This being considered, the occasion of a most fre(]uent paralogism is removed. If errors must be tolerated, say some, then men may do Avhat they please, without control. No means, it seems, must be used
OF TOLERATION. 1 71
to reclaim tliem. But is gospel conviction no means ? Hath the swortl of discipline no edge? Is there no means of instruction in the New Testament established, but a prison and a halter? Are the hammer of the word and the sword of the Spirit, which in days of old broke the stubbornest mountains, and overcame the proudest nations, now quite useless? God forbid! Were the churches of Christ established according to his appointment, and the professors of the truth so knit up " in the unity of the Spirit and bond of peace " as they ought to be, and were in the primitive times, I am persuaded those despised instruments would quickly make the proudest heretic to tremble. When the churches walked in sweet communion, giving each other continual account of their affairs, and warning each other of all or any such persons as, either in practice or doctrine, walked not with a right foot (as we have examples in Clem. Epist. ad Corinth. ; — the chiu'ches of Vienne and Lyons to those of Asia, Euseb. ; — of Ignatius to several persons and churches; — of Irenseus to Victor., Euseb.; — Dionysius to Stephen, ibid., and the like), heretics found such cold entertainment as made them ashamed, if not weary, of their chosen wanderings. But this is not my present business.
Secondly, There is an opposition or forbeara^nce in reference to a civil judicature and precedence of things which respecteth errors in a. real sense, as to the mflicting or not inflicting of punishment on religious delinquents. And this is the sole thing under debate, viz., — •
Whether persons enjojing civil authority over others, — being in- trusted therewithal according to the constitutions of the place and nation where the lot of them both, by providence, is fallen, — are invested with power from above, and commanded in the word of God, to coerce, restrain, punish, confine, imprison, banish, hang, or bum, such of those persons under their jurisdiction as shall not em- brace, profess, believe, and practise, that truth and way of worship which is revealed unto them of God? or how far, into what degrees, by what means, in any of these ways, may they proceed ?
The general propositions and considerations of the penal laws of God, which were before laid down, have, as I suppose, left this busi- ness to a naked debate from the word of truth, without any such preju- dices on either part as many take from a misapprehension of the mind of God in them ; and therefore, by the reader's patience, I shall ven- ture upon the Avhole anew, as if no such arguments had ever been proposed for the affirmative of the question in hand, not declining the utmost weight that is in any of them, according to equity and due proportion. And here, first, I shall give in a few things, —
(1.) To the question itself
(2.) To the manner of handling it.
(1.) To the question itself For herein I suppose, —
1 72 OF TOLERATION.
[1.] That the persons enjoying authority do also enjoy the tmth; which is to the advantage of the affinnative.
[2.] That their power in civil things is just and uncjuesti enable; which also looks favourably on that side.
[o.] That non-toleration makes out itself in positive infliction of punishment ; which is so, or is nothing. Casting men out of protec- tion, exposing them to vulgar violence, is confessedly unworthy of men representing the authority of God, and contrary to the whole end of their trust.
(2.) To the manner of handling this question among persons at variance. And here I cannot but obsei've, —
[1.] That if I have taken my aim aright, there is no one thing under debate amongst Christians that is agitated Avith more confi- dence and mutual animosity of the parties litigant, — each chargino- other with dreadful inferences, — streams of blood, and dishonour to God, flowing out from their several persuasions; so that ofttimes, instead of a fair dispute, you meet on this suljject with a pathetical outcry, as though all religion were utterly contaminated and tram- pled under foot, if both these contradictory assertions be not embraced. Now, seeing that in itself it is a thing wherein the gospel is exceed- ingly sparing, if not altogether silent, certainly there must be a far- ther interest than of judgment alone, or else that very much prejudi- cated with corrupt affections, or men could not possibly be carried out with so much violence upon supposed self-created consequences, wherewith in this cause they urge one another.
[2.] That generally thus much of private interest appears in the several contesters, that non-toleration is the opinion of the many, and these enjoying the countenance of authority; — toleration, of the op- pressed, who always go under the name of the faction, or factions, — the unavoidable livery of the smaller number professing a way of worship by themselves, be it right or wrong. I do not desu-e to lay forth the usual deportment of men seeking the suppressing of others differing from them, towards those in authority. It is but too cleai'ly made out by daily experience. If they close A\dth them, they are " custodes utriusque tabulae," — the church's nursing-fathers, &c., — what they please ; but if they draw back, for want of light or truth to serve them, logs and storks find not worse entertainment from frogs than they from some of them. Such tilings as these may, nay, ought to be, especially heeded by every one that knows what influence cornipt affections have upon the judgments of men, and woukl willingly take the pains to wipe his eyes for the discerning of the tnith.