Controversies sooner composed and Heresies suppressed or quite extinguished but if the whole matter be duely weighed it will appear that such an Ecclesiastical Monarch may be very easily spared in the Church For granting such Whether it be necessary to set up a general Judge of all Controversies in the Church an universal Judge of all Controversies arising in the Church he must be supposed to be infallible and that beyond all contradiction as well in point of Matter of Fact as to the lawfulness of the Case for it may so happen that it be plain enough whether a Doctrine be erroneous or not when at the same time it may be disputable whether the said Error ought to be laid to a certain Man's Charge or not For if an Appeal be allowed from this Judge after Sentence pronounced there will never be an end of the Process It is therefore absolutely requisite that this infallible Authority should be so manifestly proved that it cannot reasonably be called in question For unless this Authority be unquestionable for the decision of this Controversie we must run from this Judge to another who must also be supposed to be Infallible and so in infinite it being granted by all without Exception that no body ought to be a Judge in his own Case And since this Privilege of being Infallible could not be granted by any body but by God alone the whole Body of Christians being not invested with such a Power it must plainly be proved out of the Scriptures that this particular Prerogative and Authority was granted to one certain Person for him and his Successors to decide all Controversies concerning the Articles of Faith without being liable to any Error But of this there is not the least footstep in the holy Scripture Nay the Apostles when they were sent by Christ into all the World were endued with the same Spirit and had an equal Authority So that there is but one way now left for the attaining to the true Knowledge of the Christian Religion both for the Teachers in the Church and all Believers in general which is to study the Scriptures devoutly and without Intermission And whoever pretends to Inspiration 2 Tim. 3. 14. 15. or to a prophetical Spirit ought by undeniable Demonstrations to justifie his Pretensions These Qualifications which the Apostle Paul describes in the 2 Epistle to Timothy c. 2. 24 25 ought to be applied to all Bishops and Teachers in general And the Servant of the Lord he says must not strive but be gentle unto all Men apt to teach patiently In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves if God peradventure will give them Repentance to the acknowledging of the Truth Out of what has been said it is apparent that if any one now adays does pretend to any Prerogative or Infallibility in deciding Controversies as to matter of Faith he ought to be endued with such extraordinary Qualifications as are most requisite for the due Explaining and Interpreting the Sense of the holy Scripture and this in so high a degree as that the other Teachers in the Church are not able to stand in Competition with him nay that even all their joint Endeavours in this kind are not to be compared to his Judgment Besides this it must be supposed that this universal Judge except he be to be look'd upon as an useless Engine must be invested with a Power to execute his Decrees and to oblige all Christians to acquiesce in his Judgment For if it be supposed that his Decrees have no other force than as far as they influence People by the force of Truth they would be either useless or else this Judge in vain pretends thereby to any further Prerogative but what he has in common with other Christians that apply themselves to the Study of the holy Scripture Furthermore this obliging Power must either have been obtained by a peculiar Privilegde granted by God Almighty or by a general consent of the Christians or by an inherent Right to a Sovereignty over all the Christian Churches As for a priviledge granted by God or the general consent of the Christian Churches there is not the least Proof of it as far as ever I could find And as to the pretended Sovereign Power its legal Title ought to be proved by such Documents as are suitable to so great a Pretension For it is a very insignificant Proof to alledge in a case of such Moment Tradition and a long continued Usurpation which adds nothing to the right of a long continued illegal Possession and cannot be taken for a solid Foundation whereupon to build a real Pretension to such a Sovereignty for it is possible that whereas something of a Prerogative was intended in the primitive times the same in process of Time has been abused and consequently degenerated into an insufferable Tyranny We cannot therefore but look upon such a Tradition aâ—â— aâ— not the least foundation in the Scriptures as very suspicious especially when we consider that such a Sovereign Power is quite contrary to the true Genius of the Christian Religion It may perhaps be objected that nothing else can be so powerful to put a stop to all Controversies but it ought to be considered also that thereby the worsest sort of Slavery must be introduced worse than that whereof Tacitus complains in his time Adempto per Inquisitiones loquendi audiendioque 〈◊〉 â—â— que ipsacum voce memoria perdatur si tam in