them but say the Commanders of those Jews and those Soldiers might have compelled them in those cases I say if any of them could they ought and they should not have been said then to dye in their innocency I say again if they might then can a Magistrate command and force a man to act against his conscience then can he command him to sin then can he command what God has forbidden then must man be above God The earth it self methinks can as soon be moved as this foundation SECT 12. What shall we say then to these things Shall we complain that God Almighty hath put in man such a sturdy thing as Conscience is which makes him so often to become refractory to the commandments of his Superiors whensoever they do but require any thing against it No there is good reason God should maintain to himself an Authority above any mortal in the earth and that his name should be glorified by his servants in the confession of it to be world Or shall we complain of Government desiring to be rid of it as that which is so uneasie to our Consciences that we cannot hardly serve God but we must disobey man and incur danger about it Shall we rise up therefore in rebellion and acquit our selves God forbid It is the will of Heaven who hath put into the heart of man an awe to his invisible being as our supream Lord to constitute the Magistrate to bear his Image and representation in the earth that in his person himself may be honoured so long as we obey only with subordination to his will and the common good which is the end of his appointment If neither of these what then Shall we be e'en content in this state of corruption and imperfection when the Fall hath brought so much difficulty upon all things else as well as Government to offer the best composition we can between the duty the Magistrate owes to God and his people and the obedience the people owe to him and their consciences so that we may not put off any truth which stands irrefragable by the pleading inconvenience when these inconveniences are by prudence to be prevented and if we do it but as well as we can that is as the state of mans corruption or human frailty and infirmity will allow it suffices and the rest must be born Shall we agree upon this if we shall I have but a little more to say hereunto and I have done The Office of the Magistrate is to make the Laws and to see to the execution In all things as well Religious I have said as Civil which are for the peoples good he may pass and execute any Laws so long as they be agreeable to the Word of God and mens Consciences but he can command or inforce nothing which is against mens Consciences This is delivered already Those things now which are against mens Consciences let us consider in the last place which hath been intimated also from one or two occasions before are either such as are against the Vniversality or against so many of their Consciences as the Magistrate is to take Cognizance of them or against the Consciences only of so few as is not meet for him to take cognizance of them In the first case he is not to pass such a Law I count upon any terms if he do he sins against his Charge and he hath no authority to sin himself or cause any to sin In the second we may suppose that the Consciences of a few particular persons only are not sufficient to put an obstruction to any law really good for the Community but it is to be accounted for the universalities sake to be according to the subjects Consciences and not against them But when I have said thus as to the passing of the Law I must say also that in the execution of such Laws I hold that even those particular persons ought to be regarded In order hereunto There are some that pretend conscience of a thing when indeed they make none of it Understand not this so as if all that could not give a reason sufficient for what they hold did not make a conscience of it which hath cause a great prejudice and false reckoning of this business but when they believe not the thing really in their heart to be so as they pretend When men pretend they make a Conscience of a thing and indeed do not I would have the Magistrate above all men to execute the Law upon such supposing they judg that Law righteous and make them an example If you will say But how shall a Magistrate know this seeing no man can judg of anothers heart I acknowledge readily this is a difficulty and the chief thing which requires the Magistrates prudence and faithfulness Yet this I say That every man for all that being judg of his own acts and the punishing of forbearing a person being what the Magistrate does he must go and can but go according to his judgment He uses the Mediums as a wise man does and lawfully may take his conjecture the tree is known by his fruit and it is not necessary it should be certain but only that it be certain he so judges and if he be convinced in his Soul and indeed judges the mans profession only to be pretence it is his own judgment and nothing else can determine him Although where the person is serious in what he declares and not under any publick note of perfidiousness the rule of Charity which hopeth all things and believeth all things and thinketh no evil must encline him to the best construction When men do truly make the conscience they pretend let the Justice take heed and see that he likewise reverence Conscience no less than they do If the penalty be such only as the man is like to endure it without scruple rather than do that which is against his Conscience the Magistrate may be the bolder in executing that Law upon him But if it be such as he is like rather to do the thing against his Conscience than suffer it I would not be that Magistrate who should put such a Law in execution upon any In the mean time every particular man for himself is to look to his Conscience as his Judg in the business of his Soul and account that authority void to him whatsoever it be that commands any thing contrary to what that dictates And the supream Authority is to conceive that those that act under it will use prudence upon that account Which prudence I fear me really in this case can hardly be Christian but it must come to this That either they must totally forbear and not so much as threaten prosecution of the Law upon such a person or else perswade him first to resolution to bear the penalty and not do the thing against his conscience They must in effect say thus to the man If this thing be against your Conscience we advise you not
11. There is one thing yet seems wanting I do speak here to one branch of the main position as false while in things Religious though they could not be known but by Revelation and the world could be governed without them I affirm the Magistrate hath authority and may use his Sword as he may in other matters that is provided they be not against mens Consciences But as to the other branch in things Civil and and Moral which men may know by natural light and in which the Government is more concern'd I have not said whether it be true or false I will proceed therefore and declare that as the Position laid down at first or the worthy maintainer of it goes too low in denying the Magistrate the use of his sword in Religious things which is to be granted I count herein as in other matters to wit upon supposition of both to be not against but according to their Consciences So does he go too high in yielding it in Civils without the same limitation whereof we must be still as tender as of our Eye or of our Salvation I do think also of the two the last is the more dangerous extremity I argue then If the Magistrate may not use force or the temporal Sword in Religious affairs because such things are of that nature as the Conscience is like to be concer'd in them and if it be against their Conscience it is unlawful then when the Conscience likewise is concern'd in Civil things he may not use the Sword neither For if the ground be good in the one it must be good in the other if it will not hold in both it may be denied in either Again the things perhaps are Civil things but the man or men makes a Conscience of them and so the case must be the same to them as if it were in Religion To make a conscience of a thing is to look upon it as commanded or forbidden of God and to go about to perform or avoid it upon that account But to do or leave a thing undone upon the account of the command or prohibition of God is an act of Religion Consequently though the thing be Civil yet so long as a person or persons make a consciscience of it it is all one to them I say as if the things were religious and the authority of the Magistrate can be no more in the one than the other I will propose some instances Doeg accuses the Priests to Saul He hears their cause condemns them as Traytors commands his Servants to do execution upon them they refuse the execution It is against their Consciences Saul here hath no authority over those Servants in this case either to command them to act or to punish them for not acting against their Consciences If they obey him they sin against God Saul might urge here the thing was of Civil concern and if all should do as they did that is question the Judges sentence and refuse to execute it upon pretence of conscience the Government could not stand yet this wont serve they must not act against their Consciences for all that If he falls upon them for it they must bear it but it will be tyranny over them and injury to Heaven the superiority of whose authority over his being the thing in effect they asserted by that refusal You may say this is an instance indeed in Civil things wherein the Magistrate had not authority and consequently when Civil things are imposed against a mans Conscience the case is the same as in Religious But you will add the Consciences of these men was in the right and you would have some instance in Civil things where the Conscience is erroneous I will offer you therefore other instances A Garrison under Scanderbeg is besieged by the Turks it has but one Well in it a Traytor throws in a dead Carrion The Soldiers are under a superstition that the water hereupon is unclean and that they cannot drink it without sin Rather than do so they yield the place otherwise impregnable This instance I once used elsewhere on another occasion let me offer you one more authentick out of the Machabees The Jews are of the general perswasion that they may not fight on the Sabbath Their enemies come upon them on that day on purpose rather than act against their Consciences they suffer themselves all to be slain I will ask