For obedience is due,in the first place,to God and,afterwards to the laws.But some may ask:"What if the magistrate should enjoin anything by his authority that appears unlawful to the conscience of a private person?"I answer that,if government be faithfully administered and the counsels of the magistrates be indeed directed to the public good,this will seldom happen.But if,perhaps,it do so fall out,I say,that such a private person is to abstain from the action that he judges unlawful,and he is to undergo the punishment which it is not unlawful for him to bear.For the private judgement of any person concerning a law enacted in political matters,for the public good,does not take away the obligation of that law,nor deserve a dispensation.But if the law,indeed,be concerning things that lie not within the verge of the magistrate's authority (as,for example,that the people,or any party amongst them,should be compelled to embrace a strange religion,and join in the worship and ceremonies of another Church),men are not in these cases obliged by that law,against their consciences.For the political society is instituted for no other end,but only to secure every man's possession of the things of this life.
The care of each man's soul and of the things of heaven,which neither does belong to the commonwealth nor can be subjected to it,is left entirely to every man's self.Thus the safeguard of men's lives and of the things that belong unto this life is the business of the commonwealth;and the preserving of those things unto their owners is the duty of the magistrate.
And therefore the magistrate cannot take away these worldly things from this man or party and give them to that;nor change propriety amongst fellow subjects (no not even by a law),for a cause that has no relation to the end of civil government,I mean for their religion,which whether it be true or false does no prejudice to the worldly concerns of their fellow subjects,which are the things that only belong unto the care of the commonwealth.But what if the magistrate believe such a law as this to be for the public good?I answer:As the private judgement of any particular person,if erroneous,does not exempt him from the obligation of law,so the private judgement (as I may call it)of the magistrate does not give him any new right of imposing laws upon his subjects,which neither was in the constitution of the government granted him,nor ever was in the power of the people to grant,much less if he make it his business to enrich and advance his followers and fellow-sectaries with the spoils of others.But what if the magistrate believe that he has a right to make such laws and that they are for the public good,and his subjects believe the contrary?Who shall be judge between them?I answer:God alone.For there is no judge upon earth between the supreme magistrate and the people.God,I say,is the only judge in this case,who will retribute unto every one at the last day according to his deserts;that is,according to his sincerity and uprightness in endeavouring to promote piety,and the public weal,and peace of mankind.