Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
scripture_n	dominion_n	method_n	paternal_a	96	3	17.3248	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

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

evident I think to be apprehended that the same rights and consequencies of Soveraignty which belongs to a Supreme by Institution do not belong to one by Conquest CHAP. XVI SECT I. Mr. Hobbs his method censured his contradictions noted Of the right of Dominion from Generation Paternal Dominion not flowing from the consent of children Infants cannot consent Paternal Dominion flowing from the Laws of God and Nature Scripture vilified by Mr. Hobbs IN the next Paragraph he comes to treat of Dominion Paternal how attained as the Margin directs My first note shall be upon his method He had treated in the precedent Cap. of Dominion by Institution then the Title of this Cap was of Dominion Paternal and Despotical In all the preceding part of this Cap. he hath handled only Dominion by acquisition and that without consideration of what he had writ before he defined to be such as is got by force Now he confutes himself in the first words of this Paragraph which are Dominion is acquired two ways either by Generation or by Conquest That by Generation I am sure cannot be called by force therefore either his definition of acquired Dominion is not good or that Dominion by Generation is not an acquired Dominion He proceeds The right of Dominion by Generation is that which the Parent hath over his Children and is called Paternal A high Mystery expounded that the Government of Parents should be called Paternal But his next words confute this immediately which are And is not so derived from the Generation as if therefore the Parent had Dominion over his Child because he begot him How then can Paternal Dominion be acquired by Generation which he immediately before affirmed when he said Dominion is acquired two ways by Generation and by Conquest but saith he from the Childs consent either express or by other sufficient Arguments declared Let us consider this and examine what consent a Child can give in his Infancy certainly no otherwise then a Pig or any Infant Beast he can wish for a Teat and cry for it when he lacks it and be satisfied with any that is offered If this Doctrine of his were true the Child did chuse his Nurse who gave him suck not the Mother who gave him being At the first in his Infancy he cannot distinguish betwixt his Parents and therefore can have no election nor consent I mean rational consent to one more then another to be his Guardian yet the Parent hath Dominion over that Child and like other Governours shall give an account one day of that Stewardship and of his behaviour towards him Let us go on and observe the Child grown up with a smattering of Reason Can any man think that the Parent should not govern that Child who hath not prudence enough to govern himself but much passion to make him unruly and therefore needs to have a Governour Well let us go further and bring the Child to one and twenty years of age when he is generally thought fit to govern his estate if he have any yet even then until his death he owes obedience to his Parents and they have Dominion over him whether he consent or not And whosoever denies this denies not only Scripture which is nothing with Mr. Hobbs but even Humanity which hath expressed her tenderness of this duty in all Ages as will appear ●ore fully hereafter SECT II. Mr. Hobbs his Chain of contradictions discovered BUt good Reader observe with me how many contradictions are crouded together in one page First an acquired Dominion is by force and that contradicted because that a Dominion is acquired by Generation which is not a forced but a most natural act and that is again contradicted because not Generation but consent gives the Dominion and this which he calls consent is not such a thing as belonged to an acquired Dominion for that consent is only a consent to that Government for fear of the Conquerour but this consent is for love of his own accommodation or out of that reverential awe which Children have to their Parents and this is in nothing like the other And surely if it participated of either it most resembled the consent which he imagines to be in an instituted Commonwealth and therefore not to be ranked under the Acquisite SECT III. Mr. Hobbs his constant abuse of Scripture noted The command of the Mother to be obeyed in subordination to the Father in whom the obedience of children is terminated His iterated quarrelling with Scripture Rules of Government to be proportionable to general emergencies BUt let us go on with him for saith he As to the Generation God hath ordained to man a helper and there be always two that are equally Parents The Dominion therefore over the Child should belong equally to them both and he be equally subject to both which is impossible for no man can obey two Masters To begin where he ends He doth abuse Scripture wheresoever it crosseth his way as it doth very often No man can serve two Masters but in every Family a man serves a Master and a Mistress There cannot be two Supremes But in an Oeconomical Dominion the Man is above the Woman and if the Woman command contrary to the Man the Mans command is to be obeyed and the Woman her self is to be obedient to the Man the Mother to the Father I but saith he they are equally principles of Generation therefore if the right of Dominion be an appendant to Generation it must equally belong to them both I will not dispute the nature of Generation which Philosophers and Physitians have abundantly done but suppose that in the case it exacts an obedience to them both yet with a subordination to the Father which must clearly appear in this because the Woman her self must be obedient to the Father as will appear in the two first principles of Generation Adam and Evah God gave them that Law Thy desire shall be to thy Husband and he shall rule over thee Gen. 3.16 Now then if the man rules the woman then in the subordination of Government she cannot equally share in that Dominion with him who is Governour of her So that although the Child hath from his Generation two persons to obey yet this obedience is terminated in one the Father who is Supreme to whom the Mother also is subject He proceeds And whereas some have attributed the Dominion to the man only as being of the m●re excellent Sex they misreckon it for there is not always that difference of strength and prudence between the man and the woman as that the right can be determined without war Thus this Author hath a spight to Scripture and hopes with a flash of wicked wit to divert men from that due observance which they ought to have of those duties which are there required or at the least to diminish that rational obedience which men should give to it It may be some do attribute the obedience to the man only out