your meaning is that if all the World would agree to such a Toleration though then the true Religion would lose by it in those few places where it is now establish'd as the National Religion yet upon the whole matter it would be a gainer by the bargain because then it would stand upon even terms with all other Religions in so many more places where now it is either not at all suffer'd or at least under great disadvantages If this be the thing you aim at then 1. I suppose you do not hope you shall perswade the whole World to consent in your Toleration or that you shall prevail with Pagans Mahumetans and Papists every where to allow true and sound Religion the same terms with their own supposing you could prevail with those of that Religion to do this to them And if that Religion alone should tolerate all other Religions whilest it self is tolerated by none I think it is not easy to conceive how it would be a gainer by so doing But 2. Supposing your Toleration were set up all the World over Even in that case it is so far from being probable that the true Religion would be any way advantaged by it that on the contrary I think there is great reason to fear that without God's extraordinary Providence it would in a much shorter time than any one that does not well consider the matter would imagine be most effectually extirpated by it throughout the World Considering what has already been observ'd that even when the true Religion was the onely Religion in the World it did not long continue so but the depraved Nature of Man soon found out other Religions more agreeable to it self which quickly prevail'd and overspread the World As to the Inquisition Dragooning or any other such Severities which are any where used to keep or force men to the National Religion I suppose I need not put you in mind that I condemn them as much as you do You tell me the Author of the Letter says Truth will do well enough if she were once left to shift for her self The contrary whereof has been sufficiently shewn She seldom has receiv'd and he fears never will receive much Assistance from the Power of great men to whom she is but rarely known and more rarely welcome And yet God himself foretold and promised that Kings should be nursing Fathers and Queens nursing Mothers to his Church As I doubt they cannot be if Truth does not receive Assistance from their Power Errors indeed prevail by the Assistance of foreign and borrow'd Succours And without it too Truth makes way into our Understanding by her own Light and is but the weaker for any borrow'd Force that Violence can add to her Yet moderate Penalties may make way for Truth to men's Understanding that so she may make way into it by her own Light And then you add These words of his how hard soever they may seem to you may help you to conceive how he should think to do service to true Religion by recommending and perswading such a Toleration as he proposed And now you go on pray tell me your self whether you do not think true Religion would be a gainer by it if such a Toleration establish'd there would permit the Doctrine of the Church of England to be freely preach'd and its Worship set up in any Popish Mahumetan or Pagan Country Sir I have told you already that I think it would for a time though I think withall that an universal Toleration would ruine it both there and every where else in the end And I have told you why I think so You add If you do not you have a very ill Opinion of the Religion of the Church of England and must own that it can onely be propagated and supported by Force But why may not I have as good an Opinion of the Religion of the Church of England as I have of Noah's Religion notwithstanding that I think it cannot now be propagated and supported without using some kinds or degrees of Force If say you you think it would gain in those Countries by such a Toleration you are then of the Author's mind Not so Sir For as I fear it would lose all at last by such a Toleration so I doubt not but at present it would lose vastly more by it where it is now Nationally received than it would gain where false or unsound Religions are so received But say you if you allow such a Toleration useful to Truth in other Countries you must find something very peculiar in the Air that must make it less useful to Truth in England And 't will savour of much partiality and be too absurd I fear for you to own that Toleration will be advantageous to true Religion all the World over except onely in this Island Though I much suspect this as absurd as it is lies at the bottom And you build all you say upon this lurking Supposition that the National Religion now in England back'd by the Publick Authority of the Law is the onely true Religion and therefore no other is to be tolerated How useful to Truth or advantangeous to true Religion I think Toleration would be in other Countries or all the World over I suppose I have by this time sufficiently declared But why you should suspect that I look upon this Island as the onely part of the World that would receive no advantage by it I cannot imagine If you will take my word for it I assure you I think there are many other Countries in the World where whatever their Air be your Toleration would be as little useful to Truth as in England For notwithstanding the lurking Supposition you speak of I am far enough from thinking that the true Religion is confined to this Kingdom or this Island But as to my supposing that the National Religion now in England back'd by the Publick Authority of the Law is the onely true Religion if you own with our Author that there is but one true Religion I cannot see how you your self can avoid supposing the same For you own your self of the Church of England and consequently you own the National Religion now in England to be the true Religion for that is her Religion And therefore if you believe there is but one true Religion there is no help for it but you must suppose with me that the National Religion now in England back'd with the Publick Authority of the Law is the onely true Religion But this is not all the lurking Supposition you speak of For you suspect me likewise to suppose that no other Religion is to be tolerated By which if you mean that as this onely true Religion ought to be received wherever it is preach'd so where-ever it is receiv'd I suppose all other Religions ought to be discouraged in some measure by the Civil Powers I own that I do suppose it And I think I have shewn good
visibly lost ground by the relaxation of those Laws Whether Sects and Heresies even the wildest and most absurd and even Epicurism and Atheism have not continually thereupon spread themselves and Whether the very Spirit and Life of Christianity has not sensibly decayed as well as the number of sound Professors of it been dayly lessen'd upon it Not to speak of what at this time our eyes cannot but see for fear of giving offense Though I hope it will be none to any that have a just concern for Truth and Piety to take notice of the Books and Pamphlets which now fly so thick about this Kingdom manifestly tending to the multiplying of Sects and Divisions and even to the promoting of Scepticism in Religion among us In which number I shall not much need your pardon if I reckon the First and Second Letter concerning Toleration And if these have always been the Fruits of the relaxation of moderate Penal Laws made for the preserving and advancing true Religion I think this consideration alone is abundantly sufficient to shew the Usefulness and Benefit of such Laws For if these Evils have constantly sprung from the relaxation of those Laws 't is evident they were prevented before by those Laws Though the Work of our Salvation be as you justly call it stupendous and supernatural yet I suppose no sober man doubts but it both admits and ordinarily requires the use of natural and humane means in subordination to that Grace which works it And therefore till you have shewn as you have not yet that no Penal Laws that can be made can do any service toward the salvation of men's Souls in subordination to God's Grace or that God has forbidden the Magistrate to serve him in that great Work with the Authority which he has given him there will be no occasion for the Caution you give us not to be wiser than our Maker in that stupendous and supernatural work You add When you can shew any Commission in Scripture for the use of Force to compell men to hear any more than to embrace the Doctrine of others that differ from them we shall have reason to submit to it and the Magistrate have some ground to set up this nâ—w way of Persecution To which I answer Though no Force can compell men to embrace if by that you mean to believe the Doctrine of others that differ from them yet some Force may induce those who would not otherwise to hear what may and ought to move them to embrace the Truth And if the Magistrate has Commission to use convenient Force or Penalties for that purpose his doing it will not be the setting up a new way of Persecution but the discharging an old Duty I call it so because it is as old as the Law of Nature in which the Magistrate's Commission lies as has been shewn already For the Scriâ—ture does not properly give it him but presupposes it and speâ—ks of him as antecedently entrusted with it as it does also the Law of Nature which is God's Law as well as the Scripture But till then you say i. e. till I can shew a Commission in Scripture c. 