GSTC
A N
N Q^ U I R Y
INTO THE
PRINCIPLES
O F
TOLERATION;
THE
DEGREE, in which they are admitted
by our L A W S j
AND THE
Reasonableness of the late Application
made by the Dissenters
TO PARLIAMENT
FOR AN
Enlargement of their Religious Liberties.
By JOSEPH FOWNES.
The Second Edition, with confiderable Additions.
Quot adhuc repurgandae latent leges, quas neque ajuiorum nvune-
rus, neque conditorum dignitas commendat, fed sequitas fola ? et
iJeo, cum iniquz recognofcuntut, merito damnantur.
Tcrtiilliani Apolog. cap. iv, p. 54. ed. Havercampi.
SHREWSBURT:
Printed by J. Eddowes ; and fold by J. Buckland,
at No. 57, Pater -noli er-Ronjo , London. 177 3.
9 oSpSLt a'
r'nte Two Shillings and Six-pence.
[ Si ]
BK.
\G\0
?
<
PREFACE
To the First Edition.
THE plan of the following cfTay was
laid, and the molt material thoughts
in it ranged under their refpective heads,
before the author had feen Mr. Mauduit's
cafe of the diflenters. Upon looking into it,
o he found fome of the topicks, which had
been comprehended in his original defign,
<^> infilled upon to great advantage ; and for
^ this reafon has omitted feveral obfervations,
: which he intended to have made, that the
reader might not be at the trouble of attend-
ing a fecond time, to what had been fo
much better faid already. The writer hopes,
therefore, that he (hall not be confidered
by that ingenious gentleman in the light of
a rival, but be received as an auxiliary :
an auxiliary in fupport of a caufe, which,
z: as he has juftly obferved, is worthy of the
S efforts of all the friends of liberty to fup-
= port it.
A % It
301066
IV
PREFACE.
It was not till a greatL part, of what the
author propofed to himfelf, was finifhed, that
the letter to the difienting minifters, who fo-
liated parliament, fell into his hands. As
two gentlemen of diftinguifhed learning and
abilities afe directly attacked, and in a man-
ner called upon to defend themfelves, by the
writer of that letter ; and as it appeared
highly probable, that one of them, at leaft,
would undertake the vindication of himfelf,
his brethren, and their caufe , it was at firft
intended to have taken no notice' at ill of
that performance in this piece. But when
that part of it, which relates more immedi-
ately to the diflenters, came to be confider-
ed, the objections, which this gentleman has
made to their conduct, lay fo continually
and directly in the way, that it was found
impoffible not to make fome animadyerfions
on his reprefentations and reaibnings. This
has made fome confiderable alteration in the
form, which this head of the Work would
otherwife have worn, and added fomething
to the length of it. Who the writer of the
letter is, it would perhaps be thought dif-
refpedtful to conjecture. He has aflumed
no character, which requires or warrants
any particular kind of reference -, and there-
fore he is all along mentioned only as a
writer. A confiderable matter of eafy and
elegant compofuion, he certainly is , and, as it
is
PREFACE. v
is hoped his meaning has not been miftaken*
(defignedly mifreprefented it affuredly has
not) fo, it is hoped, there is nothing in the
pafTages, in which he is introduced, but
what is confiftent with the regard due to a
gentleman of abilities and learning, and agree-
able to that temper, which ought always
to be preferved in controverfial writings.
With whatever freedom any of his arguments
have been confidered, care has been taken to
do it with decency , and not to have con-
fidered them with freedom would have been
jnjuftice to the caufe, which is here pleaded.
The whole of this performance was finifh-
ed, and put into the printer's hands, before
a fight of Dr. Kippis's very fenfible defence
of the diflenters was obtained : fo that Very
little, if any, alteration could be produced, in
what had been written, by the perufal of it.
One thought, towards the conclufion of this
tract, was inierted, while the meets were work-
ing off, which was fuggefted by the Doctor's
book, of which an acknowledgement is made
at the bottom of the page in which it occurs.
The author gladly, takes this opportunity of
returning his thanks to the Dodor for the
great pleafure received from his book.
It is only necefTary for the author to
add, with his predeceflbrs in publication,
Dr. Kippis and Mr. Mauduit, that what he
has here drawn up, was drawn up without
beina
Yl
PREFACE.
being communicated to a fingle diflenting
minifter. He entered upon the fubject un-
iblicited and uninfluenced by any motive,
but the defire of doing juftice to a good
caufe. He hopes there will be nothing found
in his performance unfuitable to the temper
of one who is a friend to truth, and to re-
Jigioiis liberty ; - who honours all, in whofe
attention the facred rights of confcience find
3, place ; who is a fteady friend to chrifti-
anity, and an hearty well-wilher to the fuc-
cefs of all attempts to promote it by ex-
ample, argument and per fuafion j but an
enemy to all meafures of violence and per-
secution. Thefe are the characters he will
always be defirous to maintain : and thefe
characters alone would dictate the fentiments
he has here committed to writing, though
he were utterly unconnected with any reli-
gious body in the kingdom. They are, in-
deed, no other fentiments than what Mr.
Locke, though no difienter, nor attached to
any of their fentiments, (any farther than he
approved the general principles, upon which
they went, as the principles of that liberty
in which all chriftians ought to ftand fail,)
has delivered in his preface to his letter on
Toleration. The circumftances, which gave
occafion to fome of his expreffions, have, it
muft be gratefully owned, long fince ceafed
to exift among us : and thefe expreffions are
pre-
I* R E $ A C E. ru
preferved here for this caufe only, that they
could not well be feparated from thofe, which
are adjoining to them ; and without the leaft
intention of making the moft diftaht appli-
cation of them to any perfons now living.
But, though his words had a lingular claim
to the regard of the times, in which he
lived, they are by ho means unworthy of
the attention of the prefent, or indeed of
any times whatsoever, in which this queftion
is under confideration.
" Narrownefs of fpirit, on all fides, has
" undoubtedly been the principal occafion of
" our miferies and confufions. But, whatever
" may have been the occafion, it is now
" high time to feek for a thorough cure. >
" It is neither declarations of indulgence,
" nor acls of comprehenfion, [alone] fuch
" as have been yet praclifed or projected
" among us, that can do the work. 'The
" firft will but palliate, the fecond encreafe
** our evil. Abfolute liberty, juft and true,
** equal and impartial liberty is the thing
* c we ftand in need of. I cannot therefore
u but hope, that this difcourfe, demonftra-
" ting both the equitablenefs and practica-
44 blends of the thing, will be efteemed
" highly feafonable by all men, that have
" fouls large enough to prefer the intereft
" of the publick before that of a party."
A glorious, and never to be forgotten Hep
was,
tiii PREFACE,
was, about that time, taken towards intro-
ducing this important blefling. Whether \%
quite anfwered the idea of religious liberty,
which is pointed out in the above cited
words, let thofe, who have maturely confi-
dered it, judge. And if it does not, 1 leav$
them to judge alfo, whether, if this great
man were now living, and were to be afked
his opinion of the fitnefs of granting the
requeft of the diflenters, he would not give
it for going this ftep farther ?
f qrp ffp orb O
PREFACE
[ i* ]
PREFACE
To the Second Edition.
AN account having been already given,
in the preface to the firft edition of
this pamphlet, of the rife and progrefs of
it, nothing farther is neceffary to be added
here concerning it. The differences between
the conclufion of this and the foregoing edi-
tion will be eafily accounted for by any
one, who confiders that at the time of this
fecond publication, the petition of the dif-
fenters was again laid before the parliament.
This additional preface, and the appendix,
will fufficiently explain themfelves ; and all,
which remains farther to be faid, concerning
them, and the eflay, to which they relate,
is to recommend the reafonings ' contained in
them to the candid attention of fuch as may
perufe them.
What apology may be needful for the
whole, or any part, of the enfuing enquiry,
the readers of it will determine by their own
judgment. That, which the author himfelf
apprehended, at the writing of it, might be
a thought
x - Preface to the Second Edition,
thought mod liable to exception, was his
employing fo many pages in attempting to
eftablifh the general principles of Toleration,
which had been fo largely difcuffed by wri-
ters of the moft diftinguifhed reputation.
But according to his views of the affair,
which gave occafion for his book, fuch
a confideration of them feemed unavoidable.
The more he reflected on the difappointment
of the difTenters, the more he was convinced,
that it could be reafonably founded only on
one of the following fuppofitions : that
Toleration is not a matter of right, but of
favour -, that, allowing it to be a matter
of right, the penal laws againft diffenters
are no infringement of that right , i. c. are
not perfecuting laws ; that if they are per-
fecting laws, the act of Toleration is an
exemption from them, adequate to the relief
of all, who need to be exempted from them ;
or, laitly, that there was fomething in
the nature of the requeft made by the dif-
fenters, which rendered the farther exemp-
tion, which they folicited from thefe laws,
unreafanable. That the act of Toleration
affords but a very imperfect protection from
the feverky of thefe itatutes, is a plain mat-
ter of fact, which admits of no difpute. But
how far the laws, of which it is a mitiga-
tion, are in themfelves uniuilifiable ; or whe-
ther there was any thing peculiar in that
iecuritv
Preface to the Second Edition. xi
fecurity from them, for which the difTenters
became fuitors, which rendered their cafe
unworthy of regard, mud be determined by
an appeal to the original principles of To-
leration. For this reafon it was thought
indifpenfably requilite to ftate them, and col-
led: all the fubfequent parts of this queftion
into one point of view with this leading,
capital part of all ; that, by the light which
it mull of neceflity caft upon the others,
the equity of the relief requefled by the
difTenters might be clearly determined. And,
if it has appeared, upon a careful furvey,
that Toleration is the right of all good fub-
jects, and members of fociety ; r if it is
found, that the penal laws againft difTenters
are utterly fubverlive of this right, and, con-
fequently, unjuft , and, if it has been
made evident, that the principles and de-
portment of the difTenters, and the afTurances,
which they are ready to give to the ftate
for their loyal and unexceptionable demean-
or, are fuch as ought, in reafon, to obviate
all fufpicion of the contrary : if thefe things
have been fatisfaclorily fhewn, the inference
makes itfelf, and is too plain and certain,
not to be feen and acknowledged by every
intelligent perfon ; - that the requeft of the
difTenters was reafonable, and that the part
they acted in prefenting it was worthy to
be approved.
a 2 When
xii Preface to the Second Edition.
When applications, for relief from bur-
thens, are founded upon principles of juftice,
it is generally allowed that apprehenfions of
ibme accidental, or merely poffible inconve-
niencies, with which granting the defired re-
lief might be attended, are not of ftrength
fufficient to juftify the refufal of it. And
yet to this clafs the objections, which have
been urged againft the arguments by which
the diffenters have defended their cauie, muft,
in general, be reduced.- Alarming hints
have been given of the dangers, which might
have followed, if their defire had been
granted. Great refpect has been expreffed
for the prefent diffenters , but great doubt
concerning their conduct, and an unwilling-
nefs to anfwer for their behaviour, were they
to carry their point, have been joined with
thefe profeffions of refpect. Vague and
obfcure prefages of evils, which, in this cafe,
might fome time arife, have been entertained
and fuffered to work upon the imagination ;
and fuppofitions of events have been made, fo
chimerical and deftitute of foundation, that it
is furprizing that gentlemen of underftand-
ing, fliould ever be imprefTed by them. But
the groundleffnefs of thefe fuppofitions will
be confidered hereafter. What is now to be
obferved is, that all thefe reafonings proceed
upon an entire inattention to the nature of the
cafe, which they are defigned to affect. In
matters
Preface to the Seeond Edition. xiii
matters of mere favour, or expedience, fuch
confiderations as thefe may be allowed to
have their weight; though, even in things
of this kind, it is owned, that prefent and
probable advantages ought to turn the fcale
againft diftant, and merely poflible, difadvan-
tages. But, in matters of right, fuch objec-
tions as thefe are feldom admitted. Were
they fuffered indeed to prevail, there is no
liberty fo important and reafonable, but it
might be denied ; no right fo facred and
inviolable, but it might be taken away. For
what right, what liberty is there which may
not be abufed ? Or what advantage is there,
from which fome poflible inconvenience may
not refult ? The diffenters apprehend the
relief, which they afked, was no more than
the principles of reafon, chriftianity, and pro-
teftantifm, warranted them to requeft ; yet
fuch objections as thofe, which have been
mentioned, feem to be with many confider-
able enough to overbalance all, which the
petitioners could produce in fupport of their
requeft ; and to juflify the retaining of laws,
which even they who contend for their con-
tinuance, have not undertaken to vindicate ;
except it be by alledging, that they are laws
not to be executed, but to ftand in terror em
only -, an excufe, which is at once utterly
infufficient to defend the keeping up of fuch
laws , and, (as the argument has been con-
ducted
xiv Preface to the Second Edition.
ducted by thofe who have thought proper
to have recourfe to it) is, in effect, giving
up the caufe.
To be made in terrorem, is the com-
mon chara&er of all penal laws whatfoever.
The first intention of them is to prevent-
the forbidden actions, by the fear of the
penalties enacted on account of the viola-
tion of the law. The execution of fuch laws
comes in only in the fecond place, and is
to be confidered merely as the remedy, which
is to be applied, when the bare declaration
of the law is not effectual to procure obe-
dience. But, if the laws themfelves are good,
it is univerfally allowed that, when they are
broken, the execution of them ought to fol-
low. When laws, therefore, are faid to
ftand in terrorem only, or without any view
to the infliction of the penalty appointed
by them, the very form of the exprefllon
implies, that there are fome circumftances
annexed to them which render the execution
of them unfit. To fuppoie of any laws, that
they are not fit to be executed, is giving,
at belt, but a very unfavourable, difhonour-
able reprefentation of them j and the farther
we enter into the grounds of the fuppofition,
the more unfavourable to the credit of fuch
laws it will appear. For why are they not
fit to be executed ? If it is becaufe they
are calculated to produce more evil than
good,
Preface to the Second Edition. xv
good, they are bad laws in point of policy.
But if it is bccaufe they arc unjuft, in
reipect to their end, or the means by which
they direct that end to be purfued, they are
bad in point of confcience ; and no competent
caufe can be afligned for retaining them.
They cannot, as Dr. Furneaux has juftly
obferved, a " be confidered as the offspring
" of political wifdom, fo much as of an
" arbitrary and tyrannical difpofition." And,
as they were enacted upon indefenfible prin-
ciples -, fo no merely poflible conveniencies,
which may be imagined to refult from them,
are weighty enough to fhew that it i^ right
to permit them to remain, were the reality
of fuch conveniencies to be admitted. But
in fad, the argument drawn from them is
as deftitute of foundation, as it is void of
itrength - t and, inftead of fortifying the credit
of fuch laws, tends rather to weaken it.
Let the notion of laws, kept up merely in
terrorem, be ftrictly adhered to, and it will
be evident, to fay the gentlefl things of
them, that they muft be of little or no ufe.
If any doubt can arife concerning this, it
muft proceed from hence, that lbme laws
may be inadvertently comprehended under
this denomination, only becaufe it is but
ieldom that occafions happen to require the
execution of them ; but this is departing from
the
Letters to Sir William Blackfione, 2d cd. p. 122.
xvi Preface to the Second Edition.
the fignification of the phrafe, as it is ap-
plied in the cafe under confideration. In-
stances of perfons fuffering for treafon and
rebellion are, in general, but rare, and bear
no proportion to the number of thofe, who
fufFer on other accounts j/ and yet no one, it
is prefumed, imagines, for this reafon, that
the laws againft thofe offences, are laws
merely in terrorem. The laws concerned in
the prefent debate, are laws, the execution
of which is laid afide, though the objects,
againft which they are directed, are conti-
nually exifting. They are laws which are vir-
tually condemned, by a general difapprobation
of the execution of them, as improper to be
renewed. And, when it is afked, of what ad-
vantage it can be to retain fuch laws as thefe - 9
which are not only fallen into neglect, but,
which the very advocates for their conti-
nuance confefs ought to be left in this
neglected ftate ; the queftion, thus ftated,
carries its own anfwer with it : and a mo-
derate fhare of attention to the very terms
of it will fatisfy us, that their continuance
can be of no advantage. When the dread
of a law ceales, all the efficacy of the law
ceafes with it. When the execution of the
law is entirely thrown afide, efpecially when
it is by common confent exploded j (which
in the cafe; here argued it is) the dread of
the law foon comes to an end. For it is
the
Preface to tlie Second Edition. xvii
the execution, which fupports the terror,
gives it all its permanence, vigour and effect;
and when that is given up, all the practical
authority of the law is given up alfo : and
all their ufe, upon fuppofition that it were
pofiible for them ever to be of any fervice,
is deftroyed.
But the ufelefihefs of keeping fuch laws
in force is the leaft objection to it : the
confequences of it may be highly pernicious.
Bad laws may be fuffered to deep for a
feafon, and, while they remain in this dor-
mant (late, may be treated as very harmlefs,
inoffenfive things. But the power of opprei-
fing, by their means, abides , this power,
by fome combination of unhappy circum*
fiances, may be awakened into action ; and,
perhaps, among the whole body of obnoxious
penal laws, there are none, which are more
likely to be molt grofsly perverted, and be
made the instruments of the mofl infupport-
able evils, than thofe, which have been for a
time difcarded, and afterwards refumed for
execution. For what is it, which mod com-
monly brings them into this difgrace, -but a
conviction that they are yokes too heavy to be
endured? What, but a conviction that they
arc inconfulent with the laws of reafon and
humanity , that to enforce them is repugnant
to the principles of natural and political
jiiftice -, and would be equally oppofite to
b the
xviii Preface to the Second Edition.
the fafety of individuals, and the tranquillity
of the publick ? The execution of fuch laws
can never be fuppofed to be revived, but
from bad views and difpofitions : and from
this confideration, alone, it is eafy to forefee,
of what innumerable mifchiefs they may be-
come the occafion. Regard to the laws will
be the pretended reafon, for the profecutions
commenced upon them ; but the advance-
ment of fome finifter defign will be the
real one. Private intereft, pique, revenge,
and other bafe and unworthy principles, will
be (heltered under the cover of what, in fuch
feafons, would be ftiled juftice, order, and
the fupport of authority ; and a counterfeit
zeal for the welfare of the ftate, become a
cloak for every malicious and fhameful in-
clination, by which we can fuppofe the word
of men to be prompted. Nor are thefe only
arbitrary affertions, which deferve to be
treated as unworthy of regard. All, who
are acquainted with hiftory, well know, that
fome of the word acts of injuftice, which
are recorded in it, have been committed un-
der the fanction of obsolete laws j that
is (if it be poflible for any of my readers,
to want fuch an explanation) laws grown
into difufe, though fupinely fuffered to con-
tinue in force ; and which, if they were re-
membered to be laws at all, were confidered
as
Preface to the Second Edition. xix
as laws, which were permitted to retain that
name in terror em only.
But if we afcend to the primary princi-
ples, to which all political regulations ought
to be adjufted, we fhall be furnifhed with
frefh evidence, that no laws, founded upon
injuftice, let the execution of them be ever
fo little intended, or expected, are capable
of a folid vindication. Laws ought to guard
againft oppreflion, from whatever quarter it
is apprehended. Such laws as thefe, give
power to opprefs ; incorporate incroachments
upon the rights of men into the conftitu-
tion ; and arm thofe, who are difpofed to
violate the peace of others, with the force
of publick authority. They are fo far from
being proper means of preferving the pub-
lick tranquillity, that they are the moft im-
proper ones, which can be chofen for that
purpofe. For, in their natural operation,
they are adapted only to create diflrefs and
confufion : and, if it be poffible for any par-
ticular circumftances to arife, in which fome
momentary convenience may refult from
them i there are other methods, by which
the evils, (which it is pretended they may be
of ufe to check,) may be remedied with in-
comparably greater efficacy, fafety and ho-
nour. If the apprehended evils are, in rea-
lity, proper objects of punimment by the
civil magistrate, furely the regular, obvious
b 2 COUI'ff
xx Preface to the Second Edition.
courfe to be purfued, is to eftablifh proper
laws againft them ; and not to think of fup-
prefling them by making or fupporting laws,
which decree penalties againft what no hu-
man power has a right to punifii , which di-
rectly forbid what, it is allowed, ought not
to be forbidden , and while they, perhaps,
make no mention of what is really an of-
fence againft the obligations of good fubjects,
condemn only that, which the judgment of
men has no authority to reftrain. Laws di-
rected againft thole actions, which fall pro-
perly under their cognizance ; (in' which the
nature of the offence is clearly defined, and
the fanflions of them duly proportioned to
the offences which they prohibit ) will gene-
rally have their influence confined within
its proper limits. The terrors of them will
be aimed at their original and juft object i
and there is, comparatively, but little dan-
ger of their being abufed. But to have re-
courfe to laws, intended to prevent one thing,
to reftrain another, which is totally diftind
from it, and has, perhaps, no probable, and
certainly no neceflary connexion with it ; and
to ordain penalties, in cafes in which they can
never be juft, merely becaufe it is poffible,
that they may, by chance, be employed in
cafes where punifhments may be juft , (that
is, in other words, to make the innocent
directly obnoxious to fufferings, merely for
the
Preface to the Second 'Edition. xxi
the fake of accidentally reaching the guilty jf)
is giving fcope to an endlefs variety of op-
preflions. P'or^the execution of laws, which
are thus made ufe of, being 'directed, not by
any rule arifing from the laws themfelves, but
by the inclination of thofe, who call in their
force, will always be arbitrary in their ap-
plication : and the confequence of this is,
that they will always be liable to be perverted
into fome of the worft engines of tyranny -,
engines, againft which no caution is able to
guard, and by which perfons, the moft un-
quePaonably harmlefs, and without rebuke,
may be given up to be harrafled by every
man, who has either an intereft to ferve,
or a paflion to gratify, by disturbing them.
And is this an expedient, to which it can
ever beneceflary to the fafety, or fuitable
to the dignity, of a well ordered ftate, to
have recourfe ? It appears, on the contrary,
to be fuch a folecifm in government, and fo
inconfiltent with all political wifdom, that,
without the ilrongeft evidence, it is not to
be imputed to any fet of legiQators what-
foever. And, indeed, to urge it in the cafe
before us feems to be only an afttr thought,
to give fome countenance to the continuance
of laws, for the making of which it is not
pretended, that any good plea can be offered.
This was plainly not the original light, in
which they were confidered by the authors
of
xxii Preface to the Second Edition,
of them, who fufficiently (hewed themfelves
in earned for the execution of them j though
the better judgment, and better fpirit of the
prefent times, has utterly condemned them.
When laws are allowed to be indefenfible,
the natural expectation, from fuch a concef-
fion, is, that thofe, who acknowledge this,
ihould approve of giving them up. That
the penal laws, from which the diffenters re-
quested a farther exemption, are of this kind,
feems to be confeffed ; and every argument
againft keeping up unjuft laws, in terrorem,
in general, muft be acknowledged to conclude
againft them in particular j and yet, flrange
as it may feem, a necefiity is pleaded for their
continuing in force, to keep the diffenters in
awe. But let it be allowed to afk, whence
this neceffity arifes ? Or againft what is it
that all thefe terrors are pointed r It furely
cannot be againft attempts to hurt the efta-
bliihment by force. Were there no fuch laws
as thofe, which we are confidering, in being ;
the laws, by which every man, and every body
ox men, are protected in the enjoyment of
their properties and priviledges, would be
an ample fecurity againft all fuch encroach-
ments. The continuance of thefe laws can-
not, again, be thought neceffary, from a
defire to deter the diffenters from writing and
{peaking in defence of their religious prin-
ciples and practices. For the diffenters to
admit
Preface to the Second Edition. xxiii
admit this thought, would be to impute to
their brethren of the eftablifhment a diftrufl
of their caufe, with a fufpicion of which, they
might be juftly difpleafed ; and to charge
them with an inclination to fubftitute force
inftead of argument, which they would dis-
claim with indignation. To fuppofe thefe
laws are retained from an apprehenfion, that
the doctrines of the church could not fub-
fift without them, would be a reflection upon
the articles of it, which the friends to them
would have reafon to refent. Truth wants
nothing but an impartial hearing. The
way to promote the interefl of it is to per-
mit the judgments of men to determine free-
ly, by the evidence which appears before
them, unbiaffed by the terrors of this world ,
and it can never be to the honour of any
caufe, to think it wants any of thefe aids
to fupport it, or redound to the praife of its
advocates to depend upon them. And yet,
againft what other contingencies thole, who
contend for keeping up the terror of thefe
laws, can think it necefiary to maintain fuch
a powerful guard, it is not cafy to conceive.
