a theologico-political treatise [part iv]-第11章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！




in　the　settlement　made　by　them　at　the　time　of　the　Earl　of　Leicester's



mission：　they　always　reserved　for　themselves　the　authority　to　keep　the



counts　up　to　their　duties；　and　the　power　to　preserve　this　authority



and　the　liberty　of　the　citizens。　（72）　They　had　ample　means　of　vindicating



their　rights　if　their　rulers　should　prove　tyrannical；　and　could　impose



such　restraints　that　nothing　could　be　done　without　their　consent　and



approval。







（18：73）　Thus　the　rights　of　sovereign　power　have　always　been　vested　in　the



States；　though　the　last　count　endeavoured　to　usurp　them。　（74）　It　is



therefore　little　likely　that　the　States　should　give　them　up；　especially　as



they　have　just　restored　their　original　dominion；　lately　almost　lost。







（18：75）　These　examples；　then；　confirm　us　in　our　belief；　that　every　dominion



should　retain　its　original　form；　and；　indeed；　cannot　change　it　without



danger　of　the　utter　ruin　of　the　whole　state。　（76）　Such　are　the　points　I　have



here　thought　worthy　of　remark。



















＇19：0＇　CHAPTER　XIX　…　IT　IS　SHOWN　THAT　THE　RIGHT　OVER　MATTERS



　　SPIRITUAL　LIES　WHOLLY　WITH　THE　SOVEREIGN；　AND　THAT



　　THE　OUTWARD　FORMS　OF　RELIGION　SHOULD　BE　IN　ACCORDANCE



　　WITH　PUBLIC　PEACE；　IF　WE　WOULD　OBEY　GOD　ARIGHT。







（1）　When　I　said　that　the　possessors　of　sovereign　power　have　rights　over



everything；　and　that　all　rights　are　dependent　on　their　decree；　I　did　not



merely　mean　temporal　rights；　but　also　spiritual　rights；　of　the　latter；　no



less　than　the　former；　they　ought　to　be　the　interpreters　and　the



champions。　（2）　I　wish　to　draw　special　attention　to　this　point；　and　to



discuss　it　fully　in　this　chapter；　because　many　persons　deny　that　the　right



of　deciding　religious　questions　belongs　to　the　sovereign　power；　and　refuse



to　acknowledge　it　as　the　interpreter　of　Divine　right。　（3）　They



accordingly　assume　full　licence　to　accuse　and　arraign　it；　nay；　even　to



excommunicate　it　from　the　Church；　as　Ambrosius　treated　the　Emperor



Theodosius　in　old　time。　（4）　However；　I　will　show　later　on　in　this　chapter



that　they　take　this　means　of　dividing　the　government；　and　paving　the



way　to　their　own　ascendancy。　（5）　I　wish；　however；　first　to　point　out　that



religion　acquires　its　force　as　law　solely　from　the　decrees　of　the　sovereign。



（6）　God　has　no　special　kingdom　among　men　except　in　so　far　as　He　reigns



through　temporal　rulers。　＇19：1＇　（7）　Moreover；　the　rites　of　religion　and　the



outward　observances　of　piety　should　be　in　accordance　with　the　public　peace



and　well…being；　and　should　therefore　be　determined　by　the　sovereign　power



alone。　（8）　I　speak　here　only　of　the　outward　observances　of　piety　and　the



external　rites　of　religion；　not　of　piety；　itself；　nor　of　the　inward　worship



of　God；　nor　the　means　by　which　the　mind　is　inwardly　led　to　do　homage　to　God



in　singleness　of　heart。







（19：9）　Inward　worship　of　God　and　piety　in　itself　are　within　the　sphere　of



everyone's　private　rights；　and　cannot　be　alienated　（as　I　showed　at　the　end



of　Chapter　VII。）。　（10）　What　I　here　mean　by　the　kingdom　of　God　is；　I



think；　sufficiently　clear　from　what　has　been　said　in　Chapter　XIV。



（11）　I　there　showed　that　a　man　best　fulfils　Gods　law　who　worships　Him；



according　to　His　command；　through　acts　of　justice　and　charity；　it　follows；



therefore；　that　wherever　justice　and　charity　have　the　force　of　law　and



ordinance；　there　is　God's　kingdom。







（19：12）　I　recognize　no　difference　between　the　cases　where　God　teaches　and



commands　the　practice　of　justice　and　charity　through　our　natural　faculties；



