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
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
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
and perverted Zeal of some who make these Differences their Tools wherewith they often raise Disturbances in the State Such turbulent Spirits ought to be curbed and care to be taken so to tye up their Hands as that they want Power to influence the Minds of such Subjects as otherwise would be well satisfied to enjoy peaceably a Liberty of Conscience And what should move a Prince to disturb his good Subjects meerly upon the score of Differences in Opinion as long as they live quietly under his Goverment For supposing their Opinion to be erroneous it is not at his but their own Peril and they alone must be answerable for it For in my Opinion Sovereigns are entrusted with the Sword wherewith to dissect Controversies as Alexander did with the Gordian Knot But that it may not be objected as if I intended to encourage all sorts of Heresies and Licentiousness I do declare that this is far different from my purpose but that on the contrary it is to be wished and ought to be endeavoured to procure but one Faith and Religion in a State and especially such a one as is absolutely agreeable to the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles contained in the Holy Scripture such a one as cannot but contrbute towards the maintaining of the Publick Tranquility For I do not think that all Uniformity in Religion is equally capable of procuring that Union neither can the Pagan Religion Mahometans Arians Anabaptists and that of Antichrist himself claim that Prerogative but only the true and antient Religion contained in the Holy Scripture For this is only to be deemed the truly Antient Religion which is derived from the pure and genuine Spring of the Primitive Christian Religion As among the Jews such only could boast to follow the true foot-steps of Antiquity as proved their Doctrine out of the Books of Moses All what degenerates from the Nature of its genuine Spring tho' back'd by the Traditions of some Ages being only to be look'd upon as an inveterate Error Princes being then Protectors of the Publick Tranquility have an Authority to inspect what Canons are received into the Church and to cause them to be examined according to the true Tenure of the Holy Scripture and this care is not to be committed to the management of a few who may perhaps be swayed by Faction or Interest but to all such as have a solid knowledge of the Holy Scripture If every thing be found consonant to its Rules then may a Sovereign by his Authority Command this Doctrine to be Taught both in publick and private But where there is not any Publick Form of Religion established in a Commonwealth it is the Sovereign's care that one may be composed by the assistance of such as are well versed in the Holy Scripture which being approved of by the general consent of his Subjects ought to be professed by all and all those especially who pretend to the Ministry are to be tyed up to its Rules This form of Worship being once received a Prince may justly deny his Peotection to all such as will not comply with it unless he find it to be against the Common Interest of the Common-weal If any one should undertake to contradict this Publick Form especially in such Points as are the Heads of the Christian Religion he ought to be admonished to desist his Reasons if he has any to be examined and when convicted of his Error to be silenced if all this prove fruitless he may lawfully be banished For since according to the Doctrine of the Apostles we are to avoid the Conversation of Hereticks it would be unreasonable that a whole Society of Men should fly from one or a few capricious Persons So that he or they ought to seek out for a new Habitation after they have been legally convicted of their Error for fear they should spread their erroneous Doctrines further than may be consistent with the Publick Safety But we allow no other Punishment in such a case except their Doctrine should amount to Blasphemy § 50. Notwithstanding what has been alledg'd Concerning Tolerating of several Religions in a State there may be such a juncture of Time Circumstances that Sovereigns may nay ought with a safe Conscience to tolerate such of their Subjects as are of a different Opinion from the Established Religion For it may so happen that the number of the Dissenters is so great as not to be expelled without great Prejudice to the State and not without danger to the Commonwealth if they should settle under another Government For that common Saying of a certain Sort of Men that 't is better to have a Country lie waste than to have it inhabited by Hereticks savours of Barbarity if not Inhumanity And a certain Prince who said that he would rather walk out of his Territories with nothing but a Staff in his hands than to suffer it to be inhabited by Hereticks may well pass for one of the most bigotted Zealots in Christendom For the Doctrine of the Gospel is not destructive to civil Society neither is thereby the least Obligation laid upon Princes to propagate Religion by violent and