they are not preferrable in this Point before any other in Europe If any one questions thâ— 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 â—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 Parentâ— 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 thâ— 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 â—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 opâ—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
the Jewish Religion and Ceremonies and fortified them by very severe Laws no body upon Earth had Power to make the least alteration in them or to add any thing to or to diminish from them The Kings Saul and Vsiah paid dearly for it because they attempted to interfere with the Levites in their Office And those of the Jews that introduced a Foreign Religious Service are in the Holy Scripture Branded with Infamy So that their Kings had no further Power in Religiouâ— Conâ—erns than the Supream Inspection that every one in his Station not excepting the High Priest himself did Exercise his Office according to God's Commands and that the Ecclesiastical Constitutions were kept inviolable Neither did the Tribe of Levi or the Priestly Order make up a separate Body independent from the State but they were actually considered as part of the Nation and Subjects of their Kings who as we read sometimes Deposed them for several Crimes and if negligent in their Office used to give them severe Rebukes King David went further for he to maintain a decent Order in the Church disposed the several Ecclesiastical Functions among the Priests and Levites and ordered that the Singers and Door-waitors should take their places by Lott which nevertheless was not done without the Advice of the Chief Men and Elders of the People and the whole Tribe of Levi. In so doing he did not assume to himself the Power of Disposing or Altering any thing in their Religion but only over those that were Ordained by God Almighty for that Function viz. to Establish such an Order among them the better to enable them to 1 Chron. â— 26. seq Exercise their Function without Confusion For when afterwards instead of the Tabernacle a Temple was to be Erected that is to say when instead of a slight and decayed Building a most noble and firm Structure was to be built the same was not undertaken without God's Advice This Temple being the Principal of all Publick Structures it was the King's Care to see it Repaired in due time who also might levy a Tax for that use and provide for the necessary Expences of the Workmen it is very remarkable that we do not read in the Scriptures that any of those Kings that introduced Foreign Service among the Jews did ever attempt to force by Threats or otherwise their Subjects to such a Worship but rather by several Allurements enticed them to follow their Example and that such as were thus seduced did as well as their King receive Condign Punishment from God accordingly And that such among the Jews as abhorred this Idolatry ought not to be look'd upon as Rebellious Subjects upon that score but as Persons that did bear this Publick Calamity with Patience And as those Kings that Abolished Idolatry and Foreign Worship amongst the Jews are highly extolled in the Scriptures so those Impious Kings that were the Authors of this Idolatry were by the high Rank they bore in the State exempted from the ordinary Punishment which according to God's Ordinance was else to be inflicted upon all others that should attempt to introduce Idolatry Lastly another remarkable Observation may be made as to the Jewish Religion that whereas there was so strict an Unity betwixt the State and Religion that the latter might justly be called the Foundation Stone of the first and God had expresly enjoyned them an exact observance of it under forfeiture of the quiet Possession of that Country where their Commonwealth was Established the Felicity of the State depended absolutely from the due observance of that Religion and the Civil Magistrates were to take cognizance of all such Matters as might prove either dangerous or destructive to it as it may plainly appear by the Law of God prescribed in this behalf in the Books of Moses § 11. The Christian Religion differs in many points from that of the Jews not only The Genius of the Christian Religion is quite different from that of the Jews because it represents our Saviour to us as he has already appeared upon Earth and thereby has freed us from these many Ceremonies and Sacrifices which were so â—any Emblems of his future coming amongst us but also because the Christian Religion is by God's peculiar Providence endowed with such Qualifications that it ought and may be received by all Nations without Prejudice and consequently deserves the Name of an Universal Religion whereas the Divine Worship of the Jews was so adapted to that State as scarce to be suitable to any other being unaccessible to any other Nation but their own the Christian Religion on the other hand is now-a-days not tyed up to a certain Place or Temple but every 1 Tim. 2. 8. where Men may pray lifting up holy hands We need not appear before God with sumptuous Sacrifices but those Sacrifices which are acceptable to God are to be purchased without Gold or Silver Neither is the Ministry of the Gospel granted as a peculiar Priviledge to one particular Nation or Family but the Christians in general are called Priests before God and Apocal. 1. 6. 5. 10. no body is excluded from that Ministry provided he be endued with the necessary Qualifications except that St. Paul forbids Women 1 Tim. 11. 1â— to Teach Lastly Each Nation has an equal share in the Christian Religion neither can any of them claim a peculiar Right or Prerogative before others every one having equal share in the Merits of Christ Here is neither Jew nor Greek here is neither Bond nor Free neither Male nor Female for ye are all one in Christ Jesus There is neither Greek nor Jew Gal. 3. 28. Coloss 3. 11. Vide 1 Tim. 11. â—â— Circumcision or Vncircumcision Barbarian Scythian Bond nor Free but Christ is all and in all But because the Christian Religion is not like the Jewish adapted to one particular State that had its rise at the same time with this Religion but was introduced after Civil Societies were erected throughout the World The main point now in question is Whether after this Religion has been introduced it has altered the Nature of Civil Societies or the Rights of Sovereigns and whether by its establishment a new sort of Government separate and independent from the Civil Power has been introduced Or which is the same in effect Whether the Church is to be considered as a State separate and independent from the Civil Covernment which ought to be Governed and Maintained by Human Force and Power By the Word State we understand a considerable number of People who being joyned in one Society independent from another are Governed by their own Laws and How Moses behaved himself when he laid the Foundation of the Jewish Common-wealth Governors § 12. To trace the very Original of this point the Behaviour of Moses the Founder both of the Jewish Church and State must be taken into due consideration and how far different Jesus Christ the Saviour of Mankind and
a Right of constituting Ministers For says he their Right is the same But a Prince who makes not Profession of the Christian Faith tho' he has Christian Subjects under his Jurisdiction and allows them the free Exercise of their Religion has nevertheless not the least Power over their Church as being no Member of it It is no less false what he says that since Princes are become Christians the Vocation of Ministers does no more depend from the Church Just as a Man by submitting himself under another Jurisdiction is no more at his own disposal For a Prince by becoming a Member of the Church does thereby not make himself Master of that Church but rather submits to the Obedience of Christ the Head of the Church and therefore does not incroach all its Rights to himself but only can claim his share as such unless a certain Church should voluntarily surrender its Rights as far as it lies in its power to the Sovereign And I see no reason why the Church may not be under the Protection of a Christian Sovereign as representing a certain Person in the Commonwealth and therefore to Act and Decree by plurality of Votes which implies a Right at least by Consent For there is a Medium betwixt the State or Commonwealth and a disorderly Multitude viz. a Colledge where there is no occasion for a coerâ—ive â—overeign Power This may be illustrated by an Example For supposing in a Commonwealth a certain Society or Company of Merchants regulated by certain Statures of their own under the Direction of some of its own Members Into this Colledge a Prince has a mind to be received as a Member paying his certain share By being thus made a Member of this Company he has not obtained an absolute disposal over this Society but rather has accommodated himself to the Statutes of the Colledge neither can he claim any other Prerogative there but what is derived either from his share in that Company or from a free Gift and voluntary consent of the rest of its Members and as a Member of this Colledge he is to be considered not as a Prince but as a Merchant There is nevertheless one remarkable difference viz. That it is in the Power of a Sovereign to hinder the setting up of such a Society which is not the same in regard of the Church He plainly betrays his Ignorance when he says That the Church is to be considered as a multitude of People comprehended in the Person of one Prince from whence the Prince represents the People like one Publick Person through whom the whole People declare their Sentiments For tho' this be appliable to the Commonwealth it is not to the Church they being quite different from one another It cannot be denied but that those who have the Sovereign Power in the State may Enact what Laws they think most convenient But to attribute the same Power to Sovereigns over the Church is a Madness and savours of Blasphemy And supposing a Prince should be misled into Errors or Heresie must therefore the whole Church be accounted Erroneous or Heretical Except he would perswade us also that Princes are Infallible Wherefore in those places where the Election of Ministers is independent from the Prince it is supposed to proceed from a Right transferred unto him by the Church The same is to be understood where this Election is managed either by the Bishops or Presbyters But in case the same be done by the whole Church it would be preposterous to say that such an Election was made by vertue of a Priviledge granted by the Prince Mr. Houtuyn having granted before That the Pastoral Function not being annexed to any certain Person considered as such had no dependency from the Civil Jurisdiction but owed its Institution to Christ Nevertheless in § LXVI he affirms That the actual Administration of the Ministerial Function is an External Publick Act such as is subject to the Civil Power Which is the same in effect as if he said Matrimony is a Divine Institution but it depends from the Prince whether he will allow his Subjects to Marry actually or not For supposing a Sovereign should take a Resolution to forbid the antient Exercise of the Ministerial Function what would in such a Case become of this Pastoral or Ministerial Function It is also insufferable what he says immediately after An Election is a voluntary Act therefore revocable at pleasure it being certain that it cannot be done without impairing the Reputation of the Minister What relates to § LXVII It is denied that Nebuchadonosor had any legal Authority to put to Death such as refused to adore the great Statue set up by his Order For a Prince who inflicts any Punishment upon his Subjects against the express Command of the holy Scripture does not at that time exercise his legal Authority but commits an hostile and tyrannical Act. So when King Ahab under pretence of a legal Process and by subborning of false Witnesses possess'd himself of Naboth's Vineyard did no more exercise his legal Jurisdiction than a Guardian may be said to do when he commits a Rape upon a Pupil committed to his Management But when the same Nebuchadonosor publishes his Edict That no body dare to blaspheme the God of the Jews he did without all question nothing but what belong'd to his high Station He runs on further viz. That Peter John Stephen Paul nay even our Saviour himself did appear before the Sanhedrim before Foelix Festus Caesar and Pilate without taking the least Exception against the legality of their Jurisdiction What could be more falsely invented Did Peter and John acknowledge the Jurisdiction of the Sanhedrim in respect of the Christian Doctrine when they told them to their very Faces that they would not obey their Command of not preaching in the Name of Jesus Did Stephen acknowledge the Jurisdiction Act. 4. 19 20. of the Sanhedrim when he told them You uncircumcised in your Hearts and Ears you always resist the holy Ghost Neither is it an Argument that Paul and an infinite Number of Martyrs did acknowledge the Jurisdiction of those Princes and other Civil Magistrates when they being forced to appear before them endeavoured to prove their Innocence there being no other Tribunal to which they could appeal and it being at that time look'd upon as a Crime deserving Death for any one to profess himself a Christian All the defence they made may be reduced under two Heads For they either denied those Crimes laid to their Charge as calumnious or else they asserted even to the last That the profession of the Christian Religion did not depend from the Civil Jurisdiction And those Magistrates that absolved the Confessors of this Truth did in effect give this Sentence That this was a Cause not belonging to their Jurisdiction It is a wonder to me how Mr. Houtuyn who pretends to be a Lawyer can find out any thing in the least resembling a legal Process in that
Christian Churches St. Peter had in the abovementioned place made his Confession That Jesus was the Son of the living God This excellent Confession did deserve a suitable answer from Christ who said thou art Peter as if he would say persist in this thy Confession Peter which does in no wise imply that Peter should thereby have deserved those Prerogatives over the other Apostles as the Romanists do pretend to For St. Peter did not make this Confession for himself only but in the Name of all those unto whom Christ spoke at that time In the same manner as he spoke in the Name of the rest of the Disciples by St. John 6. 69. We believe and are sure that thou art Christ the Son of the living God Joh. 1. 34 36 42 45 49. Mat. 10. 32 33. John 11 27. Acts 4. 11. Neither was Peter the first that made this Confession For before him the same had been made by John the Baptist by St. Andrew Philip and Nathanael And it is no difficult Task to prove out of several passages of the holy Scripture that none could be taken for a true Disciple of Christ unless he had made this â— 8. â—â— â— 9. â—0 22. Confession And our Saviour to shew of what consequence this Confession was added these Words Vpon this Rock I will build my Church Which is as much as to say this Doctrine that Jesus is the Son of God is the main Foundation Stone whereupon is to be built the mystical Edifice of the Christian Church So that no further inference can be made from these Words than what is expressed to the same purpose by St. John 20. 31. and in the 1 Epist of John 2. 22. c. 3. â—0 c. 4 2. viz That the fundamental Article of the Christian Religion is That Jesus of Nazareth is the true Messias and the Son of the living God § 27. It also is worth our Consideration Whâ—thâ—r the Power of 〈…〉 any Sovâ—reign Right of Juriâ—â—cation whether the Power of Excommunication which was used by the Apostles and in the Primitive Church implies any Sovereign Authority such as ought to be exercised in a State Unto this we answer in the Negative provided the same be taken according to the proper Use and End of its genuine and primitive Institution For that this Power may with conveniency enough be made use of if misapplied to serve an ambitious Design and to keep the poor People in awe is sufficiently proved by Experience It seems to me that there was a remarkable Difference betwixt the Excommunication of the Jews by virtue of which they were excluded from their Synagogues and the Excommunication used among the Primitive Christians For among the Jews where the Sovereigns and the People professed one and the same Religion which also was entirely united with the State it might easily happen that the Exclusion from the Synagogue did carry along with it several Inconveniencies in Civil Affairs and might therefore not unjustly be considered at the same time as a Civil Punishment which rendered the Offenders infamous in the Commonwealth Especially since according to the Fundamental Constitution of that Government there were several things belonging to Religion punishable by their civil Constitutions But it being already put beyond Question that neither our Saviour nor his Apostles did ever pretend to any Civil Power and that besides this the Primitive Christians lived under the Jurisdiction of other Princes how could their Excommunication Ban or what other sort of Ecclesiastical Censine was used among them be supposed to have any influence upon the Civil State and Condition of the Christians or to have been of the same nature and force properly speaking as Civil Punishments are This will more plainly appear if we examine those Passages where this Matter is compleatly treated of in the New Testament It is said in Matthew 18. 15. 