religious by those ordinances of civil power, from which Chrift their head hath difcharged us; "blotting out the hand writing of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us; and took it out of the way, nailing it to his crois," ver. 14. Blotting out ordinances written by God himfelf, much more thofe fo boldly written over again by men ordinances which were against us, that is, againft our frailty, much more thofe which are againft our confcience. "Let no man therefore judge you in respect of, &c." v, 16; Gal. iv, 3, &c., "Even fo we, when we were children, were in bondage under the rudiments of the world: But when the fulnefs of time was come, God fent forth his fon, &c. to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of fons, &c. Wherefore thou art no more a fervant, but a fon, &c. But now, &c. how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly rudiments, whereunto ye defire again to be in bondage? Ye obferve days, &c." Hence it plainly appears, that if we be not free, we are not fons, but ftill fervants unadopted; and if we turn again to thofe weak and beggarly rudiments, we are not free; yea, though willingly, and with a mifguided ccnfcience, we defire to be in bondage to them; how much more then if unwillingly and againft our confcience? Ill was our condition changed from legal to evangelical, and finall advantage gotten by the golpel, if for the fpirit of adoption to freedom promifed us, we receive again the fpirit of bondage to fear; if our fear, which was then fervile towards God only, must be now fervile in religon towards men ftrange alfo and prepofterous fear, if when and wherein it hath attained by the redemption of our Saviour to be filial only towards God, it must be now fervile towards the magiftrate: who, by fubjecting us to his punishment in thefe things, brings back into religion that law of terrour and fatisfaction belonging now only to civil crimes; and thereby in effect abolishes the gofpel, by eftablishing again the law to a far worse yoke of fervitude upon us than before. It will therefore not mifbecome the meaneft chriftian to put in mind christian magiftrates, and fo much the more frcely by how much the more they defire to be thought chriftian, (for they

will be thereby, as they ought to be in these things, the more our brethren and the lefs our Lords) that they meddle not rafhly with chriftian liberty, the birthright and outward teftimony of our adoption; left while they little think it, nay, think they do God service, they themselves, like the fons of that bondwoman, be found perfecuting them who are freeborn of the fpirit, and by a facrilege of not the leaft aggravation, bereaving them of that facred liberty, which our faviour with his own blood purchafed for them.

A fourth reafon, why the magiftrate ought not to use force in religion, I bring from the confideration of all thofe ends, which he can likely pretend to the interpofing of his force therein: and thofe hardly can be other than firft the glory of God; next, either the fpiritual good of them whom he forces, or the temporal punishment of their scandal to others. As for the promoting of God's glory, none, I think, will fay that his glory ought to be promoted in religious things by unwarrantable means, much lefs by means contrary to what he hath commanded. That outward force is fuch, and that God's glory in the whole adminiftration of the gospel according to his own will and counfel ought to be fulfilled by weakness, at least so refuted, not by force; or if by force, inward and fpiritual, not outward and corporeal, is already proved at large. That outward force cannot tend to the good of him who is forced in religion, is unquestionable. For in religion whatever we do under the gofpel, we ought to be thereof perfuaded without fcruple; and are juftified by the faith we have, not by the work we do: Rom. xiv, 5, "Let every man be fully perfuaded in his own mind." The other reafon which follows neceffarily, is obvious, Gal. ii, 16, and in ' many other places of St. Paul, as the groundwork and foundation of the whole gofpel, that we are "juftified by the faith of Chrift, and not by the works of the law." If not by the works of God's law, how then by the injunctions of man's law? Surely force cannot work perfuafion, which is faith; cannot therefore juftify nor pacify the confcience; and that which juftifies not in the gofpel, condemns; is not only not good, but finful to

z 3

do:

do: Rom. xiv, 23, "Whatfoever is not of faith, is fin.' It concerns the magiftrate then to take heed how he forces in religion confcientious men: left by compelling them to do that whereof they cannot be perfuaded, that wherein they cannot find themfelves juftified, but by their own confciences condemned, inftead of aiming at their fpiritual good, he force them to do evil; and while he thinks himfelf Afa, Jofiah, Nehemiah, he be found Jeroboam, who caufed Ifrael to fin; and thereby draw upon his own head all thofe fins and fhipwrecks of implicit faith and conformity, which he hath forced, and all the wounds given to thofe little ones, whom to offend he will find worfe one day than that violent drowning mentioned Mat. xviii, 6. Laftly, as a preface to force, it is the ufual pretence, That although tender confciences fhall be tolerated, yet fcandals thereby given fhall not be unpunished, prophane and licentious men fhall not be encouraged, to neglect the performance of religious and holy duties by colour of any law giving liberty to tender confciences. By which contrivance the way lies ready open to them hereafter, who may be fo minded, to take away by little and little that liberty which Chrift and his gofpel, not any magiftrate, hath right to give though this kind of his giving be but to give with, one hand, and take away with the other, which is a deluding not a giving. As for fcandals, if any man be offended at the conicientious liberty of another, it is a taken scandal, not a given. To heal one confcience, we muft not wound another : and men muft be exhorted to beware of fcandals in chriftian liberty, not forced by the magiftrate; left while he goes about to take away the fcandal, which is uncertain whether given or taken, he take away our liberty, which is the certain and the facred gift of God, neither to be touched by him, nor to be parted with by us. None more cautious of giving fcandal than St. Paul. Yet while he made himfelf "Servant to all," that he " might gain the more," he made himfelf fo of his own accord, was not made fo by outward force, teftifying at the fame time that he "was free from all men," 1 Cor. ix, 19; and thereafter exhorts us alfo, Gal. v, 13, "Ye were called to liberty, &c. but by love ferve one

