Selected quad for the lemma: conscience_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
conscience_n law_n liberty_n penal_a 1,025 5 12.2059 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A56257 Of the nature and qualification of religion in reference to civil society written by Samuel Puffendorff ... ; which may serve as an appendix to the author's Duty of men ; translated from the original.; De habitu religionis Christianae ad vitam civilem. English Pufendorf, Samuel, Freiherr von, 1632-1694.; Crull, J. (Jodocus), d. 1713?; Pufendorf, Samuel, Freiherr von, 1632-1694. De officio hominis et civis. 1698 (1698) Wing P4180; ESTC R6881 106,116 202

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

well weighed and the Reasons thereof duly examined on both sides is very plain and easy to be determined But if any moral Decrees are made by a Council the same are to be taken to have no obliging Power but what proceeds either from a preceding Commission and Authority or from the Approbation of these Churches so that Chuncils have no coercive Power over the Church I cannot but touch by the by upon this Head viz. that this Assertion The Council is above the Pope is of such a Nature as will easily gain credit with all that are guided by right Reason or the Scriptures For who can be so stupid as not to be sensible that a great many learned Men who with joint labour apply themselves to the search after Truth are to be preferred before the Judgment of one single Person and that oftentimes of such a one who has but a very indifferent insight into the Holy Scriptures and Divinity This seems to imply somewhat of a Contradiction that this Point is asserted by the self-same People who make the Papal Chair the Center of the Church and the Pope the O●cumenick Bishop For the Romish Church pretends to be a Monarchical State but this Assertion of the Superiority of the Councils favours most of an Aristocracy But this Riddle may be unfolded in a few Words The French Clergy allows the Pope to be the Supream Head of the Church as far as they find it suitable with their Interest But whenever he attempts any thing against them or the States Policy of that Kingdom the old Song of the Liberty of the Gallican Church and the antient Doctrine of the Sorbone is revived which serves the French Clergy now and then for a Pretext to persuade the vulgar sort of People that the Gallican Church has not been polluted with those gross and abominable Errours as are introduced in the Church of Rome The next thing to be considered is that it is most evident that if a Controversie arises which may be decided within the Body of one Church there is no Occasion for the Communicating in such a Point with other Churches And that in case one Church alone is not stock'd sufficiently with able Teachers for the composing of the Difference and therefore must call to its Aid those of other Churches it is superfluous to call together a greater number than may be sufficient for the accomplishment of the Work So did the Church of Antioch refer the whole Controversie to those of Jerusalem without giving the least Trouble to those of Phenice and Samaria though their Deputies passed in their Way thither through both these Places Besides this the Deputies that are sent ought to receive their Authority and Instruction from their several Churches whom they represent because no Church has without reserve submitted herself to the Determination of her Teachers but only as far as their Doctrine is agreeable to the Word of God Neither are the Words in the Epistle to the Hebr. c. 13. 17. to be understood any otherwise than with this Limitation Besides this it is absolutely requisite that such Persons as have raised a Controversie should be heard in the Council that their Reasons should be duely examined weighed and proceeded upon according to the Rules prescribed in the Holy Writ And if the Controversie does not barely concern a Point of Doctrine but implies a Temporal Interest those that have any Share in it cannot pretend to a Power of deciding the Point in Prejudice of the adverse Party From whence it is evident that the Points in question betwixt the Protestant Church and the Papal Chair cannot be composed by any Council their Difference arising not barely from Point of Doctrine but about Domination Temporal Dignities and vast Revenues Nor is there the least Probability of any Composition betwixt these two Parties by way of Arbitration For who is it that can pretend to decide so great a Point Who is likely to be accepted of as an Arbitrator by both Parties The Protestants in all likelihood will not be so foolish as to submit themselves and their Case to the Determination of any Assembly consisting all of Roman Catholicks their sworn Enemies nor can they have the Imprudence as to ask it And as for the Pope he likes his Station too well to put it to the Hazard of an Arbitration But if an Assembly should be proposed to consist of an equal Number chosen by each Party this Expedient would scarce take it being to be feared that they would scarce keep within the bounds of Moderation and that the Assembly would appear sometimes not unlike the Feast of the Centaures § 39. It having been hitherto demonstrated In what condition the Churches were under the Pagan Emperours at large that the Church is no State we must consider in the next place unto what kind of moral Bodies the Churches have the nearest relation as they were in primitive Times under the Pagan Princes It is evident enough That they were of the nature of Colledges or such Societies where a great many are joined for the carrying on a certain Business under this limitation nevertheless as not to be independent from the Civil Jurisdiction Concerning the nature of the Colledges and Corporations Jacobus Cujachus may be consulted before all others 7 Observ 30 and 16 and Observ 3 and 5. And it is here very well worth our most particular Observation that such Societies as were erected for the exercise of Religion were by Publick Authority allowed of in the antient Roman Empire This is attested among a great many others by Athanagoras in the beginning of his Apology for the Christians when he says It is by your Command you greatest of Princes that several Nations live according to their own Customs and Laws and every one without being controuled by any Penal Statutes freely exercise the same Religion in which he was educated And thus he proceeds immediately after All Mankind offer their Sacrifices and use other Religious Ceremonies according to the Custom of their Native Country This Liberty of Conscience was among others the true cause why the Christian Religion in so short a time did spread it self all over so vast an Empire and why in the beginning very few opposed its Progress the Magistrates not thinking it belonging to their Province to intermeddle with it And this is one Reason why we never read of the Apostles having desired leave from the Civil Magistrates to preach the Gospel or to plant a Church Tho' another Reason may be given why the Apostles were not obliged to ask leave from the Civil Magistrates for the Constituting of Christian Churches because the Apostles had received their immediate Authority of Preaching the Gospel from him who is the King of kings and by whose Command all Mankind were then called to repentance From what has been said this rational Conclusion may be drawn That the Apostles had not only a Power to plant Churches in all places where they
