided for,
(as far-forth as the necessities of Nature require,) by the Lawes
of the Common-wealth. For as it is Uncharitablenesse in any man,
to neglect the impotent; so it is in the Soveraign of a Common-wealth,
to expose them to the hazard of such uncertain Charity.
Prevention Of Idlenesse
But for such as have strong bodies, the case is otherwise:
they are to be forced to work; and to avoyd the excuse of not
finding employment, there ought to be such Lawes, as may encourage
all manner of Arts; as Navigation, Agriculture, Fishing, and all
manner of Manifacture that requires labour. The multitude of poor,
and yet strong people still encreasing, they are to be transplanted
into Countries not sufficiently inhabited: where neverthelesse,
they are not to exterminate those they find there; but constrain them
to inhabit closer together, and not range a great deal of ground,
to snatch what they find; but to court each little Plot with art
and labour, to give them their sustenance in due season.
And when all the world is overchargd with Inhabitants, then
the last remedy of all is Warre; which provideth for every man,
by Victory, or Death.
Good Lawes What
To the care of the Soveraign, belongeth the making of Good Lawes.
But what is a good Law? By a Good Law, I mean not a Just Law:
for no Law can be Unjust. The Law is made by the Soveraign Power,
and all that is done by such Power, is warranted, and owned
by every one of the people; and that which every man will have so,
no man can say is unjust. It is in the Lawes of a Common-wealth,
as in the Lawes of Gaming: whatsoever the Gamesters all agree on,
is Injustice to none of them. A good Law is that, which is Needfull,
for the Good Of The People, and withall Perspicuous.
Such As Are Necessary
For the use of Lawes, (which are but Rules Authorised) is not
to bind the People from all Voluntary actions; but to direct
and keep them in such a motion, as not to hurt themselves
by their own impetuous desires, rashnesse, or indiscretion,
as Hedges are set, not to stop Travellers, but to keep them in the way.
And therefore a Law that is not Needfull, having not the true End
of a Law, is not Good. A Law may be conceived to be Good, when
it is for the benefit of the Soveraign; though it be not Necessary
for the People; but it is not so. For the good of the Soveraign
and People, cannot be separated. It is a weak Soveraign, that has
weak Subjects; and a weak People, whose Soveraign wanteth Power
to rule them at his will. Unnecessary Lawes are not good Lawes;
but trapps for Mony: which where the right of Soveraign Power
is acknowledged, are superfluous; and where it is not acknowledged,
unsufficient to defend the People.
Such As Are Perspicuous
The Perspicuity, consisteth not so much in the words of the Law it selfe,
as in a Declaration of the Causes, and Motives, for which it was made.
That is it, that shewes us the meaning of the Legislator, and the
meaning of the Legislator known, the Law is more easily understood
by few, than many words. For all words, are subject to ambiguity;
and therefore multiplication of words in the body of the Law,
is multiplication of ambiguity: Besides it seems to imply,
(by too much diligence,) that whosoever can evade the words,
is without the compasse of the Law. And this is a cause of many
unnecessary Processes. For when I consider how short were the
Lawes of antient times; and how they grew by degrees still longer;
me thinks I see a contention between the Penners, and Pleaders
of the Law; the former seeking to circumscribe the later;
and the later to evade their circumscriptions; and that the Pleaders
have got the Victory. It belongeth therefore to the Office
of a Legislator, (such as is in all Common-wealths the Supreme
Representative, be it one Man, or an Assembly,) to make the
reason Perspicuous, why the Law was made; and the Body of the Law
it selfe, as short, but in as proper, and significant termes, as may be.
It belongeth also to the Office of the Soveraign, to make a right
application of Punishments, and Rewards. And seeing the end of punishing
is not revenge, and discharge of choler; but correction, either of
the offender, or of others by his example; the severest Punishments
are to be inflicted for those Crimes, that are of most Danger
to the Publique; such as are those which proceed from malice
to the Government established; those that spring from contempt
of Justice; those that provoke Indignation in the Multitude;
and those, which unpunished, seem Authorised, as when they are
committed by Sonnes, Servants, or Favorites of men in Authority:
For Indignation carrieth men, not onely against the Actors,
and Authors of Injustice; but against all Power that is likely
to protect them; as in the case of Tarquin; when for the Insolent act
of one of his Sonnes, he was driven out of Rome, and the Monarchy
it selfe dissolved. But Crimes of Infirmity; such as are those
which proceed from great provocation, from great fear, great need,
or from ignorance whether the Fact be a great Crime, or not,
there is place many times for Lenity, without prejudice to
the Common-wealth; and Lenity when there is such place for it,
is required by the Law of Nature. The Punishment of the Leaders,
and teachers in a Commotion; not the poore seduced People,
when they are punished, can profit the Common-wealth by their example.
To be severe to the People, is to punish that ignorance, which may
in great part be imputed to the Soveraign, whose fault it was,
they were no better instructed.
In like manner it belongeth to the Office, and Duty of the Soveraign,
to apply his Rewards alwayes so, as there may arise from them benefit
to the Common-wealth: wherein consisteth their Use, and End;
and is then done, when they that have well served the Common-wealth,
are with as little expence of the Common Treasure, as is possible,
so well recompenced, as others thereby may be encouraged, both to
serve the same as faithfully as they can, and to study the arts
by which they may be enabled to do it better. To buy with Mony,
or Preferment, from a Popular ambitious Subject, to be quiet,
and desist from making ill impressions in the mindes of the People,
has nothing of the nature of Reward; (which is ordained not
for disservice, but for service past;) nor a signe of Gratitude,
but of Fear: nor does it tend to the Benefit, but to the Dammage
of the Publique. It is a contention with Ambition, like that of
Hercules with the Monster Hydra, which having many heads, for every
one that was vanquished, there grew up three. For in like manner,
when the stubbornnesse of one Popular man, is overcome with Reward,
there arise many more (by the Example) that do the same Mischiefe,
in hope of like Benefit: and as all sorts of Manifacture,
so also Malice encreaseth by being vendible. And though sometimes
a Civill warre, may be differred, by such wayes as that, yet the
danger growes still the greater, and the Publique ruine more assured.
It is therefore against the Duty of the Soveraign, to whom the
Publique Safety is committed, to Reward those that aspire to
greatnesse by disturbing the Peace of their Country, and not rather
to oppose the beginnings of such men, with a little danger,
than after a longer time with greater.
Another Businesse of the Soveraign, is to choose good Counsellours;
I mean such, whose advice he is to take in the Government
of the Common-wealth. For this word Counsell, Consilium,
corrupted from Considium, is a large signification, and comprehendeth
all Assemblies of men that sit together, not onely to deliberate
what is to be done hereafter, but also to judge of Facts past,
and of Law for the present. I take it here in the first sense onely:
And in this sense, there is no choyce of Counsell, neither in
a Democracy, nor Aristocracy; because the persons Counselling
are members of the person Counselled. The choyce of Counsellours
therefore is to Monarchy; In which, the Soveraign that endeavoureth
not to make choyce of those, that in every kind are the most able,
dischargeth not his Office as he ought to do. The most able
Counsellours, are they that have least hope of benefit by giving
evill Counsell, and most knowledge of those things that conduce
to the Peace, and Defence of the Common-wealth. It is a hard matter
to know who expecteth benefit from publique troubles; but the signes
that guide to a just suspicion, is the soothing of the people
in their unreasonable, or irremediable grievances, by men whose
estates are not sufficient to discharge their accustomed expences,
and may easily be observed by any one whom it concerns to know it.
But to know, who has most knowledge of the Publique affaires, is yet
harder; and they that know them, need them a great deale the lesse.
For to know, who knowes the Rules almost of any Art, is a great
degree of the knowledge of the same Art; because no man can be
assured of the truth of anothers Rules, but he that is first taught
to understand them. But the best signes of Knowledge of any Art,
are, much conversing in it, and constant good effects of it.
Good Counsell comes not by Lot, nor by Inheritance; and therefore
there is no more reason to expect good Advice from the rich,
or noble, in matter of State, than in delineating the dimensions
of a fortresse; unlesse we shall think there needs no method
in the study of the Politiques, (as there does in the study
of Geometry,) but onely to be lookers on; which is not so.
For the Politiques is the harder study of the two. Whereas in these
parts of Europe, it hath been taken for a Right of certain persons,
to have place in the highest Councell of State by Inheritance;
it is derived from the Conquests of the antient Germans; wherein many
absolute Lords joyning together to conquer other Nations, would not
enter in to the Confederacy, without such Priviledges, as might be
marks of difference in time following, between their Posterity,
and the posterity of their Subjects; which Priviledges being
inconsistent with the Soveraign Power, by the favour of the Soveraign,
they may seem to keep; but contending for them as their Right,
they must needs by degrees let them go, and have at last no
further honour, than adhaereth naturally to their abilities.
And how able soever be the Counsellours in any affaire, the benefit
of their Counsell is greater, when they give every one his Advice,
and reasons of it apart, than when they do it in an Assembly,
by way of Orations; and when they have praemeditated, than when
they speak on the sudden; both because they have more time,
to survey the consequences of action; and are lesse subject
to be carried away to contradiction, through Envy, Emulation,
or other Passions arising from the difference of opinion.
The best Counsell, in those things that concern not other Nations,
but onely the ease, and benefit the Subjects may enjoy, by Lawes
that look onely inward, is to be taken from the generall informations,
and complaints of the people of each Province, who are best acquainted
with their own wants, and ought therefore, when they demand nothing
in derogation of the essentiall Rights of Soveraignty, to be diligently
taken notice of. For without those Essentiall Rights, (as I have often
before said,) the Common-wealth cannot at all subsist.
A Commander of an Army in chiefe, if he be not Popular, shall not
be beloved, nor feared as he ought to be by his Army; and consequently
cannot performe that office with good successe. He must therefore
be Industrious, Valiant, Affable, Liberall and Fortunate, that he
may gain an opinion both of sufficiency, and of loving his Souldiers.
This is Popularity, and breeds in the Souldiers both desire,
and courage, to recommend themselves to his favour; and protects
the severity of the Generall, in punishing (when need is) the Mutinous,
or negligent Souldiers. But this love of Souldiers, (if caution be
not given of the Commanders fidelity,) is a dangerous thing
to Soveraign Power; especially when it is in the hands of an
Assembly not popular. It belongeth therefore to the safety
of the People, both that they be good Conductors, and faithfull
subjects, to whom the Soveraign Commits his Armies.
But when the Soveraign himselfe is Popular, that is, reverenced
and beloved of his People, there is no danger at all from the
Popularity of a Subject. For Souldiers are never so generally unjust,
as to side with their Captain; though they love him, against their
Soveraign, when they love not onely his Person, but also his Cause.
