such Cases care is to be taken that the Sentence of Excommunication and the Execution thereof carry with it no rough usage of Word or Action whereby the ejected Person may any wise be damnified in Body or Estate For all Force as has often been said belongs only to the Magistrate nor ought any private Persons at any time to use Force unless it be in self-defence against unjust Violence Excommunication neither does nor can deprive the excommunicated Person of any of those Civil Goods that he formerly possessed All those things belong to the Civil Government and are under the Magistrate's Protection The whole Force of Excommunication consists only in this that the Resolution of the Society in that respect being declared the Union that was between the Body and some Member comes thereby to be dissolved and that Relation ceasing the participation of some certain things which the Society communicated to its Members and unto which no Man has any Civil Right comes also to cease For there is no Civil Injury done unto the excommunicated Person by the Church-Minister's refusing him that Bread and Wine in the Celebration of the Lord's Supper which was not bought with his but other mens Money Secondly No private Person has any Right in any manner to prejudice another Person in his Civil Enjoyments because he is of another Church or Religion All the Rights and Franchises that belong to him as a Man or as a Denison are inviolably to be preserved to him These are not the Business of Religion No Violence nor Injury is to be offered him whether he be Christian or Pagan Nay we must not content our selves with the narrow Measures of bare Justice Charity Bounty and Liberality must be added to it This the Gospel enjoyns this Reason directs and this that natural Fellowship we are born into requires of us If any man err from the right way it is his own misfortune no injury to thee Nor therefore art thou to punish him in the things of this Life because thou supposest he will be miserable in that which is to come What I say concerning the mutual Toleration of private Persons differing from one another in Religion I understand also of particular Churches which stand as it were in the same Relation to each other as private Persons among themselves nor has any one of them any manner of Jurisdiction over any other no not even when the Civil Magistrate as it sometimes happens comes to be of this or the other Communion For the Civil Government can give no new Right to the Church nor the Church to the Civil Government So that whether the Magistrate joyn himself to any Church or separate from it the Church remains always as it was before a free and voluntary Society It neither acquires the Power of the Sword by the Magistrate's coming to it nor does it lose the Right of Instruction and Excommunication by his going from it This is the fundamental and immutable Right of a spontaneous Society that it has power to remove any of its Members who transgress the Rules of its Institution But it cannot by the accession of any new Members acquire any Right of Jurisdiction over those that are not joined with it And therefore Peace Equity and Friendship are always mutually to be observed by particular Churches in the same manner as by private Persons without any pretence of Superiority or Jurisdiction over one another That the thing may be made yet clearer by an Example Let us suppose two Churches the one of Arminians the other of Calvinists residing in the City of Constantinople Will any one say that either of these Churches has Right to deprive the Members of the other of their Estates and Liberty as we see practised elsewhere because of their differing from it in some Doctrines or Ceremonies whilst the Turks in the mean while silently stand by and laugh to see with what inhumane Cruelty Christians thus rage against Christians But if one of these Churches hath this Power of treating the other ill I ask which of them it is to whom that Power belongs and by what Right It will be answered undoubtedly That it is the Orthodox Church which has the Right of Authority over the Erroneous or Heretical This is in great and specious Words to say just nothing at all For every Church is Orthodox to it self to others Erroneous or Heretical For whatsoever any Church believes it believes to be true and the contrary unto those things it pronounces to be Error So that the Controversie between these Churches about the Truth of their Doctrines and the Purity of their Worship is on both sides equal nor is there any Judge either at Constantinople or elsewhere upon Earth by whose Sentence it can be determined The Decision of that Question belongs only to the Supream Judge of all men to whom also alone belongs the Punishment of the Erroneous In the mean while let those men consider how hainously they sin Who adding Injustice if not to their Error yet certainly to their Pride do rashly and arrogantly take upon them to misuse the Servants of another Master who are not at all accountable to them Nay further If it could be manifest which of these two dissenting Churches were in the right there would not accrue thereby unto the Orthodox any Right of destroying the other For Churches have neither any Jurisdiction in Worldly matters nor are Fire and Sword any proper Instruments wherewith to convince mens minds of Error and inform them of the Truth Let us suppose nevertheless that the Civil