established by the supreme vvhich he instituted But I do not finde this expressed there in that latitude he novv formes it but rather I thought that he vvould have supposed that the supreme should be obeyed in such things cross not the Lavv of God vvhatsoever either natural or positive but it seems novv he must be obeyed in all vvhich is not against the Lavv of Nature onely he vvould have the Scriptures and positive Lavvs laid aside By this if a King shall command us not to be baptized not to receive the Communion or like Darius not to pray to God for a certain time not to repent c. vvhich are not acts of the Lavv of Nature but positive Lavvs vve should not doe them vvhich must needs be most odious to any Christian man But indeed had not Mr. Hobbs distinguished these tvvo the positive and natural Lavvs of God before in the former page and raised these doubts to disgrace the positive laws of God I could have answered that there is no Law more Natural than that we should obey the positive Laws of God for he being the supreme power must needs have that authority to make Laws for the government of men and this is universally received All Nations in the World pretend to have divine Laws for their direction I mean positive divine Laws onely Mr. Hobbs denyeth it clearly in this place Let us examine what follows CHAP. XXII SECT XIII Obedience founded upon the belief or acknowledgment of his power that commands Mr. Hobbs his complacency in quarrelling with Religion The want of reason in his proofs discovered and censured Faith commanded by God urged by promissory and penal Laws The dreadful punishment of such as believe not or disturb other mens belief with frivolous arguments God the searcher of hearts and punisher of evil thoughts contrary to Mr. Hobbs his Doctrine HE is bound saith he to obey it but not bound to believe it A strange proposition for take his particle i how you please for obedience to divine or humane Laws he can be bound to obey none when he hath no belief for he cannot have an obligation to divine Laws unless he believe they are given by God nor can he perform obedience to humane Laws unless he have a belief that they are made by the supreme power So that obedience in all kinds supposeth a belief of that authority which commands But again consider what he means by this word belief He is bound to obey but not to believe Certainly as I said he must believe the authority that commands and 't is as true that he must believe that that aâ—thority commands this Act or else he can have no ground for his obedience This man had a mind to be quarrelling at Religion but could not find expressions to do it But he proves his conclusion for saith he Mens belief and interiour cogitations are not subject to the commands but only to the operation of God ordinary or extraordinary The vainest and weakest Argument that ever was urged First in Logick it cannot follow because they are subject to the operations of God they therefore are not subject to commands as Charity and all the restraint of exorbitant lusts are subject to his operations are they not therefore subject to commands This is a pitiful inference but then consider further that faith and the cogitations of men are commanded by God that faith is commanded first Heb. 11. 6. Without faith it is impossible to please God for he that cometh to God must believe that he is and that he is a rewarder of them who diligently seek him Now it is necessary that he who requires us to come must in that exaction require such things as are necessary to obtain it and therefore faith without which Heaven cannot be attained And God hath given a blessed promissory Law that he will bless such as do believe and penal also that he will punish such as do not believe For the first John 3. 15 16. Whosoever believeth in him that is in Christ should not perish but have eternal life The same is added in the 16 verse God so loved the World that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believeth on him should not perish but have everlasting life Here is a Law made concerning happiness an eternal Law concerning an eternal life all terms indefinite The same is repeated in the 18 verse of the same Chap. but with the addition of the penal Law He that believeth not is condemned already As likewse our Saviour Mark 16. 16. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved but he that believeth not shall be damned and this is no more but a prâ—mise performed by God which was made Deut. 18. 15. urged by St. Peter Acts 3. 