a true relish of Learning, I might without the least Prejudice to him, supercede to enlarge here upon this Treatise, if it were not rather out of a desire to satisfie the Curiosity of some, who believe to have sufficient Reason for certain Objections made against some Assertions contained in this Treatise, than with an Intention to make the least Addition to a Piece, which, whether in regard of the nicety of the Subject it Treats of, or of the Concatination and force of its Arguments, deserves to be reckoned among the best now extant in Europe.
2 Those, who center the utmost Felicity of Civil Society
in a Democratical form of Government, have not been wanting to charge our Author
with too much Passion for
that Doctrine, of Passive Obedience,
which leaves Subjects to the absolute Disposal of their Princes; But, besides that, the Appendix
annexed to this Treatise,
written by our Author,
in opposition to Mr. Hobbes’s
Monstrous Principles concerning this unlimited Power,
3 may sufficiently clear him from this Imputation; If these Gentlemen would have taken the pains to make a due comparison of the several Passages both in this, and other Treatises of our Author,
4 relating to this Subject, they might, without much difficulty, have been convinc’d of their Error; As far as I am capable of penetrating into the Matter, it is the word Princeps,
or Prince,
which sticks most closely in their Stomachs, not considering, That the Words, Summi Imperantes,
or Sovereigns;
and that of Princeps,
or Prince,
are Synonyms to our Author;
and that out of a great many Passages in this Treatise,
it is sufficiently apparent, that he attributes the Sovereign Power not always to one single Person, but sometimes also to a Council invested with the Supream Administration of the Sovereign Authority in the Commonwealth. If it were but only for that Advice given by our Author
at the very beginning of his Appendix
to young Lawyers, to wit,
to take care, that under the Pretence of maintaining the Prerogatives of Princes, they should not be prodigal of their Liberty and Property,
and his asserting the Foundation of Civil Societies
to be built upon the Common Consent
of mutual Defence against Violences; This alone, I say, might be a convincing Argument to any unbyass’d Person, that his Aim was very remote from maintaining an Arbitrary Power in the State. The next thing laid to our Author
’s Charge is, that he so entirely separates the Christian Religion from the State, as not to have the least Interference with one another; whereas the contrary is now a-days practised in most Christian States, and in the Commonwealth of the Jews
(instituted by God’s peculiar Direction) this Union was inseparable. It cannot be denied, but that the outward Form of Church Government, especially among the Protestants,
is in a great measure, and in most places adapted to that of the State;
it being evident, that most of the Monarchical States, Episcopacy,
as most suitable with that Constitution, was never abolished; as on the contrary, the same was quite extirpated in the Protestant Commonwealths.
This is most particularly observable among the Lutherans,
who, tho’ all agreeing in Point of Doctrine, are nevertheless, so far different from one another in the Ceremonial Point, and outward Form of Church Government, that in outward Appearance, they seem’d to be so many several Churches. Thus in the two Northern Kingdoms of Sweden
and Denmark,
the Episcopal Authority (tho’ much diminished in its Revenues) is retained to this day; whereas in some Commonwealths in Germany,
where the same Religion is Established, it is quite abolished, and not the least footsteps of Subordination of Priests to be met with. But this Objection is easily cleared, if we take into due Consideration, that is being the Intention of our Author to represent in those pieces Religion in its genuine and native Constitution, freed from all what is foreign to its true Genius, he did not think it convenient, to clog it with any thing that was not an Essential part of it; especially when his chief aim was to shew the real difference betwixt the Christian and Jewish Religion. There are also not a few, who prompted by a preposterous Zeal, have imputed to our Author a certain kind of Libertinism
in Religion, for which, I can see no other Reason, than that they are dissatisfied with his Assertions against any thing that has the least resemblance of Persecution upon the score of Difference of Opinions. I am well satisfied, that the Reasons alledged by him, are so solid in themselves, and so exactly applied to this Purpose, that they cannot but be Convincing to all such, as are not prepossessed either with By-Interest, or a most stupid Ignorance, For, if the Slavery of the Body be absolutely repugnant to the Inclinations of a generous Soul, How much more insupportable must the Slavery of the Mind be to a sublime Genius, elevated above the common Sphere of bigotted Zealots Ignorance, being the Mother of perverted Zeal, and consequently of a persecuting Spirit, the same ought to be look’d upon as the common Enemy of all such as are guided by the Light of true Reason? I cannot but take notice here, that our English
Modern Clergy has of late gain’d so peculiar a Character of following so closely these footsteps of convincing such as differ from them in Opinion, rather by strength of Argument, than any forcible Means, that I do not know whether they are not preferrable in this Point, before any other in Europe.
If any one questions the Truth of it, I appeal to Mr. Toland’s
Case, concerning his Treatise, Entituled, Christianity not Mysterious.
5 It is both beyond my scope, and the compass of a Letter, to enter upon the Merits of the Cause on both Sides, it will be sufficient here to refer my self to what has been Published against him lately here in England,
and in other Places; All which, if duely compared, will soon evince, how much the English
Clergy has out-done the rest, both by force of Argument, and a generous, gentle Behaviour. But I am afraid I have abused your Lordship’s Patience; I will therefore conclude with recommending both my Author
and my Self,
to your Lordship’s Protection, begging Leave to subscribe my self,
My Lord,
Your Devoted Servant.
J. Crull. M. D.
THE
CONTENTS
Sect. 1. Concerning Religion before Civil Societies were Instituted
Sect. 2. Every Man is accountable to God for his own Religion
Sect. 3. How the same might be exercised in the free State of Nature
Sect. 4. Parents had originally the Care of Religious Worship lodged in them
Sect. 5. Civil Societies were not constituted for Religions sake
Sect. 6. Subjects did never submit their Opinions, as to Religious Worship, to the Disposal of their Sovereigns
Sect. 7. What Power properly, and according to the Laws of Nature, belongs to Sovereigns in Ecclesiastical Affairs
Sect. 8. Of the Nature of Revealed Religion
Sect. 9. Among the Jews there was a very strict Union betwixt the Church and State
Sect. 10. Who was the Supream Head of the Jewish Church
Sect. 11. The Christian Religion is quite different from the Jewish
Sect. 12. Some Reflections on the Behaviour of Moses, when he laid the Foundation of the Commonwealth of the Jews
Sect. 13. What on the other Hand our Saviour did, when he Established his Church here on Earth
Sect. 14. Christ was not the Founder of a New Commonwealth or People
Sect. 15. Neither had he any Territories belonging to him
Sect. 16. Christ did not exercise any Sovereign Power
Sect. 17. But the Office of a Doctor or Teacher
Sect. 18. The Apostles did propagate the Doctrine of our Saviour
Sect. 19. The Apostles had received their Authority of Teaching from God alone, independant from any Human Power
Sect. 20. The Apostles never assumed any Authority of Commanding others
Sect. 21. Whether their Authority of Teaching does indirectly imply any right of Commanding others
Sect. 22. Whether the Power of Absolution does imply any Right of Sovereignty
Sect. 23. What is to be understood by absolving from Sins
Sect.