The apprehenfions of indecency and petu-
lance, on the part of the diflenters, need
give them no pain ; -Thefe are faults which,
wherever they are found, furnilh the beft
antidotes againft themfelves, and never fail to
difcredit the caufe of thofe, who have fo little
judgment
xxiv Preface to the.Secqnd Edition.
judgment and temper as to give way to them.
And were thefe excefles to prevail much more
frequently, and in a higher degree, than can be
reasonably fiippofed ; yet to defire to have a
perfon lie at the mercy of cruel and unjuft
laws, and be Subject to ruin, merely becaufe
in the warmth of a controverfy, he has loft
his caution, has fomething in it, which a
man of true greatnefs of mind will abhor-,
and one, who has a juft reverence for his
own reputation, will be. extremely backward
to acknowledge.
. Hitherto the" propriety of fuffering the pe-
nal ftatutes againft difTenters, to hold the
place in our laws, which is (till left to them
by the act of Toleration, has been confidered
as it refts upon the general expedience of
keeping them up as laws in terrorem only.
But, befides the objections, which have al-
ready been urged againft them, upon this
footing-, the antagonists of the difTenters, in
this cafe, have embarrafled themfelves with
new difficulties -, and, by endeavouring to
mollify the fe verity of that fide of the quef-
tion, which they defend, have taken away
the force of all the arguments, by which
they attempt to vindicate it. To reconcile
the difTenters to their difappointment, they
have been told, that all their fears are vi-
fionary, that they may make themfelves per-
fectly
Preface to the Second Edition. xxv
fectly cafy, b " the ftate will not attend to
" their preaching, and the church are en-
" gaged in labours of their own. " Let
this, for the prefent, be granted. The ques-
tion ftill returns, (and returns with additional
force :) for what reafon, then, are thofe re-
licks of perfecution, which are yet contain-
ed in the laws againft difienters, fo tenaci-
oufly held fall ? Or on what account is a
legal aflurance of that fafety, which it is
acknowledged the diffenting minifters ought
to enjoy, and which they are fo confidently
told they will enjoy, deemed fo improper ?
To attempt, in any form, to vindicate the
perpetuating of laws confeiTedly bad, mere-
ly for the fake of ftriking terror, is attempt-
ing an arduous tafk. But to reprefent thefe
laws as harmlefs, becaufe no ufe will ever
be made of them ; and, at the fame time,
fpeak of the repeal of them as a rifk not
to be run, is furely very peculiar. It is, if
the exprefTion will be pardoned, a felf-de-
ftrudtive mode of reafoning, which faps the
very foundation, upon which it appears to
ftand ; and brings thofe, who adopt it, into
the midft of contradictions. If, as the au-
thor of the letter to the dilTenting minifters
tells them, c all that part of the law, by
which they think themielves aggrieved, " is
" now as dead, as if the whole were ob-
c " folete;
b Letter, p. 17. c Ibid, p, 57.
xxvi Preface to the Second Edition*
" folete ; " where is the terror it is fup-
pofed to contain ? Or what is become of
that fecurity, which it is fuppofed to give
to church and ftate ? If thefe laws, on the
other hand, are referved, becaufe occafions
may call for their execution; from whence
can the difTenting minifters derive that en*
tire fatisfaction, in their prefent circumftan-
ces, which is recommended to them ? If the
execution of thefe laws is to ceafe for ever,
where would be the harm of a law for
quieting the minds of the diflfenters, by gi-
ving them a proper, real fecurity from thofe
Jaws, which difturb them ? But, if thofe
may yet be the inftruments of opprefllon,
and the apprehenfion of this may juftly make
the diffenters uneafy, why Ihould they be
cenfured as raifing a [needlefs] ferment d by
their application , ? Or with what equity can
they be blamed, as indulging unreafonable
jealoufies, when the very reafons aftigned for
denying their petition, have fuch an apparent
tendency to keep their apprehenfions awake ?
When they think, indeed, of the liberal fenti-
ments and exemplary moderation, which reflect
fo much honour on the members of the efta-
blifhment, their fears vanifh. But the fame
excellent fpirit, which dwells in thefe valuable
perfons, may not defcend to others. If it
Ihould, yet, as our laws now ftand, it is
not
d Letter, p. 32.
Preface to the Second Edition. xxvii
not in the power of thofe, who may have
the bed inclination to it, to infure the fafety
of the diflenters from the dangers, to which
they are expofed : and, when thefe things are
candidly confidered, it cannot be juftly
thought ftrange, if they are ftill defirous to
enjoy the advantage of legal fafety , and be
completely affured of the unmolefted exercife
of thofe rights of human nature, which, as a
very able writer has happily exprefled it,
'* ought to have every protection and ground
<e of fecurity, which law and the policy of
** free Hates can give them."
How far the cafe of the diflenters is inti-
tled to the benefit of this valuable pro-
tection, they mud leave to the judgment
of the legiflature ; to which their petition
is again, with all deference and humility,
fubmitted. With thefe difpofitions, they
hope every ftep, which they take, will
be found to be conducted ; and as they are
fatisfied, that making an application for the
removal of what they have efleemed a grie-
vance, will never be condemned by thofe
great afiemblies, to which they look up ; fo
they are willing to believe, that, if any of
their fellow fubjects have been inclinable to
cenfure them for this reafon, it will, upon
further confideration appear, that they have
been
e Dr. Furneaux's preface to the ift edit, of his
letters, &c. p. 17. 2d edit.
xxviii Preface to the Sewnd Edition.
been cenfured without caufe; and that they are
liable to no imputation of having made any
requeft* which it would be unfit for the moft
dutiful fubje&s to preferit, or inconfiftent with
the honour of government to grant. To
borrow the words of a .confefiedly competent
judge of this matter; " SapienthTimi etiam
" legiflatores non omnia viderunt, quse rei-
" publicas utilia aut noxia effe porlunt ; &
" plerumque progrefiu temporis accidit, ut
" morum, perfonarum, aut rerum mutatio,
" alia plane fanciri defideret. Sollemnis
" ilia jurifconfultorum romanorum formula,
" DURUM, SED ITA SCRIPTA LEX EST ; illlld
" inquam, tamdiu valere debet, quamdiu
" fine graviori incommodo, quod durum eft,.
" aut tolli, aut emolliri non poteft; sed ubi
" primum data est occasio, eo redeat lex
" iniqua, unde malum pedem tulerat j nulla
" idonea caufa eft, quare fummas poteftates-
" audtoritate fua illam tueri porro pergant.'
> (
i Barbeyrac. orat. inaugural, de dignitate, et uti-
litate, juris, ac Hiilor. p 17. Droit de la nature,
Sc des Genev. edit. Amfterd. 1712. torn ii. a la fin.
An
[ i 1
% = jrfk j*% ja*. jr* jBfk r $
# & v luJ SJr kjHi v &3 %
An ENQUIRY, Sec.
?fM^HE worthy and refpectable Dr.
Hg T a* Law, a fpeaking of the common
St*j42jH( difpofition to extol the former
times at the expence of the pre-
fent, mentions two circumftances, among
others, in which the latter are greatly pre-
ferable. One is, " that we have certain
" virtues now in greater perfection ; parti-
" culatfy, more of true charity, or univerfal
<c benevolence, than ever fince the time of
*' primitive chriftianity : " b and the other,
" that we live under the mildeft, moft in-
** dulgent of all Governments ; and enjoy the
" bleffing of liberty in that perfection, which
" has been unknown to former ages, and
" is fo ftill to moft other nations." c The
truth of the obfervation is granted. But
mould it be inferred from hence, that the
B fpirit
* The prefent Biftiop of Carlf/Ie, b Con fidcrat ions on
Religion, Part III. p. 243. Ed. 1765. c p. 759, 260
2 An Enquiry into the true
fpirit of the times, and the ftate of our
laws are brought to fuch a degree of per-
fection, as to need no farther improvement,
it would be an error -, an error, which would
need correction equally with that, which this
candid writer makes it his bufinefs to rec-
tify. Thefe are points, indeed, which are
never to be taken for granted in the moft
advantageous fituation, in which we can fup-
pofe ourfelves to be placed. Sober enqui-
ries whether there are not flill fome mif-
takes to be corrected j fome remains of
the injudicious appointments of the feafons
of comparative ignorance, which it would
be both juft and wife to remove; and fome
defects, which greatly need to be fupplied ;
are always worthy of attention. Such an
enquiry into the Hate of religious liberty
among ourfelves is here attempted ; and the
author fincerely regrets that there mould be
fuch weighty reafons for his entering upon
it, as he apprehends there are. It appears,
indeed, to be a fubject very far from being
univerfally feen in its true light. Whether
any thing, which is here offered, may con-
tribute to lead perfons to jufter apprehen-
fions of it, muft be left to the judgment
of others. This can be affirmed with sreat
truth that, whatever is faid, proceeds only
from a fincere concern to clear up the
rights of conference more completely, and
Dromote
Principles of Toleration, &c. 3
promote the exemption of it from every
unwarrantable impofition ; which has a much
clofer connection with the intereft of reli-
gion, and virtue, than is generally ima-
gined. Whatever therefore may be the fate
of his reafonings, the author hopes the
freedom, which he takes of laying his fenti-
ments before the world, will not be cen-
fured.
In order to difcover the genuine Principles
of Toleration, it is necefTary to look back
to the original liberties of mankind : and
that, antecedently to the confideration of
their being formed into civil focieties, there
are certain rights belonging to them, inde-
pendent of all human grant, not derived
from any compact, and which are, therefore
to be acknowledged as the rights of human
nature, it is prefumed will not be called
into queftion. That a right to judge for
themfelves in points of religion, is, in thefe
circumftances, one of thefe rights, muft be
equally evident ; and to attempt a formal
proof of it, is needlefs. It is a principle,
in reality, fo obvioufiy true, and reafonable,
as to be fcarcely liable to contradiction, or
capable of illuftration. But the neceflary
confequences of this Universal right of
men may deferve more particular attention ;
for, while it authorizes every individual to
claim the exercife of this priviledge to
B 2 himfelf.
$ An Enquiry into the true
himfelf, it obliges him to allow it, in the
very fame extent, to all about him ; and
eftablifhes one uniform regulation for his
behaviour towards others, and their beha^
viour towards him. It is evident, for in-
ftance, that no apprehenfions of the truth,
and certainty of any perfon's religious fen-
timents, can juftify him in attempting to
impofe them on his neighbour : for the fame
right of judgment, which any one can claim,
belongs, on the fame principle, equally to
all, and ought to be equally facred, and in-
violable in all ; and no reafon can be al-
ledged by him for taking the religious li-
berty of others from them, but what will,
at the fame time, equally deftroy his own
title to it. It can juftify no man in break-
ing in upon the peace, property, or enjoy-
ments of others. They hold their claim to
be unmolefted in all thefe refpects, by the
fame tenure, by which he holds his : and
it is impofiible for him to fet it afide, in
their cafe, without virtually renouncing it
jn his own. The injuftice of all fucfy
encroachments upon him from others fol-
lows from the fame principle, with the fame
force of evidence ; and, if any attempt to-
wards them (hould be made, common fenfe
and equity muft condemn and oppofe it. In
fltort, whatever apprehenfions fome perfons,
not ufed to think qpon the fuhject, may en*
tertain
Principles of Toleration, Zee. 5
tertain, that claiming fuch a. liberty of judg-
ment in religion for ourfelves might open
a door to invafions of the rights of others j
nothing is plainer, than that it gives not the
Jeaft real countenance to them. It places the
ftrongeft guard againft them, and may fafe-
Iy be adopted in all its juft confequences.
Whether this claim is weakened by men's
entering into civil fociety, is the next thing
to be confidered.
The great end of government is to pro-
tect the fubjefts of it from the injuries, to
which they were expofed in a ftate of na-
ture. Thefe injuries may be divided into
internal and external , or thofe to which per-
fons, who by any natural tie, or accidental
circumftance are connected together, are ob-
noxious from each other ; and thofe, to which
they are liable from any perfons, or number
of perfons, not thus connected with them.
This latter clafs of injuries is here out of
the queftion, and only thofe of the former
come under confideration. Now all injuries
imply, in the very notion of them, fome
rights, of which they are violations ; all the
care, which is taken to guard againft the vio-
lation of thefe rights, is an acknowledgment
of the reality and importance of them : and,
if the primary and leading view of govern-
ment be, as it has juft been ftated, to pre-
vent or reftrain thofe injuries, to which men
were
6 'An Enquiry into the true
were expofed for want of its protection \
it is evidently implied, that, when they enter
into civil fociety, they carry thefe rights
with them ; that they continue to retain
them j and that, inftead of fuppofing them-
felves to be deprived of them, the very de-
figri, with which they put themfelves under
the authority of government, is to secure
them the more firmly. I am very fenfible,
that this matter is, commonly, otherwife ap-
prehended. It is fuppofed by many, that,
when men enter into civil focieties, they give
up their liberties -, furrender their rights into
the hands of the ruling powers , and become
entirely dependent, for the enjoyment of any
part of them, on the pleafure of their fu-
periors. That this is in fact the general con-
fequence of their living in fociety, there can
be no doubt. But it is not by attending only
to the practice of Governors, and to the
extent of that mere force and power which is
fuppofed in the abftracl: notion of fupremacy,
to be annexed to their office ; it is not, I
fay, by appealing to thefe considerations, that
fuch queftions, as this before us, are to be
determined -, but by entering into the great
defign of that power, and attending to the
exprefs, or implied conditions, upon which
it is committed to them, and the meafures,
by which the exercife of it is to be adjufted.
It is certain, again, that reftraint is, in
fome
Principles of toleration, tec. y
fome degree, efTential to the very being of
fubjection to government. Wherever it is
eftablifhed, there muft be fome common laws,
by which thofe, who live under it, muft agree
to be controuled. There muft be fome com-
mon ruler invefted with authority, and armed
with power, to enforce the obfervation of thofe
laws. The members of the fociety muft
confent to leave to the magiftrate the deter-
mination of thofe civil difputes, which they
either cannot, or do not, compromife between
themfelves ; and the punifhment of thofe vio-
lations of their rights, for which, if there
were no fuch perfon impowered to redrefs
their wrongs, they muft have done themfelves
juftice. In confequence of this they confent
to defift from thofe forcible methods of aven-
ging the injuries, which are offered them, to
which, in a ftate of independence on go-
vernment, all men have an equal right ; and
to have recourfe to thofe methods of relief,
which are appointed by the laws of the fo-
ciety to which they belong. But all this is
far, very far, from amounting to an abfolute
divefting themfelves of all thofe rights, which
they enjoyed antecedently to their forming
themfelves into fuch communities. It is, on
the, contrary, raifing up perfons to be the
defenders of them, and entrufting the prefer-
vation of them to common Guardians, by
whole intervention, it is prcfumed, they will
be
8 An Enquiry into the true
be more vigoroufly afierted, and more eflrec*
tually protected, than it is poflible they
mould be in a Hate, where there is no com-
mon umpire to cheek the evils of oppreflion
on the one hand, and reftrain the no lefs
formidable evils of immoderate refentment
on the other. And if we only give ourfelves
leave to reflect a little on the nature of thofe
rights, the exercife of which they transfer
to the magiftrate, this will make the point
I am illuftrating yet clearer.
For what are the rights which men give up
to government ? Not thofe, which may moil
properly be ftiled the primary rights of human
nature. Not the right, which every innocent
man has, to live undifturbed, enjoy the ad-
vantages, which he juftly pofTefTes, and be
left to his freedom in all things, not injurious
to his fellow creatures ; but the confequen-
tial, though equally real and certain right,
which, where men are not fubject to govern-
ment, every perfon has to take the affertion
of all his rights into his own hands, and
correct the infringers of them, by the in-
fliction of fuch pains, or the ufe of fuch
other methods of deterring the authors of
the wrong, as reafon fhall warrant for his
future fecurity. And after all, if we fpeak
precifely, even these rights are not abfolutely
extinguimed and utterly loft, but fufpended
by fuch limitations, as the order and well-
being
Principles of Toleration, &c. 9
being of fociety require, and fo long as the
fuccours of government fhall be effectual ;
as is evident from hence, that many cafes
may be fuppofed, and are frequently occur-
ring, even under the beft regulated govern-
ments, in which the ufe of force for our
own prefervation is not efteemed culpable,
even in a political fenfe. For it is granted,
I think by all, who have been moft valued
for their judgment in thefe fubjects, that
wherever the aid of the fociety is too diftant
to prevent the injury, and the evil, which, if
we neglect to fecure ourfelves, will be
brought upon us, is of fuch a nature as to
be irreparable by any redrefs which govern-
ment can give ; there all the original rights
of felf-defence return, and it is warrantable
to repel force by force. d Inquifition indeed
always is, and always ought to be made in
thefe cafes j to determine whether fuch neceflity
exifted : but, if it is found to have been real,
and urgent, and the impending evil was irre-
parable, and unavoidable by any other me-
thod , the felf-defence is allowed, even though
it proved fatal to the aggreffor, e From all
which it appears, that the primary rights of
liberty, fafety, and prote&ion from oppreflion
C ftili
d Puffendorff, L. ii. c. 5. . 7, 8. per Barbeyrac.
Grot. J. B. ic P. L. ii. c.i. . 37. Kdit. Barbeyrac,
e Sir William Blackftone's Commentaries, vol. i
p. i?o. 2d Edi:.
io An Enquiry into the true
(till fubfift in their full vigour. To fuppofc
them abandoned, renounced and annihilated,
or that government can have any right to
deftroy them, is afcribing to it a right to
defeat the very end, for which it is eftablifh-
ed, and betray the truft repofed in it. It is
indeed totally inverting the principle, upon
which the power of rulers ftands, and by
which the acts of it ought to be guided.
Man was not made for government, but
government for man ; and the great object,
to which all the operations of it mould be
directed, is to guard, as much as poflible,
the equal, impartial, eafe and freedom of all
the fubjects of it. And if it mould be
thought by any that thefe expreffions are too
ftrong, the author is perfuaded they will alter
their opinion, upon their perufal of the fol-
lowing excellent paffage from Sir William
Blackftone's valuable Commentaries on the
Laws of England. It is needlefs to make an
apology for the length of the quotation : my
readers cannot wonder that I mould embrace
the opportunity of availing myfelf of fuch a
refpectable authority , and, whether they have
already perufed it or not, will dwell upon it
with pleafure.
" The principal aim of fociety," fays this
judicious writer, f " is to protect individuals
" in the enjoyment of thole ablolute rights,
" which
f Comment. Vol. i. p. 124. 126.
Principles of Toleration, &c. u
" which were veiled in them by the immu-
" table laws of nature, but which could not
" be preferred in peace, without that mutual
" afiiftance and intercourfe, which is gained
" by the institution of friendly and focial com-
" munities. -r- Hence it follows, that the firft
" and primary end of human laws, is to main-
" tain and regulate thefe abfolute rights of
" individuals. Such rights as are focial and
" relative, refult from, and are pofterior to
" the formation of ftates and focieties ; fo
" that to maintain and regulate thefe is clear-
" ly a fubfequent confideration. And there-
" fore the principal view of human laws is,
" or always ought to be, to explain, protect
" and enforce fuch rights as are abfolute,
" which in themfelves are few and fimple ;
" and then fuch rights as are relative, which,
ft arifing from a variety of connexions, will be
" far more numerous and more complicated.
" 'The abfolute rights of man, (he goes on
" to obferve a few lines after,) confidered as
u a free agent, endowed with difcernment t^o
" know good from evil, and with power of
" chufing thofe meafures, which appear to
" him to be mod: defirable, are ufually fum-
" med up in one general appellation, and
" denominated the natural liberty of man-
" kind. This natural liberty confifts propcr-
" ly, in a power of acting as one thinks fit,
" without any restraint or controul , unlefs
C 2 " by
j 2 An "Enquiry into the true
" by the law of nature ; being a right inhe-*
u rent in us by birth, and one of the gifts
" of God to man at his creation, v/hen he
*' endued him with the faculty of free will,
" But every man when he enters into fociety
" gives up a part of his natural liberty as
" the price of fo valuable a purchafe ; and,
" in eonfideration of receiving the advan-
" tages of mutual commerce, obliges himfelf
* e to conform to thofe laws, which the commu-
" nity has thought proper to eftablifh. And
" this fpecies of legal obedience and confor-
" mity is infinitely more defirable than that
" wild and favage liberty, which is facrificed
tc to obtain it. For no man that confiders
* c a moment, would wiih to retain the ab-
" folute and uncontrolled power of doing
" whatever he pleafes , the conference of
* c which is, that every other man would alfo
" have the fame power , and then there would
" be no fecurity to individuals in any of
" the enjoyments of life. Political, there-
f* fore, or civil, liberty, which is that of a
" member of fociety, is no other than na-
" tural liberty, fo far reftrained by human
" laws (AND NO FARTHER) as is ne-
" ceffary and expedient for the general ad-
'* vantage of the publick. Hence we may
" colle5b that the law, which reflrains a man
" from doing mifchief to his fellow citizens,
" though it diminifhes the natural, increafes
" the
Principles of foleratiwt Sec. 13
" the civil liberty of mankind : but every
" wanton and caufelefs reftraint of the will
" of the fubject, whether practifed by a mo-
narch, a nobility, or a popular affembly,
" is a degree of tyranny. Nay, that even
" LAWS themfelves, whether made with or
** without our eonfent, if they regulate and
< conftrain our conduct in matters of mere
** indifference, without any good end in view,
<c are laws dcftru&ive of liberty , whereas,
** if any publick advantage can arife from
obferving fuch precepts, the controul of our
** private inclinations, in one or two particu-
** lar points, will conduce to preferve our ge-
" ncral freedom, in others of more importance,
" by fupporting that ftate of fociety, which
" can alone fecure our independency. Thus
u the ilatute of King Edward IV. which
*' forbad the fine gentlemen of thofe times
** (under the degree of a lord) to wear pikes
H upon their fhoes or boots of more than
" two inches in length, was a law that fa-
" voured of oppreflion ; becaufe, however
" ridiculous the fafhion then in ufe might ap-
" pear, the reftraining it by pecuniary penalties
" could ferve no purpofe of common utility.
" But the ftatute of King Charles II. which
" prefcribes a thing feemingly as indifferent,
" viz. a drefs for the dead, who are all or-
<c dered to be buried in woollen, is a law
" confident with public liberty ; for it en-
" courages
14 An Enquiry into the true
" courages the ftaple trade, on which, in
" great meafure, depends the univerfal good
cc of the nation. So that laws, when pru-
" dently framed, are by no means fubverfive
" but rather introductive of liberty j for, (as
" Mr. Locke has well obferved) where there
" is no law there is no freedom. But then,
" on the other hand, that conftitution or
" frame of government, that fyftem of laws,
" is alone calculated to maintain civil liberty,
" which leaves the fubjec"t entire master
" OF HIS OWN CONDUCT, EXCEPT IN THOSE
" POINTS WHEREIN THE PUBLIC GOOD RE-
" QUIRES SOME DIRECTION OR RESTRAINT,"
Thus far this able writer. Whether there
be any thing in the letter, or fpirit of our
laws, contrary to thefe noble declarations, is
a queftion, which needs not create the leaft
uneafinefs to the author of this valuable per-
formance. He could report the laws no
otherwife than he found them. If there
fhould be any fuch inconfiilency, it cannot in
the leaft invalidate the certainty, and weight
of the truths, which he has here delivered.
They hold, indeed, the rank of axioms in
the doctrine of government, carry their own
evidence with them, and merit the thanks
of all, who are cordially attached to the
caufe of liberty, and concerned for the ad-
vancement of the welfare of fociety.
Now
Principles of Toleration, &c. 15
Now, of all the rights inherent in human
nature, that of thinking for ourfelves, and
following the conviction of our own judg-
ments in relation to the object of our faith,
worfhip, and religious obedience, is the moll
facred, incontestable, and, in every view of
it, intitled to the moft careful protection.
It is, in the nature of it, the moft important
to every Being capable of moral obligation.