And therefore those, who by violence have at any time suppressed
the Power of their Lawfull Soveraign, before they could settle
themselves in his place, have been alwayes put to the trouble
of contriving their Titles, to save the People from the shame
of receiving them. To have a known Right to Soveraign Power,
is so popular a quality, as he that has it needs no more,
for his own part, to turn the hearts of his Subjects to him,
but that they see him able absolutely to govern his own Family:
Nor, on the part of his enemies, but a disbanding of their Armies.
For the greatest and most active part of Mankind, has never
hetherto been well contented with the present.
Concerning the Offices of one Soveraign to another, which are
comprehended in that Law, which is commonly called the Law of Nations,
I need not say any thing in this place; because the Law of Nations,
and the Law of Nature, is the same thing. And every Soveraign
hath the same Right, in procuring the safety of his People, that
any particular man can have, in procuring the safety of his own Body.
And the same Law, that dictateth to men that have no Civil Government,
what they ought to do, and what to avoyd in regard of one another,
dictateth the same to Common-wealths, that is, to the Consciences
of Soveraign Princes, and Soveraign Assemblies; there being no
Court of Naturall Justice, but in the Conscience onely; where not Man,
but God raigneth; whose Lawes, (such of them as oblige all Mankind,)
in respect of God, as he is the Author of Nature, are Naturall;
and in respect of the same God, as he is King of Kings, are Lawes.
But of the Kingdome of God, as King of Kings, and as King also
of a peculiar People, I shall speak in the rest of this discourse.
OF THE KINGDOME OF GOD BY NATURE
The Scope Of The Following Chapters
That the condition of meer Nature, that is to say, of absolute Liberty,
such as is theirs, that neither are Soveraigns, nor Subjects,
is Anarchy, and the condition of Warre: That the Praecepts,
by which men are guided to avoyd that condition, are the Lawes of Nature:
That a Common-wealth, without Soveraign Power, is but a word,
without substance, and cannot stand: That Subjects owe to Soveraigns,
simple Obedience, in all things, wherein their obedience is not repugnant
to the Lawes of God, I have sufficiently proved, in that which I have
already written. There wants onely, for the entire knowledge of
Civill duty, to know what are those Lawes of God. For without that,
a man knows not, when he is commanded any thing by the Civill Power,
whether it be contrary to the Law of God, or not: and so, either by
too much civill obedience, offends the Divine Majesty, or through feare
of offending God, transgresses the commandements of the Common-wealth.
To avoyd both these Rocks, it is necessary to know what are
the Lawes Divine. And seeing the knowledge of all Law, dependeth
on the knowledge of the Soveraign Power; I shall say something
in that which followeth, of the KINGDOME OF GOD.
Who Are Subjects In The Kingdome Of God
"God is King, let the Earth rejoice," saith the Psalmist. (Psal. 96. 1).
And again, "God is King though the Nations be angry; and he that
sitteth on the Cherubins, though the earth be moved." (Psal. 98. 1).
Whether men will or not, they must be subject alwayes to
the Divine Power. By denying the Existence, or Providence of God,
men may shake off their Ease, but not their Yoke. But to call this
Power of God, which extendeth it selfe not onely to Man, but also
to Beasts, and Plants, and Bodies inanimate, by the name of Kingdome,
is but a metaphoricall use of the word. For he onely is properly
said to Raigne, that governs his Subjects, by his Word, and by promise
of Rewards to those that obey it, and by threatning them with Punishment
that obey it not. Subjects therefore in the Kingdome of God, are not
Bodies Inanimate, nor creatures Irrationall; because they understand
no Precepts as his: Nor Atheists; nor they that believe not that God
has any care of the actions of mankind; because they acknowledge no
Word for his, nor have hope of his rewards, or fear of his threatnings.
They therefore that believe there is a God that governeth the world,
and hath given Praecepts, and propounded Rewards, and Punishments to
Mankind, are Gods Subjects; all the rest, are to be understood as Enemies.
A Threefold Word Of God, Reason, Revelation, Prophecy
To rule by Words, requires that such Words be manifestly made known;
for else they are no Lawes: For to the nature of Lawes belongeth
a sufficient, and clear Promulgation, such as may take away
the excuse of Ignorance; which in the Lawes of men is but of
one onely kind, and that is, Proclamation, or Promulgation by
the voyce of man. But God declareth his Lawes three wayes;
by the Dictates of Naturall Reason, By Revelation, and by the Voyce
of some Man, to whom by the operation of Miracles, he procureth
credit with the rest. From hence there ariseth a triple Word of God,
Rational, Sensible, and Prophetique: to which Correspondeth a
triple Hearing; Right Reason, Sense Supernaturall, and Faith.
As for Sense Supernaturall, which consisteth in Revelation,
or Inspiration, there have not been any Universall Lawes so given,
because God speaketh not in that manner, but to particular persons,
and to divers men divers things.
A Twofold Kingdome Of God, Naturall And Prophetique
From the difference between the other two kinds of Gods Word,
Rationall, and Prophetique, there may be attributed to God,
a two-fold Kingdome, Naturall, and Prophetique: Naturall,
wherein he governeth as many of Mankind as acknowledge his Providence,
by the naturall Dictates of Right Reason; And Prophetique, wherein
having chosen out one peculiar Nation (the Jewes) for his Subjects,
he governed them, and none but them, not onely by naturall Reason,
but by Positive Lawes, which he gave them by the mouths of
his holy Prophets. Of the Naturall Kingdome of God I intend
to speak in this Chapter.
The Right Of Gods Soveraignty Is Derived From His Omnipotence
The Right of Nature, whereby God reigneth over men, and punisheth
those that break his Lawes, is to be derived, not from his Creating them,
as if he required obedience, as of Gratitude for his benefits;
but from his Irresistible Power. I have formerly shewn, how the
Soveraign Right ariseth from Pact: To shew how the same Right may
arise from Nature, requires no more, but to shew in what case
it is never taken away. Seeing all men by Nature had Right to
All things, they had Right every one to reigne over all the rest.
But because this Right could not be obtained by force, it concerned
the safety of every one, laying by that Right, to set up men
(with Soveraign Authority) by common consent, to rule and defend them:
whereas if there had been any man of Power Irresistible; there had
been no reason, why he should not by that Power have ruled,
and defended both himselfe, and them, according to his own discretion.
To those therefore whose Power is irresistible, the dominion of all
men adhaereth naturally by their excellence of Power; and consequently
it is from that Power, that the Kingdome over men, and the Right
of afflicting men at his pleasure, belongeth Naturally to God Almighty;
not as Creator, and Gracious; but as Omnipotent. And though Punishment
be due for Sinne onely, because by that word is understood Affliction
for Sinne; yet the Right of Afflicting, is not alwayes derived from
mens Sinne, but from Gods Power.
Sinne Not The Cause Of All Affliction
This question, "Why Evill men often Prosper, and Good men
suffer Adversity," has been much disputed by the Antient,
and is the same with this of ours, "By what Right God dispenseth
the Prosperities and Adversities of this life;" and is of
that difficulty, as it hath shaken the faith, not onely of the Vulgar,
but of Philosophers, and which is more, of the Saints, concerning
the Divine Providence. "How Good," saith David, "is the God of Israel
to those that are Upright in Heart; and yet my feet were almost gone,
my treadings had well-nigh slipt; for I was grieved at the Wicked,
when I saw the Ungodly in such Prosperity." And Job, how earnestly
does he expostulate with God, for the many Afflictions he suffered,
notwithstanding his Righteousnesse? This question in the case of Job,
is decided by God himselfe, not by arguments derived from Job's Sinne,
but his own Power. For whereas the friends of Job drew their arguments
from his Affliction to his Sinne, and he defended himselfe by
the conscience of his Innocence, God himselfe taketh up the matter,
and having justified the Affliction by arguments drawn from his Power,
such as this "Where was thou when I layd the foundations of the earth,"
and the like, both approved Job's Innocence, and reproved the Erroneous
doctrine of his friends. Conformable to this doctrine is the sentence
of our Saviour, concerning the man that was born Blind, in these words,
"Neither hath this man sinned, nor his fathers; but that the works
of God might be made manifest in him." And though it be said
"That Death entred into the world by sinne, (by which is meant that
if Adam had never sinned, he had never dyed, that is, never suffered
any separation of his soule from his body,) it follows not thence,
that God could not justly have Afflicted him, though he had not Sinned,
as well as he afflicteth other living creatures, that cannot sinne.
Having spoken of the Right of Gods Soveraignty, as grounded
onely on Nature; we are to consider next, what are the Divine Lawes,
or Dictates of Naturall Reason; which Lawes concern either the
naturall Duties of one man to another, or the Honour naturally
due to our Divine Soveraign. The first are the same Lawes of Nature,
of which I have spoken already in the 14. and 15. Chapters
of this Treatise; namely, Equity, Justice, Mercy, Humility,
and the rest of the Morall Vertues. It remaineth therefore
that we consider, what Praecepts are dictated to men, by their
Naturall Reason onely, without other word of God, touching
the Honour and Worship of the Divine Majesty.
Honour And Worship What
Honour consisteth in the inward thought, and opinion of the Power,
and Goodnesse of another: and therefore to Honour God, is to think
as Highly of his Power and Goodnesse, as is possible. And of that
opinion, the externall signes appearing in the Words, and Actions
of men, are called Worship; which is one part of that which the
Latines understand by the word Cultus: For Cultus signifieth properly,
and constantly, that labour which a man bestowes on any thing,
with a purpose to make benefit by it. Now those things whereof we make
benefit, are either subject to us, and the profit they yeeld, followeth
the labour we bestow upon them, as a naturall effect; or they are not
subject to us, but answer our labour, according to their own Wills.
In the first sense the labour bestowed on the Earth, is called
Culture; and the education of Children a Culture of their mindes.
In the second sense, where mens wills are to be wrought to our
purpose, not by Force, but by Compleasance, it signifieth as much
as Courting, that is, a winning of favour by good offices; as by praises,
by acknowledging their Power, and by whatsoever is pleasing to them
from whom we look for any benefit. And this is properly Worship:
in which sense Publicola, is understood for a Worshipper of the People,
and Cultus Dei, for the Worship of God.
Severall Signes Of Honour
From internall Honour, consisting in the opinion of Power and Goodnesse,
arise three Passions; Love, which hath reference to Goodnesse;
and Hope, and Fear, that relate to Power: And three parts of
externall worship; Praise, Magnifying, and Blessing: The subject
of Praise, being Goodnesse; the subject of Magnifying, and Blessing,
being Power, and the effect thereof Felicity. Praise, and Magnifying
are significant both by Words, and Actions: By Words, when we say
a man is Good, or Great: By Actions, when we thank him for his Bounty,
and obey his Power. The opinion of the Happinesse of another,
can onely be expressed by words.
