A SECOND PART OF OBSERVATIONS CENSVRES AND CONFVTATIONS OF DIVERS ERROURS IN Mr. HOBBS his LEVIATHAN Beginning at the seventeenth Chapter of that BOOK By William Lucy Bishop of S. Davids LONDON Printed by S. G. and B. G. for Edward Man at the White Swan in S. Pauls Church-yard 1673. â—CUT DISPENSATORâ— MYSTERIORUM DEâ— To the Reader READER BEfore you go further into this Treatise I think it fit to premonish you of three things First How it is writ Secondly Why by me Thirdly Why now put out Concerning the first expect no other but to read the strongest Discourse in Politiques betwixt Mr. Hobbs and me that ever was writ for the Art of Polity being more properly signified by the name of Prudence is always by those who writ of it from Plato and Aristotle downward until you come to the very last is naturally powder'd with sentences and interlarded with Histories for it being not a Science whose demonstrations come from necessary causes where posita causa most certainly follows the effect or grant the effect you must own the cause from whence it came but a prudence which disposeth men to a wise conformity not by the force of a necessary efficacy but by the perswasions which fear and love induce to which are not necessary but arbitrary men in the manage of such affairs do most discreetly when they produce the sentences of wise men who have gone before and by great experience found those sentences effectual in such occasions and because there is nothing new under the Sun therefore Histories of our Fore-fathers in like conditions are most excellent Guides for the prudent diposure of our lives who indeed do but repeat what they have done but Mr. Hobbs presuming upon the greatness of his own wit which indeed is great and it is a thousand pities he bestow'd it so ill scorns to tread in beaten paths and thinks by the strength of his own fancies to make his feet leave such an impression as all others shall follow him not he them I must follow him for whosoever is to be confuted must have it done out of his own Principles and therefore I fall upon him with only downright reasons therefore if at any time my Pen hath dropt a sentence or a story unawares which was opposite to the business which I believe is very seldom I though it not worth the mending but let it pass And so having shew'd the Reader why I writ so unpolitically of Politiques I pass to the seâ—ond Advertisement The second Premonition is a question why I should write of this piece and my Answer is short having spoke to the former part of his Leviathan it was proper for me not to step over this but take him in order as he writes But a man may object and some have objected that were acquainted with my undertakings that this is not so proper fâ—r a Bishop whose time should be taken up with his Profession which is Divinity to meddle with such State affairs I answer that Mr. Hobbs his writings are so interlined with so much Heterodox shall I say or Heretical and Atheistical Divinity that it befits none so well as a Divine tâ— meddle with them And again I said that although there is a Generation that think we should be Fools in any thing else yet let them know that if so we must be Fools in that likewise as well as other things for Theologia Diuinity is not only Scientia Knowledge but as many of the School-men Mr. Hobbs hâ—s good friends speak it is Sapientia we may render it in English Wisdom which is the highest knowledge whose principles are the highest and first Rules which habitually are imprinted in man and whose conclusions are the premises of other inferiour Sciences And they say moreover that this which is called Scholastica Theologia School Divinity differs from Natural only in this that it adds one principle to the other which is the Faith in the revealed Will of God which I am forced to fight for in this Treatise with Mr Hobbs And because this is the nature of this great Wisdom of Divinity it may prescribe the Rules to all Sciences and Prudencies and all conditions of men from the King to the Cobler how they may live and demean themselves vertuously But besides this let those men consider that there is one piece of a Divines study without which he will be lame and very deficient which must needs teach him a great deal more of this Prudence then I have need to use in this Discourse unless he be a very dull man which is Ecclesiastical Story wherein he shall find such acts and subtilties practised by Hereticks and Schismaticks whom I have always observed to be more crafty though not wiser then the Orthodox part such applications to Emperours to Emperesses to Favourites at Court such cloaking evil intentions with pious pretences such artificial slandering the persons of their Adversaries that he cannot but know the polity yea the base crafts of men and knowing them to be such may the better learn to avoid those snares which have catched men heretofore and will if not prevented do so again yea shall find that many times the wisdom of learned and pious Bishops have been the prop and stay of both the Empires East and West and which is more even in the practick peace of Polity you shall find Bishops execute them in the most excellent manner for wisdom and courage that ever any men did I write not this to invite men of that condition to muddle themselves with the trivial affairs of this world no as S. Paul to the Philippians 3.20 Our conversation is in heaven The word which we render Conversation is in the Original 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is excellently noted by Beza that it is that kind of Conversation which agrees to the Polity of such as are Citizens of the heavenly Hierusalem So that although the Apostle affâ—rms this of all men who aspire to Christian perfection that such men should live and converse in that Polity which conduceth to the establishment of that spiritual society which are parts of that Kingdom yet in a more especial manner it agrees to them who are exalted to that high dignity in that society that the Polity of their abilities should be applied to the advance of that Kingdom and in order to that when the benefit or ill of a sublunary Kingâ—om or Commonwealth shall conduce to that Kingdom in heaven it will become such men to interpose their counsels in a way most proper for them to imploy themselves in But my intent in writing this is to shew that a poor old man sitting in his Study and principally applying that study to Divinity may easily by that study give advice and admonition to greater doubts then are in his Politiques which indeed are gross mistakes from the first corner stone he laid in the Foundation to the top-tile in the Roof But then it may further be enquired why I
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
external impediments but absolute liberty it is not because both it is impeded from overflowing the channel by the banks and likewise because it is restrained by its nature so that it is not absolutely liberty There is libertas à coactione a liberty from constraint of outward causes but there is no liberty à necessitate from the necessity of its nature without which there is no proper liberty any otherwise then a prisoner hath to live in Gaol But liberty is ad opposita to things of divers nature where the Internal Principle hath power to do this or that or at the least to do or not to do as he speaks at the end of the last Paragraph The doer had liberty to omit Now the water hath freedom to do it is not hindred from running in the channel but not so much liberty as School boys take one towards another when the weaker Boy should chuse the best the stronger would give him the worst and bid him chuse that or none for the water hath not liberty to run or not to run but only liberty to run SECT VIII Mr. Hobbs his former instance to voluntary actions His liberty to have or not to have written and dispersed these impious Doctrines HE proceeds So likewise in the actions which men voluntarily do It is not so in the actions which men voluntarily do there is no necessity for them to do their voluntary actions they can chuse whether they will do them or not that man who doth vertuously can chuse and do vitiously And so contrarily he could have chosen whether