Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
scripture_n christian_a faith_n tradition_n 2,586 5 9.0088 5 false
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
A56257 Of the nature and qualification of religion in reference to civil society written by Samuel Puffendorff ... ; which may serve as an appendix to the author's Duty of men ; translated from the original.; De habitu religionis Christianae ad vitam civilem. English Pufendorf, Samuel, Freiherr von, 1632-1694.; Crull, J. (Jodocus), d. 1713?; Pufendorf, Samuel, Freiherr von, 1632-1694. De officio hominis et civis. 1698 (1698) Wing P4180; ESTC R6881 106,116 202

There are 8 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

consequently be of a quite different nature and make up a particular Sovereignty Wherefore if both these should happen to be joined in one Person he becomes thereby at once master over our Lives and Consciences But if this Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction be lodged in another Person he must either at the same time be acknowledged to have a Power of executing his Decrees by his own Prerogative or else to have only an Authority of giving Sentence leaving the Execution of it to the civil Magistrates If the first of these two be supposed it is evident that a double headed Sovereignty must carry along with it great Inconveniencies and Distractions and if the latter those that exercise the Sovereignty in the State must be look'd upon as Executioners only to this holy Judge All these Things duely considered as they must needs occasion great Convulsions in the State so no man that is not beyond his Wits will be apt to imagine unless it be made appear by most evident Proofs that Christ intended to introduce by his Doctrine such pernicious Diseases into civil Societies For tho' it is impossible that no Controversies should be raised in the Church like Christ himself has foretold it in the Parable by Matthew c. 13. 24. And St. Paul in the 1 Epistle to the Corinthians c. 11. 19. Nevertheless if any Controversie does arise he that is the first Author of it must of necessity maintain his Opinion under a colour at least of its being agreeable to the Scriptures For if any one should pretend to introduce a new Article of Faith without endeavouring to prove it out of the holy Scripture he would be look'd upon as a mad Man tho' he should call to his aid all the Sophistications of the Philosophers And if he should insist upon the Authority of Traditions without the Scriptures this would only serve to disclose the weakness of that Foundation whereupon he builds his Doctrine But if any one should make an attempt against any Article of Faith received already as such in the Church he is scarce worth taking notice of unless he should be able to alledge at least some specious Reasons out of the holy Scripture for his Opinion And in such a case especially if his Endeavours seem to proceed from a real Love to Truth he ought not to be absolutely slighted without being heard and his Reasons examined So that then the whole decision of the Matter must depend from a right Interpretation of the several passages in the holy Scripture relating to this Controversie And to find out this Interpretation I see not any necessity which obliges us to have recourse to a Sovereign Power or any infallible Authority but only to such M●ans as ●● most proper for the searching into and find●ng out the genuine Sense of other Authors viz. by a true Knowledge of the Tongue and a diligent search into the nature and whole s●ame of the Christian Religion and by duely comparing the Articles of Faith and observing their Annology and Connexion Whosoever besides this has a natural good Judgment and is not propossessed with Prejudice private Interest or Passion it will o● no such difficult Task for him to find out the genuine Sense of the Scriptures and to demonstrate it so plainly that such as oppose him will by the consent of all Understanding People be judged to be in the wrong So did our Saviour at several times convince the Pharis●es and Saduceans out of the whole Scripture and by the force of his Arguments taken from thence that they were not able to make any further reply And why should it not be reasonably supposed that in each Christian Church there may be found a sufficient number of Teachers capable of disproving such as pretend to introduce among them Innovations and false Doctrines But supposing that these alone should prove insufficient they may call to their aid those of the Neighbouring most famous Churches From whence it appears that there is no absolute Necessity of acknowledging a Judge General of Controversies in the Church And put the Case that those that dissent from the Church are so numerous as to have spread their Doctrine all over the State this Judge will prove useless in his Office For if he pretends to have recourse to violent means to make them renounce their false Opinion they will in all probability oppose force to force But if he takes the other way and endeavours to convince them of their Earor by Arguments taken out of the holy Scripture this may be done as well by other Teachers sitly qualified for their Office than by such a Judge General in the Church Neither ought we to be so over timerous as to believe that Errors should in so much prevail over Truth as to domineer always and every where over it it being not to be question'd but that by help of the most clear-sighted Teachers in the Church these Clouds may be soon dispersed and Truth again appear in its splendor I appeal to Experience whether not a great many Heresies by the only help of prevailing Truth without the assistance of such a Judge or any human Force have by degrees dwindled away and at last quite disappeared It must be confest there are some erroneous Opinions which being nourished and maintained by a Temporal Interest and certain Reasons of State of some particular Churches are not so easie to be suppressed Of this kind are those Controversies wherein the Protestants differ with the Papishes All which if duely considered are so deeply entangled with the Interest of the Popish Monarchy that it is impossible for the Roman Catholicks to recede an Inch from the point of the controverted Articles without diminution of their Authority and endangering their great Revenues so that all hopes of an Union betwixt them and the Protestants are in vain unless the latter can resolve to submit themselves under the same Popish Yoak which they have shaken off so long ago I cannot sufficiently admire that gross way of Arguing made use of by the Papishes when they talk of nothing else but the Authority of their Church telling us that if we would but once acknowledge the same all the Differences and Questions concerning the chief Articles of Faith would fall a-course making themselves both Party and Judge and pretending to give Sentence in their own Case according to their own Testimony They always make use of this Sophism that they attribute only to themselves the glorious Name of the True Church excluding all orher Christians from it but such as are of the same Communion with them And to back this pretence nothing is more common among them than to lay aside all manner of demonstrative Arguments founded in the Scriptures and in lien thereof to find out new Methods unknown to the Apostles of Converting People and to endeavour to establish their Authority by all manner of violence against those that dare to maintain Truth in opposition to their Doctrine For which