Worship Naturall And Arbitrary
There be some signes of Honour, (both in Attributes and Actions,)
that be Naturally so; as amongst Attributes, Good, Just, Liberall,
and the like; and amongst Actions, Prayers, Thanks, and Obedience.
Others are so by Institution, or Custome of men; and in some times
and places are Honourable; in others Dishonourable; in others
Indifferent: such as are the Gestures in Salutation, Prayer,
and Thanksgiving, in different times and places, differently used.
The former is Naturall; the later Arbitrary Worship.
Worship Commanded And Free
And of Arbitrary Worship, there bee two differences: For sometimes
it is a Commanded, sometimes Voluntary Worship: Commanded, when it is
such as hee requireth, who is Worshipped: Free, when it is such as
the Worshipper thinks fit. When it is Commanded, not the words,
or gestures, but the obedience is the Worship. But when Free,
the Worship consists in the opinion of the beholders: for if to them
the words, or actions by which we intend honour, seem ridiculous,
and tending to contumely; they are not Worship; because a signe
is not a signe to him that giveth it, but to him to whom it is made;
that is, to the spectator.
Worship Publique And Private
Again, there is a Publique, and a Private Worship. Publique, is the
Worship that a Common-wealth performeth, as one Person. Private, is that
which a Private person exhibiteth. Publique, in respect of the whole
Common-wealth, is Free; but in respect of Particular men it is not so.
Private, is in secret Free; but in the sight of the multitude,
it is never without some Restraint, either from the Lawes,
or from the Opinion of men; which is contrary to the nature of Liberty.
The End Of Worship
The End of Worship amongst men, is Power. For where a man seeth
another worshipped he supposeth him powerfull, and is the readier
to obey him; which makes his Power greater. But God has no Ends:
the worship we do him, proceeds from our duty, and is directed
according to our capacity, by those rules of Honour, that Reason
dictateth to be done by the weak to the more potent men, in hope
of benefit, for fear of dammage, or in thankfulnesse for good
already received from them.
Attributes Of Divine Honour
That we may know what worship of God is taught us by the light
of Nature, I will begin with his Attributes. Where, First,
it is manifest, we ought to attribute to him Existence: For no man
can have the will to honour that, which he thinks not to have any Beeing.
Secondly, that those Philosophers, who sayd the World, or the Soule
of the World was God, spake unworthily of him; and denyed his Existence:
For by God, is understood the cause of the World; and to say the World
is God, is to say there is no cause of it, that is, no God.
Thirdly, to say the World was not Created, but Eternall, (seeing that
which is Eternall has no cause,) is to deny there is a God.
Fourthly, that they who attributing (as they think) Ease to God,
take from him the care of Mankind; take from him his Honour:
for it takes away mens love, and fear of him; which is the root of Honour.
Fifthly, in those things that signifie Greatnesse, and Power;
to say he is Finite, is not to Honour him: For it is not a signe
of the Will to Honour God, to attribute to him lesse than we can;
and Finite, is lesse than we can; because to Finite, it is easie
to adde more.
Therefore to attribute Figure to him, is not Honour; for all
Figure is Finite:
Nor to say we conceive, and imagine, or have an Idea of him,
in our mind: for whatsoever we conceive is Finite:
Not to attribute to him Parts, or Totality; which are the Attributes
onely of things Finite:
Nor to say he is this, or that Place: for whatsoever is in Place,
is bounded, and Finite:
Nor that he is Moved, or Resteth: for both these Attributes
ascribe to him Place:
Nor that there be more Gods than one; because it implies them all Finite:
for there cannot be more than one Infinite: Nor to ascribe to him
(unlesse Metaphorically, meaning not the Passion, but the Effect)
Passions that partake of Griefe; as Repentance, Anger, Mercy:
or of Want; as Appetite, Hope, Desire; or of any Passive faculty:
For Passion, is Power limited by somewhat else.
And therefore when we ascribe to God a Will, it is not to be understood,
as that of Man, for a Rationall Appetite; but as the Power, by which
he effecteth every thing.
Likewise when we attribute to him Sight, and other acts of Sense;
as also Knowledge, and Understanding; which in us is nothing else,
but a tumult of the mind, raised by externall things that presse
the organicall parts of mans body: For there is no such thing in God;
and being things that depend on naturall causes, cannot be
attributed to him.
Hee that will attribute to God, nothing but what is warranted
by naturall Reason, must either use such Negative Attributes,
as Infinite, Eternall, Incomprehensible; or Superlatives, as Most High,
Most Great, and the like; or Indefinite, as Good, Just, Holy, Creator;
and in such sense, as if he meant not to declare what he is,
(for that were to circumscribe him within the limits of our Fancy,)
but how much wee admire him, and how ready we would be to obey him;
which is a signe of Humility, and of a Will to honour him as much
as we can: For there is but one Name to signifie our Conception of
his Nature, and that is, I AM: and but one Name of his Relation to us,
and that is God; in which is contained Father, King, and Lord.
Actions That Are Signes Of Divine Honour
Concerning the actions of Divine Worship, it is a most generall
Precept of Reason, that they be signes of the Intention to Honour God;
such as are, First, Prayers: For not the Carvers, when they made Images,
were thought to make them Gods; but the People that Prayed to them.
Secondly, Thanksgiving; which differeth from Prayer in Divine Worship,
no otherwise, than that Prayers precede, and Thanks succeed the benefit;
the end both of the one, and the other, being to acknowledge God,
for Author of all benefits, as well past, as future.
Thirdly, Gifts; that is to say, Sacrifices, and Oblations,
(if they be of the best,) are signes of Honour: for they are Thanksgivings.
Fourthly, Not to swear by any but God, is naturally a signe of Honour:
for it is a confession that God onely knoweth the heart; and that
no mans wit, or strength can protect a man against Gods vengence
on the perjured.
Fifthly, it is a part of Rationall Worship, to speak Considerately
of God; for it argues a Fear of him, and Fear, is a confession
of his Power. Hence followeth, That the name of God is not to be
used rashly, and to no purpose; for that is as much, as in Vain:
And it is to no purpose; unlesse it be by way of Oath, and by order
of the Common-wealth, to make Judgements certain; or between
Common-wealths, to avoyd Warre. And that disputing of Gods nature
is contrary to his Honour: For it is supposed, that in this naturall
Kingdome of God, there is no other way to know any thing, but by
naturall Reason; that is, from the Principles of naturall Science;
which are so farre from teaching us any thing of Gods nature,
as they cannot teach us our own nature, nor the nature of
the smallest creature living. And therefore, when men out
of the Principles of naturall Reason, dispute of the Attributes
of God, they but dishonour him: For in the Attributes which we give
to God, we are not to consider the signification of Philosophicall Truth;
but the signification of Pious Intention, to do him the greatest
Honour we are able. From the want of which consideration,
have proceeded the volumes of disputation about the Nature of God,
that tend not to his Honour, but to the honour of our own wits,
and learning; and are nothing else but inconsiderate, and vain
abuses of his Sacred Name.
Sixthly, in Prayers, Thanksgivings, Offerings and Sacrifices,
it is a Dictate of naturall Reason, that they be every one
in his kind the best, and most significant of Honour. As for example,
that Prayers, and Thanksgiving, be made in Words and Phrases, not sudden,
nor light, nor Plebeian; but beautifull and well composed; For else
we do not God as much honour as we can. And therefore the Heathens
did absurdly, to worship Images for Gods: But their doing it in Verse,
and with Musick, both of Voyce, and Instruments, was reasonable.
Also that the Beasts they offered in sacrifice, and the Gifts
they offered, and their actions in Worshipping, were full of
submission, and commemorative of benefits received, was according
to reason, as proceeding from an intention to honour him.
Seventhly, Reason directeth not onely to worship God in Secret;
but also, and especially, in Publique, and in the sight of men:
For without that, (that which in honour is most acceptable)
the procuring others to honour him, is lost.
Lastly, Obedience to his Lawes (that is, in this case to the
Lawes of Nature,) is the greatest worship of all. For as Obedience
is more acceptable to God than sacrifice; so also to set light
by his Commandements, is the greatest of all contumelies.
And these are the Lawes of that Divine Worship, which naturall
Reason dictateth to private men.
Publique Worship Consisteth In Uniformity
But seeing a Common-wealth is but one Person, it ought also to
exhibite to God but one Worship; which then it doth, when it
commandeth it to be exhibited by Private men, Publiquely.
And this is Publique Worship; the property whereof, is to be Uniforme:
For those actions that are done differently, by different men,
cannot be said to be a Publique Worship. And therefore, where many
sorts of Worship be allowed, proceeding from the different Religions
of Private men, it cannot be said there is any Publique Worship,
nor that the Common-wealth is of any Religion at all.
All Attributes Depend On The Lawes Civill
And because words (and consequently the Attributes of God) have
their signification by agreement, and constitution of men;
those Attributes are to be held significative of Honour, that men
intend shall so be; and whatsoever may be done by the wills of
particular men, where there is no Law but Reason, may be done by
the will of the Common-wealth, by Lawes Civill. And because a
Common-wealth hath no Will, nor makes no Lawes, but those that
are made by the Will of him, or them that have the Soveraign Power;
it followeth, that those Attributes which the Soveraign ordaineth,
in the Worship of God, for signes of Honour, ought to be taken
and used for such, by private men in their publique Worship.
Not All Actions
But because not all Actions are signes by Constitution; but some
are Naturally signes of Honour, others of Contumely, these later
(which are those that men are ashamed to do in the sight of
them they reverence) cannot be made by humane power a part
of Divine worship; nor the former (such as are decent, modest,
humble Behaviour) ever be separated from it. But whereas there be
an infinite number of Actions, and Gestures, of an indifferent nature;
such of them as the Common-wealth shall ordain to be Publiquely
and Universally in use, as signes of Honour, and part of Gods Worship,
are to be taken and used for such by the Subjects. And that which
is said in the Scripture, "It is better to obey God than men,"
hath place in the kingdome of God by Pact, and not by Nature.
