A treatise of civil policy

and when many families were on earth, every one independent within themselves, if a commune enemy should invade a tract of Land governed by families, I conceive, by natures light they should incline to defend themselves, and to join in one politic body for their own safety, as is most natural; but in that case they having no King, and there were no reason of many fathers all alike loving their own families and self preservation, why one should be King over all, rather then another, except by voluntary compact; so it is clear that Nature is nearer to Aristocracy before this contract, then a Monarchy: and let him show us in multitudes of families dwelling together before there was a King, as clear a warrant for Monarchy, as here is for Aristocracy, though to me both be laudable and lawful ordinances of God, and the difference merely accidental, being one and the same power from the Lord, Rom. 13. 1. which is in divers subjects in one, as a Monarchy, in many as in Aristocracy, and the one is as natural as the other: and the subjects are accidental to the nature of the power. 2. The Stars have no light at all, but in actual aspect toward the Sun, and they are not lightsome bodies by the free will of the Sun, and have no immediate light from God formally, but from the Sun, so as if there were no Sun, there should be no Stars. 3. for actual shining and sending out of beams of light actusecundo, they depend upon the presence of the Sun, but for¹ inferior Judges though they have their call from the King, yet have they gifts to govern from no King on earth, but only from the King of Kings. 4. When the King is dead the Judges are Judges, and they depend not on the King for their second acts of judging, and for the actual emission and putting forth their beams and rays of justice, upon the poor and needy, they depend on no voluntary aspect, information or commandment of the King, but on that immediate subjection of their conscience to the King of Kings. And their Judgement which they execute is the Lords immediately, and not the Kings, and so the comparison halteth.

and when many families were on earth, every one independent within themselves, if a commune enemy should invade a tract of Land governed by families, I conceive, by natures light they should incline to defend themselves, and to joyne in one politique body for their owne safety, as is most naturall; but in that case they having no King, and there were no reason of many fathers all alike loving their own families and selfe preservation, why one should be King over all, rather then another, except by voluntary compact; so it is cleare that Nature is nearer to Aristocracy before this contract, then a Monarchy: and let him shew us in multitudes of families dwelling together before there was a King, as cleare a warrant for Monarchy, as here is for Aristocracy, though to me both be lawdable and lawfull ordinances of God, and the difference meerely accidentall, being one and the same power from the Lord,