they are not preferrable in this Point before any other in Europe If any one questions th● Truth of it I appeal to Mr. Toland's Case concerning his Treatise Entituled Christianity not Mysterious It is both beyond my scope and the compass of a Letter to enter upon the Merits of the Cause on both Sides it will be sufficient here to refer my self to what has been Published against him lately here in England and in other Places All which if duely compared will soon evince how much the English Clergy ●as out-done the rest both by force of Argument and a generous gentle Behaviour But I am afraid I have abused your Lordship's Patience I will therefore conclude with recommending both my Author and my Self to your Lordship's Protection begging Leave to subscribe my self My Lord Your Devoted Servant J. Crull M. D. THE CONTENTS COncering Religion before Civil Societies were Instituted SECT 1. Every Man is accountable to God for his own Religion 2 How the same might be exercised in the free State of Nature 3 Parent● had originally the Care of Religious Worship lodged in them 4 Civil Societies were not constituted for Religions sake 5 Subjects did never submit their Opinions as to Religious Worship to the Disposal of their Sovereigns 6 What Power properly and according to the Laws of Nature belongs to Sovereigns in Ecclesiastical Affairs 7 Of the Nature of Revealed Religion 8 Among the Jews there was a very strict Vnion betwixt the Church and State 9 Who was the Supream Head of the Jewish Church 10 The Christian Religion is quite different from the Jewish 11 Some Reflections on the Behaviour of Moses when he laid the Foundation of the Commonwealth of the Jews 12 What on the other Hand our Saviour did when he Estalished his Church here on Earth 13 Christ was not the Founder of a New Common-wealth or People 14 Neither had he any Territories belonging to him 15 Christ did not exercise any Sovereign Power 16 But th● Office of a Doctor or Teacher 17 The Apostles did propagate the Doctrine of our Saviour 18 The Apostles had received their Authority of Teaching from God alone independant from any Human Power 19 The Apostles never assumed any Authority of Commanding others 20 Whether their Authority of Teaching does indirectly imply any right of Commanding others 21 Whether the Power of Absolution does imply any Right of Sovereignty 22 What is to be understood by absolving from Sins 23 Vnder whose Authority the Apostles did exercise the Power of Absolution 24 Of what nature it was 25 Whether St. Peter had any Prerogative granted above others 26 Whether the Power of Excommunicating imply a Sovereignty 27 The Commission granted by Christ to his Apostles contains nothing of Command 28 The Kingdom of Christ is no Temporal Kingdom 29 Whether the Christian Church ought to be considered as a State or Sovereignty 30 In the Primitive Church there was nothing like it 31 There is a great difference betwixt the Church and State 32 And the Doctors or Teachers in the Church are quite different from those that exercises the Sovereignty in a State 33 Whether the whole Christian Church ought to be considered as a State 34 It is not requisite to reduce the whole Christian Church under one Independant Severeignty or Head 35 Whether there ought not to be one Supream Judge in the Church to determine such Differences as may arise from time to time 36 An Example of a Controversie composed in the Apostles Times 37 Some Observations concerning the Nature and Vsefulness of General Councils 38 Concerning the Condition of the Christian Church under the Pagan Princes 39 Concerning its Condition under the Christian Emperours 40 The Church has not changed her Nature of being a Colledge or Society 41 Neither are Sovereigns thereby become Bishops 42 Christian Sovereigns are obliged to maintain and defend the Church 43 Of the Prerogatives of Princes in Ecclesiastical Affairs 44 Of the Power of Sovereigns over the Church Ministers 45 Of the Power of calling a Synod or Convention 46 Of their Power as to Church-Discipline 47 Of their Power of making Laws and Ecclesiastical Constitutions 48 How far Sovereigns are obliged to intermeddle in Religious Affairs when the Publick Safety lies at stake 49 Concerning Toleration of several Religions 50 Princes ought to be very careful not to be led away by false Suggestions 51 Sometimes the Prerogatives of Sovereigns are impaired under a religious Pretext 52 Concerning the Power of setting up a Reformation 53 Whether Subjects without the concurrence of their Sovereigns can pretend to set up a Reformation 54 OF THE Nature and Qualification OF RELIGION In REFERENCE to CIVIL SOCIETY c. AMong all those Questions which have for many Ages past been Controverted among Christians this may be deem'd one of the Chiefest which Treats of the Nature Authority and Power of the Church and which of the several Christian Sects ought most justly to claim the Title of the True Church The Romanists keep this for their last Reserve when Engag'd with the Protestants That they Attribute the Name of the True Church only to themselves and boldly stigmatize all such as are not of their Communion with the Names of rebellious Deserters This is the main Bulwark they rely upon thinking it sufficient to Alledge in their own behalf That they are not obliged so strictly to Examin and maintain every Article of their Faith against the Protestants since whatever Objections may be made out of the Holy Scripture the same ought to be rejected as Erroneous if not agreeable with the Interpretations and Traditions of their Church Thus making themselves both Judges and Witnesses in their own Cause ●esides this it is to be look'd upon as a Matter of the greatest Consequence both in regard of the Christian Church and the Publick Safety in a State to know exactly what bounds ought to be prescribed to the Priestly Order in Ecclesiastical Affairs as likewise to determin how far the Power of Sovereigns extends it self in Ecclesiastical Matters For if either of them transgress their Bounds it must of necessity prove the Cause of great Abuses Disturbances and Oppressions both in Church and State I was the sooner prevail'd upon to Search into the very bottom of this Question at this juncture of Time when not only the Romish Priests apply all their Cunning for the rooting out of the Protestants but also some of the greatest Princes in Christendom setting aside the Antient way of Converting People by Reason and force of Arguments have now recourse to op●n Violence and by Dragooning force their miserable Subjects to a Religion which always appear'd abominable to them But if we propose to our selves to examin this Point according to its own solid Principles as we ought to do without having recourse to Ambiguous Terms and Tergiversations it is absolutely requisite that we trace the very Original of Religion in General and of the Christian Religion in Particular so as
