---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ,transcriber's ,note3 ,this version of the text cannot represent certain typographical effects4 ,the many instances of italic text are delimited with the #8' character as italic4 ,title page use of blackletter text uses the #8' as a delimiter4 ,marginal sidenotes which spanned multiple pages were often repeated on each page4 ,these have been removed4 ,minor errors1 attributable to the printer1 have been corrected4 ,please see the transcriber's note at the end of this text for details regarding the handling of any textual issues encountered during its preparation4 ,,the ,,english ,,works ,,of ,,thomas ,,hobbes4 ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ,,the ,,english ,,works ,,of ,,thomas ,,hobbes ,,of ,,malmesbury2 ,,now ,,first ,,collected ,,and ,,edited ,,by ,,sir ,,william ,,molesworth1 ,,bart4 --- ,,vol4 ,,iv4 --- ,,london3 ,,john ,,bohn1 ,,henrietta ,,street1 ,,covent ,,garden4 --- ,,mdcccxl4 ,,london3 ,c4 ,,richards1 ,,printer1 ,,st4 ,,martin',s ,,lane4 ,,contents ,,of ,,vol4 ,,iv4 ------- ,,page ,,tripos2 in ,three ,discourses3 ,i4 ,human ,nature1 or the ,fundamental ,elements of ,policy #a ,,ii4 ,de ,corpore ,politico1 or the ,elements of ,law #gg ,,iii4 ,of ,liberty and ,necessity #bbi ,an ,answer to ,bishop ,bramhall's ,book1 called 8,the ,catching of the ,leviathan0 #bgi ,an ,historical ,narration concerning ,heresy1 and the ,punishment thereof #che ,considerations upon the ,reputation1 ,loyalty1 ,manners1 and ,religion of ,thomas ,hobbes #dji ,answer to ,sir ,william ,davenant's ,preface before 8,gondibert0 #dda ,letter to the ,right ,honourable ,edward ,howard #deh ,,hobbes' ,,tripos ,,in ,three ,discourses4 ,,the ,,first1 ,,human ,,nature3 ,,the ,,second1 ,,de ,,corpore ,,politico3 ,,the ,,third1 ,,of ,,liberty ,,and ,,necessity4 --- ,,by ,,thomas ,,hobbes ,,of ,,malmesbury4 ,,human ,,nature1 ,,or ,,the ,,fundamental ,,elements ,,of ,,policy4 ,,being ,a ,,discovery ,,of ,,the ,,faculties1 ,,acts1 ,,and ,,passions1 ,,of ,,the ,,soul ,,of ,,man1 ,,from ,,their ,,original ,,causes2 ,,according ,,to ,,such ,,philosophical ,,principles1 ,,as ,,are ,,not ,,commonly ,,known ,,or ,,asserted4 ,,by ,,thomas ,,hobbes ,,of ,,malmesbury4 ,,to ,,the ,,reader4 ------- ,,reader1 ,it was thought good to let you know that ,mr4 ,hobbes hath written a body of philosophy1 upon such principles and in such order as are used by men conversant in demonstration3 this he hath distinguished into three parts2 ,de ,corpore1 ,de ,homine1 ,de ,cive2 each of the consequents beginning at the end of the antecedent1 and insisting thereupon1 as the later ,books of ,euclid upon the former4 ,the last of these he hath already published in ,latin beyond the seas2 the second is this now presented3 and if these two receive justice in the world1 there is hope we may obtain the first4 ,he whose care it is1 and labour1 to satisfy the judgment and reason of mankind1 will condescend so far1 we hope1 to satisfy the desire of those learned men whom these shall either have found or made2 which cannot be1 until they shall analytically have followed the grand phnomena of states and kingdoms through the passions of particular men1 into the elemental principles of natural and corporeal motions4 ,the former work was published by the ,author1 and so is out of danger2 this by a friend1 with leave from him3 and to secure this1 you are intreated to consider the relations wherein it stands1 especially to the book de ,cive4 ,it was thought a part of religion1 not to make any change without the author's advice1 which could not suddenly be obtained2 and so it comes forth innocently1 supposing nothing to have happened since the ,dedication of it2 which if it seem a solecism to some1 it may to others give satisfaction1 in calling to mind those times and opportunities to which we are indebted for these admirable compositions4 ,f4 ,b4 ------- ,,to ,,the ,,right ,,honourable ,,william1 ,,earl ,,of ,,newcastle1 ,,governor ,,to ,,the ,,prince ,,his ,,highness1 ,,one ,,of ,,his ,,majesty',s ,,most ,,honourable ,,privy ,,council4 --- ,,my ,,most ,,honoured ,,lord1 ,from the principal parts of ,nature1 ,reason and ,passion1 have proceeded two kinds of learning1 mathematical and dogmatical3 the former is free from controversy and dispute1 because it consisteth in comparing figure and motion only2 in which things1 truth1 and the interest of men1 oppose not each other3 but in the other there is nothing undisputable1 because it compareth men1 and meddleth with their right and profit2 in which1 as oft as reason is against a man1 so oft will a man be against reason4 ,and from hence it cometh1 that they who have written of justice and policy in general1 do all invade each other and themselves with contradictions4 ,to reduce this doctrine to the rules and infallibility of reason1 there is no way1 but1 first1 put such principles down for a foundation1 as passion1 not mistrusting1 may not seek to displace2 and afterwards to build thereon the truth of cases in the law of nature 7which hitherto have been built in the air7 by degrees1 till the whole have been inexpugnable4 ,now1 my ,lord1 the principles fit for such a foundation1 are those which heretofore ,i have acquainted your ,lordship withal in private discourse1 and which by your command ,i have here put into a method4 ,to examine cases thereby between sovereign and sovereign1 or between sovereign and subject1 ,i leave to them that shall find leisure and encouragement thereto4 ,for my part1 ,i present this to your ,lordship for the true and only foundation of such science4 ,for the style1 it is therefore the worse1 because1 whilst ,i was writing1 ,i consulted more with logic than with rhetoric3 but for the doctrine1 it is not slightly proved2 and the conclusions thereof of such nature1 as1 for want of them1 government and peace have been nothing else1 to this day1 but mutual fears2 and it would be an incomparable benefit to commonwealth1 that every one held the opinion concerning law and policy here delivered4 ,the ambition therefore of this book1 in seeking by your ,lordship's countenance to insinuate itself with those whom the matter it containeth most nearly concerneth1 is to be excused4 ,for myself1 ,i desire no greater honour than ,i enjoy already in your ,lordship's favour1 unless it be that you would be pleased1 in continuance thereof1 to give me more exercise in your commands2 which1 as ,i am bound by your many great favours1 ,i shall obey1 being1 ,my most honoured ,lord1 ,your most humble and most obliged ,servant1 ,,thomas ,,hobbes4 ,may #i1 #afdj4 ,,in ,,libellum ,,pr,,stantissimi ,,thom ,,hobbii1 ,,viri ,,vere ,,philosophi1 8,,de ,,natura ,,hominis40 ,qu magna cli mnia1 et tractus maris ,terrque fines1 siquid aut ultra est1 capit1 ,mens ipsa tandem capitur3 omnia hactenus ,qu nosse potuit1 nota jam primum est sibi4 ,accede1 ,lector1 disce quis demum sies2 ,et inquilinam jecoris agnoscas tui1 ,qua propius hret nil tibi1 et nil tam procul4 ,non hic scholarum frivola1 aut cassi logi1 ,quales per annos forte plus septem legit2 ,ut folle pleno prodeat1 rix artifex2 ,vanasque merces futili lingua crepet3 ,sed sancta rerum pondera1 et sensus graves1 ,quales parari decuit1 ipsa cum fuit ,pingenda ratio1 et vindici suo adstitit4 ,panduntur omnes machin gyri tu1 ,animque vectes1 trochle1 cunei1 rot2 ,qua concitetur arte1 quo sufflamine ,sistatur illa rursus1 et constet sibi3 ,nec1 si fenestram pectori humano suam ,aptasset ipse ,momus1 inspiceret magis4 ,hic cerno levia affectuum vestigia1 ,gracilesque sensus lineas2 video quibus ,vehantur alis blanduli cupidines1 ,quibusque stimulis urgeant ir graves4 ,hic et dolores1 et voluptates suos ,produnt recessus2 ipse nec timor latet4 ,has norit artes1 quisquis in foro velit ,animorum habenas flectere1 et populos cupit ,aptis ligatos nexibus jungi sibi4 ,hic ,archimedes publicus figat pedem1 ,siquando regna machinis politicis ,urgere satagit1 et feras gentes ciet1 ,imisque motum sedibus mundum quatit3 ,facile domabit cuncta1 qui menti imperat4 ,consultor audax1 et ,promethei potens ,facinoris anime6 quis tibi dedit ,deus ,hc intueri sculis longe abdita1 ,oculosque luce tinxit ambrosia tuos8 ,tu mentis omnis1 at tu nulla est capax4 ,hac laude solus fruere3 divinum est opus ,animam creare2 proximum huic1 ostendere4 ,,rad4 ,,bathurst1 ,a4,m4 ,,col4 ,,trin4 ,,oxon4 ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ,,human ,,nature3 ,,or ,,the ,,fundamental ,,elements ,,of ,,policy4 ------- ,,chapter ,i4 ,sidenote3 ,introduction4 #a4 ,the true and perspicuous explication of the elements of laws natural and politic 7which is my present scope7 dependeth upon the knowledge of what is human nature1 what is body politic1 and what it is we call a law2 concerning which points1 as the writings of men from antiquity downwards have still increased1 so also have the doubts and controversies concerning the same3 and seeing that true knowledge begetteth not doubt nor controversy1 but knowledge1 it is manifest from the present controversies1 that they1 which have heretofore written thereof1 have not well understood their own subject4 #b4 ,harm ,i can do none1 though ,i err no less than they2 for ,i shall leave men but as they are1 in doubt and dispute3 but1 intending not to take any principle upon trust1 but only to put men in mind of what they know already1 or may know by their own experience1 ,i hope to err the less2 and when ,i do1 it must proceed from too hasty concluding1 which ,i will endeavour as much as ,i can to avoid4 #c4 ,on the other side1 if reasoning aright win not consent1 which may very easily happen1 from them that being confident of their own knowledge weigh not what is said1 the fault is not mine1 but theirs2 for as it is my part to shew my reasons1 so it is theirs to bring attention4 #d4 ,man's nature is the sum of his natural faculties and powers1 as the faculties of nutrition1 motion1 generation1 sense1 reason1 c4 ,these powers we do unanimously call natural1 and are contained in the definition of man1 under these words1 animal and rational4 #e4 ,according to the two principal parts of man1 ,i divide his faculties into two sorts1 faculties of the body1 and faculties of the mind4 #f4 ,since the minute and distinct anatomy of the powers of the body is nothing necessary to the present purpose1 ,i will only sum them up in these three heads1 power nutritive1 power motive1 and power generative4 #g4 ,of the powers of the mind there be two sorts1 cognitive1 imaginative1 or conceptive and motive2 and first of cognitive4 ,for the understanding of what ,i mean by the power cognitive1 we must remember and acknowledge that there be in our minds continually certain images or conceptions of the things without us1 insomuch that if a man could be alive1 and all the rest of the world annihilated1 he should nevertheless retain the image thereof1 and all those things which he had before seen or perceived in it2 every one by his own experience knowing1 that the absence or destruction of things once imagined doth not cause the absence or destruction of the imagination itself4 ,this imagery and representations of the qualities of the thing without1 is that we call our conception1 imagination1 ideas1 notice or knowledge of them2 and the faculty or power by which we are capable of such knowledge1 is that ,i here call cognitive power1 or conceptive1 the power of knowing or conceiving4 ------- ,,chapter ,,ii4 #b4 ,definition of sense4 #d4 ,four propositions concerning the nature of conceptions4 #e4 ,the first proved4 #f4 ,the second proved4 #g1 #h4 ,the third proved4 #i4 ,the fourth proved4 #aj4 ,the main deception of sense4 #a4 ,having declared what ,i mean by the word conception1 and other words equivalent thereunto1 ,i come to the conceptions themselves1 to shew their differences1 their causes1 and the manner of the production1 so far as is necessary for this place4 ,sidenote3 ,definition of sense4 #b4 ,originally all conceptions proceed from the action of the thing itself1 whereof it is the conception3 now when the action is present1 the conception it produceth is also called sense2 and the thing by whose action the same is produced1 is called the object of the sense4 #c4 ,by our several organs we have several conceptions of several qualities in the objects2 for by sight we have a conception or image composed of colour and figure1 which is all the notice and knowledge the object imparteth to us of its nature by the eye4 ,by hearing we have a conception called sound1 which is all the knowledge we have of the quality of the object from the ear4 ,and so the rest of the senses are also conceptions of several qualities1 or natures of their objects4 ,sidenote3 ,four propositions concerning the nature of conceptions4 #d4 ,because the image in vision consisting of colour and shape is the knowledge we have of the qualities of the object of that sense2 it is no hard matter for a man to fall into this opinion1 that the same colour and shape are the very qualities themselves2 and for the same cause1 that sound and noise are the qualities of the bell1 or of the air4 ,and this opinion hath been so long received1 that the contrary must needs appear a great paradox2 and yet the introduction of species visible and intelligible 7which is necessary for the maintenance of that opinion7 passing to and fro from the object1 is worse than any paradox1 as being a plain impossibility4 ,i shall therefore endeavour to make plain these points3 ,that the subject wherein colour and image are inherent1 is not the object or thing seen4 ,that there is nothing without us 7really7 which we call an image or colour4 ,that the said image or colour is but an apparition unto us of the motion1 agitation1 or alteration1 which the object worketh in the brain1 or spirits1 or some internal substance of the head4 ,that as in vision1 so also in conceptions that arise from the other senses1 the subject of their inherence is not the object1 but the sentient4 ,sidenote3 ,the first proved #e4 ,every man hath so much experience as to have seen the sun and the other visible objects by reflection in the water and glasses2 and this alone is sufficient for this conclusion1 that colour and image may be there where the thing seen is not4 ,but because it may be said that notwithstanding the image in the water be not in the object1 but a thing merely phantastical1 yet there may be colour really in the thing itself3 ,i will urge further this experience1 that divers times men see directly the same object double1 as two candles for one1 which may happen from distemper1 or otherwise without distemper if a man will1 the organs being either in their right temper1 or equally distempered2 the colours and figures in two such images of the same thing cannot be inherent therein1 because the thing seen cannot be in two places4 ,one of these images therefore is not inherent in the object3 but seeing the organs of the sight are then in equal temper or distemper1 the one of them is no more inherent than the other2 and consequently neither of them both are in the object2 which is the first proposition1 mentioned in the precedent number4 ,sidenote3 ,the second proved4 #f4 ,secondly1 that the image of any thing by reflection in a glass or water or the like1 is not any thing in or behind the glass1 or in or under the water1 every man may grant to himself2 which is the second proposition4 ,sidenote3 ,the third proved4 #g4 ,for the third1 we are to consider1 first that upon every great agitation or concussion of the brain 7as it happeneth from a stroke1 especially if the stroke be upon the eye7 whereby the optic nerve suffereth any great violence1 there appeareth before the eyes a certain light1 which light is nothing without1 but an apparition only1 all that is real being the concussion or motion of the parts of that nerve2 from which experience we may conclude1 that apparition of light is really nothing but motion within4 ,if therefore from lucid bodies there can be derived motion1 so as to affect the optic nerve in such manner as is proper thereunto1 there will follow an image of light somewhere in that line by which the motion was last derived to the eye2 that is to say1 in the object1 if we look directly on it1 and in the glass or water1 when we look upon it in the line of reflection1 which in effect is the third proposition2 namely1 that image and colour is but an apparition to us of that motion1 agitation1 or alteration which the object worketh in the brain or spirits1 or some internal substance in the head4 #h4 ,but that from all lucid1 shining and illuminate bodies1 there is a motion produced to the eye1 and1 through the eye1 to the optic nerve1 and so into the brain1 by which that apparition of light or colour is affected1 is not hard to prove4 ,and first1 it is evident that the fire1 the only lucid body here upon earth1 worketh by motion equally every way2 insomuch as the motion thereof stopped or inclosed1 it is presently extinguished1 and no more fire4 ,and further1 that that motion1 whereby the fire worketh1 is dilation1 and contraction of itself alternately1 commonly called scintillation or glowing1 is manifest also by experience4 ,from such motion in the fire must needs arise a rejection or casting from itself of that part of the medium which is contiguous to it1 whereby that part also rejecteth the next1 and so successively one part beateth back another to the very eye2 and in the same manner the exterior part of the eye presseth the interior1 7the laws of refraction still observed74 ,now the interior coat of the eye is nothing else but a piece of the optic nerve2 and therefore the motion is still continued thereby into the brain1 and by resistance or reaction of the brain1 is also a rebound into the optic nerve again2 which we not conceiving as motion or rebound from within1 do think it is without1 and call it light2 as hath been already shewed by the experience of a stroke4 ,we have no reason to doubt1 that the fountain of light1 the sun1 worketh by any other ways than the fire1 at least in this matter4 ,and thus all vision hath its original from such motion as is here described3 for where there is no light1 there is no sight2 and therefore colour also must be the same thing with light1 as being the effect of the lucid bodies3 their difference being only this1 that when the light cometh directly from the fountain to the eye1 or indirectly by reflection from clean and polite bodies1 and such as have not any particular motion internal to alter it1 we call it light2 but when it cometh to the eye by reflection from uneven1 rough1 and coarse bodies1 or such as are affected with internal motion of their own that may alter it1 then we call it colour2 colour and light differing only in this1 that the one is pure1 and the other perturbed light4 ,by that which hath been said1 not only the truth of the third proposition1 but also the whole manner of producing light and colour1 is apparent4 ,sidenote3 ,the fourth proved4 #i4 ,as colour is not inherent in the object1 but an effect thereof upon us1 caused by such motion in the object1 as hath been described3 so neither is sound in the thing we hear1 but in ourselves4 ,one manifest sign thereof is1 that as a man may see1 so also he may hear double or treble1 by multiplication of echoes1 which echoes are sounds as well as the original2 and not being in one and the same place1 cannot be inherent in the body that maketh them4 ,nothing can make any thing which is not in itself3 the clapper hath no sound in it1 but motion1 and maketh motion in the internal parts of the bell2 so the bell hath motion1 and not sound1 that imparteth motion to the air2 and the air hath motion1 but not sound2 the air imparteth motion by the ear and nerve unto the brain2 and the brain hath motion but not sound2 from the brain1 it reboundeth back into the nerves outward1 and thence it becometh an apparition without1 which we call sound4 ,and to proceed to the rest of the senses1 it is apparent enough1 that the smell and taste of the same thing1 are not the same to every man2 and therefore are not in the thing smelt or tasted1 but in the men4 ,so likewise the heat we feel from the fire is manifestly in us1 and is quite different from the heat which is in the fire3 for our heat is pleasure or pain1 according as it is great or moderate2 but in the coal there is no such thing4 ,by this the fourth and last proposition is proved1 viz4 that as in vision1 so also in conceptions that arise from other senses1 the subject of their inherence is not in the object1 but in the sentient4 ,sidenote3 ,the main deception of sense4 #aj4 ,and from hence also it followeth1 that whatsoever accidents or qualities our senses make us think there be in the world1 they be not there1 but are seeming and apparitions only3 the things that really are in the world without us1 are those motions by which these seemings are caused4 ,and this is the great deception of sense1 which also is to be by sense corrected3 for as sense telleth me1 when ,i see directly1 that the colour seemeth to be in the object2 so also sense telleth me1 when ,i see by reflection1 that colour is not in the object4 ------- ,,chapter ,,iii4 #a4 ,imagination defined4 #b4 ,sleep and dreams defined4 #c4 ,causes of dreams4 #d4 ,fiction defined4 #e4 ,phantasms defined4 #f4 ,remembrance defined4 #g4 ,wherein remembrance consisteth4 #h4 ,why in a dream a man never thinks he dreams4 #i4 ,why few things seem strange in dreams4 #aj4 ,that a dream may be taken for reality and vision4 ,sidenote3 ,imagination defined4 #a4 ,as standing water put into motion by the stroke of a stone1 or blast of wind1 doth not presently give over moving as soon as the wind ceaseth1 or the stone settleth3 so neither doth the effect cease which the object hath wrought upon the brain1 so soon as ever by turning aside of the organs the object ceaseth to work2 that is to say1 though the sense be past1 the image or conception remaineth2 but more obscure while we are awake1 because some object or other continually plieth and soliciteth our eyes1 and ears1 keeping the mind in a stronger motion1 whereby the weaker doth not easily appear4 ,and this obscure conception is that we call phantasy1 or imagination3 imagination being1 to define it1 conception remaining1 and by little and little decaying from and after the act of sense4 ,sidenote3 ,sleep and dreams defined4 #b4 ,but when present sense is not1 as in sleep1 there the images remaining after sense1 when there be many1 as in dreams1 are not obscure1 but strong and clear1 as in sense itself4 ,the reason is1 that which obscured and made the conceptions weak1 namely sense1 and present operation of the object1 is removed3 for sleep is the privation of the act of sense1 7the power remaining7 and dreams are the imagination of them that sleep4 ,sidenote3 ,causes of dreams4 #c4 ,the causes of dreams1 if they be natural1 are the actions or violence of the inward parts of a man upon his brain1 by which the passages of sense by sleep benumbed1 are restored to their motion4 ,the signs by which this appeareth to be so1 are the differences of dreams 7old men commonly dream oftener1 and have their dreams more painful than young7 proceeding from the different accidents of man's body1 as dreams of lust1 as dreams of anger1 according as the heart1 or other parts within1 work more or less upon the brain1 by more or less heat2 so also the descents of different sorts of phlegm maketh us a dream of different tastes of meats and drinks2 and ,i believe there is a reciprocation of motion from the brain to the vital parts1 and back from the vital parts to the brain2 whereby not only imagination begetteth motion in those parts2 but also motion in those parts begetteth imagination like to that by which it was begotten4 ,if this be true1 and that sad imaginations nourish the spleen1 then we see also a cause1 why a strong spleen reciprocally causeth fearful dreams1 and why the effects of lasciviousness may in a dream produce the image of some person that had caused them4 ,another sign that dreams are caused by the action of the inward parts1 is the disorder and casual consequence of one conception or image to another3 for when we are waking1 the antecedent thought or conception introduceth1 and is cause of the consequent1 as the water followeth a man's finger upon a dry and level table2 but in dreams there is commonly no coherence1 and when there is1 it is by chance1 which must needs proceed from this1 that the brain in dreams is not restored to its motion in every part alike2 whereby it cometh to pass1 that our thoughts appear like the stars between the flying clouds1 not in the order which a man would choose to observe them1 but as the uncertain flight of broken clouds permits4 ,sidenote3 ,fiction defined4 #d4 ,as when the water1 or any liquid thing moved at once by divers movents1 receiveth one motion compounded of them all2 so also the brain or spirit therein1 having been stirred by divers objects1 composeth an imagination of divers conceptions that appeared single to the sense4 ,as for example1 the sense sheweth at one time the figure of a mountain1 and at another time the colour of gold2 but the imagination afterwards hath them both at once in a golden mountain4 ,from the same cause it is1 there appear unto us castles in the air1 chimeras1 and other monsters which are not in rerum natura1 but have been conceived by the sense in pieces at several times4 ,and this composition is that which we commonly call fiction of the mind4 ,sidenote3 ,phantasms defined4 #e4 ,there is yet another kind of imagination1 which for clearness contendeth with sense1 as well as a dream2 and that is1 when the action of sense hath been long or vehement3 and the experience thereof is more frequent in the sense of seeing1 than the rest4 ,an example whereof is1 the image remaining before the eye after looking upon the sun4 ,also1 those little images that appear before the eyes in the dark 7whereof ,i think every man hath experience1 but they most of all1 who are timorous or superstitious7 are examples of the same4 ,and these1 for distinction-sake1 may be called phantasms4 ,sidenote3 ,remembrance defined4 #f4 ,by the senses1 which are numbered according to the organs to be five1 we take notice 7as hath been said already7 of the objects without us2 and that notice is our conception thereof3 but we take notice also some way or other of our conceptions3 for when the conception of the same thing cometh again1 we take notice that it is again2 that is to say1 that we have had the same conception before2 which is as much as to imagine a thing past2 which is impossible to the sense1 which is only of things present4 ,this therefore may be accounted a sixth sense1 but internal1 7not external1 as the rest7 and is commonly called remembrance4 ,sidenote3 ,wherein remembrance consisteth4 #g4 ,for the manner by which we take notice of a conception past1 we are to remember1 that in the definition of imagination1 it is said to be a conception by little and little decaying1 or growing more obscure4 ,an obscure conception is that which representeth the whole object together1 but none of the smaller parts by themselves2 and as more or fewer parts be represented1 so is the conception or representation said to be more or less clear4 ,seeing then the conception1 which when it was first produced by sense1 was clear1 and represented the parts of the object distinctly2 and when it cometh again is obscure1 we find missing somewhat that we expected2 by which we judge it past and decayed4 ,for example1 a man that is present in a foreign city1 seeth not only whole streets1 but can also distinguish particular houses1 and parts of houses2 but departed thence1 he cannot distinguish them so particularly in his mind as he did1 some house or turning escaping him2 yet is this to remember3 when afterwards there escape him more particulars1 this is also to remember1 but not so well4 ,in process of time1 the image of the city returneth but as a mass of building only1 which is almost to have forgotten it4 ,seeing then remembrance is more or less1 as we find more or less obscurity1 why may not we well think remembrance to be nothing else but the missing of parts1 which every man expecteth should succeed after they have a conception of the whole8 ,to see at a great distance of place1 and to remember at a great distance of time1 is to have like conceptions of the thing3 for there wanteth distinction of parts in both2 the one conception being weak by operation at distance1 the other by decay4 ,sidenote3 ,why in a dream a man never thinks he dreams4 #h4 ,and from this that hath been said1 there followeth1 that a man can never know he dreameth2 he may dream he doubteth1 whether it be a dream or no3 but the clearness of the imagination representeth every thing with as many parts as doth sense itself1 and consequently1 he can take notice of nothing but as present2 whereas to think he dreameth1 is to think those his conceptions1 that is to say dreams1 obscurer than they were in the sense3 so that he must think them both as clear1 and not as clear as sense2 which is impossible4 ,sidenote3 ,why few things seem strange in dreams4 #i4 ,from the same ground it proceedeth1 that men wonder not in their dreams at place and persons1 as they would do waking3 for waking1 a man would think it strange to be in a place where he never was before1 and remember nothing of how he came there2 but in a dream1 there cometh little of that kind into consideration4 ,the clearness of conception in a dream1 taketh away distrust1 unless the strangeness be excessive1 as to think himself fallen from on high without hurt1 and then most commonly he waketh4 ,sidenote3 ,that a dream may be taken for reality and vision4 #aj4 ,nor is it impossible for a man to be so far deceived1 as when his dream is past1 to think it real3 for if he dream of such things as are ordinarily in his mind1 and in such order as he useth to do waking1 and withal that he laid him down to sleep in the place where he findeth himself when he awaketh2 all which may happen3 ,i know no or mark by which he can discern whether it were a dream or not1 and therefore do the less wonder to hear a man sometimes to tell his dream for a truth1 or to take it for a vision4 ------- ,,chapter ,,iv4 #a4 ,discourse4 #b4 ,the cause of coherence of thoughts4 #c4 ,ranging4 #d4 ,sagacity4 #e4 ,reminiscence4 #f4 ,experience4 #g4 ,expectation4 #h4 ,conjecture4 #i4 ,signs4 #aj4 ,prudence4 #aa4 ,caveats of concluding from experience4 ,sidenote3 ,discourse4 #a4 ,the succession of conceptions in the mind1 series or consequence of one after another1 may be casual and incoherent1 as in dreams for the most part2 and it may be orderly1 as when the former thought introduceth the latter2 and this is discourse of the mind4 ,but because the word discourse is commonly taken for the coherence and consequence of words1 ,i will1 to avoid equivocation1 call it discursion4 ,sidenote3 ,the cause of coherence of thoughts4 #b4 ,the cause of the coherence or consequence of one conception to another1 is their first coherence or consequence at that time when they are produced by sense3 as for example1 from ,st4 ,andrew the mind runneth to ,st4 ,peter1 because their names are read together2 from ,st4 ,peter to a stone1 for the same cause2 from stone to foundation1 because we see them together2 and for the same cause1 from foundation to church1 and from church to people1 and from people to tumult3 and according to this example1 the mind may run almost from anything to anything4 ,but as in the sense the conception of cause and effect may succeed one another2 so may they after sense in the imagination3 and for the most part they do so2 the cause whereof is the appetite of them1 who1 having a conception of the end1 have next unto it a conception of the next means to that end3 as1 when a man1 from a thought of honour to which he hath an appetite1 cometh to the thought of wisdom1 which is the next means thereunto2 and from thence to the thought of study1 which is the next means to wisdom4 ,sidenote3 ,ranging4 #c4 ,to omit that kind of discursion by which we proceed from anything to anything1 there are of the other kind divers sorts3 as first1 in the senses there are certain coherences of conceptions1 which we may call ranging2 examples whereof are2 a man casteth his eye upon the ground1 to look about for some small thing lost2 the hounds casting about at a fault in hunting2 and the ranging of spaniels3 and herein we take a beginning arbitrary4 ,sidenote3 ,sagacity4 #d4 ,another sort of discursion is1 when the appetite giveth a man his beginning1 as in the example before1 where honour to which a man hath appetite1 maketh him think upon the next means of attaining it1 and that again of the next1 c4 ,and this the ,latins call sagacitas1 and we may call hunting or tracing1 as dogs trace beasts by the smell1 and men hunt them by their footsteps2 or as men hunt after riches1 place1 or knowledge4 ,sidenote3 ,reminiscence4 #e4 ,there is yet another kind of discursion beginning with the appetite to recover something lost1 proceeding from the present backward1 from thought of the place where we miss at1 to the thought of the place from whence we came last2 and from the thought of that1 to the thought of a place before1 till we have in our mind some place1 wherein we had the thing we miss3 and this is called reminiscence4 ,sidenote3 ,experience4 #f4 ,the remembrance of succession of one thing to another1 that is1 of what was antecedent1 and what consequent1 and what concomitant1 is called an experiment2 whether the same be made by us voluntarily1 as when a man putteth any thing into the fire1 to see what effect the fire will produce upon it3 or not made by us1 as when we remember a fair morning after a red evening4 ,to have had many experiments1 is that we call experience1 which is nothing else but remembrance of what antecedents have been followed by what consequents4 ,sidenote3 ,expectation4 #g4 ,no man can have in his mind a conception of the future1 for the future is not yet3 but of our conceptions of the past1 we make a future2 or rather1 call past1 future relatively4 ,thus after a man hath been accustomed to see like antecedents followed by like consequents1 whensoever he seeth the like come to pass to any thing he had seen before1 he looks there should follow it the same that followed then3 as for example1 because a man hath often seen offences followed by punishment1 when he seeth an offence in present1 he thinketh punishment to be consequent thereto2 but consequent unto that which is present1 men call future2 and thus we make remembrance to be the prevision of things to come1 or expectation or presumption of the future4 ,sidenote3 ,conjecture4 #h4 ,in the same manner1 if a man seeth in present that which he hath seen before1 he thinks that that which was antecedent to that which he saw before1 is also antecedent to that he presently seeth3 as for example1 he that hath seen the ashes remain after the fire1 and now again seeth ashes1 concludeth again there hath been fire3 and this is called again conjecture of the past1 or presumption of the fact4 ,sidenote3 ,signs4 #i4 ,when a man hath so often observed like antecedents to be followed by like consequents1 that whensoever he seeth the antecedent1 he looketh again for the consequent2 or when he seeth the consequent1 maketh account there hath been the like antecedent2 then he calleth both the antecedent and the consequent1 signs one of another1 as clouds are signs of rain to come1 and rain of clouds past4 ,sidenote3 ,prudence4 #aj4 ,this taking of signs by experience1 is that wherein men do ordinarily think1 the difference stands between man and man in wisdom1 by which they commonly understand a man's whole ability or power cognitive2 but this is an error3 for the signs are but conjectural2 and according as they have often or seldom failed1 so their assurance is more or less2 but never full and evident3 for though a man have always seen the day and night to follow one another hitherto2 yet can he not thence conclude they shall do so1 or that they have done so eternally3 experience concludeth nothing universally4 ,if the signs hit twenty times for one missing1 a man may lay a wager of twenty to one of the event2 but may not conclude it for a truth4 ,but by this it is plain1 that they shall conjecture best1 that have most experience1 because they have most signs to conjecture by3 which is the reason old men are more prudent1 that is1 conjecture better1 cteris paribus1 than young3 for1 being old1 they remember more2 and experience is but remembrance4 ,and men of quick imagination1 cteris paribus1 are more prudent than those whose imaginations are slow3 for they observe more in less time4 ,prudence is nothing but conjecture from experience1 or taking of signs from experience warily1 that is1 that the experiments from which he taketh such signs be all remembered2 for else the cases are not alike that seem so4 ,sidenote3 ,caveats of concluding from experience4 #aa4 ,as in conjecture concerning things past and future1 it is prudence to conclude from experience1 what is like to come to pass1 or to have passed already2 so it is an error to conclude from it1 that it is so or so called2 that is to say1 we cannot from experience conclude1 that any thing is to be called just or unjust1 true or false1 or any proposition universal whatsoever1 except it be from remembrance of the use of names imposed arbitrarily by men3 for example1 to have heard a sentence given in the like case1 the like sentence a thousand times is not enough to conclude that the sentence is just2 though most men have no other means to conclude by3 but it is necessary1 for the drawing of such conclusion1 to trace and find out1 by many experiences1 what men do mean by calling things just and unjust4 ,further1 there is another caveat to be taken in concluding by experience1 from the tenth section of the second chapter2 that is1 that we conclude such things to be without1 that are within us4 ------- ,,chapter ,v4 #a4 ,of marks4 #b4 ,names or appellations4 #c4 ,names positive and privative4 #d4 ,advantage of names maketh us capable of science4 #e4 ,names universal and singular4 #f4 ,universals not in rerum natura4 #g4 ,equivocal names4 #h4 ,understanding4 #i4 ,affirmation1 negation1 proposition4 #aj4 ,truth1 falsity4 #aa4 ,ratiocination4 #ab4 ,according to reason1 against reason4 #ac4 ,names causes of knowledge1 so of error4 #ad4 ,translation of the discourse of the mind into the discourse of the tongue1 and of the errors thence proceeding4 ,sidenote3 ,of marks4 #a4 ,seeing the succession of conceptions in the mind are caused1 as hath been said before1 by the succession they had one to another when they were produced by the senses1 and that there is no conception that hath not been produced immediately before or after innumerable others1 by the innumerable acts of sense2 it must needs follow1 that one conception followeth not another1 according to our election1 and the need we have of them1 but as it chanceth us to hear or see such things as shall bring them to our mind4 ,the experience we have hereof1 is in such brute beasts1 which1 having the providence to hide the remains and superfluity of their meat1 do nevertheless want the remembrance of the place where they hid it1 and thereby make no benefit thereof in their hunger3 but man1 who in this point beginneth to rank himself somewhat above the nature of beasts1 hath observed and remembered the cause of this defect1 and to amend the same1 hath imagined or devised to set up a visible or other sensible mark1 the which1 when he seeth it again1 may bring to his mind the thought he had when he set it up4 ,a mark therefore is a sensible object which a man erecteth voluntarily to himself1 to the end to remember thereby somewhat past1 when the same is objected to his sense again3 as men that have passed by a rock at sea1 set up some mark1 thereby to remember their former danger1 and avoid it4 ,sidenote3 ,names or appellations4 #b4 ,in the number of these marks1 are those human voices1 which we call the names or appellations of things sensible by the ear1 by which we recall into our mind some conceptions of the things to which we gave those names or appellations2 as the appellation white bringeth to remembrance the quality of such objects as produce that colour or conception in us4 ,a name or appellation therefore is the voice of a man arbitrary1 imposed for a mark to bring into his mind some conception concerning the thing on which it is imposed4 ,sidenote3 ,names positive and privative4 #c4 ,things named1 are either the objects themselves1 as a man2 or the conception itself that we have of man1 as shape and motion3 or some privation1 which is when we conceive that there is something which we conceive1 not in him2 as when we conceive he is not just1 not finite1 we give him the name of unjust1 of infinite1 which signify privation or defect2 and to the privations themselves we give the names of injustice and infiniteness3 so that here be two sorts of names2 one of things1 in which we conceive something2 or of the conceptions themselves1 which are called positive3 the other of things wherein we conceive privation or defect1 and those names are called privative4 ,sidenote3 ,advantage of names maketh us capable of science4 #d4 ,by the advantage of names it is that we are capable of science1 which beasts1 for want of them are not2 nor man1 without the use of them3 for as a beast misseth not one or two out of many her young ones1 for want of those names of order1 one1 two1 and three1 and which we call number2 so neither would a man1 without repeating orally or mentally the words of number1 know how many pieces of money or other things lie before him4 ,sidenote3 ,names universal and singular4 #e4 ,seeing there be many conceptions of one and the same thing1 and for every conception we give it a several name2 it followeth that for one and the same thing1 we have many names or attributes2 as to the same man we give the appellations of just1 valiant1 c4 for divers virtues2 of strong1 comely1 c4 for divers qualities of the body4 ,and again1 because from divers things we receive like conceptions1 many things must needs have the same appellation3 as to all things we see1 we give the same name of visible2 and to all things we see moveable1 we give the appellation of moveable3 and those names we give to many1 are called universal to them all2 as the name of man to every particular of mankind3 such appellation as we give to one only thing1 we call individual1 or singular2 as ,socrates1 and other proper names3 or1 by circumlocution1 he that writ the ,iliads1 for ,homer4 ,sidenote3 ,universals not in rerum natura4 #f4 ,the universality of one name to many things1 hath been the cause that men think the things are themselves universal2 and so seriously contend1 that besides ,peter and ,john1 and all the rest of the men that are1 have been1 or shall be in the world1 there is yet something else that we call man1 viz4 man in general1 deceiving themselves1 by taking the universal1 or general appellation1 for the thing it signifieth3 for if one should desire the painter to make him the picture of a man1 which is as much as to say1 of a man in general2 he meaneth no more1 but that the painter should choose what man he pleaseth to draw1 which must needs be some of them that are1 or have been1 or may be1 none of which are universal4 ,but when he would have him to draw the picture of the king1 or any particular person1 he limiteth the painter to that one person he chooseth4 ,it is plain therefore1 that there is nothing universal but names2 which are therefore called indefinite2 because we limit them not ourselves1 but leave them to be applied by the hearer3 whereas a singular name is limited and restrained to one of the many things it signifieth2 as when we say1 this man1 pointing to him1 or giving him his proper name1 or by some such other way4 ,sidenote3 ,equivocal names4 #g4 ,the appellations that be universal1 and common to many things1 are not always given to all the particulars1 7as they ought to be7 for like conceptions1 and like considerations in them all2 which is the cause that many of them are not of constant signification1 but bring into our mind other thoughts than those for which they were ordained1 and these are called equivocal4 ,as for example1 the word faith signifieth the same with belief2 sometimes it signifieth particularly that belief which maketh a ,christian2 and sometime it signifieth the keeping of a promise4 ,also all metaphors are by profession equivocal3 and there is scarce any word that is not made equivocal by divers contextures of speech1 or by diversity of pronunciation and gesture4 ,sidenote3 ,understanding4 #h4 ,this equivocation of names maketh it difficult to recover those conceptions for which the name was ordained2 and that not only in the language of other men1 wherein we are to consider the drift1 and occasion1 and contexture of the speech1 as well as the words themselves2 but also in our discourse1 which being derived from the custom and common use of speech1 representeth unto us not our own conceptions4 ,it is therefore a great ability in a man1 out of the words1 contexture1 and other circumstances of language1 to deliver himself from equivocation1 and to find out the true meaning of what is said3 and this is it we call understanding4 ,sidenote3 ,affirmation1 negation1 proposition4 #i4 ,of two appellations1 by the help of this little verb is1 or something equivalent1 we make an affirmation or negation1 either of which in the ,schools we call also a proposition1 and consisteth of two appellations joined together by the said verb is3 as for example1 man is a living creature2 or thus1 man is not righteous3 whereof the former is called an affirmation1 because the appellation1 living creature1 is positive2 the latter a negative1 because not righteous is privative4 ,sidenote3 ,truth1 falsity4 #aj4 ,in every proposition1 be it affirmative or negative1 the latter appellation either comprehendeth the former1 as in this proposition1 charity is a virtue1 the name of virtue comprehendeth the name of charity1 and many other virtues beside2 and then is the proposition said to be true1 or truth3 for1 truth1 and a true proposition1 is all one4 ,or else the latter appellation comprehendeth not the former2 as in this proposition1 every man is just2 the name of just comprehendeth not every man2 for unjust is the name of the far greater part of men3 and the proposition is said to be false1 or falsity3 falsity and a false proposition being also the same thing4 ,sidenote3 ,ratiocination4 #aa4 ,in what manner of two propositions1 whether both affirmative1 or one affirmative1 the other negative1 is made a syllogism1 ,i forbear to write4 ,all this that hath been said of names or propositions1 though necessary1 is but dry discourse3 and this place is not for the whole art of logic1 which if ,i enter further into1 ,i ought to pursue3 besides1 it is not needful2 for there be few men which have not so much natural logic1 as thereby to discern well enough1 whether any conclusion ,i shall make in this discourse hereafter1 be well or ill collected3 only thus much ,i say in this place1 that making of syllogisms is that we call ratiocination or reasoning4 ,sidenote3 ,according to reason1 against reason4 #ab4 ,now when a man reasoneth from principles that are found indubitable by experience1 all deceptions of sense and equivocation of words avoided1 the conclusion he maketh is said to be according to right reason3 but when from his conclusion a man may1 by good ratiocination1 derive that which is contradictory to any evident truth whatsoever1 then he is said to have concluded against reason3 and such a conclusion is called absurdity4 ,sidenote3 ,names causes of knowledge1 so of error4 #ac4 ,as the invention of names hath been necessary for the drawing men out of ignorance1 by calling to their remembrance the necessary coherence of one conception to another2 so also hath it on the other side precipitated men into error3 insomuch1 that whereas by the benefit of words and ratiocination they exceed brute beasts in knowledge1 and the commodities that accompany the same2 so they exceed them also in error3 for true and false are things not incident to beasts1 because they adhere not to propositions and language2 nor have they ratiocination1 whereby to multiply one untruth by another1 as men have4 ,sidenote3 ,translation of the discourse of the mind into the discourse of the tongue1 and of the errors thence proceeding4 #ad4 ,it is the nature almost of every corporal thing1 being often moved in one and the same manner1 to receive continually a greater and greater easiness and aptitude to the same motion1 insomuch as in time the same becometh so habitual1 that1 to beget it1 there needs no more than to begin it4 ,the passions of man1 as they are the beginning of voluntary motions2 so are they the beginning of speech1 which is the motion of the tongue4 ,and men desiring to shew others the knowledge1 opinions1 conceptions1 and passions which are in themselves1 and to that end having invented language1 have by that means transferred all that discursion of their mind mentioned in the former chapter1 by the motion of their tongues1 into discourse of words3 and ratio now is but oratio1 for the most part1 wherein custom hath so great a power1 that the mind suggesteth only the first word2 the rest follow habitually1 and are not followed by the mind2 as it is with beggars1 when they say their paternoster1 putting together such words1 and in such manner1 as in their education they have learned from their nurses1 from their companies1 or from their teachers1 having no images or conceptions in their mind1 answering to the words they speak3 and as they have learned themselves1 so they teach posterity4 ,now1 if we consider the power of those deceptions of the sense1 mentioned chapter ,,ii4 section #aj1 and also how unconstantly names have been settled1 and how subject they are to equivocation1 and how diversified by passion1 7scarce two men agreeing what is to be called good1 and what evil2 what liberality1 what prodigality2 what valour1 what temerity7 and how subject men are to paralogism or fallacy in reasoning1 ,i may in a manner conclude1 that it is impossible to rectify so many errors of any one man1 as must needs proceed from those causes1 without beginning anew from the very first grounds of all our knowledge and sense2 and instead of books1 reading over orderly one's own conceptions3 in which meaning1 ,i take nosce te ipsum for a precept worthy the reputation it hath gotten4 ------- ,,chapter ,,vi4 #a4 ,of the two kinds of knowledge4 #b4 ,truth and evidence necessary to knowledge4 #c4 ,evidence defined4 #d4 ,science defined4 #e4 ,supposition defined4 #f4 ,opinion defined4 #g4 ,belief defined4 #h4 ,conscience defined4 #i4 ,belief1 in some cases1 no less from doubt than knowledge4 ,sidenote3 ,of the two kinds of knowledge4 #a4 ,there is a story somewhere1 of one that pretends to have been miraculously cured of blindness1 wherewith he was born1 by ,st4 ,alban or other ,saints1 at the town of ,st4 ,alban's2 and that the ,duke of ,gloucester being there1 to be satisfied of the truth of the miracle1 asked the man1 ,what colour is this8 who1 by answering1 it was green1 discovered himself1 and was punished for a counterfeit3 for though by his sight newly received he might distinguish between green1 and red1 and all other colours1 as well as any that should interrogate him1 yet he could not possibly know at first sight which of them was called green1 or red1 or by any other name4 ,by this we may understand1 there be two kinds of knowledge1 whereof the one is nothing else but sense1 or knowledge original1 as ,i have said in the beginning of the second chapter1 and remembrance of the same2 the other is called science or knowledge of the truth of propositions1 and how things are called1 and is derived from understanding4 ,both of these sorts are but experience2 the former being the experience of the effects of things that work upon us from without2 and the latter experience men have from the proper use of names in language3 and all experience being1 as ,i have said1 but remembrance1 all knowledge is remembrance3 and of the former1 the register we keep in books1 is called history2 but the registers of the latter are called the sciences4 ,sidenote3 ,truth and evidence necessary to knowledge4 #b4 ,there are two things necessarily implied in this word knowledge2 the one is truth1 the other evidence2 for what is not truth1 can never be known4 ,for1 let a man say he knoweth a thing never so well1 if the same shall afterwards appear false1 he is driven to confession1 that it was not knowledge1 but opinion4 ,likewise1 if the truth be not evident1 though a man holdeth it1 yet is his knowledge thereof no more than theirs who hold the contrary3 for if truth were enough to make it knowledge1 all truth were known2 which is not so4 ,sidenote3 ,evidence defined4 #c4 ,what truth is1 hath been defined in the precedent chapter2 what evidence is1 ,i now set down3 and it is the concomitance of a man's conception with the words that signify such conception in the act of ratiocination3 for when a man reasoneth with his lips only1 to which the mind suggesteth only the beginning1 and followeth not the words of his mouth with the conceptions of his mind1 out of custom of so speaking2 though he begin his ratiocination with true propositions1 and proceed with certain syllogisms1 and thereby make always true conclusions2 yet are not his conclusions evident to him1 for want of the concomitance of conception with his words3 for if the words alone were sufficient1 a parrot might be taught as well to know truth1 as to speak it4 ,evidence is to truth1 as the sap to the tree1 which1 so far as it creepeth along with the body and branches1 keepeth them alive2 where it forsaketh them1 they die3 for this evidence1 which is meaning with our words1 is the life of truth4 ,sidenote3 ,science defined4 #d4 ,knowledge thereof1 which we call science1 ,i define to be evidence of truth1 from some beginning or principle of sense3 for the truth of a proposition is never evident1 until we conceive the meaning of the words or terms whereof it consisteth1 which are always conceptions of the mind3 nor can we remember those conceptions1 without the thing that produced the same by our senses4 ,the first principle of knowledge is1 that we have such and such conceptions2 the second1 that we have thus and thus named the things whereof they are conceptions2 the third is1 that we have joined those names in such manner as to make true propositions2 the fourth and last is1 that we have joined those propositions in such manner as they be concluding1 and the truth of the conclusion said to be known4 ,and of these two kinds of knowledge1 whereof the former is experience of fact1 and the latter evidence of truth2 as the former1 if it be great1 is called prudence2 so the latter1 if it be much1 hath usually been called1 both by ancient and modern writers1 sapience or wisdom3 and of this latter1 man only is capable2 of the former1 brute beasts also participate4 ,sidenote3 ,supposition defined4 #e4 ,a proposition is said to be supposed1 when1 being not evident1 it is nevertheless admitted for a time1 to the end1 that1 joining to it other propositions1 we may conclude something2 and to proceed from conclusion to conclusion1 for a trial whether the same will lead us into any absurd or impossible conclusion2 which if it do1 then we know such supposition to have been false4 ,sidenote3 ,opinion defined4 #f4 ,but if running through many conclusions1 we come to none that are absurd1 then we think the proposition probable2 likewise we think probable whatsoever proposition we admit for truth by error of reasoning1 or from trusting to other men3 and all such propositions as are admitted by trust or error1 we are not said to know1 but to think them to be true2 and the admittance of them is called opinion4 ,sidenote3 ,belief defined4 #g4 ,and particularly1 when the opinion is admitted out of trust to other men1 they are said to believe it2 and their admittance of it is called belief1 and sometimes faith4 ,sidenote3 ,conscience defined4 #h4 ,it is either science or opinion which we commonly mean by the word conscience3 for men say that such and such a thing is true in or upon their conscience2 which they never do1 when they think it doubtful2 and therefore they know1 or think they know it to be true4 ,but men1 when they say things upon their conscience1 are not therefore presumed certainly to know the truth of what they say2 it remaineth then1 that that word is used by them that have an opinion1 not only of the truth of the thing1 but also of their knowledge of it1 to which the truth of the proposition is consequent4 ,conscience ,i therefore define to be opinion of evidence4 ,sidenote3 ,belief1 in some cases1 no less from doubt than knowledge4 #i4 ,belief1 which is the admitting of propositions upon trust1 in many cases is no less free from doubt1 than perfect and manifest knowledge3 for as there is nothing whereof there is not some cause2 so1 when there is doubt1 there must be some cause thereof conceived4 ,now there be many things which we receive from report of others1 of which it is impossible to imagine any cause of doubt3 for what can be opposed against the consent of all men1 in things they can know1 and have no cause to report otherwise than they are1 such as is a great part of our histories1 unless a man would say that all the world had conspired to deceive him4 ,and thus much of sense1 imagination1 discursion1 ratiocination1 and knowledge1 which are the acts of our power cognitive1 or conceptive4 ,that power of the mind which we call motive1 differeth from the power motive of the body2 for the power motive of the body is that by which it moveth other bodies1 and we call strength3 but the power motive of the mind1 is that by which the mind giveth animal motion to that body wherein it existeth2 the acts hereof are our affections and passions1 of which ,i am to speak in general4 ------- ,,chapter ,,vii4 #a4 ,of delight1 pain1 love1 hatred4 #b4 ,appetite1 aversion1 fear4 #c4 ,good1 evil1 pulchritude1 turpitude4 #d4 ,end1 fruition4 #e4 ,profitable1 use1 vain4 #f4 ,felicity4 #g4 ,good and evil mixed4 #h4 ,sensual delight1 and pain2 joy and grief4 ,sidenote3 ,of delight1 pain1 love1 hatred4 #a4 ,in the eighth section of the second chapter is shewed1 that conceptions and apparitions are nothing really1 but motion in some internal substance of the head2 which motion not stopping there1 but proceeding to the heart1 of necessity must there either help or hinder the motion which is called vital2 when it helpeth1 it is called delight1 contentment1 or pleasure1 which is nothing really but motion about the heart1 as conception is nothing but motion in the head3 and the objects that cause it are called pleasant or delightful1 or by some name equivalent2 the ,latins have jucundum1 a juvando1 from helping2 and the same delight1 with reference to the object1 is called love3 but when such motion weakeneth or hindereth the vital motion1 then it is called pain2 and in relation to that which causeth it1 hatred1 which the ,latins express sometimes by odium1 and sometimes by tdium4 ,sidenote3 ,appetite1 aversion1 fear4 #b4 ,this motion1 in which consisteth pleasure or pain1 is also a solicitation or provocation either to draw near to the thing that pleaseth1 or to retire from the thing that displeaseth2 and this solicitation is the endeavour or internal beginning of animal motion1 which when the object delighteth1 is called appetite2 when it displeaseth1 it is called aversion1 in respect of the displeasure present2 but in respect of the displeasure expected1 fear4 ,so that pleasure1 love1 and appetite1 which is also called desire1 are divers names for divers considerations of the same thing4 ,sidenote3 ,good1 evil1 pulchritude1 turpitude4 #c4 ,every man1 for his own part1 calleth that which pleaseth1 and is delightful to himself1 good2 and that evil which displeaseth him3 insomuch that while every man differeth from another in constitution1 they differ also from one another concerning the common distinction of good and evil4 ,nor is there any such thing as absolute goodness1 considered without relation3 for even the goodness which we apprehend in ,god ,almighty1 is his goodness to us4 ,and as we call good and evil the things that please and displease2 so call we goodness and badness1 the qualities or powers whereby they do it3 and the signs of that goodness are called by the ,latins in one word pulchritudo1 and the signs of evil1 turpitudo2 to which we have no words precisely answerable4 ,as all conceptions we have immediately by the sense1 are1 delight1 or pain1 or appetite1 or fear2 so are all the imaginations after sense4 ,but as they are weaker imaginations1 so are they also weaker pleasures1 or weaker pain4 ,sidenote3 ,end1 fruition4 #d4 ,as appetite is the beginning of animal motion towards something that pleaseth us2 so is the attaining thereof1 the end of that motion1 which we also call the scope1 and aim1 and final cause of the same3 and when we attain that end1 the delight we have thereby is called the fruition3 so that bonum and finis are different names1 but for different considerations of the same thing4 ,sidenote3 ,profitable1 use1 vain4 #e4 ,and of ends1 some of them are called propinqui1 that is1 near at hand2 others remoti1 far off3 but when the ends that be nearer attaining1 be compared with those that be further off1 they are called not ends1 but means1 and the way to those4 ,but for an utmost end1 in which the ancient philosophers have placed felicity1 and disputed much concerning the way thereto1 there is no such thing in this world1 nor way to it1 more than to ,utopia3 for while we live1 we have desires1 and desire presupposeth a further end4 ,those things which please us1 as the way or means to a further end1 we call profitable2 and the fruition of them1 use2 and those things that profit not1 vain4 ,sidenote3 ,felicity4 #f4 ,seeing all delight is appetite1 and presupposeth a further end1 there can be no contentment but in proceeding3 and therefore we are not to marvel1 when we see1 that as men attain to more riches1 honour1 or other power2 so their appetite continually groweth more and more2 and when they are come to the utmost degree of some kind of power1 they pursue some other1 as long as in any kind they think themselves behind any other3 of those therefore that have attained to the highest degree of honour and riches1 some have affected mastery in some art2 as ,nero in music and poetry1 ,commodus in the art of a gladiator2 and such as affect not some such thing1 must find diversion and recreation of their thoughts in the contention either of play or business3 and men justly complain of a great grief1 that they know not what to do4 ,felicity1 therefore1 by which we mean continual delight1 consisteth not in having prospered1 but in prospering4 ,sidenote3 ,good and evil mixed4 #g4 ,there are few things in this world1 but either have mixture of good and evil1 or there is a chain of them so necessarily linked together1 that the one cannot be taken without the other3 as for example1 the pleasures of sin1 and the bitterness of punishment1 are inseparable2 as is also labour and honour1 for the most part4 ,now when in the whole chain1 the greater part is good1 the whole is called good2 and when the evil over-weigheth1 the whole is called evil4 ,sidenote3 ,sensual delight1 and pain2 joy and grief4 #h4 ,there are two sorts of pleasure1 whereof the one seemeth to affect the corporeal organ of the sense1 and that ,i call sensual2 the greatest part whereof1 is that by which we are invited to give continuance to our species2 and the next1 by which a man is invited to meat1 for the preservation of his individual person3 the other sort of delight is not particular to any part of the body1 and is called the delight of the mind1 and is that which we call joy4 ,likewise of pains1 some affect the body1 and are therefore called the pains of the body2 and some not1 and those are called grief4 ------- ,,chapter ,,viii4 #a1 #b4 ,wherein consist the pleasures of sense4 #c1 #d4 ,of the imagination1 or conception of power in man4 #e4 ,honour1 honourable1 worth4 #f4 ,signs of honour4 #g4 ,reverence4 #h4 ,passions4 ,sidenote3 ,wherein consist the pleasures of sense4 #a4 ,having in the first section of the precedent chapter presupposed1 that motion and agitation of the brain which we call conception1 to be continued to the heart1 and there to be called passion2 ,i have therefore obliged myself1 as far forth as ,i am able1 to search out and declare from what conception proceedeth every one of those passions which we commonly take notice of3 for1 seeing the things that please and displease1 are innumerable1 and work innumerable ways1 men have not taken notice but of a very few1 which also are many of them without name4 #b4 ,and first1 we are to consider1 that of conceptions there are three sorts1 whereof one is of that which is present1 which is sense2 another1 of that which is past1 which is remembrance2 and the third1 of that which is future1 which we call expectation3 all which have been manifestly declared in the second and third chapters2 and every of these conceptions is pleasure or pain present4 ,and first for the pleasures of the body which affect the sense of touch and taste1 as far forth as they be organical1 their conceptions are sense3 so also is the pleasure of all exonerations of nature3 all which passions ,i have before named1 sensual pleasures2 and their contrary1 sensual pains3 to which also may be added the pleasures and displeasures of odours1 if any of them shall be found organical1 which for the most part they are not1 as appeareth by this experience which every man hath1 that the same smells1 when they seem to proceed from others1 displease1 though they proceed from ourselves2 but when we think they proceed from ourselves1 they displease not1 though they come from others3 the displeasure of this is a conception of hurt thereby from those odours1 as being unwholesome1 and is therefore a conception of evil to come1 and not present4 ,concerning the delight of hearing1 it is diverse1 and the organ itself not affected thereby3 simple sounds please by equality1 as the sound of a bell or lute3 insomuch as it seems1 an equality continued by the percussion of the object upon the ear1 is pleasure2 the contrary is called harshness1 such as is grating1 and some other sounds1 which do not always affect the body1 but only sometime1 and that with a kind of horror beginning at the teeth4 ,harmony1 or many sounds together agreeing1 please by the same reason as the unison1 which is the sound of equal strings equally stretched4 ,sounds that differ in any height1 please by inequality and equality alternate1 that is to say1 the higher note striketh twice1 for one stroke of the other1 whereby they strike together every second time2 as is well proved by ,galileo1 in the first dialogue concerning local motion3 where he also sheweth1 that two sounds differing a fifth1 delight the ear by an equality of striking after two inequalities2 for the higher note striketh the ear thrice1 while the other strikes but twice4 ,in like manner he sheweth wherein consisteth the pleasure of concord1 and the displeasure of discord1 in other difference of notes4 ,there is yet another pleasure and displeasure of sounds1 which consisteth in consequence of one note after another1 diversified both by accent and measure2 whereof that which pleaseth is called an air2 but for what reason one succession in tone and measure is a more pleasing air than another1 ,i confess ,i know not2 but ,i conjecture the reason to be1 for that some of them imitate and revive some passion which otherwise we take no notice of1 and the other not2 for no air pleaseth but for a time1 no more doth imitation4 ,also the pleasures of the eye consist in a certain equality of colour3 for light1 the most glorious of all colours1 is made by equal operation of the object2 whereas colour is perturbed1 that is to say1 unequal light1 as hath been said1 chapter ,,ii4 section #h4 ,and therefore colours1 the more equality is in them1 the more resplendent they are2 and as harmony is pleasure to the ear1 which consisteth of divers sounds2 so perhaps may some mixture of divers colours be harmony to the eye1 more than another mixture4 ,there is yet another delight by the ear1 which happeneth only to men of skill in music1 which is of another nature1 and not1 as these1 conception of the present1 but rejoicing of their own skill2 of which nature are the passions of which ,i am to speak next4 ,sidenote3 ,of the imagination1 or conception of power in man4 #c4 ,conception of the future1 is but a supposition of the same1 proceeding from remembrance of what is past2 and we so far conceive that anything will be hereafter1 as we know there is something at the present that hath power to produce it3 and that anything hath power now to produce another thing hereafter1 we cannot conceive1 but by remembrance that it hath produced the like heretofore4 ,wherefore all conception of future1 is conception of power able to produce something4 ,whosoever therefore expecteth pleasure to come1 must conceive withal some power in himself by which the same may be attained4 ,and because the passions1 whereof ,i am to speak next1 consist in conception of the future1 that is to say1 in conception of power past1 and the act to come2 before ,i go any further1 ,i must in the next place speak somewhat concerning this power4 #d4 ,by this power ,i mean the same with the faculties of the body1 nutritive1 generative1 motive1 and of the mind1 knowledge2 and besides these1 such further power as by them is acquired1 viz4 riches1 place of authority1 friendship or favour1 and good fortune2 which last is really nothing else but the favour of ,god ,almighty4 ,the contraries of these are impotencies1 infirmities1 or defects of the said powers respectively4 ,and because the power of one man resisteth and hindereth the effects of the power of another1 power simply is no more1 but the excess of the power of one above that of another3 for equal powers opposed1 destroy one another2 and such their opposition is called contention4 ,sidenote3 ,honour1 honourable1 worth4 #e4 signs by which we know our own power1 are those actions which proceed from the same2 and the signs by which other men know it1 are such actions1 gesture1 countenance and speech1 as usually such powers produce3 and the acknowledgment of power is called honour2 and to honour a man inwardly1 is to conceive or acknowledge that that man hath the odds or excess of that power above him with whom he contendeth or compareth himself4 ,and honourable are those signs for which one man acknowledgeth power or excess above his concurrent in another3 as for example1 beauty of person1 consisting in a lively aspect of the countenance1 and other signs of natural heat1 are honourable1 being signs precedent of power generative1 and much issue2 as also1 general reputation among those of the other sex1 because signs consequent of the same4 ,and actions proceeding from strength of body1 and open force1 are honourable1 as signs consequent of power motive1 such as are victory in battle or duel2 a d'avoir tu son homme4 ,also to adventure upon great exploits and danger1 as being a sign consequent of opinion of our own strength1 and that opinion a sign of the strength itself4 ,and to teach or persuade are honourable1 because they be signs of knowledge4 ,and riches are honourable2 as signs of the power that acquired them3 and gifts1 cost1 and magnificence of houses1 apparel1 and the like1 are honourable1 as signs of riches4 ,and nobility is honourable by reflection1 as a sign of power in the ancestors3 and authority1 because a sign of the strength1 wisdom1 favour or riches by which it is attained4 ,and good fortune or casual prosperity is honourable1 because a sign of the favour of ,god1 to whom is to be ascribed all that cometh to us by fortune1 no less than that we attain unto by industry4 ,and the contraries and defects of these signs are dishonourable2 and according to the signs of honour and dishonour1 so we estimate and make the value or worth of a man3 for so much worth is every thing1 as a man will give for the use of all it can do4 ,sidenote3 ,signs of honour4 #f4 ,the signs of honour are those by which we perceive that one man acknowledgeth the power and worth of another2 such as these1 to praise1 to magnify1 to bless1 to call happy1 to pray or supplicate to1 to thank1 to offer unto or present1 to obey1 to hearken unto with attention1 to speak to with consideration1 to approach unto in decent manner1 to keep distance from1 to give way to1 and the like1 which are the honour the inferior giveth to the superior4 ,but the signs of honour from the superior to the inferior1 are such as these2 to praise or prefer him before his concurrent1 to hear more willingly1 to speak to him more familiarly1 to admit him nearer1 to employ him rather1 to ask his advice rather1 to take his opinions1 and to give him any gifts rather than money2 or if money1 so much as may not imply his need of a little3 for need of a little is greater poverty than need of much4 ,and this is enough for examples of the signs of honour and power4 ,sidenote3 ,reverence4 #g4 ,reverence is the conception we have concerning another1 that he hath the power to do unto us both good and hurt1 but not the will to do us hurt4 ,sidenote3 ,passions4 #h4 ,in the pleasure men have1 or displeasure from the signs of honour or dishonour done unto them1 consisteth the nature of the passions1 whereof we are to speak in the next chapter4 ------- ,,chapter ,,ix4 #a4 ,glory aspiring1 false glory1 vain glory4 #b4 ,humility and dejection4 #c4 ,shame4 #d4 ,courage4 #e4 ,anger4 #f4 ,revengefulness4 #g4 ,repentance4 #h4 ,hope1 despair1 diffidence4 #i4 ,trust4 #aj4 ,pity and hardness of heart4 #aa4 ,indignation4 #ab4 ,emulation and envy4 #ac4 ,laughter4 #ad4 ,weeping4 #ae4 ,lust4 #af4 ,love4 #ag4 ,charity4 #ah4 ,admiration and curiosity4 #ai4 ,of the passion of them that flock to see danger4 #bj4 ,of magnanimity and pusillanimity4 #ba4 ,a view of the passions represented in a race4 ,sidenote3 ,glory aspiring1 false glory1 vain glory4 #a4 ,glory1 or internal gloriation or triumph of the mind1 is the passion which proceedeth from the imagination or conception of our own power above the power of him that contendeth with us2 the signs whereof1 besides those in the countenance1 and other gestures of the body which cannot be described1 are1 ostentation in words1 and insolency in actions3 and this passion1 of them whom it displeaseth1 is called pride2 by them whom it pleaseth1 it is termed a just valuation of himself4 ,this imagination of our power or worth1 may be from an assured and certain experience of our own actions2 and then is that glory just1 and well grounded1 and begetteth an opinion of increasing the same by other actions to follow2 in which consisteth the appetite which we call aspiring1 or proceeding from one degree of power to another4 ,the same passion may proceed not from any conscience of our own actions1 but from fame and trust of others1 whereby one may think well of himself1 and yet be deceived2 and this is false glory1 and the aspiring consequent thereto procureth ill success4 ,further1 the fiction1 which is also imagination1 of actions done by ourselves1 which never were done1 is glorying2 but because it begetteth no appetite nor endeavour to any further attempt1 it is merely vain and unprofitable2 as when a man imagineth himself to do the actions whereof he readeth in some romance1 or to be like unto some other man whose acts he admireth3 and this is called vain glory2 and is exemplified in the fable1 by the fly sitting on the axletree1 and saying to himself1 ,what a dust do ,i make rise6 ,the expression of vain glory is that wish1 which some of the ,schools mistaking for some appetite distinct from all the rest1 have called velleity1 making a new word1 as they made a new passion which was not before4 ,signs of vain glory in the gesture are1 imitation of others1 counterfeiting and usurping the signs of virtue they have not1 affectation of fashions1 captation of honour from their dreams1 and other little stories of themselves1 from their country1 from their names1 and from the like4 ,sidenote3 ,humility and dejection4 #b4 ,the passion contrary to glory1 proceeding from apprehension of our own infirmity1 is called humility by those by whom it is approved2 by the rest1 dejection and poorness3 which conception may be well or ill grounded2 if well1 it produceth fear to attempt any thing rashly2 if ill1 it utterly cows a man1 that he neither dares speak publicly1 nor expect good success in any action4 ,sidenote3 ,shame4 #c4 ,it happeneth sometimes1 that he that hath a good opinion of himself1 and upon good ground1 may nevertheless1 by reason of the frowardness which that passion begetteth1 discover in himself some defect or infirmity1 the remembrance whereof dejecteth him2 and this passion is called shame2 by which being cooled and checked in his frowardness1 he is more wary for the time to come4 ,this passion1 as it is a sign of infirmity1 which is dishonour2 so also it is a sign of knowledge1 which is honour4 ,the sign of it is blushing1 which appeareth less in men conscious of their own defect1 because they less betray the infirmities they acknowledge4 ,sidenote3 ,courage4 #d4 ,courage1 in a large signification1 is the absence of fear in the presence of any evil whatsoever3 but in a strict and more common meaning1 it is contempt of wounds and death1 when they oppose a man in the way to his end4 ,sidenote3 ,anger4 #e4 ,anger or sudden courage is nothing but the appetite or desire of overcoming present opposition4 ,it hath been defined commonly to be grief proceeding from an opinion of contempt2 which is confuted by the often experience which we have of being moved to anger by things inanimate1 and without sense1 and consequently incapable of contemning us4 ,sidenote3 ,revengefulness4 #f4 ,revengefulness is that passion which ariseth from an expectation or imagination of making him that hath hurt us1 find his own action hurtful to himself1 and to acknowledge the same2 and this is the height of revenge3 for though it be not hard1 by returning evil for evil1 to make one's adversary displeased with his own fact2 yet to make him acknowledge the same1 is so difficult1 that many a man had rather die than do it4 ,revenge aimeth not at the death1 but at the captivity or subjection of an enemy2 which was well expressed in the exclamation of ,tiberius ,csar1 concerning one1 that1 to frustrate his revenge1 had killed himself in prison2 ,hath he escaped me8 ,to kill1 is the aim of them that hate1 to rid themselves out of fear3 revenge aimeth at triumph1 which over the dead is not4 ,sidenote3 ,repentance4 #g4 ,repentance is the passion which proceedeth from opinion or knowledge that the action they have done is out of the way to the end they would attain3 the effect whereof is1 to pursue that way no longer1 but1 by the consideration of the end1 to direct themselves into a better4 ,the first motion therefore in this passion is grief2 but the expectation or conception of returning again into the way1 is joy2 and consequently1 the passion of repentance is compounded and allayed of both3 but the predominant is joy2 else were the whole grief1 which cannot be1 forasmuch as he that proceedeth towards the end1 he conceiveth good1 proceedeth with appetite2 and appetite is joy1 as hath been said1 chapter ,,vii4 section #b4 ,sidenote3 ,hope1 despair1 diffidence4 #h4 ,hope is expectation of good to come1 as fear is the expectation of evil3 but when there be causes1 some that make us expect good1 and some that make us expect evil1 alternately working in our mind2 if the causes that make us expect good1 be greater than those that make us expect evil1 the whole passion is hope2 if contrarily1 the whole is fear4 ,absolute privation of hope is despair1 a degree whereof is diffidence4 ,sidenote3 ,trust4 #i4 ,trust is a passion proceeding from the belief of him from whom we expect or hope for good1 so free from doubt that upon the same we pursue no other way to attain the same good2 as distrust or diffidence is doubt that maketh him endeavour to provide himself by other means4 ,and that this is the meaning of the words trust and distrust1 is manifest from this1 that a man never provideth himself by a second way1 but when he mistrusteth that the first will not hold4 ,sidenote3 ,pity and hardness of heart4 #aj4 ,pity is imagination or fiction of future calamity to ourselves1 proceeding from the sense of another man's calamity4 ,but when it lighteth on such as we think have not deserved the same1 the compassion is greater1 because then there appeareth more probability that the same may happen to us3 for1 the evil that happeneth to an innocent man1 may happen to every man4 ,but when we see a man suffer for great crimes1 which we cannot easily think will fall upon ourselves1 the pity is the less4 ,and therefore men are apt to pity those whom they love3 for1 whom they love1 they think worthy of good1 and therefore not worthy of calamity4 ,thence it is also1 that men pity the vices of some persons at the first sight only1 out of love to their aspect4 ,the contrary of pity is hardness of heart1 proceeding either from slowness of imagination1 or some extreme great opinion of their own exemption from the like calamity1 or from hatred of all or most men4 ,sidenote3 ,indignation4 #aa4 ,indignation is that grief which consisteth in the conception of good success happening to them whom they think unworthy thereof4 ,seeing therefore men think all those unworthy whom they hate1 they think them not only unworthy of the good fortune they have1 but also of their own virtues4 ,and of all the passions of the mind1 these two1 indignation and pity1 are most raised and increased by eloquence3 for1 the aggravation of the calamity1 and extenuation of the fault1 augmenteth pity2 and the extenuation of the worth of the person1 together with the magnifying of his success1 which are the parts of an orator1 are able to turn these two passions into fury4 ,sidenote3 ,emulation and envy4 #ab4 ,emulation is grief arising from seeing one's self exceeded or excelled by his concurrent1 together with hope to equal or exceed him in time to come1 by his own ability4 ,but1 envy is the same grief joined with pleasure conceived in the imagination of some ill fortune that may befall him4 ,sidenote3 ,laughter4 #ac4 ,there is a passion that hath no name2 but the sign of it is that distortion of the countenance which we call laughter1 which is always joy3 but what joy1 what we think1 and wherein we triumph when we laugh1 is not hitherto declared by any4 ,that it consisteth in wit1 or1 as they call it1 in the jest1 experience confuteth3 for men laugh at mischances and indecencies1 wherein there lieth no wit nor jest at all4 ,and forasmuch as the same thing is no more ridiculous when it groweth stale or usual1 whatsoever it be that moveth laughter1 it must be new and unexpected4 ,men laugh often1 especially such as are greedy of applause from every thing they do well1 at their own actions performed never so little beyond their own expectations2 as also at their own jests3 and in this case it is manifest1 that the passion of laughter proceedeth from a sudden conception of some ability in himself that laugheth4 ,also men laugh at the infirmities of others1 by comparison wherewith their own abilities are set off and illustrated4 ,also men laugh at jests1 the wit whereof always consisteth in the elegant discovering and conveying to our minds some absurdity of another3 and in this case also the passion of laughter proceedeth from the sudden imagination of our own odds and eminency3 for what is else the recommending of ourselves to our own good opinion1 by comparison with another man's infirmity or absurdity8 ,for when a jest is broken upon ourselves1 or friends of whose dishonour we participate1 we never laugh thereat4 ,i may therefore conclude1 that the passion of laughter is nothing else but sudden glory arising from some sudden conception of some eminency in ourselves1 by comparison with the infirmity of others1 or with our own formerly3 for men laugh at the follies of themselves past1 when they come suddenly to remembrance1 except they bring with them any present dishonour4 ,it is no wonder therefore that men take heinously to be laughed at or derided1 that is1 triumphed over4 ,laughter without offence1 must be at absurdities and infirmities abstracted from persons1 and when all the company may laugh together3 for laughing to one's-self putteth all the rest into jealousy and examination of themselves4 ,besides1 it is vain glory1 and an argument of little worth1 to think the infirmity of another1 sufficient matter for his triumph4 ,sidenote3 ,weeping4 #ad4 ,the passion opposite hereunto1 whose signs are another distortion of the face with tears1 called weeping1 is the sudden falling out with ourselves1 or sudden conception of defect2 and therefore children weep often2 for seeing they think that every thing ought to be given them which they desire1 of necessity every repulse must be a check of their expectation1 and puts them in mind of their too much weakness to make themselves masters of all they look for4 ,for the same cause women are more apt to weep than men1 as being not only more accustomed to have their wills1 but also to measure their powers by the power and love of others that protect them4 ,men are apt to weep that prosecute revenge1 when the revenge is suddenly stopped or frustrated by the repentance of their adversary2 and such are the tears of reconciliation4 ,also revengeful men are subject to this passion upon the beholding those men they pity1 and suddenly remember they cannot help4 ,other weeping in men proceedeth for the most part from the same cause it proceedeth from in women and children4 ,sidenote3 ,lust4 #ae4 ,the appetite which men call lust1 and the fruition that appertaineth thereunto1 is a sensual pleasure1 but not only that2 there is in it also a delight of the mind3 for it consisteth of two appetites together1 to please1 and to be pleased2 and the delight men take in delighting1 is not sensual1 but a pleasure or joy of the mind consisting in the imagination of the power they have so much to please4 ,but the name lust is used where it is condemned2 otherwise it is called by the general word love3 for the passion is one and the same indefinite desire of different sex1 as natural as hunger4 ,sidenote3 ,love4 #af4 ,of love1 by which is understood the joy man taketh in the fruition of any present good1 hath been already spoken of in the first section1 chapter ,,vii4 under which is contained the love men bear to one another1 or pleasure they take in one another's company2 and by which nature1 men are said to be sociable4 ,but there is another kind of love1 which the ,greeks call 1 and is that which we mean1 when we say that a man is in love3 forasmuch as this passion cannot be without diversity of sex1 it cannot be denied but that it participateth of that indefinite love mentioned in the former section4 ,but there is a great difference betwixt the desire of a man indefinite1 and the same desire limited ad hunc2 and this is that love which is the great theme of poets3 but notwithstanding their praises1 it must be defined by the word need3 for it is a conception a man hath of his need of that one person desired4 ,the cause of this passion is not always nor for the most part beauty1 or other quality in the beloved1 unless there be withal hope in the person that loveth3 which may be gathered from this1 that in great difference of persons1 the greater have often fallen in love with the meaner2 but not contrary4 ,and from hence it is1 that for the most part they have much better fortune in love1 whose hopes are built upon something in their person1 than those that trust to their expressions and service2 and they that care less1 than they that care more3 which not perceiving1 many men cast away their services1 as one arrow after another1 till1 in the end1 together with their hopes1 they lose their wits4 ,sidenote3 ,charity4 #ag4 ,there is yet another passion sometimes called love1 but more properly good will or charity4 ,there can be no greater argument to a man1 of his own power1 than to find himself able not only to accomplish his own desires1 but also to assist other men in theirs3 and this is that conception wherein consisteth charity4 ,in which1 first1 is contained that natural affection of parents to their children1 which the ,greeks call 1 as also1 that affection wherewith men seek to assist those that adhere unto them4 ,but the affection wherewith men many times bestow their benefits on strangers1 is not to be called charity1 but either contract1 whereby they seek to purchase friendship2 or fear1 which maketh them to purchase peace4 ,the opinion of ,plato concerning honourable love1 delivered according to his custom in the person of ,socrates1 in the dialogue intituled ,convivium1 is this1 that a man full and pregnant with wisdom and other virtues1 naturally seeketh out some beautiful person1 of age and capacity to conceive1 in whom he may1 without sensual respects1 engender and produce the like4 ,and this is the idea of the then noted love of ,socrates wise and continent1 to ,alcibiades young and beautiful3 in which1 love is not the sought honour1 but the issue of his knowledge2 contrary to the common love1 to which though issue sometimes follows1 yet men seek not that1 but to please1 and to be pleased4 ,it should be therefore this charity1 or desire to assist and advance others4 ,but why then should the wise seek the ignorant1 or be more charitable to the beautiful than to others8 ,there is something in it savouring of the use of that time3 in which matter though ,socrates be acknowledged for continent1 yet the continent have the passion they contain1 as much and more than they that satiate the appetite2 which maketh me suspect this platonic love for merely sensual2 but with an honourable pretence for the old to haunt the company of the young and beautiful4 ,sidenote3 ,admiration and curiosity4 #ah4 ,forasmuch as all knowledge beginneth from experience1 therefore also new experience is the beginning of new knowledge1 and the increase of experience the beginning of the increase of knowledge4 ,whatsoever therefore happeneth new to a man1 giveth him matter of hope of knowing somewhat that he knew not before4 ,and this hope and expectation of future knowledge from anything that happeneth new and strange1 is that passion which we commonly call admiration2 and the same considered as appetite1 is called curiosity1 which is appetite of knowledge4 ,as in the discerning of faculties1 man leaveth all community with beasts at the faculty of imposing names2 so also doth he surmount their nature at this passion of curiosity4 ,for when a beast seeth anything new and strange to him1 he considereth it so far only as to discern whether it be likely to serve his turn1 or hurt him1 and accordingly approacheth nearer to it1 or fleeth from it3 whereas man1 who in most events remembereth in what manner they were caused and begun1 looketh for the cause and beginning of everything that ariseth new unto him4 ,and from this passion of admiration and curiosity1 have arisen not only the invention of names1 but also supposition of such causes of all things as they thought might produce them4 ,and from this beginning is derived all philosophy2 as astronomy from the admiration of the course of heaven2 natural philosophy from the strange effects of the elements and other bodies4 ,and from the degrees of curiosity1 proceed also the degrees of knowledge amongst men3 for1 to a man in the chase of riches or authority1 7which in respect of knowledge are but sensuality7 it is a diversity of little pleasure1 whether it be the motion of the sun or the earth that maketh the day1 or to enter into other contemplations of any strange accident1 otherwise than whether it conduce or not to the end he pursueth4 ,because curiosity is delight1 therefore also novelty is so1 but especially that novelty from which a man conceiveth an opinion true or false of bettering his own estate2 for1 in such case1 they stand affected with the hope that all gamesters have while the cards are shuffling4 ,sidenote3 ,of the passion of them that flock to see danger4 #ai4 ,divers other passions there be1 but they want names3 whereof some nevertheless have been by most men observed3 for example2 from what passion proceedeth it1 that men take pleasure to behold from the shore the danger of them that are at sea in a tempest1 or in fight1 or from a safe castle to behold two armies charge one another in the field8 ,it is certainly1 in the whole sum1 joy2 else men would never flock to such a spectacle4 ,nevertheless there is in it both joy and grief3 for as there is novelty and remembrance of our own security present1 which is delight2 so there is also pity1 which is grief2 but the delight is so far predominant1 that men usually are content in such a case to be spectators of the misery of their friends4 ,sidenote3 ,of magnanimity and pusillanimity4 #bj4 ,magnanimity is no more than glory1 of the which ,i have spoken in the first section2 but glory well grounded upon certain experience of a power sufficient to attain his end in open manner4 ,and pusillanimity is the doubt of that4 ,whatsoever therefore is a sign of vain glory1 the same is also a sign of pusillanimity3 for sufficient power maketh glory a spur to one's end4 ,to be pleased or displeased with fame true or false1 is a sign of that same1 because he that relieth on fame hath not his success in his own power4 ,likewise art and fallacy are signs of pusillanimity1 because they depend not upon our own power1 but the ignorance of others4 ,also proneness to anger1 because it argueth difficulty of proceeding4 ,also ostentation of ancestors1 because all men are more inclined to make shew of their own power when they have it1 than of another's4 ,to be at enmity and contention with inferiors1 is a sign of the same1 because it proceedeth from want of power to end the war4 ,to laugh at others1 because it is an affectation of glory from other men's infirmities1 and not from any ability of their own4 ,also irresolution1 which proceedeth from want of power enough to contemn the little difficulties that make deliberations hard4 ,sidenote3 ,a view of the passions represented in a race4 #ba4 ,the comparison of the life of man to a race1 though it hold not in every part1 yet it holdeth so well for this our purpose1 that we may thereby both see and remember almost all the passions before mentioned4 ,but this race we must suppose to have no other goal1 nor other garland1 but being foremost1 and in it3 ,to endeavour1 is appetite4 ,to be