To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.
WHen I had published my Oceana, one of my sisters making good provision of Copies, presented of them unto her friends, as well to shew her re∣spect to them, as to know their judgements of it. Among the rest
being acquainted with Doctor Ferne, she sent him one, and soon after received this answer.
Madam,
I Received a Booke directed to me from your Ladiship, with intima∣tion I should expresse my sense of it: I acknowledge, Madam, the favour you have done me in sending it; but the return you expect hath its diffi∣culties: the Book being now past the Press, and of such an argument, had I seen it before it was publique, I should have said it was not likely to please, &c. but that is nothing to me; your desire I suppose is to know how I like it. I conceive your Ladiship is not so far a stranger either to the Booke which you sent, or to me, whome you are pleased thus to owne, but that you take me to be of a different judgement from the Author in this his forme, whether con∣cerning State or Church. And it may be your Ladiship did therefore call me
to speak as one that would be lesse partial. Give me leave then Madam in plain English to say, that albeit the Author hath shewn good sufficiency of parts, and taken much pains in order to his design; yet I conceive, First, that he is not a little mistaken in thinking the Israel-Common-wealth or Government under Moses so ap∣pliable unto his purpose as he would make it. Next, that when the que∣stion 'twixt his form and the Mo∣narchical is disputed over and over again, reason and experience will still plead for the latter. Nor can the ballance he pretends stand so steady in his form, as in a well tempered Monarchie, by reason the temptations of advancing are more like to sway with many in a Common Weal, then with one, &c. in the height of Dig∣nity. Next, When I consider such a change by this Modell from what was ever in, &c. And that the Agrari∣an,
with some other levelling Orders, are the laws of it, I should think the nature of men was first to be new model'd, before they would be capable of this. Lastly, what is said in rela∣tion to the Church or Religion in the point of Government, Ordination, Excommunication, had better beseem∣ed Leviathan, and is below the parts of this Gentleman, to retain and sit down with those little things, and poor mistakes, which the ignorance or wilfulnesse of many in these days hath broached in way of quarrel against the Church of England. And la∣mentable it is to see so many (especi∣ally Gentlemen of good parts) so opi∣nionate, so boldly medling in matters of Religion, as if they had forgot, or did not understand their Article of the Catholique Church. Madam, You see I have been plain in speaking my sense, and hope you will think me therefore more fit to
do you reall service when you shall have occasion to command. Madam,
Your humble Servant.
Nov. 4th. (56.
THe Doctor's letter though it be scandalous (for to charg a writer of little things, poor mistakes, sit∣ting down by ignorance, or wilful∣nesse, without proof, is no better) was yet but private; and there∣fore I may be asked why I would make it publique? whereunto I answer, That what a Divine will have to be true, is no lesse pub∣lique then if it were printed; but more, for he will Preach it; and Preaching communicates unto more then can read: Also his pre∣sent Doctrines are exceeding dan∣gerous. For in government that is cast upon Parliaments or popular elections, as ours hath ever been
and is, to take wise men, and under∣standing, and known among their Tribes to be Rulers over them, hath ever (except where the people were not free in their elections) been, and must ever be, the certain and infallible consequence. Now wise men, and understanding, and known among their Tribes, must needs be (at least for the greater part) of that rank which we now call the Aristocracy or Gentlemen. Whence the Senate in every well ordered Commonwealth hath con∣sisted of the Aristocracy or Gentry. And that the Senate ever had the supreme Authority, as well in matters of Religion as State, is not only clear in all other popular Governments, but in the Old Te∣stament; which also is confirmed by our Saviour in the New, Mat. 23. 2. The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses's seat, and therefore what∣soever they bid you observe, (both He
and His Apostles observed the national Religion) observe and do; for the liberty of conscience or prophetick right in the Common-wealth of Israel, as in others was such, as by which Christianity not∣withstanding the national Religi∣on might grow. But do not (saith he) after their works, for they say and do not. In their inquiry after John, Joh. 1. they seem to imply or say, that if he were that Prophet, there was nothing in the Law why he might not introduce his Baptism; and therefore why he might not gather Churches, or in∣struct the people in his way. Ne∣verthelesse when they come to doing, they kill the Prophets, and stone them. This indeed Christ blameth, being the abuse of their power. But whereas the supreme Authority of the Senate, whether in matters of Religion or State, is confirmed by all divine and hu∣mane
prudence; and the Senate is the more peculiar Province of the Gentry: The Doctor saith that Lamentable it is to see so many, (not only men of such parts or quality as the people in their ele∣ctions are not likely to look upon) but especially Gentlemen of good parts (then which the people upon like occasions have no other refuge) so opinionate, so boldly medling in matters of Religion, as if they had forgot or did not understand their Article of the Catholique Church. Now where ever the Clergy have gained this point, namely, that they are the Catholique Church, or that it is unlawful for Gentle∣men, either in their private capa∣city to discourse, or in their pub∣lique to propose, as well in the matter of Church as State Go∣vernment, neither government nor Religion have fayled to dege∣nerate into meere Priest-craft.
This especially was the reason why I wrote unto the Doctor as followeth.
Sir,
WHereas in a Letter of yours to one of my Sisters, I find your judgement given vehement∣ly against me, but meerly positive, I conceive that both in the matter and manner of delivery you have given me right to desire, and laid obligation upon your self to afford me your reasons, which may be done (if you please) either by confuting my book, or answering the Quaeries hereunto annexed; in either of which ways, or any other I am more then desirous to under∣take you; and that for many con∣siderations, as your abilities, the safety (at least on your part) in the performance, the importance of the argument, the seasonable∣nesse, and (however it came in
your mind to distrust it) the wel∣comenesse of such discourse unto all men of ingenuity, both in pow∣er and out of it, or whose interest is not the meer study of Parties, from which the freest since the late troubles, that hath written in this nature is Sir,
Your humble Servant.