of the Church was either for a time deprived from enjoying the benefit of the Publick Worship or entirely excluded from being a Member of the Church This being the utmost unto which any Colledge can pretend viz. entirely to exclude a Member of their Society This Exclusion tho' in it self considered of the greatest moment since thereby a Christian was deprived of the whole Communion with the Church Nevertheles did not alter the Civil State or Condition of a Subject But those that were thus excommunicated suffered no loss in their Dignities Honour Rights or Fortunes For that the Church Censures should extend to the real Prejudice of the civil Condition of any Subject is not any ways requisite for the obtaining the Ends for which the Church is Established Neither can it be supposed that without defrauding Sovereigns of their Right such a Power can be exercised over Subjects unless with their own Consent and by vertue of a publick Civil Authority § 40. The next thing which deserves our Consideration is whether the Church is and Concerning the condition of the Church under Christian Princes how far it received any Alteration from its former Condition after Princes whole Kingdoms and States did profess the Christian Religion Where it is to be observed That the Churches did thereby not receive any essential Perfection it being evident that the Christian Religion could be exercised and subsist without the State and Commonwealths did not depend from the Christian Religion The scope of the Christian Religion and of civil Governments being quite different in their own nature For our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our Conversation Phil. 3. 20. 2 Cor. 5 ● 8. 1 Cor. 14 19. is in Heaven and if in this Life only we have hope in Christ we are of all Men most miserable For this Reason it was that the Apostles were never forward to appear before Princes tho' they might have obtained an easie Access by their miraculous Deeds So Herod was exceeding glad when he saw Jesus because he hoped to have seen some Miracle done Luke 23. 8. by him But they were very cautious in this point lest it might appear to some as if the Gospel wanted to be maintained by Human Strength or that perhaps those Princes might pretend to a greater Authority over them than was consistent with the safety of the Christian Religion Notwithstanding all this the Christian Religion does not in any wise impair or ecclipse the legal Rights of Sovereigns but rather confirms and establishes the civil Power Mat. 22. 21. Joh. 18. 2. Rom. 13. 1 Cor. 35. 24. as is apparent out of several passages in the holy Scripture If it should be granted that the Church was a State independent from any temporal Jurisdiction the consequence would be this That the civil Power could not but receive a most remarkable Limitation and Diminution and the condition of a Subject must receive a great alteration whereas on the other hand the condition of Christians or of Teachers in the Church considered as such is neither abolished nor altered because either the Prince or the Subjects in general do receive the Christian Faith there being not the least footstep to be met withal in the Scriptures implying any such alteration Besides this there is not any express Command in the New Testament directed to Sovereigns which entitles them to any particular Prerogative in the Church like to that which the Kings of Israel had received in the 17 Chap. of Deuteronomy From whence arises this conclusion that what right Sovereigns can claim in the Church and Church Affairs must be deduced either out of the natural constitution of the civil Power or out of the true Genius of the Christian Religion or else must owe its off-spring to the free consent of the Church § 41. Out of what has been laid down it Churches do not alter their nature of being a Colledge appears first of all that if a Prince or whole Commonwealth do receive the Doctrine of Christ the Church does thereby not receive any other Alteration as to her natural Constitution but that whereas she was formerly to be considered only as a private Society or Colledge yet such a one as being subordinate to the Law and therefore to be cherished by the Higher Powers who had no legal Right to disturb prosecute or destroy it She now being put under the particular Protection of her Sovereigns enjoys a greater share of Security and is beyond the reach of the Persecutions of the Infidels Notwithstanding this the Church is thereby not exalted from a Colledge to a State since by the receiving of the Christian Religion the civil Government does not undergo any Alteration or Diminution On the contrary Sovereigns loose nothing of their legal Rights neither are Subjects in any wise absolved from their Duties and Obligations For it implies a contradiction that a double Sovereignty and two different sorts of Obligations in the Subject should be lodged in one and the same Commonwealth It is a frivolous Objection that the Church and civil Government have different Ends and Objects not repugnant to one another For from thence is not to be inferred that the Church must be a State or that the Christian Religion cannot be propagated maintained or exercised without the Church assume the same Power that belongs to the civil Government In these places therefore where the whole People and the Prince profess the Christian Religion the Commonwealth receives the Church into its Protection and tho' strictly united there is no collision or emulation betwixt them nor does either of them receive any prejudice in their respective Rights but without the least Interference with one another the Church remains a Colledge whereof the Prince and all the Subjects are now become Members So that each Subject besides the Person he represented in the State has assumed that of a Christian and in this respect is esteemed a Member of the Church Neither is every one to be considered in the Church according to the Station or Dignity he bears in the Commonwealth but these Qualifications are as it were laid aside there and he is only regarded as a Christian So that the General of an Army cannot claim any Prerogative to himself in the Church beyond the private Centinel And it is past all doubt that one and the same Man may represent several Persons according to the several Functions and Obligations belonging to him § 42. It is also according to my Opinion 〈…〉 made Bishops beyond question that Kings Princes or other civil Magistrates by receiving the Christian Doctrine are not constituted Bishops or Teachers in the Church this Function not properly belonging to every Christian but only to such as have a lawful Vocation and are fitly qualified for it Besides this the Royal Office and that of Teachers are of such a nature that they cannot conveniently be Administred by one and the same Person not because of any natural repugnancy betwixt
