A Theologico-Political Treatise (Part IV)

8/19/2019 A Theologico-Political Treatise (Part IV)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/a-theologico-political-treatise-part-iv 1/83

A Theologico-Political Treatise (Part IV)

Benedict de Spinoza

A Theologico-Political Treatise (Part III)

*The Project Gutenberg Etext of A Theologico-Political Treatise*This is Part I!" in our series b# Spinoza $%riginall# Published Anon#&ousl#'

Translated b# () ) +) El,es

op#right la,s are changing all o.er the ,orld/ be sure to chec0

the cop#right la,s for #our countr# before posting these files11

Please ta0e a loo0 at the i&portant infor&ation in this header)2e encourage #ou to 0eep this file on #our o,n dis0/ 0eeping anelectronic path open for the next readers) 3o not re&o.e this)

**2elco&e To The 2orld of 4ree Plain anilla Electronic Texts**

**Etexts (eadable B# Both u&ans and B# o&puters/ Since 5"65**

*These Etexts Prepared B# undreds of olunteers and 3onations*

Infor&ation on contacting Project Gutenberg to get Etexts/ andfurther infor&ation is included belo,) 2e need #our donations)

A Theologico-Political Treatise $Part I'

b# Benedict de Spinoza

Also 0no,n as Baruch Spinoza


7ul#/ 5""6 $Etext !""8'

*The Project Gutenberg Etext of A Theologico-Political Treatise******This file should be na&ed 9spnt5:)txt or 9spnt5:)zip******

orrected E3ITI%;S of our etexts get a ne, ;<+BE(/ 9spnt55)txt)E(SI%;S based on separate sources get ne, =ETTE(/ 9spnt5:a)txt)

This Etext ,as created b# 7oseph B) >essel&an j#sel&an?erols)co&

Please send corrections to hi& and also to hart?pobox)co&



2e are no, tr#ing to release all our boo0s one &onth in ad.anceof the official release dates/ for ti&e for better editing)

Please note@ neither this list nor its contents are final till&idnight of the last da# of the &onth of an# such announce&ent)

The official release date of all Project Gutenberg Etexts is at+idnight/ entral Ti&e/ of the last da# of the stated &onth) Apreli&inar# .ersion &a# often be posted for suggestion/ co&&entand editing b# those ,ho ,ish to do so) To be sure #ou ha.e anup to date first edition $xxxxx5:x)xxx' please chec0 file sizesin the first ,ee0 of the next &onth) Since our ftp progra& hasa bug in it that scra&bles the date $tried to fix and failed' aloo0 at the file size ,ill ha.e to do/ but ,e ,ill tr# to see ane, cop# has at least one b#te &ore or less)

Infor&ation about Project Gutenberg one page

2e produce about t,o &illion dollars for each hour ,e ,or0) Thefift# hours is one conser.ati.e esti&ate for ho, long it ,e ta0eto get an# etext selected/ entered/ proofread/ edited/ cop#rightsearched and anal#zed/ the cop#right letters ,ritten/ etc) Thisprojected audience is one hundred &illion readers) If our .alueper text is no&inall# esti&ated at one dollar then ,e produce C8&illion dollars per hour this #ear as ,e release thirt#-t,o textfiles per &onth@ or 9:: &ore Etexts in 5""D for a total of ::)If these reach just 5:F of the co&puterized population/ then thetotal should reach : billion Etexts)

The Goal of Project Gutenberg is to Gi.e A,a# %ne Trillion Etext4iles b# the 3ece&ber 5/ 8::5) $5:/::: x 5::/:::/:::HTrillion'This is ten thousand titles each to one hundred &illion readers/,hich is onl# 5:F of the present nu&ber of co&puter users) 8::5should ha.e at least t,ice as &an# co&puter users as that/ so it,ill reuire us reaching less than JF of the users in 8::5)

2e need #our donations &ore than e.er1

All donations should be &ade to KProject GutenbergL+<K@ and are

tax deductible to the extent allo,able b# la,) +< H arnegie-+ellon <ni.ersit#)

4or these and other &atters/ please &ail to@

Project GutenbergP) %) Box 868ha&paign/ I= D58J

2hen all other e&ail fails tr# our Executi.e 3irector@+ichael S) art Mhart?pobox)co&N

2e ,ould prefer to send #ou this infor&ation b# e&ailInternet/ Bitnet/ o&puser.e/ ATT+AI= or +I&ail)



******If #ou ha.e an 4TP progra& or e&ulator/ please4TP directl# to the Project Gutenberg archi.es@$+ac users/ do ;%T point and clic0) ) )t#pe'

ftp uiarchi.e)cso)uiuc)edu

login@ anon#&ouspass,ord@ #our?logincd etextLetext": through Letext"Dor cd etextLarticles $get suggest gut for &ore infor&ation'dir $to see files'get or &get $to get files) ) )set bin for zip files'GET I;3EO::)G<Tfor a list of boo0sandGET ;E2 G<T for general infor&ationand+GET G<T* for ne,sletters)

**Infor&ation prepared b# the Project Gutenberg legal ad.isor**Three Pages

***STA(T**TE S+A== P(I;T1**4%( P<B=I 3%+AI; ETEOTS**STA(T***2h# is this KS&all Print1K state&ent here >ou 0no,@ la,#ers)The# tell us #ou &ight sue us if there is so&ething ,rong ,ith#our cop# of this etext/ e.en if #ou got it for free fro&so&eone other than us/ and e.en if ,hatQs ,rong is not our fault) So/ a&ong other things/ this KS&all Print1K state&entdisclai&s &ost of our liabilit# to #ou) It also tells #ou ho,

#ou can distribute copies of this etext if #ou ,ant to)

*BE4%(E1* >%< <SE %( (EA3 TIS ETEOTB# using or reading an# part of this P(%7ET G<TE;BE(G-t&etext/ #ou indicate that #ou understand/ agree to and acceptthis KS&all Print1K state&ent) If #ou do not/ #ou can recei.ea refund of the &one# if an# #ou paid for this etext b#sending a reuest ,ithin : da#s of recei.ing it to the person#ou got it fro&) If #ou recei.ed this etext on a ph#sical&ediu& such as a dis0/ #ou &ust return it ,ith #our reuest)

AB%<T P(%7ET G<TE;BE(G-T+ ETEOTS

This P(%7ET G<TE;BE(G-t& etext/ li0e &ost P(%7ET G<TE;BE(G-t& etexts/ is a Kpublic do&ainK ,or0 distributed b# Professor +ichael S) art through the Project Gutenberg Association atarnegie-+ellon <ni.ersit# the KProjectK) A&ong other things/ this &eans that no one o,ns a <nited States cop#righton or for this ,or0/ so the Project and #ou1 can cop# anddistribute it in the <nited States ,ithout per&ission and,ithout pa#ing cop#right ro#alties) Special rules/ set forthbelo,/ appl# if #ou ,ish to cop# and distribute this etextunder the ProjectQs KP(%7ET G<TE;BE(GK trade&ar0)

To create these etexts/ the Project expends considerable

efforts to identif#/ transcribe and proofread public do&ain,or0s) 3espite these efforts/ the ProjectQs etexts and an#&ediu& the# &a# be on &a# contain K3efectsK) A&ong other



things/ 3efects &a# ta0e the for& of inco&plete/ inaccurate or corrupt data/ transcription errors/ a cop#right or other intellectual propert# infringe&ent/ a defecti.e or da&ageddis0 or other etext &ediu&/ a co&puter .irus/ or co&puter codes that da&age or cannot be read b# #our euip&ent)

=I+ITE3 2A((A;T>R 3IS=AI+E( %4 3A+AGESBut for the K(ight of (eplace&ent or (efundK described belo,/$5' the Project and an# other part# #ou &a# recei.e thisetext fro& as a P(%7ET G<TE;BE(G-t& etext disclai&s allliabilit# to #ou for da&ages/ costs and expenses/ includinglegal fees/ and $8' >%< AE ;% (E+E3IES 4%( ;EG=IGE;E %(<;3E( ST(IT =IABI=IT>/ %( 4%( B(EA %4 2A((A;T> %( %;T(AT/I;=<3I;G B<T ;%T =I+ITE3 T% I;3I(ET/ %;SE<E;TIA=/ P<;ITIE%( I;I3E;TA= 3A+AGES/ EE; I4 >%< GIE ;%TIE %4 TEP%SSIBI=IT> %4 S< 3A+AGES)

If #ou disco.er a 3efect in this etext ,ithin ": da#s of

recei.ing it/ #ou can recei.e a refund of the &one# if an##ou paid for it b# sending an explanator# note ,ithin thatti&e to the person #ou recei.ed it fro&) If #ou recei.ed iton a ph#sical &ediu&/ #ou &ust return it ,ith #our note/ andsuch person &a# choose to alternati.el# gi.e #ou a replace&entcop#) If #ou recei.ed it electronicall#/ such person &a#choose to alternati.el# gi.e #ou a second opportunit# torecei.e it electronicall#)

TIS ETEOT IS %TE(2ISE P(%I3E3 T% >%< KAS-ISK) ;% %TE(2A((A;TIES %4 A;> I;3/ EOP(ESS %( I+P=IE3/ A(E +A3E T% >%< AST% TE ETEOT %( A;> +E3I<+ IT +A> BE %;/ I;=<3I;G B<T ;%T

=I+ITE3 T% 2A((A;TIES %4 +E(A;TABI=IT> %( 4IT;ESS 4%( APA(TI<=A( P<(P%SE)

So&e states do not allo, disclai&ers of i&plied ,arranties or the exclusion or li&itation of conseuential da&ages/ so theabo.e disclai&ers and exclusions &a# not appl# to #ou/ and #ou&a# ha.e other legal rights)

I;3E+;IT>>ou ,ill inde&nif# and hold the Project/ its directors/officers/ &e&bers and agents har&less fro& all liabilit#/ costand expense/ including legal fees/ that arise directl# or

indirectl# fro& an# of the follo,ing that #ou do or cause@$5' distribution of this etext/ $8' alteration/ &odification/or addition to the etext/ or $' an# 3efect)

3IST(IB<TI%; <;3E( KP(%7ET G<TE;BE(G-t&K>ou &a# distribute copies of this etext electronicall#/ or b#dis0/ boo0 or an# other &ediu& if #ou either delete thisKS&all Print1K and all other references to Project Gutenberg/or@

$5' %nl# gi.e exact copies of it) A&ong other things/ this reuires that #ou do not re&o.e/ alter or &odif# the

etext or this Ks&all print1K state&ent) >ou &a# ho,e.er/ if #ou ,ish/ distribute this etext in &achine readable binar#/ co&pressed/ &ar0-up/ or proprietar# for&/



including an# for& resulting fro& con.ersion b# ,ord pro- cessing or h#pertext soft,are/ but onl# so long as *EITE(*@

$*' The etext/ ,hen displa#ed/ is clearl# readable/ and does *not* contain characters other than those

intended b# the author of the ,or0/ although tilde U/ asteris0 * and underline V characters &a# be used to con.e# punctuation intended b# the author/ and additional characters &a# be used to indicate h#pertext lin0sR %(

$*' The etext &a# be readil# con.erted b# the reader at no expense into plain ASII/ EB3I or eui.alent for& b# the progra& that displa#s the etext as is the case/ for instance/ ,ith &ost ,ord processorsR %(

$*' >ou pro.ide/ or agree to also pro.ide on reuest at no additional cost/ fee or expense/ a cop# of the etext in its original plain ASII for& or in EB3I or other eui.alent proprietar# for&)

$8' onor the etext refund and replace&ent pro.isions of this KS&all Print1K state&ent)

$' Pa# a trade&ar0 license fee to the Project of 8:F of the net profits #ou deri.e calculated using the &ethod #ou alread# use to calculate #our applicable taxes) If #ou donQt deri.e profits/ no ro#alt# is due) (o#alties are

pa#able to KProject Gutenberg AssociationLarnegie-+ellon <ni.ersit#K ,ithin the D: da#s follo,ing each date #ou prepare or ,ere legall# reuired to prepare #our annual or eui.alent periodic tax return)

2AT I4 >%< *2A;T* T% SE;3 +%;E> EE; I4 >%< 3%;QT AE T%The Project gratefull# accepts contributions in &one#/ ti&e/scanning &achines/ %( soft,are/ public do&ain etexts/ ro#alt#free cop#right licenses/ and e.er# other sort of contribution#ou can thin0 of) +one# should be paid to KProject Gutenberg Association L arnegie-+ellon <ni.ersit#K)

*E;3*TE S+A== P(I;T1 4%( P<B=I 3%+AI; ETEOTS*er):9)8")"*E;3*

This Etext ,as created b# 7oseph B) >essel&an j#sel&an?erols)co&Please send corrections to hi& and also to hart?pobox)co&

Part 5 - hapters I to - 5spnt5:)txt

Part 8 - hapters I to O - 8spnt5:)txtPart - hapters OI to O - spnt5:)txtPart 9 - hapters OI to OO - 9spnt5:)txt



Sentence ;u&bers/ sho,n thus 5/ ha.e been added b# .olunteer)

A Theologico-Political Treatise

Part I of I - hapters OI to OO

b# Baruch Spinoza

TAB=E %4 %;TE;TS@ Search strings are sho,n thus $5D@x') Search for,ard and bac0 ,ith the sa&e string)

$5D@:' APTE( OI - %f the 4oundations of a StateR of the ;atural and i.il (ights of Indi.idualsR and of the (ights of the So.ereign Po,er)

$5D@5' In ;ature right co-extensi.e ,ith po,er)

$5D@8' This principle applies to &an0ind in the state of ;ature)

$5D@' o, a transition fro& this state to a ci.il state is possible)

$5D@9' Subjects not sla.es)

$5D@J' 3efinition of pri.ate ci.il right - and ,rong)

$5D@D' %f alliance)

$5D@6' %f treason)

$5D@' In ,hat sense so.ereigns are bound b# 3i.ine la,)

$5D@"' i.il go.ern&ent not inconsistent ,ith religion)

$56@:' APTE( OII)- It is sho,n/ that no one can or need transfer all his (ights to the So.ereign Po,er) %f the ebre, (epublic/ as it ,as during the lifeti&e of +oses/ and after his death till the foundation of the +onarch#R and of its Excellence) =astl#/ of the auses ,h# the Theocratic (epublic fell/ and ,h# it could hardl# ha.e

continued ,ithout 3issension)

$56@5' The absolute theor#/ of So.ereignt# ideal - ;o one can



in fact transfer all his rights to the So.ereign po,er) E.idence of this)

$56@8' The greatest danger in all States fro& ,ithin/ not ,ithout)

$56@' %riginal independence of the 7e,s after the Exodus)

$56@9' hanged first to a pure de&ocratic Theocrac#)

$56@J' Then to subjection to +oses)

$56@D' Then to a Theocrac# ,ith the po,er di.ided bet,een the high priest and the captains)

$56@6' The tribes confederate states)

$56@' (estraints on the ci.il po,er)

$56@"' (estraints on the people)

$56@A' auses of deca# in.ol.ed in the constitution of the =e.itical priesthood)

$5@:' APTE( OIII)- 4ro& the o&&on,ealth of the ebre,s and their istor# certain =essons are deduced)

$5@5' The ebre, constitution no longer possible or desirable/

#et lessons &a# be deri.ed fro& its histor#)

$5@8' As the danger of entrusting an# authorit# in politics to ecclesiastics - the danger of identif#ing religion ,ith dog&a)

$5@' The necessit# of 0eeping all judicial po,er ,ith the so.ereign - the danger of changes in the for& of a State)

$5@9' This last danger illustrated fro& the histor# of England - of (o&e)

$5@J' And of olland)

$5"@:' APTE( OIO - It is sho,n that the (ight o.er +atters Spiritual lies ,holl# ,ith the So.ereign/ and that the %ut,ard 4or&s of (eligion should be in accordance ,ith Public Peace/ if ,e ,ould ,orship God aright)

$5"@5' 3ifference bet,een external and in,ard religion)

$5"@8' Positi.e la, established onl# b# agree&ent)



$5"@' Piet# furthered b# peace and obedience)

$5"@9' Position of the Apostles exceptional)

$5"@J' 2h# hristian States/ unli0e the ebre,/ suffer fro& disputes bet,een the ci.il

and ecclesiastical po,ers)

$5"@D' Absolute po,er in things spiritual of &odern rulers)

$8:@:' APTE( OO - That in a 4ree State e.er# &an&a# Thin0 ,hat he =i0es/ and Sa# ,hat he Thin0s)

$8:@5' The &ind not subject to State authorit#)

$8:@8' Therefore in general language should not be)

$8:@' A &an ,ho disappro.ing of a la,/ sub&its his ad.erse opinion to the judg&ent of the authorities/ ,hile acting in accordance ,ith the la,/ deser.es ,ell of the State)

$8:@9' That libert# of opinion is beneficial/ sho,n fro& the histor# of A&sterda&)

$8:@J' 3anger to the State of ,ithholding it) - Sub&ission of the Author to the judg&ent of his countr#Qs rulers)

$AuthorQs Endnotes' to the Treatise)

$5D@:' APTE( OI - %4 TE 4%<;3ATI%;S %4 A STATER %4 TE;AT<(A= A;3 II= (IGTS %4 I;3II3<A=SR A;3 %4 TE(IGTS %4 TE S%E(EIG; P%2E()

5 itherto our care has been to separate philosoph# fro& theolog#/ and tosho, the freedo& of thought ,hich such separation insures to both) 8 It isno, ti&e to deter&ine the li&its to ,hich such freedo& of thought anddiscussion &a# extend itself in the ideal state) 4or the dueconsideration of this uestion ,e &ust exa&ine the foundations of a State/first turning our attention to the natural rights of indi.iduals/ andafter,ards to religion and the state as a ,hole)

5D@9 B# the right and ordinance of nature/ I &erel# &ean those naturalla,s ,here,ith ,e concei.e e.er# indi.idual to be conditioned b# nature/ soas to li.e and act in a gi.en ,a#) J 4or instance/ fishes are naturall#conditioned for s,i&&ing/ and the greater for de.ouring the lessR therefore

fishes enjo# the ,ater/ and the greater de.our the less b# so.ereign naturalright) $5D@5' D 4or it is certain that nature/ ta0en in the abstract/ hasso.ereign right to do an#thing/ she canR in other ,ords/ her right is co-



extensi.e ,ith her po,er) 6 The po,er of nature is the po,er of God/ ,hichhas so.ereign right o.er all thingsR and/ inas&uch as the po,er of natureis si&pl# the aggregate of the po,ers of all her indi.idual co&ponents/ itfollo,s that e.er#/ indi.idual has so.ereign right to do all that he canR inother ,ords/ the rights of an indi.idual extend to the ut&ost li&its of hispo,er as it has been conditioned) ;o, it is the so.ereign la, and right

of nature that each indi.idual should endea.our to preser.e itself as it is/,ithout regard to an#thing but itself R therefore this so.ereign la, andright belongs to e.er# indi.idual/ na&el#/ to exist and act accordingto its natural conditions) " 2e do not here ac0no,ledge an#difference bet,een &an0ind and other indi.idual natural entities/ nor bet,een &en endo,ed ,ith reason and those to ,ho& reason is un0no,nR nor bet,een fools/ &ad&en/ and sane &en) 5: 2hatsoe.er an indi.idual does b#the la,s of its nature it has a so.ereign right to do/ inas&uch as itacts as it ,as conditioned b# nature/ and cannot act other,ise) $5D@8' 552herefore a&ong &en/ so long as the# are considered as li.ing under the s,a#of nature/ he ,ho does not #et 0no, reason/ or ,ho has not #et acuired thehabit of .irtue/ acts solel# according to the la,s of his desire ,ith as

so.ereign a right as he ,ho orders his life entirel# b# the la,s of reason)

5D@58 That is/ as the ,ise &an has so.ereign right to do all that reasondictates/ or to li.e according to the la,s of reason/ so also the ignorantand foolish &an has so.ereign right to do all that desire dictates/ or toli.e according to the la,s of desire) 5 This is identical ,ith theteaching of Paul/ ,ho ac0no,ledges that pre.ious to the la, - that is/ solong as &en are considered of as li.ing under the s,a# of nature/ there isno sin)

5D@59 The natural right of the indi.idual &an is thus deter&ined/ not b#sound reason/ but b# desire and po,er) 5J All are not naturall#

conditioned so as to act according to the la,s and rules of reasonR na#/ onthe contrar#/ all &en are born ignorant/ and before the# can learn theright ,a# of life and acuire the habit of .irtue/ the greater part of their life/ e.en if the# ha.e been ,ell brought up/ has passed a,a#) 5D;e.ertheless/ the# are in the &ean,hile bound to li.e and preser.ethe&sel.es as far as the# can b# the unaided i&pulses of desire) 56 ;aturehas gi.en the& no other guide/ and has denied the& the present po,er of li.ing according to sound reasonR so that the# are no &ore bound to li.e b#the dictates of an enlightened &ind/ than a cat is bound to li.e b# the la,sof the nature of a lion)

5D@5 2hatsoe.er/ therefore/ an indi.idual considered as under the s,a#

of nature thin0s useful for hi&self/ ,hether led b# sound reason or i&pelled b# the passions/ that he has a so.ereign right to see0 and to ta0efor hi&self as he best can/ ,hether b# force/ cunning/ entreat#/ or an#other &eansR conseuentl# he &a# regard as an ene&# an#one ,ho hindersthe acco&plish&ent of his purpose)

5D@5" It follo,s fro& ,hat ,e ha.e said that the right and ordinance of nature/ under ,hich all &en are born/ and under ,hich the# &ostl# li.e/ onl#prohibits such things as no one desires/ and no one can attain@ it does notforbid strife/ nor hatred/ nor anger/ nor deceit/ nor/ indeed/ an# of the &eans suggested b# desire)

5D@8: This ,e need not ,onder at/ for nature is not bounded b# the la,s of hu&an reason/ ,hich ai&s onl# at &anQs true benefit and preser.ationR her li&its are infinitel# ,ider/ and ha.e reference to the eternal order of



nature/ ,herein &an is but a spec0R it is b# the necessit# of this alonethat all indi.iduals are conditioned for li.ing and acting in a particular ,a#) 85 If an#thing/ therefore/ in nature see&s to us ridiculous/ absurd/or e.il/ it is because ,e onl# 0no, in part/ and are al&ost entirel#ignorant of the order and interdependence of nature as a ,hole/ and alsobecause ,e ,ant e.er#thing to be arranged according to the dictates of our

hu&an reasonR in realit# that ,hich reason considers e.il/ is not e.il inrespect to the order and la,s of nature as a ,hole/ but onl# in respect tothe la,s of our reason)

5D@88 ;e.ertheless/ no one can doubt that it is &uch better for us to li.eaccording to the la,s and assured dictates of reason/ for/ as ,e said/ the#ha.e &enQs true good for their object) 8 +oreo.er/ e.er#one ,ishes toli.e as far as possible securel# be#ond the reach of fear/ and this ,ould beuite i&possible so long as e.er#one did e.er#thing he li0ed/ and reasonQsclai& ,as lo,ered to a par ,ith those of hatred and angerR there is no one,ho is not ill at ease in the &idst of en&it#/ hatred/ anger/ and deceit/and ,ho does not see0 to a.oid the& as &uch as he can) $5D@' 89 2hen ,e

reflect that &en ,ithout &utual help/ or the aid of reason/ &ust needs li.e&ost &iserabl#/ as ,e clearl# pro.ed in hap) )/ ,e shall plainl# see that&en &ust necessaril# co&e to an agree&ent to li.e together as securel# and,ell as possible if the# are to enjo# as a ,hole the rights ,hich naturall#belong to the& as indi.iduals/ and their life should be no &ore conditionedb# the force and desire of indi.iduals/ but b# the po,er and ,ill of the,hole bod#) 8J This end the# ,ill be unable to attain if desire betheir onl# guide for b# the la,s of desire each &an is dra,n in a differentdirectionR the# &ust/ therefore/ &ost fir&l# decree and establish that the#,ill be guided in e.er#thing b# reason ,hich nobod# ,ill dare openl# torepudiate lest he should be ta0en for a &ad&an/ and ,ill restrain an#desire ,hich is injurious to a &anQs fello,s/ that the# ,ill do to all as

the# ,ould be done b#/ and that the# ,ill defend their neighbourQs rights astheir o,n)

5D@8D o, such a co&pact as this should be entered into/ ho, ratified andestablished/ ,e ,ill no, inuire)

86 ;o, it is a uni.ersal la, of hu&an nature that no one e.er neglectsan#thing ,hich he judges to be good/ except ,ith the hope of gaining agreater good/ or fro& the fear of a greater e.ilR nor does an#one endure ane.il except for the sa0e of a.oiding a greater e.il/ or gaining a greater good) 8 That is/ e.er#one ,ill/ of t,o goods/ choose that ,hich he thin0sthe greatestR and/ of t,o e.ils/ that ,hich he thin0s the least) 8" I sa#

ad.isedl# that ,hich he thin0s the greatest or the least/ for it does notnecessaril# follo, that he judges right) : This la, is so deepl#i&planted in the hu&an &ind that it ought to be counted a&ong eternal truthsand axio&s)

5D@5 As a necessar# conseuence of the principle just enunciated/ no onecan honestl# pro&ise to forego the right ,hich he has o.er all things$Endnote 8D'/ and in general no one ,ill abide b# his pro&ises/ unless under the fear of a greater e.il/ or the hope of a greater good) 8 An exa&ple,ill &a0e the &atter clearer) Suppose that a robber forces &e topro&ise that I ,ill gi.e hi& &# goods at his ,ill and pleasure) 9 It isplain inas&uch as &# natural right is/ as I ha.e sho,n/ co-extensi.e ,ith

&# po,er that if I can free &#self fro& this robber b# stratage&/ b#assenting to his de&ands/ I ha.e the natural right to do so/ and to pretendto accept his conditions) J %r again/ suppose I ha.e genuinel# pro&ised



so&eone that for the space of t,ent# da#s I ,ill not taste food or an#nourish&entR and suppose I after,ards find that ,as foolish/ and cannot be0ept ,ithout .er# great injur# to &#selfR as I a& bound b# natural la, andright to choose the least of t,o e.ils/ I ha.e co&plete right to brea0 &#co&pact/ and act as if &# pro&ise had ne.er been uttered) D I sa# that Ishould ha.e perfect natural right to do so/ ,hether I ,as actuated b# true

and e.ident reason/ or ,hether I ,as actuated b# &ere opinion in thin0ing Ihad pro&ised rashl#R ,hether &# reasons ,ere true or false/ I should be infear of a greater e.il/ ,hich/ b# the ordinance of nature/ I should stri.eto a.oid b# e.er# &eans in &# po,er)

5D@6 2e &a#/ therefore/ conclude that a co&pact is onl# &ade .alid b# itsutilit#/ ,ithout ,hich it beco&es null and .oid) It is/ therefore/foolish to as0 a &an to 0eep his faith ,ith us for e.er/ unless ,e alsoendea.our that the .iolation of the co&pact ,e enter into shall in.ol.e for the .iolator &ore har& than good) " This consideration should ha.e .er#great ,eight in for&ing a state) 9: o,e.er/ if all &en could be easil#led b# reason alone/ and could recognize ,hat is best and &ost useful for a

state/ there ,ould be no one ,ho ,ould not fors,ear deceit/ for e.er#one,ould 0eep &ost religiousl# to their co&pact in their desire for the chief good/ na&el#/ the shield and buc0ler of the co&&on,ealth) 95 o,e.er/ itis far fro& being the case that all &en can al,a#s be easil# led b# reasonaloneR e.er#one is dra,n a,a# b# his pleasure/ ,hile a.arice/ a&bition/en.#/ hatred/ and the li0e so engross the &ind that/ reason has no placetherein) 98 ence/ though &en &a0e - pro&ises ,ith all the appearances of good faith/ and agree that the# ,ill 0eep to their engage&ent/ no one canabsolutel# rel# on another &anQs pro&ise unless there is so&ething behindit) 9 E.er#one has b# nature a right to act deceitfull#) and to brea0 hisco&pacts/ unless he be restrained b# the hope of so&e greater good/ or thefear of so&e greater e.il)

5D@99 o,e.er/ as ,e ha.e sho,n that the natural right of the indi.idualis onl# li&ited b# his po,er/ it is clear that b# transferring/ either ,illingl# or under co&pulsion/ this po,er into the hands of another/ he inso doing necessaril# cedes also a part of his rightR and further/ that theSo.ereign right o.er all &en belongs to hi& ,ho has so.ereign po,er/,here,ith he can co&pel &en b# force/ or restrain the& b# threats of theuni.ersall# feared punish&ent of deathR such so.ereign right he ,illretain onl# so long as he can &aintain his po,er of enforcing his ,illRother,ise he ,ill totter on his throne/ and no one ,ho is stronger than he,ill be bound un,illingl# to obe# hi&)

5D@9J In this &anner a societ# can be for&ed ,ithout an# .iolation of natural right/ and the co.enant can al,a#s be strictl# 0ept - that is/ if each indi.idual hands o.er the ,hole of his po,er to the bod# politic/ thelatter ,ill then possess so.ereign natural right o.er all thingsR that is/it ,ill ha.e sole and unuestioned do&inion/ and e.er#one ,ill be bound toobe#/ under pain of the se.erest punish&ent) 9D A bod# politic of this0ind is called a 3e&ocrac#/ ,hich &a# be defined as a societ# ,hich ,ieldsall its po,er as a ,hole) 96 The so.ereign po,er is not restrained b# an#la,s/ but e.er#one is bound to obe# it in all thingsR such is the state of things i&plied ,hen &en either tacitl# or expressl# handed o.er to it alltheir po,er of self-defence/ or in other ,ords/ all their right) 9 4or if the# had ,ished to retain an# right for the&sel.es/ the# ought to ha.e ta0en

precautions for its defence and preser.ationR as the# ha.e not done so/and indeed could not ha.e done so ,ithout di.iding and conseuentl# ruiningthe state/ the# placed the&sel.es absolutel# at the &erc# of the so.ereign



po,erR and/ therefore/ ha.ing acted as ,e ha.e sho,n as reason andnecessit# de&anded/ the# are obliged to fulfil the co&&ands of the so.ereignpo,er/ ho,e.er absurd these &a# be/ else the# ,ill be public ene&ies/ and,ill act against reason/ ,hich urges the preser.ation of the state as apri&ar# dut#) 9" 4or reason bids us choose the least of t,o e.ils)

5D@J: 4urther&ore/ this danger of sub&itting absolutel# to the do&inionand ,ill of another/ is one ,hich &a# be incurred ,ith a light heart@ for ,eha.e sho,n that so.ereigns onl# possess this right of i&posing their ,ill/so long as the# ha.e the full po,er to enforce it@ if such po,er be losttheir right to co&&and is lost also/ or lapses to those ,ho ha.e assu&ed itand can 0eep it) J5 Thus it is .er# rare for so.ereigns to i&posethoroughl# irrational co&&ands/ for the# are bound to consult their o,ninterests/ and retain their po,er b# consulting the public good andacting according to the dictates of reason/ as Seneca sa#s/ K.iolentai&peria ne&o continuit diu)K J8 ;o one can long retain a t#rantQs s,a#)

5D@J In a de&ocrac#/ irrational co&&ands are still less to be feared@ for

it is al&ost i&possible that the &ajorit# of a people/ especiall# if it be alarge one/ should agree in an irrational design@ and/ &oreo.er/ the basisand ai& of a de&ocrac# is to a.oid the desires as irrational/ and to bring&en as far as possible under the control of reason/ so that the# &a# li.e inpeace and har&on#@ if this basis be re&o.ed the ,hole fabric falls to ruin)

5D@J9 Such being the ends in .ie, for the so.ereign po,er/ the dut# of subjects is/ as I ha.e said/ to obe# its co&&ands/ and to recognize no rightsa.e that ,hich it sanctions)

$5D@9' JJ It ,ill/ perhaps/ be thought that ,e are turning subjects intosla.es@ for sla.es obe# co&&ands and free &en li.e as the# li0eR but this

idea is based on a &isconception/ for the true sla.e is he ,ho is led a,a#b# his pleasures and can neither see ,hat is good for hi& nor actaccordingl#@ he alone is free ,ho li.es ,ith free consent under the entireguidance of reason)

5D@JD Action in obedience to orders does ta0e a,a# freedo& in a certainsense/ but it does not/ therefore/ &a0e a &an a sla.e/ all depends on theobject of the action) J6 If the object of the action be the good of thestate/ and not the good of the agent/ the latter is a sla.e and doeshi&self no good@ but in a state or 0ingdo& ,here the ,eal of the ,holepeople/ and not that of the ruler/ is the supre&e la,/ obedience to theso.ereign po,er does not &a0e a &an a sla.e/ of no use to hi&self/ but a

subject) J Therefore/ that state is the freest ,hose la,s are founded onsound reason/ so that e.er# &e&ber of it &a#/ if he ,ill/ be free $Endnote86'R that is/ li.e ,ith full consent under the entire guidance of reason)

5D@J" hildren/ though the# are bound to obe# all the co&&ands of their parents/ are #et not sla.es@ for the co&&ands of parents loo0 generall# tothe childrenQs benefit)

D: 2e &ust/ therefore/ ac0no,ledge a great difference bet,een a sla.e/ ason/ and a subjectR their positions &a# be thus defined) D5 A sla.e is one,ho is bound to obe# his &asterQs orders/ though the# are gi.en solel# inthe &asterQs interest@ a son is one ,ho obe#s his fatherQs orders/ gi.en

in his o,n interestR a subject obe#s the orders of the so.ereign po,er/gi.en for the co&&on interest/ ,herein he is included)



5D@D8 I thin0 I ha.e no, sho,n sufficientl# clearl# the basis of ade&ocrac#@ I ha.e especiall# desired to do so/ for I belie.e it to be of allfor&s of go.ern&ent the &ost natural/ and the &ost consonant ,ith indi.iduallibert#) D In it no one transfers his natural right so absolutel# that hehas no further .oice in affairs/ he onl# hands it o.er to the &ajorit# of asociet#/ ,hereof he is a unit) Thus all &en re&ain as the# ,ere in the state

of nature/ euals)

5D@D9 This is the onl# for& of go.ern&ent ,hich I ha.e treated of atlength/ for it is the one &ost a0in to &# purpose of sho,ing the benefits of freedo& in a state)

DJ I &a# pass o.er the funda&ental principles of other for&s of go.ern&ent/ for ,e &a# gather fro& ,hat has been said ,hence their rightarises ,ithout going into its origin) DD The possessor of so.ereign po,er/,hether he be one/ or &an#/ or the ,hole bod# politic/ has the so.ereignright of i&posing an# co&&ands he pleases@ and he ,ho has either .oluntaril#/ or under co&pulsion/ transferred the right to defend hi& to

another/ has/ in so doing/ renounced his natural right and is thereforebound to obe#/ in all things/ the co&&ands of the so.ereign po,erR and ,illbe bound so to do so long as the 0ing/ or nobles/ or the people preser.e theso.ereign po,er ,hich for&ed the basis of the original transfer) D6 I needadd no &ore)

$5D@J' D The bases and rights of do&inion being thus displa#ed/ ,e shallreadil# be able to define pri.ate ci.il right/ ,rong/ justice/ andinjustice/ ,ith their relations to the stateR and also to deter&ine ,hatconstitutes an all#/ or an ene&#/ or the cri&e of treason)

