The True Way of Concord of All the Christian Churches, Part 3 · Chapter 14
CHAP. XIV.
Vnlimited Toleration will wrong and divide the Church.
§ I. ALL ſober Men are ſo far agreed in this, that I need not ſay much of it; no doubt there are intolerable Errors and Sins. And though Mr. Hales and others ſay,See Sir Thomas Overbury's late Plea for Toleration, in Anſwer to Ataxiae Obſtaculum, Renouncing Unlimited Toleration. It is not Hereſie, unleſs it be wilful, and we ſeldom know the wilfulneſs of another; Yet in truth, 1. It is not only formal ſubjective Hereſie, which maketh the Man an Heretick, which we muſt reſiſt and reſtrain, but alſo material objective Hereſie; whatever be the Divulgers mind. 2. And alſo there is a wilfulneſs which is Privative, when the Will doth not its duty to diſcover Truth and Error, as well as a poſitive willingneſs to err (which Auguſtine ſaith, That few or none can have:) And no mans will is wholly innocent in any culpable Sin or Error.
§ II. Doubtleſs mans Conſcience is not properly his Lawmaker, nor his Law, (though ſome unaptly ſay ſo) but only his diſcerning of that which is his Law; no more than the Lawyers eye, or reaſon, or skill, is the Law of the Land. And therefore to have an erring Conſcience, taking that for Gods Law which is not, is a Sin (where it was poſſible to know it.)
§ III. And therefore Gods Law is not ſuſpended, but violated by mans Error; God hath not as many ſorts of Law as men have Opinions of it, or Conſciences in Error. If a man ſhould think that God bindeth him to kill, ſteal, ſlander, &c. this would not make any of theſe no ſin, but it would be no ſmall ſin in him, that would father ſuch wickedneſs on the moſt holy God, and on his Law. If an erring Conſcience think that God forbiddeth our duty to Princes, Parents, Children, Neighbors, Juſtice, Charity, &c. This would not diſſolve any of his Obligations, but be an added ſin in ſlandering God: Far be it from any ſober man to think, That the Magiſtrate muſt let all men do all the Evil which they will but pretend God and Conſcience for.
§ IV. Nor is the Papal Doctrine true or tolerable, That Prieſts onelyonly are for mens Souls, and Princes but for their Bodies, and Temporal Concerns; and ſo that the Prieſt is as much higher than the Prince, as the Soul is than the Body. Indeed the Miniſter of Chriſt is to manage only the Word, which worketh on the Soul by the way of Senſe, and not of the Sword; but yet it is to be finally for the good of Souls, that the Magiſtrate uſeth the Sword: As the voice toucheth the Ear, ſo doth the Sword the Fleſh for the benefit of Souls, either the ſinners, or other mens. And verily he that ſaith otherwiſe, and placeth the bonum publicum, which is the end of Government, meerly in the bodies proſperity, diſhonoureth and debaſeth Magiſtracy, and ſetteth Princes lower than Prieſts, Parents or Friends. Godly men that believe the vanity of things Tranſitory and Corporeal, would have as low an eſteem of the Means, as of the End, and ſo of all Civil Rules, if they believed this. But he that is the King, as well as the great High-Prieſt of the Church, for holy Ends, and for mens Salvation, hath made Princes his Officers ſubordinate to him for thoſe Ends, as well as Paſtors. I will not ſtand here to confute one or two Scotiſh Divines that have written againſt me, for ſaying, That Princes and Magiſtrates are now the Mediators Officers, and have their Power from Him, into whoſe Hands all Power in Heaven and Earth is given. Sober Thoughts in wiſe Chriſtians will ſave me that labour.
§ V. And he that ſaith, By me Kings reign, and will have Kings to be the Churches Nurſing-Fathers, will not take it for an excuſe of their neglect, to ſay, We were authorized onelyonly for mens Bodies: It is not equally for all that have Bodies, nor for bodily Ends, but to ſee to the execution of Gods Law, by their Bie Subordinate Laws; and Gods Laws all look to higher Ends.
