Whoever does this does in effect however he may deny it in Words claim a Legislative Power But where there is such a Power one is oblig'd to obey upon the account and for the sake of the Authority that commands it And if the Magistrate had such a Power Men would be obliged to profess whatever Religion he commands them 4. The Reason why a Judg is necessary in Civil and not in Religious Controversies is because in Civil Matters it is impossible that Titius should enjoy the things in Controversy and Sempronius too therefore the Plaintiff must injure the Defendant by disquieting his Possession or the Defendant wrong the Plaintiff by keeping his Right from him so that there is a necessity of a common Judg between them who would be to no purpose if both Parties were not obliged to acquiesce in his Sentence I mean with an external Obedience so as to suffer it to be put in execution but not with an Internal so as to believe it always just But in Religious Controversies the Case is otherwise for there each may hold his Opinion and do the other no wrong nor himself neither if he did his best in judging concerning his Opinion so that there can be no occasion of a Judg And it 's further considerable that here can be none but what is a Party as being before engaged either for or against the Opinion that is to be decided But for a Party to judg it against all natural Equity tho it 's the constant practice of the Clergy to make profest and highly interessed Parties whose Preferments are held by declaring for such Opinions to be both Accusers and Judges that is to declare themselves Orthodox and therefore to engross all Preferments and their Opponents Heterodox and consequently not to share with them But if there is a Judg to whose Determination one is obliged to submit he that is so obliged must give an Internal Consent because here all External Compliance contrary to one's Judgment is a Sin but all the Power in the World is not able to make a Man give an Internal Consent because it 's not in his own much less in another's Power to make him believe or think as he pleaseth Yet were that possible no Man is qualified to be a Judg but he that is infallible besides were there any such Judg yet a Man was not to be ruled by him except he was convinced he was so But 5. There being no such Judg on Earth there is an absolute necessity of leaving those Controversies to be decided by God himself as being Matters wholly relating to him and consequently wholly to be left to him Therefore for the Magistrate to punish any for acting according to their Judgments is not only invading the Rights of his Fellow-men but the Prerogative of God himself in taking upon him to judg those Matters God has reserv'd for his own Tribunal Nay he goes further than this and punisheth Men for obeying God rather than himself God requires Man to worship him as he in his Conscience thinks most agreeable to his Will and the Magistrate threatneth him if he does so to Fine Imprison and Ruin him which is setting himself above God a Crime greater than that of Lucifer who only attempted an Equality with his Maker not a Superiority above him 6. It 's said the Magistrate has a Right to hinder his Subjects from following their Consciences when erroneous Which is very absurd for if a Man was not oblig'd to act according to his Conscience for fear of its being erroneous no Man would be obliged to act according to his Conscience at all since the mistaken Person thinks himself as much in the right nay is generally more confident than he that is really so So that if one must follow his Conscience there 's the same necessity for all because all equally judg themselves in the Right But if the Magistrate is to judg whose Conscience is erroneous then Men must desert their Consciences and all the World over profess the same Principles with the Magistrates they live under For Civil Government is every where the same and one Magistrate as well as another has an equal right to judg who of his Subjects have erroneous Consciences 7. If it be Mens indispensible Duty to worship God according to Conscience and that publickly too for the more publick the Worship is the more it tends to the Glory of God it must be their Duty to use the Means that are necessary to that End and consequently if it be necessary oppose Force to Force for the Magistrate in things beyond his Commission is but a private Person and People do no Injustice in defending that Right none can have a right to deprive them of and which themselves cannot part with it being the Essential Right of Human Nature to worship God according to Conviction which is antecedent to all Government and can never be subject to it But 8. If the Magistrate has a Right to use Force in Matters of meer Religion he must have this Right by God's positive Law or by the Law of Nature But that he has no such Power by God's positive Law is evident from this one Consideration that all Mankind except the Jews whose Laws were not obligatory to other Nations were under no Law but that of Nature until the coming of Christ But Christ whose Kingdom is not of this World and who disclaimed all Civil Power made no Change or Alteration in the Civil Rights and Conditions of Mankind which he must have done had he made Mens Properties depend upon their thinking or acting in Matters purely Religious according to the Magistrate's Judgment As Christ and the Magistrate have each their distinct Kingdoms so they must have each their Limits and Bounds the Magistrate's Kingdom it's true must be subservient to Christ's in punishing Vice and Immorality and in preserving People from being molested in their Civil Rights for worshipping