Having thus briefly spoken of the Naturall Kingdome of God,
and his Naturall Lawes, I will adde onely to this Chapter
a short declaration of his Naturall Punishments. There is no
action of man in this life, that is not the beginning of so long
a chayn of Consequences, as no humane Providence, is high enough,
to give a man a prospect to the end. And in this Chayn, there are
linked together both pleasing and unpleasing events; in such manner,
as he that will do any thing for his pleasure, must engage himselfe
to suffer all the pains annexed to it; and these pains, are the
Naturall Punishments of those actions, which are the beginning of
more Harme that Good. And hereby it comes to passe, that Intemperance,
is naturally punished with Diseases; Rashnesse, with Mischances;
Injustice, with the Violence of Enemies; Pride, with Ruine; Cowardise,
with Oppression; Negligent government of Princes, with Rebellion;
and Rebellion, with Slaughter. For seeing Punishments are consequent
to the breach of Lawes; Naturall Punishments must be naturally
consequent to the breach of the Lawes of Nature; and therfore
follow them as their naturall, not arbitrary effects.
The Conclusion Of The Second Part
And thus farre concerning the Constitution, Nature, and Right
of Soveraigns; and concerning the Duty of Subjects, derived from
the Principles of Naturall Reason. And now, considering how different
this Doctrine is, from the Practise of the greatest part of the world,
especially of these Western parts, that have received their Morall
learning from Rome, and Athens; and how much depth of Morall Philosophy
is required, in them that have the Administration of the Soveraign Power;
I am at the point of believing this my labour, as uselesse, and the
Common-wealth of Plato; For he also is of opinion that it is impossible
for the disorders of State, and change of Governments by Civill Warre,
ever to be taken away, till Soveraigns be Philosophers. But when I
consider again, that the Science of Naturall Justice, is the onely
Science necessary for Soveraigns, and their principall Ministers;
and that they need not be charged with the Sciences Mathematicall,
(as by Plato they are,) further, than by good Lawes to encourage men
to the study of them; and that neither Plato, nor any other Philosopher
hitherto, hath put into order, and sufficiently, or probably proved
all the Theoremes of Morall doctrine, that men may learn thereby,
both how to govern, and how to obey; I recover some hope, that one time
or other, this writing of mine, may fall into the hands of a Soveraign,
who will consider it himselfe, (for it is short, and I think clear,)
without the help of any interested, or envious Interpreter; and by the
exercise of entire Soveraignty, in protecting the Publique teaching
of it, convert this Truth of Speculation, into the Utility of Practice.
OF A CHRISTIAN COMMON-WEALTH
OF THE PRINCIPLES OF CHRISTIAN POLITIQUES
The Word Of God Delivered By Prophets Is
The Main Principle Of Christian Politiques
I have derived the Rights of Soveraigne Power, and the duty of
Subjects hitherto, from the Principles of Nature onely; such as
Experience has found true, or Consent (concerning the use of words)
has made so; that is to say, from the nature of Men, known to us
by Experience, and from Definitions (of such words as are Essentiall
to all Politicall reasoning) universally agreed on. But in that I
am next to handle, which is the Nature and Rights of a CHRISTIAN
COMMON-WEALTH, whereof there dependeth much upon Supernaturall
Revelations of the Will of God; the ground of my Discourse must be,
not only the Naturall Word of God, but also the Propheticall.
Neverthelesse, we are not to renounce our Senses, and Experience;
nor (that which is the undoubted Word of God) our naturall Reason.
For they are the talents which he hath put into our hands to negotiate,
till the coming again of our blessed Saviour; and therefore not to be
folded up in the Napkin of an Implicate Faith, but employed in the
purchase of Justice, Peace, and true Religion, For though there be
many things in Gods Word above Reason; that is to say, which cannot
by naturall reason be either demonstrated, or confuted; yet there is
nothing contrary to it; but when it seemeth so, the fault is either
in our unskilfull Interpretation, or erroneous Ratiocination.
Therefore, when any thing therein written is too hard for
our examination, wee are bidden to captivate our understanding
to the Words; and not to labour in sifting out a Philosophicall truth
by Logick, of such mysteries as are not comprehensible, nor fall under
any rule of naturall science. For it is with the mysteries of
our Religion, as with wholsome pills for the sick, which swallowed
whole, have the vertue to cure; but chewed, are for the most part
cast up again without effect.
What It Is To Captivate The Understanding
But by the Captivity of our Understanding, is not meant a Submission
of the Intellectual faculty, to the Opinion of any other man; but of
the Will to Obedience, where obedience is due. For Sense, Memory,
Understanding, Reason, and Opinion are not in our power to change;
but alwaies, and necessarily such, as the things we see, hear,
and consider suggest unto us; and therefore are not effects of our Will,
but our Will of them. We then Captivate our Understanding and Reason,
when we forbear contradiction; when we so speak, as (by lawfull
Authority) we are commanded; and when we live accordingly; which in sum,
is Trust, and Faith reposed in him that speaketh, though the mind
be incapable of any Notion at all from the words spoken.
How God Speaketh To Men
When God speaketh to man, it must be either immediately; or by mediation
of another man, to whom he had formerly spoken by himself immediately.
How God speaketh to a man immediately, may be understood by
those well enough, to whom he hath so spoken; but how the same
should be understood by another, is hard, if not impossible to know.
For if a man pretend to me, that God hath spoken to him supernaturally,
and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive
what argument he can produce, to oblige me to beleeve it. It is true,
that if he be my Soveraign, he may oblige me to obedience, so, as not
by act or word to declare I beleeve him not; but not to think any
otherwise then my reason perswades me. But if one that hath not such
authority over me, shall pretend the same, there is nothing that
exacteth either beleefe, or obedience.
For to say that God hath spoken to him in the Holy Scripture,
is not to say God hath spoken to him immediately, but by mediation
of the Prophets, or of the Apostles, or of the Church, in such manner
as he speaks to all other Christian men. To say he hath spoken
to him in a Dream, is no more than to say he dreamed that God
spake to him; which is not of force to win beleef from any man,
that knows dreams are for the most part naturall, and may proceed
from former thoughts; and such dreams as that, from selfe conceit,
and foolish arrogance, and false opinion of a mans own godlinesse,
or other vertue, by which he thinks he hath merited the favour
of extraordinary Revelation. To say he hath seen a Vision, or heard
a Voice, is to say, that he hath dreamed between sleeping and waking:
for in such manner a man doth many times naturally take his dream
for a vision, as not having well observed his own slumbering.
To say he speaks by supernaturall Inspiration, is to say he finds
an ardent desire to speak, or some strong opinion of himself,
for which he can alledge no naturall and sufficient reason.
So that though God Almighty can speak to a man, by Dreams, Visions,
Voice, and Inspiration; yet he obliges no man to beleeve he hath
so done to him that pretends it; who (being a man), may erre,
and (which is more) may lie.
By What Marks Prophets Are Known
How then can he, to whom God hath never revealed his Wil immediately
(saving by the way of natural reason) know when he is to obey,
or not to obey his Word, delivered by him, that sayes he is a Prophet?
(1 Kings 22) Of 400 Prophets, of whom the K. of Israel asked counsel,
concerning the warre he made against Ramoth Gilead, only Micaiah
was a true one.(1 Kings 13) The Prophet that was sent to prophecy
against the Altar set up by Jeroboam, though a true Prophet,
and that by two miracles done in his presence appears to be
a Prophet sent from God, was yet deceived by another old Prophet,
that perswaded him as from the mouth of God, to eat and drink with him.
If one Prophet deceive another, what certainty is there of knowing the
will of God, by other way than that of Reason? To which I answer out of
the Holy Scripture, that there be two marks, by which together,
not asunder, a true Prophet is to be known. One is the doing
of miracles; the other is the not teaching any other Religion than
that which is already established. Asunder (I say) neither of these
is sufficient. (Deut. 13 v. 1,2,3,4,5 ) "If a Prophet rise amongst you,
or a Dreamer of dreams, and shall pretend the doing of a miracle,
and the miracle come to passe; if he say, Let us follow strange Gods,
which thou hast not known, thou shalt not hearken to him, &c.
But that Prophet and Dreamer of dreams shall be put to death,
because he hath spoken to you to Revolt from the Lord your God."
In which words two things are to be observed, First, that God wil
not have miracles alone serve for arguments, to approve the
Prophets calling; but (as it is in the third verse) for an
experiment of the constancy of our adherence to himself. For the
works of the Egyptian Sorcerers, though not so great as those of Moses,
yet were great miracles. Secondly, that how great soever the miracle be,
yet if it tend to stir up revolt against the King, or him that governeth
by the Kings authority, he that doth such miracle, is not to be
considered otherwise than as sent to make triall of their allegiance.
For these words, "revolt from the Lord your God," are in this place
equivalent to "revolt from your King." For they had made God their
King by pact at the foot of Mount Sinai; who ruled them by Moses only;
for he only spake with God, and from time to time declared Gods
Commandements to the people. In like manner, after our Saviour Christ
had made his Disciples acknowledge him for the Messiah, (that is to say,
for Gods anointed, whom the nation of the Jews daily expected for
their King, but refused when he came,) he omitted not to advertise
them of the danger of miracles. "There shall arise," (saith he)
"false Christs, and false Prophets, and shall doe great wonders
and miracles, even to the seducing (if it were possible) of the
very Elect." (Mat. 24. 24) By which it appears, that false Prophets
may have the power of miracles; yet are wee not to take their doctrin
for Gods Word. St. Paul says further to the Galatians, that
"if himself, or an Angell from heaven preach another Gospel to them,
than he had preached, let him be accursed." (Gal. 1. 8) That Gospel was,
that Christ was King; so that all preaching against the power
of the King received, in consequence to these words, is by
St. Paul accursed. For his speech is addressed to those,
who by his preaching had already received Jesus for the Christ,
that is to say, for King of the Jews.
The Marks Of A Prophet In The Old Law, Miracles,
And Doctrine Conformable To The Law
And as Miracles, without preaching that Doctrine which God
hath established; so preaching the true Doctrine, without the
doing of Miracles, is an unsufficient argument of immediate Revelation.
For if a man that teacheth not false Doctrine, should pretend to
bee a Prophet without shewing any Miracle, he is never the more
to bee regarded for his pretence, as is evident by Deut. 18. v. 21, 22.
"If thou say in thy heart, How shall we know that the Word
(of the Prophet) is not that which the Lord hath spoken.
When the Prophet shall have spoken in the name of the Lord,
that which shall not come to passe, that's the word which
the Lord hath not spoken, but the Prophet has spoken it out of
the pride of his own heart, fear him not." But a man may here
again ask, When the Prophet hath foretold a thing, how shal we know
whether it will come to passe or not? For he may foretel it as
a thing to arrive after a certain long time, longer then the time
of mans life; or indefinitely, that it will come to passe one
time or other: in which case this mark of a Prophet is unusefull;
and therefore the miracles that oblige us to beleeve a Prophet,
ought to be confirmed by an immediate, or a not long deferr'd event.
