mine and thine you may reade a most excellent passage in the 23. of Gen. with what civility of discourse and reciprocal courtesies Abraham bought the field in Machpelah of Ephron the Hittite First I collect thence that Abraham judged there was a legall interest in Ephron for else he would not have payd such a round price for it as foure hundred shekels of Silver and then you may observe how sacred amongst all people the preservation of interest was for in the last of Gen. you shall find that Jacob when he died in Egypt a great way off in another Nation having both he and his left the Land neare two hundred yeares after the purchase when he and his without doubt were not known scarce remembred Iacob gave order for the burying of his body there and it was performed without any disturbance so sacred did those people without any positive law but the principles of nature observe the particular interest of particular men even such who at the time of the Purchase were but sojourners among them and at the time of the last usage were not so much as cohabitants but strangers in another Country and Nation so that we see as men have had alwaies Consciences which directed them in their actions so those Consciences have had a sense of intruding upon another's interest and Abraham was assured that it was such amongst them for upon that presumption he paid so great a price for that field Sect. 11. If it should be asked how men should come to get these interests I will not here scan all wayes one is evident that is Occupancy taking possession of it first for all the things in this world being but Bona utilia and the profit they have is their service to man he who first gets possession of them is Lord of them thus Fowles and Fishes even in planted Nations which are no mans possessions being caught by any man are his to make profit and when one man hath caught them that they are his possession it is thievery to rob him of them I speak not here of Deere Conyes Hares nor Fishes in ponds c. which are impaled and so for their habitation by our laws are made to pay their host with their lives nor such things which our lawes indulging the pleasures of Gent. and men of quality have appropriated to certain persons and places as Pheasants and Partridges and the like but whatsoever no nationall particular Law hath given to another that the law of Nature gives to the first possessor and this law men find before any positive law of Nations in the practise of the world so that then it is apparent that without positive laws or an outward humane coercive power the law of Nations hath alwaies given a propriety in this world's goods to the sons of men Thus I have passed my opinion upon his 13. Chapter and I think have given reasons for what I spake but if this be not enough let the Reader consider what I shall speake to the next Chapter and that will the more fully discribe the mist of his opinions and confirm mine more stronger Censures upon the 14 th Chapter of LEVIATHAN which is entituled The first and second naturall Lawes and of Contracts which thus begin's CHAP. XXII Concerning the pretended necessity in Nature for the preservation of life The prospect of an happiness beyond it Death represented more terrible than it is c. Sect. 1. THE right of Nature which Writers commonly call jus Naturale is the liberty each man hath to use his own power as he will himself for the preservation of his own nature that is to say his own life and consequently of doing any thing which in his own judgement and reason he shall conceive to be the aptest means thereunto Here is a description of the right of Nature which is that he saith Writers call Jus Naturale I believe this Gentleman never in his life read Jus Naturale so described in any Author It is true to preserve a mans own life is a branch of the right of nature but it doth not contain the whole nature of it as if the right of nature extended to nothing else but the preservation of a mans own life there are many other things which the right of nature enables us to doe but because I find this question in my opinion more methodically and Schollarly delivered in his Book entituled De Copore Politico Cap. 1. I shall therefore consider that first and having cleared that discourse apply my self to this description and I will begin with his 6. Number That number begins thus Sect. 2. Forasmuch as necessity of nature maketh men to will and desire that which is good for themselves and to avoyd that which is hurtful but most of all the terrible enemy of nature Death from whom men expect the losse of all power and also the greatest of bodily paine in the loosing The phrase which I here censure first is that necessity makes us do this I know this word Necessity is often used for what we terme want or poverty because such a man need 's somewhat therefore we say he is in necessity and in this sense there may be some truth in that Proposition for because men's lives have lack of supplies and according to this Gentleman all the world are his enemies or what is the truth no man will have so much care to supply him as himself therefore he must doe it but then take necessity as it opposeth contingency which is the common logical sense it is absolutely false for many men throw