Part 45

§. IX. But since we find that several Testimonies of Scripture do sufficiently shew, That such _external Rites are no necessary Part of the New Covenant Dispensation, therefore not needful now to continue_, however they were for a Season practised of old, I shall instance some few of them, whereby from the Nature of the Thing, as well as those Testimonies, it may appear, That the Ceremony of _Bread and Wine_ is ceased, as well as those other Things confessed by our Adversaries to be so. [Sidenote: _The Ceremony of _Bread_ and _Wine_ is ceased._] The first is _Rom._ xiv. 17. _For the Kingdom of God is not Meat and Drink, but Righteousness and Peace, and Joy in the Holy Ghost_: Here the Apostle evidently shews, That the _Kingdom of God_, or _Gospel of Christ_, stands not in _Meats and Drinks_, and such like Things, but in _Righteousness_, &c. as by the Context doth appear, where he is speaking of the _Guilt_ and _Hazard_ of judging one another about _Meats and Drinks_. So then, if the _Kingdom of God_ stand not in them, nor the _Gospel_, nor _Work of Christ_, then the eating of outward _Bread and Wine_ can be no necessary Part of the _Gospel-worship_, nor any _perpetual Ordinance_ of it. Another of the same Apostle is yet more plain, _Col._ ii. 16. the Apostle throughout this whole _second Chapter_ doth clearly plead for us, and against the _Formality_ and _Superstition_ of our Opposers: For in the Beginning he holds forth the great _Privileges_ which Christians have by Christ, who are indeed come to the _Life of Christianity_; and therefore he desires them, Ver. 6. _As they have received Christ, so to walk in him; and to beware, lest they be spoiled through Philosophy and vain Deceit, after the Rudiments or Elements of the World; because that in Christ, whom they have received, is all Fulness: And that they are circumcised with the Circumcision made without Hands (_which he calls the_ Circumcision of Christ) and being buried with him by Baptism, are also arisen with him through the Faith of the Operation of God._ Here also they did partake of the _true Baptism of Christ_; and being such as are _arisen_ with him, let us see whether he thinks it needful they should make use of such _Meat and Drink_ as _Bread and Wine_, _to put them in Remembrance of Christ’s Death_; or whether they ought to be judged, that they did it not; Ver. 16. _Let no Man therefore judge you in Meat and Drink_: Is not _Bread_ and _Wine_ _Meat_ and _Drink_? But why? _Which are a Shadow of Things to come: But the Body is of Christ._ [Sidenote: _’Tis but a _Sign_ and _Shadow_ they confess._] Then since our Adversaries confess, That their _Bread_ and _Wine_ is a _Sign_ or _Shadow_; therefore, according to the Apostle’s Doctrine, we ought not to be _judged_ in the Non-observation of it. But is it not fit for those that are _dead with Christ_ to be subject to such Ordinances? [Sidenote: _And which do perish with the Using._] See what he saith, Ver. 20. _Wherefore if ye be dead with _Christ_ from the Rudiments of the World, why, as though living in the World, are ye subject to Ordinances? (Touch not, taste not, handle not: Which all are to perish with the Using) after the Commandments and Doctrines of Men._ What can be more plain? If this serve not to take away the absolute Necessity of the Use of _Bread_ and _Wine_, what can it serve to take away? Sure I am, the Reason here given is applicable to them, _which all do perish with the Using_; since _Bread_ and _Wine_ perish with the Using, as much as other Things. But further, If the Use of _Water_, and _Bread_ and _Wine_, were that wherein the very _Seals_ of the _New Covenant_ stood, and did pertain to the chief _Sacraments_ of the _Gospel_ and _Evangelical Ordinances_ (so called) then would not the _Gospel_ differ from the _Law_, or be preferable to it. [Sidenote: _The Law was Meats and Drinks; not so the Gospel._] Whereas the Apostle shews the Difference, _Heb._ ix. 10. in that such Kind of Observations of the _Jews_ were as a Sign of the _Gospel_, for that they _stood only in Meats and Drinks, and divers Washings_. But if the _Gospel-worship_ and _Service_ stand in the same, where is the Difference?

