Recent scholarship interprets Leviathan as subtly revealing Thomas Hobbes’s allegiance to Cromwell, the Rump Parliament and the Commonwealth. I, however, argue that Hobbes’s Leviathan intends to smash the religious principles underwriting Cromwell, the Rump and the new regime. I begin by situating Leviathan alongside the popular religious rhetoric favoring Cromwell, the Rump and their allies. I then proceed to reveal how Hobbes’s Leviathan subverts the popular religious opinions justifying their claims to authority. Hobbes’s politically subversive arguments are important because de (...) facto power ultimately rests on the legitimizing public opinions that lead men to consent to obey and to support a particular man or an assembly of men. That is, right makes might, according to Hobbes. By subverting the powerful religious opinions legitimizing Cromwell’s and the Rump’s rise, Hobbes intends Leviathan to disempower Cromwell and the Rump Parliament. (shrink)

English royalists with absolutist leanings developed a specific discourse of honouring during the English civil wars. The discourse directed men to engage in active obedience and to become political activists for the king. As a theory of praxis, it is distinguishable from accounts offered by scholars who emphasize aristocratic honour and its role in the civil wars. The discourse of honouring also differs from accounts offered by social historians who emphasize the ways in which honouring was contested. Moreover, the author (...) distances the discourse of honouring not only from those who construe it as a passive acquiescence but also from those who see it as flattery. Active honouring is divided into two inward and outward honouring. The former refers to love and will, understanding and motivation, which reflect inner reverence. The latter includes such actions as obedience to the King's commandments, helping him financially, engaging for him in battle, and praising him in speech. In this last form of honouring, the subject is specifically asked to hide and cover royal infirmities and weaknesses. (shrink)

It is refreshing to read fifteen erudite articles written by seasoned experts and promising young scholars who engage the wide-ranging question of the intersection of religion and politics in Hobbes's works. The free standing arguments are not framed by Hobbes's alleged religious sincerity, or by a priori conceptions of natural law, or some modernization thesis. This work is therefore a must-read for scholars yearning to explore Hobbes's religious politics in new ways. I hope it inspires more volumes, possibly organized around (...) narrower religious topics.Johan Olsthoorn argues that Hobbes's theory of representation takes him beyond Erastianism to the stronger claim of church-state identity... (shrink)