there is no trusting to their Words Promises or Oaths VII My Seventh and last Argument shall be taken ab Authoritate Ecclesiae affirmativè from the Authority of Christians both ancient and modern the Antient Christians generally denied the Persecution of Hereticks for at least well nigh the first 400 years for which there are well-known Testimonies cited out of Tertullian Lactantius c. that Faith is to be perswaded not forced St. Austin is very express contra Cresconium Gra 〈…〉 maticum l. 3. c. 50. Nullis bonis in Catholicâ hoc placet 〈◊〉 usque ad mortem in quenquam licet haereticum saeviatur It pleaseth no good Men in the Catholick Church that Hereticks should be put to Death This Testimony sheweth not his private Opinion but the Judgment of the Universâ—l Church which no Man knew better than he and strongly proves that the Papists are neither the Catholick Church nor good Men for he saith Nullis bonis hoc placet in Catholicâ but it is no wonder for Apostates to alledg the whole Primitive Church as for them when it is all against them This place is quoted by Bishop Jewel Apol. c. 32. Div. 1. p. 431. who cites also Chrysostom Homil 19. in Matth. Num Ovis persequitur Lupum Christianus haereticum c. Doth the Sheep persecute the Wolf No but the Wolf doth persecute the Sheep Doth the Christian persecute the Heretick No but the Heretick doth persecute the Christian And again Whomsoever you see rejâ—icing in the Blood of Persecution he is the Wolf and wisheth that God would kill the Heretick with spiritual Darts and the two-edged Sword of the Spirit Eusebius relates in Vitâ Constantini that Constantine decreed that they which erred should have equal fruition of Peace and Quiet with the Faithful and that we may know Constantine was in earnest he puts it into his Prayer l. 2. c. 55. It is true he banished Arius but he banished likewise Athanasius and neither of them for their Opinions which he accounted trifling and Bp. Jewel saith in Apol. c. 3. Div. 2. p. 524. was thought to encline in his own Opinion rather to Arius but for other Causes and Immoralities and unchristian Contentions not to be reconciled by the Emperours Tears Letters and the Mediation of his Legate Hosius Bishop of Corduba This is certain that Athanasians Arians and Novatians were all suffered in the same Cities to have Churches and Bishops of their own whose Successions are delivered in Ecclesiastical History till Pope Celestine banished the Novatians out of Rome deprived them of their Churches and constrained Rusticula their Bishop to raise private Conventicles anno 425. Socrates Schol. l. 7. c. 11. For now he and Cyril of Alexandria were grown â—reat having gone beyond the Bounds of Priesthood and gotten the temporal Sword. He that would see more of Antiquity may consult Mr. Daillé of the right use of the Fathers and read the Comments of the Fathers upon the Parable of the Tares c. Ye know not what Spirit ye are of I shall add some modern Testimonies of our own Country-men The Apology of the Church of England set out by Authority p. 431. mihi As for us we run not to the Fire as these Mens Guise is but we run to the Scriptures neither do we reason with the Sword but with the Word of God. Indeed the Writ de Haeretico comburendo is now out of Doors and I hope his Fellow de Excommunicato capiendo will follow him ere long See Dr. Hammond in his Defence of my Lord Falkland who writes very fully to this Purpose but especially see his last Words about Paedobaptism in his six Queries His Words are And God forbid we that desire to reduce Dissenters should ever think of damning killing or persecuting any that dissent in this or any other particular And I think it but Duty to pray against that treacherous Prosperity which should be able to infuse any greater Degree of Unkindness or Roughness into the Minds of Men whether Sons or Fathers of the Church than what I here avow to be strict Duty in every Christian Dr. Taylour since Bishop of Down and Conner wrote a whole Book de Libertate Prophetandi the like hath been done by several Conformists in their Pleas for Nonconformists Mr. Hudson who rode with King Charles the first in Disguise in his Treatise of Monarchy c. dedicated to the King asserts Liberty of Conscience boldly and perhaps too boldly but that it was Mr. Hudson who carried his Life in his Hand and at last lost it in the King's Cause See what Dr. More in his Appendix to his Antidote against Idolatry saith p. 55. of Nadab and Abihu's offering strange Fire before the Lord Lev. 10. 1. where he compares it with Luke 9. 54. John 16. 2. and saith Whether Protestants or Papists that kill one the other for conscientious Difference in Religion as thinking 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to make an Oblation of Divine Worship to God thereby do turn the living God of the Christians who is Love it self into the foulest Idols of the Heathens who used to be worshipped with the bloody sacrificing of Men. This holds good in Proportion against Religious Robbery by Fines or Confiscation of Goods Mr. Day on Isa 1. 