The writings of these sectaries on toleration, along with those of Hales, Chillingworth, Milton, Taylor, Baxter, Howe, and Barclay, paved the way for Locke's immortal Letters, quoted so frequently in the present volume, and which are still the best of our many excellent treatises on religious liberty. Among the distinguished followers of Locke during the 18th century may be enumerated Hoadly, Ibbot,

in its plenitude the doctrine of the liberty of conscience-the equality of opinions before the law; and in its defence," continues Mr Bancroft, he was the harbinger of Milton,—the precursor and the superior of Jeremy Taylor. For Taylor limited his toleration to a few Christian sects; the philanthropy of Williams compassed the earth: Taylor favoured partial reform, commended lenity, argued for forbearance, and entered a special plea in behalf of each tolerable sect; Williams would permit persecution of no opinion, of no religion, leaving heresy unharmed by law, and orthodoxy unprotected by the terrors of penal statutes. Taylor still clung to the necessity of positive regulations enforcing religion and eradicating error; he resembled the poets, who, in their folly, first declare their hero to be invulnerable, and then clothe him in earthly armour! Williams was willing to leave Truth alone, in her own panoply of light, believing that if, in the ancient feud between Truth and Error, the employment of force could be entirely abrogated, Truth would have much the best of the bargain. It is the custom of mankind to award high honours to the successful inquirer into the laws of nature, to those who advance the bounds of human knowledge. We praise the man who first analysed the air, or resolved water into its elements, or drew the lightning from the clouds; even though the discoveries may have been as much the fruits of time as of genius. A moral principle has a much wider and nearer influence on human happiness; nor can any discovery of truth be of more direct benefit to society, than that which establishes a perpetual religious peace, and spreads tranquillity through every community and every bosom. If Copernicus is held in perpetual reverence, because, on his death-bed, he published to the world that the sun is the centre of our system; if the name of Kepler is preserved in the annals of human excellence, for his sagacity in detecting the laws of the planetary motion; if the genius of Newton has been almost adored for dissecting a ray of light, and weighing heavenly bodies as in a balance,let there be for the name of Roger Williams at least some humble place among those who have advanced moral science, and made themselves the benefactors of mankind." For advocating the liberty of conscience, this excellent man (whose merit is but little diminished by the fact of his not having been the first to proclaim it, and to respect it in others) was banished from Salem by men who themselves had lately fled from persecution in England.

Sir James Mackintosh, again, in his Review of the Causes of the Revolution of 1688 (Miscellaneous Works, ed. 1851, p. 361), says of the Independents, that "the government of Cromwell, more influenced by them than by any other persuasion, made as near approaches to general toleration as public prejudice would endure; and Sir Henry Vane, an Independent, was probably the first who laid down, with perfect precision, the inviolable rights of conscience, and the exemption of religion from all civil authority." The title of Vane's work is not given by Sir James, nor do I recognise it among the publications specified in the article VANE in Watt's Bibliotheca Britannica; but Williams probably preceded him by ten years at least. A brief account of the liberal sentiments of Vane will be found in Bancroft, ch. xi.- When Cromwell occupied Scotland, the principle of toleration was disseminated by the Independents in his army, in a manner which excited the horror and alarm of the Presbyterians (ante, pp. 150, 315); and, among others, of the Rev. James Fergusson, minister of Kilwinning, whose Brief Refutation of the Errors of Toleration, Erastianism, &c., was posthumously published at Edinburgh in 1692 (forty years after it was written), and forms a remarkable contrast to Locke's Letter concerning Toleration, which had appeared in 1689. For some just remarks upon Fergusson's intolerant views, see Dr Robert Lee's preface to the Theses of Erastus, p. xvii.

Gordon, Jortin, Balguy, Campbell, Law, Blackburne, Paley, and Watson; who in their turn were worthily succeeded in our own age by Sydney Smith, and others of the Edinburgh Reviewers. With respect to the living advocates of religious freedom-Whately and Baden Powell among the clergy, and Samuel Bailey among laymen, may be said to stand pre-eminent; nor will the occupation of such writers be gone till the arrival of that distant day when the much-lauded but little-heeded maxim shall be reduced to practice," All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them."*

In the United States of North America, great progress has been made in reducing this grand principle to practice in ecclesiastical matters. Thus the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights (quoted in the Edinburgh Review, vol. xcii., p. 356) sets forth

"It is the right, as well as duty, of all men in society, publicly, and at stated seasons, to worship the Supreme Being, the great Creator and Preserver of the universe; and no subject shall be hurt, molested, or restrained, in his person, liberty, or estate, for worshipping God in the manner and season most agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience; or for his religious professions or sentiments, provided he does not disturb the public peace, or obstruct others in their religious worship." (Art. 2.)

