his pupill or do him injustice There is onely this difference that a pupill may implead his Guardian and recover his right against him But from a Soveraign Law-giver there lies no appeal but onely to God Otherwise there would be endlesse appeales which both nature and pollicy doth abhor As in the instance of the Roman Arbitrament formerly mentioned An arbitrary power is the highest of all powers Judges must proceed according to law Arbitrators are tied to no law but their own reason and their own consciences Yet all the world will say that the Romans dealt fraudulently and unjustly with the two parties Lastly the holy Scriptures do every where brand wicked Laws as infamous As the Statutes of Omrâ—… and the Statutes of Israel and stileth them expressely unjust laws or unrighteous decrees He asketh to whom the Bible is a law The Bible is not a law but the positive laws of God are contained in the Bible Doth he think the Law of God is no Law without his suffrage He might have been one of Tiberius his Council when it was proposed to the Senate Whether they should admit Christ to be a God or not He saith I know that it is not a law to all the World Not de facto indeed How should it when the World is so full of Atheists that make no more account of their soules than of so many handfuls of salt to keep their bodies from stinking But de jure by right it is a Law and ought to be a Law to all the World The Heathens and particularly the Stoicks themselves did speak with much more reverence of the holy Books of which to suspect a falsehood they held to be an heinous and detestable crime And the first argument for necessity they produced from the authority of those Books because they said that God did know all things and dispose all things He asketh How the Bible came to be a Law to us Did God speake it viva voce to us have we seen the miracles have we any other assurance then the words of the Prophets and the authority of the Church And so it concludeth that it is the Legislative power of the Common-wealth wheresoever it is placed which makes the Bible a Law in England If a man digged a pit and covered it not again so that an oxe or an asse fell into it he was obbliged by the Mosaical Law to make satisfaction for the dammage I know not whether he do this on purpose to weaken the authority of holy Scripture or not Let God and his own conscience be his Triers But I am sure he hath digged a pit for an oxe or an asse without covering it again and if they chance to stumble blindfold into it their blood will be required at his hands If a Turke had said so much of the Alchoran at Constantinople he were in some danger If it were within the compasse of the present controversie I should esteem it no difficult task to demonstrate perspicuously that the holy Scriptures can be no other then the word of God himself by their antiquity by their harmony by their efficacy by the sanctity and sublimity of their matter such as could not have entered into the thoughts of man without the inspiration of the Holy Ghost By the plainnesse of their stile so full of Majesty by the light of prophetical predictions by the testimony of the blessed Martyrs by a multitude of miracles by the simplicity of the Penmen and Promulgers poor fishermen and shepherds who did draw the World after their oaten reeds and lastly by the judgements of God that have fallen upon such Tyrants and others as have gone about to suppr esse or profane the Sacred Oracles But this is one of those things de quibus nefas est dubitare which he that calleth into question deserveth to be answered otherwise than with arguments But that which is sufficient to confute him is the law of nature which is the same in a great part with the positive Law of God recorded in holy Scriptures All the ten Commandments in respect of their substanrials are acknowledged by all men to be branches of the law of nature I hope he will not say that these laws of nature were made by our Suffrages though he be as likely to say such an absurdity as any man living For he saith the law of nature is the assent it self which all men give to the means of their preservation Every law is a rule of our actions a meer assent is no rule A law commandeth or forbiddeth an assent doth neither But to shew him his vanity Since he delighteth so much in distinctions let him satisfie himself out of the distinction of the law of nature The law of nature is the prescription of right reason whereby thorough that light which nature hath placed in us we know some things to be done because they are honest and other things to be shunned because they are dishonest He had forgotten what he had twice cited and approved out of Cicero concerning the law of nature which Philo calls The law that cannot lie not moral made by mortals not without life or written in paper or columnes without life but that which can not be corrupted written by the immortal God in our understandings Secondly if this which he saith did deserve any consideration it was before the Bible was admitted or assented unto or received as the word of God But the Bible hath been assented unto and received in England sixteen hundred years A fair prescription and in all that time I do not find any law to authorize it or to under-prop heaven from falling with a bullrush This is undeniable that for so many successive ages we have received it as the law of God himself not depending upon our assents or the authority of our Law-makers Thirdly we have not onely a nationall tradition of our own Church for the divine authority of holy Scripture but which is of much more moment we have the perpetuall constant universall tradition of the Catholick Church of Christ ever since Christ himself did tread upon the face of the earth This is so clear a proof of the universall reception of the Bible for the genuine Word of God that there cannot justly be any more doubt made of it than whether there ever was a William the Conquerer or not But this is his opinion That true religion in every Country is that which the Soveraign Magistrate doth admit and injoyne I could wish his deceived followers would think upon what rock he drives them For if this opinion be true then that which is true religion to day may be false religion tomorrow and change as often as the chief Governour or Governours change their opinions Then that which is true religion in one Country is false religion in another Country because the Governours are of different opinions then all the religions of the World Christian Jewish Turkish Heathenish are true religions in
But he who calleth him perfection it self acknowledgeth that all the perfection of the Creatures is by participation of his infinite perfection Such errours as these formerly recited do deserve another manner of refutation and when he is in his lucide intervalles he himself acknowledgeth what I say to be true That God is incomprehensible and immaterial And he himself proveth so much from this very attribute of God that he is infinite Ci. c. 15. s. 14. Figure is not attributed to God for every figure is finite Neither can he be comprehended by us for whatsoever we conceive is finite nor hath he parts which are attributed only to finite things nor is be more than one there can be but one infinite Whereas I called hell the true Tophet he telleth us gravely That Tophet was a place not far from the walls of Hierusalem and consequently on the earth Adding after his boasting manner That he cannot imagine what I will say to this in my answer to his Leviathan unlesse I say that by the true Tophet in this place is meant a not true Tophet Whosoever answereth his Leviathan will be more troubled with his extravagancies than with his arguments Doth he not know that almost all things happened to them as figures There may be a true mystical Tophet as well as a literal And there is a true mystical Gehenna or Vally of Hinnon as well as a literal He that should say that Christ is the true Paschal Lamb or the Church the true Hierusalem or John Baptist the true Elias may well justifie it without saying That by the true Paschal Lamb is meant no true Paschal Lamb or by the true Hierusalem no true Hierusalem or by the true Elias no true Elias VVhat poor stuff is this And so he concludeth his Animadversion with a rapping Paradox indeed True religion consisteth in obedience to Christs Lieutenants and in giving God such honour both in Attributes and actions as they in their several Lieutenancies shall ordain That Soveraign Princes are Gods Lieutenants upon earth no man doubteth but how come they to be Christs Lieutenants with him who teacheth expressely that the kingdom of Christ is not to begin till the general Resurrection His errours come so thick that it is difficult to take notice of them all yet if he had resolved to maintain his Paradox it had been ingenuously done to take notice of my reasons against it in this place First what if the Soveraign Magistrate shall be no Christian himself Is an Heathen or Mahumetan Prince the Lieutenant of Christ or a fit infallible Judge of the controversies of Christian Religion Are all his Christian subjects obliged to sacrifice to idols or blaspheme Christ upon his command Certainly he giveth the same latitude of power and right to Heathen and Mahumetan Princes that he doth to Christian. There is the same submition to both I authorise and give up my right of governing my self to this man whom he maketh to be a mortal God To him alone he ascribeth the right to allow and disallow of all doctrines all formes of worship all miracles all revelations And most plainly in the 42. and 43. Chapters of his Leviathan where he teacheth obedience to infidel Princes in all things even to the denial of Christ to be necessary by the Law of God and nature My second reason in this place was this What if the Magistrate shall command contrary to the Law of God must we obey him rather than God He confesseth That Christ ought to be obeyed rather than his Lieutenant upon earth This is a plain concession rather than an answer But he further addeth That the question is not who is to be obeyed but what be his commands Most vainly For if true Religion do consist in obedience to the commands of the Soveraign Prince then to be truly religiouâ—… it is not needful to inquire further than what he commandeth Frustra fit per plura quod fierâ—… potest per pauciora Either he must make the Soveraign Prince to be infallible in all his commands concerning Religion which we see by experience to be false and he himself confesseth that they may command their subjects to deny Christ or else the authority of the Soveraign Prince doth justifie to his subjects whatsoever he commands and then they may obey Christs Lieutenant as safely without danger of punishment as himself My third reason was this If true Religion do consist in obedience to the commands of the Soveraign Prince then the Soveraigne Prince is the ground and pillar of truth not the Church But the Church is the ground and pillar of truth not the Soveraign Prince These things write I unto thee c. that thou mayest know how thou oughest to behave thy self in the house of God which is the Church of the living God the power and ground of truth What the Church signifieth in this place may be demonstratively collected both from the words themselves wherein he calleth it the house of God which appellation cannot be applied to a single Soveraign much lesse to a Heathen Prince as their Soveraign then was And likewise by the things written which were directions for the ordering of Ecclesiastical persons The last Argument used by me in this place was ad hominem Why then is T. H. of a different mind from his Soveraign and from the laws of the Land concerning the Attributes of God and the religious worship which is to be given to him The Canons and Constitutions and Articles of the Church of England and their Discipline and form of Divine Worship were all confirmed by Royal authority And yet Mr. Hobbes made no scruple to assume to himself that which he denieth to all other subjects the knowledge of good and evil or of true and false religion And a judgement of what is consonant to the Law of Nature and Scripture different from the commands of his Soveraign and the judgement of all his fellow Subjects as appeareth by his book De cive printed in the year 1642. Neither can he pretend that he was then a local Subject to another Prince for he differed more from him in Religion than from his own natural Soveraign This Paradox hath been confuted before and some of those grosse absurdities which flow from it represented to the Reader to all which he may adde these folowing reasons First true Religion cannot consist in any thing which is sinful But obedience to Soveraign Princes may be sinful This is proved by the example of Jeroboam who established idolatry in his kingdom And the Text saith this thing became a sin It may be he will say this idolatrous worship was a sin in Jeroboam not in the people who obeyed him But the Text taketh away this evasion branding him ordinarily with this mark of infamy Jeroboam the son of Nebat who made Israel to sin Secondly true Religion cannot consist in obedience to contradictory commands But the commands of
