De Cive
by Thomas Hobbes
1651
RELIGION
Chap. XV
Of the Kingdome of God, by Nature
I. Wee have already in the foregoing Chapters, proved both by
reason, and testimonies of holy Writ, that the estate of nature,
that is to say, of absolute liberty, such as is theirs, who
neither govern, nor are governed, is an Anarchy, or hostile
state; that the precepts whereby to avoyd this state, are the
Lawes of nature; that there can be no civill government without a
Soveraigne; and that they who have gotten this Soveraigne command
must be obey'd simply, that is to say, in all things which
repugne not the Commandments of God: There is this one thing only
wanting to the complete understanding of all civill duty, & that
is, to know which are the Laws and Commandments of God. For else
we cannot tell whether that which the civill power commands us,
be against the Lawes of God, or not; whence it must necessarily
happen, that either by too much obedience to the civill
authority, we become stubborne against the divine Majesty; or for
feare of sinning against God, we runne into disobedience against
the civill power: To avoid both these rocks, its necessary to
know the Divine Lawes. now because the knowledge of the Lawes,
depends on the knowledge of the Kingdome, we must in what
followes, speak somewhat concerning the Kingdome of God.
II. The Lord is King, the earth may be glad there of saith
the Psalmist, Psal: 97 v. 1. And againe the same Psalmist, Psal.
99. v. 1. The Lord is King, be the People never so unpatient; he
sitteth betweene the Cherubins, be the Earth never so unquiet; to
wit, whether men will, or not, God is THE King over all the
Earth, nor is he mov'd from his Throne, if there be any who deny
either his existence, or his providence. Now although God governe
all men so by his power, that none can doe any thing which he
would not have done, yet this, to speake properly, and
accurately, is not to reigne; for he is sayed to reigne, who
rules not by acting, but speaking, that is to say, by precepts
and threatnings. And therefore we account not inanimate, nor
irrationall bodies, for Subjects in the Kingdome of God, although
they be subordinate to the Divine power; because they understand
not the commands, and threats of God; nor yet the Atheists,
because they beleeve not that there is a God; nor yet those who
beleeving there is a God, doe not yet beleeve that he rules these
Inferiour things; for even these, although they be govern'd by
the power of God, yet doe they not acknowledge any of his
Commands, nor stand in awe of his threats. Those onely therefore
are suppos'd to belong to Gods Kingdome, who acknowledge him to
be the Governour of all things, and that he hath given his
Commands to men, and appointed punishments for the
transgressours; The rest, we must not call Subjects, but Enemies
of God.
III. But none are said to governe by commands, but they who
openly declare them to those who are govern'd by them; for the
Commands of the Rulers are the Lawes of the Rul'd. But lawes they
are not, if not perspicuously publisht, in so much as all excuse
of Ignorance may be taken away. Men indeed publish their Lawes by
word or voice, neither can they make their will universally
knowne any other way; But Gods lawes are declar'd after a
threefold manner: first, by the tacit dictates of Right reason:
next, by immediate revelation, which is suppos'd to be done
either by a supernaturall voice, or by a vision or dreame, or
divine inspiration: Thirdly, by the voice of one man whom God
recommends to the rest, as worthy of beliefe, by the working of
true miracles. Now he whose voice God thus makes use of to
signifie his will unto others, is called a PROPHET. These three
manners may be term'd the threefold word of God, to wit the
Rationall word, the sensible word, and the word of Prophecy: To
which answer, the three manners whereby we are said to heare God,
Right reasoning, sense, and faith. Gods sensible word hath come
but to few; neither hath God spoken to men by Revelation except
particularly to some, and to diverse diversely; neither have any
Lawes of his Kingdome beene publisht on this manner unto any
people.
IV. And according to the difference which is between the
Rationall word and the word of Prophecy, we attribute a twofold
Kingdome unto God: Naturall, in which he reignes by the dictates
of right reason, and which is universall over all who acknowledge
the Divine power, by reason of that rationall nature which is
common to all; and Propheticall, in which he rules also by the
word of Prophecy, which is peculiar, because he hath not given
positive Lawes to all men, but to his peculiar people, and some
certaine men elected by him.
V. God in his naturall Kingdome hath a Right to rule, and to
punish those who break his Lawes, from his sole irresistable
power. For all Right over others is either from nature, or from
Contract. How the Right of governing springs from Contract, we
have already shewed in the 6. Chapter. And the same Right is
derived from nature, in this very thing, that it is not by nature
taken away. For when by nature all men had a Right over all
things, every man had a Right of ruling over all as ancient as
nature it selfe; but the reason why this was abolisht among men,
was no other but mutuall fear; as hath been declared above in the
second Chapter, the 3. art; reason namely dictating that they
must foregoe that Right for the preservation of mankinde, because
the equality of men among themselves according to their strength
and naturall powers was necessarily accompanied with warre, and
with warre joynes the destruction of mankinde. Now if any man had
so farre exceeded the rest in power, that all of them with joyned
forces could not have resisted him, there had been no cause why
he should part with that Right which nature had given him; The
Right therefore of Dominion over all the rest, would have
remained with him, by reason of that excesse of power whereby he
could have preserved both himselfe and them. They therefore whose
power cannot be resisted, and by consequence God Almighty,
derives his Right of Soveraignty from the Power it selfe. And as
oft as God punisheth, or slayes a sinner, although he therefore
punish him because he sinned, yet may we not say that he could
not justly have punisht or killed him although he had not sinned.
Neither, if the will of God in punishing, may perhaps have regard
to some sin antecedent, doth it therefore follow, that the Right
of afflicting, and killing, depends not on divine Power, but on
mens sins.
VI. That question made famous by the disputations of the
Antients, why evill things befell the good, and good things the
evill, is the same with this of ours, by what Right God
dispenseth good and evill things unto men. And with its
difficulty, it not only staggers the faith of the vulgar
concerning the divine providence, but also of Philosophers, and
which is more, even of holy men. Psal. 73. v. 1, 2, 3. Truly God
is good to Israel, even to such as are of a clean heart. but as
for me, my feet were almost gone, my steps had well nigh slipt.
And why? I was grieved at the wicked, I doe also see the ungodly
in such prosperity. And how bitterly did Job expostulate with
God, that being just, he should yet be afflicted with so many
calamities? God himselfe with open voyce resolved this difficulty
in the case of Job, and hath confirmed his Right by arguments
drawn not from Jobs sinne, but from his own power. For Job and
his friends had argued so among themselves, that they would needs
make him guilty, because he was punisht; and he would reprove
their accusation by arguments fetcht from his own innocence: But
God when he had heard both him and them, refutes his
expostulation, not by condemning him of injustice, or any sin,
but by declaring his own power, Job. 38. v. 4. Where wast thou
(sayes he) when I laid the foundation of the earth, &c. And for
his friends, God pronounces himself angry against them, Job. 42.
v. 7. Because they had not spoken of him the thing that is right,
like his servant Job. Agreeable to this is that speech of our
Saviours in the mans case who was born blind, when, his Disciples
asking him whether he or his Parents had sinned, that he was born
blind, he answered, John 9. v. 3. neither hath this man sinned,
nor his Parents, but that the works of God should be manifest in
him. For though it be said, Rom. 5. 12. That death entred into
the world by sinne, it followes not, but that God by his Right
might have made men subject to diseases, and death, although they
had never sinned, even as he hath made the other animalls
mortall, and sickly, although they cannot sinne.
VII. Now if God have the Right of Soveraignty from his power,
it is manifest, that the obligation of yeelding him obedience
lyes on men by reason of their weaknesse; for that obligation
which rises from Contract, of which we have spoken in the second
Chapter, can have no place here, where the Right of Ruling (no
Covenant passing between) rises only from nature. But there are
two Species of naturall obligation, one when liberty is taken
away by corporall impediments, according to which we say that
heaven and earth, and all Creatures, doe obey the common Lawes of
their Creation: The other when it is taken away by hope, or fear,
according to which the weaker despairing of his own power to
resist, cannot but yeeld to the stronger. From this last kinde of
obligation, that is to say from fear, or conscience of our own
weaknesse (in respect of the divine power) it comes to passe,
that we are obliged to obey God in his naturall Kingdome; reason
dictating to all, acknowledging the divine power and providence,
that there is no kicking against the pricks.
(By reason of their weaknesse) If this shall seem hard to any
man, I desire him with a silent thought to consider, if there
were two Omnipotents, whether were bound to obey; I beleeve he
will confesse that neither is bound: if this be true, then it is
also true what I have set down, that men are subject unto God
because they are not omnipotent. And truly our Saviour
admonishing Paul (who at that time was an enemy to the Church)
that he should not kick against the pricks, seems to require
obedience from him for this cause, because he had not Power
enough to resist.
VIII. Because the word of God ruling by nature onely, is
supposed to be nothing else but right reason, and the Laws of
Kings can be known by their word only, its manifest that the Laws
of God ruling by nature alone, are onely the naturall Lawes;
namely those which we have set down in the second and third
Chapters, and deduced from the dictates of reason, Humility,
Equity, Justice, Mercy, and other Morall vertues befriending
Peace, which pertain to the discharge of the duties of men one
toward the other, and those which right reason shall dictate
besides, concerning the honour and worship of the Divine Majesty.
We need not repeat what those Naturall Laws, or Morall vertues
are; but we must see what honours, and what divine worship, that
is to say, what sacred Lawes, the same naturall reason doth
dictate.
IX. Honour, to speak properly, is nothing else but an opinion
of anothers Power joyned with goodnesse; and to honour a man, is
the same with highly esteeming him, and so honour is not in the
Party honoured, but in the honourer. Now three Passions do
necessarily follow honour thus placed in opinion; Love, which
referres to goodnesse; hope, and feare, which regard Power. And
from these arise all outward actions, wherewith the powerfull are
appeased, and become Propitious, and which are the effects, and
therefore also the naturall signes of honour it selfe. But the
word honour is transferred also to those outward effects of
honour, in which sense, we are said to honour him, of whose power
we testifie our selves, either in word, or deed, to have a very
great respect; insomuch as honour is the same with worship. Now
WORSHIP is an outward act, the sign of inward honour. and whom we
endeavour by our homage to appease, if they be, angry or
howsoever to make them favourable to us, we are said to worship.
X. All signes of the mind are either words or deeds, and
therefore all worship consists either in words or deeds. Now both
the one and the other are referred to three kindes; whereof the
first is Praise, or publique declaration of goodnesse; The
second, a publique declaration of Present Power, which is to
magnify megalunois; The third, is a publique declaration of
happinesse, or of Power, secure also for the future, which is
called, makariomos. I say, that all kindes of honour may be
discerned, not in words only, but in deeds too. But we then
praise, and celebrate in words, when we doe it by way of
Proposition, or Dogmatically, that is to say by Attributes, or
Titles, which may be termed praysing, and celebrating,
categorically, and plainly, as when we declare him whom we honour
to be liberall, strong, wise; And then, in deeds, when it is done
by consequence, or by hypothesis, or supposition, as by
Thanksgiving, which supposeth goodnesse; or by Obedience, which
supposeth Power. or by Congratulation, which supposeth
happinesse;
XI. Now whether we desire to praise a man in words, or deeds,
we shall find some things which signify honour with all men, such
as among attributes, are the generall words of vertues and
powers, which cannot be taken in ill sense, As Good, Faire,
Strong, Just, and the like; and among actions, Obedience,
Thanksgiving, Prayers, and others of that kinde, by which an
acknowledgement of vertue and power is ever understood: Others,
which signify honour, but with some, and scorne with others, or
else neither; such as in Attributes, are those words which
according to the diversity of opinions, are diversly referred to
vertues or vices, to honest or dishonest things; As that a man
slew his enemy, that he fled, that he is a Philosopher, or an
Orator, and the like, which with some are had in honour, with
others in contempt. In deeds, such as depend on the custome of
the place, or prescriptions of civill Lawes, as in saluting to be
bareheaded, to put off the shoes, to bend the body. to petition
for any thing, and the like. Now standing, prostrate, kneeling,
forms of ceremony, that worship which is alwayes, and by all men
accounted honourable, may be called Naturall; the other, which
followes places, and customes, Arbitrary.
XII. Furthermore, worship may be enjoyned, to wit by the
command of him that is worshiped, and it may bee voluntary,
namely such as seems good to the worshipper: If it be enjoyned,
the actions expressing it, do not signify honour, as they signify
actions, but as they are enjoyned: for they signify obedience
immediately, obedience power; insomuch as worship enjoyned
consists in obedience. Voluntary is honourable onely in the
nature of the actions, which if they doe signify honour to the
beholders, it is worship, if not, it is Reproach. Again worship
may be either publique or private. But publique, respecting each
single worshipper, may not be voluntary; respecting the City it
may. For seeing that which is done voluntarily, depends on the
will of the Doer, there would not one worship be given, but as
many worships as worshippers, except the will of all men were
united by the command, of one. But Private worship may be
voluntary, if it be done secretly; for what is done openly is
restrained, either by Lawes, or through modesty, which is
contrary to the nature of a voluntary action.
XIII. Now that we may know what the scope and end of
worshipping others is, we must consider the cause why men delight
in worship: And we must grant what we have shewed elsewhere, that
Joy consists in this, that a man contemplate vertue, strength,
science, beauty, friends, or any Power whatsoever, as being, or
as though it were his own; and it is nothing else but a Glory, or
Triumph of the mind conceiving it selfe honoured, that is to say,
lov'd and fear'd, that is to say, having the services and
assistances of men in readinesse. Now because men beleeve him to
be powerfull whom they see honoured (that is to say) esteemed
powerfull by others, it falls out that honour is increased by
worship; and by the opinion of power, true power is acquired. His
end therefore who either commands, or suffers himself to be
worshipt, is, that by this means he may acquire as many as he
can, either through love, or fear, to be obedient unto him.
XIV. But that we may understand what manner of Worship of God
naturall reason doth assigne us, let us begin from his
Attributes: where, first it is manifest, that existence is to be
allowed him; for there can be no will to honour him, who, we
think, hath no being. Next, those Philosophers who said, that God
was the World, or the worlds Soul, (that is to say, a part of it)
spake unworthily of God, for they attribute nothing to him, but
wholly deny his being. For by the word God we understand the
Worlds cause; but in saying that the World is God, they say, that
it hath no cause, that is as much, as there is no God. In like
manner, they who maintain the world not to be created, but
eternall; because there can be no cause of an eternall thing, In
denying the world to have a Cause, they deny also that there is a
God. They also have a wretched apprehension of God, who imputing
idlenesse to him, doe take from him the Government of the world,
and of mankind. For say they should acknowledge him omnipotent,
yet if he minde not these inferiour things, that same thred-bare
Sentence will take place with them, Quod supra nos, nihil ad nos;
What is above us, doth not concern us. And seeing there is
nothing for which they should either love, or fear him, truly he
will be to them as though he were not at all. Moreover in
Attributes which signifie Greatnesse, or Power, those which
signifie some finite, or limited thing, are not signes at all of
an honouring mind. For we honour not God worthily if we ascribe
lesse Power, or greatnesse to him then possibly we can; but every
finite thing is lesse then we can, for most easily we may alwayes
assigne and attribute more to a finite thing; No shape therefore
must be assigned to God, for all shape is finite; nor must he be
said to be conceived, or comprehended by imagination, or any
other faculty of our soul; for whatsoever we conceive is finite:
And although this word Infinite signifie a conception of the
mind, yet it followes not, that we have any conception of an
infinite thing: For when we say that a thing is infinite, we
signifie nothing really, but the impotency in our owne mind, as
if we should say we know not whether, or where it is limited:
Neither speak they honourably enough of God, who say we have an
Idea of him in our mind; for an Idea is our conception, but
conception we have none, except of a finite thing: Nor they, who
say that he hath Parts, or that he is some certaine intire thing;
which are also attributes of finite things: Nor that he is in any
place; for nothing can be said to be in a place, but what hath
bounds and limits of its greatnesse on all sides: Nor that he is
moved, or is at rest; for either of them suppose a being in some
place: Nor that there are more Gods; because not more infinites.
Farthermore concerning attributes of happinesse, those are
unworthy of God which signify sorrow (unlesse they be taken not
for any Passion, but by a Metonomy for the effect) such as
Repentance, anger, Pity: Or Want, as Appetite, Hope,
Concupiscence, and that love which is also called lust, for they
are signes of Poverty, since it cannot be understood, that a man
should desire, hope, and wish for ought, but what he wants and
stands in need. of. Or any Passive faculty; for suffering belongs
to a limited power, and which depends upon another. When we
therefore attribute a will to God, it is not to be conceived like
unto ours, which is called a rationall desire; for if God
desires, he wants, which for any man to say, is a contumelie; but
we must suppose some resemblance which we cannot conceive. In
like manner when wee attribute sight and other acts of the senses
to him, or knowledge, or understanding, which in us are nothing
else but a tumult of the minde raised from outward objects
pressing the Organes, wee must not think that any such thing
befalls the Deity; for it is a signe of power depending upon some
other, which is not the most blessed thing. He therefore who
would not ascribe any other titles to God, then what reason
commands, must use such as are either Negative, as infinite,
eternall, incomprehensible, &c. or superlative, as most good,
most great, most powerfull, &c. or Indefinite, as good, just,
strong, Creatour, King, and the like; in such sense, as not
desiring to declare what he is (which were to circumscribe him
within the narrow limits of our phantasie), but to confesse our
own admiration, and obedience, which is the property of humility,
and of a minde yeelding all the honour it possibly can doe. For
Reason dictates one name alone, which doth signify the nature of
God (i.e.) Existent, or simply, that he is; and one in order to,
and in relation to us, namely God, under which is contained both
King, and Lord, and Father.
XV. Concerning the Outward actions wherewith God is to be
worshipped (as also concerning his Titles) its a most generall
command of Reason, that they be signes of a mind yeelding honour;
under which are contained in the first place, Prayers;
Qui fingit sacros auro, vel marmore vultus,
Non facit ille Deos, qui rogat, ille facit.
For Prayers are the signes of hope, and hope is an
acknowledgement of the divine Power, or goodnesse.
In the second place, Thanksgiving; which is a signe of the
same affection, but that prayers goe before the benefit, and
thanks follow it.
In the third, Guifts, that is to say oblations and
sacrifices, for these are thanksgivings.
In the fourth, not to sweare by any other. For a mans Oath is
an, Imprecation of his wrath against him if he deceive, who both
knowes whether he doe, or not, and can punish him if he doe,
though he be never so powerfull; which only belongs to God: for
if there were any man from whom his subjects malice could not lye
hid, and whom no humane power could resist, plighted faith would
suffice without swearing, which, broken, might be punisht by that
Man; and for this very reason there would be no need of an Oath.
In the fifth place, To speak warily of God; for that is a
sign of fear, and feare is an acknowledgement of Power. It
followes from this precept: That we may not take the name of God
in vain, or use it rashly; for either are inconsiderate. That wee
must not swear where there is no need; for that is in vain; but
need there is none, unlesse it be between Cities to avoyd or take
away contention by force, which necessarily must arise, where
there is no faith kept in promises, or in a City, for the better
certainty of Judicature. Also, That we must not dispute of the
Divine nature: For it is supposed that all things in the naturall
Kingdom of God are enquired into by reason only, that is to say,
out of the Principles of naturall Science; but we are so far off
by these to attain to the knowledge of the nature of God, that we
cannot so much as reach to the full understanding of all the
qualities of our own bodies, or of any other Creatures. Wherefore
there comes nothing from these disputes, but a rash imposition of
names to the divine Majesty, according to the small measure of
our conceptions. It followes also (which belongs to the Right of
Gods Kingdome) that their speech is inconsiderate, and rash, who
say, That this, or that, doth not stand with divine justice; for
even men count it an affront that their children should dispute
their Right, or measure their justice otherwise then by the rule
of their Commands.
In the sixth. Whatsoever is offered up in Prayers,
thanksgivings, and sacrifices, must in its kind be the best, and
most betokening honour; namely, Prayers must not be rash, or
light, or vulgar, but beautifull, and well composed.
For though it were absurd in the Heathen to worship God in an
image, yet was it not against reason to use Poetry, and Musick,
in their Churches.