16 17. If thy Brother shall trespass against thee go and tell him his Fault between thee and him alone If he shall hear thee thou hast gained thy Brother But if he will not hear thee then take with thee One or Two more that in the mouth of two or three Witnesses every Word may be established And if he shall neglect to hear them tell it unto the Church but if he neglect to hear the Church let him be unto thee as a Heathen Man and a Publican Certainly out of this passage nothing can be inferr'd that has any relation to a Temporal Jurisdiction or Sovereignty but barely shews us how differences ought to be composed among Christians So St. Paul ordains 1 Cor. â— 1. 2. that we shall rather leave Differences to the Arbitration of a Brother or rather take wrong than to go to Law with a Brother before the Unbelievers to the great shame of the Christian Name So that tho' it is else required from the Offender to beg the Pardon of and Vid. Mat 5. 40. offer Satisfaction to the Person offended nevertheless if he neglect his Duty in this Point Christ commanded that the offended Party shall first offer a Reconciliation and try before he brings his Action against the Offender whether Satisfaction for the Injury received and a Reconciliation may not be obtained by a private Arbitration If this prove fruitless he says he ought to take along with him two or three Witnesses to try whether they can prevail with his Adversary to bring him to a more pliable Temper and at the same time may testifie That the offended Party did offer every thing which might tend towards a Reconciliation betwixt them But if after all this he remain obstinate the Difference ought to be referr'd to the whole Congregation of the Believers residing in that Place for I see no reason why by the word Ecclesia or Church the Presbyters only should be understood But if they also cannot prevail with their Authority over his Stubborness let him then be unto thee like a Heathen man and Publican unto whom his Trespasses will not be remitted because he refuses to acknowledge his Offence or to give Satisfaction for it which is as much as to say fly his Conversation like that of a vile Person which eâ—â—ry one may freely do without being thereuâ—â—â— compelled by any Superior Power For that the Jews did not converse with the Heaâ—â—ns and Publicans except in Civil 〈…〉 of no great force against us it being ceâ—â—ain that the Heathens and Publicans were noâ— so infamous in themselves by any Civil Constitution the Jews being at that time subject to the Heathens who matter'd not their Conversation Besides this it is left to every ones free Choice whom he will admit into his familiar Conversation and always was a certain Rule among the wiser Sort not to be familiar with People of a perversed Humour and an ill Life whose Conversation every body may avoid as he finds it most convenient So the Apostle bids us to reject a Man that is a Heretick after the first and
which are in the holy Scripture attributed to the Kingdom of Christ and the Kingdom of Heaven here upon Earth It is without question that the Union of the Believers under Christ their King ought to be considered as a Kingdom or Empire but such a one as is not of this World and consequently of a quite different nature from that Sovereign Power which is exercised in a Civil Government Christ is there the King who having withdrawn himself from our sight has as it may be said settled his Court in Heaven His subjects are dispersed throughout all parts of the World where the Christian Doctrine is taught and received by the Believers who by the intrinlick Vertue of this Doctrine are confirmed in their Faith and made proof against all the Temptations and Malice of this World The Civil Power does not reach this Kingdom true Piety being not to be implanted by Human Force which is insufficient to procure God's Grace or raise those inward Motions which are chiefly acceptable to God Almighty and without which all our exterior Actions that may be enforced by a Civil Authority are to be deem'd vain and fruitless For the Kingdom of Christ being a Kingdom of Truth it requires no Civil Power or Force For Truth by the help of the Christian Doctrine and with the assistance of God's Grace does gently insinuate it self into the Hearts of Men and the Rewards or Punishments which those are to receive that either accept or despise this Doctrine are reserved for the Life to come He that will be pleased to examine those several Passages where mention is made of the Kingdom of Christ or the Kingdom of Heaven may soon be convinced that not any thing is to be met withal there which has the least resemblance to a Civil Power or Sovereignty Those that expect to enter into this Kingdom Mat. 3. 2. c. 4. 1â— c. 4. 23. c. 9. 35. must qualifie themselves by Repentance It is spoke of Christ himself that he went about Mat. 5. 1. seq preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom of Heaven The Virtues and Qualifications which Christ requires in those that will enter into his Kingdom and consequently be blessed with eternal Salvation have but little relation to the Qualifications of a Subject in a Civil Government Mat. 5. 19. c. 7. 21. c. 6. 33. c. 13. 21. 33. 44 45 52. In that Kingdom every one is called great or the least according to his Proficiency in the Christian Doctrine and according to his Obedience or disobedience to it We are commanded first to seek the Righteousness of this Kingdom The great Mystery of this Kingdom is the powerful operation of the Word of c. 24. 47. God In this Kingdom are not only suffered those that are Foreigners to it but also its Enemies which is against the Maxims of a Mat. 16. 19. Civil Government The Keys of this Kingdom are contained in the Doctrine of Remission of Sins And what is taught us concerning Mat. 18. 1. c. 10. 21. c. 23. 8. Mark 9. 33 34. c. 10. 42. Precedency in the Kingdom of Heaven is quite contrary to what is practised in a Civil State It is allowable by the Civil Constitutions for every one to pursue his Right but in the Kingdom of Christ he is counted an ill Subject who will not remit a Trespass to Mat. 18. 23. c. 21. 14. Mark 10. 14. his Brother The Kingdom of Christ is also of the little Children Those that are employed in this Kingdom have different Tasks and undergo different sorts of Hardship and yet their Reward is the same This Kingdom is Mat. 20. 1. c. 21. 23 taken from those that refuse it whereas it is a Maxim of Temporal Sovereigns to force such c. 2â— 2. as are refractory to Obedience and this was the reason why after the Jews had despised it it was offered to the Gentiles He that will c. 25. 1. enjoy the Benefit of this Kingdom must not be sloathful The richest find always the easiest Reception in a Civil State but the rich Man shall hardly enter into the Kingdom of Christ Mat. 19. 23. Mark 10 23. Luke 12 32. He is accounted a good Subject in a State who is industrious and gathers Riches by all lawful ways and means but this is reckoned as superfluous in the Kingdom of Heaven One of the chiefest Motives which induced Mankind to enter into Civil Societies was to preserve themselves and their Possessions But Christ says Whoever he be of you that forsaked not all that he hath he cannot be my Disciple Luk. 1â— 33. And lastly of all he says The Kingdom of God cometh not with observation neither shall they say lo here or lo there for behold the Kingdom of God is within you It would be superfluous to c. 17. 21. alledge more for the proof of it all the rest being most of them the same in Substance § 30. Though it be evident that the Union Whether the Church be a State of the Believers under Christ their King and that Mystical Body whose Head is Christ the Members of all the Believers in general cannot be considered as a Temporal State nevertheless it is worth our enquiry whether not all those in General that profess the Christian Doctrine may be considered as a Body belonging under one Civil Government or at least have a near resemblance to a Civil Commonwealth Or which is the same in effect Whether the Church according to our Saviour's Intention ought to be considered as a State or Commonwealth We take here the Word State in its common Acceptation viz. for a certain Society of Men which being independent from any Foreign Jurisdiction live under the Protection of their own Sovereigns The main intention of this Question is that after we shall have made it appear That the Church according to the intention of Christ and his Apostles neither was nor could be a State it may from thence be concluded whether that Church which pretends to a Sovereignty considered as such be Christ's Church But to trace the very original of this Question it ought first of all to be considered in what What is unâ—erâ—tood in the holy Scripture by the word 〈◊〉 Sense the Word Ecclesia or Church is taken in the holy Scripture The word Ecclesia has its off-spring out of the Democracy's of the Greeks whereby they understood a Convention Meeting or sometimes a Concourse of the People or of a considerable Part of their Citizens in order to receive Propositions to consult and make Decrees concerning Matte belonging to the Commonwealth It is derâ—ved of â—vocare or to Call-forth not that there by was always understood an Assembly summoned out of a greater Multitude for I â—â— see no reason why not all the Citizens had Right to appear in those Assemblies but because they were called out of their private Dwelling-places and from their ordinarâ—â—usiness to meet in a publick Place
else overturn that Government under which they then live So when Moses delivered the Israelites from the Aegyptian Bondage he led them into the Desarts of Arabia And when Romulus had resolved to erect a new Commonwealth he first withdrew himself from the Subjection of the Kings of Alba and such of the Neighbouring Countries as were for being Members of that new Commonwealth did leave their former Habitations and settled themselves in Rome But neither Christ nor his Apostles did ever remove Christians from their Habitations to other Places but allowed every body to remain in the same Station and under the same Government without the least prejudice to the former Rights of their Sovereigns over them From whence it is evident that the Christians tho' never so numerous could not be in a condition to settle themselves under any one State of their own For since according to the Rules of the Christian Religion the Rights of Sovevereigns over their Subjects Lives and Goods are not taken away or impair'd and no body can be subject to two Masters there could be no pretence of erecting a new Sovereignty especially in the midst of another Common-wealth nay it was beyond their Power even to enter into such a Society as should be in the least prejudicial to the Rights of their present Rom. 13. 1. 1 Pet. 2. 1â— Sovereigns Who can be so ignorant in civil Affairs as not to understand what prodigious Sums of Money are required for the maintainig of a State And tho the Rights of Sovereigns do not extend so far as to take away from Subjects the private disposal of their Goods nevertheless may they lawfully restrain the Extravagancy of their Subjects if they pretend to dispose of their Goods in prejudice of the State For if this Liberty should be granted to the Subjects without limitation the State if deprived oâ— its nourishment would quickly be reduced to a languishing condition or else private Men might be enabled to erect a new State in the midst of the old one or at least to impair and endanger the Publick Safety And since those Sovereigns under whose Jurisdiction the Apostles lived had the same Right over the Fortunes of their Subjects as other Governments have and the Rights of Sovereigns were not taken away by the Doctrine of Christ there could be no other provision made for the maintainance of those Congregations as such but what was consistent with the lawful Rights of their Sovereigns and as much only as might lawfully be given by private Persons which could not exceed a private Fortune and were nothing more than Voluntary Contributions or Alms And whatsoever of any real Estate was attributed to these Uses was thereby not exempted from paying of Taxes no more than the Estates of other Subjects § 32. But if we take a full view of the The inward Structure of the Church is quite different from that of a State whole Structure of Civil Societies and by what means Subjects were united under one Government we shall find them to differ as Heaven and Earth from that Union which belongs properly to the Body of a Church If we trace that Original of Civil Societies or Commonwealths it is evident that Men having found the Inconveniencies and Dangers which attended a solitary Life in the free natural State did enter and unite themselves into Societies for their common Security And having agreed to a certain Form of Government did constitute one certain Person or a Counsel who were to be the supream Governours of that Society unto whom they submitted themselves and their fortunes for the common Benefit of that Society But Churches were erected upon quite another Foundation For here Men being made sensible of their miserable condition did not by their own accord and a general agreement turn themselves to God Almighty but being on the contrary overwhelmed with Darkness and Ignorance so as to be over secure and neglecting their own Salvation God did send his Messengers among them commanding all men every where to repent Here is not the least Acts 1â— 30. footstep of any general Agreement of Men to erect and submit themselves under one Church but each particular Person for himself without any respect or regard to others did follow Christ and his Doctrine And whereas in a Civil State the whole family has its dependency from their Master and enjoys all the Privileges belonging to them under his Protection it is quite different in the Church where the Wife is not obliged to follow her Husband's Religion nor the Servant the Master So were in the family of 1 Cor. 7. 12. 21. Nacissus who himself was not a Christian several Christian Servants who are saluted as such by S. Paul And in this sense is to be â—â—m 16. â—â— taken what is said by Christ He that loved Father or Mother Son or Daughter more than me is not worthy of me As likewise Mat. 10. 3â— c 12 5â— Luk. 1â— â—6 what is mentioned concerning Divisions Discords Dissensions which are to be raised by the Doctrine of Christ among the nearest Friends is to be understood of the strict Union betwixt Christ and the Believers which surpasses and is to be preferred before all the Tyes of Consangninity among Men. So Mat. â—0 34. that if a Father Husband or Master should turn Apostate the Son Wife or Servant are not obliged to follow their footsteps Neither is it requisite to be solicitous about any particular or certain Form of Government in the Church viz. whether the same ought to be Monarchical Aristocratical or Democratical For these seveveral Forms belonging only to a Civil Government are very preposterously made use of in the behalf of the Church which is far different from a Temporal State And as Churches and Commonwealths are erected for different Ends so the Offices belonging to both are altogether of a different Nature Who is so ignorant as not to know that for the obtaining the Ends of Civil Societies it was requisite to constitute various Degrees of Dignities appertaining to the Managers of the State whereas the most plain and natural Distinction betwixt Christians in reference to the Church is only that of Teachers and Auditors § 33. Besides all this the Teachers in a 9 There is a great difference betwixt Teachers in a Church and the Governours of a State Church do not only differ from Temporal Governours in a State in that these are constituted for different Ends But the main Difference is the very nature of their Constitution We will not insist here upon the Point of Succession by which a great many Sovereigns obtain their Sovereign Power which is quite otherwise in the Church But we will only treat in this place concerning the different Constitution betwixt Teachers and such Sovereigns as exercise the Supream Civil Power by Vertue of Election When therefore the Sovereign Power is lodged in any Persons by Election the rest who have thus chosen them their
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 Mâ—ans as â—â— most proper for the searching into and findâ—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 sâ—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 oâ— 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 Pharisâ—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