5D@D" B# pri.ate ci.il right ,e can onl# &ean the libert# e.er# &an

possesses to preser.e his existence/ a libert# li&ited b# the edicts of theso.ereign po,er/ and preser.ed onl# b# its authorit#@ for ,hen a &an hastransferred to another his right of li.ing as he li0es/ ,hich ,as onl#li&ited b# his po,er/ that is/ has transferred his libert# and po,er of self-defence/ he is bound to li.e as that other dictates/ and to trust tohi& entirel# for his defence) 6: 2rong ta0es place ,hen a citizen/ or subject/ is forced b# another to undergo so&e loss or pain in contradictionto the authorit# of the la,/ or the edict of the so.ereign po,er)

5D@65 2rong is concei.able onl# in an organized co&&unit#@ nor can it e.er accrue to subjects fro& an# act of the so.ereign/ ,ho has the right to do,hat he li0es) 68 It can onl# arise/ therefore/ bet,een pri.ate persons/

,ho are bound b# la, and right not to injure one another) 6 7usticeconsists in the habitual rendering to e.er# &an his la,ful due@ injusticeconsists in depri.ing a &an/ under the pretence of legalit#/ of ,hat thela,s/ rightl# interpreted/ ,ould allo, hi&) 69 These last are also calledeuit# and iniuit#/ because those ,ho ad&inister the la,s are bound to sho,no respect of persons/ but to account all &en eual/ and to defend e.er#&anQs right euall#/ neither en.#ing the rich nor despising the poor)

$5D@D'6J The &en of t,o states beco&e allies/ ,hen for the sa0e of a.oiding ,ar/ or for so&e other ad.antage/ the# co.enant to do each other nohurt/ but on the contrar#/ to assist each other if necessit# arises/ eachretaining his independence) 6D Such a co.enant is .alid so long as its

basis of danger or ad.antage is in force@ no one enters into an engage&ent/or is bound to stand b# his co&pacts unless there be a hope of so&e accruinggood/ or the fear of so&e e.il@ if this basis be re&o.ed the co&pact thereb#



beco&es .oid@ this has been abundantl# sho,n b# experience) 66 4or although different states &a0e treaties not to har& one another/ the# al,a#sta0e e.er# possible precaution against such treaties being bro0en b# thestronger part#/ and do not rel# on the co&pact/ unless there is asufficientl# ob.ious object and ad.antage to both parties in obser.ing it)6 %ther,ise the# ,ould fear a breach of faith/ nor ,ould there be an#

,rong done thereb#@ for ,ho in his proper senses/ and a,are of the right of the so.ereign po,er/ ,ould trust in the pro&ises of one ,ho has the ,ill andthe po,er to do ,hat he li0es/ and ,ho ai&s solel# at the safet# andad.antage of his do&inion 6" +oreo.er/ if ,e consult lo#alt# andreligion/ ,e shall see that no one in possession of po,er ought to abide b#his pro&ises to the injur# of his do&inionR for he cannot 0eep such pro&ises,ithout brea0ing the engage&ent he &ade ,ith his subjects/ b# ,hich both heand the# are &ost sole&nl# bound) : An ene&# is one ,ho li.es apart fro&the state/ and does not recognize its authorit# either as a subject or as anall#) It is not hatred ,hich &a0es a &an an ene&#/ but the rights of thestate) 5 The rights of the state are the sa&e in regard to hi& ,hodoes not recognize b# an# co&pact the state authorit#/ as the# are against

hi& ,ho has done the state an injur#@ it has the right to force hi& as bestit can/ either to sub&it/ or to contract an alliance)

$5D@6' 8 =astl#/ treason can onl# be co&&itted b# subjects/ ,ho b#co&pact/ either tacit or expressed/ ha.e transferred all their rights to thestate@ a subject is said to ha.e co&&itted this cri&e ,hen he has atte&pted/for ,hate.er reason/ to seize the so.ereign po,er/ or to place it indifferent hands) I sa#/ has atte&pted/ for if punish&ent ,ere not too.erta0e hi& till he had succeeded/ it ,ould often co&e too late/ theso.ereign rights ,ould ha.e been acuired or transferred alread#)

5D@9 I also sa#/ has atte&pted/ for ,hate.er reason/ to seize the

so.ereign po,er/ and I recognize no difference ,hether such an atte&ptshould be follo,ed b# public loss or public gain) J 2hate.er be hisreason for acting/ the cri&e is treason/ and he is rightl# conde&ned@ in,ar/ e.er#one ,ould ad&it the justice of his sentence) D If a &an doesnot 0eep to his post/ but approaches the ene&# ,ithout the 0no,ledge of hisco&&ander/ ,hate.er &a# be his &oti.e/ so long as he acts on his o,n &otion/e.en if he ad.ances ,ith the design of defeating the ene&#/ he is rightl#put to death/ because he has .iolated his oath/ and infringed the rights of his co&&ander) 6 That all citizens are euall# bound b# these rights inti&e of peace/ is not so generall# recognized/ but the reasons for obedienceare in both cases identical) The state &ust be preser.ed and directedb# the sole authorit# of the so.ereign/ and such authorit# and right ha.e

been accorded b# uni.ersal consent to hi& alone@ if/ therefore/ an#one elseatte&pts/ ,ithout his consent/ to execute an# public enterprise/ e.en thoughthe state &ight as ,e said reap benefit therefro&/ such person has nonethe less infringed the so.ereigns right/ and ,ould be rightl# punished for treason)

5D@" In order that e.er# scruple &a# be re&o.ed/ ,e &a# no, ans,er theinuir#/ ,hether our for&er assertion that e.er#one ,ho has not thepractice of reason/ &a#/ in the state of nature/ li.e b# so.ereign naturalright/ according to the la,s of his desires/ is not in direct opposition tothe la, and right of God as re.ealed) ": 4or as all &en absolutel#,hether the# be less endo,ed ,ith reason or &ore are euall# bound b# the

3i.ine co&&and to lo.e their neighbour as the&sel.es/ it &a# be said thatthe# cannot/ ,ithout ,rong/ do injur# to an#one/ or li.e according to their desires)



5D@"5 This objection/ so far as the state of nature is concerned/ can beeasil# ans,ered/ for the state of nature is/ both in nature and in ti&e/prior to religion) "8 ;o one 0no,s b# nature that he o,es an# obedience toGod $Endnote 8'/ nor can he attain thereto b# an# exercise of his reason/but solel# b# re.elation confir&ed b# signs) " Therefore/ pre.ious to

re.elation/ no one is bound b# a 3i.ine la, and right of ,hich he isnecessaril# in ignorance) "9 The state of nature &ust b# no &eans beconfounded ,ith a state of religion/ but &ust be concei.ed as ,ithouteither religion or la,/ and conseuentl# ,ithout sin or ,rong@ this is ho,,e ha.e described it/ and ,e are confir&ed b# the authorit# of Paul) "J Itis not onl# in respect of ignorance that ,e concei.e the state of nature asprior to/ and lac0ing the 3i.ine re.ealed la, and rightR but in respect of freedo& also/ ,here,ith all &en are born endo,ed)

5D@"D If &en ,ere naturall# bound b# the 3i.ine la, and right/ or if the3i.ine la, and right ,ere a natural necessit#/ there ,ould ha.e been no needfor God to &a0e a co.enant ,ith &an0ind/ and to bind the& thereto ,ith an

oath and agree&ent)

5D@"6 2e &ust/ then/ full# grant that the 3i.ine la, and right originatedat the ti&e ,hen &en b# express co.enant agreed to obe# God in all things/and ceded/ as it ,ere/ their natural freedo&/ transferring their rights toGod in the &anner described in spea0ing of the for&ation of a state)

" o,e.er/ I ,ill treat of these &atters &ore at length presentl#)

$5D@' "" It &a# be insisted that so.ereigns are as &uch bound b# the3i.ine la, as subjects@ ,hereas ,e ha.e asserted that the# retain their natural rights/ and &a# do ,hate.er the# li0e)

5D@5:: In order to clear up the ,hole difficult#/ ,hich arises rather concerning the natural right than the natural state/ I &aintain thate.er#one is bound/ in the state of nature/ to li.e according to 3i.ine la,/in the sa&e ,a# as he is bound to li.e according to the dictates of soundreasonR na&el#/ inas&uch as it is to his ad.antage/ and necessar# for hissal.ationR but/ if he ,ill not so li.e/ he &a# do other,ise at his o,n ris0)5:5 e is thus bound to li.e according to his o,n la,s/ not according toan#one elseQs/ and to recognize no &an as a judge/ or as a superior inreligion) 5:8 Such/ in &# opinion/ is the position of a so.ereign/ for he&a# ta0e ad.ice fro& his fello,-&en/ but he is not bound to recognize an# asa judge/ nor an#one besides hi&self as an arbitrator on an# uestion of

right/ unless it be a prophet sent expressl# b# God and attesting his&ission b# indisputable signs) 5: E.en then he does not recognize a &an/but God i&self as is judge)

$5D@"' 5:9 If a so.ereign refuses to obe# God as re.ealed in is la,/he does so at his o,n ris0 and loss/ but ,ithout .iolating an# ci.il or natural right) 5:J 4or the ci.il right is dependent on his o,n decreeR andnatural right is dependent on the la,s of nature/ ,hich latter are notadapted to religion/ ,hose sole ai& is the good of hu&anit#/ but to theorder of nature - that is/ to GodQs eternal decree un0no,n to us)

5D@5:D This truth see&s to be adu&brated in a so&e,hat obscurer for& b#

those ,ho &aintain that &en can sin against GodQs re.elation/ but notagainst the eternal decree b# ,hich e has ordained all things)



5:6 2e &a# be as0ed/ ,hat should ,e do if the so.ereign co&&ands an#thingcontrar# to religion/ and the obedience ,hich ,e ha.e expressl# .o,ed toGod should ,e obe# the 3i.ine la, or the hu&an la, 5: I shall treat of this uestion at length hereafter/ and ,ill therefore &erel# sa# no,/ thatGod should be obe#ed before all else/ ,hen ,e ha.e a certain andindisputable re.elation of is ,ill@ but &en are .er# prone to error on

religious subjects/ and/ according to the di.ersit# of their dispositions/are ,ont ,ith considerable stir to put for,ard their o,n in.entions/ asexperience &ore than sufficientl# attests/ so that if no one ,ere bound toobe# the state in &atters ,hich/ in his o,n opinion concern religion/the rights of the state ,ould be dependent on e.er# &anQs judg&entand passions) 5:" ;o one ,ould consider hi&self bound to obe# la,s fra&edagainst his faith or superstitionR and on this pretext he &ight assu&eunbounded license) 55: In this ,a#/ the rights of the ci.il authorities,ould be utterl# set at nought/ so that ,e &ust conclude that the so.ereignpo,er/ ,hich alone is bound both b# 3i.ine and natural right to preser.e andguard the la,s of the state/ should ha.e supre&e authorit# for &a0ing an#la,s about religion ,hich it thin0s fitR all are bound to obe# its behests

on the subject in accordance ,ith their pro&ise ,hich God bids the& to 0eep)

5D@555 o,e.er/ if the so.ereign po,er be heathen/ ,e should either enter into no engage&ents there,ith/ and #ield up our li.es sooner than transfer to it an# of our rightsR or/ if the engage&ent be &ade/ and our rightstransferred/ ,e should inas&uch as ,e should ha.e oursel.es transferred theright of defending oursel.es and our religion be bound to obe# the&/ and to0eep our ,ord@ ,e &ight e.en rightl# be bound so to do/ except in thosecases ,here God/ b# indisputable re.elation/ has pro&ised is special aidagainst t#rann#/ or gi.en us special exe&ption fro& obedience) 558 Thus ,esee that/ of all the 7e,s in Bab#lon/ there ,ere onl# three #ouths ,ho ,erecertain of the help of God/ and/ therefore/ refused to obe# ;ebuchadnezzar)

55 All the rest/ ,ith the sole exception of 3aniel/ ,ho ,as belo.ed b#the 0ing/ ,ere doubtless co&pelled b# right to obe#/ perhaps thin0ing thatthe# had been deli.ered up b# God into the hands of the 0ing/ and that the0ing had obtained and preser.ed his do&inion b# GodQs design) 559 %n theother hand/ Eleazar/ before his countr# had utterl# fallen/ ,ished to gi.e aproof of his constanc# to his co&patriots/ in order that the# &ight follo,in his footsteps/ and go to an# lengths/ rather than allo, their right andpo,er to be transferred to the Gree0s/ or bra.e an# torture rather thans,ear allegiance to the heathen) 55J Instances are occurring e.er# da# inconfir&ation of ,hat I here ad.ance) 55D The rulers of hristian0ingdo&s do not hesitate/ ,ith a .ie, to strengthening their do&inion/ to&a0e treaties ,ith Tur0s and heathen/ and to gi.e orders to their subjects

,ho settle a&ong such peoples not to assu&e &ore freedo&/ either inthings secular or religious/ than is set do,n in the treat#/ or allo,ed b#the foreign go.ern&ent) 556 2e &a# see this exe&plified in the 3utchtreat# ,ith the 7apanese/ ,hich I ha.e alread# &entioned)

$56@:' APTE( OII - IT IS S%2; TAT ;% %;E A;/ %(;EE3/ T(A;S4E( A== IS (IGTS T% TE S%E(EIG; P%2E()%4 TE EB(E2 (EP<B=I/ AS IT 2AS 3<(I;G TE =I4ETI+E%4 +%SES/ A;3 A4TE( IS 3EAT/ TI== TE 4%<;3ATI%;

%4 TE +%;A(>R A;3 %4 ITS EOE==E;E) =AST=>/ %4TE A<SES 2> TE TE%(ATI (EP<B=I 4E==/ A;3 2>IT %<=3 A(3=> AE %;TI;<E3 2IT%<T 3ISSE;SI%;)



$56@5' 5 The theor# put for,ard in the last chapter/ of the uni.ersalrights of the so.ereign po,er/ and of the natural rights of the indi.idualtransferred thereto/ though it corresponds in &an# respects ,ith actualpractice/ and though practice &a# be so arranged as to confor& to it &oreand &ore/ &ust ne.ertheless al,a#s re&ain in &an# respects purel# ideal) 8

;o one can e.er so utterl# transfer to another his po,er and/ conseuentl#/his rights/ as to cease to be a &anR nor can there e.er be a po,er soso.ereign that it can carr# out e.er# possible ,ish) It ,ill al,a#s be.ain to order a subject to hate ,hat he belie.es brings hi& ad.antage/ or tolo.e ,hat brings hi& loss/ or not to be offended at insults/ or not to ,ishto be free fro& fear/ or a hundred other things of the sort/ ,hichnecessaril# follo, fro& the la,s of hu&an nature) 9 So &uch/ I thin0/ isabundantl# sho,n b# experience@ for &en ha.e ne.er so far ceded their po,er as to cease to be an object of fear to the rulers ,ho recei.ed such po,er and rightR and do&inions ha.e al,a#s been in as &uch danger fro& their o,nsubjects as fro& external ene&ies) J If it ,ere reall# the case/ that &encould be depri.ed of their natural rights so utterl# as ne.er to ha.e an#

further influence on affairs $Endnote 8"'/ except ,ith the per&ission of theholders of so.ereign right/ it ,ould then be possible to &aintain ,ithi&punit# the &ost .iolent t#rann#/ ,hich/ I suppose/ no one ,ould for aninstant ad&it)

56@D 2e &ust/ therefore/ grant that e.er# &an retains so&e part of hisright/ in dependence on his o,n decision/ and no one elseQs)

6 o,e.er/ in order correctl# to understand the extent of the so.ereignQsright and po,er/ ,e &ust ta0e notice that it does not co.er onl# thoseactions to ,hich it can co&pel &en b# fear/ but absolutel# e.er# action,hich it can induce &en to perfor&@ for it is the fact of obedience/ not the

&oti.e for obedience/ ,hich &a0es a &an a subject)

56@ 2hate.er be the cause ,hich leads a &an to obe# the co&&ands of theso.ereign/ ,hether it be fear or hope/ or lo.e of his countr#/ or an# other e&otion - the fact re&ains that the &an ta0es counsel ,ith hi&self/ andne.ertheless acts as his so.ereign orders) " 2e &ust not/ therefore/assert that all actions resulting fro& a &anQs deliberation ,ith hi&self aredone in obedience to the rights of the indi.idual rather than the so.ereign@as a &atter of fact/ all actions spring fro& a &anQs deliberation ,ithhi&self/ ,hether the deter&ining &oti.e be lo.e or fear of punish&entRtherefore/ either do&inion does not exist/ and has no rights o.er itssubjects/ or else it extends o.er e.er# instance in ,hich it can pre.ail on

&en to decide to obe# it) 5: onseuentl#/ e.er# action ,hich a subjectperfor&s in accordance ,ith the co&&ands of the so.ereign/ ,hether suchaction springs fro& lo.e/ or fear/ or as is &ore freuentl# the case fro&hope and fear together/ or fro& re.erence) co&pounded of fear andad&iration/ or/ indeed/ an# &oti.e ,hate.er/ is perfor&ed in .irtue of hissub&ission to the so.ereign/ and not in .irtue of his o,n authorit#)

56@55 This point is &ade still &ore clear b# the fact that obedience doesnot consist so &uch in the out,ard act as in the &ental state of the personobe#ingR so that he is &ost under the do&inion of another ,ho ,ith his ,holeheart deter&ines to obe# anotherQs co&&andsR and conseuentl# the fir&estdo&inion belongs to the so.ereign ,ho has &ost influence o.er the &inds of

his subjectsR if those ,ho are &ost feared possessed the fir&est do&inion/the fir&est do&inion ,ould belong to the subjects of a t#rant/ for the# areal,a#s greatl# feared b# their ruler) 58 4urther&ore/ though it is



i&possible to go.ern the &ind as co&pletel# as the tongue/ ne.ertheless&inds are/ to a certain extent/ under the control of the so.ereign/ for hecan in &an# ,a#s bring about that the greatest part of his subjects shouldfollo, his ,ishes in their beliefs/ their lo.es/ and their hates) 5Though such e&otions do not arise at the express co&&and of the so.ereignthe# often result as experience sho,s fro& the authorit# of his po,er/ and

fro& his direction R in other ,ords/ in .irtue of his rightR ,e &a#/therefore/ ,ithout doing .iolence to our understanding/ concei.e &en ,hofollo, the instigation of their so.ereign in their beliefs/ their lo.es/their hates/ their conte&pt/ and all other e&otions ,hatsoe.er)

56@59 Though the po,ers of go.ern&ent/ as thus concei.ed/ are sufficientl#a&ple/ the# can ne.er beco&e large enough to execute e.er# possible ,ish of their possessors) 5J This/ I thin0/ I ha.e alread# sho,n clearl# enough)5D The &ethod of for&ing a do&inion ,hich should pro.e lasting I do not/as I ha.e said/ intend to discuss/ but in order to arri.e at the object Iha.e in .ie,/ I ,ill touch on the teaching of 3i.ine re.elation to +oses inthis respect/ and ,e ,ill consider the histor# and the success of the 7e,s/

gathering therefro& ,hat should be the chief concessions &ade b# so.ereignsto their subjects ,ith a .ie, to the securit# and increase of their do&inion)

$56@8' 56 That the preser.ation of a state chiefl# depends on thesubjectsQ fidelit# and constanc# in carr#ing out the orders the# recei.e/ is&ost clearl# taught both b# reason and experienceR ho, subjects ought to beguided so as best to preser.e their fidelit# and .irtue is not so ob.ious)5 All/ both rulers and ruled/ are &en/ and prone to follo, after their lusts) 5" The fic0le disposition of the &ultitude al&ost reduces those ,hoha.e experience of it to despair/ for it is go.erned solel# b# e&otions/ notb# reason@ it rushes headlong into e.er# enterprise/ and is easil# corrupted

either b# a.arice or luxur#@ e.er#one thin0s hi&self o&niscient and ,ishesto fashion all things to his li0ing/ judging a thing to be just or unjust/la,ful or unla,ful/ according as he thin0s it ,ill bring hi& profit or [email protected]# leads hi& to despise his euals/ and refuse their guidance@ en.# of superior fa&e or fortune for such gifts are ne.er euall# distributedleads hi& to desire and rejoice in his neighbourQs do,nfall) 8: I neednot go through the ,hole list/ e.er#one 0no,s alread# ho, &uch cri&e)results fro& disgust at the present - desire for change/ headlong anger/and conte&pt for po.ert# - and ho, &enQs &inds are engrossed and 0eptin tur&oil thereb#)

56@85 To guard against all these e.ils/ and for& a do&inion ,here no roo&

is left for deceitR to fra&e our institutions so that e.er# &an/ ,hate.er his disposition/ &a# prefer public right to pri.ate ad.antage/ this is thetas0 and this the toil) 88 ;ecessit# is often the &other of in.ention/ butshe has ne.er #et succeeded in fra&ing a do&inion that ,as in less danger fro& its o,n citizens than fro& open ene&ies/ or ,hose rulers did not fear the latter less than the for&er) 8 2itness the state of (o&e/ in.incibleb# her ene&ies/ but &an# ti&es conuered and sorel# oppressed b# her o,ncitizens/ especiall# in the ,ar bet,een espasian and itellius) 89 SeeTacitus/ ist) b0) i.) for a description of the pitiable state of the cit#)

56@8J Alexander thought prestige abroad &ore eas# to acuire than prestigeat ho&e/ and belie.ed that his greatness could be destro#ed b# his o,n

follo,ers) 8D 4earing such a disaster/ he thus addressed his friends@Keep &e safe fro& internal treacher# and do&estic plots/ and I ,ill front,ithout fear the dangers of battle and of ,ar) 86 Philip ,as &ore secure



in the battle arra# than in the theatre@ he often escaped fro& the hands of the ene&#/ he could not escape fro& his o,n subjects) 8 If #ou thin0 o.er the deaths of 0ings/ #ou ,ill count up &ore ,ho ha.e died b# the assassinthan b# the open foe)K ) urtius/ chap) .i)

56@8" 4or the sa0e of &a0ing the&sel.es secure/ 0ings ,ho seized the

throne in ancient ti&es used to tr# to spread the idea that the# ,eredescended fro& the i&&ortal gods/ thin0ing that if their subjects and therest of &an0ind did not loo0 on the& as euals/ but belie.ed the& to begods/ the# ,ould ,illingl# sub&it to their rule/ and obe# their co&&ands): Thus Augustus persuaded the (o&ans that he ,as descended fro& AEneas/,ho ,as the son of enus/ and nu&bered a&ong the gods) 5 Ke ,ishedhi&self to be ,orshipped in te&ples/ li0e the gods/ ,ith fla&ens andpriests)K Tacitus/ Ann) i) 5:)

56@8 Alexander ,ished to be saluted as the son of 7upiter/ not fro&&oti.es of pride but of polic#/ as he sho,ed b# his ans,er to the in.ecti.eof er&olaus@ KIt is al&ost laughable/K said he/ that er&olaus as0ed &e to

contradict 7upiter/ b# ,hose oracle I a& recognized) A& I responsiblefor the ans,ers of the gods 9 It offered &e the na&e of sonRacuiescence ,as b# no &eans foreign to &# present designs) J 2ould thatthe Indians also ,ould belie.e &e to be a god1 D 2ars are carried throughb# prestige/ falsehoods that are belie.ed often gain the force of truth)Kurtius/ .iii/) Para/ ) 6 In these fe, ,ords he cle.erl# contri.es topal& off a fiction on the ignorant/ and at the sa&e ti&e hints at the &oti.efor the deception)

56@ leon/ in his speech persuading the +acedonians to obe# their 0ing/adopted a si&ilar de.ice@ for after going through the praises of Alexander ,ith ad&iration/ and recalling his &erits/ he proceeds/ Kthe Persians are

not onl# pious/ but prudent in ,orshipping their 0ings as gods@ for 0ingshipis the shield of public safet#/K and he ends thus/ KI/ &#self/ ,hen the 0ingenters a banuet hall/ should prostrate &# bod# on the groundR other &enshould do the li0e/ especiall# those ,ho are ,ise K urtius/ .iii)Para) DD) " o,e.er/ the +acedonians ,ere &ore prudent - indeed/ it isonl# co&plete barbarians ,ho can be so openl# cajoled/ and can suffer the&sel.es to be turned fro& subjects into sla.es ,ithout interests of their o,n) 9: %thers/ not,ithstanding/ ha.e been able &ore easil# to spread thebelief that 0ingship is sacred/ and pla#s the part of God on the earth/ thatit has been instituted b# God/ not b# the suffrage and consent of &enR andthat it is preser.ed and guarded b# 3i.ine special pro.idence and aid)95 Si&ilar fictions ha.e been pro&ulgated b# &onarchs/ ,ith the object of

strengthening their do&inion/ but these I ,ill pass o.er/ and in order toarri.e at &# &ain purpose/ ,ill &erel# recall and discuss the teaching onthe subject of 3i.ine re.elation to +oses in ancient ti&es)

$56@' 98 2e ha.e said in hap) ) that after the ebre,s ca&e up out of Eg#pt the# ,ere not bound b# the la, and right of an# other nation/ but ,ereat libert# to institute an# ne, rites at their pleasure/ and to occup#,hate.er territor# the# chose) 9 After their liberation fro& theintolerable bondage of the Eg#ptians/ the# ,ere bound b# no co.enant to an#&anR and/ therefore/ e.er# &an entered into his natural right/ and ,as freeto retain it or to gi.e it up/ and transfer it to another) 99 Being/ then/in the state of nature/ the# follo,ed the ad.ice of +oses/ in ,ho& the#

chiefl# trusted/ and decided to transfer their right to no hu&an being/ butonl# to GodR ,ithout further dela# the# all/ ,ith one .oice/ pro&ised toobe# all the co&&ands of the 3eit#/ and to ac0no,ledge no right that e did



not proclai& as such b# prophetic re.elation) 9J This pro&ise/ or transference of right to God/ ,as effected in the sa&e &anner as ,e ha.econcei.ed it to ha.e been in ordinar# societies/ ,hen &en agree to di.estthe&sel.es of their natural rights) 9D It is/ in fact/ in .irtue of a setco.enant/ and an oath see Exod) xxxi.@5:/ that the 7e,s freel#/ and notunder co&pulsion or threats/ surrendered their rights and transferred the&

to God) 96 +oreo.er/ in order that this co.enant &ight be ratifiedand settled/ and &ight be free fro& all suspicion of deceit/ God did notenter into it till the 7e,s had had experience of is ,onderful po,er b#,hich alone the# had been/ or could be/ preser.ed in a state of prosperit#Exod) xix@9/ J) 9 It is because the# belie.ed that nothing butGodQs po,er could preser.e the& that the# surrendered to God the naturalpo,er of self-preser.ation/ ,hich the# for&erl#/ perhaps/ thought the#possessed/ and conseuentl# the# surrendered at the sa&e ti&e all their natural right)

$56@9' 9" God alone/ therefore/ held do&inion o.er the ebre,s/ ,hosestate ,as in .irtue of the co.enant called GodQs 0ingdo&/ and God ,as said

to be their 0ingR conseuentl# the ene&ies of the 7e,s ,ere said to be theene&ies of God/ and the citizens ,ho tried to seize the do&inion ,ere guilt#of treason against GodR and/ lastl#/ the la,s of the state ,ere called thela,s and co&&and&ents of God) J: Thus in the ebre, state the ci.il andreligious authorit#/ each consisting solel# of obedience to God/ ,ere oneand the sa&e) J5 The dog&as of religion ,ere not precepts/ but la,s andordinancesR piet# ,as regarded as the sa&e as lo#alt#/ i&piet# as the sa&eas disaffection) J8 E.er#one ,ho fell a,a# fro& religion ceased to be acitizen/ and ,as/ on that ground alone/ accounted an ene&#@ those ,hodied for the sa0e of religion/ ,ere held to ha.e died for their countr#Rin fact/ bet,een ci.il and religious la, and right there ,as no distinction,hate.er) Win Biblical ebre,/ there ,as no ,ord for ,hat ,e call (eligion)K

+odern ebre, has selected a ,ord ,hose root is K0no,ledge)KX J 4or thisreason the go.ern&ent could be called a Theocrac#/ inas&uch as the citizens,ere not bound b# an#thing sa.e the re.elations of God)

56@J9 o,e.er/ this state of things existed rather in theor# than inpractice/ for it ,ill appear fro& ,hat ,e are about to sa#/ that theebre,s/ as a &atter of fact/ retained absolutel# in their o,n hands theright of so.ereignt#@ this is sho,n b# the &ethod and plan b# ,hich thego.ern&ent ,as carried on/ as I ,ill no, explain)

56@JJ Inas&uch as the ebre,s did not transfer their rights to an# other person but/ as in a de&ocrac#/ all surrendered their rights euall#/ and

cried out ,ith one .oice/ K2hatsoe.er God shall spea0 no &ediator or &outhpiece being na&ed that ,ill ,e do/K it follo,s that all ,ere euall#bound b# the co.enant/ and that all had an eual right to consult the 3eit#/to accept and to interpret is la,s/ so that all had an exactl# eual sharein the go.ern&ent) $56@J' JD Thus at first the# all approached Godtogether/ so that the# &ight learn is co&&ands/ but in this firstsalutation/ the# ,ere so thoroughl# terrified and so astounded to hear Godspea0ing/ that the# thought their last hour ,as at hand@ full of fear/therefore/ the# ,ent afresh to +oses/ and said/ K=o/ ,e ha.e heard Godspea0ing in the fire/ and there is no cause ,h# ,e should ,ish to die@surel# this great fire ,ill consu&e us@ if ,e hear again the .oice of God/,e shall surel# die) J6 Thou/ therefore/ go near/ and hear all the ,ords

of our God/ and thou not God shalt spea0 ,ith us@ all that God shall tellus/ that ,ill ,e hear0en to and perfor&)K



56@J The# thus clearl# abrogated their for&er co.enant/ and absolutel#transferred to +oses their right to consult God and interpret is co&&ands@for the# do not here pro&ise obedience to all that God shall tell the&/ butto all that God shall tell +oses see 3eut) .@8: after the 3ecalogue/ andchap) x.iii@5J/ 5D) J" +oses/ therefore/ re&ained the sole pro&ulgator and interpreter of the 3i.ine la,s/ and conseuentl# also the so.ereign

judge/ ,ho could not be arraigned hi&self/ and ,ho acted a&ong the ebre,sthe part/ of GodR in other ,ords/ held the so.ereign 0ingship@ he alonehad the right to consult God/ to gi.e the 3i.ine ans,ers to thepeople/ and to see that the# ,ere carried out) D: I sa# he alone/ for if an#one during the life of +oses ,as desirous of preaching an#thing in thena&e of the =ord/ he ,as/ e.en if a true prophet/ considered guilt# and ausurper of the so.ereign right ;u&b) xi@8 $Endnote :') D5 2e &a# herenotice/ that though the people had elected +oses/ the# could not rightfull#elect +osesQs successorR for ha.ing transferred to +oses their right of consulting God/ and absolutel# pro&ised to regard hi& as a 3i.ine oracle/the# had plainl# forfeited the ,hole of their right/ and ,ere bound toaccept as chosen b# God an#one proclai&ed b# +oses as his successor) D8 If

+oses had so chosen his successor/ ,ho li0e hi& should ,ield the sole rightof go.ern&ent/ possessing the sole right of consulting God/ and conseuentl#of &a0ing and abrogating la,s/ of deciding on peace or ,ar/ of sendinga&bassadors/ appointing judges - in fact/ discharging all the functions of aso.ereign/ the state ,ould ha.e beco&e si&pl# a &onarch#/ onl# differingfro& other &onarchies in the fact/ that the latter are/ or should be/carried on in accordance ,ith GodQs decree/ un0no,n e.en to the &onarch/,hereas the ebre, &onarch ,ould ha.e been the onl# person to ,ho& thedecree ,as re.ealed) D A difference ,hich increases/ rather thandi&inishes the &onarchQs authorit#) D9 As far as the people in both casesare concerned/ each ,ould be euall# subject/ and euall# ignorant of the 3i.ine decree/ for each ,ould be dependent on the &onarchQs ,ords/ and

,ould learn fro& hi& alone/ ,hat ,as la,ful or unla,ful@ nor ,ould the factthat the people belie.ed that the &onarch ,as onl# issuing co&&ands inaccordance ,ith GodQs decree re.ealed to hi&/ &a0e it less in subjection/but rather &ore) $56@D' DJ o,e.er/ +oses elected no such successor/ butleft the do&inion to those ,ho ca&e after hi& in a condition ,hich could notbe called a popular go.ern&ent/ nor an aristocrac#/ nor a &onarch#/ but aTheocrac#) DD 4or the right of interpreting la,s ,as .ested in one &an/,hile the right and po,er of ad&inistering the state according to thela,s thus interpreted/ ,as .ested in another &an see ;u&b) xx.ii@85$Endnote 5')

56@D6 In order that the uestion &a# be thoroughl# understood/ I ,ill dul#

set forth the ad&inistration of the ,hole state)

D 4irst/ the people ,ere co&&anded to build a tabernacle/ ,hich shouldbe/ as it ,ere/ the d,elling of God - that is/ of the so.ereign authorit# of the state) D" This tabernacle ,as to be erected at the cost of the ,holepeople/ not of one &an/ in order that the place ,here God ,as consulted&ight be public propert#) 6: The =e.ites ,ere chosen as courtiers andad&inistrators of this ro#al abodeR ,hile Aaron/ the brother of +oses/ ,aschosen to be their chief and second/ as it ,ere/ to God their ing/ beingsucceeded in the office b# his legiti&ate sons)

56@65 e/ as the nearest to God/ ,as the so.ereign interpreter of the

3i.ine la,sR he co&&unicated the ans,ers of the 3i.ine oracle to the people/and entreated GodQs fa.our for the&) 68 If/ in addition to thesepri.ileges/ he had possessed the right of ruling/ he ,ould ha.e been neither



&ore nor less than an absolute &onarchR but/ in respect to go.ern&ent/ he,as onl# a pri.ate citizen@ the ,hole tribe of =e.i ,as so co&pletel#di.ested of go.erning rights that it did not e.en ta0e its share ,ith theothers in the partition of territor#) 6 +oses pro.ided for its support b#inspiring the co&&on people ,ith great re.erence for it/ as the onl# tribededicated to God)

56@69 4urther/ the ar&#/ for&ed fro& the re&aining t,el.e tribes/ ,asco&&anded to in.ade the land of anaan/ to di.ide it into t,el.e portions/and to distribute it a&ong the tribes b# lot) 6J 4or this tas0 t,el.ecaptains ,ere chosen/ one fro& e.er# tribe/ and ,ere/ together ,ith7oshua and Eleazar/ the high priest/ e&po,ered to di.ide the land intot,el.e eual parts/ and distribute it b# lot) 6D 7oshua ,as chosen for thechief co&&and of the ar&#/ inas&uch as none but he had the right to consultGod in e&ergencies/ not li0e +oses/ alone in his tent/ or in thetabernacle/ but through the high priest/ to ,ho& onl# the ans,ers of God,ere re.ealed) 66 4urther&ore/ he ,as e&po,ered to execute/ and cause thepeople to obe# GodQs co&&ands/ trans&itted through the high priestsR to

find/ and to &a0e use of/ &eans for carr#ing the& outR to choose as &an#/ar&# captains as he li0edR to &a0e ,hate.er choice he thought bestR tosend a&bassadors in his o,n na&eR and/ in short/ to ha.e the entire controlof the ,ar) 6 To his office there ,as no rightful successor - indeed/ thepost ,as onl# filled b# the direct order of the 3eit#/ on occasions of public e&ergenc#) 6" In ordinar# ti&es/ all the &anage&ent of peace and,ar ,as .ested in the captains of the tribes/ as I ,ill shortl# point out): =astl#/ all &en bet,een the ages of t,ent# and sixt# ,ere ordered tobear ar&s/ and for& a citizen ar&#/ o,ing allegiance/ not to its general-in-chief/ nor to the high priest/ but to (eligion and to God) 5 The ar&#/ or the hosts/ ,ere called the ar&# of God/ or the hosts of God) 8 4or thisreason God ,as called b# the ebre,s the God of Ar&iesR and the ar0 of the

co.enant ,as borne in the &idst of the ar&# in i&portant battles/ ,hen thesafet# or destruction of the ,hole people hung upon the issue/ so that thepeople &ight/ as it ,ere/ see their ing a&ong the&/ and put forth all their strength)

