to the Scribes and Pharisees because they sit in Moses chair But then Christ should have wronged the Roman Governors in whom he acknowledged kingly power by paying tribute and by submitting himself to be judged by them Their sitting then in Moses chair doeth not imply kingly power but their power in expounding the law of Moses And it is as weak an inference to say that Christ is not King of his Church Because he would not divide the inheritance between the two brethren or because he came to save the world not to judge it For dividing of inheritances belonging not to Christs spiritual kingdom neither was it the end of Christs comming to judge that is to condemn the world for the Greek word signifieth both but to save it for his name was Jesus a Saviour because he came to save his people from their sins And no less weak is this reason The time of Christs preaching is called regeneration therefore it is no kingdom Regeneration is not the time but the fruit and effect of Christs preaching and so far is regeneration from being inconsistent with Christs Kingdom that our Saviour tells us in plain tearms except we be regenerate we cannot enter into the Kingdom of God Iohn 3. In his two and fortty chapter he broacheth a strange wheemsie concerning the blessed Trinity in saying That God who hath been represented that is personated thrice to wit by Moses by Christ and by the Apostles may properly enough be said to be three Persons as represented by the Apostles the holy Spirit by which they spake is God as represented by Christ the Son is that God as represented by Moses and the high Priests the Father is that God Hence the names of Father Son and Holy Ghost in the signification of the Godhead are never used in the old Testament for they are Persons that is they have their names from representing which could not be till divers men had represented Gods Person c. Here is strange stuffe For first The word Person in the Trinity was never taken by Divines for a Visard a personating or representation but for a peculiar way of subsisting therefore by the Greek Church the word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} was used till wanton and idle wits began to â—aise differences about that word and then {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} was used answering to the Latine word Persona and is defined thus {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} by Iustin Martyr and Damâ—sâ—en an eternal or unbeginning manner of an eternal existing so that in the same essence there is a threefold way of subsisting The Fathers existence is from himself the Sons from the Father the Spirits from both so in man there is the soul the intellect and will these three are but one essence yet differently subsisting the soul of it self the intellect from the soul and the wilâ— from both Secondly if personating or representing makes the persons in the Trinity it will follow that there have been and are more then three persons nay I may truly say innumerable for God hath been represented not onely by Moses but by Iosuah also and his successors by Aaron the high Priest and all his successors by all Judges also and Kings who are therefore called gods there must be then as many persons as there have been personatings or representations and in this respect the Trinity may be called a Legion or rather innumerable persons Thirdly Why should God be called the Holy Spiâ—â—â— as he was represented by the Apostles rather then by being personated by Moses or by Christ his reason is because the Apostles spoke by the Spirit I pray did not Moses and Christ speak by the same Spirit St. Peter saith that the holy men of old spake as the Spirit moved them Or why is God by him called Father as he was represented by Moses rather then as he was represented by Christ Was there more Paternity in Moses then in any other man or in Christ who by Isaiah is called the everlasting Father Or why is he called Father as personated by the high Priests Fâ—uâ—thly It is untrue what he saith that the nâ—â—es of Father Son and Holy Ghost are never used in the old Testament For Psal. 89. which contains not only a prophesie of Solomâ—n but also of Christ it is thus written He shall cry unto me thou art my Father Psal. 89. 26. and Isa. 9. he is called the everlasting Father So Psal 2. Christ is called Son Thou art my Son this day have I begotten thee And Isa. 9. For unto us a Son is given So the third Person or Spirit is mentioned The Spirit of God moved upon the Waters Gen. 1. Now that this was no winde as some have thought is plain because air was created afterwards and this Spirit is said to move or by moving to cherish the waters but the winde is an enemy to the waters both in regard of its siccity and impâ—tuosity neither is the winde ever called the Spirit of God as we have shewed already So Ioel. â— I will pour my Spirit upon all flesh And Zach â—â— I will pour upon the house of David and the Inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication But he saith that these names are not used in the signification of the God-head but he is deceived for when the child Christ is called the everlasting Father by Isaiah this cannot be in signification of his humanity for how can a little child be an everlasting Father but in respect of his God-head He saith Cap. 42. If the Supreme King have not his regal power in this world by what authority can obedience be required to his Officers This is not to be doubted but the Supreme King hath his regal power in this world for this cause he tells his Apostles after his resurrection That all power was given to him in heaven and in earth therefore he sends them abroad into all nations of this world teaching them to observe all things which he had commanded them Matth. 