[Sidenote: Object.] If it be said, _These under the _Gospel_ have a spiritual Signification_;

[Sidenote: _Answ._] So had those under the _Law_; God was the Author of those, as well as Christ is pretended to be the Author of these. But doth not this contending for the Use of _Water_, _Bread_ and _Wine_, as necessary Parts of the _Gospel-worship_, destroy the Nature of it, as if the _Gospel_ were a Dispensation of _Shadows_, and not of the _Substance_? [Sidenote: _The Law has_ Shadows, _the Gospel brings the Substance_.] Whereas the Apostle, in that of the _Colossians_ above-mentioned, argues against the Use of these Things, as needful to those that are _dead_ and _arisen_ with Christ, because they are but _Shadows_. And since, through the whole _Epistle_ to the _Hebrews_, he argues with the _Jews_, to _wean_ them from their _old Worship_, for this Reason, because it was _typical_ and _figurative_; is it agreeable to right Reason to bring them to another of the same Nature? What Ground from _Scripture_ or _Reason_ can our Adversaries bring us, to evince that one _Shadow_ or _Figure_ should point to another _Shadow_ or _Figure_, and not to the _Substance_? And yet they make the Figure of _Circumcision_ to point to _Water-baptism_, and the _Paschal Lamb_ to _Bread and Wine_. But was it ever known that one Figure was the _Anti-type_ of the other, especially seeing _Protestants_ make not these their _Anti-types_ to have any more Virtue and Efficacy than the _Type_ had? [Sidenote: _Their _Sacraments_ confer not Grace._] For since, as they say, and that truly, _That their Sacraments confer not Grace, but that it is conferred according to the Faith of the Receiver_, it will not be denied but the Faithful among the _Jews_ received also Grace in the Use of their _Figurative Worship_. And though _Papists_ boast that their Sacraments confer Grace _ex opere operato_, yet Experience abundantly proveth the contrary.

§. X. [Sidenote: _Opposers claim a Power to give their Sacraments; from whence do they derive it?_] But supposing the Use of _Water-baptism_ and _Bread and Wine_ to have been in the Primitive Church, as was also that of _abstaining from Things strangled_, _and from Blood_, _the Use of Legal Purification_, Acts xxi. 23, 24, 25. and _anointing of the Sick with Oil_, for the Reasons and Grounds before mentioned; yet it remains for our Adversaries to shew us how they come by Power or Authority to administer them. It cannot be from the Letter of the Scripture, else they ought also to do those other Things, which the Letter declares also they did, and which in the Letter have as much Foundation. Then their Power must be _derived from the Apostles_, either _mediately_ or _immediately_; but we have shewn before, in the _tenth Proposition_, that they have no _mediate Power_, because of the Interruption made by the _Apostasy_; and for an _immediate Power_ or _Command_ by the Spirit of God to administer these Things, none of our Adversaries pretend to it. We know that in this, as in other Things, they make a Noise of the _constant Consent of the Church, and of Christians in all Ages_; [Sidenote: _Tradition no sufficient Ground for _Faith.] but as _Tradition_ is not a sufficient Ground for _Faith_, so in this Matter especially it ought to have but small Weight; for that in this Point of _Ceremonies_ and _superstitious Observations_ the Apostasy began very early, as may appear in the _Epistle_ of _Paul_ to the _Galatians_ and _Colossians_; and we have no Ground to imitate them in those Things, whose Entrance the Apostle so much _withstood_, so heavily _regretted_, and so sharply _reproved_. But if we look to _Antiquity_, we find that in such Kind of Observances and Traditions they were very uncertain and changeable; so that neither _Protestants_ nor _Papists_ do observe this Ceremony as they did, both in that they gave it to _young Boys_, and to _little Children_: [Sidenote: _The _Supper_ they gave to young Boys and Children._] And for aught can be learned, the Use of this and _Infant-baptism_ are of a like Age, though the one be laid aside both by _Papists_ and _Protestants_, and the other, to wit, _Baptism of Infants_, be stuck to. And we have so much the less Reason to lay Weight upon _Antiquity_, for that if we consider their Profession of Religion, especially as to Worship, and the ceremonial Part of it, we shall not find any Church now, whether _Popish_ or _Protestant_, who differ not widely from them in many Things, [Sidenote: Dallæus.] as _Dallæus_, in his Treatise concerning the _Use of the Fathers_, well observeth and demonstrateth. And why they should obtrude this upon us because of the _Ancients Practice_, which they themselves follow not, or why we may not reject this, as well as they do other Things no less zealously practised by the _Ancients_, no sufficient Reason can be assigned.

Nevertheless I doubt not but many, whose Understandings have been clouded with these _Ceremonies_, have notwithstanding, by the Mercy of God, had some secret Sense of the _Mystery_, which they could not clearly understand, because it was sealed from them by their sticking to such outward Things; and that through that secret Sense diving in their Comprehensions they ran themselves into these carnal Apprehensions, as imagining the _Substance_ of the _Bread_ was changed, or that if the _Substance_ was not changed, yet the _Body_ was there, _&c._ [Sidenote: _Calvin’s ingenuous Confession commended._] And indeed I am inclinable very favourably to judge of _Calvin_ in this Particular, in that he deals so ingenuously to confess he _neither comprehends it, nor can express it in Words_; _but yet by a feeling Experience can say, The Lord is spiritually present_. Now as I doubt not but _Calvin_ sometimes had a Sense of his _Presence_ without the Use of this Ceremony, so as the Understanding given him of God made him justly reject the false Notions of _Transubstantiation_ and _Consubstantiation_, though he knew not what to establish instead of them, if he had fully waited in the [134]_Light that makes all Things manifest_, and had not laboured in his own Comprehension to settle upon that external Ceremony, by affixing the _spiritual Presence_ as chiefly or principally, though not only, as he well knew by Experience, there, or especially to relate to it, he might have further reached unto the Knowledge of this _Mystery_ than many that went before him.

