a work of his mere sovereignty; he created, because it was his pleasure
{b374} to create (Rev. iv. 11). He is not necessitated to do this or
that. He might have chosen whether he would have framed an earth and
heavens, and laid the foundations of his chambers in the waters. He
was under no obligation to reduce things from nullity to existence.
(2.) Preservation is the fruit of his sovereignty. When he had called
the world to stand out, he might have ordered it to return into its
dark den of nothingness, ripped up every part of its foundation, or
have given being to many more creatures then he did. If you consider
his absolute sovereignty, why might he not have divested Adam presently
of those rational perfections wherewith he had endowed him? And might
he not have metamorphosed him into some beast, and elevated some beast
into a rational nature? Why might he not have degraded an angel to a
worm, and advanced a worm to the nature and condition of an angel? Why
might he not have revoked that grant of dominion, which he had passed
to man over all creatures? It was free to him to permit sin to enter
into the earth, or to have excluded it out of the earth, as he doth
out of heaven. (3.) Redemption is a fruit of his sovereignty. By his
absolute sovereignty he might have confirmed all the angels in their
standing by grace, and prevented the revolt of any of their members
from him; and when there was a revolt both in heaven and earth, it was
free to him to have called out his Son to assume the angelical, as well
as the human, nature, or have exercised his dominion in the destruction
of men and devils, rather than in the redemption of any; he was under
no obligation to restore either the one or the other. (4.) May he not
impose what terms he pleases? May he not impose what laws he pleases,
and exact what he will of his creature without promising any rewards?
May he not use his own for his own honor, as well as men use for their
credit what they do possess by his indulgence? (5.) Affliction is an
act of his sovereignty. By this right of sovereignty, may not God take
away any man’s goods, since they were his doles? As he was not indebted
to us when he bestowed them, so he cannot wrong us when he removes
them. He takes from us what is more his own than it is ours, and was
never ours but by his gift, and that for a time only, not forever. By
this right he may determine our times, put a period to our days when he
pleases, strip us of one member, and lop off another. Man’s being was
from him, and why should he not have a sovereignty to take what he had
a sovereignty to give? Why should this seem strange to any of us, since
we ourselves exercise an absolute dominion over those things in our
possession, which have sense and feeling, as well as over those that
want it? Doth not every man think he hath an absolute authority over
the utensils of his house, over his horse, his dog, to preserve or kill
him, to do what he please with him, without rendering any other reason
than, _It is my own?_ May not God do much more? Doth not his dominion
over the work of his hands transcend that which a man can claim over
his beast that he never gave life unto? He that dares dispute against
God’s absolute right, fancies himself as much a god as his Creator:
understands not the vast difference between the Divine nature and his
own; between the sovereignty of God and his own, which is all the theme
{b375} God himself discourseth upon in those stately chapters (Job.
xxxviii., xxxix. &c.); not mentioning a word of Job’s sin, but only
vindicating the rights of his own authority. Nor doth Job, in his
reply (Job xl. 4), speak of his sin, but of his natural vileness as a
creature in the presence of his Creator. By this right, God unstops the
bottles of heaven in one place, and stops them in another, causing it
“to rain upon one city, and not upon another” (Amos iv. 7); ordering
the clouds to move to this or that quarter where he hath a mind to be
a benefactor or a judge. (6.) Unequal dispensations are acts of his
sovereignty. By this right he is patient toward those whose sins, by
the common voice of men, deserve speedy judgments, and pours out pain
upon those that are patterns of virtue to the world. By this he gives
sometimes the worst of men an ocean of wealth and honor to swim in,
and reduceth an useful and exemplary grace to a scanty poverty. By
this he “rules the kingdoms of men,” and sets a crown upon the head of
the basest of men (Dan. iv. 17), while he deposeth another that seemed
to deserve a weightier diadem. This is, as he is the Lord of the
ammunition of his thunders, and the treasures of his bounty. (7.) He
may inflict what torments he pleases. Some say, by this right of
sovereignty he may inflict what torments he pleaseth upon an innocent
person; which, indeed, will not bear the nature of a punishment as
an effect of justice, without the supposal of a crime; but a torment,
as an effect of that sovereign right he hath over his creature, which
is as absolute over his work as the “potter’s” power is “over his
