No More Learning

To be uncovered, before a man of Power and Authority, or before the
Throne of a Prince, or in such other places as hee ordaineth to that
purpose in his absence, is to Worship that man, or Prince with Civill
Worship; as being a signe, not of honoring the stoole, or place, but the
Person; and is not Idolatry. But if hee that doth it, should suppose the
Soule of the Prince to be in the Stool, or should present a Petition to
the Stool, it were Divine Worship, and Idolatry.

To pray to a King for such things, as hee is able to doe for us, though
we prostrate our selves before him, is but Civill Worship; because we
acknowledge no other power in him, but humane: But voluntarily to pray
unto him for fair weather, or for any thing which God onely can doe
for us, is Divine Worship, and Idolatry. On the other side, if a King
compell a man to it by the terrour of Death, or other great corporall
punishment, it is not Idolatry: For the Worship which the Soveraign
commandeth to bee done unto himself by the terrour of his Laws, is not
a sign that he that obeyeth him, does inwardly honour him as a God, but
that he is desirous to save himselfe from death, or from a miserable
life; and that which is not a sign of internall honor, is no Worship;
and therefore no Idolatry. Neither can it bee said, that hee that does
it, scandalizeth, or layeth any stumbling block before his Brother;
because how wise, or learned soever he be that worshippeth in that
manner, another man cannot from thence argue, that he approveth it; but
that he doth it for fear; and that it is not his act, but the act of the
Soveraign.

To worship God, in some peculiar Place, or turning a mans face towards
an Image, or determinate Place, is not to worship, or honor the Place,
or Image; but to acknowledge it Holy, that is to say, to acknowledge
the Image, or the Place to be set apart from common use: for that is the
meaning of the word Holy; which implies no new quality in the Place, or
Image; but onely a new Relation by Appropriation to God; and therefore
is not Idolatry; no more than it was Idolatry to worship God before
the Brazen Serpent; or for the Jews when they were out of their owne
countrey, to turn their faces (when they prayed) toward the Temple of
Jerusalem; or for Moses to put off his Shoes when he was before the
Flaming Bush, the ground appertaining to Mount Sinai; which place God
had chosen to appear in, and to give his Laws to the People of Israel,
and was therefore Holy ground, not by inhaerent sanctity, but by
separation to Gods use; or for Christians to worship in the Churches,
which are once solemnly dedicated to God for that purpose, by the
Authority of the King, or other true Representant of the Church. But to
worship God, is inanimating, or inhibiting, such Image, or place; that
is to say, an infinite substance in a finite place, is Idolatry: for
such finite Gods, are but Idols of the brain, nothing reall; and are
commonly called in the Scripture by the names of Vanity, and Lyes, and
Nothing. Also to worship God, not as inanimating, or present in the
place, or Image; but to the end to be put in mind of him, or of some
works of his, in case the Place, or Image be dedicated, or set up
by private authority, and not by the authority of them that are our
Soveraign Pastors, is Idolatry. For the Commandement is, "Thou shalt not
make to thy selfe any graven image. " God commanded Moses to set up the
Brazen Serpent; hee did not make it to himselfe; it was not therefore
against the Commandement. But the making of the Golden Calfe by Aaron,
and the People, as being done without authority from God, was Idolatry;
not onely because they held it for God, but also because they made it
for a Religious use, without warrant either from God their Soveraign, or
from Moses, that was his Lieutenant.

The Gentiles worshipped for Gods, Jupiter, and others; that living, were
men perhaps that had done great and glorious Acts; and for the Children
of God, divers men and women, supposing them gotten between an Immortall
Deity, and a mortall man. This was Idolatry, because they made them so
to themselves, having no authority from God, neither in his eternall Law
of Reason, nor in his positive and revealed Will. But though our Saviour
was a man, whom wee also beleeve to bee God Immortall, and the Son of
God; yet this is no Idolatry; because wee build not that beleef upon
our own fancy, or judgment, but upon the Word of God revealed in the
Scriptures. And for the adoration of the Eucharist, if the words of
Christ, "This is my Body," signifie, "that he himselfe, and the seeming
bread in his hand; and not onely so, but that all the seeming morsells
of bread that have ever since been, and any time hereafter shall bee
consecrated by Priests, bee so many Christs bodies, and yet all of them
but one body," then is that no Idolatry, because it is authorized by our
Saviour: but if that text doe not signifie that, (for there is no other
that can be alledged for it,) then, because it is a worship of humane
institution, it is Idolatry. For it is not enough to say, God can
transubstantiate the Bread into Christs Body: For the Gentiles also held
God to be Omnipotent; and might upon that ground no lesse excuse their
Idolatry, by pretending, as well as others, as transubstantiation of
their Wood, and Stone into God Almighty.

Whereas there be, that pretend Divine Inspiration, to be a supernaturall
entring of the Holy Ghost into a man, and not an acquisition of Gods
grace, by doctrine, and study; I think they are in a very dangerous
Dilemma. For if they worship not the men whom they beleeve to be so
inspired, they fall into Impiety; as not adoring Gods supernaturall
Presence. And again, if they worship them, they commit Idolatry; for the
Apostles would never permit themselves to be so worshipped. Therefore
the safest way is to beleeve, that by the Descending of the Dove upon
the Apostles; and by Christs Breathing on them, when hee gave them
the Holy Ghost; and by the giving of it by Imposition of Hands, are
understood the signes which God hath been pleased to use, or ordain to
be used, of his promise to assist those persons in their study to
Preach his Kingdome, and in their Conversation, that it might not be
Scandalous, but Edifying to others.




Scandalous Worship Of Images

Besides the Idolatrous Worship of Images, there is also a Scandalous
Worship of them; which is also a sin; but not Idolatry. For Idolatry is
to worship by signes of an internall, and reall honour: but Scandalous
Worship, is but Seeming Worship; and may sometimes bee joined with
an inward, and hearty detestation, both of the Image, and of the
Phantasticall Daemon, or Idol, to which it is dedicated; and proceed
onely from the fear of death, or other grievous punishment; and is
neverthelesse a sin in them that so worship, in case they be men whose
actions are looked at by others, as lights to guide them by; because
following their ways, they cannot but stumble, and fall in the way of
Religion: Whereas the example of those we regard not, works not on us
at all, but leaves us to our own diligence and caution; and consequently
are no causes of our falling.

If therefore a Pastor lawfully called to teach and direct others, or any
other, of whose knowledge there is a great opinion, doe externall honor
to an Idol for fear; unlesse he make his feare, and unwillingnesse to
it, as evident as the worship; he Scandalizeth his Brother, by seeming
to approve Idolatry. For his Brother, arguing from the action of his
teacher, or of him whose knowledge he esteemeth great, concludes it
to bee lawfull in it selfe. And this Scandall, is Sin, and a Scandall
given. But if one being no Pastor, nor of eminent reputation for
knowledge in Christian Doctrine, doe the same, and another follow him;
this is no Scandall given; for he had no cause to follow such example:
but is a pretence of Scandall which hee taketh of himselfe for an excuse
before men: For an unlearned man, that is in the power of an idolatrous
King, or State, if commanded on pain of death to worship before an
Idoll, hee detesteth the Idoll in his heart, hee doth well; though if he
had the fortitude to suffer death, rather than worship it, he should
doe better. But if a Pastor, who as Christs Messenger, has undertaken to
teach Christs Doctrine to all nations, should doe the same, it were
not onely a sinfull Scandall, in respect of other Christian mens
consciences, but a perfidious forsaking of his charge.

The summe of that which I have said hitherto, concerning the Worship of
Images, is that, that he that worshippeth in an Image, or any Creature,
either the Matter thereof, or any Fancy of his own, which he thinketh
to dwell in it; or both together; or beleeveth that such things hear
his Prayers, or see his Devotions, without Ears, or Eyes, committeth
Idolatry: and he that counterfeiteth such Worship for fear of
punishment, if he bee a man whose example hath power amongst his
Brethren, committeth a sin: But he that worshippeth the Creator of the
world before such an Image, or in such a place as he hath not made, or
chosen of himselfe, but taken from the commandement of Gods Word, as the
Jewes did in worshipping God before the Cherubins, and before the Brazen
Serpent for a time, and in, or towards the Temple of Jerusalem, which
was also but for a time, committeth not Idolatry.

Now for the Worship of Saints, and Images, and Reliques, and other
things at this day practised in the Church of Rome, I say they are not
allowed by the Word of God, not brought into the Church of Rome, from
the Doctrine there taught; but partly left in it at the first conversion
of the Gentiles; and afterwards countenanced, and confirmed, and
augmented by the Bishops of Rome.




Answer To The Argument From The Cherubins, And Brazen Serpent

As for the proofs alledged out of Scripture, namely, those examples
of Images appointed by God to bee set up; They were not set up for the
people, or any man to worship; but that they should worship God himselfe
before them: as before the Cherubins over the Ark, and the Brazen
Serpent. For we read not, that the Priest, or any other did worship the
Cherubins; but contrarily wee read (2 Kings 18. 4. ) that Hezekiah brake
in pieces the Brazen Serpent which Moses had set up, because the
People burnt incense to it. Besides, those examples are not put for
our Imitation, that we also should set up Images, under pretence
of worshipping God before them; because the words of the second
Commandement, "Thou shalt not make to thy selfe any graven Image, &c. "
distinguish between the Images that God commanded to be set up, and
those which wee set up to our selves. And therefore from the Cherubins,
or Brazen Serpent, to the Images of mans devising; and from the Worship
commanded by God, to the Will-Worship of men, the argument is not good.
This also is to bee considered, that as Hezekiah brake in pieces the
Brazen Serpent, because the Jews did worship it, to the end they should
doe so no more; so also Christian Soveraigns ought to break down the
Images which their Subjects have been accustomed to worship; that there
be no more occasion of such Idolatry. For at this day, the ignorant
People, where Images are worshipped, doe really beleeve there is a
Divine Power in the Images; and are told by their Pastors, that some
of them have spoken; and have bled; and that miracles have been done by
them; which they apprehend as done by the Saint, which they think either
is the Image it self, or in it. The Israelites, when they worshipped the
Calfe, did think they worshipped the God that brought them out of Egypt;
and yet it was Idolatry, because they thought the Calfe either was
that God, or had him in his belly. And though some man may think it
impossible for people to be so stupid, as to think the Image to be
God, or a Saint; or to worship it in that notion; yet it is manifest
in Scripture to the contrary; where when the Golden Calfe was made, the
people said, (Exod. 32. 2. ) "These are thy Gods O Israel;" and where the
Images of Laban (Gen. 31. 30. ) are called his Gods. And wee see daily by
experience in all sorts of People, that such men as study nothing but
their food and ease, are content to beleeve any absurdity, rather than
to trouble themselves to examine it; holding their faith as it were by
entaile unalienable, except by an expresse and new Law.




