Against Pretended Liberty of Conscience, Chapter 10
CHAP. X. Of indulgence in fundamentall, or non-fundamentall errors.
BUt ſay the Arminians,Remon. 16. the queſtion is of Hereticks, not of thoſe who dare deny the things openly decided in the Scripture, but of thoſe who call in queſtion thoſe things that are, or may be contraverted. There was never an Heretick who called in queſtion whether theeves,How the Arminian Libertines do define an heretick. drunkards, robbers, railers, Idolaters, ſhall enter into the Kingdome of heaven, or whether God be to beloved above all things, he is not a Chriſtian, he is not an hereticke, but worſe than a hereticke who denyes thoſe things that are plain and obvious in ſcripture. But he that layeth a law upon others, which he muſt follow under pain of death, impriſonment or baniſhment in things belonging to liberty of prophecying, which are conjoyned with the reverence of God and the ſcripture, trampleth all propheſies under foot.
Anſw. 1 This definition of an Hereticke is in queſion, there be in England who deny all ſcriptures as no word of God, yet are judged by Libertines, not puniſhable by man. 2. All things that may be controverted, is wide. Nothing but it is converted, except whether there be a God or not, and many doubt of that: There be even now, who deny Jeſus Chriſt God man, the neceſſity of his death, his offices, the immortallity of the ſoule, the reſurrection, laſt judgement, a heaven, a hell, but al to Libertines are uncertaine, and the denyall of any point, not by the light of reaſon, but by ſupernaturall revelation, ſuch as theſe articles, that God is one in three diſtinct perſons, that Chriſt is God and Man in one perſon, that he dyed to ſatisfie divine juſtice, that we are ſaved by his righteouſneſſe imputed to us by faith, &c. Is no hereſie, but may conſiſt with true godlineſſe, and therefore they give inſtance in fundamentals which are knowne by the light of nature, as that theeves, drunkards ſhall not inherit the Kingdome of God, that God is to bee loved above all things,Heretickes to Libertines only ſuch as deny things knowable by the light of nature diverſity of opinions among them. now th…ſe are principles of naturall Theology known to heathens, ſo that ſuch godly men, to which Libertines would yeeld an indulgence and liberty, are good moral honeſt civil men, who beleeve fundamentals known by the light of nature to Chriſtians and Heathens equally, for civill Heathens may have the ſound faith of al ſuch fundamentals, and beleeving morall and naturall fundamentals, though they know not Jeſus Chriſt, or poſſibly never heard of him, may be ſaved and not be beholden to Chriſt knowne as a Saviour, ſo ſome Libertines tell us, not any man is to ſuffer death, though he deny and malitiouſly oppoſe, all the principles of the Goſpell, becauſe theſe are knowne no ways, but by ſupernaturall revelation, and the light of faith which commeth from God, but I take the ground of this to bee, becauſe ſupernaturall light is above us, and not in our power, but by this reaſon, Chriſt ſhould not have rebuked the Phariſees for not beleeving in him, nor the Sadduces for denying the reſurrection, nor ſhould Paul have ſmitten Eli…as with blindneſſe for perverting Sergius Paulus from the faith, for it was not in their power to know or beleeve otherwiſe of theſe Goſpel fundamentals that are not beleeved, but by ſupernaturall revelation, then they did, other Libertines ſay, they are only Hereticks or at leaſt puniſhable by men, who deny fundamentals of Cbriſtian Religion, but are ſparing to tell us what fundamentals, whether of law and known by the light of nature, or of Goſpel known onelyonly by ſupernaturall revellation,The puniſhing of men forpubliſhing of fundamental errors and the indulgence of a toleration yeelded to them though they teach all errors in non-fundamentals a vain diſtinction and hath no ground in ſcripture. ſo that ere they finde the hereticke, they muſt ſhow you the point they deny is fundamental, and its poſſible that is a difficil buſineſſe, whether it be fundamental or not, if he go for a Sectarie he is a godly man, and his godlineſſe ſhal prove the poynt is not fundamental, for this is the logick of our time, ſuch a people are godly, therefore their opinions are againſt no fundamentall point, whereas this is a better conſequence; ſuch points are fundamentall, ergo, if men twice or thrice admoniſhed doe yet wilfully goe on to maintaine opinions manifeſtly contrary, they are not godly, for the Apoſtle tel… us of doctrine according to godlineſſe then muſt the doctrine ſoundly beleeved make the perſon godly or argue him to be ſo, but the man let him goe for a Saint cannot make or argue the doctrine to bee the doctrine according to godlineſſe, if it be not ſo in it ſelf, and we are inclined, if the man be of our own tribe and ſect, to defend his tenets, and not to judge them fundamental error.