Also Oblations must be clean, and Presents sumptuous, and
such as are significative either of submission, or gratitude, or
commemorative of benefits received; for all these proceed from a
desire of honouring.
In the seventh. That God must be worshipt not privately
onely, but openly, and publiquely in the sight of all men;
because that worship is so much more acceptable, by how much it
begets honour, and esteem in others (as hath been declared before
in the 13. art.). Unlesse others therefore see it, that which is
most pleasing in our worship, vanisheth.
In the last place. That we use our best endeavour to keep the
Lawes of Nature. For the undervaluing of our Masters command,
exceeds all other affronts whatsoever; as on the other side,
Obedience is more acceptable then all other sacrifices. And these
are principally the naturall Lawes concerning the worship of God,
those I mean which Reason dictates to every Man; but to whole
Cities, every one whereof is one Person, the same naturall Reason
farther commands an uniformity of publique worship. For the
actions done by particular Persons, according to their private
Reasons, are not the Cities actions, and therefore not the Cities
worship; but what is done by the City, is understood to be done
by the command of him, or them who have the Soveraignty,
wherefore also together with the consent of all the subjects,
that is to say, Uniformly.
XVI. The naturall Lawes set down in the foregoing Article
concerning the divine worship, only command the giving of
naturall signes of honour; but we must consider that there are
two kindes of signes, the one naturall, the other done upon
agreement, or by expresse, or tacite composition. Now because in
every language, the use of words, and names, come by appointment,
it may also by appointment be altered; for that which depends on,
and derives its force from the will of men, can by the will of
the same men agreeing be changed again, or abolisht. Such names
therefore as are attributed to God by the appointment of men, can
by the same appointment be taken away; now what can be done by
the appointment of men, that the City may doe; The City therefore
by Right (that is to say, they who have the power of the whole
City) shall judge what names or appellations are more, what lesse
honourable for God, that is to say, what doctrines are to be held
and profest concerning the nature of God, and his operations. Now
actions doe signify not by mens appointment, but naturally, even
as the effects are signes of their causes; whereof some are
alwayes signes of Scorn to them before whom they are committed,
as those, whereby the bodies uncleannesse is discovered, and
whatsoever men are ashamed to doe before those whom they respect;
Others are alwayes signes of honour, as to draw near, and
discourse decently and humbly, to give way, or to yeeld in any
matter of private benefit: In these actions the City can alter
nothing. But there are infinite others, which, as much as belongs
to honour, or reproach, are indifferent; now these, by the
institution of the City, may both be made signes of honour, and
being made so, doe in very deed become so. From whence we may
understand, that we must obey the City in whatsoever it shall
command to be used for a sign of honouring God, that is to say,
for Worship; provided it can be instituted for a sign of honour,
because that is a sign of honour, which by the Cities command is
us'd for such.
XVII. We have already declared which were the Laws of God, as
wel sacred as secular, in his government by the way of Nature
onely. Now because there is no man but may be deceived in
reasoning, and that it so falls out, that men are of different
opinions concerning the most actions, it may be demanded farther,
whom God would have to be the Interpreter of right Reason, that
is to say, of his Lawes. And as for the Secular Lawes, I mean
those which concern justice, and the carriage of men towards men;
by what hath been said before of the constitution of a City, we
have demonstratively shewed it agreeable to reason, that all
Judicature belongs to the City, and that Judicature is nothing
else but an Interpretation of the Laws, and by consequence, that
everywhere Cities, that is to say, those who have the Soveraign
power, are the Interpreters of the Lawes. As for the Sacred
Lawes, we must consider what hath been before demonstrated in the
fifth Chap. the 13. art. that every Subject hath transferr'd as
much right as he could on him, or them, who had the supreme
authority, but he could have transferred his right of judging the
manner how God is to be honoured, and therefore also he hath done
it; That he could, it appeares hence, that the manner of
honouring God before the constitution of a City was to be fetcht
from every mans private Reason; but every man can subject his
private Reason to the Reason of the whole. City Moreover, if each
Man should follow his own reason in the worshipping of God, in so
great a diversity of worshippers, one would be apt to judge
anothers worship uncomely, or impious; neither would the one seem
to the other to honour God: Even that therefore which were most
consonant to reason, would not be a worship, because that the
nature of worship consists in this, that it be the sign of inward
honour; but there is no sign but whereby somewhat becomes known
to others, and therefore is there no sign of honour but what
seems so to others. Again, that's a true sign which by the
consent of men becomes a sign; therefore also that is honourable,
which by the consent of men, that is to say, by the command of
the City, becomes a sign of honour. It is not therefore against
the will of God, declared by the way of reason onely, to give him
such signs of honour as the City shall command. Wherefore
Subjects can transferre their Right of judging the manner of Gods
worship on him or them who have the Soveraign power. Nay, they
must doe it, for else all manner of absurd opinions, concerning
the nature of God, and all ridiculous ceremonies which have been
used by any Nations, will bee seen at once in the same, City.
whence it will fall out, that every man will beleeve that all the
rest doe offer God an affront; so that it cannot be truly said of
any that he worships God; for no man worships God, that is to
say, honours him outwardly, but he who doth those things, whereby
hee appeares to others for to honour him. It may therefore bee
concluded, that the Interpretation of all Lawes, as well Sacred,
as Secular, (God ruling by the way of nature only) depends on the
authority of the City, that is to say, that man, or councell, to
whom the Soveraign power is committed; and that whatsoever God
commands, he commands by his voyce. And on the other side, that
whatsoever is commanded by them, both concerning the manner of
honouring God, and concerning secular affaires, is commanded by
God himselfe.
XVIII. Against this, some Man may demand, first, Whether it
doth not follow, that the City must be obeyed if it command us
directly to affront God, or forbid us to worship him? I say, it
does not follow, neither must we obey. For to affront, or not to
worship at all, cannot by any Man be understood for a manner of
worshipping; neither also had any one, before the constitution of
a City, of those who acknowledge God to rule, a Right to deny him
the honour which was then due unto him; nor could he therefore
transfer a Right on the City of commanding any such things. Next,
if it be demanded whether the City must be obeyed if it command
somewhat to be said, or done, which is not a disgrace to God
directly, but from whence by reasoning disgracefull consequences
may be derived: as for example, if it were commanded to worship
God in an image, before those who account that honourable? Truly
it is to be done. For Worship is instituted in signe of Honour;
but to Worship him thus, is a signe of honour, and increaseth
Gods Honour among those who do so account of it. Or if it be
commanded to call God by a name which we know not what it
signifies, or how it can agree with this word, God? That also
must be done; for what we do for Honours sake, (and we know no
better), if it be taken for a signe of Honour, it is a signe of
Honour; and therefore if we refuse to doe it, we refuse the
enlarging of Gods Honour. The same judgement must be had of all
the Attributes and Actions about the meerly rationall Worship of
God which may be controverted, and disputed; for though these
kind of commands may be sometimes contrary to right reason, and
therefore sins in them who command them, yet are they not against
right reason, nor sins in Subjects, whose right reason in points
of Controversie is that, which submits its selfe to the reason of
the City. Lastly, if that Man, or Councell, who hath the Supreme
Power, command himselfe to be Worshipt with the same Attributes,
and Actions, wherewith God is to be Worshipt, the question is,
whether we must obey? There are many things which may be commonly
attributed both to God, and Men; for even Men may be Praised, and
Magnified; and there are many actions whereby God, and Men, may
be Worshipt. But the significations of the Attributes, and
Actions, are onely to be regarded: Those Attributes therefore,
whereby we signify our selves to be of an opinion, that there is
any man endued with a Soveraignty independent from God, or that
he is immortall, or of infinite power, and the like, though
commanded by Princes, yet must they be abstained from. As also
from those Actions signifying the same, as Prayer to the absent;
to aske those things which God alone can give, as Rain, and Fair
weather; to offer him what God can onely accept, as Oblations,
Holocausts; or to give a Worship, then which a greater cannot be
given, as Sacrifice. For these things seeme to tend to this end,
that God may not be thought to rule, contrary to what was
supposed from the beginning. But genuflection, prostration, or
any other act of the body whatsoever, may be lawfully used even
in civill Worship. for they may signifie an acknowledgment of the
civill power onely. For Divine Worship is distinguisht from
civill, not by the motion, placing, habit, or gesture of the
Body, but by the declaration of our opinion of him whom we doe
Worship; as if we cast down our selves before any man, with
intention of declaring by that Signe that we esteeme him as God,
it is Divine Worship; if we doe the same thing as a Signe of our
acknowledgment of the civill Power, it is civill Worship. Neither
is the Divine Worship distinguished from Civill by any action
usually understood by the words latreia and douleia, whereof the
former marking out the Duty of Servants, the latter their
Destiny, they are words of the same action in degree.
Truly it is to be done We said in the 14. Article of this
Chapter, That they who attributed limits to God, transgrest the
naturall Law concerning Gods Worship. Now they who worship him in
an Image, assigne him limits; wherefore they doe that which they
ought not to doe, and this place seemes to contradict the former.
We must therefore know first, that they who are constrained by
Authority, doe not set God any bounds, but they who command them;
for they who worship unwillingly, doe worship in very deed, but
they either stand or fall there, where they are commanded to
stand or fall by a lawfull Soveraign. Secondly, I say it must be
done, not at all times, and every where, but on supposition that
there is no other rule of worshipping God beside the dictates of
humane reason; for then the will of the City stands for Reason.
But in the Kingdome of God by way of Covenant, whether old, or
new, where idolatry is expressely forbid, though the City
commands us to worship thus, yet must we not do it. Which, if he
shall consider, who conceived some repugnancy between this, and
the 14. Article, will surely cease to think so any longer.
XIX. From what hath been said may be gathered, that God
reigning by the way of naturall reason onely, Subjects doe sinne,
First, if they break the morall Laws, which are unfolded in the
second and third Chapters. Secondly, if they break the Lawes, or
commands of the City in those things which pertain to Justice.
Thirdly, if they worship not God, kata ta nomika. Fourthly, if
they confesse not before men, both in words, and deeds, that
there is one God most good, most great, most blessed, the Supreme
King of the World, and of all worldly Kings; that is to say, if
they doe not worship God. This fourth sinne in the naturall
Kingdome of God, by what hath been said in the foregoing Chapter,
in the second Article, is the sinne of Treason against the Divine
Majesty; for it is a denying of the Divine Power, or Atheisme.
For sinnes proceed here, just as if we should suppose some man to
be the Soveraign King, who being himselfe absent, should rule by
his Vice-Roy; against whom sure they would transgresse who should
not obey his Vice-Roy in all things, except he usurpt the
Kingdome to himself, or would give it to some other; but they who
should so absolutely obey him, as not to admit of this exception,
might be said to be guilty of Treason.
Chap. XVI
Of the Kingdome of God under the Old Covenant
I. Mankind, from conscience of its own weaknesse, and
admiration of naturall events, hath this, that most men beleeve
God to be the invisible Maker of all visible things, whom they
also fear, conceiving that they have not a sufficient protection
in themselves; but the imperfect use they had of their Reason,
the violence of their Passions did so clowd them, that they could
not rightly worship him. Now the fear of invisible things, when
it is sever'd from right reason is superstition. It was therefore
almost impossible for men without the speciall assistance of God
to avoyd both Rocks of Atheisme and Superstition: for this
proceeds from fear without right reason, that, from an opinion of
right reason, without feare.
Idolatry therefore did easily fasten upon the greatest part
of men, and almost all nations did worship God in Images, and
resemblances of finite things; and they worshipt spirits, or vain
visions, perhaps out of fear calling them Devills. But it pleased
the Divine Majesty (as we read it written in the sacred history)
out of all mankind to call forth Abraham, by whose means he might
bring men to the true worship of him, and to reveal himselfe
supernaturally to him, and to make that most famous Covenant with
him and his seed, which is called the old Covenant, or Testament.
He therefore is the head of true Religion; he was the first that
after the Deluge taught, that there was one God, the Creatour of
the Universe; And from him the Kingdome of God by way of
Covenants, takes its beginning. Joseph. Antiq. Jewes. lib. I.
cap. 7.
II. In the beginning of the world God reigned indeed, not
onely naturally, but also by way of Covenant, over Adam, and Eve;
so as it seems he would have no obedience yeelded to him, beside
that which naturall Reason should dictate, but by the way of
Covenant, that is to say, by the consent of men themselves. Now
because this Covenant was presently made void, nor ever after
renewed, the originall of Gods Kingdom (which we treat of in this
place) is not to be taken thence. Yet this is to be noted by the
way, that by that precept of not eating of the tree of the
knowledge of good and evill (whether the judicature of good and
evill, or the eating of the fruit of some tree were forbidden)
God did require a most simple obedience to his commands, without
dispute whether that were good, or evill, which was commanded;
for the fruit of the tree, if the Command be wanting, hath
nothing in its own nature, whereby the eating of it could be
morally evill, that is to say, a sinne.
III. Now the Covenant between God and Abraham, was made in
this manner. Gen. 17. v. 7, 8. I will establish my Covenant
between me and thee, and thy seed after thee in their
generations,for an everlasting Covenant, to be a God unto thee,
and to thy seed after thee. And I will give unto thee, and to thy
seed after thee, the Land wherein thou art a stranger, all the
Land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession, and I will be
their God. Now it was necessary to institute some sign whereby
Abraham and his seed should retain the memory of this Covenant;
wherefore Circumcision was added to the Covenant, but yet as a
sign onely. vers 10: This is my Covenant which yee shall keep
between me and thee, and thy seed after thee, every man-child
among you shall be circumcised, and ye shall circumcise the flesh
of your foreskin, and it shall be a token of the Covenant between
me and you. It is therefore Covenanted, that Abraham shall
acknowledge God to be his God, and the God of his seed; that is
to say, that he shall submit himselfe to be governed by him, and
that God shall give unto Abraham the inheritance of that Land
wherein he then dwelt, but as a Pilgrim, and that Abraham for a
memoriall sign of this Covenant, should take care to see
himselfe, and his male seed circumcised.
IV. But seeing that Abraham even before the Covenant
acknowledged God to be the Creatour and King of the world, (for
he never doubted either of the being, or the Providence of God)
how comes it not to be superfluous, that God would purchase to
himself with a price, and by contract, an obedience which was due
to him by nature; namely by promising Abraham the Land of Canaan,
upon condition that he would receive him for his God, when by the
Right of nature he was already so? By those words therefore, To
be a God unto thee and to thy seed after thee, wee understand not
that Abraham satisfied this Covenant by a bare acknowledgement of
the power, and Dominion which God had naturally over men, that is
to say, by acknowledging God indefinitely, which belongs to
naturall reason; but he must definitely acknowledge him, who said
unto him, Gen. 12. v. 1. Get thee out of thy Country, &c. Gen.
13. v. 14. Lift up thine eyes. &c. who appear'd unto him, Gen.
18. v. 1. in the shape of three celestiall men, and Gen. 15. v.
1. In a vision; and vers. 13. In a dream, which is matter of
faith. In what shape God appeared unto Abraham, by what kinde of
sound he spake to him, is not exprest, yet it is plain that
Abraham beleeved that voyce to be the voyce of God, and a true
Revelation; and would have all his to worship him, who had so
spoken unto him, for God the Creatour of the world; and that his
faith was grounded on this, not that he beleeved God to have a
being, or that he was true in his promises, that which all men
beleeve, but that he doubted not him to be God, whose voice, and
promises he had heard; and that the God of Abraham signified not
simply God, but that God which appeared unto him, even as the
worship which Abraham owed unto God in that notion, was not the
worship of reason, but of Religion, and Faith, and that, which
not reason, but God had supernaturally revealed.
V. But we read of no Lawes given by God to Abraham, or by
Abraham to his family, either then, or after, secular, or sacred
(excepting the Commandement of Circumcision, which is contained
in the Covenant it selfe); whence it is manifest, that there were
no other Lawes, or worship, which Abraham was obliged to, but the
Lawes of nature, rationall worship, and circumcision.
VI. Now Abraham was the Interpreter of all Lawes, as well
sacred as secular, among those that belonged to him, not meerly
naturally, as using the Lawes of nature onely, but even by the
form of the Covenant it selfe, in which obedience is promised by
Abraham not for himselfe onely, but for his seed also; which had
been in vain, except his children had been tyed to obey his
Commands: And how can that be understood, which God sayes Gen.
18. vers. 18. 19. (All the Nations of the earth shall be blessed
in him; for I know him, that he will command his children, and
his houshold after him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord
to doe justice, and judgement) unlesse his children and his
houshold were supposed to be obliged to yeeld obedience unto his
Commands.
VII. Hence it followes, that Abrahams subjects could not
sinne in obeying him, provided that Abraham commanded them not,
to deny Gods Existence, or Providence, or to doe somewhat
expresly contrary to the honour of God. In all other things, the
word of God was to be fetcht from his lips only, as being the
Interpreter of all the Lawes, and words of God. For Abraham alone
could teach them who was the God of Abraham, and in what manner
he was to be worshipped. And they who after Abrahams death were
subject to the Soveraignty of Isaac or Iacob, did by the same
reason obey them in all things without sin, as long as they
acknowledged, and profest the God of Abraham to be their God. For
they had submitted themselves to God simply, before they did it
to Abraham; and to Abraham before they did it to the God of
Abraham; againe, to the God of Abraham before they did it to
Isaac. In Abrahams subjects therefore, To deny God was the only
Treason against the Divine Majesty; but in their posterity it was
also Treason to deny t he God of Abraham, that is to say, to
worship God otherwise then was instituted by Abraham, to wit, in
Images made with hands, as other Nations did, which for that
reason were called Idolators. And hitherto subjects might easily
enough discern what was to be observed, what avoyded in the
Commands of their Princes. In Images made with hands In the 15.
Chap. 14. Article, There wee have shewed such a kinde of worship
to be irrationall; but if it be done by the command of a City to
whom the written word of God is not known, nor received, we have
then shewed this worship in the 15. Chap. art. 18. to be
rationall. But where God reigns by way of Covenant, in which it
is expresly warned not to worship thus, as in the Covenant made
with Abraham, there, whether it be with, or without the Command
of the City, it is ill done.
VIII. To goe on now, following the guidance of the holy
Scripture, The same Covenant was renewed, Gen. 26. vers. 3, 4.
with Isaac, and Gen. 28. vers. 14. with Iacob, where God stiles
himselfe not simply God, whom nature doth dictate him to be, but
distinctly the God of Abraham and Isaac; afterward being about to
renew the same Covenant, by Moyses, with the whole People of
Israel, Exod. 3. v. 6. I am saith he the God of thy Father, the
God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. Afterward
when that People, not only the freest, but also the greatest
enemy to humane subjection, by reason of the fresh memory of
their AEgyptian bondage, abode in the wildernesse near mount
Sinai, that antient Covenant was propounded to them all to be
renewed in this manner, Exod. 19. ver. 5. Therefore if yee will
obey my voice indeed, and keep my Covenant, (to wit, that
Covenant which was made with Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob) then
shall yee be a peculiar Treasure unto me, above all People; for
all the earth is mine, and yee shall be to me a Kingdome of
Priests, and an holy Nation. And all the People answered
together, and said, All that the Lord hath spoken, will we doe,
vers. 8.
IX. In this Covenant, among other things, we must consider
well the appellation of Kingdom not used before. For although God
both by nature & by Covenant made with Abraham, was their King,
yet owed they him an obedience and worship only naturall, as
being his subjects; & religious such as Abraham instituted, as
being the Subjects of Abraham, Isaac, & Iacob, their naturall
Princes; For they had received no word of God beside the naturall
word of right reason, neither had any Covenant past between God
and them, otherwise then as their wils were included in the will
of Abraham, as their Prince. But now by the Covenant made at
mount Sinai, the consent of each man being had, there becomes an
institutive Kingdome of God over them. That Kingdom of God so
renowned in Scriptures and writings of Divines, took its
beginning from this time, and hither tends that which God said to
Samuel, when the Israelites asked a King, 1. Sam. 8. 7. They have
not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not
reign over them; and that which Samuel told the Israelites, 1.
