Hobbes on religion and the church between The Elements of Law and Leviathan: A dramatic change of direction?

Journal of the History of Ideas

Volumn 63, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 577-598

  Nauta, Lodi ^a  

^a Filosofisch Instituut   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0042368974     PISSN: 00225037     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/3654161     Document Type: Article

References (112)

1. David Johnston, The Rhetoric of Leviathan: Thomas Hobbes and the Politics of Cultural Transformation (Princeton, 1986), 68.
2. Ibid., 150; cf. 137, 184 and passim.
3. Quentin Skinner, Reason and Rhetoric in the Philosophy of Hobbes (Cambridge, 1997) 347.
4. Ibid., 11 and 12.
5. Richard Tuck, introduction to his edition of Leviathan (Cambridge 1991, 1996 ), xxxviii-xxxix Cf. his Hobbes (Oxford, 1989), 86ff.; "The 'Christian Atheism' of Thomas Hobbes in Atheism from the Reformation to the Enlightenment, eds. Michael Hunter and David Wootton (Oxford 1992), 111-30; "The Civil Religion of Thomas Hobbes" in Political Discourse in Early Modern Britain, eds. N. Phillipson and Quentin Skinner (Cambridge 1993), 120-38; and his preface to De Cive, ed. and trans. as On the citizen by Richard Tuck and M. Silverthorne (Cambridge, 1998).
6. Richard Tuck, introduction to his edition of Leviathan (Cambridge 1991, 1996 ), xxxviii-xxxix Cf. his Hobbes (Oxford, 1989), 86ff.; "The 'Christian Atheism' of Thomas Hobbes in Atheism from the Reformation to the Enlightenment, eds. Michael Hunter and David Wootton (Oxford 1992), 111-30; "The Civil Religion of Thomas Hobbes" in Political Discourse in Early Modern Britain, eds. N. Phillipson and Quentin Skinner (Cambridge 1993), 120-38; and his preface to De Cive, ed. and trans. as On the citizen by Richard Tuck and M. Silverthorne (Cambridge, 1998).
7. Richard Tuck, introduction to his edition of Leviathan (Cambridge 1991, 1996 ), xxxviii-xxxix Cf. his Hobbes (Oxford, 1989), 86ff.; "The 'Christian Atheism' of Thomas Hobbes in Atheism from the Reformation to the Enlightenment, eds. Michael Hunter and David Wootton (Oxford 1992), 111-30; "The Civil Religion of Thomas Hobbes" in Political Discourse in Early Modern Britain, eds. N. Phillipson and Quentin Skinner (Cambridge 1993), 120-38; and his preface to De Cive, ed. and trans. as On the citizen by Richard Tuck and M. Silverthorne (Cambridge, 1998).
8. Richard Tuck, introduction to his edition of Leviathan (Cambridge 1991, 1996 ), xxxviii-xxxix Cf. his Hobbes (Oxford, 1989), 86ff.; "The 'Christian Atheism' of Thomas Hobbes in Atheism from the Reformation to the Enlightenment, eds. Michael Hunter and David Wootton (Oxford 1992), 111-30; "The Civil Religion of Thomas Hobbes" in Political Discourse in Early Modern Britain, eds. N. Phillipson and Quentin Skinner (Cambridge 1993), 120-38; and his preface to De Cive, ed. and trans. as On the citizen by Richard Tuck and M. Silverthorne (Cambridge, 1998).
9. Richard Tuck, introduction to his edition of Leviathan (Cambridge 1991, 1996 ), xxxviii-xxxix Cf. his Hobbes (Oxford, 1989), 86ff.; "The 'Christian Atheism' of Thomas Hobbes in Atheism from the Reformation to the Enlightenment, eds. Michael Hunter and David Wootton (Oxford 1992), 111-30; "The Civil Religion of Thomas Hobbes" in Political Discourse in Early Modern Britain, eds. N. Phillipson and Quentin Skinner (Cambridge 1993), 120-38; and his preface to De Cive, ed. and trans. as On the citizen by Richard Tuck and M. Silverthorne (Cambridge, 1998).
10. Richard Tuck, "Warrender's De Cive," Political Studies, 33 (1985), 308-15, on 313.
11. Lodi Nauta, "Hobbes the Pessimist? Continuity in Hobbes's Views on Reason and Eloquence between The Elements of Law and Leviathan," in The British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 10 (2002), 31-54.
