The Truth of the Times Vindicated, Chapter 1
CHAP. I,
NOw becauſe the Baſis of our Queſtion is, concerning the nature of Government, Rule and Authority, or ruling and governing power (in which principle our Doctor is ſo much miſtaken) I muſt (though at laſt) ſhew what that is. Power in it ſelfe therefore, or foreign, the word uſed Rom. 13. properly ſignifies a liberty or authority tocPoteſt as in genere eſt facultas quae dam propinqua ad exercendum aliquam operationem in aliquo ſuppoſito, ut domificator babet poteſtatem domificandi, id eſt facultatem qua in propinquo poteſt exire in talem operationem. Alman. depoteſt Eccl. & Laic q. 1. apud Gerſon. worke or act towards others, tranſlated licentia from foreign, as licentia à licet: Sometimes the word is uſed in the abſtract, as Luke 4. 6. Luke 19. 17. Sometimes in the concreate, as Matth. 8. 9. Rom. 13. 1. 2. Where, ſaith Gerard, dVbi non ſine gravi …onfilio Apostolus abstractivalocutione uti voluit, ut oſtenderet ſubditos non debere ad perſonas imperantium reſpicere, ſed adipſorum officium quo divinitus ſunt inſtructi. Ger. de mag. polit. cap. 1.not without great advice the Apoſtle Paul doth uſe an abſtractive manner of ſpeech to ſhew that ſubiects ought not ſo much to reſpect the perſons commanding, as the office it ſelfe in their commandements. Take the word in the abſtract, ſo it is all one with juriſdiction, which is ordinarily deſcribed to be Jus dicendi in invitum. Now this governing power is either Eccleſiaſticall or Civill: civill Concerning which our queſtion is according to the Apoſtle Paul, as Gerard, eIn Epiſt. ad Rom. Regem ettam definit prope ad dialecticā ſubtilitatem eſſe enim ait miniſtrum cui gladius traditus eſt ut malos puntat, ac bonos foveat & ſublevet. Buchan de Jure Regni apud Scotos. Magiſtratus in abſtracto ex loco Apoſtolico, Rom 13. ſic doſmire poteſt, Eſt potest as à Deo ordinata, gla…io armata ut ſit custos divinae legis & aliarum honeſt arum conſtitutionum ad conſervand. pacem in genere hnmano, & re…pub. ſalutem obtinendam, Ger. de pol. mag concluſ gen.Bucanan, and others have it, is that ordinance of God which is armed with the ſword for the terror of thoſe that are evill, and encouragement of thoſe that do well, Rom. 13 1 2. 3. This dominion of juriſdiction is diſtinguiſhed from dominion of propriety: for dominion of propriety, as Medina obſerves,fDominium juriſdictionis eſt poteſt as gubernandi ſubdiios ſuos cujus actus ſunt p aecipere vetare, judicare, punire, pr…miare. Dominum oroprie…atis jus disponendi de r… aliqua in ſuum com…dum. Medina de jure & juſtitia. is a power of diſpoſing of any thing that is a mans owne to his own profit. The power of Juriſdiction or government is not ſo; which while ſome have miſtaken, they have attributed ſo much power to the Prince, in regard of Townes, Caſtles and Forts, as if he had therein dominion of propriety, which breeds much confuſion in mens apprehenſions, and doth bias their thoughts into ſtate errors. According to Alman, Secular or Civill power,gPoteſt as Secularis vel Laica, eſt poteſt as à populo vel ſucceſſione haere atarea, vel ex electione alt…ui, vel alicubus traaita regulanter ad aedificationem comm…nitatis quantum adres civiles, ſecundum leges civiles pro conſtitutione habitationis pacifi…ae. Alman. ibid. is that power which regularly is given to one, or more, by the people, for the ordering and preſervation of the Common-Wealth, according to the civill Lawes thereof. I ſhall go no further then the Scripture will lead us plainly in this particular: As Eccleſiaſticall power or juriſdiction is miniſteriall, and therefore called, Jus clavium, the power of the Keyes; ſo Civill power is Lordly, and therefore called, Jus gladii, the power of the Sword, whereby ſome are authorized to exerciſe juriſdiction in Common-wealths over others, for the reward of thoſe that are good, and the puniſhment of thoſe that are evill: that is, governing or ruling power.
2d Propoſition.
