of the Church was either for a time deprived from enjoying the benefit of the Publick Worship or entirely excluded from being a Member of the Church This being the utmost unto which any Colledge can pretend viz. entirely to exclude a Member of their Society This Exclusion tho' in it self considered of the greatest moment since thereby a Christian was deprived of the whole Communion with the Church Nevertheles did not alter the Civil State or Condition of a Subject But those that were thus excommunicated suffered no loss in their Dignities Honour Rights or Fortunes For that the Church Censures should extend to the real Prejudice of the civil Condition of any Subject is not any ways requisite for the obtaining the Ends for which the Church is Established Neither can it be supposed that without defrauding Sovereigns of their Right such a Power can be exercised over Subjects unless with their own Consent and by vertue of a publick Civil Authority § 40. The next thing which deserves our Consideration is whether the Church is and Concerning the condition of the Church under Christian Princes how far it received any Alteration from its former Condition after Princes whole Kingdoms and States did profess the Christian Religion Where it is to be observed That the Churches did thereby not receive any essential Perfection it being evident that the Christian Religion could be exercised and subsist without the State and Commonwealths did not depend from the Christian Religion The scope of the Christian Religion and of civil Governments being quite different in their own nature For our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our Conversation Phil. 3. 20. 2 Cor. 5 ◠8. 1 Cor. 14 19. is in Heaven and if in this Life only we have hope in Christ we are of all Men most miserable For this Reason it was that the Apostles were never forward to appear before Princes tho' they might have obtained an easie Access by their miraculous Deeds So Herod was exceeding glad when he saw Jesus because he hoped to have seen some Miracle done Luke 23. 8. by him But they were very cautious in this point lest it might appear to some as if the Gospel wanted to be maintained by Human Strength or that perhaps those Princes might pretend to a greater Authority over them than was consistent with the safety of the Christian Religion Notwithstanding all this the Christian Religion does not in any wise impair or ecclipse the legal Rights of Sovereigns but rather confirms and establishes the civil Power Mat. 22. 21. Joh. 18. 2. Rom. 13. 1 Cor. 35. 24. as is apparent out of several passages in the holy Scripture If it should be granted that the Church was a State independent from any temporal Jurisdiction the consequence would be this That the civil Power could not but receive a most remarkable Limitation and Diminution and the condition of a Subject must receive a great alteration whereas on the other hand the condition of Christians or of Teachers in the Church considered as such is neither abolished nor altered because either the Prince or the Subjects in general do receive the Christian Faith there being not the least footstep to be met withal in the Scriptures implying any such alteration Besides this there is not any express Command in the New Testament directed to Sovereigns which entitles them to any particular Prerogative in the Church like to that which the Kings of Israel had received in the 17 Chap. of Deuteronomy From whence arises this conclusion that what right Sovereigns can claim in the Church and Church Affairs must be deduced either out of the natural constitution of the civil Power or out of the true Genius of the Christian Religion or else must owe its off-spring to the free consent of the Church § 41. Out of what has been laid down it Churches do not alter their nature of being a Colledge appears first of all that if a Prince or whole Commonwealth do receive the Doctrine of Christ the Church does thereby not receive any other Alteration as to her natural Constitution but that whereas she was formerly to be considered only as a private Society or Colledge yet such a one as being subordinate to the Law and therefore to be cherished by the Higher Powers who had no legal Right to disturb prosecute or destroy it She now being put under the particular Protection of her Sovereigns enjoys a greater share of Security and is beyond the reach of the Persecutions of the Infidels Notwithstanding this the Church is thereby not exalted from a Colledge to a State since by the receiving of the Christian Religion the civil Government does not undergo any Alteration or Diminution On the contrary Sovereigns loose nothing of their legal Rights neither are Subjects in any wise absolved from their Duties and Obligations For it implies a contradiction that a double Sovereignty and two different sorts of Obligations in the Subject should be lodged in one and the same Commonwealth It is a frivolous Objection that the Church and civil Government have different Ends and Objects not repugnant to one another For from thence is not to be inferred that the Church must be a State or that the Christian Religion cannot be