and with the mouth is confession made unto salvation If a man deny Christ with his mouth the faith of the heart will not serve his turn Sixthly Christ denounceth damnation to all those who for saving of their lives do deny their Religion and promiseth eternal life to all those who do seale the truth of their Christian faith with their blood against the commands of heathenish Magistrates Who soever will save his life shall lose it and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it Christ doth not promise eternal life for violation of true Religion Lastly no Christian Soveraign or Common-wealth did ever assume any such authority to themselves Never any subjects did acknowledge any such power in their Soveraigns Never any Writer of Politicks either waking or dreaming did ever phansie such an unlimitted power and authority in Princes as this which he ascribeth to them not onely to make but to justifie all doctrines all laws all religions all actions of their Subjects by their commands as if God Almighty had reserved onely Soveraign Princes under his own Jurisdiction and quitted all the rest of mankind to Kings and Common-wealths In vain ye worship me teaching for doctrine the commandments of men that is to say making true religion to consist in obedience to the commands of men If Princes were heavenly Angels free from all ignorance and passions such an unlimited power might better become them But being mortal men it is dangerous least Phaeton-like by their violence or unskilfulnesse they put the whole Empire into a flame It were too too much to make their unlawful commands to justifie their Subjects If the blind lead the blind both fall into the ditch He who imposeth unlawful commands and he who obeyeth them do both subject themselves to the judgements of God But if true religion do consist in active obedience to their commands it justifieth both their Subjects and themselves True religion can prejudice no man He taketh upon him to refute the distinction of obedience into active and passive As if a sin against the law of nature could be expiated by arbitrary punishments imposed by men Thus it happeneth to men who confute that which they do not understand Passive obedience is not for the expiation of any fault but for the maintenance of innocence When God commands one thing and the soveraign Prince another we cannot obey them both actively therefore we chuse to obey God rather than men and yet are willing for the preservation of peace to suffer from man rather than to resist If he understood this distinction well it hath all those advantages which he fancieth to himself in his new platform of government without any of those inconveniences which do attend it And whereas he intimateth that our not obeying our Soveraign actively is a sin against the law of nature meaning by the violation of our promised obedience it is nothing but a grosse mistake no Subjects ever did nor ever could make any such pact to obey the commands of their Soveraign actively contrary to the law of God or nature This reason drawn from universal practise was so obvious that he could not misse to make it an objection The greatest objection is that of the practice when men ask where and when such power has by Subjects been acknowledged A shrewd objection indeed which required a more solid answer then to say That though in all places of the World men should lay the foundation of their houses on the sand it could not thence be inferred that so it ought to be As if there were no more difficulty in founding and regulating a Common-wealth then in distinguishing between a loose sand and a firm rock or as if all Societies of men of different tempers of different humours of different manners and of different interests must of necessity be all ordered after one and the same manner If all parts of the World after so long experience do practise the contrary to that which he fancieth he must give me leave to suspect that his own grounds are the quick-sands and that his new Common-wealth is but a Castle founded in the aire That a Soveraign Prince within his own dominions is custos utriusque tabulae the keeper of both the Tables of the Law to see that God be duely served and justice duely administred between man and man and to punish such as transgresse in either kind with civil punishment That he hath an Architectonical power to see that each of his Suctjects do their duties in their several callings Ecclesiasticks as well as Seculars That the care and charge of seeing that no doctrine be taught his Subjects but such as may consist with the general peace and the authority to prohibit seditious practices and opinions do reside in him That a Soveraign Prince oweth no account of his actions to any mortal man That the Kings of England in particular have been justly declared by Act of Parliament Supreme Governours in their own kingdoms in all causes over all persons as well Ecclesiastical as Civil is not denyed nor so much as questioned by me Otherwise a kingdom or a Common-wealth should be destitute of necessary means for its own preservation To all this I do readily assent all this I have vindicated upon surer grounds than those desperate and destructive principles which he supposeth But I do utterly deny that true religion doth consist in obedience to Soveraign Magistrates or that all their injunctions ought to be obeyed not onely passively but actively or that he is infallible in his laws and commands or that his Soveraign authority doth justifie the active obedience