Sam. 12. 12. Yee said unto me, nay, but a King shall reign over
us, when the Lord your God was your King; and that which is said,
Jer. 31. vers. 31. I will make a new Covenant, &c. Although I was
an Husband unto them; And the doctrine also of Judas Galilaeus,
where mention is made in Ioseph. Antiq. of the Iewes, 18. Book,
2. Chap. in these words: But Judas Galilaeus was the first
authour of this fourth way of those who followed the study of
wisdome. These agree in all the rest with the Pharisees,
excepting that they burn with a most constant desire of liberty,
beleeving God alone to be held for their Lord and Prince, and
will sooner endure even the most exquisite kinds of torments,
together with their kinsfolks, and dearest friends, then call any
mortall man their Lord.
X. The Right of the Kingdome being thus constituted by way of
Covenant, let us see in the next place, what lawes God propounded
to them; now those are knowne to all, to wit, the Decalogue, and
those other, as well judiciall as ceremoniall lawes, which we
find from the 20. Chap. of Exodus to the end of Deuteronomie, and
the death of Moyses. Now of those lawes deliver'd in generall by
the hand of Moyses, some there are which oblige naturally, being
made by God, as the God of nature, and had their force even
before Abrahams time; others there are which oblige by vertue of
the Covenant made with Abraham, being made by God as the God of
Abraham, which had their force even before Moyses his time, by
reason of the former Covenant; but there are others which oblige
by vertue of that Covenant onely which was made last with the
people themselves, being made by God, as being the Peculiar King
of the Israelites. Of the first sort are all the Precepts of the
Decalogue which pertaine unto manners, such as, Honour thy
Parents, thou shalt not Kill, thou shalt not commit Adultery,
thou shalt not Steale, thou shalt not beare false witnesse, thou
shalt not Covet; For they are the Lawes of nature; Also the
precept of not taking Gods name in vaine, for it is a part of
naturall worship, as hath beene declar'd in the foregoing Chap.
Art. 15. In like manner the second Commandement of not
worshipping by way of any Image made by themselves; for this also
is a part of naturall Religion, as hath beene shewed in the same
Article. Of the second sort is the first Commandment of the
Decalogue, of not having any other Gods; for in that consists the
essence of the Covenant made with Abraham, by which God requires
nothing else, but that he should be his God, and the God of his
seede: Also the Precept of keeping holy the Sabbath; for the
Sanctification of the seventh day is instituted in memoriall of
the six dayes Creation, as appeares out of these words, Exod. 31.
ver. 16, 17. It is a perpetuall Covenant, (meaning the Sabbath)
and a signe betweene me, and the Children of Israel for ever, for
in sixe dayes the Lord made Heaven, and Earth, and on the seventh
day he rested, and was refreshed. Of the third kind are the
Politique, judiciall and Ceremoniall lawes, which onely belong'd
to the Jewes. The lawes of the first and second sort written in
Tables of stone, to wit the Decalogue, was kept in the Ark it
selfe. The rest written in the volume of the whole Law, were laid
up in the side of the Arke. Deut. 31. ver. 26. For these
retaining the faith of Abraham might be chang'd, those could not.
XI. All Gods Lawes are Gods Word; but all Gods Word is not
his Law. I am the Lord thy God which brought thee out of the Land
of AEgypt, is the word of God, it is no Law: Neither is all that
which for the better declaring of Gods Word is pronounc't, or
written together with it, instantly to be taken for Gods Word:
For, Thus saith the Lord, is not the voice of God, but of the
Preacher or Prophet. All that, and onely that, is the word of God
which a true Prophet hath declar'd God to have spoken. Now the
writings of the Prophets comprehending as well those things which
God, as which the Prophet himselfe speaks, are therefore called
the word of God, because they containe the word of God. Now
because all that, and that alone, is the Word of God which is
recommended to us for such, by a true Prophet, it cannot be
knowne what Gods Word is, before we know who is the true Prophet;
nor can we beleeve Gods Word, before we beleeve the Prophet.
Moyses was beleev'd by the People of Israel for two things, His
Miracles, and his Faith; for how great, and most evident Miracles
soever he had wrought, yet would they not have trusted him, at
least he was not to have beene trusted, if he had call'd them out
of AEgypt to any other worship then the worship of the God of
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob their Fathers. For it had beene
contrary to the Covenant made by themselves with God. In like
manner two things there are, to wit, supernaturall Prediction of
things to come, which is a mighty miracle; and Faith in the God
of Abraham their deliverer out of AEgypt, which God propos'd to
all the Jews to be kept for marks of a true Prophet. He that
wants either of these is no Prophet, nor is it to be receiv'd for
Gods word which he obtrudes for such. If Faith be wanting, he is
rejected in these words, Deut. 13. ver. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. If there
arise among you a Prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth
thee a signe, or a wonder, and the signe or the wonder come to
Passe, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us goe after other
Gods, & c. That Prophet, or that dreamer of dreames shall be put
to death. If Praediction of events be wanting, he is condemn'd by
these, Deut. 18. ver. 21, 22. And if thou say in thine heart, how
shall we know the word which the Lord hath not spoken? When a
Prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow
not, nor come to Passe, that is the thing which the Lord hath not
spoken, but the Prophet hath spoken it presumptuously. Now, that
that is the word of God which is publisht for such by a true
Prophet, and that he was held to be a true Prophet among the
Jewes, whose faith was true, and to whose praedictions the events
answer'd, is without controversie. But what it is to follow other
Gods, and whether the events which are affirm'd to answer their
praedictions, doe truly answer them, or not, may admit many
controversies, specially in praedictions which obscurely, &
aenigmatically foretell the Event, such as the praedictions of
almost all the Prophets are, as who saw not God apparently like
unto Moyses, but in darke speeches, and in figures. Numb. 12.
ver. 8. But of these we cannot judge otherwise then by the way of
naturall reason; because that Judgment depends on the Prophets
interpretation, and on its proportion with the Event.
XII. The Jewes did hold the booke of the whole Law which was
called Deuteronomie, for the written word of God, and that onely,
(forasmuch as can be collected out of sacred history) untill the
Captivity; for this booke was deliver'd by Moyses himselfe to the
Priests to be kept, and layd up in the side of the Ark of the
Covenant, and to be copyed out by the Kings; and the same a long
time after by the authority of King Josiah acknowledg'd againe
for the Word of God. Kings 23. ver. 2. But it is not manifest
when the rest of the books of the Old Testament were first
receiv'd into Canon. But what concernes the Prophets, Isaiah and
the rest, since they foretold no other things then what were to
come to passe, either in or after the Captivity, their writings
could not at that time be held for Prophetique, by reason of the
Law cited above. Deut. 18. ver. 21, 22. Whereby the Israelites
were commanded not to account any man for a true Prophet but him
whose Prophecies were answer'd by the events; And hence
peradventure it is that the Jews esteem'd the writings of those
whom they slew when they Prophesied, for Prophetique afterward,
that is to say, for the word of God.
XIII. It being known what Lawes there were under the old
Covenant, and that Word of God receiv'd from the beginning; we
must farthermore consider with whom the authority of judging,
whether the writings of the Prophets arising afterward, were to
be receiv'd for the Word of God, that is to say, whether the
Events did answer their praedictions or not, and with whom also
the authority of interpreting the Lawes already receiv'd, and the
written Word of God, did reside; which thing is to be trac't
through all the times, and severall changes of the Commonwealth
of Israel. But it is manifest that this power during the life of
Moyses, was intirely in himselfe; for if he had not been the
Interpreter of the Lawes and Word, that office must have belong'd
either to every private Person, or to a congregation, or
Synagogue of many, or to the High-Priest, or to other Prophets.
First, that that office belong'd not to private men, or any
Congregation made of them, appeares hence, that they were not
admitted, nay they were prohibited, with most heavy threats, to
heare God speake, otherwise then by the means of Moyses; for it
is written, Let not the Priests and the people break through to
come up unto the Lord, lest he break forth upon them. So Moyses
went downe unto the people, and spake unto them. Exod. 19. 24,
25. It is farther manifestly, and expresly declar'd, upon
occasion given by the Rebellion of Core, Dathan and Abiram, and
the two hundred and fifty Princes of the Assembly, that neither
private men, nor the Congregation should pretend that God had
spoken by them, and by Consequence that they had the right of
interpreting Gods Word; for they contending, that God spake no
lesse by them then by Moyses, argue thus, Yee take too much upon
you, seeing all the Congregation are holy, every one of them, and
the Lord is among them; wherefore then lift yee up your selves
above the Congregation of the Lord? Numb. 16. ver. 3. But how God
determin'd this controversie is easily understood by the 33. and
35. verses of the same Chapter, where Corah, Dathan, and Abiram
went downe alive into the Pit, and there came out fire from the
Lord, and consumed the two hundred and fifty men that offer'd
Incense: Secondly, that Aaron the high Priest had not this
authority, is manifest by the like controversie betweene him
(together with his Sister Miriam) and Moyses; For the question
was, whether God spake by Moyses only, or by them also, that is
to say, whether Moyses alone, or whether they also were
interpreters of the Word of God. For thus they said, Hath the
Lord indeed spoken onely by Moyses? Hath he not also spoken by
us? Numb. 12. ver. 2. But God reprov'd them, and made a
distinction betweene Moyses and other Prophets, saying, If there
be a Prophet among you, I the Lord will make my selfe knowne unto
him in a vision, and will speake unto him in a dreame: My Servant
Moyses is not so, &c. For with him will I speake mouth to mouth,
even apparently, and not in darke speeches, and the Similitude of
the Lord shall he behold; wherefore then were yee not afraid to
speake against my Servant Moyses? Ibid. ver. 6, 7, 8. Lastly,
that the interpretation of the Word of God as long as Moses
liv'd, belong'd not to any other Prophets whatsoever, is
collected out of that place which we now cited concerning his
eminency above all others, and out of naturall reason, for as
much as it belongs to the same Prophet who brings the Commands of
God to unfold them too; but there was then no other Word of God,
beside that which was declar'd by Moyses. And out of this also,
that there was no other Prophet extant at that time, who
Prophesied to the people, excepting the 70. Elders who Prophesied
by the Spirit of Moyses; and even that Joshuah, who was then
Moyses his Servant, his successour afterward, beleev'd to be
injuriously done, till he knew it was by Moyses his Consent;
which thing is manifest by Text of Scripture, And the Lord came
downe in a clowd, & c. and tooke of the spirit that was upon
Moyses, and gave it unto the 70. Elders. Numb. 11. ver. 25. Now
after it was told that they Prophesied, Joshuah said unto Moyses,
Forbid them my Lord. But Moyses answered, Why enviest thou for my
sake? Seeing therefore Moyses alone was the Messenger of Gods
Word, and that the authority of interpreting it pertain'd neither
to private men, nor to the Synagogue, nor to the High Priest, nor
to other Prophets; it remaines, that Moyses alone was the
Interpreter of Gods Word, who also had the supreme power in
civill matters; And that the conventions of Corah with the rest
of his complices against Moses and Aaron; and of Aaron with his
Sister against Moyses, were rais'd, not for the salvation of
their soules, but by reason of their ambition, and desire of
Dominion over the People.
XIV. In Joshuahs time the interpretation of the Lawes, and of
the Word of God, belong'd to Eleazar the High Priest, who was
also under God, their absolute King. Which is collected first of
all out of the Covenant it selfe, in which the Common-wealth of
Israel is called a Priestly Kingdome, or as it is recited in the
1 Pet. 2. 9. A Royall Priesthood; which could in no wise be sayd,
unlesse by the institution and Covenant of the People, the regall
power were understood to belong to the High Priest. Neither doth
this repugne what hath beene said before, where Moyses, and not
Aaron, had the Kingdome under God; since it is necessary that
when one man institutes the forme of a future Common-wealth, that
one should governe the Kingdome which he institutes, during his
life, (whether it be Monarchie, Aristocraty, or Democraty) and
have all that power for the present, which he is bestowing on
others for the future. Now, that Eleazar the Priest, had not
onely the Priesthood, but also the Soveraignty, is expressely set
downe in Joshuahs call to the administration; for thus it is
written. Take thee Joshuah the Son of Nun, a man in whom is the
Spirit, and lay thine hand upon him, and set him before Eleazer
the Priest, and before all the Congregation, and give him a
charge in their sight, and thou shalt put some of thine honour
uPon him, that all the Congregation of the Children of Israel may
be obedient, and he shall stand before Eleazar the Priest, who
shall aske Counsell for him after the judgment of Urim, before
the Lord: at his word shall they goe out, and at his word shall
they come in, and all the Children of Israel with him, even all
the Congregation. Num. 27. ver. 18, 19, 20, 21. where to aske
Counsell of God for whatsoever is to be done, (that is) to
interpret Gods word, and in the name of God to Command in all
matters, belongs to Eleazar; and to goe out, and, to come in at
his word, that is to say, to obey, belongs both to Joshuah, and
to all the People. Its to be observ'd also, that that speech,
Part of thy glory; clearely denotes that Joshuah had not a power
equall with that which Moyses had. In the meane time it is
manifest, that even in Ioshuahs time, the Supreme power and
authority of interpreting the word of God, were both in one
Person.
XV. After Ioshuahs death follow the times of the Iudges
untill King Saul, in which it is manifest that the right of the
Kingdome instituted by God, remained with the High Priest. For
the Kingdome was by Covenant Priestly, that is to say, Gods
government by Priests; and such ought it to have been untill that
form with Gods consent were changed by the people themselves:
which was not done, before that requiring a King God consented
unto them, and said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voyce of the
people in all that they say unto thee; for they have not rejected
thee, but they have rejected me that I should not reign over
them. 1. Sam. 8. 7. The supreme civill power was therefore
Rightly due by Gods own institution to the High-Priest; but
actually that power was in the Prophets, to whom (being raysed by
God in an extraordinary manner) the Israelites (a people greedy
of the Prophets) submitted themselves to be protected, and
judged, by reason of the great esteem they had of Prophecies. The
Reason of this thing, was, because that though penalties were
set, and Judges appointed in the institution of Gods priestly
Kingdome, yet, the Right of inflicting punishment, depended
wholly on private judgement; and it belonged to a dissolute
multitude, and each single Person, to punish or not to punish
according as their private zeale should stirre them up. And
therefore Moyses by his own command punisht no man with death;
but when any man was to be put to death, one or many stirred up
the multitude against him or them, by divine authority, and
saying, Thus saith the Lord. Now this was conformable to the
nature of Gods peculiar Kingdome. For there God reignes indeed
where his Lawes are obeyed, not for fear of men, but for fear of
himselfe. And truly, if men were such as they should be, this
were an excellent state of civill government; but as men are,
there is a coercive power (in which I comprehend both right and
might) necessary to rule them. And therefore also God from the
beginning prescribed Lawes by Moyses for the future Kings. Deut.
17. vers. 14. and Moyses foretold this in bis last words to the
people, saying, I know that after my death ye will utterly
corrupt your selves, and turn aside from the way that I have
commanded you, &c. Deut. 31. 29. When therefore according to this
prediction there arose another generation who knew not the Lord,
nor yet the works which he had done for Israel, the children of
Israel did evill in the sight of the Lord, and served Balaam,
Iud. 2. 10, 11. to wit, they cast off Gods government, that is to
say, that of the Priest, by whom God ruled, and afterward, when
they were overcome by their enemies, and opprest with bondage,
they looked for Gods will, not at the hands of the Priest any
more, but of the Prophets. These therefore actually judged
Israel, but their obedience was rightly due to the High Priest;
Although therefore the Priestly Kingdome after the death of
Moyses, & Ioshuah, was without power, yet was it not without
Right. Now that the interpretation of Gods word did belong to the
same High Priest, is manifest by this, That God, after the
Tabernacle, & the Ark of the Covenant was consecrated, spake no
more in mount Sinai, but in the Tabernacle of the Covenant, from
the propitiatory which was between the Cherubims, whether it was
not lawfull for any to aproach except the High Priest. If
therefore regard be had to the Right of the Kingdome, the supreme
civill Power, and the authority of interpreting Gods word, were
joyned in the High Priest; If we consider the fact, they were
united in the Prophets who judged Israel. For as Iudges, they bad
the civill authority, as Prophets, they interpreted Gods word,
and thus every way hitherto these two powers continued
inseparable.
XVI. Kings being once constituted, its no doubt but the
civill authority belonged to them, for the Kingdome of God by the
way of Priesthood, (God consenting to the request of the
Israelites) was ended; which Hierom also marks speaking of the
books of Samuel: Samuel (sayes he) Eli being dead, and Saul
slain, declares the old Law abolisht; Furthermore the Oaths of
the new Priesthood, and new Soveraignty in Zadok, and David, do
testifie, that the Right whereby the Kings did rule, was founded
in the very concession of the People. The Priest could rightfully
do only what God had commanded, but the King had by right
whatsoever power over every man that each man by right had over
himself; for the Israelites granted him a Right to judge of all
things, and to wage warre for all men; in which two are contained
all Right whatsoever can be conceived from man to man. Our King
(say they) shall judge us, and goe out before us, and fight our
battails, 1. Sam. 8. 20. Iudicature therefore belonged to the
Kings; but to judge is nothing else then by interpreting to apply
the facts to the Lawes; to them therefore belonged the
interpretation of Lawes too. And because there was no other
written word of God acknowledged beside the Law of Moyses, untill
the Captivity, the authority of interpreting Gods word, did also
belong to the Kings; Nay, forasmuch as the word of God must be
taken for a Law, if there had been another written word beside
the Mosaicall Law, seeing the interpretation of Lawes belonged to
the Kings, the interpretation of it must also have belonged to
them. When the book of Deuteronomie (in which the whole Mosaicall
Law was contained) being a long time lost, was found again, the
Priests indeed asked Counsell of God concerning that book; but
not by their own authority, but by the Commandement of Iosiah,
and not immediately neither, but by the meanes of Holda the
Prophetesse. Whence it appears that the authority of admitting
books for the word of God, belonged not to the Priest; neither
yet followes it that that authority belonged to the Prophetesse,
because others did judge of the Prophets whether they were to be
held for true, or not. For to what end did God give signes, and
tokens to all the People, whereby the true Prophets might be
discerned from the false, namely, the event of predictions, and
conformity with the Religion establisht by Moyses, if they might
not use those marks? The authority therefore of admitting books
for the word of God belonged to the King, & thus that book of the
Law was approved, and received again by the authority of King
Iosiah, as appears by the fourth book of the Kings, 22. 23. Chap.
where it is reported that he gathered together all the severall
degrees of his Kingdome, the Elders, Priests, Prophets, and all
the people, and he read in their eares all the words of the
Covenant, that is to say, he caused that Covenant to be
acknowledged for the Mosaicall Covenant, that is to say, for the
word of God, and to be again received, and confirmed by the
Israelites. The civill power therefore, and the power of
discerning Gods word from the word of men, and of interpreting
Gods word even in the dayes of the Kings was wholly belonging to
themselves. Prophets were sent not with authority, but in the
form, and by the Right of Proclaimers, and Preachers, of whom the
hearers did judge; and if perhaps these were punisht who did not
listen to them plainly, teaching easie things, it doth not thence
follow, that the Kings were obliged to follow all things which
they in Gods name did declare, were to be followed. For though
Iosiah the good King of Iudah were slain because he obeyed not
the word of the Lord from the mouth of Necho King of AEgypt, that
is to say, because he rejected good Counsell though it seemed to
come from an enemy, yet no man I hope will say that Iosiah was by
any bond either of divine, or humane Lawes obliged to beleeve
Pharoah Necho King of AEgypt, because he said that God had spoken
to him. But what some man may object against Kings, that for want
of learning, they are seldome able enough to interpret those
books of antiquity in the which Gods word is contained, and that
for this cause it is not reasonable that this office should
depend on their authority, he may object as much against the
Priests, and all mortall men, for they may erre; and although
Priests were better instructed in nature, and arts then other
men, yet Kings are able enough to appoint such interpreters under
them; and so, though Kings did not themselves interpret the word
of God, yet the office of interpreting them might depend on their
authority; and they who therefore refuse to yeeld up this
authority to Kings, because they cannot practise the office it
selfe, doe as much as if they should say that the authority of
teaching Geometry must not depend upon Kings, except they
themselves were Geometricians. We read that Kings have prayed for
the People, that they have blest the people, that they have
consecrated the Temple, that they have commanded the Priests,
that they have removed Priests from their office, that they have
constituted others. Sacrifices indeed they have not offered, for
that was hereditary to Aaron, and his sonnes; but it is manifest,
as in Moyses his life time, so throughout all ages from King Saul
to the captivity of Babylon, that the Priesthood was not a
Maistry, but a Ministry.