propagated maintained or exercised without the Church assume the same Power that belongs to the civil Government In these places therefore where the whole People and the Prince profess the Christian Religion the Commonwealth receives the Church into its Protection and tho' strictly united there is no collision or emulation betwixt them nor does either of them receive any prejudice in their respective Rights but without the least Interference with one another the Church remains a Colledge whereof the Prince and all the Subjects are now become Members So that each Subject besides the Person he represented in the State has assumed that of a Christian and in this respect is esteemed a Member of the Church Neither is every one to be considered in the Church according to the Station or Dignity he bears in the Commonwealth but these Qualifications are as it were laid aside there and he is only regarded as a Christian So that the General of an Army cannot claim any Prerogative to himself in the Church beyond the private Centinel And it is past all doubt that one and the same Man may represent several Persons according to the several Functions and Obligations belonging to him § 42. It is also according to my Opinion 〈…〉 made Bishops beyond question that Kings Princes or other civil Magistrates by receiving the Christian Doctrine are not constituted Bishops or Teachers in the Church this Function not properly belonging to every Christian but only to such as have a lawful Vocation and are fitly qualified for it Besides this the Royal Office and that of Teachers are of such a nature that they cannot conveniently be Administred by one and the same Person not because of any natural repugnancy betwixt
them but that each of them is involved in such a multitude of Trouble and variety of Business that it cannot rationally be supposed for one Man to be able to undergo such a Fatigue Iâ—â—s no less evident that Sovereigns by becoming Christians are not authorised to alter the Ministry of the Church or to order it at pleasure or to force the Ministers of the Gospel to teach any Doctrine which is not founded in the Scriptures or to preach up Human Inventions for Articles of Faith For what and how Ministers ought to Teach is prescribed by God himself who expects an exact Obedience in this Point as well from Kings as other Christians And it is to be considered that whenever Princes receive the Christian Doctrine the Teachers notwithstanding this remain in their former Station as to their Duty and Obligation to God as well as all the rest of their Christian Subjects who having received their Instructions as to their Religion only from God without the assistance of their Sovereigns these cannot claim any right to impose any thing of this kind upon them § 43. Notwithstanding all this it is not Concerning the Duty and Right of Christian Princes of defending the Church to be supposed that Sovereigns by becoming Christians have acquir'd no peculiar Rights or have not a more particular Duty laid upon them than before There being certain Obligations which owe their off-spring to the union of that Duty which is incumbent to every Christian with that of the Royal Office The first and chiefest of these Obligations seems to be that Sovereigns ought to be Defenders of the Church which they are oblig'd to protect not only against all such of their Subjects as dare to attempt any thing against it but also against Foreigners who pretend to be injurious to their Subjects upon that score And tho' the Christian Doctrine is not to be propagated by violence or force of Arms and our Saviour has highly recommended Patience and Sufferings as peculiar Vertues belonging to Christians Princes are nevertheless not debarr'd from their Right of Protecting the Christian Religion by all lawful means and Patience ought not to take place here except when no other lawful means can secure us against our Enemies So we see that St. Paul Acts 2. 2â— saved himself from being scourged by declaring himself to be a Roman and escaped the Fury of the Jews by making his Appeal to the Emperour And our Saviour himself left this Mat. 10. 2â— Advice to his Disciples That when they were persecuted in one City they should fly into another And it being an incumbent Duty belonging to all Sovereigns to defend their Subjects against all violence they ought to take more effectual care that they do not suffer any Injuries for the Christian Religions sake for what could be more reproachful to a Christian Prince than that his Subjects should be sufferers upon that account The next care which belongs to Christian Princes is to provide necessary Revenues for the exercise of the Christian Religion For as has been shewn before that no other Patrimony belonged to the Primitive Church but the Alms and free Contributions of the Believers and that these cannot but be supposed to be very uncertain the Ministers and Teachers in the Church run no small hazard of being exposed to want if they have nothing else to rely upon but the bare contributions of the Congregation who being in some places poor and Subject to other Taxes are incapable of supplying their want And not to dissemble the Truth after Princes and enâ—tire States have received the Doctrine of Christ it would appear very ill that whereas they enjoy such ample Revenues they would deal so sparingly with the Church the more because it is a general Maxim among Men to value a Function according to its Revenues What St. Paul recommends to the Romans in the 15th Chapter v. 27. and in the 1 Epist to the Corinthians 9. 