To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.
THere cannot be imagined a more laudable Design than the promoting the Salvation of Mens Souls, by any one who shall undertake it. But if it be a Pretence made use of to cover some other By-Interest, nothing can be more odious to Men, nothing more provoking to the great God of Heaven and Earth, nothing more misbecoming the Name and Character of a Christian. With what Intention you took your P•…•…n in hand to
defend and incourage the use of Force in the business of Mens Salvation, 'tis sit in Charity we take your Word; but what your Scheme, as you have delivered it, is guilty of, 'tis my bu∣siness to take notice of, and represent to you.
To my saying, that if Persecution, as is pretended, were for * 1.1 the Salvation of Mens Souls, bare Conformity would not serve the turn, but Men would be examined whether they do it upon Reason and Conviction: You answer, Who they be that pretend * 1.2 that Persecution is for the Salvation of Mens Souls, you know not. Whatever you know not, I know one, who in the Letter under consideration pleads for Force, as useful for the promoting the Sal∣vation * 1.3 of Mens Souls: and that the use of Force is no other Means * 1.4 for the Salvation of Mens Souls, than what the Author and Finisher of our Faith has directed. That so far is the Magistrate, when he * 1.5 gives his helping- Hand to the furtherance of the Gospel, by laying con∣venient Penalties upon such as reject it, or any part of it, from using any other Means for the Salvation of Mens Souls, than what the Au∣thor and Finisher of our Faith has directed, that he does no more than his Duty for promoting the Salvation of Souls. And as the Means by which Men may be brought into the Way of Salvation. Ay, but where * 1.6 do you say that Persecution is for the Salvation of Souls? I thought you had been arguing against my Meaning, and against the things I say, and not against my Words in your Meaning, which is not against me. That I used the word Persecution for what you call Force and Penalties, you knew: for in pag. 21. that immedi∣ately precedes this, you take notice of it, with some little kind of Wonder, in these Words; Persecution, so it seems you call all Punishments for Religion. That I do so then, (whether proper∣ly or improperly) you could not be ignorant; and then I be∣seech you apply your Answer here to what I say: My Words are; `I•…•… Persecution (as is pretended) were for the Salvation of Mens Souls, Men that conform would be examined whether `they did so upon Reason and Conviction. Change my word Persecution into Punishment for Religion, and then consider the Truth or Ingenuity of your Answer: for in that sense of the word Persecution, do you know no body that pretends Persecution is for the Salvation of Mens Souls? So much for your Ingenuity, and the Arts you allow your self to serve a good Cause. What do you think of one of my Pagans or Mahometans? Could he have done better? For I shall often have occasion to mind you of
them. Now to your Argument I said,
That I thought those who make Laws, and use Force, to bring Men to Church-Con∣formity in Religion; seek only the Compliance, but concern themselves not for the Conviction of those they punish, and so never use Force to convince. For pray tell me, When any Dissenter conforms, and enters into the Church-Communion, is he ever examined to see whether he does it upon Reason and Conviction, and such Grounds as would become a Christian concer∣ned for Religion? If Persecution (as i•…•… pr•…•…tended) were for the Salvation of Mens Souls, this would be done, and Men not driven to take the Sacrament to keep their Places, or obtain Licences to s•…•…ll Ale, (for so low have these holy things been * 1.7 prostituted.)To this you here reply; As to those Magistrates, who having provided sufficiently for the Instruction of all under their Care, in the true Religion, do make Laws, and use moderate Penal∣ties to bring Men to the Communion of the Church of God, and Con∣formity to the Rules and Orders of it, I think their Behaviour does plainly enough speak them to seek and concern themselves for the Con∣viction of those wh•…•…m they punish, and for their Compliance only as the Fruit of their Conviction. If Means of Instruction were all, that is necessary to convince People, the providing sufficiently for In∣struction would be an Evidence, that those that did so, did seek and concern themselves for Mens Conviction: but if there be some∣thing as necessary for Conviction as the Means of Instruction, and without which those Means will signify nothing, and that be severe and impartial Examination; and if Force be, as you say, so necessary to make Men thus examine, that they can by no other way but Force be brought to do it: If Magistrates do not lay their Penalties on Non-examination, as well as provide Means of Instruction, whatever you may say you think, few People will sind reason to believe you think those Magistrates seek and concern them∣selves much for the Conviction of those they punish, when that Punish∣ment is not levell'd at that, which is a hindrance to their Convicti∣on, i. e. against their Aversion to severe and impartial Examination. To that Aversion no Punishment can be pretended to be a Reme∣dy, which does not reach and combat the Aversion; which '〈◊〉〈◊〉 plain no Punishment does, which may be avoided without part∣ing with, or abating the Prevalency of that Aversion. This is the Case, where Men undergo Punishments for not conforming, which they may be rid of, without 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and impartially exami∣ning Matters of Religion.
To shew that what I mentioned was no Sign of Unconcerned∣ness in the Magistrate for Mens Conviction; You add, Nor does the contrary appear from the not examining Dissenters when they con∣form, * 1.8 t•…•… see whether they do it upon Reason and Conviction: For where sufficient Instruction is provided, it is ordinarily presumable that when Dissenters conform, they do it upon Reason and Conviction. Here if ordinarily signifies any thing, (for it is a Word you make much use of, whether to express or cover your Sense, let the Reader judg) then you suppose there are Cases wherein it is not presuma∣ble; and I a•…•…k you whether in those, or any Cases it be examin'd whether Dissenters when they conform, do it upon Reason and Conviction? At best that it is ordinarily pr•…•…sumable, is but gra•…•…is dictum, especially since you suppose, that it is the Corruption of their Nature that hinders them from considering as they ought, so as upon Reason and. Conviction to imbrace the Truth: Which Cor∣ruption of Nature, that they may retain with Conformity I think is very presumable. But be that as it will, this I am fure is ordinarily and always presumable, that if those who use Force, were as intent upon Mens Conviction, as they are on their Conformity, they would not wholly content themselves with the one, without ever examining and looking into the other.
Another Excuse you make for this Neglect, is, That as to ir∣religious * 1.9 Persons who only seek their s•…•…chlar Advantage, how easy it is for them to pretend Conviction, and to offer such Grounds (if that were required) as would become a Christian concerned for Religion, that is, what no Care of Man can certainly prevent. This is an admirable Justification of your Hypothesis. Men are to be pu∣nished: To what end? To make them severely and impartially consider Matters of Religion, that they may be convinced, and thereupon sincerely imbrace the Truth. But what need of Force or Punishment for this? Because their Lusts and Corrup∣tions will otherwise keep them both from considering as they ought, and imbracing the true Religion; and therefore they must lie under Penalties till they have considered as they ought, which is when they have upon Conviction imbraced. But how shall the Magistrate know when they upon Conviction imbrace, that he may then take off their Penalties? That indeed cannot be known, and ought not to be inquired after, because irreligious Persons who only seek their secular Advantage, or in other Words, all those who desire at their ease to retain their beloved Lusts
and Corruptions, may easily pretend Conviction, and offer such Grounds (if it were required) as would become a Christian concern∣ed for Religion: This is what no Care of Man can certainly prevent. Which is Reason enough, why no busy Forwardness in Man to disease his Brother should use Force upon Pretence of prevalling against Man's Corruptions, that hinder their considering and im∣bracing the Truth upon Conviction, when 'tis confessed, it cannot be known, whether they have considered, are convinced, or have really imbraced the true Religion or no? And thus you have shewn us your admirable Remedy, which is not it seems for the irreligious (for 'tis easy, you say, for them to pretend Con∣viction, and so avoid Punishment) but for those who would be religious without it.