XVII. After their returne from Babylonian bondage, the
Covenant being renewed, and sign'd, the Priestly Kingdome was
restor'd to the same manner it was in from the death of Ioshuah
to the beginning of the Kings; excepting that it is not expresly
set downe that the return'd Jewes did give up the Right of
Soveraignty either to Esdras (by whose directions they ordred
their State) or to any other, beside God himselfe. That
reformation seemes rather to be nothing else then the bare
promises, and vowes of every man to observe those things which
were written in the booke of the Law. Notwithstanding, (perhaps
not by the Peoples intention) by virtue of the Covenant which
they then renewed, (for the Covenant was the same with that which
was made at Mount Sinai) that same state was a Priestly Kingdome,
that is to say, the supreme civill authority, and the sacred were
united in the Priests. Now, howsoever through the ambition of
those who strove for the Priesthood, and by the interposition of
forraigne Princes, it was so troubled till our Saviour Iesus
Christs time, that it cannot be understood out of the histories
of those times, where that authority resided; yet it's plaine,
that in those times, the power of interpreting Gods Word was not
severed from the supreme civill power.
XVIII. Out of all this, we may easily know how the Iewes in
all times from Abraham unto Christ were to behave themselves in
the Commands of their Princes. For as in Kingdomes meerly humane
men must obey a subordinate Magistrate in all things, excepting
when his Commands containe in them some Treason; so in the
Kingdome of God, the Iewes were bound to obey their Princes,
Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moyses, the Priest, the King, every one
during their time in all things, except when their commands did
containe some treason against the Divine Majesty. Now treason
against the Divine Majesty was, first, the deniall of his divine
providence, for this was to deny God to be a King by nature;
next, Idolatry, or the worship not of other (for there is but one
God) but of strange Gods, that is to say, a worship though of one
God, yet under other Titles, Attributes, and Rites, then what
were establisht by Abraham, and Moyses. For this was to deny the
God of Abraham to be their King by Covenant made with Abraham,
and themselves. In all other things they were to obey; and if a
King or Priest having the Soveraign authority, had commanded
somewhat else to be done which was against the Lawes, that had
been his sinne, and not his subjects, whose duty it is, not to
dispute, but to obey the Commands of his superiours.
Chap. XVII
Of the Kingdome of God by the new Covenant
I. There are many cleare prophesies extant in the old
Testament concerning our Saviour Jesus Christ, who was to restore
the Kingdome of God by a new Covenant, partly foretelling his
regall Dignity, partly his Humility and Passion. Among others
concerning his Dignity, these; God blessing Abraham, makes him a
promise of his sonne Isaac, and addes, And Kings of People shall
be of him, Gen. 17. vers. 16. Jacob blessing his sonne Judah, The
Scepter (quoth he) shall not depart from Judah, Gen. 49. vers.
10. God to Moyses, A Prophet (saith he) will I raise them up from
among their brethren like unto thee, and will put my words in his
mouth, and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him,
and it shall come to Passe, that whosoever will not hearken unto
my words, which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of
him, Deut. 18. vers. 18. Isaias, The Lord himselfe shall give
thee a signe, Behold a Virgin shall conceive, and bear a Sonne,
and shall call his name Emanuel, Isai 7. v. 14. The same Prophet,
Unto us a child is born, unto us a Sonne is given, and the
government shall be upon his shoulders; and his name shall be
called Wonderfull, Counsellour, the mighty God, the Everlasting
Father, the Prince of Peace, Isai 9. vers. 6. And again, There
shall come forth a Rod out of the stemme of Jesse, and a branch
shall grow out of his roots; the spirit of the Lord shall rest
upon him, &c. he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes,
neither reProve after the hearing of his eares, but with
righteousnesse shall he judge the Poor, &c. and he shall smite
the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his
lips shall he slay the wicked, Isay 11. vers. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
Furthermore in the 51, 52, 53, 54, 56, 60, 61, 62. Ch. of the
same Isay, there is almost nothing else contained but a
description of the coming, and the works of Christ. Jeremias,
Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new
Covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah,
Jerem. 31. 31. And Baruch, This is our God. &c. Afterward did he
shew himselfe upon earth, and conversed with men; Baruch 3. vers.
35, 37. Ezekiel, I will set up one Shepheard over them, and he
shall feed them, even my Servant David, And I will make with them
a Covenant of Peace, &c. Ezek. 34. vers. 23, 25. Daniel, I saw in
the night visions, and behold one like the Sonne of man came with
the clouds of heaven, and came to the antient of dayes, and they
brought him near before him, and there was given him Dominion,
and Glory, and a Kingdome, that all People, Nations, and
Languages should serve him, his Dominion is an everlasting
Dominion, &c. Dan. 7. vers. 13, 14. Hagga, Yet once it is a
little while, and I will shake the Heaven, and the Earth, and the
Sea, and the drye Land, and I will shake all Nations, and the
desire of all Nations shall come, Hagga 2. v. 8. Zachariah, Under
the type of Joshuah the High Priest: I will bring forth my
servant the Branch, &c. Zach. 3. v. 8. And again, Behold the man
whose name is the Branch, Zach. 6. v. 12. And again, Rejoyce
greatly O Daughter of Sion, Shout O Daughter of Jerusalem, behold
thy King cometh to thee, he is just, having salvation, Zach. 9.
v. 9. The Jewes moved by these, and other Prophesies, expected
Christ their King to be sent from God, who should redeem them,
and furthermore bear rule over all Nations. Yea this Prophesie
had spread over the whole Roman Empire (which Vespasian too,
though falsly, interpreted in favour of his own enterprises) That
out of Judea should come he that should have dominion.
II. Now the Prophesies of Christs Humility and Passion,
amongst others are these. Isa 53. v. 4 He hath born our griefes,
and carried our sorrowes; yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten
of God, & afflicted, and by and by, He was oPpressed, he was
afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth; He is brought as a Lamb
to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her Shearer is dumb, so
opened he not his mouth, &c. vers. 7. And again, He was cut out
of the Land of the living,for the transgression of my People was
he stricken, &c. vers. 8. Therefore will I divide him a portion
with the great, and he shall divide the spoyle with the strong,
because he hath poured out his soule unto death, and he was
numbred with the transgressours, and he bare the sinne of many,
and made intercession for the transgressours, vers. 12. And that
of Zachary, He is lowly, riding upon an Asse, and upon a Colt the
foale of an Asse. Zach. 9. vers. 9.
III. In the reign of Tiberius Cesar, JESUS our Saviour a
Galilaean began to preach, the sonne (as was supposed) of Joseph,
declaring to the people of the Jewes, that the Kingdome of God
expected by them, was now come; and that himselfe was a King,
that is to say, THE CHRIST: Explaining the Law; choosing twelve
Apostles, and seventy Disciples, after the number of the Princes
of the Tribes, and seventy Elders (according to the pattern of
Moyses) to the Ministry; teaching the way of salvation by
himselfe and them; purging the Temple; doing great signes, and
fulfilling all those things which the Prophets had foretold of
Christ to come. That this man, hated of the Pharisees, (whose
false doctrine and hypocriticall sanctity he had reproved) and by
their means, of the People accused of unlawfull seeking for the
Kingdome, and crucified, was the true CHRIST, and King promised
by God, and sent from his father to renew the new Covenant
between them and God, both the Evangelists doe shew (describing
his Genealogie, nativity, life, doctrine, death, and
resurrection) and by comparing the things which he did, with
those which were foretold of him, all Christians doe consent to.
IV. Now from this, That CHRIST was sent from God his Father
to make a Covenant between him and the people, it is manifest,
that though Christ were equall to his Father according to his
nature, yet was he inferior according to the Right of the
Kingdom; for this office to speak properly, was not that of a
King, but of a Vice-roy, such as Moyses his Government was. For
the Kingdom was not his, but his Fathers; which CHRIST himselfe
signified when he was baptized as a subject, and openly profest,
when he taught his Disciples to pray, Our Father, Thy Kingdome
come, &c. And when he said, I will not drink of the blood of the
grape, untill that day when I shall drink it new with you in the
Kingdome of my Father, Mat. 26. vers. 29. And Saint Paul. As in
Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive; but every man
in his own order; Christ the first fruits, afterward they that
are Christs, who beleeved in his coming; Then cometh the end when
he shall have delivered up the Kingdom to God even his Father,
&c. 1. Cor. 15. vers. 22, 23, 24. The same notwithstanding is
also called the Kingdome of Christ: for both the Mother of the
sonnes of Zebedie petitioned Christ, saying, Grant that these my
two sonnes may sit, the one on thy right hand, the other on thy
left, in thy Kingdome, Mat. 20. vers. 21. And the Theef on the
Cross, Lord remember me when thou comest into thy Kingdom, Luke
23. vers. 42. And Saint Paul, For this know yee, that no
whormonger, &c. shall enter into the Kingdome of God, and of
Christ, Ephes. 5. ver. 5. And elsewhere, I charge thee before
God, and the Lord Iesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and
dead at his appearing, and his Kingdome, & c. 2 Tim. 4. ver. 1.
And the Lord shall deliver me from every evill worke, and will
Preserve me unto his heavenly Kingdome, ver. 18. Nor is it to be
marvelled at, that the same Kingdome is attributed to them both,
since both the Father, and the Son, are the same God; and the new
Covenant concerning Gods Kingdome, is not propounded in the Name
of the FATHER, but in the name of the FATHER, of the SON, and of
the HOLY-GHOST, as of one God.
V. But the Kingdome of God, for restitution whereof CHRIST
was sent from God his Father, takes not its beginning before his
second comming, to wit, from the day of Judgement, when he shall
come in Majesty accompanied with his Angels: For it is promis'd
the Apostles, that in the Kingdome of God, they shall judge the
twelve tribes of Israel. Ye which have followed me in the
regeneration, when the Sonne of man shall sit in the Throne of
his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve Thrones judging the
twelve tribes of Israel, Mat. 19. ver. 28. which is not to be
done till the day of judgement; CHRIST therefore is not yet in
the throne of his Majesty, nor is that time when CHRIST was
conversant here in the world call'd a Kingdome, but a
regeneration, that is to say a renovation, or restitution of the
Kingdome of God, and a calling of them who were hereafter to be
receiv'd into his Kingdome; And where it is said, When the Son of
man shall come in his glory, and all the holy Angels with him,
then shall he sit uPon the throne of his glory, and before him
shall be gathered all Nations, and he shall seParate them one
from another, as a Shepheard divideth his Sheep from the Goates,
Mat. 25. ver. 31. we may manifestly gather, that there will be no
Locall separation of Gods Subjects from his Enemies, but that
they shall live mixt together untill CHRISTS second comming.
Which is also confirm'd by the comparison of the Kingdome of
heaven, with wheat mingled with Darnell; and with a net
containing all sorts of fish. But a multitude of men, Enemies and
Subjects, living promiscuously together, cannot properly be
term'd a Kingdome. Besides, the Apostles, when they askt our
Saviour, Whether he would at that time when he ascended into
heaven, restore the Kingdome unto Israel? did openly testifie,
that they then, when CHRIST ascended, thought the Kingdome of God
not to be yet come. Farthermore, the words of CHRIST, My Kingdome
is not of this world; And, I will not drinke, &c. till the
Kingdome of God come: And, God hath not sent his Son into the
World, to judge the World, but that the World through him might
be sav'd. And, If any man heare not my words, and keepe them, I
judge him not; for I came not to judge the World, but to save the
World. And, Man, who made me a judge or divider betweene you? And
the very Appellation of the Kingdome of Heaven testifies as much.
The same thing is gathered out of the words of the Prophet
Jeremiah, speaking of the Kingdome of God by the new Covenant,
They shall teach no more every man his Neighbour, saying, Know
the Lord, for they shall all know me from the least of them, to
the greatest of them, saith the Lord, Jer. 31. v. 34. which
cannot be understood of a Kingdome in this World. The Kingdome of
God therefore, for the restoring whereof CHRIST came into the
world, of which the Prophets did Prophesie, and of which praying
wee say, Thy Kingdome come, (if it must have Subjects locally
separated from Enemies, if judicature, if Majesty, according as
hath beene foretold,) shall begin from that time, wherein God
shall separate the Sheep from the Goats; wherein the Apostles
shall judge the twelve Tribes of Israel; wherein CHRIST shall
come in Majesty, and glory; wherein Lastly, all men shall so know
God, that they shall not need to be taught, that is to say, at
CHRIST his second comming, or the day of Judgement. But if the
Kingdome of God were now already restor'd, no reason could be
rendered why CHRIST having compleated the work for which he was
sent, should come againe, or why we should pray, Thy Kingdome
come.
VI. Now, although the Kingdome of God by CHRIST to be
establisht with a new Covenant, were Heavenly, we must not
therefore thinke, that they, who beleeving in CHRIST would make
that Covenant, were not so to be govern'd here on the Earth too,
as that they should persevere in their faith, and obedience
promis'd by that Covenant. For in vaine had the Kingdome of
heaven beene promis'd, if we were not to have been led into it.
But none can be led, but those who are directed in the way.
Moyses, when he had instituted the Priestly Kingdome, himselfe
though he were no Priest, yet rul'd, and conducted the People all
the time of their Peregrination untill their entrance into the
promis'd Land. In the same manner is it our Saviours office (whom
God in this thing would have like unto Moyses) as he was sent
from his Father, so to governe the future Subjects of his
heavenly Kingdome in this life, that they might attaine to, and
enter into that, although the Kingdome were not properly his, but
his Fathers. But the government whereby CHRIST rules the
faithfull ones in this life, is not properly a Kingdome, or
Dominion, but a Pastorall charge, or the Right of teaching, that
is to say, God the father gave him not a power to judge of Meum
and Tuum as he doth to the Kings of the Earth; nor a Coercive
power; nor legislative; but of shewing to the world, and teaching
them the way, and knowledge of Salvation, that is to say, of
Preaching, and declaring what they were to doe, who would enter
into the Kingdome of Heaven. That CHRIST had receiv'd no power
from his father to judge in questions of Meum and Tuum, that is
to say, in all questions of Right among those who beleev'd not;
those words above cited doe sufficiently declare: Man, who made
me a judge, or divider betweene you? And it is confirm'd by
reason; for seeing CHRIST was sent to make a Covenant between God
and men, and no man is oblig'd to performe obedience before the
Contract be made, if he should have judg'd of questions of Right,
no man had been tyed to obey his sentence. But that the
discerning of Right was not committed to CHRIST in this world,
neither among the faithfull, nor among infidels, is apparent in
this, that that Right without all controversie belongs to Princes
as long as it is not by, But it is not derogated God himselfe
derogated from their authority; before the day of Judgement, as
appeares by the words of Saint Paul, speaking of the day of
Judgement, Then commeth the end when He shall have delivered up
the Kingdome to God even the Father, when He shall have put downe
all rule, and all authority, and Power, 1 Cor. 15. ver. 24.
Secondly, the words of our Saviour reproving James, and Iohn,
when they had said, Wilt thou that we call for Fyer from Heaven,
that it may consume them (namely the Samaritans, who had denyed
to receive him going up to Jerusalem) and replying, The Son of
Man is not come to destroy soules, but to save them; And those
words, Behold I send you as Sheep among Wolves; Shake off the
dust of your Feet, and the like; And those words, God sent not
his Son into the world, to judge the world, but that the world
through him might be sav'd; and those, If any man heare my words,
and keep them not, I judge him not, for I came not to judge the
world, & c. doe all shew, that he had no power given him, to
condemne or punish any man. We reade indeed that the Father
judgeth no Man, but hath committed all judgement to the Son, but
since that both may, and must be understood of the day of future
judgement, it doth not at all repugne what hath beene sayed
before. Lastly, that he was not sent to make new Lawes, and that
therefore by his Office, and mission, he was no Legislatour
properly so called, nor Moyses neither, but a bringer and
Publisher of his Fathers Lawes, (for God only, and neither
Moyses, nor CHRIST, was a King by Covenant) is collected hence,
that he sayed, I came not to destroy (to wit the Lawes before
given from God by Moyses, which he presently interprets) but to
fulfill; And, He that shall break one of the least of these
Commandements, and shall teach men so, He shall be called least
in the Kingdome of Heaven. CHRIST therefore had not a Royall, or
Soveraigne power committed to him from his Father in this world,
but consiliary, and doctrinall onely; which himselfe signifies,
as well then when he call his Apostles, not Hunters, but Fishers
of men; as when he compares the Kingdome of God to a graine of
mustard seed, and to a little Leaven hid in meale.
VII. God promis'd unto Abraham first, a numerous seed, the
possession of the Land of Canaan, and a blessing upon all Nations
in his seed, on this Condition, that he, and his seed should
serve him; next unto the seed of Abraham according to the flesh,
a Priestly Kingdome, a Government most free, in which they were
to be Subject to no humane power, on this Condition, that they
should serve the God of Abraham on that fashion which Moyses
should teach. Lastly, both to them, and to all Nations, a
heavenly, and eternall Kingdome, on Condition that they should
serve the God of Abraham, on that manner which Christ should
teach. For by the new, that is to say, the Christian Covenant,
it's covenanted on mens part, to serve the God of Abraham, on
that manner which JESUS should teach: On Gods part, to pardon
their sinnes, and bring them into his caelestiall Kingdome. We
have already spoken of the quality of the heavenly Kingdome above
in the 5. Article; but it is usually call'd, sometimes the
Kingdome of Heaven, sometimes the Kingdome of Glory, sometimes
the life Eternall. What's required on mens part, namely to serve
God as CHRIST should teach, containes two things, Obedience to be
performed to God, (for this is to serve God) and Faith in JESUS,
to wit, That we beleeve JESUS TO BE THAT CHRIST who was promis'd
by God: for that only is the cause why his Doctrine is to be
followed, rather then any others. Now in holy Scriptures,
Repentance is often put in stead of Obedience, because Christ
teacheth every where, that with God the Will is taken for the
deed; but Repentance is an infallible sign of an obedient mind.
These things being understood, it will most evidently appear out
of many places of sacred Scripture, that those are the Conditions
of the Christian Covenant which we have nam'd, to wit, giving
remission of sins, and eternall life on Gods part; and Repenting,
and Beleeving in JESUS CHRIST, on Mens part. First, the words,
The Kingdom of God is at hand. Repent yee and beleeve the
Gospell, Mark 1. 15. contain the whole Covenant: In like manner
those, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer,
and to rise from the dead the third day; and that repentance, and
remission of sinnes should be preached in his Name among all
Nations, begining at Jerusalem, Luke 24. vers. 46, 47. And those,
Repent and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when
the times of refreshing shall come, &c. Acts 3. vers. 19. And
sometimes one part is expresly propounded, and the other
understood, as here, He that beleeveth in the Sonne, hath
everlasting life; He that beleeveth not the Sonne, shall not see
life, but the wrath of God abideth on him, Iohn 3. vers. 36,
Where Faith is exprest, Repentance not mentioned. And in CHRISTS
preaching, Repent, for the Kingdome of heaven is at hand, Mat. 4.