he would have writ these wicked Doctrines which he hath taught If not let him confess it and I will prove him not to be a Man but a Beast and fit to be used as a Beast yea worse then a Beast to be like a stone which naturally descends or water which necessarily runs down its Channel and so ought to be used like it for indeed there is no one thing more peculiar to man then this liberty SECT IX Mr. Hobbs his Reason of the former Assertion invalid Of the first and second causes Men actively other creatures passively capable of commands Fools and Mad-men incapable of commands BUt he gives a reason for what he speaks And yet because every act of mans will and every desire and inclination proceedeth from some causes and that from another cause in a continual chain whose first link is in the hand of God the first of all causes proceed from necessity The force of this Argument is invisible for though this will doth proceed from a cause as he expresseth it yet if that immediate cause from which it proceeds be not necessary yea if any one Link in the Chain of Causes be free and not necessary the effect is not necessary for the arbitrariness of any one will make the effect such But this liberty of the Agent he speaks of looks only upon the immediate cause which in humane actions is free and may not be done yea very often the Agent may chuse the contrary That the first cause works with all second causes is as certain as any thing in the Mathematicks for there cannot be a second or a third or any number but it proceeds from a first And yet because the first hath an influence upon the rest it follows not that they are Cyphers but each out of that foundation hath its several operations So in this the first cause is Causa generalis and works with second causes which are derived from it But they have their several ways and powers of working Natural according to their natural inclination Animal according to the peculiar disposition of those Souls which inhabit them only man hath a free nature amongst bodily things in that resembling the Great Cause of Causes he is the Principle of those actions which he doth as a man voluntarily and therefore is capable of Commands actively to do and the other Creatures passively to be done or used and Man is used as a Master or Owner under God of them a Steward who must give an account of such of them as come within the sphere of his Dominion Let any man tell me how a man can be capable of commands if he were like them necessitated No man commands Fools Mad-men or Infants we might account them Fools or Mad who should do it but if he would have them act any thing he must work upon their predominant passion as we would do with Beasts because there is in them a deficiency of this high Power to be Master of their own actions It cannot be then that all those Precepts Councels Commands of God should be given to him who hath no power to obey And from thence we must needs conclude that they have a liberty to do or not to do But let us follow him SECT X. Mr. Hobbs his Supposition impossible without a Revelation The force of the word See His Hypothesis granted His Inference would not follow Causes not otherwise to seem then as they are in their own Nature SO that saith he to him who could see the connexion of those Causes the necessity of all mens voluntary actions would appear manifest This conclusion is founded upon an impossible supposal there is no possibility that a man in this world should see that Chain of Causes in Heaven hereafter he may but here he cannot without a mighty strange Revelation But suppose he could This word See denotes a clear apprehension What would follow then but that he should see such causes necessary which are necessary and such free which are free he would see them as they are not see them in a representation false and so not agreeing to their condition SECT XI Of Gods concurrence with humane actions No man a sinner if necessitated to sin Divine disposure necessitates not to Evil. God not the Author of those actions which are contrary to his commands He is truly the Author of those actions he adviseth Gods concurrence further illustrated from the influx of the Sun Liberal Agents not necessitated by the ordinary concurrence of God HE proceeds And therefore God that seeth and disposeth all things seeth also that the liberty of man in doing what he will is accompanied with the necessity of doing that which God will and no more nor less Certainly although I think very many men are too bold to discourse of both Gods Knowledge and Will as they do which are things too high for the weak sight of man to look clearly into yet men may confidently say as his Knowledge cannot be deceived to judge falsly so his Will cannot be deceived in willing that which is not good and therefore because men are free Agents in what they do and must give an account of their actions to him and be judged according to them by him it is not possible to conceive that he should know them other then free which liberty was his own gift And for his will since it hath pleased
holy Bible had manifested those positive laws to us and never to have raised such scruples whereby a man may doubt as it seems he doth whether these laws are divine or not Consider therefore his answer for the first question how a man can be assured of the revelation of another without a revelation particularly to himsef it is evidently impossible and I answer it is possiible we will try it out and first let us consider this leading term for this discourse which is assured how a man can be assured the power of that word must be explained There is a diversity of assurances Mathematical physical moral all which have their several force and differ only by degrees In the first kind we are assured that two and two make four and the like in the second that fire will burn whose nature doth if not hindred break out into the act in the third that when I see a debauched man stay with a company of drunkards a long time at a Tavern I can be assured that they will be inflamed with drink so likewise when a pious man hears the bell tole to prayers he will go to Church Thus our assurance is varied according to the object which it is busied about But there is another diversity drawn from the difference of this act which produceth assurance as thus there is an assurance from science from opinion from faith The certainty of science is drawn from the certainty of the medium by which it is proved and is exceeding great by some esteemed greater than that of faith at the least of a greater evidence although for my part I am not of that mind for it being a most clear and absolute truth that God is infinitely verax as well as verus true speaking as well as true being and faith I mean divine faith being an adhesion to what God speaks it is not possible to be a falsehood then there is the greatest argumentative evidence that can be of the truth of such a proposition which God hath delivered but I will not involve my self in niceties That which is proper to my immediate discourse is that science is from natural opperations of natural causes faith divine faith from supernatural from God which must be more certain in it self by faith made more certain to us opinion is only probable which may be other and this probability either relates to science as it is probable such causes will produce such effects or such effects proceed from such causes or else it relates to faith and it is then when a good honest man speaks any thing it is by faith probable to be true but yet it may be otherwise only divine faith admitts of no falsehood in its self and requires no doubting or hesitation in us Now although this assurance of opinion and probability be the least yet it yields us such an assurance as we build the greatest moral and politick actions which are practised amongst us upon it As when a man is dead his hand and seale passeth away his estate witnesses are dead likewise these are probable arguments only but being the greatest that the subject question can yield the greatest matters must be regulated by such probable arguments I can say the like of oathes they have neither a Physical certainty nor do they produce a divine faith but