Religion ought to be declared Erroneous before it be duely examined and the Parties convicted especially if they are ready to prove the same out of the Fundamental Articles of the Christian Faith And great care is to be taken that such a Decision be not left to the Management of their Adversaries who being perhaps guided by self Interest oftentimes are both Accusers and Judges There are not a few Politicians who are of opinion that Sovereigns may with a safe Conscience give Protection to their Subjects tho' of an erroneous Opinion provided it be for the benefit of the Commonwealth especially if care be taken that they do not draw away others into the same Error For supposing the established Religion both in point of Doctrine and Morality to excel all others it is to be hoped that the Dissenting Parties may be in time brought over to it rather than to be feared that they should seduce others Besides that it may contribute to the encrease of the Zeal and Learning of the established Clergy it being sufficiently proved by Experience that in those places and times where and when no Religious Differences were in agitation the Clergy soon degenerated into Idleness and Barbarity § 51. Furthermore as Sovereigns in all other Sovereigns in matters of Religion ought not to be misguided by Flatterers Matters of Moment ought to act with great Circumspection so especially in matters of Religion they cannot proceed with too much caution an injustice of this nature being the most sensible of all that can be done to a Subject For what can be more abominable than to let Subjects suffer unjustly for their Faith in Christ and that perhaps for no other reason but because some others out of self Interest cannot agree with them in Opinion And if a Prince who prompted by his own cruel Inclinations tyrannises over his Subjects is odious to all the World how much more abominable appears a Prince who acts the part of an Executioner and is made an Instrument by others to fulfil their cruel Designs against their Fellow Subjects All Christian Princes therefore as they tender their Consciences ought to avoid all manner of Extreamities in Matters of this Nature which ought never to be undertaken unless they be well instructed beforehand in every particular Point A Prince ought not only to be satisfyed with or rely entirely on what is represented to him by his Clergy tho' never so pious in outward appearance there being too many Instances to be given that the best of Princes by their own Inclinations abhorring all manner of Cruelty have by the Instigation of over-zealous Clergy-Men turn'd the most cruel Tyrants We scarce ever read of any Prince who undertook to decide Controversies in Physick or other Sciences except he had attained to a particular Knowledge in these Matters and why should Sovereigns be too forward in deciding Religious Differences which are of much greater Moment the eternal and temporal welfare of Millions of People do depend thereon unless they be very well instructed in every thing that has any relation to it And since Princes very rarely bestow sufficient Time and Pains in being fully instructed in Divinity it is to be wished that they would be byassed by their own natural Understanding rather than be influenc'd by the Opinions of others As for an Instance in those Controversies which are betwixt the Protestants and Papists there are such evident Signs from whence it is a difficult matter for a Christian Prince to discern which of these two ought to be preferred before the other For if it be considered that the Protestants are so far from forbidding the reading of the holy Scripture to the Laity that on the contrary they exhort them to it and make the Scriptures the Touchstone of their Doctrine and the true Judge of their Controversies That the Protestants trusting upon the goodness of their own Cause do not forbid the reading of Popish Authors but allow them to be publickly sold as being confident that the weakness of their Arguments cannot have any influence even over an indifferent Understanding it cannot but seem very strange why in the Church of Rome the Laity is not allowed the reading of the holy Scripture nay that they leave no stone unturn'd to suppress the Validity of the holy Scripture so that in those places where the Inquisition is in vogue a Man may with less danger be guilty of Blasphemy Perjury and other the most enormous Crimes than to read and examine the Mysteries of the holy Scripture On the other hand what a clamour do they make about Traditions and the Prerogatives of the Church which Title they claim as belonging in a most peculiar manner to themselves and notwithstanding the same is not allowed them by others they assume to themselves the Authority of giving Judgment in their own Cause It is very well worth the Consideration of a Prince that they will not allow our Books to be read among them and especially how careful they are in keeping them from the Knowledge of Great Men tho' belonging to the Communion of their Church Who is so ignorant as not to know what great Difficulties and Obstacles were to be surmounted before it could be obtained that the Augsburgh Confession was read to the Emperour Charles V. All which taken together are most evident Proofs to any unbyassed Person that the Protestants act like Men as relying upon the goodness of their Cause but the Roman Catholicks as mistrusting themselves and fearing that if their Doctrine should be examined according to the Tenure of the holy Scripture and out of the Protestant Wrttings the same would scarce bear the Touchstone It may also be taken into consideration how far different the Interest of the Roman Catholicks Party is from that of the Protestants For tho' both Parties with equal Zeal in Publick pretend to the Honour of God and the Truth of the Gospel and it is not to be denied but that a great many among the Roman Catholicks are very Zealous for the same nevertheless if we duely consider the Nature of Mankind in general it may easily be supposed that they aim at something more And what this something is is easily discernable if we make a due comparison betwixt the Clergy of both Parties Among the Protestants the greatest part of the Clergy are so stinted in their Revenues as to give them no opportunity of living in State what Respect is paid them is on the account of their Function as being Teachers their power very seldom reaches beyond their Revenues which are very moderate and oftentimes very mean Both their Persons and Estates depend from the Authority of their Sovereigns neither have they any where else to seek for Protection On the contrary in what Pomp and affluence of Fortune does the Popish Clergy live Unto what hight have they not exalted their Power in Europe Have they not so ordered their Matters as to be almost independant from the Civil