now upon this perswasion of these men that the doing these necessary things as drinking that water and defending themselves was sin whether the Captains of those Soldiers could command them to drink or to fight and force them to it Nothing can be pleaded of more moment in any case The whole Government and their lives depend on it and the light of nature might teach them that necessity should take place of their superstition Nevertheless until they had consulted the thing and their Consciences were satisfied of the lawfulness of it that is until they came to find out the substance of what Christ afterward revealed That man was not made for the Sabbath but the Sabbath for man There was no Captain or Governour I suppose could have power to command them or force them in the case I will descend to an instance frequent in the present Nation It is a Civil thing for any of the King's Courts to grant a Writ for a man to come and give his testimony by Oath to any Cause that is before them I will suppose now that some and that many have received the impression that it is unlawful for them to Swear at all and thereupon they refuse to Swear It may be urged in this case what a civilly evil opinion this is which is both destructive to the Government in the Administration and injurious to particular persons who may be undone in their Estates for want of such an Oath Nevertheless there are many of the Quakers ready to go to prison themselves and lose all their own Estates and we may suppose their Lives rather than they will be induced to swear I ask What will you say now to this case Hath the Magistrate power over these mens Consciences If he hath he may command them to judg otherwise than they do and punish them that they act according to this judgment And if he can command and use his Sword upon them to make them swear he may to make them come to Church and if he was a Papist Magistrate to come to Mass and if a heathen Magistrate to sacrifice to Idols If he have not power over their Consciences and to command them to have other judgments then must he let them alone as generally our Justices have done or challenge an authority to make men act against their Consciences which is to use the power which he hath from God against him If you think there is here some difference between such cases as these and that of the Machabees before it matters little But if you make none between
to it If our prosecuting the Law upon you will make you do it rather than suffer we dare not prosecute you to destroy your Soul but if you will for the sake of the general commodity or good example bear the punishment rather than do the thing and we be assured of it then can we do our office without hazard either of yours or our own damnation SECT 13. After this I begin to think what does hinder but that this worthy Knight my friend and I should reconcile As for the main business we hold together against any that shall oppose us That in all matters of Religion the Magistrate may not use his Sword to force any against their Consciences and so long as we agree in the main we may have leave to abound each in his own sense otherwise The difference then we have under this agreement does I suppose lie in two things The one is That in things Religious this Gentleman seems to deny the Magistrate the use of his Sword altogether and I deny it him not but meerly when such things are against mens Consciences And herein methinks he should come over to me for seeing Liberty of Conscience is the thing mainly he is engaged for in the denial of the Magistrate the use of his Sword in these things there is no need he should deny it at all when Conscience is not concern'd in them The other is that in Civil things he grants the Magistrate the use of his Sword as over liberally as he takes it away in Religious whereas I suppose that as long as there is still the same reason that is so long as the thing is against a man's conscience the Magistrate may not force any one to it whether it be Civil or Religious And herein indeed should I be as ready to come over to him who knows how prudent it must seem in standing for Liberty to confine it to things of Supernatural Revelation lest the Magistrate be offended if we touch on Civils but that if I did so I must really forsake the Patronage of Conscience which I am not willing my self nor that this Gentleman should do For if we grant once that Conscience may be forc'd in any one thing there may be the same or the like reason urged to force it in another and so in all and then here liberty is gone If we will not stand by her in all distresses we cannot defend her in any The ground of all 's is Conscience is a thing which can be ruled by none but the Almighty And for as much as all Authority or power resolved into its original is the will of God that such a one should command it seems not a thing consonant to reason to suppose it the will of God that a Superiour should require that of a person which it is his will that person should not do Things then which are Civil may be so in themselves and yet come under some consideration which is religious or may have Religion incidental to them If this worthy Gentleman be content to hold that in things Civil under every consideration that is but civil the Magistrate may use his Sword without scruple I yeild to him but if a thing secular does come under a consideration which is religious and in that consideration is against a mans Conscience I cannot conceive but that the case is the same here as if the matter were it self Religious For whatsoever the thing be in that respect as he makes a Conscience of it I have said before it is a point of Religion to him The Fifth-Monarchy-man thinks in his Conscience he may not pay Taxes A strange opinion Against Scripture Sense and Righteousness Yet if you ask the man his reason he will bring you a Text perhaps out of Daniel or the Revelations and the sum of all will come to this that if he does he thinks verily he shall receive the mark of the Beast and be cast into the lake of fire and brimstone and rather than venture that he will chose to suffer though it were death I count this man now as one in a Feaver that is touched in his head and who can help such a conceit his opinion is grounded on the Revelation and we agree that in matters of supernatural Revelation the Magistrate may not force any against their Consciences What then shall he do I answer In this case and the like as this is it is the management only of the Laws with prudence will decide such difficulties It is against the mans Conscience voluntarily to pay his Tax it will wound his Soul if he does but it is not against his Conscience nor will it wound him that he is assessed and that the Officer comes and distrains and pays himself So long as he bears his testimony by a non-payment he is willing to have the money taken by force And thus does the Officer do right for the Law is he shall pay or be distrained and the man keeps his Conscience and no hurt is done But if a Magistrate would not be content here unless the man payes his money in specie and by way of acknowledging his Authority from God or else he will hang him or burn him I have not a heart so hard to justifie any such rigor which appears more than needs Unto this instance no doubt but we may suppose many more wherein there may be required of persons some things which are apparently their duty as this rendring to Caesar the things which are Caesars is by the Law of God as well as man and yet in regard of some principles some have received or some circumstances they are in they are against their Consciences You may ask therefore in general Does not the Magistrate well to use his Sword and execute the Law upon offenders in such cases I answer no doubt but he does because he acts upon supposition that such things are according to their Consciences and he is not to suppose otherwise Nevertheless if it come within his cognizance that the thing indeed is a matter of Conscience to him I do humbly apprehend and say that the great duty of Charity which he owes to his brothers Soul and is above any Law of man ought to prevail with him for some such middle course in the execution of the Law that neither may the man be hurt in his Religion nor the publick suffer by his ill example but that both his Conscience be regarded and righteousness also take place You may say perhaps You would indeed have the magistrate have a care and not force a man to any thing against his Conscience but you think notwithstanding he may very comfortably punish him if he do not what was enjoyned I will ask then For what could you comfortably punish him for being true only to his Conscience which is to be faithful to God I do not find if I were a Magistrate that I could have any great comfort in that Indeed if a man were
THE AUTHORITY OF THE MAGISTRATE About RELIGION DISCUSSED In a Rebuke to the PREFACER of a late Book of Bishop BRAMHALLS BEING A Confutation of that mishapen Tenent Of The Magistrates Authority over the Conscience in the matters of Religion And the better asserting of his Authority Ecclesiastical by dividing aright between the use of his Sword about Religious Affairs and Tenderness towards Mens Consciences AND ALSO For Vindication of the grateful Receivers of His Majesties late gracious Declaration against his and others Aspersions By J. H. London Printed for the Author 1672. The AUTHORITY of the MAGISTRATE about RELIGION Discussed SECT 1. I Have met in the Book-sellers Shop with some Sheets of late put out under the pretence of a Preface to another Book but with the design of so much Malevolence in the abuse of one particular worthy person that I am astonished at the man That ever one of parts and understanding though so young a Doctor as he is should be so forsaken of his Discretion of Religion of Morality of Ingenuity of the knowledg of himself and all discernment of his duty to God and to his Neighbour as to suffer this Half Book of his now upon cold blood after so great a Whole one which was enough to have rid anothers stomack if it had been a Stable to look the World in the face and his own Cheeks not be abashed Alas that the Talents of our Lord and excellent parts which he hath given this man should become to him such a temptation Not a Novice says the Apostle lest he fall into the condemnation of the Devil Is it because the young man perhaps is misled abused himself and drawn in by some of eviller nature and more inveterate that he can sprinkle himself thus in gall and delight his soul in such an