The English works of Thomas Hobbes of Malmesbury, Volume 03 (of 11)
Thomas Hobbes · en
But what, may some object, if a king, or a senate, or other sovereign
person forbid us to believe in Christ? To this I answer, that such
forbidding is of no effect; because belief and unbelief never follow
men’s commands. Faith is a gift of God, which man can neither give, nor
take away by promise of rewards, or menaces of torture. And if it be
further asked, what if we be commanded by our lawful prince to say with
our tongue, we believe not; must we obey such command? Profession with
the tongue is but an external thing, and no more than any other gesture
whereby we signify our obedience; and wherein a Christian, holding
firmly in his heart the faith of Christ, hath the same liberty which the
prophet Elisha allowed to Naaman the Syrian. Naaman was converted in his
heart to the God of Israel; for he saith (_2 Kings_ v. 17, 18) _Thy
servant will henceforth offer neither burnt offering nor sacrifice unto
other gods, but unto the Lord. In this thing the Lord pardon thy
servant, that when my master goeth into the house of Rimmon to worship
there, and he leaneth on my hand, and I bow myself in the house of
Rimmon: when I bow down myself in the house of Rimmon, the Lord pardon
thy servant in this thing._ This the prophet approved, and bid him _Go
in peace_. Here Naaman believed in his heart; but by bowing before the
idol Rimmon, he denied the true God in effect, as much as if he had done
it with his lips. But then what shall we answer to our Saviour’s saying,
(_Matth._ x. 33) _Whosoever denieth me before men, I will deny him
before my Father which is in heaven_. This we may say, that whatsoever a
subject, as Naaman was, is compelled to do in obedience to his
sovereign, and doth it not in order to his own mind, but in order to the
laws of his country, that action is not his, but his sovereign’s; nor is
it he that in this case denieth Christ before men, but his governor, and
the law of his country. If any man shall accuse this doctrine, as
repugnant to true and unfeigned Christianity; I ask him, in case there
should be a subject in any Christian commonwealth, that should be
inwardly in his heart of the Mahomedan religion, whether if his
sovereign command him to be present at the divine service of the
Christian church, and that on pain of death, he think that Mahomedan
obliged in conscience to suffer death for that cause, rather than obey
that command of his lawful prince. If he say, he ought rather to suffer
death, then he authorizeth all private men to disobey their princes in
maintenance of their religion, true or false: if he say, he ought to be
obedient, then he alloweth to himself that which he denieth to another,
contrary to the words of our Saviour, (_Luke_ vi. 31) _Whatsoever you
would that men should do unto you, that do ye unto them_; and contrary
to the law of nature, which is the indubitable everlasting law of God,
_Do not to another, that which thou wouldest not he should do unto
thee_.
[Sidenote: Of martyrs.]