destructive means or to undertake more in that behalf than belongs to them as Protectors of the publick Tranquility they may therefore with a safe Conscience supercede such violent ways by which the State either is endangered or weakned especially since neither our Saviour did make use of them himself nor commanded any thing like it to his Apostles On the other hand those that expect to be tolerated in a State ought by all means to endeavour to live peaceably and quietly and as becomes good Subjects they ought not to Teach any Doctrine which savours of Sedition and Disobedience or to suffer such Principles to be fomented in their Congregations as may prove destructive to the Prerogatives of their Sovereigns For there is not the least question to be made but Princes have a right to rout out such as propagate these Doctrines they having not the least relation to Religion but are like spots wherewith some turbulen Heads bespatter the Christian Religion Besides this there is another duty incumbent to Sovereigns over a State where more than one Religion is tolerated viz. to keep a watchful eye over them that the Dissenting Parties do not break out into extravagant Expressions about the Differences in Religion these being the Fuel that enflames them into Animosities which oftentimes prove the spring of Factions Troubles and intestine Commotions A much greater Obligation lies upon Sovereigns to tolerate Dissenters if they when they first submitted to the Government had their Liberty of Conscience granted them by Contract or have obtain'd it afterwards by certain Capitulations any following Statutes or by the fundmental Laws of the Land all which ought to be sacred to Princes and to be observed by them with the same Circumspection as they expect a due Obedience from their Subjects No Opinion concerning matter of
to Examin both their Natural Qualifications in reference to Civil Society For if this which is to be look'd upon as the Foundation Stone be well Secured And we afterwards do look into the Scriptures to investigate in what manner Christ himself has represented his Doctrine to us it will be no difficult Task to judge whether according to the Institution of our Saviour there ought to be an Ecclesiastical Sovereignty exercised by Priests Or whether Princes have a Right to make use of an Absolute Power Or can Compel their Subjects to Obedience by Force of Arms in Matters of Religion § 1. That there is a Supream Being the Conceâ—â—ing Relâ—gion before Civil Societies wâ—râ— Iâ—â—â—ituted Author and Creator both of the Universe and especially of Mankind which ought to be acknowledged and worshipped as such by Menkind as they are Rational Creatures has been generally receiv'd not only among Christians but also by most of the Pagan Philosophers that to pretend to demonstrate it here would be Superfluous and perhaps might be taken as done in prejudice of the judicious Reader since scarce any body that is not beyond his right Wits can be supposed now a days to make the least Doubt of the Verity of this Assertion The true Knowledge of Divine Worship arises from two several Springs For we either by true Ratioâ—ination deducâ—d out of the Light of Nature may be Convinced of those Sentiments we ought to have of God and what Reverence is due to him from us Mortals Or else some Matters being beyond our Apprehension by the bare Light of Nature are by God's special Command Revealed to Mankind Both Kinds are to be the Subject of the following Treatise with this Restriction nevertheless not to insist upon each particular Head of either of them any further than they have relation to Civil Society § 2. The first Thing which is to be considered both in Natural and Revealed Religion Every Man is accountable for his Religion is That every body is obliged to worship God in his own Person Religious Duty being not to be performed by a Deputy but by himself in Person who expects to reap the Benefit of religious Worship promised by God Almighty For Man being a rational Creature owing its Off-spring to God alone is thereby put under such an indispensible Obligation that the Cosideration of worshipping him to the utmost of his Power can never be entirely exstinguished in a rational Soul And here lies the main difference betwixt that Care which we ought to have our Souls and that of our Bodies the latter of which may be committed to the Management of others who being to be Accountable for all Injuries which may befall us under their Tuition we are thereby freed from any Guilt against our selves So do we commit our selves when we pass the Seas to the Management of the Master of a Ship by whose sole Care without our own Assistance we are conducted to the desired Port. But no body can so entirely tâ—ansfer the Care of his Soul and the Exercise of Religious Worship from himself to another Man as to make him alone Accountable for all Miscarriages and to free himself from Punishment Every one of us shall give Rom. 14. 12. Rom. 9. 