contains every particular Point of Doctrine in the true sense as they are proposed in the Holy Scripture And those are called Hereticks who only profess some particular Points out of the Holy Writ for such as absolutely reject it are counted Infidels and Reprobates but either deny or explain the rest in a wrong and perverted sense How can the Popish Clergy therefore assume the Title of the Catholick Church before they have and that without contradiction proved every Point of their Faith out of the Holy Scripture Or exclude us Protestants from that Title till they have proved that our Doctrine is contrary to it Lastly It is called the Apostolical Church as being founded upon the Doctrine of the Apostles And the true Church loses nothing of its intrinsick Value whether it has been planted by the Apostles or whether the Apostolical Doctrine has been transmitted to them by others § 54. But it is not a very difficult Task to Whether Subjects without the Consent of their Sovereigns may separate themselves from an Erroneous Religion introduce a Reformation in Religion with the mutual Consent of Sovereign and Subjects so it may be questioned whether Subjects may attempt a Reformation when their Sovereigns and the whole Clergy or at least the greatest part of them do not acknowledge their Error but rather pretend to maintain it In this case it is our Opinion that provided these Errors ●o touch the Fundamental Points of our 〈…〉 Subjects as by the Grace of God and the ●ight of his holy Spirit have attain●●he true Knowledge may separate themselves from the Communion of that Church without the consent of their Sovereigns of the Clergy For every body being accountable to God for his Religion and answerable for his own Soul ●hose Salvation cannot absolutely be committed to any Body else and a Christian in Matters of Faith being not altogether to rely upon his Sovereign or the Clergy at least no farther than their Doctrine is congruous with the holy Scripture It is undeniable that Subjects may separate themselves from the Communion of that Church which is prosessed by their Sovereign and Clergy provided they can make it evidently appear that such a Church is infected with gross Abuses and dangerous Errors For the Church is a Colledge whose Members are not kept in Union by any Temporal Power but by the Union of the Faith and whosoever relinquishes that he dissolves the sacred Tye of the Believers Besides that it is not absolutely necessary for our Salvation that the Church be composed of a great Number but the same may be obtained either by a greater or lesser Number of the Believers Neither can this Separation prove in the least prejudicial to the Sovereign Authority it being supposed that those who have separated themselves adhere to the true pure Doctrine of the Gospel free from all Poison and Principles dangerous or prejudicial to the Government For civil Society was not instituted for Religion's sake neither does the Church of Christ participate of the nature of a Temporal State and therefore a Prince that embraces the Christian Faith does not thereby acquire an absolute Sovereignty over the Church or Mens Consciences So that if notwithstanding this Separation the Subjects pay due Allegiance to their Prince in Temporal Affairs there is no reason sufficient which can oblige him to trouble them meerly upon the score of their Consciences For what loss is it to the Prince whether his Subjects are of the same Religion with himself or of unother Or which was supposed before whether they did maintain the same Errors as he does The case indeed would be quite different if they should endeavour to withdaw themselves from their Allegiance to set up a separate Society without his Consent tho' it is undeniable that there are some Cases of Necessity when this civil Tye or Allegiance may be dissolved as for Instance when Subjects for want of sufficient Protection from their natural Prince are so hardly pressed upon by a more Potent Enemy that they are forc'd to submit to his Power And granted the Power of Sovereigns in the Church to be much greater than in effect it is Subjects are nevertheless bound to take care of their Souls whose Salvation is to be preferr'd before all other things in regard of which they may separate themselves from an Established Religion provided they are convinced of its Errors For that Subject who sacrifices his Life for his Prince does doubtless a glorious Action but what Prince can be so unreasonable as to expect that his Subjects should Sacrifice their Souls to the Devil for his sake That Prince therefore who does trouble his faithful Subjects for no other reason but because they cannot conform to his Opinion especially if they can maintain theirs out of the Holy Scripture commits an Act of Injustice Nay I cannot see how he can with Justice force them out of his Territories It is true he may refuse to receive Hereticks into his Dominions unless it be for Reasons of State Neither can a true Believer take it amiss if he is not permitted to settle in a Commonwealth govern'd by Hereticks For the Right of Naturalization belongs to Sovereigns which they may refuse and give to whom they think it convenient But as it is certainly the greatest Injustice in the World to force an in-born Natural Subject who has settled all his Fortunes in a Commonwealth meerly for his Religion's sake without being convicted of his Error out of his Native Country to the great detriment and danger of himself and his Family So if a Subject inclines voluntarily to leave his Native Country either to avoid the Frowns of his Prince or the hatred of the Clergy and Common People and to serve God with more freedom according to his own Conscience it ought not to be refused by his Sovereign I remember there is a certain Proverb used among the Germans viz. He that Commands the Country Commands Religion But this cannot be applied to the Princes of the Roman Catholick Religion who cannot lay any Claim to it it being evident that the Popish Clergy do not allow any such thing to these Princes And as to what concerns the Protestant Estates of Germany it cannot be denied but that they made use of this Pretension against the Emperor at the time of the Reformation which however ought to be thus interpreted That they denied the Emperor to have any Power of intermedling in the Affairs relating to their own Dominions not that only they claim'd it as belonging to the Rights of Sovereignty to impose any Religion tho' never so false upon their Subjects notwithstanding all which there are not wanting Examples that Princes have acted conformable to this Proverb with their Subjects A Prince who troubles his faithful Subjects meerly upon the score of Religion commits a gross Error no Christian Prince being obliged to propagate his Religion by forcible means provided his Subjects stand firm to their Allegiance to him