nostra potestate foret oblivisci quam tacere By the Inquisition the benefit of our Tongue and Ears is taken away at once and if it was as easie to controul Mens Memories as it is to bridle their Tongues the very remembrance of things past had been long ago abolished among us Truly by such Methods perhaps the Commonwealth may be stock'd with Hypocrites and dissembling Hereticks but few will be brought over to the Orthodox Christian Faith As it is therefore absolutely requisite that a hidden Ulcer should be laid open whereby it may the sooner be purg'd from its Malignancy and proper Remedies more immediately be applied to the affected Part So is it much conducing in the Church that such Scruples and Erroneous Opinions as have seised our Minds should be brought to light that by applying timely Remedies they may be removed before they are gone too far than by couching them over to let them run into a malignant Suppuration which at last may turn to an incurable Gangren It is also to be taken notice of that if this Ecclesiastical Sovereignty be granted there must of necessity be a double headed Sovereign Power in one State it being evident that Subjects would be obliged to acknowledge the Authority of this Ecclesiastical Judge in point of Controversie as well and in the same measure as they do the Authority of their civil Governours in civil Actions And since this Ecclesiastical Sovereignty has a different scope from that for which Civil Societies were erected it must
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
propagating of this Doctrine They destroy the very Essential part of our Faith which being a Gift of the Holy Ghost and a Belief founded in our Hearts is transmuted into an outward Confession where the Tongue to avoid Temporal Punishment is forced to speak those things which are in no wise agreeable to the Heart This however admits again of a Limitation For herein are not comprehended these Points which proceeding from Natural Religion are also contained in the Christian Doctrine and all of them imply a profound Reverence to be paid to the Supream BEING For it is beyond all question that those that act against the very Dictates of Reason ought to be subject to Civil Punishments since they strike at the very Foundation of Civil Societies Such are Idolatry Blasphemy Profanation of the Sabbath where nevertheless great care is to be taken that a due difference be made betwixt the Moral part of that Precept concerning the Sabbath which is unalterable and the Ceremonial part of it Princes therefore at their first entrance into the Communion of the Christian Church might Lawfully destroy the Images and Temples of the Idols and the Groves and other Meeting-places dedicated to their superstitious Worship Neither can it be called in question but that Christian Soveraigns have a Right to inflict Civil Punishments upon such as revile the whole System of the Christian Religion and ridicule the Mysteries of the Christian Faith at least they may Banish them the Country But for the rest it is in vain to believe that the true enlightning of our Mind and the inward consent to such Articles of Faith as surpass our Understanding can be procured by violent means or temporal punishments For supposing you force a Man to dissemble his thoughts to speak contrary to what he conceives in his own Opinion let his Confession be never so formal and his Gestures never so well composed and conformable to certain prescribed Rules this has not the least affinity with true Religion unless he at the same time does feel an inward motion and hearty compliance with what he professes Neither ought People according to the true Genius of the Doctrine of Christ be enticed to receive the Christian Religion by Temporal Interest Honours or other such like Advantages for Christ did promise that those that followed him should receive their Reward in the Life to come but fore-told them nothing but Crosses and Tribulations in this And those that embrace any Religion out of a Motive of Temporal Advantages do plainly shew that they have a greater Value for their own â—erest than Religion And certainly scarce any body that has but common sense can perswade himself that such a sort of Worship can be pleasing to God Almighty Sovereigns being not constituted for Religion's sake they cannot under that colour exact from their Subjects a blind Obedience in matters of Religion it being unquestionable that if Subjects should blindfold follow the Religion of their Sovereign they cannot by all his Authority be assured of their Salvation from whence it is evident that in case any Subject be fully convinced that he can out of the Holy Scripture discover any Errors which are crept into the Church even that by Law established especially concerning any Principal Point of Faith he neither can nor ought to be hindered in his design by the Sovereign Authority before his Reasons be heard and well debated in the presence of the best and ablest Judges and if by them he be legally and plainly convicted of his Error then and 〈◊〉 before ought he to be silenced To force People into the Church â—y the bare Civil Authority must needs fill the Commonwealth with Hypocrites who cannot be supposed to Act according to the Dictates of their Consciences For since