22. A Prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your Brethren like unto me him sâ—all you hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you v 23. And it shall coâ—e to pass that every Soul which will not hear that Prophet shall be dâ—stroyed from among the People Let Mr. Hobbs and his Followers read these thrâ—e words and tremble Condemned Damned Destroyed who believes not c. What shall such be who have not only this privative infidelity but a positive which opposeth and disturbs the faith of such as do believe with foolish and unnecessary Arguments Faith is commanded and exacted by God upon a dreadful penalty So likewise John 3 23. This is his commandement that we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ. There in express terms this belief is commanded and as I have shewed obedience could not be given to other Laws if faith did not preceed which is the first step towards Heaven I need not speak of other cogitations of the Heart as Pride Self-conceitedness Covetous desiring others goods c. are all prohibited by God and he will punish them Mr. Hobbs was therefore to blame very much in saying that faith and the interiour cogitations are not subject to Gods commands had they been humane Laws of which he spoke it had been somewhat to the purpose men cannot know and therefore cannot punish the interiour cogitations and so not make Laws for them but God knows and searcheth the heart and reins and will punish them and therefore it is fit for him to give commands concerning them CHAP. XXII SECT Xâ—V External and inferiour Acts subject to divine regulation Faith the fuâ—filling of that Law which commanded it Vain-glory and fear equally impeding practical Faith BUt it seems there is more in this argument of his where he saith but only to the operation of God ordinary or extraordinary I have spoken somewhat to this a little before where I shewed that other vertues which cannot be denyed to be commanded are subject to the operations of God who worketh both to will and to doe who creates and preserves and although he gives the will yet if he goe not on in the operation it will
the holy Ghost should commit a sin against that Christ whose Gospel and Laws he preached and taught every where with hazard of his life if that Law were to be understood in that latitude and extent in which it is taken Any man who considers this must needs cast about to see if learned men who throughout the whole Christian World have practised with St. Paul have given any such exposition upon these words of our Saviour as may consist with the universal practice of mankind and doing that he may find this fully explained so as fit to shew our Saviours design which was not in this to controul the practice of his servants The difficulty will lye in these two Phrase the Negative in the 34 verse and the Affirmative in the 37 verse First for the Negative sweare not at all to apprehend this consider that these universal as also indefinite terms are with much caution to be extended and to be expounded in Scripture according to that consent they have with other places and the Analogie of Faith In the 21 verse of this 5 Chap. of St. Matthew it is said thou shalt not kill and lest some should say there is no universal sign preceding as in my Text consider the following words which make it as large as this in my Text whosoever killeth shall be in danger of the judgement And yet surely it is lawful for an Executioner to hang according to the Law of the Land and so to kill any man who is condemned when he hath received a command to do it So likewise it is lawful for a Souldier in defence of his Country and for any private man to kill any private man in defence of himself So likewise the same we may say of our Saviours words John 10. and the 8. All that ever came before me were Thieves and Robbers Here are as full and large words as possibly can be but a man say what were the Patriarchs the Prophets and St. John the Baptist Thieves and Robbers Certainly no it is easie to observe many more of the like Nature and I think one answer will serve them all thou shalt not kill voluntarily but upon necessity or command that is a Natural or Moral necessity for a command from lawful Superiours introduceth a Moral necessitie of obeying And so for that in St. Iohn all that came of themselves unsent by God were Thieves and Robbers But Iohn the Baptist the Patriarchs and the Prophets were men sent from God And so for those Swearers swear not all that is of your selves unless you are commanded by Superiour Powers unless to confirm some great and considerable truth which way all vertuous and holy men have ever understood this Text as their practice assures us and so that place in St Iames the 5. must abide the same exposition And although much more may be said for the exposition of thi Nâ—gative command of our Saviours yet I conceive that this is sufficient and so pass to the Affirmative precept in the 37 verse But let your communication be yea yea nay nay for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil Here it â—eems that as our Saviour before forbad swearing by his Negative swear not at all so here he insinuates the same by his Affirmative but let your communication be yea yea and nay nay and he gives a reason for it