Controversies sooner composed and Heresies suppressed or quite extinguished but if the whole matter be duely weighed it will appear that such an Ecclesiastical Monarch may be very easily spared in the Church For granting such Whether it be necessary to set up a general Judge of all Controversies in the Church an universal Judge of all Controversies arising in the Church he must be supposed to be infallible and that beyond all contradiction as well in point of Matter of Fact as to the lawfulness of the Case for it may so happen that it be plain enough whether a Doctrine be erroneous or not when at the same time it may be disputable whether the said Error ought to be laid to a certain Man's Charge or not For if an Appeal be allowed from this Judge after Sentence pronounced there will never be an end of the Process It is therefore absolutely requisite that this infallible Authority should be so manifestly proved that it cannot reasonably be called in question For unless this Authority be unquestionable for the decision of this Controversie we must run from this Judge to another who must also be supposed to be Infallible and so in infinite it being granted by all without Exception that no body ought to be a Judge in his own Case And since this Privilege of being Infallible could not be granted by any body but by God alone the whole Body of Christians being not invested with such a Power it must plainly be proved out of the Scriptures that this particular Prerogative and Authority was granted to one certain Person for him and his Successors to decide all Controversies concerning the Articles of Faith without being liable to any Error But of this there is not the least footstep in the holy Scripture Nay the Apostles when they were sent by Christ into all the World were endued with the same Spirit and had an equal Authority So that there is but one way now left for the attaining to the true Knowledge of the Christian Religion both for the Teachers in the Church and all Believers in general which is to study the Scriptures devoutly and without Intermission And whoever pretends to Inspiration 2 Tim. 3. 14. 15. or to a prophetical Spirit ought by undeniable Demonstrations to justifie his Pretensions These Qualifications which the Apostle Paul describes in the 2 Epistle to Timothy c. 2. 24 25 ought to be applied to all Bishops and Teachers in general And the Servant of the Lord he says must not strive but be gentle unto all Men apt to teach patiently In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves if God peradventure will give them Repentance to the acknowledging of the Truth Out of what has been said it is apparent that if any one now adays does pretend to any Prerogative or Infallibility in deciding Controversies as to matter of Faith he ought to be endued with such extraordinary Qualifications as are most requisite for the due Explaining and Interpreting the Sense of the holy Scripture and this in so high a degree as that the other Teachers in the Church are not able to stand in Competition with him nay that even all their joint Endeavours in this kind are not to be compared to his Judgment Besides this it must be supposed that this universal Judge except he be to be look'd upon as an useless Engine must be invested with a Power to execute his Decrees and to oblige all Christians to acquiesce in his Judgment For if it be supposed that his Decrees have no other force than as far as they influence People by the force of Truth they would be either useless or else this Judge in vain pretends thereby to any further Prerogative but what he has in common with other Christians that apply themselves to the Study of the holy Scripture Furthermore this obliging Power must either have been obtained by a peculiar Privilegde granted by God Almighty or by a general consent of the Christians or by an inherent Right to a Sovereignty over all the Christian Churches As for a priviledge granted by God or the general consent of the Christian Churches there is not the least Proof of it as far as ever I could find And as to the pretended Sovereign Power its legal Title ought to be proved by such Documents as are suitable to so great a Pretension For it is a very insignificant Proof to alledge in a case of such Moment Tradition and a long continued Usurpation which adds nothing to the right of a long continued illegal Possession and cannot be taken for a solid Foundation whereupon to build a real Pretension to such a Sovereignty for it is possible that whereas something of a Prerogative was intended in the primitive times the same in process of Time has been abused and consequently degenerated into an insufferable Tyranny We cannot therefore but look upon such a Tradition a●● a● not the least foundation in the Scriptures as very suspicious especially when we consider that such a Sovereign Power is quite contrary to the true Genius of the Christian Religion It may perhaps be objected that nothing else can be so powerful to put a stop to all Controversies but it ought to be considered also that thereby the worsest sort of Slavery must be introduced worse than that whereof Tacitus complains in his time Adempto per Inquisitiones loquendi audiendioque 〈◊〉 ●● que ipsacum voce memoria perdatur si tam in nostra potestate foret oblivisci quam tacere By the Inquisition the benefit of our Tongue and Ears is taken away at once and if it was as easie to controul Mens Memories as it is to bridle their Tongues the very remembrance of things past had been long ago abolished among us Truly by such Methods perhaps the Commonwealth may be stock'd with Hypocrites and dissembling Hereticks but few will be brought over to the Orthodox Christian Faith As it is therefore absolutely requisite that a hidden Ulcer should be laid open whereby it may the sooner be purg'd from its Malignancy and proper Remedies more immediately be applied to the affected Part So is it much conducing in the Church that such Scruples and Erroneous Opinions as have seised our Minds should be brought to light that by applying timely Remedies they may be removed before they are gone too far than by couching them over to let them run into a malignant Suppuration which at last may turn to an incurable Gangren It is also to be taken notice of that if this Ecclesiastical Sovereignty be granted there must of necessity be a double headed Sovereign Power in one State it being evident that Subjects would be obliged to acknowledge the Authority of this Ecclesiastical Judge in point of Controversie as well and in the same measure as they do the Authority of their civil Governours in civil Actions And since this Ecclesiastical Sovereignty has a different scope from that for which Civil Societies were erected it must