yet when we have hand and seal and Oath Mr. Hobbs will not say I think that we have no assurance How then can he say that we have no assurance that these are divine revelations which are delivered in the Bible for that is the sence of the question which he proposeth but that we have great assurance is that which I affirm I shall not here meddle with School nice yes nor with any thing about infused faith but only the acquired faith which we have of these truths Many learned men have debated this question with great variety of Learning which may be perused in their Comments upon the 3. of the sentences Dist 24. as likewise many times in Prolog and 22. of Aquinas question 1. as also in I ma. secundae with many particular treatises to that purpose I turn the reader to these places which with ease he may peruse and find amongst them what he reads not with me who intend to deliver such things here as they have scarce touched upon My arguments shall be drawn first from the things delivered in this book Then from the manner of the delivery and Thirdly from the persons who delivered these things in all which I shall not meddle with those particular Books or Chapters of Books which are controverted betwixt us and the Church of Rome I think it incomparably handled by my much honoured and truly Reverend Brother Iohn Lord Bishop of Durham but my design is to shew that the bulke of Christianity and our faith is delivered in such a manner in respect of the things delivered of the manner of the delivery and of the persons who delivered them that it is most rational for a man to assure himself that these were divine revelations if it be not absolutely impossible that they should be other I will begin with the things delivered and first with the beginning of the Bible the first book of Moses the 1. Chap. of Genesis where we find the Creation so delivered as it was not possible for man to do it without revelation Men might and men have by reason even Philosophers guessed and proved that the world was created but to say when and set it down in such a method as that a man may find the year in which it was done this was never undertaken by any nor could any man do it but by divine revelation Yet you may think that Adam being made a perfect man might know the instant when he first appeared in the world and communicate that to Seth and he downward but could Adam without revelation know that he was made of earth Nay could Adam without revelation know how Evah was taken out of him or all the works of God which were wrought in the 6. dayes before he was made this could not be this story of the Creation must need be a revelation no man of himself could search it out But I am afraid Mr. Hobbs will say it is false no Christian ever said it was so but I suppose my self to have to do with an heathen not an Atheist but a Theist at the best Well then it is most reasonable for any man to think this story to be true because it is rational for a man to think that since God will and must be worshipped by men and it is impossible for men to know what worship is proper to be given him unless he tells them It is then most reasonable for a man to think that God will prescribe how that worship is to be performed and therefore caused this whole book to be writ for mens instruction and in it sets down this work of his creation to shew
have been something to be understood There is no doubt but the King hath the power of conducting even in those things he named before and in those which follow none of which can be aâ—â—ed without him and therefore ought to have a higher faculty allowed him than that of Motion CHAP. XXIII SECT XV. Mr. Hobbs his reflection upon the House of Lords and Commons in Parliament His supposed danger for want of the consent of one or either of these refuted All humane constitutions subject to error Government rightly so stiled though without power to take away the lives or estates of Subjects The several Estates in Parliament termed factious by Mr. Hobbs No government absolutely and practically pure according to the definition of Politicians but denominated from the predominant part The soveraign not the representative of the Common-wealth no more than the head is of a man His instance of the Vnity in the holy Trinity impertinent Vnity in subordination ANd the power of making Laws which is the rational faculty on the accidentall consent not only of those two but also of a third By the third he means the house of Lords and here be understands that these three maâ—e the rational part which without doubt was necessarily required to the act of conduct as before but he attributes nothing in particular to the Lords let them vindicate themselves and the House of Commons themselves I shall only meddle with the inconveniences which arise out of this policie which he begins immediately to fall upon this endangereth the Common-wealth sometimes for want of consent to good Laws This danger I never found but many times the stop of evil Laws which have been projected by private men or perhaps might pass one house faults which have been observed by one which were not taken notice of by the other A multitude of Councellors gives safety to laws a weaker understanding many times sees that which a greater overlooked that which appears lovely to some may be known to be faulty by others But certainly these two houses being compounded of men of all conditions who must needs be acquainted with all the unhappinesses in the Government cannot but be thought most fit to have the examing and passing Laws for the Government He goes on but often for want of such nourishment as is most necessary to life and motion I doubt this can hardly be made out where the necessity of such contributions shall be made appear but at such times when his rebellious principles have been infused for without doubt where such necessities are the necessities of the Kingdome and the King lacks the supplies proper to such motions as war defensive and offensive the very state and condition of every man is endangered and his doctrine of self-preservation will compel men to it although they cast one eye upon the publick But such things he will say have been done it is true that the niggardliness of the People to such expences have brought the kingdome to destruction I can call it no less the same may be said of some Kings whose too much frugality has made them lack both men and hearts to serve their occasions There is nothing humane that is not subject to error and a possibility of being mistaken But certainly this as little as any because this assembly as he calls them are men selected for their estates and prudence and because they are prudent it is likely they are able and because of their estates it is reasonable to think that they should be willing to give their best assistance to the publick good He goes on for although few perceive that such government is not government but division of the Common-wealth into three factions and call it mixt Monarchie Indeed I think that never man did conceive that this Government is not Government Mr. Hobbs doth govern his servants yet his government is limited with many more bounds than this is and yet that is a government he cannot take their cloaths from them or their Estates much less their lives or limbs yet he is their Governour And though he saith only a few did perceive yet I think until he wrote this none did ever perceive three factions factions do oppose one another they are not joyned neither do they co-operate in the same effect as these do in all things which are done by them And in this business it seems not to be a co-operation of equal shares in the work but like an universal cause working with particular causes The Sun with the same light shines upon a Rose a Violet and a Primrose Yet with these particular specifical causes produceth those various effects with those several subordinate powers to his but they were not instituted for factions nor are such but subordinate to him and to concurr with him in the legal settlement of that is good for the publick it was therefore very ill phrased of him to call the factions a mixt Monarchie For my part I am of the Opinion which I have expressed before