own clay” (Jer. xviii. 6; Rom. ix. 21). May not the potter, after his
labor, either set his “vessel” up to adorn his house, or knock it in
pieces, and fling it upon the dunghill; separate it to some noble use,
or condemn it to some sordid service?[1002] Is the right of God over
his creatures less than that of the potter over his vessel, since God
contributed all to his creature, but the potter never made the clay,
which is the substance of the vessel, nor the water which was necessary
to make it tractable, but only moulded the substance of it into such a
shape? The vessel that is framed, and the potter that frames it, differ
only in life: the body of the potter, whereby he executes his authority,
is of no better a mould than the clay, the matter of his vessel. Shall
he have so absolute a power over that which is so near him, and shall
not God over that which is so infinitely distant from him? The “vessel,”
perhaps, might plead for itself that it was once part of the body of
a man, and as good as the “potter” himself; whereas no creature can
plead it was part of God, and as good as God himself. Though there
be no man in the world but deserves affliction, yet the Scripture
sometimes lays affliction upon the score of God’s dominion, without any
respect to the sin of the afflicted person. Speaking of a sick person
(James v. 15), “If he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven
him;” whereby is implied, that he might be struck into sickness by God,
without any respect to a particular sin, but in a way of trial; and
that his affliction sprung not from any exercise of Divine justice, but
from his absolute sovereignty; and so, in the case of the blind man,
when the disciples asked for what sin it was, {b376} whether for his
“own,” or his “parents sin,” he was born blind? (John ix. 3), “Neither
hath this man sinned, nor his parents;” which speaks, in itself, not
against the whole current of Scripture; but the words import thus much,
that God, in this blindness from the birth, neither respected any sin
of the man’s own, nor of his parents, but he did it as an absolute
sovereign, to manifest his own glory in that miraculous cure which
was wrought by Christ. Though afflictions do not happen without the
desert of the creature, yet some afflictions may be sent without any
particular respect to that desert, merely for the manifestation of
God’s glory, since the creature was made for God himself, and his honor,
and therefore may be used in a serviceableness to the glory of the
Creator.
2d. His dominion is absolute in regard of unlimitedness by any
law without him. He is an absolute monarch that makes laws for his
subjects, but is not bound by any himself, nor receives any rules and
laws from his subjects, for the management of his government. But most
governments in the world are bounded by laws made by common consent.
But when kings are not limited by the laws of their kingdoms, yet they
are bounded by the law of nature, and by the providence of God. But God
is under no law without himself; his rule is within him, the rectitude
and righteousness of his own nature; he is not under that law he hath
prescribed to man. The law was not made for a “righteous man” (1 Tim.
i. 9), much less for a righteous God. God is his own law; his own
nature is his rule, as his own glory is his end; himself is his end,
and himself is his law. He is moved by nothing without himself; nothing
hath the dominion of a motive over him but his own will, which is his
rule for all his actions in heaven and earth. (Dan. iv. 32), “He rules
in the kingdom of men, and gives it to whomsoever he will.” And, (Rom.
ix. 18), “He hath mercy on whom he will have mercy;” as all things are
wrought by him according to his own eternal ideas in his own mind, so
all is wrought by him according to the inward motive in his own will,
which was the manifestation of his own honor. The greatest motives,
therefore, that the best persons have used, when they have pleaded for
any grant from God, was his own glory, which would be advanced by an
answer of their petition.
3d. His dominion is absolute in regard of supremacy and
uncontrollableness. None can implead him, and cause him to render a
reason of his actions. He is the sovereign King, “Who may say unto him,
What dost thou?” (Eccles. viii. 4.) It is an absurd thing for any to
dispute with God. (Rom. xi. 20), “Who art thou, O man, that repliest
against God?” Thou, a man, a piece of dust, to argue with a God
incomprehensibly above thy reason, about the reason of his works! Let
the potsherds strive with the potsherds of the earth, but “not with Him
that fashioned them” (Isa. xlv. 9). In all the desolations he works,
he asserts his own supremacy to silence men. (Ps. xlvi. 10), “Be still,
and know that I am God!” Beware of any quarrelling motions in your
minds; it is sufficient than I am God, that is supreme, and will not
be impleaded, and censured, or worded with by any creature about what I
do. He is not bound to render a {b377} reason of any of his proceedings.