§ VI. And he that ſaid, They are the Miniſters of God to us for good, meant true and durable good, no doubt: And when he ſaith, That they are a Terror to evil doers, he meaneth ſuch as is contrary to the well-doing which they muſt encourage. And is Piety and Chriſtianity none of that? He doth not except Blaſphemy, Idolatry, Oppoſition to God, Chriſt, Holineſs, Heaven, Juſtice or Charity, from the number of Evil Works, which are the worſt of them. It is therefore certain, That Princes may and muſt puniſh many ſins againſt the Firſt Table, and ſuch againſt the Second as would ſhelter themſelves under pretence of Conſcience.
§ VII. But all the doubt is, What bounds here to ſet, where it is ſo dangerous to go too far. And it is one of the moſt neceſſary Caſes of Conſcience, which a Chriſtian Prince hath to ſtudy and reſolve; in which he muſt neither hearken to a proud, envious, idle, worldly Clergy, nor to injudicious Zealots, nor to licentious Hereticks, but avoid Extreams.
§ VIII. In ſhort, what I have before ſaid, decideth the Caſe.
1. He muſt Tolerate no one Sin how ſmall ſoever, which is within his Cognizance and Juriſdiction, which he can indeed cure by righteous means, which will do more good than hurt.
2. Thoughts, Heart Sins and Secret Sins are not within his Cognizance.
3. To do the work of Parents, Paſtors, Tutors, or Phyſicians, is no part of the Office to which he is appointed and authorized.
4. But he may drive on all theſe to do their duties by due means.
5. It is unlawful to ſeek to cure a leſſer Evil, with a greater: That is to be numbred with the things which the Prince cannot do, which he cannot do by lawful means, or ſuch as do more hurt than good.
6. The Miſchiefs before enumerated againſt the Princes Safety and Honour, and againſt Love, and Juſtice, and Conſcience, and Religion, are ſo great, as that no Severity muſt be uſed which procureth them, and doth not a greater good.
7. The puniſhing of ſmall Faults by great Puniſhments, is Injuſtice, and Unlawful.
8. Abundance of Infirmities, and humane Frailties and Errors, are ſuch as muſt be endured, ſo they be but by Doctrine, Love and gentle Reproofs, rebuked and diſowned, without Puniſhments Eccleſiaſtical or Corporal; elſe there will be no Love or Peace.
9. Preachers muſt not be ſuffered to perſuade Men from the Faith, Love or Obedience of God in Chriſt, againſt any Article of the Creed, or Petition of the Lords Prayer, or Precept of the Decalogue, or any eſſential part of the Chriſtian Religion.
10. If ſuch ſpeak a damnable Error or Hereſie by Ignorance or Heedleſneſs, they muſt have a firſt and ſecond Admonition, and they … repent. But if they forbear not upon. Admonition, they do it ſtudiouſly and wilfully; and ſuch are to be Silenced till they Reform, becauſe the Preaching of one that oppoſeth an eſſential Point of Religion, will do more harm than good, except among Heathens, or where no better Preachers can be had.
11. It will not be unmeet for the Rulers to draw up either a Catalogue of integral Points of Religion of great moment, which all ſhall be forbidden to Preach or Diſpute againſt; or elſe a Catalogue of Errors contrary to ſuch, which none ſhall have leave to propagate: But it is not every one that violateth the Law, that is to be forbidden to preach Chriſts Goſpel; but leſſer pecuniary Mulcts, may be ſufficient puniſhment to many; and the bare denying them preferment or maintenance, and caſting them among the diſowned that are but tolerated, may be better puniſhment, and more effectual in caſe of tolerable Faults, than the more ſevere.
12. Rulers ſhould do much more to reſtrain from Evils, than to conſtrain to Religious Duties: And thoſe Evils are of theſe ſorts.