in Religions Matters an absolute Uniformity betwixt the Heart and Tongue is required how can it otherwise be but that such as profess a Religion disagreeable to their Opinion should never be satisfied in their Consciences when they consider that they impose upon God Almighty § 49. The Care of preserving the Publick What Prerogatives belong to Sovereigns as being Protectors of the Publick Tranquility Peace belonging in a most peculiar manner to Sovereigns has furnished some with a specious Pretence to affirm that since differences in Religion cause frequent Convulsions in the State and it is to be deemed one of the greatest Happinesses of a Government if its Subjects in general are of one Religion all means tho' never so violent may be put in execution to extirpate these Differences in Religion They alledge that as much more precious our Souls are before our Bodies the more Sovereigns are obliged to be watchful over them and that the true Love which a Sovereign bears to his Subjects can never be more conspicuous than when he takes effectual care of their Salvation These it must be confess'd are very specious Pretences and have sometimes had such powerful influence over Princes who were else naturally not inclined to Severity that they have nevertheless by these plausible Arguments been prevailed upon to assist with their Authority the cruel Designs of Priests It will therefore not be beyond our scope to make a strict Enquiry what account ought to be made of these so specious Reasons in a well constituted Government In the first place then it is to be considered that it has been foretold by our Saviour that there should always be in the Church Weeds amongst the Wheat that is to say that there should be false Doctrines raised in the Church and these according to the Commands of our Saviour were not to be extirpated Root and Branch but to be reserved for the Day of Judgment For a Sovereign that takes to such violent courses may make a havock among his Subjects which commonly proves equally pernicious to the Innocent and Guilty nevertheless he will find it impracticable quite to abolish all Errors and Differences in the Church Never did any body shew a greater Love to Mankind than our Saviour who sacrificed himself for our Salvation Yet he made use of no other ways to propagate his Doctrine than Teaching when he might have commanded Twelve Legions of Angels to force Mankind to Obedience How can a Prince be esteemed to follow the Foot-steps of Christ who makes such profligate Wretches as the Dragoons his Apostles for the Conversion of his Subjects That Pretence of the Love of Sovereigns toward their Subjects let it be never so specious he ought not under that colour endeavour to subvert or alter the Method of propagating the Christian Doctrine according to the true Genius of the Christian Religion Besides this it is not absolutely necessary to maintain the Publick Tranquility that all the Subjects in general should be of one Religion or which is the same in effect the differences about some Points in Religion considered barely as such are not the true causes of Disturbances in a State but the Heats and Animosities Ambition
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
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
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
reason God has threatned in a most peculia manner to destroy this Monster of a State An Example of Controversie composed in the times of the Apostles § 37. The true Method of composing Controversies arisen in the Church is taught us by what is set us as an Example of this kind in the Acts c. 15. where it deserves our most particular Observation that the Controversy then in question was concerning a main Point in the Christian Religion viz. Whether a man might be saved without being circumcised according to the Institution of Moses For S. Paul in the Epistle to the Galatians c. 5. 2. had positively declared If you be circumcised Christ shall profit you nothing And it is very remarkable that this Question was started in the very Infancy of the Church when the Canon of the Church was not perfected and there were not wanting living Testimonies of such as had received the Doctrine of Christ from his own mouth and were endued with the Holy Ghost and Instructed with an Apostolical Authority Neither is it to be doubted but that Paul and Barnabas were endued with a sufficient Share of Wisdom and Understanding of the Holy Scripture for the reducing of this Errour as plainy appears out of the 5. verse of the above alledged Chapter that they opposed Act. 1◠such forcible Reasons against this erroneous Opinion that those that were come thither out of Judea were not able to contradict them So they appealed to the Authority of the Church of Jerusalem which being the V 2. Spring from whence the Christian Religion was derived into other Parts of the World they hoped to be back'd in this Opinion by such of the Members of that Church as did not without some Reluctancy brook the Abolishing of the Jewish Synagogue and that they were not quite beyond their guess but met with a great many there that were addicted to the same Opinion appears out of the 5th Verse in the same 15th Chapter To prevent therefore any further Disturbance which