of his Subjects to his unlawful commands Suppose a King should command his Judges to set Naboth on high among the people and to set two sons of Belial before him to bear witnesse against him saying Thou didst blaspheme God and the King and then carry him out and stone him that he may dye The regal authority could neither justifie such an unlawful command in the King nor obedience in the Judges Suppose a King should set up a golden Image as Nebucadnezar did and command all his Subjects to adore it his command could not excuse his Subjects from idolatry much lesse change idolatry into true religion His answer to the words of Peter and John do signifie nothing The High Priest and his Councel commanded the Apostles not to teach in the name of Jesus Here was sufficient humane authority yet say the Apostles Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God judge ye The question was not what were the commands that was clear enough what God commanded and what man commanded but who was to be obeyed which could admit no debate He asketh What has the Bishop to doe with what God sayes to me when I read the Scriptures more than I have to do with what God sayes to him when he reads them
But he who calleth him perfection it self acknowledgeth that all the perfection of the Creatures is by participation of his infinite perfection Such errours as these formerly recited do deserve another manner of refutation and when he is in his lucide intervalles he himself acknowledgeth what I say to be true That God is incomprehensible and immaterial And he himself proveth so much from this very attribute of God that he is infinite Ci. c. 15. s. 14. Figure is not attributed to God for every figure is finite Neither can he be comprehended by us for whatsoever we conceive is finite nor hath he parts which are attributed only to finite things nor is be more than one there can be but one infinite Whereas I called hell the true Tophet he telleth us gravely That Tophet was a place not far from the walls of Hierusalem and consequently on the earth Adding after his boasting manner That he cannot imagine what I will say to this in my answer to his Leviathan unlesse I say that by the true Tophet in this place is meant a not true Tophet Whosoever answereth his Leviathan will be more troubled with his extravagancies than with his arguments Doth he not know that almost all things happened to them as figures There may be a true mystical Tophet as well as a literal And there is a true mystical Gehenna or Vally of Hinnon as well as a literal He that should say that Christ is the true Paschal Lamb or the Church the true Hierusalem or John Baptist the true Elias may well justifie it without saying That by the true Paschal Lamb is meant no true Paschal Lamb or by the true Hierusalem no true Hierusalem or by the true Elias no true Elias VVhat poor stuff is this And so he concludeth his Animadversion with a rapping Paradox indeed True religion consisteth in obedience to Christs Lieutenants and in giving God such honour both in Attributes and actions as they in their several Lieutenancies shall ordain That Soveraign Princes are Gods Lieutenants upon earth no man doubteth but how come they to be Christs Lieutenants with him who teacheth expressely that the kingdom of Christ is not to begin till the general Resurrection His errours come so thick that it is difficult to take notice of them all yet if he had resolved to maintain his Paradox it had been ingenuously done to take notice of my reasons against it in this place First what if the Soveraign Magistrate shall be no Christian himself Is an Heathen or Mahumetan Prince the Lieutenant of Christ or a fit infallible Judge of the controversies of Christian Religion Are all his Christian subjects obliged to sacrifice to idols or blaspheme Christ upon his command Certainly he giveth the same latitude of power and right to Heathen and Mahumetan Princes that he doth to Christian. There is the same submition to both I authorise and give up my right of governing my self to this man whom he maketh to be a mortal God To him alone he ascribeth the right to allow and disallow of all doctrines all formes of worship all miracles all revelations And most plainly in the 42. and 43. Chapters of his Leviathan where he teacheth obedience to infidel Princes in all things even to the denial of Christ to be necessary by the Law of God and nature My second reason in this place was this What if the Magistrate shall command contrary to the Law of God must we obey him rather than God He confesseth That Christ ought to be obeyed rather than his Lieutenant upon earth This is a plain concession rather than an answer But he further addeth That the question is not who is to be obeyed but what be his commands Most vainly For if true Religion do consist in obedience to the commands of the Soveraign Prince then to be truly religiouâ—… it is not needful to inquire further than what he commandeth Frustra fit per plura quod fierâ—… potest per pauciora Either he must make the Soveraign Prince to be infallible in all his commands concerning Religion which we see by experience to be false and he himself confesseth that they may command their subjects to deny Christ or else the authority of the Soveraign Prince doth justifie to his subjects whatsoever he commands and then they may obey Christs Lieutenant as safely without danger of punishment as himself My third reason was this If true Religion do consist in obedience to the commands of the Soveraign Prince