of what he may Tolerate and Deny him the Knowledge of what he may Impose In fine Your Arguments and Opinions duely weigh'd his Majesty has either no Power or no Reason to permit you a Toleration No Power as You state his Capacity and no Reason as you Disclaim his Supremacie Scrup. I do not Oppose the Coactive Power of the Civil Magistrate in Matters of Civil Concernment but I take the Case in Question to be of Another Quality and out of the Verge of the Secular Iurisdiction Conf. I think it will become you then not to Importune his Majesty for the Dissolving of an Ecclesiastical Law before you acknowledge him Vested with the Right of Making it Ze. If you think fit let that Point be the Next Question Conf. Agreed it shall SECT XI The Proper Subject and Extent of Humane Power Conf. AS Reasonable Nature consists of Soul and Body so is the Authority that Governs it Divine and Humane God Eminently over All and Princes Ministerially under Him and as His Substitutes The Dominion of our Souls God reserves peculiarly to Himself committing That of our Bodyes to the Care of the Magistrate Now if Power be a. Divine Ordinance so consequently is Subjection for to Imagine the One without the Other were to Destroy the Ratio of Relatives A sober Disquisition of This Matter would save much Trouble that arises about the Bounds and Limits of our Duty how far Religion binds us and how far Allegeance That they are severable we must not doubt for Truth it self hath said it Give unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's and unto God the things that are God's But that They are only so severable as never to become Inconsistent is founded upon the same Immovable Rock Let every soul be subject c. a Precept of a Perpetual and Universal Operation and Limited neither to Time Place nor Persons Ze. Your Deduction of Government and Subjection from Divine Institution is well enough Coucht and that we are to Obey the Magistrate for God's sake and in subordination to God is Easily Prov'd and Granted but I hear Nothing yet of the Particular Bounds and Terms of Humane Jurisrisdiction What 't is belongs to God and What to Caesar Conf. That I confess is the Pinch of the Question for One Duty comes up so close to the Other that 't is not for Every Common Eye to passe between them Effectually they Touch but in what Point is of a Nice Decision The Readyest way in my opinion to the strict Knowledge of our Duty is by the Lawes and Powers of the Authority for 't is Requisite that a Man know the Rule before he can Observe it Wee are then to Consider that the Almighty Wisdom has Invested Kings with an Unlimited Power of Commanding or Forbidding in all matters which God himself has not either Commanded or Forbidden which Proposition Resolves it self into This Conclusion Whatsoever God has left Indifferent is the subject of Humane Power Scrup. Does not That Opinion destroy Christian Liberty Conf. No but the Denyal of it Destroyes Magistracy If Kings have not This Power they have none at all and it Implyes a Contradiction to suppose any Authority in Nature without it Scrup. But may not a Prince tye himself up in a Thing Otherwise Indifferent Conf. I speak of Power according to the Institution not of Power limited by Paction Scrup. May not the same thing be Indifferent to One and not so to Another Conf. Granted and I pray'e follow it a little further May not every thing Imaginable appear Non-Indifferent to some or other if nothing can be commanded but what upon such a Phansy may be Disobey'd Scrup. Pardon me I do not speak of Matters of Civil Concern but of Matters of Religion Conf. That 's all a Case for you cannot Instance in any One Civil Action that may not be made Relative to Religion But stick to the Mark We are upon the Extent of Humane Power That there is such a Power and That Authoris'd too by God Himself You have already granted Now tell me Upon what shall That Power be Exercis'd if you Exclude things Indifferent One man may have a Reall Scruple and All the Rest Pretend one Who shall Distinguish So that the Rule holding from One to All the Sacred Authority of the Prince becomes Dependent upon the Pleasure of the Subject and the Validity of a Divine and Unchangeable Ordinance is subjected to the Mutable Judgement and Construction of the People Scrup. It may be You Expect the Magistrate should as well have a Power of Judging what 's Indifferent as of Restreyning it Conf. You may be sure I do for otherwise I 'm where I was if I make You the Judge Is 't not all one as to the Magistrate Whether you Refuse upon Pretense that the Thing is not Indifferent or upon Pretense that he cannot Restreyn a Thing Indifferent The Crime indeed is differing in the Subject for the One way 't is an Usurpation of Authority and the Other way 't is a Denyall of it Scrup. Why then it seems I am to Believe any thing Indifferent which the Magistrate tells me is so be it never so Wicked Conf. No There You 're bound up by a Superiour Law Scrup. Have you forgot your self so soon 'T was but just now you would not allow me to be a Iudge and here you Make me One. Conf. Right to your self you are but not to the Publique A Judge of your own Thought but not of the Law Scrup. At your rate of Arguing now from One to All Authority methinks should be as much Endanger'd This way as the Other for All may Iudge Thus as well as One. Conf. 