2. We wiſh much an argument to prove bodily violence, or Eccleſiaſticall co-action may be uſed againſt men erring in points fundamentall,Some murthers non-fundamentall …n David, which yet are conſiſtent with the ſtate, ſalvation ſhould as wel be tolerated as ſome errours in non-fundamentals, by the diſtinction of Libertines. but not in non-fundamentals, ſince God delivers his mind as clearly in non-fundamentals, if not more clearely, as in fundamentals, and the authority of the Lord who commands faith is as great in non-fundamentals, and our obligation to beleeve no leſſe, then in the moſt neceſſary fundamentals, as therefore abſtinence from adultery with Bathſheba, and murthering of Ʋriah in David, is as neceſſary, neceſſitate precepts, as the whole courſe of Davids repentance and turning to God, yet it is not ſo neceſſary, neceſſitate medii, for David is a ſaved Saint, though he abſta… not from that adultery and murther, but without converſion from the ſtate of ſinfull nature to the way of ſaving grace, it is unpoſſible David can be ſaved; ſo to abſtain from Idolatry, and to demoliſh the high places, and to puniſh thoſe who reſort to them is a godly practice, yet though … commit Idolatry with the golden Calfe, yea and make the people naked alſo: And Aſa, though he demoliſh not the high places all his reigne, nor puniſh any for that Idolatry, and did perſecute the Seer, yet Aaron was the faithfull Prieſt, and the anointed of God, and Aſa and ſome other Kings heart, were perfect before the Lord, though they fell in theſe ſins, nor were theſe fundamentals, ſinnes in practice, inconſiſtent with ſaving faith, more then errours and teaching of errours in non-fundamentals, to the ruine of many ſouls doth exclude a poſſibility of being in the ſtate of ſaving grace, but it cannot follow, that becauſe teaching and publiſhing of errours in non-fundamentals is conſiſtent with ſaving grace, that therefore theſe non-fundamentall ſinnes of murther, adultery, tolerating of Idolatrous high places, perſecuting of faithfull Prophets, making of a golden Calfe, and hallowing of it to be adored as the God that brought Iſrael out of Aegypt, are ſins not to be tolerated in the truly godly, ſuch as Aaron, David, and Aſa, for then ſhould they be tolerated in the wicked alſo, for the toleration of ſuch in the godly, becauſe they are not fundamental wickedneſſes, inconſiſtent with ſaving grace, is as deſtructive and more, becauſe of their extream ſcandalouſneſſe, to all peace and ſafety of humaine ſocieties, and to the duty of the godly Magiſtrate, as theſe ſame ſins in the wicked, upon the ſame grounds publiſhing of all errors non-fundamentall, the toleration of the high places are as inconſiſtent with peace, deſtructive and injurious to ſoules, eſpecially in the godly, as ſcandalous to other falſe teachers, as theſe non-fundamentall ſins.
But (ſay they) the reaſon is not alike in non-fundamentall ſinnes, that are expreſly condemned by all, Aarons Idolatry, Davids adultery, Aſaes perſecution, no man ever defended, therefore they cannot bee tolerated by the Magiſtrate without ſin, though the acting of theſe ſins may conſiſt with ſound faith. But moſt of non-fundamentalls are not clearly determined in the word, in regard of our dulneſſe and naturall blindneſſe, and therefore the Magiſtrate cannot puniſh the non-fundamentall errours, for theſe which be non-fundamentall errours to ſome godly and learned, are non-fundamentall and ſeaſonable truths to others, as godly and learned as they are. But to all the godly and learned, Aarons Idolatry, Davids adultery and murther, Aſa's tolerating the high places, and impriſoning the Seer, were ſins unjuſtifiable, and by the light of nature ſuch as no godly Magiſtrate can tolerate.