God according to Conscience and here he still keeps within the Confines of his own Kingdom but if he exerciseth a Legislature in Christ's and makes use of Violence to put his Laws in execution he assumes a greater Power than Christ himself claims But 9. If the Magistrate claims such a Right by the Law of Nature that Right ought fully to be made appear because there is no part of that Law but what is most clear and evident To prove he has such a Power it 's usually urged that if Parents by the Law of Nature have a right to use Force on their Children in Matters of meer Religion the Magistrate whose Power over his Subjects is much greater than that of Parents over their Children has at least as great a Right I answer It 's a Duty in Parents for the Good of their Children for which they are fitted by their natural Love and Tenderness to supply the Defects of their Understanding until they are capable of understanding for themselves Before which time Parents no
an Injustice if he should any farther than relates to the good of the Publick enjoin Men the Care of their Private Concerns or force them to a prosecution of their Private Interest but only protect them from being invaded which is much the same as Toleration there is the same reason he should no farther use Force in Matters of Religion than the Publick Good is concerned and only protect Men from being injured by others in their Private Concerns between God and themselves 10. To suppose that one Man in the State of Nature had a Right to use Force on another on the account of meer Religion is to suppose that State a State of Anarchy War and Confusion because every one supposing himself in the right and not being willing to submit to another there must necessarily happen perpetual Quarrels Confusions and Destruction which is contrary to the Law of right Reason whereby in that State Men were wholly to be governed The only Difference between being in a State of Nature and under Government consists in this that under Government Men have debarred themselves from exercising their natural Rights and intrusted the Magistrate to do those things that in the State of Nature every one of them had a Right to do so that the Magistrate's Power is not larger but their 's more contracted than it was in that State 11. If in the State of Nature Men had a Right to use Force one upon the other for Differences of Opinion different Nations who with respect to one another are still in that State may upon that account justly use it which would involve almost all Nations since there are scarce any but differ and in their own Opinions very materially in endless Wars But they are so far from thinking they ought to make War for this Reason that by the Sacred Laws of Nations Ambassadors and all vested with a Publick Character have a Right to exercise their own Religion in the Country they are sent to tho never so contrary to that there established But 12. If the Magistrate of one Society has no Right to use Force on the Members of another he can have as little to use it on those of his own because in becoming their Governour he has obliged himself to promote their Happiness and Welfare And he that is entrusted with a Power for the Good of the Society can never have a Right to use it to the Prejudice of it as he manifestly does who deprives his Subjects either of their Lives or Properties for things that do not relate to the Safety or Good of the Civil Society Which either against Foreign or Domestick Enemies is best provided for by the Peoples Union which arises from the mutual Enjoyments of their Liberty whereby the Source and Foundation of Domestick Enmities is taken away and their Strength against Foreign Enemies encreased which Union and with it the general Welfare of the People can only be secured by such a Conduct in the Governors as gives impartial Encouragement to all that are Vertuous and Industrious and perfect Security to every one in the Fruits of their Labours Which is altogether inconsistent with the Magistrate's depriving them of those Fruits or any part of them for Matters meerly Religious which can only tend to divide a People into Parties and Factions and to weaken the State by their Disunion and endanger it by their Discontents But this is not the worst it necessarily tends to the ruining and beggaring of a Nation not only by destroying all Encouragement to Industry Frugality and Labour but by depriving People of the Means to carry on those Trades upon which the Safety and Riches of a Nation depend which must in time depopulate a Country as we find evident in all those where Men are not secure in the enjoyments of the Fruits of their own and their Ancestors Labours But such Tyranny is much more destructive when it happens upon the Account of Religion then it wholly falls on the truly Religious and Conscientious who are the most Just most Frugal most Industrious and in a word most serviceable to their Country both in Peace and War For that Conscience that makes them suffer rather than act against it causeth them to abound with all those moral Vertues about which there are no Contentions that are necessary and useful to the Publick But because I shall have further occasion to mention the fatal Consequences of Persecution I shall only add here that there never was a Nation especially a trading One where Men could with ease remove themselves and their Effects long either Rich Populous or Happy where Persecution prevail'd And on the contrary no Nation but what has thriven proportionably as they have allowed a Toleration 13. In a word since it 's the Magistrate's Duty to preserve as much as possible when it 's not contrary to the greater