Selected quad for the lemma: ground_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
ground_n authority_n believe_v faith_n 2,627 5 6.0967 4 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
A62452 A discourse of the forbearance or the penalties which a due reformation requires by H. Thorndike ... Thorndike, Herbert, 1598-1672. 1670 (1670) Wing T1044; ESTC R1719 71,571 188

There are 5 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

for want of due abilities and they will find cause I doubt not to prefer the Whole Church before a late Party and abate the Sermon to restore the Eucharist Especially seeing the Law of this Land must be changed to bear out what others have done though it is manifest they never gave any reason for it They will see cause to think that the best Preaching is that which may fit the people for the Eucharist by understanding the Covenant of Baptism and the importance of daily renewing and restoring it by Communion in the Eucharist The other Instance shall be the Psalms that are sung in Cathedral Churches but allowed to be read where there is not company to sing them For it is plain enough what excuses are made and what indeavours used to silence this part of Gods Service and to turn the Psalms which this Church with the Whole Church appointeth for devotion into Lessons of Instruction only Hence all the Plea against the Old Translation with points all the indeavors to crowd in the Psalms in Rhime instead of the Psalter and all use which the Church hath always made of it But did not partiality and faction prevail over that Reason which all Christendom before the Reformation hath always owned there could be no question of using the Psalter of David for an Instrument to tune the devotion of Christian people by transforming the expressions of David unto our Lord Christ in the first place and according to the Figure of Christ to the Whole Church first and then to every particular member of it He that hath learnt this from the Whole Church will never think it reason to put this part of Gods Service to silence whosoever they be that desire or desing it He will rather indeavour to reduce the singing of them into Parish Churches being evidently so much easier then the singing of the Psalms in Rhime But howsoever retain the reading of them by Antiphones and not quench the Spirit of God which breatheth forth that transformation whereof I spake Having thus instanced I will not propose the Ground upon which I maintain that all Reformation is to proceed for the condition of the Conference which I propose I will think it a point of that Forbearance which S. Paul commandeth the Romans not to insist upon those terms which the Authority of the Apostles doth inforce Because I see him not insist upon the Authority of an Apostle with them but having infallibly proved his ground of Justification by Faith alone forbear the consequence of it charging the Romans to hold that indifferent whatsoever his Authority so grounded declareth such yet charging them to forbear those that for all his Authority and Reasons understood it not For I believe verily that his reason and mine is the very same Namely to keep both Parties in the Unity of one Church a Member of the Whole Hoping that by Gods blessing upon the advantages which the communication of the Faithful one with another and with their Clergy affordeth those that are now most keenly set against these little things that are excepted at in the Act of Uniformity may by that condescension which the Interest of Christianity obliges all Parties to come to understand the only Principle of Reformation and Unity both The Authority of the Catholick Church in all things not determined by Gods Law which is only the Gospel under this time of Christianity And I set before them to that purpose the example of the Jews Who for all the Forbearance commanded by S. Paul having stopped their ears at all his charms with the Unity of the Church have forfeited the Faith hitherto irrecoverably For being fully perswaded that without this Principle it is not possible either for this Church or for any part of the Reformation long to subsist Can I fear any less then the utter loss of Religion for my dearest Country and for the dearer Church of God in it CHAP. XXVII How Recusants may or may not be punished as Idolaters IT remains that I say what Penalties this Position makes competent to those that refuse the Reformation thus limited A thing easie for me to do having declared the Ground upon which the refusing of Christianity is punishable Which the Reformation hitherto hath not been able to do The Position of punishing Hereticks capitally is generally decryed by them And yet we see Servetus and Gentilis put to death at Geneva and Bern and others elsewhere If because sentenced for Hereticks by them that put them to death Why should not the Powers that adhere to the Church of Rome execute the Sentence thereof upon those whom they pronounce Hereticks If because so sentenced by the Primitive Church in which we both agree Why owne we not the Primitive Church in the rest as well as in that If because they that gave the Sentence are competent Judges in Religion What remains but that contrary Sentences be executed by the Sword and Religion be no otherwise judged But supposing Religion and the Church and the sense of the Scripture Visible so far as the preserving of Unity requires Christian Powers must both protect Subjects in their Civil as well as natural being though not true Christians and yet punish them for not being true Christians Only if they pretend freedom from Allegiance by Christianity and we know it is false Christianity that so pretends there will be