Nov. 17. (56.
The Quaeries I shall inter∣weave with the Doctor's Answer unto each of them returned unto me with this Preamble.
Sir,
I Received your Paper wherein you are pleased to propound Quaeries, and say an obligation now lies upon me to render my reasons of dissenting, or to answer the Interrogatories. But you must give me leave to say, the ob∣ligation still ariseth from my respect to my Lady and your self, not from the matter or manner (as you seeme to imply) of the delivering my former judgement. For I could not conceive that by the favour and honour my Lady did me in sending the Book, I had lost my freedome, and stood bound either to complye, or be challenged as an Adversary to try out the difference.
Therefore upon the score of friendship and civility, I have forced my self in the midst of many pressing occa∣sions, to give you this account of my Thoughts in order to your Quaeries.
The Doctor hath written hereto∣fore upon the Politicks; Then this among the occasions or subjects of writing, there is none of great∣er moment. I am a beginner in this art, and have no desire to im∣pose upon any man; but if I can∣not teach him, to learn of him. But my Senior in it contradicts me, and gives me no reason. Now to contradict a man and give him no reason, is to give him an af∣front; and to demand reason in such a case, that is, for such an affront to send such a challenge, as provoketh unto no other conten∣tion then that for truth, being ac∣cording unto Scripture, and not against Laws, concerns a mans
honour and right; therefore it is in such a case not of curtesie, but the devoir of him that gave the affront to answer; which the Doctor having now done, I come into the lists or to the Quaeries, with his answers and my replies.
How much or in what the Author of Oceana is mi∣staken, to think the Com∣mon-wealth of the He∣brews appliable to his pur∣pose.
I Have reason still to think and say, The Government or Common-wealth (as you call it) of the He∣brews, was of all other lesse applia∣ble to your form, which supposes a
Senate debating, proposing, and the people resolving, choosing, as page 15. To which there was nothing like in that Government. You find indeed princes and Heads of the Tribes, and may call them a Senate, and read of the Assemblies of the people, but with∣out any such power or authority, Both of them receiving Laws by the hand of Moses without any debate or con∣tradiction. And 'tis in a manner confessed, page 18. where you say the function of that Senate was exe∣cutive only, the Laws being made by God. And if we look to the Institu∣tion of the seventy, we find it was upon the advice of Jethro, and that not to be as a Councel to Moses, but as Ʋnder-Judges for his case in the Administration of the Laws, which rather sutes with the condition of in∣feriour Min sters of Justice under a Monarch, Gods Vice-gerent on earth, as all Kings are in a more large con∣sideration, as Moses was more speci∣ally
in that Theocracy. Therefore I did not a little wonder at your asser∣tions and inferences, Pag. 16, & 17. Where you speak of their making God their King, their power of rejecting and deposing him as their civil Ma∣gistrate ▪ the harshnesse of the phrase may be mollified, but the thing asser∣ted I suppose cannot be defended (viz.) any such power in the people to God-ward; your inference also seems strange and infirm, that they had power to have rejected any of those Laws. What you assert in the 17. page of all the Laws given by Covenant, is true in a sober sense, but the inference strange, that only which was resolved (or chosen) by the People of Israel was their Law. This is so far from good Logick, that it falls short of good divinity; for it must suppose God and the People on equall termes at their entring that Convenant; whereas God often (especially in Deut.) shews his right of comman∣ding,
and enforces their obedience to his commands upon antecedent obli∣gations; his being the Lord their God, his choosing them out of all Nations to be a peculiar People, his bringing them out of the Land of Egypt: Much more might be said to shew these in∣stances of the People receiving laws from God (in which they were onely passive) are far from proving any power in the People as to God-ward, or from concluding generally the power in the People of resolving and choosing Laws; and therefore this Common-wealth of Israel not appliable to your purpose.
IN my Book I call the Govern∣ment whereupon we are dispu∣ting the Commonwealth of Israel; but though I think I did not much amiss, I am the first that ever cal∣led it so, and you make no diffi∣culty
in your first Letter to speak after me: But when I come to call it, as all they doe that have writ∣ten upon it, then you begin to doubt, and it is the Commonwealth (as I call it) of the Hebrews, whence you will be more then suspected, not to have read any of those Au∣thors. And yet how confidently is it laid to me in your first Letter, that I am not a little mistaken in thinking the Israelitish Commonwealth or Go∣vernment under Moses to be so ap∣pliable to my purpose, as I would make it? Nevertheless when you come in Answer unto this Quaere to give your Reasons, you bring this for one, that Page 18. I say the function of the Senate was onely executive, the Laws being made by God; Where First the word onely is not mine, but of your imposing; Secondly, when you should shew that I am mistaken in thinking the Com∣monwealth of Israel so appliable
to my purpose as I would make it, you shew that I make it no more appliable to my purpose than it is: Which is not fair, especially when I gave you so cleer a Reason, that albeit the Authority of proposing laws appertain unto every Senate (as such) yet the Laws of the Com∣monwealth of the Hebrews ha∣ving been all made by an infallible Legislator, even God himself, the Senate had no Laws in the begin∣ning to propose, but came after∣wards to propose, when those laws given in the beginning came to need addition; for if you find the Kings upon such occasions as David, 1 Sam. 7. 2. and Hezekiah, 2 Chron. 30. proposing, and the People resolving, was this likely to have been introduced by them? or if the People had the result in the Monarchy, must they not much more have had it in the Commonwealth? Wherefore the
Authority of proposing unto the people, as will better appear here∣after, was derived by the King from the Judge, by the Judge from the Sanhedrim, by the Sanhedrim from Moses, and by Moses from God: As (Exod. 19. 5.) where God giveth him instructions for a Proposition unto the People; Thus shalt thou say unto the House of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel, ye have seen what I did unto the Egy∣ptians, &c. Now therefore if you will obey my voice indeed, and keepe my Covenant, then you shall be unto me a Kingdome of Priests: If you will (not whether you will or no) you shall be (which relates unto the future) unto me a Kingdome; that is, I will be your King. God having given these instructions unto his sole Legislator, Moses came (accordingly) and called for the Elders of the People, and laid be∣fore their faces all these words that
the Lord had commanded him. And all the People answered together (gave their suffrage, Nemine contradi∣cente) and said, All that the Lord hath spoken we will doe: And Moses returned the words (that is, the suf∣frage, or result) of the People unto the Lord. Wherefore God was King in Israel by Covenant, pro∣posed by Himselfe or his servant Moses, and resolved by the People: Now that he was afterwards reje∣cted by the People (when they chose another King) that he should not reign over them, 1 Sam. 8. 7. are his own words: And if in these words he shew plainly that the People had power to reject a Law that was not onely proposed unto them, but resolved by them, then must it needs be included even in Gods own words, that the People must have had power to have re∣jected any thing that was propo∣sed, and not confirmed by them:
And yet you tell me, that this is so far from good Logick, that it falls short of good Divinity; And why? because it must suppose God and the People on equal termes at their entring that Covenant. Then that a King either cannot covenant (for exam∣ple) with his Chandler to serve him with Wax, or that the Chan∣dler was upon equal Terms, or Hail-fellow well met with the King, at their entering that cove∣nant, comes up to good Divinity. Such is the Logick which you chop with me, for you are beyond my understanding! But the ho∣nest part of Logick I understand well enough, not to envy them that seem to have more.
