A discourse of the forbearance or the penalties which a due reformation requires by H. Thorndike ...

CHAP. XXVII. How Recusants may, or may not be punished as Idolaters.

IT remains that I say, what Penalties this Position makes competent to those, that refuse the Reformation thus limited. A thing easie for me to do, having decla∣red the Ground, upon which the refusing

of Christianity is punishable; Which the Reformation, hitherto, hath not been able to do. The Position of punishing Hereticks capitally is generally decryed by them; And yet we see Servetus and Gentilis put to death, at Geneva and Bern; and others elsewhere. If, because sen∣tenced for Hereticks by them that put them to death; Why should not the Powers that adhere to the Church of Rome execute the Sentence thereof, upon those whom they pronounce Hereticks? If, because so sentenced by the Primitive Church, in which we both agree; Why owne we not the Primitive Church in the rest, as well as in that? If, because they that gave the Sentence are compe∣tent Judges in Religion; What remains, but that contrary Sentences be executed by the Sword, and Religion be no other∣wise judged? But, supposing Religion, and the Church, and the sense of the Scri∣pture Visible, so far as the preserving of Unity requires; Christian Powers must both protect Subjects in their Civil, as well as natural being, though not true Christians; and yet punish them for not being true Christians. Only, if they pretend freedom from Allegiance, by

Christianity, (and we know it is false Christianity that so pretends) there will be also fit time to declare, why they may be capitally punished. But those who declare the Pope Antichrist, and the Pa∣pists Idolaters in the exercise of their Religion, have not declared, what Penal∣ty is competent to their Idolatry. And yet, till that be cleared, we are in the clouds. This difficulty, I find my self able to look in the face, without ever dis∣puting, whether the Papists, by their Religion, are bound to commit Idolatry, or not. The Law of Moses, indeed, seems to shew, that, by the Law of Nature, Idolaters may be put to death, for their Idolatry. For, there is no appearance, that the Law of God would have injoyn∣ed that, which the Law of Nature allows not. But the Case is otherwise under Chri∣stianity, then under the Law of Moses. The people of Israel held the Land of Promise, upon Condition, not to suffer any other God to be worshipped within the Bounds of it, but the true God, that gave it them upon those terms. There∣fore they committed a forfeit, whenso∣ever they suffered Idolatry in it. But the Gospel was preached to the Roman

Empire, consisting of two Religions, of Jews and Gentiles; Maintaining the State of the World upon the same terms which it found; saving that, which, if they imbraced the Faith, they must voluntari∣ly change. When therefore the Sove∣raign Power of the Empire came to pro∣fess the Faith; (and thereupon, an obli∣gation to maintain and propagate it, by all means, which the Right of Soveraign Power furnishes) they could not answer God, for the right use of their Power, using any other means, then the Interest of Christianity allows. They might have confiscated Estates, where they might have taken away lives; But that would have made the meekness, which Christianity pretendeth, to appear that Hypocrisie of our Sects; Who are always humble, always for Toleration, till they get the Power into their own hands. To shut up the Temples of Idols, and to for∣bid Sacrifices, was no more then to sup∣press that Sacriledge, which the light and Law of Nature discovereth. If any of the Imperial Laws make it death to sacri∣fice; it is to be understood, upon presum∣ption, that those Sacrifices were Inquiries into the life of the Prince, or of their

enemies. To constrain them to be Chri∣stians by Penalties, had been to make them counterfeit Christians. Besides, the Nations that bordered upon the Empire were all Idolaters; And Christianity pretended to convert them, as well as the Empire. If the Emperors had punished their Subjects, being Gentiles, for being Idolaters, must not the Neighbour Na∣tions have persecuted the Christians, their Subjects, for being Christians? The reason of the difference between the Law and the Gospel, in this behalf, is that which S. Austin giveth, why the Law of Moses voids the Marriages of Jews with Gen∣tiles; Whereas S. Paul advises those that •…•…ned Christians, being married to Ido∣laters, to continue in Wedlock with them, desiring it. S. Austins reason is this; That the Law, tendring only temporal promises expresly, (which Gentiles as well as Jews, might & did injoy in this world) thought it too hard a temptation, to trust a Jew in Wedlock with a Gentile; by wh•…•…, he might be in danger to be sedu∣ced, to prosperous Idolatry. Whereas Christianity, upon the advantage of the world to come, assured by the Preaching of our Lord and his Apostles, challengeth

all other Religions, as unable to resist it, when it is performed as well as professed. So that to suffer Idolaters, in conversing with Christians, was but the allowing of opportunity, for the converting of Idola∣ters. I think I have cause to make this an argument ad hominem, that our Secta∣ries themselves cannot, nor do require the Penalty of Idolatry, by Moses Law, upon Papists. They that remember the time, when the late Q. Mother of Royal memory came over, do know, what infusi∣ons the Pulpits then made, into the minds of the people, of the curse of God hang∣ing upon the Nation, for His Majesties Marriage. The pretense was wholly, upon the Law of Moses; Which, as I have shewed, is not to the purpose among Christians. But indeed, those prognosti∣cations were no other, then the Prophe∣sies of the Devils Oracles, among the Gentiles; Foretelling the mischiefs, which they intended or desired to do themselves. This being a sufficient rea∣son, why the same pretense is not now on foot, because it cannot be plausible, after so dear experience of the mischief it tends to; I think I am to take advantage of it, in behalf of Truth and Justice; That