well weighed and the Reasons thereof duly examined on both sides is very plain and easy to be determined But if any moral Decrees are made by a Council the same are to be taken to have no obliging Power but what proceeds either from a preceding Commission and Authority or from the Approbation of these Churches so that Chuncils have no coercive Power over the Church I cannot but touch by the by upon this Head viz. that this Assertion The Council is above the Pope is of such a Nature as will easily gain credit with all that are guided by right Reason or the Scriptures For who can be so stupid as not to be sensible that a great many learned Men who with joint labour apply themselves to the search after Truth are to be preferred before the Judgment of one single Person and that oftentimes of such a one who has but a very indifferent insight into the Holy Scriptures and Divinity This seems to imply somewhat of a Contradiction that this Point is asserted by the self-same People who make the Papal Chair the Center of the Church and the Pope the Oâ—cumenick Bishop For the Romish Church pretends to be a Monarchical State but this Assertion of the Superiority of the Councils favours most of an Aristocracy But this Riddle may be unfolded in a few Words The French Clergy allows the Pope to be the Supream Head of the Church as far as they find it suitable with their Interest But whenever he attempts any thing against them or the States Policy of that Kingdom the old Song of the Liberty of the Gallican Church and the antient Doctrine of the Sorbone is revived which serves the French Clergy now and then for a Pretext to persuade the vulgar sort of People that the Gallican Church has not been polluted with those gross and abominable Errours as are introduced in the Church of Rome The next thing to be considered is that it is most evident that if a Controversie arises which may be decided within the Body of one Church there is no Occasion for the Communicating in such a Point with other Churches And that in case one Church alone is not stock'd sufficiently with able Teachers for the composing of the Difference and therefore must call to its Aid those of other Churches it is superfluous to call together a greater number than may be sufficient for the accomplishment of the Work So did the Church of Antioch refer the whole Controversie to those of Jerusalem without giving the least Trouble to those of Phenice and Samaria though their Deputies passed in their Way thither through both these Places Besides this the Deputies that are sent ought to receive their Authority and Instruction from their several Churches whom they represent because no Church has without reserve submitted herself to the Determination of her Teachers but only as far as their Doctrine is agreeable to the Word of God Neither are the Words in the Epistle to the Hebr. c. 13. 17. to be understood any otherwise than with this Limitation Besides this it is absolutely requisite that such Persons as have raised a Controversie should be heard in the Council that their Reasons should be duely examined weighed and proceeded upon according to the Rules prescribed in the Holy Writ And if the Controversie does not barely concern a Point of Doctrine but implies a Temporal Interest those that have any Share in it cannot pretend to a Power of deciding the Point in Prejudice of the adverse Party From whence it is evident that the Points in question betwixt the Protestant Church and the Papal Chair cannot be composed by any Council their Difference arising not barely from Point of Doctrine but about Domination Temporal Dignities and vast Revenues Nor is there the least Probability of any Composition betwixt these two Parties by way of Arbitration For who is it that can pretend to decide so great a Point Who is likely to be accepted of as an Arbitrator by both Parties The Protestants in all likelihood will not be so foolish as to submit themselves and their Case to the Determination of any Assembly consisting all of Roman Catholicks their sworn Enemies nor can they have the Imprudence as to ask it And as for the Pope he likes his Station too well to put it to the Hazard of an Arbitration But if an Assembly should be proposed to consist of an equal Number chosen by each Party this Expedient would scarce take it being to be feared that they would scarce keep within the bounds of Moderation and that the Assembly would appear sometimes not unlike the Feast of the Centaures § 39. It having been hitherto demonstrated In what condition the Churches were under the Pagan Emperours at large that the Church is no State we must consider in the next place unto what kind of moral Bodies the Churches have the nearest relation as they were in primitive Times under the Pagan Princes It is evident enough That they were of the nature of Colledges or such Societies where a great many are joined for the carrying on a certain Business under this limitation nevertheless as not to be independent from the Civil Jurisdiction Concerning the nature of the Colledges and Corporations Jacobus Cujachus may be consulted before all others 7 Observ 30 and 16 and Observ 3 and 5. And it is here very well worth our most particular Observation that such Societies as were erected for the exercise of Religion were by Publick Authority allowed of in the antient Roman Empire This is attested among a great many others by Athanagoras in the beginning of his Apology for the Christians when he says It is by your Command you greatest of Princes that several Nations live according to their own Customs and Laws and every one without being controuled by any Penal Statutes freely exercise the same Religion in which he was educated And thus he proceeds immediately after All Mankind offer their Sacrifices and use other Religious Ceremonies according to the Custom of their Native Country This Liberty of Conscience was among others the true cause why the Christian Religion in so short a time did spread it self all over so vast an Empire and why in the beginning very few opposed its Progress the Magistrates not thinking it belonging to their Province to intermeddle with it And this is one Reason why we never read of the Apostles having desired leave from the Civil Magistrates to preach the Gospel or to plant a Church Tho' another Reason may be given why the Apostles were not obliged to ask leave from the Civil Magistrates for the Constituting of Christian Churches because the Apostles had received their immediate Authority of Preaching the Gospel from him who is the King of kings and by whose Command all Mankind were then called to repentance From what has been said this rational Conclusion may be drawn That the Apostles had not only a Power to plant Churches in all places where they
found their Auditors inclined to receive the Doctrine of the Gospel but that also in all other places whither this Doctrine was transplanted the Believers might enter into such a Society or plant a Church upon their own accord without any Commission or Permission for so doing from the Apostles but that pursuant to our Saviour's Expression it was sufficient if two or three were inclined to meet in his Name If we trace the true nature of these Societies which are constituted by a free Choice and Consent of certain Men. we may easily find to contain all of them something resembling a Democracy where such Matters as concern the whole Body of the Society are to be dispatched by common Consent and where no particular Person can claim any further Power over the rest than what he has received by their joint Consent From whence it may be rationally concluded that at the first beginning the Power of Constituting Teachers and other Ministers of the Church was originally lodged in the whole Church or the whole Congregation of the Believers And tho' it is unquestionable that in the first primitive Church Teachers were constituted by the Apostles in a great many places nevertheless the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which implies something of a Democracy and is often used in the Scriptures in this Case argues sufficiently that this was not done without the Approbation of the Church It would be a hard Task to prove that the Apostles did constitute Teachers themselves in all lesser Towns or that they preached the Gospel in all lesser Places and Villages It seems rather probable that the Gospel was published by the Apostles in great Cities and other places of note from whence it was communicated unto other Places and that such Churches as were not provided with Teachers Bishops or Presbyters by the Apostles themselves or their special Authority used either to chuse those very Persons to that Function who were the first Preachers of the Gospel among them or any others whom they esteemed to be endowed before others with the Gift of Teaching If we consult the Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans it seems that the Gospel had been taught at Rome before ever Peter and Paul came thither And the High Treasurer of the Chap. 16. Queen Candaces who is generally believed to have first carried the Doctrine of the Gospel to Aethiopia and to have been the first Founder of the Christian Churches in those Parts received no Ordination as a Bishop or Presbyter from Philip after his Baptism Neither did Acts 8. Christ or his Apostles prescribe any certain Form to be used in the Ordination of Bishops as he did in the use of the Sacraments which seems to prove that for the obtaining of this Function there is nothing more required than for the Person to be called by the Church and to have the Gift of Teaching It is not to be denied but that the Ordination of Ministers and Imposition of Hands by the Bishops and Presbyters is a very laudable and useful Ceremony and ought to be received as such with this restriction nevertheless that the same need not to be deemed so absolutely necessary as if without it no Person ought to be taken for a true Minister of the Church especially since these miraculous Gifts which accompanied that Ceremony in the Infancy of the Primitive Church are many Ages past become useless The Church like all other Colledges 1 Tim. 4 14. have power to collect Stipends for their Ministers and to make Collections for the Use of the Poor but in a different degree from that which belongs to Civil Magistrates or Sovereigns who levy Taxes and have a Power to force their Subjects to a compliance with their Commands But in the Church this Power is founded upon the meer Liberality and free Consent of all the Believers in general who being made sensible of their Duty of paying a Workman his Stipend and relieving those in Distress ought not to refuse such Acts of Justice and Humanity It properly belongs to all 1 Cor. 8. 2 3. c. 2. 12 13. c. 9. 5 9 7. Colledges as well as Churches to have a Power to make with joint Consent of their Members such Statutes as may conduce towards the obtaining the Ends of their Society provided they do not interfere with the legal Rights of their Sovereigns Of this kind are these Statutes which St. Paul recommends to the Corinthians in his first Epistle in the 7 Chapt. If any one acted contrary to these Rules he deservedly was to receive Correction or to undergo such a Penalty as was dictated by the Statute and which was to be laid upon him not by Vertue of an Inherent Power in the Colledge but pursuant to their Contract And tho' Colledges have not any Power or Jurisdiction over their Members unless what is absolutely requisite for the obtaining the true end of each Society or else has been granted to them by their Sovereigns Nevertheless it is often practised in these Societies and may be done without prejudice to the Rights of their Sovereigns that if any Differences arise betwixt the Members of one and the same Colledge these are composed by the Interposition and Arbitration of the rest of the Members of that Colledge or Society to the End that a mutual good Correspondency may be cultivated among them In which sense is to be taken the Admonition which St. Paul gives to the Corinthians concerning this point in the 1 Epistle in the 6 Chapter in the first and following Verses Lastly because many Vices were at the time of the first publishing of the Gospel in vogue among the Heathens which were not punishable by the Pagan Laws they being more encouraged to the observance of Moral Duty by the prospect of Honours than by any civil Commands And the Christians believing it more peculiarly belonging to themselves to recommend and adorn their Profession by a holy Life and by an innocent Conversation to excel the Heathens some Statutes were at the very beginning introduced into the Primitive Church which were thought most convenient to correct all manner of Licentiousness according to St. Paul's Direction If any one that is called a Brother be a Fornicator or Covetous 1 Cor. 5. 2. or an Idolater or a Railer or a Drunkard or an Extortioner with such a one do not eat From whence it appears that in the primitive Times Church Censure was used in the Churches all which may easily be supposed to have been done without the least prejudice to the Sovereign Power it being always for the Interest of the State that Subjects should lead an innocent Life It is worth our Observation that the Punishments inflicted by vertue of these Statutes were of such a nature as might be put in execution without the least prejudice to the Civil Government such were private Admonitions publick Reprimands and Church Penances the extream Remedy was Excommunication by vertue of which a Member
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
questionless a Right to examin what Matters and in what Manner they are transacted in the Convention of their Presbyters or in their Ecclesiastical Courts if there be any such among them Whether they do not transgress their Bounds whether they act according to the Civil Laws or whether they do not assume to themselves a Power to determine such Cases as properly belong to the Civil Jurisdiction Of this Kind are Matrimonial Cases which without Reason and upon very slender Pretences the Priests have drawn under their Jurisdiction to the great Prejudice of the Sovereign Power For it being an unquestionable Right belonging to Sovereigns to constitute Laws concerning Matrimonial Cases according to the Law of Nature and of God I cannot see any Reason why they have not a Right to determine Matrimonial Differences And because the Ministers of the Church make use of Church discipline the Prince may make a legal Enquiry whether under Pretence of these Rules prescribed by our Saviour they do not introduce Novelties which may prove prejudicial to the State And as these Enchroachments are no essential Part of the Christian Doctrine but rather to be looked upon like Spots which disgnise its natural Beauty So I cannot see with what Face it can be denied that those ought to be taken off especially by the Authority of those whose Interest is most nearly concerned unless they have Impudence enough to own that the Christian Religion may lawfully be misapplied to By-uses And let it be granted that every thing is transacted as it ought to be in these Conventions of the Presbyters Consistories or Episcopal Courts why should they be asham'd or angry at their Sovereigns taking Cognisance of their Proceedings And this Right of Inspection does never cease after the Sovereign has once entred into the Communion of the Church it being his Duty to take care that no Abuses may creep into the Church in process of Time that may endanger the State § 45. Because the Right of Constituting Concerning the Right of Princes as to Church Ministers Ministers of the Church does originally belong to the whole Congregation the Prince must needs have his Share in it as being a Member of the Congregation I say his Share For it is not reasonable that a Minister should be forced upon any Church against their Consent and without their Approbation except it be for very weighty Reasons For the Right of Constituting Ministers in the Church does not belong to the Prince in the same manner as it is his Prerogative to constitute Civil Magistrates and other Publick Ministers of State which being a part of the Sovereign Power cannot be called in question But Teachers in the Church considered meerly as such are none of the King's Ministers but Servants of Christ and Ministers of the Church not Officers of the State And because in the Primitive Church Ministers used to be constituted by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or by the Suffrages of the Christians the Prince may lawfully claim his Vote in the same Church whereof he is a Member But as for the other Churches under his Jurisdiction they ought to be left to their free Choice exept there be some prevailing Reasons which oblige the Prince to interpose his Authority it being unjust that a Minister should be put upon a Church against their Will if they can alledge any lawful Exception against him For a Teacher thus forced upon his Auditors for whom they have neither esteem nor Love is likely to edifie but little by his Doctrine Nevertheless Sovereigns ought to have a watchful Eye over the Churches and to take care that Persons not fitly qualified for this sacred Function may not be promoted to the Ministry either by Simony or other unlawful Means For though it is the Interest of the whole Church to provide against these Corruptions Sovereigns are likely to do it with much better Success than can be expected from private Persons They may authorise certain Persons to be present at these Elections and who by their Authority may prevent all manner of Disorder or Corruption and at the same time make a due enquiry whether such Persons as are to be put into the Ministry are of an approved Life and Doctrine And because the Ministers of the Church do 1 Tim. 3 10. sometimes act negligently or preposterously in their Office which often proves the Occasion of Scandal and Schism in the Church Rom. 16 17. Sovereigns may constitute over them Inspectors with an Authority to reprove and sometimes to punish such as transgress their Rules But these Inspectors being no less subject to human Frailties than other men Care ought to be taken that their Authority be so limited as to be accountable of all their Proceedings either to the Prince or before a Consistory authorised for that purpose if they transgress their Bounds or trespass upon the Ministers of the Church As all these maters do contribute to the maintaining of good Order in the Church and may best be put in execution by the Sovereign Authority So it is manifest that Princes as they are chief Members of the Church may justly claim this Prerogative as properly belonging to their high Station and Princely Office § 46. In case of any Difference or Controversie Concerning the Right of calling together a Synod concerning any Point of Doctrine which may sometimes arise in the Church so that the Teachers are divided in their Opinions it belongs to the Sovereign Authority to take care that these Differences may be composed not only as the Sovereign is a Member of the Church but as he is the Supream Head of the Commonwealth It having been frequently observed that Differencee of Opinions and Animosities of the Parties concerned cause great Commotions in the State Upon such Occasions Sovereigns have a Right to call together an Assembly of the most able Divines and to authorise them to examine the Controversie and to determine it according to the Tenure of the Scriptures The Supream Direction of this Assembly ought to be managed by the Prince'◠Authority For since it can scarce be supposed that matters should be transacted there without Heats and Animosities it will be both for the Honour and Interest of this Assembly if by the Presence of certain Persons well versed in Business these Heats be allayed and matters carried on with an equal Temperament Neither do I see how any one besides the Prince can lay claim to this Power of calling such an Assembly for put the case that one Party should refuse to appear and to submit unto the other's Direction which way will they be able to compel them to it And who is it that can with less Difficulty put in execution the Decrees of such a Synod than he who has the Sovereign Power in his Hands Tho' at the same time it ought not to be forgotten that this Power must not extend it self beyond its due Bounds but be suitable to the Genius of the Christian