56@ 4ro& these directions/ left b# +oses to his successors/ ,e plainl#see that he chose ad&inistrators/ rather than despots/ to co&e after hi&Rfor he in.ested no one ,ith the po,er of consulting God/ ,here he li0ed andalone/ conseuentl#/ no one had the po,er possessed b# hi&self of ordainingand abrogating la,s/ of deciding on ,ar or peace/ of choosing &en to filloffices both religious and secular@ all these are the prerogati.es of aso.ereign) 9 The high priest/ indeed/ had the right of interpreting la,s/

and co&&unicating the ans,ers of God/ but he could not do so ,hen he li0ed/as +oses could/ but onl# ,hen he ,as as0ed b# the general-in-chief of thear&#/ the council/ or so&e si&ilar authorit#) J The general-in-chief andthe council could consult God ,hen the# li0ed/ but could onl# recei.e isans,ers through the high priestR so that the utterances of God/ as reportedb# the high priest/ ,ere not decrees/ as the# ,ere ,hen reported b# +oses/but onl# ans,ersR the# ,ere accepted b# 7oshua and the council/ and onl#then had the force of co&&ands and decrees W=i0e the separation of po,ers inthe <nited States of A&erica)X

56@D The high priest/ both in the case of Aaron and of his son Eleazar/,as chosen b# +osesR nor had an#one/ after +osesQ death/ a right to elect to

the office/ ,hich beca&e hereditar# ) 6 The general-in-chief of the ar&#,as also chosen b# +oses/ and assu&ed his functions in .irtue of theco&&ands/ not of the high priest/ but of +oses@ indeed/ after the death of



7oshua/ the high priest did not appoint an#one in his place/ and thecaptains did not consult God afresh about a general-in-chief/ but eachretained 7oshuaQs po,er in respect to the contingent of his o,n tribe/and all retained it collecti.el#/ in respect to the ,hole ar&#) Theresee&s to ha.e been no need of a general-in-chief/ except ,hen the# ,ereobliged to unite their forces against a co&&on ene&#) " This occurred

&ost freuentl# during the ti&e of 7oshua/ ,hen the# had no fixed d,elling)place/ and possessed all things in co&&on) $56@6' ": After all the tribeshad gained their territories b# right of conuest/ and had di.ided their allotted gains/ the#/ beca&e separated/ ha.ing no longer their possessionsin co&&on/ so that the need for a single co&&ander ceased/ for thedifferent tribes should be considered rather in the light of confederatedstates than of bodies of fello,-citizens) "5 In respect to their God andtheir religion/ the#/ ,ere fello,-citizensR but/ in respect to the rights,hich one possessed ,ith regard to another/ the# ,ere onl# confederated@the#/ ,ere/ in fact/ in &uch the sa&e position if one excepts the Te&pleco&&on to all as the <nited States of the ;etherlands Wor <nited States of A&ericaX) "8 The di.ision of propert#/ held in co&&on is onl# another

phrase for the possession of his share b# each of the o,ners singl#/ and thesurrender b# the others of their rights o.er such share) " This is ,h#+oses elected captains of the tribes - na&el#/ that ,hen the do&inion ,asdi.ided/ each &ight ta0e care of his o,n partR consulting God through thehigh priest on the affairs of his tribe/ ruling o.er his ar&#/ building andfortif#ing cities/ appointing judges/ attac0ing the ene&ies of his o,ndo&inion/ and ha.ing co&plete control o.er all ci.il and &ilitar# affairs)"9 e ,as not bound to ac0no,ledge an# superior judge sa.e God$Endnote 8'/ or a prophet ,ho& God should expressl# send) "J If hedeparted fro& the ,orship of God/ the rest of the tribes did not arraign hi&as a subject/ but attac0ed hi& as an ene&#) "J %f this ,e ha.e exa&ples inScripture) "D 2hen 7oshua ,as dead/ the children of Israel not a fresh

general-in-chief consulted GodR it being decided that the tribe of 7udahshould be the first to attac0 its ene&ies/ the tribe in uestion contracteda single alliance ,ith the tribe of Si&eon/ for uniting their forces/ andattac0ing their co&&on ene&#/ the rest of the tribes not being included inthe alliance 7udges i@5/ 8/ ) "6 Each tribe separatel# &ade ,ar againstits o,n ene&ies/ and/ according to its pleasure/ recei.ed the& as subjectsor allies/ though it had been co&&anded not to spare the& on an# conditions/but to destro# the& utterl#) " Such disobedience &et ,ith reproof fro&the rest of the tribes/ but did not cause the offending tribe to bearraigned@ it ,as not considered a sufficient reason for proclai&ing a ci.il,ar/ or interfering in one anotherQs affairs) "" But ,hen the tribe of Benja&in offended against the others/ and so loosened the bonds of peace

that none of the confederated tribes could find refuge ,ithin its borders/the# attac0ed it as an ene&#/ and gaining the .ictor# o.er it after threebattles/ put to death both guilt# and innocent/ according to the la,s of ,ar@ an act ,hich the# subseuentl# be,ailed ,ith tard# repentance)

56@5:: These exa&ples plainl# confir& ,hat ,e ha.e said concerning therights of each tribe) 5:5 Perhaps ,e shall be as0ed ,ho elected thesuccessors to the captains of each tribeR on this point I can gather nopositi.e infor&ation in Scripture/ but I conjecture that as the tribes ,eredi.ided into fa&ilies/ each headed b# its senior &e&ber/ the senior of allthese heads of fa&ilies succeeded b# right to the office of captain/ for +oses chose fro& a&ong these seniors his se.ent# coadjutors/ ,ho for&ed ,ith

hi&self the supre&e council) 5:8 Those ,ho ad&inistered the go.ern&entafter the death of 7oshua ,ere called elders/ and elder is a .er# co&&onebre, expression in the sense of judge/ as I suppose e.er#one 0no,sR



ho,e.er/ it is not .er# i&portant for us to &a0e up our &inds on this point)5: It is enough to ha.e sho,n that after the death of +oses no one &an,ielded all the po,er of a so.ereignR as affairs ,ere not all &anaged b# one&an/ nor b# a single council/ nor b# the popular .ote/ but partl# b# onetribe/ partl# b# the rest in eual shares/ it is &ost e.ident that thego.ern&ent/ after the death of +oses/ ,as neither &onarchic/ nor

aristocratic/ nor popular/ but/ as ,e ha.e said/ Theocratic)5:9 The reasons for appl#ing this na&e are@

56@5:J I) Because the ro#al seat of go.ern&ent ,as the Te&ple/ and inrespect to it alone/ as ,e ha.e sho,n/ all the tribes ,ere fello,-citizens/

5:D II) Because all the people o,ed allegiance to God/ their supre&e7udge/ to ,ho& onl# the# had pro&ised i&plicit obedience in all things)

56@5:6 III) Because the general-in-chief or dictator/ ,hen there ,as needof such/ ,as elected b# none sa.e God alone) 5: This ,as expressl#co&&anded b# +oses in the na&e of God 3eut) xix@5J/ and ,itnessed b# the

actual choice of Gideon/ of Sa&son/ and of Sa&uelR ,herefro& ,e &a# concludethat the other faithful leaders ,ere chosen in the sa&e &anner/ though it isnot expressl# told us)

56@5:" These preli&inaries being stated/ it is no, ti&e to inuire theeffects of for&ing a do&inion on this plan/ and to see ,hether it soeffectuall# 0ept ,ithin bounds both rulers and ruled/ that the for&er ,erene.er t#rannical and the latter ne.er rebellious)

56@55: Those ,ho ad&inister or possess go.erning po,er/ al,a#s tr# tosurround their high-handed actions ,ith a cloa0 of legalit#/ and to persuadethe people that the# act fro& good &oti.esR this the# are easil# able to

effect ,hen the# are the sole interpreters of the la,R for it is e.identthat the# are thus able to assu&e a far greater freedo& to carr# out their ,ishes and desires than if the interpretation if the la, is .ested inso&eone else/ or if the la,s ,ere so self-e.ident that no one could be indoubt as to their &eaning) $56@' 555 2e thus see that the po,er of e.il-doing ,as greatl# curtailed for the ebre, captains b# the fact that the,hole interpretation of the la, ,as .ested in the =e.ites 3eut) xxi@J/,ho/ on their part/ had no share in the go.ern&ent/ and depended for alltheir support and consideration on a correct interpretation of the la,sentrusted to the&) 558 +oreo.er/ the ,hole people ,as co&&anded to co&etogether at a certain place e.er# se.en #ears and be instructed in the la,b# the high-priestR further/ each indi.idual ,as bidden to read the boo0 of

the la, through and through continuall# ,ith scrupulous care) 3eut) xxxi@"/5:/ and .i@6) 55 The captains ,ere thus for their o,n sa0es bound tota0e great care to ad&inister e.er#thing according to the la,s laid do,n/and ,ell 0no,n to all/ if the#/ ,ished to be held in high honour b#/ thepeople/ ,ho ,ould regard the& as the ad&inistrators of GodQs do&inion/ andas GodQs .icegerentsR other,ise the# could not ha.e escaped all the.irulence of theological hatred) 559 There ,as another .er# i&portantchec0 on the unbridled license of the captains/ in the fact/ that the ar&#,as for&ed fro& the ,hole bod#/ of the citizens/ bet,een the ages of t,ent#and sixt#/ ,ithout exception/ and that the captains ,ere not able to hirean# foreign soldier#) 55J This I sa# ,as .er#/ i&portant/ for it is ,ell0no,n that princes can oppress their peoples ,ith the single aid of

the soldier# in their pa#R ,hile there is nothing &ore for&idable to the&than the freedo& of citizen soldiers/ ,ho ha.e established the freedo& andglor# of their countr#/ b# their .alour/ their toil/ and their blood) 55D



Thus Alexander/ ,hen he ,as about to &a0e ,ax on 3arius/ a second ti&e/after hearing the ad.ice of Par&enio/ did not chide hi& ,ho ga.e the ad.ice/but Pol#sperchon/ ,ho ,as standing b#) 556 4or/ as urtius sa#si.) Para) 5/ he did not .enture to reproach Par&enio again after ha.ingshortl#/ before repro.ed hi& too sharpl#) 55 This freedo& of the+acedonians/ ,hich he so dreaded/ he ,as not able to subdue till after the

nu&ber of capti.es enlisted in the ar&#/ surpassed that of his o,n people@then/ but not till then/ he ga.e rein to his anger so long chec0ed b#/ theindependence of his chief fello,-countr#&en)

56@55" If this independence of citizen soldiers can restrain the princesof ordinar# states ,ho are ,ont to usurp the ,hole glor# of .ictories/ it&ust ha.e been still &ore effectual against the ebre, captains/ ,hosesoldiers ,ere fighting/ not for the glor# of a prince/ but for the glor# of God/ and ,ho did not go forth to battle till the 3i.ine assent had beengi.en)

56@58: 2e &ust also re&e&ber that the ebre, captains ,ere associated onl#

b# the bonds of religion@ therefore/ if an# one of the& had transgressed/and begun to .iolate the 3i.ine right/ he &ight ha.e been treated b# therest as an ene&# and la,full# subdued)

56@585 An additional chec0 &a# be found in the fear of a ne, prophetarising/ for if a &an of unble&ished life could sho, b# certain signs thathe ,as reall# a prophet/ he ipso facto obtained the so.ereign right to rule/,hich ,as gi.en to hi&/ as to +oses for&erl#/ in the na&e of God/ asre.ealed to hi&self aloneR not &erel# through the high priest/ as in thecase of the captains) 588 There is no doubt that such an one ,ould easil#be able to enlist an oppressed people in his cause/ and b# trifling signspersuade the& of an#thing he ,ished@ on the other hand/ if affairs ,ere ,ell

ordered/ the captain ,ould be able to &a0e pro.ision in ti&eR that theprophet should be sub&itted to his appro.al/ and be exa&ined ,hether he ,erereall# of unble&ished life/ and possessed indisputable signs of his &ission@also/ ,hether the teaching he proposed to set forth in the na&e of the =ordagreed ,ith recei.ed doctrines/ and the general la,s of the countr#R if hiscredentials ,ere insufficient/ or his doctrines ne,/ he could la,full# beput to death/ or else recei.ed on the captainQs sole responsibilit# andauthorit#)

56@58 Again/ the captains ,ere not superior to the others in nobilit# or birth/ but onl# ad&inistered the go.ern&ent in .irtue of their age andpersonal ualities) 589 =astl#/ neither captains nor ar&# had an# reason

for preferring ,ar to peace) 58J The ar&#/ as ,e ha.e stated/ consistedentirel# of citizens/ so that affairs ,ere &anaged b# the sa&e persons bothin peace and ,ar) 58D The &an ,ho ,as a soldier in the ca&p ,as a citizenin the &ar0et-place/ he ,ho ,as a leader in the ca&p ,as a judge in the la,courts/ he ,ho ,as a general in the ca&p ,as a ruler in the state) 586Thus no one could desire ,ar for its o,n sa0e/ but onl# for the sa0e of preser.ing peace and libert#R possibl# the captains a.oided change as far aspossible/ so as not to be obliged to consult the high priest and sub&it tothe indignit# of standing in his presence)

56@58 So &uch for the precautions for 0eeping the captains ,ithin bounds)$56@"' 58" 2e &ust no, loo0 for the restraints upon the people@ these/

ho,e.er/ are .er# clearl# indicated in the .er# ground,or0 of the socialfabric)



56@5: An#one ,ho gi.es the subject the slightest attention/ ,ill see thatthe state ,as so ordered as to inspire the &ost ardent patriotis& in thehearts of the citizens/ so that the latter ,ould be .er# hard to persuade tobetra# their countr#/ and be read# to endure an#thing rather thansub&it to a foreign #o0e) 55 After the# had transferred their rightto God/ the# thought that their 0ingdo& belonged to God/ and that the#

the&sel.es ,ere GodQs children) 58 %ther nations the# loo0ed upon asGodQs ene&ies/ and regarded ,ith intense hatred ,hich the# too0to be piet#/ see Psal& cxxxix@85/ 88@ nothing ,ould ha.e been &oreabhorrent to the& than s,earing allegiance to a foreigner/ and pro&ising hi&obedience@ nor could the# concei.e an# greater or &ore execrable cri&e thanthe betra#al of their countr#/ the 0ingdo& of the God ,ho& the# adored)

56@5 It ,as considered ,ic0ed for an#one to settle outside of thecountr#/ inas&uch as the ,orship of God b# ,hich the# ,ere bound could notbe carried on else,here@ their o,n land alone ,as considered hol#/ the restof the earth unclean and profane)

56@59 3a.id/ ,ho ,as forced to li.e in exile/ co&plained before Saul asfollo,s@ KBut if the# be the children of &en ,ho ha.e stirred thee upagainst &e/ cursed be the# before the =ordR for the# ha.e dri.en &e out thisda# fro& abiding in the inheritance of the =ord/ sa#ing/ Go/ ser.e other gods)K I Sa&) xx.i@5") 5J 4or the sa&e reason no citizen/ as ,e shouldespeciall# re&ar0/ ,as e.er sent into exile@ he ,ho sinned ,as liable topunish&ent/ but not to disgrace)

56@5D Thus the lo.e of the ebre,s for their countr# ,as not onl#patriotis&/ but also piet#/ and ,as cherished and nurtured b. dail# ritestill/ li0e their hatred of other nations/ it &ust ha.e passed into their nature) 56 Their dail# ,orship ,as not onl# different fro& that of other

nations as it &ight ,ell be/ considering that the# ,ere a peculiar peopleand entirel# apart fro& the rest/ it ,as absolutel# contrar#) 5 Suchdail# reprobation naturall# ga.e rise to a lasting hatred/ deepl# i&plantedin the heart@ for of all hatreds none is &ore deep and tenacious thanthat ,hich springs fro& extre&e de.outness or piet#/ and is itself cherishedas pious) 5" ;or ,as a general cause lac0ing for infla&ing such hatred&ore and &ore/ inas&uch as it ,as reciprocatedR the surrounding nationsregarding the 7e,s ,ith a hatred just as intense)

56@59: o, great ,as the effect of all these causes/ na&el#/ freedo& fro&&anQs do&inionR de.otion to their countr#R absolute rights o.er allother &enR a hatred not onl# per&itted but piousR a conte&pt for their

fello,-&enR the singularit# of their custo&s and religious ritesR theeffect/ I repeat/ of all these causes in strengthening the hearts of the7e,s to bear all things for their countr#/ ,ith extraordinar# constanc# and.alour/ ,ill at once be discerned b# reason and attested b# experience)595 ;e.er/ so long as the cit# ,as standing/ could the# endure to re&ainunder foreign do&inionR and therefore the# called 7erusale& Ka rebelliouscit#K Ezra i.@58) 598 Their state after its reestablish&ent ,hich ,as a&ere shado, of the first/ for the high priests had usurped the rights of thetribal captains ,as/ ,ith great difficult#/ destro#ed b# the (o&ans/ asTacitus bears ,itness ist) ii@9@- Kespasian had closed the ,ar againstthe 7e,s/ abandoning the siege of 7erusale& as an enterprise difficultand arduous rather fro& the character of the people and the obstinac# of

their superstition/ than fro& the strength left to the besieged for &eetingtheir necessities)K 59 But besides these characteristics/ ,hich are&erel# ascribed b# an indi.idual opinion/ there ,as one feature



peculiar to this state and of great i&portance in retaining the affectionsof the citizens/ and chec0ing all thoughts of desertion/ or abandon&ent of the countr#@ na&el#/ self-interest/ the strength and life of all hu&anaction) 599 This ,as peculiarl# engaged in the ebre, state/ for no,here else did citizens possess their goods so securel#/ as did thesubjects of this co&&unit#/ for the latter possessed as large a share in the

land and the fields as did their chiefs/ and ,ere o,ners of their plots of ground in perpetuit#R for if an# &an ,as co&pelled b# po.ert# to sell hisfar& or his pasture/ he recei.ed it bac0 again intact at the #ear of jubilee@ there ,ere other si&ilar enact&ents against the possibilit# of alienating real propert#)

56@59J Again/ po.ert# , as no,here &ore endurable than in a countr# ,heredut# to,ards oneQs neighbour/ that is/ oneQs fello,-citizen/ ,as practised,ith the ut&ost piet#/ as a &eans of gaining the fa.our of God the ing)59D Thus the ebre, citizens ,ould no,here be so ,ell off as in their o,ncountr#R outside its li&its the# &et ,ith nothing but loss and disgrace)

56@596 The follo,ing considerations ,ere of ,eight/ not onl# in 0eepingthe& at ho&e/ but also in pre.enting ci.il ,ar and re&o.ing causes of strifeR no one ,as bound to ser.e his eual/ but onl# to ser.e God/ ,hilecharit# and lo.e to,ards fello,-citizens ,as accounted the highest piet#Rthis last feeling ,as not a little fostered b# the general hatred ,ith ,hichthe# regarded foreign nations and ,ere regarded b# the&) 59 4urther&ore/the strict discipline of obedience in ,hich the# ,ere brought up/ ,as a .er#i&portant factorR for the# ,ere bound to carr# on all their actionsaccording to the set rules of the la,@ a &an &ight not plough ,hen he li0ed/but onl# at certain ti&es/ in certain #ears/ and ,ith one sort of beast at ati&eR so/ too/ he &ight onl# so, and reap in a certain &ethod and season -in fact/ his ,hole life ,as one long school of obedience see hap) ) on

the use of cere&oniesR such a habit ,as thus engendered/ that confor&it#see&ed freedo& instead of ser.itude/ and &en desired ,hat ,as co&&andedrather than ,hat ,as forbidden) 59" This result ,as not a little aided b#the fact that the people ,ere bound/ at certain seasons of the #ear/ to gi.ethe&sel.es up to rest and rejoicing/ not for their o,n pleasure/ but inorder that the# &ight ,orship God cheerfull#)

56@5J: Three ti&es in the #ear the# feasted before the =ordR on these.enth da# of e.er# ,ee0 the# ,ere bidden to abstain fro& all ,or0 and torestR besides these/ there ,ere other occasions ,hen innocent rejoicing andfeasting ,ere not onl# allo,ed but enjoined) 5J5 I do not thin0 an# better &eans of influencing &enQs &inds could be de.isedR for there is no &ore

po,erful attraction than jo# springing fro& de.otion/ a &ixture of ad&iration and lo.e) 5J8 It ,as not eas# to be ,earied b# constantrepetition/ for the rites on the .arious festi.als ,ere .aried and recurredseldo&) 5J 2e &a# add the deep re.erence for the Te&ple ,hich all &ostreligiousl# fostered/ on account of the peculiar rites and duties that the#,ere obliged to perfor& before approaching thither) 5J9 E.en no,/ 7e,scannot read ,ithout horror of the cri&e of +anasseh/ ,ho dared to place auidol in the Te&ple) 5JJ The la,s/ scrupulousl# preser.ed in the in&ostsanctuar#/ ,ere objects of eual re.erence to the people) 5JD Popular reports and &isconceptions ,ere/ therefore/ .er# little to be fearedin this uarter/ for no one dared decide on sacred &atters/ but allfelt bound to obe#/ ,ithout consulting their reason/ all the co&&ands gi.en

b# the ans,ers of God recei.ed in the Te&ple/ and all the la,s ,hich Godhad ordained)



56@5J6 I thin0 I ha.e no, explained clearl#/ though briefl#// the &ainfeatures of the ebre, co&&on,ealth) 5J I &ust no, inuire into thecauses ,hich led the people so often to fall a,a# fro& the la,/ ,hichbrought about their freuent subjection/ and/ finall#/ the co&pletedestruction of their do&inion) 5J" Perhaps I shall be told that it sprangfro& their hardness of heartR but this is childish/ for ,h# should this

people be &ore hard of heart than othersR ,as it b# nature

$56@A' 5D: But nature for&s indi.iduals/ not peoplesR the latter areonl# distinguishable b# the difference of their language/ their custo&s/ andtheir la,sR ,hile fro& the t,o last - i)e)/ custo&s and la,s/ - it &a# arisethat the# ha.e a peculiar disposition/ a peculiar &anner of life/ andpeculiar prejudices) 5D5 If/ then/ the ebre,s ,ere harder of heart thanother nations/ the fault la# ,ith their la,s or custo&s)

56@5D8 This is certainl# true/ in the sense that/ if God had ,ished their do&inion to be &ore lasting/ e ,ould ha.e gi.en the& other rites and la,s/and ,ould ha.e instituted a different for& of go.ern&ent) 5D 2e can/

therefore/ onl# sa# that their God ,as angr# ,ith the&/ not onl#/ as7ere&iah sa#s/ fro& the building of the cit#/ but e.en fro& the founding of their la,s)

56@5D9 This is borne ,itness to b# Eze0iel xx@8J@ K2herefore I ga.e the&also statutes that ,ere not good/ and judg&ents ,hereb# the# should notli.eR and I polluted the& in their o,n gifts/ in that the# caused to passthrough the fire all that openeth the ,o&bR that I &ight &a0e the& desolate/to the end that the# &ight 0no, that I a& the =ord)K

56@5DJ In order that ,e &a# understand these ,ords/ and the destruction of the ebre, co&&on,ealth/ ,e &ust bear in &ind that it had at first been

intended to entrust the ,hole duties of the priesthood to the firstborn/ andnot to the =e.ites see ;u&b) .iii@56) 5DD It ,as onl# ,hen all thetribes/ except the =e.ites/ ,orshipped the golden calf/ that thefirstborn ,ere rejected and defiled/ and the =e.ites chosen in their stead3eut) x@) 5D6 2hen I reflect on this change/ I feel disposed to brea0forth ,ith the ,ords of Tacitus) 5D GodQs object at that ti&e ,as not thesafet# of the 7e,s/ but .engeance) 5D" I a& greatl# astonished that thecelestial &ind ,as so infla&ed ,ith anger that it ordained la,s/ ,hichal,a#s are supposed to pro&ote the honour/ ,ell-being/ and securit# of apeople/ ,ith the purpose of .engeance/ for the sa0e of punish&entR so thatthe la,s do not see& so &uch la,s - that is/ the safeguard of the people - as pains and penalties)

56@56: The gifts ,hich the people ,ere obliged to besto, on the =e.itesand priests - the rede&ption of the firstborn/ the poll-tax due to the=e.ites/ the pri.ilege possessed b# the latter of the sole perfor&ance of sacred rites - all these/ I sa#/ ,ere a continual reproach to the people/ acontinual re&inder of their defile&ent and rejection) 565 +oreo.er/ ,e &a#be sure that the =e.ites ,ere for e.er heaping reproaches upon the&@ for a&ong so &an# thousands there &ust ha.e been &an# i&portunate dabblers intheolog#) 568 ence the people got into the ,a# of ,atching the acts of the =e.ites/ ,ho ,ere but hu&anR of accusing the ,hole bod# of the faults of one &e&ber/ and continuall# &ur&uring)

56@56 Besides this/ there ,as the obligation to 0eep in idleness &enhateful to the&/ and connected b# no ties of blood) 569 Especiall# ,ouldthis see& grie.ous ,hen pro.isions ,ere dear) 2hat ,onder/ then/ if in ti&es



of peace/ ,hen stri0ing &iracles had ceased/ and no &en of para&ountauthorit# ,ere forthco&ing/ the irritable and greed# te&per of the peoplebegan to ,ax cold/ and at length to fall a,a# fro& a ,orship/ ,hich/ though3i.ine/ ,as also hu&iliating/ and e.en hostile/ and to see0 after so&ethingfreshR or can ,e be surprised that the captains/ ,ho al,a#s adopt thepopular course/ in order to gain the so.ereign po,er for the&sel.es b#

enlisting the s#&pathies of the people/ and alienating the high priest/should ha.e #ielded to their de&ands/ and introduced a ne, ,orship 56J If the state had been for&ed according to the original intention/ the rightsand honour of all the tribes ,ould ha.e been eual/ and e.er#thing ,ouldha.e rested on a fir& basis) 56D 2ho is there ,ho ,ould ,illingl# .iolatethe religious rights of his 0indred 566 2hat could a &an desire &ore thanto support his o,n brothers and parents/ thus fulfilling the duties of religion 56 2ho ,ould not rejoice in being taught b# the& theinterpretation of the la,s/ and recei.ing through the& the ans,ers of God

56@56" The tribes ,ould thus ha.e been united b# a far closer bond/ if allali0e had possessed the right to the priesthood) 5: All danger ,ould ha.e

been ob.iated/ if the choice of the =e.ites had not been dictated b# anger and re.enge) 55 But/ as ,e ha.e said/ the ebre,s had offended their God/2ho/ as Eze0iel sa#s/ polluted the& in their o,n gifts b# rejecting all thatopeneth the ,o&b/ so that e &ight destro# the&)

56@58 This passage is also confir&ed b# their histor#) As soon as thepeople in the ,ilderness began to li.e in ease and plent#/ certain &en of no&ean birth began to rebel against the choice of the =e.ites/ and to &a0e ita cause for belie.ing that +oses had not acted b# the co&&ands of God/ butfor his o,n good pleasure/ inas&uch as he had chosen his o,n tribe beforeall the rest/ and had besto,ed the high priesthood in perpetuit# on his o,nbrother) 5 The#/ therefore/ stirred up a tu&ult/ and ca&e to hi&/ cr#ing

out that all &en ,ere euall# sacred/ and that he had exalted hi&self abo.ehis fello,s ,rongfull#) 59 +oses ,as not able to pacif# the& ,ithreasonsR but b# the inter.ention of a &iracle in proof of the faith/ the#all perished) 5J A fresh sedition then arose a&ong the ,hole people/ ,hobelie.ed that their cha&pions had not been put to death b# the judg&ent of God/ but b# the de.ice of +oses) 5D After a great slaughter/ or pestilence/ the rising subsided fro& inanition/ but in such a &anner thatall preferred death to life under such conditions)

56@56 2e should rather sa# that sedition ceased than that har&on# ,as re-established) 5 This is ,itnessed b# Scripture 3eut) xxxi@85/ ,hereGod/ after predicting to +oses that the people after his death ,ill fall

a,a# fro& the 3i.ine ,orship/ spea0s thus@ K4or I 0no, their i&agination,hich the# go about/ e.en no, before I ha.e brought the& into the land ,hichI s,areRK and/ a little ,hile after xxxi@86/ +oses sa#s@ 4or I 0no, th#rebellion and th# stiff nec0@ behold ,hile I a& #et ali.e ,ith #ou thisda#/ #e ha.e been rebellious against the =ordR and ho, &uch &ore after &#death1K

56@5" Indeed/ it happened according to his ,ords/ as ,e all 0no,)5": Great changes/ extre&e license/ luxur#/ and hardness of heart gre, upRthings ,ent fro& bad to ,orse/ till at last the people/ after beingfreuentl# conuered/ ca&e to an open rupture ,ith the 3i.ine right/ and,ished for a &ortal 0ing/ so that the seat of go.ern&ent &ight be the ourt/

instead of the Te&ple/ and that the tribes &ight re&ain fello,-citizens inrespect to their 0ing/ instead of in respect to 3i.ine right and the highpriesthood)



56@5"5 A .ast &aterial for ne, seditions ,as thus produced/ e.entuall#resulting in the ruin of the entire state) ings are abo.e all things jealous of a precarious rule/ and can in no,ise broo0 a do&inion ,ithintheir o,n) 5"8 The first &onarchs/ being chosen fro& the ran0s of pri.atecitizens/ ,ere content ,ith the a&ount of dignit# to ,hich the# had risenR

but their sons/ ,ho obtained the throne b# right of inheritance/ begangraduall# to introduce changes/ so as to get all the so.ereign rights intotheir o,n hands) 5" This the# ,ere generall# unable to acco&plish/ solong as the right of legislation did not rest ,ith the&/ but ,ith the highpriest/ ,ho 0ept the la,s in the sanctuar#/ and interpreted the& to thepeople) 5"9 The 0ings ,ere thus bound to obe# the la,s as &uch as ,ere thesubjects/ and ,ere unable to abrogate the&/ or to ordain ne, la,s of eualauthorit#R &oreo.er/ the# ,ere pre.ented b# the =e.ites fro& ad&inisteringthe affairs of religion/ 0ing and subject being ali0e unclean) 5"J =astl#/the ,hole safet# of their do&inion depended on the ,ill of one &an/ if that&an appeared to be a prophetR and of this the# had seen an exa&ple/ na&el#/ho, co&pletel# Sa&uel had been able to co&&and Saul/ and ho, easil#/ because

of a single disobedience/ he had been able to transfer the right of so.ereignt# to 3a.id) 5"D Thus the 0ings found a do&inion ,ithin their o,n/ and ,ielded a precarious so.ereignt#)

56@5"6 In order to sur&ount these difficulties/ the# allo,ed other te&plesto be dedicated to the gods/ so that there &ight be no further need of consulting the =e.itesR the# also sought out &an# ,ho prophesied in the na&eof God/ so that the# &ight ha.e creatures of their o,n to oppose to the trueprophets) 5" o,e.er/ in spite of all their atte&pts/ the# ne.er attained their end) 5"" 4or the prophets/ prepared against e.er#e&ergenc#/ ,aited for a fa.ourable opportunit#/ such as the beginning of ane, reign/ ,hich is al,a#s precarious/ ,hile the &e&or# of the pre.ious

reign re&ains green) 8:: At these ti&es the# could easil# pronounce b#3i.ine authorit# that the 0ing ,as t#rannical/ and could produce a cha&pionof distinguished .irtue to .indicate the 3i.ine right/ and la,full# to clai&do&inion/ or a share in it) 8:5 Still/ not e.en so could the prophetseffect &uch) 8:8 The# could/ indeed/ re&o.e a t#rantR but there ,erereasons ,hich pre.ented the& fro& doing &ore than setting up/ at great costof ci.il bloodshed/ another t#rant in his stead) 8: %f discords and ci.il,ars there ,as no end/ for the causes for the .iolation of 3i.ine rightre&ained al,a#s the sa&e/ and could onl# be re&o.ed b# a co&pletere&odelling of the state)

56@8:9 2e ha.e no, seen ho, religion ,as introduced into the ebre,

co&&on,ealth/ and ho, the do&inion &ight ha.e lasted for e.er/ if the just,rath of the =a,gi.er had allo,ed it) 8:J As this ,as i&possible/ it ,asbound in ti&e to perish) 8:D I a& no, spea0ing onl# of the firstco&&on,ealth/ for the second ,as a &ere shado, of the first/ inas&uch as thepeople ,ere bound b# the rights of the Persians to ,ho& the# ,ere subject)8:6 After the restoration of freedo&/ the high priests usurped the rightsof the secular chiefs/ and thus obtained absolute do&inion) 8: Thepriests ,ere infla&ed ,ith an intense desire to ,ield the po,ers of theso.ereignt# and the high priesthood at the sa&e ti&e) 8:" I ha.e/therefore/ no need to spea0 further of the second co&&on,ealth) 85:2hether the first/ in so far as ,e dee& it to ha.e been durable/ is capableof i&itation/ and ,hether it ,ould be pious to cop# it as far as possible/

,ill appear fro& ,hat fello,s) 855 I ,ish onl# to dra, attention/ as acro,ning conclusion/ to the principle indicated alread# - na&el#/ that it ise.ident/ fro& ,hat ,e ha.e stated in this chapter/ that the 3i.ine right/ or



the right of religion/ originates in a co&pact@ ,ithout such co&pact/none but natural rights exist) 858 The ebre,s ,ere not bound b# their religion to e.ince an# pious care for other nations not included in theco&pact/ but onl# for their o,n fello,-citizens)

$5@:' APTE( OIII - 4(%+ TE %++%;2EA=T %4 TE EB(E2S/ A;3TEI( IST%(>/ E(TAI; P%=ITIA= 3%T(I;ES A(E 3E3<E3)

$5@5' 5 Although the co&&on,ealth of the ebre,s/ as ,e ha.e concei.edit/ &ight ha.e lasted for e.er/ it ,ould be i&possible to i&itate it at thepresent da#/ nor ,ould it be ad.isable so to do) 8 If a people ,ished totransfer their rights to God it ,ould be necessar# to &a0e an expressco.enant ,ith i&/ and for this ,ould be needed not onl# the consent of those transferring their rights/ but also the consent of God) God/ho,e.er/ has re.ealed through his Apostles that the co.enant of God is no

longer ,ritten in in0/ or on tables of stone/ but ,ith the Spirit of God inthe flesh# tables of the heart)

5@9 4urther&ore/ such a for& of go.ern&ent ,ould onl# be a.ailable for those ,ho desire to ha.e no foreign relations/ but to shut the&sel.es up,ithin their o,n frontiers/ and to li.e apart fro& the rest of the ,orldR it,ould be useless to &en ,ho &ust ha.e dealings ,ith other nationsR so thatthe cases ,here it could be adopted are .er# fe, indeed)