for what is more than these cometh of evil Thus the Argument being enforced I answer clearly that in the Translation of the English there is a full gloss upon the Text which expounds it clearly for so it is read let your communication which intimates that their common conversation should not be powdred with Oathes which is far distant from those just occasions where oathes are exacted by the commands of Superiours or the urgency of some great and weighty business which needs a strong affirmation to assure the credulity of it and the Original which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 enforceth no more but let your Speech be yea c. And the reason which is added in the Text makes this interpretation good for what is more than these cometh of evil it is not sin it is not Evil but cometh of Evil which is evident for no man swears in conversation but either because he doubts his own reputation if he do not swear or because other men are distrustful both which arise out of the evil of humane falshood which makes him apt to lye This Text being thu opened let us consider what will result out of it in the Negative first and then out of the Affirmative precept In the Negative we may find that it is opposed to a practice of the Jews who by some tradition or other imagined that it was no sin to swear but to swear falsly only So that if a man performed his promise which he swore he would do it was no sin and it seems therefore to be spoken only of promissory Oaths not of such which were made to give Testimony of matters of fact if so then there is no prohibition of such Oaths which are for the decision of controversies commonly called Assertory Oaths and then again it may justly be conceived that they that is the Jews thought out of some tradition or other that it was only unlawful to swear by God but not by the Creature for our Saviours instances are only in them Thou shalt not swear by Heaven by Earth by Ierusalem by the Gold of the Altar or thy Head Which he sheweth relatively to reach even the Creator himself so that for these considerations it must be understood that it excludes not assertory Oath vvhich decide controversies that it extends not to such Oaths vvhere God is religiously called to witness any thing And then for the second the affirmative precept it reacheth to our Communication and common conference one with another that Gods most Sacred Name be not slightly or in vain taken by us but that either some great business more than ordinary or else some supreme power must exact it from us So then this being thus expounded it must needs appear that in this case a man may justly depose his errour and he cannot be necessitated to sin when he hath an errour in his Conscience And truly it is an excellent rule for the practice of a mans life when he shall find a general practice of good and holy men in all Ages to practise any thing which he is offended at to suppress that averseness in himself and with study and pains to cast about which way he may reconcile himself to that common practice and not without strong and evident grounds which will hardly be possible oppose that which the universal practice makes us know that the universal Church understood as they practised for if there be an Error in such a practice a man may find something to excuse himself with erravimum cum patribus but in the other nothing but pride and self conceipt which makes him oppose these
he wept bitterly and how powerful those tears wrought upon our Saviour we know so that it was hardly spoke of him and more then he could know to say it was easily and worse in his conclusion when he said that horrid sin might be committed without a fault and that it was lawful to do it I am sure that fevere sentence which the Councel of Nice lay upon it and the bitter tears of St. Peter are no arguments for it and the whole course of Divinity delivered by our Saviour and Apostles makes against it and the constant practise of holy and religious men for our Saviour Luk. 9. 23. If any man will come after me he must deny himself and take up the Cross and follow me Mark you it is deny himself not Christ it is take up his Cross not cast it away and reject it his Cross that is all affliction which is upon him as in this case he must either Sin or bear it thus it is laid upon him as likewise there are other cases but this is one and a main one Again Mat. 33. He who denies me before men him will I deny before my Father who is in Heaven What more pertinent and close against his conclusion and you may perceive that as we demean our selves towards Christ here he will so demean himself towards us hereafter if we suffer for him we shall raign with him if we forsake him to save this life we shall have no share in his life or death hereafter and surely if a man might lawfully deny Christ it was a strange folly yea madness in all those glorious Martyrs who suffered such