doth not afflict the children of men willingly except it be for sin Fools are afflicted because of their transgression The afflictions as he calleth them of those creatures that cannot sin that is brute beasts are alltogether of another nature They were created for the use of man they were given for the sustenance of men every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you even as the green herb have I given you all things But the tormenting even of the brute creatures needlessely for the pleasing of our sensual appetites or the satisfaction of our humour is not onely unchristian but unhumane A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruell God hath made two covenants with man none with the beasts He saith It is no more cruelty to afflict a man with endlesse torment for sin than without sin when he might without trouble have kept him from sinning Is it not great pitty that T. H. was not of God Almighties councel when he ordered the World that he might have advised him to have made man impeccable which he might have done without any trouble or that otherwise his fall and consequently his punishment might be justly imputed to God himself It was well enacted in the laws of the twelve tables Ad divos adeunto caste pietatem adhibento qui secus faxit Deus ipse vindex erit our addresses to God ought to be pure and devout they who do otherwise will find God himself the revenger Doth T. H. believe St. Jude That God hath reserved the Angels that kept not their first estate in everlasting chains under darknesse unto the judgement of the great day God could by his absolute power have kept them in their first estate yet he would not By his absolute power he can do all things which do not implic imperfection or contradiction but by his ordinate power he cannot change his decrees nor alter whathe hath ordained Acts of grace may be free but punishments must be alwayes just That King who doth not pardon a willfull traitour is not equally guilty of murther with him that hangs up an innocent Subject Then to answer fully to his question Why God suffered man to sinne having power to withhold him To preserve that order and course which he had established in the World and to draw a greater good out of evill for the further manifestation of his own glory First the manifestation of his power as St. Austin saith He that created all things very good and did foreknow that evill would arise from good knew likewise that it appeerteined rather to his most Almighty goodnesse to draw good out of evill then not to suffer evill Secondly the manifestation of his providence in suffering man whom he had indowed with freedom of will and power sufficient to resist and overcome Satan either to conquer or yield at his own choice Thirdly the manifestation of his justice and mercy by punishing some out of the corrupted masse justly and saving others out of his meer mercy If T. H. thinks vainly that the onely manifestation of Gods power is a sufficient ground for the punishment of men in hell fire without their own faults or crimes how much better may good Christians conclude That the greater manifestation of Gods power and providence and justice and mercy is a sufficient ground for the punishment of men with the like torments for their own crimes His second answer is set down by way of interrogation What infallible evidence hath the Bishop that a man shal be eternally in torments never die Even the authority of our Saviour and the Holy Scriptures which call it an everlasting fire an eternall fire a fire that is not quenched everlasting punishment everlasting chains the worm that never dyeth and the fire that goeth not out Go ye cursed into everlasting fire prepared for the devill and his angels The Bishop hath the testimony of the Athanasian creed that they who have done good shall go into life everlasting and they that have done evil into everlasting fire He hath the testimony of the universall Church of all ages except a few Originists If T. H. have no more than his own single private authority to oppose against all these he is a bold man They who question everlasting torments will not stick to question everlasting life To his demand about the second death I answer This is the second death if he could see wood for trees In the next place he urgeth how that inconveniencies follow from our opinion First That mans liberty to will quite takes away the prescience of God for if man have it in his power to will or not to will it cannot be certainly foreknown what he will will The second That Gods prescience doth take away liberty by making all events necessary from eternity for it is impossible that that should not come to passe or come to passe otherwise than it was foreknown which God foreknoweth shall come to passe And if it be impossible that it should not come to passe then it is necessary that it should come to passe This is too severe first to make us take prescience quite away and yet with the same breath to argue against us from prescience But for once I will give him a cleaâ—… solution to both his pretended demonstrations and let him see that there is no necessity that men must either turn blocks without liberty or sacrilegious to rob God of his prescience But I give him it upon a condition That hereafter before he take away either prescience or liberty he will first take away this answer and not repeat us the same thing over and over again to no purpose To the first inconvenience I answer That a thing may be said to be foreknown two wayes either as it is in its causes before it be produced and so I confesse That if the free Agent have it in his power to will or not to will there is no determinate truth of future contingents that is in their causes and consequently no prescience or foreknowledge in that respect or else a thing may be said to be foreknown as it is or shall be in it self in the nature of things after it is produced And thus every particular event that shall be untill the end of the World is foreknown or to speak more properly is known to God from all eternity For in Gods knowledge there is neither before nor after past nor to come Those things which are past or to come to us are allwayes present to God whose infinite understanding that is himself doth encompasse all times and events in one instant of eternity and so doth prevent or anticipate all differences of time Time is the measure of all our acts but Gods knowledge being infinite is not measured but by eternity so that which is a prescience or a before-hand knowledge as he calleth it to us is a present
logge in the fable which terrified the poor Frogs with the noise it made at the first falling of it into the water but afterwards they insulted over it and took their turns to leap upon it Some take it to be pure nonsense Whether a man be free in such things as be within his power That is whether he be free wherein he is free or that be within his power which is in his power I have formerly shewed and shall demonmonstrate further as there is occasion that this distinction is contradictory and destructive to his own grounds according to which all the other powers and faculties of a man are determined to one by an extrinsecal fluxe of natural causes equally with the will And therefore a man is no more necessitated to will or chuse what he will do than to do what he wills Secondly I have shewed that this distinction is vain and unuseful and doth not hold off so much as one blow from Mr. Hobâ—…es and his bleeding cause All those grosse absurdities which do necessarily follow the inevitable determinations of all actions and events by extrinsecal causes do fall much more heavily and insupportably upon the extrinsecal determination of the will So he stickes deeper by means of this distinction in the same mire All the ground of justice that he can find in punishments is this That though mens actions be necessary yet they do them willingly Now if the will be irresistibly determined to all its individial acts then there is no more justice to punish a man for willing necessarily than for doing necessarily Thirdly I have shewed already in part that this distinction is contrary to the sense of the whole World who take the will to be much more free than the performance Which may be thus enlarged Though a man were thrust into the deepest dungeon in Europe yet in despite of all the second causes he may will his own liberty Let the causes heap a conglomeration of diseases upon a man more than Herod had yet he may will his own health Though a man be withheld from his friend by Seas and Mountains yet he may will his presence He that hath not so much as a cracked groat towards the payment of his debts may yet will the satisfaction of his Creditors And though some of these may seem but pendulous wishes of impossibilities and not so compatibile with a serious deliberation yet they do plainly shew the freedom of the will In great things said the Poet it is sufficient to have willed that is to have done what is in our power So we say God accepteth the will that which we can for the deed that which we cannot If there be first a willing mind it is accepted according to that a man hath that is to will And not according to that he hath not that is to perform And yet more plainly To will is present with me but how to perform that which is good that find I not Yet saith T. H. A man is free to do what he willes but not to will what he will do To come yet a little nearer to T. H. For since he refuseth all humane authority I must stick to Scripture It is called a mans own will and his own voluntary will If it be determined irresistibly by outward causes it is rather their own will than his own will Nay to let him see that the very name of free-will it self is not such a stranger in Scripture as he imagineth it is called a mans own free will How often do we read in the books of Moses Ezra and the Psalms of free-will offerings This free-will is opposed not onely to compulsion but also to necessity not of necessity but willingly And is inconsistent with all extrinsecal determination to one with which election of this or that indifferently is incompatible Is not the whole land before thee said Abraham to Lot If thou wilt take the left hand then I will go to the right or if thou depart to the right hand then I will go to the left God said to David I offer thee three things chuse one of them And to Solomon Because thou hast asked this thing and hast not asked long life or riches And Herod to his daughter Ask of me whatsoever thou wilt And Pilate to the Jews Whether of the twain will ye that I release unto you And St. Paul unto the Corinthians What will ye shall I come unto you with a rod or in love Both were in their choice Yet T. H. doth tell us That all these were free to do this or that indifferently if they would but not free to will To chuse and to elect is of all others the most proper Act of the will But all these were free to chuse and elect this or that indifferently or else all this were meer mockery And therefore they were free to will The Scripture koweth no extrinsecal determiners of the will but iâ—…self So it is said of Eli's sons Give flesh to roast for the Priest for he will not have sodden flesh of thee but raw And if thou wilt not give it I will take it by force Sic volo sic jubeo stat pro ratione voluntas Here was more will than necessity So it is said of the rich man in the Gospel What shall I do This I will do I will pull down my barnes and build greater and there will I bestow all my fruits and my goods And I will say to my soul take thine ease eat drink and be merry Both his purse and person were under the command of his wâ—…ll So St. Iames saith Go to now ye that say to day or tomorrow we will go into such a City and continue there a year and buy and sell and get gain whereas ye know not what shall be to morrow c. for that ye ought to say if the Lord will we shall live and do this or that The defect was not in their will to resolve but in their power to perform So T. H. his necessity was their liberty and their liberty was his necessity Lastly the Scriptures teach us that it is in the power of a man to chuse his own will for the future All that thou commandest us we will do And whithersoever thou sendest us we will go As we hearkened unto Moses in all things so will we hearken unto thee So saith St. Paul What I do that I will do And in another place I do rejoyce and I will rejoyce And they that will be rich When Christ inquired of his Disciples Will ye also go away According to T. H. his principles he should have said Must ye also go away We have viewed his distinction but we have not answered his comparison Will is an appetite And it is one question whether he be free to eat that hath an appetite And another Whether he be free to have an appetite Comparisons are but a poor kind
