and sometimes also with his tongue; seriously alleaging, that every mans
conservation, and contentment, being committed to his own care, there
could be no reason, why every man might not do what he thought conduced
thereunto; and therefore also to make, or not make; keep, or not keep
Covenants, was not against Reason, when it conduced to ones benefit.
He does not therein deny, that there be Covenants; and that they are
sometimes broken, sometimes kept; and that such breach of them may
be called Injustice, and the observance of them Justice: but he
questioneth, whether Injustice, taking away the feare of God, (for the
same Foole hath said in his heart there is no God,) may not sometimes
stand with that Reason, which dictateth to every man his own good; and
particularly then, when it conduceth to such a benefit, as shall put a
man in a condition, to neglect not onely the dispraise, and revilings,
but also the power of other men. The Kingdome of God is gotten by
violence; but what if it could be gotten by unjust violence? were it
against Reason so to get it, when it is impossible to receive hurt by
it? and if it be not against Reason, it is not against Justice; or else
Justice is not to be approved for good. From such reasoning as this,
Succesfull wickednesse hath obtained the Name of Vertue; and some that
in all other things have disallowed the violation of Faith; yet have
allowed it, when it is for the getting of a Kingdome. And the Heathen
that believed, that Saturn was deposed by his son Jupiter, believed
neverthelesse the same Jupiter to be the avenger of Injustice: Somewhat
like to a piece of Law in Cokes Commentaries on Litleton; where he
sayes, If the right Heire of the Crown be attainted of Treason; yet the
Crown shall descend to him, and Eo Instante the Atteynder be voyd; From
which instances a man will be very prone to inferre; that when the Heire
apparent of a Kingdome, shall kill him that is in possession, though his
father; you may call it Injustice, or by what other name you will; yet
it can never be against Reason, seeing all the voluntary actions of
men tend to the benefit of themselves; and those actions are most
Reasonable, that conduce most to their ends. This specious reasoning is
nevertheless false.

For the question is not of promises mutuall, where there is no security
of performance on either side; as when there is no Civill Power erected
over the parties promising; for such promises are no Covena