

The Great Case of Liberty of Conscience once more briefly debated [...]


<!-- // 
 function footNote(link) {
 openpopup = window.open(link,"openpopup","width=512,height=128,left=256,top=256,resizable=no,scrollbars=1,menubar=1,statusbar=0,toolbar=0");
}
// -->



#### Corpus of Electronic Texts Edition


### Background details and bibliographic information


The Great Case of Liberty of Conscience once more briefly debated [...]
=======================================================================


Author: William Penn
--------------------


### File Description

Electronic edition transcribed by Ruth Canning

Edited at CELT and proof-read by Beatrix Färber

Funded by University College, Cork, School of History and  
Irish Research Council, New Foundations Scheme 2. Second draft.Extent of text: 
17465 words#### Publication


CELT: Corpus of Electronic Texts: a project of University College, Cork  
College Road, Cork, Ireland —http://www.ucc.ie/celt

 (2016) (2017) Distributed by CELT online at University College, Cork, Ireland.  
Text ID Number: E670001-001Availability 
Available with prior consent of the CELT programme for purposes of academic research and teaching only.


#### Notes

#### Sources


**Edition**2. See below.
**Selection of further reading**2. My Irish Diary, 1669–1670 by William Penn. Edited by Isabel Grubb with an Introduction by Henry J. Cadbury (London: Longmans, Green and Company, 1952).
3. William Penn, A letter of love to the young convinced (Cork: William Smith 1670).
4. Thomas Holme and Abraham Fuller, A brief relation of some part of the sufferings of the true Christians, the people of God (in scorn called Quakers) in Ireland (1672).
5. Samuel Fuller and Thomas Holme, A compendious view of some extraordinary sufferings of the people call'd Quakers, both in person and substance, in the kingdom of Ireland (Dublin, 1731).
6. John Rutty, History of the Rise and Progress of the People called Quakers in Ireland from the Year 1653 to 1700 (1751).
7. A. C. Meyers, Immigration of Irish Quakers into Pennsylvania, 1682–1750, with their early history in Ireland (Swarthmore, Pennsylvania 1902).
8. Robert Murray, Ireland, 1603–1714 (London 1920).
9. Isabel Grubb, Quakers in Ireland, 1654–1900 (London 1927).
10. R. B. McDowell, 'The problem of religious dissent in Ireland, 1660–1740,' Bulletin, Irish Committee of Historical Sciences 40 (1945).
11. Henry J. Cadbury, 'Intercepted correspondence of William Penn, 1670', The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, 70 (1946) 349–72.
12. Mary Penington and Henry J. Cadbury, 'More Penn Correspondence, Ireland, 1669–1670', The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, 73 (1949) 9–15.
13. Thomas E. Drake, (Review) 'My Irish Journal, 1669–1670 by William Penn; Isabel Grubb', The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, 77 (1953) 112–114.
14. Mary Maples Dunn and Richard S. Dunn, The papers of William Penn (5 vols, Philadelphia 1981–87).
15. Mary Maples Dunn and Richard S. Dunn, The world of William Penn (Philadelphia 1986).
16. J. G. Simms, War and politics in Ireland: 1649–1730; edited by D.W. Hayton and Gerard O'Brien (London 1986).
17. Helen Hatton, The largest amount of good, Quaker relief in Ireland, 1654–1921 (Montreal 1993).
18. Phil Kilroy, Protestant dissent and controversy in Ireland, 1660–1714 (Cork 1994).
19. W. K. Sessions, 'William Penn's tract printing in Cork in 1670' in idem, Further Irish studies in early printing history (York: Ebor Press 1994).
20. Robert L. Greaves, God's other children: Protestant nonconformists and the emergence of denominational churches in Ireland, 1660–1700 (Stanford CA, 1997).
21. Robert L. Greaves, Merchant-Quaker: Anthony Sharp and the community of Friends, 1643–1707 (Stanford CA, 1998).
22. Andrew Murphy (ed.), The political writings of William Penn (Indianapolis 2002).
**Concise Penn Bibliography, compiled by Ruth Canning [There is some overlap with the above list]**2. "List of Penn Manuscripts," The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. 28, No. 2 (1904), pp. 155-168.
3. Penn, William. A Memoir of William Penn (Philadelphia, 1870).
4. Bernet, Claus. "Marc Swanner (1639-1713): The Man Behind Fox and Penn," Quaker History, Vol. 99, No. 2 (2010), pp. 20-36.
5. Brailsford, Mabel. The Making of William Penn (New York: Longmans, Green, and Company, 1930).
6. Braithwaite, William C. The Beginnings of Quakerism (London: Macmillan, 1912).
7. Braithwaite, William C. The Second Period of Quakerism (London, 1919).
8. Broghill, Mary Pennington and Henry J. Cadbury (eds.). "More Penn Correspondence, Ireland, 1669-1670," The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. 73, No. 1 (1949), pp. 9-15.
9. Buckley, Eila. "William Penn in Dublin," Dublin Historical Record, Vol. 6, No. 3 (1944), pp. 81-90.
10. Buranelli, Vincent. The King and the Quaker (Philadelphia, 1962).
11. Cadbury, Henry J. "Intercepted Correspondence of William Penn, 1670," The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. 70, No. 4 (1946), pp. 349-372.
12. Calvert, Jane E. Quaker Constitutionalism and the Political Thought of John Dickinson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001).
13. Davies, Adrian. The Quakers in English Society, 1655-1725 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000).
14. De Krey. "Rethinking the restoration: Dissenting Cases of Conscience, 1667-1672," Historical Journal, 38 (1995), pp. 53-83.
15. Dunn, Richard S. and Dunn, Mary Maples (eds.). The World of William Penn (Pennsylvania, 1986).
16. Dunn, Richard S. and Dunn, Mary Maples (eds.). The Papers of William Penn (Philadelphia, 1981-).
17. Dunn, Mary Maples. William Penn: Politics and Conscience (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1967).
18. Dunn, Mary Maples. "The Personality of William Penn," Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, Vol. 127, No. 5 (1983), pp. 316-321.
19. Endy, Melvin B. Jr. William Penn and Early Quakerism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973).
20. Fisher, Sydney George. The True William Penn (Philadelphia, 1899).
21. Ford, Linda. "William Penn's Views on Women: Subjects of Friendship," Quaker History, Vol. 72, No. 2 (1983), pp. 75-102.
22. Geiter, Mary. "William Penn and Jacobitism: A Smoking Gun?" Historical Research, Vol. 73:181 (2000), pp. 213-218.
23. Greaves, Richard L. Enemies Under His Feet: Radicals and Nonconformists in Britain, 1664-1667 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1990).
24. Hodges, George. William Penn (Cambridge, 1901).
25. Holland, Rupert. William Penn (New York, 1915).
26. Hughs, Mary. The life of William Penn (Philadelphia, 1828).
27. Horle, Craig. The Quakers and the English Legal System 1660-1688 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1988).
28. Ingle, H. Larry. First Among Friends: George Fox and the Creation of Quakerism (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994).
29. Janney, Samuel Mcpherson. The Life of William Penn: with selections from his correspondence and autobiography (Philadelphia: Lippincott, Grambo, 1853).
30. Leach, M Atherton. "Gulielma Maria Springett, First Wife of William Penn," The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. 57, No. 2 (1933), pp. 97-116.
31. Lockhart, Audrey. "The Quakers and Emigration From Ireland to the North American Colonies," Quaker History, Vol. 77, No. 2 (1988), pp. 67-92.
32. Maloyed, Christie N. "A liberal Civil Religion: William Penn's Holy Experiment," Journal of Church and State, Vol. 55, No. 4 (2013), pp. 669-711.
33. Morgan, Edmund S. "The World of William Penn," Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, Vol. 127, No. 5 (1983), pp. 291-315.
34. Moore, Rosemary. The Light of their Consciences: The Early Quakers in Britain, 1646-1666 (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2000).
35. Murphy, Andrew R. "The Emergence of William Penn, 1668-1671," Journal of Church and State, Vol. 57, No. 2 (2014), pp. 333-359.
36. Murphy, Andrew R. "Trial Transcripts as Political Theory: Principles and Performance in the Penn-Mead Case," Political Theory, Vol. 41 (2013), pp. 775-808.
37. Murphy, Andrew R. "The Limits and Promise of Political Theorizing: William Penn and the Founding of Pennsylvania,"History of Political Thought, Vol. 34 (2013), pp. 639-668.
38. Nash, Gary B. Quakers and Politics: Pennsylvania, 1681-1726, (Princeton, 1968).
39. Neill, Desmond. "The Quakers in Ireland," North Irish Roots, Vol. 6, No. 1 (1995), pp. 9-11.
40. Newman, Paul Douglas. "'Good Will to all men ... from the King on the throne to the beggar on the dunghill': William Penn, the Roman Catholics, and Religious Toleration," Pennsylvania History: A Journal of Mid-Atlantic Studies, Vol. 61, No. 4 (1994), pp. 457-479.
41. Peare, Catherine O. William Penn (Philadelphia, 1957).
42. Penn, Granville. Memorials of the professional life and times of Sir William Penn, 2 Vols., From 1644-1670 (London: 1833).
43. Penn, William. A Collection of the Works of William Penn. 2 Vols. (London: 1726) The book can be found on www.archive.org and contains a list of further publications by Penn: https://archive.org/stream/collectionofwork01penn#page/n18/mode/1up.
44. Pincus, Steve. 1688: The First Modern Revolution (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2009).
45. Robbins, Caroline. "The Papers of William Penn," The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. 93, No. 1 (1969), pp. 3-12.
46. Schwartz, Sally. "William Penn and Toleration: Foundations of Colonial Pennsylvania," Pennsylvania History: A Journal of Mid-Atlantic Studies, Vol. 50, No. 4 (1983), pp. 284-312.
47. Sutto, Antoinette. The borders of Absolutism: William Penn, Chalres Calvert, and the Limits of Royal Authority, 1680-1685," Pennsylvania History: A Journal of Mid-Atlantic Studies, Vol. 76, No. 3 (2009), pp. 276-300.
48. Vann, Richard. The Social Development of English Quakerism 1655-1755 (Cambridge, Mass., 1969).
49. Wainwright, Nicholas B. "The Penn Collection," The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. 87, No. 4 (1963), pp. 393-419.
50. Wight, Thomas. A History of the Rise and Progress of the People called Quakers in Ireland (1811).
51. Young Kunze, Bonnelyn. "Religious Authority and Social Status in Seventeenth-Century England: The Friendship of Margaret Fell, George Fox, and William Penn," Church History, Vol. 57, No. 2 (1988), pp. 170-186.
**The edition used in the digital edition**2. The Great Case of Liberty of Conscience once more briefly debated and defended, by the authority of Reason, Scripture, and Antiquity: which may serve the place of a general reply to such late discourses; as have oppos'd a tolleration. William Penn First edition [55 pages] unknownLondon (1670)

### Encoding


#### Project Description


CELT: Corpus of Electronic Texts


#### Sampling Declaration


The present text consists of pp. 3–55. The table of contents is omitted.


#### Editorial Declaration


##### Correction


Text proofread once at CELT. The author's errata listed in the preface are included.


##### Normalization


Editorial notes are included, marked note type="auth" and numbered. Italic print occurring in the printed edition has not been retained.


##### Quotation


Direct speech is not tagged; neither have quotes been tagged as the references are sometimes unclear.


##### Hyphenation


When a hyphenated word (hard or soft) crosses a page-break or line-break, this break is marked after the completion of the hyphenated word.


##### Segmentation


div0=the tract; div1=the chapter, div2=the section. Paragraphs are marked; page-breaks are marked pb n="".


##### Standard Values


There are no standardized dates.


##### Interpretation


Names have not been tagged.


#### Canonical References


This text uses the DIV1 element to represent the Chapter. ### Profile Description


Created: By William Penn (1644–1718)
 (1670) #### Use of language


##### Language: [EN] The text is in seventeenth-century English.


##### Language: [LA] Some words are in Latin.


### Revision History


* (2017-01-12) Beatrix Färber (ed.)