might be raised in the Antiochian Church by reason of this Controversie Paul and Barnabas with some others were deputed to go to the Church of Jerusalem to decide this Controversie When they came thither a Convocation was called consisting not only of the Apostles and Presbyters but also of the other Members of that Church not excepting those of the contrary side After their Reasons had been heard the Case was in debate a considerable time and at last the whole matter having been sufficiently disputed on both sides then Peter rose up not as an universal Judge or who pretended to decide the Controversie by Virtue of his Authority but his Proceeding was by demonstrative Arguments telling them what prodigious Effects had been wrought among the Gentiles by his preaching the Gospel to them after the Vision which appeared to him at Joppe Where Act. 11 9 he thus argues That since the Holy Ghost had in the same measure purified the Hearts of those Believers that were uncircumcised it would be unreasonable to put this Yoak upon the Neck of the Christians the more because they were not to be saved by Circumcision but through the Grace of the Lord Jesus Christ Paul and Barnabas being of the same Opinion did declare at the same time what Miracles and Wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them which would not have been done if they were to be taken for unsanctified as being not circumcised or if Circumcision was an essential Part of the Christian Faith After all had held their Peace that is to say no body further appearing who could contradict them or oppose their Arguments James at last arose declaring that the Vision of Peter did agree to the Words of the Prophets and that therefore it was his Opinion that such among the Centiles as did turn to Christ ought not to be troubled But that they also in some measure might gratifie themselves and to induce them not to fly the Conversation of such of the Gentiles as received the Christian Faith it was thought sit that these should abstain from Pollution of Idols from Fornication from things strangled and from Blood all which was forbidden by the Mosaic Law and partly disagreeable to the Law of Nature as Fornication which nevertheless was a common Vice among the Gentiles the rest being things indifferent in themselves might easily be let alone rather than give Offence to a Brother This having been approved of by common Consent and as it appears even by those that were of a contrary Sentiment before a Synodical Epistle was writ to the Church at Antioch in the name not only of those Apostles and Elders but also of the Brethren of the Church of Jerusalem Judas and Silas were deputed to carry this Epistle who being arrived at Antioch did not publish it in the nature of a Law but having delivered it to the Brethren from whom it met with a general Approbation they exhorted them with many words to a due Observance of it § 38. If the whole matter be duly weighed Some Observations concerning the natura and use of Councils it furnishes us with several Observations which may not a little contribute towards the Explaining the Nature of Ecclesiastical Councils In the first place it is most apparent that these Councils are not such Bodies whose Authority is everlasting for the Government of the Church But that they are extraordinary Convocations or Conventions composed out of some selected and most eminent Men of the Church who are called together for the composing certain Controversies arisen in the Church And because those Councils were very frequent in the Church from its Primitive times this alone may serve as a convincing argument that the Church never acknowledged one infallible Judge for the deciding of Controversies For to what purpose were so many Heads set to work if one single Person was sufficient and infallible in the Decision of them And what is yet more if the Decrees of the Councils had only their obliging Force from his Confirmation Furthermore those that compose such a Council are not to be considered as Members of an Assembly or Colledge who by the Majority of Votes can so absolutely determine the Question in hand as to be obligatory to all Christians in general Truth generally speaking not depending from the Plurality of Suffrages much less can they pretend to a legislative Power vested in them so as to impose what Laws or Canons they please upon the Church But they may be considered no otherwise than Men deputed by the Churches for the examining the true Grounds of the Controversies laid before them and for searching for the Decision of them in the Holy Scripture So that these Churches are not obliged to acquiesce in this Decision any further than they find it agreeable to the Word of God For it may chance to fall out so that a Controversie which appears at first sight very intricate and difficult afterwards being
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
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
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
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
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
