Some Queries concerning Liberty of Conscience, directed to William Penn and Henry Care. 1. FRiends, Is this Liberty of Conscience, for which you so much contend, designed only for Christians, and perhaps Jews; or must it also be extended to Mahometans and Pagans? 2. Must not the Indians, who worship the Devil, to keep him from doing them mischief, come under the Wings of this your Christian Liberty? 3. The Indians under the Spaniard, who complained, that they were not suffered to worship their Pagods once a year, when the Spaniards worshipped their Pagods every day: Had they not just Reason for their Complaint, as being debarred the Exercise of their Religion? And was it not strange, that the Christian Idolaters should be to the Pagan Idolaters so harsh and rigorous, and should thus disturb and molest them in their way of Worship, being so like their own? 4. Are not the Laws of Carolina too straitlaced in your Opinion, which tolerate only those that believe a God: For perhaps you may think, that even professed Atheists may he useful Subjects, and fit to be employed by Princes? 5. Is not that which you call Liberty of Conscience, in reality a general Licence for Blasphemy and Idolatry? Or in words more at length, Do not you intent, that the grossest Idolatries, and the most horrid Blasphemies, shall have their free and full swing, without the least Punishment or Restraint? 6. The Kings of Judah that beat down Idolatrous Worship, and who are vulgarly reputed good Kings, were they not in your judgement, inhuman Persecutors for Matters of mere Religion, and Usurpers of God's Empire over the Conscience? 7. Friend Penn, Dost thou believe in the Council of Lateran? If thou dost not, thou art not so good a Catholic as some take thee to be? 8. Doth not a Decree of that Council oblige all good Catholics to Extirpate Heresy? 9 Is not then the Northern Heresy to be Extirpated? 10. And is not all this pains taken for its Extirpation? 11. Can any thing free good Catholics from the Obligation of that Decree, save only their want of Power to perform it? 12. When ever they get that Power, doth not the Obligation return? 13. Can you, with all your Skill, tie up a future Popish Parliament? I mean, King and Parliament? 14. Is not an immutable humane Law, a Monster in Nature? And do not you dream, or would make us believe, that your Magna Charta shall be such a Monster? 15. Will not your Magna Charta be void from the beginning, if it want the Pope's Confirmation? 16. Doth not Contzen the Jesuit, (a famous Writer of Church-Politicks) recommend Liberty of Conscience, for a proper and effectual means, (as the Case may be) to propagate the Roman Catholic Faith? And can there be any Case more fit for it, than where the Papists are inferior in Strength and Number, and Superior in Favour? 17. Doth not Coleman in his Trial deny that he ever designed to bring in Popery by force, or any other way save only by a Toleration? 18. If all Sects have full Liberty, and one Sect have all the Favour and Preferment, will not that Sect soon out-grow and over-top the rest? And will not all that are in Office, and all that expect or desire to be, (that is, almost all the Men of Parts and Industry in the Nation) have a strong temptation to be of that Sect? 19 Can you inform us of any Government, either past or present, wherein there are not some Qualifications required by Law, for those that take Public Offices and Employments? Which thing You call Tramelling and Cramping the Government? 20. If a Kingdom should be in danger of being over run with Mahometanism, and to prevent it a Law were made, obliging all Public Officers to make open profession of the Christian Faith, and solemnly to renounce the Alcoran, or some of the muddest Points of it; is not even this, in your Opinion, a Cramping and putting Trammels upon the Government; And were not such a Law null and void, think you; as debarring the Prince that Liberty of Employing whom he pleaseth, and Mahometans among the rest, which by the Law of Nature is inherent in his Person? And might you not farther say, That Mahometan or Turkish Subjects may be very useful to a Prince, and that it were very unreasonable by such pernicious Religious Tests to deprive him of their Service? And if he be minded to have Turks in his Household, either in part or wholly, and Turkish Magistrates, Turkish Ministers and Counsellors, Turkish Officers and Soldiers; and even whole Turkish Regiments, whole Turkish Garrisons, whole Turkish Armies; why should any Laws hinder him? And why may he not fill the Church Dignities with Turkish Priests, what ever the Laws say to the contrary? And tho' these things tend plainly to the Destruction of the Kingdom, what matter is it? 21. Which ought to be esteemed of greater Authority? The Opinion of Four men in Red Gowns (purged and garbled for the purpose, and having the Rod still over their Backs) which asserts the Dispensing Power; or the declared Judgement of two Parliaments at least, which denies it and damns it? 22. Were not those four Men like the Speaking Head; and only seemed to give a sound to those words, which were spoken in another Room? And were they not plainly at this Lock, Say as you are bid, or out you go, as others have gone before you? 23. Was not the Martyr a sneaking Novice in the Art of Ranny-ty, when he laboured the Judges underhand, and in the Case of Ship money? Whereas now things are carried openly and bravely? 24. Friends, Do you intent to have the Oath of Supremacy taken away among the other Tests? 25. Is not this Oath a Civil Test, tho' it may seem in some sort Religious? Since it is only a Renouncing of a Foreign Usurped Power. And though this Power be Spiritual, yet it draws Temporals with it, and our Civil Liberties are concerned; for we cannot pretend to Civil Liberty, if we are under Spiritual Bondage? 26. Is not the designing and endeavouring to enslave Ones Country to a Foreign Usurped Power, High Treason in its own Nature, tho' there were no positive Law against it? 27. Is it not just and necessary, that persons who are openly carrying on a Design so Destructive, should be excluded from all Public Command and Authority; thereby to keep them from having power to accomplish their wicked Intentions? 