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 â—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 bâ—â—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
OF THE Nature and Qualification OF RELIGION In Reference to Civil Society WRITTEN BY Samuel Puffendorff Counsellor of State to the Late King of Sweden Which may serve as an Appendix to the Author's Duty of Men. Translated from the Original LONDON Printed by D. E. for A. Roper at the Black Boy and A. Bosvile at the Dial both over against St. Dunstan's Church in Fleet-street 1698. THE Introductory Epistle Presented to the RIGHT HONOURABLE WILLIAM Lord Craven Baron Craven OF HAMSTEAD MARSH My LORD THE extraordinary Character you have acquirâ—d by the joint Consent of those that have the Honour of your Acquaintance Encourages me to deviate from the common Road used by our Modern Authors being made sufficiently sensible how much a Mind endow'd with Genorous and Modest Inclinations the inseparable Companions of a Great Soul disdains the fulsome Praises which those Gentlemen make the Chief Subject of their Dedications whenever they pretend to Court the Patronage of Persons of Quality in behalf of their Treatises I must confess I should scarce have had so much Presumption thus to intrude my self into your Lordship's Favour if I had not been sufficiently persuaded that the Renown our Author has so deservedly gainâ—d both here and abroad and that under the Protection of some of the greatest Princâ—s in Europe would be prevailing enough with your Lordship to pardon an Undertaking which if in it self justifiable in nothing else might perhaps claim the benefit of a general Custom from your Goodness The Reputation of our Author being so universally and unquestionably established among all such as have a true relish of Learning I might without the least Prejudice to him supercede to enlarge here upon this Treatise if it were not rather out of a desire to satisfie the Curiosity of some who beleive to have sufficient Reason for certain Objections made against some Assertions contained in this Treatise than with an Intention to make the least Addition to a Piece which whether in regard of the nicety of the Subject it Treats of or of the Concatination and force of its Arguments deserves to be reckoned among the best now extant in Europe Those who center the utmost Felicity of Civil Society in a Democratical form of Government have not been wanting to charge our Author with too much Passion for that Doctrine of Passive Obedience which leaves Subjects to the absolute Disposal of their Princes But besides that the Appendix annexed to this Treatise written by our Author in opposition to Mr. Hobbes's Monstrous Principles concerning this unlimited Power may sufficiently clear him from this Imputation If these Gentlemen would have taken the pains to make a due comparison of the several Passages both in this and other Treatises of our Author relating to this Subject they might without much difficulty have been convincâ—d of their Error As far as I am capable of penetrating into the Matter it is the word Princeps or Prince which sticks most closely in their Stomachs not considering That the Words Summi Imperantes or Sovereigns and that of Princeps or Prince are Synoms to our Author and that out of a great many Passages in this Treatise it is sufficiently apparent that he attributes the Sovereign Power not always to one single Person but sometimes also to a Council invested with the Supream Administration of the Sovereign Authority in the Common-wealth If it were but only for that Advice given by our Author at the very beginning of his Appendix to young Lawyers to wit to take care that under the Pretence of maintaining the Prerogatives of Princes they should not be prodigal of their Liberty and Property and his asserting the Foundation of Civil Societies to be built upon the Common Consent of mutual Defence against Violences This alone I say might be a convincing Argument to any unbyass'd Person that his Aim was very remote from maintaining an Arbitrary Power in the State The next thing laid to our Author's Charge is that he so entirely separates the Christian Religion from the State as not to have the least Interference with one another whereas the contrary is now a-days practised in most Christian Staâ—â—s and in the Commonwealth of the Jews instituted by God s peculiar Direction this Union was inseparable It cannot be denied but that the outward Form of Church Government especially among the Protestants is in a great measure and in most places adapted to that of the State it being evident that most of the Monarchical States Episcopacy as most suitable with that Constitution was never abolished as on the contrary the same was quite extirpated in the Protestant Common-wealths This is most particularly observable among the Lutherans who tho' all agreeing in Point of Doctrine are nevertheless so far different from one another in the Ceremonial Point and outward Form of Church Government that in outward Appearance they seem'd to be so many several Churches Thus in the two Northern Kingdoms of Sweden and Denmark the Episcopal Authority tho' much diminished in its Revenues is retained to this day whereas in some Commonwealths in Germany where the same Religion is Established it is quite abolished and not the least footsteps of Subordination of Priests to be met with But this Objection is easily cleared if we take into due Consideration that it being the Intention of our Author to represent in those places Reliligion in its genuine and native Constitution freed from all what is foreign to its true Genius he did not think it convenient to clog it with any thing that was not an Essential part of it especially when his chief aim was to shew the real difference betwixt the Christian and Jewish Religion There are also not a few who prompted by a preposterous Zeal have imputed to our Author a certain kind of Libertinism in Religion for which I can see no other Reason than that they are dissatisfied with his Assertions against any thing that has the least resemblance of Persecution upon the score of Difference of Opinions I am well satisfied that the Reasons alledged by him are so solid in themselves and so exactly applied to this Purpose that they cannot but be Convincing to all such as are not prepossâ—ssed either with By Interest or a most stupid Ignorance For if the Slavery of the Body be absolutely repugnant to the Inclinations of a generous Soul How much more insupportable must the Slavery of the Mind be to a sublime Genius elevated above the common Sphere of bigotted Zealots Ignorance being the Mother of perverted Zeal and consequently of a persecuting Spirit the same ought to be look'd upon as the common Enemy of all such as are guided by the Light of true Reason I cannot but take notice here that our English Modern Clergy has of late gain'd so peculiar a Character of following so closely these footsteps of convincing such as differ from them in Opinion rather by strength of Argument than any forcible Means that I do not know whether
us but by all gentle means persuades us to a Compliance with his Will according to St. Paul's 2 Cor. 5. 20. Saying Now then we are Ambassadors for Christ as though God did beseech you by us we pray you in Christs stead be ye reconciled to God § 4. It is an unquestionable Truth and The first Care of religious Worship lodged in Parents generally received among Mankind That one is obliged to give a helping-hand to another in several Respects In the same manner it is with Religion that these who by nearest of Blood are in Duty bound to take Care of young Peoples Education ought at the same time to Instruct them in the true Knowledge of God and prepare their Minds for the receiving of the Christian Doctrine 'T is upon this score that this Care touches most nearly all Parents in regard of their Children it being the principal Part of Paternal Duty to take effectual Care that they may be throughly Instructed in all Matters relating to God and his holy Word and to be encouraged in all manner of religious Exercises For i◠is too dangerous to leave young People to their own Inclinations till they may be capable by the Strength of their own Reason to learn their Duty towards God And it would be much more dangerous to defer it under pretence or expectation of Revelations to be made upon that account at this time when the Word of God is already planted and established among us Besides that Children soon grow head-strong and refractory if they are not in their tender Age accustomed to pious Exercises Nevertheless Parents ought not to exercise this Paternal Office any otherwise than in a manner suitable to the Genius of the Christian Religion which will have them not to act with Violence but to be diligent and assiduous in Teaching Exhorting Praying and announcing God's Wrath. Wherefore the Priestly Office was originally joined with the Paternal in the antient Fathers of Families and Abraham is commended both for a good Father and a good Master of his House because he instructed his Children in all manner of Piety and himself Administred Circumcision Gen. 18. 19. The like Commands were made to Parents both in the Old and New Testament and the Patriarch Jacob removed the Idols out Ge. 17. 20 Deut. 6. 7. 11. 19. Eph. 6. 4. Gen. 35. 1 3 4. of his Family not by Compulsion but by Instructing those of his House in the Knowledge of the true God who thereupon voluntarily surrendred those Idols to his Disposal This part of the Paternal Office like all the rest does cease as soon as a Son after leaving his Father's House comes to set up for himself and consequently becomes the Father of a separate Family and enjoys the same Rights which his Father had before over him And tho' perhaps in such a Case a Father may still retain the priviledge of giving some Paternal Admonitions to his Sons yet ought the same to be look'd upon to resemble in their Nature our last Will or Testament which does not always imply properly a Command but ought to be observed for its good Intentions sake and to shew a due Reverence to the Memory of a Father never to be neglected by any that will not at the same time profess themselves guilty of Improbity § 5. Out of what has been said before it Civil Societies were not Instituted for Religions sake is most evident That Civil Governments were not erected for Religions sake or that Man did not enter into Civil Societies that they might with more conveniency establish and exercise their Religion For since Religions Exercises could be performed as well by a few as by a great Number and in a small Congregation as well as in a great one it was unnecessary to erect several great Societies on that account Besides that those who committed open violences against others which was the first motive that obliged Men to enter into Societies for their mutual Defence did not aim at the Religion of Mankind but to robb these that were weaker than themselves of their Liberty Life and Fortunes Neither does a Man's Probity and Piety receive the least addition by the Number of People which join in their Devotion For every one must be acceptable to God Almighty upon his own account neither is a Man always deem'd the more pious because he lives among such as are pious themselves Those Patriarchs that liv'd before Civil Societies were erected are no less Famous for their Piety than those that lived afterwards under a settled Government From whence it is evident That Religion is not an ingenious Invention of the first Founders of Commonwealths but as antient as Humane Raceit self it being sufficiently apparent that Mankind did not enter into Civil Societies till long after being enforced thereunto by great and weighty Reasons tho' at the same time it cannot be deny'd but that some have cunningly abused Religion for obtaining their Ends in the State But Religion in it self considered is not made subordinate to the State or to be deem'd a proper Instrument to serve a States Turn and to keep the People in Obedience And when Religion is called Vinculum Societatis Civilis The Cement of Civil Society it must be taken in this Sense That if all Religion and Regard which ought to be had to God's displeasure were abolished there would be no Tie left strong enough to oblige Mankind to a compliance with those Laws and fundamental Constitutions which are the original Foundation of all Common-wealths And that without the fear of being accountable to God Almighty no Human Power alone would be prevailing enough to bridle the Enormities of some stubborn and refractory Spirits § 6. It being therefore beyond question Subjects did not submit their Opinions in Matters of Religion to the Disposal of their Sovereigns That Commonwealths were not erected for Religions sake it is easie to be understood that the antient Fathers of Families when they first submitted themselves under a Civil Government were thereby not obliged to surrender at the same time their Religion in the same manner as they did their Lives and Fortunes to their Sovereigns for the obtaining the End of Civil Society which was their common Security The more because Religion was not instituted for the obtaining of this mutual Security and as such do's not contribute any thing towards the maintaining of Civil Society Religion arises from a much more noble Spring than Civil Government and more strictly obliges Mankind than any Civil Power and therefore is unalterable in its Nature Thus it would be not only useless but imply a Contradiction if a Man who is to become a Subject to a Civil Government should be obliged to swear Allegiance to his Sovereign in these following Terms I. N. N. Submit my Will entirely to your Commands I promise to love honour and trust in God according to your Pleasure and to put more Confidence in you than in
