in Latine upon his Majesties returne In 48 England was totally subdued to the Power of the Rump Ireland in 49. Scotland in 51. was almost reduct by the Rump and his Majesties Army totally routed at Worcester in this year the Leviathan was published was this Book in defence of the Kings Power Spiritual and Temporal when his Majestie was in Banishment ' His Majestie was then devested of all his lawfull Power and Authority and forc't into Exile This Leviathan if the Principles were admited justfied the Actions of his Enemies he casts this Imputation on the Rump that they were obeyed onely for fear in the same book he endeavours to prove that man is not by Nature a lover of Society but at his original is in a state of War The dread of the Evils which are incident to that condition makes him to enter into a Society with others and let it be considered whether if Fear be the great inducement to Government they according to his Principles are to be condemned who out of the same fear obeyed the Rump and that the fundamental law of Nature is self Preservation and for fear that end should not be attained pacts are entred into but if after those pacts that design cannot beaccomplished then pacts are void and therefore if people have a suspicion that the Prince will destroy them they may take up Arms. And if the Prince be devested of his Government the People are no longer obliged to obey him and upon this account of Self-Preservation they are to submit to those who can protect them Upon this reason the taking the Engagement was lawful and it was his honour to present to the English Nation those Principles w ch induced many to take the Engagement Oliver gaining the Protectorship was so pleased with him on those accounts that the great place of being Secretary was profered him If these things be true as unquestionably they are let it then be considered whether any Sober man can believe that the Book called the Leviathan was writ in defence of the Kings Power Temporal and Ecclesiastical since it manifestly asserts the cause of Usurpers It must be granted that Mr. Hobs doth give to the Soveraign all illimited power in things just and sacred But this he gives to all sorts of Government to Aristocracy and Democracy as well as Monarchy A Book to be penned and published by him when all the Kings Dominions were in the Power of those who took up Arms against him which containes these Docttines Pag. 112. ' But in case a great many men have already resisted the Soveraign Power unjustly or committed some Capital Crime for which every one of them expects Death whether have they not the Libertie then to joyn together and assist and defend one another certainly they have for they but defend their lives which the Guilty man may as well do as the Innocent There was indeed Injustice in the first breach of their Duty Their bearing of Arms subsequent to it tho it be to maintain what they have done is no new unjust Act and if it be only to defend their persons it is not unjust at all Pag. 114. The Obligation of Subjects to the Soveraign is understood to last as long and no longer than the power lasteth by which he is able to protect them For the Right men have by nature to protect themselves when none else can protect them can by no covenant be relinquished The Soveraignty is he Soul of the Common-wealth which once departed from the body the members do no more receive their motion from it Pag. 174. When in a War forraine or intestine the Enemies get a final Victory so as the forces of the Common Wealth keeping the Field no longer there is no ther protection of Subjects in their Loyalty then is the Common-wealth dissolved and every man at liberty to protect himself by such causes as his own discretion shall suggest unto him For the Soveraign is the publick Soul giveing Life and motion to the Common-wealth which expiring the Members are governed by it no more than the Carcass of a man by his departed tho immortal Soul For tho the Right of a Soveraign Monarch cannot be extinguished by the Act of another yet the Obligation of the members may For he that wants protection may seek it any where and when he hath it is obliged without fraudulous pretence of having submitted himself out of fear to protect his Protector as long as he is able ' It was so far from defending His Majesties Authority that without Command they plainly justifie the actions of his usurping Enemies No person that hath suckt in Hobs his Principles can be a loyal Subject and hence likewise it appears that he did not ingeniously with his Majesty when he averts in his Apology for his Leviathan in an Epistle dedicated to the King before Problemata Phisica nec vitio vertant quod contra Hostes pugnans c. Let none account me a Criminal that fighting against your Enemies I took what Arms I could and Brandished a two Edged Sword certainly those Propositions Fought against his Majesty and defended the Cause of of his Enemies That in the same book he did write against Bishops and the Doctrine of the Church of England is manifestly proved before In the Common-Prayer book are contained several Doctrines of the Church of England to oppose or deny which as Mr. Hobs doth in the aforesaid book is made Criminal that is to be punished by the Civil magistrate by the first of Queen Eliza. Cap. 