IF we take governing or ruling power as abſtractively conſidered, ſo it is an ordinance appointed by God himſelfe, By me Kings reigne, ſaith God. And our Saviour when Pilate ſaid: Knoweſt thou not that I have power to looſe thee? &c. ſaid, Thou hadſt it not unleſſe it were given thee from above. And againe, Give unto Caeſar the things that are Caejars, ſhewing that as God hath his dues in the world, ſo the magiſtrate hath his. Beſides, we are comanded to obey and ſubmit unto the higher powers, Rom. 13. And why ſhould there be any obedience if the power it ſelfe were not commanded of God; yea, the Iſraelites are faulted for contemning of God himſelfe, in caſting off the government of Samuel, which there ſhould not have been, had not government been appointed by God. foreign, ſaid the Heathen. Luther calls Magiſtracie, Neceſſarium naturae corruptaremedium, the neceſſarie remedy of corrupt nature. And Tertullian ſaith well, Inde Imperator unde homo antequam Imperator. The voice of nature is the voice of God: now nature it ſelfe teacheth, that in a commmunity, or body politicke, there muſt be juſtice adminiſtred, otherwiſe the community can never be preſerved: but juſtice cannot be adminiſtred, nnleſſe authority, power or juriſdiction, be firſt appointed; for what hath a private man to do to put another to death? Thou ſhalt not kill, is made to all men.
Object. But the Apoſtle calls it, foreign, an humane conſtitution or creature, how therefore is it true that ruling power is an ordinance appointed of God himſelfe.
Anſw. The Apoſtle dorh no where ſay, that power it ſelfe, or Magiſtracie in the abſtract, is an ordinance of man, but the forme or qualification of it, as Monarchy, Ariſtocracie, Democracie, (which are the chanels in which this power runs) is foreign. And therefore the Apoſtle having ſaid, Be ſubject to every ordidinance of man, he addeth, whether to the King as ſupreame, or to the Governours, &c.hPoteſt as ſecularis ſive lai…aeſt a Deo quantum ad debitum, ſed frequenter non eſt a Deo quantum ad acquiſitionem vel uſum nam ſecundum dictamen rectum debitum eſt taiemeſſe poteſtatem naturaliter enim iudicant bomines quod oportet eos ſubdi alicui qui eis judicium & ju… a…miniſtres, exordinationem enim …incitum eſt nobis tale judicium naturaleut conſormiter adipſum veniamus, & boca Deo, ſed non eſt a Deo regula…iter ad iſtum ſenſum quod alicui Deus communi…aret iſtam juriſdictionem laicam, &c. Durand. lib. de origine juris. Durandus here diſtinguiſhes between inſtitution of power, and acquiſition of it Secular power, ſaith he, conſidered according to its inſtitution, is of God, but according to its acquiſition, and way of uſe, ſo not: Our Doctor doth ordinarily confound theſe in his reaſonings; yea, though he diſtinguiſhes them when he ſets downe his owne naked judgement, yet when he comes to reaſon againſt us, he will take no notice of his owne diſtinction, neither can we perſwade him to it: but the thing being as viſible as the Sunne, I paſſe to the third and chiefe ſtep of my diſcourſe, which is this following.
3• Propoſ.
THough power abſtractively conſidered, be originally from God himſelfe, yet he hath communicated that power to the people, ſo as the firſt ſubject ſeat and receptacle of ruling civill power under himſelfe, is the whole people or body politicke. To this purpoſe Doctor Ruherfords words are very plaine, Afree Common-wealth, ſaith he, containes ordines regni, the States that have Nomotheticke power, and they not onelyonly by the law of Nature may uſe juſta tutela, a neceſſary defence of their lives from a tyrants fury, but alſo by the law of Nations may authoritatively repreſſe and limit, as is proved by Junius, Brutus, Bucherius, Althaſius, Haenomus. Therefore Heming, Amiceus doe well diſtinguiſh between Plebem & foreign, populum: for indeed the multitude (excluding the States) or baſe of the people, can hardly have another law againſt iIoh. Brut. q. 3. Bucher. lib. 1. p. 6. Althuſius polit. cap. 15. Henomius polit. diſ. 2. 1 1. 6 Iſod. lib. 9. Origen cont. Celſum. cap. 9. Ariſtot. polit. lib. 1. c. 3. Plato de Rep. cap. 8. Livi lib 4. Aeneus Silvius de geſtis Concil. Baſil. Vide Rutherford in his plea for Preſbytery, chap. 4. pag. 46.tyrant, then the law of Nature. But the Common-wealth, including the States of a free Kingdome, hath an authoritative. So Iſodore, Origen, Atiſtotle, Plato, Titus Livius, Plutarch, and that of the Councell of Baſil, Plus valet Regnum quam Rex, The Kingdome is more worth then the King, approved by all. Thus farre Doctor Rutherford, profeſſor of Divinity in Scotland. The reaſons of my poſition are theſe:
Firſt, when God gave the power of the Sword to men, Gen. 9 6. he gave it indiſcriminatim, without difference, to all the world, Noah and his ſonnes being all the men that were then alive in the world; and he gave not the Sword onelyonly to Noah, but to all his ſonnes that then were upon the face of the earth; not that every one might ordinarily uſe it, but that they might, as they thought fit, appoint one or more who might exerciſe that power that was given to all, as the firſt ſeat of it.