insulting malice petulant hatred and an implacable disposition Can he indeed think and believe or any else for him that this is what becomes a Christian and a Minister to set himself for so many weeks as he hath been writing this to the exercise of wrath revenge spite uncharitableness rancour reviling calumny wrong evil speaking Is this indeed the serving of God and going to Chappel Alas that the zeal of this Chaplain for the cause of the Church should be shewn only in such good works Ego quando cuique vel dicendo vel scribendo respondeo says St. Austin etiam contumeliosis criminationibus lacessitus quantum mihi Dominus donat fraenatis atque coercitis vanae indignationis aculâ—is auditori lectorive consulens non ago ut efficiar homini convitiando Superior sed errorem convincendo salubrior This is a passage it is like this youthful Divine never read I am sure he hath not yet practised and it will be worthy his future observation Contra litteras Petiliani l. 3. c. 1. Shall I be sorry now and mourn over the man for his sin which he hath sinned against God against all good men and against his neighbour and wish him with all earnestness to repent of so great iniquity that he may be forgiven If I do so I am afraid it will do nothing Shall I excuse him as overtaken with passion prejudice hast precipitancy unadvisedness surprize No he will by all means be believed thus insolent deliberately with a composed mind and upon choice Shall I then commend his Christian bravery magnanimous charity and pious adventure in his agressing of one person and reproving another of so much eminency and ability which others are afraid to cope with meerly out of tenderness of Conscience and great compassion to the souls of people least they should be hurt by their esteem and good name and for no other reason in the World hath he done this Why this is possible But what meaneth then the bleating of the Sheep and lowing of the Oxen that I hear Is this the language or voice of a man so affected on of a tongue which setteth on fire the course of nature and is set on fire of Hell What! is it then the pride self conceit ostentation vanity the arrogance of this young man and infinite presumption upon his voluble tongue and parts which he can draw upon any body and yet with a heart not malicious that hath made him do thus and â—all upon this worthy person so unworthyly as he hath done who being a reverend man a Doctor of Divinity of so much gravity of long standing excelling in Learning and all sorts of it for his profession of Dignity in his time as much as any have been capable of a person of not dâ—constant piety and a studious life of universal affability ready presence and discourse liberal graceful and courteous demeanour that speak him certainly whatsoever he be else one that is more a Gentleman then most in the Clergy and is accordingly favoured sometimes with his Princes converse and the general veneration of the people And for such a man to be treated after this barbarous prostituted manner with so horrid insolent a disdain and contempt as if he were the vilest Caitiffe and son of Belial with the like expressions it is such a monstrous piece of immorality in the thing it self a villainy to Religion and indignity to humane nature a breaking the hedge of what is Sacred laying open the inclosures of all modesty and civility in making the worthy common and level with the infamous to the affront of the whole Nation while every man in Justice is bound to defend his neighbour from injury so far as he can as well as do him none that we all me thinks should be ready to rise up as one man to the rebuke of such a crime and go with our desires to the King and to the Councel that the young man be made an example It is my just indignation at the fact onely makes me use this vehemence in my expression but my meaning is that he be brought to publick pennance and recantation And then shall all the people hear and fear and none shall do any more so presumptuously For the appearance of some method to his Preface this Author tells us at the beginning that he intends two things To say something of the Treatise and something of the seasonableness of it As for me I have nothing to say of either of these they require it not Only I perceive that is not past four of five leaves but himself hath done with these two particulars as insignificant to spend more time upon and then there is fourty more for him to ramble in about the matter of his former Books and one new matter he hath started and against Doctor Owen which indeed is the Helena that hath given life to this publication Well! I have no more to say to him about that Doctor only I have one thing to offer in the way to the Doctor about him and it shall be that advise out of Augustine Si non aurem solum percutit iracundia criminantis verum etiam
they must be done rather then we resist or suffer they do not bind us in our consciences The will of God that such a one should command is I say power in the root This will is that he command nothing but for our edification or the common good According to the power given us of God for edification If his command then be not indeed such it is destitute of Gods authority and becoming thereby a command in foro alieno that is in foro exteriori onely and in aliena materia the conscience whose adaequate rule the will of God only is must be left to its liberty The Body indeed is bound says Dr. Taylor and we must suffer patiently the evil which we cannot deprecate but Laws that are made to purposes beyond these measures do no ways oblige the conscience He is the Minister of God for good says St. Paul otherwise he is not Gods Minister and hath to other purposes none of Gods authority and therefore cannot oblige the conscience to an active obedience in such where the power is incompetent to command Duc. Dub. B. 3. c. 1. r. 3. Having then granted and stated one member of the distinction I must come to the other which is that though the Magistrate hath an authority over his Subjects in the matters of Religion as well as civil matters yet hath he no authority for all that over the conscience of any Conscience is the judgement of a man concerning himself and actions with reference to the Judgement of God It is a faculty whereby we discern what is Gods Judgement of us and our actions and there is no man must do any thing contrary to that judgement If the Magistrate then have power over the conscience in any thing whatsoever he must have power either to make us change our judgement of that thing and judge otherwise or else though we judge thus to do otherwise then that judgement that is though we judge that it is Gods will we should do thus the command of the Magistrate shall make it lawful for us to do oterwise The first of these is against reason there is no man can make himself to judge otherwise of a thing in good earnest then he does judge and it cannot then be in the power of the Magistrate to make him do it any more then it is in his power to make him fly in the Air or live under water This is so manifest that this ingenious Author hath spoken enough of it himself in his first Book The latter is against Piety for to do the thing which I judge to be the will of God I should not do because the Magistrate does command it is manifestly a preferring the will of Man before Gods that is an having of other Gods before him which is the sin of the first Commandment The truth is to go about the making of the Magistrates will to be the rule of conscience in any thing let it be what it will is manifestly to defloure conscience to make that which is peculiar to God to be common with man or profane For con-scientia importing in the very word and thing the judgement of God together with ours it must be his will and that alone must be the rule of it and if any thing else be once made its rule it is gone If the Magistrate have an authority over the conscience in any thing the reason will be the same for all I mean if I may do any thing which I judge contrary to Gods will which judgement I say is my conscience then cannot that be a reason to restrain me in another The reason why I dare not commit Adultery or do the like hainous crime is because it is against my conscience and if that reason be rendred insufficient that a thing may be done though it be against a mans conscience there is an end of Religion If the Magistrate have an authority over the conscience then must the internal acts of men be subject to his Government when it is God only that knows and can rule the heart But Grotius hath taught us well here There are internal acts of men and the external Those acts of men says he which do subiacere humano imperio are his external acts only and our internal acts can be commanded no further then they are concerned in the external The inward acts of mans soul in general and much less his conscience are not within his cognizance and so not under his jurisdiction If the Magistrate hath power over the conscience then good and evil should be founded in jure positivo and not in jure naturae Then might he impose on us a new Faith nor new Articles in our Creed Then must we have no Religion but his Will and no God but Leniathan only It is true that when the Magistrate commands me any thing for my good or for the common good though to my loss that thing is now become my duty and as I know it is Gods will that I should obey such commands I am obliged in conscience and if this very nimble Gentleman will but be contented with this interpretation and declare that by the Magistrates authority over the conscience he intends not either that he hath power to force the judgement or the action against the judgement when upon the last indeed it is he does intrench I may descend to the other distinction Sect. 5. The second distinction then that must bring some light to this young Doctors understanding if he be not yet too old to learn and confutation to his charge which he so frivolously without any cause to no purpose does advance against he knows not whom may appear with conviction upon himself from these words speaking of the Non-Conformists exceptions which relate says he either to the Power it self or the matters of the command If then he distinguishes well the power it self and it commands the duty or obligation that arises upon the subject in reference to these which are two must be distinct likewise The force of it cannot be avoided let him seem never so much to neglect it He is pleased indeed to say that we exhort people in effect to make no conscience of subjection to Princes because we say that they are not always bound in conscience to their Commands that is because we do instruct them so about the obligation of human Laws as they may know they are not to make the will of the Magistrate but the will of God alone to be the rule of the Conscience We do therefore here instruct them right and that which this man would have were to pervert them He does discover plainly his ignorance of this distinction and this distinction the vanity of his accusation We are always bound in conscience to subjection unto the Powers that are we acknowledge this this we Preach it we Print it and are ready to maintain it but we are not always bound in conscience to Obedience And God forbid that