Painting Of Fancies No Idolatry: Abusing Them To Religious Worship Is

But they inferre from some other places, that it is lawfull to paint
Angels, and also God himselfe: as from Gods walking in the Garden; from
Jacobs seeing God at the top of the ladder; and from other Visions, and
Dreams. But Visions, and Dreams whether naturall, or supernaturall, are
but Phantasmes: and he that painteth an Image of any of them, maketh not
an Image of God, but of his own Phantasm, which is, making of an Idol. I
say not, that to draw a Picture after a fancy, is a Sin; but when it
is drawn, to hold it for a Representation of God, is against the second
Commandement; and can be of no use, but to worship. And the same may be
said of the Images of Angels, and of men dead; unlesse as Monuments of
friends, or of men worthy remembrance: For such use of an Image, is not
Worship of the Image; but a civill honoring of the Person, not that is,
but that was: But when it is done to the Image which we make of a Saint,
for no other reason, but that we think he heareth our prayers, and is
pleased with the honour wee doe him, when dead, and without sense, wee
attribute to him more than humane power; and therefore it is Idolatry.

Seeing therefore there is no authority, neither in the Law of Moses,
nor in the Gospel, for the religious Worship of Images, or other
Representations of God, which men set up to themselves; or for the
Worship of the Image of any Creature in Heaven, or Earth, or under the
Earth: And whereas Christian Kings, who are living Representants of God,
are not to be worshipped by their Subjects, by any act, that signifieth
a greater esteem of his power, than the nature of mortall man is capable
of; It cannot be imagined, that the Religious Worship now in use,
was brought into the Church, by misunderstanding of the Scripture. It
resteth therefore, that it was left in it, by not destroying the Images
themselves, in the conversion of the Gentiles that worshipped them.




How Idolatry Was Left In The Church

The cause whereof, was the immoderate esteem, and prices set upon the
workmanship of them, which made the owners (though converted, from
worshipping them as they had done Religiously for Daemons) to retain
them still in their houses, upon pretence of doing it in the honor of
Christ, of the Virgin Mary, and of the Apostles, and other the Pastors
of the Primitive Church; as being easie, by giving them new names, to
make that an Image of the Virgin Mary, and of her Sonne our Saviour,
which before perhaps was called the Image of Venus, and Cupid; and so of
a Jupiter to make a Barnabas, and of Mercury a Paul, and the like. And
as worldly ambition creeping by degrees into the Pastors, drew them to
an endeavour of pleasing the new made Christians; and also to a liking
of this kind of honour, which they also might hope for after their
decease, as well as those that had already gained it: so the worshipping
of the Images of Christ and his Apostles, grow more and more Idolatrous;
save that somewhat after the time of Constantine, divers Emperors, and
Bishops, and generall Councells observed, and opposed the unlawfulnesse
thereof; but too late, or too weakly.




Canonizing Of Saints

The Canonizing of Saints, is another Relique of Gentilisme: It is
neither a misunderstanding of Scripture, nor a new invention of the
Roman Church, but a custome as ancient as the Common-wealth of Rome it
self. The first that ever was canonized at Rome, was Romulus, and that
upon the narration of Julius Proculus, that swore before the Senate,
he spake with him after his death, and was assured by him, he dwelt in
Heaven, and was there called Quirinius, and would be propitious to
the State of their new City: And thereupon the Senate gave Publique
Testimony of his Sanctity. Julius Caesar, and other Emperors after him,
had the like Testimony; that is, were Canonized for Saints; now defined;
and is the same with the Apotheosis of the Heathen.




The Name Of Pontifex

It is also from the Roman Heathen, that the Popes have received the
name, and power of PONTIFEX MAXIMUS. This was the name of him that in
the ancient Common-wealth of Rome, had the Supreme Authority under
the Senate and People, of regulating all Ceremonies, and Doctrines
concerning their Religion: And when Augustus Caesar changed the State
into a Monarchy, he took to himselfe no more but this office, and that
of Tribune of the People, (than is to say, the Supreme Power both in
State, and Religion;) and the succeeding Emperors enjoyed the same. But
when the Emperour Constantine lived, who was the first that professed
and authorized Christian Religion, it was consonant to his profession,
to cause Religion to be regulated (under his authority) by the Bishop
of Rome: Though it doe not appear they had so soon the name of Pontifex;
but rather, that the succeeding Bishops took it of themselves, to
countenance the power they exercised over the Bishops of the Roman
Provinces. For it is not any Priviledge of St. Peter, but the Priviledge
of the City of Rome, which the Emperors were alwaies willing to uphold;
that gave them such authority over other Bishops; as may be evidently
seen by that, that the Bishop of Constantinople, when the Emperour made
that City the Seat of the Empire, pretended to bee equall to the Bishop
of Rome; though at last, not without contention, the Pope carryed it,
and became the Pontifex Maximus; but in right onely of the Emperour; and
not without the bounds of the Empire; nor any where, after the Emperour
had lost his power in Rome; though it were the Pope himself that took
his power from him. From whence wee may by the way observe, that there
is no place for the superiority of the Pope over other Bishops, except
in the territories whereof he is himself the Civill Soveraign; and where
the Emperour having Soveraign Power Civill, hath expressely chosen the
Pope for the chief Pastor under himselfe, of his Christian Subjects.




Procession Of Images

The carrying about of Images in Procession, is another Relique of the
Religion of the Greeks, and Romans: For they also carried their
Idols from place to place, in a kind of Chariot, which was peculiarly
dedicated to that use, which the Latines called Thensa, and Vehiculum
Deorum; and the Image was placed in a frame, or Shrine, which they
called Ferculum: And that which they called Pompa, is the same that
now is named Procession: According whereunto, amongst the Divine Honors
which were given to Julius Caesar by the Senate, this was one, that in
the Pompe (or Procession) at the Circaean games, he should have Thensam
& Ferculum, a sacred Chariot, and a Shrine; which was as much, as to be
carried up and down as a God: Just as at this day the Popes are carried
by Switzers under a Canopie.




Wax Candles, And Torches Lighted

To these Processions also belonged the bearing of burning Torches, and
Candles, before the Images of the Gods, both amongst the Greeks, and
Romans. For afterwards the Emperors of Rome received the same honor; as
we read of Caligula, that at his reception to the Empire, he was carried
from Misenum to Rome, in the midst of a throng of People, the wayes
beset with Altars, and Beasts for Sacrifice, and burning Torches: And
of Caracalla that was received into Alexandria with Incense, and with
casting of Flowers, and Dadouchiais, that is, with Torches; for Dadochoi
were they that amongst the Greeks carried Torches lighted in the
Processions of their Gods: And in processe of time, the devout, but
ignorant People, did many times honor their Bishops with the like
pompe of Wax Candles, and the Images of our Saviour, and the Saints,
constantly, in the Church it self. And thus came in the use of Wax
Candles; and was also established by some of the ancient Councells.

The Heathens had also their Aqua Lustralis, that is to say, Holy Water.
The Church of Rome imitates them also in their Holy Dayes. They had
their Bacchanalia; and we have our Wakes, answering to them: They
their Saturnalia, and we our Carnevalls, and Shrove-tuesdays liberty
of Servants: They their Procession of Priapus; wee our fetching in,
erection, and dancing about May-poles; and Dancing is one kind of
Worship: They had their Procession called Ambarvalia; and we our
Procession about the fields in the Rogation Week. Nor do I think that
these are all the Ceremonies that have been left in the Church, from the
first conversion of the Gentiles: but they are all that I can for the
present call to mind; and if a man would wel observe that which is
delivered in the Histories, concerning the Religious Rites of the Greeks
and Romanes, I doubt not but he might find many more of these old empty
Bottles of Gentilisme, which the Doctors of the Romane Church, either
by Negligence, or Ambition, have filled up again with the new Wine of
Christianity, that will not faile in time to break them.



CHAPTER XLVI. OF DARKNESSE FROM VAIN PHILOSOPHY, AND FABULOUS TRADITIONS




What Philosophy Is

By Philosophy is understood "the Knowledge acquired by Reasoning, from
the Manner of the Generation of any thing, to the Properties; or from
the Properties, to some possible Way of Generation of the same; to the
end to bee able to produce, as far as matter, and humane force permit,
such Effects, as humane life requireth. " So the Geometrician, from the
Construction of Figures, findeth out many Properties thereof; and from
the Properties, new Ways of their Construction, by Reasoning; to the end
to be able to measure Land and Water; and for infinite other uses. So
the Astronomer, from the Rising, Setting, and Moving of the Sun, and
Starres, in divers parts of the Heavens, findeth out the Causes of Day,
and Night, and of the different Seasons of the Year; whereby he keepeth
an account of Time: And the like of other Sciences.




Prudence No Part Of Philosophy

By which Definition it is evident, that we are not to account as any
part thereof, that originall knowledge called Experience, in which
consisteth Prudence: Because it is not attained by Reasoning, but found
as well in Brute Beasts, as in Man; and is but a Memory of successions
of events in times past, wherein the omission of every little
circumstance altering the effect, frustrateth the expectation of the
most Prudent: whereas nothing is produced by Reasoning aright, but
generall, eternall, and immutable Truth.




No False Doctrine Is Part Of Philosophy

Nor are we therefore to give that name to any false Conclusions: For he
that Reasoneth aright in words he understandeth, can never conclude an
Error:



No More Is Revelation Supernaturall

Nor to that which any man knows by supernaturall Revelation; because it
is not acquired by Reasoning:




Nor Learning Taken Upon Credit Of Authors

Nor that which is gotten by Reasoning from the Authority of Books;
because it is not by Reasoning from the Cause to the Effect, nor from
the Effect to the Cause; and is not Knowledge, but Faith.