28. If then he hath regal power in the world why should not his Officers be obeyed 'T is true Christs Kingdom is not of this world will it therefore follow that it is not in this world For if in this world he subdueth the nations to his Scepter by the sword of his word if he leads captivity captive if he giveth gifts unto men if he prescribe laws and punisheth the offendors shall we not say he hath Kingly power in this world if the Kings and Potentates of the earth have submitted their scepters to his Heraulds have received his yoak and have placed his cross upon their crowns in sign of subjection is he not their Supreme King whose dominion here is called the Kingdom of grace his other Kingdom in the next world shal be the kingdom of glory which M. Hobs confounds with this of grace as for the coercive or commanding power of Ministers which he
truth in things as well as in words for entity can be no more without truth then the fire without heat or the Sun without light And when he saith that Geometry is the only science which God hath left into man He is injurious to Arithmatick whose principles are no less certain firm indemonstrable and evident then those of Geometry He enveighs much against book learning but in this he speaks without book for he calls in derision school knowledge Pedantry Pedantry is that knowledge which is taught to young Scollers and indeed the best books are read to them and they are instructed in the knowledge of the best things both in divine and humane litterature being fit that new vessels be seasoned with the best liquor Quo â—emel est imbuta c. So the preceps of divinity and philosophy to this profound Rabbi whose learning passeth all understanding are but Pedantry but in speaking against the Schools he fouls his own nest for whence had he the knowledge which he now rejects but out of them as for his own supposed learning which he hath without them it is such as will never be thought worthy to be called Pedantry nor shall it ever be honoured to be taught in Schools nor shall Aristotle Plato Cicero Thomas and other eminent men need to fear lest Mr. Hobbs's whimsies and dreams thrust their solid and grave learning out of doors He accounteth these subsequent assersions absurd namely That faith is infused or inspired when nothing can be poured or breathed into any thing but body and that extention is body c. I would know how saith being a gift from without and not born with us should enter into us If not by inspiration or infusion And if nothing can be poured or breathed but body then it must follow that Adam's soul was a body for it was breathed into Adam and that the Holy Ghost is a body for he is said to be poured upon all flesh by the prophets Ioel and Zachariah but if by the spirit be understood spiritual vertues or graces then in Mr. Hobbs his judgment this will be counted an absurd assertion but I hope he hath more Religion in him then to think the Holy Scripture speaks absurdly neither is there any absurdity in calling extension a body seeing not a substantial but a mathematical body is meant to distinguish it from superficies and line He will not have colour to be in the body nor sound in the air Where then is colour which is its subject is it in a spirit I know no other subject in which it can be inherent except one of these two If there be any there name it and if sound be not in the air how come we to hear it He should do well to prove his new assertions as wel as to deny the old so he holds it absurd to say That a living creature is a genus or general thing But the contrary is plain for this proposition man is a living creature were absurd because identical if living creature were not a general but a particular thing it must also follow that a horse were not a living creature or that a man and a horse were the same particular thing seeing he admits of no general thing any one may see here whether the ancient and wise Philosophers or this new Misosopher be most guilty of absurdities neither is it absurd to say That the nature of a thing is its definition Seeing man the thing defined is the same with rational creature which is his definition Nor is there absurdity in this speech Mans command is his will seeing there is no other commanding faculty in man but his will neither are Metaphors Tropes and other Rhetorical figures absurd speeches except he will accuse the Holy Ghost of absurdity who useth them so frequently in scripture and if these words Hypostatical Transubstantiate c. be absurd words let him impart better and more significant terms and we shall think him though not a good Philosopher yet a good Grammarian In his sixth chapter he makes animal and voluntary motion the same but absurdly for the motion of spirits is voluntary not animal and the motion of men in their sleep is animal not voluntary for many in their sleep speak those words and perform those actions of which they are both ashamed and afraid when they are awakened if to speak were an animal motion as he saith then beasts could speak for they are animals He saith That which we neither desire nor hate we are said to contemn But this is not so for I neither desire nor hate the Kingdom of Persia and yet I contemn it not whatsoever I hate I contemn but I contemn many things which I hare not When he distinguisheth Religion from Superstition I hear the voice of Leviathan not of a Christian For saith he Fear of power invisible feigned by the minde or from tales publâ—ckly allowâ— is Religion not allowed Superstition and when the power imagined is truly such as we imagine true Religion It seems then both Religion and Superstition are grounded upon tales and imagination onely they differ in this that tales publickly allowed beget