not my knowledge of a thing and that I am to do it but my knowledge that it is God will or my knowledge of his judgement of the thing to be the same with mine that makes it Conscience I think I am full enough now You may then object that I sometimes seem in that Book to make the obligation of the outward man to be negative not to rebell and another time to be positive also to some act I answer 't is true that from the beginning I do make the obligation of the outward man to lye in both these a necessity never to resist and upon that necessity to act rather then suffer But interest of fear or self preservation binds the reason as well as the sense I say true and that there is the reason then of the outward man which is one and the reason of the conscience which is another When my reason is the fear of suffering because I may not resist and therefore I will it is my outward man is bound but when my reason is that the thing hath Gods Authority and it will offend him if I do it not and therefore I will then am I bound in conscience A human Law which is for the common good binds me from reason of conscience a Law which is unprofitable or against it binds me only from the outward mans reason There is Candour indeed to be allowed to this distinction which I have intimated as to most terms of Art but they are not therefore to be left both because of their constant use and also for their profit in the shorter cut which we get to what we would have by the use of them Onely they are verily to be at once first throughly understood and then shall all that which we signifie by them be as compleatly represented with a word as if it were drawn out in the full expression That which I have to offer upon this against the Prefacer and Debater who are companions in this cause is this that whereas they see no more but to think that the stability of Crowns and Scepters and so of all Government does lye in the Ministers especially the Episcopal Divines preaching such Doctrine as theirs which is to lay an obligation upon the conscience of the subject to obey them in all things indefinitely unless they be apparently forbidden in the Word of God they are exceedingly mistaken for if there were nothing else to support Soveraignity but that the Kings Crown might perhaps stick no longer on his Head then till the Parliament sits again seeing we may then very likely have more Laws that we shall make no conscience to obey and yet we shall make conscience God willing of our Loyalty to his Majesty and must do while we live by the command of the Aâ—mighty It is not the point of Obedience then it must be inculcated upon which the Government of Kings is established but upon the point of Subjection Let me say it over again It is not on the point of obedience out of Conscience but on the point that we must obey because the Magistrate beareth the Sword and that not in vain that the whole World is kept in Order And also upon this point of Conscience that whether we have cause to obey or not obey we must however never resist upon pain of damnation Let the Book before mentioned be herein further consulted And after this there will be little reason for our Prefacer to talk any more of exceptions levelled at the Power it self by any Pretences of the Non-Conformist against the Soveraign right of the King in the matters of the Church any more then of the State for we own no such no more then he though the way of his expressing himself by putting a restraint upon his Subjects consciences is so feat and grating till it be digested and withal so wayward that I cannot but point it to the Readers correction by what will hereafter follow If he hath any thing then to charge us with it must be in regard to the matters of the command unto which therefore he proceeds But then they say there are some particular things exempted from all humane cognizance which if the Civil Magistrate presume to impose upon the consciences of his Subjects He should say upon his Subjects not upon the consciences of his Subjects for the Magistrate imposes nothing but upon the outward man requiring the external act and the inward acts follow onely so far as they are necessary to the external as he ventures beyond the Warrant of his Commission so he can tye no Obligation of Obedience upon them seeing they can be under no subjection in those things where they are under no Authority Now this pretence resolves it self thus that they do not quarrel his Majesties Ecclesiastical Supremacy but they acknowledge it to be the undoubted right of all Soveraign Princes as long as its exercise is kept within due bounds of modesty and moderation Which being granted all their general exceptions Very fine when we have indeed none at all against the sufficiency of the Authority it self are quitted and they have now nothing to except against but the excess of its Jurisdiction So that having gained this ground Mighty to gain what never was with held the next thing to be assigned and determined is the just and lawful bounds of this Power which may be summed up in this general rule That Governours take care not to impose things apparently evil and that Subjects be not allowed to plead Conscience in any other case This is the safest and most easie Rule to secure the Quiet of all that are upright and peaceable and all that refuse subjection to such a gentle and moderate Government make themselves uncapable of all the benefits of society It is well we are come now at last where the water â—…cks The Non-Conformist differs not from the Conformist in the main point that secures all Government that is Subjection but it is in the point of Obedience only we differ And here are two questions The one is about the matters of our obedience in general what is the rule or the bounds that must be set to the Magistrates commands that we exceed not our duty to God while we are obedient to our Governours The other is about the particular matters of it whether the present impositions of Conformity do keep within that compass and consequently are lawful or unlawful The latter of these is the pitcht Field between the Conformist and Non-Conformist and neither of us have a mind to enter into it Only I will offer thus much by the way The Conformists generally do hold that the things we differ about are indifferent and consequently thae they may be removed out of the Church by Authority without sin The Non-Conformists say generally they shall sin if they obey them What then is to be done in the case but if my friend be weak and cannot indeed come to me I must go to my
in the matters of Religion they are not able to say Thus far as far as Conscience even to these Confines and it must go no farther It is Gods Authority must be first That of the Conscience next and then the Magistrates So long as the Magistrates commands trespass not upon conscience they are within his proper Territories but if they require any thing against that they are gone beyond their bounds and their Authority ceases The truth is there is but Gods Authority and Mans in all and the conscience hath Gods Authority which must therefore be over mans There is no Determination almost in any point which hath been held of difficulty which in the vertical turn is so plain clear and perfect as this The Magistrate I say hath power over his Subject in all things N.B. even in all things whatsoever in the Earth that he can do as to the external acts I have said and the Subject may or is to obey him in them so far as his conscience will let him Lo here the true rule or bounds of Gods own setting in this business In short The Magistrate shall command me in any thing but my conscience And who will not be ready to say now that this is indeed that which they knew and must wonder that they themselves did not make the Determination Indeed how shall a man be subject to the Magistrate for conscience sake if the command of conscience had not in it a Superiour and more prevalent Power than his it would be for his own sake and not for conscience sake if his authority was greater than it I know I have something here anticipated what is to follow in giving my notion so soon and at once but I do it for this reason because I know also it is the dry light at last and that alone that must be of force for conviction of those that will receive any by controversie Sect. 6. I must not yet leave this There are things in their nature indifferent and things apparently forbidden or required of God There is no difference between us in the last God must be obeyed in such things beyond question Duo sunt genera actuum imperii qui ad jus imperantis non pertinent Deo vetita jubere Deo jussa vetare For the other there is a double case The case of meer indifferency and the case of doubt That is there are things which are indifferent in their nature and appear so to us and there are things indifferent in their nature and yet appear to us unlawful In the one case the resolution is plain To do a thing whereof I am in doubt that is whereof I am not sufficiently perswaded it is lawful to do is forbidden Whatsoever is not of Faith is sin But the Magistrate hath not power to command me to sin You may say I had better obey doubtfully then disobey doubtfully I answer my doubt in the one refers unto God in the other unto Man and I must prefer God before Man If I disobey I doubt that I do ill onely because of Mans command but if I obey I doubt I do ill because of Gods I must be resolved that God forbids not the thing before the command of man can take place I obey then doubtfully but I forbear in saith I believe and am assured that God hath not commanded the thing I forbear but I am in doubt whether he hath not forbidden what I obey In the other case the resolution in general is that we are bound to obedience but it must be offered not indefinitely but with the distinction