Part IL. The Liwzna Temple. 26$ ly, or a ifo in the latter ? Can we fay, God had been uninji, in not fo deter- mining ? VVhofe Rights had he violat- ed in trilling otherwife ? Not Man's, to whom he did owe nothing : Will we fay. his own ? But volenti non fit injuria : Which Maxim doth not fet to at liberty, abfo- lutely, to do rrhatfoever we will, with ourfelves, and rehat is ours ; becaufe of others, whole Rights are complicated with ours, the chief Ruler, and Lord of all, efpecially, whobath principal In- tereft inw, and all that rre have; yet it holds even as to us : For tho' we may ..injure others, God efpecially, by an undue Difpolition of our Properties, which he intrufts us with (not for our felves only, but for himfilfchiefly, and for other Men, whom therefore, in the f cond place, we may wrong, by difa- bling our (elves to do them that Good, which we ought) : And tho' we may also prejudice our felves, yet, our flees apart, we cannon be laid, fo far, to wrong, by our barn content, as to be able to refume our Right; becaufe, by that Content (fupzoffing it imprudent, or any way undue) "we ha e. quitted, and even forfeited, the Right, which, for ow felves
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=