also fit time to declare why they may be capitally punished But those who declare the Pope Antichrist and the Papists Idolaters in the exercise of their Religion have not declared what Penalty is competent to their Idolatry And yet till that be cleared we are in the clouds This difficulty I find my self able to look in the face without ever disputing whether the Papists by their Religion are bound to commit Idolatry or not The Law of Moses indeed seems to shew that by the Law of Nature Idolaters may be put to death for their Idolatry For there is no appearance that the Law of God would have injoyned that which the Law of Nature allows not But the Case is otherwise under Christianity then under the Law of Moses The people of Israel held the Land of Promise upon Condition not to suffer any other God to be worshipped within the Bounds of it but the true God that gave it them upon those terms Therefore they committed a forfeit whensoever they suffered Idolatry in it But the Gospel was preached to the Roman Empire consisting of two Religions of Jews and Gentiles Maintaining the State of the World upon the same terms which it found saving that which if they imbraced the Faith they must voluntarily change When therefore the Soveraign Power of the Empire came to profess the Faith and thereupon an obligation to maintain and propagate it by all means which the Right of Soveraign Power furnishes they could not answer God for the right use of their Power using any other means then the Interest of Christianity allows They might
with these Positions which I cannot shew to have been Professed by Visible Bodies I discharge my self upon a number of Pamphlets of the time of that Confusion which was called the Blessed Reformation wherein free Grace was made to be the pardon of sin before it is done Justification to be the Revelation of predestination to Glory and no sin to be seen in Gods Elect. One particularly which I have cause to believe was printed by Cromwells own Appointment because it answered a Petition of Welsh Fanaticks which charged him to depart from his Principles answers expresly that the Principle of Salvation is neither Faith nor good Works but Christ living in the heart and abiding there whatever Principles the Godly may change And for the Church have we not seen our Independent Congregations or do we not see them in New-England refuse Baptism to all that will not take the Covenant which they appoint themselves to take and owne no other Churches but such Congregations I suppose no man in his right senses will imagine that there can be a Catholick Church consisting in the Communion of all such Congregations Or that there can be any Faith to give Law to their Communion who have the Law in their own hand to be to morrow Socinians if they please Or any other Sect that allows Independent Congregations For the Socinians may seem to have the Eldership of New-England for Independent Congregations On the other side do we not see the Leviathan that Monster of a Christian openly Profess that he is bound to renounce Christ with his mouth if his Soveraign command Though still bound to believe in him at the heart So utterly perswaded that there is no such thing as a Church of Gods Ordinance But only by the Act of Soveraign Powers within the respective Dominions of each of them That he had rather renounce his Baptism and so the Benefit of it then owne any Creed or any Catholick Church CHAP. VII That it is for the Interest of the Reformation as much as of the See of Rome HAving therefore observed upon due consideration as I hope that all the Errours which have had Vogue during our late Confusions are reducible to these two Positions destructive to two Articles of our Creed that Profess one Catholick Church and one Baptism for remission of Sins I am still led by the same Consideration to think my self tyed in Conscience freely to Profess that where these two Positions clearly renounced and the sense of those two Articles duely established and received by all Parties that owne the same Creed the Re-union of the whole Church must needs follow For the Power of the whole Church being so stated as to presuppose the whole condition of our Salvation and to extend only to the determining of those things which may promote edification in it without endangering the Unity of the Church why should not I think that there is found by the consent of the whole Church from the beginning so clear a resolution of all that is disputed to maintain Separation concerning the Condition of the Covenant of Grace that it cannot be refused by the Parties owning the common Faith There is great cause to fear that notwithstanding the mischiefs we feel by our own Divisions some would think it still a greater mischief that the Whole Church should be re-united Though upon just Terms and such as must needs re-unite our selves But if the Christian Religion oblige us to do men good against their will He that demands nothing but the Right Vnderstanding of two Articles in the Creed to the Re-uniting of Christendom intends the greatest Charity that those who love Division can receive Whether his demand be sufficient to do his Work or no he must leave it to the World to judge For it is to be acknowledged that when the Condition of our Salvation is setled and all that causes Division upon the Account of it there remains besides very many Disputes concerning Publick Orders as well in the Offices of the Church as in the publick Government of it and the Interest as well of the State as of the Church in the same But let not therefore those that love not Unity pretend Difficulty For they shall find such Principles laid to the determining of them all in