So that it is manifest, that the teaching of the Religion which God
hath established, and the showing of a present Miracle, joined together,
were the only marks whereby the Scripture would have a true Prophet,
that is to say immediate Revelation to be acknowledged; neither of them
being singly sufficient to oblige any other man to regard what he saith.
Miracles Ceasing, Prophets Cease,
And The Scripture Supplies Their Place
Seeing therefore Miracles now cease, we have no sign left, whereby
to acknowledge the pretended Revelations, or Inspirations of any
private man; nor obligation to give ear to any Doctrine, farther than
it is conformable to the Holy Scriptures, which since the time
of our Saviour, supply the want of all other Prophecy; and from which,
by wise and careful ratiocination, all rules and precepts necessary
to the knowledge of our duty both to God and man, without Enthusiasme,
or supernaturall Inspiration, may easily be deduced. And this Scripture
is it, out of which I am to take the Principles of my Discourse,
concerning the Rights of those that are the Supream Govenors on earth,
of Christian Common-wealths; and of the duty of Christian Subjects
towards their Soveraigns. And to that end, I shall speak in the
next Chapter, or the Books, Writers, Scope and Authority of the Bible.
OF THE NUMBER, ANTIQUITY, SCOPE, AUTHORITY,
AND INTERPRETERS OF THE BOOKS OF HOLY SCRIPTURES
Of The Books Of Holy Scripture
By the Books of Holy SCRIPTURE, are understood those, which ought
to be the Canon, that is to say, the Rules of Christian life.
And because all Rules of life, which men are in conscience bound
to observe, are Laws; the question of the Scripture, is the question
of what is Law throughout all Christendome, both Naturall, and Civill.
For though it be not determined in Scripture, what Laws every Christian
King shall constitute in his own Dominions; yet it is determined
what laws he shall not constitute. Seeing therefore I have already
proved, that Soveraigns in their own Dominions are the sole Legislators;
those Books only are Canonicall, that is, Law, in every nation,
which are established for such by the Soveraign Authority.
It is true, that God is the Soveraign of all Soveraigns; and therefore,
when he speaks to any Subject, he ought to be obeyed, whatsoever
any earthly Potentate command to the contrary. But the question is not
of obedience to God, but of When, and What God hath said; which to
Subjects that have no supernaturall revelation, cannot be known,
but by that naturall reason, which guided them, for the obtaining
of Peace and Justice, to obey the authority of their severall
Common-wealths; that is to say, of their lawfull Soveraigns.
According to this obligation, I can acknowledge no other Books of
the Old Testament, to be Holy Scripture, but those which have been
commanded to be acknowledged for such, by the Authority of the
Church of England. What Books these are, is sufficiently known,
without a Catalogue of them here; and they are the same that are
acknowledged by St. Jerome, who holdeth the rest, namely, the Wisdome
of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Judith, Tobias, the first and second of
Maccabees, (though he had seen the first in Hebrew) and the third
and fourth of Esdras, for Apocrypha. Of the Canonicall, Josephus
a learned Jew, that wrote in the time of the Emperor Domitian,
reckoneth Twenty Two, making the number agree with the Hebrew Alphabet.
St. Jerome does the same, though they reckon them in different manner.
For Josephus numbers Five Books of Moses, Thirteen of Prophets,
that writ the History of their own times (which how it agrees with
the Prophets writings contained in the Bible wee shall see hereafter),
and Four of Hymnes and Morall Precepts. But St. Jerome reckons Five
Books of Moses, Eight of Prophets, and Nine of other Holy writ,
which he calls of Hagiographa. The Septuagint, who were 70. learned
men of the Jews, sent for by Ptolemy King of Egypt, to translate
the Jewish Law, out of the Hebrew into the Greek, have left us no
other for holy Scripture in the Greek tongue, but the same that are
received in the Church of England.
As for the Books of the New Testament, they are equally acknowledged
for Canon by all Christian Churches, and by all sects of Christians,
that admit any Books at all for Canonicall.
Who were the originall writers of the severall Books of Holy Scripture,
has not been made evident by any sufficient testimony of other History,
(which is the only proof of matter of fact); nor can be by any
arguments of naturall Reason; for Reason serves only to convince
the truth (not of fact, but) of consequence. The light therefore
that must guide us in this question, must be that which is held out
unto us from the Bookes themselves: And this light, though it show us
not the writer of every book, yet it is not unusefull to give us
knowledge of the time, wherein they were written.
The Pentateuch Not Written By Moses
And first, for the Pentateuch, it is not argument enough that they
were written by Moses, because they are called the five Books of Moses;
no more than these titles, The Book of Joshua, the Book of Judges,
The Book of Ruth, and the Books of the Kings, are arguments
sufficient to prove, that they were written by Joshua, by the Judges,
by Ruth, and by the Kings. For in titles of Books, the subject
is marked, as often as the writer. The History Of Livy, denotes the
Writer; but the History Of Scanderbeg, is denominated from the subject.
We read in the last Chapter of Deuteronomie, Ver. 6. concerning
the sepulcher of Moses, "that no man knoweth of his sepulcher
to this day," that is, to the day wherein those words were written.
It is therefore manifest, that those words were written after
his interrement. For it were a strange interpretation, to say Moses
spake of his own sepulcher (though by Prophecy), that it was not found
to that day, wherein he was yet living. But it may perhaps be alledged,
that the last Chapter only, not the whole Pentateuch, was written
by some other man, but the rest not: Let us therefore consider that
which we find in the Book of Genesis, Chap. 12. Ver. 6 "And Abraham
passed through the land to the place of Sichem, unto the plain of Moreh,
and the Canaanite was then in the land;" which must needs bee
the words of one that wrote when the Canaanite was not in the land;
and consequently, not of Moses, who dyed before he came into it.
Likewise Numbers 21. Ver. 14. the Writer citeth another more
ancient Book, Entituled, The Book of the Warres of the Lord,
wherein were registred the Acts of Moses, at the Red-sea,
and at the brook of Arnon. It is therefore sufficiently evident,
that the five Books of Moses were written after his time,
though how long after it be not so manifest.
But though Moses did not compile those Books entirely, and in
the form we have them; yet he wrote all that which hee is there
said to have written: as for example, the Volume of the Law,
which is contained, as it seemeth in the 11 of Deuteronomie,
and the following Chapters to the 27. which was also commanded
to be written on stones, in their entry into the land of Canaan.
(Deut. 31. 9) And this did Moses himself write, and deliver to
the Priests and Elders of Israel, to be read every seventh year
to all Israel, at their assembling in the feast of Tabernacles.
And this is that Law which God commanded, that their Kings
(when they should have established that form of Government)
should take a copy of from the Priests and Levites to lay in
the side of the Arke; (Deut. 31. 26) and the same which having
been lost, was long time after found again by Hilkiah, and sent
to King Josias, who causing it to be read to the People, renewed
the Covenant between God and them. (2 King. 22. 8 & 23. 1,2,3)
The Book of Joshua Written After His Time
That the Book of Joshua was also written long after the time
of Joshua, may be gathered out of many places of the Book it self.
Joshua had set up twelve stones in the middest of Jordan, for a
monument of their passage; (Josh 4. 9) of which the Writer saith thus,
"They are there unto this day;" (Josh 5. 9) for "unto this day",
is a phrase that signifieth a time past, beyond the memory of man.
In like manner, upon the saying of the Lord, that he had rolled off
from the people the Reproach of Egypt, the Writer saith, "The place
is called Gilgal unto this day;" which to have said in the time
of Joshua had been improper. So also the name of the Valley of Achor,
from the trouble that Achan raised in the Camp, (Josh. 7. 26)
the Writer saith, "remaineth unto this day;" which must needs bee
therefore long after the time of Joshua. Arguments of this kind
there be many other; as Josh. 8. 29. 13. 13. 14. 14. 15. 63.
The Booke Of Judges And Ruth
Written Long After The Captivity
The same is manifest by like arguments of the Book of Judges,
chap. 1. 21,26 6.24 10.4 15.19 17.6 and Ruth 1. 1. but
especially Judg. 18. 30. where it is said, that Jonathan
"and his sonnes were Priests to the Tribe of Dan, untill the day
of the captivity of the land."
The Like Of The Bookes Of Samuel
That the Books of Samuel were also written after his own time,
there are the like arguments, 1 Sam. 5.5. 7.13,15. 27.6. & 30.25.
where, after David had adjudged equall part of the spoiles,
to them that guarded the Ammunition, with them that fought,
the Writer saith, "He made it a Statute and an Ordinance to Israel
to this day." (2. Sam. 6.4.) Again, when David (displeased,
that the Lord had slain Uzzah, for putting out his hand to sustain
the Ark,) called the place Perez-Uzzah, the Writer saith,
it is called so "to this day": the time therefore of the writing
of that Book, must be long after the time of the fact; that is,
long after the time of David.
The Books Of The Kings, And The Chronicles
As for the two Books of the Kings, and the two books of the Chronicles,
besides the places which mention such monuments, as the Writer saith,
remained till his own days; such as are 1 Kings 9.13. 9.21. 10. 12.
12.19. 2 Kings 2.22. 8.22. 10.27. 14.7. 16.6. 17.23. 17.34.
17.41. 1 Chron. 4.41. 5.26. It is argument sufficient they were
written after the captivity in Babylon, that the History of them
is continued till that time. For the Facts Registred are alwaies
more ancient than such Books as make mention of, and quote the Register;
as these Books doe in divers places, referring the Reader to the
Chronicles of the Kings of Juda, to the Chronicles of the Kings
of Israel, to the Books of the Prophet Samuel, or the Prophet Nathan,
of the Prophet Ahijah; to the Vision of Jehdo, to the Books of
the Prophet Serveiah, and of the Prophet Addo.
Ezra And Nehemiah
The Books of Esdras and Nehemiah were written certainly after
their return from captivity; because their return, the re-edification
of the walls and houses of Jerusalem, the renovation of the Covenant,
and ordination of their policy are therein contained.
The History of Queen Esther is of the time of the Captivity;
and therefore the Writer must have been of the same time, or after it.
The Book of Job hath no mark in it of the time wherein it was written:
and though it appear sufficiently (Exekiel 14.14, and James 5.11.)
that he was no fained person; yet the Book it self seemeth not to be
a History, but a Treatise concerning a question in ancient time
much disputed, "why wicked men have often prospered in this world,
and good men have been afflicted;" and it is the most probably, because
from the beginning, to the third verse of the third chapter, where the
complaint of Job beginneth, the Hebrew is (as St. Jerome testifies)
in prose; and from thence to the sixt verse of the last chapter in
Hexameter Verses; and the rest of that chapter again in prose.