3. Account of himself to God And it is in vain for St. Paul to wish to be Accursed from Christ for his Brethren his Kinsmen according to the Flesh And though it is undeniable That those who have been negligent in taking care of other Peoples Souls that were committed to their Charge shall receive Punishment Nevertheless these whose Souls have been thus neglected shall perish with them for having put too much Trust in others and neglected their own Salvation As it is plainly expressed by the Prophet Ezekiel 33. 7 8. And the Habak 2. 4. Mark 16. 16. Just shall live by Faith And the Evangelist St. Mark speaks without any Reservation He that believed not shall be damned without distinction whether you were seduced by others or whether you have renounced your Faith for worldly Ends. § 3. From whence it is evident That Religion How the same is to be exercised in the free State of Nature having its relation to God the same may be exercised without the Communion of a great many And that a Man ought not to judge of the Soundness of his Doctrine or Religion by the Number of those that adhere to it So that it is manifest That at the beginning of the World our first Parents might and did really perform Religious Duties And that if one alone or a few together live in a solitary Place they are therefore not to be deem'd to live without Religion because they do not make up a Congregation For God being the only Judge of what is best pleasing to him in his Worship knows and searches the very bottom of our Hearts And since we are not able without his Assistance to perform religious Duties the same can't be esteem'd properly our own Invention As those that live in the free State of Nature are not Subject to any Human Power So in the same State their Religion having only a relation to God Almighty unto whom alone they are bound to pay Reverence it is free from all Human Force or Power which in this State of Natural Freedom they may exercise either according to the Dictates of Reason or according to Divine Revelation and according to the best of their Knowledge may dispose the outward Form of their religious Worship without being accountable to any body but God Almighty Neither can they be Controuled or forced rather to worship God according to another's than their own Opinion But if any body pretends to bring them over to his Side he ought with suitable Arguments to Convince them how far he is in the Right and they in the Wrong There may be besides this another Reason be given why no body in what Condition soever ought to be forced to another Man's Religion because the Knowledge of Truth can't be implanted in us without proper and convincing Arguments such as are capable of preparing our Minds for the receiving of the True Doctrine of Religion And as to the Mysteries of the Christian Religion which transcend our Reason these must be acquired by the assistance of Divine Grace which is contrary to all Violence 'T is true a Prince may force a Subject to make an outward Confession by way of Mouth to comply in his Behaviour with his Commands and to dissemble his Thoughts or to speak contrary to his Belief but he can force no body to believe contrary to his own Opinion For we ought to bâ—lieve with Actâ— â— 37. all our Hearts but whatever is done in order to obtain any worldly Advantage or to avoid an imminent Evil of this kind can't be done with all our Heart But Faith cometh by Hearing Rom. 1â— 17. and Hearing by the Word of God Neither does our Saviour force his Word upon
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
God Almighty to set aside all your Command all Love Respect and Duty which I owe to God Almighty and to perform such things as I know to be contrary to him and his Commands For here ought to be remembred what the Apostles said We ought to obey God rather than Man Acts 5. 29. And whenever Sovereigns pretend to extend thus far their Authority they transgress their Bounds and if they inflict any Punishment on their Subjects for refusing to be obedient to their Commands on this Account such an Act ought to be look'd upon as illegal unjust and tyrannical God has verified this by extraordinary Miracles It was an absurd and illegal Proceeding when Darius overpersuaded by his Courtiers who intended to lay a Trap for Daniel issued out his Proclamation That no body for thirty Days should ask a Petition Dan. 6. 7. 9. of any God or Man For what concerns had the King with his Subjects Prayers unlawful Prayers being not accepted of by God Almighty especially with those made in private For if any one should have prayed in publick against the King it would been a quite different Case and such a one had deservedly received Punishment as an Enemy to his Sovereign Wherefore Daniel did very well in continuing his daily private Prayers according to his former Custom notwithstanding the King 's impious and foolish Command and was for this Reason by an extraordinary Miracle delivered out of the Lions Den. In the same manner did God preserve Daniel's three Companions in the midst of the Flames because they refused to worship the Golden Image according to the King's Command Though at the same time Dan. 3. 