that there is no Government in the World so pure that it hath no mixture in it either Monarchy Aristocracy or Democracy but the denomination in all these is from the predominant part yet saith he the truth is that it is not one Independent Common-wealth but three Independent factions Again factions this needs not unless he can infuse factions which I hope he shall never be able to do either with this book or any other and saith he not one representative Person but three The vanity of this language I have heretofore spoken to In a Monarchie the Monarch cannot be called the representative Person of the Common-wealth no more than the head can be termed the representative of man he is the head of this body politick and governs it but not represents it He is so fond of that conceipt as indeed it is the foundation of his whole politie that the error mixeth it self in almost every page But let us go on with him In the kingdome of God there may be three Persons Independent without breach of unity in God that reigneth Yes by him there may be twenty a hundred or a thousand and indeed are so many for as he makes a Person to be a man who represents another as Moses did God of which I have treated at large in my former part against him certainly there was a thousand such which represented him in his Kingdome in this World and therefore this instance is nothing to the purpose especially concerning the representation here treated of Yes saith he this is without breach of unity in God who reigneth There can be no doubt of it for though God be represented by a thousand several men his unity is the same And I may say of a King though he be represented in divers Provinces by divers Vice-royes yet he is the same King and the only King But where men reign that are subject to diversity of opinions saith he it cannot be so What
Soveraign obliged to take care for the decision of Controversies and accomptable to God as for his own so also for his Officers neglect EIghthly saith he Is annexed to the Soveraign the Rights of Controversies which may arise concerning Law either Civil or Natural or concerning Fact for without the decision of Controversies there is no protection of one Subject from the injuries of another That is true which he speaks so that he understands by it not a natural immediate Agent but a moral political act by his Deputies and inferiour Officers as Judges and then it is not only a right which he may but a duty which he ought to do And I may go further then Mr. Hobbs here and say that he shall be responsible to the great King of Kings for not taking care that those his Officers do his duty of Justice in deciding causes Jethro Moses Father-in-law gave him good counsel not to take that burthen impossible for his shoulders to bear upon himself alone but divide it to others and keep weighty causes only to himself SECT II. Mr. Hobbs ninth Inference affirmed Soveraigns in ordinary emergencies to use ordinary means Salus Populi Suprema Lex NInthly c. saith he truly Reader I am tired with transcribing his words distinctly The drift of this ninth Inference is to say That the Soveraign hath right to the Militia of his Kingdom and so of all means to maintain his Army and he saith right without this all others are nothing The Subjects cannot be protected either from forreign or domestick injuries This is true but yet he hath right only to use right means for this I speak not of cases of necessity Salus Reipublicae est summae Lex but in the ordinary mannage of affairs he must reserve himself questionless to the ordinary ways SECT III. The choice of Councellors c. in the Soveraign Mr. Hobbs his reason of this Conclusion refuted FOr his tenth Inference which is his right of chusing Councellors Officers of his Army and the like I agree with him but not for his oft confuted reason because he hath right to the end he must have right to the means for he cannot have right to get his right ends by crooked means but because he is Supreme and is the Fountain of all Power in his Realm But yet there are in many Kingdomes great Offices belonging to Families as Generals Chamberlains and the like and those cannot justly be laid aside out of those places that they are born to and have by Inheritances without great and just cause of disinheriting be produced SECT IV. The eleventh Inference affirmed where there is no Law there is no transgression and consequently no punishment HIs eleventh is most true That to the Sâ—veraign is committed the power of punishing and rewarding according to Law or if there be no Law I fear to joyn with him here to punish where is no Law according as he shall judge meet to conduce to the deterring of men from doing disservice to the Commonwealth This I like not sin is the transgression of a Law where no Law no sin therefore no punishment His last Inference is after a long preamble That it belongs to the Soveraign Power to give Titles of Honour I agree with him in this clause but observe that his twelfth eleventh tenth ninth Inferences are all page 92. SECT V. Mr. Hobbs his Objection and Answer approved Kings more incommodated then Subjects from the burthen of their Crimes and their account to the King of Kings I Have thus briefly touched upon these particular Inferences which he calls the right of a Soveraign and having censured them any man may easily look through that which follows in that Cap. but in the latter end of that Cap. page 94. he seems to answer an Objection A man may here object that the condition of Subjects is very miserable as being obnoxious to the lusts or other irregular passions of him or them who have so unlimited a power in their hands and commonly they who live under a Monarch think it the fault of Monarchy c. not considering saith he that the estate of man can never be without some incommodity or other I think he speaks truth in almost all this whole Paragraph but as a Christian man who is assured there is a God a Heaven and Hell I may say that as all Subjects must whilst they are in this world have incommodities so Kings have many more their Crowns are made of Thorns and their Scepters too heavy almost for men to bear because they have a mighty accompt to make up to their King the King of Kings of the good or evil in their Government with which words I end this Cap. and come to his next which is Cap. 19. entituled thus Of the several kinds of Commonwealth by Institution and of Succession to the Soveraign Power CHAP. XIII SECT I. Mr. Hobbs his expression of Representative not proper and diminutive of Soveraignty Two Questions raised about the divisions of Commonwealths left to the judgment of others HE begins this Cap. with an Exposition of that ancient division of a Commonwealth into Monarchical Aristocratical and Democratical which he affirms to be the only forms by which any Commonwealth is governed and in the bottom of this 94 page he proves it thus For the Representative must needs be one man or more and if more then it is either the Assembly of all or but of a part When the Representative is one man then it is a Monarchy when an Assembly of all that will come together then it is a Democracy or popular Commonwealth when an Assembly of a part only then it is Aristocracy Other kinds of Commonwealths there can be none for either one or more or all must have the Soveraign Power which I have shewed to be indivisible I will not here contend against that word Representative which I have oft already spoke against and cannot be a fit word to express a Soveraign for it makes him to be but an Image or Creature of the people whose Supreme he is But for that division of a Common-wealth which he proposeth although it is so honoured by the universality of Writers in Politicks that it were not modesty in any particular man to deny it yet give me leave to put a Question I will not be peremptory in it Why since a Commonwealth is the whole Body Politick and consists in the whole Regiment from the King to the Cottager why there may not be thought of some division in respect of subordination as well as in respect of the Supreme But I will leave the answer to some younger head who may have leisure to examine it and raise another Question Since the division is made only out of the quantity or number which constitute a Supreme why may not some things be thought upon concerning the quality of it which may give a new and another illustration to that condition of a Supreme For although this
