commensurable with his Religious Liberties that is that as any man may be of any Religion so every man may in civil affairs do what seems good in his own eyes without restraint upon his Conscience and see what a Common-wealth he hath Setled upon the foundations of Civil and Religious Liberties He may find the patterne of it in the 5. or 6. last Chapters of the Book of Judges 3. But wherein doth this Spiritual Liberty consist In this that no person professing faith in Christ be molested or oppressed in his conscience for his judgment in matters of Religion c. If this be the meaning that no man shall be molested in his conscience for his judgment only in matters of Religion and Worship it will easily be granted for what Magistrate or Church can take cognizance of mens judgments while they keep them to themselves But the question is whether every man that professes faith in Christ must be left to himself to publish and propagate his erroneous and heretical judgment to others and to practise openly what worship he in his erring judgment thinks to be true Besides conscience pretended and so Religion is true or false if it be truly informed in the true Religion he ought not to be molested or oppressed in conscience in matters of Religion But if false to deny some kind of molestation though we allow not opression to such a conscience is to deny charity to a soul running headlong to Hell for feare of troubling a misleading Conscience Contrary to that Scripture Rule Of some have compassion Jude v. 22. 23. making a difference and others save with feare pulling them out of the fire Lastly He makes the Religious Liberty of the people to consist in this That no person professing faith in Christ be molested in his conscience c. But this Rule is too narrow and too strait-laced allowing a coercive power to molest some consciences viz. of such as profess not faith in Christ And such an abortive brat is that late Act of Parliament falsly so called made in more hast than good Speed the night before their last dissolution by the Army for Toleration of tender consciences almost in the same words For if no person may be molested for conscience then not a Jew that denies and blasphemes Jesus Christ not a Turke for Mahometan worship not an Heathen that worships the Sun or some old worm-eaten Idol not any man of any Religion whatever All or any of these may set up their Temples and worship of their Gods in England without any molestation of conscience For they have consciences as well as other men and act according to their consciences as well as they and conscience says he say all men may not be forced Behold an Universal Toleration indeed Would he see a parallel to it He may find it I say not in New Rome where Jews and others find far more favour than protestants but either in old Rome where they had a Pantheon of all Gods or in Solomons old age and doting times allowing under the view of Gods own Temple high places to all his wives Idols and a Toleration to worship them 1. King 11.7 8. Then did Solomon build an high place for Chemosh the abomination of Moab in the hill that is before Jerusalem and for Moloch the abomination of the children of Ammon and likewise did he for all his strange wives which burnt incense and sacrificed to their Gods England it seems is grown old and is come to Solomons dotage an hundred year or thereabouts the age of Solomon it is since the first Reformation from Popery by protestant Religion so long this Author accounts this our Religion to have persecuted the Papists as above and that which she could never be perswaded to do in her younger days viz. to grant a Toleration to Papists or other Sectaries she now in her dotage in favour to her outlandish Paramours the Jesuites hath by a pretended Parliament too liberally granted That which the former Kings and Parliaments both when Popish and since they had the name of Protestants would never yield that which the King of Scots would rather loose the Assistance offered by two potent Popish Princes to settle him in his Throne than yeild unto That which Papists and Jesuites deny to yield to Protestants in their dominions that this lower and latter end of a broken Parliament hath yielded to Papists and the worst of Sectaries To the shame of Parliaments our Nation and Religion But I forbear But to the Setlement he says The Government of these Nations as the case now stands cannot be firmly setled without taking away all Restraint over Mens consciences and granting an innocent Toleration This is the question now between us In the stating whereof are these things very considerable 1. He qualifies it with these words as the case now stands which a little after he explains by these words especially when variety of Religions have got footing in a Nation 1. It seems then where the case is otherwise that variety of Religions have got no footing it may be lawful to lay some Restraint upon erring consciences and to deny the most innocent Toleration But did he not say universally no man professing Christ is to be molested in conscience for his judgment in matters of Religion Which if it were true no cases nor exeptions need to be put in no Restraint must be laid upon mens consciences to start or publish some new Religion according to their consciences for that will prove a way to unsettle that Nation or Church 2. Must all restraint of conscience be taken away What of those consciences whose principles are destructive not only to Religion in the Church but also to the peace and safety of the State as those of Papists that it is Lawful to murder Kings made heretical by the Pope or to follow Impulses of Spirit to kill Anti-Christian Priests as the Quakers the Jesuites disciples now begin to assert and avow That State that will allow such consciences with such principles deserve to be destroyed as having neither Policy Prudence nor Piety Yet all Restraint in this case must be taken away says our Author and an innocent tolleration which is a kind of contradiction granted 3. But see the Impudence of Jesuites They have been the Instruments to give variety of Religions footing in the Nation and now they tell us as the case now stands the Government cannot be setled till all restraint of conscience be taken away and an Innocent toleration granted But hear his reasons 1. All men know the freedome of conscience in matters of Religion is the last and highest interest of man valued by him above all earthly things and therefore nothing can be more earnestly desired by him And nothing is more repugnant to man than a Restraint or Coercive Power over his conscience and therefore cannot but raise a deep discontent in him and earnest desire to be free of that soul-tyranny and
money be free and common to all there will be no disturbance in the State so in matters of Religion let men have liberty to be of any Religion or none true or false let them blaspheme the Name of God and Jesus Christ worship them with what worship they please though forbidden and the Church and States need not trouble themselves or sear any troubles It is the Magistrate or the Church that by denying People this liberty and laying restraint upon their consciences that are guilty of all unsetling disturbances c. 2. The Toleration of the Hollander I never yet heard a truly religious man to commend or approve till now if now it is I fear more out of policy than piety But I believe if the Hollander had not a better Guard by Sea and Land to secure and defend his State than the cement or untempered Mortar of Toleration he had long ere this been reduced either to his old Master or to utter destruction However malè parta male dilabentur when the time comes We see the fruit of Toleration in England since it hath been granted the variety of Religions as it hath served in one sense to strengthen a prevailing party by the politick Maxim Divide Impera So it hath made no small disturbances in the Church and State and had they not an Army to quiet them had long ere this laid them in the dust and the Nation in ashes And what will be the issue God only knows 2. His next Reason or Argument is borrowed from one Mr. Collier an Anabaptist at least