27 28. it is very probable that this Image set up by Nebuchadnezar was not intended to be worshipped as a God but only as a Sign or Emblem of that Eternal Being which he would have to be Adored and Worshipped by his Subjects Certainly Jeroboam could not be so much besides himself as to imagine or to pretend to persuade the Jews That the Golden Calves which he had caused to be made were the same God by whose Power they were brought out of Aegypt But he set them up as a Token or Representative whereby to put them in mind of the Benefits received from God the great Deliverer of Israel and that they might not want places where to pay their Devotions and perform their religeous Duties So that though he did not fall off from God but only for Reasons of State and because he thought it belonging to his Royal Prerogative made an Joseph Arch. 8. 3. Alteration in the outward Form of Worship Yet was he with his whole Family rooted out of Israel and the Jews for having obeyed and followed their King in his Idolatry 2 Reg. 19. 17 16. paid for it with the Loss of the Holy Land § 7. Sovereigns are nevertheless not excluded What Power according to the Law of Nature belongs Sovereigns in Ecclesiastical Affairs from having a certain Power and Disposal in Ecclesiastical Affairs as they are the Supream Heads and Governours of the Commonwealth and are therefore stil'd the Publick Fathers and Fathers of their Native Country And as has been said before as it is one of the Principal parts of Paternal Duty to implant Piety into their Children so Sovereigns ought to take care that Publick Discipline of which the Reverence due to God Almighty is one main Point to be maintained among their Subjects And whereas the Fear of God is the Foundation Stone of Probity and other Moral Vertues and it being the Interest of Sovereigns that the same be by all means encouraged in a State and that Religion is the strongest Knot for the maintaining a true Union betwixt Sovereigns and their Subjects God being a God of Truth who has commanded that Faith and Compacts should be sacred among Men It is therefore a Duty incumbent upon Sovereigns to take not only effectual Care that Natural Religion be maintain'd and cultivated among their Subjects But they have also a sufficient Authority to Enact such Laws as may enable them to keep their Subjects from committing any thing which tends either to the total Destruction or the Subversion of the Capital Points of Religion As if for instance any one should attempt to deny publickly the Existency of a God and his Providence to set up plurality of Gods to worship fictitious Gods or Idols in Gods stead to spread abroad Blasphemies for to worship the Devil enter with him into a Compact and such like Actions For if these are kept within the compass of Peoples Thoughts without breaking out into publick or outward Actions they are not punishable by the Law neither can any Humane Power take Cognizance of what is contained only and hidden in the Heart And as to what concerns those Ceremonies which have been annexed to Religious Worship though it be undeniable that one of the main Points towards the maintaining a good Order in the State is that a due Uniformity should be observed in the same Nevertheless Sovereigns need not be so very anxious on this Account because these Differences do not Overturn Religion it self neither do they as such considered dispose Subjects to raise Disturbances and Dissention in the State Neither can Sovereigns be any great Loosers by the Bargain if their Subjects differ in some Ceremonies no more than if they were divided into several Opinions concerning some Philosophical Doctrine But this is beyond all doubt that if under a Religious Pretext Subjects pretend to raise Factions which may prove dangerous to the State or hatch other secret Mischiefs these are Punishable by the Supream Magistrates notwithstanding their Religious Pretences for as Religion in its self considered is not the cause of Vices so ought it not to serve for a Cloak wherewith to cover and protect such treacherous Designs So the Roman Senate did acquit themselves very well in their Station when they Abolished these Debaucheries which were crept into the State with the Bachanals But those Sovereigns who Le◠〈…〉 have transgressed these Bounds by compelling their Subjects to a Religion of their own Invention have without doubt abused that Power wherewith they were entrusted Neither have these Princes acquitted themselves much better in their Station who have Persecuted their Subjects for no other Reason but because they Professed a Religion different from their own without making a due Enquiry whether their Doctrine were Erroneous or not Thus the Proceedings of Pliny the Younger a Man otherwise of a very good Temper against the Christians in Bithynia cannot in any wise be justified For he confesses himself That he never was present Plin. 10. Ep. 97. at the Tryals of the Christians and was therefore ignorant both of their Crime and consequently of what Punishment they deserved For these are his Words I only ask some of them several times whether they were Christians which they having constantly Professed they were I ordered them to be
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
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