the Visible Laws of that one Church which cannot continue One but by owning the same that the due bounds of Reformation cannot escape them that will not decline the thred and the grain of these grounds And yet in all this no man declines the Scripture for the only Rule of Faith But he that refuses the See of Rome for Judge in the Sense of it which is all that remains in question may well crave leave to decline the Judgment of any private Spirit not confined within the bounds which the Visible consent of the Church determineth Not as if the sense of the Scripture were not more and more to be discovered which is indeed discovered every day more and more But because the true sense of it will always fall within the compass of that which the Church hath always received I am very well perswaded that the See of Rome will never hear of any Terms of Reconcilement so long as they see our Divisions increase But I am very well assured that the Divisions of the Reformation can never be Re-united so as to prevent the like for the future but upon that Ground which being received will serve to re-unite the Whole Church There can never be One Visible Faith One Visible Church upon any other terms There can be no such sin as Heresie to violate Faith as Schism to violate Charity upon other terms And therefore it is out of Love to the Reformation that I insist upon such a Principle as may serve to re-unite us with the Church of Rome Being well assured that we can never be well re-united with our selves otherwise That not only the Reformation but the Common Christianity must needs be lost in the Divisions which will never have an end otherwise And he that can take measure how much of it is lost in thirty years time since these Troubles began even among them that inclose the Name of Saints and the Godly to themselves will easily believe that it hath not long to live unless Division be put to death And yet the vain hopes of the Parties ever since the Division may make it appear that both have Reason enough to be reconciled They of the See of Rome have long expected a hundred and fifty years or thereabouts that those Christian Princes that have looked upon the Reformation as dangerous to the Peace of their Dominions should give them assistance to reduce all that Protest against the abuses thereof by force of Arms to submit to their Will Which would be to make that Will the Law of Religion as well to themselves as to those that should be so reduced But the experience of so much time evidences that the Powers of
Jurisdiction of Ecclesiastical Courts under the Jurisdiction of the Laws of the Land and those Courts that minister the same This Interest espouseth the Opinion which voids the Article of our Creed that professes One Catholick Church making Excommunication and Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction founded by our Lord Christ a meer Imposture declareth it uncapable of any Sacriledge to be committed in the using of it In the mean time the Clergy whose Interest is no ways concerned in the Scandals which the Ecclesiastical Courts may give Further then as they are hindred by the said Courts to cure their Scandals by the due Use of their own Office do suffer not only the Scandals which are done under colour of their Patents But even the affronts of the Ecclesiastical Courts themselves Receiving Appeals from the Censure of their Bishops upon the Clergy For a few examples serving the Bishops not to imploy that Jurisdiction which is so easily affronted it must be acknowledged that the debauches of the Clergy are come to that height that till they be Reformed Reformation is not duely pretended against the See of Rome CHAP. XXII The ground of the proper Interest of the Church BUt perhaps there be those that are perswaded by the Leviathan that a Church is nothing else but a Christian Common-wealth And that the Civil Power thereof which is Soveraign hath full Right to injoyn whatsoever it please for the Christian Religion exacting what Penalties it please of Recusants There be others besides the Leviathan that have maintained some branches of the same Opinion but he is the only man that hath looked the whole Question in the Face with this Answer I will but relate the Issue which his own Resolution hath driven him to and leave him to Judgment For having objected to himself in his Latine Book de Cive that which is obvious to all Understandings That then a Christian may be justly punished for his Christianity He answers that it is no inconvenience that he should Because by suffering he purchases an abundant reward I know not whether any man told him or whether himself took notice that this was the answer of Julian the Apostate making himself sport with the complaints of the Christians That they were beholding to him for the Kingdom of Heaven which they gained by suffering his Persecutions But that it was not for the credit of his doctrine to bring Christian Princes into the predicament of Julian the Apostate And therefore upon second thoughts his Leviathan answers That a Subject is bound to obey all that his Soveraign commands in Religion whether he be Christian or not Insomuch that if he command him to renounce Christ he is bound to do it with his mouth and shall be saved believing in him with his heart nevertheless This answer shews the necessary issue of this Opinion That he who holds it if he be as bad as his word is as necessarily an Apostate as Julian the Apostate The hope of Salvation and the Right of Communion with the Church lyes not only in the heart which believes to righteousness but in the mouth which professeth to Salvation The Profession which is made at our Baptism is a Condition without