The English works of Thomas Hobbes of Malmesbury, Volume 02 (of 11) — Thomas Hobbes — John Shaqi
The English works of Thomas Hobbes of Malmesbury, Volume 02 (of 11)
Thomas Hobbes · en
28. Now because there are two kinds of controversies: the one about
spiritual matters, that is to say, questions of faith, the truth
whereof cannot be searched into by natural reason; such are the
questions concerning _the nature and office of Christ_, _of rewards
and punishments to come_, _of the sacraments_, _of outward worship_,
and the like: the other, about questions of human science, whose
truth is sought out by natural reason and syllogisms, drawn from the
covenants of men, and definitions, that is to say, significations
received by use and common consent of words; such as are all
questions of right and philosophy; for example, when in matter of
right it is questioned, whether there be _a promise_ and _covenant_,
or not, that is nothing else but to demand whether such words,
spoken in such a manner, be by common use and consent of the
subjects _a promise_ or _covenant_; which if they be so called, then
it is true that a contract is made; if not, then it is false: that
truth therefore depends on the compacts and consents of men. In like
manner, when it is demanded in philosophy, whether the same thing
may entirely be in divers places at once; the determination of the
question depends on the knowledge of the common consent of men,
about the signification of the word _entire_. For if men, when they
say a thing is entirely somewhere, do signify by common consent that
they understand nothing of the same to be elsewhere; it is false
that the same thing is in divers places at once. That truth
therefore depends on the consents of men, and by the same reason, in
all other questions concerning _right_ and _philosophy_. And they
who do judge that anything can be determined, contrary to this
common consent of men concerning the appellations of things, out of
obscure places of Scripture; do also judge that the use of speech,
and at once all human society, is to be taken away. For he who hath
sold a whole field, will say he meant one whole ridge; and will
retain the rest as unsold. Nay, they take away reason itself; which
is nothing else but a searching out of the truth made by such
consent. This kind of questions, therefore, need not be determined
by the city by way of interpretation of Scriptures; for they belong
not to God’s _Word_, in that sense wherein _the Word of God_ is
taken for the _Word concerning God_; that is to say, for the
_doctrine of the gospel_. Neither is he who hath the sovereign power
in the Church, obliged to employ any _ecclesiastical doctors_ for
the judging of any such kind of matters as these. But for the
deciding of questions of faith, that is to say, _concerning God_,
which transcend human capacity, we stand in need of a divine
blessing, (that we may not be deceived at least in necessary
points), to be derived from Christ himself by the imposition of
hands. For, seeing to the end we may attain to eternal salvation we
are obliged to a supernatural doctrine, and which therefore it is