Subjects are accountable to their princes, and princes to God, God
to none; since he is not limited by any superior, his prerogative is
supreme.
4th. His dominion is absolute in regard of irresistibleness. Other
governments are bounded by law; so that what a governor hath strength
to do, he hath not a right to do; other governors have a limited
ability, that what they have a right to do, they have not always a
strength to do; they may want a power to execute their own counsels.
But God is destitute of neither; he hath an infinite right, and an
infinite strength; his word is a law; he commands things to stand out
of nothing, and they do so. “He commanded,” or spake, ὁ εἰπὼν, “light
to shine out of darkness” (2 Cor. iv. 6). There is no distance of time
between his word: “Let there be light; and there was light” (Gen. i. 3).
Magistrates often use not their authority, for fear of giving occasion
to insurrections, which may overturn their empire. But if the Lord will
work, “who shall let it?” (Isa. xliii. 19): and if God will not work,
who shall force him? He can check and overturn all other powers; his
decrees cannot be stopped, nor his hand held back by any: if he wills
to dash the whole world in pieces, no creature can maintain its being
against his order. He sets the ordinances of the heavens, and the
dominion thereof in the earth; and sends lightnings, that they may go,
and say unto him, “Here we are” (Job. xxxviii. 33, 34).
3. Yet this dominion, though it be absolute, is not tyrannical, but
it is managed by the rules of wisdom, righteousness, and goodness.
If his throne be in the heavens, it is pure and good: because the
heavens are the purest parts of the creation, and influence by their
goodness the lower earth. Since he is his own rule, and his nature is
infinitely wise, holy, and righteous, he cannot do a thing but what is
unquestionably agreeable with wisdom, justice, and purity. In all the
exercises of his sovereign right, he is never unattended with those
perfections of his nature. Might not God, by his absolute power, have
pardoned men’s guilt, and thrown the invading sin out of his creatures?
but in regard of his truth pawned in his threatening, and in regard
of his justice, which demanded satisfaction, he would not. Might not
God, by his absolute sovereignty, admit a man into his friendship,
without giving him any grace? but in regard of the incongruity of such
an act to his wisdom and holiness, he will not. May he not, by his
absolute power, refuse to accept a man that desires to please him,
and reject a purely innocent creature? but in regard of his goodness
and righteousness, he will not. Though innocence be amiable in its own
nature, yet it is not necessary in regard of God’s sovereignty, that he
should love it; but in regard of his goodness it is necessary, and he
will never do otherwise. As God never acts to the utmost of his power,
so he never exerts the utmost of his sovereignty: because it would be
inconsistent with those other properties which render him perfectly
adorable to the creature. As no intelligent creature, neither angel nor
man, can be framed without a law in his nature, so we cannot imagine
God without a law in his own nature, unless we would fancy him a
rude, tyrannical, foolish being, that hath nothing of holiness, {b378}
goodness, righteousness, wisdom. If he “made the heavens in wisdom” (Ps.
cxxxvi. 5), he made them by some rule, not by a mere will, but a rule
within himself, not without. A wise work is never the result of an
absolute unguided will.
(1.) This dominion is managed by the rule of wisdom. What may appear
to us to have no other spring than absolute sovereignty, would be
found to have a depth of amazing wisdom, and accountable reason, were
our short capacities long enough to fathom it. When the apostle had
been discoursing of the eternal counsels of God, in seizing upon one
man, and letting go another, in neglecting the Jews, and gathering in
the Gentiles, which appears to us to be results only of an absolute
dominion, yet he resolves not those amazing acts into that, without
taking it for granted that they were governed by exact wisdom, though
beyond his ken to see and his line to sound. “O, the depth of the
riches, both of the wisdom and knowledge of God; how unsearchable are
his judgments, and his ways past finding out” (Rom. ii. 33)! There are
some things in matters of state, that may seem to be acts of mere will,
but if we were acquainted with the _arcana imperii_, the inward engines
which moved them, and the ends aimed at in those undertakings, we might
find a rich vein of prudence in them, to incline us to judge otherwise
than bare arbitrary proceedings. The other attributes of power and
goodness are more easily perceptible in the works of God than his
wisdom. The first view of the creation strikes us with this sentiment,
that the Author of this great fabric was mighty and beneficial; but his
wisdom lies deeper than to be discerned at the first glance, without
a diligent inquiry; as at the first casting our eyes upon the sea, we
behold its motion, color, and something of its vastness, but we cannot
presently fathom the depth of it, and understand those lower fountains
that supply that great ocean of waters. It is part of God’s sovereignty,
as it is of the wisest princes, that he hath a wisdom beyond the
reach of his subjects; it is not for a finite nature to understand
an Infinite Wisdom, nor for a foolish creature that hath lost his
understanding by the fall, to judge of the reason of the methods of
a wise Counsellor. Yet those actions that savor most of sovereignty,
present men with some glances of his wisdom. Was it mere will, that
he suffered some angels to fall? But his wisdom was in it for the
manifestation of his justice, as it was also in the case of Pharaoh.