carried to the Place of Execution it being plain to me That of what Nature soever their Confession might be such an inflexible Humour and obstinate Behaviour ought not to go unpunished § 8. But the Condition of Mankind being Of the Nature of revealed Religion such That it was impossible by the sole help of Natural Religion to attain to that Felicity which was proposed by the great Creator it had pleased the Great and All-wise God to reveal unto us Mortals his Will and to instruct us by what means we may obtain his Favour and how he expects to be Worshipped by us It is for this reason that no body of a right Understanding ought to make the least Scruple but that all such Matters as God has revealed to us in a manner surpassing our Natural Understanding ought to be reverenced by Mankind and to be received with a general consent and submission Among the several Doctrines thus revealed the Article of Justification or the Purging us from Sins through the Merits of our Saviour was one of the Principal ones And I am of Opinion that these bloody Sacrifices which from the very Beginning of the World were Instituted by God's Command were so many Emblems of this our Redemption by the Blood of Christ for without this supposition it would seem scarce Rational that a living Creature sensible of Death and Pains and which cannot be killed without great Torments should be destroyed for the Honour of its Creator As if Man should enter into the Work-House of an Artificer and by destroying his Handy-Work pretend to do him an extraordinary Honour This most Antient way of Sacrificing the chief Badge of True Religion before it was Corrupted by Ignorance or Superstition though it was no small addition to Natural Religion yet did it cause no alteration as to the Exercise of it For in the State of Natural Freedom every one had a right to Sacrifice though at the same time every one was not obliged to Sacrifice for himself For this Ceremony of Sacrificing being only an Emblem representing the future Redemption of Mankind one and the same Sacrifice might answer that End in respect to all that were present at the time of the Sacrifice From hence it was become a Custom that the Heads of each Family used to Sacrifice for the rest and if more Families were assembled in order to Sacrifice it was to be Administred by him that was chosen by the rest for that purpose And it is observable that the same Person that had the Right of Sacrificing had also the Power of prescribing time and place for that Sacrifice Thus when afterwards God had Ordained the Ceremony or Sacrament of Circumcision Abraham did Administer the same in his House as being the Father of his Family What we have alledged concerning the Right of Sacrificing may be proved from thence that both Abel and Cain after they had left their Fathers House did Sacrifice And by several Passages in Genesis we Gen. 4. 3 4. are informed That the Antient Patriarchs being Fathers of their Families did erect Altars So Micha set up a House of Gods at home during the Anarchy in Israel there being then neither King nor any other Man that took care of the Publick Worship thus attributing to himself though unjustly the same Right Iude 17. 5 6. which the Ancient Fathers of Families had been possess'd of in more Antient Times § 9. It had pleased God according to his Amongst the Jews there was a strict vâ—ion betwixt the Church and State Wisdom not to send our Saviour or the Messias into the World soon after the Creation at a time when the whole World was not stockt with a sufficient number of Inhabitants lest his Sufferings might be obliterated by Oblivion or by a too long Tract of Time turned into a Fabulous Relation But he was to appear amongst us after the whole Earth was filled up every where with Inhabitants and Mankind was arrived as it was to its Age of Perfection It was also thought convenient and almost necessary that the Messias should not appear in this World all upon a sudden but after his Coming had been long foretold and expected in order to raise a more ardent desire after him in us Mortals and that he might find the easier a Reception amongst us when his Deeds were found so agreeable to what was Prophesied concerning him so many Ages before And that these Predictions or Prophesies might not through length of time come to decay and be buried in Oblivion God Almighty had in a most peculiar manner recommended them to the Care and Custody of the Jews amongst whom he as it may be said kept his Records of Prophesies it being the most likely that that same Nation from whence the Messias was one day to have his Off spring as Man upon Earth would preserve them with their utmost Care to their great Honour and Advantage It was questionless in a great measure for this Reason that God entered with them into so strict a League Circumcision being made the Bagde whereby to distinguish them from other Nations And being afterwards become a very numerous People and freed from the Aegyptian Bondage he himself established at once both their Civil Government and Religion which was not to cease till the appearing of our Saviour on Earth and this in such a manner that there was always to remain a strict Union betwixt their Religion and State Therefore the Administration of Religious Worship was committed to one particular Tribe amongst them unto whom according to God's special Command no Lands were allotted lest they might thereby be inticed to mind Temporal Possessions and Riches more than God's Service but were to be maintained out of the Tenths and other Revenues belonging to the Altar in which Sense God is called The Portion of the Levites There was also a certain place assigned for the Publick Exercise of Divine Worship with Exclusion of all others and their whole Religion was thus disposed by God's peculiar Order that the same could not be put in practise unless it were in a free Nation independent from any Foreign Power This was the true Reason why the Jews unless they would overturn the Foundation of their Religion could not be entirely United with any Foreign State And as the Jewish Religion and State were of the same Date their Laws both Exclesiastical and Civil having been Constituted at the same time and contained in one Book so was the Union betwixt their Religion and State so entire that the first could not remain standing after the fall of the last and therefore the destruction of the Temple and of the Commonwealth of the Jâ—ws was an infallible Sign of the total abolishment of their Religion They were called God's People and the Holy People because the whole Jewish Nation publickly professed the True Religion § 10. But because God himself had Established Who was the Supream Head of the Jewish Church
Founder of the Christian Church shewed himself in his Behaviour from Moses Moses was commanded by God to deliver the Posterity of the Patriarchs from the Bondage of Aegypt and to lead them according to God's Govenant with them into Canaan the Land of Promise where he was to Erect a New Commonwealth and to Establish their Ecclesiastical and Civil Laws at the same time The better therefore to Establish his Authority not only amongst his Country-men over whom he had no other Lawful Jurisdiction but also to gain Credit with the Aegyptians that hitherto had kept the others under their Jurisdiction he did by his Extraordinary and Miraculous Deeds give them most evident Demonstrations of his Divine Commission and of a secret Correspondence with God Almighty These Miracles struck such a Terror into the Aegyptian King that his Obstinacy was at last overcome who else in all likelihood would not have parted upon easie terms with so vast a number of his Subjects Their number being sufficient to make up a new and strong People And the Jews moved by his Miracles and in acknowledgment of the Benefits received from his Hands and being sensible that God stood by him in all his Vndertakings willingly received him for their Prince and General As long as he lived he exercised this Princely Authority in the highest degree for he did Constitute amongst them both their Ecclesiastical and Civil Laws and Ordained and Established their whole Government He used to Administer Justice Inflict Punishents upon those that were found Criminal he had the Power of Constitating Magistrates and others that were to aid and assist him in his Office and those that attempted against his Authority he made sensible of their Folly by inflicting most severe Punishments upon them There was all that time no occasion for the levying of Taxes upon the People except what was requisite for the Maintainance and Ornament of their Publick Religious Service He was very watchful for the Preservation of the People and if they were Attack'd by their Enemies used to defend them by Force of Arms. Lastly when he knew that he was shortly to depart this Life he Constituted his Successor who was to be their General and under whose Conduct they were to be put into Possession of the so long desired Land of Promise from whence it is very evident that Moses as long as he lived bore the Office of a Prince and that he was the Founder of the State or Commonwealth of the Jews § 13. But if we look upon our Saviour What on the other â—and our Saviour did when he established his Church Jesus Christ he acted in a quite different manner from whence it was very evident that his intention was not to Erect a new State here upon Earth 'T is true he gained to himself a great deal of Credit and Authority by his Miracles but these were no terrifying Miracles or such as ever proved injurious to any So when his Disciples would have persuaded him to command fire to come down from Heaven and consume those that refused Luke 9. 54 â—5 to receive him they met with a severe Rebuke The main Demonstrations he used to give them of his Diviniâ—y always tendâ—d to the benefit of others and the Miracles performed by him were of such a nature as must needs attract the love and favour of all Men and at the same time were apparent and convincing Proofs of his Divinity not any thing less than a Divine Power being able to cause a new Motion or Alteration in the course of Nature without Natural means For he went about doing good and he aling Acts 16. 38. all that were oppressed of the Devil All which had not the least Relation towards the laying of the Foundation of a new State He had some Disciples but these were few in number unarmed poor of a mean Profession and Condition and of so little Authority that it was impossible for them to make the least pretension of setting up a State of their own or of raising any Commotions or Disturbances in another State And when the multitude in acknowledgment of the benefits received by his Doctrine and Miracles would at several times have proclaimed him King he absconded and made his escape The principal Care he took of his Followers was to instruct them by his Doctrine from whence they were called Disciples and they in return used to give him the Name of Master or Teacher Neither did he Constitute any new Laws at least not any that could be supposed to have any reference towards the Establishment of a new State but the Antient Law as far as it was given to Mankind in general was explained and the People exhorted to a due observance of it He did never execute Luke 12. 13 14. the Office of a Judge nay he refused to be an Arbitrator to convince the World that hâ—s Joh. 8 11. coming was intended for no such purpose Lastly he did himself pay Taxes to others and tho' it was in his Power to prevent it suffered himself to be Judged and Executed All which is altogether inconsistent with the Nature and Office of a Temporal Sovereign § 14. This will appear more clearly to us if Châ—ist did not Constitute a nâ—w People we duly consider that Christ never acted according to the Rules of those that intend to lay the Foundation of a new State For their principal and first care is to Constitute a new People that is to bring over to their side such a number of People as are willing and sufficient to be joyned under one Civil Government This Multitude of People is either Assembled at once and drawn out of another Commonwealth as Moses did or by degrees brought over out of other Commonwealths as Romulus gathered the People of Rome But it is easie to be seen that our Saviour's Intention was of a quite different Nature His Disciples were not so many in number as to have the least resemblance with a Nation or People neither were they instructed in those matters which have the least relation to the Establishment of a new Commonwealth Their dependance from him was not near the same which Subjects have of their Prince having never sworn Allegiance to him but only as Disciples from their Master being influenced by the Love and Admiration they had both for his Person and Doctrine Sometimes John 6. â—6 â—â— 68. a great Multitude of People would flock about him but these only came to hear him Preach and to be Spectators of his Miracles which being done they return'd to their respective homes And Christ never shewed the least inclination to command over or to withdraw them from the Obedience due to their Sovereigns Lastly when the time of his Death approached his most trusty and particular Friends and Followers absconded and durst not as much as make any publick appearance When we therefore speak of Christians we do not understand a certain Nation or People subject
So that the original Signification of the Word â—â—clesia implies not that of a State but only a certain Qualification of a Democratical Government it being evident that a great number of 〈◊〉 cannot conveniently give their assâ—nt to a thing unless they be Convened in one Place In the Translation the LXX Interpreters this Word is taken for a Convention ot Meeting of a considerable number of People met not only for the exercise of Divine Worship but also for unlawful Ends. So the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken for the Ps 26 5 Luk. 2â— 3. 4 c â—8 24. Acts 19 32 3â— Num. 20. 8 10 Jos 16. 1 2. 2 Chron. 15. 9. c. 34 â—8 Calling and Summoning an Assembly about Matters concerning the Commonwealth But in the New Testament the word Ecclesia is generally taken either for all the Christians in General wherever dispersed or for the Congregation of the Believers in a certain Country City private House or Family In either sense if we duely weigh the Attributes and Actions properly belonging to the Church for by these we ought to judge of the Nature of a thing in Moral Cases we do not meet with any thing which has a relation to What actions are celebrated in Scripture as belonging to the Church a Civil State The true â—ncomium most frequently given to the Members of the Church is that they are Brothers holy and redeemed by the Blood of Christ Their chief Actions are said to be to hear the Word of God to pray unto and praise God to be Charitable to walk in the fear of God to Fast and to provide for the Poor It is spoken of St. Paul and Barnabas That Act 1. 4. 23. they did Constitute Elders in those Churches which they had planted in Asia where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is made â—se of which implies as much as having made them by Suffrages of the Congregation in the same manner as the Decrees used to pass in the antient Democracies by the plurality of Votes by which it appears that they pretended to no Absolute Power of Constituting Elders over them but such as 〈◊〉 approved of by the Congregation And it iâ— remarkable that these nevertheless are said to have been made Overseers over the Chuâ—ch by the Holy Act. 20 â—8 2 Chron. 10. 5 Ghost So were the Judges that were set in the Land by Jehosaphat stiled Judges for the Lord because whoever is fitly qualified for any Office or Function not contrary to the Word of God and has obtained the same by lawful ways and Means may justly be said to have been Constituted in that same Office by God Almighty And though it belongs most properly to the Church to constitute Teachers this nevertheless does not imply any Act of Sovereignty it being evident that a private Colledge or Society subject to another Jurisdiction may lawfully enjoy the same Power A Diffension being arosen concerning an Article of Faith in the Church of Antiocha they determined Act. 15. 2 that some of them should go concerning this Question then in dispute to the Church of Jerusalem And these Deputies were by the rest of the Brethren conducted out of the Town in their way to Jerusalem where this Question having been debated and determined they sent Word thus to their Brethren It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and us c. where it is to be observed that to send Deputies concerning such Matters as are not intended in prejudice of the Sovereign Power for one Congregation to consult another concerning any Articles of Faith and to determine any Differences about them are to be looked upon as Actions of such a nature which do not imply a Sovereign and Absolute Power but may legally belong to a private Colledge or sometimes a private Person provided the Business in hand be not imposed upon its Members but transacted and admitted by common consent So the Church of Jerusalem chose certain Men who were to be Overseers Act. 6. 1 1. of the Poor which they had a Right to do as being a Society or Colledge In the same Sense ought to be taken what is said in the 2 Epistle to the Corinthians c. 8. 19. That the Churches had chosen one to travel with St. Paul The Church is called a Flock which is to be â—ed by the Bishops with the pure Word of Acts 20 28. God who are to preserve it from the Wolves That is to say from Men speaking perverse things to draw away Disciples after them Against those Teachers of the Church ought to be watchful not ceasing to Admonish their Auditors to avoid their Snares What concerns that passage in the 1 Epistle to the Corinthians c. 6. 1. and following Verses it is apparent enough that there is not any Sovereign Authority or Jurisdiction granted to the Christians barely considered as Christians But the Apostle enjoyns them that in case of any Differences in Civil Affairs among the Members of the Church they should rather refer it to the Arbitration of the Brethren than to go to Law before the Gentiles and fall under the Censure of being Avaricious In the following Chapter it is plainly expressed that no body by becoming a Member of the Church does change his Qualification or Function which belonged to him as a Subject or that Christianity is inconsistent with the Subjection to a Civil Government a Servant therefore by being a Christian does not become a Freeman neither is a Subject thereby absolved from the Allegiance due to his Sovereign concerning the Union and Modesty which ought to be practised in the Church or the Christian Congregations where the Word of God was Preached and the Sacraments Ep. Rom. 13 1. 2 Tim. 5 8. 14 c. 6. 1 2. Administred St. Paul speaks in the 1 Epistle to the Corinthians c. 11. 18 and following Verses and in the 14 Chap. 34 40 Verse And what sort of Religiouâ— Exercises was to be used in these Congregations is expressed in the 1 Epistle to the Corinthians c. 14. viz. to be Vid Eph. 4. 2. Hymns Doctrines Tongues Prophesies Revelations Interpretations all which are to be applied to Edifie the Congregation and in the 12 Chapter 28 Verse the several Degrees and Functions of the Members of the Church are thus enumerated First Apostles secondarily Prophets thirdly Teachers after that Miracles then Gifts of Healings Helps Governments Diversities of Tongues All which are Requisites Eph. 4. 11 belonging to the propagating and establishing of the Gospel and are Gifts of that self same Spirit who dispenses his Gifts to every Man as he pleases So that he that has received more noble Endowments can therefore not claim any Prerogative as being a more honorable Member of this Mystical Body or pretend to any Jurisdiction over such as are not endowed with these Qualifications in the same Degree as himself And charity which is the inseparable Attribute of all Christians is more 1 Cor.
