The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Bloudy Tenent of Persecution for Cause of Conscience Discussed and Mr. Cotton's Letter Examined and Answered, by Roger Williams CHAP. XCIII. Truth. Again, whereas they say that outward civil peace cannot stand where religion is corrupted; and quote for it 2 Chron. xv. 3, 5, 6, and Judges viii.— Many civil states in flourishing peace and quiet where the Lord Jesus is not sounded. I answer, with admiration, how such excellent spirits, as these authors are furnished with, not only in heavenly but earthly affairs, should so forget, and be so fast asleep in things so palpably evident, as to say that outward civil peace cannot stand where religion is corrupt. When so many stately kingdoms and governments in the world have long and long enjoyed civil peace and quiet, notwithstanding their religion is so corrupt, as that there is not the very name of Jesus Christ amongst them. And this every historian, merchant, traveller, in Europe, Asia, Africa, America, can testify: for so spake the Lord Jesus himself, John xvi. [20,] The world shall sing and rejoice. Secondly, for that scripture, 2 Chron. xv. 3, &c., relating the miseries of Israel and Judah, and God’s plagues upon that people for corruption of their religion, it must still have reference to that peculiar state unto which God called the seed of one man, Abraham, in a figure, dealing so with them as he dealt not with any nation in the world, Ps. cxlvii., Rom. ix. The antitype to this state I have proved to be the Christian church, which consequently hath been and is afflicted with spiritual plagues, desolations, and captivities, for corrupting of that religion which hath been revealed unto them. This appears by the seven churches; and the people of God, now so many hundred years in woful bondage and slavery to the mystical Babel, until the time of their joyful deliverance. Peace. Yea; but they say that “such laws as are conversant about religion may still be accounted civil laws, as on the contrary an oath doth still remain religious, though conversant about civil matters.” Truth. Laws respecting religion are twofold. Laws concerning religion, either religious or civil. First, such as concern the acts of worship and the worship itself, the ministers of it, their fitness or unfitness, to be suppressed or established: and for such laws we find no footing in the New Testament of Jesus Christ. The very Indians abhor to disturb any conscience at worship. Secondly, laws respecting religion may be such as merely concern the civil state, bodies, and goods of such and such persons, professing these and these religions; viz., that such and such persons, notorious for mutinies, treasons, rebellions, massacres, be disarmed: again, that no persons, papists, Jews, Turks, or Indians, be disturbed at their worship, a thing which the very Indians abhor to practise toward any. Also, that immunity and freedom from tax and toll may be granted unto the people of such or such a religion, as the magistrate pleaseth, Ezra vii. 24. These and such as are of this nature, concerning only the bodies and goods of such and such religious persons, I confess are merely civil. Canons and constitutions pretended civil but indeed ecclesiastical. But now, on the other hand, that laws restraining persons from such and such a worship, because the civil state judgeth it to be false:— That laws constraining to such and such a worship, because the civil state judgeth this to be the only true way of worshipping God:— That such and such a reformation of worship be submitted unto by all subjects in such a jurisdiction:— That such and such churches, ministers, ministries, be pulled down, and such and such churches, ministries, and ministrations, set up:— That such laws properly concerning religion, God, the souls of men, should be civil laws and constitutions, is as far from reason as that the commandments of Paul, which he gave the churches concerning Christ’s worship (1 Cor. xi. and 1 Cor. xiv.), were civil and earthly constitutions: or that the canons and constitutions of either œcumenical or national synods, concerning religion, should be civil and state conclusions and arguments. Laws merely concerning spiritual things must needs be spiritual. To that instance of an oath remaining religious, though conversant about civil things; I answer and acknowledge, an oath may be spiritual, though taken about earthly business; and accordingly it will prove, and only prove, what before I have said, that a law may be civil though it concern persons of this and of that religion, that is, as the persons professing it are concerned in civil respects of bodies or goods, as I have opened; whereas if it concern the souls and religions of men, simply so considered in reference to God, it must of necessity put on the nature of religious or spiritual ordinance or constitution. Beside, it is a most improper and fallacious instance; for an oath, being an invocation of a true or false God to judge in a case, is an action of a spiritual and religious nature, whatever the subject matter be about which it is taken, whether civil or religious: but a law or constitution may be civil or religious, as the subject about which it is conversant is either civil, merely concerning bodies or goods; or religious, concerning soul and worship.