2. The Title of which is That there be Uniformity of Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments in which there are these words ' Be it enacted that every Per son or Persons whatsoeverthat shall in any Interludes Plays Songs Rhymes or by any other open words declare or speak any thing depraving or despiseing the same Book or any part thereof or any thing therein contained then the party convicted shall forfeit to the Queen for the first Offence an Hundred Marks ' He concludes this Tract with casting an odious and false Scandal upon the whole Christian Clergy Down from the whole Council of Nice to this present time in these words ' So fierce are men for the most part in dispute where either their Learning or Power is debated that they never think of the Laws but as soon as they are offended they cry out Crucify forgetting what Paul saith even in case of obstinate holding of an Error 2. Tim. 24. 25. The Servant of the Lord must not strive but be gentle unto all men apt to Teach Patient in Meekness Instructing those that oppose if God peradventure may give them Repentance to the acknowledging of the Truth ' T is true both the Bishops and the Presbyterians did accuse that Book in the Parliament of Heresy why could they be fierce their learning and their power being not disputed when he professes in that book he medled not with them their power or learning Those things make not the Clergy fierce t is the Person the Religion the Faith of the Holy Jesus for which the Clergy have been and are still so Zealously contending they are and were piously fierce in opposing prophane Heresies and Blasphemous Impieties the Zeal of the Lord of Hosts hath eaten up those holy Divines their zelous defence of the Doctrine of their master hath not violated the Apostles direction given to the Pastors of the Church 2. Tim. that reaches only those who erred through infirmity not obstinacy Contumacious Hereticks they are bound to oppose withall Holy Zeal and Indignation Did not he blush to averr that they cryed Crucifie when they knew not the Law Could they be ignorant of that Law which they themselves put in execution Their ignorance of the Law did not make them cry Crufie but knowing the Law and Gospel became profest Enemies to those who by their Antichristian opinions Crucifie again the Lord of Glory What Reproach casts he upon Religion when he loads the Christian Divines with such imputations Those that are verst in Ecclesiastical History and have read the Fathers cannot but conclude that the Basil's the Gregory's c. were men as great for Learning and Goodness as the World ever produced their fervent opposition of Hereticks was not contrariant to that Apostoliocal Precept The Holy Christian Divines obeying the Apostolical Commands Titus 3. 10. An Heretick after the first and second Admonition reject 2 Pet. 2. 1. If any one bring another Doctrine receive him not into your house nor bid him good speed down from the Apostles time to this day have and will be till Christ come to Judgement Zealous and Pious opposers of those who privately bring in damnable Heresies denying the Lord that bought them FINIS
Bishop These were condemned in the Chalcedonian Council I will grant that the Disciples of Eutyches did say If two Natures there would be two hypostases I will say it was an Heretical illation and affirme that the Latine word Persona answers to the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the Sence of the Churches both East and West 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not Substance but Subsistence to which Persona directly answers But saith he in the Nicene Creed there 's no mention of Hypostasis or Hypostatical Union nor of Corporeal nor Incorporeal nor of parts but this was acknowledged by the Fathers in that Council there was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which necessarily infers it after a dispute concerning the sense of these words they all agreed in the same Faith and that Hypostasis is as well as Persona entertained by the universal Church not signifying Substantiam as usally but Subsistentiam from the Nicene decree must of nâ—cessity flow the Hypostatical Vnion Tho the word Incorporeal was not used in the Nicene Creed yet it is used in Eusebius his Synodical Episties who styles God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Immaterial and Incorporeal as before asserted but invidiously to throw dirt upon the Fathers ' such Points saith he were not necessary to Salvation but set a broach for ostentation of learning or else to dazle men with designe to lead them towards some ends of their own ' By which he charges the most humble persons with pride the most sincere with Hypocrisie and the most unbiass'd with secular aims T is true that it was not judged necessary to Salvation that vulgar persons should know what Hypostasis and Persona intended as appears by that Council held at Alexandria by Athanasius Bishop of that See Eusebius of Vercelles and Lucifer of Calaris Two Western Bishops who after they had contended about these words were united in this Nicene article that Christ was the Eternal Son of God and really God and that it was an Article of the Christian Faith necessary to Salvation What he says concerning St. Cyprian is nothing to my design nor shall