no Party can pretend, the Penalty of Moses Law to lye, in our Case; Supposing, not granting the Papists to be Idolaters, according to Moses Law. And is not the Case the same, between the Reformation and the See of Rome? At least it is so, if the Reformation be that which it pre∣tendeth. For then, the advantage must needs be so Visible, that to allow conver∣sation between the Professions that are at such distance, is but to allow the means of bringing all Popish Recusants to Church; when the Reformation is that, which it pretendeth. I grant that it falls out to be otherwise, in our experience. For, they that are converted to the See of Rome, at this time, are converted by this miscarri∣age, that they venture themselves into dispute with those, which they are not able to deal with. But the miscarriage is accidental; Because of the Divisions within our selves; arising from hence, that our Reformation owneth not the Bounds which it requireth. For, by this means, the Clergy of this Church is in contempt with their Flock; and private Christians venture themselves into dis∣pute with Recusants, (that is, with their Priests) without trusting their Pastors,

or acquainting them with what they do. Which if they did do, in due time, such occasions would be opportunities of re∣ducing Recusants to Church. Besides, to pursue the Idolatry of the See of Rome, (supposing, not granting that so it is) what would it be, but to draw the Sword on both sides, to try the quarrel of Religion with? And therefore Soveraign Powers cannot give God account, that they use the Right he gives them over Papists their Subjects, pursuing them to the Penalty of Moses Law, as Idolaters. There is ano∣ther reason for the same, that appears now and then, in the disputes of them, that maintain the Religion of the See of Rome to be Idolaters. For, they have many times found themselves obliged to grant, that their Idolatry is another kind of Idolatry, then that which is prohibited, and punished with death, by the Law of Moses. And if so, it must be another kind of Penalty, that belongs to it. Now I suppose S. Paul says true, that Covetous∣ness is Idolatry, and that, there be those that make their Belly their God. And whosoever understands the difference between the Old and the New Testa∣ment, will allow, that S. Hierom under∣stood

it; Who, in his Commentaries upon the Prophets, makes all that they, the Prophets say, against the Idolatry of the ten Tribes, to belong to the Heresies and Schisms of Christians; and, all Here∣ticks and Schismaticks to be Idolaters, in the mystical sense of the Old Testament, under the New. Which is no more, then our Lord says of the Samaritans; That they worshipped they knew not what; At such time when it was well enough known, that the Samaritans were no Ido∣laters; worshipping the only true God of Israel. For certainly, though all Super∣stition be not Idolatry, yet all Idolatry is Superstition; Because the chief of Super∣stitions is Idolatry. All Superstitions stand upon the same ground as Idolatry, and aim at the same mark. Man is sensi∣ble, by that Conscience, which the light of Nature creates, that one true God is to be worshipped; And that as himself shall require, not as his Creature is willing to allow. And being therefore sensible, that Concupiscence allows him not that Service, which Conscience requires, they are willing to pay him in Coin of their own stamping; Usurping the Prero∣gative of his Soveraignty, even in that,

whereby they pretend to pay their Alle∣giance. Is there any other sourse of Ido∣latry but this? For, is it not reasonable to think, that men can satisfie themselves, and put off the Gods they have made themselves, with that, which the jealous God, the true God will not be served with? And therefore, Religion teaches, that Idolatry is the Worship of the Devil. Not only, because he teaches it; But be∣cause he holds the Opinion of a God, by corresponding with Idolaters in their Ido∣latries. And what is all Superstition, but redeeming the Service of God in Spirit and Truth, by the service of our Bodies or Estates; which may be done, when the inward man is not subject to God? Such are the Invocations of Saints, the Worshipping of their Reliques and Images, the Pilgrimages and Indulgences commended or commanded by the See of Rome; And such they may be owned to be, by him that dare not undertake them to be that Idolatry, that was punishable with death by the Law of Moses. And being such, it will be punishable in all, who, for an undue respect to the See of Rome, will not have their fellow-subjects freed from superstitious customs; Nor

obey the Laws of their Country, that give them this freedom. But if this be the due Reason, for which it is punish∣able; the same Reason will render them punishable, who think they serve God, by running into Conventicles, in despite of the Laws of God and their Country. For, what is that, but a pretense of pay∣ing the debt of Religion, which Christia∣nity makes due to God, by worshipping an Idol of their own setting up? That is, as I said afore, by worshipping God ac∣cording to an Imagination of their own erecting; and not according to that, which the common Christianity requires. And thus I am come to the Conclusion, which I intended, without disputing, whether or no, the Papists, by their Re∣ligion, do exercise that Idolatry, which is punishable by death in Moses Law. For if capital Penalty lye not in our Case; If it be agreed upon, that they are punish∣able upon the same Ground, for which the other sort of Recusants are punish∣able; then is the way clear before me, to proceed to declare, what Penalties, both sorts of Recusants are to be, or may be punished with: Supposing our Reforma∣tion confined within those Bounds, which

the Faith and the Laws of the Catholick Church either determine or allow.