Religion not allowed Superstition but what will he say of the Gentiles among them tales were publickly allowed were they therefore religious and not superstitious and is Religion grounded upon fiction or imagination even true Religion I thought that faith and not imagination had been the substance and ground of things not seen that the just live by faith not by imagination that by faith we are saved by faith we are justified by faith we overcom the world not by fancy fiction or imagination We must mend the Creed if Mr. Hobbs his religion be true and insteed of saying I beleeve in God we must say I imagine or feign in my minde an invisible power In this also he contradicts himself for if the power be invisible how can it be imagined seeing as he saith before imagination is onely of things perceived by the sense and it is so called from the image made in seeing He will not have the will to be a rational appetite because then there could be no voluntary acts against reason But the School doctrine stands firm that the will is a rational appetite and that there can be no voluntary acts against reason because the object of the will is a known good for we cannot will or affect what we know not and knowledge in man is never without reason which regulates the will besides each man in willing aimes at an end which cannot be attained withous its medium nor this ordered without reason either true or apparent Part 1. cap. 7. He seems to make faith and opinion the same thing when he saith That in belief are two opinions one of the saying of the man the other of his vertâ—e but in this he makes the Christian mans happiness very incertain and builds it upon a tottering foundation for opinion is meerly
that it was a winde not the holy Spirit which in the Creation moved on the waters that the dove and fierytongues may be called Angels that Christ hath no spiritual kingdom here on earth that he did not cast out devils but onely cured madness that Satan did not enter into Iudas that we may dissemble in matter of religion that we may disobey Christ and his Apostles without sin Such and much more like stuff and smoke doth this Leviathan send out of his nostrils as out of a boyling pot or caldron Job 41. 〈◊〉 This is the sperma caete or spawn which this whale casteth out a whale I say that hath not swallowed up Ionah the prophet but Cerinthus the heretick and vomited up the condemned opinions of the old hereticks and chiefly the Anthropomorphits Sabellians Nestorians Saduceans Arabeans Tacians or Eucratits Manichies Mahumetans and others for in holding life eternal to be onely on earth he is a Cerinthian and Mahumetan in giving to God corporiety he is an Anthropomorphit Manichean Tertullianist and Audaean in holding the three Persons to be distinct names and essences represented by Moses Christ and the Apostles he is a Sabellian Montanist Aetian and Priscillianist in saying that Christ personated God the Son he is a Nestorian giving him two personalities for no person can personate himself â—id denying spirits he is a Saducean in making the soul to rest with the body till the resurrection he is an Arabian in making the soul of man corporeal he is a Luciferian by putting a period to hell torments he is an Originist by teaching dissimulation in religion he is a Tacian or Encratit in making God the cause of injustice or sin he is a Manichee in slighting Christs miracles he is a Iew and in making our natural reason the word of God he is Socinian In discovering of these errors I quarrel not with Mr. Hobbs but with his book which not onely I but many more who are both learned and judicious men look upon as a piece dangerous both to Government and Religion All the hurt I wish him is true illumination a sanctified heart and Christian sobriety that he may retract what is amiss And so I bid him and thee farewel A. R. In doctissimum marinae belluae domitorem AL ROSSEUM ALcides clava Lernaeum perculit hydram Sed tu Ros calamo monstra marina dâ—mas Quantum Leviathan superavit viribus hydram Tantum Ros superas Amphytrioniadem D. C. The Preface BEing desired by some of my friends a while ago to peruse Mr. Hobbs his Leviathan and deliver my opinion of it I have done accordingly I finde him a man of excellent parts and in this book much gold and withal much dross he hath mingled his wine with too much water and imbittered his pottage with too much Coloquintida there are some of his positions which may prove of dangerous consequence to green heads and immature judgments who look no farther then the superficies or outside of things thinking all to be gold that glisters and all wholesome food that is pleasing to the tast under green grass lurch oftentimes snakes and serpents such as Euridice perceive not till they be stung to death I have therefore not to wrong Mr. Hobbs but to vindicate the truth for in Republica libera oportet linguas esse liberas adventured upon his Leviathan which I do not finde so fierce and tâ—rrible as he in Job that people should be cast down at the sight of him this may be drawn out with a Hook and held even with a single bridle I will onely touch such passages and not all but some as deserve Animadversions wherein I will be both brief and modest aiming rather at verity then victory though he slights all learned men as Iob's Leviathan doth all humane strength and prideth himself too much in his scales LEVIATHAN Drawn out with an HOOK OR ANIMADVERSIONS UPON Mr HOBB's Book Called LEVIATHAN By ALEXANDER ROSS IN His introduction he calls Nature The art whereby God hath made and governs the World God made not the world by Nature for Nature had no beeing till God made it and when he made it it was neither the exemplary nor adjuvant cause of the creation the world could