For if by the Word Terms you understand the Conditions of the Covenant, it is fair: as to these indeed, the parties covenanting are so far equal, that they may e∣qually will or choose; else it were
a Precept or Command, not a Co∣venant; but if by the Word Terms you understand the dignity or power of the parties, it is not fair, but an equivocation; for the e∣quality of the Parties in that sense is nothing at all unto the equality of the Covenant; wherefore the impiety you would fix upon me, is your own, and ariseth from your want of distinguishing between the Almighty Power of God in which he is above all things, and his infinite love whereby he bow∣eth the Heavens, and descendeth unto his poor creatures; in the former regard to talk of electing or deposing God (who is King, be the Heathen never so unquiet) were, in∣deed, impious; but in the latter it is most certain, that He ruleth a∣mong no other than a consenting, a resolving, a willing People; Or tell me whether the reign of God on the neck of the Turks be the
same with that in the hearts of his elect, or wherein consists the diffe∣rence? Moreover to what I have said, and more than what I have said for the debate that was in the Senate, and the result that was in the People of Israel, Grotius hath summed up the Talmudists in this Note upon the Tenth Verse of Deu. 18. Notandum praeterea scita Se∣natus nonnull a sive legi interpretandae sive praemuniendae fact a evanuisse, non modò si Senatus ante receptum ubi{que} morem sententiam mutasset, verum etiam sivel ab initio Populus ea non ferret, vel si irent in dissuetudinem, where there is nothing plainlier to be perceived than that debate was in this Senate, and result in this People: and you confesse what I assert in the 17th page of all their Laws given by Covenant to be true in a sober sense; now the sense which I have shew'd you is that of all so∣ber Men. But can you shew me the
judgement of any sober man that because we find Princes and heads of the Tribes, we may call them a Senate? pray' how do you cut Twelve Princes into Seventy El∣ders, or where do you find them in the Senate? but this is nothing. If we look to the institution of the Se∣venty, we find it (say you) to be upon the advice of Jethro. (We) I pray you take it to your self, or I appeal to him that shall compare Exod. 18. with Numb. 11. whether this have been the opinion of any sober man. Moses in that of Exodus hearkens unto the voice of his father in law, Jethro the Priest of Midi∣an: Making able men out of Israel, Heads over the people, Rulers of thou∣sands, Rulers of hundreds, Rulers of fifties, and Rulers of tenns. And they judged the People at all seasons: the hard causes they brought unto Moses, but every small matter they judged themselves. These were the Je∣thronian
praefectures, or the courts afterwards consisting of Twenty three Judges that sate in the gates of every City. Never were they mistaken before for the Sanhe∣drim or Seventy Elders, which came not to be instituted till af∣terwards in the Eleventh of Num∣bers, where Moses while he stood alone, being as weary of the re∣course had unto him from these judicatories, as he was of That, be∣fore their Institution, Cries unto God, I am not able to bear this People alone (his Office of sole Legislator, in which relation Lycurgus and So∣lon are as well and as properly cal∣led Kings, as He, who was King in∣deed in Jesurun, Deut. 33. 5. but no otherwise than they in their Com∣monwealths, that is to propose the Laws of his form, when the Heads of the People, & the Tribes of Israel were gathered together 〈◊…〉〈◊…〉 was now almost accomplished.) Wherefore
the Lord said unto Moses, Gather un∣to me Seventy Elders of the men of Israel, whom thou knowest to be El∣ders of the People, and Officers over them, and bring them unto the Taber∣nacle of the congregation (in which or in the Temple was ever after the Session-house of the Senate) that they may stand there with thee. If this be not enough, you may have a farther sight of your great mistake, 2 Chron. 19. where at the restitution of this Govern∣ment in some part by Jehosha∣phat, the Jethronian Councils are set up City by City: But the Senate or Seventy Elders with a moreover in Jerusalem; and that the Jethro∣nian Courts are intimated in the New Testament by the name of the Judgement, as the Sanhedrim by that of the Council, Godwyn the Schoolmaster could have told you. But whereas nothing is more con∣stantly delivered by all Authors,
nor express in Scripture, then that Moses having instituted the Sanhe∣drim stood from that time for∣ward no more alone, or was thence forth but Prince of the Se∣nate, which God appointed to stand with him; You say, that he was a Monarch or stood alone. And whereas the Jethronian Prae∣fectures henceforth brought all their difficult Cases unto the San∣hedrim, in the institution of which Sanhedrim Jethro had no hand: You say, that the Sanhedrim or Seventy Elders were instituted by Jethro. How plain would your Eng∣lish have been upon this occasion if they had given it; whereas I shall say no more then that these are no little things nor poor mistakes.