16. 1. 2 Cor. 8. 2 3 8. noble and excellent than â—â— other spiritual Gifts Alms are the only Taxes which belong to the Church and these also cannot be exacted 1 Tim. 5. 16. by the Sovereign Authority of the Church Tho' it be undeniable that every Church is obliged Phil. 4. 1â— Cor 9. â—◠〈…〉 to maintain its Ministers In the 2 Epist to the Corinthians c. 11. 28. St. Paul professeâ— That the Care of all the Churches lies upon him to strengthen those that were weak and to obâ—â—ate Scandals And in the next following Chapter he says That the Church of Corinth is an no wise inferior to other Churches which were planted by others who had exercised the Apostolical Function before him Neither is any thing to be met withal in the Holy Scripture which proves the Subordination of one Church to another Nay the Congregations of small Towns and even of private Families are often stiled Churches as those of vast Cities and those particular Churches which 1 Thâ—â— 2. 14. 2 Thâ—â— 1. 4. were planted in Judea are called the Churches of God In the Epistle to the Ephesians c. 1. 22. c. 5. 23. and to the Colossianâ— c. 1 18 24. Christ is called the Head of the Body of the Church which he has presented to himself a glorious Church not having Spot or Wrinkle or any such thing but that it should be Holy and without Blemish sanctified by Christ's Redemption and Ephes 5. 26 27. cleansed with the washing of Water by the Word What Qualifications are required in a Bishop or a Governour of a particular Church is expressed in the 1 Epistle to Timothy c. 3. 2. and following Verses in the 2 Epistle to Timothy c. 4. 2. in the Epistle to Titus c. 1. 2 8 9 and c. 2. 7. All which if duely examined have a relation meerly to the Purity of his Doctrine and his being blameless in his Behaviour and do not in the least savour of any thing properly belonging to the Supream Governours of a State For it is said that he must be the Husband of one Wife Vigilant Sober of a good Behaviour given to Hospitality apt to Teach Not given to Wine no Striker not greedy of Filthy Lucre but patient not a Bawler not Covetous One that ruled well his own House having his Children in Subjection with all Gravity Not a Novice not lifted up with Pride All which are such Vertues as belong properly to a Teacher or a private Person In the 1 Epistle to Timothy c. 3. 15. the Church is called the House of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or The Pillar and Ground of Truth like we are used to affix Proclamations to great Pillars to the view of every body Tho' some antient Manuscripts refer these words The Pillar and Ground of Truth to the following Sentence the Preceding ending with the words The Church of the living God Then begins a new Sentence thus The pillar and ground of Truth and without Controversy great is the Mystery of Godliness God was manifest in the Flesh c. So that in this sense this Passage is parallel to what Christ told St. Peter by St. Matthew c. 16. 18. and to that of St. John c. 20. 31. The Titles of Honour belonging to the Christian Church are recited in the Epistle to the Hebrews c. 12. 22. where it is called The mount of Sion the City of the living God the heavenly Jerusalem the innumerable Company of Angels the General Assembly and Church of the first Born which are written in Heaven where God is the Judge of all and Jesus the Mediator of the New Covenant and the Sperit of just Men made perfect And in the Revelation c. 2. 3. the Churches of Asia are praised for their good Deeds and their Vices exposed with a severe Commination that if they did not repent their Candlestick which is the Doctrine of the Gospel should be taken away from them which is sufficient to shew that the Light of the Gospel may be extinguished in particular Churches All these passages if duely compared and examined do not furnish us with any Matter proving the Christian Church to be a State or to have any resemblance to a Temporal Sovereignty The Condition of the primitive Church was such as not to permit a Sovereignty within it self § 31. But besides what has been said already a great many Reasons may be alledged which sufficiently prove that it was not in the power of the Apostles to plant a Church resembling in Power to a Temporal Sovereignty if they had entertained any Thoughts of attempting a Design both unnecessary and illegal The common Security is the main End of every Government whereby Men are enabled to defend themselves by their united strength against all Injuries which cannot be performed without a considerable number of stout and well appointed Men. But the Name of the Church is often given to the Congregations of an indifferent Town nay even of private Families And does not our Saviour himself Mat. 1â— 20. say Where two or three are gathered in my Name there am I in the midst of them Which moved Tertullian to say Three make up a Church as well as a Colledge And where Christ is in the midst of a Congregation certainly there cannot be wanting sufficient Means to obtain Salvation viz. the Word the Minister and the Sacraments so that the end and scope of the Christian Religion may be attained to even in an indifferent numerous Congregation of the Believers Neither does the greater number of the Believers joyned in one Church like a vast number of People is necessary for the erecting of a State in it self considered add any thing or is necessary for the obtaining the end of the Christian Religion it being indifferent in regard of obtaining Salvation whether a Man worship God in a great or small Congregation From whence this inference may be made That in case the greatest part of the Church should separate it self from the others the rest notwithstanding all this may pursue and obtain the End of the Christian Faith Quite otherwise as it is with Temporal Commonweaths where if the greatest part of its Inhabitants happen to be rooted out the rest will be thereby disinabled to maintain the State These Qualifications belonging to Subjects especially to such of them as are to be preferred before others in a State either for their Usefulness or the honour of the Commonwealth are not esteemed the same in the Church so that he who does not excel in Riches Strength or Wisdom shall therefore not be deemed a good Christian Furthermore 1 Cor. 20. 21 22. those that pretend to lay the Foundation of a new State must have Territories belonging to them where their new Subjects may settle themselves and their Fortunes And all such as live or are seated in a Commonwealth if they pretend to set up a new State must either transplant themselves into another Country or
Decemviri And because Christians do not build their Faith upon any Human Authority but upon the Word of God alone they are Joh. 6. 1â— 1 Thes 4â— said to be taught of God For which Reason S. Paul utterly denied that they had any Dominion over the Faith of the Corinthians or which is the same in effect that they could exercise any Dominion over them under the 〈◊〉 of Faith For the rest as Christians 〈…〉 which are well versed in the Scriptures may without great difficulty try their Teacher's Doctrine by the Touchstone of the Holy Scripture So the Catechism and other compendious Instructions relating to the chiefest Articles of the Christian Faith may be sufficient for those of a meaner Capacity wherein all Christians ought to be well instructed in their younger Years both by their Parents and Teachers of the Church this being likely to prove more useful to those of an indifferent Capacity than all the other Subtilities and Controversies which in themselves are not absolutely necessary or requisite to be understood by every Christian in particular And if we duely consider what is required by the Apostle for the obtaining of Rom. 10. 9 10. â—â—m 1. â— 2 â—â—m 2. â—â— Salvation we shall find that this Knowledge may be attained to without much Difficulty because the Confession that Jesus was Christ the Son of God is the Foundation Stone and as it was the Center of the Christian Religion and that this Article was chiefly 〈◊〉 20. 3. opposed by the Gates of Hell in the time of the Primitive Christians the Apostle S. John prescribes this as a general Rule to be particularly taken notice of by such as are of a mean Capacity Hereby know you said he the Spirit of God Every Spirit that confesseth 〈◊〉 4 â— â— that Jesus Christ is come in the Flesh is of God and every Spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the Flesh is not of God Though from hence no Inference ought to be made as if Christian may neglect or ought not also to be well instructed concerning all the other Articles of Faith or that it is indifferent for any Christian to believe what he pleaseâ— concerning the rest of the Articles of the Christian Doctrine § 34. It being then evident that there 〈…〉 is a great difference betwixt the condition of particular Churches and that of a State or Commonwealth It may further he enquired into whether perhaps those Churches united don 't make up a Body like to that of a grâ—â—t State For it is certain that the Word Church is in the Scriptures attributed to the whole Body of the Believers wheresoever dispersed throughout the World yet so that there is not the least appearance if a duâ— regard he had to our Saviour's Intention of a Design to erect a State Go you into all the World and Mark 16. â—â— Preach the Gospel to every Creature are the Words of our Saviour to his Disciples Here is no mention made of any Persons who should be the supream Governours over the rest as is usual and absolutely necessary in a State nor any certain Place of Residence appointed for these Governours from whence the rest should receive their Orders Neither is the least care taken by what means they should maintain a Correspondency with their capital City And truly considering the vast Extent of the World and the prodigious Distance of those Countries where the Apostles Preached the Gospel besides that there was a mortal Enmity betwixt some of these States these were unsurmountable Obstacles for the settling and maintaining a Correspondency betwixt them So that it does not appear by what means all the Christians could be united under one State It is not denied but that there is often mention made in the Scripture of the Union of the Christians as in the 1 Cor. c. 12. 12 13. As the body is one and had many members and all the members of that one body being many are one body So also is Christ For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body whether we be Jews or Gentiles whether we be bond or free and have been all made to drink into one Spirit Christ says in the 10. Chap. of S. John ver 16 My Sheep hear my voice and there shall be one fold and one shepherd Which shews that all the Sheep are brought into one Flock by hearing the Voice of their Pastour who is Christ So it is said in the Epistle to the Ephesians ch 4. ver 2 3 4 5 6. Forbearing one another in love endeavouring the Vnity of the Spirit in the bond of peace There is one body and one Spirit even as you are called in one hope of your calling One Lord one Faith one Baptism one God and Father of all And Christ in his farewel Sermon does Joh. 13 chiefly recommend to his Disciples Charity and Unity as the true Badges of Christianity And the Name of Brother which particularly Vid. 1 Cor. 13. Colos 3. 14. Gal. 6. 10. belongs to the Christians seems to imply a general union betwixt them But if we consider the Nature of these holy Tyes we may easily observe them to have been in no ways adapted to the Constitution of a temporal Government but properly belonging to the Establishment and Union of a mystical Body For as none of them requires of implies any dependency from a Temporal Power so they may belong in common to all Christians tho' living in far distant Countries and several Jurisdictions § 35. Neither does it appear for what end 〈…〉 for Châ—â—stians 〈…〉 united under one State or purpose all the Christians in General should be reduced under one State For each Congregation or Church may with more â—ase and conveniency constitute Teachers in their Churches sitly qualified for the Ministry of the Gospel and have a more watchful Eye over those who are known and near at hand than can be expected from one single Person tho' never so wise living at a great distance who being besides this ovewhelmed with multitude of Businesses is forced to see with other Peoples Eyes and to hear with other Peoples Ears Neither is it a sufficient Reason what is alledged that for the composing and determining of such Differences as may arise betwixt the Teachers of the Church or betwixt them and others a General Court ought to be established in the Christian Church it being evident that such Cases can be no where determined with more conveniency than in the same Government where they live and that there cannot any sufficient reason be given why they should not acknowledge the same Jurisdiction with the rest of their fellow Subjects There is one objection which has something of colour in it for it is alledged That if all the Christian Churches throughout the World were united under one Head whether under one Person or a certain Assembly matters not the unity of Faith might be better preserved
them but that each of them is involved in such a multitude of Trouble and variety of Business that it cannot rationally be supposed for one Man to be able to undergo such a Fatigue Iâ—â—s no less evident that Sovereigns by becoming Christians are not authorised to alter the Ministry of the Church or to order it at pleasure or to force the Ministers of the Gospel to teach any Doctrine which is not founded in the Scriptures or to preach up Human Inventions for Articles of Faith For what and how Ministers ought to Teach is prescribed by God himself who expects an exact Obedience in this Point as well from Kings as other Christians And it is to be considered that whenever Princes receive the Christian Doctrine the Teachers notwithstanding this remain in their former Station as to their Duty and Obligation to God as well as all the rest of their Christian Subjects who having received their Instructions as to their Religion only from God without the assistance of their Sovereigns these cannot claim any right to impose any thing of this kind upon them § 43. Notwithstanding all this it is not Concerning the Duty and Right of Christian Princes of defending the Church to be supposed that Sovereigns by becoming Christians have acquir'd no peculiar Rights or have not a more particular Duty laid upon them than before There being certain Obligations which owe their off-spring to the union of that Duty which is incumbent to every Christian with that of the Royal Office The first and chiefest of these Obligations seems to be that Sovereigns ought to be Defenders of the Church which they are oblig'd to protect not only against all such of their Subjects as dare to attempt any thing against it but also against Foreigners who pretend to be injurious to their Subjects upon that score And tho' the Christian Doctrine is not to be propagated by violence or force of Arms and our Saviour has highly recommended Patience and Sufferings as peculiar Vertues belonging to Christians Princes are nevertheless not debarr'd from their Right of Protecting the Christian Religion by all lawful means and Patience ought not to take place here except when no other lawful means can secure us against our Enemies So we see that St. Paul Acts 2. 2â— saved himself from being scourged by declaring himself to be a Roman and escaped the Fury of the Jews by making his Appeal to the Emperour And our Saviour himself left this Mat. 10. 