not be made by that which had no beeing till it was made and when it was made it was nothing else but the form and matter of things the one being the active the other the passive nature and both but parts of the universe if again by nature that we may make a favourable construction of his phrase he meaneth the ordinary power of God the world was not made thus by his ordinary power he governs it but by his extraordinary power he made it which power is never called natural but miraculous neither again is Nature Art as he calls it though both be principles because Nature is an internal Art an external principle I say external in respect of essence though it may be internal in regard of site albeit Art as it is an habit and in the minde of the Artificer is altogether external but take it for the effect of Art it may be internal in the thing made by Art as may be seen in the motions of a watch He gives us a bad definition of life when he saith Life is but the motion of limbs for life is not motion but the cause of motion there may be life in the limbs when there is no motion as in sleep and in histerical women and there may be motion in the limbs without life as when they are moved violently by some external mover and there is life where there be no limbs at all as in the soul and there is motion where there is no life at all as in a wooden leg. In the first chapter he tells us That the cause of sense is the external object which presseth the organ either immediately as in the tast and touch or imediately as in the other senses The object indeed is the cause both material and efficient of sensation but not of sense that is of the act of seeing but not of the faculty the soul is the cause of this neither doth the object press immediately upon the organ of tast or touch but â—mediately for the organ of tast is the nervous part of the tongue the medium is the spungy flesh and salival humidity for the dry tongue tasteth not the organ of tact is the nerve the medium is the flesh and skin called Epidemis But when he says that seeming or fansie is that which men call sense He makes deception and sense one thing for quod videtur non est what seems to be hath no beeing therefore in Euripides mad Orestes is counselled by his sister to be quiet because saith she {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} thou seest none of those things which thou supposeth thou seeth or knowest sense then is not fancy for what we fancy we see not but seem to see
like the most excellent men but rather like to God himself Latius regnes avidum dâ—â—ando spiritum quam si Lybiam remotis Gadibus jungas c. What availed it Alexander to conquer the world and not to conquer himself to be a slave to his vices and not subject to his laws And I pray why should not a Prince be as well subject to his own laws as to his oaths covenants and promises there is nothing so honorable for a King as to keep his word and to observe the laws which he not onely made but by oath and promise tied himself to obey And surely this is the very law of nature which as Mr. Hobbs saith is divine and cannot by any man or common-wealth be abrogated Neither is there any inconvenience to set the law as a Judge above the Prince for as Aristotle tells us Polit. l. 3. c. 11. The law where it is plain and perspicuous ought to beat rule because without it no King norâ— Common-wealth can govern And secondly Because the law is just not subject to partiality passion and affection as Princes and other men are and indeed Princes should be so far from disobeying their own laws that they should be the life and soul of the law which of it self is but a dead letter therefore the common saying of that good Emperor Aurelius was Rex viva Lex No Common-wealth can be happy or continue long but where the Prince is as well subject to the law as the People his example will move them to obedience Nec sic inflectere sensus humanosâ— edicta valent ac vita regentis therefore the counsel of Pittaâ—us was good Let not them break the law who make the Law parâ—to legi quisquis legem sanxerit Cap. 29. He is angry with those who say That every private man hath a property in his goods Among the Turks indeed no private man hath any property at all under Christian Princes private men live more happily who enjoy a property yet not simply absolute if we consider that the Prince hath a right to our goods in cases of necessity as in his own and Countries defence and such like cases in this regard no man is born for himself nor hath any man an absolute property in his own life which he ought when occasion urgeth lay down for his Country Dulce decorum pro patria mori therefore Plato saith well That our Country requires a share in our birth the property then of the subject excludeth not the Princes right in cases of necessity but onely his arbitrary power Hence are these sayings Omnia rex imperio possidet singuli dominio Again Ad reges potestas omnium pertinet ad singulos proprietas The power here spoke of is meant of his just lawful not of his arbitrary tyrannical power In his thirty one chapter he makes a needless distinction between the objects of love hope and fear shewing That love hath reference to goodness hope and fear to power the subject of praise is goodness the subject of magnifying and blessing is power David knoweth no such distinction who in the 18. Psalm he loves God for his strength or power and in another Psalm he fears him for his mercy or goodness There is saith he mercy with thee therefore shalt thou be feared So he makes Gods goodness and not his power the object of his hope or belief Psal. 27. I hoped to see the goodness of God in the land of the living so likewise he praiseth God for his strength or power as well as for his