* New SGML and HTML files created.
* (2017-01-11) Ruth Canning (ed.)

* Concise Penn Bibliography supplied.
* (2016-10-18) Beatrix Färber (ed.)

* SGML and HTML files created.
* (2016-10-17) Beatrix Färber (ed.)

* TEI header created using material from companion file (E660001-002); file parsed.
* (2016-09) Beatrix Färber (ed.)

* File converted to XML, encoding modified accordingly.
* (2016-08-22) Ruth Canning (data capture)

* Text transcribed from hardcopy to Word file.




---


#### Corpus of Electronic Texts Edition: E670001-001


### The Great Case of Liberty of Conscience once more briefly debated [...]: Author: William Penn


### TO THE Supream Authority OF ENGLAND.


TOLLERATION (for these ten years past) has not been more the Cry of some, then PERSECUTION hath been the practice of others, though not on Grounds equally rational.


The present cause of this Address, is to solicite a Conversion of that Power to our Relief, which hitherto has been imployd to our Depression; that after this large experience of our innocency, and long since expir'd Apprentiship of Cruel Sufferings, you will(?) be pleased to cancel all our Bonds, 
 and give [*...*] of those Freedoms, to which we are [*...*] English Birthright.




---

p.??


This has been often promised 
 to us, and we as earnestly have expected the performance; but to this time we labour under the unspeakable pressure of Nasty Prisons, 
 and daily Confiscation of our Goods, 
 to the apparent ruin of intire Families.


We would not attribute the whole of this severity to Malice, since not a little share, may justly be ascrib'd to Mis-intelligence:


For 'tis the infelicity of Governors to
 see and hear by the Eyes and Ears of other men; which is equally unhappy for the People.


And we are bold to say, that Suppositions 
 and meer Conjectures, have been the best Measures, that most have taken of Us, and of our Principles; for whilst there have been none more inoffensive, we have been mark't for Capital Offenders.


'Tis hard that we should alwayes lie under this undeserved imputation; and which is worse, be Persecuted as such, without the Liberty of a just Defence.


In short, if you are apprehensive, that our Principles are inconsistant with the Civil
 Government, grant us a free Conference about the Points in Question, and let us know, what are those Laws, essential to preservation, that our Opinions carry an opposition to? And if upon a due enquiry we 


---

p.??



are found so Hetrodox, as represented, it will be then but time enough to inflict these heavy penalties 
 upon us.


And as this Medium seems the fairest, and most reasonable; so can you never do your selves greater Justice, either in the vindication of your proceedings against us, be we
 Criminal, or if Innocent, in dis-ingaging your service of such, as have been Authours of so much Mis-information.


But could we once obtain the favour of such debate, we doubt not to evince a clear consistency of our Life and Doctrine with the English Government; and that an indulging of Dissenters in the Sence defended, is not only most Christian and Rational, 
 but Prudent also. And the contrary (how plausibly soever insinuated) the most injurious to the Peace 
 and destructive of that discreet Ballance, which the Best and Wisest States, have ever carefully Observ'd.


But if this fair and equal Offer, find not a place with you, on which to rest its Foot; 
 much less


---

p.??



 that it should bring us back the Olive Branch of TOLLERATION; we heartily embrace and bless the Providence of God; and in his Strength resolve, by Patience, to
 outweary PERSECUTION, and by ourconstant Sufferings,seek to obtain a 
 Victory, more glorious, than
 any our Adversaries can atchive by all their Cruelties.


Vincit qui patitur.


Newgate, the
 7th of the 12th Moneth, call'd February, 1670.


From a Prisoner for Conscience Sake,


W. P.




---

p.3


### The PREFACE.


Were some as Christian, as they boast themselves to be, 'twould save us all the Labour we bestow in rendring Persecution so unchristian, 
 as it most truly is: Nay were they those men of Reason they Character themselves, and what the Civil Law stiles good Citizens, it had been needless for us to tell them, that neither can any external Coercive Power convince the understanding of the poorest
 Idiot, nor Fines and Prisons be judg'd fit, and adequate Penalties for Faults purely intellectual; as well as that they are destructive
 of all civil Government. 


But we need not run so far as beyond the Seas, to fetch the sense of the Codes, Institutes, and Digests, out of the Corpus Civile to adjudge such practices, incongruous with the good of civil
 society, since our own good, old, admirable Laws 
 of England, have made such excellent provision for its Inhabitants, that if they were but thought as fit to be executed by this present Age, as they were lightly judg'd necessary to be made by our careful Ancestors: We know how great a Stroak they would give such, as venture to lead away our Property in Triumph (as our just Forfeiture) for only Worshipping our God in a differing Way, from that which is more generally Profest and Establisht.


And indeed it is most truly lamentable, That above others (who have been found in so Un-natural and Anti-christian an Imployment) those, that by their own frequent Practices and voluminous Appologies, 
 have defended a Separation from the Papacy) should now become such earnest Persecuters for it, not considering, that the Enaction of such Laws, as restrain Persons
 from the free Exercise of their Consciences, 
 in matters of Religion, is but a knotting Whip cord to lash their own Posterity; 
 whom 


---

p.4



 they can never promise to be conformed to a national
 Religion. Nay, since Mankind is subject to such Mutability, they can't ensure themselves, from being taken by some Perswasions, that are esteem'd Hetrodox, and consequently ketch themselves in Snares of their own providing.
 And that men thus lyable to change, and no wayes certain of their own Belief to be the most infallible,) as by their multiply'd Concessions, may appear) to enact any Religion, or prohibit Persons from the free Exercise of theirs, sounds harsh in the Ears of all modest and unbya'st men. We are bold to say our Protestant Ancestors thought of nothing less, then to be succeeded by Persons Vain-glorious of their Reformation, and yet Adversaries to Liberty of
 Conscience; for to People in their Wits, it seems a Paradox.


Not that we are so ignorant, as to think is within the reach of humane Power to fetter Conscience, or to restrain its Liberty strictly taken: But that plain English, of Liberty of Conscience, we would be understood to mean, is this; namely, The Free and Uninterrupted Exercise of our Consciences, in that Way of Worship, we are most clearly parswaded, God requires us to serve him in (without endangering our undoubted Birthright of English Freedoms) which being matter, of FAITH, we Sin if we omit, and they can't do less, that shall endeavour it.


To tell us, we are Obstinate and Enemies to Government, are but those Groundless Phrases, the first Reformers were not a little pestered with; but as they said, so say we, The being call'd this, or that, does not conclude us so; and hitherto we have not been detected of that Fact, which only justifies, such Criminations. 


But however free we can approve our selves of Actions prejudicial of the Civil Government; 'tis most certain we have not suffered a little, as Criminals, 
 and therefore have been far 


---

p.5



from being free from Sufferings; indeed, in some respect, Horrid Plunders: Widdows have lost their Cows, Orphans their Beds, and Labourers their Tools. A Tragedy so said, that methinks it should obliege them to do in England, 
 as they did at Athens; when they had sacrificed their Divine Socrates to the sottish fury of their lewd and commical Multitude, they so regreeted their hasty Murder, that not only the Memorial of Socrates was 
 most venerable with them, but his Enemies they esteemed so much theirs, that none would Trade or hold the least Commer*c*e with them; for which some turned their own Executioners, and without any other Warrant then their own Guilt, Hang'd themselves. How neer a kin the wretched Mercenary Informers of our Age are to those, the great resemblance that is betwixt their Actions manifestly shews. 


And we are bold to say, the grand Fomenters 
 of Persecution, are no better Friends to the English State, then were Anytus and Aristophanes of old to that of Athens, the Case being so nearly the same, as that they did not more bitterly envy the Reputation of Socrates amongst the Athenians for his grave and religious Lectures (thereby giving the Youth a diversion from frequenting their Plays) then some now emulate the true Dissenter, for his Pious Life, and great Industry. 


And as that famous Commonwealth was noted to decline, and the most observing Persons of it, dated its decay from that illegal and ingrateful Carriage towards Socrates (witness their dreadful Plagues, with other multiply'd Disasters) So is it not less worthy Observation, that Heaven hath not been wholly wanting to scourge this Land, for, as well as their Cruelty to the Conscientious, 
 as their other multiply'd Provocations. 


And when we seriously consider the dreadful Judgments that 


---

p.6



now impend the Nation (by reason of the Robbery, Violence, and unwonted Oppression; that almost everywhere, have not only been committed, upon the Poor, the Widdow, and the Fatherless; 
 but most tenaciously justified, and the Actors 
 manifestly encourag'd) in meer pitty, and concern, for the everlasting welfare of such as have not quite sinn'd away their Visitation 
 (for some have) we once more bring to publique view, our Reasons against Persecution, backt with the plainest Instances, both of Scripture and Antiquity. 
 If but one may be perswaded, to desist from making any farther progress in such an Anti-protestant, and truly Anti-christian Path, as
 that of persecuting honest and vertuous English men, for only worshipping the God that made them, in the Way they judge most acceptable with him.


But if those, who ought to think themselves oblieg'd to weigh these affairs with the greatest deliberation, will obstinately close their Eyes, to
 these last Remonstrances; and slightly over-look the pinching Case of so many thousand Families, that
 are by these Severities expos'd for Prey, to the unsatiable appetites of a Villanous Crew of broken Informers (daubing themselves
 with that deluding Apprehension of pleasing God, or at least of profiting the Country; (whilst they greatly displease the one, and evidently ruin the other) as certain as ever the Lord God Almighty destroy'd Sodom, and lay'd waste Gomorah, by the
 consuming Flames of his just Indignation; will he hasten to make desolate this wanton Land, and not leave an Hiding-place for the Oppressor.


Let no man therefore think himself too bigg to be admonish'd, nor put too slight a value upon the Lives, Liberties, and Properties of so many thousand free-born English Families, Embarqu't in that one concern of Liberty of Conscience. It will become him better to reflect upon his own Mortality, and not forget his Breath is in his Nostrils, and that every Action of his Life the everlasting God will bring to Judgment, and him for them.




---

p.7




---

p.8




---

p.9


That Imposition, Restraint, and Persecution
 for Conscience sake, highly Invade divine Prerogative, and Divest
 the Almighty of a Right, due to none beside himself, and that in
 five eminent Particulars.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The great Case of Liberty
 of Conscience so often Debated 
 and Defended 
 (however dissatisfactorily to such as
 have so little Conscience as to Persecute for it) 
 is once more brought to publique view, by a late Act against
 Dissenters, and Bill of an additional one, that we all hop'd the wisdom of our
 Rulers had long since laid aside, as what was fitter to be pass'd
 into an Act 
 of perpetual Oblivion. 
 The Kingdoms are allarum'd at this Proceedure, and Thousands
 greatly at a stand, wondring what should be the meaning of such
 hasty Resolutions, that seem as fatal as they were unexpected:
 Some ask what Wrong they have done;
 others, what Peace they have broken; and all, what Plots they have
 form'd, to prejudice the present Government, or occasions given,
 to hatch new Jealousies of them and their Proceedings, 
 being not conscious to themselves of guilt in any such respect. 


For mine own part, I publickly confess my self
 to be a very hearty Dissenter from
 the establish'd
 Worship of these Nations,


---

p.10



as believing Protestants 
 to have much degenerated from their first Principles, and as
 owning the poor despised Quakers 
 in Life and Doctrine, to have espous'd the Cause of God, and to be
 undoubted Followers of Jesus Christ, 
 in his most Holy, Straight and Narrow Way that leads to the
 eternal Rest. In all which I know no Treason, nor any Principle
 that would urge me to a Thought injurious to the Civil Peace. If
 any be *defective* in this particular, 'tis equal, both Individuals and whole Societies 
 should answer for their own Defaults, but we are clear. 


