all these be knocked on the head thus This hath such a force of injustice that men with humanity about them cannot consent unto I leave this therefore and come to his 4th Inference CHAP. VIII SECT I. Mr. Hobbs his fourth Inference censured and refuted from his own conclusions He that impowers another to do justly though he make him Pleni-potentiary is not guilty of his unjust actions his first reason refuted FOurthly Because every Subject is by this Institution Author of all the actions and judgments of the Soveraign instituted it follows that whatsoever he doth it can be no injury to any of his Subjects nor ought he by any of them be accused of injustice Accused What doth he mean by that to be convicted arraigned condemned This certainly he cannot because the power of Judgment supposeth Superiority which cannot be over the Soveraign in his own Kingdom But let us observe the consequence of this Argument out of these impossible premises that because by his fancy of the Institution every subject is Author of all his actions he can do no injury to any of them certainly this doth not follow by his own Doctrine for put the case that the Supreme doth authorize a Judge to hear and determine such causes doth the Supreme only do injustice in it when the Royal Authority gives power to the Judge who acts unjustly by that Authority which was given him by the Supreme or the Judge likewise who abuseth that Authority I believe no man will affirm it or if he do he must destroy Mr. Hâ—bbs his conclusion which makes the Kings acting by the Authority of the peoples grant not to offend in himself for which is his reason before spoke to if the Author do solely perform not the Actor or the person who immediately operates which he delivered before the King not the Judge doth unjustly when by his Authority the Judge decrees wickedly But he proceeds with another reason for saith he He that doth any thing by Authority from another doth therein no injury to him by whose Authority he acts This is not true generally a Judge judgeth by the Authority of the Supreme but if he Judge unjustly yea judgeth a cause against the King perhaps unjustly he then doth the King an injury by his own Authority Again a General with Plenipotency to kill slay c. from the King he turns now his Army to the Kings destruction perhaps doth not he then do the King an injury by his own power SECT II. Mr. Hobbs his second reason invalid from the falsity of his supposition Consent or dissent gives not the stamp of Justice or Injustice He that gives power to do any act may complain of ill Execution of that power HE goes on But by this Institution of a Commonwealth every particular man is Author of what the Soveraign doth and consequently he that complaineth of injury from his Soveraign complaineth of that whereof he himself is Author and therefore ought not accuse any man but himself nor himself of injury because to do an injury to himself is impossible It is first observeabâ—e here which runs throughout the whole Politiques that it is built totally upon that foundation which neither is nor is probable to be in any but is impossible to be in a great Commonwealth and therefore must needs fall of it self But supposing that impossibility let us consider his inference every man is Author of what the Soveraign doth the reason of that is before expressed because he covenants to avow his actions Now if he do avow them it follows not that therefore they shall be just many a man owns that act which is unjust his owning of it makes it neither just nor unjust These are qualitiâ—s inherent in the act not adherent to others Opinions or acceptance or disacceptance of them I but saith he Consequently he that complaineth of injury from his Soveraign complaineth of that whereof he himself is Author I return that he may do that and complain that he himself hath done amiss men do and it is vertuously done of him who doth it but much rather of that which he acts by anothers hand that which may be good in the Institution may be spoiled and hurt in the Execution and although they did institute him with such a power yet his mannagement of it may be ill and unjust and that they may complain of SECT III. A man may do an injury to himself Mr. Hobbs his distinction between Iniquity and Injustice or Injury disproved and censured UPon this ground will appear the faultiness of what follows which is And therefore ought not to accuse any man but himself no nor himself of injury because to do injury to a mans self is impossible To the first piâ—ce I have shewed that though he were Author of Leviathans Power yet his evil usage of that power may be complained of To the second I think a man may injure himself when a rich man through niggardliness shall deny his belly or his back those expences which were necessary for the support of his health he deals unjustly with himself when another foolishly desperate shall adventure his life upon idle and frivolous occasions he deals unjustly with himself by hazarding so Noble a Creature upon so base and unworthy a prize These things and multitudes of more are unjust dealing towards a mans self But he hath a nice distinction at the bottom of this Paragraph It is true that they that have Soveraign Power may commit Iniquity but not injustice or injury in the proper signification I would he had expounded the proper signification At the first I was amazed at this distinction and did doubt there was some great and excellent Notion in it but duly considering the words I find they were airy and do