It is the moft efTential to our peace, and
that which every good man will be moft
tenderly concerned to have fecured to him. If
therefore, the prefervation of the great natural
and abfolute rights of men be one of the chief,
I fhould, perhaps, rather have faid the very
first, of all the intentions, with which civil
focieties are inftituted, and the rulers of them
inverted with power j what is the confequence
from thefe premifes ? Mull it not be this,
that, in all governments, the rights of con-
fcience mould have a principal place af-
figned them in the care of thofe, to whom the
protection of their fellow creatures is com-
mitted ? If the fecuring of equal, impartial
liberty in all thofe inftances of it, in which
it is not injurious to others, be fo much
the object of every equitable, wife, and well
conftituted fyftem of laws, that all needlefs
encroachments upon it are deviations from
the fpirit, which ought to be diffufed through
all laws, and impair the very benefit, which
they
16 An Enquiry into the true
they ought to confirm; can it be fuppofed
that the rights of confcience ought not to
be guarded from violation ? To take for
granted a renunciation of thefe rights, when
men enter into fociety, is, of all preemp-
tions, the moft groundlefs. They are the
laft rights, which men can ever be imagined
to give up to be modelled at the pleafure
of others ; nor is there any one principle
conne&ed with their fubmifilon to governors
in other refpects, from which fuch an infer-
ence can be deduced. Does it follow, that,
becaufe the magiftrate is etttrufted with au-
thority to decide difputes between Us and our
fellow citizens concerning property, he is au-
thorized alfo to determine points, which lie
only between God and our own confeiences ?
Becaufe it is allowed to be his office to guard
the peace of his fubjects, and to inflict punilh-
ments for this purpofe on thofe, who unjuftly
difturb it , is it to be taken for granted, that
he is to dictate to them what rule of faith
they fhall adopt, and in what manner they
are to worfhip the Deity, when it is allowed
on all hands, that of thefe things the will
of God is the only rule, and that no worfhip
can be acceptable to him, but what is ac-
companied with the fmcere conviction of
him who offers it ? Nay, there is no pre-
emption in advancing a ftep further, and
aiferting that fuch is the nature of this right ;
and
Principles of Toleration^ &c. i /
arid in this refpect, it (lands upon a foun-
dation peculiar to itielf, and is diflinguiihed
from every other right, that it cannot be
given up. Property may be refigned, transfer-
red, or fubmitted to the regulation of others.
** A man may in many inftances relinquifh
his cafe, and fubject himlelf to inconvcni-
ences* and, in fo doing, act not only an innc*-
eent but a laudable part. Cafes may occur,
in which a man may facrifice life itfelf, and
the facrifice may merit the higheft applaufe.
But his conscience, he cannot refrgn. To
prove all things, and hold fall that, which is
good, is not only a privilege but a duty ; art
obligation laid upon him, by the very nature
of religion and virtue, and from which he
cannot difcharge himfelf without departing
from the principles of both. It mult always
remain entire to him ; nor, while the princi-
ples of the moft reafonable liberty are al-
lowed to fubfift in their due extent, can any
attempt be confiftently made to take it from
him.
There is no difficulty in difcerning, that
while I am fpeaking in this manner, an
objection will offer itfelf to the reader ; and
that it will be fuppofed, that my own reafon-
ing may be retorted againft me. The more im-
portant conicience is repreiented, the more,
it will be faid, it falls under the infpection
of the mag;iltrate. To exempt it thus from
D hi.
1 8 An Enquiry into the true
his jurifdiction will be thought laying a
foundation for excluding him, by degrees,
from taking that care of the fafety of his
fubjects, which is confcfled to be a part of
his office. Religion, it will be urged, may
be made a plea for any thing ; and, if go-
vernors muft never interpofe to reftrain it,
there is no enormity but what will pa<s
unpuniflied. But thefe objections arife en-
tirely from imperfect views of the principle,
which is here aflerted. To contend for a
right to think for themfelves in fome, and
deny it to others, might indeed be charge-
able with thefe confequences. But to con-
tend for this, as a right to which every
individual has a claim equally valid and
clear, never can be juftly liable to fuch an
imputation. For a man firft to own, that
not only he, but all around him have an
indifputable right, the very fame right with
himfelf, to be guided by their own con-
fciences in religion, (and let it be remem-
bered, it is thus the matter has all along
been ftated) for a man to allow this, I fay,
and yet make his perfuafion a pretence for
taking that liberty from them, is a contradic-
tion fo grofs and palpable, that it is fcarcely
conceivable a perfon in pofleffion of his
understanding can fall into it. Were a
perfon to be iuppofed capable of this ex-
travagance, every one would inftantly dii-
cern
Principles of Toleration, &c. 19
cern that the very principle, upon which he
pretends to aft, condemns him. Were it a-
gain fuppofed, that the magiftrate was to
guard a part of his fubjects only in the
rights of confcience, it might be poflible
for that favourite part to make it a cover
for violating the peace and fafety of others
with impunity : but -, let this protection be
granted impartially to all of them, an4 no
fuch confequences can take place. For pro-
tection confifts in the prevention or fup-
preflion of injuries , and while this is allowed
to be the office and duty of the magiftrate,
the duty, which he is to difcharge equally
to every one under his care, he will always
have an unqueftionable right, as the guar-
dian of the whole community, whenever fuch
mifdemeanors are committed, to animadvert
upon the authors of them. Nor is main-
taining this at all repugnant to the general
principles here aflerted. For it is not in a
religious, but political view, that fuch difor-
ders come under his cognizance. It is not as
offences againft God, but as hurtful to the
community, and breaches of the peace that
he punifhes them. B Where this is not vio-
lated
B What is obferved above is not very different
from what has been often faid ; but there is one
thing more to be confidered here, which, though it
mull have occurred to every thinking perfon, I do net
remember
20 An Enquiry into the true
lated, the right of following their own
convictions in religion without being mo-
lefted for it, continues : the more facred, im-
portant, and valuable it is, (and valuable it
muft be allowed to be to the advancement
of truth, the real intereft of fociety, and
the
remember to have feen fo diftin&ly mentioned as,
perhaps, it ought to have been, viz. that the cnfes,
in which the magiftrate. has a right thus tr imprpofe,
are the very fame, in which perfons out of civil fo-r
ciety would have a right to defend themfehes. Shouid
a man, in the (late of nature, be (o weak or {o
wicked as., from a real, or pretended, plea of con-
fcience, to opprefs, defraud, or in any re'pst mifufo
another, every individual thus injured would be juiti-
fied in punifmng, or (if that word mould oe thought
improper, where no government is fuppofed to exiit)
in retraining the tranfgreflbr by force. His neighbours
might lawfully affift him, or, if they thought it neceflary,
enter into a confederacy to defend themfelvss againft
ail fuch attempts, upoa their common, fecurity. This
right, indeed, lodged in the hand of the magiftrate,
will, in all probability, be much more equitably
and efFedually exerted, than by fingle, independent
perfons : but the end of fuch an exertion of it is
precifely the fame, the nature of the occafions upon
which he is to exercife this power is not changed, nor
is the lead right to ufe force in matters of confci-
ence, as fuch, acquired by him in confequence of his
having fuch a truft repofed in him. For his right
to fupport his authority in the juft execution of his
office neither enlarges, or contracts, the bounds of
any part of the office itfelf; the extent of which is
always to be determined by the extent of thofe rights,
for the defence of which he was invefted with his
Principles cf Toleration, &c. 21
the caufe of pure and undefiled religion)
the more effectually it mould be guarded
from every encroachment upon it : and by
this general rule, the real, genuine principles
of Toleration are to be determined.
Let what has been obferved then be ap-
plied to this purpofe. And we may collect
from it in what light Toleration in general
ought to be confidered. There is room to
think, (more room than was till of late ap-
prehended) that it is confidered by many as
a matter of mere grace or favour, which
government has a right to withhold, grant,
abridge, or refume at pleafure. But, if the
arguments, which have been advanced, are
conclufive, it ftands on a totally different
foundation. It is the acknowledgment and
confirmation of a right , not one of thofe
adventitious rights, which are fubfequent to
the eftablifhment of civil focieties, and arife
out of the peculiar forms and conftitutions
of them ; but of thofe higher rights, which
belong to men as fuch, and which ought
to be preferved under all Hates and govern-
ments whatfoever. It is a branch of pro-
tection, which ought to be as effectually,
univerfally and impartially fecured, as pio-
tection in the enjoyment and exercife of any
other right, which can be named. The ex-
tent of it again, or, to fpeak more precifely,
what is comprehended in the juft idea of it,
flows
22 An Enquiry into the true
flows from the fame principles with equal
evidence. If liberty of confcience be a right
eflential to human nature, all penalties, in
cafes merely of a religious nature, muft be
an infringement of a right, and a degree of
oppression, though inflicted by a law : nor
can the expreflion be juftly thought improper*
Every law is oppreflive, which is unjuft ;
every law is unjuft, which fubverts the eflen-
tial rights of mankind : and, if to judge for
ourfelves in religion be one of the firft and
moft inviolable of all thofe, which have ever
been dignified with this title ; it is evident,
that every hardfhip, laid upon men for ufing
it, is a degree of oppreflion, which the com-
plete and perfect idea of Toleration excludes.
And, from the fame principles, it can furely
be no difficult matter to determine who are
entitled to this protection. For this does not
depend on the fuppofed truth or error of the
fentiments which men may adopt ; but upon
the common right which all men have, to
be led in thefe points by the light of their
own minds, and to enjoy all the fecurities
and benefits of fociety, while they fulfil the
obligations of it. All, who can give good
fecurity to the government, under which they
live, and to the community to which they
belong, for the performance of the duties of
good fubjects and good citizens, have an
undoubted claim to it, and cannot with any
juft
Principles of Toleration, &c. 23
juft reafon be deprived of it. If, indeed,
there are any, whofe religious principles put
it out of their power to give fuch affurances
of this, as may be fafely trufted, their cafe
may be thought an excepted one ; though
in ftridlnefs of fpeech fuch cafes are not fo
properly exceptions from the rule laid down,
as cafes, which can never with reafon be fup-
pofed to be included in it ; for to fay, that
all, who give proper, fatisfactory pledges for
their being faithful fubjects, have a right to
Toleration, can never give thofe the fame
right to it, who are incapable of giving fuch
pledges. But whatever fuch cafes may at
any time appear, or be fuppofed now to exift,
the principle upon which this argument is
conducted (lands untouched. It is not on
account of their miftakes in religion, but
their incapacity to be fteady friends to the
(late, that they are laid under reftraints. To
fix thefe reftraints upon any other footing,
would be rendering them utterly indefenfible.
It is not error, but injury to the (late, or
the individuals, who are under the care of
it, which juftirles the animadverfion of the
magiftrate ; and all, to whom this cannot be
juftly imputed, are the objects of his pro-
tection : nor ought it to make any difference,
in this refpect, what are the comparative
numbers of thofe different bodies of men,
which cornpofe the fociety. As the magif-
trate
24 An Enquiry into the true
trate is not to attempt to diftrefs any of
them, becaufe they differ from him in judg-
ment ; fo neither is he at liberty to facrifice
one part to the clamour and bigotry of the
other ; but, as the common defender of juf-
tice, equity and peace, impartially to preferve
the freedom of them all. And here this part
of the fubject might be dimhTed, were it
not that the intervention of eftablifhments of
religion makes, in the opinion of many, a
great alteration in the extent of this religious
liberty ; for which reafon there feems to be
a neceflity of confidering the grounds, and
confequences of them a little diftinctly.
That eftablifhments cannot be juflly found-
ed on a right in the magiftrate to impofe his
own fentiments in religion upon his people,
muft, if the reafonings hitherto purfued are
allowed to be folid, be fufficiently clear. For
whence can this right arife ? It cannot accrue
to him by virtue of his office. That is mere-
ly civil , and for him to affume the direction
of confcience in confequence of it would be
going beyond the end of his power, and ex-
ceeding the bounds of his authority. It can-
not be given him by the confent of his fub-
jects. To give up the independence of con-
fcience upon merely human authority, to any
government, is making a facrifice to it, which
they have no right to make. In this fenfe,
they are not at liberty to call any man maf-
Principles of Toleration, &c. 25
ter upon earth; and from hence it is no
obfcure, nor diflant, but a near and obvious
inference, that to fuppofe the office of the
magiilrate juftifies him in demanding fuch a
fubmiffion from thofe, who are under his
power, is to make it incompatible with re-
ligion, and letting the duties of the man and
the citizen at irreconcileable variance. Let
it be ferioufly confidered to what this leads.
If religion has a real foundation, and the
obligations of it are immutable, and yet no
man can become a fubjecl of civil govern-
ment, without implicitly refigning his con-
fcience into the hands of the magiilrate ;
upon this fuppofition, I fay, (for, let it be
obferved, it is only upon this fuppofition
that this argument is formed) fubmiffion to
magiilracy will be unjuftifiable, and go-
vernment itfelf will be fhaken : fince it af-
fumes to itfelf an authority, which no earthly
power can claim, and exacts a fubje&ion
which no man can have a right to yield,-
If, again, to fupport government on this
principle, it mould be aiferted, that the ma-
giilrate has fuch an authority over conscience,
what becomes of religion ? For a proper
authority.in the governor to prelcribe, will al-
ways bring with it a correfpondent obligation,
on the governed, to obey : nor is this confe-
quence to be evaded by laying, that, in fuch
cafes, a man mud be willing to fubmit to fuf-
E ferings,
26 An Enquiry into the true
feririgs, rather than do evil. Where a rule of
truth and duty is acknowledged independent
on, and fuperior to, the pleafure of the magif-
trate, this reply is good. But if the direction
of the magiftrate is allowed to be the rule
of our conscience, or the ftandard, by
' which we are to govern our fentiments, and
practice, in points relating to God ; confor-
mity to it will become the higheft principle
of our actions, and v/hatever he enjoins mull
of courfe be our duty. However he mo-
dels, enlarges, or contracts religion, (let it
be remembered this argument is ftill con-
ducted upon this fuppofition only) it is our
part to obey ; and, though he fhould com-
mand things contrary even to his own con-
fcience, which from political or other views
is very poflible, we muft be bound in
confcience to comply. And is this, I was
going to afk, a principle which can be a-
dopted by any one, who knows what religion
and virtue mean, and is animated with a
fincere regard to either ? But it is needlefs.
To afcribe fuch a power as this to any
earthly fuperior is in reality to annihilate
religion ; and, inftead of fuppofing it to
have a real immoveable foundation in truth,
to refolve it all into the will of a fallible
mortal. Nor will it be eafy for perfons to
extricate themfelves from the difficulties,
which thus prefs them clofe on both fides,
till
Principles of Toleration, Sec. iy
till they are brought to feparate the power
of the magiftrate to guard the rights and
fafety of the fubject, and maintain his own
authority for that purpofe, from a right to
afiume a junfdiction over confeience, which
belongs to a much higher tribunal ; and thus,
while they render unto Casfar the things
which are Caefar's, referve for God, the
things which are God's.
The only juft, reafonable and honourable
conception of human eftablifhments of reli-
gion, is that of provisions made by the
governors of a ftate, for advancing the
knowledge and practice of religion and vir-
tue. According to this idea they ftand on
the fame bafis, and may properly be refer-
red to the fame general rank, with all pub-
lick institutions for the cultivation of the
minds, and improvement of the morals of
men : only, when well conftrucled, incom-
parably fuperior to them all, in weight, in-
fluence, and dignity. They are in our own
country, if I may be allowed the expref-
fion, (in which I am fure not the mod
diftant thought of difrefpect to our eccle-
fiaftical eftablifhment is admitted) they are, I
fay, incorporations by the legislature for
the propagation of the gofpel at home ; and,
by a wife profecution of the ends of them,
may be productive of Angular benefits to the
prefent and future interefts of men. But
E % then,
2# An Enquiry into the true
then, confidered in this light, I apprehend
they cannot be deemed laws for the whole
community, and univerfally binding on the
members of it , but endowments in favour of
thofe, who comply with the terms of them,,
and fubmit to the regulations enjoined by
them. As human appointments they may-
be examined, and have any defects attending
them calmly pointed out , and methods for
the improvement of them may be laudably
fuggefted Whatever political neceffities may
in fome cafes have given rife to provifions to
the contrary, in themfelves they muft certain-
ly be akerable : and as it is a principle, in all
well constituted governments, that no parti-
cular inilitutions erected by them, mould
contradict thofe primary maxims, by which
all civil focieties ought to be guided ; fo it
mull be farther allowed, that eftablifhments of
religion themfelves fhould be regulated with
a religious regard to thefe maxims. Proceed-
ing now upon thefe data, it will be eafy to
arrive at the proper conclufion. For if, in
all human focieties, the religious rights of all
men ought to be preferved to them inviola-
ble ; if it be a maxim too certain to be de-
nied, and too important to be given up, that
every man in the choice of his religion, is
to confider himfelf as accountable to God,
and bound to worfliip him according to his
will, and not according to the commandment
of
Principles of Toleration, Sec. 29
of men , if thefe are truths, there can be no
difficulty in difcerning, that all forcible me-
thods of bringing perfons to comply with
religious eftablifhments are abfolutely un-
warrantable. No encroachments on the na-
tive, original, rights of men, to procure
them a more extenfive reception, can be
juflified. Perfuafion alone is the inftrument,
by which they fhould gain ground. The
evidence of their doctrines, the goodnefs of
their inftitutions, and their conformity to
the great ftandard, by which they are con-
fefledly to be tried, are the only arguments
by which they are to be recommended ;
and no power mould be annexed to them,
or exerted in favour of them, to compel
fuch as difTent from them to embrace them.
Upon what principle, indeed, can the ufe
of fuch coercive meafures be juftified ? Of
themfelves, eftablifhments can claim no au-
thority to employ force for this purpofe.
The civil power gives them their exiftence,
invefts them with their privileges, and con-
fers upon them every diftin&ion, which they
pofiefs. If the magiftrate has no right to
exercife dominion over confeience, in himlelf,
lie can impart no fuch right to them ; nor
can they acquire it in confequence of his
appointment : for, however he may think
proper to encourage the members of them,
the limits of his power, with refpect to the
other
30 An Enquiry into the true
other members of the community, are Hill
the fame. Their common rights, as good
fubjects, are not deftroyed or lefTened-, nor
can any zeal for his own fentiments, or the
fentiments of one part of his fubjects, vindi-
cate his withholding his protection from
the other. And no judicious friend of efta-
blifhments can be difpleafed with the manner
in which thefe points are here ftated, or
think it has any unfriendly aipet, on the
ufefulnefs and honour of fuch appointments.
Thofe, who are for building them on the
ruins of the rights of human nature, and
can never be fatisfied that they are fafe, or
can be permanent, till all, who in any inftance
depart from them, are brought into fubjecltion
to them, are, in fact and eventually, their moil
dangerous enemies. It is from this excefiive
zeal for them, that fome of the ftrongeft pre-
judices againft thefe inftitutions have derived
their exiftence. To reprefent them as carry-
ing fuch claims with them is, in reality, taking
the fureft way to difcredit them ; and the
greateft harveft of profelytes, gathered by fuch
means, would be no acceflion to their praife,
or any advantage to the caufe of religion.
" Cultus dei nullus ell nifi ab animo vo-
" lente procedat. Voluntas autem docenda
" $c fuadendo elicitur : non minis non vi,
" Coactus qui credit, non credit fed credere
*' fe fimulat ut malum vitet. Qui mali fen?
" fu,
Principles of 'Toleration, Sec. 31
" fu aut metu extorquere affenfum vult, eo
" ipfo oftendit fe argumentis diffidere." Grot,
de Verit. R. C. Lib. vi. . 7.
In all the views then, which have been
taken of this fubject, the refult is the fame ,
that liberty in matters of religion is the
right of all ; that a right to protection from
the magiftrate is the juft confequence of their
claim to this liberty ; and that no difference
of opinion, refpecting modes of worfhip, or,
in a word, any thing, which does not inter-
fere with the rights of others, can juftify
his laying any reftraints upon it. And great
would be the pleafure to every liberal mind,
if, amid ft all the inftances of a wife and
vigorous attention to other branches of li-
berty, which run through the general fyftem
of our excellent laws, this alfo had been
kept more fteadily in view. But to the
religious rights of men, it is apprehended
that feveral of our laws are not altoge-
ther fo favourable ; and if, upon an appli-
cation of the principles, here advanced on
the fubject of Toleration, to them, this (hall
be found to be the cafe, it is hoped that
pointing it out will give no offence. To
fay of the bed code of human ftatutes that
they are not without defects, can be no un-
due prefumption ; nor can defiring to have
thefe defects removed have any thing in it
inconfiftent with the character of the bell
friends
32 An Enquiry into the true
friends to our conftitution. And if in this
part of my defign feveral particulars ihould
be mentioned, which have been more than
once laid before the publick ; it is not be-
caufe there is the leaft defire to give dif-
gufl to any perfons among us, or be-
caufe any pleafure is taken in the recital -,
but for this reafon only, that if they were
omitted, the juftice and weight of the re-
flections made upon the fubjecr. could not
be underflood.
Laws relating to DifTenters from the efta-
blifhed religion in popiffi reigns have no con-
cern here. They are all, it is prefumed, either
formally or virtually repealed. But upon the
revival of the reformation, an act was paffed, h
by which it is enacted, that all, who " have
" no lawful, or reafonable excufe to be abfent,
u fhall endeavour themfelves to refort to
*' their parifh church, &x. where common
" prayer fhall be ufed, upon pain of punim-
" ment by the cenfures of the church, and
" upon pain that every perfon fo offending,
" fhall forfeit, for every fuch offence, twelve
" pence." By a fecond ftatute, * paffed in the
fame reign, the fame offence, in every perfon
above the age of fixteen years, fubjeefs the
offender to a fine of twenty pounds for every
month,
h Statutes at large, by Basket and Lintot, 1758.
vol. ii. 1 Eliz. cap. 2. . 14.
J 23 Eliz. C3p. 1. .5.
Principles of 'Toleration, &c. 33
month, during which he fhall fo offend 5
and if the faid offence ihall be continued
for a twelvemonth, he fhall " over and
befides the faid forfeitures," be bound with
two fufficient fecurities in the fum of two
hundred pounds at leaft, to his good beha-
viour, and this bond to continue in force
until they " conform themfelves, and come
" to the church, according to the true mean-
" ing of the ftatute made in the firft year of
" her Majefty's reign." In the 29th of the
fame reign, another act was patted, to enforce
that juft mentioned of the 23d ; and after that
the celebrated act of the 35th of Eliz. took
place, by which, attendance on the fervice of
the common prayer is again required ; k and
all perfons above the age of fixteen, who, be-
fides abfenting themfelves from the eftablifhed
divine fervice for the fpace of a month, fhall
be prefent at any affembly, conventicle, or
meeting, under pretence of any exercife of
religion, contrary to the laws and ftatutes of
the realm, are made fubject to imprifonment,
in which they are to remain till they conform,
and make fuch fubmiffion and declaration of
conformity, as is afterwards enjoined. '
All offenders who do not, within three months
after conviction, conform and make fuch fub-
miflion, upon warning by the act preicribed,
are obliged to abjure the realm ; and it is
F farther
k 35 Eliz. cap. 1. . i, 2. ' Sect. 3. ejufd. cap.
34 An Enquiry into the true
farther enacted, that if they either refufe to
abjure, or if, after abjuration made, they do
not depart ; or if, after their departure, they
return without fpecial licence from her Ma-
jefty, in every fuch cafe, the perfon offending
mall be adjudged a felon, and fuffer as in
cafes of felony, without benefit of clergy.
In the two following reigns little occurs
in the ftatutes which is very material to my
prefent purpofe. Some acts indeed were paf-
ied, in the time of James I. againft recu-
fants, containing fome claufes, which, it is
implied in the act of Toleration, might, as
well as thofe mentioned, be extended to protec-
tant diffenters , but of thefe I fhall not enter
into any detail. From the 4th year of Charles
I. to the 1 6th no Englifh parliament was
held -, the firft called that year was almoft
inftantly diffolved, m and, after the meeting of
the fecond, confufions broke out ; a total
fubverfion of the eftablifhed church enfued ;
a new ecclefiaftical polity rofe up in its room ;
and ordinances in many refpects equally fe-
vere, and repugnant to all the principles of
chanty, juftice and humanity, with thofe
which have been mentioned, were publifhed
by the powers, which had then the afcen-
dant, in fupport of it. But foon after the
Reftoration things returned into their former
channel^,
!n It met the 13th of April, and was diffolved the
cth of May. Macadey's Hift.
Principles of ^oleration^ &c. %$
channel, and new laws againft thofe, who did
not conform to the ecclefiaftical eftablifhment
were introduced; of which notice mult be
taken. The celebrated act of uniformity,
1 662, forbids n any perfon, not having epii-
copal ordination, to celebrate the Lord's
Supper, under the penalty of one hundred
pounds for every offence ; another claufe of
the fame act declares, that every perfon, who
is by that act difabled, [and the 15 Car. II.
cap. vi. feet. 7. adds prohibited from preach-
ing,] who mall during fuch difability preach
any fermon or lecture, fhall be imprifoned
for three months. By feet. 8. of the fame act
it is enacted that every fchoolmafter, though
only teaching youth in any houfe, or private
family, (hall fubferibe a declaration contain-
ing, among other things, a promife to p con-
form to the liturgy of the church of En-
gland as by law eftablifhed ; and it is added q
that if any fchoolmafter, or other perfon
teaching youth in any private houfe or fa-
mily, fhall undertake fuch inftruction before
licence obtained, from the arch bifhop, bi-
fhop, or ordinary of the diocefe, and " before
" fuch fubfeription and acknowledgment,"
as is by this act enjoined, he fhall, for the
firft offence, fuffer three months imprifonment,
and for the fecond, and every other offence,
F 2 fuffer
. 14 of the att. . 21. p . 9.
