Selected quad for the lemma: doctrine_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
doctrine_n church_n particular_a universal_a 3,369 5 9.3348 5 true
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 20 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Clergy upon Admonition desist from these Abuses like as when a Creditor upon Summons is paid by his Debtor ought to supercede his Action against him But put the case that the Clergy either absolutely refuse or from time to time protract to desist from such Abuses so that there is but two ways left to be chosen either patiently to submit to their capricious Humour or else certain Persons in the State being damnified by these Abuses have a Right and Power to controul their Extravagancies Those that maintain the first Position must prove that the Clergy has been invested with such an unlimited Power by God Almighty to impose upon Christians even the most absurd Matters at leasure without being liable to be contr●●ued by any Power upon Earth Or they must demonstrate that Christians have absolutely submitted their Faith to the Clergy and that in such a manner that every thing which should be ordained by them should be received for Truth with all imaginable submission and patience But because it would savour of too much Impudence to pretend to the first it lies then at their Door to prove that the Clergy and their Supream Head did never err either in Point of Doctrine Ceremonies or Church-Government All which having been sufficiently demonstrated to the contrary by the consent of several Christian Nations We are of Opinion that when any Abuses are crept into the Church which are prejudicial to the Commonwealth or the Authority of Sovereigns these by vertue of their Sovereign Right and Prerogative have a Power to abolish and reform all such matters as interfere with the Publick Good and Civil Authority At the same time it cannot be denyed but that in a case of such moment it may be very convenient to acquain● the People with the Reasons of such a Reformation lest they should be surprized at it and look upon it as an Innovation which might prove of dangerous consequence And if especially the Rights of the People are invaded by these Abuses this Reformation ought to be undertaken with the knowledge and approbation of the Subjects It may be objected that by such a Reformation Divisions are raised in the Church But this is to be look'd upon as a matter of no great Weight such a Division being not to be imputed to those that rectifie such Errors but to those that obstinately refuse to return into the right Path either out ● Self-interest or Pride There is nothing more obvious out of the antient Ecclesiastical History than that such as were plainly convicted of an Error used to be excluded from the Communion of the Church But such as begin a Reformation upon a good and legal Account can under no Colour whatsoever be accused of Schism or Rebellion For those are Rebels who by forcible Ways endeavour to withdraw themselves from the Allegiance due to their lawful Sovereign Whereas all such as free themselves from Abuses unjustly imposed upon them without their own consent or any Divine Authority rather deserve to be stiled defenders of their own Liberty and Conscience especially if these Abuses and Errors are dangerous to their Souls For no Teacher no Bishop no Convention whatsoever was ever invested with an absolute Power of domineering over Christians at pleasure so that no Remedy should be left against their Usurpation It cannot therefore but be look'd upon as a great piece of Impudence in the Roman Catholick Party when they assume to themselves wholly and entirely the Title of the Church with exclusion to all others that are not of the same Communion For they either must pretend their Church to be the Universal or else a particular Church By the Universal Church is according to the Tenure of the Holy Scripture understood the whole multitude of the Believers wheresoever dispersed in the World whose Union consists in this That they acknowledge one God one Redeemer one Baptism one Faith and Eternal Salvation from whence only are excluded such as pretend to dissolve this Union that is who deny the true God and his Son Christ and who do not agree with the very Fundamental Principles of the Christian Religion This is the true Catholick Church not the Pope with his Ecclesiasticks and Ceremonies who impose their Authority upon Christendom And since those that for weighty Reasons have withdrawn themselves from the Church of Rome may and do believe a true Baptism a true God and Father a Faith agreeable to the Holy Scripture it is evident that the Roman Church is not to be taken for the Universal Church and that a Christian may be a Member of the true Catholick Church in a right sense notwithstanding that he never was in the Communion of the Roman Church or upon better Consideration has freed himself from its Abuses and Errors But the Popish Religion considered as a particular Church as it ought to be tho' if we unravel the bottom of its modern Constitution it will easily appear that the whole frame of that Church is not so much adapted to the Rules of a Christian Congregation as to a Temporal State where under a Religious pretext the chief aim is to extend its Sovereignty over the greatest part of Europe those that have withdrawn themselves from that Communion are no more to be counted Rebels than our Modern Philosophers are to be taken for Fools and Madmen because they differ in Opinion from Aristotle For all Believers who adhere to the true Faith are in regard of their Head Jesus Christ of an equal degree and aim all at the same End And Christ having given this Promise to all Believers That where two or three were gathered together Mat. 18. 20. in his Name there would he be in the midst of them no Church can claim any Prerogative by reason of the number of its Adherents What the Romanists alledge for themselves out of the Apostolical Creed is so full of absurdity that it contradicts it self viz. out of these words I believe one Holy Catholick and Apostolical Church For except they could cajole us into a belief that these words imply as much as to say There is but one true Church upon Earth which is the Roman Catholick there being no other besides that I cannot see what Inference can be drawn from thence to their Advantage Besides that the very sense of the words contradict this Interpretation if Reason the Holy Scripture and Experience it self did not sufficiently convince us to the contrary It is beyond contradiction that there is but one true Church upon Earth there being but one God one Christ one Baptism and one Faith But concerning one Point many Errors and Abuses may be committed Neither have the Popish Party any reason to brag of a particular Holiness especially concerning these matters wherein they differ from the Protestants The word Catholick relates here to a Doctrine not to a Sovereign State whose Authority is to be Universal over Christendom so that that Church is to be esteemed a Catholick Church which
else overturn that Government under which they then live So when Moses delivered the Israelites from the Aegyptian Bondage he led them into the Desarts of Arabia And when Romulus had resolved to erect a new Commonwealth he first withdrew himself from the Subjection of the Kings of Alba and such of the Neighbouring Countries as were for being Members of that new Commonwealth did leave their former Habitations and settled themselves in Rome But neither Christ nor his Apostles did ever remove Christians from their Habitations to other Places but allowed every body to remain in the same Station and under the same Government without the least prejudice to the former Rights of their Sovereigns over them From whence it is evident that the Christians tho' never so numerous could not be in a condition to settle themselves under any one State of their own For since according to the Rules of the Christian Religion the Rights of Sovevereigns over their Subjects Lives and Goods are not taken away or impair'd and no body can be subject to two Masters there could be no pretence of erecting a new Sovereignty especially in the midst of another Common-wealth nay it was beyond their Power even to enter into such a Society as should be in the least prejudicial to the Rights of their present Rom. 13. 1. 1 Pet. 2. 1● Sovereigns Who can be so ignorant in civil Affairs as not to understand what prodigious Sums of Money are required for the maintainig of a State And tho the Rights of Sovereigns do not extend so far as to take away from Subjects the private disposal of their Goods nevertheless may they lawfully restrain the Extravagancy of their Subjects if they pretend to dispose of their Goods in prejudice of the State For if this Liberty should be granted to the Subjects without limitation the State if deprived o● its nourishment would quickly be reduced to a languishing condition or else private Men might be enabled to erect a new State in the midst of the old one or at least to impair and endanger the Publick Safety And since those Sovereigns under whose Jurisdiction the Apostles lived had the same Right over the Fortunes of their Subjects as other Governments have and the Rights of Sovereigns were not taken away by the Doctrine of Christ there could be no other provision made for the maintainance of those Congregations as such but what was consistent with the lawful Rights of their Sovereigns and as much only as might lawfully be given by private Persons which could not exceed a private Fortune and were nothing more than Voluntary Contributions or Alms And whatsoever of any real Estate was attributed to these Uses was thereby not exempted from paying of Taxes no more than the Estates of other Subjects § 32. But if we take a full view of the The inward Structure of the Church is quite different from that of a State whole Structure of Civil Societies and by what means Subjects were united under one Government we shall find them to differ as Heaven and Earth from that Union which belongs properly to the Body of a Church If we trace that Original of Civil Societies or Commonwealths it is evident that Men having found the Inconveniencies and Dangers which attended a solitary Life in the free natural State did enter and unite themselves into Societies for their common Security And having agreed to a certain Form of Government did constitute one certain Person or a Counsel who were to be the supream Governours of that Society unto whom they submitted themselves and their fortunes for the common Benefit of that Society But Churches were erected upon quite another Foundation For here Men being made sensible of their miserable condition did not by their own accord and a general agreement turn themselves to God Almighty but being on the contrary overwhelmed with Darkness and Ignorance so as to be over secure and neglecting their own Salvation God did send his Messengers among them commanding all men every where to repent Here is not the least Acts 1● 30. footstep of any general Agreement of Men to erect and submit themselves under one Church but each particular Person for himself without any respect or regard to others did follow Christ and his Doctrine And whereas in a Civil State the whole family has its dependency from their Master and enjoys all the Privileges belonging to them under his Protection it is quite different in the Church where the Wife is not obliged to follow her Husband's Religion nor the Servant the Master So were in the family of 1 Cor. 7. 12. 21. Nacissus who himself was not a Christian several Christian Servants who are saluted as such by S. Paul And in this sense is to be ●●m 16. ●● taken what is said by Christ He that loved Father or Mother Son or Daughter more than me is not worthy of me As likewise Mat. 10. 3● c 12 5● Luk. 1● ●6 what is mentioned concerning Divisions Discords Dissensions which are to be raised by the Doctrine of Christ among the nearest Friends is to be understood of the strict Union betwixt Christ and the Believers which surpasses and is to be preferred before all the Tyes of Consangninity among Men. So Mat. ●0 34. that if a Father Husband or Master should turn Apostate the Son Wife or Servant are not obliged to follow their footsteps Neither is it requisite to be solicitous about any particular or certain Form of Government in the Church viz. whether the same ought to be Monarchical Aristocratical or Democratical For these seveveral Forms belonging only to a Civil Government are very preposterously made use of in the behalf of the Church which is far different from a Temporal State And as Churches and Commonwealths are erected for different Ends so the Offices belonging to both are altogether of a different Nature Who is so ignorant as not to know that for the obtaining the Ends of Civil Societies it was requisite to constitute various Degrees of Dignities appertaining to the Managers of the State whereas the most plain and natural Distinction betwixt Christians in reference to the Church is only that of Teachers and Auditors § 33. Besides all this the Teachers in a 9 There is a great difference betwixt Teachers in a Church and the Governours of a State Church do not only differ from Temporal Governours in a State in that these are constituted for different Ends But the main Difference is the very nature of their Constitution We will not insist here upon the Point of Succession by which a great many Sovereigns obtain their Sovereign Power which is quite otherwise in the Church But we will only treat in this place concerning the different Constitution betwixt Teachers and such Sovereigns as exercise the Supream Civil Power by Vertue of Election When therefore the Sovereign Power is lodged in any Persons by Election the rest who have thus chosen them their