12. "Hobbes's 'Christian Atheism,'" 125. However, Tuck also writes that "much of Leviathan was written while Hobbes was still in some sense a royalist" (preface to his ed. of Leviathan, xliii).
13. "Hobbes's 'Christian Atheism,'" 125. Cf. D. P. Gauthier, The Logic of Leviathan: The Moral and Political Theory of Thomas Hobbes (Oxford, 1969), 206: "Hobbes is best understood as a Gentile."
14. "The civil religion of Thomas Hobbes," 129.
15. Ibid., 130 (his italics).
16. Ibid., 132.
17. "Hobbes's 'Christian Atheism,'" 127.
18. Leviathan, ch. 44. I shall refer to Tuck's ed. as well as Molesworth's (London, 1839, reprint Aalen 1966), OL - Opera Latino, EW - the English Works.
19. Leviathan, ch. 44. I shall refer to Tuck's ed. as well as Molesworth's (London, 1839, reprint Aalen 1966), OL - Opera Latino, EW - the English Works.
20. Johnston, The Rhetoric of Leviathan, 143-44.
21. I have used F. Tönnies's edition (London, 1889, repr. with a new introd. by M. M. Goldsmith, London, 1969) but give also references to the Molesworth edition. For this and the following quotation see I.xi.4-5 (pp. 55-56/EW, IV, 61-62).
22. In a lost letter to Mersenne from 1640 Hobbes had already written about "de anima et Deo corporeis, de spiritu interno," and expressed his belief that there are only corporeal substances; see K. Schuhmann's reconstruction of this letter in his Hobbes: Une Chronique. Cheminement de sa pensée et de sa vie (Paris, 1998), 63.
23. II.vi.6 (p. 148/EW, IV, 175).
24. Introduction to his ed. of Leviathan, xl (my italics).
25. Leviathan, ch. 44 (p. 432/EW, III, 625).
26. E.g., Leviathan, ch. 44 (p. 433/EW, III, 627).
27. Cf. the appendix to the Latin Leviathan, OL, III, 564-65.
28. Leviathan, ch. 44 (p. 426/EW, III, 615-16).
29. Ch. 38 (pp. 306-7/EW, III, 437). Cf. ch. 46 (p. 465/EW, III, 675) on the control by the Church over their subjects.
30. II, vii, 10 (p. 167/EW, IV, 199).
31. Tuck, "The Civil Religion of Thomas Hobbes," 130. I shall put these conclusions in broader perspective at the end of this article.
32. Leviathan, ch. 43 (p. 406/EW, III, 589); ch. 32 (p. 256/EW, III, 361).
33. Johann P. Sommerville, Thomas Hobbes: Political Ideas in Historical Context (London, 1992), 111.
34. I, xi, 8 (p. 58/EW, IV, 64).
35. Leviathan, ch. 33 (p. 267/EW, III, 377-78).
36. I, xi, 9 (p. 59/EW, IV, 65); cf. the same point in Leviathan, ch. 33 (p. 267/EW, III, 378).
37. The Elements, I.xi.7 (p. 57/EW IV.63-64); the same in Leviathan, ch. 32 (pp. 257-58/EW, III, 362-63); cf. De Cive XVI.11 (ed. H. Warrender [Oxford, 1984], 240-41; transl. Tuck and Silverthorne, 194).
38. The Elements, I.xi.7 (p. 57/EW IV.63-64); the same in Leviathan, ch. 32 (pp. 257-58/EW, III, 362-63); cf. De Cive XVI.11 (ed. H. Warrender [Oxford, 1984], 240-41; transl. Tuck and Silverthorne, 194).
39. The Elements, I.xi.7 (p. 57/EW IV.63-64); the same in Leviathan, ch. 32 (pp. 257-58/EW, III, 362-63); cf. De Cive XVI.11 (ed. H. Warrender [Oxford, 1984], 240-41; transl. Tuck and Silverthorne, 194).
40. Leviathan, ch. 32 (p. 259/EW, III, 365).
41. The Elements, II.vii.11 (p. 167/EW, IV, 199). I will discuss the full implications of this passage in the next section.