1 . 11.
36 An Enquiry into the true
fuffer the fame imprifonment, with the addi-
tional penalty of the forfeiture of five pounds.
Before this, by the very firft act r of this fef-
fion, it had been made criminal for five or more
of the perfons called quakers, of or above the
age of fixteen, to affemble themfelves at one
time in any place, under pretence of joining
in a religious worfhip not authorized by the
laws of this realm : the penalty appointed is
any fum not exceeding five pounds for the firft
offence, or ten pounds for the fecond-, and
for want of diflrefs, or in cafe of non-payment
within a week, imprifonment and hard labour
for the fpace of three months for the firft
offence, fix for the fecond : and for the third
offence it is enjoined, that they fhall either
abjure the realm, or be liable to tranfpor-
tation , unlefs they take fuch oath or oaths s
for which they ftand committed, and give
fecurity that they will, tor time to come,
forbear to meet in any luch unlawful affem-
bly : in which cafe they are discharged of
the penalties aforefaid. In the year 1665,
the act for restraining non-conformifts from
inhabiting in corporations, generally known
at that time, and mentioned by writers
fince, by the name of the five mile acl, was
patTed. l By this ftatute, all parfons, &c.
who have not declared their unfeigned affent,
&c.
r 13, 14 Car. II, cap, i. . 2. s . 5,
t 17 Car. 11. cap. ii.
Principles of 'Toleration, &c. 37
&c. and have not fubfcribed the declaration
contained in feci:. 9. of the late act of unifor-
mity, u and fhall not take the oath prefcribed
by this act, (and all perfons preaching in any
unlawful aflembly,) are forbidden, till they
have taken this oath, to refide within five
miles of any town, which fends members to
parliament, or of any place, wherein they had,
fince the act of oblivion, been parfons, &c.
under the penalty of forty pounds for each
offence , and, upon refufal of the oath, after
fuch offence fworn againft them, are liable to
imprifonment for fix months. And fuch per-
fons are farther enjoined, w " to frequent divine
" fervice, as eftablifhed by the laws of this
" kingdom,'* or elfe to abftain from teaching
publick or private fchool, or from taking any
boarders or tablers, to be inftructed by them-
felves or by any other, upon pain of forfeiting,
in like manner for every fuch offence, the fum
of forty pounds. And this wars followed, in
the 22d year of the fame reign, by another
act againft conventicles, x which fubjects eve-
ry perfon of the age of fixteen years, who
fhall be prefent at any affembly, &c. under
colour or pretence of any exerciie of religion,
in other manner than according to the liturgy
and practice of the church of England, to a
fine of five millings for the firft offence, y and
of ten {hillings for every fucceeding one. z
The
u 13, 14 Car. If. cap. iv. v . 4. x 22 Car. IT.
cap. i. y . i. z . z.
.'Ji)J 066
38 An Enquiry into the true
The preacher at every fuch affembly is liable
to the penalty of twenty pounds for the firft:
offence, and of forty pounds for each fuc-
ceeding one. a By the fame ad, a fine of
five pounds is impofed on all conftables, &c.
who fhall willingly omit giving information,
of fuch meetings or conventicles held with-
in his precincts, &c. to fome juftice of the
peace, or the chief magiftrate ; b and then it
is declared, contrary to the general rule
with refpect to all penal ftatutes, d viz. that
they muft be conftrued ftrictly, that " this
" act and all claufes therein contained, fhall
" be conftrued mod largely and beneficially
" for the fupprefiing of conventicles, and
" for the j unification and encouragement of
" all perfons to be employed in the execu-
" tion thereof." Upon this footing I ap-
prehend the laws againft aftemblies for reli-
gious worfhip, in any manner not conform-
able to the eftablifhed, remained during the
refidue of that reign, and through the reign
which fucceeded it. What alteration was
made in them, by the aft of Toleration, will
be more properly confidered hereafter ; in
the mean time let us take a review of them,
as far as this account has been continued.
And nothing, I think, can be more evi-
dent than that, through the whole tenor of
them
a 3- b ". c . 13.
* Blackllone's Comment, introd. . 3. p. 88.
Principles of Toleration, &c. 39
them, non-conformity, mere fimple non-con-
formity to the eftablifhed worfhip, and join-
ing in religious worfhip in any manner not
according to the practice of the church of
England, are confidered as proper objects of
punifhment by the civil power, and loaded with
heavy penalties. I am fenfible it may be faid,
and juftice requires it mould be acknowledged,
that feveral of thefe laws were originally or
chiefly levelled againft the roman catholicks, e
and that the incurable enmity which they dis-
covered to the perfon and government of
Queen Elizabeth, was the caufe of their being
pafTed. It may pofiibly be faid farther, that
as the roman catholicks were the perfons
againft whom the penalties of thefe acts
were chiefly intended, fo abfenting from
church is confidered in them as a mark of
popifh diflaffection, and that it is for this
reafon fuch a ftrong guard is placed againft
it. Let this alfo be admitted, as far as
it can with any juftice be defired. It mult
neverthelefs be acknowledged, that the bare
act of abfenting from the eftablifhed worfhip,
abftracted from any connexion with other ob-
noxious circumftances, is prohibited that in
confequence of thefe laws, thofe penalties
might fall, indifcriminately, on all who did
not comply with thefe claufes of them ; and,
from
e Preamble to 13 Eliz. cap. ii. Heads of cap. i.
and preamble to 23 of Eliz. cap. i.
40 An Enquiry into the true
from 1662 to the Revolution, it will not be
difputed, I imagine, but the whole body
of thofe, who did not join in the eftablifhed
worfhip, were fuppofed to be comprehended
under them. f The act of the ift of Eliza-
beth, appears to be directly and originally
intended againft: all who did not thus con-
form. The aft of the 35th of Elizabeth
mult be allowed to be aimed againft fectaries
in general : and, whoever is acquainted with
the ftate of things at the palling of it, will
have little doubt but that it was defigned to
affect the puritans, if not principally, yet
equally with any other. If I had faid it was
contrived almolt folely with a view to them, I
mould not, I preiume, have erred ; fince it is
declared in the fame act, g that no popifli
recufant mail be compelled or bound to
abjure, by virtue of it. That it was on
account of protestant dilTenters from the
national form of worfhip, that all the laws
made in the time of Charles II. which I have
been now enumerating, that it was, I fay, on
their account, that thefe ftatutes were palTed,
and againft them that they were immediately
intended to operate, is univerfally allowed.
Roman catholicks, it is well known, were
the
f The ftatute of 16 Car. II. cap. iv. for fupprefling
of feditious conventicies exprefly declares the 35th of
Eliz. to be in force, and that it ought to be put in
execution.
8 . 12.
Principles of Toleration, &c. 41
the favoured party, with fome of thofe at
the helm, during a confiderable part of that
reign. Whatever was done to reftrain them
was extorted by the voice and the murmurs
of the people, and the remonftrances of the
two houfes, when they began to be aware of
the defigns of the court. The proteftant non-
conforming were the obnoxious kt of men,
who were to be harrafled and oppreffed.
No fhort indulgencies were granted them,
but what were fufpe&ed, at lead, to proceed
from fome dangerous defigns ; and when it
was found that no ftratagem was effectual to
bring them to countenance meafures, which
they judged inconfiftent with the liberties of
their country, and hazardous to the intereft
of the proteftant religion, all the power,
which the laws had thrown into the hands
of their enemies, was exerted to crufh them
with as much eagernefs as ever.
Now, in order to juftify thefe laws, it
mull be fuppofed that non-conformity is in
itself a crime, and a very heinous one.
For to fay that the laws have made it a
crime is faying nothing : fince, upon this
principle, there is no action, how innocent,
how laudable foever, but what may be con-
verted into a crime, and the law, by which it
is punifhed, may be vindicated. If this me-
thod of reafoning be juft, it was a crime in
Daniel to perfiit in his devotions after they
G were
42 An Enquiry into the true
were forbidden by the decree of Darius ; and
the death, which the enemies of that noble
example of fortitude in the worlhip of the true
God, infilled on his Suffering, was no more
than he merited. By this argument it was cri-
minal in any of the Jews to acknowledge Jefus
as the Meffiah, becaufe it had been made a
rule among them, that if any man did con-
fefs that Jefus was the Chrift, he fhould be
put out of the fynagogue. When the fpirit
and fitnefs of any laws are under confideration,
the determining point is, what reafons there
were, antecedently to their being enacted, to
induce the legislators to adopt them ; and
the queftion in all penal laws in particu-
lar muft be, whether the thing prohibited
by them is ' in itfelf a juft object of punifh-
ment. If this great requifite to their j uni-
fication be wanting, all attempts to defend
them will be impotent and vain.
To affert, that non-conformity to the efta-
blifhed religion of any country, is in itfelf
an offence againfl the flate, is to maintain a
pofition unsupported by fcripture, reafon and
experience, and indeed confuted by every one
of them. St. Paul evidently fuppofes, that
non-conformifts might be the bell of fubjects
to the civil magiflrate, when he enjoins chris-
tians, whofe religious principles flood in the
mofl direct oppofition to the eftablifned wor-
fhip of the heathens, to be " fubjecl to the
" higher
Principles of Toleration, &c. 43
" higher powers," b and commands that they
fhould be taught to be " iubjed: to principa-
*' lities and powers, to obey magiftrates, and
" to be ready to every good work." ' St. Peter
muft have been fully convinced that difap-
probation of the authorized religion of the
Roman empire was perfectly confiftent with
loyalty to the rulers of it, when he requires
thofe to whom he wrote, k " to be fubjecl to
" every ordinance of man for the Lord's
" fake i whether to the emperor ' as fupreme,
" or unto governors as unto thofe, who are
" fent by him for the punifhment of evil-
" doers, and the praife of them that do well : "
and yet, while he warns none of them to
fuffer as evil-doers, encourages them, if they
fuffer as chriftians, not to be afhamed, but
to glorify God on this account. Where in-
deed is the repugnance between not aiTenting
to the eftablifhed worihip, and retaining at
the fame time the warmefl: affection to the
welfare of the flate ? Men may yield fub-
jeclion to the civil laws of their country, and
bear their fhare of the publick burthens ; be
zealoufly attached to their fovereign, benevo-
lent to their fellow fubjects, unite with them
in their endeavours to fupport the authority of
the government, and to refift their common
enemies whether foreign or domeftick ; and,
G 2 in
h Romans xiii. i. ' Titus Hi. !.
k 1 Ep. ii. 13. x Grot, & Beza on the verfe.
44 An Enquiry into the true
in a word, enter chearfully into every mea-
fure, which is neceffary to advance the peace,
profperity, and reputation of the community,
though they may differ widely in their reli-
gious fentiments from their fuperiors, or from
the majority of thofe about them. Nor is
this mere theory. It is certain and notori-
ous fact. In Switzerland we have an inftance
which comes nearly up to this. There pro-
teftant and popifh cantons are all vigorous
in keeping a confederacy, for the preferva-
tion of their common liberty, unbroken. In
the United Provinces we have an inftance
which comes nearer to it {till. Calvinifts, ar-
minians, and other religious denominations of
that republick, have unanimoufly fhown them-
selves ready to afTert its freedom , purfued
the interefl of their country with unremitting
attention j and, notwithstanding all their va-
riety of religious tenets, live amicably one
with another. Our own nation has for many
years happily afforded us a cafe of this na-
ture, which is fully in point ; and whoever
looks back to the year 1745, and recollects
the fervour and animated refolution, with
which all parties among us rofe up, as one
man, to repel the attempt, which was then
made, to fubvert the fettlement of the illuf-
trious houfe of Hanover in the throne of
thefe kingdoms, and defend the wife and be-
neficent conftitution, from which they derive
fuch
Principles of 'Toleration, ore. 45
fuch invaluable bleflings : whoever attends
to this, and to the friendly intercourfe, which
fubfifts between the members of our religi-
ous eftablifhment, and thofe, who in fome
relpects differ from it, will want no farther
confirmation of what is here afferted. It is in-
deed only a contracted view of things, which
can lead any to call it in queftion. And if any
inftances mould be fuppofed to occur in hif-
tory to the contrary 4 it will be found, upon
examination, that they have never been really
occafioned by the juft principles of religious
liberty. The non-tolerating fpirit has been
the true fource of them j
" Hoc fonte derivata clades
" In patriam, populumque fluxit."
If non-conformity then is in itfelf no of-
fence againft the ftate, and yet diffenters, as
fuch, are (till confidered as the proper fub-
ject of punifhment, from what principles
muft this judgment be formed of them ?
From thefe, and thefe only, that all perfons
are bound to take their fentiments in religion
from the legiflature : that it is a duty in-
cumbent on them, to acquiefce in, and con-
form to, what the ruling powers eftablifh ; and
that to feparate from it, and conduct religi-
ous worfhip in a manner not prefcribed by
them, is a fufficient realon for inflicting pe-
nalties
46 An Enquiry into the true
nalties upon thofe, who are convicted of it.
From thefe maxims the laws, which are now
under confideration, derive their exiftence j
and whoever carefully weighs the language,
and enters into the fpirit of them, will find
that thefe are the principles which are im-
plied in every one of them. It is true, in-
deed, that different reafons are amgned in
the laws themfelves for palling them. The
35th of Elizabeth, fo often mentioned, is
faid to be " for the preventing and avoiding
" of fuch great inconveniencies and penis,
" as might happen and grow by the wicked
" and dangerous practices of feditious fecta-
" ries and difloyal perfons. " m But, befides
what has been fuggefted of thefe a<5ts in gene*-
ral, and is particularly true of this, that they
are fo conftructed as to involve all, whether
peaceable or- feditious, loyal or difloyal non-
conformifts, in one common condemnation;
it will perhaps be found that mere diffenting
from, and cenfuring fome appointments of,
the eftablifhed religion, are the very grounds,
in part at leaft, upon which this fedition is
laid to their charge. And this appears to me
evident from the fubmiffion, which, by this
act, perfons who had tranfgreffed it were al-
lowed and required to make, in order to
avoid the penalties which they had incurred ;
and which, as it may poflibly never have been
feen,
m See the beginning of the aft.
Principles of Toleration, &c. 47
feen, or perhaps fo much as heard of, by
fome perfons, into whofe hands this eflay may
fall, is here tranfcribed. " (1) I A. B. do
" humbly confefs and acknowledge, that I
" have grievoufly offended God in contemn -
" ing her Majefty's godly and lawful go-
" vernment and authority, by abfenting my-
" felf from church, and from hearing divine
" fervice, contrary to the godly laws and
" ftatutes of this realm, and in ufing and
" frequenting difordered and unlawful con-
" venticles and affemblies, under pretence
" and colour of exercife of religion ; (2)
" and I am heartily forry for the fame,
" and do acknowledge and teftify in my
" confcience, that no other perfbn hath,
" or ought to have, any power or auth'o-
" rity over her Majefty ; (3) and I do pro-
" mife and proteft, without any diflimula-
" tion, or any colour or means of any dif-
" penfation, that from henceforth I will, from
" time to time, obey and perform her Ma-
" jefty's laws and ftatutes in repairing to the
" church and hearing divine fervice, and do
" my uttermoft endeavour to maintain and
" defend the fame." n And if from hence we
defcend to the laws of later date, which have
now been before us, we mail find the fame,
or.fimilar principles interwoven with them,
und infeparable from them. Thay clearly
fuppofe,
! 5-
48 An Enquiry into the 4rue
fuppofe, that the rule enjoined by the .go-
vernment ,is the rule, to which every perfon
in the realm is to conform in publick wor-
fhip. That his non-compliance with it
brings him under a guilt cognizable by hi*,
man tribunals, and juftifies the magiftrate in
laying any penalties upon the fuppofed de-
linquents, which fhall be judged neceffary to
compel them to fubmifiion. To go on to
enquire, after this, how far fuch laws are re*
concileable to the principles of Toleration,
would be almoft an affront to the under-
standing of the reader. More has been faid
already than would have been thought need-
ful, were it not for the implicit approba-
tion, which fome may give to thefe laws
without ever reflecting on the foundation of
them. -On this account it was thought rer
quifite to trace them up to their firft prin r
ciples -, and nothing can be clearer, than that
they {land in the fulleft oppofition to all
claims of religious liberty. According to thefe,
in matters relating to God, every man is to
judge for himfelf. But thefe laws virtually af-
fert, that the magiftrate has a right to judge
for him. The principles of Toleration affirm,
that, for the ufe of this merely religious
liberty, no man ought to be hurt with ref-
pect to his peace, freedom or eftate. Thefe
laws imply, that for this caufe alone, he may
be punilhed with refpect to all thefe interefts :
that
Principles of Toleration, &c. 49
that is, in other words, that he may be
perfecuted for confcience fake ; for thefe are
the very principles upon which perfecution
relies for its defence : they are pregnant with
all the evils of which that dreadful iniquity is
productive , and, wherever they are admitted,
vindicated, and the effects of them juftified,
the principles of Toleration are fo far exclu-
ded. To be confident advocates for the con-
tinuance of penalties founded on fuch a bafis,
and friends to the rights of confcience in
their due extent, is impofiible. So long as
thefe laws remained in their full force and
extent; fo long as they were the rule of
judgment upon all thofe who thought them-
felves bound to diffent from the ecclefiaftkal
eftablimment ; no liberty of choofmg any
kind of religious publick worfhip but that,
which was commanded by the government
was acknowledged to belong to the fubjects
of it. All fuppofition of any right in per-
fons to be tolerated in departing from points
determined by that eftablifhment, was fo far
from being fuffered to take place, that it
was rejected as utterly inadmillible, and a
power virtually afcribed to the magiftrate of
prefcribing, to thofe under his jurifdiction,
whatever articles and forms of religion he might
think proper. For the fame principles, by
which conformity to thefe doctrines, and modes
of worfhip was required, might, with equal
H juftice,
50 An Enquiry into the true
juftice, have been applied to any others en-
joined in like manner ; the fame arguments
which were urged for inflicting punifhments
on thofe who refufed fubmiffion in cafes
already fettled, would have been judged
equally clear and cogent for the ufe of them
in all others of a fimilar nature ; and no
pleas of confcience, how fincere foever, would
have been allowed as a fufficient reafon for
exemption from them.
When the ever-memorable and aufpicious
Revolution had taken place, the feverity of
thefe laws was exchanged for a toleration of
the fentiments and worfhip of thofe perfons,
who had fo long and greatly fuffered in confe-
quence of them , and the dawn of conftitu-
tional religious liberty broke in upon the
kingdom. The diffenten joyfully and grate-
fully owned the alteration, which was made
in their favour , and it is with the fame dif-
pofiticns, that the difTenters of thefe days
look back to the relief, which was then
granted to their predeceiTors, and attend to
the happy confequences, which may be con-
fidered as refulting from it to themfelves. It
is with a degree of pain that they find them-
felves under a neceifity of fpeaking of it as
in any meaiurc inadequate to the relief of
thofe, who, upon the right principles of To-
leration, ought to be placed in fecurity. But
if the limitations contained in it be confi-
dered.
Principles of Toleration, Sec. 51
dered, it will appear that the eafe given by-
it to confeientious diffenters, though great,
was not abfolutely a complete one, even at
the time of its paffing. In thefe days it is
much lefs fo. The great changes which the
religious fentiments of all denominations in
the kingdom have undergone fince, exclude
great numbers who are entitled, upon all the
principles of reafon and humanity, to enjoy
religious liberty, from the benefits of it ; and
render the Toleration which is granted by
it, in fact, a very defective, contracted one ;
and that not only in the light of political
juftice, but I believe it may be added, upon
the very principles of many of the moft
eminent adverfaries to any extenfion of it.
The quakers, it is well known, are entitled
to the advantages of the act of Toleration,
upon fubferibing the declaration againft
tranfubftantiation, making a declaration of
fidelity to the government, profefling their
belief in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghofl, as
one God, and acknowledging the infpiration
of the Holy Scriptures. But, in order to be
comprehended in thele claufes, it mull furely
be neceflary for a man to profefs himfelf a
quaker ; and every preacher among the dif-
fenters, who cannot do this, muft either fub-
fcribe to all the other articles of the church,
excepting the 34th, 35th, 36th, part of the
H 2 20th,
. 13. compared with . z.
52 An Enquiry into the true
20th, and that part of the 27th which relates
to infant baptifm, or be liable to all the
penalties to which he would have been fub*
ject, had the act of Toleration never taken
place. Let it be confidered then who are,
by the tenor of this ad, deprived of all ad-
vantages from it. By the ill and 2d ar-r
tides, not only thofe, who openly contradict
the doctrine of the Trinity, as ftated in the
articles, but every one, who, from the diffi-
culties which he may find attending it, is not
able to declare his afTent to it, is debarred
from all the benefits of Toleration.- The 5th
article excludes all thofe, who think with the
Greek church concerning the proceftion of
the Holy Ghoft And the 8th article, by de-
claring the creed of Athanafius to be one of
thofe which ought thoroughly to be received
and believed, will be thought by many to ex-
clude all thofe, who do believe this part of
the eftablifhed dodtrine, if they cannot at thi
fame time declare all thofe, who do not re-
ceive it, fubject, without doubt, to perilh
everlaftingly. By the 17th, all thofe who
are diffatisfied with the doctrine of predefti-
nation, in what is commonly ftiled the calvi-
niftick fenfe of the do&rine, and, who are
neverthelefs perfuaded that in this fenfe it is
taught in the article, and that the profefiion
of it, in this fenfe, is implied in their fub-
fcription ; all thefe, I fay, are debarred from
the
Principles of Toleration, &c. $$
the benefit of the ad in like manner. To
fay, they miftake the meaning of the article,
does not leffen but, in the event, rather ag-
gravates the hardfhip : fince, in this cafe,
they are excluded, not for any error in doc-
trine, but merely by underftanding the article
to teach a doctrine, which not, only the lan-
guage of it ftrongly favours ; but which it was
generally fuppofed to teach for many years
after it received the fanction of authority ;
and which the commons in parliament, in the
year 1628 p avowed, in opposition to the
{tn(e of the arminians, to be delivered by
publick act of the church of England, and
by the general and concurrent expofition
of the writers of that church. It was, in-
deed, if bifhop Hoadley's authority may
determine this matter, one of thofe points,
which were once thought as fundamental
and efiential to orthodoxy, by numbers in
the church of England, as they ftill are
among fome proteftants, till, as he tells us, s
archbifhop Laud altered the whole current
of the received doctrine, and accommodated
this doctrine fo altered, to the words of the
articles firft framed upon another fcheme.
It will, again, be a matter of very ferious
doubt, at lealt, with many, whether, in con-
sequence
p Macauley's hiit. vol. ii. p. 35. 8vo. ed.-
1 Anfwer to the reprefentation of the committee,
p. 268.
54 An Enquiry into the true
fequence of the fubfcription required to the
1 8th article among the reft, fuch as cannot
bring themfeives to deny falvation to the moll
virtuous heathens, and in a word to all
thofe who have not heard of the gof-
pel, are not excluded alfo. And it is pre-
fumed it is out of all queftion, that all
perfons, who do not acknowledge, that the
" fault or corruption of the nature of every
" man, that naturally is engendered of the
** offspring of Adam in every perfon
" born into the world, deferveth God's wrath
" and damnation ; " r all, who afcribe to
man, fince the fall of Adam, an ability " to
' turn and prepare himfelf by his own na-
" tural ftrength and good works, to faith and
** calling upon God ; " s and all thofe, who
fcruple to affirm, that " works done before
" the grace of Chrift and the infpiration of
** his Spirit, are not pleafant to God ; " l and
know not how to fay they Ci doubt not that
" they [fuch works] have rather the nature
" of fin : " there is no queftion, it is appre-
hended, but that all, who are included in
this number, will, if fubfcription implies be-
lief, be incapable of deriving any fecurity
from this act. Let thefe particulars now
be weighed, and how narrow will the limits
of this Toleration appear ? Were the efta-
blifhment of the church of England now to
be
r See article 9th. ! Article 10th. : Article 13th.