However, all conclude that Union 
 very Ominous, and Unhappy, which makes the first discovery of it self, by a John Baptists Head
 in a Charger, They mean that Feast some are design'd to make upon the Liberties and Properties of Free-born English-men, since to have the I[*gap: extent: one or two letters*]ail of those undoubted hereditary Rights cut off for matters purely relative of another World) is a severe beheading in the Law; which must be obvious to all, but such as measure the justice of
 things only by that proportion they bear with their own interest. 


A sort of men that seek themselves, though at the apparent loss of whole Societies, like to that barbarous Fancy of old, which had rather that Rome should burn, then it be without
 the satisfaction of a Bone-fire. And sad it is, when men have so far stupified their Understandings with the strong doses of their
 private interest, as to become insensible of the Publicks. Certainly such an Over-fondness for self, or that strong inclination, to raise themselves in the ruine
 of what does not so much oppose them, as that they will believe so, because they would be persecuting, is a malignant Enemy to that Tranquility, which all Dissenting Parties seem to believe, would be the consequence of a Toleration.




---

p.11


In short we say, there can be but two ends in Persecution, the one to satisfie (which none can ever do) the insatiable appetites of a decimating Clergy (whose best Arguments are Fines and Imprisonments) and the other, as
 thinking therein they do God good Service; but 'tis so hateful a thing upon any account, that we shall make it appear by this ensuing
 Discourse, to be a declar'd Enemy to God, Religion, and the Good of humane Society. 


The whole will be small, since it is but an Epitomy of no larger a tract then *fourteen* sheets; yet divides it self into the same particulars, every of which we shall defend against Imposition, Restraint, and Persecution, though not with that scope of Reason (nor consequently Pleasure to the Readers) being by other contingent disappointments, limitted to a narrow stint. 


### The Tearms explained, and the Question stated.


First, By Liberty of Conscience, we understand not only a meer Liberty of the Mind, 
 in believing or disbelieving this or that Principle or Doctrine,
 but the Exercise of our selves in a visible Way of Worship, upon our believing it to be indispensibly required at our hands, that if we neglect it for Fear or Favour of any Mortal Man, we Sin, and incur divine Wrath: 
 Yet we would be so understood to extend and justifie the lawfulness of our so meeting to Worship God, as not to contrive, or abet any Contrivance distructive of the Government and Laws of the Land, tending to matters of an external nature, directly, or indirectly; but so far only, as it may refer to religious Matters,
 and a Life to come, and consequently wholly independent of the
 secular affairs of this, wherein we are suppos'd to Transgress. 




---

p.12


Secondly, By Imposition, Restraint, and Persecution, we don't only mean, the strict requiring of us to believe this to be true, or that to be false; and upon refusal, to incur the Penalties enacted in such Cases; but by those tearms we mean thus much, any coersive let or hindrance to us, from meeting together to perform those Religious Exercises which are according to our Faith and Perswasion. 


### The Question stated.


For Proof of the aforesaid Tearms thus given, we singly state the Question thus.


Whether Imposition,
 Restraint, and Persecution, 
 upon persons for Exercising such a Liberty of Conscience, as is
 before expressed, and so circumstantiated, be not to impeach the
 Honour of God, the Meekness of the Christian Religion, the
 Authority of Scripture, the Priviledge of Nature, the Principles
 of common Reason, the Well-being of Government, and Apprehensions
 of the greatest Personages of former and latter Ages. 


First, Then we say that 
 Imposition, Restraint, and Persecution, for
 matters relating to Conscience, 
 directly Invade divine Prerogative, and Divest the Almighty of a
 Due, proper to none besides himself. And
 this we prove by these five Particulars.


1. First, If we do allow the honour of our Creation, due to God only, and that no other besides himself has endow'd us with those excellent Gifts of Understanding, Reason, Judgment, and Faith, and consequently that he only is the Object as well as Author, both of our Faith, Worship, 
 and Service, then whoever shall interpose their Authority to enact Fa *i*th 
 and Worship, in a way that seems not to us congruous with what he has discover'd 



---

p.13



to us, to be Faith, and Worship (whose alone property it is to do it) or to restrain us from what we are perswaded; is our indispensible
 duty, they evidently usurp this Authority and invade his incommunicable right of Government over Conscience: For the Inspiration of the Almighty gives understanding: And Faith is the Gift of God,
 says the divine Writ.


2. Secondly, such Magisterial determinations carry an evident claim to that infallibility, which Protestants have been hitherto so jealous of owning, that to avoid the Papists, they have denied it to all, but God himself. 


Either they have forsook their old Plea, or if not, we desire to know when, and where they were invested with that divine excellency, and that Imposition, Restraint, and Persecution, were deem'd by God ever the Fruits of his Spirit: However, that it self were not sufficient; for unless it appear as well to us, that
 they have it, as to them who have it, we cannot believe it upon any convincing Evidence, but by Tradition only; an Anti-Protestant
 way of believing.


3. Thirdly, It enthrones man as King over Conscience, the alone just claim and Priviledge of his Creator, whose Thoughts are not as mens Thoughts, but has reserv'd to himself, that Empire from all the Caesars on Earth; for if men in reference to Souls, and Bodies, things appertaining to this and to'ther World, shall be subject to their Fellow-Creatures, what follows? but that Caesar (however he got it) has all, Gods share, and his own too; and being lord of both, both are Caesars, and nothing Gods.


4. Fourthly, It defeats the Work of his Grace, and the invisible Opperation of his eternal Spirit, which can alone beget Faith, and is only to be obey'd, in and about Religion and Worship, and attributes mens conformity to outward force & corporal punishments. A Faith subject to as many revolutions as the powers that enact it.


5. Fiftly and lastly, Such persons assume the Judgment of the great Tribunal unto themselves; 
 for to whomsoever men are 


---

p.14



imposedly or restrictively subject and accountable in matters of Faith, Worship and Conscience; in them alone must the power of judgement reside; but it is equally true that God shall judge all by Jesus Christ, and that no man is so accountable to his fellow Creatures, as to be impos'd upon, restrain'd, or persecuted for any matter of Conscience whatever. 


Thus and in many more particulars are men accustom'd to entrench upon divine Property, to gratifie particular Interests in the world (and at best) through a misguided apprehension, to imagine they do God good service, that where they
 cannot give Faith, they will use
 force, which kind of Sacrifice is
 nothing less unreasonable, then the other is abominable: God
 will not give his honor to another, and to him only that searches
 the heart and tries the reins,
 it is our duty to ascribe the gifts 
 of Understanding and S[*gap: extent: two or three letters*] without which none can please God.


The next great evil which attends externall 
 force in matters of faith and worship, is no less then the overthrow of the whole Christian Religion, and this we will briefly evidence in these four particulars. 1.
 First, that there can be nothing more remote from the nature 2. Secondly, the practice. 
 3. Thirdly, the promotion. 
 4 Fourthly, the Rewards of it.


1. First, it is the priviledge of the Christian Faith above the dark suggestions of ancient and modern superstious
 Traditions, to carry with it a most self evidencing verity, which
 ever was sufficient to proselite believers, without
 the weak Auxilaries of external power; 
 The son of God, and great Example of
 the world, was so far from calling
 his Father's omnipotency 


---

p.15



in legions of Angels to his defence, that he at once repeal'd all Acts of force, and defin'd unto us the
 nature of his Religion in this one
 great saying of his, MY KINGDOM IS
 NOT OF THIS WORLD. It was spiritual,
 not carnall, accompanied with weapons, as heavenly as its own
 nature, and design'd for the good and salvation of the soul, and
 not the injury and destruction of the body: no Goals,
 Fines, Exiles &c. but sound
 reason, clear truth, and a strict life. In short, the Christian Religion intreats all, but compells none. 


2. Secondly, that Restraint
 and Persecution overturn the practise of it; 
 I need go no further then the allow'd Martyrologies 
 of several ages, of which the Scriptures 
 claim a share; begin with Abel go down to Moses, so to the Prophets, 
 and then to the meek example of Jesus Christ himself; How patiently devoted was he, to undergo the contradictions of men? and so far from persecuting any, that he would not
 so much as revile his Persecutors, 
 but pray'd for them; thus liv'd his Apostles 
 and the true Christians, of the first three hundred years: Nor are
 the famous Stories of our first Reformers silent in the matter;
 witness the Christian practises of the Waldenses,
 Lollards, Hussites, Lutherans, and our noble Martyrs, who as became the true followers of Jesus Christ, enacted and confirm'd their Religion, with their own blood, and not with the blood of their Opposers.


3. Thirdly, Restraint and Persecution obstructs the promotion of the Christian Religion, for if such as restraint, confess themselves miserable sinners, and altogether imperfect, it either followes, that they never desire to be better, or that they should incourage such as may be capable of further informing and reforming them; they condemn the Papists for encoffening the Scriptures and their Worship in an 



---

p.16



unknown tongue, and yet are guilty themselves of the same kind of fact. 


4. Fourthly, they
 prevent many of eternal Rewards, for
 where any are Religious for fear, and that of men, 'tis slavish;
 and the recompence, of such Religion is condemnation, not peace:
 besides, 'tis man that is serv'd, who having no power 
 but what is temporary, 
 his reward must needs be so too; he that imposes a duty, or
 restrains from one, must reward; but because no man can reward for
 such Duties, no man can or ought to impose them, or restrain from
 them. So that we conclude imposition,
 restraint, and persecution, 
 are destructive, of the Christian Religion, in the nature,
 practice, promotion and rewards of it, which
 are Eternall.


We further say, that imposition, restraint, and persecution are repugnant to the plain Testimonies and precepts of the Scriptures.


The inspiration of the Almighty gives understanding, 1. Job 32. 8. 


If no man can believe before he understands, and no man can understand before he is inspir'd of God, then are the impositions of men excluded as unreasonable, and their persecutions for non-obedience as inhumane.


Wo unto them that take counsell, but not of me, 2. Isa: 30. 1. 


Wo unto them that make a man an offender for a word, and lay a snare for him that reproves in the gate, and turns aside the Just for a thing of naught, 3. Isa. 29. 15, 21. 


Let the Wheat and the Tares grow together until the time of the harvest, or end of the World. 4. Mat. 13. 27, 28, 29. 




---

p.17


And Jesus call'd them unto him, and said ye know that the Princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are greatest exercise authority upon them, but it shall not be so amongst you. 5
 Matt: 20. 25, 26. 


And Jesus answering said unto them, Render unto Caesar the things that are Cesars, and unto God the things that are Gods, 6
 Luke 20. 21, 22, 23, 24, 25. 


When his Disciples saw this (that there were Non-conformists then as well as now) they said, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven and consume them, as Elisha did; But he turned, and rebuk'd them, and said, Ye know not
 what spirit ye are of; for the Son of Man is not come to destroy mens lives but to save them, 7. Luke 9. 54. 55. 56 


Howbeit, when the spirite of truth is come, he
 shall lead you into all Truth. [*...*]. John 16. 8, 13. 


But now the anointing which ye have received of him abides in you, and you need not that any man teach you (much less impose upon any, or restrain them from what any are perswaded it leads to) but as the same anointing teaches you of all things and is truth, and is not lye. 9. John. 1, 9, 27. 


Dearly beloved, avenge not your selves but rather give place unto Wrath (much less should any be Wrath that are call'd Christians where no occasion is given) therefore if thine Enemy Hunger Feed him, and if he Thirst, give him Drink; Recompence no man Evil for Evil. 10 Rom. 12. 19, 20, 21. 


For though we walk in the flesh (that
 is in the body or visible world) we
 do not war after the flesh, for the weapons of our warfare are
 not carnal. 11 2. Cor. 3. 4, 5. (but
 Fines and Imprisonments are, and such use not the Apostles
 Weapons that employ those) for a
 Bishop, 1 Tim. 3. 23 (saith Paul) 
 must be of a good behaviour, apt to teach, no
 striker, but be gentle 


---

p.18



unto all men, 
 Patient in Meekness, Instructing (not
 Persecuting) those that oppose
 themselves, if God peradventure will give them, Repentance to the
 acknowledgment of the Truth, 2 Tim. 
 2. 24, 25. 