of a Political and Moral Obligation When Samuel tells the people the manner of their King that he would take their sons for his Charrets and Daughters for confectionaries their Fields and Vineyards to give unto his Servants Here is a political obligation on this people to deliver their Children and Estates for the Kings use upon his command because the Government was such in the Constitution that if he did so they might not resist him for all that when yet if any of them could save their sons and daughters or goods without violence or offending the King no doubt but they might and have a good conscience to God A political obligation then is to be bound to the thing so as to do it rather then resist a moral is to be bound to it so as if we do it not we sin We are bound to obey the King in all his commands of things indifferent with a political we are not bound to obey them with a moral obligation onely when they are for the common good I have used other terms to the same sense in my other Book and I am free in them being explained but it may be these are less obnoxious to cavil The Ecclesiastical Polititian therefore and the Debater both so far as he goes along with him hath made a very grievous young Determination in this business while he so confoundedly asserts that the Magistrate must be obeyed in all things not intrinsecally and aparently evil without any discrimination else whatsoever whereas the holding this is manifestly impious in one of these cases and tyrannous or intolerably oppressive to the conscience in the other There are some things indifferent I say in their nature that yet to us are unlawful while we suppose them unlawful or are in doubt of it and to do them in that doubt is sin and there are some things lawfull but so inconvenient so unprofitable so grievous that we should be loath always when then outward man is to have the conscience also charged with them I know upon the whole matter what it is that can mainly be urged God commands that we honour and obey our Superiours This is the duty of the fifth Commandment When the Magistrate then does appoint this or that particular thing an obligation to it arises upon us as part of that duty and so the conscience is obliged by God and that indefinitely in all Laws I answer the Reader who hath read my other Book with this thus far I will receive this instruction as one use of the whole viz. how the duty which God requires of us the fifth Commandment is to be understood and it is to be understood thus When our Superiour commands what he ought we are obliged by the Authority of that particular command so that if the thing be not done we sin when he commands what he ought not as when a Law is not for the peoples good we are obliged only by the Authority which is in his person and so if that be preferred otherwise we sin not though the thing be left undone And this is but what is ordinarily affirmed though not ordinarily so well understood by our Divines in their saying that the commands of men do oblige onely so far as to avoid Contempt and Scandal A determination I must say to be received onely in such commands which ought not to be commanded but not in
such where the Superiour commands what he ought I will express it if you will in other words When the Superiour commands any thing which he ought we are obliged for conscience sake and the fifth Commandment requires us to do the thing or else we break that command because this thing bears in it the authority of both Commanders when he commands any thing which he ought not we are obliged for wrath's sake and the fifth Commandment requires only that we do not resist so that if we resist not we give that honour and pay that duty to the Magistrate which we owe in this case If we suffer with submission or obey rather then suffer or avoid both the grievance and suffering with prudence neither bringing contempt on his Authority or inducing our Brethren to sin we are to account that we answer the intent of this Commandment I must add still that this is as much too as the Magistrate himself need desire in the Earth seeing if he be strict upon it and the thing be not sinful he may take any body do what he please upon this account As for our Prefacer it must be yet a greater reproof to his undertaking that in this endeavour of his to set up an Authority in the Magistrate over the Conscience in all matters External he is certainly fallen in with Mr Hobs whom yet to avoid the odium he is fain himself to confute For when that more considerable person according to his principles of Government makes all men by nature before they come into society to be in a state of War that gives every man right to every thing which right upon their agreement into a Common-wealth is given up he counts into the hands of the Soveraign to determine Propriety so that his will thenceforth becomes the measure of right and wrong to the Community he proceeds so far upon the conceit as to condemn these two positions That every man is judge of good and evil Doctrine That whatsoever a man does against his conscience is sin See his Leviathan C. 29. Now let us compare this ingenuously as we ought seeing else it is so bad with other places in his Book That Subjects owe to Soveraigns simple obedience in all things wherein their obedience is not repugnant to the Laws of God I have proved C. 31. Again It is manifest enough that when a man receiveth two contrary commands and knows that one of them is Gods he ought to obey that and not the other though it be the command of his lawful Soveraign or his Father C. 43. It does appear then when the Ecclesiastical Polititian does confine the authority he gives the Magistrate over the conscience to external and indifferent things allowing the authority of the conscience over the Magistrates in things intrinsecally sinful and expresly forbidden by God he does but the same which Mr. Hobs does also if you compare them equally taking one place with another But herein are they wicked companions both that they should once offer to take away from reasonable Agents a judgement of private discretion in any concernment of conscience whatsoever One may easily indeed perceive what the Contents of this young mans papers do amount unto He dare not take off all obligations of good and evil from mens consciences antecedent to humane Laws as Hobs in that one place though otherwhere as it seems he intended not so far hath done because this were not only the way to ruine Religion but his name and to bring all Government also to ruine which he engages to assert But he would take off all obligations from mens consciences in the whole business of Conformity antecedent to the will of the Parliament and Bishops so as their Acts must be the rule of good and evil to us as to these matters He does tell us indeed of a liberty to our Judgments and to our Faith but when he will allow us to judge and believe of these things as we do and would yet have us account that the publick conscience the Laws and not the private dictates of our own must govern our outward actions it does bring to my mind one passage more in his Friend What if a Soveraign forbids his Subjects to believe in Christ I answer says Mr. Hobs it is no effect because belief or unbelief never follow mans Commands But what if we be commanded to confess with our Tongues It is an external thing and no more then any other gesture whereby we signifie our obedience and a Christian holding firmly in his heart the Faith of Christ hath the same liberty herein with Naaman Leviathan C. 42. There are no passages but this and that one before cited that in my reading over that Book I observed to be so extream bad as folks ordinarily talk but this I noted for a Devilish Doctrine seeing it is offered thus indefinitely for it is directly contrary to all the Holy Martyrs belief and practise and the express institution of our Lord that he that confesses him before men he will acknowledge and he that denieth him he will deny before his Heavenly Father Yet if any will be so kind to the old Gentleman as I have been before to produce some passages otherwhere that may confine hâ—s meaning here to such compliances of the Tongue and Knee only as are required in the impositions of Vniformity and no other but such then shall the old Leviathan and the young Leviathan agree very throughly in their opinion And why the young one should fall upon his Sire so foully as he hath done whom above all men being alone of his side he should have rather endeavoured to excuse unless out of shew onely and for a coulour or out of invenility and vanity he shall for me have the Tripos or be the eighth man who can give me a good reason I perceive indeed that two points and both of which I have had long in my thoughts are harled together through the skein of this Prefacers Discourse that is the Magistrates Authority in Religion and the Obligation of human Laws It will be expedient for me to dispatch the one quite out of my hands being already done in another Book to be at liberty to attend the other presently altogether By what hath been then laid down it may appear that the right and relation of a Subject to his Soveraign may be held good when yet there are it may be some of his Laws not obeyed Some Laws there are which a man must rather suffer or dye then obey as the Roman Emperors commanding Sacrifice to their Gods Some we are to obey out of conscience such are all the wholesome Laws of a mans Countrey Some there are that we obey out of prudence rather then suffer which yet we do not judge our selves bound to obey for fear of sin or of Gods displeasure The great question then arises what is that rule according to which the Laws of men are to be measured that we may