remiss1 is sensuality4 ,to consider them behind1 is glory4 ,to consider them before1 is humility4 ,to lose ground with looking back1 vain glory4 ,to be holden1 hatred4 ,to turn back1 repentance4 ,to be in breath1 hope4 ,to be weary1 despair4 ,to endeavour to overtake the next1 emulation4 ,to supplant or overthrow1 envy4 ,to resolve to break through a stop foreseen1 courage4 ,to break through a sudden stop1 anger4 ,to break through with ease1 magnanimity4 ,to lose ground by little hindrances1 pusillanimity4 ,to fall on the sudden1 is disposition to weep4 ,to see another fall1 is disposition to laugh4 ,to see one out-gone whom we would not1 is pity4 ,to see one out-go whom we would not1 is indignation4 ,to hold fast by another1 is to love4 ,to carry him on that so holdeth1 is charity4 ,to hurt one's-self for haste1 is shame4 ,continually to be out-gone1 is misery4 ,continually to out-go the next before1 is felicity4 ,and to forsake the course1 is to die4 ------- ,,chapter ,x4 #a4 ,having shewed in the precedent chapters1 that sense proceedeth from the action of external objects upon the brain1 or some internal substance of the head2 and that the passions proceed from the alteration there made1 and continued to the heart3 it is consequent in the next place1 seeing the diversity of degrees in knowledge in divers men1 to be greater than may be ascribed to the divers tempers of their brain1 to declare what other causes may produce such odds1 and excess of capacity1 as we daily observe in one man above another4 ,as for that difference which ariseth from sickness1 and such accidental distempers1 ,i omit the same1 as impertinent to this place1 and consider it only in such as have their health1 and organs well disposed4 ,if the difference were in the natural temper of the brain1 ,i can imagine no reason why the same should not appear first and most of all in the senses1 which being equal both in the wise and less wise1 infer an equal temper in the common organ 7namely the brain7 of all the senses4 #b4 ,but we see by experience1 that joy and grief proceed not in all men from the same causes1 and that men differ very much in the constitution of the body2 whereby1 that which helpeth and furthereth vital constitution in one1 and is therefore delightful1 hindereth it and crosseth it in another1 and therefore causeth grief4 ,the difference therefore of wits hath its original from the different passions1 and from the ends to which the appetite leadeth them4 #c4 ,and first1 those men whose ends are sensual delight1 and generally are addicted to ease1 food1 onerations and exonerations of the body1 must needs be the less thereby delighted with those imaginations that conduce not to those ends1 such as are imaginations of honour and glory1 which1 as ,i have said before1 have respect to the future3 for sensuality consisteth in the pleasure of the senses1 which please only for the present1 and take away the inclination to observe such things as conduce to honour1 and consequently maketh men less curious1 and less ambitious1 whereby they less consider the way either to knowledge or other power2 in which two consisteth all the excellency of power cognitive4 ,and this is it which men call dulness1 and proceedeth from the appetite of sensual or bodily delight4 ,and it may well be conjectured1 that such passion hath its beginning from a grossness and difficulty of the motion of the spirit about the heart4 #d4 ,the contrary hereunto1 is that quick ranging of mind described1 chapter ,,iv4 section #c1 which is joined with curiosity of comparing the things that come into the mind1 one with another3 in which comparison1 a man delighteth himself either with finding unexpected similitude of things1 otherwise much unlike1 in which men place the excellency of fancy1 and from whence proceed those grateful similies1 metaphors1 and other tropes1 by which both poets and orators have it in their power to make things please or displease1 and shew well or ill to others1 as they like themselves2 or else in discerning suddenly dissimilitude in things that otherwise appear the same4 ,and this virtue of the mind is that by which men attain to exact and perfect knowledge2 and the pleasure thereof consisteth in continual instruction1 and in distinction of places1 persons1 and seasons1 and is commonly termed by the name of judgment3 for1 to judge is nothing else1 but to distinguish or discern3 and both fancy and judgment are commonly comprehended under the name of wit1 which seemeth to be a tenuity and agility of spirits1 contrary to that restiness of the spirits supposed in those that are dull4 #e4 ,there is another defect of the mind1 which men call levity1 which betrayeth also mobility in the spirits1 but in excess4 ,an example whereof is in them that in the midst of any serious discourse1 have their minds diverted to every little jest or witty observation2 which maketh them depart from their discourse by a parenthesis1 and from that parenthesis by another1 till at length they either lose themselves1 or make their narration like a dream1 or some studied nonsense4 ,the passion from whence this proceedeth1 is curiosity1 but with too much equality and indifference3 for when all things make equal impression and delight1 they equally throng to be expressed4 #f4 ,the virtue opposite to this defect is gravity1 or steadiness2 in which the end being the great and master-delight1 directeth and keepeth in the way thereto all other thoughts4 #g4 ,the extremity of dullness is that natural folly which may be called stolidity3 but the extreme of levity1 though it be natural folly distinct from the other1 and obvious to every man's observation1 ,i know not how to call it4 #h4 ,there is a fault of the mind called by the ,greeks 1 which is indocibility1 or difficulty of being taught2 the which must needs arise from a false opinion that they know already the truth of that is called in question3 for certainly men are not otherwise so unequal in capacity as the evidence is unequal between what is taught by the mathematicians1 and what is commonly discoursed of in other books3 and therefore if the minds of men were all of white paper1 they would almost equally be disposed to acknowledge whatsoever should be in right method1 and by right ratiocination delivered to them3 but when men have once acquiesced in untrue opinions1 and registered them as authentical records in their minds1 it is no less impossible to speak intelligibly to such men1 than to write legibly upon a paper already scribbled over4 ,the immediate cause therefore of indocibility1 is prejudice2 and of prejudice1 false opinion of our own knowledge4 #i4 ,another1 and a principal defect of the mind1 is that which men call madness1 which appeareth to be nothing else but some imagination of some such predominancy above the rest1 that we have no passion but from it2 and this conception is nothing else but excessive vain glory1 or vain dejection2 which is most probable by these examples following1 which proceed in appearance every one of them from pride1 or some dejection of mind4 ,as first1 we have had the example of one that preached in ,cheapside from a cart there1 instead of a pulpit1 that he himself was ,christ1 which was spiritual pride or madness4 ,we have had also divers examples of learned madness1 in which men have manifestly been distracted upon any occasion that hath put them in remembrance of their own ability4 ,amongst the learned men1 may be remembered1 ,i think also1 those that determine of the time of the world's end1 and other such the points of prophecy4 ,and the gallant madness of ,don ,quixote is nothing else but an expression of such height of vain glory as reading of romance may produce in pusillanimous men4 ,also rage and madness of love1 are but great indignations of them in whose brains is predominant contempt from their enemies1 or their mistresses4 ,and the pride taken in form and behaviour1 hath made divers men run mad1 and to be so accounted1 under the name of fantastic4 #aj4 ,and as these are the examples of extremities1 so also are there examples too many of the degrees1 which may therefore be well accounted follies2 as it is a degree of the first1 for a man1 without certain evidence1 to think himself to be inspired1 or to have any other effect of ,god's holy spirit than other godly men have4 ,of the second1 for a man continually to speak his mind in a cento of other men's ,greek or ,latin sentences4 ,of the third1 much of the present gallantry in love and duel4 ,of rage1 a degree is malice2 and of fantastic madness1 affectation4 #aa4 ,as the former examples exhibit to us madness1 and the degrees thereof1 proceeding from the excess of self-opinion2 so also there be other examples of madness1 and the degrees thereof1 proceeding from too much vain fear and dejection2 as in those melancholy men that have imagined themselves brittle as glass1 or have had some other like imagination3 and degrees hereof are all those exorbitant and causeless fears1 which we commonly observe in melancholy persons4 ------- ,,chapter ,,xi4 #a4 ,hitherto of the knowledge of things natural1 and of the passions that arise naturally from them4 ,now forasmuch as we give names not only to things natural1 but also to supernatural2 and by all names we ought to have some meaning and conception3 it followeth in the next place1 to consider what thoughts and imaginations of the mind we have1 when we take into our mouths the most blessed name of ,,god1 and the names of those virtues we attribute unto him2 as also1 what image cometh into the mind at hearing the name of spirit1 or the name of angel1 good or bad4 #b4 ,and forasmuch as ,god ,almighty is incomprehensible1 it followeth1 that we can have no conception or image of the ,deity1 and consequently1 all his attributes signify our inability and defect of power to conceive any thing concerning his nature1 and not any conception of the same1 excepting only this1 that there is a ,god3 for the effects we acknowledge naturally1 do include a power of their producing1 before they were produced2 and that power presupposeth something existent that hath such power3 and the thing so existing with power to produce1 if it were not eternal1 must needs have been produced by somewhat before it1 and that again by something else before that1 till we come to an eternal1 that is to say1 the first power of all powers1 and first cause of all causes3 and this is it which all men conceive by the name of ,,god1 implying eternity1 incomprehensibility1 and omnipotency4 ,and thus all that will consider1 may know that ,god is1 though not what he is3 even a man that is born blind1 though it be not possible for him to have any imagination what kind of thing fire is2 yet he cannot but know that somewhat there is that men call fire1 because it warmeth him4 #c4 ,and whereas we attribute to ,god ,almighty1 seeing1 hearing1 speaking1 knowing1 loving1 and the like1 by which names we understand something in men to whom we attribute them1 we understand nothing by them in the nature of ,god3 for1 as it is well reasoned1 ,shall not the ,god that made the eye1 see2 and the ear1 hear8 ,so it is also1 if we say1 shall ,god1 which made the eye1 not see without the eye2 or that made the ear1 not hear without the ear2 or that made the brain1 not know without the brain2 or that made the heart1 not love without the heart8 ,the attributes therefore given unto the ,deity1 are such as signify either our incapacity or our reverence3 our incapacity1 when we say incomprehensible and infinite2 our reverence1 when we give him those names1 which amongst us are the names of those things we most magnify and commend1 as omnipotent1 omniscient1 just1 merciful1 c4 ,and when ,god ,almighty giveth those names to himself in the ,scriptures1 it is but 1 that is to say1 by descending to our manner of speaking2 without which we are not capable of understanding him4 #d4 ,by the name of spirit1 we understand a body natural1 but of such subtilty1 that it worketh not upon the senses2 but that filleth up the place which the image of a visible body might fill up4 ,our conception therefore of spirit consisteth of figure without colour2 and in figure is understood dimension1 and consequently1 to conceive a spirit1 is to conceive something that hath dimension4 ,but spirits supernatural commonly signify some substance without dimension2 which two words do flatly contradict one another3 and therefore when we attribute the name of spirit unto ,god1 we attribute it not as the name of anything we conceive1 no more than we ascribe unto him sense and understanding2 but as a signification of our reverence1 we desire to abstract from him all corporal grossness4 #e4 ,concerning other things1 which some men call spirits incorporeal1 and some corporeal1 it is not possible by natural means only1 to come to knowledge of so much1 as that there are such things4 ,we that are ,christians acknowledge that there be angels good and evil1 and that there are spirits1 and that the soul of a man is a spirit1 and that those spirits are immortal3 but1 to know it1 that is to say1 to have natural evidence of the same1 it is impossible3 for1 all evidence is conception1 as it is said1 chap4 ,,vi4 sect4 #c1 and all conception is imagination1 and proceedeth from sense1 chap4 ,,iii4 sect4 #a4 ,and spirits we suppose to be those substances which work not upon the sense1 and therefore not conceptible4 ,but though the ,scripture acknowledges spirits1 yet doth it nowhere say1 that they are incorporeal1 meaning thereby1 without dimension and quality2 nor1 ,i think1 is that word incorporeal at all in the ,bible2 but it is said of the spirit1 that it abideth in men2 sometimes that it dwelleth in them1 sometimes that it cometh on them1 that it descendeth1 and goeth1 and cometh2 and that spirits are angels1 that is to say messengers3 all which words do imply locality2 and locality is dimension2 and whatsoever hath dimension1 is body1 be it never so subtile4 ,to me therefore it seemeth1 that the ,scripture favoureth them more1 that hold angels and spirits corporeal1 than them that hold the contrary4 ,and it is a plain contradiction in natural discourse1 to say of the soul of man1 that it is tota in toto1 et tota in qualibet parte corporis1 grounded neither upon reason nor revelation1 but proceeding from the ignorance of what those things are which are called spectra1 images1 that appear in the dark to children1 and such as have strong fears1 and other strange imaginations1 as hath been said1 chapter ,,iii4 sect4 #e1 where ,i call them phantasms3 for1 taking them to be things real1 without us1 like bodies1 and seeing them to come and vanish so strangely as they do1 unlike to bodies2 what could they call them else1 but incorporeal bodies8 which is not a name1 but an absurdity of speech4 #f4 ,it is true1 that the heathens1 and all nations of the world1 have acknowledged that there be spirits1 which for the most part they hold to be incorporeal2 whereby it might be thought1 that a man by natural reason1 may arrive1 without the ,scriptures1 to the knowledge of this1 that spirits are3 but the erroneous collection thereof by the heathens1 may proceed1 as ,i have said before1 from the ignorance of the cause of ghosts and phantasms1 and such other apparitions4 ,and from thence had the ,grecians their number of gods1 their number of dmons good or bad1 and for every man his genius2 which is not the acknowledging of this truth1 that spirits are2 but a false opinion concerning the force of imagination4 #g4 ,and seeing the knowledge we have of spirits1 is not natural knowledge1 but faith from supernatural revelation given to the holy writers of the ,scriptures2 it followeth1 that of inspirations also1 which is the operation of spirit in us1 the knowledge which we have1 must all proceed from ,scripture4 ,the signs there set down of inspiration1 are miracles1 when they be great1 and manifestly above the power of men to do by imposture3 as for example1 the inspiration of ,elias was known by the miraculous burning of the sacrifice4 ,but the signs to distinguish whether a spirit be good or evil1 are the same by which we distinguish whether a man or a tree be good or evil1 namely1 actions and fruit3 for there are lying spirits1 wherewith men are inspired sometimes1 as well as with spirits of truth4 ,and we are commanded in ,scripture1 to judge of the spirits by their doctrine1 and not of the doctrine by the spirits4 ,for miracles1 our ,saviour 7,matth4 xxiv4 #bd7 hath forbidden us to rule our faith by them4 ,and ,saint ,paul saith1 7,gal4 i4 #h73 ,though an angel from heaven preach to you otherwise1 c4 let him be accursed4 ,where it is plain1 that we are not to judge whether the doctrine be true or not1 by the angel2 but whether the angel say true or no1 by the doctrine4 ,so likewise1 7#a ,joh4 iv4 #a73 ,believe not every spirit3 for false prophets are gone out into the world4 ,verse #b3 ,hereby shall ye know the spirit of ,god4 ,verse #c3 ,every spirit that confesseth not that ,jesus ,christ is come in the flesh1 is not of ,god3 and this is the spirit of ,antichrist4 ,verse #ae3 ,whosoever confesseth that ,jesus is the ,son of ,god1 in him dwelleth ,god1 and he in ,god4 ,the knowledge therefore we have of good and evil inspiration1 cometh not by vision of an angel that may teach it1 nor by a miracle that may seem to confirm it2 but by conformity of doctrine with this article and fundamental point of ,christian faith1 which also ,saint ,paul 7#a ,cor4 iii4 #aa7 saith is the sole foundation1 ,that ,jesus ,christ is come in the flesh4 #h4 ,but if inspiration be discerned by this point1 and this point be acknowledged and believed upon the authority of the ,scriptures2 how 7may some men ask7 know we that the ,scripture deserveth so great authority1 which must be no less than that of the lively voice of ,god2 that is1 how do we know the ,scriptures to be the word of ,god8 ,and first1 it is manifest1 that if by knowledge we understand science infallible and natural1 as is defined1 chap4 ,,vi4 sect4 #d1 proceeding from sense1 we cannot be said to know it1 because it proceedeth not from the conceptions engendered by sense4 ,and if we understand knowledge as supernatural1 we cannot have it but by inspiration3 and of that inspiration we cannot judge1 but by the doctrine3 it followeth1 that we have not any way1 natural or supernatural1 of the knowledge thereof1 which can properly be called infallible science and evidence4 ,it remaineth1 that the knowledge that we have that the ,scriptures are the word of ,god1 is only faith1 which faith therefore is also by ,saint ,paul 7,heb4 xi4 #a7 defined to be the evidence of things not seen2 that is to say1 not otherwise evident but by faith3 for1 whatsoever either is evident by natural reason1 or revelation supernatural1 is not called faith2 else should not faith cease1 no more than charity1 when we are in heaven2 which is contrary to the doctrine of the ,scripture4 ,and1 we are not said to believe1 but to know those things that be evident4 #i4 ,seeing then the acknowledgment of ,scriptures to be the word of ,god1 is not evidence1 but faith1 and faith 7chapter ,,vi4 sect4 #g7 consisteth in the trust we have of other men1 it appeareth plain1 that the men so trusted1 are the holy men of ,god's church succeeding one another from the time of those that saw the wondrous works of ,god ,almighty in the flesh4 ,nor doth this imply that ,god is not the worker or efficient cause of faith1 or that faith is begotten in man without the spirit of ,god3 for1 all those good opinions which we admit and believe1 though they proceed from hearing1 and hearing from teaching1 both which are natural1 yet they are the work of ,god3 for1 all the works of nature are his1 and they are attributed to the ,spirit of ,god3 as for example1 ,exod4 xxviii4 #c3 ,thou shalt speak unto all cunning men1 whom ,i have filled with the ,,spirit of wisdom1 that they may make ,aaron's garments for his consecration1 that he may serve me in the priest's office4 ,faith therefore1 wherewith we believe1 is the work of the ,spirit of ,god in that sense1 by which the ,spirit of ,god giveth to one man wisdom and cunning in workmanship more than another2 and by which he effecteth also in other points pertaining to our ordinary life1 that one man believeth that1 which1 upon the same grounds1 another doth not2 and one man reverenceth the opinion1 and obeyeth the commands of his superior1 and others not4 #aj4 ,and seeing our faith1 that the ,scriptures are the word of ,god1 began from the confidence and trust we repose in the church2 there can be no doubt but that their interpretation of the same ,scriptures 7when any doubt or controversy shall arise1 by which this fundamental point1 that ,jesus ,christ is come in the flesh1 may be called in question7 is safer for any man to trust to1 than his own1 whether reasoning or spirit1 that is to say1 his own opinion4 #aa4 ,now concerning men's affections to ,godward1 they are not the same always that are described in the chapter concerning passions4 ,there1 for to love1 is to be delighted with the image or conception of the thing loved2 but ,god is unconceivable3 to love ,god therefore1 in the ,scripture1 is to obey his commandments1 and to love one another4 ,also to trust ,god1 is different from our trusting one another3 for1 when a man trusteth a man1 7chap4 ,,ix4 sect4 #i7 he layeth aside his own endeavours3 but if we do so in our trust to ,god ,almighty1 we disobey him2 and how shall we trust to him whom we know we disobey8 ,to trust to ,god ,almighty therefore1 is to refer to his good pleasure all that is above our own power to effect3 and this is all one with acknowledging one only ,god1 which is the first commandment4 ,and to trust in ,christ1 is no more but to acknowledge him for ,god2 which is the fundamental article of our ,christian faith3 and consequently1 to trust1 rely1 or1 as some express it1 to cast and roll ourselves on ,christ1 is the same thing with the fundamental point of faith1 namely1 that ,jesus ,christ is the son of the living ,god4 #ab4 ,to honour ,god internally in the heart1 is the same thing with that we ordinarily call honour amongst men3 for it is nothing but the acknowledging of his power2 and the signs thereof1 the same with the signs of the honour due to our superiors1 mentioned chapter ,,viii4 section #f1 viz4 to praise1 to magnify1 to bless1 to pray to him1 to thank him1 to give oblations and sacrifices to him1 to give attention to his word1 to speak to him in prayer with consideration1 to come into his presence with humble gesture1 and in decent manner1 and to adorn his worship with magnificence and cost3 and these are natural signs of our honouring him internally3 and therefore the contrary hereof1 to neglect prayer1 to speak to him extempore1 to come to church slovenly1 to adorn the place of his worship worse than our own houses1 to take up his name in every idle discourse1 are the manifest signs of contempt of the ,divine ,majesty4 ,there be other signs which are arbitrary2 as1 to be uncovered1 as we be here1 to put off their shoes1 as ,moses at the fiery bush1 and some other of that kind1 which in their own nature are indifferent1 till1 to avoid indecency and discord1 it be otherwise determined by common consent4 ------- ,,chapter ,,xii4 #a4 ,it hath been declared already1 how external objects cause conceptions1 and conceptions1 appetite and fear1 which are the first unperceived beginnings of our actions3 for either the actions immediately follow the first appetite1 as when we do anything upon a sudden2 or else to our first appetite there succeedeth some conception of evil to happen to us by such actions1 which is fear1 and which holdeth us from proceeding4 ,and to that fear may succeed a new appetite1 and to that appetite another fear alternately1 till the action be either done1 or some accident come between1 to make it impossible2 and so this alternate appetite and fear ceaseth4 ,this alternate succession of appetite and fear during all the time the action is in our power to do or not to do1 is that we call deliberation2 which name hath been given it for that part of the definition wherein it is said that it lasteth so long as the action1 whereof we deliberate1 is in our power3 for1 so long we have liberty to do or not to do2 and deliberation signifieth a taking away of our own liberty4 #b4 ,deliberation therefore requireth in the action deliberated two conditions2 one1 that it be future2 the other1 that there be hope of doing it1 or possibility of not doing it2 for1 appetite and fear are expectations of the future2 and there is no expectation of good1 without hope2 or of evil1 without possibility3 of necessaries therefore there is no deliberation4 ,in deliberation1 the last appetite1 as also the last fear1 is called will1 viz4 the last appetite1 will to do1 or will to omit4 ,it is all one therefore to say will and last will3 for1 though a man express his present inclination and appetite concerning the disposing of his goods1 by words or writings2 yet shall it not be counted his will1 because he hath still liberty to dispose of them otherways3 but when death taketh away that liberty1 then it is his will4 #c4 ,voluntary actions and omissions are such as have beginning in the will2 all other are involuntary1 or mixed voluntary2 involuntary1 such as he doth by necessity of nature1 as when he is pushed1 or falleth1 and thereby doth good or hurt to another3 mixed1 such as participate of both2 as when a man is carried to prison1 going is voluntary1 to the prison1 is involuntary3 the example of him that throweth his goods out of a ship into the sea1 to save his person1 is of an action altogether voluntary3 for1 there is nothing therein involuntary1 but the hardness of the choice1 which is not his action1 but the action of the winds3 what he himself doth1 is no more against his will1 than to flee from danger is against the will of him that seeth no other means to preserve himself4 #d4 ,voluntary also are the actions that proceed from sudden anger1 or other sudden appetite in such men as can discern good or evil3 for1 in them the time precedent is to be judged deliberation3 for then also he deliberateth in what cases it is good to strike1 deride1 or do any other action proceeding from anger or other such sudden passion4 #e4 ,appetite1 fear1 hope1 and the rest of the passions are not called voluntary2 for they proceed not from1 but are the will2 and the will is not voluntary3 for1 a man can no more say he will will1 than he will will will1 and so make an infinite repetition of the word will2 which is absurd1 and insignificant4 #f4 ,forasmuch as will to do is appetite1 and will to omit1 fear2 the cause of appetite and fear is the cause also of our will3 but the propounding of the benefits and of harms1 that is to say1 of reward and punishment1 is the cause of our appetite1 and of our fears1 and therefore also of our wills1 so far forth as we believe that such rewards and benefits as are propounded1 shall arrive unto us2 and consequently1 our wills follow our opinions1 as our actions follow our wills2 in which sense they say truly1 and properly1 that say the world is governed by opinion4 #g4 ,when the wills of many concur to one and the same action and effect1 this concourse of their wills is called consent2 by which we must not understand one will of many men1 for every man hath his several will1 but many wills to the producing of one effect3 but when the wills of two divers men produce such actions as are reciprocally resistant one to the other1 this is called contention2 and1 being upon the persons one of another1 battle3 whereas actions proceeding from consent1 are mutual aid4 #h4 ,when many wills are involved or included in the will of one or more consenting1 7which how it may be1 shall be hereafter declared7 then is that involving of many wills in one or more1 called union4 #i4 ,in deliberations interrupted1 as they may be by diversion of other business1 or by sleep1 the last appetite of such part of the deliberation is called intention1 or purpose4 ------- ,,chapter ,,xiii4 #a4 ,having spoken of the powers and acts of the mind1 both cognitive and motive1 considered in every man by himself1 without relation to others2 it will fall fitly into this chapter1 to speak of the effects of the same power one upon another2 which effects are also the signs1 by which one taketh notice what another conceiveth and intendeth4 ,of these signs1 some are such as cannot easily be counterfeited2 as actions and gestures1 especially if they be sudden1 whereof ,i have mentioned some2 7for example1 look in chapter ,,ix47 with the several passions whereof they are signs3 others there are which may be counterfeited2 and those are words or speech2 of the use and effects whereof1 ,i am to speak in this place4 #b4 ,the first use of language1 is the expression of our conceptions1 that is1 the begetting in one another the same conceptions that we have in ourselves2 and this is called teaching2 wherein1 if the conception of him that teacheth continually accompany his words1 beginning at something true in experience1 then it begetteth the like evidence in the hearer that understandeth them1 and maketh him to know something1 which he is therefore said to learn3 but if there be not such evidence1 then such teaching is called persuasion1 and begetteth no more in the hearer1 than what is in the speaker's bare opinion4 ,and the signs of two opinions contradictory one to another2 namely1 affirmation and negation of the same thing1 is called controversy3 but both affirmations1 or both negations1 consent in opinion4 #c4 ,the infallible sign of teaching exactly1 and without error1 is this1 that no man hath ever taught the contrary3 not that few1 how few soever1 if any2 for commonly truth is on the side of a few1 rather than of the multitude3 but when in opinions and questions considered and discussed by many1 it happeneth that not any one of the men that so discussed them differ from another1 then it may be justly inferred1 they know what they teach1 and that otherwise they do not4 ,and this appears most manifestly to them that have considered the divers subjects wherein they have exercised their pens1 and the divers ways in which they have proceeded1 together with the diversity of the success thereof3 for1 those men who have taken in hand to consider nothing else but the comparison of magnitudes1 numbers1 times1 and motions1 and how their proportions are to one another1 have thereby been the authors of all those excellencies by which we differ from such savage people as now inhabit divers places in ,america2 and as have been the inhabitants heretofore of those countries where at this day arts and sciences do most flourish3 for1 from the studies of these men1 have proceeded whatsoever cometh to us for ornament by navigation1 and whatsover we have beneficial to human society by the division1 distinction1 and portraiting the face of the earth2 whatsoever also we have by the account of times1 and foresight of the course of heaven2 whatsoever by measuring distances1 planes1 and solids of all sorts2 and whatsoever either elegant or defensible in building3 all which supposed away1 what do we differ from the wildest of the ,indians8 ,yet to this day was it never heard of1 that there was any controversy concerning any conclusion in this subject2 the science whereof hath nevertheless been continually amplified and enriched by the conclusions of most difficult and profound speculation4 ,the reason whereof is apparent to every man that looketh into their writings2 for they proceed from most low and humble principles1 evident even to the meanest capacity2 going on slowly1 and with most scrupulous ratiocination2 viz4 from the imposition of names1 they infer the truth of their first propositions2 and from two of the first1 a third2 and from any two of the three1 a fourth2 and so on1 according to the steps of science1 mentioned chapter ,,vi4 section #d4 ,on the other side1 those men who have written concerning the faculties1 passions1 and manners of men1 that is to say1 of moral philosophy1 and of policy1 government1 and laws1 whereof there be infinite volumes1 have been so far from removing doubt and controversy in the questions they have handled1 that they have very much multiplied the same3 nor doth any man at this day so much as pretend to know more than hath been delivered two thousand years ago by ,aristotle3 and yet every man thinks that in this subject he knoweth as much as any other2 supposing there needeth thereunto no study but that accrueth unto them by natural wit2 though they play1 or employ their mind otherwise in the purchase of wealth or place4 ,the reason whereof is no other1 than that in their writings and discourses they take for principles those opinions which are already vulgarly received1 whether true or false2 being for the most part false4 ,there is therefore a great deal of difference between teaching and persuading2 the sign of this being controversy2 the sign of the former1 no controversy4 #d4 ,there be two sorts of men that commonly be called learned3 one is that sort that proceedeth evidently from humble principles1 as is described in the last section2 and those men are called mathematici3 the other are they that take up maxims from their education1 and from the authority of men1 or of custom1 and take the habitual discourse of the tongue for ratiocination2 and these are called dogmatici4 ,now seeing in the last section those we call mathematici are absolved of the crime of breeding controversy1 and they that pretend not to learning cannot be accused1 the fault lieth altogether in the dogmatics1 that is to say1 those that are imperfectly learned1 and with passion press to have their opinions pass everywhere for truth1 without any evident demonstration either from experience1 or from places of ,scripture of uncontroverted interpretation4 #e4 ,the expression of those conceptions which cause in us the experience of good while we deliberate1 as also of those which cause our expectation of evil1 is that which we call counselling1 and is the internal deliberation of the mind concerning what we ourselves are to do or not to do4 ,the consequences of our actions are our counsellors1 by alternate succession in the mind4 ,so in the counsel which a man taketh from other men1 the counsellors alternately do make appear the consequences of the action1 and do not any of them deliberate1 but furnish among them all1 him that is counselled with arguments whereupon to deliberate with himself4 #f4 ,another use of speech is expression of appetite1 intention1 and will2 as the appetite of knowledge by interrogation2 appetite to have a thing done by another1 as request1 prayer1 petition3 expressions of our purpose or intention1 as promise1 which is the affirmation or negation of some action to be done in the future3 threatening1 which is the promise of evil2 and commanding1 which is that speech by which we signify to another our appetite or desire to have any thing done1 or left undone1 for reasons contained in the will itself3 for it is not properly said1 ,sic volo1 sic jubeo1 without that other clause1 ,stet pro ratione voluntas3 and when the command is a sufficient reason to move us to action1 then is that command called a law4 #g4 ,another use of speech is instigation and appeasing1 by which we increase or diminish one another's passion3 it is the same thing with persuasion2 the difference not being real2 for1 the begetting of opinion and passion is the same4 ,but whereas in persuasion we aim at getting opinion from passion2 here1 the end is1 to raise passion from opinion4 ,and as in raising an opinion from passion1 any premises are good enough to enforce the desired conclusion2 so1 in raising passion from opinion1 it is no matter whether the opinion be true or false1 or the narration historical or fabulous2 for1 not the truth1 but the image1 maketh passion3 and a tragedy1 well acted1 affecteth no less than a murder4 #h4 ,though words be the signs we have of one another's opinions and intentions1 because the equivocation of them is so frequent according to the diversity of contexture1 and of the company wherewith they go1 which1 the presence of him that speaketh1 our sight of his actions1 and conjecture of his intentions1 must help to discharge us of2 it must therefore be extremely hard to find the opinions and meaning of those men that are gone from us long ago1 and have left us no other signification thereof than their books1 which cannot possibly be understood without history1 to discover those aforementioned circumstances1 and also without great prudence to observe them4 #i4 ,when it happeneth that a man signifieth unto two contradictory opinions1 whereof the one is clearly and directly signified1 and the other either drawn from that by consequence1 or not known to be contradictory to it2 then1 when he is not present to explicate himself better1 we are to take the former for his opinion2 for that is clearly signified to be his1 and directly2 whereas the other might proceed from error in the deduction1 or ignorance of the repugnancy4 ,the like also is to be held in two contradictory expressions of a man's intention and will1 for the same reason4 #aj4 ,forasmuch as whosoever speaketh to another1 intendeth thereby to make him understand what he saith1 if he speak unto him either in a language which he that heareth understandeth not1 or use any word in other sense than he believeth is the sense of him that heareth1 he intendeth also not to make him understand what he saith2 which is a contradiction of himself4 ,it is therefore always to be supposed1 that he which intendeth not to deceive1 alloweth the private interpretation of his speech to him to whom it is addressed4 #aa4 ,silence1 in him that believeth that the same shall be taken for a sign of his intent1 is a sign thereof indeed3 for1 if he did not consent1 the labour of speaking so much as to declare the same1 is so little1 as it is to be presumed he would have done it4 ,,conclusion4 ,thus have we considered the nature of man so far as was requisite for the finding out the first and most simple elements wherein the compositions of politic rules and laws are lastly resolved2 which was my present purpose4 ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ,,de ,,corpore ,,politico3 ,,or ,,the ,,elements ,,of ,,law1 ,,moral ,,and ,,politic1 ,,with ,,discourses ,,upon ,,several ,,heads3 ,,as ,,of ,,the ,,law ,,of ,,nature2 ,,of ,,oaths ,,and ,,covenants2 ,,of ,,several ,,kinds ,,of ,,government2 ,,with ,,the ,,changes ,,and ,,revolutions ,,of ,,them4 ,,to ,,the ,,reader4 ------- ,,reader1 ,you may be pleased to take notice1 that the first part of this work depends upon a former treatise of ,human ,nature1 written by ,mr4 ,hobbes1 and by a friend of his committed to the press for the benefit of mankind4 ,it was thought fit1 that nothing of so worthy an author should be left unprinted1 especially considering1 that this piece is most useful for the society of reasonable creatures1 being the grounds and principles of policy1 without which there would be nothing but confusion in the world4 ,i am confident1 if men's minds were but truly fixed upon the centre of this discourse1 they would not prove such weathercocks1 to be turned about with the wind of every false doctrine1 and vain opinion4 ,we should then be free from those disorders which threaten distraction to the soul1 and destruction to the commonwealth4 ,but let others write never so well1 if our practice do not second their instructions1 we may be wise enough to foresee our misery1 but never know how to prevent it4 ,what pity is it1 that such rare conclusions as these are1 should produce no other effect1 to inform our knowledge1 and confute our conversation1 whilst we neglect the truth that is apprehended4 ,yet there is some hope1 that such observers1 whose wisdom hath received the stamp of goodness1 will improve their skill to a real advancement of those benefits1 which lie hoarded up in this curious cabinet4 ,to whose use and behoof1 these excellent notions are commended1 as the best that ever were writ in this kind1 and may serve for a general ground and foundation to all regular conceptions1 that concern the essence and existence of man1 the government of kingdoms and commonwealths1 and by consequence our eternal salvation4 ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ,,de ,,corpore ,,politico4 ------- ,,part ,,the ,,first4 ------- ,,chapter ,i4 #a1 #b4 ,men by nature equal4 #c4 ,by vain glory indisposed to allow equality with themselves1 to others4 #d4 ,apt to provoke another by comparisons4 #e4 ,apt to encroach one upon another4 #f4 ,right defined4 #g4 ,right to the end1 implieth right to the means4 #h4 ,every man his own judge by nature4 #i4 ,every man's strength and knowledge for his own use4 #aj4 ,every man by nature hath right to all things4 #aa4 ,war and peace defined4 #ab4 ,men by nature in the state of war4 #ac4 ,in manifest inequality might is right4 #ad4 ,reason dictateth peace4 ,sidenote3 ,men by nature equal4 #a4 ,in a former treatise of human nature already printed1 hath been set forth the whole nature of man1 consisting in the powers natural of his body and mind1 and may all be comprehended in these four1 strength of body1 experience1 reason1 and passion4 #b4 ,in this1 it will be expedient to consider in what estate of security this our nature hath placed us1 and what probability it hath left us1 of continuing and preserving ourselves against the violence of one another4 ,and first1 if we consider how little odds there is of strength or knowledge1 between men of mature age1 and with how great facility he that is the weaker in strength or in wit1 or in both1 may utterly destroy the power of the stronger2 since there needeth but little force to the taking away of a man's life1 we may conclude1 that men considered in mere nature1 ought to admit amongst themselves equality2 and that he that claimeth no more1 may be esteemed moderate4 ,sidenote3 ,by vain glory indisposed to allow equality with themselves1 to others4 #c4 ,on the other side1 considering the great difference there is in men1 from the diversity of their passions1 how some are vainly glorious1 and hope for precedency and superiority above their fellows1 not only when they are equal in power1 but also when they are inferior2 we must needs acknowledge that it must necessarily follow1 that those men who are moderate1 and look for no more but equality of nature1 shall be obnoxious to the force of others1 that will attempt to subdue them4 ,and from hence shall proceed a general diffidence in mankind1 and mutual fear one of another4 ,sidenote3 ,apt to provoke another by comparisons4 #d4 ,further1 since men by natural passion are divers ways offensive one to another1 every man thinking well of himself1 and hating to see the same in others1 they must needs provoke one another by words1 and other signs of contempt and hatred1 which are incident to all comparison1 till at last they must determine the pre-eminence by strength and force of body4 ,sidenote3 ,apt to encroach one upon another4 #e4 ,moreover1 considering that many men's appetites carry them to one and the same end2 which end sometimes can neither be enjoyed in common1 nor divided1 it followeth1 that the stronger must enjoy it alone1 and that it be decided by battle who is the stronger4 ,and thus the greatest part of men1 upon no assurance of odds1 do nevertheless1 through vanity1 or comparison1 or appetite1 provoke the rest1 that otherwise would be contented with equality4 ,sidenote3 ,right defined4 #f4 ,and forasmuch as necessity of nature maketh men to will and desire bonum sibi1 that which is good for themselves1 and to avoid that which is hurtful2 but most of all1 the terrible enemy of nature1 death1 from whom we expect both the loss of all power1 and also the greatest of bodily pains in the losing2 it is not against reason1 that a man doth all he can to preserve his own body and limbs both from death and pain4 ,and that which is not against reason1 men call right1 or jus1 or blameless liberty of using our own natural power and ability4 ,it is therefore a right of nature1 that every man may preserve his own life and limbs1 with all the power he hath4 ,sidenote3 ,right to the end1 implieth right to the means4 #g4 ,and because where a man hath right to the end1 and the end cannot be attained without the means1 that is1 without such things as are necessary to the end1 it is consequent that it is not against reason1 and therefore right1 for a man to use all means1 and do whatsoever action is necessary for the preservation of his body4 ,sidenote3 ,every man his own judge by nature4 #h4 ,also1 every man by right of nature1 is judge himself of the necessity of the means1 and of the greatness of the danger4 ,for if it be against reason1 that ,i be judge of mine own danger myself1 then it is reason1 that another man be judge thereof4 ,but the same reason that maketh another man judge of those things that concern me1 maketh me also judge of that that concerneth him4 ,and therefore ,i have reason to judge of his sentence1 whether it be for my benefit1 or not4 ,sidenote3 ,every man's strength and knowledge for his own use4 #i4 ,as a man's judgment in right of nature is to be employed for his own benefit1 so also the strength1 knowledge1 and art1 of every man is then rightly employed1 when he useth it for himself2 else must not a man have right to preserve himself4 ,sidenote3 ,every man by nature hath right to all things4 #aj4 ,every man by nature hath right to all things1 that is to say1 to do whatsoever he listeth to whom he listeth1 to possess1 use1 and enjoy all things he will and can4 ,for seeing all things he willeth1 must therefore be good unto him in his own judgment1 because he willeth them1 and may tend to his preservation some time or other1 or he may judge so1 and we have made him judge thereof1 section #h1 it followeth1 that all things may rightly also be done by him4 ,and for this cause it is rightly said1 ,natura dedit omnia omnibus1 that ,nature hath given all things to all men2 insomuch1 that jus and utile1 right and profit1 is the same thing4 ,but that right of all men to all things1 is in effect no better than if no man had right to any thing4 ,for there is little use and benefit of the right a man hath1 when another as strong1 or stronger than himself1 hath right to the same4 ,sidenote3 ,war and peace defined4 #aa4 ,seeing then to the offensiveness of man's nature one to another1 there is added a right of every man to every thing1 whereby one man invadeth with right1 and another man with right resisteth1 and men live thereby in perpetual diffidence1 and study how to preoccupate each other2 the estate of men in this natural liberty1 is the estate of war4 ,for war is nothing else but that time wherein the will and contention of contending by force1 is either by words or actions sufficiently declared2 and the time which is not war1 is peace4 ,sidenote3 ,men by nature in the state of war4 #ab4 ,the estate of hostility and war being such1 as thereby nature itself is destroyed1 and men kill one another1 7as we know also that it is1 both by the experience of savage nations that live at this day1 and by the histories of our ancestors the old inhabitants of ,germany1 and other now civil countries1 where we find the people few1 and short lived1 and without the ornaments and comforts of life1 which by peace and society are usually invented and procured7 he therefore that desireth to live in such an estate as is the estate of liberty and right of all to all1 contradicteth himself4 ,for every man by natural necessity desireth his own good1 to which this estate is contrary1 wherein we suppose contention between men by nature equal1 and able to destroy one another4 ,sidenote3 ,in manifest inequality might is right4 #ac4 ,seeing this right of protecting ourselves by our own discretion and force1 proceedeth from danger1 and that danger from the equality between men's forces1 much more reason is there1 that a man prevent such equality before the danger cometh1 and before the necessity of battle4 ,a man therefore that hath another man in his power to rule or govern1 to do good to1 or harm1 hath right1 by the advantage of this his present power1 to take caution at his pleasure1 for his security against that other in time to come4 ,he therefore that hath already subdued his adversary1 or gotten into his power any other1 that either by infancy1 or weakness1 is unable to resist him1 by right of nature may take the best caution1 that such infant1 or such feeble and subdued person can give him1 of being ruled and governed by him for the time to come4 ,for seeing we intend always our own safety and preservation1 we manifestly contradict that our intention1 if we willingly dismiss such a one1 and suffer him at once to gather strength and be our enemy4 ,out of which may also be collected1 that irresistible might1 in the state of nature1 is right4 ,sidenote3 ,reason dictateth peace4 #ad4 ,but since it is supposed by the equality of strength1 and other natural faculties of men1 that no man is of might sufficient1 to assure himself for any long time1 of preserving himself thereby1 whilst he remaineth in the state of hostility and war2 reason therefore dictateth to every man for his own good1 to seek after peace1 as far forth as there is hope to attain the same2 and strengthen himself with all the help he can procure1 for his own defence against those1 from whom such peace cannot be obtained2 and to do all those things which necessarily conduce thereunto4 ------- ,,chapter ,,ii4 #a4 ,the law of nature consisteth not in consent of men1 but reason4 #b4 ,that every man divest himself of the right he hath to all things1 is one precept of nature4 #c4 ,what it is to relinquish and transfer one's right4 #d4 ,the will to transfer1 and the will to accept1 both necessary to the passing away of right4 #e4 ,right not transferred by words de futuro only4 #f4 ,words de futuro1 together with other signs of the will1 may transfer right4 #g4 ,free gift defined4 #h4 ,contract1 and the sorts of it4 #i4 ,covenant defined4 #aj4 ,contract of mutual trust1 is of no validity in the estate of hostility4 #aa4 ,no covenant of men but with one another4 #ab4 ,covenant how dissolved4 #ac4 ,covenant extorted by fear1 in the law of nature valid4 #ad4 ,covenant contrary to former covenant1 void4 #ae4 ,an oath defined4 #af4 ,oath to be administered to every man in his own religion4 #ag4 ,oath addeth not to the obligation4 #ah4 ,covenants bind but to endeavour4 ,sidenote3 ,the law of nature consisteth not in consent of men1 but reason4 #a4 ,what it is we call the law of nature1 is not agreed upon by those1 that have hitherto written4 ,for the most part1 such writers as have occasion to affirm1 that anything is against the law of nature1 do allege no more than this1 that it is against the consent of all nations1 or the wisest and most civil nations4 ,but it is not agreed upon1 who shall judge which nations are the wisest4 ,others make that against the law of nature1 which is contrary to the consent of all mankind2 which definition cannot be allowed1 because then no man could offend against the law of nature2 for the nature of every man is contained under the nature of mankind4 ,but forasmuch as all men are carried away by the violence of their passion1 and by evil customs do those things which are commonly said to be against the law of nature2 it is not the consent of passions1 or consent in some error gotten by custom1 that makes the law of nature4 ,reason is no less of the nature of man than passion1 and is the same in all men1 because all men agree in the will to be directed and governed in the way to that which they desire to attain1 namely1 their own good1 which is the work of reason3 there can therefore be no other law of nature than reason1 nor no other precepts of natural law1 than those which declare unto us the ways of peace1 where the same may be obtained1 and of defence where it may not4 ,sidenote3 ,that every man divest himself of the right he hath to all things1 is one precept of nature4 #b4 ,one precept of the law of nature therefore is this1 that every man divest himself of the right he hath to all things by nature4 ,for when divers men having right not only to all things else1 but to one another's persons1 if they use the same1 there ariseth thereby invasion on the one part1 and resistance on the other1 which is war1 and therefore contrary to the law of nature1 the sum whereof consisteth in making peace4 ,sidenote3 ,what it is to relinquish and transfer one's right4 #c4 ,when a man divesteth and putteth from himself his right1 he either simply relinquisheth it1 or transferreth the same to another man4 ,to relinquish it1 is by sufficient signs to declare1 that it is his will no more to do that action1 which of right he might have done before4 ,to transfer right to another1 is by sufficient signs to declare to that other accepting thereof1 that it is his will not to resist1 or hinder him1 according to that right he had thereto before he transferred it4 ,for seeing that by nature every man hath right to every thing1 it is impossible for a man to transfer unto another any right that he had not before4 ,and therefore all that a man doth in transferring of right1 is no more but a declaring of the will1 to suffer him1 to whom he hath so transferred his right1 to make benefit of the same1 without molestation4 ,as for example1 when a man giveth his lands or goods to another1 he taketh from himself the right to enter into1 and make use of the said lands or goods1 or otherwise to hinder him of the use of what he hath given4 ,sidenote3 ,the will to transfer1 and the will to accept1 both necessary to the passing away of right4 #d4 ,in transferring of right1 two things therefore are required3 one on the part of him that transferreth1 which is a sufficient signification of his will therein2 the other1 on the part of him to whom it is transferred1 which is a sufficient signification of his acceptation thereof4 ,either of these failing1 the right remaineth where it was3 nor is it to be supposed1 that he which giveth his right to one that accepteth it not1 doth thereby simply relinquish it1 and transfer it to whomsoever will receive it3 inasmuch as the cause of transferring the same to one1 rather than to another1 is in the one1 rather than in the rest4 ,sidenote3 ,right not transferred by words de futuro only4 #e4 ,when there appear no other signs that a man hath relinquished1 or transferred his right1 but only words1 it behoveth that the same be done in words1 that signify the present time1 or the time past1 and not only the time to come4 ,for he that saith of the time to come1 as for example1 to-morrow ,i will give1 declareth evidently1 that he hath not yet given4 ,the right1 therefore1 remaineth in him to-day1 and so continues1 till he have given actually4 ,but he that saith1 ,i give1 presently1 or have given to another anything1 to have and enjoy the same to-morrow1 or any other time further1 hath now actually transferred the said right1 which otherwise he should have had at the time that the other is to enjoy it4 ,sidenote3 ,words de futuro1 together with other signs of the will1 may transfer right4 #f4 ,but because words alone are not a sufficient declaration of the mind1 as hath been shown chapter ,,xiii4 section #h1 words spoken de futuro1 when the will of him that speaketh them may be gathered by other signs1 may be taken very often as if they were meant de prsenti3 for when it appeareth1 that he that giveth1 would have his words so understood by him to whom he giveth1 as if he did actually transfer his right1 then he must needs be understood to will all that is necessary to the same4 ,sidenote3 ,free gift defined4 #g4 ,when a man transferreth any right of his to another1 without consideration of reciprocal benefit1 past1 present1 or to come1 this is called free gift4 ,and in free gift1 no other words can be binding1 but those which are de prsenti1 or de prterito3 for being de futuro only1 they transfer nothing1 nor can they be understood1 as if they proceeded from the will of the giver2 because being a free gift1 it carrieth with it no obligation greater than that which is enforced by the words4 ,for he that promiseth to give1 without any other consideration but his own affection1 so long as he hath not given1 deliberateth still1 according as the causes of his affections continue1 or diminish2 and he that deliberateth1 hath not yet willed1 because the will is the last act of his deliberation4 ,he that promiseth therefore1 is not thereby a donor1 but doson2 which name was given to that ,antiochus1 that promised often1 but seldom gave4 ,sidenote3 ,contract1 and the sorts of it4 #h4 ,when a man transferreth his right upon consideration of reciprocal benefit1 this is not free gift1 but mutual donation1 and is called contract4 ,and in all contracts1 either both parties presently perform1 and put each other into a certainty and assurance of enjoying what they contract for1 as when men buy or sell1 or barter2 or one party performeth presently1 and the other promiseth1 as when one selleth upon trust2 or else neither party performeth presently1 but trust one another4 ,and it is impossible there should be any kind of contract besides these three4 ,for either both the contractors trust1 or neither2 or else one trusteth1 and the other not4 ,sidenote3 ,covenant defined4 #i4 ,in all contracts where there is trust1 the promise of him that is trusted1 is called a covenant4 ,and this1 though it be a promise1 and of the time to come1 yet it doth transfer the right1 when that time cometh1 no less than an actual donation4 ,for it is a manifest sign1 that he which did perform1 understood it was the will of him that was trusted1 to perform also4 ,promises therefore1 upon consideration of reciprocal benefit1 are covenants and signs of the will1 or last act of deliberation1 whereby the liberty of performing1 or not performing1 is taken away1 and consequently are obligatory4 ,for where liberty ceaseth1 there beginneth obligation4 ,sidenote3 ,contract of mutual trust1 is of no validity in the estate of hostility4 #aj4 ,nevertheless1 in contracts that consist of such mutual trust1 as that nothing be by either party performed for the present1 when the contract is between such as are not compellable1 he that performeth first1 considering the disposition of men to take advantage of every thing for their benefit1 doth but betray himself thereby to the covetousness1 or other passion of him with whom he contracteth4 ,and therefore such covenants are of none effect4 ,for there is no reason why the one should perform first1 if the other be likely not to perform afterward4 ,and whether he be likely or not1 he that doubteth1 shall be judge himself1 as hath been said chap4 ,i4 sect4 #h1 as long as they remain in the estate and liberty of nature4 ,but when there shall be such power coercive over both the parties1 as shall deprive them of their private judgments in this point1 then may such covenants be effectual1 seeing he that performeth first shall have no reasonable cause to doubt of the performance of the other1 that may be compelled thereunto4 ,sidenote3 ,no covenant of men but with one another4 #aa4 ,and forasmuch as in all covenants1 and contracts1 and donations1 the acceptance of him to whom the right is transferred1 is necessary to the essence of those covenants1 donations1 c41 it is impossible to make a covenant or donation to any1 that by nature1 or absence1 are unable1 or if able1 do not actually declare their acceptation of the same4 ,first of all1 therefore1 it is impossible for any man to make a covenant with ,god ,almighty1 further than it hath pleased him to declare who shall receive and accept of the said covenant in his name4 ,also it is impossible to make covenant with those living creatures1 of whose wills we have no sufficient sign1 for want of common language4 ,sidenote3 ,covenant how dissolved4 #ab4 ,a covenant to do any action at a certain time and place1 is then dissolved by the covenanter1 when that time cometh1 either by the performance1 or by the violation4 ,for a covenant is void that is once impossible4 ,but a covenant not to do1 without time limited1 which is as much as to say1 a covenant never to do1 is dissolved by the covenanter then only1 when he violateth it1 or dieth4 ,and generally1 all covenants are dischargeable by the covenantee1 to whose benefit1 and by whose right1 he that maketh the covenant is obliged4 ,this right therefore of the covenantee relinquished1 is a release of the covenant4 ,and universally1 for the same reason1 all obligations are determinable at the will of the obliger4 ,sidenote3 ,covenant extorted by fear1 in the law of nature valid4 #ac4 ,it is a question often moved1 whether such covenants oblige1 as are extorted from men by fear4 ,as for example1 whether if a man for fear of death1 hath promised to give a thief an hundred pounds the next day1 and not discover him2 whether such covenant be obligatory1 or not4 ,and though in some cases such covenant may be void1 yet it is not therefore void1 because extorted by fear4 ,for there appeareth no reason1 why that which we do upon fear1 should be less firm than that which we do for covetousness4 ,for both the one and the other maketh the action voluntary4 ,and if no covenant should be good1 that proceedeth from fear of death1 no conditions of peace between enemies1 nor any laws1 could be of force1 which are all consented to from that fear4 ,for who would lose the liberty that nature hath given him1 of governing himself by his own will and power1 if they feared not death in the retaining of it8 ,what prisoner in war might be trusted to seek his ransom1 and ought not rather to be killed1 if he were not tied by the grant of his life1 to perform his promise8 ,but after the introduction of policy and laws1 the case may alter2 for if by the law the performance of such a covenant be forbidden1 then he that promiseth anything to a thief1 not only may1 but must refuse to perform it4 ,but if the law forbid not the performance1 but leave it to the will of the promiser1 then is the performance still lawful3 and the covenant of things lawful is obligatory1 even towards a thief4 ,sidenote3 ,covenant contrary to former covenant1 void4 #ad4 ,he that giveth1 promiseth or covenanteth to one1 and after1 giveth1 promiseth1 or covenanteth the same to another1 maketh void the latter act4 ,for it is impossible for a man to transfer that right which he himself hath not2 and that right he hath not1 which he himself hath before transferred4 ,sidenote3 ,an oath defined4 #ae4 ,an oath is a clause annexed to a promise1 containing a renunciation of ,god's mercy by him that promiseth1 in case he perform not as far as is lawful and possible for him to do4 ,and this appeareth by the words which make the essence of the oath1 so help me ,god4 ,so also was it amongst the heathen4 ,and the form of the ,romans was1 ,thou ,jupiter kill him that breaketh1 as ,i kill this beast4 ,the intention therefore of an oath being to provoke vengeance upon the breakers of covenant2 it is to no purpose to swear by men1 be they never so great1 because their punishment by divers accidents may be avoided1 whether they will1 or no1 but ,god's punishment not4 ,though it were a custom of many nations1 to swear by the life of their princes2 yet those princes being ambitious of divine honour1 give sufficient testimony1 that they believed1 nothing ought to be sworn by1 but the ,deity4 ,sidenote3 ,oath to be administered to every man in his own religion4 #af4 ,and seeing men cannot be afraid of the power they believe not1 and an oath is to no purpose1 without fear of him they swear by1 it is necessary that he that sweareth1 do it in that form which himself admitteth in his own religion1 and not in that form which he useth1 that putteth him to the oath4 ,for though all men may know by nature1 that there is an ,almighty power1 nevertheless they believe not1 that they swear by him in any other form or name1 than what their own1 which they think the true1 religion teacheth them4 ,sidenote3 ,oath addeth not to the obligation4 #ag4 ,and by the definition of an oath1 it appeareth that it addeth not a greater obligation to perform the covenant sworn1 than the covenant carrieth in itself1 but it putteth a man into a greater danger1 and of greater punishment4 ,sidenote3 ,covenants bind but to endeavour4 #ah4 ,covenants and oaths are de voluntariis1 that is1 de possibilibus4 ,nor can the covenantee understand the covenanter to promise impossibles2 for they fall not under deliberation3 and consequently1 7by chap4 ,,xiii4 sect4 #aj of the ,treatise of ,human ,nature1 which maketh the covenantee interpreter7 no covenant is understood to bind further1 than to our best endeavour1 either in performance of the thing promised1 or in something equivalent4 ------- ,,chapter ,,iii4 #a4 ,that men stand to their covenants4 #b4 ,injury defined4 #c4 ,that injury is done only to the covenantee4 #d4 ,the signification of those names1 just1 unjust4 #e4 ,justice not rightly divided into commutative1 and distributive4 #f4 ,it is a law of nature1 that he that is trusted1 turn not that trust to the damage of him that trusteth4 #g4 ,ingratitude defined4 #h4 ,it is a law of nature1 to endeavour to accommodate one another3 #i4 ,and that man forgive upon caution for the future3 #aj4 ,and that revenge ought to respect the future only3 #aa4 ,that reproach and contempt declared1 is against the law of nature3 #ab4 ,that indifference of commerce is of the law of nature3 #ac4 ,that messengers employed to procure or maintain peace1 ought to be safe by the law of nature4 ,sidenote3 ,that men stand to their covenants4 #a4 ,it is a common saying that nature maketh nothing in vain4 ,and it is most certain1 that as the truth of a conclusion1 is no more but the truth of the premises that make it2 so the force of the command1 or law of nature1 is no more than the force of the reasons inducing thereunto4 ,therefore the law of nature mentioned in the former chapter1 section #b1 namely1 ,that every man should divest himself of the right1 c4 were utterly vain1 and of none effect1 if this also were not a law of the same nature1 ,that every man is obliged to stand to1 and perform1 those covenants he maketh4 ,for what benefit is it to a man1 that any thing be promised1 or given unto him1 if he that giveth1 or promiseth1 performeth not1 or retaineth still the right of taking back what he hath given8 ,sidenote3 ,injury defined4 #b4 ,the breach or violation of covenant1 is that which men call injury1 consisting in some action or omission1 which is therefore called unjust4 ,for it is action or omission1 without jus1 or right1 which was transferred or relinquished before4 ,there is a great similitude between that we call injury1 or injustice in the actions and conversations of men in the world1 and that which is called absurd in the arguments and disputations of the ,schools4 ,for as he1 which is driven to contradict an assertion by him before maintained1 is said to be reduced to an absurdity2 so he that through passion doth1 or omitteth that which before by covenant he promised to do1 or not to omit1 is said to commit injustice2 and there is in every breach of covenant a contradiction properly so called4 ,for he that covenanteth1 willeth to do1 or omit1 in the time to come4 ,and he that doth any action1 willeth it in that present1 which is part of the future time contained in the covenant4 ,and therefore he that violateth a covenant1 willeth the doing and the not doing of the same thing1 at the same time1 which is a plain contradiction4 ,and so injury is an absurdity of conversation1 as absurdity is a kind of injustice in disputation4 ,sidenote3 ,that injury is done only to the covenantee4 #c4 ,in all violation of covenant1 7to whomsoever accrueth the damage7 the injury is done only to him to whom the covenant was made4 ,for example1 if a man covenant to obey his master1 and the master command him to give money to a third1 which he promiseth to do1 and doth not1 though this be to the damage of the third1 yet the injury is done to the master only4 ,for he could violate no covenant with him1 with whom none was made1 and therefore doth him no injury4 ,for injury consisteth in violation of covenant by the definition thereof4 ,sidenote3 ,the signification of those names1 just and unjust4 #d4 ,the names of just1 unjust1 justice1 injustice1 are equivocal1 and signify diversly4 ,for justice and injustice1 when they be attributed to actions1 signify the same thing with no injury1 and injury1 and denominate the action just1 or unjust1 but not the man so4 ,for they denominate him guilty1 or not guilty4 ,but when justice or injustice1 are attributed to men1 they signify proneness1 and affection and inclination of nature1 that is to say1 passions of the mind1 apt to produce just and unjust actions4 ,so that when a man is said to be just1 or unjust2 not the action1 but the passion and aptitude1 to do such actions1 is considered4 ,and therefore a just man may have committed an unjust act2 and an unjust man may have done justly1 not only one1 but most of his actions4 ,for there is an oderunt peccare in the unjust1 as well as in the just1 but from different causes4 ,for the unjust man who abstaineth from injuries for fear of punishment1 declareth plainly1 that the justice of his actions dependeth upon civil constitution1 from whence punishments proceed1 which would otherwise in the estate of nature be unjust1 according to the fountain from whence they spring4 ,this distinction therefore of justice1 and injustice1 ought to be remembered1 that when injustice is taken for guilty1 the action is unjust1 but not therefore the man2 and when justice is taken for guiltlessness1 the actions are just1 and yet not always the man4 ,likewise when justice and injustice are taken for habits of the mind1 the man may be just1 or unjust1 and yet not all his actions so4 ,sidenote3 ,justice not rightly divided into commutative1 and distributive4 #e4 ,concerning the justice of actions1 the same is usually divided into two kinds1 whereof men call the one commutative1 and the other distributive2 and are said to consist1 the one in proportion arithmetical2 the other in geometrical3 and commutative justice1 they place in permutation1 as buying1 selling1 and bartering2 distributive1 in giving to every man according to their deserts4 ,which distinction is not well made1 inasmuch as injury1 which is the injustice of action1 consisteth not in the inequality of the things changed1 or distributed1 but in the inequality that men1 contrary to nature and reason1 assume unto themselves above their fellows4 ,of which inequality1 shall be spoken hereafter4 ,and for commutative justice placed in buying and selling1 though the thing bought be unequal to the price given for it1 yet forasmuch as both the buyer and the seller are made judges of the value1 and are thereby both satisfied1 there can be no injury done on either side1 neither party having trusted1 or covenanted with the other4 ,and for distributive justice1 which consisteth in the distribution of our own benefits1 seeing a thing is therefore said to be our own1 because we may dispose of it at our own pleasure1 it can be no injury to any man1 though our liberality be farther extended towards another1 than towards him2 unless we be thereto obliged by covenant3 and then the injustice consisteth in the violation of that covenant1 and not in the inequality of distribution4 ,sidenote3 ,it is a law of nature1 that he that is trusted1 turn not that trust to the damage of him that trusteth #f4 ,it happeneth many times that man benefitteth1 or contributeth1 to the power of another1 without any covenant1 but only upon confidence and trust of obtaining the grace and favour of that other1 whereby he may procure a greater1 or no less benefit1 and assistance to himself4 ,for by necessity of nature1 every man doth in all his voluntary actions intend some good unto himself4 ,in this case it is a law of nature1 ,that no man suffer him1 that thus trusteth to his charity1 or good affection towards him1 to be in the worse estate for his trusting4 ,for if he shall so do1 men will not dare to confer mutually to each other's defence1 nor put themselves into each other's mercy upon any terms whatsoever1 but rather abide the utmost and worst event of hostility2 by which general diffidence1 men will not only be enforced to war1 but also afraid to come so much within the danger of one another1 as to make any overture of peace4 ,but this is to be understood of those only1 that confer their benefits 7as ,i have said7 upon trust only1 and not for triumph or ostentation4 ,for as when they do it upon trust1 the end they aimed at1 namely to be well used1 is the reward2 so also when they do it for ostentation1 they have the reward in themselves4 ,sidenote3 ,ingratitude defined4 #g4 ,but seeing in this case there passeth no covenant1 the breach of this law of nature is not to be called injury4 ,it hath another name1 to wit1 ingratitude4 ,sidenote3 ,it is a law of nature1 to endeavour to accommodate one another4 #h4 ,it is also a law of nature1 ,that every man do help and endeavour to accommodate each other as far as may be1 without danger of their persons1 and loss of their means1 to maintain and defend themselves4 ,for seeing the causes of war and desolation proceed from those passions1 by which we strive to accommodate ourselves1 and to leave others as far as we can behind us1 it followeth1 that that passion by which we strive mutually to accommodate each other1 must be the cause of peace4 ,and this passion is that charity defined chapter ,,ix4 section #ag4 ,sidenote3 ,and that man forgive1 upon caution for the future4 #i4 ,and in this precept of nature1 is included and comprehended also this1 ,that a man forgive and pardon him that hath done him wrong1 upon his repentance and caution for the future4 ,for pardon is peace granted to him1 that1 having provoked to war1 demandeth it4 ,it is not therefore charity1 but fear1 when a man giveth peace to him that repenteth not1 nor giveth caution for maintaining thereof in the time to come4 ,for he that repenteth not1 remaineth with the affection of an enemy2 as also doth he that refuseth to give caution1 and consequently1 is presumed not to seek after peace1 but advantage4 ,and therefore to forgive him is not commanded in this law of nature1 nor is charity1 but may sometime be prudence4 ,otherwise1 not to pardon upon repentance and caution1 considering men cannot abstain from provoking one another1 is never to give peace4 ,and that is against the general definition of the law of nature4 ,sidenote3 ,and that revenge ought to respect the future only4 #aj4 ,and seeing the law of nature commandeth pardon1 when there is repentance and caution for the future1 it followeth1 that the same law ordaineth1 ,that no revenge be taken upon the consideration only of the offence past1 but of the benefit to come2 that is to say1 that all revenge ought to tend to amendment1 either of the person offending1 or of others1 by the example of his punishment2 which is sufficiently apparent1 in that the law of nature commandeth pardon1 where the future time is secured4 ,the same is also apparent by this1 that revenge when it considereth the offence past1 is nothing else1 but present triumph and glory1 and directeth to no end3 and what is directed to no end1 is therefore unprofitable2 and consequently the triumph of revenge1 is vain glory3 and whatsoever is vain1 is against reason2 and to hurt one another without reason1 is contrary to that1 which by supposition is every man's benefit1 namely peace2 and what is contrary to peace1 is contrary to the law of nature4 ,sidenote3 ,that reproach and contempt declared is against the law of nature4 #aa4 ,and because all signs which we shew to one another of hatred and contempt1 provoke in the highest degree to quarrel and battle1 7inasmuch as life itself1 with the condition of enduring scorn1 is not esteemed worth the enjoying1 much less peace7 it must necessarily be implied as a law of nature1 ,that no man reproach1 revile1 deride1 or any otherwise declare his hatred1 contempt1 or disesteem of any other4 ,but this law is very little practised4 ,for what is more ordinary than reproaches of those that are rich1 towards them that are not8 or of those that sit in place of judicature1 towards those that are accused at the bar8 although to grieve them in that manner1 be no part of the punishment for their crime1 nor contained in their office4 ,but use hath prevailed1 that what was lawful in the lord towards the servant whom he maintaineth1 is also practised as lawful in the more mighty towards the less2 though they contribute nothing towards their maintenance4 ,sidenote3 ,that indifference of commerce is of the law of nature4 #ab4 ,it is also a law of nature1 ,that one man allow commerce and traffic indifferently to one another4 ,for he that alloweth that to one man1 which he denieth to another1 declareth his hatred to him1 to whom he denieth4 ,and to declare hatred is war4 ,and upon this title was grounded the great war between the ,athenians and the ,peloponnesians4 ,for would the ,athenians have condescended to suffer the ,megareans1 their neighbours1 to traffic in their ports and markets1 that war had not begun4 ,sidenote3 ,that messengers employed to procure or maintain peace1 ought to be safe by the law of nature4 #ac4 ,and this also is a law of nature1 ,that all messengers of peace1 and such as are employed to procure and maintain amity between man and man1 may safely come and go4 ,for seeing peace is the general law of nature1 the means thereto1 such as are these men1 must in the same law be comprehended4 sp #b ------- ,,chapter ,,iv4 #a4 ,a law of nature1 that every man acknowledge other for his equal4 #b4 ,another1 that men allow qualia qualibus4 #c4 ,another1 that those things which cannot be divided1 be used in common4 #d4 ,another1 that things indivisible and incommunicable1 be divided by lot4 #e4 ,natural lot1 primogeniture1 and first possession4 #f4 ,that men submit to arbitration4 #g4 ,of an arbitrator4 #h4 ,that no man press his counsel upon any man against his will4 #i4 ,how to know suddenly what is the law of nature4 #aj4 ,that the law of nature taketh place after security from others to observe the same4 #aa4 ,the right of nature not to be taken away by custom1 nor the law of nature abrogated by any act4 #ab4 ,why the dictates of nature are called laws4 #ac4 ,whatsoever is against conscience in a man that is his own judge1 is against the law of nature4 #ad4 ,of malum pn1 malum culp2 virtue and vice4 #ae4 ,aptitude to society fulfilleth the law of nature4 ,sidenote3 ,a law of nature1 that every man acknowledge other for his equal4 #a4 ,the question1 which is the better man1 is determinable only in the estate of government and policy1 though it be mistaken for a question of nature1 not only by ignorant men1 that think one man's blood better than another's by nature1 but also by him1 whose opinions are at this day1 and in these parts1 of greater authority than any other human writings4 ,for he putteth so much difference between the powers of men by nature1 that he doubteth not to set down1 as the ground of all his politics1 that some men are by nature worthy to govern1 and others by nature ought to serve4 ,which foundation hath not only weakened the whole frame of his politics1 but hath also given men colour and pretences1 whereby to disturb and hinder the peace of one another4 ,for though there were such a difference of nature1 that master and servant were not by consent of men1 but by inherent virtue2 yet who hath that eminency of virtue1 above others1 and who is so stupid1 as not to govern himself1 shall never be agreed upon amongst men1 who do every one naturally think himself1 as able1 at the least1 to govern another1 as another to govern him4 ,and when there was any contention between the finer and the courser wits1 7as there hath been often in times of sedition and civil war7 for the most part1 these latter carried away the victory2 and as long as men arrogate to themselves more honour than they give to others1 it cannot be imagined1 how they can possibly live in peace3 and consequently we are to suppose1 that for peace sake1 nature hath ordained this law1 ,that every man acknowledge other for his equal4 ,and the breach of this law1 is that we call pride4 ,sidenote3 ,another1 that men allow qualia qualibus4 #b4 ,as it was necessary that a man should not retain his right to every thing1 so also was it1 that he should retain his right to some things2 to his own body1 for example1 the right of defending1 whereof he could not transfer2 to the use of fire1 water1 free air1 and place to live in1 and to all things necessary for life4 ,nor doth the law of nature command any divesting of other rights1 than of those only which cannot be retained without the loss of peace4 ,seeing then many rights are retained1 when we enter into peace one with another1 reason and the law of nature dictateth1 ,whatsoever right any man requireth to retain1 he allow every other man to retain the same4 ,for he that doth not so1 alloweth not the equality mentioned in the former section4 ,for there is no acknowledgment of worth1 without attribution of the equality of benefit and respect4 ,and this allowance of qualia qualibus1 is the same thing with the allowing of proportionalia proportionalibus4 ,for when a man alloweth to every man alike1 the allowance he maketh1 will be in the same proportion1 in which are the numbers of men to whom they are made4 ,and this is it men mean by distributive justice1 and is properly termed equity4 ,the breach of the law is that which the ,greeks call 1 which is commonly rendered covetousness1 but seemeth to be more precisely expressed by the word encroaching4 ,sidenote3 ,another1 that those things which cannot be divided1 be used in common4 #c4 ,if there pass no other covenant1 the law of nature is1 ,that such things as cannot be divided1 be used in common1 proportionably to the numbers of them that are to use the same1 or without limitation1 when the quantity thereof sufficeth4 ,for first supposing the thing to be used in common1 not sufficient for them that are to use it without limitation1 if a few shall make more use thereof than the rest1 that equality is not observed1 which is required in the second section4 ,and this is to be understood1 as all the rest of the laws of nature1 without any other covenant antecedent3 for a man may have given away his right of common1 and so the case be altered4 ,sidenote3 ,another1 that things indivisible and incommunicable1 be divided by lot4 #d4 ,in those things which neither can be divided1 nor used in common1 the rule of nature must needs be one of these1 lot1 or alternate use3 for besides these two ways1 there can no other equality be imagined2 and for alternate use1 he that beginneth1 hath the advantage2 and to reduce that advantage to equality1 there is no other way but lot1 in things1 therefore indivisible and incommunicable1 it is the law of nature1 ,that the use be alternate1 or the advantage given away by lot2 because there is no other way of equality4 ,and equality is the law of nature4 ,sidenote3 ,natural lot1 primogeniture1 and first possession4 #e4 ,there be two sorts of lots2 one arbitrary1 made by men1 and commonly known by the names of lot1 chance1 hazard1 and the like2 and there is natural lot1 such as is primogeniture1 which is no more but the chance1 or lot1 of being first born1 which it seemeth they considered1 that call inheritance by the name of 1 which signifieth distribution by lot4 ,secondly1 prima occupatio1 first seizing1 or finding of a thing1 whereof no man made use before1 which for the most part also is merely chance4 ,sidenote3 ,that men submit to arbitration4 #f4 ,although men agree upon these laws of nature1 and endeavour to observe the same2 yet considering the passions of men1 that make it difficult to understand by what actions1 and circumstances of actions1 those laws are broken1 there must needs arise many great controversies about the interpretation thereof1 by which the peace must needs be dissolved1 and men return again to their former estate of hostility4 ,for the taking away of which controversies1 it is necessary that there be some common arbitrator and judge1 to whose sentence both the parties in the controversies ought to stand4 ,and therefore it is a law of nature1 ,that in every controversy1 the parties thereto ought mutually to agree upon an arbitrator1 whom they both trust2 and mutually to covenant to stand to the sentence he shall give therein4 ,for where every man is his own judge1 there properly is no judge at all2 as where every man carveth out his own right1 it hath the same effect1 as if there were no right at all3 and where is no judge1 there is no end of controversy3 and therefore the right of hostility remaineth4 ,sidenote3 ,of an arbitrator4 #g4 ,an arbitrator therefore1 or he that is judge1 is trusted by the parties to any controversy1 to determine the same by the declaration of his own judgment therein4 ,out of which followeth first1 that the judge ought not to be concerned in the controversy he endeth2 for in that case he is a party1 and ought by the same reason to be judged by another4 ,secondly1 that he maketh no covenant with either of the parties1 to pronounce sentence for the one1 more than for the other4 ,nor doth he covenant so much1 as that his sentence shall be just2 for that were to make the parties judges of the sentence1 whereby the controversy would remain still undecided4 ,nevertheless for the trust reposed in him1 and for the equality which the law of nature requireth him to consider in the parties1 he violateth that law1 if for favour1 or hatred to either party1 he give other sentence than he thinketh right4 ,and thirdly1 that no man ought to make himself judge in any controversy between others1 unless they consent and agree thereto4 ,sidenote3 ,that no man press his counsel upon any man against his will4 #h4 ,it is also the law of nature1 ,that no man obtrude or press his advice or counsel to any man1 that declareth himself unwilling to hear the same4 ,for seeing a man taketh counsel concerning what is good or hurt of himself only1 and not of his counsellor1 and that counsel is a voluntary action1 and therefore tendeth also to the good of the counsellor1 there may be often just cause to suspect the counsellor3 and though there be none1 yet seeing counsel unwillingly heard1 is a needless offence to him that is not willing to hear it1 and offences tend all to the breach of peace1 it is therefore against the law of nature to obtrude it4 ,sidenote3 ,how to know suddenly what is the law of nature4 #i4 ,a man that shall see these laws of nature set down and inferred with so many words1 and so much ado1 may think there is yet much more difficulty and subtlety required to acknowledge and do according to the said laws in every sudden occasion1 when a man hath but a little time to consider4 ,and while we consider man in most passions1 as of anger1 ambition1 covetousness1 vain glory1 and the like1 that tend to the excluding of natural equality1 it is true4 ,but without these passions1 there is an easy rule to know upon a sudden1 whether the action ,i be to do1 be against the law of nature1 or not4 ,and it is but this3 ,that a man imagine himself in place of the party with whom he hath to do1 and reciprocally him in his4 ,which is no more but a changing1 as it were1 of the scales4 ,for every man's passion weigheth heavy in his own scale1 but not in the scale of his neighbour4 ,and this rule is very well known and expressed in this old dictate1 ,quod tibi fieri non vis1 alteri ne feceris4 ,sidenote3 ,that the law of nature taketh place after security from others to observe the same4 #aj4 ,these laws of nature1 the sum whereof consisteth in forbidding us to be our own judges1 and our own carvers1 and in commanding us to accommodate one another1 in case they should be observed by some1 and not by others1 would make the observers but a prey to them that should neglect them1 leaving the good both without defence against the wicked1 and also with a charge to assist them3 which is against the scope of the said laws1 that are made only for the protection and defence of them that keep them4 ,reason therefore1 and the law of nature over and above all these particular laws1 doth dictate this law in general1 ,that those particular laws be so far observed1 as they subject us not to any incommodity1 that in our own judgments may arise1 by the neglect thereof in those towards whom we observe them2 and consequently requireth no more but the desire and constant intention to endeavour and be ready to observe them1 unless there be cause to the contrary in other men's refusal to observe them towards us4 ,the force therefore of the law of nature1 is not in foro externo1 till there be security for men to obey it1 but is always in foro interno1 wherein the action of obedience being unsafe1 the will and readiness to perform1 is taken for the performance4 ,sidenote3 ,the right of nature not to be taken away by custom1 nor the law of nature abrogated by any act4 #aa4 ,amongst the laws of nature1 customs and prescriptions are not numbered4 ,for whatsoever action is against reason1 though it be reiterated never so often1 or that there be never so many precedents thereof1 is still against reason1 and therefore not a law of nature1 but contrary to it4 ,but consent and covenant may so alter the cases1 which in the law of nature may be put1 by changing the circumstances1 that that which was reason before1 may afterwards be against it2 and yet is reason still the law4 ,for though every man be bound to allow equality to another1 yet if that other shall see cause to renounce the same1 and make himself inferior1 then1 if from thenceforth he consider him as inferior1 he breaketh not thereby that law of nature that commandeth to allow equality4 ,in sum1 a mans own consent may abridge him of the liberty which the law of nature leaveth him1 but custom not2 nor can either of them abrogate either these1 or or any other law of nature4 ,sidenote3 ,why the dictates of nature are called laws4 #ab4 ,and forasmuch as law1 to speak properly1 is a command1 and these dictates1 as they proceed from nature1 are not commands1 they are not therefore called laws1 in respect of nature1 but in respect of the author of nature1 ,god ,almighty4 ,sidenote3 ,whatsoever is against conscience in a man1 that is his own judge1 is against the law of nature4 #ac4 ,and seeing the laws of nature concern the conscience1 not he only breaketh them that doth any action contrary1 but also he whose action is conformable to them1 in case he think it contrary4 ,for though the action chance to be right1 yet in his judgment he despiseth the law4 ,sidenote3 ,of malum pn1 malum culp2 virtue and vice4 #ad4 ,every man by natural passion1 calleth that good which pleaseth him for the present1 or so far forth as he can foresee2 and in like manner1 that which displeaseth him1 evil4 ,and therefore he that foreseeth the whole way to his preservation1 which is the end that every one by nature aimeth at1 must also call it good1 and the contrary evil4 ,and this is that good and evil1 which not every man in passion calleth so1 but all men by reason4 ,and therefore the fulfilling of all these laws is good in reason1 and the breaking of them evil4 ,and so also the habit1 or disposition1 or intention to fulfil them good2 and the neglect of them evil4 ,and from hence cometh that distinction of malum pn1 and malum culp2 for malum pn is any pain or molestation of the mind whatsoever2 but malum culp is that action which is contrary to reason and the law of nature3 as also the habit of doing according to these and other laws of nature1 that tend to our preservation1 is that we call virtue2 and the habit of doing the contrary1 vice4 ,as for example1 justice is that habit by which we stand to covenants1 injustice the contrary vice2 equity that habit by which we allow equality of nature1 arrogancy the contrary vice2 gratitude the habit whereby we requite the benefit and trust of others1 ingratitude the contrary vice2 temperance the habit by which we abstain from all things that tend to our destruction1 intemperance the contrary vice2 prudence1 the same with virtue in general4 ,as for the common opinion1 that virtue consisteth in mediocrity1 and vice in extremes1 ,i see no ground for it1 nor can find any such mediocrity4 ,courage may be virtue1 when the daring is extreme1 if the cause be good1 and extreme fear no vice when the danger is extreme4 ,to give a man more than his due1 is no injustice1 though it be to give him less3 and in gifts it is not the sum that maketh liberality1 but the reason4 ,and so in all other virtues and vices4 ,i know that this doctrine of mediocrity is ,aristotle's1 but his opinions concerning virtue and vice1 are no other than those1 which were received then1 and are still by the generality of men unstudied1 and therefore not very likely to be accurate4 ,sidenote3 ,aptitude to society1 fulfilleth the law of nature4 #ae4 ,the sum of virtue is to be sociable with them that will be sociable1 and formidable to them that will not4 ,and the same is the sum of the law of nature3 for in being sociable1 the law of nature taketh place by way of peace and society2 and to be formidable1 is the law of nature in war1 where to be feared is a protection a man hath from his own power3 and as the former consisteth in actions of equity and justice1 the latter consisteth in actions of honour4 ,and equity1 justice1 and honour1 contain all virtues whatsoever4 ------- ,,chapter ,v4 ,a ,confirmation out of ,holy ,scripture of the principal points mentioned in the two last ,chapters concerning the ,law of ,nature4 ,sidenote3 ,confirmation out of ,scripture1 c4 #a4 ,the laws mentioned in the former chapters1 as they are called the laws of nature1 for that they are the dictates of natural reason1 and also moral laws1 because they concern the manners and conversation of men1 one towards another2 so are they also divine laws in respect of the author thereof1 ,god ,almighty2 and ought therefore to agree1 or at least1 not to be repugnant to the word of ,god revealed in ,holy ,scripture4 ,in this chapter therefore1 ,i shall produce such places of ,scripture1 as appear to be most consonant to the said laws4 #b4 ,and first1 the word of ,god seemeth to place the divine law in reason1 by all such texts as ascribe the same to the heart and understanding2 as ,psalm xl4 #h3 ,thy law is in my heart4 ,heb4 viii4 #aj3 ,after those days1 saith the ,lord1 ,i will put my laws in their mind3 and ,heb4 x4 #af1 the same4 ,psalm xxxvii4 #ca1 speaking of the righteous man1 he saith1 ,the law of ,god is in his heart4 ,psalm xix4 #g1 #h3 ,the law of ,god is perfect1 converting the soul4 ,it giveth wisdom to the simple1 and1 light unto the eyes4 ,jer4 xxxi4 #cc3 ,i will put my law in their