17. Where Repentance is exprest, Faith is understood. But the
parts of this new Contract are most manifestly, and formally set
down there, where a certain Ruler bargaining as it were for the
Kingdom of God, asketh our Saviour, Good Waster, what shall I doe
to inherit eternall life, Luke 18. v. 18. But CHRIST first
propounds one part of the price, namely observation of the
Commandements, or obedience, which when he answered that he had
kept, he adjoynes the other, saying, Yet lackest thou one thing;
Sell all that thou hast, and distribute to the Poor, and thou
shalt have Treasure in Heaven, and come, follow me, v. 22. This
was matter of Faith. He therefore not giving sufficient credit to
CHRIST, and his heavenly Treasures, went away sorrowfull. The
same Covenant is contained in these words: Hee that beleeveth,
and is baptized, shall be saved, he that beleeveth not, shall be
damned, Mark 16. vers. 15, 16. Where Faith is exprest, Repentance
is supposed in those that are baptized; and in these words,
Except a man be born again of water, and the Holy Ghost, he
cannot enter into the Kingdome of Heaven, Iohn 3. vers. 5. Where
to be born of water, is the same with regeneration, that is to
say, Conversion to CHRIST. Now that Baptisme is required in the
two places cited just before, and in divers others, we must
understand, that what Circumcision was to the old Covenant, that
Baptisme is to the new: Seeing therefore, that was not of the
Essence, but served for a memoriall of the old Covenant, as a
Ceremony or signe (and was omitted in the wildernesse) in like
manner this also is used, not as pertaining to the Essence, but
in memory, and for a signe of the New Covenant which wee make
with God; and provided the will be not wanting, the Act through
necessity may be omitted; but Repentance and Faith, which are of
the Essence of the Covenant, are alwayes required.
VIII. In the Kingdome of God after this life there will be
no, Lawes. partly because there is no roome for Lawes, where
there is none for sinne; partly because Laws were given us from
God, not to direct us in Heaven, but unto Heaven. Let us now
therefore enquire what Laws CHRIST (establisht not himselfe, for
he would not take upon him any Legislative authority, as hath
been declared above in the sixth Article, but) propounded to us
for his Fathers. Wee have a place in Scripture, where he
contracts all the Lawes of God publisht till that time, into two
Preceps, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart,
with all thy soul, and with all thy minde: this is the greatest,
and first Commandement. And the second is like unto it: Thou
shalt love thy Neighbour as thy selfe. On these two Commandements
hangs all the Law, and the Prophets, Mat. 22. vers. 37, 38, 39,
40. The first of these was given before by Moyses in the same
words, Deut. 6. vers. 5. And the second even before Moyses; for
it is the naturall Law, having its begining with rationall nature
it selfe. And both together is the summe of all Lawes: for all
the Lawes of divine naturall worship, are contained in these
words, Thou shalt love God; and all the Lawes of divine worship
due by the old Covenant, in these words, Thou shalt love thy God,
that is to say, God as being the peculiar King of Abraham, and
his seed; and all the Lawes naturall, and civill, in these words,
Thou shalt love thy Neighbour as thy selfe. For he that loves God
and his neighbour, hath a minde to obey all Lawes, both divine,
and humane. But God requires no more then a minde to obey. Wee
have another place, where CHRIST interprets the Lawes, namely,
the fifth, sixth, and seventh entire Chapters of Saint Matthewes
Gospell. But all those Lawes are set down, either in the
Decalogue, or in the morall Law, or are contained in the faith of
Abraham; as that Law of not putting away a wife is contained in
the faith of Abraham: for that same, Two shall be one flesh, was
not delivered either by CHRIST first, or by Moyses, but by
Abraham, who first publisht the Creation of the world. The Lawes
therefore which CHRIST contracts in one place, and explaines in
another, are no other then those to which all mortall men are
obliged, who acknowledge the God of Abraham. Beside these, we
read not of any Law given by CHRIST, beside the institution of
the Sacraments of Baptisme, and the Eucharist.
IX. What may be said then of these kinde of Precepts: Repent,
Be Baptized, Keep the Commandements, Beleeve the Gospell, Come
unto me, Sell all that thou hast, give to the Poor, follow me,
and the like? We must say that they are not Lawes, but a calling
of us to the faith, such as is that of Isa. Come, buy wine, and
milk without monie, and without Price, Isai 55. vers. 1. Neither
if they come not, doe they therefore sinne against any Law, but
against prudence onely; neither shall their infidelity be
punisht, but their former sinnes. Wherefore Saint John saith of
the unbeleever, The wrath of God abideth on him; he saith not,
The wrath of God shall come upon him; And, He that beleeveth not,
is already judged; he saith not, shall be judged, but is already
judged. Nay it cannot be well conceived, that remission of sinnes
should be a benefit arising from faith, unlesse we understand
also on the other side, that the punishment of sinnes is an hurt
proceeding from infidelity.
X. From hence, that our Saviour hath prescribed no
distributive Lawes, to the Subjects of Princes, and Citizens of
Cities, that is to say, hath given no rules whereby a Subject may
know, and discerne what is his owne, what another mans, not by
what forms, words, or circumstances, a thing must be given,
delivered, invaded, possest, that it may be known by Right to
belong to the Receiver, Invader, or Possessour, we must
necessarily understand that each single subject (not only with
unbeleevers, among whom CHRIST himselfe denyed himselfe to be a
judge and distributer, but even with Christians) must take those
rules from his City, that is to say, from that Man, or Councell,
which hath the supreme power It. followes therefore, that by
those Lawes, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not commit adultery,
Thou shalt not steale, Honour thy Father and Mother, nothing else
was commanded, but that Subjects, and Citizens, should absolutely
obey their Princes in all questions concerning Meum & Tuum, their
own and others Right. For by that Precept, Thou shalt not kill,
all slaughter is not prohibited; for he that said, Thou shalt not
kill, said also, Whosoever doth work uPon the Sabbath, shall be
put to death, Exod 35. vers. 2. No, nor yet all slaughter the
cause not being heard; for he said, Slay every man his Brother,
and every man his Companion, and every man his Neighbour, Exo.
32. v. 27. And there fell of the People about three thousand men,
v. 28. Nor yet all slaughter of an innocent Person; for Iephte
vowed, Whosoever cometh forth, &c. I will offer him up for a
burnt offering unto the Lord, Jud. 11. vers. 31. and his vow was
accepted of God. What then is forbidden? Onely this: that no man
kill another, who hath not a Right to kill him, that is to say,
that no man kill, unlesse it belong to him to doe so. The Law of
CHRIST therefore concerning killing, and consequently all manner
of hurt done to any man, and what penalties are to be set,
commands us to obey the City only. In like manner, by that
Precept, Thou shalt not commit adultery, all manner of Copulation
is not forbidden, but only that of lying with another mans wife;
but the judgment which is another mans wife, belongs to the City,
and is to be determined by the rules which the City prescribes:
This precept therefore commands both male and female to keep that
faith intire which they have mutually given, according to the
statutes of the City. So also by the precept, Thou shalt not
steal, all manner of invasion, or secret surreption is not
forbidden, but of another mans. only. The subject therefore is
commanded this only, that he invade not, nor take away ought
which the City prohibits to be invaded or taken away; and
universally not to call any thing murder, adultery, or t heft,
but what is done contrary to the civill Lawes. Lastly, seeing
CHRIST hath commanded us to honour our Parents, and hath not
prescribed, with what Rites, what appellations, and what manner
of obedience they are to be honoured, it is to be supposed that
they are to be honoured with the will indeed, and inwardly, as
Kings and Lords over their Children, but outwardly, not beyond
the Cities permission, which shall assign to every man (as all
things else, so also) his honour. But since the nature of justice
consists in this, that every Man have his own given him, its
manifest, that it also belongs to a Christian City to determin
what is justice, what injustice, or a sinne against justice; Now
what belongs to a City, that must be judg'd to belong to him or
them who have the Soveraigne power of the City.
XI. Moreover, because our Saviour hath not shewed Subjects
any other Lawes for the government of a City beside those of
nature, that is to say, beside the Command of obedience, no
Subject can privately determine who is a publique friend, who an
enemy, when Warre, when Peace, when Truce is to be made; nor yet
what Subjects, what authority, and of what men, are commodious,
or prejudiciall to the safety of the Common-weale. These, and all
like matters therefore are to be learned, if need be, from the
City, that is to say, from the Soveraign powers.
XII. Furthermore, all these things, to build Castles, Houses,
Temples; to move, carry, take away mighty weights; to send
securely over Seas; to contrive engines, serving for all manner
of uses; to be well acquainted with the face of the whole world,
the Courses of the Starres, the seasons of the yeare, the
accounts of the times, and the nature of all things; to
understand perfectly all naturall and civill Rights; and all
manner of Sciences, which (comprehended under the Title of
Philosophy) are necessary partly to live, partly to live well; I
say, the understanding of these (because CHRIST hath not
delivered it) is to be learnt from reasoning, that is to say by
making necessary consequences, having first taken the beginning
from experience. But mens reasonings are sometimes right,
sometimes wrong, and consequently that which is concluded, and
held for a truth, is sometimes truth, sometimes errour. Now,
errours even about these Philosophicall points doe sometimes
publique hurt, and give occasions of great seditions, and
injuries: It is needfull therefore, as oft as any controversie
ariseth in these matters contrary to publique good, and common
Peace, that there be some body to judge of the reasoning, that is
to say, whether that which is inferred, be rightly inferred or
not, that so the controversie may be ended. But there are no
rules given by CHRIST to this purpose; neither came he into the
world to teach Logick. It remaines therefore that the Iudges of
such controversies be the same with those whom God by nature had
instituted before, namely those who in each City are constituted
by the Soveraign. Moreover, if a controversie be raised of the
accurate and proper signification (i.e.) the definition of those
names or appellations which are commonly us'd, in so much as it
is needfull for the peace of the City, or the distribution of
right, to be determin'd, the determination will belong to the
City; for men by reasoning doe search out such kind of
definitions in their observation of diverse conceptions, for the
signification whereof, those appellations were us'd at divers
times, and for divers causes. But the decision of the question
whether a man doe reason rightly, belongs to the City. For
Example. If a woman bring forth a Child of an unwonted shape, and
the Law forbid to kill a man, the question is, whether the Childe
be a man. It is demanded therefore what a man is. No man doubts,
but the City shall judge it, and that without taking an account
of Aristotles definition, that man is a rationall Creature. And
these things (namely Right, Politie, and naturall Sciences) are
Subjects concerning which CHRIST denies that it belongs to his
Office to give any Praecepts, or teach any thing, beside this
onely, that in all Controversies about them, every single Subject
should obey the Lawes, and determinations of his City. Yet must
we remember this, that the same Christ as God could not onely
have taught, but also commanded what he would.
XIII. The summe of our Saviours Office was to teach the way,
and all the meanes of Salvation, and aeternall life; but Iustice
and civill obedience, and observation of all the naturall Lawes
is one of the meanes to Salvation. Now these may be taught two
wayes; one, as Theorems by the way of naturall reason, by drawing
Right and the natural Lawes from humane Principles, and
contracts; and this Doctrine thus deliver'd is subject to the
censure of civill powers: The other, as Lawes, by divine
authority, in shewing the will of God to be such; and thus to
teach, belongs onely to him to whom the Will of God is
supernaturally knowne, that is to say, to Christ. Secondly, it
belong'd to the Office of Christ to forgive sinnes to the
Penitent, for that was necessary for the Salvation of men who had
already sinn'd; neither could it be done by any other; for
remission of sinnes followes not Repentance naturally, (as a
Debt) but it depends (as a free gift) on the will of God
supernaturally to be reveal'd. Thirdly, it belongs to the Office
of Christ to teach all those Commandements of God, whether
concerning his worship, or those points of faith which cannot be
understood by naturall reason, but onely by revelation; of which
nature are those that he was the Christ; that his Kingdome was
not terrestriall, but celestiall; that there are rewards, and
punishments after this life; that the soule is immortall; that
there should be such, and so many Sacraments, and the like.
XIV. From what hath beene sayed in the foregoing Chapter, it
is not hard to distinguish betweene things Spirituall, and
Temporall. For since by Spirituall, those things are understood
which have their foundation on the authority, and Office of
CHRIST, and unlesse CHRIST had taught them, could not have beene
known; and all other things are temporall; it followes, that the
definition, and determination of whats just, and unjust, the
cognizance of all controversies about the meanes of Peace, and
publique defence, and the Examination of doctrines, and books in
all manner of rationall science, depends upon the temporall
Right. But those which are mysteries of faith, depending on
CHRIST his word, and authority onely, their judgements belong to
spirituall Right. But it is reasons inquisition, and pertaines to
temporall Right to define what is spirituall, and what temporall,
because our Saviour hath not made that distinction; For although
Saint Paul in many places distinguish betweene spirituall things,
and carnall things, and calls those things spirituall, which are
of the spirit, to wit, the word of wisdome, the word of
knowledge, faith, the gift of healing, the working of miracles,
Prophesie, divers kindes of tongues, interpretation of tongues,
Rom. 8. 5. 1 Cor. 12. 8, 9. All supernaturally inspired by the
Holy Ghost, and such as the carnall man understands not, but he
only who hath known the mind of CHRIST, 2. Cor. 2. 14, 15, 16.
And those things carnall which belong to worldly wealth, Rom. 15.
27. And the men carnall men, 1 Cor. 3. vers. 1, 2, 3. yet hath he
not defined, nor given us any rules whereby we may know what
proceeds from naturall reason, what from supernaturall
inspiration.
XV. Seeing therefore it is plain that our Saviour hath
committed to, or rather not taken away from Princes, and those
who in each City have obtained the Soveraignty, the supreme
authority of judging & determineing al manner of controversies
about temporall matters, we must see henceforth to whom he hath
left the same authority in matters spirituall. Which because it
cannot bee known, except it be out of the word of God, and the
Tradition of the Church, we must enquire in the next place what
the word of God is, what to interpret it, what a Church is, and
what the will and command of the Church. To omit that the word of
God is in Scripture taken sometimes for the Sonne of God, it is
used, three manner of wayes; First, most properly for that which
God hath spoken; Thus whatsoever God spake unto Abraham, the
Patriarchs, Moses, and the Prophets, our Saviour to his
Disciples, or any others, is the word of God. Secondly,
whatsoever hath been uttered by men on the motion, or by Command
of the Holy Ghost; in which sense we acknowledge the Scriptures
to be the word of God. Thirdly, in the New Testament indeed the
word of God most frequently signifies the Doctrine of the
Gospell, or the word concerning God, or the word of the Kingdome
of God by CHRIST: as where it is said that CHRIST preach't the
Gospell of the Kingdome, Mat. 4. vers. 23. Where the Apostles are
said to preach the word of God, Acts 13. vers. 46. Where the word
of God is called the word of life, Acts 5. vers. 20. The word of
the Gospell, Acts 15. vers. 7. The word of faith, Rom. 10. vers.
8. The word of truth, that is to say, (adding an interpretation)
The Gospel of salvation, Eph. 1. 13. And where it is called the
word of the Apostles; For Saint Paul sayes, If any man obey not
our word, &c. 2. Thess. 3. vers. 14. which places cannot be
otherwise meant then of the doctrine Evangelicall. In like manner
where the word of God is said to be sowen, to encrease, and to be
multiplied, Acts 12. vers. 24. and Chap. 13. vers. 49. it is very
hard to conceive this to be spoken of the voyce of God, or of his
Apostles; but of their doctrine, easie. And in this third
acception is all that doctrine of the Christian faith which at
this day is preacht in Pulpits, and contained in the books of
divines, the word of God.
XVI. Now the sacred Scripture is intirely the word of God in
this second acception, as being that which we acknowledge to be
inspired from God. And innumerable places of it, in the first.
And seeing the greatest part of it is conversant either in the
prediction of the Kingdome of Heaven, or in prefigurations before
the incarnation of CHRIST, or in Evangelization, and explication
after, The sacred Scripture is also the word of God, and
therefore the Canon and Rule of all Evangelicall Doctrine, in
this third signification, where the word of God is taken for the
word concerning God, that is to say, for the Gospel. But because
in the same Scriptures we read many things Politicall,
Historicall, Morall, Physicall, and others which nothing at all
concern the Mysteries of our faith, those places although they
contain true doctrine, and are the Canon of such kind of
doctrines, yet can they not be the Canon of the Mysteries of
Christian Religion.
XVII. And truly it is not the dead voyce, or letter of the
word of God, which is the Canon of Christian doctrine, but a true
and genuine determination; For the minde is not governed by
Scriptures, unlesse they be understood. There is need therefore
of an Interpreter to make the Scriptures Canon. And hence
followes one of these two things, that either the word of the
Interpreter is the word of God, or that the Canon of Christian
doctrin is not the word of God. The last of these must
necessarily be false; for the rule of that doctrine which cannot
be knowne by any humane reason, but by divine revelation only,
cannot be lesse then divine; for whom we acknowledge not to be
able to discern whether some doctrin be true or not, its
impossible to account his opinion for a rule in the same
doctrine. The first therefore is true, That the word of an
Interpreter of Scriptures, is the word of God.
XVIII. Now that Interpreter whose determination hath the
honour to be held for the word of God, is not every one that
translates the Scriptures out of the Hebrew, and Greek tongue, to
his Latine Auditors in Latine, to his French, in French, and to
other Nations in their mother tongue; for this is not to
interpret. For such is the nature of speech in generall, that
although it deserve the chiefe place among those signes whereby
we declare our conceptions to others, yet cannot it perform that
office alone without the help of many circumstances; For the
living voice hath its interpreters present, to wit, time, place,
countenance, gesture, the Counsell of the Speaker, and himselfe
unfolding his own meaning in other words as oft as need is. To
recall these aids of interpretation, so much desired in the
writings of old time, is neither the part of an ordinary wit, nor
yet of the quaintest, without great learning, and very much skill
in antiquity. It sufficeth not therefore for interpretation of
Scriptures, that a man understand the language wherein they
speak. Neither is every one an authentique Interpreter of
Scriptures, who writes Comments upon them: For men may erre, they
may also either bend them to serve their own ambition, or even
resisting, draw them into bondage by their forestallings; whence
it will follow that an erroneous sentence must be held for the
word of God. But although this could not happen, yet as soon as
these Commentators are departed, their Commentaries will need
explications, and in processe of time, those explications,
expositions; those expositions new Commentaries without any end:
so as there cannot in any written Interpretation whatsoever be a
Canon, or Rule of Christian doctrine, whereby the Controversies
of Religion may be determined. It remains, that there must bee
some Canonicall Interpreter whose legitimate Office it is to end
Controversies begun, by explaining the word of God in the
judgements themselves; and whose authority therefore must be no
lesse obeyed, then theirs who first recommended the Scripture it
selfe to us for a Canon of faith; and that one, and the same
Person be an Interpreter of Scripture, and a supreme Judge of all
manner of doctrines.
XIX. What concerns the word Ecclesia, or Church: originally
it signifies the same thing that Concio, or a congregation does
in Latin; even as Ecclesiastes, or Church man, the same that
concionator, or Preacher, that is to say, He who speaks to the
Congregation. In which sense wee read in the Acts of the
Apostles, of a Church confused, and of a Lawfull Church, Acts 19.
vers. 32, 39. that, taken for a Concourse of people meeting in
way of tumult; this, for a convocated Assembly. But in holy writ
by a Church of Christians, is sometimes understood the Assembly,
and sometimes the Christians themselves, although not actually
assembled, if they be permitted to enter into the Congregation,
and to communicate with them. For example. Tell it to the Church,
Mat. 18. vers. 17. is meant of a Church assembled; for otherwise
it is impossible to tell any thing to the Church: But, Hee laid
waste the Church, Acts 8. vers. 3. is understood of a Church not
assembled. Sometimes a Church is taken for those who are
baptized, or for the professors of the Christian faith, whether
they be Christians inwardly, or feignedly, as when we reade of
somewhat said or written to the Church, or said or decreed, or
done by the Church; sometimes for the Elect onely, as when it is
called holy, and without blemish, Ephes. 5. vers. 27. But the
Elect, as they are militant, are not properly called a Church;
for they know not how to assemble, but they are a future Church,
namely in that day when sever'd from the reprobate, they shall
bee triumphant. Againe a Church may bee sometimes taken (for all
Christians collectively,) as when Christ is called the head of
his Church, and the head of his body the Church, Eph. 5. vers.
23. Colos. 1. vers. 18. sometimes for its parts, as the Church of
Ephesus, The Church which is in his house, the seven Churches, &
c. Lastly, a Church as it is taken for a Company actually
assembled, according to the divers ends of their meeting,
signifies sometimes those who are met together to deliberate, and
judge, in which sense it is also called a Councell, & a Synod;
sometimes those who meet together in the house of prayer to
worship God, in which signification it is taken in the 1 Cor. 14.
vers. 4, 5. 23. 28. &c.