But here in this Case, as to the Intention of the Magistrate, how can it be said, that the Force he uses is designed by subdu∣ing Mens Corruptions, to make way for considering and im∣bracing the Tr•…•…th, when it is so applied, that it is confessed here, that a Man may get rid of the Penalties without parting with the Corruptions, they are pretended to be used against? But you have a ready Answer, This is what no Care of Man can certainly prevent; which is but in other Words to proclaim the Ridiculousness of your Use of Force, and to avow that your Method can do nothing. If by not certainly, you mean it may any way, or to any degree prevent, why is it not so done? If not, why is a Word that signifies nothing put in, unless it be for a Shelter on Occasion? A Benefit you know how to draw from this way of writing: But this here taken how you please, will only serve to lay Blame on the Magistrate, or your Hypothesis, chuse you whether. I for my part have a better Opinion of the Ability and Management of the Magistrate: What he aimed at in his Laws, that I believe he mentions in them, and as wise Men do in Bu•…•…nes, fpoke out plainly what he had a Mind should be done. But c•…•…inly there cannot a more ridiculous Cha∣racter be put on Law-makers, than to tell the World they in∣tended to make Men consider, examine, &c. but yet neither re∣quired nor named any thing in their Laws but Conformity. Though yet when Men are certainly to be punished for not really imbracing the true Religion, there ought to be certain Matters of Fact, whereby those that do, and those that do not so im∣brace the Truth, should be distinguished; and for that you have, 'tis true, a clear and established Criterion, i. e. Conformi∣ty
and Nonconformity: which do very certainly distinguish the Innocent from the Guilty; those that really and sincerely do imbrace the Truth that must save them, from those that do not.
But, Sir, to resolve the Question, whether the Conviction of Mens Understandings, and the Salvation of their Souls, be the Business and Aim of those who use Force to bring Men into the Profession of the National Religion; I ask, whether if that were so, there could be so many as there are, not only in most Country-Parishes, but, I think I may say, may be found in all Parts of England, grosly ignorant in the Doctrines and Princi∣ples of the Christian Religion, if a strict Inquiry were made in∣to it? If Force be necessary to be used to bring Men to Salva∣tion, certainly some part of it would 〈◊〉〈◊〉 out some of the igno∣rant and unconsidering that are in the National Church, as well as it does so diligently all the Nonconformists out of it, whether they have considered, or are knowing or no. But to this you give a very ready Answer; Would you have the Magi∣strate * 1.10 punish all indifferently, those who obey the Law as well as them that do not? What is the Obedience the Law requires? That you tell us in these Words, If the Magistrate provides 〈◊〉〈◊〉 * 1.11 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Instruction of all his Subjects in the true Religion, and then re∣quires them all under convenient Penalties to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to the Teachers and Ministers of it, and to profess and exercise it with one Accord under their Direction in publick Assemblies: Which in other Words is but Conformity, which here you express a little plainer in these Words; But as those Magistrates who having pro∣vided * 1.12 sufficiently for the Instruction of all under their Care in the true Religion do make Laws, and use moderate Penalties to bring Men to the Communion of the Church of God, and to conform to the Rules and Orders of it. You add, Is there any Pretence to say that in so doing, he [the Magistrate] applies Force only to a part of his 〈◊〉〈◊〉, when the Law is general, and excepts none? There is no Pre∣tence, I confess, to say that in so doing he applies Force only to a part of his Subjects, to make them Conformists, from that it is plain the Law excepts none. But if Conformists may be ig∣norant, grosly ignorant of the Principles and Doctrines of Christianity; if there be no 〈◊〉〈◊〉 used to make them consi∣der as they ought, so as to understand, be convinced of, believe and obey the Truths of the Gospel, are not they exempt from that Force which you say is to make Men consider and examine Mat∣ters * 1.13 of Religion as they ought to do? Force is applied to all indeed to
make them Conformists: But if being Conformists once, and frequenting the Places of publick Worship, and there shewing an outward Compliance with the Ceremonies prescribed, (for that is all the Law requires of all, call it how you please) they are exempt from all Force and Penalties, though they are ne∣ver so ignorant, never so far from understanding, believing, receiving the Truths of the 〈◊〉〈◊〉; I think it is evident that then Force is not applied to all to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Conviction of the * 1.14 Vnderstanding. To bring Men to consider those Reasons and Argu∣ments * 1.15 which are proper to convince the Mind, and which without be∣ing forced, they would not consider. To bring Men to that Considera∣tion, * 1.16 which nothing else but Force (besides the extraordinary Grace of God) would bring them to. To make Men good Christians. To * 1.17 make Men receive Instruction. To cure their Aversion to the true * 1.18 Religion. To bring Men to consider and examine the Controversies * 1.19 which they are bound to consider and examine, i. e. those wherein they * 1.20 cannot err without dishonouring God, and endangering their own and other Mens eternal Salvation. To weigh Matters of Religion care∣fully * 1.21 and impartially. To bring Men to the true Religion and to Sal∣vation. * 1.22 That then Force is not applied to all the Subjects for these Ends, I think you will not deny. These are the Ends for which you tell us in the Places quoted, that Force is to be used in Matters of Religion: 'Tis by its Vsefulness and Necessity to those Ends, that you tell us, the Magistrate is authorized and ob∣liged to use Force in Matters of 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Now if all these Ends be not attained by a bare 〈◊〉〈◊〉, and yet if by a bare Conformity Men are wholly exempt from all Force and Penalties in Matters of Religion, will you say that for these Ends Force is applied to all the Magistrate's Subjects? If you will, I must send you to my Pagans and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 for a little Con∣science and Modesty. If you 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Force 〈◊〉〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to all for these Ends, notwithstanding any Laws obliging all to Con∣formity, you must also confess, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 what you say concerning the Laws being general, is nothing to the Purpose; since all that are under Penalties for not 〈◊〉〈◊〉 are not under any Pe∣nalties for Ignorance, Irreligion, or the want of those Ends for which you say Penalties are useful and necessary.
You go on, And therefore if such Persons profane the Sacrament * 1.23 to keep their Places, or to obtain Licences to sell Ale, this is an horri∣ble Wickedness. I 〈◊〉〈◊〉 them not. But it is their own, and they
alone must answer for it. Yes, and those who threatned poor ig∣norant and irreligious Ale-sellers, whose Livelihood it was, to take away their Licences, if they did not conform and receive the Sacrament, may be thought perhaps to have something to answer for. You add, But it is very unjust to impute it to those * 1.24 who make such Laws, and use such Force, or to say that they prosti∣tute holy things, and drive Men to profane them. Nor is it just to insinuate in your Answer, as if that had been said which was not. But if it be true that a poor ignorant loose irreligious Wretch should be threatned to be turn'd out of his Calling and Livelihood, if he would not take the Sacrament: May it not be said these holy things have been so low prostituted? And if this be not profaning them, pray tell me what is?
This I think may be said without Injustice to any body, that it does not appear, that those who make strict Laws for Con∣formity, and take no Care to have it examined upon what Grounds Men conform, are not very much concern'd, that Mens Understandings should be convinced: And though you go on to say, that they design by their Laws to do what lies in them to make Men good Christians: That will scarce be believed, if what you say be true, that Force is necessary to bring those who cannot be * 1.25 otherwise brought to it, to study the true Religion, with such Care and Diligence as they might and ought to use, and with an honest Mind. And yet we see a great part, or any of those who are ignorant in the true Religion, have no such Force applied to them, especi∣ally since you tell us, in the same Place, that no Man ever studied the true Religion with such Care and Diligence as he might and ought * 1.26 to use, and with an honest Mind, but he was convinced of the Truth of it. If then Force and Penalties can produce that Study, Care, Diligence and honest Mind, which will produce Knowledg and Con∣viction (and that as you say in the following Words) make good Men; I ask you, if there be found in the Communion of the Church, exempt from Force upon the Account of Religion, ig∣norant, irreligious, ill Men; and that to speak moderately, not in great Disproportion fewer than amongst the Nonconfor∣mists, will you believe your self, when you say the Magistrates do by their Laws all that in them lies to make them good Christians; when they use not that Force to them which you, not I, say is necessary; and that they are, where it is necessary, obliged to use? And therefore I give you leave to repeat again the Words
you subjoin here, But if after all they [i. e. the Magistrates] can do, wicked and godless Men will still resolve to be so, they will be so, and I know not who but God Almighty can help it. But this be∣ing * 1.27 spoken of Conformists, on whom the Magistrates lay no Penalties, use no Force for Religion, give me leave to mind you of the Ingenuity of one of my Pagans or Mahometans.