In case the Authors Form, and the Monarchical be or be not disputed over and over again, what the Reason or Experience may be that remaineth, or may be thought to re∣main, for the advantage of the latter?
I Have not time to dispute the two forms, nor will to make it my study; but this Reason is cogent for Monar∣chical, that in it there is one Chief; For Order is the main concernment of Government, and Order is more per∣fected by reducing to Ʋnity, or having
still One Chief in the Order; And this I mention the rather, because as anci∣ently the Romans, so you in your mo∣del, are sorced to betake you in neces∣sity to a Dictator, which undeniably evinces Monarchical Government, the fittest for all exigencies. Also be∣cause God to whom you seem to appeal (Page 15.) led his People (Psal. 77. ult.) by the hand of Moses and Aa∣ron. Moses chief in the whole Go∣vernment, and Aaron the chief in the Priesthood, and after Moses Joshua, and still raised up single persons to judge his People. Lastly, because the dust of Nature led your form of Go∣vernment, from Paternal (so it was at the beginning or Peopling of the World) unto Monarchical, as Fami∣lies encreased into Nations.
YOu in your Letter are posi∣tive that be the two Forms never so often disputed, the ad∣vantage in reason will remain to the Monarchical; but when you come to give your reason, have not time to dispute the businesse, nor will to make is your study; you will give a man his sentence, without recourse to the law, and his objections: Again, without ta∣king notice of his Answers, as in the matter of Dictatorian Power, for which you say, First, that one person is fittest, and Secondly, that one person being fittest for this one thing, it undeniably evinces Monarchical Government the fittest for all exigencies. Now granting the former were true, as I have shewed it to be false, and
therefore chosen the Ʋenetian Di∣ctator which consistth not of One man, rather than the Roman, which did; yet if One Man be fittest to be a Pilot, how doth it follow that That one man is fittest for all Exi∣gences? Or if Gideon were fittest to be Judge or Dictator of Israel, that it was fittest (as the people desired of him, Judges 8. 22.) he should rule over them, both He and his Son, and his sons son also? And whereas you say that God (unto whom I appeal) still raised up single persons to judge his people; doth it follow that these Judges or Dictators were Monarchs, especially when Gideon answers the People, I will not rule over you, neither shall my son rule over you, The Lord shall rule ouer you: Or rather that Monarchical Govern∣ment even in the time of the Judges was in this Common-wealth, to the rejection of God? In which place (to allude unto
that in your Answer to the first quaere to which I have not yet re∣ply'd,) it is plain also that antece∣dent obligations do not alwaies imply command, or enforce obedi∣ence: for say the people unto Gi∣deon, rule thou over us, &c. for thou hast delivered us from the hand of Midian; yet neither did this obilge the people to choose or Gideon, to be chosen King.
That God led his People, Psal. 77. by the hand of Moses and Aaron, is right; but your flourish upon it, where you say Moses Chief in the whole Government, and Aaron Chief in the Priesthood, withers; for the Place relateth unto the Times, (Exod. 7.) In which saith the Lord unto Moses, See I have made thee a God to Pharaoh, and Aarou thy Brother shall be thy Pro∣phet (that is) thy Chaplain or Ora∣tor (for otherwise there arose not a Prophet like Moses in Israel,) and
this was before the time that Moses made Aaron High Priest: nor af∣ter the institution of the Sanhe∣drim, was the High Priest other then subordinate unto it, whether in matter of Religion or State; Nay, if he had given them just cause, he might be whipt by the Law, as is affirmed by the Talmu∣dists. This Senate was to stand, as hath been shewed, with Moses; therefore Moses from the institu∣tion thereof, was no more than Prince or Archon of it, and Gene∣ral of the Commonwealth; in each of which functions he was succee∣ded by Joshua. And the People ser∣ved the Lord all the daies of Joshua, and all the daies of the Elders that out-lived Joshua, (Judges 2. 7.) But from this time forward you hear no more of the Jethronian Praefe∣ctures, that sate in the Gates of the Cities, nor of the Senate, as I take it, (being yet but studying this
Commonwealth, in which it were a better deed to aid, than mislead me) till the restitution of it by Je∣hoshaphat, 2 Chron. 19. For after the death of Joshua, and of the El∣ders of these Courts, the people of Israel mindlesse of the excellent Orders of their Commonwealth, given by God, were so stupid, as to let both the Senate and the infe∣riour Courts to fall. But a Com∣monwealth without the Senate must of natural necessity degene∣rate into Anarchy: Wherefor the Nature of this Commonwealth throughout the Book of Judges was downright Anarchie. You have the Tribes without any Common Council or deliberation leaguing one with another, and making War at their Phancy, as Judg 1. 3. Judah said unto Simeon his brother, Come up with me into my lot, that we may fight against the Ca∣naanites, &c. Whence (especially
when there was no Judge ne¦ther) is that frequent Complain throughout this Book, that in those daies there was no King (as men of your rank have rendred the Word, though in this place it rather signifies Suffes Consul, or Dictator, as some of the Laiety that is of the folkes do affirme) in Israell, but every one did that which was right in his owne eyes: In this case of a Common-wealth there is no help but by Dictatorian power, which God in the raising up of Judges, did therefore indulge, ap∣pointing them ordinarily but pro¦tempore, or upon some, not upon all Exigencies; For Judges 20. the Congregation sentenceth the Tribe of Benjamin, decrees and manageth the War against them, without a Judge or Dictator. This Anarchy with the confusion of it, by want of the Senate, especially when the sons of Samuel grew cor∣rupt
and imperious through the long rule of their father, was the true cause why the people chose to have a King, and so fell into Monarchy, under which they fa∣red worse; for though there hap∣ned to come with a great deal of cost, as in the War with Saul, a Da∣vid to be defended, yet by another War against his ambitious son, and after him a Solomon; in the next generation the Tribes rent in sunder, and besides the execrable wickednesse of the most of their Kings (the like whereunto was ne∣ver known,) gave not over hew∣ing one another, till Israel first, and then Judah fell into misera∣ble Captivity. And yet this is that Unity and Order which you celebrate, and the Argument for Monarchy that must be cogent; which happens because you are re∣solved not to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 see that the Unity of Government consists in such a
form, which no man can have the Will, or having the Will can have the power to disturbe, but cast all upon the unity of a Person, that may doe what he list, running still upon your Equivocations, as if brethren could not live together in Unity, unlesse reduced to the will of one brother.