XX. Now a Church which hath personall Rights, and proper
actions attributed to it, and of which that same must necessarily
be understood, Tell it to the church, and, he that obeys not the
church, and all such like formes of speech, is to be defin'd so,
as by that word may be understood, A Multitude of men who have
made a new Covenant with God in Christ, (that is to say, a
multitude of them who have taken upon them the Sacrament of
Baptisme) which multitude, may both lawfully be call'd together
by some one into one place, and he so calling them, are bound to
be present either in Person, or by others. For a multitude of
men, if they cannot meet in assembly, when need requires, is not
to be call'd a Person; For a Church can neither speak, nor
discerne, nor heare, but as it is a congregation. Whatsoever is
spoken by particular men, (to wit, as many opinions almost as
heads) that's the speech of one man, not of the Church;
farthermore, if an assembly be made, and it be unlawfull, it
shall be considered as null. Not any one of these therefore who
are present in a tumult shall be tyed to the decree of the rest,
but specially if he dissent; and therefore neither can such a
Church make any decree; for then a multitude is sayd to decree
somewhat, when every man is oblig'd by the decree of the major
part. We must therefore grant to the definition of a Church (to
which we attribute things belonging to a Person) not onely a
possibility of assembling, but also of doing it lawfully.
Besides, although there be some one who may lawfully call the
rest together, yet if they who are called may lawfully not
appeare (which may happen among men who are not subject one to
another) that same Church is not one Person. For by what Right
they, who being call'd to a certaine time, and place, doe meet
together, are one Church; by the same, others flocking to another
place appointed by them, are another Church. And every number of
men of one opinion is a Church, and by Consequence there will be
as many Churches as there are divers opinions, that is to say,
the same multitude of men will at once prove to be one, and many
Churches. Wherefore a Church is not one, except there be a
certaine, and known, that is to say, a lawfull power, by meanes
whereof every man may be oblig'd to be present in the
Congregation, either himselfe in person, or by Proxie. And that
becomes One, and is capable of personall functions, by the union
of a lawfull power of convocating Synods, and assemblies of
Christians; not by uniformity of Doctrine: and otherwise, it is a
multitude, and Persons in the plurall, howsoever agreeing in
opinions.
XXI. It followes what hath beene already said by necessary
connexion, that a City of Christian men, and a Church, is
altogether the same thing, of the same men, term'd by two names,
for two causes: For the matter of a City & a Church is one, to
wit the same Christian men. And the forme which consists in a
Lawfull power of assembling them is the same too; for 'tis
manifest that every Subject is oblig'd to come thither, whither
he is summon'd by his City. Now that which is call'd a City, as
it is made up of men, the same, as it consists of Christians, is
styled a Church.
XXII. This too is very cohaerent with the same points, If
there be many Christian Cities, they are not altogether
personally one church. They may indeed by mutuall consent become
one Church, but no otherwise, then as they must also become one
City; For they cannot assemble but at some certaine time, and to
some place appointed. But Persons, places, and times, belong to
civill Right; neither can any Subject or stranger lawfully set
his foot on any place, but by the permission of the City, which
is Lord of the place. But the things which cannot lawfully be
done but by the permission of the City, those, if they be
lawfully done, are done by the Cities authority. The Universall
church is indeed one mysticall body, whereof CHRIST is the head,
but in the same manner, that all men together acknowledging God
for the Ruler of the world, are one Kingdome, and one City, which
notwithstanding is neither one Person, nor hath it one common
action, or determination. Farthermore where it is said that
CHRIST is the head of his body the Church, it manifestly
appeares, that that was spoken by the Apostle of the Elect, who
as long as they are in this world, are a Church onely in
potentia, but shall not actually be so before they be separated
from the reprobate, and gather'd together among themselves, in
the day of Judgement. The Church of Rome of old was very great,
but she went not beyond the bounds of her Empire; and therefore
neither was she Universall, unlesse it were in that sense,
wherein it was also said of the City of Rome, Orbem jam totum
victor Romanus habebat, when as yet he had not the twentieth part
of it. But after that the civill Empire was divided into parts,
the single Cities thence arising were so many Churches; and that
power which the Church of Rome had over them, might perhaps wholy
depend on the authority of those Churches, who having cast off
the Emperours were yet content to admit the Doctours of Rome.
XXIII. They may be called Church-men who exercise a publique
office in the Church. But of offices there was one a Ministery,
another a Maistery; The office of the Ministers was to serve
Tables, to take care of the temporall goods of the Church, and to
distribute (at that time when all propriety of riches being
abolisht, they were fed in common) to each man his portion; The
Maisters according to their order, were called some Apostles,
some Bishops, some Presbyters, that is to say Elders; yet not so,
as that by the name of Presbyter, the age, but the office might
be distinguisht; For Timothy was a Presbyter although a young
man; but because for the most part the Elders were receiv'd into
the Maistership, the word, denoting age, was us'd to signifie the
office. The same Maisters, according to the diversity of their
employments were called some of them Apostles, some Prophets,
some Evangelists, some Pastors or Teachers. And the Apostolicall
worke indeed was universall; the Propheticall to declare their
owne revelations in the Church; the Evangelicall to preach, or to
be publishers of the Gospell among the infidels; that of the
Pastors to teach, confirme, and rule the minds of those who
already beleev'd.
XXIV. In the Election of Church-men two things are to be
considered, the Election of the Persons, and their consecration,
or institution, which also is called ordination. The first twelve
Apostles CHRIST himselfe both elected, and ordain'd. After
CHRISTS ascension Matthias was elected in the roome of Judas the
Traitour, the Church (which at that time consisted of a
Congregation of about one hundred and twenty men) choosing two
men: And they appointed two, Joseph and Matthias; but God
himselfe by lot approving of Mathias. And Saint Paul calls these
twelve the first, and great Apostles, also the Apostles of the
Circumcision. Afterward were added two other Apostles, Paul, and
Barnabas; ordain'd indeed by the Doctours, and Prophets of the
Church of Antioch, (which was a particular Church) by the
imposition of hands, but elected by the command of the Holy
Ghost. That they were both Apostles is manifest in the 13. of the
Acts v. 2, 3. That they receiv'd their Apostleship from hence,
namely because they were separated by command of the spirit for
the work of God, from the rest of the Prophets, and Doctours of
the Church of Antioch, Saint Paul himselfe shewes, who calls
himselfe for distinctions sake an Apostle separated unto the
Gospell of God, Rom. 1. ver. 1. But if it be demanded further; by
what authority it came to passe that that was receiv'd for the
command of the Holy Ghost, which those Prophets and Doctours did
say proceeded from him, it must necessarily be answer'd; by the
Authority of the church of Antioch. For the Prophets & Doctours
must be examined by the Church before they be admitted; For Saint
John saith, Beleeve not every Spirit, but try the Spirits,
whether they are of God, because many false Prophets are gone out
into the world; but by what Church, but that to which that
Epistle was written? In like manner Saint Paul reprooves the
Churches of Galatia, because they Judaized, Gal. 2. v. 14.
although they seemed to doe so by the Authority of Peter; for
when he had told them that he had, reprehended Peter himselfe
with these words, If thou being a Iew, livest after the manner of
Gentiles, and not as doe the Iewes, why compellest thou the
Gentiles to live as doe the Iewes? Not long after he questions
them, saying, This onely would I learne of you: Received ye the
Spirit by the works of the Law, or by the hearing of faith? Gal.
3. ver. 2. Where it is evident, that it was Judaisme which he
reprehended the Galathians for, notwithstanding that the Apostle
Peter compelled them to Judaize. Seeing therefore it belonged to
the Church, and not to Peter, and therefore also not to any man,
to determine what Doctors they should follow, it also pertained
to the authority of the Church of Antioch to elect their Prophets
and Doctors. Now because the Holy Ghost separated to himself the
Apostles Paul & Barnabas, by the imposition of hands from Doctors
thus elected; its manifest, that imposition of hands, &
consecration, of the prime Doctors in each Church, belongs to the
Doctors of the same Church. But Bishops, who were also called
Presbyters, although all Presbyters were not Bishops, were
ordain'd somtimes by Apostles (for Paul & Barnabas when they had
taught in Derbe, Lystra, and Iconium, ordained Elders in every
Church, Acts 14. v. 23.) sometimes by other Bishops, for Titus
was by Paul left in Crete, that he should ordain Elders in every
City, Tit. 1. v. 5. And Timothy was advised not to neglect the
gift that was in him, which was given him by Prophesy with the
laying on of the hands of the Presbytery, 1. Tim. 4. v. 14. And
he had rules given him concerning the Election of Presbyters. But
that cannot be understood otherwise, then of the ordination of
those who were elected by the Church; for no man could constitute
a Doctor in the Church, but by the Churches permission. For the
duty of the Apostles themselves was not to command, but to teach;
and although they who were recommended by the Apostles, or
Presbyters, were not rejected, for the esteem that was had of the
recommenders, yet seeing they could not be elected without the
will of the Church, they were also suppos'd elected by the
authority of the Church. In like manner Ministers, who are called
Deacons, were ordained by the Apostles; yet elected by the
Church. For when the seven Deacons were to bee elected, and
ordained, the Apostles elected them not, but look yee out, (say
they) among you Brethren seven men of honest report, &c. And they
chose Stephen, &c. And they set them before the Apostles, Acts 6.
vers. 3. 6. It is apparent therefore by the custome of the
Primitive Church under the Apostles, that the ordination, or
consecration of all Church-men, which is done by Prayer, and
imposition of hands, belonged to the Apostles, and Doctors; but
the Election of those who were to be consecrated, to the Church.
XXV. Concerning the power of binding, and loosing, that is to
say of remitting, and retaining of sinnes, there is no doubt, but
it was given by Christ to the Pastors then yet for to come, in
the same manner as it was to the present Apostles. Now the
Apostles had all the power of remitting of sins given them, which
Christ himselfe had; As the Father hath sent me (sayes Christ) so
send I you, John 20. vers. 21. and he addes, Whose soever sins
yee remit, they are remitted, and whose soever sins ye retain,
they are retained. vers. 23. But what binding and loosing, or
remitting and retaining of sinnes, is, admits of some scruple.
For first, to retain his sinnes who being baptized into remission
of sins, is truly penitent, seems to be against the very Covenant
it selfe of the new Testament, and therefore could not be done by
Christ himselfe, much lesse by his Pastors. And to remit the
impenitent, seems to be against the will of God the Father, from
whom Christ was sent to convert the world, and to reduce men unto
obedience. Furthermore, if each Pastor had an authority granted
him to remit and retain sinnes in this manner, all awe of
Princes, and civill Magistrates, together with all kind of civill
Government would be utterly destroyed. For Christ hath said it,
nay even nature it selfe dictates, that we should not feare them
who slay the body, but cannot kill the soule; but rather feare
him who can cast both soule and body into hell, Mat. 10. vers.
28. Neither is any man so mad as not to choose to yeeld obedience
rather to them who can remit, and retain their sinnes, then to
the powerfullest Kings. Nor yet on the other side, it is to be
imagined, that remission of sinnes is nothing else but an
exemption from Ecclesiasticall punishments; for what evill hath
excommunication in it, beside the eternall pains which are
consequent to it? or what benefit is it to be received into the
Church if there were salvation out of it? We must therefore hold,
That Pastors have Power, truly, and absolutely to forgive sinnes,
but, to the penitent; and to retain them, but, of the impenitent.
But while men think that to Repent, is nothing else but that
every one condemn his Actions, and change those Counsels which to
himselfe seem sinfull, and blameable, there is an opinion risen,
that there may be repentance before any Confession of sinnes to
men, and that repentance is not an effect, but a cause of
Confession; and thence, the difficulty of those who say that the
sins of the penitent are already forgiven in Baptisme, and theirs
who repent not, cannot be forgiven at al, is against Scripture,
and contrary to the words of Christ, Whose soever sins ye remit,
&c. We must therefore to resolve this difficulty know in the
first place, that a true acknowledgement of sin is Repentance;
for he that knows he hath sinned, knows he hath erred, but to
will an errour is impossible; therefore he that knowes he hath
sinned, wishes he had not done it, which is to repent. Farther,
where it may be doubtfull, whether that which is done be a sin or
not, we must consider, that repentance doth not precede
confession of sins, but is subsequent to it: for there is no
repentance but of sinnes acknowledged. The penitent therefore
must both acknowledge the fact, and know it to be a sinne, that
is to say, against the Law. If a man therefore think, that what
he hath done, is not against the Law; its impossible he should
repent of it. Before repentance therefore, its necessary there be
an application of the facts unto the Law. But its in vain to
apply the facts unto the Law without an Interpreter. for not the
words of the Law, but the sentence of the Law-giver is the rule
of mens actions; but surely either one man, or some men are the
Interpreters of the Law, for every man is not judge of his own
fact whether it be a sin or not; wherefore the fact of which we
doubt whether it be a sinne or not, must be unfolded before some
man or men, and the doing of this is confession. Now when the
Interpreter of the Law hath judged the fact to bee a sinne, if
the sinner submit to his judgement, and resolve with himselfe not
to do so any more, tis repentance; and thus, either it is not
true repentance, or else it is not antecedent, but subsequent to
confession. These things being thus explained, it is not hard to
understand what kinde of power that of binding and loosing is.
For seeing in remission of sinnes there are two things
considerable, one the Judgement or Condemnation whereby the fact
is judged to be a sinne; the other, (when the Party condemned
does acquiesce, and obey the sentence, that is to say, Repents)
the remission of the sinne, or, (if he repent not) the Retention:
The first of these, that is to say, the Judging whether it be a
sinne or not, belongs to the Interpreter of the Law, that is, the
Soveraign Judge; the second, namely Remission, or retention of
the sinne, to the Pastor, and it is that concerning which the
power of binding and loosing is conversant. And that this was the
true meaning of our Saviour Christ in the institution of the same
power, is apparent in the 18 of Mat. vers. 15, 16, 17, 18. thus,
He there speaking to his Disciples, sayes, If thy Brother sinne
against thee, goe, and tell him his fault betweene thee and him
alone, (where we must observe by the way, that if thy Brother
sinne against thee, is the same with, if he doe thee injury; and
therefore Christ spake of those matters which belonged to the
civill Tribunall) he addes, if he heare thee not (that is to say,
if he deny that he hath done it, or if having confest the fact,
he denies it to be unjustly done) take with thee yet one or two,
and if he refuse to heare them, tell it the Church. But why to
the Church, except that she might judge whether it were a sinne
or not? But if he refuses to hear the Church, that is, if he doe
not submit to the Churches sentence, but shall maintain that to
be no sin, which She Judges to be a sinne, that is to say, if he
repent not (for certain it is that no man repents himselfe of
that action which She conceives not to be a sinne) he saith not,
Tell it to the Apostles, that we might know that the definitive
sentence in the question, whether it were a sin or not, was not
left unto them, but to the Church; but let him be unto thee
(sayes he) as an Heathen, or Publican, that is, as one out of the
Church, as one that is not baptized, that is to say, as one whose
sinnes are retained. For all Christians were baptized into
remission of sinnes. But because it might have been demanded who
it was that had so great a power, as that of withholding the
benefit of Baptisme from the impenitent, Christ shewes that the
same Persons to whom he had given authority to baptize the
penitent into the remission of sinns, and to make them of heathen
men, Christians, had also authority to retain their sins who by
the Church should be adjudged to be impenitent, and to make them
of Christian men Heathens; and therefore presently subjoynes,
Verily I say unto you, Whose soever sinnes yee shall binde upon
Earth, they shall bee bound also in Heaven, and whose soever sins
yee shall loose upon Earth, they shall be loosed also in Heaven.
Whence we may understand, that the power of binding, and loosing,
or of remitting, and retaining of sinnes, which is called in
another place, the power of the keyes, is not different from the
power given in another place in these words, Goe, and teach all
Nations, Baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and of the
Sonne, and of the Holy Ghost, Mat. 28. ver. 19. And even as the
Pastours cannot refuse to Baptize him whom the Church judges
worthy, so neither can they retaine his sinnes whom the Church
holds fitting to be absolv'd, nor yet remit his sinnes whom the
Church pronounceth disobedient. And it is the Churches part to
judge of the sinne, the Pastours, to cast out, or to receive into
the Church those that are judg'd. Thus Saint Paul to the Church
of Corinth, Do not ye judge, saith he, of those that are within?
Yet he himself pronounc't the sentence of Excommunication against
the incestuous Person, I indeed (saith he) as absent in body, but
present in Spirit, &c.
XXVI. The act of retaining sinnes is that which is called by
the Church Excommunication, and by Saint Paul, delivering over to
Satan. The word Excommunication, sounding the same with
aposunagogon poiein, casting out of the Synagogue, seems to be
borrowed from the Mosaicall Law, wherein they who were by the
Priest adjudged leprous, were commanded to be kept apart out of
the Camp, untill by the judgement of the Priest they were againe
pronounc't cleane, and by certaine rights (among which the
washing of the body was one) were purified, Levit. 13. ver. 46.
From hence in processe of time it became a custome of the Jewes,
not to receive those who passed from Gentilisme to Judaisme,
(supposing them to be uncleane) unlesse they were first washed;
and those who dissented from the Doctrine of the Synagogue, they
cast out of the Synagogue. By resemblance of this custome, those
that came to Christianity, (whether they were Jewes, or Gentiles)
were not receiv'd into the Church without Baptisme; and those
that dissented from the Church were depriv'd of the Churches
Communion. Now, they were therefore said to be deliver'd over to
Satan, because all that was out of the Church, was comprehended
within his Kingdome. The end of this kind of Discipline was, that
being destitute for a time of the grace and spirituall
priviledges of the Church, they might be humbled to salvation.
But the effect in regard to secular matters, that being
excommunicated, they should not onely be prohibited all
Congregations, or Churches, and the participation of the
mysteries, but as being contagious they should be avoided by all
other Christians, even more then Heathen: for the Apostle allowed
to accompany with Heathen, but with these not so much as to eate,
1 Cor. 5. ver. 10,
II. Seeing then the effect of Excommunication is such, it is
manifest in the first place, that a Christian city cannot be
excommunicated. For a Christian City is a Christian Church, as
hath been declar'd above in the 21. Art. and of the same
extension. But a Church cannot be excommunicated; For either she
must excommunicate her selfe, which is impossible; or she must be
excommunicated by some other Church, and this, either universall,
or particular. But seeing an Universall Church is no Person, (as
hath been prov'd in the 22. Artic.) and therefore neither acts,
nor does any thing, it cannot excommunicate any man. And a
particular church by excommunicating another Church doth nothing;
for where there is not one common Congregation, there cannot be
any Excommunication. Neither if some one Church (suppose that of
Jerusalem) should have excommunicated an other (suppose that of
Rome) would it any more have excommunicated this, then her selfe:
for he that deprives another of his Communion, deprives himselfe
also of the Communion of that other. Secondly, No man can
excommunicate the subjects of any absolute government all at
once, or forbid them the use of their Temples, or their publique
worship of God. For they cannot be excommunicated by a Church
which themselves doe constitute; for if they could, there would
not onely not remain a Church, but not so much as a common-weale,
and they would be dissolved of themselves; and this were not to
be excommunicated, or prohibited. But if they be excommunicated
by some other Church, that church is to esteem them as Heathen.