then the Soveraigne Prince is the ground and pillar of truth not the Church But the Church is the ground and pillar of truth not the Soveraign Prince These things write I unto thee c. that thou mayest know how thou oughest to behave thy self in the house of God which is the Church of the living God the power and ground of truth What the Church signifieth in this place may be demonstratively collected both from the words themselves wherein he calleth it the house of God which appellation cannot be applied to a single Soveraign much lesse to a Heathen Prince as their Soveraign then was And likewise by the things written which were directions for the ordering of Ecclesiastical persons The last Argument used by me in this place was ad hominem Why then is T. H. of a different mind from his Soveraign and from the laws of the Land concerning the Attributes of God and the religious worship which is to be given to him The Canons and Constitutions and Articles of the Church of England and their Discipline and form of Divine Worship were all confirmed by Royal authority And yet Mr. Hobbes made no scruple to assume to himself that which he denieth to all other subjects the knowledge of good and evil or of true and false religion And a judgement of what is consonant to the Law of Nature and Scripture different from the commands of his Soveraign and the judgement of all his fellow Subjects as appeareth by his book De cive printed in the year 1642. Neither can he pretend that he was then a local Subject to another Prince for he differed more from him in Religion than from his own natural Soveraign This Paradox hath been confuted before and some of those grosse absurdities which flow from it represented to the Reader to all which he may adde these folowing reasons First true Religion cannot consist in any thing which is sinful But obedience to Soveraign Princes may be sinful This is proved by the example of Jeroboam who established idolatry in his kingdom And the Text saith this thing became a sin It may be he will say this idolatrous worship was a sin in Jeroboam not in the people who obeyed him But the Text taketh away this evasion branding him ordinarily with this mark of infamy Jeroboam the son of Nebat who made Israel to sin Secondly true Religion cannot consist in obedience to contradictory commands But the commands of
the will If he will not he doth not deserve to have so much as one of his testimonies looked upon Thirdly I answer That supposing but not granting that all his testimonies were true as he citeth them yet none of them will advantage his cause at all Luther his first witnesse disclaimed it and recanted what he had said And the necessity which he speaketh of is onely a necessity of immutability And the Synod of Dort speaketh onely of a necessity of infillability both which do imply no more than a consequent hypothetical necessity which we also maintain Zanchy Bucer Calvine Moulin speak of a necessity of sinning in respect of our original corruption This concerneth not the liberty of the will whether it be free or not free but the power of free-will whether it can without grace avoid sinne and determine it self to morall or supernaturall good which is nothing to the question between him and me And for an essay what he may expect from his witnesses Calvine who is the least disfavourable to him of them all saith no more but this Deum quoties viam facere vult suae providentiae etiam in rebus externis homiuum voluntates flectere versare nec ita liberam esse ipsorum electionem quin ejus libertati Dei arbitrium dominetur That God not allwayes but as often as he will make way for his providence even in external things doth bow and turn the wills of men neither is their election so free but that the good pleasure of God hath a dominion over their liberty Calvine did know no universal determination of all externall acts by God but onely in some extraordinary cases He acknowledged that the will of man was free to elect in external things but not so free as to be exempt from the dominion of God which two things none of us doth deny So we may conclude from Calvine That God doth not ordinarily necessitate external events that is as much as to say there is no universal necessity He will yet have lesse cause to please himself with the Councell of Dort when he shall see what was said there by our British Divines and approved by the Synod That God made our wills and endowed them with liberty That he leavs to every thing its proper manner and motion in the production of Acts and to the wills of men to act after their native manner freely That in vain are punishments threatned to Malefactors by the laws of men if no man could leave undone that which he doth They ask who in his right wits will say that David could not but have committed adultery or after that could not but have murthered Uriah They condemne his opinion positively as an errour Hominem non posse plus boni facere quam facit nec pluus mali omittere quam omittit That a man cannot do more good or leave more evill undone than he doth Still he is about his old quarrel concerning the Elicite and Imperate acts of the will not against the thing for it is as clear as the day-light that there is a ground in nature for such a distinction and that externall Agents have not so much power over the will of man to make him chuse what they think fit as over the locomotive faculty and other members to make a man move them at their pleasure But all his contention is still about the words