[134] Ephes. 5. 13.

§. XI. [Sidenote: _In Tenderness of Conscience, God winketh at our _Ignorance.] _Lastly_, If any now at this Day, from a true Tenderness of Spirit, and with real Conscience towards God, did practise this _Ceremony_ in the same Way, Method, and Manner as did the _Primitive Christians_ recorded in Scripture, I should not doubt to affirm but they might be indulged in it, and the Lord might regard them, and for a Season appear to them in the Use of these Things, as many of us have known him to do to us in the Time of our Ignorance; provided always they did not seek to obtrude them upon others, nor judge such as found themselves _delivered_ from them, or that they do not pertinaciously adhere to them. [Sidenote: _The Day is dawned wherein God is risen, and worshipped in Spirit_.] For we certainly know that the _Day_ is _dawned_, in which God hath _arisen_, and hath dismissed all those _Ceremonies_ and _Rites_, and is only to be _worshipped in Spirit_, and that he appears to them who wait upon him; and that to seek God in these Things is, with _Mary_ at the Sepulchre, to _seek the Living among the Dead_: For we know that he is _risen_, and _revealed in Spirit_, leading his Children out of these _Rudiments_, that they may walk with him in his _Light_: To whom be Glory for ever. _Amen._

PROPOSITION XIV.

Concerning the POWER of the CIVIL MAGISTRATE in Matters purely RELIGIOUS, and pertaining to the CONSCIENCE.

[135]_Since God hath assumed to himself the Power and Dominion of the _Conscience_, who alone can rightly instruct and govern it, therefore it is not lawful for any whosoever, by Virtue of any Authority or Principality they bear in the Government of this World, to force the _Consciences_ of others; and therefore all Killing, Banishing, Fining, Imprisoning, and other such Things which are inflicted upon Men for the alone Exercise of their _Conscience_, or Difference in _Worship_ or _Opinion_, proceedeth from the Spirit of _Cain_ the Murderer, and is contrary to the Truth; providing always, that no Man, under the Pretence of _Conscience_, prejudice his _Neighbour_ in his Life or Estate, or do any Thing destructive to, or inconsistent with, _Human Society_; in which Case the Law is for the Transgressor, and _Justice_ is to be administered upon all, without Respect of Persons._

[135] Luke 9. 55, 56. Matt. 7. 12, 13. 29. Tit. 3. 10.

§. I. Liberty of _Conscience_ from the Power of the Civil Magistrate hath been of late Years so largely and learnedly handled, that I shall need to be but brief in it; yet it is to be lamented that few have walked answerably to this Principle, each pleading it for themselves, but scarce allowing it to others, as hereafter I shall have Occasion more at length to observe.

It will be fit in the first Place, for clearing of Mistakes, to say something of the _State_ of the _Controversy_, that what follows may be the more clearly understood.

[Sidenote: _What Conscience is._] By _Conscience_ then, as in the Explanation of the _fifth_ and _sixth Propositions_ I have observed, is to be understood, _That Persuasion of the Mind which arises from the Understanding’s being possessed with the Belief of the Truth or Falsity of any Thing_; which though it may be false or evil upon the Matter, yet if a Man should go against his Persuasion or Conscience, he would commit a Sin; because what a Man doth contrary to his Faith, though his Faith be wrong, is no Ways acceptable to God. Hence the Apostle saith, [136]_Whatsoever is not of Faith, is Sin_; _and he that doubteth is damned if he eat_; though the Thing might have been lawful to another; and that this Doubting to eat some Kind of _Meats_ (since all the Creatures of God are good, and for the Use of Man, _if received with Thanksgiving_) might be a Superstition, or at least a Weakness, which were better removed. Hence _Ames. de Cas. Cons._ saith, _The Conscience, although erring, doth evermore bind, so as that he sinneth who doth contrary to his Conscience,[137] because he doth contrary to the Will of God, although not materially and truly, yet formally and interpretatively_.

[136] Rom. 14. 23.

[137] _i. e._ As he supposeth.