goodness Praise him saith he for his mighty acts praise him for his excellent greatness Psal. 150. and in divers Psalms he magnifyeth God for his salvation as well as for his power Now when he saith that this name God is his own name of relation to us he is deceived for this is no name of relation at all his names of relation to us are Creator Redeemer Father Lord King Master c. In his third Part and Chap. 1. He saith That our natural reason is the undoubted word of God But I doubt Leviathan himself for all his great strength and power cannot make this good for Gods word is infallible so is not our natural reason which faileth in many things Gods word saith That a Virgin did conceive and bear a Son That God became man That our bodies shall rise again out of the dust but our natural reason saith this is impossible therefore when St. Paul preached the resurrection to the Athenians who wanted not natural reason enough they thought he had been mad How comes it that the Apostle saith The natural man understandeth not the things of Gods spirit And Christ tells Peter That flesh and blood that is natural reason had not revealed the mystery of his Divinity to him but his Father in Heaven and St. Paul saith That he received not the Gospel of man nor was he taught it but by the revelation of Jesus Christ Gal. 1. 12. And that he was not taught by mans wisdom but by the Holyâ— Ghost 1 Cor. 2. 13. How comes it I say that the Scripture speaks thus in villifying natural reason if it be the infallible word of God yea what need was there of any written word at all if our natural reason be that infallible word doubtless Adam by his fall lost much of his knowledge and natural reason Peter made use of his natural reason when he undertook to disswade Christ from going up to Ierusalem and there to suffer and die but Christ tells him that he favoured the things that be of men but not of God Mat. 16. 23. Our natural reason saith he cap. 32. Is a talent not to be folded up in the napkin of an implicit faith This I grant but I hope he will permit that our natural reason be subject to an explicit faith without which it is impossible to please God and not onely must our reason be subdued to faith but every imagination in us must be cast down and every high thing that exalteth it self against the knowledge of God and every thought must be brought into captivity to the obedience of Christ 2. Cor 10. 5. And whereas he saith cap 32. That our reason must be imployed in the purchase of justice peace and true religion If reason could procure or purchase these blessings the Gentiles of old the Jews and Mahumeâ—ans of latter years might have had them as well as we for in natural reason they are not inferior to us every one of these following the dictates of reason think they have the true Religion as for justice and peace they can never be purchased by reason but by â—aith therefore saith the Apostle being justified by faith we have peace with God through Jesus Christ our Lord but his reason by which he would prove that our natural reason is the undoubted word of God is very feeble for saith he There is nothing contrary to it in
the Arabian hereticks about two hundred and seventeen years after Christ these were called {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} that is mortall soules The Psychopanvychits of this age come somewhat neer these Arabians for though they hold not the death or dissolution of the soul yet they say it sleeps with the body in the grave this error therefore Mr. Hobbs is no novelty yet we are beholding to you that you will maintain nothing in it till the sword establish it and then you will be content to approve of it But what if the sword should dethrone Christ and set up Mahumet Must that sword be obeyed Concerning the place of hell and the nature of hell fire I will not dispute with you seeing the Scripture doth not punctually set down and in proper terms either the one or the other yet we may collect by some passages of holy writ that hell is in the lower parts of the world for when it speaks of hell it still names a discent or going down Core went down to hell the rich glutton in hell lifted up his eyes towards Abraham The â—eart is said to rise the out of bottomless â—it and yet stands with reason that the place of the damned should be as remote from heaven as may be which can be no where but in the bowels of the earth The names of {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} in Greek and infernus in Lutine intimate so much the exactest description we have of hell is in Isa. 30. 33. Tophet is ordained of old c. he hath made it deep and large the pile thereof is fire and much wood the breath of the Lord like a stream of Brimston doth kindle it The Angels are said to be cast down to hell 2. Pet. 2. 4. And Christ descended into hell all which shew that it is beneath us and this visible world Because the Prophets in the old Testament by allegorical terms describe the happiness of Christs Church under the Gospel therefore Mr. Hobbs will needs cap. 38. have these phrases to be understood of an earthly kingdom after the resurrection but the Prophets speak of pleasant rivers and fields of woods and groves of horses and charriots of eating and drinking and all kinde of earthly delights which if Mr. Hobbs understand literally I shall think his opinion relisheth too much of the Alcoran and that he reviveth again the heresie of Cerinthus which the Fathers of the Church hath long since exploded as being too gross and carnal and such as none will beleeve but carnal men Nulla modo ista possunt nisi a carnalibus credi as St. Austin saith l. 20. de civit c. 7. The kingdom of God consisteth not in meat and drink saith the Apostle the words that they