Imperate or commanded Acts As if saith he the faculties could speak one to another I answered him that there were mentall terms as well as vocall by which the soule being willing may expresse it self to the locomotive or other inferiour faculties As the Angells do understand one another not by speech but as we behold one another in a glasse Here he is out again quite mistaking the plain and obvious sense of my words shewing that in his long and profound meditations he did never meet with this subject And telling us That by mentall speech I understand onely an Idea of the sound and of the letters whereof the word is made And charging me most untruely to say That when Tarquin commanded his son by striking off the tops of Poppies he did it by mentall terms This I said truly That howsoever a Superiour doth intimate his commands to his Inferiour whether it be by vocall terms as ordinarily or by mentall terms as it is among the Angels or by signes as it was between Tarquin and his sonnes it is still a command And in this case of the souls imploying the Inferiour faculties it is without dispute But I never said that the striking off the tops of the Poppies with his rod was mentall language or the terms of his mind It seemeth he hath never heard of mentall terms or mentall prayer The conceptions of the mind are the naturall representations of things Words are Signes or Symbols of the inward conceptions of the mind by imposition What way soever the inward conceptions are intimated it is the same that speech is in effect 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an instrument or means of Communication As a signe is an intimation to a Traveller where he may find an harbour He saith No drawing can be imagined but of bodies and whatsoever is drawn out is drawn out of one place into another He knoweth no drawing but drawing of wire or drawing of water or drawing of Carres St. James saith Draw nigh to God and he will draw nigh to you and no man can come unto me except my father draw him and if I be lifted up from the earth I will draw all men unto me In all these drawings here is no drawing out of one place into another A fair object draws mens eyes A good Oratour draweth them by the ears There is metaphorical drawing Take but one place more Counsel in the heart of a man is like deep water but a man of understanding will draw it out Castigations of the A nimadversions Num. 21. A Paradox is a private opinion of one man or a few factious men assumed or maintained sometimes out of errour of judgement but commonly out of pride and vain glorious affectation of singularity contrary to the common and received opinion of other men Such Paradoxes were the Stoical opnions Stoicks were fruitfull in producing Paradoxes That all sins are equal and that a wise man is all things a good King a good Captain a good Cobler I hope he will be better advised than to condemne all those of ignorance who out of civility stiled those new fangled opinions Stoicall Paradoxes rather than Stoical errours He saith Christiaen religion was once a Paradox Never A Paradox is a private opinion contrary to the common opinion Points of faith are more than opinions Faith is a certain assent grounded upon the truth and authority of the revealer Opinion is a certain assent grounded upon the probable conjectures of reason We do not use to call Turkish Heathenish or Heretical errours by the
Soveraign Princes are often contradictory one to another One commandeth to worship Christ another forbiddeth it One forbiddeth to offer sacrifice to idols another commandeth it Yea the same person may both forbid idolatry in general and yet authorise it in particular Or forbid it by the publick laws of the Country and yet authorise it by his personal commands Thirdly true Religion is alwayes justified in the sight of God But obedience to the commands of Soveraign Princes is not always justified in the sight of God This is clearly proved out of his own expresse words Whatsoever is commanded by the Soveraign power is as to the Subject though not so alwayes in the sight of God justified by their command VVhence it is evident by his own confession that the wicked commands of Soveraigne Princes are not justified by their Royal authority but are wicked and repugnant to the Law of God And consequently that of the Apostle hath place here Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God judge ye True Religion hath alwayes reference unto God Fourthly true Religion doth not consist in obedience to any laws whatsoever which are repugnant to the Moral Law of God or to the law of Nature This Proposition is granted by himself The laws of nature are immutable and eternal And all Writers do agree that the law of nature is the same with the moral Law Again Soveraigns are all Subjects to the law of nature because such laws be Divine and cannot by any man or Common-wealth be abrogated And in all things not contrary to the moral Law that is to say to the law of nature all Subjects are bound to obey that of Divine Law which is declared to be so by the laws of the Common-wealth But the commands of a Soveraign Prince may be repugnant not onely to the Moral Law or the law of nature but even to the laws of the Common-wealth This assumption is proved four wayes First by his own confession It is manifest enough that when a man receiveth two contrary commands and knows that one of them is Gods he ought to obey that and not the other If there can be no such contrary commands then it is not manifest nor yet