'T is possible they May Nay wee 'll suppose an Imposition foul Enough to move them all to do so and yet there 's a Large Difference for Diversity of Iudgment does not shake the Foundation of Authority and a man may Disobey a sinful Command with great Reverence to the Power that Imposes it Scrup. You were saying even now that my Duty to God and to the King could never be Inconsistent Pray'e How shall I behave my self if the Prince Commands One thing and God Another I cannot Observe the Law without Violence to my Conscience nor Discharge my Conscience without Offence to the Law What Course shall I take to avoid Enterfering Conf. Demean your Self as a Christian toward the Law of God on the One hand and as a Subject toward the Ordinance of God on the Other as Considering that you are Discharg'd of your Obedience but not of your Subjection Scrup. Suppose the Supreme Magistrate should by a Law Establish a False Worship Conf. Hee 's still your Prince and even in This Complication you may acquit your self both to God and Caesar. Divide the Worship from the Magistrate and in so doing you both Fear God and Honour the King and it is only This Loyal and Religious Separation of our Duties that must set us right
finds himself Bound to do 't Conf. This Argument of yours takes in Pagans as well as Christians for They have Consciences as well as Wee and They are convinc'd that there is a God and that That God ought to be Worship'd so that to grant a General License is to Tolerate Paganisme Zeal But Paganisme is not within the Pale of the Question Conf. Why then no more is Conscience for if you exclude Pagans upon what Accompt is 't They perswade Themselves they are in the Right You think them in the Wrong and because of the Error of Their Way deny them the Exercise of their Opinions so that your Exception lyes to the Error not to the Conscience Scrup. But their Consciences are Erroneous Conf. They are so if You may be Iudges of Them and so are Yours too when You come to be Iudg'd by Us. Now tell me What Right have You to be Judges in your own Case any more then They in Theirs Ze. We have a Law to judge our selves by Conf. And They even without a Law do by Nature the things contained in the Law and are a Law to Themselves But to look nearer Home 'T is it seems among Christians only that you would have a Generall Toleration and That in my opinion helps ye not much for to uphold your Claim you must either maintain that there are no Erroneous Consciences among Christians or that Errour of Conscience is no Sin or else that Sin may be Tolerated Scrup. That there are Erroneous Consciences and that sin is not to be Tolerated I Grant ye but I do not take every Error of Conscience to be a sin understand me of Consciences labouring under an Invincible Ignorance Conf. 'T is very true the Formality of sin is the Obliquity of the Will but sin Materially consider'd is the Transgression of the Divine Law and Conscience it self becomes sinfull when it dictates against That Law Scrup. Can there be any sin without Consent or any Consent without Knowledge or any Knowledge in a Case of Invincible Ignorance The Transgression of the Law implies the Knowledge of it or at least the Possibility of knowing it without which it has not the Nature of a Law as to mee The Conditions Requisite to a Rule are These it must be Certain and it must be Known If it be not Certain 't is no Rule if it be not Known 't is no Rule to Us. I had not known sin sayes the Apostle but by the Law and in another place Where there is no Law there is no Transgression From whence the Deduction is clear that sin is not barely the Transgression of a Law but the Transgression of a known Law the Inconformity of the Will to the Understanding Conf. The Perversness of the Will being a Sin does not hinder the Enormity of the Judgment to be so too Untill the Law says your own St. Paul sin was in the World but sin is not imputed when there is no Law Briefly The Word of God is the Rule of Truth and All Disproportion to That Rule is Errour God's Revealed Will is the Measure of Righteousness and all Disproportion to That Measure is sin Now the Question is not Whether Imputed or not but whether a Sin or no and you cannot make Errour of Conscience to be no Sin without making the Word of God to be no Rule Scrup. I do not deny but it is a fin as to the Law but it is None as to the Person It is none constructively with Him that accepts the Will for the Deed. Conf. Can you imagine that any Condition in the Delinquent can operate upon the Force and Equity of the Law Because God spares the Offender shall Man therefore Tolerate the Offence David was Pronounc'd a Man after God's own Heart shall Authority therefore grant a License to Murther and Adultery Scrup. What 's David's Case to Ours You Instance in Sins of Presumption and the Question is touching Sins of Ignorance Conf. Your Patience I beseech you It may be Ignorance in him that Commits the sin and yet Presumption in him that Suffers it You cannot comprehend it perhaps but the Magistrate does and wherein You