21. saith that to take away Mens Livelihood is there called Murther Lastly To name no more Dr. Burnet hath written very learnedly and solidly in Defence of Liberty of Conscience in his Preface to the History of the persecuting Emperours Now from what hath been said appears the Vanity of those Men who are content to give a private Liberty but noâ— to assemble which signifies little to many Men who think themselves bound to do so from Heb. 10. 25. and not to live like Atheists Others will give Men Liberty if they will hold their Tongues and distinguish betwixt the outward Exercise or Profession of Faith and the internal Acts of Faith which they say are not to be forced thank them for nothing did the primitive Church only tolerate the Thoughts of Hereticks and who can think any sober Man should dispute of Mens private Thoughts which as such no Man can know or if they be declared and punished yet cannot a Man certainly say that they are forced viz. that his Thoughts are altered for that may be dissembled but all Men have hitherto supposed that Mens Consciences are capable of being forced that is punished taking the inward and outward Acts together as they ought in this Question some I see would give such a Liberty as Antichrist never denied Now it may be fit to answer the principal Arguments which are produced by the Adversaries 1. From Rom. 13. where Magistrates are said to be a Terror to evil-Doers c. I answer that Text only authorizeth the Magistrate to punish civil Injuries and moral Evils He may punish Treason Rebellion Murther c. Such Heresies are Works of the Flesh and against the Light of Nature such
as the Apostle mentions Gal. 5. 20. and what they are may be known by their Companions there enumerated that the Apostle doth not speak of Errors in the Faith is plain because the Magistrates were then Heathens and he seems to speak of the present Powers when he saith The Powers that be c. though 't is true he speaks of them rather according to what they ought to be than according to what they were as may appear by those Words He is the Minister of God to thee for good which some in alledging this Scripture do little consider Doth the Apostle make Caligulâ— and Nero and Commodus with the whole Tribe of Usurpers Judges of the Faith of Christians and therefore Paul could appeal to Caesar only whether there was any Immorality or Crime in him deserving Death as the Jews caluminated 2. It is objected that the King is bound to serve God not only as a Man but as a King. I answer It is true and that may be done without Violation of Conscience in matters of Faith He may punish Immoralities Impieties and such as sin against their Profession and Conscience He may serve God by Protection of his Church by his Treasure Munificence praising and encouraging good Christians without bribing Men by extravagant Rewards and Wages which bear no Proportion to the Work by good Perswasions and Advice by his Wisdom in calling Councils and presiding in them and by defending even honest and well-meaning Hereticks from such cruel Men as put honest Men into Bear-Skins and then set the Dogs on them and care not what censure they pass upon Dissenters so lavish are they in calling every little thing Heresy Blasphemous and Damnable of which Chrysostom complains as too rife in his time in his Comment on Matthew but these Men learnt that Language of Antichrist the old Anathematizer Some urge the Power of the Kings of Israel in 2. Chron. 15. 13. That whosoever would not seek the Lord God of Israel should be put to Death But this is already answered in Propos 2 d. 3. Some say if Liberty of Conscience be granted there will be Confusion I answer This is a Selfish Objection for I dare say the Objector would not use it if he stood in need of Liberty himself Unity and Uniformity are good things but we must come honestly by them I am for Unity but as Bp. Latimer said Unity in Verity and not in Popery There is Unity enough amonst Mahumetans in Spain and Muscovie and yet in Reality there is the greatest Babylonical Confusion that is mixture of Truth and Error which is the Mother of the greatest Dissension for whensoever the Force shall be taken off as is fit there must of necessity be the greatest Differences when Men shall use their own Judgments from proper Arguments and not as now one Judg for them all right or wrong at Adventures then it will appear that he who pretends himself most infallible and other Men to be Hereticks is most deceived and the greatest Dâ—ceiver and Heretick of all as 't is usual with them to be who most of all cry out upon other Men as Hereticks and Sâ—hismaticks to be indeed such themselves and if Hereticks were to be punished they deserve most of all to be punished 4. Some say If Liberty of Conscience be granted that then there can be no National Church I answer Was there then no National Church for the first three hundred Years before the Emperor received the Faith It is true there