fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did?' But he felt other resentments than theirs; and turned about, and calmly rebuked them, saying, 'Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.'

I have been the larger in setting forth the circumstances of this story, because in so many instances they are applicable to our own case. It was hatred that grew out of a religious controversy, that bred the treason of this day; it was fire, though not from heaven, that was called for to decide the dispute: it was zeal for Christ, but not according to knowlege,' that prompted to the revenge: the revenge was bloody and unchristian; and to every one concerned in it does the voice of Christ reach, 'Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.'

It would be endless on this occasion to run into the controversies that are between us and the church of Rome: the case we have this day to plead with them, wants not the support which the righteousness of our cause might afford it. Let them be the disciples: let us be the Samaritans; mistaken, nay, obstinately mistaken in our religion : let them have all the advantage that the parallel in the text can afford them: let them call us heretics, schismatics, aliens from the body and church of Christ yet, after all, their furious rage and their cruel thirst after blood intitle them to the reproof of their Lord, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.'

Not all the boasted advantages of their church can justify them in the cruelty they use towards their fellow-creatures. Have they a zeal and love for Christ? So had the disciples. Are they provoked by the indignities offered to him? So were they. Have they faith enough among them to work miracles in his name; and will they from thence justify their practice? The same faith had the disciples; Wilt thou,' say they, 'that we command fire to come down from heaven?' You see their faith they wanted nothing but the Lord's permission to do the thing and yet, their faith notwithstanding, we learn from the unerring voice of truth that their spirit was not right within them.

But when we have considered our Saviour's judgment in this case, and how far it extends, we shall be better able to judge to what kind of spirit the dark contrivance of this day is to be ascribed.

The case has been already stated, and I need not repeat it : my business at present shall be to consider how far this reason of our Saviour's excludes all use of temporal punishments in matters of religion. And,

I. I shall briefly show that it holds in all cases with respect to church power.

II. That the argument does not affect the civil magistrate's power; nor tie up his hands from interposing with the civil sword in matters proper for his jurisdiction; however they may be pretended to be allied to religion.

III. I shall apply what is said to the present occasion.

I. As to the persons on whom the disciples would have executed vengeance, they were on two accounts the objects of their wrath. They were apostates from the true religion, and had erected a temple to themselves on the mount of Samaria. Besides this, they had very inhumanly treated them and their Master. The rule of charity is so very plain in Scripture, and the duty of forgiving injuries so express, that I think personal affronts and injuries can with no color be pleaded to justify persecution. And therefore the whole weight of the argument lies on the honor of God and religion; from which topics the doctrine of extirpating heretics fetches its main support. But to this argument our Saviour has furnished us with a short but full reply, ver. 56. The Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them.' The honor of God is best consulted by complying with the gracious designs of his providence; and the honor of religion best secured, by promoting the ends of it: and since our Saviour has told us that the design of his coming into the world, and the end of the religion he taught, was not to destroy, but to save men's lives; there can be no greater indignity offered to God, no greater contempt shown of Christ, or blemish cast on religion, than to make religion, which was designed to save men, the means and instrument of destroying them. The argument reaches to all methods of propagating religion which are hurtful or injurious to men, as well as merely destroying them by the fire or sword; for the 'Son of man' no more came to injure or abuse men, than he did to destroy them and therefore the argument is equally strong against injuring or abusing our fellow-creatures in order

to propagate the faith, as it is against destroying them. And very strong it must be in both cases, since it is our Saviour's own argument.

It is true that all punishments do not come under the notion of injuries or abuses; since many are calculated for the benefit of offenders, to reclaim them to a better mind and better manners and consequently all punishments will not come within this argument of our blessed Saviour; and therefore, notwithstanding what has been said, it may still be pretended that there is room for the exercise of temporal punishments (for of such only I speak at present) in the case of religion; since some punishments may be subservient to the end of religion, and may help to set forward the salvation of men.

But however good a reason this may be for exercising temporal punishments in the cause of religion, it can signify nothing in the present case, unless the church be vested with a power of dispensing temporal punishments: for this reason cannot create a power where it is not; it can only direct the exercise of it where it is. And therefore, to those who urge the conveniency of temporal punishments in matters of religion, we answer with our blessed Saviour, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.' The kingdom of Christ is not of this world; nor is it to be erected or supported by worldly power: he has not intrenched on the civil magistrate's authority, or granted any part of their commission to his disciples. When St. Peter drew the sword in his defence, he commanded him to put up the sword again into its place, with this threatening, For all they who take the sword, shall perish with the sword.' And in his answer to Pilate he declares, My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence: John xviii. 36.