Where there is or ever was a Monarchy upon a popular ballance, or that proposed by the Author, but those onely of the Hebrews, and whether these were not the most infirme of all o∣ther?
I Perceive not how it concerns any thing I said, or the cause in hand, as to any material point. Onely it seems to suppose the Monarchy of the Hebrews to be on a popular ballance, which I cannot apprehend, unless be∣cause they had a kind of Agrarian, their Land divided by lot, which not∣withstanding
left place for a sufficient difference, and excesse in dignity of persons, bounds of Estates, measure of Wealth and Riches.
IN your Letter you say, that the ballance I pretend cannot stand so steady in my Form, as in a well tem∣per'd Monarchy; and yet to the Quaere, where there is or ever was a Monarchy upon such a ballance? You Answer, that you perceive not how it concerns any thing you said, or the cause in hand as to any material point, as if the ballance were of slight concernment to a Govern∣ment. And for the Monarchy of the Hebrews, you say, that you can∣not apprehend it to have been upon a popular ballance. But the Land of Canaan as it is computed by He∣cataeus Abderites in Josephus against Appion, contained three Millions
of Acres; and they among whom it was divided, as appears Numb. 1. 46. At the Cense of them taken by Moses in Mount Sanai, amount unto 603550. Now if you allow them but four Acres a Man, it comes unto two Millions four hundred thousand Acres, and up∣wards, by which means there could remain for Josua's lot, Calebs portion, with the Princes of the Tribes, and the Patriarks or Princes of families, but a matter of five hundred thousand Acres, which holdeth not above a sixth part in the ballance with the peo∣ple, and yet you will not appre∣hend, that this was a popular bal∣lance: Why then it will be in vain to shew you the certain conse∣quence, Namely that the Monar∣chies of the Hebrews, being the onely governments of this kind that ever were erected upon a po∣pular ballance, were the most in∣firm
and troubled of all others; That the cause why the Congre∣tion that elected the former Kings were able to reject Rehoboam was from the power of the people, and the power of the people from their Popular Agrarian: and that the cause why the Kings of Israel and Judah, while they had not for∣reign Wars, never gave over knocking out the Braines of the people, one against another, was, that having no Monarchical bal∣lance, or not such an one as was sufficient, whereupon safely to rest themselves in peace, they were necessitated as some Kings at this day (the ballance of whose Empire is broken) to make themselves use∣ful unto the people through their danger, that so through the want of Order, they 〈◊〉〈◊〉 subsist (accor∣ding unto the modern Maxim) by confusion and war; an expedient sufficiently practised to be well known.
Whether the Temptations of advancing did sway more with the Many in the Commonwealth, than with the Few under the Monarchies of the He∣brews, (that is) under the Kings of Judah, Israel, or the High Priests, when they came to be Princes? and whether other story be not (as to this Quaere conformable unto that of Scripture.
WHether greater Temptations in the Hebrew Government before or after they had Kings, seems little material by comparing them to learn, and as little to your purpose, till what you suppose be granted, (viz.) that the Government before they had Kings, was in your sense a Common-wealth. But as for all Forms that have been popular, or shall be, still the Temptations are the more powerful or dangerous, as to the change of Go∣vernment. This put them upon an in∣convenience by often changing their Generals of Armies, and upon often banishing them, or any great Citizens, when their just deserts had made them honoured and beloved; and this I suppose puts you upon a ne∣cessity in one place of defending the Ostracisme as no Punishment, and
the People of Rome as not ingrate∣ful in banishing Camillus.
IF to doubt whether Israel were a Commonwealth in my sense be excusable in one that will take no notice of the Elders that stood wth Moses, nor why Gideon being Judge refused nevertheless to be King; yet the league that was made between Judah and Benjamin in the first, and the sentence that was given by the whole Congre∣gation, with the War thereupon levied by the people onely, with∣out so much as a Judge or Dicta∣tor, in the last Chapter of the book of Judges, evinces my sense, and that of all Reasonable Men; wherefore the comparison desired by me is plainly material: and your evasion a poor shift, below a
man of parts, or well meaning.