true Secondly this is pâ—…oved by his resolution of two queres The fist is this Whether the City or the Soveraign Prince be to be obeyd if he command directly to do any thâ—…ng to the contumely of God or forbid to worship God To which he answereth directly non esse obediendam that he ought not to be obeyed And he gives this reason Because the subjects before the constitution of the Common-wealth had no right to deny the honour due unto God and therefore could transferre no right to command such things to the common-wealth The like he hath in his Leviathan Actions which do naturally signifie contumely cannot by humane power be made a part of Divine Worship As if the denial of Christ upon a Soveraigns command which he justifieth were not contumelious to Christ or as if subjects before the constitution of the common-wealth had any right themselves to deny Christ. But such palpable contradictions are no novelties with him How doth true Religion consist in obedience to the commands of a Soveraign if his commands may be contumelious to God and deny him that worship which is due unto him by the eternal and immutable law of nature and if he be not to be obeyed in such commands His second question is If a Soveraign Prince should command himself to be worshipped with Divine Worship and Attributes whether he ought to be obeyed To which he answereth That although Kings should command it yet we ought to abstain from such attributes as signifie his independence upon God or inmortality or infinite power or the like And from such actions as do signifie the same As to pray unto him being absent to aske those things of him which none but God can give as rain and fair weather or to offer sacrifice to him Then true Religion may sometimes consist in disobedience to the commands of Soveraign Princes Thirdly that the commands of Soveraign Princes in point of Religion may be contrary to the law of nature which needeth no new promulgation or reception doth appear by all those duties internal and external which by his own confession nature doth injoyn us to perform towards God and all which may be and have been countermanded by Soveraign Princes as to acknowledge the existence of God his unity his infinitenesse his providence his creation of the World his omnipotence his eternity his incomprehensibility his ub quity To worship him and him onely with Divine worship with prayes with thanksgivings with oblations and with all expressions of honour Lastly this is proved by examples Nebuchadnezar commanded to worship a golden image And Darius made a decree that no man should ask any petition of any God or man for thirty dayes save of the King onely Yet the transgression of both these commands of Soveraign Princes was justified by God as true Religion Fiftly Christ will deny no man before his Father for true Religion But those who deny Christ before men to fulfil the commands of an earthly Prince he will deny before his father which is in Heaven And therefore Christ encourageth his Disciples against these dangers which might fall upon them by disobedience to such unlawful commands Fear not them which kill the body but are not able to kill the soul but rather fear him which is able to destroy both body and soul in hell But Mr. Hobs hath found out an evasion for such Renegadoes Whatsoever a Subject is compelled to in obedience to his Soveraign and doth it not in order to his own mind but in order to the lawes of his country that action is not his but his Soveraigns nor is it he that in this case denieth Christ before men but his Governour and the law of his Country If this Fig-leafe would have served the turn Shedrach Meshach and Abednego needed not to have been cast into the fiery Furnace For though they had worshipped the golden image by this doctrine they had not been idolaters but Nebuchadnezar onely and his Princes If this were true Daniel might have escaped the Lions Den If he had forborne his praises to God Darius had been faulty and not he But these holy Saints were of another minde I hope though he might in his baste and passion censure the blessed Martyrs to be fooles which were so many that there were five thousand for every day in the year except the calends of January when the Heathens were so intent upon their devotions that they neglected the slaughter of the poor Christians yet he will not esteem himself wiser than Daniel Behold thou art wiser than Daniel was an hyperbolical or rather an ironical expression With the heart man believeth unto righteousnesse
What deserved he who should do his uttermost endeavour to poison a common fountain whereof all the commonwealth must drinke He doth the same who poisoneth the mind of a soveraign prince Are the civil lawes the rules of good and bad just and unjust honest and dishonest And what I pray you are the rules of the civil law it self even the law of God and nature If the civil lawes swerve from these more authentick lawes they are Lesbian rules What the law-giver commands is to be accounted good what he forbids bad This was just the garb of the Athenian Sophisters as they are described by Plato Whatsoever pleased the great beast the multitude they called holy and just and good And whatsoever the great beast disliked they called evill unjust prophane But he is not yet arrived at the height of his flattery Lawfull Kings make those things which they command just by commanding them And those things which they forbid unjust by forbidding them At other times when he is in his right wits he talketh of