Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	authority_n	power_n	supreme_a	1,645	5	8.3158	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
B04263	A second part of Observations, censures, and confutations of divers errours in Mr. Hobbs his Leviathan beginning at the seventeenth chapter of that book. / By William Lucy, Bishop of S. David's.; Observations, censures, and confutations of notorious errours in Mr. Hobbes his Leviathan. Part 2	Lucy, William, 1594-1677.	1673 (1673)	Wing L3454A; ESTC R220049	191,568	301

act wickedly which no honest man can consent unto or else justly be destroyed by his fellow Subjects which he understands by that word the rest destruction is the greatest mischief can come to a man and is never inflicted but for some mighty crime which I do not find this man charged with but only a dissenting or protesting against the general Vote a thing often done in Parliaments and yet no such Sentence passeth upon the Dissenter nor were it just to do it men are not bound to be all of one mind Mr. Hobbs would make his Inquisition for Politiques more severe then any Inquisition for Religion But he hath reason for what he writes for saith he If he voluntarily entred into the Congregation of them that were assembled he sufficiently thereby declared his will and therefore tacitly covenanted to stand to what the major part should ordain I thought by what went before he must have declared his assent but now it seems it is enough if he be amongst them but what if he be not amongst them as I have shewed it is impossible all should what condition is that man in He proceeds with his proofs And therefore if he refuse to stand thereto or make protestation against any their Decrees he does contrary to his Covenant and therefore unjustly Suppose all this Shall a man be destroyed for every breach of Covenant or every unjustice Certainly Mr. Hobbs if he were a Law-maker would out-do Draco or the bloudiest that ever acted in that kind This is a foolish consequence that because he did unjustly he should justly be destroyed He goes on And whether he be of the Congregation or not and whether his consent be asked or not he must either submit to their Decrees or he left to the condition of war he was in before wherein he might without injustice be destroyed by any man whatsoever The madness of this condition of war before this Covenant I have spoke to heretofore but that he may justly be destroyed by any with whom he will not joyn in the Covenant is wicked We have in England I believe abundance of strangers of Forreign Nations which neither have nor will enter into such a Covenant may they be justly killed Nay amongst those millions which are the Kings Subjects there was never man entred this or the like Covenant may we justly kill one another Nay I think few would make such a Covenant may all these be knocked on the head thus This hath such a force of injustice that men with humanity about them cannot consent unto I leave this therefore and come to his 4th Inference CHAP. VIII SECT I. Mr. Hobbs his fourth Inference censured and refuted from his own conclusions He that impowers another to do justly though he make him Pleni-potentiary is not guilty of his unjust actions his first reason refuted FOurthly Because every Subject is by this Institution Author of all the actions and judgments of the Soveraign instituted it follows that whatsoever he doth it can be no injury to any of his Subjects nor ought he by any of them be accused of injustice Accused What doth he mean by that to be convicted arraigned condemned This certainly he cannot because the power of Judgment supposeth Superiority which cannot be over the Soveraign in his own Kingdom But let us observe the consequence of this Argument out of these impossible premises that because by his fancy of the Institution every subject is Author of all his actions he can do no injury to any of them certainly this doth not follow by his own Doctrine for put the case that the Supreme doth authorize a Judge to hear and determine such causes doth the Supreme only do injustice in it when the Royal Authority gives power to the Judge who acts unjustly by that Authority which was given him by the Supreme or the Judge likewise who abuseth that Authority I believe no man will affirm it or if he do he must destroy Mr. Hobbs his conclusion which makes the Kings acting by the Authority of the peoples grant not to offend in himself for which is his reason before spoke to if the Author do solely perform not the Actor or the person who immediately operates which he delivered before the King not the Judge doth unjustly when by his Authority the Judge decrees wickedly But he proceeds with another reason for saith he He that doth any thing by Authority from another doth therein no injury to him by whose Authority he acts This is not true generally a Judge judgeth by the Authority of the Supreme but if he Judge unjustly yea judgeth a cause against the King perhaps unjustly he then doth the King an injury by his own Authority Again a General with Plenipotency to kill slay c. from the King he turns now his Army to the Kings destruction perhaps doth not he then do the King an injury by his own power SECT II. Mr. Hobbs his second reason invalid from the falsity of his supposition Consent or dissent gives not the stamp of Justice or Injustice He that gives power to do any act may complain of ill Execution of that power HE goes on But by this Institution of a Commonwealth every particular man is Author of what the Soveraign doth and consequently he that complaineth of injury from his Soveraign complaineth of that whereof he himself is Author and therefore ought not accuse any man but himself nor himself of injury because to do an injury to himself is impossible It is first observeab●e here which runs throughout the whole Politiques that it is built totally upon that foundation which neither is nor is probable to be in any but is impossible to be in a great Commonwealth and therefore must needs fall of it self But supposing that impossibility let us consider his inference every man is Author of what the Soveraign doth the reason of that is before expressed because he covenants to avow his actions Now if he do avow them it follows not that therefore they shall be just many a man owns that act which is unjust his owning of it makes it neither just nor unjust These are qualities inherent in the act not adherent to others Opinions or acceptance or disacceptance of them I but saith he Consequently he that complaineth of injury from his Soveraign complaineth of that whereof he himself is Author I return that he may do that and complain that he himself hath done amiss men do and it is vertuously done of him who doth it but much rather of that which he acts by anothers hand that which may be good in the Institution may be spoiled and hurt in the Execution and although they did institute him with such a power yet his mannagement of it may be ill and unjust and that they may complain of SECT III. A man may do an injury to himself Mr. Hobbs his distinction between Iniquity and Injustice or Injury disproved and censured UPon this ground will appear the

