ing 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, because,* he doth contrary to the will of God, although not materially and truly, yet formally and interpretatively.

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 encroaching upon mens' 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 encroach upon, or seek to force their neighbours, otherwise

* i. e. As he supposeth.

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.

But the liberty we lay claim to is such as the primitive church justly sought 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 heretics; but spare the men, and pray for their sal

vation.

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, 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.

This pretended power of the magistrate is both contrary unto and inconsistent with the nature of the gospel, which is a thing altogether extrinsic to the rule and government of political states, as Christ expressly signified, saying, His kingdom was not of this world; and if the propagating of the gospel had had any necessary relation thereunto, then Christ had not said so. But he abundantly hath shewn by his example, whom we are chiefly to imitate in matters of that nature, that it is by persuasion and the power of God, not by whips, imprisonments, banishment, and murderings, that the gospel is to be propagated; and that those that are the propagators of it are often to suffer by the wicked, but never to cause the wicked to suffer. When he sends forth his disciples, he tells them, he sends them forth as lambs among wolves, to be willing to be devoured, not to devour, Mat. x. 16: he tells them of their being whipped, imprisoned, and killed for their conscience; but never that they shall either whip, imprison, or kill and indeed if Christians must be as lambs, it is not the nature of lambs to destroy

or devour any. It serves nothing to allege, that in Christ's and his apostles' times the magistrates were heathens, and therefore neither Christ nor his apostles, nor yet any of the believers, being magistrates, they could not exercise the power; because it cannot be denied but Christ, being the Son of God, had a true right to all kingdoms, and was righteous heir of the earth. Mat. xxviii. 18. Next as to his power it cannot be denied but he could, if he had seen meet, have called for legions of angels to defend him, and have forced the princes and potentates of the earth to be subject unto him, Mat. xxvi. 53. So that it was only because it was contrary to the nature of Christ's gospel and ministry to use any force or violence in the gathering of souls to him. This he abundantly expressed in his reproof to the two sons of Zebedee, who would have been calling for fire from heaven to burn those that refused to receive Christ it is not to be doubted but this was as great a crime as now to be in an error concerning the faith and doctrine of Christ. That there was not power wanting to have punished those refusers of Christ cannot be doubted; for they that could do other miracles, might have done this also. And moreover, they wanted not the precedent of a holy man under the law, as did Elias; yet we see what Christ saith to them, Ye know not what spirit ye are of, Luke ix. 55. "For the Son of man is not come to destroy mens' lives, but to