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.
AS Reasonable Nature consists of Soul, and Body; so is the Au∣thority that Governs it, Divine, and Hu∣mane: God, Eminently over All, and Princes Ministerially, under Him, and as his Substitutes. The Dominion of our Souls, God reserves Peculiarly to Him∣self, committing That of our Bodies to the Care of the Magistrate.
Now if Power be a Divine Ordinance, so consequently is Subjection; for to Ima∣gine the One, without the Other, were to destroy the Reason of Relatives. A Strict, and Accurate Disquisition of This Mat∣ter, would save us much Trouble that arises about the Bounds, and Limits of our Duty; How far Religion binds us, and how far Allegeance. That they are seve∣rable, we are not to doubt, since Truth it self has said it. Give unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and unto God, the things that are God's. But that they are only so severable, as never to become Inconsistent, is founded upon the same Immovable Rock; Let every Soul be sub∣ject, &c. A Precept, of a Perpetual, and Universal Operation, and Limited neither to Time, Place, not Persons.
Your Deduction of Government, and Subjection, from Divine Institution, is well enough; and that we are to Obey the Magistrate for God's sake, and in Subordination to God, is easily Prov'd, and Granted: But I hear nothing yet of the Particular Bounds, and Terms of Humane Iurisdiction; What 'tis belongs to God, and what to Caesar.
And That, I confess, is the Pinch of the Question: For One Duty comes up
so close to the Other, that 'tis not for eve∣ry Common Eye to pass between them. Effectually, they Touch; but in what Point, is of a Nice Decision. The nearest way to the Knowledge of our Duty, is to apply it to the Laws, and Powers of the Authority: for a Man must first Know the Rule, before he can Observe it. We are then to consider, that the Almighty Wis∣dom has invested Kings with an Unlimi∣mited Power of Commanding, or Forbid∣ding, in all Matters, which God Himself has not either Commanded, or Forbidden: Which Proposition resolves it self into This Conclusion. Whatsoever God has left Indifferent, is the Subject of Humane Power.
Does not that Opinion destroy Christian Liberty?
No: But the Denial of it destroys Magistracy. If Kings have not This Power, they have None at all: And it Implies a Contradiction, to suppose any Authority in Nature without it.
But may not a Prince tye himself up, in a thing otherwise Indif∣ferent?
I speak of Power according to the Institution, not of Power limited by P•…•…ction.
May not the same thing be Indifferent to One, and not to Another?
Very Good: And will not every thing Imaginable. appear Non-Indifferent to some or other; if nothing may be Com∣manded, but what upon such a Phansie may be Disobey'd?
Pardon me: I do not speak of Matters of Civil Concern, but of Mat∣ters of Religion.
That's all a Case; for you cannot Instance in any One Civil Action, that may not be made Relative to Religion. But we are now upon the Extent of Hu∣mane Power. That there is such a Power, and That, Authoriz'd too by God Him∣self, you have already Granted. Let me but understand now, Upon what Subject shall that Power be Exercis'd; If you ex∣clude Things Indifferent? One Man may have a Real Scruple, and All the Rest, pre∣tend one. Who shall distinguish? So that the Rule holding from One to All, the Sacred Authority of the Prince be∣comes dependent upon the Pleasure of the Subject; and the Validity of a Divine, and Unchangeable Ordinance, is subjected to the mutable Iudgment, and Constru∣ction of the People.
And you expect, the Magistrate
should as well have the Authority of Iudging what's Indifferent, as of Re∣streining it.
You may be sure I do; for I am but where I was, If I make You the Judge. Is it not all one, as to the Magi∣strate, whether you Refuse, upon Pre∣tense that the Thing is not Indifferent, or upon Pretense, that He cannot Restrein a thing Indifferent? The Crime indeed is differing in the Subject: for the One way, 'tis an USURPATION of Autho∣rity; and the Other way, 'tis a DENI∣AL of it.
Why then it seems, I am to believe every thing Indifferent, which the Magistrate tells me is so, be it ne∣ver so Wicked.
No; There you are bound up, by a Superiour Law.
Have you so soon forgot your self? You would not allow me to be a Iudge, just now; and here, you make me one.