and　those　where　He　makes　special　revelations；　nor　is　the　form　of　the



revelation　of　importance　so　long　as　such　practice　is　revealed　and　becomes　a



sovereign　and　supreme　law　to　men。　（13）　If；　therefore；　I　show　that　justice



and　charity　can　only　acquire　the　force　of　right　and　law　through　the　rights



of　rulers；　I　shall　be　able　readily　to　arrive　at　the　conclusion　（seeing　that



the　rights　of　rulers　are　in　the　possession　of　the　sovereign）；　that　religion



can　only　acquire　the　force　of　right　by　means　of　those　who　have　the　right　to



command；　and　that　God　only　rules　among　men　through　the　instrumentality　of



earthly　potentates。　（14）　It　follows　from　what　has　been　said；　that　the



practice　of　justice　and　charity　only　acquires　the　force　of　law　through　the



rights　of　the　sovereign　authority；　for　we　showed　in　Chapter　XVI。　that　in　the



state　of　nature　reason　has　no　more　rights　than　desire；　but　that　men　living



either　by　the　laws　of　the　former　or　the　laws　of　the　latter；　possess　rights



co…extensive　with　their　powers。







（19：15）　For　this　reason　we　could　not　conceive　sin　to　exist　in　the　state　of



nature；　nor　imagine　God　as　a　judge　punishing　man's　transgressions；　but　we



supposed　all　things　to　happen　according　to　the　general　laws　of　universal



nature；　there　being　no　difference　between　pious　and　impious；　between　him



that　was　pure　（as　Solomon　says）　and　him　that　was　impure；　because　there　was



no　possibility　either　of　justice　or　charity。







＇19：2＇　（16）　In　order　that　the　true　doctrines　of　reason；　that　is　（as　we



showed　in　Chapter　IV。）；　the　true　Divine　doctrines　might　obtain　absolutely



the　force　of　law　and　right；　it　was　necessary　that　each　individual　should



cede　his　natural　right；　and　transfer　it　either　to　society　as　a　whole；　or　to



a　certain　body　of　men；　or　to　one　man。　（17）　Then；　and　not　till　then；



does　it　first　dawn　upon　us　what　is　justice　and　what　is　injustice；



what　is　equity　and　what　is　iniquity。







（19：18）　Justice；　therefore；　and　absolutely　all　the　precepts　of　reason；



including　love　towards　one's　neighbour；　receive　the　force　of　laws　and



ordinances　solely　through　the　rights　of　dominion；　that　is　（as　we　showed　in



the　same　chapter）　solely　on　the　decree　of　those　who　possess　the　right　to



rule。　（19）　Inasmuch　as　the　kingdom　of　God　consists　entirely　in　rights



applied　to　justice　and　charity　or　to　true　religion；　it　follows　that　（as　we



asserted）　the　kingdom　of　God　can　only　exist　among　men　through　the　means　of



the　sovereign　powers；　nor　does　it　make　any　difference　whether　religion　be



apprehended　by　our　natural　faculties　or　by　revelation：　the　argument　is　sound



in　both　cases；　inasmuch　as　religion　is　one　and　the　same；　and　is　equally



revealed　by　God；　whatever　be　the　manner　in　which　it　becomes　known　to　men。







（19：20）　Thus；　in　order　that　the　religion　revealed　by　the　prophets　might　have



the　force　of　law　among　the　Jews；　it　was　necessary　that　every　man　of　them



should　yield　up　his　natural　right；　and　that　all　should；　with　one　accord；



agree　that　they　would　only　obey　such　commands　as　God　should



reveal　to　them　through　the　prophets。　（21）　Just　as　we　have　shown　to　take



place　in　a　democracy；　where　men　with　one　consent　agree　to　live　according　to



the　dictates　of　reason。　（22）　Although　the　Hebrews　furthermore　transferred



their　right　to　God；　they　were　able　to　do　so　rather　in　theory　than　in



practice；　for；　as　a　matter　of　fact　（as　we　pointed　out　above）　they



absolutely　retained　the　right　of　dominion　till　they　transferred　it　to　Moses；



who　in　his　turn　became　absolute　king；　so　that　it　was　only　through　him　that



God　reigned　over　the　Hebrews。　（23）　For　this　reason　（namely；　that　religion