Magistrate inclined to favour one of them and to put his Sword into their Hands that by his Consent they might chastise the Dissenters as they pleased Will any man say that any Right can be derived unto a Christian Church over its Brethren from a Turkish Emperor An Infidel who has himself no Authority to punish Christians for the Articles of their Faith cannot confer such an Authority upon any Society of Christians nor give unto them a Right which he has not himself This would be the Case at Constantinople And the Reason of the thing is the same in any Christian Kingdom The Civil Power is the same in every place nor can that Power in the Hands of a Christian Prince confer any greater Authority upon the Church than in the Hands of a Heathen which is to say just none at all Nevertheless it is worthy to be observed and lamented that the most violent of these Defenders of the Truth the Opposers of Errors the Exclaimers against Schism do hardly ever let loose this their Zeal for God with which they are so warmed and inflamed unless where they have the Civil Magistrate on their side But so soon as ever Court-favour has given them the better end of the Staff and they begin to feel themselves the stronger then presently Peace and Charity are to be laid aside Otherwise they are religiously to be observed Where they have not
any other Bonds but what proceed from the certain expectation of eternal Life A Church then is a Society of Members voluntarily uniting to this end It follows now that we consider what is the Power of this Church and unto what Laws it is subject Forasmuch as no Society how free soever or upon whatsoever slight occasion instituted whether of Philophers for Learning of Merchants for Commerce or of men of leisure for mutual Conversation and Discourse No Church or Company I say can in the least subsist and hold together but will presently dissolve and break to pieces unless it be regulated by some Laws and the Members all consent to observe some Order Place and time of meeting must be agreed on Rules for admitting and excluding Members must be establisht Distinction of Officers and putting things into a regular Course and such like cannot be omitted But since the joyning together of several Members into this Church-Society as has already been demonstrated is absolutely free and spontaneous it necessarily follows that the Right of making its Laws can belong to none but the Society it self or at least which is the same thing to those whom the Society by common consent has authorised thereunto Some perhaps may object that no such Society can be said to be a true Church unless it have in it a Bishop or Presbyter with Ruling Authority derived from the very Apostles and continued down unto the present times by an uninterrupted Succession To these I answer In the first place Let them shew me the Edict by which Christ has imposed that Law upon his Church And let not any man think me impertinent if in a thing of this consequence I require that the Terms of that Edict be very express and positive For the Promise he has made us that wheresoever two or three are gathered together in his Name he will be in the midst of them seems to imply the contrary Whether such an Assembly want any thing necessary to a true Church pray do you consider Certain I am that nothing can be there wanting unto the Salvation of Souls Which is sufficient to our purpose Next Pray observe how great have always been the Divisions amongst even those who lay so much stress upon the Divine Institution and continued Succession of a certain Order of Rulers in the Church Now their very Dissention unavoidably puts us upon a necessity of deliberating and consequently allows a liberty of choosing that which upon consideration we prefer And in the last place I consent that these men have a Ruler of their Church established by such a long Series of Succession as they judge necessary provided I may have liberty at the same time to join my self to that Society in which I am perswaded those things are to be found which are necessary to the Salvation of my Soul. In this manner Ecclesiastical Liberty will be preserved on all sides and no man will have a Legislator imposed upon him but whom himself has chosen But since men are so sollicitous about the true Church I would only ask them here by the way if it be not more agreeable to the Church of Christ to make the Conditions of her Communion consist in such things and such things only as the Holy Spirit has in the Holy Scriptures declared in express Words to be necessary to Salvation I ask I say whether this be not more agreeable to the Church of Christ than for men to impose their own Inventions and Interpretations upon others as if they were of Divine Authority and to establish by Ecclesiastical Laws as absolutely necessary to the Profession of Christianity such things as the Holy Scriptures do either not mention or at least not expresly command Whosoever requires those things in order to Ecclesiastical Communion which Christ does not require in order to Life Eternal he may perhaps indeed constitute a Society accommodated to his own Opinion and his own Advantage but how that can be called the Church of Christ which is established upon Laws that are not his and which excludes such Persons from its Communion as he will one day receive into the Kingdom of Heaven I understand not But this being not a proper place