5@J ;e.ertheless/ though it could not be copied in its entiret#/ itpossessed &an# excellent features ,hich &ight be brought to our notice/ andperhaps i&itated ,ith ad.antage) D +# intention/ ho,e.er/ is not to ,rite

a treatise on for&s of go.ern&ent/ so I ,ill pass o.er &ost of such pointsin silence/ and ,ill onl# touch on those ,hich bear upon &# purpose)

5@6 GodQs 0ingdo& is not infringed upon b# the choice of an earthl# ruler endo,ed ,ith so.ereign rightsR for after the ebre,s had transferred their rights to God/ the# conferred the so.ereign right of ruling on +oses/in.esting hi& ,ith the sole po,er of instituting and abrogating la,s inthe na&e of God/ of choosing priests/ of judging/ of teaching/ of punishing - in fact/ all the prerogati.es of an absolute &onarch)

5@ Again/ though the priests ,ere the interpreters of the la,s/ the# hadno po,er to judge the citizens/ or to exco&&unicate an#one@ this could onl#

be done b# the judges and chiefs chosen fro& a&ong the people) " Aconsideration of the successes and the histories of the ebre,s ,ill bringto light other considerations ,orth# of note) To ,it@

5@" I) That there ,ere no religious sects/ till after the high priests/in the second co&&on,ealth/ possessed the authorit# to &a0e decrees/ andtransact the business of go.ern&ent) 5: In order that such authorit# &ightlast for e.er/ the high priests usurped the rights of secular rulers/ andat last ,ished to be st#led 0ings) 55 The reason for this is read# tohandR in the first co&&on,ealth no decrees could bear the na&e of the highpriest/ for he had no right to ordain la,s/ but onl# to gi.e the ans,ers of God to uestions as0ed b# the captains or the councils@ he had/ therefore/

no &oti.e for &a0ing changes in the la,/ but too0 care/ on the contrar#/ toad&inister and guard ,hat had alread# been recei.ed and accepted) 58 isonl# &eans of preser.ing his freedo& in safet# against the ,ill of the



captains la# in cherishing the la, intact) 5 After the high priests hadassu&ed the po,er of carr#ing on the go.ern&ent/ and added the rights of secular rulers to those the# alread# possessed/ each one began both inthings religious and in things secular/ to see0 for the glorification of hiso,n na&e/ settling e.er#thing b# sacerdotal authorit#/ and issuing e.er#da#/ concerning cere&onies/ faith/ and all else/ ne, decrees ,hich he sought

to &a0e as sacred and authoritati.e as the la,s of +oses) 59 (eligion thussan0 into a degrading superstition/ ,hile the true &eaning andinterpretation of the la,s beca&e corrupted) 5J 4urther&ore/ ,hile thehigh priests ,ere pa.ing their ,a# to the secular rule just after therestoration/ the# atte&pted to gain popular fa.our b# assenting toe.er# de&andR appro.ing ,hate.er the people did/ ho,e.er i&pious/ andacco&&odating Scripture to the .er# depra.ed current &orals) 5D +alachibears ,itness to this in no &easured ter&s@ he chides the priests of histi&e as despisers of the na&e of God/ and then goes on ,ith his in.ecti.e asfollo,s +al ii@6/ @ K4or the priestQs lips should 0eep 0no,ledge/and the# should see0 the la, at his &outh@ for he is the &essenger of the =ord of hosts) 56 But #e are departed out of the ,a#R #e ha.e

caused &an# to stu&ble at the la,/ #e ha.e corrupted the co.enant of =e.i/ saith the =ord of hosts)K 5 e further accuses the& of interpretingthe la,s according to their o,n pleasure/ and pa#ing no respect to God butonl# to persons) 5" It is certain that the high priests ,ere ne.er socautious in their conduct as to escape the re&ar0 of the &ore shre,d a&ongthe people/ for the latter ,ere at length e&boldened to assert that nola,s ought to be 0ept sa.e those that ,ere ,ritten/ and that the decrees,hich the Pharisees consisting/ as 7osephus sa#s in his K A&tiuities/Kchiefl#/ of the co&&on people/ ,ere decei.ed into calling the traditions of the fathers/ should not be obser.ed at all) 8: o,e.er this &a# be/ ,e canin no,ise doubt that flatter# of the high priest/ the corruption of religionand the la,s/ and the enor&ous increase of the extent of the last-na&ed/

ga.e .er# great and freuent occasion for disputes and altercationsi&possible to alla#) 85 2hen &en begin to uarrel ,ith all the ardour of superstition/ and the &agistrac# to bac0 up one side or the other/ the# canne.er co&e to a co&pro&ise/ but are bound to split into sects)

5@88 II) It is ,orth# of re&ar0 that the prophets/ ,ho ,ere in a pri.atestation of life/ rather irritated than refor&ed &an0ind b# their freedo& of ,arning/ rebu0e/ and censureR ,hereas the 0ings/ b# their reproofs andpunish&ents/ could al,a#s produce an effect) 8 The prophets ,ere oftenintolerable e.en to pious 0ings/ on account of the authorit# the# assu&edfor judging ,hether an action ,as right or ,rong/ or for repro.ing the 0ingsthe&sel.es if the# dared to transact an# business/ ,hether public or

pri.ate/ ,ithout prophetic sanction) 89 ing Asa ,ho/ according tothe testi&on# of Scripture/ reigned piousl#/ put the prophet anani into aprison-house because he had .entured freel# to chide and repro.e hi& for entering into a co.enant ,ith the 0ing of Ar&enia)

5@8J %ther exa&ples &ight be cited/ tending to pro.e that religiongained &ore har& than good b# such freedo&/ not to spea0 of the further conseuence/ that if the prophets had retained their rights/ greatci.il ,ars ,ould ha.e resulted)

8D III) It is re&ar0able that during all the period/ during ,hich thepeople held the reins of po,er/ there ,as onl# one ci.il ,ar/ and that one

,as co&pletel# extinguished/ the conuerors ta0ing such pit# on theconuered/ that the# endea.oured in e.er# ,a# to reinstate the& in their for&er dignit# and po,er) 86 But after that the people/ little accusto&ed



to 0ings/ changed its first for& of go.ern&ent into a &onarch#/ ci.il ,ar raged al&ost continuousl#R and battles ,ere so fierce as to exceed allothers recordedR in one engage&ent taxing our faith to the ut&ostfi.e hundred thousand Israelites ,ere slaughtered b# the &en of 7udah/ andin another the Israelites sle, great nu&bers of the &en of 7udah thefigures are not gi.en in Scripture/ al&ost razed to the ground the ,alls of

7erusale&/ and sac0ed the Te&ple in their unbridled fur#) 8 At length/laden ,ith the spoils of their brethren/ satiated ,ith blood/ the# too0hostages/ and lea.ing the 0ing in his ,ell-nigh de.astated 0ingdo&/ laiddo,n their ar&s/ rel#ing on the ,ea0ness rather than the good faith of their foes) 8" A fe, #ears after/ the &en of 7udah/ ,ith recruited strength/again too0 the field/ but ,ere a second ti&e beaten b# the Israelites/ andslain to the nu&ber of a hundred and t,ent# thousand/ t,o hundred thousandof their ,i.es and children ,ere led into capti.it#/ and a great boot# againseized) : 2orn out ,ith these and si&ilar battles set forth at length intheir histories/ the 7e,s at length fell a pre# to their ene&ies)

5@5 4urther&ore/ if ,e rec0on up the ti&es during ,hich peace pre.ailed

under each for& of go.ern&ent/ ,e shall find a great discrepanc#) 8Before the &onarch# fort# #ears and &ore often passed/ and once eight# #earsan al&ost unparalleled period/ ,ithout an# ,ar/ foreign or ci.il) After the 0ings acuired so.ereign po,er/ the fighting ,as no longer for peace and libert#/ but for glor#R accordingl# ,e find that the# all/ ,iththe exception of Solo&on ,hose .irtue and ,isdo& ,ould be better displa#edin peace than in ,ar ,aged ,ar/ and finall# a fatal desire for po,er gainedground/ ,hich/ in &an# cases/ &ade the path to the throne a blood# one)

5@9 =astl#/ the la,s/ during the rule of the people/ re&aineduncorrupted and ,ere studiousl# obser.ed) J Before the &onarch# there,ere .er#/ fe, prophets to ad&onish the people/ but after the establish&ent

of 0ings there ,ere a great nu&ber at the sa&e ti&e) D %badiah sa.ed ahundred fro& death and hid the& a,a#/ lest the# should be slain ,ith therest) 6 The people/ so far as ,e can see/ ,ere ne.er decei.ed b# falseprophets till after the po,er had been .ested in 0ings/ ,hose creatures &an#of the prophets ,ere) Again/ the people/ ,hose heart ,as generall#proud or hu&ble according to its circu&stances/ easil# corrected it-self under &isfortune/ turned again to God/ restored is la,s/ and so freeditself fro& all perilR but the 0ings/ ,hose hearts ,ere al,a#s euall#puffed up/ and ,ho could not be corrected ,ithout hu&iliation/ clungpertinaciousl# to their .ices/ e.en till the last o.erthro, of the cit#)

$5@8' " 2e &a# no, clearl# see fro& ,hat I ha.e said@-

9: I) o, hurtful to religion and the state is the concession to &inistersof religion of an# po,er of issuing decrees or transacting the business of go.ern&ent@ ho,/ on the contrar#/ far greater stabilit# is afforded/ if thesaid &inisters are onl# allo,ed to gi.e ans,ers to uestions dul# putto the&/ and are/ as a rule/ obliged to preach and practise the recei.ed andaccepted doctrines)

5@95 II o, dangerous it is to refer to 3i.ine right &atters &erel#speculati.e and subject or liable to dispute) 98 The &ost t#rannicalgo.ern&ents are those ,hich &a0e cri&es of opinions/ for e.er#one has aninalienable right o.er his thoughts - na#/ such a state of things leads to

the rule of popular passion)

5@9 Pontius Pilate &ade concession to the passion of the Pharisees in



consenting to the crucifixion of hrist/ ,ho& he 0ne, to be innocent) 99 Again/ the Pharisees/ in order to sha0e the position of &en richer thanthe&sel.es/ began to set on foot uestions of religion/ and accused theSadducees of i&piet#/ and/ follo,ing their exa&ple/ the .ilest - h#pocrites/stirred/ as the# pretended/ b# the sa&e hol# ,rath ,hich the# called zealfor the =ord/ persecuted &en ,hose unble&ished character and distinguished

.irtue had excited the popular hatred/ publicl# denounced their opinions/and infla&ed the fierce passions of the people against the&)

5@9J This ,anton licence being cloa0ed ,ith the specious garb of religion could not easil# be repressed/ especiall# ,hen the so.ereignauthorities introduced a sect of ,hich the#/ ,ere not the headR the# ,erethen regarded not as interpreters of 3i.ine right/ but as sectarians - thatis/ as persons recognizing the right of 3i.ine interpretation assu&ed b# theleaders of the sect) 9D The authorit# of the &agistrates thus beca&e of little account in such &atters in co&parison ,ith the authorit# of sectarianleaders before ,hose interpretations 0ings ,ere obliged to bo,)

5@96 To a.oid such e.ils in a state/ there is no safer ,a#/ than to &a0epiet# and religion to consist in acts onl# - that is/ in the practice of justice and charit#/ lea.ing e.er#oneQs judg&ent in other respects free)9 But I ,ill spea0 of this &ore at length presentl#)

$5@' 9" III) 2e see ho, necessar# it is/ both in the interests of thestate and in the interests of religion/ to confer on the so.ereign po,er theright of deciding ,hat is la,ful or the re.erse) J: If this right of judging actions could not be gi.en to the .er# prophets of God ,ithout greatinjur#/ to the state and religion/ ho, &uch less should it be entrusted tothose ,ho can neither foretell the future nor ,or0 &iracles1 J5 But thisagain I ,ill treat of &ore full# hereafter)

5@J8 I) =astl#// ,e see ho, disastrous it is for a people unaccusto&edto 0ings/ and possessing a co&plete code of la,s/ to set up a &onarch#) J;either can the subjects broo0 such a s,a#/ nor the ro#al authorit# sub&itto la,s and popular rights set up b# an#one inferior to itself) J9 Stillless can a 0ing be expected to defend such la,s/ for the# ,ere not fra&ed tosupport his do&inion/ but the do&inion of the people/ or so&e council ,hichfor&erl# ruled/ so that in guarding the popular rights the 0ing ,ould see&to be a sla.e rather than a &aster) JJ The representati.e of a ne,&onarch# ,ill e&plo# all his zeal in atte&pting to fra&e ne, la,s/ soas to ,rest the rights of do&inion to his o,n use/ and to reduce the peopletill the# find it easier to increase than to curtail the ro#al prerogati.e)

JD I &ust not/ ho,e.er/ o&it to state that it is no less dangerous tore&o.e a &onarch/ though he is on all hands ad&itted to be a t#rant) J64or his people are accusto&ed to ro#al authorit# and ,ill obe# no other/despising and &oc0ing at an# less august control)

5@J It is therefore necessar#/ as the prophets disco.ered of old/ if one0ing be re&o.ed/ that he should be replaced b# another/ ,ho ,ill be a t#rantfro& necessit# rather than choice) J" 4or ho, ,ill he be able to endurethe sight of the hands of the citizens ree0ing ,ith ro#al blood/ and torejoice in their regicide as a glorious exploit D: 2as not the deedperpetrated as an exa&ple and ,arning for hi&self

5@D5 If he reall# ,ishes to be 0ing/ and not to ac0no,ledge the people asthe judge of 0ings and the &aster of hi&self/ or to ,ield a precarious s,a#/he &ust a.enge the death of his predecessor/ &a0ing an exa&ple for his o,n



sa0e/ lest the people should .enture to repeat a si&ilar cri&e) D8 e ,illnot/ ho,e.er/ be able easil# to a.enge the death of the t#rant b# theslaughter of citizens unless he defends the cause of t#rann# and appro.esthe deeds of his predecessor/ thus follo,ing in his footsteps)

5@D ence it co&es to pass that peoples ha.e often changed their

t#rants/ but ne.er re&o.ed the& or changed the &onarchical for& of go.ern&ent into an# other)

$5@9' D9 The English people furnish us ,ith a terrible exa&ple of thisfact) DJ The# sought ho, to depose their &onarch under the for&s of la,/but ,hen he had been re&o.ed/ the# ,ere utterl# unable to change the for& of go.ern&ent/ and after &uch bloodshed onl# brought it about/ that a ne,&onarch should be hailed under a different na&e as though it had been a&ere uestion of na&esR this ne, &onarch could onl# consolidate his po,er b# co&pletel# destro#ing the ro#al stoc0/ putting to death the 0ingQsfriends/ real or supposed/ and disturbing ,ith ,ar the peace ,hich &ightencourage discontent/ in order that the populace &ight be engrossed ,ith

no.elties and di.ert its &ind fro& brooding o.er the slaughter of the 0ing)DD At last/ ho,e.er/ the people reflected that it had acco&plished nothingfor the good of the countr# be#ond .iolating the rights of the la,ful 0ingand changing e.er#thing for the ,orse) D6 It therefore decided to retraceits steps as soon as possible/ and ne.er rested till it had seen aco&plete restoration of the original state of affairs)

5@D It &a# perhaps be objected that the (o&an people ,as easil# able tore&o.e its t#rants/ but I gather fro& its histor# a strong confir&ation of &# contention) D" Though the (o&an people ,as &uch &ore thanordinaril# capable of re&o.ing their t#rants and changing their for& of go.ern&ent/ inas&uch as it held in its o,n hands the po,er of

electing its 0ing and his successor/ said being co&posed of rebels andcri&inals had not long been used to the ro#al #o0e out of its six 0ings ithad put to death three/ ne.ertheless it could acco&plish nothingbe#ond electing se.eral t#rants in place of one/ ,ho 0ept it groaning under a continual state of ,ar/ both foreign and ci.il/ till at last it changedits go.ern&ent again to a for& differing fro& &onarch#/ as in England/ onl#in na&e)

$5@J' 6: As for the <nited States of the ;etherlands/ the# ha.e ne.er/ as,e 0no,/ had a 0ing/ but onl# counts/ ,ho ne.er attained the full rights of do&inion) 65 The States of the ;etherlands e.identl# acted as principalsin the settle&ent &ade b# the& at the ti&e of the Earl of =eicesterQs

&ission@ the# al,a#s reser.ed for the&sel.es the authorit# to 0eep thecounts up to their duties/ and the po,er to preser.e this authorit#and the libert# of the citizens) 68 The# had a&ple &eans of .indicatingtheir rights if their rulers should pro.e t#rannical/ and could i&posesuch restraints that nothing could be done ,ithout their consent andappro.al)

5@6 Thus the rights of so.ereign po,er ha.e al,a#s been .ested in theStates/ though the last count endea.oured to usurp the&) 69 It istherefore little li0el# that the States should gi.e the& up/ especiall# asthe# ha.e just restored their original do&inion/ latel# al&ost lost)

5@6J These exa&ples/ then/ confir& us in our belief/ that e.er# do&inionshould retain its original for&/ and/ indeed/ cannot change it ,ithoutdanger of the utter ruin of the ,hole state) 6D Such are the points I ha.e



here thought ,orth# of re&ar0)

$5"@:' APTE( OIO - IT IS S%2; TAT TE (IGT %E( +ATTE(S

SPI(IT<A= =IES 2%==> 2IT TE S%E(EIG;/ A;3 TAT TE %<T2A(3 4%(+S %4 (E=IGI%; S%<=3 BE I; A%(3A;E 2IT P<B=I PEAE/ I4 2E 2%<=3 %BE> G%3 A(IGT)

5 2hen I said that the possessors of so.ereign po,er ha.e rights o.er e.er#thing/ and that all rights are dependent on their decree/ I did not&erel# &ean te&poral rights/ but also spiritual rightsR of the latter/ noless than the for&er/ the# ought to be the interpreters and thecha&pions) 8 I ,ish to dra, special attention to this point/ and todiscuss it full# in this chapter/ because &an# persons den# that the rightof deciding religious uestions belongs to the so.ereign po,er/ and refuseto ac0no,ledge it as the interpreter of 3i.ine right) The#

accordingl# assu&e full licence to accuse and arraign it/ na#/ e.en toexco&&unicate it fro& the hurch/ as A&brosius treated the E&peror Theodosius in old ti&e) 9 o,e.er/ I ,ill sho, later on in this chapter that the# ta0e this &eans of di.iding the go.ern&ent/ and pa.ing the,a# to their o,n ascendanc#) J I ,ish/ ho,e.er/ first to point out thatreligion acuires its force as la, solel# fro& the decrees of the so.ereign)D God has no special 0ingdo& a&ong &en except in so far as e reignsthrough te&poral rulers) $5"@5' 6 +oreo.er/ the rites of religion and theout,ard obser.ances of piet# should be in accordance ,ith the public peaceand ,ell-being/ and should therefore be deter&ined b# the so.ereign po,er alone) I spea0 here onl# of the out,ard obser.ances of piet# and theexternal rites of religion/ not of piet#/ itself/ nor of the in,ard ,orship

of God/ nor the &eans b# ,hich the &ind is in,ardl# led to do ho&age to Godin singleness of heart)

5"@" In,ard ,orship of God and piet# in itself are ,ithin the sphere of e.er#oneQs pri.ate rights/ and cannot be alienated as I sho,ed at the endof hapter II)) 5: 2hat I here &ean b# the 0ingdo& of God is/ Ithin0/ sufficientl# clear fro& ,hat has been said in hapter OI)55 I there sho,ed that a &an best fulfils Gods la, ,ho ,orships i&/according to is co&&and/ through acts of justice and charit#R it follo,s/therefore/ that ,here.er justice and charit# ha.e the force of la, andordinance/ there is GodQs 0ingdo&)

5"@58 I recognize no difference bet,een the cases ,here God teaches andco&&ands the practice of justice and charit# through our natural faculties/and those ,here e &a0es special re.elationsR nor is the for& of there.elation of i&portance so long as such practice is re.ealed and beco&es aso.ereign and supre&e la, to &en) 5 If/ therefore/ I sho, that justiceand charit# can onl# acuire the force of right and la, through the rightsof rulers/ I shall be able readil# to arri.e at the conclusion seeing thatthe rights of rulers are in the possession of the so.ereign/ that religioncan onl# acuire the force of right b# &eans of those ,ho ha.e the right toco&&and/ and that God onl# rules a&ong &en through the instru&entalit# of earthl# potentates) 59 It follo,s fro& ,hat has been said/ that thepractice of justice and charit# onl# acuires the force of la, through the

rights of the so.ereign authorit#R for ,e sho,ed in hapter OI) that in thestate of nature reason has no &ore rights than desire/ but that &en li.ingeither b# the la,s of the for&er or the la,s of the latter/ possess rights



co-extensi.e ,ith their po,ers)

5"@5J 4or this reason ,e could not concei.e sin to exist in the state of nature/ nor i&agine God as a judge punishing &anQs transgressionsR but ,esupposed all things to happen according to the general la,s of uni.ersalnature/ there being no difference bet,een pious and i&pious/ bet,een hi&

that ,as pure as Solo&on sa#s and hi& that ,as i&pure/ because there ,asno possibilit# either of justice or charit#)

$5"@8' 5D In order that the true doctrines of reason/ that is as ,esho,ed in hapter I)/ the true 3i.ine doctrines &ight obtain absolutel#the force of la, and right/ it ,as necessar# that each indi.idual shouldcede his natural right/ and transfer it either to societ# as a ,hole/ or toa certain bod# of &en/ or to one &an) 56 Then/ and not till then/does it first da,n upon us ,hat is justice and ,hat is injustice/,hat is euit# and ,hat is iniuit#)

5"@5 7ustice/ therefore/ and absolutel# all the precepts of reason/

including lo.e to,ards oneQs neighbour/ recei.e the force of la,s andordinances solel# through the rights of do&inion/ that is as ,e sho,ed inthe sa&e chapter solel# on the decree of those ,ho possess the right torule) 5" Inas&uch as the 0ingdo& of God consists entirel# in rightsapplied to justice and charit# or to true religion/ it follo,s that as ,easserted the 0ingdo& of God can onl# exist a&ong &en through the &eans of the so.ereign po,ersR nor does it &a0e an# difference ,hether religion beapprehended b# our natural faculties or b# re.elation@ the argu&ent is soundin both cases/ inas&uch as religion is one and the sa&e/ and is euall#re.ealed b# God/ ,hate.er be the &anner in ,hich it beco&es 0no,n to &en)

5"@8: Thus/ in order that the religion re.ealed b# the prophets &ight ha.e

the force of la, a&ong the 7e,s/ it ,as necessar# that e.er# &an of the&should #ield up his natural right/ and that all should/ ,ith one accord/agree that the# ,ould onl# obe# such co&&ands as God shouldre.eal to the& through the prophets) 85 7ust as ,e ha.e sho,n to ta0eplace in a de&ocrac#/ ,here &en ,ith one consent agree to li.e according tothe dictates of reason) 88 Although the ebre,s further&ore transferredtheir right to God/ the# ,ere able to do so rather in theor# than inpractice/ for/ as a &atter of fact as ,e pointed out abo.e the#absolutel# retained the right of do&inion till the# transferred it to +oses/,ho in his turn beca&e absolute 0ing/ so that it ,as onl# through hi& thatGod reigned o.er the ebre,s) 8 4or this reason na&el#/ that religiononl# acuires the force of la, b# &eans of the so.ereign po,er +oses ,as

not able to punish those ,ho/ before the co.enant/ and conseuentl# ,hilestill in possession of their rights/ .iolated the Sabbath Exod) x.i@86/but ,as able to do so after the co.enant ;u&b) x.@D/ because e.er#one hadthen #ielded up his natural rights/ and the ordinance of theSabbath had recei.ed the force of la,)

5"@89 =astl#/ for the sa&e reason/ after the destruction of the ebre,do&inion/ re.ealed religion ceased to ha.e the force of la,R for ,e cannotdoubt that as soon as the 7e,s transferred their right to the 0ing of Bab#lon/ the 0ingdo& of God and the 3i.ine right forth,ith ceased) 8J4or the co.enant ,here,ith the# pro&ised to obe# all the utterances of God,as abrogatedR GodQs 0ingdo&/ ,hich ,as based thereupon/ also ceased) 8D

The ebre,s could no longer abide thereb#/ inas&uch as their rights nolonger belonged to the& but to the 0ing of Bab#lon/ ,ho& as ,e sho,ed inhapter OI) the# ,ere bound to obe# in all things) 86 7ere&iah chap)



the public ,elfare out,eighed ,ith hi& his dut# to,ards his children) 9This being so/ it follo,s that the public ,elfare is the so.ereign la, to,hich all others/ 3i.ine and hu&an/ should be &ade to confor&) 99 ;o,/ itis the function of the so.ereign onl# to decide ,hat is necessar# for thepublic ,elfare and the safet# of the state/ and to gi.e orders accordingl#Rtherefore it is also the function of the so.ereign onl# to decide the li&its

of our dut# to,ards our neighbour - in other ,ords/ to deter&ine ho, ,eshould obe# God) 9J 2e can no, clearl# understand ho, the so.ereignis the interpreter of religion/ and further/ that no one can obe# Godrightl#/ if the practices of his piet# do not confor& to the public ,elfareRor/ conseuentl#/ if he does not i&plicitl# obe# all the co&&ands of theso.ereign) 9D 4or as b# GodQs co&&and ,e are bound to do our dut# to all&en ,ithout exception/ and to do no &an an injur#/ ,e are also bound notto help one &an at anotherQs loss/ still less at a loss to the ,hole state)96 ;o,/ no pri.ate citizen can 0no, ,hat is good for the state/ except helearn it through the so.ereign po,er/ ,ho alone has the right to transactpublic business@ therefore no one can rightl# practise piet# or obedience toGod/ unless he obe# the so.ereign po,erQs co&&ands in all things) 9 This

proposition is confir&ed b# the facts of experience) 9" 4or if theso.ereign adjudge a &an to be ,orth# of death or an ene&#/ ,hether he be acitizen or a foreigner/ a pri.ate indi.idual or a separate ruler/ no subjectis allo,ed to gi.e hi& assistance) J: So also though the 7e,s ,erebidden to lo.e their fello,-citizens as the&sel.es =e.it) xix@56/ 5/ the#,ere ne.ertheless bound/ if a &an offended against the la,/ to point hi& outto the judge =e.it) .@5/ and 3eut) xiii@/ "/ and/ if he should beconde&ned to death/ to sla# hi& 3eut) x.ii@6)

5"@J5 4urther/ in order that the ebre,s &ight preser.e the libert# the#had gained/ and &ight retain absolute s,a# o.er the territor# the# hadconuered/ it ,as necessar#/ as ,e sho,ed in hapter OII)/ that their

religion should be adapted to their particular go.ern&ent/ and that the#should separate the&sel.es fro& the rest of the nations@ ,herefore it ,asco&&anded to the&/ K=o.e th# neighbour and hate thine ene&#K +att) .@9/but after the# had lost their do&inion and had gone into capti.it# inBab#lon/ 7ere&iah bid the& ta0e thought for the safet# of the state into,hich the# had been led capti.eR and hrist ,hen e sa, that the# ,ould bespread o.er the ,hole ,orld/ told the& to do their dut# b# all &en ,ithoutexceptionR all of ,hich instances sho, that religion has al,a#s been &ade toconfor& to the public ,elfare) $5"@9' J8 Perhaps so&eone ,ill as0@ B# ,hatright/ then/ did the disciples of hrist/ being pri.ate citizens/ preacha ne, religion J I ans,er that the# did so b# the right of thepo,er ,hich the# had recei.ed fro& hrist against unclean spirits see +att)

x@5) J9 I ha.e alread# stated in hapter OI) that all are bound to obe#a t#rant/ unless the# ha.e recei.ed fro& God through undoubted re.elation apro&ise of aid against hi&R so let no one ta0e exa&ple fro& the Apostlesunless he too has the po,er of ,or0ing &iracles) JJ The point is broughtout &ore clearl# b# hristQs co&&and to is disciples/ K4ear not those ,ho0ill the bod#K +att) x@8) JD If this co&&and ,ere i&posed on e.er#one/go.ern&ents ,ould be founded in .ain/ and Solo&onQs ,ords Pro.) xxi.@85/K+# son/ fear God and the 0ing/K ,ould be i&pious/ ,hich the# certainl# arenotR ,e &ust therefore ad&it that the authorit# ,hich hrist ga.e to isdisciples ,as gi.en to the& onl#/ and &ust not be ta0en as an exa&ple for others)

5"@J6 I do not pause to consider the argu&ents of those ,ho ,ish toseparate secular rights fro& spiritual rights/ placing the for&er under thecontrol of the so.ereign/ and the latter under the control of the uni.ersal



hurchR such pretensions are too fri.olous to &erit refutation) J Icannot ho,e.er/ pass o.er in silence the fact that such persons are ,oefull#decei.ed ,hen the# see0 to support their seditious opinions I as0 pardonfor the so&e,hat harsh epithet b# the exa&ple of the 7e,ish high priest/,ho/ in ancient ti&es/ had the right of ad&inistering the sacred offices)J" 3id not the high priests recei.e their right b# the decree of +oses

,ho/ as I ha.e sho,n/ retained the sole right to rule/ and could the# notb# the sa&e &eans be depri.ed of it D: +oses hi&self chose not onl# Aaron/ but also his son Eleazar/ and his grandson Phineas/ and besto,ed onthe& the right of ad&inistering the office of high priest) D5 This right,as retained b# the high priests after,ards/ but none the less ,ere the#delegates of +oses - that is/ of the so.ereign po,er) D8 +oses/ as ,e ha.esho,n/ left no successor to his do&inion/ but so distributed hisprerogati.es/ that those ,ho ca&e after hi& see&ed/ as it ,ere/ regents ,hoad&inister the go.ern&ent ,hen a 0ing is absent but not dead)

5"@D8 In the second co&&on,ealth the high priests held their rightabsolutel#/ after the# had obtained the rights of principalit# in addition)

D 2herefore the rights of the high priesthood al,a#s depended on theedict of the so.ereign/ and the high priests did not possess the& tillthe# beca&e so.ereigns also) D9 (ights in &atters spiritual al,a#sre&ained under the control of the 0ings absolutel# as I ,ill sho, at theend of this chapter/ except in the single particular that the# ,ere notallo,ed to ad&inister in person the sacred duties in the Te&ple/ inas&uchas the# ,ere not of the fa&il# of Aaron/ and ,ere therefore consideredunclean/ a reser.ation ,hich ,ould ha.e no force in a hristian co&&unit#)

5"@DJ 2e cannot/ therefore/ doubt that the dail# sacred rites ,hoseperfor&ance does not reuire a particular genealog# but onl# a special &odeof life/ and fro& ,hich the holders of so.ereign po,er are not excluded as

unclean are under the sole control of the so.ereign po,erR no one/sa.e b# the authorit# or concession of such so.ereign/ has the right or po,er of ad&inistering the&/ of choosing others to ad&inister the&/ of defining or strengthening the foundations of the hurch and her doctrinesRof judging on uestions of &oralit# or acts of piet#R of recei.ingan#one into the hurch or exco&&unicating hi& therefro&/ or/ lastl#/ of pro.iding for the poor)

5"@DD These doctrines are pro.ed to be not onl# true as ,e ha.e alread#pointed out/ but also of pri&ar# necessit# for the preser.ation of religionand the state) D6 2e all 0no, ,hat ,eight spiritual right and authorit#carries in the popular &ind@ ho, e.er#one hangs on the lips/ as it ,ere/ of

those ,ho possess it) D 2e &a# e.en sa# that those ,ho ,ield suchauthorit# ha.e the &ost co&plete s,a# o.er the popular &ind)

5"@D" 2hosoe.er/ therefore/ ,ishes to ta0e this right a,a# fro& theso.ereign po,er/ is desirous of di.iding the do&inionR fro& such di.ision/contentions/ and strife ,ill necessaril# spring up/ as the# did of oldbet,een the 7e,ish 0ings and high priests/ and ,ill def# all atte&pts toalla# the&) 6: ;a#/ further/ he ,ho stri.es to depri.e the so.ereign po,er of such authorit#/ is ai&ing as ,e ha.e said/ at gaining do&inion for hi&self) 65 2hat is left for the so.ereign po,er to decide on/ if thisright be denied hi& 68 ertainl# nothing concerning either ,ar or peace/ if he has to as0 another &anQs opinion as to ,hether ,hat he

belie.es to be beneficial ,ould be pious or i&pious) 6 E.er#thing ,oulddepend on the .erdict of hi& ,ho had the right of deciding and judging ,hat,as pious or i&pious/ right or ,rong)



5"@69 2hen such a right ,as besto,ed on the Pope of (o&e absolutel#/ hegraduall# acuired co&plete control o.er the 0ings/ till at last he hi&self &ounted to the su&&its of do&inionR ho,e.er &uch &onarchs/ and especiall#the Ger&an e&perors/ stro.e to curtail his authorit#/ ,ere it onl# b# ahairsbreadth/ the# effected nothing/ but on the contrar# b# their .er#

endea.ours largel# increased it) 6J That ,hich no &onarch could acco&plish,ith fire and s,ord/ ecclesiastics could bring about ,ith a stro0e of thepenR ,hereb# ,e &a# easil# see the force and po,er at the co&&and of thehurch/ and also ho, necessar# it is for so.ereigns to reser.e suchprerogati.es for the&sel.es)

5"@6D If ,e reflect on ,hat ,as said in the last chapter ,e shall see thatsuch reser.ation conduced not a little to the increase of religion andpiet#R for ,e obser.ed that the prophets the&sel.es/ though gifted ,ith3i.ine efficac#/ being &erel# pri.ate citizens/ rather irritated thanrefor&ed the people b# their freedo& of ,arning/ reproof/ and denunciation/,hereas the 0ings b# ,arnings and punish&ents easil# bent &en to their ,ill)

66 4urther&ore/ the 0ings the&sel.es/ not possessing the right in uestionabsolutel#/ .er# often fell a,a# fro& religion and too0 ,ith the& nearl# the,hole people) 6 The sa&e thing has often happened fro& the sa&e cause inhristian states)

5"@6" Perhaps I shall be as0ed/ KBut if the holders of so.ereign po,er choose to be ,ic0ed/ ,ho ,ill be the rightful cha&pion of piet# : Shouldthe so.ereigns still be its interpreters KI &eet the& ,ith the counter-uestion/ KBut if ecclesiastics ,ho are also hu&an/ and pri.ate citizens/and ,ho ought to &ind onl# their o,n affairs/ or if others ,ho& it isproposed to entrust ,ith spiritual authorit#/ choose to be ,ic0ed/ shouldthe# still be considered as piet#Qs rightful interpretersK 5 It is uite

certain that ,hen so.ereigns ,ish to follo, their o,n pleasure/ ,hether the#ha.e control o.er spiritual &atters or not/ the ,hole state/ spiritualand secular/ ,ill go to ruin/ and it ,ill go &uch faster if pri.atecitizens seditiousl# assu&e the cha&pionship of the 3i.ine rights)

5"@8 Thus ,e see that not onl# is nothing gained b# den#ing such rightsto so.ereigns/ but on the contrar#/ great e.il ensues) 4or as happened,ith the 7e,ish 0ings ,ho did not possess such rights absolutel# rulers arethus dri.en into ,ic0edness/ and the injur# and loss to the state beco&ecertain and ine.itable/ instead of uncertain and possible) 9 2hether ,eloo0 to the abstract truth/ or the securit# of states/ or the increase of piet#/ ,e are co&pelled to &aintain that the 3i.ine right/ or the right of

control o.er spiritual &atters/ depends absolutel# on the decree of theso.ereign/ ,ho is its legiti&ate interpreter and cha&pion) J Thereforethe true &inisters of GodQs ,ord are those ,ho teach piet# to the people inobedience to the authorit# of the so.ereign rulers b# ,hose decree it hasbeen brought into confor&it# ,ith the public ,elfare)