Secondly, becauſe the power of ruling and governing is naturall, and what ever is naturall, doth firſt agree to the communitie, or totum, and afterward to the particular perſon or part, as the power of ſeeing and hearing (askVulgare eſt atque indubtratum fidei axioma Deum & naturam prius atque immediat us ad totam ſuppoſitum quam ad aliquam partem ſuppoſiti quamvis nobiliſſimam intendere; eum que ob cauſam faccultatem videndi datum eſſe bomini ut per oculum tanquam per organum & miniſtrum hominis exerceretur; namoculus per & propter hominem exiſt it. Facultas Parifienſis de pol. Eccleſ▪ Et istudetiam deduci poteſt ex Thom Aquin. 2. 2…. q▪ 64. Omnis enim pars ordinatur ad totum, cujus eſt pars vel imperfectum ad perfectnm, & ſiſalutitotius corporis expediat abſciſſio alicujus membri puta quia eſt putridum aut ceterorum infectivum in toto corpore reſidet potestatem illud perſcmdendi. Quid ergo quelibet perſona comparetur ad totam communitatem ſicut pars ad totum, ideo ſi aliquis ſit pernitioſus in communitate laudabiliter a communitate interimitur. Almain. de authorit. Ecclef. apud Gerſ. cap. 1. Facultas Pariſienſis obſerves to this purpoſe) is firſtly in the man and from the man in the eye or eare or particular member.
Thirdly, becauſe the Fluxus and Refluxus of civill authoritie, is from and to the people: If the authority of ruling in a Commonwealth be given by the people to him that ruleth (I ſpeake what is Jure & Regulariter) and returneth to them againe to ſee juſtice done in caſe that there is no particular ſupreme Magiſtrate left to rule then the firſt ſubject ſeat and receptable of ruling power muſt needs be in the people. Now ſo it is, that both theſe are true, which I ſhall prove one after another: As firſt, The Fluxus of civill authority is from the people, civill government or authority is derived from the people to the Prince, or him that ruleth: they ordinarily and regularly doe and are to communicate that governing power where with ſuch or ſuch a perſon is ſo inveſted: therefore ſaith the Lord, D…ut. 17. 14. 15. When thou art come into the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee, and ſhalt poſſeſſe it, and ſhalt dwell therein, and ſhalt ſay, I will ſet a King over me, like as all the nations that are about me, thou ſhalt in any wiſe ſet him King over thee whom the Lord thy God ſhall chuſe, thou ſhalt not ſet a ſtranger over thee whi h is not thy brother.
Where we ſhall ſee, that the whole power of appointing and ſetting a King over them, was given unto that people (as other Nations had it) by God himſelfe. For firſt, God directing them herein, doth not ſay thus: When thou dwelleſt in the land which I ſhall give thee, Take heed that thou do not ſet a King over thee, which thing belongs not to thee; but as a matter belonging to the people, he ſaith, when thou ſhalt ſay, I will ſet a King over me, be ſure that he be a good one, and ſuch as is pleaſing to me. Secondly, In that he doth take away the power from them of making a ſtranger, he granteth them a power to make a brother, aslAuferendo poteſtatem ad faciendum externum ſupponit ad faciendum naturalem nam qui poteſtarem ſolam excipit ad regem ex peregrina natione conſtituendum plane illam ſupponit ad conſtituendum expropria. Mendoza in Sam. 1. 8. 12. Mendoza well obſerves. Now ſaith God to them, thou mayeſt not ſet a ſtranger over thee, which is not thy brother. Thirdly, what can be more plaine then the words themſelves? In the 15. verſe the words are reduplicated, Ponendo pones, according to the Hebrew, in placing thou ſhalt place: And that there might bee no miſtake in the matter, God is pleaſed to explaine the former word foreign, which we tranſlate, ſet or place, by an afterward in the …5. verſe, foreign, which ſignifies to give, Thus, thou mai…ſt not give a ſtranger over thee, ſo that ſetting and giving in theſe two verſes, are all one, ſhewing that is firſtly in the people to ſet or give a power unto others to rule over them. Secondly the Apoſtle Peter