dangerous But if this be so Why is not the Magistrate afraid of his own Church and why does he not forbid their Assemblies as things dangerous to his Government You 'll say Because he himself is a Part and even the Head of them As if he were not also a Part of the Commonwealth and the Head of the whole People Let us therefore deal plainly The Magistrate is afraid of other Churches but not of his own because he is kind and favourable to the one but severe and cruel to the other These he treats like Children and indulges them even to Wantonness Those he uses as Slaves and how blamelesly soever they demean themselves recompenses them no otherwise than by Gallies Prisons Confiscations and Death These he cherishes and defends Those he continually scourges and oppresses Let him turn the Tables Or let those Dissenters enjoy but the same Privileges in Civils as his other Subjects and he will quickly find that these Religious Meetings will be no longer dangerous For if men enter into Seditious Conspiracies 't is not Religion inspires them to it in their Meetings but their Sufferings and Oppressions that make them willing to ease themselves Just and moderate Governments are every where quiet every where safe But Oppression raises Ferments and makes men struggle to cast off an uneasie and tyrannical Yoke I know that Seditions are very frequently raised upon pretence of Religion But 't is as true that for Religion Subjects are frequently ill treated and live miserably Believe me the Stirs that are made proceed not from any peculiar Temper of this or that Church or Religious Society but from the common Disposition of all Mankind who when they groan under any heavy Burthen endeavour naturally to shake off the Yoke that galls their Necks Suppose this Business of Religion were let alone and that there were some other Distinction made between men and men upon account of their different Complexions Shapes and Features so that those who have black Hair for example or gray Eyes should not enjoy the same Privileges as other Citizens that they should not be permitted either to buy or sell or live by their Callings that Parents should not have the Government and Education of their own Children that all should either be excluded from the Benefit of the Laws or meet with partial Judges can it be doubted but these Persons thus distinguished from others by the Colour of their Hair and Eyes and united together by one common Persecution would be as dangerous to the Magistrate as any others that had associated themselves meerly upon the account of Religion Some enter into Company for Trade and Profit Others for want of Business have their Clubs for Clarret Neighbourhood joyns some and Religion others But there is one only thing which gathers People into Seditious Commotions and that is Oppression You 'll say What will you have People to meet at Divine Service against the Magistrates Will I answer Why I pray against his Will Is it not both lawful and necessary that they should meet Against his Will do you say That 's what I complain of That is the very Root of all the Mischief Why are Assemblies less sufferable in a Church than in a Theater or Market Those that meet there are not either more vicious or more turbulent than those that meet elsewhere The Business in that is that they are ill used and therefore they are not to be suffered Take away the Partiality that is used towards them in matters of Common Right change the Laws take away the Penalties unto which they are subjected and all things will immediately become safe and peaceable Nay those that are averse to the Religion of the Magistrate will think themselves so much the more bound to maintain the Peace of the Commonwealth as their Condition is better in that place than elsewhere And all the several separate Congregations like so many Guardians of the Publick Peace will watch one another that nothing may be innovated or changed in the Form of the Government Because they can hope for nothing better than what they already enjoy that is an equal Condition with their Fellow-Subjects under a just and moderate Government Now if that Church which agrees in Religion with the Prince be esteemed the chief Support of any Civil Government and that for no other Reason as has already been shewn than because the Prince is kind and the Laws are favourable to it how much greater will be the Security of a Government where all good Subjects of whatsoever Church they be without any Distinction upon account of Religion enjoying the same Favour of the Prince and the same Benefit of the Laws shall become the common Support and Guard of it and where none will have any occasion to fear the Severity of the Laws but those that do Injuries to their Neighbours and offend against the Civil Peace That we may draw towards a Conclusion The Sum of all we drive at is That every Man may enjoy the same Rights that are granted to others Is it permitted to worship God in the Roman manner Let it be permitted to do it in the Geneva Form also Is it permitted to speak Latin in the Market-place Let those that have a mind to it be permitted to do it also in the Church Is it lawfull for any man in his own House to kneel stand sit or use any other Posture and to cloath himself in White or Black in short or in long Garments Let it not be made unlawful to eat Bread drink Wine or wash with Water in the Church In a Word Whatsoever things are left free by Law in the common occasions of Life let them remain free unto every Church in Divine Worship Let no Mans Life or Body or House or Estate suffer any manner of Prejudice upon these