Action of Pilate it being to be considered no otherwise than a publick Robbery and a power Luk. 22. 53. of darkness since in all his Proceedings there is not a footstep of a legal Process to be met with And it is so manifest that when religious Matters were in question the due Method and judicial Order of a legal Process have been violated a thousand times over and over that it would be superfluous to alledge any Examples of it here When Sovereigns punish or chastise a Pastor or Minister of the Church who has abused his Function or been defective in it this power does properly not proceed from the Civil Jurisdiction but from a Right translated to the Sovereign by the Church But those that are punished by the Civil Authority because they have stirr'd up by their turbulent Speeches and Sermons the People to Rebellion against their Soverereigns or have attempted to withdraw the Auditors from and to resist the Power of a legal Jurisdiction cannot be said to undergo Punishment on the account of the Christian Religion Furthermore it is false that the Church considered as such can claim any Jurisdiction properly speaking It is no less false that the Power of disposing and exercising those Functions belonging to each Church is a civil Act in regard of its publick Effect Mr. Houtuyn has been drawn into all these Errors by confounding the Commonwealth with the Church If these two be not very nicely distinguished but we allow the Church to be entirely swallowed up in the civil Power what have we got by shaking of the Popish Yoak For the condition of the Church will be never the better if all Ecclesiastical Matters without Exception are left to the arbitrary Disposal of Sovereigns To maintain which Mr. Houtuyn in contradiction to all Reason and the Scripture it self has invented A spiritual Good or the eternal Welfare of People as the main End and Duty of the Sovereign Power By Vertue of which he enables his Prince to force his Subjects to profess publickly what Religion he will be pleased to impose upon them tho' never so contrary to their own Opinion For it may be sufferable for a Man to keep his own Opinion concealed to himself but to be oblig'd to profess what is quite contrary to it is both abominable and intolerable The Saying of Constantine the Great so much extoll'd by Mr. Houtuyn himself is contradictory to his Assertion viz. That he could have wish'd all his Subjects to have been Christians but that he never forced any For this Emperour not only never attempted to force any one from his own Opinion which indeed was beyond his Power but also never constrained his Subjects to profess themselves Christians against their own Inclinations Our Author does also not a little contradict himself in what he says concerning Words sometimes exempting them from any civil Cognisance whereas before he had made them liable to the civil Jurisdiction What says he if our Faith express'd by Words should come to the knowledge of our Sovereign It ought to be look'd upon not so much as a Crime but rather as an Error to correct which is not to be effected by Punishments which do illuminate our Mind but rather by good Instructions But those that know the real difference betwixt the Common-wealth and Church that is to say betwixt the State and a Colledge may without much difficulty dissolve these knotty Questions which he has started concerining the Jurisdiction and Legislative Power of Princes over the Church As to the § LXIX It is to be observed that it is put beyond all question that Sovereigns have a Right to give the Authority and Force of a Law to such Statutes as they find suitable to the State it being their Prerogative to determine according to what Laws Judgment is to be given in Civil Courts of Judicature what is punishable and what is to be left to the Conscience of every Subject But it implies an Absurdity to attribute to Sovereigns a Right of giving publick Authority to Prophesies themselves neither the Intrinsick nor Historical Faith having any dependence on the Civil Jurisdiction by the force of which Subjects may be obliged to act but not to believe From whence it is evident that if any Prophecy appear to be from God it cannot receive any Addition by the Authority of the Prince no more than if he should declare Cicero to be a good Latin Author But in case a pretended Prophecy be either ambiguous or supposititious in it self and a Prince should persuade himself to be able by his own Authority to make it pass current for Truth he would be look'd upon as one beyond his Senses What he insinuates concerning the New Testament in general is much of the same Stamp It was not says he in the power of Christ and his Apostles to establish this Doctrine of the New Testament by Publick Authority which was the reason it remain'd in a private condition ●ill such time when Princes having received the Christian Faith they gave it a publick Authority and the force of Laws But the Rules and Doctrine of Christ cannot receive any additional Strength from the Civil Power it being contrary to its Genius to be established and promoted by civil Punishments For whosoever out of fear of Temporal Punishments professes in outward shew only this Doctrine does not act according to nor fulfil the Will of Christ The same may be repliy'd to § LXX For as the Scripture and the Christian Doctrine do not owe their Authority to the civil Jurisdiction the latter being introduced in the Government by God's peculiar Assistance inspite of all the Resistance of the civil Powers So ought the Interpretation of the the ambiguous and controverted Passages in the holy Scripture not to be determined by the Sovereign Authority it belonging not to the Prince only but to the whole Church or such as are authorised by the Church tho' at the same time the Prince considered as the Chief Member of it cannot b●●xcluded from having his share in such a Debate It is a prophane Expression when he says Christ himself having an unquestionable Power of introducing a new Law must needs have a right to interpret the same But since during the time of his abode here he lived among those that either out of Ignorance or Disobedience did not own Christ and that in a private Condition subject to the civil Power it is evident that his Laws Doctrine and the Interpretation of them did acquire their obliging Power and publick Authority from the civil Constitution A little more would have made the Office of Christ as being Mediator of the World also dependent from the civil Jurisdiction Is it not a prodigious Absurdity to affirm That the Doctrine of Christ has received its publick Authority from the civil Power among those who denied Christ And what follows That if at the time of Christ Princes had been Christians they would have acknowledged him for the