can be none with Coercion to it nor should there be any such What National Church can there be where the major part of the Nation are Infidels or Papists What Parochial Church where the major part of the Parish are such What National Churches can there be where the Soveraign Authorities are Infidel or Popish must they appoint the Bishops They are sure like to be good ones Constantine would set up no such National Church but suffered Arians Novatians and others to have their Churches and Bishops And Mr. Heylin saith there were Bishops in Poland but no Man forced by the Civil Sword and Bishops could uphold when the Emperours were against them but now we think as good no Bishop if all that live within such a part of the Country be not forced to be subject to him as being in his Diocess That Church may be said to be National when the most are of it and especially when the Soveraign Authority doth countenance it doth establish and encourage it by favourable Laws and Priviledges The best way to make a National Church was by such healing Principles as these For Magistrates to command as little as may be and People to obey as much as they can besides the Test against Popery to require as little to be subscibed to as is possible and that in the words of the Scripture To let the Parishes where the Fault is committed to examine and censure gross and notoriously scandalous Offendors and order the needful Rites and Ceremonies of their own Church without chargeable Travelling tedious Suits crafty Pleadings Quirks of Law and Pettefoggeries Fees and Charges Extortion and Barretry in forreign Courts who indeed have nothing to do in such matters not easily to impose a Pastor upon a Parish without their Consent nor a President Bishop upon his Clergy without their Consent And he with the chief of them to ordain Ministers and see that they who receive the Magistrates Maintenance do the Work accordingly I am so far from being against Bishops that where there is one I would there were many more 5. Others say Why do they then deny the Papists Liberty 1. Because the Papists are gross Idolaters against Natural Light. 2. Because the Papists will give no Liberty And if they do promise it and swear it by virtue of the Decrees of Popes and Councils they must not perform it longer than the Pope pleaseth if they will be true to their Religion 3. Because the Papists introduce a Foreign Power viz. the Pope with his Locusts to burthen the Land and emunge the People and cheat them of their Money and therefore no more tolerable than Regraters or Forestallers c. 4. Because the Papists where they get full Power are unmeasurably cruel Bishop Bramhall against Militeir saith that they have equalled if not exceeded the Heathens in Cruelty and now of late they have outdone themselves witness their Dragooning in France and Savoy and the like in other places Otherwise The Papists are not to be punished as Hereticks Queen Elizabeth and our Kings do expresly deny that they punished them meerly for their Religion Indeed our Laws were very cruel against them but never executed in any very high degree and as to any great Violence or Severity I wish they were so moderated as to be fit to be executed and with consideration of all mollifying Circumstances and not one Man to suffer for the Offence of another IV. My fourth and last Conclusion is this An
11. suffered Perfecution was very unlikely to perswade the Galatian Magistrates to persecute 'T is also certain that those Judaizers were Men full of moral Impiety and Persecutors of others The same Answer may serve for them who were blamed Rev. 2. 20. for suffering Jezabel the false Prophetess to seduce but to what viz. to Fornication and Idolatry Moreover what Toleration is here blamed is easily proved by this that the Christians were then no Magistrates but were by sound Doctrine to have stopped the Mouths and convinced Gain-sayers by the Sword of the Spirit which is the Word of God and if the seven Churches be prophetical as hath of late been very well proved we know who they were that had the temporal Sword and how well they managed it in the Thyatirian Interval they were certainly damnable Hereticks and such as deserved to be punished for their innumerable Crimes if they had had their due As an Appendix to this Argument let it be considered that the Apostles and Primitive Christians being accounted Hereticks by the generality of Men were very unlikely to have put such a Sword into the hands of their Enemies as to teach them that Hereticks were to be punished by the Civil Magistrate And our Saviour Christ laying the Foundation of his Church in his own Blood and the Blood of his Apostles and Disciples was very unlikely to prescribe a way for the shedding the Blood of his Enemies by a judicial Trial in humane Courts for that wherein their Consciences were thorowly satisfied as true and good and therefore must needs think themselves honest and innocent and the Christians unjust and inhumane notwithstanding all their preaching up of Meekness and the Example of the most meek and merciful Jesus who endured such Contradiction of Sinners against himself what had that been but to disgrace the Glory of Christian Martyrdom as when our Saviour biddeth Peter to put up his Sword Matth. 