contains every particular Point of Doctrine in the true sense as they are proposed in the Holy Scripture And those are called Hereticks who only profess some particular Points out of the Holy Writ for such as absolutely reject it are counted Infidels and Reprobates but either deny or explain the rest in a wrong and perverted sense How can the Popish Clergy therefore assume the Title of the Catholick Church before they have and that without contradiction proved every Point of their Faith out of the Holy Scripture Or exclude us Protestants from that Title till they have proved that our Doctrine is contrary to it Lastly It is called the Apostolical Church as being founded upon the Doctrine of the Apostles And the true Church loses nothing of its intrinsick Value whether it has been planted by the Apostles or whether the Apostolical Doctrine has been transmitted to them by others § 54. But it is not a very difficult Task to Whether Subjects without the Consent of their Sovereigns may separate themselves from an Erroneous Religion introduce a Reformation in Religion with the mutual Consent of Sovereign and Subjects so it may be questioned whether Subjects may attempt a Reformation when their Sovereigns and the whole Clergy or at least the greatest part of them do not acknowledge their Error but rather pretend to maintain it In this case it is our Opinion that provided these Errors ●o touch the Fundamental Points of our 〈…〉 Subjects as by the Grace of God and the ●ight of his holy Spirit have attain●●he true Knowledge may separate themselves from the Communion of that Church without the consent of their Sovereigns of the Clergy For every body being accountable to God for his Religion and answerable for his own Soul ●hose Salvation cannot absolutely be committed to any Body else and a Christian in Matters of Faith being not altogether to rely upon his Sovereign or the Clergy at least no farther than their Doctrine is congruous with the holy Scripture It is undeniable that Subjects may separate themselves from the Communion of that Church which is prosessed by their Sovereign and Clergy provided they can make it evidently appear that such a Church is infected with gross Abuses and dangerous Errors For the Church is a Colledge whose Members are not kept in Union by any Temporal Power but by the Union of the Faith and whosoever relinquishes that he dissolves the sacred Tye of the Believers Besides that it is not absolutely necessary for our Salvation that the Church be composed of a great Number but the same may be obtained either by a greater or lesser Number of the Believers Neither can this Separation prove in the least prejudicial to the Sovereign Authority it being supposed that those who have separated themselves adhere to the true pure Doctrine of the Gospel free from all Poison and Principles dangerous or prejudicial to the Government For civil Society was not instituted for Religion's sake neither does the Church of Christ participate of the nature of a Temporal State and therefore a Prince that embraces the Christian Faith does not thereby acquire an absolute Sovereignty over the Church or Mens Consciences So that if notwithstanding this Separation the Subjects pay due Allegiance to their Prince in Temporal Affairs there is no reason sufficient which can oblige him to trouble them meerly upon the score of their Consciences For what loss is it to the Prince whether his Subjects are of the same Religion with himself or of unother Or which was supposed before whether they did maintain the same Errors as he does The case indeed would be quite different if they should endeavour to withdaw themselves from their Allegiance to set up a separate Society without his Consent tho' it is undeniable that there are some Cases of Necessity when this civil Tye or Allegiance may be dissolved as for Instance when Subjects for want of sufficient Protection from their natural Prince are so hardly pressed upon by a more Potent Enemy that they are forc'd to submit to his Power And granted the Power of Sovereigns in the Church to be much greater than in effect it is Subjects are nevertheless bound to take care of their Souls whose Salvation is to be preferr'd before all other things in regard of which they may separate themselves from an Established Religion provided they are convinced of its Errors For that Subject who sacrifices his Life for his Prince does doubtless a glorious Action but what Prince can be so unreasonable as to expect that his Subjects should Sacrifice their Souls to the Devil for his sake That Prince therefore who does trouble his faithful Subjects for no other reason but because they cannot conform to his Opinion especially if they can maintain theirs out of the Holy Scripture commits an Act of Injustice Nay I cannot see how he can with Justice force them out of his Territories It is true he may refuse to receive Hereticks into his Dominions unless it be for Reasons of State Neither can a true Believer take it amiss if he is not permitted to settle in a Commonwealth govern'd by Hereticks For the Right of Naturalization belongs to Sovereigns which they may refuse and give to whom they think it convenient But as it is certainly the greatest Injustice in the World to force an in-born Natural Subject who has settled all his Fortunes in a Commonwealth meerly for his Religion's sake without being convicted of his Error out of his Native Country to the great detriment and danger of himself and his Family So if a Subject inclines voluntarily to leave his Native Country either to avoid the Frowns of his Prince or the hatred of the Clergy and Common People and to serve God with more freedom according to his own Conscience it ought not to be refused by his Sovereign I remember there is a certain Proverb used among the Germans viz. He that Commands the Country Commands Religion But this cannot be applied to the Princes of the Roman Catholick Religion who cannot lay any Claim to it it being evident that the Popish Clergy do not allow any such thing to these Princes And as to what concerns the Protestant Estates of Germany it cannot be denied but that they made use of this Pretension against the Emperor at the time of the Reformation which however ought to be thus interpreted That they denied the Emperor to have any Power of intermedling in the Affairs relating to their own Dominions not that only they claim'd it as belonging to the Rights of Sovereignty to impose any Religion tho' never so false upon their Subjects notwithstanding all which there are not wanting Examples that Princes have acted conformable to this Proverb with their Subjects A Prince who troubles his faithful Subjects meerly upon the score of Religion commits a gross Error no Christian Prince being obliged to propagate his Religion by forcible means provided his Subjects stand firm to their Allegiance to him
they are not preferrable in this Point before any other in Europe If any one questions th● Truth of it I appeal to Mr. Toland's Case concerning his Treatise Entituled Christianity not Mysterious It is both beyond my scope and the compass of a Letter to enter upon the Merits of the Cause on both Sides it will be sufficient here to refer my self to what has been Published against him lately here in England and in other Places All which if duely compared will soon evince how much the English Clergy ●as out-done the rest both by force of Argument and a generous gentle Behaviour But I am afraid I have abused your Lordship's Patience I will therefore conclude with recommending both my Author and my Self to your Lordship's Protection begging Leave to subscribe my self My Lord Your Devoted Servant J. Crull M. D. THE CONTENTS COncering Religion before Civil Societies were Instituted SECT 1. Every Man is accountable to God for his own Religion 2 How the same might be exercised in the free State of Nature 3 Parent● had originally the Care of Religious Worship lodged in them 4 Civil Societies were not constituted for Religions sake 5 Subjects did never submit their Opinions as to Religious Worship to the Disposal of their Sovereigns 6 What Power properly and according to the Laws of Nature belongs to Sovereigns in Ecclesiastical Affairs 7 Of the Nature of Revealed Religion 8 Among the Jews there was a very strict Vnion betwixt the Church and State 9 Who was the Supream Head of the Jewish Church 10 The Christian Religion is quite different from the Jewish 11 Some Reflections on the Behaviour of Moses when he laid the Foundation of the Commonwealth of the Jews 12 What on the other Hand our Saviour did when he Estalished his Church here on Earth 13 Christ was not the Founder of a New Common-wealth or People 14 Neither had he any Territories belonging to him 15 Christ did not exercise any Sovereign Power 16 But th● Office of a Doctor or Teacher 17 The Apostles did propagate the Doctrine of our Saviour 18 The Apostles had received their Authority of Teaching from God alone independant from any Human Power 19 The Apostles never assumed any Authority of Commanding others 20 Whether their Authority of Teaching does indirectly imply any right of Commanding others 21 Whether the Power of Absolution does imply any Right of Sovereignty 22 What is to be understood by absolving from Sins 23 Vnder whose Authority the Apostles did exercise the Power of Absolution 24 Of what nature it was 25 Whether St. Peter had any Prerogative granted above others 26 Whether the Power of Excommunicating imply a Sovereignty 27 The Commission granted by Christ to his Apostles contains nothing of Command 28 The Kingdom of Christ is no Temporal Kingdom 29 Whether the Christian Church ought to be considered as a State or Sovereignty 30 In the Primitive Church there was nothing like it 31 There is a great difference betwixt the Church and State 32 And the Doctors or Teachers in the Church are quite different from those that exercises the Sovereignty in a State 33 Whether the whole Christian Church ought to be considered as a State 34 It is not requisite to reduce the whole Christian Church under one Independant Severeignty or Head 35 Whether there ought not to be one Supream Judge in the Church to determine such Differences as may arise from time to time 36 An Example of a Controversie composed in the Apostles Times 37 Some Observations concerning the Nature and Vsefulness of General Councils 38 Concerning the Condition of the Christian Church under the Pagan Princes 39 Concerning its Condition under the Christian Emperours 40 The Church has not changed her Nature of being a Colledge or Society 41 Neither are Sovereigns thereby become Bishops 42 Christian Sovereigns are obliged to maintain and defend the Church 43 Of the Prerogatives of Princes in Ecclesiastical Affairs 44 Of the Power of Sovereigns over the Church Ministers 45 Of the Power of calling a Synod or Convention 46 Of their Power as to Church-Discipline 47 Of their Power of making Laws and Ecclesiastical Constitutions 48 How far Sovereigns are obliged to intermeddle in Religious Affairs when the Publick Safety lies at stake 49 Concerning Toleration of several Religions 50 Princes ought to be very careful not to be led away by false Suggestions 51 Sometimes the Prerogatives of Sovereigns are impaired under a religious Pretext 52 Concerning the Power of setting up a Reformation 53 Whether Subjects without the concurrence of their Sovereigns can pretend to set up a Reformation 54 OF THE Nature and Qualification OF RELIGION In REFERENCE to CIVIL SOCIETY c. AMong all those Questions which have for many Ages past been Controverted among Christians this may be deem'd one of the Chiefest which Treats of the Nature Authority and Power of the Church and which of the several Christian Sects ought most justly to claim the Title of the True Church The Romanists keep this for their last Reserve when Engag'd with the Protestants That they Attribute the Name of the True Church only to themselves and boldly stigmatize all such as are not of their Communion with the Names of rebellious Deserters This is the main Bulwark they rely upon thinking it sufficient to Alledge in their own behalf That they are not obliged so strictly to Examin and maintain every Article of their Faith against the Protestants since whatever Objections may be made out of the Holy Scripture the same ought to be rejected as Erroneous if not agreeable with the Interpretations and Traditions of their Church Thus making themselves both Judges and Witnesses in their own Cause ●esides this it is to be look'd upon as a Matter of the greatest Consequence both in regard of the Christian Church and the Publick Safety in a State to know exactly what bounds ought to be prescribed to the Priestly Order in Ecclesiastical Affairs as likewise to determin how far the Power of Sovereigns extends it self in Ecclesiastical Matters For if either of them transgress their Bounds it must of necessity prove the Cause of great Abuses Disturbances and Oppressions both in Church and State I was the sooner prevail'd upon to Search into the very bottom of this Question at this juncture of Time when not only the Romish Priests apply all their Cunning for the rooting out of the Protestants but also some of the greatest Princes in Christendom setting aside the Antient way of Converting People by Reason and force of Arguments have now recourse to op●n Violence and by Dragooning force their miserable Subjects to a Religion which always appear'd abominable to them But if we propose to our selves to examin this Point according to its own solid Principles as we ought to do without having recourse to Ambiguous Terms and Tergiversations it is absolutely requisite that we trace the very Original of Religion in General and of the Christian Religion in Particular so as
are first examined but where the Faith was the forgiveness of Sins was the immediate consequence of it He that believed on him says 〈…〉 3. 1● St. John is not condemned but he that believed not is condemned already Neither is that Confession whether tacit or express which ought to precede the Remission of Sins like to those Confessions which in Judicial Courts are required to be made by Offenders and are sure to meet with deserved Punishment But it has Jos 7 1● ● 20 21. a resemblance to those Confessions that are made to Physicians by such of their Patients as labour under a secret Distemper hoping thereby for Relief in their Diseases As it is expressed in the 32 Psalm v. 3 4 5. of David Neither can true Repentance be supposed without such a Confession for how can we ask forgiveness either of God or our Neighbour whom we have offended unless we confess and acknowledge our Error Lastly it is to be Prov. 28. observed That Christ and his Apostles during the time of Grace here upon Earth did not intend to set up a judicial Court but to preach and to announce repentance and forgiveness of Sins But of the great Day of Judgment it is said That God will proceed to Judgment in a solemn manner there the Supream Judge will sit upon the Throne of Judgment thère Seats are to be prepared for the Assessours Rev. 20. 12. the Books are to be opened and every one is to be judged according to his Works and that without Appeal It ought also to be taken notice of That tho' we have obtained pardon for an Offence from our Neighbour this does not always and necessarily imply a Pardon from God Almighty for it is possible that notwithstanding a Pardon obtained from Men God has not absolved us from that Offence as for instance if the Offender be without true Faith or an Hypocrite And on the other hand it is possible that our Offences are forgiven by God when forgiveness has been denied us by Men as in case our Neighbour refuses to pardon an Offence tho' we beg Forgiveness and profer Satisfaction to be made or a Priest being overcome by private Passion should deny us Absolution When therefore the Priest says Thy Sins are forgiven unto thee it is not always to be taken for granted that Christ does then make use of the same Words For God alone is the Judge of our Faith and even our Thoughts But Men can only give their Judgment according to such Circumstances or outward Signs as effect our Senses which often prove deceitful and far different from what we keep concealed within us And tho' in Civil Courts of Judicature it is sufficient if Judgment be given in a Case according to what is proved by Evidence notwithstanding the same may be contrary to Truth it is quite otherwise with God Almighty who searching into the very bottom of our Hearts cannot be deceived by Hypocrisie And tho' the Priest should tell thee a hundred times over and over thy Sins are forgiven unto the and thou art destitute of Faith it can avail thee nothing Lastly it ought not to be forgotten that when God did give unto the Apostles the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven he did not thereby surrender all his Power of forgiving Sins or of receiving penitent Sinners into his Favour or did debar himself from making use of this Power unless by the means of Priests so as to reserve only to himself the Supream Prerogative of remitting of Sins in case of an unjust refusal of the Priest No by no means for if this were granted it would be in vain for us to pray every day Forgive us our Sins All these things duely considered are evident Proofs that when it is said that the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven were given unto the Apostles it is to be understood from the Doctrine of the Gospel which creats of the remission of Sins through our Faith in Christ when the Apostles taught this Doctrine to the Believers it was said of them that they forgave Sins in the same sense as they are said to save others by Preaching the Gospel to the Believers And on the contrary 〈…〉 4. 16. when they preach the Gospel to the Unbelieving they are said to have bound them so as that they shall be bound in Heaven The Apostles Joh 3. 18. therefore when they announced to the Believing the Grace of God and Forgiveness of Sins through Christ did open the Gates of Heaven and they shut them against such as being unbelieving refused to accept this Doctrine So that when a Minister of the Church applies this Doctrine of the Gospel to one particular Person he says thus much to him If thou believest according to thy Confession I announce and confirm unto thee Remission of thy Sins through the Merits of Christ so that thou mayest be now assured that the same are forgiven by Christ in Heaven But if thou not believest thy Sins are not forgiven For remission of Sins is the necessary consequence of Faith even before the Absolution is pronounced by the Priest it being not left to the arbitrary Pleasure of Men whether to apply the gracious Doctrine of Remission of Sins to a believing Person or not But he that believes is thereby justified before God notwithstanding he be prevented from receiving Absolution from the Priest Out of what has been said it is evident that according to the Intention of our Saviour these Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven were not to be made use of for the Establishment of a Temporal State or to gain other Temporal Advantages For Christ ordered the Apostles to preach Remission of Sins and give for nothing what they had received for nothing but not to traffick with the Word of God Neither did they by preaching the Gospel make Men subject to themselves but to Christ Nay St. Paul could not understand without Indignation that some among the Corinthians would 1 Cor. 1. 12 1● Whether St. Peter had any be called from him some from Apollo c. § 26. But of what nature soever their Power or Function might be the same was granted Prerogative granted him before the rest of the Apostles in an equal degree to all the Apostles so that none of them cogld claim a particular Prerogative or at least not any right of Commanding the rest For if we peruse those several Mat. 28. 18 19 20. c. 23. 8. S. Joh. 20. 21 22 23. c. 13. 14 15 16. Passages in the holy Scripture where the Apostolical Function was established and conferred upon them there are not the least footsteps of Inequality to be found among them And that Passage St. Luke 22. 26 27. Epistle to the Galat. 2. 9 14. By St. Matth. 16. 18. which the Romanists make such a stir about contains nothing that can give any legal Pretence Superiority to St. Peter and much less to the Roman Bishops over all the