"All religious sects and denominations demeaning themselves peaceably, and as good citizens of the Commonwealth, shall be equally under the protection of the law; and no subordination of any one sect or denomination to another shall ever be established by law." (Amendments to the Constitution of Massachusetts. Art. 11.)

66

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." (Constitution of the United States. Amendments, Art. 1.)

"The School Committees shall never direct to be purchased or used, in any town schools, any school books which are calculated to favour the tenets of any particular sect of Christians." (Revised Statutes, c. xxiii., sec. 23.)

Some defects which still adhere to the laws of the United States in regard to religious liberty are pointed out by Mr Hurlbut;† nor

* "There are," says Locke," fundamental truths that lie at the bottom, the basis upon which a great many others rest, and in which they have their consistency. These are teeming truths, rich in store, with which they furnish the mind; and, like the lights of heaven, are not only beautiful and entertaining in themselves, but give light and evidence to other things, that without them could not be seen or known. Such is that admirable discovery of Mr Newton, that all bodies gravitate to one another, which may be counted as the basis of natural philosophy; which of what use it is to the understanding of the great frame of our solar system, he has to the astonishment of the learned world shown; and how much farther it would guide us in other things, if rightly pursued, is not yet known. Our Saviour's great rule, that we should love our neighbour as ourselves, is such a fundamental truth for the regulating human society, that, I think, by that alone, one might without difficulty determine all the cases and doubts in social morality."(Conduct of the Understanding, § 43.) † Essays on Human Rights, &c., by E. P. Hurlbut, pp. 26-29, Edin. ed. As to the complete religious liberty secured by the constitution of Louisiana, see p. 83 of the same work, Note E. The celebrated Act for establishing Religious Freedom in Virginia may be seen in Brown on Civil Obedience, p. 503, or the New Annual Register for 1786, p. (63).

have the Americans yet learned universally to abstain from social persecution for difference of theological opinion.* But there seems to be far less inclination to such conduct in America than where one sect is politically dominant over the others. Mr James F. W. Johnston, in his travels in the United States, says that "The equality of all religious sects in the eye of the law, the equal personal bearing of all denominations, and their independence of each other in all respects, is a point which early strikes the European. All have an equal right to their religious opinions, whatever they may be; few hesitate to avow them; and though I have often heard people differ and argue on religious points, I do not recollect to have anywhere observed a single expression, either by word or feature, which seemed to imply that one of the disputants thought himself superior to the other because of the opinions he entertained, or that he had a better right to entertain them. I was most struck with this circumstance in the State of Massachusetts, where the freedom of speech upon religious matters will often startle the orthodox stranger."+ Mr Johnston, however, could not know that "few hesitate to avow their religious opinions." Where a sect is numerous and influential, its adherents are not unwilling to be known; but in America, as elsewhere, highly disreputable opinions are no doubt extensively concealed. It will be long before the multitude in any part of Christendom will act upon the principle that no opinion ought to be infamous which does not necessarily imply defective moral feeling in its holder.

"In Scotland," says Dr Cook, "not a shade of penal statute or of hardship remains; and the full liberty of worship and of opinion which is happily enjoyed, is in general prized as an invaluable blessing, which men in the Church and out of it would cordially unite to preserve. It must, indeed, be acknowledged, that there are still vestiges of what may be called speculative intolerance, to which allusion has been already made, and from which it is extremely difficult, in our present imperfect state, wholly to emancipate the human mind. It is not unusual to find sects and denominations of Christians arrogating to themselves exclusively the title of the Church of Christ, and maintaining that those who differ from them, however sincere, and however zealous, are merely nominal Christians, if they be Christians at all; and as this proceeds from a state of mind which may exist with equal reason in all parties, it might, under peculiar circumstances and states of society, have led to the renewal of active persecution. This, fortunately, is not the case in our days; and it may be hoped that we see in such theoretical antipathy the expiring struggle of intolerance. Whilst it becomes every man firmly to adhere to what he is convinced has been taught by revelation, it is no less his duty not to wrest from others what he esteems his own most valuable privilege. Every deviation from this, in whatever manner it may be disguised or defended, and however it may be represented as proceeding from the most tender concern for the spiritual and eternal * See ante, p. 394.

↑ Notes on North America, vol. ii., p. 242; Edinburgh, 1851. See also the Edinburgh Review, vol. xcii., p. 342.

The law that chairs in universities could be occupied only by persons subscribing the Confession of Faith must have escaped the Doctor's memory.

interests of mankind, is an approach to the temper and spirit from which all the evils of persecution proceeded. This will become, we may trust, more and more evident, till Christians everywhere unite in the conviction, that genuine principle, sincere love of truth, and the persuasion of mind enforced by St Paul, are the evidences of that temper and disposition which all ought to cherish, and which all ought to respect and to revere.'

