abstract:
Seven sorts of superiority and
inferiority.—Power of life and death from a
positive law.—A dominion antecedent and
consequent.—Slavery not natural from four
reasons.—Every man born free in regard of
civil subjection (not in regard of natural, such
as of children and wife, to parents and husband)
proved by seven arguments.—Politic government
how necessary, now natural.—That parents
should enslave their children not natural.
Skip Navigation
Whether or no royal dignity have its spring from nature, and how that is
true, everyman is born free,
and how servitude is contrary to
nature.
I conceive it to be evident that royal dignity is not immediately, and
without the intervention of the people's consent, given by God to any one
person, and that conquest and violence is no just title to a crown. Now the
question is, If royalty flow from nature, if royalty be not a thing merely
natural, neither can subjection to royal power be merely naturel; but the
former is rather civil than natural: and the question of the same nature is,
Whether subjection or servitude be natural.
I conceive that there be divers subjections to these that are above us some
way natural, and therefore I rank them in order, thus:—
- There is a subjection in respect of natural being, as the effect to the
cause; so, though Adam had never sinned, this morality of the fifth
command should have stood in vigour, that the son by nature, without any
positive law, should have been subject to the father, becasue from him he
hath his being, as from a second cause. But I doubt if the relation of a
father, as a father, doth necessarily infer a royal or kingly authority of
the father over the son; or by nature's law, that the father hath a power
of life and death over, or above, his children, and the reasons I give
are,
- Because power of life and death is by a positive law, presupposing
sin and the fall of man; and if adam, standing in innocency, could
lawfully kill his son, though the son should be a malefactor, without
any positive law of God, I much doubt.
- I judge that the power royal, and the fatherly power of a father
over his children, shall be found to be different; and the one is
founded on the law of nature, the other, to wit, royal power, on a
mere positive law.
- The degree or order of subjection natural is a subjection in respect of
gifts or age. So Aristotle (1 polit. cap. 3) saith,
that some are by
nature servants.
His meaning is good,--that some gifts of nature, as
wisdom natural, or aptitude to govern, hath made some men of gold, fitter
to command, and some of iron and clay, fitter to be servants and slaves.
But I judge this title to make a king by birth, seeing Saul, whom God by
supervenient gifts made a king, seemeth to owe small thanks to the womb,
or nature, that he was a king, for his cruelty to the Lord's priests
speaketh nothing but natural baseness. It is possible Plato had a good
meaning, (dialog. 3, de legib.) who made six orders here.
That fathers command their sons;
The noble the ignoble;
The older the younger;
The masters the servants;
The stronger the weaker;
The wise the ignorant.
Aquinas (22. q. 57, art. 3), Driedo (de libert. Christ. lib. 1, p. 8),
following Aristotle, (polit. lib. 7, c. 14,) hold, though man had never
sinned there should have been a sort of dominion of the more gifted and
wiser above the less wise and weaker; not antecedent from nature properly,
but consequent, for the utility and good of the weaker, in so far as it is
good for the weaker to be guided by the stronger, which cannot be denied
to have some ground in nature. But there is no ground for kings by nature
here.
- Because even those who plead that the mother's womb must be the best
title for a crown, and make it equivalent to royal unction, are to be
corrected in memory thus,--That it is merely accidental, and not
natural, for such a son to be born a king, because the free consent of
the people making choice of the first father of that line to be their
king, and in him making choice of the first-born of the family, is
merely accidental to father and son, and so cannot be natural.
- Because royal gifts to reign are not held by either us or our
adversaries to be the specific essence of a king; for if the people
crown a person their king, say we,--if the womb bring him forth to be
a king, say the opponents,--he is essentially a king, and to be obeyed
as the Lord's anointed, though nature be very parce, sparing,
and a niggard in bestowing royal gifts; yea, though he be an idiot,
say some, if he be the first-born of a king, he is by just title a
king, but must have curators and tutors to guide him in the exercise
of that royal right that he hath from the womb. But Buchanan saith
well,1
He who cannot
govern himself shall never govern others.
- As a man cometh into the world a member of a politic society, he is,
by consequence, born subject to the laws of that society; but this
maketh him not, from the womb and by nature, subject to king, as by
nature he is subject to his father who begat him, no more than by
nature a lion is born subject to another king-lion; for it is by
accident that he is born of parents under subjection to a monarch, or
to either democratical or aristocratical governors, for Cain and Able
were born under none of these forms of government properly; and if he
had been born in a new planted colony in a wilderness, where no
government were yet established, he should be under no such
government.
- Slavery of servants to lords or masters, such as were of old amongst
the Jews, is not natural, but against nature.
- because slavery is malum natur+-AOY- a
penal evil and contrary to nature, and a punishment of sin.
- Slavery should not have been in the world, if man had never
sinned, no more than there could have been buying and selling of
men, which is a miserable consequent of sin and a sort of death,
when men are put to the toiling pains of the hireling, who longeth
for the shadow, and under iron harrows and saws, and to hew wood,
and draw water continually.