Accounts Can you allow of the Presbyterian Discipline Why should not the Episcopal also have what they like Ecclesiastical Authority whether it be administred by the Hands of a single Person or many is every where the same and neither has any Jurisdiction in things Civil nor any manner of Power of Compulsion nor any thing at all to do with Riches and Revenues Ecclesiastical Assemblies and Sermons are justified by daily experience and publick allowance These are allowed to People of some one Perswasion Why not to all If any thing pass in a Religious Meeting seditiously and contrary to the publick Peace it is to be punished in the same manner and no otherwise than as if it had happened in a Fair or Market These Meetings ought not to be Sanctuaries for Factious and Flagitious Fellows Nor ought it to be less lawful for Men to meet in Churches than in Halls Nor are one part of the Subjects to be esteemed more blameable for their meeting together than others Every one is to be accountable for his own Actions and no Man is to be laid under a Suspition or Odium for the Fault of
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
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
to come In the last place Let us now consider what is the Magistrate's Duty in the Business of Toleration which certainly is very considerable We have already proved That the Care of Souls does not belong to the Magistrate Not a Magisterial Care I mean if I may so call it which consists in prescribing by Laws and compelling by Punishments But a charitable Care which consists in teaching admonishing and persuading cannot be denied unto any man. The Care therefore of every man's Soul belongs unto himself and is to be left unto himself But what if he neglect the Care of his Soul I answer What if he neglect the Care of his Health or of his Estate which things are nearlier related to the Government of the Magistrate than the other Will the Magistrate provide by an express Law That such an one shall not become poor or sick Laws provide as much as is possible that the Goods and Health of Subjects be not injured by the Fraud or Violence of others they do not guard them from the Negligence or Ill-husbandry of the Possessors themselves No man can be forced to be Rich or Healthful whether he will or no. Nay God himself will not save men against their wills Let us suppose however that some Prince were desirous to force his Subjects to accumulate Riches or to preserve the Health and Strength of their Bodies Shall it be provided by Law that they must consult none but Roman Physicians and shall every one be bound to live according to their Prescriptions What shall no Potion no Broth be taken but what is prepared either in the Vatican suppose or in a Geneva Shop Or to make these Subjects rich shall they all be obliged by Law to become Merchants or Musicians Or shall every one turn Victualler or Smith because there are some that maintain their Families plentifully and grow rich in those Professions But it may be said There are a thousand ways to Wealth but one only way to Heaven 'T is well said indeed especially by those that plead for compelling men into this or the other Way For if there were several ways that lead thither there would not be so much as a pretence left for Compulsion But now if I be marching on with my utmost Vigour in that way which according to the Sacred Geography leads streight to Ierusalem Why am I beaten and ill used by others because perhaps I wear not Buskins because my Hair is not of the right Cut because perhaps I have not been dip't in the right Fashion because I eat Flesh upon the Road or some other Food which agrees with my Stomach because I avoid certain By-ways which seem unto me to lead into Briars or Precipices because amongst the several Paths that are in the same Road I choose that to walk in which seems to be the streightest and cleanest because I avoid to keep company with some Travellers that are less grave and others that are more sowre that they ought to be or in fine because I follow a Guide that either is or is not clothed in White and crowned with a Miter Certainly if we consider right we shall find that for the most part they are such frivolous things as these that without any prejudice to Religion or the Salvation of Souls if not accompanied with Superstition or Hypocrisie might either be observed or omitted I say they are such like things as as these which breed implacable Enmities amongst Christian Brethren who are all agreed in the Substantial and truly Fundamental part of Religion But let us grant unto these Zealots who condemn all things that are not of their Mode that from these Circumstances arise different Ends. What shall we conclude from thence There is only one of these which is the true way to Eternal Happiness But in this great variety of ways that men follow it is still doubted which is this right one Now neither the care of the Commonwealth nor the right of enacting Laws does discover this way that leads to Heaven more certainly to the Magistrate than every private mans Search and Study discovers it unto himself I have a weak Body sunk under a languishing Disease for which I suppose there is one only Remedy but that unknown Does it therefore belong unto the Magistrate to prescribe me a Remedy because there is but one and because it is unknown Because there is but one way for me to escape Death will it therefore be safe for me to do whatsoever the Magistrate ordains Those things that every man ought sincerely to enquire into himself and by Meditation Study Search and his own Endeavours attain the