bear though hardly that word liberty which he applies to it So that the meaning is the way is of an open condition not appropriated to any particular owner so as to forbid you legally to pass there nor is this an abusive speech but this word liberty is seldom used but with such addition as may expound it in a passive sense for some power to act although freedom in others SECT III. The instance of a Gift not at all to Mr. Hobbs his purpose A double acceptation of the word Gift The vulgar phrase of Gift is free abused in either sense Metonymies the Elegancies of common Language ANd saith he when we say a Gift is free there is not meant any liberty of the Gift but of the Giver that was not bound by any Law or Covenant to give it Consider good Reader how this instance disagrees with his undertaking which is first that freedom applied to any thing but bodies is abused Secondly his medium by which he proves that it is for that which is without motion is without impediment Now his second instance is because a gift is called a free gift Let us consider that a gift is either the thing given which is often called the gift of such a man or else the very act of giving it In the first acceptation he cannot say it was bodies nor a body that hath no motion like to a high way of which before it may be a horse a dog or any living creature Then secondly take it for the act of giving that is a motion of the mouth or hand by writing it is a motion of a man that therefore cannot be pertinent But then he expounds right when he says it signifies the liberty of the giver who was not bound by any Law or Covenant to give it It is true Mr. Hobbs but yet this is no abusive speech but a Metonymie the effect for the cause which figures are so far from being an abuse as they are the Elegancy of common Language and indeed have so prevailed upon every mans tongue and pen that a man can hardly speak or write significantly without them unless he would tye himself to strict Logical and Metaphysical notions and expressions SECT IV. Mr. Hobbs his third instance censured Freedom of Speech diversly accepted His illustrations most uncertain and deviating from his matter HIs third instance So when we speak freely it is not the liberty of voice or pronuntiation but of the man whom no Law had obliged to speak otherwise then he did First I think he is mistaken much in the sense of this phrase free speech for we shall find it two ways used in our common conversation of men with men sometimes in a virtuous sense as he did preach freely deliver the truth without fear of men for that bondage of fear is a great captivity sometimes in a worse sense when we use to say such a man is one of a free conversation he speaks freely not that he speaks things as no Law hath forbid to speak otherwise but without consideration he gives no Law to his own tongue one as we otherwise phrase him sometimes without fear or wit and it is within an inch of sauciness Now freedom of speech doth not relate only to the outward Laws but to the ability sometimes of Language and yet I may add he was to blame when he denied the use of it concerning the bodily pronuntiation for we use to say he is free from stammering and for stammering he hath an impediment in his speech Let the Reader forgive me for medling with such trifles as these are which in this place I do because he may observe how crude and indigested his discourse is and how uncertain even his illustrations are which ought to be of a clearer evidence But now I come to his Lastly which indeed I guess to be the work he aimed at and this only a Preamble to the Liberty of Subjects which indeed it concerns not SECT V. Of freedom and liberty again These two contrary to his former acception of the words now distinguished by Mr. Hobbs The word will taken in a double sense equally with understanding by the Philosophers The common notion justified against Mr. Hobbs The subjectum quod and the subjectum quo of liberty in the will A twofold act of the will confounded by Mr. Hobbs explained and asserted God only can do what ever he has inclination to LAstly saith he from the use of the word Free-will no liberty can be enforced of the will desire or inclination but the liberty of the man which consisteth in this that he finds no stop in doing what he has the will desire or inclination to do What from the use of this word Free-will no liberty can be inferred of the will desire or inclination I wonder why by his discourse because it is no body which he conceives to be the only free thing but that hath been refuted other things are as free as bodies according to his conceit of freedom because other things produce alteration and may be impeded in their operations But perhaps he puts a difference here betwixt freedom and liberty which before he conjoyned and conceives that the freedom of the will which may not be stopt or hindred in its operations is a distinct thing from its liberty of doing or not doing of electing this or refusing that And although he allows the first that it is free without stop to operate but hath no liberty to operate or not operate or to refuse one and chuse another this I apprehend to be his meaning as will appear presently his whole discourse pointing at it To understand which let the Reader consider with me that this word will is taken two ways for a faculty in the Soul by which it produceth divers acts as to will or nill chuse or refuse And secondly for the prime act of this faculty which is to will for so Philosophers do with the understanding Intellectus is the faculty by which a man understands any thing and the prime act of the understanding or indeed the chief habit by which it understands any thing The habitus principiorum is called Intellectus Thus sometimes the same name is applied to the faculty and the chief operation of the faculty I speak this because he more then once abuseth this notion with some derision but however until we can learn more significant terms to express our notions by we must be content with such as are in use Now consider here he takes will for the act or the operation of the faculty not the faculty it self that is evident because he expounds it as if they were one by desire and inclination Now those two desire and inclination are actual motions or at the least tendencies to motions Now saith he of these there is no liberty but the liberty of the man It is true the man is the subjectum quod or the Soul of man in which the faculty of the
Philosophers concerning God his essence his attributes concerning the Creation we shall find that they laboured still to prove what they spoke and by reason to convince mans understanding Only I must confess Trismegistus in his Pomander makes his discourse which is most divine to be revelation and four ought I know it may be so much of it but otherwise they all go upon ratiocination and the reason is because such things ought not to be assented to which are not either proved or revealed by God which is the most invincible evidence that any truth can have But now Moses and those holy writers inspired by God in their compiling those holy Books only affirm this and this without arguing the reasons of it because they were divine not humane words likewise in all those moral duties which concern men they are writ with the majesty of the King of Kings and Lord of Lords Do this or this not disputing as Plato and Aristotle how it conduceth to the present happiness but exacting obedience It is true when the Prophets disputed with the Gentiles or Apostles with Jewes or Gentiles who believed not their report they confuted the one by reason or out of their own authors and the other out of the former Scriptures because all proofs must be made ex concessis and out of such premisses they would confirm these Conclusions God exacted a belief and this he doth with the greatest arguments and most forcing that are possible by Praemium and Poena reward and punishment but such as never King or Emperour either