6

This may serve to show the meaning and extent of our Saviour's argument; and how contrary it is to the genius and spirit of the Christian religion to found its faith in temporal punishments. The powers which are derived to the church from Christ the head of it, are purely spiritual: the punishments she inflicts are of the same nature; and the effect of them generally suspended till the offender comes to another world. It is just

reasoning, I think, to infer from the spiritual nature of Christ's kingdom, and the spiritual power of his ministers on earth, that temporal punishments are not proper to inforce the laws and edicts of Christ's kingdom; for since the kingdom is not of this world, the powers belonging to this kingdom cannot be of this world. But how those, who derive all church power and authority from the magistrate or the people, can on their own principles exclude temporal punishments in matters of religion, I cannot well conceive; for if the authority be of this world, the magistrate bears the sword to command obedience to his laws and edicts; and the exercise of the sword reaches as far as his authority goes; and therefore if the power of the church is founded in his authority, it must likewise be upheld by his sword and consequently, those who are for throwing all spiritual power out of the church, and introducing into the room of it a power derived from the civil magistrate, must, to exempt the consciences of men from a spiritual jurisdiction, submit them to a temporal, and leave them to truckle to the power the sword; which is in its consequence, whatever it may be in its principle, downright popery.

of

As the power of the magistrate is by some exalted, in matters of religion, beyond all proportion of reason; so by others it is as much depressed.

Let us therefore, in the second place, proceed to show that the reason of the text does not affect the civil magistrate's power, nor tie up his hands from interposing with the civil sword, in matters proper for its jurisdiction, however they may be pretended to be allied to religion.

The foundation or principle on which the magistrate's power has been both unreasonably exalted and depressed, is liberty of conscience. Though, to speak properly, on the one side a liberty from conscience seems to be the thing aimed at; for which reason all regard to spiritual matters is struck out, and the magistrate's will set up as the supreme law of conscience: on the other side a liberty for conscience to act as it pleases, is the thing contended for; and therefore the magistrate's power, in all cases where conscience is concerned, is taken away, and men set at liberty to act as their conscience, how erroneous soever, shall direct them without control. But it ought to be remem

bered that the arguments drawn from the nature of religion, and of Christ's spiritual kingdom, against the use of temporal punishments, are conclusive only as to the ministers of that kingdom; and cannot extend to the civil magistrate; they, as they are ministers of a kingdom purely spiritual, can have no claim as such to any temporal power; and therefore they can exercise none they consider men's actions with respect to the consequences of them in another world, and therefore they denounce the punishments of another world against offenders: 'Knowing the terrors of the Lord, we persuade men.' But the civil magistrate has a temporal power; and the peace and order of this world are his care and concern: it is his proper business to consider the actions of men with regard to public peace and order, without respecting from what internal principle they flow. If the actions of men are such as tend to disturb the peace, or to destroy the frame of the government over which he presides, whether they proceed from conscience or not, he is not bound to consider; nor indeed can he: but it is his duty to punish and to restrain them. Whenever men's religion or conscience come to show themselves in practice, they fall under the cognizance of the civil power: or whenever they branch out into principles destructive of the civil government, they are then ripe for the civil sword, and may justly be rooted out. On these principles, I presume there have been many penal laws enacted against popery in this kingdom; not on the weak supposition that no man's conscience ever led him to be a papist, but on this known and experienced truth, that whenever a man's conscience leads him to be a papist, it leads him to be an enemy to the constitution of this government; and therefore the government has a right to secure itself against the practices of a professed enemy, by the terror of temporal punishments, notwithstanding the pleas of conscience and religion. And should any sect hereafter arise, entering into practices, or professing principles destructive of the legal constitution, the magistrate would have as good a right to unsheath the sword against them, as at present he has to do it against the papists: nor shall it avail them any more than these to say, they act on principles of religion or conscience.

As to mere difference in opinion, which ends only in specu