Principles of Toleration, &c. $%
be formed, or were it thought expedient to
model the articles of it anew ; the appeal is
chearfully made to the laity, the*clergy, and
even to thofe, to whom the government of
the church and clergy is committed, whether
fubfeription to all thefe decifions woulcl ftill
be required ? Would they think it confiftent
with the wifdom and charity, with which
they would undoubtedly conduct fuch an
undertaking, to make afienting to proporti-
ons fo doubtful, and which have been the
fubject of fo much controverfy, as fome of
thefe are known to have been, the condition
of being admitted to the miniftry ? Would
they fix upon that as the center of union,
which, inftead of uniting, muft divide ; give
uneafinefs to numbers of candid, thoughtful,
and ingenuous minds ; and perhaps keep ma-
ny of thofe, whofe concurrence would be a
ftrength and ornament to their caufe, from
continuing among them? As the eftablifh-
ment is now conftituted, it is a fact univer-
ially known, that there are the wideft dif-
ferences of fentiment, among the clergy of
it, upon feveral of thefe topicks. So far is
this from being accounted a reproach, that
it is appealed to as a token of the extenfive
charity and moderation of the church of
England, that fuch freedom of thought fub-
fifts among thofe, who are received into her
bofom. And,, if they think it would be
wrong
cjo An Enquiry into the true
wrong to infift upon greater uniformity of
judgment in thofe of their own body, can it
be reafonable to exact it from others, in or-
der to their enjoyment of a Toleration ? It
is undoubtedly an error (and deferves to be
efteemed a very great one) when doctrines of
doubtful difputation, and unefTential to the
intereft of religion, are bound upon the mi-
nifters of any church, and thofe, who can-
not afient to them, are rejected as unfit to
partake of the advantages, or difcharge the
duties of that important character. The
nearer any eftabliihments approach to pure,
original chriftianity, and the more the genu-
ine fpirit of the gofpel appears in them, with
all its native luftre and fimplicity ; the more
excellent, the more amiable they are in the
eyes of their friends. The more fuperior to
all the objections of their enemies they will
always be found : and, wherever any advances
are made in bringing any of them to great-
er degrees of this perfection, there is not a
judicious advocate for truth and charity, who
will not be ready to fay, with an illuftrious
promoter of both ; Blejfed be they who have
contributed to fo good a work. u But to con-
tend for making doctrines greatly controvert-
ed, and which, if they were not already in
poiTefiion of a place among the articles of
the
u Biihop Hoadley's poitfeript to his anfwer to Dr.
Hare,- p. 207.
-
Principles of Toleration, &c. 57
the church, \vould perhaps never be admitted
into the number : to contend, I fay, for ma-
king thefe the boundaries of a Toleration^
and, (which is the plain meaning of it, how
harfhly foever the expofition may found,)
plead for leaving thofe, who fcruple affenting
to them, fubject to the terrors of fines,* impri-
fonments, and all the hardfhips which thefe
penalties may bring with them, hurts huma-
nity itfelf. Thefe are feverrties, which it ought
not to be fuppofed one, even of thofe gen tie-
men, who oppofe making the act of Tolera-
tion more extenfive, would wifh to take place.
And I am perfuaded that I do no more than
juftice to the equity and candor of their dif-
pofitions, when I fay, that were the execu-
tion of the laws which flill fland in force,
againft all thofe, who cannot come up to the
conditions required by the act of Toleration,
to be revived, they would find all the ge-
nerous feelings of their hearts revolt at the
confequenoes. But what part then might it
be expected every one, who profeffes himfelf
a friend to Toleration, when the queltion
comes before him, and waits for his fober,
impartial decifion, fhould choofc ? What ?
But to join in placing it on a more enlarged
bafis, and procuring for thofe, who requeft
it, that extenfive legal fecurity, which the
fpirit of the gofpel requires they fhould enjoy,
I and
58 An Enquiry into the true
and to which natural juftice gjves them art
unqueftionable title ?
And this, of courfe, brings on the confe-
deration of the ftep, which the diffenters fo
lately took, of applying for an enlargement
of the liberties which are granted them by
the act of Toleration. It may indeed be
fuppofed that, if what has been faid be
granted, all occafion to add any thing far-
ther upon the fubjeft is precluded. And
were the principles of religious liberty admit-
ted in their juft confequences, and the nature
of the application made by the diffenters
univerfally underftood, it would be fo. But
fince the attempt itfelf has been much unap-
prehended , fince there are perfons, truly ref-
peftable for their underftanding and cha-
racter, who have fo amazingly overlooked
the natural inferences from their own prin-
ciples, as to profefs to adopt the moft ge-
nerous notions of Toleration, and yet mown
themfelves utterly averfe from granting the
relief requefted , it cannot be fuperfluous to
debate the queftion. The reflections which
the attempt has drawn upon the diffenters,
render it every way expedient ; and, far from
deferving to be thought an inftance of over-
officious zeal, it is but a mere aft of juftice
to remove the objections which have been
made to their conduct. The time and man-
ner of their application are only circum-
ftances.
Principles of Toleration, &c. 59
ilauces, in which the merits of their cafe
have little or no concern. It is the nature
of their requeft, which is to determine the
judgment of every man relating to it : and
if it fhall appear, that what they afked was
reafonable in itfelf; that it was not afked
without occafion ; -that the evils apprehend-
ed from granting it were either imaginary,
or insufficient reafons for rejecting it ; - that
their general character and conduct afford no
ground to judge them unworthy of the li-
berty which they fblicited ; and that the
terms upon which they defired to enjoy it,
were adequate to every demand, which could
reafonably be made upon them : if thefe
things fhall be found evident, it is prefumed
their application ftands clear of exception, and
will be found to aim at nothing contradictory
to the principles of good fubjects, confiftent
proteftants, and fincere chriftians.
Let the nature of their requeft be firft
confidered. For if this was wrong in itfelf,
the point is already decided. But upon what
principle can this be afferted ? Will it be
maintained that the laws from which they
defire a farther exemption are, in themfelves,
right and equitable ? If there be any re-
maining who can ferioufly retain this opinion,
and think it fit that mere difTenters from the
doctrines of the church mould continue lia-
ble to legal penalties, it is natural for them
I z to
So An Enquiry into the true
to efteem the matter of the requeft wrong.
In their apprehenfion the ad of Toleration,
limited as it is, . muft be unreafonable ;
and they muft judge, in oppofirion to the
fenfe of our rulers, who firft palled the act,
and the repeated and moil publick declara-
tions of all the conftituent parts of the le-
giflature, that, inftead of being extended, it
ought not to be in any degree maintained, but
revoked, and that all the feverities of former
days mould be acted over again. But it is
not to perlbns of this complexion that the dif-
fenters can be fuppofed to refer the merits of
fheir late petition. They founded their hopes
of fuccefs in a perfuafion, that perfecuting laws
were now allowed to be indefenfible ; and that
the juftice of Toleration, and the political wif-
dom of it too, had the univerfal fuffrage. That
the matter of their petition therefore, mould
be condemned, as wrong in itfelf, by gentle-
men profeffing to efpouie thefe fentiments, ap-
pears to them beyond explication. Whether
any of the articles, which the diffenters may
fcruple to fubfcribe, in any refpect vary
from the truth or not, is a point, into
which it is utterly needlefs here to enquire.
The queftion to be attended to is this ; does
their doubt of any of them affect their cha-
racter as good fubjects ? Is their declining
to profefs their belief of a number of doctri-
nal propofitions, (the fenfe, of fome of which,
is difputed, and the certain meaning of others
of
Principles of Toleration, &c. 6x
of them utterly contradicted, by numbers of
the ableft, moft learned, and moft refpectable
of thofe, who enjoy the emoluments, which
are annexed to the eftablifhed church,) a fuf-
ficient ground to judge them unworthy of the
protection of the government r" If not, it
mull ftill be a wonder, that any of the advo-
cates for Toleration fhould aiBgn tlie mere
matter of the requeft of the diffenters as a-
caufe for rejecting it ; and will continue to be
fo till a very convincing reafon is afligned for
the refufal. For it is to be confidered, that,,
if Toleration be the general right of all, who
approve themfelves good members of fociety,
thofe, who oppose it are the perlbns, uporr
whom it is incumbent to prove that it ought
not to be granted.
The author of the letter to the difTenting
minifters, who applied to parliament for re-
lief, has, it rauft be owned, attempted to
Ihow this. His reafon in fhort is, that the
act paHed for the relief of diffenters at the
Revolution, confines Toleration to matters of
difcipline only ; and that the Toleration then
granted to protectant diflenters, as fuch,
could not be meant to extend farther than
to the points, in which they differed from
the national church, with which, at that time,
they agreed in points of doctrine. w Had
this reaioning been advanced by a pcrfon of
lower
v ' See the letter, p. 4 n.
62 An Enquiry into the true
lower abilities, many would be difpofed to
think that the bare ftating of this objection
to the application of the diflenters, is, in ef-
fect, anfwering it, and that it might be fafely
difmilTed without any reflections. But the de-
ference due to a writer, who certainly dis-
covers much, both of the language and ad-
drefs of a gentleman, in his manner of wri-
ting, requires that more particular notice
fhould be taken of it. With fubmiffion to
his authority then, it may be obferved, that
his reprefentation of the ad of Toleration
itfelf is not perfectly exact. He fays, that
the act " did not mean to tolerate doctrines
" different from thofe of the chriftian church
" in general." * How then came the body
of the quakers to be included in it ? Their
doctrines, at that time, were certainly differ-
ent, in lbme refpects, from thofe that were
generally held by the chriftian church ; and
their denying the obligation of the facra-
ments in particular, was a departure from the
moil univerfal confent of the fentiments and
practice of the chriftian church, which can
be urged in favour of any points, which
were ever called into queftion. Whoever at-
tentively confiders the conftruction of the
act of Toleration, and the judicious remarks,
which the author of the cafe of the dhTenters
has made upon it, will find reafon to believe*
that
x Letter, p. 9^
Principles of 'toleration, Sec. 63
that the intention of the act was to com-
prehend all proteftants, who aflented to the
received doctrine of the Trinity , and that
the meafure of their fubferiptions, or decla-
rations, relating to religious doctrines in other
particulars, was adjufted to the degree, in
which the feveral denominations of them
were known to approach to, or depart from,
the articles of the national church. Had not
this been their defign, it is inconceivable that
the quakers, who flood at fo great a dis-
tance from the eftablifhed church, in points
of doctrine as well as difcipline, fhould have
been comprehended in it, and " enjoy, " a9
the ad exprefsly fays they fhall, " all the
" other benefits, privileges, and advantages,
" under the like limitations, &c. which any
" other diffenters fhall or ought to enjoy,
" by virtue of this act. " y And can it be
fuppofed then, that, if the prefbyterians or
independents had differed farther in their fen-
timents, than at that time they did, from the
articles of the church, the fame parliament,
which confulted in this manner the eafe of
that body, (which, ufeful and refpectable as
it is, was certainly the leall popular, in ref-
pect to religious fentiments, of all the other
tolerated bodies of men,) can it be fuppofed,
I fay, that, in this cafe, the eafe of the
other diffenters would not have been equally
con-
' * 13.
64 An Enquiry into the true
confulted ? z But, admit the fad to be as this
author has ftated it ; of what weight is it ? Is
it a confequence, that becaufe that parliament
went only thus far, fucceeding ones mult go
no farther ? If the diffenters of thofe times
needed nothing more to make them eafy,
and therefore afked for nothing more, does
that make it unreafonable for their fucceffors
to afk and obtain more? In a word, the
queftion is not, what was formerly determi-
ned, but what the rights of confcience make
it equitable for men to requeft, and for the
legiflature to grant : and if the laws againft
diffenters were wrong in themfelves, and
thofe, who ftill lye open to them, have an
equally juft plea to be placed out of the
reach of their oppreflion with thofe, who are
now ilieltered from it ; nothing can be plain-
er than that they ought to be put in the
fame fecure fituation ; and that the requeft
of the diffenters was juft and good.
To fuppofe that Toleration is to be limi-
ted, by the articles of the national church, is,
in effect, reducing the Toleration of protef-
tant diffenters to very little in this ; and, in all
roman catholick countries, it is giving up the
Toleration of the whole body of proteftants
entirely. They differ from the national
churches of the ftates, of which they are parts,
not
Eifhop Burnet fays the Toleration a>5t palled
i-ASitY. vol. ii. p. jo. folio,
Principles of Toleration, &e. 65
not only in difcipline, but in doctrines. Their
opinions are inconfiftent with thofe, which are
eftablifhed by law, in points, which the ca-
tholicks efteem fundamental ; in thofe which
concern the rule of faith, and the objects
of worfhip : and they have given it as their
judgment, that the honours paid to faints,
to images, and to the hoft, are nothing lefs
than idolatry. Will this writer therefore fay,
they ought not to be tolerated, but lie open
to the punimment of the gallies, imprilbn-
ments, and all the tortures of the inquifi-
tion ? If he efteems this too abfurd to be
admitted, with what confiftency can he fup-
pofe, that the diffent of proteftants from
a Protestant church, in fome points of
doctrine, deftroys their title to a legal Tole-
ration ? It is no juftification of this Oppref-
fion, to dignify the principles, thus enforced
by penalties, with the founding titles of doc-
trines, which have been acknowledged by the
chriftian church in general, and the fuppofed
fundamentals of chriftianity. The content
of all the churches upoo earth, in favour
of a doctrine, creates no obligation upon
others to receive it, in oppofition to their
convictions, that it is unfupported by fcrip-f-
ture ; nor authorizes the application of penal-
ties to enforce it. Chriitianity itfelf is not
to be propagated by the terrors and cruel-
tics of perlecution. It is not many ages
K finer
66 An Enquiry into the true
fince tranfubftantiation, and all the mercilefs
load of the other enormous corruptions and
fuperftitions of popery, were " maintained "
by all the eftablifhed churches of the weftern
world, and it was efteemed impiety to dif-
pute them. To infinuatc, therefore, that
perfons become unfit for a Toleration, by
departing from thofe doctrines which an
eftablifhed church, or all eftablifhed churches
(if that expreflion is liked better) judge to
be fundamental ; to infinuate this, I fay, is
fixing a brand upon the Reformation. It
opens a door to oppreflion wherever fuch
diflent from the publick religion is to be
found, and, in a protestant, is fomething
aftonifhing. Every church, as Mr. Locke
obferves, and as it has been innumerable
times obferved after him, is orthodox to
herfelf, and judges her doctrines to be thofe
of chriftianity. The church of Rome main-
tains feveral of thofe doctrines, which are
utterly rejected by proteftants, to be the
ancient catholick faith of chriftianity , and,
whatever fome of her more moderate mem-
bers may do, in her publick, authentick
acts, excludes all, who deny them, from
being truly parts of the chriftian church.
So that wherever the faith of that church
is eftablifhed, all thofe who adhere to the
doctrines of the Reformation, mull, upon
this author's own principles, lofe their claim
to-
Principles of Toleration, &c. 67
to a Toleration. But there is a peculiar
unreafonablenefs in confining this privilege
within thefe limits, if, as he affirms, * there
are doctrines inferted in the articles of the
church, which were not intended by the
compilers as credenda, or things necefTary
to be believed. To be obliged to fubferibe
thefe is furely more than can be neceflary
to a Toleration, even upon his own princi-
ples : nor is it any alleviation of the bur-
then, that the dirTenting miniflers were for-
merly fuppofed to approve them, and have
actually afTented to them in their writings. b
Whether they approve them or not, the
dirTenting miniflers are laid under the fame
necefilty of fubferibing these articles, as
they are under to fubferibe the mod fun-
damental doctrines, which can be named a-
mong the whole collection : and it very little
mitigates the hardfhip, that they are fpoken
of under the foftening title of articles of
peace. c This is a diftinction in the articles,
which the diffenters know not that they
have any warrant from publick authority to
make ; and, if by this is meant, that they
are only articles not to be oppofed, the an-
fwer is, that to declare an approbation of,
and fubferibe to an article, is, in the judg-
ment of the difienters in general, an act of
K 2 a very
* Letter, p. 7. b Ibid. p. 7. c Ibid. p. 9.
68 An Enquiry into the true
very different amount from a bare promife
po keep filence in relation to it.
But fuppoflng all this to be admitted in
favour of the diffenters, their application is
flamed by mauy, as being a needlefs one.
The ftate of their cafe, delivered to the
members of the two houfes, is fpoken of as
dwelling upon appearances of a perfecution d
which no where exifts, and only flipping as
it were by accident, into an indirect acknow-
Jedgment that the violation of the law has
been connived at. But was it pofllble for
the cafe to be otherwife drawn up ? Does
not every petition for the redrefs of grie-
vances, carry in it a reprefentation of thofe
grievances ? Were the diffenters to lay be-
fore the legiflature their deflres to be relieved
from burthens, without fpecifying what thefe
burthens were ? To charge them, though
ever fo indirectly, with an intention to infi-
nuate, that they fuffer hardlhips from which
they are entirely free, is to load them with
an imputation of unfairnefs, for which they
have given no caufe. Their complaint was
not of the fpirit of the times, but of the
fpirit of the laws, from which they hoped to
be relieved. This, whether thofe laws are
executed, or unexecuted, is in itfelf ftill the
fame ; and if the recital of the fubflance of
them excites " horror and companion," c the
reproach
d Letter, p. > r Ibid, ubi fup.
Principles of tolerat'ioi^ &c. 69
reproach falls upon them, and not upon the
administration of the government, the mild
and gentle tenor of which is thankfully per-
ceived, and chearfully owned, by every dif-
fenter in the kingdom. But connivance is
not legal Toleration , non- execution of the
penal laws, againft non-conformifts, is a very
different thing from proper exemption from
them. And, if this be what they are per-
fuaded they may reafonably aik, upon what
principle they can be blamed, merely for
making an application for it, is little fhort
of being utterly incomprehenfible. Was it
ever imputed to men as a crime, as an in-
stance of reftlefihefs, or even a want of
decorum, that they defired not to be left
open to oppreflion ? Or can it be any reafon
for cenfuring perfons as not eafily fatisfied, '
that they are folicitous to be guarded from
dangers, to which they are always expofed,
and from which, though they have no im-
mediate profpect of it, great evils may pof-
iibly come upon them ? To fay, that the
diflenters labour under no grievance, though
in one fenfe it may be allowed, falls far fhort
of the point. If the laws in queftion are in
themfelves unreafonable ; if feveral of them
were at firft dictated by a fpirit of revenge ;
calculated for bad purpofes ; and may be
made the instruments of breaking in upon
the
f Letter, p. 37.
jq An Enquiry into the true
the peace, property and liberty, of perfons
of the moft unexceptionable behaviour, and
irreproachable character, whenever the ma-
lice, animofity, or avarice of fome of the
worft of men, may inftigate them to fuch
means of gratifying thefe pafiions : if this,
I fay, be really the cafe, to be liable to
fuch evils is itfelf a grievance ; a grievance
which it would be want of prudence, of re-
gard to the welfare of thofe in whom we
are interefted, and of a juft concern for the
common caufe of liberty itfelf, not to be
folicitous to remove. To reprefent the pe-*
tition of the dilTenters, therefore, as a foli-
citation for what is apparently fomething,
but really nothing, g is, with fubmifiion to
a late writer, fcarcely confident with that
candor of which he makes fuch ample pro-
feflions. And were it fo, the difficulty would
only fall back upon himfelf, and leave every
man, who is unwilling to admit unfavourable
thoughts of the juftice and humanity of his
fellow creatures, at a lofs for a reafon for
his being fo much difturbed, by the diflen-
ters making an application for, what he
calls, an unfubftantial favour. h To fay, " it
" was too much to be granted, and too little
" to afk, " * may pleaie the imagination by
the antithefis, but has too much the air of
an enigma in it ever to fatisfy the under-
ftanding,
* Letter, p. 4. h Ibid. p. 4. ' Ibid. p. 37,
Principles of Toleration, Sec. yi
Handing. It may found prettily, but will
not bear the teft of a fober examination. If
the judgment of the petitioners is to deter-;
mine this point ; what they apprehend it rea-
fonable to requeft, and worthy of their ap-
plication to obtain, is neither too great to
be granted, nor too little to be afked. If,
on the other hand, the perfons, to whom
the petition is addrefTed, allow the requeft
to be reafonable, it may be, indeed, in their
opinion too little to be afked (for it mould,
in that cafe, have been given without afking)
but it can never be thought too great to
be granted. And mould it be fuppofed, once
more, that the requeft is deemed an unrea-
lbnable one ; the contradiction flill remains.
The fubjefb of the requeft may, it is true,
be judged too great to be granted : but then
it can never be too little, but too much,
abundantly too much to be afked. To con-
fider a grant as next to nothing, and yet ta
oppofe it with the ferioufnefs with which
this author feems to oppofe it, is, in reality,
almoft without a precedent. The fmallnefs
of a favour has often been deemed a good
reafon for beftowing it ; but it is not eafy
to recollect an inftance, in which it has been
judged, of itfelf, a fufficient ground for
with-holding it. And were the alteration
defired by the petition of the diffenters, only
an apparent improvement of the Toleration,
there
72 An Enquiry into the true
there is reafon to believe, that many of the
eftablifhment, as well as the difTenters, would
fincerely rejoice to fee it adopted, as a pur-
gation of our laws from what numbers con-
lider as fo many blemifhes in them, the ta-
king away of which they cannot help think-
ing would greatly encreafe their beauty, and
give new force to that noble, and, in the
main, juft encomium of them, that the
" idea and practice of political and civil
*' liberty flourifh in their higheft vigour in
" thefe kingdoms, where it falls lfttle fhort
se of perfection." k But many it feems judge
differently, and prefage that fuch an altera-
tion would be productive of great and a-
larming evils : and it is fit that the ob-
jection mould be impartially confidered ; for
it muft be confeffed it is a popular one,
and fuch as may ftrike forcibly on the minds
of thofe, who do not attend carefully to the
real ftate of the queftion.
It has been faid, then, that were the re-
queft of the difTenters to be granted, here-
iies would increafe, and the common faith
of christians be fubverted ; and therefore it
is fit, (for this muft be the meaning of the
objection) that the laws relating to diffenting
minifters mould continue as they are. It is
eafy to fee, that this reafoning afcribes to
the magiftrate a right of retraining herefies,
or
''- Bhckflcne's Comment, vol. j. p. 126.
Principles of toleration, &c. J3
or opinions which are not orthodox, by pe-
naltiesj or elfe it proves nothing. If it is
allowed to afcribe this right to the magis-
trate, it proves too much ; much more than,
I am perfuaded, thofc, who now make ufe
Of it, will be difpofed to acknowledge. For,
by the very fame train of reafoning, all the
edicts of heathen governors againft chriftians,
the execution of, the decrees of popes, and
councils, againft protectants, by popifh prin-
ces, and, in a word, all perfecuting exertions
of power whatever againft thofe, who depart
from eftablimed doctrines, might be eafily
juftified. But other alarming confequences
of complying with the defire of the diflen-
ters are apprehended. One of their writers,
it is alledged, has charged every church
which maintains the doctrine of the trinity
with being idolatrous. ' Becaufe the diflenting
minifters inferted no offer in their bill, to
fubfcribe to the doctrine of the Trinity, it
is concluded, not by the ftricteft rules of
logick, that this is one doctrine which fome
of the petitioners defire to be at liberty to
oppofe or deny j m - and from hence a fup-
pofition is formed, that there is a poflibility
" that by urging the precedent of the ido-
" latrous people of Canaan, " n the hearers
of diflenting minifters may be ripened " for
" the expulfion or extermination of " the
L members
*
' Letter, p. 11. r ' Ibid. p. 13. ? IbiJ. p. 15.
74 dn Enquiry into the true
members ofthe eftablifhment, " as an a6fc
" of obedience to the divine command.'*
Difienters, it appears, are not the only peo-
ple liable to be thrown into panicks. But
to be ferious. All this is only a proof of
what has been already fuggefted ; that the
petition of the difienters has been ftrangely
mifunderftood. All, which is defired by it,
fo far as the articles are concerned, is, in
effect, this ; that diflenting minifters may be
exempted from the penalties, to which their
not having complied with the fubfcription
to them, required by the act of Toleration,
leaves them fubje<5b. The words of the bill
are, " Whereas, by an act made in the ift
ct year of the reign of King William III.
" &c. preachers or teachers of any diflent-
" ing congregations, are required, &c. to
" declare their approbation, and to fubfcribe
" the articles of religion, mentioned in the
" ftatute of the 13th of Queen Elizabeth,
" except as in the faid act, &c. is excepted ;
" and whereas, many fuch perfons fcruple to
ct declare their approbation of, &c. be it
" enacled, &c. that fo much of the faid
" aft, &c. as relates to the faid articles, or
" to any of them, fhall be, and the fame is
" hereby repealed." Suppofe this had been
granted, what would have been the eftecl: ?
