a theologico-political treatise [part iv]-第14部分

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！




of　such　authority；　is　aiming　（as　we　have　said）；　at　gaining　dominion　for



himself。　（71）　What　is　left　for　the　sovereign　power　to　decide　on；　if　this



right　be　denied　him？　（72）　Certainly　nothing　concerning　either　war　or



peace；　if　he　has　to　ask　another　man's　opinion　as　to　whether　what　he



believes　to　be　beneficial　would　be　pious　or　impious。　（73）　Everything　would



depend　on　the　verdict　of　him　who　had　the　right　of　deciding　and　judging　what



was　pious　or　impious；　right　or　wrong。







（19：74）　When　such　a　right　was　bestowed　on　the　Pope　of　Rome　absolutely；　he



gradually　acquired　complete　control　over　the　kings；　till　at　last　he　himself



mounted　to　the　summits　of　dominion；　however　much　monarchs；　and　especially



the　German　emperors；　strove　to　curtail　his　authority；　were　it　only　by　a



hairsbreadth；　they　effected　nothing；　but　on　the　contrary　by　their　very



endeavours　largely　increased　it。　（75）　That　which　no　monarch　could　accomplish



with　fire　and　sword；　ecclesiastics　could　bring　about　with　a　stroke　of　the



pen；　whereby　we　may　easily　see　the　force　and　power　at　the　command　of　the



Church；　and　also　how　necessary　it　is　for　sovereigns　to　reserve　such



prerogatives　for　themselves。







（19：76）　If　we　reflect　on　what　was　said　in　the　last　chapter　we　shall　see　that



such　reservation　conduced　not　a　little　to　the　increase　of　religion　and



piety；　for　we　observed　that　the　prophets　themselves；　though　gifted　with



Divine　efficacy；　being　merely　private　citizens；　rather　irritated　than



reformed　the　people　by　their　freedom　of　warning；　reproof；　and　denunciation；



whereas　the　kings　by　warnings　and　punishments　easily　bent　men　to　their　will。



（77）　Furthermore；　the　kings　themselves；　not　possessing　the　right　in　question



absolutely；　very　often　fell　away　from　religion　and　took　with　them　nearly　the



whole　people。　（78）　The　same　thing　has　often　happened　from　the　same　cause　in



Christian　states。







（19：79）　Perhaps　I　shall　be　asked；　〃But　if　the　holders　of　sovereign　power



choose　to　be　wicked；　who　will　be　the　rightful　champion　of　piety？　（80）　Should



the　sovereigns　still　be　its　interpreters？　〃I　meet　them　with　the　counter…



question；　〃But　if　ecclesiastics　（who　are　also　human；　and　private　citizens；



and　who　ought　to　mind　only　their　own　affairs）；　or　if　others　whom　it　is



proposed　to　entrust　with　spiritual　authority；　choose　to　be　wicked；　should



they　still　be　considered　as　piety's　rightful　interpreters？〃　（81）　It　is　quite



certain　that　when　sovereigns　wish　to　follow　their　own　pleasure；　whether　they



have　control　over　spiritual　matters　or　not；　the　whole　state；　spiritual



and　secular；　will　go　to　ruin；　and　it　will　go　much　faster　if　private



citizens　seditiously　assume　the　championship　of　the　Divine　rights。







（19：82）　Thus　we　see　that　not　only　is　nothing　gained　by　denying　such　rights



to　sovereigns；　but　on　the　contrary；　great　evil　ensues。　（83）　For　（as　happened



with　the　Jewish　kings　who　did　not　possess　such　rights　absolutely）　rulers　are



thus　driven　into　wickedness；　and　the　injury　and　loss　to　the　state　become



certain　and　inevitable；　instead　of　uncertain　and　possible。　（84）　Whether　we



look　to　the　abstract　truth；　or　the　security　of　states；　or　the　increase　of