of reasoning at the best which may illustrate something but prove nothing And of all comparisons this is one of the worst which is drawn from the sensual appetite to the rational appetite The rational appetite and the sensual appetite are even as like one to another as an apple and an oyster The one is a natural Agent the other is a free Agent The one acts necessarily the other acts contingently I take the word largly The one is determined to one the other is not determined to one The one hath under God a Dominion over it self and its own acts The other hath no Dominion over it self or its own acts Even the will it self when it acts after a natural manner which is but rarely in some extraordinary cases as in the appetite of the chiefest good being fully revealed or in a panical terrour which admitteth no deliberation acts not freely but necessarily How much more must Agents meerly Natural which have neither reason to deliberate nor dominion or liberty to elect act necessarily and determinately So to answer a comparison with a comparison his Argument is just such another as this The Gally-slave which is chained to the oare is a man as well as the Pilot that sits at the sterne therefore the Gally-slave hath as much dominion in the ship as the Pilot and is as free to turn it hither and thither So falls this dreadfull engine all in pieces which should have battered down the Fort of Liberty His gentle reprehension That if I have not been able to distinguish between these two questions I have not done well to meddle with either And if I have understood them I have dealt uningenuously and frandulently would better become me who defend liberty than him who supposeth an irresistible necessity of all events If he think I have not done well yet according to his own grounds he may rather blame the causes that do necessitate me than blame me who am irresistibly necessitated to do what I do Fraud and deceit have no place in necessary Agents who can do no otherwise then they do He might as well accuse the Sea to have dealt fraudulently with him because he mistook the tide and could not passe over the Foard at an high water as he purposed Such is the power of truth that it comes to light many times when it is not sought for He doth see in part already that I understand the vanity of his distinction and shall see it better yet before this Treatise be ended Yet if I would be so courteous as to forgive him all this his distinction would not prejudice me The places of Scripture alledged by me in my former defence do not onely prove that a man is free to do if he will but much more that a man is free to chuse and to elect that is as much to say as to will and determine it self An answer to his Fountains of Arguments in this Question IT is a certain rule Contraries being placed one besides another do appear much more clearly He who desires to satisfie his judgment in this controversie must compare our writings one with another without partiality the Arguments and Answers and pretended absurdities on both sides But T. H. seeketh to ingratiate himself and his cause before hand and if it be possible to anticipate and preoccupate the judgements of his readers with a Flourish or Preludium under the specious name of Fountains of Arguments So before a serious war Cities use to personate their adverse party and feign mock-combats and skirmishes to encourage their friends wherein you may be sure their own side shall conquer As Players make their little puppets prate and act what they please and stand or fall as they lend them motion which brings to my mind the Lions answer in the Fable when the picture of a man beating a Lion was produced to him If a Lion had made this picture he would have made the Lioâ—… above and the man beneath It is a sufficient answer to this prologue That Mr. Hobbes that is an adversary made it Nihil est quin male narrando possit depravarier What had he to do to urge arguments foâ—… me or to give solutions for me or to presâ—… the inconveniences and absurdities which flow from fatal destiny on my behalf I gaâ—… him no commission I need none of his help yet by this personated conflict he hoped to have stolen an easie victory withouâ—… either blood or sweate I will not tire out my selfe and the reader with the superfluous repetition of those things which we shall meet with again much more opportunely in their proper places Some Authours are like those people who measuring all others by themselves believe nothing is well understood until it be repeated over and over again Qui nihil alios credunt intelligere nisi idem dictum est centies But whatsoever is new in this Preface if it have but any one grain of weight I will not faile to examine and answer it either here or there And first I cannot chuse but wonder at his confidence that a single person who never took degree in schooles that I have heard of except it were by chance in Malmesbury should so much sleight not onely all the scholars of this present Age but all the Fathers Schoole-men and old Philosophers which I dare say he hath not studied much and forget himself so far as to deny all their authorities at once if they give not him satisfaction to make his private and crasy judgement to be the standard and seale of truth and himself an universal Dictatour among Scholars to plant and to pull up to reform and new modulate or rather turn upside down Theology Phylosophy Morality and all other Arts and Sciences which he is pleased to favour so much as not to eradicate them or pluck them up root and branch as if he was one of Aesops fellows who could do all things and say all things He is not the first man in the World who hath lost himself by grasping and ingrossing too much As the Athenians used to say of Metiochus Metiochus is Captain Metiochus is Surveier Metiochus bakes the bread Metiochus grinds the Corn Metiochus doth all an evill year to Metiochus He mentioneth the Scriptures indeed but his meaning is to be the sole Interpreter of them himself without any respect to the perpetuall and universall tradition of the Catholick Church or the sense of all ancient Expositors Well for once I will forbear all the advantage which I have from the authority of Councells Fathers Schoolmen and Philosophers meet him singly at his own weapon yet with this protestation that if he value his own single judgement above all theirs he comes within the compasse of Solomons censure Seest thou a man wise in his own eyes there is more hope of a fool than of him He telleth us That the Attributes of God are oblations given onely for honour but
unlesse he have authority given him by him whom Christ hath constituted his Lieutenant First I answer his question with a question What if the Bishop have such authority and he hath not He cannot deny but the Bishop had such authority when he had not And yet he doubted not even then to interpret the Scriptures contrary both to the Bishop and to Christs Lieutenant Secondly I answer That by his own confession there is a great difference between him and me in this particular Our Saviour hath promised this infallability in those things which are necessary to salvation to the Apostles until the day of judgement that is to say to the Apostles and to Pastors to be consecrated by them by imposition of hands Therefore the Soveraign Magistrate as he is a Christian is obliged to interpret the holy Scriptures when there is question about the mysteries of faith by Ecclesiastical persons rightly ordained Unlesse he have such ordination by imposition of hands I am better qualified then he is for the interpretation of Scripture by his own confession But he supposeth that a Bishop or a Synod of Bishops should be set up for our civil Soveraign A likely thing indeed Suppose the skie fall then we shall have Larks But to gratifie him let us suppose it What then Then that which I object against him he could object in the same words against me So he might if I should be so fond as to say that true religion did consist in obedience to that single Bishop or that Synod of bishops as he saith that it doth consist in obedience to the Soveraign Prince He deceiveth himself and mistaketh us if he think that we hold any such ridiculous opinions If he could shew that Bishops do challenge an infallability to themselves by divine right and which is more than infallability a power to authorise all their commands for true religion he said something to the purpose He telleth us that he remembers there have been books written to entitle the Bishops to a divine right underived from the Civil Soveraign Very likely if the law of nature do make a divine right Perhaps a locomotive faculty or a liberty of respiration which all other men do challenge as well as Bishops But he meaneth no religion Why not They have their holy orders by succession from the Apostles not from their civil Soveraigns They have the power of the keys by the concession of Christ Whose sins yet remit they are remitted whose sins ye retain they are retained None can give that to another which they have not themselves Where did Christ give the power of the keys to the civil Magistrate I was far enough from thinking of Odes when I writ my defence of liberty That which he calleth my Ode was written about a thousand years before I was born I cited it onely to shew the sense of the primitive Christians concerning obedience to the unlawful commands of Soveraign Princes that we ought to obey God rather than them And to that it is full Iussum est Caesaris ore Gallieni Princeps quod colit ut colamus omnes Aeternum colo principem dierum Factorem dominumque Gallieni This put him into such a fit of versifying that he could not forbear to make a Parode such as it is wherein out of pure zeal if it were worth taking notice of he retaineth the errours of the presse And so confounding Regal Supremacy with a kind of omnipotence and the external Regiment of the Church with the power of the keys and jurisdiction in the inner court of conscience and forraign usurpations with the ancient rights and liberties of the English Church and a stipendiary School-master who hath neither title nor right but the meer pleasure of the master of the family with Bishops who are the successors of the Apostles in that part of their office which is of ordinary and perpetual necessity and the Kings proper councel in Ecclesiastical affairs He concludeth his Animadversion with this fair intimation to Doctor Hamond and me That if we had gone upon these his principles when we did write in defence of the Church of England against the imputation of Scisme quitting our own pretenses of jurisdiction and jus divinum we had not been so shrewdly handled as we have been by an English Papist