Doubt Authority is Certain I could lead you now by a Thred from the Toleration of all Opinions to the Toleration of all Practices and shew you the execrable Effects of giving way to the Impulses of Deluded Conscience But what needs That when Two words will dispatch This Controversie In Pleading for All Opinions you plead for all Heresies and for the establishment of wickedness by a Law Do ye think such a Toleration as This either fit for You to Ask or for Authority to Grant Ze. But is it not Pity considering our Duty is Obedience and not Wisedom that a Good man should be punished for not being a Wise Man Conf. And do not you think we should have fine work if a State were bound to make no Provision against Crafty Knaves for fear of Dis-obliging Honest Fools You 'l set no Trapps for Foxes for fear of catching your Lambs and Hunt no Wolves for fear some of your Currs should stumble upon a Sheep In short the Honest will Obey Good Laws and let not the Unwise pretend to Mend them As to the sparing of the Man even where 't were Impious to give Quarter to the Opinion I wish it could be done but how shall we separate the Errour from the Person so as to make a General Law take notice of it To Tolerate Both were Irreligious and it seems to Mee Impossible to sever them If you your self now can either prove the Former to be Lawfull that is to do evil that Good may come of it or the Latter to be Practicable I 'le agree with you For a General Toleration If otherwise I hope you 'l joyn with me Against it Ze. The Truth is I am not yet Resolv'd to Burn for This Opinion but what do ye think of a Limited or Partial Toleration Conf. I fear you 'l find That as much too Narrow for your Conscience as the other is too Wide but Wee 'l Try't however SECT III. Limited Toleration does not answer Liberty of Conscience Conf. WEE are already Agreed That a Toleration of All Opinions is a Toleration of all Wickedness and consequently Unlawfull Come now to your Limited or Partial Toleration which I take to be A Legal Grant of Freedom or Immunity to such or such a Sect or Way and to no Other Will a Toleration of This Latitude content ye Scrup. I See no other Choyce Conf. Would ye have it Granted in favour of the Conscience that Desires it or in Allowance of the Tolerated Opinion Scrup. With an Eye to Both that Nothing which is Grievous may be Impos'd on the One hand nor any thing which is Unlawfull Tolerated on the Other Conf. But what if the Subject shall accompt that Imposition Grievous which the Magistrate thinks Necessary or That Liberty Conscientious which the Magistrate
in the Main Controversie Where do ye find that Kings Reign upon Condition of Ruling Righteously Or that we owe them less After Misgovernment than we did Before Scrup. But do ye say we are bound to Honour an Idolatrous Prince Conf. Yes yes the Prince you are bound to Honour though not as an Idolater Shall the Vice or Error of the Person blemish the faultless Dignity of the Order By That Rule the world must Continue without a Government till we can find Men without Failings Scrup. So that you allow I perceive of Distinguishing betwixt the Person and the Office Conf. Betwixt the Frailty of the One and the Sacredness of the Other I do for Kings Command as Gods though they Iudge as Men but I do no more allow of Dividing the Person of a Prince from his Authority then of Dividing his Soul from his Body Scrup. And I beseech ye what is that which you Call Authority Conf. To tell ye Only that it is Gods Ordinance falls short I believe of the Scope of your Question Wherefore take This in Surplusage It is the Will and Power of a Multitude Deliver'd up by Common Consent to One Person or More for the Good and Safety of the Whole and this Single or Plural Representative Acts for All. Take This along with ye too The Disposition of such or such a Number of Persons into an Order of Commanding and Obeying is That which we call a Society Scrup. What is the Duty of the Supreme Magistrate Conf. To procure the Welfare of the People or according to the Apostle He is the Minister of God for a Comfort to Those that Do Well and for a Terrour to Evill-Doers Scrup. How far are his Lawes binding upon his Subjects Conf. So far as They that parted with their Power had a Right over Themselves Scrup. Whence was the Original of Power and what Form of Government was First Regal or Popular Conf. Power was Ordain'd of God but Specify'd by Man and beyond doubt the First Form of Goverment was Monarchique Scrup. Nay Certainly the Popular Form was first for How could there be a King without a People Conf. So was the Son before the Father you 'll say for How could there be a Father without a Son But the Question is First Was the World ever without a Government since the Creation of Man Secondly Whether was first in the World One Man or More I see well enough what 'tis You 'd be at You would fain advance the Popular Form above the Regal which if ye could 't were Nothing to our purpose for we are not upon the Form of Government but upon the Latitude of Humaene Iurisdiction be the Sovereignty where it will and that it extends to whatsoever God has left Indifferent is my Assertion If you Deny This You Overthrow All Government as