if not Jesuited and consists of many no less than sour Arguments which all have respect to the Magistrate As by Coercive power in matters of Religion becoming guilty of high Treason against Jesus Christ in usurping upon his prerogative But the man hath quite mistaken the question as no doubt this Author knows but would take no notice of it This he undertakes to prove That it is unlawful for the Magistrate to pretend any right of Coercive power over mens consciences and an heinous sin in him to exercise it The thing is true in it self but not to the question The Magistrate hath no more Coercive power over mens consciences than the Church hath over mens bodies Christ only is Lord over the conscience Magistrates cannot impose any Laws of their own over the consciences of men nor force any to believe or practise contrary to the Laws of Christ or contrary to their consciences or punish them for not so believing c. But the question is whether a Magistrate Christian at least professing the true Religion may not use his power to command professed Christians to the observance of the Laws of Christ and the outward prescribed worship of God and punish them for not conforming thereunto whether also he may not restrain men from publishing and practsing of Errors and Heresies and false worship contrary to the true Religion to the perverting and destroying of mens souls And if his Arguments prove not the Negative of these they prove nothing But let us hear them 1. The Magistrate hath received no such power from Christ in the New Testament in matters relating to Faith and Worship Ergo Christ hath reserved the power over conscience to himself as Lord of it The whole of this may be granted and is granted above in a right sence without any prejudice to the question between us Christ only is Lord over the Conscience to prescribe Laws of Faith and Worship 2. The second is the same with the first in fense The Magistrate cannot impose Rules of Faith and Worship upon people c. But may he not impose the Laws of God and Christ upon his people And ought he not therein to be obeyed And Punish those that refuse them or walk contrary to them And if he command contrary to those Rules of Christ though he must not be therein obeyed must he not Passively be submitted to And what if Christ have not in the New Testament committed such power to the Magistrate as will be proved he hath is it not sufficient that he hath committed it to him in the old Testament And that not only the Kings of Judah but Heathen Kings have executed such a Power See Dan. 3.29 and 6.26 So that it is a Moral duty of a Magistrate known by the light of Nature as Gods Vicegerent to publish the Laws of God to command obedience to them and to punish Trangressors and is not this a Coercive power committed to the Magistrate 3. He thus argues If the Magistrates have such a power then all or some If all then Heathen Magistrates have it but that 's absurde If Christian only they may be of divers Religions and command contrary to Christs Rules one one Religion another another c. This is the sum of his Dilemmatical discourse But the Answer is easie this power we speak of belongs to all Magistrates as Magistrates even Heathens as afore though all are not in a capacity or have ability to perform it As in the fifth Commandment all parents are bound to instruct and command their children to know and fear God and correct their disobedience but Heathen parents cannot rightly do it The power of the Magistrate who is pater patriae is the very same in a greater latitude and belongs to the same Commandment though all cannot perform it but that 's their fault Obj. They may be of different Religions or beliefs and think themselves in the right and so every one that hath power will persecute another Protestants Papists and contra At their perill be it if they believe falsly and persecute the true Religion But ought they to do so May they that are of a false Religion persecute those that profess the true Religion Did he not say above this was the most heinous sin And may not they that profess and have the true Religion prosecute those that are heretical to bring them to a true belief and practise This case is parallel A Magistrate may punish offenders against righteousness in civil affairs Ergo He or another may persecute others for righteousness but sayes he Allow this that divers Religions may persecute one another and what confusion will this bring into a State into the World Sol. 1. Is there no difference between prosecution of evil doers and persecution of the innocent every Thief and every Heretick if punished or restrained cry out of persecution But how unjustly 2. Hath not Christ foretold it and by his Providence so orders it that there shall be persecution of the good for his sake and for righteousness sake yea and command his people to suffer it not with opposition or a desire to ruine and subvert that State that offers it but without impatience with greatest joy and gladness How unlike to Jesus are our Jesuites 4. His fourth Argument is this Christ hath committed his authority in matters of Religion relating to worship to his Church and commands to tell
ENGLANDS SETTLEMENT MISTAKEN OR A Short Survey of a Pamphlet CALLED ENGLAND'S SETTLEMENT Vpon the two solid Foundations of the Peoples Civil and Religious LIBERTIES PLEADING For a Toleration of all Religions Wherein His Ten ARGUMENTS for Toleration are Confuted as so many Sophisms and Fallacies By a Well-willer to both Civil and Religious Liberties of the People London Printed by D. Maxwell 1660. ENGLANDS SETTLEMENT MISTAKEN c. THe Author of Englands Settlement is by many wise men thought to be a disguised Jesuite or a Jesuited Sectary ' The voice is Jacobs voice but the hands are the hands of Esau He personates in his words a Protestant putting himself amongst us as one of us but his Design is under a pretence of an Vniversal Toleration of all Religions as to asperse our both Church and State with the ugly crime of Persecution so especially to plead for Liberty of Conscience to Papists and Recusants as shall be made appear in ventilation of the Tract it self He hath scraped together out of several Sectarian Books or Pamphlets Anabaptists Levellers Fifth Monarchy men c. no less then ten Arguments which as they are very plausible like a fair picture upon course cloath afar off to simple and weak apprehensions so being looked on nearer hand and touched by the hand of a solid understanding are like the Apples of Sodom which touched turn to ashes and prove but so many thred-bare Sophisms or transparent Fallacies often confuted His method of proceeding that they that have not his Tract may see what he hath said and judg the better of it is this 1. He seemes out of pity and compassion to the Nation whiles he is secretly piling up his barrels of Gunpowder once more under the Parliament House to blow it up by procuring an Act of Toleration for all Religions to exemplifie and bewaile out past and present miseries as the Amazement of the world and the intolerable burden of the nation for so he sayes They experience that their so much talk'd of and so often promised liberty has proved nothing but real and almost intolerable Slavery their plenty has been turned into miserable poverty and their peace into endless troubles How truly let others judg 2. He tells us what indeed we find There has been a curse upon the Government these ten years it hath been all that time a rolling like Sysiphus stone and inconstant like the Moon The judgments of God have been very terrible and universal both over Church and State and have gone round over all sorts of Persons as well of high as low degree For the late English Church hath been quite overturned the King himself the Head thereof tragically beheaded and his posterity rigorously excluded The Nobillity is in a manner degraded the house of Peeres abolished the Ancient Gentry slighted the Marchants and Commons by decay of trade and by the unhappy conjunction of extraordinary Taxes impoverished Yea the Parliaments themselves have not gone without some chastisement For their own hired servants have oftener than once lifted