inward parts1 and write it in their hearts4 ,and 7,john i47 the lawgiver himself1 ,god ,almighty1 is called by the name of 1 which is also called 7verse #d7 ,the light of men2 and 7verse #i7 ,the light which lighteth every man1 which cometh into the world4 ,all which are descriptions of natural reason4 #c4 ,and that the law divine1 for so much as is moral1 are those precepts which tend to peace1 seemeth to be much confirmed by such places of ,scripture as these3 ,rom4 iii4 #ag1 righteousness which is the fulfilling of the law1 is called ,the way of peace4 ,and ,psalm lxxxv4 #aj3 ,righteousness and peace shall kiss each other4 ,and ,matth4 v4 #i3 ,blessed are the peace-makers4 ,and ,heb4 vii4 #b1 ,melchisedec king of ,salem is interpreted king of righteousness1 and king of peace4 ,and 7verse #ba7 our ,saviour ,christ is said to be a priest for ever after the order of ,melchisedec3 out of which may be inferred1 that the doctrine of our ,saviour ,christ annexeth the fulfilling of the law to peace4 #d4 ,that the law of nature is unalterable1 is intimated by this1 that the priesthood of ,melchisedec is everlasting2 and by the words of our ,saviour1 7,matth4 v4 #ah73 ,heaven and earth shall pass away1 but one jot or tittle of the law shall not pass till all things be fulfilled4 #e4 ,that men ought to stand to their covenants1 is taught ,psalm xv1 where the question being asked 7verse #a71 ,lord who shall dwell in thy tabernacle1 c4 ,it is answered 7verse #d71 ,he that sweareth to his own hindrance1 and yet changeth not4 ,and that men ought to be gratified1 where no covenant passeth1 ,deut4 xxv4 #d3 ,thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn1 which ,st4 ,paul 7#a ,cor4 ix4 #i7 interpreteth not of oxen but of men4 #f4 ,that men content themselves with equality1 as it is the foundation of natural law1 so also is it of the second table1 of the divine law1 ,matth4 xxii4 #ci1 #dj3 ,thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself4 ,on these two laws depend the whole law and the prophets2 which is not so to be understood1 as that a man should study so much his neighbour's profit as his own1 or that he should divide his goods amongst his neighbours2 but that he should esteem his neighbour worthy all rights and privileges that himself enjoyeth2 and attribute unto him1 whatsoever he looketh should be attributed unto himself3 which is no more1 but that he should be humble1 meek1 and content with equality4 #g4 ,and that in distributing of right amongst equals1 that distribution is to be made according to the proportions of the numbers1 which is the giving of qualia qualibus1 et proportionalia proportionalibus2 we have ,numb4 xxvi4 #ec1 #ed1 the commandment of ,god to ,moses3 ,thou shalt divide the land according to the number of names2 to many thou shalt give more1 to few thou shalt give less1 to every one according to his number4 ,that decision by lot is a means of peace1 ,prov4 xviii4 #ah3 ,the lot causeth contention to cease1 and maketh partition among the mighty4 #h4 ,that the accommodation and forgiveness of one another1 which have before been put for laws of nature1 are also law divine1 there is no question4 ,for they are the essence of charity1 which is the scope of the whole law4 ,that we ought not to reproach1 or reprehend one another1 is the doctrine of our ,saviour1 ,matth4 vii4 #a3 ,judge not1 that ye be not judged3 7verse #c73 ,why seest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye1 and seest not the beam that is in thine own eye8 ,also the law that forbiddeth us to press our counsel upon others further than they admit1 is a divine law4 ,for after our charity and desire to rectify one another is rejected1 to press it further1 is to reprehend him1 and condemn him1 which is forbidden in the text last recited2 as also ,rom4 xiv4 #ab1 #ac3 ,every one of us shall give account of himself to ,god4 ,let us not therefore judge one another any more1 but use your judgment rather in this1 that no man put an occasion to fall1 or a stumbling block before his brother4 #i4 ,further1 the rule of men concerning the law of nature1 ,quod tibi fieri non vis1 alteri ne feceris1 is confirmed by the like1 ,matth4 vii4 #ab3 ,whatsoever therefore you would have men do unto you1 that do you unto them3 for this is the law and the prophets4 ,and ,rom4 ii4 #a3 ,in that thou judgest another1 thou condemnest thyself1 c4 #aj4 ,it is also manifest by the ,scriptures1 that these laws concern only the tribunal of our conscience2 and that the actions contrary to them1 shall be no further punished by ,god ,almighty1 than as they proceed from negligence1 or contempt4 ,and first1 that these laws are made to the conscience1 appeareth1 ,matth4 v4 #bj3 ,for ,i say unto you1 except your righteousness exceed the righteousness of the ,scribes and ,pharisees1 ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven4 ,now the ,pharisees were the most exact amongst the ,jews in the external performance2 they therefore must want the sincerity of conscience2 else could not our ,saviour have required a greater righteousness than theirs4 ,for the same reason our ,saviour ,christ saith 7,luke1 xviii4 #ad73 ,the publican departed from the temple justified1 rather than the ,pharisee4 ,and ,christ saith1 7,matth4 xi4 #cj73 ,my yoke is easy1 and my burthen light2 which proceedeth from this1 that ,christ required no more than our best endeavour4 ,and ,rom4 xiv4 #bc3 ,he that doubteth1 is condemned1 if he eat4 ,and in innumerable places both in the ,old and ,new ,testament1 ,god ,almighty declareth1 that he taketh the will for the deed1 both in good and evil actions4 ,by all which it plainly appears1 that the divine law is dictated to the conscience4 ,on the other side it is no less plain1 that how many and heinous actions soever a man commit through infirmity1 he shall nevertheless1 whensoever he shall condemn the same in his own conscience1 be freed from the punishments that to such actions otherwise belong4 ,for1 ,at what time soever a sinner doth repent him of his sins from the bottom of his heart1 ,i will put all his iniquities out of my remembrance1 saith the ,lord4 #aa4 ,concerning revenge1 which by the law of nature ought not to aim1 as ,i have said chapter ,,iii4 section #aj1 at present delight1 but future profit1 there is some difficulty made1 as if the same accorded not with the law divine1 by such as object the continuance of punishment after the day of judgment1 when there shall be no place1 neither for amendment1 nor for example4 ,this objection had been of some force1 if such punishment had been ordained after all sins were past2 but considering the punishment was instituted before sin1 it serveth to the benefit of mankind1 because it keepeth men in peaceable and virtuous conversation by the terror4 ,and therefore such revenge was directed to the future only4 #ab4 ,finally1 there is no law of natural reason1 that can be against the law divine3 for ,god ,almighty hath given reason to a man to be a light unto him4 ,and ,i hope it is no impiety to think1 that ,god ,almighty will require a strict account thereof1 at the day of judgment1 as of the instructions which we were to follow in our peregrination here1 notwithstanding the opposition and affronts of supernaturalists now a-days1 to rational and moral conversation4 ------- ,,chapter ,,vi4 #a4 ,that men1 notwithstanding these laws1 are still in the state of war1 till they have security one against another4 #b4 ,the law of nature in war1 is nothing but honour4 #c4 ,no security without the concord of many4 #d4 ,that concord of many cannot be maintained without power to keep them all in awe4 #e4 ,the cause why concord remaineth in a multitude of some irrational creatures1 and not of men4 #f4 ,that union is necessary for the maintaining of concord4 #g4 ,how union is made4 #h4 ,body politic defined4 #i4 ,corporation defined4 #aj4 ,sovereign and subject defined4 #aa4 ,two sorts of bodies politic1 patrimonial and commonwealth4 ,sidenote3 ,that men1 notwithstanding these laws1 are still in the state of war1 till they have security one against another4 #a4 ,in chapter ,,xii4 section #f1 of the ,treatise of ,human ,nature1 it hath been shewed1 that the opinions men have of the rewards and punishments which are to follow their actions1 are the causes that make and govern the will to those actions4 ,in this estate of man therefore1 wherein all men are equal1 and every man allowed to be his own judge1 the fears they have one of another are equal1 and every man's hopes consist in his own sleight and strength3 and consequently when any man by his natural passion1 is provoked to break these laws of nature1 there is no security in any other man of his own defence but anticipation4 ,and for this cause1 every man's right1 howsoever he be inclined to peace1 of doing whatsoever seemeth good in his own eyes1 remaineth with him still1 as the necessary means of his preservation4 ,and therefore till there be security amongst men for the keeping of the law of nature one towards another1 men are still in the estate of war1 and nothing is unlawful to any man that tendeth to his own safety or commodity3 and this safety and commodity consisteth in the mutual aid and help of one another1 whereby also followeth the mutual fear of one another4 ,sidenote3 ,the law of nature in war1 is nothing but honour4 #b4 ,it is a proverbial saying1 inter arma silent leges4 ,there is a little therefore to be said concerning the laws that men are to observe one towards another in time of war1 wherein every man's being and well-being is the rule of his actions4 ,yet thus much the law of nature commandeth in war1 that men satiate not the cruelty of their present passions1 whereby in their own conscience they foresee no benefit to come4 ,for that betrayeth not a necessity1 but a disposition of the mind to war1 which is against the law of nature4 ,and in old time we read1 that rapine was a trade of life1 wherein nevertheless many of them that used it1 did not only spare the lives of those they invaded1 but left them also such things1 as were necessary to preserve that life which they had given them2 as namely their oxen and instruments for tillage1 though they carried away all their other cattle and substance4 ,and as the rapine itself was warranted in the law of nature1 by the want of security otherwise to maintain themselves1 so the exercise of cruelty was forbidden by the same law of nature1 unless fear suggested anything to the contrary4 ,for nothing but fear can justify the taking away of another's life4 ,and because fear can hardly be made manifest1 but by some action dishonourable1 that bewrayeth the conscience of one's own weakness1 all men1 in whom the passion of courage or magnanimity hath been predominant1 have abstained from cruelty2 insomuch1 that though there be in war no law1 the breach whereof is injury1 yet there are in war those laws1 the breach whereof is dishonour4 ,in one word1 therefore1 the only law of actions in war1 is honour2 and the right of war1 providence4 ,sidenote3 ,no security without the concord of many4 #c4 ,and seeing natural aid is necessary for defence1 as mutual fear is necessary for peace1 we are to consider how great aids are required for such defence1 and for the causing of such mutual fear1 as men may not easily adventure on one another4 ,and first1 it is evident1 that the mutual aid of two or three men is of very little security4 ,for the odds on the other side1 of a man or two1 giveth sufficient encouragement to an assault4 ,and therefore before men have sufficient security in the help of one another1 their number must be so great1 that the odds of a few which the enemy may have1 be no certain and sensible advantage4 ,sidenote3 ,that concord of many cannot be maintained without power to keep them all in awe4 #d4 ,and supposing how great a number soever of men assembled together for their mutual defence1 yet shall not the effect follow1 unless they all direct their actions to one and the same end2 which direction to one and the same end is that which1 chap4 ,,xii4 sect4 #g1 is called consent4 ,this consent1 or concord1 amongst so many men1 though it may be made by the fear of a present invader1 or by the hope of a present conquest1 or booty1 and endure as long as that action endureth1 nevertheless1 by the diversity of judgments and passions in so many men contending naturally for honour and advantage one above another1 it is impossible1 not only that their consent to aid each other against an enemy1 but also that the peace should last between themselves1 without some mutual and common fear to rule them4 ,sidenote3 ,the cause why concord remaineth in a multitude of some irrational creatures1 and not of men4 #e4 ,but contrary hereunto may be objected1 the experience we have of certain living creatures irrational1 that nevertheless continually live in such good order and government for their common benefit1 and are so free from sedition and war amongst themselves1 that for peace1 profit1 and defence1 nothing more can be imaginable4 ,and the experience we have in this1 is in that little creature the bee1 which is therefore reckoned amongst animalia politica4 ,why therefore may not men1 that foresee the benefit of concord1 continually maintain the same without compulsion1 as well as they8 ,to which ,i answer1 that amongst other living creatures1 there is no question of precedence in their own species1 nor strife about honour1 or acknowledgment of one another's wisdom1 as there is amongst men1 from whence arise envy and hatred of one towards another1 and from thence sedition and war4 ,secondly1 those living creatures aim every one at peace and food common to them all2 men aim at dominion1 superiority1 and private wealth1 which are distinct in every man1 and breed contention4 ,thirdly1 those living creatures that are without reason1 have not learning enough to espy1 or to think they espy1 any defect in the government2 and therefore are contented therewith4 ,but in a multitude of men1 there are always some that think themselves wiser than the rest1 and strive to alter what they think amiss1 and divers of them strive to alter divers ways1 and that causeth war4 ,fourthly1 they want speech1 and are therefore unable to instigate one another to faction1 which men want not4 ,fifthly1 they have no conception of right and wrong1 but only of pleasure and pain1 and therefore also no censure of one another1 nor of their commander1 as long as they are themselves at ease2 whereas men that make themselves judges of right and wrong1 are then least at quiet1 when they are most at ease4 ,lastly1 natural concord1 such as is amongst those creatures1 is the work of ,god by the way of nature2 but concord amongst men is artificial1 and by way of covenant4 ,and therefore no wonder1 if such irrational creatures as govern themselves in multitude1 do it much more firmly than mankind1 that do it by arbitrary institution4 ,sidenote3 ,that union is necessary for the maintaining of concord4 #f4 ,it remaineth therefore still1 that consent1 by which ,i understand the concurrence of many men's wills to one action1 is not sufficient security for their common peace1 without the erection of some common power1 by the fear whereof they may be compelled both to keep the peace amongst themselves1 and to join their strengths together1 against a common enemy4 ,and that this may be done1 there is no way imaginable1 but only union1 which is defined1 chapter ,,xii4 section #h1 to be the involving1 or including the wills of many in the will of one man1 or in the will of the greatest part of any one number of men1 that is to say1 in the will of one man1 or of one council4 ,for a council is nothing else but an assembly of men deliberating concerning something common to them all4 ,sidenote3 ,how union is made4 #g4 ,the making of union consisteth in this1 that every man by covenant oblige himself to some one and the same man1 or to some one and the same council1 by them all named and determined1 to do those actions1 which the said man or council shall command them to do1 and to do no action1 which he or they shall forbid1 or command them not to do4 ,and further1 in case it be a council1 whose commands they covenant to obey1 that then also they covenant1 that every man shall hold that for the command of the whole council1 which is the command of the greater part of those men1 whereof such council consisteth4 ,and though the will of man being not voluntary1 but the beginning of voluntary actions1 is not subject to deliberation and covenant2 yet when a man covenanteth to subject his will to the command of another1 he obligeth himself to this1 that he resign his strength and means to him1 whom he covenanteth to obey4 ,and hereby he that is to command1 may by the use of all their means and strength1 be able by the terror thereof1 to frame the will of them all to unity and concord1 amongst themselves4 ,sidenote3 ,body politic defined4 #h4 ,this union so made1 is that which men call now a-days1 a body politic1 or civil society2 and the ,greeks call it 1 that is to say1 a city1 which may be defined to be a multitude of men1 united as one person1 by a common power1 for their common peace1 defence1 and benefit4 ,sidenote3 ,corporation defined4 #i4 ,and as this union into a city or body politic1 is instituted with common power over all the particular persons1 or members thereof1 to the common good of them all2 so also may there be amongst a multitude of those members instituted1 a subordinate union of certain men1 for certain common actions to be done by those men for some common benefit of theirs1 or of the whole city2 as for subordinate government1 for counsel1 for trade1 and the like4 ,and these subordinate bodies politic are usually called corporations2 and their power such over the particulars of their own society1 as the whole city1 whereof they are members1 have allowed them4 ,sidenote3 ,sovereign and subject defined4 #aj4 ,in all cities1 or bodies politic not subordinate1 but independent1 that one man1 or one council1 to whom the particular members have given that common power1 is called their sovereign1 and his power1 the sovereign power2 which consisteth in the power and the strength1 that every of the members have transferrred to him from themselves by covenant4 ,and because it is impossible for any man really to transfer his own strength to another1 or for that other to receive it2 it is to be understood1 that to transfer a man's power and strength1 is no more but to lay by1 or relinquish his own right of resisting him to whom he so transferreth it4 ,and every member of the body politic1 is called a subject1 to wit1 to the sovereign4 ,sidenote3 ,two sorts of bodies politic1 patrimonial and commonwealth4 #aa4 ,the cause in general1 which moveth a man to become subject to another1 is 7as ,i have said already7 the fear of not otherwise preserving himself4 ,and a man may subject himself to him that invadeth1 or may invade him1 for fear of him2 or men may join amongst themselves1 to subject themselves to such as they shall agree upon for fear of others4 ,and when many men subject themselves the former way1 there ariseth thence a body politic1 as it were naturally4 ,from whence proceedeth dominion1 paternal and despotic4 ,and when they subject themselves the other way1 by mutual agreement amongst many1 the body politic they make1 is for the most part1 called a commonwealth1 in distinction from the former1 though the name be the general name for them both4 ,and ,i shall speak in the first place of commonwealths1 and afterwards of bodies politic1 patrimonial1 and despotical4 ,,the ,,second ,,part4 ------- ,,chapter ,i4 #a4 ,introduction4 #b4 ,a multitude before their union1 c4 #c4 ,express consent of every particular1 c4 #d4 ,democratical1 aristocratical1 and monarchical union may be instituted for ever1 or1 c4 #e4 ,without security no private right relinquished4 #f4 ,covenants of government1 without power of coercion1 are no security4 #g4 ,power coercive1 c4 #h4 ,the sword of war1 c4 #i4 ,decision in all debates1 c4 annexed to the sword4 #aj4 ,laws civil1 c4 #aa4 ,appointment of magistrates1 c4 #ab4 ,sovereign power includeth impunity4 #ac4 ,a supposed commonwealth1 where laws are made first1 and the commonwealth after4 #ad4 ,the same refelled4 #ae4 ,mixed forms of government supposed in sovereignty4 #af4 ,that refelled4 #ag4 ,mixed government1 c4 #ah4 ,reason and experience to prove absolute sovereignty somewhere in all commonwealths4 #ai4 ,some principal1 c4 marks of sovereignty4 ,sidenote3 ,introduction4 #a4 ,that ,treatise of ,human ,nature1 which was formerly printed1 hath been wholly spent in the consideration of the natural power1 and the natural estate of man1 namely1 of his cognition and passions in the first eleven chapters1 and how from thence proceed his actions2 in the twelfth1 how men know one another's minds3 in the last1 in what estate men's passions set them4 ,in the first1 second1 third1 fourth1 and fifth chapters of the former ,part of this ,treatise is showed1 what estate they are directed unto by the dictates of reason1 that is to say1 what be the principal articles of the law of nature4 ,and lastly1 how a multitude of persons natural1 are united by covenants into one person civil1 or body politic4 ,in this part therefore shall be considered1 the nature of a body politic1 and the laws thereof1 otherwise called civil laws4 ,and whereas it hath been said in the last chapter1 and last section of the former part1 that there be two ways of erecting a body politic2 one by arbitrary institution of many men assembled together1 which is like a creation out of nothing by human wit2 the other by compulsion1 which is as it were a generation thereof out of natural force2 ,i shall first speak of such erection of a body politic1 as proceedeth from the assembly and consent of a multitude4 ,sidenote3 ,a multitude before their union1 c4 #b4 ,having in this place to consider1 a multitude of men about to unite themselves into a body politic1 for their security1 both against one another1 and against common enemies1 and that by covenants2 the knowledge of what covenants they must needs make1 dependeth on the knowledge of the persons1 and the knowledge of their end4 ,first1 for their persons they are many1 and 7as yet7 not one2 nor can any action done in a multitude of people met together1 be attributed to the multitude1 or truly called the action of the multitude1 unless every man's hand1 and every man's will1 7not so much as one excepted7 have concurred thereto4 ,for multitude1 though in their persons they run together1 yet they concur not always in their designs4 ,for even at that time when men are in tumult1 though they agree a number of them to one mischief1 and a number of them to another2 yet1 in the whole1 they are amongst themselves in the state of hostility1 and not of peace2 like the seditious ,jews besieged in ,jerusalem1 that could join against their enemies1 and fight amongst themselves4 ,whensoever therefore any man saith1 that a number of men hath done any act1 it is to be understood1 that every particular man in that number hath consented thereunto1 and not the greatest part only4 ,secondly1 though thus assembled with intention to unite themselves1 they are yet in that estate in which every man hath right to everything1 and consequently1 as hath been said1 chapter ,i4 section #aj1 in an estate of enjoying nothing4 ,and therefore meum and tuum hath no place amongst them4 ,sidenote3 ,express consent of every particular1 c4 #c4 ,the first thing therefore they are to do1 is expressly every man to consent to something1 by which they may come near to their ends1 which can be nothing else imaginable1 but this1 that they allow the wills of the major part of their whole number1 or the wills of the major part of some certain number of men by them determined and named2 or lastly1 the will of some one man1 to involve and be taken for the wills of every man4 ,and this done1 they are united1 and a body politic4 ,and if the major part of their whole number be supposed to involve the wills of all the particulars1 then are they said to be a democracy1 that is to say1 a government wherein the whole number1 or so many of them as please1 being assembled together1 are the sovereign1 and every particular man a subject4 ,if the major part of a certain number of men named or distinguished from the rest1 be supposed to involve the wills of every one of the particulars1 then are they said to be an oligarchy1 or aristocracy1 which two words signify the same thing1 together with the divers passions of those that use them4 ,for when the men that be in that office please1 they are called an aristocracy1 or otherwise an oligarchy1 wherein those1 the major part of which declare the wills of the whole multitude being assembled1 are the sovereign1 and every man severally a subject4 ,lastly1 if their consent be such1 that the will of one man1 whom they name1 shall stand for the wills of them all1 then is their government or union called a monarchy1 and that one man a sovereign1 and every of the rest a subject4 ,sidenote3 ,democratical1 aristocratical1 and monarchical union may be instituted for ever4 #d4 ,and those several sorts of unions1 governments1 and subjections of man's will1 may be understood to be made1 either absolutely1 that is to say1 for all future time1 or for a time limited only4 ,but forasmuch as we speak here of a body politic1 instituted for the perpetual benefit and defence of them that make it2 which therefore men desire should last for ever1 ,i will omit to speak of those that be temporary1 and consider of those that be for ever4 ,sidenote3 ,without security no private right relinquished4 #e4 ,the end for which one man giveth up1 and relinquisheth to another1 or others1 the right of protecting and defending himself by his own power1 is the security which he expecteth thereby1 of protection and defence from those to whom he doth so relinquish it2 and a man may then account himself in the estate of security1 when he can foresee no violence to be done unto him1 from which the doer may not be deterred by the power of that sovereign1 to whom they have every one subjected themselves3 and without that security1 there is no reason for a man to deprive himself of his own advantages1 and make himself a prey to others4 ,and therefore when there is not such a sovereign power erected1 as may afford this security1 it is to be understood1 that every man's right of doing whatsoever seemeth good in his own eyes1 remaineth still with him2 and contrariwise1 where any subject hath right by his own judgment and discretion1 to make use of his force1 it is to be understood1 that every man hath the like1 and consequently1 that there is no commonwealth at all established4 ,how far therefore in the making of a commonwealth1 man subjecteth his will to the power of others1 must appear from the end1 namely1 security4 ,for whatsoever is necessary to be by covenant transferred1 for the attaining thereof1 so much is transferred1 or else every man is in his natural liberty to secure himself4 ,sidenote3 ,covenants of government without power of coercion1 are no security4 #f4 ,covenants agreed upon by every man assembled for the making of a commonwealth1 and put in writing without erecting of a power of coercion1 are no reasonable security for any of them that so covenant1 nor are to be called laws1 and leave men still in the estate of nature and hostility4 ,for seeing the wills of most men are governed only by fear1 and where there is no power of coercion1 there is no fear1 the wills of most men will follow their passions of covetousness1 lust1 anger1 and the like1 to the breaking of those covenants1 whereby the rest1 also1 who otherwise would keep them1 are set at liberty1 and have no law1 but from themselves4 ,sidenote3 ,power coercive1 c4 #g4 ,this power of coercion1 as hath been said1 chap4 ,,ii4 sect4 #c1 of the former part1 consisteth in the transferring of every man's right of resistance against him1 to whom he hath transferred the power of coercion4 ,it followeth therefore1 that no man in any commonwealth whatsoever1 hath right to resist him1 or them1 to whom they have transferred this power coercive1 or 7as men use to call it7 the sword of justice1 supposing the not-resistance possible4 ,for1 ,part ,i4 chapter ,,ii4 sect4 #ah1 covenants bind but to the utmost of our endeavour4 ,sidenote3 ,the sword of war1 c4 #h4 ,and forasmuch as they who are amongst themselves in security1 by the means of this sword of justice1 that keeps them all in awe1 are nevertheless in danger of enemies from without1 if there be not some means found1 to unite their strengths and natural forces1 in the resistance of such enemies1 their peace amongst themselves is but in vain4 ,and therefore it is to be understood as a covenant of every member to contribute their several forces for the defence of the whole1 whereby to make one power as sufficient1 as is possible for their defence4 ,now seeing that every man hath already transferred the use of his strength to him1 or them1 that have the sword of justice1 it followeth1 that the power of defence1 that is to say1 the sword of war1 be in the same hands wherein is the sword of justice2 and consequently those two swords are but one1 and that inseparably and essentially annexed to the sovereign power4 ,sidenote3 ,decision in all debates1 c4 annexed to the sword4 #i4 ,moreover1 seeing to have the right of the sword1 is nothing else but to have the use thereof depending only on the judgment and discretion of him or them that have it1 it followeth1 that the power of indenture in all controversies1 wherein the sword of justice is to be used2 and in all deliberations concerning war1 wherein the use of that sword is required1 the right of resolving and determining what is to be done1 belong to the same sovereign4 ,sidenote3 ,laws civil1 c4 #aj4 ,further1 considering it is no less1 but much more necessary to prevent violence and rapine1 than to punish the same when it is committed1 and all violence proceedeth from controversies that arise between men concerning meum and tuum1 right and wrong1 good and bad1 and the like1 which men use every one to measure by their own judgments1 it belongeth also to the judgment of the same sovereign power1 to set forth and make known the common measure by which every man is to know what is his1 and what another's2 what is good1 and what bad1 and what he ought to do1 and what not1 and to command the same to be observed4 ,and these measures of the actions of the subjects are those1 which men call laws politic1 or civil3 the making whereof1 must of right belong to him that hath the power of the sword1 by which men are compelled to observe them2 for otherwise they should be made in vain4 ,sidenote3 ,appointment of magistrates1 c4 #aa4 ,furthermore1 seeing it is impossible that any one man that hath such sovereign power1 can be able1 in person1 to hear and determine all controversies1 to be present at all deliberations concerning common good1 and to execute and perform all those common actions that belong thereunto1 whereby there will be necessity of magistrates and ministers of public affairs2 it is consequent1 that the appointment1 nomination1 and limitation of the same be understood1 as an inseparable part of the same sovereignty1 to which the sum of all judicature1 and execution1 hath been already annexed4 ,sidenote3 ,sovereign power includeth impunity4 #ab4 ,and forasmuch1 as the right to use the forces of every particular member1 is transferred from themselves1 to their sovereign1 a man will easily fall upon this conclusion of himself1 that to sovereign power1 whatsoever it doth1 there belongeth impunity4 ,sidenote3 ,a supposed commonwealth where laws are made first1 and the commonwealth after4 #ac4 ,the sum of these rights of sovereignty2 namely1 the absolute use of the sword in peace and war1 the making and abrogating of laws1 supreme judicature1 and decision1 in all debates judicial and deliberative1 the nomination of all magistrates and ministers1 with other rights contained in the same1 make the sovereign power no less absolute in the commonwealth1 than before commonwealth every man was absolute in himself1 to do1 or not to do1 what he thought good2 which men1 that have not had the experience of that miserable estate1 to which men are reduced by long war1 think so hard a condition1 that they cannot easily acknowledge such covenants1 and subjection on their parts1 as are here set down1 to have been ever necessary to their peace4 ,and therefore some have imagined1 that a commonwealth may be constituted in such manner1 as the sovereign power may be so limited1 and moderated1 as they shall think fit themselves4 ,for example3 they suppose a multitude of men to have agreed upon certain articles1 which they presently call laws1 declaring how they will be governed1 and that done1 to agree further upon some man1 or number of men1 to see the same articles performed1 and put in execution2 and to enable him1 or them1 thereunto1 they allot unto them a provision limited1 as of certain lands1 taxes1 penalties1 and the like1 than which1 if mispent1 they shall have no more1 without a new consent of the same men that allowed the former4 ,and thus they think they have made a commonwealth1 in which it is unlawful for any private man to make use of his own sword for his security2 wherein they deceive themselves4 ,sidenote3 ,the same refelled4 #ad4 ,for first1 if to the revenue1 it did necessarily follow1 that there might be forces raised and procured at the will of him that hath such revenue2 yet since the revenue is limited1 so must also the forces3 but limited forces against the power of an enemy1 which we cannot limit1 are unsufficient4 ,whensoever therefore there happeneth an invasion greater than those forces are able to resist1 and there be no other right to levy more1 then is every man1 by necessity of nature1 allowed to make the best provision he can for himself2 and thus is the private sword1 and the estate of war again reduced4 ,but seeing revenue1 without the right of commanding men1 is of no use1 neither in peace1 nor war1 it is necessary to be supposed1 that he that hath the administration of those articles1 which are in the former section supposed1 must have also right to make use of the strengths of particular men4 ,and what reason soever giveth him that right over any one1 giveth him the same over all4 ,and then is his right absolute4 ,for he that hath right to all their forces1 hath right to dispose of the same4 ,again1 supposing those limited forces and revenue1 either by the necessary1 or negligent use of them1 to fail1 and that for a supply1 the same multitude be again to be assembled1 who shall have power to assemble them1 that is to compel them to come together8 ,if he that demandeth the supply hath that right1 to wit1 the right to compel them all1 then is his sovereignty absolute2 if not1 then is every particular man at liberty to come or not2 to frame a new commonwealth1 or not1 and so the right of the private sword returneth4 ,but suppose them willingly1 and of their own accord1 assembled to consider of this supply1 if now it be still in their choice1 whether they shall give it1 or not1 it is also in their choice1 whether the commonwealth shall stand or not4 ,and therefore there lieth not upon any of them any civil obligation that may hinder them from using force1 in case they think it tend to their defence4 ,this device therefore of them that will make civil laws first1 and then a civil body afterwards1 7as if policy made a body politic1 and not a body politic made policy7 is of no effect4 ,sidenote3 ,mixed forms of government supposed in sovereignty4 #ae4 ,others1 to avoid the hard condition1 as they take it1 of absolute subjection1 which1 in hatred thereto1 they also call slavery1 have devised a government1 as they think1 mixed of the three sorts of sovereignty4 ,as for example3 they suppose the power of making laws1 given to some great assembly democratical1 the power of judicature to some other assembly1 and the administration of the laws to a third1 or to some one man2 and this policy they call mixed monarchy1 or mixed aristocracy1 or mixed democracy1 according as any of these three sorts do most visibly predominate4 ,and in this estate of government1 they think the use of the private sword excluded4 ,sidenote3 ,that refelled4 #af4 ,and supposing it were so1 how were this condition1 which they call slavery1 eased thereby4 ,for in this estate they would have no man allowed1 either to be his own judge1 or own carver1 or to make any laws unto himself2 and as long as these three agree1 they are as absolutely subject to them1 as is a child to the father1 or a slave to the master1 in the state of nature4 ,the ease therefore of this subjection1 must consist in the disagreement of those amongst whom they have distributed the rights of sovereign power4 ,but the same disagreement is war4 ,the division therefore of the sovereignty1 either worketh no effect to the taking away of simple subjection1 or introduceth war1 wherein the private sword hath place again4 ,but the truth is1 as hath been already showed in the seventh1 eighth1 ninth1 tenth1 eleventh1 and twelfth precedent sections1 the sovereignty is indivisible4 ,and that seeming mixture of several kinds of government1 is not mixture of the things themselves1 but confusion in our understandings1 that cannot find out readily to whom we have subjected ourselves4 ,sidenote3 ,mixed government1 c4 #ag4 ,but though the sovereignty be not mixed1 but be always either simple democracy1 or simple aristocracy1 or pure monarchy1 nevertheless in the administration thereof1 all those sorts of government may have place subordinate4 ,for suppose the sovereign power be democracy1 as it was sometimes in ,rome1 yet at the same time they may have a council aristocratical1 such as was the senate2 and at the same time they may have a subordinate monarch1 such as was their dictator1 who had1 for a time1 the exercise of the whole sovereignty1 and such as are all generals in war4 ,so also in monarchy there may be a council aristocratical of men1 chosen by the monarch2 or democratical of men1 chosen by the consent1 the monarch permitting1 of all the particular men of the commonwealth4 ,and this mixture is it that imposeth1 as if it were the mixture of sovereignty4 ,as if a man should think1 because the great council of ,venice doth nothing ordinarily but choose magistrates1 ministers of state1 captains1 and governors of towns1 ambassadors1 counsellors1 and the like1 that therefore their part of the sovereignty is only choosing of magistrates2 and that the making of war1 and peace1 and laws1 were not theirs1 but the part of such counsellors as they appointed thereto3 whereas it is the part of these to do it but subordinately1 the supreme authority thereof being in the great council that choose them4 ,sidenote3 ,reason and experience to prove absolute sovereignty somewhere in all commonwealths4 #ah4 ,and as reason teacheth us1 that a man1 considered out of subjection to laws1 and out of all covenants obligatory to others1 is free to do and undo1 and deliberate as long as he listeth1 every member being obedient to the will of the whole man1 that liberty being nothing else but his natural power1 without which he is no better than an inanimate creature1 not able to help himself2 so also it teacheth us1 that a body politic1 of what kind soever1 not subject to another1 nor obliged by covenants1 ought to be free1 and in all actions to be assisted by the members1 every one in their place1 or at least1 not resisted by them4 ,for otherwise1 the power of a body politic1 the essence whereof is the not-resistance of the members1 is none1 nor a body politic of any benefit4 ,and the same is confirmed by the use of all nations and commonwealths1 wherein that man or council1 which is virtually the whole1 hath any absolute power over every particular member2 or what nation or commonwealth is there1 that hath not power and right to constitute a general in their wars8 ,but the power of a general is absolute2 and consequently there was absolute power in the commonwealth1 from whom it was derived4 ,for no person1 natural or civil1 can transfer unto another more power than himself hath4 ,sidenote3 ,some principal1 c4 marks of sovereignty4 #ai4 ,in every commonwealth1 where particular men are deprived of their right to protect themselves1 there resideth an absolute sovereignty1 as ,i have already showed4 ,but in what man1 or in what assembly of men the same is placed1 is not so manifest1 as not to need some marks1 whereby it may be discerned4 ,and first1 it is an infallible mark of absolute sovereignty in a man1 or in an assembly of men1 if there be no right in any other person1 natural or civil1 to punish that man1 or to dissolve that assembly4 ,for he that cannot of right be punished1 cannot of right be resisted2 and he that cannot of right be resisted1 hath coercive power over all the rest1 and thereby can frame and govern their actions at his pleasure1 which is absolute sovereignty4 ,contrariwise1 he that in a commonwealth is punishable by any1 or that assembly that is dissolvable1 is not sovereign4 ,for a greater power is always required to punish and dissolve1 than theirs who are punished or dissolved2 and that power cannot be called sovereign1 than which there is a greater4 ,secondly1 that man or assembly1 that by their own right not derived from the present right of any other1 may make laws1 or abrogate them at his or their pleasure1 have the sovereignty absolute4 ,for seeing the laws they make1 are supposed to be made by right1 the members of the commonwealth1 to whom they are made1 are obliged to obey them1 and consequently not resist the execution of them2 which not-resistance1 maketh the power absolute of him that ordaineth them4 ,it is likewise a mark of this sovereignty1 to have the right original of appointing magistrates1 judges1 counsellors1 and ministers of state4 ,for without that power1 no act of sovereignty1 or government1 can be performed4 ,lastly1 and generally1 whosoever by his own authority independent1 can do any act1 which another of the same commonwealth may not1 must needs be understood to have the sovereign power4 ,for by nature men have equal right4 ,this inequality therefore must proceed from the power of the commonwealth4 ,he therefore that doth any act lawfully by his own authority1 which another may not1 doth it by the power of the commonwealth in himself1 which is absolute sovereignty4 ------- ,,chapter ,,ii4 #a4 ,democracy precedeth all other1 c4 #b44 ,the sovereign people covenanteth not with the subjects4 #c4 ,the sovereign1 c4 cannot1 c4 do injury1 c4 #d4 ,the faults of the sovereign people1 c4 #e4 ,democracy1 c4 an aristocracy of orators4 #f4 ,aristocracy how made4 #g4 ,the body of the optimates not properly said to injure the subjects4 #h4 ,the election of the optimates1 c4 #i4 ,an elective king1 c4 #aj4 ,a conditional king1 c4 #aa4 ,the word people equivocal4 #ab4 ,obedience discharged by release1 c4 #ac4 ,how such releases are to be understood4 #ad4 ,obedience discharged by exile3 #ae4 ,by conquest3 #af4 ,by ignorance of the right of succession4 ,sidenote3 ,democracy precedeth all other1 c4 #a4 ,having spoken in general concerning instituted policy in the former chapter1 ,i come in this1 to speak of the sorts thereof in special1 how every of them is instituted4 ,the first in order of time of these three sorts1 is democracy2 and it must be so of necessity1 because an aristocracy and a monarchy1 require nomination of persons agreed upon1 which agreement in a great multitude of men1 must consist in the consent of the major part2 and where the votes of the major part involve the votes of the rest1 there is actually a democracy4 ,sidenote3 ,the sovereign people covenanteth not with the subjects4 #b4 ,in the making of a democracy1 there passeth no covenant between the sovereign1 and any subject4 ,for while the democracy is a making1 there is no sovereign with whom to contract4 ,for it cannot be imagined1 that the multitude should contract with itself1 or with any one man1 or number of men1 parcel of itself1 to make itself sovereign2 nor that a multitude1 considered as one aggregate1 can give itself anything which before it had not4 ,seeing then that sovereignty democratical is not conferred by the covenant of any multitude1 which supposeth union and sovereignty already made1 it resteth1 that the same be conferred by the particular covenants of every several man2 that is to say1 every man with every man1 for and in consideration of the benefit of his own peace and defence1 covenanteth to stand to and obey whatsoever the major part of their whole number1 or the major part of such a number of them1 as shall be pleased to assemble at a certain time and place1 shall determine and command4 ,and this is that which giveth being to a democracy1 wherein the sovereign assembly was called of the ,greeks1 by the name of ,demus1 that is1 the people1 from whence cometh democracy4 ,so that1 where to the supreme and independent court1 every man may come that will1 and give his vote1 there the sovereign is called the people4 ,sidenote3 ,the sovereign1 c4 cannot1 c4 do injury1 c4 #c4 ,out of this that hath been said1 may readily be drawn1 that whatsoever the people doth to any one particular member or subject of the commonwealth1 the same by him ought not to be styled injury4 ,for first1 injury1 by the definition1 ,part ,i4 chap4 ,,iii4 sect4 #b1 is breach of covenant2 but covenants1 as hath been said in the precedent section1 there passed none from the people to any private man2 and consequently it1 to wit1 the people1 can do him no injury4 ,secondly1 how unjust soever the action be1 that this sovereign demus shall do1 is done by the will of every particular man subject to him1 who are therefore guilty of the same4 ,if therefore they style it injury1 they but accuse themselves4 ,and it is against reason for the same man1 both to do and complain2 implying this contradiction1 that whereas he first ratified the people's acts in general1 he now disalloweth the same of them in particular4 ,it is therefore said truly1 volenti non fit injuria4 ,nevertheless nothing doth hinder1 but that divers actions done by the people1 may be unjust before ,god ,almighty1 as breaches of the laws of nature4 ,sidenote3 ,the faults of the sovereign people1 c4 #d4 ,and when it happeneth1 that the people by plurality of voices1 decree or command anything contrary to the law of ,god or nature1 though the decree and command be the act of every man1 not only present in the assembly1 but also absent from it2 yet is not the injustice of the decree1 the injustice of every particular man1 but only of those men1 by whose express suffrages1 the decree or command was passed4 ,for a body politic1 as it is a fictitious body1 so are the faculties and will thereof fictitious also4 ,but to make a particular man unjust1 which consisteth of a body and soul natural1 there is required a natural and very will4 ,sidenote3 ,democracy1 c4 an aristocracy of orators4 #e4 ,in all democracies1 though the right of sovereignty be in the assembly1 which is virtually the whole body2 yet the use thereof is always in one1 or a few particular men4 ,for in such great assemblies1 as those must be1 whereinto every man may enter at his pleasure1 there is no means any ways to deliberate and give counsel what to do1 but by long and set orations1 whereby to every man there is more or less hope given1 to incline and sway the assembly to their own ends4 ,in a multitude of speakers therefore1 where always either one is eminent alone1 or a few being equal amongst themselves1 are eminent above the rest1 that one or few must of necessity sway the whole4 ,insomuch1 that a democracy1 in effect1 is no more than an aristocracy of orators1 interrupted sometimes with the temporary monarchy of one orator4 ,sidenote3 ,aristocracy how made4 #f4 ,and seeing a democracy is by institution1 the beginning both of aristocracy and monarchy1 we are to consider next1 how aristocracy is derived from it4 ,when the particular members of the commonwealth growing weary of attendance at public courts1 as dwelling far off1 or being attentive to their private businesses1 and withal1 displeased with the government of the people1 assemble themselves to make an aristocracy1 there is no more required to the making thereof but putting to the question one by one1 the names of such men as it shall consist of1 and assenting to their election2 and by plurality of vote1 to transfer that power1 which before the people had1 to the number of men so named and chosen4 ,sidenote3 ,the body of the optimates not properly said to injure the subjects4 #g4 ,and from this manner of erecting an aristocracy1 it is manifest1 that the few1 or optimates1 have entered into no covenant with any of the particular members of the commonwealth1 whereof they are sovereign2 and consequently cannot do any thing to any private man1 that can be called injury to him1 howsoever their act be wicked before ,almighty ,god1 according to that which hath been said before1 section #c4 ,further1 it is impossible1 that the people1 as one body politic1 should covenant with the aristocracy or optimates1 on whom they intend to transfer their sovereignty4 ,for no sooner is the aristocracy erected1 but the democracy is annihilated1 and the covenants made unto them void4 ,sidenote3 ,the election of the optimates1 c4 #h4 ,in all aristocracies1 the admission of such1 as are from time to time to have vote in the sovereign assembly1 dependeth on the will and decree of the present optimates4 ,for they being the sovereign1 have the nomination1 by the eleventh section of the former chapter1 of all magistrates1 ministers1 and counsellors of state whatsoever1 and may therefore choose either to make them elective1 or hereditary1 at their pleasure4 ,sidenote3 ,an elective king1 c4 #i4 ,out of the same democracy1 the institution of a political monarch proceedeth in the same manner1 as did the institution of the aristocracy1 to wit1 by a decree of the sovereign people1 to pass the sovereignty to one man named and approved by plurality of suffrage4 ,and if this sovereignty be truly and indeed transferred1 the estate or commonwealth is an absolute monarchy1 wherein the monarch is at liberty1 to dispose as well of the succession1 as of the possession1 and not an elective kingdom4 ,for suppose a decree be made first in this manner1 that such a one shall have the sovereignty for his life1 and that afterward they will choose a-new4 ,in this case1 the power of the people is dissolved1 or not2 if dissolved1 then after the death of him that is chosen1 there is no man bound to stand to the decrees of them that shall1 as private men1 run together to make a new election2 and consequently1 if there be any man1 who by the advantage of the reign of him that is dead1 hath strength enough to hold the multitude in peace and obedience1 he may lawfully1 or rather is by the law of nature obliged so to do3 if this power of the people were not dissolved at the choosing of their king for life1 then is the people sovereign still1 and the king a minister thereof only1 but so1 as to put the whole sovereignty in execution2 a great minister1 but no otherwise for his time1 than a dictator was in ,rome4 ,in this case1 at the death of him that was chosen1 they that meet for a new election1 have no new1 but their old authority for the same4 ,for they were the sovereign all the time1 as appeareth by the acts of those elective kings1 that have procured from the people1 that their children might succeed them4 ,for it is to be understood1 when a man receiveth any thing from the authority of the people1 he receiveth it not from the people his subjects1 but from the people his sovereign4 ,and further1 though in the election of a king for his life1 the people grant him the exercise of their sovereignty for that time2 yet if they see cause1 they may recall the same before the time4 ,as a prince that conferreth an office for life1 may nevertheless1 upon suspicion of abuse thereof1 recall it at his pleasure2 inasmuch as offices that require labour and care1 are understood to pass from him that giveth them1 as onera1 burthens1 to them that have them2 the recalling whereof are therefore not injury1 but favour4 ,nevertheless1 if in making an elective king1 with intention to reserve the sovereignty1 they reserve not a power at certain known and determined times and places to assemble themselves1 the reservation of their sovereignty is of no effect1 inasmuch as no man is bound to stand to the decrees and determinations of those that assemble themselves without the sovereign authority4 ,sidenote3 ,a conditional king1 c4 #aj4 ,in the former section is showed1 that elective kings that exercise their sovereignty for a time1 which determines with their life1 either are subjects1 or not sovereigns2 and that it is1 when the people in election of them1 reserve unto themselves the right of assembling at certain times and places limited and made known2 or else absolute sovereigns1 to dispose of the succession at their pleasure1 and that is1 when the people in their election have declared no time nor place of their meeting1 or have left it to the power of the elected king1 to assemble and dissolve them at such times1 as he himself shall think good4 ,there is another kind of limitation of time1 to him that shall be elected to use the sovereign power1 which whether it hath been practised anywhere1 or not1 ,i know not1 but it may be imagined1 and hath been objected against the rigour of sovereign power2 and it is this1 that the people transfer their sovereignty upon conditions4 ,as for example1 for so long as he shall observe such and such laws1 as they then prescribe him4 ,and here as before in elected kings1 the question is to be made1 whether in the electing of such a sovereign1 they reserved to themselves a right of assembling at times and places limited and known1 or not2 if not1 then is the sovereignty of the people dissolved1 and they have neither power to judge of the breach of the conditions given him1 nor to command any forces for the deposing of him1 whom on that condition they had set up1 but are in the estate of war amongst themselves1 as they were before they made themselves a democracy3 and consequently1 if he that is elected by the advantage of the possession he hath of the public means1 be able to compel them to unity and obedience1 he hath not only the right of nature to warrant him1 but the law of nature to oblige him thereunto4 ,but if in electing him1 they reserved to themselves a right of assembling1 and appointed certain times and places to that purpose1 then are they sovereign still1 and may call their conditional king to account at their pleasure1 and deprive him of his government1 if they judge he deserve it1 either by breach of the condition set him1 or otherwise4 ,for the sovereign power can by no covenant with a subject be bound to continue him in the charge he undergoeth by their command1 as a burden imposed not particularly for his good1 but for the good of the sovereign people4 ,sidenote3 ,the word people equivocal #aa4 ,the controversies that arise concerning the right of the people1 proceed from the equivocation of the word4 ,for the word people hath a double signification4 ,in one sense it signifieth only a number of men1 distinguished by the place of their habitation2 as the people of ,england1 or the people of ,france1 which is no more1 but the multitude of those particular persons that inhabit those regions1 without consideration of any contracts or covenants amongst them1 by which any one of them is obliged to the rest4 ,in another sense1 it signifieth a person civil1 that is to say1 either one man1 or one council1 in the will whereof1 is included and involved the will of every one in particular4 ,as for example1 in this latter sense1 the lower house of parliament is all the commons1 as long as they sit there with authority and right thereto2 but after they be dissolved1 though they remain1 they be no more the people1 nor the commons1 but only the aggregate1 or multitude of the particular men there sitting1 how well soever they agree1 or concur1 in opinions amongst themselves2 whereupon1 they that do not distinguish between these two significations1 do usually attribute such rights to a dissolved multitude1 as belong only to the people virtually contained in the body of the commonwealth or sovereignty4 ,and when a great number of their own authority flock together in any nation1 they usually give them the name of the whole nation4 ,in which sense they say the people rebelleth1 or the people demandeth1 when it is no more than a dissolved multitude1 of which though any one man may be said to demand or have right to something1 yet the heap1 or multitude1 cannot be said to demand or have right to anything4 ,for where every man hath his right distinct1 there is nothing left for the multitude to have right unto3 and when the particulars say1 this is mine1 this is thine1 and this is his1 and have shared all amongst them1 there can be nothing whereof the multitude can say1 this is mine2 nor are they one body1 as behoveth them to be1 that demand anything under the name of mine1 or his3 and when they say ours1 every man is understood to pretend in several1 and not the multitude4 ,on the other side1 when the multitude is united into a body politic1 and thereby are a people in the other signification1 and their wills virtually in the sovereign1 there the rights and demands of the particulars do cease2 and he or they that have the sovereign power1 doth for them all1 demand1 and vindicate under the name of his1 that which before they called in the plural1 theirs4 ,sidenote3 ,obedience discharged by release1 c4 #ab4 ,we have seen how particular men enter into subjection1 by transferring their rights2 it followeth to consider1 how such subjection may be discharged4 ,and first1 if he or they that have the sovereign power1 shall relinquish the same voluntarily1 there is no doubt1 but every man is again at liberty to obey1 or not4 ,likewise1 if he or they retaining the sovereignty over the rest1 do nevertheless exempt some one or more1 from their subjection1 every man so exempted1 is discharged4 ,for he or they to whom any man is obliged1 hath the power to release him4 ,sidenote3 ,how such releases are to be understood4 #ac4 ,and here it is to be understood1 that when he or they that have the sovereign power1 give such exemption1 or privilege1 to a subject1 as is not separable from the sovereignty1 and nevertheless directly retaineth the sovereign power1 not knowing the consequence of the privilege they grant1 the person or persons exempted or privileged1 are not thereby released4 ,for in contradictory significations of the will 7,human ,nature1 chap4 ,,xiii4 sect4 #i71 that which is directly signified1 is to be understood for the will1 before that which is drawn from it by consequence4 ,sidenote3 ,obedience discharged by exile4 #ad4 ,also exile perpetual1 is a release of subjection1 forasmuch1 as being out of the protection of the sovereignty that expelled him1 he hath no means of subsisting but from himself4 ,now every man may lawfully defend himself1 that hath no other defence2 else there had been no necessity that any man should enter into voluntary subjection1 as they do in commonwealths4 ,sidenote3 ,by conquest4 #ae4 ,likewise a man is released of his subjection by conquest4 ,for when it cometh to pass1 that the power of a commonwealth is overthrown1 and any particular man thereby lying under the sword of his enemy1 yieldeth himself captive1 he is thereby bound to serve him that taketh him1 and consequently discharged of his obligation to the former4 ,for no man can serve two masters4 ,sidenote3 ,by ignorance of the right of succession4 #af4 ,lastly1 ignorance of the succession dischargeth obedience4 ,for no man can be understood to be obliged to obey he knoweth not whom4 ,,chapter ,,iii4 #a1 #b4 ,titles to dominion3 master and servant1 c4 #c4 ,chains and other1 c4 ,bonds1 c4 ,slave defined4 #d4 ,servants have no property against their lord1 c4 #e4 ,the master hath right to alienate his servant4 #f4 ,the servant of the servant1 c4 #g4 ,how servitude is discharged4 #h4 ,the middle lord1 c4 #i4 ,the title of man1 c4 over beasts4 ,sidenote3 ,titles to dominion2 master and servant1 c4 #a4 ,having set forth in the two preceding chapters1 the nature of a commonwealth institutive by the consent of many men together1 ,i come now to speak of dominion1 or a body politic by acquisition1 which is commonly called a patrimonial kingdom4 ,but before ,i enter thereinto1 it is necessary to make known upon what title one man may acquire right1 that is to say1 property or dominion1 over the person of another4 ,for when one man hath dominion over another1 there is a little kingdom4 ,and to be a king by acquisition1 is nothing else1 but to have acquired a right or dominion over many4 #b4 ,considering men therefore again in the state of nature1 without covenants or subjection one to another1 as if they were but even now all at once created male and female1 there be three titles only1 by which one man may have right and dominion over another2 whereof two may take place presently1 and those are1 voluntary offer of subjection1 and yielding by compulsion3 the third is to take place1 upon the supposition of children begotten amongst them4 ,concerning the first of these three titles1 it is handled before in the two last chapters4 ,for from thence cometh the right of sovereigns over their subjects in a commonwealth institutive4 ,concerning the second title1 which is when a man submitteth to an assailant for fear of death1 thereby accrueth a right of dominion4 ,for where every man1 as it happeneth in this case1 hath right to all things1 there needs no more for the making of the said right effectual1 but a covenant from him that is overcome1 not to resist him that overcometh4 ,and thus cometh the victor to have right of absolute dominion over the conquered4 ,by which there is presently constituted a little body politic1 which consisteth of two persons1 the one sovereign1 which is called the master1 or lord2 the other subject1 which is called the servant4 ,and when a man hath acquired right over a number of servants so considerable1 as they cannot by their neighbours be securely invaded1 this body politic is a kingdom despotical4 ,sidenote3 ,chains and other1 c4 bonds1 c4 slave defined4 #c4 ,and it is to be understood1 that when a servant taken in the wars1 is kept bound in natural bonds1 as chains1 and the like1 or in prison1 there hath passed no covenant from the servant to his master4 ,for those natural bonds have no need of strengthening by the verbal bonds of covenant1 and they show that the servant is not trusted4 ,but covenant1 7,part ,i4 chapter ,,ii4 section #i17 supposeth trust4 ,there remaineth therefore in the servant thus kept bound1 or in prison1 a right of delivering himself1 if he can1 by what means soever4 ,this kind of servant is that which ordinarily and without passion1 is called a slave4 ,the ,romans had no such distinct name1 but comprehended all under the name of servus2 whereof such as they loved and durst trust1 were suffered to go at liberty1 and admitted to places of office1 both near to their persons1 and in their affairs abroad2 the rest were kept chained1 or otherwise restrained with natural impediments to their resistance4 ,and as it was amongst the ,romans1 so it was amongst other nations1 the former sort having no other bond but a supposed covenant1 without which the master had no reason to trust them2 the latter being without covenant1 and no otherwise tied to obedience1 but by chains1 or other like forcible custody4 ,sidenote3 ,servants have no property against their lord1 c4 #d4 ,a master therefore is to be supposed to have no less right over those1 whose bodies he leaveth at liberty1 than over those he keepeth in bonds and imprisonment1 and hath absolute dominion over both1 and may say of his servant1 that he is his1 as he may of any other thing4 ,and whatsoever the servant had1 and might call his1 is now the master's2 for he that disposeth of the person1 disposeth of all the person could dispose of3 insomuch1 as though there be meum and tuum amongst servants distinct from one another by the dispensation1 and for the benefit of their master2 yet there is no meum and tuum belonging to any of them against the master himself1 whom they are not to resist1 but to obey all his commands as law4 ,sidenote3 ,the master hath right to alienate his servant4 #e4 ,and seeing both the servant and all that is committed to him1 is the property of the master1 and every man may dispose of his own1 and transfer the same at his pleasure1 the master may therefore alienate his dominion over them1 or give the same by his last will to whom he list4 ,sidenote3 ,the servant of the servant1 c4 #f4 ,and if it happen1 that the master himself by captivity or voluntary subjection1 become servant to another1 then is that other master paramount2 and those servants of him that becometh servant1 are no further obliged1 than their master paramount shall think good2 forasmuch as he disposing of the master subordinate1 disposeth of all he hath1 and consequently of his servants1 so that the restriction of absolute power in masters1 proceedeth not from the law of nature1 but from the political law of him that is their master supreme or sovereign4 ,sidenote3 ,how servitude is discharged4 #g4 ,servants immediate to the supreme master1 are discharged of their servitude1 or subjection1 in the same manner that subjects are released of their allegiance in a commonwealth institutive4 ,as first1 by release4 ,for he that captiveth1 which is done by accepting what the captive transferreth to him1 setteth again at liberty1 by transferring back the same4 ,and this kind of release is called manumission4 ,secondly1 by exile4 ,for that is no more but manumission given to a servant1 not in the way of benefit1 but punishment4 ,thirdly1 by a new captivity1 where the servant having done his endeavour to defend himself1 hath thereby performed his covenant to his former master1 and for the safety of his life1 entering into new covenant with the conqueror1 is bound to do his best endeavour to keep that likewise4 ,fourthly1 ignorance of who is successor to his deceased master1 dischargeth him of obedience3 for no covenant holdeth longer than a man knoweth to whom he is to perform it4 ,and lastly1 that servant that is no longer trusted1 but committed to his chains and custody1 is thereby discharged of the obligation in foro interno1 and therefore if he can get loose1 may lawfully go his way4 ,sidenote3 ,the middle lord1 c4 #h4 ,but servants subordinate1 though manumitted by their immediate lord1 are not thereby discharged of their subjection to their lord paramount4 ,for the immediate master hath no property in them1 having transferred his right before to another1 namely1 to his own and supreme master4 ,nor if the chief lord should manumit his immediate servant1 doth he thereby release his servants of their obligation to him that is so manumitted4 ,for by this manumission1 he recovereth again the absolute dominion he had over them before4 ,for after a release1 which is the discharge of a covenant1 the right standeth as it did before the covenant was made4 ,sidenote3 ,the title of man1 c4 over beasts4 #i4 ,this right of conquest1 as it maketh one man master over another1 so also maketh it a man to be master of the irrational creatures4 ,for if a man in the state of nature be in hostility with men1 and thereby have lawful title to subdue or kill1 according as his own conscience and discretion shall suggest unto him for his safety and benefit1 much more may he do the same to beasts2 that is to say1 save and preserve for his own service1 according to his discretion1 such as are of nature apt to obey1 and commodious for use2 and to kill and destroy1 with perpetual war1 all other1 as fierce1 and noisome to him4 ,and this dominion is therefore of the law of nature1 and not of the divine law positive4 ,for if there had been no such right before the revealing of ,god's will in the ,scripture1 then should no man1 to whom the ,scripture hath not come1 have right to make use of those his creatures1 either for his food or sustenance4 ,and it were a hard condition of mankind1 that a fierce and savage beast should with more right kill a man1 than a man a beast4 ------- ,,chapter ,,iv4 #a4 ,the dominion over the child1 c4 #b4 ,pre-eminence of sex giveth not the child to the father1 rather than to the mother4 #c4 ,the title of the father or mother1 c4 #d4 ,the child of a woman-servant1 c4 #e4 ,the right to the child given from the mother1 c4 #f4 ,the child of the concubine1 c4 #g4 ,the child of the husband and the wife1 c4 #h4 ,the father1 or he or she that bringeth up the child1 have absolute power over him4 #i4 ,freedom in subjects what it is4 #aj4 ,a great family is a patrimonial kingdom4 #aa4 ,succession of the sovereign power1 c4 #ab4 ,though the successor be not declared1 yet there is always one to be presumed4 #ac4 ,the children preferred to the succession1 c4 #ad4 ,the males before the females4 #ae4 ,the eldest before the rest of the brothers4 #af4 ,the brother next to the children4 #ag4 ,the succession of the possessor1 c4 ,sidenote3 ,the dominion over the child1 c4 #a4 ,of three ways by which a man becometh subject to another1 mentioned section #b1 chapter the last1 namely1 voluntary offer1 captivity and birth1 the former two have been spoken of1 under the name of subjects1 and servants4 ,in the next place1 we are to set down the third way of subjection1 under the name of children1 and by what title one man cometh to have propriety in a child1 that proceedeth from the common generation of two2 to wit1 of male and female4 ,and considering men again dissolved from all covenants one with another1 and that 7,part ,i4 chap4 ,,iv4 sect4 #b7 every man by the law of nature1 hath right or propriety to his own body1 the child ought rather to be the propriety of the mother1 of whose body it is part1 till the time of separation1 than of the father4 ,for the understanding therefore of the right that a man or woman hath to his or their child1 two things are to be considered2 first1 what title the mother1 or any other1 originally hath1 to a child new born3 secondly1 how the father1 or any other man1 pretendeth by the mother4 ,sidenote3 ,pre-eminence of sex giveth not the child to the father1 rather than to the mother4 #b4 ,for the first1 they that have written of this subject1 have made generation to be a title of dominion over persons1 as well as the consent of the persons themselves4 ,and because generation giveth title to two1 namely1 father and mother1 whereas dominion is indivisible1 they therefore ascribe dominion over the child to the father only1 ob prstantiam sexs2 but they show not1 neither can ,i find out by what coherence1 either generation inferreth dominion1 or advantage of so much strength1 which1 for the most part1 a man hath more than a woman1 should generally and universally entitle the father to a propriety in the child1 and take it away from the mother4 ,sidenote3 ,the title of the father or mother1 c4 #c4 ,the title to dominion over a child1 proceedeth not from the generation1 but from the preservation of it2 and therefore in the estate of nature1 the mother1 in whose power it is to save or destroy it1 hath right thereto by that power1 according to that which hath been said1 ,part ,i4 chapter ,i4 sect4 #ac4 ,and if the mother shall think fit to abandon1 or expose her child to death1 whatsoever man or woman shall find the child so exposed1 shall have the same right which the mother had before2 and for this same reason1 namely1 for the power not of generating1 but preserving4 ,and though the child thus preserved1 do in time acquire strength1 whereby he might pretend equality with him or her that hath preserved him1 yet shall that pretence be thought unreasonable1 both because his strength was the gift of him1 against whom he pretendeth1 and also because it is to be presumed1 that he which giveth sustenance to another1 whereby to strengthen him1 hath received a promise of obedience in consideration thereof4 ,for else it would be wisdom in men1 rather to let their children perish1 while they are infants1 than to live in their danger or subjection1 when they are grown4 ,sidenote3 ,the child of a woman servant1 c4 #d4 ,for the pretences which a man may have to dominion over a child by the right of the mother1 they be of divers kinds4 ,one by the absolute subjection of the mother2 another1 by some particular covenant from her1 which is less than a covenant of such subjection4 ,by absolute subjection1 the master of the mother1 hath right to her child1 according to section #f1 chapter ,,iii1 whether he be the father thereof1 or not4 ,and thus the children of the servant are the goods of the master in perpetuum4 ,sidenote3 ,the right to the child given from the mother1 c4 #e4 ,of covenants that amount not to subjection between a man and woman1 there be some which are made for a time2 they are covenants of cohabitation1 or else of copulation only4 ,and in this latter case1 the children pass by covenants particular4 ,and thus in the copulation of the ,amazons with their neighbours1 the fathers by covenant had the male children only1 the mothers retaining the females4 ,sidenote3 ,the child of the concubine1 c4 #f4 ,and covenants of cohabitation are either for society of bed1 or for society of all things2 if for society of bed only1 then is the woman called a concubine4 ,and here also the child shall be his or hers1 as they shall agree particularly by covenant4 ,for although for the most part1 a concubine is supposed to yield up the right of her children to the father1 yet doth not concubinate enforce so much4 ,sidenote3 ,the child of the husband and the wife1 c4 #g4 ,but if the covenants of cohabitation be for society of all things1 it is necessary that but one of them govern and dispose of all that is common to them both2 without which1 as hath been often said before1 society cannot last4 ,and therefore the man1 to whom for the most part the woman yieldeth the government1 hath for the most part1 also1 the sole right and dominion over the children4 ,and the man is called the husband1 and the woman the wife4 ,but because sometimes the government may belong to the wife only1 sometimes also the dominion over the children shall be in her only4 ,as in the case of a sovereign queen1 there is no reason that her marriage should take from her the dominion over her children4 ,sidenote3 ,the father1 or he or she that bringeth up the child1 have absolute power over him4 #h4 ,children therefore1 whether they be brought up and preserved by the father1 or by the mother1 or by whomsoever1 are in most absolute subjection to him or her1 that so bringeth them up1 or preserveth them4 ,and they may alienate them1 that is1 assign his or her dominion1 by selling1 or giving them1 in adoption or servitude to others2 or may pawn them for hostages1 kill them for rebellion1 or sacrifice them for peace1 by the law of nature1 when he or she1 in his or her conscience1 think it to be necessary4 ,sidenote3 ,freedom in subjects what it is4 #i4 ,the subjection of them who institute a commonwealth amongst themselves1 is no less absolute1 than the subjection of servants4 ,and therein they are in equal estate4 ,but the hope of those is greater than the hope of these4 ,for he that subjecteth himself uncompelled1 thinketh there is reason he should be better used1 than he that doth it upon compulsion2 and coming in freely1 calleth himself1 though in subjection1 a freeman2 whereby it appeareth1 that liberty is not any exemption from subjection and obedience to the sovereign power1 but a state of better hope than theirs1 that have been subjected by force and conquest4 ,and this was the reason1 that the name which signifieth children in the ,latin tongue1 is liberi1 which also signifieth freemen4 ,and yet in ,rome1 nothing at that time was so obnoxious to the power of others1 as children in the family of their fathers4 ,for both the state had power over their life without consent of their fathers1 and the father might kill his son by his own authority1 without any warrant from the state4 ,freedom therefore in commonwealths is nothing but the honour of equality of favour with other subjects1 and servitude the estate of the rest4 ,a freeman therefore may expect employments of honour1 rather than a servant4 ,and this is all that can be understood by the liberty of the subject4 ,for in all other senses1 liberty is the state of him that is not subject4 ,sidenote3 ,a great family is a patrimonial kingdom4 #aj4 ,now when a father that hath children1 hath servants also1 the children1 not by the right of the child1 but by the natural indulgence of the parents1 are such freemen4 ,and the whole1 consisting of the father or mother1 or both1 and of the children1 and of the servants1 is called a family1 wherein the father or mother of the family is sovereign of the same1 and the rest1 both children and servants equally1 subjects4 ,the same family1 if it grow by multiplication of children1 either by generation1 or adoption2 or of servants1 either by generation1 conquest1 or voluntary submission1 to be so great and numerous1 as in probability it may protect itself1 then is that family called a patrimonial kingdom1 or monarchy by acquisition1 wherein the sovereignty is in one man1 as it is in a monarch made by political institution4 ,so that whatsoever rights be in the one1 the same also be in the other4 ,and therefore ,i shall no more speak of them as distinct1 but of monarchy in general4 ,sidenote3 ,succession of the sovereign power1 c4 #aa4 ,having showed by what right the several sorts of commonwealths1 democracy1 aristocracy1 and monarchy1 are erected1 it followeth1 to show by what right they are continued4 ,the right by which they are continued1 is called the right of succession to the sovereign power2 whereof there is nothing to be said in a democracy1 because the sovereign dieth not1 as long as there be subjects alive3 nor in an aristocracy1 because it cannot easily fall out1 that the optimates should every one fail at once2 and if it should so fall out1 there is no question1 but the commonwealth is thereby dissolved4 ,it is therefore in a monarchy only1 that there can happen a question concerning the succession4 ,and first1 forasmuch as a monarch1 which is absolute sovereign1 hath the dominion in his own right1 he may dispose thereof at his own will4 ,if therefore by his last will1 he shall name his successor1 the right passeth by that will4 ,sidenote3 ,though the successor be not declared1 yet there is always one to be presumed4 #ab4 ,nor if the monarch die without any will concerning the succession declared1 it is not therefore to be presumed1 it was his will1 his subjects1 which are to him as his children and servants1 should return again to the state of anarchy1 that is1 to war and hostility4 ,for that were expressly against the law of nature1 which commandeth to procure peace1 and to maintain the same4 ,it is therefore to be conjectured with reason1 that it was his intention to bequeath them peace1 that is to say1 a power coercive1 whereby to keep them from sedition amongst themselves2 and rather in the form of a monarchy1 than any other government2 forasmuch as he1 by the exercise thereof in his own person1 hath declared1 that he approveth the same4 ,sidenote3 ,the children preferred to the succession1 c4 #ac4 ,further1 it is to be supposed1 his intention was1 that his own children should be preferred in the succession1 when nothing to the contrary is expressly declared1 before any other4 ,for men naturally seek their own honour1 and that consisteth in the honour of their children after them4 ,sidenote3 ,the males before the females4 #ad4 ,again1 seeing every monarch is supposed to desire to continue the government in his successors1 as long as he may2 and that generally men are endued with greater parts of wisdom and courage1 by which all monarchies are kept from dissolution1 than women are2 it is to be presumed1 where no express will is extant to the contrary1 he preferreth his male children before the female4 ,not but that women may govern1 and have in divers ages and places governed wisely1 but are not so apt thereto in general1 as men4 ,sidenote3 ,the eldest before the rest of the brothers4 #ae4 ,because the sovereign power is indivisible1 it cannot be supposed1 that he intended the same should be divided1 but that it should descend entirely upon one of them1 which is to be presumed1 should be the eldest1 assigned thereto by the lot of nature1 because he appointed no other lot for the decision thereof4 ,besides1 what difference of ability soever there may be amongst the brethren1 the odds shall be adjudged to the elder1 because no subject hath authority otherwise to judge thereof4 ,sidenote3 ,the brother next to the children4 #af4 ,and for want of issue in the possessor1 the brother shall be presumed successor4 ,for by the judgment of nature1 next in blood is next in love2 and next in love is next to preferment4 ,sidenote3 ,the succession of the possessor1 c4 #ag4 ,and as the succession followeth the first monarch1 so also it followeth him or her that is in possession2 and consequently1 the children of him in possession1 shall be preferred before the children of his father1 or predecessor4 ------- ,,chapter ,v4 #a4 ,the utility of the commonwealth1 c4 #b4 ,the loss of liberty1 c4 #c4 ,monarchy approved by1 c4 #d4 ,monarchy less subject to passion1 c4 #e1 #f4 ,subjects in monarchy1 c4 #g4 ,laws in monarchy less changeable1 c4 #h4 ,monarchies less subject to dissolution4 ,sidenote3 ,the utility of the commonwealth1 c4 #a4 ,having set forth the nature of a ,body ,politic1 and the three sorts thereof1 democracy1 aristocracy1 and monarchy2 in this chapter shall be declared1 the conveniences1 and inconveniences1 that arise from the same1 both in general1 and of the said several sorts in particular4 ,and first1 seeing a body politic is erected only for the ruling and governing of particular men1 the benefit and damage thereof1 consisteth in the benefit or damage of being ruled4 ,the benefit is that for which a body politic was instituted1 namely1 the peace and preservation of every particular man1 than which it is not possible there can be a greater1 as hath been touched before1 ,part ,i4 chapter ,i4 section #ab4 ,and this benefit extendeth equally both to the sovereign1 and to the subjects4 ,for he or they that have the sovereign power1 have but the defence of their persons1 by the assistance of the particulars2 and every particular man hath his defence by their union in the sovereign4 ,as for other benefits1 which pertain not to their safety and sufficiency1 but to their well and delightful being1 such as are superfluous riches1 they so belong to the sovereign1 as they must also be in the subject2 and so to the subject1 as they must also be in the sovereign4 ,for the riches and treasure of the sovereign1 is the dominion he hath over the riches of his subjects4 ,if therefore the sovereign provide not so as that particular men may have means1 both to preserve themselves1 and also to preserve the public2 the common or sovereign treasure can be none4 ,and on the other side1 if it were not for a common and public treasure belonging to the sovereign power1 men's private riches would sooner serve to put them into confusion and war1 than to secure and maintain them4 ,insomuch1 as the profit of the sovereign and subject goeth always together4 ,that distinction therefore of government1 that there is one government for the good of him that governeth1 and another for the good of them that be governed2 whereof the former is despotical1 that is lordly2 the other1 a government of freemen1 is not right4 ,no more is the opinion of them that hold it to be no city1 which consisteth of a master and his servants4 ,they might as well say1 it were no city1 that consisted in a father and his own issue1 how numerous soever they were4 ,for to a master that hath no children1 the servants have in them all those respects1 for which men love their children4 ,for they are his strength and his honour4 ,and his power is no greater over them1 than over his children4 ,sidenote3 ,the loss of liberty1 c4 #b4 ,the inconvenience arising from government in general to him that governeth1 consisteth partly in the continual care and trouble about the business of other men1 that are his subjects2 and partly1 in the danger of his person4 ,for the head always is that part1 not only where the care resideth1 but also against which the stroke of an enemy most commonly is directed4 ,to balance this incommodity1 the sovereignty1 together with the necessity of this care and danger1 comprehendeth so much honour1 riches1 and means1 whereby to delight the mind1 as no private man's wealth can attain unto4 ,the inconveniences of government in general to a subject are none at all1 if well considered1 but in appearance4 ,there be two things that may trouble his mind1 or two general grievances2 the one is1 loss of liberty2 the other1 the uncertainty of meum and tuum4 ,for the first1 it consisteth in this1 that a subject may no more govern his own actions according to his own discretion and judgment1 or1 which is all one1 conscience1 as the present occasions from time to time shall dictate to him2 but must be tied to do according to that will only1 which once for all he had long ago laid up1 and involved in the wills of the major part of an assembly1 or in the will of some one man4 ,but this is really no inconvenience4 ,for1 as it hath been showed before1 it is the only means1 by which we have any possibility of preserving ourselves4 ,for if every man were allowed this liberty of following his conscience1 in such difference of consciences1 they would not live together in peace an hour4 ,but it appeareth a great inconvenience to every man in particular1 to be debarred of this liberty1 because every one apart considereth it as in himself1 and not as in the rest2 by which means1 liberty appeareth in the likeness of rule and government over others4 ,for where one man is at liberty1 and the rest bound1 there that one hath government2 which honour1 he that understandeth not so much1 demanding by the name simply of liberty1 thinketh it a great grievance and injury to be denied it4 ,for the second grievance concerning meum and tuum1 it is also none1 but in appearance only2 it consisteth in this1 that the sovereign power taketh from him that which he used to enjoy1 knowing no other propriety1 but use and custom4 ,but without such sovereign power1 the right of men is not propriety to anything1 but a community1 no better than to have no right at all1 as hath been showed1 ,part ,i4 chapter ,i4 section #aj4 ,propriety therefore being derived from the sovereign power1 is not to be pretended against the same1 especially1 when by it every subject hath his propriety against every other subject1 which when sovereignty ceaseth1 he hath not1 because in that case they return to war amongst themselves4 ,those levies therefore which are made upon men's estates1 by the sovereign authority1 are no more but the price of that peace and defence which the sovereignty maintaineth for them4 ,if this were not so1 no money nor forces for the wars1 nor any other public occasion1 could justly be levied in the world4 ,for neither king1 nor democracy1 nor aristocracy1 nor the estates of any land1 could do it1 if the sovereignty could not4 ,for in all those cases1 it is levied by virtue of the sovereignty4 ,nay more1 by the three estates here1 the land of one man may be transferred to another1 without crime of him from whom it was taken1 and without pretence of public benefit1 as hath been done2 and this without injury1 because done by the sovereign power4 ,for the power whereby it is done1 is no less than sovereign1 and cannot be greater4 ,therefore this grievance for meum and tuum is not real1 unless more be exacted than is necessary2 but it seemeth a grievance1 because to them that either know not the right of sovereignty1 or to whom that right belongeth1 it seemeth an injury2 and injury1 how little soever the damage1 is always grievous1 as putting us in mind of our disability to help ourselves1 and into envy of the power to do us wrong4 ,sidenote3 ,monarchy approved by1 c4 #c4 ,having spoken of the inconveniences of the subject1 by government in general1 let us consider the same in the three several sorts thereof1 namely1 democracy1 aristocracy and monarchy2 whereof the two former are in effect but one4 ,for1 as ,i have showed before1 democracy is but the government of a few orators4 ,the comparison therefore will be between monarchy and aristocracy3 and to omit that the world1 as it was created1 so also it is governed by one ,god ,almighty2 and that all the ancients have preferred monarchy before other governments1 both in opinion1 because they feigned a monarchical government amongst their gods1 and also by their custom2 for that in the most ancient times all people were so governed3 and that paternal government1 which is monarchy1 was instituted in the beginning from the creation2 and that other governments have proceeded from the dissolution thereof1 caused by the rebellious nature of mankind1 and be but pieces of broken monarchies cemented by human wit1 ,i will insist only on this comparison1 upon the inconveniences that may happen to the subjects in consequence to each of these governments4 ,sidenote3 ,monarchy less subject to passion1 c4 #d4 ,and first1 it seemeth inconvenient there should be committed so great a power to one man1 as that it might be lawful to no other man or men to resist the same2 and some think it inconvenient eo nomine1 because he hath the power4 ,but this reason we may not by any means admit1 for it maketh it inconvenient to be ruled by ,almighty ,god1 who without question hath more power over every man1 than can be conferred upon any monarch4 ,this inconvenience therefore must be derived not from the power1 but from the affections and passions which reign in every one1 as well monarch as subject1 by which the monarch may be swayed to use that power amiss3 and because an aristocracy consisteth of men1 if the passions of many men be more violent when they are assembled together1 than the passions of one man alone1 it will follow1 that the inconvenience arising from passions will be greater in an aristocracy1 than a monarchy4 ,but there is no doubt1 when things are debated in great assemblies1 but every man delivering his opinion at large without interruption1 endeavoureth to make whatsoever he is to set forth for good1 better2 and what he would have apprehended as evil1 worse1 as much as is possible1 to the end his counsel may take place2 which counsel also is never without aim at his own benefit1 or honour2 every man's end being some good to himself4 ,now this cannot be done without working on the passions of the rest4 ,and thus the passions of these that are singly moderate1 are altogether vehement2 even as a great many coals1 though but warm asunder1 being put together1 inflame one another4 ,sidenote3 ,subjects in monarchy1 c4 #e4 ,another inconvenience of monarchy1 is this1 that the monarch1 besides the riches necessary for the defence of the commonwealth1 may take so much more from the subjects1 as may enrich his children1 kindred and favourites1 to what degree he pleaseth2 which though it be indeed an inconvenience1 if he should so do1 yet is the same both greater in an aristocracy1 and also more likely to come to pass1 for there not one only1 but many have children1 kindred1 and friends to raise4 ,and in that point they are as twenty monarchs for one1 and likely to set forward one another's designs mutually1 to the oppression of all the rest4 ,the same also happeneth in a democracy1 if they all do agree2 otherwise they bring a worse inconvenience2 to wit1 sedition4 #f4 ,another inconvenience of monarchy1 is the power of dispensing with the execution of justice1 whereby the family and friends of the monarch1 may1 with impunity1 commit outrages upon the people1 or oppress them with extortion4 ,but in aristocracies1 not only one1 but many have power of taking men out of the hands of justice1 and no man is willing his kindred or friends should be punished according to their demerits4 ,and therefore they understand amongst themselves without further speaking1 as a tacit covenant1 hodie mihi1 cras tibi4 ,sidenote3 ,laws in monarchy less changeable1 c4 #g4 ,another inconvenience of monarchy1 is the power of altering laws4 ,concerning which1 it is necessary that such a power be1 that laws may be altered1 according as men's manners change1 or as the conjuncture of all circumstances within and without the commonwealth shall require2 the change of law being then inconvenient1 when it proceedeth from the change1 not of the occasion1 but of the minds of him or them1 by whose authority the laws are made4 ,now it is manifest enough of itself1 that the mind of one man is not so variable in that point1 as are the decrees of an assembly4 ,for not only they have all their natural changes1 but the change of any one man may be enough1 with eloquence and reputation1 or by solicitation and faction1 to make that law to-day1 which another by the very same means1 shall abrogate to-morrow4 ,sidenote3 ,monarchies less subject to dissolution4 #h4 ,lastly1 the greatest inconvenience that can happen to a commonwealth1 is the aptitude to dissolve into civil war2 and to this are monarchies much less subject1 than any other governments4 ,for where the union1 or band of a commonwealth1 is one man1 there is no distraction2 whereas in assemblies1 those that are of different opinions1 and give different counsel1 are apt to fall out amongst themselves1 and to cross the designs of the commonwealth for one another's sake3 and when they cannot have the honour of making good their own devices1 they yet seek the honour to make the counsels of their adversaries prove vain4 ,and in this contention1 when the opposite factions happen to be anything equal in strength1 they presently fall to war4 ,wherein necessity teacheth both sides1 that an absolute monarch1 to wit1 a general1 is necessary both for their defence against one another1 and also for the peace of each faction within itself4 ,but this aptitude to dissolution1 is to be understood for an inconvenience in such aristocracies only where the affairs of state are debated in great and numerous assemblies1 as they were anciently in ,athens1 and in ,rome2 and not in such as do nothing else in great assemblies1 but choose magistrates and counsellors1 and commit the handling of state affairs to a few2 such as is the aristocracy of ,venice at this day4 ,for these are no more apt to dissolve from this occasion1 than monarchies1 the counsel of state being both in the one and the other alike4 ------- ,,chapter ,,vi4 #a4 ,a difficulty concerning absolute subjection to man1 arising from our absolute subjection to ,god ,almighty1 propounded4 #b4 ,that this difficulty is only amongst those ,christians that deny the interpretation of the ,scripture to depend upon the sovereign authority of the commonwealth4 #c4 ,that human laws are not made to govern the consciences of men1 but their words and actions4 #d4 ,places of ,scripture to prove obedience due from ,christians to their sovereign in all things4 #e4 ,a distinction propounded between a fundamental point of faith1 and a superstruction4 #f4 ,an explication of the points of faith1 that be fundamental4 #g4 ,that the belief of those fundamental points1 is all that is required to salvation1 as of faith4 #h4 ,that other points not fundamental1 are not necessary to salvation as matter of faith2 and that no more is required by way of faith to the salvation of one man1 than to the salvation of another4 #i4 ,that superstructions are not points of the faith necessary to a ,christian4 #aj4 ,how faith and justice concur to salvation4 #aa4 ,that in ,christian commonwealths1 obedience to ,god and man stand well together4 #ab4 ,this tenet1 whatsoever is against the conscience1 is sin1 interpreted4 #ac4 ,that all men do confess the necessity of submitting of controversies to some human authority4 #ad4 ,that ,christians under an infidel are discharged of the injustice of disobeying him1 in that which concerneth the faith necessary to salvation1 by not resisting4 ,sidenote3 ,a difficulty concerning absolute subjection to man1 arising from our absolute subjection to ,god ,almighty1 propounded4 #a4 ,having showed1 that in all commonwealths whatsoever1 the necessity of peace and government requireth1 that there be existent some power1 either in one man1 or in one assembly of men1 by the name of the power sovereign1 which it is not lawful for any member of the same commonwealth to disobey2 there occurreth now a difficulty1 which1 if it be not removed1 maketh it unlawful for a man to put himself under the command of such absolute sovereignty as is required thereto4 ,and the difficulty is this2 we have amongst us the ,word of ,god for the rule of our actions3 now if we shall subject ourselves to men also1 obliging ourselves to do such actions as shall be by them commanded1 when the commands of ,god and man shall differ1 we are to obey ,god1 rather than man2 and consequently1 the covenant of general obedience to man is unlawful4 ,sidenote3 ,that this difficulty is only amongst those ,christians that deny the interpretation of ,scripture to depend upon the sovereign authority of the commonwealth4 #b4 ,this difficulty hath not been of very great antiquity in the world4 ,there was no such dilemma amongst the ,jews2 for their civil law1 and divine law1 was one and the same law of ,moses2 the interpreters whereof were the priests1 whose power was subordinate to the power of the king2 as was the power of ,aaron1 to the power of ,moses4 ,nor is it a controversy that was ever taken notice of amongst the ,grecians1 ,romans1 or other ,gentiles3 for amongst these their several civil laws were the rules whereby not only righteousness and virtue1 but also religion1 and the external worship of ,god1 was ordered and approved2 that being esteemed the true worship of ,god1 which was 1 according to the laws civil4 ,also those ,christians that dwell under the temporal dominion of the bishop of ,rome1 are free from this question2 for that they allow unto him1 their sovereign1 to interpret the ,scriptures1 which are the law of ,god1 as he in his own judgment shall think right4 ,this difficulty therefore remaineth amongst1 and troubleth those ,christians only1 to whom it is allowed1 to take for the sense of the ,scripture1 that which they make thereof1 either by their own private interpretation1 or by the interpretation of such as are not called thereunto by public authority2 they that follow their own interpretation continually1 demanding liberty of conscience2 and those that follow the interpretation of others not ordained thereunto by the sovereign of the commonwealth1 requiring a power in matters of religion either above the power civil1 or at least not depending on it4 ,sidenote3 ,that human laws are not made to govern the consciences of men1 but their words actions4 #c4 ,to take away this scruple of conscience1 concerning obedience to human laws1 amongst those that interpret to themselves the word of ,god in the ,holy ,scriptures1 ,i propound to their consideration1 first1 that no human law is intended to oblige the conscience of a man1 unless it break out into action1 either of the tongue1 or other part of the body4 ,the law made thereupon would be of none effect1 because no man is able to discern1 but by word or other action whether such law be kept or broken4 ,nor did the apostles themselves pretend dominion over men's consciences1 concerning the faith they preached1 but only persuasion and instruction4 ,and therefore ,st4 ,paul saith 7#b ,cor4 i4 #bd71 writing to the ,corinthians1 concerning their controversies1 that he and the rest of the apostles had no dominion over their faith1 but were helpers of their joy4 ,sidenote3 ,places of ,scripture to prove obedience due from ,christians to their sovereign in all things4 #d4 ,and for the actions of men which proceed from their consciences1 the regulating of which actions is the only means of peace1 if they might not stand with justice1 it were impossible that justice towards ,god1 and peace amongst men1 should stand together in that religion that teacheth us1 that justice and peace shall kiss each other1 and in which we have so many precepts of absolute obedience to human authority2 as ,matth4 xxiii4 #b1 #c1 we have this precept3 ,the ,scribes and ,pharisees sit in ,moses' seat2 all therefore whatsoever they bid you observe1 that observe and do4 ,and yet were the ,scribes and ,pharisees not priests1 but men of temporal authority4 ,again ,luke xi4 #ag3 ,every kingdom divided against itself shall be desolate2 and is not that kingdom divided against itself1 where the actions of every one shall be ruled by his private opinion1 or conscience1 and yet those actions such as give occasion of offence and breach of peace8 ,again ,rom4 xiii4 #e3 ,wherefore you must be subject1 not because of wrath only1 but also for conscience sake4 ,titus iii4 #a3 ,put them in remembrance1 that they be subject to principalities and powers4 #a ,peter ii4 #ac1 #ad3 ,submit yourselves unto all manner of ordinance of man1 for the ,lord's sake1 whether it be unto the king1 as unto the superior1 or unto governors1 as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evil doers4 ,jude1 verse #h3 ,these dreamers also that defile the flesh1 and despise government1 and speak evil of them that are in authority4 ,and forasmuch as all subjects in commonwealths are in the nature of children and servants1 that which is a command to them1 is a command to all subjects4 ,but to these ,st4 ,paul saith 7,colos4 iii4 #bj1 #bb73 ,children1 obey your parents in all things2 servants1 be obedient to your masters according to the flesh in all things4 ,and verse #bc3 ,do it heartily as to the ,lord4 ,these places considered1 it seemeth strange to me1 that any man in a ,christian commonwealth1 should have any occasion to deny his obedience to public authority1 upon this ground1 that it is better to obey ,god than man4 ,for though ,st4 ,peter and the apostles did so answer the council of the ,jews1 that forbad them to preach ,christ1 there appeareth no reason that ,christians should allege the same against their ,christian governors1 that command them to preach ,christ4 ,to reconcile this seeming contradiction of simple obedience to ,god1 and simple obedience to man1 we are to consider a ,christian subject1 as under a ,christian sovereign1 or under an infidel4 ,sidenote3 ,a distinction propounded between a fundamental point of faith and a superstruction4 #e4 ,and under a ,christian sovereign we are to consider1 what actions we are forbidden by ,god ,almighty to obey them in1 and what not4 ,the actions we are forbidden to obey them in1 are such only1 as imply a denial of that faith which is necessary to our salvation3 for otherwise there can be no pretence of disobedience2 for why should a man incur the danger of a temporal death1 by displeasing of his superior1 if it were not for fear of eternal death hereafter8 ,it must therefore be enquired1 what those propositions and articles be1 the belief whereof our ,saviour or his apostles have declared to be such1 as without believing them1 a man cannot be saved2 and then all other points1 that are now controverted1 and made distinction of sects1 ,papists1 ,lutherans1 ,calvinists1 ,arminians1 c4 7as in old time1 the like made ,paulists1 ,apollonians1 and ,cephasians71 must needs be such1 as a man needeth not for the holding thereof1 deny obedience to his superiors4 ,and for the points of faith necessary to salvation1 ,i shall call them fundamental1 and every other point a superstruction4 ,sidenote3 ,an explication of the points of faith1 that be fundamental4 #f4 ,and without all controversy1 there is not any more necessary point to be believed for man's salvation than this1 that ,jesus is the ,messiah1 that is1 the ,christ2 which proposition is explicated in sundry sorts1 but still the same in effect2 as1 that he is ,god's anointed2 for that is signified by the word ,christ3 that he was the true and lawful king of ,israel1 the son of ,david1 the ,saviour of the world1 the redeemer of ,israel1 the salvation of ,god1 he that should come into the world1 the son of ,god1 and1 which ,i desire by the way to have noted1 against the now sect of ,arians1 the begotten ,son of ,god1 ,acts iii4 #ac2 ,heb4 v4 #e3 ,the only begotten ,son of ,god1 ,john i4 #ad1 #ah2 ,john iii4 #af1 #ah2 #a ,john iv4 #i3 ,that he was ,god1 ,john i4 #a2 ,john xx4 #bh3 ,that the fulness of the ,godhead dwelt in him bodily1 ,coloss4 ii4 #i3 ,moreover1 the ,holy ,one1 the ,holy ,one of ,god1 the forgiver of sins1 that he is risen from the dead4 ,these are explications1 and parts of that general article1 that ,jesus is the ,christ4 ,this point therefore1 and all the explications thereof are fundamental3 as also all such as be evidently inferred from thence2 as1 ,,belief ,,in ,,god ,,the ,,father3 ,john xii4 #dd3 ,he that believeth in me1 believeth not in me1 but in him that sent me2 #a ,john ii4 #bc3 ,he that denieth the ,son1 hath not the ,father3 ,,belief ,,in ,,god ,,the ,,holy ,,ghost1 of whom ,christ saith1 ,john xiv4 #bf3 ,but the ,comforter1 which is the ,holy ,ghost1 whom the ,father will send in my name3 and ,john xv4 #bf3 ,but when the ,comforter shall come1 whom ,i will send unto you from the ,father1 even the ,spirit of truth3 ,,belief ,,of ,,the ,,scriptures1 by which we believe those points and of the immortality of the soul1 without which we cannot believe he is a ,saviour4 ,sidenote3 ,that the belief of those fundamental points1 is all that is required to salvation1 as of faith4 #g4 ,and as these are the fundamental points of faith necessary to salvation2 so also are they only necessary as matter of faith1 and only essential to the calling of a ,christian2 as may appear by many evident places of ,holy ,scripture3 ,john v4 #ci3 ,search the ,scriptures1 for in them ye think ye have eternal life1 and they are they which testify of me4 ,now1 forasmuch as by the ,scripture1 is meant there the ,old ,testament 7the ,new being then not written71 the belief of that which was written concerning our ,saviour in the ,old ,testament1 was sufficient belief for the obtaining of eternal life3 but in the ,old ,testament1 there is nothing revealed concerning ,christ1 but that he is the ,messiah1 and such things as belong to the fundamental points thereupon depending4 ,and therefore those fundamental points are sufficient to salvation as of faith4 ,and ,john vi4 #bh1 #bi3 ,then said they unto him1 ,what shall we do1 that we might work the works of ,god8 ,jesus answered and said unto them4 ,this is the work of ,god1 that ye believe in him1 whom he hath sent4 ,so that the point to be believed is1 ,that ,jesus ,christ came forth from ,god1 and he which believeth it1 worketh the works of ,god4 ,john xi4 #bf1 #bg3 ,whosoever liveth and believeth in me1 shall never die4 ,believest thou this8 ,she said unto him1 ,yea1 ,lord1 ,i believe that thou art the ,christ1 the ,son of ,god1 which should come into the world4 ,hence followeth1 ,he that believeth this1 shall never die4 ,john xx4 #ca3 ,but these things are written1 that ye might believe1 that ,jesus is the ,christ1 the ,son of ,god2 and that believing1 ye might have life through his name4 ,by which appeareth1 that this fundamental point is all that is required1 as of faith to our salvation4 #a ,john iv4 #b3 ,every spirit that confesseth that ,jesus ,christ is come in the flesh1 is of ,god3 #a ,john v4 #a3 ,whosoever believeth that ,jesus is the ,christ1 is born of ,god2 and 7verse #e7 ,who is he that overcometh the world1 but he that believeth1 that ,jesus is the ,son of ,god3 and verse #ac3 ,these things have ,i written unto you that believe in the name of the ,son of ,god1 that ye may know that ye have eternal life4 ,acts1 viii4 #cf1 #cg3 ,the eunuch said1 ,here is water1 what doth hinder me to be baptized8 ,and ,philip said unto him1 ,if thou believest with all thy heart1 thou mayest4 ,he answered and said1 ,i believe that ,jesus ,christ is the ,son of ,god4 ,this point therefore was sufficient for the reception of man into baptism1 that is to say1 to ,christianity4 ,and ,acts1 xvi4 #bi-ca3 ,the keeper of the prison fell down before ,paul and ,silas1 and said1 ,sirs1 what shall ,i do to be saved8 ,and they said1 ,believe in the ,lord ,jesus ,christ4 ,and the sermon of ,st4 ,peter1 upon the day of ,pentecost1 was nothing else but an explication1 that ,jesus was the ,christ4 ,and when they had heard him1 they asked him1 ,what shall we do8 ,he said unto them1 7,acts1 ii4 #ch73 ,amend your lives1 and be baptized every one of you in the name of ,jesus ,christ for the remission of sins4 ,rom4 x4 #i3 ,if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the ,lord ,jesus1 and shalt believe in thy heart1 that ,god raised him up from the dead1 thou shalt be saved4 ,to these places may be added1 that wheresoever our ,saviour ,christ doth approve the faith of any man1 the proposition believed1 if the same be to be collected out of the text1 is always some of these fundamental points before mentioned1 or something equivalent3 as the faith of the centurion 7,matth4 viii4 #h73 ,speak the word only1 and my servant shall be healed2 believing he was omnipotent3 the faith of the woman1 which had an issue of blood1 7,matth4 ix4 #ba73 ,if ,i may but touch the hem of his garment2 implying1 he was the ,messiah3 the faith required of the blind men1 7,matth4 ix4 #bh73 ,believe you that ,i am able to do this8 the faith of the ,canaanitish woman1 7,matth4 xv4 #bb71 that he was the ,son of ,david1 implying the same4 ,and so it is in every one of those places1 none excepted1 where our ,saviour commendeth any man's faith1 which because they are too many to insert here1 ,i omit1 and refer them to his inquisition that is not otherwise satisfied4 ,and as there is no other faith required1 so there was no other preaching3 for the prophets of the ,old ,testament preached no other2 and ,john the ,baptist preached only the approach of the kingdom of heaven1 that is to say1 of the kingdom of ,christ4 ,the same was the commission of the apostles 7,matth4 x4 #g73 ,go preach1 saying1 ,the kingdom of heaven is at hand4 ,and ,paul preaching amongst the ,jews1 7,acts1 xviii4 #e71 did but testify unto the ,jews1 that ,jesus was the ,christ4 ,and the heathens took notice of ,christians no otherwise1 but by this name1 that they believed ,jesus to be a king1 crying out1 7,acts1 xvii4 #f1 #g73 ,these are they that have subverted the state of the world1 and here they are1 whom ,jason hath received4 ,and these all do against the decrees of ,csar1 saying1 that there is another king1 one ,jesus4 ,and this was the sum of the predictions1 the sum of the confessions of them that believed1 as well men as devils4 ,this was the title of his cross1 ,jesus of ,nazareth1 king of the ,jews2 this the occasion of the crown of thorns1 sceptre of reed1 and a man to carry his cross2 this was the subject of the ,hosannas2 and this was the title1 by which our ,saviour1 commanding to take another man's goods1 bade them say1 ,the ,lord hath need2 and by this title he purged the temple of the profane market kept there4 ,nor did the apostles themselves believe any more than that ,jesus was the ,messiah1 nor understand so much2 for they understood the ,messiah to be no more than a temporal king1 till after our ,saviour's resurrection4 ,furthermore1 this point1 that ,christ is the ,messiah1 is particularly set forth for fundamental by that word1 or some other equivalent thereunto in divers places4 ,upon the confession of ,peter 7,matth4 xvi4 #af73 ,thou art the ,christ1 the son of the living ,god1 our ,saviour 7verse #ah7 saith1 ,upon this rock will ,i build my church4 ,this point therefore is the whole foundation of ,christ's church4 ,st4 ,paul saith1 7,rom4 xv4 #bj7 ,i so enforced myself to preach the ,gospel1 not where ,christ was named1 lest ,i should have built upon another man's foundation4 ,st4 ,paul1 7#a ,cor4 iii4 #aj7 when he had reprehended the ,corinthians for their sects1 and curious doctrines and questions1 he distinguisheth between fundamental points1 and superstruction2 and saith1 ,i have laid the foundation1 and another buildeth thereupon2 but let every man take heed how he buildeth upon it4 ,for other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid1 which is ,jesus ,christ4 ,coloss4 ii4 #f1 #g3 ,as you have received ,christ ,jesus the ,lord1 so walk in him1 rooted and builded in him1 and stablished in the faith4 ,sidenote3 ,that other points not fundamental1 are not necessary to salvation as matters of faith2 and that no more is required by way of faith to the salvation of one man than to the salvation of another4 #h4 ,having showed this proposition1 ,jesus is the ,christ1 to be the only fundamental and necessary point of faith1 ,i shall set down a few places more1 to show1 that other points1 though they may be true1 are not so necessary to be believed1 as that a man may not be saved1 though he believe them not4 ,and first1 if a man could not be saved without assent of the heart to the truth of all controversies1 which are now in agitation concerning religion1 ,i cannot see1 how any man living can be saved2 so full of subtilty1 and curious knowledge it is to be so great a divine4 ,why therefore should a man think that our ,saviour1 who 7,matth4 xi4 #cj71 saith1 that his yoke is easy1 should require a matter of that difficulty8 or how are little children said to believe1 7,matth4 xviii4 #f72 or how could the good thief be thought sufficiently catechised upon the cross8 or ,st4 ,paul so perfect a ,christian presently upon his conversion8 and though there may be more obedience required in him that hath the fundamental points explicated unto him1 than in him that hath received the same but implicitly2 yet there is no more faith required for salvation in one man1 than another4 ,for if it be true1 that ,whosoever shall confess with his mouth the ,lord ,jesus1 and believe in his heart1 that ,god raised him from the dead1 shall be saved2 as it is1 ,rom4 x4 #i1 and that ,whosoever believeth that ,jesus is the ,christ1 is born of ,god2 the belief of that point is sufficient for the salvation of any man whosoever he be1 forasmuch as concerneth faith4 ,and seeing he that believeth not that ,jesus is the ,christ1 whatsoever he believe else1 cannot be saved2 it followeth1 that there is no more required of the salvation of one man1 than another1 in matter of faith4 ,sidenote3 ,that superstructions are not points of the faith necessary to a ,christian4 #i4 ,about these points fundamental1 there is little controversy amongst ,christians1 though otherwise of different sects amongst themselves4 ,and therefore the controversies of religion1 are altogether about points unnecessary to salvation2 whereof some are doctrines raised by human ratiocination1 from the points fundamental4 ,as for example2 such doctrines as concern the manner of the real presence1 wherein are mingled tenets of faith concerning the omnipotency and divinity of ,christ1 with the tenets of ,aristotle and the ,peripatetics concerning substance and accidents1 species1 hypostasis1 and the subsistence and migration of accidents from place to place2 words some of them without meaning1 and nothing but the canting of ,grecian sophisters4 ,and these doctrines are condemned expressly1 ,col4 ii4 #h1 where after ,st4 ,paul had exhorted them to be rooted and builded in ,christ1 he giveth them this further caveat3 ,beware lest there be any man that spoil you through philosophy and vain deceits1 through the traditions of men1 according to the rudiments of the world4 ,and such are such doctrines1 as are raised out of such places of the ,scriptures1 as concern not the foundation1 by men's natural reason2 as about the concatenation of causes1 and the manner of ,god's predestination2 which are also mingled with philosophy3 as if it were possible for men that know not in what manner ,god seeth1 heareth1 or speaketh1 to know nevertheless the manner how he intendeth1 and predestinateth4 ,a man therefore ought not to examine by reason any point1 or draw any consequence out of ,scripture by reason1 concerning the nature of ,god ,almighty1 of which reason is not capable4 ,and therefore ,st4 ,paul1 7,rom4 xii4 #c7 giveth a good rule1 ,that no man presume to understand above that which is meet to understand1 but that he understand according to sobriety3 which they do not1 who presume out of ,scripture1 by their own interpretation1 to raise any doctrine to the understanding1 concerning those things which are incomprehensible4 ,and this whole controversy concerning the predestination of ,god1 and the free-will of man1 is not peculiar to ,christian men4 ,for we have huge volumes of this subject1 under the name of fate and contingency1 disputed between the ,epicureans and the ,stoics1 and consequently it is not matter of faith1 but of philosophy3 and so are also all the questions concerning any other point1 but the foundation before named2 and ,god receiveth a man1 which part of the question soever he holdeth4 ,it was a controversy in ,st4 ,paul's time1 whether a ,christian ,gentile might eat freely of any thing which the ,christian ,jews did not2 and the ,jew condemned the ,gentile that he did eat1 to whom ,st4 ,paul saith1 7,rom4 xiv4 #c73 ,let not him that eateth not1 judge him that eateth2 for ,god hath received him4 ,and verse #f1 in the question concerning the observing of holy days1 wherein the ,gentiles and ,jews differed1 he saith unto them1 ,he that observeth the day1 observeth it to the ,lord2 and he that observeth not the day1 observeth it not to the ,lord4 ,and they who strive concerning such questions1 and divide themselves into sects1 are not therefore to be accounted zealous of the faith1 their strife being but carnal1 which is confirmed by ,st4 ,paul 7#a ,cor4 iii4 #d73 ,when one saith1 ,i am of ,paul1 and another1 ,i am of ,appollos1 are ye not carnal8 ,for they are not questions of faith1 but of wit1 wherein1 carnally1 men are inclined to seek the mastery one of another4 ,for nothing is truly a point of faith1 but that ,jesus is the ,christ2 as ,st4 ,paul testifieth1 7#a ,cor4 ii4 #b73 ,for ,i esteemed not the knowledge of any thing amongst you1 save ,jesus ,christ1 and him crucified4 ,and #a ,tim4 vi4 #bj1 #ba3 ,o ,timotheus1 keep that which is committed unto thee1 and avoid profane and vain babblings1 and opposition of science falsely so called1 which while some profess1 they have erred concerning the faith4 #b ,tim4 ii4 #af3 ,shun profane and vain babblings1 c4 ,verse #ag1 #ah3 ,of which sort is ,hymenus and ,philetus1 which as concerning the truth1 have erred1 saying1 that the resurrection is past already4 ,whereby ,st4 ,paul showed1 that the raising of questions by human ratiocination1 though it be from the fundamental points themselves1 is not only not necessary1 but most dangerous to the faith of a ,christian4 ,out of all these places1 ,i draw only this conclusion in general1 that neither the points now in controversy amongst ,christians of different sects1 or in any point that ever shall be in controversy1 excepting only those that are contained in this article1 ,jesus is the ,christ1 are necessary to salvation1 as of faith2 though in matter of obedience1 a man may be bound not to oppose the same4 ,sidenote3 ,how faith and justice concur to salvation4 #aj4 ,although to the obtaining of salvation1 there be required no more1 as hath been already declared1 out of the ,holy ,scriptures1 as matter of faith1 but the belief of those fundamental articles before set forth2 nevertheless1 there are required other things1 as matter of obedience4 ,for1 as it is not enough in temporal kingdoms1 to avoid the punishment which kings may inflict1 to acknowledge the right and title of the king1 without obedience also to his laws3 so also it is not enough1 to acknowledge our ,saviour ,christ to be the king of heaven1 in which consisteth ,christian faith1 unless also we endeavour to obey his laws1 which are the laws of the kingdom of heaven1 in which consisteth ,christian obedience4 ,and forasmuch as the laws of the kingdom of heaven1 are the laws of nature1 as hath been showed1 ,part ,i4 chapter ,v41 not only faith1 but also the observation of the law of nature1 7which is that for which a man is called just or righteous1 in that sense1 in which justice is taken not for the absence of guilt1 but for the endeavour and constant will to do that which is just7 not only faith1 but this justice1 which also from the effect thereof1 is called repentance1 and sometimes works1 is necessary to salvation4 ,so that faith and justice do both concur thereto2 and in the several acceptation of this word 7justification7 are properly said both of them to justify2 and the want of either of them is properly said to condemn4 ,for not only he that resisteth a king upon doubt of his title1 but also he that doth it upon the inordinateness of his passions1 deserveth punishment4 ,and when faith and works are separated1 not only the faith is called dead without works1 but also works are called dead works without faith4 ,and therefore ,st4 ,james1 7chapter ii4 #ag71 saith1 ,even so the faith1 if it have no works1 is dead in itself2 and verse #bf3 ,for as the body without the spirit is dead1 even so faith without works is dead4 ,and ,st4 ,paul1 7,heb4 vi4 #a71 calleth works without faith1 dead works1 where he saith1 ,not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works4 ,and by these dead works1 is understood not the obedience and justice of the inward man1 but the opus operatum1 or external action1 proceeding from fear of punishment1 or from vain-glory1 and desire to be honoured of men3 and these may be separated from faith1 and conduce no way to a man's justification4 ,and for that cause1 ,st4 ,paul1 7,rom4 iv47 excludeth the righteousness of the law1 from having part in the justification of a sinner4 ,for by the law of ,moses1 which is applied to men's actions1 and requireth the absence of guilt1 all men living are liable to damnation2 and therefore no man is justified by works1 but by faith only4 ,but if works be taken for the endeavour to do them1 that is1 if the will be taken for the deed1 or internal for external righteousness1 then do works contribute to salvation4 ,and then taketh place that of ,st4 ,james1 7chap4 ii4 #bd73 ,ye see then1 how that of works a man is justified1 and not of faith only4 ,and both of these are joined to salvation1 as in ,st4 ,mark i4 #ae3 ,repent and believe the gospel4 ,and ,luke xviii4 #ah-bb1 when a certain ruler asked our ,saviour1 what he ought to do to inherit eternal life1 he propounded to him the keeping of the commandments2 which when the ruler said he had kept1 he propounded to him the faith1 ,sell all that thou hast1 and follow me4 ,and ,john iii4 #cf3 ,he that believeth in the ,son1 hath everlasting life4 ,and ,he that obeyeth not the ,son1 shall not see life4 ,where he manifestly joineth obedience and faith together4 ,and ,rom4 i4 #ag3 ,the just shall live by faith2 not every one1 but the just4 ,for also the devils believe and tremble4 ,but though both faith and justice 7meaning still by justice1 not absence of guilt1 but the good intentions of the mind1 which is called righteousness by ,god1 that taketh the will for the deed7 be both of them said to justify1 yet are their parts in the act of justification to be distinguished4 ,for justice is said to justify1 not because it absolveth1 but because it denominates him just1 and setteth him in an estate1 or capacity of salvation1 whensoever he shall have faith4 ,but faith is said to justify1 that is1 to absolve1 because by it a just man is absolved of1 and forgiven his unjust actions4 ,and thus are reconciled the places of ,st4 ,paul and ,st4 ,james1 that ,faith only justifieth1 and a man is not justified by faith only2 and showed how faith and repentance must concur to salvation4 ,sidenote3 ,that in ,christian commonwealths1 obedience to ,god and man stand well together4 #aa4 ,these things considered1 it will easily appear1 that under the sovereign power of a ,christian commonwealth1 there is no danger of damnation from simple obedience to human laws2 for in that the sovereign alloweth ,christianity1 no man is compelled to renounce that faith1 which is enough for his salvation1 that is to say1 the fundamental points4 ,and for other points1 seeing they are not necessary to salvation1 if we conform our actions to the laws1 we do not only what we are allowed1 but also what we are commanded by the law of nature1 which is the moral law taught by our ,saviour himself4 ,and it is part of that obedience which must concur to our salvation4 ,sidenote3 ,this tenet1 whatsoever is against the conscience is sin1 interpreted4 #ab4 ,and though it be true1 whatsoever a man doth against his conscience1 is sin2 yet the obedience in these cases1 is neither sin1 nor against the conscience4 ,for the conscience being nothing else but a man's settled judgment and opinion1 when he hath once transferred his right of judging to another1 that which shall be commanded1 is no less his judgment1 than the judgment of that other4 ,so that in obedience to laws1 a man doth still according to his own conscience1 but not his private conscience4 ,and whatsoever is done contrary to private conscience1 is then a sin1 when the laws have left him to his own liberty1 and never else4 ,and then whatsoever a man doth1 not only believing it is ill done1 but doubting whether it be ill or not1 is done ill1 in case he may lawfully omit the doing4 ,sidenote3 ,that all men do confess the necessity of submitting of controversies to some human authority4 #ac4 ,and as it hath been proved1 that a man must submit his opinions in matter of controversy to the authority of the commonwealth2 so also is the same confessed by the practice of every one of them that otherwise deny it4 ,for who is there differing in opinion from another1 and thinking himself to be in the right1 and the other in the wrong1 that would not think it reasonable1 if he be of the same opinion that the whole state alloweth1 that the other should submit his opinion also thereunto2 or that would not be content1 if not that one or a few men1 yet all the divines of a whole nation1 or at least an assembly of all those he liketh1 should have the power to determine all the controversies of religion8 or1 who is there that would not be content1 to submit his opinions1 either to the pope1 or to a general council1 or to a provincial council1 or to a presbytery of his own nation8 ,and yet in all these cases he submitteth himself to no greater than human authority4 ,nor can a man be said to submit himself to ,holy ,scripture1 that doth not submit himself to some or other for the interpretation thereof4 ,or1 why should there be any church government at all instituted1 if the ,scripture itself could do the office of a judge in controversies of faith8 ,but the truth is apparent1 by continual experience1 that men seek not only liberty of conscience1 but of their actions2 nor that only1 but a further liberty of persuading others to their opinions2 nor that only1 for every man desireth1 that the sovereign authority should admit no other opinions to be maintained1 but such as he himself holdeth4 ,sidenote3 ,that ,christians under an infidel are discharged of the injustice of disobeying him1 in that which concerneth the faith necessary to salvation1 by not resisting4 #ad4 ,the difficulty therefore of obeying both ,god and man in a ,christian commonwealth is none3 all the difficulty resteth in this point1 whether he that hath received the faith of ,christ1 having before subjected himself to the authority of an infidel1 be discharged of his obedience thereby1 or not1 in matters of religion4 ,in which case it seemeth reasonable to think1 that since all covenants of obedience are entered into for the preservation of a man's life1 if a man be content without resistance to lay down his life1 rather than obey the commands of an infidel1 in so hard a case he hath sufficiently discharged himself thereof4 ,for no covenant bindeth further than to endeavour2 and if a man cannot assure himself to perform a just duty1 when thereby he is assured of present death1 much less can it be expected that a man should perform that1 for which he believeth in his heart he shall be damned eternally4 ,and thus much concerning the scruple of conscience1 that may arise concerning obedience to human laws1 in them that interpret the law of ,god to themselves4 ,it remaineth1 to remove the same scruple from them1 that submit their controversies to others not ordained thereunto by the sovereign authority4 ,and this ,i refer to the chapter following4 ------- ,,chapter ,,vii4 #a4 ,the question propounded1 who are the magistrates in the kingdom of ,christ4 #b4 ,the question exemplified1 in the controversies between ,moses and ,aaron1 and between ,moses and ,corah4 #c4 ,amongst the ,jews1 the power temporal and spiritual in the same hand4 #d4 ,parallel of the twelve princes of ,israel1 and the twelve apostles4 #e4 ,parallel of seventy elders1 and seventy disciples4 #f4 ,the hierarchy of the church in our ,saviour's time1 consisted in the twelve1 and in the seventy4 #g4 ,why ,christ ordained no priests for sacrifices1 as ,moses did4 #h4 ,the hierarchy of the church in the apostles' time1 apostles1 bishops1 and priests4 #i4 ,the preaching of the gospel was not commanding1 but persuading4 #aj4 ,excommunication4 ,sovereigns immediate rulers ecclesiastical under ,christ4 #aa4 ,that no man hath any just pretence of religion against obedience to commonwealth4 ,god speaketh to man by his vicegerents4 ,sidenote3 ,the question propounded1 who are the magistrates in the kingdom of ,christ4 #a4 ,in the former chapter have been removed those difficulties opposing our obedience to human authority1 which arise from misunderstanding of our ,saviour's title and laws3 in the former whereof1 namely1 his title1 consisteth our faith2 and in the latter1 our justice4 ,now they who differ not amongst themselves concerning his title and laws1 may nevertheless have different opinions concerning his magistrates1 and the authority he hath given them4 ,and this is the cause1 why many ,christians have denied obedience to their princes1 pretending that our ,saviour ,christ hath not given this magistracy to them1 but to others4 ,as for example3 some say1 to the pope universally2 some1 to a synod aristocratical2 some1 to a synod democratical in every several commonwealth2 and the magistrates of ,christ being they by whom he speaketh1 the question is1 whether he speak unto us by the pope1 or by convocations of bishops and ministers1 or by them that have the sovereign power in every commonwealth4 ,sidenote3 ,the question exemplified1 in the controversies between ,moses and ,aaron1 and between ,moses and ,corah4 #b4 ,this controversy was the cause of those two mutinies1 that happened against ,moses in the wilderness4 ,the first by ,aaron and his sister ,miriam1 who took upon them to censure ,moses1 for marrying an ,ethiopian woman4 ,and the state of the question between them and ,moses1 they set forth 7,numb4 xii4 #b7 in these words3 ,what hath the ,lord spoken but only by ,moses8 hath he not spoken also by us8 ,and the ,lord heard this1 c41 and punished the same in ,miriam1 forgiving ,aaron upon his repentance4 ,and this is the case of all them that set up the priesthood against the sovereignty4 ,the other was of ,corah1 ,dathan1 and ,abiram1 who with two hundred and fifty captains gathered themselves together against ,moses1 and against ,aaron4 ,the state of their controversy was this1 whether ,god were not with the multitude1 as well as with ,moses1 and every man as holy as he4 ,for 7,numb4 xvi4 #c7 thus they say1 ,you take too much upon you1 seeing all the congregation is holy2 every one of them1 and the ,lord is amongst them3 wherefore then lift ye yourselves above the congregation of the ,lord8 ,and this is the case of them that set up their private consciences1 and unite themselves to take the government of religion out of the hands of him or them1 that have the sovereign power of the commonwealth3 which how well it pleaseth ,god1 may appear by the hideous punishment of ,corah and his accomplices4 ,sidenote3 ,amongst the ,jews1 the power temporal and spiritual in the same hand4 #c4 ,in the government therefore of ,moses there was no power1 neither civil1 nor spiritual1 that was not derived from him4 ,nor in the state of ,israel under kings1 was there any earthly power1 by which those kings were compellable to any thing1 or any subject allowed to resist them in any case whatsoever4 ,for though the prophets by extraordinary calling1 did often admonish and threaten them1 yet they had no authority over them4 ,and therefore amongst the ,jews1 the power spiritual and temporal1 was always in the same hand4 ,sidenote3 ,parallel of the twelve princes of ,israel1 and the twelve apostles4 #d4 ,our ,saviour ,christ1 as he was the rightful king of the ,jews in particular1 as well as king of the kingdom of ,heaven1 in the ordaining of magistrates1 received that form of policy which was used by ,moses4 ,according to the number of the children of ,jacob1 ,moses took unto him by the appointment of ,god 7,numb4 i4 #d7 twelve men1 every one of the chief of their tribe1 which were to assist him in the muster of ,israel4 ,and these twelve1 verse #dd1 are called the princes of ,israel1 twelve men1 every one for the house of their fathers2 which are said also 7,numb4 vii4 #b71 to be heads over the houses of their fathers1 and princes of the tribes1 and over them that were numbered4 ,and these were every one equal amongst themselves4 ,in like manner our ,saviour took unto him twelve apostles1 to be next unto him in authority1 of whom he saith 7,matth4 xix4 #bh71 ,when the ,son of ,man shall sit in the throne of his majesty1 ye which follow me in the regeneration1 shall sit also upon twelve thrones1 and judge the twelve tribes of ,israel4 ,and concerning the equality of the twelve apostles amongst themselves1 our ,saviour saith 7,matth4 xx4 #be71 ,ye know that the ,lords of the ,gentiles have domination over them1 c4 ,verse #bf3 ,but it shall not be so amongst you2 but whosoever will be greatest among you1 let him be your servant4 ,and ,matth4 xxiii4 #aa3 ,he that is greatest among you1 let him be your servant4 ,and a little before1 verse #h1 ,be not called ,rabbi2 for one is your doctor1 ,christ1 and all ye are brethren4 ,and ,acts i4 in choosing of ,matthias to be an apostle1 though ,st4 ,peter used the part of a prolocutor1 yet did no man take upon him the authority of election1 but referred the same to lot4 ,sidenote3 ,parallel of the seventy elders seventy disciples4 #e4 ,again1 ,moses had the command of ,god1 ,numb4 xi4 #af3 ,gather to me seventy men of the elders of ,israel1 whom thou knowest that they are the elders of the people1 and governors over them1 and bring them unto the tabernacle1 c4 ,and ,moses1 verse #bd1 did accordingly4 ,and these were chosen to help ,moses in bearing the burthen of the government1 as appeareth1 verse #ag of the same chapter4 ,and as the twelve princes of the tribes were according to the number of ,jacob's children2 so were the seventy elders according to the number of the persons that went down with ,jacob into ,egypt4 ,in like manner our ,saviour in his kingdom of ,heaven1 the church1 out of the whole number of those that believed in him1 ordained seventy persons1 which peculiarly were called the seventy disciples1 to whom he gave power to preach the ,gospel and baptize4 ,sidenote3 ,the hierarchy of the church in our ,saviour's time1 consisted in the twelve1 and in the seventy4 #f4 ,in our ,saviour's time therefore1 the hierarchy of the church consisted1 besides himself that was the head1 of twelve apostles1 who were equal amongst themselves1 but ordained over others1 as were the twelve heads of the tribes1 and seventy disciples1 who had every one of them power to baptize and teach1 and help to govern the whole flock4 ,sidenote3 ,why ,christ ordained no priests for sacrifices1 as ,moses did4 #g4 ,and whereas in the commonwealth instituted by ,moses1 there was not only a high-priest for the present1 but also a succession and order of priests2 it may be demanded1 why our ,saviour ,christ did not ordain the like8 ,to which may be answered1 that the high-priesthood1 forasmuch as concerneth the authority thereof1 was in the person of ,christ1 as he was ,christ1 that is king4 ,so also was it in ,moses1 ,aaron having the ministerial part only4 ,for notwithstanding that ,aaron was the high-priest1 yet the consecration of him belonged 7,exod4 xxix4 #a7 to ,moses4 ,all the utensils of sacrifice1 and other holy things1 were ordered by ,moses2 and in sum1 the whole ,levitical law was delivered by ,god by the hand of ,moses1 who was to ,aaron a ,god1 and ,aaron to him a mouth4 ,and for the ministerial part1 there could no high-priest be ordained but himself2 for seeing our ,saviour was himself the sacrifice1 who but himself could offer him up8 ,and for the celebration of that sacrifice for ever after1 our ,saviour annexed the priesthood to those whom he had appointed to govern in the church4 ,sidenote3 ,the hierarchy of the church1 in the apostles' time1 apostles1 bishops1 and priests4 #h4 ,after the ascension of our ,saviour1 the apostles dispersed themselves for the spreading of the ,gospel1 and continually as they converted any number of men1 in any city or region1 to the faith1 they chose out such as they thought fittest1 to direct them in matter of conversation and life1 according to ,christ's law1 and to explicate unto them1 that mystery of ,christ come in the flesh1 that is to say1 to unfold unto them at large the office of the ,messiah4 ,and of those elders1 some were subordinate to others1 according as the apostles1 who ordained them1 thought meet4 ,so ,st4 ,paul gave power unto ,titus1 to ordain elders in ,crete1 and to redress things that were amiss4 ,so that ,titus was both an elder1 and ordained elders 7,tit4 i4 #e73 ,for this cause ,i left thee in ,crete1 that thou shouldest continue to redress the things that remain1 and ordain elders in every city2 where the word is 1 that is constitute2 whereby it appeareth1 that in the apostles' times1 one elder had authority over another1 to ordain and rule them4 ,for #a ,tim4 v4 #ai1 ,timothy an elder1 is made judge of accusations against other elders4 ,and ,acts xiv4 #bc1 the disciples are said to ordain elders1 for all the congregations of the cities they had preached in4 ,and though the word there be 1 yet it signifieth not election by holding up of hands1 but simply and absolutely ordination4 ,for the ordinary choosing of magistrates amongst the ,grecians1 which were all either popularly governed1 or else by oligarchy1 being performed by holding up of hands1 made that word be taken simply1 for an election or ordination1 howsoever made4 ,and thus in the primitive church1 the hierarchy of the church1 was apostles1 elders that governed other elders1 and elders that ruled not1 but their office was to preach1 to administer the sacraments1 to offer up prayers and thanksgiving in the name of the people4 ,but at that time there appeared no distinction between the names of bishop and elder4 ,but immediately after the apostles' time1 the word bishop was taken to signify such an elder as had the government of elders1 and other elders were called by the name of priests1 which signifieth the same that elder doth4 ,and thus the government of bishops hath a divine pattern in the twelve rulers1 and seventy elders of ,israel1 in the twelve apostles and seventy disciples of our ,saviour1 in the ruling elders1 and not ruling elders1 in the time of the apostles4 ,sidenote3 ,the preaching of the gospel was not commanding1 but persuading4 #i4 ,and thus much of the magistrates over ,christ's flock in the primitive church4 ,for the office of a minister1 or ministress1 was to be subject to the flock1 and to serve them in those things which appertain to their temporal business4 ,the next thing to be considered is the authority which our ,saviour gave them1 either over those whom they had converted1 or those whom they were about to convert4 ,and for these latter1 which as yet were without the church1 the authority which our ,saviour gave to his apostles was no more but this1 to preach unto them that ,jesus was the ,christ1 and to explicate the same in all points1 that concern the kingdom of heaven1 and to persuade men to embrace our ,saviour's doctrine1 but by no means to compel any man to be subject to them3 for seeing the laws of the kingdom of heaven1 as hath been showed1 ,part ,i1 chap4 ,v4 sect4 #aj1 are dictated to the conscience only1 which is not subject to compulsion and constraint1 it was not congruent to the style of the ,king of ,heaven to constrain men to submit their actions to him1 but to advise them only2 nor for him that professeth the sum of his law to be love1 to extort any duty from us with fear of temporal punishment4 ,and therefore as the mighty men in the world1 that hold others in subjection by force1 are called in ,scripture by the name of hunters2 so our ,saviour calleth those whom he appointed to draw the world unto him1 by subduing their affections1 fishers4 ,and therefore he saith to ,peter and ,andrew1 7,matth4 iv4 #ai73 ,follow me1 and ,i will make ye fishers of men4 ,and ,luke x4 #c3 ,behold1 saith ,christ1 ,i send ye forth as lambs amongst wolves4 ,and it were to no end to give them the right of compelling1 without strengthening the same with greater power than of lambs amongst wolves4 ,moreover1 ,matth4 x1 where our ,saviour giveth a commission to his apostles1 to go forth and convert the nations to the faith1 he giveth them no authority of coercion and punishment1 but only saith1 7verse #ad1 #ae7 ,whosoever shall not receive you1 nor hear your words1 when ye depart out of that house1 or that city1 shake off the dust of your feet4 ,it shall be easier for the land of ,sodom and ,gomorrah in the day of judgment1 than for that city4 ,whereby it is manifest1 that all that the apostles could do by their authority1 was no more than to renounce communion with them1 and leave their punishment to ,god ,almighty1 in the day of judgment4 ,likewise the comparisons of the kingdom of heaven to the seed1 ,matth4 xiii4 #c1 and to the leaven1 ,matth4 xiii4 #cc1 doth intimate unto us that the increase thereof ought to proceed from internal operation of ,god's word preached1 and not from any law or compulsion of them that preach it4 ,moreover our ,saviour himself saith 7,john xviii4 #cf71 ,that his kingdom is not of this world2 and consequently his magistrates derive not from him any authority of punishing men in this world4 ,and therefore also1 ,matth4 xxvi4 #eb1 after ,st4 ,peter had drawn his sword in his defence1 our ,saviour saith1 ,put up thy sword into his place4 ,for all that take the sword1 shall perish by the sword4 ,and1 verse #ed1 ,how then shall the ,scriptures be fulfilled1 which say1 that it must be so8 showing out of the ,scriptures1 that the kingdom of ,christ was not to be defended by the sword4 ,sidenote3 ,excommunication4 ,sovereigns immediate rulers ecclesiastical under ,christ4 #aj4 ,but concerning the authority of the apostles or bishops over those who were already converted and within the church1 there be that think it greater than over them without4 ,for some have said1 7,bellarmin4 ,lib4 de ,rom4 ,pont4 cap4 #bi17 ,though the law of ,christ deprive no prince of his dominion1 and ,paul did rightly appeal unto ,csar1 whilst kings were infidels and out of the church2 yet when they became ,christians1 and of their own accord underwent the laws of the gospel1 presently as sheep to a shepherd1 and as members to the head1 they became subject to the prelate of the ecclesiastical hierarchy4 ,which1 whether it be true or not1 is to be considered by that light which we have from the ,holy ,scripture1 concerning the power of our ,saviour and his apostles1 over such as they had converted4 ,but our ,saviour1 as he imitated the commonwealth of the ,jews in his magistrates1 the twelve and the seventy2 so did he also in the censure of the church1 which was excommunication2 but amongst the ,jews1 the church did put the excommunicated persons from the congregation1 which they might do by their power temporal2 but our ,saviour and his apostles1 who took upon them no such power1 could not forbid the excommunicated person to enter into any place and congregation1 into which he was permitted to enter1 by the prince1 or sovereign of the place4 ,for that had been to deprive the sovereign of his authority4 ,and therefore the excommunication of a person subject to an earthly power1 was but a declaration of the church1 which did excommunicate1 that the person so excommunicated was to be reputed still as an infidel1 but not to be driven by their authority1 out of any company1 he might otherwise lawfully come into4 ,and this is it our ,saviour saith 7,matth4 xviii4 #ag73 ,if he refuse to hear the church1 let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican4 ,so that the whole effect of excommunicating a ,christian prince1 is no more than he or they that so excommunicate him depart and banish themselves out of his dominion4 ,nor can they thereupon discharge any of his subjects of their obedience to him2 for that were to deprive him of his dominion2 which they may not do1 for being out of the church4 ,it is confessed by them that make this objection1 and proved in the former section1 that our ,saviour gave no authority to his apostles to be judges over them4 ,and therefore in no case can the sovereign power of a commonwealth be subject to any authority ecclesiastical1 besides that of ,christ himself4 ,and though he be informed concerning the kingdom of heaven1 and subject himself thereto at the persuasions of persons ecclesiastical1 yet is he not thereby subject to their government and rule4 ,for if it were by their authority he took that yoke upon him1 and not by their persuasion1 then by the same authority he might cast it off4 ,but this is unlawful4 ,for if all the churches in the world should renounce the ,christian faith1 yet is not this sufficient authority for any of the members to do the same4 ,it is manifest therefore1 that they who have sovereign power1 are immediate rulers of the church under ,christ1 and all other but subordinate to them4 ,if that were not1 but kings should command one thing upon pain of death1 and priests another1 upon pain of damnation1 it would be impossible that peace and religion should stand together4 ,sidenote3 ,that no man hath any just pretence of religion against obedience to commonwealth4 ,god speaketh to man by his vicegerents4 #aa4 ,and therefore there is no just cause for any man to withdraw his obedience from the sovereign state1 upon pretence that ,christ hath ordained any state ecclesiastical above it4 ,and though kings take not upon them the ministerial priesthood1 yet are they not so merely laic1 as not to have sacerdotal jurisdiction4 ,to conclude this chapter1 since ,god speaketh not in these days to any man by his private interpretation of the ,scriptures1 nor by the interpretation of any power above1 or not depending on the sovereign power of every commonwealth1 it remaineth1 that he speaketh by his vice-gods1 or lieutenants here on earth1 that is to say1 by sovereign kings1 or such as have sovereign authority as well as they4 ------- ,,chapter ,,viii4 #a4 ,the things that dispose to rebellion1 discontent1 pretence1 and hope of success4 #b4 ,discontent that disposeth to sedition1 consisteth partly in fear of want1 or punishment3 #c4 ,partly in ambition4 #d4 ,six heads of pretences to rebellion4 #e4 ,the first of them1 that men ought to do nothing against conscience1 confuted4 #f4 ,the second1 that sovereigns are subject to their own laws1 confuted4 #g4 ,the third1 that the sovereignty is divisible1 confuted4 #h4 ,the fourth1 that subjects have a propriety distinct from the dominion of the sovereign1 confuted4 #i4 ,the fifth1 that the people is a person distinct from the sovereign1 confuted4 #aj4 ,the sixth1 that tyrannicide is lawful1 confuted4 #aa4 ,four heads of hope of success in rebellion4 #ab4 ,two things necessary to an author of rebellion1 much eloquence1 and little wisdom4 #ac4 ,that the authors of rebellion necessarily are to be men of little wisdom4 #ad4 ,that the same are necessarily eloquent4 #ae4 ,in what manner they concur to their common effects4 ,sidenote3 ,the things that dispose to rebellion1 discontent1 pretence1 and hope of success4 #a4 ,hitherto of the causes why1 and the manner how1 men have made commonwealth4 ,in this chapter ,i shall show briefly by what causes1 and in what manner1 they be again destroyed2 not meaning to say anything concerning the dissolution of a commonwealth1 from foreign invasions1 which is as it were the violent death thereof4 ,i shall speak only of sedition1 which is also the death of the commonwealth1 but like to that which happeneth to a man from sickness and distemper4 ,to dispose men to sedition1 three things concur4 ,the first is discontent2 for as long as a man thinketh himself well1 and that the present government standeth not in his way to hinder his proceeding from well to better1 it is impossible for him to desire the change thereof4 ,the second is pretence of right2 for though a man be discontent1 yet if in his own opinion there be no just cause of stirring against1 or resisting the government established1 nor any pretence to justify his resistance1 and to procure aid1 he will never show it4 ,the third is hope of success2 for it were madness to attempt without hope1 when to fail1 is to die the death of a traitor4 ,without these three1 discontent1 pretence1 and hope1 there can be no rebellion3 and when the same are all together1 there wanteth nothing thereto1 but a man of credit to set up the standard1 and to blow the trumpet4 ,sidenote3 ,discontent that disposeth to sedition1 consisteth partly in fear of want1 or punishment3 #b4 ,and as for discontent1 it is of two sorts3 for it consisteth either in bodily pain present or expected1 or else in trouble of the mind2 which is the general division of pleasure and pain1 ,human ,nature1 chap4 ,,vii4 sect4 #h4 ,the presence of bodily pain disposeth not to sedition2 the fear of it doth4 ,as for example2 when a great multitude1 or heap of people1 have concurred to a crime worthy of death1 they join together1 and take arms to defend themselves for fear thereof4 ,so also the fear of want1 or in present want1 the fear of arrests and imprisonment dispose to sedition4 ,and therefore great exactions1 though the right thereof be acknowledged1 have caused great seditions4 ,as in the time of ,henry ,,vii4 the seditions of the ,cornish men1 that refused to pay a subsidy1 and1 under the conduct of the ,lord ,audley1 gave the ,king battle upon ,blackheath2 and that of the northern people1 who in the same king's time1 for demanding a subsidy granted in parliament1 murdered the ,earl of ,northumberland in his house4 ,sidenote3 ,partly in ambition4 #c4 ,thirdly1 the other sort of discontent1 which troubleth the mind of them who otherwise live at ease1 without fear of want1 or danger of violence1 ariseth only from a sense of their want of that power1 and that honour and testimony thereof1 which they think is due unto them4 ,for all joy and grief of mind consisting 7as hath been said1 ,human ,nature1 chap4 ,,ix4 sect4 #ba7 in a contention for precedence to them with whom they compare themselves2 such men must needs take it ill1 and be grieved with the state1 as find themselves postposed to those in honour1 whom they think they excel in virtue and ability to govern4 ,and this is it for which they think themselves regarded but as slaves4 ,now seeing freedom cannot stand together with subjection1 liberty in a commonwealth is nothing but government and rule1 which because it cannot be divided1 men must expect in common2 and that can be no where but in the popular state1 or democracy4 ,and ,aristotle saith well1 7lib4 ,,vi4 cap4 #b of his ,politics71 ,the ground or intention of a democracy1 is liberty4 ,which he confirmeth in these words3 ,for men ordinarily say this1 that no man can partake of liberty1 but only in a popular commonwealth4 ,whosoever therefore in a monarchical estate1 where the sovereign power is absolutely in one man1 claimeth liberty1 claimeth 7if the hardest construction should be made thereof7 either to have the sovereignty in his turn1 or to be colleague with him that hath it1 or to have the monarchy changed into a democracy4 ,but if the same be construed1 with pardon of that unskilful expression1 according to the intention of him that claimeth1 then doth he thereby claim no more but this1 that the sovereign should take notice of his ability and deserving1 and put him into employment and place of subordinate government1 rather than others that deserve less4 ,and as one claimeth1 so doth another1 every man esteeming his own desert greatest4 ,amongst all those that pretend to1 or are ambitious of such honour1 a few only can be served1 unless it be in a democracy2 the rest therefore must be discontent4 ,and so much of the first thing that disposeth to rebellion1 namely1 discontent1 consisting in fear and ambition4 ,sidenote3 ,six heads of pretences to rebellion4 #d4 ,the second thing that disposeth to rebellion1 is pretence of right4 ,and that is when men have an opinion1 or pretend to have an opinion1 that in certain cases they may lawfully resist him or them that have the sovereign power1 or deprive him or them of the means to execute the same4 ,of which pretences1 there be six special cases4 ,one is1 when the command is against their conscience1 and they believe it is unlawful for a subject at the command of the sovereign power to do any action1 which he thinketh in his own conscience not lawful for him to do1 or to omit any action1 which he thinketh not lawful for him to omit4 ,another is1 when the command is against the laws1 and they think the sovereign power in such sort obliged to his own laws1 as the subject is2 and that when he performeth not his duty1 they may resist his power4 ,a third is1 when they receive commands from some man or men1 and a supersedeas to the same from others1 and think the authority is equal1 as if the sovereign power were divided4 ,a fourth is1 when they are commanded to contribute their persons or money to the public service1 and think they have a propriety in the same distinct from the dominion of the sovereign power2 and that therefore they are not bound to contribute their goods and persons1 no more than every man shall of himself think fit4 ,a fifth1 when the commands seem hurtful to the people2 and they think1 every one of them1 that the opinion and sense of the people1 is the same with the opinion of himself1 and those that consent with him2 calling by the name of people1 any multitude of his own faction4 ,the sixth is1 when the commands are grievous2 and they account him that commandeth grievous things a tyrant2 and tyrannicide1 that is1 the killing of a tyrant1 not only lawful1 but also laudable4 ,sidenote3 ,the first of them1 that men ought to do nothing against conscience1 confuted4 #e4 ,all these opinions are maintained in the books of the dogmatics1 and divers of them taught in public chairs1 and nevertheless are most incompatible with peace and government1 and contradictory to the necessary and demonstrable rules of the same4 ,and for the first1 namely1 that a man may lawfully do or omit any thing against his conscience1 and from whence arise all seditions concerning religion and ecclesiastical government1 it hath been plainly declared in the two last chapters1 that such opinion is erroneous4 ,for those two chapters have been wholly spent1 to prove1 that ,christian religion not only forbiddeth not1 but also commandeth1 that in every commonwealth1 every subject should in all things to the uttermost of his power obey the commands of him or them that is the sovereign thereof1 and that a man in so obeying1 doth according to his conscience and judgment1 as having deposited his judgment in all controversies in the hands of the sovereign power2 and that this error proceedeth from the ignorance of what and by whom ,god ,almighty speaketh4 ,sidenote3 ,the second1 that sovereigns are subject to their own laws1 confuted4 #f4 ,as for the second opinion1 which is this1 that the sovereign is in such sort obliged to his own laws1 as the subject is2 the contrary thereof hath been showed1 ,part ,,ii4 chapter ,i4 sections #g-ab1 by which it appeareth1 that the sovereign power is not to be resisted2 that it carrieth the sword both of war and justice2 that it hath the right of deciding all controversies1 both judicial and deliberative2 that it hath the making of all the laws civil2 that it appointeth magistrates and public ministers1 and that it implieth an universal impunity4 ,how then can he or they be said to be subject to the laws which they may abrogate at their pleasure1 or break without fear of punishment8 ,and this error seemeth to proceed from this1 that men ordinarily understand not aright1 what is meant by this word law1 confounding law and covenant1 as if they signify the same thing4 ,but law implieth a command2 covenant is but a promise4 ,and not every command is a law1 but only 7,human ,nature1 chap4 ,,xiii4 sect4 #f7 when the command is the reason we have of doing the action commanded4 ,and then only is the reason of our actions in the command1 when the omitting is therefore hurtful1 because the action was commanded1 not because it was hurtful of itself2 and doing contrary to a command1 were not at all hurtful1 if there were not a right in him that commandeth to punish him that so doth4 ,he or they that have all punishments in their own disposing1 cannot be so commanded1 as to receive hurt for disobeying1 and consequently no command can be a law unto them4 ,it is an error therefore to think1 that the power which is virtually the whole power of the commonwealth1 and which in whomsoever it resideth1 is usually called supreme or sovereign1 can be subject to any law but that of ,god ,almighty4 ,sidenote3 ,the third1 that the sovereignty is divisible1 confuted4 #g4 ,the third opinion1 that the sovereign power may be divided1 is no less an error than the former1 as hath been proved1 ,part ,,ii4 chapter ,i4 sect4 #ae4 ,and if there were a commonwealth1 wherein the rights of sovereignty were divided1 we must confess with ,bodin1 ,lib4 ,,ii4 chap4 ,i4 ,de ,republica1 that they are not rightly to be called commonwealths1 but the corruption of commonwealths4 ,for if one part should have power to make the laws for all1 they would by their laws at their pleasure1 forbid others1 to make peace or war1 to levy taxes1 or to yield fealty and homage without their leave2 and they that had the right to make peace and war1 and command the militia1 would forbid the making of other laws1 than what themselves liked4 ,and though monarchies stand long1 wherein the right of sovereignty hath seemed so divided1 because monarchy of itself is a durable kind of government1 yet monarchs have been thereby divers times thrust out of their possession4 ,but the truth is1 that the right of sovereignty is such1 as he or they that have it1 cannot1 though they would1 give away any part thereof1 and retain the rest4 ,as for example2 if we should suppose the people of ,rome to have had the absolute sovereignty of the ,roman state1 and to have chosen them a council by the name of the senate1 and that to this senate they had given the supreme power of making laws1 reserving nevertheless to themselves1 in direct and express terms1 the whole right and title of the sovereignty2 which may easily happen amongst them that see not the inseparable connexion between the sovereign power1 and the power of making laws3 ,i say1 this grant of the people to the senate is of no effect1 and the power of making laws is in the people still4 ,for the senate understanding it to be the will and intention of the people1 to retain the sovereignty1 ought not to take that for granted1 which was contradictory thereto1 and passed by error4 ,for 7,human ,nature1 chap4 ,,xiii4 sect4 #i7 in contradictory promises1 that which is directly promised1 is preferred before that which is opposite thereunto by consequence2 because the consequence of a thing is not always obscured1 as is the thing itself4 ,the error concerning mixed government hath proceeded from want of understanding of what is meant by this word body politic1 and how it signifieth not the concord1 but the union of many men4 ,and though in the chapters of subordinate corporations1 a corporation being declared to be one person in law1 yet the same hath not been taken notice of in the body of a commonwealth or city1 nor have any of those innumerable writers of politics1 observed any such union4 ,sidenote3 ,the fourth1 that subjects have a propriety distinct from the dominion of the sovereign1 confuted4 #h4 ,the fourth opinion1 to wit1 that subjects have their meum1 tuum1 and suum1 in property1 not only by virtue of the sovereign power over them all1 distinct from one another1 but also against the sovereign himself1 by which they would pretend to contribute nothing to the public1 but what they please1 hath been already confuted1 by proving the absoluteness of the sovereignty1 and more particularly1 ,part ,,ii4 chapter ,v4 sect4 #b2 and ariseth from this1 that they understand not ordinarily that before the institution of sovereign power1 meum and tuum1 implied no propriety1 but a community1 where every man had right to every thing1 and was in state of war with every man4 ,sidenote3 ,the fifth1 that the people is a person distinct from the sovereign1 confuted4 #i4 ,the fifth opinion1 ,that the people is a distinct body from him or them that have the sovereignty over them1 is an error already confuted1 ,part ,,ii4 chap4 ,,ii4 sect #aa1 where it is showed1 that when men say1 the people rebelleth1 it is to be understood of those particular persons only1 and not of the whole nation4 ,and when the people claimeth any thing otherwise than by the voice of the sovereign power1 it is not the claim of the people1 but only of those particular men1 that claim in their own persons2 and this error ariseth from the equivocation of the word people4 ,sidenote3 ,the sixth1 that tyrannicide is lawful1 confuted4 #aj4 ,lastly1 for the opinion1 that tyrannicide is lawful1 meaning by a tyrant any man in whom resideth the right of sovereignty1 is no less false and pernicious to human society1 than frequent in the writings of those moral philosophers1 ,seneca and others1 so greatly esteemed amongst us4 ,for when a man hath the right of sovereignty1 he cannot justly be punished1 as hath been often showed already1 and therefore much less deposed1 or put to death4 ,and howsoever he might deserve punishment1 yet punishment is unjust without judgment preceding1 and judgment unjust without power of judicature1 which a subject hath not over a sovereign4 ,but this doctrine proceedeth from the ,schools of ,greece1 and from those that writ in the ,roman state1 in which not only the name of a tyrant1 but of a king1 was hateful4 ,sidenote3 ,four heads of hope of success in rebellion4 #aa4 ,besides discontent1 to the disposing of a man to rebellion1 and pretence1 there is required1 in the third place1 hope of success1 which consisteth in four points3 ,i4 ,that the discontented have mutual intelligence2 ,,ii4 ,that they have sufficient number2 ,,iii4 ,that they have arms2 ,,iv4 ,that they agree upon a head4 ,for these four must concur to the making of one body of rebellion1 in which intelligence is the life1 number the limbs1 arms the strength1 and a head the unity1 by which they are directed to one and the same action4 ,sidenote3 ,two things necessary to an author of rebellion1 much eloquence1 and little wisdom4 #ab4 ,the authors of rebellion1 that is1 the men that breed these dispositions to rebel in others1 of necessity must have in them these three qualities3 ,i4 ,to be discontented themselves2 ,,ii4 ,to be men of mean judgment and capacity2 and1 ,,iii4 ,to be eloquent men1 or good orators4 ,and as for their discontent1 from whence it may proceed1 hath been already declared4 ,and for the second and third1 ,i am to show now1 first1 how they may stand together2 for it seemeth a contradiction1 to place small judgment and great eloquence1 or1 as they call it1 powerful speaking1 in the same man3 and then in what manner they concur1 to dispose other men to sedition4 ,sidenote3 ,that the authors of rebellion necessarily1 are to be men of little wisdom4 #ac4 ,it was noted by ,sallust1 that in ,catiline1 who was author of the greatest sedition that ever was in ,rome1 there was ,eloquenti satis1 sapienti parum2 eloquence sufficient1 but little wisdom4 ,and perhaps this was said of ,catiline1 as he was ,catiline3 but it was true of him as an author of sedition4 ,for the conjunction of these two qualities made him not ,catiline1 but seditious4 ,and that it may be understood1 how want of wisdom1 and store of eloquence1 may stand together1 we are to consider1 what it is we call wisdom1 and what eloquence4 ,and therefore ,i shall here again remember some things1 that have been said already1 ,human ,nature1 chap4 ,v4 ,,vi4 ,it is manifest that wisdom consisteth in knowledge4 ,now of knowledge there are two kinds2 whereof the one is the remembrance of such things1 as we have conceived by our senses1 and of the order in which they follow one another4 ,and this knowledge is called experience2 and the wisdom that proceedeth from it1 is that ability to conjecture by the present1 of what is past1 and to come1 which men call prudence4 ,this being so1 it is manifest presently1 that the author of sedition1 whosoever he be1 must not be prudent4 ,for if he consider and take his experiences aright1 concerning the success which they have had1 who have been the movers and authors of sedition1 either in this or any other state1 he shall find1 that for one man that hath thereby advanced himself to honour1 twenty have come to a reproachful end4 ,the other kind of knowledge1 is the remembrance of the names or appellations of things1 and how every thing is called1 which is1 in matters of common conversation1 a remembrance of pacts and covenants of men made amongst themselves1 concerning how to be understood of one another4 ,and this kind of knowledge is generally called science1 and the conclusions thereof truth4 ,but when men remember not how things are named1 by general agreement1 but either mistake and misname things1 or name them aright by chance1 they are not said to have science1 but opinion1 and the conclusions thence proceeding1 are uncertain1 and for the most part erroneous4 ,now that science in particular1 from which proceed the true and evident conclusions of what is right and wrong1 and what is good and hurtful to the being1 and well-being of mankind1 the ,latins call sapientia1 and we by the general name of wisdom4 ,for generally1 not he that hath skill in geometry1 or any other science speculative1 but only he that understandeth what conduceth to the good and government of the people1 is called a wise man4 ,now that no author of sedition can be wise in this acceptation of the word1 is sufficiently proved1 in that it hath been already demonstrated1 that no pretence of sedition can be right or just4 ,and therefore the authors of sedition must be ignorant of the right of state1 that is to say1 unwise4 ,it remaineth therefore1 that they be such1 as name things1 not according to their true and generally agreed upon names1 but call right and wrong1 good and bad1 according to their passions1 or according to the authorities of such as they admire1 as ,aristotle1 ,cicero1 ,seneca1 and others of like authority1 who have given the names of right and wrong1 as their passions have dictated2 or have followed the authority of other men1 as we do theirs4 ,it is required therefore in an author of sedition1 that he think right1 that which is wrong2 and profitable1 that which is pernicious2 and consequently that there be in him sapienti parum1 little wisdom4 ,sidenote3 ,that the same are necessarily eloquent4 #ad4 ,eloquence is nothing else but the power of winning belief of what we say4 ,and to that end we must have aid from the passions of the hearer4 ,now to demonstration and teaching of the truth1 there are required long deductions1 and great attention1 which is unpleasant to the hearer4 ,therefore they which seek not truth1 but belief1 must take another way1 and not only derive what they would have to be believed1 from somewhat believed already1 but also1 by aggravations and extenuations1 make good and bad1 right and wrong1 appear great or less1 according as shall serve their turns4 ,and such is the power of eloquence1 as many times a man is made to believe thereby1 that he sensibly feeleth smart and damage1 when he feeleth none1 and to enter into rage and indignation1 without any other cause1 than what is in the words and passion of the speaker4 ,this considered1 together with the business that he hath to do1 who is the author of rebellion1 namely1 to make men believe that their rebellion is just1 their discontents grounded upon great injuries1 and their hopes great2 there needeth no more to prove1 there can be no author of rebellion1 that is not an eloquent and powerful speaker1 and withal1 as hath been said before1 a man of little wisdom4 ,for the faculty of speaking powerfully1 consisteth in a habit gotten of putting together passionate words1 and applying them to the present passions of the hearer4 are not able to effect4 ,sidenote3 ,in what manner they concur to their common effects4 #ae4 ,seeing then eloquence and want of discretion concur to the stirring of rebellion1 it may be demanded1 what part each of these acteth therein8 ,the daughters of ,pelias1 king of ,thessaly1 desiring to restore their old decrepit father to the vigour of his youth1 by the counsel of ,medea1 chopped him in pieces1 and set him a boiling with ,i know not what herbs in a cauldron1 but could not revive him again4 ,so when eloquence and want of judgment go together1 want of judgment1 like the daughters of ,pelias1 consenteth1 through eloquence1 which is as the witchcraft of ,medea1 to cut the commonwealth in pieces1 upon pretence or hope of reformation1 which when things are in combustion1 they are not able to effect4 ------- ,,chapter ,,ix4 #a4 ,the law over sovereigns1 salus populi4 #b4 ,that sovereigns ought to establish the religion they hold for best4 #c4 ,that to forbid unnatural copulation1 promiscuous use of women1 c4 is the law of nature4 #d4 ,that to leave man as much liberty as may be1 c4 is the duty of a sovereign by the law of nature4 #e4 ,meum and tuum1 to be set out to the subjects1 distinct from one another1 c4 a duty of sovereigns by the law of nature4 #f4 ,an extraordinary power for judging the abuses of magistrates1 necessary1 c4 #g4 ,the suppressing of popularity1 c4 necessary1 c4 #h4 ,the instruction of youth1 c4 necessary1 c4 #i4 ,avoiding of unnecessary war1 a necessary duty of the sovereign1 c4 ,sidenote3 ,the law over sovereigns salus populi4 #a4 ,having hitherto set forth how a body politic is made1 and how it may be destroyed1 this place requireth to say something concerning the preservation of the same1 not purposing to enter into the particulars of the art of government1 but to sum up the general heads1 wherein such art is to be employed1 and in which consisteth the duty of him or them that have the sovereign power4 ,for the duty of a sovereign consisteth in the good government of the people4 ,and although the acts of sovereign power be no injuries to the subjects who have consented to the same by their implicit wills1 yet when they tend to the hurt of the people in general1 they be breaches of the law of nature1 and of the divine law2 and consequently1 the contrary acts are the duties of sovereigns1 and required at their hands to the utmost of their endeavour1 by ,god ,almighty1 under the pain of eternal death4 ,and as the art and duty of sovereigns consist in the same acts1 so also doth their profit4 ,for the end of art1 is profit2 and governing to the profit of the subjects1 is governing to the profit of the sovereign1 as hath been showed ,part ,,ii4 chapter ,v4 section #a4 ,and these three3 #a4 ,the law over them that have sovereign power3 #b4 ,their duty3 #c4 ,their profit3 are one and the same thing contained in this sentence1 ,salus populi suprema lex4 ,by which must be understood1 not the mere preservation of their lives1 but generally their benefit and good4 ,so that this is the general law for sovereigns1 ,that they procure1 to the uttermost of their endeavour1 the good of the people4 ,sidenote3 ,that sovereigns ought to establish the religion they hold for best4 #b4 ,and forasmuch as eternal is better than temporal good1 it is evident1 that they who are in sovereign authority1 are by the law of nature obliged to further the establishing of all such doctrines and rule1 and the commanding of all such actions1 as in their conscience they believe to be the true way thereunto4 ,for unless they do so1 it cannot be said truly1 that they have done the uttermost of their endeavour4 ,sidenote3 ,that to forbid unnatural copulation1 promiscuous use of women1 c4 is the law of nature4 #c4 ,for the temporal good of the people1 it consisteth in four points3 #a4 ,multitude3 #b4 ,commodity of living3 #c4 ,peace amongst themselves3 #d4 ,defence against foreign power4 ,concerning multitude1 it is the duty of them that are in sovereign authority1 to increase the people1 in as much as they are governors of mankind under ,god ,almighty1 who having created but one man1 and one woman1 declared1 that it was his will they should be multiplied and increased afterwards4 ,and seeing this is to be done by ordinances concerning copulation1 they are by the law of nature bound to make such ordinances concerning the same1 as may tend to the increase of mankind4 ,and hence it cometh1 that in them who have sovereign authority1 not to forbid such copulations as are against the use of nature2 not to forbid the promiscuous use of women1 not to forbid one woman to have many husbands1 not to forbid marriages within certain degrees of kindred and affinity1 are against the law of nature4 ,for though it be not evident1 that a private man living under the law of natural reason only1 doth break the same1 by doing any of the things aforesaid2 yet it is manifestly apparent1 that being so prejudicial as they are to the improvement of mankind1 that not to forbid the same1 is against the law of natural reason in him1 that hath taken into his hands any portion of mankind to improve4 ,sidenote3 ,that to leave man as much liberty as may be1 c4 is the duty of a sovereign by the law of nature4 #d4 ,the commodity of living consisteth in liberty and wealth4 ,by liberty1 ,i mean1 that there be no prohibition without necessity of any thing to any man1 which was lawful to him in the law of nature2 that is to say1 that there be no restraint of natural liberty1 but what is necessary for the good of the commonwealth1 and that well-meaning men may not fall into the danger of laws1 as into snares1 before they be aware4 ,it appertaineth also to this liberty1 that a man may have commodious passage from place to place1 and not be imprisoned or confined with the difficulty of ways1 and want of means for transportation of things necessary4 ,and for the wealth of people1 it consisteth in three things1 the well ordering of trade1 procuring of labour1 and forbidding the superfluous consuming of food and apparel4 ,all those therefore that are in sovereign authority1 and have taken upon them the government of people1 are bound by the law of nature to make ordinances consisting in the points afore named1 as being contrary to the law of nature1 unnecessarily1 either for one's own fancy1 to enthral1 or tie men so1 as they cannot move without danger2 or to suffer them whose maintenance is our benefit1 to want anything necessary for them1 by our negligence4 ,sidenote3 ,meum and tuum1 to be set out to the subjects1 distinct from one another1 c4 a duty of sovereigns by the law of nature4 #e4 ,for maintaining of peace at home1 there be so many things necessarily to be considered1 and taken order in1 as there be several causes concurring to sedition4 ,and first1 it is necessary to set out to every subject1 his propriety1 and distinct lands and goods1 upon which he may exercise and have the benefit of his own industry1 and without which men would fall out amongst themselves1 as did the herdsmen of ,abraham and ,lot1 every man encroaching and usurping as much of the common benefit as he can1 which tendeth to quarrel and sedition4 ,secondly1 to divide the burthens and charges of the commonwealth proportionably4 ,now there is a proportionably to every man's ability1 and there is a proportionably to his benefit by commonwealth3 and this latter is it1 which is according to the law of nature4 ,for the burdens of the commonwealth being the price that we pay for the benefit thereof1 they ought to be measured thereby4 ,and there is no reason1 when two men equally enjoying1 by the benefit of the commonwealth1 their peace and liberty1 to use their industry to get their livings1 whereof one spareth1 and layeth up somewhat1 the other spendeth all he gets1 why they should not equally contribute to the common charge4 ,that seemeth therefore to be the most equal way of dividing the burden of public charge1 when every man shall contribute according to what he spendeth1 and not according to what he gets4 ,and this is then done1 when men pay the commonwealth's part in the payments they make for their own provision4 ,and this seemeth not only most equal1 but also least sensible1 and least to trouble the mind of them that pay it4 ,for there is nothing so aggravateth the grief of parting with money to the public1 as to think they are over-rated1 and that their neighbours whom they envy1 do thereupon insult over them1 and this disposeth them to resistance1 and1 after that such resistance hath produced a mischief1 to rebellion4 ,sidenote3 ,an extraordinary power for judging the abuses of magistrates1 necessary1 c4 #f4 ,another thing necessary for the maintaining of peace1 is the due execution of justice1 which consisteth principally in the right performance of their duties1 which are the magistrates1 ordained for the same by and under the authority of the sovereign power1 which being private men in respect of the sovereign1 and consequently such as may have private ends1 whereby they may be corrupted with gifts1 or intercession of friends1 ought to be kept in awe by an higher power1 lest people1 grieved by their injustice1 should take upon them to make their own revenges1 to the disturbance of the common peace2 which can by no way be avoided in the principal and immediate magistrates1 without the judicature of the sovereign himself1 or some extraordinary power delegated by him4 ,it is therefore necessary1 that there be a power extraordinary1 as there shall be occasion from time to time1 for the syndication of judges and other magistrates1 that shall abuse their authority1 to the wrong and discontent of the people2 and a free and open way for the presenting of grievances to him or them that have the sovereign authority4 ,sidenote3 ,the suppressing of popularity1 c4 necessary1 c4 #g4 ,besides these considerations1 by which are prevented the discontents that arise from oppression1 there ought to be some means for the keeping under of those1 that are disposed to rebellion by ambition2 which consist principally in the constancy of him that hath the sovereign power1 who ought therefore constantly to grace and encourage such1 as being able to serve the commonwealth1 do nevertheless contain themselves within the bounds of modesty1 without repining at the authority of such as are employed1 and without aggravating the errors1 which1 as men1 they may commit1 especially when they suffer not in their own particular2 and constantly to show displeasure1 and dislike of the contrary4 ,and not only so1 but also to ordain severe punishments for such1 as shall by reprehension of public actions1 affect popularity and applause amongst the multitude1 by which they may be enabled to have a faction in the commonwealth at their devotion4 ,sidenote3 ,the instruction of youth1 c4 necessary1 c4 #h4 ,another thing necessary1 is the rooting out of the consciences of men1 all those opinions which seem to justify and give pretence of right to rebellious actions2 such as are the opinions1 that a man can do nothing lawfully against his private conscience2 that they who have the sovereignty1 are subject to the civil laws2 that there is any authority of subjects1 whose negative may hinder the affirmative of the sovereign power2 that any subject hath a propriety distinct from the dominion of the commonwealth2 that there is a body of the people without him or them that have the sovereign power2 and that any lawful sovereign may be resisted under the name of a tyrant2 which opinions are they1 which1 ,part ,,ii4 chap4 ,,viii4 sect4 #e-aj1 have been declared to dispose men to rebellion4 ,and because opinions which are gotten by education1 and in length of time1 are made habitual1 cannot be taken away by force1 and upon the sudden2 they must therefore be taken away also by time and education4 ,and seeing the said opinions have proceeded from private and public teaching1 and those teachers have received them from grounds and principles1 which they have learned in the ,universities1 from the doctrine of ,aristotle1 and others1 who have delivered nothing concerning morality and policy demonstratively2 but being passionately addicted to popular government1 have insinuated their opinions by eloquent sophistry4 ,there is no doubt1 if the true doctrine concerning the law of nature1 and the properties of a body politic1 and the nature of law in general1 were perspicuously set down and taught in the ,universities1 but that young men1 who come thither void of prejudice1 and whose minds are as white paper1 capable of any instruction1 would more easily receive the same1 and afterward teach it to the people1 both in books and otherwise1 than now they do the contrary4 ,sidenote3 ,avoiding of unnecessary war1 a necessary duty of the sovereign1 c4 #i4 ,the last thing contained in that supreme law1 salus populi1 is their defence2 and consisteth partly in the obedience and unity of the subjects1 of which hath been already spoken1 and in which consisteth the means of levying soldiers1 and of having money1 arms1 ships1 and fortified places in readiness for defence2 and partly1 in the avoiding of unnecessary wars4 ,for such commonwealths1 or such monarchs1 as affect war for itself1 that is to say1 out of ambition1 or of vain-glory1 or that make account to revenge every little injury1 or disgrace done by their neighbours1 if they ruin not themselves1 their fortune must be better than they have reason to expect4 ------- ,,chapter ,x4 #a4 ,all expressions1 c4 concerning future actions1 are either covenant1 counsel1 or command4 #b4 ,the difference between a law and a covenant4 #c4 ,the command of him whose command is law in one thing1 is law in every thing4 #d4 ,the difference between law and counsel4 #e4 ,the difference between jus and lex4 #f4 ,the division of laws1 c4 #g4 ,that the divine moral law1 and the law of nature1 is the same4 #h4 ,that the civil laws are the common measure of right and wrong1 c4 #i4 ,martial law is civil law4 #aj4 ,written laws1 c4 ,unwritten1 c4 ,customs and opinions1 c4 ,sidenote3 ,all expressions1 c4 concerning future actions1 are either covenant1 counsel1 or command4 #a4 ,thus far concerning the ,nature of ,man1 and the constitution and properties of a ,body ,politic4 ,there remaineth only for the last chapter1 to speak of the nature and sorts of law4 ,and first it is manifest1 that all laws are declarations of the mind1 concerning some action future to be done1 or omitted4 ,and all declarations and expressions of the mind concerning future actions and omissions1 are either promissive1 as ,i will do1 or not do2 or provisive1 as for example1 ,if this be done or not done1 this will follow2 or imperative1 as ,do this1 or do it not4 ,in the first sort of these expressions1 consisteth the nature of a covenant2 in the second1 consisteth counsel2 in the third1 command4 ,sidenote3 ,the difference between a law and a covenant4 #b4 ,it is evident when a man doth1 or forbeareth to do any action1 if he be moved thereto by this only consideration1 that the same is good or evil in itself2 and that there be no reason why the will or pleasure of another1 should be of any weight in his deliberation1 that then neither to do nor omit the action deliberated1 is any breach of law4 ,and consequently1 whatsoever is a law to a man1 respecteth the will of another1 and the declaration thereof4 ,but a covenant is a declaration of a man's own will4 ,and therefore a law and a covenant differ3 and though they be both obligatory1 and a law obligeth no otherwise than by virtue of some covenant made by him who is subject thereunto1 yet they oblige by several sorts of promises4 ,for a covenant obligeth by promise of an action1 or omission especially named and limited2 but a law bindeth by a promise of obedience in general1 whereby the action to be done1 or left undone1 is referred to the determination of him1 to whom the covenant is made4 ,so that the difference between a covenant and a law1 standeth thus3 in simple covenant1 the action to be done1 or not done1 is first limited and made known1 and then followeth the promise to do or not do2 but in a law1 the obligation to do or not to do1 precedeth1 and the declaration what is to be done1 or not done1 followeth after4 ,sidenote3 ,the command of him whose command is law in one thing1 is law in every thing4 #c4 ,and from this may be deduced1 that which to some may seem a paradox1 ,that the command of him1 whose command is a law in one thing1 is a law in every thing4 ,for seeing a man is obliged to obedience before what he is to do be known1 he is obliged to obey in general1 that is to say1 in every thing4 ,sidenote3 ,the difference between law and counsel4 #d4 ,that the counsel of a man is no law to him that is counselled1 and that he who alloweth another to give him counsel1 doth not thereby oblige himself to follow the same1 is manifest enough4 ,and yet men usually call counselling1 by the name of governing2 not that they are not able to distinguish between them1 but because they envy many times those men that are called to counsel1 and are therefore angry with them that they are counselled4 ,but if to counsellors there should be given a right to have their counsel followed1 then are they no more counsellors1 but masters of them whom they counsel2 and their counsels no more counsels1 but laws4 ,for the difference between a law and a counsel being no more but this1 that in counsel the expression is1 ,do1 because it is best2 in a law1 ,do1 because ,i have a right to compel you2 or ,do1 because ,i say1 do2 when counsel should give the reason of the action it adviseth to1 because the reason thereof itself is no more counsel1 but a law4 ,sidenote3 ,the difference between jus lex4 #e4 ,the names lex and jus1 that is to say1 law and right1 are often confounded1 and yet scarce are there any two words of more contrary signification4 ,for right is that liberty which law leaveth us1 and laws those restraints by which we agree mutually to abridge one another's liberty4 ,law and right therefore are no less different than restraint and liberty1 which are contrary2 and whatsoever a man doth1 that liveth in a commonwealth jure1 he doth it jure civili1 jure natur1 and jure divino4 ,for whatsoever is against any of these laws1 cannot be said to be jure4 ,for the civil law cannot make that to be done jure1 which is against the law divine1 or of nature4 ,and therefore whatsoever any subject doth1 if it be not contrary to the civil law1 and whatsoever a sovereign doth1 if it be not against the law of nature1 he doth it jure divino1 by divine right4 ,but to say1 lege divin1 by divine law1 is another thing4 ,for the laws of ,god and nature allowing greater liberty than is allowed by the law civil2 for subordinate laws do still bind more than superior laws1 the essence of law being not to loose1 but to bind1 a man may be commanded that by a law civil1 which is not commanded by the law of nature1 nor by the law divine4 ,so that of things done lege1 that is to say1 by command of the law1 there is some place for a distinction between lege divin1 and lege civili4 ,as when a man giveth an alms1 or helpeth him that is in need1 he doth it not lege civili1 but lege divin1 by the divine law1 the precept whereof is charity4 ,but for things that are done jure1 nothing can be said to be done jure divino1 that is not also jure civili1 unless it be done by them that having sovereign power1 are not subject to the civil law4 ,sidenote3 ,the division of laws1 c4 #f4 ,the differences of laws1 are according to the differences1 either of the authors and lawmakers1 or of the promulgation1 or of those that are subject to them4 ,from the difference of the authors1 or lawmakers1 cometh the division of law into divine1 natural1 and civil4 ,from the difference of promulgation1 proceedeth the division of laws into written and unwritten4 ,and from the difference of the persons to whom the law appertaineth1 it proceedeth1 that some laws are called simply laws1 and some penal4 ,as for example1 thou shalt not steal1 is simply a law2 but this1 he that