torments rather then they would deny their Saviour I have spoke of this before in this very Treatise and I see nothing opposed to any thing there which was brought against his or for my conclusion this might have been therefore spared SECT IV. A Digression to Mr. Hobs. BUt now Mr. Hobs I again bespeak you leave off the Justification of such horrid Errors as this consider if you intend to act according to this Doctrine you can have no part in Christ he will reject you at the last day consider again that you have taught and by that teaching have tempted others to be of that Error to love and prefer this temporal life before that eternal An Atheistical practice which men may easily be induced to entertain and practise when there is little reason produced for it and consider with your self that although this is one of the greatest sins a man can commit yet according to that ever honoured Councel in the Canon cited by you there is room for you in the Church here and in Heaven hereafter if you prove penitent Repent therefore of this your wickedness that God may according to his Sacred Covenant have Mercy upon you Judge your self that you be not judged of the Lord and make amends for this publick Scandal you have given to the Church of Christ which I think since the first Conversion never had any so publickly professed this Doctrine before Leviathan do it therefore in some publick Treatise and that in English whereby there may be amends to those who have been seduced by your Doctrines and so Farewell This is all which concerns me in this Appendix of yours at this time therefore I meddle with nothing else AN ALPHABETICAL TABLE Of the Principal CONTENTS In which C. denotes the Chapter and S. the Section A THe Promises to Abraham and his Seed Cap. 22. Sect. 16. Why his Family was obliged to obey Gods Commands C. 22. S. 17. Whence are Actions just or unjust C. 8. S. 2. not from Consent or Dissent C. 8. S. 2. Mixed Actions what they are C. 19. S. 6. External and Internal Acts subject to Gods command C. 22. S. 14. Agag spared C. 20. S. 2. Subjects not freed from their Allegiance C. 5. S. 4. Of the Amazons Commonwealth C. 16. S. 5. 7. St. Ambroses contest with Theodosius C. 20. S. 4. Apostles their gift of Tongues Miraculous C. 22. S. 10. Their Learning Miraculous Cap. 22. S. 11. Appetite over-rules the Will C. 19. S. 6. Aristides Banished C. 20. S. 5. No taking Armes against the King C. 16. S. 7. Assurance of Revelations C. 22. S. 1. What is Assurance C. 22. S. 1. how many ways it may be had C. 22. S. 1. that of Faith greater then of Sciences C. 22. S. 1. what we have of Christian Religion C. 22. S. 1. Athenians used Ostracism C. 20. S. 5. He who Acts by anothers Authority may do injury to him by whose Authority he Acts C. 8. S. 1. B The worshippers of Baal not excused by the command of the King of Israel C. 22. S. 17. Bishops most competent Judges of Books in Religion and of Preaching C. 10. S. 3. C The Canons of the Church of England confirmed by Laws C. 23. S. 13. When one is said to be a Captive C. 17. S. 2. To whom a Captive belongs ibid. The first cause doth not necessitate Cap. 19. Sect. 9 10 11 12. The chain of causes not to be discerned C. 19. S. 10. The injuries done to K. Charles I. had their rise from Mr. Hobs's doctrine C. 14. S. 2. C. 21. Children ought to love those that nourished them C. 16. S. 10. Whether they can give consent in their Infancy C. 16. S. 1. Christianity to be introduced by reason and sufferings and not by force C. 10. S. 9. Man only actively capable of commands C. 19. S. 9. The difference between the commands of God and of men C. 18. S. 11. External and Internal Acts subject to Gods command C. 22. S. 14. Conduct and Command how like the Motive faculty C. 23. S. 14. Commons the Representative of the People C. 23. S. 16. The Division of a Common-wealth into Monarchy Aristocracy and Democracy examined C. 13. S. 1 2. How fathers rather then mothers did erect them C. 16. S. 5. Rules to govern them not certain and demonstrative C. 18. S. 14. Mr. Hobs's Commonwealth no where to be found C. 4. S. 1. not consistent with Reason C. 4. S. 2. he first called it a Leviathan C. 3. What is Dominion by Conquest C. 16. S. 12. how it becomes despotical C. 16. S. 12. When one is said to be Conquered C. 17. S. 1. What power the Victor hath over the Conquered C. 16. S. 12 Covenant upon Conquest may give possession but not right when the cause of the War is not just C. 17. S. 2. Conscience what it is C. 23. S. 4. whatsoever is against it is sin C. 23. S. 4. what is an erronious C. 23. S. 4. how it obligeth ibid. Whether there be a publick conscience C. 23. S. 5. how private consciences differ from private opinions ibid. Controversies the Soveraign ought to take care of deciding them and is accountable to God for the neglect thereof C. 12. S. 1. Covenant not a breath C. 6. S. 2 3. C. 16. S. 6. whence their Obligation C. 6.