their heels against them and without any lawful Authority but according to their own pleasures or interests have dissolved called annihilated and revived them Only the Souldiers whom God hath used as Instruments to punish others may seem to have gone hitherto unpunished How true this is also let others judg 3 He seems to take upon him to be a prophet and to foretel what is like to come upon those the Army that have not yet smarted for so he says Every thing must have its time to come to maturity and God Almighty has begun already to manifest his judgments upon some of their principal Heads and first Movers O. P. his posterity and others of his chief Officers c. which may serve for a warning for all the rest to prevent Gods Judgments â—est they sall heavily upon them here or hereafter They may do well to consider it and lay it to heart 4. Having done this he inquires into the causes of these judgments and divine visitations and our so long unsettlement and resolves well in general Some very heinous sin or sins have provoked them but what these sins are in particular is not so easie to determine to every mans satisfaction Yet he goes on in the search of them and first gives us his own judgment upon the case it may probably be affirmed if not averred as a certain truth that Soul-tyranny or coercive power over mens consciences is the principal sin that hath drawn down these judgments from heaven for some reasons For first it is an heinous sin in it self as he will shew shortly and especially if it be exercised against the true Religion Before we hear the rest consider this First he should have said Soul Tyranny is an heinous sin not especially but only when it is exercised against the true Religion Coercive power exercised against false Religion is no Tyranny no sin at all but an Act of Justice or Religion Secondly he forgot himself in this Assertion and did not remember that in Rome it self Italy and Spaine c. where that Soul Tyranny is most rigorously exercised setting up a false Religion and persecuting the true in their High commission and Inquisition Courts there is as yet the greatest peace and prosperity and flourishing of those Nations their sins being not yet mature for their long ago determined judgments However it seems those Politician are not of this mans Cabinet Council that Toleration of all Religions is one of the Pillars of a States Settlement Its experimented too much and too long through many ages that no hatreds and so no differences are like those of different Religions and which is observable the nearer they come unto an union in matters of Religion if yet there be some difference the more strong and deadly are their hatreds the more fierce and violent their Animosities The Jew and the Samaritan were The Protestants and Papists The Lutheran Arminians and Calvinists c. are at this day the most deadly enemies The reason is well given by one not meanly learned They both plead for their God and that man hath no Religion that can put up an Indignity offered to his God See that story Act. 19.23 c. But Thirdly he forgot himself once more and did not consider that all those miseries or most of them have fallen upon this Nation since the desired Liberty of conscience was gratified with a Toleration or Connivence at least And whither they will ever end till Religion be established in truth purity and power is a probleme not yet determined but may be ere we have done A second Reason why Soul tyranny is so heinous a sin and cause of our miseries he gives to be this that This Nation hath been deeply gurley of it above these hundred years He means forsooth in prosecuting Papists not for their Religion but their Rebellion and rebellious principles What is this but to call our Church and State Persecutors
But of this more anon It is true which is his third Reason of our miseries Each party objects persecution to another as the cause of all their miseries But one party only truly For as there is but one true Religion so there can be no persecution properly but of that the rest is a just prosecution of errors and heresies that destroy not only the Faith but the Souls of many And his distinction I desire may be remembred Arbitrary Government was one of the alledged grounds of the late war c. p. 5. as of use hereafter But that this was the cause or principle ground of the late wars between King and Parliament is is utterly false The ground of their differences as they held them forth was the encroachment upon their civil Liberties and priviledges of Parliament but I leave this to them whom it concerns as for what is made the judgments of others concerning our miseries by Papists Presbyterians Royalists Independents it is not worth the while to debate It s like every party will remove the objection from it self and charge it upon others let them agree it 3. He is now drawing towards his main business what ever the sin be that hath drawn the foresaid Judgments upon these Nations it is certain with allmost all Prudent and Unbyassed men that this State especially as matters now stand in such a variety of Religions shall never be firmly setled under any form of Government unless it be built upon such a solid Foundation as may assert and secure the peoples liberties both Religious and Civil leave but out these words especially as matters now stand in such a variety of Religion which have a secret design as we shall hear presently the thing will be granted by all prudent men that no State can be firmly setled unless it be built upon such a solid foundation as may assert and secure the peoples liberties both civil and Religious But I pray what is that foundation In his Title page he speaks of two solid foundations for the settlement of England and makes them there and here to be the peoples civil and Religious Liberties when as these themselves do need a foundation to secure and settle them upon which he cunningly conceals and is unwilling to discover for thus he asserts again page 4. The two pillars whereupon this State must be setled are the Spiritual and civil liberties of the people that is in the Parliaments language as Men as Christians But upon what foundation shall these two pillars stand The peoples Liberties civil or Religious are but the walls or roof of this building and as he said before must be built upon some other solid foundation which what it is I desire to know He seems to resolveit into just Lawes to free the people from Slavery in their Persons and Oppression in their Goods And indeed that may go for one of the foundations to settle a State upon viz Righteousnes to assert and secure their Civil and Religious Liberties but there is another and a stronger foundation and that is the True Religion established and practised of which more hereafter For the first pillar or foundation that of civil liberties of the people he says he shall speak but a little and I less it is not our main business in hand Three things only he delivers concerning the civil Liberties 1 That they were much more violated since the Kings death then before in his time viz. 1. In their Representatives when the Major part of the Parliament members were violently thrust out of the House and divers of them Imprisoned and much more when they were dissolved without any Lawful Authority by force and power of the sword which the peoples servants turned against themselves 2. By the change of Government and Election of a new supreme Magistrate without the suffrages of the people c. 3. When freeborn persons were imprisoned by Arbitrary power and inhumanly used in Prison Trepanning men into Plots and then cruelly executed c. Lastly in their Goods by exorbitant and continual Taxes c. Then 2. like a good Physitian or Statesman he prescribes the Remedies to these our Maladies I shall but name them 1. That some course be taken to make the power of the sword subordinate to the civil power that the Souldiers be not suffered any more to domineere over their Masters as the Romane Praetorian bands did and the Turks Janisaries do 2. That no person be imprisoned nor his goods touched without breach of a known Law 3. That at length the people may be freed from