't will be fit for us to obey that Precept of the Gâ—spel which bids us take heed what we hear So that hearing is not always so useful as you suppose If it had we should never have had so direct a Caution against it This I suppose is onely intended for the vulgar Reader For all the Force of it lies in our English Version of the Text you mention Which may and ought the Context requiring it to be render'd Attend or give heed to what you hear And if this be the true sense of the Place as any one that considers it well will find it to be then our Saviour's Precepâ— is so far from being a direct Caution against hearing that on the contrary it requires hearing with great Attention and Consideration Go and teach all Nations you say was a Commission of our saviour's But there was not added to it Punish those that will not hear and consider what you say No but if they will not receive you shake off the dust of your feet leave them and apply your selâ—es to some others Which is all very true indeed but nothing at all to your purpose For as our Saviour was no Magistrate and therefore could not inflict Political Punishments upon any man so much less could he empower his Apostles to do it But as he could not punish men to make them hear him so neither was there any need that he should He came as a Prophet sent from God to reâ—eal a new Doctrine to the World And therefore to prove his Mâ—ssion he was to do such things as could onely be done by a divine Power And the Works which he did were abundantly sufficient both to gain him a hearing and to oblige the World to receive his Doctrine And accordingly when he sent his Apostles to preach his Gospel though as he could not so he did not add Punish those that will not hear and consider what you say yet he communicated to them the Power of Miracles and bad them heal the sick cleanse the Lepers raise the dead and cast out Devils Which might serve altogether as well to procure them a hearing and a great deal better to manifest the divine Authority of their Doctrine so as to leave them that should not embrace it more inexcusable than Sodom and Gomorrha And what extraordinary Gifts and Powers our Lord bestow'd after his Asscension for the propagation of his Gospel which were continued in his Church in such measures as he thought fit for some Ages after I need not mention But what can be concluded from hence That when Christian Religion was sufficiently rooted and establish'd in the World and those extraordinary Graces were withdrawn as no longer necessary Penal Laws could do no service toward the preserving and promoting it or That the Christian Magistrate had no Authority to make any such Laws for the preserving and promoting it No such matter On the contrary considering that those extraordinary Mâ—ans were not withdrawn till by their help Christianity had prevail'd to be receiv'd for the Religion of the Empire and to be supported and encouraged by the Laws of it I cannot but think it highly probable if we may he allow'd to guess at the Counsils of infinite Wisdom that God was pleas'd to continue them till then not so much for any necessity there was of them all that while for the evincing the Truth of the Christian Religion as to supply the want of the Magistrate's Assistance You add further St. Paul knew no other means to make men hear but the Preaching of the Gospel as will appear to any one who will read Rom. 10.14 c. Faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the Word of God But whoever will consider as well as read the Place will find no such
which reason at least I think I might well be startled at the largeness of our Author's Toleration For whereas you say you do not see why Pagans should not be tolerated as well as others if we wish their Conversion whatever may be said for the tolerating of others I think it is plain enough as to them that we ought not to purchase the opportunity of conventing them by suffering them to commit those Indignities and Abominations among us which they call Religion till they are converted But as to the converting Iews Mahumetans and Pagans to Christianity I fear there will be no great progress made in it till Christians come to a better agreement and union among themselves I am sure our Saviour pray'd that all that should believe in him might be one in the Father and in him i. e. I suppose in that holy Religion which he taught them from the Father that the World might believe that the Father had sent him And therefore when he comes to make inquisition why no more Iews Mahumetans and Pagans have been converted to his Religion I very much fear that a great part of the blame will be found to lie upon the Authors and Promoters of Sects and Divisions among the professors of it Which therefore I think all that are guilty and all that would not be guilty ought well to consider In what sense I allow that Force is improper to convert Men to any Religion has already been sufficiently declared in my Answer and I shall have occasion to speak more of it afterwards Where I say that some seem to place the advancement of Trade and Commerce above all other Considerations you tell me that if I do not know that the Author places the advancement of Trade above Religion my Insinuation is very uncharitable But I thought I had sufficiently prevented such an interpretation of my words by acquiâ—ting the Author but just before of any ill design towards Religion That there are some Men in the World who are justly suspected of the Crime I mention I believe you will not deny And I assure you I did not intend by those words to bring any Man under the suspicion of it who has not given just cause for it I say speaking of the Toleration which our Author proposes I see no reason from any experiment which has been made to expect that true Religion would be any way a gainer by it And you tell me I have an experiment of this in the Christian Religion in its first appearance in the World and several hundred of years after But how does that appear Why you say the Christian Religion was then better preserv'd more widely propagated in proportion and render'd more fruitful in the lives of its Professors than ever since though then Iews and Pagans were tolerated and more than tolerated by the Governments of those places where it grew up And is this your Experiment of the true Religion's being a gainer by Toleration The Christian Religion prosper'd more you say in those times than ever since though then Iews and Pagans were tolerated c. and therefore it was a gainer by the Toleration of Iews and Pagans Is there any manner of Consequence in this That the Christian Religion prosper'd more in those times than ever since though then Iews and Pagans were tolerated I readily grant you But whoever does but understand what though means must needs see that this is so far from proving what you inferr from it that it strongly proves the contrary viz. that the Toleration of Jews and Pagans was rather an hindrance than an advantage to the Christian Religion But let us see the utmost you can make of this Experiment of yours You say you hope I do not imagine the Christian Religion has lost any of its first Beauty Force or Reasonableness by having been almost 2000 Years in the World that I should fear it should be less able now to shift for it self without the help of Force And you doubt not but I look upon it still to be the Power and Wisdom of God for our Salvation and therefore cannot suspect it less capable to prevail now by its own Truth and Light than it was in the first Ages of the Church when poor contemptible Men without Authority or the countenance of Authority had alone the care of it In which words I understand you to say these three things 1. That the Christian Religion prevail'd at first meerly by its own Beauty Force or Reasonableness without the help of Authority or Force 2. That that Religion has still the same Beauty Force or Reasonableness which it had at first 3. Lastly that therefore it is now as well able to shift for it self and to prevail without any assistance of Authority as it was then Now to clear this matter I must observe that in the Beauty Force or Reasonableness by which you say the Christian Religion prevail'd at first without the Assistance of Authority either you include the Miracles done by the poor contemptible men you speak of to make their Religion prevail or you do not If you do not then the meaning of your first Assertion is that the Christian Religion prevail'd at first without the Assistance of Authority meerly by the Beauty Force or Reasonableness which it had separate from those Miracles Which I believe you will not undertake to defend But if you do include the Miracles then your second Assertion is manifestly false For I am sure you cannot say that the Christian Religion is still accompanied with Miracles as it was at its first planting And so the Conclusion you draw from thence That therefore the Christian Religion is now as well able to shift for it self and to prevail without any Assistance of Authority as it was at first falls to the ground You add This as I take it has been made use of by Christians generally and by some of our Church in particular as an Argument for the Truth of the Christian Religion that it grew and spread and prevail'd without any Aid from Force or the Assistance of the Powers in being Wherein I hope you are mistaken for I am sure this is a very bad Argument That the Christian Religion so contrary in the nature of it as well to Flesh and Bloud as to the Powers of Darkness should prevail as it did and that not onely without any Assistance from Authority but even in spight of all the opposition which Authority and a wicked World join'd with those infernal Powers could make against it This I acknowledge has deservedly been insisted upon by Christians as a very good Proof of the Truth of their Religion But to argue the Truth of the Christian Religion from its meer prevailing in the World without any Aid from Force or the Assistance of the Powers in being as if whatever Religion should so prevail must needs be the true Religion whatever may be intended is really not to
reason why But you go on and speaking of this lurking Supposition That the National Religion now in England is the onely true Religion and therefore no other is to be tolerated you say Which being a Supposition equally unavoidable and equally just in other Countries unless we can imagine that every where but in England men believe what at the same time they think to be a Lie will in other places exclude Toleration and thereby hinder Truth from the means of propagating it self How Sir Is this Supposition equally unavoidable and equally just in other Countries where false Religions are the National Religion For that you must mean or nothing to the purpose If so then I fear it will be equally true too and equally rational For otherwise I see not how it can be either equally unavoidable or equally just For if it be not equally true iâ— cannot be equally just and if it be not equally rational it cannot be equally unavoidable But if it be equally true and equally rational then either all Religions are true or none is true For if they be all equally true and any one of them be not true then none of them can be true And then the least that will follow is that we must unsuppose again what we supposed but now viz. that the Religion now establish'd in England is the onely true Religion For whether we admit that all Religions are true or that none is true we must unavoidably admit that there is no onely true Religion And if there be no onely true Religion then neither the Religion now establish'd in England nor any other can be the onely true Religion There is therefore no remedy but you must either recall this Assection of yours or own these Consequences which flow from it But I hope when you have thought a little more of the matter you will be so far from asserting that the Supposition that the National Religion is the onely true Religion is in all Countries equally unavoidable and equally just that you will acknowledge that it cannot be at all unavoidable or just where any false Religion is the National Religion Otherwise you will be forced to own that men may be bound to embrace false Religions For whatever Religion any man does unavoidably and justly suppose or judge to be the onely true Religion that Religion he must needs be bound to embrace because he has all the reason to embrace it which any man can have for embracing any Religion whatsoever and he can no more reasonably reject it than any other man may reject the onely true Religion Now if this Supposition that the National is the onely true Religion be indeed neither equally unavoidable nor equally just in other Countries as it is where the True is the National