Although the Christian spirit here spoken of does not appear to have increased in Scotland during the thirty years which have elapsed since the work of Dr Cook was published, there is reason to hope that the next generation will shew a better knowledge of the principles of religious liberty. By and by, it is likely, the very word "toleration" will cease to be tolerated a word implying in him who uses it, the notion that he is entitled to withhold from his neighbours that freedom, which, nevertheless, he graciously permits them to enjoy. Dr Parr used to exclaim against the employment of this term, as an outrage to

common sense and decency. Surely," he would say, "it is high

time that a word which denotes falsehood should be exchanged for one that speaks truth; and that the abject spirit which implores or accepts toleration, should give place to the nobler spirit which claims and demands as a just, sacred, unalienable right, in all religious concerns, absolute liberty-just and true liberty-equal and impartial liberty."" To call one's self an " orthodox" or " evangelical" Christian, and such as interpret the Scriptures differently "heretics," will in due time, also, be discovered by most people to be a sign of arrogant folly on the part of men who, by professing themselves Protestants, deny the existence of an infallible earthly judge of truth.

NOTE P, page 15.

The Duty of acting according to one's Religious Belief.

"Where a man is mistaken in his judgment, even in that case it is always a sin to act against it. Though we should take that for a duty which is really a sin, yet so long as we are thus persuaded, it will be highly criminal in us to act in contradiction to this persuasion : and the reason of this is evident, because by so doing, we wilfully act against the best light which at present we have for the direction of our actions. So that when all is done, the immediate guide of our actions can be nothing but our conscience, our judgment and persuasion. If a man, for instance, should of a Jew become a Christian, whilst yet in his heart he believed that the Messiah is not yet come, and that our Lord Jesus was an impostor: or if a Papist should renounce the communion of the Roman church, and join with ours, whilst yet he is persuaded that the Roman church is the only catholic church, and that our reformed churches are heretical or schismatical;

* General and Historical View of Christianity, vol. iii., p. 461.

Field's Life of Parr, vol. ii., p. 383.-This sentiment is illustrated by Dr John Brown in his work on the Law of Christ concerning Civil Obedience, 3d edition, pp. 468-470. See also Hints on Toleration, by Philagatharches, 2d edi. tion (London, 1811), Essay I.

though now there is none of us that will deny that the men in both these cases have made a good change, as having changed a false religion for a true one, yet for all that I dare say we should all agree they were both of them great villains for making that change, because they made it not upon honest principles, and in pursuance of their judgment, but in direct contradiction to both."*

To the objection which may be brought by some, that if a man be so far mistaken in his judgment as to think it his duty to act injuriously to others, the reply is sufficiently obvious:-he is a madman or an idiot, and must be taken charge of as a person unfit to be trusted with liberty.t

Analogous to the duty of acting according to our opinions, is that of endeavouring to disseminate them among others whom we think they may benefit. On this subject Mr Samuel Bailey has written excellently in one of his essays:

"It may be said in general terms," he remarks, "that every one who has taken due pains to master a subject, who feels persuaded that he can present it in a new light, and who is not destitute of the obvious qualifications for the task, lies under an obligation to communicate his knowledge to his fellow-creatures, provided they are in a sufficiently civilised and virtuous condition to receive it without destroying the happiness or the existence of their instructor. Not to do it, if the matter were of importance, would be reprehensible selfishness; it could be only to avoid trouble, or shrink from responsibility, or maintain a solitary superiority over the rest of the world.

"It is true, he may be deceived in his estimate of his own achievements; an exaggerated opinion of the value of what we ourselves accomplish, is perhaps inseparable from human nature; but if he has taken due pains, and is actuated by a proper spirit, his conduct is on every principle entitled to unmixed approbation. It may happen, too, that, by communicating the result of his inquiries, he may be instrumental in promulgating error; his views may wander widely from the truth, and he may lead many astray by the same misconceived facts or illusive reasonings which have deceived his own mind. These are things which, according to the constitution of man and the present state of society, cannot be avoided. Even in this case, nevertheless, he is doing good. His errors are in all probability such as have, with more or less distinctness, presented themselves to other minds as well as his, in the character of truths. To bring them openly forward, with the premises from which they are deduced and the train of reasoning by which they have established themselves as truths in his own understanding, is giving them the best chance of being refuted, and refuted in so full and luminous a manner, that their real character will be conspicuous to every future inquirer.

"Had they been kept back by indolence or timidity, had they and the arguments in their support not been openly produced and examined, *A Discourse concerning Conscience, by Dr John Sharp, Archbishop of York, 1687, p. 18; quoted in Locke's Third Letter for Toleration.

The following saying is ascribed to Henry IV. of France:-" Ceux qui suivent tout droit leur conscience, sont de ma religion; et moi, je suis de celle de tous ceux-la qui sont braves et bons."

See ante, pp. 161, 265–6.

t See Note B, ante, p. 26.