to enquire into the marks of the true Church I will only mind those that contend so earnestly for the Decrees of their own Society and that cry out continually the Church the Church with as much noise and perhaps upon the same Principle as the Ephesian Silversmiths did for their Diana this I say I desire to mind them of That the Gospel frequently declares that the true Disciples of Christ must suffer Persecution but that the Church of Christ should persecute others and force others by Fire and Sword to embrace her Faith and Doctrine I could never yet find in any of the Books of the New Testament The End of a Religious Society as has already been said is the Publick Worship of God and by means thereof the acquisition of Eternal Life All Discipline ought therefore to tend to that End and all Ecclesiastical Laws to be thereunto confined Nothing ought nor can be transacted in this Society relating to the Possession of Civil and Worldly Goods No Force is here to be made use of upon any occasion whatsoever For Force belongs wholly to the Civil Magistrate and the Possession of all outward Goods is subject to his Jurisdiction But it may be asked By what means then shall Ecclesiastical Laws be established if they must be thus destitute of all Compulsive Power I answer They must be established by Means suitable to the Nature of such Things whereof the external Profession and Observation if not proceeding from a thorow Conviction and Approbation of the Mind is altogether useless and unprofitable The Arms by which the Members of this Society are to be kept within their Duty are Exhortations Admonitions and Advices If by these means the Offenders will not be reclaimed and the Erroneous convinced there remains nothing farther to be done but that such stubborn and obstinate Persons who give no ground to hope for their Reformation should be cast out and separated from the Society This is the last and utmost Force of Ecclesiastical Authority No other Punishment can thereby be inflicted than that the Relation ceasing between the Body and the Member which is cut off the Person so condemned ceases to be a Part of that Church These things being thus determined let us inquire in the next place how far the Duty of Toleration extends and what is required from every one by it And first I hold That no Church is bound by the Duty of Toleration to retain any such Person in her Bosom as after Admonition continues obstinately to offend against the Laws of the Society For these being the Condition of Communion and the Bond of the Society if the Breach of them were permitted without any Animadversion the Society would immediately be thereby dissolved But nevertheless in all
Worship And the Doctrines and Articles of Faith these things must be handled each distinctly that so the whole matter of Toleration may the more clearly be understood Concerning outward Worship I say in the first place that the Magistrate has no Power to enforce by Law either in his own Church or much less in another the use of any Rites or Ceremonies whatsoever in the Worship of God. And this not only because these Churches are free Societies but because whatsoever is practised in the Worship of God is only so far justifiable as it is believed by those that practise it to be acceptable unto him Whatsoever is not done with that assurance of Faith is neither well in it self nor can it be acceptable to God. To impose such things therefore upon any People contrary to their own Judgment is in effect to command them to offend God which considering that the end of all Religion is to please him and that Liberty is essentially necessary to that End appears to be absurd beyond expression But perhaps it may be concluded from hence that I deny unto the Magistrate all manner of Power about indifferent things which if it be not granted the whole Subject-matter of Law-making is taken away No I readily grant that Indifferent Things and perhaps none but such are subjected to the Legislative Power But it does not therefore follow that the Magistrate may ordain whatsoever he pleases concerning any thing that is indifferent The Publick Good is the Rule and Measure of all Law-making If a thing be not useful to the Common-wealth tho it it be never so indifferent it may not presently be established by Law. And further Things never so indifferent in their own nature when they are brought into the Church and Worship of God are removed out of the reach of the Magistrate's Jurisdiction because in that use they have no connection at all with Civil Affairs The only business of the Church is the Salvation of Souls and it no ways concerns the Common-wealth or any Member of it that this or the other Ceremony be there made use of Neither the Use nor the Omission of any Ceremonies in those Religious Assemblies does either advantage or prejudice the Life Liberty or Estate of any man. For Example Let it be granted that the washing of an Infant with water is in it self an indifferent thing Let it be granted also that if the Magistrate understand such washing to be profitable to the curing or preventing of any Disease that Children are subject unto and esteem the matter weighty enough to be taken care of by a Law in that case he may order it to be done But will any one therefore say that a Magistrate has the same Right to ordain by Law that all Children shall be baptized by Priests in the sacred Font in order