to Examin both their Natural Qualifications in reference to Civil Society For if this which is to be look'd upon as the Foundation Stone be well Secured And we afterwards do look into the Scriptures to investigate in what manner Christ himself has represented his Doctrine to us it will be no difficult Task to judge whether according to the Institution of our Saviour there ought to be an Ecclesiastical Sovereignty exercised by Priests Or whether Princes have a Right to make use of an Absolute Power Or can Compel their Subjects to Obedience by Force of Arms in Matters of Religion § 1. That there is a Supream Being the Conce●●ing Rel●gion before Civil Societies w●r● I●●●ituted Author and Creator both of the Universe and especially of Mankind which ought to be acknowledged and worshipped as such by Menkind as they are Rational Creatures has been generally receiv'd not only among Christians but also by most of the Pagan Philosophers that to pretend to demonstrate it here would be Superfluous and perhaps might be taken as done in prejudice of the judicious Reader since scarce any body that is not beyond his right Wits can be supposed now a days to make the least Doubt of the Verity of this Assertion The true Knowledge of Divine Worship arises from two several Springs For we either by true Ratio●ination deduc●d out of the Light of Nature may be Convinced of those Sentiments we ought to have of God and what Reverence is due to him from us Mortals Or else some Matters being beyond our Apprehension by the bare Light of Nature are by God's special Command Revealed to Mankind Both Kinds are to be the Subject of the following Treatise with this Restriction nevertheless not to insist upon each particular Head of either of them any further than they have relation to Civil Society § 2. The first Thing which is to be considered both in Natural and Revealed Religion Every Man is accountable for his Religion is That every body is obliged to worship God in his own Person Religious Duty being not to be performed by a Deputy but by himself in Person who expects to reap the Benefit of religious Worship promised by God Almighty For Man being a rational Creature owing its Off-spring to God alone is thereby put under such an indispensible Obligation that the Cosideration of worshipping him to the utmost of his Power can never be entirely exstinguished in a rational Soul And here lies the main difference betwixt that Care which we ought to have our Souls and that of our Bodies the latter of which may be committed to the Management of others who being to be Accountable for all Injuries which may befall us under their Tuition we are thereby freed from any Guilt against our selves So do we commit our selves when we pass the Seas to the Management of the Master of a Ship by whose sole Care without our own Assistance we are conducted to the desired Port. But no body can so entirely t●ansfer the Care of his Soul and the Exercise of Religious Worship from himself to another Man as to make him alone Accountable for all Miscarriages and to free himself from Punishment Every one of us shall give Rom. 14. 12. Rom. 9. 3. Account of himself to God And it is in vain for St. Paul to wish to be Accursed from Christ for his Brethren his Kinsmen according to the Flesh And though it is undeniable That those who have been negligent in taking care of other Peoples Souls that were committed to their Charge shall receive Punishment Nevertheless these whose Souls have been thus neglected shall perish with them for having put too much Trust in others and neglected their own Salvation As it is plainly expressed by the Prophet Ezekiel 33. 7 8. And the Habak 2. 4. Mark 16. 16. Just shall live by Faith And the Evangelist St. Mark speaks without any Reservation He that believed not shall be damned without distinction whether you were seduced by others or whether you have renounced your Faith for worldly Ends. § 3. From whence it is evident That Religion How the same is to be exercised in the free State of Nature having its relation to God the same may be exercised without the Communion of a great many And that a Man ought not to judge of the Soundness of his Doctrine or Religion by the Number of those that adhere to it So that it is manifest That at the beginning of the World our first Parents might and did really perform Religious Duties And that if one alone or a few together live in a solitary Place they are therefore not to be deem'd to live without Religion because they do not make up a Congregation For God being the only Judge of what is best pleasing to him in his Worship knows and searches the very bottom of our Hearts And since we are not able without his Assistance to perform religious Duties the same can't be esteem'd properly our own Invention As those that live in the free State of Nature are not Subject to any Human Power So in the same State their Religion having only a relation to God Almighty unto whom alone they are bound to pay Reverence it is free from all Human Force or Power which in this State of Natural Freedom they may exercise either according to the Dictates of Reason or according to Divine Revelation and according to the best of their Knowledge may dispose the outward Form of their religious Worship without being accountable to any body but God Almighty Neither can they be Controuled or forced rather to worship God according to another's than their own Opinion But if any body pretends to bring them over to his Side he ought with suitable Arguments to Convince them how far he is in the Right and they in the Wrong There may be besides this another Reason be given why no body in what Condition soever ought to be forced to another Man's Religion because the Knowledge of Truth can't be implanted in us without proper and convincing Arguments such as are capable of preparing our Minds for the receiving of the True Doctrine of Religion And as to the Mysteries of the Christian Religion which transcend our Reason these must be acquired by the assistance of Divine Grace which is contrary to all Violence 'T is true a Prince may force a Subject to make an outward Confession by way of Mouth to comply in his Behaviour with his Commands and to dissemble his Thoughts or to speak contrary to his Belief but he can force no body to believe contrary to his own Opinion For we ought to b●lieve with Act● ● 37. all our Hearts but whatever is done in order to obtain any worldly Advantage or to avoid an imminent Evil of this kind can't be done with all our Heart But Faith cometh by Hearing Rom. 1● 17. and Hearing by the Word of God Neither does our Saviour force his Word upon