At the heart of the debate between absolutists and constitutionalists were differences of opinion on the ultimate source of government authority. For absolutists, the answer was clear. All authority was in the hands of divinely appointed monarchs, and their laws and decisions were to be viewed as direct commandments from God. Moreover, the monarch was the head of a divinely ordered society in which each person played an assigned part in carrying out God’s plan. In sharp contrast, constitutionalists saw governments and societies as essentially voluntary associations, at least in their initial formation. Their starting point was not God, but the inherent rights of the individual. Society and government existed to protect those rights by providing law and order. In forming governments and entering society, individuals agreed to abide by the rule of law, but only so that freedom could be guaranteed. The documents included in this feature offer an opportunity to compare the ideas of the seventeenth century’s leading theorist of absolutism, Jacques-Benigne Bossuet, with those of the century’s leading theorist of constitutionalism, John Locke. As you read the excerpts from their work, pay particular attention to the way in which their central assumptions about the nature of authority shape their views on government, law, and society. How did each believe that government and society came into existence? How did their beliefs about the origins of government and society shape their views on its nature and functions?