But I anſwer, if this be a good reaſon, why there is not the like conſideration of theſe ſins non-fundamentall, and doctrines non-fundamentall, becauſe ſome doctrines non-fundamentall are ſeaſonable truths to ſome godly and learned, and theſe ſame are lyes and untruths to others, as godly and learned as they; then ſhould alſo divers fundamentall errours bee tolerated as well as non-fundamentall errours, which Independents, the Maſters of this diſtinction with the Arminians will not ſay, becauſe to ſome godly and learned Independents, this is a fundamentall truth, that murther, and adultery, and robbery, are not to be tolerated by the Magiſtrate, that Magiſtracy is an ordinance of God, but to many Anabaptiſts as godly and learned as they, it is duplicate page duplicate page duplicate page duplicate page duplicate page duplicate page not onelyonly no fundamentall truth, but a fundamentall errour, under our meeke Saviours reigne, there ought to bee neither ſword nor ſpeare, but inſtead of them, plow-ſhares and pruning hooks, and ſince Libertines will not have godlineſſe to be valued by ſoundneſſe in doctrine, but by mens ſpirits of diſcerning and charity, Independents are to repute Familiſts, Socinians, Antinomians as godly and learned as themſelves: Now Independents thinke that Chriſt God-man came to ſatisfie the juſtice of God for our ſinnes, and that Ordinances are neceſſary for all in this life, yet theſe, and many the like Familiſts and Socinians judge fundamentall lyes, and who have any diſcerning, and have heard Mr. John Goodwin pray, and ſeene his writings, which I have done, will repute him as godly and learned as any Independent in England: ſo I judge with correction; yet he will ſay the godly and learned Independents in England hold many points to bee fundamentall truths which he reputes to bee fundamentall untruths, as namely concerning juſtification by faith, that the Scriptures we now have by the ſaith whereof we muſt be ſaved, is the word of God. Mr. Joh. Goodwin muſt ſay theſe are fundamentall lyes, and many fundamentals in the late Confeſſion of Aſſ…mbly, I know M. John Goodwin in his writings, denyeth to be fundamentall truths.
2. It is not enough to ſay moſt of the non-fundamentalls are not determined clearely in the word,Some non-fundamentals clearely in the … revealed not to be beleeved with a reſerve, and others non-fundamentals with …. Libertines we … diſpute withall, muſt ſay, not any non-fundamentalls are determined in the word, but all fundamentalls are clearly determined, elſe they muſt belye their diſtinction which Independents in the Apologeticke Narration make almoſt a principle of faith (though I hope it ſhall never be one to me) that all non-fundamentals are to be beleeved without a reſerve, and all fundamentalls with a reſerve; for if many non-fundamentalls are alſo to bee beleeved without a reſerve, it would have been ſervice to the Church, they had beaten out that Arminian principle a little more, and ſubdivided non-fundamentalls in ſuch as are to bee beleeved with a reſerve, and a demurre, and ſuch as are to be beleeved without a reſerve, then in ſome non-fundamen…ll… men are not to be tolerated, and what be theſe. 2. The diſtinction ſhould ſo beare a leg and halt, for then ſome fundamentalls we beleeve without a reſerve, and no toleration is to bee yeelded in them, but the ſword and the club muſt preſſe faith in theſe, and we are to beleeve but ſome non-fundamentalls with a reſerve, not all, and indulgence is due to men in ſome non-fundamentalls, not in others; but we know our Brethrens frequent arguing, Independencie is not fundamentalls, ergo, our Brethren ſhould tolerate it, but we deny this conſequence; yea Eraſtianiſme in its higheſt ſphere is not fundamentall, and yet high Eraſtianiſme is perſecution both of Independency and Presbytery, doth it follow then, it muſt be tolerated?