Good of the Society the Property Quiet and Life of every individual Person neither Man nor God can oblige him to inconsistent or contradictory things viz. to do this and deprive the Members of the Society of these when the Good of it is not concerned But the more the Good of the Society forbids him the more he is obliged to use Force because as the Number of those he judges to be erroneous encreases so not only the Number of the Sufferers but even their Sufferings ought to encrease to put a stop to those spreading Errors But the more the Sufferers are and the more they suffer the more the Publick is damnified so that it 's evident the Magistrate cannot be obliged both to promote the Publick Good and to use this Power Nay the very exercising such a Power is inconsistent with Government and as far as it extends destroys it because a Design to deprive People not only of their Lives but Properties for conservation of which Government was instituted and therefore more sacred than Government it self and a Design to govern them are inconsistent And has not the Magistrate such a Design when he invades the Peoples Rights for things not tending to the Good of the Society nor as much as in their Power but morally impossible such as acting contrary to their Conscience is And it 's a greater piece of Tyranny to punish Men for what is morally than what is naturally impossible 14. If the Magistrate on pretence of the Honour of God or the Good of Souls can use Force to make Men of that Religion he judgeth to be true there can be no reason why the same religious Causes should not oblige the dissenting Subjects to use Force on the Magistrate and his Sect in order to cause them to be of that Religion they judg to be true The same reason that will justify one will equally justify the other For Property is no more founded in speculative Opinions or ceremonial Practices than Dominion is and the Magistrate is as much bound to protect his Subjects and not to destroy their Privileges as they
Magistrate's using Force in other Matters than those relating to the Civil Society I shall now examine with all impartiality the Reasons that are urged in behalf of the contrary Opinion from Divine and Human Authority and from Reason But first as to Divine Authority 1. All that can be urged from the New Testament with the least colour of Reason is contained in Rom. 13. where it 's said Rulers are not a Terror to good Works but to the Evil Wilt thou not be afraid of the Powers do that which is good and thou shalt have praise of the same If thou dost that which is evil be afraid for he beareth not the Sword in vain Where say they by Evil and Good Works not only those Actions that relate to the Civil Society but those that are meerly Religious are meant To make this out they ought to prove 1. That meer Errors of the Understanding are evil Works So that those who act justly in all Matters of a Civil Nature and in all others according to the best of their Understanding are evil Doers 2. That the Apostle means such here which ought fully to be proved because without it the Magistrate's Jurisdiction is not to be presumed much less Penal Laws to be extended But not to mention that they whose Opinions are no wise prejudicial to others are never for the sake of those Opinions termed Malefactors or evil Doers it 's clear from the Text that Evil and Good Works there spoken of relate only to Civil Matters because otherwise the latter Part will not consist with the former where it 's said If thou wilt not fear the Power do good and thou shalt have praise of the same Which supposing Good and Evil relate to Matters simply Religious was so far from being true that they were at that time persecuted for doing Good and encouraged in doing Evil and consequently the Apostle's Reasoning would be so far from being an Argument as he here intends it for the Christians paying Obedience and Tribute to the Powers in being that it would have been a good one to the contrary since they bore the Sword worse than in vain being only a Terror to good Works and were not God's but the Devil's Ministers attending continually upon this very thing The Primitive Christians it 's certain would have been loth it should have been taken in this Sense since it would have given an unanswerable Argument to Nero to whom the Apostle here requires Obedience and the other Emperors for punishing Christians who according to their Notions taking Evil in this Sense were the most evil Doers 2. As to the Old Testament that 's positive say they that the Magistrate ought to punish for Idolatry which is no Injury to the State but an Offence simply Religious and consequently has a Right to use Force in those Matters For Job Chap. 31. 28. speaking of Idolatry saith This were an Iniquity to be punished by the Judg. But to give no other Answer it appears from the very Prints of our Bibles that to be punished by the is not in the Original which only saith For this might be accounted to me an Iniquity and agreeable to the Hebrew the Septuagint renders it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It 's an easy thing to have Proofs if Men when they cannot find them are resolved to make them 3. But they further add That if by the Jewish Law Idolaters and those that denied the God of Israel were to be put to death by the same Reason Christians who ought not to be less zealous for the Honour of God should destroy all Idolaters and Blasphemers I answer The Jewish Laws oblige no Nation but that of Israel to whom alone they were given And if any of these Laws are now obligatory it 's not because they were commanded them but as they are Parts of the Law of Nature for there