Christian Churches St. Peter had in the abovementioned place made his Confession That Jesus was the Son of the living God This excellent Confession did deserve a suitable answer from Christ who said thou art Peter as if he would say persist in this thy Confession Peter which does in no wise imply that Peter should thereby have deserved those Prerogatives over the other Apostles as the Romanists do pretend to For St. Peter did not make this Confession for himself only but in the Name of all those unto whom Christ spoke at that time In the same manner as he spoke in the Name of the rest of the Disciples by St. John 6. 69. We believe and are sure that thou art Christ the Son of the living God Joh. 1. 34 36 42 45 49. Mat. 10. 32 33. John 11 27. Acts 4. 11. Neither was Peter the first that made this Confession For before him the same had been made by John the Baptist by St. Andrew Philip and Nathanael And it is no difficult Task to prove out of several passages of the holy Scripture that none could be taken for a true Disciple of Christ unless he had made this ● 8. ●● ● 9. ●0 22. Confession And our Saviour to shew of what consequence this Confession was added these Words Vpon this Rock I will build my Church Which is as much as to say this Doctrine that Jesus is the Son of God is the main Foundation Stone whereupon is to be built the mystical Edifice of the Christian Church So that no further inference can be made from these Words than what is expressed to the same purpose by St. John 20. 31. and in the 1 Epist of John 2. 22. c. 3. ●0 c. 4 2. viz That the fundamental Article of the Christian Religion is That Jesus of Nazareth is the true Messias and the Son of the living God § 27. It also is worth our Consideration Wh●th●r the Power of 〈…〉 any Sov●reign Right of Juri●●cation whether the Power of Excommunication which was used by the Apostles and in the Primitive Church implies any Sovereign Authority such as ought to be exercised in a State Unto this we answer in the Negative provided the same be taken according to the proper Use and End of its genuine and primitive Institution For that this Power may with conveniency enough be made use of if misapplied to serve an ambitious Design and to keep the poor People in awe is sufficiently proved by Experience It seems to me that there was a remarkable Difference betwixt the Excommunication of the Jews by virtue of which they were excluded from their Synagogues and the Excommunication used among the Primitive Christians For among the Jews where the Sovereigns and the People professed one and the same Religion which also was entirely united with the State it might easily happen that the Exclusion from the Synagogue did carry along with it several Inconveniencies in Civil Affairs and might therefore not unjustly be considered at the same time as a Civil Punishment which rendered the Offenders infamous in the Commonwealth Especially since according to the Fundamental Constitution of that Government there were several things belonging to Religion punishable by their civil Constitutions But it being already put beyond Question that neither our Saviour nor his Apostles did ever pretend to any Civil Power and that besides this the Primitive Christians lived under the Jurisdiction of other Princes how could their Excommunication Ban or what other sort of Ecclesiastical Censine was used among them be supposed to have any influence upon the Civil State and Condition of the Christians or to have been of the same nature and force properly speaking as Civil Punishments are This will more plainly appear if we examine those Passages where this Matter is compleatly treated of in the New Testament It is said in Matthew 18. 15. 16 17. If thy Brother shall trespass against thee go and tell him his Fault between thee and him alone If he shall hear thee thou hast gained thy Brother But if he will not hear thee then take with thee One or Two more that in the mouth of two or three Witnesses every Word may be established And if he shall neglect to hear them tell it unto the Church but if he neglect to hear the Church let him be unto thee as a Heathen Man and a Publican Certainly out of this passage nothing can be inferr'd that has any relation to a Temporal Jurisdiction or Sovereignty but barely shews us how differences ought to be composed among Christians So St. Paul ordains 1 Cor. ● 1. 2. that we shall rather leave Differences to the Arbitration of a Brother or rather take wrong than to go to Law with a Brother before the Unbelievers to the great shame of the Christian Name So that tho' it is else required from the Offender to beg the Pardon of and Vid. Mat 5. 40. offer Satisfaction to the Person offended nevertheless if he neglect his Duty in this Point Christ commanded that the offended Party shall first offer a Reconciliation and try before he brings his Action against the Offender whether Satisfaction for the Injury received and a Reconciliation may not be obtained by a private Arbitration If this prove fruitless he says he ought to take along with him two or three Witnesses to try whether they can prevail with his Adversary to bring him to a more pliable Temper and at the same time may testifie That the offended Party did offer every thing which might tend towards a Reconciliation betwixt them But if after all this he remain obstinate the Difference ought to be referr'd to the whole Congregation of the Believers residing in that Place for I see no reason why by the word Ecclesia or Church the Presbyters only should be understood But if they also cannot prevail with their Authority over his Stubborness let him then be unto thee like a Heathen man and Publican unto whom his Trespasses will not be remitted because he refuses to acknowledge his Offence or to give Satisfaction for it which is as much as to say fly his Conversation like that of a vile Person which e●●ry one may freely do without being thereu●●● compelled by any Superior Power For that the Jews did not converse with the Hea●●ns and Publicans except in Civil 〈…〉 of no great force against us it being ce●●ain that the Heathens and Publicans were no● so infamous in themselves by any Civil Constitution the Jews being at that time subject to the Heathens who matter'd not their Conversation Besides this it is left to every ones free Choice whom he will admit into his familiar Conversation and always was a certain Rule among the wiser Sort not to be familiar with People of a perversed Humour and an ill Life whose Conversation every body may avoid as he finds it most convenient So the Apostle bids us to reject a Man that is a Heretick after the first and
second Admonition lest we Tit. 3. 10. Thes 2. 14. 2 Pet. 2. 1. 2 Gal. 1. 8 9. should be infected with his false Doctrine for which he is to expect due Punishment from God Almighty Neither does that passage in the 1 Epistle to the Corinthians 5. 1. and following Verses and in the 2 Epistle to the Corinthians 13. 2 10. where St. Paul declares that according to the Power given him he intends to deliver the incestuous Person to Satan take it in what sense you please involve any Civil Jurisdiction or Command no more than those in the 1 Epistle to the Corinthians 6. 9. seq in the 1 Timothy 1. 20. in the 2 Epist of John 5. 10. All which passages signifie no more than that every body may freely decline the Conversation of such People as he thinks may be reproach or hurtful to him without implying a prejudice to their Reputation in Civil Affairs So that by avoiding the Conversation of ill Livers we are not obliged to retire from the World that is we need not be so scrupulous in avoiding such Conversation as to neglect our Duty or other necessary Business appertaining to Civil Society And in this sense it is appliable as well to Christians as to Pagans of an ill Conversation The Commission of the Apostles contains nothing resembling any Sovereign Power § 28. Lastly if we cast our eyes upon those Instructions which Christ gave to his Apostles and Disciples it will evidently appear that their Commission had not the least relation to the Establishment of a Sovereign State A State cannot be without a Supream Head who having Power to bestow Honours and Dignities this generally proves the occasion of ambitious Designs A State cannot be maintained without considerable Revenues which entices Men to Avarice But if we look upon our Saviour we shall find that his main Endeavour is to keep his Disciples from ambitious Mat. 18 1 2 3 4. c. 23 8. Mark 9. 33. Luke 9. 46. Joh. 13. 13 14 15 16. Designs and Covetousness The Instruction given by Christ to his Disciples in S. Matthew 10. when after having endowed them with the Gift of Miracles he sent them as it was to make their first Tryal among the Jews deserves particularly here to be taken notice of tho' it is not to be questioned but that the same Instruction remained in force for the most part after they were sent among the Gentiles The first Precept in this Instruction is That they shall take heed not to abuse the Christian Doctrine and the Gift of Miracles for the heaping up of Gold and Silver which are otherwise accounted the Sinews of a State As you have received it for nothing so you shall give it for nothing is the Command which was very well observed by St. Peter when he said Silver and Gold have I Act. 3. 6. none And lest they should under pretence of Subsistance and acquiring Necessaries be enticed to Avarice Christ forbid them even to provide two Coats Shoes Staves or a Purse but that they should be contented with what they received from their Auditors It is not to be denied but that this Command may chiefly be applied to such Journeys as were not to be too long or in far distant Countries But on the other hand it ought to be taken into consideration that the Allowances to be given to those that preached the Gospel are compared to the Wages of Workmen which seldom amount to any more than is necessary for Subsistance or at the most cannot exceed a private Fortune having not the least comparison with those vast Revenues which are required to maintain a State As may be seen in Mat. 10. 10. Luk. 10. 7. 1 Cor 9. 11. And the passage in the 1 Epist to Timothy ● 18. chiefly relates to the Priesthood where it is expresly forbidden not to make a Trade of their Office and to sly Avarice as the root of all Evil and consequently of all those Abuses and Superstitions which have overwhelmed the Church of Rome And that by their Number they might not appear terrible Christ only sends them two and two with this express Mark 6. 7. Command not to force their Doctrine upon any Body but to seek for reception by a kind Salute and if they find them inclined to receive their Doctrine to abide there but to leave those whom they found unworthy and not ready to hear their Words and even to shake off the Dust of their Feet After these Instructions given Christ foretels them what Persecutions and Dangers they must undergo all which he will have them to overcome not by Force but by Patience by shewing their Innocence Mat. 5. 10 11. or flying to another Place The quite contrary is practised in Temporal Governments whose Founders lay this down for a sure Maxim of State Tu contra audentior ito Never shrink before your Enemy After the Ascension of our Saviour they dispersed into all Parts of the World according as they were inspired without having appointed any certain place of Residence for their Government from whence they might receive their Instructions or Commissions and where they were to be accountable concerning their Negotiation or where to fix the Center of their Correspondency at least thus much is certain that nothing like it is recorded in the holy Scripture Neither was it in their Power to have acquired any great Territories it being obvious that they lived always under another Jurisdiction and in such Places where the Government was already Established Nor had they any Authority to exact upon their Auditors except what they were pleased to allot them by voluntary Contribution For if they should have attempted any thing beyond it no doubt but those Magistrates under whose Jurisdiction they lived might legally have stopt their Proceedings as done in prejudice of their Authority For in case the generality or the greatest part of the Christians should have attempted to follow the Example of some of their Brethren at Jerusalem who were for having Acts 2. 44 45. c. 4. 5. all things in Common it had been lawful for their Sovereigns to put a stop to their inconsiderate Design which needs must have tended to the great detriment of the Common-wealth Lastly the Apostles did not oblige their Auditors to leave their antient Habitations like Moses led the Israelites out of Aegypt but left them in quiet Possession of their former Station and honest Functions not pretending to any Innovation but that they should receive the Christian Religion § 29. It is furthermore to be consicered whether the Doctrine of Christ which unites The Kingdom of Christs implies no Temporal Sovereignty our Hearts under the Obedience of Christ by the Faith does not by vertue of this Union constitute a certain Sovereignty resembling the Sovereign Power of our Civil Governments To this we answer in the Negative as it may plainly appear to those that will duely consider the Nature and Qualifications
