These Sections teach the following propositions : 1st. God alone is Lord of the human conscience, which is responsible only to his authority.

2d. God has authoritatively addressed the human conscience only in his law, the only perfect revelation of which in this world is the inspired Scriptures. Hence God himself has set the human conscience free from all obligation to believe or obey any such doctrines or comCHEISTIAN LIBERTY— LIBERTY OF CONSCIEKOE. 359

mand merits of men as are either contrary to or aside from the teachings of that Word.

3d. Hence to believe such doctrines, or to obey such commandments as a matter of conscience, is to be guilty of the sin of betraying the liberty of conscience and its loyalty to its only Lord ; and to require such an obedience of others is to be guilty of the sin of usurping the prerogative of God and attempting to destroy the most precious liberties of men.

4th. This Christian liberty is not, however, absolute. It has its distinct end and limits. Its end is that every person, without hindrance of his fellow-men, should have opportunity to serve God according to his will. The limits of this liberty are of two kinds: (a.) The authority of God, the Lord of conscience. (6.) The equal liberties and rights of our fellow-men, with whom we dwell in organized societies.

5th. Since God has established both the Church and the State, obedience to the legitimate authorities of either, acting within their rightful sphere, is an essential part of obedience to God.

6th. The Church has the right from God of exercising its discipline upon any who maintain or practice opinions or actions plainly contrary to the light of nature, the doctrines of the Scripture or the peace and welfare of the Christian community.

1st. That, in the highest and only absolute sense, God alone is Lord of the human conscience, has never been denied. The real question raised by Romanists, and those in general who have claimed the authority of binding and loosing the consciences of their fellow-men, relates to the standard which God has given us of bi*

"will, and the means he has chosen to enforce it. The Romanists maintain that the true standard and organ of the will of God in the world is the infallible inspired Church, or body of bishops ordained regularly in a direct line from the apostles and in communion with the See of Rome. They hold that this Church has power to define doctrines and enact laws in God's name, binding the consciences of men; and that it possesses, in the power .of the keys, the right, in execution of these laws, to absolve or condemn in God's name, to bind or loose the subject and open or shut the kingdom of heaven, and to impose ecclesiastical penalties.* By far the larger part of what the Church of Rome actually enforces in the way of faith and practice is derived from ecclesiastical tradition and evidently perverted interpretations of Scripture.

The Erastian State churches of Germany and England have often attempted to enforce outward uniformity in profession and worship, in spite of the conscientious scruples of multitudes of their best citizens, on the plea that the right and responsibility of regulating the ecclesiastical as well as the civil interests of the nation devolve upon the civil magistrate.

In opposition to all this, Protestants insist — 2d. That God has given only one, and that a perfect, rule of faith and practice in spiritual matters in the inspired Scriptures, and that he has hence set free the human conscience from all obligation to believe or obey any such doctrines or commandments of men as are contrary to or aside from the teachings of that Word.

* Catechism of the Council of Trent, i. 10, 18 ; Beilarmine Eccle Mil., ch. xiv. ; Catechism of the Council of Trent, i. 11, 4.

CHRISTIAN LIBERTY — LIBERTY OF CONSCIENCE. 361

We have already proved, under Chapter i., §§ 6, 7, 9, 10, that Scripture is at once a complete and perspicuous rule of faith and practice, and supreme judge of all controversies. It hence follows self-evidently (a) that nothing contrary to Scripture can be true, (b) that nothing in addition to what is revealed or commanded in Scripture can be binding upon the conscience, and (c) that, since the Scriptures are perspicuous, every believer is personally responsible for interpreting Scripture and judging of all human doctrines and commandments by Scripture for himself. This is further proved —

(1.) Because the Scriptures are addressed immediately either to all men promiscuously, or else to the whole body of believers as such. Deut. vi. 4-9 ; Luke i. 3 ; Rom. i. 7 ; 1 Cor. i. 2 ; Gal. i. 2, etc.

(2.) All Christians promiscuously are commanded to search the Scriptures (Acts xvii. 11 ; 2 Tim. iii. 15-17 ; John V. 39), and to give a reason for their faith (1 Pet. iii. 15), and to resist the authority even of legitimate church rulers when it is opposed to that of the Lord of conscience. Acts iv. 19, 20.