You tell us, That the Usefulness of Force to make Scholars learn, authorizes Schoolmasters to use it. And would you not think a Schoolmaster discharged his Duty well, and had a great Care of their Learning, who used his Rod only to bring Boys to School; but if they come there once a Week, whether they slept, or only minded their Play, never examined what Profici∣ency they made, or used the Rod to make them study and learn, tho they would not apply themselves without it?
But to shew you how much you your self are in earnest for the Salvation of Souls in this your Method, I shall set down what I said, p. 61. of my Letter on that Subject, and what you answer, p. 68. of yours.
L. 2. p. 61. You speak of it here as the most deplorable Condition imaginable, that Men should be left to themselves, and not be forced to consider and examine the Grounds of their Religion, and search impartially and diligently after the Truth. This you make the great Miscarriage of Man∣kind; and for this you seem so∣licitous, all through your Trea∣tise, to find out a Remedy; and there is scarce a Leaf where∣in you do not offer yours. But what if after all, now you should be found to prevaricate? Men have contrived to themselves, say you, a great Variety of Religions: 'Tis granted. They seek not the Truth in this matter with that Ap∣plication of Mind, and that free∣dom
of Judgment which is requi∣site: 'Tis confessed. All the false Religions now on foot in the World, have taken their rise from the slight and partial Considerati∣on, which Men have contented themselves with in searching after the true; and Men take them up, and persist in them for want of due Examination: Be it so. There is need of a Remedy for this; and I have found one whose Success cannot be questioned: Very well. What is it? Let us hear it. Why, Dissenters must be punished. Can any body that hears you say so, believe you in earnest; and that want of Examination is the thing you would have amend∣ed, when want of Examination is not the thing you would have punished? If want of Exami∣nation be the Fault, want of Examination must be punished; if you are, as you pretend, ful∣ly satisfied that Punishment is the proper and only Means to remedy it. But if in all your Treatise you can shew me one Place, where you say that the Ignorant, the Careless, the In∣considerate, the Negligent in examining throughly the Truth of their own and others Religion, &c. are to be punished, I will allow your Remedy for a good one. But you have not said any thing like this; and which is more, I tell you before-hand, you dare not say it. And whilst you do
not, the World has reason to judg, that however want of Examination be a general Fault, which you with great Vehemen∣cy have exaggerated; yet you use it only for a pretence to pu∣nish Dissenters; and either di∣strust your Remedy, that it will not cure this Evil, or else care not to have it generally cur'd. This evidently appears from your whole Management of the Argument. And he that reads your Treatise with attention, wil be more confirm'd in this Opinion, when he shall find, that you (who are so earnest to have Men punished, to bring them to consider and examine, that so they may discover the Way to Salvation) have not said one word of considering, searching, and hearkning to the Scripture; which had been as good a Rule for a Christian to have sent them to, as to Reasons and Ar∣guments proper to convince them, of you know not what; As to the Instruction and Government of the proper Ministers of Religion, which who they are, Men are yet far from being agreed; Or as to the Information of those, who tell them they have mistaken their Way, and offer to shew them the right; and to the like uncertain and dangerous Guides; which were not those that our Saviour and the Apostles sent Men to, bat to the Scriptures. Search
the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal Life, says our Saviour to the unbelieving * 2.1 persecuting Jews. And 'tis the Scriptures which St. Paul says, * 2.2 are able to make wise unto Salva∣tion. Talk no more therefore, if you have any care of your Re∣putation, how much it is every Man's Interest not to be left to him∣self, without Molestation, without Punishment in Matters of Religion. Talk not of bringing Men to im∣brace the Truth that must save them, by putting them upon Ex∣amination. Talk no more of Force and Punishment, as the on∣ly way lest to bring Men to examin. 'Tis evident you mean nothing less: For tho want of Exami∣nation be the only Fault you complain of, and Punishment be in your Opinion the only way to bring Men to it; and this the whole Design of your Book; yet you have not once proposed in it, that those who do not im∣partially examine, should be for∣ced to it. And that you may not think I talk at random, when I say you dare not; I will, if you please, give you some Reasons for my saying so.
First, Because if you propose that all should be punished, who are ignorant, who have not used such Consideration as is apt and proper to manifest the Truth; but have been determined in the choice
of their Religion by Impressions of Education, Admiration of Per∣sons, worldly Respects, Prejudices, and the like incompetent Motives; and have taken up their Religion, without examining it as they ought; you will propose to have several of your own Church (be it what it will) punished; which would be a Proposition too apt to offend too many of it, for you to venture on. For what∣ever need there be of Reforma∣tion, every one will not thank you sor proposing such an one as must begin at (or at least reach to) the House of God. Secondly, Because if you should propose that all those who are ignorant, careless, and negligent in examining, should be punished, you would have little to say in this Question of To∣leration: For if the Laws of the State were made as they ought to be, equal to all the Subjects, without distinction of Men of different Professions in Religion; and the Faults to be amended by Punishments, were impartially punished in all who are guilty of them; this would immediately produce a perfect Toleration, or shew the Uselesness of Force in Matters of Re∣ligion. Is therefore you think it so necessary, as you say, for the promoting of true Religion, and the Salvation of Souls, that Men should be punished to make them examine; do but sind a way to apply Force to all that have not throughly and impartially exa∣mined, and you have my Consent. For tho Force be not the proper means of promoting Religion; yet there is no better way to shew the Uselesness of it, than the applying it equally to Miscarriage, in whomsoever found, and not to distinct: Parties or Perswasions of Men, for the Reformation of them alone, when others are equally faulty.