$5"@J' D There re&ains for &e to point out the cause for the freuentdisputes on the subject of these spiritual rights in hristian statesR,hereas the ebre,s/ so far as I 0no,/ ne.er/ had an# doubts about the&atter) 6 It see&s &onstrous that a uestion so plain and .itall#i&portant should thus ha.e re&ained undecided/ and that the secular rulerscould ne.er obtain the prerogati.e ,ithout contro.ers#/ na#/ nor ,ithout

great danger of sedition and injur# to religion) If no cause for thisstate of things ,ere forthco&ing/ I could easil# persuade &#self that all Iha.e said in this chapter is &ere theorizing/ or a0ind of speculati.e



reasoning ,hich can ne.er be of an# practical use) " o,e.er/ ,hen ,ereflect on the beginnings of hristianit# the cause at once beco&es&anifest) ": The hristian religion ,as not taught at first b# 0ings/ butb# pri.ate persons/ ,ho/ against the ,ishes of those in po,er/ ,hosesubjects the#/ ,ere/ ,ere for a long ti&e accusto&ed to hold &eetings insecret churches/ to institute and perfor& sacred rites/ and on their o,n

authorit# to settle and decide on their affairs ,ithout regard to the state/"5 2hen/ after the lapse of &an# #ears/ the religion ,as ta0en up b# theauthorities/ the ecclesiastics ,ere obliged to teach it to the e&perorsthe&sel.es as the# had defined it@ ,herefore the# easil# gained recognitionas its teachers and interpreters/ and the church pastors ,ere loo0ed upon as.icars of God) "8 The ecclesiastics too0 good care that the hristian0ings should not assu&e their authorit#/ b# prohibiting &arriage to thechief &inisters of religion and to its highest interpreter) " The#further&ore elected their purpose b# &ultipl#ing the dog&as of religion tosuch an extent and so blending the& ,ith philosoph# that their chief interpreter ,as bound to be a s0illed philosopher and theologian/ and toha.e leisure for a host of idle speculations@ conditions ,hich could onl# be

fulfilled b# a pri.ate indi.idual ,ith &uch ti&e on his hands)

5"@"9 A&ong the ebre,s things ,ere .er# differentl# arranged@ for their hurch began at the sa&e ti&e as their do&inion/ and +oses/ their absoluteruler/ taught religion to the people/ arranged their sacred rites/ and chosetheir spiritual &inisters) "J Thus the ro#al authorit# carried .er# great,eight ,ith the people/ and the 0ings 0ept a fir& hold on their spiritualprerogati.es)

5"@"D Although/ after the death of +oses/ no one held absolute s,a#/ #etthe po,er of deciding both in &atters spiritual and &atters te&poral ,as inthe hands of the secular chief/ as I ha.e alread# pointed out) "6 4urther/

in order that it &ight be taught religion and piet#/ the people ,as bound toconsult the supre&e judge no less than the high priest 3eut) x.ii@"/ 55)" =astl#/ though the 0ings had not as &uch po,er as +oses/ nearl# the,hole arrange&ent and choice of the sacred &inistr# depended on their decision) "" Thus 3a.id arranged the ,hole ser.ice of the Te&ple see 5hron) xx.iii@55/ 58/ Yc)R fro& all the =e.ites he chose t,ent#-four thousand for the sacred psal&sR six thousand of these for&ed thebod# fro& ,hich ,ere chosen the judges and proctors/ four thousand ,ereporters/ and four thousand to pla# on instru&ents see 5 hron) xxiii@9/ J)5:: e further di.ided the& into co&panies of ,ho& he chose the chiefs/so that each in rotation/ at the allotted ti&e/ &ight perfor& the sacredrites) 5:5 The priests he also di.ided into as &an# co&paniesR I ,ill not

go through the ,hole catalogue/ but refer the reader to 8 hron) .iii@5/,here it is stated/ KThen Solo&on offered burnt offerings to the =ord ) ) )) ) after a certain rate e.er# da#/ offering according to the co&&and&entsof +osesRK and in .erse 59/ KAnd he appointed/ according to the order of 3a.id his father/ the courses of the priests to their ser.ice ) ) ) )) ) for so had 3a.id the &an of God co&&anded)K 5:8 =astl#/ the historianbears ,itness in .erse 5J@ KAnd the# departed not fro& the co&&and&ent of the 0ing unto the priests and =e.ites concerning an# &atter/ or concerning the treasuries)K

$5"@D' 5: 4ro& these and other histories of the 0ings it is abundantl#e.ident/ that the ,hole practice of religion and the sacred &inistr#

depended entirel# on the co&&ands of the 0ing)

5"@5:9 2hen I said abo.e that the 0ings had not the sa&e right as +oses to



elect the high priest/ to consult God ,ithout inter&ediaries/ and to conde&nthe prophets ,ho prophesied during their reignR I said so si&pl# because theprophets could/ in .irtue of their &ission/ choose a ne, 0ing and gi.eabsolution for regicide/ not because the# could call a 0ing ,ho offendedagainst the la, to judg&ent/ or could rightl# act against hi& $Endnote ')

5"@5:J 2herefore if there had been no prophets ,ho/ in .irtue of a specialre.elation/ could gi.e absolution for regicide/ the 0ings ,ould ha.epossessed absolute rights o.er all &atters both spiritual and te&poral)5:D onseuentl# the rulers of &odern ti&es/ ,ho ha.e no prophets and,ould not rightl# be bound in an# case to recei.e the& for the# are notsubject to 7e,ish la,/ ha.e absolute possession of the spiritualprerogati.e/ although the# are not celibates/ and the# ,ill al,a#s retainit/ if the# ,ill refuse to allo, religious dog&as to be undul# &ultiplied or confounded ,ith philosoph#)

$8:@:' APTE( OO - TAT I; A 4(EE STATE EE(> +A; +A> TI; 2AT E =IES/ A;3 SA> 2AT E TI;S)

$8:@5' 5 If &enQs &inds ,ere as easil# controlled as their tongues/ e.er#0ing ,ould sit safel# on his throne/ and go.ern&ent b# co&pulsion ,ouldceaseR for e.er# subject ,ould shape his life according to the intentions of his rulers/ and ,ould estee& a thing true or false/ good or e.il/ just or unjust/ in obedience to their dictates) 8 o,e.er/ ,e ha.e sho,n alread#hapter OII) that no &anQs &ind can possibl# lie ,holl# at thedisposition of another/ for no one can ,illingl# transfer his natural rightof free reason and judg&ent/ or be co&pelled so to do) 4or this

reason go.ern&ent ,hich atte&pts to control &inds is accounted t#rannical/and it is considered an abuse of so.ereignt# and a usurpation of the rightsof subjects/ to see0 to prescribe ,hat shall be accepted as true/ or rejected as false/ or ,hat opinions should actuate &en in their ,orship of God) 9 All these uestions fall ,ithin a &anQs natural right/ ,hich hecannot abdicate e.en ,ith his o,n consent)

8:@J I ad&it that the judg&ent can be biassed in &an# ,a#s/ and to anal&ost incredible degree/ so that ,hile exe&pt fro& direct external controlit &a# be so dependent on another &anQs ,ords/ that it &a# fitl# be said tobe ruled b# hi&R but although this influence is carried to great lengths/ ithas ne.er gone so far as to in.alidate the state&ent/ that e.er# &anQs

understanding is his o,n/ and that brains are as di.erse as palates)

8:@D +oses/ not b# fraud/ but b# 3i.ine .irtue/ gained such a hold o.er the popular judg&ent that he ,as accounted superhu&an/ and belie.ed to spea0and act through the inspiration of the 3eit#R ne.ertheless/ e.en he couldnot escape &ur&urs and e.il interpretations) 6 o, &uch less then canother &onarchs a.oid the&1 >et such unli&ited po,er/ if it exists atall/ &ust belong to a &onarch/ and least of all to a de&ocrac#/ ,here the,hole or a great part of the people ,ield authorit# collecti.el#) " Thisis a fact ,hich I thin0 e.er#one can explain for hi&self)

8:@5: o,e.er unli&ited/ therefore/ the po,er of a so.ereign &a# be/

ho,e.er i&plicitl# it is trusted as the exponent of la, and religion/ it canne.er pre.ent &en fro& for&ing judg&ents according to their intellect/ or being influenced b# an# gi.en e&otion) 55 It is true that it has the right



to treat as ene&ies all &en ,hose opinions do not/ on all subjects/ entirel#coincide ,ith its o,nR but ,e are not discussing its strict rights/ but itsproper course of action) 58 I grant that it has the right to rule in the&ost .iolent &anner/ and to put citizens to death for .er# tri.ial causes/but no one supposes it can do this ,ith the appro.al of sound judg&ent) 5;a#/ inas&uch as such things cannot be done ,ithout extre&e peril to itself/

,e &a# e.en den# that it has the absolute po,er to do the&/ or/conseuentl#/ the absolute rightR for the rights of the so.ereign areli&ited b# his po,er)

$8:@8' 59 Since/ therefore/ no one can abdicate his freedo& of judg&entand feelingR since e.er# &an is b# indefeasible natural right the &aster of his o,n thoughts/ it follo,s that &en thin0ing in di.erse and contradictor#fashions/ cannot/ ,ithout disastrous results/ be co&pelled to spea0 onl#according to the dictates of the supre&e po,er) 5J ;ot e.en the &ostexperienced/ to sa# nothing of the &ultitude/ 0no, ho, to 0eep silence) 5D+enQs co&&on failing is to confide their plans to others/ though there beneed for secrec#/ so that a go.ern&ent ,ould be &ost harsh ,hich depri.ed

the indi.idual of his freedo& of sa#ing and teaching ,hat he thoughtR and,ould be &oderate if such freedo& ,ere granted) 56 Still ,e cannot den#that authorit# &a# be as &uch injured b# ,ords as b# actionsR hence/although the freedo& ,e are discussing cannot be entirel# denied tosubjects/ its unli&ited concession ,ould be &ost banefulR ,e &ust/therefore/ no, inuire/ ho, far such freedo& can and ought to be conceded,ithout danger to the peace of the state/ or the po,er of the rulersR andthis/ as I said at the beginning of hapter OI)/ is &# principal object)5 It follo,s/ plainl#/ fro& the explanation gi.en abo.e/ of thefoundations of a state/ that the ulti&ate ai& of go.ern&ent is not torule/ or restrain/ b# fear/ nor to exact obedience/ but contrari,ise/ tofree e.er# &an fro& fear/ that he &a# li.e in all possible securit#R in

other ,ords/ to strengthen his natural right to exist and ,or0 - ,ithoutinjur# to hi&self or others)

8:@5" ;o/ the object of go.ern&ent is not to change &en fro& rationalbeings into beasts or puppets/ but to enable the& to de.elope their &indsand bodies in securit#/ and to e&plo# their reason unshac0ledR neither sho,ing hatred/ anger/ or deceit/ nor ,atched ,ith the e#es of jealous# andinjustice) 8: In fact/ the true ai& of go.ern&ent is libert#)

8:@85 ;o, ,e ha.e seen that in for&ing a state the po,er of &a0ing la,s&ust either be .ested in the bod# of the citizens/ or in a portion of the&/or in one &an) 88 4or/ although &ens free judg&ents are .er# di.erse/ each

one thin0ing that he alone 0no,s e.er#thing/ and although co&plete unani&it#of feeling and speech is out of the uestion/ it is i&possible to preser.epeace/ unless indi.iduals abdicate their right of acting entirel# on their o,n judg&ent) $8:@' 8 Therefore/ the indi.idual justl# cedes the rightof free action/ though not of free reason and judg&entR no one can actagainst the authorities ,ithout danger to the state/ though his feelings and judg&ent &a# be at .ariance there,ithR he &a# e.en spea0 against the&/pro.ided that he does so fro& rational con.iction/ not fro& fraud/ anger/ or hatred/ and pro.ided that he does not atte&pt to introduce an# change on hispri.ate authorit#)

8:@89 4or instance/ supposing a &an sho,s that a la, is repugnant to sound

reason/ and should therefore be repealedR if he sub&its his opinion to the judg&ent of the authorities ,ho/ alone/ ha.e the right of &a0ing andrepealing la,s/ and &ean,hile acts in no,ise contrar# to that la,/ he has



deser.ed ,ell of the state/ and has beha.ed as a good citizen shouldR but if he accuses the authorities of injustice/ and stirs up the people againstthe&/ or if he seditiousl# stri.es to abrogate the la, ,ithout their consent/ he is a &ere agitator and rebel)

8:@8J Thus ,e see ho, an indi.idual &a# declare and teach ,hat he

belie.es/ ,ithout injur# to the authorit# of his rulers/ or to the publicpeaceR na&el#/ b# lea.ing in their hands the entire po,er of legislation asit affects action/ and b# doing nothing against their la,s/ though hebe co&pelled often to act in contradiction to ,hat he belie.es/ andopenl# feels/ to be best)

8:@8D Such a course can be ta0en ,ithout detri&ent to justice anddutifulness/ na#/ it is the one ,hich a just and dutiful &an ,ould adopt)86 2e ha.e sho,n that justice is dependent on the la,s of the authorities/so that no one ,ho contra.enes their accepted decrees can be just/ ,hile thehighest regard for dut#/ as ,e ha.e pointed out in the preceding chapter/ isexercised in &aintaining public peace and tranuillit#R these could not be

preser.ed if e.er# &an ,ere to li.e as he pleasedR therefore it is no lessthan undutiful for a &an to act contrar# to his countr#Qs la,s/ for if thepractice beca&e uni.ersal the ruin of states ,ould necessaril# follo,)

8:@8 ence/ so long as a &an acts in obedience to the la,s of his rulers/he in no,ise contra.enes his reason/ for in obedience to reason hetransferred the right of controlling his actions fro& his o,n hands totheirs) 8" This doctrine ,e can confir& fro& actual custo&/ for in aconference of great and s&all po,ers/ sche&es are seldo& carriedunani&ousl#/ #et all unite in carr#ing out ,hat is decided on/ ,hether the#.oted for or against) : But I return to &# proposition)

8:@5 4ro& the funda&ental notions of a state/ ,e ha.e disco.ered ho, a&an &a# exercise free judg&ent ,ithout detri&ent to the supre&e po,er@ fro&the sa&e pre&ises ,e can no less easil# deter&ine ,hat opinions ,ould beseditious) 8 E.identl# those ,hich b# their .er# nature nullif# theco&pact b# ,hich the right of free action ,as ceded) 4or instance/ a&an ,ho holds that the supre&e po,er has no rights o.er hi&/ or thatpro&ises ought not to be 0ept/ or that e.er#one should li.e as he pleases/or other doctrines of this nature in direct opposition to the abo.e-&entioned contract/ is seditious/ not so &uch fro& his actual opinionsand judg&ent/ as fro& the deeds ,hich the# in.ol.eR for he ,ho &aintainssuch theories abrogates the contract ,hich tacitl#/ or openl#/ he &ade ,ithhis rulers) 9 %ther opinions ,hich do not in.ol.e acts .iolating the

contract/ such as re.enge/ anger/ and t he li0e/ are not seditious/ unlessit be in so&e) corrupt state/ ,here superstitious and a&bitious persons/unable to endure &en of learning/ are so popular ,ith the &ultitudethat their ,ord is &ore .alued than the la,)

8:@J o,e.er/ I do not den# that there are so&e doctrines ,hich/ ,hilethe# are apparentl# onl# concerned ,ith abstract truths and falsehoods/ are#et propounded and published ,ith un,orth# &oti.es) D This uestion ,eha.e discussed in hapter O)/ and sho,n that reason should ne.erthelessre&ain unshac0led) 6 If ,e hold to the principle that a &anQs lo#alt# tothe state should be judged/ li0e his lo#alt# to God/ fro& his actions onl# -na&el#/ fro& his charit# to,ards his neighboursR ,e cannot doubt that the

best go.ern&ent ,ill allo, freedo& of philosophical speculation no less thanof religious belief) I confess that fro& such freedo& incon.eniences&a# so&eti&es arise/ but ,hat uestion ,as e.er settled so ,isel# that no



abuses could possibl# spring therefro& " e ,ho see0s to regulatee.er#thing b# la,/ is &ore li0el# to arouse .ices than to refor& the&) 9:It is best to grant ,hat cannot be abolished/ e.en though it be in itself har&ful) 95 o, &an# e.ils spring fro& luxur#/ en.#/ a.arice/ drun0enness/and the li0e/ #et these are tolerated - .ices as the# are - because the#cannot be pre.ented b# legal enact&ents) 98 o, &uch &ore then should free

thought be granted/ seeing that it is in itself a .irtue and that it cannotbe crushed1 9 Besides/ the e.il results can easil# be chec0ed/ as I ,illsho,/ b# the secular authorities/ not to &ention that such freedo&is absolutel# necessar# for progress in science and the liberal arts@ for no&an follo,s such pursuits to ad.antage unless his judg&ent be entirel# freeand unha&pered)

8:@99 But let it be granted that freedo& &a# be crushed/ and &en be sobound do,n/ that the# do not dare to utter a ,hisper/ sa.e at the bidding of their rulersR ne.ertheless this can ne.er be carried to the pitch of &a0ingthe& thin0 according to authorit#/ so that the necessar# conseuences ,ouldbe that &en ,ould dail# be thin0ing one thing and sa#ing another/ to the

corruption of good faith/ that &ainsta# of go.ern&ent/ and to the fosteringof hateful flatter# and perfid#/ ,hence spring stratage&s/ and thecorruption of e.er# good art)

8:@9J It is far fro& possible to i&pose unifor&it# of speech/ for the &orerulers stri.e to curtail freedo& of speech/ the &ore obstinatel# arethe# resistedR not indeed b# the a.aricious/ the flatterers/ and other nu&s0ulls/ ,ho thin0 supre&e sal.ation consists in filling their sto&achsand gloating o.er their &one#-bags/ but b# those ,ho& good education/ sound&oralit#/ and .irtue ha.e rendered &ore free) 9D +en/ as generall#constituted/ are &ost prone to resent the branding as cri&inal of opinions,hich the# belie.e to be true/ and the proscription as ,ic0ed of that ,hich

inspires the& ,ith piet# to,ards God and &anR hence the# are read# tofors,ear the la,s and conspire against the authorities/ thin0ing it notsha&eful but honourable to stir up seditions and perpetuate an# sort of cri&e ,ith this end in .ie,) 96 Such being the constitution of hu&annature/ ,e see that la,s directed against opinions affect the generous&inded rather than the ,ic0ed/ and are adapted less for coercing cri&inalsthan for irritating the uprightR so that the# cannot be &aintained ,ithoutgreat peril to the state)

8:@9 +oreo.er/ such la,s are al&ost al,a#s useless/ for those ,ho holdthat the opinions proscribed are sound/ cannot possibl# obe# the la,R,hereas those ,ho alread# reject the& as false/ accept the la, as a 0ind of

pri.ilege/ and &a0e such boast of it/ that authorit# is po,erless to repealit/ e.en if such a course be subseuentl# desired)

8:@9" To these considerations &a# be added ,hat ,e said in hapter OIII)in treating of the histor# of the ebre,s) J: And/ lastl#/ ho, &an#schis&s ha.e arisen in the hurch fro& the atte&pt of the authorities todecide b# la, the intricacies of theological contro.ers#1 J5 If &en ,erenot allured b# the hope of getting the la, and the authorities on their side/ of triu&phing o.er their ad.ersaries in the sight of an applauding&ultitude/ and of acuiring honourable distinctions/ the# ,ould not stri.eso &aliciousl#/ nor ,ould such fur# s,a# their &inds) J8 This is taughtnot onl# b# reason but b# dail# exa&ples/ for la,s of this 0ind prescribing

,hat e.er# &an shall belie.e and forbidding an#one to spea0 or ,rite to thecontrar#/ ha.e often been passed/ as sops or concessions to the anger of those ,ho cannot tolerate &en of enlighten&ent/ and ,ho/ b# such harsh and



croo0ed enact&ents/ can easil# turn the de.otion of the &asses into fur# anddirect it against ,ho& the# ,ill) J o, &uch better ,ould it beto restrain popular anger and fur#/ instead of passing useless la,s/,hich can onl# be bro0en b# those ,ho lo.e .irtue and the liberal arts/ thusparing do,n the state till it is too s&all to harbour &en of talent) J92hat greater &isfortune for a state can be concei.ed then that honourable

&en should be sent li0e cri&inals into exile/ because the# hold di.erseopinions ,hich the# cannot disguise JJ 2hat/ I sa#/ can be &ore hurtfulthan that &en ,ho ha.e co&&itted no cri&e or ,ic0edness should/ si&pl#because the# are enlightened/ be treated as ene&ies and put to death/ andthat the scaffold/ the terror of e.il-doers/ should beco&e the arena ,herethe highest exa&ples of tolerance and .irtue are displa#ed to thepeople ,ith all the &ar0s of igno&in# that authorit# can de.ise

8:@JD e that 0no,s hi&self to be upright does not fear the death of acri&inal/ and shrin0s fro& no punish&entR his &ind is not ,rung ,ithre&orse for an# disgraceful deed@ he holds that death in a good causeis no punish&ent/ but an honour/ and that death for freedo& is glor#)

8:@J6 2hat purpose then is ser.ed b# the death of such &en/ ,hat exa&plein proclai&ed the cause for ,hich the# die is un0no,n to the idle and thefoolish/ hateful to the turbulent/ lo.ed b# the upright) J The onl#lesson ,e can dra, fro& such scenes is to flatter the persecutor/ or else toi&itate the .icti&)

8:@J If for&al assent is not to be estee&ed abo.e con.iction/ and if go.ern&ents are to retain a fir& hold of authorit# and not be co&pelled to#ield to agitators/ it is i&perati.e that freedo& of judg&ent should begranted/ so that &en &a# li.e together in har&on#/ ho,e.er di.erse/ or e.en openl# contradictor# their opinions &a# be) J" 2e cannot doubt that

such is the best s#ste& of go.ern&ent and open to the fe,est objections/since it is the one &ost in har&on# ,ith hu&an nature) D: In a de&ocrac#the &ost natural for& of go.ern&ent/ as ,e ha.e sho,n in hapter OI)e.er#one sub&its to the control of authorit# o.er his actions/ but not o.er his judg&ent and reasonR that is/ seeing that all cannot thin0 ali0e/ the.oice of the &ajorit# has the force of la,/ subject to repeal if circu&stances bring about a change of opinion) D5 In proportion as thepo,er of free judg&ent is ,ithheld ,e depart fro& the naturalcondition of &an0ind/ and conseuentl# the go.ern&ent beco&es &oret#rannical)

$8:@9' D8 In order to pro.e that fro& such freedo& no incon.enience

arises/ ,hich cannot easil# be chec0ed b# the exercise of the so.ereignpo,er/ and that &enQs actions can easil# be 0ept in bounds/ though their opinions be at open .ariance/ it ,ill be ,ell to cite an exa&ple) D Suchan one is not .er#/ far to see0) D9 The cit# of A&sterda& reaps the fruitof this freedo& in its o,n great prosperit# and in the ad&iration of allother people) DJ 4or in this &ost flourishing state/ and &ost splendidcit#/ &en of e.er#/ nation and religion li.e together in the greatesthar&on#/ and as0 no uestions before trusting their goods to a fello,-citizen/ sa.e ,hether he be rich or poor/ and ,hether he generall# actshonestl#/ or the re.erse) DD is religion and sect is considered of noi&portance@ for it has no effect before the judges in gaining or losing acause/ and there is no sect so despised that its follo,ers/ pro.ided that

the# har& no one/ pa# e.er# &an his due/ and li.e uprightl#/ are depri.ed of the protection of the &agisterial authorit#)



8:@D6 %n the other hand/ ,hen the religious contro.ers# bet,een(e&onstrants and ounter-(e&onstrants began to be ta0en up b# politiciansand the States/ it gre, into a schis&/ and abundantl# sho,ed that la,sdealing ,ith religion and see0ing to settle its contro.ersies are &uch &orecalculated to irritate than to refor&/ and that the# gi.e rise to extre&elicence@ further/ it ,as seen that schis&s do not originate in a lo.e of

truth/ ,hich is a source of courtes# and gentleness/ but rather in aninordinate desire for supre&ac#/ D 4ro& all these considerations it isclearer than the sun at noonda#/ that the true schis&atics are those ,hoconde&n other &enQs ,ritings/ and seditiousl# stir up the uarrelso&e &assesagainst their authors/ rather than those authors the&sel.es/ ,ho generall#,rite onl# for the learned/ and appeal solel# to reason) D" In fact/ thereal disturbers of the peace are those ,ho/ in a free state/ see0 to curtailthe libert# of judg&ent ,hich the# are unable to t#rannize o.er)

8:@6: I ha.e thus sho,n@-

65 I) That it is i&possible to depri.e &en of the libert# of sa#ing ,hat

the# thin0)

68 II) That such libert# can be conceded to e.er# &an ,ithout injur#to the rights and authorit# of the so.ereign po,er/ and that e.er# &an&a# retain it ,ithout injur# to such rights/ pro.ided that he does notpresu&e upon it to the extent of introducing an# ne, rights into thestate/ or acting in an# ,a# contrar#/ to the existing la,s)

8:@6 III) That e.er# &an &a# enjo# this libert# ,ithout detri&ent to thepublic peace/ and that no incon.eniences arise therefro& ,hich cannot easil#be chec0ed)

69 I) That e.er# &an &a# enjo# it ,ithout injur# to his allegiance)

6J ) That la,s dealing ,ith speculati.e proble&s are entirel# useless)

6D I) =astl#/ that not onl# &a# such libert# be granted ,ithout prejudiceto the public peace/ to lo#alt#/ and to the rights of rulers/ but that it ise.en necessar#/ for their preser.ation) 66 4or ,hen people tr# to ta0e ita,a#/ and bring to trial/ not onl# the acts ,hich alone are capable of offending/ but also the opinions of &an0ind/ the# onl# succeed insurrounding their .icti&s ,ith an appearance of &art#rdo&/ and raisefeelings of pit# and re.enge rather than of terror) 6 <prightness andgood faith are thus corrupted/ flatterers and traitors are encouraged/ and

sectarians triu&ph/ inas&uch as concessions ha.e been &ade to their ani&osit#/ and the# ha.e gained the state sanction for the doctrines of ,hich the# are the interpreters) 6" ence the# arrogate to the&sel.es thestate authorit# and rights/ and do not scruple to assert that the# ha.e beendirectl# chosen b# God/ and that their la,s are 3i.ine/ ,hereas the la,s of the state are hu&an/ and should therefore #ield obedience to the la,s of God- in other ,ords/ to their o,n la,s) : E.er#one &ust see that this is nota state of affairs conduci.e to public ,elfare) 5 2herefore/ as ,e ha.esho,n in hapter OIII)/ the safest ,a# for a state is to la# do,n the rulethat religion is co&prised solel# in the exercise of charit# and justice/and that the rights of rulers in sacred/ no less than in secular &atters/should &erel# ha.e to do ,ith actions/ but that e.er# &an should thin0 ,hat

he li0es and sa# ,hat he thin0s)

8:@8 I ha.e thus fulfilled the tas0 I set &#self in this treatise)



$8:@J' It re&ains onl# to call attention to the fact that I ha.e,ritten nothing ,hich I do not &ost ,illingl# sub&it to the exa&ination andappro.al of &# countr#Qs rulersR and that I a& ,illing to retract an#thing,hich the# shall decide to be repugnant to the la,s/ or prejudicial to thepublic good) 9 I 0no, that I a& a &an/ and as a &an liable to error/ butagainst error I ha.e ta0en scrupulous care/ and ha.e stri.en to 0eep in

entire accordance ,ith the la,s of &# countr#/ ,ith lo#alt#/ and ,ith&oralit#)

End of Part 9 of 9)

A<T%(QS E;3;%TES T% TE TE%=%GI%-P%=ITIA= T(EATISE

APTE( OI)

$Endnote 8D') 5 K;o one can honestl# pro&ise to forego the right ,hichhe has o.er all things)K 8 In the state of social life/ ,here generalright deter&ines ,hat is good or e.il/ stratage& is rightl# distinguished asof t,o 0inds/ good and e.il) But in the state of ;ature/ ,here e.er# &anis his o,n judge/ possessing the absolute right to la# do,n la,s for hi&self/ to interpret the& as he pleases/ or to abrogate the& if he thin0sit con.enient/ it is not concei.able that stratage& should be e.il)

$Endnote 86') 5 KE.er# &e&ber of it &a#/ if he ,ill/ be free)K 82hate.er be the social state a &an findsR hi&self in/ he &a# be free) 4or certainl# a &an is free/ in so far as he is led b# reason) 9 ;o,

reason though obbes thin0s other,ise is al,a#s on the side of peace/,hich cannot be attained unless the general la,s of the state be respected)J Therefore the &ore he is free/ the &ore constantl# ,ill he respect thela,s of his countr#/ and obe# the co&&ands of the so.ereign po,er to ,hichhe is subject)

$Endnote 8') 5 K;o one 0no,s b# nature that he o,es an# obedience toGod)K 8 2hen Paul sa#s that &en ha.e in the&sel.es no refuge/ he spea0s asa &an@ for in the ninth chapter of the sa&e epistle he expressl# teachesthat God has &erc# on ,ho& e ,ill/ and that &en are ,ithout excuse/ onl#because the# are in GodQs po,er li0e cla# in the hands of a potter/ ,ho outof the sa&e lu&p &a0es .essels/ so&e for honour and so&e for dishonour/ not

because the# ha.e been fore,arned) As regards the 3i.ine natural la,,hereof the chief co&&and&ent is/ as ,e ha.e said/ to lo.e God/ I ha.ecalled it a la, in the sa&e sense/ as philosophers st#le la,s those generalrules of nature/ according to ,hich e.er#thing happens) 9 4or the lo.e of God is not a state of obedience@ it is a .irtue ,hich necessaril# exists ina &an ,ho 0no,s God rightl#) J %bedience has regard to the ,ill of aruler/ not to necessit# and truth) D ;o, as ,e are ignorant of the natureof GodQs ,ill/ and on the other hand 0no, that e.er#thing happens solel# b#GodQs po,er/ ,e cannot/ except through re.elation/ 0no, ,hether God ,ishesin an# ,a# to be honoured as a so.ereign)

6 AgainR ,e ha.e sho,n that the 3i.ine rights appear to us in the light of

rights or co&&ands/ onl# so long as ,e are ignorant of their cause@ as soonas their cause is 0no,n/ the# cease to be rights/ and ,e e&brace the& nolonger as rights but as eternal truthsR in other ,ords/ obedience passes



into lo.e of God/ ,hich e&anates fro& true 0no,ledge as necessaril# aslight e&anates fro& the sun) (eason then leads us to lo.e God/ butcannot lead us to obe# i&R for ,e cannot e&brace the co&&ands of God as3i.ine/ ,hile ,e are in ignorance of their cause/ neither can ,e rationall#concei.e God as a so.ereign la#ing do,n la,s as a so.ereign)

APTE( OII)$Endnote 8"') 5 KIf &en could lose their natural rights so as to beabsolutel# unable for the future to oppose the ,ill of the so.ereignK 8T,o co&&on soldiers undertoo0 to change the (o&an do&inion/ and did changeit) Tacitus/ ist) i@6)

$Endnote :') 5 See ;u&bers xi) 8) In this passage it is ,ritten thatt,o &en prophesied in the ca&p/ and that 7oshua ,ished to punish the&) 8This he ,ould not ha.e done/ if it had been la,ful for an#one to deli.er the3i.ine oracles to the people ,ithout the consent of +oses) But +osesthought good to pardon the t,o &en/ and rebu0ed 7oshua for exhorting hi& to

use his ro#al prerogati.e/ at a ti&e ,hen he ,as so ,ear# of reigning/ thathe preferred death to holding undi.ided s,a# ;u&b) xi@59) 9 4or he &adeans,er to 7oshua/ KEn.iest thou for &# sa0e J 2ould God that all the=ordQs people ,ere prophets/ and that the =ord ,ould put is spirit uponthe&)K D That is to sa#/ ,ould God that the right of ta0ing counsel of God,ere general/ and the po,er ,ere in the hands of the people) 6 Thus 7oshua,as not &ista0en as to the right/ but onl# as to the ti&e for using it/ for ,hich he ,as rebu0ed b# +oses/ in the sa&e ,a# as Abishai ,as rebu0ed b#3a.id for counselling that Shi&ei/ ,ho had undoubtedl# been guilt# of treason/ should be put to death) See 8 Sa&) xix@88/ 8)

$Endnote 5') 5 See ;u&bers xx.ii@85) 8 The translators of the Bible

ha.e rendered incorrectl# .erses 5" and 8 of this chapter) The passagedoes not &ean that +oses ga.e precepts or ad.ice to 7oshua/ but that he &adeor established hi& chief of the ebre,s) 9 The phrase is .er# freguent inScripture see Exodus/ x.iii@8R 5 Sa&) xiii@5JR 7oshua i@"R 5 Sa&)xx.@:)

$Endnote 8' 5 KThere ,as no judge o.er each of the captains sa.eGod)K 8 The (abbis and so&e hristians euall# foolish pretend that theSanhedrin/ called Kthe greatK ,as instituted b# +oses) As a &atter of fact/ +oses chose se.ent# colleagues to assist hi& in go.erning/ because he,as not able to bear alone the burden of the ,hole peopleR but hene.er passed an# la, for for&ing a college of se.ent# &e&bersR on the

contrar# he ordered e.er# tribe to appoint for itself/ in the cities ,hichGod had gi.en it/ judges to settle disputes according to the la,s ,hich hehi&self had laid do,n) 9 In cases ,here the opinions of the judgesdiffered as to the interpretation of these la,s/ +oses bade the& ta0ecounsel of the igh Priest ,ho ,as the chief interpreter of the la,/ or of the chief judge/ to ,ho& the# ,ere then subordinate ,ho had the right of consulting the igh Priest/ and to decide the dispute in accordance ,iththe ans,er obtained) J If an# subordinate judge should assert/ that he ,asnot bound b# the decision of the igh Priest/ recei.ed either directl# or through the chief of his state/ such an one ,as to be put to death 3eut)x.ii@" b# the chief judge/ ,hoe.er he &ight be/ to ,ho& he ,as asubordinate) D This chief judge ,ould either be 7oshua/ the supre&e

captain of the ,hole people/ or one of the tribal chiefs ,ho had beenentrusted/ after the di.ision of the tribes/ ,ith the right of consultingthe high priest concerning the affairs of his tribe/ of deciding on peace or



,ar/ of fortif#ing to,ns/ of appointing inferior judges/ Yc) 6 %r/ again/it &ight be the 0ing/ in ,ho& all or so&e of the tribes had .ested their rights) I could cite &an# instances in confir&ation of ,hat I heread.ance) " I ,ill confine &#self to one/ ,hich appears to &e the &osti&portant of all) 5: 2hen the Shilo&itish prophet anointed 7eroboa& 0ing/he/ in so doing/ ga.e hi& the right of consulting the high priest/ of

appointing judges/ Yc) 55 In fact he endo,ed hi& ,ith all the rights o.er the ten tribes/ ,hich (ehoboa& retained o.er the t,o tribes) 58onseuentl# 7eroboa& could set up a supre&e council in his court ,ith as&uch right as 7ehoshaphat could at 7erusale& 8 hron) xix@) 5 4or itis plain that neither 7eroboa&/ ,ho ,as 0ing b# GodQs co&&and/ nor 7eroboa&Qs subjects/ ,ere bound b# the =a, of +oses to accept the judg&entsof (ehoboa&/ ,ho ,as not their 0ing) 59 Still less ,ere the# under the jurisdiction of the judge/ ,ho& (ehoboa& had set up in 7erusale& assubordinate to hi&self) 5J According/ therefore/ as the ebre, do&inion,as di.ided/ so ,as a supre&e council setup in each di.ision) 5D Those ,honeglect the .ariations in the constitution of the ebre, States/ and confusethe& all together in one/ fall into nu&erous difficulties)