I make any remarks upon his discourse of the Usurpation of the Bishop of Rome or take cognizance of what he says of the punishment ordained against Hereticks in the Reign of K. Rich. the 2. and succeding Princes for this is nothing to my purpose my whole designe is to make good the contradiction with which he is charged I must therefore have no regard to any penal statures in Causes Ecclesiastical until the Reign of Queen Elisabeth I charge him with these heretical propositions contrary to the doctrine of the Church of England to whom he is obliged by the laws of the King to be Subject 1. That God hath parts 2. That Christ is not of the same Substance with the Father 3. That the Persons in the sacred Trinity are temporall All which are declared Heretical by the lawes and Church of England But Mr. Hobs would evade the two last Heretical propositions by saying he believes the Doctrine of the Trinity as the Church hath explained it in the Catechisme When the Minister asks the Catecumene what dost thou chiefly lear in these Articles of thy Belief He answers I learn first to believe in God the Father who created me and all the World 2. I God the Son who hath redeemed me and all Mankind 3. I God the Holy-Ghost who hath Sanctified me and all the Elecâ— People of God What is then intended but this thaâ— God in his own person-did create all things in the Person of his Son did redeem Mankind in the person oâ— the Holy Ghost did Sanctifiâ— the Church What clearlie concerning the Divine persons or more consentaneous to the Faith can be said Appendix ad Leviath Cap. 1. On the contrary I will pronounce that nothing is more obscure nor distentaneous to the Faith Tully said properly Ego tres sustineo personas mei Judicis adversarij yet it must be granted that the same word may have divers significations peculiarly in various sciences else the great and famous Northern Constellations may note the greatest Bear in the Muscovian Snowes The Latine Fathers and after them the Schools and Divines take not the word Persona in the same sence that Orators and Philosophers do I believe that Bellarmine did know the meaning of the Latine word persona as well as Mr. Hobs. Let common sence be appealed can the Mystery of the Trinity be explained according to Cicero's use of the word Persona For according to the Church of England in the Athanasian Creed which is part of the Liturgy established by Law and ratified in the 8 Article in which are these words the Three Creeds the Nicene Creed the Athanasian Creed and that commonly called the Apostles Creed ought to be throughly received and believed In the Athanasian the Eternity is not onely of the Essence but of the Persons not as the Father Eternal the Son Eternal and the Holy Ghost Eternal but according to Mr. Hobs the Persons were Temporal i. e. God became a Father when he created the World A Son when he redeemed Mankind and the Holy Ghost when he Sanctifies which is absolutely contrary to the Faith for upon the Impious account of Mr. Hobs the Persons were not eternal by reason the Actions of God in creating the World by which there was the parsonality of the Father and of the Son in redeeming the World and of the Holy Ghost in Sanctifying the Elect People of God were temporal Let this be Queried What Sence is this God redeemed Mankind in the person of his Son Persona mei is Tully himself but Persona Judicis is Tully reprensenting a Judge did God represent another in the redeeming of the World This leads to the making good this Heresy concerning the Incarnation of the Son of God for he utterly denies the eternal Filiation and saith that Christ being the Son of God was an eternal God but as being begotten extraordinarily in time he acknowledgeth that expressly and frequently in the Scriptures Christ is said to be begotten that he was God born of the Father before the World when Christ is said to be begotten t is meant that he was begotten of God himself the Father of the Matter of the Virgin Mat. 1. vers 20. that which was begotten of the Virgin Mary was of the Holy Ghost and should be called the Son of God ' But some perhaps will say that the eternal generation differs from that which was made in the Womb of the Virgin ' To which he thus answers where doth the Holy Scripture or Synod thus distinguish this Question is a certain demonstration that he denys the eternal generation and that he by a strange passion resolves to deny those things which for certain he knows to be true if a stou denyal serves his designe The sacred Scripture in several places is express for the eternal generation