3. If the Magiſtrate cannot puniſh the error in non-fundamentals, becauſe, in regard of our dulneſſe, they are not clear in the word, ſo in regard of our dulneſſe many fundamentals in the Goſpel are as uncleare, and that all acknowledge that Aarons Idolatry, and Davils adultery and murther, are ſins unjuſtifiable, and which the Magiſtrate by the light of nature is not to tolerate, and that he is not a Chriſtian who denyes that theeves and Idolaters who ſhall not enter into heaven, and that God is to be loved above all, is a great untruth, many Anabaptiſts there were in Bullingers time, who taught none but whores and harlots ſhould enter into the Kingdome of God, which is couſen Germains to this. Againe, what is theft, is as diſputable, as in the caſe of uſury, and whether the Saints the juſt and ſpirituall inheritors of the earth, all things are yours (ſaith Paul) doe rob and ſteale, if they invade the poſſeſſions, houſes, monies, and lands of unregenerate and carnall man? whether he bee a murtherer who ſacrificeth his childe to God in imitation of Abraham? are as uncleare, in regard of our naturall blindneſſe, as moſt of the non-fundamentalls: and Anabaptiſts that are godly and learned, have as much to ſay from Scripture for denying of fundamentals, as in many in non-fundamentals can plead, why their tenets are true, and though erroneous, yet not puniſhable; and they ſhould upon the ſame ground have a toleration for murtherers, robbers, theeves, that flow from meere conſcience, and religious grounds, and though theſe practiſes bee deſtructive to peace, yet with what conſcience can the Magiſtrate puniſh them as deſtructive to peace, when it is not clearely determined in the word of God that they are deſtructive to true humaine peace? For if they be lawfull, and ſome of them acts of worſhip, as the actors are in conſcience perſwaded they are, they cannot be deſtructive to peace, yea to puniſh them is tyranny over the conſcience, ſay Libertines. Now I propoſe theſe Queries, and deſire Libertines to anſwer them.
1. Should not the Magiſtrate puniſh no thefts, no robbery, no murther,Queries propounded to Libertines. but ſuch as are thefts, robberies, and murthers, undeniably and uncontroverſally to the conſcience of all that are members of that ſociety, whether Anabaptiſts or others?
2. Should the Magiſtrate abſtaine from puniſhing of that which is falſe worſhip, for example ſacrificing of a childe to God, for feare he domineere over the conſcience of a Chriſtian, and ſo tranſgreſſe his ſphere, and ſit down in Gods roome (which is really murther, and ſhedding of innocent blood) though it be not ſo to the man-ſlayer, but acceptable ſervice to God, and yet puniſh the ſame falſe worſhip, as murther and deſtructive to peace, whereas to the actors conſience, whom he deſires to favour, it is not murther and not deſtructive to peace,Why may not the Magiſtrate lawfully ſpare the life of him who out of a Libertine conſcience meerly ſacrificeth his childe to God… or why ſhould …e puniſh with the ſword ſome acts not deſtructive to peace in the con…cience of the puniſhed, and not a… acts of the ſame ki…d. does he not really and by his office as great violence, and exerciſeth no leſſe a domineering power over the mans conſcience, then if hee ſhould puniſh this as falſe worſhip?
3. Will, or can notionall or mentall conſideration licence the Magiſtrate to domineere over mens conſciences, and exerciſe ſoule-tyranny and invade the Throne of God over the conſcience, when it is upon the ſame reaſons and arguments of Scripture; as probable that the taking away of a fathers head for ſacrificing his ſon to God, is not deſtructive to peace, nor any breach of the ſixt Commandement, as it is probable it is true and acceptable, and worſhip to God, and though it were falſe worſhip, it is as probable that to puniſh it, is a ſacrilegious invading of Gods place, as it is an act of juſtice in the Magiſtrate?