Magistrates What likelihood can there be in all this that the Protestants should be as much concerned for a Temporal By-Interest as the Popish Clergy For whereas they first can expect no more than what is alloted them already the latter have no less in view than vast Riches and the Possessions of whole Kingdoms All these Matters duely considered may be convincing Proofs that all the Clamour which the Popish Clergy makes against the Protestants is of the same nature with that of Demetrius at Ephesus when he exclaimed against St. Paul Love and Meekness being the products of the Christian Faith the Cruelties of the Popish Clergy exercised against Protestants ought to be suspected by Princes and serve them as a forewarning what good is to be expected from those that prosecute with so much Barbarity all such as oppose their Pride and Ambition After the Persecutions were ceased in the Primitive Church the Arians were the first who shew'd their teeth to the Christians But they would have blushed for shame if they should have attempted to propagate their Religion by force of Arms and such other cruel Persecutions as are now in vogue among the Popish Clergy If we were not sufficiently convinced that the Spirit of Envy is not the Spirit of Christ we may be instructed as to this Point by our Saviour himself when he rebuked James and John who would have Luk. 9. 54 55 56. fire come down from Heaven in these words Ye know not what manner of Spirit you are of For the Son of Man is not come to destroy Mens lives but to save them The Sword of Christ is not girted on the side of Men but goes out of his Mouth and in all the Rev. 19. 15. holy Scripture there is not one passage where the Church of Christ is said to be drunken with the Blood of Hereticks but it is said of the Whore of Babylon that she is drunken with the Rev. 17. 6. Blood of the Saints and with the Blood of the Martyrs of Christ § 52. Lastly Since Sovereigns ought to be Sovereigns are often encroached upon in their rights under a religious pretext jealous of their own Prerogatives they may without Injustice make an Enquiry whether the Protestant or the Popish Religion be most encroaching upon their Authority and which of these two be most consistent with the Civil Government For whenever the Civil Power bears any diminution under a Religious Pretence it is then high time for Sovereigns to look about them to examine upon what Foundation these Pretensions are built it being evident that Civil Goverment was introduced before the Christian Religion and that therefore it ought plainly to be demonstrated how Civil Authority came to be diminished by the Christian Religion Now if we look into the Constitution of the Popish Clergy it is manifest that by many steps and degrees and by various Artifices and Intrigues they have at last patch'd up a Potent State of their own and that their Supream Head for these many Ages past is possess'd of great Territories and Acts as a Sovereign and not only this but also obtrudes his Authority upon all such as profess the Roman Catholick Religion For they don't think it sufficient that the whole Clergy have their dependance from him but he pretends to an Absolute Authority of determining all Matters of Faith by which means he is sure to guide the Minds of the People where ever he pleases If any thing in the World is destructive to the Civil Powers it must of necessity be this when a Party inhabiting their Territories disown their Jurisdiction and depending from a Foreign Power deny the Authority of their Natural Prince over them or at least acknowledge it no longer than they think it convenient If Neighbouring States are commonly the most jealous of one another must it not be look'd upon as a great Solocism of State to permit such as depend from a Foreign Jurisdiction to abide in the Commonwealth It is next door to take Foreign Garisons into our Forts or to allow a Foreign Force to Encamp in the midst of our Dominions And this Mischief seems to be the more pernicious when the Revenues by which the Grandeur of this Ecclesiastical State is maintained are squeezed out of the Subjects of any Prince and the best part of his Territories exhausted whereas on the contrary these Leeches are not only freed from all manner of Taxes but also pretend to a Legislative Authority so as to inflict Punishments upon the Subjects and to Absolve them from their Allegiance due to their Sovereigns I cannot see how Princes without great Prejudice to the Commonweal can allow the least Authority over their Persons to the Clergy For if the Prince and they happen to jarr together the poor Subjects pay for it with a Vengeance when they are to serve two Masters of a contrary side at one time and the Taxes must fall the heavier upon the Subjects where the Clergy are exempted from all Contributions Lastly is it not a heavy Burthen to the Subjects to be subject both to an Ecclesiastical and Temporal Jurisdiction The former being generally the most severe as is most evident in Spain and Italy where the Courts of Inquisition are in vogue It being therefore beyond all question that all these things are practised by the Roman Catholicks but in no wise by the Protestants such Princes as being misled by the Popish Clergy endeavour to extirpate their Protestant Subjects Act not only contrary to Justice but even against the very Dicrates of right Reason What has been objected by some viz. That Protestants