stealeth an ox1 shall restore four-fold1 is a penal1 or as others call it1 a judicial law4 ,now in those laws1 which are simply laws1 the commandment is addressed to every man2 but in penal laws the commandment is addressed to the magistrate1 who is only guilty of the breach of it1 when the penalties ordained1 are not inflicted2 to the rest appertained nothing1 but to take notice of their danger4 ,sidenote3 ,that the divine moral law1 and the law of nature1 is the same4 #g4 ,as for the first division of law into divine1 natural1 and civil1 the first two branches are one and the same law4 ,for the law of nature1 which is also the moral law1 is the law of the author of nature1 ,god ,almighty2 and the law of ,god taught by our ,saviour ,christ1 is the moral law4 ,for the sum of ,god's law is1 ,thou shalt love ,god above all1 and thy neighbour as thyself2 and the same is the sum of the law of nature1 as hath been showed1 ,part ,i4 chap4 ,v4 ,and although the doctrine of our ,saviour be of three parts1 moral1 theological1 and ecclesiastical2 the former part only1 which is the moral1 is of the nature of a law universal2 the latter part is a branch of the law civil2 and the theological1 which containeth those articles concerning the divinity and kingdom of our ,saviour1 without which there is no salvation1 is not delivered in the nature of laws1 but of counsel and direction1 how to avoid the punishment1 which by the violation of the moral law1 men are subject to4 ,for it is not infidelity that condemneth1 though it be faith that saveth1 but the breach of the law and commandments of ,god1 written first in man's heart1 and afterwards in tables1 and delivered to the ,jews by the hands of ,moses4 ,sidenote3 ,that the civil laws are the common measure of right and wrong1 c4 #h4 ,in the state of nature1 where every man is his own judge1 and differeth from other concerning the names and appellations of things1 and from those differences arise quarrels and breach of peace1 it was necessary there should be a common measure of all things1 that might fall in controversy4 ,as for example2 of what is to be called right1 what good1 what virtue1 what much1 what little1 what meum and tuum1 what a pound1 what a quart1 c4 ,for in these things private judgments may differ1 and beget controversy4 ,this common measure1 some say1 is right reason3 with whom ,i should consent1 if there were any such thing to be found or known in rerum natur4 ,but commonly they that call for right reason to decide any controversy1 do mean their own4 ,but this is certain1 seeing right reason is not existent1 the reason of some man or men must supply the place thereof2 and that man or men1 is he or they1 that have the sovereign power1 as hath been already proved2 and consequently the civil laws are to all subjects the measures of their actions1 whereby to determine1 whether they be right or wrong1 profitable or unprofitable1 virtuous or vicious2 and by them the use and definition of all names not agreed upon1 and tending to controversy1 shall be established4 ,as for example1 when upon occasion of some strange and deformed birth1 it shall not be decided by ,aristotle1 or the philosophers1 whether the same be a man1 or no1 but by the laws2 the civil law containing in it the ecclesiastical1 as a part thereof1 proceeding from the power of ecclesiastical government1 given by our ,saviour to all ,christian sovereigns1 as his immediate vicars1 as hath been said ,part ,,ii4 chap4 ,,vii4 sect4 #aj4 ,sidenote3 ,martial law is civil law4 #i4 ,but seeing it hath been said1 that all laws are either natural or civil1 it may be demanded1 to which of these shall be referred that law1 which is called martial law1 and by the ,romans1 disciplina militaris8 ,and it may seem to be the same with the law of nature2 because the laws by which a multitude of soldiers are governed in an army are not constant1 but continually changing with the occasion2 and that is still a law1 which is reason for the present1 and reason is the law of nature4 ,it is nevertheless true1 that martial law is civil law1 because an army is a body politic1 the whole power whereof is in the ,general1 and the laws thereof made by him2 and though they still follow and change as reason requireth1 yet it is not1 as the reason of every private man1 but as the reason of the ,general requireth4 ,sidenote3 ,written laws1 ,unwritten1 c4 ,customs1 and ,opinions1 c4 #aj4 ,when he or they in whom is the sovereign power of a commonwealth1 are to ordain laws for the government and good order of the people1 it is not possible they should comprehend all cases of controversy that may fall out1 or perhaps any considerable diversity of them3 but as time shall instruct them by the rising of new occasions1 so are also laws from time to time to be ordained3 and in such cases where no special law is made1 the law of nature keepeth its place1 and the magistrates ought to give sentence according thereunto1 that is to say1 according to natural reason4 ,the constitutions therefore of the sovereign power1 by which the liberty of nature is abridged1 are written1 because there is no other way to take notice of them2 whereas the laws of nature are supposed to be written in men's hearts4 ,written laws therefore are the constitutions of a commonwealth expressed2 and unwritten1 are the laws of natural reason4 ,custom of itself maketh no laws4 ,nevertheless when a sentence hath been once given1 by them that judge by their natural reason1 whether the same be right or wrong1 it may attain to the vigour of a law2 not because the like sentence hath of custom been given in the like case1 but because the sovereign power is supposed tacitly to have approved such sentence for right1 and thereby it cometh to be a law1 and numbered amongst the written laws of the commonwealth4 ,for if custom were sufficient to introduce a law1 then it would be in the power of every one that is deputed to hear a cause1 to make his errors laws4 ,in the like manner1 those laws that go under the title of responsa prudentum1 that is to say1 the opinions of lawyers1 are not therefore laws1 because responsa prudentum1 but because they are admitted by the sovereign4 ,and from this may be collected1 that when there is a case of private contract between the sovereign and the subject1 a precedent against reason shall not prejudice the cause of the sovereign2 no precedent being made a law1 but upon supposition that the same was reasonable from the beginning4 ,and thus much concerning the elements and general grounds of laws natural and politic4 ,as for the law of nations1 it is the same with the law of nature4 ,for that which is the law of nature between man and man1 before the constitution of commonwealth1 is the law of nations between sovereign and sovereign1 after4 ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ,,of ,,liberty ,,and ,,necessity3 ,a ,,treatise1 ,,wherein ,,all ,,controversy ,,concerning ,,predestination1 ,,election1 ,,free-,,will1 ,,grace1 ,,merits1 ,,reprobation1 c4 ,,is ,,fully ,,decided ,,and ,,cleared4 ,,in ,,answer ,,to ,a ,,treatise ,,written ,,by ,,the ,,bishop ,,of ,,londonderry1 ,,on ,,the ,,same ,,subject4 ,,to ,,the ,,sober ,,and ,,discreet ,,reader4 ,it made ,st4 ,chrysostom tremble whenever he reflected on the proportion1 which those that went the narrow way1 bore to those which marched in the broad1 how many were the called1 and how few the chosen1 how many they were that were created for and in a capacity of eternal beatitude1 and how few attained it4 ,this consideration certainly would make a man look upon the ,holy ,scriptures1 among ,christians1 as the greatest indulgence of heaven1 being all the directions it hath been pleased to afford poor man in so difficult a journey as that of his eternal bliss or misery4 ,but when a man cometh to look into those transcendant writings1 he finds them to be the works of a sort of innocent harmless men1 that had little acquaintance or familiarity with the world1 and consequently not much interested in the troubles and quarrels of several countries2 that though they are all but necessary1 yet were they written occasionally1 rather than out of design2 and lastly1 that their main business is1 to abstract man from this world1 and to persuade him to prefer the bare hope of what he can neither see1 hear1 nor conceive1 before all the present enjoyments this world can afford4 ,this begat a reverence and esteem to them in all those who endeavour to work out their salvation out of them4 ,but if a man1 not weighing them in themselves1 shall consider the practices of those1 who pretend to be the interpreters of them1 and to make them fit meat for the people2 how that instead of renouncing the world1 they endeavour to raise themselves into the greatest promotions1 leisure1 and luxury2 that they make them the decoys of the people1 to carry on designs and intrigues of state1 and study the enjoyments of this world more than any other people3 he will find some grounds to conclude1 the practices of such men to be the greatest disturbance1 burden1 and vexation of the ,christian part of the world4 ,the complaint is as true as sad2 instead of acquainting the credulous vulgar1 with the main end of their functions1 and the great business of their embassy1 what a great measure of felicity is prepared for them1 and how easily it may be forfeited2 they involve their consciences in the briars of a thousand needless scruples1 they spin out volumes out of half sentences1 nay1 out of points and accents1 and raise endless controversies about things1 7were men free from passion and prejudice71 in themselves clear enough3 and when they have canvassed their questions1 till they are weary themselves1 and have wearied hearers and readers1 and all they have to do with1 every one sits down under his own vine1 and hugs his own apprehensions2 so that after all their pains1 bandings1 and implacable adhesion to parties1 the inconvenience remains still1 and we as far from any solid conviction1 as at first setting out4 ,the controversies betwixt ,rome and the ,reformation are long since beaten out of the pit1 by other combatants of their own brood2 so that if we speak of ,protestant and ,catholic1 they are in a manner content to sit down with their present acquests3 for as to conviction1 he certainly is a rare proselyte1 at whose conversion1 interest1 humour1 discontent1 inclination1 are not admitted to the debate4 ,but to come yet nearer our purpose1 let us consider our own fractions of fractions of religion here in ,england1 where if that saying1 that it is better to live where nothing is lawful1 than where all things1 be as true in religion as policy1 posterity may haply feel the sad consequence of it4 ,what1 ,i pray1 is the effect of so many sermons1 teachings1 preachings1 exercises1 and exercising of gifts1 meetings1 disputations1 conferences1 conventicles1 printed books1 written with so much distraction and presumption upon ,god ,almighty1 and abuse of his ,holy ,word8 ,marry this3 it is the seminary of many vexatious1 endless1 and fruitless controversies1 the consequence whereof are jealousies1 heart-burnings1 exasperation of parties1 the introduction of factions and national quarrels into matters of religion1 and consequently all the calamities of war and devastation4 ,besides1 they are good lawful diversions for the duller sort of citizens1 who contract diseases for want of motion2 they supply the building of pyramids among the ,egyptians1 by diverting the thoughts of the people from matters of state1 and consequently from rebellion4 ,they find work for printers1 c4 if the parties interested are troubled with the itch of popularity1 and will suffer themselves to be scratched out of somewhat by way of contribution to the impression4 ,hence is the stationer's shop furnished1 and thence the minister's study in the country1 who having found out the humour of his auditory1 consults with his stationer1 on what books his money is best bestowed2 who very gravely1 it may be1 will commend ,cole upon the ,philippians before the excellent1 but borrowed1 ,caryl upon ,job4 ,but as to any matter of conviction1 we see every one acquiesces in his own sentiments1 every one hears the teacher who is most to his humour2 and when he hath been at church1 and pretends to have sat at his feet1 comes home and censures him as he pleases4 ,to be yet a little more particular1 what shall we think of those vast and involuble volumes concerning predestination1 free-will1 free-grace1 election1 reprobation1 c41 which fill not only our libraries1 but the world with their noise and disturbance1 whereof the least thing we are to expect is conviction2 every side endeavouring to make good their own grounds1 and keep the cudgels in their hands as long as they can8 ,what stir is there between the ,molinists and ,jansenists about grace and merits2 and yet both pretend ,st4 ,augustin6 ,must we not expect1 that the ,jesuits will1 were it for no other end but to vindicate that reputation of learning they have obtained in the world1 endeavour to make good their tenets1 though the other were the truer opinion8 ,is truth then retired to that inaccessible rock that admits no approaches8 ,or are we all turned ,ixions1 and instead of enjoying that ,juno1 entertain ourselves with the clouds of our own persuasions2 of which unnatural coition1 what other issue can there be but ,centaurs and monstrous opinions8 ,to these questions ,i shall not presume to answer1 but in the words of this great author1 who answering the charge of impiety laid upon the holding of necessity1 says thus2 ,if we consider the greatest part of mankind1 not as they should be1 but as they are1 that is as men1 whom either the study of acquiring wealth and preferment1 or whom the appetite of sensual delights1 or the impatience of meditating1 or the rash embracing of wrong principles1 have made unapt to discuss the truth of things1 ,i must confess1 c4 ,certainly we have some reason to expect an effectual cure from this man1 since he hath so fortunately found out the disease4 ,now if he in so few sheets hath performed more than all the voluminous works of the priests and ministers1 and that in points of soul-concernment and ,christian interest1 as predestination1 free-will1 grace1 merits1 election1 reprobation1 necessity1 and liberty of actions1 and others1 the main hinges of human salvation2 and to do this1 being a person1 whom not only the averseness of his nature to engage himself in matters of controversy of this kind1 but his severer study of the mathematics1 might justly exempt from any such skirmishes2 we may not stick to infer1 that the black-coats1 generally taken1 are a sort of ignorant tinkers1 who in matters of their own profession1 such as is the mending and soldering of men's consciences1 have made more holes than they found2 nay1 what makes them more impardonable1 they have neither the gratitude nor ingenuity to acknowledge this repairer of their breaches1 and assertor of their reputation1 who hath now effected what they all this while have been tampering about4 ,i know this author is little beholden to the ministers1 and they make a great part of the nation2 and besides them1 ,i know there are many illiterate1 obstinate1 and inconvincible spirits3 yet ,i dare advance this proposition1 how bold soever it may seem to some2 that this book1 how little and contemptible soever it may seem1 contains more evidence and conviction in the matters it treats of1 than all the volumes1 nay libraries1 which the priests1 jesuits1 and ministers have1 to our great charge1 distraction1 and loss of precious time1 furnished us with4 ,which if so1 ,i shall undertake for any rational man1 that all the controversial labours concerning religion in the world1 all the polemical treatises of the most ancient or modern1 shall never breed any maggots of scruples1 or dissatisfactions in his brains1 nor shall his eyes or head ever ache with turning them over2 but he shall be so resolved in mind1 as never to importune ,god ,almighty with impertinent addresses1 nor ever become any of those enthusiastical spiritati1 who1 as the most learned ,mr4 ,white says1 expound ,scripture without sense or reason1 and are not to be disputed with but with the same success as men write on sand1 and trouble their neighbours with their dreams1 revelations1 and spiritual whimsies4 ,no6 here is solid conviction1 at least so far as the metaphysical mysteries of our religion will admit4 ,if ,god be omnipotent1 he is irresistible2 if so1 just in all his actions1 though we1 who have as much capacity to measure the justice of ,god's actions as a man born blind to judge of colours1 haply may not discern it4 ,what then need any man trouble his head1 whether he be predestinated or no8 ,let him live justly and honestly according to the religion of his country1 and refer himself to ,god for the rest1 since he is the potter1 and may do what he please with the vessel4 ,but ,i leave the reader to find his satisfaction in the treatise itself1 since it may be ,i derogate from it by saying so much before it4 ,this book1 ,i doubt not1 will find no worse entertainment than the ,leviathan1 both in regard of its bulk1 and that it doth not strike so home at the ministers and ,catholic party as that did4 ,and yet here we must complain of want of sufficiency or ingenuity to acknowledge the truths or confute the errors of that book2 which till it is done1 we shall not count the author an heretic4 ,on this side the sea1 besides the dirt and slander cast on him in sermons and private meetings1 none hath put anything in print against him1 but ,mr4 ,rosse2 one who may be said to have had so much learning1 as to have been perpetually barking at the works of the most learned4 ,how he hath been received beyond seas ,i know not1 but certainly1 not without the regret of the ,catholics2 who building their church on other foundations than those of the ,scriptures1 and pretending infallibility1 certitude1 and unity in religion1 cannot but be discontented that these prerogatives of religion are taken away1 not only from tradition1 that is to say1 from the church1 but also from the ,scriptures1 and are invested in the supreme power of the nation1 be it of what persuasion it will4 ,thus much1 ,reader1 ,i have thought fit to acquaint thee with1 that thou mightest know what a jewel thou hast in thy hands1 which thou must accordingly value1 not by the bulk1 but the preciousness4 ,thou hast here in a few sheets what might prove work enough for many thousand sermons and exercises2 and more than the catechisms and confessions of a thousand assemblies could furnish thee with3 thou hast what will cast an eternal blemish on all the cornered caps of priests and jesuits1 and all the black and white caps of the canting tribe2 to be short1 thou art now acquainted with that man1 who1 in matters of so great importance as those of thy salvation1 furnishes thee with better instructions1 than any thou hast ever yet been acquainted with1 what profession1 persuasion1 opinion1 or church soever thou art of2 of whom and his works make the best use thou canst4 ,farewell4 pm hrdbl ,,to ,,the ,,lord ,,marquis ,,of ,,newcastle4 ------- ,,right ,,honourable1 ,i had once resolved to answer my ,lord ,bishop's objections to my book ,,de ,,cive in the first place1 as that which concerns me most2 and afterwards to examine his ,discourse of ,,liberty and ,,necessity1 which1 because ,i had never uttered my opinion of it1 concerned me the less4 ,but seeing it was your ,lordship's and my ,lord ,bishop's desire that ,i should begin with the latter1 ,i was contented so to do1 and here ,i present and submit it to your ,lordship's judgment4 ,and first ,i assure your ,lordship ,i find in it no new argument neither from ,scripture nor from reason1 that ,i have not often heard before1 which is as much as to say1 ,i am not surprised4 ,the preface is a handsome one1 but it appeareth even in that1 that he hath mistaken the question4 ,for whereas he says thus1 ,if ,i be free to write this ,discourse1 ,i have obtained the cause3 ,i deny that to be true1 for it is enough to his freedom of writing1 that he had not written it1 unless he would himself4 ,if he will obtain the cause1 he must prove that before he writ it1 it was not necessary he should prove it afterward4 ,it may be his ,lordship thinks it all one to say1 ,i was free to write it1 and1 ,it was not necessary ,i should write it4 ,but ,i think otherwise4 ,for he is free to do a thing1 that may do it if he have the will to do it1 and may forbear1 if he have the will to forbear4 ,and yet if there be a necessity that he shall have the will to do it1 the action is necessarily to follow3 and if there be a necessity that he shall have the will to forbear1 the forbearing also will be necessary4 ,the question therefore is not1 whether a man be a free agent1 that is to say1 whether he can write or forbear1 speak or be silent1 according to his will2 but1 whether the will to write1 and the will to forbear1 come upon him according to his will1 or according to anything else in his own power4 ,i acknowledge this liberty1 that ,i can do if ,i will2 but to say1 ,i can will if ,i will1 ,i take to be an absurd speech4 ,wherefore ,i cannot grant my ,lord the cause upon his preface4 ,in the next place1 he maketh certain distinctions of liberty1 and says he meaneth not liberty from sin1 nor from servitude1 nor from violence2 but1 from necessity1 necessitation1 inevitability1 and determination to one4 ,it had been better to define liberty1 than thus to distinguish4 ,for ,i understand never the more what he means by liberty2 and though he say he means liberty from necessitation1 yet ,i understand not how such a liberty can be1 and it is a taking of the question without proof4 ,for what is else the question between us1 but whether such a liberty be possible or not8 ,there are in the same place other distinctions3 as a liberty of exercise only1 which he calls a liberty of contradiction1 namely of doing not good1 or evil simply1 but of doing this or that good1 or this or that evil respectively1 and a liberty of specification and exercise also1 which he calls a liberty of contrariety1 namely a liberty not only to do good or evil1 but also to do or not do this or that good or evil4 ,and with these distinctions his ,lordship says he clears the coast1 whereas in truth1 he darkeneth his own meaning and the question1 not only with the jargon of exercise only1 specification also1 contradiction1 contrariety1 but also with pretending distinction where none is3 for how is it possible that the liberty of doing or not doing this or that good or evil1 can consist1 as he says it does in ,god and good angels1 without a liberty of doing or not doing good or evil8 ,the next thing his ,lordship does1 after clearing of the coast1 is the dividing of his forces1 as he calls them1 into two squadrons1 one of places of ,scriptures1 the other of reasons1 which allegory he useth1 ,i suppose1 because he addresseth the discourse to your ,lordship1 who is a military man4 ,all that ,i have to say touching this1 is1 that ,i observe a great part of those his forces do look and march another way1 and some of them fight amongst themselves4 ,and the first place of ,scripture1 taken from ,numb4 xxx4 #ac1 is one of those that look another way2 the words are1 ,if a wife make a vow1 it is left to her husband's choice either to establish it or make it void4 ,for it proves no more but that the husband is a free and voluntary agent1 but not that his choice therein is not necessitated or not determined to what he shall choose1 by precedent necessary causes4 ,for if there come into the husband's mind greater good by establishing than abrogating such a vow1 the establishing will follow necessarily2 and if the evil that will follow in the husband's opinion outweigh the good1 the contrary must needs follow3 and yet in this following of one's hopes and fears1 consisteth the nature of election4 ,so that a man may both choose this1 and cannot but choose this1 and consequently choosing and necessity are joined together4 ,the second place of ,scripture is ,joshua1 xxiv4 #ae4 ,the third is #b ,sam4 xxiv4 #ab1 whereby it is clearly proved1 that there is election in man1 but not proved that such election was not necessitated by the hopes1 and fears1 and considerations of good and bad to follow1 which depend not on the will1 nor are subject to election4 ,and therefore one answer serves all such places1 if there were a thousand4 ,but his ,lordship supposing1 it seems1 ,i might answer1 as ,i have done1 that necessity and election might stand together1 and instance in the actions of children1 fools1 or brute beasts1 whose fancies1 ,i might say1 are necessitated and determined to one2 before these his proofs out of ,scripture1 desires to prevent that instance1 and therefore says that the actions of children1 fools1 madmen1 and beasts1 are indeed determined1 but that they proceed not from election1 nor from free1 but from spontaneous agents4 ,as for example1 that the bee1 when it maketh honey1 does it spontaneously2 and when the spider makes his web1 he does it spontaneously1 but not by election4 ,though ,i never meant to ground my answer upon the experience of what children1 fools1 madmen1 and beasts do2 yet that your ,lordship may understand what can be meant by spontaneous1 and how it differeth from voluntary1 ,i will answer that distinction1 and show that it fighteth against its fellow arguments4 ,your ,lordship therefore is to consider1 that all voluntary actions1 where the thing that induceth the will is not fear1 are called also spontaneous1 and said to be done by a man's own accord4 ,as when a man giveth money voluntarily to another for merchandise1 or out of affection1 he is said to do it of his own accord1 which in ,latin is sponte1 and therefore the action is spontaneous2 though to give one's money willingly to a thief to avoid killing1 or throw it into the sea to avoid drowning1 where the motive is fear1 be not called spontaneous4 ,but every spontaneous action is not therefore voluntary1 for voluntary presupposes some precedent deliberation1 that is to say1 some consideration1 and meditation1 of what is likely to follow1 both upon the doing1 and abstaining from the action deliberated of2 whereas many actions are done of our own accord1 and are therefore spontaneous1 for which nevertheless1 as my ,lord thinks1 we never consulted nor deliberated in ourselves4 ,as when making no question nor any the least doubt in the world1 but the thing we are about is good1 we eat and walk1 or in anger strike or revile1 which my ,lord thinks spontaneous1 but not voluntary nor elective actions1 and with such kind of actions1 he says necessitation may stand1 but not with such as are voluntary1 and proceed upon election and deliberation4 ,now if ,i make it appear to your ,lordship1 that those actions1 which1 he says1 proceed from spontaneity1 and which he ascribes to children1 fools1 madmen1 and beasts1 proceed from election and deliberation1 and that actions inconsiderate1 rash1 and spontaneous1 are ordinarily found in those1 that are by themselves and many more thought as wise1 or wiser than ordinarily men are1 then my ,lord ,bishop's argument concludeth1 that necessity and election may stand together1 which is contrary to that which he intendeth by all the rest of his arguments to prove4 ,and first your ,lordship's own experience furnishes you with proof enough1 that horses1 dogs1 and other brute beasts1 do demur oftentimes upon the way they are to take1 the horse retiring from some strange figure that he sees1 and coming on again to avoid the spur4 ,and what else doth a man that deliberateth1 but one while proceed toward action1 another while retire from it1 as the hope of greater good draws him1 or the fear of greater evil drives him away4 ,a child may be so young as to do what it does without all deliberation1 but that is but till it have the chance to be hurt by doing of somewhat1 or till it be of age to understand the rod3 for the actions1 wherein he hath once had a check1 shall be deliberated on the second time4 ,fools and madmen manifestly deliberate no less than the wisest men1 though they make not so good a choice1 the images of things being by disease altered4 ,for bees and spiders1 if my ,lord ,bishop had had so little to do as to be a spectator of their actions1 he would have confessed not only election1 but art1 prudence1 and policy1 in them1 very near equal to that of mankind4 ,of bees1 ,aristotle says1 their life is civil4 ,again1 his ,lordship is deceived1 if he think any spontaneous action1 after once being checked in it1 differs from an action voluntary and elective3 for even the setting of a man's foot1 in the posture for walking1 and the action of ordinary eating1 was once deliberated of how and when it should be done1 and though afterward it became easy and habitual1 so as to be done without forethought2 yet that does not hinder but that the act is voluntary1 and proceedeth from election4 ,so also are the rashest actions of choleric persons voluntary and upon deliberation3 for who is there but very young children1 that hath not considered when and how far he ought1 or safely may strike or revile8 ,seeing then his ,lordship agrees with me1 that such actions are necessitated1 and the fancy of those that do them determined to the action they do1 it follows out of his ,lordship's own doctrine1 that the liberty of election does not take away the necessity of electing this or that individual thing4 ,and thus one of his arguments fights against another4 ,the second argument from ,scripture1 consisteth in histories of men that did one thing1 when if they would1 they might have done another2 the places are two3 one is #a ,kings iii4 #aj1 where the history says1 ,god was pleased that ,solomon1 who might1 if he would1 have asked riches1 or revenge1 did nevertheless ask wisdom at ,god's hands3 the other is the words of ,st4 ,peter to ,ananias1 ,acts v4 #d3 ,after it was sold1 was it not in thine own power8 ,to which the answer is the same with that ,i answered to the former places1 that they prove there is election1 but do not disprove the necessity1 which ,i maintain1 of what they so elect4 ,the fourth argument 7for to the third and fifth ,i shall make but one answer7 is to this effect2 ,if the decrees of ,god1 or his foreknowledge1 or the influence of the stars1 or the concatenation of causes1 or the physical or moral efficacy of causes1 or the last dictate of the understanding1 or whatsoever it be1 do take away true liberty1 then ,adam before his fall had no true liberty4 ,quicquid ostendes mihi sic incredulus odi4 ,that which ,i say necessitateth and determinateth every action1 that his ,lordship may no longer doubt of my meaning1 is the sum of all things1 which being now existent1 conduce and concur to the production of that action hereafter1 whereof if any one thing now were wanting1 the effect could not be produced4 ,this concourse of causes1 whereof every one is determined to be such as it is by a like concourse of former causes1 may well be called 7in respect they were all set and ordered by the eternal cause of all things1 ,god ,almighty7 the decree of ,god4 ,but that the foreknowledge of ,god should be a cause of any thing1 cannot be truly said1 seeing foreknowledge is knowledge1 and knowledge depends on the existence of the things known1 and not they on it4 ,the influence of the stars is but a small part of the whole cause1 consisting of the concourse of all agents4 ,nor does the concourse of all causes make one simple chain or concatenation1 but an innumerable number of chains1 joined together1 not in all parts1 but in the first link ,god ,almighty2 and consequently the whole cause of an event1 doth not always depend on one single chain1 but on many together4 ,natural efficacy of objects does determine voluntary agents1 and necessitates the will1 and consequently the action2 but for moral efficacy1 ,i understand not what he means4 ,the last dictate of the judgment1 concerning the good or bad1 that may follow on any action1 is not properly the whole cause1 but the last part of it1 and yet may be said to produce the effect necessarily1 in such manner as the last feather may be said to break a horse's back1 when there were so many laid on before as there wanted but that one to do it4 ,now for his argument1 that if the concourse of all the causes necessitate the effect1 that then it follows1 ,adam had no true liberty3 ,i deny the consequence2 for ,i make not only the effect1 but also the election1 of that particular effect necessary1 inasmuch as the will itself1 and each propension of a man during his deliberation1 is as much necessitated1 and depends on a sufficient cause1 as any thing else whatsoever4 ,as for example1 it is no more necessary that fire should burn1 than that a man or other creature1 whose limbs be moved by fancy1 should have election1 that is liberty1 to do what he hath a fancy to do1 though it be not in his will or power to choose his fancy1 or choose his election and will4 ,this doctrine1 because my ,lord ,bishop says he hates1 ,i doubt had better been suppressed1 as it should have been1 if both your ,lordship and he had not pressed me to an answer4 ,the arguments of greatest consequence1 are the third and the fifth1 and they fall both into one1 namely3 ,if there be a necessity of all events1 that it will follow1 that praise and reprehension1 and reward and punishment1 are all vain and unjust2 and that if ,god should openly forbid1 and secretly necessitate the same action1 punishing men for what they could not avoid1 there would be no belief among them of heaven and hell4 ,to oppose hereunto ,i must borrow an answer from ,st4 ,paul1 ,rom4 ix4 #bj1 #ba4 ,from the eleventh verse of the chapter to the eighteenth1 is laid down the very same objection in these words3 ,when they1 meaning ,esau and ,jacob1 were yet unborn1 and had done neither good nor evil1 that the purpose of ,god according to election1 not by works1 but by him that calleth1 might remain firm1 it was said unto her 7viz4 ,rebecca7 that the elder should serve the younger1 c4 ,what then shall we say8 ,is there injustice with ,god8 ,god forbid4 ,it is not therefore in him that willeth1 nor in him that runneth1 but in ,god that showeth mercy4 ,for the ,scripture saith to ,pharaoh1 ,i have stirred thee up that ,i might show my power in thee1 and that my name might be set forth in all the earth4 ,therefore whom ,god willeth1 he hath mercy on1 and whom he willeth he hardeneth4 ,thus you see the case put by ,st4 ,paul1 is the same with that of my ,lord ,bishop1 and the same objection in these words following3 ,thou wilt ask me then1 why does ,god yet complain1 for who hath resisted his will8 ,to this therefore the ,apostle answers1 not by denying it was ,god's will1 or that the decree of ,god concerning ,esau was not before he had sinned1 or that ,esau was not necessitated to do what he did2 but thus3 ,who art thou1 ,o man1 that interrogatest ,god8 ,shall the work say to the workman1 why hast thou made me thus8 ,hath not the potter power over the clay1 of the same stuff to make one vessel to honour1 another to dishonour8 ,according therefore to this answer of ,st4 ,paul1 ,i answer my ,lord's objection1 and say1 the power of ,god alone without other helps is sufficient justification of any action he doth4 ,that which men make amongst themselves here by pacts and covenants1 and call by the name of justice1 and according whereunto men are accounted and termed rightly just or unjust1 is not that by which ,god ,almighty's actions are to be measured or called just1 no more than his counsels are to be measured by human wisdom4 ,that which he does1 is made just by his doing it2 just1 ,i say1 in him1 though not always just in us4 ,for a man that shall command a thing openly1 and plot secretly the hindrance of the same1 if he punish him that he so commandeth1 for not doing it1 it is unjust4 ,so also1 his counsels are therefore not in vain1 because they be his1 whether we see the use of them or not4 ,when ,god afflicted ,job1 he did object no sin unto him1 but justified his afflicting of him1 by telling him of his power3 7,job xl4 #i37 ,hast thou1 saith ,god1 an arm like mine8 7,job xxviii4 #d73 ,where wert thou when ,i laid the foundations of the earth8 and the like4 ,so our ,saviour1 7,john ix4 #c7 concerning the man that was born blind1 said1 it was not for his sin1 or for his parents' sin1 but that the power of ,god might be shown in him4 ,beasts are subject to death and torments1 yet they cannot sin3 it was ,god's will they should be so4 ,power irresistible justifies all actions1 really and properly1 in whomsoever it be found2 less power does not1 and because such power is in ,god only1 he must needs be just in all actions1 and we1 that not comprehending his counsels1 call him to the bar1 commit injustice in it4 ,i am not ignorant of the usual reply to his answer1 by distinguishing between will and permission1 as that ,god ,almighty does indeed sometimes permit sins1 and that he also foreknoweth that the sin he permitteth1 shall be committed1 but does not will it1 nor necessitate it4 ,i know also they distinguish the action from the sin of the action1 saying1 that ,god ,almighty does indeed cause the action1 whatsoever action it be1 but not the sinfulness or irregularity of it1 that is1 the discordance between the action and the law4 ,such distinctions as these dazzle my understanding2 ,i find no difference between the will to have a thing done1 and the permission to do it1 when he that permitteth can hinder it1 and knows that it will be done unless he hinder it4 ,nor find ,i any difference between an action and the sin of that action2 as for example1 between the killing of ,uriah1 and the sin of ,david in killing ,uriah1 nor when one is cause both of the action and of the law1 how another can be cause of the disagreement between them1 no more than how one man making a longer and a shorter garment1 another can make the inequality that is between them4 ,this ,i know2 ,god cannot sin1 because his doing a thing makes it just1 and consequently1 no sin2 as also because whatsoever can sin1 is subject to another's law1 which ,god is not4 ,and therefore it is blasphemy to say1 ,god can sin2 but to say1 that ,god can so order the world1 as a sin may be necessarily caused thereby in a man1 ,i do not see how it is any dishonour to him4 ,howsoever1 if such or other distinctions can make it clear1 that ,st4 ,paul did not think ,esau's or ,pharaoh's actions proceeded from the will and purpose of ,god1 or that proceeding from his will1 could not therefore without injustice be blamed or punished1 ,i will1 as soon as ,i understand them1 turn unto my ,lord's opinion3 for ,i now hold nothing in all this question betwixt us1 but what seemeth to me1 not obscurely1 but most expressly said in this place by ,st4 ,paul4 ,and thus much in answer to his places of ,scripture4 ------- ,,to ,,the ,,arguments ,,from ,,reason4 ,of the arguments from reason1 the first is that which his ,lordship saith is drawn from ,zeno's beating of his man1 which is therefore called argumentum baculinum1 that is to say1 a wooden argument4 ,the story is this2 ,zeno held1 that all actions were necessary2 his man therefore being for some fault beaten1 excused himself upon the necessity of it3 to avoid this excuse1 his master pleaded likewise the necessity of beating him4 ,so that not he that maintained1 but he that derided the necessity1 was beaten1 contrary to that his ,lordship would infer4 ,and the argument was rather withdrawn than drawn from the story4 ,the second argument is taken from certain inconveniences which his ,lordship thinks would follow such an opinion4 ,it is true that ill use might be made of it1 and therefore your ,lordship and my ,lord ,bishop ought1 at my request1 to keep private what ,i say here of it4 ,but the inconveniences are indeed none1 and what use soever be made of truth1 yet truth is truth1 and now the question is not1 what is fit to be preached1 but1 what is true4 ,the first inconvenience he says1 is this2 ,that the laws1 which prohibit any action1 will be unjust4 #b4 ,that all consultations are vain4 #c4 ,that admonitions to men of understanding1 are of no more use1 than to children1 fools1 and madmen4 #d4 ,that1 praise1 dispraise1 reward and punishment1 are in vain4 #e1 #f4 ,that counsels1 acts1 arms1 books1 instruments1 study1 tutors1 medicines1 are in vain4 ,to which arguments his ,lordship expecting ,i should answer1 by saying1 the ignorance of the event were enough to make us use the means1 adds1 as it were a reply to my answer foreseen1 these words3 ,alas6 how should our not knowing the event be a sufficient motive to make us use the means8 ,wherein his ,lordship says right1 but my answer is not that which he expecteth3 ,i answer1 ,first1 that the necessity of an action doth not make the laws1 that prohibit it1 unjust4 ,to let pass1 that not the necessity1 but the will to break the law1 maketh the action unjust1 because the law regardeth the will1 and no other precedent causes of action4 ,and to let pass1 that no law can possibly be unjust1 inasmuch as every man maketh1 by his consent1 the law he is bound to keep1 and which consequently must be just1 unless a man can be unjust to himself4 ,i say1 what necessary cause soever precede an action1 yet if the action be forbidden1 he that doth it willingly may justly be punished4 ,for instance1 suppose the law on pain of death prohibit stealing1 and that there be a man1 who by the strength of temptation is necessitated to steal1 and is thereupon put to death1 does not this punishment deter others from theft8 ,is it not a cause that others steal not8 ,doth it not frame and make their wills to justice8 ,to make the law1 is therefore to make a cause of justice1 and to necessitate justice2 and consequently1 it is no injustice to make such a law4 ,the intention of the law is not to grieve the delinquent1 for that which is past1 and not to be undone2 but to make him and others just1 that else would not be so1 and respecteth not the evil act past1 but the good to come2 insomuch as without the good intention for the future1 no past act of a delinquent could justify his killing in the sight of ,god4 ,but you will say1 how is it just to kill one man to amend another1 if what were done were necessary8 ,to this ,i answer1 that men are justly killed1 not for that their actions are not necessitated1 but because they are noxious1 and they are spared and preserved whose actions are not noxious4 ,for where there is no law1 there no killing nor anything else can be unjust2 and by the right of nature1 we destroy1 without being unjust1 all that is noxious1 both beasts and men2 and for beasts we kill them justly1 when we do it in order to our own preservation1 and yet my ,lord himself confesseth1 that their actions1 as being only spontaneous1 and not free1 are all necessitated and determined to that one thing they shall do4 ,for men1 when we make societies or commonwealths1 we lay not down our right to kill1 excepting in certain cases1 as murder1 theft or other offensive action2 so that the right1 which the commonwealth hath to put a man to death for crimes1 is not created by the law1 but remains from the first right of nature1 which every man hath to preserve himself2 for that the law doth not take the right away in the case of criminals1 who were by the law excepted4 ,men are not therefore put to death1 or punished1 for that their theft proceedeth from election2 but because it was noxious and contrary to men's preservation1 and the punishment conducing to the preservation of the rest1 inasmuch as to punish those that do voluntary hurt1 and none else1 frameth and maketh men's wills such as men would have them4 ,and thus it is plain1 that from the necessity of a voluntary action1 cannot be inferred the injustice of the law that forbiddeth it1 or the magistrate that punisheth it4 ,secondly1 ,i deny that it maketh consultations to be in vain2 it is the consultation that causeth a man1 and necessitateth him to choose to do one thing rather than another3 so that unless a man say that that cause is in vain which necessitateth the effect1 he cannot infer the superfluousness of consultation out of the necessity of the election proceeding from it4 ,but it seemeth his ,lordship reasons thus3 ,if ,i must do this rather than that1 ,i shall do this rather than that1 though ,i consult not at all2 which is a false proposition and a false consequence1 and no better than this3 ,if ,i shall live till to-morrow1 ,i shall live till to-morrow1 though ,i run myself through with a sword to-day4 ,if there be a necessity that an action shall be done1 or that any effect shall be brought to pass1 it does not therefore follow1 that there is nothing necessarily requisite as a means to bring it to pass2 and therefore when it is determined1 that one thing shall be chosen before another1 it is determined also for what cause it shall so be chosen1 which cause1 for the most part1 is deliberation or consultation1 and therefore consultation is not in vain1 and indeed the less in vain by how much the election is more necessitated1 if more and less had any place in necessity4 ,the same answer is to be given to the third supposed inconvenience1 namely1 that admonitions are in vain2 for the admonitions are parts of consultation1 the admonitor being a counsellor for the time to him that is admonished4 ,the fourth pretended inconvenience is1 that praise1 dispraise1 reward1 and punishment will be in vain4 ,to which ,i answer1 that for praise and dispraise1 they depend not at all on the necessity of the action praised or dispraised4 ,for what is it else to praise1 but to say a thing is good8 ,good1 ,i say1 for me1 or for somebody else1 or for the state and commonwealth8 ,and what is it to say an action is good1 but to say it is as ,i would wish8 or as another would have it1 or according to the will of the state8 that is to say1 according to the law4 ,does my ,lord think that no action can please me1 or him1 or the commonwealth1 that should proceed from necessity8 ,things may be therefore necessary1 and yet praise-worthy1 as also necessary1 and yet dispraised1 and neither of them both in vain1 because praise and dispraise1 and likewise reward and punishment1 do by example make and conform the will to good and evil4 ,it was a very great praise in my opinion1 that ,velleius ,paterculus 7,lib4 ii4 #ce7 gives ,cato1 where he says that he was good by nature1 et quia aliter esse non potuit4 ,to the fifth and sixth inconveniences1 that counsels1 arts1 arms1 instruments1 books1 study1 medicines1 and the like1 would be superfluous1 the same answer serves as to the former1 that is to say1 that this consequence1 if the effect shall necessarily come to pass1 then it shall come to pass without its causes1 is a false one1 and those things named counsels1 arts1 arms1 c4 are the causes of these effects4 ,his ,lordship's third argument consisteth in other inconveniences1 which he saith will follow1 namely1 impiety and negligence of religious duties1 as repentance1 and zeal to ,god's service1 c4 ,to which ,i answer as to the rest1 that they follow not4 ,i must confess1 if we consider the greatest part of mankind1 not as they should be1 but as they are1 that is1 as men1 whom either the study of acquiring wealth1 or preferment1 or whom the appetite of sensual delights1 or the impatience of meditating1 or the rash embracing of wrong principles1 have made unapt to discuss the truth of things3 ,i must1 ,i say1 confess that the dispute of this question will rather hurt than help their piety2 and therefore if his ,lordship had not desired this answer1 ,i should not have written it1 nor do ,i write it but in hopes your ,lordship and his will keep it private4 ,nevertheless in very truth1 the necessity of events does not of itself draw with it any impiety at all4 ,for piety consisteth only in two things2 one1 that we honour ,god in our hearts1 which is1 that we think as highly of his power as we can1 for to honour anything is nothing else but to think it to be of great power2 the other is1 that we signify that honour and esteem by our words and actions1 which is called cultus1 or worship of ,god4 ,he therefore that thinketh that all things proceed from ,god's eternal will1 and consequently are necessary1 does he not think ,god omnipotent8 ,does he not esteem of his power as highly as is possible8 which is to honour ,god as much as may be in his heart4 ,again1 he that thinketh so1 is he not more apt by external acts and words to acknowledge it1 than he that thinketh otherwise8 yet is this external acknowledgment the same thing which we call worship4 ,so that this opinion fortifies piety in both kinds1 external and internal2 therefore is far from destroying it4 ,and for repentance1 which is nothing else but a glad returning into the right way1 after the grief of being out of the way2 though the cause that made him go astray were necessary1 yet there is no reason why he should not grieve2 and1 again though the cause why he returned into the way were necessary1 there remained still the causes of joy4 ,so that the necessity of the actions taketh away neither of those parts of repentance1 grief for the error1 and joy for returning4 ,and for prayer1 whereas he saith that the necessity of things destroy prayer1 ,i deny it2 for though prayer be none of the causes that move ,god's will1 his will being unchangeable1 yet since we find in ,god's word1 he will not give his blessings but to those that ask1 the motive of prayer is the same4 ,prayer is the gift of ,god no less than the blessing1 and the prayer is decreed together in the same decree wherein the blessing is decreed4 ,it is manifest that thanksgiving is no cause of the blessing past1 and that which is past is sure and necessary1 yet even amongst men thanks is in use as an acknowledgment of the benefit past1 though we should expect no new benefit for our gratitude4 ,and prayer to ,god ,almighty is but thanksgiving for ,god's blessings in general1 and though it precede the particular thing we ask1 yet it is not a cause or means of it1 but a signification that we expect nothing but from ,god1 in such manner1 as he1 not as we1 will2 and our ,saviour by word of mouth bids us pray1 thy will1 not our will1 be done1 and by example teaches us the same2 for he prayed thus1 ,father if it be thy will1 let this cup pass1 c4 ,the end of prayer1 as of thanksgiving1 is not to move but to honour ,god ,almighty1 in acknowledging that what we ask can be effected by him only4 ,the fourth argument from reason is this3 the order1 beauty1 and perfection of the world requireth that in the universe should be agents of all sorts2 some necessary1 some free1 some contingent4 ,he that shall make all things necessary1 or all things free1 or all things contingent1 doth overthrow the beauty and perfection of the world4 ,in which argument ,i observe1 first a contradiction2 for seeing he that maketh anything1 in that he maketh it1 maketh it to be necessary2 it followeth that he that maketh all things1 maketh all things necessarily to be3 as if a workman make a garment1 the garment must necessarily be2 so if ,god make every thing1 every thing must necessarily be4 ,perhaps the beauty of the world requireth1 though we know it not1 that some agents should work without deliberation 7which his lordship calls necessary agents7 and some agents with deliberation 7and those both he and ,i call free agents7 and that some agents should work1 and we not know how 7and their effects we both call contingents72 but this hinders not but that he that electeth may have his election necessarily determined to one by former causes1 and that which is contingent1 and imputed to fortune1 be nevertheless necessary and depend on precedent necessary causes4 ,for by contingent1 men do not mean that which hath no cause1 but that which hath not for cause anything that we perceive2 as for example1 when a traveller meets with a shower1 the journey had a cause1 and the rain had a cause sufficient to produce it2 but because the journey caused not the rain1 nor the rain the journey1 we say they were contingent one to another4 ,and thus you see that though there be three sorts of events1 necessary1 contingent1 and free1 yet they may be all necessary without destruction of the beauty or perfection of the universe4 ,to the first argument from reason1 which is1 ,that if liberty be taken away1 the nature and formal reason of sin is taken away2 ,i answer by denying the consequence3 the nature of sin consisteth in this1 that the action done proceed from our will and be against the law4 ,a judge in judging whether it be sin or no1 which is done against the law1 looks at no higher cause of the action1 than the will of the doer4 ,now when ,i say the action was necessary1 ,i do not say it was done against the will of the doer1 but with his will1 and necessarily1 because man's will1 that is every volition or act of the will and purpose of man had a sufficient1 and therefore a necessary cause1 and consequently every voluntary action was necessitated4 ,an action therefore may be voluntary and a sin1 and nevertheless be necessary2 and because ,god may afflict by a right derived from his omnipotence1 though sin were not1 and because the example of punishment on voluntary sinners1 is the cause that produceth justice1 and maketh sin less frequent1 for ,god to punish such sinners1 as ,i have said before1 is no injustice4 ,and thus you have my answer to his ,lordship's objections both out of ,scripture1 and from reason4 ------- ,,certain ,,distinctions1 ,,which ,,his ,,lordship ,,supposing ,,might ,,be ,,brought ,,to ,,evade ,,his ,,arguments1 ,,are ,,by ,,him ,,removed4 ,he says a man may perhaps answer1 that the necessity of things held by him1 is not a stoical necessity1 but a ,christian necessity1 c4 ,but this distinction ,i have not used1 nor indeed ever heard before1 nor could ,i think any man could make stoical and ,christian two kinds of necessity1 though they may be two kinds of doctrine4 ,nor have ,i drawn my answer to his ,lordship's arguments from the authority of any sect1 but from the nature of the things themselves4 ,but here ,i must take notice of certain words of his ,lordship's in this place1 as making against his own tenet4 ,where all the causes1 saith he1 being joined together1 and subordinate one to another1 do make but one total cause1 if any one cause1 much more the first1 in the whole series or subordination of causes1 be necessary1 it determines the rest1 and without doubt maketh the effect necessary4 ,for that which ,i call the necessary cause of any effect1 is the joining together of all causes subordinate to the first1 into one total cause4 ,if any of these1 saith he1 especially the first1 produce its effect necessarily1 then all the rest are determined4 ,now it is manifest1 that the first cause is a necessary cause of all the effects that are next and immediate to it1 and therefore by his ,lordship's own reason all effects are necessary4 ,nor is that distinction of necessary in respect of the first cause1 and necessary in respect of second causes1 mine2 it does1 as his ,lordship well notes1 imply a contradiction4 ,but the distinction of free into free from compulsion1 and free from necessitation1 ,i acknowledge4 ,for to be free from compulsion is to do a thing so as terror be not the cause of his will to do it2 for a man is then only said to be compelled1 when fear makes him willing to it3 as when a man willingly throws his goods into the sea to save himself1 or submits to his enemy for fear of being killed4 ,thus all men that do anything for love1 or revenge1 or lust1 are free from compulsion1 and yet their actions may be as necessary as those that are done by compulsion2 for sometimes other passions work as forcibly as fear4 ,but free from necessitation1 ,i say1 no man can be1 and it is that which his ,lordship undertook to disprove4 ,this distinction1 his ,lordship says1 uses to be fortified by two reasons1 but they are not mine4 ,the first he says1 is1 that it is granted by all divines1 that an hypothetical necessity1 or necessity upon supposition1 may stand with liberty4 ,that you may understand this1 ,i will give you an example of hypothetical necessity4 ,if ,i shall live1 ,i shall eat4 ,this is an hypothetical necessity4 ,indeed it is a necessary proposition1 that is to say1 it is necessary that that proposition should be true whensoever uttered1 but it is not the necessity of the thing1 nor is it therefore necessary that the man should live1 nor that the man should eat4 ,i do not use to fortify my distinctions with such reasons2 let his ,lordship confute them how he will1 it contents me2 but ,i would have your ,lordship take notice hereby1 how easy and plain a thing1 but withal false1 with the grave usage of such terms as hypothetical necessity1 and necessity upon supposition1 and such like terms of ,schoolmen1 may be obscured and made to seem profound learning4 ,the second reason that may confirm the distinction of free from compulsion1 and free from necessitation1 he says is1 that ,god and good angels do good necessarily1 and yet are more free than we4 ,this reason1 though ,i had no need of1 yet ,i think it so far forth good1 as it is true that ,god and good angels do good necessarily1 and yet are free2 but because ,i find not in the articles of our faith1 nor in the decrees of our church1 set down in what manner ,i am to conceive ,god and good angels to work by necessity1 or in what sense they work freely1 ,i suspend my sentence in that point1 and am content that there be a freedom from compulsion1 and yet no freedom from necessitation1 as hath been proved1 in that a man may be necessitated to some action without threats and without fear of danger4 ,but how my ,lord can avoid the consisting together of freedom and necessity1 supposing ,god and good angels are freer than men1 and yet do good necessarily1 that we must examine3 ,i confess1 saith he1 that ,god and good angels are more free than we1 that is1 intensively in degree of freedom1 not extensively in the latitude of the object1 according to a liberty of exercise not of specification4 ,again1 we have here two distinctions that are no distinctions1 but made to seem so by terms invented by ,i know not whom to cover ignorance1 and blind the understanding of the reader3 for it cannot be conceived that there is any liberty greater1 than for a man to do what he will4 ,one heat may be more intensive than another1 but not one liberty than another2 he that can do what he will1 hath all liberty possible1 and he that cannot1 hath none at all4 ,also liberty1 as his ,lordship says the ,schools call it1 of exercise1 which is as ,i have said before1 a liberty to do or not to do1 cannot be without a liberty1 which they call1 of specification1 that is to say1 a liberty to do1 or not to do this or that in particular4 ,for how can a man conceive he hath liberty to do anything1 that hath not liberty to do this1 or that1 or somewhat in particular8 ,if a man be forbidden in ,lent to eat this1 and that1 and every other particular kind of flesh1 how can he be understood to have a liberty to eat flesh1 more than he that hath no licence at all8 ,you may by this again see the vanity of distinctions used in the ,schools1 and ,i do not doubt but that the imposing of them1 by authority of doctors in the ,church1 hath been a great cause that men have laboured1 though by sedition and evil courses1 to shake them off2 for nothing is more apt to beget hatred1 than the tyrannizing over men's reason and understanding1 especially when it is done1 not by the ,scriptures1 but by the pretence of learning1 and more judgment than that of other men4 ,in the next place his ,lordship bringeth two arguments against distinguishing between free from compulsion and free from necessitation4 ,the first is1 that election is opposite not only to coaction or compulsion1 but also necessitation or determination to one4 ,this is it he was to prove from the beginning1 and therefore bringeth no new argument to prove it2 and to those brought formerly1 ,i have already answered4 ,and in this place ,i deny again1 that election is opposite to either2 for when a man is compelled1 for example1 to subject himself to an enemy or to die1 he hath still election left him1 and a deliberation to bethink which of the two he can better endure4 ,and he that is led to prison by force1 hath election1 and may deliberate whether he will be hauled and trained on the ground1 or make use of his own feet3 likewise when there is no compulsion1 but the strength of temptation to do an evil action1 being greater than the motives to abstain1 it necessarily determines him to the doing of it2 yet he deliberates while sometimes the motives to do1 sometimes the motives to forbear1 are working on him1 and consequently he electeth which he will4 ,but commonly when we see and know the strength that moves us1 we acknowledge necessity2 but when we see not1 or mark not the force that moves us1 we then think there is none1 and that it is not causes but liberty that produceth the action4 ,hence it is that they think he does not choose this1 that of necessity chooses it2 but they might as well say1 fire doth not burn1 because it burns of necessity4 ,the second argument is not so much an argument as a distinction1 to show in what sense it may be said that voluntary actions are necessitated1 and in what sense not4 ,and therefore his ,lordship allegeth1 as from the authority of the ,schools1 and that which rippeth up the bottom of the question1 that there is a double act of the will4 ,the one1 he says1 is actus imperatus1 an act done at the command of the will1 by some inferior faculty of the soul2 as to open or shut one's eyes2 and this act may be compelled3 the other1 he says1 is actus elicitus1 an act allured or drawn forth by allurement out of the will1 as to will1 to choose1 to elect2 this he says cannot be compelled4 ,wherein1 letting pass that metaphorical speech of attributing command and subjection to the faculties of the soul1 as if they made a commonwealth or family within themselves1 and could speak one to another1 which is very improper in searching the truth of a question1 you may observe1 first1 that to compel a voluntary act1 is nothing else but to will it2 for it is all one to say1 my will commands the shutting of my eyes1 or the doing of any other action2 and to say1 ,i have the will to shut my eyes3 so that actus imperatus1 here1 might as easily have been said in ,english a voluntary action1 but that they that invented the term1 understood not anything it signified4 ,secondly1 you may observe1 that actus elicitus1 is exemplified by these words1 to will1 to elect1 to choose1 which are all one1 and so to will is here made an act of the will2 and indeed as the will is a faculty or power in a man's soul1 so to will is an act of it according to that power2 but as it is absurdly said1 that to dance is an act allured or drawn by fair means out of the ability to dance2 so is it also to say1 that to will is an act allured or drawn out of the power to will1 which power is commonly called the will4 ,howsoever it be1 the sum of his ,lordship's distinction is1 that a voluntary act may be done by compulsion1 that is to say1 by foul means1 but to will that1 or any act1 cannot be but by allurement1 or fair means4 ,now seeing fair means1 allurements1 and enticements1 produce the action which they do produce1 as necessarily as foul means and threatening2 it follows1 that to will may be made as necessary as anything that is done by compulsion4 ,so that distinction of actus imperatus and actus elicitus are but words1 and of no effect against necessity4 ,his ,lordship in the rest of his discourse1 reckoneth up the opinion of certain professions of men1 touching the causes wherein the necessity of things1 which they maintain1 consisteth4 ,and first he saith1 the astrologer deriveth his necessity from the stars2 secondly1 that the physician attributeth it to the temper of the body4 ,for my part1 ,i am not of their opinion1 because1 neither the stars alone1 nor the temperature of the patient alone1 is able to produce any effect1 without the concurrence of all other agents4 ,for there is hardly any one action1 how casual soever it seem1 to the causing whereof concur not whatsoever is in rerum natur1 which because it is a great paradox1 and depends on many antecedent speculations1 ,i do not press in this place4 ,thirdly1 he disputeth against the opinion of them that say1 external objects presented to men of such and such temperatures1 do make their actions necessary2 and says1 the power such objections have over us1 proceeds from our own fault3 but that is nothing to the purpose1 if such fault of ours proceedeth from causes not in our own power1 and therefore that opinion may hold true for all that answer4 ,further he says1 prayer1 fasting1 c4 may alter our habits2 it is true1 but when they do so1 they are causes of the contrary habit1 and make it necessary1 as the former habit had been necessary1 if prayer1 fasting1 c4 had not been4 ,besides1 we are not moved or disposed to prayer or any other action1 but by outward objects1 as pious company1 godly preachers1 or something equivalent4 ,fourthly1 he says a resolved mind is not easily surprised1 as the mind of ,ulysses1 who when others wept1 alone wept not2 and of the philosopher1 that abstained from striking1 because he found himself angry2 and of him that poured out the water when he was thirsty1 and the like4 ,such things ,i confess have1 or may have been done1 and do prove only that it was not necessary for ,ulysses then to weep1 nor for that philosopher to strike1 nor for that other man to drink2 but it does not prove that it was not necessary for ,ulysses then to abstain1 as he did1 from weeping1 nor for the philosopher to abstain1 as he did1 from striking1 nor for the other man to forbear drinking1 and yet that was the thing his ,lordship ought to have proved4 ,lastly his ,lordship confesses1 that the dispositions of objects may be dangerous to liberty1 but cannot be destructive4 ,to which ,i answer1 it is impossible3 for liberty is never in any other danger than to be lost2 and if it cannot be lost1 which he confesses1 ,i may infer1 it can be in no danger at all4 ,the fourth opinion his ,lordship rejecteth1 is of them that make the will necessarily to follow the last dictate of the understanding2 but it seems his ,lordship understands that tenet in another sense than ,i do2 for he speaketh as if they that held it1 did suppose men must dispute the sequel of every action they do1 great and small1 to the least grain2 which is a thing his ,lordship1 with reason1 thinks untrue4 ,but ,i understand it to signify1 that the will follows the last opinion or judgment immediately preceding the action1 concerning whether it be good to do it or not1 whether he have weighed it long before1 or not at all1 and that ,i take to be the meaning of them that hold it4 ,as for example1 when a man strikes1 his will to strike follows necessarily that thought he had of the sequel of his stroke1 immediately before the lifting up of his hand4 ,now if it be understood in that sense1 the last dictate of the understanding does necessitate the action1 though not as the whole cause1 yet as the last cause1 as the last feather necessitates the breaking of a horse's back1 when there are so many laid on before1 as there needed but the addition of one to make the weight sufficient4 ,that which his ,lordship allegeth against this1 is first1 out of a poet1 who in the person of ,medea says1 8,video meliora1 proboque1 ,deteriora sequor40 ,but that saying1 as pretty as it is1 is not true2 for though ,medea saw many reasons to forbear killing her children1 yet the last dictate of her judgment was1 that the present revenge on her husband outweighed them all1 and thereupon the wicked action necessarily followed4 ,then the story of the ,roman1 who of two competitors1 said1 one had the better reason1 but the other must have the office4 ,this also maketh against his ,lordship1 for the last dictate of his judgment that had the bestowing of the office1 was this1 that it was better to take a great bribe1 than reward a great merit4 ,thirdly1 he objects that things nearer the sense1 move more powerfully than reason2 what followeth thence but this1 the sense of the present good is commonly more immediate to the action1 than the foresight of the evil consequence to come8 ,fourthly1 whereas his ,lordship says1 that do what a man can1 he shall sorrow more for the death of his son than for the sin of his soul1 makes nothing to the last dictate of the understanding2 but it argues plainly1 that sorrow for sin is not voluntary1 and by consequence1 that repentance proceedeth from causes4 ,the last part of this discourse containeth his ,lordship's opinions about reconciling liberty with the prescience and decrees of ,god1 otherwise than some divines have done1 against whom1 he says1 he had formerly written a treatise1 out of which he repeateth only two things3 one is1 ,that we ought not to desert a certain truth1 for not being able to comprehend the certain manner of it4 ,and ,i say the same1 as for example1 that his ,lordship ought not to desert this certain truth1 that there are certain and necessary causes which make every man to will what he willeth1 though he do not yet conceive in what manner the will of man is caused4 ,and yet ,i think the manner of it is not very hard to conceive1 seeing we see daily1 that praise1 dispraise1 reward1 and punishment1 good and evil1 sequels of men's actions retained in memory1 do frame and make us to the election of whatsoever it be that we elect1 and that the memory of such things proceeds from the senses1 and sense from the operation of the objects of sense1 which are external to us1 and governed only by ,god ,almighty2 and by consequence all actions1 even of free and voluntary agents1 are necessary4 ,the other thing that he repeateth1 is1 that the best way to reconcile contingence and liberty with prescience and the decrees of ,god1 is to subject future contingencies to the aspect of ,god4 ,the same is also my opinion1 but contrary to what his ,lordship all this while laboured to prove4 ,for hitherto he held liberty and necessity1 that is to say1 liberty and the decrees of ,god1 irreconcileable1 unless the aspect of ,god1 which word appeareth now the first time in this discourse1 signify somewhat else besides ,god's will and decree1 which ,i cannot understand4 ,but he adds that we must subject them1 according to that presentiality which they have in eternity1 which he says cannot be done by them that conceive eternity to be an everlasting succession1 but only by them that conceive it as an indivisible point4 ,to which ,i answer1 that as soon as ,i can conceive eternity to be an indivisible point1 or anything but an everlasting succession1 ,i will renounce all that ,i have written on this subject4 ,i know ,st4 ,thomas ,aquinas calls eternity1 nunc stans1 an ever-abiding now2 which is easy enough to say1 but though ,i fain would1 yet ,i could never conceive it3 they that can1 are more happy than ,i4 ,but in the mean time his ,lordship alloweth all men to be of my opinion1 save only those that can conceive in their minds a nunc stans1 which ,i think are none4 ,i understand as little how it can be true his ,lordship says1 that ,god is not just1 but justice itself2 not wise1 but wisdom itself2 not eternal1 but eternity itself2 nor how he concludes thence1 that eternity is a point indivisible1 and not a succession1 nor in what sense it can be said1 that an infinite point1 and wherein is no succession1 can comprehend all time1 though time be successive4 ,these phrases ,i find not in the ,scripture2 ,i wonder therefore what was the design of the ,schoolmen to bring them up1 unless they thought a man could not be a true ,christian unless his understanding be first strangled with such hard sayings4 ,and thus much for answer to his ,lordship's discourse1 wherein ,i think not only his squadrons of arguments1 but also his reserve of distinctions1 are defeated4 ,and now your ,lordship shall have my doctrine concerning the same question1 with my reasons for it1 positively1 and as briefly as ,i can1 without any terms of art1 in plain ,english4 ,,my ,,opinion ,,about ,,liberty ,,and ,,necessity4 ,first ,i conceive1 that when it cometh into a man's mind to do or not to do some certain action1 if he have no time to deliberate1 the doing it or abstaining necessarily follow the present thought he hath of the good or evil consequence thereof to himself4 ,as for example1 in sudden anger1 the action shall follow the thought of revenge2 in sudden fear1 the thought of escape4 ,also when a man hath time to deliberate1 but deliberates not1 because never anything appeared that could make him doubt of the consequence1 the action follows his opinion of the goodness or harm of it4 ,these actions ,i call ,,voluntary1 my ,lord1 if ,i understand him aright that calls them ,,spontaneous4 ,i call them voluntary1 because those actions that follow immediately the last appetite1 are voluntary1 and here where is one only appetite1 that one is the last4 ,besides1 ,i see it is reasonable to punish a rash action1 which could not be justly done by man to man1 unless the same were voluntary4 ,for no action of a man can be said to be without deliberation1 though never so sudden1 because it is supposed he had time to deliberate all the precedent time of his life1 whether he should do that kind of action or not4 ,and hence it is1 that he that killeth in a sudden passion of anger1 shall nevertheless be justly put to death1 because all the time1 wherein he was able to consider whether to kill were good or evil1 shall be held for one continual deliberation1 and consequently the killing shall be judged to proceed from election4 ,secondly1 ,i conceive when a man deliberates whether he shall do a thing or not do it1 that he does nothing else but consider whether it be better for himself to do it or not to do it4 ,and to consider an action1 is to imagine the consequences of it1 both good and evil4 ,from whence is to be inferred1 that deliberation is nothing else but alternate imagination of the good and evil sequels of an action1 or1 which is the same thing1 alternate hope and fear1 or alternate appetite to do or quit the action of which he deliberateth4 ,thirdly1 ,i conceive that in all deliberations1 that is to say1 in all alternate succession of contrary appetites1 the last is that which we call the ,,will1 and is immediately next before the doing of the action1 or next before the doing of it become impossible4 ,all other appetites to do1 and to quit1 that come upon a man during his deliberations1 are called intentions and inclinations1 but not wills1 there being but one will1 which also in this case may be called the last will1 though the intentions change often4 ,fourthly1 ,i conceive that those actions1 which a man is said to do upon deliberation1 are said to be voluntary1 and done upon choice and election1 so that voluntary action1 and action proceeding from election is the same thing2 and that of a voluntary agent1 it is all one to say1 he is free1 and to say1 he hath not made an end of deliberating4 ,fifthly1 ,i conceive liberty to be rightly defined in this manner3 ,liberty is the absence of all the impediments to action that are not contained in the nature and intrinsical quality of the agent4 ,as for example1 the water is said to descend freely1 or to have liberty to descend by the channel of the river1 because there is no impediment that way1 but not across1 because the banks are impediments4 ,and though the water cannot ascend1 yet men never say it wants the liberty to ascend1 but the faculty or power1 because the impediment is in the nature of the water1 and intrinsical4 ,so also we say1 he that is tied1 wants the liberty to go1 because the impediment is not in him1 but in his bands2 whereas we say not so of him that is sick or lame1 because the impediment is in himself4 ,sixthly1 ,i conceive that nothing taketh beginning from itself1 but from the action of some other immediate agent without itself4 ,and that therefore1 when first a man hath an appetite or will to something1 to which immediately before he had no appetite nor will1 the cause of his will1 is not the will itself1 but something else not in his own disposing4 ,so that whereas it is out of controversy1 that of voluntary actions the will is the necessary cause1 and by this which is said1 the will is also caused by other things whereof it disposeth not1 it followeth1 that voluntary actions have all of them necessary causes1 and therefore are necessitated4 ,seventhly1 ,i hold that to be a sufficient cause1 to which nothing is wanting that is needful to the producing of the effect4 ,the same also is a necessary cause4 ,for if it be possible that a sufficient cause shall not bring forth the effect1 then there wanteth somewhat which was needful to the producing of it1 and so the cause was not sufficient2 but if it be impossible that a sufficient cause should not produce the effect1 then is a sufficient cause a necessary cause1 for that is said to produce an effect necessarily that cannot but produce it4 ,hence it is manifest1 that whatsoever is produced1 is produced necessarily2 for whatsoever is produced hath had a sufficient cause to produce it1 or else it had not been2 and therefore also voluntary actions are necessitated4 ,lastly1 that ordinary definition of a free agent1 namely1 that a free agent is that1 which1 when all things are present which are needful to produce the effect1 can nevertheless not produce it1 implies a contradiction1 and is nonsense2 being as much as to say1 the cause may be sufficient1 that is to say1 necessary1 and yet the effect shall not follow4 ------- ,,my ,,reasons4 ,for the first five points1 wherein it is explicated ,i1 what spontaneity is2 ,,ii1 what deliberation is2 ,,iii1 what will1 propension1 and appetite are2 ,,iv1 what a free agent is3 ,v1 what liberty is2 there can no other proof be offered but every man's own experience1 by reflection on himself1 and remembering what he useth in his mind1 that is1 what he himself meaneth when he saith an action is spontaneous1 a man deliberates2 such is his will1 that agent or that action is free4 ,now he that reflecteth so on himself1 cannot but be satisfied1 that deliberation is the consideration of the good and evil sequels of an action to come2 that by spontaneity is meant inconsiderate action1 or else nothing is meant by it2 that will is the last act of our deliberation2 that a free agent is he that can do if he will1 and forbear if he will2 and that liberty is the absence of external impediments4 ,but to those that out of custom speak not what they conceive1 but what they hear1 and are not able1 or will not take the pains to consider what they think when they hear such words1 no argument can be sufficient1 because experience and matter of fact are not verified by other men's arguments1 but by every man's own sense and memory4 ,for example1 how can it be proved that to love a thing and to think it good is all one1 to a man that doth not mark his own meaning by those words8 ,or how can it be proved that eternity is not nunc stans1 to a man that says those words by custom1 and never considers how he can conceive the thing in his mind8 ,also the sixth point1 that a man cannot imagine anything to begin without a cause1 can no other way be made known1 but by trying how he can imagine it2 but if he try1 he shall find as much reason1 if there be no cause of the thing1 to conceive it should begin at one time as another1 that he hath equal reason to think it should begin at all times1 which is impossible1 and therefore he must think there was some special cause why it began then1 rather than sooner or later2 or else that it began never1 but was eternal4 ,for the seventh point1 which is1 that all events have necessary causes1 it is there proved1 in that they have sufficient causes4 ,further let us in this place also suppose any event never so casual1 as the throwing1 for example1 ames ace upon a pair of dice1 and see1 if it must not have been necessary before it was thrown4 ,for seeing it was thrown1 it had a beginning1 and consequently a sufficient cause to produce it1 consisting partly in the dice1 partly in outward things1 as the posture of the parts of the hand1 the measure of force applied by the caster1 the posture of the parts of the table1 and the like4 ,in sum1 there was nothing wanting which was necessarily requisite to the producing of that particular cast1 and consequently the cast was necessarily thrown2 for if it had not been thrown1 there had wanted somewhat requisite to the throwing of it1 and so the cause had not been sufficient4 ,in the like manner it may be proved that every other accident1 how contingent soever it seem1 or how voluntary soever it be1 is produced necessarily1 which is that that my ,lord ,bishop disputes against4 ,the same may be proved also in this manner4 ,let the case be put1 for example1 of the weather4 ,it is necessary that to-morrow it shall rain or not rain4 ,if therefore it be not necessary it shall rain1 it is necessary it shall not rain1 otherwise there is no necessity that the proposition1 it shall rain or not rain1 should be true4 ,i know there be some that say1 it may necessarily be true that one of the two shall come to pass1 but not1 singly that it shall rain1 or that it shall not rain1 which is as much to say1 one of them is necessary1 yet neither of them is necessary2 and therefore to seem to avoid that absurdity1 they make a distinction1 that neither of them is true determinate1 but indeterminate2 which distinction either signifies no more but this1 one of them is true1 but we know not which1 and so the necessity remains1 though we know it not2 or if the meaning of the distinction be not that1 it hath no meaning1 and they might as well have said1 one of them is true ,titirice1 but neither of them1 ,tu patulice4 ,the last thing1 in which also consisteth the whole controversy1 namely that there is no such thing as an agent1 which when all things requisite to action are present1 can nevertheless forbear to produce it2 or1 which is all one1 that there is no such thing as freedom from necessity1 is easily inferred from that which hath been before alleged4 ,for if it be an agent1 it can work2 and if it work1 there is nothing wanting of what is requisite to produce the action1 and consequently the cause of the action is sufficient2 and if sufficient1 then also necessary1 as hath been proved before4 ,and thus you see how the inconveniences1 which his ,lordship objecteth must follow upon the holding of necessity1 are avoided1 and the necessity itself demonstratively proved4 ,to which ,i could add1 if ,i thought it good logic1 the inconvenience of denying necessity1 as that it destroyeth both the decrees and the prescience of ,god ,almighty2 for whatsoever ,god hath purposed to bring to pass by man1 as an instrument1 or foreseeth shall come to pass2 a man1 if he have liberty1 such as his ,lordship affirmeth1 from necessitation1 might frustrate1 and make not to come to pass1 and ,god should either not foreknow it1 and not decree it1 or he should foreknow such things shall be1 as shall never be1 and decree that which shall never come to pass4 ,this is all that hath come into my mind touching this question since ,i last considered it4 ,and ,i humbly beseech your ,lordship to communicate it only to my ,lord ,bishop4 ,and so praying ,god to prosper your ,lordship in all your designs1 ,i take leave1 and am1 ,my most noble and most obliging ,lord1 ,your most humble servant1 ,,thomas ,,hobbes4 ,rouen1 ,aug4 #bj1 #afeb4;,a ,footnote ,a3 ,in the first edition of #afed this date is #afdf4 ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ,,an ,,answer ,,to ,a ,,book ,,published ,,by ,,dr4 ,,bramhall1 ,,late ,,bishop ,,of ,,derry2 ,,called ,,the 8,,catching ,,of ,,the ,,leviathan40 ,,together ,,with ,,an ,,historical ,,narration ,,concerning ,,heresy1 ,,and ,,the ,,punishment ,,thereof4 ,,to ,,the ,,reader4 ------- ,as in all things which ,i have written1 so also in this piece1 ,i have endeavoured all ,i can to be perspicuous2 but yet your own attention is always necessary4 ,the late ,lord ,bishop of ,derry published a book called ,the ,catching of the ,leviathan1 in which he hath put together divers sentences picked out of my ,leviathan1 which stand there plainly and firmly proved1 and sets them down without their proofs1 and without the order of their dependance one upon another2 and calls them atheism1 blasphemy1 impiety1 subversion of religion1 and by other names of that kind4 ,my request unto you is1 that when he cites my words for erroneous1 you will be pleased to turn to the place itself1 and see whether they be well proved1 and how to be understood4 ,which labour his ,lordship might have saved you1 if he would have vouchsafed as well to have weighed my arguments before you1 as to have shown you my conclusions4 ,his book containeth two chapters1 the one concerning ,religion1 the other concerning ,politics4 ,because he does not so much as offer any refutation of any thing in my ,leviathan concluded1 ,i needed not to have answered either of them4 ,yet to the first ,i here answer1 because the words atheism1 impiety1 and the like1 are words of the greatest defamation possible4 ,and this ,i had done sooner1 if ,i had sooner known that such a book was extant4 ,he wrote it ten years since1 and yet ,i never heard of it till about three months since2 so little talk there was of his ,lordship's writings4 ,if you want leisure or care of the questions between us1 ,i pray you condemn me not upon report4 ,to judge and not examine is not just4 ,farewell4 ,t4 ,,hobbes4 ------- ,,an ,,answer1 ,,etc4 ------- ,,that ,,the ,,hobbian ,,principles ,,are ,,destructive ,,to ,,christianity ,,and ,,all ,,religion4 ,j4 ,d4 ,the image of ,god is not altogether defaced by the fall of man1 but that there will remain some practical notions of ,god and goodness2 which when the mind is free from vagrant desires1 and violent passions1 do shine as clearly in the heart1 as other speculative notions do in the head4 ,hence it is1 that there was never any nation so barbarous or savage throughout the whole world1 which had not their ,god4 ,they who did never wear clothes upon their backs1 who did never know magistrate but their father1 yet have their ,god1 and their religious rights and devotions to him4 ,hence it is1 that the greatest atheists in any sudden danger do unwittingly cast their eyes up to heaven1 as craving aid from thence1 and in a thunder creep into some hole to hide themselves4 ,and they who are conscious to themselves of any secret crimes1 though they be secure enough from the justice of men1 do yet feel the blind blows of a guilty conscience1 and fear ,divine vengeance4 ,this is acknowledged by ,t4 ,h4 himself in his lucid intervals4 ,that we may know what worship of ,god natural reason doth assign1 let us begin with his attributes1 where it is manifest in the first place1 that existency is to be attributed to him4 ,to which he addeth1 infiniteness1 incomprehensibility1 unity1 ubiquity4 ,thus for attributes2 next for actions4 ,concerning external actions1 wherewith ,god is to be worshipped1 the most general precept of reason is1 that they be signs of honour2 under which are contained prayers1 thanksgivings1 oblations1 and sacrifices4 ,t4 ,h4 ,hitherto his ,lordship discharges me of atheism4 ,what need he to say that all nations1 how barbarous soever1 yet have their ,gods and religious rites1 and atheists are frighted with thunder1 and feel the blind blows of conscience8 ,it might have been as apt a preface to any other of his discourses as this4 ,i expect therefore in the next place to be told1 that ,i deny again my afore-recited doctrine4 ,j4 ,d4 ,yet1 to let us see how inconsistent and irreconcileable he is with himself1 elsewhere reckoning up all the laws of nature at large1 even twenty in number1 he hath not one word that concerneth religion1 or hath the least relation in the world to ,god4 ,as if a man were like the colt of a wild ass in the wilderness1 without any owner or obligation4 ,thus in describing the laws of nature1 this great clerk forgetteth the ,god of nature1 and the main and principal laws of nature1 which contain a man's duty to his ,god1 and the principal end of his creation4 ,t4 ,h4 ,after ,i had ended the discourse he mentions of the laws of nature1 ,i thought it fittest in the last place1 once for all1 to say they were the laws of ,god1 then when they were delivered in the word of ,god2 but before1 being not known by men for any thing but their own natural reason1 they were but theorems1 tending to peace1 and those uncertain1 as being but conclusions of particular men1 and therefore not properly laws4 ,besides1 ,i had formerly in my book ,de ,cive1 cap4 ,,iv1 proved them severally1 one by one1 out of the ,scriptures3 which his ,lordship had read and knew4 ,it was therefore an unjust charge of his to say1 ,i had not one word in them that concerns religion1 or that hath the least relation in the world to ,god2 and this upon no other ground than that ,i added not to every article1 this law is in the ,scripture4 ,but why he should call me 7ironically7 a great clerk1 ,i cannot tell4 ,i suppose he would make men believe1 ,i arrogated to myself all the learning of a great clerk1 bishop1 or other inferior minister4 ,a learned bishop1 is that bishop that can interpret all parts of ,scripture truly1 and congruently to the harmony of the whole2 that has learnt the history and laws of the ,church1 down from the apostles' time to his own2 and knows what is the nature of a law civil1 divine1 natural1 and positive2 and how to govern well the parochial ministers of his diocese1 so that they may both by doctrine and example keep the people in the belief of all articles of faith necessary to salvation1 and in obedience to the laws of their country4 ,this is a learned bishop4 ,a learned minister1 is he that hath learned the way by which men may be drawn from avarice1 pride1 sensuality1 profaneness1 rebellious principles1 and all other vices1 by eloquent and powerful disgracing of them1 both from ,scripture and from reason2 and can terrify men from vice1 by discreet uttering of the punishments denounced against wicked men1 and by deducing1 rationally1 the damage they receive by it in the end4 ,in one word1 he is a learned minister that can preach such sermons as ,st4 ,chrysostom preached to the ,antiochians1 when he was presbyter in that city4 ,could his ,lordship find in my book1 that ,i arrogated to myself the eloquence or wisdom of ,st4 ,chrysostom1 or the ability of governing the church8 ,it is one thing to know what is to be done1 another thing to know how to do it4 ,but his ,lordship was pleased to use any artifice to disgrace me in any kind whatsoever4 ,j4 ,d4 ,perhaps he will say that he handleth the laws of nature there1 only so far as may serve to the constitution or settlement of a commonwealth4 ,in good time1 let it be so4 ,he hath devised us a trim commonwealth1 which is founded neither upon religion towards ,god1 nor justice towards man2 but merely upon self-interest1 and self-preservation4 ,those rays of heavenly light1 those natural seeds of religion1 which ,god himself hath imprinted in the heart of man1 are more efficacious towards preservation of a society1 whether we regard the nature of the thing1 or the blessing of ,god1 than all his pacts1 and surrenders1 and translations of power4 ,he who unteacheth men their duty to ,god1 may make them eye-servants1 so long as their interest doth oblige them to obey2 but is no fit master to teach men conscience and fidelity4 ,t4 ,h4 ,he has not yet found the place where ,i contradict either the existence1 or infiniteness1 or incomprehensibility1 or unity1 or ubiquity of ,god4 ,i am therefore yet absolved of atheism4 ,but ,i am1 he says1 inconsistent and irreconcileable with myself2 that is1 ,i am 7though he says not so7 he thinks1 a forgetful blockhead4 ,i cannot help that3 but my forgetfulness appears not here4 ,even his ,lordship1 where he says1 8those rays of heavenly light1 those seeds of religion1 which ,god himself hath imprinted in the heart of man 7meaning natural reason71 are more efficacious to the preservation of society1 than all the pacts1 surrenders1 and translating of power10 had forgotten to except the old pact of the ,jews1 and the new pact of ,christians4 ,but pardoning that1 did he hope to make any wise man believe1 that when this nation very lately was an anarchy1 and dissolute multitude of men1 doing every one what his own reason or imprinted light suggested1 they did again out of the same light call in the king1 and peace again1 and ask pardon for the faults1 which that their illumination had brought them into1 rather than out of fear of perpetual danger and hope of preservation8 ,j4 ,d4 ,without religion1 societies are like but soapy bubbles1 quickly dissolved4 ,it was the judgment of as wise a man as ,t4 ,h4 himself1 though perhaps he will hardly be persuaded to it1 that ,rome owed more of its grandeur to religion1 than either to strength or stratagems4 ,we have not exceeded the ,spaniards in number1 nor the ,gauls in strength1 nor the ,carthaginians in craft1 nor the ,grecians in art1 c4 but we have overcome all nations by our piety and religion4 ,t4 ,h4 ,did not his ,lordship forget himself here again1 in approving this sentence of ,tully1 which makes the idolatry of the ,romans1 not only better than the idolatry of other nations2 but also better than the religion of the ,jews1 whose law ,christ himself says he came not to destroy but to fulfil8 ,and that the ,romans overcame both them and other nations by their piety1 when it is manifest that the ,romans overran the world by injustice and cruelty1 and that their victories ought not to be ascribed to the piety of the ,romans1 but to the impiety as well of the ,jews as of other nations8 ,but what meant he by saying 8,tully was as wise a man as ,t4 ,h4 himself1 though perhaps he will hardly be persuaded to it80 ,was that any part of the controversy8 ,no3 then it was out of his way4 ,god promiseth to assist good men in their way1 but not out of their way4 ,it is therefore the less wonder that his ,lordship was in this place deserted of the light1 which ,god imprints in the hearts of rudest savages4 ,j4 ,d4 ,among his laws he inserteth gratitude to men as the third precept of the law of nature2 but of the gratitude of mankind to their ,creator1 there is a deep silence4 ,if men had sprung up from the earth in a night1 like mushrooms or excrescences1 without all sense of honour1 justice1 conscience1 or gratitude1 he could not have vilified the human nature more than he doth4 ,t4 ,h4 ,my ,lord discovers here an ignorance of such method as is necessary for lawful and strict reasoning1 and explication of the truth in controversy4 ,and not only that1 but also how little able he is to fix his