- The original of servitude was, when men were taken in war, to
eschew a greater evil, even death, the captives were willing to
undergo a less evil, slavery, (S. Servitus, 1 de jure. Pers.)
- A man being created according to God's image, he is res sacra, a sacred thing, and can no more,
by nature's law, be sold and bought, than a religious and sacred
thing dedicated to God. S. 1. Instit. de
inutil. scrupl. l. inter Stipulantem, S. Sacram, F. de verber.
Obligat.
- Every man by nature is a freeman born, that is, by nature no man
cometh out of the womb under any civil subjection to king, prince, or
judge, to master, captain, conqueror, teacher, &c.
- Because freedom is natural to all, except freedom from
subjection to parents; and subjection politic is merely
accidental, coming from some positive laws of men, as they are in
a politic society; whereas they might have been born with all
concomitants of nature, though born in a single family, the only
natural and first society in the world.
- Man is born by nature free from all subjection, except of that
which is most kindly an natural, and that is fatherly or filial
subjection, or matrimonial subjection of the wife to the husband;
and especially he is free of subjection to a prince by nature;
because to be under jurisdiction to a judge or king, hath a sort
of jurisdiction, (argument, L. Si quis sit
fugitivus. F. de edil. edict. in S. penult. vel jin.)
especially to be under penal laws now in the state of sin. The
learned senator Ferdinandus Vasquez saith, (lib. 2, c. 82. n. 15,)
Every subject is to lay down his life for the prince. Now no man
is born under subjection to penal laws or dying for his
prince.
- Man by nature is born free, and as free as beasts; but by nature
no beast, no
lion is born king of lions; no horse, no bullock, no eagle, king
of horses, bullocks, or eagles. Nor is there any subjection here,
except that the young lion is subject to the old, every foal to its
dam; and by that same law of nature, no man isborn king of men,
nor any man subject to man in a civil subjection by nature. (I
speak not of natural subjection of children to parents,) and
therefore Ferdi. Vasquez (illustr. quest. lib. 2, c. 82, n. 6,)
said, that kingdoms and empires were brought in, not by nature's
law, but by the law of nations. He expoundeth himself elsewhere to
speak of the law of nature secondary, otherwise the primary law of
nations is indeed the law of nature, as appropriated to man. If
any reply, That the freedom natural of beasts and birds who never
sinned, cannot be one with the natural freedom of man who is now
under sin, and so under bondage for sin, my answer is That the
subjection of the misery of man by nature, because of sin, is more
than the subjection of beasts, comparing species and kinds of
beasts and birds with mankind, but comparing individuals of the
same kind amongst themselves; as lion with lion, eagle with eagle,
and so man with man; in which respect, because he who is supposed
to be the man born free from subjection politic, even the king
born a king, is under the same state of sin, and so by reason of
sin, of which he hath a share equally with all other men by
nature, he must be, by nature, born under as great subjection
penal for sin (except the king be born void of sin) as other men,
therefore he is not born freer by nature than the other men,
except he come out of the womb with a king's crown on his
head.
- To be a king is a free gift of God, which God bestoweth on some
men above others, as is evident,
(2 Sam.
xii.7, 8;
Psal. lxxv.6;
Dan. iv.32;)
and therefore all must be born kings, if any one man be by
nature a king born, and another a born subject. But if some be by
God's grace made kings above others, they are not so by nature;
for things which agree to man by nature, agree to all men equally
but all men equally are not born kings, as is evident; and all men
are not equally born by nature under politic subjection to kings,
as the adversaries grant, because those who are by nature kings,
cannot be also by nature subjects.
- If men be not by nature free from politic subjection, then must
some, by the law of relation, by nature be kings. But none are by
nature kings, because none have by nature these things which
essentially constitute kings, for they have neither by nature the
calling of God, nor gifts for the throne; nor the free election of
the people, nor conquest; and if there be none a king by nature,
there can be none a subject by nature. And the law saith, Omnes sumus natura liberi, nullius ditioni subjecti.
lib. Manumiss. F. de just. et jur. S. jus antem gentium, Jus. de
jur. nat. We are by nature free, and D. L. ex hoc jure cum simil.
- Politicians agree to this as an undeniable truth, that as
domestic society is natural, being grounded upon nature's
instince, so politic society is voluntary, being grounded on the
consent of men; and so politic society is natural, in radice, in the root, and voluntary and
free, in modo, in the manner of their
union; and the Scripture cleareth to us, that a king is made by the free consent of the people,
(Deut xvii.15,)
and so not by
nature.
- What is from the womb, and so natural, is eternal, and agreeth
to all societies of men; but a monarchy agreeth not to all
societies of men; for many hundred years, de facto, there
was not a king till Nimrod's time, the world being governed by
families, and till Moses' time we find no institution for kings,
(Gen. vii.)
and the numerous multiplication of mankind did occasion
monarchies, otherwise, fatherly government being the first and
measure of the rest, must be the best; for it is better that my
father govern me, than that a stranger govern me, and, therefore,
the Lord forbade his people to set a stranger over themselves to
be their king. The P. Prelate contendeth for the contrary, (c. 12,
p. 125,)
Every man (saith he) is born
subject to his father, of whom immediately he hath his existence
in nature; and if his father be the subject of another, he is born
the subject of his father's
superior.
