Principles of Christian Politics

The Word Of God Delivered By Prophets Is The Main Principle

God’s Word Delivered Through Prophets Is the Main Principle

Of Christian Politiques

On Christian Politics

I have derived the Rights of Soveraigne Power, and the duty of Subjects hitherto, from the Principles of Nature onely; such as Experience has found true, or Consent (concerning the use of words) has made so; that is to say, from the nature of Men, known to us by Experience, and from Definitions (of such words as are Essentiall to all Politicall reasoning) universally agreed on. But in that I am next to handle, which is the Nature and Rights of a CHRISTIAN COMMON-WEALTH, whereof there dependeth much upon Supernaturall Revelations of the Will of God; the ground of my Discourse must be, not only the Naturall Word of God, but also the Propheticall.

So far, I have derived the rights of sovereign power and the duties of subjects from natural principles alone. These principles are established as true either by experience or by agreement about the meanings of words. In other words, my reasoning rests on human nature as we know it through experience. It also rests on universally agreed definitions of words essential to all political reasoning. But I will now consider the nature and rights of a CHRISTIAN COMMONWEALTH. Much about this subject depends on supernatural revelations of God’s will. So my argument must rest not only on God’s natural word, but also on his prophetic word.

Neverthelesse, we are not to renounce our Senses, and Experience; nor (that which is the undoubted Word of God) our naturall Reason. For they are the talents which he hath put into our hands to negotiate, till the coming again of our blessed Saviour; and therefore not to be folded up in the Napkin of an Implicate Faith, but employed in the purchase of Justice, Peace, and true Religion, For though there be many things in Gods Word above Reason; that is to say, which cannot by naturall reason be either demonstrated, or confuted; yet there is nothing contrary to it; but when it seemeth so, the fault is either in our unskilfull Interpretation, or erroneous Ratiocination.

Nevertheless, we must not abandon our senses and experience. Nor must we abandon our natural reason, which is the unquestionable Word of God. For these faculties are the funds he has entrusted to us to invest until our blessed Saviour returns. So we must not wrap them in the napkin of unquestioning faith. Instead, we must use them to gain justice, peace, and true religion. For although many things in God’s Word are beyond reason, nothing in God’s Word is contrary to reason. That is, natural reason can neither prove nor disprove those things. But when God’s Word seems contrary to reason, the fault lies either in our unskilled interpretation or our faulty reasoning.

Therefore, when any thing therein written is too hard for our examination, wee are bidden to captivate our understanding to the Words; and not to labour in sifting out a Philosophicall truth by Logick, of such mysteries as are not comprehensible, nor fall under any rule of naturall science. For it is with the mysteries of our Religion, as with wholsome pills for the sick, which swallowed whole, have the vertue to cure; but chewed, are for the most part cast up again without effect.

Therefore, when anything written there is too difficult for us to examine, we are told to submit our understanding to the words. We should not use logic to seek philosophical truth in mysteries beyond our understanding and outside the rules of natural science. For the mysteries of our religion are like healing pills for the sick. Swallowed whole, the pills have the power to cure. But when chewed, the pills are usually vomited up again without doing any good.

But by the Captivity of our Understanding, is not meant a Submission of the Intellectual faculty, to the Opinion of any other man; but of the Will to Obedience, where obedience is due. For Sense, Memory, Understanding, Reason, and Opinion are not in our power to change; but alwaies, and necessarily such, as the things we see, hear, and consider suggest unto us; and therefore are not effects of our Will, but our Will of them. We then Captivate our Understanding and Reason, when we forbear contradiction; when we so speak, as (by lawfull Authority) we are commanded; and when we live accordingly; which in sum, is Trust, and Faith reposed in him that speaketh, though the mind be incapable of any Notion at all from the words spoken.

But taking our understanding captive does not mean submitting our intellect to another person’s opinion. It means submitting our will to obedience where obedience is due. For we cannot choose to change our perceptions, memory, understanding, reason, or opinions. They are always and necessarily shaped by what we see, hear, and consider. So they are not effects of our will. Rather, our will is an effect of them. We therefore take our understanding and reason captive when we refrain from contradicting what is said. We do so when we speak as lawful authority commands us and live accordingly. In short, such obedience means placing trust and faith in the speaker, though our minds cannot form any idea at all from the words spoken.