11. ought to be the more taken notice of by Christian Princes because they can with less difficulty or any sensible injury to themselves put it in practise in their Station they having the management of the Publick Revenues in their hands It cannot be denied but that too vast Revenues are not always useful to Ministers of the Church and prove somâ—times prejudicial both to Church and State and that such as make profession of the Ministry of the Gospel ought not to make a Trade of their Function or to think it their main Business to gather Riches and take the Ministry for their By-work nevertheless if it be duely considered that he who cordially as he ought to do applies himself to the Ministerial Function has no other ways left him to provide for his Family and that the vulgar Sort scarce pay a due Respect to a Minister unless they see him live handsomely and well whereas he who is starv'd by his Function is the May-Game of the common People unto whom may be applied that old Saying of the Poet That this Man appears to be the Servant of a poor and wretched Lord. Apparet servum hunc esse Domini pauperis miserique Princes ought therefore to look upon this as one main part of their Devotion to settle certain and constant Sallaries or Revenues upon the Ministers of the Church as much as may be at least sufficient for their Maintainance In the Old Testament the Priests were to live from the Altar but those of the best kind were Vid. Ep. Gal. 6. 6. 2 Tim. 2. 4. brought to the Altar Besides this Princes ought not only to take care of Church-Buildings but also to erect and maintain Schools which being the Seminaries both of the Church and State if the first Rudiments of Christianity be not implanted in the Schools it cannot scarce be expected that Men when grown up should receive much benefit by publick Sermons § 44. But among other Considerations as Coâ—ceâ—ning the rights of Princes as to Ecclesiastical Affairs And first of the gâ—nâ—ral Inspection to what Rights properly belong to Princes as to Ecclesiastical Affairs it is evident that since by the Doctrine of the Gospel the Civil Power is in no wise impaired and a Prince cherishes a Church under his Jurisdiction he legally claims a Right of having a general Inspection over this as well as all other Societies at least so far as to take care that nothing be transacted in these Colledges to his Prejudice For Mankind being so perverse in its Nature that in Matters even the most Sacred if managed without controul they seldom let it slip through their hands without a Stain And that therefore it is scarce to be questioned but the Christian Doctrine is subject to the same Corruption and that under Pretence of Religion many pernicious Designs may be hatched against the Interest of the Commonwealth A Prince in whose Territories a Church is planted if he afterwards enters into the Communion of that Church has
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
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
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
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
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
to any particular Government but in general all such as make profession of a certain Doctrine or Religion § 15. One of the main points which those Christ had no Teritories belonging to him that intend to Establish a new Commonwealth ought to take care of is how to acquire considerable Territories where their new Subjects may settle themselves and their Fortunes So Moses when he saw it not fecible to set up the Jewish Commonwealth within the bounds of Aegypt led them into the Desert and through such places as were not subject to any particular Government till such time that they Conquered the Land of Canaan and rooted out its Antient Inhabitants Neither were the Jews before they were put into Possession of this Country the less free for they were then a Nation independent from any Foreign Power and though they sometimes marched upon the Borders of other Princes nevertheless were they not during that time subject to their Jurisdiction partly because no body ever laid any particular claim to those Territories or if some of them did they marched through them like Soldiers of Fortune ready to make good their Pretences and Titles to these Lands by the edge of their Swords But Christ did say of himself That he was so poor as he had not where to lay his head He was always so far Mat. 8. 