and take away their own lives now that which is necessarily done cannot be otherwise men cannot choose but doe what they doe out of necessity the phrase were much more proper to say that the law of nature enjoyne's them to provide for themselves for the great Natura naturans God as I said before know's our necessities and like a wise law-maker makes lawes to provide for them and so infinitely wise are those laws that what he hath not by some law or other provided for it is not necessary for any man whatsoever and certainly therefore where is no lawfull and honest way to preserve it life its self is not necessary he seem's therefore to expresse himself better in Corpore politico then in Leviathan because in Leviathan he restrain's this right of Nature only to the preservation of his own life but in this I now write against he saith not only but most of all his own life other things he may have a right unto but most of all or chiefly the preservation of his own life or rather the avoyding of death Sect. 3. What he saith that necessity of nature makes us desire our own good and avoyd that which is hurtful is true in that generality but applyed to any particular is false for there is no particular but may appeare to some men good and to others hurtfull even
in that down right sense which the words seem at first to beare and they who object it would inferre For Invocation or calling upon the name of the Lord as it is many times it being a principal piece of it is taken for the whole worship of God it cannot be that men should now begin to do that which without doubt Adam Abel Seth and all such as were godly must needs have done long before Nay although this Story of the Fathers is delivered by Moses in exceeding short notes yet in the 3. and 4. vers of this 4. Chap. it is recorded that both Cain and Abel brought Oblations to the Lord which was an Act of Religion so that Religion did not now begin There are many witty Expositions given and some in their Expositions destroy the Text but what seem's most probable to me is that as in every age men desirous of Gods honour studied which way to act it most laudably and give any addition to it so now they might at this time adde something to their natural worship by prostration on the ground and Oblaeions and sacrifices as Hymmes and Invocations of God which were not used before Men began to call upon the name of the Lord in such a way which afterwards improving it selfe to a generall Devotion amongst the sonnes of God as I think pious men were called in those dayes it gained that name in a peculiar manner to be attributed to it so that men began that worship which was known by the name of calling upon God As you may see in Confession every acknowledgement of a mans sins or God's goodnesse is Confession yet if you aske have you been at Confession It is understood of Confessing to a Priest and accounting your sinnes to him Instances might be very many in this kind take one more perhaps a little closer We know that every pious act is a service to God yet for the eminence and excellence of it The Common Prayer used in the Church hath so appropriated that name that if a man asked were you at Service to day it will be understood of Common Prayer If the Question be at what time did service begin The answer will be Nine Ten Two Three a clock and be applyed only to the beginning of serving God with it yea I have heard many answer I was at Sermon not at Service so distinctly is the word applied to that of Common Prayer I can adde one Instance more almost in the very words before specified that Doxologie which is used in the Church at the end of every Psalm and some other times in the Common Prayers used in divine Service Glory be to the Father c. did so gaine the approbation of that name Gloria Patri that although all religious devotions payd to God are honouring and glorifying of him yet when we heare men speake of Gloria Patri we know they meane this Doxologie and we can say of it that Gloria Patri began with Flavianus as Theodoret assisted by St. Chrysostom and Nicephorus so that although in the end of this Doxologie it is said As it was in the beginning is now c. that is that in all ages men did give Glory to the Father c. Yet we can say that at that time began Glory to the Father c. So was it in this occasion then began the Name of God to be glorified with some particular service although men did in all ages before glorifie him So that we may well beleeve that in that time of the birth of Enos or some years after began that piece of worship which for some eminency had that name of calling upon God by the use of speech appropriated to it Whether this addition was by the Institution of God immediately or Divine men as Seth or Enos introduced it in the Publique Religion I determine not being not revealed but conceive this the most reasonable way of expounding that place which cannot be understood in that grosse way it is urged Sect. 3 A second Argument to prove that there was an Idolatrous worship before the Floud is thus framed The punishment of Sinnes is proportioned to the Sins which are punished now the Floud being the greatest punishment that ever God afflicted the world with it is necessary that it should be for the worship