another :"

then

then not by force. As for that fear, left prophane and licentious men fhould be encouraged to omit the performance of religious and holy duties, how can that care belong to the civil magiftrate, especially to his force? For if prophane and licentious perfons must not neglect the performance of religious and holy duties, it implies, that fuch duties they can perform, which no protestant will affirm. They who mean the outward performance, may fo explain it; and it will then appear yet more plainly, that fuch performance of religious and holy duties, elpecially by prophane and licentious perfons, is a difhonouring rather than a worshipping of God; and not only by him not required, but detefted: Prov. xxi, 27, “The facrifice of the wicked is an abomination; how much more when he bringeth it with a wicked mind?" To compel therefore the prophane to things holy in his prophanenefs, is all one under the gofpel, as to have compelled the unclean to facrifice in his uncleannefs under the law. And I add witha', that to compel the licentious. in his licentioufnefs, and the confcientious against his confcience, comes all to one; tends not to the honour of God, but to the multiplying and the aggravating of fin to them both. We read not that Chrift ever exercifed force but once; and that was to drive prophane ones out of his temple, not to force them in: and if their being there was an offence, we find by many other feriptures that their praying there was an abomination: and yet to the Jewith law that nation, as a fervant, was obliged; but to the gospel each perfon is left voluntary, called only, as a fon, by the preaching of the word; not to be driven in by edicts and force of arms. For if by the apostle, Rom. xii, 1, we are "betecched as brethren by the mercies of God to prefent our bodies a living facrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is our reafonable fervice" or worfhip, then is no man to be forced by the compulfive laws of men to prefent his body a dead facrifice; and fo under the gofpel moft unholy and unacceptable, because it is his unreasonable fervice, that is to fay, not only unwilling but unconscionable. But if prophane and licentious perfons may not omit the performance of holy duties, why may they not partake of holy things? Why are they pro

Z 4

hibited

hibited the Lord's fupper, fince both the one and the other action may be outward; and outward performance of duty may attain at leaft an outward participation of benefit? The church denying them that communion of grace and thankfgiving, as it juftly doth, why doth the magiftrate compel them to the union of performing that which they neither truly can, being themfelves unholy, and to do feemingly is both hateful to God, and perhaps no lefs dangerous to perform holy duties irreligioufly, than to receive holy figns or facraments unworthily? All prophane and licentious men, fo known, can be confidered but either fo without the church as never yet within it, or departed thence of their own accord, or excommunicate if never yet within the church, whom the apostle, and fo confequently the church, have nought to do to judge, as he profeffes, 1 Cor. v, 12, then by what authority doth the magiftrate judge; or, which is worse, compel in relation to the church? If departed of his own accord, like that loft fheep, Luke xv, 4, &c. the true church either with her own or any borrowed force worries him not in again, but rather in all charitable manner fends after him; and if the find him, lays him gently on her fhoulders; bears him, yea bears his burdens, his errours, his infirmities any way tolerable, "fo fulfilling the law of Chrift," Gal. vi, 2. If excommunicate, whom the church hath bid go out, in whofe name doth the magiftrate compel to go in? The church indeed hinders none from hearing in her public congregation, for the doors are open to all nor excommunicates to deftruction; but, as much as in her lies, to a final faving. Her meaning therefore muft needs be, that as her driving out brings on no outward penalty, fo no outward force or penalty of an improper and only a deftructive power fhould drive in again her infectious theep; therefore fent out because infectious, and not driven in but with the danger not only of the whole and found, but alfo of his own utter perithing. Since force neither inftructs in religion, nor begets repentance or amendment of life, but on the contrary, hardness of heart, formality, hypocrify, and, as I faid before, every way increafe of fin; more and more alienates the mind from a violent religion, expelling out and compelling

3