20. from attempting to acquire any Possessions or Territories or to encourage his Followers to do it that he rather chose to live during the whole course of his life in other Territories and under Civil Jurisdiction § 16. There are a great many other remarkable Christ did not exircise the Office of a Prince Circumstances from whence it may plainly be inferred that Christ never did nor intended to appear as a Prince here upon Earth When the Mother of the Sons of Zebedeus begged of our Saviour that her Sons might be prefer'd to the Chiefest Dignities in the Kingdom of Christ he rebuked her for her ignorance and Prophesied to his Followers a very slender share of outward Splendor and temporal Preferments but abundance of Persecution nay he plainly told and enjoyned his Disciples that they should not strive for Pre-eminency over one another as Temporal Princes do It shall says he not be so amongst you Vid. Mat. 20. 20. ordering them to live in an equal and Brotherlike degree with one another And to remove by his own Example all remnants of Luke 20. 26. Pride he in their presence did abase himself to that degree of Servitude as to wash the feet of St. Peter Lastly it is of great Consequence John 13. 9 10. at the first Establishment of a new Commonwealth that its Founder be long-lived that thereby he may be enabled to lay a more solid Foundation of the new Government For this reason it was that David's Soldiers would not any longer suffer him to expose his Person in Battel lest the light of Israel should 2 Sam. 21. 17. be extinguished the loss of his own Person being esteemed more than of a great many thousands But our Saviour did surrender himself voluntarily to death after he had scarce four years appeared in Publick and that without appointing a Successor who was to exercise any Power or Authority over those that followed his Doctrine § 17. As now Christ during his abode 〈…〉 of a Doctor or Teacher here upon Earth did not make the least appearance or outward shew resembling the greatness of Temporal Princes and as out of all his Actions there cannot be gathered the least thing which may prove his intention to have been to erect a new State or Common-wealth so it is sufficiently apparent that during the whole course of his publick Conversation on Earth he employed all his Time and Labour in publishing the Word of God So that in the Quality of a Doctor or Teacher he appeared to the Eyes of all the World John 1. 2â— whereas his Office of being the Saviour of Mankind was at that time understood only by such as were capable of applying the Antient Oracles of the Prophets to his Person Furthermore our Saviour to establish and shew his Authority made use of such Miracles as might be evident proofs of his Divine Power partly because the Antient Ceremonies which were to be abolished were first ordained by God's special Command partly because the principal Heads of his Doctrine were surpassing all Human Understanding But as for his way of Teaching it was plain and free from Vanity without all affectation wherein appeared nothing which justly might cause the least suspicion of fictitious Worship Notwithstanding his Doctrine appeared thus in her Native and Pure Simplicity yet so powerful were its Charmâ— that all what Human Art Dexterity Eloquence has been able to invent of that kind if compared to the solid Expessions of our Saviour is only superficial and insipid Neither do we find that he made use of any outward means to promote his Doctrine He did not call to his aid the Power and Authority of Civil Magistates to force People to receive his Words The Word was Mat. 11. 15. 13. 9. 43. Luke 8. 8 14. 35 there He that can take let him take it And how often do we read that he exclaimed to them He that hath Ears to hear let him hear It was not God Almighty's pleasure to pull People head-long into Heaven or to make use of the new French way of Converting them by Dragoons But he has laid open to us the way of our Salvation in such a manner as not to have quite debarr'd us from our own choise so that if we will be refractory we may prove the cause of our own Destruction Neither did it please Almighty God to inveigle Mankind by the Allurements of Profit and Temporal Pleasures but rather to foretel those that should follow his Doctrine nothing but Adversities Calamities Persecutions and all sorts of Afflictions reserving the chiefest Reward till after this Life where also such as had neglected his Doctrine were to receive condign Punishment This is the most evident Proof that can be given of the intrinsick Value and extraordinary Worth of the Christian Doctrine the natural Constitution of Mankind in general being such as to be chiefly moved with those Objects that are present and affect our Senses whereas those things that are represented to our Minds at a distance are but faintly received and often meet with dubious Interpretations It is worth our Observation what Method Christ made use of in his Doctrine viz. That he taught as one having Authority as it is expressed by Matth. 7. â—9 not as the Scribes that is he had no recourse to the Authority and Traditions of their Antient Rabbi's so as to sâ—t up for an Interpreter of their antient Laws but he spoke Lord-like and as a Legislator who had a lawful Authority belonging to himself to propose his Doctrine It is my Will and Command who is it that dare gain-say