were several things requir'd under the Jewish Oeconomy which are so far from being now Obligatory that they are utterly unlawful Therefore to conclude that a thing which was binding to the Jews is so to the Christians it ought to be proved to be part of the Law of Nature or at least that they are under the very same Circumstances and there can be no reason why it should hold in one Case and not in another But whoever considers this Point will quickly perceive as vast a difference as can be For the Jewish Common-Wealth being a perfect Theocracy God himself was their King and as such he gave them their whole Body of Politick Laws with no other Sanction but what was Civil viz. Temporal Rewards and Punishments and did himself judicially determine Controversies of Legal Rights and other Matters of Moment So that he was not to be considered by them only simply as he was the Creator of all Men but as their King the Laws established concerning the Worshipping of one God being the Civil Law of the Nation and a Fundamental of their Constitution So that none could be a Member of that Common-Wealth without owning the God that brought them out of the Land of Egypt and they that revolted from him by disowning him for their God it being impossible to own him for their King and yet disown him for their God were proceeded against as Traitors and Rebels So that such a manifest Revolt no-wise consisting with his Kingship there was an absolute necessity that all Idolatry should be rooted out of God's peculiar Kingdom the Land of Canaan And that it was for this Reason is evident from this one Consideration because in all other Places where the Jews extended their Conquests none were put to death nor punished for their Idolatry tho it were manifest all were guilty of it it reached only to the Members of the Jewish Common-Wealth who as they were free People upon their coming out of Egypt so it was not without their express Consent Exod. 19. that God became their King and consequently for disowning him they were most justly treated as Rebels and Traitors But Christ as he had no Civil Power himself so he did not establish those Precepts he was to deliver with any Temporal Sanctions But as those of the Law were meerly Temporal so those of the Gospel are purely Eternal He that does this shall live and he that does it not shall be damned Yea Christ was so far from bestowing a Temporal Canaan on his Disciples that he foretold they should suffer Persecution for his sake And he when his Disciples urged a Precedent from the Jewish Dispensation to oblige him to destroy severely rebuked them saying Ye know not what Spirit you are of for the Son of Man is not come to destroy but to save Mens Lives Which is far from being true if Men are to be punished with Death for Idolatry or material Blasphemy for then the Christians would think themselves obliged to destroy the Indians and other Heathens for Idolatry in owning more Gods than own and all Jews and Turks for Blasphemy
according to the Submission c. That the Clergy shall not presume to attempt c. unless they have the King 's most Royal Assent and Licence to make c. So that it 's evident the King's Licence is antecedently necessary to their making or even attempting which includes all conferring or debating in order to the making any new Canons and that they are to be punished unless they have the King's Authority on that behalf And none but our Author can be so absurd as to think the King 's confirming the Canons the Convocation has made is a Licence to them to make or attempt the making new ones Is the King 's signing an Act a Licence to the Parliament to make a new one But the Author's Ingenuity in reciting this Act and his Reasoning upon it is much alike 14. The Author demands Why are the Clergy called to a Convocation if when they come they are not to act The Convocation was once a Limb of Parliament and the Writ they are now summoned by is not much different from that of the Commons and no doubt did then meet were Adjourned Prorogued Dissolved with the rest of the Parliament and this continued till H. 8. when they lost all their Parliamentary Rights but of Taxing themselves for the doing of which they were still summoned according to the Antient Form and tho they have now lost that Right too and so the Reason of summoning wholly ceaseth yet the Writs are issued out still after the same manner It is not their being summoned by this Writ that alone makes them a Synod for Ecclesiastical Matters for in the Popish Times they were always summoned with the rest of the Parliament yet they were not a Synod nor could not act as such without Authority from the Pope and instead of any such Authority now the King makes them a Synod and gives them Power to enact Canons by Licence under the Broad-Seal and this with Submission I take to be the true state of the Case 15. As to the third that a Convocation is as essential and necessary to the Church and Constitution and binds all People in Ecclesiasticals as a Parliament does in Temporals I answer If the Clergy have another Right to make Canons besides the Will of the Legislative Power viz. a Divine Right their Canons would be valid without the King 's confirming them nor could an Act of Parliament abrogate or annul any of those Canons made by a Spiritual Authority which is so far from depending on theirs that the Parliament it self is subject to them in those Matters nor could they hinder them from sitting when and as long as they had a Mind to because they that have a Divine Right to make Ecclesiastical Laws must have the same Right to sit in order to make them which is but necessary to the making them and in a