mind upon what he reads in other men's writings4 ,when ,i had defined ingratitude universally1 he finds fault that ,i do not mention ingratitude towards ,god1 as if his ,lordship knew not that an universal comprehends all the particulars4 ,when ,i had defined equity universally1 why did he not as well blame me for not telling what that equity is in ,god8 ,he is grateful to the man of whom he receives a good turn1 that confesseth1 or maketh appear he is pleased with the benefit he receiveth4 ,so also gratitude towards ,god is to confess his benefits4 ,there is also1 in gratitude towards men1 a desire to requite their benefits2 so there is in our gratitude towards ,god1 so far to requite them1 as to be kind to ,god's ministers1 which ,i acknowledged in making sacrifices a part of natural divine worship2 and the benefit of those sacrifices is the nourishment of ,god's ministers4 ,it appears therefore1 that the bishop's attention in reading my writings1 was either weak in itself1 or weakened by prejudice4 ,j4 ,d4 ,from this shameful omission or preterition of the main duty of mankind1 a man might easily take the height of ,t4 ,h4 his religion4 ,but he himself putteth it past all conjectures4 ,his principles are brim full of prodigious impiety4 ,in these four things1 opinions of ghosts1 ignorance of second causes1 devotion to what men fear1 and taking of things casual for prognostics1 consisteth the natural seed of religion2 the culture and improvement whereof1 he referreth only to policy4 ,human and divine politics1 are but politics4 ,and again1 mankind hath this from the conscience of their own weakness1 and the admiration of natural events1 that the most part of men believe that there is an invisible ,god1 the maker of all visible things4 ,and a little after he telleth us1 that superstition proceedeth from fear without right reason1 and atheism from an opinion of reason without fear2 making atheism to be more reasonable than superstition4 ,what is now become of that divine worship which natural reason did assign unto ,god1 the honour of existence1 infiniteness1 incomprehensibility1 unity1 ubiquity8 ,what is now become of that dictate or precept of reason1 concerning prayers1 thanksgivings1 oblations1 sacrifices1 if uncertain opinions1 ignorance1 fear1 mistakes1 the conscience of our own weakness1 and the admiration of natural events1 be the only seeds of religion8 ,he proceedeth further1 that atheism itself1 though it be an erroneous opinion1 and therefore a sin1 yet it ought to be numbered among the sins of imprudence or ignorance4 ,he addeth1 that an atheist is punished not as a subject is punished by his king1 because he did not observe laws3 but as an enemy1 by an enemy1 because he would not accept laws4 ,his reason is1 because the atheist never submitted his will to the will of ,god1 whom he never thought to be4 ,and he concludeth that man's obligation to obey ,god proceedeth from his weakness1 7,de ,cive1 ,,xv4 #g3 vol4 ,,ii4 p4 #ccf73 ,manifestum est obligationem ad prestandam ipsi 7,deo7 obedientiam1 incumbere hominibus propter imbecilitatem4 ,first1 it is impossible that should be a sin of mere ignorance or imprudence1 which is directly contrary to the light of natural reason4 ,the laws of nature need no new promulgation1 being imprinted naturally by ,god in the heart of man4 ,the law of nature was written in our hearts by the finger of ,god1 without our assent2 or rather1 the law of nature is the assent itself4 ,then if nature dictate to us that there is a ,god1 and that this ,god is to be worshipped in such and such a manner1 it is not possible that atheism should be a sin of mere ignorance4 ,secondly1 a rebellious subject is still a subject de jure1 though not de facto2 by right1 though not by deed3 and so the most cursed atheist that is1 ought by right to be the subject of ,god1 and ought to be punished not as a just enemy1 but as a disloyal traitor4 ,which is confessed by himself3 this fourth sin 7that is1 of those who do not by word and deed confess one ,god1 the supreme ,king of ,kings7 in the natural kingdom of ,god is the crime of high treason1 for it is a denial of ,divine power1 or atheism4 ,then an atheist is a traitor to ,god1 and punishable as a disloyal subject1 not as an enemy4 ,lastly1 it is an absurd and dishonourable assertion1 to make our obedience to ,god to depend upon our weakness1 because we cannot help it1 and not upon our gratitude1 because we owe our being and preservation to him4 ,who planteth a vineyard1 and eateth not of the fruit thereof8 ,and who feedeth a flock1 and eateth not of the milk of the flock8 ,and again1 ,thou art worthy1 ,o ,lord1 to receive glory1 and honour and power2 for thou hast created all things1 and for thy pleasure they are and were created4 ,but it were much better1 or at least not so ill1 to be a downright atheist1 than to make ,god to be such a thing as he doth1 and at last thrust him into the ,devil's office1 to be the cause of all sin4 ,t4 ,h4 ,though this bishop1 as ,i said1 had but a weak attention in reading1 and little skill in examining the force of an argument1 yet he knew men1 and the art1 without troubling their judgments1 to win their assents by exciting their passions4 ,one rule of his art was to give his reader what he would have him swallow1 a part by itself1 and in the nature of news1 whether true or not4 ,knowing that the unlearned1 that is most men1 are content to believe1 rather than be troubled with examining1 therefore1 a little before1 he put these words1 ,t4 ,h4 no friend to religion1 in the margin4 ,and in this place1 before he offer at any confutation1 he says my principles are brim full of prodigious impieties4 ,and at the next paragraph1 in the margin1 he puts that ,i excuse atheism4 ,this behaviour becomes neither a bishop1 nor a ,christian1 nor any man that pretends to good education4 ,fear of invisible powers1 what is it else in savage people1 but the fear of somewhat they think a ,god8 ,what invisible power does the reason of a savage man suggest unto him1 but those phantasms of his sleep1 or his distemper1 which we frequently call ghosts1 and the savages thought gods2 so that the fear of a ,god1 though not of the true one1 to them was the beginning of religion1 as the fear of the true ,god was the beginning of wisdom to the ,jews and ,christians8 ,ignorance of second causes made men fly to some first cause1 the fear of which bred devotion and worship4 ,the ignorance of what that power might do1 made them observe the order of what he had done2 that they might guess by the like order1 what he was to do another time4 ,this was their prognostication4 ,what prodigious impiety is here8 ,how confutes he it8 ,must it be taken for impiety upon his bare calumny8 ,i said superstition was fear without reason4 ,is not the fear of a false ,god1 or fancied demon1 contrary to right reason8 ,and is not atheism boldness grounded on false reasoning1 such as is this1 the wicked prosper1 therefore there is no ,god8 ,he offers no proof against any of this2 but says only ,i make atheism to be more reasonable than superstition2 which is not true3 for ,i deny that there is any reason either in the atheist or in the superstitious4 ,and because the atheist thinks he has reason1 where he has none1 ,i think him the more irrational of the two4 ,but all this while he argues not against any of this2 but enquires only1 what is become of my natural worship of ,god1 and of his existency2 infiniteness1 incomprehensibility1 unity1 and ubiquity4 ,as if whatsoever reason can suggest1 must be suggested all at once4 ,first1 all men by nature had an opinion of ,god's existency2 but of his other attributes not so soon1 but by reasoning1 and by degrees4 ,and for the attributes of the true ,god1 they were never suggested but by the ,word of ,god written4 ,in that ,i say atheism is a sin of ignorance1 he says ,i excuse it4 ,the prophet ,david says1 the fool hath said in his heart1 there is no ,god4 ,is it not then a sin of folly8 ,it is agreed between us1 that right reason dictates1 there is a ,god4 ,does it not follow1 that denying of ,god is a sin proceeding from misreasoning4 ,if it be not a sin of ignorance1 it must be a sin of malice4 ,can a man malice that which he thinks has no being8 ,but may not one think there is a ,god1 and yet maliciously deny him8 ,if he think there is a ,god1 he is no atheist2 and so the question is changed into this1 whether any man that thinks there is a ,god1 dares deliberately deny it8 ,for my part ,i think not4 ,for upon what confidence dares any man1 deliberately ,i say1 oppose the ,omnipotent8 ,david saith of himself1 ,my feet were ready to slip when ,i saw the prosperity of the wicked4 ,therefore it is likely the feet of men less holy slip oftener4 ,but ,i think no man living is so daring1 being out of passion1 as to hold it as his opinion4 ,those wicked men that for a long time proceeded so successfully in the late horrid rebellion1 may perhaps make some think they were constant and resolved atheists3 but ,i think rather that they forgot ,god1 than believed there was none4 ,he that believes there is such an atheist1 comes a little too near that opinion himself2 nevertheless if words spoken in passion signify a denial of a ,god1 no punishment preordained by law1 can be too great for such an insolence2 because there is no living in a commonwealth with men1 to whose oaths we cannot reasonably give credit4 ,as to that ,i say1 an atheist is punished by ,god not as a subject by his king1 but as an enemy2 and to my argument for it1 namely1 because he never acknowledged himself ,god's subject1 he opposeth1 that if nature dictate that there is a ,god1 and to be worshipped in such and such manner1 then atheism is not a sin of mere ignorance3 as if either ,i or he did hold that nature dictates the manner of ,god's worship1 or any article of our creed1 or whether to worship with or without a surplice4 ,secondly1 he answers that a rebel is still a subject de jure1 though not de facto3 and it is granted4 ,but though the king lose none of his right by the traitor's act1 yet the traitor loseth the privilege of being punished by a precedent law2 and therefore may be punished at the king's will1 as ,ravaillac was for murdering ,henry ,,iv of ,france4 ,an open enemy and a perfidious traitor are both enemies4 ,had not his ,lordship read in the ,roman story1 how ,perseus and other just enemies of that state were wont to be punished8 ,but what is this trifling question to my excusing of atheism8 ,in the seventh paragraph of chapter ,,xv4 of my book ,de ,cive1 he found the words in ,latin1 which he here citeth4 ,and to the same sense ,i have said in my ,leviathan1 that the right of nature whereby ,god reigneth over men1 is to be derived not from his creating them1 as if he required obedience1 as of gratitude2 but from his irresistible power4 ,this he says is absurd and dishonourable4 ,whereas first all power is honourable1 and the greatest power is most honourable4 ,is it not a more noble tenure for a king to hold his kingdom1 and the right to punish those that transgress his laws1 from his power1 than from the gratitude or gift of the transgressor4 ,there is nothing therefore here of dishonour to ,god ,almighty4 ,but see the subtilty of his disputing4 ,he saw he could not catch ,leviathan in this place1 he looks for him in my book ,de ,cive1 which is ,latin1 to try what he could fish out of that3 and says ,i make our obedience to ,god1 depend upon our weakness2 as if these words signified the dependence1 and not the necessity of our submission1 or that incumbere and dependere were all one4 ,j4 ,d4 ,for ,t4 ,h4 his ,god is not the ,god of ,christians1 nor of any rational men4 ,our ,god is every where1 and seeing he hath no parts1 he must be wholly here1 and wholly there1 and wholly every where4 ,so nature itself dictateth4 ,it cannot be said honourably of ,god that he is in a place2 for nothing is in a place1 but that which hath proper bounds of its greatness4 ,but ,t4 ,h4 his ,god is not wholly every where4 ,no man can conceive that any thing is all in this place1 and all in another place at the same time1 for none of these things ever have or can be incident to sense4 ,so far well1 if by conceiving he mean comprehending2 but then follows1 ,that these are absurd speeches taken upon credit1 without any signification at all1 from deceived philosophers1 and deceived or deceiving ,schoolmen4 ,thus he denieth the ubiquity of ,god4 ,a circumscriptive1 a definitive1 and a repletive being in a place1 is some heathen language to him4 ,t4 ,h4 ,though ,i believe the omnipotence of ,god1 and that he can do what he will1 yet ,i dare not say how every thing is done1 because ,i cannot conceive nor comprehend either the ,divine substance1 or the way of its operation4 ,and ,i think it impiety to speak concerning ,god any thing of my own head1 or upon the authority of philosophers or ,schoolmen1 which ,i understand not1 without warrant in the ,scripture3 and what ,i say of omnipotence1 ,i say also of ubiquity4 ,but his ,lordship is more valiant in this place1 telling us that ,god is wholly here1 and wholly there1 and wholly every where2 because he has no parts4 ,i cannot comprehend nor conceive this4 ,for methinks it implies also that the whole world is also in the whole ,god1 and in every part of ,god4 ,nor can ,i conceive how any thing can be called whole1 which has no parts1 nor can ,i find anything of this in the ,scripture4 ,if ,i could find it there1 ,i could believe it2 and if ,i could find it in the public doctrine of the ,church1 ,i could easily abstain from contradicting it4 ,the ,schoolmen say also1 that the soul of man 7meaning his upper soul1 which they call the rational soul7 is also wholly in the whole man1 and wholly in every part of the man4 ,what is this1 but to make the human soul the same thing in respect of man's body1 that ,god is in respect of the world8 ,these his ,lordship calls here rational men1 and some of them which applaud this doctrine1 would have the high court of parliament corroborate such doctrines with a law4 ,i said in my ,leviathan1 that it is no honourable attribute to ,god1 to say he is in a place1 because infinite is not confined within a place4 ,to which he replies1 ,t4 ,h4 his ,god is not wholly every where4 ,i confess the consequence4 ,for ,i understand in ,english1 he that says any thing to be all here1 means that neither all nor any of the same thing is elsewhere4 ,he says further1 ,i take a circumscriptive1 a definitive1 and a repletive being in a place to be heathen language4 ,truly1 if this dispute were at the bar1 ,i should go near to crave the assistance of the court1 lest some trick might be put upon me in such obscurity4 ,for though ,i know what these ,latin words singly signify1 yet ,i understand not how any thing is in a place definitively and not circumscriptively4 ,for definitively comes from definio1 which is to set bounds4 ,and therefore to be in a place definitively1 is when the bounds of the place are every way marked out4 ,but to be in a place circumscriptively1 is when the bounds of the place are described round about4 ,to be in a place repletively1 is to fill a place4 ,who does not see that this distinction is canting and fraud8 ,if any man will call it pious fraud1 he is to prove the piety as clearly as ,i have here explained the fraud4 ,besides1 no fraud can be pious in any man1 but him that hath a lawful right to govern him whom he beguileth2 whom the ,bishop pretends to govern1 ,i cannot tell4 ,besides1 his ,lordship ought to have considered1 that every ,bishop is one of the great ,council1 trusted by the ,king to give their advice with the ,lords temporal1 for the making of good laws1 civil and ecclesiastical1 and not to offer them such obscure doctrines1 as if1 because they are not versed in ,school-divinity1 therefore they had no learning at all1 nor understood the ,english tongue4 ,why did the divines of ,england contend so much heretofore to have the ,bible translated into ,english1 if they never meant any but themselves should read it8 ,if a lay-man be publicly encouraged to search the ,scriptures for his own salvation1 what has a divine to do to impose upon him any strange interpretation1 unless1 if he make him err to damnation1 he will be damned in his stead8 ,j4 ,d4 ,our ,god is immutable without any shadow of turning by change1 to whom all things are present1 nothing past1 nothing to come4 ,but ,t4 ,h4 his ,god is measured by time1 losing something that is past1 and acquiring something that doth come every minute4 ,that is as much as to say1 that our ,god is infinite1 and his ,god is finite2 for unto that which is actually infinite1 nothing can be added1 neither time nor parts4 ,hear himself3 ,nor do ,i understand what derogation it can be to the ,divine perfection1 to attribute to it potentiality1 that is in ,english1 power 7so little doth he understand what potentiality is7 and successive duration4 ,and he chargeth it upon us as a fault1 that we will not have eternity to be an endless succession of time4 ,how1 successive duration1 and an endless succession of time in ,god8 ,then ,god is not infinite1 then ,god is older to-day than he was yesterday4 ,away with blasphemies6 ,before1 he destroyed the ubiquity of ,god1 and now he destroyeth his eternity4 ,t4 ,h4 ,i shall omit both here and henceforth his preambulatory1 impertinent1 and uncivil calumnies4 ,the thing he pretends to prove is this4 ,that it is a derogation to the ,divine power to attribute to it potentiality 7that is in ,english power7 and successive duration4 ,one of his reasons is1 ,god is infinite1 and nothing can be added to infinite1 neither of time nor of parts3 it is true4 ,and therefore ,i said1 ,god is infinite and eternal1 without beginning or end1 either of time or place2 which he has not here confuted1 but confirmed4 ,he denies potentiality and power to be all one1 and says ,i little understand what potentiality is4 ,he ought therefore in this place to have defined what potentiality is3 for ,i understand it to be the same with potentia1 which is in ,english power4 ,there is no such word as potentiality in the ,scriptures1 nor in any author of the ,latin tongue4 ,it is found only in ,school-divinity1 as a word of art1 or rather as a word of craft1 to amaze and puzzle the laity4 ,and therefore ,i no sooner read than interpreted it4 ,in the next place he says1 as wondering3 ,how1 an endless succession of time in ,god6 ,why not8 ,god's mercy endureth for ever1 and surely ,god endureth as long as his mercy2 therefore there is duration in ,god1 and consequently endless succession of time4 ,god who in sundry times and divers manners spake in time past1 c4 ,but in a former dispute with me about free-will1 he hath defined eternity to be nunc stans1 that is an ever standing now1 or everlasting instant4 ,this he thinks himself bound in honour to defend4 ,what reasonable soul can digest this8 ,we read in ,scripture1 that a thousand years with ,god1 is but as yesterday4 ,and why8 but because he sees as clearly to the end of a thousand years1 as to the end of a day4 ,but his ,lordship affirms1 that both a thousand years and a day are but one instant1 the same standing now1 or eternity4 ,if he had showed an holy text for this doctrine1 or any text of the book of ,common ,prayer 7in the ,scripture and book of ,common ,prayer is contained all our religion71 ,i had yielded to him2 but ,school-divinity ,i value little or nothing at all4 ,though in this he contradict also the ,school-men1 who say the soul is eternal only a parte post1 but ,god is eternal both a parte post1 and a parte ante4 ,thus there are parts in eternity2 and eternity being1 as his ,lordship says1 the ,divine substance1 the ,divine substance has parts1 and nunc stans has parts4 ,is not this darkness8 ,i take it to be the kingdom of darkness1 and the teachers of it 7especially of this doctrine1 that ,god1 who is not only optimus1 but also maximus1 is no greater than to be wholly contained in the least atom of earth1 or other body1 and that his whole duration is but an instant of time7 to be either grossly ignorant or ungodly deceivers4 ,j4 ,d4 ,our ,god is a perfect1 pure1 simple1 indivisible1 infinite essence2 free from all composition of matter and form1 of substance and accidents4 ,all matter is finite1 and he who acteth by his infinite essence1 needeth neither organs nor faculties 7id est1 no power1 note that71 nor accidents1 to render him more complete4 ,but ,t4 ,h4 his ,god is a divisible ,god1 a compounded ,god1 that hath matter1 or qualities1 or accidents4 ,hear himself4 ,i argue thus3 ,the ,divine substance is indivisible2 but eternity is the ,divine substance4 ,the major is evident1 because ,god is actus simplicissimus2 the minor is confessed by all men1 that whatsoever is attributed to ,god1 is ,god4 ,now listen to his answer3 ,the major is so far from being evident1 that actus simplicissimus signifieth nothing4 ,the minor is said by some men1 thought by no man2 whatsoever is thought is understood4 ,the major was this1 the ,divine substance is indivisible4 ,is this far from being evident8 ,either it is indivisible1 or divisible4 ,if it be not indivisible1 then it is divisible1 then it is materiate1 then it is corporeal1 then it hath parts1 then it is finite by his own confession4 ,habere partes1 aut esse totum aliquid1 sunt attributa finitorum4 ,upon this silly conceit he chargeth me for saying1 that ,god is not just1 but justice itself2 not eternal1 but eternity itself2 which he calleth unseemly words to be said of ,god4 ,and he thinketh he doth me a great courtesy in not adding blasphemous and atheistical4 ,but his bolts are so soon shot1 and his reasons are such vain imaginations1 and such drowsy phantasies1 that no sober man doth much regard them4 ,thus he hath already destroyed the ubiquity1 the eternity1 and the simplicity of ,god4 ,i wish he had considered better with himself1 before he had desperately cast himself upon these rocks4 ,but paulo majora canamus4 ,my next charge is1 that he destroys the very being of ,god1 and leaves nothing in his place1 but an empty name4 ,for by taking away all incorporeal substances1 he taketh away ,god himself4 ,the very name1 saith he1 of an incorporeal substance1 is a contradiction4 ,and to say that an angel or spirit1 is an incorporeal substance1 is to say in effect1 that there is no angel or spirit at all4 ,by the same reason to say1 that ,god is an incorporeal substance1 is to say there is no ,god at all4 ,either ,god is incorporeal2 or he is finite1 and consists of parts1 and consequently is no ,god4 ,this1 that there is no incorporeal spirit1 is that main root of atheism1 from which so many lesser branches are daily sprouting up4 ,t4 ,h4 ,god is indeed a perfect1 pure1 simple1 infinite substance2 and his name incommunicable1 that is to say1 not divisible into this and that individual ,god1 in such manner as the name of man is divisible into ,peter and ,john4 ,and therefore ,god is individual2 which word amongst the ,greeks is expressed by the word indivisible4 ,certain heretics in the primitive church1 because special and individual are called particulars1 maintained that ,christ was a particular ,god1 differing in number from ,god the ,father4 ,and this was the doctrine that was condemned for heresy in the first council of ,nice1 by these words1 ,god hath no parts4 ,and yet many of the ,latin fathers1 in their explications of the ,nicene creed1 have expounded the word consubstantial1 by the community of nature1 which different species have in their genus1 and different individuals in the species2 as if ,peter and ,john were consubstantial1 because they agree in one human nature2 which is contrary1 ,i confess1 to the meaning of the ,nice fathers4 ,but that in a substance infinitely great1 it should be impossible to consider any thing as not infinite1 ,i do not see it there condemned4 ,for certainly he that thinks ,god is in every part of the church1 does not exclude him out of the churchyard4 ,and is not this a considering of him by parts8 ,for dividing a thing which we cannot reach nor separate one part thereof from another1 is nothing else but considering of the same by parts4 ,so much concerning indivisibility from natural reason2 for ,i will wade no further1 but rely upon the ,scriptures4 ,god is nowhere said in the ,scriptures to be indivisible1 unless his ,lordship meant division to consist only in separation of parts1 which ,i think he did not4 ,st4 ,paul indeed saith 7#a ,cor4 i4 #ac73 ,is ,christ divided8 ,not that the followers of ,paul1 ,apollos1 and ,cephas1 followed some one part1 some another of ,christ2 but that thinking differently of his nature1 they made as it were different kinds of him4 ,secondly1 his ,lordship expounds simplicity1 by not being compounded of matter and form1 or of substance and accidents1 unlearnedly4 ,for nothing can be so compounded4 ,the matter of a chair is wood2 the form is the figure it hath1 apt for the intended use4 ,does his ,lordship think the chair compounded of the wood and the figure8 ,a man is rational3 does it therefore follow that reason is a part of the man8 ,it was ,aristotle deceived him1 who told him that a rational living creature1 is the definition of a man1 and that the definition of a man was his essence2 and therefore the ,bishop and other ,schoolmen1 from this that the word rational is a part of these words1 man is a rational living creature1 concluded that the essence of man was a part of the man1 and a rational man the same thing with a rational soul4 ,i should wonder how any man1 much more a doctor of divinity1 should be so grossly deceived1 but that ,i know naturally the generality of men speak the words of their masters by rote1 without having any ideas of the things1 which the words signify4 ,lastly1 he calls ,god an essence4 ,if he mean by essence the same with ens1 1 ,i approve it4 ,otherwise1 what is essence8 ,there is no such word in the ,old ,testament4 ,the ,hebrew language1 which has no word answerable to the copulative est1 will not bear it4 ,the ,new ,testament hath 1 but never for essence1 nor for substance1 but only for riches4 ,i come now to his argument in mood and figure1 which is this1 the ,divine substance is indivisible4 ,that is the major4 ,eternity is the ,divine substance4 ,that is the minor4 ,ergo1 the ,divine substance is indivisible4 ,the major1 he says1 is evident1 because ,god is actus simplicissimus4 ,the minor is confessed1 he thinks1 by all men1 because whatsoever is attributed to ,god1 is ,god4 ,to this ,i answered1 that the major was so far from being evident1 that actus simplicissimus signifieth nothing1 and that the minor was understood by no man4 ,first1 what is actus in the major8 ,does any man understand actus for a substance1 that is1 for a thing subsisting by itself8 ,is not actus1 in ,english1 either an act or an action1 or nothing8 ,or is any of these substance8 ,if it be evident1 why did he not explain actus by a definition8 ,and as to the minor1 though all men in the world understand that the ,eternal is ,god1 yet no man can understand that the eternity is ,god4 ,perhaps he and the ,schoolmen mean by actus1 the same that they do by essentia4 ,what is the essence of a man1 but his humanity2 or of ,god1 but his ,deity2 of great1 but greatness2 and so of all other denominating attributes8 ,and the words1 ,god and ,deity1 are of different signification4 ,john ,damascene1 a father of the church1 expounding the ,nicene creed1 denies plainly that the ,deity was incarnate2 but all true ,christians hold that ,god was incarnate4 ,therefore ,god and the ,deity signify divers things2 and therefore eternal and eternity are not the same1 no more than a wise man and his wisdom are the same2 nor ,god and his justice the same thing3 and universally it is false1 that the attribute in the abstract is the same with the substance1 to which it is attributed4 ,also it is universally true of ,god1 that the attribute in the concrete1 and the substance to which it is attributed1 is not the same thing4 ,i come now to his next period or paragraph1 wherein he would fain prove1 that by denying incorporeal substance1 ,i take away ,god's existence4 ,the words he cites here are mine3 to say an angel or spirit is an incorporeal substance1 is to say in effect there is no angel nor spirit at all4 ,it is true also1 that to say that ,god is an incorporeal substance1 is to say in effect there is no ,god at all4 ,what alleges he against it1 but the ,school-divinity which ,i have already answered8 ,scripture he can bring none1 because the word incorporeal is not found in ,scripture4 ,but the ,bishop1 trusting to his ,aristotelian and ,scholastic learning1 hath hitherto made no use of ,scripture1 save only of these texts3 #a ,cor4 ix4 #g3 ,who hath planted a vineyard1 and eateth not of the fruit thereof2 or who feedeth a flock1 and eateth not of the milk of the flock8 and ,rev4 iv4 #aa3 ,thou art worthy1 ,o ,lord1 to receive glory1 honour1 and power3 for thou hast created all things1 and for thy pleasure they were created3 thereby to prove that the right of ,god to govern and punish mankind is not derived from his omnipotence4 ,let us now see how he proves incorporeity by his own reason without ,scripture4 ,either ,god1 he saith1 is incorporeal or finite4 ,he knows ,i deny both1 and say he is corporeal and infinite3 against which he offers no proof1 but only1 according to his custom of disputing1 calls it the root of atheism2 and interrogates me1 what real thing is left in the world1 if ,god be incorporeal1 but body and accidents8 ,i say there is nothing left but corporeal substance4 ,for ,i have denied1 as he knew1 that there is any reality in accidents2 and nevertheless maintain ,god's existence1 and that he is a most pure1 and most simple corporeal spirit4 ,here his ,lordship catching nothing1 removes to the eternity of the ,trinity1 which these my grounds1 he says1 destroy4 ,how so8 ,i say the ,trinity1 and the persons thereof1 are that one pure1 simple1 and eternal corporeal spirit2 and why does this destroy the ,trinity1 more than if ,i had called it incorporeal8 ,he labours here and seeketh somewhat to refresh himself in the word person2 by the same grounds1 he saith1 every king hath as many persons as there be justices of peace in his kingdom1 and ,god ,almighty hath as many persons as there be kings4 ,why not8 ,for ,i never said that all those kings were that ,god2 and yet ,god giveth that name to the kings of the earth4 ,for the signification of the word person1 ,i shall expound it by and by in another place4 ,here ends his ,lordship's ,school-argument2 now let me come with my ,scripture-argument4 ,st4 ,paul1 concerning ,christ 7,col4 ii4 #i7 saith thus3 ,in him dwelleth all the fulness of the ,godhead bodily4 ,this place ,athanasius1 a great and zealous doctor in the ,nicene ,council1 and vehement enemy of ,arius the heretic1 who allowed ,christ to be no otherwise ,god1 than as men of excellent piety were so called1 expoundeth thus3 ,the fulness of the ,godhead dwelleth in him bodily1 7,greek 71 id est 1 id est1 realiter4 ,so there is one ,father for corporality1 and that ,god was in ,christ in such manner as body is in body4 ,again1 there were in the primitive church a sort of heretics who maintained that ,jesus ,christ had not a true real body1 but was only a phantasm or spright1 such as the ,latins call spectra4 ,against the head of this sect1 whose name ,i think was ,apelles1 ,tertullian wrote a book1 now extant amongst his other works1 intituled ,de ,carne ,christi2 wherein after he had spoken of the nature of phantasms1 and showed that they had nothing of reality in them1 he concludeth with these words1 8whatsoever is not body1 is nothing40 ,so here is on my side a plain text of ,scripture1 and two ancient and learned ,fathers4 ,nor was this doctrine of ,tertullian condemned in the ,council of ,nice2 but the division of the divine substance into ,god the ,father1 ,god the ,son1 and ,god the ,holy ,ghost4 ,for these words1 ,god has no parts1 were added1 for explication of the word consubstantial1 at the request of the dissenting ,fathers1 and are further explained both in ,athanasius his creed1 in these words1 not three ,gods but one ,god1 and by the constant attribute ever since of the individual ,trinity4 ,the same words nevertheless do condemn the ,anthropomorphites also2 for though there appeared no ,christians that professed that ,god had an organical body1 and consequently that the persons were three individuals1 yet the ,gentiles were all ,anthropomorphites1 and there condemned by these words1 ,god has no parts4 ,and thus ,i have answered his accusation concerning the eternity and existence of the ,divine substance1 and made it appear that in truth1 the question between us1 is whether ,god be a phantasm 7id est1 an idol of the fancy1 which ,st4 ,paul saith is nothing7 or a corporeal spirit1 that is to say1 something that has magnitude4 ,in this place ,i think it not amiss1 leaving for a little while this theological dispute1 to examine the signification of those words which have occasioned so much diversity of opinion in this kind of doctrine4 ,the word substance1 in ,greek 1 1 1 signify the same thing1 namely1 a ground1 a base1 any thing that has existence or subsistence in itself1 anything that upholdeth that which else would fall1 in which sense ,god is properly the hypostasis1 base1 and substance that upholdeth all the world1 having subsistence not only in himself1 but from himself2 whereas other substances have their subsistence only in themselves1 not from themselves4 ,but metaphorically1 faith is called 7,heb4 xi4 #a7 a substance1 because it is the foundation or base of our hope2 for faith failing1 our hope falls4 ,and 7#b ,cor4 ix4 #d7 ,st4 ,paul having boasted of the liberal promise of the ,corinthians towards the ,macedonians1 calls that promise the ground1 the hypostasis of that his boasting4 ,and 7,heb4 i4 #c7 ,christ is called the image of the substance 7the hypostasis7 of his ,father1 and for the proper and adequate signification of the word hypostasis1 the ,greek ,fathers did always oppose it to apparition or phantasm2 as when a man seeth his face in the water1 his real face is called the hypostasis of the phantastic face in the water4 ,so also in speaking1 the thing understood or named is called hypostasis1 in respect of the name2 so also a body coloured is the hypostasis1 substance and subject of the colour2 and in like manner of all its other accidents4 ,essence and all other abstract names1 are words artificial belonging to the art of logic1 and signify only the manner how we consider the substance itself4 ,and of this ,i have spoken sufficiently in my ,leviathan 7vol4 ,,iii4 page #fgb74 ,body 7,latin1 corpus1 7 is that substance which hath magnitude indeterminate1 and is the same with corporeal substance2 but a body is that which hath magnitude determinate1 and consequently is understood to be totum or integrum aliquid4 ,pure and simple body1 is body of one and the same kind1 in every part throughout2 and if mingled with body of another kind1 though the total be compounded or mixed1 the parts nevertheless retain their simplicity1 as when water and wine are mixed1 the parts of both kinds retain their simplicity4 ,for water and wine can not both be in one and the same place at once4 ,matter is the same with body2 but never without respect to a body which is made thereof4 ,form is the aggregate of all accidents together1 for which we give the matter a new name2 so albedo1 whiteness1 is the form of album1 or white body4 ,so also humanity is the essence of man1 and ,deity the essence of ,deus4 ,spirit is thin1 fluid1 transparent1 invisible body4 ,the word in ,latin signifies breath1 air1 wind1 and the like4 ,in ,greek from 1 spiro1 flo4 ,i have seen1 and so have many more1 two waters1 one of the river1 the other a mineral water1 so like that no man could discern the one from the other by his sight2 yet when they have been both put together1 the whole substance could not by the eye be distinguished from milk4 ,yet we know that the one was not mixed with the other1 so as every part of the one to be in every part of the other1 for that is impossible1 unless two bodies can be in the same place4 ,how then could the change be made in every part1 but only by the activity of the mineral water1 changing it every where to the sense1 and yet not being every where1 and in every part of the water8 ,if then such gross bodies have so great activity1 what shall we think of spirits1 whose kinds be as many as there be kinds of liquor1 and activity greater8 ,can it then be doubted1 but that ,god1 who is an infinitely fine ,spirit1 and withal intelligent1 can make and change all species and kinds of body as he pleaseth8 ,but ,i dare not say1 that this is the way by which ,god ,almighty worketh1 because it is past my apprehension3 yet it serves very well to demonstrate1 that the omnipotence of ,god implieth no contradiction2 and is better than by pretence of magnifying the fineness of the ,divine substance1 to reduce it to a spright or phantasm1 which is nothing4 ,a person 7,latin1 persona7 signifies an intelligent substance1 that acteth any thing in his own or another's name1 or by his own or another's authority4 ,of this definition there can be no other proof than from the use of that word1 in such ,latin authors as were esteemed the most skilful in their own language1 of which number was ,cicero4 ,but ,cicero1 in an epistle to ,atticus1 saith thus3 ,unus sustineo tres personas1 mei1 adversarii1 et judicis3 that is1 8,i that am but one man1 sustain three persons2 mine own person1 the person of my adversary1 and the person of the judge40 ,cicero was here the substance intelligent1 one man2 and because he pleaded for himself1 he calls himself his own person3 and again1 because he pleaded for his adversary1 he says1 he sustained the person of his adversary3 and lastly1 because he himself gave the sentence1 he says1 he sustained the person of the judge4 ,in the same sense we use the word in ,english vulgarly1 calling him that acteth by his own authority1 his own person1 and him that acteth by the authority of another1 the person of that other4 ,and thus we have the exact meaning of the word person4 ,the ,greek tongue cannot render it2 for is properly a face1 and1 metaphorically1 a vizard of an actor upon the stage4 ,how then did the ,greek ,fathers render the word person1 as it is in the blessed ,trinity8 ,not well4 ,instead of the word person they put hypostasis1 which signifies substance2 from whence it might be inferred1 that the three persons in the ,trinity are three ,divine substances1 that is1 three ,gods4 ,the word they could not use1 because face and vizard are neither of them honourable attributes of ,god1 nor explicative of the meaning of the ,greek church4 ,therefore the ,latin 7and consequently the ,english7 church1 renders hypostasis every where in ,athanasius his creed by person4 ,but the word hypostatical union is rightly retained and used by divines1 as being the union of two hypostases1 that is1 of two substances or natures in the person of ,christ4 ,but seeing they also hold the soul of our ,saviour to be a substance1 which1 though separated from his body1 subsisted nevertheless in itself1 and consequently1 before it was separated from his body upon the cross1 was a distinct nature from his body1 how will they avoid this objection1 that then ,christ had three natures1 three hypostases1 without granting1 that his resurrection was a new vivification1 and not a return of his soul out of ,heaven into the grave8 ,the contrary is not determined by the church4 ,thus far in explication of the words that occur in this controversy4 ,now ,i return again to his ,lordship's discourse4 ,j4 ,d4 ,when they have taken away all incorporeal spirits1 what do they leave ,god himself to be8 ,he who is the fountain of all being1 from whom and in whom all creatures have their being1 must needs have a real being of his own4 ,and what real being can ,god have among bodies and accidents8 ,for they have left nothing else in the universe4 ,then ,t4 ,h4 may move the same question of ,god1 which he did of devils4 ,i would gladly know in what classes of entities1 the ,bishop ranketh ,god8 ,infinite being and participated being are not of the same nature4 ,yet to speak according to human apprehension1 7apprehension and comprehension differ much3 ,t4 ,h4 confesseth that natural reason doth dictate to us1 that ,god is infinite1 yet natural reason cannot comprehend the infiniteness of ,god7 ,i place him among incorporeal substances or spirits1 because he hath been pleased to place himself in that rank1 ,god is a ,spirit4 ,of which place ,t4 ,h4 giveth his opinion1 that it is unintelligible1 and all others of the same nature1 and fall not under human understanding4 ,they who deny all incorporeal substances1 can understand nothing by ,god1 but either nature1 7not naturam naturantem1 that is1 a real author of nature1 but naturam naturatam1 that is1 the orderly concourse of natural causes1 as ,t4 ,h4 seemeth to intimate17 or a fiction of the brain1 without real being1 cherished for advantage and politic ends1 as a profitable error1 howsoever dignified with the glorious title of the eternal cause of all things4 ,t4 ,h4 ,to his ,lordship's question here3 ,what ,i leave ,god to be8 ,i answer1 ,i leave him to be a most pure1 simple1 invisible spirit corporeal4 ,by corporeal ,i mean a substance that has magnitude1 and so mean all learned men1 divines and others1 though perhaps there be some common people so rude as to call nothing body1 but what they can see and feel4 ,to his second question3 ,what real being ,he can have amongst bodies and accidents8 ,i answer1 the being of a spirit1 not of a spright4 ,if ,i should ask any the most subtile distinguisher1 what middle nature there were between an infinitely subtile substance1 and a mere thought or phantasm1 by what name could he call it8 ,he might call it perhaps an incorporeal substance2 and so incorporeal shall pass for a middle nature between infinitely subtile and nothing1 and be less subtile than infinitely subtile1 and yet more subtile than a thought4 ,it is granted1 he says1 that the nature of ,god is incomprehensible4 ,doth it therefore follow1 that we may give to the ,divine substance what negative name we please8 ,because he says1 the whole ,divine substance is here and there and every where throughout the world1 and that the soul of a man is here and there and every where throughout man's body2 must we therefore take it for a mystery of ,christian religion1 upon his or any other ,schoolman's word1 without the ,scripture1 which calls nothing a mystery but the incarnation of the eternal ,god8 ,or is incorporeal a mystery1 when not at all mentioned in the ,bible1 but to the contrary it is written1 ,that the fulness of the ,deity was bodily in ,christ8 ,when the nature of the thing is incomprehensible1 ,i can acquiesce in the ,scripture3 but when the signification of words is incomprehensible1 ,i cannot acquiesce in the authority of a ,schoolman4 ,j4 ,d4 ,we have seen what his principles are concerning the ,deity1 they are full as bad or worse concerning the ,trinity4 ,hear himself3 ,a person is he that is represented as often as he is represented4 ,and therefore ,god who has been represented1 that is personated thrice1 may properly enough be said to be three persons1 though neither the word ,person nor ,trinity be ascribed to him in the ,bible4 ,and a little after3 ,to conclude1 the doctrine of the ,trinity1 as far as can be gathered directly from the ,scripture1 is in substance this1 that the ,god who is always one and the same1 was the person represented by ,moses1 the person represented by his ,son incarnate1 and the person represented by the apostles4 ,as represented by the apostles1 the holy spirit by which they spake is ,god4 ,as represented by his ,son1 that was ,god and man1 the ,son is that ,god4 ,as represented by ,moses and the ,high-priests1 the ,father1 that is to say1 the ,father of our ,lord ,jesus ,christ1 is that ,god4 ,from whence we may gather the reason why those names1 ,father1 ,son1 and ,holy ,ghost1 in the signification of the ,godhead1 are never used in the ,old ,testament4 ,for they are persons1 that is1 they have their names from representing1 which could not be till divers persons had represented ,god1 in ruling or in directing under him4 ,who is so bold as blind ,bayard8 ,the emblem of a little boy attempting to lade all the water out of the sea with a cockle-shell1 doth fit ,t4 ,h4 as exactly as if it had been shaped for him1 who thinketh to measure the profound and inscrutable mysteries of religion1 by his own silly1 shallow conceits4 ,what is now become of the great adorable mystery of the blessed undivided ,trinity8 ,it is shrunk into nothing4 ,upon his grounds there was a time when there was no ,trinity3 and we must blot these words out of our creed1 the ,father eternal1 the ,son eternal1 and the ,holy ,ghost eternal3 and these other words out of our ,bibles1 ,let us make man after our image3 unless we mean that this was a consultation of ,god with ,moses and the apostles4 ,what is now become of the eternal generation of the ,son of ,god1 if this sonship did not begin until about four thousand years after the creation were expired8 ,upon these grounds every king hath as many persons1 as there be justices of peace and petty constables in his kingdom4 ,upon this account ,god ,almighty hath as many persons1 as there have been sovereign princes in the world since ,adam4 ,according to this reckoning each one of us1 like so many ,geryons1 may have as many persons as we please to make procurations4 ,such bold presumption requireth another manner of confutation4 ,t4 ,h4 ,as for the words recited1 ,i confess there is a fault in the ratiocination1 which nevertheless his ,lordship hath not discovered1 but no impiety4 ,all that he objecteth is1 that it followeth hereupon1 that there be as many persons of a king1 as there be petty constables in his kingdom4 ,and so there are1 or else he cannot be obeyed4 ,but ,i never said that a king1 and every one of his persons1 are the same substance4 ,the fault ,i here made1 and saw not1 was this2 ,i was to prove that it is no contradiction1 as ,lucian and heathen scoffers would have it1 to say of ,god1 he was one and three4 ,i saw the true definition of the word person would serve my turn in this manner2 ,god1 in his own person1 both created the world1 and instituted a church in ,israel1 using therein the ministry of ,moses3 the same ,god1 in the person of his ,son ,god and man1 redeemed the same world1 and the same church2 the same ,god1 in the person of the ,holy ,ghost1 sanctified the same church1 and all the faithful men in the world4 ,is not this a clear proof that it is no contradiction to say that ,god is three persons and one substance8 ,and doth not the church distinguish the persons in the same manner8 ,see the words of our catechism4 ,question4 ,what dost thou chiefly learn in these articles of thy belief8 ,answer4 ,first1 ,i learn to believe in ,god the ,father1 that hath made me and all the world2 ,secondly1 in ,god the ,son1 who hath redeemed me and all mankind2 ,thirdly1 in ,god the ,holy ,ghost1 that hath sanctified me and all the elect people of ,god4 ,but at what time was the church sanctified8 ,was it not on the day of ,pentecost1 in the descending of the ,holy ,ghost upon the apostles8 ,his ,lordship all this while hath catched nothing4 ,it is ,i that catched myself1 for saying1 instead of by the ministry of ,moses1 in the person of ,moses4 ,but this error ,i no sooner saw1 than ,i no less publicly corrected than ,i had committed it1 in my ,leviathan converted into ,latin1 which by this time ,i think is printed beyond the seas with this alteration1 and also with the omission of some such passages as strangers are not concerned in4 ,and ,i had corrected this error sooner1 if ,i had sooner found it4 ,for though ,i was told by ,dr4 ,cosins1 now ,bishop of ,durham1 that the place above-cited was not applicable enough to the doctrine of the ,trinity1 yet ,i could not in reviewing the same espy the defect1 till of late1 when being solicited from beyond sea1 to translate the book into ,latin1 and fearing some other man might do it not to my liking1 ,i examined this passage and others of the like sense more narrowly4 ,but how concludes his ,lordship out of this1 that ,i put out of the creed these words1 the ,father eternal1 the ,son eternal1 the ,holy ,ghost eternal8 ,or these words1 let us make man after our image1 out of the ,bible8 ,which last words neither ,i nor ,bellarmine put out of the ,bible1 but we both put them out of the number of good arguments to prove the ,trinity2 for it is no unusual thing in the ,hebrew1 as may be seen by ,bellarmine's quotations1 to join a noun of the plural number with a verb of the singular4 ,and we may say also of many other texts of ,scripture alleged to prove the ,trinity1 that they are not so firm as that high article requireth4 ,but mark his ,lordship's ,scholastic charity in the last words of this period3 such bold presumption requireth another manner of confutation4 ,this bishop1 and others of his opinion1 had been in their element1 if they had been bishops in ,queen ,mary's time4 ,j4 ,d4 ,concerning ,god the ,son1 forgetting what he had said elsewhere1 where he calleth him ,god and man1 and the ,son of ,god incarnate1 he doubteth not to say1 that the word hypostatical is canting4 ,as if the same person could be both ,god and man without a personal1 that is1 an hypostatical union of the two natures of ,god and man4 ,t4 ,h4 ,if ,christian profession be 7as certainly it is in ,england7 a law2 and if it be of the nature of a law to be made known to all men that are to obey it1 in such manner as they may have no excuse for disobedience from their ignorance2 then1 without doubt1 all words unknown to the people1 and as to them insignificant1 are canting4 ,the word substance is understood by the vulgar well enough1 when it is said of a body1 but in other sense not at all1 except for their riches4 ,but the word hypostatical is understood only by those1 and but few of those that are learned in the ,greek tongue1 and is properly used1 as ,i have said before1 of the union of the two natures of ,christ in one person4 ,so likewise consubstantial in the ,nicene creed1 is properly said of the ,trinity4 ,but to an ,englishman that understands neither ,greek nor ,latin1 and yet is as much concerned as his ,lordship was1 the word hypostatical is no less canting than eternal now4 ,j4 ,d4 ,he alloweth every man who is commanded by his lawful sovereign1 to deny ,christ with his tongue before men4 ,t4 ,h4 ,i allow it in some cases1 and to some men1 which his ,lordship knew well enough1 but would not mention4 ,i alleged for it1 in the place cited1 both reason and ,scripture1 though his ,lordship thought it not expedient to take notice of either4 ,if it be true that ,i have said1 why does he blame it8 ,if false1 why offers he no argument against it1 neither from ,scripture nor from reason8 ,or why does he not show that the text ,i cite is not applicable to the question1 or not well interpreted by me8 ,first1 he barely cites it1 because he thought the words would sound harshly1 and make a reader admire them for impiety4 ,but ,i hope ,i shall so well instruct my reader ere ,i leave this place1 that this his petty art will have no effect4 ,secondly1 the cause why he omitted my arguments was1 that he could not answer them4 ,lastly1 the cause why he urgeth neither ,scripture nor reason against it was1 that he saw none sufficient4 ,my argument from ,scripture was this1 7,leviathan1 vol4 ,,iii4 p4 #dic7 taken out of #b ,kings v4 #ag-ai1 where ,naaman the ,syrian saith to ,elisha the prophet3 ,thy servant will henceforth offer neither burnt-offering nor sacrifice to other ,gods1 but unto the ,lord4 ,in this thing the ,lord pardon thy servant1 that when my master goeth into the house of ,rimmon to worship there1 and he leaneth on my hand1 and ,i bow myself in the house of ,rimmon3 when ,i bow myself in the house of ,rimmon1 the ,lord pardon thy servant in this thing4 ,and he said unto him1 ,go in peace4 ,what can be said to this8 ,did not ,elisha say it from ,god8 ,or is not this answer of the prophet a permission8 ,when ,st4 ,paul and ,st4 ,peter commanded the ,christians of their time to obey their princes1 which then were heathens and enemies of ,christ1 did they mean they should lose their lives for disobedience8 ,did they not rather mean they should preserve both their lives and their faith1 believing in ,christ as they did1 by this denial of the tongue1 having no command to the contrary8 ,if in this kingdom a ,mahometan should be made by terror to deny ,mahomet and go to church with us1 would any man condemn this ,mahometan8 ,a denial with the mouth may perhaps be prejudicial to the power of the church2 but to retain the faith of ,christ stedfastly in his heart1 cannot be prejudicial to his soul that hath undertaken no charge to preach to wolves1 whom they know will destroy them4 ,about the time of the ,council of ,nice1 there was a canon made 7which is extant in the history of the ,nicene ,council7 concerning those that being ,christians had been seduced1 not terrified1 to a denial of ,christ1 and again repenting1 desired to be readmitted into the church2 in which canon it was ordained1 that those men should be no otherwise readmitted than to be in the number of the cathechised1 and not to be admitted to the communion till a great many years' penitence4 ,surely the church then would have been more merciful to them that did the same upon terror of present death and torments4 ,let us now see what his ,lordship might1 though but colourably1 have alleged from ,scripture against it4 ,there be three places only that seem to favour his ,lordship's opinion4 ,the first is where ,peter denied ,christ1 and weepeth4 ,the second is1 ,acts v4 #bi3 ,then ,peter and the other ,apostles answered and said1 we ought to obey ,god rather than men4 ,the third is1 ,luke xii4 #i3 ,but he that denieth me before men1 shall be denied before the angels of ,god4 ,for answer to these texts1 ,i must repeat what what ,i have written1 and his ,lordship read in my ,leviathan1 p4 #fef4 ,for an unlearned man that is in the power of an idolatrous king1 or state1 if commanded on pain of death to worship before an idol1 doing it1 he detesteth the idol in his heart1 he doth well2 though if he had the fortitude to suffer death1 rather than worship it1 he should do better4 ,but if a pastor1 who1 as ,christ's messenger1 has undertaken to teach ,christ's doctrine to all nations1 should do the same1 it were not only a sinful scandal in respect of other ,christian men's consciences1 but a perfidious forsaking of his charge4 ,in which words ,i distinguish between a pastor and one of the sheep of his flock4 ,st4 ,peter sinned in denying ,christ2 and so does every pastor1 that denieth ,christ1 having undertaken the charge of preaching the gospel in the kingdom of an infidel1 where he could expect at the undertaking of his charge no less than death4 ,and why1 but because he violates his trust in doing contrary to his commission4 ,st4 ,peter was an apostle of ,christ1 and bound by his voluntary undertaking of that office not only to confess ,christ1 but also to preach him before those infidels who1 he knew1 would like wolves devour him4 ,and therefore1 when ,paul and the rest of the apostles were forbidden to preach ,christ1 they gave this answer1 ,we ought to obey ,god rather than men4 ,and it was to his disciples only which had undertaken that office1 that ,christ saith1 he that denieth me before men1 shall be denied before the angels of ,god4 ,and so ,i think ,i have sufficiently answered this place1 and showed that ,i do not allow the denying of ,christ1 upon any colour of torments1 to his ,lordship1 nor to any other that has undertaken the office of a preacher4 ,which if he think right1 he will perhaps in this case put himself into the number of those whom he calls merciful doctors3 whereas now he extends his severity beyond the bounds of common equity4 ,he has read ,cicero1 and perhaps this story in him4 ,the senate of ,rome would have sent ,cicero to treat of peace with ,marcus ,antonius2 but when ,cicero had showed them the just fear he had of being killed by him1 he was excused2 and if they had forced him to it1 and he by terror turned enemy to them1 he had in equity been excusable4 ,but his ,lordship1 ,i believe1 did write this more valiantly than he would have acted it4 ,j4 ,d4 ,he deposeth ,christ from his true kingly office1 making his kingdom not to commence or begin before the day of judgment4 ,and the regimen1 wherewith ,christ governeth his faithful in this life1 is not properly a kingdom1 but a pastoral office1 or a right to teach4 ,and a little after1 ,christ had not kingly authority committed to him by his ,father in this world1 but only consiliary and doctrinal4 ,t4 ,h4 ,how do ,i take away ,christ's kingly office8 ,he neither draws it by consequence from my words1 nor offers any argument at all against my doctrine4 ,the words he cites are in the contents of chap4 ,,xvii4 ,de ,cive 7vol4 ,,ii74 ,in the body of the chapter it is thus3 ,the time of ,christ's being upon the earth is called1 in ,scripture1 the regeneration often1 but the kingdom never4 ,when the ,son of ,god comes in majesty1 and all the angels with him1 then he shall sit on the seat of majesty4 ,my kingdom is not of this world4 ,god sent not his ,son that he should judge the world4 ,i came not to judge the world1 but to save the world4 ,man1 who made me a judge or divider amongst you8 ,let thy kingdom come4 ,and other words to the same purpose4 ,out of which it is clear that ,christ took upon him no regal power upon earth before his assumption4 ,but at his assumption his ,apostles asked him if he would then restore the kingdom to ,israel1 and he answered1 it was not for them to know4 ,so that hitherto ,christ had not taken that office upon him1 unless his ,lordship think that the kingdom of ,god1 and the kingdom of ,christ1 be two distinct kingdoms4 ,from the ,assumption ever since1 all true ,christians say daily in their prayers1 ,thy kingdom come4 ,but his ,lordship had perhaps forgot that4 ,but when then beginneth ,christ to be a king8 ,i say it shall be then1 when he comes again in majesty with all the angels4 ,and even then he shall reign 7as he is man7 under his ,father4 ,for ,st4 ,paul saith 7#a ,cor4 xv4 #be1 #bf73 ,he must reign till he hath put all enemies under his feet2 the last enemy that shall be destroyed1 is death4 ,but when shall ,god the ,father reign again8 ,st4 ,paul saith in the same chapter1 verse #bh3 ,when all things shall be subdued unto him1 then shall the ,son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him1 that ,god may be all in all4 ,and verse #bd3 ,then cometh the end1 when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to ,god1 even the ,father2 when he shall have put down all rule1 authority1 and power4 ,this is at the resurrection4 ,and by this it is manifest1 that his ,lordship was not so well versed in ,scripture as he ought to have been4 ,j4 ,d4 ,he taketh away his priestly or propitiatory office4 ,and although this act of our redemption be not always in ,scripture called a sacrifice and oblation1 but sometimes a price2 yet by price we are not to understand anything1 by the value whereof he could claim right to a pardon for us from his offended ,father1 but that price which ,god the ,father was pleased in mercy to demand4 ,and again3 ,not that the death of one man1 though without sin1 can satisfy for the offences of all men in the rigour of justice1 but in the mercy of ,god1 that ordained such sacrifices for sin1 as he was pleased in mercy to accept4 ,he knoweth no difference between one who is mere man1 and one who was both ,god and man2 between a ,levitical sacrifice1 and the all-sufficient sacrifice of the cross2 between the blood of a calf1 and the precious blood of the ,son of ,god4 ,t4 ,h4 ,yes1 ,i know there is a difference between blood and blood1 but not any such as can make a difference in the case here questioned4 ,our ,saviour's blood was most precious1 but still it was human blood2 and ,i hope his ,lordship did never think otherwise1 or that it was not accepted by his ,father for our redemption4 ,j4 ,d4 ,and touching the prophetical office of ,christ1 ,i do much doubt whether he do believe in earnest1 that there is any such thing as prophecy in the world4 ,he maketh very little difference between a prophet and a madman1 and a demoniac4 ,and if there were nothing else1 says he1 that bewrayed their madness1 yet that very arrogating such inspiration to themselves is argument enough4 ,he maketh the pretence of inspiration in any man to be1 and always to have been1 an opinion pernicious to peace1 and tending to the dissolution of all civil government4 ,he subjecteth all prophetical revelations from ,god1 to the sole pleasure and censure of the sovereign prince1 either to authorize them1 or to exauctorate them4 ,so as two prophets prophecying the same thing at the same time1 in the dominions of two different princes1 the one shall be a true prophet1 the other a false4 ,and ,christ1 who had the approbation of no sovereign prince1 upon his grounds1 was to be reputed a false prophet everywhere4 ,every man therefore ought to consider who is the sovereign prophet2 that is to say1 who it is that is ,god's vicegerent upon earth1 and hath next under ,god the authority of governing ,christian men2 and to observe for a rule that doctrine1 which in the name of ,god he hath commanded to be taught1 and thereby to examine and try out the truth of those doctrines which pretended prophets1 with miracle or without1 shall at any time advance1 c4 ,and if he disavow them1 then no more to obey their voice2 or if he approve them1 then to obey them as men1 to whom ,god hath given a part of the ,spirit of their sovereign4 ,upon his principles the case holdeth as well among ,jews and ,turks and ,heathens1 as ,christians4 ,then he that teacheth transubstantiation in ,france1 is a true prophet2 he that teacheth it in ,england1 a false prophet2 he that blasphemeth ,christ in ,constantinople1 a true prophet2 he that doth the same in ,italy1 a false prophet4 ,then ,samuel was a false prophet to contest with ,saul1 a sovereign prophet3 so was the man of ,god1 who submitted not to the more ,divine and prophetic spirit of ,jeroboam4 ,and ,elijah for reproving ,ahab4 ,then ,micaiah had but his deserts1 to be clapped up in prison1 and fed with bread of affliction1 and water of affliction1 for daring to contradict ,god's vicegerent upon earth4 ,and ,jeremiah was justly thrown into a dungeon1 for prophecying against ,zedekiah his liege lord4 ,if his principles were true1 it were strange indeed1 that none of all these princes1 nor any other that ever was in the world1 should understand their own privileges4 ,and yet more strange1 that ,god ,almighty should take the part of such rebellious prophets1 and justify their prophesies by the event1 if it were true that none but the sovereign in a ,christian 7the reason is the same for ,jewish7 commonwealth1 can take notice1 what is or what is not the word of ,god4 ,t4 ,h4 ,to remove his ,lordship's doubt in the first place1 ,i confess there was true prophesy and true prophets in the church of ,god1 from ,abraham down to our ,saviour1 the greatest prophet of all1 and the last of the ,old ,testament1 and first of the ,new4 ,after our ,saviour's time1 till the death of ,st4 ,john the apostle1 there were true prophets in the church of ,christ1 prophets to whom ,god spake supernaturally1 and testified the truth of their mission by miracles4 ,of those that in the ,scripture are called prophets without miracles1 7and for this cause only1 that they spake in the name of ,god to men1 and in the name of men to ,god71 there are1 have been1 and shall be in the church1 innumerable4 ,such a prophet was his ,lordship1 and such are all pastors in the ,christian church4 ,but the question here is of those prophets that from the mouth of ,god foretell things future1 or do other miracle4 ,of this kind ,i deny there has been any since the death of ,st4 ,john the ,evangelist4 ,if any man find fault with this1 he ought to name some man or other1 whom we are bound to acknowledge that they have done a miracle1 cast out a devil1 or cured any disease by the sole invocation of the ,divine ,majesty4 ,we are not bound to trust to the legend of the ,roman saints1 nor to the history written by ,sulpitius of the life of ,st4 ,martin1 or to any other fables of the ,roman clergy1 nor to such things as were pretended to be done by some divines here in the time of king ,james4 ,secondly1 he says ,i make little difference between a prophet1 and a madman or demoniac2 to which ,i say1 he accuses me falsely4 ,i say only thus much1 that ,i see nothing at all in the ,scripture that requireth a belief1 that demoniacs were any other thing than madmen4 ,and this is also made very probable out of ,scripture1 by a worthy divine1 ,mr4 ,mede4 ,but concerning prophets1 ,i say only that the ,jews1 both under the ,old ,testament and under the ,new1 took them to be all one with madmen and demoniacs2 and prove it out of ,scripture by many places1 both of the ,old and ,new ,testament4 ,thirdly1 that the pretence or arrogating to one's-self ,divine inspiration1 is argument enough to show a man is mad1 is my opinion2 but his ,lordship understands not inspiration in the same sense that ,i do4 ,he understands it properly of ,god's breathing into a man1 or pouring into him the ,divine substance1 or ,divine graces4 ,and in that sense1 he that arrogateth inspiration unto himself1 neither understands what he saith1 nor makes others to understand him3 which is properly madness in some degree4 ,but ,i understand inspiration in the ,scripture metaphorically1 for ,god's guidance of our minds to truth and piety4 ,fourthly1 whereas he says1 ,i make the pretence of inspiration to be pernicious to peace2 ,i answer1 that ,i think his ,lordship was of my opinion2 for he called those men1 which in the late civil war pretended the spirit1 and new light1 and to be the only faithful men1 fanatics2 for he called them in his book1 and did call them in his life-time1 fanatics4 ,and what is a fanatic but a madman8 ,and what can be more pernicious to peace1 than the revelations that were by these fanatics pretended8 ,i do not say there were not doctrines of other men1 not called fanatics1 as pernicious to peace as their's were1 and in great part a cause of those troubles4 ,fifthly1 from that ,i make prophetical revelations subject to the examination of the lawful sovereign1 he inferreth1 that two prophets prophecying the same thing at the same time1 in the dominions of two different princes1 the one shall be a true prophet1 the other a false4 ,this consequence is not good3 for seeing they teach different doctrines1 they cannot both of them confirm their doctrine with miracles4 ,but this ,i prove1 in the place 7vol4 iii4 p4 #dbf7 he citeth1 that whether either of their doctrines shall be taught publicly or not1 it is in the power of the sovereign of the place only to determine4 ,nay1 ,i say now further1 if a prophet come to any private man in the name of ,god1 that man shall be judge whether he be a true prophet or not1 before he obey him4 ,see #a ,john1 iv4 #a4 ,sixthly1 whereas he says that1 upon my grounds1 ,christ was to be reputed a false prophet every where1 because his doctrine was received no where2 his ,lordship had read my book more negligently1 than was fit for one that would confute it4 ,my ground is this2 that ,christ in right of his ,father was king of the ,jews1 and consequently supreme prophet1 and judge of all prophets4 ,what other princes thought of his prophesies1 is nothing to the purpose4 ,i never said that princes can make doctrines or prophesies true or false2 but ,i say every sovereign prince has a right to prohibit the public teaching of them1 whether false or true4 ,but what an oversight is it in a divine1 to say that ,christ had the approbation of no sovereign prince1 when he had the approbation of ,god1 who was king of the ,jews1 and ,christ his viceroy1 and the whole ,scripture written 7,john1 xx4 #ca7 to prove it2 when his miracles declared it2 when ,pilate confessed it2 and when the apostles' office was to proclaim it8 ,seventhly1 if we must not consider1 in points of ,christian faith1 who is the sovereign prophet1 that is1 who is next under ,christ our supreme head and governor1 ,i wish his ,lordship would have cleared1 ere he died1 these few questions4 ,is there not need of some judge of controverted doctrines8 ,i think no man can deny it1 that has seen the rebellion that followed the controversy here between ,gomar and ,arminius4 ,there must therefore be a judge of doctrines4 ,but1 says the ,bishop1 not the king4 ,who then8 ,shall ,dr4 ,bramhall be this judge8 ,as profitable an office as it is1 he was more modest than to say that4 ,shall a private layman have it8 ,no man ever thought that4 ,shall it be given to a ,presbyterian minister8 ,no2 it is unreasonable4 ,shall a synod of ,presbyterians have it8 ,no2 for most of the ,presbyters in the primitive church were undoubtedly subordinate to bishops1 and the rest were bishops4 ,who then8 ,a synod of bishops8 ,very well4 ,his ,lordship being too modest to undertake the whole power1 would have been contented with the six-and-twentieth part4 ,but1 suppose it in a synod of bishops1 who shall call them together8 ,the king4 ,what if he will not8 ,who should excommunicate him1 or if he despise your excommunication1 who shall send forth a writ of significavit8 ,no2 all this was far from his ,lordship's thoughts4 ,the power of the clergy1 unless it be upheld legally by the king1 or illegally by the multitude1 amounts to nothing4 ,but for the multitude1 ,suarez and the ,schoolmen will never gain them1 because they are not understood4 ,besides there be very few bishops that can act a sermon1 which is a puissant part of rhetoric1 so well as divers ,presbyterians1 and fanatic preachers can do4 ,i conclude therefore1 that his ,lordship could not possibly believe that the supreme judicature in matter of religion could any where be so well placed as in the head of the church1 which is the king4 ,and so his ,lordship and ,i think the same thing2 but because his ,lordship knew not how to deduce it1 he was angry with me because ,i did it4 ,he says1 further1 that by my principles1 he that blasphemeth ,christ at ,constantinople1 is a true prophet3 as if a man that blasphemeth ,christ1 to approve his blasphemy can procure a miracle4 ,for by my principles1 no man is a prophet whose prophesy is not confirmed by ,god with a miracle4 ,in the last place1 out of this1 that the lawful sovereign is the judge of prophesy1 he deduces that then ,samuel and other prophets were false prophets1 that contested with their sovereigns4 ,as for ,samuel1 he was at that time the judge1 that is to say1 the sovereign prince in ,israel1 and so acknowledged by ,saul4 ,for ,saul received the kingdom from ,god himself1 who had right to give and take it1 by the hands of ,samuel4 ,and ,god gave it to himself only1 and not to his seed2 though if he had obeyed ,god1 he would have settled it also upon his seed4 ,the commandment of ,god was1 that he should not spare ,agag4 ,saul obeyed not4 ,god therefore sent to ,samuel to tell him that he was rejected4 ,for all this1 ,samuel went not about to resist ,saul4 ,that he caused ,agag to be slain1 was with ,saul's consent4 ,lastly1 ,saul confesses his sin4 ,where is this contesting with ,saul8 ,after this ,god sent ,samuel to anoint ,david1 not that he should depose ,saul1 but succeed him1 the sons of ,saul having never had a right of succession4 ,nor did ever ,david make war on ,saul1 or so much as resist him1 but fled from his persecution4 ,but when ,saul was dead1 then indeed he claimed his right against the house of ,saul4 ,what rebellion or resistance could his ,lordship find here1 either in ,samuel or in ,david8 ,besides1 all these transactions are supernatural1 and oblige not to imitation4 ,is there any prophet or priest now1 that can set up in ,england1 ,scotland1 or ,ireland1 another king by pretence of prophecy or religion8 ,what did ,jeroboam to the man of ,god 7#a ,kings xiii47 that prophesied against the altar in ,bethel without first doing a miracle1 but offer to seize him for speaking1 as he thought1 rashly of the king's act2 and after the miraculous withering of his hand1 desire the prophet to pray for him8 ,the sin of ,jeroboam was not his distrust of the prophet1 but his idolatry4 ,he was the sole judge of the truth which the man of ,god uttered against the altar1 and the process agreeable to equity4 ,what is the story of ,elijah and ,ahab 7#a ,kings xviii471 but a confirmation of the right even of ,ahab to be judge of prophecy8 ,elijah told ,ahab1 he had transgressed the commandment of ,god4 ,so may any minister now tell his sovereign1 so he do it with sincerity and discretion4 ,ahab told ,elijah he troubled ,israel4 ,upon this controversy ,elijah desired trial4 ,send1 saith he1 and assemble all ,israel2 assemble also the prophets of ,baal1 four hundred and fifty4 ,ahab did so4 ,the question is stated before the people thus3 if the ,lord be ,god1 follow him2 but if ,baal1 follow him4 ,then upon the altars of ,god and ,baal were laid the wood and the bullocks2 and the cause was to be judged by fire from heaven1 to burn the sacrifices2 which ,elijah procured1 the prophets of ,baal could not procure4 ,was not this cause here pleaded before ,ahab8 ,the sentence of ,ahab is not required2 for ,elijah from that time forward was no more persecuted by ,ahab1 but only by his wife1 ,jezabel4 ,the story of ,micaiah 7#b ,chron4 xviii47 is this4 ,ahab ,king of ,israel consulted the prophets1 four hundred in number1 whether he should prosper or not1 in case he went with ,jehoshaphat1 king of ,judah1 to fight against the ,syrians at ,ramoth-gilead4 ,the prophet ,micaiah was also called1 and both the kings1 ,ahab and ,jehoshaphat1 sat together to hear what they should prophecy4 ,there was no miracle done4 ,the four hundred pronounced victory2 ,micaiah alone the contrary4 ,the king was judge1 and most concerned in the event2 nor had he received any revelation in the business4 ,what could he do more discreetly than to follow the counsel of four hundred1 rather than of one man8 ,but the event was contrary2 for he was slain2 but not for following the counsel of the four hundred1 but for his murder of ,naboth1 and his idolatry4 ,it was also a sin in him1 that he afflicted ,micaiah in prison4 ,but an unjust judgment does not take away from any king his right of judicature4 ,besides1 what is all this1 or that of ,jeremiah which he cites last1 to the question of who is judge of ,christian doctrine8 ,j4 ,d4 ,neither doth he use ,god the ,holy ,ghost1 more favourably than ,god the ,son4 ,where ,st4 ,peter saith1 holy men of ,god spake as they were moved by the ,holy ,spirit2 he saith1 ,by the spirit1 is meant the voice of ,god in a dream or vision supernatural2 which dreams or visions1 he maketh to be no more than imaginations which they had in their sleep1 or in an extasy1 which in every true prophet were supernatural1 but in false prophets were either natural or feigned1 and more likely to be false than true4 ,to say1 ,god hath spoken to him in a dream1 is no more than to say1 he dreamed that ,god spake to him1 c4 ,to say1 he hath seen a vision or heard a voice1 is to say1 that he hath dreamed between sleeping and waking4 ,so ,st4 ,peter's ,holy ,ghost1 is come to be their own imaginations1 which might be either feigned1 or mistaken1 or true4 ,as if the ,holy ,ghost did enter only at their eyes1 and at their ears1 not into their understandings1 nor into their minds2 or as if the ,holy ,ghost did not seal unto their hearts the truth and assurance of their prophecies4 ,whether a new light be infused into their understandings1 or new graces be inspired into their heart1 they are wrought1 or caused1 or created immediately by the ,holy ,ghost2 and so are his imaginations1 if they be supernatural4 ,t4 ,h4 ,for the places of my ,leviathan he cites1 they are all1 as they stand1 both true and clearly proved4 ,the setting of them down by fragments is no refutation2 nor offers he any arguments against them4 ,his consequences are not deduced4 ,i never said that the ,holy ,ghost was an imagination1 or a dream1 or a vision1 but that the ,holy ,ghost spake most often in the ,scripture by dreams and visions supernatural4 ,the next words of his1 as if the ,holy ,ghost did enter only at their eyes1 and at their ears1 not into their understandings1 nor into their minds1 ,i let pass1 because ,i cannot understand them4 ,his last words1 ,whether new light1 c4 ,i understand and approve4 ,j4 ,d4 ,but he must needs fall into these absurdities1 who maketh but a jest of inspiration4 ,they who pretend ,divine inspiration to be a supernatural entering of the ,holy ,ghost into a man1 are1 as he thinks1 in a very dangerous dilemma2 for if they worship not the men whom they conceive to be inspired1 they fall into impiety2 and if they worship them1 they commit idolatry4 ,so mistaking the ,holy ,ghost to be corporeal1 something that is blown into a man1 and the graces of the ,holy ,ghost to be corporeal graces4 ,and the words1 inpoured or infused virtue1 and1 inblown or inspired virtue1 are as absurd and as insignificant1 as a round quadrangle4 ,he reckons it as a common error1 that faith and sanctity are not attained by study and reason1 but by supernatural inspiration or infusion4 ,and layeth this for a firm ground2 faith and sanctity are indeed not very frequent1 but yet they are not miracles1 but brought to pass by education1 discipline1 correction1 and other natural ways4 ,i would see the greatest ,pelagian of them all1 fly higher4 ,t4 ,h4 ,i make here no jest of inspiration4 ,seriously1 ,i say1 that in the proper signification of the words inspiration and infusion1 to say virtue is inspired1 or infused1 is as absurd as to say a quadrangle is round4 ,but metaphorically1 for ,god's bestowing of faith1 grace1 or other virtue1 those words are intelligible enough4 ,j4 ,d4 ,why should he trouble himself about the ,holy ,spirit1 who acknowledgeth no spirit1 but either a subtle fluid body1 or a ghost1 or other idol or phantasm of the imagination2 who knoweth no inward grace or intrinsical holiness8 ,holy is a word which in ,god's kingdom answereth to that1 which men in their kingdoms use to call public1 or the king's4 ,and again1 wheresoever the word1 holy1 is taken properly1 there is still something signified of propriety gotten by consent4 ,his holiness is a relation1 not a quality2 for inward sanctification1 or real infused holiness1 7in respect whereof the third person is called the ,holy ,ghost1 because he is not only holy in himself1 but also maketh us holy71 he is so great a stranger to it1 that he doth altogether deny it1 and disclaim it4 ,t4 ,h4 ,the word holy ,i had defined in the words which his ,lordship here sets down1 and by the use thereof in the ,scripture made it manifest1 that that was the true signification of the word4 ,there is nothing in learning more difficult than to determine the signification of words4 ,that difficulty excuses him4 ,he says that holiness1 in my sense1 is a relation1 not a quality4 ,all the learned agree that quality is an accident3 so that in attributing to ,god holiness1 as a quality1 he contradicts himself4 ,for he has in the beginning of this his discourse denied1 and rightly1 that any accident is in ,god2 saying1 whatsoever is in ,god is the ,divine substance4 ,he affirms also1 that to attribute any accident to ,god1 is to deny the simplicity of the ,divine substance4 ,and thus his ,lordship makes ,god1 as ,i do1 a corporeal spirit4 ,both here1 and throughout1 he discovers so much ignorance1 as had he charged me with error only1 and not with atheism1 ,i should not have thought it necessary to answer him4 ,j4 ,d4 ,we are taught in our creed to believe the catholic or universal church4 ,but ,t4 ,h4 teacheth us the contrary3 ,that if there be more ,christian churches than one1 all of them together are not one church personally4 ,and more plainly3 ,now if the whole number of ,christians be not contained in one commonwealth1 they are not one person1 nor is there an universal church1 that hath any authority over them4 ,and again3 ,the universal church is not one person1 of which it can be said1 that it hath done1 or decreed1 or ordained1 or excommunicated1 or absolved4 ,this doth quite overthrow all the authority of general councils4 ,all other men distinguish between the church and the commonwealth2 only ,t4 ,h4 maketh them to be one and the same thing4 ,the commonwealth of ,christian men1 and the church of the same1 are altogether the same thing1 called by two names for two reasons4 ,for the matter of the church and of the commonwealth is the same1 namely1 the same ,christian men2 and the form is the same1 which consisteth in the lawful power of convocating them4 ,and hence he concludeth1 that every ,christian commonwealth is a church endowed with all spiritual authority4 ,and yet more fully3 ,the church if it be one person1 is the same thing with the commonwealth of ,christians2 called a commonwealth1 because it consisteth of men united in one person their sovereign2 and a church1 because it consisteth in ,christian men united in one ,christian sovereign4 ,upon which account there was no ,christian church in these parts of the world1 for some hundreds of years after ,christ1 because there was no ,christian sovereign4 ,t4 ,h4 ,for answer to this period1 ,i say only this2 that taking the church1 as ,i do1 in all those places1 for a company of ,christian men on earth incorporated into one person1 that can speak1 command1 or do any act of a person1 all that he citeth out of what ,i have written is true2 and that all private conventicles1 though their belief be right1 are not properly called churches2 and that there is not any one universal church here on earth1 which is a person indued with authority universal to govern all ,christian men on earth1 no more than there is one universal sovereign prince or state on earth1 that hath right to govern all mankind4 ,i deny also that the whole clergy of a ,christian kingdom or state being assembled1 are the representative of that church further than the civil laws permit2 or can lawfully assemble themselves1 unless by the command or by the leave of the sovereign civil power4 ,i say further1 that the denial of this point tendeth in ,england towards the taking away of the king's supremacy in causes ecclesiastical4 ,but his ,lordship has not here denied any thing of mine1 because he has done no more but set down my words4 ,he says further1 that this doctrine destroys the authority of all general councils2 which ,i confess4 ,nor hath any general council at this day in this kingdom the force of a law1 nor ever had1 but by the authority of the king4 ,j4 ,d4 ,neither is he more orthodox concerning the holy ,scriptures3 hitherto1 that is1 for the books of ,moses1 the power of making the ,scripture canonical1 was in the civil sovereign4 ,the like he saith of the ,old ,testament1 made canonical by ,esdras4 ,and of the ,new ,testament1 that it was not the apostles which made their own writings canonical1 but every convert made them so to himself3 yet with this restriction1 that until the sovereign ruler had prescribed them1 they were but counsel and advice1 which whether good or bad1 he that was counselled might without injustice refuse to observe1 and being contrary to the laws established1 could not without injustice observe4 ,he maketh the primitive ,christians to have been in a pretty condition4 ,certainly the gospel was contrary to the laws then established4 ,but most plainly1 ,the word of the interpreter of the ,scripture is the word of ,god4 ,and the same is the interpreter of the ,scripture1 and the sovereign judge of all doctrines1 that is1 the sovereign magistrate1 to whose authority we must stand no less1 than to theirs1 who at first did commend the ,scripture to us for the canon of faith4 ,thus if ,christian sovereigns1 of different communications1 do clash one with another1 in their interpretation1 or misinterpretation of ,scripture1 as they do daily1 then the word of ,god is contradictory to itself2 or that is the word of ,god in one commonwealth1 which is the word of the ,devil in another commonwealth4 ,and the same thing may be true1 and not true at the same time3 which is the peculiar privilege of ,t4 ,h4 to make contradictories to be true together4 ,t4 ,h4 ,there is no doubt but by what authority the ,scripture or any other writing is made a law1 by the same authority the ,scriptures are to be interpreted1 or else they are made law in vain4 ,but to obey is one thing1 to believe is another2 which distinction perhaps his ,lordship never heard of4 ,to obey is to do or forbear as one is commanded1 and depends on the will2 but to believe1 depends not on the will1 but on the providence and guidance of our hearts that are in the hands of ,god ,almighty4 ,laws only require obedience2 belief requires teachers and arguments drawn either from reason1 or from some thing already believed4 ,where there is no reason for our belief1 there is no reason we should believe4 ,the reason why men believe1 is drawn from the authority of those men whom we have no just cause to mistrust1 that is1 of such men to whom no profit accrues by their deceiving us1 and of such men as never used to lie1 or else from the authority of such men whose promises1 threats1 and affirmations1 we have seen confirmed by ,god with miracles4 ,if it be not from the king's authority that the ,scripture is law1 what other authority makes it law8 ,here some man being of his ,lordship's judgment1 will perhaps laugh and say1 it is the authority of ,god that makes them law4 ,i grant that4 ,but my question is1 on what authority they believe that ,god is the author of them8 ,here his ,lordship would have been at a nonplus1 and turning round1 would have said the authority of the ,scripture makes good that ,god is their author4 ,if it be said we are to believe the ,scripture upon the authority of the universal church1 why are not the books we call ,apocrypha the word of ,god as well as the rest8 ,if this authority be in the church of ,england1 then it is not any other than the authority of the head of the church1 which is the king4 ,for without the head the church is mute4 ,the authority therefore is in the king2 which is all that ,i contended for in this point4 ,as to the laws of the ,gentiles1 concerning religion in the primitive times of the church1 ,i confess they were contrary to ,christian faith4 ,but none of their laws1 nor terrors1 nor a man's own will1 are able to take away faith1 though they can compel to an external obedience2 and though ,i may blame the ,ethnic princes for compelling men to speak what they thought not1 yet ,i absolve not all those that have had the power in ,christian churches from the same fault4 ,for ,i believe1 since the time of the first four general councils1 there have been more ,christians burnt and killed in the ,christian church by ecclesiastical authority1 than by the heathen emperors' laws1 for religion only without sedition4 ,all that the ,bishop does in this argument is but a heaving at the ,king's supremacy4 ,oh1 but1 says he1 if two kings interpret a place of ,scripture in contrary senses1 it will follow that both senses are true4 ,it does not follow4 ,for the interpretation1 though it be made by just authority1 must not therefore always be true4 ,if the doctrine in the one sense be necessary to salvation1 then they that hold the other must die in their sins1 and be damned4 ,but if the doctrine in neither sense be necessary to salvation1 then all is well1 except perhaps that they will call one another atheists1 and fight about it4 ,j4 ,d4 ,all the power1 virtue1 use1 and efficacy1 which he ascribeth to the holy sacraments1 is to be signs or commemorations4 ,as for any sealing1 or confirming1 or conferring of grace1 he acknowledged6 nothing4 ,the same he saith particularly of baptism3 upon which grounds a cardinal's red hat1 or a serjeant-at-arms his mace1 may be called sacraments as well as baptism1 or the holy eucharist1 if they be only signs and commemorations of a benefit4 ,if he except1 that baptism and the eucharist are of ,divine institution2 but a cardinal's red hat or a serjeant-at-arms his mace are not3 he saith truly1 but nothing to his advantage or purpose1 seeing he deriveth all the authority of the word and sacraments1 in respect of subjects1 and all our obligation to them1 from the authority of the sovereign magistrate1 without which these words1 ,repent and be baptized in the name of ,jesus1 are but counsel1 no command4 ,and so a serjeant-at-arms his mace1 and baptism1 proceed both from the same authority4 ,and this he saith upon this silly ground1 that nothing is a command1 the performance whereof tendeth to our own benefit4 ,he might as well deny the ,ten ,commandments to be commands1 because they have an advantageous promise annexed to them1 ,do this and thou shalt live2 and cursed is every one that continueth not in all the words of this law to do them4 ,t4 ,h4 ,of the sacraments ,i said no more1 than that they are signs or commemorations4 ,he finds fault that ,i add not seals1 confirmations1 and that they confer grace4 ,first1 ,i would have asked him1 if a seal be any thing else besides a sign1 whereby to remember somewhat1 as that we have promised1 accepted1 acknowledged1 given1 undertaken somewhat4 ,are not other signs1 though without a seal1 of force sufficient to convince me or oblige me8 ,a writing obligatory1 or release1 signed only with a man's name1 is as obligatory as a bond signed and sealed1 if it be sufficiently proved1 though peradventure it may require a longer process to obtain a sentence2 but his ,lordship ,i think knew better than ,i do the force of bonds and bills2 yet ,i know this1 that in the court of heaven there is no such difference between saying1 signing1 and sealing1 as his ,lordship seemeth here to pretend4 ,i am baptized for a commemoration that ,i have enrolled myself4 ,i take the sacrament of the ,lord's ,supper to commemorate that ,christ's body was broken1 and his blood shed for my redemption4 ,what is there more intimated concerning the nature of these sacraments1 either in the ,scripture or in the book of ,common ,prayer8 ,have bread and wine and water in their own nature1 any other quality than they had before the consecration8 ,it is true that the consecration gives these bodies a new relation1 as being a giving and dedicating of them to ,god1 that is to say a making of them holy1 not a changing of their quality4 ,but as some silly young men returning from ,france affect a broken ,english1 to be thought perfect in the ,french language2 so his ,lordship1 ,i think1 to seem a perfect understander of the unintelligible language of the ,schoolmen1 pretends an ignorance of his mother-tongue4 ,he talks here of command and counsel1 as if he were no ,englishman1 nor knew any difference between their significations4 ,what ,englishman1 when he commandeth1 says more than1 ,do this2 yet he looks to be obeyed1 if obedience be due unto him4 ,but when he says1 ,do this1 and thou shalt have such or such a reward1 he encourages him1 or advises him1 or bargains with him2 but commands him not4 ,oh1 the understanding of a ,schoolman6 ,j4 ,d4 ,sometimes he is for holy orders1 and giveth to the pastors of the church the right of ordination and absolution1 and infallibility1 too much for a particular pastor1 or the pastors of one particular church4 ,it is manifest1 that the consecration of the chiefest doctors in every church1 and imposition of hands1 doth pertain to the doctors of the same church4 ,and1 it cannot be doubted of1 but the power of binding and loosing was given by ,christ to the future pastors1 after the same manner as to his present apostles4 ,and1 our ,saviour hath promised this infallibility in those things which are necessary to salvation1 to his apostles1 until the day of judgment1 that is to say1 to the apostles1 and pastors to be consecrated by the apostles successively1 by the imposition of hands4 ,but at other times he casteth all this meal down with his foot4 ,christian sovereigns are the supreme pastors1 and the only persons whom ,christians now hear speak from ,god1 except such as ,god speaketh to in these days supernaturally4 ,what is now become of the promised infallibility8 ,and1 it is from the civil sovereign that all other pastors derive their right of teaching1 preaching1 and all other functions pertaining to that office2 and they are but his ministers in the same manner as the magistrates of towns1 or judges in courts of justice1 and commanders of armies4 ,what is now become of their ordination8 ,magistrates1 judges1 and generals1 need no precedent qualifications4 ,he maketh the pastoral authority of sovereigns to be jure divino1 of all other pastors jure civili3 he addeth1 neither is there any judge of heresy among subjects1 but their own civil sovereign4 ,lastly1 the church excommunicateth no man but whom she excommunicateth by the authority of the prince4 ,and1 the effect of excommunication hath nothing in it1 neither of damage in this world1 nor terror upon an apostate1 if the civil power did persecute or not assist the church3 and in the world to come1 leaves them in no worse estate1 than those who never believed4 ,the damage rather redoundeth to the church4 ,neither is the excommunication of a ,christian subject1 that obeyeth the laws of his own sovereign1 of any effect4 ,where is now their power of binding and loosing8 ,t4 ,h4 ,here his ,lordship condemneth1 first my too much kindness to the pastors of the church2 as if ,i ascribed infallibility to every particular minister1 or at least to the assembly of the pastors of a particular church4 ,but he mistakes me2 ,i never meant to flatter them so much4 ,i say only that the ceremony of consecration1 and imposition of hands1 belongs to them2 and that also no otherwise than as given them by the laws of the commonwealth4 ,the bishop consecrates1 but the king both makes him bishop and gives him his authority4 ,the head of the church not only gives the power of consecration1 dedication1 and benediction1 but may also exercise the act himself if he please4 ,solomon did it2 and the book of canons says1 that the ,king of ,england has all the right that any good king of ,israel had2 it might have added1 that any other king or sovereign assembly had in their own dominions4 ,i deny that any pastor or any assembly of pastors in any particular church1 or all the churches on earth though united1 are infallible3 yet ,i say1 the pastors of a ,christian church assembled are1 in all such points as are necessary to salvation4 ,but