is already prov'd and if you Grant it we are at Liberty for the next Enquiry which is concerning SECT XII The Bounds of TOLERATION with some Reflections upon SCHISM and SCANDAL Conf. IT is already agreed that Government is a Divine Ordinance and Order according to the Reverend Hooker is only A Manifestation of the Eternal Law of God So that I think a Man may safely pronounce upon This Allowance First that What Principle soever is Manifestly Destructive of Government or but rationally tending to Confusion cannot le of God Secondly Every Man is to Content himself in his Station as being no farther accomptable than for what 's committed to his Charge Under These Two Heads will be found if I mistake not whatsoever belongs to the Political Part of our Debate We are here to enquire not how far Toleration may be Convenient or otherwise but how far Warrantable and Lawful and I find it by a Reverend and Learned Prelate brought to This Standard In the Question of Toleration The Foundation of Faith Good Life and Government is to be Secur'd Wherein is compris'd a Provision and Care that we may live as Christians toward God as Members of a Community toward one another and as Loyal Subjects toward our Sovereign Now if you 'll admit Opinions to be only so far Tolerable as they Consist with These Duties of Religion Morality and Society We have no more to do but to apply Matters in Controversie to the Rules of Piety and Good Manners and to the Ends of Government Scrup. ' T is True were Men Agreed upon Those Rules But we see Several Men have Various apprehensions of the same thing and that which One Man takes for a Rule Another Counts an Errour Conf. By your Argument we shall have no Religion because Men Differ about the Right No Bible because Men Disagree about the Meaning of it No Rule in fine at all to square our Actions by till Truth and Reason shall be Establisht by a Popular Vote The Law says Worship Thus or So use This Form That Ceremony Posture Habit c. The Libertine cries No 't is a Confinement of the Spirit an Invention of Man a Making of That Necessary which God left Free a Scandal to Tender Consciences c. And Here 's Authority Concluded as to the Manner of Worship So for the Time How do They know when Christ was Born or Crucify'd Nay They have much adoe to call to Mind when the Late King was Murder'd but the Relief of Taunton and the Repulse They gave the Cavaliers at Lyme This They can very well Remember and Celebrate Those Daies of Mercy with a most Superstitious Gravity and Form The Churches Fasting-Daies They make their Iubilees and still it happens that Their Consciences and the Law run Counter 'T is the same Thing as to the Place Command Them to Church They 'll tell ye there 's no Inherent Holiness in the Walls the Hearts of the Saints are the Temples of the Lord. Is not God to be found in a Parlour as well as in a Steeple-House In fine What 's their Plea for All This but that This is One Mans Iudgment That Anothers This or That may be Indifferent to You but not to Mee What 's Indifference to Christianity This sickly Humour opens a door to as many Controversies as there are Men it leaves Authority naked and exposes the Law to any mans Scorn that shall think fit to Scruple his Obedience To conclude This Lawless Liberty Razes the very foundation of Government it creates as many Religions as there are several Phansies and briefly the Assertors of This Liberty are of the Number of Those that are not upon any Terms to be admitted within the Pale of a Toleration Scrup. Shall the Magistrate make me Act against my Conscience Conf. Shall the Subject make Him Tolerate against His But to proceed There are that place the Soveraignty in the Diffusive Body of the People that hold it Lawfull for the Subjects to enter into Leagues and Covenants not only Without the Soveraign's Consent but Against his Authority that call upon the People in the Pulpit to Assist
Oblig'd to rely upon other Mens Eyes as Totally to Abandon the Direction of his Own or so Unconditionally to swear Obedience to Other Mens Lawes and Perswasions as to hold no Intelligence at all with That Sacred Law and faithfull Counsellor which he carryes in his own Bosom Conf. Forgive me If you Imagine that I would have ye Renounce your Reason No but on the Contrary I would have ye to be Guided and Concluded by 't and only to Obey for Quiet 's sake so far as you can possibly Obey in Conscience Scrup. What if a Single Person hitts That Truth which a General Council Misses Which will you have him follow Truth or Authority Conf. Why truly Both Truth with his Soul and Authority with his Body but so Remote a Possibility must not Presume to Bolster up the Thinkings of a Private Spirit against the Resolutions of Authority yet for the very Possibility's sake wee 'l take That supposition likewise into our Care and Word the sum of the Whole Matter Plainly Thus The Church says ye May do and the Law says ye Must Do That which your Conscience says You Ought not to Do. How will you Reconcile your Duty and your Conscience in This Case Scrup. Very well for I think it my Duty to obey my Conscience upon This Principle that Conscience is God's Substitute over Individuals Conf. Keep to That and Answer me again Is not the Civil Magistrate God's Substitute too If he bee How comes Your Conscience to take Place of His Authority They are Both Commission'd alike and consequently They are Both to bee Obey'd alike which is Impossible where their Commands are Inconsistent Scrup. The Magistrate is a Publique Minister and his Commission does not Reach to Particular Consciences Conf. 