4. If the Magiſtrate muſt beleeve, as the Libertine, doth, doth, and teacheth him, what he will, if it were King and Parliament, and all the Judges in Britain, if they be of the faith of Libertines, what conſcience have they to take away the …ead of a father, who ſacrificeth his onelyonly childe to God, upon meere religious principles, what warrant have they before the tribunall of God to cut off his head, as a peace-breaker, rather then to ſpare his life as a ſacrificer, and a devout, and zealous (whether it be blinde zeal or no, the Libertine Magiſtrate hath nothing to do to judge) worſhipper of God? whether or no hath the Magiſtrate who in that caſe, killeth a… innocent man (according to his own libertine-conſcience) greater reſpect to falſe peace in a humane ſociety, then to true piety and innocent walking with God, which forbids him to puniſh any thing that is onelyonly to the ſubject, he puniſheth, a meere devout worſhipping of God.
5. Upon the ſame ground, ſhould not the maſſe, and all the broad worſhip on earth be tolerated, ſince it hath farre leſſe connexion with diſturbance of peace, then the Anabaptiſts children-killing worſhip of God?
6. If the formall is ratio, the onelyonly formall reaſon and cauſe why the Magiſtrate is to uſe corporall coerſion againſt none now under the New Teſtament, but is to ſuffer every man to worſhip God, as he beſt pleaſeth, becauſe the worſhip of the New Teſtament is more ſpirituall, the Law-giver Chriſt, a meeker Mediator, then Moſes, and there is no warrant now to hinder any man, or lay bands and coactive violence upon Chriſts free ſubjects, with force of ſword, to reſtraine them in one worſhip, more then another, what reaſon an Anabaptiſts offering his ſon a ſacrifice to God, ſhould be reſtrained in his ſacrificing, more then in other acts of worſhip? is not the man perſecuted for his conſcience? is not this a carnall, and no New Teſtament way of reſtraining him, when he is reſtrained by the ſword▪ is not the onelyonly word of God, and no weapons that are carnall, the way of reſcuing men from all falſe worſhip, and the onelyonly way.
7. Nor can the bloodineſſe and cruelty of that worſhip be a ſufficient ground, why the Magiſtrate may reſtraine the conſcience of the devout worſhipper; for who ought to ſit as Lord Judge above the conſcience of this father, and ſentence the worſhip as deſtructive to peace, or the worſhipper as a bloody man? his conſcience is under the New Teſtament, and the Lord his onelyonly judge.
But by the light of nature, that the father kill the ſonne to God, … murther, and …ruel…y.
But I anſwer, if it be gratefull worſhip to God, it is no more cruelty then to burne a beaſt to God, and you are to ſuppoſe that a godly Anabaptiſt, hath warrant from God for that worſhip, as well for burning of beaſts, and offering yearely thouſands of bullocks and ſheep to God, in memory of Chriſt once already ſacrificed for ſinners, and that there is in it neither cruelty to beaſts, nor hurt to the Commonwealth, that the Magiſtrate can reſtraine, for though there be no reaſon at all for the worſhip, ex natura rei, if we conſider the worſhip it ſelfe, yet there is ſuch reaſon to tolerate the worſhip, ſo as if the Magiſtrate reſtraine, he tyranni…eth over the conſcience, and a bloody conſcience is a conſcience as uncapable of violence, and as immediately in the New Testament, ſubject to God onelyonly, not to the ſword, as a good conſcience, then if the ſword can ſtraine no conſcience as conſcience; how can it ſqueeze a conſcience wading in bloody ſon-butchery more then any other conſcience?To compell men to do againſt their conſcience, that is to ſin neither in Old or New Teſt-lawfull.
8. If the Magiſtrates puniſhing of any for his conſcience be a violent compelling of him to ſin, to worſhip or to forbeare worſhip againſt his conſcience, how will Libertines cleare Magiſtracy in the Old Teſtament, from being intrinſecally a ſinfull ordinance, for the Magiſtrate in the Old Teſtament in ſtoning to death the ſeducing Prophet, and the blaſphemer muſt compell him to ſin againſt his conſcience, and to profeſſe Jehovah, Deut 13.not Baal was the true God, whereas the ſeducer believed in his conſcience the contrary,Deut. 17. ſince to compell men to ſin is intrinſecally ſinfull, let Libertines anſwer the query, if God ever in Old or New Teſtament could command ſin, or if there was ever ſuch a thing heard that a Magiſtrate might by his office command men to ſin, or then puniſh them?