(3.) The " Church" which Christ promises to guide into all truth and to pre«erve from fatal error is not a hierarchy or a body of officers, but the body of the "called'' or "elect" — the body of believers as such. 1 John ii. 20, 27 ; 1 Tim. iii. 15 ; Matt. xvi. 18 ; Eph. V. 27 ; 1 Pet. ii. 5 ; Col. i. 18, 24.

(4.) Those who claim, as the successors of the apostles, to exercise this authority, are utterly destitute of all tb.e "signs of an apostle." 2 Cor. xii. 12 ; 1 Cor. ix. 1 ; Gal. i. 1, 12; Acts i. 21, 22. While provision was made for the regular perpetuation of the offices of deacon and

presbyter (1 Tim. iii. 1-13), there was no direction given for the perpetuation of the apostolate. They are utterly without credentials.

The question as to the right of the civil magistrate to impose religious articles of faith or rules of worship will recur again under Chapter xxiii., § 3. It hence follows —

3d. That it is a great sin, involving at the same time sacrilege, and treason to the human race, for any man or set of men to arrogate the prerogative of God and to attempt to bind the consciences of their fellow-men by any obligation not certainly imposed by God and revealed in his word. At the same time it is a sin of disloyalty to God, and a violation of our own nature as moral and rational beings, to yield to any such imposition, and to accept as a matter truly binding the conscience anything not authoritatively taught and imposed in the Scriptures.

4th. It is of the highest importance, on the other hand, clearly to understand that Christian liberty is not an absolute liberty to do as we choose, but a regulated liberty to obey God without hindrance fi'om man. It is a freedom from usurped authority, in order that we may be the more perfectly subject to the only legitimate authority. It is hence absurd, as well as wicked, for a man to make his Christian liberty to obey only God a plea to disobey God, as he does whenever he violates any of the principles of natural right or of revealed truth which express at once the unchangeable nature and the all-perfect will of God. There can be no liberty which sets a man independent of that will ; and this is always the will of God concerning us, even our sanctification. 1 Thess. iv. 3.

CHRISTIAN LIBERTY — LIBERTY OF CONSCIENCE. 363

Christian liberty is also further limited by the mutual duties we owe one another. The eating of meat offered to idols is in itself a thing indifferent, because not either commanded or forbidden. The Christian, therefore, is at liberty either to eat or not to eat. But Paul commands the Corinthians to " take hvod lest by any means this liberty of theirs becomes a stumbling-block to them that are weak." 1 Cor. viii. 9. To allow this would be a sin. The Christian, therefore, may be at liberty to eat or not to eat, but he is not at all at liberty so to use his liberty that his fellow-man is injured thereby. The liberty ceases to be liberty and becomes licentiousness when it transcends the law of God or infringes upon the rights of our fellows.

5th and 6th. Since both the Church and the State are divine institutions, it follows necessarily that the authority of the officers of each, when acting legitimately within their respective spheres, represents the authority of God and binds the Christian to obedience for conscience' sake. It follows also that both the civil magistrate and the ecclesiastical courts must have the right of enforcing obedience by a mode of discipline appropriate to both spheres of authority. These matters, however, come up appropriately under Chapters xxiii., xxv. and xxx.

In this section the doctrine of liberty of conscience is laid I down in most explicit terms. The conscience, in all matters of faith and duty, is subject to the authority of God alone, and entirely free from all subjection to the traditions and commandments of men. To believe any doctrine, or obey any commandment, contrary to, or beside, the Word of God, out of submission to human authority, is to betray true liberty of conscience. And be the power and authority whose it will — be it that of a magistrate or a minister — of a husband, a master, or a parent — that would require an implicit faith and an absolute blind obedience, it would destroy liberty of conscience.

The rights of conscience have been frequently invaded by rulers, both civil and ecclesiastical. By the Church of Rome the statements of our Confession are directly contradicted, both in doctrine and in practice. They teach that the Pope, and the bishops in their own dioceses, may, by their owq

200 CONFESSION OF FAIin. [^CHAP. XX.

authority, enact laws which bind the conscience, and which cannot be transgressed without incurring the same penalties which are annexed to every breach of the divine law. And they have actually imposed many articles of faith, and enjoined numberless rites and ceremonies, as necessary in the worship of God, which have no foundation in Scripture; and they require implicit faith in all their decrees, and a blind obedience to all their commands. Against the tyrannical usurpations and encroachments of that Church this section is principally levelled.