calis this civill power foreign. Now it is not therefore called ſo, onelyonly becauſe it concerns men, or becauſe it is converſant about men, or appointed for the good of men: for then the governmentmEt ſic …angitur prima differentia inter has duas poteſt ates quia Eccleſiaſtica estimmediate a Ob▪ ſto inſtituente, ſed laua quamvis ſit a D…o ex ordinatione quantum ad debitum nu…qu…m tamene…. a Leo regula…iter & immediate inſtituendum. Almain. de poteſt. Ecccleſ. & laic cap. 1. of the Church alſo ſhould be ſo called but becauſe the way of governing is raiſed appointed, eſtabliſhed by man himſelfe, as is obſerved out of Oecumenius nVocatur human a ordinatio non reſpectuprime originis & principalis cauſae efficient is, ſed respectu cauſe inſtrumentalis, quia per bominem ſapius conſtituitur magiſtratus ut Oecumenum in Commeut. humanam foreign opponit per foreign quod conſtitutus & poſitus ſit magiſtratus ab hominibus Deo tamen ſic innuente & ſanctiente Gererd loc. com. fol. 481.. Thirdly, this derivation of authority from the people will appeare alſo, if men do ſeriouſly conſider the ſtate of Jewiſh government. There was no people nnder heaven whom God did ſo immediatly reigne over, as their King; yet if we obſerve thoſe Kings that were the moſt immediatly appointed by God himſelfe, we ſhall finde the intervening choice of the people, inſomuch as it is ſaid of Saul expreſly, that the people did chuſe him, 1 Sam. 12. 13. Behold your King whom you have choſen and deſired, upon which words Mendoza obſerves, that by the word choſen cannot be meant deſired, becauſe that word was added too, as different from the former, yet it is ſaid, 1 Sam. 11. 15. That all the people went to Gilgall, and there they made Saul King: Whereupon, ſayesoQuil apertius neque enim videtur aliter eum Regem fa…ere potuiſſe quam ei regiam poteſtatem conferendo. Mendoza 1 Sam. 8. Mendoza, What is more plain? Neither could they make him King otherwiſe, then by conferring Kingly power upon him. I doe not ſay that God did not make a deſignation of his perſon to the Crowne, there is much difference between the deſignation of perſon, and collation of power. When the Iſraelites were under the government ofthe Judges, they deſired & choſe a new way of government, ſaying to Samuel: Now make us a King to judge us, like all the Nations, 1. Sam. 8 5. And when God had yeelded to them, and had deſigned Saul over them, the people alſo came in with their election and ſufftages. Neither are theſe two, Gods deſignation and mans election repugnant, but may ſtand together: For as Zepperus obſerves on thoſe words, Deut. 17.pƲbielectio regis Deo conſtitutio ſuſceptio velcomprobatio populi ſuffragiis tribuitur. Zeppeperus leg. Moſaic. Forens explan▪ lib. 3. cap 7. Thou ſhalt ſet over thee a man whom God ſhall chooſe; the election may be of God, the conſtitution, ſuſception and comprobation of the people by their ſuffrages. And Car. Scribanius qQnod autem adcreationemipertinet creatus eſt primum ſ…ffragiis populi univerſi▪ &c. Car. Scr. de rep Hebr l. 7. c. 3.who purpoſely writes of the forme and manner of the Jewes government and Common-wealth, ſpeaks abundantly and plainly thus: But for that which concernes the creation of the King of Iſrael, he was firſt (ſaith he) created by the ſuffrages of the whole people. And if God would have it ſo then among the children of Iſrael, whom he intended in ſpeciall manner to reigne over himſelfe, much more may we thinke that God would have the firſt conſtitution of Kingdomes to be ſo ordered now, and amongſt other people: Wherefore I conclude this, That the Prince doth and ought at firſt to receive his government and authoritie from the people, and that the people themſelves do give it to him. And if ſo, then the firſt ſeat and ſubject of civill government, is the people:rErgo illa authorit as eſt perprius in communitate quia nemo alteridet quod non habet. … For that nothing can give that to another, which it hath not it ſelfe firſt either formally or virtually.