else overturn that Government under which they then live So when Moses delivered the Israelites from the Aegyptian Bondage he led them into the Desarts of Arabia And when Romulus had resolved to erect a new Commonwealth he first withdrew himself from the Subjection of the Kings of Alba and such of the Neighbouring Countries as were for being Members of that new Commonwealth did leave their former Habitations and settled themselves in Rome But neither Christ nor his Apostles did ever remove Christians from their Habitations to other Places but allowed every body to remain in the same Station and under the same Government without the least prejudice to the former Rights of their Sovereigns over them From whence it is evident that the Christians tho' never so numerous could not be in a condition to settle themselves under any one State of their own For since according to the Rules of the Christian Religion the Rights of Sovevereigns over their Subjects Lives and Goods are not taken away or impair'd and no body can be subject to two Masters there could be no pretence of erecting a new Sovereignty especially in the midst of another Common-wealth nay it was beyond their Power even to enter into such a Society as should be in the least prejudicial to the Rights of their present Rom. 13. 1. 1 Pet. 2. 1â— Sovereigns Who can be so ignorant in civil Affairs as not to understand what prodigious Sums of Money are required for the maintainig of a State And tho the Rights of Sovereigns do not extend so far as to take away from Subjects the private disposal of their Goods nevertheless may they lawfully restrain the Extravagancy of their Subjects if they pretend to dispose of their Goods in prejudice of the State For if this Liberty should be granted to the Subjects without limitation the State if deprived oâ— its nourishment would quickly be reduced to a languishing condition or else private Men might be enabled to erect a new State in the midst of the old one or at least to impair and endanger the Publick Safety And since those Sovereigns under whose Jurisdiction the Apostles lived had the same Right over the Fortunes of their Subjects as other Governments have and the Rights of Sovereigns were not taken away by the Doctrine of Christ there could be no other provision made for the maintainance of those Congregations as such but what was consistent with the lawful Rights of their Sovereigns and as much only as might lawfully be given by private Persons which could not exceed a private Fortune and were nothing more than Voluntary Contributions or Alms And whatsoever of any real Estate was attributed to these Uses was thereby not exempted from paying of Taxes no more than the Estates of other Subjects § 32. But if we take a full view of the The inward Structure of the Church is quite different from that of a State whole Structure of Civil Societies and by what means Subjects were united under one Government we shall find them to differ as Heaven and Earth from that Union which belongs properly to the Body of a Church If we trace that Original of Civil Societies or Commonwealths it is evident that Men having found the Inconveniencies and Dangers which attended a solitary Life in the free natural State did enter and unite themselves into Societies for their common Security And having agreed to a certain Form of Government did constitute one certain Person or a Counsel who were to be the supream Governours of that Society unto whom they submitted themselves and their fortunes for the common Benefit of that Society But Churches were erected upon quite another Foundation For here Men being made sensible of their miserable condition did not by their own accord and a general agreement turn themselves to God Almighty but being on the contrary overwhelmed with Darkness and Ignorance so as to be over secure and neglecting their own Salvation God did send his Messengers among them commanding all men every where to repent Here is not the least Acts 1â— 30. footstep of any general Agreement of Men to erect and submit themselves under one Church but each particular Person for himself without any respect or regard to others did follow Christ and his Doctrine And whereas in a Civil State the whole family has its dependency from their Master and enjoys all the Privileges belonging to them under his Protection it is quite different in the Church where the Wife is not obliged to follow her Husband's Religion nor the Servant the Master So were in the family of 1 Cor. 7. 12. 21. Nacissus who himself was not a Christian several Christian Servants who are saluted as such by S. Paul And in this sense is to be â—â—m 16. â—â— taken what is said by Christ He that loved Father or Mother Son or Daughter more than me is not worthy of me As likewise Mat. 10. 