know the kind and the degrees of their obligation This rule I have advanced in my former Book and I say that in matters of Religion the Word of God is the Rule in Morals the Law of Nature in Politicals God hath appointed a Rule also as sure and that is the common good The Laws of the Magistrates as the Sermons of Ministers do carry Gods Authority and oblige the consciences of the people so far and so much and no further or more then they are commensurate with their Rule in the one of the Word in the other I say of the common good But who shall be judge whether a Law be for the good of the publick or no I have made it my business to speak to this at large in that Book Every man must have a judgement of private discretion to compare the matters which are enjoyned him with the Rule in respect to his own actions or else he acts as a Bruite or howsoever he acts he cannot act out of conscience Conscience lyes in this very point my knowledge of this or that to have the authority of God but no human law hath any authority of his any further then it agrees with his Rule Note here I do not resolve my obedience but my obedience out of conscience into my private judgement whether the Law be or be not for the common good And here I must say no more because I refer you thither where this is made my proper work and I find nothing remaine after what you have here and there that is wanting in my mind but the satisfying two Objections as to the main Determination The one of them is this If the common good be Gods rule in Politicals then how may any Law which is not for the common good be obeyed We may not obey any command of man against Gods rule in Morality and in Religion I answer if a thing be notoriously against the Common good so as to be destructive to it we must suffer rather then obey such a command for this very reason as we dare not go against Gods Word because it is our rule and Gods rule must be obeyed and not Mans. But if a thing be but a little against the common good or no more then that the dammage to the publick by my obeying will not be so considerable as my own suffering then is it for the common good that I obey rather then suffer And I observe my rule still For though some things in themselves be against the common good yet may my obeying them commanded be for the common good And this is to be laid down and supposed that in all ordinary and common matters it is better for all in general or more for the common good to obey then to resist or suffer It is for my good and the common good I will suppose that I let the thing alone if I can help it but if I must suffer if I do it not the thing must be of great moment or detriment to the publick or else it is for the good of most in general that we obey It is certainly best if a Master commands any thing that will hurt the affairs of his House that it be let alone if the Boy or Man can escape without his anger or beating and it is better the thing be done that hurts him a little then that I suffer what hurts me more This is yet most certain that a Coercive power is the hedge of all Order in any State or Family which so long as that is kept whole it is safe and so far as that is infringed and that only it verges to ruine The other may be offered thus The common good is not the end alone of Government but the honour of the Magistrate and the Glory of God are ends also which are served by our obedience and therefore we are bound in conscience to the Laws unless they be against the Law of God whether they be for the common good or not I answer the foundation of this supposition is upon a great mistake in Policy which is that all Societies are formed by Contract between the Governor and Governed wherein both parties have their interests to secure which lays the leven of Civil Wars Whereas if it be placed in the mutual agreement of the people themselves in choosing their Governour and kind of Government as they judge best for their general advantage this supposing it agreed at first to be absolute secures it for ever being set up and answers the end of the institution He is the Minister of God to us for good I do not like therefore the making any more then one end of Polity as of Medicine and Theology The honour of the Ruler is but part of the bonum commune and is to be distinguished from it no more then the wealth of the Citizens The good of one is the good of both And as I like not the making Gods Glory and Mans Salvation two ends of Divinity for perplexities that have risen from thence so do I account that the glorifying God in the common good of the pars imperans pars subdita which both make up the Common-wealth to be one end of Politicks and the Glorifying God in mans Salvations to be the one end of Religion Let every Art Science and Profession be distinguished by its proper Object and End I must say then after this the Magistrate is honoured in our subjection always in obedience when his commands are for the common good for conscience sake when they are not in our obedience onely for fear and rather then resist or in taking heed of any contempt or provocation of him if we leave his commands undone So I conclude If any receive the information I have brought him let him give God the thanks if any receive it not the the wrong will be to himself he shall do me no hurt Sect. 7. And thus am I glad that I have had opportunity to say all I had need and desire in reference to the subject of my other Book which the Prefacer hath mingled with the subject of this I shall now apply my self wholly to the present Theme The Magistrates Authority in things Sacred I will begin as it were to discourse of it afresh as if I had yet said nothing of it and there are two Books come out some few years since which do seem to me to offer something both in their kind very remarkable on the subject The one of them owes its birth to the Author of this Preface who hath another also to the same effect which I shall only name again in my way having been too long engaged with him already as being in an extream on the one hand while he gives not only a power to the Magistrate in the Religious matters which is well but a power over the conscience in Religious matters The other has a person of honour and a worthy Student for its Author who hath proposed a state
of the question with some more mature thoughts and peculiar notion which affording me a ground work for further disquisition hath given me both the rise and ability to carry the point on to a full Determination And this Gentleman I count hath given too little to the Magistrate on the other hand in the matters of Religion but hath gone to make it up with giving him too much in Moral and Civil matters I must be forced to tell this to my ordinary Reader who else would perhaps hardly believe that it is I who stand for Liberty of Conscience that grant the Magistrate his due power in things Sacred as well as Civil and it is he is not tender enough of it when denying him what is his due the use of his Sword or power in things Religious he hath left him without a rule or bounds to his commands in other matters If I appear to drive on my purpose in this and other of my Books more dryly and scantily then in a Subject or Subjects so capacious might be expectted let not the Judicious Reader impute that to me as a fault which is a thing so much to be wished in the writings of others that I do single out the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the main thing altogether which is to be sought and I do by no means deflect from it leaving whatsoever else the matter may lead to as more copious and where none of the knot lyes to the Volums of others Sect. 8. The first of these Books then is A Discourse of Ecclesiastical Polity the design whereof as to the substance consists in the giving a Superiority to the Magistrate over the Conscience that in all doubtful or disputable cases viz. in all matters in their nature indifferent he means according to his Scope in all matters now in difference between the Conformist and Non-Conformist a man must account according to that Authors opinion that if he act against the dictates of his conscience out of obedience to the lawful Magistrates commands he does but as a Christian and is justifyed by him in the doing A Doctrine that I take to be not only new and Heterodox but dangerous to Religion and the opening a door to the pleasing of man and seeking preseâ—ment above keeping a good conscience before God In things apparently and intrinsecally evil he grants that the Magistrate is not to be obeyed But how can this stand on its foundation if conscience had not certainly an authority over the commands of the Magistrate and the authority of the Magistrate not over conscience as he speaks There need no more proof that conscience must have the superiority in every thing then to yeild it in any thing seeing it is the conscience of every particular person is the judge to him of what God has forbidden and the command of God must take place of the command of men in all things alike whatsoever If this eminently accomplished young Divine then be not too proud to take it kindly I would help him out here according to the best that I think can be done There is the conscience of the universality and of particular persons When he says the Magistrates Authority is over the conscience let us understand his meaning to be onely as to the conscience of such particulars which in some sense may be granted while he passes any Law upon the account that it is according to the consciences of the Generality notwithstanding it proves against theirs And then whereas he speaks often to this purpose that the conscience being in doubt a man should in all matters indifferent make the Law or will of the Magistrate his rule Let us understand him favourably that he means onely when a man is satisfied in the main of the thing that it is lawful and there remains only some scruples that are fit to be shaken off in which case Divines I think do ordinarily advise it to be safest to obey the Law But this is to be known also that the conscience is not to be accounted doubtful in this case but satisfied and troubled only as the Travellour is with the Scrupuli the gravel in his Shooe which he throws out and walks on whereas if his feet be really wounded and he does so he may be undone That this may be the better relished I will entreat this person to take good heed onely to a certain Book which is another such a one as his and came out then and I suppose he likes well a Book entituled Toleration discussed where he may read these passages for his instruction Am I to believe every thing to be indifferent which the Magistrate tells me is so though it be wicked No he answers Sect. 21. You are bound there by a Superiour Law and to your self you are Judge Again I am so far in another place from advising you to renounce your reason that on the contrary I would have you absolutely guided and concluded by it and only to obey for quiets sake so far as you can possibly obey in conscience Again The Magistrate is a publick Minister and his Commission reaches not to particular consciences On the other side there is as little reason for any ones private opinion to operate on a publick Law So that if I mistake not we are upon accord thus far That every particular is to look to one and the King to the whole Again The King is accountable to God for the welfare of his people and you are accountable to God for the good of your little particular If you cannot obey the Law do not but abide the penalty And finally when he hath balanced all the interest he can for the Law with this alone of Conscience he hath the same cloze And yet I say stick to your conscience I do cite these passages with pleasure to see a reverence to conscience in the heart of the Gentleman who wrot that Book and that meerly out of conviction when the Divine who wrot this Discourse of Ecclesiastical polity hath so carried it as if in the whole matters which are now in agitation between all parties in the Nation the Magistrates Authority alone should satisfie every body When the Dictates of a private conscience says he happen to thwart the determinations of the publick Laws they in that case loose their binding power with several passages to that purpose which is certainly a fair beginning as is intimated for the making the Rulers favour and a mans own advancement very quickly all his Religion The Magistrate then which I offer as what himself and this Gentleman intends in the passing any Law the matter whereof is against any of his Subjects consciences is to be conceived to go by a Judgement on the Generality and those Laws to be supposed according to conscience because they are according to his own and those of the generality when else they could not be passed without sinning against God In the mean time every particular man for himself is