Would
See the bill, at the end of Mr. Mauduit's pam-
phlet.
Principles of 'Toleration, &c y$
Would it have put the dififenters into pof-
feftion of any legal liberty to write or preach
againft any of the doctrines of the eftablifh-
rnent, from which they are now excluded ?
By no means. Not to be obliged to fub-
fcribe to, and declare an approbation of
principles, i& one thing ; to write or
preach against them is another. To defire
not to lie under a load, which would crufh
the moft humble, filent, ancl cautious dinen-
ter, as well as one of the moft oppofite
qualities j and to afk for a legal right to
give way to thofe angry, indecent invectives,
to which fome perfons feem to think the
diffenters fo greatly addicted, are two points,
fo totally diftinct, that it is furprifing that
gentlemen of abilities mould ever confound
them together. The generality of diffenting
minifters have very little inclination, I be-
lieve, to conlume the time devoted to their
publick inftructions, in preaching againft the
cftablilhment. They have greater points in
view. But had their application been fuc-
cefsful, the doctrines of the national church
would have been very little, if any thing,
more expoied to fuch attacks, than they arc
now it has mifcarried. It has been fuppo-
ied p that the provifo in the act of Tolera-
tion, [ which fays " that nothing therein
" contained mall extend, or be conftrued to
L 2 " extend,
" See the letter to the difTentcrs, p. i:, 13.
7 6 An Enquiry into the true
" extend, to give any eafe, &c. to any pa-
" pift, or to any perfon that fhall deny,
" in his preaching or writing, the doctrine
" of the bleffed Trinity, as it is declared in
" the aforefaid articles of religion : " q ] would
have been affected if the bill in queftion
had pafled. There is room for a doubt, at
leaft, whether this clauie would have been
at all affected. r But grant that it would ; -m-
pro-
q n-
1 It is allowed, that the expreflion in the bill, at
;he end of the cafe of the diffenters, is very comprehen-
five : for it defires that Co much of the faid aft, &c. as
relates to the faid articles, or to any of them, may be
repealed. And, were the expreflion to be taken fingly,
and independently ,cf any other words, with which it
is connected, there might be fome appearance of reafon
for the application, of which the author of the letter to
the diflenting rainilters, fuppofes it capable. But, if
it be considered that it makes only the conclufion
of a fentence, in which the fcruples of the difTenting
minifters, relating to fubfcription, are afTigned as the
ground of their application to parliament; that the
defired repeal of what relates to the articles, in the
aft, has a direft reference to thofe fcruples, and is
propofed as a remedy againft the difficulties occafioned
by them : when all this is laid together, 1 fay, it may
furely be concluded, that the faireft and moft candid,
and indeed the moft natural interpretation of the words
is, that a repeal of fo much of the aft, as relates to
a subscription to the faid articles, or to any of
them, is defired. Ir is not, indeed, after all, of any
material confequence, which of thefe conffruftions is
fuppofed to be the trueff. However this may be de-
termined,
Principles of Toleration^ Sec. yy
profecutions for herefy, according to the no-
tions given of it by our laws, s woulo) have
flood upon the fame footing, upon which
they fland now - 3 i the honour of the liturgy
would have been kept under the fame pro-
tection, which now defends it;' the ioth
of William III. would have retained its au-
thority ;* in a word, all thefe guards of the
principles and worfhip of the eftablifhment,
would have fubfifted in their full vigour.
And upon what foundation then, can the
application of the diflenters be confidered as
a requeft for permiflion by law, to preach
againft the fundamental doctrines of the na-
tional church ? Or with what propriety could
the compliance of the legiflature have been
reprefented as ' fetting up the opinion of a
fmall body of. diffenting minifters againft
the fundamental doctrines of the chriltian
church ?
termined, the do&rine of the Trinity is ft ill guarded
by law, as ftrongly as can be defired. But when fur-
mifes are fubftituted inftead of certain facts ; when fuf-
picions fupply the place of proofs; and infinuations
are introduced to play upon men's prejudices, alarm
their jealoufies, and divert their attention from the
real point in queftion ; it is fit that the requeft of the
diflenters fhould be precifely ftated, and cleared from
all thofe mifapprehenflons, which might incline per-
fons to think unfavourably of it, and form difadvanta-
geous judgments of thofe who promoted it.
* i Eliz. cap. i. . 36. r 1 Eliz. cap. ii. . 9.
10, 11.
yS An Enquiry into the true
church ? Or what fhadow of reafon can
there be in urging the apprehenfion of one
thing, as a plea for retaining a power of pu-
niming perfons for another, which is utterly
different from it, and has no relation to it ?
That men may have invincible objections to
fubfcription, and yet be zealous advocates for
the doctrine of the Trinity, and the doctrine
of Satisfaction too, the warmed oppofers of
the diffenters in this affair will fcarcely de-
ny. And by what one good political maxim
can it be juftified, to contend for leaving
room to reftrain actions by the means of
laws, which, if executed, muft bring hea-
vy fufferings upon thofe, who never were
guilty of the offence, which, it is pretended,
makes them ncceffary ; and, if they are not
to be executed, muft be wholly ineffectual
to guard againft it ?
The argument, which has been drawn from
this laft confideration, to mow that a more
extenfive Toleration will not be productive
of inconvemencies, is treated, indeed, by the
author of the letter fo often cited, with fome
contempt. u But the diflenters muft beg his
pardon, if they think it merited a different
anfwer. What they advance flows with un-
deniable evidence from his own affertions - y
and he muft cither admit the juftice of it,
or give up all, which he has faid to fhow
the
u Letter, p. 21.
Principles of Toleration, &c. 79
the requeft of the diffenters to be a needlefs
one. As long as it is but intimated, that
circumftances may occur, in which it may-
be proper to have recourfe to the penal laws
againft diffenters, and the continuance of
them is contended for as neceffary, though
they are pretended to be kept up only in
terrorem ; fo long the difienters will have
reafon to be alarmed. Should the execution
of them once be put in motion, none can
fay where it will (lop : nor may it be always
in the power of the greateft perfons to check
its violence. If it is certain, on the other
hand, that no fuch thing will ever be at-
tempted, thefe laws muft lofe all their ef-
ficacy. It is too much to be taken for
granted, that the reftraints of law are always
of real ufe. w The reftraints of good laws
are real blefiings. Thofe of bad laws are real
evils. But it is only on a fuppofition that they
may be executed, that they will be either.
Indeed for this gentleman to imagine that
keeping up an obligation to fubfcribe, when,
by his own confeffion, " that part of the law,
[which requires it] " is now as dead as if the
" whole law were obfolete " x can have any
great influence upon the mode of thinking
and fpeaking, of which fuch terrible appre-
henfions are entertained, is utterly miftaking
the true fource of it. For it is not the dii-
uic
v - Letter, p. 21. x Ibid. p. 3-.
So An Enquiry into the true
ufe of fubfcription, which has produced this
freedom of thought and language upon re-
ligious fubjects | but it is this freedom of
thought, which has produced the difufe of
fubfcription. Taking away the obligation to
fubferibe would make very little alteration
in the cafe. If this liberty of fpeech mould
afterwards encreafe, the change in the law
would be fo far from , deferving to be thought
the proper caufe, that it could fcarcely be
thought, with juftice, to be the remote oc*
cafion of this increafe. The real caufes would
continue to be the fame, which they ever
have been \ the growth of an inquifitive
difpofition , and the advancement of that
largenefs of mind, which invites perfons to
propofe their fentiments freely , makes the
exertion of the civil power, on account of
difference in opinions, odious , and, thus
checks the operation of thofe laws which,
in time's of another complexion, would be
carried into rigorous execution.
But admit that, to adopt the language
which has been ufed on this occafion, he-
refies might abound fomething more , is keep-
ing up penal laws the proper remedy againft
them ? Is this a competent reafon for re-
futing the difienters that liberty, which, upon
all the juft principles of Toleration, they
are entitled to enjoy ? For to thefe principles,
after all, the appeal muft be made ; and if
they
Ptintiples of Toleration, &c. Si
they are again brought before the mind of
the Teadef, the repetition, cannot, with rea-
fon, be blamed. Gentlemen who know not
how to difpute their truth, and yet are un-
willing to admit their plain confequencesj
may, to evade the force of them, be in hafte
to fay, " 'tis needlefs to urge them they are
" admitted; but they are mifapplied." * But
when all, which is owned to be indifputable
in the right' of private judgment, (which has
generally been thought to include a right
of publick worfhip, according to that judg-
ment) feems to be reduced y to tlie bare pof-
feflion of that inward conviction',- to which
*' no power of government can extend,'" and
for which it is needlefs to fupplicate even
" in an arbitrary ftate ; " is- there not a caufe
to have reco.urfe to them ? When defiring
not. to be criminals in the eye of the ftate,
till fome real offence againft that ftate, (which
not profefling an agreement with the articles-
of the national church can never be,) is pro-
ved upon them : when this, I fay, is unfairly
confounded with " a pretended right to ex-
" empt certain publick acts, " univerfally,
ffor this word mud be underftood, though it
is not exprehed,) from the cognizance of the
civil power ; can inculcating the principles
of Toleration, in tlvefe circumftances, with
any reafon be thought needlefs ? If the
M right
>' Letter, p. 24, 2;.
82 An Enquiry into the true
right of the governors of the ftate, or of the
churchy to " prevent the opinions of private
" men from ciafhing with fuch of the efta-
" blifhed doctrines as are fundamental ; " *
that is (for this is, in fad, the cafe) which
they think fundamental, u fo long as it can be
" done ^without violence - % " if thisy I fay, be,
urged as a plea for continuing laws in force,
which, i they operate at all, muft have
fqme degree of violence in their operation ;
every man is left to judge, whether to lead
the thpuglits of men back to the true,
grounds of religious liberty, does not become
highly neceffary. Nor can it, with any rea-
fon, be faid, th,ey are mifapplied, * The
iafety of the ftate, and the principles of
Toleration, it is allowed, are in perfect
confiftence with each other. The bounda-
ries, which determine the right exercife of
power on the one hand, and of liberty on
the other^ are to be marked out with an
impartial view to both thefe important points.
But the. fafety of the ftate can never be-
rightly pretended as a reafon for laws in-
confiftent with the clear dictates of juftice
and humanity. And. that the fafety of the
itate is at all concerned in fubfcription to
a number of articles, fome of which are
owned to be fuperfluous, b to have been in-
ferred to reconcile the predeceilors of the
diflenters
2 Letter, p. 28. * Ibid. p. 18. b Ibid, p. 46.
Principles of Toleration, &c. 83
diffenters to the church, and are hbw not
confidered as important ; the diffenters never
did admit, neither do they yet admit it. They
think they may add, with reafon, that the
largeft degree of Toleration which they have
folicited, carries nothing in k e incompati-
ble with any fecurity, which the eftablimed
church can equitably defire , and believe,
that if they declare they, cannot yet fee the
manifeft impropriety of their recjueft, d it
will be no impeachment of their understand-
ing-
Whether the general character and deport-
ment of the diffenters have given. any' juft oc-
cafion for them to be efteemed unworthy of
the liberty which they have afked, is chear-
fully left to the judgment of all who are dif-
pofed to judge candidly. Their loyalty has
been acknowledged in the moft publick man-
ner. With refped to their zeal for liberty,
and the fupport of the conftitution, if we are
rightly informed, they have been honoured
with the fingular, and perhaps not wholly
unmerited applaufe, of having been, in fome
ieaibns, almoft the only deadfall adherents
to that glorious caufe. For their zeal for
the honour of chriftianity, and their merits
as advocates, in behalf of it, they prefume
they may chearfully turn themfelves to the
reverend the clergy of all orders, as their
M 2 fa-
c Letter, p. 54. d Ibid. p. 14.
$4 An Enquiry into the true
favourable judges. From the fame, refpect-
able body, they doubt not but they may
hope to receive an honourable teftimony to
the application, learning and fagacity, with
which many among them have devoted their
abilities to the illuftration of the facred wri-
tings. Jt has been urged againft them, that
{hey are an intolerant feet. They own, with-
out hefitation, that time was when too
many, who paffed under their denomination,
wpre juftly chargeable with this fpjrit -, and,
with as little hefitation they confefs, it was
a reproach to their predeceflbrs that they
were fo. But it was the common error of
t,he age. Numbers of their brethren of the
eftablilhment, were once liable to the fame
objection. But they have, in general, re-
nounced their error, and thinly their affuranr
ces of this ought to be helieved. The dif-
fenters have long fince, and umyerfally, done
the fame'; and hope they may, with equal
reafon, expect to have credit given them for
the truth and reality of their repentance,
For reafons, which have often been laid be-
fore the world, they decline conftant and
entire conformity to the worfhip of the
eftablifhed church \ but the juftice, which
they have been always ready to do to the
writings of her members, and to the piety,
learning;, and eminent attainments of her
clergy ; the zeal and refolution, with which
they
Principles of Toleration, &x. 85
they have, in very criticial and hazardous
feafons, joined with their fellow fubjefts, in
withflanding attempts, which were made for
her deftruction ; and the felf-denying fteadfaft-
nefs, with which they have refufed to con-
cur in meafures, which they apprehended were
concerted with defigns unfriendly to their
proteftant brethren, even at a time, when
too many of thofe brethren difcovered not
the kindeft difpofition to them : all thefe
are convincing tokens, that though they dif-
fent, they do it not only with charity, but
with high efteem. The general tenor of
their deportment, towards the clergy and
laity of the national church, they prefume,
gives a new proof of their being filled with
thefe fentiments. Let it not be faid, they
make a merit of this. They take a plea-
fure in owning, that great numbers of their
brethren of the eftablifhment, and thofe,
perfons of rank and eminence, have given
them a pattern of moderation and gentlenefs,
which it was their duty and praife to imi-
tate, and treated them with an' affability and
good nature, fufficient to make impreflions
on hearts, far lefs fufceptible of friendly
fentiments than thofe, which, it is hoped,
are commonly lodged in the bofoms of dif-
fenters. But this may be faid with great
truth, that the diffenters have had no ex-
ample of this kind fet before them, but
what
S6 An Enquiry into ihe true
what they hare been earneftly defirous to
follow , and have received no marks of be-
nevolence and friendship, but what they
have always been folicitous to return, in the
moft ample manner, which has been in their
power. And though, from their late appli-
cation to parliament, occafion has been ta-
ken to introduce oblique charges of viru-
lence and hatred ; e and the relief, which
they afked, has had the furprizing complaint
made of it ; f that it " could only anfwer
" the purpofe of manifeftirig to the world,"
that they " were indilpofed to tolerate " their
brethren, " as an eftablifhment : " they de-
lerve to have a much milder fentence paf-
fed upon them. Their minifters, in particu-
lar, upon whom thefe intimations are like
chiefly to fall, are men of a better fpirit :
men, who would have rejoiced to clofe
breaches* rather than to widen them ; and
who, when they have reflected upon the
character of many of the clergy, whofe abi-
lities they efteem, whofe learning they Value,
and whofe virtues they honour, have filently
lamented, that there fhould be fuch a wall
of partition remaining, to keep them and
their brethren aiunder. They have the fatis-
fa&ion to obferve, that the gentleman him-
jfelf, from whom thefe expreflions are taken,
]n other parts of his pamphlet, fpeaks in
milder
c Letter,- p. 56, 58. f Ibid. p. 58.
Principles of Toleration* &c. Sy
milder terms of them. He owns, indeed,
the merit of feveral among them, with a
politenefs, which entitles him to their molt
refpe&ful acknowledgments ; and makes it
rather furprizing how difpofitions fo oppo-
fite to thofe, which really influence them,
and views fo diftant from thofe, # which were
the true fprings of their application, could
be imputed to them.
One thing more remains to be confidercd ;
which is, the declaration which the diflenters
offered, inftead of the fubfcription, now re-
quired, by law. And forry I am that there
ihould be any oecafion to vindicate this from
objections , and much pleafure would it have
given me to have fpared fome animadver-
iions, which, by the exceptions made to
this part of their conduct, are rendered
unavoidable. The declaration, as it ftands
in the bill, prepared for the relief of the
diflenters, is this. 7, A. B. do declare* as in
the prefence of Almighty God, that I believe
that the Scriptures of the Old and New Tejta-
ment contain a revelation of the mind and will
of God , and that I receive them as the rule
of my faith and pratlice. g The reflections
which the author of the letter to the dif-
ienting minifters makes, upon this declara-
tion, arc thefe. " You offer to fubfcribe to
** the Holy Scriptures, as containing a re-
" velation
* The cafe of the diflenters, p. 60, 6i.
83 Ah Enquiry into the true
" velation of the mind and will of God>
" and being the rule of your faith and
" practice. You know full well, gentlemen,
" that there is not an error, however ob-
" noxious to chriftians, or however fubverfive
" of civil fociety, which may not be cover-
*' ed, under the cloak of this fubfcription.
" Need I tell you, that tranfubftantiation,
" purgatory, invocation of faints, idolatry,-
" murthers, rebellions, and almoft every evil
" work, have been drawn from mifinterpre-
" tations of fcripture ? Had you refufed all
" fubfcription, the ftate had been full as
" fecure as in the offer of one fo very un-
" fatisfactory and indeterminate. It had,
" really, the appearance of trifling with the
" legiilature, which, as you could not intend
" it, had, at beft, the appearance of pre-
" fuming upon their total inattention to mat*
" ters of this fort, or upon their taking
" them very fuperficially into confiderati-
on." h
In the twenty eighth page of this pam-
phlet, " an eminent writer " among the dif-
femers, is charged with carrying his idea of
liberty, quite to a mocking extreme. Shock-
ing is a ftrong term, and were it to be re-
turned upon this gentleman, on account of
the length to which he is carried, by his
zeal for fubfcription to human articles, he
might
R Letter, p. xc, ) i.
Principles of Tokratisn, &c. 89
might pofiibly complain. But certainly ir.
may be faid, that he has, in this palTage,
made ufe of cxprefiions, which the calmeft,
mod difpafiionate perfon, cannot read with-
out emotion*. Could it have been expected,
indeed, that an author, whofe performance
exprefles fo much of a concern for chrifti-
anity and proteflantifm, would have allowed
himfelf in fuch degrading language as this,
concerning a folemn declaration of cordial
aflent, to the whole body of the facred wri-
tings ? Is that doctrine, which is according
to godlinefs , ' that icripture which the
apoftle declares, to be " profitable for doe-
" trine, for reproof, for correction, for in-
" ftruction in righteoufnefs, that the man of
" God may be perfect, thoroughly furniflied
" unto all good works, " k fo loofe, defec-
tive and indeterminate, " that there is not
an error, how obnoxious foever, or however
fubverfive of civil fociety, but what may be
covered under the cloak of fubfeription to
it ? " ' When it is the acknowledged defign
of the whole tenor of the books of the Old
and New Teftament, to eitablim the worfhip
of the only 'living and true God, and to
teach men to deny all ungodlinefs and worldly
lufts : m can the ferious profefTion of our
owning them, as the rule of our faith and
N pra&ice,
1 I Tim. vi. 3. ,: 2 Tim. iii. 1 3.
1 letter, p. 10, II. m Titus, ii. i?..
90 An Enquiry into the true
practice, be juftly fuppofed to contain in it,
no affurancc of the orderly, virtuous deport-
ment of thofe who make it ? When we find
this revelation of the will of God declaring,
in the moll expreffive terms, that neither
idolaters, nor adulterers, nor thieves, nor
drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, mall
inherit the kingdom of God *, is the language
of it fo indeterminate and void of force, that
it places no effectual guard againft thofe enor-
mities r* Becaufe it may have happened, that
tranfubftantiation, purgatory, invocation of
faints, idolatry, and other errors and evil
works, have been fheltered under mifmterpre-
tations of fcripture -, are the words of it to be
fuppofed fo deftitute of clearnefs and precifion,
as to give no fufficient pledge to govern-
ment, for the good behaviour of thofe who
own their divine authority ? Or would the
refufal of all fubfcription, which might have
left it uncertain whether perfons acknow-
ledged any religion at all, have made the
ftate full as fecure as the profeflion of thofe
principles, which carry in them every awful
reftraint from evil, and every powerful mo-
tive to good actions, which can be prefented
to the human mind ? If this declaration is
not an adequate iatisfaction to the legifla-
ture, what iatisfaction can the fubfcription
required by the act of Toleration be ? Men
of franrick, enthufiaflick minds, may abufe
every
Principles of Toleration, 6cc. 91
every thing. Men of difhoneft and infin-
cere hearts may, and will, fubferibe any
thing ; take any oaths, conform to any teft,
which human policy can invent : and no
articles, were they to be diverfified and ad-
j ufted to the exigencies of the times ever
fo often, and encreafed till they equalled the
mod voluminous confefllon, which ever ex-
ifted, will be fufficient to bind them. All
thefe fecurities muft imply common fenfe and
integrity, in thofe who give them, to make
them of the leaft avail : and if this gentle-
man allows, as he profeflfes to do, (and, I
doubt not, with fincerity,) that the petitioning
minifters have fome right not to be account-
ed deftitute of either of thefe qualities ; he
will, it is hoped, upon fecond thoughts ac-
knowledge, that the fecurity, which they of-
fered, in their propofed declaration, was nei-
ther trifling nor fallacious ; but as determi-
nate and perfectly adapted to prevent every
doubt, which the rulers of a date can rea-
fonably entertain, as any of which they could
poflibly have made a tender. The legiflature
has indeed already, in effect, accepted it as
fufficient, in the cafe of the quakers ; for
excepting the eftablifhed doctrine of the
Trinity, (which, however true it may be in
itfelf, and how important foever in a theo-
logical view, makes the reftraints of the gof-
pel upon immorality and difobedience to go-
N 2 vernment,
'92 An Enquiry into the true
vernment, no more precife and. determinate
than the arian or foeinian doctrine of it -, )
they are only required to profefs their belief
in the infpiration of the fcriptures. And, if
the ftate be fecured by this declaration from
them, why mould more be neceffary for this
purpofe from other proteftant diflenters ? n
To
If this writer fhould fay, that by giving fatis-
fadtion to the ftate, he means declaring an appro-
bation of fuch merely religious opinions, as the go-
vernment has thought fit to take into the national
church, he has exprefled himfelf ambiguoufiy, and not
very properly. All, which is understood by fecurity
to the ftate, in the common acceptation of the words,
and all, which the ftate can, in reafon require, is,
fufficient affurance that men will behave as peaceable
members of fociety, " pay tribute to whom tribute,
" cuftom to whom cuftom, fear to whom fear, and
" honour to whom honour is due ; " and be faithful
and bear true allegiance to thofe, who rule ever them.
But there is a much greater' imperfeilion than mere
impropriety, in making an affent to the dcclrincs cf
an eltablifhrncnt a neceffary part of the fatisfadion
due to the ftau- ; for it implies, that the magiftiate
has a right to enforce his own fenfe of fcripture, by
penalties, on thofe, who do not acquiefce in it. Whe-
ther this be the meaning of this author I will not
pretend to affirm j but it ought not to be his mean-
ing. A writer, who has expreft'ed himfelf with fuch
lauiable indignation, againft the fhare, which Calvin
had in the death of Servctus, has not left himfeif at
liberty to be an advocate for reftraining a diiTent, from
the eilablifhcd faith, even by the fmalleft puniihments ;
which a fpirit of perfecntion will always be ready to
change into greater, till it has accomplilhed the de-
itruction of all, which ftarids in the way of its fury.
Principles of 'Toleration, &c. 93
To employ many words in refuting other
objections againit this declaration, fuch as,
that it might be made by heathens, deifts,
or mahometans, (and jews might as well have
been added to the lift,) would be little better
than trifling with the time of the reader.
To acknowledge, that the facred fcriptures
not only contain a revelation of the will of
God, but that they are to be received as
the rule of faith and practice, plainly im-
plies, not barely that they contain truth, but
fo far as it is to be learnt, from revelation
only, all truth which we are bound to re-
ceive on the authority of it. The obvious
force of the expreflion is, not only that the
Old and New Teftament are a ftandard, by
which truth and error are to be judged, but
that they are the only fupernatural ftandard,
to which we are to have recourfe, for this
purpofe. And how totally repugnant this
is, to the principles of thofe who reject all
revelation ; of thofe, who admit the autho-
rity of Mofes, but reject that of Jefus ;
or of thofe, who admit the divine million
of Jefus, but fuperfede his Gofpel, by intro-
ducing the pretended million of Mahomet,
and contending for the Koran, as the rule
of faith and practice ; is too plain to need
enlargement. He indeed, who does not dif-
cern it of himfelf, will lcarcely difcern it by
the help of any arguments which can be of-
fered
94 & Enquiry into the trut
fered to him. The declaration, fairly inter-
preted, equally implies the great principles of
the Reformation, and is utterly jnconfiftent
with thofe of Popery j and, whatever fufpici-
ons might be entertained, from the compre-
henfive nature of it, by fome perfons \ yet if
the affair be impartially confidered, it will be
found the only one, which, without coun-
teracting their own views, and the avow-
ed principles of their denomination, they
could propofe. The dhTenters, it is well
known, though not more widely diftant from
each other, than many of thofe who, in the
eflablifhed church, are acknowledged as her
members, admitted to her communion, and
advanced to the higheft preferments ; are very
far from being uniform in their fentiments,
concerning the controverted points of divi-
nity. To have drawn, up, and offered par-
ticular fubfcriptions, relating to any of thefe,
therefore, would h^ve been excluding many
of themfelves from the benefit d^fired.