3â— c 12 5â— Luk. 1â— â—6 what is mentioned concerning Divisions Discords Dissensions which are to be raised by the Doctrine of Christ among the nearest Friends is to be understood of the strict Union betwixt Christ and the Believers which surpasses and is to be preferred before all the Tyes of Consangninity among Men. So Mat. â—0 34. that if a Father Husband or Master should turn Apostate the Son Wife or Servant are not obliged to follow their footsteps Neither is it requisite to be solicitous about any particular or certain Form of Government in the Church viz. whether the same ought to be Monarchical Aristocratical or Democratical For these seveveral Forms belonging only to a Civil Government are very preposterously made use of in the behalf of the Church which is far different from a Temporal State And as Churches and Commonwealths are erected for different Ends so the Offices belonging to both are altogether of a different Nature Who is so ignorant as not to know that for the obtaining the Ends of Civil Societies it was requisite to constitute various Degrees of Dignities appertaining to the Managers of the State whereas the most plain and natural Distinction betwixt Christians in reference to the Church is only that of Teachers and Auditors § 33. Besides all this the Teachers in a 9 There is a great difference betwixt Teachers in a Church and the Governours of a State Church do not only differ from Temporal Governours in a State in that these are constituted for different Ends But the main Difference is the very nature of their Constitution We will not insist here upon the Point of Succession by which a great many Sovereigns obtain their Sovereign Power which is quite otherwise in the Church But we will only treat in this place concerning the different Constitution betwixt Teachers and such Sovereigns as exercise the Supream Civil Power by Vertue of Election When therefore the Sovereign Power is lodged in any Persons by Election the rest who have thus chosen them their
Religion But in case Divines out of other Countries are to be called unto this Convocation or Assembly it is I think a plain case that these cannot appear there without leave first obtained from their Sovereigns And if a Council should be called consisting of selected Divines out of a great many Common-wealths this cannot be done without a foregoing Agreement made betwixt those Sovereigns that are concerned therein For it is not allowable for Subjects of another State to come to us upon such an Account noâ— can ours go to them upon such an Errand unless by joint Consent of the higher Powers And since Sovereigns cannot claim any Jurisdiction over one another there will be no place left for any Prerogative but Matters must be transacted according to mutual Contract § 47. For what Reasons the Primitive Theâ—r Right concerning Church-Discipline Christians did introduce Church Discipline viz. to be distinguished from the Heathens by their holy Life and Conversation and to supply the Defects of the civil Pagan Laws which did not restrain them from such Vices as were abominable to the Christians has been sufficiently explained before This Reason takes no more place now after whole Commonwealths as well as their Sovereigns are entred into the Communion of the Christian Church for there is not the same Occasion now to be distinguished from the Heathens by an unspotted Conversation after the rooting out of the Pagan Religion all Christians being under an equal Obligation to endeavour an unblemished Life But notwithstanding the general Conversion of whole Commonwealths to the Christian Faith care ought to be taken that Holiness of Life be not laid aside among Christians from whence arises this Question Whether it be better to make use of the antient Church Discipline now in the same manner as it was practised in the Primitive times Or whether it be not more expedient to admit of some Alterations after Sovereigns are entred into the Communion of the Church The last of these two seems to be most probable because this antient Church Discipline which was introduced for a certain time to supply the deficiency of the Pagan Laws and to amend their vicious Lives and Conversation and was thus left to the direction of certain People is not an Essential part of Christianity and besides this carries this Inconveniency along with it that it may easily degenerate into a kind of a pretended Soveraignty and prove prejudicial to the Civil Power And as Soveraigns have a Right to provide against every thing that may be the probable cause of Convulsions in the State so may this defect be supplied by the Civil Laws and Vices may be suppressed by Civil Punishments Neither do I see any reason to the contrary why Vices should not be as easily corrected by Punishments prescribed by the Civil Laws as by Church-Censures or why the first should not prove as effectual as the latter for the suppressing of Publick Scandals It will perhaps be objected That Ecclesiastical Discipline has a much greater Influence over Christians towards the amendment of their Lives than Civil Punishments because the first penetrates into the Heart whereas Civil Punishments do not touch us but superficially Unto this it may be answered That Church-Discipline does not always answer this end it being not to be doubted but that some Men tho' they undergo all the Church-Penances retain in their hearts the same vicious Inclinations or sometimes grow more stubborn and bold But if it be taken as an Expiation for our Sins in regard of God Almighty it is to be observed that if we pretend to an Expiation for any