Thomas Hobbes

The Notre Dame Philosophy Review  tells us of a new book on Thomas Hobbes' philosophy of religion, reviewed by Arish Abizadeh of McGill University.  

If I recall the relevant undergrad course properly, Hobbes' view on religion was straightforward. He was willing to worship in any manner his sovereign tells him to worship -- to worship a thousand gods, or one, and that one conceived as three persons, or as simply One. 

"Any law has reason enough for my obedience." 

At another level, Hobbes was suspicious of religious fervor, precisely because fervor in the worship of a Leviathan in the heavens, distinct from the Leviathan on earth, is always in danger of spilling over into opposition or insubordination with regard to the latter. "I'm looking at you, Oliver Cromwell!"

The first-level view may be said to be delivered with a wink: "You're the boss, so I'll go along with Trinity-talk Sire." The second-level view was heartfelt.

Between those two observations, one is done with Hobbes' philosophy of religion: right?  

Well ... it appears not. Thomas Holden, professor in the philosophy department of UC Santa Barbara has written a book on the subject. if I understand the account given by the reviewer, and if Abizaden also understands Holden, the argument is this: Hobbes did believe that there exists a God, a Being not of this world and worthy of worship. He also believed that nothing beyond that could be said of it. Thus, beyond "God exists," anything else we might want to say, including both statements we make in the act of worship and otherwise, must be conventional in nature.  And of course it is without a wink too that Hobbes leaves the setting and revision of those conventions to the sovereign. 

The reviewer does not find this view entirely convincing, though he is kind, and he ends thus: "No one studying Hobbes' philosophy of religion can afford to ignore it."  A very conventional formulation for praise, BTW.  I am not well enough versed in Hobbesian texts to follow the particulars of Abizaden's reservations about this non-ignorable view, and I won't try to convey them. 

I did enjoy the mental work-out, though. I gather I was educated into a particular view of Hobbes (the Straussian view) that is itself more contestable than I had thought it.  Hobbes can be interpreted consistently without the assumption that he is winking.