Could they have agreed in a confefilon, in
which the majority would have united ; to
have folicited relief only upon that footing,
would have been grofly and indefenfibly
partial. It would have been leaving the bur-
then, and that probably with much aggravated
weight, upon others, whom,, how far foever
they may be from adopting fome of their te-
nets, they think to have an equal right, up-
on
Principles of 'Toleration^ Sec, g%
on every equitable principle, to Toleration
with themfelves. But, above all, it would
have been departing from that fundamental
maxim, upon which they are proteftants and
diifenters, stnd, by adhering to which, they
think they fhall befl ferve the caufe of real
ehriftianity ; that the words of God, and not
the explications of fallible men, are the au-
thentick tefts of truth and orthodoxy. The/
thought themfelves bound therefore, to offer
no fubfeription, but to the facred writings ;
and laudably fetting aftde all their internal
diftinclions, agreed in this, as the only con-
fident and catholick principle, upon which
their caufe could be relied.
Catholick and charitable, however, as their
conduct to each other may appear; it is
charged with' difcovering a different fpirit,
towards thofe of the eftablifhment. It is 1
reprefented as confidering the confeflion of
faith of the church of England, " as a
" yoke or a burthen, too heavy to be borne
** by proteftants." To intimate this is ap-
prehended to have a manifeft tendency to
" diffolve the proteftant union ; and the
* time, it is (aid may eome, when the dif-
'* fenters will not regret, that they are ac-
" knowledged by law, as members of the
** proteftant church." Do the remonftrants,
in Holland, then, diflblvc the proteftant uni-
on,
Letter, p. 50,
gS . An Enquiry into the true
on, by rejecting fome articles of the Belgiek
confeflion ? Or are they confidered by the
ftates, as no part of the proteftant church,
becaufe they are now difTenters, in points
of doctrine, from the eftablifhed church of
that republick ? With fubmiffion to this
gentleman's better acquaintance . with thefe
things* it is apprenended that true proteftant-
ifm, and an attachment to scriptural chrif-
tianity, are the fame thing \\ that to main-
tain the fumciency and perfection of fcrip-
ture, is what properly conftitutes a protef-
tant ; that the agreement of thofe who firft
bore the name, in feveral points which were
maintained by the firft reformers, was merely
accidental to the character ; and that all, who
affent to the infpired writings, as the only
rule by which chriftians are to be bound, re-
tain their title to this honourable name. And,
the more clofely they adhere to thefe facred
oracles, and the more carefully they bring
all confeflions and fyftems of opinions to
them, as the touchftone, by which the va-
lue of all human decifions in religion is to
be afcertained, the more -confiftently and
perfectly proteftant their behaviour deferves
to be accounted. .
But it is not only with a kind of apoftacy
from proteftantifm, but want of a friendly
ipirit to the eftabliihment, that the difTenters
are charged for their late attempt. Succefs
in
Principles of Toleraiisn, &c. 97
in it, we are told, p would have " been but
" the poor femblance of a triumph ; " perfift-
ing in the attempt will be a caufe, it is
faid, for confidering the diffenting minifters
as men, who u to make their hatred to the
" eftablifhment more effectual, are ready to
" feize upon every favourable time and op-
" portunity of manifefting it.'" 4 The ap-
plication is taxed again, for it feems to be
a favourable topick, with " implying a defire
" to make a reconciliation more defperate
" than ever : " r and granting the requeft,
it is afferted, would have been declaring by
a " new law, that the bond of union, " be-
tween " his Majefty's proteftant fu ejects,
" who are luppofed by law to makltain the
** fame chriftian doctrines, is broken. " s Per-
fons of ability and refinement, may flrike
many meanings out of any meafufe, which
never entered into the hearts of thofe who
engaged in it. But this meafure authorizes
no fuch conftruction. It implies, it is true,
that the preient diffenters have objections to
fubfcribing to fome of the articles, which
their predecellors had not. But this has been
long known -, and petitioning not to be fub-
ject to penalties, on that account, makes not
the leait alteration in the cafe ; nor had the
petition been granted, would it in the leall
O have
p Letter, p. 4.1. 1 Ibid. p. 58. r Ibid. p. 3S.
Ibid. p. 22.
98 An Enquiry into the true
have leffened the ties of affection, by which, it
is hoped, thofe, who are of the eftablifhment,
and thofe, * who diffent from it, would ftill
have been bound to each other, as thofe who
are " of the fame body, and partakers of the
" fame promife in Chrift, by the gofpel." But
' let the cafe be as this gentleman has Hated it.
What has rejecting the petition done towards
preferving this union, for which he profefles
himfelf fo folicitous ? It cannot be fuppofed
to bring the judgment of the diffenters a
ftep nearer to the articles than they were
before ; and all thought of compelling per-
fons to exprefs their approbation of them,
contrary to their judgment, is what he ut-
terly difclaims. Had the bill paiTed, it would
have been a noble addition to the proofs,
which the church of England has given of
her moderation to diffenting proteftants ; and
had the fathers of the church been zealous
in promoting it, they would have erected
MONUMENTUM AERE PERENNIUS tO their
praiie. But rejecting the bill, has rather the
appearance of excluding thofe, who decline
fubfcription, from the number of thofe whom
the eftablifhment choofes to acknowledge as
brethren. Inftead of difcovering an unwil-
lingnefs to part with them, it looks much
more like a readinefs to caft them off, as unfit
to be comprehended in that legal protection,
which they were moved to feek, by no other
principles
Principles of Tokration y &c. 99
principles than a regard to their own fafety,
and to the caufe of liberty ; and, on their
application for which, a defire to fhow the
leaft hoftile difpofitions to the members of
the eftablifhment, had not the remoteft in-
fluence.
So far, in reality, are the diflenters in ge-
neral, from being actuated by fuch motives
as thefe, that the very reverfe of this is
the truth. Senflble and moderate men, both
in the eftablifhment and out of it, feem to
be gradually moving on to a more open and
friendly intercourfe with each other. Their
fentiments on points which were formerly
the fubjecl of much and warm controverfy,
more generally coincide. The diftinction
between the great end and efTentials of re-
ligion, and the mere circumftantials which
attend it, is better underftood and more ge-
nerally acknowledged. But it unhappily falls
out, that the nearer the diflenters approach
in fome of thefe things, to a great part of
the members of the eftablifhment, to the
greater diflance they find themfelves removed
from fome of the articles of it. The lefs
diflike fome among them may retain to the
mode of the publick fervices of the church,
the greater objections they have to fome of
the materials, which are incorporated with
them i and thus, while fome circumftances
might feem to prepare the way for a more
O 2 perfed
ioo An Enquiry into the true
perfect union, there are others, which, as
things are now fettled, raife up new and
ftill ftronger obftacles to it : obftacles, which
not even the example and authority of the
great Chillingworth, x will enable them
to furmount. The diffenters have always
held the memory of that eminent man in
the jufteft veneration. They think of him
with peculiar fatisfaction, for the noble and
fuccefsful ardour, with which he aflerted the
fole right and authority of the facred fcrip-
tures to command the aflent and fubmif-
fion of chriftians : but they cannot implicit-
ly give themfelves up to his judgment, and
follow his example contrary to their fenti-
ments. His practice, indeed, if we may
credit the account given of his fubicription,
by hands, which appear to be good, bears
po fuch teftimony to the articles as iems
to be collected from it. His own fenfe of
it, as we are told by the author of his life,
is exprelfed in thefe words : " I do verily
" believe the church of England a true
" member of the church catholick ; that fhe
" wants nothing neceffary to falvation, and
" holds nothing repugnant thereto." " And
" I thought (he adds) that to think fo, had
c ' fufEciently qualified me for a fubferipti-
" on.' " Were this all, which is intended
by
1 Letter, p. 52.
u Free and candid Difquifit. p. 169. ed. 1749.
Principles of Toleration, &c. 101
by fubfeription, the diffenters would have
much lefs object ion to it than they have ;
and it is reafonable to believe this applica-
tion to parliament would never have been
heard of. But by what competent authority
has this ever been determined ? Bifhop Bur-
net w fuppofes indeed, that this is all, which
is implied in the communion of the laity
with the church ; but, defirous as he was
to foften the hard injunction of fubfeription,
againft which he left his dying teftimony, *
he could not apply it to the declaration re-
quired of the clergy. I think it may be
juftly doubted, whether this author himfelf
will admit of this fenfe of fubfeription. Ex-
pounded in this manner, it carries nothing
more in it than what arians, focinians,
or in a word any, who reject thofe articles
of the church, which he confiders as fun-
damental, may fubferibe, if they have but
charity fufficient to acknowledge the belief
of them confident with falvation. And
with what juftice then could he imagine
that the example of a perfon, who is be-
lieved to have fubicribed only in this mean-
ing, could be of any force to remove the
fcruples of the diffenters concerning it ?
Indeed till this gentleman, or fome other
of the zealous advocates for fubfeription,
have
w Expofit. of the article*, p. 6. ed. 1720.
* Concjufion of his hift. p. 624. vol. ii. folio ed.
102 ... An Enquiry into the true
have more precisely determined the meaning
and extent of it, the doubts, not only of
thofe out of the eftablilhment, but of num-
bers of thoughtful perfons in it, will con-
tinue in all their ftrength. From the ftrefs
laid upon it, by this writer at leaft, which
is fo great that he treats releafing the dif-
fenters from k, as an indulgence which might
have been pernicious to the ftate, y (and by
which, the chriftian religion itfelf might have
been affected, z ) fuch as are unacquainted with
what has been faid upon the fubjedt, might be
led to fuppofe that the import of it was out
of all diipute, and that it was allowed to be
an indifputable affurance of affection to the
doctrines of the articles. And yet there is
fcarcely a point more controverted. Some
contend earneftly, that hearty affent to them,
in the fenfe of the compilers, is the neceffa-
ry meaning of it ; and confider fubfcribing, in
any other fenfe, as incapable of vindication,
Other gentlemen, of great learning, think
themfelves warranted in fubfcribing with
greater latitude. Others have been defirous
to confider the articles as articles of peace j
and others may have views of the matter
different from all thefe. While thefe difputes
are left undecided, what great lecurity can
fubfcriptions give to any church of the found-
nefs of its minifters ? AYhile there is fuch a
diyerfity
K Letter, p. 58. - Ibid. p. tz.
Principles of Toleration, Sec, 103
diverfity of opinions concerning the very act,
which is required in order to prevent it ;
who can wonder that the diffenters choofe
to decline it, left they fhould have construc-
tions put upon their conduct which they can-
not admit, and from which they may be
urged with conceflions, which they cannot al-
low themfelves to make ? And they have
the pleafure to fee, that, however the practice
of the above mentioned eminent defender of
the proteflant caufe may be quoted againft
them, his principles may be quoted, and
fpeak forcibly, very forcibly, for them : and
fully juftify the fubfeription they propofed.
So long as that memorable fentence (lands
in his incomparable book j the Bible, the
Bible only is the religion of proteftants,
the diffenters will think they have a right
to glory in him, as a patron of their caufe
in their late application : efpecially when
they join with it that noble motion of his,
which is more appofite ftill to their pur-
pofe: " Let all men believe the fcripture,
** and that only ; and endeavour to believe
" it in the true fenfe, and require no more
" of others ; and they fhall find this a bet-
" ter means not only to fupprefs herefy, but
" to reftore unity. For he that believes the
" fcripture fincerely, and endeavours to be-
" lieve it in the true fenle, cannot poflibly
" be an heretick. And if no more than
* this
104 dn Enquiry into the true
" this was required of any man, to make
" him capable of the church's communion,
" then all men fo qualified, though they
" were different in opinion, yet, notwith-
<c Handing any fuch difference, they mult
" be, of neceffity, one in communion. " *
Whether there be any reaibn to expect,
that by any fchemes, which may now, or
fome time hence, be in contemplation, fuch b
a change will be effected in our eftablifhment,
as will open the doors of it wide enough
for good men of all parties, to enter into
it , the diffenters pretend not to be mafters
of fufficient intelligence to determine. It
gives them great pleafure to have but hints
from gentlemen, who appear to fpeak from
authentick information, that fuch a defign is
ferioufly entertained. What they have heard
fome of great eminence have faid mufl be
done, they flatter themfelves, fome time will
be done. But if a century, and perhaps
much more than a century, from the lafl
fettlement of the church, mufl intervene be-
fore fo much as one ftcp, which can be
laid to have produced any effect, is taken
in this good worK. , if, after fuch a flep is
take.i, it fhould be found infufficient to an-
fwer the defired end, and another period of
equal duration mufl complete its round be-
fore
* Conclufion of his preface, to the author of charity
maintained. b letter, p. 47, 59.
Principles of Toleration, &c. ft) 5
fore a fecofld will be found admifiible, not
only Dr. Furneaux, but others may doubt,
without reprobating the eftablifhment as un-
worthy of them, whether they (hall live to
fee the time when they can have the fatis-
faction of being comprehended in it. Should
fuch a day open upon them, I am fatisfied
the diuenters will not be indifpofed to make
every due acknowledgment to the wifdom
and piety of the gentlemen, who quickened
the approach of it. In the mean time, why
mould it be thought fo reftlefs in them to
be willing to be fecured ? Or what obftruc-
tion can their attempt, in reafon, create to
the defirable undertaking ? Had it fuc-
ceeded, it would have put no new difficulties
in the way of conformity, as the terms of it
now ftand , and mould thofe, which as yet
fubfift, be removed, refufing the difTenters
their requeft, makes their way into the church
no eafier, nor can it render their minds at all
more difpofed to it, than if their defire had
been granted. But there is one confidera-
tion more, which has great weight with the
difTenters, and which they beg leave to re-
commend to the moit ferious thoughts of alj^
who undertake to judge of their conduct.
They have propofed fubfeription to the Bi-
ble as a qualification, upon which they wifh
to enjoy the advantages of Toleration. If
the conductors of any defign, for lefTening
P the
io6 An Enquiry into the true
the difficulties of the clergy, and bringing
in the difTenters, fhould entertain the fame un-
favourable opinion of this fubfcription, which
the author of the letter, fo frequently men-
tioned, appears to entertain of it ; c tiiere is
no ground to fuppofe that any alterations will
fix the admiffion of minifters into the church,
upon this extenfive principle : and if not,
there is room to believe, that fame good,
very good men, may ftill be kept out.
All thofe who are fhut out from fuch an
eftablifhment, will moft afTuredly be fhut out
from the benefit of Toleration, as it is now
bounded by law. " And mould Toleration
" itfelf affume a new form, in confequence
" of any change in the eftablifhment , yet,
tc if fubfcription to this new fet of articles
<c fhould be the condition of it, .numbers may
" ftill be deprived of all advantage from it ;"
for whofe fafety, therefore, fome provifion will
be neceffary, and whofe cafe will be highly
worthy of regard. d Since, inconsiderable as
they may be efteemed on account of their
circumftances, and, unpopular as they may
be mads by their fingularity ; they may, ne-
yerthelefs, be fome of the moft truly con-
fcientious,
c Letter, p. 10, n.
d For fo much of the above fentence as is marked
with commas, and which was added while the meets
of the firfi: edition of this eflay were printing off, the
author is indebted to the hint given by Dr. Kippis;
p-8i. iftedit.
Principles of Tvleration, Sec. 107
fcientious, and greatly virtuous men in
the kingdom ; and it can never be fit,
that the peace of perfons of this charac-
ter, mould lie at the mercy of bigotry, ha-
tred, or perhaps of ftill meaner princi-
ples. Let the prefent days be ever fo
mild and gentle, yet, if, in the rotation of
human events, it is fuppofable that the diflent-
ers may become the eftablifhed church j c it
is furely equally pofTible, and much lefs im-
probable, that, in the- courfe of the fame
rotation, events may happen in fome diflant
times* which may raife the fpirit of perfe-
ction again among us, and bring on a re-
petition of the fe verities and fufferings of
the former days. And though the prefent
diffenters may be ever fo eafy for them-
felves , yet, as the friends of mankind, and
thofe who confine not their views to the
prefent generation, but look forward to the
poffible cafe of poilerity-, they think them-
felves juftified in their endeavours to enlarge
the legal bounds of Toleration, and promote
a nearer advancement of them to the extent
of that juft and reafonable liberty, which,
at prefent, prevails, with general approbation,
in practice. And if it is allowed to be fit
to prevail in practice, what good reafon
can be given, for which it mould not alfo
prevail in the language of law ?
P 2 The
c Letter, p. 27.
io8 An Enquiry into the true
The matter indeed is reduced to this (hort
and plain iflue. Either the juft principles
of Toleration muft be facrificed ; or the laws>
from which the duTenters defire to be fhel-
tered, muft be allowed to be indefenfiblc
The truth of the one, and the juft ice of the
other, cannot ftand together. If one of thefe
oppofttes muft be parted with, it is eafy
to fee which is the better, more chriftian
choice. And could the author of this pam-
phlet imagine, that it would ever rife to the
notice of thofe in fuperior rank ; he would
beg leave, with all the deference which be-
comes him, to fubmit it to their ferious con-
iideration, whether, as it is a matter of con-
fcience with them not haftily to admit
requefts for the extenfion of religious li-
berty *, it ought not alfo to be matter of con-
science not caufelefsly to reject them. In
the nervous language of a late prelate, of
diftinguifhed eminence, " if it is not. very
" right to punifh men for their opinions -,
" there is no medium , it muft be very
" wrong. " { The ftatutes, which authorize
iuch a practice, muft be fubjecr, to the fame-
alternative. If they are not very just, they
muft be very unjust. And if this be their
only true denomination, it can fcarcely bear
a doubt, what ought to be determined con-
cerning
f Difficulties and difcouragements which attend the
ftudy of the {captures, p, 25. 9th edit.
Principles of Toleration, Sec, 109
cerning them. Certainly it can never be
unworthy of the equity, clemency and wif-
dom of government, to fhut the door which
is ftill left open for their being made in-
ft rumen ts of opprefiion ; and entirely take
away the power, which they always give,
and the temptations, which they may some
time offer, to perfons of bad difpofitions,
to injure men of integrity, virtue and piety.
Whether fuch an happy alteration, with
refpect to thefe laws, will be the confequence
of the farther attempt, which the diffenters are
now making to obtain it -, they muft leave to
the wifdom of the great council of the king-
dom, (to whom their defires are again, with
all deference, fubmitted) to determine. And,
if the diffenters humbly apprehend, that there
is no impropriety in the repetition of their re-
queft ; what is there culpable in this apprehen-
iion ? So far as the fenfe of the legiflature was
concerned, the queftion was left undecided ;
and, upon all the principles of reafon and
equity, there was ample room left for them
to apply for a rehearing of their caufe. The
honourable houfe of Commons allowed the
juftice of their requeft; and bore teftimony
to it in a manner, which will remain an evi-
dence in favour of it, as long as the me-
mory of the tranfa&ions of parliament mall
endure. Nor can it, they apprehend, be
deemed an inftancc of the leaft want of that
regard
no An Enquiry into the true
regard, which they always defire to retain
for that illuftrious affembly, in which their
petition was not viewed in the fame advan-
tageous light; that the diffenters, a fecond
time, prefume to fubmit their requeft to the
noble perfons, who before rejected it, with
full reliance on their willingnels again to
honour it with their impartial, deliberate
attention. Among fuch as, inftead of bring-
ing law to reafon, bring reafon to law, and
haftily conclude, that whatever is done legally,
is done juftly ; the diffenters are fenfible they
may have many prejudices raifed againft them.
But this age and kingdom abound with per-
fons, who are placed far above the reach of
all fuch impreffions -, " who are men of re-
" fined and exalted understandings, who have
" a large compafs of thought, and have
" looked into the principles of things. Thefe
" know, that written laws are but deducti-
" ons from the law of nature, which is prior
4C to all human inftitutions ; that thefe fome-
" times deviate from that unwritten law ;
" and, when they do, are of no real, intrin-
" fick authority. They know, that a thing
" is not juft and reafonable, becaufe it is
" enacted ; but, in good governments, is
" enacted becaufe it is juft and reafonable." h
And it is with great fatisfaction that the
dif-
h Difnculues and difcouragements, &c. p. 25.
oth edit.
Principles of toleration, &c. in
diffentefs reflect, that it is before perfons of
this clafs that the caufe, which they have
fo much at heart, is to be reviewed.
With men of this truly elevated fpirit, they
may juftly hope they mall obtain a candid
audience ; and they cannot but be confirmed
in the hope, when they turn their thoughts
to that truly refpectable band of worthies,
who have, already, in this queflion, rifen up
and avowed their caufe : perfons, great in
their rank, and by the trufts repofed in
them , great in their abilities, and the re-
putation, with which they have filled up
high and important ftations : but great above
all in this, that, though connected by no ties
of party, nor united by any views of inte-
reft , yet, when the venerable form of truth
appears before them, they with one accord
refort to her, and range themfelves under her
banners. Many fuch, the difTenters are fatis-
fied, there are alfo among thofe, who were
not inclinable, when this affair was firft pro-
pofed, to favour their caufe : nor can they
relinquifh the hopes, which they entertained,
that, when once thofe fears were fubfided,
and thofe mifapprehenfions removed, which
prevented the real ftate of their cafe from
being feen in its true light ; they mould
have the pleafure and honour of numbering
thefe truly refpectable perfons among their
friends alfo. But, however thefe hopes may
be
H2 An Enquiry into the Principles ', &c.
be anfwered, or difappointed 5 there is one
fatisfaction, which they will always enjoy ;
that the views, by which they are anima-
ted, are fuch as, inftead of deierving to
be condemned, are worthy to be applaud-
ed. It is not the intereft of a party ;
but of chriftian liberty, truth, and cha-
rity, which they are labouring to ferve ;
and, however fome perfons may attempt to
fet thefe interefts at variance, nothing is more
certain than, that they will all be found ul-
timately to coincide with each other ; and
that the greater regard is paid to each, in
its feafon, the fwifter advances will be made,
to that defirable ifTue, which is the hope,
and wifh of the diffenters, (and in which
every good heart will concur with them, )
that BROTHERLY LOVE MAY CONTINUE j that
all thofe remains of jealoufy, which have of-
ten defeated noble deligns, for promoting the
caufe of truth and peace, may be more com-
pletely taken away ; that zeal for the advance-
ment of genuine chriftianity may temper all
inferior views -, and that all may increafe in
their defire, with one heart and one
MOUTH, TO GLORIFY God, EVEN THE FA-
THER of our Lord Jesus Christ.
APPEN-
[ "3 3
APPENDIX.
IN the courfe of writing the foregoing
Treatife, feveral points occurred to the
Author befides thofe confidered in it/jwnich,
though they appeared to him not unworthy
of attention, he did not then choofe to en-
large. Farther thoughts upon the fubject
having led him to alter his judgment, in
this refpecl, the fubftance of his reflections,
Upon thefe and fome other Heads is added
in this and the following pages.
Note I.
Page 17. line 24. " There is no difficulty
" in difcerning, that while I am fpeaking
" in this manner, &c."
As it has been apprehended, by a judicious friend,
that what is faid in this paragraph, though it is
allowed to be a fufficient anfwer to the objection
propofed in it, will fcarcely be feen to be fo, by
fome perfons, without farther explication ; it may
not be amifs to ftate the whole affair a little more
diilindUy ; that the miitake of the objection, and
the force of the reply to it, may be the more eafi-
!y underflood.
Q The
ii 4 APPENDIX.