Lastly, We shall subjoyn one Passage more, and
 then no more of this Particular; Whatsoever
 ye would that men should do unto you, do ye even so unto them. 
 12. Matt. 7. 12. Luke 6. 31. 


Now upon the whole we seriously ask, Whether
 any should be Impos'd upon, or Restrain'd, in matters of 
 Faith and 
 Worship? Whether such Practices
 become the Gospel, or are sutable to
 Christs Meek Precepts and Suffering Doctrine? And lastly, Whether those, who are herein guilty, do to us, 
 as they would be done unto by others?


What if any were once severe to you; many are
 unconcern'd in that, who are yet lyable to the Lash, as if they
 were not. But if you once thought, the
 Imposition of a Directory Unreasonable, and a Restraint from your
 way of Worship Unchristian, can you
 believe that Liberty of Conscience 
 is changed, because the Parties 
 in points of Power are? or that the same Reasons do not yet remain
 in vindication of an Indulgeance for others, that were once
 Employ'd by you for your selves? Surely such Conjectures would
 argue gross Weakness. 


To conclude, Whether Persecutors 
 at any time, read the Scriptures 
 we know not; but certain we are, such
 practise as little of them as may be, who with so much Delight reject them, and think it no small Accession to the discovery of their Loyalty, to lead us and our Properties in Triumph after them.




---

p.19


We further say, That Imposition, Restraint, and Persecution are also destructive of the great Priviledge of Nature and Principle of Reason. Of Nature in three Instances: 


1. First, If God Almighty has made of one Blood
 all Nations, as himself has declar'd, and that he has given them both Sences Corporal and Intellectual, to discern things and their differences, so as to assert or deny from Evidences and Reasons proper to each; then where any Enacts
 the Belief or Disbelief of any thing upon the rest, or Restrains
 any from the Exercise of their Faith to
 them indispensible, such Exalts
 himself beyond his Bounds, Enslaves his Fellow-Creatures, Invades
 their Right of Liberty, and so *perverts* the whole order of Nature.


2. Secondly, Mankind 
 is hereby rob'd of the use and benefit of that instinct 
 of a Diety, which is so natural to him, that he can be no more without it, and be, 
 then he can be without the most essential Part of himself; For to
 what serves that divine Principle 
 in the universallity of Mankind, if men be restricted by the
 Prescriptions of some Individuals? But if the excellent Nature of
 it, inclines men to God, not Man; if the Power of Accusing and Excusing be committed to it; if the troubled Thoughts and sad *reflections* of Forlorn and Dying men, make their tendency that a way only, (as being hopeless of all
 other Relief and Succour from any external Power or Command) What
 shall we say? but that such as invallid the Authority of this
 Heavenly Instinct, (as Imposition and
 Restraint evidently do) destroy Nature, 
 or that Priviledge which men are born
 with, and to 


---

p.20



3. All natural Affection is destroy'd; for those
 who have so little tenderness, as to persecute men that cannot for
 Conscience sake yield them compliance, manifestly act injuriously
 to their Fellow-Creatures, and consequently are Enemies to Nature;
 for Nature being one in all, such as
 ruin those who are equally intitled with themselves to Nature,
 ruin it in them, as in Liberty,
 Property, &c. and so bring the
 state of Nature to the state of War, the great 
 Leviathan of the times, as ignorantly
 as boldly does assert.


2. But secondly, We also prove them destructive of the noble Principle of Reason, and that in these eight Particulars. 


1. First, In that
 those who Impose or Restrain are uncertain of the truth and
 justifiableness of their actions in either 
 of this, their own Discourses and Confessions are pregnant
 Instances, where they tell us, that
 They do not pretend to be infallible,
 only they humbly conceive 'tis thus, or it is not. 
 Since then they are uncertain and fallible, how can they impose
 upon, or restrain others whom they are so far from assuring, as
 they are not able to do so much for themselves? What
 is this, but to impose an uncertain Faith upon Certain Penalties?


3. As he that Acts Doubtfully is Damn'd, so
 Faith in all Acts of Religion is necessary: now in order to
 believe, we must first Will; to Will, 
 we must first Judge; to Judge any thing, we must first Understand; if then we cannot be said to Understand any thing against our Understanding: no more can we Judge, Will, and Believe against our Understanding: and if the Doubter be Damn'd, what must he be that *conforms* directly against his Judgment 
 and Belief, and they likewise that require it from him? In short, that Man cannot be said to have any Religion, that takes it by another mans choice,
 not his own.




---

p.21


4. Where men are limitted in Matters of Religion, there the Rewards which are entail'd on the free acts of men, are quite overthrown; and such as superceed that Grand Charter of Liberty of Conscience, frustrate all hopes of Recompence, by rendring the Actions of men unavoidable: But those think perhaps, They do not
 destroy all Freedom, because they use so much of their own.


5. Fifthly, They subvert all true Religion; 
 for where men believe not because it is True, 
 but because they are required to do so, there they will unbelieve, not because 'tis False, but so commanded by their Superiors, whose Authority their Interest and Security 
 obliege them rather to obey, then dispute. 


6. Sixthly, They Delude, or rather Compel
 people out of their eternal Rewards; for where men are commanded
 to act in reference to Religion, and can neither be secur'd of
 their Rewards, nor yet sav'd harmless from punishments; their so
 acting and believing dispriviledges them forever of that
 Recompence, which is provided for the Faithful.


7. Seventhly, Men have their Liberty and Choice
 in external matters; they are not compelled to Marry
 this Person, to Converse with that, to Buy here, to Eat there, nor
 to Sleep yonder; yet if men had
 Power to Impose or Restrain in any thing, one would think
 it should be in such exteriour Matters; but that this Liberty
 should be unquestion'd, and that of the Mind
 Destroy'd issues here, that
 it does not Unbruit us, but Unman
 us; for take away Understanding,
 Reason, Judgment, and Faith, 
 and like Nebuchadnezar, 
 let us go Graze with the Beasts of the Field. 


8. Eightly and lastly, That which
 most of all blackens the Business is PERSECUTION; 
 for though it is very unreasonable to require Faith, 
 where men cannot chuse but doubt, 


---

p.22



 yet after all, to punish them
 for Disobedience, 'tis Cruelty in the abstract; for we demand,
 Shall men Suffer for not doing *what*
 they cannot do? Must they be
 Persecuted here if they do not go against their *Consciences*, and
 punished hereafter if they do? But neither is this all; for that
 part that is yet most unreasonable, and that gives the clearest
 sight of Persecution, 
 is still behind, namely, The
 monstrous Arguments they have to Convince an Heretick with: 
 Not those of old, as Spiritual as the Christian Religion, which
 were to Admonish, Warn, and finally
 to Reject; but such as were imploy'd
 by the Persecuting Jews 
 and Heathens 
 against the great Example 
 of the World, and such as follow'd him, and by the inhuman Papists against our first Reformers, as Clubbs, Staves, Stocks, Pillories, Prisons, Dungeons, Exiles, &c. 
 in a word, Ruin 
 to whole Families, as if it were not
 so much their Design to Convince the Soul, as to Destroy the
 Body.


To conclude, There ought to be an Adequation 
 and Resemblance betwixt all Ends, and the means to them, but in
 this case there can be none imaginable; the
 End is the conformity of our Judgments and Understandings to the
 acts of such as require it, the Means are Fines and Imprisonments (and bloody Knocks to boot.)


Now what Proportion or Assimulation these
 bear, let the Sober judge: The
 Understanding can never be convinc'd, nor properly submit, but by
 such Arguments, as are Rational,
 Perswasive, and Sutable to its own Nature; something
 that can Resolve its Doubts, Answer
 its Objections, Enervate its Propositions, but
 to imagine those Barbarous Newgate
 Instruments of Clubbs, Fines,
 Prisons, &c. with that whole
 Troop of external and dumb Materials of force should be fit
 Arguments to convince the Understanding, 
 scatter its scruples, & finally, convert it to their Religion
 is altogether irrational, cruel, and
 impossible. Force may make an Hipocrite; 
 'tis Faith grounded upon knowledge, & consent that 


---

p.23



 makes a Christian. And to conclude, as we can
 never betray the honour of our Conformity (only due to Truth) by
 a base and timorous Hypocrisie to any external Violence under
 Heaven, so must we needs say, unreasonable are those Imposers, who secure not the Imposed or Restrained 
 from what may occur to them, upon their account; and most inhuman
 are those Persecutors that punish men for not obeying them though to their utter ruin.


We next urge, that Force in matters relating to Conscience, carry a plain Contradiction to Government in the Nature, Execution, and End of it. 


By Government we understand, an external Order of Justice or the right and prudent Disciplining of any Society, by just Laws, either in the Relaxation, or Execution of them. 


1. First it carries a Contradiction to Government in the Nature of it, which is Justice, and that in three Respects. 


1. It is the first Lesson that great Synterisis, 
 so much renowned by Phylosophers 
 and Civilians, learns Mankind, to do as *he* would be done to, since he that gives, what he would not take, or takes what he would not give, only shews care for himself, but neither Kindness nor Justice 
 for another. 


2. Secondly, The
 just Nature of Government lies in a fair and equal Retribution; 
 but what can be more unequal, then that men should be rated more
 then their Proportion, to answer the
 Necessities of Government, and yet that they should not only
 receive no Protection from it, 
 but by it be disseiz'd of their dear Liberty 
 and Properties; 
 we say to be compell'd to pay that Power, that exerts it self to
 ruin 



---

p.24



 those that pay it, or that any should be requir'd to
 enrich those, that ruin them, is hard, and unequal, and therefore
 contrary to the just Nature of Government. If
 we must be Contributaries, to the maintenance of it, we are
 entituled to a protection from it.


3. Thirdly, It is
 the Justice of Government to proportion Penalties to the Crime
 committed. Now granting our Dissent
 to be a Fault, yet the infliction of a Corporal or External
 Punishment, for a meer mental Error (and that not voluntarily
 too) is Unreasonable and Inadequate, as well as against particular
 directions of the Scriptures, Tit 
 3. 9, 10, 11. For as Corporal Penalties cannot convince the
 Understanding; 
 so neither can they be commensurate Punishments, for Faults purely
 Intellectual: 
 And for the Goverment 
 of this World to intermediate
 with what belongs to the Government
 of Another, and which can have no
 ill Aspect or Influence upon it, shews
 more of Invasion then Right and Justice.


2. Secondly, 
 It carries a Contradition to Government in the Execution of it,
 which is Prudence, and that in these Instances. 


The state of the Case is this, That there is no Republick so great, no Empire 
 so vast, but the Laws of them are Resolvable into these two
 Series or Heads, Of Laws Fundamental, which are Indispensible and Immutable: And Laws Superficial, which are Temporary and Alterable: And as it
 is Justice and Prudence 
 to be punctual in the Execution of the former, so by Circumstances
 it may be neither, to Execute the latter, they
 being suited to the present Conveniency and Emergency of State; 
 as the Prohibiting of Cattle out of Ireland, 
 was judg'd of advantage to the Farmers of England, 
 yet a Murrin would make it the good of the whole, that the Law
 should be broke, or at least the Execution of it suspended. That
 the Law 


---

p.25



 of Restraint 
 in point of Conscience is of this number; we may further manifest, and the imprudence of thinking otherwise: For, first, if the saying were as true as 'tis false; No Bishop, no King, (which admits of various readings; As no decimating
 Clergy, or no Persecution, no King, we should be as silent, as some would have us: but the confidence of their Assertion, and the impollicy of such as believe it, makes us to say, that a greater injury cannot be done to the present
 Government. For if such Laws and Establishments are fundamental; they are as immutable as mankind it self; but that they are as alterable as the Conjectures and Opinions of Governors have been, is evident; since the same
 fundamental indispensable Laws and Pollicy of these Kingdoms have still remain'd, through all variety of opposite Ruling Opinions and Judgments, and disjoynt from them all. Therefore to admit such a fixation to temporary Laws, must needs be highly imprudent, and destructive of the essential parts of the Government of these Countries. 