signifie no more difference then if I had affirmed Mr. Hobbs or the Writer of Leviathan said this or that meerly nominal For what is iniquity but unequal dealings which in him who is bound to deal equally in distribution or commutation is injustice and indeed injustice is nothing else and injury what is that but not just or right and I am sure injustice is nothing else But where some Law directs this or that he doth otherwise This is the proper and genuine sense of the words and unless he had shewed us some more proper use of them there is no reason why we should be forced from this common acceptation Here now I might justly break off from further discourse of this business having answered what he objects but because I would give some satisfaction to the Reader in this Conclusion I shall a little insist further and shew that Leriathans or Supremâ—s may do unjustly SECT IV. A Soveraign may do injustice by himself and by his Ministers impowred and not punished by him IT will be a strong foundation for this discourse to produce the Actions of the King of Kings God himself which I may do in the eighteenth of Genesis ye may
ipse legibus tenebatur I have sinned only to thee for he was a King he was held or confined by no laws because saith he Kings are free from the bonds of laws neither by any laws are they called to punishment being safe by the power of Empire This a man would think abundantly full but yet he never used Mr. Hobbs his Phrase to say he did not unjustly But his first speech must be understood that he was not with held by any humane laws for Mr. Hobbs confesseth that he is responsable for the breach of divine laws by the law of nature Secondly that speech of his that Kings are freed from the bonds of their faults that must be understood of such bonds as imprisonments or such punishments which by humane laws are injoyned offenders and that is clearly expounded by his last sentence that they are by no laws called to punishment being safe in the power of Empire that iâ— safe from the questioning of their subjects so that his whâ—le sence is this That David as a King was not responsable for his subjects to any man nor lyable to any punishment for them I could speak more to this and shew how that Sâ— Ambrose prodâ—ced another exposition presently after but certainly neither he nor any man but Mr. Hobbs will say it was not injustice it is suâ naturâ â—â—just to punish with the greatest punishment death an innocent person Nor doth his being a King make it less injustice â—ut rather aggravate it because his chief office under God and for which he is constituted by God is to distribuâ—e justice equally and reward the vertuous and punish the evil as St. Paul excellently and clearly speaks Rom. 13. 4. He is the minister of God to thee for Good that is to thee who dost that wâ—ich is good as he speaks in the 3. verse but if thou dost evil be afraid for he beareth not the sword in vain for he is the minister of God a Revenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil So likewise St. Peter 1. Epist. 2. 14. makes it their business to punish evil doers and the praise of them who do well Now if these be the contents of the commission from God to these his Dâ—puties they must needs be guilty of injustâ—ce who punish citra condignum where there was no desert of it and they who aâ—e Kings so much the more by how much it is their particular duty to take care of the contrary I have now cleared the sence of Sâ— Ambrose as I guess but lest any scruple might remain from his authority with any man who might mistake his sence I will therefore weigh down the Scales with the weights of others his near contemporaries of no less honour in Christendom than himself And the first I shall present you with is St. Basil the great so he is called in his scholia upon this verse of this Psalm Tibi soli peccavi cùm multis magnis donis tuis sum positus Since I enjoy many and great gifts of thine but have returned contrary things he doth not say here that he had not sinned against Uriah he had indeed offended against him and against his wife but the greatest prevarication was committed against God himself who had câ—oâ—en him and constituted him King and therefore he rightly added and done this evil in thy sight thus far St. Basil. The next which I shall produce shall be Sâ— Chrysostom upon this Psalm and this verse and he agrees very much with St. Basil. To thee only have I sinned Many saith he and great benefits have I received from thee but I have returned them with contrary things for these things which by thy law are interdicted I have not doubted to commit neither doth he say that I have not hurt Uriah for he had both hurt him and his wife but the greatest iniquity was against God Thus far St. Chrysostum Next consider St. Hierom Tibi solùm peccavi to thee only have I sinned for to thee every man sins when he sins because thou art only without sin as the Apostle speaks Rom. 3. 