evident by 5 Eliz. Cap. 23 with the significavit to be added to the Writ and in that Significavit 'tis joyn'd that the Excommunication doth proceed upon some cause of some Original matter of Heresy or Error in Religion or Doctrine now received and allowed in the said Church of England whereby it appears that Persons for Heresy might be Imprisoned and so Heresy to become Criminal For it was to be punished by the civil Magistrate with Corporal Mulcts and farther lay a Writ de Heretico comburendo if nothing was declared Heresy why did their lye such a Writ That such a Writ was in force is clear by the annulling of it when this fetal Plot was detected then the Parliament made an Act to Cancel it either it was in force or not if in force the Parliament was Prudent in making it void if not it casts a reproach upon the Two Houses to annul that which was exploded That these Writs were in force is declared and that the Writ de excommunicato capiendo retains its Vigor is evinc'd by the usage of the Kingdome of England As for the Writ de Heretico comburendo it was put in execution in King James his time Legat Wightman were Burnt the one in Smith-field and the other in Litchfield for the Arrian Heresy He saith that they which approve such executions may peradventure know better grounds for them then I do But grounds are very well worthy to be enquired after but he might very well know the just grounds for them He that affirms the Law to be the Sole rule of just and unjust could not be ignorant that by the common Law of England the Writ de Heretico comburendo was valid and thereupon an Heretick might legally be Burnt My Lord Cook part 3. cap. 5. affirms that by the Books of the common Law the King Issuing our his VVrit de Heretico comburendo an Heretick ought to be Burnt That Heresy might be punished by Corporeal and pecumiary Mulcts is clear by the Queens Letters Patents authorized by the 1. Statute of her Reign She did give to the Arch Bishop of Cant. the Bishop of London and divers others any Three or more of them full Power and Authority to reforme redress order correct and amend c. and to have full Power and Authority to order and award to every such offendor by Fine Imprisonment Censure of the Church or otherways or all or any of the said ways Cawdrys Case and in that same case it is resolved by the Judges that the Statute of the First of Queen Elizabeth did not introduce any new Law but declared an ancient one The Title of the Statute being an Act restoring to the Crown the Ancient jurisdiction over the State Ecclesiastical and Spiritual The Sovereign being the Supream head of the Church without whose Authority no person can or ought to exercise any Ecclesiastical jurisdiction or proceed to any Censure it demonstrates that by the Royal Power an Heretick might be punished with a Civil and Corporeal Mulct Farther the Star-Chamber was an ancient Court grounded upon the common Law of England and confirmed by Act of Parliament Which Court took cognizance not onely of Civil Crimes but also of Ecclesiastical and did punish Hereticks by Imprisoning Fineing and Stigmatizeing as appears by the Records of that Court and that famous Instance of Thrask who in the 16. year of King James for spreading of Judaical Heresies he was cited into the Court and being obstinate was sentenced to be set in the Pillory Whipt to the Fleet Fined and Imprisoned all which was executed by which it appears what truth there is in this assertion of Mr. Hobs During the Time the High Commission was in being there was no Statute by which an Heretick might be punished otherwise than by the ordinary Censure of the Church for 't is proved that by the Common Law of England and the Statute Law during the time of the High Commission Hereticks might suffer in their Bodies and Purses hence it follows that Heresy was criminal and he hath not vindicated himself from that contradiction with which he stands charged He farther proceeds ' That no Doctrine could be accounted Heresy unless Commissioners had actually declared and published that what was made Heresy by the Four first general Councils should be Heresie ' but I never heard yet there was any such declaration made either by Proclamation by Recording in Churches or by Printing as is requisite in Penal Laws We have before proved that the High Commission was not the Sole Judges of Heresy That which the Church and Law of England condemns for Heresy is as fully divulged as can be expected The 39. Articles are sufficiently known and those Doctrines which the Four first general Councils received as Orthodox or condemned as Heretical are ratifi'd by the Law and Church of England and sufficiently promulged The Nicene Creed which was completed by the Fourth general Council is read in every Church on Sundaies and Holy daies The Athanasian Creed is to be read at peculiar Festivals both which Creeds as also the Apostles are part of the Liturgy of the Church which is imbodyed into the Laws of the Land and that the opinions which are contrary are made Heretical appears by these Clauses of the Athanasian Creed He therefore that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity Furthermore it is Necessary to Everlasting Salvation that he also believe rightly the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ and this Clause ends the Creed This is the Catholick Faith which except a man believe Faithfully he cannot be saved The Doctrines therefore declared to be Heretical are sufficiently by Printing and Recording in Churches divulged To alleviate his Crime or at least to vindicare himself from Heresie he reflects upon our late sad distractions w ch to me administers matter of horror ' Before arms were taken up saith he the King abolished the High Commission but the Parliament pursued the Rebellion and put down both Episopacy and Monarchy erecting a power by them called a Common wealth by others the Rump which men obeyed not out of Duty but Fear ' those actions were dreadfull and are the fontinels of all those fears which now afflict us The just principles by which Government is formed and established and reasonable laws are enacted deservedly reprove and condemn those actions perpetrated in our late confusions which gave a scandall to our Religion and Nation But how can he cast an odium upon those actions his sentiments justifie Saith he ' there were no humane Laws left in force to restrain any man from Preaching or Writing any Doctrine concerning Religion that he pleased And in this time it was that a book called the Leviathan was writ in defence of the Kings Power Spiritual or Temporal without any word against Episcopacy or against Bishop or against the publick Doctrine of the Church ' To which t is thus Replyed ' the Leviathan was impressed 1651 and come out