2. Secondly, That since there has been a time of connivance, and that with no ill success to publick Affairs, it cannot be prudence to discontinue it, unless it was imprudence before to give it, and such little deserve it that think so.


3. Thirdly, Dissenters not being conscious to themselves of any just Forfeiture of that Favour, are as well griev'd in their Resentments of this Alteration, as the contrary did oblige them to very gratefull Acknowledgments. 


4. Fourthly, this must be done to gratifie all, or the greatest Part, or but some few only; it is a demonstration all are *not* pleased with it; that the greatest Number is not, the empty publick Auditories will speak: 
 In short, how should either be, when six Parties are sacrificed to
 the 


---

p.26



seventh; that this cannot be Prudence, common
 Maxims and Observations 
 prove. 


5. Fifthly, It strikes fatally at 
 Protestant-sincerity; for will the 
 Papists say, Did Protestants exclaim against us, for Persecutors, and are they now the Men themselves? Was it an Instance of Weakness in our Religion, and is't become a Demonstration in theirs? Have they
 transmuted it from Antichristian in us, to Christian in themselves? Let Persecutors answer.


6. Sixthly, It is not only an Example, but an Incentive to the Romanists, to Persecute the Reformed Religion abroad; for when they see their Actions (once void of all Excuse) now defended by the Example
 of Protestants, that once accus'd them (but now themselves) doubtless they will revive their Cruelty.


7. Seventhly, It overturns the very Ground of the 
 Protestants Retreat from Rome; for if men must be Restrain'd upon pretended Prudential Considerations, *from* the Exercise of their Conscience in England; why not the same in France, Holland, Germany, Constantinople, &c. 
 where matters of State may equally be pleaded? This makes Religion, State-pollicy; and Faith and Worship, subservient to the Humors and Interests of Superiors: Such Doctrine would have prevented our Ancestors Retreat; and We wish it be not the beginning of a Back-march; for Some think it shrewdly to be
 suspected, where Religion is suited to the Government, and Conscience to it's Conveniency.


8. Eighthly, Vice is incourag'd; for if Licentious Persons see Men of Vertue molested
 for Assembling with a Religious Purpose to Reverence and Worship
 God, and That are otherwise most serviceable to the Common-Wealth,
 they may and will inferr, it is better for them to be as they are
 since not to be *demure,* 
 as they call it, is half way to that kind of Accomplishment, which
 procures Preferment. 




---

p.27


9. Ninthly, For such persons as are so poor
 spirited as to truckle under such Restraints; What Conquest is
 there over them? that before were Conscientious men, and now
 Hypocrites; who so forward to be aveng'd of them, that brought this Guilt upon them, as they themselves? And how can the Imposers be secure of their Friendship, whom they have taught to change with the Times? 


10. Tenthly, Such Laws are so far from benefiting the Country, that the Execution of them will be the assured ruin of it, in the Revenues, and consequently in the Power of it; For where there is a decay of Families, there will
 be of Trade; so of Wealth, and in the end of Strength and Power;
 and if both kinds of Relief fail; Men,
 the Prop of Republiques; Money, the Stay of Monarchies; this as
 requiring Mercenaries, that as needing 
 Freemen (farewell the Interest of England; 
 'tis true, the Priests get (though that's but for a time) but
 the King and People lose; as the event will shew. 


11. Eleventhly, It ever was the prudence of
 wise Magistrates of Obliege their people; but what comes shorter of of it then Persecution? What's dearer to them then the Liberty of their Conscience? What cannot they better spare then it? Their Peace consists in the enjoyment of it: And he that by Compliance has lost it, carries his Penalty with him, and is his own Prison. Surely such Practices must render the Government Uneasie, and beget a great Disrespect to the Governours, in the Hearts of the people. 


12. Twelfthly, But that which concludes our
 prudential part, shall be this, That after all their Pains and
 Good-will to stretch men to their Measure, they never will be able
 to accomplish their End: And if he be an unwise Man, *that* provides
 Means where he designs no End, how neer is he 


---

p.28



 
kin to him that proposes an end inobtainable. Experience has told us. 1. How
 Invective it has made the Impos'd. 2. What Distractions 
 have insued such Attempts. 3. What Reproach has follow'd to the Christian
 Religion, when the Professors of it have us'd a coercive Power upon Conscience. And lastly, That Force never yet made, either a Good Christian or a Good
 Subject.


3. Thirdly and Lastly, Since the proceedings we
 argue against, are prov'd so destructive to the Justice 
 and Prudence of Government, we ought the less to wonder that they should hold the same malignity against the End of it, which is Felicity, since the Wonder would be to find it otherwise; and this is evident from these three brief Considerations.


1. First, Peace (the End of War and Government, and its great Happiness too) has been, is, and yet will be broken by the frequent Tumultuary Disturbances, that ensue the Disquieting our Meetings, and the
 Estreeting Fines upon our Goods and Estates. And what these things
 may issue in, concerneth the Civil Magistrate to consider. 


2. Secondly, Plenty 
 (another great End of Government) will be converted into Poverty by the Destruction of so many thousand Families as refuse Compliance and Conformity, and that not only to the Sufferers, but influentially to all, the rest; a Demonstration of which we have in all those Places where the late Act has been any thing considerably put in Execution. Besides, how great Provocation such Incharity and Cruel Usage, as stripping Widdows, Fatherless, and Poor of their very Necessaries for human Life, meerly upon an account of Faith or Worship, must needs be to the Just and Righteous Lord of Heaven and Earth; 
 Scriptures, and plenty of other Stories plainly shew us. 




---

p.29


3. Thirdly, Unity (not the least but greatest End of Government is lost) for by seeking an Unity of Opinion (by the wayes intended) the Unity requisit to uphold us, as a Civil Society, will be quite destroy'd. And such as relinquish that, 
 to get the other (besides that they are Unwise) will infallibly lose both in the end.


In short, We say, that 'tis unreasonable we should not be entertain'd as men, because some think we are not as Good Christians 
 as they pretend to wish us; or that we should be depriv'd of our Liberties and Properties, 
 who never broke the Laws that gave them to us: What can be harder,
 then to take that from us by a Law, which the great indulgence and
 solicitude of our Ancestors took so much pains to intail upon us
 by Law; An. 18 Ed. 
 3. stat 3. also stat. 20. Ed. 
 3. cap. 1. again Petition of Right, 
 An. 3. Car. 
 and more fully in Magna Charta; 
 further peruse 37 Ed. 
 5. cap. 8. 28. 42 Ed. 
 3. cap. 3. 28 Hen. 
 cap. 7. 


And we are perswaded, that no Temporary
 Subsequential Law whatever, to our Fundamental Rights (as this of
 Force on Conscience is) can invalid so essential a part of the
 Government, as an English Liberty 
 and Property: 
 Nor that it's in the power of any on Earth, to deprive us of them,
 till we have first done it our selves, by
 such Enormious Facts, as those very Laws prohibit, 
 and make our Forfeiture of that benefit we should otherwise
 receive by them; for these being such Cardinal 
 and Fundamental Points of English
 Law-Doctrine, individually, and by
 the collective body of the People agreed to; and on which as the
 most solid Basis, our Secondary
 Legislative Power, as well as
 Executive is built; it seems most rational that the Superstructure 
 cannot quarrel or invalid its own Foundation, without manifestly
 endangering its own security, the Effect 
 is ever less noble then the Cause, 
 the Gift 
 then the Giver, 
 and the Superstructure 
 then the Foundation.




---

p.30


The single Question to be resolved in the case, briefly will be this, Whether any visible Authority (being founded in its primitive Institution upon those Fundamental Laws, that inviolably preserve the People in all their just Rights and Priviledges) may invalidate all, or any of the said Laws, without an implicit shaking of its own Foundation, and a clear overthrow of its own Constitution of Government, and so reduce them to their Statu quo prius, or first Principles: The Resolution is every mans, at his own pleasure. Read Hen. 3. 9. 14. 29. 25 Ed 3. *Cook* Justit. 
 2. 19. 50, 51. 


Those who intend us no Share or Interest in the Laws of England, as they relate to civil Matters, unless we correspond with them in Points of Faith and Worship, must do two things: First, It will lie heavy on their parts to prove, That the Ancient Compact and Original of our Laws, carries that Proviso with it; else we are manifestly diseized of our Free-Customs.


Secondly, They are to prove the Reasonableness of such Proceedings to our Understandings, that we may not be concluded by a Law, we know not how to understand; for if I take the matter rightly (as I think I do) we must not Buy or Sell
 unless of this or that Perswasion in Religion; not considering civil Society was in the World before the Protestant Profession; Men, as such, and in Affairs peculiarly relative of them, in an external and civil capacity, have subsisted many Ages, under great variety of Religious Apprehensions, and therefore not so dependent on them as to receive any Variation or Revolution with them. What shall we say then? but that some will not that we should Live, Breath, and Commerce as men, because
 we are not such model'd Christians 
 as they coercively would have us; they might with as much Justice
 and Reputation to themselves forbid us to look or see unless our
 Eyes were Grey, Black, Brown, Blew, 


---

p.31



or some one colour best suiting theirs: For not to be able to give us Faith, or save our Consciences harmless, and yet to persecute us for refusing conformity, is intollerable hard measure. 


In short, That coercive way of bringing all men to their height of Perswasion, must either arise from Exorbitant
 Zeal and Superstition; or from a
 consciousness of Error 
 and Defect, 
 which is unwilling any thing more sincere, and reformed should
 take place; being of that Cardinals 
 mind, who therefore would not hearken to a Reformation, 
 at the sitting of the Counsel of Trent; 
 because he would not so far approve the Reformers
 Judgment (for having once condescended to their Apprehensions, he
 thought 'twould forever inslave them to their Sence) 
 though otherwise he saw as much as any man, the grand necessity of
 a Reformation, both of the Roman
 Doctrine and Conversation.


### Some grand Objections in the way must be
 Considered.


Objection 1. But you are a People that meet with Designs to Disaffect the People, and to ruin the Government. 


Answer, A
 Surmise is no Certainty, 
 neither is A may be, or Conjecture, any Proof; That from the first we have behaved our selves inoffensively is a Demonstration; that our Meetings are open, where all may hear our Matter, and have liberty to object or discuse any Point, is notorious. Ignorant Calumnies are
 Sandy Foundations to build so high a Charge upon: Let us fairly be heard in a publique Conference, how far we can justifie our Principles from being deservedly suspected of 


---

p.32



 Sedition or Disloyalty, and not over-run us with meer
 Suppositions. We declare our readiness to obey the Ordinance of
 man, which is only relative of Human or Civil Matters, and not
 Points of Faith, or Practise in Worship: But if Accusations 
 must stand for Proofs, 
 we shall take it for granted, that we must stand for Criminals;
 but our Satisfaction will be, that we shall not deserve it
 otherwise then as prejudice seeks to traduce us. 


Object. 2. But
 you strike at the Doctrine, at least the Discipline of the
 Church, and consequently are Hereticks. 


Answ. This
 Story is as old as the Reformation; 
 If we must be objected against out of pure Reputation, let it be
 in some other matter then what the Papists
 objected against the first Protestants; 
 otherwise you do but hit your selves in aiming at us? To
 say you were in the Right, but we are in the Wrong, 
 is but a meer begging of the Question; for doubtless the Papists 
 said the same to you, and all that you can say to us: Your best
 Plea was, Conscience upon Principles, the most evident and
 rational to you: Do not we the like? What if you think our Reasons
 thick, and our ground of Separation mistaken? Did not the Papists 
 harbour the same Thoughts of you? You perswaded as few of them, as
 we of you: Were you therefore in the Wrong? No more are we: It was
 not what they thought of you, or enacted against you, that
 concluded you: And why should your Apprehensions conclude us? If
 you have the way of giving Faith beyond what they had, and have
 the faculty of Perswasion, evidence as much; but if you are as
 destitute of both, as they were to you; why should Fines
 and Prisons, once us'd by them
 against you, and by you exclaimed
 against, as Unchristian Wayes of reclaiming Hereticks 
 (supposing your selves to be such) be 



---

p.33



 employ'd by you as
 rational, Christian, and Convincing upon us? To say we deserve
 them more, is to suppose your selves in the Right, and we in the
 Wrong, which proves nothing. Besides, the Question is not barely
 this, whether Hereticks 
 or no Hereticks; 
 but whether an Heretick should be
 Persecuted into a disclaiming of his Error; 
 your old Arguments run thus, as I well remember. 