their long and exorbitant Taxes by reducing the Army to as small and competent a number as can be c. 4. All possible means used to quicken Trade c. 3. He seems to prophesie once more to the little comfort of the people When all is done let them make the best Settlement they can the people are not like to be in so good a case as they were in the Kings time c. The Government setled cannot be maintained without a continued Army and Navy nor those without continual Taxes Excise and other insupportable burthens c. which with him I leave to the consideration of the Present powers He now comes to the other maine Basis or Pillar that must uphold the great Fabrick of this State to make it stand firme and sure the Spiritual or Religious Liberties of the people which consists in this that no person professing Faith in Christ be molested or oppressed in his conscience for his judgment in matters of Religion or in things relating to the worship of God 1. That true Religion maintained in its power and purity is a maine Bâ—sis or Power of a State I have often heard but the peoples Religious Liberties are but the product and fruit of that Religion or of civil Righteousnes in a well setled State 2. If by Religious Liberty he meane as he does Toleration of all Religions in all that pretend to conscience that every man may not only think and be on what Religion he please but practise accordingly it is to be feared it will in stead of a solid foundation prove a quicksand or quagmire and quickly sink or draw after it the peoples civil Liberties which is his other pillar For is there not a conscience to be made in civil Liberties And must not a man follow his conscience in civil things as well as in Religious Suppose a man be an Anabaptist that out of conscience denies all Magistracy or a Leveller or Familist that hold all things ought to be common goods and wives and all may he be suffered to follow his Conscience in these things Or may he be restrained or punished if he take another mans goods or abuse his wife c. If so is not this to exercise a coercive power over Conscience If not will it not destroy as some Principles of Religion so all Humane Society Let him but make the peoples civil Liberties
to wish and work if it be in their power and make a change of that Government whence it clearly followes that that state which puts a restraint upon mens consciences especially when variety of Religions hath got a footing in it cannot be well and solidly setled but is exposed to unavoidable troubles jealousies and danger of ruine Thus far the Jesuite To which we say Liberty of Conscience in profession of the true Religion is a thing of special value and by all desired but liberty granted to erroneous and heretical consciences is a thing most dangerous and destructive to their own and other souls and by no wise man to be desired nor by any religious State to be granted But observe again those interposed words especially when variety of Religions hath got a footing in a Nation And again especially as the case now stands observe what was noted above that it was the design of the Jesuites on purpose to break our Religion into fractions that so they might plead for toleration of all upon this ground that the State cannot now be solidly setled if they put a restraint upon mens consciences At Rome and else where where they are all of one false Religion they may and do put restraint upon mens consciences that whatever they think in their judgments they may not dare to publish their opinions and set up new Religions May not a Protestant Magistrate lay a restraint upon all Religions but the true by way of remedy which they do by way of prevention knowing that if variety of Religions be suffered to get footing in a Nation they will unsettle the peace of the Nation as well as where they have already got footing But enough of that In particular to the Argument I say many things 1. It is no Paradox to say conscience it self though the body may cannot be forced or restrained as the will cannot but is ever seen when the tongue or body may be bound The Word of God is not bound though I be said the great Apostle in Prison The conscience hath its freedome either to practise according to it or to suffer in its restraint not with discontent as he but upon choice and joyfully too 2. That 's no good conscience that desires and works to be free from soul-tyranny by working a change of that Government by which it is racked The Apostles and primitive Christians when they had power in their hand as the greater number did not so but pleaded and urged obedience either active or passive to the worst of Governments Whence it appears that this is no part of the Doctrine of Jesus but a drop of Jesuitisme That restraint of conscience may lawfully put men upon designs to ruine the State under which they live and suffer This may be part of the Politicians Catechisme which he speaks of hatched in the Conclave of Rome or the Jesuites juncto's but is wisedome earthly sensual divelish yea too often practised by them as in other States so in ours of England His own instances shall convince him that of the forraign Invesion in the year 88 and again by a detestible Gunpowder Plot of some few desperate Papists c. Detestible Plots indeed and desperate not by some few Papists or as one called them unfortunate Gentlemen not for the undertaking but unfortunate in their success not by some few Papists but by an Armado the one the other not without the Approbation of many Priests and Jesuites and the Canonization of the chief Contriver Garnet at Rome True Protestants have ever hated such Religion as allowes People to rebell against and endeavour the ruine or subversion of the State rather then suffer for Religion As for those instances in France Holland Scotland or any other I shall not take upon me to justifie or condemn them because I know not their grounds they are old enough and able to plead for themselves But this only I shall commend to the consideration of the present Powers That though some other Sects or several Religions as he calls them have made Insurrections since the change of the Government above ten years since to the danger of the State yet those that are true Presbyterians have never in the least devised any Plots or moved a Finger against any of the Powers that have been uppermost but have sat still in silence and submission resolved to yield active obedience to their commands where lawfully they may or passive obedience to suffer where their consciences dare not act or approve And to this man I say The Presbyterians have never exercised any Soul tyranny over mens consciences upon any of different opinions from them in matters of Religion as never having had any such power granted them unless upon their own consenting Members in a spiritual way which himself allowes Whom have they ever punished in their bodies mulcted in their goods cropt off their ears imprisoned banished c. They abhor the thoughts much more the practise of such soul-tyranny and leave it either to the former Government or to his holy Father the Pope from whence it had its Original Yet these are the men whom this bold Calumniator dare asperse as overturners of the State some more precise sort of Protestants who past all before under the name of Puritans and that upon the same score of Religion to be free of all restraint of their consciences and enjoy a greater freedome The Lord rebuke thee thou slanderous Tongue that restraint was laid upon the consciences of those honest men who were unjustly called Puritans is too evident to be denyed That they might seek to be free from that restraint may also be yielded but not in any seditious or tumultuous way but in a way of Address to the Supream Power of Parliament abhorring the very thought of overturning the State though by the fraud and subtilty of some that have followed which they never intended Himself hath told us what was one and a chief if not the only cause of the late Wars Arbitrary Government and encroaching upon the Peoples Civil Liberties p. 5. not at all or not primarily upon the score of Religion though they might justly fear that by Arbitrary Government Religion at last might come to suffer as all that know the state of those times cannot but confess 3. As for his innocent toleration let us hear what he sayes An inoffensive Toleration in matters of Religion secures all and cements the Peoples greatest Interest to preserve and defend the Common-wealth whereof we see a near and clear example in the Common-wealth of Holland But 1. Why may he not conclude the like for Peoples civil Liberties An innocent and inoffensive community of all things will secure all and cement the Peoples Interest to preserve and defend the Common wealth wherein they enjoy such freedome It is propriety that puts wicked men upon Breach of Peace that puts men upon stealing one from another Let rich men but be perswaded to let their houses goods and