Was it mere will, that he suffered sin to be committed by man? Was not
his wisdom in this for the discovery of his mercy, which never had been
known without that, which should render a creature miserable? “He hath
concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all” (Rom.
xi. 32). Though God had such an absolute right, to have annihilated the
world as soon as ever he had made it, yet how had this consisted with
his wisdom, to have erected a creature after his own image one day, and
despised it so much the next, as to cashier it from being? What wisdom
had it been to make a thing only to destroy it; to repent of his work
as soon as ever it came out of his hands, without any occasion offered
by the creature? If God be supposed to be Creator, he must be supposed
to have an end in creation; what end can that be {b379} but himself
and his own glory, the manifestation of the perfections of his nature?
What perfection could have been discovered in so quick an annihilation,
but that of his power in creating, and of his sovereignty in snatching
away the being of his rational creature, before it had laid the methods
of acting? What wisdom to make a world, and a reasonable creature for
no use; not to praise and honor him, but to be broken in pieces, and
destroyed by him?
(2.) His sovereignty is managed according to the rule of righteousness.
Worldly princes often fancy tyranny and oppression to be the chief
marks of sovereignty, and think their sceptres not beautiful till died
in blood, nor the throne secure till established upon slain carcasses.
But “justice and judgment” are the foundation of the throne of God (Ps.
lxxxix. 14); alluding perhaps to the supporters of arms and thrones,
which among princes are the figures of lions, emblems of courage, as
Solomon had (1 Kings, x. 19). But God makes not so much might, as right,
the support of his. He sits on a “throne of holiness” (Ps. xlvii. 8).
As he reigns over the heathens, referring to the calling of the
Gentiles after the rejecting of the Jews; the Psalmist here praising
the righteousness of it, as the Apostle had the unsearchable wisdom
of it (Rom. xi. 33). “In all his ways he is righteous” (Ps. cxlv. 17):
in his ways of terror as well as those of sweetness; in those works
wherein little else but that of his sovereignty appears to us. It is
always linked with his holiness, that he will not do by his absolute
right anything but what is conformable to it: since his dominion is
founded upon the excellency of his nature, he will not do anything but
what is agreeable to it, and becoming his other perfections. Though
he be an absolute sovereign, he is not an arbitrary governor; “Shall
not the Judge of all the earth do right” (Gen. xviii. 25)? _i. e._ it
is impossible but he should act righteously in every punctilio of his
government, since his righteousness capacitates him to be a judge, not
a tyrant, of all the earth. The heathen poets represented their chief
god Jupiter with Themis, or Right, sitting by him upon his throne in
all his orders. God cannot by his absolute sovereignty command some
things, because they are directly against unchangeable righteousness;
as to command a creature to hate or blaspheme the Creator, not to own
him nor praise him. It would be a manifest unrighteousness to order
the creature not to own him, upon whom he depends both in its being
and well‑being; this would be against that natural duty which is
indispensably due from every rational creature to God. This would be to
order him to lay aside his reason, while he retains it; to disown him
to be the Creator, while man remains his creature. This is repugnant
to the nature of God, and the true nature of the creature; or to exact
anything of man, but what he had given him a capacity, in his original
nature, to perform. If any command were above our natural power, it
would be unrighteous; as to command a man to grasp the globe of the
earth, to stride over the sea, to lave out the waters of the ocean;
these things are impossible, and become not the righteousness and
wisdom of God to enjoin. There can be no obligation on man to an
impossibility. God had a free dominion over nullity before the creation;
he could call it out into the being {b380} of man and beast, but he
could not do anything in creation foolishly, because of his infinite
wisdom; nor could he by the right of his absolute sovereignty make man
sinful, because of his infinite purity. As it is impossible for him
not to be sovereign, it is impossible for him to deny his Deity and
his purity. It is lawful for God to do what he will, but his will being
ordered by the righteousness of his nature, as infinite as his will, he
cannot do anything but what is just; and therefore in his dealing with
men, you find him in Scripture submitting the reasonableness and equity