which are in the holy Scripture attributed to the Kingdom of Christ and the Kingdom of Heaven here upon Earth It is without question that the Union of the Believers under Christ their King ought to be considered as a Kingdom or Empire but such a one as is not of this World and consequently of a quite different nature from that Sovereign Power which is exercised in a Civil Government Christ is there the King who having withdrawn himself from our sight has as it may be said settled his Court in Heaven His subjects are dispersed throughout all parts of the World where the Christian Doctrine is taught and received by the Believers who by the intrinlick Vertue of this Doctrine are confirmed in their Faith and made proof against all the Temptations and Malice of this World The Civil Power does not reach this Kingdom true Piety being not to be implanted by Human Force which is insufficient to procure God's Grace or raise those inward Motions which are chiefly acceptable to God Almighty and without which all our exterior Actions that may be enforced by a Civil Authority are to be deem'd vain and fruitless For the Kingdom of Christ being a Kingdom of Truth it requires no Civil Power or Force For Truth by the help of the Christian Doctrine and with the assistance of God's Grace does gently insinuate it self into the Hearts of Men and the Rewards or Punishments which those are to receive that either accept or despise this Doctrine are reserved for the Life to come He that will be pleased to examine those several Passages where mention is made of the Kingdom of Christ or the Kingdom of Heaven may soon be convinced that not any thing is to be met withal there which has the least resemblance to a Civil Power or Sovereignty Those that expect to enter into this Kingdom Mat. 3. 2. c. 4. 1● c. 4. 23. c. 9. 35. must qualifie themselves by Repentance It is spoke of Christ himself that he went about Mat. 5. 1. seq preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom of Heaven The Virtues and Qualifications which Christ requires in those that will enter into his Kingdom and consequently be blessed with eternal Salvation have but little relation to the Qualifications of a Subject in a Civil Government Mat. 5. 19. c. 7. 21. c. 6. 33. c. 13. 21. 33. 44 45 52. In that Kingdom every one is called great or the least according to his Proficiency in the Christian Doctrine and according to his Obedience or disobedience to it We are commanded first to seek the Righteousness of this Kingdom The great Mystery of this Kingdom is the powerful operation of the Word of c. 24. 47. God In this Kingdom are not only suffered those that are Foreigners to it but also its Enemies which is against the Maxims of a Mat. 16. 19. Civil Government The Keys of this Kingdom are contained in the Doctrine of Remission of Sins And what is taught us concerning Mat. 18. 1. c. 10. 21. c. 23. 8. Mark 9. 33 34. c. 10. 42. Precedency in the Kingdom of Heaven is quite contrary to what is practised in a Civil State It is allowable by the Civil Constitutions for every one to pursue his Right but in the Kingdom of Christ he is counted an ill Subject who will not remit a Trespass to Mat. 18. 23. c. 21. 14. Mark 10. 14. his Brother The Kingdom of Christ is also of the little Children Those that are employed in this Kingdom have different Tasks and undergo different sorts of Hardship and yet their Reward is the same This Kingdom is Mat. 20. 1. c. 21. 23 taken from those that refuse it whereas it is a Maxim of Temporal Sovereigns to force such c. 2● 2. as are refractory to Obedience and this was the reason why after the Jews had despised it it was offered to the Gentiles He that will c. 25. 1. enjoy the Benefit of this Kingdom must not be sloathful The richest find always the easiest Reception in a Civil State but the rich Man shall hardly enter into the Kingdom of Christ Mat. 19. 23. Mark 10 23. Luke 12 32. He is accounted a good Subject in a State who is industrious and gathers Riches by all lawful ways and means but this is reckoned as superfluous in the Kingdom of Heaven One of the chiefest Motives which induced Mankind to enter into Civil Societies was to preserve themselves and their Possessions But Christ says Whoever he be of you that forsaked not all that he hath he cannot be my Disciple Luk. 1● 33. And lastly of all he says The Kingdom of God cometh not with observation neither shall they say lo here or lo there for behold the Kingdom of God is within you It would be superfluous to c. 17. 21. alledge more for the proof of it all the rest being most of them the same in Substance § 30. Though it be evident that the Union Whether the Church be a State of the Believers under Christ their King and that Mystical Body whose Head is Christ the Members of all the Believers in general cannot be considered as a Temporal State nevertheless it is worth our enquiry whether not all those in General that profess the Christian Doctrine may be considered as a Body belonging under one Civil Government or at least have a near resemblance to a Civil Commonwealth Or which is the same in effect Whether the Church according to our Saviour's Intention ought to be considered as a State or Commonwealth We take here the Word State in its common Acceptation viz. for a certain Society of Men which being independent from any Foreign Jurisdiction live under the Protection of their own Sovereigns The main intention of this Question is that after we shall have made it appear That the Church according to the intention of Christ and his Apostles neither was nor could be a State it may from thence be concluded whether that Church which pretends to a Sovereignty considered as such be Christ's Church But to trace the very original of this Question it ought first of all to be considered in what What is un●er●tood in the holy Scripture by the word 〈◊〉 Sense the Word Ecclesia or Church is taken in the holy Scripture The word Ecclesia has its off-spring out of the Democracy's of the Greeks whereby they understood a Convention Meeting or sometimes a Concourse of the People or of a considerable Part of their Citizens in order to receive Propositions to consult and make Decrees concerning Matte belonging to the Commonwealth It is der●ved of ●vocare or to Call-forth not that there by was always understood an Assembly summoned out of a greater Multitude for I ●● see no reason why not all the Citizens had Right to appear in those Assemblies but because they were called out of their private Dwelling-places and from their ordinar●●usiness to meet in a publick Place
16. 1. 2 Cor. 8. 2 3 8. noble and excellent than ●● other spiritual Gifts Alms are the only Taxes which belong to the Church and these also cannot be exacted 1 Tim. 5. 16. by the Sovereign Authority of the Church Tho' it be undeniable that every Church is obliged Phil. 4. 1● Cor 9. ●● 〈…〉 to maintain its Ministers In the 2 Epist to the Corinthians c. 11. 28. St. Paul professe● That the Care of all the Churches lies upon him to strengthen those that were weak and to ob●●ate Scandals And in the next following Chapter he says That the Church of Corinth is an no wise inferior to other Churches which were planted by others who had exercised the Apostolical Function before him Neither is any thing to be met withal in the Holy Scripture which proves the Subordination of one Church to another Nay the Congregations of small Towns and even of private Families are often stiled Churches as those of vast Cities and those particular Churches which 1 Th●● 2. 14. 2 Th●● 1. 4. were planted in Judea are called the Churches of God In the Epistle to the Ephesians c. 1. 22. c. 5. 23. and to the Colossian● c. 1 18 24. Christ is called the Head of the Body of the Church which he has presented to himself a glorious Church not having Spot or Wrinkle or any such thing but that it should be Holy and without Blemish sanctified by Christ's Redemption and Ephes 5. 26 27. cleansed with the washing of Water by the Word What Qualifications are required in a Bishop or a Governour of a particular Church is expressed in the 1 Epistle to Timothy c. 3. 2. and following Verses in the 2 Epistle to Timothy c. 4. 2. in the Epistle to Titus c. 1. 2 8 9 and c. 2. 7. All which if duely examined have a relation meerly to the Purity of his Doctrine and his being blameless in his Behaviour and do not in the least savour of any thing properly belonging to the Supream Governours of a State For it is said that he must be the Husband of one Wife Vigilant Sober of a good Behaviour given to Hospitality apt to Teach Not given to Wine no Striker not greedy of Filthy Lucre but patient not a Bawler not Covetous One that ruled well his own House having his Children in Subjection with all Gravity Not a Novice not lifted up with Pride All which are such Vertues as belong properly to a Teacher or a private Person In the 1 Epistle to Timothy c. 3. 15. the Church is called the House of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or The Pillar and Ground of Truth like we are used to affix Proclamations to great Pillars to the view of every body Tho' some antient Manuscripts refer these words The Pillar and Ground of Truth to the following Sentence the Preceding ending with the words The Church of the living God Then begins a new Sentence thus The pillar and ground of Truth and without Controversy great is the Mystery of Godliness God was manifest in the Flesh c. So that in this sense this Passage is parallel to what Christ told St. Peter by St. Matthew c. 16. 18. and to that of St. John c. 20. 31. The Titles of Honour belonging to the Christian Church are recited in the Epistle to the Hebrews c. 12. 22. where it is called The mount of Sion the City of the living God the heavenly Jerusalem the innumerable Company of Angels the General Assembly and Church of the first Born which are written in Heaven where God is the Judge of all and Jesus the Mediator of the New Covenant and the Sperit of just Men made perfect And in the Revelation c. 2. 3. the Churches of Asia are praised for their good Deeds and their Vices exposed with a severe Commination that if they did not repent their Candlestick which is the Doctrine of the Gospel should be taken away from them which is sufficient to shew that the Light of the Gospel may be extinguished in particular Churches All these passages if duely compared and examined do not furnish us with any Matter proving the Christian Church to be a State or to have any resemblance to a Temporal Sovereignty The Condition of the primitive Church was such as not to permit a Sovereignty within it self § 31. But besides what has been said already a great many Reasons may be alledged which sufficiently prove that it was not in the power of the Apostles to plant a Church resembling in Power to a Temporal Sovereignty if they had entertained any Thoughts of attempting a Design both unnecessary and illegal The common Security is the main End of every Government whereby Men are enabled to defend themselves by their united strength against all Injuries which cannot be performed without a considerable number of stout and well appointed Men. But the Name of the Church is often given to the Congregations of an indifferent Town nay even of private Families And does not our Saviour himself Mat. 1● 20. say Where two or three are gathered in my Name there am I in the midst of them Which moved Tertullian to say Three make up a Church as well as a Colledge And where Christ is in the midst of a Congregation certainly there cannot be wanting sufficient Means to obtain Salvation viz. the Word the Minister and the Sacraments so that the end and scope of the Christian Religion may be attained to even in an indifferent numerous Congregation of the Believers Neither does the greater number of the Believers joyned in one Church like a vast number of People is necessary for the erecting of a State in it self considered add any thing or is necessary for the obtaining the end of the Christian Religion it being indifferent in regard of obtaining Salvation whether a Man worship God in a great or small Congregation From whence this inference may be made That in case the greatest part of the Church should separate it self from the others the rest notwithstanding all this may pursue and obtain the End of the Christian Faith Quite otherwise as it is with Temporal Commonweaths where if the greatest part of its Inhabitants happen to be rooted out the rest will be thereby disinabled to maintain the State These Qualifications belonging to Subjects especially to such of them as are to be preferred before others in a State either for their Usefulness or the honour of the Commonwealth are not esteemed the same in the Church so that he who does not excel in Riches Strength or Wisdom shall therefore not be deemed a good Christian Furthermore 1 Cor. 20. 21 22. those that pretend to lay the Foundation of a new State must have Territories belonging to them where their new Subjects may settle themselves and their Fortunes And all such as live or are seated in a Commonwealth if they pretend to set up a new State must either transplant themselves into another Country or
Supream Governour do thereby submit themselves to the Disposal of those their Sovereigns in such a manner as to oblige themselves that whatsoever they think conducing for the publick Welfare shall be taken as such by the whole Body and that they will always be ready to execute their Commands Wherefore Sovereigns are always invested with a full Power to force their Subjects to a compliance with their Commands by inflicting Punishments ●pon them But how is it possible to imagine that any Church or Congregation of the Believers should ever or ought to submit themselves so entirely to the Pleasure and Disposal of their Teachers as to oblige themselves to acquiesce barely in and to follow blindly whatever shall be proposed by them as conducing and leading to the way of Salvation it being certain without contradiction that none of the Believers do entirely submit themselves and their Faith to any Body but to God Almighty whose Will and Commands ought to be interpreted by the Teachers of the Church and their Auditors to be exhorted to a due Compliance with them For whoever it be that proposes any Doctrine surpassing human Reason if he pretends to gain credit by his Auditors must either claim it by Virtue of his own Authority or by Compulsion or by Virtue of a more Superiour Power But any Man that offers Matters not agreeable to Reason does thereby expose himself and so looses his Authority except he can by other more powerful means maintain his Doctrine and gain credit with his Auditors It was for this Reason that to the Greeks who were Men that sought after Wisdom and Reason the Preaching of the Apostles was Foolishness And S. Paul was for the same Reason nick-named 1 Cor. 1. 23. a Babler by the Athenian Philosophers Neither is any human Power capable of enforcing Acts 17. 18. the Mysteries of Faith and the Christian Doctrine upon People for which reason Christ told his Apostles Go and Teach and Believe and that with all your hearts to obtain which all human means which imply any Temporal Advantages or are forcible in their own nature are to be taken for Trifles and insufficient There is then no other Way left but that such Doctrines must be verified by a Superiour Being or Principle Mark 16. 20. viz. the Grace of God which always accompanies the Gospel and those Miracles wherewith the Apostles antiently authorized their Acts 14. ● Heb. 2 4. Doctrine Tho' it is at the same time undeniable that since the Gospel is sufficiently spread abroad in the World we do not now any more stand in need of such Miracles In the same manner as the Thunder and Lightning which were heard at the Publishing of the Ten Commandments were never repeated afterwards among the Jews The Christians therefore have submitted their Faith and Reason only to Christ whose Authority is unquestionable as being God himself and was testified by his Father's Voice from Heaven when he said This is my beloved Son in whom Mat. ● 17. Luk. 3. 22. I am well pleased And as the People of Israel willingly submitted their Faith to Moses as soon as he had given them plain Demonstrations of his Divine Commission so were Exod 20. 