'T is very Right and on the other side My friend Scruple is a Private Person and there 's as little Reason to pretend that his Opinion should operate upon a Publique Law So that if I Mistake ye not Wee are Agreed thus far That Every Particular is to look to One and the King to the Whole Scrup. I do not much Oppose it Conf. If your Brother Zeal would deal as candidly with me now about the Ecclesiastical Power as You have done in the Civill we might make short work of This Question and I hope he will not deny that the Church is as well Authoris'd to TEACH and INSTRUCT in all the External Acts of Worship as the Magistrate is to COMPELL to those External Acts. Ze. There is no Doubt but the Church as the Church has a Ministerial Power Ex Officio to Define Controversies according to the Word of God and that A Synod Lawfully Conven'd is a Limited Ministerial and bounded visible Judg and to be Believed in so far as they follow Christ the Peremptory and Supreme Judg speaking in his own Word Conf. This will not do our business yet for if a Synod be but to be Believed in SO FAR as it followes Christ c. They that ought to be Concluded by That Act are left the Iudges of it and the Credit of the Authority rests upon the Conscience or if you please the Phansy or Humour of the Believer and so there 's no Decision Ze. e The Truth is we are to believe Truths Determin'd by Synods to be Infallible and never again lyable to Retraction or Discussion nor because So sayes the Synod but because So sayes the Lord Conf. Still y' are short for 't is not in our Power to Disbelieve what we acknowledge to be a Truth but That which is Truth at the Fountain may become Errour in the Passage or at least appear so to me and what Then Ze. It must be look'd upon as an Errour of the Conscience which is no discharge at all of your Obedience from which Errour you are to be Reclaym'd either by Instruction or Censure For the People are oblig'd to Obey those that are over them in the Lord who watch for their souls as those who must give an Accompt and not Oblig'd to stand to and Obey the Ministerial and Official Judgement of the PEOPLE He that Heareth You MINISTERS of the Gospel not the PEOPLE heareth MEE and he that Despiseth YOU despiseth MEE Conf. Then I find we shall shake hands You two Gentlemen are joyntly engag'd against the Act for Uniformity and yet ye cannot say that it wants any thing to give it the full Complement of a binding Law Whether ye Regard either the Civil or the Ecclesiastical Authority Here 's first the Judgment of the Church Duely Conven'd touching the Meetness and Convenience of the Rites and Forms therein Conteyn'd You have next the Royal Sanction Approving and Authorising Those Rites and Forms and Requiring your Exact Obedience to Them Now so it is that you can neither Decline the Authority of your Iudges nor the Subjection of your Dutyes What is it then that hinders your Obedience Scrup. That which to me is More then all the World It goes against My Conscience Conf. Only That Point then and no More upon This Subject That God is the Iudg of the World that the Church is the Iudg of what Properly concerns Religion that the Civil Magistrate is the Iudg of what concerns the Publique Peace and that Every Mans Conscience is the Iudg of what concerns his Own Soul is already Clear'd The Remaining Difficulty is This How I am to behave my self in a Case where the Law bids me do One Thing and my Conscience Another To take a true Estimate of what 's before us we must first ballance the Two Interests that meet in Competition There is in favour and for the Execution of the Law meaning that of Uniformity 1. The Personal Conscience and 2. the Political Conscience of the King There is likewise for the Equity of it the solemn and deliberate Iudgment of the Church which is Effectually the Publique Conscience and lastly for the Observance of it there is the Duty of the Subject which if it be withdrawn does not only invalidate This Particular Act but it loosens the sinews of Sovereign Authority and which is more it destroyes even a Divine Ordinance for take away Obedience and Government lapses into Confusion Now for the Counterpoize AGAINST This Law and Thus supported appears your Naked Conscience Nay That 's the Fairest on 't It may be worse and in Truth any thing that 's Ill under that name Scrup. But what 's the World to Mee in the scale against my Soul Conf. You have great Reason sure and 't is no more than every man may challenge That is to Stand or Fall to his own Conscience Is That your Principle Scrup. Yes out of doubt 't is Mine and Yours and His and any Man's that's Honest. Conf. Well hold ye a little Your Conscience will not down with This Law it seems and This Law will as little down with Your Conscience Weigh now the Good against the Bad What if it stands What if it