II: Of Paternal and Regal Power explained

What happens

Themes in this chapter

• Natural Rights and Liberty

  Locke counters Filmer's claim that 'men are not naturally free' by asserting that governments are formed by the consent of men using their reason to unite into society, implying a natural state of freedom.

• Consent of the Governed

  Locke argues that if Filmer's foundation fails, governments must be 'made by contrivance, and the consent of men,' emphasizing the role of popular consent in political society.

• Critique of Patriarchalism and Divine Right

  Locke systematically dismantles Filmer's identification of paternal authority with royal authority, criticizing the lack of definition and proof for 'fatherly authority' and its supposed divine right.

• Limited Government and Rule of Law

  Locke warns that Filmer's doctrine of absolute, arbitrary power flatters ambition and tempts rulers to exceed their limits, implying the need for limited government and the rule of law.

Characters to notice

• Sir Robert Filmer

  Filmer's central thesis that men are not naturally free and his equation of paternal authority with royal authority are critiqued. Locke notes Filmer's failure to define 'fatherly authority' and his reliance on unproven assertions about Adam's sovereignty.

• Adam

  Adam is the focal point of Filmer's theory, claimed to possess absolute royal authority, dominion over Eve, and fatherhood over all mankind. Locke challenges the lack of evidence for Adam's sovereignty.

• Eve

  Eve is mentioned in the context of Filmer's argument that God gave Adam dominion over her, which Locke considers part of the insufficient proof for Adam's absolute power.

• Bellarmine

  Bellarmine is referenced as an opponent whom Filmer claims to have defeated, but Locke notes that Filmer's 'victory' is based on an 'evident confession' that creation made Adam prince of his posterity, which Locke finds unconvincing.

• Noah

  Noah is mentioned in Filmer's narrative as a patriarch through whom the 'fatherhood' continued after the flood, part of the story Locke critiques.

• Moses

  Moses is implicitly referenced through the decalogue and the commandment 'Honour thy father and mother,' which Filmer selectively quotes.

Key passages

• “Sir Robert Filmer’s great position is, that “men are not naturally free.” This is the foundation on which his absolute monarchy stands... But if this foundation fails, all his fabric falls with it, and governments must be left again to the old way of being made by contrivance, and the consent of men...”

  Filmer's core claim is that humans are born into subjection, not freedom, which he uses to justify absolute monarchy. Locke argues that if this premise is false, then government must be based on human agreement and reason.

  Locke identifies the central thesis of Filmer's absolutism and counters it with the principle of consent.

• “He tells us, p. 12, “Men are born in subjection to their parents,” and therefore cannot be free. And this authority of parents he calls “royal authority,” p. 12, 14, “fatherly authority, right of fatherhood,” p. 12, 20.”

  Filmer equates parental authority with royal authority, claiming that because children are subject to parents, all humans are born into subjection and cannot be free.

  Locke highlights Filmer's conflation of paternal and political power, which he will later critique.

• “For God says, “Honour thy father and mother”; but our author contents himself with half, leaves out “thy mother” quite, as little serviceable to his purpose.”

  Filmer selectively quotes the commandment 'Honour thy father' while omitting 'thy mother,' because including mothers would undermine his argument that all power originates in the father.

  Locke exposes Filmer's biased interpretation of scripture to support his patriarchal theory.

• “This fatherly authority then, or right of fatherhood, in our A.’s sense, is a divine unalterable right of sovereignty, whereby a father or a prince hath an absolute, arbitrary, unlimited, and unlimitable power over the lives, liberties, and estates of his children and subjects; so that he may take or alienate their estates, sell, castrate, or use their persons as he pleases, they being all his slaves, and he lord or proprietor of everything, and his unbounded will their law.”

  According to Filmer, fatherly authority is a God-given, absolute power that allows a father or king to control the lives, property, and bodies of his children or subjects as if they were slaves, with his will as the only law.

  Locke summarizes the extreme implications of Filmer's doctrine, which he finds absurd and dangerous.