of his proceedings to the judgment of his depraved creatures, and
the inward dictates of their own conscience. “And now, O inhabitants
of Jerusalem, and men of Judah, judge, I pray you, between me and my
vineyard” (Isa. v. 3). Though God be the great Sovereign of the world,
yet he acts not in a way of absolute sovereignty. He rules by law;
he is a “Lawgiver” as well as a “King” (Isa. xxxiii. 22). It had been
repugnant to the nature of a rational creature to be ruled otherwise;
to be governed as a beast, this had been to frustrate those faculties
of will and understanding which had been given him. To conclude this:
when we say, God can do this or that, or command this or that, his
authority is not bounded and limited properly. Who can reasonably
detract from his almightiness, because he cannot do anything which
savors of weakness; and what detracting is it from his authority, that
he cannot do anything unseemly for the dignity of his nature? It is
rather from the infiniteness of his righteousness than the straitness
of his authority; at most it is but a voluntary bounding his dominion
by the law of his own holiness.
(3.) His sovereignty is managed according to the rule of goodness. Some
potentates there have been in the world, that have loved to suck the
blood, and drink the tears, of their subjects; that would rule more by
fear than love; like Clearchus, the tyrant of Heraclea, who bore the
figure of a thunderbolt instead of a sceptre, and named his son Thunder,
thereby to tutor him to terrify his subjects.[1003] But as God’s throne
is a throne of holiness, so it is a “throne of grace” (Heb. iv. 16),
a throne encircled with a rainbow: “In sight like to an emerald” (Rev.
iv. 23): an emblem of the covenant, that hath the pleasantness of a
green color, delightful to the eye, betokening mercy. Though his nature
be infinitely excellent above us, and his power infinitely transcendent
over us, yet the majesty of his government is tempered with an
unspeakable goodness. He acts not so much as an absolute Lord, as a
gracious Sovereign and obliging Benefactor. He delights not to make
his subjects slaves; exacts not from them any servile and fearful, but
a generous and cheerful, obedience. He requires them not to fear, or
worship him so much for his power, as his goodness. He requires not
of a rational creature anything repugnant to the honor, dignity, and
principles of such a nature; not anything that may shame, disgrace
it, and make it weary of its own being, and the service it owes to its
Sovereign. He draws by the cords of a man; his goodness renders his
laws as sweet as honey or the honey‑comb to an unvitiated palate and
a renewed mind. And though it be granted he hath a full dispose of his
creature, as the {b381} potter of his vessel, and might by his absolute
sovereignty inflict upon an innocent an eternal torment, yet his
goodness will never permit him to use this sovereign right to the hurt
of a creature that deserves it not. If God should cast an innocent
creature into the furnace of his wrath, who can question him? But who
can think that his goodness will do so, since that is as infinite as
his authority? As not to punish the sinner would be a denial of his
justice, so to torment an innocent would be a denial of his goodness.
A man hath an absolute power over his beast, and may take away his
life, and put him to a great deal of pain; but that moral virtue of
pity and tenderness would not permit him to use this right, but when
it conduceth to some greater good than that can be evil; either for the
good of man, which is the end of the creature, or for the good of the
poor beast itself, to rid him of a greater misery; none but a savage
nature, a disposition to be abhorred, would torture a poor beast merely
for his pleasure. It is as much against the nature of God to punish
one eternally, that hath not deserved it, as it is to deny himself,
and act anything foolishly and unbeseeming his other perfections, which
render him majestical and adorable. To afflict an innocent creature
for his own good, or for the good of the world, as in the case of the
Redeemer, is so far from being against goodness, that it is the highest
testimony of his tender bowels to the sons of men. God, though he be
mighty, “withdraws not his eyes,” _i. e._ his tender respect, “from
the righteous” (Job, xxxvi. 5, 7‒10). And if he “bind them in fetters,”
it is to “show them their transgressions,” and “open their ear to
discipline,” and renewing commands, in a more sensible strain, “to
depart from iniquity.” What was said of Fabritius, “You may as soon
remove the sun from its course, as Fabritius from his honesty,” may
be of God: you may as soon dash in pieces his throne, as separate his
goodness from his sovereignty.