Knowledge of cannot be looked upon as the Peculiar Possession of any one sort of Men. Princes indeed are born Superior unto other men in Power but in Nature equal Neither the Right nor the Art of Ruling does necessarily carry along with it the certain Knowledge of other things and least of all of the true Religion For if it were so how could it come to pass that the Lords of the Earth should differ so vastly as they do in Religious Matters But let us grant that it is probable the way to Eternal Life may be better known by a Prince than by his Subjects or at least that in this incertitude of things the safest and most commodious way for private Persons is to follow his Dictates You will say what then If he should bid you follow Merchandise for your Livelihood would you decline that Course for fear it should not succeed I answer I would turn Merchant upon the Princes command because in case I should have ill Success in Trade he is abundantly able to make up my Loss some other way If it be true as he pretends that he desires I should thrive and grow rich he can set me up again when unsuccessful Voyages have broke me But this is not the Case in the things that regard the Life to come If there I take a wrong Course if in that respect I am once undone it is not in the Magistrates Power to repair my Loss to ease my Suffering nor to restore me in any measure much less entirely to a good Estate What Security can be given for the Kingdom of Heaven Perhaps some will say that they do not suppose this infallible Judgment that all men are bound to follow in the Affairs of Religion to be in the Civil Magistrate but in the Church What the Church has determined that the Civil Magistrate orders to be observed and he provides by his Authority that no body shall either act or believe in the business of Religion otherwise than the Church teaches So that the Judgment of those things is in the Church The Magistrate himself yields Obedience thereunto and requires the like Obedience from others I answer Who sees not how frequently the Name of the Church which was so venerable in the time of the Apostles has been made use of to throw Dust in Peoples Eyes
in following Ages But however in the present case it helps us not The one only narrow way which leads to Heaven is not better known to the Magistrate than to private Persons and therefore I cannot safely take him for my Guide who may probably be as ignorant of the way as my self and who certainly is less concerned for my Salvation than I my self am Amongst so many Kings of the Iews how many of them were there whom any Israelite thus blindly following had not fall'n into Idolatry and thereby into Destruction Yet nevertheless you bid me be of good Courage and tell me that all is now safe and secure because the Magistrate does not now enjoin the observance of his own Decrees in matters of Religion but only the Decrees of the Church Of what Church I beseech you Of that certainly which likes him best As if he that compells me by Laws and Penalties to enter into this or the other Church did not interpose his own Judgment in the matter What difference is there whether he lead me himself or deliver me over to be led by others I depend both ways upon his Will and it is he that determines both ways of my eternal State. Would an Israelite that had worshipped Baal upon the Command of his King have been in any better condition because some body had told him that the King ordered nothing in Religion upon his own Head nor commanded any thing to be done by his Subjects in Divine Worship but what was approved by the Counsel of Priests and declared to be of Divine Right by the Doctors of their Church If the Religion of any Church become therefore true and saving because the Head of that Sect the Prelates and Priests and those of that Tribe do all of them with all their might extol and praise it what Religion can ever be accounted erroneous false and destructive I am doubtful concerning the Doctrine of the Socinians I am suspicious of the way of Worship practised by the Papists or Lutherans will it be ever a jot the safer for me to join either unto the one or the other of those Churches upon the Magistrates Command because he commands nothing in Religion but by the Authority and Counsel of the Doctors of that Church But to speak the truth we must acknowledge that the Church if a Convention of Clergy-men making Canons must be called by that Name is for the most part more apt to be influenced by the Court than the Court by the Church How the Church was under the Vicissitude of Orthodox and Arrian Emperors is very well known Or if those things be too remote our modern English History affords us fresh Examples in the Reigns of Henry the 8 th Edward the 6 th Mary and Elizabeth how easily and smoothly the Clergy changed their Decrees their Articles of Faith their Form of Worship every thing according to the inclination of those Kings and Queens Yet were those Kings and Queens of such different minds in point of Religion and enjoined thereupon such different things that no man in his Wits I had almost said none but an Atheist will presume to say that any sincere and upright Worshipper of God could with a safe Conscience obey their several Decrees To conclude It is the same thing whether a King that prescribes Laws to another mans Religion pretend to do it by his own Judgment or by the Ecclesiastical Authority and Advice of others The Decisions of Church-men whose Differences and Disputes are sufficiently known cannot be any founder or safer than his Nor can all their Suffrages joined together add any new strength