Firſt, Such as blaſpheme God.
Secondly, Such as draw the Hearers Souls into damnable Error or Sin.
Thirdly, Such as tend to overthrow the Honour and Safety of the Governors.
Fourthly, Such as tend directly to breed Hatred in men againſt each other, and kindle the fire of Contention and Enmity.
Fifthly, Such as draw men from the common duties of Juſtice towards Neighbors, or Relations, into Fraud and Injury.
13. It is the greateſt part of the Magiſtrates duty about Religion,
Firſt, To ſee Gods own Laws kept in Honour.
Secondly, And to keep Peace by Church Juſtices among Clergymen and People, that are apt to take occaſion from Religion, to abuſe and calumniate one another.
14. Yet Rulers may and muſt compel Perſons that are groſly ignorant or erroneous, to hear what can be ſaid againſt their Error, and for their Inſtruction: As Parents (ſo Magiſtrates) may compel Children (and Subjects) to be Catechized, and to hear Gods Word; and may compel them to hear ſuch Teachers as have the Rulers Licence, either as Approved, or Tolerated to Teach.
15. Men ought not to be compelled to receive the Sacraments of Baptiſm or the Lords Supper, by the Sword or Force; becauſe it is to receive a ſealed Pardon of Sin, and Donation of Christ and Life; which no unwilling perſon hath right to, or doth receive: For to ſay I am unwilling, is to ſay I receive not; and ſo the reception of the outward ſign is Hypocriſie, Prophanation, and taking the Name of God in vain.
16. Yet thoſe that being Baptized, and at Age, avoid Communion, are, after Admonition, to be taken for Revolters ſo far, and to be declared ſuch as ſo far caſt themſelves from the Communion of the Church: And the Chriſtian Magiſtrate may well deny them many Priviledges in the Commonwealth, which he ſhould appropriate to ſound perſevering Chriſtians.
17. Places in Government, Truſt, Burgeſs-ſhip, and Votes in Elections of Governors, and ſuch like, are beſt appropriated to the Approved part of Chriſtians, and ſome the Tolerated; but never granted to Apoſtates, proper Hereticks, or any that are intolerable.
18. Paſtors of the Churches ſhould not be conſtrained to give the Sacrament of Baptiſm, or the Lords Supper, to any one againſt their Conſciences; becauſe,
Firſt, It is their Office to be Judges, who is to be Baptized, and to Communicate. This is the power of the Keys.
Secondly, If they may not judge of the very Act which they are to perform, they have not ſo much as that judicium diſcretionis, which belongeth to every man as a man, and ſo muſt act brutiſhly.
Thirdly, If they may adminiſter againſt Conſcience when they think it Sin, the ſame reaſon would hold for all men to ſin, whenever a Ruler commandeth them that judgeth it no Sin: what Bounds ſhall be ſet againſt abſolute blind Obedience?
Fourthly, Whereas the Objection is from Inconveniences, As, [Then every Paſtor may deny Men Sacraments.]
I anſwer, 1. So every Tutor, Phyſician, &c. may abuſe his Truſt.
2. Therefore men muſt have care whom they chooſe and truſt.
3. There are better Remedies than ſinful ſlavery in the Miniſter, even conſulting with Synods of Miniſters, or where Biſhops rule, appealing to them.
4. The perſons that expect the Sacrament, may have it from ſome other Paſtor that is willing. It is a leſs inconvenience that a ſingle perſon remove, or elſe communicate in another Aſſembly, than that the Paſtor, whoſe Office is to uſe the Church Keys, be enſlaved to ſin againſt his Conſcience.