For albeit Israel for the far grea∣ter time of the Commonwealth before the Kings was Anarchy, the most subject State of such a Go∣vernment unto confusion; yet a∣bating the conspiracy of Abimelech (made King of the men of Sichem) there was (as I remember) no di∣sturbance from ambition, nor stri∣ving to be uppermost, of which af∣ter the Kings, there was no end. For (to omit David's destroying of the house of Saul, and reigning in his stead (as done with good warrant) you have Absolom levying War a∣gainst his father; Jeroboam an Ar∣rant knave breaking the Empire of Rehoboam a hair-brain'd fool in two pieces, whence the children of Judah turning Sodomites, (a King. 14. 24.) and they of Israel Idola∣ters; You have Baasha conspiring against Nadab King of Israel, mur∣thering him, destroying all the
Posterity of Jeroboam, and reig∣ning in his stead: Zimri (Captain of the Chariots) serving Asa the son with the same sauce, when he was drunk (killing all of his kin∣red, that pissed againg the Wall,) as Baasha the father had done Na∣dab, when (may chance) he was sober: Omri hereupon made Cap∣tain by the people, and Zimri after he had reigned seven daies, bur∣ning himself; The people of Is∣rael when Zimri was burnt, divi∣ding into two parts, one for Omri, and the other for Tibni, who is slain in the dispute; whereupon Omri out-does all the Tyrants that went before him, and when he has done, leaves Ahab his son, the heir of his Throne and virtue: You have Jehu destroying the Fa∣mily of Ahab, giving the flesh of Jezebel unto the dogs, and recei∣ving a pretty Present from those of Samaria, seventy heads of his
Masters sons in Baskets. To Asa and Jehoshaphat of the Kings of Ju∣dah belongeth much reverence; but the wickedness of Athalia, who upon the death of her son Ahaziah, that shee might reign, murthered all her Grand children, but one stoln away, which was Joash, was repaid by that one in the like coin, who also was slain by his servants; so was his son A∣mastah that reigned after him: and about the same time Zachariah King of Israel, by Shallum, who reigned in his stead, and Shallum was smitten by Manahim, who reigned in his stead, (Battail Royal in Shoo-lane) Pekahah the son of Manahim was smitten by Pekah one of his Captains, who reigned in his room, Pekah by Hoshea, who having reigned Nine years in his stead, was carried by Salmanezer King of Assyria with the Ten Tribes into Captivity. Will Judah
take a warning? Yes, Hezekiah, the next, is a very good King, but Manasseh his son, like the rest, a shedder of innocent blood; to him succeedeth Ammon, fathers own child, who is slain by his servants: Josiah once again is a very good King; but Jehoahaz, that died by the heels in Egypt deserv'd his end, nor was Jehoiakim the brother of the former (who became Tribu∣tary unto Pharaoh) any better; In whose Reign & his successor Zede∣chia's was Judah led into Captivity by Nebuchadnezzar, (the common end of battail Royal) where I leave any man to judge how far the uni∣ty of a person tends to the unity of Government, and whether the temptations of advancing (to use your Phrase) were greater in the Commonwealth or in the Monar∣chies of the Hebrews. It were easie to shew, if you had not e∣nough already, that the High
Priests when they came to be Princes, were never a barrel better herring; whereas that there is no such work in Ʋenice Switz, or Hol∣land, you both know, and might if you did not wink as easily see. All's one, It is, for it is as you have said, nay and more in all forms that have been Popular or shall be, still the Temptations are more powerful and dangerous as to the change of Govern∣ment; this put them upon great in∣conveniences by often changing their Generals of Armies. A pound of Clergy, for which take an ounce of wisdome, in this Maxim evin∣ced by * 4.1Machiavel. Prolongation of Magistracy is the ruine of popular Go∣vernment. The not often chan∣ging their Generals or Dictators was the bane of the Common-wealths both of Rome and of Israel, as by the corruption of Samuel's sons (Moss that groweth not upon a roling stone) is apparent: And
for the banishment of Great Men, Name me one that since those Go∣vernments were settled, hath been banished from Ʋenice, Switz or Holland. The Examples in Rome are but two that can be objected by a rational man in Seven hun∣dred years, and I have answered those in my Book; For the Ostra∣cisme, though I hold it a foolish Law, yet where the people have not had the prudence to found their Government upon an Agra∣rian, I shew'd you out of Reason, A∣ristotle and experience, that it is a shift they will be put to, whether a punishment, or not; Though no man, that is versed in the Greek story, can hold it to have been so esteem'd.
Whether Men as they be∣come richer or poorer, free, or servile, be not of a different Genius, or be∣come new modeld, and whether these things hap∣pen not as the ballance changes?
SƲch suddain changes of the Genius and Nature of Men, I leave to the Pipe of Orpheus, or Ovids Meta∣morphosis.
A Pretty jeer; but there is one in that Book metamorphosed into the Bird that cannot see by day. Now, a change that happens in the Revolution of one hundred and forty years, is not suddain; but so long hath the Government in question been changing from Ari∣stocratical to popular: and if the Acts of popular Councils from that time, have still been and be to this hour more and more po∣pular, the Genius of the people is as cleer as the day with the altera∣tion of it, in those opinions you in your first Letter are pleased to call the ignorance or wilfulnesse of these daies, that since the Aristo∣cratical ballance of the Clergy is gone, shake the yoak of the Priest, The Butcher sought his Knife and had it in his mouth.
Whether Gentlemen have been more beholding un∣to Divines, or Men in Or∣ders, or Divines more be∣holding unto Gentlemen, or such as have not been in Orders, for the know∣ledge which we have of the Commonwealth of the Hebrews? or who of each sort have written best upon that Subject?
COmparisons being Odious, I onely say, Divines have cause to give learned Gentlemen their due, and thanke for their labours, but also cause to complain when they are too bold with holy things: not onely with the Commonwealth of the Hebrews, the Forme that God then appointed, but also with the Government of the Christian Church, the form and fun∣ctions left by Christ and his Apostles, according to which the Church acted three hundred years before the Civil power became Christian.
DIvines have cause to com∣plain when Gentlemen are too bold with holy things, as with the Commonwealth of the He∣brews; but if you ask, who of each sort have written best upon this Subject, Comparisons aae odious; here you can be modest; for no body hath written in this kind, but Carolus Sigonius, Buxtorfius, Cornelius Bertramus, Hugo Grotius, Selden and Cunaeus, all which were Gentlemen, or such as were not in Orders. Nor can it be gathe∣red from any thing now extant, that any Divine understood this Government. But if Divines can∣not deal with this Government and Gentlemen may not, how should it be known? or if Di∣vines understand not this, why do they meddle with others?