4. God is true but every man a lyar or else David saith I have sinned and thou only art without sin as saith the Prophet Isaiah 53. Who did no sin nor was guile found in his mouth St. Augustin likewise harps upon the same string To thee only have I sinned and done this evil in thy sight what is this saith that heavenly man Had not he adulterated anothers wife and slain her husband Did not all men know what David had done What is that he saith then to thee only have I sinned and done this evil in thy sight He answers because thou only art without sin he is a just punisher who hâ—th nothing in himself to be punished he is a just reprehender who hath nothing in himself to be reprehended Here you may see how holy and learned men living near together about one time with St. Ambrose men famous in their generations and to whom the Church of Christ owes exceeding much for the propagation of the Gospel gave their sense of this text of scripture as well as he and St. Augustin was one who honoured St. Ambrose living and dead yet you see varies from him in his judgment in this point Give me leave to shew my sense of these words and then conclude And first I will allow Mr. Hobbs his reading to thee which is not according to our translation which is against thee and certainly by men learned in the Hebrew both amongst the ancient and modern writers with a great conâ—ent 〈◊〉 is acknowledged to be true yet it profits his cause nothing to read it as he doth insomuch that Bellarmine in his Comment upon this Psalm saith To thee only have I sinned he doth not say against thee only he had offended against vriah against Bathsheba he had scandalized the people but to thee only as Judge and none else can judge and condemn me as he illustrates it So that although Mr. Hobbs varies from his own rule of scripture yet he gets nothing to his cause by it But to proceed in expounding I ask leave and beg pardon of such eminent men from whom I may seem to differ for my part I do not think that David here acts the part of a King or so much as thinks of his great Regality if he did it was to aggravate not to extenuate his sin but of a penitent and in his penitence is a pattern to other men as well as Kings how they should demean themselves even Kings in those duties are reconciling themselves to their King in respect of whom they are poor and mean people and if they should consider themselves Kings they should by this increase their humility considering that he who oâ—es so much to God should be so ungrateful and unmindful of him The Prophet therefore now considering his offence to God cryes out To thee only have I sinned before Nathan the
but by divine revelation therefore he who taught it had divine revelation I must not spend time in particulars look upon all the Prophecies in the whole Book of God so many as their time is expired we find them all fufilled the Prophecies made to Abraham of the children of Israels long captivity in Aegypt and their extraction thence and plantation in the land of Canaan of all the great transactions of the highest affairs of the world The erection and destruction of all the great Monarchies which were punctually foretold and accomplished and foretold long before could these be foretold by any other way than by divine revelation Certainly it could not be nor can the wit of man think how it should be done Jaddus the high Priest shewed Alexander his own story foretold by Daniel Let us consider how the Prophets long before prophesied of Christ how the Prophet Isaiah writ like an antedated Evangelist differing only in these words shall and did only in the time Let us consider how not only those great and remarkable passges of his birth his miracles his death his resurrection but even such little things as the piercing of his side the parting of his garment casting lots for his vesture his burial were foretold hundreds of yeares before Let Mr. Hobbs or any other heathen tell me how these could be foretold without divine revelation But perhaps he will say as before these were not true books nor prophecies but fained since Christianity No even the Jewes themselves yet remaining in the world do consent unto them and are preserved by God a glorious witness of these truths who are the greatest enemies of Christianity CHAP. XXII SECT III. The former assertion further proved from the piety of the doctrines taught in the scripturâ—s and excellency of the matter contained in them The power of the word of God and efficacy of Scripture above the reach of Philoophie BUt then consider the doctrines taught here they are so full of religious piety to God so full of such excellent moral conversation betwixt men that the wit of man could not invent them there must needs be divine revelation in them there was never any thing delivered by men meer men without divine revelation that had not imperfections in it he who reads the Philosophers may find it I do not love to rake their Dunghills and shew their filth but the duties taught in this book are so divine and so like God from whence they came that they are able to make a man absolutely good if practised Wherefore as a tree may be known by its fruits as the heart of man by his language so these Books may be known to be Gods by the heavenliness of the matters delivered in them which have such a power of sanctity in them as is able to make such as receive them of a more Godly disposition than other men yea than themselves at other times before they received these doctrines I could treat of a strange Metamorphosis in Saul to Paul who was a persecutor a destroyer and when converted with this doctrine accounted it joy to suffer and be persecuted for this cause As also of King David who to hide the shame of his adultery committed Murther and slept securely in his sin yet when awakened from that stupidity he was in and taught his state by the Prophet Nathan he cares for no shame of this world so God be pleased cares for nothing but the shame of his sin and made his penitence for it to be chaunted out in all ages for all Churches in the 51. Psalm Se that there is a strange power and force in the