And now ſecondly, for the reflux of authority, ſo it is, that in caſe there have been a ſupreme Magiſtrate in a State, and all particulars ceaſe, and the Royall line be ſpent▪ and juſtice to be executed, it returnes to the whole body to ſee to it. As when Joſua and divers Judges had ruled in Iſrael yet we read that after them, Judg. 19 1. There was no King in Iſrael, and then was the great ſinne committed by the men of Gibeah with the Levites Concubine: whereupon all Iſrael did take the ſword of juſtice, and they ſaid Judg. 20. 13. to the men of Gibea, Deliver us the men the children of Belial, which are in Gibea, that we may put them to death; which Gibea refuſing, they did all as one man, goe up in Armes againſt them, God himſelfe approving their act. And what had all Iſrael to doe to execute juſtice, if the power of the Sword did not returne to the people, vacante magistratu ſupremo: Neither can it be objected, that though Iſraell had no King and ſupreme Magiſtrate amongſt them, yet they had ſeverall heads of the Tribes, by whoſe power they did come together for the execution of juſtice, as it might ſeeme to be Judges. 20. 2. For ſometimes the chiefe of the Tribes doth in Scripture phraſe ſignifie thoſe that are chiefe in age, wiſedome and riches, not ſuch as were chiefe in authority. Beſides, this action is imputed to all the people, there being foure hundred thouſand men that came together upon this deſigne, verſ. 2, unto whom the Levite made his complaint, verſ 7. Yee are all children of Iſrael, give here your advice and counſell And all the people aroſe as one man, verſ 8 ſaying verſ. 9. Now this ſhall be the thing we will doe to Gibea, and verſ 11 So all the men of Iſrael were gathered againſt Gibea. And leaſt that any ſhould thinke that this worke was done by the power of ſome remaines of regall authority amongſt them, it is not onelyonly ſaid before this work begun, that there was no King in Iſrael in thoſe dayes▪ Judg. 19 1. But after all was done▪ i is ſaid further chap. 21. 25. In thoſe dayes there was no King in Iſrael, and every man did that which was right in his owne eyes; ſo that Jus gladii, the right of the ſword, in caſe of defection, returneth to them again, ſo far as to ſee that juſtice be duly executed: And therefore if both the Fluxus and Refluxus of authority, be from and to the people, then muſt they needs be under God the firſt ſeat, ſubject and receptacle of civill power.
Object. But the Scripture tells us, that the powers that be are ordained of God Rom. 13 1. And it ordained of God, then not of man, nor by any Fluxus, or appointment from or of man.
Anſ. Not to ſpeake of the word foreign, which ſignifies rather ordered then ordained: Government is of God two wayes, either by immediate donation, as that of Moſes, or by mediate derivation, as that of Iudges, and the Kings of Iſrael. The government of Princes now is not by immediate donation or deſignation, but by mediate derivation, and ſo it is both of God and man too, as Forteſcue ſpeakes, Quicquid facit cauſa ſecunda, facit & cauſa prima.
But the Doctor tells us, that Kings at firſt were not by choice of the people, but that election was a defection from, and a diſturbance to that naturall way of deſcent of governing Kingly power by a paternall right, pag. 9. of his Reply. That Monarchicall government is not a meere invention of man, as Democracie and Ariſtocracie are; but that it is rather ductunaturae, though not jure naturae, we being led there unto through the veines of Nature in a paternall or fatherly rule, pag. 8. as is plaine by the Booke of God, that the firſt fathers of mankinde, were the firſt Kings and Rulers: For we ſee (ſaith he) that the earth was divided amongst Noah and his three ſonnes, and ſtill as they increaſed, new Colonies were ſent out, who had the government both Regall and Sacerdotall, by primogeniture; whence it appeares, (ſaith he) that Monarchy was the firſt government, it being late ere any popular rule Ariſtocraticall or Democraticall appeared in the world: And that Monarchy, how ever we cannot ſay that it was jure divino, yet it was exemplo divino, the government which God ſet up over his people, being Monarchicall ſtill in Moſes, Judges and the Kings of Iſrael, pag. 8.
Anſ. Firſt, whereas the Dr ſaith, that the firſt Kings were not by the choice of the people at the firſt, p. 8. And that popular election was a kinde of defection from and a diſturbance to that naturall way, &c. I refer Doctor Fern unto Doctor Fern, who ſaith both in his firſt and ſecond book, pag. 67. of his Reply, It is probable that Kings at firſt were by election here as elſwhere. This I have ſpoke to already, and ſhall ſpeak to yet afterwards; neither doe we take it unkindly that the Doctor cannot agree with us, ſeeing he cannot agree with himſelfe.
Secondly, whereas he ſaith, Monarchicall government is not a meere invention of Man, as Ariſtocracie and Democracie are, I refer him to what he ſaith himſelfe: For in his firſt booke, pag. 13. 14. he ſaith: We muſt diſtinguiſh power it ſelfe, and the qualification of that power in ſeverall formes of government: If we conſider the qualification of this governing power, and the manner of executing it, according to the ſeverall formes of government, we granted it before to be the invention of man. And when ſuch a qualification or forme is orderly agreed upon, wee ſay it hath Gods permiſſive approbation. Yet in his Reply he makes this forme of Monarchicall government, rather an appointment of God, both ducta natura, and exemplo divino, and not a meere invention of man, as other formes of government are. Here I muſt leave him to agree with himſelfe.