I hope neither the Church of England nor any genuine son of the English Church hath complained to him that the Church hath suffered any disadvantage by our pains nor our adversaries in that cause boasted to him of any advantage they have gained I do rather believe that it is but his own imagination without ever reading either party Why should he interrupt his sadder meditations with reading such trifles But for his principles as he calleth them I thank him I will have nothing to do with them except it be to shew him how destructive they are both to Church and Common-wealth But this I believe in earnest that if we had gone upon his principles we should not have made our selves the object of our adversaries pity but well of their scorn In his conclusion or in his postscript chuse whether you will call it first he setteth down his censure of my defence with the same ingenuity and judgement that he hath shewed hitherto that is none at all which I esteem no more than a deaf nut Let the book justifie it self And to the manner of writing he bites first and whines doth an injury and complains The Reader will find no railing in my Treatise nor any of those faults which he objecteth I rather fear that he will censure it as too complying with such an adversary But he had not then given me so much occasion as he hath done since to make him lose that pleasure in reading which he took in writing In the next place he presenteth to the Readers view a large muster of terms and phrases such as are used in the Schools which he calleth nonsense and the language of the kingdom of darknesse that is all the confutation which he vouchsafeth them He hath served them up oft enough before to the Readers loathing Let him take it for a warning wheresoever he reneweth his complaint I shall make bold to renew my story of old Harpaste who complained that the room was dark when the poor Beldam wanted her sight There is more true judgement and solid reason in any one of the worst of those phrases which he derides then there is in one of his whole Sections Thirdly he cavilleth against a saying of mine which he repeateth thus He hath said that his opinion is demonstrable in reason though he be not able to comprehend how it consisteth together with Gods eternal prescience and though it exceed his weak capacity yet he ought to adhere to that truth which is manifest Whence he concludeth after this manner So to him that truth is manifest and demonstrable by reason which is beyond his capacity Let the Reader see what an
himself and all mankind If he did ground his opinions upon any other authority than his own dreams If he did interpret Scripture according to the perpetual tradition of the Catholick Church and not according to his private distemperd phantasies If his discourse were as full of deep reasons as it is of supercilious confidence so that a man might gain either knowledge or reputation by him a great volume would be well bestowed upon him Digna res esset ubi quis nervos intenderet suos But to what purpose is it to draw the coard of contention with such a man in such a cause where it is impiety to doubt much more to dispute Quid cum illis agas qui neque jus neque bonum aut â—…quum sciunt Melius pejus profit obsit nihil vident nisi quod lubet For mine own part as long as God shall furnish me with ability and opportunity I will endeavour to bestow my vacant hours upon a better subject conducing more to the advancement of primitive Piety and the re-union of Christendome by disabusing the hood-winked World then this doth tend to the increase of Atheisme and destruction of ancient truth unlesse the importunity of T. H. or some other divert me to look to my own defence I desire thy Christian prayers that God who hath put this good desire into my mind by his preventing grace will help me by his assisting grace to bring the same to good effect The Preface HItherto I have made use onely of a buckler to guard my self from Mr. Hobbes his assaults What passed between him and me in private had been buried in perpetual silence if his flattering Disciples not without his own fault whether it were connivance or neglect is not material to me had not published it to the World to my prejudice And now having carved out mine own satisfaction I thought to have desisted here as not esteeming him to be a fit adversary who denieth all common principles but rather to be like a pillar of smoake breaking out of the top of some narrow chimny and spreading it self abroad like a cloud as if it threatned to take possession of the whole Region of the air darkening the skie and seeming to pierce the heavens And after all this when it hath offended the eyes a little for the present the first puffe of wind or a few minutes do altogether disperse it I never nourished within my breast the least thought of answering his Leviathan as having seen a great part of it answered before ever I read it and having moreover received it from good hands that a Roman Catholick was about it but being braved by the authour in print as giving me a title for my answer Behemoth against Leviathan And at other times being so solicitous for me what I would say to such a passage in my answer to his Leviathan imagining his silly cavils to be irrefragable demonstrations I will take the liberty by his good leave to throw on two or three spadefulls of earth towards the final interrement of his pernicious principles and other mushrome errours And truly when I ponder seriously the horrid consequences of them I do not wonder so much at his mistaken exception to my civil form of valediction So God blesse us miscalling it A buffonly abusing of the Name of God to calumny He conceived me amisse that because in times less scrupulous and more conscientious men used to blesse themselves after this form at the naming of the devil therefore I did intend it as a prayer for the deliverance of all good Christians from him and his blasphemous opinions I do believe there never was any Authour Sacred or Profane Ancient or Moderne Christian Iew Mahumetan or Pagan that hath inveighed so frequently and so bitterly against all feined phantasmes with their first devisers maintainers and receivers as T. H. hath done excluding out of the nature of things the souls of Men Angels Devils and all incorporeal Substances as fictions phantasmes and groundlesse contradictions Many men fear the meaning of it is not good that God himself must be gone for company as being an incorporeal substance except men will vouchsafe by God to understand nature So much T H. himself seemeth to intimate This concourse of causes whereof every one is determined to be such as it is by a like concourse of former causes may well be called in respect they were all set and ordered by the eternal cause of all things God Almighty the Decree of God If Gods eternal Decree be nothing else but the concourse of natural causes then Almighty God is nothing else but nature And if there be no spirits or incorporeal substances he must be either nature or nothing T. H. defieth the Schooles and therefore he knoweth no difference between immanent and emanant or transient Actions but confoundeth the eternal Decrees of God before all time with the execution of them in time which had been a foule fault in a Schooleman And yet his Leviathan or mortal God is a meer phantasme of his own devising neither flesh nor fish but a confusion of a man and a whale engendered in his own brain not unlike Dagon the Idol of the Philistims a mixture of a god and a man and a fish The true literall Leviathan is the Whale-fish Canst thou draw out Leviathan with an hook whom God hath made to take his pastime in the great and wide sea And for a metaphorical Leviathan I know none so proper to personate that huge body as T. H. himself The Levia than doth not take his pastime in the deep with so much freedom nor behave himself with so much height and insolence as T. H. doth in the Schooles nor domineer over the lesser fishes with so much scorn and contempt as he doth over all other authours censuring branding contemning proscribing whatsoever is contrary to his humour bustling and bearing down before him whatsoever cometh in his way creating truth and falshood by the breath of his mouth by his sole authority without other reason A second Pythagoras at least There have been self conceited persons in all Ages but none that could ever King it like him over all the children of pride Ruit agit rapit tundit prosternit Yet is not his Leviathan such an absolute Soveraign of the Sea as he imagineth God hath chosen the weak things of this world to confound the mighty The little mouse stealeth up thorough the Elephants trunke to eat his brains making him die desperately mad The Indian rat creepeth into the belly of the gaping Crocodile and knaweth his bowels asunder The great Leviathan hath his adversaries the sword-fish which pierceth his belly beneath and the thrasher-fish which beateth his head above and whensoever these two unite their forces together against him they destroy him But this is the least part of his Leviathans sufferings Our Greenland fishers have found out a new art to draw
finite and consists of parts and consequently is no God This That there is no incorporal spirit is that main root of Atheisme from which so many lesser branches are daily sprouting up When they have taken away all incorporal spirits what do they leave God himself to be He who is the fountain of all being from whom and in whom all creatures have their being must needs have a real being of his own And what real being can God have among bodies and accidents for they have left nothing else in the universe Then T. H. may move the same question of God which he did of devils I would gladly know in what classis of entities the Bishop ranketh God Infinite being and participated being are not of the same nature Yet to speak according to humane apprehension apprehension and comprehension differ much T. H. confesseth that natural reason doth dictate to us that God is infinite yet natural reason cannot comprehend the infinitenesse of God I place him among incorporeal substances or spirits because he hath been pleased to place himself in that rank God is a spirit Of which place T. H. giveth his opinion that it is unintelligible and all others of the same nature and fall not under humane understanding They who deny all incorporeal substances can understand nothing by God but either nature not naturam naturantem that is a real authour of nature but naturam naturatam that is the orderly concourse of natural causes as T. H. seemeth to intimate or a fiction of the brain without real being cherished for advantage and politick ends as a profitable error howsoever dignified with the glorious title of the eternal causes of all things We have seen what his principles are concerning the Deity they are full as bad or worse concerning the Trinity Hear himself A person is he that is represented as often as he is represented And therefore God who has been represented that is personated thrice may properly enough be said to be three Persons though neither the word Person nor Trinity be ascribed to him in the Bible And a little after to concludethe doctrine of the Trinity as far as can be gathered directly from the Scripture is in substance this that the God who is alwayes one and the same was he person represented by Moses the person represented by his Son incarnate and the person represented by the Apostles As represented by the Apostles the holy spirit by which they spake is God As represented by his son that was God and Man the Son is that God As represented by Moses and the High Priests the Father that is to say the Father of our Lord Iesus Christ is that God From whence we may gather the reason why those names Father Son and Holy Ghost in the signification of the Godhead are never used in the Old Testament For they are persons that is they have their names from representing which could not be till diverse men had represented Gods person in ruling or in directing under him Who is so bold as blind Bayard The emblime of a little boy attempting to lade all the water out of the sea with a Coccleshel doth fit T. H. as exactly as if it had been shaped for him who thinketh to measure the