Religion then neither will the Supposition that therefore no other Religion is to be tolerated be either equally unavoidable or equally just in other Countries as it is where the True is the National Religion And therefore if this Supposition shall any where exclude the Toleration of the Truth and thereby hinder it from the means of propagating it self the blame will lie upon those who admit that Supposition where there is no just ground for it who therefore must answer for the Consequences of it The Toleration the Fruits whereof I say give no encouragement to hope for any advantage from our Author's Toleration to true Religion is that as I thought you would easily have guess'd which almost all but those of the Church of England enjoyed in the times of the Blessed Reformation as it was call'd And for the Fruits of it viz. the Sects and Heresies which it produced some of which I say still remain with us how numerous and of what quality they were some yet living remember and the Writers of those times do sufficiently discover But here whatever the Fruits of that Toleration were you boldly say that if the Magistrates will severely and impartially set themselves against Vice in whomsoever it is found and leave men to their own Consciences in their Articles of Faith and Ways of Worship true Religion will be spread wider and be more fruitful in the Lives of its Professors than ever hitherto it has been by the imposition of Creeds and Ceremonies It seems then with you the rejecting the true Faith and the refusing to worship God in decent Ways prescribed by those to whom God has left the ordering of such matters are not comprehended in the name of Vice Otherwise you must allow the Magistrates to set themselves against these things likewise if they must severely and impartially set themselves against Vice which would not consist with leaving men to their own Consciences in them But if you except these things and will not allow them to be call'd by the name of Vice perhaps other men may think it as reasonable to except some other things which they have a kindness for For instance Some perhaps may except arbitrary Divorcing others Polygamy others Concubinacy others simple Fornication other Marrying within Degrees which have hitherto been thought forbidden And all these it may be will boldly say too that if the Magistrates will severely and impartially set themselves against Vice and leave men to their own Consciences in these things Vertue and good Manners would be spread wider and shine more gloriously in the Lives of men than ever hitherto it has done by the help of any Laws that have been made about these matters But Sir whether the Magistrates setting themselves severely and impartially against what I suppose you call Vice or the imposition of found Creeds and decent Ceremonies does more conduce to the spreading true Religion and rendering it fruitful in the Lives of its Professours we need not examine I confess I think both together do best And this I think is as much as needs to be said to your next Paragraph also As to what our Author offers in behalf of the Toleration he contends for I thought the whole Strength of it comprized in this Argument There is but one Way of Salvation or but one true Religion No man can be saved by this Religion who does not believe it to be the true Religion This Belief is to be wrought in men by Reason and Argument not by outward Force and Compulsion Therefore all such Force is utterly of no use for the promoting true Religion and the Salvation of Souls And therefore no body can have any Right to use any Force or Compulsion for the bringing men to the true Religion neither any Private Person nor any Ecclesiastical Officer Bishop Priest or other nor any Church or Religious Society nor the Civil Magistrate But to this you say If it be a true Consequence that men must be tolerated if Magistrates have no Commission or Authority to punish them for Matters of Religion then the onely Strength of that Letter lies not in the unfitness of Force to convince Men's
and I thought fit to mention it to prevent Cavils yet it is none of the Mâ—â—ns of which I was speaking in the place you referr to which any one who reads that Paragraph will find to be onely Humane Means And therefore â—hough the Grace of God be both a proper and sufficient Means and such as can work by it self and without which neither Penalties nor any other Means can do any thing yet it may be true however that when Admonitions and Intreaties fail there is no Humane Means left but Penalties to bring prejudiced Persons to hear and consider what may convince them of their Errors and discover the Truth to them And then Penalties will be necessary in respect to that end as an Humane Means What you intend by saying that the Grace of God is the onely Means I do not well understand If you mean onely that it is the principal and most necessary Means and that without which all other Means are vain and ineffectual I grant it is so Or if you mean that it is the onely necessary Means as being able to do its work without any help of other Means This I have already granted But if by calling it the onely Means you intend to say that it does either always or ordinarily exclude all other Means I see no ground you have to say it Yes say you God alone can open the Ear that it may hear and open the Heart that it may understand But by your â—â—vour this does not prove that he makes use of no Means in doing it For whatever Means we may suppose him to make use of it is he alone still that does it though he does it by the Means he makes use of You add And this he does i.e. he opens the Ear that it may hear and the Heart that it may understand in his own good time and to whom he is gratiously pleas'd but not according to the Will and Phansy of Man when he thinks fit by Punishments to compell his Brethren By which I suâ—pose you mean that the Magistrate has no ground to hope that God will bless any Penalties that he may use to bring men to hear and consider the Doctrine of Saâ—vation or which is the same thing that God does not at least not ordâ—â—arily afford his Grace and Assistance to them who are brought by such Penalties to hear and consider that Doctrine to enable them to hear and consider it as they ought i. e. so as to be moved heartily to embrace it If this be your meaning then to let you see that it is not true I shall onely desire you to tell me whether they that are so brought to hear and consider are bound to believe the Gospel or not If you say they are and I suppose you dare not say otherwise then it evidently follows that God does afford them that Grace which is requisite to enable them to believe the Gospel Because without that Grace it is impossible for them to believe it and they cannot be bound to believe what it is impossible for them to believe You go on If God has pronounced against any Person or People what he did against the Iews Isai. 6.10 Make the heart of this People fat and make their ears heavy and shut their eyes lest they see with their eyes and hear with their ears and understand with their hearts and convert and be heal'd Will all the Force you can use be a means to make them hear and understand and be converted No Sir it will not But what then What if God declares that he will not heal those who have long resisted all his ordinary Methods and made themselves morally speaking incurable by them Which is the utmost you can make of the words you quote Will it follow from thence that no good can be done by Penalties upon others who are not so far gone in Wickedness and Obstinacy If it will not as it is evident it will not to what purpose is this said In the next place you attempt to return my Argument And that you may do it the more successfully you represent it as you commonly do in such a manner as if I allow'd any Magistrate of what Religion soever to lay Penalties upon all that dissent from him Whereas in my own words it stands thus When men fly from the means of a right Information and will not so much as consider how reasonable it is throughly and impartially to examine a Religion which they embraced upon such Inducements as ought to have no sway at all in the matter and therefore with little or no examination of the proper Grounds of it What humane Method can be used to bring them to act like Men in an affair of such consequence and to make a wiser and more rational choice but that of laying such Penalties upon them as may balance the weight of those Prejudices which enclined them to preferr a False Way before the True c Now this Argument you pretend to retort in this manner And I say I see no other means left taking the World as we now find it wherein the Magistrate never lays Penalties for Matters of Religion upon those of his own Church nor is it to be expected they ever should to make men of the National Church any where throughly and impartially examine a Religion which they embraced upon such Inducements as ought to have no sway at all in the matter and therefore with little or no examination of the proper Grounds of it And therefore I conclude the use of Force by Dissenters upon Conformists necessary And then you add I appeal to all the World whether this be not as just and natural a Conclusion as yours And I am well content the World should judge And when it determines that there is the same reason to say That to bring those who conform to the National Church to examine their Religion it is necessary for Dissenters who cannot possibly have the Coactive Power because the National Church has that on its side and cannot be National without it to use Force upon Conformists As there is to say That where the National Church is the true Church there to bring Dissenters as you call them to examine their Religion it is necessary for the Magistrate who has the Coactive Power to lay moderate Penalties upon them for dissenting I say when the World determines thus I will never pretend any more to judge what is reasonable in any case whatsoever For I doubt not but I may safely presume that the World will easily admit these two things 1. That though it be very fit and desireable that all that are of the true Religion should understand the true Grounâ—s of it that so they may be the better able both to defend themselves against the assaults of Seducers and to reduce such as are out of the Way yet this is not strictly necessary to their Salvation because Experience shews as far as men