Thirdly, whereas he ſaith; That the firſt Fathers of mankinde, were the firſt Kings and Rulers: for we ſee the earth divided amongst Noahs three ſonnes, &c. I referre him for information to the 1 Chron. 1▪ 10. where it is ſaid expreſſely of Nimrod, that hee began to be mighty upon the earth; whereas if Noah and his ſonnes were Kings, their dominions being greater before the d…viſion of the earth into after Colonies, they ſhould have been more mighty then he. And what his might was▪ is declared to us, Gen. 10. 10. And the beginning of his kingdome was Babel, &c. Here is the firſt time, as Mendoza well obſerves, that we read of a kingdome after the flood, and that is marked with a foreign, Rebellavit: For Nimrod comes of foreign, to rebell, as if in erecting his Kingdome, he had rebelled againſt the way of government which before wasuſed if not appointed. And it ſhould ſeem ſtrange if God had appointed that way of government by making the ſonnes of Noah Kings; that Cham, from whom came Nimrod, who was that curſed and wicked poſterity of Noah, ſhould keep that government alive which was ſet up by God; and that Shem, who was the godly poſterity of Noah, from whom came Abram, ſhould not: for we read not that Abraham was a King, or that his government was Monarchical▪ but rather the contrary, as 1 Chro. 1. 43. Now theſe are the Kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before any King reigned over the children of Iſrael. To this purpoſe Mendoza ſAnte diſcenſum in Egyptum in quo Hebraei non Ren publicam ſed ſamiliam conſtituebat; Nam (ut Ari…t) non niſi ex multis ſamiliis coaleſ…it reſpub▪ tune autem una erat Abrah…e domus, in quam ſucceſſit Iſaac, & in bane domus Jacob, & quamvis in tempore Jacob: poſt connub…a plures …am familtae darentur, quarum omnium gubernatio non potuit eſſe Oeconomica, ta…en non e…ant it a m…ltae u… politicum Rempublicum▪ conflarent, ſed medtant quandam commitatem quam vitalem ſeu collectaneam appellant. Mendoza 1 Tom. Annot. 3. Proem. Sect. 10.writeth who ſaith, Before the deſcent into Egypt, the Jewes did not conſtitute a Common-wealth, but a family: for (as Ariſtotle) a Common-wealth doth not ariſe but from a conjunction of many families; but the… Abrahams family was one, to which Iſaac's ſucceeded, and to that the houſe of Jacob. And although in Jacobs time, after ſeverall marriages there ſp…ang up divers families (the government of all which could not be Occonom…al… or Domeſticall) yet were there not ſo many families as could conſtitute any politicall Common-wealth, but a middle kinde of Community, which is called Vitalis, or Collectanea. Yea in Sect. 6. he proves out of Auſtine, Anton. Iſidore, that Kingly government fell in the fourth age of the world: and therefore Rupertus compares the fourth Age of the world to the fourth day of the creation,tQuia ut hec ſideribus, it a illa regibus fulgurant. 6. Sect Proem. Becauſe as that did ſhine with ſtarres, ſo this with Kings.
And whereas the Doctor tells us, that this Regall Monarchicall government is naturall, though not jure, yet ductu naturae, we being led thereunto through the veines of Nature, in a paternall or fatherly rule, as is plaine by the Booke of God, that the firſt Fathers of mankinde were Kings, and ſo Regall government to deſcend upon the firſt borne by primogeniture, as their families increaſed and ſpread further, &c. pag. 8.
I referre him to what Molina and Pineda ſay,uQuaedam namque poteſt as eſt quae ortum babet ex ſolo jure naturali, quae de cauſa poteſtas naturalis dicitur talis eſt poteſt as patris in filios & in alios deſcendentes alia vero eſt quae ortum babet ex bominum voluntatibus ſe illi ſubjicere voluntium & idcirco civilis poteſt as dicitur-Molina de Jure & Just. Disp. 20. Tract. 2. Molina will tell him, that power is of two ſorts, ſome that hath its riſe ex ſolo jure naturali, and therefore called naturall, as the power of the Father over his children, and thoſe that deſcend from him: Other power there is, which hath its origination from the will of Men, they being willing to ſubject themſelves to the ſupreame, and is therefore called a civill power. So that paternall and civill power are not the ſame, but have two originals.
And if Monarchicall government ſhould bee by paternall right, then is it not onelyonly ductu, ſed jure naturae; ductus naturae is that whereby wee are led to any thing by the principles of Nature: and that which wee are led to by the principles of Nature, is jure naturae: For naturale eſt (ſayes the Philoſopher) quod fluit ex principiis naturae. And ſo the Membra dividentia ſhould interfeere, whereas they ought to be fully oppoſite. Beſides, if paternall government doe lead us to Regall, and Monarchicall, then Kings ſhould and ought to rule as arbitrarily in their Kindomes, as Fathers doe in their Families: And if ſubjects doe deny this Arbitrary power to them, they ſinne, becauſe they are led thereunto by Nature, and ſo all the Kingdomes of the world ſhould he in this ſinne: for in what Kingdome of the world doth a King rule as arbitrarily as a Father in his family.