1. Error is a Mistake in the Understanding. 


2. This is for want of a better Illumination. 


3. This Error can never be dislodged, but by
 Reason and Perswasion, as what are most suitable to the Intellect
 of man.


4. Fines, Goals, Exiles, Gibbets, &c. are
 no Convincing Arguments to the most erring Understanding in the
 World, being slavish and bruitish. 


5. This way of Force makes, instead of an
 honest Dissenter, but an Hypocritical Conformist; then whom
 nothing is more detestable to God and man. 


This being the Protestants 
 Plea, we are not to be disliked by Protestants, 
 for following their own avow'd Maxims 
 and Axioms of Conscience in defence
 of its own Liberty.


In short, either allow separation upon the single Principle of, My Conscience owns this, or disowns that; or never
 dwell in that Building, which knew no better Foundation (indeed good enough) but accusing your Fore-fathers of Schism, and Heresie, return to the Romish Church. What short of this can any say to an
 Anti-liberty-of-Conscience-Protestant.


Object. 3. But
 at this rate ye may pretend to Cut our Throats, and do all manner
 of savage Acts. 




---

p.34


Answ. 
 Though the Objection be frequent, yet it is as fouly ridiculous.
 We are pleading only for such a Liberty
 of Conscience, as preserves the Nation in Peace, Trade, and Commerce; and would not exempt any man, or Party of men, from not keeping those excellent Laws, that tend to Sober, Just, and Industrious Living. It
 is a Jesuitical Morral, To Kill a man before he is Born: 
 First, to suspect him of an Evil Design, and then kill him to
 prevent it. 


Object. 4. But
 do not you see what has been the end of this Separation? Wars, and
 Revolutions, and Danger to Government; witness our late Troubles. 


Ans. We see
 none of all this, but are able to make it appear,
 that the true cause of all that perplext
 Disturbance, which was amongst the
 Homousians 
 & Arrians 
 of old, & among us of later years (as well as what has
 modernly attended our Neighbouring Countries) took its first
 rise from a narrowness of spirit, in
 not Tollerating others to live the Freemen God made them, in
 External Matters upon the Earth, 
 meerly upon some difference in Religion. 


And were there once but an Hearty Tolleration 
 establisht, 'twould be a Demonstration of the truth of this
 Assertion. On this Ground, Empire 
 stands safe; on the other, it seems more uncertain. 


But these are only the popular Devices of some
 to traduce honest Men, and their Principles; whose lazy
 Life, and intollerable Avarice 
 become question'd, by a Tolleration of people better inclin'd. 


Object 5. But
 what need you take this Pains to prove Liberty of Conscience
 Reasonable and Necessary, when none questions it; 


---

p.35



all that is required is, That you meet but four more then your own Families;
 and can you not be contented with that? Your Disobedience to a
 Law, so favourable, brings suffering upon you.


Answ. Here is
 no need of answering the former part of the Objection; 'Tis too
 apparent throughout the Land, that Liberty
 of Conscience, as we have stated it,
 has been severely prosecuted, and therefore not so franckly
 injoyed: The latter part, I answer thus, If the words Lawful 
 or Unlawful, 
 may bear their signification from the nature of the things they
 stand for, then we conceive that a
 Meeting of Four Thousand is no more Unlawful, 
 then a Meeting of Four; for Number
 singly consider'd criminates no Assembly: 
 but the reason of their Assembling; the Posture in which; and the
 Matter transacted, with the Consequences thereof. 


Now if those things are taken for granted, to
 be things dispensible (as appears by
 the allowance of Four besides every Family) 
 certainly the Number 
 can never render it Unlawful; 
 so that the Question will be this, Whether
 if Four met to worship God, be an Allowable Meeting, Four Thousand
 met with the same Design be not an Allowable Meeting?


It is so plain a Case, that the Matter in the
 Question resolves it.


Object. 6. But
 the Law forbids it. 


Answ. If the enacting any-thing can make it lawful, we have done; but if an Act so made by the Papists against Protestants, was never esteem'd so by a true Protestant; and if the nature of the matter will not bear it; and lastly, that we are as much commanded by God to meet Four thousand as Four; we
 must desire to be excused, if we forbear not the assembling of our selves together, as the manner of some is. 




---

p.36


Object 7. But the reason of the prohibition of the number is. (for you see they allow all that can be said to Four Thousand to be to said the Family and Four) that Tumults may arise, and Plots may be made, and the like Inconveniences happen to the Goverment.


Answ. Great
 Assemblies are so far from being injurious, that they are the most
 inoffensive; for, First, They are open, 
 exposed to the view of all, which of all things Plotters
 are the shyest of; but how fair an opportunity 'twere, for men so principled, to do it in those allowed Meetings of but four besides the Family, is easie to guess, when we consider, that few
 make the best and closest Council; and next, that such an Assembly
 is the most private and clandestine, and so fitted for Mischief
 and Surprize.


Secondly, Such Assemblies, are not only publique and large, but they are frequented, as well by those that are not of their Way, as of their own; from whence it follows, that we have the greatest reason to be cautious and wise in our
 Behaviour, since the more there be at
 our Meetings, the more Witnesses are against us, if we should say
 or act any thing that may be prejudicial to the Government.


Lastly, For these several years none could ever
 observe such an ill use made of that Freedom, 
 or such wicked Designs to follow such Assemblies; 
 and therefore it is high Incharity to proceed so severely upon
 meer Suppositions.


To this we shall add several Authorities and
 Testimonies for further confirmation of our sense of the matter,
 and to let Imposers 
 see, that we are not the only Persons, 
 who have impleaded Persecution, and justified Liberty
 of Conscience, as Christian 
 and Rational.




---

p.37


A Brief Collection of the Sence and Practice of the Greattest, Wisest, and Learnedst Common-Wealths, Kingdoms, and particular Persons of
 their Times, concerning Force upon
 Conscience.


1. First, Though the Jews 
 above all people had the most to say for Imposition 
 and Restraint 
 within their own Dominions, having their Religion instituted by
 so many signal Proofs of Divine Original, it being deliver'd to
 them by the Hand of God himself, yet such was their indulgence to
 Dissenters, 
 that if they held the common receiv'd Noachical
 Principles tending to the
 acknowledgment of one God, 
 and a just Life, 
 they had the Free Exercise of their distinct Modes or Wayes of
 Worship, which were numerous. Of this their own Rabbies are Witnesses, and Grotius out of them. 


Secondly, The Romans 
 themselves, as strict as they were, not only had Thirty Thousand
 Godds (if Varro 
 may be credited) but almost every Family of any note, had its
 distinct Sacra, or peculiar Way of Worship. 


3. Thirdly, 
 It was the sence of that grave, exemplary Common-wealths man,
 Cato, in Salust, 
 that among other things which ruin any Government want
 of Freedom of Speech, or mens being oblieged to humor Times is a great one; which we find made good by the
 Flowrentine Republick, as Guicceardine 
 relates. 


4. Fourthly, Livy 
 tells us, It was a Wonder that Hannibals 
 Army, consisting of divers Nations,
 divers Humors, 


---

p.38



 differing Habits, contrary Religions, various
 Languages, should live 13 years from their own Country under his
 Command without so much as once mutining, either against their
 General, or among themselves. But
 what Livy 
 relates for a Wonder that ingenious
 Marquess, Virgilio Malvetzy gives
 the Reason of, namely, that the
 difference of their Opinion, Tongues, and Customs, was the reason
 of their Preservation and Conquest; 
 For said he, 'Twas impossible so many contrary Spirits should
 Combine, and if any should have done it, 'twas in the Generals 
 power to make the greater Party by his equal hand; they owing him
 more of Reverence, then they did of Affection to one an another:
 This, says he, some impute to Hannibal, 
 but how great soever he was, I give it to the variety of Humors
 in the Army. For (adds he) Romes Army
 was ever less given to Mutining when joyned with the Provincial
 Auxilaries, then when intirely Roman; 
 thus much and more, in his publique Discourses upon Cornelius Tacitus.


5. Fifthly, 
 The same, best Statist 
 of his Time, C. Tacitus, 
 tells us in the Case of Cremtius, 
 That it had been the interest of Tiberius 
 not to have punished him, in as much as Curiosity is begotten by
 Restriction of Liberty to Write or Speak, which never mist of
 Proselites. 


6. Sixthly, Just. Martin. I will forbear to quote, in
 less then this, two whole Apollogies, dedicated to Adrian and Antonius Pius, 
 as I take it. 


Seventhly, Tertullian ad scapulum, 
 that learned and juditious Appollogist, 
 plainly tells us. That 'tis not the
 Property of Religion to Compel or Persecute for Religion, 
 she should be accepted for her Self, 
 not for Force; 
 that being a poor and beggarly one, that has no better Arguments
 to Convince; and a manifest Evidence of her Superstition and Falshood. 




---

p.39


8. Eightly, 
 Of this we take the nine Moneths Reign of the Emperor Jovianus 
 to be an excellent Demonstration, whose great Wisdom, and
 admirable Prudence ingranting Tolleration (expresly saying, He
 would have none molested for the Exercise of their Religious Worship) 
 Calm'd the impetuous Storms of Dissention betwixt Homousians 
 and Arrians; 
 and reduc'd the whole Empire, before agitated with all *kind* of
 Commotions during the reign of Constantine,
 Constantius, and Julian, 
 to a wonderful Serenity and Peace, as Socrates
 Scholasticus affirms. 


9. Ninthly, That little Kingdom of Aegypt 
 had no less then Forty Thousand Persons retir'd to their private
 and seperate Wayes of Worship, as Eusebius 
 out of Philo Judeus, and Josephus relates. 


10. Tenthly; And here let me bring in honest Chaucer, whose Matter (and not his Poetry) heartely affects me: 'twas in a time when Priests 
 were as rich, and lofty, as they are now, and Causes of Evil alike. 


[1](javascript:footNote('E670001-001/note001.html'))

> 1. The time was once, and may return again,
>   
> (for oft may happen that hath been beforn)
>   
> when Shepherds had none Inheritance,
>   
> ne of Land, nor Fee insufferance,
>   
>  But what might arise of the bare Sheep,
>   
> (were it more or less) which they did keep,
>   
> Well ywis was it with Shepherds tho:
>   
> nought having, nought fear'd they to forgo,
>   
> For PAN (God) himself was their Inheritance,
>   
> and little them serv'd for their Maintenance,
>   
> The Shepherds God so well them guided,
>   
> that of nought were they unprovided;
> 
> 
> ---
> 
> p. 40
> 
> 
> [2](javascript:footNote('E670001-001/note002.html'))Butter enough, Honey, Milk, and Whay,
>   
> and their Flock Fleeces them to array.
>   
> But Tract of Time and long Prosperity,
>   
> (that Nurse of Vice, this of Insolency) 
>   
> Lulled the Shepheards in such security,
>   
> that not content with Loyal obeysance,
>   
> Some gan to gap for greedy governance,
>   
> and match themselves with mighty Potentates.
>   
> [3](javascript:footNote('E670001-001/note003.html'))Lovers of lordships and troublers of states;
>   
> then gan Shepheards Swains to look aloft, 
>   
> And leave to live hard, and learn to lig soft,
>   
> though under colour of Shepheards some while
>   
> There crept in, Wolves full of fraud and guile,
>   
> that often devour'd their own Sheep,
>   
> And often the Shepheard that did them keep,
>   
> [4](javascript:footNote('E670001-001/note004.html'))This was the first source of the
>  Shepherds sorrow.
>   
> that nor will be quit, with hale, nor borrow.
> 

 


II. Who knows not that our first Reformers 
 were great Champions for Liberty of Conscience, as Wicklif 
 in his Remonstration to the Parliament. 
 The Albigences to Leuis the 11th and 12th of France. Luther to the several Dyets 
 under Fredrick and Charles the fifth; Calvin to Francis the first, and many of our English Martyrs, as the poor Plowman's
 Famous Complaint, in Foxes
 Martyralogy, &c. 