5. We ſuppoſe that of ancient right, the Church is not to have a Paſtor over them, whom they conſent not to: Therefore if the Church find themſelves wronged by the Paſtors Fact, they have their Remedy. They may admoniſh the Paſtor, and if he hear not, tell the Biſhop, Synod or Magiſtrate (for I am not now determining the caſe of ſuperior Biſhops, but tell what is the actual Remedy where ſuch bear Rule:) And if he hear not the Church, Synod, Biſhop or Magiſtrate, they may deſert him, and chooſe a fitter Paſtor, and yet neither Excommunicate nor Silence him, but the ſame man may be more ſutable to another Flock which will deſire him.
They that object Inconveniences in this motion, ſhould conſider,
Firſt, That a Miſchief and Sin is worſe than an Inconvenience.
Secondly, That there is nothing deſirable here without Inconveniences, which may furniſh an unwiſe Contender with Objections.
Thirdly, That they that cry up the Canons and Traditions, Cuſtom or judgment of Antiquity, Biſhops, Councils, Fathers, and the Catholick Church, ſhould not haſtily ſet their own Wit or Authority againſt them all, who for 600, if not nearer 1000 years after Chriſt, did not only judge that Biſhops muſt come in by the Peoples Election and Conſent, but that he was to be accounted an Uſurper, and no Biſhop of theirs, that had it not.
Fourthly, And we have reaſon to think St. Cyprian, and the Carthage Council of Biſhops, as wiſe as the Objectors, who, in the Caſe of Martial and Baſilides before deſcribed judged, that the People ought to forſake an uncapable ſcandalous Paſtor, though other Biſhops (even he of Rome) abſolved him: And that the chief power of chooſing or forſaking was in them, and if they did otherwiſe, it was not the contrary Sentence of Biſhops that would excuſe them before God. It is eaſie to ſay [St. Cyprian erred, and we are in the right and this would overthrow all Government:] But neither the perſons that object, nor their Reaſons, have ever yet ſeemed to me ſufficient, to make me prefer their judgment even in this before Cyprian, and the African Fathers.
XI. In all probability FREE SACRAMENTS adminiſtred by ſuch Miniſters of Chriſt as by the Chriſtian Magiſtrates Licence are either Approved or Tolerated, would heal moſt of all the Diſcords about Religion in England, I mean, Sacraments not conſtrainedly, but freely given and received.
I ſhall tell you why I think ſo, by inſtances.
1. The Thing call'd Strict Presbytery, [with a power of Claſſes and National Aſſemblies, compoſed of Ordained and Unordained Elders, as a Judicature, whoſe Excommunication is to be enforced by the Magiſtrates Sword] is approved by few of my acquaintance in England: But thoſe that Prelatiſts cal… Presbyterians here, commonly are Miniſters that deſire but the exerciſe of ſo much of their proper Office, and the freedom of a Chriſtian and a Man, as not to be forced to adminiſter Sacraments againſt their knowledge and conſcience to the uncapable, becauſe a Lay-Chancelor or a Dioceſane that knoweth not his Neighbours and Flocks ſo well as he, ſhall ſay that they are worthy, and command him to renounce his knowledge in obeying them. And if God had made all ſuch Miniſters to be only the Lay-Chancellors, or the Dioceſanes Agents or Servants, to Baptize, and give the Lords Supper only in the Chancellors or Biſhops name as a Meſſenger, and if it be done amiſs, that not we, but the Chancellor or Biſhop ſhould anſwer it to God, then we could joyfully thus obey them. But while we believe, That we muſt anſwer our ſelves for our own actions, and that we muſt Baptize, and give the Lords Body and Blood, in Chriſts Name, and not the Biſhops, we dare not obey Men before God, nor renounce our own judgment in the matters of our own Office and Truſt: Therefore it would ſatisfie us, had we but freedom in our Miniſterial action, not to go againſt our Conſcience, however blind malice would make the world believe, that it is ſome Papal Empire, even over Princes, that we deſire. Nay, we deſire, That if the Magiſtrate will allow us Pariſh-Churches, and Maintenance, and Countenance in our work, that any perſon that cannot remove his dwelling without great detriment, and cannot be ſatiſfied in our Order of Worſhip and Communion, but can receive more Edification from another Miniſter, may have leave to join in Communion with any other Approved or Tolerated Church, keeping the Laws of Loyalty and Peace: Why ſhould I envy anothers deſires or benefits? Or think it hard, that any can profit more by another, than by me? Or why ſhould I be againſt it?