THE Leviathan HERETICAL OR The Charge Exhibited in Parliament against M. Hobbs justified by the Refutation of a Book of his Entituled The Historical Narration of Heresie and the Punishments thereof By JOHN DOWEL Vicar of Melton-Mowbray in Leicester Shire OXON Printed by L. Lichfield and are to be sold by A. Stephens Bookseller 1683. THE PREFACE THE Author of this Tract may thus be reproached Are not the Corps of dead men Sacred To violate Tombs and Graves is Sacrilegious why doth the Author intend to disturb the Manes of this universal Scholar Will he not be permitted to sleep quietly in the Grave How unworthy a thing is it to insult over a dead Lyon and write against him who rests in the dust The Author hears these words with a quiet mind Certainly if to answer the works of those who are dead be so Criminal how hainous offendors have so many writers in all ages been and how Capital a Delinquent is Mr. Hobs who hath by writeing endeavoured to render the sentiments of the best and most learned men ridiculous This Treatise discourseth with his Ghost He dyed in 1679 and the Treatise came out in 80. 'T is his umbra it carries his own lineaments and speaks his own language A Reverend Neighbour Minister a Learned Friend of the Authors acquainted him with the language of Mr. Hobs in private discourse exactly agreeing with this Tract and we find the most of it cap 1 and 2. de Heresi app ad Leviath Ed. Latina I will acknowledge him a Gentleman of great parts of a wonderful vivacity to his old age that he had so fine a Pen that by the clearness and propriety of his Style and exactness of his method he gain'd more Proselytes than by his Principles few exceed him in both languages but these aggrandize his Crimes he ought not to have abused such excellent qualifications he hath so managed his Pen that many believe him unanswerable yet let this Tract be considered whether he be not fully refuted as to the Contents of his Narrative I will appeal to the Learned World whether Mr. Hobs hath not thrown dirt and ugly expressions upon the Christian Religion the best of Councils the whole Christian Clergie and hath abused the English Laws It may be again objected This Author durst not write whilst he was a live Whom did Mr. Hobs ever answer but the clear Pen of the Arch-B of Armagh and the Great Professor Dr. Wallis In the Verses which he made of himself he vaunts a Victory the world is the Judge if what he saith be true That there is an Eternal Fate and Necessity Why can he commend himself and discommend others If in these Lines the Author does a thing ill what reproof does he deserve he is hurried to it by a fatal Necessity On this account his praising himself and dispraising others is groundless he is charged with contradictions from a great one of which he endeavours to vindicate himself but 't is in vain his artifices are fruitless One of his Moral and Political Principles is That whatsoever is just or unjust or to be received as true or false is by the approbation or rejection of the Supream Power He writes his Ieviathan in which this is asserted and defended yet in the same eviathan he delivers those doctrines for true which are judged Heretical by the Church of England and Laws of the Kingdom To evade this he useth all Art and Industry In the First part of this Answer some Doctrines which he propagated in that Book are proved Heretical In the Latter part is proved That these Doctrines are Criminal and the persons that maintain'd them are liable to be punished by the Civil Majestrate His Book being An Historical Narrative the Author is forc'd to have recourse to Books Mr. Hobs gives us several Histories but Quotes no Authour whereupon the Answerer is compelled to cite the place whence he has taken them No Memory Reading Vnderstanding or Observation is infinite therefore the Authour sometime useth this or the like expression so as to him it occurs he abstaines from all virulent language the hardest word and that but once used is Notoriously false Mr. Hobs gives occasion to dispute a great part of his Leviathan but the Answerer prosecutes his design to make good the Contradiction as for Instance Mr. Hobs averrs That God hath Parts here is a just occasion to dispute The Nature of Spirits but the Authour waves it 't is sufficient to prove That the Church of England has judged that Proposition Heretical and thereupon has contradicted himself He asserts That they who embrâ—ce the Liberty of the Will are allyed to the Manichees This gives a fair opportunity to discourse of