next End for which they are to be punish'd But what is that to your Question which if it be pertinent demands for what Fault not for what End they are to be punish'd As appears even by your next words So that they are punish'd not for having offended against a Law i. e. not for any Fault For there is no Law of the Land that requires them to examine It seems then the Likeness of the two Pleas lies in this The Pleaders for the French Discipline say that those who refuse to go to Mass are not punish'd for their Religion but for disobeying the King's Laws And you make me say that Dissenters are to be punish'd not for having offended against a Law And were there ever any Twinns more like than these two Pleas are But as if you had forgotten the Likeness you talk'd of you conclude with these words And which now is the fairer Plea pray judge So that the thing I am to judge of at last is not how like these Pleas are to each other but which is the fairer Plea of them Now I confess as you have made my Plea for me I think there is no considerable difference as to the Fairness of them excepting what arises from the different Degrees of Punishment in the French Discipline and my Method But if the French Plea be not true and that which you make to be mine be not mine To what purpose is it to enquire which is the fairer of them The truth of the matter is this The French Discipline Dragoons men and many as you say out of their lives for not coming to Mass which is no Fault to make them come to Mass which they cannot do wiâ—hout sin And my Method punishes men with Punishments which do not deserve to be call'd so when compared with those of the French Discipline for rejecting the true Religion proposed to them with sufficient Evidence which certainly is a Fault to bring them to consider and examine the Evidence with which it is proposed that so they may embrace it which is both lawful for them and their duty to do And which of these Methods or Pleas is the fairer let all the World judge Whereas you say here that there is no Law of the Land that requires men to examine I think the contrary is plain enough For where the Laws provide sufficient means of Instruction in the true Religion and then require all men to embrace that Religion I think the most natural Construction of those Laws is that they require men to embrace it upon Instruction and Conviction as it cannot be expected they should do without examining the Grounds upon which it stands How pertinent the Declamation is which makes up the rest of this Paragraph appears sufficiently by what has been said and will appear yet further before I take leave of you But that this new sort of Discipline may as you pretend have all fair play you come now to enquire at large into several Particulars relating to it As namely Who it is I would have to be punâ—sh'd For what I would have them punish'd With what sort of Penalties what degree of Punishment they should be forced And how long they are to be punish'd And here upon all these Heads you discover as you imagine such Difficulties and Inconsistencies as are enough to spoil any Discipline in the World and render it just good for nothing But I hope I have not follow'd you thus close hitherto to no purpose but am apt to think that I have already abundantly laid open the Mistakes and Cavils upon which those Imaginations are grounded And therefore having as I suppose sufficiently prepared my way I shall without more adoe address my self to manifest the Consistency and Practicableness of my new Method as you will have it in the way you your self prescibe me viz. by telling the World plainly and directly 1. Who are to be punish'd 2. For what 3. With what Punishments 4. How long 5. What Advantage to true Religion it would be if Magistrates every where did so punish 6. And lastly Whence the Magistrate had Commission to do so Which when I have done and by settling these Points have framed the parts of my new Engine set it together and shew'd that it will work without doing more harm than good in the World you tell me you think then men may be content to submit to it Onely before I do this I crave leave to take some notice of one of the Conditions you are pleas'd to lay upon me For you require me to do it â—ot onely plainly and intelligibly without keeping in the uncertainty of general expressions which is reasonable enough but likewise without supposing all along my Church in the right and my Religion the true Now as to this latter Condition I confess I do not see how you can oblige me to it For if my Church be in the right and my Religion be the true why may I not all along suppose it to be so You say this can no more be allow'd to me in this case whatever my Church or Religion be than it can be to a Papist or a Lutheran a Presbyterian or an Anabaptist nay no more to me than it can be allow'd to a Iew or a Mahometan No Sir Not whatever my Church or Religion be That seems somewhat haâ—d And methinks you might have given us some Reason for what you say For certainly it is not so self-evident as to need no proof But I think it is no hard matter to guess at your Reason though you did not think fit expressly to own it For 't is obvious enough that there can be no other Reason for this Assertion of yours but either the equal Truth or at least the equal Certainty or Uncertainty of all Religions For whoever considers your Assertion must see that to make it good you will be obliged to maintain one of these two things Either 1. That no Religion is the true Religion in opposition to other Religions Which makes all Religions true or all false and so either way indifferent Or 2. That though some one Religion be the true Religion yet no man can have any more reason than another man of another Religion may have to believe his to be the true Religion Which makes all Religions equally certain or uncertain whether you please and so renders it vain and idle to enquire after the true Religion and onely a piece of good luck if any man be of it and such good luck as he can never know that he has till he come into the other World Whether of these two Principles you will own I know not But certainly one or the other of them lies at the bottom with you and is the lurking Supposition upon which you build all that you say But as unreasonable as this Condition is I see no need I have to decline it nor any occasion you had to impose it upon me For certainly the
defend the Christian Religion but to betray it For neither does the true Religion always prevail without the Assistance of the Powers in being nor is that always the true Religion which does so spread and prevail As I doubt not but you will acknowledge with me when you have but consider'd within how few Generations after the Floud the Worship of False Gods prevail'd against the Religion which Noah profess'd and taught his Children which was undoubtedly the true Religion almost to the utter exclusion of it though that at first was the onely Religion in the World without any Aid from Force or the Assistance of the Powers in being for any thing we find in the History of those Times and as we may reasonably believe considering that it found an entrance into the World and entertainment in it when it could have no such Aid or Assistance Of which besides the Corruption of Humane Nature I suppose there can no other Cause be assigned or none more probable than this that the Powers then in being did not do what they might and ought to have done towards the preventing or checking that horrible Apostasy You go on And if it be a mark of the true Religion that it will prevail by its own Light and Strength but that false Religions will not but have need of Force and foreign Helps to support them nothing certainly can be more for the advantage of true Religion than to take away Compulsion every where But if this be not a mark of the true Religion as you have not proved it to be then what you conclude here may not be true That the true Religion has always Light and Strength of its own sufficient to prevail with all that consider it seriously and without Prejudice I readily grant But if when you make it a mark of the true Religion that it will prevail by its own Light and Strength you mean as it is plain you must that it will always prevail in the World against other Religions meerly by its own Light and Strength without the Assistance either of Miracles or of Authority then I must tell you that prevailing by its own Light and Strength is so far from being a mark of the true Religion that it is not true that the true Religion will so prevail by its own Light and Strength The Instance but now given is too great a proof of this For if you admit that Noah's Religion was the true Religion you must admit like wise that it had Light and Strength enough to prevail with all that should but fairly consider it And yet however we find that it was so far from prevailing against false Religions without foreign Help that though at first it had quiet possession of the World without any false Religion to contest its Title yet it did not long maintain its advantage but notwithstanding all its Light and Strength was within a few Generations almost extinguish'd and lost out of the World Idolatry prevailing against it not by its own Light and Strength you may be sure for it could have nothing of either nor yet by the help of Force as has already been shew'd but meerly by the advantage which it had in the Corruption and Pravity of Humane Nature left as it is most reasonable to suppose to it self unbridled by Authority For to the corrupt Nature of Man false Religions are ever more agreeable than the true For whatever Hardships some false Religions may impose it will however always be easier to carnal and wordly-minded men to give even their first-born for their Transgressions than to mortify the Lusts from which they spring which no Religion but the true requires of them And upon this account though there is nothing more certain than that false Religions will never prevail by their own Light and Strength yet it seems contrary to Reason as well as to Experience to say that they always have need of Force and foreign Helps to support them On the contrary I see no reason to doubt but the meer Agreeableness of false Religions to Flesh and Bloud may very well support them without foreign Helps whilest the true Religion may stand in need of them not for any defects of its own but by reason of the Folly Perversness and Wickedness of Men. If therefore it be no mark of the true Religion that it will prevail by its own Light and Strength but that false Religions will not but have need of Force and foreign Helps to support them as you have not proved it is and I think I have proved it is far from being so then it does not yet appear that nothing can be more for the advantage of the true Religion than to take away Compulsion every where You say A Religion that is of God wants not the Assistance of Humane Authority to make it prevail Which is not simply or always true Indeed when God takes the matter wholly into his own hands as he does at his first revealing and planting a Religion there can then be no need of the Assistance of Humane Authority because then to make such a Religion appear to be his God himself does all that is requisite to make it prevail But when once God has sufficiently settled his Religion in the World so that if Men will but thenceforth do what they may and ought in their several Capacities to preserve and propagate it it may subsist and prevail without that extraordinary Assistance from him which was necessary for its first establishment then he leaves it to their care under his ordinary Providence to try whether they will do their Duties or not leaving them answerable for all that may follow from their neglect And then if that Religion will not prevail without the Assistance of Humane Authority â—t cannot be said not to need that Assistance to make it prevail I guess say you when this dropp'd from you you had narrow'd your Thoughts to your own Age and Country But if you will enlarge them a little beyond the Confines of England I do not doubt but you will easily imagine that if in Italy Spain Portugal c. the Inquisition and in France their Dragooâ—ing and in other parts those Severities that are used to keep or force men to the National Religion were taken away and instead thereof the Toleration proposed by the Author were set up the true Religion would be a gainer by it How easily soever I can imagine that in this case the true Religion would for some time be a gainer by our Author's Toleration because then it would be tolerated in Italy Spain Portugal France c. where now it is not Yet I think it is manifest enough that it does not follow from thence that in England or wherever else the true Religion is Nationally received it would reap any advantage by having its present Establishment taken away and our Author's i. e. an universal Toleration of Religions set up instead of it But I suppose