---

p.41


12. The present affairs of Germany, Plainly tell us that tolleration is the preservation of their states; the contrary having formerly, almost quite wasted them. 


13. The same in France: who can be so ignorant of their Story, as not to know that the timely Indulgence of Henry 
 the fourth, and the discreet Tolleration 
 of Richlieu and Mazarin saved that Kingdom from being ruin'd both by the Spaniards; and one another.


14. Holland, then
 which, what place is there so improved in Wealth, Trade and Power, 
 chiefly owes it to her Indulgence in matters of Faith and Worship. 


15. Among the very Mahumetans 
 of Turky, and Persia, 
 what variety of opinions, yet what Unity and Concord 
 is there? we mean in matters of a Civil Importance. 


16. It was the opinion of that great Master of the 
 sentences, Dominious a Soto, that every man had A natural right
 to instruct others in things that are good: and he may teach the
 Gospell truths also; but cannot compell any to believe them, he
 may explain them, and to this (says he) every man has a right, as in his 4 Sent: Dist. Art. 510. Pag. 
 115. 7. 


17. Strifes about Religions said Judicious and learned Grotius, are the most pernicious and
 destructive; where provision is not made for 
 Dissenters: the contrary most happy; 
 As in Muscovy; he further says upon the occasion of Campanella, that not a rigid but easy Government suits best with the Northren people; he often pleads the relaxation of temporary Laws to be resonable and necessary. As in the case of the Curatij and Heratij, 
 and Fabius Vitulanus; and others stincted to time and place, 
 as the Jewish Laws &c. Polit. Maxims P. 12 18. 78, 98. 


18. The Famous Raleigh 
 tells us, that the way for Magistrates to govern well and gain
 the esteem of their People 


---

p.42



 is to Govern by Piety, Justice, Wisdom, and a Gentle and Moderate Carriage towards them: And that Disturbance attends those States where men are ruin'd or depress'd by Parties. See his Observations and Maxims of State.


19. If I mistake not, the French 
 and Duch Protestants 
 enjoy their Separated Wayes of Worship in London, 
 if not in other parts of these Lands, without Molestation; we do
 the like in remote Countries, but not
 in our own.


20. This must needs be the meaning of the
 learned Doctor to his inquisitive Student, 
 in their Juditious Diologue about the Fundamental Laws of the
 Kingdoms, when he says, That such
 Laws as have not their Foundation in Nature, Justice, and Reason
 are void ipso Facto. And whether
 Persecution 
 or Restraint upon Conscience be congruous with either, let the
 Impartial judge. lib. 1. chap.
 6. 


21. Doctor Hammond 
 himself, and the Grand Patron of the
 English Church, was so far from
 urging the Legallity of Restriction in Matters relating to
 Conscience, that he Writ, Argu'd, and left upon his Dying Bed his
 sense to the Contrary: As the Author 
 of his Life might have been pleas'd to observe, but that interest
 stood in the way; the Doctor
 exhorting his Party, not to seek to Displace those then in the
 University; or to Persecute them for any matter of Religious
 difference.


22. That a Person of no less ability In the Irish 
 Protestant Church did the same, I mean D.
 Jer. Taylor, his whole discourse of
 Liberty of Prophesy, is a most pregnant demonstration. 


23. It was the
 saying of a Person once, too
 great to be Nam'd Now. That liberty
 of Conscience is every mans Natural Right, and be who is depriv'd
 of it, is a Slave in the midst of the greatest Liberty: And since
 every man should do as he would be done to, such only don't
 deserve to have it, that won't give it.




---

p.43


24. Lactantius reflects
 upon Persecutors thus, If you will
 with Blood, with Evil, and with Torments defend your Worship, it
 shall not thereby be Defended but Polluted, lib. 5. cap. 20. 


25. Hillary against Auxentius, saith, The Christian Church does not persecute, but is persecuted.


26. Jerom, thus, Heresie must be cut off with the Sword of the Spirit, Proam lib. 4. 


27. Chrysostum saith, 
 That it is not the manner of the Children of God to persecute
 about their Religion, but 
 an evident Token of Antichrist —— Relig.
 Uris. pag. 192.


28. Stephen King of Poland declared his mind in the point controverted thus, 
 I am King of Men, not of Conscience; a Commander of Bodies, not
 of Souls. 


29. the King of Bohemia was of Opinion, That mens Consciences ought in no sort to be Violated, Urged, or Constrained.


30. And lastly, let me add (as what is, or should be now of more force) the sense of King James, and Charles the first, Men
 fam'd for their great natural abilities, and acquir'd Learning; that no man ought to be punished for his Religion nor disturb'd for his Conscience; In that it is the duty of every man to give what he would Receive. It is a sure Rule in Divinity, said
 King James, that God never loves to plants his Church by
 Violence and Bloodshed. And in his
 Exposition on Revel. 20. he
 saith, That PERSECUTION is the note
 of a false Church. And in the last Kings advice to the Present
 King, he sayes, Take heed of abetting any factions; your Partiall
 adhearing to ANY ONE SIDE 
 gains you not so great advantages in some mens hearts (who
 are prone to be of their Kings Religion) 
 as it loseth you in others, who think themselves, and their
 profession, first dispis'd, then persecuted by you. 


Again, Beware of exasperating any Factions by the
 Crosness, 


---

p.44



and Asperity of some mens Passions, Humours, 
 or private opinions imployed by you, grounded
 only upon their difference in lesser matters, which are but the
 Skirts and Suburbs of Religion. 
 Wherein a Charitable Connivence, and Christian Toleration often
 dissipates their strength, whom
 rougher opposition fortifies; and
 puts the despised 
 and oppressed Party, 
 into such combinations as may most enable them to get a full
 revenge on those they count their Persecutors, who
 are commonly assisted by that vulgar Commiseration, which attends all that are said suffer under the notion of Religion.


Always keep up SOLLID
 PIETY and those fundamentall Truths
 (which mend both hearts and lives of men) with Impartial
 favour and Justice. Your Prerogative is best shown and exercis'd in remitting, rather then exacting the rigour of Laws; there being nothing worse than Legall Tyranny. —— 


Now upon the whole, we ask, What can be more
 Equal, what more reasonable then
 Liberty of Conscience; so correspondent with the Reverence due to God, 
 and Respect to the Nature, Practice, Promotion, and Rewards 
 of the Christian Religion; the Sense of Divine Writ; 
 the Great Priviledge of Nature, and Noble Principle 
 of Reason; the Justice, Prudence, and Felicity 
 of Government; And Lastly, to the Judgment and Authority 
 of a whole Cloud of Famous Witnesses, 
 whose Harmony in Opinion, as much detects the Unreasonableness, and Incharity


---

p.45



of Persecutors, 
 as their Savage Cruelties imply an highcontempt of so sollid
 determinations; of which number I can not forbear the mention of two, whose Actions are so near of kin to one another, and both to inhumanity, as the same thing can be to it self. 


The first is a great Lord 
 of Buckingham-shire; 
 but so hearty a Persecutor 
 of the poor Quakers, 
 that rather then they should peaceably enjoy the Liberty of
 Worshipping God, (and to supply the County-defect of Informers) 
 he has encourag'd a pair of such Wretches, 
 that it had bin a Disgrace 
 for the meanest Farmer 
 to coverse with; *once* having been Prisoner in Alsbury 
 for Theft, 
 & said to have bin burnt 
 in the Hand; 
 and the other of a Complexion 
 not much less Scandalous and Immortal. 


To give an undeniable testimony of their Merit 
 once for all, I shall briefly relate a most notorious piece of Perjury. They suspecting a Religious Assembly to be at a certain place in the same County came, and finding one in reallity, repaired to one they call Sr. Tho Clayton, and a Justice, where they depos'd, That
 not only a meeting was at such an House, but one Tho. Zachery and his Wife were there, who at the same time (as at
 the Tryal upon Indictment for Perjury 
 at Alsbury was proved by snfficient Witnesses from London) were then in that City, yet fined not only for being there, but for the Speaker also, though none spoke that day.


Upon the prosecution of these Men, 
 as perjur'd men, 
 and by the Law dispriviledged of all
 Imply, and never to be credited more
 in evidence, several delays were made, much time spent, and not a
 little pains bestow'd, all in hopes of an Exemplary
 Success; which proved so, but the
 wrong way; for the very last Sessions, 
 when the matter should have receiv'd an absolute Decission,
 and the Attendants have been dismist 
 (especially on the score of the Witnesses, that came from London 
 the second time, upon no other account) a Letter was reported to
 have bin writ 


---

p.46




from the aforesaid Lord, 
 in favour of these Informers, to this purpose, That
 since Sr. Tho Clayton was
 not present, the business could not well be determin:d,
 but if the Court would undertake the ending of it, he beseecht
 them to be favourable to those 
 HONEST MEN. If this be as true as said, 'tis a most aggravated
 shame to Nobility: 
 what! to protect them from the Lash of Law, who went about to
 destroy Truth the Life of it: 'Tis a Dishonour
 to the Government, a Scandal to the County, and a manifest Injury
 to an inoffensive and useful Inhabitant.


'Tother is as well known by his Cruelty, 
 as by his Name, 
 and he scarce deserves another; However, he is understood by that
 of the Reading Knight, Arrant, 
 and alwayes in Armour 
 for the Devil; a man, whose Life seems to be whole BONNER
 reviev'd: Hogestraut, the Popish Inquisiter, could not hate Martin Luther 
 more, then he does a poor Dissenter; and wants but as much Power,
 as he has Will, to hang more then he has Imprisoned. The Laws made
 against Papists, he inflicts upon the Quakers; And
 makes it Crime enough for a Primunire to have an Estate to lose.


The single Question is not, Were
 you at such a Meeting? which the Act
 intends: But will you Swear, 
 which it intends not; and Women
 escape him as little for this, as those of his own Tribe do for 
 SOME THING ELSE: but what of all things most aggrivates the mans
 Impiety, is the making a devillish snare of a Christian Duty;
 since such as have come to visit the imprison'd, have been
 imprisoned themselves for their Charity; so that with him it
 seems a current Maxime, that those must not come to see Prisoners,
 and not be such themselves, who will not take the Oath of
 Allegiance to do it. 


To relate the whole Tragedy 
 would render him as Bad, 
 as the Discourse Big; 
 and the latter not less Voluminous, 
 then the former Odious. 
 But three things I shall observe. 




---

p.47


First, That he has clouded 72 Persons (of
 those call'd Quakers) 
 Men and Women, immodestly into Goal, not suffering them to enjoy
 common Conveniencies. And for his Divertion, and the Punishment
 of little Children, he pours Cold Water down their Necks. 


2d His Imprisonments are almost perpetual. First he premunires them, without any just cause of Suspition; then Imprisens them; and lastly, Plunders them, and that by a Law enacted against Romanists; which, if all be true, that is said, is more his concern then theirs, If
 without offence, it may be suppos'd he has Religion at all. 


3d Some have been there about Eight Years, and
 should be Eighteen more, were he as sure to live (being more then
 70.) and enjoy his Power, as doubtless he hopes to die before
 those good Laws over-take him, that would make an Example of such
 an Oppressor; in short, Wives, Widdows, Poor and Father less, are
 all Fish for his Net; & whether over or under Age he casts
 none away, but seems to make it his priviledge to correct Law by
 out-doing it. When we have said all we can (and we can never say
 too much, (if enough) he is still his own best Character.