19. they obliged to subimt their Faith to the Apostles after they had once verified their Divine Commission by their Miracles Tho' it cannot be denied but that their Doctrine did sometimes produce good Effects without Miracles It is therefore very observable that when they preached and taught their Doctrine to such as were ●well versed in the Old Testament they did not take it amiss if their Auditors examined their Words whether they were consonant with the Prophesies contained therein From whence it is sufficently Acts 1●●● apparent that no body ought to engage himself unto a blind Obedience of such Teachers as cannot verifie their immediate Divine Commission by Miracles so as to make his Faith absolutely dependant from their Doctrine without Exception but only so far as their Doctrine is sound agreeable to the Doctrine of those who had given manifest demonstrations of their divine Authority And for this Reason it is 〈◊〉 it ●● not sufficient for a Teacher in the Church to say so it is and so it shall and must ●● But he lies under an indispensible Obligation of ma●●ing it plain and apparent that what 〈…〉 to his Auditor is absolutely 〈◊〉 to the Doctrine published by Christ and his Apostles Neither ought the Auditors p●● their Faith upon the Authority of their Teachers but to refer themselves to the Authority of God and his Word which is the Touchstone by which the Teachers Doctrine into be examined and approved The Schools of Philosophers used to take their Names from their Chief Teachers or Founders as we may observe in the Schools of Plato Aristoteles and Zeno But the Church ought to have no other Name but that she is the Church of God or Christ It was upon that score when S. Paul rebuked the Corinthians because some of them said they were of Paul some of Apollo some of Cephas and 1 Cor. 1 12 some of Christ So that since the holy Scripture is now established among us Christians ought not to be like the Disciples of Pythagoras who used for their Motto that old Saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He himself has spoken it But they have sufficient Authority to look themselves into the Holy Scripture and to examine whether the Doctrine of their Teachers be agreeable to the Doctrine of our Saviour For Christ when he said search ●●e Scriptures did not only speak to his Disciples but to his Auditors in general And Joh. 5. 39. 1 Thes ● 21. 1 Joh 4● S. Paul bid us to prove all things and to hold fast that which is good S. John says that we shall try the Spirits whether they are of God Neither can I conceive how the Examination of our selves which S. Paul so highly recommends to all that intend to be 1 Cor 11. 28 Partakers of the Lords Supper can be duely performed without meditating the Scriptures For in this case I take the condition of a Teacher and of a Physician to be quite different it being only required in the latter to understand the Art of Physick and to apply the same to his Patients which may be done with good Success tho' they be never so ignorant But it is not sufficient for a Teacher of a Church to be alone versed in the Articles of the Christian Religion that Church being to be deemed most excellent where the Auditors are not inferiour to their Teachers in the Cognition of the Mysteries of the Faith For the Apostles did not shun to declare unto Mankind all the Counsel Act. ●0 ●7 of God having not committed the Christian Doctrine to the care and custody of one particular Person who was to be the only Interpreter of it as the Sibyllin Oracles were antiently at Rome in the Custody of the
Controversies sooner composed and Heresies suppressed or quite extinguished but if the whole matter be duely weighed it will appear that such an Ecclesiastical Monarch may be very easily spared in the Church For granting such Whether it be necessary to set up a general Judge of all Controversies in the Church an universal Judge of all Controversies arising in the Church he must be supposed to be infallible and that beyond all contradiction as well in point of Matter of Fact as to the lawfulness of the Case for it may so happen that it be plain enough whether a Doctrine be erroneous or not when at the same time it may be disputable whether the said Error ought to be laid to a certain Man's Charge or not For if an Appeal be allowed from this Judge after Sentence pronounced there will never be an end of the Process It is therefore absolutely requisite that this infallible Authority should be so manifestly proved that it cannot reasonably be called in question For unless this Authority be unquestionable for the decision of this Controversie we must run from this Judge to another who must also be supposed to be Infallible and so in infinite it being granted by all without Exception that no body ought to be a Judge in his own Case And since this Privilege of being Infallible could not be granted by any body but by God alone the whole Body of Christians being not invested with such a Power it must plainly be proved out of the Scriptures that this particular Prerogative and Authority was granted to one certain Person for him and his Successors to decide all Controversies concerning the Articles of Faith without being liable to any Error But of this there is not the least footstep in the holy Scripture Nay the Apostles when they were sent by Christ into all the World were endued with the same Spirit and had an equal Authority So that there is but one way now left for the attaining to the true Knowledge of the Christian Religion both for the Teachers in the Church and all Believers in general which is to study the Scriptures devoutly and without Intermission And whoever pretends to Inspiration 2 Tim. 3. 14. 15. or to a prophetical Spirit ought by undeniable Demonstrations to justifie his Pretensions These Qualifications which the Apostle Paul describes in the 2 Epistle to Timothy c. 2. 24 25 ought to be applied to all Bishops and Teachers in general And the Servant of the Lord he says must not strive but be gentle unto all Men apt to teach patiently In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves if God peradventure will give them Repentance to the acknowledging of the Truth Out of what has been said it is apparent that if any one now adays does pretend to any Prerogative or Infallibility in deciding Controversies as to matter of Faith he ought to be endued with such extraordinary Qualifications as are most requisite for the due Explaining and Interpreting the Sense of the holy Scripture and this in so high a degree as that the other Teachers in the Church are not able to stand in Competition with him nay that even all their joint Endeavours in this kind are not to be compared to his Judgment Besides this it must be supposed that this universal Judge except he be to be look'd upon as an useless Engine must be invested with a Power to execute his Decrees and to oblige all Christians to acquiesce in his Judgment For if it be supposed that his Decrees have no other force than as far as they influence People by the force of Truth they would be either useless or else this Judge in vain pretends thereby to any further Prerogative but what he has in common with other Christians that apply themselves to the Study of the holy Scripture Furthermore this obliging Power must either have been obtained by a peculiar Privilegde granted by God Almighty or by a general consent of the Christians or by an inherent Right to a Sovereignty over all the Christian Churches As for a priviledge granted by God or the general consent of the Christian Churches there is not the least Proof of it as far as ever I could find And as to the pretended Sovereign Power its legal Title ought to be proved by such Documents as are suitable to so great a Pretension For it is a very insignificant Proof to alledge in a case of such Moment Tradition and a long continued Usurpation which adds nothing to the right of a long continued illegal Possession and cannot be taken for a solid Foundation whereupon to build a real Pretension to such a Sovereignty for it is possible that whereas something of a Prerogative was intended in the primitive times the same in process of Time has been abused and consequently degenerated into an insufferable Tyranny We cannot therefore but look upon such a Tradition a●● a● not the least foundation in the Scriptures as very suspicious especially when we consider that such a Sovereign Power is quite contrary to the true Genius of the Christian Religion It may perhaps be objected that nothing else can be so powerful to put a stop to all Controversies but it ought to be considered also that thereby the worsest sort of Slavery must be introduced worse than that whereof Tacitus complains in his time Adempto per Inquisitiones loquendi audiendioque 〈◊〉 ●● que ipsacum voce memoria perdatur si tam in nostra potestate foret oblivisci quam tacere By the Inquisition the benefit of our Tongue and Ears is taken away at once and if it was as easie to controul Mens Memories as it is to bridle their Tongues the very remembrance of things past had been long ago abolished among us Truly by such Methods perhaps the Commonwealth may be stock'd with Hypocrites and dissembling Hereticks but few will be brought over to the Orthodox Christian Faith As it is therefore absolutely requisite that a hidden Ulcer should be laid open whereby it may the sooner be purg'd from its Malignancy and proper Remedies more immediately be applied to the affected Part So is it much conducing in the Church that such Scruples and Erroneous Opinions as have seised our Minds should be brought to light that by applying timely Remedies they may be removed before they are gone too far than by couching them over to let them run into a malignant Suppuration which at last may turn to an incurable Gangren It is also to be taken notice of that if this Ecclesiastical Sovereignty be granted there must of necessity be a double headed Sovereign Power in one State it being evident that Subjects would be obliged to acknowledge the Authority of this Ecclesiastical Judge in point of Controversie as well and in the same measure as they do the Authority of their civil Governours in civil Actions And since this Ecclesiastical Sovereignty has a different scope from that for which Civil Societies were erected it must
consequently be of a quite different nature and make up a particular Sovereignty Wherefore if both these should happen to be joined in one Person he becomes thereby at once master over our Lives and Consciences But if this Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction be lodged in another Person he must either at the same time be acknowledged to have a Power of executing his Decrees by his own Prerogative or else to have only an Authority of giving Sentence leaving the Execution of it to the civil Magistrates If the first of these two be supposed it is evident that a double headed Sovereignty must carry along with it great Inconveniencies and Distractions and if the latter those that exercise the Sovereignty in the State must be look'd upon as Executioners only to this holy Judge All these Things duely considered as they must needs occasion great Convulsions in the State so no man that is not beyond his Wits will be apt to imagine unless it be made appear by most evident Proofs that Christ intended to introduce by his Doctrine such pernicious Diseases into civil Societies For tho' it is impossible that no Controversies should be raised in the Church like Christ himself has foretold it in the Parable by Matthew c. 13. 24. And St. Paul in the 1 Epistle to the Corinthians c. 11. 19. Nevertheless if any Controversie does arise he that is the first Author of it must of necessity maintain his Opinion under a colour at least of its being agreeable to the Scriptures For if any one should pretend to introduce a new Article of Faith without endeavouring to prove it out of the holy Scripture he would be look'd upon as a mad Man tho' he should call to his aid all the Sophistications of the Philosophers And if he should insist upon the Authority of Traditions without the Scriptures this would only serve to disclose the weakness of that Foundation whereupon he builds his Doctrine But if any one should make an attempt against any Article of Faith received already as such in the Church he is scarce worth taking notice of unless he should be able to alledge at least some specious Reasons out of the holy Scripture for his Opinion And in such a case especially if his Endeavours seem to proceed from a real Love to Truth he ought not to be absolutely slighted without being heard and his Reasons examined So that then the whole decision of the Matter must depend from a right Interpretation of the several passages in the holy Scripture relating to this Controversie And to find out this Interpretation I see not any necessity which obliges us to have recourse to a Sovereign Power or any infallible Authority but only to such M●ans as ●● most proper for the searching into and find●ng out the genuine Sense of other Authors viz. by a true Knowledge of the Tongue and a diligent search into the nature and whole s●ame of the Christian Religion and by duely comparing the Articles of Faith and observing their Annology and Connexion Whosoever besides this has a natural good Judgment and is not propossessed with Prejudice private Interest or Passion it will o● no such difficult Task for him to find out the genuine Sense of the Scriptures and to demonstrate it so plainly that such as oppose him will by the consent of all Understanding People be judged to be in the wrong So did our Saviour at several times convince the Pharis●es and Saduceans out of the whole Scripture and by the force of his Arguments taken from thence that they were not able to make any further reply And why should it not be reasonably supposed that in each Christian Church there may be found a sufficient number of Teachers capable of disproving such as pretend to introduce among them Innovations and false Doctrines But supposing that these alone should prove insufficient they may call to their aid those of the Neighbouring most famous Churches From whence it appears that there is no absolute Necessity of acknowledging a Judge General of Controversies in the Church And put the Case that those that dissent from the Church are so numerous as to have spread their Doctrine all over the State this Judge will prove useless in his Office For if he pretends to have recourse to violent means to make them renounce their false Opinion they will in all probability oppose force to force But if he takes the other way and endeavours to convince them of their Earor by Arguments taken out of the holy Scripture this may be done as well by other Teachers sitly qualified for their Office than by such a Judge General in the Church Neither ought we to be so over timerous as to believe that Errors should in so much prevail over Truth as to domineer always and every where over it it being not to be question'd but that by help of the most clear-sighted Teachers in the Church these Clouds may be soon dispersed and Truth again appear in its splendor I appeal to Experience whether not a great many Heresies by the only help of prevailing Truth without the assistance of such a Judge or any human Force have by degrees dwindled away and at last quite disappeared It must be confest there are some erroneous Opinions which being nourished and maintained by a Temporal Interest and certain Reasons of State of some particular Churches are not so easie to be suppressed Of this kind are those Controversies wherein the Protestants differ with the Papishes All which if duely considered are so deeply entangled with the Interest of the Popish Monarchy that it is impossible for the Roman Catholicks to recede an Inch from the point of the controverted Articles without diminution of their Authority and endangering their great Revenues so that all hopes of an Union betwixt them and the Protestants are in vain unless the latter can resolve to submit themselves under the same Popish Yoak which they have shaken off so long ago I cannot sufficiently admire that gross way of Arguing made use of by the Papishes when they talk of nothing else but the Authority of their Church telling us that if we would but once acknowledge the same all the Differences and Questions concerning the chief Articles of Faith would fall a-course making themselves both Party and Judge and pretending to give Sentence in their own Case according to their own Testimony They always make use of this Sophism that they attribute only to themselves the glorious Name of the True Church excluding all orher Christians from it but such as are of the same Communion with them And to back this pretence nothing is more common among them than to lay aside all manner of demonstrative Arguments founded in the Scriptures and in lien thereof to find out new Methods unknown to the Apostles of Converting People and to endeavour to establish their Authority by all manner of violence against those that dare to maintain Truth in opposition to their Doctrine For which