Action of Pilate it being to be considered no otherwise than a publick Robbery and a power Luk. 22. 53. of darkness since in all his Proceedings there is not a footstep of a legal Process to be met with And it is so manifest that when religious Matters were in question the due Method and judicial Order of a legal Process have been violated a thousand times over and over that it would be superfluous to alledge any Examples of it here When Sovereigns punish or chastise a Pastor or Minister of the Church who has abused his Function or been defective in it this power does properly not proceed from the Civil Jurisdiction but from a Right translated to the Sovereign by the Church But those that are punished by the Civil Authority because they have stirr'd up by their turbulent Speeches and Sermons the People to Rebellion against their Soverereigns or have attempted to withdraw the Auditors from and to resist the Power of a legal Jurisdiction cannot be said to undergo Punishment on the account of the Christian Religion Furthermore it is false that the Church considered as such can claim any Jurisdiction properly speaking It is no less false that the Power of disposing and exercising those Functions belonging to each Church is a civil Act in regard of its publick Effect Mr. Houtuyn has been drawn into all these Errors by confounding the Commonwealth with the Church If these two be not very nicely distinguished but we allow the Church to be entirely swallowed up in the civil Power what have we got by shaking of the Popish Yoak For the condition of the Church will be never the better if all Ecclesiastical Matters without Exception are left to the arbitrary Disposal of Sovereigns To maintain which Mr. Houtuyn in contradiction to all Reason and the Scripture it self has invented A spiritual Good or the eternal Welfare of People as the main End and Duty of the Sovereign Power By Vertue of which he enables his Prince to force his Subjects to profess publickly what Religion he will be pleased to impose upon them tho' never so contrary to their own Opinion For it may be sufferable for a Man to keep his own Opinion concealed to himself but to be oblig'd to profess what is quite contrary to it is both abominable and intolerable The Saying of Constantine the Great so much extoll'd by Mr. Houtuyn himself is contradictory to his Assertion viz. That he could have wish'd all his Subjects to have been Christians but that he never forced any For this Emperour not only never attempted to force any one from his own Opinion which indeed was beyond his Power but also never constrained his Subjects to profess themselves Christians against their own Inclinations Our Author does also not a little contradict himself in what he says concerning Words sometimes exempting them from any civil Cognisance whereas before he had made them liable to the civil Jurisdiction What says he if our Faith express'd by Words should come to the knowledge of our Sovereign It ought to be look'd upon not so much as a Crime but rather as an Error to correct which is not to be effected by Punishments which do illuminate our Mind but rather by good Instructions But those that know the real difference betwixt the Common-wealth and Church that is to say betwixt the State and a Colledge may without much difficulty dissolve these knotty Questions which he has started concerining the Jurisdiction and Legislative Power of Princes over the Church As to the § LXIX It is to be observed that it is put beyond all question that Sovereigns have a Right to give the Authority and Force of a Law to such Statutes as they find suitable to the State it being their Prerogative to determine according to what Laws Judgment is to be given in Civil Courts of Judicature what is punishable and what is to be left to the Conscience of every Subject But it implies an Absurdity to attribute to Sovereigns a Right of giving publick Authority to Prophesies themselves neither the Intrinsick nor Historical Faith having any dependence on the Civil Jurisdiction by the force of which Subjects may be obliged to act but not to believe From whence it is evident that if any Prophecy appear to be from God it cannot receive any Addition by the Authority of the Prince no more than if he should declare Cicero to be a good Latin Author But in case a pretended Prophecy be either ambiguous or supposititious in it self and a Prince should persuade himself to be able by his own Authority to make it pass current for Truth he would be look'd upon as one beyond his Senses What he insinuates concerning the New Testament in general is much of the same Stamp It was not says he in the power of Christ and his Apostles to establish this Doctrine of the New Testament by Publick Authority which was the reason it remain'd in a private condition ●ill such time when Princes having received the Christian Faith they gave it a publick Authority and the force of Laws But the Rules and Doctrine of Christ cannot receive any additional Strength from the Civil Power it being contrary to its Genius to be established and promoted by civil Punishments For whosoever out of fear of Temporal Punishments professes in outward shew only this Doctrine does not act according to nor fulfil the Will of Christ The same may be repliy'd to § LXX For as the Scripture and the Christian Doctrine do not owe their Authority to the civil Jurisdiction the latter being introduced in the Government by God's peculiar Assistance inspite of all the Resistance of the civil Powers So ought the Interpretation of the the ambiguous and controverted Passages in the holy Scripture not to be determined by the Sovereign Authority it belonging not to the Prince only but to the whole Church or such as are authorised by the Church tho' at the same time the Prince considered as the Chief Member of it cannot b●●xcluded from having his share in such a Debate It is a prophane Expression when he says Christ himself having an unquestionable Power of introducing a new Law must needs have a right to interpret the same But since during the time of his abode here he lived among those that either out of Ignorance or Disobedience did not own Christ and that in a private Condition subject to the civil Power it is evident that his Laws Doctrine and the Interpretation of them did acquire their obliging Power and publick Authority from the civil Constitution A little more would have made the Office of Christ as being Mediator of the World also dependent from the civil Jurisdiction Is it not a prodigious Absurdity to affirm That the Doctrine of Christ has received its publick Authority from the civil Power among those who denied Christ And what follows That if at the time of Christ Princes had been Christians they would have acknowledged him for the