Moral Cause to procure the enlightening of the Understanding and the production of Belief And if it be in this sort useful for the promoting true Religion and the Salvation of Souls as I see no reason hitherto to doubt but it is then it may still be lawful for the Magistrate to make use of it in matters of Religion though it has no proper Efficacy to enlighten the Understanding or produce Belief Where I say that Force may indirectly and at a distance do some service c. you say you do not understand what I mean by doing service at a distance towards the bringing men to Salvation or to embrace Truth unless perhaps it be what others in propriety of Speech call by Accident But I make little doubt but all other men that read the place do well enough understand what I mean by those words even such as do not understand what it is to do service by Accident And if by doing service by Accident you mean doing it but seldom and beside the intention of the Agent I assure you that is not the thing that I mean when I say Force may indirectly and at a distance do some service For in that use of Force which I defend the Effect is both intended by him that uses it and withall I doubt not so often attain'd as abundantly to manifest the Usefulness of it But be it what it will say you it is such a service as cannot be asscribed to the direct and proper Efficacy of Force And so say you Force indirectly and at a distance may do some service I grant it Make your best of it What do you conclude from thence That therefore the Magistrate may make use of it That I deny That such an indirect and at a distance Usefulness will authorize the Civil Power in the use of it that will never be proved It seems then you grant at last that Force may indirectly and at a distance do some service in the matter we are speaking of But where I beseech you do I affirm that therefore the Magistrate may make use of it Methinks you might remember that I assert Force to be generally necessary as well as useful to bring erring Persons to the way of Truth and that accordingly I ground the Magistrate's Authority to use Force for that purpose upon the Necessity as well as Usefulness of it Now whether such an indirect and at a distance Usefulness as you are pleas'd to call it together with a general Necessity of Force will not authorize the Civil Power in the use of it you will perhaps be better able to judge when you have answer'd a plain Question or two That Force does some service toward the making of Scholars and Artists I suppose you will easily grant Give me leave therefore to ask How it does it I suppose you will say Not by its direct and proper Efficacy for Force is no more capable to work Learning or Arts than the Belief of the true Religion in men by its direct and proper Efficacy but by prevailing upon those who are designed for Scholars or Artists to receive Instruction and to apply themselves to the use of those Means and Helps which are proper to make them what they are designed to be That is it does it indirectly and at a distance Well then If all the Usefulness of Force towards the bringing Scholars or Apprentices to the Learning or Skill they are designed to attain be onely an indirect and at a distance Usefulness I pray what is it that warrants and authorizes Schoolmasters Tutours or Masters to use Force upon their Scholars or Apprentices to bring them to Learning or to the Skill of their Arts and Trades if such an indirect and at a distance Usefulness of Force together with that Necessity of it which Experience discovers will not do it I believe you will acknowledge that even such an Usefulness together with that Necessity will serve the turn in these cases But then I would fain know why the same kind of Usefulneâ—s join'd with the like Necessity will not as well do it in the case before us I confess I see no reason why it should not nor do I believe you can assign any That the Magistrate may make use of whatsoever God has at any time made the occasions of good to men or of whatsoever may indirectly and at a distance or as you speak before may any way at any time upon any Person by any Accident be useful towards the promoting of true Religion This I do no where assert And therefore you might have spared the Instances by which you prove the contrary There is no doubt but God who can do what he pleases by what means he pleases and even without any means can make many things occasions of good to men which are not apt in their own natures to be so Nor do I doubt but sometimes what in his infinite Wisdom he sees would be hurtful and pernicious to all other men he sees will be good and salutary to some particular persons and accordingly in his Goodness orders it for them But if men should thence take occasion to apply such things generally Who sees not that however they might chance to hit right in some few cases yet upon the whole matter they would certainly do a great deal more harm than good And in all Pleas as you tell us for any thing because of its Usefulness it is not enough to say that it may be serviceable But it must be consider'd not onely what it may but what it is likely to produce And the greater Good or Harm like to come from it ought to determine the use of it And therefore I can easily grant you that as Running a man through though once upon a time it chanced to save a man's life by opening a lurking Impostume is nevertheless no lawful or justifiable Chirurgery because it is always much more likely to let out men's lives than to open lurking Impostumes So though Loss of Estate c. the Gallies and the Torments suffer'd in the late Persecution might possibly as directed and managed by divine Providence bring some Persons to Repentance Sobriety of Thought and a true sense of Religion c. and so indirectly and at a distance serve to the Salvation of their Souls Yet since consider'd in themselves and with respect to the generality of men these Methods for the reasons alleged in my Answer are justly to be look'd upon us more apt to hinder than to promote that end the Success which God was pleas'd perhaps but not bound to give them will by no means justify them or prove that the French King had Right and Authority to make use of them This I say I can easily grant you But how will this serve your purpose Will it follow from hence that the Magistrate has no Right to use any Force at all for the bringing men to the true Religion Or
their spiritual and eternal good by such means as their several Places and Relations enable them to use so does it especially oblige the Magistrate to do it as a Magistrate i.e. by that Power which enables him to do it above the rate of other men So far therefore is the Christian Magistrate when he gives his helping hand to the furtherance of the Gospel by laying convenient Penalties upon such as reject it or any part of it from using any other means for the Salvation of men's Souls than what the Author and Finisher of our Faith has directed that he does no more than his Duty to God to his Redeemer and to his Subjects requires of him You add You may be mistaken in what you think useful No doubt of that Sir But you have not shewn that I am mistaken Dives thought say you and so perhaps should you and I too if not better inform'd by the Scriptures that it would be useful to rouze and awaken men if one should come to them from the dead But he was mistaken And we are told that if men will not hearken to Moses and the Prophets the means appointed neither will the Strangeness nor Terror of one coming from the dead perswade them Very good Sir And what then Dives thought it seems that though Moses and the Prophets had not prevail'd with his Brethren to repent yet if Lazarus were sent to them from the dead to testify what he had seen and heard in the other World such an Evidence as this so much greater than Moses and the Prophets had given of the Necessity of Repentance would not fail of taking effect upon them But herein Abraham assures him he was mistaken and tâ—at the true ground of his Brethren's not being perswaded by Mâ—ses and the Prophets was not any want of Evidence in them as he thought it was but onely their own Hardness and Insensibility contracted by the custom of sinning which render'd them incapable of any impressions from the greatest Evidence that could be given This I take to be the meaning of those words If they hear not Moses and the Prophets i.e. if they hear them not effectually so as to be perswaded by them as appears by the next Clause where the same thing is express'd by that word neither will they be perswaded though one rose from the dead But how does this concern the matter before us Is there any thing in my Assertion like this Mistake of Dives Do I any where say that the means appointed for the satisfying men's Minds concerning the true Religion are not sufficient to do it without the Assistance of outward Force Or that the Magistrate is more likely to convince men's Understanding by inflicting Penalties than Christ's Ministers are by preaching the Gospel If I had said any such thing you might reasonably enough have put me in mind how Dives was mistaken in what he thought useful But if I do expresly deny that Force has any proper Efficacy to convince men's Minds and do place all its Usefulness in its Subserviency to the means appointed for that purpose as it is apt to take off that unreasonable Aversness and Prejudice which usually keeps those who reject the Truth from applying themselves to those means then though Dives was mistaken in thinking that Lazarus might be able to convert his Brethren though Moses and the Prophets had not done it it may however be no Mistake to think Force useful for the purpose for which I affirm it to be so You go on If what we are apt to think useful were thence to be concluded so we should I fear be obliged to believe the Miracles pretended to by the Church of Rome Never fear it Sir for I assure you there is no danger of it But