of false Gods or Idolatry which are the greatest Sins To this is rightly answered that the punishment of Sins in this world is not alwaies proportioned to the sins All the temporal punishment that men have is lesse then they deserve and therefore may in justice be moderated according to Gods equitable kindnesse what punishment God layd upon these men who perished in the Floud after death was not revealed but the judgement was most right because they held the truth of God in unrighteousness as St. Paul Rom. 1.18 and as it is in the 21. verse of the same Because they knowing GOD glorified him not as God neither were thankful but became vaine in their imaginations So that the Condemnation upon the Gentiles was not alwaies for Errours in judgement but Errours in practise that although they did know God aright yet they did not worship him as God And therefore we may be satisfied concerning their sins with what the Scripture revealeth and need not make them worse then they were described there which sayes That the wickednesse of man was great in the Earth and that every Imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evill continually Gen. 6.5 and it is the same which S. Paul before they became vaine in their Imaginations that is their desires and affections as was described before they were given to all Luxury and sensuality So that here was a large scope for Gods justice to punish and the temporal punishment of this world Death by drowning was vehemently called for by the sins of those men who lived in that Age without any addition of false worship I therefore conclude for that first age in the first sense in respect of the God they worshipped there was none but the right God worshipt in the world but in regard of the second sense the manner of worship in their Religion to him unlesse these Oblations before spoke of we find nothing recorded before the Floud that is necessary to be assented to Sect. 4. For both these we cannot conceive that this Religion so formed was founded upon the Faith c. For although we may justly think that men who have either by an Innate principle or else by reason knowledge that there is a GOD of an infinite excellency to whom out of duty they owe this divine Worship which is called Religion we may likewise think that it is impossible for their capacities to find out what worship would be pleasing to him unlesse he reveale it and therefore did act all they did in that worship by his direction yet because there is no mention
much lesse is man able to reach at that infinite excellency of God being many degrees much lower then God than any Creature is below man This is the knowledge a man may have of God if there be any thing else it must be that other way in which many Divines have trod besides these negatives of imperfections to conceive these things we call perfections to be in a much more infinitely excellent manner in him who is God So a husbandman may know that a learned man exceed's him in knowledge and that this knowledge is in divine naturall and morall things but what that knowledge of his is he cannot tell unlesse that learned man reveale it to him so it is in respect of God we know he hath excellencies beyond us that these consist in these or these eminencies but what is the nature of these eminencies no man can know but he to whom God reveale's them yet he cannot choose but desire to know them But it may here be said that God hath revealed these excellencies of his in his holy book he hath revealed something of himself in Scripture enough for a viaticum for a repâ—st by the way in a Riddle darkely behind a Cloud by which he believe's there are such things yet faith cannot make men absolutely perfect it is the support the foundation of things hoped for but Peregrinamur fide we must be strangers from happiness whilst we live in faith it is of things absent happinesse consists in the fruition the possession of what is present which cannot be so long as we are believing Faith give 's a man a nearer approach to happinesse then any thing else in this world and therefore a faithfull man can passe better through all the affronts of this world then any other because he knowe's there is a happiness for him elswhere that he is approaching to it his conversation is in heaven as S. Paul speaketh his thoughts are there his businesse and negotiation this world belong's not to him but yet he is going to his happinesse onely he is not there untill he put off his flesh and blood There are other revelations to prophetique persons by dreames visions and other apparitions by which God is pleased to reveale himself to some especiall Servants of his but these are of some particular things which cannot fill the vast understanding of man there are likewise extasies in some men which I guess have had by them fuller and greater manifestations of God of that kind was that Saint Paul speake's of in which were unutterable mysteries but these are very short enough to give a man a taste of heaven not satisfie him enough to make him long for more of the same and desire to be dissolved and be with Christ enough to give him an eagernesse of desire mixed with the Comfort of assurance He who hath happinesse as it must be full so it must be â—onstant without