did or was able to propose by eternal happiness or misery which nothing can doe but God alone And this is done to those who will receive or not receive his word Well the words contained here are delivered with such an exaction as never man proposed the same truths in and required with such promises as never man did meet with nor could perform we must needs therefore be assured they are divine CHAP. XXII SECT V. The third Argument from the sanctity and integrity of the persons who delivered these truths The miraculous conduct of the Children of Israel by Moses The objection of his assertation of dominion answered The predictions of the Prophets not possible without a divine revelation The truth and certainty of their predictions objected ANd so I come to the persons who delivered these truths to us who will give us as full assurance as any thing else of the certainty The persons were of most eminent integrity and affirmed that these writings were delivered them from God I will begin with the first Moses a man who approved his conversation with God and Gods approbation of him by most certain signs first by those mighty wonders which he wrought in Aegypt before Pharaoh upon him and his in their journey afterwards by his wonderful conduct of the Children of Israel through the wilderness the like of which was never known The bringing water out of the rock feeding that mighty Host with bread and flesh the miraculous stopping the mouths of Korah c. why should we imagine that this man should lye and say he received this law from God when he did not Yes to make himself King among them Indeed the rebells last spoke of did object that but God confuted it by a miraculous destroying them and we see although whilst he lived he went betwixt God and them delivering prayers to God for them and bringing Gods will to them yet we find not that he acquired any high matters for himself the Priesthood which was to be a perpetual dignity he put Aaron into the Politique government he bequeathed to Josuah and we do not find him contriving more than an ordinary proportion for his Children which shews that he had no self end in any thing he did Nay we may read in the 32. of Exodus 10. when Moses interceded with God for favour to the Children of Israel God made him answer let me alone that my wrath may wax hot against them and that I may consume them and I will make of thee a great Nation Nevertheless Moses was not bribed with this for his own interest to forsake Gods glory but presently after presseth God for his own honour to have pitty upon the Israelites as you may read vers 11. c. where methinks he did like Abraham offer his whole posterity to Gods glory and honour which sheweth that Moses had no sinister ends in his actions but only the glory of God which certainly could not rise out of such a proud lye as to take upon him divine revelations where there were none Next let us consider the Prophets they were men that adventured their lives and suffered miseries for those truths they foretold and taught yea they were sure of it and they who followed their counsels according to these revelations which God made to them it was well with them and mischief followed them who did otherwise Those things which they foretold did come to pass accordingly both concerning the Jewes and all other nations yea the whole world why should not we be assured that these things came from God which they say were revealed by him since we see them true in all those works which they forespoke of CHAP. XXII SECT VI. Of the doctrine of the Apostles the efficacy of their preaching The power of Tongues their sufferings and patience not possible but from divine inspiration A further assertion of the same argument à posteriori such effect not producible but from a divine law IF we descend to the Apostles we shall find they were a sort of men of mean extraction and education how could it be possible that they unless by revelation should attain to such an efficacy of preaching as to be able to convince the whole world and preach this divine Philosophy How came they by the power of Tongues to be able to travel through the world and preach to every man in his own language but by the supernatural assistance of the Holy Ghost Why would they undertake the work through such cruel persecutions foretold them that they should be as sheep amongst wolves but that it was a duty enjoyned them from the Holy Ghost and they were sure that he who promised it would make good their reward in heaven hereafter for here they were to have miseries Truly I know not what can be opposed against this but that both from the matters delivered rom the manner that they are delivered by and from the persons who delivered them we have as great an assurance that these truths were revealed to them by God as can be wrought by humane faith Yea but let us consider further and it is scientifical à posteriori from the effect to the cause for if it be not possible that these effects should come from any cause but God as indeed I think it not possible then it is demonstrated that these must be revelations and we have a mighty assurance of them CHAP. XXII SECT
VII Another argument ad hominem Mr. Hobbs his assurance of his being born at Malmsbury not comparable to this of the verity of the holy scriptures Some doubts of the place of Mr. Hobbs his birth from the erring of his doctrines from Christianity The attestation of the Gospel from the sufferings of the Saints and Martyrs The encrease and continuance of it in despite of persecution The Scriptures not possible to be written by bad men in regard their design is to destroy the Kingdom of Satan Good men would not obtrude a Lye upon the world Faith resolved into divine revelation The rest is a preparation to this faith and conclusion of this point LEt Mr. Hobbs tell me what assurance he hath of any thing He saith in the beginning of this Book that he is Thomas Hobbs of Malmsbury I think he is as sure of this as of any thing but I am much surer and so may any man be that this Scripture was writ by divine revelation than he can be of that first for his place that he was of Malmsbury which is a town in Wiltshire where Christianity is professed where men are assured of the Scriptures that they are by divine revelation How should it breed such a monster who would bring all their hopes of heaven their faith in Gods promises to be dubious as if they were not promised But he is Thomas Hobbs how knows he that perhaps his mother told him so and the midwife I know not whether after he came to the years of discretion he ever talked with them but if he did it is but a weak Testimony in respect of ours which was and is affirmed by such divine and incomparable persons as the Apostles and Prophets were His Mother and the Midwife although true persons yet were apt to be deceived and it may be he was a supposititious Child how oft have such things been done when contrariwise these men who have delivered infalible truths many ages before they came to pass cannot be conceived to have any Error I but perhaps he will say he is like his father in his countenance in his speech certainly not so like as these truths are to that incomparable essence which we call God than which nothing more fully expressed these divine perfections unless it was his personal word I but his Christening is registred in the Church Book of Malmsbury a good legal evidence and perhaps he enjoyed his fathers estate by this I know not but certainly there is a possibility of Error in it because the Church Book may be counterfeited and many a man hath intruded into other mens estates by unjust means but our evidence is recorded may I say or ingraven in these volumes which have been attested in every age since the first writing with the Blood of many martyrs which can be affirmed of no Church Book in the world worms and Cankers may eat them and thieves may break through and steal them and counterfeit them but these are subject to no corruption but by the providence of God have been and will be preserved so long as the world stands and endures So I think evidently that it appears that we have as full an assurance that these Scriptures are Divine as men can have of any thing