Of The Beginnings And Progresse Of Philosophy

The faculty of Reasoning being consequent to the use of Speech, it was
not possible, but that there should have been some generall Truthes
found out by Reasoning, as ancient almost as Language it selfe. The
Savages of America, are not without some good Morall Sentences; also
they have a little Arithmetick, to adde, and divide in Numbers not too
great: but they are not therefore Philosophers. For as there were Plants
of Corn and Wine in small quantity dispersed in the Fields and Woods,
before men knew their vertue, or made use of them for their nourishment,
or planted them apart in Fields, and Vineyards; in which time they
fed on Akorns, and drank Water: so also there have been divers true,
generall, and profitable Speculations from the beginning; as being the
naturall plants of humane Reason: But they were at first but few in
number; men lived upon grosse Experience; there was no Method; that is
to say, no Sowing, nor Planting of Knowledge by it self, apart from the
Weeds, and common Plants of Errour and Conjecture: And the cause of it
being the want of leasure from procuring the necessities of life, and
defending themselves against their neighbours, it was impossible, till
the erecting of great Common-wealths, it should be otherwise. Leasure
is the mother of Philosophy; and Common-wealth, the mother of Peace, and
Leasure: Where first were great and flourishing Cities, there was first
the study of Philosophy. The Gymnosophists of India, the Magi of Persia,
and the Priests of Chaldea and Egypt, are counted the most ancient
Philosophers; and those Countreys were the most ancient of Kingdomes.
Philosophy was not risen to the Graecians, and other people of the West,
whose Common-wealths (no greater perhaps then Lucca, or Geneva) had
never Peace, but when their fears of one another were equall; nor the
Leasure to observe any thing but one another. At length, when Warre had
united many of these Graecian lesser Cities, into fewer, and greater;
then began Seven Men, of severall parts of Greece, to get the reputation
of being Wise; some of them for Morall and Politique Sentences; and
others for the learning of the Chaldeans and Egyptians, which was
Astronomy, and Geometry. But we hear not yet of any Schools of
Philosophy.




Of The Schools Of Philosophy Amongst The Athenians

After the Athenians by the overthrow of the Persian Armies, had gotten
the Dominion of the Sea; and thereby, of all the Islands, and Maritime
Cities of the Archipelago, as well of Asia as Europe; and were grown
wealthy; they that had no employment, neither at home, nor abroad, had
little else to employ themselves in, but either (as St. Luke says, Acts
17. 21. ) "in telling and hearing news," or in discoursing of Philosophy
publiquely to the youth of the City. Every Master took some place for
that purpose. Plato in certaine publique Walks called Academia, from one
Academus: Aristotle in the Walk of the Temple of Pan, called Lycaeum:
others in the Stoa, or covered Walk, wherein the Merchants Goods were
brought to land: others in other places; where they spent the time of
their Leasure, in teaching or in disputing of their Opinions: and some
in any place, where they could get the youth of the City together to
hear them talk. And this was it which Carneades also did at Rome, when
he was Ambassadour: which caused Cato to advise the Senate to dispatch
him quickly, for feare of corrupting the manners of the young men that
delighted to hear him speak (as they thought) fine things.

From this it was, that the place where any of them taught, and disputed,
was called Schola, which in their Tongue signifieth Leasure; and their
Disputations, Diatribae, that is to say, Passing of The Time. Also the
Philosophers themselves had the name of their Sects, some of them from
these their Schools: For they that followed Plato's Doctrine, were
called Academiques; The followers of Aristotle, Peripatetiques, from the
Walk hee taught in; and those that Zeno taught, Stoiques, from the Stoa:
as if we should denominate men from More-fields, from Pauls-Church, and
from the Exchange, because they meet there often, to prate and loyter.

Neverthelesse, men were so much taken with this custome, that in time
it spread it selfe over all Europe, and the best part of Afrique; so as
there were Schools publiquely erected, and maintained for Lectures, and
Disputations, almost in every Common-wealth.




Of The Schools Of The Jews

There were also Schools, anciently, both before, and after the time of
our Saviour, amongst the Jews: but they were Schools of their Law. For
though they were called Synagogues, that is to say, Congregations of the
People; yet in as much as the Law was every Sabbath day read, expounded,
and disputed in them, they differed not in nature, but in name onely
from Publique Schools; and were not onely in Jerusalem, but in every
City of the Gentiles, where the Jews inhabited. There was such a Schoole
at Damascus, whereinto Paul entred, to persecute. There were others at
Antioch, Iconium and Thessalonica, whereinto he entred, to dispute:
And such was the Synagogue of the Libertines, Cyrenians, Alexandrians,
Cilicians, and those of Asia; that is to say, the Schoole of Libertines,
and of Jewes, that were strangers in Jerusalem: And of this Schoole they
were that disputed with Saint Steven.




The Schoole Of Graecians Unprofitable

But what has been the Utility of those Schools? what Science is there
at this day acquired by their Readings and Disputings? That wee have
of Geometry, which is the Mother of all Naturall Science, wee are not
indebted for it to the Schools. Plato that was the best Philosopher
of the Greeks, forbad entrance into his Schoole, to all that were not
already in some measure Geometricians. There were many that studied that
Science to the great advantage of mankind: but there is no mention of
their Schools; nor was there any Sect of Geometricians; nor did they
then passe under the name of Philosophers. The naturall Philosophy
of those Schools, was rather a Dream than Science, and set forth in
senselesse and insignificant Language; which cannot be avoided by
those that will teach Philosophy, without having first attained great
knowledge in Geometry: For Nature worketh by Motion; the Wayes,
and Degrees whereof cannot be known, without the knowledge of the
Proportions and Properties of Lines, and Figures. Their Morall
Philosophy is but a description of their own Passions. For the rule of
Manners, without Civill Government, is the Law of Nature; and in it,
the Law Civill; that determineth what is Honest, and Dishonest; what is
Just, and Unjust; and generally what is Good, and Evill: whereas they
make the Rules of Good, and Bad, by their own Liking, and Disliking: By
which means, in so great diversity of taste, there is nothing generally
agreed on; but every one doth (as far as he dares) whatsoever seemeth
good in his own eyes, to the subversion of Common-wealth. Their Logique
which should bee the Method of Reasoning, is nothing else but Captions
of Words, and Inventions how to puzzle such as should goe about to pose
them. To conclude there is nothing so absurd, that the old Philosophers
(as Cicero saith, who was one of them) have not some of them maintained.
And I beleeve that scarce any thing can be more absurdly said
in naturall Philosophy, than that which now is called Aristotles
Metaphysiques, nor more repugnant to Government, than much of that hee
hath said in his Politiques; nor more ignorantly, than a great part of
his Ethiques.




The Schools Of The Jews Unprofitable

The Schoole of the Jews, was originally a Schoole of the Law of Moses;
who commanded (Deut. 31. 10. ) that at the end of every seventh year, at
the Feast of the Tabernacles, it should be read to all the people, that
they might hear, and learn it: Therefore the reading of the Law (which
was in use after the Captivity) every Sabbath day, ought to have had
no other end, but the acquainting of the people with the Commandements
which they were to obey, and to expound unto them the writings of the
Prophets. But it is manifest, by the many reprehensions of them by
our Saviour, that they corrupted the Text of the Law with their
false Commentaries, and vain Traditions; and so little understood the
Prophets, that they did neither acknowledge Christ, nor the works he
did; for which the Prophets prophecyed. So that by their Lectures and
Disputations in their Synagogues, they turned the Doctrine of their Law
into a Phantasticall kind of Philosophy, concerning the incomprehensible
nature of God, and of Spirits; which they compounded of the Vain
Philosophy and Theology of the Graecians, mingled with their own
fancies, drawn from the obscurer places of the Scripture, and which
might most easily bee wrested to their purpose; and from the Fabulous
Traditions of their Ancestors.




University What It Is

That which is now called an University, is a Joyning together, and an
Incorporation under one Government of many Publique Schools, in one and
the same Town or City. In which, the principal Schools were ordained for
the three Professions, that is to say, of the Romane Religion, of the
Romane Law, and of the Art of Medicine. And for the study of Philosophy
it hath no otherwise place, then as a handmaid to the Romane Religion:
And since the Authority of Aristotle is onely current there, that
study is not properly Philosophy, (the nature whereof dependeth not on
Authors,) but Aristotelity. And for Geometry, till of very late times it
had no place at all; as being subservient to nothing but rigide Truth.
And if any man by the ingenuity of his owne nature, had attained to any
degree of perfection therein, hee was commonly thought a Magician, and
his Art Diabolicall.




Errors Brought Into Religion From Aristotles Metaphysiques

Now to descend to the particular Tenets of Vain Philosophy, derived to
the Universities, and thence into the Church, partly from Aristotle,
partly from Blindnesse of understanding; I shall first consider their
Principles. There is a certain Philosophia Prima, on which all other
Philosophy ought to depend; and consisteth principally, in right
limiting of the significations of such Appellations, or Names, as are
of all others the most Universall: Which Limitations serve to avoid
ambiguity, and aequivocation in Reasoning; and are commonly called
Definitions; such as are the Definitions of Body, Time, Place, Matter,
Forme, Essence, Subject, Substance, Accident, Power, Act, Finite,
Infinite, Quantity, Quality, Motion, Action, Passion, and divers others,
necessary to the explaining of a mans Conceptions concerning the Nature
and Generation of Bodies. The Explication (that is, the setling of the
meaning) of which, and the like Terms, is commonly in the Schools called
Metaphysiques; as being a part of the Philosophy of Aristotle, which
hath that for title: but it is in another sense; for there it signifieth
as much, as "Books written, or placed after his naturall Philosophy:"
But the Schools take them for Books Of Supernaturall Philosophy: for the
word Metaphysiques will bear both these senses. And indeed that which is
there written, is for the most part so far from the possibility of being
understood, and so repugnant to naturall Reason, that whosoever
thinketh there is any thing to bee understood by it, must needs think it
supernaturall.




Errors Concerning Abstract Essences

From these Metaphysiques, which are mingled with the Scripture to make
Schoole Divinity, wee are told, there be in the world certaine
Essences separated from Bodies, which they call Abstract Essences, and
Substantiall Formes: For the Interpreting of which Jargon, there is
need of somewhat more than ordinary attention in this place. Also I
ask pardon of those that are not used to this kind of Discourse, for
applying my selfe to those that are. The World, (I mean not the Earth
onely, that denominates the Lovers of it Worldly Men, but the Universe,
that is, the whole masse of all things that are) is Corporeall, that
is to say, Body; and hath the dimensions of Magnitude, namely, Length,
Bredth, and Depth: also every part of Body, is likewise Body, and hath
the like dimensions; and consequently every part of the Universe,
is Body, and that which is not Body, is no part of the Universe: And
because the Universe is all, that which is no part of it, is Nothing;
and consequently No Where. Nor does it follow from hence, that Spirits
are Nothing: for they have dimensions, and are therefore really Bodies;
though that name in common Speech be given to such Bodies onely, as are
visible, or palpable; that is, that have some degree of Opacity: But for
Spirits, they call them Incorporeall; which is a name of more honour,
and may therefore with more piety bee attributed to God himselfe; in
whom wee consider not what Attribute expresseth best his Nature, which
is Incomprehensible; but what best expresseth our desire to honour him.