word of God to turn men to godliness which no other hath And the great and mighty effects wrought by this scripture do fully evince it to be divine having divine power annexed to them Thus having shewed that the doctrines contained in scripture are fit for a man to believe they are divine and by divine revelation yea that they could not proceed from a pen which was not guided and assisted by the holy spirit we therefore may have assurance that they were such I shall come next to shew how we may be further assured from the manner of their delivery CHAP. XXII SECT IV. The second Argument from the difference of the Style of the Scriptures from the books of Philosophers The propositions and conclusions in Scripture not so much deduced from reason as asserted from the Majesty of God not disputing or endeavouring to perswade but commanding to do The rewards and punishments proposed in scripture of eternal truth impossible to be propounded or given but by God himself LEt a man look upon all the doctrines of the Philosophers concerning God his essence his attributes concerning the Creation we shall find that they laboured still to prove what they spoke and by reason to convince mans understanding Only I must confess Trismegistus in his Pomander makes his discourse which is most divine to be revelation and four ought I know it may be so much of it but otherwise they all go upon ratiocination and the reason is because such things ought not to be assented to which are not either proved or revealed by God which is the most invincible evidence that any truth can have But now Moses and those holy writers inspired by God in their compiling those holy Books only affirm this and this without arguing the reasons of it because they were divine not humane words likewise in all those moral duties which concern men they are writ with the majesty of the King of Kings and Lord of Lords Do this or this not disputing as Plato and Aristotle how it conduceth to the present happiness but exacting obedience It is true when the Prophets disputed with the Gentiles or Apostles with Jewes or Gentiles who believed not their report they confuted the one by reason or out of their own authors and the other out of the former Scriptures because all proofs must be made ex concessis and out of such premisses they would confirm these Conclusions God exacted a belief and this he doth with the greatest arguments and most forcing that are possible by Praemium and Poena reward and punishment but such as never King or Emperour either did or was able to propose by eternal happiness or misery which nothing can doe but God alone And this is done to those who will receive or not receive his word Well the words contained here are delivered with such an exaction as never man proposed the same truths in and required with such promises as never man did meet with nor could perform we must needs therefore be assured they are divine CHAP. XXII SECT V. The third Argument from the sanctity and integrity of the persons who delivered these truths The miraculous conduct of the Children of Israel by Moses The objection of his assertation of dominion answered The predictions of the Prophets not possible without a divine revelation The truth and
were Divine revelations from the Sanctity of the Persons who delivered it Hâ— answers that that may be feigned I reply It is improbable which were enough but I think I may go further and say it is impossible for the first clause that it is improbable we may discern Reason for it First in the Persons the Apostles who delivered these Revelations and affirmed they were such it is not probable they should be counterfeited all counterfeiting is for some end some wordly end for a man cannot think to get Heaven by counterfeiting and lâ—ing but the Apostles could have no worldlâ— end in what they did the asserting of these Revelations being the ready way to miseries and unhappiness which was foretold by their great Master our most blessed Saviour We have seen in this distracted world in which we have lived now and then a man proud with an imagined Enthusiasme persevere in an abominable lye even to death but for so many to do it and suffer for the relation of the same story it cannot be imagined And then consider that they were men blessed by God in having these Revelations and the relating them I say relating them for because the Doctrine was to be divulged to all Nations by them God assisted them with the gift of Tongues by which they were able suddenly to relate in their own Language to every Nation the wonderful things which concerned their salvation And from hence I will draw the impossibility of their feigning their sanctity in the delivery of these Revelations for as the Revelation was from God so the very delivery of them by the power of Tongues was from God who cannot countenance and make good a lye But yet certainly although their might be a possibility of being other I grant that for Arguments sake which I allow not yet when there is no probability of the contrary we have great assurance of that truth and his answer is most wicked as well as weak drawn from a possibility of feigning and counterfeiting in the Apostles CHAP. XXII SECT XI Mr. Hobbs his third Argument from the wisdom of the Apostles confirmed The miraculous consent of men to the revelations published by them An Argument from the propagation of Christianity against the opposition of the whole world A serious application and vow for Mr. Hobbs his conversion A Third Argument which he endeavours to