in this world which they receive by hear-say Nay let us go further examine whether we have not a Demonstration from the effect to the cause we know such a man was our friend by his voice when he speaks another by his style as the report is of St. Thomas Moore with Erasmus aut Erasmus aut Diabolus Yea Critiques every where discerne Authors by their Styles may not we think you discern God by these heavenly writings which are more than humane When we hear a man discoursing of high points in Philosophy learnedly we know such an effect cannot proceed from a Country-education at the Cart and Plough it requires another study and industry When the Scripture teacheth us things higher than the natural wit of man can reach to as I have shewed it must needs come from a higher strain than our natural Condition could deliver to us I will conclude with one word The Scriptures must be writ by good or ill men ill men could not do it it teacheth those doctrines which destroy the Devil and his Kingdom all evil if good men writ it they would not lye to say they were inspired by God when they were not they would not deliver such things for assured truths which none could know but God if God did not teach it them Upon these invincible Grounds I think I may say that we have a mighty assurance that these are divine revelations which he wickedly affirms we have no assurance of But it may be objected if the demonstration be so evident why do not all men receive it for the understanding is made after such a manner as the Eye when you shew it colours the Eye must see them so shew by demonstration a truth to the understanding it must needs assent For my part I do not apprehend that man hath liberty in his understanding to accept or refuse truths which are laid open to it neither do I think that which is called liberum arbitrium is only a freedom of the will but a result out of them both however it is not in the understanding alone nor is this belief of ours that these things are revealed only an act of the understanding but of the will which refuseth to heare the voice of the Charmer charme he never so wisely Sometimes a malitious Will will not permit a man to study and think of these arguments which the more he studyeth the more he will approve sometimes when he hath studyed them it will make him seek further and being not delighted with that reason which is proposed it will not be satisfied with it so that there is a submission to these reasons offered which is necessary to our assent to them And certainly that is much by such arguments as shew the happiness men have in being under Gods Government for then men will seek what and wherein he will bless them and when he finds that these Scriptures and these only are rational for a man to think are his own dictates he will willingly submit to them But contrariwise when a proud man shall think that he and he only is faber not fortunae only but of his own happiness and that he need not seek to God for assistance then he slighâ—s all these discourses and listens not to them But still a man may say it seems that resolution of our faith is into this way of arguing I answer noe our faith is resolved into the divine revelations that God hath said this or that this is but a preparation for that foundation when a wise and vertuous man tells me any thing I believe it for the esteem of him and that is my last resolution of that faith because such a man speaks it but
before this I must be prepared for this with an acquaintance that this is such a man and I must know he speaketh it These preparatoy Acts are necessary for the introduction of that Act of faith in him but faith in him is the foundation of my belief in that sentence it is evidently so in this Case we believe these divine truths absolutely and the last resolution of them is into this that God hath revealed them but yet it may be enquired whether these Arguments be necessary to our assent to these divine principles or not Certainly to a man who should be converted from Paganisme Vt prudenter credat that he be not carryed about with winds of Doctrine it is fit he should have these or some other equivalent Arguments to induce him to them But to a man born in the Church and bred up in the Christian religion it is comfortable to his faith when he finds it attended with such invincible reasons and he is able to understand them But if not simplicity of faith and obedience to God will be blessed by him It will not be expected that I should engage in more niceties of this kind I hope it appears that we have assurance of these divine revelations It was therefore not only a bold but impious and wicked affirmation of him to say it is evidently impossible for a man to be assured of the revelation to another without a revelation particularly made to himself But he proceeds to answer some seeming proofes brought to affirm the assurance of these revelations I will put them down in order and examine his answer The first is drawn from miracles and is thus set down in the place last cited CHAP. XXII SECT VIII Mr. Hobbs his answer to the first proof retorted Miracles defined FOR though a man may be induced to believe such revelation from the Miracles they see him d that is the first Objection he answers Miracles are marvellous wores but that which is marvellous to one may not be so to another This answer of his to speak ad hominem doth not become him as I shewed in my first piece page 19. He had said that Concerning the worlds magnitude and beginning he was content with that doctrine which the Scripture perswaded and the fame of these miracles which confirm them the Countreys custom and the due reverence to the Laws There you will allow Miracles to confirm them that is the Scriptures why now should you not be content with â—hem They are now when you writ this as good as famous as evident as they were then when you writ the other Well we will examine the force of Miracles and see what content they can give a a rational man and before I go further we will consider what we understand by this word Miracle We do conceive a Miracle to be a work above the reach and power of nature and extraordinary not only a strange and wonderful thing to the common observation of men but above the power of all those things which God hath made produceable by natural causes so that it is not only strange that nature should do it but impossible it should produce this effect which is miraculous And when I say This miraculous effect I mean by it not the work only as to cure a lame man such a man perhaps may be cured by natural means physically applied but to cure him at a distance with a word speaking is miraculous and is a work beyond natures power So that then we understand by a Miracle what is either in its self or in the manner of doing beyond Nature The last term is extraordinary there are many works beyond the power of Nature which are ordinarily wrought by God in a most ordinate way in an infallibly settled course as they relate to Heaven which are the giving his Graces to such as are penitent or pray or which observe their duties in the use of the Sacraments with the like which being ordinate by his sacred Covenants are most certain and being so although above Nature yet are no Miracles because certain and ordinate CHAP. XXII SECT IX Miracles produced to confirm an untruth are a Lye and blasphemy against God This Proposition confirmed Mr. Hobbs his confederacy with the Devil Matth. 4.3 explained Our blessed Saviours use of Miracles for the confirmation of his Gospel Mr. Hobbs his Logick desired The apprehensions of men alter not the nature of Miracles THus the Nature of Miracles being explained I think it appears clearly that because nothing but the God of Nature who made this nature and could have made another can act beyond or beside that order which he hath settled things in therefore he must needs be the Author of these effects which are above the reach of Nature of which kind Miracles are And thus if he should produce them for the confirmation of falshood it would be as apparent a Lye as any false Proposition delivered by words which certainly were abominable blasphemy in any man to affirm The force of this Argument will appear from the Devil who was and is as able a Logician as Mr. Hobbs and although he dissemble and labours to make men believe there is no such thing yet I doubt they two do underhand confederate too much together Howsoever let us consider an Argument of the Devils by which he required an assurance of our Saviour's being the Son of God and consequently God Matth. 