reason God has threatned in a most peculia manner to destroy this Monster of a State An Example of Controversie composed in the times of the Apostles § 37. The true Method of composing Controversies arisen in the Church is taught us by what is set us as an Example of this kind in the Acts c. 15. where it deserves our most particular Observation that the Controversy then in question was concerning a main Point in the Christian Religion viz. Whether a man might be saved without being circumcised according to the Institution of Moses For S. Paul in the Epistle to the Galatians c. 5. 2. had positively declared If you be circumcised Christ shall profit you nothing And it is very remarkable that this Question was started in the very Infancy of the Church when the Canon of the Church was not perfected and there were not wanting living Testimonies of such as had received the Doctrine of Christ from his own mouth and were endued with the Holy Ghost and Instructed with an Apostolical Authority Neither is it to be doubted but that Paul and Barnabas were endued with a sufficient Share of Wisdom and Understanding of the Holy Scripture for the reducing of this Errour as plainy appears out of the 5. verse of the above alledged Chapter that they opposed Act. 1● such forcible Reasons against this erroneous Opinion that those that were come thither out of Judea were not able to contradict them So they appealed to the Authority of the Church of Jerusalem which being the V 2. Spring from whence the Christian Religion was derived into other Parts of the World they hoped to be back'd in this Opinion by such of the Members of that Church as did not without some Reluctancy brook the Abolishing of the Jewish Synagogue and that they were not quite beyond their guess but met with a great many there that were addicted to the same Opinion appears out of the 5th Verse in the same 15th Chapter To prevent therefore any further Disturbance which might be raised in the Antiochian Church by reason of this Controversie Paul and Barnabas with some others were deputed to go to the Church of Jerusalem to decide this Controversie When they came thither a Convocation was called consisting not only of the Apostles and Presbyters but also of the other Members of that Church not excepting those of the contrary side After their Reasons had been heard the Case was in debate a considerable time and at last the whole matter having been sufficiently disputed on both sides then Peter rose up not as an universal Judge or who pretended to decide the Controversie by Virtue of his Authority but his Proceeding was by demonstrative Arguments telling them what prodigious Effects had been wrought among the Gentiles by his preaching the Gospel to them after the Vision which appeared to him at Joppe Where Act. 11 9 he thus argues That since the Holy Ghost had in the same measure purified the Hearts of those Believers that were uncircumcised it would be unreasonable to put this Yoak upon the Neck of the Christians the more because they were not to be saved by Circumcision but through the Grace of the Lord Jesus Christ Paul and Barnabas being of the same Opinion did declare at the same time what Miracles and Wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them which would not have been done if they were to be taken for unsanctified as being not circumcised or if Circumcision was an essential Part of the Christian Faith After all had held their Peace that is to say no body further appearing who could contradict them or oppose their Arguments James at last arose declaring that the Vision of Peter did agree to the Words of the Prophets and that therefore it was his Opinion that such among the Centiles as did turn to Christ ought not to be troubled But that they also in some measure might gratifie themselves and to induce them not to fly the Conversation of such of the Gentiles as received the Christian Faith it was thought sit that these should abstain from Pollution of Idols from Fornication from things strangled and from Blood all which was forbidden by the Mosaic Law and partly disagreeable to the Law of Nature as Fornication which nevertheless was a common Vice among the Gentiles the rest being things indifferent in themselves might easily be let alone rather than give Offence to a Brother This having been approved of by common Consent and as it appears even by those that were of a contrary Sentiment before a Synodical Epistle was writ to the Church at Antioch in the name not only of those Apostles and Elders but also of the Brethren of the Church of Jerusalem Judas and Silas were deputed to carry this Epistle who being arrived at Antioch did not publish it in the nature of a Law but having delivered it to the Brethren from whom it met with a general Approbation they exhorted them with many words to a due Observance of it § 38. If the whole matter be duly weighed Some Observations concerning the natura and use of Councils it furnishes us with several Observations which may not a little contribute towards the Explaining the Nature of Ecclesiastical Councils In the first place it is most apparent that these Councils are not such Bodies whose Authority is everlasting for the Government of the Church But that they are extraordinary Convocations or Conventions composed out of some selected and most eminent Men of the Church who are called together for the composing certain Controversies arisen in the Church And because those Councils were very frequent in the Church from its Primitive times this alone may serve as a convincing argument that the Church never acknowledged one infallible Judge for the deciding of Controversies For to what purpose were so many Heads set to work if one single Person was sufficient and infallible in the Decision of them And what is yet more if the Decrees of the Councils had only their obliging Force from his Confirmation Furthermore those that compose such a Council are not to be considered as Members of an Assembly or Colledge who by the Majority of Votes can so absolutely determine the Question in hand as to be obligatory to all Christians in general Truth generally speaking not depending from the Plurality of Suffrages much less can they pretend to a legislative Power vested in them so as to impose what Laws or Canons they please upon the Church But they may be considered no otherwise than Men deputed by the Churches for the examining the true Grounds of the Controversies laid before them and for searching for the Decision of them in the Holy Scripture So that these Churches are not obliged to acquiesce in this Decision any further than they find it agreeable to the Word of God For it may chance to fall out so that a Controversie which appears at first sight very intricate and difficult afterwards being
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
of the Church was either for a time deprived from enjoying the benefit of the Publick Worship or entirely excluded from being a Member of the Church This being the utmost unto which any Colledge can pretend viz. entirely to exclude a Member of their Society This Exclusion tho' in it self considered of the greatest moment since thereby a Christian was deprived of the whole Communion with the Church Nevertheles did not alter the Civil State or Condition of a Subject But those that were thus excommunicated suffered no loss in their Dignities Honour Rights or Fortunes For that the Church Censures should extend to the real Prejudice of the civil Condition of any Subject is not any ways requisite for the obtaining the Ends for which the Church is Established Neither can it be supposed that without defrauding Sovereigns of their Right such a Power can be exercised over Subjects unless with their own Consent and by vertue of a publick Civil Authority § 40. The next thing which deserves our Consideration is whether the Church is and Concerning the condition of the Church under Christian Princes how far it received any Alteration from its former Condition after Princes whole Kingdoms and States did profess the Christian Religion Where it is to be observed That the Churches did thereby not receive any essential Perfection it being evident that the Christian Religion could be exercised and subsist without the State and Commonwealths did not depend from the Christian Religion The scope of the Christian Religion and of civil Governments being quite different in their own nature For our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our Conversation Phil. 3. 20. 2 Cor. 5 ● 8. 1 Cor. 14 19. is in Heaven and if in this Life only we have hope in Christ we are of all Men most miserable For this Reason it was that the Apostles were never forward to appear before Princes tho' they might have obtained an easie Access by their miraculous Deeds So Herod was exceeding glad when he saw Jesus because he hoped to have seen some Miracle done Luke 23. 8. by him But they were very cautious in this point lest it might appear to some as if the Gospel wanted to be maintained by Human Strength or that perhaps those Princes might pretend to a greater Authority over them than was consistent with the safety of the Christian Religion Notwithstanding all this the Christian Religion does not in any wise impair or ecclipse the legal Rights of Sovereigns but rather confirms and establishes the civil Power Mat. 22. 21. Joh. 18. 2. Rom. 13. 1 Cor. 35. 24. as is apparent out of several passages in the holy Scripture If it should be granted that the Church was a State independent from any temporal Jurisdiction the consequence would be this That the civil Power could not but receive a most remarkable Limitation and Diminution and the condition of a Subject must receive a great alteration whereas on the other hand the condition of Christians or of Teachers in the Church considered as such is neither abolished nor altered because either the Prince or the Subjects in general do receive the Christian Faith there being not the least footstep to be met withal in the Scriptures implying any such alteration Besides this there is not any express Command in the New Testament directed to Sovereigns which entitles them to any particular Prerogative in the Church like to that which the Kings of Israel had received in the 17 Chap. of Deuteronomy From whence arises this conclusion that what right Sovereigns can claim in the Church and Church Affairs must be deduced either out of the natural constitution of the civil Power or out of the true Genius of the Christian Religion or else must owe its off-spring to the free consent of the Church § 41. Out of what has been laid down it Churches do not alter their nature of being a Colledge appears first of all that if a Prince or whole Commonwealth do receive the Doctrine of Christ the Church does thereby not receive any other Alteration as to her natural Constitution but that whereas she was formerly to be considered only as a private Society or Colledge yet such a one as being subordinate to the Law and therefore to be cherished by the Higher Powers who had no legal Right to disturb prosecute or destroy it She now being put under the particular Protection of her Sovereigns enjoys a greater share of Security and is beyond the reach of the Persecutions of the Infidels Notwithstanding this the Church is thereby not exalted from a Colledge to a State since by the receiving of the Christian Religion the civil Government does not undergo any Alteration or Diminution On the contrary Sovereigns loose nothing of their legal Rights neither are Subjects in any wise absolved from their Duties and Obligations For it implies a contradiction that a double Sovereignty and two different sorts of Obligations in the Subject should be lodged in one and the same Commonwealth It is a frivolous Objection that the Church and civil Government have different Ends and Objects not repugnant to one another For from thence is not to be inferred that the Church must be a State or that the Christian Religion cannot be propagated maintained or exercised without the Church assume the same Power that belongs to the civil Government In these places therefore where the whole People and the Prince profess the Christian Religion the Commonwealth receives the Church into its Protection and tho' strictly united there is no collision or emulation betwixt them nor does either of them receive any prejudice in their respective Rights but without the least Interference with one another the Church remains a Colledge whereof the Prince and all the Subjects are now become Members So that each Subject besides the Person he represented in the State has assumed that of a Christian and in this respect is esteemed a Member of the Church Neither is every one to be considered in the Church according to the Station or Dignity he bears in the Commonwealth but these Qualifications are as it were laid aside there and he is only regarded as a Christian So that the General of an Army cannot claim any Prerogative to himself in the Church beyond the private Centinel And it is past all doubt that one and the same Man may represent several Persons according to the several Functions and Obligations belonging to him § 42. It is also according to my Opinion 〈…〉 made Bishops beyond question that Kings Princes or other civil Magistrates by receiving the Christian Doctrine are not constituted Bishops or Teachers in the Church this Function not properly belonging to every Christian but only to such as have a lawful Vocation and are fitly qualified for it Besides this the Royal Office and that of Teachers are of such a nature that they cannot conveniently be Administred by one and the same Person not because of any natural repugnancy betwixt