Again, this contrivance of government by the Doctor, ſuppoſes that the eldeſt Man, or Father after the Flood, though he were never ſo ſilly and weake, ſhould be King, and that this Regall government muſt neceſſarily deſcend upon the firſt borne, by vertue of primogeniture.
Ex ſuccedentium line… in qua pauciſſimos invenies primogenitos ſuccedentes parentibus, qua e Abulenſis aperte ſatetur ſe retractare communem ſententiam quam ipſe aliquande ſequutus fuiſſet, & jam tunc aſſerere ſucceſſionem in regnum aut principatum nunquam fuiſſe …lligatum …ut debitum primogenitis, & confirmat ex to quod Paralip. 1. 5. 1 Primogenita Ruben data fuere Joſept, Fili…s & tamen Juda regnabat. Pineda derebus Salomonis, lib. 2. cap. 1. Ipſonatur… jure omnes aequaltter Filios Patri ſuccedere do…uit. Ariſt 7 Ethick. Decreto item & voluntate divina indiſcriminatim Salomonis poſteritati pollicetar. Dem regnum ſed ub…plures erunt filii ad ſolum parentis voluntatem ſpectaſſe videntur. Abulenſis addit poſteriorum regum tempore invaleſcente conſuetudinem b…reditarium regni jus ad primogenitos devolutum eſſe; Ego vero perpetuum fuiſſe exiſtimo ut regni ſucceſſor expar…utis a rbitrto & voluntate penderet ut ex ſerie regum patet. Pineda lib. 2. de rebus Salomonis cap 1. 2. 3.For this I referre him to Pineda, where at large in his Booke de rebus Salomonis, he may read Pineda proving that among the Iſraelites the Crown did not deſcend upon the firſt born, but was alwayes diſpoſed of according to the will of the parent, appointing it to this or that childe; where he brings in Abulenſis retracting his opinion, and profeſſing, that though he did formerly thinke that the Crowne did deſcend upon the firſt borne, by vertue of primogeniture, yet at the laſt he was of another ſentence, becauſe it is ſaid, 1 Chron. 5. 1. 2. Ruben the firſt borne of Iſrael, becauſe he defiled his Fathers bed, his birthright was given to the ſonnes of Joſeph; yet verſe 2. Juda prevailed above his brethren, and of him came the chiefe Rulers.
Now as they argue, if the Crowne belonged to the firſt borne, as part of the Birthright that ſhould have been given unto the ſonnes of Joſeph; unto whom it is here ſaid expreſſely the Birthright was given: but the rule and Crowne was given unto another Tribe, arguing that it was no part of the birthright, or any neceſſary annexum to the primogeniture in thoſe dayes.
This doctrine Pineda proves by examining the ſeries of all the Kings, inſtancing eſpecially in Solomon who was appointed King by David, notwithſtanding he was not Davids eldeſt ſonne; and Abiah who was appointed by Rehoboam, though Rehoboam had many elder children▪ as he clears from 2 Chron. 11 18, 19, 20, 21 22.
Fifthly, whereas the Doctor ſaith, This Monarchicall government was the firſt government that God ſet up; In Moſes, Judges, and Kings of Iſrael, and ſo though not jure divino, yet exemplo divino. I conſeſſe I cannot but wonder at the conceit, ſeeing the difference between the government of Judges and Kings is ſo abundantly made out by Car. Sigonius, Feverdentius, Ranervus, Abulenſis, and many others (aCeterum cum deforma Reipub. quaritur nibil aliud quaeritur niſi penes quem principatum ſumma rerum fuerit conſtituta; hae… vero apud Haebreos primum penes optimates poſita fuit deinde penes Reges quorum principatum illum Ariſtacr…cian, hoc regnum Greci vocarunt, Ariſtocratia ſuit ſub Moſe, Ioſua, …ioribus & Indicibus, reg…um ſub reg…bus de Ariſto…ratia … non facietis, &c. Car. Sigon. li▪ 1. ca. 5.) Sigonius ſaith expreſly, the firſt government among the Hebrews was by the chiefe of the people, and after by Kings, that by the Greeks being, called Ariſtocracie, and this Monarchie; Ariſtocracie, ſaith he, was under the Judges, Joſhua, and others, Monarchie under Kings, which Ariſtocraticall government of theirs is ſignified to us by theſe words in Deut. 12. 1. 8. Theſe are the ſtatutes and judgements which ye ſhall obſerve to do in the Land which the Lord thy God giveth thee. Verſe 1. then verſe 8. Ye ſhall not do after all the things that we do here this day, every man whatſoever is right in his own eyes. And indeed if the Iſraelites were under Monarchicall government in the times of the Judges and Monarchie was then on foot; why ſhould they deſire it as another kind of government which yet they had not, 1. Sam. 8. ſaying to Samuel, Now make us a King to judge us like all the Nations: verſe 5. By which it appeares that the government which they had before under the Judges was not Monarchicall as that which they had afterwards.