Thirdly, Because without being sor as large a Toleration as the Author proposes, you cannot be truly and sincerely for a free and impartial Examination. For whoever examines, must have the Liberty to judg, and follow his Judgment; or else you
put him upon Examination to no purpose. And whether that will not as well lead Men from, as to your Church, is so much a Venture, that by your way of Writing, 'tis evident enough you are loth to hazard it; and if you are of the National Church, 'tis plain your Brethren will not bear with you in the Allowance of such a Liberty. You must therefore either change your Method; and if the want of Examination be that great and dangerous Fault you would have corrected, you must equally punish all that are equally guilty of any Neglect in this Matter, and then take your only means, your beloved Force, and make the best of it; or else you must put off your Mask, and confess that you design not your Punishments to bring Men to Examination, but to Conformity. For the Fallacy you have used, is too gross to pass upon this Age. L. 3. p. 68. Your next Pa∣ragraph runs high, and charges me with nothing less than Pre∣varication. For whereas, as you tell me, I speak of it here as the most deplorable Condition imaginable, that Men should be left to themselves, and not be forced to consider and examine the Grounds of their Religion, and search impartially and dili∣gently after the Truth, &c. It seems all the Remedy I offer, is no more than this, Dissenters must be punished. Vpon which thus you insult; Can any bo∣dy that hears you say so, believe you in earnest, &c. Now here I acknowledg, that though want or neglect of Exa∣mination be a general Fault, yet
the Method I propose for curing it, does not reach to all that are guilty of it, but is limited to those who reject the true Religi∣on, preposed to them with suffi∣cient Evidence. But then to let you see how little ground you have to say that I prevaricate in this matter, I shall only de∣sire you to consider, what it is that the Author and my self were enquiring after: For it is not, What Course is to be taken to confirm and establish those in the Truth, who have already embraced it: nor, How they may be enabled to propagate it to others, (for both which Purposes I have already acknow∣ledged it very useful, and a thing much to be desired, that all such Persons should, as far as they are able, search into the Grounds upon which their Reli∣gion stands, and challenges their Belief;) but the Subject of our Enquiry is only, What Method is to be used, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 bring Men to the true Religion. Now if this be the only thing we were inqui∣ring after, (as you cannot deny it to be) then every one sees that in speaking to this Point, I had nothing to do with any who have already imbraced the true Reli∣gion; because they are not to be brought to that Religion, but only to be confirmed and edi∣fied in it; but was only to con∣sider how those who reject it,
may be brought to imbrace it. So that how much soever any of those who own the true Religion, may be guilty of neglect of Exa∣mination; 'tis evident, I was only concerned to shew how it may be cured in those, who by reason of it, reject the true Re∣ligion, duly proposed or tender'd to them. And certainly to con∣fine my self to this, is not to prevaricate, unless to keep within the Bounds which the Question under debate prescribes me, be to prevaricate. In telling me therefore that I dare not say that the Igno∣rant, the Careless, the In∣considerate, the Negligent in examining, &c. (i. e. all that are such) are to be punished, you only tell me that I dare not be impertinent. And therefore I hope you will excuse me, if I take no notice of the three Rea∣sons you offer in your next Page for your saying so. And yet if I had had a mind to talk im∣pertinently, I know not why I might not have dared to do so, as well as other Men.
There is one thing more in this Paragraph, which though nothing more pertinent than the rest, I shall not wholly pass over. It lies in these Words; He that reads your Treatise with At∣tention, will be more confirm'd
in this Opinion, (viz. That I use want of Examina∣tion only for a Pretence to pu∣nish Dissenters, &c.) when he shall find that you (who are so earnest to have Men pu∣nish'd, to bring them to con∣sider and examine, that so they may discover the Way of Salvation) have not said one Word of considering, searching, and hearkning to the Scripture; which had been as good a Rule for a Christian to have sent them to, as to Reasons and Argu∣ments proper to convince them, of you know not what, &c. How this confirms that Opinion, I do not see; nor have you thought fit to instruct me. But as to the thing it self, viz. my not saying one Word of considering, searching, and hearkning to the Scrip∣ture; whatever Advantage a captious Adversary may imagine he has in it, I hope it will not seem strange to any indifferent and judicious Person, who shall but consider that throughout my Treatise I speak of the true Re∣ligion only in general, i. e. not as limited to any particular Dis∣pensation, or to the Times of the Scriptures; but as reaching from the Fall of Adam to the End of the World, and so com∣prehending the Times which pre∣ceded the Scriptures; wherein
yet God left not himself with∣out Witness, but furnished Mankind with sufficient Means of knowing Him and his Will, in order to their eternal Salva∣tion. For I appeal to all Men of Art, whether, speaking of the True Religion under this Generality, I could be allowed to descend to any such Rules of it, as belong only to some particular Times, or Dispen∣sations; such as you cannot but acknowledg the Old and New Testaments to be.
In this your Answer you say, the Subject of our Inquiry is only what Method is to be used to bring Men to the true Religion. He that reads what you say, again and again, That the Magistrate * 3.1 is impower'd and obliged to procure as much as in him lies, i. e. as far as by Penalties it can be procured that NO MAN neglect his Soul, and shall remember how many Pages you imploy, A. p 6, &c. And here p. 6, &c. to shew that it is the Corruption of humane Nature which hinders Men from doing what they may and ought for the Salvation of their Souls, and that therefore Penal∣ties, no other means being left, and Force were necessary to be used by the Magistrate to remove these great Obstacles of L•…•…sts and Corruptions, that none of his Subjects might remain ignorant of the way of Salvation, or refuse to imbrace it. One would think your Inquiry had been after the means of CVRING MENS A∣version to the true Religion, (which you tell us, p. 53. if not cured, is certainly destructive of Mens Eternal Salvation) that so they might heartily imbrace it for their Salvation. But here you tell us, your Inquiry is only what Method is to be used to bring Men to the true Religion: whereby you evidently mean nothing but outward Conformity to that which you think the true Church, as appears by the next following Words; Now if this be the only thing we were inquiring after, then every one sees that in speaking to this Point, I had nothing to do with any who have already imbraced the true Reli∣gion. And also every one sees that since amongst those with whom (having already imbraced the true Religion) you and your
Penalties have nothing to do; there are those who have not consi∣dered and examined Matters of Religion as they ought, whose Lusts and corrupt Natures keep them as far alienated from believing, and as averse to a real obeying the Truth that must save them, as any other Men; it is manifest that imbracing the true Religion in your Sense is only imbracing the outward Profession of it, which is nothing but outward Conformity. And that being the furthest you would have your Penalties pursue Men, and there leave them with as much of their Ignorance of the Truth, and Carelesness of their Souls as they please, who can deny but that it would be impertinent in you to consider how want of impartial Examination, or Aversion to the true Religion should in them be cured? because they are none of those Subjects of the Commonwealth, whose spiritual and eternal Interests are by politi∣cal Government to be procured or advanced, none of those Subjects whose Salvation the Magistrate is to take Care of.
And therefore I excuse you, as you desire, for not taking notice of my three Reasons; but whether the Reader will do so or no, is more than I can undertake. I hope you too will excuse me for having used so harsh a Word as prevaricate, and impute it to my want of Skill in the English Tongue. But when I find a Man pretend to a great Concern for the Salvation of Mens Souls, and make it one of the great Ends of Civil Government, that the Magistrate should make use of Force to bring all his Subjects to consider, study and examine, believe and imbrace the Truth that must save them: when I shall have to do with a Man, who to this Pur∣pose hath writ two Books to find out and desend the proper Re∣medies for that general Backwardness and Aversion (which de∣praved humane Nature keeps Men in) to an impartial Search after, and hearty imbracing the true Religion; and who talks of nothing less than Obligations on Soveraigns, both from their particular Duty, as well as from common Charity, to take Care that none of their Subjects should want the Assistance of this only means left for their Salvation; nay, who has made it so necessary to Mens Salvation, that he talks as if the Wisdom and Goodness of God would be brought in Question, if those who needed it should be destitute of it; and yet notwithstanding all this Shew of Concern for Mens Salvation, contrives the Appli∣cation of this sole Remedy so, that a great many who lie under the Disease, should be out of the Reach and Benefit of his
Cure, and never have this only Remedy applied to them: When this I say is so manifestly in his Thoughts all the while, that he is forced to confess that though Want or Neglect of Exami∣nation be a general Fault, yet the Method he proposes for curing it does not reach to all that are guilty of it; but frankly owns, that he was not concerned to shew how the Neglect of Examination might be cured in those who conform, but only in those who by reason of it reject the true Religion duly proposed to them: which rejecting the true Religion will require a Man of Art to shew to be here any thing but Nonconformity to the National Religion. When, I say, I meet with a Man another time that does this, who is so much a Man of Art, as to talk of all, and mean but some; talk of hearty imbracing the true Religion, and mean no∣thing but Conformity to the National; pretend one thing, and mean another; if you please to tell me what Name I shall give it, I shall not fail: for who knows how soon again I may have an occasion sor it.