Right. To your self, you are one, but not to the Publique; you are a Judge of your own Thought, but not of the Law.
And does not This way of Ar∣guing as much endanger Authority, as the Other? For All may Iudge Thus, as well as One.
'Tis possible they may. Nay we'l suppose an Imposition foul enough to move them all to do so; and yet there's a large difference: For Diversity of Iudg∣ment does not shake the Foundation of Au∣thority; and a Man may disobey a Sinful Command, with great Reverence to the Power that Imposes it.
You were saying e'en now, that my Duty to God, and to the King, could never be Inconsistent. How shall I behave my self, I pray'e, if the King command one thing, and God another? I cannot observe the Law, without vi∣olence to my Conscience, nor discharge my Conscience, without Offence to the Law. What Course shall I take, to avoid Enterfering?
Demea•…•… your self as a Christian, to∣ward the LAW of God, one the One hand, and as a Subject, toward the OR∣DINANCE of God, on the Other: As considering, that you are discharg'd of your Obedience in That Particular, but not of your Subjection in the General.
Put Case the Supreme Ma∣gistrate, should by a Law, Establish a False Worship.
He's nevertheless your Prince, and even in This Complication, you may ac∣quit
your self both to God, and to Caesar. Though the Worship be amiss, The Ma∣gistrate is yet to be Reverenc'd; and you are to divide the One from the Other; in such manner, as still both to Fear God, and Honour the King. This Loyal, and Religious Separation of our Duties, will set us right in the Main Controversie. Where do ye find that Kings Reign, upon Condition of Ruling Righteously? Or that we owe them Less, AFTER Misgo∣vernment, then we did Before?
But do you say, we are bound to Honour an Idolatrous Prince? This is not according to the Doctrine of ma∣ny of our Grave Divines.
They are never the Better Divines for That Doctrine. The Prince, I tell ye, you are bound to Honour, though not as an Idolater. Shall the Vice, or Errour of the Person, degrade the Order? By That Rule, The World must continue without a Government, till we can find Men with∣out Failings.
So that, when it makes for your Turn, you can Allow (I see) of Distinguishing betwixt the PER∣SON, and the OFFICE.
Betwixt the Frailty of the One, and the Sacredness of the Other, I do: for
Kings Command, as Gods, though they Iudge, as Men. But I do no more ap∣prove of Dividing the Person of a Prince, from his Authority, then of Dividing his Soul from his Body.
And I beseech you, What is That, which you call AUTHORI∣TY?
It is the Will, and Power of a Multitude, deliver'd up by Common Con∣sent, to some One Person, or More, for the Good, and Safety of the Whole: And This Representative Acts for All. Now on the other side, The Disposition of such, or such a Number of Persons, into an Or∣der of Commanding, and Obeying, is That which we call a Society.
What is the Duty of the Su∣preme Magistrate?
To procure the Welfare of the Peo∣ple; Or, according to the Apostle, He is the Minister of God, for a Comfort to those that do Well, and for a Terrour to Evil doers.
How far are his Laws Binding upon his Subjects?
So far, as They that Parted with their Power, had a Right over Them∣selves.
Whence was the Original of
Power? And what Form of Government was First; Regal, or Popular?
Power was Ordein'd of God, but Specifi'd by Man: And beyond doubt, the First Form of Government was Mo∣narchique.
But I should rather think the Popular Form was First: For how could there be a King, without a People?
So was the Son before the Father, you may say, for How could there be a Fa∣ther without a Son? But the Q•…•…estion is; First: Was the World ever without a Go∣vernment, since the Creation of M•…•…n? Secondly; Whether was there first in the World, One Man, or More? But we are not here upon the Form of Govern∣ment, but upon the Latitude of Humane Iurisdiction; be the Sovereignty where it will. And my Assertion is, that It ex∣tends to whatsoever God has left Indiffe∣rent. If you deny This, you overthrow all Government.
And what are you the better, If I should grant it; unless we could All come to an Agreement, about what is Indifferent, and what not?
Which must be procured by the Al∣lowance of some Iudicial Authority to de∣c•…•…de it.