What and how many be those little things, and poor mistakes, which the Author below a Gentle∣man of his parts hath en∣tertain'd?
THose little things and poor mi∣stakes I confined to the matters of the Church: for innovating where∣in these latter times make exceptions against our Translation, delight in some Notions of Words in Scripture, vent new interpretations, make strange inferences, in which to rest satisfied is below, &c. Such Page 16. from Notion or Origination of Ec∣clesia, to infer Democratical Govern∣ment
of the Church; and that infe∣rence for the right of gathering Churches now, Page 28. So after in the model, what is said for the Notion of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to the prejudice of due Ordination and the like.
IN Judges 20. 2. the Civil Con∣gregation of the Chief of all the Tribes of Israel, is called Ecclesia Dei; and not onely Greek writers, as particularly Aeschines, use that word for the Assemblies of the Peo∣ple in the Grecian Common-wealths, but Luke also speaking of the People of Ephesus, he saith, Erat autem Ecclesia confusa; * 4.2 wherefore this Word having been of this use before the Apostles, and being ap∣plyed by them unto their Convo∣cations or Assemblies, there must needs have been some reason, why they made choice of this, rather
then of any other. Now if the Reason had not been that they in∣tended the Church to be Democra∣tical, why would they borrow a word that is of that sense? or why should you think that they would give names unto things not accor∣ding unto their Nature; seeing if they had intended it should have been Aristocratical, they might as well have taken the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or Senate? Wherefore saies Calvin the Lawyer, Sumpserunt Apostoli illud melius nomen ad significandum Ecclesiam, ut ostenderent politiam Populi Dei esse quidem Democrati∣cam, &c. I have shewed you my reasons, and given you my Testi∣mony, and yet you that have nei∣ther, call this a Notion. Then for the Chirotonia, or holding up of hands, it was the way of giving suffrage in some of those Popular Assemblies, more particularly, that of Athens, and this word the Apo∣stles
also came to borrow for the suffrage of their Congregations, as in the Greek, Acts 14. 23. where they use the Word (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) the same that was used by the A∣thenians, signifying holding up of hands or their manner of suf∣frage; but this the English Tran∣slators have left out, and where they should have rendred the place, and when they had Ordained Elders by the holding up of hands in every Congregation, they render it, When they had Ordained them Elders in every Church: Now You, though you know this well enough, never lay any blame upon the Transla∣tors, but with them that find fault with the Translation, as if it were less impiety in Divines to corrupt the Scriptures than in others to vindicate them from Corruption. And this is another of those things which you have the confidence to call Notions, albeit in so doing
you must needs sin against your own conscience: but what is that to Interest? if this place be resto∣red, Ordination is restored unto the People; and so Divines losing it, there is an end of Priest-craft, as by telling the story of this in∣vention, (though in brief) will better appear. Ordination in the Commonwealth of Israel being primarily nothing else but Ele∣ction of Magistrates; was perfor∣med by the suffrage of the people, or (as is shewn by the Talmudists upon Numb. 11. in Eldad and Me∣dad) by the balot. Nor was it o∣therwise till the Sanhedrim got a whim of their own, without any precept of God, to Ordain their Successors by the Chirothesia or Imposition of hands, and the Par∣ties being so ordained calld Presby∣ters, became capable of being ele∣cted into the Judicatories, where∣by cheating the People of the
right of electing their Magistrates: the Sanhedrim instituted the first Presbyterian Government; ne∣vertheless this Form as to the Im∣position of hands, was not alwaies held so necessary among the Jews, but if the party were absent it might be done by letter, and sometimes though he were present it was done by verse or charme only. But whereas the Senate, if not every Senator, by this Innova∣tion had right to Ordain; by Hilel High Priest and Prince of the San∣hedrim, (who lived some three hundred yeares before Christ) means was found to get the whole power into his hand, which being of such consequence, that no Ma∣gistrate could thenceforth be made but by the High Priest, it changed this same first Presbytery (the High Priests becomming af∣terwards Monarchs,) as I may say, into the first Papacy; for this track
was exactly troden over again by the Christians; first, to the Presby∣tery, from thence to the Bishop, and that by means of the same Chirothesia or Imposition of hands taken up from the Jews; and out of this Bishop stept up the Pope, and his Seventy Cardinals, anciently the Presbytery, or Seventy Elders of Rome in imitation of those of Israel. Moreover it is the judge∣ment of good Divines, as Bullinger, Musculus, P. Martyr, Luther and Me∣lancton, that this Chirothesia or Im∣position of hands is not necessary, for that the Apostles took up some things from the Jews, as commu∣nity of goods, which are not ne∣cessary, you will not deny: and if this were not of that kind, then wherefore in the place alledged, where the Chirotonia, prayer and fasting, as all things necessary unto Ordination are mentioned, is the Chirothesia omitted even by the A∣postles
themselves? Nor can you find that it was otherwise than sparingly used by them in compa∣rison of the Chirotonia or suffrage of the people; and perhaps there onely where the people had not the Civil right of any such suf∣frage, by which where it was, they Ordained Elders in every Church. And in this place comes that of your Answer unto the 7th Quaere, Namely, That the Church acted three hundred years before the Civil Power became Christian, to be very questionable. For that Tar∣sus a City of Cilicia, was so free, that Paul, being a Native thereof, claimeth the right of a Roman, is clear in Scripture; Nor is it more obscure in story, that the people in the Cities of Lycia, Pamphylia, Ly∣caonia, or Cappadocia, in which the Apostle ordained Ecclesiastical El∣ders by the Chirotonia of the Church or Congregation, had not