have not been altogether free from the imputation of raising Disturbances in the State and having joined with a Foreign Power scarce deserves an Answer For this is not to be imputed to Religion it self but rather to some dangerous Juncture and other Circumstances which often prove the occasion of dangerous Commotions in a State Or else the Papists have first begun the Dance and what Wonder is it if some Protestants to avoid their cruel Designs against them have endeavoured to repel the Fury of their Adversaries and when they found themselves insufficient have sought for Aid by Foreign Princes For as it is the greatest piece of Injustice to compel Subjects by force of Arms to any Religion so these may justly defend their Religion by force of Arms especially if they live under a Government where they have a Right belonging to them of Protecting their Liberties against any Invaders § 53. Last of all it very well deserves to Concerning the Right of Reformation make an Enquiry who it is that has the Power in the Commonwealth to amend such Errors and Abuses as are crept into the Church either in Point of Doctrine Morality or Church-Government Or which turns to the same Account who has the Right of Reformation Where first of all it is unquestionable that there is no occasion of a Reformation where the
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
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
true God and the Son of God submitting themselves to his Judgment so that the Interpretation of the Christian Doctrine would have been owing by Christ to their Submission Away with such Fictions not agreeable even to common Sense He might as well say that God's Power over us Mortals did owe its original to the submission of Princes and in case they thought fit to withdraw themselves from this Obedience God Almighty I cannot relate it without horror must thereby be reduced to the Condition of a private Person In the next Assertion he is not altogether so much beyond his Senses when he grants even to Pagan Princes a Right of determining the controverted Points among Christians which is as much as to make a blind Man a competent Judge of the difference of Colours When the Primitive Christians were forced to appear before the Pagan Judges it was not on the Account of the Interpretation of the Scripture The Christians could never be guilty of so gross an Error as to Consult with the Unbelieving concerning the controverted Articles of Faith But being forced against their will to appear before them they could not avoid to receive their Judgment such as they were pleased to give as having no way left them to decline it Furthermore our Author is pleased to affirm That such an Interpretation ought to be look'd upon as establish'd by Publick Authority which carries along with it an obliging force at least in outward appearance so that Subjects are obliged to conform themselves to it by a verbal Confession tho' never so discrepant from that Opinion they keep concealed within their hearts But the outward Behaviour and verbal Confessions of a Christian which are not agreeable to the true Sentiments of his Heart having not the least affinity with Religion it self I don't see upon what Account this Chimerical Power is attributed to Princes unless it be to furnish them with a specious pretext to afflict their Innocent Subjects Thus much is certain that Christ did not command his Doctrine to be propagated by forcible means so that supposing the Articles thus established by the Civil Authority to be never so consonant to Truth it is nevertheless inconsistent with the Genius of the Christian Religion to impose them upon Subjects by force and under severe Penalties But supposing them to be false the case of Subjects must needs be very miserable when they suffer Punishment because they will not profess an erroneous or false Doctrine I see no other benefit to be reap'd from the egregious Assertions of our Author than to serve for a Justification of the most Tyrannical Persecutions that have been and to declare them to have been done by Vertue of a Legal Authority At this rate it will be no difficult Task to justifie the Proceedings against the Protestants in France which move both Pity and Horror in all good Men at least Mr. Houtuyn has very freely offered his Advice and Patronage What follows next is very smartly said to wit That the Coersive Power may be Legal whereas the Act of Obedience is not allowable No body of common sense but will acknowledge that this implies a most manifest Contradiction and that the Legal Sovereign Authority and the Obligation of paying Obedience to it are inseparable from one another Yet with this Nicety Mr. Houtuyn is so mightily taken that he does not consider that at the same time he grants an absolute Authority to his Prince to persecute his Subjects on the Account of Religion he takes away from them the Power of denying the true Religion But what Reason can be given why the one should have a coersive Power where the other cannot obey unless it be done on purpose to encourage ambitious and imperious Princes either to force their Subjects to a sinful compliance or never to want an Opportunity of afflicting the Innocent at Pleasure For those that take to these violent ways of