So that the dispute is all in verse; and the prose is added,
but as a Preface in the beginning, and an Epilogue in the end.
But Verse is no usuall stile of such, as either are themselves
in great pain, as Job; or of such as come to comfort them,
as his friends; but in Philosophy, especially morall Philosophy,
in ancient time frequent.
The Psalmes were written the most part by David, for the use
of the Quire. To these are added some songs of Moses, and other
holy men; and some of them after the return from the Captivity;
as the 137. and the 126. whereby it is manifest that the Psalter
was compiled, and put into the form it now hath, after the return
of the Jews from Babylon.
The Proverbs, being a Collection of wise and godly Sayings,
partly of Solomon, partly of Agur the son of Jakeh; and partly of
the Mother of King Lemuel, cannot probably be thought to have been
collected by Solomon, rather then by Agur, or the Mother of Lemues;
and that, though the sentences be theirs, yet the collection or
compiling them into this one Book, was the work of some other godly man,
that lived after them all.
Ecclesiastes And The Canticles
The Books of Ecclesiastes and the Canticles have nothing that
was not Solomons, except it be the Titles, or Inscriptions.
For "The Words of the Preacher, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem;"
and, "the Song of Songs, which is Solomon's," seem to have been made
for distinctions sake, then, when the Books of Scripture were gathered
into one body of the Law; to the end, that not the Doctrine only,
but the Authors also might be extant.
Of the Prophets, the most ancient, are Sophoniah, Jonas, Amos,
Hosea, Isaiah and Michaiah, who lived in the time of Amaziah,
and Azariah, otherwise Ozias, Kings of Judah. But the Book of Jonas
is not properly a Register of his Prophecy, (for that is contained
in these few words, "Fourty dayes and Ninivy shall be destroyed,"
but a History or Narration of his frowardenesse and disputing
Gods commandements; so that there is small probability he should be
the Author, seeing he is the subject of it. But the Book of Amos
is his Prophecy.
Jeremiah, Abdias, Nahum, and Habakkuk prophecyed in the time of Josiah.
Ezekiel, Daniel, Aggeus, and Zacharias, in the Captivity.
When Joel and Malachi prophecyed, is not evident by their Writings.
But considering the Inscriptions, or Titles of their Books, it is
manifest enough, that the whole Scripture of the Old Testament,
was set forth in the form we have it, after the return of
the Jews from their Captivity in Babylon, and before the time of
Ptolemaeus Philadelphus, that caused it to bee translated into Greek
by seventy men, which were sent him out of Judea for that purpose.
And if the Books of Apocrypha (which are recommended to us
by the Church, though not for Canonicall, yet for profitable Books
for our instruction) may in this point be credited, the Scripture
was set forth in the form wee have it in, by Esdras; as may appear
by that which he himself saith, in the second book, chapt. 14.
verse 21, 22, &c. where speaking to God, he saith thus, "Thy law
is burnt; therefore no man knoweth the things which thou has done,
or the works that are to begin. But if I have found Grace before thee,
send down the holy Spirit into me, and I shall write all that hath
been done in the world, since the beginning, which were written in
thy Law, that men may find thy path, and that they which will live
in the later days, may live." And verse 45. "And it came to passe
when the forty dayes were fulfilled, that the Highest spake, saying,
'The first that thou hast written, publish openly, that the worthy
and unworthy may read it; but keep the seventy last, that thou mayst
deliver them onely to such as be wise among the people.'"
And thus much concerning the time of the writing of the Bookes
of the Old Testament.
The New Testament
The Writers of the New Testament lived all in lesse then an age
after Christs Ascension, and had all of them seen our Saviour,
or been his Disciples, except St. Paul, and St. Luke; and
consequently whatsoever was written by them, is as ancient
as the time of the Apostles. But the time wherein the Books
of the New Testament were received, and acknowledged by the Church
to be of their writing, is not altogether so ancient. For, as the
Bookes of the Old Testament are derived to us, from no higher time
then that of Esdras, who by the direction of Gods Spirit retrived them,
when they were lost: Those of the New Testament, of which the copies
were not many, nor could easily be all in any one private mans hand,
cannot bee derived from a higher time, that that wherein the Governours
of the Church collected, approved, and recommended them to us, as the
writings of those Apostles and Disciples; under whose names they go.
The first enumeration of all the Bookes, both of the Old, and
New Testament, is in the Canons of the Apostles, supposed to be
collected by Clement the first (after St. Peter) Bishop of Rome.
But because that is but supposed, and by many questioned, the Councell
of Laodicea is the first we know, that recommended the Bible to
the then Christian Churches, for the Writings of the Prophets
and Apostles: and this Councell was held in the 364. yeer after Christ.
At which time, though ambition had so far prevailed on the great
Doctors of the Church, as no more to esteem Emperours, though Christian,
for the Shepherds of the people, but for Sheep; and Emperours not
Christian, for Wolves; and endeavoured to passe their Doctrine,
not for Counsell, and Information, as Preachers; but for Laws,
as absolute Governours; and thought such frauds as tended to make
the people the more obedient to Christian Doctrine, to be pious;
yet I am perswaded they did not therefore falsifie the Scriptures,
though the copies of the Books of the New Testament, were in the hands
only of the Ecclesiasticks; because if they had had an intention
so to doe, they would surely have made them more favorable to their
power over Christian Princes, and Civill Soveraignty, than they are.
I see not therefore any reason to doubt, but that the Old, and New
Testament, as we have them now, are the true Registers of those
things, which were done and said by the Prophets, and Apostles.
And so perhaps are some of those Books which are called Apocrypha,
if left out of the Canon, not for inconformity of Doctrine with
the rest, but only because they are not found in the Hebrew.
For after the conquest of Asia by Alexander the Great, there were
few learned Jews, that were not perfect in the Greek tongue.
For the seventy Interpreters that converted the Bible into Greek,
were all of them Hebrews; and we have extant the works of Philo
and Josephus both Jews, written by them eloquently in Greek.
But it is not the Writer, but the authority of the Church,
that maketh a Book Canonicall.
And although these Books were written by divers men, yet it is
manifest the Writers were all indued with one and the same Spirit,
in that they conspire to one and the same end, which is the
setting forth of the Rights of the Kingdome of God, the Father,
Son, and Holy Ghost. For the Book of Genesis, deriveth the
Genealogy of Gods people, from the creation of the World,
to the going into Egypt: the other four Books of Moses, contain
the Election of God for their King, and the Laws which hee prescribed
for their Government: The Books of Joshua, Judges, Ruth, and Samuel,
to the time of Saul, describe the acts of Gods people, till the time
they cast off Gods yoke, and called for a King, after the manner
of their neighbour nations; The rest of the History of the Old
Testament, derives the succession of the line of David, to the
Captivity, out of which line was to spring the restorer of
the Kingdome of God, even our blessed Saviour God the Son,
whose coming was foretold in the Bookes of the Prophets,
after whom the Evangelists writt his life, and actions, and his claim
to the Kingdome, whilst he lived one earth: and lastly, the Acts,
and Epistles of the Apostles, declare the coming of God, the Holy Ghost,
and the Authority he left with them, and their successors, for the
direction of the Jews, and for the invitation of the Gentiles.
In summe, the Histories and the Prophecies of the old Testament,
and the Gospels, and Epistles of the New Testament, have had one
and the same scope, to convert men to the obedience of God;
1. in Moses, and the Priests; 2. in the man Christ; and 3. in the
Apostles and the successors to Apostolicall power. For these three
at several times did represent the person of God: Moses, and his
successors the High Priests, and Kings of Judah, in the Old Testament:
Christ himself, in the time he lived on earth: and the Apostles,
and their successors, from the day of Pentecost (when the Holy Ghost
descended on them) to this day.
The Question Of The Authority Of The Scriptures Stated.
It is a question much disputed between the divers sects of Christian
Religion, From Whence The Scriptures Derive Their Authority;
which question is also propounded sometimes in other terms, as,
How Wee Know Them To Be The Word Of God, or, Why We Beleeve Them
To Be So: and the difficulty of resolving it, ariseth chiefly from
the impropernesse of the words wherein the question it self is couched.
For it is beleeved on all hands, that the first and originall Author
of them is God; and consequently the question disputed, is not that.
Again, it is manifest, that none can know they are Gods Word,
(though all true Christians beleeve it,) but those to whom God himself
hath revealed it supernaturally; and therefore the question is not
rightly moved, of our Knowledge of it. Lastly, when the question
is propounded of our Beleefe; because some are moved to beleeve for one,
and others for other reasons, there can be rendred no one generall
answer for them all. The question truly stated is, By What Authority
They Are Made Law.
Their Authority And Interpretation
As far as they differ not from the Laws of Nature, there is no doubt,
but they are the Law of God, and carry their Authority with them,
legible to all men that have the use of naturall reason: but this is
no other Authority, then that of all other Morall Doctrine consonant
to Reason; the Dictates whereof are Laws, not Made, but Eternall.
If they be made Law by God himselfe, they are of the nature of
written Law, which are Laws to them only to whom God hath so
sufficiently published them, as no man can excuse himself, by saying,
he know not they were his.
He therefore, to whom God hath not supernaturally revealed, that they
are his, nor that those that published them, were sent by him,
is not obliged to obey them, by any Authority, but his, whose Commands
have already the force of Laws; that is to say, by any other Authority,
then that of the Common-wealth, residing in the Soveraign, who only
has the Legislative power. Again, if it be not the Legislative Authority
of the Common-wealth, that giveth them the force of Laws, it must bee
some other Authority derived from God, either private, or publique:
if private, it obliges onely him, to whom in particular God hath been
pleased to reveale it. For if every man should be obliged, to take
for Gods Law, what particular men, on pretence of private Inspiration,
or Revelation, should obtrude upon him, (in such a number of men,
that out of pride, and ignorance, take their own Dreams, and
extravagant Fancies, and Madnesse, for testimonies of Gods Spirit;
or out of ambition, pretend to such Divine testimonies, falsely,
and contrary to their own consciences,) it were impossible that
any Divine Law should be acknowledged. If publique, it is the
Authority of the Common-wealth, or of the Church. But the Church,
if it be one person, is the same thing with a Common-wealth
of Christians; called a Common-wealth, because it consisteth of men
united in one person, their Soveraign; and a Church, because it
consisteth in Christian men, united in one Christian Soveraign.