unto the Civil Power Tho this also must be taken notice of that Princes seldom have any regard to the Suffrages of Ecclesiasticks that are not Favourers of their own Faith and way of Worship But after all the principal Consideration and which absolutely determines this Controversie is this Although the Magistrates Opinion in Religion be sound and the way that he appoints be truly Evangelical yet if I be not thoroughly perswaded thereof in my own mind there will be no safety for me in following it No way whatsoever that I shall walk in against the Dictates of my Conscience will ever bring me to the Mansions of the Blessed I may grow rich by an Art that I take not delight in I may be cured of some Disease by Remedies that I have not Faith in but I cannot be saved by a Religion that I distrust and by a Worship that I abhor It is in vain for an Unbeliever to take up the outward shew of another mans Profession Faith only and inward Sincerity are the things that procure acceptance with God. The most likely and most approved Remedy can have no effect upon the Patient if his Stomach reject it as soon taken And you will in vain cram a Medicine down a sick mans Throat which his particular Constitution will be sure to turn into Poison In a word Whatsoever may be doubtful in Religion yet this at least is certain that no Religion which I believe not to be true can be either true or profitable unto me In vain therefore do Princes compel their Subjects to come into their Church-communion under pretence of saving their Souls If they believe they will come of their own accord if they believe not their coming will nothing avail them How great soever in fine may be the pretence of Good-will and Charity and concern for the Salvation of mens Souls men cannot be forced to be saved whether they will or no. And therefore when all is done they must be left to their own Consciences Having thus at length freed men from all Dominion over one another in matters of Religion let us now consider what they are to do All men know and acknowledge that God ought to be publickly worshipped Why otherwise do they compel one another unto the publick Assemblies Men therefore constituted in this liberty are to enter into some Religious Society that they may meet together not only for mutual Edification but to own to the world that they worship God and offer unto his divine Majesty such service as they themselves are not ashamed of and such as they think not unworthy of him nor unacceptable to him and finally that by the purity of Doctrine Holiness of Life and Decent form of Worship they may draw others unto the love of the true Religion and perform such other things in Religion as cannot be done by each private man apart These Religious Societies I call Churches and these I say the Magistrate ought to tolerate For the business of these Assemblies of the People is nothing but what is lawful for every man in particular to take care of I mean the Salvation of their Souls nor in this case is there any difference between the National Church and other separated Congregations But as in every Church there are two things especially to be considered The outward Form and Rites of
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
and the like To this I answer That in Religious Worship we must distinguish between what is part of the Worship it self and what is but a Circumstance That is a part of the Worship which is believed to be appointed by God and to be well-pleasing to him and therefore that is necessary Circumstances are such things which tho' in general they cannot be separated from Worship yet the particular instances or modifications of them are not determined and therefore they are indifferent Of this sort are the Time and Place of Worship the Habit and Posture of him that worships These are Circumstances and perfectly indifferent where God has not given any express Command about them For example Amongst the Iews the Time and Place of their Worship and the Habits of those that officiated in it were not meer Circumstances but a part of the Worship it self in which if any thing were defective or different from the Institution they could not hope that it would be accepted by God. But these to Christians under the liberty of the Gospel are meer Circumstances of Worship which the Prudence of every Church may bring into such use as shall be judged most subservient to the end of Order Decency and Edification But even under the Gospel those who believe the First or the Seventh Day to be set apart by God and consecrated still to his Worship to them that portion of Time is not a simple Circumstance but a Real Part of Divine Worship which can neither be changed nor neglected In the next place As the Magistrate has no Power to impose by his Laws the use of any Rites and Ceremonies in any Church so neither has he any Power to forbid the use of such Rites and Ceremonies as are already received approved and practised by any Church Because if he did so he would destroy the Church it self the end of whose Institution is only to worship God with freedom after its own manner You will say by this Rule if some Congregations should have a mind to sacrifice Infants or as the Primitive Christians were falsely accused lustfully pollute themselves in promiscuous Uncleanness or practise any other such heinous Enormities is the Magistrate obliged to tolerate them because they are committed in a Religious Assembly I answer No. These things are not lawful in the ordinary course of life nor in any private house and therefore neither are they so in the Worship of God or in any