Then he sets down the true cause, ' We are helpers of yom- joy.' If I had come, and told you of your faults, if I had not spared you, it should have been to help your joy ; and now I come not to you, it is to help your joy : my scope in all is to be a furtherer of your joy. So these words are a reason of the former, why he did not come to domineer over their faith, ' For by faith ye stand.' You stand by faith, and you stand out by faith against all oppositions whatsoever ; therefore your faith must not lean on me ; I must not domineer over that you stand by ; if your faith should rely on me, I am but a man. Faith must rely on God. It must have a better pillar than myself. You must stand upon Divine strength : therefore ' you stand by faith ;' and if you stand by faith, we have no reason to have domi- nion over your faith.
These words are declined by many interjDreters (kkkk). They know not what the dependence is : but this is the best dependence of the words, ' We domineer not, or rule not over your faith ; ' because by faith you stand as upon a bottom ; you stand against all adverse power by faith. Therefore you had need to have it well founded, you had need to plant your faith well, by which you stand against all opposite power, and against all human authority. For a man may be a liar, and do good in many things. A man hath a deceitful natm-e, as far as he hath a corrupt principle in him. He may deceive, and yet be a good man too ; in particular cases he may shew himself a changeable creature. But there must be no falsehood nor uncer- tainty in faith ; for it is a grace that must have truth and certainty : it must have immoveable and unchangeable truth to build on. Therefore we domineer not over your faith. God forbid we should do so ; for faith is the grace whereby you stand ; if you should build upon us as men, you could not stand alway. The point is clear, that,
Doct. No creature can have dominion over the faith of another.
The faith of a man is only subject to the Spirit of God, to God, and to
Christ. And by the way, St Paultaxeth'^' those false apostles and false teachers,
that laboured to creep into the consciences of people, to have higher place
in the hearts of people than they should have, that so they might rule the
* That is, ' chargeth, accuaeth.' — G.
500 COMMENTARY ON
pcoplo as they list. Now that should not bo the scope of the minister, to have dominion over the faith of others ; for the ministry is a ministry, not a magistracy. A miuisler, so far as he is a pastor, he is a minister ; that is, ho is to deliver things from God that may stablish the soul, not to domineer over men's faith, as if he would prescribe what men should beUeve.
Now to unfold this point, I will first shew what it is to have no dominion over men's faith. And then what it is to have dominion and rule over other men's faith, and who arc guilty of this.
1. Not to have dominion over another man's faith, it is not when a church doth fox'ce prescribing-- to the articles of religion. That is not to have dominion over the faith of others, to draw people to conformity of the same religion in the substantials of it (as some that seek extravagant liberty, lay that imputation perhaps). It is used in all churches.
2. Again, it is not to domineer over faith, to suppress that that they call of late in neighbour-countries, a liberty of prophesy (////), to suppress a liberty of preaching when men list ; that men should have an iiubridled licence. We see in Poland, f and other countries, what abundance of heretics there are, where there is more liberty to preach, and to publish what men list. Those countries are like Africa^, where, they say, there are alway new monsters. Or like to Egypt ; when Kilns overflows it leaves a slime behind, and when the sun works upon that slime it breeds many im- perfect strange creatures. So those countries where there is liberty of religions, there are always some strange novel opinions, some monsters. Experience of foreign countries shews it too true ; therefore to hinder that extravagant liberty is not dominion over faith.
Nay, to force men to the means of faith, it is not to domineer over faith. St Austin himself was once of this mind, that people were not to be forced (m^nmm). It is true. But they may be compelled to the means, though they cannot be compelled to believe. Men may be compelled to the means by mulcts, and other courses of state. And it is a happy necessity when people are forced to the means, under which means, by God's blessing, they may be reduced to a better habit and temper of soul.
Therefore it is cruelty to neglect this care, to leave people to their own liberty to attend upon the means, or not to attend on them. Therefore our State is, and may be justified well, for those violent courses to recusants. And many of them after, bless God they have done it, and they have cause. For there is a majesty in the ordinances of God. If people were brought under the means, God's Spirit would make the means effectual. And there is not a greater snare of the devil, whereby he holds more in the Romish church in perdition, than by persuading them that it is a dangerous thing to come to om- prayers, and to attend upon the means of salvation ; whenas in our liturgy there is nothing that may justly offend. Therefore to force to the means, it is not to domineer over faith ; because it is only a di-awing from outward inforcement to the use of means.