Authority of Magistrates About Religion, Section 8
Sect. 8.
The firſt of theſe Books then, is, A Diſcourſe of Eccleſiaſtical Polity, the deſign whereof, as to the ſubſtance, conſiſts in the giving a Superiority to the Magiſtrate over the Conſcience, that in all doubtful or diſputable caſes, viz. in all matters in their nature indifferent (he means according to his Scope, in all matters now in difference between the Conformiſt, and Non-Conformiſt) a man muſt account according to that Authors opinion, that if he act againſt the dictates of his conſcience, out of obedience to the lawful Magiſtrates commands, he does but as a Chriſtian, and is juſtifyed by him in the doing. A Doctrine that I take to be not only new and Heterodox, but dangerous to Religion, and the opening a door to the pleaſing of man and ſeeking preſe…ment, above keeping a good conſcience before God. In things apparently and intrinſecally evil, he grants that the Magiſtrate is not to be obeyed. But how can this ſtand on its foundation, if conſcience had not certainly an authority over the commands of the Magiſtrate, and the authority of the Magiſtrate not over conſcience, as he ſpeaks? There need no more proof that conſcience muſt have the ſuperiority in every thing, then to yeild it in any thing, ſeeing it is the conſcience of every particular perſon is the judge to him of what God has forbidden; and the command of God muſt take place of the command of men in all things alike whatſoever. If this eminently accompliſhed young Divine then be not too proud to take it kindly, I would help him out here, according to the beſt that I think can be done. There is the conſcience of the univerſality: and of particular perſons. When he ſays, the Magiſtrates Authority is over the conſcience, let us underſtand his meaning to be onelyonly as to the conſcience of ſuch particulars, which in ſome ſenſe may be granted, while he paſſes any Law upon the account that it is according to the conſciences of the Generality, notwithſtanding it proves againſt theirs. And then whereas he ſpeaks often to this purpoſe, that the conſcience being in doubt, a man ſhould in all matters indifferent make the Law, or will of the Magiſtrate his rule; Let us underſtand him favourably, that he means onelyonly when a man is ſatisfied in the main of the thing that it is lawful, and there remains only ſome ſcruples that are fit to be ſhaken off; in which caſe Divines I think do ordinarily adviſe it to be ſafeſt to obey the Law. But this is to be known alſo, that the conſcience is not to be accounted doubtful in this caſe, but ſatisfied; and troubled only as the Travellour is with the Scrupuli the gravel in his Shooe, which he throws out and walks on; whereas if his feet be really wounded, and he does ſo, he may be undone. That this may be the better reliſhed, I will entreat this perſon to take good heed, onelyonly to a certain Book, which is another ſuch a one as his, and came out then, and I ſuppoſe he likes well, a Book entituled Toleration diſcuſſed, where he may read theſe paſſages for his inſtruction; Am I to believe every thing to be indifferent, which the Magiſtrate tells me is ſo, though it be wicked? No, he anſwers, (Sect. 21.) You are bound there by a Superiour Law, and to your ſelf you are Judge. Again, I am ſo far (in another place) from adviſing you to renounce your reaſon, that on the contrary, I would have you abſolutely guided and concluded by it: and only to obey for quiets ſake, ſo far as you can poſſibly obey in conſcience. Again, The Magiſtrate is a publick Miniſter, and his Commiſſion reaches not to particular conſciences. On the other ſide, there is as little reaſon for any ones private opinion to operate on a publick Law. So that if I miſtake not, we are upon accord thus far, That every particular is to look to one, and the King to the whole. Again, The King is accountable to God for the welfare of his people, and you are accountable to God for the good of your little particular. If you cannot obey the Law, do not, but abide the penalty. And finally, when he hath balanced all the intereſt he can for the Law, with this alone of Conſcience, he hath the ſame cloze. And yet I ſay ſtick to your conſcience. I do cite theſe paſſages with pleaſure, to ſee a reverence to conſcience in the heart of the Gentleman who wrot that Book, and that meerly out of conviction, when the Divine who wrot this Diſcourſe of Eccleſiaſtical polity hath ſo carried it, as if in the whole matters which are now in agitation between all parties in the Nation, the Magiſtrates Authority alone ſhould ſatisfie every body. When the Dictates of a private conſcience (ſays he) happen to thwart the determinations of the publick Laws, they in that caſe looſe their binding power, with ſeveral paſſages to that purpoſe, which is certainly a fair beginning (as is intimated) for the making the Rulers favour, and a mans own advancement, very quickly all his Religion. The Magiſtrate then (which I offer, as what himſelf, and this Gentleman intends) in the paſſing any Law, the matter whereof is againſt any of his Subjects conſciences, is to be conceived to go by a Judgement on the Generality, and thoſe Laws to be ſuppoſed according to conſcience, becauſe they are according to his own, and thoſe of the generality, when elſe they could not be paſſed without ſinning againſt God. In the mean time every particular man for himſelf is to obey onelyonly with ſubordination to his conſcience, and is not to have Ghoſtly encouragement, to go againſt the Dictates of it, upon any ſcore. Which as it may ſerve for the information of the Divine, who will receive it perhaps from ſuch a hand, when he would not elſe from mine; ſo may it give me occaſion to ask the Gentleman two queſtions: The one is, what if any ſuch things ſhould again come to be put in a Bill at the Houſe, which the King does believe really is againſt the conſcience of the Generality, or of ſuch a particular number at leaſt, as is fit and neceſſary for him to take cognezance of them? Can he paſs ſuch a Bill in point of conſcience? The other then follows, whether the preſſing this Nation in the main to Conformity, is not really ſuch a thing at this ſeaſon, when the generality are ſo divided in their opinions? I require here no more candour in the Gentleman then what he hath ſhewen in that laſt work. Who as I found him a lover of learning and reading in theſe preſent deboſhed times, ſhould not eſcape my praiſe (notwithſtanding others odium) for his induſtry and ſufficiency, (eſpecially as one of the Laity) if the deſign of his writings had been but as commendable as the example.