II. The sum of what is usually drawn from holy writ, against such forbearance, as I suppose may be asserted, and for the punishing heretics with capital punishments being briefly discussed ; I proceed, in the next place, to such other general observations as may serve to the farther clearing of the business in hand, and they are these that follow.
The forbearance of, or opposition unto, errors, may be considered with respect either unto civil, or spiritual ju- dicature.
First, For the latter, it is either personal, or ecclesiasti- cal, properly so called. Personal forbearance of errors, in a spiritual sense, is a moral toleration or approbation of them ; so also is ecclesiastical. The warrant for procedence
OF TOLERATION. 209
against them, on that hand is plain and evident : certainly this way no error is to be forborne. All persons, who have any interest and share in truth, are obliged in their several ways and stations to an opposition unto every error. An opposition to be carried on by gospel mediums, and spiritual weapons. Let them, according as they are called or oppor- tuned, disprove them from the word, ' contending earnestly for the faith once delivered unto the saints.' Erring per- sons are usually* bono animo,' says Salvian, very zealous to propagate their false conceptions ; and shall the children of truth be backward in her defence? Precepts unto this as a duty, commendations of it, encouragements unto it, are very frequent in the gospel. Alike is this duty incumbent on all churches walking to the rule. The spiritual sword of discipline maybe lawfully sheathed in the blood of heresies. No spiritual remedy can be too sharp for a spiritual disease. When the cure is suited to the malady, there is no danger of the application. And this is not denied by any. He that submits himself to any church society, does it 'ea lege,' of being obedient to the authority of Christ in that church, in all its censures. 'Volenti non fit injuria.' Error is of- fensive, and must be proceeded against. Examples and precepts of this abound in the Scriptures. The blood of many erring persons, I doubt not, will one day have a * Quo warranto' granted them, against their (as to the particulars in debate) orthodox slayers, who did it to promote the ser- vice of God. Let them not fear an after reckoning, who use the discipline of Christ, according to his appointment.
This being considered, the occasion of a most frequent paralogism is removed. If errors must be tolerated, say some, then men may do what they please, without control. No means, it seems, must be used to reclaim them. But is gospel conviction no means? Hath the sword of discipline no edge? Is there no means of instruction in the New Testa- ment established, but a prison and a halter? Are the ham- mer 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 appoint- ment, and the professors of the truth so knit up 'in the unity of the spirit and bond of peace,' as they ought to be,
VOL. XV. p
210 OF TOLERATION.
and were in the primitive times ; I am persuaded those de- spised instruments would quickly make the proudest heretic to tremble. When the churches walked in sweet communion, givino- 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 churches of Vienna and Lyons to those of Asia, Euseb. of Ignatius to several persons and churches, of Irenaeus 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 pre- sent business.
Secondly, There is an opposition, or forbearance, in re- ference to a civil judicature, and procedence of things, which respecteth errors in a real sense, as to the inflicting, or not inflicting of punishment on religious delinquents. And this is the sole thing under debate, viz.
Whether persons enjoying civil authority over others, being intrusted therewithal, accordins; to the constitutions of the place and nation, where the lot of them both, by pro- vidence is fallen, are invested with power from above, and commanded in the word of God, to coerce, restrain, punish, confine, imprison, banish, hang, or burn, such of those per- sons under their jurisdiction, as shall not embrace, 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 sup- pose, left this business to a naked debate from the word of truth, without any such prejudices 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 venture upon the whole anew, as if no such arguments had ever been pro- posed for the affirmative of the question in hand, not de- clining 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,