religious Meeting But indeed if any People congregated upon account of Religion should be desirous to sacrifice a Calf I deny that That ought to be prohibited by a Law. Melibaeus whose Calf it is may lawfully kill his Calf at home and burn any part of it that he thinks fit For no Injury is thereby done to any one no prejudice to another mans Goods And for the same reason he may kill his Calf also in a religious Meeting Whether the doing so be well-pleasing to God or no it is their part to consider that do it The part of the Magistrate is only to take care that the Commonwealth receive no prejudice and that there be no Injury done to any man either in Life or Estate And thus what may be spent on a Feast may be spent on a Sacrifice But if peradventure such were the state of things that the Interest of the Commonwealth required all slaughter of Beasts should be forborn for some while in order to the increasing of the stock of Cattel that had been destroyed by some extraordinary Murrain Who sees not that the Magistrate in such a case may forbid all his Subjects to kill any Calves for any use whatsoever Only 't is to be observed that in this case the Law is not made about a Religious but a Political matter nor is the Sacrifice but the Slaughter of Calves thereby prohibited By this we see what difference there is between the Church and the Commonwealth Whatsoever is lawful in the Commonwealth cannot be prohibited by the Magistrate in the Church Whatsoever is permitted unto any of his Subjects for their ordinary use neither can nor ought to be forbidden by him to any Sect of People for their religious Uses If any man may lawfully take Bread or Wine either sitting or kneeling in his own house the Law ought not to abridge him of the same Liberty in his Religious Worship tho' in the Church the use of Bread and Wine be very different and be there applied to the Mysteries of Faith and Rites of Divine Worship But those things that are prejudicial to the Commonweal of a People in their ordinary use and are therefore forbidden by Laws those things ought not to be permitted to Churches in their sacred Rites Onely the Magistrate ought always to be very careful that he do not misuse his Authority to the oppression of any Church under pretence of publick Good. It may be said What if a Church be Idolatrous is that also to be tolerated by the Magistrate I answer What Power can be given to the Magistrate for the suppression of an Idolatrous Church which may not in time and place be made use of to the ruine of an Orthodox one For it must be remembred that the Civil Power is the same every where and the Religion of every Prince is Orthodox to himself If therefore such a Power be granted unto the Civil Magistrate in Spirituals as that at Geneva for Example he may extirpate by Violence and Blood the Religion which is there reputed Idolatrous by the same Rule another Magistrate in some neighbouring Country may oppress the Reformed Religion and in India the Christian. The Civil Power can either change every thing in Religion according to the Prince's pleasure or it can change nothing If it be once permitted to introduce any thing into Religion by the means of Laws and Penalties there can be no bounds put to it but it will in the same manner be lawful to alter every thing according to that Rule of Truth which the Magistrate has framed unto himself No man whatsoever ought therefore to be deprived of his Terrestrial Enjoyments upon account of his Religion Not even Americans subjected unto a Christian Prince are to be punished either in Body or Goods for not imbracing our Faith and Worship If they are perswaded that they please God in observing the Rites of their own Country and that they shall obtain Happiness by that means they are to be left unto God and themselves Let us trace this matter to the bottom Thus it is An inconsiderable and weak number of Christians destitute of every thing arrive in a Pagan Country These Foreigners beseech the Inhabitants by the bowels of Humanity that they would succour them with the necessaries of life Those necessaries are given them Habitations are granted and they all joyn together and grow up into one Body of People The Christian Religion by this means takes root in that Countrey and spreads it self but does not suddenly
their Promise that Princes may be dethroned by those that differ from them in Religion or that the Dominion of all things belongs only to themselves For these things proposed thus nakedly and plainly would soon draw on them the Eye and Hand of the Magistrate and awaken all the care of the Commonwealth to a watchfulness against the spreading of so dangerous an Evil. But nevertheless we find those that say the same things in other words What else do they mean who teach that Faith is not to be kept with Hereticks Their meaning forsooth is that the priviledge of breaking Faith belongs unto themselves For they declare all that are not of their Communion to be Hereticks or at least may declare them so whensoever they think fit What can be the meaning of their asserting that Kings excommunicated forfeit their Crowns and Kingdoms It is evident that they thereby arrogate unto themselves the Power of deposing Kings because they challenge the Power of Excommunication as the peculiar Right of their Hierarchy That Dominion is founded in Grace is also an Assertion by which those that maintain it do plainly lay claim to the possession of all things For they are not so wanting to themselves as not to believe or at least as not to profess themselves to be the truly pious and faithful These therefore