to the purification of their Souls The extream difference of these two Cases is visible to every one at first sight Or let us apply the last Case to the Child of a Iew and the thing speaks it self For what hinders but a Christian Magistrate may have Subjects that are Iews Now if we acknowledge that such an Injury may not be done unto a Iew as to compel him against his own Opinion to practice in his Religion a thing that is in its nature indifferent how can we maintain that any thing of this kind may be done to a Christian Again Things in their own nature indifferent cannot by any human Authority be made any part of the Worship of God for this very reason because they are indifferent For since indifferent things are not capable by any Virtue of their own to propitiate the Deity no human Power or Authority can confer on them so much Dignity and Excellency as to enable them to do it In the common Affairs of Life that use of indifferent things which God has not forbidden is free and lawful and therefore in those things human Authority has place But it is not so in matters of Religion Things indifferent are not otherwise lawful in the Worship of God than as they are instituted by God himself and as he by some positive command has ordain'd them to be made a part of that Worship which he will vouchsafe to accept of at the hands of poor sinful men Nor when an incensed Deity shall ask us Who has required these or such like things at our hands will it be enough to answer him that the Magistrate commanded them If civil Jurisdiction extended thus far what might not lawfully be introduced into Religion What hodge-podge of Ceremonies what superstitious Inventions built upon the Magistrate's Authority might not against Conscience be imposed upon the Worshippers of God For the greatest part of these Ceremonies and Superstions consists in the Religious Use of such things as are in their own nature indifferent nor are they sinful upon any other account than because God is not the Author of them The sprinkling of Water and the use of Bread and Wine are both in their own nature and in the ordinary occasions of Life altogether indifferent Will any man therefore say that these things could have been introduced into Religion and made a part of Divine Worship if not by Divine Institution If any Human Authority or Civil Power could have done this why might it not also injoyn the eating of Fish and drinking of Ale in the holy Banquet as a part of Divine Worship Why not the sprinkling of the Blood of Beasts in Churches and Expiations by Water or Fire and abundance more of this kind But these things how indifferent soever they be in common uses when they come to be annexed unto Divine Worship without Divine Authority they are as abominable to God as the Sacrifice of a Dog. And why a Dog so abominable What difference is there between a Dog and a Goat in respect of the Divine Nature equally and infinitely distant from all Affinity with Matter unless it be that God required the use of the one in his Worship and not of the other We see therefore that indifferent things how much soever they be under the Power of the Civil Magistrate yet cannot upon that pretence be introduced into Religion and imposed upon Religious Assemblies because in the Worship of God they wholly cease to be indifferent He that worships God does it with design to please him and procure his favour But that cannot be done by him who upon the command of another offers unto God that which he knows will be displeasing to him because not commanded by himself This is not to please God or appease his Wrath but willingly and knowingly to provoke him by a manifest Contempt which is a thing absolutely repugnant to the nature and end of Worship But it will here be asked If nothing belonging to Divine Worship be left to human Discretion how is it then that Churches themselves have the power of ordering any thing about the Time and Place of Worship
manifest that those who have one and the same Rule of Faith and Worship are of the same Religion and those who have have not the same Rule of Faith and Worship are of different Religions For since all things that belong unto that Religion are contained in that Rule it follows necessarily that those who agree in one Rule are of one and the same Religion and vice versa Thus Turks and Christians are of different Religions because these take the Holy Scriptures to be the Rule of their Religion and those the Alcoran And for the same reason there may be different Religions also even amongst Christians The Papists and the Lutherans tho' both of them profess Faith in Christ and are therefore called Christians yet are not both of the same Religion because These acknowledge nothing but the Holy Scriptures to be the Rule and Foundation of their Religion Those take in also Traditions and the Decrees of Popes and of these together make the Rule of their Religion And thus the Christians of St. Iohn as they are called and the Christians of Geneva are of different Religions because These also take only the Scriptures and Those I know not what Traditions for the Rule of their Religion This being setled it follows First that Heresy is a Separation made in Ecclesiastical Communion between men of the same Religion for some Opinions no way contained in the Rule it self And Secondly that amongst those who acknowledge nothing but the Holy Scriptures to be their Rule