Liberty and Necessity and he that seriously considers himself will find the freedom of his Will ariseth not from the flexibilty of the Vnderstanding flowing from various impressions upon that faculty but from the Dominion which the Will has over it self which the Greeks excellently express by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but the Authour does not medle with that Controversie contenting himself with the Demonstration of the absurdity of Mr. Hobs his Imputation and that it is contrariant to the Doctrine of the Church of England The Doctrine of the Sacred Trinity is religiously imbrac'd and entertain d by the Church of England as it was by the Church of Christ in all ages hence Lucian in his Philopatris jeer'd the Primitive Christians for believing such an incredible opinion That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Tres Unus and Unus Tres Three Persons and One God which scoff shews sufficiently the Faith of the Primitive Church The Authour does not therefore dispute the Doctrine of the Trinity but wipes off all that Varnish with which Mr. Hobs useth to bide the deformity of his sentiments and makes him appear in his proper Colours proves him Heretical in being an enemy to the Faith and Doctrine of the Church of England The like may be said of other things which the Author treats of the charge being made good that Mr. Hobs has notoriously contradicted himself His book is answered and his great Postulatum demonstrated to be false in that he is forc'd to acknowledge those things which are contrary to it A DISCOURSE OF HERESIE A 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a Greek word and the derivations that are given of Heresie from other words then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Greek or Latine are fond and spurious It was a word amongst the Philosophers Greek and Latine us'd for any Sect promiscuously and so the acception is indifferent but 't is otherwise in sacred Scripture in Ecclesiastical Writers Fathers and Historians amongst whom 't is alwaies us'd in an evil sense the Acts of the Apostles being excepted where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is alwaies translated Sect only Acts 24. 14. 't is probable 't is used in an ill sense The Reason may be
Hermogines not from the recited proposition but his own contrarietys the same may be applyed to what he disputes against Marchiaean Apelles and Praxeas Therefore against Mr. Hobs I may be confident to averr that Tertullian never attempts the refuting Apelles or any other Heretick in his time from this Topick whatsoever was not Corporeal was a Phantasme T is true the Nicene Fathers went to establish one Individual God in Trinity to abolish the diversity of Species in God and t is not true that they did not intend to destroy the distinction of here and there for the Council in explaining the word did say that it could not be understood of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the Essence of God was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the discourse is not concerning the intent of the Council Since the Council judged the nature of God to be Immaterial and Incorporeal they did conclude that an Incorporeal Substance was not a contradiction therefore the holy Fathers must needs have thought that God had no extended parts nor any sort of parts and therefore not be considered as here and there What a force is don by him to the Apostles question St. Paul asks the Corinthians Is Christ divided which he thus interprets ' He did not think they thought him impossible to be considered as having hands and feet but that they might think him alluding to the manner of the Gentiles one of the sons of God but not the only begotten Thus expounded in Athanasius his Creed Not Confounding the Persons nor dividing the Substance i. e. God is not divided into 3 Persons Peter James and John nor are the 3 Persons one and the same Person ' T is granted that the Fathers intended the last but it is denied that they had any such intent by not dividing the Substance to have a respect unto various Individuals for in that division the Persons substances are divided the Substances are different and not the same but in the persons of the Individual Trinity the Substance is the same And in created beings the Persona of every Individual is really distinct not onely from the essence and person of another Individual but from the Substance in which it doth subsist which appears in the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ who assumed not the Person but Nature of Man but the mistery being great above all the understanding and apprehension of man it is rather the object of Faith than Reason My main undertaking against Mr. Hobs in this Tract is not to illustrate or prove the meaning but to manifest that he has not cleared himself of the contradiction and that in his attempts he throws himself into new absurdities one of which is this Paragraph ' But Aristotle and from him all the Greek Fathers and other learned men when they distinguish the general latitude of a word they call it division as when they divide the Animal into Man and Beast they call these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Species and when they again divide the Species Man into Peter and John they