Such are the Passion, Follies, and Prejudices, Men devoted to a spirit of Imposition, and Persecution, 
 are attended with,
  

 Non enim possumus quae vidimus, et audivimus non loqui. 


In short, What Religious, what Wise, what Prudent, what Good-natured Person would be a Persecuter? Certainly it's an Office only fit for those who being wide of all reason, to evidence the verity of their own Religion, fancy it to be true, from that strong Propensity and greedy Inclination they find in
 themselves to Persecute the Contrary; A Weakness of so ill a consequence to all 


---

p.48



civil Societies, that the admission of it ever was, and ever will prove their utter
 Ruin, as well as their great Infelicity who pursue it. 


And though we could not more effectually
 express our *Revenge,* then by leaving
 such Persons to the scope of their own Humors; 
 Yet being taught to Love and Pray for
 our very Persecutors, we heartily
 wish their better information, that (if it be possible) they may
 Act more suitably 
 to the good pleasure of the Eternal just God, and beneficialy 
 to these Nations. 


To conclude, Liberty of Conscience (as, thus Stated & Defended) we ask as
 our undoubted Right by the Law of God, of Nature, and of our own
 Country: It has been often promised, we have long waited for it;
 we have Writ much, and Suffered more in its Defence, and
 have made many true Complaints, but found little or no Redress.


However, we take the Righteous Holy God to Record against
 all Objections that are ignorantly, or designedly rais'd against
 us. That. 


1st We hold no Principle 
 destructive of the English Government. 


2d That we plead for no such Dissenter (if such an one there be.) 


3d That we desire the Temporal and Eternal Happiness of all Persons (in submission to the Divine Will of God) 
 heartily forgiving our Cruel Persecutors.


4thly, And Lastly, We
 shall engage, by Gods assistance, to lead peaceable, just, and
 industrious lives amongst men, to the good and example of all. 
 But if after all we have said, this short Discourse should not be
 credited, nor answer'd in any of its sober Reasons, and Requests;
 but Sufferings should be the present Lot of our Inheritance from
 this Generation, 


---

p.49



be it known to them all, THAT
 MEET WE MUST, & MEET, we cannot but encourage all to do
 (whatever Hardship we sustain in Gods Name, & Authority, who
 is Lord of Hosts and King of Kings; at the revelation of whose
 Righteous Judgments and Glorious Tribunal, Mortal Men shall render
 an Account of the Deeds done in the Body; 
 and whatever the Apprehensions of such may be, concerning this
 Discourse, 'twas writ in Love, and from a true sense of the
 present State of things: and TIME, 
 and the EVENT 
 will vindicate it 
 from Untruth. In the mean while, 'tis matter of great Satisfaction
 to the Author, that he has so plainly cleared his Conscience, in
 pleading for the Liberty of other Mens, 
 and publickly born his honest Testimony for God, not
 out of Season to his POOR COUNTRY.




---

p.50


### Postscript.

### A few brief Observations upon the late Act,
 and the usual Tearms of Acts of this Nature.


That which we have to say, relates, either to the Tearms of the Act, or the Application of them to us. 


As to the Tearms of the Act, they are these, Seditious Conventicles, Seditious Sectaries, and Meetings under Colour or Pretence of Religion, P. 1. 


1. Seditious, from 
 Sedition, imports as much as 
 Turbulent, Contentious, Factious, which sowes Strife, and Debate,
 and hazards the Civil Peace of the Government. 


2. Conventicle, is
 a diminutive private Assembly, designning and contriving Evil to
 particular Persons, or the Government in generall, 
 see Lamb. p. 173. In Tertullians 
 sense it is an Assembly of immodest
 and unclean Persons, at least it was
 so taken in those dayes, and objected against the Christians as
 their practise, whom he defends. Ter. Apol. 




---

p.51


3. Sectaries, 
 must be such as disjoyn or dis-member themselves from the body of
 Truth, and confess to a strange and untrue opinion. If any Subject
 of this Realm being 16 years of age or upwards, shall be present
 at any assembly, Conventicle or pretence of Religion &c.
 which can signifie no more then thus much, 
 that true it is some may meet and assemble to Worship God, and
 upon a religious account, that are dissenters, such
 we censure not, but those who under
 colour or pretence of any exercise of Religion conspire
 &c. they are to be suspected and Prosecuted. This being the
 true explanation of the tearms of the Act; we proceed to show how
 unreasonably they are applyed to us.


1. Words are but so many intelligible Marks,
 and Characters set and employ'd, to inform us of each others
 conceptions, and therein of the nature of those things they stand
 for; Now because we take the Act to mean what it speaks, and that
 the Law concludes no man guilty upon conjectures, but from the
 detection of some fault; we affirm our selves altogether
 unconcern'd in that word Seditious, 
 because 'twas never our practise in words, or actions to disturb
 the Government; or suggest Principles
 that might hatch Conspiracies, or feed the vulgar with
 disaffection to their Rulers; but
 before the Kings coming in, at his coming in, and ever since,
 notwithstanding our frequent suffering, we
 have made it our business to heal Animosities, Preach forgiveness
 and Charity amongst men, and that
 they would by an hearty repentance turn to God, rather then hunt
 after revenge upon one another: therefore we assert we have not
 done one thing that may be prov'd Seditious 
 in the sense above mention'd. 


2. That we are Strangers to Conventicles 
 is most evident, for where the parts that render it such, are
 wanting, there 


---

p.52



can be no Conventicle; 
 but that they are in our Assemblies, appears. 


First, Because our
 Meetings are not Small. 2. Neither are they private or
 Clandestine; but in the view of all People. 
 3. Nor are they riotous, liscentious, or otherwise immodest, or
 immorall; but on purpose to diswade persons from such impieties;
 so that we are clear in the Interpretation of the Law. 13 H.
 5. cap. 8. 19. and 19. H.
 7. cap. 13. and in the sense of the
 famous Father Tertullian.


3. Sectaries, 
 is a word, that whosoever has but confidence enough to conceit
 himself in the Right, by consequence wants none to suppose the
 contrary in the wrong, and so to call him a Sectary; 
 but this is but a meer begging of the Question; For to say those
 are Sectaries, 
 do's not conclude them such, nor does the Act speak so plainly of
 Dissenters: 
 but granting it did, yet they must be Seditious
 Ones, or else all will be in vain;
 where we may observe, that purely to be a Sectary, 
 is not what the Act strikes at, but to be a Seditious
 One: for a man may differ in
 judgement about matters of Faith, from the national Religion, and
 yet correspond with the Government in matters civil: so that ACT
 upon the whole, aims not at Sectaries 
 simply, but they must be such as are Enemies to the civil
 constitution to be rendred Seditious
 Ones, from which we have
 sufficiently clear'd our selves. 


4. That we meet under Colour and Pretence, and
 not really to Worship God; we deny,
 and none can prove. 'Twere high Incharity to affirm positively, 
 This, or that People meet only under a Colour of Religion; yet
 unless the Act had so expres'd it self, we conceive their
 Authority lame and imperfect that Persecute us by it. It will help
 but little to say, The King, 


---

p.53



 Lords and Commons, by the following words, in other manner then
 according
 to the Liturgy of the Church of England, 
 meant, that such meet under a Pretence that
 did not conform to that Worship; since
 the precedent words say, under
 Colour or Pretence of any Exercise of Religion in other manner,
 &c. So that they are only struck
 ar, who are not sincere Dissenters, but that are such, with Design
 to carry on another End.


Obj But may some
 say, 'Tis granted, you have very
 evidently evaded the Force of the Act, so far as relates to these
 recited Expressions; but what if a Bill be ready, for an
 Explanatory and Supplementory Act to the former, wherein this
 Scope for Argument will not be found, because your Meetings will
 be absolutely adjudged Seditious, Riotous, and Unlawful. 


To which we Answer, 
 That as the granting of the first, which none reasonably can deny,
 is a manifest Impeachment of such as have violently prosecuted
 people for being present at Religious Assemblies (almost to their
 utter Undoing) so shall we as easily answer the second, which
 amounts to the force of an Objection, and briefly thus. 


First, It is not more impossible for Mankind 
 to preserve, their Society 
 without Speech, 
 then it is absolutely requisit that the Speech
 be regular and certain. For, if what
 we call a Man, 
 a Lion, 
 a Whale 
 to day, we should call a Woman, 
 a Dog, 
 a Sprat 
 to morrow; there would be such Uncertainty and Confusion, as it
 would be altogether impossible to preserve Speech or Language
 intelligible. 


Secondly, it is not in the power of all the men
 in the World to reconcile an absolute
 Contradiction, to convert the nature of Light into that of
 Darkness, nor to enact a thing to be that which it is not; 
 but that Those endeavour to do, who think of making 


---

p.54



our Religious Meetings Routs 
 and Riots; 
 for first they offer Violence to our common Propriety of Language,
 it being the first time that ever a Religious and Peaceable
 Assembly would be enacted a Rout or Riot: Nature,
 Reason, the Law of the Land, and common Practice, and Observation, 
 give a clear contrary definition of a Rout
 and Riot.


Secondly, They endeavour to reconcile
 Contradictions; for they would have a
 thing that which by nature it cannot be; 
 for that which is Peaceable 
 cannot be Riotous, 
 and what is Religious 
 can never be Seditious. 
 For any to say our Meetings are not
 Religious, 
 is not only a poor Evasion, 
 but great Incharity; for that is
 properly a Religious Assembly where Persons are congregated
 with a real purpose of Worshipping God, by Prayer, or otherwise,
 let the Persons met be esteem'd Doctrinally Orthodox, or not. 
 Can any be so Ignorant, or so Malitious,
 as to believe we do not Assemble to Worship God, to the best of
 our Understanding? If they think otherwise, they must, and do
 assume unto themselves a Power beyond the Arrogancy of the POPE 
 himself, that never yet adventur'd to tell man his Thoughts, nor
 the Purposes and Intents of his Heart, which he, or they must do,
 that definitively judge our Assemblies, void
 of Sword or Staff, Drum or Musket, Tumult or Violence, and
 circumstantiated with all the Tokens of Christian Devotion, 
 a Rout or a Riot. And truly, If Protestants
 deny the Legallity of those Acts or Edicts, which were contriv'd
 and executed
 in order to their suppression, by the respective Kings and
 Parliaments that own'd the Romish Faith and Authority, where they
 either did or do live, let them not think it strange, if we on the
 same Tearms (namely, Scruple of
 Conscience) refuse compliance with
 their Laws of Restraint. And as the
 first Reformers were no whit daunted at the Black Characters the
 Romanists 
 fastened on them, neither thought their Assemblies 
 in 


---

p.55



a way of profest seperation, the more unlawful, for their
 representing them such; no more are we surpriz'd or scar'd at the
 ugly Phroses, 
 daily cast upon us by a sort of men, that either do not know us,
 or would not that others should: 
 For we are not so easily to be Brav'd, Menac'd, or Persecuted out
 of our Sense, Reason, and Priviledge.


They say, LOSERS have leave to Speak, at least, we take it; none being greater Losers, 
 then such as for Dissenting from national institutions in point of
 Faith or Worship, are depriv'd of their Common Rights 
 and Freedoms, 
 and hindred as much as may be, from reverencing the God that made
 them, in that Way which to them seems most acceptable to him. 


To Conclude, we say, and by it let our
 Intentions in our whole discourse be measur'd, that we have not
 *defended* any Dissenters, 
 whose quarrell 
 or dissent 
 is rather Civill 
 and Politticall, 
 then Religious 
 and Concientious; 
 for both we really think such unworthy of Protection from the
 English government,
 who seek the ruin of it; and that such as are Contributries to
 the pres preservation
 of it, (though Dissenters
 in point *of* Faith or Worship) are unquestionably Intituled to a
 Protection from IT. 


THE END.