The obje&ion, in fhort, is this ; that if the mi-
giflrate has no right to lay reflraints upon confci-
cnce, as fuch, wherever a plea of confcience inter-
venes, his authority is at an end : that, as he can be
no judge of men's hearts, whether this plea be real,
or pretended, the efFecl which it will have upon his
jurifdidtion, will be the fame : and that the greateft
crimes, by being fheltered under this excufe, may
be committed with impunity. The inflances, in
which this inconvenience may be fuppofed to arife
from liberty of confcience, may, I prefume, be ge-
nerally reduced to one of thefe cafes. The cafe
of perfons, who think themfelves bound to ufe force
for the propagation of what they apprehend to be
truth. The cafe of thofe, whofe principles lead
them to judge, what are commonly thought vices
hurtful to fociety, to be innocent, and what may
be indulged without fcruple. Or, laftly, the cafe
of thofe, who are fo unhappily milled as to incor-
porate things hurtful to fociety into their religion,
and account it their duty to praftife them. Thefe
cafes will, in fome cirCumftances, perhaps, run one
into another; but it is proper to mention them
diilindUy : and a few words, it is hoped, will make
it appear, that the principles, here eftablifhed, nei-
ther lead to thefe evils, nor take away the power
of the magiflrate to reftrain them.
As to the firft of thefe cafes ; that allowing every
man a right to think for himfelf in matters of reli-
gion can never authorize perfons to offer violence
to others, for differing from them in religion, is felf
evident ; for to affirm that it would authorize them in
this, is the fame abfurdity as faying, that to affert a
right is giving power to take away that right. That
any man fhould ever attempt to ufe compulfion in
religion upon the principle of every man's having a
right to think for himfelf, is, at leafr, a moral im-
poffibility, if it is not a natural one. For to allow
that
APPENDIX. u 5
that every man has a right to judge for himfelf, in
matters of confcience, is allowing, almoft in exprefs
terms, that confcience is not to be forced ; and that
a man mould ever lay this down as the foundation,
upon which he attempts to force confcience, is in-
conceivable. In order to juftify himfelf in fuch a
conduct, he muft go upon a dire&ly oppofite prin-
ciple; and maintain that all men have not a right
to judge for themfelves, but that fome others have
a right to judge for them. If any doubt then can
remain upon this head, it muft be this ; why a per-
fon who thinks himfelf authorized to impofe his
fentiments on others, fhould not be fuffered to aft
according to his judgment, as well as others be
fuffered to ail according to theirs ? But the anfwer
is obvious, and arifes almoft inftantaneoufly out of
the premifes here mentioned : viz. becaufe his fol-
lowing his judgment, in this cafe, is deftrudtive of
all the right, which others have to follow their
judgments; becaufe the liberty, which he takes, is
breaking in upon that liberty, which ought to be
preferved in the fame extent to all ; and becaufe no
imaginary right, which he may arrogate to himfelf
of obliging others to be directed by his judgment,
can annul the real rights of others to be guided by
their own. Every attack, which he makes upon their
perfon, liberty or eftate, for this purpofe, is an in-
jury, which comes within the limits of the civil
power ; and which the magistrate is not only allowed,
but is, by virtue of his office, obliged to reftrain : for
conniving at thefe als of injuftice in fome, would
be a breach of his truft in behalf of others. In-
deed to imagine that becaufe men have a right to
be protected in adling for themfelves in religion,
while they offer no injury to their fellow fubje&s,
therefore they muft have a right to be protected,
when they do offer injuries to them ; is as idle as
in fuppofo, that becaufe perfons have a right to be
O ?. fafe
n6 APPENDIX.
fafe in pafling peaceably and incffenfively along the
publick road, they have alfo a right to be unmo-
lefted, when they infult, and plunder all who fall
in their way.
The fame reafoning, only a little varied in the
application of it, will entirely remove this objection
alfo in the fecpnd cafe. Fraud, robbery, perjury,
and other crimes of the like nature, are dire&Iy
repugnant to all the effential and acquired rights
of men. Immoralities of other kinds, are a&s of
injuftice to individuals, and fubverfive of the welfare
of the publick. When inftances of them occur, there-
fore, the magiftrate has again a right to interpofe;
and, upon the very fame principles, to correft them :
nor can this right be controuled by any pleas of
confcience, whether real or fictitious, which may be
advanced in excufe for them. The nature and con-
fequences of the injury are what properly comes
under his infpeftion ; and not the inward fentiment.
The violations of the rights of fociety and the mem-
bers of it, are the evils, againft which he is to guard ;
and, wherever thefe are to be found, he has a proper
and direft authority to check them by fuch penalties,
as their malignity, and the circumstances attending
them, require.
To enter into a particular consideration of the
third cafe, after what has been faid, would be tedi-
ous. Every intelligent reader will carry on to it,
the obfervations, which have been already made ;
and the folution of it will be the fame. Religion
muft be the refult of convi&ion ; and every man
muft, therefore, have a right, and is under an obli-
gation, in proportion to his abilities, to judge for
himfelf in the choice of it. But if his judgment
fhould unhappily lead him to make any thing a part
of his religion, which is injurious to others, and
contrary to the fundamental laws of fociety ; he fo
far ftill falls under the animadverfion of the magi-
strate.
APPENDIX. u 7
/Irate* But then, it muft always be remembered,
that it is not becaufe the magiftrate has an authority
to diftate to confidence, that he is thus warranted
ro interpofe ; but becaufe the rights of others, whom
he is equally called to defend, are infringed ; and
the fafety of the civil fociety, over which he is to
watch, is ftruck at. He a^s not as the di&ator
to his fubie&s in fpirituals, but as the guardian of
their temporalities, and the impartial proteclor of
their civil and religious liberties. By attending to
this obvious diflinttion, the rights of confcience and
the real rights of government will both be preferved ;
and the pernicious extremes of calling either in quef-
tion will be avoided. Religious liberty will be kept
from running into licentioufnefs ; civil authority be
preferved from degenerating into tyranny ; and the
eonclufion, which has been already drawn from the
whole, may be fafely admitted ; that as no man
can derive from his right to follow his own con-
viftion in religion an authority to infringe the rights
of others ; fo, while he keeps clear of this, it " muft
" always remain entire to him ; nor, while princi-
" pies of the mod reafonable liberty are allowed to
" fubfift in their due extent, can any attempt be
" confidently made to take it from him." f
j- Page 17, of this Efliy.
Note II.
P. $j. 1. 26". " What, but to join in
u placing it on a more enlarged bafis, and
" procuring for thofe who requeft it, &c."
So much has been already faid, in this pamphlet,
to cftablifli this title of good fubjeils to religious
liberty, that it is prefumed, in what follows, it
may be confidered as a principle, from which the
diffenters may fairly reafon, as often as occafions for
having
n8 APPENDIX.
having recourfe to it may offer themfelves. It may be
proper, however, to obferve here, that the very adl
of Toleration, the imperfe&ion of which has been
the fubjett of fome of the foregoing pages, carries
in it a legal acknowledgment of the right under
confideration. A writer of diftinguifhed abilities, in
what has been commonly called the Bangorian con-
troverfy, aflerts indeed, as I find him quoted by
Bilhop Hoadly, " That the legiflature knows no reli-
*' gious rights, but what are contained in the efta-
' blifliment of the church of England." What ufe
was intended to be made of this affertion in that
part of the controverfy, which gave occafion for
them, it is not to our prefent purpofe to enquire :
and that, before the Revolution, the Legiflature knew
of no religious rights, but fuch as this writer men-
tions, is very willingly admitted. It was the very
grievance, of which the nonconforming, in the
reigns preceding that important event, complained;
that liberty of confcience, as far as law could de-
prive them of it, was entirely taken from them.
But, at the time when the writer referred to ad-
vanced this afiertion, it had been long contradicted
by the voice of law. The parliament, which pafled
the aft of Toleration, plainly fuppofed thefe rights
as the foundation, upon which they refted the fitnefs
of that law ; and herein all the fincere approvers of
it mull concur with them. For as the excellent
author, from whom I take this account of the
affertions of his celebrated antagonift, juftly argues : *
* f This either was the right of the diflenters, or it
" was not. If it was not, then the legiflature
" granted them what they had no right to, and
"* acled a piece of injuftice to the eftablilhed church.
** But if it was their right, then here is a right,
" and this a religious right, reftored by the means
v of the Revolution, diftintt from all thofe religious
<c rights,
* Bp. Hssd!y"i common rigkts of fubjedls. P, 24.3.
APPENDIX. u 9
" fights, which are implied in the eftablifhment of
" the church of England. The legiflature granted
" this as a right, and a religious right: and there-
" fore, it is a groundlefs imputation upon it to fay,
" that the legiflature knows no religious rights, but
" what are contained in the eftablifliment of the
' church, when it is fo evident that the legifla-
" ture knows the right of Toleration, upon which
" the exprefs law for it muft be fuppofed to be
" founded, unlefs you will fuppofe them to have
" done wrong to the eftablifliment by it." The
force of this reafoning, it is prefumed, will be al-
lowed : and it is an obvious remark, that if rights of
any kind, and religious rights in particular, are
juftly fuppofed in law as the ground of it, there
muft be a degree, in which they fubfift independently
of law. And if this be granted, it will furely be
admitted with it, that in whatever degree, reafon
and the found principles of political focieties fhew
them to fubfift, it is fit that law fhould allow them
to fubfift alfo.
But had it ftill been fadl, that the legiflature knows
no religious rights but what are contained in the
ellablifliment of the church of England ; what would
it have proved ? Nothing but the palpable injuftice
of" thofe laws, which refufed to admit fuch rights.
During the time, in which this was really the lan-
guage of the laws, the diflenters juftly thought
themfelves kept in a ftate of heavy bondage
and oppreffion ; and herein the wifer and better
part of the nation concurred with them. There
were, even then, great numbers, who faw (though
ftill, it muft be owned, but impeffe&ly) that there
were religious rights inherent in men, of which no
human power could juftly attempt to deprive them.
From a fenfe of this they more tha,n once nobly
ftruggled to refcue their brethren from the flavery
which was entailed upon them ; and had at length
the
i2o APPENDIX.
the pleafure to fee this deliverance take place. But
had the diflenters never obtained fuch a recognition
of their religious rights; would their rights have
been lefs real ? Or the effefts of thofe, who laboured
to reftore the exercife of them, lefs laudable ? " To
" take our notions of religious rights from human
** laws, or of what Almighty God has veiled man-
" kind with, from the declarations and decifions of
* his fallible creatures,"* (that! may again borrow
the words of that able and confiftent defender of civil
and religious liberty, whom I have before quoted,) to
do this, I fay, is following an erroneous rule of judg-
ment. *' Suppofing, as he proceeds, f the legiflature
" in Spain to know no religious rights, but what are
" contained in the eftablifhment of the popifh church
'* there: will it follow, that opprefled and injured
* proteftants there, have no fuch rights? Suppofing
" the legiflature in Scotland, before the union, knew
' nothing of any religious rights, but what are
" contained in the eftablifliment of the Kirk of
" Scotland ; or that the prefent legiflature of Great-
" Britain, knows nothing of any other religious
u rights, in that kingdom : does it follow, that
'* therefore, epifcopal men, being good fubje&s, have
' no religious rights there ? I prefume not*" The
application is obvious.
* Common rights of fubjefts. p. 243. f p. 244.
Note III.
P. 64. L 2. " Is it a confequence,
" that becaufe that parliament, went only
" thus far, fucceeding ones muft go no
" further ? "
It is eafy to fee, that, if this way of reafoning
were juft againft an enlargement of legal Toleration,
now, it would have been equally juft immediately
after
APPENDIX. i2i
after the Revolution, againft any aft of Toleration
at all ; fince that was more than had been, till that
time, granted by law. It would, I think, be very
unjuftihable to fuppofe, that the author, whofe rea-
foning is here confidered, entertains any diflike to
the Toleration as it now Hands. But it may fure-
ly be worthy of his confideration, whether his man-
ner of arguing, in this part of his letter, is not,
in its juft confequences, unfavourable to it. The dif-
fenters have been often condemned for feparating from
the ellablifhment on account, of ceremonies, forms,
matters of difcipline, and comparatively indifferent
things. This feems, at lead, to be fomething of a
conceffion, that if their diffent was founded on points
of doftrine, it would be more defensible ; and yet
now that they defire to be exempted from an obli-
gation to fubfcribe to the doftrinal articles of the
church, they are told, that this is an indulgence
never intended for them by the aft of Toleration ; *
that it was what their predecefibrs never defired, f
and from hence it is infinuated, that the liberty
which is afked, is too extenfive to be allowed. But,
notwithftanding the diftinftion made between thefe
two cafes, the right of differing from the national
efiablifhment in religious doftrines, and the right
of differing from it in rites and ceremonies, Hand
or fall together. If the civil magiltrate has an au-
thority to command his fubjetfs what doftrines
they fhall make a part of their religion ; he has
the fame right to command what lites, and modes
of worffiip they fhall admit into it alfo. If he has
no authority to oblige them to receive thofe modes
of worfhip, which he efpoufes, he can have no au-
thority, to oblige them to receive thofe articles of
faith, which he embraces. They have the fame li-
berty, and are under the fam obligation to enquire,
and adhere to the direftion of their ccnfciences, with
R refpeft
* Letter to the diflenting mbiftcrs, p. 6. f IbiJ. p. S.
j22 APPENDIX.
refpedl to one as well as the other ; and their dif-
ftnting from his judgment, in either cafe, can never
be juitly confidered as an offence againft. his real
authority ; nor, while they difcharge the duties of
good fubjefts, can it be any warrant for (hutting
them out of his protection.
Note IV.
P. 65. 1. 18. " It is no juftification of
" this opprefiion, to dignify the principles
" thus enforced by penalties, with the
" founding titles of doctrines, which have
" been acknowledged by the chriftian church
" in general, and the fuppofed fundamen-
" tals of chriftianity."
How far this gentleman extends his notion of the
unfitnefs of a Toleration of diffent, in points of
do&rine, from the eftablifhmenf, it might be run-
ning a rifle of mifapprehending his meaning to af-
firm. There is fomething fo general, and indeter-
minate in his expreffions, whenever he touches upon
this fubjec"!, that it is difficult to fee, precifely,
what his idea is of it. If he thinks, however, that
merely departing from eftablifhed articles, is, in any
cafe, a reafon for with-holding a Toleration ; he
will have no reafon, furely, to complain of being
injured by a fuppofition, that he is of this opinion,
in the cafe of a departure from, what he . calls,
fundamentals. * But to make a mere difference from
the religion eftablifhed by the magiftrate, even in
fundamentals, a reafon for the refufal of a Tole-
ration, is ftill treating Toleration, not as the right
of the good citizen, but a priviledge of which he
may be deprived for no offence againft the com-
munity
Letter, p. 2, 9.
APPENDIX. 123
munity, to which he belongs, but merely on account
of nonconformity to the ecclefiaftical eftablimment
of it : and thus we are infenfibly brought back to
the miftaken apprehenfion of a right in the ma-
giftrate to oblige his fubjefts to regulate their re-
ligious profeflion by his own. For, if he has
no authority to require their fubmiflion to his
fentiments in religion in general, he can have
none to require it in fundamentals ; and, if he
has no right to demand it, to fay he has a right
to inflidl punifhment for the refufal of it, is an
abfurdity. And though limiting this power in the
magiftrate to the cafe of fundamentals, may feem,
in a great meafure, to refirain the exercife of it ;
yet, when the limitation is fearched to the bottom,
it will appear to amount to very little, if to any thing
at all. For, as it is left to the magiftrate to de-
termine what are fundamentals, it will always be
in his power to adjuft and enlarge the lift of them,
as he judges it necefTary. Conformity to the whole
fyftem of his religious opinions may be made the
conditions, upon which the peace and fafety of his fub-
jects are to depend ; and want of light, and bigotry,
may lead him into all the excefTes of perfecution,
which can arife from the moil arbitrary and defpotick
exercife of power. It is, in reality, little more than
a limitation in name ; which, in effect, afferts the
very thing in more plaufible language, which it
is not thought expedient to maintain in plainer
terms ; and will, by degrees, take away all liberty
of diflenting from the eftablilbed church.
But, indeed, the more I reded on this fubjeer,
the more I am inclinable to think, that the gentle-
men, who argue in this manner, infenfibly con-
found fundamentals in the church, with effentials,
or fundamentals in the ftate, (if the expreflion will be
allowed,) and imagine that what is to be compre-
hended under this title in the one, muft, of courfe,
R 2 b.e
124 APPENDIX.
be fo in the other. Did not fomething of this
kind mingle itfelf with their reafonings, it feems
difficult to conceive, that perfons of fuch unquef-
tionable good fenfe, mould adjuft the limits of
Toleration by a ftandard 'fo foreign to the real
principles of it. And I have the pleafure of
finding " this conjecture confirmed by a very able
writer, by whofe favourable mention of this pam-
phlet, the author of it thinks himfelf greatly ho-
noured, and fome of whofe words, upon this occa-
fion, the reader- will not be difpleafed to fee. The
writer, to whom I refer, is the prefent Dean of
Gloucefter, who obferves, in his letters to Dr. Kip-
pis, * (which fell into my hands while this note
was in writing,) that it was " a pernicious maxim,
" univerfally embraced by every proteftant ftate, at
" firft, that all the members of the fame ftate
" ought, en that very account, to become members
" of the fame church." " They confidered non-
" conformity to the external mode of publick wor-
*' fhip, and non conformity to the civil laws of a
*' country, as one and the fame thing ; and, there-
*' fore, they punilhed both actions on the fame
" principle. " The gentlemen, who are here con-
cerned, do net profefs to carry this matter fo far.
They are for tolerating a difient, but not in funda-
mentals. But why not in thefe, as well as in non-
fundamentals, excepting it be that, what is funda-
mental in the religious eftablifhment of a nation,
is fo likewife to the political fafety of it; and that
whoever departs from the one, becomes an adver-
fary to the other ? But, if this be their meaning,
it is taking that for granted, which has never yet
been proved ; nay, which may be eafily difproved.
Since nothing is eafier to conceive than, that per-
fons who differ from the articles of the national
church
* Paee 61, 67.,
APPENDIX* 125
church, in feveral points, thought fundamental by
that church, may be, neverthelefs, unfeignedly zea-
lous for piety, juftice, and all thofe practical prin-
ciples in which the welfare of the ftate can be
at all concerned. Nor is there any thing more
certain, in fatt, than that numbers, who have thus
differed from the eftablifhed fyftem of opinions,
have been eminent for their fidelity to the govern-
ment, love of their country, and all thofe moral
and political virtues, which are the props of civil
fociety. Upon the whole, not acquiefcing even in
articles, which may be deemed fundamental in reli-
gion by the formers of an ecclefiaftical eflabliihment,
may be confiftent with all the duty which can be
expected from the beft of fubjects j and therefore
can never be a juft reafon for cutting perfons oft' from
the religious rights of good fubjc&s. Where no
civil duty is violated, no penalty, on a civil account,
can juftly take place. It can be inflicted only on
an account ftrictly ecclefiallical, and, therefore, mult
be, itnctly and properly, perfecution.
Note V.
P. 77. After the conclufion of the note,
at the bottom of this page, add as fol-
lows.
A writer in one of the publick papers,* to whom
the author of this piece owns himfelf much indebt-
ed, for his civility, Teems to queilion whether the
doubt, to which the foregoing note relates, is a real
one; and aCcs, whether, if it be, the author fliould
not have taken this opportunity to have argued in
favour of a more extenfive Toleration than the
claufe in the act, referred to in the paflage to which
the note is annexed, would allow, provided it fhould
no:.
London Chronicle, Dcr. 2224, I 77 2,
i 2 6 APPENDIX.
not be affected by the words of the bill prefented
by the diffenters ? In anfwer to the firft of thefe
particulars, the author affures him, that the doubt
was a real one. In anfwer to the fecond, the writer
of the letter is defired to confider, that the bufinefs
of this treatife, in this part of it, was only to en-
quire, whether the confequence charged upon the
bill in queftion, would, in fact, have followed from
it, if it had pa{Ted ; and to {hew that if the confe-
quence really followed from it, with refpeft to the
act of Toleration, there were other equivalent, and
more than equivalent legal fccurities of the honour
of the eftablifhed doctrine and worfhip of the church
of England, which would not have been affected
by the liberty requefted by the diffenters ; and as
this was the author's only view, in this place, this
was all which he thought it neceffary to fay here
upon the fubjeft. But endeavouring to fhew that an
objection is made without foundation in fad, is,
by no means admitting that, if it had been other-
wife, it would have been of fufficient force to an-
fwer the end for which it is produced. It is rea-
dily agreed, with the writer, for the removal of
whofe doubts this paragraph is inferted ; that the
followers of Athanafius, Arius, Arminius, and Soci-
cos, may, all of them, be equally good fubjects j
and, as fuch, equally entitled to the protection of
the magiftrate in their refpeclive religious perfua-
fions. No judicious friend of truth will object to
having any human expofitions of the articles of
revelation, left open to fober and candid difcuffion ;
nor do the gentlemen, who are defirous to have
Inch enquiries reftrained by worldly terrors, if any
fuch there be, at all confult the honour and fafety
of the doctrines, for which they are fo tenderly
concerned. " If there be a way upon earth," as it
has juftly been obferved, " to render a doctrine fuf-
' peeled, it is to enforce the belief of it by pains
" and
APPENDIX. 127
" and penalties." If the dottrines of a national
religion are founded in truth, they will Hand ; and
neither argument, nor ridicule, (how improper fo-
ever the ufe of it on fuch fubje&s may be) will
be able to fubvert them. If they are not found-
ed in truth, their fincereft defenders will not wifli
them to ftand ; nor will it be in the power of pe-
nal laws always to fupport them. The author
fpeaks not this in the character of an enemy to
the doctrines of the articles, with the merits of
which his book does not require him to intermed-
dle. His concern in it is not with the truth and
falfhood of opinions, but with the principles and
juft extent of religious liberty ; and he thinks it
an happinefs, that, for the j unification of his zeal
in favour of fo excellent a caufe, he need look no
farther than the authority of a late very celebra-
ted writer, whofe words, in his letter to Horace
Walpole, Efq; concerning American Bifhops, p. 23,
it may not be improper to repeat. *' It is not
* merely from my attachment to the church of En-
* gland, that I am a favourer of the fcheme in
' queftion : but from my love of religious liber-
< ry . wn i c h, in this point, the members of the
" church of England, in our colonies, do not en-
" joy." Whether, from the fame principles, the
cliflentcrs are not juflified in their application, the
reader is left to judge.
Note VI.
P. 87. 1. 9. " He owns, indeed, the
" merit of feveral among them, with a
" politenefs, which entitles him to their
" mod refpectful acknowledgments j &:c."
Great ftrefs is laid by the author of the letter
to the difTenting minilteis upon the oppufition, which
the
128 A P P E N DJ X.
the diffenters are fuppofed to have made to the
fcheme of eftablifhing bifhops in America ; and he
fpeaks as if it had baen confidered as almoft decifive
againft them. The impreffion which this reprefen-
tation of the conduft of the difTenters might make
is not here difputed. The juftice of the charge
againft the diffenters, it is ftill expe&ed, will be ex-
amined by a better pen. But if it is this writer's
defign to insinuate that the diffenters, and efpecially
their minifters in general, are concerned to hinder
their epifcopal brethren abroad, from enjoying the
advantages of the defired inflitution, he is much a
ftranger to their difpofition. Dr. Furneaux's letters
which were appealed to as a witnefs in this cafe
againft the diffenters, contain a fufficient teftimony
for them, * that with proper fecurity for the liberty
of thofe of other denominations, they will be fo far
from oppcfing, that they will be advocates for fuch
a fcheme. But were the fadl otherwife j the ufe
made of it by this writer, in the affair under confi-
deration, is, in the judgment of the lately quoted
primate of the church, a very unjuftifiable one. He
fays, indeed, f " that he cannot imagine how the
' diffenters can pretend to be lovers of [religious
* liberty,] and wifh it to be with-held from their
* fellow fubje&s." But admit they fhould j what
is his reflection ? " God forbid that we fhould ever
" be moved by this, or any other provoca-
" tion, to wifh it with-held in any instance
" whatever from the diffenters ! " J
* P. 191. ad edit, -f Letters to Horace Walpole. p. 23.
J Ibid. p. 24.
THE END.
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT LOS ANGELES
THE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY
This book is DUE on the last date stamped below
NOV 7
Z ii '^
WAN 24 1958
NTERL1BRARY LJDAN
DEC 20 \<&U
TWO WEEKS FROM DAT BI3
NON-RENEWABLE
U2b?
|fEJr0O5-'ulft
,*3
mffOfr
OCT
JAN 1 4 13S?
C ffD LU-U
H
Z
UJ
CO
UJ
<
fJftfcP
im
\
s
UJ
3^8
, c0 <
gvfujQ
JUN
- *, *aa&
DYERSITY of califobj
i oaiiiofma, los
L 007 037 661 1
UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY
A A 000 093 276 4