speak are spirit and truth and are spiritually to be understood if we shall be like the Angels after the resurrection as our Saviour assures us what other delights can we have then but such as they enjoy now why should not heaven be the place of our abode as well as theirs they need not the earth to reside in now neither shall we then But he saith That the subjects of God should have any place higher then his foot-stool seemeth not sutable to the dignity of a King It may be so Mr. Hobbs of you speak of earthly Kings who pride themselves in their supposed greatness and stand upon punctilios but it is not so with the King of heaven who made no scruple to wash his servants feet and to tell them that they should sit with him upon twelve thrones to jude the twelve tribes of Israel And assures us that he will grant to him who overcometh to sit down with him in his throne even as I saith he also overcame and am set down with my Father in his throne Rev. 1. 21. And St. Iohn tells us that Christ hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father Rev. 1. 6. It will not then be unsutable to his dignity if we ascend higher then his footstool In his forty one chapter he tells us That the Kingdom of Christ is not to begin till the general resurrection What hath Christ been all this while a King without a Kingdom or hath his Church been all this time a people without a King sheep without a Shepherd a body without a head Are Christians in a worse condition then other people And is not Christ highly wronged who having conquered a kingdom with his blood and having got the victory over all his enemies is notwithstanding now 1652. years without his kingdom and must be without it till the general resurrection How can this stand that he should so many yeers since by his Apostles and their successors subdue so many nations to his obedience by that sharpe two edged sword of his mouth and yet all this while have no kingdom could Alexander in three yeers space subdue so many kindoms and Christ after so many hundred years be without his kingdom what is become of his rod of Iron by which he was to rule the stubborn Gentiles How can this stand that he ascended up on high led captivity captive and gave liberal gifts to men yea likewise hath prescribed divers laws ordinances hath distributed divers rewardsâ— and inflicted divers punishments and yet is no King he confesseth to Pilate that he was even at that time a King when he stood before him ready to suffer death for his subjects but withal acknowledgeth that his kingdom was not of this world and therefore refuseth to be an earthly king When Satan profferred him all the kingdoms of the world Matth. 4. And when the Jews sought to make him King he absented himself If he was a King in his humiliation shall he now be no King in his glory and exaltation Now Mr. Hobbs gives us a reason cap. 41. why Christs Kâ—ngdom begins not till the resurrection Because then he shall reward every man according to his work and this is to excute the office of a King This is a feeble reason for a King may be a King though he differ the rewards or punishments which his subjects have deserved Shall we say that David was not king because he did not reward Ioab Shimei and the sons of Barzillai according to their works but left that to his son Solomon both to reward Barzillai's sons for their good service to David in his affliction and to punish Iob with death for the murthering of Abner and Amasa and likewise Shimei for his railling against the king There is a time for all things even for punishments and rewards and if the differing of these do argue no king he may then as well say that God himself is no King who differred the drowning of the world one thouand six hundred years And the punishing of the Amorites four hundred years And so doth put off the rewarding of men till the world to come But he tells us That Christ ascribed kingly power
our Saviour did acknowledge by paying tribute and counselling to give to Caesar that which were Caesars He cap. 42 will not have excommunication to be a punishment but onely a denouncing of punishment that Christ shall inflict at the day of Judgement But I say that excommunication is not a bare denouncing but a real suffering of punishment and of such a punishment as is most grievous to wit a â— paration from Gods people and the benefits which they enjoy for if the Abstenti in the Prinâ—itive Church held it a great punishment to be debarred from the Sacrament for a whÃle how much more grievous is it to be cut off from the mystical body of Christ and to be excluded from the Communion of the Saints and of all the priviledges which they do now and shall hereafter enjoy He denieth cap. 42. that there is any spiritual Common-wealth among men in this world This he gronnds upon two reasons 1. because it is the same thing with the Kingdom of Christ which is not of this world Secondly There are no men on earth whose bodies are spiritual These reasons are very weak For first because a spiritual Common-wealth and Christs Kingdom are the same it will follow that there is a spiritual Common-wealth amongst men which is the Kingdom of grace here where Christ raigneth in the hearts of his faithful people which though it be not of this world yet it is in this world as I have shewed already And of this Kingdom our Saviour speaks when he saith The Kingdom of God is within you Luke 17. 21 Which consisteth in righteousness peace and joy in the holy Ghost Rom. 14. 17. Secondly To say that Christ hath not here a spiritual Common-wealth because mens bodies are not spiritual is ridiculous for Christs subjects here are spiritual though their bodies be corporeal because they are animated regulated directed by the spirit They are regenerated by the spirit John 3. They walk not after the flesh but after the spirit Rom. 8. The spirit helpeth their inâ—irmities and teacheth them to pray Rom. 8. The holy spirit dwelleth in them 2 Tim. 1. 