4. This sovereignty is extensive over all creatures. He rules all, as
the heavens do over the earth. He is “King of worlds, King of ages,” as
the word translated “eternal” signifies (1 Tim. i. 17), τῷ δὲ βασιλεῖ
τῶν αἰώνων: and the same word is so translated (Heb. i. 2), “By whom
also he made the worlds.” The same word is rendered “worlds” (Heb. xi.
3): “The worlds were framed by the Word of God.” God is King of ages
or worlds, of the invisible world and the sensible; of all from the
beginning of their creation, of whatsoever is measured by a time. It
extends over angels and devils, over wicked and good, over rational and
irrational creatures; all things bow down under his hand; nothing can
be exempted from him: because there is nothing but was extracted by
him from nothing into being. All things essentially depend upon him;
and, therefore, must be essentially subject to him; the extent of his
dominion flows from the perfection of his essence; since his essence is
unlimited, his royalty cannot be restrained. His authority is as void
of any imperfection as his essence is; it reaches out to all points of
the heaven above, and the earth below. Other princes reign in a spot of
ground. Every worldly potentate hath the confines of his dominions. The
Pyrenean mountains divide France from Spain, and the Alps, Italy from
France. None are called kings absolutely, but kings of this or {b382}
that place. But God is the King; the spacious firmament limits not his
dominion; if we could suppose him bounded by any place, in regard of
his presence, yet he could never be out of his own dominion; whatsoever
he looks upon, wheresoever he were, would be under his rule. Earthly
kings may step out of their own country into the territory of a
neighbor prince; and as one leaves his country, so he leaves his
dominion behind him; but heaven and earth, and every particle of both,
is the territory of God. “He hath prepared his throne in the heavens,
and his kingdom rules over all.”
(1.) The heaven of angels, and other excellent creatures, belong to his
authority. He is principally called “The Lord of Hosts,” in relation
to his entire command over the angelical legions: therefore, ver. 21,
following the text, they are called his “hosts,” and “ministers that
do his pleasure.” Jacob called him so before (Gen. xxxii. 1, 2). When
he met the angels of God, he calls them “the host of God;” and the
Evangelist, long after, calls them so (Luke, ii. 13): “A multitude
of the heavenly host, praising God;” and all this host he commands
(Isa. xlv. 12): “My hands have stretched out the heavens, and all
their host have I commanded.” He employs them all in his service; and
when he issues out his orders to them to do this or that, he finds no
resistance of his will. And the inanimate creatures in heaven are at
his beck; they are his armies in heaven, disposed in an excellent order
in their several ranks (Ps. cxlvii. 4): “He calls the stars by name;”
they render a due obedience to him as servants to their master, when he
singles them out, “and calls them by name,” to do some special service;
he calls them out to their several offices, as the general of an army
appoints the station of every regiment in a battalia. Or “he calls them
by name,” _i. e._ he imposeth names upon them, a sign of dominion: the
giving names to the inferior creatures being the first act of Adam’s
derivative dominion over them. These are under the sovereignty of God.
The stars, by their influences, fight against Sisera (Judges v. 20).
And the sun holds in its reins, and stands stone still, to light Joshua
to a complete victory (Josh. x. 12). They are all marshalled in their
ranks to receive his word of command, and fight in close order, as
being desirous to have a share in the ruin of the enemies of their
Sovereign. And those creatures which mount up from the earth, and take
their place in the lower heavens, vapors, whereof hail and snow are
formed, are part of the army, and do not only receive, but fulfil, his
word of command (Ps. cxlviii. 8). These are his stores and magazines
of judgment against a time of trouble, and “a day of battle and war”
(Job xxxviii. 22, 23). The sovereignty of God is visible in all their
motions, in their going and returning. If he says, Go, they go; if he
say, Come, they come; if he say, do this, they gird up their loins, and
stand stiff to their duty.