—Ans. But the
consequence is weak. Every man is born under natural subjection to
his father, therefore he is born naturally under civil subjection
to his father's superior or king. It followeth not. Yea, because
his father was born only by nature subject to his own father,
therefore he was subject to a prince or king only by accident, and
by the free constitution of men, who freely choose politic
government, whereas there is no government natural, but fatherly
or marital, and therefore the contradictory consequence is true.
P. Prelate.—Every man by nature hath immunity and liberty
from despotical and hierarchial empire, and so may dispose of his own at will,
and cannot enslave himself without his own free will; but God hath laid a
necessity on all men to be under government and nature also laid this
necessity on him, therefore this sovereignty cannot protect us in
righteousness and honesty, except it be entirely endowed with sovereign power
to preserve itself, and protect us.
Ans.—
- The Prelate here deserteth his own consequence, which is strong against
himself, for if a man be naturally subject to his father's superior, as he
said before, why is not the son of a slave naturally subject to his
father's superior and master?
- As a man may not make away his liberty without his own consent, so can
he not, without his own consent, give his liberty to be subject to penal
laws under a prince, without his own consent, either in his father's or in
the representative society in which he liveth.
- God and nature hath laid a necessity on all men to be under government,
a natural necessity from the womb to be under some government, to wit, a
paternal government, that is true; but under this government politic, and
namely under sovereignty, it is false; and that is but said: for why is he
naturally under sovereignty rather than aristocracy? I believe any of the
three forms are freely chosen by any society.
- It is false that one cannot defend the people, except he have entire
power, that is to say, he cannot do good except he have a vast power to do
both good and ill.
P. Prelate.—It
is accidental to any to render himself a slave,
being occasioned by force or extreme indigence, but to submit to government
congrous to the condition of man, and is necessary for his happy being, and
natural, and necesary, by the inviolable ordinance of God and nature.
Ans.—
- If the father be a slave, it is natural and not accidental, by the
Prelate's logic, to be a slave.
- It is also accidental to be under sovereignty, and sure not natural; for
then aristocracy and democracy must be unnatural, and so unlawful
governments.
- If to be congrous to the condition of man be all one with natural man,
(which he must say if he speak sense) to believe in God, to be an
excellent mathematician, to swim in deep waters, being congrous to the
nature of man, must be natural.
- Man by nature is under government paternal, not politic properly, but by
the free consent of his will.
P. Prelate (p. 126).—
Luke xi.5,
Christ himself was
ὐποτασσομὲνος
subject to his parents, (the word which is used,
Rom xiii.)
therefore none are exempted from
subjection to lawful government.
Ans.—We
never said that any were exempted from lawful government. The
Prelate and his fellow Jesuits teach that the clergy are exempted from the
laws of the civil magistrate, not we, but because Christ was subject to his parents, and the same word is used,
Luke xi.,
which is in
Rom xiii.,
it will not
follow, therefore, men are by nature subject to kings, because they are by
nature subject to parents.
P. Prelate.—The
father had power over the children, by the law of God and
nature, to redeem himself from debt, or any distressed condition, by enslaving
his children begotten of his own body, if this power was not by the right of
nature and by the warrant of God, I can see no other, for it could not be by
mutual and voluntary contract of children and fathers.
Ans.—
- Show a law of nature, that the father might enslave his children; by a
divine positive law, presupposing sin, the father might do that; and yet I
think that may be questioned, whether it was not a permission rather than
a law, as was the bill of divorce, but a law of nature it was not.
- The P. Prelate can see no law but the law of nature here; but it is
because he is blind or will not see. His reason is, It was not by mutual
and voluntary contract of children and fathers, therefore it was by the
law of nature; so he that cursed his father was to die by God's law. This
law was not made by mutual consent betwixt the father and the son,
therefore it was a law of nature: the Prelate will see no better. Nature
will teach a man to enslave himself to redeem himself from death, but that
it is a dictate of nature that a man should enslave his son, I conceive
not.
- What can this prove, but that if the son may, by the law of nature, be
enslaved for the father, but that the son of a slave is by nature under
subjection to slavery, and that by nature's law; the contrary whereof he
spake in the page preceding, and in this same page.
As for the argument of the Prelate to answer Suarez, who laboureth to prove
monarchy not to be natural, but of free consent, because it is various in
sundry nations, it
is the Jesuits' argument, not ours. I own it
not. Let Jesuits plead for Jesuits.
Endnotes
1. Buchan. de jure Regni apud Scotos.
back to top
National Reform Association,
Publishers of
The Christian Statesman.
Declaring the Lordship of Christ since 1864
editor
Bill Einwechter
A six month subscription to The Christian Statesman
is FREE on request. Renewals are FREE on request.
POBox 8741-WP
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15221
Use this form to comment on this site.
Use this form to
request a FREE introductory six month subscription to The Christian
Statesman or to renew your existing subscription.
For a FREE introductory three issue subscription,
send email to
Bill Gould with
your
name and mailing address.