14. God hath given them of his spirit 1 John 4. 13. They are sealed with the spirit of promise Ephes. 1. 13. They have the fruits of the spirit which are love joy peace long-suffering c. Gal. 5. 22. Therefore Christs subjects though they are here cloathed with flesh yet are called spiritual Gal 6. 1. Yoâ— which are spiritual restore such a one in the spirit of meekness These are distinguished froâ— carnal or natural men 1 Cor 3. 1. I could not speak to you brethren as to spiritual men but as to carnal So 1 Cor. 2. 14 15. The natural man perceiveth not the things of the spirit of God but he that is spiritual discerneth all things So their seed is spiritual 1. Cor. 9. 11. Their meat and drink is spiritual 1 Cor. 10. 3 4. Their songs are spiritual Eph. 5. 19. Their house is spiritual a Pet. 2. 5. And their sacrifice is spiritual 1 Pet. 2. 5. Can we say then that Christs Kingdom or Common-wealth as he calls it is not spiritual He cap. 42 â— will not have the members of a Common-weath to depend one of another but to cohere together They depend onely saith he on the Soveraign which is the soul on the Common-wealth But there is a dependence as well as a coherence in a dead body there is a coherence of members but no dependence in a living body there are both though the body depend on the soul it will not therefore follow that the members do not depend one of another for the hands and feet depend on the stomack to be â—ed by it and it depends on them to be defended provided and carried by them the like may be said of the other members So in a Common-wealthâ— the Soveraign depends on the people for assistance maintenance and defence they depend on him for counsel government and peace The members of the Common-wealth depend on the Clothyer for cloaths on the Husbandman for food on the Physition for health on the Divine for instruction on the Lawyer for counsel c. And these depend on each other Heresie saith he cap. 42. is nothing else but a private opinion obstinately maintained contrary to the opinion which the publick person bath commanded to be taught Hence an opinion publickly appointed to be taught cannot be heresie nor the Princes that authorise them hereticks It seems then by this definition that Arianiâ—m was onely an heresie whilâ—t it was maintained by Arius a private person but when it was anthorised publickly by the Arian Princes it was no more an heresie and so now not Arius but Athanasius that opposed it must be called an heretick by Mr. Hobbs contrary to the judgment of all learned men and the Church of God hitherto The great Turk and the Mahumetans who profess at this day the same damnable doctrine of Arius are not hereticks but the Christians within his dominions who are of another opinion these are your hereticks Mr. Hobbs by this your definition you may call Christ and his Apostles hereticks for they held doctrines contary to the traditions and opinions of the Scribes and Pharisees who as you say sat in Moyses chair It is not the person private or publick that makes an heretick but it is the doctrine repugnant to Gods word and the articles of our faith maintained obstinately for siniâ—trous ends as lucre honor c. that makes heresie a private man may maintain an opinion in Philosophy contrary to the opinion of the Prince and yet no heretick in this because he holds nothing against our Christian faith his opinion may be erroneous but not heretical In his three and forty chapter he tels us That the faith of Christians ever since Christs time hath had for foundation the reputation of Pastors and Authority of Christian Soveraigns This is to build our faith upon a sandy foundation which with every blast will be overtâ—rned the authority and reputation of men are but arms of flesh and broken reeds to rely upon these may be motives to induceus to give our assent as the testimony of that woman John 4. induced many of the Samaritans of that City to beleeve on Christ But the foundation of their faith was Christ himself who bestowed that gift upon them as he doeth upon us And how can mans reputation or authority be the foundation of that which exceeds all humane reason and capacity but such is faith Besides faith it self is the ground of our justification and salvation for we are both justified and saved by faith but if man be the ground of our faith he must also be the ground of our jâ—stification and saluation and so Christ died rose in vain But the Apostle sheweth us the true foundation of our faith in these words For other foundation canâ—no man lay them that is laid which is Jesus Christ 1 Cor. 3. 11.
in her fits would speak Greek and Latin sentences which she never before had heard She foretold the Saâ—on war in these words {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} â— {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} that is There will be tribulation upon the earth and wrath in this peoplâ— He mentions another Demoniack who by the prayers of the congregation was freed from the devil which at certain times used to torment her I could allegde many examples of modern Demoniacks out of Del Rio Wierus Bodin Zacuta â—â—ularts memorable histories and others which physick could not cure but were cured by Christian exorcisms that is by prayers fastings and almes of the Congregation Demones a nobis adjurantur tâ—rquentur spiritualibus flagris orationis flagellis exire coguntuâ— We adjure and torment the devils our spiritual whips scourging prayers force them to go oâ—t saith Lactantiae I know some superstitious ceremonies have been and