9. Let Libertines anſwer if Arminians extend not liberty of propheſying as farre as mens luſts can carry them,…pan… in theſe words, But to ſuffer every man (ſay they) to … publickly in Religion every thing i… perilous. Why? for either that which … aſſerteth is true, or falſe, if it be true, why admit we is not? why doe we impriſon the Author thereof? this injury reflects upon God the Author of truth: if it be falſe, the truth ſhall eaſily overcome …ar, of it ſelf it ſhall melt like was before the Sunne, if ye offer violence … it, yee ſtrip Religion of its glory, and furniſh oyle to err…. Whether is not reaſon as ſtrong to refute errours fundamentall as nonfundamentall? whether if ye offer violence to truth in fundamentalls, as well as in non-fundamentalls, yee ſtrippe Religion and truth of its glory, and furniſh oyle to errour?
They goe on and tell us, …. Apo c. 25. f. 290.Wee need not ever bee in learning theſe that are clearely determined in the word; for they are cleare, open, and of undoubled truths in the Scripture, in other points (not fundamentall) a Chriſtian is ever a diſciple and a ſearcher, not that he doth ever doubt and heſitate, but becauſe, though for the preſent he neither doubt, nor hath cauſe of doubting, yet can he not be ſure of theſe points, with ſuch a certitude, which is free of all danger of errour, and therefore he is often to examine theſe according to the rule that cannot erre, and ſo it is enough before God that he may be ſaid ever to learne, and to come to the knowledge of the truth, as far as frailty in this life can permit.
Anſw. 1. There is then no ſtability of faith, but in two or three points, in which all Papiſts, Latherans, Anti…ni…ar…ans, Arrians, Socinians, Libertines, Familiſts, Sabellians, Neſtorians, Macedonians, Arminians, Antinomians, Seekers, F…thyſtaſts, Anabaptiſts, &c. agree, and make one true Church, beleeving what is neceſſary for ſalvation, and holding the foundation Chriſt, and we have no divine faith of the miracles that Chriſt wrought, that the old world periſhed with waters, which God ſpeakes as clearly in the word, as he doth fundamentalls.
But Libertines ſhould diſtinguiſh the formall reaſon of beleeving truths, which breedeth an obligation, and the neceſſity of beleeving, for the one onelyonly formall reaſon of beleeving, both fundam…ntalls and non-fundamentalls, is thus, ſaith the Lord. For we are as much obliged to beleeve non-fundamentalls that are cleare,There is the ſame obligation, the ſame formall reaſon (ſo ſaith the Lord) of beleeving non-fundamentals revealed, and fundamentals, and the ſame neceſſity of divine command not the ſame neceſſity of means called, neceſſitas med…. as that there were eight perſons ſaved in the Arke, and the old world drowned with waters, S…dome burnt with fire, as to beleeve fundamentalls, that there is no name whereby men may be ſaved, but by the … of Jeſus, for the Authority of God ſpeaking in his word and his Command doth equally oblige to both, but there is no ſuch neceſſity ſo abſolute in beleeving non-fundamentalls, as in beleeving theſe, without the knowledge whereof, wee cannot be ſaved; but it never followeth that errours in non-fundamentalls publiſhed and taught to the ruine of the ſoules of many, they having ſuch a ſtrong connexion and influence on the knowledge of fundamentalls, are to bee tolerated ſince our ſinning here doth as equally and ſtrongly ſtrike againſt the authority and expreſſe command of God (at leaſt in moſt things of that kinde) as in points fundamentall, and therefore the Magiſtrate who is to looketo the honour of God as a Chriſtian, and peace of ſocieties in all, is as much obliged to puniſh, clearly opened, non-fundamentall as fundamentall falſe doctrines.