If I would punish Men for Nonconformity without owning of it, I could not use a better Pretence than to say it was to make them hearken to Reasons and Arguments proper to convince them, or to make them submit to the Instruction and Government of the proper Ministers of Religion, without any thing else, sup∣posing still at the bottom the Arguments for, and the Ministers of my Religion to be these, that till they outwardly complied with, they were to be punished. But if (instead of outward Conformity to my Religion covered under these indesinite terms) I should tell them, they were to examine the Scripture, which was the sixed Rule for them and me, not examining could not give me a Pretence to punish them, unless I would also pu∣nish Conformists as ignorant and unversed in the Scripture as they, which would not do my Business.
But what need I use Arguments to shew, that your punishing to make Men examine is designed only against Dissenters, when in your Answer to this very Paragraph of mine, you in plain Words acknowledg, that though want of Examination be a general * 3.2 Fault, yet the Method you propose for curing does not reach to all that are guilty of it? To which if you please to add what you tell us, That when Dissenters conform, the Magistrate cannot know, * 3.3 and therefore never examins whether they do it upon Reason and Conviction or no, though it be certain that upon conforming,
Penalties, the necessary Means, cease, it will be obvious, that whatever be talked, Conformity is all that is aimed at, and that want of Examination is but the Pretence to punish Dis∣senters.
And this I told you, any one must be convinced of, who * 3.4 observes that you (who are so earnest to have Men punished to bring them to consider and examine that so they may discover the way of Salvation) have not said one Word of considering, searching, and hearkning to the Scripture, which, you were told, was as good a Rule for a Christian to have sent Men to, as to the Instruction and Government of the proper Ministers of Religion, or to the Information of those who tell them they have mis∣taken 'their way, and offer to shew them the right. For this p•…•…ssing by the Scripture you give us this Reason, that throughout your Trea•…•…se you speak of the true Religion only in general, i. e. not as li∣mited * 3.5 to any particular Dispensation, or to the times of the Scrip∣tures, but as reaching from the Fall of Adam to the End of the World, &c. And then you appeal to all Men of Art, whether speaking of the true Religion under this Generality, you could be al∣lowed to descend to any such Rules of it as belong only to some particu∣lar Times or Dispensations, such as I cannot but acknowledg the Old and New Testaments to be.
The Author that you write against, making it his Business (as no body can doubt who reads but the first Page of his Letter) to shew that it is the Duty of Christians to tolerate both Chri∣stians and others who differ from them in Religion, 'tis pretty strange (in asserting against him that the Magistrate might and ought to use Force to bring Men to the true Religion) you should mean any other Magistrate than the Christian Magistrate; or any other Religion than the Christian Religion. But it seems you took so little notice of the Design of your Adversary, which was to prove, that Christians were not to use Force to bring any one to the true Christian Religion; that you would prove, that Christians now were to use Force, not only to bring Men to the Christian, but also to the Jewish Religion; or that of the true Church before the Law, or to some true Religion so ge∣neral that it is none of these. For, say you, throughout your Treatise you speak of the true Religion only in general, i. e. not as limited to any particular Dispensation: Though one that were not a Man of Art would suspect you to be of another Mind your self, when you told * 3.6
us, the shuting out of the Jews from the Rights of the Common∣wealth, is a just and necessary Caution in a Christian Commonwealth; which you say to justify your Exception in the beginning of your A— against the Largeness of the Author's Tolerati∣on, who would not have Jews excluded. But speak of the true Religion only in general as much as you please, if your true Reli∣gion be that by which Men must be saved, can you send a Man to any better Guide to that true Religion now than the Scripture?
If when you were in your Altitudes, writing the first Book, your Men of Art could not allow you to descend to any such Rule as the Scripture, (though even there you acknowledg the Severi∣ties * 3.7 spoken against, are such as are used to make Men Christians) because there (by an Art proper to your self) you were to speak of true Religion under a Generality, which had nothing to do with the Duty of Christians, in reference to Toleration. Yet when here in your second Book, where you condescend all along to speak of the CHRISTIAN RELIGION, and tell us, that the Magistrates have Authority to make Laws for promoting the Chri∣stian RELIGION, and do by their Laws design to contribute what in them lies to make Men good CHRISTIANS; and complain of Toleration as the very Bane of the Life and Spirit of CHRISTI∣ANITY, &c. and have vouchsafed particularly to mention the Gospel; why here, having been call'd upon for it, you could not send Men to the Scriptures, and tell them directly, that those they were to study diligently, those they were impartially and carefully to examine, to bring them to the true Religion, and into the way of Salvation; rather than talk to them as you do, of receiving Instruction, and considering Reasons and Arguments proper and sufficient to convince them; rather than propose, as you do all along, such Objects of Examination and Enquiry in general terms, as are as hard to be found, as the thing it self, for which they are to be examined: Why I say you have here again avoid∣ed sending Men to examine the Scriptures, is just matter of In∣quiry. And for this you must apply your self again to your Men of Art, to furnish you with some other Reason.
If you will but cast your Eyes back to your next Page, you will there find that you build upon this, that the Subject of your and the Author's I•…•…quiry is only what Method is to be used to bring Men to the true Religion. If this be so, your Men of Art, who cannot allow you to descend to any such Rule as the Scriptures,
because you speak of the true Religion in general, i. e. not as li∣mited to any particular Dispensation, or to the times of the Scriptures, must allow, that you deserve to be Head of their Colledg; since you are so strict an Observer of their Rules, that though your Inquiry be, What Method is to be used to bring Men to the true Re∣ligion (now under the particular Dispensation of the Gospel, and under Scripture-times) you think it an unpardonable Fault to re∣cede so far from your Generality, as to admit the Study and Ex∣amination of the Scripture into your Method; for fear, 'tis like, your Method would be too particular, if it would not now serve to bring Men to the true Religion, who lived before the Flood. But had you had as good a Memory, as is generally thought needful to a Man of Art, it is believed you would have spared this Reason, for your being so backward in putting Men upon Examination of the Scripture. And any one, but a Man of Art, who shall read what you tell us the Magistrate's Duty is; and * 3.8 will but consider how convenient it would be, that Men should receive no Instruction but from the Ministry, that you there tell us the Magistrate assists; examine no Arguments, hear nothing of the Gospel, receive no other Sense of the Scripture, but what that Ministry proposes; who if they had but the coactive Power, (you think them as capable of as other Men) might assist them∣selves; He, I say, who reflects but on these things, may perhaps find a Reason that may better satisfy the Ignorant and Unlearn∣ed, who have not had the good luck to arrive at being of the Number of these Men of Art, why you cannot descend to pro∣pose to Men the studying of the Scripture.
Let me for once suppose you in holy Orders, (for we that are not of the Adepti, may be allow'd to be ignorant of the Punctilio's in Writing observed by the Men of Art:) And let me then ask what Art is this, whose Rules are of that Authority; that One, who has received Commission from Heaven to preach the Gospel in Season and out of Season, for the Salvation of Souls, may not allow himself to propose the reading, studying, examining of the Scripture, which has for at least these sixteen hundred Years contained the only true Religion in the World; for fear 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Proposal should offend against the Rules of this Art by being too particular and consined to the Gospel-Dispensation; And therefore could not pass muster, nor find Admittance, in a Treatise wherein the Author professes it his only Business to in∣quire
what Method is to be used to bring Men to the true Religion? Do you expect any other Dispensation; that you are so afraid of being too particular, if you should recommend the Use and Study of the Scripture, to bring Men to the true Religion now in the times of the Gospel? Why might you not as well send them to the Scriptures, as to the Ministers and Teachers of the true Religion? Have those Ministers any other Religion to teach, than what is contained in the Scriptures? But perhaps you do this out of Kindness and Care, because possibly the Scriptures could not be found; but who were the Ministers of the true Religion, Men could not possibly miss. Indeed you have allowed your self to descend to what belongs only to some particular Times and Dispensati∣ons, for their sakes, when you speak of the Ministers of the Go∣spel. But whether it be as fully agreed on amongst Christians, who are the Ministers of the Gospel that Men must hearken to, and be guided by; as which are the Writings of the Apostles and Evangelists, that (if studied) will instruct them in the way to Heaven; is more than you or your Men of Art can be positive in. Where are the Canons of this over-ruling Art to be found, to which you pay such Reverence? May a Man of no distin∣guishing Character be admitted to the Privilege of them? For I see it may be of notable Use at a dead-lift, and bring a Man off with flying Colours, when Truth and Reason can do him but little Service. The strong Guard you have in the Powers you write for; And when you have engaged a little too far, the safe Retreat you have always at hand in an Appeal to these Men of Art, made me almost at a stand, whether I were not best make a Truce with one who had such Auxiliaries. A Friend of mine finding me talk thus, replied briskly; 'tis a Matter of Religion, which requires not Men of Art; and the Assistance of such Art as savours so little of the Simplicity of the Gospel, both shews and makes the Cause the weaker. And so I went on to your two next Paragraphs.