are still used in exorcisms which I allow not but I do not like Mr. Hobbs his slighting of Christs miracles and his Apostles when he tels us That Demoniacks were many in the primitive Church and few mad-men whereas now there are many mad-men and few Demoniacks which proceed not from the change of nature Is not this to extenuate Christs miracles who came to destroy the works of the devil and to cast out the prince of this world And is it not likewise to make the Evangelists imposters in publishing those cures for miraculous which were not and calling ordinary and natural diseases by the termes of devils and evil spirits He will not cap. 45. have it Satan that entred into Iudas though St. Luke writes so But an hostile and trayterous intention of selling Christ for as by the holy Ghost are meant frequently graces and good inclinations so by entring of Satan may be understood wicked cogitations To Mr. Hobbs Satan is any thing so he may not be a spirit or incorporeal substances Sometimes he is but a fancy shaddow dream or apparition sometimes is madness palsy lunacy or any other melady here he is a traytorous intention but indeed there was more then a trayterous intention that entred into Iudas at last the intention to betray Christ was put into the heart of Iudas by Satan John 13. 2. But when he had received the sop Satan himself entered into him and as St. Austin on that place saith took full possession of him John 13. 27. And though I should yeeld that sometimes the holy Ghost is put for the graces of the spirit yet it will not follow that Satan is used in Scripture for any evil suggestion or intention Again Satan doth not presently intrude himself into any man but first prepares his way by his Harbingers that is suggestions and evil thoughts which having made the soul fit for him he enters and takes possession and thus he dealt with Iudas Again I would know of Mr. Hobbs whether it was Satan in the Serpent or onely a treacherous intention that moved him to speak and seduce Eve Lastly why should we take his bare word for Gospel and prefer this his whimsie to the belief of the whole Church and the stream of all interpreters In his forty sixth chapter he spurnes at all learning except his own and that with such a magisterial spirit and so supercilious scorn as if Aristotle Plato Zenn the Peripateticks Academicks Stoicks Colledges Schooles Universities Synagogues and all the wise men of Europe Asia and Affrick hitherto were scarce worthy to carry his books With him Logick is but captions of words Aristotles Metaphisicks are absurd his politicks repugnant to government his Ethicks ignorant the Natural Phylosophy of the Schooles is a dream rather then a science set forth in senseless and insignificant language Aristotles Philosophy is vain and many such like expressions which shews how little he hath of the spirit of humility and modesty I finde not too much learning but too much pride makes some men mad true learning is alwaies joyned with humility the deepest rivers saith Seneca make the least sound the Cypress tree is tall but fruitless the Apple-tree is low but fruitful and the more it s laden the more it stoops that man that slights all but himself will be slighted of all but himself intemperance in words argue impotency of minde and as the Court saith He is an unjust man that prefers his own wit to all others Homine imperito nihil quid quam injustius qui nisi quod ipse facit nil rectum putat He cannot but fowle his own hands that caâ—â—eth dirt in the face of his betters Every wise man will employ his eyes at home will look upon the wallet that hangs at his own back will descend into himself and then he shall see how small cause he hath to despise other mens gifts when he considereth the defects of his own Tecum babita disces quam sit tibi curta supellex He that thinks to rear up the imaginary tower of his own fame upon the ruins of other mens will finde he builds upon a sandy foundation and indeed makes castles in the air St. Austins counsel is good in this case He that will build high must lay his foundation low Si vis magnam fabricam construere celsitudinis de fundamento prius incipe humilitatis Hercules cannot be pulled down by pigmies nor can the rocks be shaken though the frothy waves beat against them Eminent men like solid trees the more they are shaken the stronger they grow saith Seneca Quid miraris bonos viros ut confirmentur concuti Non est arbor solidaneâ— fortis nisi in quam frequens ventus incursat ipsa enim vexatiene constringitur radices certius figit We are bound to acknowledge with thankfulness the paines and industry of those brave men which have intiched us with such monuments of learning which the Universities of the world have received and do to this day cherish and maintain with such applause and not to require them with scorn and contempt this is ingratitude in the highest degree I wish therefore that Mr. Hobbs had used more solidity in his arguments and less impotency in his expressions against those eminent lights of learning and not with Leviathan to cast against them smoak out of his nostrils as out of aseething Pot or Caldron To use the word of God in Iob for I doubt me Mr. Hobbs will never be brought in competition with Aristotle but now let us receive his accusation against Aristotles Philosophy He saith cap. 46. That this doctrine of separated essences will fright men from obeying the laws of their Country I should think rather that this doctrine would fright men from disobeying the laws for if God commands obedience to the laws and subjection to the higher powers is it likely that he will permit spirits to walk to disswade men from obedience Or will the spirits of those holy men who taught subjection to Magistrates