But if the Church be not one person, then it hath no authority at all;
it can neither command, nor doe any action at all; nor is capable of
having any power, or right to any thing; nor has any Will, Reason,
nor Voice; for all these qualities are personall. Now if the whole
number of Christians be not contained in one Common-wealth, they
are not one person; nor is there an Universall Church that hath
any authority over them; and therefore the Scriptures are not made Laws,
by the Universall Church: or if it bee one Common-wealth, then all
Christian Monarchs, and States are private persons, and subject
to bee judged, deposed, and punished by an Universall Soveraigne
of all Christendome. So that the question of the Authority of
the Scriptures is reduced to this, "Whether Christian Kings, and
the Soveraigne Assemblies in Christian Common-wealths, be absolute
in their own Territories, immediately under God; or subject to one
Vicar of Christ, constituted over the Universall Church; to bee judged,
condemned, deposed, and put to death, as hee shall think expedient,
or necessary for the common good."
Which question cannot bee resolved, without a more particular
consideration of the Kingdome of God; from whence also, wee are
to judge of the Authority of Interpreting the Scripture.
For, whosoever hath a lawfull power over any Writing, to make it Law,
hath the power also to approve, or disapprove the interpretation
of the same.
OF THE SIGNIFICATION OF SPIRIT, ANGEL, AND INSPIRATION
IN THE BOOKS OF HOLY SCRIPTURE
Body And Spirit How Taken In The Scripture
Seeing the foundation of all true Ratiocination, is the constant
Signification of words; which in the Doctrine following, dependeth not
(as in naturall science) on the Will of the Writer, nor (as in common
conversation) on vulgar use, but on the sense they carry in
the Scripture; It is necessary, before I proceed any further,
to determine, out of the Bible, the meaning of such words,
as by their ambiguity, may render what I am to inferre upon them,
obscure, or disputable. I will begin with the words BODY, and SPIRIT,
which in the language of the Schools are termed, Substances,
Corporeall, and Incorporeall.
The Word Body, in the most generall acceptation, signifieth that
which filleth, or occupyeth some certain room, or imagined place;
and dependeth not on the imagination, but is a reall part of that
we call the Universe. For the Universe, being the Aggregate of
all Bodies, there is no reall part thereof that is not also Body;
nor any thing properly a Body, that is not also part of (that
Aggregate of all Bodies) the Universe. The same also, because
Bodies are subject to change, that is to say, to variety of apparence
to the sense of living creatures, is called Substance, that is to say,
Subject, to various accidents, as sometimes to be Moved, sometimes
to stand Still; and to seem to our senses sometimes Hot, sometimes Cold,
sometimes of one Colour, Smel, Tast, or Sound, somtimes of another.
And this diversity of Seeming, (produced by the diversity of the
operation of bodies, on the organs of our sense) we attribute to
alterations of the Bodies that operate, & call them Accidents
of those Bodies. And according to this acceptation of the word,
Substance and Body, signifie the same thing; and therefore
Substance Incorporeall are words, which when they are joined together,
destroy one another, as if a man should say, an Incorporeall Body.
But in the sense of common people, not all the Universe is called Body,
but only such parts thereof as they can discern by the sense of Feeling,
to resist their force, or by the sense of their Eyes, to hinder them
from a farther prospect. Therefore in the common language of men,
Aire, and Aeriall Substances, use not to be taken for Bodies, but
(as often as men are sensible of their effects) are called Wind, or
Breath, or (because the some are called in the Latine Spiritus) Spirits;
as when they call that aeriall substance, which in the body of any
living creature, gives it life and motion, Vitall and Animall Spirits.
But for those Idols of the brain, which represent Bodies to us,
where they are not, as in a Looking-glasse, in a Dream, or to a
Distempered brain waking, they are (as the Apostle saith generally
of all Idols) nothing; Nothing at all, I say, there where they
seem to bee; and in the brain it self, nothing but tumult,
proceeding either from the action of the objects, or from the
disorderly agitation of the Organs of our Sense. And men, that are
otherwise imployed, then to search into their causes, know not of
themselves, what to call them; and may therefore easily be perswaded,
by those whose knowledge they much reverence, some to call them Bodies,
and think them made of aire compacted by a power supernaturall,
because the sight judges them corporeall; and some to call them Spirits,
because the sense of Touch discerneth nothing in the place where
they appear, to resist their fingers: So that the proper signification
of Spirit in common speech, is either a subtile, fluid, and invisible
Body, or a Ghost, or other Idol or Phantasme of the Imagination.
But for metaphoricall significations, there be many: for sometimes
it is taken for Disposition or Inclination of the mind; as when
for the disposition to controwl the sayings of other men, we say,
A Spirit Contradiction; For A Disposition to Uncleannesse, An Unclean
Spirit; for Perversenesse, A Froward Spirit; for Sullennesse, A Dumb
Spirit, and for Inclination To Godlinesse, And Gods Service,
the Spirit of God: sometimes for any eminent ability, or extraordinary
passion, or disease of the mind, as when Great Wisdome is called
the Spirit Of Wisdome; and Mad Men are said to be Possessed With A Spirit.
Other signification of Spirit I find no where any; and where none
of these can satisfie the sense of that word in Scripture,
the place falleth not under humane Understanding; and our Faith
therein consisteth not in our Opinion, but in our Submission;
as in all places where God is said to be a Spirit; or where by the
Spirit of God, is meant God himselfe. For the nature of God
is incomprehensible; that is to say, we understand nothing of
What He Is, but only That He Is; and therefore the Attributes
we give him, are not to tell one another, What He Is, Nor to
signifie our opinion of his Nature, but our desire to honor him
with such names as we conceive most honorable amongst our selves.
The Spirit Of God Taken In The Scripture
Sometimes For A Wind, Or Breath
Gen. 1. 2. "The Spirit of God moved upon the face of the Waters."
Here if by the Spirit of God be meant God himself, then is Motion
attributed to God, and consequently Place, which are intelligible
only of Bodies, and not of substances incorporeall; and so the place
is above our understanding, that can conceive nothing moved that
changes not place, or that has not dimension; and whatsoever has
dimension, is Body. But the meaning of those words is best
understood by the like place, Gen. 8. 1. Where when the earth
was covered with Waters, as in the beginning, God intending to
abate them, and again to discover the dry land, useth like words,
"I will bring my Spirit upon the Earth, and the waters shall be
diminished:" in which place by Spirit is understood a Wind,
(that is an Aire or Spirit Moved,) which might be called
(as in the former place) the Spirit of God, because it was Gods Work.
Secondly, For Extraordinary Gifts Of The Understanding
Gen. 41. 38. Pharaoh calleth the Wisdome of Joseph, the Spirit of God.
For Joseph having advised him to look out a wise and discreet man,
and to set him over the land of Egypt, he saith thus, "Can we find
such a man as this is, in whom is the Spirit of God?" and Exod. 28.3.
"Thou shalt speak (saith God) to all that are wise hearted,
whom I have filled with the Spirit of Wisdome, to make Aaron Garments,
to consecrate him." Where extraordinary Understanding, though but in
making Garments, as being the Gift of God, is called the Spirit of God.
The same is found again, Exod. 31.3,4,5,6. and 35.31. And Isaiah 11.2,3.
where the Prophet speaking of the Messiah, saith, "The Spirit of
the Lord shall abide upon him, the Spirit of wisdome and understanding,
the Spirit of counsell, and fortitude; and the Spirit of the fear
of the Lord." Where manifestly is meant, not so many Ghosts,
but so many eminent Graces that God would give him.
Thirdly, For Extraordinary Affections
In the Book of Judges, an extraordinary Zeal, and Courage in the
defence of Gods people, is called the Spirit of God; as when it
excited Othoniel, Gideon, Jeptha, and Samson to deliver them
from servitude, Judg. 3.10. 6.34. 11.29. 13.25. 14.6,19. And of Saul,
upon the newes of the insolence of the Ammonites towards the men
of Jabeth Gilead, it is said (1 Sam.11.6.) that "The Spirit of God
came upon Saul, and his Anger (or, as it is in the Latine, His Fury)
was kindled greatly." Where it is not probable was meant a Ghost,
but an extraordinary Zeal to punish the cruelty of the Ammonites.
In like manner by the Spirit of God, that came upon Saul, when hee
was amongst the Prophets that praised God in Songs, and Musick
(1 Sam.19.20.) is to be understood, not a Ghost, but an unexpected
and sudden Zeal to join with them in their devotions.
Fourthly, For The Gift Of Prediction
By Dreams And Visions.
The false Prophet Zedekiah, saith to Micaiah (1 Kings 22.24.)
"Which way went the Spirit of the Lord from me to speak to thee?"
Which cannot be understood of a Ghost; for Micaiah declared before
the Kings of Israel and Judah, the event of the battle, as from
a Vision, and not as from a Spirit, speaking in him.
In the same manner it appeareth, in the Books of the Prophets,
that though they spake by the Spirit of God, that is to say,
by a speciall grace of Prediction; yet their knowledge of the future,
was not by a Ghost within them, but by some supernaturall Dream or Vision.
Fiftly, For Life
Gen. 2.7. It is said, "God made man of the dust of the Earth,
and breathed into his nostrills (spiraculum vitae) the breath of life,
and man was made a living soul. There the Breath of Life inspired
by God, signifies no more, but that God gave him life; And (Job 27.3.)
"as long as the Spirit of God is in my nostrils;" is no more then to say,
"as long as I live." So in Ezek. 1.20. "the Spirit of life was
in the wheels," is equivalent to, "the wheels were alive."
And (Ezek. 2.30.) "the spirit entred into me, and set me on my feet,"
that is, "I recovered my vitall strength;" not that any Ghost,
or incorporeal substance entred into, and possessed his body.
Sixtly, For A Subordination To Authority
In the 11 chap. of Numbers. verse 17. "I will take (saith God)
of the Spirit, which is upon thee, and will put it upon them,
and they shall bear the burthen of the people with thee;"
that is, upon the seventy Elders: whereupon two of the seventy
are said to prophecy in the campe; of whom some complained,
and Joshua desired Moses to forbid them; which Moses would not doe.
Whereby it appears; that Joshua knew not they had received authority
so to do, and prophecyed according to the mind of Moses, that is to say,
by a Spirit, or Authority subordinate to his own.
In the like sense we read (Deut. 34.9.) that "Joshua was full
of the Spirit of wisdome, because Moses had laid his hands upon him:
that is, because he was Ordained by Moses, to prosecute the work
hee had himselfe begun, (namely, the bringing of Gods people into
the promised land), but prevented by death, could not finish.