APTE( OIO)$Endnote ') 5 I &ust here bespea0 special attentionfor ,hat ,as said in hap) OI) concerning rights)

End of Part I Endnotes)

End of the four parts of *The Project Gutenberg Etext of A Theologico-Political Treatise*

Benedict de Spinoza

*The Project Gutenberg Etext of A Theologico-Political Treatise*This is Part III! in our series b# Spinoza $%riginall# Published Anon#&ousl#'


op#right la,s are changing all o.er the ,orld/ be sure to chec0the cop#right la,s for #our countr# before posting these files11

Please ta0e a loo0 at the i&portant infor&ation in this header)2e encourage #ou to 0eep this file on #our o,n dis0/ 0eeping anelectronic path open for the next readers) 3o not re&o.e this)

**2elco&e To The 2orld of 4ree Plain anilla Electronic Texts**

**Etexts (eadable B# Both u&ans and B# o&puters/ Since 5"65**

*These Etexts Prepared B# undreds of olunteers and 3onations*



This is ten thousand titles each to one hundred &illion readers/,hich is onl# 5:F of the present nu&ber of co&puter users) 8::5should ha.e at least t,ice as &an# co&puter users as that/ so it,ill reuire us reaching less than JF of the users in 8::5)

2e need #our donations &ore than e.er1

All donations should be &ade to KProject GutenbergL+<K@ and aretax deductible to the extent allo,able b# la,) +< H arnegie-+ellon <ni.ersit#)

4or these and other &atters/ please &ail to@

Project GutenbergP) %) Box 868ha&paign/ I= D58J

2hen all other e&ail fails tr# our Executi.e 3irector@+ichael S) art Mhart?pobox)co&N

2e ,ould prefer to send #ou this infor&ation b# e&ailInternet/ Bitnet/ o&puser.e/ ATT+AI= or +I&ail)

******If #ou ha.e an 4TP progra& or e&ulator/ please4TP directl# to the Project Gutenberg archi.es@$+ac users/ do ;%T point and clic0) ) )t#pe'

ftp uiarchi.e)cso)uiuc)edulogin@ anon#&ouspass,ord@ #our?logincd etextLetext": through Letext"Dor cd etextLarticles $get suggest gut for &ore infor&ation'dir $to see files'get or &get $to get files) ) )set bin for zip files'GET I;3EO::)G<Tfor a list of boo0sandGET ;E2 G<T for general infor&ationand

+GET G<T* for ne,sletters)

**Infor&ation prepared b# the Project Gutenberg legal ad.isor**Three Pages

***STA(T**TE S+A== P(I;T1**4%( P<B=I 3%+AI; ETEOTS**STA(T***2h# is this KS&all Print1K state&ent here >ou 0no,@ la,#ers)The# tell us #ou &ight sue us if there is so&ething ,rong ,ith#our cop# of this etext/ e.en if #ou got it for free fro&so&eone other than us/ and e.en if ,hatQs ,rong is not our fault) So/ a&ong other things/ this KS&all Print1K state&ent

disclai&s &ost of our liabilit# to #ou) It also tells #ou ho,#ou can distribute copies of this etext if #ou ,ant to)



*BE4%(E1* >%< <SE %( (EA3 TIS ETEOTB# using or reading an# part of this P(%7ET G<TE;BE(G-t&etext/ #ou indicate that #ou understand/ agree to and acceptthis KS&all Print1K state&ent) If #ou do not/ #ou can recei.ea refund of the &one# if an# #ou paid for this etext b#sending a reuest ,ithin : da#s of recei.ing it to the person

#ou got it fro&) If #ou recei.ed this etext on a ph#sical&ediu& such as a dis0/ #ou &ust return it ,ith #our reuest)

AB%<T P(%7ET G<TE;BE(G-T+ ETEOTSThis P(%7ET G<TE;BE(G-t& etext/ li0e &ost P(%7ET G<TE;BE(G-t& etexts/ is a Kpublic do&ainK ,or0 distributed b# Professor +ichael S) art through the Project Gutenberg Association atarnegie-+ellon <ni.ersit# the KProjectK) A&ong other things/ this &eans that no one o,ns a <nited States cop#righton or for this ,or0/ so the Project and #ou1 can cop# anddistribute it in the <nited States ,ithout per&ission and,ithout pa#ing cop#right ro#alties) Special rules/ set forth

belo,/ appl# if #ou ,ish to cop# and distribute this etextunder the ProjectQs KP(%7ET G<TE;BE(GK trade&ar0)

To create these etexts/ the Project expends considerableefforts to identif#/ transcribe and proofread public do&ain,or0s) 3espite these efforts/ the ProjectQs etexts and an#&ediu& the# &a# be on &a# contain K3efectsK) A&ong other things/ 3efects &a# ta0e the for& of inco&plete/ inaccurate or corrupt data/ transcription errors/ a cop#right or other intellectual propert# infringe&ent/ a defecti.e or da&ageddis0 or other etext &ediu&/ a co&puter .irus/ or co&puter codes that da&age or cannot be read b# #our euip&ent)

=I+ITE3 2A((A;T>R 3IS=AI+E( %4 3A+AGESBut for the K(ight of (eplace&ent or (efundK described belo,/$5' the Project and an# other part# #ou &a# recei.e thisetext fro& as a P(%7ET G<TE;BE(G-t& etext disclai&s allliabilit# to #ou for da&ages/ costs and expenses/ includinglegal fees/ and $8' >%< AE ;% (E+E3IES 4%( ;EG=IGE;E %(<;3E( ST(IT =IABI=IT>/ %( 4%( B(EA %4 2A((A;T> %( %;T(AT/I;=<3I;G B<T ;%T =I+ITE3 T% I;3I(ET/ %;SE<E;TIA=/ P<;ITIE%( I;I3E;TA= 3A+AGES/ EE; I4 >%< GIE ;%TIE %4 TEP%SSIBI=IT> %4 S< 3A+AGES)

If #ou disco.er a 3efect in this etext ,ithin ": da#s of recei.ing it/ #ou can recei.e a refund of the &one# if an##ou paid for it b# sending an explanator# note ,ithin thatti&e to the person #ou recei.ed it fro&) If #ou recei.ed iton a ph#sical &ediu&/ #ou &ust return it ,ith #our note/ andsuch person &a# choose to alternati.el# gi.e #ou a replace&entcop#) If #ou recei.ed it electronicall#/ such person &a#choose to alternati.el# gi.e #ou a second opportunit# torecei.e it electronicall#)

TIS ETEOT IS %TE(2ISE P(%I3E3 T% >%< KAS-ISK) ;% %TE(2A((A;TIES %4 A;> I;3/ EOP(ESS %( I+P=IE3/ A(E +A3E T% >%< AS

T% TE ETEOT %( A;> +E3I<+ IT +A> BE %;/ I;=<3I;G B<T ;%T=I+ITE3 T% 2A((A;TIES %4 +E(A;TABI=IT> %( 4IT;ESS 4%( APA(TI<=A( P<(P%SE)



So&e states do not allo, disclai&ers of i&plied ,arranties or the exclusion or li&itation of conseuential da&ages/ so theabo.e disclai&ers and exclusions &a# not appl# to #ou/ and #ou&a# ha.e other legal rights)

I;3E+;IT>>ou ,ill inde&nif# and hold the Project/ its directors/officers/ &e&bers and agents har&less fro& all liabilit#/ costand expense/ including legal fees/ that arise directl# or indirectl# fro& an# of the follo,ing that #ou do or cause@$5' distribution of this etext/ $8' alteration/ &odification/or addition to the etext/ or $' an# 3efect)

3IST(IB<TI%; <;3E( KP(%7ET G<TE;BE(G-t&K>ou &a# distribute copies of this etext electronicall#/ or b#dis0/ boo0 or an# other &ediu& if #ou either delete thisKS&all Print1K and all other references to Project Gutenberg/

or@

$5' %nl# gi.e exact copies of it) A&ong other things/ this reuires that #ou do not re&o.e/ alter or &odif# the etext or this Ks&all print1K state&ent) >ou &a# ho,e.er/ if #ou ,ish/ distribute this etext in &achine readable binar#/ co&pressed/ &ar0-up/ or proprietar# for&/ including an# for& resulting fro& con.ersion b# ,ord pro- cessing or h#pertext soft,are/ but onl# so long as *EITE(*@

$*' The etext/ ,hen displa#ed/ is clearl# readable/ and

does *not* contain characters other than those intended b# the author of the ,or0/ although tilde U/ asteris0 * and underline V characters &a# be used to con.e# punctuation intended b# the author/ and additional characters &a# be used to indicate h#pertext lin0sR %(

$*' The etext &a# be readil# con.erted b# the reader at no expense into plain ASII/ EB3I or eui.alent for& b# the progra& that displa#s the etext as is the case/ for instance/ ,ith &ost ,ord processorsR %(

$*' >ou pro.ide/ or agree to also pro.ide on reuest at no additional cost/ fee or expense/ a cop# of the etext in its original plain ASII for& or in EB3I or other eui.alent proprietar# for&)

$8' onor the etext refund and replace&ent pro.isions of this KS&all Print1K state&ent)

$' Pa# a trade&ar0 license fee to the Project of 8:F of the net profits #ou deri.e calculated using the &ethod #ou alread# use to calculate #our applicable taxes) If #ou

donQt deri.e profits/ no ro#alt# is due) (o#alties are pa#able to KProject Gutenberg AssociationLarnegie-+ellon <ni.ersit#K ,ithin the D: da#s follo,ing each



date #ou prepare or ,ere legall# reuired to prepare #our annual or eui.alent periodic tax return)

2AT I4 >%< *2A;T* T% SE;3 +%;E> EE; I4 >%< 3%;QT AE T%The Project gratefull# accepts contributions in &one#/ ti&e/scanning &achines/ %( soft,are/ public do&ain etexts/ ro#alt#

free cop#right licenses/ and e.er# other sort of contribution#ou can thin0 of) +one# should be paid to KProject Gutenberg Association L arnegie-+ellon <ni.ersit#K)

*E;3*TE S+A== P(I;T1 4%( P<B=I 3%+AI; ETEOTS*er):9)8")"*E;3*

This Etext ,as created b# 7oseph B) >essel&an j#sel&an?erols)co&Please send corrections to hi& and also to hart?pobox)co&

Part 5 - hapters I to - 5spnt5:)txtPart 8 - hapters I to O - 8spnt5:)txtPart - hapters OI to O - spnt5:)txtPart 9 - hapters OI to OO - 9spnt5:)txt

Sentence ;u&bers/ sho,n thus 5/ ha.e been added b# .olunteer)

A Theologico-Political Treatise

Part III - hapters OI to O

b# Baruch Spinoza

TAB=E %4 %;TE;TS@

APTE( OI - An Inuir# ,hether the Apostles ,rote their Epistles as Apostles and Prophets/ or &erel# as Teachers/and an Explanation of ,hat is &eant b# Apostle)

The epistles not in the prophetic st#le)

The Apostles not co&&anded to ,rite or preach in particular places)

3ifferent &ethods of teaching adopted b# the Apostles)



APTE( OII - %f the true %riginal of the 3i.ine =a,/and ,herefore Scripture is called Sacred/ and the 2ord of God)o, that/ in so far as it contains the 2ord of God/it has co&e do,n to us uncorrupted)

APTE( OIII - It is sho,n/ that Scripture teaches onl# .er# Si&ple 3octrines/such as suffice for right conduct)

Error in speculati.e doctrine not i&pious - nor 0no,ledge pious)Piet# consists in obedience)

APTE( OI - 3efinitions of 4aith/ the True 4aith/ and the 4oundationsof 4aith/ ,hich is once for all separated fro& Philosoph#)

3anger resulting fro& the .ulgar idea of faith)

The onl# test of faith obedience and good ,or0s)

As different &en are disposed to obedience b# different opinions/uni.ersal faith can contain onl# the si&plest doctrines)

4unda&ental distinction bet,een faith and philosoph# -the 0e#-stone of the present treatise)

APTE( O - Theolog# is sho,n not to be subser.ient to(eason/ nor (eason to Theolog#@ a 3efinition of the reason,hich enables us to accept the Authorit# of the Bible)

Theor# that Scripture &ust be acco&&odated to (eason -&aintained b# +ai&onides - alread# refuted in hapter .ii)

Theor# that (eason &ust be acco&&odated to Scripture -&aintained b# Alpa0har - exa&ined)

And refuted)

Scripture and (eason independent of one another)

ertaint#/ of funda&ental faith not &athe&atical but &oral)

Great utilit# of (e.elation)

Authors Endnotes to the Treatise)

APTE( OI - A; I;<I(> 2ETE( TE AP%ST=ES 2(%TE TEI(EPIST=ES AS AP%ST=ES A;3 P(%PETS/ %( +E(E=> AS TEAE(SR



A;3 A; EOP=A;ATI%; %4 2AT IS +EA;T B> A; AP%ST=E)

5 ;o reader of the ;e, Testa&ent can doubt that the Apostles ,ereprophetsR but as a prophet does not al,a#s spea0 b# re.elation/ but onl#/ atrare inter.als/ as ,e sho,ed at the end of hap) I)/ ,e &a# fairl# inuire

,hether the Apostles ,rote their Epistles as prophets/ b# re.elation andexpress &andate/ as +oses/ 7ere&iah/ and others did/ or ,hether onl# aspri.ate indi.iduals or teachers/ especiall# as Paul/ in orinthians xi.@D/&entions t,o sorts of preaching)

8 If ,e exa&ine the st#le of the Epistles/ ,e shall find it totall#different fro& that e&plo#ed b# the prophets)

The prophets are continuall# asserting that the# spea0 b# the co&&and of God@ KThus saith the =ord/K KThe =ord of hosts saith/K KThe co&&and of the=ord/K Yc)R and this ,as their habit not onl# in asse&blies of the prophets/but also in their epistles containing re.elations/ as appears fro& the epistle

of Elijah to 7ehora&/ 8 hron) xxi@58/ ,hich begins/ KThus saith the =ord)K

9 In the Apostolic Epistles ,e find nothing of the sort) J ontrari,ise/in I or) .ii@9: Paul spea0s according to his o,n opinion and in &an#passages ,e co&e across doubtful and perplexed phraseR such as/ K2e thin0/therefore/K (o&) iii@8R K;o, I thin0/K $Endnote 89'/ (o&) .iii@5/ and soon) D Besides these/ other expressions are &et ,ith .er# different fro&those used b# the prophets) 6 4or instance/ 5 or) .ii@D/ KBut I spea0this b# per&ission/ not b# co&&and&entRK KI gi.e &# judg&ent as one thathath obtained &erc# of the =ord to be faithfulK 5 or) .ii@8J/ and so onin &an# other passages) 2e &ust also re&ar0 that in the aforesaidchapter the Apostle sa#s that ,hen he states that he has or has

not the precept or co&&and&ent of God/ he does not &ean the precept or co&&and&ent of God re.ealed to hi&self/ but onl# the ,ords uttered b# hristin is Ser&on on the +ount) " 4urther&ore/ if ,e exa&ine the &anner in,hich the Apostles gi.e out e.angelical doctrine/ ,e shall see that itdiffers &ateriall# fro& the &ethod adopted b# the prophets) 5: The Apostles e.er#,here reason as if the# ,ere arguing rather than prophes#ingRthe prophecies/ on the other hand/ contain onl# dog&as and co&&ands) 55God is therein introduced not as spea0ing to reason/ but as issuing decreesb# is absolute fiat) 58 The authorit# of the prophets does not sub&it todiscussion/ for ,hosoe.er ,ishes to find rational ground for his argu&ents/b# that .er# ,ish sub&its the& to e.er#oneQs pri.ate judg&ent) 5 ThisPaul/ inas&uch as he uses reason/ appears to ha.e done/ for he sa#s in 5

or) x@5J/ KI spea0 as to ,ise &en/ judge #e ,hat I sa#)K 59 The prophets/as ,e sho,ed at the end of hapter I)/ did not percei.e ,hat ,as re.ealed b#.irtue of their natural reason/ and though there are certain passages in thePentateuch ,hich see& to be appeals to induction/ the# turn out/ on nearer exa&ination/ to be nothing but pere&ptor# co&&ands) 5J 4or instance/ ,hen+oses sa#s/ 3eut) xxxi@86/ KBehold/ ,hile I a& #et ali.e ,ith #ou/ this da##e ha.e been rebellious against the =ordR and ho, &uch &ore after &# death/K ,e &ust b# no &eans conclude that +oses ,ished to con.ince theIsraelites b# reason that the# ,ould necessaril# fall a,a# fro& the ,orshipof the =ord after his deathR for the argu&ent ,ould ha.e been false/ asScripture itself sho,s@ the Israelites continued faithful during the li.esof 7oshua and the elders/ and after,ards during the ti&e of Sa&uel/ 3a.id/

and Solo&on) 5D Therefore the ,ords of +oses are &erel# a &oralinjunction/ in ,hich he predicts rhetoricall# the future bac0sliding of thepeople so as to i&press it .i.idl# on their i&agination) 56 I sa# that



+oses spo0e of hi&self in order to lend li0elihood to his prediction/ andnot as a prophet b# re.elation/ because in .erse 85 of the sa&e chapter ,eare told that God re.ealed the sa&e thing to +oses in different ,ords/ andthere ,as no need to &a0e +oses certain b# argu&ent of GodQs prediction anddecreeR it ,as onl# necessar# that it should be .i.idl# i&pressed onhis i&agination/ and this could not be better acco&plished than b#

i&agining the existing contu&ac# of the people/ of ,hich he had had freuentexperience/ as li0el# to extend into the future)

5 All the argu&ents e&plo#ed b# +oses in the fi.e boo0s are to beunderstood in a si&ilar &annerR the# are not dra,n fro& the ar&our# of reason/ but are &erel#/ &odes of expression calculated to instil ,ithefficac#/ and present .i.idl# to the i&agination the co&&ands of God)5" o,e.er/ I do not ,ish absolutel# to den# that the prophets e.er arguedfro& re.elationR I onl# &aintain that the prophets &ade &ore legiti&ate useof argu&ent in proportion as their 0no,ledge approached &ore nearl# toordinar# 0no,ledge/ and b# this ,e 0no, that the# possessed a 0no,ledgeabo.e the ordinar#/ inas&uch as the# proclai&ed absolute dog&as/

decrees/ or judg&ents) 8: Thus +oses/ the chief of the prophets/ ne.er used legiti&ate argu&ent/ and/ on the other hand/ the long deductions andargu&ents of Paul/ such as ,e find in the Epistle to the (o&ans/ are inno,ise ,ritten fro& supernatural re.elation)

85 The &odes of expression and discourse adopted b# the Apostles in theEpistles/ sho, .er# clearl# that the latter ,ere not ,ritten b# re.elationand 3i.ine co&&and/ but &erel# b# the natural po,ers and judg&ent of theauthors) 88 The# consist in brotherl# ad&onitions and courteousexpressions such as ,ould ne.er be e&plo#ed in prophec#/ as for instance/PaulQs excuse in (o&ans x.@5J/ KI ha.e ,ritten the &ore boldl# unto #ou inso&e sort/ &# brethren)K

8 2e &a# arri.e at the sa&e conclusion fro& obser.ing that ,e ne.er readthat the Apostles ,ere co&&anded to ,rite/ but onl# that the# ,ente.er#,here preaching/ and confir&ed their ,ords ,ith signs) 89 Their personal presence and signs ,ere absolutel# necessar# for the con.ersion andestablish&ent in religion of the GentilesR as Paul hi&self expressl# statesin (o&) i@55/ KBut I long to see #ou/ that I &a# i&part to #ou so&espiritual gift/ to the end that #e &a# be established)K

8J It &a# be objected that ,e &ight pro.e in si&ilar fashion that the Apostles did not preach as prophets/ for the# did not go to particular places/ as the prophets did/ b# the co&&and of God) 8D 2e read in

the %ld Testa&ent that 7onah ,ent to ;ine.eh to preach/ and at thesa&e ti&e that he ,as expressl# sent there/ and told that he &ost preach)86 So also it is related/ at great length/ of +oses that he ,ent to Eg#ptas the &essenger of God/ and ,as told at the sa&e ti&e ,hat he should sa# tothe children of Israel and to 0ing Pharaoh/ and ,hat ,onders he should ,or0before the& to gi.e credit to his ,ords) 8 Isaiah/ 7ere&iah/ andEze0iel ,ere expressl# co&&anded to preach to the Israelites) =astl#/ theprophets onl# preached ,hat ,e are assured b# Scripture the# had recei.edfro& God/ ,hereas this is hardl# e.er said of the Apostles in the ;e,Testa&ent/ ,hen the# ,ent about to preach) 8" %n the contrar#/ ,e findpassages expressl# i&pl#ing that the Apostles chose the places ,here the#should preach on their o,n responsibilit#/ for there ,as a difference

a&ounting to a uarrel bet,een Paul and Barnabas on the subject Acts x.@6/) : %ften the# ,ished to go to a place/ but ,ere pre.ented/ as Paul,rites/ (o&) i@5/ K%ftenti&es I purposed to co&e to #ou/ but ,as let



hithertoRK and in I or) x.i@58/ KAs touching our brother Apollos/ I greatl#desired hi& to co&e unto #ou ,ith the brethren/ but his ,ill ,as not at allto co&e at this ti&e@ but he ,ill co&e ,hen he shall ha.e con.enient ti&e)K

5 4ro& these expressions and differences of opinion a&ong the Apostles/and also fro& the fact that Scripture no,here testifies of the&/ as of the

ancient prophets/ that the# ,ent b# the co&&and of God/ one &ight concludethat the# preached as ,ell as ,rote in their capacit# of teachers/ and notas prophets@ but the uestion is easil# sol.ed if ,e obser.e the differencebet,een the &ission of an Apostle and that of an %ld Testa&ent prophet) 8The latter ,ere not called to preach and prophes# to all nations/ but tocertain specified ones/ and therefore an express and peculiar &andate ,asreuired for each of the&R the Apostles/ on the other hand/ ,ere called topreach to all &en absolutel#/ and to turn all &en to religion) Therefore/ ,hithersoe.er the# ,ent/ the# ,ere fulfilling hristQsco&&and&entR there ,as no need to re.eal to the& beforehand ,hat the# shouldpreach/ for the# ,ere the disciples of hrist to ,ho& their +aster i&self said +att) O@5"/ 8:@ KBut/ ,hen the# deli.er #ou up/ ta0e no thought

ho, or ,hat #e shall spea0/ for it shall be gi.en #ou in that sa&ehour ,hat #e shall spea0)K 9 2e therefore conclude that the Apostles,ere onl# indebted to special re.elation in ,hat the# orall# preached andconfir&ed b# signs see the beginning of hap) 55)R that ,hich the# taughtin spea0ing or ,riting ,ithout an# confir&ator# signs and ,ondersthe# taught fro& their natural 0no,ledge) See I or) xi.@D) J 2e neednot be deterred b# the fact that all the Epistles begin b# citing thei&pri&atur of the Apostleship/ for the Apostles/ as I ,ill shortl# sho,/,ere granted/ not onl# the facult# of prophec#/ but also the authorit# toteach) D 2e &a# therefore ad&it that the# ,rote their Epistles as Apostles/ and for this cause e.er# one of the& began b# citing the Apostolici&pri&atur/ possibl# ,ith a .ie, to the attention of the reader b# asserting

that the# ,ere the persons ,ho had &ade such &ar0 a&ong the faithful b#their preaching/ and had sho,n b. &an# &ar.elous ,or0s that the# ,ereteaching true religion and the ,a# of sal.ation) 6 I obser.e that ,hat issaid in the Epistles ,ith regard to the Apostolic .ocation and the ol#Spirit of God ,hich inspired the&/ has reference to their for&er preaching/except in those passages ,here the expressions of the Spirit of God and theol# Spirit are used to signif# a &ind pure/ upright/ and de.oted toGod) 4or instance/ in 5 or) .ii@9:/ Paul sa#s@ But she is happier if she so abide/ after &# judg&ent/ and I thin0 also that I ha.e the Spirit of God)K " B# the Spirit of God the Apostle here refers to his &ind/ as,e &a# see fro& the context@ his &eaning is as follo,s@ KI account blesseda ,ido, ,ho does not ,ish to &arr# a second husbandR such is &# opinion/ for

I ha.e settled to li.e un&arried/ and I thin0 that I a& blessed)K 9: Thereare other si&ilar passages ,hich I need not no, uote)

95 As ,e ha.e seen that the Apostles ,rote their Epistles solel# b# thelight of natural reason/ ,e &ust inuire ho, the# ,ere enabled to teach b#natural 0no,ledge &atters outside its scope) 98 o,e.er/ if ,e bear in&ind ,hat ,e said in hap) II) of this treatise our difficult# ,ill .anish@for although the contents of the Bible entirel# surpass our understanding/,e &a# safel# discourse of the&/ pro.ided ,e assu&e nothing not toldus in Scripture@ b# the sa&e &ethod the Apostles/ fro& ,hat the# sa,and heard/ and fro& ,hat ,as re.ealed to the&/ ,ere enabled to for& andelicit &an# conclusions ,hich the# ,ould ha.e been able to teach to &en had

it been per&issible)

9 4urther/ although religion/ as preached b# the Apostles/ does not co&e



,ithin the sphere of reason/ in so far as it consists in the narration of the life of hrist/ #et its essence/ ,hich is chiefl# &oral/ li0e the ,holeof hristQs doctrine/ can readil#/ be apprehended b# the naturalfaculties of all)

99 =astl#/ the Apostles had no lac0 of supernatural illu&ination for the

purpose of adapting the religion the# had attested b# signs to theunderstanding of e.er#one so that it &ight be readil# recei.edR nor for exhortations on the subject@ in fact/ the object of the Epistles is to teachand exhort &en to lead that &anner of life ,hich each of the Apostles judgedbest for confir&ing the& in religion) 9J 2e &a# here repeat our for&er re&ar0/ that the Apostles had recei.ed not onl# the facult# of preaching thehistor#/ of hrist as prophets/ and confir&ing it ,ith signs/ but alsoauthorit# for teaching and exhorting according as each thought best) 9DPaul 8 Ti&) i@55/ K2hereunto I a& appointed a preacher/ and an apostle/and a teacher of the GentilesRK and again I Ti&) ii@6/ K2hereunto I a&ordained a preacher and an apostle I spea0 the truth in hrist and lienot/ a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and .erit#)K 96 These passages/ I

sa#/ sho, clearl# the sta&p both of the apostleship and the teachership@the authorit# for ad&onishing ,ho&soe.er and ,heresoe.er he pleased isasserted b# Paul in the Epistle to Phile&on/ .@@ K2herefore/ though I &ightbe &uch bold in hrist to enjoin thee that ,hich is con.enient/ #et/K Yc)/,here ,e &a# re&ar0 that if Paul had recei.ed fro& God as a prophet,hat he ,ished to enjoin Phile&on/ and had been bound to spea0 in hisprophetic capacit#/ he ,ould not ha.e been able to change the co&&and of Godinto entreaties) 9 2e &ust therefore understand hi& to refer to theper&ission to ad&onish ,hich he had recei.ed as a teacher/ and not as aprophet) 9" 2e ha.e not #et &ade it uite clear that the Apostles &ighteach choose his o,n ,a# of teaching/ but onl# that b# .irtue of their Apostleship the# ,ere teachers as ,ell as prophetsR ho,e.er/ if ,e

call reason to our aid ,e shall clearl# see that an authorit# to teachi&plies authorit# to choose the &ethod) J: It ,ill ne.ertheless be/perhaps/ &ore satisfactor# to dra, all our proofs fro& ScriptureR ,e arethere plainl# told that each Apostle chose his particular &ethod (o&) x.@8:@ K>ea/ so ha.e I stri.ed to preach the gospel/ not ,here hrist ,asna&ed/ lest I should build upon another &anQs foundation)K J5 If all the Apostles had adopted the sa&e &ethod of teaching/ and had all builtup the hristian religion on the sa&e foundation/ Paul ,ould ha.e had noreason to call the ,or0 of a fello,-Apostle Kanother &anQs foundation/Kinas&uch as it ,ould ha.e been identical ,ith his o,n@ his calling itanother &anQs pro.ed that each Apostle built up his religious instruction ondifferent foundations/ thus rese&bling other teachers ,ho ha.e each their

o,n &ethod/ and prefer instructing uite ignorant people ,ho ha.e ne.er learnt under another &aster/ ,hether the subject be science/ languages/ or e.en the indisputable truths of &athe&atics) J8 4urther&ore/ if ,e gothrough the Epistles at all attenti.el#/ ,e shall see that the Apostles/,hile agreeing about religion itself/ are at .ariance as to the foundationsit rests on) J Paul/ in order to strengthen &enQs religion/ and sho, the&that sal.ation depends solel# on the grace of God/ teaches that no one canboast of ,or0s/ but onl# of faith/ and that no one can be justified b# ,or0s(o&) iii@86/8R in fact/ he preaches the co&plete doctrine of predestination) J9 7a&es/ on the other hand/ states that &an is justifiedb# ,or0s/ and not b# faith onl# see his Epistle/ ii@89/ and o&itting allthe disputations of Paul/ confines religion to a .er# fe, ele&ents)

JJ =astl#/ it is indisputable that fro& these different groundR for religion selected b# the Apostles/ &an# uarrels and schis&s distracted the



of Scripture than of GodQs 2ord that it is &utilated and corrupted) 6 Ifear that such objectors are too anxious to be pious/ and that the# are indanger of turning religion into superstition/ and ,orshipping paper and in0in place of GodQs 2ord)

I a& certified of thus &uch@ I ha.e said nothing un,orth# of Scripture

or GodQs 2ord/ and I ha.e &ade no assertions ,hich I could not pro.e b# &ostplain argu&ent to be true) " I can/ therefore/ rest assured that I ha.ead.anced nothing ,hich is i&pious or e.en sa.ours of i&piet#)

5: fro& ,hat I ha.e said/ assu&e a licence to sin/ and ,ithout an# reason/at I confess that so&e profane &en/ to ,ho& religion is a burden/ &a#/ thesi&ple dictates of their lusts conclude that Scripture is e.er#,here fault#and falsified/ and that therefore its authorit# is nullR but such &en arebe#ond the reach of help/ for nothing/ as the pro .erb has it/ can be saidso rightl# that it cannot be t,isted into ,rong) 55 Those ,ho ,ish to gi.erein to their lusts are at no loss for an excuse/ nor ,ere those &en of old,ho possessed the original Scriptures/ the ar0 of the co.enant/ na#/ the

prophets and apostles in person a&ong the&/ an# better than the people of to-da#) 58 u&an nature/ 7e, as ,ell as Gentile/ has al,a#s been the sa&e/and in e.er# age .irtue has been exceedingl# rare)

5 ;e.ertheless/ to re&o.e e.er# scruple/ I ,ill here sho, in ,hat sensethe Bible or an# inani&ate thing should be called sacred and 3i.ineRalso ,herein the la, of God consists/ and ho, it cannot be contained in acertain nu&ber of boo0sR and/ lastl#/ I ,ill sho, that Scripture/ in so far as it teaches ,hat is necessar# for obedience and sal.ation/ cannot ha.ebeen corrupted) 59 4ro& these considerations e.er#one ,ill be able to judge that I ha.e neither said an#thing against the 2ord of God nor gi.enan# foothold to i&piet#)

5J A thing is called sacred and 3i.ine ,hen it is designed for pro&otingpiet#/ and continues sacred so long as it is religiousl# used@ if the userscease to be pious/ the thing ceases to be sacred@ if it be turned to baseuses/ that ,hich ,as for&erl# sacred beco&es unclean and profane) 5D 4or instance/ a certain spot ,as na&ed b# the patriarch 7acob the house of God/because he ,orshipped God there re.ealed to hi&@ b# the prophets the sa&espot ,as called the house of iniuit# see A&os .@J/ and osea x@J/ becausethe Israelites ,ere ,ont/ at the instigation of 7eroboa&/ to sacrifice thereto idols) 56 Another exa&ple puts the &atter in the plainest light) 52ords gain their &eaning solel# fro& their usage/ and if the# are arrangedaccording to their accepted signification so as to &o.e those ,ho read the&

to de.otion/ the# ,ill beco&e sacred/ and the boo0 so ,ritten ,ill be sacredalso) 5" But if their usage after,ards dies out so that the ,ords ha.e no&eaning/ or the boo0 beco&es utterl# neglected/ ,hether fro& un,orth#&oti.es/ or because it is no longer needed/ then the ,ords and the boo0 ,illlose both their use and their sanctit#@ lastl#/ if these sa&e ,ords beother,ise arranged/ or if their custo&ar# &eaning beco&es per.erted into itsopposite/ then both the ,ords and the boo0 containing the& beco&e/ insteadof sacred/ i&pure and profane)

8: 4ro& this it follo,s that nothing is in itself absolutel# sacred/ or profane/ and unclean/ apart fro& the &ind/ but onl# relati.el# thereto) 85Thus &uch is clear fro& &an# passages in the Bible) 88 7ere&iah to select

one case out of &an# sa#s chap) .ii@9/ that the 7e,s of his ti&e,ere ,rong in calling Solo&onQs Te&ple/ the Te&ple of God/ for/ as he goeson to sa# in the sa&e chapter/ GodQs na&e ,ould onl# be gi.en to the Te&ple



so long as it ,as freuented b# &en ,ho ,orshipped i&/ and defended justice/ but that/ if it beca&e the resort of &urderers/ thie.es/ idolaters/and other ,ic0ed persons/ it ,ould be turned into a den of &alefactors)

8 Scripture/ curiousl# enough/ no,here tells us ,hat beca&e of the Ar0 of the o.enant/ though there is no doubt that it ,as destro#ed/ or burnt

together ,ith the Te&pleR #et there ,as nothing ,hich the ebre,s considered&ore sacred/ or held in greater re.erence) 89 Thus Scripture is sacred/and its ,ords 3i.ine so long as it stirs &an0ind to de.otion to,ards God@but if it be utterl# neglected/ as it for&erl# ,as b# the 7e,s/ it beco&esnothing but paper and in0/ and is left to be desecrated or corrupted@ still/though Scripture be thus corrupted or destro#ed/ ,e &ust not sa# that the2ord of God has suffered in li0e &anner/ else ,e shall be li0e the 7e,s/ ,hosaid that the Te&ple ,hich ,ould then be the Te&ple of God had perished inthe fla&es) 8J 7ere&iah tells us this in respect to the la,/ for he thuschides the ungodl# of his ti&e/ K2herefore/ sa# #ou ,e are &asters/ and thela, of the =ord is ,ith us 8D Surel# it has been gi.en in .ain/ it is in.ain that the pen of the scribes K has been &ade - that is/ #ou sa#

falsel# that the Scripture is in #our po,er/ and that #ou possess the la, of GodR for #e ha.e &ade it of none effect)