to obey onely with subordination to his conscience and is not to have Ghostly encouragement to go against the Dictates of it upon any score Which as it may serve for the information of the Divine who will receive it perhaps from such a hand when he would not else from mine so may it give me occasion to ask the Gentleman two questions The one is what if any such things should again come to be put in a Bill at the House which the King does believe really is against the conscience of the Generality or of such a particular number at least as is fit and necessary for him to take cognezance of them Can he pass such a Bill in point of conscience The other then follows whether the pressing this Nation in the main to Conformity is not really such a thing at this season when the generality are so divided in their opinions I require here no more candour in the Gentleman then what he hath shewen in that last work Who as I found him a lover of learning and reading in these present deboshed times should not escape my praise notwithstanding others odium for his industry and sufficiency especially as one of the Laity if the design of his writings had been but as commendable as the example Sect. 9. The other Book is those papers entituled Liberty of Conscience which are of another complexion and moulded with no less ingenuity of matter then the other in expression I am very well satisfied with the fulness aptness and conviction of the arguments for that Liberty I read there nevertheless I do apprehend the main state of the very point does require farther ventilation If I do provoke that Learned and excellingly worthy person by this means to write again on this Subject I shall I think do the World some service and perhaps bring more light to my own understanding The substance of the whole in his stating this business I take it comes to this The Magistrate is the Officer of God to see his will executed which unâ—er the Gospel he must do in that manner God hath appointed and therefore he must not use the Temporal Sword in the concerns of Religion In this Position thus â—aid down I must confess I judge there are some clouds but not without Truth under them The clouds are to be removed the truth maintained and that liberty which is irrefragable to the conscience must not be lost In the first place therefore There is a distinction among Dâ—vines which is the foundation this Gentleman goes upon that he hath drawn beyond the Staple This distinction if you consult their common places on that Head De Magistratu you shall find made by these two questions Whether the Magistrate is to take care of Religion Whether he is to compel his Subjects to it And when the former generally is granted the latter is denyed This studious person it is like meeting with this hint in some of his Books hath suffered a deception into these thoughts that the Magistrate therefore hath indeed something to do about Religion but he is not to use his Sword about it For the making his conceptions out after he hath ingenuously offâ—red three opinions as extremes in some that make the Magistrate the sole judge of all matters Spiritual and Temporal in others that affirm the like power but to be exercised in Spirituals in a perfect subserviency to the Clergy in a third that make him have nothing to do but in civil matters only he does endeavour to find himself a middle way wherein the Magistrate shall have his something to do a he speaks and not all to do in these matters then offering his notion of what has something he hath to do is which is to be the great Officer or Minister of God upon Earth to see his will which in Religion be accounts onely what he hath revealed to be put in executive he does put in for the reskâ—ing that Liberty which he would assert for the Conscience that under the Gospel he must do this in the manner also that Christ hath appointed and so not by the temporal Sword A great mistake The office it self of the Magistrate is to bear the Sword and by that to act or effect what it has to do Where a person hath no power of Coercion he acts not as a Magistrate but as another man and to say he may not use his Sword in the concerns of the Gospel is all one as to deny him any Authority any care any concernment about Religion at all The Sword says Bracton does signifie potestatem Regni and this must be laid down for a truth undeniable that unto whatsoever the Power or Government of the Magistrate extends his Sword must What he can command he may compel and where he cannot compel he cannot command It is in vain I mean to talk of rule if he have not power to punish when his command is not fulfilled The meaning then of our Divines by their distinction at first is that Faith indeed cannot be constrained and so men are not to be driven into Religion by force but yet that the care which the Magistrate is to have for maintaining the true Religion being received is Authoratative and to be mannaged not precario but by his Sword is with them also out of question In the second place Here is a difference seems to be put between the Law and the Gospel as to the Magistrates seeing Gods will executed in the manner he hath appointed whereas that manner God hath appointed in seeing his will performed is only that his Officer should act agreeably to the light of nature or right reason in applying such means as are proper to that end whether under the Law or Gospel For magistracy it self and the manner of its actings both so far as concerns Gods appointment we are to consider does derive from Nature and not from Positive Institution By the manner which Christ hath appointed under the Gospel he must either mean something in opposition to the use of the Sword or not in opposition to it If something in opposition it must be as much as if he had said that the Magistrate must see Christs will executed by some other way then the use of his Sword whereas there is no other way or manner quâ Migistrate he can see any thing done The use of his Sword is nothing but the using his Authority or Office which I have said just now and that he cannot act as a Magistrate any otherwise If he mean something not in opposition hereunto then cannot his consequence be valid that the Magistrate must see Christs will done onely in the manner he hath appointed and therefore not by the use of his Sword seeing the causing it to be done in Christ manner and the use of the Sword will stand together And what is it then indeed he means by this manner Christ hath appointed I turn to his Book and apprehend by this manner he
understands nothing but by the means and Ordinances Christ hath appointed The people are to be brought into Christianity and obey the Gospel but it must be by preaching and the use of the like means for Faith comes by hearing and by force a man cannot be made to believe Well now the Magistrate is to sâ—e the means Christ hath appointed to be used for the setting up the Christian Religion therefore he must not use his Sword to the end I answer the direct contrary does follow therefore he may use it seeing by his Sword or Authority it is that he must cause these means to be administred It is true the will of Christ is that the people believe in him and obey him but it is not his will that they should believe in him without the use of the means How can we believe without a Preacher when the Magistrate then here is to see his will executed the meaning is he is to see the means used that the people may be brought to believe and obey him and to this purpose he may and must use his Sword if there be occasion for it He may and must punish the Minister and others if they neglect to do their Officer In the third place this position seems to put a difference between the matter of Religion and other matters in reference to the consequence inferred viz. as if the Magistrate acting in seeing Gods will executed in no other manner then God does approve must not use the Temporal Sword in Religious when he may in other matters whereas there is a difference indeed to be put between Things and Things upon this account for some things come not within the Verge hereof and some do but these Things and Things are not rightly stated Religious and Civil matters This cloud doubtless arises from hence In regard that in matters of Religion the Conscience is supposed to be concerned when it is not ordinarily in other things therefore are Religious matters conceived as reciprocal here with the whole matter of conscience wherein indeed the distinction does lye which is to be made in opposition to other matters The fourth cloud is upon the consequence it self It follows not from the Magistrate acting in no other manner then God approves in the seeing his will performed 〈…〉 â—ot use his Sword in the concerns of Religion The King of Ninive Decrees a fast in honour to the true God not be neglected we may be sure without punishment by any Nebuchadnezar Decrees that no body speak amiss of the Jews God under the pain of being cut in pieces Attaxerxes gives Commission to Ezra that whosoever would not obey the