losse or feare of losing for although beasts are happy in the present enjoyment of their happy objects because they have no forecast of any future evill unlesse such little Sagacities and instincts of nature as dispose them to these or these provisions for the future yet man having foreseeing eyes alwayes looking at what will become of him hereafter cannot be happy in the present without forecast of the future what he shall be and therefore these temporary felicities cannot make him blessed Sect. 13. What I have said of the Understanding may be applyed to the Will for the Understanding give 's light to all the Will 's actions and the reasonable Will cannot possibly enjoy any thing without it Therefore as the Understanding cannot in this world fully apprehend the infinite good neither can the Will enjoy it the Will joye's in nothing which is not present and the Vnderstanding is that onely arme which embraceth this infinite good and the onely hand which layeth hold of it to convey it to the Will and therefore because the Understanding cannot fully and clearely receive this infinite Goodnesse neither Understanding nor Will neither of these most excellent faculties can be perfected in this World Sect. 14. And now after this tedious discourse from which I can yet hardly withdraw my Pen consider my Argument and see if in reason it may not yield a man as strong assurance as almost any natural Truth that there is a felicity after death Consider the most apparent truths which thy Reason can perswadâ— thee to of things unseen thou art â—ssured that all men in all the world are mortal and must dye ask the reason thou seest or â—earest that all here doe so where thou livest and from thence canst collect that death belong's to all mankind thou knowest that the fire burn's in the Indies because it hath a power of burning and an appetite to it wheresoever it is so I wâ—ll argue not from one Species or sort of things but from all the things in this world there is nothing in the world which hath an appetite not satisfiable a power without an adequate subject as Logicians speak therefore it must be in man in whom certainly there can be nothing in vain or imperfect so that the certainty of this is drawn from the most universal Principle that is in Nature and such a Principle which is as universally touched upon by Philosophers and School-men as any one whatsoever that Deus natura nihil faciunt frustra that frustra est potentia quae nunquam reducitur in actum which these powers should be if there were no felicity after this life because there can be none absolutely here Sect. 15. I know of but two things which can be objected here against this Conclusion and I will endeavour to satisfie them in order severally The first is that although man cannot enjoy the compleat full satisfaction of these powers in this life yet he may be happy in those little parcels of knowledge of God and his delight in that by confining his desire and curbing it in sapere ad sobrietatem as S. Paul speaketh and thus he will be happy here in this life I answer this may breed a moderate content but not a happiness Happiness is thâ—n which no more can be desired but there is no man know's so much of God in this life that he ought not to desire more because more is knowable for although in the fulness of happiness the whole blessed Vision is manifest in a glorious manner at one act and that enjoyed yet here we get it by piece-meal now one then another apprehension by parts and pieces and the Infiniteness of Divine perfections is such that no man's life applyed to nothing else can compass a full apprehension of it yea the further he goe's in this Journey the further he finde's himself at a loss and behind with knowledge therefore a man must not be content but strive for more knowledge or if he have some content yet this cannot be
exceed's him for placing happinesse as he doth in the enjoyment of this world's contentments Epicurus contemne's and despiseth death and will not allow it to be any evill and dispute's most excellently to prove it is not to be feared for saith he that is not to be feared which hurt 's not a true rule for those things are onely to be feared being absent which when they are present will hurt us Now saith he death hurt 's no man for when death come's man is not therefore not hurt by it It hurt 's neither the living nor the dead saith he not the living for whilst men live death is not not the dead for where death is man is not The force of this Argument is necessary because in all Injuries or hurts that come there must be these two Termes the thing hurting and that hurted but these can never be together death and man now herein he excell's Mr. Hobbes for whether Mr. Hobbes make's man's happinesse to consist in the enjoying the world or in a Complacencie or contentment with other men yet when he make's death so fearfull a thing as he doth it is in vaine for that man to look for happinesse who knowe's he must die when he shall lose this happinesse and he may dy this day and suddenly lose it by that which he and such men make their greatest evill death so that Epicurus and his Sect went beyond Mr. Hobbes and spake more justifiably out of these Principles then he did But Epicurus goe's on and deliver's