2â— Advice to his Disciples That when they were persecuted in one City they should fly into another And it being an incumbent Duty belonging to all Sovereigns to defend their Subjects against all violence they ought to take more effectual care that they do not suffer any Injuries for the Christian Religions sake for what could be more reproachful to a Christian Prince than that his Subjects should be sufferers upon that account The next care which belongs to Christian Princes is to provide necessary Revenues for the exercise of the Christian Religion For as has been shewn before that no other Patrimony belonged to the Primitive Church but the Alms and free Contributions of the Believers and that these cannot but be supposed to be very uncertain the Ministers and Teachers in the Church run no small hazard of being exposed to want if they have nothing else to rely upon but the bare contributions of the Congregation who being in some places poor and Subject to other Taxes are incapable of supplying their want And not to dissemble the Truth after Princes and enâ—tire States have received the Doctrine of Christ it would appear very ill that whereas they enjoy such ample Revenues they would deal so sparingly with the Church the more because it is a general Maxim among Men to value a Function according to its Revenues What St. Paul recommends to the Romans in the 15th Chapter v. 27. and in the 1 Epist to the Corinthians 9. 11. ought to be the more taken notice of by Christian Princes because they can with less difficulty or any sensible injury to themselves put it in practise in their Station they having the management of the Publick Revenues in their hands It cannot be denied but that too vast Revenues are not always useful to Ministers of the Church and prove somâ—times prejudicial both to Church and State and that such as make profession of the Ministry of the Gospel ought not to make a Trade of their Function or to think it their main Business to gather Riches and take the Ministry for their By-work nevertheless if it be duely considered that he who cordially as he ought to do applies himself to the Ministerial Function has no other ways left him to provide for his Family and that the vulgar Sort scarce pay a due Respect to a Minister unless they see him live handsomely and well whereas he who is starv'd by his Function is the May-Game of the common People unto whom may be applied that old Saying of the Poet That this Man appears to be the Servant of a poor and wretched Lord. Apparet servum hunc esse Domini pauperis miserique Princes ought therefore to look upon this as one main part of their Devotion to settle certain and constant Sallaries or Revenues upon the Ministers of the Church as much as may be at least sufficient for their Maintainance In the Old Testament the Priests were to live from the Altar but those of the best kind were Vid. Ep. Gal. 6. 6. 2 Tim. 2. 4. brought to the Altar Besides this Princes ought not only to take care of Church-Buildings but also to erect and maintain Schools which being the Seminaries both of the Church and State if the first Rudiments of Christianity be not implanted in the Schools it cannot scarce be expected that Men when grown up should receive much benefit by publick Sermons § 44. But among other Considerations as Coâ—ceâ—ning the rights of Princes as to Ecclesiastical Affairs And first of the gâ—nâ—ral Inspection to what Rights properly belong to Princes as to Ecclesiastical Affairs it is evident that since by the Doctrine of the Gospel the Civil Power is in no wise impaired and a Prince cherishes a Church under his Jurisdiction he legally claims a Right of having a general Inspection over this as well as all other Societies at least so far as to take care that nothing be transacted in these Colledges to his Prejudice For Mankind being so perverse in its Nature that in Matters even the most Sacred if managed without controul they seldom let it slip through their hands without a Stain And that therefore it is scarce to be questioned but the Christian Doctrine is subject to the same Corruption and that under Pretence of Religion many pernicious Designs may be hatched against the Interest of the Commonwealth A Prince in whose Territories a Church is planted if he afterwards enters into the Communion of that Church has
Clergy upon Admonition desist from these Abuses like as when a Creditor upon Summons is paid by his Debtor ought to supercede his Action against him But put the case that the Clergy either absolutely refuse or from time to time protract to desist from such Abuses so that there is but two ways left to be chosen either patiently to submit to their capricious Humour or else certain Persons in the State being damnified by these Abuses have a Right and Power to controul their Extravagancies Those that maintain the first Position must prove that the Clergy has been invested with such an unlimited Power by God Almighty to impose upon Christians even the most absurd Matters at leasure without being liable to be contrâ—â—ued by any Power upon Earth Or they must demonstrate that Christians have absolutely submitted their Faith to the Clergy and that in such a manner that every thing which should be ordained by them should be received for Truth with all imaginable submission and patience But because it would savour of too much Impudence to pretend to the first it lies then at their Door to prove that the Clergy and their Supream Head did never err either in Point of Doctrine Ceremonies or Church-Government All which having been sufficiently demonstrated to the contrary by the consent of several Christian Nations We are of Opinion that when any Abuses are crept into the Church which are prejudicial to the Commonwealth or the Authority of Sovereigns these by vertue of their Sovereign Right and Prerogative have a Power to abolish and reform all such matters as interfere with the Publick Good and Civil Authority At the same time it cannot be denyed but that in a case of such moment it may be very convenient to acquainâ— the People with the Reasons of such a Reformation lest they should be surprized at it and look upon it as an Innovation which might prove of dangerous consequence And if especially the Rights of the People are invaded by these Abuses this Reformation ought to be undertaken with the knowledge and approbation of the Subjects It may be objected that by such a Reformation Divisions are raised in the Church But this is to be look'd upon as a matter of no great Weight such a Division being not to be imputed to those that rectifie such Errors but to those that obstinately refuse to return into the right Path either out â— Self-interest or Pride There is nothing more obvious out of the antient Ecclesiastical History than that such as were plainly convicted of an Error used to be excluded from the Communion of the Church But such as begin a Reformation upon a good and legal Account can under no Colour whatsoever be accused of Schism or Rebellion For those are Rebels who by forcible Ways endeavour to withdraw themselves from the Allegiance due to their lawful Sovereign Whereas all such as free themselves from Abuses unjustly imposed upon them without their own consent or any Divine Authority rather deserve to be stiled defenders of their own Liberty and Conscience especially if these Abuses and Errors are dangerous to their Souls For no Teacher no Bishop no Convention whatsoever was ever invested with an absolute Power of domineering over Christians at pleasure so that no Remedy should be left against their Usurpation It cannot therefore but be look'd upon as a great piece of Impudence in the Roman Catholick Party when they assume to themselves wholly and entirely the Title of the Church with exclusion to all others that are not of the same Communion For they either must pretend their Church to be the Universal or else a particular Church By the Universal Church is according to the Tenure of the Holy Scripture understood the whole multitude of the Believers wheresoever dispersed in the World whose Union consists in this That they acknowledge one God one Redeemer one Baptism one Faith and Eternal Salvation from whence only are excluded such as pretend to dissolve this Union that is who deny the true God and his Son Christ and who do not agree with the very Fundamental Principles of the Christian Religion This is the true Catholick Church not the Pope with his Ecclesiasticks and Ceremonies who impose their Authority upon Christendom And since those that for weighty Reasons have withdrawn themselves from the Church of Rome may and do believe a true Baptism a true God and Father a Faith agreeable to the Holy Scripture it is evident that the Roman Church is not to be taken for the Universal Church and that a Christian may be a Member of the true Catholick Church in a right sense notwithstanding that he never was in the Communion of the Roman Church or upon better Consideration has freed himself from its Abuses and Errors But the Popish Religion considered as a particular Church as it ought to be tho' if we unravel the bottom of its modern Constitution it will easily appear that the whole frame of that Church is not so much adapted to the Rules of a Christian Congregation as to a Temporal State where under a Religious pretext the chief aim is to extend its Sovereignty over the greatest part of Europe those that have withdrawn themselves from that Communion are no more to be counted Rebels than our Modern Philosophers are to be taken for Fools and Madmen because they differ in Opinion from Aristotle For all Believers who adhere to the true Faith are in regard of their Head Jesus Christ of an equal degree and aim all at the same End And Christ having given this Promise to all Believers That where two or three were gathered together Mat. 18. 20. in his Name there would he be in the midst of them no Church can claim any Prerogative by reason of the number of its Adherents What the Romanists alledge for themselves out of the Apostolical Creed is so full of absurdity that it contradicts it self viz. out of these words I believe one Holy Catholick and Apostolical Church For except they could cajole us into a belief that these words imply as much as to say There is but one true Church upon Earth which is the Roman Catholick there being no other besides that I cannot see what Inference can be drawn from thence to their Advantage Besides that the very sense of the words contradict this Interpretation if Reason the Holy Scripture and Experience it self did not sufficiently convince us to the contrary It is beyond contradiction that there is but one true Church upon Earth there being but one God one Christ one Baptism and one Faith But concerning one Point many Errors and Abuses may be committed Neither have the Popish Party any reason to brag of a particular Holiness especially concerning these matters wherein they differ from the Protestants The word Catholick relates here to a Doctrine not to a Sovereign State whose Authority is to be Universal over Christendom so that that Church is to be esteemed a Catholick Church which
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 â—o touch the Fundamental Points of our 〈…〉 Subjects as by the Grace of God and the â—ight of his holy Spirit have attainâ—â—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 â—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
Commonwealth 'T is true the Church is a Society but not a Body Politick founded upon the Publick Authority but owes it Original to a higher Principle having not like other Colledges its dependency from the State What is alledged out of Titus 2. 9. Colos 3. 20 22. Rom. 13. 3 4. 1 Pet. 2. 14. is strangely misrepresented to evince that Ecclesiastical Matters are dependent from the absolute Pleasure of Sovereigns What Follows might also very well deserve some Animadversions if it were not beyond our scope at present N. 13. It is a gross Error That as a Consequence of this Sovereign Power in Ecclesiastical Affairs he attributes to them the Titles of Pastors Ministers Heralds of God Bishops Priests and Apostles Pray with what Authority and with what sense For the Duty belonging to Sovereigns which entitles them to the name of being the Guardians of both Tables of the Decalogue and of being the Foster-Fathers and Defenders of the Church is of a far different Nature from what he would insinuate here And if it be not to be left to the absolute Judgment of the Clergy it self with exclusion of the rest of the Members of the Church to determine in Ecclesiastical Affairs what is agreeable to the Word of God how can this Judgment belong to the Sovereign alone without allowing a share to the rest of the Members of the Church These words in the § LXIV Each Sovereign may establish what Religion he pleases in his Dominions ought not to be let pass by without a severe Correction The Reason alledged is very frivolous Because all Publick and external Actions depend from the Publick Authority Is this your Assertion good Mr. Houtuyn that Princes may impose what Religion they please upon their Subjects and by their absolute Authority make it the establish'd Religion with exclusion to all others who if not complying must forsooth sly the Country What Religion they please do you say the the Pagan False Fictious or Superstitious it matters not which From whence pray was this Power derived to Sovereigns Not certainly from God except you can shew us a Divine Authority for it Not from the common consent of those that entred into Civil Societies Commonwealths not being instituted for Religion's sake and of a later date besides that such a Power is not requisite for the attaining that end for which Civil Societies were establish'd Neither is it left to the bare pleasure of any Person tho' considered as in the Natural state of Freedom to profess what Religion he pleases But supposing it was no Inference can be made from thence that the same may be forc'd upon others The distinction he makes betwixt the internal and external Religion must also be taken with a great deal of Circumspection lest some People might perswade themselves that it is indifferent what Religion a Man professes in outward shew provided he be satisfied as to the internal part of it Furthermore it is absolutely false that all Publick Actions that is every thing done in Publick in the Common-wealth owes its Original to the Sovereign Power there being several things to be done by Subjects in publick depending meerly from that Liberty belonging to them in the Natural state of Liberty or from God's Command or from a certain Power granted to them by God Almighty It is no less false That all exterior Actions depend from the Civil Authority For according to Mr. Houtuyn's Opinion the Doctrine of Divinity and the Confession of Faith as comprehended in a certain form are to be reckoned among those exterior Actions Mr. Houtuyn is much in the wrong when he pretends to draw an Inference from thence that because it belongs to Sovereigns to take care that their Subjects may be well instructed concerning what Opinion they ought to have of God as the Establisher of Justice they therefore have a Right of disposing in an Arbitrary way of revealed Religion and to declare any Religion whatsoever which pretends to Revelation the Establish'd Religion in the Commonwealth It is a much grosser Mistake yet when he asserts That any Religion establish'd in a State tho' never so false contributes to the Publick Tranquility of that Commonwealth It is possible that a Religion defective in some Points may nevertheless lead People into the way of Salvation but those that contain false Doctrines of God and his Attributes are incapable of producing that Effect The Publick Tranquility founded upon such false Opinions will be very unstable and may with more ease or at least with the same conveniency be obtained by the true Doctrine especially if it be taken into consideration that tho' it be possible that such Impostures may beguile the giddy-headed Multitude they cannot always pass for currant among Men of a sound Understanding It is to be remembred that the Southsayers at Rome cannot forbear laughing when they meet another of the same Profession We must beg Mr. Houtuyn's Pardon if we question his Authority when he pretends to perswade us That Faith which he is pleased to call every ones private Religion independent from any Temporal Power will not be impaired by a Man's professing any other Religion established by the Sovereign Authority and he leaves it to the discretion of those Civil Governours which of all Religions they will be pleased to establish in their Dominions whether that of the Japoneses of the Brachmans Mahometans Jews or Christians and among all those that pretend to the Christian Name such a one as may be most agreeable to their own Fancy I much question whether he will meet with many Tools that will take his Word for it A great part of Christendom did look upon it as a thing insufferable that the Pope of Rome should set up for the great Arbitrator of Christendom in matters relating to the Christian Faith tho' his Pretences did not reach further than to force one Religion upon the World which he knew was most likely to turn to his own Advantage But now it seems it has pleased God that Sovereigns should be invested with a Power of establishing any Religion at pleasure and it being beyond question that there are several Religions which have not the least relation to one another they may with the same Right at several times declare several distinct Religions nay even those that are quite opposite to one another the establish'd Religion and nevertheless every one of these must be accepted forsooth as the true Religion The next Consequence will be that Sovereigns having a Right of defending and altering the establish'd Religion and to punish such as trespass against it one Prince will have no more Right to cherish and maintain one Religion but his Successors may with the same Right abolish it and punish such of his Subjects as adhere to it So that according to the Doctrine of Mr. Houtuyn's Gospel the establish'd Religion will be settled upon the same Foundation with some Statutes which may be enacted and repeal'd by Sovereigns at pleasure In
