or following of any opinion good or bad in religion, or any other learning: and thus not only in heathen authors, but in the New Teftament itself, without cenfure or blame; Acts xv, 5, "Certain of the herefy of the Pharifces which believed;" and xxvi, 5, "After the exacteft herefy of our religion I lived a Pharifee." In which fenfe prefbyterian or independent may without reproach be called a herefy. Where it is mentioned with blame, it seems to differ little from fchifm; 1 Cor. xi, 18, 19, "I hear that there be fchifms among you, &c. for there muft alfo herefies be among you," &c. Though fome, who write of herefy after their own heads, would make it far worse than fchifm; whenas on the contrary, fchifin fignifies divifion, and in the worft fenfe; herefy, choice only of one opinion before another, which may be without difcord. In apoftolic times, therefore, ere the fcripture was written, herefy was a doctrine maintained against the doctrine by them delivered; which in thefe times can be no otherwite defined than a doctrine maintained against the light, which we now only have, of the fcripture. Seeing therefore that no man, no fynod, no feffion of men, though called the Church, can judge definitively the fenfe of fcripture to another man's confcience, which is well known to be a general inaxim of the protestant religion; it follows plainly, that he who holds in religion that belief, or thofe opinions, which to his confcience and utmost understanding appear with moft evidence or probability in the fcripture, though to others he feem erroneous, can no more be juftly cenfured for a heretic than his cenfurers; who do but the fame thing themfelves, while they cenfure him for fo doing. For ask them, or any proteftant, which hath moft authority, the Church or the Church or the Scripture? They will anfwer, doubtlefs, that the fcripture: and what hath most authority, that no doubt but they will confefs is to be followed. He then, who to his beft apprehenfion follows the fcripture, though againft any point of doctrine by the whole church received, is not the heretic; but he who follows the church against his confcience and perfuafion grounded on the icripture. To

make this yet more undeniable, I shall only borrow a plain fimile, the fame which our own writers, when they would demonftrate plaineft, that we rightly prefer the fcripture before the church, ufe frequently against the papift in this manner. As the Samaritans believed Chrift, firft for the woman's word, but next and much rather for his own, fo we the fcripture: firft on the church's word, but afterwards and much more for its own, as the word of God; yea, the church itself we believe then for the fcripture. The inference of itself follows: if by the proteftant doctrine we believe the fcripture, not for the Church's faying, but for its own as the word of God, then ought we to believe what in our confcience we apprehend the fcripture. to lay, though the vifible church, with all her doctors, gaintay and being taught to believe them only for the fcripture, they who fo do are not heretics, but the best proteftants: and by their opinions, whatever they be, can hurt no proteftant, whofe rule is not to receive them but from the fcripture: which to interpret convincingly to his own confcience, none is able but himself guided by the holy fpirit; and not fo guided, none than he to himfelf can be a worle deceiver. To proteftants, therefore, whofe common rule and touchftone is the fcripture, nothing can with more confcience, more equity, nothing more proteftantly can be permitted, than a free and lawful debate at all times by writing, conference, or difputation of what opinion foever, difputable by fcripture: concluding, that no man in religion is properly a heretic at this day, but he who maintains traditions or opinions not probable by fcripture, who, for aught I know, is the papift only; he the only heretic, who counts all heretics but himfelf. Such as thefe, indeed, were capitally punished by the law of Mofes, as the only true heretics, idolaters, plain and open delerters of God and his known law; but in the gofpel fuch are punifhed by excommunion only. Tit. iii, 10, "An heretic, after the firft and fecond admonition, reject." But they who think not this heavy enough, and understand not that dreadful awe and fpiritual efficacy, which the Apostle hath expreffed fo highly

to

to be in church-difcipline, 2 Cor. x, of which anon, and think weakly that the church of God cannot long fubfift but in a bodily fear, for want of other proof will needs wreft that place of St. Paul, Rom. xiii, to fet up civil inquifition, and give power to the magiftrate both of civil judgment, and punishment in caufes ecclefiaftical. But let us fee with what strength of argument; "let every foul be fubject to the higher powers. First, how prove they that the Apostle means other powers, than fuch as they to whom he writes were then under; who meddled not at all in ecclefiaftical caufes, unless as tyrants and perfecuters? And from them, I hope, they will not derive either the right of magiftrates to judge in fpiritual things, or the duty of fuch our obedience. How prove they next, that he entitles them here to fpiritual caufes, from whom he withheld, as much as in him lay, the judging of civil? 1 Cor. vi, 1, &c. If he himself appealed to Cæfar, it was to judge his innocence, not his religion. "For rulers are not a terrour to good works, but to the evil" then are they not a terrour to confcience, which is the rule or judge of good works grounded on the fcripture. But herefy, they fay, is reckoned among evil works, Gal. v, 20, as if all evil works were to be punished by the magiftrate; whereof this place, their own citation, reckons up befides herefy a fufficient number to confute them; uncleannels, wantonnefs, enmity, ftrife, emulations, animofities, contentions, envyings;" all which are far more manifeft to be judged by him than herefy, as they define it; and yet I fuppose they will not fubject thefe evil works, nor many more fuchlike, to his cognizance and punishment. "Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? Do that which is good, and thou fhalt have praife of the fame." This fhows that religious matters are not here meant; wherein from the power here spoken of, they could have no praife: "For he is the minifter of God to thee for good:" True; but in that office, and to that end, and by thofe means which in this place muft be clearly found, if from this place they intend to argue. And how, for thy good by forcing, oppreffing,