And we deſire (not that the People may be Ordainers, or Church-Governors, or have the power of the Keys, but) that if any Flock cannot be ſatisfied, after full hearing, to reſt under the conduct of our Miniſtery, they may freely choo…e another, and remove us. And for my own part, as I never did, ſo I wonder how any ingenious Miniſter can obtrude himſelf on any People, and pretend to be their Paſtor againſt their wills. As my Conſcience condemneth it as againſt God and them, ſo I confeſs my Prudence is againſt it for my ſelf, and I am not ſo baſe as to endure ſuch a life.
2. And as for the Party called Independant, I have reaſon to think that it is the main of that Toleration which they deſire. For Mr. Philip Nye, who led them more than any one man known to me, did purpoſely write to prove, That the Chriſtian Magiſtrate may ſet up Teachers, all over his Dominions, whom the People, upon his Command, are bound to hear: But that to take any for their Paſtors, he thought they might not be compelled.
3. And even the Anabaptiſts would be contented with the ſame liberty, if they be but near as peaceable as Mr. Tombes was, who wrote for even Par…chial Communion, and perſuaded the Anabaptiſts to it: Though few ſo far followed him, moſt, I think, would be contented with Free Sacraments, in which I include the Euchariſtical Lords-day worſhip.
§ X. And what harm will this do, where Love prevaileth, and where Pride and Envy make not … Prieſts to think all wrong them, that do not Adore or Idolize them, or give them more than is their due? What harm will it do me, if an hundred of my Pariſh hear and prefer another man, by whom they can profit more than by me? What if they worſhip God in other (ſound) words, or in Cloaths of another make or colour, as long as they are reſtrained from reviling, and the breach of Peace? Are they any better in my Auditory with cenſuring or diſſenting …dgments, hearing me againſt their wills, than where they can freely join in Love and Peace? If a bad or weak Miniſter grudge at all that go to an able Conformiſt in the next Pariſh, few wiſe men will think that he doth it more for God, or for his Brothers Soul, than for himſelf: and yet that perſon breaketh the Canon that goeth to the next Pariſh, as well as he that goeth to a Nonconformiſt. And why ſhould we be more impatient with this man, than with that?
§ XXI. The Pamphlets that are ſpread abroad for Rigor and Severity of late, under the pretence of Conformity, do many of them ſavor ſo rankly of Church-Tyranny, and a bloody Mind and Principles, and are made up of ſuch Reaſons, as give us juſt cauſe to ſuſpect, that more of them are written by Papiſts, than ſome think. I inſtance in one called, [A Repreſentation of the State of Chriſtianity in England, and of its decay and danger from Sectaries, as well as Papiſts. Printed 1674, for Benjamin Tooke.] in which the Sta…e of Religion here is unworthily ſlandered, and the Follies of ſome few, ſuch as the Quakers, pretended to be the State of our Religion, and words beſeeming Mad-men, (which we never hear) fathered on thoſe that he pleaſe… to call Sectaries; and they are repreſented as … of the Creed, Lords Prayer, and Commandments, and what not, that is reverend, good and holy, and the Papiſts much preferred before them ſaying, [That for one infallible old Gentleman at Rome we have Thouſands of Hot Spirits in England, that pretend to more of the Divine Perfections than ever he did: For if the Holy Ghost doth perſonally indwell in Sectaries, then they are perſonally poſſeſſed with all the glorious Attributes of the Godhead, pag. 26. And 28. The Idolatry of the Papiſts will be as excuſable at the great day of Accounts, as the unreverent Rudeneſs, and ſuperſtitious Sowreneſs of the Sectary. And p. 29. The groſs Uſurpation and Invaſion of the Prieſtly Office by Sectaries, to erect Churches, &c. throws more dirt upon the Chriſtian Religion, than the groſſeſt Errors in the Roman Church, &c.