which it cannot be had It is the taking up of Christs Cross which the Gospel requireth He that declares himself free in any Case whatsoever to renounce Christs though he hath not done it hath declared himself free of the Bond which he entred into at his Baptism And as he is no more a Christian to God no more should he be to the Church If further he say As the Propositions first maintained and afterwards recanted by his late Disciple at Cambridge do import That there is no difference between good and bad before Civil Power that is Soveraign inact it Then must it be said further that he is properly an Atheist For if God govern not the World if he reward not the good if he punish not the bad though man do not pardon me God and all good Christians if I repeat Blasphemy that it may never more be repeated then is he not God Particularly if Civil Power can oblige a man to say or swear that which he means not there remains not that Ground for Civil Society which the Heathen themselves whom nevertheless S. Paul truly calls Atheists maintained For what Ground for Civil trust if there be no Law before Civil trust to punish the falsifying of it Let him that considers this Consequence necessary upon all Opinions that distinguish not the matter of Ecclesiastical Law consequent to the State and Constitution of the Church from the Force it hath to be a Law of the Kingdom by the Act of the Kingdom I say let him answer in Conscience whether those Laws by which the Rights of the Crown Usurped by the See of Rome are Resumed into it did proceed upon this Opinion or not For my part I remember very well a solemn Protestation which one of them makes that the intent was not to innovate any thing in Religion by vindicating the Rights of the Crown And therefore do infer that none of them can be understood to extinguish the Rights of Religion concurrent with the Rights of the Crown in Church-matters which it doth not distinguish Knowing how difficult it is to distinguish between them As not knowing that ever the ground upon which they are to be distinguished was delivered till now But there is an Act of the V. of Q. Elizabeth by which that abatement in the sense of the Supremacy of the Crown in Church-matters which had been declared by her Injunctions from the beginning of her Raign to prevent misconstructions was made a Law of the Land This Act because it undertaketh not to limit the Supremacy by distinguishing the Interest of the Crown from the Interest of the Church for the difficulty of satisfying all Consciences gives the Subject leave to declare the sense in which he takes that Oath reserving to himself that which Religion requires a Christian to reserve for the Church Which was not the sense of them that believed no Catholick Church no Visible Right of it And by vertue of this Declaration it is that my self have undertaken to declare that limitation which the Catholick Church requireth For how many Prelates and Divines of this Church King James of excellent Memory in particular have done the same But it is no other then that which the Canons of K. James declare when they describe this Supremacy to be the same which the Godly Kings of Gods Ancient People which the Roman Emperors of the Primitive times before that corruption came in which we Protest against did exercise Here have you the due bounds of this Supremacy setled by Law upon the true ground of it For it is manifest that it cannot be derived from the Rights of the Kings of Gods Ancient People alone Because there could be no Catholick Church before the calling of the Gentiles But the Empire imbracing the Faith when the Church
was setled upon that Faith and those Laws that are now as Visible as the Laws of England from which present Titles are derived can be Visible must needs have that Right from which the Right of all present Soveraignties must be derived Because the Church whose Interest concurreth with the Interest of them all in the same matters is always One and the same and ought so to be from the first to the second Coming of Christ And that answers any difficulty that may be objected when any Law of any Roman Emperor or other Christian Prince or State seems to infringe the Canons of the Church For the Protection of the Crown being of such advantage as it is both for the inlarging and maintaining of Christianity It is enough that the Church can continue One and the same Visible Church by one and the same Visible Laws Though the force and effect of them be hindred now and then here and there by some Acts of Secular Power which in some regards may advance the Church as much as they hinder it in others It was necessary for the Crown under Henry the VIII to vindicate the Supremacy from the pretense of the Popes Secular Power which had been on foot divers Ages afore And therefore not to have to do with him that pretended to assoil the Subjects of Princes whom he should excommunicate of their Allegiance till they might owne him upon terms consistent with the Protection they owe their People And it was still more necessary under Edward the VI. when the Reformation was inacted which they knew well enough that the Pope would not endure But when the Right of the Crown in Church-matters is declared by Law to be the same which the Kings of Gods Ancient People and the first Christian Emperors did exercise the ground of that Interest and the bounds of that Interest which the Church must challenge if it will continue a Church are declared to be the same which the Faith and the Laws of the Whole Church from the beginning do allow CHAP. XXIII Of restoring and reforming the Jurisdictions of the Crown and of the Church in Ecclesiastical Causes ANd this makes the