§ LXV He entirely and without limitation ascribes to the Prince the Power of Constituting Ministers of the Gospel in the same manner as if they were Ministers of the State But in the Commonwealth of the Jews regulated according to God's own Institution no such Power was granted to their Kings Neither had the Apostles themselves tho' the most general Teachers that ever were as being sent to Preach the Gospel to all the World their Authority of Teaching from any Temporal Sovereigns Neither can it be proved that the Church at the time when Sovereigns first embraced the Christian Faith did transferr this Power of constituting Ministers of the Gospel without limitation to those Princes tho' at the same time it is not to be denied but that Sovereigns have a considerable share in it His Argument taken from the care Parents ought to have of the Salvation of their Children does not reach to what he pretends to prove for says he Princes being the Publick Fathers of the Common-wealth it belongs to their Princely Office to provide for the Eternal Salvation of their Subjects For besides that the Title of Father of the Commonwealth is a Metaphorical Expression the Fatherly and the Regal Office depend from a quite different Principle and the care to be taken of Children of a tender Age is of another Nature with that which ought to be employed for the Safety of a whole People neither were Sovereigns invested with the Supream Authority to enable them to procure Eternal Salvation to their Subjects God having prescribed other ways and means for the obtaining of it It cannot be denied but that a Prince must not be regardless of this Care nevertheless ought the same not to reach beyond its due Bounds but must be effected by such Methods as are approved of in the Holy Scripture and suit with the true Genius of the Christian Religion Wherefore it is in vain to attribute to Sovereigns a Power of obtruding any Religion at pleasure upon their Subjects it being beyond question that not all Religions are conducing to obtain Eternal Salvation So Abraham the Father of Believers did not impose upon his Children what Religion he thought most convenient but he charged them to walk in the ways of the Lord such as were manifested to them in the Holy Scripture What St. Paul says 1 Tim. 2. 2. is very well worth taking notice of viz. That the chief care of the Supream Governours shall be so to Rule over their Subjects that they may live under them not only honestly but piously this being the way to Eternal Salvation It is to be observed that those Princes for whom the Apostle enjoined the Christians to pray being Pagans made but little account of Piety especially of that belonging to the Christians but it was thought sufficient for the Christians to enjoy the common Benefit of the Publick Tranquility under their Protection the rest being left to their own care So we read that the Poet's enjoyment of his Muses was owing to Augustus Caesar's Protection nevertheless the Emperor did not concern himself about the Rules of Poetry Furthermore it is a very gross way of Arguing when he Asserts That the Commonwealth and Church are both one and the same thing under a Christian Prince whose Subjects also profess the Christian Religion the only difference being in respect of their different Qualifications They being in the Commonwealth to be considered as they are Subjects in the Church as Believers It seems Mr. Houtuyn looks upon that Difference to be of little moment which arises from divers Moral Qualifications and includes different Obligations and is founded upon another Legal Principle It is confess'd that in such a case where the Head is not differing in his Natural Constitution from the Rights and Power belonging to him the rest of the Members tho' differently considered under divers Qualifications are nevertheless to be look'd upon as one and the same Society As for instance If a Prince puts himself at the Head of all his Subjects upon an Expedition these tho' they may be considered either as Soldiers or Subjects yet do not differ in any Essential Part As for Example The People of Israel when going upon their Expedition under the Conduct of Joshua was the very same that afterwards under his Protection enjoyed and inhabited the Country of Canaan But the Church and Commonwealth tho' composed out of the self-same Persons do not only differ in their very Foundation but also a Sovereign cannot claim the same Right and Name of being the Supream Head of the Church in the same sense as he is the Supream Governour of the State For in the latter he exercises his Authority without controul being subject to no body But the Head of the Church is Christ who Rules it by his Word announced to us by the Teachers of the Church so that a Sovereign cannot as much as claim the Right of being Christ's Vicegerent in the Church And on the other hand tho' it is said of Christ That all Power is given unto him in Heaven and upon Earth nevertheless it cannot be said of him to be in the same manner the Head of Civil Societies as of the Church The next following Assertion runs thus Where the whole Commonwealth is not composed out of Christians the Church is a Congregation of the Believers in the Commonwealth But where all Subjects are Christians the Church is nevertheless nothing else than a Colledge in the Commonwealth But what he alledges of the Church being sometimes taken in the same sense with the Commonwealth is absolutely false For the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Acts 14 23. and those in Titus 1. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are no Synoms but the latter is to be understood thus In all the Towns and Cities where there was any Christian Church The Inference he would make from the Military Function and the Administration of Justice being both included in one Government is to no purpose both of them owing their Off-spring to that End for which Civil Societies were instituted which is not the same in the Church and Sovereigns are entrusted with the Sword of War and Justice not with the Ministerial Function of Preaching the Gospel From whence it comes that Generals and Judges are subordinate to the Princely Office but not the Ministers of the Gospel they being barely considered as such not properly Ministers of the Prince and State but Ministers of Christ and the Church He says further That the assignation of the Ministerial Function does not appertain to the Internal part of Religion But if Faith comes from hearing and no body can believe without being instructed it is undeniable that those that Preach the Gospel have a share in the internal part of Religion they being to be considered as the Instruments by the help of whom the Gospel and consequently the Faith is conveyed to their Auditors It is false when he asserts That Sovereigns tho' no Christians have
he being not answerable in particular for their Religion It cannot be taken notice of without astonishment how both in former times and our Age some Princes who were naturally not enclined to Cruelty having in other respects given great Proofs of their Clemency yet have been prevailed upon to raise the most horrid Persecutions against their Subjects barely upon the score of Religion But it has been foretold in Holy Scripture that this Fate should attend the Christian Church when it is said That Mighty Kings upon Earth should commit Rev. 18. 3. Whoredom with the Whore of Babylon And who is ignorant that Gallants will often commit the most barbarous Acts meerly to please their Harlots All true Christians therefore ought couragiously to oppose the Threats and Attempts of this Beast committing the rest to Divine Providence And as for such Princes and States as have shaken off the Yoke of Popish Slavery if they seriously reflect how their fellow-Protestants are persecuted and in what barbarous manner they are treated will questionless without my Advice take such measures as may be most convenient for to secure themselves from so imminent a Danger The following ANIMADVERSIONS Made by the Author upon some Passages of a Book Entituled A POLITICAL EPITOMY Concerning the Power of Sovereigns in Ecclesiastical Affairs WRITTEN BY ADRIAN HOUTUYN Having a very near Relation to the former TREATISE it was thought sit to Insert them here by way of APPENDIX IT is a Question of the greatest moment which if rightly determined tends to the Benefit of Mankind in general viz. Unto whom and under what Limitations the Power in Ecclesiastical Affairs is to be ascribed in the State If the old Proverb That those who chuse the middle way are commonly the most successful has not lost its force it may without question be most properly applied in this Case where both Extreams are equally dangerous since thereby the Consciences of Subjects are left to the arbitrary disposal either of the Pope of Rome or their Sovereigns There having not been wanting both in the last and our Age Men eminent for their Learning who have with very solid Arguments opposed the Tyranny of the first it is but reasonable for us to take heed that since we have escaped the danger of Scylla we may not be swallowed up by Charybdis For as scarce any body that is in his right Senses can go about to deny that the Sovereign Power ows its original either to God or the general Consent of the People So it is a matter mutually advantageous both to the Prince and Subjects to understand how far this Power is limited in the State that the first may not transgress their due Bounds and instead of being Fathers of their Subjects prove their most dangerous Enemies Adrian Houtuyn a Civilian in Holland having in a Treatise called A Political Epitomy inserted several Assertions tending to the latter of these two Extremes and it having been observed of late that this Book has been recommended by some Doctors in the Law to the great detriment of young Students I thought it not amiss to make some Animadversions upon his LXIII and following SECTIONS which may serve as a Guide to the younger Sort lest they under the Cloak of asserting the Prerogatives of Sovereigns may be mislead into the latter of these Extremes and attribute that to the Prince which God has reserved as his own Prerogative and thus irrecoverably play the Prodigal with their own Liberty and Property This Author speaking concerning the Prerogative of Princes Sect. LXIII runs on thus He has an uncontroul'd Power over all External Ecclesiastical Affairs which are not determined in the Holy Scripture He alledges for a Reason because that Power is granted to Sovereigns at the same time when Subjects submitted themselves and their Fortunes to their Disposal But it ought to be taken into Consideration that certain Matters belonging to the external Exercise of Religious Worship have so strict an Union with the internal Part that if the first be not disposed in a manner agreeable to this inseparable Tye the latter must of necessity undergo such Alterations as are inconsistent with its Nature And since Mr. Houtuyn do's not leave the internal Part to the Disposal of Sovereigns how can the exterior Worship be submitted to their meer Pleasure considering this strict Union betwixt them Besides this General Submission he speaks of admits of Limitation in regard of that End for which Civil Societies were Instituted which is the mutual defence against Violences From whence it is evident that there are certain Matters belonging to every private Person derived from the State of natural Freedom which were not absolutely left to the Disposal of Sovereigns at least no further than they were necessary to obtain that End Religion having not any relation to this End it is not to be imagined that Subjects did submit their Religion to the arbitrary Pleasure of Sovereigns And it being unquestionable that Subjects may exercise certain Acts belonging to them by Vertue of an inherent Right derived from the free State of Nature and independent from their Sovereigns it may rationally be concluded that when Subjects did submit themselves in Matters of Religion to their Sovereigns it was done with this Supposition that both the Prince and Subjects were of one and the same Religion and that the external Exercise of Religious Worship was not left to the Disposal of the first any further than in such Matters as are indifferent in regard of the internal Part of it What is alledged concerning the the maintaining a good Order and avoiding of Confusion it is to be observed that this is not the main End for which Civil Societies were Instituted nor has it any relation to it but only thus far as it may be instrumental to maintain the Publick Tranquility As to N. 2. It is to be observed that because Priests have a dependance from the Civil Power in certain Respects belonging to its Jurisdiction this does not involve Religion considered as such under the same Subjection The following words ought also to be taken notice of A Christian Prince commands over the Church as being a Colledge and representing one single Person in the Commonwealth The Church thus considered is a Civil Society or Body Politick founded upon the Publick Authority and Power and ought to be regarded as being in the same condition with other Colledges and Bodies Politick and in this Sense a King is the Head of the Church in his Dominions Whoever will consider the real difference betwixt the Church and Commonwealth must needs find as many Errors as there are words here For because a Prince has the Sovereign Jurisdiction in a Commonweath consisting of Christian Subjects no inference is to be made that therefore he may in the same degree exercise his Sovereignty in the Church as in the Common-wealth and that in the same Sense he may be called The Supream Head of the Church as of the