But no christian Church by the doctrine of Christ, can forbid the
Heathen to gather together, and Communicate among themselves, as
it shall seem good to their Cities, especially if they meet to
worship Christ, although it be done in a singular custome, and
manner: therefore also not the excommunicated, who are to be
dealt with as Heathen. Thirdly, a Prince who hath the Soveraign
Power, cannot be excommunicated. For by the doctrine of Christ,
neither one, nor many subjects together can interdict their
Prince any publique, or private places, or deny him entrance into
any Assembly whatsoever, or prohibit him the doing of what hee
will within his own jurisdiction. For it is Treason among all
Cities, for any one, or many subjects joyntly to arrogate to
themselves any authority over the whole City; but they who
arrogate to themselves an authority over him who hath the supreme
power of the City, doe arrogate the same authority over the City
it selfe. Besides, a Soveraign Prince, if he be a Christian, hath
this farther advantage, that the City whose Will is contained in
His, is that very thing which we call a Church; the Church
therefore excommunicates no man, but whom it excommunicates by
the authority of the Prince: but the Prince excommunicates not
himselfe, his subjects therefore cannot doe it. It may be indeed
that an Assembly of rebellious Citizens or Traytors, may
pronounce the sentence of excommunication against their Prince,
but not by Right. Much lesse can one Prince be excommunicated by
another, for this would prove not an excommunication, but a
provocation to Warre by the way of affront. For since that is not
one church which is made up of Citizens belonging to two absolute
Cities, for want of power of lawfully assembling them, (as hath
been declar'd before in the 22. Art.) they who are of one Church
are not bound to obey an other, and therefore cannot be
excommunicated for their disobedience. Now, what some may say,
that Princes, being they are members of the Universall church,
may also by the authority of the Universall church be
excommunicated, signifies nothing: because the Universall church
(as hath beene shewed in the 22. Art.) is not one Person, of whom
it may be said that shee acted, decreed, determin'd,
excommunicated, absolv'd, and the like personall attributes;
neither hath she any Governour upon Earth at whose command she
may assemble, and deliberate: For to be guide of the Universall
church, and to have the power of assembling her, is the same
thing as to be Governour, and Lord over all the Christians in the
world, which is granted to none, but God onely.
XXVII. It hath beene shewed above in the 18. Art. that the
authority of interpreting the Holy Scriptures consisted not in
this, that the interpreter might without punishment, expound, and
explicate his sentence & opinion taken thence, unto others,
either by writing, or by his owne voice; but, that others have
not a Right to doe, or teach ought contrary to his sentence;
insomuch as the interpretation we speak of is the same with the
power of defining in all manner of controversies to be determined
by sacred Scriptures. Now we must shew that that power belongs to
each Church, and depends on his, or their authority who have the
Supreme command, provided that they be Christians. For if it
depend not on the civill authority, it must either depend on the
opinion of each private Subject, or some forraigne authority. But
among other reasons, the inconveniencies that must follow private
opinions cannot suffer its dependance on them; of which this is
the chiefe, that not onely all civill obedience would be taken
away (contrary to Christ his praecept) but all humane society and
peace would be dissolved (contrary to the Lawes of nature;) for
seeing every man is his owne interpreter of Scripture, that is to
say, since every man makes himselfe judge of what is pleasing and
displeasing unto God, they cannot obey their Princes before that
they have judg'd whether their commands be conformable to the
Word of God, or not. And thus either they obey not, or they obey
for their owne opinions sake, that is to say, they obey
themselves, not their Soveraigne; civill obedience therefore is
lost. Againe, when every man followes his owne opinion, it's
necessary that the controversies which rise among them will
become innumerable, and indeterminable; whence there will breed
among men (who by their own naturall inclinations doe account all
dissention an affront) first hatred, then brawles and warres, and
thus all manner of peace and society would vanish. We have
farthermore for an example, that which God under the old Law
required to be observed concerning the book of the Law, namely,
that it should be transcrib'd, and publiquely us'd, and he would
have it to be the Canon of Divine doctrine: but the controversies
about it not to be determined by private Persons, but onely by
the Priests. Lastly, it is our Saviours Precept, that if there be
any matter of offence between private Persons, they should hear
the Church. Wherefore it is the Churches duty to define
controversies; it therefore belongs not to private men, but to
the Church, to interpret Scriptures. But that we may know that
the authority of interpreting Gods Word, that is to say, of
determining all questions concerning God, and Religion, belongs
not to any forraign Person whatsoever, we must consider first
what esteem such a power carries in the mindes of the subjects,
and their civill actions. For no man can be ignorant that the
voluntary actions of men by a naturall necessity, doe follow
those opinions which they have concerning good, and evill,
Reward, and Punishment; whence it happens that necessarily they
would chuse rather to obey those by whose judgement they beleeve
that they shall be eternally happy, or miserable. Now, by whose
judgement it is appointed what Doctrines are necessary to
salvation, by their judgement doe men expect their eternall
blisse, or perdition; they will therefore yeeld them obedience in
all things. Which being thus, most manifest it is, that those
subjects who believe themselves bound to acquiesce to a forraign
authority in those Doctrines which are necessary to salvation,
doe not per se constitute a City, but are the subjects of that
forraign power. Nor therefore although some Soveraign Prince
should by writing grant such an authority to any other, yet so,
as he would be understood to have retained the civill power in
his own hands, shall such a Writing be valid, or transferre ought
necessary for the retaining, or good administration of his
command. For by the 2. Chap. 4. artic. no man is said to
transferre his Right, unlesse he give some proper sign, declaring
his Will to transferre it; but he who hath openly declared his
will to keep his Soveraignty, cannot have given a sufficient sign
of transferring the means necessary for the keeping it. This
kinde of Writing therefore will not be a sign of Will, but of
Ignorance in the contractors. We must consider next how absurd it
is for a City, or Soveraign, to commit the ruling of his Subjects
consciences to an enemy. For they are, as hath been shewed above
in the 5. Chap. 6. artic. in an hostile state, whosoever have not
joyn'd themselves into the unity of one Person. Nor contradicts
it this truth that they doe not alwayes fight: (for truces are
made between enemies) it is sufficient for an hostile minde, that
there is suspition, that the Frontiers of Cities, Kingdomes,
Empires, strengthned with Garisons, doe with a fighting posture
and countenance, though they strike not, yet as enemies mutually
behold each other. Lastly, how unequall is it to demand that,
which by the very reason of your demand, you confesse belongs to
anothers Right? I am the Interpreter of Scriptures to you who are
the Subject of anothers Realme: Why? By what Covenants past
between you and me? By Divine authority. Whence knowne? Out of
holy Scripture. Behold the Book, read it. In vain, unlesse I may
also interpret the same for my self; That interpretation
therefore doth by Right belong to me, and the rest of my private
fellow-subjects; which we both deny. It remains therefore that in
all christian Churches, that is to say, in all christian Cities,
the interpretation of sacred Scripture depend on, and derive from
the authority of that man, or Councell, which hath the Soveraign
power of the City.
XXVIII. Now because there are two kindes of controversies,
the one about spirituall matters, that is to say, questions of
faith, the truth whereof cannot be searcht into by naturall
reason; such are the questions concerning the nature, and office
of Christ, of rewards and punishments to come, of the Sacraments,
of outward worship, and the like: the other, about questions of
humane science, whose truth is sought out by naturall reason, and
Syllogismes, drawne from the Covenants of men, and definitions
(that is to say, significations received by use, and common
consent of words) such as are all questions of Right, and
Philosophy. For example, when in matter of Right its questioned
whether there be a Promise, and Covenant, or not? that is nothing
else, but to demand, whether such words spoken in such a manner
be by common use, and consent of the Subjects, a Promise or
Covenant; which if they be so called, then it is true that a
Contract is made, if not, then it is false: that truth therefore
depends on the compacts, and consents of men. In like manner when
it is demanded in Philosophy whether the same thing may entirely
be in divers places at once; the determination of the question
depends on the knowledge of the common consent of men about the
signification of the word entire: for if men when they say a
thing is entirely somewhere doe signifie by common consent that
they understand nothing of the same to be elsewhere, it is false
that the same thing is in divers places at once: that truth
therefore depends on the consents of men, and by the same reason
in all other questions concerning Right, and Philosophy. And they
who doe judge that any thing can be determin'd, (contrary to this
common consent of men concerning the appellations of things) out
of obscure places of Scripture, doe also judge that the use of
speech, and at once all humane society, is to be taken away; for
he who hath sold an whole field, will say, he meant one whole
ridge, and will retaine the rest as unsold; nay, they take away
reason it selfe, which is nothing else but a searching out of the
truth made by such consent. These kinde of questions therefore
need not be determin'd by the City by way of interpretation of
Scriptures; for they belong not to Gods Word, in that sense
wherein the Word of God is taken for the Word concerning God,
that is to say, for the Doctrine of the Gospell; neither is he
who hath the Soveraigne Power in the Church, oblig'd to employ
any Ecclesiastical Doctours for the judging of any such kind of
matters as these. But for the deciding of questions of Faith,
that is to say, concerning God, which transcend humane capacity,
we stand in need of a divine blessing (that we may not be
deceiv'd at least in necessary points) to be deriv'd from CHRIST
himselfe by the imposition of hands. For, seeing to the end we
may attaine to aeternal Salvation, we are oblig'd to a
supernatural Doctrine, & which therefore it is impossible for us
to understand; to be left so destitute, as that we can be
deceiv'd in necessary points, is repugnant to aequity. This
infallibility our Saviour Christ promis'd (in those things which
are necessary to Salvation) to his Apostles untill the day of
judgement; that is to say, to the Apostles, and Pastors
succeeding the Apostles who were to be consecrated by the
imposition of hands. He therefore who hath the Soveraigne power
in the City, is oblig'd as a Christian, where there is any
question concerning the Mysteries of Faith, to interpret the Holy
Scriptures by Clergy-men lawfully ordain'd. And thus in Christian
Cities the judgement both of spirituall and temporall matters
belongs unto the civill authority. And that man, or councell who
hath the Supreme power, is head both of the City, and of the
Church; for a Church, and a Christian City is but one thing.
Chap. XVIII
Concerning those things which are necessary for our entrance into
the Kingdome of Heaven.
I. It was ever granted that all authority in secular matters
deriv'd from him who had the Soveraigne power, whether he were
one Man, or an Assembly of Men. That the same in spirituall
matters depended on the authority of the Church, is manifest by
the next foregoing proofs; and besides this, that all Christian
Cities are Churches endued with this kind of authority From
whence a man though but dull of apprehension may collect, that in
a Christian City, (that is to say, in a City whose Soveraignty
belongs to a Christian Prince, or Councell) all Power, as well
spiritual, as secular, is united under Christ; and therefore it
is to be obey'd in all things. But on the other side, because we
must rather obey God then Wen, there is a difficulty risen, how
obedience may safely be yeelded to them, if at any time somewhat
should be commanded by them to be done which CHRIST hath
prohibited. The reason of this difficulty is, that seeing God no
longer speakes to us by CHRIST, and his Prophets in open voice,
but by the holy Scriptures, which by divers men are diversly
understood, they know indeed what Princes, and a congregated
Church doe command; but whether that which they doe command be
contrary to the word of God, or not, this they know not, but with
a wavering obedience between the punishments of temporall, and
spirituall death, as it were sailing betweene Scilla and
Carybdis, they often run themselves upon both. But they who
rightly distinguish betweene the things necessary to Salvation,
and those which are not necessary, can have none of this kind of
doubt. For if the command of the Prince, or City be such, that he
can obey it without hazard of his aeternall Salvation, it is
unjust not to obey them, and the Apostles praecepts take place:
Servants in all things obey your Wasters according to the flesh.
Children obey your Parents in all things. Col. 3. v. 20, 22. And
the command of CHRIST, The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moyses
chair, all things therefore whatsoever they command you, that
observe, and doe. Mat. 23. v. 2. On the contrary, if they command
us to doe those things which are punisht with aeternall death, it
were madnesse not rather to chuse to dye a naturall death, then
by obeying, to dye eternally; and then comes in that which CHRIST
sayes, Feare not them who kill the body, but cannot kill the
Soule. Mat. 10. v. 28. We must see therefore what all those
things are, which are necessary to Salvation.
II. Now all things necessary to Salvation are comprehended in
two vertues, Faith, and Obedience. The latter of these if it
could be perfect would alone suffice to preserve us from
damnation; but because we have all of us beene long since guilty
of disobedience against God in Adam, and besides we our selves
have since actually sinned, Obedience is not sufficient without
remission of sinnes. But this, together with our entrance into
the Kingdome of Heaven is the reward of Faith. Nothing else is
requisite to Salvation; for the Kingdome of Heaven is shut to
none but sinners, that is to say, those who have not perform'd
due Obedience to the Lawes; and not to those neither, if they
beleeve the necessary articles of the Christian Faith. Now, if we
shall know in what points Obedience doth consist, and which are
the necessary articles of the Christian Faith, it will at once be
manifest what we must doe, and what abstaine from, at the
commands of Cities, and of Princes.
III. But by Obedience in this place is signified not the
fact, but the Will and desire wherewith we purpose, and endeavour
as much as we can to obey for the future: in which sense the word
Obedience is aequivalent to Repentance. For the vertue of
repentance consists not in the sorrow which accompanies the
remembrance of sinne; but in our conversion to the way, and full
purpose to sinne no more, without which that sorrow is said to be
the sorrow not of a Penitent but a desperate person. But because
they who love God cannot but desire to obey the divine Law, and
they who love their Neighbours cannot but desire to obey the
morall Law, which consists as hath beene shewed above in the 3.
Chapter, in the prohibition of Pride, ingratitude, contumely,
inhumanity, cruelty, injury, and the like offences, whereby our
Neighbours are prejudic't, therefore also Love or charity are
aequivalent to Obedience. Justice also (which is a constant will
of giving to every man his due) is aequivalent with it. But that
Faith and Repentance are sufficient for Salvation, is manifest by
the Covenant it selfe of Baptisme; for they who were by Peter
converted on the day of Pentecost, demanding him what they should
do? He answered, Repent, and be Baptiz'd every one of you in the
name of Jesus for the remission of your Sins. Act. 2. v. 38.
There was nothing therefore to be done for the obtaining of
Baptisme, that is to say, for to enter into the Kingdome of God,
but to Repent, and beleeve in the Name of JESUS. For the Kingdome
of Heaven is promis'd by the Covenant which is made in Baptisme;
farthermore, by the words of CHRIST answering the Lawyer who askt
him what he should doe to inherit eternall life, Thou knowest the
Commandements, Thou shalt not Kill, Thou shalt not commit
Adultery, &c. which refer to Obedience; and, Sell all that thou
hast, and come, and follow me, which relates to faith, Luke 18.
ver. 20. Mar. 10. ver. 18. And by that which is said, The just
shall live by Faith, (not every man, but the just) for justice is
the same disposition of Will which Repentance and Obedience are;
And by the words of Saint Mark, The time is fulfilled, and the
Kingdome of God is at hand, Repent yee, and beleeve the Gospell,
by which words is not obscurely signified that there is no need
of other Vertues, for our entrance into the Kingdome of God,
excepting those of Repentance and Faith. The Obedience therefore
which is necessarily requir'd to Salvation is nothing else but
the Will, or endeavour to obey, that is to say, of doing
according to the Lawes of God, that is the morall Lawes, which
are the same to all men; and the civill Lawes, that is to say,
the commands of Soveraignes in temporall matters, and the
Ecclesiasticall Lawes in spirituall; which two kinds of Lawes are
divers in divers Cities, and Churches, and are knowne by their
promulgation, and publique sentences.
IV. That we may understand what the Christian Faith is, we
must define Faith in generall, and distinguish it from those
other acts of the minde wherewith commonly it is confounded. The
object of Faith universally taken, namely for that which is
beleev'd, is evermore a proposition, (that is to say a speech
affirmative, or negative) which we grant to be true. But because
Propositions are granted for divers causes, it falls out, that
these kind of concessions are diversly called: But we grant
Propositions sometimes which notwithstanding we receive not into
our mindes; and this either for a time, to wit, so long, till by
consideration of the consequencies, we have well examin'd the
truth of them, which we call supposing; or also simply, as
through feare of the Lawes, which is to professe, or confesse by
outward tokens; or for a voluntary compliance sake, which men use
out of civility to those whom they respect, and for love of Peace
to others, which is absolute yeelding. Now the Propositions which
we receive for truth, we alwaies grant for some reasons of our
owne, and these are deriv'd either from the Proposition it selfe,
or from the Person propounding. They are deriv'd from the
Proposition it selfe, by calling to minde what things those words
which make up the Proposition doe by common consent usually
signifie: if so, then the assent which we give is called
knowledge, or Science. But if we cannot remember what is
certainly understood by those words, but sometimes one thing,
sometimes another seeme to be apprehended by us, then we are said
to thinke. For example, if it be propounded that two and three
makes five; and by calling to minde the order of those numerall
words, that it is so appointed by the common consent of them who
are of the same language with us, (as it were by a certaine
contract necessary for humane society) that five shall be the
name of so many unities as are contain'd in two and three taken
together, a man assents, that this is therefore true because two
and three together, are the same with five. This assent shall be
called knowledge, and to know this truth is nothing else but to
acknowledge that it is made by our selves; For by whose will and
rules of speaking the number... is called two,... is called
three, &c... is called five, by their will also it comes to
passe, that this Proposition is true, Two and three taken
together makes five. In like manner if we remember what it is
that is called theft, and what injury, we shall understand by the
words themselves, whether it be true that theft is an injury, or
not. Truth is the same with a true Proposition; but the
Proposition is true in which the word consequent, which by
Logicians is called the praedicate, embraceth the word antecedent
in its amplitude, which they call the Subject; and to know truth
is the same thing as to remember that it was made by our selves
in the common use of words. Neither was it rashly, or unadvisedly
said by Plato of old, that knowledge was memory. But it happens
sometimes that words although they have a certaine, and defin'd
signification by constitution, yet by vulgar use either to
adorne, or deceive, they are so wrested from their owne
significations, that to remember the conceptions for which they
were first impos'd on things is very hard, and not to be
maistered but by a sharpe judgement, and very great diligence. It
happens too, that there are many words which have no proper,
determin'd, and every where the same signification; and are
understood not by their owne, but by vertue of other signes us'd
together with them. Thirdly, there are some words of things
unconceivable; of those things therefore whereof they are the
words, there is no conception; and therefore in vaine doe we
seeke for the truth of those Propositions, which they make out of
the words themselves. In these cases, while by considering the
definitions of words we search out the truth of some proposition,
according to the hope we have of finding it, we thinke it
sometimes true, and sometimes false; either of which apart is
called thinking, and also beleeving; both together, doubting. But
when our reasons for which we assent to some Proposition, derive
not from the Proposition it selfe, but from the Person
Propounding, whom we esteeme so learned that he is not deceiv'd,
and we see no reason why he should deceive us; our assent,
because it growes not from any confidence of our owne, but from
another mans knowledge, is called Faith: And by the confidence of
whom, we doe beleeve, we are said to trust them, or to trust in
them. By what hath been said, the difference appeares first
betweene Faith, and Profession; for that is alwaies joyn'd with
inward assent, this not alwayes; That is an inward perswasion of
the minde, this an outward obedience. Next, betweene Faith, and
Opinion; for this depends on our owne reason, that on the good
esteeme we have of another. Lastly betweene Faith and Knowledge;
for this deliberately takes a proposition broken, and chewed;
that swallowes downe whole and entire. The explication of words,
whereby the matter enquir'd after is propounded, is conducible to
knowledge; nay, the onely way to know, is by definition. But this
is prejudiciall to Faith; for those things which exceede humane
capacity, and are propounded to be beleev'd, are never more
evident by explication, but on the contrary more obscure, and
harder to be credited. And the same thing befalls a man who
endeavours to demonstrate the mysteries of Faith by naturall
reason, which happens to a sick man, who will needs chew before
he will swallow his wholsome, but bitter Pills; whence it comes
to passe, that he presently brings them up againe, which perhaps
would otherwise, if he had taken them well downe, have prov'd his
remedy.
V. We have seene therefore what it is to beleeve. But what is
it to beleeve in CHRIST? Or what Proposition is that which is the
object of our Faith in CHRIST? For when we say, I beleeve in
CHRIST, we signifie indeed Whom, but not What we beleeve. Now, to
beleeve in CHRIST is nothing else but to beleeve that JESUS IS
THE CHRIST, namely Hee, who according to the Prophesies of
Moyses, and the Prophets of Israel, was to come into this world
to institute the Kingdome of God. And this sufficiently appeares
out of the words of CHRIST himselfe to Martha: I am (saith he)
the Resurrection and the life, HE THAT BELEEVETH IN ME, though he
were dead, yet he shall live, and WHOSOEVER LIVETH, AND BELEEVETH
IN ME, shall never dye. Beleevest thou this? She saith unto him,
Yea Lord, I beleeve that THOU ART THE CHRIST the Son of God,
which should come into the world. John 11. ver. 25, 26, 27. In
which words we see that the question BELEEVEST THOU. IN ME? is
expounded by the answer, THOU ART THE CHRIST. To beleeve in
CHRIST therefore is nothing else but to beleeve JESUS HIMSELFE
saying that he is THE CHRIST.