When God speaketh to man, it must be either immediately; or by mediation of another man, to whom he had formerly spoken by himself immediately. How God speaketh to a man immediately, may be understood by those well enough, to whom he hath so spoken; but how the same should be understood by another, is hard, if not impossible to know. For if a man pretend to me, that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce, to oblige me to beleeve it. It is true, that if he be my Soveraign, he may oblige me to obedience, so, as not by act or word to declare I beleeve him not; but not to think any otherwise then my reason perswades me. But if one that hath not such authority over me, shall pretend the same, there is nothing that exacteth either beleefe, or obedience.

When God speaks to a person, he must speak either directly or through another person. If through another person, God must first have spoken directly to that person. Those to whom God has spoken directly may understand well enough how he does so. But how anyone else could understand how God speaks directly is hard, if not impossible, to know. For suppose someone claims that God has spoken to him supernaturally and directly, and I doubt his claim. I cannot easily see what argument he could offer that would require me to believe him. It is true that if he is my sovereign, he may require my obedience. He may require me not to express my disbelief in words or actions. But he cannot require me to think anything other than what my reason persuades me to think. But if someone without such authority over me makes the same claim, nothing requires either belief or obedience.

For to say that God hath spoken to him in the Holy Scripture, is not to say God hath spoken to him immediately, but by mediation of the Prophets, or of the Apostles, or of the Church, in such manner as he speaks to all other Christian men. To say he hath spoken to him in a Dream, is no more than to say he dreamed that God spake to him; which is not of force to win beleef from any man, that knows dreams are for the most part naturall, and may proceed from former thoughts; and such dreams as that, from selfe conceit, and foolish arrogance, and false opinion of a mans own godlinesse, or other vertue, by which he thinks he hath merited the favour of extraordinary Revelation. To say he hath seen a Vision, or heard a Voice, is to say, that he hath dreamed between sleeping and waking: for in such manner a man doth many times naturally take his dream for a vision, as not having well observed his own slumbering. To say he speaks by supernaturall Inspiration, is to say he finds an ardent desire to speak, or some strong opinion of himself, for which he can alledge no naturall and sufficient reason. So that though God Almighty can speak to a man, by Dreams, Visions, Voice, and Inspiration; yet he obliges no man to beleeve he hath so done to him that pretends it; who (being a man), may erre, and (which is more) may lie.

For someone to say God has spoken to him in Holy Scripture does not mean God has spoken directly. Instead, God has spoken through the Prophets, the Apostles, or the Church, just as he speaks to all other Christians. To say God has spoken to him in a dream means only that he dreamed God spoke to him. Such a claim cannot convince anyone who knows that dreams are mostly natural and may come from earlier thoughts. Dreams of God speaking may come from self-importance, foolish arrogance, and a false opinion of one's own godliness or other virtue. Such opinions lead a person to think he has earned the favor of an extraordinary revelation. To say someone has seen a vision or heard a voice means he has dreamed between sleeping and waking. For people often naturally mistake a dream for a vision because they have not noticed themselves dozing. To say someone speaks through supernatural inspiration means he feels a burning desire to speak. Or he holds some strong opinion of himself for which he can give no adequate natural explanation. So although God Almighty can speak to someone through dreams, visions, voices, and inspiration, no one must believe such claims. God does not require anyone to believe he has spoken in these ways to someone who claims he has. The person making the claim is human and may be mistaken. More than that, he may lie.