call these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 partes individuae And by this confounding the division of the Substance with the distinction of words divers men have been led into Error of attributing to God a name which is not the name of any Substance at all viz. Incorporeal ' 'T is true that the Philosophers when they divide Animae or the Genus into Men or Beasts they call these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Species but when they again divide the Species Man into Peter and John they never call these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Partes Individuae for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are partes dividuae therefore Individua are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but what sence there is in his deduction I 'le give when I understand it There is a substance which is Incorporeal the Philosophers were led into that truth by observing the operations of some beings which are not Corporeal where it must needs follow that these essences are Incorporeal and by some other Arguments but that they should be led into this which he calls an Error by confounding the division of Substance with the distinction of words is a thing far from Truth and any conception of mine ' Many Heresies which were Antecedent to the first general Council were condemned as that of Manes he might have added Marcion by the first article I believe in one God ' This was not directed onely against them but also against the polutheisme of the Heathens ' tho to me it seems still to remain in the Doctrine of the Church of Rome which so attributes a liberty of the will to men as that their will and purpose to commit sin uot should proceed from the cause of all things God but originally from themselves or from the Devil ' Indeed Marcion and Manes attributed Sin to an evill God but the Church of Rome the Church of England and all other Churches look upon that Opinion as Heretical why this Doctrine of the Liberty of the will is to remain in the Church of Rome this is to palliate This Doctrine continues in the Church of England and in all the Churches of Christ The Devil does vehemently tempt to sin but he is not the cause of sin hence that good Axom is received by all knowing men No body is injured but by himself that which is properly an Evil is the Evil of Sin which our selves only can inflict upon us but how comes it to pass that this Doctrine of the Liberty of the Will should be opposed by this Article I believe in one God they who maintain that Doctrine firmly believe this Article They say that the one true God is infinitely glorious in all perfections amongst which is the Liberty of his will he created all things amongst which he created Rational beings which he endowed with the Liberty of Will whereby they are made capable of being vertuous and so to be rewarded or vitious and so to be punished where is there by this sentiment a setting up another God by God he means one first Cause which necessarily moved from all eternity from which necessary cause there flows an infinite concatenation of necessary causes whence if any say that there is a Liberty of the Will he must assigne another first Cause and from thence oppose this Article I believe in one God we say there is but one first Cause and that a free Agent whence springs the Liberty of Rational Beings By the account which Mr. Hobs gives of God and by several of his opinions it must be concluded that he believes there is no God One of his sayings is He that saith there is no mind in the World hath no mind This is a gingling quibble besides many gross absurdites with w ch his opinion is charged this is no mean one God is the Author of Sin to which he replys Leviath cap. 46. by this distinction God is not the
makeing it distant from the temporal The scriptures were wrested and false Glosses put upon them Arrius did not deny the praeexistence of the Son of God who was Incarnate the difference was not concerning the Eternal Generation but the Consubstantiality Having thus proved that his Leviathan contains certain Haeretical propositions It remains that I prove these Heresies Criminal and thus I state the Question and pursue it 'T is one of Mr. Hob's great Artifices to avoid those absurdities into which his own sentiments casts him Mr. Hobs percieving that he is justly charg'd with this imputation writes the book call'd The Historical Narrative of Heresie The Parliament complain'd That in it were contain'd several Heretical Opinions i. e. Opinions declared Heresie by the Church and Laws of England he being a Subject to the King is obliged to obedience to the Laws of his Soveraign By this therefore he doth manifestly contradict himself and opposeth these his great Moral and Political Postulata's ' Nothing is Just or Unjust but what is made so by Law and that nothing is Criminal but what a Penal Law prohibits ' From this his most just charge he would free his Leviathan to shew that his attemts are frivolous it must be prov'd that his Leviathan doth contain Heretical Opinions To which he returns That there is no opinion that opposeth a Penal Statute or that no Person can be justly by the Civil Magistrate punish'd for any Opinion contain'd in the Leviathan For saith he ' All the Penal Laws against Hereticks