the Church c. Ergo Not to the Magistrate But 1. Why did he leave out in matters of Faith that might have given us cause to suspect the Jesuite who allowes to his Pope power in matters of Faith in his Trent Creed but in worship the Church he would have us believe have some latitude of power which she hath not except in meer circumstances not to appoint the worship it self 2. For I ask Hath Christ committed his Authority to the Church to coin new Articles of Faith and new forms of Worship If not the Church and Magistrate are herein equal in their power between whom this Argument would insinuate a difference The Church hath no Authority Coercive upon mens consciences in matters relating to Faith and Worship more then the Magestrate hath but both are in their own way to publish and look to the execution of Christs rules in both The only difference is that the power of the Church is Spiritual that of the Magistrate Corporal And they may not meddle with each other Powers the Magistrate may no more exercise the spiritual power of the Church than the Church may exercise power over mens bodies or estates 3. This Disputer if he understand what he sayes would insinuate that Christ hath committed Authority over mens consciences to the Church which the Apostle earnestly disclaims 2 Cor. 1.24 And yet the Church hath some kind of Coercive power over her Members as appears in her censure of Excommunication which our Author sayes is a worse punishment than all the Magistrate can inflict upon the body as giving men over to the World and to Satan Now look back a little and sum up all It is a general rule laid down by all sides Conscience may not must not be forced in matters of Religion by any Coercive power Then neither by the Church nor Magistrate neither spiritually nor corporally The Church may no more force conscience than the Magistrate yet the Church exercising and executing Examination upon an Heretick or scandalous person exercises a Coersive power and as they will say over their consciences for they verily believe themselves in the right Religion Therefore either the exercise of Coercive power by the Church is also unlawful and so he hath destroyed the power of the Church in matters of Religion as well as of the Magistrate or else it is no force over mens consciences but over the errors of their consciences And laftly If it be lawful for the Church to restrain and chaftise an Heretick by her spiritual censures without any force to her conscience Why may it not be lawful for the Magistrate to restrain such a soul destroying Heretick by bodily punishments and yet without force upon his conscience Why may not the Magistrate deliver such a man to the Jaylor as the Church delivers him to the Devil Especially the end of both being as much as in them lies to save his soul Whence I conclude against him this Power of the Magistrate is no Vsurpation of the Dominion of Christ or the Power of the Church much lefs Treason against Christ Thus weakly hath M. Collier argued hitherto we shall hear of him again are long 3. His third Reason is borrowed from as wise an Author The Vindicatour of Sir Henry Vane Nothing can be more against the spiritual good of People than to make them hypocrites in Religion professing to believe what they do not Learned Soul Hath not the State and Church of England commanded all their People to frequent our Congregations under a penalty every Lords Day Hath not this man accordingly frequented them And hath he been all this while an hypocrite professing to believe what he doth not But if force in Religion make men hypocrites why did God commend Abraham to circumcise all the males of his family Why did the Godly Magistrates command all their Subjects under the Old Testament to serve the Lord according to the worship prescribed Did God or men intend to make them hypocrites Which they must have done if Coercive power did make them so Alas most men are hypocrites already though they be not forced to worship God therefore Coercive power does not make but find and discovers hypocrites Must not God be obeyed though men be hypocrites But real Christians who only can truly be forced against conscience do not turn hypocrites but refuse obedience and chuse to suffer which discovers their faith and patience and bring much glory to God There must be persecution as well as Heresies that they which are approved may be known It is therefore by accident that such force makes men appear hypocrites by commanding them to obey the Laws of God the Law of God irritates corruption but causes it not Rom. 7.13 23. If then God or men from God command men to worship God according to his will they find many hypocrites but do not make them such They sin if they serve him not and if hypocritically they sin also and its hard to say which is worst But this is some of the new light of this age that Children must not be taught their Commandments Creed or Lords Prayer or to read the Scriptures because they are yet hypocrites or none must receive the Lords Supper that knows not himself regenerate lest it make him an hypocrite Enough of this 4. His fourth Reason is taken out of the Levellers Catechism A Levelling Principle indeed to deny the Magistrates power in matters of Religion first and then in civil affairs If all were levelled and but content to be so what need what use of a Magistrate But hear their worthy Reason It 's against the nature of faith and worship to be forced Christ hath ordained the preaching of the Gospel to be the outward means of converting souls and spiritual Ordinances for punishment of erroneous and heretical persons c. This hath been spoken to in answering Mr. Colliers first and second reasons and in the last before But I add further it contradicts it self twice 1. In saying that the preaching of the word is the outward means of Conversion and yet denies any force to bring professed Christians to the attending on that means 2. That they allow spiritual punishment which is a greater force for reducing erroneous and heretical persons and yet denies not only the Magistrate to use any the least force to the bodies or estates of men but any force at all over mens consciences If no force may be used then not the spiritual as was said afore Lastly he takes for granted what we utterly deny that we allow the Church a power to punish mis-believers or mis-livers in bodies or purses Some have done so but I hope they have had time to repent it for so dishonouring the Church 5. The next is from a better Author but to as little purpose From the parable of the Tares among the Wheat both must be let alone till the Harvest the Wheat are the elect the Tares are Hereticks c. It might be