about what points are necessary to salvation1 he and ,i differ4 ,for ,i1 in the forty-third chapter of my ,leviathan1 have proved that this article1 ,jesus is the ,christ1 is the unum necessarium1 the only article necessary to salvation2 to which his ,lordship hath not offered any objection4 ,and he1 it seems1 would have necessary to salvation every doctrine he himself thought so4 ,doubtless in this article1 ,jesus is the ,christ1 every church is infallible2 for else it were no church4 ,then he says1 ,i overthrow this again by saying that ,christian sovereigns are the supreme pastors1 that is1 heads of their own churches2 ,that they have their authority jure divino2 that all other pastors have it jure civili4 ,how came any ,bishop to have authority over me1 but by letters patent from the king8 ,i remember a parliament wherein a bishop1 who was both a good preacher and a good man1 was blamed for a book he had a little before published in maintenance of the jus divinum of bishops2 a thing which before the reformation here1 was never allowed them by the pope4 ,two jus divinums cannot stand together in one kingdom4 ,in the last place he mislikes that the church should excommunicate by authority of the king1 that is to say1 by authority of the head of the church4 ,but he tells not why4 ,he might as well mislike that the magistrates of the realm should execute their offices by the authority of the head of the realm4 ,his ,lordship was in a great error1 if he thought such encroachments would add any thing to the wealth1 dignity1 reverence1 or continuance of his order4 ,they are pastors of pastors1 but yet they are the sheep of him that is on earth their sovereign pastor1 and he again a sheep of that supreme pastor which is in heaven4 ,and if they did their pastoral office1 both by life and doctrine1 as they ought to do1 there could never arise any dangerous rebellion in the land4 ,but if the people see once any ambition in their teachers1 they will sooner learn that1 than any other doctrine2 and from ambition proceeds rebellion4 ,j4 ,d4 ,it may be some of ,t4 ,h4 his disciples desire to know what hopes of heavenly joys they have upon their master's principles4 ,they may hear them without any great contentment3 ,there is no mention in ,scripture1 nor ground in reason1 of the clum empyrum1 that is1 the heaven of the blessed1 where the saints shall live eternally with ,god4 ,and again1 ,i have not found any text that can probably be drawn to prove any ascension of the saints into heaven1 that is to say1 into any clum empyrum4 ,but he concludeth positively1 that ,salvation shall be upon earth1 when ,god shall reign at the coming of ,christ in ,jerusalem4 ,and again1 ,in short1 the kingdom of ,god is a civil kingdom1 c4 called also the kingdom of heaven1 and the kingdom of glory4 ,all the ,hobbians can hope for1 is1 to be restored to the same condition which ,adam was in before his fall4 ,so saith ,t4 ,h4 himself3 ,from whence may be inferred1 that the elect1 after the resurrection1 shall be restored to the estate wherein ,adam was before he had sinned4 ,as for the beatifical vision1 he defineth it to be a word unintelligible4 ,t4 ,h4 ,this clum empyrum for which he pretendeth so much zeal1 where is it in the ,scripture1 where in the book of ,common ,prayer1 where in the canons1 where in the homilies of the church of ,england1 or in any part of our religion8 ,what has a ,christian to do with such language8 ,nor do ,i remember it in ,aristotle4 ,perhaps it may be in some ,schoolman or commentator on ,aristotle1 and his ,lordship makes it in ,english the heaven of the blessed1 as if empyrum signified that which belongs to the blessed4 ,st4 ,austin says better2 that after the day of judgment all that is not heaven shall be hell4 ,then for beatifical vision1 how can any man understand it1 that knows from the ,scripture that no man ever saw or can see ,god4 ,perhaps his ,lordship thinks that the happiness of the life to come is not real1 but a vision4 ,as for that which ,i say 7,leviathan1 p4 #fbe71 ,i have answered to it already4 ,j4 ,d4 ,but considering his other principles1 ,i do not marvel much at his extravagance in this point4 ,to what purpose should a clum empyrum1 or heaven of the blessed1 serve in his judgment1 who maketh the blessed angels that are the inhabitants of that happy mansion1 to be either idols of the brain1 that is in plain ,english1 nothing1 or thin1 subtile1 fluid bodies1 destroying the angelical nature4 ,the universe being the aggregate of all bodies1 there is no real part thereof that is not also body4 ,and elsewhere1 ,every part of the universe is body1 and that which is not body1 is no part of the universe4 ,and because the universe is all1 that which is no part of it is nothing1 and consequently nowhere4 ,how8 ,by this doctrine he maketh not only the angels1 but ,god himself to be nothing4 ,neither doth he salve it at all1 by supposing erroneously angels to be corporeal spirits1 and by attributing the name of incorporeal spirit to ,god1 as being a name of more honour1 in whom we consider not what attribute best expresseth his nature1 which is incomprehensible1 but what best expresseth our desire to honour him4 ,though we be not able to comprehend perfectly what ,god is1 yet we are able perfectly to comprehend what ,god is not1 that is1 he is not imperfect1 and therefore he is not finite1 and consequently he is not corporeal4 ,this were a trim way to honour ,god indeed1 to honour him with a lie4 ,if this that he says here be true1 that every part of the universe is a body1 and whatsoever is not a body is nothing1 then1 by this doctrine1 if ,god be not a body1 ,god is nothing3 not an incorporeal spirit1 but one of the idols of the brain1 a mere nothing1 though they think they dance under a net1 and have the blind of ,god's incomprehensibility between them and discovery4 ,t4 ,h4 ,this of incorporeal substance he urged before1 and there ,i answered it4 ,i wonder he so often rolls the same stone4 ,he is like ,sisyphus in the poet's hell1 that there rolls a heavy stone up a hill1 which no sooner he brings to day-light1 than it slips down again to the bottom1 and serves him so perpetually4 ,for so his ,lordship rolls this and other questions with much ado1 till they come to the light of ,scripture1 and then they vanish2 and he vexing1 sweating1 and railing1 goes to it again1 to as little purpose as before4 ,from that ,i say of the universe1 he infers1 that ,i make ,god to be nothing3 but infers it absurdly4 ,he might indeed have inferred that ,i make him a corporeal1 but yet a pure spirit4 ,i mean by the universe1 the aggregate of all things that have being in themselves2 and so do all men else4 ,and because ,god has a being1 it follows that he is either the whole universe1 or part of it4 ,nor does his ,lordship go about to disprove it1 but only seems to wonder at it4 ,j4 ,d4 ,to what purpose should a clum empyrum serve in his judgment1 who denieth the immortality of the soul8 ,the doctrine is now1 and hath been a long time1 far otherwise2 namely1 that every man hath eternity of life by nature1 inasmuch as his soul is immortal4 ,who supposeth that when a man dieth1 there remaineth nothing of him but his carcase8 ,who maketh the word soul in ,holy ,scripture to signify always either the life1 or the living creature2 and expoundeth the casting of body and soul into hell-fire1 to be the casting of body and life into hell-fire8 ,who maketh this orthodox truth1 that the souls of men are substances distinct from their bodies1 to be an error contracted by the contagion of the demonology of the ,greeks1 and a window that gives entrance to the dark doctrine of eternal torments8 ,who expoundeth these words of ,solomon 7,then shall the dust return to the earth as it was1 and the spirit shall return to ,god that gave it7 thus1 ,god only knows what becometh of a man's spirit when he expireth8 ,he will not acknowledge that there is a spirit1 or any substance distinct from the body4 ,i wonder what they think doth keep their bodies from stinking4 ,t4 ,h4 ,he comes here to that which is a great paradox in ,school-divinity4 ,the grounds of my opinion are the canonical ,scripture1 and the texts which ,i cited ,i must again recite1 to which ,i shall also add some others4 ,my doctrine is this3 first1 that the elect in ,christ1 from the day of judgment forward1 by virtue of ,christ's passion and victory over death1 shall enjoy eternal life1 that is1 they shall be immortal4 ,secondly1 that there is no living soul separated in place from the body1 more than there is a living body separated from the soul4 ,thirdly1 that the reprobate shall be revived to judgment1 and shall die a second death in torments1 which death shall be everlasting4 ,now let us consider what is said to these points in the ,scripture1 and what is the harmony therein of the ,old and ,new ,testament4 ,and first1 because the word immortal soul1 is not found in the ,scriptures1 the question is to be decided by evident consequences from the ,scripture4 ,the ,scripture saith of ,god expressly 7#a ,tim4 vi4 #af7 that ,he only hath immortality1 and dwelleth in inaccessible light4 ,hence it followeth that the soul of man is not of its own nature immortal1 but by grace1 that is to say1 by the gift of ,god4 ,and then the question will be1 whether this grace or gift of ,god were bestowed on the soul in the creation and conception of the man1 or afterwards by his redemption4 ,another question will be1 in what sense immortality of torments can be called a gift1 when all gifts suppose the thing given to be grateful to the receiver4 ,to the first of these1 ,christ himself saith 7,luke xiv4 #ac1 #ad73 ,when thou makest a feast1 call the poor1 the maimed1 the lame1 the blind3 and thou shalt be blessed1 for they cannot recompense thee3 for thou shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of them that be just4 ,it follows hence that the reward of the elect is not before the resurrection4 ,what reward then enjoys a separated soul in heaven1 or any where else1 till that day come1 or what has he to do there till the body rise again8 ,again1 ,st4 ,paul says 7,rom4 ii4 #f-h73 ,god will render to every man according to his works4 ,to them1 who by patient continuance in well doing seek for honour1 glory1 and immortality1 eternal life4 ,but unto them that be contentious1 and do not obey the truth1 but obey unrighteousness1 indignation and wrath4 ,here it is plain that ,god gives eternal life only to well doers1 and to them that seek1 not to them that have already1 immortality4 ,again 7#b ,tim4 i4 #aj73 ,christ hath abolished death1 and brought life and immortality to light1 through the ,gospel4 ,therefore before the ,gospel of ,christ1 nothing was immortal but ,god4 ,and ,st4 ,paul1 speaking of the day of judgment 7#a ,cor4 xv4 #ed71 saith1 that this mortal shall put on immortality1 and that then death is swallowed up in victory4 ,there was no immortality of any thing mortal till death was overcome1 and that was at the resurrection4 ,and ,john1 viii4 #ea3 ,verily1 verily1 if a man keep my sayings he shall never see death2 that is to say1 he shall be immortal4 ,but it is nowhere said1 that he which keeps not ,christ's sayings shall never see death1 nor be immortal3 and yet they that say that the wicked1 body and soul1 shall be tormented everlastingly1 do therein say they are immortal4 ,matth4 x4 #bh3 ,fear not them that can kill the body1 but are not able to kill the soul2 but fear him that is able to destroy both soul and body in hell4 ,man cannot kill a soul2 for the man killed shall revive again4 ,but ,god can destroy the soul and body in hell1 as that it shall never return to life4 ,in the ,old ,testament 7,gen4 vii4 #d7 we read3 ,i will destroy every living substance that ,i have made1 from off the face of the earth2 therefore1 if the souls of them that perished in the ,flood were substances1 they were also destroyed in the ,flood1 and were not immortal4 ,matth4 xxv4 #da3 ,depart from me1 ye cursed1 into everlasting fire1 prepared for the devil and his angels4 ,these words are to be spoken in the day of judgment1 which judgment is to be in the clouds4 ,and there shall stand the men that are reprobated alive1 where souls1 according to his ,lordship's doctrine1 were sent long before to hell4 ,therefore at that present day of judgment they had one soul by which they were there alive1 and another soul in hell4 ,how his ,lordship could have maintained this1 ,i understand not4 ,but by my doctrine1 that the soul is not a separated substance1 but that the man at his resurrection shall be revived by ,god1 and raised to judgment1 and afterwards body and soul destroyed in hell-fire1 which is the second death1 there is no such consequence or difficulty to be inferred4 ,besides1 it avoids the unnecessary disputes about where the soul of ,lazarus was for four days he lay dead4 ,and the order of the divine process is made good1 of not inflicting torments before the condemnation pronounced4 ,now as to the harmony of the two ,testaments1 it is said in the ,old 7,gen4 ii4 #ag73 ,in the day that thou eatest of the tree of knowledge1 dying thou shalt die3 moriendo morieris3 that is1 when thou art dead thou shalt not revive2 for so hath ,athanasius expounded it4 ,therefore ,adam and ,eve were not immortal by their creation4 ,then 7,gen4 iii4 #bb73 ,behold the man is become as one of us3 now lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life1 and eat1 and live for ever1 c4 ,here they had had an immortality by the gift of ,god if they had not sinned4 ,it was therefore sin that lost them eternal life4 ,he therefore that redeemed them from sin was the author of their immortality1 which consequently began in the day of judgment1 when ,adam and ,eve were again made alive by admission to the new tree of life1 which was ,christ4 ,now let us compare this with the ,new ,testament2 where we find these words 7#a ,cor4 xv4 #ba73 since by man came death1 by man came also the resurrection of the dead4 ,therefore all the immortality of the soul1 that shall be after the resurrection1 is by ,christ1 and not by the nature of the soul4 ,verse #bb3 ,as by ,adam all die1 even so in ,christ shall all be made alive4 ,therefore since we died by ,adam's sin1 so we shall live by ,christ's redemption of us1 that is1 after the resurrection4 ,again 7verse #bc73 ,but every man in his own order2 ,christ the first-fruits1 afterwards they that are ,christ's1 at his coming4 ,therefore none shall be made alive till the coming of ,christ4 ,lastly1 as when ,god had said1 that day that thou eatest of the tree of knowledge of good and evil1 thou shalt die1 though he condemned him then1 yet he suffered him to live a long time after2 so when ,christ had said to the thief on the cross1 this day thou shalt be with me in ,paradise1 yet he suffered him to lie dead till the general resurrection1 for no man rose again from the dead before our ,saviour's coming1 and conquering death4 ,if ,god bestowed immortality on every man then when he made him1 and he made many to whom he never purposed to give his saving grace1 what did his ,lordship think that ,god gave any man immortality with purpose only to make him capable of immortal torments8 ,it is a hard saying1 and ,i think cannot piously be believed4 ,i am sure it can never be proved by the canonical ,scripture4 ,but though ,i have made it clear that it cannot be drawn by lawful consequence from ,scripture1 that man was created with a soul immortal1 and that the elect only1 by the grace of ,god in ,christ1 shall both bodies and souls from the resurrection forward be immortal2 yet there may be a consequence well drawn from some words in the rites of burial1 that prove the contrary1 as these3 ,forasmuch as it hath pleased ,almighty ,god of his great mercy1 to take unto himself the soul of our dear brother here departed1 c4 ,and these3 ,almighty ,god1 with whom do live the spirits of them that depart hence in the ,lord3 which are words authorised by the church4 ,i wonder his ,lordship1 that had so often pronounced them1 took no notice of them here4 ,but it often happens that men think of those things least1 which they have most perfectly learnt by rote4 ,i am sorry ,i could not1 without deserting the sense of ,scripture and mine own conscience1 say the same4 ,but ,i see no just cause yet1 why the church should be offended at it4 ,for the church of ,england pretendeth not1 as doth the church of ,rome1 to be above the ,scripture2 nor forbiddeth any man to read the ,scripture2 nor was ,i forbidden1 when ,i wrote my ,leviathan1 to publish anything which the ,scriptures suggested4 ,for when ,i wrote it1 ,i may safely say there was no lawful church in ,england1 that could have maintained me in1 or prohibited me from writing anything4 ,there was no bishop2 and though there was preaching1 such as it was1 yet no common prayer4 ,for extemporary prayer1 though made in the pulpit1 is not common prayer4 ,there was then no church in ,england1 that any man living was bound to obey4 ,what ,i write here at this present time ,i am forced to in my defence1 not against the church1 but against the accusations and arguments of my adversaries4 ,for the church1 though it excommunicates for scandalous life1 and for teaching false doctrines1 yet it professeth to impose nothing to be held as faith1 but what may be warranted by ,scripture3 and this the church itself saith in the twentieth of the ,thirty-nine ,articles of religion4 ,and therefore ,i am permitted to allege ,scripture at any time in the defence of my belief4 ,j4 ,d4 ,but they that in one case are grieved1 in another must be relieved4 ,if perchance ,t4 ,h4 hath given his disciples any discontent in his doctrine of heaven and the holy angels1 and the glorified souls of the saints1 he will make them amends in his doctrine of hell1 and the devils1 and the damned spirits4 ,first of the devils2 he fancieth that all those devils which our ,saviour did cast out1 were phrenzies2 and all demoniacs1 or persons possessed1 no other than madmen3 and to justify our ,saviour's speaking to a disease as to a person1 produceth the example of enchanters4 ,but he declareth himself most clearly upon this subject1 in his animadversions upon my reply to his defence of fatal destiny4 ,there are in the ,scripture two sorts of things which are in ,english translated devils4 ,one is that which is called ,satan1 ,diabolus ,abaddon1 which signifieth in ,english an enemy1 an accuser1 and a destroyer of the church of ,god2 in which sense the devils are but wicked men4 ,the other sort of devils are called in the ,scripture ,dmonia1 which are the feigned ,gods of the heathen1 and are neither bodies nor spiritual substances1 but mere fancies1 and fictions of terrified hearts1 feigned by the ,greeks1 and other heathen people1 which ,st4 ,paul calleth nothings4 ,so ,t4 ,h4 hath killed the great infernal ,devil1 and all his black angels1 and left no devils to be feared1 but devils incarnate1 that is1 wicked men4 ,t4 ,h4 ,as for the first words cited 7,leviathan1 vol4 iii4 p4 #fh7 ,i refer the reader to the place itself2 and for the words concerning ,satan1 ,i leave them to the judgment of the learned4 ,j4 ,d4 ,and for hell1 he describeth the kingdom of ,satan1 or the kingdom of darkness1 to be a confederacy of deceivers4 ,he telleth us that the places1 which set forth the torments of hell in holy ,scripture1 do design metaphorically a grief and discontent of mind1 from the sight of that eternal felicity in others1 which they themselves1 through their own incredulity and disobedience1 have lost4 ,as if metaphorical descriptions did not bear sad truths in them1 as well as literal2 as if final desperation were no more than a little fit of grief or discontent2 and a guilty conscience were no more than a transitory passion2 as if it were a loss so easily to be borne1 to be deprived for evermore of the beatifical vision2 and lastly1 as if the damned1 besides that unspeakable loss1 did not likewise suffer actual torments1 proportionable in some measure to their own sins1 and ,god's justice4 ,t4 ,h4 ,that metaphors bear sad truths in them1 ,i deny not4 ,it is a sad thing to lose this present life untimely4 ,is it not therefore much more a sad thing to lose an eternal happy life8 ,and ,i believe that he which will venture upon sin1 with such danger1 will not stick to do the same notwithstanding the doctrine of eternal torture4 ,is it not also a sad truth1 that the kingdom of darkness should be a confederacy of deceivers8 ,j4 ,d4 ,lastly1 for the damned spirits1 he declareth himself every where1 that their sufferings are not eternal4 ,the fire shall be unquenchable1 and the torments everlasting2 but it cannot be thence inferred1 that he who shall be cast into that fire1 or be tormented with those torments1 shall endure and resist them1 so as to be eternally burnt and tortured1 and yet never be destroyed nor die4 ,and though there be many places1 that affirm everlasting fire1 into which men may be cast successively one after another for ever2 yet ,i find none that affirm that there shall be an everlasting life therein of any individual person4 ,if he had said1 and said only1 that the pains of the damned may be lessened1 as to the degree of them1 or that they endure not for ever1 but that after they are purged by long torments from their dross and corruptions1 as gold in the fire1 both the damned spirits and the devils themselves should be restored to a better condition2 he might have found some ancients 7who are therefore called the merciful doctors7 to have joined with him2 though still he should have wanted the suffrage of the ,catholic church4 ,t4 ,h4 ,why does not his ,lordship cite some place of ,scripture here to prove1 that all the reprobates which are dead1 live eternally in torment8 ,we read indeed1 that everlasting torments were prepared for the ,devil and his angels1 whose natures also are everlasting2 and that the ,beast and the false prophet shall be tormented everlastingly2 but not that every reprobate shall be so4 ,they shall indeed be cast into the same fire2 but the ,scripture says plainly enough1 that they shall be both body and soul destroyed there4 ,if ,i had said that the devils themselves should be restored to a better condition1 his ,lordship would have been so kind as to have put me into the number of the merciful doctors4 ,truly1 if ,i had had any warrant for the possibility of their being less enemies to the church of ,god than they have been1 ,i would have been as merciful to them as any doctor of them all4 ,as it is1 ,i am more merciful than the ,bishop4 ,j4 ,d4 ,but his shooting is not at rovers1 but altogether at random1 without either precedent or partner4 ,all that eternal fire1 all those torments which he acknowledgeth1 is but this1 that after the resurrection1 the reprobate shall be in the estate that ,adam and his posterity were in1 after the sin committed1 saving that ,god promised a redeemer to ,adam and not to them3 adding1 that they shall live as they did formerly1 marry and give in marriage2 and consequently engender children perpetually after the resurrection1 as they did before3 which he calleth an immortality of the kind1 but not of the persons of men4 ,it is to be presumed1 that in those their second lives1 knowing certainly from ,t4 ,h4 that there is no hope of redemption for them from corporal death upon their well-doing1 nor fear of any torments after death for their ill-doing1 they will pass their times here as pleasantly as they can4 ,this is all the damnation which ,t4 ,h4 fancieth4 ,t4 ,h4 ,this he has urged once before1 and ,i answered to it1 that the whole paragraph was to prove1 that for any text of ,scripture to the contrary1 men might1 after the resurrection1 live as ,adam did on earth2 and that1 notwithstanding the text of ,st4 ,luke1 7chap4 xx4 #cd-cf71 ,marry and propagate4 ,but that they shall do so1 is no assertion of mine4 ,his ,lordship knew ,i held1 that after the resurrection there shall be at all no wicked men2 but the elect 7all that are1 have been1 and hereafter shall be7 shall live on earth4 ,but ,st4 ,peter 7#b ,epist4 iii4 #ac7 says1 there shall then be a new heaven and a new earth4 ,j4 ,d4 ,in sum ,i leave it to the free judgment of the understanding reader1 by these few instances which follow1 to judge what the ,hobbian principles are in point of religion4 ,ex ungue leonem4 ,first1 that no man needs to put himself to any hazard for his faith1 but may safely comply with the times4 ,and for their faith it is internal and invisible4 ,they have the licence that ,naaman had1 and need not put themselves into danger for it4 ,secondly1 he alloweth subjects1 being commanded by their sovereign1 to deny ,christ4 ,profession with the tongue is but an external thing1 and no more than any other gesture1 whereby we signify our obedience3 and wherein a ,christian1 holding firmly in his heart the faith of ,christ1 hath the same liberty which the prophet ,elisha allowed to ,naaman1 c4 who by bowing before the idol ,rimmon1 denied the true ,god as much in effect1 as if he had done it with his lips4 ,alas1 why did ,st4 ,peter weep so bitterly for denying his master1 out of fear of his life or members8 ,it seems he was not acquainted with these ,hobbian principles4 ,and in the same place he layeth down this general conclusion3 ,this we may say1 that whatsoever a subject is compelled to1 in obedience to his sovereign1 and doth it not in order to his own mind1 but in order to the laws of his country1 that action is not his1 but his sovereign's2 nor is it he1 that in this case denieth ,christ before men1 but his governor and the law of his country4 ,his instance1 in a ,mahometan commanded by a ,christian prince to be present at divine service1 is a weak mistake1 springing from his gross ignorance in case-divinity1 not knowing to distinguish between an erroneous conscience1 as the ,mahometan's is1 and a conscience rightly informed4 ,t4 ,h4 ,in these his two first instances1 ,i confess his ,lordship does not much belie me4 ,but neither does he confute me4 ,also ,i confess my ignorance in his case-divinity1 which is grounded upon the doctrine of the ,schoolmen2 who to decide cases of conscience1 take in1 not only the ,scriptures1 but also the decrees of the popes of ,rome1 for the advancing of the dominion of the ,roman church over consciences2 whereas the true decision of cases of consciences ought to be grounded only on ,scripture1 or natural equity4 ,i never allowed the denying of ,christ with the tongue in all men1 but expressly say the contrary 7,leviathan1 vol4 iii4 p4 #fef7 in these words3 ,for an unlearned man that is in the power of an idolatrous king or state1 if commanded on pain of death to worship before an idol1 he detesteth the idol in his heart1 he doth well2 though if he had the fortitude to suffer death rather than worship it1 he should do better4 ,but if a pastor1 who as ,christ's messenger has undertaken to teach ,christ's doctrine to all nations1 should do the same1 it were not only a sinful scandal in respect of other ,christian men's consciences1 but a perfidious forsaking of his charge4 ,therefore ,st4 ,peter1 in denying ,christ1 sinned1 as being an apostle4 ,and it is sin in every man that should now take upon him to preach against the power of the ,pope1 to leave his commission unexecuted for fear of the fire2 but in a mere traveller1 not so4 ,the three children and ,daniel were worthy champions of the true religion4 ,but ,god requireth not of every man to be a champion4 ,as for his ,lordship's words of complying with the times1 they are not mine1 but his own spiteful paraphrase4 ,j4 ,d4 ,thirdly1 if this be not enough1 he giveth licence to a ,christian to commit idolatry1 or at least to do an idolatrous act1 for fear of death or corporal danger4 ,to pray unto a king voluntarily for fair weather1 or for anything which ,god only can do for us1 is ,divine worship1 and idolatry4 ,on the other side1 if a king compel a man to it by the terror of death1 or other great corporal punishment1 it is not idolatry4 ,his reason is1 because it is not a sign1 that he doth inwardly honour him as a ,god1 but that he is desirous to save himself from death1 or from a miserable life4 ,it seemeth ,t4 ,h4 thinketh there is no ,divine worship but internal3 and that it is lawful for a man to value his own life or his limbs more than his ,god4 ,how much is he wiser than the three children1 or ,daniel himself1 who were thrown1 the first into a fiery furnace1 the last into the lions' den1 because they refused to comply with the idolatrous decree of their sovereign prince8 ,t4 ,h4 ,here also my words are truly cited4 ,but his ,lordship understood not what the word worship signifies2 and yet he knew what ,i meant by it4 ,to think highly of ,god1 as ,i had defined it1 is to honour him4 ,but to think is internal4 ,to worship1 is to signify that honour1 which we inwardly give1 by signs external4 ,this understood1 as by his ,lordship it was1 all he says to it1 is but a cavil4 ,j4 ,d4 ,a fourth aphorism may be this1 that1 which is said in the ,scripture1 it is better to obey ,god than man1 hath place in the kingdom of ,god by pact1 and not by nature4 ,why8 ,nature itself doth teach us it is better to obey ,god than men4 ,neither can he say that he intended this only of obedience in the use of indifferent actions and gestures1 in the service of ,god1 commanded by the commonwealth3 for that is to obey both ,god and man4 ,but if ,divine law and human law clash one with another1 without doubt it is evermore better to obey ,god than man4 ,t4 ,h4 ,here again appears his unskilfulness in reasoning4 ,who denies1 but it is always1 and in all cases1 better to obey ,god than man8 ,but there is no law1 neither ,divine nor human1 that ought to be taken for a law1 till we know what it is2 and if a ,divine law1 till we know that ,god hath commanded it to be kept4 ,we agree that the ,scriptures are the word of ,god4 ,but they are a law by pact1 that is1 to us who have been baptized into the covenant4 ,to all others it is an invitation only to their own benefit4 ,it is true that even nature suggesteth to us that the law of ,god is to be obeyed rather than the law of man4 ,but nature does not suggest to us that the ,scripture is the law of ,god1 much less how every text of it ought to be interpreted4 ,but who then shall suggest this8 ,dr4 ,bramhall8 ,i deny it4 ,who then8 ,the stream of divines8 ,why so8 ,am ,i1 that have the ,scripture itself before my eyes1 obliged to venture my eternal life upon their interpretation1 how learned soever they pretend to be1 when no counter-security1 that they can give me1 will save me harmless8 ,if not the stream of divines1 who then8 ,the lawful assembly of pastors1 or of bishops8 ,but there can be no lawful assembly in ,england without the authority of the ,king4 ,the ,scripture1 therefore1 what it is1 and how to be interpreted1 is made known unto us here1 by no other way than the authority of our sovereign lord both in temporals and spirituals1 the ,king's ,majesty4 ,and where he has set forth no interpretation1 there ,i am allowed to follow my own1 as well as any other man1 bishop or not bishop4 ,for my own part1 all that know me1 know also it is my opinion1 that the best government in religion is by episcopacy1 but in the ,king's right1 not in their own4 ,but my ,lord of ,derry1 not contented with this1 would have the utmost resolution of our faith to be into the doctrine of the ,schools4 ,i do not think that all the bishops be of his mind4 ,if they were1 ,i would wish them to stand in fear of that dreadful sentence1 all covet1 all lose4 ,i must not let pass these words of his ,lordship1 if ,divine law and human law clash one with another1 without doubt it is better evermore to obey ,god than man4 ,where the king is a ,christian1 believes the ,scripture1 and hath the legislative power both in church and state1 and maketh no laws concerning ,christian faith1 or ,divine worship1 but by the counsel of his bishops whom he trusteth in that behalf2 if the bishops counsel him aright1 what clashing can there be between the ,divine and human laws8 ,for if the civil law be against ,god's law1 and the bishops make it clearly appear to the king that it clasheth with ,divine law1 no doubt he will mend it by himself1 or by the advice of his parliament2 for else he is no professor of ,christ's doctrine1 and so the clashing is at an end4 ,but if they think that every opinion they hold1 though obscure and unnecessary to salvation1 ought presently to be law1 then there will be clashings innumerable1 not only of laws1 but also of swords1 as we have found it too true by late experience4 ,but his ,lordship is still at this1 that there ought to be1 for the ,divine laws1 that is to say for the interpretation of ,scripture1 a legislative power in the church1 distinct from that of the ,king1 which under him they enjoy already4 ,this ,i deny4 ,then for clashing between the civil laws of infidels with the law of ,god1 the apostles teach that those their civil laws are to be obeyed1 but so as to keep their faith in ,christ entirely in their hearts2 which is an obedience easily performed4 ,but ,i do not believe that ,augustus ,csar or ,nero was bound to make the holy ,scripture law2 and yet unless they did so1 they could not attain to eternal life4 ,j4 ,d4 ,his fifth conclusion may be1 that the sharpest and most successful sword1 in any war whatsoever1 doth give sovereign power and authority to him that hath it1 to approve or reject all sorts of theological doctrines1 concerning the kingdom of ,god1 not according to their truth or falsehood1 but according to that influence which they have upon political affairs4 ,hear him3 but because this doctrine will appear to most men a novelty1 ,i do but propound it1 maintaining nothing in this or any other paradox of religion1 but attending the end of that dispute of the sword concerning the authority 7not yet amongst my countrymen decided7 by which all sorts of doctrine are to be approved or rejected1 c4 ,for1 the points of doctrine concerning the kingdom of ,god1 have so great influence upon the kingdom of man1 as not to be determined1 but by them that under ,god have the sovereign power4 8---------------- ,careat successibus opto1 ,quisquis ab eventu facta notanda putat40 ,let him evermore want success who thinketh actions are to be judged by their events4 ,this doctrine may be plausible to those who desire to fish in troubled waters4 ,but it is justly hated by those which are in authority1 and all those who are lovers of peace and tranquillity4 ,the last part of this conclusion smelleth rankly of ,jeroboam 7#a ,kings xii4 #bf-bh73 ,now shall the kingdom return to the house of ,david1 if this people go up to do sacrifice in the house of the ,lord at ,jerusalem2 whereupon the king took counsel1 and made two calves of gold1 and said unto them1 it is too much for you to go up to ,jerusalem1 behold thy ,gods1 ,o ,israel1 which brought thee out of the land of ,egypt4 ,but by the just disposition of ,almighty ,god1 this policy turned to a sin1 and was the utter destruction of ,jeroboam and his family4 ,it is not good jesting with edge-tools1 nor playing with holy things3 where men make their greatest fastness1 many times they find most danger4 ,t4 ,h4 ,his ,lordship either had a strange conscience1 or understood not ,english4 ,being at ,paris when there was no bishop nor church in ,england1 and every man writ what he pleased1 ,i resolved 7when it should please ,god to restore the authority ecclesiastical7 to submit to that authority1 in whatsoever it should determine4 ,this his ,lordship construes for a temporizing and too much indifferency in religion2 and says further1 that the last part of my words do smell of ,jeroboam4 ,to the contrary1 ,i say my words were modest1 and such as in duty ,i ought to use4 ,and ,i profess still1 that whatsoever the church of ,england 7the church1 ,i say1 not every doctor7 shall forbid me to say in matter of faith1 ,i shall abstain from saying it1 excepting this point1 that ,jesus ,christ1 the ,son of ,god1 died for my sins4 ,as for other doctrines1 ,i think it unlawful1 if the church define them1 for any member of the church to contradict them4 ,j4 ,d4 ,his sixth paradox is a rapper3 ,the civil laws are the rules of good and evil1 just and unjust1 honest and dishonest2 and therefore what the lawgiver commands1 that is to be accounted good1 what he forbids1 bad4 ,and a little after3 ,before empires were1 just and unjust were not1 as whose nature is relative to a command1 every action in its own nature is indifferent4 ,that is1 just or unjust proceedeth from the right of him that commandeth4 ,therefore lawful kings make those things which they command just1 by commanding them1 and those things which they forbid1 unjust by forbidding them4 ,to this add his definition of a sin1 that which one doth1 or omitteth1 saith1 or willeth1 contrary to the reason of the commonwealth1 that is1 the 7civil7 laws4 ,where by the laws he doth not understand the written laws1 elected and approved by the whole commonwealth1 but the verbal commands or mandates of him that hath the sovereign power1 as we find in many places of his writings4 ,the civil laws are nothing else but the commands of him1 that is endowed with sovereign power in the commonwealth1 concerning the future actions of his subjects4 ,and the civil laws are fastened to the lips of that man who hath the sovereign power4 ,where are we8 ,in ,europe8 or in ,asia1 where they ascribed a divinity to their kings1 and1 to use his own phrase1 made them mortal gods2 ,o king1 live for ever8 ,flatterers are the common moths of great palaces1 where ,alexander's friends are more numerous than the king's friends4 ,but such gross1 palpable1 pernicious flattery as this is1 ,i did never meet with1 so derogatory both to piety and policy4 ,what deserveth he who should do his uttermost endeavour to poison a common fountain1 whereof all the commonwealth must drink8 ,he doth the same who poisoneth the mind of a sovereign prince4 ,are the civil laws the rules of good and bad1 just and unjust1 honest and dishonest8 ,and what1 ,i pray you1 are the rules of the civil law itself8 ,even the law of ,god and ,nature4 ,if the civil laws swerve from these more authentic laws1 they are ,lesbian rules4 ,what the lawgiver commands is to be accounted good1 what he forbids1 bad4 ,this was just the garb of the ,athenian sophisters1 as they are described by ,plato4 ,whatsoever pleased the great beast1 the multitude1 they call holy1 and just1 and good4 ,and whatsoever the great beast disliked1 they called evil1 unjust1 profane4 ,but he is not yet arrived at the height of his flattery4 ,lawful kings make those things1 which they command1 just by commanding them4 ,at other times1 when he is in his right wits1 he talketh of sufferings1 and expecting their reward in heaven4 ,and going to ,christ by martyrdom4 ,and if he had the fortitude to suffer death he should do better4 ,but ,i fear all this was but said in jest4 ,how should they expect their reward in heaven1 if his doctrine be true1 that there is no reward in heaven8 ,or how should they be martyrs1 if his doctrine be true1 that none can be martyrs1 but those who conversed with ,christ upon earth8 ,he addeth1 before empires were1 just and unjust were not4 ,nothing could be written more false in his sense1 more dishonourable to ,god1 more inglorious to the human nature2 than that ,god should create man1 and leave him presently without any rules1 to his own ordering of himself1 as the ostrich leaveth her eggs in the sand4 ,but in truth there have been empires in the world ever since ,adam4 ,and ,adam had a law written in his heart by the finger of ,god1 before there was any civil law4 ,thus they do endeavour to make goodness1 and justice1 and honesty1 and conscience1 and ,god himself1 to be empty names1 without any reality1 which signify nothing1 further than they conduce to a man's interest4 ,otherwise he would not1 he could not1 say1 that every action as it is invested with its circumstances1 is indifferent in its own nature4 ,t4 ,h4 ,my sixth paradox he calls a rapper4 ,a rapper1 a swapper1 and such like terms1 are his ,lordship's elegancies4 ,but let us see what this rapper is3 it is this2 the civil laws are the rules of good and evil1 just and unjust1 honest and dishonest4 ,truly1 ,i see no other rules they have4 ,the ,scriptures themselves were made law to us here1 by the authority of the commonwealth1 and are therefore part of the law civil4 ,if they were laws in their own nature1 then were they laws over all the world1 and men were obliged to obey them in ,america1 as soon as they should be shown there1 though without a miracle1 by a friar4 ,what is unjust1 but the transgression of a law8 ,law therefore was before unjust3 and the law was made known by sovereign power before it was a law3 therefore sovereign power was antecedent both to law and injustice4 ,who then made unjust but sovereign kings or sovereign assemblies8 ,where is now the wonder of this rapper1 that lawful kings make those things which they command just1 by commanding them1 and those things which they forbid unjust1 by forbidding them8 ,just and unjust were surely made4 ,if the king made them not1 who made them else8 ,for certainly the breach of a civil law is a sin against ,god4 ,another calumny which he would fix upon me1 is1 that ,i make the ,king's verbal commands to be laws4 ,how so8 ,because ,i say1 the civil laws are nothing else but the commands of him that hath the sovereign power1 concerning the future actions of his subjects4 ,what verbal command of a king can arrive at the ears of all his subjects1 which it must do ere it be a law1 without the seal of the person of the commonwealth1 which is here the ,great ,seal of ,england8 ,who1 but his ,lordship1 ever denied that the command of ,england was a law to ,englishmen8 ,or that any but the ,king had authority to affix the ,great ,seal of ,england to any writing8 ,and who did ever doubt to call our laws1 though made in ,parliament1 the ,king's laws8 ,what was ever called a law1 which the ,king did not assent to8 ,because the ,king has granted in divers cases not to make a law without the advice and assent of the lords and commons1 therefore when there is no parliament in being1 shall the ,great ,seal of ,england stand for nothing8 ,what was more unjustly maintained during the ,long ,parliament1 besides the resisting and murdering of the ,king1 than this doctrine of his ,lordship's8 ,but the ,bishop endeavoured here to make the multitude believe ,i maintain1 that the ,king sinneth not1 though he bid hang a man for making his apparel otherwise than he appointed1 or his servant for negligent attendance4 ,and yet he knew ,i distinguished always between the ,king's natural and politic capacity4 ,what name should ,i give to this wilful slander8 ,but here his ,lordship enters into passion1 and exclaims3 ,where are we1 in ,europe or in ,asia8 ,gross1 palpable1 pernicious flattery1 poisoning of a commonwealth1 poisoning the ,king's mind4 ,but where was his ,lordship when he wrote this8 ,one would not think he was in ,france1 nor that this doctrine was written in the year #afeh1 but rather in the year #afdh1 in some cabal of the ,king's enemies4 ,but what did put him into this fit of choler8 ,partly1 this very thing1 that he could not answer my reasons2 but chiefly1 that he had lost upon me so much ,school-learning in our controversy touching ,liberty and ,necessity3 wherein he was to blame himself1 for believing that the obscure and barbarous language of ,school-divinity1 could satisfy an ingenuous reader1 as well as plain and perspicuous ,english4 ,do ,i flatter the ,king8 ,why am ,i not rich8 ,i confess his ,lordship has not flattered him here4 ,j4 ,d4 ,something there is which he hath a confused glimmering of1 as the blind man sees men walking like trees1 which he is not able to apprehend and express clearly4 ,we acknowledge1 that though the laws or commands of a sovereign prince be erroneous1 or unjust1 or injurious1 such as a subject cannot approve for good in themselves2 yet he is bound to acquiesce1 and may not oppose or resist1 otherwise than by prayers and tears1 and at the most by flight4 ,we acknowledge that the civil laws have power to bind the conscience of a ,christian1 in themselves1 but not from themselves1 but from him who hath said1 ,let every soul be subject to the higher powers4 ,either they bind ,christian subjects to do their sovereign's commands1 or to suffer for the testimony of a good conscience4 ,we acknowledge that in doubtful cases1 semper prsumitur pro rege et lege1 the sovereign and the law are always presumed to be in the right4 ,but in plain evident cases1 which admit no doubt1 it is always better to obey ,god than man4 ,blunderers1 whilst they think to mend one imaginary hole1 make two or three real ones4 ,they who derive the authority of the ,scriptures or ,god's law from the civil laws of men1 are like those who seek to underprop the heavens from falling1 with a bulrush4 ,nay1 they derive not only the authority of the ,scripture1 but even the law of nature itself1 from the civil law4 ,the laws of nature 7which need no promulgation7 in the condition of nature are not properly laws1 but qualities which dispose men to peace and obedience4 ,when a commonwealth is once settled1 then are they actually laws1 and not before4 ,god help us1 into what times are we fallen1 when the immutable laws of ,god and nature are made to depend upon the mutable laws of mortal men1 just as one should go about to control the sun by the authority of the clock4 ,t4 ,h4 ,hitherto he never offered to mend any of the doctrines he inveighs against2 but here he does4 ,he says ,i have a glimmering of something ,i was not able to apprehend and express clearly4 ,let us see his ,lordship's more clear expression4 ,we acknowledge1 saith he1 that though the laws or commands of a sovereign prince be erroneous1 or unjust1 or injurious1 such as a subject cannot approve for good in themselves1 yet he is bound to acquiesce1 and may not oppose or resist otherwise than by prayers and tears1 and at the most by flight4 ,hence it follows clearly1 that when a sovereign has made a law1 though erroneous1 then1 if his subject oppose it1 it is a sin4 ,therefore ,i would fain know1 when a man has broken that law by doing what it forbad1 or by refusing to do what it commanded1 whether he have opposed this law or not4 ,if to break the law be to oppose it1 he granteth it4 ,therefore his ,lordship has not here expressed himself so clearly1 as to make men understand the difference between breaking a law and opposing it4 ,though there be some difference between breaking of a law1 and opposing those that are sent with force to see it executed2 yet between breaking and opposing the law itself1 there is no difference4 ,also1 though the subject think the law just1 as when a thief is by law condemned to die1 yet he may lawfully oppose the execution1 not only by prayers1 tears1 and flight1 but also 7as ,i think7 any way he can4 ,for though his fault were never so great1 yet his endeavour to save his own life is not a fault4 ,for the law expects it1 and for that cause appointeth felons to be carried bound and encompassed with armed men to execution4 ,nothing is opposite to law1 but sin3 nothing opposite to the sheriff1 but force4 ,so that his ,lordship's sight was not sharp enough to see the difference between the law and the officer4 ,again1 ,we acknowledge1 says he1 that the laws have power to bind the conscience of a ,christian in themselves1 but not from themselves4 ,neither do the ,scriptures bind the conscience because they are ,scriptures1 but because they were from ,god4 ,so also the book of ,english ,statutes bindeth our consciences in itself1 but not from itself1 but from the authority of the king1 who only in the right of ,god has the legislative powers4 ,again he saith1 ,we acknowledge that in doubtful cases1 the sovereign and the law are always presumed to be in the right4 ,if he presume they are in the right1 how dare he presume that the cases they determine are doubtful8 ,but1 saith he1 in evident cases which admit no doubt1 it is always better to obey ,god than man4 ,yes1 and in doubtful cases also1 say ,i4 ,but not always better to obey the inferior pastors than the supreme pastor1 which is the king4 ,but what are those cases that admit no doubt8 ,i know but very few1 and those are such as his ,lordship was not much acquainted with4 ,j4 ,d4 ,but it is not worthy of my labour1 nor any part of my intention1 to pursue every shadow of a question which he springeth4 ,it shall suffice to gather a posy of flowers 7or rather a bundle of weeds7 out of his writings1 and present them to the reader1 who will easily distinguish them from healthful plants by the rankness of their smell4 ,such are these which follow4 ,t4 ,h4 ,as for the following posy of flowers1 there wants no more to make them sweet1 than to wipe off the venom blown upon some of them by his ,lordship's breath4 ,j4 ,d4 #a4 ,to be delighted in the imagination only of being possessed of another man's goods1 servants1 or wife1 without any intention to take them from him by force or fraud1 is no breach of the law which saith3 ,thou shalt not covet4 ,t4 ,h4 ,what man was there ever1 whose imagination of anything he thought would please him1 was not some delight8 ,or what sin is there1 where there is not so much as an intention to do injustice8 ,but his ,lordship would not distinguish between delight and purpose1 nor between a wish and a will4 ,this was venom4 ,i believe that his ,lordship himself1 even before he was married1 took some delight in the thought of it1 and yet the woman then was not his own4 ,all love is delight1 but all love is not sin4 ,without this love of that which is not yet a man's own1 the world had not been peopled4 ,j4 ,d4 #b4 ,if a man by the terror of present death be compelled to do a fact against the law1 he is totally excused1 because no law can oblige a man to abandon his own preservation2 nature compelleth him to the fact4 ,the like doctrine he hath elsewhere4 ,when the actor doth anything against the law of nature by the command of the author1 if he be obliged by former covenants to obey him1 not he1 but the author breaketh the law of nature4 ,t4 ,h4 ,the second flower is both sweet and wholesome4 ,j4 ,d4 #c4 ,it is a doctrine repugnant to civil society1 that whatsoever a man does against his conscience1 is sin4 ,t4 ,h4 ,it is plain1 that to do what a man thinks in his own conscience to be sin1 is sin2 for it is a contempt of the law itself2 and from thence ignorant men1 out of an erroneous conscience1 disobey the law1 which is pernicious to all government4 ,j4 ,d4 #d4 ,the kingdom of ,god is not shut but to them that sin1 that is1 to them who have not performed due obedience to the laws of ,god2 nor to them1 if they believe the necessary articles of the ,christian faith4 #e4 ,we must know that the true acknowledging of sin is repentance itself4 #f4 ,an opinion publicly appointed to be taught cannot be heresy2 nor the sovereign princes that authorized the same1 heretics4 ,t4 ,h4 ,the fourth1 fifth1 and sixth smell well4 ,but to say1 that the sovereign prince in ,england is a heretic1 or that an act of parliament is heretical1 stinks abominably2 as it was thought primo ,elizabeth4 ,j4 ,d4 #g4 ,temporal and spiritual government are but two words to make men see double1 and mistake their lawful sovereign1 c4 ,there is no other government in this life1 neither of state nor religion1 but temporal4 #h4 ,it is manifest1 that they1 who permit a contrary doctrine to that which themselves believe and think necessary 7to salvation71 do against their consciences1 and will1 as much as in them lieth1 the eternal destruction of their subjects4 ,t4 ,h4 ,the seventh and eighth are roses and jessamine4 ,but his leaving out the words 7to salvation7 was venom4 ,j4 ,d4 #i4 ,subjects sin if they do not worship ,god according to the laws of the commonwealth4 ,t4 ,h4 ,the ninth he hath poisoned1 and made it not mine4 ,he quotes my book ,de ,cive1 cap4 ,,xv4 #ai1 where ,i say1 regnante ,deo per solam rationem naturalem1 that is1 before the ,scripture was given1 they sinned that refused to worship ,god1 according to the rites and ceremonies of the country2 which hath no ill scent1 but to undutiful subjects4 ,j4 ,d4 #aj4 ,to believe in ,jesus 7in ,jesum71 is the same as to believe that ,jesus is ,christ4 ,t4 ,h4 ,and so it is always in the ,scripture4 ,j4 ,d4 #aa4 ,there can be no contradiction between the laws of ,god1 and the laws of a ,christian commonwealth4 ,yet1 we see ,christian commonwealths daily contradict one another4 ,t4 ,h4 ,the eleventh is also good4 ,but his ,lordship's instance1 that ,christian commonwealths contradict one another1 has nothing to do here4 ,their laws do indeed contradict one another1 but contradict not the law of ,god4 ,for ,god commands their subjects to obey them in all things1 and his ,lordship himself confesseth that their laws1 though erroneous1 bind the conscience4 ,but ,christian commonwealths would seldom contradict one another1 if they made no doctrine law1 but such as were necessary to salvation4 ,j4 ,d4 #ab4 ,no man giveth but with intention of some good to himself4 ,of all voluntary acts1 the object is to every man his own good4 ,moses1 ,st4 ,paul1 and the ,decii were not of his mind4 ,t4 ,h4 ,that which his ,lordship adds to the twelfth1 namely1 that ,moses1 ,st4 ,paul1 and the ,decii were not of my mind1 is false4 ,for the two former did what they did for a good to themselves1 which was eternal life2 and the ,decii for a good fame after death4 ,and his ,lordship also1 if he had believed there is an eternal happiness to come1 or thought a good fame after death to be anything worth1 would have directed all his actions towards them1 and have despised the wealth and titles of the present world4 ,j4 ,d4 #ac4 ,there is no natural knowledge of man's estate after death1 much less of reward which is then to be given to breach of faith1 but only a belief grounded upon other men's saying1 that they know it supernaturally1 or that they know those that knew them that knew others that knew it supernaturally4 ,t4 ,h4 ,the thirteenth is good and fresh4 ,j4 ,d4 #ad4 ,david's killing of ,uriah was no injury to ,uriah2 because the right to do what he pleased1 was given him by ,uriah himself4 ,t4 ,h4 ,david himself makes this good1 in saying1 to thee only have ,i sinned4 ,j4 ,d4 #ae4 ,to whom it belongeth to determine controversies which may arise from the divers interpretations of ,scripture1 he hath an imperial power over all men1 which acknowledge the ,scripture to be the word of ,god4 #af4 ,what is theft1 what is murder1 what is adultery1 and universally what is an injury1 is known by the civil law1 that is1 by the commands of the sovereign4 ,t4 ,h4 ,for the fifteenth1 he should have disputed it with the head of the church4 ,and as to the sixteenth1 ,i would have asked him by what other law his ,lordship would have it determined what is theft1 or what is injury1 than by the laws made in parliament1 or by the laws which distinguish between meum and tuum8 ,his ,lordship's ignorance smells rankly 7'tis his own phrase in this and many other places1 which ,i have let pass7 of his own interest4 ,the ,king tells us what is sin1 in that he tells us what is law4 ,he hath authorized the clergy to dehort the people from sin1 and to exhort them1 by good motives both from ,scripture and reason1 to obey the laws2 and supposeth them 7though under forty years old71 by the help they have in the university1 able1 in case the law be not written1 to teach the people1 old and young1 what they ought to follow in doubtful cases of conscience2 that is to say1 they are authorized to expound the laws of nature2 but not so as to make it a doubtful case1 whether the ,king's laws be to be obeyed or not4 ,all they ought to do1 is from the ,king's authority4 ,and therefore this my doctrine is no weed4 ,j4 ,d4 #ag4 ,he admitteth incestuous copulations of the heathens1 according to their heathenish laws1 to have been lawful marriages4 ,though the ,scripture teach us 7,levit4 xviii4 #bh7 expressly1 that for those abominations the land of ,canaan spued out her inhabitants4 ,t4 ,h4 ,the seventeenth he hath corrupted with a false interpretation of the text4 ,for in that chapter1 from the beginning to verse twenty1 are forbidden marriages in certain degrees of kindred4 ,from verse twenty1 which begins with ,moreover1 to the twenty-eighth1 are forbidden sacrificing of children to ,moloch1 and profaning of ,god's name1 and buggery with man and beast1 with this cause expressed1 7,for all these abominations have the men of the land done which were before you1 and the land is defiled17 that the land spue not you out also4 ,as for marriages within the degrees prohibited1 they are not referred to the abominations of the heathen4 ,besides1 for some time after ,adam1 such marriages were necessary4 ,j4 ,d4 #ah4 ,i say that no other article of faith besides this1 that ,jesus is ,christ1 is necessary to a ,christian man for salvation4 #ai4 ,because ,christ's kingdom is not of this world1 therefore neither can his ministers1 unless they be kings1 require obedience in his name4 ,they have no right of commanding1 no power to make laws4 ,t4 ,h4 ,these two smell comfortably1 and of ,scripture4 ,the contrary doctrine smells of ambition and encroachment of jurisdiction1 or rump of the ,roman tyranny4 ,j4 ,d4 #bj4 ,i pass by his errors about oaths1 about vows1 about the resurrection1 about the kingdom of ,christ1 about the power of the keys1 binding1 loosing1 excommunication1 c41 his ignorant mistakes of meritum congrui and condigni1 active and passive obedience1 and many more1 for fear of being tedious to the reader4 ,t4 ,h4 ,the terms of ,school divinity1 of which number are meritum congrui1 meritum condigni1 and passive obedience1 are so obscure1 as no man living can tell what they mean2 so that they that use them may admit or deny their meaning1 as it shall serve their turns4 ,i said not that this was their meaning1 but that ,i thought it was so4 ,for no man living can tell what a ,schoolman means by his words4 ,therefore ,i expounded them according to their true signification4 ,merit ex condigno1 is when a thing is deserved by pact2 as when ,i say the labourer is worthy of his hire1 ,i mean meritum ex condigno4 ,but when a man of his own grace throweth money among the people1 with an intention that what part soever of it any of them could catch he should have1 he that catcheth merits it1 not by pact1 nor by precedent merit1 as a labourer1 but because it was congruent to the purpose of him that cast it amongst them4 ,in all other meaning these words are but jargon1 which his ,lordship had learnt by rote4 ,also passive obedience signifies nothing1 except it may be called passive obedience when a man refraineth himself from doing what the law hath forbidden4 ,for in his ,lordship's sense1 the thief that is hanged for stealing1 hath fulfilled the law2 which ,i think is absurd4 ,j4 ,d4 ,his whole works are a heap of mis-shapen errors1 and absurd paradoxes1 vented with the confidence of a juggler1 the brags of a mountebank1 and the authority of some ,pythagoras1 or third ,cato1 lately dropped down from heaven4 ,thus we have seen how the ,hobbian principles do destroy the existence1 the simplicity1 the ubiquity1 the eternity1 and infiniteness of ,god1 the doctrine of the ,blessed ,trinity1 the hypostatical union1 the kingly1 sacerdotal1 and prophetical office of ,christ1 the being and operation of the ,holy ,ghost1 heaven1 hell1 angels1 devils1 the immortality of the soul1 the ,catholic and all national churches2 the holy ,scriptures1 holy orders1 the holy sacraments1 the whole frame of religion1 and the worship of ,god2 the laws of nature1 the reality of goodness1 justice1 piety1 honesty1 conscience1 and all that is sacred4 ,if his disciples have such an implicit faith1 that they can digest all these things1 they may feed with ostriches4 ,t4 ,h4 ,he here concludes his first chapter with bitter reproaches1 to leave in his reader1 as he thought1 a sting2 supposing perhaps that he will read nothing but the beginning and end of his book1 as is the custom of many men4 ,but to make him lose that petty piece of cunning1 ,i must desire of the reader one of these two things4 ,either that he would read with it the places of my ,leviathan which he cites1 and see not only how he answers my arguments1 but also what the arguments are which he produceth against them2 or else1 that he would forbear to condemn me1 so much as in his thought3 for otherwise he is unjust4 ,the name of ,bishop is of great authority2 but these words are not the words of a bishop1 but of a passionate ,schoolman1 too fierce and unseemly in any man whatsoever4 ,besides1 they are untrue4 ,who that knows me1 will say that ,i have the confidence of a juggler1 or that ,i use to brag of anything1 much less that ,i play the mountebank8 ,what my works are1 he was no fit judge4 ,but now he has provoked me1 ,i will say thus much of them1 that neither he1 7if he had lived71 nor ,i1 if ,i would1 could extinguish the light which is set up in the world by the greatest part of them3 and for these doctrines which he impugneth1 ,i have few opposers1 but such whose profit1 or whose fame in learning is concerned in them4 ,he accuses me first of destroying the existence of ,god2 that is to say1 he would make the world believe ,i were an atheist4 ,but upon what ground8 ,because ,i say1 that ,god is a spirit1 but corporeal4 ,but to say that1 is allowed me by ,st4 ,paul1 that says 7#a ,cor4 xv4 #dd73 ,there is a spiritual body1 and there is an animal body4 ,he that holds there is a ,god1 and that ,god is really somewhat1 7for body is doubtlessly a real substance71 is as far from being an atheist1 as it is possible to be4 ,but he that says ,god is an incorporeal substance1 no man can be sure whether he be an atheist or not4 ,for no man living can tell whether there be any substance at all1 that is not also corporeal4 ,for neither the word incorporeal1 nor immaterial1 nor any word equivalent to it1 is to be found in ,scripture1 or in reason4 ,but on the contrary1 that the ,godhead dwelleth bodily in ,christ1 is found in ,colos4 ii4 #i2 and ,tertullian maintains that ,god is either a corporeal substance or nothing4 ,nor was he ever condemned for it by the church4 ,for why8 ,not only ,tertullian1 but all the learned1 call body1 not only that which one can see1 but also whatsoever has magnitude1 or that is somewhere2 for they had greater reverence for the divine substance1 than that they durst think it had no magnitude1 or was nowhere4 ,but they that hold ,god to be a phantasm1 as did the exorcists in the ,church of ,rome1 that is1 such a thing as were at that time thought to be the sprights1 that were said to walk in churchyards and to be the souls of men buried1 do absolutely make ,god to be nothing at all4 ,but how8 ,were they atheists8 ,no4 ,for though by ignorance of the consequence they said that which was equivalent to atheism1 yet in their hearts they thought ,god a substance1 and would also1 if they had known what substance and what corporeal meant1 have said he was a corporeal substance4 ,so that this atheism by consequence is a very easy thing to be fallen into1 even by the most godly men of the church4 ,he also that says that ,god is wholly here1 and wholly there1 and wholly every where1 destroys by consequence the unity of ,god1 and the infiniteness of ,god1 and the simplicity of ,god4 ,and this the ,schoolmen do1 and are therefore atheists by consequence1 and yet they do not all say in their hearts that there is no ,god4 ,so also his ,lordship by exempting the will of man from being subject to the necessity of ,god's will or decree1 denies by consequence the ,divine prescience1 which also will amount to atheism by consequence4 ,but out of this1 that ,god is a spirit corporeal and infinitely pure1 there can no unworthy or dishonourable consequence be drawn4 ,thus far to his ,lordships first chapter1 in justification of my ,leviathan as to matter of religion2 and especially to wipe off that unjust slander cast upon me by the ,bishop of ,derry4 ,as for the second chapter1 which concerns my civil doctrines1 since my errors there1 if there be any1 will not tend very much to my disgrace1 ,i will not take the pains to answer it4 ,whereas his ,lordship has talked in his discourse here and there ignorantly of heresy1 and some others have not doubted to say publicly1 that there be many heresies in my ,leviathan2 ,i will add hereunto1 for a general answer1 an historical relation concerning the word ,heresy1 from the first use of it amongst the ,grecians till this present time4 ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ,,an ,,historical ,,narration ,,concerning ,,heresy1 ,,and ,,the ,,punishment ,,thereof4 ------- 8,nam veluti pueri trepidant1 atque omnia ccis ,in tenebris metuunt3 sic nos in luce timemus ,interdum1 nihilo qu sunt metuenda magis1 quam ,qu pueri in tenebris pavitant1 finguntque futura40 ,,lucretius1 ,lib4 ,,ii4 #ed-eg4 ,h,,rese,s ,,larvas1 ,,sectarum ,,immania ,,monstra ,,hobbius ,,invicto ,,dispulit ,,ingenio4 ,,concerning ,,heresy1 ,,and ,,the ,,punishment ,,thereof4 -------------- ,the word heresy is ,greek1 and signifies a taking of any thing1 and particularly the taking of an opinion4 ,after the study of philosophy began in ,greece1 and the philosophers1 disagreeing amongst themselves1 had started many questions1 not only about things natural1 but also moral and civil2 because every man took what opinion he pleased1 each several opinion was called a heresy2 which signified no more than a private opinion1 without reference to truth or falsehood4 ,the beginners of these heresies were chiefly ,pythagoras1 ,plato1 ,aristotle1 ,epicurus1 ,zeno2 men1 who as they held many errors1 so also found they out many true and useful doctrines1 in all kinds of learning3 and for that cause were well esteemed of by the greatest personages of their own times2 and so also were some few of their followers4 ,but the rest1 ignorant men1 and very often needy knaves1 having learned by heart the opinions of these admired philosophers1 and pretending to take after them1 made use thereof to get their living by the teaching of rich men's children that happened to be in love with those great names3 though by their impertinent discourse1 sordid and ridiculous manners1 they were generally despised1 of what sect or heresy soever2 whether they were ,pythagoreans2 or ,academics1 followers of ,plato2 or ,peripatetics1 followers of ,aristotle2 ,epicureans2 or ,stoics1 followers of ,zeno4 ,for these were the names of heresies1 or1 as the ,latins call them1 sects1 a sequendo1 so much talked of from after the time of ,alexander till this present day1 and that have perpetually troubled or deceived the people with whom they lived1 and were never more numerous than in the time of the primitive church4 ,the heresy of ,aristotle1 by the revolutions of time1 has had the good fortune to be predominant over the rest4 ,however1 originally the name of heresy was no disgrace1 nor the word heretic at all in use3 though the several sects1 especially the ,epicureans and the ,stoics1 hated one another2 and the ,stoics1 being the fiercer men1 used to revile those that differed from them1 with the most despiteful words they could invent4 ,it cannot be doubted1 but that1 by the preaching of the apostles and disciples of ,christ1 in ,greece and other parts of the ,roman empire full of these philosophers1 many thousands of men were converted to the ,christian faith1 some really1 and some feignedly1 for factious ends1 or for need2 for ,christians lived then in common1 and were charitable4 ,and because most of these philosophers had better skill in disputing and oratory than the common people1 and thereby were better qualified both to defend and propagate the ,gospel1 there is no doubt1 ,i say1 but most of the pastors of the primitive church were for that reason chosen out of the number of these philosophers2 who retaining still many doctrines which they had taken up on the authority of their former masters1 whom they had in reverence1 endeavoured many of them to draw the ,scriptures every one to his own heresy4 ,and thus at first entered heresy into the church of ,christ4 ,yet these men were all of them ,christians2 as they were1 when they were first baptized4 ,nor did they deny the authority of those writings which were left them by the ,apostles and ,evangelists1 though they interpreted them1 many times1 with a bias to their former philosophy4 ,and this dissention amongst themselves1 was a great scandal to the unbelievers1 and which not only obstructed the way of the ,gospel1 but also drew scorn and greater persecution upon the church4 ,for remedy whereof1 the chief pastors of churches did use1 at the rising of any new opinion1 to assemble themselves for the examining and determining of the same4 ,wherein1 if the author of the opinion were convinced of his error1 and subscribed to the sentence of the church assembled1 then all was well again3 but if he still persisted in it1 they laid him aside1 and considered him but as an heathen man2 which to an unfeigned ,christian1 was a great ignominy1 and of force to make him consider better of his own doctrine2 and sometimes brought him to the acknowledgment of the truth4 ,but other punishment they could inflict none2 that being a right appropriated to the civil power4 ,so that all the punishment the church could inflict1 was only ignominy2 and that among the faithful1 consisting in this1 that his company was by all the godly avoided1 and he himself branded with the name of heretic1 in opposition to the whole church1 that condemned his doctrine4 ,so that catholic and heretic were terms relative2 and here it was that heretic came to be a name1 and a name of disgrace1 both together4 ,the first and most troublesome heresies of the primitive church1 were about the ,trinity4 ,for1 according to the usual curiosity of natural philosophers1 they could not abstain from disputing the very first principles of ,christianity1 into which they were baptized1 in the name of the ,father1 the ,son1 and the ,holy ,ghost4 ,some there were that made them allegorical4 ,others would make one creator of good1 and another of evil2 which was in effect to set up two ,gods1 one contrary to another2 supposing that causation of evil could not be attributed to ,god1 without impiety4 ,from which doctrine they are not far distant1 that now make the first cause of sinful actions to be every man as to his own sin4 ,others there were1 that would have ,god to be a body with parts organical1 as face1 hands1 fore-parts1 and back-parts4 ,others1 that ,christ had no real body1 but was a mere phantasm3 for phantasms were taken then1 and have been ever since1 by unlearned and superstitious men1 for things real and subsistent4 ,others denied the divinity of ,christ4 ,others1 that ,christ1 being ,god and man1 was two persons4 ,others confessed he was one person1 and withal that he had but one nature4 ,and a great many other heresies arose from the too much adherence to the philosophy of those times3 whereof some were suppressed for a time by ,st4 ,john's publishing his ,gospel1 and some by their own unreasonableness vanished1 and some lasted till the time of ,constantine the ,great1 and after4 ,when ,constantine the ,great1 made so by the assistance and valour of the ,christian soldiers1 had attained to be the only ,roman ,emperor1 he also himself became a ,christian1 and caused the temples of the heathen gods to be demolished1 and authorised ,christian religion only to be public4 ,but towards the latter end of his time1 there arose a dispute in the city of ,alexandria1 between ,alexander the ,bishop1 and ,arius1 a presbyter of the same city2 wherein ,arius maintained1 first1 that ,christ was inferior to his ,father2 and afterwards1 that he was no ,god1 alleging the words of ,christ1 my ,father is greater than ,i3 the bishop1 on the contrary1 alleging the words of ,st4 ,john1 and the word was ,god2 and the words of ,st4 ,thomas1 my ,lord and my ,god4 ,this controversy presently1 amongst the inhabitants and soldiers of ,alexandria1 became a quarrel1 and was the cause of much bloodshed in and about the city2 and was likely then to spread further1 as afterwards it did4 ,this so far concerned the ,emperor's civil government1 that he thought it necessary to call a general council of all the bishops and other eminent divines throughout the ,roman ,empire1 to meet at the city of ,nice4 ,when they were assembled1 they presented the ,emperor with libels of accusation one against another4 ,when he had received these libels into his hands1 he made an oration to the fathers assembled1 exhorting them to agree1 and to fall in hand with the settlement of the articles of faith1 for which cause he had assembled them2 saying1 whatsoever they should decree therein1 he would cause to be observed4 ,this may perhaps seem a greater indifferency1 than would in these days be approved of4 ,but so it is in the history2 and the articles of faith necessary to salvation1 were not thought then to be so many as afterwards they were defined to be by the ,church of ,rome4 ,when ,constantine had ended his oration1 he caused the aforesaid libels to be cast into the fire1 as became a wise king and a charitable ,christian4 ,this done1 the fathers fell in hand with their business1 and following the method of a former creed1 now commonly called the ,apostles' ,creed1 made a confession of faith1 viz43 ,i ,,believe ,,in ,,one ,,god1 ,,the ,,father ,,almighty1 ,,maker ,,of ,,heaven ,,and ,,earth1 ,,and ,,of ,,all ,,things ,,visible ,,and ,,invisible3 in which is condemned the polytheism of the ,gentiles3 ,,and ,,in ,,one ,,lord ,,jesus ,,christ1 ,,the ,,only ,,begotten ,,son ,,of ,,god3 against the many sons of the many ,gods of the heathen3 ,,begotten ,,of ,,his ,,father ,,before ,,all ,,worlds1 ,,god ,,of ,,god3 against the ,arians3 ,,very ,,god ,,of ,,very ,,god3 against the ,valentinians1 and against the heresy of ,apelles and others1 who made ,christ a mere phantasm3 ,,light ,,of ,,light3 this was put in for explication1 and used before to that purpose by ,tertullian3 ,,begotten1 ,,not ,,made1 ,,being ,,of ,,one ,,substance ,,with ,,the ,,father3 in this again they condemn the doctrine of ,arius4 ,for this word1 of one substance1 in ,latin consubstantialis1 but in ,greek 1 that is1 of one essence1 was put as a touchstone to discern an ,arian from a ,catholic2 and much ado there was about it4 ,constantine himself1 at the passing of this creed1 took notice of it for a hard word2 but yet approved of it1 saying1 that in a divine mystery it was fit to use divina et arcana verba2 that is1 divine words1 and hidden from human understanding3 calling that word 1 divine1 not because it was in the divine ,scripture1 7for it is not there7 but because it was to him arcanum1 that is1 not sufficiently understood4 ,and in this again appeared the indifferency of the ,emperor1 and that he had for his end1 in the calling of the ,synod1 not so much the truth1 as the uniformity of the doctrine1 and peace of his people that depended on it4 ,the cause of the obscurity of this word 1 proceeded chiefly from the difference between the ,greek and ,roman dialect1 in the philosophy of the ,peripatetics4 ,the first principle of religion in all nations1 is1 that ,god is1 that is to say1 that ,god really is something1 and not a mere fancy2 but that which is really something1 is considerable alone by itself1 as being somewhere4 ,in which sense a man is a thing real2 for ,i can consider him to be1 without considering any other thing to be besides him4 ,and for the same reason1 the earth1 the air1 the stars1 heaven1 and their parts1 are all of them things real4 ,and because whatsoever is real here1 or there1 or in any place1 has dimensions1 that is to say1 magnitude2 that which hath magnitude1 whether it be visible or invisible1 finite or infinite1 is called by all the learned a body4 ,it followeth1 that all real things1 in that they are somewhere1 are corporeal4 ,on the contrary1 essence1 deity1 humanity1 and such like names1 signify nothing that can be considered1 without first considering there is an ens1 a god1 a man1 c4 ,so also if there be any real thing that is white or black1 hot or cold1 the same may be considered by itself2 but whiteness1 blackness1 heat1 coldness1 cannot be considered1 unless it be first supposed that there is some real thing to which they are attributed4 ,these real things are called by the ,latin philosophers1 entia1 subjecta1 substanti2 and by the ,greek philosophers1 1 4 ,the other1 which are incorporeal1 are called by the ,greek philosophers1 1 2 but most of the ,latin philosophers used to convert into substantia1 and so confound real and corporeal things with incorporeal3 which is not well2 for essence and substance signify divers things4 ,and this mistake is received1 and continues still in these parts1 in all disputes1 both of philosophy and divinity2 for in truth essentia signifies no more1 than if we should talk ridiculously of the isness of the thing that is4 ,,by ,,whom ,,all ,,things ,,were ,,made4 ,this is proved out of ,st4 ,john i4 #a1 #b1 #c1 and ,heb4 i4 #c1 and that again out of ,gen4 i4 where ,god is said to create every thing by his sole word1 as when he said3 ,let there be light1 and there was light4 ,and then1 that ,christ was that ,word1 and in the beginning with ,god1 may be gathered out of divers places of ,moses1 ,david1 and other of the prophets4 ,nor was it ever questioned amongst ,christians1 except by the ,arians1 but that ,christ was ,god eternal1 and his incarnation eternally decreed4 ,but the ,fathers1 all that write expositions on this creed1 could not forbear to philosophize upon it1 and most of them out of the principles of ,aristotle2 which are the same the ,schoolmen now use2 as may partly appear by this1 that many of them1 amongst their treatises of religion1 have affected to publish principles of logic and physics according to the sense of ,aristotle2 as ,athanasius1 and ,damascene4 ,and so some later divines of note1 still confound the concrete with the abstract1 deus with deitas1 ens with essentia1 sapiens with sapientia1 ternus with ternitas4 ,if it be for exact and rigid truth sake1 why do they not say also1 that holiness is a holy man1 covetousness a covetous man1 hypocrisy an hypocrite1 and drunkenness a drunkard1 and the like1 but that it is an error8 ,the ,fathers agree that the ,wisdom of ,god is the eternal ,son of ,god1 by whom all things were made1 and that he was incarnate by the ,holy ,ghost1 if they meant it in the abstract3 for if deitas abstracted be deus1 we make two ,gods of one4 ,this was well understood by ,john ,damascene1 in his treatise ,de ,fide ,orthodoxa1 which is an exposition of the ,nicene creed2 where he denies absolutely that deitas is deus1 lest seeing ,god was made man1 it should follow1 the ,deity was made man2 which is contrary to the doctrine of all the ,nicene ,fathers4 ,the attributes therefore of ,god in the abstract1 when they are put for ,god1 are put metonymically2 which is a common thing in ,scripture2 for example1 ,prov4 viii4 #be1 where it is said3 before the mountains were settled1 before the hills1 was ,i brought forth2 the wisdom there spoken of1 being the wisdom of ,god1 signifies the same with the wise ,god4 ,this kind of speaking is also ordinary in all languages4 ,this considered1 such abstracted words ought not to be used in arguing1 and especially in the deducing the articles of our faith2 though in the language of ,god's eternal worship1 and in all godly discourses1 they cannot be avoided2 and the creed itself is less difficult to be assented to in its own words1 than in all such expositions of the ,fathers4 ,,who ,,for ,,us ,,men ,,and ,,our ,,salvation ,,came ,,down ,,from ,,heaven1 ,,and ,,was ,,incarnate ,,by ,,the ,,holy ,,ghost ,,of ,,the ,,virgin ,,mary1 ,,and ,,was ,,made ,,man4 ,i have not read of any exception to this2 for where ,athanasius in his creed says of the ,son1 ,he was not made1 but begotten1 it is to be understood of the ,son as he was ,god eternal2 whereas here it is spoken of the ,son as he is man4 ,and of the ,son1 also as he was man1 it may be said he was begotten of the ,holy ,ghost2 for a woman conceiveth not1 but of him that begetteth2 which is also confirmed1 7,matth4 i4 xx73 ,that which is begotten in her1 7 71 is of the ,holy ,ghost4 ,,and ,,was ,,also ,,crucified ,,for ,,us ,,under ,,pontius ,,pilate3 ,,he ,,suffered ,,and ,,was ,,buried3 ,,and ,,the ,,third ,,day ,,he ,,rose ,,again ,,according ,,to ,,the ,,scriptures1 ,,and ,,ascended ,,into ,,heaven1 ,,and ,,sitteth ,,on ,,the ,,right ,,hand ,,of ,,the ,,father3 ,,and ,,he ,,shall ,,come ,,again ,,with ,,glory ,,to ,,judge ,,both ,,the ,,quick ,,and ,,the ,,dead4 ,,whose ,,kingdom ,,shall ,,have ,,no ,,end4 ,of this part of the creed ,i have not met with any doubt made by any ,christian4 ,hither the ,council of ,nice proceeded in their general confession of faith1 and no further4 ,this finished1 some of the bishops present at the ,council 7seventeen or eighteen1 whereof ,eusebius ,bishop of ,csarea was one7 not sufficiently satisfied1 refused to subscribe till this doctrine of should be better explained4 ,thereupon the ,council decreed1 that whosoever shall say that ,god hath parts1 shall be anathematized2 to which the said bishops subscribed4 ,and ,eusebius1 by order of the ,council1 wrote a letter1 the copies whereof were sent to every absent bishop1 that being satisfied with the reason of their subscribing1 they also should subscribe4 ,the reason they gave of their subscription was this1 that they had now a form of words prescribed1 by which1 as a rule1 they might guide themselves so1 as not to violate the peace of the church4 ,by this it is manifest1 that no man was an heretic1 but he that in plain and direct words contradicted that form by the church prescribed1 and that no man could be made an heretic by consequence4 ,and because the said form was not put into the body of the creed1 but directed only to the bishops1 there was no reason to punish any lay-person that should speak to the contrary4 ,but what was the meaning of this doctrine1 that ,god has no parts8 ,was it made heresy to say1 that ,god1 who is a real substance1 cannot be considered or spoken of as here or there1 or any where1 which are parts of places8 ,or that there is any real thing without length every way1 that is to say1 which hath no magnitude at all1 finite1 nor infinite8 ,or is there any whole substance1 whose two halves or three thirds are not the same with that whole8 ,or did they mean to condemn the argument of ,tertullian1 by which he confuted ,apelles and other heretics of his time1 namely1 whatsoever was not corporeal1 was nothing but phantasm1 and not corporeal1 for heretical8 ,no1 certainly1 no divines say that4 ,they went to establish the doctrine of one individual ,god in ,trinity2 to abolish the diversity of species in ,god1 not the distinction of here and there in substance4 ,when ,st4 ,paul asked the ,corinthians1 ,is ,christ divided1 he did not think they thought him impossible to be considered as having hands and feet1 but that they might think him1 according to the manner of the ,gentiles1 one of the sons of ,god1 as ,arius did2 but not the only-begotten ,son of ,god4 ,and thus also it is expounded in the ,creed of ,athanasius1 who was present in that council1 by these words1 not confounding the persons1 nor dividing the substances2 that is to say1 that ,god is not divided into three persons1 as man is divided into ,peter1 ,james1 and ,john2 nor are the three persons one and the same person4 ,but ,aristotle1 and from him all the ,greek ,fathers1 and other learned men1 when they distinguish the general latitude of a word1 they call it division2 as when they divide animal into man and beast1 they call these 1 species2 and when they again divide the species man into ,peter and ,john1 they call these 1 partes individu4 ,and by this confounding the division of the substance with the distinction of words1 divers men have been led into the error of attributing to ,god a name1 which is not the name of any substance at all1 viz4 incorporeal4 ,by these words1 ,god has no parts1 thus explained1 together with the part of the creed which was at that time agreed on1 many of those heresies which were antecedent to that first general ,council1 were condemned2 as that of ,manes1 who appeared about thirty years before the reign of ,constantine1 by the first article1 ,i believe in one ,god2 though in other words it seems to me to remain still in the doctrine of the church of ,rome1 which so ascribeth a liberty of the will to men1 as that their will and purpose to commit sin1 should not proceed from the cause of all things1 ,god2 but originally from themselves or from the ,devil4 ,it may seem perhaps to some1 that by the same words the ,anthropomorphites also were then condemned3 and certainly1 if by parts were meant not persons individual1 but pieces1 they were condemned3 for face1 arms1 feet1 and the like1 are pieces4 ,but this cannot be1 for the ,anthropomorphites appeared not till the time of ,valens the ,emperor1 which was after the ,council of ,nice between forty and fifty years2 and were not condemned till the second general ,council at ,constantinople4 ,now for the punishment of heretics ordained by ,constantine1 we read of none2 but that ecclesiastical officers1 bishops and other preachers1 if they refused to subscribe to this faith1 or taught the contrary doctrine1 were for the first fault deprived of their offices1 and for the second banished4 ,and thus did heresy1 which at first was the name of private opinion1 and no crime1 by virtue of a law of the ,emperor1 made only for the peace of the church1 become a crime in a pastor1 and punishable with deprivation first1 and next with banishment4 ,after this part of the creed was thus established1 there arose presently many new heresies1 partly about the interpretation of it1 and partly about the ,holy ,ghost1 of which the ,nicene ,council had not determined4 ,concerning the part established1 there arose disputes about the nature of ,christ1 and the word hypostasis1 id est1 substance2 for of persons there was yet no mention made1 the creed being written in ,greek1 in which language there is no word that answereth to the ,latin word persona4 ,and the union1 as the ,fathers called it1 of the human and ,divine nature in ,christ1 hypostatical1 caused ,eutyches1 and after him ,dioscorus1 to affirm1 there was but one nature in ,christ2 thinking that whensoever two things are united1 they are one3 and this was condemned as ,arianism in the ,councils of ,constantinople and ,ephesus4 ,others1 because they thought two living and rational substances1 such as are ,god and man1 must needs be also two hypostases1 maintained that ,christ had two hypostases3 but these were two heresies condemned together4 ,then concerning the ,holy ,ghost1 ,nestorius ,bishop of ,constantinople1 and some others1 denied the divinity thereof4 ,and whereas about seventy years before the ,nicene ,council1 there had been holden a provincial ,council at ,carthage1 wherein it was decreed1 that those ,christians which in the persecutions had denied the faith of ,christ1 should not be received again into the church unless they were again baptized3 this also was condemned1 though the ,president in that ,council was that most sincere and pious ,christian1 ,cyprian4 ,and at last the creed was made up entire as we have it1 in the ,chalcedonian ,council1 by addition of these words3 ,,and ,i ,,believe ,,in ,,the ,,holy ,,ghost1 ,,the ,,lord ,,and ,,giver ,,of ,,life1 ,,who ,,proceedeth ,,from ,,the ,,father ,,and ,,the ,,son4 ,,who ,,with ,,the ,,father ,,and ,,the ,,son ,,together ,,is ,,worshipped ,,and ,,glorified4 ,,who ,,spake ,,by ,,the ,,prophets4 ,,and ,i ,,believe ,,one ,,catholic ,,and ,,apostolic ,,church4 ,i ,,acknowledge ,,one ,,baptism ,,for ,,the ,,remission ,,of ,,sins4 ,,and ,i ,,look ,,for ,,the ,,resurrection ,,of ,,the ,,dead1 ,,and ,,the ,,life ,,of ,,the ,,world ,,to ,,come4 ,in this addition are condemned1 first the ,nestorians and others1 in these words3 ,,who ,,with ,,the ,,father ,,and ,,the ,,son ,,together ,,is ,,worshipped ,,and ,,glorified3 and secondly1 the doctrine of the ,council of ,carthage1 in these words3 ,i ,,believe ,,one ,,baptism ,,for ,,the ,,remission ,,of ,,sins4 ,for one baptism is not there put as opposite to several sorts or manners of baptism1 but to the iteration of it4 ,st4 ,cyprian was a better ,christian than to allow any baptism that was not in the name of the ,father1 ,son1 and ,holy ,ghost4 ,in the general confession of faith contained in the creed called the ,nicene ,creed1 there is no mention of hypostasis1 nor of hypostatical union1 nor of corporeal1 nor of incorporeal1 nor of parts2 the understanding of which words being not required of the vulgar1 but only of the pastors1 whose disagreement else might trouble the church2 nor were such points necessary to salvation1 but set abroach for ostentation of learning1 or else to dazzle men1 with design to lead them towards some ends of their own4 ,the changes of prevalence in the empire between the ,catholics and the ,arians1 and how the great ,athanasius1 the most fierce of the ,catholics1 was banished by ,constantine1 and afterwards restored1 and again banished1 ,i let pass2 only it is to be remembered1 that ,athanasius is supposed to have made his creed then1 when 7banished7 he was in ,rome1 ,liberius being pope2 by whom1 as is most likely1 the word hypostasis1 as it was in ,athanasius's ,creed1 was disliked4 ,for the ,roman church could never be brought to receive it1 but instead thereof used their own word persona4 ,but the first and last words of that creed the church of ,rome refused not3 for they make every article1 not only those of the body of the creed1 but all the definitions of the ,nicene ,fathers to be such1 as a man cannot be saved1 unless he believe them all stedfastly2 though made only for peace sake1 and to unite the minds of the clergy1 whose disputes were like to trouble the peace of the empire4 ,after these four first general ,councils1 the power of the ,roman church grew up apace2 and1 either by the negligence or weakness of the succeeding ,emperors1 the ,pope did what he pleased in religion4 ,there was no doctrine which tended to the power ecclesiastical1 or to the reverence of the clergy1 the contradiction whereof was not by one ,council or another made heresy1 and punished arbitrarily by the ,emperors with banishment or death4 ,and at last kings themselves1 and commonwealths1 unless they purged their dominions of heretics1 were excommunicated1 interdicted1 and their subjects let loose upon them by the ,pope2 insomuch as to an ingenuous and serious ,christian1 there was nothing so dangerous as to enquire concerning his own salvation1 of the ,holy ,scripture2 the careless cold ,christian was safe1 and the skilful hypocrite a saint4 ,but this is a story so well known1 as ,i need not insist upon it any longer1 but proceed to the heretics here in ,england1 and what punishments were ordained for them by acts of parliament4 ,all this while the penal laws against heretics were such1 as the several princes and states1 in their own dominions1 thought fit to enact4 ,the edicts of the emperors made their punishments capital1 but for the manner of the execution1 left it to the prefects of provinces3 and when other kings and states intended1 according to the laws of the ,roman church1 to extirpate heretics1 they ordained such punishment as they pleased4 ,the first law that was here made for the punishment of heretics1 called ,lollards and mentioned in the ,statutes1 was in the fifth year of the reign of ,richard the ,second1 occasioned by the doctrine of ,john ,wickliff and his followers2 which ,wickliff1 because no law was yet ordained for his punishment in parliament1 by the favour of ,john of ,gaunt1 the ,king's son1 during the reign of ,edward the ,third1 had escaped4 ,but in the fifth year of the next king1 which was ,richard the ,second1 there passed an act of parliament to this effect3 that sheriffs and some others should have commissions to apprehend such as were certified by the prelates to be preachers of heresy1 their fautors1 maintainers1 and abettors1 and to hold them in strong prison1 till they should justify themselves1 according to the law of holy church4 ,so that hitherto there was no law in ,england1 by which a heretic could be put to death1 or otherways punished1 than by imprisoning him till he was reconciled to the church4 ,after this1 in the next king's reign1 which was ,henry the ,fourth1 son of ,john of ,gaunt1 by whom ,wickliff had been favoured1 and who in his aspiring to the crown had needed the good will of the bishops1 was made a law1 in the second year of his reign1 wherein it was enacted1 that every ordinary may convene before him1 and imprison any person suspected of heresy2 and that an obstinate heretic shall be burnt before the people4 ,in the next king's reign1 which was ,henry the ,fifth1 in his second year1 was made an act of parliament1 wherein it is declared1 that the intent of heretics1 called ,lollards1 was to subvert the ,christian faith1 the law of ,god1 the church1 and the realm3 and that an heretic convict should forfeit all his fee-simple lands1 goods1 and chattels1 besides the punishment of burning4 ,again1 in the five-and-twentieth year of ,king ,henry the ,eighth1 it was enacted1 that an heretic convict shall abjure his heresies1 and refusing so to do1 or relapsing1 shall be burnt in open place1 for example of others4 ,this act was made after the putting down of the ,pope's authority3 and by this it appears1 that ,king ,henry the ,eighth intended no farther alteration in religion1 than the recovering of his own right ecclesiastical4 ,but in the first year of his son1 ,king ,edward the ,sixth1 was made an act1 by which were repealed not only this act1 but also all former acts concerning doctrines1 or matters of religion2 so that at this time there was no law at all for the punishment of heretics4 ,again1 in the ,parliament of the first and second year of ,queen ,mary1 this act of #a ,edward ,,vi was not repealed1 but made useless1 by reviving the statute of #be ,henry ,,viii1 and freely putting it in execution2 insomuch as it was debated1 whether or no they should proceed upon that statute against the ,lady ,elizabeth1 the ,queen's sister4 ,the ,lady ,elizabeth1 not long after1 by the death of ,queen ,mary1 coming to the crown1 in the fifth year of her reign1 by act of ,parliament repealed in the first place all the laws ecclesiastical of ,queen ,mary1 with all other former laws concerning the punishments of heretics3 nor did she enact any other punishments in their place4 ,in the second place it was enacted1 that the ,queen by her letters patents should give a commission to the