them but that each of them is involved in such a multitude of Trouble and variety of Business that it cannot rationally be supposed for one Man to be able to undergo such a Fatigue I●●s no less evident that Sovereigns by becoming Christians are not authorised to alter the Ministry of the Church or to order it at pleasure or to force the Ministers of the Gospel to teach any Doctrine which is not founded in the Scriptures or to preach up Human Inventions for Articles of Faith For what and how Ministers ought to Teach is prescribed by God himself who expects an exact Obedience in this Point as well from Kings as other Christians And it is to be considered that whenever Princes receive the Christian Doctrine the Teachers notwithstanding this remain in their former Station as to their Duty and Obligation to God as well as all the rest of their Christian Subjects who having received their Instructions as to their Religion only from God without the assistance of their Sovereigns these cannot claim any right to impose any thing of this kind upon them § 43. Notwithstanding all this it is not Concerning the Duty and Right of Christian Princes of defending the Church to be supposed that Sovereigns by becoming Christians have acquir'd no peculiar Rights or have not a more particular Duty laid upon them than before There being certain Obligations which owe their off-spring to the union of that Duty which is incumbent to every Christian with that of the Royal Office The first and chiefest of these Obligations seems to be that Sovereigns ought to be Defenders of the Church which they are oblig'd to protect not only against all such of their Subjects as dare to attempt any thing against it but also against Foreigners who pretend to be injurious to their Subjects upon that score And tho' the Christian Doctrine is not to be propagated by violence or force of Arms and our Saviour has highly recommended Patience and Sufferings as peculiar Vertues belonging to Christians Princes are nevertheless not debarr'd from their Right of Protecting the Christian Religion by all lawful means and Patience ought not to take place here except when no other lawful means can secure us against our Enemies So we see that St. Paul Acts 2. 2● saved himself from being scourged by declaring himself to be a Roman and escaped the Fury of the Jews by making his Appeal to the Emperour And our Saviour himself left this Mat. 10. 2● Advice to his Disciples That when they were persecuted in one City they should fly into another And it being an incumbent Duty belonging to all Sovereigns to defend their Subjects against all violence they ought to take more effectual care that they do not suffer any Injuries for the Christian Religions sake for what could be more reproachful to a Christian Prince than that his Subjects should be sufferers upon that account The next care which belongs to Christian Princes is to provide necessary Revenues for the exercise of the Christian Religion For as has been shewn before that no other Patrimony belonged to the Primitive Church but the Alms and free Contributions of the Believers and that these cannot but be supposed to be very uncertain the Ministers and Teachers in the Church run no small hazard of being exposed to want if they have nothing else to rely upon but the bare contributions of the Congregation who being in some places poor and Subject to other Taxes are incapable of supplying their want And not to dissemble the Truth after Princes and en●tire States have received the Doctrine of Christ it would appear very ill that whereas they enjoy such ample Revenues they would deal so sparingly with the Church the more because it is a general Maxim among Men to value a Function according to its Revenues What St. Paul recommends to the Romans in the 15th Chapter v. 27. and in the 1 Epist to the Corinthians 9. 11. ought to be the more taken notice of by Christian Princes because they can with less difficulty or any sensible injury to themselves put it in practise in their Station they having the management of the Publick Revenues in their hands It cannot be denied but that too vast Revenues are not always useful to Ministers of the Church and prove som●times prejudicial both to Church and State and that such as make profession of the Ministry of the Gospel ought not to make a Trade of their Function or to think it their main Business to gather Riches and take the Ministry for their By-work nevertheless if it be duely considered that he who cordially as he ought to do applies himself to the Ministerial Function has no other ways left him to provide for his Family and that the vulgar Sort scarce pay a due Respect to a Minister unless they see him live handsomely and well whereas he who is starv'd by his Function is the May-Game of the common People unto whom may be applied that old Saying of the Poet That this Man appears to be the Servant of a poor and wretched Lord. Apparet servum hunc esse Domini pauperis miserique Princes ought therefore to look upon this as one main part of their Devotion to settle certain and constant Sallaries or Revenues upon the Ministers of the Church as much as may be at least sufficient for their Maintainance In the Old Testament the Priests were to live from the Altar but those of the best kind were Vid. Ep. Gal. 6. 6. 2 Tim. 2. 4. brought to the Altar Besides this Princes ought not only to take care of Church-Buildings but also to erect and maintain Schools which being the Seminaries both of the Church and State if the first Rudiments of Christianity be not implanted in the Schools it cannot scarce be expected that Men when grown up should receive much benefit by publick Sermons § 44. But among other Considerations as Co●ce●ning the rights of Princes as to Ecclesiastical Affairs And first of the g●n●ral Inspection to what Rights properly belong to Princes as to Ecclesiastical Affairs it is evident that since by the Doctrine of the Gospel the Civil Power is in no wise impaired and a Prince cherishes a Church under his Jurisdiction he legally claims a Right of having a general Inspection over this as well as all other Societies at least so far as to take care that nothing be transacted in these Colledges to his Prejudice For Mankind being so perverse in its Nature that in Matters even the most Sacred if managed without controul they seldom let it slip through their hands without a Stain And that therefore it is scarce to be questioned but the Christian Doctrine is subject to the same Corruption and that under Pretence of Religion many pernicious Designs may be hatched against the Interest of the Commonwealth A Prince in whose Territories a Church is planted if he afterwards enters into the Communion of that Church has
questionless a Right to examin what Matters and in what Manner they are transacted in the Convention of their Presbyters or in their Ecclesiastical Courts if there be any such among them Whether they do not transgress their Bounds whether they act according to the Civil Laws or whether they do not assume to themselves a Power to determine such Cases as properly belong to the Civil Jurisdiction Of this Kind are Matrimonial Cases which without Reason and upon very slender Pretences the Priests have drawn under their Jurisdiction to the great Prejudice of the Sovereign Power For it being an unquestionable Right belonging to Sovereigns to constitute Laws concerning Matrimonial Cases according to the Law of Nature and of God I cannot see any Reason why they have not a Right to determine Matrimonial Differences And because the Ministers of the Church make use of Church discipline the Prince may make a legal Enquiry whether under Pretence of these Rules prescribed by our Saviour they do not introduce Novelties which may prove prejudicial to the State And as these Enchroachments are no essential Part of the Christian Doctrine but rather to be looked upon like Spots which disgnise its natural Beauty So I cannot see with what Face it can be denied that those ought to be taken off especially by the Authority of those whose Interest is most nearly concerned unless they have Impudence enough to own that the Christian Religion may lawfully be misapplied to By-uses And let it be granted that every thing is transacted as it ought to be in these Conventions of the Presbyters Consistories or Episcopal Courts why should they be asham'd or angry at their Sovereigns taking Cognisance of their Proceedings And this Right of Inspection does never cease after the Sovereign has once entred into the Communion of the Church it being his Duty to take care that no Abuses may creep into the Church in process of Time that may endanger the State § 45. Because the Right of Constituting Concerning the Right of Princes as to Church Ministers Ministers of the Church does originally belong to the whole Congregation the Prince must needs have his Share in it as being a Member of the Congregation I say his Share For it is not reasonable that a Minister should be forced upon any Church against their Consent and without their Approbation except it be for very weighty Reasons For the Right of Constituting Ministers in the Church does not belong to the Prince in the same manner as it is his Prerogative to constitute Civil Magistrates and other Publick Ministers of State which being a part of the Sovereign Power cannot be called in question But Teachers in the Church considered meerly as such are none of the King's Ministers but Servants of Christ and Ministers of the Church not Officers of the State And because in the Primitive Church Ministers used to be constituted by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or by the Suffrages of the Christians the Prince may lawfully claim his Vote in the same Church whereof he is a Member But as for the other Churches under his Jurisdiction they ought to be left to their free Choice exept there be some prevailing Reasons which oblige the Prince to interpose his Authority it being unjust that a Minister should be put upon a Church against their Will if they can alledge any lawful Exception against him For a Teacher thus forced upon his Auditors for whom they have neither esteem nor Love is likely to edifie but little by his Doctrine Nevertheless Sovereigns ought to have a watchful Eye over the Churches and to take care that Persons not fitly qualified for this sacred Function may not be promoted to the Ministry either by Simony or other unlawful Means For though it is the Interest of the whole Church to provide against these Corruptions Sovereigns are likely to do it with much better Success than can be expected from private Persons They may authorise certain Persons to be present at these Elections and who by their Authority may prevent all manner of Disorder or Corruption and at the same time make a due enquiry whether such Persons as are to be put into the Ministry are of an approved Life and Doctrine And because the Ministers of the Church do 1 Tim. 3 10. sometimes act negligently or preposterously in their Office which often proves the Occasion of Scandal and Schism in the Church Rom. 16 17. Sovereigns may constitute over them Inspectors with an Authority to reprove and sometimes to punish such as transgress their Rules But these Inspectors being no less subject to human Frailties than other men Care ought to be taken that their Authority be so limited as to be accountable of all their Proceedings either to the Prince or before a Consistory authorised for that purpose if they transgress their Bounds or trespass upon the Ministers of the Church As all these maters do contribute to the maintaining of good Order in the Church and may best be put in execution by the Sovereign Authority So it is manifest that Princes as they are chief Members of the Church may justly claim this Prerogative as properly belonging to their high Station and Princely Office § 46. In case of any Difference or Controversie Concerning the Right of calling together a Synod concerning any Point of Doctrine which may sometimes arise in the Church so that the Teachers are divided in their Opinions it belongs to the Sovereign Authority to take care that these Differences may be composed not only as the Sovereign is a Member of the Church but as he is the Supream Head of the Commonwealth It having been frequently observed that Differencee of Opinions and Animosities of the Parties concerned cause great Commotions in the State Upon such Occasions Sovereigns have a Right to call together an Assembly of the most able Divines and to authorise them to examine the Controversie and to determine it according to the Tenure of the Scriptures The Supream Direction of this Assembly ought to be managed by the Prince'● Authority For since it can scarce be supposed that matters should be transacted there without Heats and Animosities it will be both for the Honour and Interest of this Assembly if by the Presence of certain Persons well versed in Business these Heats be allayed and matters carried on with an equal Temperament Neither do I see how any one besides the Prince can lay claim to this Power of calling such an Assembly for put the case that one Party should refuse to appear and to submit unto the other's Direction which way will they be able to compel them to it And who is it that can with less Difficulty put in execution the Decrees of such a Synod than he who has the Sovereign Power in his Hands Tho' at the same time it ought not to be forgotten that this Power must not extend it self beyond its due Bounds but be suitable to the Genius of the Christian
propagating of this Doctrine They destroy the very Essential part of our Faith which being a Gift of the Holy Ghost and a Belief founded in our Hearts is transmuted into an outward Confession where the Tongue to avoid Temporal Punishment is forced to speak those things which are in no wise agreeable to the Heart This however admits again of a Limitation For herein are not comprehended these Points which proceeding from Natural Religion are also contained in the Christian Doctrine and all of them imply a profound Reverence to be paid to the Supream BEING For it is beyond all question that those that act against the very Dictates of Reason ought to be subject to Civil Punishments since they strike at the very Foundation of Civil Societies Such are Idolatry Blasphemy Profanation of the Sabbath where nevertheless great care is to be taken that a due difference be made betwixt the Moral part of that Precept concerning the Sabbath which is unalterable and the Ceremonial part of it Princes therefore at their first entrance into the Communion of the Christian Church might Lawfully destroy the Images and Temples of the Idols and the Groves and other Meeting-places dedicated to their superstitious Worship Neither can it be called in question but that Christian Soveraigns have a Right to inflict Civil Punishments upon such as revile the whole System of the Christian Religion and ridicule the Mysteries of the Christian Faith at least they may Banish them the Country But for the rest it is in vain to believe that the true enlightning of our Mind and the inward consent to such Articles of Faith as surpass our Understanding can be procured by violent means or temporal punishments For supposing you force a Man to dissemble his thoughts to speak contrary to what he conceives in his own Opinion let his Confession be never so formal and his Gestures never so well composed and conformable to certain prescribed Rules this has not the least affinity with true Religion unless he at the same time does feel an inward motion and hearty compliance with what he professes Neither ought People according to the true Genius of the Doctrine of Christ be enticed to receive the Christian Religion by Temporal Interest Honours or other such like Advantages for Christ did promise that those that followed him should receive their Reward in the Life to come but fore-told them nothing but Crosses and Tribulations in this And those that embrace any Religion out of a Motive of Temporal Advantages do plainly shew that they have a greater Value for their own ●erest than Religion And certainly scarce any body that has but common sense can perswade himself that such a sort of Worship can be pleasing to God Almighty Sovereigns being not constituted for Religion's sake they cannot under that colour exact from their Subjects a blind Obedience in matters of Religion it being unquestionable that if Subjects should blindfold follow the Religion of their Sovereign they cannot by all his Authority be assured of their Salvation from whence it is evident that in case any Subject be fully convinced that he can out of the Holy Scripture discover any Errors which are crept into the Church even that by Law established especially concerning any Principal Point of Faith he neither can nor ought to be hindered in his design by the Sovereign Authority before his Reasons be heard and well debated in the presence of the best and ablest Judges and if by them he be legally and plainly convicted of his Error then and 〈◊〉 before ought he to be silenced To force People into the Church ●y the bare Civil Authority must needs fill the Commonwealth with Hypocrites who cannot be supposed to Act according to the Dictates of their Consciences For since in Religions Matters an absolute Uniformity betwixt the Heart and Tongue is required how can it otherwise be but that such as profess a Religion disagreeable to their Opinion should never be satisfied in their Consciences when they consider that they impose upon God Almighty § 49. The Care of preserving the Publick What Prerogatives belong to Sovereigns as being Protectors of the Publick Tranquility Peace belonging in a most peculiar manner to Sovereigns has furnished some with a specious Pretence to affirm that since differences in Religion cause frequent Convulsions in the State and it is to be deemed one