To know now upon what grounds they say there be Essences Abstract, or
Substantiall Formes, wee are to consider what those words do properly
signifie. The use of Words, is to register to our selves, and make
manifest to others the Thoughts and Conceptions of our Minds. Of which
Words, some are the names of the Things conceived; as the names of all
sorts of Bodies, that work upon the Senses, and leave an Impression in
the Imagination: Others are the names of the Imaginations themselves;
that is to say, of those Ideas, or mentall Images we have of all things
wee see, or remember: And others againe are names of Names; or of
different sorts of Speech: As Universall, Plurall, Singular, Negation,
True, False, Syllogisme, Interrogation, Promise, Covenant, are the names
of certain Forms of Speech. Others serve to shew the Consequence, or
Repugnance of one name to another; as when one saith, "A Man is a Body,"
hee intendeth that the name of Body is necessarily consequent to the
name of Man; as being but severall names of the same thing, Man; which
Consequence is signified by coupling them together with the word Is.
And as wee use the Verbe Is; so the Latines use their Verbe Est, and
the Greeks their Esti through all its Declinations. Whether all other
Nations of the world have in their severall languages a word that
answereth to it, or not, I cannot tell; but I am sure they have not need
of it: For the placing of two names in order may serve to signifie their
Consequence, if it were the custome, (for Custome is it, that give words
their force,) as well as the words Is, or Bee, or Are, and the like.

And if it were so, that there were a Language without any Verb
answerable to Est, or Is, or Bee; yet the men that used it would bee
not a jot the lesse capable of Inferring, Concluding, and of all kind of
Reasoning, than were the Greeks, and Latines. But what then would become
of these Terms, of Entity, Essence, Essentiall, Essentially, that are
derived from it, and of many more that depend on these, applyed as most
commonly they are? They are therefore no Names of Things; but Signes, by
which wee make known, that wee conceive the Consequence of one name or
Attribute to another: as when we say, "a Man, is, a living Body," wee
mean not that the Man is one thing, the Living Body another, and the Is,
or Beeing a third: but that the Man, and the Living Body, is the same
thing: because the Consequence, "If hee bee a Man, hee is a living
Body," is a true Consequence, signified by that word Is. Therefore, to
bee a Body, to Walke, to bee Speaking, to Live, to See, and the like
Infinitives; also Corporeity, Walking, Speaking, Life, Sight, and the
like, that signifie just the same, are the names of Nothing; as I have
elsewhere more amply expressed.

But to what purpose (may some man say) is such subtilty in a work of
this nature, where I pretend to nothing but what is necessary to the
doctrine of Government and Obedience? It is to this purpose, that men
may no longer suffer themselves to be abused, by them, that by this
doctrine of Separated Essences, built on the Vain Philosophy of
Aristotle, would fright them from Obeying the Laws of their Countrey,
with empty names; as men fright Birds from the Corn with an empty
doublet, a hat, and a crooked stick. For it is upon this ground, that
when a Man is dead and buried, they say his Soule (that is his Life) can
walk separated from his Body, and is seen by night amongst the graves.
Upon the same ground they say, that the Figure, and Colour, and Tast of
a peece of Bread, has a being, there, where they say there is no Bread:
And upon the same ground they say, that Faith, and Wisdome, and other
Vertues are sometimes powred into a man, sometimes blown into him from
Heaven; as if the Vertuous, and their Vertues could be asunder; and a
great many other things that serve to lessen the dependance of Subjects
on the Soveraign Power of their Countrey. For who will endeavour to obey
the Laws, if he expect Obedience to be Powred or Blown into him? Or who
will not obey a Priest, that can make God, rather than his Soveraign;
nay than God himselfe? Or who, that is in fear of Ghosts, will not bear
great respect to those that can make the Holy Water, that drives them
from him? And this shall suffice for an example of the Errors, which are
brought into the Church, from the Entities, and Essences of Aristotle:
which it may be he knew to be false Philosophy; but writ it as a thing
consonant to, and corroborative of their Religion; and fearing the fate
of Socrates.

Being once fallen into this Error of Separated Essences, they are
thereby necessarily involved in many other absurdities that follow it.
For seeing they will have these Forms to be reall, they are obliged to
assign them some place. But because they hold them Incorporeall, without
all dimension of Quantity, and all men know that Place is Dimension, and
not to be filled, but by that which is Corporeall; they are driven to
uphold their credit with a distinction, that they are not indeed any
where Circumscriptive, but Definitive: Which Terms being meer Words, and
in this occasion insignificant, passe onely in Latine, that the vanity
of them may bee concealed. For the Circumscription of a thing, is
nothing else but the Determination, or Defining of its Place; and so
both the Terms of the Distinction are the same. And in particular, of
the Essence of a Man, which (they say) is his Soule, they affirm it,
to be All of it in his little Finger, and All of it in every other Part
(how small soever) of his Body; and yet no more Soule in the Whole Body,
than in any one of those Parts. Can any man think that God is served
with such absurdities? And yet all this is necessary to beleeve,
to those that will beleeve the Existence of an Incorporeall Soule,
Separated from the Body.

And when they come to give account, how an Incorporeall Substance can
be capable of Pain, and be tormented in the fire of Hell, or Purgatory,
they have nothing at all to answer, but that it cannot be known how fire
can burn Soules.

Again, whereas Motion is change of Place, and Incorporeall Substances
are not capable of Place, they are troubled to make it seem possible,
how a Soule can goe hence, without the Body to Heaven, Hell, or
Purgatory; and how the Ghosts of men (and I may adde of their clothes
which they appear in) can walk by night in Churches, Church-yards, and
other places of Sepulture. To which I know not what they can answer,
unlesse they will say, they walke Definitive, not Circumscriptive, or
Spiritually, not Temporally: for such egregious distinctions are equally
applicable to any difficulty whatsoever.




Nunc-stans

For the meaning of Eternity, they will not have it to be an Endlesse
Succession of Time; for then they should not be able to render a reason
how Gods Will, and Praeordaining of things to come, should not be before
his Praescience of the same, as the Efficient Cause before the Effect,
or Agent before the Action; nor of many other their bold opinions
concerning the Incomprehensible Nature of God. But they will teach us,
that Eternity is the Standing still of the Present Time, a Nunc-stans
(as the Schools call it;) which neither they, nor any else understand,
no more than they would a Hic-stans for an Infinite greatnesse of Place.




One Body In Many Places, And Many Bodies In One Place At Once

And whereas men divide a Body in their thought, by numbring parts of
it, and in numbring those parts, number also the parts of the Place
it filled; it cannot be, but in making many parts, wee make also many
places of those parts; whereby there cannot bee conceived in the mind of
any man, more, or fewer parts, than there are places for: yet they will
have us beleeve, that by the Almighty power of God, one body may be at
one and the same time in many places; and many bodies at one and the
same time in one place; as if it were an acknowledgment of the Divine
Power, to say, that which is, is not; or that which has been, has not
been. And these are but a small part of the Incongruities they are
forced to, from their disputing Philosophically, in stead of admiring,
and adoring of the Divine and Incomprehensible Nature; whose Attributes
cannot signifie what he is, but ought to signifie our desire to honour
him, with the best Appellations we can think on. But they that venture
to reason of his Nature, from these Attributes of Honour, losing their
understanding in the very first attempt, fall from one Inconvenience
into another, without end, and without number; in the same manner,
as when a man ignorant of the Ceremonies of Court, comming into the
presence of a greater Person than he is used to speak to, and stumbling
at his entrance, to save himselfe from falling, lets slip his Cloake;
to recover his Cloake, lets fall his Hat; and with one disorder after
another, discovers his astonishment and rusticity.




Absurdities In Naturall Philosophy, As Gravity The Cause Of Heavinesse

Then for Physiques, that is, the knowledge of the subordinate, and
secundary causes of naturall events; they render none at all, but empty
words. If you desire to know why some kind of bodies sink naturally
downwards toward the Earth, and others goe naturally from it; The
Schools will tell you out of Aristotle, that the bodies that sink
downwards, are Heavy; and that this Heavinesse is it that causes them to
descend: But if you ask what they mean by Heavinesse, they will define
it to bee an endeavour to goe to the center of the Earth: so that the
cause why things sink downward, is an Endeavour to be below: which is
as much as to say, that bodies descend, or ascend, because they doe.
Or they will tell you the center of the Earth is the place of Rest, and
Conservation for Heavy things; and therefore they endeavour to be there:
As if Stones, and Metalls had a desire, or could discern the place they
would bee at, as Man does; or loved Rest, as Man does not; or that a
peece of Glasse were lesse safe in the Window, than falling into the
Street.




Quantity Put Into Body Already Made

If we would know why the same Body seems greater (without adding to it)
one time, than another; they say, when it seems lesse, it is Condensed;
when greater, Rarefied. What is that Condensed, and Rarefied? Condensed,
is when there is in the very same Matter, lesse Quantity than before;
and Rarefied, when more. As if there could be Matter, that had not some
determined Quantity; when Quantity is nothing else but the Determination
of Matter; that is to say of Body, by which we say one Body is greater,
or lesser than another, by thus, or thus much. Or as if a Body were made
without any Quantity at all, and that afterwards more, or lesse were put
into it, according as it is intended the Body should be more, or lesse
Dense.




Powring In Of Soules

For the cause of the Soule of Man, they say, Creatur Infundendo, and
Creando Infunditur: that is, "It is Created by Powring it in," and
"Powred in by Creation. "




Ubiquity Of Apparition

For the Cause of Sense, an ubiquity of Species; that is, of the Shews
or Apparitions of objects; which when they be Apparitions to the Eye, is
Sight; when to the Eare, Hearing; to the Palate, Tast; to the Nostrill,
Smelling; and to the rest of the Body, Feeling.




Will, The Cause Of Willing

For cause of the Will, to doe any particular action, which is called
Volitio, they assign the Faculty, that is to say, the Capacity in
generall, that men have, to will sometimes one thing, sometimes another,
which is called Voluntas; making the Power the cause of the Act: As
if one should assign for cause of the good or evill Acts of men, their
Ability to doe them.




Ignorance An Occult Cause

And in many occasions they put for cause of Naturall events, their own
Ignorance, but disguised in other words: As when they say, Fortune is
the cause of things contingent; that is, of things whereof they know no
cause: And as when they attribute many Effects to Occult Qualities; that
is, qualities not known to them; and therefore also (as they thinke)
to no Man else. And to Sympathy, Antipathy, Antiperistasis, Specificall
Qualities, and other like Termes, which signifie neither the Agent that
produceth them, nor the Operation by which they are produced.

If such Metaphysiques, and Physiques as this, be not Vain Philosophy,
there was never any; nor needed St. Paul to give us warning to avoid it.