what ever it be though Kings be gone have no reason in policy to tolerate such so it will be no persecution of them for conscience sake but a wise and just prosecution of them for such destructive principles as make the owners of them unfit to live amongst men in any civil society And as for the petitions of the people for liberty of conscience as they were made tendered by some few Sectaries whose loose opinions and practises will abide no government not by the generality of the most and best people of the Land so in a right-sense it is grated by these That a care be had of truly tender consciences viz. Who profess faith in Christ and live peaceably in godliness and honesty But they only desire some discipline may be exercised upon such us either deny Jesus Christ directly or by necessary consequence or live not peaceably but by earnest propagation of their errors and he resies destroy both their own and others souls and disturb the peace of Church and State or have neither godliness nor holiness in their lives Yet these that plead for such a Government are the men against whom he cunningly inveighs p. 25. As dangerous persons that desire to domineer and tyrannize over other mens consciences and as their judgments are not greatly to be heeded so themselves are rather closly to be looked too lest they set all on fire again as the Jesuites have lately done as the â—â—cendiaries of all States when ever they come And again he stirs up the Nation against them p 30. It were just that such boutefeues 10. Lastly sayes he coercive power is against our own Interest at home and the Protestant Interest abroad at home because by fit we say a foundation of persecution to our selves and posterity If it be lawful for us to persecute others so it will be for them towards us if they get power So Mr. Collier According to the proverb like to like quoth the Divel to the Collier for what a fine new way have these men found to frustrate the predictions of Christ and his 〈…〉 In the World 〈◊〉 shall have tribulation Job 16. last All that will live Godly shall suffer persecution c. Their best Interest were to sit still and meddle with no bodies sins or errors How foolish was Paul to excommunicate those Hereticks that is in this new canting Language to persecute them if it was lawful for Paul to persecute and molest them for their faith and conscience it was lawful for them to persecute and excommunicate him and what a disturbance might this cause in the Church Foolish Politicians the profession of the Gospel in truth and sincerity looks not at our own Interest in the World but expects persecution teaching men to deny themselves to forsake all their goods their peace their lives were not this as politick an Argument in a Corporation where Officers are Annual Be favourable to drunkards and prosane persons in this your year lest one of them get into place next year and persecute you It is for your Interest lest you lay a â—oundation of persecution to your selves or your posterity for if it be lawful for you to exercise coercive power over others by the same rule of reason it will be lawful for others to persecute you 2. Say the same for the Protestant Interest abroad If we persecute mâ—n of their Religion here they will persecute ours there c. If be shall say there is not the same reason in matters civil as in Religion I shall choak him first by a Scripture Instance Nehemiah was a prudent man but he had not learned the Jesuites politicks He used coercive power towards the Heathen Merchants as well as his own Nations in a matter of Religion the profanation of the Sabbath threatning to lay them by the heels if they brought any more Wares to sell on that day How imprudently with respect to the Jewish Interest abroad Did he not lay a foundation of persecution of his Country-men in their dominions in that or some other point of their Religion Secondly I confute his policy by Scripture reason The Magistrate is the Minister of God a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil Rom. 13.4 Therefore he must either say that it is not evil for an heretical seducer to destroy the subjects souls or else the Magistrate must use coercive power to restrain and punish such let his Interest be what it will at home or abroad In a word there is as great a distance between persecution and prosecution as between innocency and wickedness truth and error and surely both ought not to enjoy the same priviledges shall truth have but a Toleration as well as error He must therefore make this consequence the foundation of his error good It is lawful for truth and innocency to presecute error and wickedness Ergo It is lawful by the same reason for error and wickedness to persecute truth and innocency or be shews himself a very Sophister Cheater 〈◊〉 Sâ—ducer and that he hath done suffâ—â—â—ntly in all his reasons A POSTSCRIPT Reader IF this little discourse for removing the false foundations of Englands Settlement find favour and acceptance with thee expect shortly if God permit another like it â—â—ying down and fixing the true and solid Foundations of its Settlement Righteousness and Religion together with the true and many causes of our so â—oâ—g unsettlement Fare well
enough to answer this that it is a parable which is a similitude and must not be strained beyond its scope which is to let us know that good and bad upright and hypocrites must be in the Church till the end of the World And yet some are about to make a Church of all Saints and to pluck up the Wheat in pretence of pulling up the Tares But 2. By Tares cannot well be meant heretical persons not in Austin's judgment for he and other Doctors with the Scripture allow Excommunication of Hereticks and scandalous persons which is not only a plucking up of the Tares but a casting them out of the Church into Hell without repentance 3. Our Saviour himseif tells us who are the tares the children of the wicked one and such as do iniquity Mat. 13.38.41 Now hence it would follow that neither Church nor Magistrate must punish such but let them alone to the end of the World a pleasiing Doctrine to thieves and all wicked persons But if notwithstanding this parable it be lawful for the Church to punish Hereticks spiritually and for the Magistrate to punish them corporally he hath mistaken the parable And if the Magistrate may punish a murdour bodily for killing the bodies of men why should it be unlawful for him to punish an heretical seducer that destroyes mens souls and that eternally I leave him to consider it 6. He fetches this next Reason from far from the judgment of the ancients and practise of the primitive Church Lactan. Tertull. c. who seem to deny all force in Religion A little may serve for this There is a difference to be put between Heathens and Christians in matters of Religion The Ancients speak against forcing Heathens into Christianity till they first be informed and convinced of the truth thereof not of compelling professed Christians to the outward Worship of God as the King of Judah did 2. The practise of Christian Emperours was accordingly for the most part with respect to Heathens Yet some of them made Edicts to command all their subject to be of the Christian Religion Justinian and others as were easie to instance 3. In Pressing this ARgument too far he forgot himself that he makes his Pope and Popish Princes worse then Turks and Furies in their persecution of Protestants And let them but give this liberty of conscience to all their subjects which he pleads for in England and lay aside their coercive power and I believe Popery will have but a few clients most of them would quickly forsake their Church and Religion especially if they might have the truth freely taught by some Protestants 7. But a reason fatcht from a principle of nature and natural light will convince any reasonable man It 's against the golden rule of natural righteousness do as we would be done by and do not to others what we would not have done to our selves but who would be content to be persecuted by others for his Religion c. Truly no man would or at least should be persecuted for his true Religion but he that would not be prosecuted for a false Religion argues himself to be unrighteous and to violate that principle of nature and another like it Aequo animo paenam qui meruere luant Let him make this rule universal and thieves and malefactors will give him many thanks What Thieves would be content to be hang'd by a Magistrate Ergo If he get to be a Magistrate he must not hang a Thief c. Bring it neerer to himself what Jesuite would be content to be executed for sedition and seducement of Protestants from their Religion and Loyalty Ergo. nor should they persecute Protestants in their Dominions How likes he this The Golden Rule is made for true rectifyed consciences not for every one that pretends it What in true