how these sensuall pleasures are to be preserved by Frugality and temperance two vertues which I cannot find in Mr. Hobbes his whole booke which yet necessarily conduce to the preservation of this felicity Frugality that so the stock may be supported which must maintaine his pleasures Temperance which is a moderate use of them that so he may enjoy them the fuller Frugality preserve's the fuel Temperance the fire and as he speake's the enjoyment of a mans pleasure doth not consist in the use of luxurious superfluities but in the proportion the object hath to the appetite or the necessity of the man who enjoye's it So a hungry needy and necessitous man find's as great pleasure in a Crust of bread and a draught of water as any riotous person doth in his greatest excesse of dainties Now I read in Mr. Hobbes nothing of these two which are as necessary as any for the happinesse which sensuall pleasures can bring to a man and therefore although I thinke this Sect erred as much as any in his moralls yet I thinke likewise that these writers did thinke more truly then he wherein the goodnesse of these vertues of which he speake's consisteth that is making men happy and gave better reasons for what they said then he I have dwelt longer upon this Sect both because few men have described it aright which I have read and likewise because it containing as ill or worse opinions then any other hath suffered most justly under the generall Censure of Writers And although it being a doctrine which flattered our flesh and blood and thereby for a while got a great applause amongst men and the readers of this Philosophy like Ranters in divinity were much followed for a while yet in the passages of an age or two it was cryed down and I know not of any late writers who hath so nearly insinuated his worst opinions as this Author with whom I have to doe unlesse it be the Mahumetans who agree with the Epicureans in this that sensuall pleasure is the happinesse of man but here they differ the Mahumetans make that happinesse eteâ—nall hereafter but Epicurus with whom Mr. Hobbes seeme's to shake hands in this world onely Sect. 11. To discourse of the Stoicke Philosophy were needles because the common Authors which are read by the generality of men as Tully Seneca Epictetus doe manifestly shew how they placed humane happinesse in his owne breast and in his power which is the injoyment of himself without the disturbance of passions And to this end they imposed that impossible meanes of rooting out passions as living onely by reason which certainly if it could be done would make man's life like that of the Angels or his bodily life like his spirituall And these Cardinal vertues Prudence Justice Fortitude Temperance to be the supports of all this worke and that man's happinesse hath no dependence upon any thing without him these certainly carried with them much more perswasive reason to induce the end which these vertues aimed at then any thing Mr. Hobbes hath delivered Then for Aristotle who as appeare's in the tenth of his Ethickes Cap. 7. make's first the happinesse of man to consist in action and that in the noblest action of man which is of man's Understanding then in the excellentest Act of his Understanding which is Contemplation and last of all in the perfectest act of Contemplation which is the Contemplation of God I will not discourse his reasons which were worthy his writing this way A man may be happy alone without any reference to a Common-wealth yea the businesse of publique affaires would but hinder and distract this and throughout that book these vertues are taught in relation of this chief Good of man his happinesse in which he may well rest and seek no further but in his Politiques he shewe's how the same vertues conduce to the publike Mr. Hobbes therefore was much to blame when he in generall passed so weake though cruell a Censure upon the universality of morall Philosophers as to say they did not see wherein the goodnesse of these Vertues they wrote of consisted and his instance is as much to blame which is that Sect. 12. Those Writers place them in the mediocrity of passions as if not the Cause but the Degrees of daring made Fortitude or not the Cause but quantity of a gift made liberality He is mistaken almost in every word he writ First that morall vertue called Iustice is not in the passions nor in any thing thâ—t hath not reason So I may say by prudence nor doe Philosophers say it is nor are many of the lawes of nature as he calle's them written in these inferiour faculties but in the superiour nor doe these men who write of these things so foolishly discourse of those vertues whose nature is busied about the moderating of passions as if there were no more to doe but to bridle a mans passions but then finding it necessary for the attayning man's happinesse in this World that men's passions must be curbed without which like an unruly horse these passions will transport a man to a thousand inconveniencies and not be governed by Reason but runne away with it these vertuous habits subdue those passions that they act so far and no farther then prudence and right Reason shall direct them so that mens passions facilitated by Custome to the yoke are made to stop turne or move