piety；　we　are　compelled　to　maintain　that　the　Divine　right；　or　the　right　of



control　over　spiritual　matters；　depends　absolutely　on　the　decree　of　the



sovereign；　who　is　its　legitimate　interpreter　and　champion。　（85）　Therefore



the　true　ministers　of　God's　word　are　those　who　teach　piety　to　the　people　in



obedience　to　the　authority　of　the　sovereign　rulers　by　whose　decree　it　has



been　brought　into　conformity　with　the　public　welfare。







＇19：5＇　（86）　There　remains　for　me　to　point　out　the　cause　for　the　frequent



disputes　on　the　subject　of　these　spiritual　rights　in　Christian　states；



whereas　the　Hebrews；　so　far　as　I　know；　never；　had　any　doubts　about　the



matter。　（87）　It　seems　monstrous　that　a　question　so　plain　and　vitally



important　should　thus　have　remained　undecided；　and　that　the　secular　rulers



could　never　obtain　the　prerogative　without　controversy；　nay；　nor　without



great　danger　of　sedition　and　injury　to　religion。　（88）　If　no　cause　for　this



state　of　things　were　forthcoming；　I　could　easily　persuade　myself　that　all　I



have　said　in　this　chapter　is　mere　theorizing；　or　akind　of　speculative



reasoning　which　can　never　be　of　any　practical　use。　（89）　However；　when　we



reflect　on　the　beginnings　of　Christianity　the　cause　at　once　becomes



manifest。　（90）　The　Christian　religion　was　not　taught　at　first　by　kings；　but



by　private　persons；　who；　against　the　wishes　of　those　in　power；　whose



subjects　they；　were；　were　for　a　long　time　accustomed　to　hold　meetings　in



secret　churches；　to　institute　and　perform　sacred　rites；　and　on　their　own



authority　to　settle　and　decide　on　their　affairs　without　regard　to　the　state；



（91）　When；　after　the　lapse　of　many　years；　the　religion　was　taken　up　by　the



authorities；　the　ecclesiastics　were　obliged　to　teach　it　to　the　emperors



themselves　as　they　had　defined　it：　wherefore　they　easily　gained　recognition



as　its　teachers　and　interpreters；　and　the　church　pastors　were　looked　upon　as



vicars　of　God。　（92）　The　ecclesiastics　took　good　care　that　the　Christian



kings　should　not　assume　their　authority；　by　prohibiting　marriage　to　the



chief　ministers　of　religion　and　to　its　highest　interpreter。　（93）　They



furthermore　elected　their　purpose　by　multiplying　the　dogmas　of　religion　to



such　an　extent　and　so　blending　them　with　philosophy　that　their　chief



interpreter　was　bound　to　be　a　skilled　philosopher　and　theologian；　and　to



have　leisure　for　a　host　of　idle　speculations：　conditions　which　could　only　be



fulfilled　by　a　private　individual　with　much　time　on　his　hands。







（19：94）　Among　the　Hebrews　things　were　very　differently　arranged：　for　their



Church　began　at　the　same　time　as　their　dominion；　and　Moses；　their　absolute



ruler；　taught　religion　to　the　people；　arranged　their　sacred　rites；　and　chose



their　spiritual　ministers。　（95）　Thus　the　royal　authority　carried　very　great



weight　with　the　people；　and　the　kings　kept　a　firm　hold　on　their　spiritual



prerogatives。







（19：96）　Although；　after　the　death　of　Moses；　no　one　held　absolute　sway；　yet



the　power　of　deciding　both　in　matters　spiritual　and　matters　temporal　was　in



the　hands　of　the　secular　chief；　as　I　have　already　pointed　out。　（97）　Further；



in　order　that　it　might　be　taught　religion　and　piety；　the　people　was　bound　to



consult　the　supreme　judge　no　less　than　the　high　priest　（Deut。　xvii：9；　11）。