faultiness of what follows which is And therefore ought not to accuse any man but himself no nor himself of injury because to do injury to a mans self is impossible To the first piece I have shewed that though he were Author of Leviathans Power yet his evil usage of that power may be complained of To the second I think a man may injure himself when a rich man through niggardliness shall deny his belly or his back those expences which were necessary for the support of his health he deals unjustly with himself when another foolishly desperate shall adventure his life upon idle and frivolous occasions he deals unjustly with himself by hazarding so Noble a Creature upon so base and unworthy a prize These things and multitudes of more are unjust dealing towards a mans self But he hath a nice distinction at the bottom of this Paragraph It is true that they that have Soveraign Power may commit Iniquity but not injustice or injury in the proper signification I would he had expounded the proper signification At the first I was amazed at this distinction and did doubt there was some great and excellent Notion in it but duly considering the words I find they were airy and do signifie no more difference then if I had affirmed Mr. Hobbs or the Writer of Leviathan said this or that meerly nominal For what is iniquity but unequal dealings which in him who is bound to deal equally in distribution or commutation is injustice and indeed injustice is nothing else and injury what is that but not just or right and I am sure injustice is nothing else But where some Law directs this or that he doth otherwise This is the proper and genuine-sense of the words and unless he had shewed us some more proper use of them there is no reason why we should be forced from this common acceptation Here now I might justly break off from further discourse of this business having answered what he objects but because I would give some satisfaction to the Reader in this Conclusion I shall a little insist further and shew that Leviathans or Supremes may do unjustly SECT IV. A Soveraign may do injustice by himself and by his Ministers impowred and not punished by him IT will be a strong foundation for this discourse to produce the Actions of the King of Kings God himself which I may do in the eighteenth of Genesis ye may observe there that God was pleased to reveal to Abraham his intended destruction of Sodom Abraham after he had undertaken to plead for them in the twenty fourth verse puts the Question Peradventure there will be fifty righteous within the City wilt thou also destroy and not spare the City for the fifty righteous that are therein Then in the twenty fifth verse That be far from thee to do after this manner to slay the righteous with the wicked and that the righteous shall be as the wicked that be far from thee shall not the Judge of all the Earth do right In which you may observe that Abraham in a bold manner did dare to intimate that God himself should have done amiss not right but unjustly in punishing the righteous with the wicked and shall we be afraid to say that Leviathan can do unjustly when they shall slay the righteous as the wicked which many of them have done If we consider all the Species and several sorts of injustice we shall find that they may and have perpetrated them They have broke the equity of distributive Justice in preferring base and unworthy people and neglecting yea punishing vertuous men for Commutative Justice they have taken against Law and Equity other mens Estates they have neglected to pay their due debts and what can be more unjust then those they may therefore do unjustly nay what is more by how much their power is greater by so much they are enabled to do more injustice and I may add other mens injustice may prove theirs not only out of his vain principles because all Judges in his Dominion act by his Authority even in those Causes where they judge wickedly But because he is the Supreme and should take care for his inferiour Officers that they do their duties which if he knows they do not and yet neglect to correct them for amendment they will prove his wickedness We know the Judgment upon old Eli who was a vertuous and good man in himself and the Leviathan of that Nation then yet the Judgment of God was upon him for not using severe Justice to his Sons when he knew their faults as you may observe in 1 Sam. 2.27 So that it is apparent that they may do injustice more then others and indeed if he cannot be unjust neither can he be just for contraries are belonging to the same subject he who cannot be vicious cannot be vertuous and contrary acts in any man will by degrees eat out any vice or vertue nor can men call it vertue in any who cannot do ill But I think there is now enough said to this I will pass to his fifth Inference which is this CHAP. IX SECT I. Mr. Hobbs his fifth Inference The Proposition asserted The reason of this Inference weak and invalid FIfthly and consequently to that which was said last No man that hath Soveraign Power can justly be put to death or otherwise in any manner by his Subjects be punished This conclusion is most true because he is Supreme and to put to death or punish are acts only of Supremacy But his reason and the only means which he useth to obtain this excellent conclusion is so false that unless it should be confuted we may think so excellent a truth had a weak support his reason follows For seeing every Subject is Author of the actions of his Soveraign he punisheth another for the actions committed by himself I have oft spoke of this by this consequence a King cannot punish a wicked Judge a rebellious General and the like as I have often said before And if the Supreme should urge to these instances that this Judge or this General acted implicitly against the Authority granted by the Supreme the same answer may be returned to him from his Subjects when he doth that which is contrary to their good or peace so that although this conclusion is most necessary to the establishment of peace and happiness in any Kingdom yet when it is urged only by such fallacious Inferences it makes the Readers imagine that the greatest and most weighty things in Polity are dubious SECT II. He that hath right to the end hath not right to all the means to attain that end but only to such mediums as are just and legal HE infers presently upon the bottom of this conclusion And because the end of this Institution is the peace and defence of them all and whosoever has right to the end has right to the means it belongeth of right to him Whatsoever man or Assembly that hath the