42. II.vi.9 (p. 153/EW, IV, 181); the quotation from Leviathan is from ch. 44 (p. 424/EW, III, 613);
43. on the impossibility of the migration of accidents see already the first section of Hobbes's Short Tract from 1632/33 (ed. by Tönnies in his ed. of The Elements of Law, 193-97; new ed. Jean Bernhardt [Paris, 1988]).
44. Johnston, The Rhetoric of Leviathan, 131 (my italics). Cf. De Cive. XVI.1, ed. Warrender, 234; trans. Tuck and Silverthorne, 187-88. De Cive is largely ignored by Johnston.
45. Johnston, The Rhetoric of Leviathan, 131 (my italics). Cf. De Cive. XVI.1, ed. Warrender, 234; trans. Tuck and Silverthorne, 187-88. De Cive is largely ignored by Johnston.
46. Johnston, The Rhetoric of Leviathan, 131 (my italics). Cf. De Cive. XVI.1, ed. Warrender, 234; trans. Tuck and Silverthorne, 187-88. De Cive is largely ignored by Johnston.
47. Johnston, The Rhetoric of Leviathan, 131 (my italics). Cf. De Cive. XVI.1, ed. Warrender, 234; trans. Tuck and Silverthorne, 187-88. De Cive is largely ignored by Johnston.
48. Leviathan, ch. 44 (p. 419/EW, III, 605).
49. The Rhetoric of Leviathan, 144, n. 23, referring to De Cive XVII. 14.
50. XVII.28, ed. Warrender, 279, transl. Tuck and Silverthorne, 233.
51. Introduction to his ed. of Leviathan, xl.
52. II, vii, 10 (p. 167/EW, IV, 198).
53. II, vii, 9 (p. 164/EW, IV,195-96).
54. II, x, 7 (p. 187-88/EW, IV, 224-25). The next quotation is from II.x.8 (p. 189/EW, IV, 226).
55. Cf. also II, vi, 13 (p. 158/EW, IV, 187-88).
56. Johnston does not clearly see this difference; see his The Rhetoric of Leviathan, 144 n.23 and 170,
57. and compare this with, e.g., De Cive XVII (ed. Warrender, 279; transl. Tuck and Silverthorne, 233).
58. The Elements II.vii. 11 (p. 167/EW, IV, 199); Leviathan ch. 42 (p. 374/EW, III, 541). In his otherwise excellent book, Sommerville wrongly suggests that Hobbes departs from his earlier teaching on this point (Thomas Hobbes: Political Ideas in Historical Context, 121).
59. The Elements II.vii. 11 (p. 167/EW, IV, 199); Leviathan ch. 42 (p. 374/EW, III, 541). In his otherwise excellent book, Sommerville wrongly suggests that Hobbes departs from his earlier teaching on this point (Thomas Hobbes: Political Ideas in Historical Context, 121).
60. The Elements II.vii. 11 (p. 167/EW, IV, 199); Leviathan ch. 42 (p. 374/EW, III, 541). In his otherwise excellent book, Sommerville wrongly suggests that Hobbes departs from his earlier teaching on this point (Thomas Hobbes: Political Ideas in Historical Context, 121).
61. "The Civil Religion of Thomas Hobbes," 128; Leviathan, ch. 42 (p. 355-56/EW, III, 512).
62. "The Civil Religion of Thomas Hobbes," 128; Leviathan, ch. 42 (p. 355-56/EW, III, 512).
63. II, 6, 3 (p. 146/EW, IV, 172).
64. I extract these points from the excellent discussion by Sommerville, Thomas Hobbes: Political Ideas in Historical Context, 119-27.