of Faith Heresy is a Separation made in their Christian Communion for Opinions not contained in the express words of Scripture Now this Separation may be made in a twofold manner 1. When the greater part or by the Magistrate's Patronage the stronger part of the Church separates it self from others by excluding them out of her Communion because they will not profess their Belief of certain Opinions which are not the express words of the Scripture For it is not the paucity of those that are separated nor the Authority of the Magistrate that can make any man guilty of Heresy But he only is an Heretick who divides the Church into parts introduces Names and Marks of Distinction and voluntarily makes a Separation because of such Opinions 2. When any one separates himself from the Communion of a Church because that Church does not publickly profess some certain Opinions which the Holy Scriptures do not expresly teach Both these are Hereticks because they err in Fundamentals and they err obstinately against Knowledge For when they have determined the Holy Scriptures to be the only Foundation of Faith they nevertheless lay down certain Propositions as fundamental which are not in the Scripture and because others will not acknowledge these additional Opinions of theirs nor build upon them as if they were necessary and fundamental they therefore make a Separation in the Church either by withdrawing themselves from the others or expelling the others from them Nor does it signifie any thing for them to say that their Confessions and Symboles are agreeable to Scripture and to the Analogy of Faith. For if they be conceived in the express words of Scripture there can be no question about them because those things are acknowledged by all Christians to be of Divine Inspiration and therefore fundamental But if they say that the Articles which they require to be profess'd are Consequences deduced from the Scripture it is undoubtedly well done of them who believe and profess such things as seem unto them so agreeable to the Rule of Faith. But it would be very ill done to obtrude those things upon others unto whom they do not seem to be the indubitable Doctrines of the Scripture And to make a Separation for such things as these which neither are nor can be fundamental is to become Hereticks For I do not think there is any man arrived to that degree of madness as that he dare give out his Consequences and Interpretations of Scripture as Divine Inspirations and compare the Articles of Faith that he has framed according to his own Fancy with the Authority of the Scripture I know there are some Propositions so evidently agreeable to Scripture that no body can deny them to be drawn from thence but about those therefore there can be no difference This only I say that however clearly we may think this or the other Doctrine to be deduced from Scripture we ought not therefore to impose it upon others as a necessary Article of Faith because we believe it to be agreeable to the Rule of Faith unless we would be content also that other Doctrines should be imposed upon us in the same manner and that we should be compell'd to receive and profess all the different and contradictory Opinions of Lutherans Calvinists Remonstrants Anabaptists and other Sects which the Contrivers of Symbols Systems and Confessions are accustomed to deliver unto their Followers as genuine and necessary Deductions from the Holy Scripture I cannot but wonder at the extravagant arrogance of those men who think that they themselves can explain things necessary to Salvation more clearly than the Holy Ghost the Eternal and Infinite Wisdom of God. Thus much concerning Heresy which word in common use is applied only to the Doctrinal part of Religion Let us now consider Schism which is a Crime near a-kin to it For both those words seem unto me to signifie an ill-grounded Separation in Ecclesiastical Communion made about things not necessary But since Use which is the Supream Law in matter of Language has determined that Heresy relates to Errors in Faith and Schism to those in Worship or Discipline we must consider them under that Distinction Schism then for the same reasons that have already been alledged is nothing else but a Separation made in the Communion of the Church upon account of something in Divine Worship or Ecclesiastical Discipline that is not any necessary part of it Now nothing in Worship or Discipline can be necessary to Christian Communion but what Christ our Legislator or the Apostles by Inspiration of the Holy Spirit have commanded in express words In a word He that denies not any thing that the holy Scriptures teach in express words nor makes a Separation upon occasion of any thing that is not manifestly contained in the Sacred Text however he may be nick-named by any Sect of Christians and declared by some or all of them to be utterly void of true Christianity yet indeed and in truth this man cannot be either a Heretick or Schismatick These things might have been explained more largely and more advantageously but it is enough to have hinted at them thus briefly to a Person of your parts FINIS Books lately Printed for Awnsham Churchill at the Black Swan at Amen-Corner AN Historical Account of Making the Penal Laws by the Papists against the Protestants and by the Protestants against the Papists Wherein the true Ground and Reason of Making the Laws is given the