propagating the Faith or rather to speak Truth Hypocrisie and Superstition by their booted Apostles are not contented to silence their Subjects dissenting from them in Point of Religion who are also debarr'd even to save themselves by flight tho' it be no small Misfortune to a Subject to be forced to leave his Native Country but they compel them to profess publickly those things for Truth which they abhor in their Hearts and appear to be Idolatrous Superstitious or Fictitious invented on purpose by those that make their Market by Religion Mr. Houtuyn himself cannot but confess That no body can safely acquiesce in any determination made concerning an Article of Faith unless by his own private Judgment he find it agreeable to the Word of God And if he find it not consonant to that he ought not to rest satisfied in it for fear he should disown his Faith this being the worst and most unbecoming thing belonging to a Christian But if it be unbecoming a Christian to deny his Faith which is the same in effect as to rest satisfied in ones own private Opinion and Conscience to keep secret within the heart what one believes not to indulge ones Tongue and to refrain from External Actions This being the Advice which in contradiction to himself he had not long before given to the Dissenting Subjects what Reason can he give for his Assertion when he attributes to his Prince a Power so unlimited that his Christian Subjects must either be forced to undergo such an Indignity or else the most horrible Persecutions that can be invented The first Inventer of this unlimited Power as far as ever I could learn was Mr. Thomas Hâ—bbs the worst Interpreter that ever was in Divinity whose Opinion as to this kind no body has taken so much pains to revive with the same Impudence as Mr. Adrian Houtuyn What I most admire at is that this should be attempted by one living in a State whose Maxims are quite opposite to these Principles and where consequently he could not reasonably propose to himself any Reward of his Adulation There being not the least likelihood that the States General of the Vnited Provinces should ever lay claim to such a Power As it is not very probable that Princes will apply themselves to the Ministry of the Church and undertake the Publick Exercise of the Pastoral Function in Person so that I cannot see to what purpose our Author has been so careful in asserting it in the behalf of Sovereigns Unless he has pleased himself with this Fancy that his Assertions cannot fail to make him to be the more admired among the Youngsters by how much the more remote they are from common Sense Thus much at present for Mr. Houtuyn FINIS Books Printed for Abel Roper at the Black Boy over against St. Dunstan 's Church in Fleet-street SOlid Philosophy asserted against the Fancies of the Ideists Or The Method to Science farther illustrated With Reflections on Mr. Lock 's Essay concerning Human Vnderstanding By I. S. A True History of the several Designs and Conspiracies against His Majesty's Sacred Person and Government as they were continually carry'd on from 1688. to 1697. Containing Matters extracted from Original Papers Depositions of the Witnesses and Authentick Records as appears by the References to the Appendix wherein they are digested Publish'd with no other Design than to acquaint the English Nation that notwithstanding the Present Posture of Affairs our Enemies are still so Many Restless and Designing that all imaginable Care ought to be taken for the Defence and Safety of His Majesty and his Three Kingdoms By R. K. The Doctrine of Acids in the Cure of Diseases farther asserted Being an Answer to some Objections raised against it by Dr. F. Tuthill of Dorchester in Dorsetshire In which are contained some things relating to the History of Blood As also an Attempt to prove what Life is and that it is principally supported by an Acid and Sulphur To which is added an Exact Account of the Case of Edmund Turner Esq deceased as also the Case of another Gentleman now living exactly parallel to Mr. Turner's By John Colbatch a Member of the College of Physicians London Books Printed for A. Bosvile at the Dial against St. Dunstan 's Church in Fleet-street A Discourse of Conscience Shewing 1. What Conscience is and what are its Acts and Offices 2. What is the Rule of it 3. The several sorts of Conscience 4. How some Practical Cases or Questions concerning Conscience may be resolv'd 5. The Benefit and Happiness of a Good Conscience and the Unhappiness of an Evil one 6. How a Good Conscience may be attain'd and how we may judge whether we have attain'd it Publish'd chiefly for the Benefit of the Unlearned tho' it may also be useful to others Together with brief Reflections upon that which the Author of Christianity not Mysterious saith upon that known Text 1 Tim. 3. 16. The Christian Belief Wherein is asserted and proved That as there is nothing in the Gospel contrary to Reason yet there are some Doctrines in it above Reason and these being necessarily enjoyn'd us to Believe are properly call'd Mysteries In Answer to a Book entituled Christianity not Mysterious The Second Edition with a Preface and other Additions
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
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