How then can he, to whom God hath never revealed his Wil immediately (saving by the way of natural reason) know when he is to obey, or not to obey his Word, delivered by him, that sayes he is a Prophet? (1 Kings 22) Of 400 Prophets, of whom the K. of Israel asked counsel, concerning the warre he made against Ramoth Gilead, only Micaiah was a true one.(1 Kings 13) The Prophet that was sent to prophecy against the Altar set up by Jeroboam, though a true Prophet, and that by two miracles done in his presence appears to be a Prophet sent from God, was yet deceived by another old Prophet, that perswaded him as from the mouth of God, to eat and drink with him. If one Prophet deceive another, what certainty is there of knowing the will of God, by other way than that of Reason? To which I answer out of the Holy Scripture, that there be two marks, by which together, not asunder, a true Prophet is to be known. One is the doing of miracles; the other is the not teaching any other Religion than that which is already established. Asunder (I say) neither of these is sufficient. (Deut. 13 v. 1,2,3,4,5 ) “If a Prophet rise amongst you, or a Dreamer of dreams, and shall pretend the doing of a miracle, and the miracle come to passe; if he say, Let us follow strange Gods, which thou hast not known, thou shalt not hearken to him, &c. But that Prophet and Dreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he hath spoken to you to Revolt from the Lord your God.” In which words two things are to be observed, First, that God wil not have miracles alone serve for arguments, to approve the Prophets calling; but (as it is in the third verse) for an experiment of the constancy of our adherence to himself. For the works of the Egyptian Sorcerers, though not so great as those of Moses, yet were great miracles. Secondly, that how great soever the miracle be, yet if it tend to stir up revolt against the King, or him that governeth by the Kings authority, he that doth such miracle, is not to be considered otherwise than as sent to make triall of their allegiance. For these words, “revolt from the Lord your God,” are in this place equivalent to “revolt from your King.” For they had made God their King by pact at the foot of Mount Sinai; who ruled them by Moses only; for he only spake with God, and from time to time declared Gods Commandements to the people. In like manner, after our Saviour Christ had made his Disciples acknowledge him for the Messiah, (that is to say, for Gods anointed, whom the nation of the Jews daily expected for their King, but refused when he came,) he omitted not to advertise them of the danger of miracles. “There shall arise,” (saith he) “false Christs, and false Prophets, and shall doe great wonders and miracles, even to the seducing (if it were possible) of the very Elect.” (Mat. 24. 24) By which it appears, that false Prophets may have the power of miracles; yet are wee not to take their doctrin for Gods Word. St. Paul says further to the Galatians, that “if himself, or an Angell from heaven preach another Gospel to them, than he had preached, let him be accursed.” (Gal. 1. 8) That Gospel was, that Christ was King; so that all preaching against the power of the King received, in consequence to these words, is by St. Paul accursed. For his speech is addressed to those, who by his preaching had already received Jesus for the Christ, that is to say, for King of the Jews.

How, then, can someone know when to obey God’s Word as delivered by someone claiming to be a Prophet? Suppose God has never revealed his will directly to that person, except through natural reason. How can that person know when to obey or refuse? (1 Kings 22) The King of Israel consulted 400 Prophets about his war against Ramoth Gilead. Only Micaiah was a true Prophet. (1 Kings 13) Another Prophet was sent to speak against the Altar set up by Jeroboam. He was a true Prophet. Two miracles performed in his presence showed that God had sent him. Yet another, older Prophet deceived him. The older Prophet persuaded him to eat and drink with him, claiming that God had commanded it. If one Prophet deceives another, how can we know God’s will with certainty by any means other than Reason? My answer, drawn from Holy Scripture, is that two signs together identify a true Prophet. These signs must be considered together, not separately. One is performing miracles. The other is teaching no Religion other than the Religion already established. Neither sign, I repeat, is sufficient on its own. (Deut. 13:1,2,3,4,5) “If a Prophet or a Dreamer of dreams appears among you and announces a miracle, and the miracle happens, beware. If he says, Let us follow strange Gods you have not known, you must not listen to him, etc. But that Prophet or Dreamer of dreams must be put to death. For he has urged you to rebel against the Lord your God.” Two points should be noted in these words. First, God does not intend miracles alone to prove that he has called a Prophet. Rather, as the third verse says, miracles test how firmly we remain faithful to him. For the Egyptian Sorcerers performed great miracles, though their miracles were not as great as those of Moses. Second, however great a miracle is, it may encourage rebellion against the King or someone governing with the King’s authority. If so, the miracle-worker must be regarded only as someone sent to test the people’s allegiance. For the words “rebel against the Lord your God” mean, in this passage, “rebel against your King.” The people had made God their King by an agreement at the foot of Mount Sinai. God ruled them through Moses alone. For Moses alone spoke with God and, from time to time, declared God’s Commandments to the people. Likewise, our Saviour Christ had led his Disciples to acknowledge him as the Messiah, meaning God’s anointed. The Jewish nation daily awaited this anointed one as their King, but rejected him when he came. After his Disciples acknowledged him, Christ also warned them about the danger of miracles. “False Christs and false Prophets will arise,” he says, “and perform great wonders and miracles. They will deceive even the Elect, if that were possible.” (Mat. 24:24) This shows that false Prophets may have the power to perform miracles. Yet we must not accept their teaching as God’s Word. St. Paul further tells the Galatians: “If I myself, or an Angel from heaven, preach a different Gospel from the one I preached to you, let him be cursed.” (Gal. 1:8) That Gospel was that Christ was King. It follows from these words that St. Paul curses all preaching against the authority of the King already accepted. For he addresses people who, through his preaching, had already accepted Jesus as the Christ, meaning King of the Jews.

