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
Yes yes He is a little Eager in his Way Conf. Come Zeal I 'le Disabuse ye What will you say if I bring you to a Person that shall Averre to Mr. Calamy's Face that since his Majesty's Return He has Declar'd Himself not Unsatisfy'd with the Government and Discipline of the Church of England and that only the Importunity of his Parishioners Diverted Him from accepting a Bishoprick You will the less wonder at This when ye Consider how Absolutely he was For the Church till he found it more Beneficial to be Against it Zea. All that I shall say is This Let every man speak as he finds and so if you please wee 'll leave him to take his Fortune SECT X. Arguments against TOLERATION in Respect of the Authority that is to Grant it Conf. COme Gentlemen I have yet one Exception more to your Toleration and That is upon the Accompt of the Authority that is to Grant it From whom do ye Expect it Zea. From the Parliament Conf. But what is 't you call a Parliament for one while the King and the Two Houses in Co-ordination are a Parliament and when Ye have Screw'd out the Kings Negative Voyce The Lords and Commons are a Parliament and Then down go the Lords and the Commons alone are a Parliament and at Last Out with Them too For the Fountain of Dominion is in the People This is the Scale of your Politicks But to the Point in hand You Apply to the Parliament and your Grievance is Matter of Conscience Do ye make the Civil Power a Judge of Conscience Zea. No under Favour My Desire that the Parliament will Relieve my Conscience does not Consequently make it a Judge of it Conf. And with Your Pardon too How shall the Magistrate know whether your Conscience is opprest or no if he be no Judge of it One of these Two Rules He is to proceed by Either That of his own Particular or the General Rule of all Consciences If He measure your Conscience by the Former there 's no Oppression in the Case for His Conscience is very well satisfy'd in That which will not down with Yours If by the Latter All other Consciences would be Concern'd as well as Yours in the Violation of a General Rule So that Evidently your Scruples are Singular and if you cannot bring them within his Cognizance you must Subject them to his Authority and First teach him to Know when your Conscience is troubled before ye Complain because 't is not Eas'd Scrup. For That Every man tells his owne Tale best and may best be Credited in That which No body knows but Himself Conf. And under That Colour so Many Men as make no Conscience at all of an Imposture shall pretend to make one of a Ceremony Peruse the Tragedies of our Holy Leagues Covenants and Reformations What Crime so Execrable that has not been Committed under the Motto of Gods Cause and Patronage of Conscience What Act so Horrid that has not past for a Divine Impulse and if it Hit the Author of it for an Inspired Instrument of Iustice Nay more not One Notorious Practice of a Hundred upon the Person of a Prince but under a Religious Vernish and Commonly a Priest at the One End of it and an Impulse at the Other Was it not a Holy Father and the Prior of the Covent one of the Heads of the League that Confirm'd Clement in his Purpose of Murdering Harry the Third of France For his Encouragement They Assur'd him that if he out-liv'd the Fact he should be a Cardinal if he Dy'd a Saint and This was it that fixt him in his Determination What was it again that Originally Dispos'd this Monster to That Direful Villany but principally Seditious Sermons against the King as a Persecuting Tyrant Stimolato dalle predicationi the giornalmente sentiva fare contra Henrico di Valois nomi nato il persecutore della fede il Tiranno c. See in the same Author the Confession of Iohn Castle concerning his Attempt upon Harry the Great which was that he had been brought up in the Jesuites School and Instructed that it was not only Lawful but Meritorious to Destroy Harry of Bourbon that Revolted Heretick and Persecutor of the Holy Church Esaminato con le solite forme confesso liberamento c. What was it that Animated Ravillac to his Damn'd Practice upon that Brave Prince but by his own Confession a Discourse of Mariana's De Rege Regis Institutione 'T was a Divine Instinct too that Mov'd Balthasar Gerard to Destroy the Prince of Aurange Divine tantum Instinctu id à se patratum constanter Affirmabat diu Tortus c. To conclude with that Fresh and Horrible Instance here at Home Acted upon the Sacred Person of the Late King What was it but the Operation of That Poyson in the People which was Instill'd into them by their Ministers How Inconsistent then is the Liberty of the Pulpit with the Safety of the Government and how Great a Madness were it to Expect that the same Persons should Establish This Prince by virtue of the same Liberty by which They Ruin'd the Last You cannot certainly but Confess the Hazard to his Sacred Majesty of Granting a Toleration take a little Notice now of the Indignity in proposing it That Grace which were an Ample Reward even for the most Meritorious Services and Loyalty do These People Mutinously Demand as a Requital for the Contrary Scrup. Will ye oppose the Exercise of a Charity because it may be Abus'd Conf. No but I shall Oppose the Encouragement of a Confidence that Presses to be Requited for an Injury and in truth Your Petition properly taken is rather a Mockery then a Request As for the Purpose What is 't ye stick at Scrup. The Act for Uniformity Conf. Is it the Model or the Uniformity that troubles you Scrup. Why truly I Except to Both for Neither is the Particular Act fram'd to my satisfaction nor is it possible that any One Form of Worship should suit All Judgments Conf. Will Toleration suit All Judgments any better then Uniformity Or do ye accompt the Sanction of any One Form Whatsoever to be Lawfull Scrup. Indeed I do not think it lawfull for a Magistrate to Enjoyn any thing upon a Penalty which a Private Person may not lawfully obey him in nor do I think it Warrantable for a Man to Obey any Humane Command against his Conscience Conf. Now lay together what you have said First It is not Possible that any One Form of Worship should suit All Iudgments and then it is not lawfull to Enjoyn any thing upon a Penalty which does not suit All Iudgments What is This but a meer Trifling of Government to suppose a Law without an Obligation Again If the Magistrate cannot Impose neither can he Tolerate unless you 'l suppose him a more Competent Judge of Your Conscience then of his Own for you Allow him the Cognisance
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