One Makes The Things Incongruent, Another The Incongruity

And for their Morall, and Civill Philosophy, it hath the same, or
greater absurdities. If a man doe an action of Injustice, that is to
say, an action contrary to the Law, God they say is the prime cause of
the Law, and also the prime cause of that, and all other Actions; but no
cause at all of the Injustice; which is the Inconformity of the Action
to the Law. This is Vain Philosophy. A man might as well say, that one
man maketh both a streight line, and a crooked, and another maketh their
Incongruity. And such is the Philosophy of all men that resolve of their
Conclusions, before they know their Premises; pretending to comprehend,
that which is Incomprehensible; and of Attributes of Honour to make
Attributes of Nature; as this distinction was made to maintain the
Doctrine of Free-Will, that is, of a Will of man, not subject to the
Will of God.




Private Appetite The Rule Of Publique Good:

Aristotle, and other Heathen Philosophers define Good, and Evill, by the
Appetite of men; and well enough, as long as we consider them governed
every one by his own Law: For in the condition of men that have no other
Law but their own Appetites, there can be no generall Rule of Good, and
Evill Actions. But in a Common-wealth this measure is false: Not the
Appetite of Private men, but the Law, which is the Will and Appetite of
the State is the measure. And yet is this Doctrine still practised; and
men judge the Goodnesse, or Wickednesse of their own, and of other mens
actions, and of the actions of the Common-wealth it selfe, by their own
Passions; and no man calleth Good or Evill, but that which is so in his
own eyes, without any regard at all to the Publique Laws; except onely
Monks, and Friers, that are bound by Vow to that simple obedience to
their Superiour, to which every Subject ought to think himself bound by
the Law of Nature to the Civill Soveraign. And this private measure of
Good, is a Doctrine, not onely Vain, but also Pernicious to the Publique
State.




And That Lawfull Marriage Is Unchastity

It is also Vain and false Philosophy, to say the work of Marriage is
repugnant to Chastity, or Continence, and by consequence to make them
Morall Vices; as they doe, that pretend Chastity, and Continence, for
the ground of denying Marriage to the Clergy. For they confesse it is
no more, but a Constitution of the Church, that requireth in those holy
Orders that continually attend the Altar, and administration of the
Eucharist, a continuall Abstinence from women, under the name of
continuall Chastity, Continence, and Purity. Therefore they call the
lawfull use of Wives, want of Chastity, and Continence; and so make
Marriage a Sin, or at least a thing so impure, and unclean, as to render
a man unfit for the Altar. If the Law were made because the use of Wives
is Incontinence, and contrary to Chastity, then all marriage is vice; If
because it is a thing too impure, and unclean for a man consecrated to
God; much more should other naturall, necessary, and daily works which
all men doe, render men unworthy to bee Priests, because they are more
unclean.

But the secret foundation of this prohibition of Marriage of Priests, is
not likely to have been laid so slightly, as upon such errours in Morall
Philosophy; nor yet upon the preference of single life, to the estate of
Matrimony; which proceeded from the wisdome of St. Paul, who perceived
how inconvenient a thing it was, for those that in those times of
persecution were Preachers of the Gospel, and forced to fly from one
countrey to another, to be clogged with the care of wife and children;
but upon the design of the Popes, and Priests of after times, to make
themselves the Clergy, that is to say, sole Heirs of the Kingdome of God
in this world; to which it was necessary to take from them the use of
Marriage, because our Saviour saith, that at the coming of his Kingdome
the Children of God shall "neither Marry, nor bee given in Marriage, but
shall bee as the Angels in heaven;" that is to say, Spirituall. Seeing
then they had taken on them the name of Spirituall, to have allowed
themselves (when there was no need) the propriety of Wives, had been an
Incongruity.




And That All Government But Popular, Is Tyranny

From Aristotles Civill Philosophy, they have learned, to call all manner
of Common-wealths but the Popular, (such as was at that time the state
of Athens,) Tyranny. All Kings they called Tyrants; and the Aristocracy
of the thirty Governours set up there by the Lacedemonians that subdued
them, the thirty Tyrants: As also to call the condition of the people
under the Democracy, Liberty. A Tyrant originally signified no more
simply, but a Monarch: But when afterwards in most parts of Greece that
kind of government was abolished, the name began to signifie, not onely
the thing it did before, but with it, the hatred which the Popular
States bare towards it: As also the name of King became odious after the
deposing of the Kings in Rome, as being a thing naturall to all men,
to conceive some great Fault to be signified in any Attribute, that is
given in despight, and to a great Enemy. And when the same men shall be
displeased with those that have the administration of the Democracy,
or Aristocracy, they are not to seek for disgraceful names to expresse
their anger in; but call readily the one Anarchy, and the other
Oligarchy, or the Tyranny Of A Few. And that which offendeth the People,
is no other thing, but that they are governed, not as every one of them
would himselfe, but as the Publique Representant, be it one Man, or an
Assembly of men thinks fit; that is, by an Arbitrary government: for
which they give evill names to their Superiors; never knowing (till
perhaps a little after a Civill warre) that without such Arbitrary
government, such Warre must be perpetuall; and that it is Men, and Arms,
not Words, and Promises, that make the Force and Power of the Laws.




That Not Men, But Law Governs

And therefore this is another Errour of Aristotles Politiques, that in
a wel ordered Common-wealth, not Men should govern, but the Laws.
What
man, that has his naturall Senses, though he can neither write nor read,
does not find himself governed by them he fears, and beleeves can kill
or hurt him when he obeyeth not? or that beleeves the Law can hurt him;
that is, Words, and Paper, without the Hands, and Swords of men? And
this is of the number of pernicious Errors: for they induce men, as oft
as they like not their Governours, to adhaere to those that call them
Tyrants, and to think it lawfull to raise warre against them: And yet
they are many times cherished from the Pulpit, by the Clergy.




Laws Over The Conscience

There is another Errour in their Civill Philosophy (which they never
learned of Aristotle, nor Cicero, nor any other of the Heathen,) to
extend the power of the Law, which is the Rule of Actions onely, to the
very Thoughts, and Consciences of men, by Examination, and Inquisition
of what they Hold, notwithstanding the Conformity of their Speech and
Actions: By which, men are either punished for answering the truth
of their thoughts, or constrained to answer an untruth for fear of
punishment. It is true, that the Civill Magistrate, intending to employ
a Minister in the charge of Teaching, may enquire of him, if hee bee
content to Preach such, and such Doctrines; and in case of refusall,
may deny him the employment: But to force him to accuse himselfe of
Opinions, when his Actions are not by Law forbidden, is against the
Law of Nature; and especially in them, who teach, that a man shall bee
damned to Eternall and extream torments, if he die in a false opinion
concerning an Article of the Christian Faith. For who is there, that
knowing there is so great danger in an error, when the naturall care
of himself, compelleth not to hazard his Soule upon his own judgement,
rather than that of any other man that is unconcerned in his damnation?




Private Interpretation Of Law

For a Private man, without the Authority of the Common-wealth, that is
to say, without permission from the Representant thereof, to Interpret
the Law by his own Spirit, is another Error in the Politiques; but not
drawn from Aristotle, nor from any other of the Heathen Philosophers.
For none of them deny, but that in the Power of making Laws, is
comprehended also the Power of Explaining them when there is need. And
are not the Scriptures, in all places where they are Law, made Law by
the Authority of the Common-wealth, and consequently, a part of the
Civill Law?

Of the same kind it is also, when any but the Soveraign restraineth in
any man that power which the Common-wealth hath not restrained: as they
do, that impropriate the Preaching of the Gospell to one certain Order
of men, where the Laws have left it free. If the State give me leave to
preach, or teach; that is, if it forbid me not, no man can forbid me.
If I find my selfe amongst the Idolaters of America, shall I that am a
Christian, though not in Orders, think it a sin to preach Jesus Christ,
till I have received Orders from Rome? or when I have preached, shall
not I answer their doubts, and expound the Scriptures to them; that is
shall I not Teach? But for this may some say, as also for administring
to them the Sacraments, the necessity shall be esteemed for a sufficient
Mission; which is true: But this is true also, that for whatsoever,
a dispensation is due for the necessity, for the same there needs no
dispensation, when there is no Law that forbids it. Therefore to deny
these Functions to those, to whom the Civill Soveraigne hath not denyed
them, is a taking away of a lawfull Liberty, which is contrary to the
Doctrine of Civill Government.




Language Of Schoole-Divines

More examples of Vain Philosophy, brought into Religion by the Doctors
of Schoole-Divinity, might be produced; but other men may if they please
observe them of themselves. I shall onely adde this, that the
Writings of Schoole-Divines, are nothing else for the most part, but
insignificant Traines of strange and barbarous words, or words otherwise
used, then in the common use of the Latine tongue; such as would pose
Cicero, and Varro, and all the Grammarians of ancient Rome. Which if any
man would see proved, let him (as I have said once before) see whether
he can translate any Schoole-Divine into any of the Modern tongues, as
French, English, or any other copious language: for that which cannot
in most of these be made Intelligible, is no Intelligible in the Latine.
Which Insignificancy of language, though I cannot note it for false
Philosophy; yet it hath a quality, not onely to hide the Truth, but also
to make men think they have it, and desist from further search.




Errors From Tradition

Lastly, for the errors brought in from false, or uncertain History, what
is all the Legend of fictitious Miracles, in the lives of the Saints;
and all the Histories of Apparitions, and Ghosts, alledged by the
Doctors of the Romane Church, to make good their Doctrines of Hell, and
purgatory, the power of Exorcisme, and other Doctrines which have no
warrant, neither in Reason, nor Scripture; as also all those Traditions
which they call the unwritten Word of God; but old Wives Fables?
Whereof, though they find dispersed somewhat in the Writings of the
ancient Fathers; yet those Fathers were men, that might too easily
beleeve false reports; and the producing of their opinions for testimony
of the truth of what they beleeved, hath no other force with them that
(according to the Counsell of St. John 1 Epist. chap. 4. verse 1. )
examine Spirits, than in all things that concern the power of the Romane
Church, (the abuse whereof either they suspected not, or had benefit
by it,) to discredit their testimony, in respect of too rash beleef of
reports; which the most sincere men, without great knowledge of naturall
causes, (such as the Fathers were) are commonly the most subject to: For
naturally, the best men are the least suspicious of fraudulent purposes.
Gregory the Pope, and S. Bernard have somewhat of Apparitions of Ghosts,
that said they were in Purgatory; and so has our Beda: but no where, I
beleeve, but by report from others. But if they, or any other, relate
any such stories of their own knowledge, they shall not thereby confirm
the more such vain reports; but discover their own Infirmity, or Fraud.




