Selected quad for the lemma: nature_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
nature_n contain_v law_n moral_a 2,485 5 9.8922 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A41307 Observations concerning the original and various forms of government as described, viz. 1st. Upon Aristotles politiques. 2d. Mr. Hobbs's Laviathan. 3d. Mr. Milton against Salmatius. 4th. Hugo Grotius De jure bello. 5th. Mr. Hunton's Treatise of monarchy, or the nature of a limited or mixed monarchy / by the learned Sir R. Filmer, Barronet ; to which is added the power of kings ; with directions for obedience to government in dangerous and doubtful times. Filmer, Robert, Sir, d. 1653. 1696 (1696) Wing F920; ESTC R32803 252,891 546

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

which Natural Reason appoints all men to use is the Law of Nations saith Theophilus in the Text of the Civil Law and in the second Book of the Instit cap. 1. Jus Naturae is confounded with Jus Gentium As the Civilians sometimes confound and sometimes separate the Law of Nature and the Law of Nations so other-whiles they make them also contrary one to the other By the Law of Nature all men are born free Jure naturali omnes liberi nascuntur But Servitude is by the Law of Nations Jure Gentium Servitus invasit saith Vlpian And the Civil Law not only makes the Law of Nature and of Nations contrary but also will have the Law of Nations contrary to it self War saith the Law was brought in by the Law of Nations Ex jure gentium introducta bella and yet the Law of Nations saith Since Nature hath made us all of one Kindred it follows it is not lawful for one man to lye in wait for another Cùm inter nos cognitionem quandam natura constituit consequens est hominem homini insidiari nefas esse saith Florentinus Again the Civil Law teacheth that from the Law of Nature proceeds the Conjunction of man and woman the Procreation and Education of Children But as for Religion to God and Obedience to Parents it makes it to be by the Law of Nations To touch now the Canon Law we may find in one place that men are governed either by the Law of Nature or by Customs Homines reguntur Naturali jure aut moribus The Law of Nations they call a Divine Law the Customs a humane Law Leges aut divinae sunt aut humanae divinae naturâ humanae moribus constant But in the next place the Canon Law makes Jus to be either Naturale aut Civile aut Gentium Though this Division agree in Terms with that of Vlpian in the Civil Law yet in the Explication of the Terms there is Diversity for what one Law makes to belong to the Law of Nature the other refers to the Law of Nations as may easily appear to him that will take the Pains to compare the Civil and Canon Law in these Points A principal Ground of these Diversities and Contrarieties of Divisions was an Error which the Heathens taught that all things at first were common and that all men were equal This mistake was not so heinous in those Ethnick Authors of the Civil Laws who wanting the Guide of the History of Moses were fain to follow Poets and Fables for their Leaders But for Christians who have read the Scriptures to dream either of a Community of all things or an Equality of all Persons is a Fault scarce pardonable To salve these apparent Contrarieties of Community and Property or Equality and Subjection the Law of Jus Gentium was first invented when that could not satisfie to mend the matter this Jus Gentium was divided into a Natural Law of Nations and an Humane Law of Nations and the Law of Nature into a Primary and a Secondary Law of Nature Distinctions which make a great sound but edifie not at all if they come under Examination If there hath been a time when all things were common and all men equal and that it be otherwise now we must needs conclude that the Law by which all things were common and men equal was contrary to the Law by which now things are proper and men subject If we will allow Adam to have been Lord of the World and of his Children there will need no such Distinctions of the Law of Nature and of Nations For the Truth will be that whatsoever the Heathens comprehended under these two Laws is comprised in the Moral Law That the Law of Nature is one and the same with the Moral may appear by a Definition given by Grotius The Law of Nature saith he is the Dictate of Reason shewing that in every Action by the agreeing or disagreeing of it with natural Reason there is a moral Honesty or Dishonesty and consequently that such an Action is commanded or forbidden by God the Author of Nature I cannot tell how Grotius would otherwise have defined the Moral Law And the Canon Law grants as much teaching that the Law of Nature is contained in the Law and the Gospel Whatsoever ye will that men do c. Mat. 7. The Term of Jus Naturae is not originally to be found in Scripture for though T. Aquinas takes upon him to prove out of the 2. to the Romans that there is a Jus Naturae yet St. Paul doth not use those express Terms his words are The Gentiles which have not the Law do by Nature the things contained in the Law these having not the Law are a Law unto themselves He doth not say Nature is a Law unto them but they are a Law unto themselves As for that which they call the Law of Nations it is not a Law distinct much less opposite to the Law of Nature but it is a small Branch or Parcel of that great Law for it is nothing but the Law of Nature or the moral Law between Nations The same Commandment that forbids one Private man to rob another or one Corporation to hurt another Corporation obliges also one King not to rob another King and one Commonwealth not to spoil another the same Law that enjoyns Charity to all men even to Enemies binds Princes and States to shew Charity to one another as well as private Persons And as the Common or Civil Laws of each Kingdom which are made against Treason Theft Murder Adultery or the like are all and every one of them grounded upon some particular Commandment of the moral Law so all the Laws of Nations must be subordinate and reducible to the moral Law The Law of Nature or the moral Law is like the main Ocean which though it be one entire Body yet several Parts of it have distinct Names according to the diversity of the Coasts on which they border So it comes to pass that the Law of Nations which is but a part of the Law of Nature may be sub-divided almost in infinitum according to the Variety of the Persons or Matters about which it is conversant The Law of Nature or the divine Law is general and doth only comprehend some Principles of Morality notoriously known of themselves or at the most is extended to those things which by necessary and evident Inference are consequent to those Principles Besides these many other things are necessary to the well governing of a Common-wealth and therefore it was necessary that by Humane Reason something more in particular should be determined concerning those things which could not be defined by Natural Reason alone hence it is that Humane Laws be necessary as Comments upon the Text of the Moral Law and of this Judgment is Aquinas who teacheth that necessitas legis humanae manat ex eo quod Lex naturalis vel Divina generalis est solum