26. 52. he giveth this reason For they that take the Sword shall perish by the Sword intimating nothing of real worth and excellency in the Sufferings of Christians by the Sword if themselves should take the Sword as a matter but of quid pro quo He wanted not more effectual Souldiers to have made use of against his Persecutors viz. whole Legions of Angels II. I argue from Divine Authority affirmatively Our Saviour doth condemn Persecution in meer Causes of Religion in that Parable of the Tares Matth. 13. and so Chrysostom Austin and others both ancient and modern have expounded the place The Reapers are to be Angels not Men those Words Let them grow together cannot forbid Excommunication and therefore Let them grow together must forbid temporal Excision and if that should be taken only to signify eventually that there would be Tares to the End of the World yet there is a good Argument in the Caution ver 29. Lest while ye gather the Tares ye root up the Wheat also for though Men may think that they can distinguish clearly enough betwixt Tares and Wheat in some cases of Heresy yet as wise Men as they have found themselves deceived Acts 26. 9. And let Men give way to judicial Proceedings in this kind and the Ignorance and Rashness of Men will pluck up ten Orthodox Professors for one Heretick I am sure they have hither to pluck'd up many more Now in Civil Causes there is not the like danger wherein the Criminals own Consciences accuse them for the most part and they cannot deny the justness of the Law but deny their own particular Fact which made St. Cyprian say to Demetrian Proconsul of Africa Torqueri enim debui si negarem nunc autem cum sponte confitear c. quid tormenta admoves confitenti 2. Consider also how our Saviour rebuked his Disciples when they called for Fire from Heaven upon the Samaritans who received him not when his Face was as though he would go to Jerusalme Luke 9. 55. Ye know not what manner of Spirit ye are of i. e. how unsuitable these killing Spirits or Dispositions of yours are to the Times of the Gospel or that the Times of the Gospel require you to be of other Dispositions see Dr. Hammond in loc It is manifest that our Saviour opposeth not fault to fault as if the Samaritans fault was less deserving Punishment nor doth it appear that he opposeth the private Passions of his Disciples as Desire of Revenge or the like to the publick Spirit of Elias but he opposeth the Severity of legal Times to the eminent and extraordinary Grace of the Times of the Gospel as appears by the words following ver 56. For the Son of Man is not come to destroy Mens Lives but to save them as if he had said Ye must not be so prodigal of Mens Lives now the Saviour of the World is come to lay down his own Life for the ransom of other Mens 3. Some also argue from those words of the Apostle 2 Cor. 10. 4. For the Weapons of our Warfare are not carnal where tho the word carnal doth signify weak as the word Flesh is often used 〈…〉 gnify Weakness yet the words do imply that the Christians Weapons are spiritual and of another sort distinct from those which worldly Souldiers use III. My next Argument is drawn à Regulâ Fidei from the Rule of Faith viz. the Scriptures it is not proper to say that the Scripture is Judex Controversiarum the Judg of Controversies but it is Norma Fidei the Rule of Faith this I take here for granted Now this Rule is too hard to be understood to be introduced into humane Courts for civil coaction by temporal Punishments for unto the right determination of many Questions in Religion the Scriptures must be well translated various Copies must be consulted Figures of Speech must be known and the Idiom or Properiety of Language with many obsolete Customs the Analogy of Religion the Context and Coherence of Words comparing Scripture with Scripture are to be minded besides many Prejudices from diversity of Interpretations Authority Education and Company c. must be considered all which make it so easy for a Man to be mistaken as to exempt his Error from the cognizance and animad version of humane Courts by civil coercion they who are the great Persecutors when they please and it serves their turns can make large declamations of the Obscurity of Scripture even to little better than Blasphemy and Atheism saying it is but a Leaden Rule a Nose of Wax and yet see not what a horrible folly and detestable Impiety it is to quote Scripture to an fro whether a Man shall be burnt as many poor honest innocent Men yea even Women were in Queen Mary's Days after the Doctors had disputed of Hoc est corpus meum and whether Hoc was an individuum vagum or no If these things had been only ridiculous they might have been born but tending to so much Mischief and Murder they were intolerable