Reformation of our Ecclesiastical Laws as easie as it is visibly the cure of all distempers in Religion among us It is in brief this That the Jurisdiction which may by this means appear to the Kingdom to be invested in the Church by Gods Law be by a Law of the Kingdom restored to the Clergy To the Bishops in chief then to the Chapters of their Cathedrals and to their Archdeacons And to these not without the Assistance of the Principal Clergie of their Respective Jurisdictions the Judges of the Ecclesiastical Courts continuing the Kings Judges as they are now by Law to manage the Interest of the Crown in all the Rights thereof resumed into the Crown by the Acts of Supremacy according to the Roman Laws in those Ages of Christendom which passed before the Usurpation of the See of Rome had taken place If it be said That it is not Visible when those Usurpations took place I shall allow all the time which that Code of the Canons contains that Pope Adrian sent to Charles the Great In whose time there can be no pretense of Usurpation upon the Temporalties of Princes by the See of Rome This Code is yet read under the Name of Codex Canonum Ecclesiae Romanae I have commended the Justice and Wisdom of that Commission which was designed under Henry the VIII and Edward the VI for the qualities of Persons limited by it But I do not think it possible for any Commission to Reform the Alterations introduced by the Popes Canon Law after that time in one Kings Raign with that circumspection which is requisite The Jurisdiction which the Church challenges by Gods Law can not be distinctly stated with more satisfaction to all Interests preserving that of Religion then by a Commission so qualified The Interest of the Kingdom in preserving the study of the Roman Laws hath always been thought considerable But how shall the study of them be maintained if the Authority of them be not maintained Or how shall that Authority be maintained but by adopting them into the Law of the Kingdom in matters necessary to be provided for by Law but not provided for by the native Law of the Kingdom Or what provision can there he by the native Law of the Kingdom for those Causes which for so many hundred years before the Reformation the Popes Canon Law had sentenced by the Authority of the Kingdom There is an Interest of Religion in Matrimonial Causes in Testamentary Causes in Causes arising upon Elections of Corporate Clergie in Causes of Dispensation in Canons in Causes of Tithes in divers sorts of Causes besides those which the Power of the Keys in the Discipline of the People and the Correction of Inferior Clergy occasioneth Let me not say that it were Barbarous for a flourishing Kingdom in a flourishing Age for all other Learning to reduce the Tryal of them to the Arbitrary Verdicts of Juries Who can never understand the Grounds upon which the matter of Fact is to be stated when I can so clearly say that there can be nothing more like to meer Tyranny then Arbitrary Justice nor Justice more Arbitrary then where it is manifest that there can have been no other Law provided because the Canon Law hath been hitherto used As for those Causes which are proper to the Church as rising from the Constitution of it how can it stand with Religion and Reformation in Religion which we pretend to try them otherwise then by those which the Kingdom shall be satisfied by such a Commission that they are by Gods Law capable of Authority to do it And the Interest of the Crown and of the Subjects which it is bound to protect shall be secured when provision is made by adopting the Roman Laws for managing the Rights of the Crown resumed by the Act of Supremacy within those Bounds which the Roman Laws maintained before the Usurpation of the See of Rome It cannot be denied that the Popes Canon Law which the Law of the Land hath already adopted so far as it contradicteth not the Law of the Land provideth for many things not provided for by the Primitive Canons within the Compass of the Roman Laws And it would be too much rashness to recal that Adoption and to leave so much matter to arbitrary Justice rather then retain a Provision which the Law and Religion professed by the Kingdom owns not the Original of though it owne the matter it hath adopted For whatsoever shall prove by time and tryal to hinder the Reformation which we pretend thus to ground and thus to bound the faults that shall be found by experience must open the way of mending it because the Cure must be as particular as the disease is And upon these Terms it can be no dishonour to the Kingdom and to the Reformation
man is not subject to God Such are the Invocations of Saints the Worshipping of their Reliques and Images the Pilgrimages and Indulgences commended or commanded by the See of Rome And such they may be owned to be by him that dare not undertake them to be that Idolatry that was punishable with death by the Law of Moses And being such it will be punishable in all who for an undue respect to the See of Rome will not have their fellow-subjects freed from superstitious customs Nor obey the Laws of their Country that give them this freedom But if this be the due Reason for which it is punishable the same Reason will render them punishable who think they serve God by running into Conventicles in despite of the Laws of God and their Country For what is that but a pretense of paying the debt of Religion which Christianity makes due to God by worshipping an Idol of their own setting up That is as I said afore by worshipping God according to an Imagination of their own erecting and not according to that which the common Christianity requires And thus I am come to the Conclusion which I intended