Trespasses which fall under the cognizance of Humane Laws we must therein be directed by the Word of God which does not prescribe Church-Penance as a proper Satisfaction in this case For our sins are not remitted because we have undergone Church-Penance but because our Hearts are purified by the Blood of Christ provided we by the Faith apply his Sufferings unto us But supposing it should be thought most convenient that some sort of Vices ought to be corrected by Church-Discipline the best Expedient would be to leave it first to the determination of the Civil Judges who according to the Circumstances of the Case ought to send the Delinquents to the Ecclesiastical Court there to undergo the Church-Censure For Christian Soveraigns have an unquestionable Right to determine what sort of Misdemeanors are punishable by the Civil Laws and which of them come under the Cognizance of Ecclesiastical Courts and consequently to decree what sort of Church-Censure ought to be laid upon the Delinquents according to the different Nature of the Trespass which may be put in Execution by the Ministers accordingly Concerning Excommunication the same ought not to be put in Practice but with this caution that it ought not to be left to the discretion of Priests so as to be inflicted by them aâ— pleasure but this Power ought to be limited by certain Rules prescribed by those that have the Legislative Power in a State For in a Christian Commonwealth Excommunication alters the Civil Condition of a Subject and â—enders him infamous and detestable among his fellow-Christians And as it affects the Civil State of Subjects Soveraigns unless they will let others encroach upon their Prerogative ought to determine concerning its Legality § 48. Since the Christian Religion does not Concerning the Power of making Ecclesiastical Canons or Statutes in any wise diminish the Rights of Soveraigns these if entred into the Communion of the Church have a Power to examine what Canons or Ecclesiastical Statutes are received in the Church and if some of them are found superfluous or interfering with the Soveraign Power to abolish the same and if there appears any deficiency to supply what is wanting towards the maintaining a good Order and the Glory of the Church which however ought not to be done without the Advice at least of the chief Men of the Church and lastly give to those Statutes the force of Civil Laws This Power nevertheless of making Ecclesiastical Statutes must be exercised with a great deal of caution the same being limited to the outward form of the Church-Government and to maintain its Order and Decency Christians being not to be over-heap'd with a vast number of Canons For those that stretch Colos 2. 16. 21 22. 1 Tim. 4. â—4 the Power of Soveraigns to such a pitch as to make them the absolute Judges of the Christian Religion and to attribute to them a Right of establishing certain Articles of Faith by Civil Laws or to annex to them a force equal to the Civil Constitutions and to force upon their Subjects a certain Religion under severe Penalties or oblige them either to profess or to deny certain Points of Doctrine which are controverted amongst Christians These I say act quite contrary to the true Genius of the Christian Religion and to the Method made use of by Christ and his Apostles for the
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
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
Religion ought to be declared Erroneous before it be duely examined and the Parties convicted especially if they are ready to prove the same out of the Fundamental Articles of the Christian Faith And great care is to be taken that such a Decision be not left to the Management of their Adversaries who being perhaps guided by self Interest oftentimes are both Accusers and Judges There are not a few Politicians who are of opinion that Sovereigns may with a safe Conscience give Protection to their Subjects tho' of an erroneous Opinion provided it be for the benefit of the Commonwealth especially if care be taken that they do not draw away others into the same Error For supposing the established Religion both in point of Doctrine and Morality to excel all others it is to be hoped that the Dissenting Parties may be in time brought over to it rather than to be feared that they should seduce others Besides that it may contribute to the encrease of the Zeal and Learning of the established Clergy it being sufficiently proved by Experience that in those places and times where and when no Religious Differences were in agitation the Clergy soon degenerated into Idleness and Barbarity § 51. Furthermore as Sovereigns in all other Sovereigns in matters of Religion ought not to be misguided by Flatterers Matters of Moment ought to act with great Circumspection so especially in matters of Religion they cannot proceed with too much caution an injustice of this nature being the most sensible of all that can be done to a Subject For what can be more abominable than to let Subjects suffer unjustly for their Faith in Christ and that perhaps for no other reason but because some others out of self Interest cannot agree with them in