it seems you think there is For say you Miracles we know were once useful for the promoting true Religion and the Salvation of Souls which is more than you can say for your Political Punishments But yet we must conclude that God thinks them not useful now unless we will say that which without Impiety cannot be said that the Wise and Benign Disposer and Governer of all things does not now use all useful means for promoting his own Honour in the World and the good of Souls And then you add I think this Consequence will hold as well as what you draw in near the same words But I think it is easy to shew it will not For in the place you intend I speak not of useful but of competent i. e. sufficient means Now competent or sufficient means are necessary but I think no man will say that all useful means are so And therefore though as I affirm it cannot be said without Impiety that the Wise and Benign Disposer and Governer of all things has not furnish'd Mankind with competent means for the promoting his own Honour in the World and the good of Souls yet it is very agreeable with Piety and with Truth too to say that he does not now use all useful means Because as none of his Attributes obliges him to use more than sufficient means so he may use sufficient means without using all useful means For where there are many useful means and some of them are sufficient without the rest there is no necessity of using them all So that from God 's not using Miracles now to promote the true Religion you cannot conclude that he does not think them useful now but onely that he does not think them necessary And therefore though what we are apt to think useful were thence to be concluded so yet if whatever is useful be not likewise to be concluded necessary there is no reason to fear that we should be obliged to believe the Miracles pretended to by the Church of Rome For if Miracles be not now necessary there is no inconvenience in thinking the Miracles pretended to by the Church of Rome to be but pretended Miracles But after all how comes this Supposition in That what we are apt to think useful is thence to be concluded so For whatever you would insinuate I speak not of what we are apt to think or phansy with little or no reason to be useful but of what we judge so upon just and sufficient grounds Upon a strong Probability of Success which you your self seem to think sufficient not onely to ground an opinion of its Usefulness but even to warrant the Use of it grounded upon the consideration of Humane Nature and the general temper of Mankind apt to be wrought upon by the Method I speak of And upon the indisputable attestation of Experience For how confidently soever you tell me here that it is more than I can say for my Political Punishments that they were ever useful for the promoting true Religion I appeal to all observing persons Whether where-ever true Religion or sound Christianity has been nationally received and establish'd by moderate Penal Laws it has not always
making what you call my new Method consistent and practicable does no way oblige me to suppose all along my Religion is the true as you imagine No Sir 't is enough for that purpose to suppose that there is one true Religion and but one and that that Religion may be known by those who profess it to be the onely true Religion and may also be manifested to be such by them to others so far aâ— least as to oblige them to receive it and to leave them without excuse if they do not Indeed if either of the two Principles but now mention'd be true i. e. if all Religions be equally true and so indifferent or all be equally certain or uncertain then without more adoe the Cause is yours For then 't is plain there can be no reason why any man in respect to his Salvation should change his Religion and so there can be no room for using any manner of Force to bring men to consider what may reasonably move them to change But if on the contrary there be one true Religion and no more and that may be known to be the onely true Religion by those who are of it and may by them be manifested to others in such sort as has been said then 't is altogether as plain that it may be very reasonable and necessary for some men to change their Religion and that it may be made appear to them to be so And then if such men will not consider what is offer'd to convince them of the Reasonableness and Necessity of doing it it may be very fit and reasonable for any thing you have said to the contrary in order to the brâ—nging them to Consideration to require them under convenient Penalties to forsake their false Religions and to embrace the true Now as these things are all that I need to suppose so I shall take leave to suppose them till you shew good reason why I should not And now I come to give an account of the Particulars mention'd Which I think may be done in a very few words so plainly and intelligibly upon these Supposals as to enable any Reader to see without any more help to how little purpose you multiply words about these matters Here therefore I am to tell the World 1. Who are to be punish'd And those according to the whole tenor of my Answer are no other but such as having sufficient Evidence tender'd them of the true Religion do yet reject it whether utterly refusing to consider that Evidence or noâ— considering it as they ought viz. with such care and diligence as the matter deserves and requires and with honest and unbiass'd minds And what difficulty there is in this I cannot imagine For there is nothing more evident than that those who do so reject the true Religion are culpable and deserve to be punish'd And it is easy enough to know when men do so reject the true Religion For that requires no more than that we know that that Religion was tender'd to them with sufficient Evidence of the truth of it And that it may be tender'd to men with such Evidence and that it may be known when it is so tender'd these things you know I take leave here to suppose Now if the persons I describe do really deserve to be punish'd and may be known to be such as I describe them then as they deserve to be punish'd so they may be punish'd Which is all that needs be said upon this Head to shew the Consistency and Practicableness of this Method And what do you any where say against this 2. For what By which I perceive you mean two things For sometimes you speak of the Fault and sometimes of the End for which men are to be punish'd And sometimes you plainly confound them Now if it be enquired For what Fault men are to be punish'd I answer For rejecting the true Religion after sufficient Evidence tender'd them of the truth of it Which certainly is a Fault and deserves Punishment But if you enquire for what End such as do so reject the true Religion are to be punish'd I say To bring them to embrace the true Religion and in order to that to bring them to consider and that carefully and impartially the Evidence which is offer'd to convince them of the truth of it Which are undeniably just and excellent Ends and which through God's blessing have often been procured and may yet be procured by convenient Penalties inflicted for that purpose Nor do I know of any thing you say against any part of this which is not already answer'd 3. With what Punishments Now here having in my Answer declared that I take the Severities so often mention'd which either destroy men or make them miserable to be utterly unapt and improper for Reasons there given to bring men to embrace the Truth which must save them I do not presume to determine nor have you shewn any cause why I should just how far within those bounds that Force extends it self which is really serviceable to that end but content my self to say That so much Force or such Penalties as are ordinarily sufficient â—o prevail with men of common Discretion and not desperately perverse and obstinate to weigh matters of Religion carefully and impartially and without which ordinarily they will not do this so much Force or such Penalties may fitly and reasonably be used for the promoting true Religion in the World and the Salvation of Souls And what just exception this is liable to I do not understand For when I speak of men of common Discretion and not desperately perverse and obstinate I think 't is plain enough that by common Discretion I exclude not Idiotes onely and such as we usually call Mad-men but likewise the desperately perverse and obstinate who perhaps may well enough deserve that name though they be not wont to be sent to Bedlam And if the Penalties I speak of be intended for the curing men's unreasonable Prejudices and Refractariness against the true Religion then the reason why the desperately perverse and obstinate are not to be regarded in measuring these Penalties is very apparent For as Remedies are not provided for the incurable so in the preparing and tempering them regard is to be had onely to those for whom they are designed Perhaps it may be needful here to prevent a little Caviâ— to note that there are degrees of Perversness and Obstinacy and that men may be perverse and obstinate without being desperately so And that therefore some perverse and obstinate persons may be thought curable though such as are desperately so cannot As there are likewise degrees of Carelessness in men of their Salvation as well as of Concern for it So that such as have some Coâ—cern for their Salvation may yet be careless of it to a great degree And therefore if those who have any Concern for their Salvation deserve regard and pity then so may some carless persons