only the Ancient right but custom of electing their civil Elders in the same manner: and where was the necessity, or sense that the A∣stles to convert them unto the Christian Religion, should go a∣bout to depose them, than which nothing could have caused a grea∣ter jealousie, obstruction, or scan∣dal upon their Doctrine? But if the Apostles used the words Eccle∣sia and Chirotonia in these places according unto the right of the people, and the known sense (in which they had been alwaies ta∣ken) then acted not the Church three hundred years nor halfe a hundred years before the Civil Power became Christian: And if the Bishops, when the Emperors became Christian, made no bones of receiving their Mitres from the Civil Magistrate, they must have done ill, had they known or con∣ceived that the Church in the pu∣rest
times had waved the Civil Magistracy. Paul arriving at A∣thens converts Dionysius one of the Senators, and some others unto the Christian faith: Suppose he had converted the whole S••••ate and the People, what sober Man can imagine, that he would have disputed with the Congregation the sense of their former Name Ecclesia, or the right of electing their new Elders by their old Chi∣rotonia, or suffrage by holding up of hands? But he converted but a few; wherefore as he had no aid, so he had no hinderance from the Magistrate; This, then, was a ga∣ther'd Church, I think, or what was it? If the Prophets in Israel went up and down preaching unto the people, by whom they were followed; and if some of these that were thus followed were true, and more of them false, the people that followed them
could not be all of the same per∣swasion, though it is like that no man would follow such an one as he was not perswaded was true. But the people choosing at their own discretion whom they would follow, how could these Congre∣gations be lesse gathered than these when the people were divi∣ded into three sects, Pharisees, Sa∣duces, and Esscans, which could be no other? Nor doth the San∣hedrim, though they had the Go∣vernment of the National Reli∣gion, sending unto John the Baptist (John 11. 25.) to know who he was, and why he baptized, refuse him the like Prophetick right, used by him first, and afterwards by our Saviour and the Apostles, without the Authority of the San∣hedrim; Nor doth Paul blame the Congregations of Apollos and Ce∣phas (1 Cor. 1.) in that they were gathered, but in that they put too
much upon them that gathered them: How then doth it appear that my Inference for gathered Congregations now, is a little thing or poor mistake below a Gentleman of parts; when I say no more than that gathered Con∣gregations were in use both before and after Christ, notwithstanding the National Religion that was then settled? and therefore ga∣thered Congregations for any thing in the Old or New Testa∣ment that I can find to the con∣trary, might be now, though a Na∣tional Religion were settled. And if this be not true, the Testimony, which you bear in your present practice, is against your self; for what else are your Congregations now, that will use none other then the Common-prayer, but gathered?
To conclude, it should seem by you, that if the National Religion were so settled, that the meddling with holy things by any other than a Divine, might be resolv'd as boldly (and to use a fine word) opinionately done, as if it were a∣gainst an Article of our Creed; you would be pleased. But the National Religion and the Li∣berty of Conscience so ordered in Oceana, that neither the Interest of the Learned, nor the Ignorance of the unlearned can corrupt Re∣ligion (in which case though there might, yet there is no probability, that there would be any gathered Congregations, this being the pe∣culiar Remedy for that which you hold a disease) you are dis∣pleased: for thus you Conclude,
Sir,
YOu see I have used freedome a∣gain, it is like you will think too much; but I desire you would allow me the priviledge of the Old saying, suo quis{que} sensu abundet, and not trouble your self with interrogating me, from whom you can draw fo little satisfaction. I never made it my study to model or shape out Forms of Government, but to yield Obedience to every lawful Command proceeding from Authority, how perfect, or other∣wise the form was. In a word, Sir, I honour your parts, wish them im∣ployed as may be most for the service of God and his Church, and doe pro∣mise my selfe in all friendly and Christian Offices,
Nov. 26. (56.)
Sir,
Your humble servant. H. Ferne.
To which I say that
I Have not heard a Divine quote Scripture (Quis{que} suo sensu abun∣det) as an Old saying; but you are not contented to doe so onely but to use it accordingly; for whereas (Rom. 14. 15.) it is indulged by the Apostle as to indifferent things, this was never intended to be an Argument that the Seventy Elders were erected upon the ad∣vice of Jethro, that Moses instituted a Monarchy, that Gideon was King of Israel, or indeed for any thing that you have said; And therefore however you cal it Interrogatory, it is civil enough in such a case to desire better reason, but do not fear that I should trouble you any more in this kind, nor had I at all, if whereas you confess in the close that you have not studied these things, you had but said so much
in the beginning, for there had been an end.
This study indeed as I have shewd elsewhere, is peculiar unto Gentlemen; but if it be of your goodnesse that you study not to shape such work, must it ever be the study of your Tribe to mi∣shape it? Is it in such less impiety to have ruin'd a Kingdome then in any other to shew the true Principles of a Commonwealth? Or whereas the Nature of the Po∣liticks, or such Civil Power (wit∣nesse the Sanhedrim of Israel) as commeth neerest unto Gods own pattern, regards as well Religion as Government and is receptible of Gentlemen; doth it follow that I have not laid out the best of my parts in my Vocation, to the service of God and his Church, because you in your pretended zeal have chosen to insinuate the contrary by a prayer? But he,
unto whom you have addressed your self knoweth the secrets of all hearts; To him therefore I ap∣peal, whether I have not sought him in a work of Universal Cha∣rity; and whether one end of this present writing be not least you making use of your great Autho∣rity thus to prejudice such a work, should hurt them most, whom you love best: It being apparent unto any Man that can see and understand the ballance of Go∣vernment with the irrisistible consequence of the same, that by such time as the vanity of mens waies shall have tired them a little more, it will be found that God in his infinite goodnesse and mercy, hath made that onely pos∣sible for us which is best for us all, most for the good of manking, and his own glory. And so not∣withstanding the heat of our dis∣pute, which so far as it hath not
resisted nor exceeded truth, cannot have been very sinful or unchari∣table, I do oblige my self in all the devoirs of
London Jan. 3. (56.
Sir,
Your affectionate friend and humble servant, James Harrington.
M. Disc. B. 3. Ch. 24.
Acts.