complectitur quaedam principia morum per se nota ad summum extenditur ad ea quae necessaria evidenti elatione ex illis principiis consequuntur praeter illa verò multa alia sunt necessaria in republica ad ejus rectam Gubernationem ideo necessarium fuit ut per humanam rationem aliqua magis in particulari determinarentur circa ea quae per solam rationem naturalem definiri non possunt Ludo. Molin de Just. Thus much may suffice to shew the Distractions in and between the Civil and Common Laws about the Law of Nature and Nations In the next place we are to consider how Grotius distinguisheth these Laws To maintain the Community of things to be Natural Grotius hath framed new Divisions of the Law of Nature First in his Preface to his Books De Jure Belli Pacis he produceth a Definition of the Law of Nature in such doubtful obscure and reserved Terms as if he were diffident of his Undertaking Next in his first Book and first Chapter he gives us another Distribution which differs from his Doctrine in his Preface In his Preface his Principle is that the Appetite of Society that is to say of Community is an Action proper to man Here he presently corrects himself with an Exception that some other Creatures are found to desire Society and withal he answers the Objections thus that this Desire of Society in brute Beasts comes from some external Principle What he means by Principium intelligens extrinsecum I understand not nor doth he explain nor is it material nor is the Argument he useth to any purpose for admitting all he saith to be true yet his Principle fails for the Question is not from what Principle this Desire of Society proceeds in Beasts but whether there be such a Desire or no. Besides here he takes the Appetite of Society and Community to be all one whereas many live in Society which live not in Community Next he teacheth that the keeping of Society custodia Societatis which in a rude manner saith he we have now expressed is the fountain of that Law which is properly so called I conceive by the Law properly so called he intends the Law of Nature though he express not so much And to this appetite of Sociable Community he refers Alieni Abstinentia but herein it may be he forgets himself for where there is Community there is neither meum nor tuum nor yet alienum and if there be no alienum there can be no alieni abstinentia To the same purpose he saith that by the Law of Nature men must stand to bargains Juris naturae sit stare pactis But if all things were common by Nature how could there be any bargain Again Grotius tells us that from this signification of the Law there hath flowed another larger which consists saith he in Discerning what delights us or hurts us and in judging how things should be wisely distributed to each one This latter he calls the looser Law of Nature the former Jus Sociale the Law of Nature strictly or properly taken And these two Laws of Nature should have place saith he though men should deny there were a a God But to them that believe there is a God there is another Original of Law beside the Natural coming from the free Will of God to the which our own Vnderstanding tells us we must be subject Thus have I gathered the Substance of what is most material concerning the Law of Nature in his Preface If we turn to the Book it self we have a division of the Law into Jus Naturale Voluntarium Divinum Humanum Civile Latiùs patens Seu Jus Gentium Arctiùs patens Seu Paternum Seu Herile In the Definition of Jus Naturale he omits those Subtleties of Jus Naturae propriè dictum and quod laxius ita dicitur which we find in his Preface and gives such a plain Definition as may fitly agree to the Moral Law By this it seems the Law of Nature and the Moral Law are one and the same Whereas he affirmeth That the Actions about which the Law of Nature is conversant are lawful or unlawful of themselves and therefore are necessarily commanded or forbidden by God by which mark this Law of Nature doth not only differ from humane Law but from the Divine voluntary Law which doth not command or forbid those things which of themselves and by their own nature are lawful or unlawful but makes them unlawful by forbidding them and due by commanding them In this he seems to make the Law of Nature to differ from Gods Voluntary Law whereas in God Necessary and Voluntary are all one Salmasius de Vsuris in the twentieth Chapter condemns this Opinion of Grotius though he name him not yet he means him if I mistake not In the next place I observe his saying That some things are by the Law of Nature not propriè but reductivè and that the Law of Nature deals not only with those things which are beside the Will of Man but also with many things which follow the act of Man's Will so Dominion such as is now in Vse mans Will brought in but now that it is brought in it is against the Law of Nature to take that from thee against thy will which is in thy Dominion Yet for all this Grotius maintains That the Law of Nature is so immutable that it cannot be changed by God himself He means to make it good with a Distinction Some things saith he are by the Law of Nature but not simply but according to the certain state of things so the common use of things was natural as long as Dominion was not brought in and Right for every man to take his own by Force before Laws were made Here if Grotius would have spoken plain instead of but not simply but according to the certain State of Things he would have said but not immutably but for a certain Time And then this Distinction would have run thus Some things are by the Law of Nature but not immutably but for a certain time This must needs be the naked Sense of his Distinction as appears by his Explication in the Words following where he saith That the common Vse of Things was natural so long as Dominion was not brought in Dominion he saith was brought in by the will of man whom by this Doctrine Grotius makes to be able to change that Law which God himself cannot change as he saith He gives a double ability to man first to make that no Law of Nature which God made to be the Law of Nature And next to make that a Law of Nature which God made not for now that Dominion is brought in he maintains it is against the Law of Nature to take that which is in another man's dominion Besides I find no Coherence in these Words By the Law of Nature it was right for every man to take his own by force before Laws