Suppression Of Reason

With the Introduction of False, we may joyn also the suppression of True
Philosophy, by such men, as neither by lawfull authority, nor sufficient
study, are competent Judges of the truth. Our own Navigations make
manifest, and all men learned in humane Sciences, now acknowledge there
are Antipodes: And every day it appeareth more and more, that Years, and
Dayes are determined by Motions of the Earth. Neverthelesse, men that
have in their Writings but supposed such Doctrine, as an occasion to
lay open the reasons for, and against it, have been punished for it
by Authority Ecclesiasticall. But what reason is there for it? Is it
because such opinions are contrary to true Religion? that cannot be,
if they be true. Let therefore the truth be first examined by competent
Judges, or confuted by them that pretend to know the contrary. Is
it because they be contrary to the Religion established? Let them be
silenced by the Laws of those, to whom the Teachers of them are subject;
that is, by the Laws Civill: For disobedience may lawfully be punished
in them, that against the Laws teach even true Philosophy. Is it because
they tend to disorder in Government, as countenancing Rebellion, or
Sedition? then let them be silenced, and the Teachers punished by vertue
of his power to whom the care of the Publique quiet is committed; which
is the Authority Civill. For whatsoever Power Ecclesiastiques take upon
themselves (in any place where they are subject to the State) in their
own Right, though they call it Gods Right, is but Usurpation.



CHAPTER XLVII. OF THE BENEFIT THAT PROCEEDETH FROM SUCH DARKNESSE,

AND TO WHOM IT ACCREWETH




He That Receiveth Benefit By A Fact, Is Presumed To Be The Author

Cicero maketh honorable mention of one of the Cassii, a severe Judge
amongst the Romans, for a custome he had, in Criminal causes, (when the
testimony of the witnesses was not sufficient,) to ask the Accusers,
Cui Bono; that is to say, what Profit, Honor, or other Contentment, the
accused obtained, or expected by the Fact. For amongst Praesumptions,
there is none that so evidently declareth the Author, as doth the
BENEFIT of the Action. By the same rule I intend in this place to
examine, who they may be, that have possessed the People so long in this
part of Christendome, with these Doctrines, contrary to the Peaceable
Societies of Mankind.




That The Church Militant Is The Kingdome Of God, Was First Taught By

The Church Of Rome

And first, to this Error, That The Present Church Now Militant On Earth,
Is The Kingdome Of God, (that is, the Kingdome of Glory, or the Land of
Promise; not the Kingdome of Grace, which is but a Promise of the
Land,) are annexed these worldly Benefits, First, that the Pastors,
and Teachers of the Church, are entitled thereby, as Gods Publique
Ministers, to a Right of Governing the Church; and consequently (because
the Church, and Common-wealth are the same Persons) to be Rectors, and
Governours of the Common-wealth. By this title it is, that the Pope
prevailed with the subjects of all Christian Princes, to beleeve, that
to disobey him, was to disobey Christ himselfe; and in all differences
between him and other Princes, (charmed with the word Power Spirituall,)
to abandon their lawfull Soveraigns; which is in effect an universall
Monarchy over all Christendome. For though they were first invested in
the right of being Supreme Teachers of Christian Doctrine, by, and
under Christian Emperors, within the limits of the Romane Empire (as is
acknowledged by themselves) by the title of Pontifex Maximus, who was an
Officer subject to the Civill State; yet after the Empire was divided,
and dissolved, it was not hard to obtrude upon the people already
subject to them, another Title, namely, the Right of St. Peter; not
onely to save entire their pretended Power; but also to extend the same
over the same Christian Provinces, though no more united in the Empire
of Rome. This Benefit of an Universall Monarchy, (considering the desire
of men to bear Rule) is a sufficient Presumption, that the popes that
pretended to it, and for a long time enjoyed it, were the Authors of
the Doctrine, by which it was obtained; namely, that the Church now
on Earth, is the Kingdome of Christ. For that granted, it must be
understood, that Christ hath some Lieutenant amongst us, by whom we are
to be told what are his Commandements.

After that certain Churches had renounced this universall Power of the
Pope, one would expect in reason, that the Civill Soveraigns in all
those Churches, should have recovered so much of it, as (before they had
unadvisedly let it goe) was their own Right, and in their own hands.
And in England it was so in effect; saving that they, by whom the Kings
administred the Government of Religion, by maintaining their imployment
to be in Gods Right, seemed to usurp, if not a Supremacy, yet an
Independency on the Civill Power: and they but seemed to usurp it, in
as much as they acknowledged a Right in the King, to deprive them of the
Exercise of their Functions at his pleasure.




And Maintained Also By The Presbytery

But in those places where the Presbytery took that Office, though many
other Doctrines of the Church of Rome were forbidden to be taught; yet
this Doctrine, that the Kingdome of Christ is already come, and that it
began at the Resurrection of our Saviour, was still retained. But Cui
Bono? What Profit did they expect from it? The same which the Popes
expected: to have a Soveraign Power over the People. For what is it for
men to excommunicate their lawful King, but to keep him from all places
of Gods publique Service in his own Kingdom? and with force to resist
him, when he with force endeavoureth to correct them? Or what is it,
without Authority from the Civill Soveraign, to excommunicate any
person, but to take from him his Lawfull Liberty, that is, to usurpe
an unlawfull Power over their Brethren? The Authors therefore of this
Darknesse in Religion, are the Romane, and the Presbyterian Clergy.




Infallibility

To this head, I referre also all those Doctrines, that serve them to
keep the possession of this spirituall Soveraignty after it is gotten.
As first, that the Pope In His Publique Capacity Cannot Erre. For who
is there, that beleeving this to be true, will not readily obey him in
whatsoever he commands?




Subjection Of Bishops

Secondly, that all other Bishops, in what Common-wealth soever, have
not their Right, neither immediately from God, nor mediately from their
Civill Soveraigns, but from the Pope, is a Doctrine, by which there
comes to be in every Christian Common-wealth many potent men, (for so
are Bishops,) that have their dependance on the Pope, and owe obedience
to him, though he be a forraign Prince; by which means he is able, (as
he hath done many times) to raise a Civill War against the State
that submits not it self to be governed according to his pleasure and
Interest.




Exemptions Of The Clergy

Thirdly, the exemption of these, and of all other Priests, and of all
Monkes, and Fryers, from the Power of the Civill Laws. For by this
means, there is a great part of every Common-wealth, that enjoy the
benefit of the Laws, and are protected by the Power of the Civill State,
which neverthelesse pay no part of the Publique expence; nor are
lyable to the penalties, as other Subjects, due to their crimes; and
consequently, stand not in fear of any man, but the Pope; and adhere to
him onely, to uphold his universall Monarchy.




The Names Of Sacerdotes, And Sacrifices

Fourthly, the giving to their Priests (which is no more in the New
Testament but Presbyters, that is, Elders) the name of Sacerdotes, that
is, Sacrificers, which was the title of the Civill Soveraign, and his
publique Ministers, amongst the Jews, whilest God was their King. Also,
the making the Lords Supper a Sacrifice, serveth to make the People
beleeve the Pope hath the same power over all Christian, that Moses
and Aaron had over the Jews; that is to say, all power, both Civill and
Ecclesiasticall, as the High Priest then had.




The Sacramentation Of Marriage

Fiftly, the teaching that Matrimony is a Sacrament, giveth to the
Clergy the Judging of the lawfulnesse of Marriages; and thereby, of what
Children are Legitimate; and consequently, of the Right of Succession to
haereditary Kingdomes.




The Single Life Of Priests

Sixtly, the Deniall of Marriage to Priests, serveth to assure this Power
of the pope over Kings. For if a King be a Priest, he cannot Marry, and
transmit his Kingdome to his Posterity; If he be not a Priest then the
Pope pretendeth this Authority Ecclesiasticall over him, and over his
people.




Auricular Confession

Seventhly, from Auricular Confession, they obtain, for the assurance of
their Power, better intelligence of the designs of Princes, and great
persons in the Civill State, than these can have of the designs of the
State Ecclesiasticall.




Canonization Of Saints, And Declaring Of Martyrs

Eighthly, by the Canonization of Saints, and declaring who are Martyrs,
they assure their Power, in that they induce simple men into an
obstinacy against the Laws and Commands of their Civill Soveraigns even
to death, if by the Popes excommunication, they be declared Heretiques
or Enemies to the Church; that is, (as they interpret it,) to the Pope.




Transubstantiation, Penance, Absolution

Ninthly, they assure the same, by the Power they ascribe to every
Priest, of making Christ; and by the Power of ordaining Pennance; and of
Remitting, and Retaining of sins.




Purgatory, Indulgences, Externall Works

Tenthly, by the Doctrine of Purgatory, of Justification by externall
works, and of Indulgences, the Clergy is enriched.




Daemonology And Exorcism

Eleventhly, by their Daemonology, and the use of Exorcisme, and other
things appertaining thereto, they keep (or thinke they keep) the People
more in awe of their Power.




School-Divinity

Lastly, the Metaphysiques, Ethiques, and Politiques of Aristotle, the
frivolous Distinctions, barbarous Terms, and obscure Language of the
Schoolmen, taught in the Universities, (which have been all erected and
regulated by the Popes Authority,) serve them to keep these Errors
from being detected, and to make men mistake the Ignis Fatuus of Vain
Philosophy, for the Light of the Gospell.




The Authors Of Spirituall Darknesse, Who They Be

To these, if they sufficed not, might be added other of their dark
Doctrines, the profit whereof redoundeth manifestly, to the setting up
of an unlawfull Power over the lawfull Soveraigns of Christian People;
or for the sustaining of the same, when it is set up; or to the worldly
Riches, Honour, and Authority of those that sustain it. And therefore by
the aforesaid rule, of Cui Bono, we may justly pronounce for the Authors
of all this Spirituall Darknesse, the Pope, and Roman Clergy, and
all those besides that endeavour to settle in the mindes of men this
erroneous Doctrine, that the Church now on Earth, is that Kingdome of
God mentioned in the Old and New Testament.

But the Emperours, and other Christian Soveraigns, under whose
Government these Errours, and the like encroachments of Ecclesiastiques
upon their Office, at first crept in, to the disturbance of their
possessions, and of the tranquillity of their Subjects, though they
suffered the same for want of foresight of the Sequel, and of insight
into the designs of their Teachers, may neverthelesse bee esteemed
accessories to their own, and the Publique dammage; For without
their Authority there could at first no seditious Doctrine have been
publiquely preached. I say they might have hindred the same in the
beginning: But when the people were once possessed by those spirituall
men, there was no humane remedy to be applyed, that any man could
invent: And for the remedies that God should provide, who never faileth
in his good time to destroy all the Machinations of men against the
Truth, wee are to attend his good pleasure, that suffereth many times
the prosperity of his enemies, together with their ambition, to grow
to such a height, as the violence thereof openeth the eyes, which the
warinesse of their predecessours had before sealed up, and makes men
by too much grasping let goe all, as Peters net was broken, by the
struggling of too great a multitude of Fishes; whereas the Impatience
of those, that strive to resist such encroachment, before their Subjects
eyes were opened, did but encrease the power they resisted. I doe not
therefore blame the Emperour Frederick for holding the stirrop to our
countryman Pope Adrian; for such was the disposition of his subjects
then, as if hee had not doe it, hee was not likely to have succeeded in
the Empire: But I blame those, that in the beginning, when their power
was entire, by suffering such Doctrines to be forged in the Universities
of their own Dominions, have holden the Stirrop to all the succeeding
Popes, whilest they mounted into the Thrones of all Christian
Soveraigns, to ride, and tire, both them, and their people, at their
pleasure.