Opinion And if a Prince who prompted by his own cruel Inclinations tyrannises over his Subjects is odious to all the World how much more abominable appears a Prince who acts the part of an Executioner and is made an Instrument by others to fulfil their cruel Designs against their Fellow Subjects All Christian Princes therefore as they tender their Consciences ought to avoid all manner of Extreamities in Matters of this Nature which ought never to be undertaken unless they be well instructed beforehand in every particular Point A Prince ought not only to be satisfyed with or rely entirely on what is represented to him by his Clergy tho' never so pious in outward appearance there being too many Instances to be given that the best of Princes by their own Inclinations abhorring all manner of Cruelty have by the Instigation of over-zealous Clergy-Men turn'd the most cruel Tyrants We scarce ever read of any Prince who undertook to decide Controversies in Physick or other Sciences except he had attained to a particular Knowledge in these Matters and why should Sovereigns be too forward in deciding Religious Differences which are of much greater Moment the eternal and temporal welfare of Millions of People do depend thereon unless they be very well instructed in every thing that has any relation to it And since Princes very rarely bestow sufficient Time and Pains in being fully instructed in Divinity it is to be wished that they would be byassed by their own natural Understanding rather than be influenc'd by the Opinions of others As for an Instance in those Controversies which are betwixt the Protestants and Papists there are such evident Signs from whence it is a difficult matter for a Christian Prince to discern which of these two ought to be preferred before the other For if it be considered that the Protestants are so far from forbidding the reading of the holy Scripture to the Laity that on the contrary they exhort them to it and make the Scriptures the Touchstone of their Doctrine and the true Judge of their Controversies That the Protestants trusting upon the goodness of their own Cause do not forbid the reading of Popish Authors but allow them to be publickly sold as being confident that the weakness of their Arguments cannot have any influence even over an indifferent Understanding it cannot but seem very strange why in the Church of Rome the Laity is not allowed the reading of the holy Scripture nay that they leave no stone unturn'd to suppress the Validity of the holy Scripture so that in those places where the Inquisition is in vogue a Man may with less danger be guilty of Blasphemy Perjury and other the most enormous Crimes than to read and examine the Mysteries of the holy Scripture On the other hand what a clamour do they make about Traditions and the Prerogatives of the Church which Title they claim as belonging in a most peculiar manner to themselves and notwithstanding the same is not allowed them by others they assume to themselves the Authority of giving Judgment in their own Cause It is very well worth the Consideration of a Prince that they will not allow our Books to be read among them and especially how careful they are in keeping them from the Knowledge of Great Men tho' belonging to the Communion of their Church Who is so ignorant as not to know what great Difficulties and Obstacles were to be surmounted before it could be obtained that the Augsburgh Confession was read to the Emperour Charles V. All which taken together are most evident Proofs to any unbyassed Person that the Protestants act like Men as relying upon the goodness of their Cause but the Roman Catholicks as mistrusting themselves and fearing that if their Doctrine should be examined according to the Tenure of the holy Scripture and out of the Protestant Wrttings the same would scarce bear the Touchstone It may also be taken into consideration how far different the Interest of the Roman Catholicks Party is from that of the Protestants For tho' both Parties with equal Zeal in Publick pretend to the Honour of God and the Truth of the Gospel and it is not to be denied but that a great many among the Roman Catholicks are very Zealous for the same nevertheless if we duely consider the Nature of Mankind in general it may easily be supposed that they aim at something more And what this something is is easily discernable if we make a due comparison betwixt the Clergy of both Parties Among the Protestants the greatest part of the Clergy are so stinted in their Revenues as to give them no opportunity of living in State what Respect is paid them is on the account of their Function as being Teachers their power very seldom reaches beyond their Revenues which are very moderate and oftentimes very mean Both their Persons and Estates depend from the Authority of their Sovereigns neither have they any where else to seek for Protection On the contrary in what Pomp and affluence of Fortune does the Popish Clergy live Unto what hight have they not exalted their Power in Europe Have they not so ordered their Matters as to be almost independant from the Civil
§ 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