there is this is as good an Argument to prove that there is somewhere a right to use such Force for that purpose as the utter Uselessness of Force if that could be made out would be to prove that no body has any such right Where every one sees that I do not inferr a right to use Force from the Usefulness of it barely as you make me but from the Necessity as well as Usefulness of it For though the utter Uselessness of Force if â—t could be made out would as I here acknowledge be a good Argument to prove that no body has any right to use it yet I never thought that the bare Usefulness of it was sufficient to prove that there is a right somewhere to use it But if Force be both useful and necessary that I think is a good proof of it And that is the thing I insist upon You might therefore have spared the pains you have taken to prove that Usefulness of Punishment cannot give a Commission to punish or that useful Punishment from every hand is not lawful For I never asserted the contrary But because some perhaps may think that there is more in the Instance you here make use of than what you intend to prove by it it may not be amiss briefly to shew there is not That Instance is this You say a man may have the Stone and it may be useful more than indirectly and at a distance useful to him to be cut but yet this usefulness will not justify the most skilful Chiâ—urgeon in the world by Force to make him endure the pain and hazard of Cutting because he has no commission no right without the Patient 's own consent to do so Nor is it a good Argument Cutting will be useful to him therefore there is a right somewhere to cut him whether he will or no. Now that this Instance does not come up to the Point in question between us is very evident For 1. It is to be consider'd That the Stone does not always kill though it be not cured but men do often live to a great age with it and die at last of other Distempers But Aversion to the true Religion is certainly and inevitably mortal to the Soul iâ— not cured and so of absolute necessity to be cured And yet if we should suppose the Stone as certainly destructive of this temporal life as that Aversion is of men's eternal Salvation even so the necessity of curing it would be as much less than the necessity of curing that Aversion as this temporal Life falls short in value of that which is eternal And 2. It may be consider'd That Cutting for the Stone is not always necessary in order to the Cure And that even where it is most so it is withall hazardous by your own confession and may kill as well as cure and that without any fault of the Patient But the Penalties I speak of as they are altogether necessary without extraordinary Grace to cure that pernicious and otherwise untractable Aversion so they can no way endanger or hurt the Soul but by the fault of him that undergoes them And if these things be true if there be no such Necessity that persons troubled with the Stone should be cured of it as there is that such as are possess'd with an Aversion to the true Religion should be cured of that Aversion And iâ— Cutting for the Stone be neither so necessary nor yet so safe a Means of curing as moderate Penalties are in the other case Then how reasonable soever you may suppose it that it should be left to the Patient's choice whether he shall be cut or not and how true soever it may be that the most skilful Chirurgeon in the world has no Commission no right without the Patient 's own consent by Force to make him endure the pain and hazard of Cutting The Magistrate may nevertheless have a right to use Penalties to cure men of their Aversion to the true Religion For 't is plain enough these things may very well sâ—and together This may suffice to shew how short this Instance falls of the Case before us However I shall add That though as things now stand no Chirurgeon has any right to cut his Calculous Patient without his consent yet if the Magistrate should by a Publick Law appoint and authorize a competent number of the most skilful in that Art to visit such as labour under that Disease and to cut those whether they consent or not whose Lives they unanimously judge it impossible to save otherwise I am apt to think you would find it hard to prove that in so doing he exceeded the bounds of his Power And I am sure it would be as hard to prove that those Artists would have no right in that case to cut sâ—ch Persons Whereas you say in this Paragraph that to justify Punishment it is requisite that it be directly useful for the procuring some greater good than that which it takes away I wish you had told us why it must needs be directly useful for that pupose or why Penalties are not as directly useful for the bringing men to the true Religion as the rod of correction is to drive foolishness from a Child or to work wisdom in him Why Force was not necessary for the first 300 years after Christ has already been shewn And whoever considers the accoâ—nt which has been given of that matter will easily see that unless that which made Force needless then does still continue it may be necessary now though it was not then But here you think you put me a very confounding Question If say you your supposed Usefulness and Necessity you should have added places a right somewhere to use it pray tell me in whose hands it places it in Turky Persia or China or any Country where Christians of different Churches live under a Heathen or Mahometan Sovereign But Sir I answer roundly and plainly In the hands of the Sovereign What will you say a right in Mahometan or Pagan Princes hands to use Force upon Christians for fear as you speak lest mankind in those Countries should be unfurnish'd with means for the promoting God's honour and the good of Souls No Sir but a right to use convenient Penalties for the promoting the true Religion which I think is the promoting God's honour and the good of Souls If this startle you then I must tell you further that I look upon the Supreme Power to be the same all the World over in what hands soever it is placed And I take this Right to be contain'd in it And if those that have it do not use it as they ought but instead of promoting true Religion by proper Penalties set themselves to enforce Mahometanism or Paganism or any other false Religion all that can or that needs be said to that matter is that God will one day call them to an account for their neglect of their Duty for the
Government yields And accordingly I say they are instituted for the attaining of all the Benefits which Civil Society or Political Government can yield And this I took to be so plain a Truth that I thought it no great boldness to usher it in with a Doubtless And I confess I am still so much of the same mind that I can hardly believe that any man who has not a very urgent occasion will make any question of it For if what has hitherto been universally acknowledged be true viz. That no Power is given in vain but to be used upon occasion I think a very little Logick may serve a man to draw this Conclusion from it That all Societies are instituted for the attaining all the good or all the benefits they are enabled to attain Because if you except any of those benefits you will be obliged to admit that the Power of attaining them was given in vain Nor will it follow from hence that all Societies are instituted for one and the same End as you imagine it will unless you suppose all Societies enabled by the Powers they are endued with to attain the same End which I believe no man hitherto did ever affirm And therefore notwithstanding this Position there may be still as great a difference as you please between Church and State a Commonwealth and an Army or between a Family and the East-India Company Which several Societies as they are instituted for different Ends so are they likewise furnish'd with different Powers proportionate to their respective Ends. To your next Paragraph after what has already been said I think it may suffice to say as follows Though perhaps the Peripatetick Philosophy may not be true and perhaps it is no great matter if it be not yet the true Religion is undoubtedly true And though perhaps a great many have not time nor Parts to study that Philosophy and perhaps it may be no great matter neither if they have not yet all that have the true Religion duly tender'd them have time and all but Idiotes and Mad-men have Parts likewise to study it as much as it is necessary for them to study it And though perhaps a great many who have studied that Philosophy câ—nnot be convinced of the truth of it which perhaps is no great wonder yet no man ever studied the true Religion with such care and diligence as he might and ought to use and with an honest mind but he was convinced of the truth of it And that those who cannot otherwise be brought to do this should be a little disturb'd and diseas'd to bring them to it I take to be the Interest not onely of those particular persons who by this means may be brought into the way of Salvation but of the Commonwealth likewise upon these two accounts 1. Because the true Religion which this Method propagates makes good Men and good Men are always the best Subjects or Members of a Commonwealâ—h not onely as they do more sincerely and zealously promote the Publick Good than other men but likewise in regard of the favour of God which they often procurâ— to the Societies of which they are Members And 2. Because this Care in any Commonwealth of God's Honour and Men's Salvation entitles it to his special protection and blessing So that where this Method is used it proves both a Spiritual and a Civil Benefit to the Commonwealth You say I speak very improperly or rather very mistakenly if I call such Benefits as may any way i. e. indirectly and at a distance or by Accident be attain'd by Civil or any other Society the Ends for which it is instituted Whereas indeed the Mistake lies on your side which I must now again put you in mind of in thinking that by indirectly and at a distance I mean by Accident in your sense which I no where gave you any occasion to think And therefore I can easily admit that nothing can in reason be reckon'd among the Ends of any Society but what may in reason be supposed to be designed by those who enter into it Though I see no reason why the Author or Institutor of any Society especially of Civil Society may not be supposed to design more than those usually do who enter inâ—o it But what follows from this Why you say No body can in reason suppose that any one enter'd into Civil Society for the procuring securing or advancing the Salvation of his Soul when he for that end needed not the Force of Civil Society So that it seems the reason why the procuring securing or advancing the Salvation of Souls must not be reckon'd among the Ends of Civil Societies is because there is no need of the Force of Civil Society for that End The contrary whereof has I suppose already beâ—n sufficiently made good But whereas I say Doubtless Commonwealths are instituted for the attaining of all the Benefits which Political Government can yield and therefore c. Upon the same Grounds say you thus I reason Doubtless Churches are instituted for the attaining of all the Benefits which Ecclesiastical Government can yield And therefore if the Temporal and Secular Interests of Men may any way be procured or advanced by Ecclesiastical Politie the procuring and advancing those Interests must in all reason be reckon'd among the Ends of Religious Societies and so consequently fall within the compass of Churchmen's Iurisdiction Well Sir I admit the Consequence and do freely own the procuring and advancing the Temporal and Secular Interests of Men to be one of the Ends an inferiour or secundary End of Religious Societies c. And what do you conclude from thence Why The Church of Rome you say has openly made its advantage of Secular Interests to be procured or advanced indirectly and at a distance and in ordine ad spiritualia all â—hich ways if I mistake not English are comprehended under your any way But I do not remember that any of the Reformed Churches have hiâ—herto directly profess'd it But there is a time for all things So that it seems what the Church of Rome has openly made its advantage of I am endeavouring to bring it in at a back-door to the Reformed Churches For that I take to be the thing you would insinuate by these words But what is it I beseech you that the Church of Rome has openly made its advantage of For I confess I do not understand what you mean by Secular Interests to be procured or advanced indirectly and at a distance and in ordine ad spiritualia That some of the Bishops of Rome have made their advantage of a Power they claim'd to dispose of all Secular matters as they thought fit even to the deposing of Kings and Emperours and the bestowing their Dominions on whomsoever they pleas'd And that they claim'd this Power as belonging to them at least as Bellarmine minces the matter not directly and immediately i. e. not for the procuring or advancing men's Secular