only　acquires　the　force　of　law　by　means　of　the　sovereign　power）　Moses　was



not　able　to　punish　those　who；　before　the　covenant；　and　consequently　while



still　in　possession　of　their　rights；　violated　the　Sabbath　（Exod。　xvi：27）；



but　was　able　to　do　so　after　the　covenant　（Numb。　xv：36）；　because　everyone　had



then　yielded　up　his　natural　rights；　and　the　ordinance　of　the



Sabbath　had　received　the　force　of　law。







（19：24）　Lastly；　for　the　same　reason；　after　the　destruction　of　the　Hebrew



dominion；　revealed　religion　ceased　to　have　the　force　of　law；　for　we　cannot



doubt　that　as　soon　as　the　Jews　transferred　their　right　to　the　king　of



Babylon；　the　kingdom　of　God　and　the　Divine　right　forthwith　ceased。　（25）



For　the　covenant　wherewith　they　promised　to　obey　all　the　utterances　of　God



was　abrogated；　God's　kingdom；　which　was　based　thereupon；　also　ceased。　（26）



The　Hebrews　could　no　longer　abide　thereby；　inasmuch　as　their　rights　no



longer　belonged　to　them　but　to　the　king　of　Babylon；　whom　（as　we　showed　in



Chapter　XVI。）　they　were　bound　to　obey　in　all　things。　（27）　Jeremiah　（chap。



xxix：7）　expressly　admonishes　them　of　this　fact：　〃And　seek　the　peace　of　the



city；　whither　I　have　caused　you　to　be　carried　away　captives；　and　pray　unto



the　Lord　for　it；　for　in　the　peace　thereof　shall　ye　have　peace。〃　（28）　Now；



they　could　not　seek　the　peace　of　the　City　as　having　a　share　in　its



government；　but　only　as　slaves；　being；　as　they　were；　captives；　by



obedience　in　all　things；　with　a　view　to　avoiding　seditions；　and　by　observing



all　the　laws　of　the　country；　however　different　from　their　own。　（29）　It　is



thus　abundantly　evident　that　religion　among　the　Hebrews　only　acquired　the



form　of　law　through　the　right　of　the　sovereign　rule；　when　that　rule　was



destroyed；　it　could　no　longer　be　received　as　the　law　of　a　particular



kingdom；　but　only　as　the　universal　precept　of　reason。　（30）　I　say　of　reason；



for　the　universal　religion　had　not　yet　become　known　by　revelation。　（31）　We



may　therefore　draw　the　general　conclusion　that　religion；　whether　revealed



through　our　natural　faculties　or　through　prophets；　receives　the　force　of　a



command　solely　through　the　decrees　of　the　holders　of　sovereign　power；　and；



further；　that　God　has　no　special　kingdom　among　men；　except　in　so　far　as　He



reigns　through　earthly　potentates。







（19：32）　We　may　now　see　in　a　clearer　light　what　was　stated　in　Chapter　IV。；



namely；　that　all　the　decrees　of　God　involve　eternal　truth　and　necessity；　so



that　we　cannot　conceive　God　as　a　prince　or　legislator　giving　laws　to



mankind。　（33）　For　this　reason　the　Divine　precepts；　whether　revealed　through



our　natural　faculties；　or　through　prophets；　do　not　receive　immediately　from



God　the　force　of　a　command；　but　only　from　those；　or　through　the　mediation　of



those；　who　possess　the　right　of　ruling　and　legislating。　（34）　It　is　only



through　these　latter　means　that　God　rules　among　men；　and　directs　human



affairs　with　justice　and　equity。







（19：35）　This　conclusion　is　supported　by　experience；　for　we　find　traces　of



Divine　justice　only　in　places　where　just　men　bear　sway；　elsewhere　the　same



lot　（to　repeat；　again　Solomon's　words）　befalls　the　just　and　the　unjust；　the



pure　and　the　impure：　a　state　of　things　which　causes　Divine　Providence　to　be



doubted　by　many　who　think　that　God　immediately　reigns　among　men；　and



directs　all　nature　for　their　benefit。







＇19：3＇　（36）　As；　then；　both　reason　and　experience　tell　us　that　the　Divine



right　is　entirely　dependent　on　the　decrees　of　secular　rulers；　it　follows



that　secular　rulers　are　its　proper　interpreters。　（37）　How　this　is　so　we



shall　now　see；