But as the Inventions of men are woven, so also are they ravelled out;
the way is the same, but the order is inverted: The web begins at the
first Elements of Power, which are Wisdom, Humility, Sincerity, and
other vertues of the Apostles, whom the people converted, obeyed, out
of Reverence, not by Obligation: Their Consciences were free, and their
Words and Actions subject to none but the Civill Power. Afterwards the
Presbyters (as the Flocks of Christ encreased) assembling to consider
what they should teach, and thereby obliging themselves to teach nothing
against the Decrees of their Assemblies, made it to be thought the
people were thereby obliged to follow their Doctrine, and when
they refused, refused to keep them company, (that was then called
Excommunication,) not as being Infidels, but as being disobedient: And
this was the first knot upon their Liberty. And the number of Presbyters
encreasing, the Presbyters of the chief City or Province, got themselves
an authority over the parochiall Presbyters, and appropriated to
themselves the names of Bishops: And this was a second knot on Christian
Liberty. Lastly, the Bishop of Rome, in regard of the Imperiall City,
took upon him an Authority (partly by the wills of the Emperours
themselves, and by the title of Pontifex Maximus, and at last when the
Emperours were grown weak, by the priviledges of St. Peter) over all
other Bishops of the Empire: Which was the third and last knot, and the
whole Synthesis and Construction of the Pontificall Power.

And therefore the Analysis, or Resolution is by the same way; but
beginning with the knot that was last tyed; as wee may see in the
dissolution of the praeterpoliticall Church Government in England.

First, the Power of the Popes was dissolved totally by Queen Elizabeth;
and the Bishops, who before exercised their Functions in Right of the
Pope, did afterwards exercise the same in Right of the Queen and her
Successours; though by retaining the phrase of Jure Divino, they were
thought to demand it by immediate Right from God: And so was untyed the
first knot. After this, the Presbyterians lately in England obtained the
putting down of Episcopacy: And so was the second knot dissolved:
And almost at the same time, the Power was taken also from the
Presbyterians: And so we are reduced to the Independency of the
Primitive Christians to follow Paul, or Cephas, or Apollos, every man
as he liketh best: Which, if it be without contention, and without
measuring the Doctrine of Christ, by our affection to the Person of his
Minister, (the fault which the Apostle reprehended in the Corinthians,)
is perhaps the best: First, because there ought to be no Power over the
Consciences of men, but of the Word it selfe, working Faith in every
one, not alwayes according to the purpose of them that Plant and Water,
but of God himself, that giveth the Increase: and secondly, because it
is unreasonable in them, who teach there is such danger in every little
Errour, to require of a man endued with Reason of his own, to follow the
Reason of any other man, or of the most voices of many other men; Which
is little better, then to venture his Salvation at crosse and pile. Nor
ought those Teachers to be displeased with this losse of their antient
Authority: For there is none should know better then they, that power is
preserved by the same Vertues by which it is acquired; that is to
say, by Wisdome, Humility, Clearnesse of Doctrine, and sincerity of
Conversation; and not by suppression of the Naturall Sciences, and
of the Morality of Naturall Reason; nor by obscure Language; nor by
Arrogating to themselves more Knowledge than they make appear; nor by
Pious Frauds; nor by such other faults, as in the Pastors of Gods Church
are not only Faults, but also scandalls, apt to make men stumble one
time or other upon the suppression of their Authority.




Comparison Of The Papacy With The Kingdome Of Fayries

But after this Doctrine, "that the Church now Militant, is the Kingdome
of God spoken of in the Old and New Testament," was received in
the World; the ambition, and canvasing for the Offices that belong
thereunto, and especially for that great Office of being Christs
Lieutenant, and the Pompe of them that obtained therein the principal
Publique Charges, became by degrees so evident, that they lost the
inward Reverence due to the Pastorall Function: in so much as the Wisest
men, of them that had any power in the Civill State, needed nothing but
the authority of their Princes, to deny them any further Obedience. For,
from the time that the Bishop of Rome had gotten to be acknowledged for
Bishop Universall, by pretence of Succession to St. Peter, their whole
Hierarchy, or Kingdome of Darknesse, may be compared not unfitly to
the Kingdome of Fairies; that is, to the old wives Fables in England,
concerning Ghosts and Spirits, and the feats they play in the night. And
if a man consider the originall of this great Ecclesiasticall Dominion,
he will easily perceive, that the Papacy, is no other, than the Ghost of
the deceased Romane Empire, sitting crowned upon the grave thereof: For
so did the Papacy start up on a Sudden out of the Ruines of that Heathen
Power.

The Language also, which they use, both in the Churches, and in their
Publique Acts, being Latine, which is not commonly used by any Nation
now in the world, what is it but the Ghost of the Old Romane Language.

The Fairies in what Nation soever they converse, have but one Universall
King, which some Poets of ours call King Oberon; but the Scripture calls
Beelzebub, Prince of Daemons. The Ecclesiastiques likewise, in whose
Dominions soever they be found, acknowledge but one Universall King, the
Pope.

The Ecclesiastiques are Spirituall men, and Ghostly Fathers. The
Fairies are Spirits, and Ghosts. Fairies and Ghosts inhabite Darknesse,
Solitudes, and Graves. The Ecclesiastiques walke in Obscurity of
Doctrine, in Monasteries, Churches, and Churchyards.

The Ecclesiastiques have their Cathedral Churches; which, in what Towne
soever they be erected, by vertue of Holy Water, and certain Charmes
called Exorcismes, have the power to make those Townes, cities, that is
to say, Seats of Empire. The Fairies also have their enchanted Castles,
and certain Gigantique Ghosts, that domineer over the Regions round
about them.

The fairies are not to be seized on; and brought to answer for the hurt
they do. So also the Ecclesiastiques vanish away from the Tribunals of
Civill Justice.

The Ecclesiastiques take from young men, the use of Reason, by certain
Charms compounded of Metaphysiques, and Miracles, and Traditions, and
Abused Scripture, whereby they are good for nothing else, but to execute
what they command them. The Fairies likewise are said to take young
Children out of their Cradles, and to change them into Naturall Fools,
which Common people do therefore call Elves, and are apt to mischief.

In what Shop, or Operatory the Fairies make their Enchantment, the old
Wives have not determined. But the Operatories of the Clergy, are well
enough known to be the Universities, that received their Discipline from
Authority Pontificall.

When the Fairies are displeased with any body, they are said to
send their Elves, to pinch them. The Ecclesiastiques, when they are
displeased with any Civill State, make also their Elves, that is,
Superstitious, Enchanted Subjects, to pinch their Princes, by preaching
Sedition; or one Prince enchanted with promises, to pinch another.

The Fairies marry not; but there be amongst them Incubi, that have
copulation with flesh and bloud. The Priests also marry not.

The Ecclesiastiques take the Cream of the Land, by Donations of ignorant
men, that stand in aw of them, and by Tythes: So also it is in the Fable
of Fairies, that they enter into the Dairies, and Feast upon the Cream,
which they skim from the Milk.

What kind of Money is currant in the Kingdome of Fairies, is not
recorded in the Story. But the Ecclesiastiques in their Receipts accept
of the same Money that we doe; though when they are to make any Payment,
it is in Canonizations, Indulgences, and Masses.

To this, and such like resemblances between the Papacy, and the Kingdome
of Fairies, may be added this, that as the Fairies have no existence,
but in the Fancies of ignorant people, rising from the Traditions of old
Wives, or old Poets: so the Spirituall Power of the Pope (without the
bounds of his own Civill Dominion) consisteth onely in the Fear that
Seduced people stand in, of their Excommunication; upon hearing of false
Miracles, false Traditions, and false Interpretations of the Scripture.

It was not therefore a very difficult matter, for Henry 8. by his
Exorcisme; nor for Qu. Elizabeth by hers, to cast them out. But who
knows that this Spirit of Rome, now gone out, and walking by Missions
through the dry places of China, Japan, and the Indies, that yeeld him
little fruit, may not return, or rather an Assembly of Spirits worse
than he, enter, and inhabite this clean swept house, and make the End
thereof worse than the beginning? For it is not the Romane Clergy onely,
that pretends the Kingdome of God to be of this World, and thereby to
have a Power therein, distinct from that of the Civill State. And
this is all I had a designe to say, concerning the Doctrine of the
POLITIQUES. Which when I have reviewed, I shall willingly expose it to
the censure of my Countrey.




A REVIEW, AND CONCLUSION


From the contrariety of some of the Naturall Faculties of the Mind, one
to another, as also of one Passion to another, and from their reference
to Conversation, there has been an argument taken, to inferre an
impossibility that any one man should be sufficiently disposed to all
sorts of Civill duty. The Severity of Judgment, they say, makes men
Censorious, and unapt to pardon the Errours and Infirmities of other
men: and on the other side, Celerity of Fancy, makes the thoughts lesse
steddy than is necessary, to discern exactly between Right and Wrong.
Again, in all Deliberations, and in all Pleadings, the faculty of solid
Reasoning, is necessary: for without it, the Resolutions of men are
rash, and their Sentences unjust: and yet if there be not powerfull
Eloquence, which procureth attention and Consent, the effect of Reason
will be little. But these are contrary Faculties; the former being
grounded upon principles of Truth; the other upon Opinions already
received, true, or false; and upon the Passions and Interests of men,
which are different, and mutable.

And amongst the Passions, Courage, (by which I mean the Contempt of
Wounds, and violent Death) enclineth men to private Revenges, and
sometimes to endeavour the unsetling of the Publique Peace; And
Timorousnesse, many times disposeth to the desertion of the Publique
Defence. Both these they say cannot stand together in the same person.

And to consider the contrariety of mens Opinions, and Manners in
generall, It is they say, impossible to entertain a constant Civill
Amity with all those, with whom the Businesse of the world constrains
us to converse: Which Businesse consisteth almost in nothing else but a
perpetuall contention for Honor, Riches, and Authority.