In the like sense it is said, (Rom. 8.9.) "If any man have not
the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his: not meaning thereby the
Ghost of Christ, but a Submission to his Doctrine. As also
(1 John 4.2.) "Hereby you shall know the Spirit of God; Every Spirit
that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is of God;"
by which is meant the Spirit of unfained Christianity, or Submission
to that main Article of Christian faith, that Jesus is the Christ;
which cannot be interpreted of a Ghost.
Likewise these words (Luke 4.1.) "And Jesus full of the Holy Ghost"
(that is, as it is exprest, Mat. 4.1. and Mar. 1.12. "of the Holy
Spirit",) may be understood, for Zeal to doe the work for which hee
was sent by God the Father: but to interpret it of a Ghost,
is to say, that God himselfe (for so our Saviour was,) was
filled with God; which is very unproper, and unsignificant.
How we came to translate Spirits, by the word Ghosts, which
signifieth nothing, neither in heaven, nor earth, but the Imaginary
inhabitants of mans brain, I examine not: but this I say, the word
Spirit in the text signifieth no such thing; but either properly
a reall Substance, or Metaphorically, some extraordinary Ability
of Affection of the Mind, or of the Body.
Seventhly, For Aeriall Bodies
The Disciples of Christ, seeing him walking upon the sea, (Mat. 14.26.
and Marke 6.49.) supposed him to be a Spirit, meaning thereby an
Aeriall Body, and not a Phantasme: for it is said, they all saw him;
which cannot be understood of the delusions of the brain, (which are
not common to many at once, as visible Bodies are; but singular,
because of the differences of Fancies), but of Bodies only.
In like manner, where he was taken for a Spirit, by the same Apostles
(Luke 24.3,7.): So also (Acts 12.15) when St. Peter was delivered out
of Prison, it would not be beleeved; but when the Maid said he was
at the dore, they said it was his Angel; by which must be meant
a corporeall substance, or we must say, the Disciples themselves
did follow the common opinion of both Jews and Gentiles, that some
such apparitions were not Imaginary, but Reall; and such as needed
not the fancy of man for their Existence: These the Jews called
Spirits, and Angels, Good or Bad; as the Greeks called the same
by the name of Daemons. And some such apparitions may be reall,
and substantiall; that is to say, subtile Bodies, which God can form
by the same power, by which he formed all things, and make use of,
as of Ministers, and Messengers (that is to say, Angels) to declare
his will, and execute the same when he pleaseth, in extraordinary
and supernaturall manner. But when hee hath so formed them they
are Substances, endued with dimensions, and take up roome, and can be
moved from place to place, which is peculiar to Bodies; and therefore
are not Ghosts Incorporeall, that is to say, Ghosts that are in No Place;
that is to say, that are No Where; that is to say, that seeming to be
Somewhat, are Nothing. But if corporeall be taken in the most vulgar
manner, for such Substances as are perceptible by our externall Senses;
then is Substance Incorporeall, a thing not Imaginary, but Reall;
namely, a thin Substance Invisible, but that hath the same dimensions
that are in grosser Bodies.
By the name of ANGEL, is signified generally, a Messenger;
and most often, a Messenger of God: And by a Messenger of God,
is signified, any thing that makes known his extraordinary Presence;
that is to say, the extraordinary manifestation of his power,
especially by a Dream, or Vision.
Concerning the creation of Angels, there is nothing delivered
in the Scriptures. That they are Spirits, is often repeated:
but by the name of Spirit, is signified both in Scripture,
and vulgarly, both amongst Jews, and Gentiles, sometimes thin Bodies;
as the Aire, the Wind, the Spirits Vitall, and Animall, of living
creatures; and sometimes the Images that rise in the fancy in Dreams,
and Visions; which are not reall Substances, but accidents of the brain;
yet when God raiseth them supernaturally, to signifie his Will, they
are not unproperly termed Gods Messengers, that is to say, his Angels.
And as the Gentiles did vulgarly conceive the Imagery of the brain,
for things really subsistent without them, and not dependent on
the fancy; and out of them framed their opinions of Daemons,
Good and Evill; which because they seemed to subsist really,
they called Substances; and because they could not feel them
with their hands, Incorporeall: so also the Jews upon the same ground,
without any thing in the Old Testament that constrained them thereunto,
had generally an opinion, (except the sect of the Sadduces,) that
those apparitions (which it pleased God sometimes to produce
in the fancie of men, for his own service, and therefore called
them his Angels) were substances, not dependent on the fancy,
but permanent creatures of God; whereof those which they thought
were good to them, they esteemed the Angels of God, and those
they thought would hurt them, they called Evill Angels, or Evill
Spirits; such as was the Spirit of Python, and the Spirits of Mad-men,
of Lunatiques, and Epileptiques: For they esteemed such as were
troubled with such diseases, Daemoniaques.
But if we consider the places of the Old Testament where Angels
are mentioned, we shall find, that in most of them, there can
nothing else be understood by the word Angel, but some image raised
(supernaturally) in the fancy, to signifie the presence of God
in the execution of some supernaturall work; and therefore in the rest,
where their nature is not exprest, it may be understood in the same manner.
For we read Gen. 16. that the same apparition is called, not onely
an Angel, but God; where that which (verse 7.) is called the Angel
of the Lord, in the tenth verse, saith to Agar, "I will multiply
thy seed exceedingly;" that is, speaketh in the person of God.
Neither was this apparition a Fancy figured, but a Voice.
By which it is manifest, that Angel signifieth there, nothing but
God himself, that caused Agar supernaturally to apprehend a voice
supernaturall, testifying Gods speciall presence there. Why therefore
may not the Angels that appeared to Lot, and are called Gen. 19.13. Men;
and to whom, though they were but two, Lot speaketh (ver. 18.) as but one,
and that one, as God, (for the words are, "Lot said unto them,
Oh not so my Lord") be understood of images of men, supernaturally
formed in the Fancy; as well as before by Angel was understood
a fancyed Voice? When the Angel called to Abraham out of heaven,
to stay his hand (Gen. 22.11.) from slaying Isaac, there was
no Apparition, but a Voice; which neverthelesse was called properly
enough a Messenger, or Angel of God, because it declared Gods will
supernaturally, and saves the labour of supposing any permanent Ghosts.
The Angels which Jacob saw on the Ladder of Heaven (Gen. 28.12.)
were a Vision of his sleep; therefore onely Fancy, and a Dream;
yet being supernaturall, and signs of Gods Speciall presence,
those apparitions are not improperly called Angels. The same is to be
understood (Gen.31.11.) where Jacob saith thus, "The Angel of the Lord
appeared to mee in my sleep." For an apparition made to a man in
his sleep, is that which all men call a Dreame, whether such Dreame
be naturall, or supernaturall: and that which there Jacob calleth
an Angel, was God himselfe; for the same Angel saith (verse 13.)
"I am the God of Bethel."
Also (Exod.14.9.) the Angel that went before the Army of Israel to
the Red Sea, and then came behind it, is (verse 19.) the Lord himself;
and he appeared not in the form of a beautifull man, but in form (by day)
of a Pillar Of Cloud and (by night) in form of a Pillar Of Fire;
and yet this Pillar was all the apparition, and Angel promised
to Moses (Exod. 14.9.) for the Armies guide: For this cloudy pillar,
is said, to have descended, and stood at the dore of the Tabernacle,
and to have talked with Moses.
There you see Motion, and Speech, which are commonly attributed
to Angels, attributed to a Cloud, because the Cloud served as a sign
of Gods presence; and was no lesse an Angel, then if it had had
the form of a Man, or Child of never so great beauty; or Wings,
as usually they are painted, for the false instruction of common people.
For it is not the shape; but their use, that makes them Angels.
But their use is to be significations of Gods presence in
supernaturall operations; As when Moses (Exod. 33.14.) had desired
God to goe along with the Campe, (as he had done alwaies before
the making of the Golden Calfe,) God did not answer, "I will goe,"
nor "I will send an Angel in my stead;" but thus, "my presence
shall goe with thee."
To mention all the places of the Old Testament where the name
of Angel is found, would be too long. Therefore to comprehend
them all at once, I say, there is no text in that part of the
Old Testament, which the Church of England holdeth for Canonicall,
from which we can conclude, there is, or hath been created,
any permanent thing (understood by the name of Spirit or Angel,)
that hath not quantity; and that may not be, by the understanding divided;
that is to say, considered by parts; so as one part may bee in one place,
and the next part in the next place to it; and, in summe, which is not
(taking Body for that, which is some what, or some where) Corporeall;
but in every place, the sense will bear the interpretation of Angel,
for Messenger; as John Baptist is called an Angel, and Christ the
Angel of the Covenant; and as (according to the same Analogy) the Dove,
and the Fiery Tongues, in that they were signes of Gods speciall presence,
might also be called Angels. Though we find in Daniel two names
of Angels, Gabriel, and Michael; yet is cleer out of the text it selfe,
(Dan. 12.1) that by Michael is meant Christ, not as an Angel,
but as a Prince: and that Gabriel (as the like apparitions made
to other holy men in their sleep) was nothing but a supernaturall
phantasme, by which it seemed to Daniel, in his dream, that two Saints
being in talke, one of them said to the other, "Gabriel, let us make
this man understand his Vision:" For God needeth not, to distinguish
his Celestiall servants by names, which are usefull onely to
the short memories of Mortalls. Nor in the New Testament is there
any place, out of which it can be proved, that Angels (except when
they are put for such men, as God hath made the Messengers,
and Ministers of his word, or works) are things permanent,
and withall incorporeall. That they are permanent, may bee gathered
from the words of our Saviour himselfe, (Mat. 25.41.) where he saith,
it shall be said to the wicked in the last day, "Go ye cursed into
everlasting fire prepared for the Devil and his Angels:" which place
is manifest for the permanence of Evill Angels, (unlesse wee might
think the name of Devill and his Angels may be understood of the
Churches Adversaries and their Ministers;) but then it is repugnant
to their Immateriality; because Everlasting fire is no punishment
to impatible substances, such as are all things Incorporeall.
Angels therefore are not thence proved to be Incorporeall.
In like manner where St. Paul sayes (1 Cor. 6.3.) "Knew ye not
that wee shall judge the Angels?" And (2 Pet. 2.4.) " For if God
spared not the Angels that sinned, but cast them down into Hell."
And (Jude 1,6.) "And the Angels that kept not their first estate,
but left their owne habitation, hee hath reserved in everlasting
chaines under darknesse unto the Judgement of the last day;" though
it prove the Permanence of Angelicall nature, it confirmeth also
their Materiality. And (Mat. 22.30.) In the resurrection men doe
neither marry, nor give in marriage, but are as the Angels of God
in heaven:" but in the resurrection men shall be Permanent,
and not Incorporeall; so therefore also are the Angels.
There be divers other places out of which may be drawn the