Y 4

66

and

and enfnaring thy confcience? Many are the ministers of God, and their offices no lefs different than many: none more different than state and church-government. Who feeks to govern both, muft needs be worse than any lord prelate, or church-pluralift: for he in his own faculty and profeffion, the other not in his own, and for the moft part not thoroughly understood, makes himself fupreme lord or pope of the church, as far as his civil jurifdiction ftretches; and all the minifters of God therein, his minifters, or his curates rather in the function only, not in the government; while he himfelf affumes to rule by civil power things to be ruled only by fpiritual: whenas this very chapter, verse 6, appointing him his peculiar office, which requires utmoft attendance, forbids him this worfe than churchplurality from that full and weighty charge, wherein alone he is "the minifter of God, attending continually on this very thing.' To little purpofe will they here inftance Motes, who did all by immediate divine direction; no nor yet Afa, Jehofaphat, or Jofiah, who both might, when they pleafed, receive anfwer from God, and had a commonwealth by him delivered them, incorporated with a national church, exercifed more in bodily than in fpiritual worthip: fo as that the church might be called a commonwealth, and the whole commonwealth a church: nothing of which can be faid of chriftianity, delivered without the help of magiftrates, yea, in the midft of their oppofition; how little then with any reference to them, or mention of them, fave only of our obedience to their civil laws, as they countenance good, and deter evil? which is the proper work of the magiftrate, following in the fame verfe, and fhows diftinctly wherein he is the minifter of God, “ a revenger to execute wrath on him that doth evil.” But we must firft know who it is that doth evil: the heretic they fay among the firft. Let it be known then certainly who is a heretic; and that he who holds opinions in religion profeffedly from tradition, or his own inventions, and not from fcripture, but rather againft it, is the only heretic: and yet though fuch, not always punishable by the magiftrate, unless he do evil against a

5

civil

civil law, properly fo called, hath been already proved, without need of repetition. "But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid." To do by fcripture and the gospel, according to confcience, is not to do evil; if we thereof ought not to be afraid, he ought not by his judging to give caufe: caufes therefore of religion are not here meant. "For he beareth not the fword in vain." Yes, altogether in vain, if it fmite he knows not what; if that for herefy, which not the church itself, much less he can determine abfolutely to be fo; if truth for errour, being himself so often fallible, he bears the fword not in vain only, but unjustly and to evil. "Be fubject not only for wrath, but for confcience fake:" How for confcience fake, against confcience? By all thefe reafons it appears plainly, that the Apoftle in this place gives no judgment or coercive power to magiftrates, neither to thofe then, nor thefe now, in matters of religion; and exhorts us no otherwife than he exhorted thofe Romans. It hath now

twice befallen me to affert, through God's affiftance, this moft wrefted and vexed place of fcripture; heretofore againft Salmafius, and regal tyranny over the ftate; now againft Eraftus, and ftate-tyranny over the church. If from fuch uncertain, or rather fuch improbable grounds as thefe, they endue magiftracy with fpiritual judgment, they may as well inveft him in the fame fpiritual kind with power of utmost punishment, excommunication; and then turn fpiritual into corporal, as no worfe authors did than Chryfoftom, Jerome, and Auftin, whom Erafmus and others in their notes on the New Teftament have cited, to interpret that cutting off which St. Paul wifhed to them who had brought back the Galatians to circumcifion, no lefs than the amercement of their whole virility: and Grotius adds, that this concifing punifliment of circumcifers became a penal law thereupon among the Vifigoths: a dangerous example of beginning in the fpirit to end fo in the flesh; whereas that cutting off much likelier feems meant a cutting off from the church, not unusually fo termed in fcripture, and a zealous imprecation, not a command. But I have mentioned this paffage to fhow

how