profound and inscrutable mysteries of religion by his own silly shallow conceits What is now become of the great adorable mysterie of the blessed undivided Trinity it is shrunk into nothing Upon his grounds there was a time when there was no Trinity And we must blot these words out of our Creed The Father eternal the Son eternal the Holy Ghost eternal And these other words out of our Bibles Let us make man after our image Unlesse we mean that this was a consultation of God with Moses and the Apostles What is now become of the eternal generation of the Son of God if this Sonship did not begin until about four thousand years after the creation were expired Upon these grounds every King hath as many persons as there be Justices of Peace and petty Constables in his kingdom Upon this account God Almighty hath as many persons as there have been Soveraign Princes in the World since Adam According to this reckoning each one of us like so many Gerious may have as many persons as we please to make procurations Such bold presumption requireth another manner of confutation Concerning God the Son forgetting what he had said elsewhere where he calleth him God and man and the Son of God incarnate he doubteth not to say that the word hypostatical is canting As if the same person could be both God and man without a personal that is an hypostatical union of the two natures of God and man He alloweth every man who is commanded by his lawful Soveraign to deny Christ with his tongue before men He deposeth Christ from his true kingly office making his kingdom not to commence or begin before the day of judgement And the regiment wherewith Christ governeth his faithful in this life is not properly a kingdom but a pastoral office or a right to teach And a little after Christ had not kingly authority committed to him by his Father in this World but onely consiliary and doctrinall He taketh away his Priestly or propitiatory office And although this act of our redemption be not alwayes in Scripture called a Sacrifice and oblation but sometimes a price yet by price we are not to understand any thing by the value whereof he could claim right to a pardon for us from his offended father but that price which God the Father was pleased in mercy to demand And again Not that the death of one man though without sin can satisfie for the offences of all men in the rigour of iustice but in the mercy of God that ordained such Sacrifices for sin as he was pleased in mercy to accept He knoweth no difference between one who is meer man and one who was both God and man between a Levitical Sacrifice and the all-sufficient Sacrifice of the Crosse between the blood of a Calf and the precious blood of the Son of God And touching the Prophetical Office of Christ I do much doubt whether he do believe in earnest that there is any such thing as prophecy in the World He maketh very little difference between a Prophet and a mad-man and a demoniack And if there were nothing else saith he that bewrayed their madnesse yet that very arrogating such inspiration to themselves is argument enough He maketh the pretence of inspiration in any man to be and alwayes to have been an opinion pernicious to peace and tending to the dissolution of all civil government He subjecteth all Prophetical Revelations from God to the sole pleasure and censure of the Soveraign Prince either to authorize them or to exauctorate them So as two Prophets prophesying the same thing at the same time in the dominions of two different Princes
the one shall be a true Prophet the other a false And Christ who had the approbation of no Soveraign Prince upon his grounds was to be reputed a false Prophet every where Every man therefore ought to consider who is the Soveraign Prophet that is to say who it is that is Gods Vicegerent upon earth and hath next under God the authority of governing Christian men and to observe for a rule that doctrine which in the name of God he hath commanded to be taught and thereby to examine and try out the truth of those doctrines which pretended Prophets with miracle or without shall at any time advance c. And if he disavow them then no more to obey their voice or if he approve them than to obey them as men to whom God hath given a part of the spirit of their Soveraign Upon his principles the case holdeth as well among Jews and Turks and Heathens as Christians Then he that teacheth transubstantiation in France is a true Prophet he that teacheth it in England a false Prophet He that blasphemeth Christ in Constantinople a true Prophet he that doth the same in Italy a false Prophet Then Samuel was a false Prophet to contest with Saul a Soveraign Prophet So was the man of God who submitted not to the more divine and prophetick spirit of Jeroboam And Elijah for reproving Ahab Then Micaiah had but his deserts to be clapt up in prison and fed with bread of affliction and water of affliction for daring to contradict Gods Vicegerent upon earth And Jeremiah was justly thrown into a Dungeon for prophesying against Zedekiah his Liege Lord. If his principles were true it were strange indeed that none of all these Princes nor any other that ever was in the World should understand their own priviledges And yet more strange that God Almighty should take the part of such rebellious Prophets and justifie their prophesies by the event if it were true that none but the Soveraign in a Christian the reason is the same for Jewish Common-wealth can take notice what is or what is not the word of God Neither doth he use God the holy Ghost more favourably than God the Son Where S. Peter saith Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the holy Spirit He saith By the Spirit is meant the voice of God in a dream or vision supernatural which dreams or visions he maketh to be no more than imaginations which they had in their sleep or in an extasie which in every true Prophet were supernatural but in false Prophets were either natural or feined and more likely to be false than true To say God hath spoken to him in a dream is no more than to say He dreamed that God spake to him c. To say he hath seen a vision or heard a voice is to say That he hath dreamed between sleeping and waking So S. Peters holy Ghost is come to be their own imaginations which might be either feined or mistaken or true As if the holy Ghost did enter onely at their eyes and at their eares not into their understandings nor into their minds Or as if the holy Ghost did not seale unto their hearts the truth and assurance of their Prophesies Whether a new light be infused into their understandings or new graces be inspired into their heart they are wrought or caused or created immediately by the holy Ghost And so are his imaginations if they be supernatural But he must needs fall into these absurdities who maketh but a jest of inspiration They who pretend Divine inspiration to be a supernatural entering of the holy Ghost into a man are as he thinks in a very dangerous dilemma for if they worship not the men whom they conceive to be inspired they fall into impiety And if they worship them they commit idolatry So mistaking the holy Ghost to be corporeal something that is blown into a man and the graces of the holy Ghost to be corporeal graces And the words impowered or infused virtue and inblown or inspired virtue are as absurd and insignificant as a round qnadrangle He reckons it as a common errour That faith and sanctity are not attained by study and reason but by supernatural inspiration or infusion And laieth this for a firm ground Faith and sanctity are indeed not very frequent but yet they are not miracles but brought to passe by education discipline correction and other natural waeyes I would see the greatest Pelagian of them all flie higher Why should he trouble himself about the holy Spirit who acknowledgeth no spirit but either a subtile fluide invisible body or a ghost or other idol or phantasme of the imagination who knoweth no inward grace or intrinsecal holinesse Holy is a word which in Gods kingdome answereth to that which men in their kingdoms use to call publick or the kings And again wheresoever the word holy is taken properly there is still something signified of propriety gotten by consent His holinesse is a relation not a quality but for inward sanctification or reall infused holinesse in respect whereof the third person is called the holy Ghost because he is not onely holy in himself but also maketh us holy he is so great a stranger to it that he doth altogether deny it and disclaim it We are taught in our Creed to believe the Catholick or Universal Church But T. H. teacheth us the contrary That if there be more Christian Churches than one all of them together are not one Church personally And more plainly Now if the whole number of Christians be not contained in one Common-wealth they are not one person nor is there an Universal Church that hath any authority over them And again The Universal Church is not one person of which it can be said that it hath done or decreed or ordained or excommunicated or absolved This doth quite overthrow all the authority of general Councils All other men distinguish between the Church and the Common-wealth Onely T. H. maketh them to be one and the same thing The Common-wealth of Christian men and the Church of the same are altogether the same thing called by two names for two reasons For the matter of the Church and of the Common-wealth is the same namely the same Christian men And the form is the same which consisteth in the lawful power of convocating them And hence he concludeth That every Christian Common-wealth is a Church endowed with all spiritual authority And yet more fully The Church if it be one person is the same thing with the Common-wealth of Christians called a Common-wealth because it consisteth of men united in one person their Soveraign And a Church because it consisteth in Christian men united in one Christian Soveraign Upon which account there was no Christian Church in these parts of the World for some hundreds of years after Christ because there was no Christian
Soveraign Neither is he more orthodox concerning the Holy Scriptures Hitherto that is for the books of Moses the power of making the Scripture canonical was in the civil Soveraign The like he saith of the Old Testament made canonical by Esdras And of the New Testament That it was not the Apostles which made their own writings canonical but every convert made them so to himself Yet with this restriction That until the Soveraign ruler had prescribed them they were but counsel and advise which whether good or bad he that was counselled might without injustice refuse to observe and being contrary to the Laws established could not without injustice observe He maketh the Primitive Christians to have been in a pretty condition Certainly the Gospel was contrary to the Laws then established But most plainly The word of the Interpreter of the Scripture is the word of God And the same is the Interpreter of the Scripture and the Soveraign Iudge of all Doctrines that is the Soveraign Magistrate to whose authority we must stand no lesse than to Theirs who at first did commend the Scripture to us for the canon of faith Thus if Christian Soveraigns of different communions do clash one with another in their interpretations or misinterpretation of Scripture as they do daily then the word of God is contradictory to it self or that is the word of God in one Common-wealth which is the word of the the devil in another Common-wealth and the same thing may be true and not true at the same time which is the peculiar priviledge of T. H. to make contradictories to be true together All the power virtue use and efficacy which he ascribeth to the holy Sacraments is to be signes or commemorations As for any sealing or confirming or conferring of grace he acknowledgeth nothing The same he saith particularly of Baptisme upon which grounds a Cardinals red hat or a Serjeant at arms his mace may be called Sacraments as well as Baptisme or the holy Eucharist if they be only signes or commemorations of a benefit If he except that Baptisme and the Eucharist are of divine institution but a Cardinals red hat or a Serjeant at arms his mace are not he saith truely but nothing