65. De Cive, XVII.28, ed. Warrender, 279, transl. Tuck and Silverthorne, 233.
66. Ch. 42 (p. 365/EW, III, 526).
67. XVII.28, ed. Warrender, 279, transl. Tuck and Silverthorne, 233.
68. Sommerville, Thomas Hobbes: Political Ideas in Historical Context, 125.
69. Leviathan, ch. 43 (p. 415/EW, III, 602).
70. Edwin Curley, Leviathan (Indianapolis, 1994), xxxix.
71. De Cive XI.6, transl. Tuck and Silverthorne, 129.
72. The Elements II, vii, 8 (p. 164/EW, IV, 194). Cf. Leviathan, ch. 42 (365/EW, III, 526).
73. The Elements II, vii, 8 (p. 164/EW, IV, 194). Cf. Leviathan, ch. 42 (365/EW, III, 526).
74. De Cive XVII.24, ed. Warrender, 270, transl. Tuck and Silverthorne, 224.
75. XVII.24, ed. Warrender, 269, transl. Tuck and Silverthorne, 223; cf. XVII.22.
76. Patricia Springborg rightly points out that this definition of the church (ecclesia) in the New Testament era as a "quasi-parliamentary institution convened in the person of the king" is paradoxical in the light of Hobbes's claim that the mission of the church is nongovernmental ("Hobbes on Religion," in The Cambridge Companion to Hobbes, ed. T. Sorell [Cambridge, 1996], 346-80, on 359).
77. De Cive XVIII.13, ed. Warrender, 291, trans. Tuck and Silverthorne, 245.
78. Ch. 42 (378/EW, III, 546). Hence I cannot agree with Tuck who writes that it was not earlier than in Leviathan that Hobbes argued that "the sovereign had to apply to the religion of his commonwealth the same set of considerations which governed his approach to its secular affairs" (introduction to Leviathan, xl).
79. Sommerville, Thomas Hobbes: Political Ideas in Historical Context, 127 on De Cive: "its Anglicanism was skin-deep." Cf. Springborg, "Hobbes on Religion," 347: "the grand structure of his arguments [on religion] was not subject to change," though the theme of this excellent article is not the question of the (dis)continuity in Hobbes's thinking.
80. Thomas Hobbes: The Correspondence, ed. N. Malcolm (2 vols.; Oxford, 1994), i, 120 (Letter 37, dated 23 July/2 August 1641). Tuck does not refer to this letter.
81. This position is in no way undermined by the passages from Hobbes's critique of White's De mundo, which Tuck adduces as evidence of Hobbes's orthodox position at that time (early 1640s); see his "The Civil Religion of Thomas Hobbes," 125-27. He quotes, for example, from ch. 26 the words "it must not be thought that the articles of faith are [philosophical] problems; they are laws, and it is inequitable for a private individual to interpret them otherwise than as they are formulated," but does not quote the sentence that follows: "For a private person to call for a re-examination of matters that have once and for all been settled and determined by the authority of the Supreme Power is absurd and directly counter to the reasons for the Church's peace and unity" (transl. H. W. Jones [Bradford, 1976], 307). It is important to bear in mind that when Hobbes writes "Ecclesia," he means the church governed by the sovereign and entirely dependent on him. Cf. Jacquot and Jones in the introduction to their edition, Thomas Hobbes, Critique du De Mundo de Thomas White (Paris 1973), 69, referring also to Deshommeaux's reaction to De Cive: "Il veut que le souverain sacerdoce soit joint à la principauté et par conséquent autant de princes, autant de chefs de religion" (letter from 10 Sept. 1642).
82. This position is in no way undermined by the passages from Hobbes's critique of White's De mundo, which Tuck adduces as evidence of Hobbes's orthodox position at that time (early 1640s); see his "The Civil Religion of Thomas Hobbes," 125-27. He quotes, for example, from ch. 26 the words "it must not be thought that the articles of faith are [philosophical] problems; they are laws, and it is inequitable for a private individual to interpret them otherwise than as they are formulated," but does not quote the sentence that follows: "For a private person to call for a re-examination of matters that have once and for all been settled and determined by the authority of the Supreme Power is absurd and directly counter to the reasons for the Church's peace and unity" (transl. H. W. Jones [Bradford, 1976], 307). It is important to bear in mind that when Hobbes writes "Ecclesia," he means the church governed by the sovereign and entirely dependent on him. Cf. Jacquot and Jones in the introduction to their edition, Thomas Hobbes, Critique du De Mundo de Thomas White (Paris 1973), 69, referring also to Deshommeaux's reaction to De Cive: "Il veut que le souverain sacerdoce soit joint à la principauté et par conséquent autant de princes, autant de chefs de religion" (letter from 10 Sept. 1642).
83. Perez Zagorin, "Clarendon and Hobbes," Journal of Modern History, 57 (1985), 593-616.
84. Qutoed by Tuck, "Hobbes's 'Christian Atheism,'" 112. The relevant sentence, however, contains nothing that Payne could not have derived from a critical reading of De Cive or The Elements, namely "that the Civil sovereign (whether one or more) is chief pastor, and may settle what kind of Church government he shall think it fit for the people's salvation."