reason I would have another do or not do to me that I should be content to do or not do to another If a man should argue thus I would not be content to be persecuted for the true Religion Ergo I must not prosecute one that is in the false Or thus If I am an Heretick perverting Souls and would not be restrained or punished for so doing Ergo I must let others alone and not punish them for the same both these consequences are false and unreasonable and meer pervertings and crooknings of that Golden Rule This is a Jesuitical consequence I would not be punished for my seduce ment in England Ergo I may plead for Toleration of Popery and all Religions This consequence I say is good now in England to cheat simple souls but would be denyed with an Inquisition at Rome or in Spain Such another fallacy is that which followes a Christian must pray for his Enemies Ergo he must not persecute his brother be he never so wicked q. d. I must pray for a Thief or Murderer Heretick Ergo I may not prosecute them to just punishment corporally the one spiritually the other 8. The next reason comes yet neerer home ad hominem as we say and that is thus It is against our own principles and the testimony of an Adversary is most strong against himself Wherein In three things 1. We profess our selves to be fallible in judging universally in matters of Religion and object it to the Papists pretending infallibility but by persecuting others for conscience we make our selves infallible as Mr. Collier wiely observes For this he hath been told we persecute no man for his conscience but may prosecute a man for an erring conscience which he still concludes a just prosecution with an unjust persecution 2. We profess our selves to be fallible or not infallible in the Popish sense He deludes us with the equivocation of the words If he mean that we hold our selves fallible universally in all matters of Religion that we are uncertain of all points of Religion and certain of nothing that were to make us meer Scepticks in our Religion and we own not such a fallibility On the other side we do not think our selves infallible universally in matters of Religion as the Pope does but that in some fundamental truths we are infallible that is most certain of the truths of our Religion clearly revealed in Scripture which is an infallible rule though we are not alwayes able to apply it But the Pope as he makes himself infallible in all points of Religion which he determines out of the Pontifical Chair so he does it in things besides and against the Scripture and this we object to him as an hainous crime and high usurpation of the prerogative of Jesus Christ speaking in the Scripture 3. What need is there that we must be infallible to judg and punish an Heretick why this We cannot rationally persecute any man for his conscience unlesswe we do not only know that he is in an ertor but also be infallibly sure that we are bringing him to an undoubted truth Be it so then we assume we may know
that the man is in an errour if we may know the truth and be infallibly sure we are bringing him to an undoubted truth Ergo we may persecute we say prosecute him for his erring conscience e. g. We know certainly that he that denies a God or Jesus Christ to be the Son of God and Saviour of the World is in an error and we are infallibly sure we are bringing him to an undoubted truth to profess a God and Jesus Christ and Ergo we may by his own premises persecute or rather prosecute him for his erring conscience Whereupon the following assertion is most unchristian and uncharitable It would be better for us to let him alone in his known damning errors than to force him to ours which we not falsly as he truly esteem truth The very mercies of the wicked are cruel 4. These men seem to be Scepticks in their Religion for if there be any Religion or rules of faith and worship delivered in Scripture we may come to be infallibly sure that this is the Truth of God and thereby discover errors and consequently may prosecute them though we be not universally infallible The Magistrates of the Old Testament might not force any mans conscience more than now nor were more infallible than ours are now yet having a cleer rule of Religion and worship given them they compelled their subjects to observe it why may not ours do so now having a cleer light and greater illumination Is it not a certain and infallible truth that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and only Saviour of the World If not what an uncertain thing is Christianity which depends upon that one principle If it be shall any man professing the Christian Religion be suffered to deny that truth and blaspheme that holy name with impurity because the Magistrate or Church is not in all things infallible Lastly as to this first principle ex ungue leonem we may descry and discover the Fox the Jesuite by his strong plea for Toleration to his Recusants or Papists Though he speak in the person of Protestants as if one of them yet his secret or open girding at the State shews what he is Who having laid aside the King by whom and for whom those laws of restraint were made which is indeed the abolishing of those Laws yet we keep up the penalties of those Laws in vigour against Recusants which seems to be a very irrational Act And puts this Jeer upon the present powers by way of thanks or scorne for their granted soleration That as we have not one particular positive Religion setled for undoubted truth amongst us So we purpose not any one Religion to the Recusants to be followed by them but at most hold them out a medly of all Sects profest in the Nation c. Quis tulerit Gracchos de Seditione querentes The Subtle cursed Jesuites self condemned men have broken our Religion into so many Sects and Fractions to keep us from Setling the true Religion and then make themselves merry with our divisions The Lord rebuke them This to our first principle 2. The next is We have always pretended a general Toleration for all tender consciences of which kind there are some amongst the Prelatical and Popish party And yet they only are excepted from Toleration by the Parliament for so he means it But he goes on still Grant it to a poor sneaking foolish fellow that can scarce speak sense and hath hardly a groat in his purse to lose for his conscience and deny it to men of Honour Prudence and Estates suffering meerly for their conscience as having no tender consciences 1. Me thinks I hear the proud Pharisees speak in this Jesuite This people that knoweth not the Law is cursed and Lord I thank thee I am not as other men He cals mean simple Christians Sneaking Fellows as if they had no conscience because they have no Estates He may remember Not many Wife not many Noble or Mighty were called or honoured to be primitive Martyrs to suffer meerly for conscience They had too much to lose to dare to profess Christianity But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise c. He may read the rest 1 Cor. 1.26 c. And he makes men of Honour Prudence and Estates to have tender consciences meerly for suffering in their Estates whereas he knows many such may and do suffer only for the Religion delivered them by Tradition from their Fathers or out of some carnal respects If a man desired to be loose and profane he need not chuse an easier Religion than Popery And the Divel hath had his Martyrs and Confessors as well as Christ Martyres Satanicae virtutis as Cyprian c 2. But I have I confess often wondered that those in power who pretend so much favour to all tender consciences should so often by name except the Prelatical and Popish party when as there may be as tender consciences in some of them as in some whom they tolerate and also their laxe and loose principles and these reasons carry toleration for all or none Some Satisfaction I received from one that also pleads for Toleration as I thought for all Religions for his Arguments are as strong for all as for any why the Popish party should not have any Toleration granted them above all the rest Let him be heard speak in his own words As for Popery and Idolatry J. Milâ—on tract of civil power in Ecclesiastical causes p 35. why