VI. Faith and Obedience both necessarily concurring to
Salvation, what kinde of Obedience that same is, and to whom due,
hath beene shewed above in the 3. Article. But now we must
enquire what articles of Faith are requisite: And) I say, that to
a Christian there is no other article of Faith requisite as
necessary to Salvation, but only this, THAT JESUS IS THE CHRIST.
But we must distinguish (as we have already done before in the 4.
Article) betweene Faith, and Profession. A Profession therefore
of more articles (if they be commanded) may be necessary. for it
is a part of our obedience due to the Lawes; but we enquire not
now what Obedience, but what Faith is necessary to salvation. And
this is prov'd first out of the scope of the Evangelists which
was by the description of our Saviours life to establish this one
Article. And we shall know that such was the scope, and counsell
of the Evangelists, if we observe but the History it selfe. Saint
Matthew beginning at his Genealogy shewes that JESUS was of the
linage of David, borne of a Virgin, Chap. 1. that He was adored
by the Wise men as King of the Jewes; that Herod for the same
cause sought to slay him, Chap. 2. That his Kingdome was Preacht
both by john the Baptist, and Himselfe, Chap. 3, 4. That He
taught the Lawes, not as the Scribes, but as one having
authority, Chap. 5, 6, 7. That he cur'd diseases miraculously,
Chap. 8, 9. That He sent his Apostles the Preachers of his
Kingdome throughout all the parts of judea, to proclame his
Kingdome, Chap. 10. That He commanded the Messengers sent from
john to enquire whether he were the CHRIST or not, to tell him
what they had seene, namely the miracles which were onely
competible with CHRIST, Chap. 11. That he prov'd and declar'd his
Kingdome to the Pharisees, and others by arguments, parables and
signes, Chap: 12. and the following Chapters to the 21. That He
maintain'd himselfe to be the Christ against the Pharisees, That
He was saluted with the title of King, when he entred into
Jerusalem, Chap. 21. That he forewarn'd others of false Christs,
and That He shewed in Parables what manner of Kingdome his should
be, Chap. 22, 23, 24, 25. That He was taken, and accused for this
reason, because He said He was a King; and that a Title was
written on his Crosse, THIS IS JESUS, THE KING OF THE JEWES,
Chap. 26, 27. Lastly, that after his resurrection, He told his
Apostles that all power was given unto Him both in Heaven, and in
Earth, Chap. 28. All which tends to this end, That we should
beleeve Jesus to be the Christ. Such therefore was the Scope of
Saint Matthew in describing his Gospell; but such as his was,
such also was the rest of the Evangelists; which Saint Iohn sets
down expresly in the end of his Gospel, These things (saith He)
are written, that ye may know that Jesus is the Christ, the Sonne
of the living God. Iohn 20. vers. 31.
I say, that to a Christian. Although I conceive this
assertion to be sufficiently proved by the following reasons, yet
I thought it worth my labour to make a more ample explication of
it, because I perceive that being somewhat new, it may possibly
be distastfull to many Divines. First therefore when I say this
Article, That Jesus is the Christ, is necessary to salvation; I
say not that Faith onely is necessary, but I require justice
also, or that Obedience which is due to the Lawes of God, that is
to say, a Will to live righteously. Secondly, I deny not but the
profession of many Articles, (provided that that profession be
commanded by the Church) is also necessary to salvation; but
seeing Faith is internall, Profession externall, I say that the
former onely is properly Faith; the latter a part of Obedience;
insomuch as that Article alone sufficeth for inward beleefe, but
is not sufficient for the outward profession of a Christian.
Lastly, even as if I had said that true and inward Repentance of
sinnes was onely necessary to salvation, yet were it not to be
held for a Paradox, because we suppose justice, Obedience, and a
mind reformed in all manner of vertues to be contained in it: so
when I say that the Faith of one Article is sufficient to
salvation, it may well be lesse wondred at, seeing that in it so
many other Articles are contained. For these words, Jesus is the
Christ, do signifie that Jesus was that Person whom God had
promised by his Prophets should come into the world to establish
his Kingdom, that is to say, that Jesus is the Sonne of God, the
Creatour of Heaven and Earth, born of a Virgin, dying for the
sinnes of them who should beleeve in Him; that Hee was Christ,
that is to say a King; that He reviv'd (for else He were not like
to reign) to judge the world, and to reward every one according
to his works, for otherwise he cannot be a King; also that men
shall rise again, for otherwise they are not like to come to
judgement. The whole Symbol of the Apostles is therefore
contained in this one Article; which notwithstanding I thought
reasonable to contract thus, because I found that many men for
this alone, without the rest, were admitted into the Kingdome of
God, both by Christ, and his Apostles; as the Thief on the
Crosse, the Eunuch baptized by Philip, the two thousand men
converted to the Church at once by Saint Peter. But if any man be
displeased that I doe not judge all those eternally damned, who
doe not inwardly assent to every Article defined by the Church
(and yet doe not contradict, but if they be commanded, doe
submit) I know not what I shall say to them; for the most evident
Testimonies of Holy Writ which doe follow, doe withhold me from
altering my opinion.
VII. Secondly, this is proved by the preaching of the
Apostles. For they were the Proclamers of his Kingdome, neither
did Christ send them to preach ought but the Kingdome of God,
Luke 9. vers. 2. Act. 15. vers. 6. And what they did after Christ
his Ascension may be understood by the accusation which was
brought against them, They drew Jason (saith Saint Luke) and
certain Brethren unto the Rulers of the City, crying, These are
the men that have turned the world upside down, and are come
hither also, whom Jason hath received; and these all do contrary
to the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another King, one
Jesus. Acts 17. vers. 6, 7. It appears also what the subject of
the Apostles Sermons was, out of these words: Opening, and
alleadging out of the Scriptures (to wit, of the old Testament)
that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the
dead, and that THIS JESUS IS THE CHRIST. Acts 17. vers. 2, 3.
VIII. Thirdly, By the places in which the easinesse of those
things which are required by Christ to the attaining of
salvation, is declared. For if an internall assent of the minde
were necessarily required to the truth of all and each
Proposition which this day is controverted about the Christian
Faith, or by divers Churches is diversly defined, there would be
nothing more difficult then the Christian Religion. And how then
would that be true, My yoke is easie, and my burthen light? Mat.
11. vers. 30. and that litle ones doe beleeve in Him? Mat. 18.
vers. 6. and that it pleased God by the foolishnesse of
Preaching, to save those that beleeve? 1 Cor. 1. vers. 21. or how
was the thiefe hanging on the Crosse sufficiently instructed to
salvation, the confession of whose Faith was contained in these
words, Lord remember me when thou comest into thy Kingdome; or
how could Saint Paul himselfe, from an enemy, so soon become a
Doctor of Christians?
IX. Fourthly, by this, that that Article is the foundation of
Faith, neither rests it on any other foundation. If any man shall
say unto you, Loe here is Christ, or He is there, beleeve it not,
for there shall arise false Christs, and false Prophets, and
shall shew great signes, and wonders, &c. Mat. 24. vers. 23.
Whence it followes, that for the Faiths sake which we have in
this Article, we must not beleeve any signes, and wonders.
Although we, or an Angell from Heaven (saith the Apostle) should
preach to you any other Gospel, then what we have preacht, let
him be accursed. Gal. 1. 8. By reason of this Article therefore
we might not trust the very Apostles, and Angels themselves (and
therefore I conceive not the Church neither) if they should teach
the contrary. Beloved, beleeve not every spirit, but try the
spirits whether they are of God, because many false Prophets are
gone out into the world, hereby know yee the spirit of God, every
spirit that confesseth Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is of
God, &c. 1 John 4. vers. 1, 2. That Article therefore is the
measure of the Spirits whereby the authority of the Doctors, is
either received, or rejected. It cannot be denied indeed, but
that all who at this day are Christians, did learn from the
Doctors, that it was Jesus who did all those things whereby he
might be acknowledged to be the Christ; yet it followes not that
the same Persons beleeved that Article for the Doctors, or the
Churches, but for Jesus his own sake. For that Article was before
the Christian Church, although all the rest were after it, and
the Church was founded upon it, not it upon the Church. Mat. 16.
vers. 18. Besides, this Article, that Jesus is the Christ, is so
fundamentall, that all the rest are by Saint Paul said to be
built upon it, For other foundation can no man lay, then that
which is layd, which is Jesus Christ (that is to say, that Jesus
is the Christ). Now if any man build uPon this foundation, gold,
silver, precious stone, wood, hay, stubble; every mans work shall
be made manifest: If any mans work abide which he hath built
thereupon, he shall receive a reward; if any mans work shall be
burnt, he shall suffer losse, but he himselfe shall be saved. 1
Cor. 3. vers. 11, 12, 13. &c. From whence it plainly appears,
that by foundation is understood this Article, THAT JESUS IS THE
CHRIST. For gold, and silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble
(whereby the Doctrines are signified) are not built upon the
Person of Christ; and also, that false Doctrines may be raised
upon this foundation, vet not so, as they must necessarily be
damned who teach them.
X. Lastly, that this Article alone is needfull to be inwardly
beleeved, may be most evidently proved out of many places of holy
Scriptures, let who will be the Interpreter: Search the
Scriptures, for in them yee think yee have eternall life; and
they are they which testify of me. John 5. 39. But Christ meant
the Scriptures of the old Testament only: for the new was then
not yet written. Now, there is no other testimony concerning
Christ in the old Testament, but that an eternall King was to
come in such a place, that He was to be born of such Parents,
that He was to teach, and doe such things; whereby, as by certain
signes, he was to be knowne: All which testify this one thing,
that JESUS who was so born, and did teach, and doe such things,
was THE CHRIST. Other Faith then was not required to attain
eternall life, besides this Article. Whosoever liveth and
beleeveth in me, shall never dye. John 11. vers. 25. But to
beleeve in Jesus (as is there exprest) is the same with beleeving
that JESUS WAS THE CHRIST. He therefore that beleeves that, shall
never dye, and by consequence, that Article alone is necessary to
salvation. These are written that yee might beleeve that JESUS IS
THE CHRIST the Sonne of God, and that beleeving yee might have
life through his name. Jo. 20. vers. 31. Wherefore he that
beleeves thus, shall have eternall life, and therefore needs no
other Faith. Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is
come in the flesh, is of God. 1 Jo. 4. v. 2. And, Whosoever
beleeveth that JESUS IS THE CHRIST, is born of God. 1 Jo. 5.
vers. 1. And, Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that
beleeveth that IESUS is the Son of God? 1 Jo. 5. v. 5. If
therefore there be no need to beleeve any thing else, to the end
a man may be of God, born of God, and overcome the world, then
that IESUS IS THE CHRIST. that one Article then is sufficient to
salvation. See, here is water, what doth hinder me to be
baptized? And Philip said, If thou beleevest with all thine
heart, thou maist. And he answered and said, I beleeve that IESUS
CHRIST is the Sonne of God. Acts 8. vers. 36, 37. If then this
Article being beleeved with the whole heart, (that is to say,
with inward Faith) was sufficient for Baptisme, it is also
sufficient for salvation. Besides these places there are
innumerable others which doe clearly, and expresly affirm the
same thing. Nay, wheresoever wee read that our Saviour commended
the Faith of any one, or that he said, Thy Faith hath saved thee,
or that he healed any one for his Faiths sake, there the
Proposition beleeved was no other but this, IESUS IS THE CHRIST,
either directly, or consequently.
XI. But because no man can beleeve IESUS TO BE THE CHRIST,
who, when he knowes that by Christ is understood that same King
who was promised from God by Moyses, and the Prophets, for to be
the King, and Saviour of the world, doth not also beleeve Moyses,
and the Prophets, neither can he beleeve these, who beleeves not
that God is, and that he governs the world; it is necessary that
the Faith of God, and of the old Testament be contained in this
Faith of the new. Seeing therefore that Atheisme, and the deniall
of the Divine Providence, were the only treason against the
Divine Majesty in the Kingdome of God by Nature; but Idolatry
also in the Kingdome of God by the Old Covenant; now in this
Kingdome wherein God rules by way of a new Covenant, apostasie is
also added, or the renunciation of this article once receiv'd,
that JESUS IS THE CHRIST. Truly other Doctrines, provided they
have their determination from a lawfull Church, are not to be
contradicted; for that is the sinne of disobedience; but it hath
been fully declar'd before that they are not needfull to be
beleev'd with an inward Faith.
XII. Faith and Obedience have divers parts in accomplishing
the salvation of a Christian; for this contributes the power, or
capacity; that the Act. And either is said to justifie in its
kinde. For Christ forgives not the sins of all men, but of the
Penitent, or the Obedient, that is to say the just, I say not the
guiltlesse, but the just; for justice is a Will of obeying the
Lawes, and may be consistent with a sinner, and with Christ the
Will to obey is Obedience; for not every man, but the just shall
live by Faith. Obedience therefore justifies because it maketh
just in the same manner as temperance maketh temperate, Prudence
Prudent, Chastity chaste, namely essentially; and puts a man in
such a state, as makes him capable of pardon. Againe, Christ hath
not promis'd forgivenesse of sinnes to all just men, but only
those of them who beleeve Him to be the Christ. Faith therefore
justifies in such a sense as a judge may be said to justifie who
absolves; namely by the sentence which actually saves a man. And
in this acception of justification (for it is an aequivocall
terme) Faith alone justifies, but in the other, Obedience onely:
but neither Obedience alone nor Faith alone doe save us, but both
together.
XIII. By what hath been said hitherto, it will be easy to
discerne what the duty of Christian Subjects is towards their
Soveraignes, who as long as they professe themselves Christians
cannot command their Subjects to deny Christ, or to offer him any
contumely; for if they should command this, they would professe
themselves to be no Christians. For seeing we have shewed both by
naturall reason, and out of holy Scriptures, that Subjects ought
in all things to obey their Princes and Governours, excepting
those which are contrary to the command of God; and that the
commands of God in a Christian City concerning temporall affairs,
(that is to say, those which are to be discust by humane reason)
are the Lawes and sentence of the City deliver'd from those who
have receiv'd authority from the City to make Laws, and judge of
controversies; but concerning spirituall matters; (that is to,
say those which are to be defin'd by the holy Scripture) are the
Lawes, and sentences of the City, that is to say the Church (for
a Christian City, and a Church, as hath beene shewed in the
foregoing Chapter in the 20. Art. are the same thing) deliv'rd by
Pastors lawfully ordain'd, and who have to that end authority
given them by the City; it manifestly followes, that in a
Christian Common weale, Obedience is due to the Soveraign in all
things, as well Spirituall, as Temporall. And that the same
obedience even from a Christian subject is due in all temporall
matters to those Princes who are no Christians, is without any
controversie; but in matters spirituall, that is to say, those
things which concern Gods worship, some christian Church is to be
followed. For it is an hypothesis of the Christian Faith, that
God speaks not in things supernaturall, but by the way of
Christian Interpreters of holy Scriptures. But what? Must we
resist Princes when we cannot obey them? Truly no; for this is
contrary to our civill Covenant. What must we doe then? Goe to
Christ by Martyrdome. Which if it seem to any man to be an hard
saying, most certain it is that he beleeves not with his whole
heart THAT IESUS IS THE CHRIST the Sonne of the living God, (for
he would then desire to be dissolved, and to be with Christ) but
he would by a feigned Christian Faith elude that obedience which
he hath contracted to yeeld up unto the City.
XIV. But some men perhaps will wonder, if, (excepting this
one Article, that IESUS IS THE CHRIST, which only is necessary to
salvation in relation to internall faith) all the rest belong to
obedience, which may be performed, although a man doe not
inwardly beleeve, (so he doe but desire to beleeve, and make an
outward profession, as oft as need requires, of whatsoever is
propounded by the Church); how it comes about that there are so
many Tenets which are all held so to concern our Faith, that
except a man doe inwardly beleeve them, He cannot enter into the
Kingdome of Heaven. But if he consider that in most controversies
the contention is about humane Soveraignty; in some, matter of
gain, and profit; in others, the glory of Wits; he will surely
wonder the lesse. The question about the propriety of the Church,
is a question about the Right of Soveraignty; for, it being known
what a Church is, it is known at once to whom the Rule over
Christians doth belong. For if every Christian City be that
Church which Christ himselfe hath commanded every Christian
subject to that city, to hear, then every subject is bound to
obey his City, that is to say, Him, or them who have the supreme
power, not only in temporall but also in spirituall matters. But
if every Christian City be not that Church, then is there some
other Church more universall, which must be obeyed. All
Christians therefore must obey that Church just as they would
obey Christ if He came upon Earth. She will therfore rule either
by the way of Monarchy, or by some Assembly: This question then
concerns the Right of ruling. To the same end belongs the
question concerning infallibility; for whosoever were truly, and
internally beleeved by all mankinde, that he could not erre,
would be sure of all Dominion, as well temporall as spirituall,
over all mankinde, unlesse himselfe would refuse it; for if he
say that he must be obeyed in temporalls, because it is supposed
he cannot erre, that Right of Dominion is immediately granted
him. Hither also tends the priviledge of interpreting Scriptures.
For he to whom it belongs to interpret the controversies arising
from the divers interpretations of Scriptures, hath authority
also simply and absolutely to determine all manner of
controversies whatsoever. but he who hath this, hath also the
command over all men who acknowledge the Scriptures to be the
Word of God. To this end drive all the disputes about the Power
of remitting, and retaining sinnes; or the authority of
excommunication. For every man, if he be in his wits, will in all
things yeeld that man an absolute obedience, by vertue of whose
sentence he beleeves himselfe to be either saved, or damned.
Hither also tends the power of instituting societies; for they
depend on him by whom they subsist, who hath as many subjects as
Monks, although living in an Enemies City. To this end also
refers the question concerning the Iudge of lawfull Matrimony;
for he to whom that judicature belongs, to him also pertains the
knowledge of all those cases which concern the inheritance, and
succession to all the goods, and Rights, not of private men
onely, but also of Soveraign Princes. And hither also in some
respect tends the Virgin-life of Ecclesiasticall Persons; for
unmarried men have lesse coherence then others with civill
society: and besides, it is an inconvenience not to be slighted,
that Princes must either necessarily forgoe the Priesthood (which
is a great bond of civill obedience) or have no hereditary
Kingdome. To this end also tends the canonization of Saints which
the Heathen called Apotheosis; for he that can allure forraign
subjects with so great a reward, may bring those who are greedy
of such glory to dare, and doe any thing. For what was it but an
honourable Name with posterity? which the Decii and other Romans
sought after, and a thousand others who cast themselves upon
incredible perils? The controversies about Purgatory, and
indulgencies, are matter of gain. The questions of Free-will,
Iustification, and the manner of receiving Christ in the
Sacrament, are Philosophicall. There are also questions
concerning some Rites not introduced, but left in the Church not
sufficiently purged from gentilisme; but we need reckon no more.
All the world knows that such is the nature of men, that
dissenting in questions which concern their Power, or profit, or
preeminence of Wit, they slander, and curse each other. It is not
therefore to be wondred at, if almost all tenets (after men grew
hot with disputings) are held forth by some or other to be
necessary to salvation, and for our entrance into the Kingdome of
Heaven; insomuch as they who hold them not, are not only
condemned as guilty of disobedience (which in truth they are
after the Church hath once defined them) but of Infidelity, which
I have declared above to be wrong out of many evident places of
Scripture; to which I adde this one of Saint Pauls, Let not him
that eateth, despise him that eateth not; and let not him that
eateth not, judge him that eateth; for God hath received him. One
man esteemeth one day above another, another esteemeth every day
alike. Let every man be fully perswaded in his own mind, Rom. 14.
v. 3, 5.