In them, to vindicate a pretty strange Argument for the Magi∣strate's Use of Force, you think it convenient to repeat it out of your A. p. 26. And so, in Compliance with you, shall I do here again. There you tell us, The Power you ascribe to the Magistrate is given him to bring Men, not to his own, but to the true Religion: And though (as our Author puts us in mind) the Religion of every Prince is Orthodox to himself; yet if this Power keep within its bounds,
it can serve the Interest of no other Religion but the true, among such as have any Concern for their Eternal Salvation; (and those that have none, deserve not to be considered) because the Penalties it inables him that has it to instict, are not such as may tempt such Persons either to renounce a Religion which they believe to be true, or to profess one which they do not believe to be so; but only such as are apt to put them upon a serious and impartial Examination of the Con∣troversy between the Magistrate and them, which is the way for them to come to the Knowledg of the Truth. And if, upon such Exa∣mination of the Matter, they chance to sind that the Truth does not lie on the Magistrate's side, they have gained thus much however, even by the Magistrate's misapplying his Power, that they know bet∣ter than they did before, where the Truth doth lie: And all the hurt that comes to them by it, is only the suffering some tolerable Incon∣veniences for their following the Light of their own Reason, and the Dictates of their own Consciences; which, certainly, is no such Mischief to Mankind as to make it more eligible that there should be no such Power vested in the Magistrate, but the Care of every Man's Soul should be left to himself alone, (as this Author demands it should be.)
To this I tell you,
That here, out of abundant Kind∣ness, * 3.9 when Dissenters have their Heads (without any cause) broken, you provide them a Plaister. For, say you, if upon such Examination of the Matter (i. e. brought to it by the Ma∣gistrate's Punishment) they chance to find that the Truth doth not lie on the Magistrate's side; they have gain'd thus much how∣ever, even by the Magistrate's misapplying his Power, that they know better than they did before, where the Truth does lie. Which is as true as if you should say; Upon Examination I find such an one is out of the way to York, therefore I know better than I did before that I am in the right. For neither of you may be in the right. This were true indeed, if there were but two ways in all, a Right and a Wrong.To this you reply here; That whoever shall consider the Penalties, will, you perswade your self, find no Heads broken, and so but little need of a Plaister. The Penalties, as you say, are to be such as will not tempt such as have any concern for their Eternal Salvation, either to renounce a Religion which they believe to be true, or profess one which they be∣lieve not to be so, but only such as (being weigh'd in Gold-Scales) are just enough, or as you express it, are apt to put them upon a
serious and impartial Examination of the Controversy between the Magistrate and them. If you had been pleased to have told us what Penalties those were, we might have been able to guess whether there would have been broken Heads or no. But since you have not vouchsafed to do it, and if I mistake not, will a∣gain appeal to your Men of Art for another Dispensation ra∣ther than ever do it; I fear no body can be sure these Penalties will not reach to something worse than a broken Head: Espe∣cially if the Magistrate shall observe that you impute the Rise * 3.10 and Growth of salse Religions (which it is the Magistrate's Du∣ty to hinder) to the Pravity of humane Nature, unbridled by Au∣thority; which, by what follows, he may have reason to think * 3.11 is to use Force sufficient to counterballance the Folly, Perverse∣ness and Wickedness of Men: And whether then he may not lay on Penalties sufficient, if not to break Mens Heads, yet to ruin them in their Estates and Liberties, will be more than you can undertake. And since you acknowledg here, that the Magi∣strate may err so far in the Use of this his Power, as to mistake the Persons that he lays his Penalties on; will you be Security that he shall not also mistake in the Proportion of them, and lay on such as Men would willingly exchange for a broken Head? All the Assurance you give us of this, is; If this Power keep within its bounds; i. e. as you here explain it, If the Penalties the Magistrate makes use of to promote a false Religion, do not exceed the Measure of those which he may warrantably use for the promo∣ting the True. The Magistrate may notwithstanding any thing you have said, or can say, use any sort of Penalties, any degree of Punishment; you having neither shew'd the Measure of them, nor will be ever able to shew the utmost Measure which may not be exceeded, if any may be used.
But what is this I find here? If the Penalties the Magistrate makes use of to promote a FALSE RELIGION. Is it possible that the Magistrate can make use of Penalties to promote a false Religion; Of whom you told us but three Pages back, That it may always be said of him, (what St. Paul said of himself) that he can do nothing against the Truth, but for the Truth? By that one would have thought you had undertaken to us, that the Magi∣strate could no more use Force to promote a false Religion, than St. Paul could preach to promote a false Religion. If you say, the Magistrate has no Commission to promote a false Religion,
and therefore it may always be said of him, what St. Paul said of himself &c. I say, no Minister was ever commissioned to preach Falshood; and therefore it may always be said of every Minister, (what St. Paul said of himself) that he can do nothing against the Truth, but for the Truth: Whereby we shall very commodiously have an infallible Guide in every Parish, as well as one in every Commonwealth. But if you thus use Scripture, I imagine you will have reason to appeal again to your Men of Art; whether, though you may not be allowed to recommend to others the Ex∣amination and Use of Scripture, to find the true Religion, yet you your self may not use the Scripture to what Purpose, and in what Sense you please, for the defence of your Cause.
To the remainder of what I said in that Paragraph, your An∣swer is nothing but an Exception to an Inference I made. The Argument you were upon, was to justify the Magistrate's in∣flicting Penalties to bring Men to a false Religion, by the Gain those that suffered them would receive.
Their Gain was this; That they would know better than they did * 3.12 before, where the Truth does lie. To which I replied,
Which is as true, as if you should say, upon Examination I find such an one is out of the Way to York; therefore I know better than I did before, that I am in the right.This Consequence you find fault with, and say it should be thus; Therefore I know better than I did before, where the right Way lies. This, you tell me, would have been true; which was not for my Purpose. These Conse∣quences, one or t'other, are much-what alike true. For he that of an hundred Ways, amongst which there is but one right, shuts out one that he discovers certainly to be wrong, knows as much better than he did before, that he is in the right, as he knows better than before, where the right Way lies. For before 'twas 99 to one he was not in the right; and now he knows 'tis but 98 to one that he is not in the right; and therefore knows so much better than before, that he is in the right, just as much as he knows better than he did before, where the right Way lies. For let him, upon your Supposition, proceed on; and every Day, upon examination of a Controversy with some one in one of the remaining Ways, discover him to be in the wrong; he will every Day know better than he did before, equally, where the right Way lies, and that he is in it; till at last he will come to discover the right Way it self, and himself in it. And there∣fore
your Inference, whatever you think, is as much as the other for my Purpose; which was to shew what a notable Gain a Man made in the variety of false Opinions and Religions in the World, by discovering that the Magistrate had not the Truth on his side; and what Thanks he owed the Magistrate, for in∣slicting Penalties upon him so much for his Improvement, and for affording him so much Knowledg at so cheap a rate. And should not a Man have reason to boast of his Purchase, if he should by Penalties be driven to hear and examine all the Argu∣ments can be proposed by those in Power for all their foolish and false Religions? And yet this Gain is what you propose, as a Justification of Magistrates inslicting Penalties for the promo∣ting their false Religions. And an impartial Examination of the Controversy between them and the Magistrate, you tell us here, is the * 3.13 way for such as have any concern for their eternal Salvation, to come to the knowledg of the Truth.