they also may not plead to be tolerated I have much less to say Their Religion the more considered the less can it be acknowledged a Religion but a Roman principallity rather endevouring to keep up her old universal Dominion under a new name and meer shadow of a Catholick Religion being indeed more rightly named a Catholick heresie against the Scripture and except in Rome supported mainly by a civil and forrain power justly therefore to be suspected not tolerated by the Magistrate of another Country Besideâ— of an Implicite Faith which they profess the conscience also becomes implicit and so by voluntary servitude to mans law forfeits her Christian Liberty Who then can plead for such a conscience as being inthraled implicitly to man instead of God almost becomes no conscience as the will not free becomes no will Lastly for Idolatry whereof the Romish Church is justly charged to be deeply guilty who know it not to be evidently against all Scripture both of the Old and New Testament And therefore a true Herefie or rather Impiety wherein a right conscience can have nought to do and the works thereof so manifest that a Magistrate can hardly err in prohibiting and quite removing at least the publick and scandalous use thereof How this will please Jesuits or how they will answer it I he ther know nor care But I satisfied my self with one or both of these considerations 1. That they might except them not out of conscience but
out of state pollicy because on the one side if the prelatical party should have a Tole ration they might in time return to challenge and take from them those fat and sweet morsels of the Bishops Revenues which some of them have swallowed down and would be loath to vomit up again On the other side if the Popish party should be tolerated I will not say they should lose a good Revenue from Sequestration of two parts of their Estates though some give this for a reason their Principles are destructive to Heretical Magistrates as the Pope can easily make them and so subversive of their New Common-wealth That 's one 2. The other consideration to stay my wonder was That that exception was so often inserted by some Jesuitical finger that if ever that party got power into their hands they might the more colourable deny Toleration to those who being in place did first deny it to them for this is a maxime amongst the Sectaries They that deny toleration to others tender consciences I Milt ubi supra p. 36. deserve not to have it for themselves And then they that now plead for Toleration of the worst sort of tender consciences will at last grant more to those whose consciences are truly tender and most rightly principled I wish I may be a false prophet in this consideration But hear the next 3. It is against another Principle of ours we allow people the Bible in the vulgar language and press them to search the Scripture to find out the mind of God and at last by our coersive power will have them believe as the the Church believes we bid men as wisely Mr Collier speaks see with their own eyes and yet put them to see with others eyes We bid men with our Saviour to search the Scriptures and with the Bereans not content themselves to believe as the Church believes that was the Colliers and the Papists beliefe but to try the truths held out by Church or Magistrate which if they do faithfully and sincerely they will see the truths with their own eyes If any man will do his will he shall know of the Doctrine whether it be of God or whether I speak of my self Jo 7.17 And we suppose and take for granted which this man makes doubtful that there is a pattern of sound words the true faiâ—h and worship of God held forth fiâ—st in the Scriptures and then by the Church or Magistrate and thereupon exhort men not to take any thing upon trust of men which is not faith but ignorance or Popish credulity but in matters of Salvation to search and see by their own eyes And if it happen that private persons mistake error for truth they must either be meekly willing to hearken to instruction which is a sign of a good conscience or resolve rather to suffer for their judgment than to disturb the peace of the Church or State For while they keep it to themselves none can take notice of it or judg them for it But this dispute allowes them either to resist the coercive power and labour their subversion as in his first Argument or else to be tolerated though never so damnably heretical and practically destructive to themselves or others True charity of Protestants bids those that have the charge of their souls which both Ministers and Magistrates have in their own way First with meekness and much patience to instruct them and if they still continue obstinate like mad men to mischief themselves and others to lay setters of restraint upon them either spiritual or corporal that they may do no further hurt 9. The next Reason is this It was against the judgment of King James and other Kings and against the peoples frequent petitions for toleration c First for King James two of his sayings are produced That God never plants a Church by violence and bloodshed True for he left that for the Jesuites amongst the poor Indians So spake Tertullian and Lantanc above Religion is not to be forced upon Heathens God does not fiâ—st plant a Church by violence much less by bloodshed but when a Church is planted as a Vine he allows pruning and purging of it by spiritual censures which in this mans sense is a kind of force upon conscience And the Magistrate being a guardian or nurse-keeper of the Church as Gods vicegerent is to publish and maintain Religion in the puriâ—y of it which cannot be done without coercive power not upon mens consciences but upon their bodies or estates His other speech That he never intended any persecution any against the Papists for conscience sake but desired to be secured for civil obedience which they cannot deny Not to tell him that King James did not own but oppose their Religion as false whose Faith is Faction whose Religion is Rebellion he knows who said it If he did restrain them from practising it publickly it was not persecution of them for conscience sake but prosecution of an erring conscience But I say when they were restrained from exercise of their Religson it was with respect to a principle of their Religion denying to give him security in civil obedience from a stated-destroying opinion and practise of theirs That it is lawful yea necessary if the Pope command it to murder and kill heretical Kings Whereof his predecessors and himself had frequent experience in such like attempts the examples of other Kings in tolerating other Keligions I fear is rather out of political Interest than real piety As for that scandal upyn the powers That the State in persecuting them now will be greater persecutors then the old Magistraâ—â—s and Bishops were yea than the Spanish Inquisition it self I leave to them to answer or chastise such Jesuitical insolence One thing aspersive upon the Bâ—shops and others is fouly and foolishly affeâ—ted and easily wiped away They to prove the lawfulness of their vocation against the Puritans derived their orders from Rome yet concurred with the State to make the Laws that any that received orders from Rome were Traitors which was most ridiculous But 1. The Puritans did not brand their vocation from Rome in the first Protestant Bishops in England some of them were ordained Presbyters by such the Browninsts and Anabaptists did that 2. The Bishops with the State made a Law that none of their Ministers should take orders from Rome in a State way first because that was a denial of our ministry to be good at home Secondly it was an owning of the Popes supremacy spiritual in England which appears by this that they so far allowed ordination by a Romish Bishop that they did not re-ordain those Priests which were converted unto the Protestant Religion But if Papists and Jesuites be of the same opinions as afore That heretical Magistrates may be murdered and maintain revelations and impulsies of spirit to kill any whom their spirit bids them kill which our young Quakers have learnt of them as the State or Government