put off is drawn from the extraordinary wisdome or extraordinary felicity of his actions all which saith he are marks of Gods extraordinary favour His answer to this is at the bottom of that page thus The visible felicities of this world are most often the work of God by natural and ordinary causes And therefore no man can infallibly know by natural reason that another has had a supernatural revelation of Gods will but only a belief everyone as the signs thereof shall appear greater or lesser a firmer or weaker belief Thus far he I no â—answer to the first which concerns their wisdome I do not remember that I have read the wisdome of these men to be produced for proof of their revelations yet because he has put it down and given one answer to it I will urge something for it that it was and is a great convincing argument that such poor ignorant illiterate fishermen should attain or rather be endued from above with such wisdome as to be able to confute the greatest and best studied Philosophers and reduce them to consent to their revelations this must need prove that these men were assisted by some knowledg above Nature But let that pass since he makes no answer but for the other the success of Christianity that is a most rational argument and his answer confutes himself for whereas he saith the visible felicities of this World are most often the work of God by natural ordinate causes I retor it to him that the felicities of this world hapning to these men were nothing but that general propagation of the Gospel which was wrought against the force and power of all natural causes all the Emperors Kings and Princes of this World fighting against and suppressing it with all the force and tyranny which they were able to use so that their strength grew by oppression Sanguis Martyrum was â—emen Ecclesiae And M. Hobbs cannot think that that was a natural seed And so I will conclude this discourse for this time hoping that God will so assist him that he may see his own error and with his own hand blot out all these unworthy doubts which he hath cast upon Christianity CHAP. XXII SECT XII Mr. Hobbs his second Question propounded and discussed his assumption not clear the Argument changed and the Reader eluded by him His manifest declension of the divine positive Law and imposure of humane Laws in opposition to them censured The Law of Nature commands obedience to the positive law of God The pretensions of all Nations to divine institution observed ANd here I thought to have knocked off with the satisfaction of the first Quaerie but as I said before he made two enquiries the first concerning the assurance of these revelations I have spoke to that The second is how a man can be bound to obey the Laws so revealed This he saith is not so hard for if the Laws declared be not against the Law of Nature which is undoubtedly Gods Law and he undertake to obey it he is bound by his own act Thus far Mr. Hobbs but indeed he utters in my judgment a most obscure doctrine â—r if clear he speaks very weakly 'T is obscure for although the Law of Nature do oblige yet it is not apparent to every man what this Law of Nature is no not to learned men for in many cases it is disputed vvhether such or such actions are according to the Lavv of Nature or no And therefore although the major proposition be unquestionably true that the Lavv of Nature is instituted by God yet the assuming of a Minor to it this is the Lavv of Nature may be full of dispute and from thence it vvill be hard to conclude Again consider that vvhen the question vvas put in the former page it vvas concerning the obedience to the revealed lavvs of God hovv a man may â—e bound to obey them of vvhich he affirmed that vve could have no assurance and that I have immediately before refuted but novv his vvhole discourse runs upon mans obedience to humane Lavvs Thus the Notion and Conceipt shuffled and changed a Reader is distracted and vvhilst he finds something seemingly proved he thinks the undertaken proposition is clear for vvhere hath he satisfied yea but seemingly this Question How a man can be bound to obey the Revelations But saith he if he undertake to obey a Law which is not against the Law of Nature he is bound by his own Act. That is that Act by vvhich he saith rather than thinks he instituted a supreme and that Act only reflects upon humane Lavvs
than was pretended He proceeds CHAP. XXIII SECT IX The soveraign protects the subject in the enjoyment of that right and Propriety which the Law gives him The rights of soveraignty not of propriety necessary for the performance of the royal Office and protection of subjects Publick necessity justifies the invasion of propriety The partition of the soveraignty among the Optimates not destructive of it according to Mr. Hobbs his own tenents The responsa prudentum of high esteem among all Nations EVery man has indeed a propriety that excludes the right of every other Subject This is granted upon all sides and saith he â—hâ— has it only from the soveraign power without the protection whereof now I am in Page 170. every other man should have equal right to the same This is not truly spoke for the protection of the soveraign doth not make or give right to any thing but enables him to use the same the law gives the right the soveraign protects us in the enjoying that which the Law hath given But I wonder at his meaning in what follows which is But if the right of the Soveraign also be excludâ—d he cannot perform the Office they have put him into That must be