85. Sommerville, Thomas Hobbes: Political Ideas in Historical Context, 195 n. 22 mentions Bramhall, Roger Coke, Eachard, Tenison, and other critics who attacked both De Cive and Leviathan. Cf. Warrender (ed.), De Cive, Latin Version, 17-26.
86. Sommerville, Thomas Hobbes: Political Ideas in Historical Context, 195 n. 22 mentions Bramhall, Roger Coke, Eachard, Tenison, and other critics who attacked both De Cive and Leviathan. Cf. Warrender (ed.), De Cive, Latin Version, 17-26.
87. Life of Bishop Ward (1697), 118,
88. quoted by Warrender, ed. De Cive, Latin Version, 30.
89. Preface to On the Citizen, xxxiii; italics by Tuck.
90. "The civil religion of Thomas Hobbes," 132 for this and the following quotations. This interpretation recurs in other places, e.g., the preface to his ed. of Leviathan, xl-xli.
91. Ch. 6 (p. 46/EW, III, 51).
92. Cf. The Elements I, xv, 13 (p. 79/EW, IV, 92-93).
93. Tuck, "The Civil Religion of Thomas Hobbes," 135 and the preface to his ed. of Leviathan, xliii.
94. T. Sorell, "Descartes, Hobbes, and the Body of Natural Science," The Monist, 71 (1988), 521-23; Perez Zagorin, "Hobbes's Early Philosophical Development," JHI, 54 (1993), 505-18, and "Hobbes without Grotius," History of Political Thought, 21 (2000), 16-40;
95. T. Sorell, "Descartes, Hobbes, and the Body of Natural Science," The Monist, 71 (1988), 521-23; Perez Zagorin, "Hobbes's Early Philosophical Development," JHI, 54 (1993), 505-18, and "Hobbes without Grotius," History of Political Thought, 21 (2000), 16-40;
96. T. Sorell, "Descartes, Hobbes, and the Body of Natural Science," The Monist, 71 (1988), 521-23; Perez Zagorin, "Hobbes's Early Philosophical Development," JHI, 54 (1993), 505-18, and "Hobbes without Grotius," History of Political Thought, 21 (2000), 16-40;
97. Quentin Skinner, Reason and Rhetoric in the Philosophy of Hobbes (Cambridge, 1997), 9, 299.
98. Tuck's reconstruction of Hobbes's early development hinges on his rejection of Hobbes's authorship of A Short Tract from about 1630 - a rejection which cannot be upheld in the light of Hobbes scholarship on this text.
99. See esp. K. Schuhmann, "Le Short Tract, première oeuvre philosophique de Hobbes," Hobbes Studies, 8 (1995), 3-36.
100. "The Civil Religion of Thomas Hobbes," 131.
101. Ch. 38 (p. 315/EW, III, 450-51).
102. "The Civil Religion of Thomas Hobbes," 132.
103. Leviathan, ch. 44 (p. 419/EW, III, 605).
104. II.vii. 10 (167/EW, IV, 199).
105. Ch. 47 (p. 476/EW, III, 691).
106. Leviathan, A Review, and Conclusion (p. 489-90/EW, III, 711); cf. Hobbes, Six Lessons to the Professors of Mathematics (1656), EW, VII, 336-37, and the appendix to the Latin Leviathan, OL, III, 560.
107. Leviathan, A Review, and Conclusion (p. 489-90/EW, III, 711); cf. Hobbes, Six Lessons to the Professors of Mathematics (1656), EW, VII, 336-37, and the appendix to the Latin Leviathan, OL, III, 560.
108. George Wright, "Hobbes and the Economic Trinity," British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 7 (1999), 397-428, on 414, in an otherwise illuminating and interesting article. I would also question the description that Hobbes's examination of the Economic Trinity "issues in the detailed refutation of Cardinal Bellarmine's assertions ..." (414, my italics). Hobbes had already criticized
109. Bellarmine in The Elements without Trinitarian considerations.
110. Cf. De Cive, XVII, 24 on the working of the Holy Spirit in the Apostles, again without Trinitarian considerations.
111. Ch. 42 (p. 339/EW, III, 486-87).
112. I am grateful to Karl Schuhmann, John North and two anonymous readers for their criticisms of an earlier draft of this article.