bishops1 with certain other persons1 in her ,majesty's name1 to execute the power ecclesiastical2 in which commission1 the commissioners were forbidden to adjudge anything to be heresy1 which was not declared to be heresy by some of the first four general ,councils3 but there was no mention made of general ,councils1 but only in that branch of the act which authorised that commission1 commonly called the ,high ,commission2 nor was there in that commission anything concerning how heretics were to be punished2 but it was granted to them1 that they might declare or not declare1 as they pleased1 to be heresy or not heresy1 any of those doctrines which had been condemned for heresy in the first four general ,councils4 ,so that during the time that the said ,high ,commission was in being1 there was no statute by which a heretic could be punished otherways1 than by the ordinary censures of the church2 nor doctrine accounted heresy1 unless the commissioners had actually declared and published1 that all that which was made heresy by those four ,councils1 should be heresy also now3 but ,i never heard that any such declaration was made either by proclamation1 or by recording it in churches1 or by public printing1 as in penal laws is necessary2 the breaches of it are excused by ignorance4 ,besides1 if heresy had been made capital1 or otherwise civilly punishable1 either the four general ,councils themselves1 or at least the points condemned in them1 ought to have been printed or put into parish churches in ,english1 because without it1 no man could know how to beware of offending against them4 ,some men may perhaps ask1 whether nobody were condemned and burnt for heresy1 during the time of the ,high ,commission4 ,i have heard there were3 but they which approve such executions1 may peradventure know better grounds for them than ,i do2 but those grounds are very well worthy to be enquired after4 ,lastly1 in the seventeenth year of the reign of ,king ,charles the ,first1 shortly after that the ,scots had rebelliously put down the episcopal government in ,scotland1 the ,presbyterians in ,england endeavoured the same here4 ,the king1 though he saw the rebels ready to take the field1 would not condescend to that2 but yet in hope to appease them1 was content to pass an act of parliament for the abolishing the ,high ,commission4 ,but though the ,high ,commission was taken away1 yet the parliament having other ends besides the setting up of the ,presbyterate1 pursued the rebellion1 and put down both episcopacy and monarchy1 erecting a power by them called ,the ,commonwealth1 by others ,the ,rump1 which men obeyed not out of duty1 but for fear2 nor were there any human laws left in force to restrain any man from preaching or writing any doctrine concerning religion that he pleased4 ,and in this heat of the war1 it was impossible to disturb the peace of the state1 which then was none4 ,and in this time it was1 that a book called ,leviathan was written in defence of the ,king's power1 temporal and spiritual1 without any word against episcopacy1 or against any bishop1 or against the public doctrine of the church4 ,it pleased ,god1 about twelve years after the usurpation of this ,rump1 to restore his most gracious ,majesty that now is1 to his father's throne1 and presently1 his ,majesty restored the bishops1 and pardoned the ,presbyterians4 ,but then both the one and the other accused in ,parliament this book of heresy1 when neither the bishops before the war had declared what was heresy2 when if they had1 it had been made void by the putting down of the ,high ,commission at the importunity of the ,presbyterians4 ,so fierce are men1 for the most part1 in dispute1 where either their learning or power is debated1 that they never think of the laws1 but as soon as they are offended1 they cry out1 crucifige2 forgetting what ,st4 ,paul 7#b ,tim4 ii4 #bd1 #be7 saith1 even in case of obstinate holding of an error3 the servant of the ,lord must not strive1 but be gentle unto all men1 apt to teach1 patient1 in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves2 if ,god peradventure will give them repentance1 to the acknowledging of the truth3 of which counsel1 such fierceness as hath appeared in the disputation of divines1 down from before the ,council of ,nice to this present time1 is a violation4 ,,finis4 ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ,,considerations ,,upon ,,the ,,reputation1 ,,loyalty1 ,,manners1 ,,and ,,religion1 ,,of ,,thomas ,,hobbes1 ,,of ,,malmesbury1 ,,written ,,by ,,himself1 ,,by ,,way ,,of ,,letter ,,to ,a ,,learned ,,person 7,,john ,,wallis1 ,d4,d47 ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ,,the ,,bookseller',s ,,advertisement4 ,,to ,,the ,,readers4 ------- ,i do here present you with a piece of ,mr4 ,hobbes's writing2 which is not published from an imperfect ,,ms4 as his ,dialogue of the ,civil ,wars of ,england was1 by some that had got accidentally a copy of it1 absolutely against his consent1 as you may see by some passages out of some of his letters to me1 which ,i have here inserted4 ,in his letter of ,june1 #afgi1 he saith3 8,i would fain have published my ,dialogue of the ,civil ,wars of ,england1 long ago2 and to that end ,i presented it to his ,majesty3 and some days after1 when ,i thought he had read it1 ,i humbly besought him to let me print it2 but his ,majesty1 though he heard me graciously1 yet he flatly refused to have it published4 ,therefore ,i brought away the book1 and gave you leave to take a copy of it2 which when you had done1 ,i gave the original to an honourable and learned friend1 who about a year after died4 ,the ,king knows better1 and is more concerned in publishing of books than ,i am3 therefore ,i dare not venture to appear in the business1 lest it should offend him4 ,therefore ,i pray you not to meddle in the business4 ,rather than to be thought any way to further or countenance the printing1 ,i would be content to lose twenty times the value of what you can expect to get1 c4 ,i pray do not take it ill2 it may be ,i may live to send you somewhat else as vendible as that3 and without offence1 ,i rest ,your very humble servant1 ,,thomas ,,hobbes40 ,chatsworth1 ,june #ai1 #afgi4 7,part of his letter in ,july1 #afgi47 8,if ,i leave any ,,mss4 worth printing1 ,i will leave word you shall have them1 if you please4 ,i am ,your humble servant1 ,,thomas ,,hobbes40 ,chatsworth1 ,july #ba1 #afgi4 7,part of his letter1 ,august1 #afgi47 8,sir1--,i thank you for taking my advice in not stirring about the printing of my book concerning the civil wars of ,england1 c4 ,i am writing somewhat for you to print in ,english1 c4 ,i am1 ,sir1 ,your humble servant1 ,,thomas ,,hobbes40 ,chatsworth1 ,aug4 #ah1 #afgi4 ,that no spurious brats1 for the time to come1 be fathered upon the deceased author1 ,i have printed1 verbatim1 these passages out of his letters written to me at several times2 their original ,i have by me4 ,i will be so just to his memory1 that ,i will not print anything but what is perfect1 and fitted for the press4 ,and if any book shall be printed with his name to it1 that hath not before been printed1 you may be confident it is not his1 unless printed for ,,william ,,crooke4 ,,considerations ,,upon ,,the ,,reputation1 c4 ,,of ,,thomas ,,hobbes4 ------- ,,sir1 ,i am one of them that admire your writings2 and having read over your ,hobbius ,heauton-timorumenos1 ,i cannot hold from giving you some account of the causes why ,i admire it4 ,and first ,i considered how you handle him for his disloyalty1 in these words 7page #e73 ,his great ,leviathan1 wherein he placed his main strength1 is now somewhat out of season2 which1 upon deserting his royal master in distress1 7for he pretends to have been the ,king's tutor1 though yet1 from those who have most reason to know it1 ,i can find but little ground for such a pretence71 was written in defence of ,oliver's title1 or whoever1 by whatsoever means1 can get to be upmost2 placing the whole right of government merely in strength1 and absolving all his ,majesty's subjects from their allegiance1 whenever he is not in a present capacity to force obedience4 ,that which ,i observe and admire here1 first1 is1 that you left not this passage out1 for two reasons2 one1 because ,mr4 ,hobbes could long for nothing more than such an occasion to tell the world his own and your little stories1 during the time of the late rebellion4 ,when the ,parliament sat1 that began in ,april #afdj1 and was dissolved in ,may following1 and in which many points of the regal power1 which were necessary for the peace of the kingdom1 and the safety of his ,majesty's person1 were disputed and denied1 ,mr4 ,hobbes wrote a little treatise in ,english1 wherein he did set forth and demonstrate1 that the said power and rights were inseparably annexed to the sovereignty2 which sovereignty they did not then deny to be in the ,king2 but it seems understood not1 or would not understand that inseparability4 ,of this treatise1 though not printed1 many gentlemen had copies1 which occasioned much talk of the author2 and had not his ,majesty dissolved the ,parliament1 it had brought him into danger of his life4 ,he was the first that had ventured to write in the ,king's defence2 and one1 amongst very few1 that upon no other ground but knowledge of his duty and principles of equity1 without special interest1 was in all points perfectly loyal4 ,the third of ,november following1 there began a new ,parliament1 consisting for the greatest part of such men as the people had elected only for their averseness to the ,king's interest4 ,these proceeded so fiercely in the very beginning1 against those that had written or preached in the defence of any part of that power1 which they also intended to take away1 and in gracing those whom the ,king had disgraced for sedition1 that ,mr4 ,hobbes1 doubting how they would use him1 went over into ,france1 the first of all that fled1 and there continued eleven years1 to his damage some thousands of pounds deep4 ,this1 ,doctor1 was your time of harvest3 you were in their favour1 and that1 as you have made it since appear1 for no goodness4 ,being at ,paris1 he wrote and published his book ,de ,cive1 in ,latin1 to the end that all nations which should hear what you and your ,con-,covenanters were doing in ,england1 might detest you1 which ,i believe they do2 for ,i know no book more magnified than this is beyond the seas4 ,when his ,majesty1 that now is1 came to ,paris1 ,mr4 ,hobbes had the honour to initiate him in the mathematics2 but never was so impudent or ignorant as to call1 or to think himself the ,king's tutor1 as you1 that understand not what that word1 out of the ,university1 signifies1 do falsely charge him with2 or ever to say1 that he was one of his ,majesty's domestic servants4 ,while upon this occasion he staid about ,paris1 and had neither encouragement nor desire to return into ,england1 he wrote and published his ,leviathan1 far from the intention either of disadvantage to his ,majesty1 or to flatter ,oliver1 who was not made ,protector till three or four years after1 on purpose to make way for his return4 ,for there is scarce a page in it that does not upbraid both him1 and you1 and others such as you1 with your abominable hypocrisy and villainy4 ,nor did he desert his ,majesty1 as you falsely accuse him1 as his ,majesty himself knows4 ,nor was his ,majesty1 as you unmannerly term it1 in distress4 ,he had the title1 right1 and reverence of a ,king1 and maintained his faithful servants with him4 ,it is true that ,mr4 ,hobbes came home1 but it was because he would not trust his safety with the ,french clergy4 ,do you know that ever he sought any benefit either from ,oliver1 or from any of his party1 or was any way familiar with any of his ministers1 before or after his return2 or curried favour with any of them1 as you did by dedicating a book to his vice-chancellor1 ,owen8 ,did you ever hear that he took anything done to him by his ,majesty in evil part1 or spake of him otherwise than the best of his servants would do2 or that he was sullen1 silent1 or sparing1 in praising his ,majesty in any company1 upon any occasion8 ,he knew who were his enemies1 and upon what ground they misconstrued his writings4 ,but your indiscretion appears more manifestly in giving him occasion to repeat what you have done1 and to consider you1 as you professedly have considered him4 ,for with what equity can it be denied him to repeat your manifest and horrible crimes1 for all you have been pardoned2 when you publish falsely pretended faults of his1 and comprehended in the same pardon8 ,if he should say and publish1 that you deciphered the letters of the ,king and his party1 and thereby delivered his ,majesty's secrets to the enemy1 and his best friends to the scaffold1 and boasted of it in your book of arithmetic1 written in ,latin1 to all the world1 as of a monument of your wit1 worthy to be preserved in the ,university ,library3 how will you justify yourself1 if you be reproached for having been a rebel and a traitor8 ,it may be you1 or some for you1 will now say1 you deciphered those letters to the ,king's advantage3 but then you were unfaithful to your masters of the ,parliament3 a very honest pretence1 and full of gallantry1 to excuse treason with treachery1 and to be a double spy4 ,besides1 who will believe it8 ,who enabled you to do the ,king that favour8 ,why herded you with his enemies8 ,who brought the ,king into a need of such a fellow's favour1 but they that first deserted him1 and then made war upon him1 and which were your friends and ,mr4 ,hobbes his enemies8 ,nay more1 ,i know not one enemy ,mr4 ,hobbes then had1 but such as were first the ,king's enemies1 and1 because the ,king's1 therefore his4 ,your being of that party1 without your deciphering1 amounts to no more than a desertion4 ,of the bishops that then were1 and for whose sakes1 in part1 you raised the war1 there was not one that followed the ,king out of the land1 though they loved him1 but lived quietly under the protection1 first of the ,parliament1 and then of ,oliver1 7whose titles and actions were equally unjust7 without treachery4 ,is not this as bad as if they had gone over1 and 7which was ,mr4 ,hobbes his case7 been driven back again8 ,i hope you will not call them all deserters1 or1 because by their stay here openly they accepted of the ,parliament's and of ,oliver's protection1 defenders either of ,oliver's or of the ,parliament's title to the sovereign power4 ,how many were there in that ,parliament at first that did indeed and voluntarily desert the ,king1 in consenting to many of their unjust actions8 ,many of these afterwards1 either upon better judgment1 or because they pleased not the faction1 7for it was a hard matter for such as were not of ,pym's cabal to please the ,parliament71 or for some other private ends deserted the ,parliament1 and did some of them more hurt to the ,king than if they had stayed where they were2 for they had been so affrighted by such as you1 with a panic fear of tyranny1 that seeking to help him by way of composition and sharing1 they abated the just and necessary indignation of his armies1 by which only his right was to be recovered4 ,that very entering into the ,covenant with the ,scottish nation against the ,king1 is by itself a very great crime1 and you guilty of it4 ,and so was the imposing of the ,engagement1 and you guilty of that also1 as being done by the then ,parliament1 whose democratical principles you approved of4 ,you were also assisting to the ,assembly of ,divines that made the ,directory1 and which were afterwards put down by ,oliver for counterfeiting themselves ambassadors4 ,and this was when the ,king was living1 and at the head of an army1 which with your own endeavour might have protected you4 ,what crime it is1 the ,king being head of the ,church of ,england1 to make ,directories1 to alter the ,church-government1 and to set up new forms of ,god's service1 upon your own fancies1 without the ,king's authority1 the lawyers could have told you2 and what punishment you were to expect from it1 you might have seen in the statute printed before the ,book of ,common ,prayer4 ,further he may say1 and truly1 that you were guilty of all the treasons1 murders1 and spoil committed by ,oliver1 or by any upon ,oliver's or the ,parliament's authority3 for1 during the late trouble1 who made both ,oliver and the people mad1 but the preachers of your principles8 ,but besides the wickedness1 see the folly of it4 ,you thought to make them mad1 but just to such a degree as should serve your own turn2 that is to say1 mad1 and yet just as wise as yourselves4 ,were you not very imprudent to think to govern madness8 ,paul they knew1 but who were you8 ,you were they1 that put the army into ,oliver's hands1 who before1 as mad as he was1 was too weak1 and too obscure to do any great mischief2 with which army he executed upon such as you1 both here and in ,scotland1 that which the justice of ,god required4 ,therefore of all the crimes1 the great one not excepted1 done in that rebellion1 you were guilty2 you1 ,i say1 ,doctor1 how little force or wit soever you contributed1 for your good-will to their cause4 ,the ,king was hunted as a partridge in the mountains2 and though the hounds have been hanged1 yet the hunters were as guilty as they1 and deserved no less punishment4 ,and the decipherers1 and all that blew the horn1 are to be reckoned amongst the hunters4 ,perhaps you would not have had the prey killed1 but rather have kept it tame4 ,and yet who can tell8 ,i have read of few kings deprived of their power by their own subjects1 that have lived any long time after it1 for reasons that every man is able to conjecture4 ,all this is so manifest1 as it needs no witnesses4 ,in the meantime ,mr4 ,hobbes his behaviour was such1 that of them who appeared in that scene1 he was the only man ,i know1 except a few that had the same principles with him1 that has not something more or less to blush for2 as having either assisted that rebellious ,parliament1 without necessity 7when they might have had protection from the ,king1 if they had resorted to him for it in the field71 by covenanting1 or by action1 or with money or plate1 or by voting against his ,majesty's interest1 in himself or his friends2 though some of them have since by extraordinary service deserved to be received into favour2 but what is that to you8 ,you are none of them2 and yet you dare to reproach the guiltless1 as if after so ill fruits of your sermons1 it were not impudence enough to preach4 ,i admire further1 that having been forgiven these so transcendant crimes1 so great a debt to the gallows1 you take ,mr4 ,hobbes by the throat for a word in his ,leviathan1 made a fault by malicious or over-hasty construction3 for you have thereby1 like the unmerciful debtor in the ,gospel1 in my opinion1 forfeited your pardon1 and so1 without a new one1 may be hanged yet4 ,to that other charge1 that he writ his ,leviathan in defence of ,oliver's title1 he will say1 that you in your own conscience know it is false4 ,what was ,oliver1 when that book came forth8 ,it was in #afej1 and ,mr4 ,hobbes returned before #afea4 ,oliver was then but ,general under your masters of the ,parliament1 nor had yet cheated them of their usurped power4 ,for that was not done till two or three years after1 in #afec1 which neither he nor you could foresee4 ,what title then of ,oliver's could he pretend to justify8 ,but you will say1 he placed the right of government there1 wheresoever should be the strength2 and so by consequence he placed it in ,oliver4 ,is that all8 ,then primarily his ,leviathan was intended for your masters of the ,parliament1 because the strength was then in them4 ,why did they not thank him for it1 both they and ,oliver in their turns8 ,there1 ,doctor1 you deciphered ill4 ,for it was written in the behalf of those many and faithful servants and subjects of his ,majesty1 that had taken his part in the war1 or otherwise done their utmost endeavour to defend his ,majesty's right and person against the rebels3 whereby1 having no other means of protection1 nor1 for the most part1 of subsistence1 they were forced to compound with your masters1 and to promise obedience for the saving of their lives and fortunes2 which in his book he hath affirmed they might lawfully do1 and consequently not lawfully bear arms against the victors4 ,they that had done their utmost endeavour to perform their obligation to the ,king1 had done all that they could be obliged unto2 and were consequently at liberty to seek the safety of their lives and livelihood wheresoever1 and without treachery4 ,but there is nothing in that book to justify the submission of you1 or such as you1 to the ,parliament1 after the ,king's being driven from them1 or to ,oliver2 for you were the ,king's enemies1 and cannot pretend want of that protection which you yourselves refused1 denied1 fought against1 and destroyed4 ,if a man owe you money1 and you by robbing him1 or other injury1 disable him to pay you1 the fault is your own2 nor needs this exception1 unless the creditor rob him1 be put into the condition of the bond4 ,protection and obedience are relative4 ,he that says a man may submit to an enemy for want of protection1 can never be construed1 but that he meant it of the obedient4 ,but let us consider his words1 when he puts for a law of nature1 7vol4 iii4 p4 #gjc7 that every man is bound1 as much as in him lieth1 to protect in war the authority by which he is himself protected in time of peace2 which ,i think is no ungodly or unreasonable principle4 ,for confirmation of it1 he defines in what point of time it is1 that a subject becomes obliged to obey an unjust conqueror2 and defines it thus3 it is that point wherein having liberty to submit to the conqueror1 he consenteth either by express words1 or by other sufficient signs1 to be his subject4 ,i cannot see1 ,doctor1 how a man can be at liberty to submit to his new1 that has not first done all he could for his old master3 nor if he have done all he could1 why that liberty should be refused him4 ,if a man be taken by the ,turk1 and brought by terror to fight against his former master1 ,i see how he may be killed for it as an enemy1 but not as a criminal2 nor can ,i see how he that hath liberty to submit1 can at the same time be bound not to submit4 ,but you will say1 perhaps1 that he defines the time of that liberty to the advantage of ,oliver1 in that he says1 that for an ordinary subject1 it is then1 when the means of his life are within the guards and garrisons of the enemy2 for it is then1 that he hath no protection but from the enemy for his contribution4 ,it was not necessary for him to explain it to men of so great understanding1 as you and other his enemies pretend to be1 by putting in the exception1 unless they came into those guards and garrisons by their own treason4 ,do you think that ,oliver's party1 for their submission to ,oliver1 could pretend the want of that protection8 ,the words therefore by themselves1 without that exception1 do signify no more than this2 that whosoever had done as much as in him did lie1 to protect the ,king in war1 had liberty afterwards to provide themselves of such protection as they could get2 which to those whose means of life were within the guards and garrisons of ,oliver1 was ,oliver's protection4 ,do you think1 when a battle is lost1 and you at the mercy of an enemy1 it is unlawful to receive quarter with condition of obedience8 ,or if you receive it on that condition1 do you think it honesty to break promise1 and treacherously murder him that gave you your life8 ,if that were good doctrine1 he were a foolish enemy that would give quarter to any man4 ,you see1 then1 that this submission to ,oliver1 or to your then masters1 is allowed by ,mr4 ,hobbes his doctrine only to the ,king's faithful party1 and not to any that fought against him1 howsoever they coloured it1 by saying they fought for the ,king and ,parliament2 nor to any that writ or preached against his cause1 or encouraged his adversaries2 nor to any that betrayed his counsels1 or that intercepted or deciphered any letters of his1 or of his officers1 or of any of his party2 nor to any that by any way had contributed to the diminution of his ,majesty's power1 ecclesiastical or civil2 nor does it absolve any of them from their allegiance4 ,you that make it so heinous a crime for a man to save himself from violent death1 by a forced submission to a usurper1 should have considered what crime it was to submit voluntarily to the usurping ,parliament4 ,i can tell you besides1 why those words were put into his last chapter1 which he calls the review4 ,it happened at that time that there were many honourable persons1 that having been faithful and unblemished servants to the ,king1 and soldiers in his army1 had their estates then sequestered2 of whom some were fled1 but the fortunes of them all were at the mercy1 not of ,oliver1 but of the ,parliament4 ,some of these were admitted to composition1 some not4 ,they that compounded1 though they helped the ,parliament less by their composition1 than they should have done1 if they had stood out1 by their confiscation1 yet they were ill-spoken of1 especially by those that had no estates to lose1 nor hope to compound4 ,and it was for this that he added to what he had written before1 this caution1 that if they would compound1 they were to do it bona fide1 without intention of treachery4 ,wherein he justified their submission by their former obedience1 and present necessity2 but condemned treachery4 ,whereas you that pretend to abhor atheism1 condemn that which was done upon necessity1 and justify the treachery3 and you had reason for it1 that cannot otherwise justify yourselves4 ,those strugglings which happened afterwards1 lost his ,majesty many a good and able subject1 and strengthened ,oliver with the confiscation of their estates2 which if they had attended the discord of their enemies1 might have been saved4 ,perhaps you will take for a sign of ,mr4 ,hobbes his ill meaning1 that his ,majesty was displeased with him4 ,and truly ,i believe he was displeased for a while1 but not very long4 ,they that complained of1 and misconstrued his writings1 were his ,majesty's good subjects1 and reputed wise and learned men1 and thereby obtained to have their misconstruction believed for some little time3 but the very next summer after his coming away1 two honourable persons of the ,court1 that came over into ,england1 assured him1 that his ,majesty had a good opinion of him2 and others since have told me1 that his ,majesty said openly1 that he thought ,mr4 ,hobbes never meant him hurt4 ,besides1 his ,majesty hath used him more graciously than is ordinary to so humble a person as he is1 and so great a delinquent as you would make him2 and testified his esteem of him in his bounty4 ,what argument now can you draw from hence more than this1 that his ,majesty understood his writings better than his accusers did8 ,i admire in the next place1 upon what ground you accuse him1 and with him all those that have approved his ,leviathan1 with atheism4 ,i thought once1 that that slander had had some1 though not firm1 ground1 in that you call his a new divinity3 but for that point he will allege these words of his ,leviathan 7p4 #dch73 ,by which it seemeth to me 7with submission nevertheless1 both in this and all other questions whereof the determination dependeth on the ,scriptures1 to the interpretation of the ,bible authorized by the commonwealth1 whose subject ,i am71 that1 c4 ,what is there in these words1 but modesty and obedience8 ,but you were at this time in actual rebellion4 ,mr4 ,hobbes1 that holds religion to be a law1 did in order thereto condemn the maintenance of any of his opinions against the law2 and you that reproach him for them1 upon your own account should also have shown by your own learning1 wherein the ,scripture1 which was his sole proof1 was miscited or misconstrued by him2 7for he submitted to the laws1 that is to say1 to the ,king's doctrine1 not to yours72 and not have insulted for the victory won by the power of the law1 to which you were then an enemy4 ,another argument of atheism you take from his denying immaterial or incorporeal substances4 ,let any man impartially now compare his religion with yours1 by this very measure1 and judge which of the two savours most of atheism4 ,it is by all ,christians confessed1 that ,god is incomprehensible2 that is to say1 that there is nothing can arise in our fancy from the naming of him1 to resemble him either in shape1 colour1 stature1 or nature2 there is no idea of him2 he is like nothing that we can think on4 ,what then ought we to say of him8 ,what attributes are to be given him 7not speaking otherwise than we think1 nor otherwise than is fit17 by those who mean to honour him8 ,none but such as ,mr4 ,hobbes hath set down1 namely1 expressions of reverence1 such as are in use amongst men for signs of honour1 and consequently signify goodness1 greatness1 and happiness2 and either absolutely put1 as good1 holy1 mighty1 blessed1 just1 wise1 merciful1 c41 or superlative1 as most good1 most great1 most mighty1 almighty1 most holy1 c41 or negative of whatsoever is not perfect1 as infinite1 eternal1 and the like3 and not such as neither reason nor ,scripture hath approved for honourable4 ,this is the doctrine that ,mr4 ,hobbes hath written1 both in his ,leviathan1 and in his book ,de ,cive1 and when occasion serves1 maintains4 ,what kind of attribute1 ,i pray you1 is1 immaterial1 or incorporeal substance8 ,where do you find it in the ,scripture8 ,whence came it hither1 but from ,plato and ,aristotle1 heathens1 who mistook those thin inhabitants of the brain they see in sleep1 for so many incorporeal men2 and yet allowed them motion1 which is proper only to things corporeal8 ,do you think it an honour to ,god to be one of these8 ,and would you learn ,christianity from ,plato and ,aristotle8 ,but seeing there is no such word in the ,scripture1 how will you warrant it from natural reason8 ,neither ,plato nor ,aristotle did ever write of1 or mention1 an incorporeal spirit4 ,for they could not conceive how a spirit1 which in their language was 1 in ours a wind1 could be incorporeal4 ,do you understand the connexion of substance and incorporeal8 ,if you do1 explain it in ,english2 for the words are ,latin4 ,it is something1 you will say1 that being without body1 stands under----4 ,stands under what8 ,will you say1 under accidents8 ,almost all the ,fathers of the ,church will be against you2 and then you are an atheist4 ,is not ,mr4 ,hobbes his way of attributing to ,god1 that only which the ,scriptures attribute to him1 or what is never any where taken but for honour1 much better than this bold undertaking of yours1 to consider and decipher ,god's nature to us8 ,for a third argument of atheism1 you put1 that he says3 besides the creation of the world1 there is no argument to prove a ,deity3 and1 that it cannot be evinced by any argument that the world had a beginning2 and1 that whether it had or no1 is to be decided not by argument1 but by the magistrate's authority4 ,that it may be decided by the ,scriptures1 he never denied2 therefore in that also you slander him4 ,and as for arguments from natural reason1 neither you1 nor any other1 have hitherto brought any1 except the creation1 that has not made it more doubtful to many men than it was before4 ,that which he hath written concerning such arguments1 in his book ,de ,corpore3 opinions1 saith he 7vol4 ,i4 p4 #dab71 concerning the nature of infinite and eternal1 as the chiefest of the fruits of wisdom1 ,god hath reserved to himself1 and made judges of them those men whose ministry he meant to use in the ordering of religion2 and therefore ,i cannot praise those men that brag of demonstration of the beginning of the world from natural reason3 and again 7vol4 ,i4 p4 #dad71 wherefore ,i pass by those questions of infinite and eternal1 contenting myself with such doctrine concerning the beginning and magnitude of the world1 as ,i have learned from the ,scripture1 confirmed by miracles1 and from the use of my country1 and from the reverence ,i owe to the law4 ,this1 ,doctor1 is not ill said1 and yet it is all you ground your slander on1 which you make to sneak vilely under a crooked paraphrase4 ,these opinions1 ,i said1 were to be judged by those to whom ,god has committed the ordering of religion2 that is1 to the supreme governors of the church1 that is1 in ,england1 to the ,king3 by his authority1 ,i say1 it ought to be decided1 not what men shall think1 but what they shall say in those questions4 ,and methinks you should not dare to deny it2 for it is a manifest relapse into your former crimes4 ,but why do you style the ,king by the name of magistrate8 ,do you find magistrate to signify any where the person that hath the sovereign power1 or not every where the sovereign's officers4 ,and ,i think you knew that2 but you and your fellows 7your fellows ,i call all those that are so besmeared all over with the filth of the same crime1 as not to be distinguished7 meant to make your ,assembly the sovereign1 and the ,king your magistrate4 ,i pray ,god you do not mean so still1 if opportunity be presented4 ,there has hitherto appeared in ,mr4 ,hobbes his doctrine1 no sign of atheism2 and whatsoever can be inferred from the denying of incorporeal substances1 makes ,tertullian1 one of the ancientest of the ,fathers1 and most of the doctors of the ,greek ,church1 as much atheists as he4 ,for ,tertullian1 in his treatise ,de ,carne ,christi1 says plainly3 omne quod est1 corpus est sui generis4 ,nihil est incorporale1 nisi quod non est3 that is to say1 whatsoever is anything1 is a body of its kind4 ,nothing is incorporeal1 but that which has no being4 ,there are many other places in him to the same purpose3 for that doctrine served his turn to confute the heresy of them that held that ,christ had no body1 but was a ghost2 also of the soul he speaks1 as of an invisible body4 ,and there is an epitome of the doctrine of the ,eastern ,church1 wherein is this1 that they thought angels and souls were corporeal1 and only called incorporeal1 because their bodies were not like ours4 ,and ,i have heard that a ,patriarch of ,constantinople1 in a ,council held there1 did argue for the lawfulness of painting angels1 from this1 that they were corporeal4 ,you see what fellows in atheism you join with ,mr4 ,hobbes4 ,how unfeigned your own religion is1 may be argued strongly1 demonstratively1 from your behaviour1 that ,i have already recited4 ,do you think1 you that have committed so abominable sins1 not through infirmity1 or sudden transport of passion1 but premeditately1 wilfully1 for twenty years together1 that any rational man can think you believe yourselves1 when you preach of heaven and hell1 or that you do not believe one another to be cheats and impostors1 and laugh at silly people in your sleeves for believing you2 or that you applaud not your own wit for it2 though for my part ,i could never conceive that very much wit was requisite for the making of a knave8 ,and in the pulpit most of you have been a scandal to ,christianity1 by preaching up sedition1 and crying down moral virtue4 ,you should have preached against unjust ambition1 covetousness1 gluttony1 malice1 disobedience to government1 fraud1 and hypocrisy3 but for the most part you preached your own controversies1 about who should be uppermost1 or other fruitless and unedifying doctrines4 ,when did any of you preach against hypocrisy8 ,you dare not in the pulpit1 ,i think1 so much as name it1 lest you set the church a laughing3 and you in particular1 when you said in a sermon1 that was not in ,homer4 ,what edification could the people have from that1 though it had been true1 as it is false8 ,for it is in his ,iliad1 ,,xv4 #dab4 ,another ,i heard make half his sermon of this doctrine1 that ,god never sent a great deliverance1 but in a great danger3 which is indeed true1 because the greatness of the danger makes the greatness of the deliverance1 but for the same cause ridiculous2 and the other half he took to construe the ,greek of his text3 and yet such sermons are much applauded4 ,but why8 ,first1 because they make not the people ashamed of any vice4 ,secondly1 because they like the preacher1 for using to find fault with the government or governors4 ,thirdly1 for their vehemence1 which they mistake for zeal4 ,fourthly1 for their zeal to their own ends1 which they mistake for zeal to ,god's worship4 ,i have heard besides divers sermons made by fanatics1 young men1 and whom1 by that and their habit1 ,i imagined to be apprentices2 and found little difference between their sermons1 and the sermons of such as you1 either in respect of wisdom1 or eloquence1 or vehemence1 or applause of common people4 ,therefore1 ,i wonder how you can pretend1 as you do in your petition for a dispensation from the ceremonies of the ,church1 to be either better preachers than those that conform1 or to have tenderer consciences than other men4 ,you that have covered such black designs with the sacred words of ,scripture1 why can you not as well find in your hearts to cover a black gown with a white surplice8 ,or what idolatry do you find in making the sign of the cross1 when the law commands it8 ,though ,i think you may conform without sin1 yet ,i think you might have been also dispensed with without sin1 if you had dispensed in like manner with other ministers that subscribed to the articles of the ,church4 ,and if tenderness of conscience be a good plea1 you must give ,mr4 ,hobbes also leave to plead tenderness of conscience to his new ,divinity1 as well as you4 ,i should wonder also1 how any of you should dare to speak to a multitude met together1 without being limited by his ,majesty what they shall say1 especially now that we have felt the smart of it1 but that it is a relic of the ecclesiastical policy of the ,popes1 that found it necessary for the disjoining of the people from their too close adherence to their ,kings or other civil governors4 ,but it may be you will say1 that the rest of the clergy1 bishops1 and episcopal men1 no friends of yours1 and against whose office ,mr4 ,hobbes never writ anything1 speak no better of his religion than you do4 ,it is true1 he never wrote against episcopacy2 and it is his private opinion1 that such an episcopacy as is now in ,england1 is the most commodious that a ,christian ,king can use for the governing of ,christ's flock2 the misgoverning whereof the ,king is to answer for to ,christ1 as the bishops are to answer for their misgovernment to the ,king1 and to ,god also4 ,nor ever spake he ill of any of them1 as to their persons3 therefore ,i should wonder the more at the uncharitable censure of some of them1 but that ,i see a relic still remaining of the venom of popish ambition1 lurking in that seditious distinction and division between the power spiritual and civil2 which they that are in love with a power to hurt all those that stand in competition with them for learning1 as the ,roman clergy had to hurt ,galileo1 do not willingly forsake4 ,all bishops are not in every point like one another4 ,some1 it may be1 are content to hold their authority from the ,king's letters patents2 and these have no cause to be angry with ,mr4 ,hobbes4 ,others will needs have somewhat more1 they know not what1 of divine right1 to govern by virtue of imposition of hands1 and consecration1 not acknowledging their power from the ,king1 but immediately from ,christ4 ,and these perhaps are they that are displeased with him1 which he cannot help1 nor has deserved2 but will for all that believe the ,king only1 and without sharers1 to be the head of all the ,churches within his own dominions2 and that he may dispense with ceremonies1 or with anything else that is not against the ,scriptures1 nor against natural equity2 and that the consent of the ,lords and ,commons cannot now give him that power1 but declare1 for the people1 their advice and consent to it4 ,nor can he be made believe that the safety of a state depends upon the safety of the ,church1 ,i mean of the clergy4 ,for neither is a clergy essential to a commonwealth2 and those ministers that preached sedition1 pretend to be of the clergy1 as well as the best4 ,he believes rather that the safety of the ,church depends on the safety of the ,king1 and the entireness of the sovereign power2 and that the ,king is no part of the flock of any minister or bishop1 no more than the shepherd is of his sheep1 but of ,christ only2 and all the clergy1 as well as the people1 the ,king's flock4 ,nor can that clamour of his adversaries make ,mr4 ,hobbes think himself a worse ,christian than the best of them4 ,and how will you disprove it1 either by his disobedience1 to the laws civil or ecclesiastical1 or by any ugly action8 ,or how will you prove that the obedience1 which springs from scorn of injustice1 is less acceptable to ,god1 than that which proceeds from fear of punishment1 or hope of benefit4 ,gravity and heaviness of countenance are not so good marks of assurance of ,god's favour1 as cheerful1 charitable1 and upright behaviour towards men1 which are better signs of religion than the zealous maintaining of controverted doctrines4 ,and therefore ,i am verily persuaded1 it was not his ,divinity that displeased you or them1 but somewhat else1 which you are not willing to pretend4 ,as for your party1 that which angered you1 ,i believe1 was this passage of his ,leviathan 7vol4 iii4 p4 #afj72 ,whereas some men have pretended for their disobedience to their sovereign1 a new covenant made1 not with men1 but with ,god2 this also is unjust4 ,for there is no covenant with ,god1 but by mediation of somebody that represented ,god's person2 which none doth but ,god's lieutenant1 who hath the sovereignty under ,god4 ,but this pretence of covenant with ,god1 is so evident a lie1 7this is it that angered you71 even in the pretenders' own consciences1 that it is not only an act of an unjust1 but also of a vile and unmanly disposition4 ,besides1 his making the ,king judge of doctrines to be preached or published1 hath offended you both2 so has also his attributing to the civil sovereign all power sacerdotal4 ,but this perhaps may seem hard1 when the sovereignty is in a ,queen4 ,but it is because you are not subtle enough to perceive1 that though man be male and female1 authority is not4 ,to please neither party is easy2 but to please both1 unless you could better agree amongst yourselves than you do1 is impossible4 ,your differences have troubled the kingdom1 as if you were the houses revived of ,york and ,lancaster4 ,a man would wonder how a little ,latin and ,greek should work so mightily1 when the ,scriptures are in ,english1 as that the ,king and ,parliament can hardly keep you quiet1 especially in time of danger from abroad4 ,if you will needs quarrel1 decide it amongst yourselves1 and draw not the people into your parties4 ,you were angry also for his blaming the scholastical philosophers1 and denying such fine things as these3 that the species or apparences of bodies come from the thing we look on1 into the eye1 and so make us see2 and into the understanding1 to make us understand2 and into the memory1 to make us remember3 that a body may be just the same it was1 and yet bigger or lesser3 that eternity is a permanent now2 and the like3 and for detecting1 further than you thought fit1 the fraud of the ,roman clergy4 ,your dislike of his divinity1 was the least cause of your calling him atheist4 ,but no more of this now4 ,the next head of your contumelies is to make him contemptible1 and to move ,mr4 ,boyle to pity him4 ,this is a way of railing too much beaten to be thought witty4 ,as for the thing itself1 ,i doubt your intelligence is not good1 and that you algebricians1 and non-conformists1 do but feign it1 to comfort one another4 ,for your own part1 you contemn him not1 or else you did very foolishly to entitle the beginning of your book1 ,mr4 ,hobbes considered2 which argues he is considerable enough to you4 ,besides1 it is no argument of contempt1 to spend upon him so many angry lines as would have furnished you with a dozen of sermons4 ,if you had in good earnest despised him1 you would have let him alone1 as he does ,dr4 ,ward1 ,mr4 ,baxter1 ,pike1 and others1 that have reviled him as you do4 ,as for his reputation beyond the seas1 it fades not yet3 and because perhaps you have no means to know it1 ,i will cite you a passage of an ,epistle1 written by a learned ,frenchman to an eminent person in ,france1 a passage not impertinent to the point now in question4 ,it is in a volume of ,epistles1 the fourth in order1 and the words 7page #afg7 concerning chemists1 are these3 ,truly1 ,sir1 as much as ,i admire them1 when ,i see them lute an alembic handsomely1 filter a liquor1 build an athanor1 so much ,i dislike them when ,i hear them discourse upon the subject of their operations2 and yet they think all they do1 is nothing in respect of what they say4 ,i wish they would take less pains1 and be at less charges2 and whilst they wash their hands after their work1 they would leave to those that attend to the polishing of their discourse1 ,i mean1 the ,galileos1 the ,descarteses1 the ,hobbeses1 the ,bacons1 and the ,gassendis1 to reason upon their work1 and themselves to hear what the learned and judicious shall tell them1 such as are used to discern the differences of things4 ,quam scit uterque libens censebo exerceat artem4 ,and more to the same purpose4 ,what is here said of chymists1 is applicable to all other mechanics4 ,every man that hath spare money1 can get furnaces1 and buy coals4 ,every man that hath spare money1 can be at the charge of making great moulds1 and hiring workmen to grind their glasses2 and so may have the best and greatest telescopes4 ,they can get engines made1 and apply them to the stars2 recipients made1 and try conclusions2 but they are never the more philosophers for all this4 ,it is laudable1 ,i confess1 to bestow money upon curious or useful delights2 but that is none of the praises of a philosopher4 ,and yet1 because the multitude cannot judge1 they will pass with the unskilful1 for skilful in all parts of natural philosophy4 ,and ,i hear now1 that ,hugenius and ,eustachio ,divini are to be tried by their glasses1 who is the more skilful in optics of the two2 but for my part1 before ,mr4 ,hobbes his book ,de ,homine came forth1 ,i never saw any thing written on that subject intelligibly4 ,do not you tell me now1 according to your wonted ingenuity1 that ,i never saw ,euclid's1 ,vitellio's1 and many other men's ,optics2 as if ,i could not distinguish between geometry and optics4 ,so also of all other arts2 not every one that brings from beyond seas a new gin1 or other jaunty device1 is therefore a philosopher4 ,for if you reckon that way1 not only apothecaries and gardeners1 but many other sorts of workmen1 will put in for1 and get the prize4 ,then1 when ,i see the gentlemen of ,gresham ,college apply themselves to the doctrine of motion1 7as ,mr4 ,hobbes has done1 and will be ready to help them in it1 if they please1 and so long as they use him civilly17 ,i will look to know some causes of natural events from them1 and their register1 and not before3 for nature does nothing but by motion4 ,i hear that the reason given by ,mr4 ,hobbes1 why the drop of glass so much wondered at1 shivers into so many pieces1 by breaking only one small part of it1 is approved for probable1 and registered in their college4 ,but he has no reason to take it for a favour3 because hereafter the invention may be taken1 by that means1 not for his1 but theirs4 ,to the rest of your calumnies the answers will be short1 and such as you might easily have foreseen4 ,and first1 for his boasting of his learning1 it is well summed up by you in these words3 ,it was a motion made by one1 whom ,i will not name1 that some idle person should read over all his books1 and collecting together his arrogant and supercilious speeches1 applauding himself1 and despising all other men1 set them forth in one synopsis1 with this title1 ,hobbius de se4 ,what a pretty piece of pageantry this would make1 ,i shall leave to your own thoughts4 ,thus say you3 now says ,mr4 ,hobbes1 or ,i for him1 let your idle person do it1 and set down no more than he has written1 as high praises as they be1 ,i will promise you he shall acknowledge them under his hand1 and be commended for it1 and you scorned4 ,a certain ,roman senator having propounded something in the assembly of the people1 which they misliking made a noise at1 boldly bade them hold their peace1 and told them he knew better what was good for the commonwealth than all they4 ,and his words are transmitted to us as an argument of his virtue2 so much do truth and vanity alter the complexion of self-praise4 ,besides1 you can have very little skill in morality1 that cannot see the justice of commending a man's self1 as well as of anything else1 in his own defence3 and it was want of prudence in you1 to constrain him to a thing that would so much displease you4 ,that part of his self-praise which most offends you1 is in the end of his ,leviathan 7page #gac71 in these words3 ,therefore ,i think it may be profitably printed1 and more profitably taught in the ,universities1 in case they also think so1 to whom the judgment of the same belongeth4 ,let any man consider the truth of it4 ,where did those ministers learn their seditious doctrine1 and to preach it1 but there8 ,where therefore should preachers learn to teach loyalty1 but there8 ,and if your principles produced civil war1 must not the contrary principles1 which are his1 produce peace8 ,and consequently his book1 as far as it handles civil doctrine1 deserves to be taught there4 ,but when can this be done8 ,when you shall have no longer an army ready to maintain the evil doctrine wherewith you have infected the people4 ,by a ready army1 ,i mean arms1 and money1 and men enough1 though not yet in pay1 and put under officers1 yet gathered together in one place or city1 to be put under officers1 armed1 and paid on any sudden occasion2 such as are the people of a great and populous town4 ,every great city is as a standing army1 which if it be not under the sovereign's command1 the people are miserable2 if they be1 they may be taught their duties in the ,universities safely and easily1 and be happy4 ,i never read of any ,christian king that was a tyrant1 though the best of kings have been called so4 ,then for the morosity and peevishness you charge him with1 all that know him familiarly1 know it is a false accusation4 ,but you mean1 it may be1 only towards those that argue against his opinion2 but neither is that true4 ,when vain and ignorant young scholars1 unknown to him before1 come to him on purpose to argue with him1 and to extort applause for their foolish opinions2 and1 missing of their end1 fall into indiscreet and uncivil expressions1 and he then appear not very well contented3 it is not his morosity1 but their vanity that should be blamed4 ,but what humour1 if not morosity and peevishness1 was that of yours1 whom he never had injured1 or seen1 or heard of1 to use toward him such insolent1 injurious1 and clownish words1 as you did in your absurd ,elenchus8 ,was it not impatience of seeing any dissent from you in opinion8 ,mr4 ,hobbes has been always far from provoking any man1 though when he is provoked1 you find his pen as sharp as yours4 ,again1 when you make his age a reproach to him1 and show no cause that might impair the faculties of his mind1 but only age1 ,i admire how you saw not that you reproached all old men in the world as much as him1 and warranted all young men1 at a certain time1 which they themselves shall define1 to call you fool4 ,your dislike of old age1 you have also otherwise sufficiently signified1 in venturing so fairly as you have done to escape it4 ,but that is no great matter to one that hath so many marks upon him of much greater reproaches4 ,by ,mr4 ,hobbes his calculation1 that derives prudence from experience1 and experience from age1 you are a very young man2 but by your own reckoning1 you are older already than ,methuselah4 ,lastly1 who told you that he writ against ,mr4 ,boyle1 whom in his writing he never mentioned1 and that it was1 because ,mr4 ,boyle was acquainted with you8 ,i know the contrary4 ,i have heard him wish it had been some person of lower condition1 that had been the author of the doctrine which he opposed1 and therefore opposed because it was false1 and because his own could not otherwise be defended4 ,but thus much ,i think is true1 that he thought never the better of his judgment1 for mistaking you for learned4 ,this is all ,i thought fit to answer for him and his manners4 ,the rest is of his geometry and philosophy1 concerning which1 ,i say only this1 that there is too much in your book to be confuted2 almost every line may be disproved1 or ought to be reprehended4 ,in sum1 it is all error and railing1 that is1 stinking wind2 such as a jade lets fly1 when he is too hard girt upon a full belly4 ,i have done4 ,i have considered you now1 but will not again1 whatsoever preferment any of your friends shall procure you4 ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ,,the ,,answer ,,of ,,mr4 ,,hobbes ,,to ,,sir ,,william ,,davenant',s ,,preface ,,before ,,gondibert4 ,,the ,,answer ,,to ,,the ,,preface ,,to ,,gondibert4 ,,sir1 ,if to commend your poem1 ,i should only say1 in general terms1 that in the choice of your argument1 the disposition of the parts1 the maintenance of the characters of your persons1 the dignity and vigour of your expression1 you have performed all the parts of various experience1 ready memory1 clear judgment1 swift and well-governed fancy3 though it were enough for the truth1 it were too little for the weight and credit of my testimony4 ,for ,i lie open to two exceptions1 one of an incompetent1 the other of a corrupted witness4 ,incompetent1 because ,i am not a poet2 and corrupted with the honour done me by your preface4 ,the former obliges me to say something1 by the way1 of the nature and differences of poesy4 ,as philosophers have divided the universe1 their subject1 into three regions1 celestial1 aerial1 and terrestial2 so the poets1 whose work it is1 by imitating human life1 in delightful and measured lines1 to avert men from vice1 and incline them to virtuous and honourable actions1 have lodged themselves in the three regions of mankind1 court1 city1 and country1 correspondent1 in some proportion1 to those three regions of the world4 ,for there is in princes1 and men of conspicuous power1 anciently called heroes1 a lustre and influence upon the rest of men1 resembling that of the heavens2 and an insincereness1 inconstancy1 and troublesome humour in those that dwell in populous cities1 like the mobility1 blustering1 and impurity of the air2 and a plainness1 and1 though dull1 yet a nutritive faculty in rural people1 that endures a comparison with the earth they labour4 ,from hence have proceeded three sorts of poesy1 heroic1 scommatic1 and pastoral4 ,every one of these is distinguished again in the manner of representation2 which sometimes is narrative1 wherein the poet himself relateth2 and sometimes dramatic1 as when the persons are every one adorned and brought upon the theatre1 to speak and act their own parts4 ,there is therefore neither more nor less than six sorts of poesy4 ,for the heroic poem narrative1 such as is yours1 is called an epic poem2 the heroic poem dramatic1 is tragedy4 ,the scommatic narrative is satire2 dramatic is comedy4 ,the pastoral narrative1 is called simply pastoral1 anciently bucolic2 the same dramatic1 pastoral comedy4 ,the figure therefore of an epic poem1 and of a tragedy1 ought to be the same3 for they differ no more but in that they are pronounced by one1 or many persons2 which ,i insert to justify the figure of yours1 consisting of five books divided into songs1 or cantos2 as five acts divided into scenes1 has ever been the approved figure of a tragedy4 ,they that take for poesy whatsoever is writ in verse1 will think this division imperfect1 and call in sonnets1 epigrams1 eclogues1 and the like pieces1 which are but essays1 and parts of an entire poem2 and reckon ,empedocles and ,lucretius1 natural philosophers1 for poets2 and the moral precepts of ,phocylides ,theognis1 and the quatrains of ,pybrach1 and the history of ,lucan1 and others of that kind1 amongst poems3 bestowing on such writers1 for honour1 the name of poets1 rather than of historians or philosophers4 ,but the subject of a poem is the manners of men1 not natural causes2 manners presented1 not dictated2 and manners feigned1 as the name of poesy imports1 not found in men4 ,they that give entrance to fictions writ in prose1 err not so much2 but they err2 for prose requireth delightfulness1 not only of fiction1 but of style2 in which if prose contend with verse1 it is with disadvantage and1 as it were1 on foot against the strength and wings of ,pegasus4 ,for verse amongst the ,greeks was appropriated anciently to the service of their ,gods1 and was the holy style2 the style of the oracles2 the style of the laws2 and the style of the men that publicly recommended to their ,gods the vows and thanks of the people1 which was done in their holy songs called hymns2 and the composers of them were called prophets and priests1 before the name of poet was known4 ,when afterwards the majesty of that style was observed1 the poets chose it as best becoming their high invention4 ,and for the antiquity of verse1 it is greater than the antiquity of letters4 ,for it is certain1 ,cadmus was the first that from ,phnicia1 a country that neighboureth ,judea1 brought the use of letters into ,greece4 ,but the service of the ,gods1 and the laws1 which by measured sounds were easily committed to the memory1 had been long time in use before the arrival of ,cadmus there4 ,there is1 besides the grace of style1 another cause why the ancient poets chose to write in measured language2 which is this4 ,their poems were made at first with intention to have them sung1 as well epic as dramatic 7which custom hath been long time laid aside1 but began to be revived in part1 of late years1 in ,italy17 and could not be made commensurable to the voice or instruments1 in prose2 the ways and motions whereof are so uncertain and undistinguished1 like the way and motion of a ship in the sea1 as not only to discompose the best composers1 but also to disappoint sometimes the most attentive reader1 and put him to hunt counter for the sense4 ,it was therefore necessary for poets in those times to write in verse4 ,the verse which the ,greeks and ,latins1 considering the nature of their own languages1 found by experience most grave1 and for an epic poem most decent1 was their hexameter2 a verse limited not only in the length of the line1 but also in the quantity of the syllables4 ,instead of which we use the line of ten syllables1 recompensing the neglect of their quantity with the diligence of rhyme4 ,and this measure is so proper to an heroic poem1 as without some loss of gravity or dignity1 it was never changed4 ,a longer is not far from ill prose2 and a shorter1 is a kind of whisking1 you know1 like the unlacing1 rather than the singing of a muse4 ,in an epigram or a sonnet1 a man may vary his measures1 and seek glory from a needless difficulty2 as he that contrived verses into the forms of an organ1 a hatchet1 an egg1 an altar1 and a pair of wings2 but in so great and noble a work as is an epic poem1 for a man to obstruct his own way with unprofitable difficulties1 is great imprudence4 ,so likewise to choose a needless and difficult correspondence of rhyme1 is but a difficult toy1 and forces a man sometimes1 for the stopping of a chink1 to say somewhat he did never think4 ,i cannot therefore but very much approve your stanza1 wherein the syllables in every verse are ten1 and the rhyme alternate4 ,for the choice of your subject you have sufficiently justified yourself in your preface4 ,but because ,i have observed in ,virgil1 that the honour done to neas and his companions1 has so bright a reflection upon ,augustus ,csar1 and other great ,romans of that time1 as a man may suspect him not constantly possessed with the noble spirit of those his heroes2 and ,i believe you are not acquainted with any great man of the race of ,gondibert1 ,i add to your justification the purity of your purpose1 in having no other motive of your labour1 but to adorn virtue1 and procure her lovers2 than which there cannot be a worthier design1 and more becoming noble poesy4 ,in that you make so small account of the example of almost all the approved poets1 ancient and modern1 who thought fit in the beginning1 and sometimes also in the progress of their poems1 to invoke a ,muse1 or some other deity1 that should dictate to them1 or assist them in their writings2 they that take not the laws of art1 from any reason of their own1 but from the fashion of precedent times1 will perhaps accuse your singularity4 ,for my part1 ,i neither subscribe to their accusation1 nor yet condemn that heathen custom1 otherwise than as accessory to their false religion4 ,for their poets were their divines2 had the name of prophets2 exercised amongst the people a kind of spiritual authority2 would be thought to speak by a divine spirit2 have their works which they writ in verse 7the divine style7 pass for the word of ,god1 and not of man1 and to be hearkened to with reverence4 ,do not the divines1 excepting the style1 do the same1 and by us that are of the same religion cannot justly be reprehended for it8 ,besides1 in the use of the spiritual calling of divines1 there is danger sometimes to be feared1 from want of skill1 such as is reported of unskilful conjurers1 that mistaking the rites and ceremonious points of their art1 call up such spirits1 as they cannot at their pleasure allay again2 by whom storms are raised1 that overthrow buildings1 and are the cause of miserable wrecks at sea4 ,unskilful divines do oftentimes the like2 for when they call unseasonably for zeal1 there appears a spirit of cruelty2 and by the like error1 instead of truth1 they raise discord2 instead of wisdom1 fraud2 instead of reformation1 tumult2 and controversy1 instead of religion4 ,whereas in the heathen poets1 at least in those whose works have lasted to the time we are in1 there are none of those indiscretions to be found1 that tended to the subversion1 or disturbance of the commonwealths wherein they lived4 ,but why a ,christian should think it an ornament to his poem1 either to profane the true ,god1 or invoke a false one1 ,i can imagine no cause1 but a reasonless imitation of custom2 of a foolish custom1 by which a man enabled to speak wisely from the principles of nature1 and his own meditation1 loves rather to be thought to speak by inspiration1 like a bagpipe4 ,time and education beget experience2 experience begets memory2 memory begets judgment and fancy2 judgment begets the strength and structure1 and fancy begets the ornaments of a poem4 ,the ancients therefore fabled not absurdly1 in making ,memory the mother of the ,muses4 ,for memory is the world1 though not really1 yet so as in a looking-glass1 in which the judgment1 the severer sister1 busieth herself in a grave and rigid examination of all the parts of nature1 and in registering by letters their order1 causes1 uses1 differences1 and resemblances2 whereby the fancy1 when any work of art is to be performed1 finds her materials at hand and prepared for use1 and needs no more than a swift motion over them1 that what she wants1 and is there to be had1 may not lie too long unespied4 ,so that when she seemeth to fly from one ,indies to the other1 and from heaven to earth1 and to penetrate into the hardest matter and obscurest places1 into the future1 and into herself1 and all this in a point of time1 the voyage is not very great1 herself being all she seeks4 ,and her wonderful celerity1 consisteth not so much in motion1 as in copious imagery discreetly ordered1 and perfectly registered in the memory2 which most men under the name of philosophy have a glimpse of1 and is pretended to by many1 that grossly mistaking her1 embrace contention in her place4 ,but so far forth as the fancy of man has traced the ways of true philosophy1 so far it hath produced very marvellous effects to the benefit of mankind4 ,all that is beautiful or defensible in building2 or marvellous in engines and instruments of motion2 whatsoever commodity men receive from the observations of the heavens1 from the description of the earth1 from the account of time1 from walking on the seas2 and whatsoever distinguisheth the civility of ,europe1 from the barbarity of the ,american savages2 is the workmanship of fancy1 but guided by the precepts of true philosophy4 ,but where these precepts fail1 as they have hitherto failed in the doctrine of moral virtue1 there the architect ,fancy must take the philosopher's part upon herself4 ,he1 therefore1 who undertakes an heroic poem1 which is to exhibit a venerable and amiable image of heroic virtue1 must not only be the poet1 to place and connect1 but also the philosopher1 to furnish and square his matter2 that is1 to make both body and soul1 colour and shadow of his poem out of his own store2 which1 how well you have performed ,i am now considering4 ,observing how few the persons be you introduce in the beginning1 and how in the course of the actions of these1 the number increasing1 after several confluences1 they run all at last into the two principal streams of your poem1 ,gondibert and ,oswald1 methinks the fable is not much unlike the theatre4 ,for so1 from several and far distant sources1 do the lesser brooks of ,lombardy1 flowing into one another1 fall all at last into the two main rivers1 the ,po and the ,adige4 ,it hath the same resemblance also with a man's veins1 which proceeding from different parts1 after the like concourse1 insert themselves at last into the two principal veins of the body4 ,but when ,i considered that also the actions of men1 which singly are inconsiderable1 after many conjunctures1 grow at last either into one great protecting power1 or into two destroying factions1 ,i could not but approve the structure of your poem1 which ought to be no other than such as an imitation of human life requireth4 ,in the streams themselves ,i find nothing but settled valour1 clean honour1 calm counsel1 learned diversion1 and pure love2 save only a torrent or two of ambition1 which1 though a fault1 has somewhat heroic in it1 and therefore must have place in an heroic poem4 ,to shew the reader in what place he shall find every excellent picture of virtue you have drawn1 is too long4 ,and to show him one1 is to prejudice the rest2 yet ,i cannot forbear to point him to the description of love in the person of ,bertha1 in the seventh canto of the second book4 ,there has nothing been said of that subject1 neither by the ancient nor modern poets1 comparable to it4 ,poets are painters2 ,i would fain see another painter draw so true1 perfect1 and natural a love to the life1 and make use of nothing but pure lines1 without the help of any the least uncomely shadow1 as you have done4 ,but let it be read as a piece by itself3 for in the almost equal height of the whole1 the eminence of parts is lost4 ,there are some that are not pleased with fiction1 unless it be bold2 not only to exceed the work1 but also the possibility of nature2 they would have impenetrable armours1 enchanted castles1 invulnerable bodies1 iron men1 flying horses1 and a thousand other such things1 which are easily feigned by them that dare4 ,against such ,i defend you1 without assenting to those that condemn either ,homer or ,virgil2 by dissenting only from those that think the beauty of a poem consisteth in the exorbitancy of the fiction4 ,for as truth is the bound of historical1 so the resemblance of truth is the utmost limit of poetical liberty4 ,in old time amongst the heathen1 such strange fictions and metamorphoses were not so remote from the articles of their faith1 as they are now from ours1 and therefore were not so unpleasant4 ,beyond the actual works of nature a poet may now go2 but beyond the conceived possibility of nature1 never4 ,i can allow a geographer to make in the sea1 a fish or a ship1 which by the scale of his map would be two or three hundred miles long1 and think it done for ornament1 because it is done without the precincts of his undertaking3 but when he paints an elephant so1 ,i presently apprehend it as ignorance1 and a plain confession of terra incognita4 ,as the description of great men and great actions is the constant design of a poet2 so the descriptions of worthy circumstances are necessary accessions to a poem1 and being well performed1 are the jewels and most precious ornaments of poesy4 ,such in ,virgil are the funeral games of ,anchises1 the duel of neas and ,turnus1 c4 ,and such in yours1 are the ,hunting1 the ,battle1 the ,city ,mourning1 the ,funeral1 the ,house of ,astragon1 the ,library and the ,temple2 equal to his1 or those of ,homer whom he imitated4 ,there remains now no more to be considered but the expression1 in which consisteth the countenance and colour of a beautiful ,muse2 and is given her by the poet out of his own provision1 or is borrowed from others4 ,that which he hath of his own1 is nothing but experience and knowledge of nature1 and specially human nature2 and is the true and natural colour4 ,but that which is taken out of books1 the ordinary boxes of counterfeit complexion1 shows well or ill1 as it hath more or less resemblance with the natural2 and are not to be used without examination unadvisedly4 ,for in him that professes the imitation of nature1 as all poets do1 what greater fault can there be1 than to betray an ignorance of nature in his poem2 especially1 having a liberty allowed him1 if he meet with any thing he cannot master1 to leave it out8 ,that which giveth a poem the true and natural colour1 consisteth in two things2 which are1 to know well1 that is1 to have images of nature in the memory distinct and clear2 and to know much4 ,a sign of the first is perspicuity1 propriety1 and decency2 which delight all sorts of men1 either by instructing the ignorant1 or soothing the learned in their knowledge4 ,a sign of the latter is novelty of expression1 and pleaseth by excitation of the mind2 for novelty causeth admiration1 and admiration curiosity1 which is a delightful appetite of knowledge4 ,there be so many words in use at this day in the ,english tongue1 that1 though of magnific sound1 yet like the windy blisters of troubled waters1 have no sense at all1 and so many others that lose their meaning by being ill coupled2 that it is a hard matter to avoid them4 ,for having been obtruded upon youth in the schools1 by such as make it1 ,i think1 their business there1 as it is expressed by the best poet 8,with terms to charm the weak and pose the wise10 ,,gondibert1 ,book ii4 ,canto #e1 verse #dd4 they grow up with them1 and gaining reputation with the ignorant1 are not easily shaken off4 ,to this palpable darkness1 ,i may also add the ambitious obscurity of expressing more than is perfectly conceived2 or perfect conception in fewer words than it requires4 ,which expressions1 though they have had the honour to be called strong lines1 are indeed no better than riddles1 and not only to the reader1 but also after a little time to the writer himself1 dark and troublesome4 ,to the propriety of expression ,i refer that clearness of memory1 by which a poet when he hath once introduced any person whatsoever1 speaking in his poem1 maintaineth in him to the end the same character he gave him in the beginning4 ,the variation whereof1 is a change of pace1 that argues the poet tired4 ,of the indecencies of an heroic poem1 the most remarkable are those that show disproportion either between the persons and their actions1 or between the manners of the poet and the poem4 ,of the first kind1 is the uncomeliness of representing in great persons the inhuman vice of cruelty1 or the sordid vices of lust and drunkenness4 ,to such parts1 as those the ancient approved poets thought it fit to suborn1 not the persons of men1 but of monsters and beastly giants1 such as ,polyphemus1 ,cacus1 and the ,centaurs4 ,for it is supposed a ,muse1 when she is invoked to sing a song of that nature1 should maidenly advise the poet to set such persons to sing their own vices upon the stage2 for it is not so unseemly in a tragedy4 ,of the same kind it is to represent scurrility1 or any action or language that moveth much laughter4 ,the delight of an epic poem consisteth not in mirth1 but admiration4 ,mirth and laughter are proper to comedy and satire4 ,great persons1 that have their minds employed on great designs1 have not leisure enough to laugh1 and are pleased with the contemplation of their own power and virtues1 so as they need not the infirmities and vices of other men to recommend themselves to their own favour by comparison1 as all men do when they laugh4 ,of the second kind1 where the disproportion is between the poet and the persons of his poem1 one is in the dialect of the inferior sort of people1 which is always different from the language of the court4 ,another is1 to derive the illustration of any thing from such metaphors or comparisons as cannot come into men's thoughts1 but by mean conversation1 and experience of humble or evil arts1 which the person of an epic poem cannot be thought acquainted with4 ,from knowing much1 proceedeth the admirable variety and novelty of metaphors and similitudes1 which are not possible to be lighted on in the compass of a narrow knowledge4 ,and the want whereof compelleth a writer to expressions that are either defaced by time1 or sullied with vulgar or long use4 ,for the phrases of poesy1 as the airs of music1 with often hearing become insipid2 the reader having no more sense of their force1 than our flesh is sensible of the bones that sustain it4 ,as the sense we have of bodies1 consisteth in change of variety of impression1 so also does the sense of language in the variety and changeable use of words4 ,i mean not in the affectation of words newly brought home from travel1 but in new1 and withal significant1 translation to our purposes1 of those that be already received2 and in far-fetched1 but withal1 apt1 instructive1 and comely similitudes4 ,having thus1 ,i hope1 avoided the first exception1 against the incompetency of my judgment1 ,i am but little moved with the second1 which is of being bribed by the honour you have done me1 by attributing in your preface somewhat to my judgment4 ,for ,i have used your judgment no less in many things of mine1 which coming to light will thereby appear the better4 ,and so you have your bribe again4 ,having thus made way for the admission of my testimony1 ,i give it briefly thus4 ,i never yet saw poem1 that had so much shape of art1 health of morality1 and vigour and beauty of expression1 as this of yours4 ,and but for the clamour of the multitude1 that hide their envy of the present under a reverence of antiquity1 ,i should say further1 that it would last as long as either the neid1 or ,iliad1 but for one disadvantage2 and the disadvantage is this2 the languages of the ,greeks and ,romans1 by their colonies and conquests1 have put off flesh and blood1 and are become immutable1 which none of the modern tongues are like to be4 ,i honour antiquity2 but that which is commonly called old time1 is young time4 ,the glory of antiquity is due1 not to the dead1 but to the aged4 ,and now1 whilst ,i think of it1 give me leave with a short discord to sweeten the harmony of the approaching close4 ,i have nothing to object against your poem2 but dissent only from something in your preface1 sounding to the prejudice of age4 ,it is commonly said1 that old age is a return to childhood4 ,which methinks you insist on so long1 as if you desired it should be believed4 ,that is the note ,i mean to shake a little4 ,that saying1 meant only of the weakness of body1 was wrested to the weakness of mind1 by froward children1 weary of the controlment of their parents1 masters1 and other admonitors4 ,secondly1 the dotage and childishness they ascribe to age1 is never the effect of time1 but sometimes of the excesses of youth1 and not a returning to1 but a continual stay1 with childhood4 ,for they that wanting the curiosity of furnishing their memories with the rarities of nature in their youth1 pass their time in making provision only for their ease and sensual delight1 are children still at what years soever2 as they that coming into a populous city1 never going out of their inn1 are strangers still1 how long soever they have been there4 ,thirdly1 there is no reason for any man to think himself wiser to-day than yesterday1 which does not equally convince he shall be wiser to-morrow than to-day4 ,fourthly1 you will be forced to change your opinion hereafter when you are old2 and in the mean time you discredit all ,i have said before in your commendation1 because ,i am old already4 ,but no more of this4 ,i believe1 ,sir1 you have seen a curious kind of perspective1 where he that looks through a short hollow pipe upon a picture containing divers figures1 sees none of those that are there painted1 but some one person made up of their parts1 conveyed to the eye by the artificial cutting of a glass4 ,i find in my imagination an effect not unlike it1 from your poem4 ,the virtues you distribute there amongst so many noble persons1 represent1 in the reading1 the image but of one man's virtue to my fancy1 which is your own2 and that so deeply imprinted1 as to stay for ever there1 and govern all the rest of my thoughts and affections in the way of honouring and serving you to the utmost of my power1 that am1 ,sir1 ,your most humble and obedient servant1 ,,thomas ,,hobbes4 ,paris1 ,jan4 #aj1 #afej4 ------- ,,letter ,,to ,,the ,,right ,,honourable ,,edw4 ,,howard4,b ,,to ,,the ,,right ,,hon4 ,,mr4 ,,edward ,,howard4 ,,sir1 ,my judgment in poetry hath1 you know1 been once already censured by very good wits1 for commending ,gondibert2 but yet they have not1 ,i think1 disabled my testimony4 ,for what authority is there in wit8 ,a jester may have it2 a man in drink may have it2 be fluent over night1 and wise and dry in the morning4 ,what is it8 ,or who can tell whether it be better to have it or be without it1 especially if it be a pointed wit8 ,i will take my liberty to praise what ,i like1 as well as they do to reprehend what they do not like4 ,your poem1 ,sir1 contains a well and judiciously contrived story1 full of admirable and heroic actions1 set forth in noble and perspicuous language1 such as becomes the dignity of the persons you introduce3 which two things of themselves are the heighth of poetry4 ,i know that variety of story1 true or feigned1 is the thing wherewith the reader is entertained most delightfully4 ,and this also to the smallness of the volume is not wanting4 ,yours is but one small piece2 whereas the poets that are with us so much admired1 have taken larger subjects4 ,but let an ,english reader1 in ,homer or ,virgil in ,english1 by whomsoever translated1 read one piece by itself1 no greater than yours2 ,i may make a question whether he will be less pleased with yours than his4 ,i know you do not equal your poem to either of theirs3 the bulk of the work does not distinguish the art of the workman4 ,the ,battle of ,mice and ,frogs may be owned without disparagement by ,homer himself4 ,yet if ,homer had written nothing else1 he never had had the reputation of so admirable a poet as he was4,c ,ajax was a man of very great stature1 and ,teucer a very little person3 yet he was brother to ,ajax1 both in blood and chivalry4 ,i commend your poem for judgment1 not for bulk2 and am assured it will be welcome to the world with its own confidence2 though if it come forth armed with verses and epistles1 ,i cannot tell what to think of it4 ,for the great wits will think themselves threatened1 and rebel4 ,unusual fortifications upon the borders1 carry with them a suspicion of hostility4 ,and poets will think such letters of commendation a kind of confederacy and league1 tending to usurp upon their liberty4 ,i have told you my judgment1 and you may make use of it as you please4 ,but ,i remember a line or two in your poem1 that touched upon divinity1 wherein we differed in opinion4 ,but since you say the book is licensed1 ,i shall think no more upon it1 but only reserve my liberty of dissenting1 which ,i know you will allow me4,d ,i rest1 ,sir1 ,your most humble and obedient servant1 ,,thomas ,,hobbes4 ,chatsworth1 ,october the #bdth1 #affh4 ,footnote ,b3 ,this letter is here printed from the autograph of ,mr4 ,hobbes1 now in the possession of ,rowland ,eyles ,egerton ,warburton1 ,esq4 of ,arley ,hall1 ,cheshire4 ,the same letter1 with the variations hereafter noticed1 was prefixed to ,mr4 ,howard's poem1 8,the ,british ,princes10 published in #affi3 it is there addressed 8,to the ,honourable ,edward ,howard1 ,esq4 on his intended impression of his poem of the ',british ,princes1'0 and is subscribed1 8,i need say no more1 but rest1 ,your ,honour's most humble and obedient servant1 ,,thomas ,,hobbs4 ,chatsworth1 ,nov4 the #fth1 #affh40 ,footnote ,c3 ,the passage between brackets is omitted in the letter prefixed to the ,british ,princes1 and the following is substituted for it3 8,besides 'tis a virtue in a poet to advance the honour of his remotest ancestors1 especially when it has not been done before4 ,what1 though you out-go the limits of certain history8 ,do painters1 when they paint the face of the earth1 leave a blank beyond what they know8 ,do not they fill up the space with strange rocks1 monsters1 and other gallantry1 to fix their work in the memory of men by the delight of fancy8 ,so will your readers from this poem think honourably of their original1 which is a kind of piety40 ,footnote ,d3 ,this passage is omitted in the 8,british ,princes40 ,,end ,,of ,,vol4 ,,iv4 ------------------------------------ ,g4 ,,richards1 ,,printer1 #ajj1 ,,st4 ,,martin',s ,,lane4 ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ,,books ,,published ,,by ,,john ,,bohn4 ------- ,to be completed in #ab ,vols4 #hvo4 each #abs4 cloth lettered1 ,,the ,,complete ,,works ,,of ,,thomas ,,hobbes ,,of ,,malmesbury1 ,,now ,,first ,,collected ,,and ,,edited ,,by ,,sir ,,william ,,molesworth1 ,,bart4 ,m4,p4 ------- ,although the close reasoning of ,,hobbes1 expressed in beautiful language1 has created a host of admirers1 yet1 owing to the excessive rarity of his detached writings1 many of which have never been reprinted1 no complete set of his works is to be found in any one of our public or private libraries4 ,to remedy this evil1 and to present an edition worthy of the ,author1 the ,editor has collected together the various pieces1 and at his own cost has determined to reprint them uniformly1 in the best style of modern typography4 ,five volumes 7,i4 ,,ii4 of the ,latin1 and ,i4 ,,iii4 and ,,iv4 of the ,english works7 are already published1 and the remainder will follow as speedily as a due regard to correctness will allow4 ,as the impression is limited1 and the price of each volume 7between #ejj and #fjj pages1 with ,engravings7 is unusually low1 the ,publisher has every reason to expect that within a short period the whole of the copies will be subscribed for1 and therefore would earnestly recommend an early application1 to prevent disappointment4 ,an excellent analysis of this author's writings will be found in ,mr4 ,hallam's able ,introduction to the ,literature of ,europe1 and the following testimonies in favour of his style will convey some idea of the estimation in which his writings are held4 8,hobbes' language is so lucid and concise that it would almost be as improper to put an algebraical process in different terms as some of his metaphysical paragraphs40--,,hallam4 8,a permanent foundation of his fame consists in his admirable style1 which seems to be the very perfection of didactic language48--,,sir ,,james ,,mackintosh4 8,here let us do justice to that great man's memory1 at a time his writings seem to be entirely neglected1 who1 with all his errors1 we must allow to be one of the first men of his age1 for a bright wit1 a deep penetration1 and a cultivated understanding40--,,bp4 ,,warburton4 ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ------- ,in crown #hvo4 price #hs4 in extra boards1 ,an ,apology ,,for ,cathedral ,service4 8,apology for the ,bible8 ,i didn't know that the ,bible wanted any apology40--,,king ,,george ,,iii4 8,this is a very delightful work1 and contains much more than its title implies4 ,the style is quaint and original1 and reminds us of that of some of our older writers4 ,it is throughout enriched with a number of curious and interesting quotations and illustrations1 which display considerable information and research4 ,it is full of the 'spirit of antiquity1' if we may use such an expression1 and is deeply imbued with a love for those admirable and venerable institutions1 which we owe to the wisdom of past ages4 ,the defence of the practice of chanting1 of the whole ,cathedral ,service1 and1 indeed1 of ,cathedral institutions altogether1 is excellent1 and will repay an attentive perusal40--,,churchman4 8,this clever work is indeed still of the ,spirit of ,antiquity1 and evinces great originality and freshness of thought1 brilliancy of imagination1 profound argument1 strong feeling1 and a thorough and hearted love of the cause so eloquently advocated40--,,salisbury ,,herald4 ------- ,in foolscap #hvo4 price #hs4 in cloth1 lettered1 ,,the ,,death ,,of ,,demosthenes4 ,and other ,original ,poems3 ,,with ,,the ,,prometheus ,,and ,,agamemnon ,,of ,,schylus1 ,,translated ,,from ,,the ,,greek1 ,,by ,,george ,,croker ,,fox1 ,,esq4 8,we hail the publication of this work as a valuable addition to our literature4 ,with an elegant and graceful dedication to our young and interesting ,queen1 the volume consists of original ,poems1 distinguished for beauty of thought1 expressed in language classic and polished2 and of translations rarely equalled for fidelity and vigour4 ,the ,death of ,demosthenes is indeed a noble subject1 nobly executed40444 8,we have now done our most arduous but pleasing task1 to review the finest poems which have appeared for many years4 ,in this utilitarian age of steam and vapour1 when1 whilst we are going on with our rail-roads1 we are going back in our learning1 it is rare to find a mind which can think with and emulate the ancients--give a new charm to classic literature--call forth the mighty spirits of ,greece--bring them1 with all their eloquence and genius1 before us--create with them--copy after them4 ,mr4 ,fox1 therefore1 deserves our commendation1 and merits our gratitude for his classical volume of poems2 for nothing perfect in eloquence1 nothing perfect in poetry1 can be produced1 unless we love1 study1 and imitate the great masters of thought and taste--the ancients-- 8---- ------------------color che sanno40--,dante4 ,the classical is another name for the beautiful1 and ,mr4 ,fox's volume must charm all1 except the ignorant without learning1 and the learned without taste40--,,dublin ,,review4 ------- ,in one volume1 #hvo4 price #afs4 in cloth1 lettered1 ,a ,,classical ,,arch,,ological ,,dictionary ,,of ,,the ,,manners1 ,,customs1 ,,laws1 ,,institutions1 ,,arts1 ,c4 ,,of ,,the ,,celebrated ,,nations ,,of ,,antiquity ,,and ,,of ,,the ,,middle ,,ages4 ,,to ,,which ,,is ,,prefixed ,a ,,synoptical ,,and ,,chronological ,,view ,,of ,,ancient ,,history4 ,,by ,p4 ,a4 ,,nuttall1 ,,ll4,d4 ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ,in #ae vols4 #hvo4 price #gl4 #ags4 #f;d4 in boards1 ,,taylor',s 7,,bp4 ,,jeremy7 ,,works1 ,with ,life1 by ,bp4 ,,heber4 ,third ,edition4 ------- ,,arrian ,,on ,,coursing1 ,translated from the ,greek1 with ,classical and ,practical ,annotations1 and a brief ,sketch of the ,life of the ,author4 ,to which is added an ,appendix1 containing some ,account of the ,canes ,venatici of ,classical ,antiquity2 royal #hvo4 #bd embellishments from the ,antique1 on ,india paper1 extra boards1 #al4 #aas4 #f;d4 ------- ,,brydges' 7,,the ,,rt4 ,,hon4 ,,sir ,,harford ,,jones7 ,,works ,,on ,,persia4 ,the ,dynasty of the ,kajars1 translated from the original ,persian ,manuscript presented by ,his ,majesty ,faty ,aly ,shah to ,sir ,harford ,jones ,brydges1 ,bart4 ,k4,c4 ,,ll4,d4 late ,envoy ,extraordinary and ,minister ,plenipotentiary from his ,britannic ,majesty to the ,court of ,teheran4 ,to which is prefixed1 a succinct ,account of the ,history of ,persia previous to that ,period1 #hvo4 frontispiece and #c maps1 boards1 #al4 #ds4 ,an ,account of the ,transactions of ,his ,majesty's ,mission to the ,court of ,persia in the ,years #ahjg-aa1 by ,sir ,harford ,jones ,brydges1 ,bart4 ,to which is added a brief ,history of the ,wahauby1 #b vols4 #hvo4 plates1 bds4 #al4 #as4 ------- ,,dansey 7,,rev4 ,w47 ,,on ,,rural ,,deans4 ,hor ,decanic ,rurales1 being an ,attempt to illustrate1 by a ,series of ,notes and ,extracts1 the ,name and ,title1 the ,origin1 ,appointment1 and ,functions of ,rural ,deans1 c4 #b vols4 #dto4 half-bound morocco1 top edges gilt1 #al4 #aas4 #f;d4 ,archdeacon ,goddard1 in his recent charge1 strongly recommends this excellent work to the attentive perusal of every clergyman4 ------- ,,higgins' 7,g47 ,,celtic ,,druids2 ,or an ,attempt to show that the ,druids were the ,priests of ,oriental ,colonies1 who emigrated from ,india1 and were the ,introducers of the first or ,cadmean ,system of ,letters1 and the builders of ,,stonehenge1 of ,carnac1 and of other ,cyclopean ,works in ,asia and ,europe1 #dto4 map and numerous plates1 bds4 #cl4 ,also1 by the same ,author4 ,,anacalypsis1 ,an ,attempt to draw aside the ,veil of the ,saitic ,isis2 or an ,inquiry into the ,origin of ,languages1 ,nations and ,religions1 #b vols4 #dto4 plates1 bds4 #el4 ------- ,,woodville',s 7,,dr4 ,,wm47 ,,medical ,,botany2 ,,third ,,edition1 materially enlarged and improved by ,professor ,sir ,,william ,,jackson ,,hooker1 ,,ll4,d4 ,f4,r4,s4 ,l4,s4 c4 and ,g4 ,,spratt1 ,esq4 #e vols4 #dto4 #caj plates1 engraved by ,sowerby and ,spratt1 boards1 #el4 #aes4 #f;d4 or with the plates finely coloured1 #hl4 ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ,in the press1 and shortly will be published1 in #c vols4 #hvo4 ,,dr4 ,,field',s ,,book ,,of ,,the ,,church4 ,a ,new ,edition1 with ,notes1 ,,by ,,the ,,rev4 ,,john ,s4 ,,brewer4 ,m4,a4 ,,of ,,queen',s ,,college1 ,,oxford4 ------- ,as ,dr4 ,field's ,book of the ,church has become excessively rare1 and1 though much in request1 is not attainable at any price1 the ,publisher1 at the suggestion of several eminent clergymen1 has undertaken a new edition of this very valuable work4 ,in order to render it worthy of attention1 and far superior to all preceding ones1 the ,rev4 ,j4 ,s4 ,brewer 7a ,gentleman whose well-known diligence and accuracy guarantee its being executed in the best manner7 has kindly offered his services to collate the various editions1 to verify all the ,references1 and to supply additional ,notes where necessary4 ,he has likewise determined1 on account of the extreme rarity of many of the ,authors cited by ,dr4 ,field1 to give his quotations at full length at the bottom of each page2 and at the end of every chapter a brief list of writers1 especially of ,english ,divines1 who have treated on the same subject3 thus rendering the work a ,,text ,,book ,,of ,,theology4 ,as the rarity of this masterpiece of one of our most eminent ,divines has prevented its being so universally known as it deserves to be1 the ,publisher may be pardoned for citing a few among the numerous commendations in its favour4 ,coleridge1 the ,poet1 in a letter to his son1 the ,rev4 ,derwent ,coleridge1 emphatically writes3--8,,this ,,one ,,volume1 ,,thoroughly ,,understood ,,and ,,appropriated1 ,,will ,,place ,,you ,,in ,,the ,,highest ,,rank ,,of ,,doctrinal ,,church-,,of-,,england ,,divines1 ,,and ,,of ,,no ,,mean ,,rank ,,as ,a ,,true ,,doctrinal ,,church ,,historian40 ,king ,james ,i4 delighted to discourse with ,field on points of ,divinity1 and1 when he first preached before him1 said3 8,is his name ,field8 ,this is the ,,field for ,god to dwell in40 ,on hearing of his death1 the ,king expressed regret1 and added1 8,i should have done more for that man60 ,fuller1 in the same punning age1 calls him1 8,that learned ,divine1 whose memory smelleth like a ,,field which the ,lord hath blessed40 ,anthony a ,wood tells us he was esteemed 8the best disputant in the schools40 8,field was well skilled in ,school ,divinity1 and a frequent preacher while he lived in ,oxfordshire1 and is said to have been very instrumental in preventing the increase of nonconformity in the ,university40--,,gough4 8,when he first set about writing his book ',,of ,,the ,,church1' his old acquaintance1 ,dr4 ,kettle1 dissuaded him1 telling him that when once he was engaged in controversy he would never live quietly1 but be continually troubled with answers and replies4 ,to this ,field answered1 ',i will so write that they shall have no great mind to answer me2' which proved to be nearly the case1 as his main arguments were never refuted40--,,chalmers4 ,heylin1 in his 8,life of ,laud10 calls him1 8the reverend right learned ,dr4 ,field1 whose excellent works will keep his name alive to succeeding ages40 --------------------- ,,subscribers' ,,names ,,received ,,by ,,john ,,bohn1 #ag1 ,henrietta ,street1 ,covent ,garden4 ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ,transcriber's ,note ,in the table of contents1 the page number for the final section 78,letter to the ,right ,honourable ,edward ,howard07 was incorrectly given as p4 #dei4 ,the section begins at p4 #deh and the correction was made4 ,at #db4ag1 the word #8forwardness' appears4 ,several lines earlier1 #8frowardness' is used4 ,the discrepancy is probably a printer's error4 #8,froward' is also used elsewhere3 #8froward children1 weary of the controlment of their parents' 7p4 #deg74 ,since ,hobbes is discussing a specific behavior1 the former has been retained as less ambiguous4 ,the chapter summary for ,part ,,ii1 ,chapter ,,ii of ,,de ,,corpore ,,politico1 on p4 #ach1 misnumbered section #b as #8#a'4 ,on p4 #aag1 a reference to section #af of the ,x,i,ith chapter of ,human ,nature is incorrect4 ,the #fth section of that chapter is the obviously correct reference4 ,on p4 #bja1 a reference to section #i of the ,v,i,ith chapter of the same text is also incorrect4 ,the #hth section seems to be the intended reference4 ,other errors deemed most likely to be the printer's have been corrected1 and are noted here4 ,the references are to the page and line in the original4 #bf4ba ,i take nosce tei_/e ipsum for a precept ,space added4 #agf4cb ,jesus ,christ is come in the flesh ,added4 #ahc4ah is not only not necessaa_/ry ,replaced4 #baf4ab a duty of sovereigns ,inserted4 #bdh4bh ,thus you see the case put by ,st4 ,paul ,inserted4 #bgj4bb are necesssary4 ,removed4 #ccc4a nor had he he received ,removed4