and the like who attribute unto the Faithful Religious and Orthodox that is in plain terms unto themselves any peculiar Priviledge or Power above other Mortals in Civil Concernments or who upon pretence of Religion do challenge any manner of Authority over such as are not associated with them in their Ecclesiastical Communion I say these have no right to be tolerated by the Magistrate as neither those that will not own and teach the Duty of tolerating All men in matters of meer Religion For what do all these and the like Doctrines signifie but that they may and are ready upon any occasion to seise the Government and possess themselves of the Estates and Fortunes of their Fellow-Subjects and that they only ask leave to be tolerated by the Magistrate so long until they find themselves strong enough to effect it Again That Church can have no right to be tolerated by the Magistrate which is constituted upon such a bottom that all those who enter into it do thereby ipso facto deliver themselves up to the Protection and Service of another Prince For by this means the Magistrate would give way to the settling of a forrein Jurisdiction in his own Country and suffer his own People to be listed as it were for Souldiers against his own Government Nor does the frivolous and fallacious distinction between the Court and the Church afford any remedy to this Inconvenience especially when both the one and the other are equally subject to the absolute Authority of the same person who has not only power to perswade the Members of his Church to whatsoever he lists either as purely Religious or in order thereunto but can also enjoyn it them on pain of Eternal Fire It is ridiculous for any one to profess himself to be a Mahumetan only in his Religion but in every thing else a faithful Subject to a Christian Magistrate whilst at the same time he acknowledges himself bound to yield blind obedience to the Mufti of Constantinople who himself is intirely obedient to the Ottoman Emperor and frames the feigned Oracles of that Religion according to his pleasure But this Mahumetan living amongst Christians would yet more apparently renounce their Government if he acknowledged the same Person to be Head of his Church who is the Supreme Magistrate in the State. Lastly Those are not at all to be tolerated who deny the Being of a God. Promises Covenants and Oaths which are the Bonds of Humane Society can have no hold upon an Atheist The taking away of God tho but even in thought dissolves all Besides also those that by their Atheism undermine and destroy all Religion can have no pretence of Religion whereupon to challenge the Privilege of a Toleration As for other Practical Opinions tho not absolutely free from all Error if they do not tend to establish Domination over others or Civil Impunity to the Church in which they are taught there can be no Reason why they should not be tolerated It remains that I say something concerning those Assemblies which being vulgarly called and perhaps having sometimes been Conventicles and Nurseries of Factions and Seditions are thought to afford the strongest matter of Objection against this Doctrine of Toleration But this has not hapned by any thing peculiar unto the Genius of such Assemblies but by the unhappy Circumstances of an oppressed or ill-setled Liberty These Accusations would soon cease if the Law of Toleration were once so setled that all Churches were obliged to lay down Toleration as the Foundation of their own Liberty and teach that Liberty of Conscience is every mans natural Right equally belonging to Dissenters as to themselves and that no body ought to be compelled in matters of Religion either by Law or Force The Establishment of this one thing would take away all ground of Complaints and Tumults upon account of Conscience And these Causes of Discontents and Animosities being once removed there would remain nothing in these Assemblies that were not more peaceable and less apt to produce Disturbance of State than in any other Meetings whatsoever But let us examine particularly the Heads of these Accusations You 'll say That Assemblies and Meetings endanger the Publick Peace and threaten the Commonwealth I answer If this be so Why are there daily such numerous Meetings in Markets and Courts of Judicature Why are Crowds upon the Exchange and a Concourse of People in Cities suffered You 'll reply Those are Civil Assemblies but These we object against are Ecclesiastical I answer 'T is a likely thing indeed that such Assemblies as are altogether remote from Civil Affairs should be most apt to embroyl them O but Civil Assemblies are composed of men that differ from one another in matters of Religion but these Ecclesiastical Meetings are of Persons that are all of one Opinion As if an Agreement in matters of Religion were in effect a Conspiracy against the Commonwealth or as if men would not be so much the more warmly unanimous in Religion the less liberty they had of Assembling But it will be urged still That Civil Assemblies are open and free for any one to enter into whereas Religious Conventicles are more private and thereby give opportunity to Clandestine Machinations I answer That this is not strictly true For many Civil Assemblies are not open to every one And if some Religious Meetings be private Who are they I beseech you that are to be blamed for it those that desire or those that forbid their being publick Again You 'll say That Religious Communion does exceedingly unite mens Minds and Affections to one another and is therefore the more
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