understood of the right of the Soveraignty but not of propriety if he be not allowed the prerogatives belonging to soveraignty he cannot protect them but if he be denyed the right of propriety he cannot well destroy them but surely may protect them with his justice and with his power He expounds himself which is to defend them both from forraign Enemies and from the injuries of one another and consequently there is no longer a Common wealth A strange inference unless he have right to their Estates he cannot defend them c. Surely many Soveraigns have defended and do defend their subjects and yet have not propriety to their Estates He who hath a propriety in an estate may use it how he will to his own advantage or content But this Supremes cannot do with their subjects justly there may be a case of extremity where Salus Reipublicae must be suprema lex put the case an Enemy invades the Kingdome the land of some particular subject lyes fit to make a Fort of the King by force takes it for the publick benefit not out of propriety that it belongs to himself but that it belongs to the Common-wealth to whose publick benefit all private interests and proprieties must submit But I may term the right of such accidents to be an universality rather than a propriety the universal right of the Common-wealth not the particular right of one or another That which follows to this purpose receives the same answer In offices of judicature and the like I pass to a sixth Doctrine which he saith is plainly and directly against the essence of a Common-wealth and 't is this that the soveraign power may be divided What he means by division I cannot readily apprehend if he means that it may not be divided into sundry persons then he hath overthrown himself when he constitutes other Government besides Monarchy as Aristocracy and Democracy which are in divers persons but united if he means which he seems to do by his following discourse two several Kings in the same kingdome I think it cannot subsist because of distractions as he intimates but the fountain of the errour I think is not well derived from the Lawyers who saith he endeavour to make the Laws depend upon their own learning and not upon the legislative power Which way this should conduce to the dependance of the Law upon their learning I see not he himself hath discoursed that the responsa prudentum were alwayes in high esteem among the Romans as the opinion of the Judges are amongst us and all men have a great reverence of them in all Nations But these responsa declare what is Law and they will cease to be prudentes when they abuse the Law He begins another Paragraph CHAP. XXIII SECT X. The Paragraph asserted Not the form of Government but the execution of good Laws makes a Nation happy The â—istory of the Grecians and Romans vindicated against Mr. Hobbs Mr. Hobbs his Precepts in his Leviathan much more seductive and encouraging to rebellion than the forementioned Histories The abuse of good things ought not to take away the use of them AND as false doctrine so oftentimes the example of different government in a Neighbouring Nation disposeth men to the alteration of the form already setled In this truly I am of his mind for when men see a neighbour prosper in that kind of life he leads he is apt to pryâ— into the wayes by which he so thrives and then taking the same course hopes to find it as beneficial to himself as it hath proved to the other I approve the discourse throughout and therefore need not transcribe any more But yet would have been glad to have read some way by which this evil being known might be hindred or avoided and truly I can think upon none but by making our selves more industrious than our Neighbours by better rewarding vertue and industry and punishing vice and sloth than they There is scarce that people whose fundamental principles are not such as may make the Kingdom happy under that government if they were used to the best advantage so that it is not the form of Government only but the disposure in that form which felicitates a Nation and so the making and execution of good Laws at home will redress the inconvenience which comes from a Neighbouring Nation He enters upon a new Paragraph And as to rebellion in particular against Monarchy one of the most frequent causes of it is the reading the Books of policie and Histories of the Antient Greeks and Romans I wonder he had not put in the Old Testament likewise but certainly he is out in it for these Books he speaks of do teach Kings and Supremes how to govern and avoid those Rocks upon which their predecessors have been split they teach Subjects to avoid all rebellion the most happy and prosperous of which brings confusion if not destruction to that Nation where they are and very frequently ruine to themselves and their Families who are Ring-leaders in such actions But if books which encourage to rebellion must be laid aside then let Leviathan be buried in silence which I have and shall shew shortly not by example only but precept to justify more rebellion than ever any Author did I but saith he from which that is these books young men and all others as are unprovided of the antidote of solid reason receiving a strong and delightful impression of the great exploits of war atchieved by the conductors of their Armies receive withal a pleasing Idea of all they have done besides I think this may be done and that these excellent stories which relate the gallant and exemplary virtues of many may yea must likewise with them record the vices of