4.3 where the Devil tempting him said If thou be the Son of God command that these stones he made bread A man might have objected suppose he should command and the effect follow how would this prove him the Son of God An Angel or a meer man assisted by God might have done this But consider now if he had done it upon the Question and had not been the Son of God because it must be done by the extraordinary power of God not by his ordinary power therefore God in doing it must have confirmed a lye which it is not possible for God to do and upon the strength of this Argument of the Devils we may be assured that Miracles used to prove any Conclusion are an invincible Argument for the Devil is abundantly able to dispute And therefore in the last verse of Saint Mar's Gospel it is reported that after Christ had given Commâ—ssiâ—n to the Eleven they went forth and preached every where tâ—e Lord working with them and confirming the word wâ—â— signs following where we may observe as the Devil urged it for an Argument so our Saviour used it for an Argument in the planting of the Church which is enough for proof of this Conclusion that the Miracles wrought by our Saviour and his Apostles here were such Arguments as did enforce belief of what they spake I could expatiate in this noble Theme of Miracles and fall upon divers most Scholastick discourses but rather chuse to apply my self close to him who answers That what is wonderful to one may
who is personated by b ita est so it is so that although a seemed to object this yet Mr. Hobs assents to it CAP. IV. The Nature of Hypostasis ANd in the 331. he proceeds thus Sed Patres Ecclesiae illis temporibus tum ante tum post concillium Nicenum in scriptis suis vocem Hypostasis videntur alio modo interpretare mysterium Trinitatis Christianis omnibus intelligibile reddere cupientes The meaning of this is that the Fathers both before and after the Council of Nice gave another sence of the word Hypostasis and saith he They thought best to do it by the similitude of fire light and heat the fire they refer'd to the Father the light to the Son the heat to the holy Spirit in which similitude saith he the congruity would perhaps be accurate but that fire splendor here he changes the term light heat neither are substances nor were thought so by the Fathers chiefly such as were Aristotelians of which kind he can produce very few Ancient unless saith he Ignis ponatur pro ignito fire be put for a fiery thing SECT II. That a Particular Fire is an Hypostasis I Will stop here and make this Note that I can guesse that never man before him said that a particular fire was not an Hypostasis for Hypostasis being nothing but an individual substance which then is the subiect of accidents no man can deny that to fire yes saith he unless fire be put for a fiery thing certainly there is no man that sees or reads this word fire but it represents to him a fiery thing as when he reads these words Earth Water Aire they make him think of Earthy Watry Airy things there is the same reason for fire and what he puts down that Aristotelian Philosophers should be of his mind I am perswaded he can produce none that ever affirmed that a particular fire was not an Hypostasis but he has reason for what he speaks and therefore follows this discourse with enim homo enim ignem lumen calorem extinguit quoties libet The sum of this is that because a man can at his pleasure extinguish Fire Heat and Light and that so infirm a thing as man is should extinguish so substantial Creatures created by an omnipotent God and so reduce it to nothing We are not commanded to believe it neither is it credible these are his very words as near as I can translate them and I think they are truely done SECT III. His Discourse Censured for changing his Termes NOw I can observe one thing which is too frequent a fallacy throughout his Book which is a changing his Termes which ought not to be when a man brings a Philosophical reason for what he speaks this appears in those main and substantial Termes of this discourse to wit extinguishing fire in the first proposition and that inlarging which fallows extinguisht ad nihilum redigere to annihilate it Oertainly as nothing can create but God so nothing can annihilate but he himself for annihilation is reducing a thing to nothing as Creation is a producing some creature or bringing a thing out of nothing now although nothing can annihilate but God yet not only man but many inferiour creatures to man can extinguish creatures of his as in particular water or earth can extinguish fire and both watry and earthy bodies this extinguishing is putting out the Candle a choaking the Fumes but annihilation destroys the very matter which no Aristotelian will allow to be possible for any created thing to do and therefore he was much to blame in a deceitful manner to mingle Truths and Falshoods as if they were one thing SECT IV. His Argument Confuted BUt now let us consider his Inference which is that it is not credible that so infirm a thing as man should destroy the works of God Alas what a pittiful Plea is this if man by his own sole power should do it this might look like an argument but if man doth it by Divine assistance as the first and moving cause why should it be hard to think so I hope the Almighty cannot be denyed to have a power of granting such powers or if he should we may produce those invincible instances which are formerly given and thousand more to prove the contrary where God hath given to creatures inferiour to man abilities to do such works as water earth and the like yea fire hath such a power to dry up water to destroy wood and the like And indeed let him but consider how any man hath a power given him of God by which he is enabled to destroy another man a much more noble creature than fire and then it need not be thought strange that he should have the abilities to do the less there is enough I think spoke to this CAP. V. His Answer to quid est Hypostasis examined I Will skip to page 339. where you shall find in the midst of that page a question put by A What is it which the Graecians mean by Hypostasis and the answer framed thus Quum aliquid intueris quod vocas album in English thus When you behold any thing which you call white you impose that name to a substance or a body subject suppose marble although the sharpness of your sight cannot penetrate the substance of marble or any other thing all this I let pass as a supposed Truth and serves but for an Introduction to what follows which is album igitur a white thing therefore is the name of a body which is subsisting by its self not the name of a colour he is out here very much without doubt it is the name both of the body and the colour a body coloured as when we see a man in his cloaths cloathed it is more and another thing then when we see him naked so when I see a body adorned with white it is more then when I see only a body which may be in any other colour besides white He proceeds impositum this name is imposed for a certain appearance or as the Graecians speak 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which seems to be somewhat but is nothing indeed SECT II. That Colour is a Real thing SUre here again he crosses both me and himself he crosseth me in that I have delivered in my first part of Censures upon his Leviathan Cap. 4. Sect. 2. himself as you may observe Sect. 3. I will begin with himself he affirms colour to be nothing but perturbed Light or light by reflection from some uneven body Now then if this be so then colour is light then it must be something not a meer phantasme a nothing as he tearms it nay I dare affirm if it be but a phantasme yet it is something ens intentionale although not a reale an intentional although not a real thing for first consider it is the work of a noble power the Phancy if we take it for the