to his advantage or purpose seeing he deriveth all the authority of the Word and Sacraments in respect of Subjects and all our obligation to them from the authority of the Soveraign Magistrate without which these words repent and be baptized in the Name of Iesus are but counsel no command And so a Serjeant at arms his mace and baptisme proceed both from the same authority And this he saith upon this silly ground That nothing is a command the performance whereof tendeth to our own benefit He might as well deny the Ten Commandements to be commands because they have an advantagious promise annexed to them Do this and thou shalt live And cursed is every one that continueth not in all the words of this Law to doe them Sometimes he is for holy orders and giveth to the Pastors of the Church the right of ordination and absolution and infallibility too much for a particular Pastor or the Pastours of one particular Church It is manifest that the consecration of the chiefest Doctours in every Church and imposition of hands doth pertein to the Doctours of the same Church And it cannot be doubted of but the power of binding and loosing was given by Christ to the future Pastours after the same manner as to his present Apostles And our Saviour hath promised this infallibility in those things which are necessary to salvation to his Apostles until the day of judgement that is to say to the Apostles and Pastours to be consecrated by the Apostles successively by the imposition of hands But at other times he casteth all this meale down with his foot Christian Soveraignes are the supreme Pastors and the only persons whom Christians now hear speak from God except such as God speaketh to in these daies supernaturally What is now become of the promised infallibility And it is from the civil Soveraign that all other Pastours derive their right of teaching preaching and all other functions pertaining to that office and they are but his Ministers in the same manner as the Magistrates of Towns or Iudges in Courts of Justice and Commanders of Armies What is now become of their Ordination Magistrates Judges and Generals need no precedent qualifications He maketh the Pastoral authority of Soveraigns to be jure divino of all other Pastors jure civill He addeth neither is there any Iudge of Heresie among Subjects but their own civil Soveraign Lastly The Church excommunicateth no man but whom she excommunicateth by the authorty of the Prince And the effect of excommunication hath nothing in it neither of dammage in this World nor terrour upon an Apostate if the civil power did persecute or not assist the Church And in the World to come leaves them in no worse estate than those who never believed The damage rather redoundeth to the Church Neither is the excommunication of a Christian Subject that obeyeth the laws of his own Soveraign of any effect Where is now their power of binding and loosing It may be some of T. H. his disciples desire to know what hopes of heavenly joies they have upon their masters principles They may hear them without any great contentment There is no mention in Scripture nor ground in reason of the coelum empyreum that is the Heaven of the blessed where the Saints shall live eternally with God And again I have not found any text that can probably be drawn to prove any ascension of the Saints into Heaven that is to say into any coelum empyreum But he concludeth positively that salvation shall be upon earth when God shall reign at the coming of Christ in Ierusalem And again In short the Kingdom of God is a civil Kingdom c. called also the Kingdom of Heaven and the Kingdom of Glory All the Hobbians can hope for is to be restored to the same condition which Adam was in before his fall So saith T. H. himself From whence may be inferred that the Elect after the resurrection shall be restored to the estate wherein Adam was before he had sinned As for the beatifical vision he defineth to be a word unintelligible But considering his other principles I do not marvel much at his extravagance in this point To what purpose should a coelum empyreum or Heaven of the blessed serve in his judgement who maketh the blessed Angels that are the inhabitants of that happy mansion to be either idols of the brain that is in plain English nothing or thin subtile fluid bodies destroying the Angelical nature The unvierse being the aggregate of all bodies there is no real part thereof that is not also body And elsewhere Every part of the universe is body and that which is not
What deserved he who should do his uttermost endeavour to poison a common fountain whereof all the commonwealth must drinke He doth the same who poisoneth the mind of a soveraign prince Are the civil lawes the rules of good and bad just and unjust honest and dishonest And what I pray you are the rules of the civil law it self even the law of God and nature If the civil lawes swerve from these more authentick lawes they are Lesbian rules What the law-giver commands is to be accounted good what he forbids bad This was just the garb of the Athenian Sophisters as they are described by Plato Whatsoever pleased the great beast the multitude they called holy and just and good And whatsoever the great beast disliked they called evill unjust prophane But he is not yet arrived at the height of his flattery Lawfull Kings make those things which they command just by commanding them And those things which they forbid unjust by forbidding them At other times when he is in his right wits he talketh of suffering and expecting their reward in heaven And going to Christ by martyrdome And if he had the fortitude to suffer death he should do better Bâ—…t I fear all this was but said in jest How should they expect their reward in heaven if his doctrine be true that there is no reward in heaven Or how should they be Martyrs if his doctrine be true that none can be Martyrs but those who conversed with Christ upon earth He addeth Before Empires were just and unjust were not Nothing could be written more false in his sense more dishonourable to God more inglorious to the humane nature That God should create man and leave him presently without any rules to his own ordering of himself as the Ostridg leaveth her egges in the sand But in truth there have been empires in the world ever since Adam And Adam had a law written in his heart by the finger of God before there was any civil law Thus they do endeavour to make goodnesse and justice and honesty and conscience and God himself to be empty names without any reality which signifie nothing further than they conduce to a mans interest Otherwise he would not he could not say That every action as it is invested with its circumstances is indifferent in its own nature Something there is which he hath a confused glimmering of as the blind man sees men walking like trees which he is not able to apprehend and expresse clearly We acknowledge that though the laws or commands of a Soveraign Prince be erroneous or unjust or injurius such as a subject cannot approve for good in themselves yet he is bound to acquiesce and may not oppose or resist otherwise than by prayers and tears and at the most by flight We acknowledge that the civil laws have power to bind the conscience of a Christian in themselves but not from themselves but from him who hath said Let every soul be subject to the higher powers Either they bind Christian subjects to do their Soveraigns commands or to suffer for the testimony of a good conscience We acknowledge that in doubtful cases semper praesumitur pro Rege lege the Soveraign and the law are alwayes presumed to be in the right But in plain evident cases which admit no doubt it is alwayes better to obey God than man Blunderers whilest they think to mend one imaginary hole make two or three reall ones They who derive the authority of the Scriptures or Gods Law from the civil laws of men are like those who seek to underprop the heavens from falling with a bullrush Nay they derive not onely the authority of the Scripture but even of the law of nature it self from the civil law The laws of nature which need no promulgation in the condition of nature are not properly laws but qualities which dispose men to peace and to obedience When a Common-wealth is once setled then are they actually laws and not before God help us into what times are we fallen when the immutable laws of God and nature are made to depend upon the mutable laws of mortal men just as if one should go about to controle the Sun by the authority of the clock But it is not worthy of my labour nor any part of my intention to pursue every shadow of a question which he springeth It shall suffice to gather a posie of flowers or rather a bundle of weeds out of his writings and present them to the Reader who will easily distinguish them from healthful plants by the ranknesse of their smell Such are these which follow 1. To be delighted in the imagination onely of being possessed of another mans goods servants or wife without any intention to take them from him by force or fraud is no breach of the law which saith Thou shalt not covet 2. If a man by the terrour of present death be compelled to do a fact against the law he is totally excused because no law can oblige a man to abandon his own preservation Nature compelleth him to the fact The like doctrine he hath elsewhere When the Actor doth any thing against the law of nature by command of the Author if he be obliged by former covenants to obey him not he but the Author breaketh the law of nature 3. It is a doctrine repugnant to civil Society that whatsoever a man does against his conscience is sin 4. The kingdom of God is not shut but to them that sin that is to them who have not performed due obedience to the Laws of God nor to them if they believe the necessary Articles of the Christian Faith 5. We must know that the true acknowledging of sin is repentance it self 6. An opinion publickly appointed to be taught cannot be heresie nor the Soveraign Princes that authorise the same hereticks 7. Temporal and spiritual government are but two words to make men see double and mistake their lawful Soveraign c. There is no other government in this life neither of State nor Religion but temporal 8. It is manifest that they who permit or tolerate a contrary doctrine to that which themselves believe and think necessary do against their conscience and will as much as in them lieth the eternal destruction of their subjects 9. Subjects sin if they do not worship God according to the laws of the Common-wealth 10. To believe in jesus in Jesum is the same as to believe that Iesus is Christ. 11. There can be no contradiction between the Laws of God and the laws of a Christian Common-wealth Yet we see Christian Common-wealths daily contradict one another 12. No man giveth but with intention of good to himself of all voluntary acts the object is to every man his own good Moses St. Paul and the Decii were out of his mind 13. There is no natural knowledge of mans estate after death much lesse of
