TOLERATION. 



other auxiliary confidcrations that are important. The 

 rcilriaion of the fiibjeA to the religion of the (late is a 

 needlcfs violation of natural liberty, and in an iiiitance with 

 regard to which conllraint is always grievous. Perfccution 

 produces no finccre conviaion, nor any real change of 

 opinion ; on the contrary, it viti.ites the pubhc morals, by 

 driving men to prevarication, and commonly ends in a ge- 

 neral though fecret infidehty, by impofing, under the name 

 of revealed i-chgion, fyllems of doarine, which man cannot 

 believe, and daiv not examine : finally, it difgraces the cha- 

 raaer, and wounds the reputation of Chriftianity itfelf, by 

 making it the author of oppreflion, cruelty, and bloodthed. 

 Our author includes under the idea of religious toleration 

 the toleration of all books of fcrious argumentation, without 

 deeming it any infringement of religious hberty to reflrain 

 the circulation of ridicule, invedlive, and mockery upon 

 religious fubjeas. 



Concerning the admiffion of diflenters from the eftablilhed 

 reli"'ion to offices and employments in the public fervice, 

 which is neceffary to render toleration complete, doubts, fays 

 Dr. Paley, have been entertained with fome appearance of 

 reafon. In vindication of thefe doubts, he refers to thofe 

 who hold religious opinions that are utterly incompatible 

 with the neccflary funtlions of civil government; enthufialts, 

 who maintain that all diflinaion of property is abohfhed by 

 Chriftianity, and that the gofpel enjoins upon its followers a 

 community of goods ; and to Quakers or Friends, who be- 

 lieve it to be contrary to Chriftianity to take up arms. He 

 allows, however, that with the fingle exception of refufing 

 to bear arms, the various feAs of Chriftians which aaually 

 prevail in the world hold no tenet which incapacitates men 

 for the fervice of the ftate. It has indeed been afferted, 

 that difcordancy of religions, even fuppofing each religion 

 to be free from any errors that aff^ea the fafety or the con- 

 dua of government, is enough to render men unfit to aa 

 together in pubhc ftations. But upon what argument, or 

 upon what experience, is this aflertion founded ? "I per- 

 ceive no reafon," fays this hberal writer, " why men of 

 different religious perfuafions may not fit upon the fame 

 bench, deliberate in the fame council, or fight in the fame 

 ranks, as well as men of various or oppofite opinions upon 

 any controverted topic of natural philofophy, hiftory, or 

 ethics." For a further account of this author's fentiments 

 on toleration and collateral fubjeas, fee RELIGION, Sub- 

 scription, and TEST-y^S. 



To the term toleration, though it has been adopted by 

 Mr. Locke and feveral writers of the firft diftinaion, others 

 have objeaed ; alleging that, as words have a confiderable 

 influence on opinions, this term appears to be injurious to 

 that religious liberty, which it is defigned to import. It 

 implies a right to impofe articles of faith, and modes of 

 worfliip ; that nonconformity is a crime ; and that the fuf- 

 ferance (toleration) of it is a matter of favour or lenity. 

 But the nonconformift in every country, whether he be a 

 Chriftian at Conftantinople, a Proteftant at Rome, an Epif- 

 copalian in Scotland, or a Preftjyterian in England, and, 

 we may add, a Catholic in any part of Great Britain, if his 

 rational principles be confonant to his praaice, will regard 

 this claim of right as ufurpation ; and will urge, that it has 

 been neither conferred by Jefus Chrift, nor delegated by the 

 people. Our Saviour exprefsly declares, " My kingdom 

 is not of this world ;" and his religion was perfecuted and 

 opprefled, during the period of its greatell purity and per- 

 feaion, and when the minifters of it had gifts and powers 

 which are now unknown. The people could not delegate 

 fuch a right to any man or body of men ; for the human mind 

 is fo mutable, tliat no individual can fi.\ a ftandard of his 



own faith, much lefs can he commiflion another to eftablilli 

 one for him and his pollerity ; and this power would be n: 