word they must be as absolute and independant in all things relating to Ecclesiasticals as the Lay-state is in Civils but there cannot be two Independant or Legislative Powers about the same or different things for then People would be obliged to obey contrary Commands about the same things or different Commands at the same Time which is impossible but that Power which can annul the Commands of the other must be able to command in all Cases and be alone Supreme because as great a Power is required to take off as to lay on If therefore the Civil Power can annul any Ecclesiastical Laws the Convocation can have no Power but what is dependant on theirs which they can abridg curtail or annul as they think fit therefore it 's absurd to pretend that a Convocation has the same Rights or Privileges or is as essential to the Constitution as a Parliament without whose Authority no Laws relating to Church or State can be made And a Convocation is so far from being necessary to make Laws for the Church that it 's usurping the Rights of the English Churches or Christian People of England who are to be tied up by no Laws about indifferent things which alone are subject to humane Empire whether of a Civil or Ecclesiastical Nature but by their own Consent given in Parliament And I know no Law of Christianity that deprives them of this Right which from the first spreading of the Gospel here they have always claimed There were no Laws in the British and Saxon Times that concerned the whole Church but as our Historians testify were made by the same Power that made the Temporal Laws and were put in execution by the same Persons The tearing the Ecclesiastical Power from the Temporal was the cursed Root of Antichrist those Powers were not distinct in England nor in most Nations till the See of Rome got the Ascendant then and not till then did the Clergy attempt to bind the Laity by those Laws they never consented to but their design was never brought to perfection for such was the Genius of a Government built upon this noble Foundation That no Man ought to be bound by a Law he does not consent to that as muffled up in Darkness and Superstition as our Ancestors were yet that Notion seemed to be so strongly engraven in their Nature that nothing could deface it and accordingly we often find them protesting that this and the other thing does not bind them because done without their Consent that they would not be bound by any Ordinances of the Clergy without their Assent that they would not subject themselves to the Clergy no more than their Ancestors had done And 25 H. 8. cap. 21. they tell the King that besides Acts of Parliament The People are bound by no other Laws but what they have taken at their free Liberty by their own Consent to be used amongst them and have bound themselves by long Vse and Custom to the observance of the same No marvel if we find this People submitting to nothing in Religion but what was ordained by themselves De majoribus omnes was one of their Fundamental Constitutions before they came hither and so it has continued to this Day and Matters of Religion were amongst their Majora even before they received Christianity And what neither the Pagan nor Popish Priests could cheat or scare them from our Author will find a hard Matter to harangue them out of If no Canon is valid that is contrary to the Custom or Law of this Realm How can a Canon oblige contrary to this most antient Custom and Fundamental part of the Constitution of the Peoples being obliged by no Laws but of their own making What 's become of the boasted English Liberty if they may be excommunicated and consequently imprisoned for Contempt or Disobedience to a Law they never made This I think is sufficient to show the Frivolousness of our Author's Reasons for making his Majesty guilty of the breach of his Coronation-Oath in denying those Rights to the Convocation he pretends are their due which I think I have proved to be contrary both to the Law of God and the Realm I shall therefore conclude praying that the God of Patience would grant that no Priests of this Man's Principles in or out of Convocation may hinder Men from being like-minded one to another nor disturb the Peace of Church or State FINIS Books sold by Andrew Bell at the Cross-Keys and Bible in Cornhil A New History of Ecclesiastical Writers Containing an Account of the Authors of the several Books of the Old and New Testament and the Lives and Writings of the Primitive Fathers An Abridgment and Catalogue of all their Works c. To which is added A Compendious History of the Councils c. Written in French by Lewis Ellies du Pin Doctor of the Sorbon In seven Volumes Fol. A Detection of the Court and State of England during the four last Reigns and the Interregnum Consisting of Private Memoirs c. with Observations and Reflections And an Appendix discovering the present State of the Nation Wherein are many Secrets never before made publick as also a more impartial Account of the Civil Wars in England than has yet been given By Rog. Coke Esq The third Edition much corrected with an Alphabetical Table Advice to the Young or the Reasonableness and Advantages of an Early Conversion In three Sermons on Eccles. 12. 1. By Joseph Stennett His Sermon at the Funeral of Mr. John Belcher Scotland's Sovereignty asserted A Dispute whether the K. of Scots owes Homage to the K. of England Written in Latin by Sir Tho. Craig Translated by Geo. Ridpath with a Preface against Mr. Rymer Answ. 1. * D r. Burnet 's Hist. Reform Part 1. Colâ—ect N. 17. * Rot. Parl. 40 Edw. 3. Num. 7 8. Rot. Parl. 5. Edw. 3. Art 46. Rot. Parl. 6 Rich. 2. Num. 62. †Tacitus de Moribus Germanorum C. 11.