To which I answer, that these are indeed great difficulties, but not
Impossibilities: For by Education, and Discipline, they may bee, and
are sometimes reconciled. Judgment, and Fancy may have place in the
same man; but by turnes; as the end which he aimeth at requireth. As the
Israelites in Egypt, were sometimes fastened to their labour of making
Bricks, and other times were ranging abroad to gather Straw: So also may
the Judgment sometimes be fixed upon one certain Consideration, and
the Fancy at another time wandring about the world. So also Reason,
and Eloquence, (though not perhaps in the Naturall Sciences, yet in the
Morall) may stand very well together. For wheresoever there is place for
adorning and preferring of Errour, there is much more place for adorning
and preferring of Truth, if they have it to adorn. Nor is there any
repugnancy between fearing the Laws, and not fearing a publique Enemy;
nor between abstaining from Injury, and pardoning it in others. There is
therefore no such Inconsistence of Humane Nature, with Civill Duties,
as some think. I have known cleernesse of Judgment, and largenesse of
Fancy; strength of Reason, and gracefull Elocution; a Courage for the
Warre, and a Fear for the Laws, and all eminently in one man; and that
was my most noble and honored friend Mr. Sidney Godolphin; who hating no
man, nor hated of any, was unfortunately slain in the beginning of the
late Civill warre, in the Publique quarrel, by an indiscerned, and an
undiscerning hand.

To the Laws of Nature, declared in the 15. Chapter, I would have this
added, "That every man is bound by Nature, as much as in him lieth, to
protect in Warre, the Authority, by which he is himself protected in
time of Peace. " For he that pretendeth a Right of Nature to preserve
his owne body, cannot pretend a Right of Nature to destroy him, by whose
strength he is preserved: It is a manifest contradiction of himselfe.
And though this Law may bee drawn by consequence, from some of those
that are there already mentioned; yet the Times require to have it
inculcated, and remembred.

And because I find by divers English Books lately printed, that the
Civill warres have not yet sufficiently taught men, in what point of
time it is, that a Subject becomes obliged to the Conquerour; nor what
is Conquest; nor how it comes about, that it obliges men to obey his
Laws: Therefore for farther satisfaction of men therein, I say, the
point of time, wherein a man becomes subject of a Conquerour, is that
point, wherein having liberty to submit to him, he consenteth, either by
expresse words, or by other sufficient sign, to be his Subject. When it
is that a man hath the liberty to submit, I have showed before in the
end of the 21. Chapter; namely, that for him that hath no obligation to
his former Soveraign but that of an ordinary Subject, it is then, when
the means of his life is within the Guards and Garrisons of the Enemy;
for it is then, that he hath no longer Protection from him, but is
protected by the adverse party for his Contribution. Seeing
therefore such contribution is every where, as a thing inevitable,
(notwithstanding it be an assistance to the Enemy,) esteemed lawfull;
as totall Submission, which is but an assistance to the Enemy, cannot
be esteemed unlawfull. Besides, if a man consider that they who submit,
assist the Enemy but with part of their estates, whereas they that
refuse, assist him with the whole, there is no reason to call their
Submission, or Composition an Assistance; but rather a Detriment to the
Enemy. But if a man, besides the obligation of a Subject, hath taken
upon him a new obligation of a Souldier, then he hath not the liberty
to submit to a new Power, as long as the old one keeps the field, and
giveth him means of subsistence, either in his Armies, or Garrisons:
for in this case, he cannot complain of want of Protection, and means to
live as a Souldier: But when that also failes, a Souldier also may seek
his Protection wheresoever he has most hope to have it; and may lawfully
submit himself to his new Master. And so much for the Time when he may
do it lawfully, if hee will. If therefore he doe it, he is undoubtedly
bound to be a true Subject: For a Contract lawfully made, cannot
lawfully be broken.

By this also a man may understand, when it is, that men may be said to
be Conquered; and in what the nature of Conquest, and the Right of a
Conquerour consisteth: For this Submission is it implyeth them all.
Conquest, is not the Victory it self; but the Acquisition by Victory,
of a Right, over the persons of men. He therefore that is slain, is
Overcome, but not Conquered; He that is taken, and put into prison, or
chaines, is not Conquered, though Overcome; for he is still an Enemy,
and may save himself if hee can: But he that upon promise of Obedience,
hath his Life and Liberty allowed him, is then Conquered, and a Subject;
and not before. The Romanes used to say, that their Generall had
Pacified such a Province, that is to say, in English, Conquered it; and
that the Countrey was Pacified by Victory, when the people of it
had promised Imperata Facere, that is, To Doe What The Romane People
Commanded Them: this was to be Conquered. But this promise may be either
expresse, or tacite: Expresse, by Promise: Tacite, by other signes. As
for example, a man that hath not been called to make such an expresse
Promise, (because he is one whose power perhaps is not considerable;)
yet if he live under their Protection openly, hee is understood to
submit himselfe to the Government: But if he live there secretly, he is
lyable to any thing that may bee done to a Spie, and Enemy of the State.
I say not, hee does any Injustice, (for acts of open Hostility bear not
that name); but that he may be justly put to death. Likewise, if a man,
when his Country is conquered, be out of it, he is not Conquered, nor
Subject: but if at his return, he submit to the Government, he is bound
to obey it. So that Conquest (to define it) is the Acquiring of the
Right of Soveraignty by Victory. Which Right, is acquired, in the
peoples Submission, by which they contract with the Victor, promising
Obedience, for Life and Liberty.

In the 29th Chapter I have set down for one of the causes of the
Dissolutions of Common-wealths, their Imperfect Generation, consisting
in the want of an Absolute and Arbitrary Legislative Power; for want
whereof, the Civill Soveraign is fain to handle the Sword of Justice
unconstantly, and as if it were too hot for him to hold: One reason
whereof (which I have not there mentioned) is this, That they will all
of them justifie the War, by which their Power was at first gotten,
and whereon (as they think) their Right dependeth, and not on the
Possession. As if, for example, the Right of the Kings of England did
depend on the goodnesse of the cause of William the Conquerour, and upon
their lineall, and directest Descent from him; by which means, there
would perhaps be no tie of the Subjects obedience to their Soveraign
at this day in all the world: wherein whilest they needlessely think to
justifie themselves, they justifie all the successefull Rebellions that
Ambition shall at any time raise against them, and their Successors.
Therefore I put down for one of the most effectuall seeds of the Death
of any State, that the Conquerours require not onely a Submission of
mens actions to them for the future, but also an Approbation of all
their actions past; when there is scarce a Common-wealth in the world,
whose beginnings can in conscience be justified.

And because the name of Tyranny, signifieth nothing more, nor lesse,
than the name of Soveraignty, be it in one, or many men, saving that
they that use the former word, are understood to bee angry with them
they call Tyrants; I think the toleration of a professed hatred of
Tyranny, is a Toleration of hatred to Common-wealth in general, and
another evill seed, not differing much from the former. For to the
Justification of the Cause of a Conqueror, the Reproach of the Cause
of the Conquered, is for the most part necessary: but neither of them
necessary for the Obligation of the Conquered. And thus much I have
thought fit to say upon the Review of the first and second part of this
Discourse.

In the 35th Chapter, I have sufficiently declared out of the Scripture,
that in the Common-wealth of the Jewes, God himselfe was made the
Soveraign, by Pact with the People; who were therefore called his
Peculiar People, to distinguish them from the rest of the world, over
whom God reigned not by their Consent, but by his own Power: And that
in this Kingdome Moses was Gods Lieutenant on Earth; and that it was he
that told them what Laws God appointed to doe Execution; especially
in Capitall Punishments; not then thinking it a matter of so necessary
consideration, as I find it since. Wee know that generally in all
Common-wealths, the Execution of Corporeall Punishments, was either put
upon the Guards, or other Souldiers of the Soveraign Power; or given
to those, in whom want of means, contempt of honour, and hardnesse of
heart, concurred, to make them sue for such an Office. But amongst the
Israelites it was a Positive Law of God their Soveraign, that he that
was convicted of a capitall Crime, should be stoned to death by the
People; and that the Witnesses should cast the first Stone, and after
the Witnesses, then the rest of the People. This was a Law that designed
who were to be the Executioners; but not that any one should throw a
Stone at him before Conviction and Sentence, where the Congregation
was Judge. The Witnesses were neverthelesse to be heard before they
proceeded to Execution, unlesse the Fact were committed in the presence
of the Congregation it self, or in sight of the lawfull Judges; for
then there needed no other Witnesses but the Judges themselves.
Neverthelesse, this manner of proceeding being not throughly understood,
hath given occasion to a dangerous opinion, that any man may kill
another, is some cases, by a Right of Zeal; as if the Executions done
upon Offenders in the Kingdome of God in old time, proceeded not from
the Soveraign Command, but from the Authority of Private Zeal: which, if
we consider the texts that seem to favour it, is quite contrary.

First, where the Levites fell upon the People, that had made and
worshipped the Golden Calfe, and slew three thousand of them; it was by
the Commandement of Moses, from the mouth of God; as is manifest, Exod.
32. 27. And when the Son of a woman of Israel had blasphemed God, they
that heard it, did not kill him, but brought him before Moses, who
put him under custody, till God should give Sentence against him; as
appears, Levit. 25. 11, 12. Again, (Numbers 25. 6, 7. ) when Phinehas
killed Zimri and Cosbi, it was not by right of Private Zeale: Their
Crime was committed in the sight of the Assembly; there needed
no Witnesse; the Law was known, and he the heir apparent to the
Soveraignty; and which is the principall point, the Lawfulnesse of his
Act depended wholly upon a subsequent Ratification by Moses, whereof he
had no cause to doubt. And this Presumption of a future Ratification, is
sometimes necessary to the safety [of] a Common-wealth; as in a sudden
Rebellion, any man that can suppresse it by his own Power in the
Countrey where it begins, may lawfully doe it, and provide to have it
Ratified, or Pardoned, whilest it is in doing, or after it is done. Also
Numb. 35. 30. it is expressely said, "Whosoever shall kill the Murtherer,
shall kill him upon the word of Witnesses:" but Witnesses suppose
a formall Judicature, and consequently condemn that pretence of Jus
Zelotarum. The Law of Moses concerning him that enticeth to Idolatry,
(that is to say, in the Kingdome of God to a renouncing of his
Allegiance) (Deut. 13. 8. ) forbids to conceal him, and commands the
Accuser to cause him to be put to death, and to cast the first stone at
him; but not to kill him before he be Condemned. And (Deut. 17. ver. 4,
5, 6. ) the Processe against Idolatry is exactly set down: For God there
speaketh to the People, as Judge, and commandeth them, when a man is
Accused of Idolatry, to Enquire diligently of the Fact, and finding it
true, then to Stone him; but still the hand of the Witnesse throweth
the first stone. This is not Private Zeal, but Publique Condemnation. In
like manner when a Father hath a rebellious Son, the Law is (Deut.