We see the germ of the doctrine in some of the Fathers, many of whom denounced coercion in matters of faith and pointed out that force is inimical to conviction, which is the very life of religion. Tertullian writes : ' However, it is a fundamental human right, a privilege of nature, that every man should worship according to his own convictions : one man's religion neither harms nor helps another man. It is assuredly no jiart of religion to compel religion — to which free-will and not force should lead us — the sacrificial victims even being required of a willing mind. You will render no real service to your gods by compelling us to sacri- fice. For they can have no desire of offerings from the unwilling, unless thej' are animated by a spirit of
• Ann. i. 78.
t L. Busher, RclUjujUS Peace, London, 1614, quoted in Rutlini, p. 168.
contention, which is a thing altogether undivine.' * Lactanlius followed in a similar strain: 'But it is religion alone in wliich freedom has placed its dwelling. For it is a matter which is voluntary above all others, nor can necessity be imposed upon any, so as to worship that which he does not wish to wor.ship. Someone may perhaps pretend, he cannot wish it.' t Many of the leading Fathers, such as Hilary of Poictiers and Chry.sostom, empha- sized the same truth. But Augustine overshadowed all his predecessors, and he gave his view in favour of the persecution of paganism and heresy. He developed his theory of persecution from the words ' Compelle intrare.'t He has been charged with flagrant inconsistency because whilst pagan- ism was the Imperial religion he advocated toleration, whereas, after the establishment of the Christian religion, he urged coercion. It may be urged, on the other hand, that Augustine's experience during the Donatist controversy led him to change his mind in regard to the persecution of heresy. But apart from that possibility, the charge of inconsistency is not so obvious as is sometimes supposed. To Augustine Christianity was the religion. Paganism, in every form of it, was false. He advocate<l the extirpation of paganism and heresy for the same reason as he had advocated toleration for Christianity. He was superficially inconsistent, but there was deep inner consistency in his attitude. To him Christi- anity and paganism stood to each other as the true and false or right and wrong or good and evil, and evil must be opposed in every pos.sible way, and good must be promoted by all possible means. Whether he advocated tolerance or coercion, his main contention was that the good should prevail, and that the evil should be repressed ; inner con- sistency made it imperative that he should advocate toleration in favour of Christianity when paganism was in power, and coercion against paganism when Christianity had secured a footing. It is evident that Augustine had solid grounds for thinking that coercion in the early stages of the religious life was effectual. The preaching of the gospel has not always appealed to the highest ethical motives. The terrors of hell have played a prominent part in the making of saints. If Martineau's view is correct that ' the administration of any uneasiness to body or mind, in consequence of a man's belief, or with a view to change it,' is persecution, the preaching even of the •20th cent, is very largely ' persecution.' There can be no successful preaching which does not produce uneasiness of mind, for the experiences of the penitent soul must issue in great uneasiness of mind. Various motives are at work in the initial stages of the religious life. Augustine had evidence of the advantages of compulsion, and it was the universal belief of mediajval Christendom, and certainly of mediteval States, that coercion was compatible with the nature of Christianity. The few voices which had been raised on behalf of tlie spontaneity of religious faith were for- gotten for many weary centuries until in writings of the advocates of religious liberty in the 17lh and 18th centuries the truth was once more set forth with greater clearness and force. It was the prevalent view of monarchs no less than of ecclesi- astical leaders that refusal to comply with the de- mands of the throne or the curia was 'obstinacy.' There are not wanting persons in the 20th cent, to whom passive resistance is only a form of ' pig- headedness.' Whilst the struggle for religious freedom was being waged on the Continent and in Great Britain, manj' exceedingly able writers pub- lished books and pamphlets on the spontaneous
Ad ScainUam,
i De Correclioue Donistarum, 6. 24.
t Div. Jmt. 64.
186
I'EliSEVliRANCE
PEKSEVEKANCE
niiture of religious faith. Persecution, wrote Milton,* is wholly unnecessary, ' for who knows not that Truth is strong next to the AluiiKlity,' and even mischievous and harmful, for each in- dividual must 'discover' the truth for himself, or else be for ever a stranger to it.
LrrERATi'RB. — In addition to the peneral works on Ecclesiasti- cal History the (ollowin^r worlis may In.' mentioned : Lactantius, tie Murtibinf Persi'cutiirum (a.d! 314); A. J. Mason, Thtt Persecution of Diocletinn, Cambridge, 1876 : B. Aub^, llintoire des persecutions de rf^'jtise jwtqu'ii fa tin (leg AntojitTis, PariH, 1876 ; F. Pollock, ' Tlie Theory of Persecution.' in Easayt in Jurih-prudene^ and Ethics, London, 1S82 ; P. Allard, Histoire des persecutions pendant les deux premiers si^cles^, Paris, 1S92, Histoire des perst^cutions pendant la premiere moiti^ rfu 111^ eiicte^, do., 18l>4, Les demif^res persecutions rfu 111' silcle'^, do., lSi)8 ; W. E. H.Uecky, Uistori/ of the Rise and Ijijiuenceo/tke S/iirit of liutii'tmlisin in /v'jiro/*,-, 2 vols. , London, 18ti5 ; E. G. Hardy, Christionitij and the Roman Government, do., 1894 ; W. M. Ramsay, The Church in tlu Roman Empire, do., 1894 ; W. E. Addis, Christianity and the Roman Empire, do., 1H93; J. A. F. Greggr, The Decian Persecution, Edinhurj^h, 1897 ; P. J. Healy, The l'alfria7i Persecution, I^ondon, 1905 ; H. B. Workman, Persecution in the Early Church, do., 1906 ; J. Herkless, The Early Christian Martyrs anil their I'crsecutions, do., n.d. ; F. Ruffini, Relirjious Liberty, tr. J. P. Ileyes, do., 1912 ; J. B. Bury, Bistory o/ Freedom of Thought, do., 1913.