So the Question is _First_, _Whether the Civil Magistrate hath Power to force Men in Things religious to do contrary to their Conscience; and if they will not, to punish them in their Goods, Liberties, and Lives?_ This we hold in the Negative. But _Secondly_, As we would have the _Magistrate_ to avoid this Extreme of incroaching upon Men’s Consciences, so on the other Hand we are far from joining with or strengthening such _Libertines_ as would stretch the Liberty of their Consciences to the Prejudice of their _Neighbours_, or to the Ruin of _Human Society_. We understand therefore by _Matters of Conscience_ such as _immediately_ relate betwixt _God_ and _Man_, or _Men_ and _Men_, that are under the same _Persuasion_, as to meet together and worship God in that Way which they judge is most acceptable unto him, and not to incroach upon, or seek to force their Neighbours, otherwise than by Reason, or such other Means as Christ and his Apostles used, _viz._ Preaching and instructing such as will hear and receive it; but not at all for Men, under the Notion of Conscience, to do any Thing contrary to the moral and perpetual Statutes generally acknowledged by all _Christians_; in which Case the _Magistrate_ may very lawfully use his Authority; as on those, who, under a Pretence of _Conscience_, make it a Principle to kill and destroy all the Wicked, _id est_, all that differ from them, that they, to wit, the _Saints_, may rule, and who therefore seek to make all Things _common_, and would force their Neighbours to share their Estates with them, and many such wild Notions, as is reported of the _Anabaptists_ of _Munster_; which evidently appears to proceed from Pride and Covetousness, and not from Purity or Conscience; and therefore I have sufficiently guarded against that in the latter Part of the _Proposition_. But the _Liberty_ we lay claim to is such as the _Primitive Church_ justly fought under the _Heathen Emperors_, to wit, for Men of Sobriety, Honesty, and a peaceable Conversation, to enjoy the Liberty and Exercise of their _Conscience_ towards God and among themselves, and to admit among them such as by their Persuasion and Influence come to be convinced of the same _Truth_ with them, without being therefore molested by the Civil Magistrate. _Thirdly_, Though we would not have Men hurt in their Temporals, nor robbed of their Privileges as Men and Members of the _Commonwealth_, because of their inward Persuasion; yet we are far from judging that in the _Church of God_ there should not be Censures exercised against such as fall into Error, as well as such as commit open Evils; and therefore we believe it may be very lawful for a _Christian Church_, if she find any of her Members fall into any Error, after due Admonitions and Instructions according to _Gospel Order_, if she find them pertinacious, to _cut them off_ from her Fellowship by the _Sword of the Spirit_, and deprive them of those Privileges which they had as Fellow-members; but not to cut them off from the World by the _temporal Sword_, or rob them of their common Privileges as Men, seeing they enjoy not these as Christians, or under such a Fellowship, but as Men, and Members of the Creation. Hence _Chrysostom_ saith well, (_de Anath._) _We must condemn and reprove the evil Doctrines that proceed from _Hereticks_; but spare the Men, and pray for their Salvation_.

§. II. But that no Man, by Virtue of any Power or Principality he hath in the Government of this World, hath Power over the _Consciences of Men_, is apparent, [Sidenote: _Conscience the Throne of God._] because _the Conscience of Man is the Seat and Throne of God in him_, of which God is the alone _proper_ and _infallible Judge_, who by his Power and Spirit can alone rectify the Mistakes of _Conscience_, and therefore hath reserved to himself the Power of punishing the Errors thereof as he seeth meet. Now for the _Magistrate_ to assume this, is to take upon him to meddle with Things not within the Compass of his Jurisdiction; for if this were within the Compass of his Jurisdiction, he should be the proper Judge in these Things; and also it were needful to him, as an essential Qualification of his being a _Magistrate_, to be capable to judge in them. But that the _Magistrate_, as a _Magistrate_, is neither proper Judge in these Cases, nor yet that the Capacity so to be is requisite in him as a _Magistrate_, our Adversaries cannot deny; or else they must say, That all the _Heathen Magistrates_ were either no _lawful Magistrates_, as wanting something essential to Magistracy, and this were contrary to the express Doctrine of the Apostle, _Rom._ xiii. or else (which is more absurd) that those _Heathen Magistrates_ were proper Judges in Matters of _Conscience_ among Christians. As for that Evasion that the _Magistrate_ ought to punish according to the Church Censure and Determination, which is indeed no less than to make the _Magistrate_ the _Church’s Hangman_, we shall have Occasion to speak of it hereafter. But if the chief Members of the _Church_, though ordained to inform, instruct, and reprove, are not to have Dominion over the _Faith_ nor _Consciences_ of the Faithful, as the Apostle expresly affirms, 2 _Cor._ i. 24. then far less ought they to usurp this Dominion, or stir up the Magistrate to persecute and murder those who cannot yield to them therein.