Let no man therefore ſwallow this principle ſo often inculcated by the Doctor, that the government of Iſrael under Judges was Monarchicall. For though ſome of the Judges were called Kings, yet as Druſius and others obſerve, the word King was taken either more ſtrictly for Monarchs, or more largely for ſuch Captains and Governours as did rule over them; Surely God at the firſt, by all we can read in the Scripture, was pleaſed to appoint Magiſtracie it ſelfe and left the children of men free to ſet up that way and forme of government, which in prudence might beſt correſpond with their condition, ſtill making people the firſt ſubject and receptacle of civill power: In proofe whereof I have ſtayed the longer, it being the foundation of all this controverſie. And now paſſe on to the fourth Propoſition, which is.
4th. Propoſition.
Effectus non exce…t virtutem cauſae ſuae.SEeing that the people are under God the firſt ſubject of civill power, therefore the Prince o… ſupreme Magiſtrate hath no more power then what is communicated to him from the communitie, becauſe the affect doth not exceed the vertue of its cauſe.
5th. Propoſition.
ANd as the Prince hath no more power then what is communicated from the communitie; ſo the people or communitie cannot give away from themſelves the power of ſelfe-preſervation. Becauſe the ſame Commandement that faith, Thou ſhalt not kill: doth alſo ſay, Thou ſhalt preſerve. Precepts that forbid evill, do command the contrary good. Now the morall naturall Law of God forbids a man to kill himſelfe, and therefore commands him to preſerve himſelfe: and as by a poſitive act men cannot make a Law to kill themſelves, no more can they not to preſerve themſelves; the one being as ſtrongly commanded by the morall Law, and as deeply ſeated in Nature as the other. Secondly, becauſe if the communitie ſhould give away the power of ſelf-preſervation, the ſtate ſhould not be in a better but in a worſer condition then before. The King and Prince is taken into Office for the good of the people, therefore called Pater patriae, & Pastor gregis: not becauſe he may arbitrarily rule in the Common wealth as a Father doth in his familie; but becauſe of his tender care that he is to have over his people; and that the people might live more ſecure and peaceably in all godlineſſe and honeſtie: But if the communitie ſhould give ſuch a truſt to any one that they might not at all defend themſelves beyond his actuall appointment, they ſhould be infinitely in a worſer condition then before, becauſe before ſuch truſt they ſhould be freemen; but after the truſt they ſhould be ſlaves, unleſſe it pleaſes the King through his own gratious condiſcention to let them be free ſtill: for what is a ſlave but ſuch a one who is ſo abſolutely at the power of anothers command, that he may be ſpoiled, or ſold, or put under the Gallies, and there beaten daily, having no power to make any reſiſtance or ſelfe-defence. Thirdly, it is agreeable to the Law of Nations and Reaſon, that no inferiour Court can undo what a ſuperiour Court hath done, As where an eſtate is ſetled upon children by Act of Parliament, no inferiour Court of Juſtice can cut off the intayle. Now ſelfe-preſervation is enacted in the Court of Nature, as he that hath read but Magirus unbound, I meane common naturall principles, will grant, and therefore no act of a communitie can cut off this intayle from their poſteritie, or make ſuch a deed of Conveyance whereby themſelves and their children ſhould be ſpoyled of ſelf-preſervation.
Ob. But though by nature a man is bound to preſerve himſelf, yet he may deſtroy or put himſelf upon that which will be his deſtruction for the publick good; doth not natura particularis go croſſe to its own diſpoſition, ne detur vacuum?
Reſponſ. True I have read indeed that Natura particularis gives way to natura univerſalis, but never heard before that natura univerſalis gives way to natura particularis, or that natura univerſalis doth ſeek its own deſtruction, or looſe the power of ſelf-preſervation for the good or betterneſſe of ſome particular nature. Wherefore if the ſeat of power be in the community, and therefore no more power in the ſupreme then was and is derived from the communitie, and the people cannot give away the power of ſelf preſervation: Then in caſe the Prince doth neglect his truſt ſo as not to preſerve them, but to oppoſe them to violence, it is no uſurpation for them to look to themſelves, which yet may be no act of juriſdiction over their Prince, or taking away of any power from him which they gave him, but is in truth a ſtirring up acting and exerciſing of that power which alwayes was left in themſelves.