To my saying, `He that is punished may have examined be∣fore, ` and then I am sure he gains nothing: You reply, But nei∣ther does he lose much, if it be true, which you there add, that all * 3.14 the Hurt that befalls him, is only the suffering some tolerable Inconve∣nience for his following the Light of his own Reason, and the Dictates of his Conscience. So it is therefore you would have a Man rewarded for being an honest Man; (for so is he who follows the Light of his own Reason, and the Dictates of his Conscience;) only with the suffering some tolerable Inconveniences. And yet those to∣lerable Inconveniences are such as are to counterballance Mens Lusts, and the Corruption of depraved Nature; which you know any slight Penalty is sufficient to master. But that the Magi∣strate's Discipline shall stop at those your tolerable Inconveni∣ences, is what you are loth to be Guarantee for: For all the Se∣curity you dare give of it, is, If it be true which you there add. But if it should be otherwise, the Hurt may be more I see than you are willing to answer for.
L. 2. p. 64. However, you think you do well to in∣courage the Magistrate in punishing, and comfort the Man who has suffer'd un∣•…•…stly, by shewing what he
shall gain by it. Whereas, on the contrary, in a Dis∣course of this Nature, where the Bounds of Right and Wrong are enquired into, and should be establish'd, the Magistrate was to be shew'd the Bounds of his Au∣thority, and warn'd of the Injury he did when he mis∣applies his Power, and pu∣nish'd any Man who de∣serv'd it not; and not be sooth'd into Injustice, by consideration of Gain that might thence accrue to the Sufferer. Shall we do Evil, that Good may come of it? There are a sort of People who are very wary of touching upon the Magi∣strate's Duty, and tender of shewing the bounds of his Power, and the Injustice and ill Consequences of his misapplying 〈◊〉〈◊〉; at least, so long as it is misapply'd in favour of them, and their Party. I know not whether you are of their number; But this I am sure, you have the misfortune here to fall into their Mistake. The Magistrate, you confess, may in this case misapply his Power: And instead of re∣presenting to him the In∣justice of it, and the Ac∣count he must give to his Sovereign one day of this
great Trust put into his Hands, for the equal Pro∣tection of all his Subjects, you pretend Advantages which the Sufferer may re∣ceive from it: And so in∣stead of disheartning from, you give encouragement to the Mischief. Which, up∣on your Principle, join'd to the natural thirst in Man after Arbitrary Power, may be carried to all manner of Exorbitancy, with some pretence of Right. L. 3. p. 71. As to what you say here of the nature of my Dis∣course, I shall only put you in mind that the Question there debated is; Whether the Magistrate has any Right or Authority to use Force for
the promoting the true Religion. Which plainly supposes the Vnlaw∣fulness and Injustice of using Force to promote a false Religion, as grant∣ed on both sides. So that I could no way be obliged to take notice of it in my Discourse, but only as occasion should be offer'd. And whether I have not shew'd the bounds of the Magistrate's Authority, as far as I was any way obliged to do it, let any indifferent Person judg. But to talk here of a sort of People who are very wa∣ry of touching upon the Magi∣strate's Duty, and tender of shew∣ing the bounds of his Power, where I tell the Magistrate that the Power I ascribe to him in reference to Religion, is given him to bring Men, not to his own, but to the true Religion; and that he mis∣applies it, when he endeavours to promote a false Religion by it, is, methinks, at least a little unseasona∣ble.
Nor am I any more concern'd in what you say of the Magistrate's misapplying his Power in favour of a Party. For as you have not yet proved that his applying his Power to the promoting the true Religion, (which is all that I contend for) is misapplying it; so much less can you prove it to be misapplying it in favour of a Party.
But that I encourage the Magi∣strate in punishing Men to bring them to a false Religion, (for that is the punishing we here speak of)
and sooth him into Injustice, by shewing what those who suffer unjustly shall gain by it, when in the very same breath I tell him that by so punishing, he misapplies his Power, is a Discovery which I be∣lieve none but your self could have made. When I say that the Magi∣strate misapplies his Power by so punishing; I suppose all other Men understand me to say, that he sins in doing it, and lays himself open to divine Vengeance by it. And can he be encouraged to this, by hearing what others may gain by what (with∣out Repentance) must cost him so dear?
Here your Men of Art will do well to be at hand again. For it may be seasonable for you to appeal to them, whether the nature of your Discourse will allow you to descend to shew ` the Magistrate the bounds of his Authority, and warn him of ` the Injury he does, if he misapplies his Power.
You say, the Question there debated, is, Whether the Magistrate has any Right or Authority to use Force for promoting the True Reli∣gion; which plainly supposes the Vnlawfulness and Injustice of using Force to promote a 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Religion, as granted on both sides. Neither is that the Question in debate; nor if it were, does it suppose what you pretend. But the Question in debate is, as you put it, Whe∣ther any body has a Right to use Force in Matters of Religion? * 5.1 You say indeed, The Magistrate has, to bring Men to the True Reli∣gion. If thereupon, you think the Magistrate has none to bring Men to a false Religion, whatever your Men of Art may think, 'tis probable other Men would not have thought it to have been besides the nature of your Discourse, to have warn'd the Ma∣gistrate, that he should consider well, and impartially examine the Grounds of his Religion before he use any Force to bring Men to it. This is of such moment to Mens temporal and e∣ternal Interests, that it might well deserve some particular 〈◊〉〈◊〉 addressed to the Magistrate; who might as much need to be
put in mind of impartial Examination as other People. And it might, whatever your Men of Art may allow, be justly expected from you; who think it no Derivation from the Rules of Art, to tell the Subjects that they must submit to the Penalties laid on them, or else fall under the Sword of the Magistrate; which how true soever, will hardly by any body be sound to be much more to your purpose in this Discourse, than it would have been to have told the Magistrate of what ill consequence it would be to him and his People, if he misused his Power, and warn'd him to be cautious in the Use of it. But not a word that way. Nay even where you mention the account he shall give for so doing, it is still to satisfy the Subjects that they are well provided for, and not left unfurnish'd of the Means of Salvation, by the right God has put into the Magistrate's hands to use his Power to bring them to the True Religion; and therefore, they ought to be well content, because if the Magistrate misapply it, the Great Judg will punish him for it. Look, Sir, and see whether what you say, any where, of the Magistrate's misuse of his Power, have any other Tendency: And then I appeal to the sober Rea∣der, whether if you had been as much concern'd for the Bound∣ing, as for the Exercise of Force in the Magistrates hands, you would not have spoke of it 〈◊〉〈◊〉 another manner.
The next thing you say, is, that the Question (being, Whether the Magistrate has any Right to use Force to bring Men to the True Reli∣gion,) supposes the Vnlawfulness of using Force to promote a False Religion as granted on both sides; which is so far from true, that I suppose quite the contrary, viz. That if the Magistrate has a Right to use Force to promote the True, he must have a Right to use Force to promote his own Religion; and that for Reasons I have given you elsewhere. But the Supposition of a Suppo∣sition serves to excuse you from speaking any thing directly of setting Bounds to the Magistrate's Power, or telling him his Du∣ty in that point; though you are very frequent in mentioning the Obligation he is under, that Men should not want the As∣sistance of his Force; and how answerable he is, if any body miscarry for want of it; though there be not the least Whisper of any care to be taken, that no body be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 by it. And now I recollect my self; I think your Method would not allow it: For if you should have put the Magistrate upon Examining, it would have suppos'd him as liable to Error as other Men;
whereas, to secure the Magistrate's acting right, upon your Foun∣dation of never using Force but for the True Religion, I see no help for it, but either he or you (who are to licence him) must be got past the State of Examination, into that of certain Know∣ledg and Infallibility.