were repeal'd in the Reign of Q. Elizabeth To remedy the Inconvenience which might arise by Novel Dogma's She apointed a Court called the High Commission to declare what was Heresie But that High Commission never declared what was Heresie or if they did it was to no purpose for they were not impower'd to inflict any punishment upon an Heretick Withal the Parliament abolishing that Court nothing could be accounted Heresie Besides the Leviathan was Printed in 1651. when it was lawful to Write or Preach any thing in matters of Religion ' To which I suppose that some nay many things contained in the Leviathan are Heretical and so judged by the Church and punishable by the Civil Majestrate Not to mention many I will assign these Two The Nature of God and the Mystery of the Individual Trinity are by him Heretically and Impiously explicated He Blasphemously avers God hath parts and makes the Persons of the Holy Trinity to be Temporal not Eternal both which are declared Heretical by the first Article and by the three Creeds The Athanasian Creed is imbodyed into the Common Law and that his opinion concerning the Trinity is Heretical is indubitable waveing the Contests he strives violently to maintain that Nothing in matters of Faith is declared Criminal by the Law or punishable by the Civil Magestrate For faith he ' the Lady Elizabeth in her first year repealed all the Laws Ecclesiastical of Queen Mary and all other Laws concerning the punishing of Hereticks nor did She enact any other punishment in their place ' These lines he could not deliver without that same arrogance by which he explodes the Universityes and accounts most of the Learned men in the World Fools For the Writs de Heretico Comburendo and de excommunicato capiendo were in force he adds in the 2 place it was enacted ' That the Queen by her Letters Patents should give a Commission to the Bishops with several other Persons in her Majesties name to execute his Power ecclesiastical this is granted he proceeds In which Commission the Commissioners were forbidden to adjudge any thing to be Heresy which was not declared to be Heresy by some of the four first General Concils nor was there any thing in that Commission concerning how Hereticks ought to be punished But it was granted to them to declare or not declare to be Heresy or not Heresy as they pleased any of those Doctrines which had been condemned in the four first general Councils for Heresie ' To refute this and what he subjoyns t is requisite that I give the words of the Statute ' They shall not meaning the High Commissioners have Authority or Power to order determine or adjudge any matter or cause to be Heresy but only such as heretofore have been determined ordered or adjudged to be Heresy by the Authority of the Canonical Scriptures or by the first four general Councils or any of them or by any other General Council wherein the same was declared Heresy by the express and plain words of the said Canonical Scriptures or such as hereafter shall be ordered determined or adjudged to be Heresy by the High Court of Parliament of this Realme with the assent of the Clergy in their Convocation ' By this it appears what a lame and false account he gives of the Statute for the Queen and her Parliament did not leave it indifferent to the High Commission to determine what was or what was not Heresy but limits them to declare what was Heresy or not Heresy not only to the four first general Councils as he seems falsely to insinuate but likewise to the express words of Scripture and to the Parliament which he seems to exclude for he omits the mentioning of them ' Nor was there he adds in that Commission any thing concerning how Hereticks ought to be punished ' The High Commission could not inflict capital punishment I hope Mr Hobs will not say there is no crime but t was capitall That the High Commission had power to punish persons in case of Heresy is evident both by the Law of England and practice of that Court. By the Law of England expressly by the Act Elizab that Court was Invested w th all Ecclesiastical power before the Cancelling of the High-Commission the Bishops had a Power to Imprison persons and the Writ de excommunicato capiendo still continues The words of the Act are that ' the Queen or any of her Successors should nominate one or more persons to use exercise and occupy all manner of jurisdictions priviledges or preeminences in any wise touching or concerning any spiritual or Ecclesiastical jurisdiction and to visiâ— reforme redress order correct and amend all such Errors Heresies Schismes c. ' It was perfect nonsence for a Parliament to enable the English Soveraign to erect a Court to punish and amend Errors and Heresies if the Law of England had not declared what was an Heresy and likewise not to Invest them with power to accomplish such ends which they had not if they could not inflict punishments he returned ' The jurisdiction was onely spiritual ' but to that was annexed a civil punishment Upon excommunication there lay a Writ de excommunicato capiendo that a Person excommunicated for Heresy or Errors in Doctrine by that Writ might be Imprisoned is clear as the day Certainly imprisonment is a civil Punishment This Writ lay against those who were obstinate Offenders in Causes Ecclesiastical is