God in his holy Word to reveal to us Rules by which we may know what is his will for us to do in doing which we please him and that he likes us as also what is against his will in doing which we shall anger and offend him and he will punish us although God be not only a general but the first cause which works with and in us yet it is not possible for man to think that God doth in that concurrence determine mans actions to such things which he himself hath declared evil and against his will and which he will punish and therefore it was too bold an Assertion to say That man doth no more or less then he is necessitated by Gods will which is to make no man a sinner for although as he spake God disposeth all things and that disposure must needs be to infinitely good and wise ends even the evils and things against his Rules of goodness yet his disposure orders such men according to their evil actions to suffer not makes them do evil that they may suffer But perhaps he explains this For though men may do many things which God does not command nor is therefore Author of them Nay I will tell him more men may do and many men do many things not only which God hath not commanded but which God hath forbidden and hath commanded they shall not do and surely then he is less Author of them But if a man do an act of advise or counsel of Gods without a Command yet that Gods Counsel is Author of Now these actions which are against Gods Command without doubt he is not Author of if he were he could not justly punish them But I would fain make out his sense which is this he doth not do it by Authority given by God but against it Well then Gods Authority is against evil but his power worketh this evil So he seems to affirm in his following words Yet they can have no passion nor appetite to any thing of which appetite Gods will is not the cause True indeed God is the first general cause but not the second and particular The Sun is an universal cause it shines upon the Earth Trees Plants and is the cause of their fertility but diversly according to the diversity of Constitutions it concurs with so doth God as he is the first and general cause meeting with several conditions operate severally to the production of those several effects which are produced by them with things necessary before he produceth necessary effects But as the Suns concourse doth not determine this thing to this and that to that effect so doth not the general concourse of God determine this or that appetite to this or that object in this or that manner but when it meets with things so disposed it concurs in the production of that effect to which it was so disposed so that God concurring with free Agents makes them no more necessary then his concurring with necessary Agents makes them free It is the same infinite Power of God which constituted both and his concurrence destroys neither in its ordinate working I speak not of his extraordinary operation whereby he can and doth controul all the frame of Nature when and how he pleaseth nor doth Mr. Hobbs Nay I may say that God himself being absolutely free bounded with no limits having nothing above or about him which can stop or hinder his Almighty hand from working it is much more reasonable to think that his concourse should make even necessary Agents free and not to be bounded by their natures which he had given them rather then that this most free Agent should against himself make those which he had constituted in a free nature to be necessary because they are by that more like himself which every Agent endeavours Nay in his extraordinary works he doth often for the present shake off those bonds which his former Donation had confined them to so that by his extraordinary concourse he makes them cease from their former operations which by their natures they were necessitated to do as the fire not to burn the water not to run down its channel and the like which are apparent to every man So then though Gods will and concurrence is a cause of those actions yet not being a terminating cause but concurring with that nature which he had given them that concurrence doth not necessitate that operation which he had given to man viz. freedom to do or not to do But he proves the contrary in his following words which are these SECT XII The consequence of this Paragraph examined His meaning conjectured and refuted Every deviation contradicts not the Power and Omnipotency of God Voluntas facere fieri distinguished in God Men not justly punished with Damnation if necessitated to sin Mr. Hobbs censured for obtruding those Doctrines in Divinity amongst his Political Discourses The actions of the King and Subject alike necessitated by Mr. Hobbs his Chain of Causes ANd did not his will assure the necessity of mans will and consequently of all that on mans will dependeth the liberty of men would be a contradiction and impediment to the Omnipotency and liberty of God I do not observe how this consequence can be deduced out of the premises for if God endowed man with liberty and free power in his nature why should it follow if God do not necessitate his actions that mans will would cross and impede the power and liberty of God For the will of God is that man should act freely the free actions therefore are according to his will and the necessitation would be contrary to his will But I think he means that if mans free power could sin against the will of God then man should be able to contradict and stop his Omnipotency and Liberty To understand this therefore consider with me that Gods Dominion over this World is like that of a King in a Kingdom he gives Laws and Rules to the Subjects which if they observe they shall live happily under him but if not he will punish and afflict yea perhaps destroy the offending parties It is an opposition to the Kings power that when men break his Laws and he shall go about to punish them they shall then rebel against him and oppose the power of the County or of the Kingdom or that power which he musters up to do Justice upon them then indeed his power is contradicted and impeded God whilst men live here with these natures hath given Rules and governs them by such Laws as he hath appointed them for their good if they observe those Laws happy are they but he seldom puts in his Omnipotency to make men do the one or the other never to make men break his Laws he ordinarily doth not vary the nature of man or any thing Men may and may not keep his Commandments I do not now dispute of the nature of Grace or any thing of that kind they that do