86 So also/ ,hen +oses bro0e the first tables of the la,/ he did not b#an# &eans cast the 2ord of God fro& his hands in anger and shatter it - suchan action ,ould be inconcei.able/ either of +oses or of GodQs 2ord - he onl#bro0e the tables of stone/ ,hich/ though the# had before been hol# fro&containing the co.enant ,here,ith the 7e,s had bound the&sel.es inobedience to God/ had entirel# lost their sanctit# ,hen the co.enant hadbeen .iolated b# the ,orship of the calf/ and ,ere/ therefore/ as liable toperish as the ar0 of the co.enant) 8 It is thus scarcel# to be ,onderedat/ that the original docu&ents of +oses are no longer extant/ nor that the

boo0s ,e possess &et ,ith the fate ,e ha.e described/ ,hen ,e consider thatthe true original of the 3i.ine co.enant/ the &ost sacred object of all/ hastotall# perished)

8" =et the& cease/ therefore/ ,ho accuse us of i&piet#/ inas&uch as ,eha.e said nothing against the 2ord of God/ neither ha.e ,e corrupted it/ butlet the& 0eep their anger/ if the# ,ould ,rea0 it justl#/ for the ancients,hose &alice desecrated the Ar0/ the Te&ple/ and the =a, of God/ and allthat ,as held sacred/ subjecting the& to corruption) : 4urther&ore/if/ according to the sa#ing of the Apostle in 8 or) iii@/ the# possessedKthe Epistle of hrist/ ,ritten not ,ith in0/ but ,ith the Spirit of theli.ing God/ not in tables of stone/ but in the flesh# tables of the heart/K

let the& cease to ,orship the letter/ and be so anxious concerning it)

5 I thin0 I ha.e no, sufficientl# sho,n in ,hat respect Scripture shouldbe accounted sacred and 3i.ineR ,e &a# no, see ,hat should rightl# beunderstood b# the expression/ the 2ord of the =ordR debar the ebre,original signifies ,ord/ speech/ co&&and/ and thing) 8 The causes for ,hich a thing is in ebre, said to be of God/ or is referred to i&/ ha.ebeen alread# detailed in hap) I)/ and ,e can therefro& easil# gather ,hat&eaning Scripture attaches to the phrases/ the ,ord/ the speech/ theco&&and/ or the thing of God) I need not/ therefore/ repeat ,hat Ithere said/ nor ,hat ,as sho,n under the third head in the chapter on&iracles) 9 It is enough to &ention the repetition for the better

understanding of ,hat I a& about to sa# - .iz)/ that the 2ord of the =ord,hen it has reference to an#one but God i&self/ signifies that 3i.ine la,treated of in hap) I)R in other ,ords/ religion/ uni.ersal and catholic



to the ,hole hu&an race/ as Isaiah describes it chap) i@5:/ teaching thatthe true ,a# of life consists/ not in cere&onies/ but in charit#/ and a trueheart/ and calling it indifferentl# GodQs =a, and GodQs 2ord)

J The expression is also used &etaphoricall# for the order of nature anddestin# ,hich/ indeed/ actuall# depend and follo, fro& the eternal &andate

of the 3i.ine nature/ and especiall# for such parts of such order as ,ereforeseen b# the prophets/ for the prophets did not percei.e future e.ents asthe result of natural causes/ but as the fiats and decrees of God) D=astl#/ it is e&plo#ed for the co&&and of an# prophet/ in so far as he hadpercei.ed it b# his peculiar facult# or prophetic gift/ and not b# thenatural light of reasonR this use springs chiefl# fro& the usual propheticconception of God as a legislator/ ,hich ,e re&ar0ed in hap) I)6 There are/ then/ three causes for the BibleQs being calledthe 2ord of God@ because it teaches true religion/ of ,hich God is theeternal 4ounderR because it narrates predictions of future e.ents asthough the# ,ere decrees of GodR because its actual authors generall#percei.ed things not b# their ordinar# natural faculties/ but b# a

po,er peculiar to the&sel.es/ and introduced these things percei.ed/as told the& b# God)

6 Although Scripture contains &uch that is &erel# historical and can bepercei.ed b# natural reason/ #et its na&e is acuired fro& its chief subject&atter)

2e can thus easil# see ho, God can be said to be the Author of theBible@ it is because of the true religion therein contained/ and not becausee ,ished to co&&unicate to &en a certain nu&ber of boo0s) " 2e can alsolearn fro& hence the reason for the di.ision into %ld and ;e, Testa&ent)9: It ,as &ade because the prophets ,ho preached religion before hrist/

preached it as a national la, in .irtue of the co.enant entered into under +osesR ,hile the Apostles ,ho ca&e after hrist/ preached it to all &en as auni.ersal religion solel# in .irtue of hristQs Passion@ the cause for thedi.ision is not that the t,o parts are different in doctrine/ nor that the#,ere ,ritten as originals of the co.enant/ nor/ lastl#/ that the catholicreligion ,hich is in entire har&on# ,ith our nature ,as ne, except inrelation to those ,ho had not 0no,n it@ K it ,as in the ,orld/K as 7ohn theE.angelist sa#s/ K and the ,orld 0ne, it not)K

95 Thus/ e.en if ,e had fe,er boo0s of the %ld and ;e, Testa&ent than ,eha.e/ ,e should still not be depri.ed of the 2ord of God ,hich/ as ,e ha.esaid/ is identical ,ith true religion/ e.en as ,e do not no, hold oursel.es

to be depri.ed of it/ though ,e lac0 &an# cardinal ,ritings such as the Boo0of the =a,/ ,hich ,as religiousl# guarded in the Te&ple as the original of the o.enant/ also the Boo0 of 2ars/ the Boo0 of hronicles/ and &an#others/ fro& ,hence the extant %ld Testa&ent ,as ta0en and co&piled) 98The abo.e conclusion &a# be supported b# &an# reasons)

9 I) Because the boo0s of both Testa&ents ,ere not ,ritten b# expressco&&and at one place for all ages/ but are a fortuitous collection of the,or0s of &en/ ,riting each as his period and disposition dictated) 99 So&uch is clearl# sho,n b# the call of the prophets ,ho ,ere bade toad&onish the ungodl# of their ti&e/ and also b# the Apostolic Epistles)

9J II) Because it is one thing to understand the &eaning of Scriptureand the prophets/ and uite another thing to understand the &eaning of God/ or the actual truth) 9D This follo,s fro& ,hat ,e said in



hap) II) 96 2e sho,ed/ in hap) I)/ that it applied to historicnarrati.es/ and to &iracles@ but it b# no &eans applies to uestionsconcerning true religion and .irtue)

9 III) Because the boo0s of the %ld Testa&ent ,ere selected fro& &an#/and ,ere collected and sanctioned b# a council of the Pharisees/ as ,e

sho,ed in hap) O) 9" The boo0s of the ;e, Testa&ent ,ere also chosen fro&&an# b# councils ,hich rejected as spurious other boo0s held sacred b# &an#)J: But these councils/ both Pharisee and hristian/ ,ere not co&posed of prophets/ but onl# of learned &en and teachers) J5 Still/ ,e &ust grantthat the# ,ere guided in their choice b# a regard for the 2ord of God R andthe# &ust/ therefore/ ha.e 0no,n ,hat the la, of God ,as)

J8 I) Because the Apostles ,rote not as prophets/ but as teachers seelast hapter/ and chose ,hate.er &ethod the# thought best adapted for those,ho& the# addressed@ and conseuentl#/ there are &an# things in the Epistlesas ,e sho,ed at the end of the last hapter ,hich are not necessar# tosal.ation)

J ) =astl#/ because there are four E.angelists in the ;e, Testa&ent/ andit is scarcel# credible that God can ha.e designed to narrate the life of hrist four ti&es o.er/ and to co&&unicate it thus to &an0ind) J9 4or though there are so&e details related in one Gospel ,hich are not inanother/ and one often helps us to understand another/ ,e cannot thenceconclude that all that is set do,n is of .ital i&portance to us/ and thatGod chose the four E.angelists in order that the life of hrist &ight bebetter understoodR for each one preached his Gospel in a separatelocalit#/ each ,rote it do,n as he preached it/ in si&ple language/ inorder that the histor# of hrist &ight be clearl# told/ not ,ith an# .ie, of explaining his fello,-E.angelists)

JJ If there are so&e passages ,hich can be better/ and &ore easil#understood b# co&paring the .arious .ersions/ the# are the result of chance/and are not nu&erous@ their continuance in obscurit# ,ould ha.e i&pairedneither the clearness of the narrati.e nor the blessedness of &an0ind)

JD 2e ha.e no, sho,n that Scripture can onl# be called the 2ordof God in so far as it affects religion/ or the 3i.ine la,R ,e &ust no,point out that/ in respect to these uestions/ it is neither fault#/ta&pered ,ith/ nor corrupt) J6 B# fault#/ ta&pered ,ith/ and corrupt/ Ihere &ean ,ritten so incorrectl#/ that the &eaning cannot be arri.ed at b# astud# of the language/ nor fro& the authorit# of Scripture) J I ,ill not

go to such lengths as to sa# that the Bible/ in so far as it contains the3i.ine la,/ has al,a#s preser.ed the sa&e .o,el-points/ the sa&e letters/ or the sa&e ,ords I lea.e this to be pro.ed b#/ the +assoretes and other ,orshippers of the letter/ I onl#/ &aintain that the &eaning b#/ ,hichalone an utterance is entitled to be called 3i.ine/ has co&e do,n to usuncorrupted/ e.en though the original ,ording &a# ha.e been &ore oftenchanged than ,e suppose) J" Such alterations/ as I ha.e said abo.e/detract nothing fro& the 3i.init# of the Bible/ for the Bible ,ould ha.ebeen no less 3i.ine had it been ,ritten in different ,ords or a differentlanguage) D: That the 3i.ine la, has in this sense co&e do,n to usuncorrupted/ is an assertion ,hich ad&its of no dispute) D5 4or fro& theBible itself ,e learn/ ,ithout the s&allest difficult# or a&biguit#// that

its cardinal precept is@ To lo.e God abo.e all things/ and oneQs neighbour as oneQs self) D8 This cannot be a spurious passage/ nor due to a hast#and &ista0en scribe/ for if the Bible had e.er put forth a different



doctrine it ,ould ha.e had to change the ,hole of its teaching/ for this isthe corner-stone of religion/ ,ithout ,hich the ,hole fabric ,ould fallheadlong to the ground) D The Bible ,ould not be the ,or0 ,e ha.e beenexa&ining/ but so&ething uite different)

D9 2e re&ain/ then/ unsha0en in our belief that this has al,a#s been the

doctrine of Scripture/ and/ conseuentl#/ that no error sufficient to.itiate it can ha.e crept in ,ithout being instantl#/ obser.ed b# allR nor can an#one ha.e succeeded in ta&pering ,ith it and escaped the disco.er# of his &alice)

DJ As this corner-stone is intact/ ,e &ust perforce ad&it the sa&e of ,hate.er other passages are indisputabl# dependent on it/ and are alsofunda&ental/ as/ for instance/ that a God exists/ that e foresees allthings/ that e is Al&ight#/ that b# is decree the good prosper and the,ic0ed co&e to naught/ and/ finall#/ that our sal.ation depends solel# onis grace)

DD These are doctrines ,hich Scripture plainl# teaches throughout/ and,hich it is bound to teach/ else all the rest ,ould be e&pt# and baselessRnor can ,e be less positi.e about other &oral doctrines/ ,hich plainl# arebuilt upon this uni.ersal foundation - for instance/ to uphold justice/ toaid the ,ea0/ to do no &urder/ to co.et no &anQs goods/ Yc) D6 Precepts/ Irepeat/ such as these/ hu&an &alice and the lapse of ages are ali0epo,erless to destro#/ for if an# part of the& perished/ its loss ,ouldi&&ediatel# be supplied fro& the funda&ental principle/ especiall# thedoctrine of charit#/ ,hich is e.er#,here in both Testa&ents extolled abo.eall others) D +oreo.er/ though it be true that there is no concei.ablecri&e so heinous that it has ne.er been co&&itted/ still there is no one ,ho,ould atte&pt in excuse for his cri&es to destro#/ the la,/ or introduce an

i&pious doctrine in the place of ,hat is eternal and salutar#R &enQs natureis so constituted that e.er#one be he 0ing or subject ,ho has co&&itted abase action/ tries to dec0 out his conduct ,ith spurious excuses/ till hesee&s to ha.e done nothing but ,hat is just and right)

D" 2e &a# conclude/ therefore/ that the ,hole 3i.ine la,/ as taught b#Scripture/ has co&e do,n to us uncorrupted) 6: Besides this there arecertain facts ,hich ,e &a# be sure ha.e been trans&itted in good faith) 654or instance/ the &ain facts of ebre, histor#/ ,hich ,ere perfectl# ,ell0no,n to e.er#one) 68 The 7e,ish people ,ere accusto&ed in for&er ti&es tochant the ancient histor# of their nation in psal&s) 6 The &ain facts/also/ of hristQs life and passion ,ere i&&ediatel# spread abroad through

the ,hole (o&an e&pire) 69 It is therefore scarcel# credible/ unlessnearl# e.er#bod#/ consented thereto/ ,hich ,e cannot suppose/ thatsuccessi.e generations ha.e handed do,n the broad outline of the Gospelnarrati.e other,ise than as the# recei.ed it)

69 2hatsoe.er/ therefore/ is spurious or fault# can onl# ha.e reference todetails - so&e circu&stances in one or the other histor# or prophec#designed to stir the people to greater de.otionR or in so&e &iracle/ ,ith a.ie, of confounding philosophersR or/ lastl#/ in speculati.e &attersafter the# had beco&e &ixed up ,ith religion/ so that so&e indi.idual&ight prop up his o,n in.entions ,ith a pretext of 3i.ine authorit#)6J But such &atters ha.e little to do ,ith sal.ation/ ,hether

the# be corrupted little or &uch/ as I ,ill sho, in detail in the nextchapter/ though I thin0 the uestion sufficientl# plain fro& ,hat I ha.esaid alread#/ especiall# in hapter II)



APTE( OIII - IT IS S%2; TAT S(IPT<(E TEAES %;=> E(> SI+P=E 3%T(I;ES/ S< AS S<44IE 4%( (IGT %;3<T)

5 In the second chapter of this treatise ,e pointed out that the prophets,ere gifted ,ith extraordinar# po,ers of i&agination/ but not of understandingR also that God onl# re.ealed to the& such things as are .er#si&ple - not philosophic &#steries/ - and that e adapted isco&&unications to their pre.ious opinions) 8 2e further sho,ed in hap) )that Scripture onl# trans&its and teaches truths ,hich can readil# beco&prehended b# allR not deducing and concatenating its conclusions fro&definitions and axio&s/ but narrating uite si&pl#/ and confir&ing itsstate&ents/ ,ith a .ie, to inspiring belief/ b# an appeal to experience asexe&plified in &iracles and histor#/ and setting forth its truths in thest#le and phraseolog# ,hich ,ould &ost appeal to the popular &ind cf) hap)

I)/ third di.ision)

=astl#/ ,e de&onstrated in hap) III) that the difficult# of understanding Scripture lies in the language onl#/ and not in theabstruseness of the argu&ent)

9 To these considerations ,e &a# add that the Prophets did not preach onl#to the learned/ but to all 7e,s/ ,ithout exception/ ,hile the Apostles ,ere,ont to teach the gospel doctrine in churches ,here there ,ere public&eetingsR ,hence it follo,s that Scriptural doctrine contains no loft#speculations nor philosophic reasoning/ but onl# .er# si&ple &atters/ suchas could be understood b# the slo,est intelligence)

J I a& conseuentl# lost in ,onder at the ingenuit# of those ,ho& I ha.ealread# &entioned/ ,ho detect in the Bible &#steries so profound that the#cannot be explained in hu&an language/ and ,ho ha.e introduced so &an#philosophic speculations into religion that the hurch see&s li0ean acade&#/ and religion li0e a science/ or rather a dispute)

D It is not to be ,ondered at that &en/ ,ho boast of possessingsupernatural intelligence/ should be un,illing to #ield the pal& of 0no,ledge to philosophers ,ho ha.e onl# their ordinar#/ facultiesR still Ishould be surprised if I found the& teaching an# ne, speculati.edoctrine/ ,hich ,as not a co&&onplace to those Gentile philosophers ,ho&/ in

spite of all/ the# stig&atize as blindR for/ if one inuires ,hat these&#steries lur0ing in Scripture &a# be/ one is confronted ,ith nothing butthe reflections of Plato or Aristotle/ or the li0e/ ,hich it ,ouldoften be easier for an ignorant &an to drea& than for the &ost acco&plishedscholar to ,rest out of the Bible)

6 o,e.er/ I do not ,ish to affir& absolutel# that Scripture contains nodoctrines in the sphere of philosoph#/ for in the last chapter I pointed outso&e of the 0ind/ as funda&ental principlesR but I go so far as to sa# thatsuch doctrines are .er# fe, and .er# si&ple) Their precise nature anddefinition I ,ill no, set forth) " The tas0 ,ill be eas#/ for ,e 0no, thatScripture does not ai& at i&parting scientific 0no,ledge/ and/ therefore/ it

de&ands fro& &en nothing but obedience/ and censures obstinac#/ but notignorance)



5: 4urther&ore/ as obedience to God consists solel# in lo.e to our neighbour - for ,hosoe.er lo.eth his neighbour/ as a &eans of obe#ing God/hath/ as St) Paul sa#s (o&) xiii@/ fulfilled the la,/ - it follo,s thatno 0no,ledge is co&&ended in the Bible sa.e that ,hich is necessar#for enabling all &en to obe# God in the &anner stated/ and ,ithout ,hichthe# ,ould beco&e rebellious/ or ,ithout the discipline of obedience)

55 %ther speculati.e uestions/ ,hich ha.e no direct bearing on thisobject/ or are concerned ,ith the 0no,ledge of natural e.ents/ do not affectScripture/ and should be entirel# separated fro& religion)

58 ;o,/ though e.er#one/ as ,e ha.e said/ is no, uite able to see thistruth for hi&self/ I should ne.ertheless ,ish/ considering that the ,hole of (eligion depends thereon/ to explain the entire uestion &ore accuratel# andclearl#) 5 To this end I &ust first pro.e that the intellectualor accurate 0no,ledge of God is not a gift/ besto,ed upon all good &enli0e obedienceR and/ further/ that the 0no,ledge of God/ reuired b# i&through is prophets fro& e.er#one ,ithout exception/ as needful to be

0no,n/ is si&pl# a 0no,ledge of is 3i.ine justice and charit#) 59 Boththese points are easil# pro.ed fro& Scripture) 5J The first plainl#follo,s fro& Exodus .i@8/ ,here God/ in order to sho, the singular gracebesto,ed upon +oses/ sa#s to hi&@ KAnd I appeared unto Abraha&/ unto Isaac/and unto 7acob b# the na&e of El Sadai A) ) God Al&ight#R but b# &# na&e7eho.ah ,as I not 0no,n to the&K - for the better understanding of ,hichpassage I &a# re&ar0 that El Sadai/ in ebre,/ signifies the God ,hosuffices/ in that e gi.es to e.er# &an that ,hich suffices for hi&R and/although Sadai is often used b# itself/ to signif# God/ ,e cannot doubt thatthe ,ord El God/ Wpo,er/ &ightX is e.er#,here understood) 5D4urther&ore/ ,e &ust note that 7eho.ah is the onl# ,ord found in Scripture,ith the &eaning of the absolute essence of God/ ,ithout reference to

created things) 56 The 7e,s &aintain/ for this reason/ that this is/strictl# spea0ing/ the onl# na&e of GodR that the rest of the ,ords used are&erel# titlesR and/ in truth/ the other na&es of God/ ,hether the# besubstanti.es or adjecti.es/ are &erel# attributi.e/ and belong to i&/ inso far as e is concei.ed of in relation to created things/ or &anifestedthrough the&) 5 Thus El/ or Eloah/ signifies po,erful/ as is ,ell 0no,n/and onl# applies to God in respect to is supre&ac#/ as ,hen ,e call Paul anapostleR the faculties of his po,er are set forth in an acco&pan#ingadjecti.e/ as El/ great/ a,ful/ just/ &erciful/ Yc)/ or else all areunderstood at once b# the use of El in the plural nu&ber/ ,ith a singular signification/ an expression freuentl# adopted in Scripture)

5" ;o,/ as God tells +oses that e ,as not 0no,n to the patriarchs b# thena&e of 7eho.ah/ it follo,s that the# ,ere not cognizant of an# attribute of God ,hich expresses is absolute essence/ but onl# of is deeds and pro&isesthat is/ of is po,er/ as &anifested in .isible things) 8: God does notthus spea0 to +oses in order to accuse the patriarchs of infidelit#/ but/on the contrar#/ as a &eans of extolling their belief and faith/ inas&uchas/ though the# possessed no extraordinar# 0no,ledge of God such as+oses had/ the# #et accepted is pro&ises as fixed and certainR ,hereas+oses/ though his thoughts about God ,ere &ore exalted/ ne.ertheless doubtedabout the 3i.ine pro&ises/ and co&plained to God that/ instead of thepro&ised deli.erance/ the prospects of the Israelites had dar0ened)

85 As the patriarchs did not 0no, the distincti.e na&e of God/ and as God&entions the fact to +oses/ in praise of their faith and single-heartedness/and in contrast to the extraordinar# grace granted to +oses/ it follo,s/ as



,e stated at first/ that &en are not bound b#/ decree to ha.e 0no,ledge of the attributes of God/ such 0no,ledge being onl# granted to a fe, of thefaithful@ it is hardl# ,orth ,hile to uote further exa&ples fro& Scripture/for e.er#one &ust recognize that 0no,ledge of God is not eual a&ong allgood &en) 88 +oreo.er/ a &an cannot be ordered to be ,ise an# &ore than hecan be ordered to li.e and exist) 8 +en/ ,o&en/ and children are all

ali0e able to obe# b#/ co&&and&ent/ but not to be ,ise) If an# tell us thatit is not necessar# to understand the 3i.ine attributes/ but that ,e &ustbelie.e the& si&pl#/ ,ithout proof/ he is plainl#/ trifling) 89 4or ,hatis in.isible and can onl#/ be percei.ed b# the &ind/ cannot be apprehendedb# an#/ other &eans than proofsR if these are absent the object re&ainsungraspedR the repetition of ,hat has been heard on such subjects no &oreindicates or attains to their &eaning than the ,ords of a parrot or a puppetspea0ing ,ithout sense or signification)

8J Before I proceed I ought to explain ho, it co&es that ,e are often toldin Genesis that the patriarchs preached in the na&e of 7eho.ah/ this beingin plain contradiction to the text abo.e uoted) 8D A reference to ,hat

,as said in hap) III) ,ill readil# explain the difficult#) 86 It ,asthere sho,n that the ,riter of the Pentateuch did not al,a#s spea0 of thingsand places b# the na&es the# bore in the ti&es of ,hich he ,as ,riting/ butb# the na&es best 0no,n to his conte&poraries) 8 God is thus said in thePentateuch to ha.e been preached b# the patriarchs under the na&e of 7eho.ah/ not because such ,as the na&e b# ,hich the patriarchs 0ne,i&/ but because this na&e ,as the one &ost re.erenced b# the 7e,s)8" This point/ I sa#/ &ust necessaril# be noticed/ for in Exodus it isexpressl# stated that God ,as not 0no,n to the patriarchs b# this na&eR andin chap) iii@5/ it is said that +oses desired to 0no, the na&e of God) :;o,/ if this na&e had been alread# 0no,n it ,ould ha.e been 0no,n to +oses)5 2e &ust therefore dra, the conclusion indicated/ na&el#/ that the

faithful patriarchs did not 0no, this na&e of God/ and that the 0no,ledge of God is besto,ed and not co&&anded b# the 3eit#)

8 It is no, ti&e to pass on to our second point/ and sho, that Godthrough is prophets reuired fro& &en no other 0no,ledge of i&self than iscontained in a 0no,ledge of is justice and charit# - that is/ of attributes,hich a certain &anner of life ,ill enable &en to i&itate) 7ere&iahstates this in so &an# ,ords xxii@5J/ 5D@ K3id not th# father eat/ anddrin0/ and do judg&ent and justice and then it ,as ,ell ,ith hi&) 9 e judged the cause of the poor and need#R then it ,as ,ell ,ith hi&@ ,as notthis to 0no, +e saith the =ord)K J The ,ords in chap) ix@89 of the sa&eboo0 are euall#/ clear) D KBut let hi& that glorieth glor# in this/ that

he understandeth and 0no,eth +e/ that I a& the =ord ,hich exercise lo.ing-0indness/ judg&ent/ and righteousness in the earthR for in these things Idelight/ saith the =ord)K 6 The sa&e doctrine &a#be gathered fro& Exod)xxxi.@D/ ,here God re.ealed to +oses onl#/ those of is attributes ,hichdispla# the 3i.ine justice and charit#) =astl#/ ,e &a# call attentionto a passage in 7ohn ,hich ,e shall discuss at &ore length hereafterR the Apostle explains the nature of God inas&uch as no one has beheld i&through charit# onl#/ and concludes that he ,ho possesses charit# possesses/and in .er#/ truth 0no,s God)

" 2e ha.e thus seen that +oses/ 7ere&iah/ and 7ohn su& up in a .er# shortco&pass the 0no,ledge of God needful for all/ and that the# state it to

consist in exactl# ,hat ,e said/ na&el#/ that God is supre&el# just/ andsupre&el# &erciful - in other ,ords/ the one perfect pattern of the truelife) 9: 2e &a# add that Scripture no,here gi.es an express definition of



God/ and does not point out an# other of is attributes ,hich should beapprehended sa.e these/ nor does it in set ter&s praise an# others)95 2herefore ,e &a# dra, the general conclusion that an intellectual0no,ledge of God/ ,hich ta0es cognizance of is nature in so far as itactuall# is/ and ,hich cannot b# an# &anner of li.ing be i&itated b# &an0indor follo,ed as an exa&ple/ has no bearing ,hate.er on true rules of conduct/

on faith/ or on re.ealed religionR conseuentl# that &en &a# be in co&pleteerror on the subject ,ithout incurring the charge of sinfulness) 98 2eneed no, no longer ,onder that God adapted i&self to the existing opinionsand i&aginations of the prophets/ or that the faithful held different ideasof God/ as ,e sho,ed in hap) II)R or/ again/ that the sacred boo0s spea0.er# inaccuratel# of God/ attributing to i& hands/ feet/ e#es/ ears/ a&ind/ and &otion fro& one place to anotherR or that the# ascribe to i&e&otions/ such as jealous#/ &erc#/ Yc)/ or/ lastl#/ that the# describei& as a 7udge in hea.en sitting on a ro#al throne ,ith hrist on isright hand) 9 Such expressions are adapted to the understanding of the&ultitude/ it being the object of the Bible to &a0e &en not learned butobedient)

99 In spite of this the general run of theologians/ ,hen the# co&e uponan# of these phrases ,hich the# cannot rationall# har&onize ,ith the 3i.inenature/ &aintain that the# should be interpreted &etaphoricall#/ passagesthe# cannot understand the# sa# should be interpreted literall#) 9J But if e.er# expression of this 0ind in the Bible is necessaril# to be interpretedand understood &etaphoricall#/ Scripture &ust ha.e been ,ritten/ not for thepeople and the unlearned &asses/ but chiefl# for acco&plished experts andphilosophers)

9D If it ,ere indeed a sin to hold piousl# and si&pl# the ideas about God,e ha.e just uoted/ the prophets ought to ha.e been strictl# on their guard

against the use of such expressions/ seeing the ,ea0-&indedness of thepeople/ and ought/ on the other hand/ to ha.e set forth first of all/ dul#and clearl#/ those attributes of God ,hich are needful to be understood)

96 This the# ha.e no,here doneR ,e cannot/ therefore/ thin0 that opinionsta0en in the&sel.es ,ithout respect to actions are either pious or i&pious/but &ust &aintain that a &an is pious or i&pious in his beliefs onl# in sofar as he is thereb# incited to obedience/ or deri.es fro& the& licenseto sin and rebel) 9 If a &an/ b# belie.ing ,hat is true/ beco&esrebellious/ his creed is i&piousR if b# belie.ing ,hat is false he beco&esobedient/ his creed is piousR for the true 0no,ledge of God co&es not b#co&&and&ent/ but b# 3i.ine gift) 9" God has reuired nothing fro& &an but

a 0no,ledge of is 3i.ine justice and charit#/ and that not as necessar# toscientific accurac#/ but to obedience)

APTE( OI - 3E4I;ITI%;S %4 4AIT/ TE 4AIT/ A;3 TE 4%<;3ATI%;S %4 4AIT/ 2I IS %;E 4%( A== SEPA(ATE3 4(%+ PI=%S%P>)

5 4or a true 0no,ledge of faith it is abo.e all things necessar# tounderstand that the Bible ,as adapted to the intelligence/ not onl# of theprophets/ but also of the di.erse and fic0le 7e,ish &ultitude) 8 This ,ill

be recognized b# all ,ho gi.e an# thought to the subject/ for the# ,ill seethat a person ,ho accepted pro&iscuousl# e.er#thing in Scripture as beingthe uni.ersal and absolute teaching of God/ ,ithout accuratel# defining ,hat



,as adapted to the popular intelligence/ ,ould find it i&possible to escapeconfounding the opinions of the &asses ,ith the 3i.ine doctrines/ praisingthe judg&ents and co&&ents of &an as the teaching of God/ and&a0ing a ,rong use of Scriptural authorit#) 2ho/ I sa#/ does notpercei.e that this is the chief reason ,h# so &an# sectaries teachcontradictor# opinions as 3i.ine docu&ents/ and support their contentions

,ith nu&erous Scriptural texts/ till it has passed in Belgiu& into apro.erb/ geen 0etter sonder letter - no heretic ,ithout a text 9 Thesacred boo0s ,ere not ,ritten b# one &an/ nor for the people of a singleperiod/ but b# &an# authors of different te&pera&ents/ at ti&es extendingfro& first to last o.er nearl# t,o thousand #ears/ and perhaps &uch longer)J 2e ,ill not/ ho,e.er/ accuse the sectaries of i&piet# because the# ha.eadapted the ,ords of Scripture to their o,n opinionsR it is thus that these,ords ,ere adapted to the understanding of the &asses originall#/ ande.er#one is at libert# so to treat the& if he sees that he can thus obe# Godin &atters relating to justice and charit# ,ith a &ore full consent@ but,e do accuse those ,ho ,ill not grant this freedo& to their fello,s/but ,ho persecute all ,ho differ fro& the&/ as GodQs ene&ies/ ho,e.er

honourable and .irtuous be their li.esR ,hile/ on the other hand/ the#cherish those ,ho agree ,ith the&/ ho,e.er foolish the# &a# be/ as GodQselect) D Such conduct is as ,ic0ed and dangerous to the state as an# thatcan be concei.ed)

6 In order/ therefore/ to establish the li&its to ,hich indi.idual freedo&should extend/ and to decide ,hat persons/ in spite of the di.ersit# of their opinions/ are to be loo0ed upon as the faithful/ ,e &ust define faithand its essentials) This tas0 I hope to acco&plish in the presentchapter/ and also to separate faith fro& philosoph#/ ,hich is the chief ai&of the ,hole treatise)

" In order to proceed dul# to the de&onstration let us recapitulate thechief ai& and object of ScriptureR this ,ill indicate a standard b# ,hich ,e&a# define faith)

5: 2e ha.e said in a for&er chapter that the ai& and object of Scriptureis onl# to teach obedience) 55 Thus &uch/ I thin0/ no one can uestion)58 2ho does not see that both Testa&ents are nothing else but schools for this object/ and ha.e neither of the& an# ai& be#ond inspiring &an0ind ,itha .oluntar# obedience 5 4or not to repeat ,hat I said in the lastchapter I ,ill re&ar0 that +oses did not see0 to con.ince the 7e,s b#reason/ but bound the& b# a co.enant/ b# oaths/ and b# conferring benefitsRfurther/ he threatened the people ,ith punish&ent if the# should infringe

the la,/ and pro&ised re,ards if the# should obe# it)59 All these are not &eans for teaching 0no,ledge/ but for inspiringobedience) 5J The doctrine of the Gospels enjoins nothing but si&plefaith/ na&el#/ to belie.e in God and to honour i&/ ,hich is the sa&e thingas to obe# hi&) 5D There is no occasion for &e to thro, further light ona uestion so plain b# citing Scriptural texts co&&ending obedience/ such as&a# be found in great nu&bers in both Testa&ents) 56 +oreo.er/ the Bibleteaches .er# clearl# in a great &an# passages ,hat e.er#one ought to do inorder to obe# GodR the ,hole dut# is su&&ed up in lo.e to oneQs neighbour)5 It cannot/ therefore/ be denied that he ,ho b# GodQs co&&and lo.es hisneighbour as hi&self is trul# obedient and blessed according to the la,/,hereas he ,ho hates his neighbour or neglects hi& is rebellious and

obstinate)

5" =astl#/ it is plain to e.er#one that the Bible ,as not ,ritten and



disse&inated onl#/ for the learned/ but for &en of e.er# age and raceR,herefore ,e &a#/ rest assured that ,e are not bound b# Scriptural co&&andto belie.e an#thing be#ond ,hat is absolutel# necessar#/ for fulfilling its &ain precept)

8: This precept/ then/ is the onl# standard of the ,hole atholic faith/

and b# it alone all the dog&as needful to be belie.ed should be deter&ined)85 So &uch being abundantl# &anifest/ as is also the fact that all other doctrines of the faith can be legiti&atel# deduced therefro& b# reasonalone/ I lea.e it to e.er# &an to decide for hi&self ho, it co&es to passthat so &an# di.isions ha.e arisen in the hurch@ can it be fro& an# other cause than those suggested at the beginning of hap) III) 88 It is thesesa&e causes ,hich co&pel &e to explain the &ethod of deter&ining the dog&asof the faith fro& the foundation ,e ha.e disco.ered/ for if Ineglected to do so/ and put the uestion on a regular basis/ I &ight justl#be said to ha.e pro&ised too la.ishl#/ for that an#one &ight/ b# &# sho,ing/introduce an# doctrine he li0ed into religion/ under the pretext that it ,asa necessar# &eans to obedience@ especiall# ,ould this be the case in

uestions respecting the 3i.ine attributes)

8 In order/ therefore/ to set forth the ,hole &atter &ethodicall#/ I ,illbegin ,ith a definition of faith/ ,hich on the principle abo.e gi.en/ shouldbe as follo,s@-

89 4aith consists in a 0no,ledge of God/ ,ithout ,hich obedience to i&,ould be i&possible/ and ,hich the &ere fact of obedience to i& i&plies)8J This definition is so clear/ and follo,s so plainl# fro& ,hat ,e ha.ealread# pro.ed/ that it needs no explanation) 8D The conseuences in.ol.edtherein I ,ill no, briefl# sho,)

86 I) 4aith is not salutar# in itself/ but onl# in respect to theobedience it i&plies/ or as 7a&es puts it in his Epistle/ ii@56/ K4aith,ithout ,or0s is deadK see the ,hole of the chapter uoted)

8 II) e ,ho is trul# obedient necessaril# possesses true and sa.ingfaithR for if obedience be granted/ faith &ust be granted also/ as the sa&e Apostle expressl# sa#s in these ,ords ii@5/ KSho, &e th# faith ,ithoutth# ,or0s/ and I ,ill sho, thee &# faith b# &# ,or0s)K 8" So also7ohn/ I Ep) i.@6@ KE.er#one that lo.eth is born of God/ and 0no,ethGod@ he that lo.eth not/ 0no,eth not GodR for God is lo.e)K : 4ro& thesetexts/ I repeat/ it follo,s that ,e can onl# judge a &an faithful or unfaithful b# his ,or0s) 5 If his ,or0s be good/ he is faithful/ ho,e.er