suffering and expecting their reward in heaven And going to Christ by martyrdome And if he had the fortitude to suffer death he should do better Bâ—…t I fear all this was but said in jest How should they expect their reward in heaven if his doctrine be true that there is no reward in heaven Or how should they be Martyrs if his doctrine be true that none can be Martyrs but those who conversed with Christ upon earth He addeth Before Empires were just and unjust were not Nothing could be written more false in his sense more dishonourable to God more inglorious to the humane nature That God should create man and leave him presently without any rules to his own ordering of himself as the Ostridg leaveth her egges in the sand But in truth there have been empires in the world ever since Adam And Adam had a law written in his heart by the finger of God before there was any civil law Thus they do endeavour to make goodnesse and justice and honesty and conscience and God himself to be empty names without any reality which signifie nothing further than they conduce to a mans interest Otherwise he would not he could not say That every action as it is invested with its circumstances is indifferent in its own nature Something there is which he hath a confused glimmering of as the blind man sees men walking like trees which he is not able to apprehend and expresse clearly We acknowledge that though the laws or commands of a Soveraign Prince be erroneous or unjust or injurius such as a subject cannot approve for good in themselves yet he is bound to acquiesce and may not oppose or resist otherwise than by prayers and tears and at the most by flight We acknowledge that the civil laws have power to bind the conscience of a Christian in themselves but not from themselves but from him who hath said Let every soul be subject to the higher powers Either they bind Christian subjects to do their Soveraigns commands or to suffer for the testimony of a good conscience We acknowledge that in doubtful cases semper praesumitur pro Rege lege the Soveraign and the law are alwayes presumed to be in the right But in plain evident cases which admit no doubt it is alwayes better to obey God than man Blunderers whilest they think to mend one imaginary hole make two or three reall ones They who derive the authority of the Scriptures or Gods Law from the civil laws of men are like those who seek to underprop the heavens from falling with a bullrush Nay they derive not onely the authority of the Scripture but even of the law of nature it self from the civil law The laws of nature which need no promulgation in the condition of nature are not properly laws but qualities which dispose men to peace and to obedience When a Common-wealth is once setled then are they actually laws and not before God help us into what times are we fallen when the immutable laws of God and nature are made to depend upon the mutable laws of mortal men just as if one should go about to controle the Sun by the authority of the clock But it is not worthy of my labour nor any part of my intention to pursue every shadow of a question which he springeth It shall suffice to gather a posie of flowers or rather a bundle of weeds out of his writings and present them to the Reader who will easily distinguish them from healthful plants by the ranknesse of their smell Such are these which follow 1. To be delighted in the imagination onely of being possessed of another mans goods servants or wife without any intention to take them from him by force or fraud is no breach of the law which saith Thou shalt not covet 2. If a man by the terrour of present death be compelled to do a fact against the law he is totally excused because no law can oblige a man to abandon his own preservation Nature compelleth him to the fact The like doctrine he hath elsewhere When the Actor doth any thing against the law of nature by command of the Author if he be obliged by former covenants to obey him not he but the Author breaketh the law of nature 3. It is a doctrine repugnant to civil Society that whatsoever a man does against his conscience is sin 4. The kingdom of God is not shut but to them that sin that is to them who have not performed due obedience to the Laws of God nor to them if they believe the necessary Articles of the Christian Faith 5. We must know that the true acknowledging of sin is repentance it self 6. An opinion publickly appointed to be taught cannot be heresie nor the Soveraign Princes that authorise the same hereticks 7. Temporal and spiritual government are but two words to make men see double and mistake their lawful Soveraign c. There is no other government in this life neither of State nor Religion but temporal 8. It is manifest that they who permit or tolerate a contrary doctrine to that which themselves believe and think necessary do against their conscience and will as much as in them lieth the eternal destruction of their subjects 9. Subjects sin if they do not worship God according to the laws of the Common-wealth 10. To believe in jesus in Jesum is the same as to believe that Iesus is Christ. 11. There can be no contradiction between the Laws of God and the laws of a Christian Common-wealth Yet we see Christian Common-wealths daily contradict one another 12. No man giveth but with intention of good to himself of all voluntary acts the object is to every man his own good Moses St. Paul and the Decii were out of his mind 13. There is no natural knowledge of mans estate after death much lesse of