No person on earth can have authority to dictate to conscience ; for this would be to assume a prerogative which belongs to none but the supreme Lord and Legislator. " There is one Lav/giver, who is able to save and to destroy." — James iv. 12. Such a power was prohibited by Jesus Christ among his followers : " The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them, but ye shall not be so." — Luke xxii. 25. It was disclaimed by the inspired apostles : " Not that we have dominion over your faith," said the Apostle of the Gentiles, " but are helpers of your joy." — 2 Cor. i. 24.

From the principles laid down in this section, it manifestly follows, that a right of private judgment about matters of religion belongs to every man, and ought to be exercised by every Christian. Christians are expressly required to examine and prove every doctrine by the unerring rule of the Word of God.— Isa. viii. 20; 1 John iv. 1. They ought to be ready to render a reason of the hope which is in them (1 Pet. iii. 15) ; and this none can do who receive the doctrines and commandments of men with implicit faith and blind obedience. Whatsoever is not done in faith, nor accompanied with a personal persuasion of the obligation or lawfulness of it in the sight of God, is pronounced to be sin.^Rom. xiv. 23.

It follows no less clearly, from the principles here laid down, that when lawful superiors command what is contrary to the Word of God, or beside it, in matters of faith and worship, their commands do not bind the conscience. The obedience which the Scriptures command us to render to lawful superiors — whether parents, or husbands, ormagistrates — is not unlimited ; there are cases in which disobedience becomes a duty. No one doubts that the precept, " Children, obey your parents in all things," is a command to obey them only in the exercise of their rightful parental authority, and imposes no obligation to implicit and passive obedience. The case is equally plain with regard to the command, " Wives submit to your own husbands." And it cannot be

questioned that the obedience due to magistrates is also limited. The precept, " Let every soul be subject to the higher powers," must be understood as a command to obey magistrates only in the exercise of their rightful authority, and in all things lawful. The same inspired teachers who enjoined in such general terms obedience to rulers, themselves uniformly and openly disobeyed them whenever their commands were inconsistent with other and higher obligations. " We ought to obey God rather than men" (Acts v. 29), was the principle which they avowed, and on which they acted. When the apostles were charged by the Jewish Council to speak no more in the name of Jesus, their unhesitating answer was : " Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye. For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard." — Acts iv. 19, 20. No command to do anything morally wrong can be binding on the conscience.

From the principles here laid down, some have inferred that civil authority is wholly inapplicable to matters of religion. Nothing, however, can be farther from the design of the Confession than to countenance this notion. That there is a lawful exercise of civil power about religious matters the compilers of the Confession clearly teach, in the fourth section of this chapter, and also in chap, xxiii. And as it was not their design, in this section, to condemn this exercise of civil authority, so no such doctrine can justly be inferred from the words ; for, " if they condemn all exercise of civil authority,'' to use the language of Dr ]\['Crie, " then they condemn also all exercise of every other species of human authority about these things, whether ecclesiastical, parental, &c. Is it not equally true, that God hath left the conscience *free from the doctrines and commandments of men, which are in anything contrary to his Word, or beside it, in matters of faith or worship,' whether these be the doctrines and commandments of ministers or magistrates, of masters or parents ? Is not ' an implicit faith,' or * an absolute and blind obedience,' unreasonable and sinful, whether it be yielded to synods or parliaments ? The design of the words is, to teach the subordination of all human power to the sovereignty and laws of God, particularly in matters of faith and worship. Nay, they seem in that passage to be more immediately levelled against invasions by Church authority, which have been fully as frequent and pernicious io religion as those of civil rulers ; such as the assumed lordship of popes, councils, prelates, and convocations, in devising new articles of faith, decreeing and imposing un&criptural

'^OS CONFESSION OF FAITH. [cHAP. XX.

rights and ceremonies, canons, &c., here called ' the doctrines and commandments of men,' in contradistinction from divine institutions ; as the traditions and superstitions of the Scribes and Pharisees, superadded to the divine law, are called by our Lord. If civil rulers concur in these impositions, or if they shall attempt the like by their own sole authority, and the claim of an ecclesiastical supremacy, this doctrine equally condemns their tyranny, and teaches, that no error, willworship, or any species of false religion, by whomsoever commanded in Churches or States, can lay any obligation on conscience, which is immediately subject to God alone. But no such thing is taught, as that men's consciences are set free from obedience to any human authority, when acting in entire consistency with the Word of God, and enjoining nothing beside it, or beyond its own proper limits ; which authority of any kind may certainly do."*