He fancieth that God reigneth by pact over Adam and Eve but this pact became presently voide And if it had stood firm what Kingdom of God by nature could have been before it But he reckons his Kingdom of God by pact from Abraham from him the Kingdom of God by pact takes its beginning But in Abrahams time and before his time the World was full of Kings every City had a King was it not better for their subjects to obey God than them yet that was the Kingdom of God by nature or no Kingdom of God at all Sometimes he saith the Laws of nature are Laws whose Laws such of them as oblige all mankind and in respect of God as he is the God of Nature are natural in respct of the same God as he is King of Kings are Laws and right reason is a Law And he defines the Law of nature to be the deictate of right reason Where by the way observe what he makes to be the end of the Laws of nature The long conservation of our lives and members so much as is in our power By this the Reader may see what he believes of honesty or the life to come At other times he saith that they are no laws Those which we call the Laws of nature being nothing else but certain conclusions understood by reason of things to be done or to be left undone And a law if we speak properly and accurately is the speech of him that commandeth something by right to others to be done or not to be done speaking properly they are not laws as they proceed from nature It is true he addeth in the same place That as they are given by God in holy Scripture they are most properly called Laws for the holy Scripture is the voice of God ruling all things by the greatest right But this will not salve the contradiction for so the Laws of nature shall be no Laws to any but those who have read the Scripture contrary to the sense of all the World And even in this he contradicteth himself also The Bible is a Law to whom to all the World he knoweth it is not How came it then to be a Law to us Did God speak it viva voce to us Have we any other warrant for it than the word of the Prophots Have we seen the miraoles Have we any other assurance of their certainty than the authority of the Church And so he concludeth That the authority of the Church is the authority of the Common-wealth the authority of the Common-wealth the authority of the Soveraign and his authority was given him by us And so the Bible was made Law by the assent of the Subjects And the Bible is their only Law where the civil Soveraign hath made it so Thus in seeking to prove one contradiction we have met with two He teacheth that the Laws of nature are eternal and immutable that which they forbid can never be lawful that which they command never unlawful At other times he teacheth that in war and especially in a war of ast men against all men the Laws of nature are silent And that they do not oblige as Laws before there be a Common-wealth constituted When a Common-wevlth is once setled then are they actually Laws and not before He saith true religion consisteth in obedience to Christs Lieutenants and in giving God such honour both in attributes and actions as they in their severall Lieutenancies shall ordein Which Lieutenant upon earth is the supreme civill magistrate And yet contrary to this he excepteth from the obedience due to soveraign Princes all things that are contrary to the lawes of God who ruleth over rulers Adding that we cannot rightly transfer the obedience due to him upon men And more plainly If a soveraign shall command himself to be worshipped with divine attributes and actions as such as imply an independance upon God or immortality or infinite power to pray unto them being absent or to ask those things of them which only God can give to offer sacrifice or the like Although Kings command us we must ab stein He conefesseth that the subjects of Abraham had sinned if they had denied the existence or providence of God or done any thing that was expressely against the honour of God in obedience to his commands And actions that are naturally signes of contumely cannot be made by humane power a part of divine worship cannot be parts of divine worship and yet religion may consist in such worship is a contradiction He confesseth That if the Common-wealth should command a Subject to say or do something that is contumelious unto God or should forbid him to worship God he ought not to obey And yet maintaineth that a Christian holding firmly the faith of Christ in his heart if he be commanded by his lawful Soveraign may deny Christ with his tongue alledging That profession with the tongue is but an external thing And that it is not he in that case who denieth Christ before men but his Governour and the law of his Country Hath he so soon forgot himself Is not the denial of Christ contumelious to God He affirmeth that if a Soveraign shall grant to a Subject any liberty inconsistent with Soveraign power if the Subject refuse to obey the Soveraigns command being contrary to the liberty granted it is a sin and contrary to his duty for he ought to take notice of what is inconsistent with Soveraignty c. And that such liberty was granted through ignorance of the evil consequence thereof Then a Subject may judge not only what is fit for his own preservation but also what are the essentiall rights of Soveraignty which is contrary to his doctrine elsewhere It belongs to Kings to discern what is good and evil and private men who take to themselves the knowledge of good and evil do covet to be as Kings which consisteth not with the safety of the Common-wealth which he calleth a seditious doctrine and one of the diseases of a Common-wealth Yet such is his forgetfulnesse that he himself licenseth his own book for the Presse and to be taught in the Universities as conteining nothing contrary to the word of God or good manners or to the disturbance of publick tranquility Is not this to take to himself the knowledge of good and evil In one place he saith that the just power of Soveraigns is absolute and to be limited by the strength of the Common-wealth and nothing else In other places he saith his power is to be limitted by the Laws of God and nature As there is that in Heaven though not on earth which he should stand in fear of and whose Laws he ought to obey And though it be not determined in Scripture what Laws every King shall constitute in his dominions yet it is determined what Law he shall not constitute And it is true
without appointing or constituting a subjection without subjection an authorising without authorising What is this He saith that it cannot be said honourably of God that he hath parts or totality which are the attributes of finite things If it cannot be said honourably of God that he hath parts or totality then it cannot be said honourably of God that he is a body for every body hath parts and totality Now hear what he saith Every part of the Universe is body And that which is no body is no part of the Universe And because the Universe is all that which is no part of it is nothing Then if God have no parts and totality God is nothing Let him judge how honourable this is for God He saith We honour not God but dishonour him by any value lesse than infinite And how doth he set an infinite value upon God who every where maketh him to subsist by successive duration Infinite is that to which nothing can be added but to that which subsisteth by successive duration something is added every minute He saith Christ had not a Kingly authority committed to him by his Father in the World but onely consiliary and doctrinal He saith on the contrary That the kingdom of Iudaea was his hereditary right from King David c. And when it pleased him to play the King he required entire obedience Math. 21. 2. Go into the village over against you and streightway ye shall find an assetied and a colt with her loose them and bring them unto me And if any man say ought unto you ye shall say The Lord hath need of them He saith The institution of eternal punishment was before sin And if the command be such as cannot be obeyed without being damned to eternal death then it were madnesse to obey it And what evil hath excommunicatien in it but the consequent eternal punishment At other times he saith there is no eternal punishment It is evident that there shall be a second death of every one that shall be condemned at the day of Iudgement after which he shall die no more He who knoweth no soul nor spirit may well be ignorant of a spiritual death He saith It is a doctrine repugnant to civil society that whatsoever a man does against his conscience is sin Yet he himself saith It is a sin whatsoever one doth against his conscience for they that do that despise the Law He saith That all power secular and spiritual under Christ is united in the Christian Common-wealth that is the Christian Soveraign Yet he himself saith on the contrary It cannot be doubted of that the power of binding and loosing that is of remotting and retaining sins which we call the power of the keyes was given by Christ to future Pastours in the same manner as to the present Apostles And all power of remitting sin which Christ himself had was given to the Apostles All spiritual power is in the Christian Magistrate Some spiritual power that is the power of the keyes is in the successours of the Apostles that is not in the Christian Magistrate is a contradiction He confesseth That it is manifest that from the ascension of Christ until the conversion of Kings the power Ecclesiastical was in the Apostles and so delivered unto their successours by imposition of hands And yet straight forgetting himself he taketh away all power from them even in that time when there were no Christian Kings in the World He alloweth them no power to make any Ecclesiastical laws or constitutions or to impose any manner of commands upon Christians The office of the Apostles was not to command but teach As Schoole-Masters not as Commanders Yet Schoole-Masters have some power to command He suffereth not the Apostles to ordain but those whom the Church appointeth nor to excommunicate or absolve but whom the Church pleaseth He maketh the determination of all controversies to rest in the Church not in the Apostles And resolveth all questions into the authority of the Church The election of Doctours and Prophets did rest upon the authority of the Church of Antioch And if it be inquired by what authority it came to passe that it was received for the command of the Holy Ghost which those Prophets and Doctors said proceeded from the Holy Ghost we must necessarily answer By the authority of the Church of Antioch Thus every where he ascribeth all authority to the Church none at all to the Apostles even in those times before there were Christian Kings He saith not tell it to the Apostles but tell it to the Church that we may know the definitive sentence whether sin or no sin is not left to them but to the Church And it is manifest that all authority in spiritual things doth depend upon the authority of the Church Thus not contented with single contradictions he twisteth them together for according to his definition of a Church there was no Christian Church at Antioch or in those parts of the World either then or long after Hear him A Church is a company of men professing Christian Religion united in the person of one Soveraign at whose command they ought to assemble and without whose authority they ought not to assemble Yet there was no Christian Soveraign in those parts of the World then or for two hundred years after and by consequence according to his definition no Church He teacheth That when the civil Soveraign is an infidel every one of his own subjects that resisteth him sinneth against the Laws of God and rejecteth the counsel of the Apostles that admonisheth all Christians to obey their Princes and all children and servants to obey their Parents and Masters in all things As for not resisting he is in the right but for obeying in all things in his sense it is an abominable errour Upon this ground he alloweth Christians to deny Christ to sacrifice to idols so they preserve faith in their hearts He telleth them They have the license that Naaman had and need not put themselves into danger for their faith That is they have liberty to do any external acts which their infidel Soveraigns shall command them Now hear the contrary from himself When Soveraigns are not Christians in spiritual things that is in those things which pertain to the manner of worshipping God some Church of Christians is to be followed Adding that when we may not obey them yet we may not resist them but eundum est ad Christum per martyrium we ought to suffer for it He confesseth That matter and power are indifferent to contrary forms and contrary acts And yet maintaineth every where that all matter is necessitated by the outward causes to one individual form that is it is not indifferent And all power by his Principles is limitted and determined to one particular act Thus he scoffeth at me for the contrary very learnedly
