You say, ‘Presumably, Hobbes would respond that this inevitable situation points to the need for a sovereign as the final arbiter of religious disagreements. This solution, however, seems to be formally equivalent to the very thing that Hobbes criticizes in the Roman Church, viz., a kind of non-thinking deference to papal authority.’

While I, of course, accept what you say the in the first sentence, I’m a bit more dubious about the conclusion you come to in the second. We must consider the Protestant line Hobbes tows with regards to the position he takes on conscience. What one professes outwardly need not conform to ones inward convictions (or rather, one’s inward persuasions); making faith, the bible, and one’s interpretation thereof, an individual pursuit. Quoting Locke, ‘the heart may be lift up to heaven, whilst the body bows’.

I look forward to your response.

D.S.

Yes, reading Hobbes is not the most pleasant experience. I find his rhetoric frustrating, and his criticisms and arguments strike me as being easily turned back on him (e.g., his claim that Christianity was corrupted by Greek philosophy, his claims that Christians rely too heavily on authority and tradition and fail to use their reason etc.).

It’s always great to receive a comment from a Scot, so thanks again for dropping by.

Best,
Cynthia

Thanks for all the stuff you write – I don’t often comment, but I do always appreciate.

With best wishes from Scotland.