（98）　Lastly；　though　the　kings　had　not　as　much　power　as　Moses；　nearly　the



whole　arrangement　and　choice　of　the　sacred　ministry　depended　on　their



decision。　（99）　Thus　David　arranged　the　whole　service　of　the　Temple　（see　1



Chron。　xxviii：11；　12；　&c。）；　from　all　the　Levites　he　chose　twenty…four



thousand　for　the　sacred　psalms；　six　thousand　of　these　formed　the



body　from　which　were　chosen　the　judges　and　proctors；　four　thousand　were



porters；　and　four　thousand　to　play　on　instruments　（see　1　Chron。　xxiii：4；　5）。



（100）　He　further　divided　them　into　companies　（of　whom　he　chose　the　chiefs）；



so　that　each　in　rotation；　at　the　allotted　time；　might　perform　the　sacred



rites。　（101）　The　priests　he　also　divided　into　as　many　companies；　I　will　not



go　through　the　whole　catalogue；　but　refer　the　reader　to　2　Chron。　viii：13；



where　it　is　stated；　〃Then　Solomon　offered　burnt　offerings　to　the　Lord　。　。　。



。　。　after　a　certain　rate　every　day；　offering　according　to　the　commandments



of　Moses；〃　and　in　verse　14；　〃And　he　appointed；　according　to　the　order



of　David　his　father；　the　courses　of　the　priests　to　their　service　。　。　。　。



。　。　for　so　had　David　the　man　of　God　commanded。〃　（102）　Lastly；　the　historian



bears　witness　in　verse　15：　〃And　they　departed　not　from　the　commandment　of



the　king　unto　the　priests　and　Levites　concerning　any　matter；　or



concerning　the　treasuries。〃







＇19：6＇　（103）　From　these　and　other　histories　of　the　kings　it　is　abundantly



evident；　that　the　whole　practice　of　religion　and　the　sacred　ministry



depended　entirely　on　the　commands　of　the　king。







（19：104）　When　I　said　above　that　the　kings　had　not　the　same　right　as　Moses　to



elect　the　high　priest；　to　consult　God　without　intermediaries；　and　to　condemn



the　prophets　who　prophesied　during　their　reign；　I　said　so　simply　because　the



prophets　could；　in　virtue　of　their　mission；　choose　a　new　king　and　give



absolution　for　regicide；　not　because　they　could　call　a　king　who　offended



against　the　law　to　judgment；　or　could　rightly　act　against　him　＇Endnote　33＇。







（19：105）　Wherefore　if　there　had　been　no　prophets　who；　in　virtue　of　a　special



revelation；　could　give　absolution　for　regicide；　the　kings　would　have



possessed　absolute　rights　over　all　matters　both　spiritual　and　temporal。



（106）　Consequently　the　rulers　of　modern　times；　who　have　no　prophets　and



would　not　rightly　be　bound　in　any　case　to　receive　them　（for　they　are　not



subject　to　Jewish　law）；　have　absolute　possession　of　the　spiritual



prerogative；　although　they　are　not　celibates；　and　they　will　always　retain



it；　if　they　will　refuse　to　allow　religious　dogmas　to　be　unduly　multiplied　or



confounded　with　philosophy。



















＇20：0＇　CHAPTER　XX　…　THAT　IN　A　FREE　STATE　EVERY　MAN



　　　MAY　THINK　WHAT　HE　LIKES；　AND　SAY　WHAT　HE　THINKS。







＇20：1＇　（1）　If　men's　minds　were　as　easily　controlled　as　their　tongues；　every



king　would　sit　safely　on　his　throne；　and　government　by　compulsion　would



cease；　for　every　subject　would　shape　his　life　according　to　the　intentions　of



his　rulers；　and　would　esteem　a　thing　true　or　false；　good　or　evil；　just　or



unjust；　in　obedience　to　their　dictates。　（2）　However；　we　have　shown　already



（Chapter　XVII。）　that　no　man's　mind　can　possibly　lie　wholly　at　the



disposition　of　another；　for　no　one　can　willingly　transfer　his　natural　right



of　free　reason　and　judgment；　or　be