 no hands fo dangerous as in thofe of the ftatcfman or prieft, 

 who has the folly and prefumption to think himfelf qualified 

 to exercife it. The ufe of this term was introduced at a 

 time, when very imperfea notions of religious liberty, and 

 very erroneous ideas of the authority of tlie civil magiftratc- 

 in the province of reUgion, prevailed. In its literal accept- 

 ation, it is without doubt objeaionable, and incompatible 

 with juft views of religious liberty. What human being, 

 however exalted his rank or extenfive his influence, can pre- 

 fume to tolerate or fuffer a fellow-creature to worftiip God 

 according to the diaates of his own confcience, and in that 

 way, or according to thofe rites and forms, which he ap- 

 prehends the objea of his worfliip has prefcribed ; or, iu 

 other words, to tolerate God in receiving that worfliip ; for 

 to this extreme the argument may be extended. All dif- 

 abilities and penalties incurred by not worfliipping God, and 

 performing other aas of religion, according to any merely 

 human ritual, are in faa prohibitions againft, man's ren- 

 dering and God's receiving the homage of the underftanding 

 and the heart. Toleration, it has been faid, fuppofes on the 

 part of thofe who exercife it an authority, to which they 

 have no juft claim ; and on the part of thofe who are the ob- 

 jefts of it, a certain degree of criminality and culpability, 

 which the perfons that exercife the right of toleration con- 

 defcend to excufe and allow. Such are the ideas which fome 

 modern writers have entertained on this fubjeft ; and ac- 

 cordingly tht*y have wilhed for a difufe of the term, as it is 

 founded in, and leads to, error. Liberty, whether it be com- 

 plete, or partial, is a term well underftood ; and the ufe of it 

 is lefs liable to objeaion than that of toleration. — See on this 

 fubjea, Fownes's Inquiry into the Principles of Toleration, 

 &c. 8vo. 1772. Locke's Letters concerning Toleration, 

 in his Works, vol. ii. p. 231, &c. Hoadley's Rights of 

 Subjeas, paffim. Paley's Philofophy, vol. ii. c. 10. Per- 

 cival's EfTay on Truth, p. 90. 



To the account above given of the general principles of 

 toleration, it will be proper to add a few words concerning 

 the ftate of toleration in our own country. With regard to 

 the Proteftant-diflenters in general, fee Dissenters, Non- 

 coxFORMisTs, and Quakers. See alfo Conventicle, 

 CoRPORATiox-.^i!?, Sheriff, and Test. 



As for diflenting teachers, or minifters in particular, they 

 were prohibited by 17 Car. II. cap. z. from coming within 

 five miles of a city, town-corporate, or borough, unlefs 

 only in pafling upon the road, or unlefs required by legal 

 precefs, without taking an oath of allegiance therein men- 

 tioned, on pain of 40/., and of commitment by two juftices, 

 on oath of the offence, for fix months. And by 22 Car. II. 

 cap. I. preaching in any meeting or conventicle, in other 

 manner than according to the praaice of the church 

 of England, incurred a forfeiture of 20/. for the firft 

 off^ence, and for every other offence 40/. Moreover, by 

 1 3 & 14 Car. II. cap. 4. no perfon fliaU prefume to confecrate 

 and adminifter the facrament before he be ordained prieft, 

 according to the form of the church of England, on pain 

 of 100/. But now by i W. cap. 18. commonly called the 

 Aa of Toleration, which, by 19 Geo. III. cap. 44. is 

 declared to be a pubhc aa, they are exempted from the 

 penalties of thofe ftatutes, upon taking the oaths of al- 

 legiance and fupremacy, and fubfcribing the declaration 

 againft popery ; and alfo, by I W. cap. 1 8. fubfcribing 

 the articles of rehgion mentioned in the ftat. 13 Eliz. cap. 12. 

 (which only concern the confeffion of the Chriftian faith 

 and the doarine of the facraments) with an exprefs excep- 

 tion of thofe relating to the government and powers of the 



church, 



