The Two Gods of "Leviathan": Thomas Hobbes on Religion and Politics (review)

Abstract

BOOK REVIEWS 303 ration of Robert Holcot's twelve arguments for the conclusion that nothing can be attributed to God (55-56), and Scotus's puzzling "second interpretation" of how God's knowledge is based on his will (178), stand out in this regard. Perhaps the most lasting impression left by this book is the utterly derivative nature of Marsilius's own theological views. The author excels at showing how Marsilius's arguments depend on Boethius, Aquinas, Henry of Ghent, Scotus, Ockham, Wodeham , Gregory of Rimini, and Buridan, as well as on lesser-known figures such as Thomas of Strasbourg, John of Ripa, John Hiltalingen of Basel, and many others (helpful here is the fact that we know of some 937 volumes from Marsilius's personal library). This book will better enable us to assess Marsilius's place in the history of ideas, which may be more as a synthesizer and transmitter of ideas to posterity, of the "characteristic blend" known as the v/a marsiliana (l), than as a penetrating and original philosopher-theologian inhis own right. J^cK ZuPKO San Diego State University A. P. Martinich. The Two Gods of"Leviathan" : Thomas Hobbes on Religion and Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press, x992. Pp. xiv + 43o. Cloth, $59.95. Martinich's The Two Gods of"Leviathan" is a philosophically provocative effort to give a definitive Calvinist reading of Hobbes's political theory and theological views. Martinich provides an overall historical argument, in which he interprets the text of Lev/athan in terms of precedents set by Catholic and Protestant theological traditions from Anselm to Erasmus, on the one hand, and from Luther to the Anglican Church under James I, on the other. He is even more specific when describing Hobbes's own intentions regarding the aims of his work: "Hobbes's religious views, like his political views.., were similar to those of James I, the monarch under whom he spent his adolescence and early childhood. It is important to recall that James I sent to the Council of Dort representatives who, like Hobbes, were committed to the doctrine of predestination .... The term 'high Calvinist' has been coined to describe someone who was in favor of the monarchy, the episcopal form of church government, and Calvinist theology. The term applies perfectly to Hobbes" (335). Martinich employs this historical argument to define the starting points of his analyses of the structure of Hobbes's political theory and the meanings of key terms used by Hobbes. The resulting study is interesting in several ways. First, it evaluates rival interpretations of Hobbes from a perspective outside the standard accounts of Taylor, Warrender , Gauthier, Skinner, Hampton, and Curley. This perspective enables Martinich to suggest, for example, that the apparently incompatible claims about Hobbes's concept of moral action put forward by divine command theorists like Taylor and Warrender and by others such as Gauthier and Hampton may be compatible if the religious beliefs presupposed by the concept are correctly understood. Thus he attributes to Hobbes a concept which combines elements from each of these rival interpretations: "An action a is moral in virtue of a law of nature if and only if God commands that a be 3o4 JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY 32:2 APRIL 199 4 done and [my italics] a is derivable by reason alone as conducive to self-preservation" (73)- Each of these conditions is necessary but neither by itself is sufficient for an action to be moral, according to Martinich's version of Hobbes's theory. Perhaps the book's most striking thesis is Martinich's assertion that Lev/athan should be regarded as a "Bible for modern man" (45). In developing this thesis, he goes beyond simply interpreting Hobbes's intentions and instead defends the rafonality of the Hobbesian project, understood as an attempt to synthesize Calvinist beliefs with a materialist modern science. The ambitious scope of such a synthesis is evident in the equally detailed treatment Martinich offers, both when discussing better-known topics like self-interest and the state of nature and when elucidating the lesser-known doctrines concerning everything from angels to eschatology in Parts III and IV of Lev/athan. How effective...