Indeed, as you say, you tell the Magistrate that the Power you a∣scribe to him in reference to Religion, is given him to bring Men not to his own, but to the True Religion. But do you put him upon a severe and impartial Examination; Which, amongst the many False, is the one only True Religion he must use Force to bring his Subjects to; that he may not mistake and misapply his Power in a Business of that Consequence? Not a Syllable of this. Do you then tell him which it is he must take, without Examina∣tion, and promote with Force; whether that of England, France or Denmark? This, methinks, is as much as the Pope, with all his Infallibility, could require of Princes. And yet, what is it less than this you do; when you suppose the Religion of the Church of England to be the only True; and upon this your Supposi∣tion, tell the Magistrate it is his Duty, by Force, to bring Men to it; without ever putting him upon Examining, or suffering him or any body else to question, whether it be the only True Religion or no? For if you will stick to what you in another place say, That it is enough to suppose that there is one True Religion, and but one, and that that Religion may be known by those who pro∣fess it; What Authority will this Knowableness of the True Religion, give to the King of England more than to the King of France, to use Force, if he does not actually know the Religion he professes to be the True; or to the Magistrate more than the Subject, if he has not examin'd the Grounds of his Religion? But if He believes you when you tell him, your Religion is the True, all is well; he has Authority enough to use Force, and he need not examine any farther. If this were not the case; why you should not be careful to prepare a little Advice to make the Magistrate examine, as well as you are sollicitous to provide Force to make the Subject examine, will require the Skill of a Man of Art to discover.
Whether you are not of the Number of those Men I there mention'd, (for that there have been such Men in the World, Instances might be given) one may doubt srom your Principles. For if upon a Supposition that yours is the True Religion, you
can give Authority to the Magistrate to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Penalties on all his Subjects that dissent from the Communion of the National Church, without examining whether theirs too may not be that only True Religion which is necessary to Salvation; Is not this to demand, that the Magistrate's Power should be applied only in favour of a Party? And can any one avoid being confirm'd in this Suspicion, when he reads that broad Insinuation of yours, P. 34. as if Our Magistrates were not concern'd for Truth 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Piety, because they granted a Relaxation of those Penalties, which you would have imploid in favour of your Party: For so it must be call'd, and not the Church of God, exclusive of others; unless you will say Men cannot be saved out of the Communion of your particular Church, let it be National where you please.
You do not, you say, encourage the Magistrate to misapply his Power; because in the very same Breath you tell him he misapplies his Power. I answer, Let all Men understand you, as much as you please, to say that he sins in doing it; That will not excuse you from encouraging him there; unless it be impossible that a Man may be encourag'd to Sin. If your telling the Magistrate that his Subjects gain by his misapplying of Force, be not an Encourage∣ment to him to misapply it, the doing good to others must cease to be an Encouragement to any Action. And whether it be not a great Encouragement in this case to the Magistrate, to go on in the use of 〈◊〉〈◊〉, without impartially examining whether his or his Subjects be the True Religion; when he is told that (be his Religion true or false,) his Subjects, who suffer, will be sure to be Gainers by it, let any one judg. For the Encouragement is not (as you put it) to the Magistrate to use Force to bring Men to what he thinks a false Religion; but it is an Encouragement to the Magistrate, who presumes his to be the True Religion, to punish his Dissenting Subjects; without due and impartial Exa∣mination on which side the Truth lies. For having never told the Magistrate, that neglect of Examination is a Sin in him; if you should tell him a thousand times, that he who uses his Power to bring Men to a False Religion misapplies it; he would not understand by it that he sinn'd, whilst he thought his the True; and so it would be no restraint to the misapplying his Power.
And thus we have some Prospect of this admirable Machin you have 〈◊〉〈◊〉 up for the Salvation of Souls.
The Magistrate is to use Force to bring Men to the True Re∣ligion. But what if he misapplies it to bring Men to a False Re∣ligion? 'Tis well still for his Subjects: They are Gainers by it. But this may encourage him to a Misapplication of it. No; You tell him that he that uses it to bring Men to a False Religion, mis∣applies it; And therefore he cannot but understand that you say he sins, and lays himself open to Divine Vengeance. No; He believes himself in the right; and thinks as St. Paul, whilst a Persecutor, that he does God good Service. And you assure him here, he makes his suffering. Subjects Gainers; and so he goes on as com∣fortably as St. Paul did. Is there no Remedy for this? Yes, a very ready one, and that is, that the one only True Religion may be known by those who profess it to be the only True Religion.
To which, if we add how you moderate as well as direct the Magistrate's Hand in punishing; by making the last Regulation of your convenient Penalties to lie in the Prudence and Experience of Magistrates themselves; we shall find the Advantages of your Method. For are not your necessary Means of Salvation, which lie in moderate Penalties used to bring Men to the True Reli∣gion, brought to an happy State; when that which is to guide the Magistrate in the Knowledg of the True Religion, is, that the True Religion may be known by those who profess it to be the only True Religion; and the convenient Penalties to be used for the promoting of it, are such as the Magistrate shall in his Prudence think fit; and that whether the Magistrate applies it right or wrong, the Subject will be a Gainer by it? If in either of your Discourses, you have given the Magistrate any better Direction than this to know the True Religion by, which he is by Force to promote; or any other intelligible Measure to moderate his Pe∣nalties by; or any other Caution to restrain the misuse of his Power; I desire you to shew it me: And then I shall think I have reason to believe, that in this Debate you have had more Care of the True Religion, and the Salvation of Souls, than to en∣courage the Magistrate to use the Power he has, by your Directi∣on, and without Examination, and to what degree he shall think sit, in favour of a Party. For the Matter thus stated, if I mistake not, will serve any Magistrate, to use any degree of Force, against any that dissent from his National Religion.
Having recommended to the Subjects the Magistrate's 〈◊〉〈◊〉 by a shew of Gain, which will accrue to them by it, you do
well to bring in the Example of Julian; who whatever he did to the Christians, would (no more than you) own that it was Perse∣cution, but for their Advantage in the other World. But whe∣ther his pretending Gain to them, upon Grounds which he did not believe; or your pretending Gain to them, which no body can believe to be one; be a greater Mockery; you were best look. This seems reasonable; That his talk of Philanthropy, and yours of Moderation, should be bound up together. For till you speak and tell them plainly what they may trust to; the Advantage the Persecuted are to receive from your Clemency, may, I imagine, make a second Part to what the Christians of that Age 〈◊〉〈◊〉 from his. But you are solicitous for the Salvation of Souls, and Dissenters shall find the Benefit of it.
L. 2. p. 11.
P. 22.
P. 17.
P. 31.
P. 32.
P. 58.
P. 22.
P. 22.
Ibid.
P. 64.
P. 63.
P. 22.
〈◊〉〈◊〉. 37.
P. 16.
P. 26.
P. 29.
P. 23.
P. 43.
P. 58.
P. 2.
P. 16.
P. 13.
P. 22.
P. 23.
P. 58.
Ibid.
P. 23.
Joh. V. 39.
2 Tim. III. 15.
P. 76, 77, 78.
P. 68.
P. 22.
L. 2. p. 62.
P. 69.
P. 3.
A. p. 13.
P. 31.
L. 2. p. 64.
P. 7.
P. 8.
L. 2. p. 64.
P. 70.
P. 71.
P. 78.