without disputing whether or no the Papists by their Religion do exercise that Idolatry which is punishable by death in Moses Law For if capital Penalty lye not in our Case If it be agreed upon that they are punishable upon the same Ground for which the other sort of Recusants are punishable then is the way clear before me to proceed to declare what Penalties both sorts of Recusants are to be or may be punished with Supposing our Reformation confined within those Bounds which the Faith and the Laws of the Catholick Church either determine or allow CHAP. XXVIII All that take Arms against the Soveraign to Reform Religion may be liable to Capital Punishment BUt if the Papists cannot be liable to capital punishment as Idolaters neither can they be liable to it as limbs of Antichrist The name of Antichrist is a challenge of Soveraign Power Because the name of Christ is so Signifying a Prince and a Prophet raised and setled by Gods immediate Word which is the Soveraign Title For Antichrist can signifie nothing but a counterfeit Christ One that pretends to be Christ and is not Our Lord Christ being the Messias which the Fathers and Prophets from the beginning expected But the Soveraignty of Christ is declared by himself to be a meer Spiritual Soveraignty which all the Jews even the Apostles before our Lords death expected to be a temporal Kingdom And therefore whososoever it is that groundeth Soveraignty upon Christianity though he be not Antichrist for that yet is he the enemy of all Christian States for it And so are the Subjects of all Christian States that think themselves free of their Allegiance to Princes or States Excommunicated by the Pope And upon this account I deny not that Papists may become liable to capital punishment or to banishment with confiscation Which seems to be of the two the greater punishment But this neither common to all Papists nor proper to Papists alone For that this is not the Faith of all Papists I need no more then the distance between the Secular Priests and the Jesuits here to prove And that it is not proper to Papists alone I need no more then the Scottish Covenant and the troubles of the three Kingdoms upon it to prove And therefore it is a thing absolutely necessary to make those Penalties just which the Laws inflict upon the Papists that they distinguish between the Cause of Religion common to all and the Cause of them that make it a point of Religion to violate their Allegiance to a Soveraign deposed by the Pope Nay it will be necessary in point of Justice to impose the same Penalties upon all of all Religions that may think themselves discharged of their Allegiance upon any account of Religion whatsoever It is manifest that they who take Arms against their Soveraign to reform Religion do ground themselves upon the Title of Religion and think themselves tyed by their Christianity to do it As they who take Arms against their Prince deposed by the Pope think themselves tyed in Christianity to execute his Sentence Those whom the people follow in reforming Religion against the will of their Soveraign Those they make as much Judges in reforming Religion as the other do the Pope And all that refuse to secure their Soveraign by Oath that they will neither lead nor follow any man in reforming Religion without his Authority deserve to be out of the protection of that Sword which he weareth not in vain They fall into the Case of the Jews expecting the Messias For when they imagine that he is come they will think themselves dispensed with by their Religion for any Bond of Allegiance But Christian Princes and States are not wont so far as I know to think themselves secured by the Oath of Jews Let this be a difference which they make between Jews and Christians to take the Oath of their Christian Subjects for security of their Allegiance Because true Christianity obliges all good Christians to bear Allegiance to their Soveraigns not to be dispensed with upon any account of Christianity Notwithstanding we see that there are those that count themselves the best Christians that do think themselves dispensed with in their Allegiance upon divers and several accounts of their Christianity But let this Kingdom having had tryal of contrary pretenses think it self bound to declare the same Penalties against the same Crimes And able to impose the utmost Penalties upon all that shall refuse to secure their Soveraign by Oath of their Allegiance And since the allowance which the Law makes in understanding the Oath of Supremacy evidences that it may be understood in a sense offensive in point of Religion let it be thought time to antiquate the old and to inact a new form that may tye all Subjects as Subjects without pretense of offending any Religion by condemning all Religions that make difficulty to undertake it for irreligious CHAP. XXIX What Penalties the Protection of Religion requires NOw I am to say how far Christian Powers are to punish Hereticks and Schismaticks For it is too late for me to say that they may punish their Conventicles having declared the reason why they may do it And being now only to draw the consequence of that reason how far they are to do or may do it Here I must first marvel at our Independents some of whom have disputed in very good earnest that it is not lawful for Civil Powers to impose Penalties upon Religion Whereas the World knows that there never was any such Religion in the World as that of Independents before the planting of New England And that since those that framed Independent Congregations there upon a Covenant whereby they renounce One Catholick Church and One Baptism for Remission of Sins have not only banished Antinomians and put Quakers to