as if there were a power that were not a power to do some particuler act or a power to kill and yet to kill no body in particular Nor doth power signifie any thing actually but those motions and present acts from which the act that is not now but shall be hereafter necessarily proceedeth If every act be necessary and all power determined to one particular act as he saith here how is power indifferent to contrary Acts as he saith there He acknowledgeth That though at some certain distance the reall and very object seem invested with the phansie it begets in us yet still the object is one thing the image or phansie is another And yet affirmeth the contrary That the Preachers voice is the same thing with hearing and a phansie in the hearer Even so he might say that the colour or the sight is the same thing with seeing Men utter their voice many times when no man heareth them He saith Inspiration implies a gift supernatural and the immediate hand of God On the contrary he saith To say a man speakes by supernatural inspiration is to say he finds an ardent desire to speak or some strong opinion of himself for which he can alledge no natural and sufficient reason He reckoneth this opinion that faith and sanctity are not to be attained by study and reason but by supernatural inspiration among the diseases of a Common-wealth And lastly he acknowledgeth no proper inspiration but blowing of one thing into another nor metaphorical but inclining the spirit He saith Ordinary men understand the word body and empty as well as learned men And when they hear named an empty vessel the learned as well as the unlearned mean and understand the same thing namely that there is nothing in it that can be seen and whether it be truly empty the plow-man and the Schoole-man know alike Now hear him confesse the contrary In the sâ—…se of common people not all the Universe is called body but onely such parts thereof as they can discern by the sense of feeling to resist the force or by the of their eyes to hinder them from a farther prospect therefore in the common language of men air and aeriall substances use not to be taken for bodies He holdeth that no law may be made to command the will The stile of law is Do this or do not this or if thou do this thou shalt suffer this But no law runs thus Will this or will not this or if thou have a will to this thou shalt suffer this And yet he defineth sin to be that which is done or left undone or spoken or willed contrary to the reason of the Common-wealth Then the laws of men are made to bind the will if that which is willed contrary to the laws be a sin He saith Necessary is that which is impossible to be otherwise or that which cannot possibly be and possible and impossible have no signification in reference to the time past or time present but onely time to come Yet in the very same paragraph he asserteth a necessity from eternity or an antecedent necessity derived from the very beginning of time He saith There is no doubt a man can will one thing or other or forbear to will it If a man can both will and forbear to will the same thing then a man is as free to will as to do But he teacheth the contrary every where That a man is free to do if he will but he is not free to will He saith Though Ged gave Solomon his choise that is the thing which he should chuse it doth not follow that he did not also give him the act of election that is determine him to that which he should chuse To give a man choice of two things and determine him to one of them is contradictory He confesseth That it is an absurd speech to say the will is compelled And yet with the same breath he affirmeth That a man may be compelled to will The reason why the will cannot be compelled is because it implyeth a contradiction Compulsion is evermore against a mans will How can a man will that which is against his will Yet saith T. H. Many things may compel a man to do an action in producing his will That a man may be compelled to do an action there is no doubt but to say he is compelled to do that action which he is willing to do that is when a new will is produced or that a will to do the action is produced then when the man is compelled is a contradiction He maketh the soveraign Prince to be the onely authentick interpreter of Scripture and to have Pastor all authority jure divino which all other Pastors hath but jure civili yet in all questions of faith and interpretation of the word of God he obligeth the soveraign to make use of Ecclesiasticall Doctours rightly ordained by imposition of hands to whom he saith Christ hath promised an infallibility His glosse that this infallibility is not such an infallibility that they cannot be deceived themselves but that a subject cannot be deceived in obeying them is absurd for such an infallibility upon his grounds the Soveraign had without their advise To passe by his confused and party coloured discourse how doth this agree with his former objection which I shall insert here mutatis mutandis That the right interpretation of scripture should depend upon the infallibility of Ecclesiasticall Doctors many incommodities and absurdities which must follow from thence do prohibit the chiefest whereof is this that not only all civill obedience would be taken away contrary to the precept of Christ but also all society and humane peace would be dissolved contrary to the lawes of nature For whilst they make the Ecclesiasticall Doctors the infallible Iudges what pleaseth God and what displeaseth him the subjects cannot obey their Soveraigns before the Doctors have judged of their commands whether they be conformable to Scripture or not And so either they do not obey or they obey for the judgment of their Doctors that is they obey their Doctors not eheir Soveraign Thus civill obedience is taken away These are his own words with a little vâ—…iation onely putting in the Doctors for the subjects I consider not what is true or false in them for the present but only shew the inconsistency of his grounds how he buildeth with one hand and pulleth down with the other He saith it is determined in Scripture what lawes every christian King shall not constitute in his dominions And in the next words Soveraigns in their own dominions are the sole Legislators And that those books only are canonicall in every nation which are established for such by the soveraign authority Then the determinations of Scripture upon his grounds are but civill lawes and do not tie the hands of Soveraignes He teacheth us every where
shunned 1 Pet. 2. 14. No proper punishment but for sin Lam. 3. 39. 2 Sam. 12. 13. 14. 2 Cor. 4. 17. Matth. 25. 46. Ioh 37. 23. Lam. 3. 33. Psal. 107. 17. Gen. 9. 3. Prov. 12. 10. Why God did not make man impeccable Jude v. 6. Matth. 25. 41 46. Mar. 9. 44 45. Jud. v. 6 7. Punishments of the damned are eternall Gods prescience proveth infalliblity not necessity Resolution proveth election and liberty In the answer to the stating of the question What is necessary Chance is from accidentall concurrence not from ignorance Eccles. 4. 10. Prov. 22. 28. Jer. 18. 15. Ex Plutarchi Polit. ad Trajan Encheiridion c. 16. Math. 7. 6. Exact definitions not frequent What liberty is What is spontaneity What is necessity De interpret l. 1. c. ultimo Necessity of being and acting distinguished Tull. Necessity upon supposition what it is Mark 10. 27. Man is not a passive instrument as the sword in his hand Act. 17. 28. The instance in ambs ace hath lost T. H. his game T. H. his will is no more than the bias of a bowle See stateing of the question answer to Num. 1. St. Austiâ—… more to be credited than T. H De lib. Arbit l. 3. c. 3. To give liberty to two and limite to one is a contradiction According to T. H. his principles all perswasions are vvin We can blame no man justly A lame comparison T. H. maketh himself no better than a wooden toppe T. H his deep skill in Logick His silly definitions Medition liâ—…tle worth without making use of other mens experience Terms of art are unungrateful to rude persons 1 Top. c. 2. ss 2. Ans. to the stat quest fount of Argum. cast Num. 1 3. def Num. 3. Freedom to do if one will without freedom to will a vain distinction Num. 30. 14. Josh. 24. 15. 2 Sam. 24. 12. Deut. 30. 19. Bulla Caroli 4. Exercit. 307. And maketh T. H. a degree worse than the Stâ—…cks Aust. de civit deâ—… l. 5. c. 10. Apud Gellium Iudicium practicé practicum explained Plut. How the object is and how it is not the cause of seeing Num. 3. Spontaneity Ethic. l. 3. c. 2. Num. 3. Conformity signifieth agreeableness as well as likeness 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what they are Eth. l. 3. c. 1 2. l. 3. c. 3 4. Phys. l. 2. c. 6. A true will may be changed Num. 8. Num. 25. Voluntarinesse doth not desend on the judgment of other Num. 33. Num. 8. Num. 8. Num. 26. 1 King 3. 11. Election of more than one Verse 5. Ver. 6 7 8 9. Ver. 10. Ver. 11. Ver. 13. Acts 5. 4. Was it not in thy power Explained Out of hatred to true liberty T. H. makes God hypocritical Gods secret and revealed will not contrary And why Fount of Arg. in fine Occulte virtue or influence Job 38 31. It is blasphemy to say that God is the cause of sinne Or to say that sin is efficaciously decreed by God 〈◊〉 no â—…d perâ—…ssion The difference between general and special influence 1 King 21. 9. Fountains of Argâ—…ments Iam. 4. 13 14. Num. 12. Rom. 11. 23. God may oblige himself Jam. 1. 17. God cannot do any unrighteous thing Tit. 1. 2. Num. 〈◊〉 19. 2 Tim. 2. 13. Hebr. 6. 10. Mich. 6. 2. Ezek. 18. 25. Gen. 18. 23 25. Iud. 7. Plut. Num. 10. It is just to afflict innocent persons for their own good Lib. de cive tit Imp. c. 6. n. 18. â—…n is properly irregularity God no cause of irregularity Laws may be unjust Impossibilities made bâ—… our selves may be justly imposed not impossibilities in them selves Acts 5. 29. 1 Pet. 2. 13 Proper punishment is ever vindictive in part Lam. 3. 39. Job 31. 11. Ezra 9. 13. Heb. 10. 28. Deut. 25. 2. 1 Pet. 2 4. Yet further of unjust laws L. 1. 14. Exod. 1. 17. Dan. 3. 18. Heb. 11. 23. 1 King 21. 2 King 6. 32. Dan. 6. 8. Mich. 6. 16. 2 K. 17 19. Isay 10. 1. The authority of the Scripture not dependent on the printer Ammon in lib. de Interpret Mr. R. H. T. H. a fit Catechist for disloial and unnatural persons Num 12. Mankind never without laws De cive c. i. Num 12. Never lawful for private men ordinarily to kill one another Numbers 35. Fount of Arg. Gen. 9. 6. Gen. 4. 10. 1 Sam. 19. 5. 2 King 24. 4. Prov. 28. Deut. 10. 11. Exod. 21. 14. Gen. 9. 6. Joh. 8. 44. T. H. Attorny General for the brute beasts Gen. 1. 28. Gen. 2. 19. Psal. 8. 6. Gen. 9. 3. Prov. 26. 5. Seen and unseen necessity Act. 27. 22. V. 30. If all things be absolutely necessary admonitions are all vaine A litter of absurdities What is morally good Isa. 5. 20. Exod. 1. 21 Rewards of bruits and men differ Rom. 1. 21. What it is to honour God Jam 2. 19. What are devils in his judgement God doth not hinder privately what he commands openly His opinion destroyeth the truth of God And his goodnesse Isa. 28. 21. Wisd. 1. 13. Ezek. 33. 11. Fount of Arg. And his justice And omnipotence making the cause of sinne Amos 3. 6. A right Hobbist cannot praise God Deut. 29. 29. Nor hear the Word or receive the Sacrament worthily Matth. 11. 12. Mat. 7. 11. Rom. 10. 14. Nor vowas he ought Nor repent of his misdeeds What repentance is 2 Cor. 7. 11. Joel 2. 12. Mans concurrence with Gods grace Act. 7. 51. Prov. 1. 24. Mark 1. 15. Rom. 11. 20. Rom. 2. 5. Rev. 3. 20. 1 Cor. 3. 9. 1 Cor. 15. 10. Confidence in praier and the efficacy of it Jam. 1. 6. 1 Tim. 2. 8. Mark 11. 24. Jam. 5. 15. Phil. 1. 19. Isay 38. 5. 1 King 8. 37. 2 Chron. 7. 12. Luk. 17. 13. 18. 2 Cor. 1. 11. T. H. Still mistaketh necessity upon supposition There is more in contingency than ignorance Def. Num. 3. stat of quest cast Num. 1. 3. c. Sin in the world before the civil law Job 4. 18. 2 Pet. 2. 4. Jude 6. Rom. 5. 12. Prov. 8. 15. Rom. 2. 14. 1â—… 15. To command impossibilities is unjust Yet further against his silly distinction free to do if he will not free to will Of monsters What is said to be in deo and what extra deum Exod. 3. 14. To will do in God the same thing He willeth not all he could will Luâ—… 3. 8. T. H. make the will to be compelled Arist. Eth. lib. 3. c. 1. 1 Sam. 28. 23. Est. 1. 8. 2 Cor. 12. 11. Motus primó primi and antipathies To search too boldly into the nature of God is a fault But the greater fault is negligence Rom. 1. 20. Exer c. 12. d. 2. T. H. his liberty omnipotence in shew in deed nothing He dare not refer himself to his own witnesses Terms of Art 1 Cor. 14. 19. A contradiction c. 17. d. 28. Matth. 15. 14. Election and compulsion inconsistent There are mixt actions Eth. l. 3.