of the greatest Happinesses of a Government if its Subjects in general are of one Religion all means tho' never so violent may be put in execution to extirpate these Differences in Religion They alledge that as much more precious our Souls are before our Bodies the more Sovereigns are obliged to be watchful over them and that the true Love which a Sovereign bears to his Subjects can never be more conspicuous than when he takes effectual care of their Salvation These it must be confess'd are very specious Pretences and have sometimes had such powerful influence over Princes who were else naturally not inclined to Severity that they have nevertheless by these plausible Arguments been prevailed upon to assist with their Authority the cruel Designs of Priests It will therefore not be beyond our scope to make a strict Enquiry what account ought to be made of these so specious Reasons in a well constituted Government In the first place then it is to be considered that it has been foretold by our Saviour that there should always be in the Church Weeds amongst the Wheat that is to say that there should be false Doctrines raised in the Church and these according to the Commands of our Saviour were not to be extirpated Root and Branch but to be reserved for the Day of Judgment For a Sovereign that takes to such violent courses may make a havock among his Subjects which commonly proves equally pernicious to the Innocent and Guilty nevertheless he will find it impracticable quite to abolish all Errors and Differences in the Church Never did any body shew a greater Love to Mankind than our Saviour who sacrificed himself for our Salvation Yet he made use of no other ways to propagate his Doctrine than Teaching when he might have commanded Twelve Legions of Angels to force Mankind to Obedience How can a Prince be esteemed to follow the Foot-steps of Christ who makes such profligate Wretches as the Dragoons his Apostles for the Conversion of his Subjects That Pretence of the Love of Sovereigns toward their Subjects let it be never so specious he ought not under that colour endeavour to subvert or alter the Method of propagating the Christian Doctrine according to the true Genius of the Christian Religion Besides this it is not absolutely necessary to maintain the Publick Tranquility that all the Subjects in general should be of one Religion or which is the same in effect the differences about some Points in Religion considered barely as such are not the true causes of Disturbances in a State but the Heats and Animosities Ambition
Magistrates What likelihood can there be in all this that the Protestants should be as much concerned for a Temporal By-Interest as the Popish Clergy For whereas they first can expect no more than what is alloted them already the latter have no less in view than vast Riches and the Possessions of whole Kingdoms All these Matters duely considered may be convincing Proofs that all the Clamour which the Popish Clergy makes against the Protestants is of the same nature with that of Demetrius at Ephesus when he exclaimed against St. Paul Love and Meekness being the products of the Christian Faith the Cruelties of the Popish Clergy exercised against Protestants ought to be suspected by Princes and serve them as a forewarning what good is to be expected from those that prosecute with so much Barbarity all such as oppose their Pride and Ambition After the Persecutions were ceased in the Primitive Church the Arians were the first who shew'd their teeth to the Christians But they would have blushed for shame if they should have attempted to propagate their Religion by force of Arms and such other cruel Persecutions as are now in vogue among the Popish Clergy If we were not sufficiently convinced that the Spirit of Envy is not the Spirit of Christ we may be instructed as to this Point by our Saviour himself when he rebuked James and John who would have Luk. 9. 54 55 56. fire come down from Heaven in these words Ye know not what manner of Spirit you are of For the Son of Man is not come to destroy Mens lives but to save them The Sword of Christ is not girted on the side of Men but goes out of his Mouth and in all the Rev. 19. 15. holy Scripture there is not one passage where the Church of Christ is said to be drunken with the Blood of Hereticks but it is said of the Whore of Babylon that she is drunken with the Rev. 17. 6. Blood of the Saints and with the Blood of the Martyrs of Christ § 52. Lastly Since Sovereigns ought to be Sovereigns are often encroached upon in their rights under a religious pretext jealous of their own Prerogatives they may without Injustice make an Enquiry whether the Protestant or the Popish Religion be most encroaching upon their Authority and which of these two be most consistent with the Civil Government For whenever the Civil Power bears any diminution under a Religious Pretence it is then high time for Sovereigns to look about them to examine upon what Foundation these Pretensions are built it being evident that Civil Goverment was introduced before the Christian Religion and that therefore it ought plainly to be demonstrated how Civil Authority came to be diminished by the Christian Religion Now if we look into the Constitution of the Popish Clergy it is manifest that by many steps and degrees and by various Artifices and Intrigues they have at last patch'd up a Potent State of their own and that their Supream Head for these many Ages past is possess'd of great Territories and Acts as a Sovereign and not only this but also obtrudes his Authority upon all such as profess the Roman Catholick Religion For they don't think it sufficient that the whole Clergy have their dependance from him but he pretends to an Absolute Authority of determining all Matters of Faith by which means he is sure to guide the Minds of the People where ever he pleases If any thing in the World is destructive to the Civil Powers it must of necessity be this when a Party inhabiting their Territories disown their Jurisdiction and depending from a Foreign Power deny the Authority of their Natural Prince over them or at least acknowledge it no longer than they think it convenient If Neighbouring States are commonly the most jealous of one another must it not be look'd upon as a great Solocism of State to permit such as depend from a Foreign Jurisdiction to abide in the Commonwealth It is next door to take Foreign Garisons into our Forts or to allow a Foreign Force to Encamp in the midst of our Dominions And this Mischief seems to be the more pernicious when the Revenues by which the Grandeur of this Ecclesiastical State is maintained are squeezed out of the Subjects of any Prince and the best part of his Territories exhausted whereas on the contrary these Leeches are not only freed from all manner of Taxes but also pretend to a Legislative Authority so as to inflict Punishments upon the Subjects and to Absolve them from their Allegiance due to their Sovereigns I cannot see how Princes without great Prejudice to the Commonweal can allow the least Authority over their Persons to the Clergy For if the Prince and they happen to jarr together the poor Subjects pay for it with a Vengeance when they are to serve two Masters of a contrary side at one time and the Taxes must fall the heavier upon the Subjects where the Clergy are exempted from all Contributions Lastly is it not a heavy Burthen to the Subjects to be subject both to an Ecclesiastical and Temporal Jurisdiction The former being generally the most severe as is most evident in Spain and Italy where the Courts of Inquisition are in vogue It being therefore beyond all question that all these things are practised by the Roman Catholicks but in no wise by the Protestants such Princes as being misled by the Popish Clergy endeavour to extirpate their Protestant Subjects Act not only contrary to Justice but even against the very Dicrates of right Reason What has been objected by some viz. That Protestants have not been altogether free from the imputation of raising Disturbances in the State and having joined with a Foreign Power scarce deserves an Answer For this is not to be imputed to Religion it self but rather to some dangerous Juncture and other Circumstances which often prove the occasion of dangerous Commotions in a State Or else the Papists have first begun the Dance and what Wonder is it if some Protestants to avoid their cruel Designs against them have endeavoured to repel the Fury of their Adversaries and when they found themselves insufficient have sought for Aid by Foreign Princes For as it is the greatest piece of Injustice to compel Subjects by force of Arms to any Religion so these may justly defend their Religion by force of Arms especially if they live under a Government where they have a Right belonging to them of Protecting their Liberties against any Invaders § 53. Last of all it very well deserves to Concerning the Right of Reformation make an Enquiry who it is that has the Power in the Commonwealth to amend such Errors and Abuses as are crept into the Church either in Point of Doctrine Morality or Church-Government Or which turns to the same Account who has the Right of Reformation Where first of all it is unquestionable that there is no occasion of a Reformation where the
found their Auditors inclined to receive the Doctrine of the Gospel but that also in all other places whither this Doctrine was transplanted the Believers might enter into such a Society or plant a Church upon their own accord without any Commission or Permission for so doing from the Apostles but that pursuant to our Saviour's Expression it was sufficient if two or three were inclined to meet in his Name If we trace the true nature of these Societies which are constituted by a free Choice and Consent of certain Men. we may easily find to contain all of them something resembling a Democracy where such Matters as concern the whole Body of the Society are to be dispatched by common Consent and where no particular Person can claim any further Power over the rest than what he has received by their joint Consent From whence it may be rationally concluded that at the first beginning the Power of Constituting Teachers and other Ministers of the Church was originally lodged in the whole Church or the whole Congregation of the Believers And tho' it is unquestionable that in the first primitive Church Teachers were constituted by the Apostles in a great many places nevertheless the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which implies something of a Democracy and is often used in the Scriptures in this Case argues sufficiently that this was not done without the Approbation of the Church It would be a hard Task to prove that the Apostles did constitute Teachers themselves in all lesser Towns or that they preached the Gospel in all lesser Places and Villages It seems rather probable that the Gospel was published by the Apostles in great Cities and other places of note from whence it was communicated unto other Places and that such Churches as were not provided with Teachers Bishops or Presbyters by the Apostles themselves or their special Authority used either to chuse those very Persons to that Function who were the first Preachers of the Gospel among them or any others whom they esteemed to be endowed before others with the Gift of Teaching If we consult the Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans it seems that the Gospel had been taught at Rome before ever Peter and Paul came thither And the High Treasurer of the Chap. 16. Queen Candaces who is generally believed to have first carried the Doctrine of the Gospel to Aethiopia and to have been the first Founder of the Christian Churches in those Parts received no Ordination as a Bishop or Presbyter from Philip after his Baptism Neither did Acts 8. Christ or his Apostles prescribe any certain Form to be used in the Ordination of Bishops as he did in the use of the Sacraments which seems to prove that for the obtaining of this Function there is nothing more required than for the Person to be called by the Church and to have the Gift of Teaching It is not to be denied but that the Ordination of Ministers and Imposition of Hands by the Bishops and Presbyters is a very laudable and useful Ceremony and ought to be received as such with this restriction nevertheless that the same need not to be deemed so absolutely necessary as if without it no Person ought to be taken for a true Minister of the Church especially since these miraculous Gifts which accompanied that Ceremony in the Infancy of the Primitive Church are many Ages past become useless The Church like all other Colledges 1 Tim. 4 14. have power to collect Stipends for their Ministers and to make Collections for the Use of the Poor but in a different degree from that which belongs to Civil Magistrates or Sovereigns who levy Taxes and have a Power to force their Subjects to a compliance with their Commands But in the Church this Power is founded upon the meer Liberality and free Consent of all the Believers in general who being made sensible of their Duty of paying a Workman his Stipend and relieving those in Distress ought not to refuse such Acts of Justice and Humanity It properly belongs to all 1 Cor. 8. 2 3. c. 2. 12 13. c. 9. 5 9 7. Colledges as well as Churches to have a Power to make with joint Consent of their Members such Statutes as may conduce towards the obtaining the Ends of their Society provided they do not interfere with the legal Rights of their Sovereigns Of this kind are these Statutes which St. Paul recommends to the Corinthians in his first Epistle in the 7 Chapt. If any one acted contrary to these Rules he deservedly was to receive Correction or to undergo such a Penalty as was dictated by the Statute and which was to be laid upon him not by Vertue of an Inherent Power in the Colledge but pursuant to their Contract And tho' Colledges have not any Power or Jurisdiction over their Members unless what is absolutely requisite for the obtaining the true end of each Society or else has been granted to them by their Sovereigns Nevertheless it is often practised in these Societies and may be done without prejudice to the Rights of their Sovereigns that if any Differences arise betwixt the Members of one and the same Colledge these are composed by the Interposition and Arbitration of the rest of the Members of that Colledge or Society to the End that a mutual good Correspondency may be cultivated among them In which sense is to be taken the Admonition which St. Paul gives to the Corinthians concerning this point in the 1 Epistle in the 6 Chapter in the first and following Verses Lastly because many Vices were at the time of the first publishing of the Gospel in vogue among the Heathens which were not punishable by the Pagan Laws they being more encouraged to the observance of Moral Duty by the prospect of Honours than by any civil Commands And the Christians believing it more peculiarly belonging to themselves to recommend and adorn their Profession by a holy Life and by an innocent Conversation to excel the Heathens some Statutes were at the very beginning introduced into the Primitive Church which were thought most convenient to correct all manner of Licentiousness according to St. Paul's Direction If any one that is called a Brother be a Fornicator or Covetous 1 Cor. 5. 2. or an Idolater or a Railer or a Drunkard or an Extortioner with such a one do not eat From whence it appears that in the primitive Times Church Censure was used in the Churches all which may easily be supposed to have been done without the least prejudice to the Sovereign Power it being always for the Interest of the State that Subjects should lead an innocent Life It is worth our Observation that the Punishments inflicted by vertue of these Statutes were of such a nature as might be put in execution without the least prejudice to the Civil Government such were private Admonitions publick Reprimands and Church Penances the extream Remedy was Excommunication by vertue of which a Member