&uch his doctrines &a# differ fro& those of the rest of the faithful@ if his,or0s be e.il/ though he &a# .erball# confor&/ he is unfaithful) 8 4or obedience i&plies faith/ and faith ,ithout ,or0s is dead)

7ohn/ in the 5th .erse of the chapter abo.e uoted/ expressl# teachesthe sa&e doctrine@ Kereb#/K he sa#s/ K0no, ,e that ,e d,ell in i& and ein us/ because e hath gi.en us of is Spirit/K i)e) lo.e) 9 e had saidbefore that God is lo.e/ and therefore he concludes on his o,n recei.edprinciples/ that ,hoso possesses lo.e possesses trul# the Spirit of God)J As no one has beheld God he infers that no one has 0no,ledge or consciousness of God/ except fro& lo.e to,ards his neighbour/ and also thatno one can ha.e 0no,ledge of an# of GodQs attributes/ except this of lo.e/

in so far as ,e participate therein)

D If these argu&ents are not conclusi.e/ the#/ at an# rate/ sho, the



ApostleQs &eaning/ but the ,ords in chap) ii@/ 9/ of the sa&e Epistle are&uch clearer/ for the# state in so &an# ,ords our precise contention@ KAndhereb# ,e do 0no, that ,e 0no, i&/ if ,e 0eep is co&&and&ents) 6 ethat saith/ I 0no, i&/ and 0eepeth not is co&&and&ents/ is a liar/ and thetruth is not in hi&)K

4ro& all this/ I repeat/ it follo,s that the# are the true ene&ies of hrist ,ho persecute honourable and justice-lo.ing &en because the# differ fro& the&/ and do not uphold the sa&e religious dog&as as the&sel.es@ for ,hosoe.er lo.es justice and charit# ,e 0no,/ b# that .er# fact/ to befaithful@ ,hosoe.er persecutes the faithful/ is an ene&# to hrist)

" =astl#/ it follo,s that faith does not de&and that dog&as should betrue as that the# should be pious - that is/ such as ,ill stir up the heartto obe#R though there be &an# such ,hich contain not a shado, of truth/ solong as the# be held in good faith/ other,ise their adherents aredisobedient/ for ho, can an#one/ desirous of lo.ing justice and obe#ing God/adore as 3i.ine ,hat he 0no,s to be alien fro& the 3i.ine nature 9:

o,e.er/ &en &a# err fro& si&plicit# of &ind/ and Scripture/ as ,eha.e seen/ does not conde&n ignorance/ but obstinac#) 95 This is thenecessar# result of our definition of faith/ and all its branchesshould spring fro& the uni.ersal rule abo.e gi.en/ and fro& the e.ident ai&and object of the Bible/ unless ,e choose to &ix our o,n in.entionsthere,ith) 98 Thus it is not true doctrines ,hich are expressl# reuiredb# the Bible/ so &uch as doctrines necessar# for obedience/ and to confir&in our hearts the lo.e of our neighbour/ ,herein to adopt the ,ords of 7ohn ,e are in God/ and God in us)

9 As/ then/ each &anQs faith &ust be judged pious or i&pious onl# inrespect of its producing obedience or obstinac#/ and not in respect of its

truthR and as no one ,ill dispute that &enQs dispositions are exceedingl#.aried/ that all do not acuiesce in the sa&e things/ but are ruledso&e b# one opinion so&e b# another/ so that ,hat &o.es one to de.otion&o.es another to laughter and conte&pt/ it follo,s that there can be nodoctrines in the atholic/ or uni.ersal/ religion/ ,hich can gi.e rise tocontro.ers# a&ong good &en) 99 Such doctrines &ight be pious to so&e andi&pious to others/ ,hereas the# should be judged solel# b# their fruits)

9J To the uni.ersal religion/ then/ belong onl# such dog&as as areabsolutel# reuired in order to attain obedience to God/ and ,ithout ,hichsuch obedience ,ould be i&possibleR as for the rest/ each &an - seeing thathe is the best judge of his o,n character should adopt ,hate.er he thin0s

best adapted to strengthen his lo.e of justice) 9D If this ,ere so/ Ithin0 there ,ould be no further occasion for contro.ersies in the hurch)

96 I ha.e no, no further fear in enu&erating the dog&as of uni.ersal faithor the funda&ental dog&as of the ,hole of Scripture/ inas&uch as the# alltend as &a# be seen fro& ,hat has been said to this one doctrine/ na&el#/that there exists a God/ that is/ a Supre&e Being/ 2ho lo.es justice andcharit#/ and 2ho &ust be obe#ed b# ,hosoe.er ,ould be sa.edR that the,orship of this Being consists in the practice of justice and lo.e to,ardsoneQs neighbour/ and that the# contain nothing be#ond the follo,ingdoctrines @-

9 I) That God or a Supre&e Being exists/ so.ereignl# just and &erciful/the Exe&plar of the true lifeR that ,hosoe.er is ignorant of or disbelie.es in is existence cannot obe# i& or 0no, i& as a 7udge)



9" II) That e is %ne) J: ;obod# ,ill dispute that this doctrine isabsolutel# necessar# for entire de.otion/ ad&iration/ and lo.e to,ards God)J5 4or de.otion/ ad&iration/ and lo.e spring fro& the superiorit# of oneo.er all else)

J8 III) That e is o&nipresent/ or that all things are open to i&/ for if an#thing could be supposed to be concealed fro& i&/ or to be unnoticed b#/i&/ ,e &ight doubt or be ignorant of the euit# of is judg&ent asdirecting all things)

J I) That e has supre&e right and do&inion o.er all things/ and that edoes nothing under co&pulsion/ but b# is absolute fiat and grace) J9 Allthings are bound to obe# i&/ e is not bound to obe# an#)

JJ ) That the ,orship of God consists onl# in justice and charit#/ or lo.e to,ards oneQs neighbour)

JD I) That all those/ and those onl#/ ,ho obe# God b# their &anner of life are sa.edR the rest of &an0ind/ ,ho li.e under the s,a# of their pleasures/ are lost) J6 If ,e did not belie.e this/ there ,ould be noreason for obe#ing God rather than pleasure)

J II) =astl#/ that God forgi.es the sins of those ,ho repent) J" ;oone is free fro& sin/ so that ,ithout this belief all ,ould despair of sal.ation/ and there ,ould be no reason for belie.ing in the &erc# of God)D: e ,ho fir&l# belie.es that God/ out of the &erc# and grace ,ith ,hiche directs all things/ forgi.es the sins of &en/ and ,ho feels his lo.e of God 0indled thereb#/ he/ I sa#/ does reall#/ 0no, hrist according to theSpirit/ and hrist is in hi&)

D5 ;o one can den# that all these doctrines are before all thingsnecessar#/ to be belie.ed/ in order that e.er# &an/ ,ithout exception/ &a#be able to obe# God according to the bidding of the =a, abo.e explained/ for if one of these precepts be disregarded obedience is destro#ed)D8 But as to ,hat God/ or the Exe&plar of the true life/ &a# be/ ,hether fire/ or spirit/ or light/ or thought/ or ,hat not/ this/ I sa#/ has nothingto do ,ith faith an# &ore than has the uestion ho, e co&es to be theExe&plar of the true life/ ,hether it be because e has a just and&erciful &ind/ or because all things exist and act through i&/ andconseuentl# that ,e understand through i&/ and through i& see ,hatis trul# just and good) D E.er#one &a# thin0 on such uestions as he

li0es/

D9 4urther&ore/ faith is not affected/ ,hether ,e hold that God iso&nipresent essentiall# or potentiall#R that e directs all things b#absolute fiat/ or b# the necessit# of is natureR that e dictates la,s li0ea prince/ or that e sets the& forth as eternal truthsR that &an obe#s i&b# .irtue of free ,ill/ or b# .irtue of the necessit# of the 3i.ine decreeRlastl#/ that the re,ard of the good and the punish&ent of the ,ic0ed isnatural or supernatural@ these and such li0e uestions ha.e no bearing onfaith/ except in so far as the# are used as &eans to gi.e us license to sin&ore/ or to obe# God less) DJ I ,ill go further/ and &aintain that e.er#&an is bound to adapt these dog&as to his o,n ,a# of thin0ing/ and to

interpret the& according as he feels that he can gi.e the& his fullest and&ost unhesitating assent/ so that he &a# the &ore easil# obe# God ,ith his,hole heart)



DD Such ,as the &anner/ as ,e ha.e alread# pointed out/ in ,hich the faith,as in old ti&e re.ealed and ,ritten/ in accordance ,ith the understandingand opinions of the prophets and people of the periodR so/ in li0e fashion/e.er# &an is bound to adapt it to his o,n opinions/ so that he &a# accept it,ithout an# hesitation or &ental repugnance) D6 2e ha.e sho,n that faith

does not so &uch re uire truth as piet#/ and that it is onl# uic0ening andpious through obedience/ conseuentl# no one is faithful sa.e b# obediencealone) D The best faith is not necessaril# possessed b# hi& ,ho displa#sthe best reasons/ but b# hi& ,ho displa#s the best fruits of justice andcharit#) D" o, salutar# and necessar# this doctrine is for a state/ inorder that &en &a# d,ell together in peace and concordR and ho, &an# and ho,great causes of disturbance and cri&e are thereb# cut off/ I lea.e e.er#oneto judge for hi&self1

6: Before ,e go further/ I &a# re&ar0 that ,e can/ b# &eans of ,hat ,eha.e just pro.ed/ easil# ans,er the objections raised in hap) I)/ ,hen ,e,ere discussing GodQs spea0ing ,ith the Israelites on +ount Sinai) 65 4or/

though the .oice heard b# the Israelites could not gi.e those &en an#philosophical or &athe&atical certitude of GodQs existence/ it ,as #etsufficient to thrill the& ,ith ad&iration for God/ as the# alread# 0ne, i&/and to stir the& up to obedience@ and such ,as the object of the displa#)68 God did not ,ish to teach the Israelites the absolute attributes of isessence none of ,hich e then re.ealed/ but to brea0 do,n their hardnessof heart/ and to dra, the& to obedience@ therefore e did not appeal to the&,ith reasons/ but ,ith the sound of tru&pets/ thunder/ and lightnings)

6 It re&ains for &e to sho, that bet,een faith or theolog#/ andphilosoph#/ there is no connection/ nor affinit#) 69 I thin0 no one ,illdispute the fact ,ho has 0no,ledge of the ai& and foundations of the t,o

subjects/ for the# are as ,ide apart as the poles)

6J Philosoph# has no end in .ie, sa.e truth@ faith/ as ,e ha.e abundantl#pro.ed/ loo0s for nothing but obedience and piet#) 6D Again/ philosoph# isbased on axio&s ,hich &ust be sought fro& nature alone@ faith is based onhistor# and language/ and &ust be sought for onl# in Scripture andre.elation/ as ,e sho,ed in hap) II) 66 4aith/ therefore/ allo,s thegreatest latitude in philosophic speculation/ allo,ing us ,ithout bla&e tothin0 ,hat ,e li0e about an#thing/ and onl# conde&ning/ as heretics andschis&atics/ those ,ho teach opinions ,hich tend to produce obstinac#/hatred/ strife/ and angerR ,hile/ on the other hand/ onl# consideringas faithful those ,ho persuade us/ as far as their reason and faculties ,ill

per&it/ to follo, justice and charit#)

6 =astl#/ as ,hat ,e are no, setting forth are the &ost i&portantsubjects of &# treatise/ I ,ould &ost urgentl# beg the reader/ before Iproceed/ to read these t,o chapters ,ith especial attention/ and to ta0e thetrouble to ,eigh the& ,ell in his &ind@ let hi& ta0e for granted that Iha.e not ,ritten ,ith a .ie, to introducing no.elties/ but in order to doa,a# ,ith abuses/ such as I hope I &a#/ at so&e future ti&e/ at last seerefor&ed)

APTE( O - TE%=%G> IS S%2; ;%T T% BE S<BSE(IE;T T% (EAS%;/ ;%( (EAS%; T% TE%=%G>@ A 3E4I;ITI%; %4 TE (EAS%; 2I



E;AB=ES <S T% AEPT TE A<T%(IT> %4 TE BIB=E)

5 Those ,ho 0no, not that philosoph# and reason are distinct/ dispute,hether Scripture should be &ade subser.ient to reason/ or reason toScripture@ that is/ ,hether the &eaning of Scripture should be &ade toagreed ,ith reasonR or ,hether reason should be &ade to agree ,ith

Scripture@ the latter position is assu&ed b# the sceptics ,ho den# thecertitude of reason/ the for&er b# the dog&atists) 8 Both parties are/ asI ha.e sho,n/ utterl# in the ,rong/ for either doctrine ,ould reuire us tota&per ,ith reason or ,ith Scripture)

2e ha.e sho,n that Scripture does not teach philosoph#/ but &erel#obedience/ and that all it contains has been adapted to the understandingand established opinions of the &ultitude) 9 Those/ therefore/ ,ho ,ish toadapt it to philosoph#/ &ust needs ascribe to the prophets &an# ideas ,hichthe# ne.er e.en drea&ed of/ and gi.e an extre&el# forced interpretation totheir ,ords@ those on the other hand/ ,ho ,ould &a0e reason and philosoph#subser.ient to theolog#/ ,ill be forced to accept as 3i.ine utterances the

prejudices of the ancient 7e,s/ and to fill and confuse their &indthere,ith) J In short/ one part# ,ill run ,ild ,ith the aid of reason/and the other ,ill run ,ild ,ithout the aid of reason)

D The first a&ong the Pharisees ,ho openl# &aintained that Scriptureshould be &ade to agree ,ith reason/ ,as +ai&onides/ ,hose opinion ,ere.ie,ed/ and abundantl# refuted in hap) III)@ no,/ although this ,riter had &uch authorit# a&ong his conte&poraries/ he ,as deserted on thisuestion b# al&ost all/ and the &ajorit# ,ent straight o.er to theopinion of a certain () 7ehuda Alpa0har/ ,ho/ in his anxiet# to a.oid theerror of +ai&onides/ fell into another/ ,hich ,as its exact contrar#) 6 eheld that reason should be &ade subser.ient/ and entirel# gi.e ,a# to

Scripture) e thought that a passage should not be interpreted&etaphoricall#/ si&pl# because it ,as repugnant to reason/ but onl# in thecases ,hen it is inconsistent ,ith Scripture itself - that is/ ,ith itsclear doctrines) " Therefore he laid do,n the uni.ersal rule/ that,hatsoe.er Scripture teaches dog&aticall#/ and affir&s expressl#/ &ust onits o,n sole authorit# be ad&itted as absolutel# true@ that there is nodoctrine in the Bible ,hich directl# contradicts the general tenour of the ,hole@ but onl# so&e ,hich appear to in.ol.e a difference/ for thephrases of Scripture often see& to i&pl# so&ething contrar# to ,hat has beenexpressl# taught) 5: Such phrases/ and such phrases onl#/ ,e &a# interpret&etaphoricall#)

55 4or instance/ Scripture clearl# teaches the unit# of God see 3eut).i@9/ nor is there an# text distinctl# asserting a pluralit# of godsR butin se.eral passages God spea0s of i&self/ and the prophets spea0 of i&/ inthe plural nu&berR such phrases are si&pl# a &anner of spea0ing/ and do not&ean that there actuall# are se.eral gods@ the# are to be explained&etaphoricall#/ not because a pluralit# of gods is repugnant to reason/ butbecause Scripture distinctl# asserts that there is onl# one)

58 So/ again/ as Scripture asserts as Alpa0har thin0s in 3eut) i.@5J/that God is incorporeal/ ,e are bound/ solel# b# the authorit# of this text/and not b# reason/ to belie.e that God has no bod#@ conseuentl# ,e &ustexplain &etaphoricall#/ on the sole authorit# of Scripture/ all those

passages ,hich attribute to God hands/ feet/ Yc)/ and ta0e the& &erel# asfigures of speech) 5 Such is the opinion of Alpa0har) In so far as hesee0s to explain Scripture b# Scripture/ I praise hi&/ but I &ar.el that a



&an gifted ,ith reason should ,ish to debase that facult#) 59 It istrue that Scripture should be explained b# Scripture/ so long as ,e are indifficulties about the &eaning and intention of the prophets/ but ,hen ,eha.e elicited the true &eaning/ ,e &ust of necessit# &a0e use of our judg&ent and reason in order to assent thereto) 5J If reason/ ho,e.er/&uch as she rebels/ is to be entirel# subjected to Scripture/ I as0/

are ,e to effect her sub&ission b# her o,n aid/ or ,ithout her/ andblindl# 5D If the latter/ ,e shall surel# act foolishl# andinjudiciousl#R if the for&er/ ,e assent to Scripture under the do&inion of reason/ and should not assent to it ,ithout her) 56 +oreo.er/ I &a# as0no,/ is a &an to assent to an#thing against his reason 5 2hat is denialif it be not reasonQs refusal to assent 5" In short/ I a& astonished thatan#one should ,ish to subject reason/ the greatest of gifts and a light fro&on high/ to the dead letter ,hich &a# ha.e been corrupted b# hu&an &aliceRthat it should be thought no cri&e to spea0 ,ith conte&pt of &ind/ the truehand,riting of GodQs 2ord/ calling it corrupt/ blind/ and lost/ ,hile it isconsidered the greatest of cri&es to sa# the sa&e of the letter/ ,hich is&erel# the reflection and i&age of GodQs 2ord) 8: +en thin0 it pious

to trust nothing to reason and their o,n judg&ent/ and i&pious to doubt thefaith of those ,ho ha.e trans&itted to us the sacred boo0s) 85 Suchconduct is not piet#/ but &ere foll#) And/ after all/ ,h# are the# soanxious 2hat are the# afraid of 88 3o the# thin0 that faith and religioncannot be upheld unless - &en purposel# 0eep the&sel.es in ignorance/ andturn their bac0s on reason 8 If this be so/ the# ha.e but a ti&id trustin Scripture)

8 o,e.er/ be it far fro& &e to sa# that religion should see0 to ensla.ereason/ or reason religion/ or that both should not be able to 0eep their so.ereignit# in perfect har&on#) 89 I ,ill re.ert to this uestionpresentl#/ for I ,ish no, to discuss Alpa0harQs rule)

8D e reuires/ as ,e ha.e stated/ that ,e should accept as true/ or reject as false/ e.er#thing asserted or denied b# Scripture/ and he further states that Scripture ne.er expressl# asserts or denies an#thing ,hichcontradicts its assertions or negations else,here) 86 The rashness of such a reuire&ent and state&ent can escape no one) 8 4or passing o.er the fact that he does not notice that Scripture consists of different boo0s/,ritten at different ti&es/ for different people/ b# different authors@ andalso that his reuire&ent is &ade on his o,n authorit# ,ithoutan# corroboration fro& reason or Scripture he ,ould be bound to sho, thatall passages ,hich are indirectl# contradictor# of the rest/ can besatisfactoril# explained &etaphoricall# through the nature of the language

and the context@ further/ that Scripture has co&e do,n to us unta&pered,ith) 8" o,e.er/ ,e ,ill go into the &atter at length)

: 4irstl#/ I as0 ,hat shall ,e do if reason pro.e recalcitrant 5Shall ,e still be bound to affir& ,hate.er Scripture affir&s/ and to den#,hate.er Scripture denies 8 Perhaps it ,ill be ans,ered that Scripturecontains nothing repugnant to reason) But I insist 1hat it expressl#affir&s and teaches that God is jealous na&el#/ in the decalogue itself/and in Exod) xxxi.@59/ and in 3eut) i.@89/ and in &an# other places/ and Iassert that such a doctrine is repugnant to reason) 9 It &ust/ I suppose/in spite of all/ be accepted as true) If there are an# passages inScripture ,hich i&pl# that God is not jealous/ the# &ust be ta0en

&etaphoricall# as &eaning nothing of the 0ind) J So/ also/ Scriptureexpressl# states Exod) xix@8:/ Yc) that God ca&e do,n to +ount Sinai/ andit attributes to i& other &o.e&ents fro& place to place/ no,here



directl# stating that God does not so &o.e) D 2herefore/ ,e &ust ta0e thepassage literall#/ and Solo&onQs ,ords I ings .iii@86/ KBut ,ill Godd,ell on the earth 6 Behold the hea.ens and earth cannot contain thee/Kinas&uch as the# do not expressl# state that God does not &o.e fro& place toplace/ but onl# i&pl# it/ &ust be explained a,a# till the# ha.e no further se&blance of den#ing loco&otion to the 3eit#) So also ,e &ust belie.e

that the s0# is the habitation and throne of God/ for Scripture expressl#sa#s soR and si&ilarl# &an# passages expressing the opinions of the prophetsor the &ultitude/ ,hich reason and philosoph#/ but not Scripture/ tell us tobe false/ &ust be ta0en as true if ,e are io follo, the guidance of our author/ for according to hi&/ reason has nothing to do ,ith the &atter) "4urther/ it is untrue that Scripture ne.er contradicts itself directl#/ butonl# b# i&plication) 9: 4or +oses sa#s/ in so &an# ,ords 3eut) i.@89/KThe =ord th# God is a consu&ing fire/K and else,here expressl# denies thatGod has an# li0eness to .isible things) 3eut) i.) 58) 95 If it bedecided that the latter passage onl# contradicts the for&er b# i&plication/and &ust be adapted thereto/ lest it see& to negati.e it/ let us grant thatGod is a fireR or rather/ lest ,e should see& to ha.e ta0en lea.e

of our senses/ let us pass the &atter o.er and ta0e another exa&ple)

98 Sa&uel expressl# denies that God e.er repents/ Kfor he is not a &anthat he should repentK I Sa&) x.@8") 9 7ere&iah/ on the other hand/asserts that God does repent/ both of the e.il and of the good ,hich e hadintended to do 7er) x.iii@-5:) 99 2hat 9J Are not these t,otexts directl# contradictor# 9D 2hich of the t,o/ then/ ,ould our author ,ant to explain &etaphoricall# 96 Both state&ents are general/ and eachis the opposite of the other - ,hat one flatl# affir&s/ the other flatl#/denies) 9 So/ b# his o,n rule/ he ,ould be obliged at once to reject the&as false/ and to accept the& as true)

9" Again/ ,hat is the point of one passage/ not being contradicted b#another directl#/ but onl# b# i&plication/ if the i&plication is clear/ andthe nature and context of the passage preclude &etaphorical interpretationJ: There are &an# such instances in the Bible/ as ,e sa, in hap) II),here ,e pointed out that the prophets held different and contradictor#opinions/ and also in haps) IO) and O)/ ,here ,e dre, attention to thecontradictions in the historical narrati.es) J5 There is no need for &e togo through the& all again/ for ,hat I ha.e said sufficientl# exposes theabsurdities ,hich ,ould follo, fro& an opinion and rule such as ,e arediscussing/ and sho,s the hastiness of its propounder)

J8 2e &a#/ therefore/ put this theor#/ as ,ell as that of +ai&onides/

entirel# out of courtR and ,e &a#/ ta0e it for indisputable that theolog# isnot bound to ser.e reason/ nor reason theolog#/ but that each has her o,ndo&ain)

J The sphere of reason is/ as ,e ha.e said/ truth and ,isdo&R the sphereof theolog#/ is piet# and obedience) J9 The po,er of reason does notextend so far as to deter&ine for us that &en &a# be blessed through si&pleobedience/ ,ithout understanding) JJ Theolog#/ tells us nothing else/enjoins on us no co&&and sa.e obedience/ and has neither the ,ill nor thepo,er to oppose reason@ she defines the dog&as of faith as ,e pointed outin the last chapter onl# in so far as the# &a# be necessar#/ for obedience/and lea.es reason to deter&ine their precise truth@ for reason is the

light of the &ind/ and ,ithout her all things are drea&s and phanto&s)

JD B# theolog#/ I here &ean/ strictl# spea0ing/ re.elation/ in so far as



it indicates the object ai&ed at b# Scripture na&el#/ the sche&e and &anner of obedience/ or the true dog&as of piet# and faith) J6 This &a# trul# becalled the 2ord of God/ ,hich does not consist in a certain nu&ber of boo0ssee hap) OII)) J Theolog# thus understood/ if ,e regard its preceptsor rules of life/ ,ill be found in accordance ,ith reasonR and/ if ,e loo0to its ai& and object/ ,ill be seen to be in no,ise repugnant thereto/

,herefore it is uni.ersal to all &en)

J" As for its bearing on Scripture/ ,e ha.e sho,n in hap) II) that the&eaning of Scripture should be gathered fro& its o,n histor#/ and not fro&the histor# of nature in general/ ,hich is the basis of philosoph#)

D: 2e ought not to be hindered if ,e find that our in.estigation of the&eaning of Scripture thus conducted sho,s us that it is here and thererepugnant to reasonR for ,hate.er ,e &a# find of this sort in the Bible/,hich &en &a# be in ignorance of/ ,ithout injur# to their charit#/ has/ ,e&a# be sure/ no bearing on theolog# or the 2ord of God/ and &a#/ therefore/,ithout bla&e/ be .ie,ed b# e.er# one as he pleases)

D5 To su& up/ ,e &a# dra, the absolute conclusion that the Bible &ust notbe acco&&odated to reason/ nor reason to the Bible)

D8 ;o,/ inas&uch as the basis of theolog# - the doctrine that &an &a# besa.ed b# obedience alone - cannot be pro.ed b# reason ,hether it be true or false/ ,e &a# be as0ed/ 2h#/ then/ should ,e belie.e it D If ,e do so,ithout the aid of reason/ ,e accept it blindl#/ and act foolishl# andinjudiciousl#R if/ on the other hand/ ,e settle that it can be pro.ed b#reason/ theolog# beco&es a part of philosoph#/ and inseparable therefro&)D9 But I &a0e ans,er that I ha.e absolutel# established that this basis of theolog# cannot be in.estigated b# the natural light of reason/ or/ at an#

rate/ that no one e.er has pro.ed it b# such &eans/ and/ therefore/re.elation ,as necessar#) DJ 2e should/ ho,e.er/ &a0e use of our reason/in order to grasp ,ith &oral certaint# ,hat is re.ealed - I sa#/ ,ith &oralcertaint#/ for ,e cannot hope to attain greater certaint#/ than theprophets@ #et their certaint# ,as onl#/ &oral/ as I sho,ed in hap) II)

DD Those/ therefore/ ,ho atte&pt to set forth the authorit# of Scripture,ith &athe&atical de&onstrations are ,holl# in error@ for the authorit#/ of the Bible is dependent on the authorit# of the prophets/ and can besupported b# no stronger argu&ents than those e&plo#ed in old ti&e b# theprophets for con.incing the people of their o,n authorit#) D6 %ur certaint# on the sa&e subject can be founded on no other basis than that

,hich ser.ed as foundation for the certaint# of the prophets)

D ;o, the certaint# of the prophets consisted as ,e pointed out in these ele&ents@-D" I) A distinct and .i.id i&agination)6: II) A sign)65 III) =astl#/ and chiefl#/ a &ind turned to ,hat is just and good) It ,as based on noother reasons than these/ and conseuentl# the# cannot pro.e their authorit# b# an# other reasons/ either to the &ultitude ,ho& the# addressed orall#/ nor to us ,ho& the# address in ,riting)

68 The first of these reasons/ na&el#/ the .i.id i&agination/ could be

.alid onl# for the prophetsR therefore/ our certaint# concerning re.elation&ust/ and ought to be/ based on the re&aining t,o - na&el#/ the sign and theteaching) 6 Such is the express doctrine of +oses/ for in 3eut) x.iii)



he bids the people obe# the prophet ,ho should gi.e a true sign in the na&eof the =ord/ but if he should predict falsel#/ e.en though it ,ere in thena&e of the =ord/ he should be put to death/ as should also he ,ho stri.esto lead a,a# the people fro& the true religion/ though he confir& hisauthorit# ,ith signs and portents) 69 2e &a# co&pare ,ith the abo.e 3eut)xiii) 6J 2hence it follo,s that a true prophet could be distinguished fro&

a false one/ both b# his doctrine and b# the &iracles he ,rought/ for +osesdeclares such an one to be a true prophet/ and bids the people trust hi&,ithout fear of deceit) 6D e conde&ns as false/ and ,orth#/ of death/those ,ho predict an#thing falsel# e.en in the na&e of the =ord/ or ,hopreach false gods/ e.en though their &iracles be real)

66 The onl# reason/ then/ ,hich ,e ha.e for belief in Scripture or the,ritings of the prophets/ is the doctrine ,e find therein/ and thesigns b# ,hich it is confir&ed) 6 4or as ,e see that the prophets extolcharit# and justice abo.e all things/ and ha.e no other object/ ,econclude that the# did not ,rite fro& un,orth# &oti.es/ but because the#reall# thought that &en &ight beco&e blessed through obedience and faith@

further/ as ,e see that the# confir&ed their teaching ,ith signs and,onders/ ,e beco&e persuaded that the# did not spea0 at rando&/ nor run riotin their prophecies) 6" 2e are further strengthened in our conclusion b#the fact that the &oralit# the# teach is in e.ident agree&ent ,ith reason/for it is no accidental coincidence that the 2ord of God ,hich ,e find inthe prophets coincides ,ith the 2ord of God ,ritten in our hearts) : 2e&a#/ I sa#/ conclude this fro& the sacred boo0s as certainl# as did the 7e,sof old fro& the li.ing .oice of the prophets@ for ,e sho,ed in hap) OII)that Scripture has co&e do,n to us intact in respect to its doctrine and&ain narrati.es)

5 Therefore this ,hole basis of theolog# and Scripture/ though it does

not ad&it of &athe&atical proof/ &a# #et be accepted ,ith the appro.al of our judg&ent) 8 It ,ould be foll# to refuse to accept ,hat is confir&edb# such a&ple prophetic testi&on#/ and ,hat has pro.ed such a co&fort tothose ,hose reason is co&parati.el# ,ea0/ and such a benefit to the stateR adoctrine/ &oreo.er/ ,hich ,e &a# belie.e in ,ithout the slightest peril or hurt/ and should reject si&pl# because it cannot be &athe&aticall# pro.ed@it is as though ,e should ad&it nothing as true/ or as a ,ise rule of life/,hich could e.er/ in an# possible ,a#/ be called in uestionR or as though&ost of our actions ,ere not full of uncertaint# and hazards)

I ad&it that those ,ho belie.e that theolog# and philosoph# are&utuall# contradictor#/ and that therefore either one or the other &ust be

thrust fro& its throne - I ad&it/ I sa#/ that such persons are notunreasonable in atte&pting to put theolog# on a fir& basis/ and tode&onstrate its truth &athe&aticall#) 9 2ho/ unless he ,ere desperate or &ad/ ,ould ,ish to bid an incontinent fare,ell to reason/ or to despise thearts and sciences/ or to den# reasonQs certitude J But/ in the&ean,hile/ ,e cannot ,holl# absol.e the& fro& bla&e/ inas&uch as the# in.o0ethe aid of reason for her o,n defeat/ and atte&pt infallibl# to pro.e her fallible) D 2hile the# are tr#ing to pro.e &athe&aticall# theauthorit# and truth of theolog#/ and to ta0e a,a# the authorit# of naturalreason/ the# are in realit# onl# bringing theolog# under reasonQs do&inion/and pro.ing that her authorit# has no ,eight unless natural reason be at thebac0 of it)

6 If the# boast that the# the&sel.es assent because of the in,ardtesti&on# of the ol# Spirit/ and that the# onl# in.o0e the aid of reason



because of unbelie.ers/ in order to con.ince the&/ not e.en so can this &eet,ith our appro.al/ for ,e can easil# sho, that the# ha.e spo0en either fro&e&otion or .ain-glor#) It &ost clearl# follo,s fro& the last chapter that the ol# Spirit onl# gi.es its testi&on# in fa.our of ,or0s/ called b#Paul in Gal) .@88 the fruits of the Spirit/ and is in itself reall#nothing but the &ental acuiescence ,hich follo,s a good action in our

souls) " ;o spirit gi.es testi&on# concerning the certitude of &atters,ithin the sphere of speculation/ sa.e onl# reason/ ,ho is &istress/ as ,eha.e sho,n/ of the ,hole real& of truth) ": If then the# assert that the#possess this Spirit ,hich &a0es the& certain of truth/ the# spea0 falsel#/and according to the prejudices of the e&otions/ or else the# are in greatdread lest the# should be .anuished b# philosophers and exposed to publicridicule/ and therefore the# flee/ as it ,ere/ to the altarR but their refuge is .ain/ for ,hat altar ,ill shelter a &an ,ho has outraged reason"5 o,e.er/ I pass such persons o.er/ for I thin0 I ha.e fulfilled &#purpose/ and sho,n ho, philosoph# should be separated fro& theolog#/ and,herein each consistsR that neither should be subser.ient to the other/ butthat each should 0eep her unopposed do&inion) "8 =astl#/ as occasion

offered/ I ha.e pointed out the absurdities/ the incon.eniences/ and thee.ils follo,ing fro& the extraordinar# confusion ,hich has hithertopre.ailed bet,een the t,o subjects/ o,ing to their not being properl#distinguished and separated) " Before I go further I ,ould expressl#state though I ha.e said it before that I consider the utilit# and theneed for ol# Scripture or (e.elation to be .er# great) "9 4or as ,ecannot percei.e b# the natural light of reason that si&ple obedience is thepath of sal.ation $Endnote 8J'/ and are taught b# re.elation onl# that it isso b# the special grace of God/ ,hich our reason cannot attain/ it follo,sthat the Bible has brought a .er# great consolation to &an0ind) "J Allare able to obe#/ ,hereas there are but .er# fe,/ co&pared ,ith theaggregate of hu&anit#/ ,ho can acuire the habit of .irtue under the unaided

guidance of reason) "D Thus if ,e had not the testi&on# of Scripture/ ,eshould doubt of the sal.ation of nearl# all &en)

End of Part - hapters OI to O)

A<T%(QS E;3;%TES T% TE TE%=%GI%-P%=ITIA= T(EATISE

APTE( OI)

Endnote 89) 5 K;o, I thin0)K 8 The translators render the WGree0X,ord KI inferK/ and assert that Paul uses it as s#non#&ous ,ith Wa Gree0,ordX) But the for&er ,ord has/ in Gree0/ the sa&e &eaning as the ebre,,ord rendered to thin0/ to estee&/ to judge) 9 And this signification,ould be in entire agree&ent ,ith the S#riac translation) J This S#riactranslation if it be a translation/ ,hich is .er# doubtful/ for ,e 0no,neither the ti&e of its appearance/ nor the translators and S#riac ,as the.ernacular of the Apostles renders the text before us in a ,a# ,ellexplained b# Tre&ellius as K,e thin0/ therefore)K

APTE( O)

Endnote 8J) 5 KThat si&ple obedience is the path of sal.ation)K 8In other ,ords/ it is enough for sal.ation or blessedness/ that ,e shoulde&brace the 3i.ine decrees as la,s or co&&andsR there is no need to concei.e



the& as eternal truths) This can be taught us b# (e.elation/ not (eason/as appears fro& the de&onstrations gi.en in hapter I)

End of Part III - hapters OI to O)

End of Part IIIThe Project Gutenberg Etext of A Theologico-Political Treatise

A Theologico-Political Treatise (Part IV)

Documents

Transcript of A Theologico-Political Treatise (Part IV)