Anſw. 1. I know none ſo worthy of the Name of Sectaries as the Papiſts, that damn all Chriſtians ſave themſelves, and feign themſelves onelyonly to be all the Church.
2. It's like by theſe Sectaries, he meaneth thoſe that are not Re-ordained, or have not (uninterrupted) Epiſcopal Ordination. And if all ſuch Reformed Churches are ſo much more dirty and injurious to Chriſtianity, than the groſſeſt Errors of the Papiſts, it's better be of the Papal Church, than of them.
3. Doth pretending to the help of Gods Spirit in Praying, and Preaching, and Living, arrogate more than pretending to Papal Infallibility in the Office of an Univerſal Monarch, and Judge of the ſenſe of all Gods Word? The word [Perſonal] I have heard uſed by none but this, and ſuch Accuſers: But what he meaneth by it, who can tell?
Firſt, If it refer to the Perſon of the Receiver, how can the Holy Ghoſt dwell in any man, and not dwell in his perſon?
Secondly, If it refer to the Perſon of the Holy Ghoſt, what Chriſtian, before this man, did ever doubt, (that took the Holy Ghoſt to be God) whether the Perſon as well as the Eſſence of the Holy Ghoſt, be every where? Doth not the Scripture ſay, That the Holy Spirit dwelleth in Believers? Rom. 8. 11. 1 Cor. 3. 16. 2 Tim. 1. 14. &c. and God dwelleth in us, 1 Joh. 4. 12. 15, 16. And that we are an habitation of God by the Spirit, Epheſ. 2. 22. Is Gods Word worſe than Popery? Or is not this to reproach God and his Word, and Spirit, more than the Reformed Churches do by not having Biſhops, who are accuſed by Mr. Dodwell, to ſin againſt the Holy Ghoſt?
Thirdly, But if [Perſonal] ſhould mean the mode and title of Union, as if by Hypoſtatical Union like Chriſts, the Holy Ghoſt and Believers be made one Perſon, who are thoſe Sectaries that hold ſuch a thing, who ſhew the ſtate of the Engliſh Religion? And this is one of the men that cry out againſt Toleration, and tells us, that [ There can be no ſtability of Government in England, till there be a ſettlement in Religion; No ſettlement of Religion, but by uniting Affections; No uniting Affections, but by unity of Religion. ] And ſo on: Therefore Rulers muſt force all to be of one Religion.
Next to the thought of the Heathen and Apoſtate Nations caſe, it is one of the ſaddeſt to me, that Rulers and People that have too little ſtudied ſuch matters, ſhould lie under the temptation and horrid abuſe of Clergymen, that write and talk at ſuch a rate as this man doth.
1. Will he maintain, That there is no Union of Religion, wherever men are not of one opinion, form or mode, in every Circumſtance, Rite or Ceremony, or every accident or integral of Faith? Are any two men in the world then of one Religion, any more than of one viſage or ſlature, &c?
2. If this man had Rulers that differed from him, as much as he doth from the Nonconformiſts, would he, and could he, preſently change his judgment? or would he falſly profeſs a change, leſt he ſhould not be of one Religion with his Prince? or rather muſt it not be he, or ſuch as he, that muſt be the ſtandard of that one Religion to all?
3. Doth he believe, That Priſons or Flames will make men of one Affection? Would ſuch uſage win himſelf to love the judgment and way of thoſe that he ſuffered by?