And as Miracles, without preaching that Doctrine which God hath established; so preaching the true Doctrine, without the doing of Miracles, is an unsufficient argument of immediate Revelation. For if a man that teacheth not false Doctrine, should pretend to bee a Prophet without shewing any Miracle, he is never the more to bee regarded for his pretence, as is evident by Deut. 18. v. 21, 22. “If thou say in thy heart, How shall we know that the Word (of the Prophet) is not that which the Lord hath spoken. When the Prophet shall have spoken in the name of the Lord, that which shall not come to passe, that’s the word which the Lord hath not spoken, but the Prophet has spoken it out of the pride of his own heart, fear him not.” But a man may here again ask, When the Prophet hath foretold a thing, how shal we know whether it will come to passe or not? For he may foretel it as a thing to arrive after a certain long time, longer then the time of mans life; or indefinitely, that it will come to passe one time or other: in which case this mark of a Prophet is unusefull; and therefore the miracles that oblige us to beleeve a Prophet, ought to be confirmed by an immediate, or a not long deferr’d event. So that it is manifest, that the teaching of the Religion which God hath established, and the showing of a present Miracle, joined together, were the only marks whereby the Scripture would have a true Prophet, that is to say immediate Revelation to be acknowledged; neither of them being singly sufficient to oblige any other man to regard what he saith.

Just as miracles alone cannot prove direct revelation without teaching the doctrine God has established, neither can true doctrine without miracles. Suppose a man teaches no false doctrine but claims to be a Prophet without showing any miracle. His claim gives us no further reason to take him seriously. This is clear from Deut. 18:21, 22: “If you ask yourself, How shall we know whether the Prophet’s message is something the Lord has not spoken? If a Prophet speaks in the Lord’s name and his prediction does not come true, the Lord has not spoken it. Instead, the Prophet has spoken out of the pride of his own heart. Do not fear him.” But someone may ask another question: When a Prophet predicts something, how shall we know whether it will happen? For he may predict an event so far in the future that it lies beyond a human lifetime. Or he may say only that the event will happen sometime. In such cases, this test for recognizing a Prophet is useless. Therefore, miracles that require us to believe a Prophet must be confirmed by an immediate event or one soon afterward. So Scripture clearly requires two signs together for recognizing a true Prophet, someone who receives direct revelation from God. He must teach the religion God has established and perform a miracle at the time. Neither sign alone is enough to require anyone else to take what he says seriously.

Seeing therefore Miracles now cease, we have no sign left, whereby to acknowledge the pretended Revelations, or Inspirations of any private man; nor obligation to give ear to any Doctrine, farther than it is conformable to the Holy Scriptures, which since the time of our Saviour, supply the want of all other Prophecy; and from which, by wise and careful ratiocination, all rules and precepts necessary to the knowledge of our duty both to God and man, without Enthusiasme, or supernaturall Inspiration, may easily be deduced. And this Scripture is it, out of which I am to take the Principles of my Discourse, concerning the Rights of those that are the Supream Govenors on earth, of Christian Common-wealths; and of the duty of Christian Subjects towards their Soveraigns. And to that end, I shall speak in the next Chapter, or the Books, Writers, Scope and Authority of the Bible.

Since miracles have now ceased, we have no sign left to verify any private person’s claimed revelations or inspirations. Nor must we listen to any teaching beyond what agrees with the Holy Scriptures. Since the time of our Saviour, the Holy Scriptures have taken the place of all other prophecy. Through wise and careful reasoning, we can easily draw from the Scriptures all necessary rules for understanding our duties to God and other people. We need neither religious ecstasy nor supernatural inspiration to do so. The Scriptures will therefore supply the principles for my discussion of the rights of supreme rulers of Christian commonwealths. I will also discuss the duty of Christian subjects toward their sovereigns. For this purpose, in the next chapter I will discuss the books, authors, purpose, and authority of the Bible.