28. Should not a Promissory Clause be added to this Oath, whereby they that take it must solemnly Swear, That they will never promote the setting up, or restoring the Pope's Authority in this Kingdom, or give their consent to it, but that they will oppose it by all Lawful ways and means to the utmost of their power? 29. Is it not the same thing in effect, to set up the Pope's power and to put those in Office and Authority that will? And is it not the same thing, to put Papists in Office and to make them capable? For if they be once made capable, will they not have all the Offices Commands and Dignities both in Church and State? 30. Must not your Divine Magna Charta have a standing Army of Mercenaries to support it? And will not this Mercenary Army be essential to our Religious, as well as to our Civil Liberties? And must there not be in it good store of Dragoons? 31. Why are not our Civil Liberties a little in your thoughts, as well as the Liberties of Religion? Seeing without the former, the latter will not be long-lived? And why are you not likewise hammering a Magna Charta for the Corporations, to restore them to their ancient Freedom? For will not our Trade in a short time decay, and at last be totally ruined, if our Corporations (that manage it) be enslaved? 32. Doth not their Condition affect the whole Kingdom, since four parts of five of those that Represent us in Parliament, are by them chosen? 33. What Shadow of Liberty have we left, if our Representatives be not free? And how can these be free, if those that choose them be at Will and Pleasure, and in downright Servitude? 34. Are they not like to be brave Champions for the People's Interest, when they cannot come to be chosen but by the King's appointment, and both They and their Electors depend upon the Crown? 35. Is not a Prince that makes Laws with a Parliament of his own Nomination, as absolute as He whose Edicts are Laws? And are not the People's Estates, their Liberties, and their Lives, wholly in his power? 36. Is not our Constitution, and the frame of our Government, quite altered by this Hellish Contivance? And are not the foundations of our Liberty totally subverted and destroyed? And hath not our Striving against Popery brought in Slavery into the bargain? And what ever becomes of our Religion, is not our Liberty lost for ever? 37. Friends, is not your Magna Charta concerned in these Matters? For _____ 38. Will not the Parliament now coming, when they have taken away the Tests and Penal Laws, be dissolved soon after? 39 And will not the next Parliament after that, of at least the Major part of it, (as Corporations now stand) be certainly Roman Catholics? 40. What avails it to provide against undue Returns (which You, Friends, or some of your party have been weekly offering at) if we shall be certainly ruined in the Elections, they being in the hands of the Papists? 41. Do they not deserve to be Hanged for Fools, that cannot govern Elections, when they may put in and put out the Electors at their pleasure? 42. Will it not therefore be a thing of no difficulty to establish Popery by a Law? And then, will not your Magna Charta be damned much easier than it was made? 43. Though it be made unalterable by a Clause as strong as can be devised, will they not first repeal that Clause, and then down goes Magna Charta? 44. Is it not the opinion of good Catholics that no Faith is to be kept with Heretics? 45. How can we rely upon that Man's Promises, who will be told by those whom he must believe, that 'tis meritorious to break them, and damnation to keep them? 46. Were not He a rare Catholic indeed, who by sparing and indulging Heretics, whom he hates, would damn his own Soul? 47. Is it not also the opinion of good Catholics, that Heretics ought not to have common Justice? Which was the way in France, before they fell to Dragooning. 48. Will it not in a while be found expedient to revive the Writ de Haeretico comburendo? The poor Heretics thought themselves very cunning in taking away that Writ; as if the Catholics could not restore it, when they have got the power. 49. Will not the Writ de Excommunicato capiendo do pretty well in the mean time? Since, they may with ease excommunicate all the Heretics, and then lay them in Jail, Which is a most as good as Hanging or Burning them. And now we talk of jails, 50. Is not the Habeas Corpus Act a Cramping and Tramelling of the Government, and therefore fit to be graciously dispensed with? Or to save that labour, will not the Parliament that repeals the Tests, repeal that Act likewise, with all other Acts of the like nature? 51. Would it not be a brave Exchange, if they that set up the new Magna Charta, should give up the Old one? 52. Can it in good sadness be reasonably expected, that a religious and devoted Prince, should draw the guilt of Sacrilege upon his own Head, by not restoring Abbey Lands when it shall be in his power to do it? And will not the Directors of his Conscience be sure to mind him of it, and put it home to him? 53. Will not the thing in a very short time be clearly in his power: and be easily accomplished by the same Methods, by which the Penal Laws were repealed? That is, by a prudent directing and managing the Elections, and framing (we must not say packing) a Parliament for the purpose? 54. Must we not therefore have three Parliaments yet, to complete our Happiness? One to repeal the Tests and Penal Laws, another to establish Popery, and the third to restore Church Lands. And hath not the last Parliament, which gave the money, thereby in effect done all the rest. 55. When these things are finished, will there be any further need of Parliaments? Will not a Standing Army supply their place? And may we not hope for the felicities of a French Government? 56. Since this French Government is already set up in New England, why should we not have it here? And is it not a good sign that in due time we may have it? 57 Had not all these good Works been finished long since, if a certain late Indian King had not been a great sluggard and Coward: And suffered himself to be so basely baffled out of his Declarations of Indulgence? For which his Soul might have roared in Purgatory to this day, if his Holiness had not stood his Friend. Here I thought to have ended: but another Question crowds in, and I cannot keep it back. 58. If other means prove ineffectual, will it not be convenient (for the quicker dispatch of Heretics) to dispense with the Penal Laws against Murder, that so they may be taken off, without the dull formalities of Law? FINIS.