4. Or if men of many Opinions and Affections be forced into the ſame Temple as a Priſon, doth their corporal preſence make them of one Religion and Affection? It is a doleful thing to hear Preachers of the Goſpel cry out for Blood, Flames, or Priſons, to make whole Kingdoms of one Religion, confeſſing how unfit they are to do it themſelves, who have undertaken the Office that ſhould do it: Woe to the Princes, Church and People, that have not wit and grace to eſcape the ſnares of ſuch ignorant Tyrannical Counſellors.
Abundance more ſuch Pamphlets have lately endeavoured to deſtroy Love and Peace, and infect the Land with Malice and Cruelty.
§ XII. The Roman Doctrine and Laws for exterminating, and burning Hereticks, is the top and perfection of this hypocritical wickedneſs, which murdereth Gods Servants, and depopulateth Countries, on pretence of Charity, Unity and Government. And when ſo many Princes became guilty of ſerving this bloody Clergy, (that never knew what manner of ſpirit they were of) it was Gods wiſdom and juſtice to permit the ſame Councils of Biſhops, and the ſame Popes, to decree their Depoſition, which decreed their Subjects extermination (Lateran. ſub Innoc. 3.) what can be more contrary to Nature? to Humane Intereſt? or to the Doctrine, Example, and Spirit of Chriſt? And whoſe blood is ſafe, while ſuch blood-ſucking Leeches are taken for the Rulers of the world, and the Phyſicians of Souls?
§ XIII. All this, I perceive, is on occaſion of Objections, but ſuperadded to what I fullier ſaid before, Part II. Chap. 8. But I ſtill ſay, That Toleration muſt have its due bounds, and not extend to intolerable Doctrines, Practices or Perſons.
To proceed then, Every one that will, muſt not be Tolerated to be a publick Paſtor and Preacher, no not of the Truth. For ſome inſufficient men may by that manner bring a ſcandal or ſcorn on the ſacred Doctrine and Worſhip of God; and taking Gods Name profanely and in vain, is worſe than ſilence: much leſs ſhould men be ſuffered to preach or diſpute down anys Point of Chriſtian Faith or Duty.
§ XIV. In a word, The Prince that will eſcape the dangerous Extreams of Licentiouſneſs, and oppreſſing Perſecution, muſt.
1. Have an eye to the Holy Scripture, and Apoſtolical Inſtitution, and to the Law of Nature together, as his Rule.
2. He muſt make the true publick Good, which lieth in mens ſpiritual welfare, his end.
3. He muſt make the promoting of Obedience to God and his Laws, the chief work of his Office and of his own Laws.
4. He muſt abhor and avoid all carnal Intereſts, contrary to the Intereſt of Chriſt, and mens Souls.
5. He muſt do all with Caution from a Spirit of Love, and a Care to preſerve mens fear of God.
6. He muſt take heed of Partiality, or hearkning to the counſel either of Atheiſts, prophane men, or of an ignorant, proud, and cruel Clergy: And muſt hearken to wiſe, pious, conſiderate, peaceable and experienced Counſellors, and avoid the examples both of Rehoboam, and of Jeroboam, and be neither an Oppreſſor nor a Corrupter.
§ XV. And to conclude, good and wiſe men may well know their duty, whom to ſilence and eject, and whom to tolerate, if they are but true to God, by this one Rule: They may, by hearing all the caſe and knowledge of the Perſons, diſcern whether that mans Preaching, conſideratis conſiderandis, is clearly like to do more good or harm: and do accordingly.
But then they muſt not judge of good and harm, by carnal ſinful luſts and intereſts, and by the counſels of ſelfiſh partial men, but by wiſe and juſt reaſon, guided by the Word of God.
§ XVI. And in all doubtful Caſes, chooſe the ſafer ſide; and when the danger of overdoing is the greater (as in caſe of Perſecution) rather do too little, than too much: And prefer not Ceremonies before Subſtance, nor tything Mint, Anniſe and Cummin, before Love, Truth and Judgment, and the great things of the Law: And be ſure that you learn what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not ſacrifice,] that you may not condemn or accuſe the Guiltleſs.