Law of his God judgement should be executed whether unto death or unto banishment or to confiscation of goods or to imprisonment Indeed these Princes being Heathen who believed more Gods then their own are not to be conceived to decree any thing hereby against their proper Religion or the consciences of of the people upon whom this is imposed but for the use of Sword in the matter of Religion as in other matters it is express in these instances to pass by what may be heaped hither from the Kings of Judah The last cloud or clouds then follow that having had difference made there where it needs not we have indeed no difference made there where it needs For besides that when the Magistrate is said to be Gods Minister to see his will in general to be executed it ought to be laid down with restriction to mens outward acts only and a salvo to his power constitutive of duty in indifferent things there are moreover these two Distinctions mainly lacking for the determining this matter and which are the groundwork of the whole Exercitation The one is that whether things be Religious or Secular under the Gospel or under the Law we must distinguish between those outward acts which are against mens consciences and those that are not against them This is the chief thing to be held fast In such acts which are against mens consciences it is true and a vehement truth the Magistrate acting in that manner God hath appointed cannot use his Temporal Sword It is not agreeable to the Law of Nature or rule of human reason to work upon the conscience with outward force and the manner God hath appointed the Magistrate to act in as was said e'en now is no other but to act agreeable hereunto Yet is not the reason for this upon on which I choose to stand here so much from the manner wherein the Magistrate is to act least that alone be to infirm to bear the stress is laid upon it as from the matter he is to see done That which he is to see performed is Gods will and I say that those acts these outward acts he were otherwise to see done which are against mens consciences are the matter of his forbidden will and so must he let them alone But as for all other outward acts of men which are not against their consciences Let the Magistrate see that what he requires be for the good of his people either for their Spiritual or Temporal good as whatsoever he requires which is not against Gods Law we may conceive like to be and whether they be Religious or Civil he is under the Gospel as well as under the Law Gods Minister and beareth not the Sword in vaine The other distinction which must not be forgotten does lye in the difference I put between a forcing men to that which is against their consciences and restraining them sometimes from that which they think they are bound to do The one of these may be lawful fit reasonable and without which the Government it self can hardly be secured when the other is never to be held so upon that one reason mentioned and is irrefragable Here then are two Questions in those ingenuous Papers proposed to the life as the sum of what could be desired if they had but been directly answered when proposed The one is How far men must be suffered to do those things which they say they are in conscience obliged to do The other 〈◊〉 How far they may be commanded and enforced to do such things which they indeed believe and say they are in conscience obliged not to do The substance of thâ—se Questions the Gentleman I perceive took to be one and so passes them off But as the putting a diffâ—rence I account before as to some things which in relation to what is asserted admits none so must the confounding that here wherein the difference bring put is so much to purpose needs lead him into darkness To these two questions therefore I answer instead of those Papers As to the former which is the case only of restraint I doubt not but men may and ought to be restrained often times in many things unto which they think themselves to be obliged and that for this reason Because that although God does require every man to act in
command and oblige the Conscience as human law does bind it which how and how far it does is stated in my other book he cannot justly punish the man for not doing that which he was not bound to do So that we see here where the Magistrate must not use his Sword even while he is using it and acts not as a Magistrate but by it He acts by his authority or sword in seeing the means used helps administred obstacles removed He can and may force others whose duty it is not to be wanting in this when he cannot then enforce the end to which he causes these means to be used He cannot I mean he ought not punish any man only because his Conscience is not wrought upon by the means which he has used and so does not what he would have him In this case it is not he or the man either can help it and he may as well beat his Dog for not whistling Upon this account there is very good reason that regard be had so much the more to things that are not attainable without supernatural help that they be not enforced as other things So that we are to understand well after this that the distinctions between the Religious and Secullar things in reference to the Magistrates Authority or using his Sword is for all what is before said to be held so far as it will reach but that is only to a majus minus of his Care not to the specification of the state of our business My meaning is that in things not Religious but Moral only or Civil the Magistrate is more free as to his commands and using his Sword than in matters of Religion or he is to take more care of what he imposes in the one than he need to do in the other but that will not advance to the stating the point hereupon that he hath Authority and may use his Sword in Civil and not in Sacred concerments The King under the Law was to have the Book of God by him to this end that he might govern the people according to it and consequently use his Authority in the things of Religion And so Jehoshaphat to name no other appoints his Officers for the doing justice in the matters of God as in the Kings matters This Proposition The Magistrate may use his Sword in Civil but not in Religious affairs is not a true Proposition and therefore can determine nothing And this Proposition The Magistrate is to take more heed how he uses his Sword in supernatural than in natural or civil concerns is a true Proposition but not a sufficient determination The main Question still remains What are those things wherein the Magistrate indeed hath no power or may not use his Sword Upon the knowledg of this must the stating the business depend for when we know in what things he may and in what he may not use his Authority the matter is at an end Here are we now therefore to think upon it what are those reasons why the Magistrate is to be more careful in the use of his power in Religious than in other matters and if it be any where it is like to be there that we shall find a bottom to determine the main issue To know these reasons look whatsoever difference there are to be made between Religious and Civil matters in respect to the Magistrates using his Sword about them and they must be these reasons The first difference then between Religious and Civil things that may be offerred as a reason why the Magistrate is to take more care of using his Sword in the one than the other is That Religious things are supposed to be of supernatural Revelation which cannot therefore be known and done without Gods grace and it is not fit the Magistrate should punish a man for the want of that which God does not give him When in Moral and Civil things he hath the knowledg of them only by Nature and the practise of the Realm Now then if this will serve to determine the Question the Proposition drawn from it must be this That in all matters that are of supernatural Revelation the Magistrate may not use his Sword but in all other he may use it But this Proposition is alike false with the first That in all Religious he may not and in all Civil he may The Law given by Moses was by Revelation but the Magistrates might punish the breakers of that Law The Gospel is by Revelation but the Magistrate may punish those that keep from Church out of Irreligion The example of the man that was put to death for gathering Sticks on the Sabbath is a president uncontroulable that a man may be punished for his Presumption when he may not for his Conscience in the matters of Religion The second difference between Sacred and Civil affairs which may be another reason why the Magistrate is to take more heed as to the one than to the other is That the World cannot be governed without the exercise of his Authority in Civils when if the world were without all that which is of supernatural Revelation and consequently if he meddles not at all with those things it might It appears then reasonable that in what the government of the World can be without the Magistrate should not be so pressing when in that which it cannot subsist without he must Let us then again draw out what is here and try if it will do In matters which the world may be governed without the Magistrate must not use his Sword but in matters without which it cannot be governed he may This Proposition labours with the same failing for the Magistrate may use his Authority in things which the world may be governed if it were without because he can use it in religious matters as hath been instanced already from Scripture A third difference between Sacred and Civil things and which is a reason why the Magistrate is to be more careful of his injunctions and using his Sword in the one above the other is Because it is more like that the things he imposes in Religious concerns should be against mens consciences than in Civil or Moral matters and the Magistrate hath no Authority over the Conscience of any It is the commandment of the most High that no man should ever do any thing against his Conscience and the Magistrate cannot use his Authority but for God Now let us see if this at last will serve for the determining the question and if it will then must this proposition be true That in all matters that are against mens Consciences the Magistrate hath no authority and cannot use his Sword but in all matters that are not against their Consciences or that are according to them he may use it And this proposition I count is true and certain and to be maintained even in Religious and Civil matters and so is the foundation concluded upon by me to establish our Determination SECT