him say what he does not that they may have something which they can confute Your next Paragraph runs high and charges me with nothing less than Prevarication 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 diligently after the Truth c. It seems all the Remedy I offer is no more than this Dissenters must be punish'd Upon which thus you insult Can any body that hears you say so believe you in earnest and that want of Examination is the thing you would have amended when want of Examination is not the thing you would have punish'd But if in all your Treatise you can shew me one place where you say that the Ignorant the Careless the Inconsiderate the negligent in examining c. are to be punish'd 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 judge that however want of Examination be a general Fault which you with great vehemency have exaggerated yet you use it only for a pretense to punish Dissenters and either distrust your Remedy or else care not to have it generally cured Now here I acknowledge that though want or neglect of Examination 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 Religion proposed to them with sufficient Evidence But then to let you see how little ground you have to say that I prevaricate in this matter I shall onely desire 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 acknowledged 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 Religion stands and challenges their belief But the Subject of our enquiry is onely What Method is to be used to bring men to the true Religion Now if this be the onely thing we were enquiring 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 embraced the true Religion because they are not to be brought to that Religion but onely to be confirm'd and edified in it but was onely to consider how those who reject it may be brought to embrace it So that how much soever any of those who own the true Religion may be guilty of neglect of Examination 't is evident I was onely concern'd to shew how it may be cured in those who by reason of it reject the true Religion duly proposed or tender'd to them And certainly to confine 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 Ignorant the Careless the Inconsiderate the negligent in examining c. i. e. all that are such are to be punish'd you onely tell me that I dare not be impertinent And therefore I hope you will excuse me if I take no notice of the three Reasons you offer in your next Page for your saying so And yet if I had had a mind to talk impertinently 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 attention will be more confirm'd in this Opinion viz. That I use want of Examination onely for a pretense to punish Dissenters c. when he shall find that you who are so earnest to have men punish'd 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 hearkening to the Scripture which had been as good a Rule for a Christian to have sent them to as to Reasons and Arguments 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 hearkening to the Scripture 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 Religion onely in general i. e. not as limited to any particular Dispensation or to the Times of the Scriptures but as reaching from the fall of Adam to the end of the World and so comprehending the Times which preceeded the Scriptures wherein yet God left not himself without witness but furnished Mankind with sufficient means of knowing Him and his Will in order to their eternal Salvation 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 Dispensations Such as you cannot but acknowledge the Old and New Testaments to be You say that Page 26. of my Answer out of abundant kindness when the Dissenters have their Heads without any cause broken I provide them a Plaister But whoever shall consider the Penalties I there speak of will I perswade my self find no Heads broken and so but little need of a Plaister But having said there That the Power I asscribe to the Magistrate is given him to bring men not to his own but to the true Religion And That though as our Author puts us in mind the Religion of every Prince is Orthodox to himself yet if this Power keep within it's bounds i.e. 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 promoting the True it can serve the interest of no other Religion but the True among such as have any concern for their eternal Salvation and they that have none deserve not to be consider'd â—â— because the Penalties it enables him that has it to inflict 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 onely such as are apt to put them upon a serious and impartial Examination
once more Where I say If Force may be any way useful for the promoting the Salvation of Souls there is a Right somewhere to use it For in the Page you referr to the words are If there be so great Use and Necessity of outward Force for the promoting true Religion and the Salvation of Souls c. Nor do I any where speak otherwise that I know But secondly let it be supposed if you please that I say what you so often tell me I do though I do not Yet even so unless it be as necessary for men to attain any greater degree of Glory as it is to attain Glory it will not follow that if the Magistrate may use Force because it may be indirectly c. useful towards the procuring any degree of Glory he may by the same Rule use it where it may be in that manner useful towards the procuring a greater degree of Glory But that there is the same Necessity of men's attaining a greater degree of Glory as there is of their attaining Glory no man will affirm For without attaining Glory they cannot escape the damnation of Hell which yet they may escape without attaining any greater degree of Glory So that the attaining Glory is absolutely necessary but the attaining any greater degree of it however desirable it is not so necessary Now if there be not the same Necessity of the one of these as there is of the other there can be no pretense to say that whatever is lawful in respect to the one of them is likewise so in respect to the other And therefore thought St. Paul assures us that the Afflictions of this Life work for us a far more exceeding weight of Glory it will not follow from thence even by the Rule which you make for me but is not mine That if men be in the right way they may be punish'd to make them by their Sufferings gainers of a far more exceeding weight of Glory So that your some pretense of Right which was all that in modesty you could undertake to prove comes at last to just none at all But how unfortunate was I to talk of the Magistrate's misapplying his Power when he punishes those who have the Right on their side For by granting that it seems I grant all that the Author contends for and so give up the Cause I undertook to defend So you tell me Sir and thus you think you prove what you say For say you if the Magistrate misapplies or makes a wrong use of his Power when he punishes in matters of Religion any one who is in the Right though it be but to make him consider he also misapplies his Power when he punishes any one whomsoever in Matters of Religion to make him consider Which is certainly as wonderful a Collection as any you make in your whole Letter As any man may see that will but compare the Magistrate's punishing in Matters of Religion any one who is in the Right to make him consider with his punishing any one whomsoever i. e. any one who is in the Wrong in matters of Religion to make him consider For first to punish one who is in the Right is to punish one who does not deserve to be punish'd which is manifestly unjust whatever the end be for which he is punish'd But to punish one who is in the Wrong and refuses to consider what may convince him of the Right and such onely are the persons whom I would have punish'd is onely to punish one who well deserves to be punish'd which no man can pretend to be unjust Again To punish one who is in the Right to make him consider what may shew him the Right and move him to embrace it which is the thing we mean here by considering is vain and ridiculous because he does already discern and embrace the Right and therefore needs not be made consider to bring him to embrace it But to punish one who is in the Wrong and can by no othe◠means be prevail'd upon to consider what may manifest the Righ◠to him I say to punish such a one to make him consider is bu◠reasonable and necessary because it is necessary for him to consider and Punishment is necessary to bring him to consider Now if these Cases are so widely different If in the first o◠them the Magistrate punishes where there is neither any desert nor any need or use of Punishment but in the other he punishes where Punishment is both deserv'd and necessary to be inflicted Is there any imaginable ground to say That if the Magistrate misapplies or makes a wrong use of his Power in the first Case he does so likewise in the other Yes you think there is For say you every one is here Iudge for himself what is Right And in matters of Faith and Religious Worship another cannot judge for him So that to punish any one in matters of Religion though it be but to make him consider is by your 〈◊〉 Confession beyond the Magistrate's Power And that punishing in matters of Religion is beyond the Magistrate's Power is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what the Author contends for Which Demostration of yours if I may have leave to put it into from stands thus Whoever takes upon him to judge for another what is Right in matters of Religion takes upon him to do what no man can do But whoever punishes any man in matters of Religion to make him consider takes upon him to judge for another what is Right in matters of Religion Therefore whoever punishes any one in Matters of Religion to make him consider takes upon him to do what no man can do and consequently misapplies his Power of punishing if he has that Power Where if the Second Proposition were as evidently true as the First is I should readily admit the Conclusion as sufficiently demonstrated But if that Proposition be so far from being evidently true that on the contrary it is certainly false and plainly involves a Contradiction in it then you must give me some better proof of the Conclusion before I shall be obliged to assent to it Now a little to examine that Proposition Why I beseech you does any one punish another to make him consider Is it not that that other may judge for himself of what he is required to consider For as he that will judge of any matter must first consider it according to that old Rule Si judicas cognosce So I know no use there is of considering but in order to judging And can he who punishes another to make him consider that he may judge for himself of the matter to be consider'd intend to judge for him whom he punishes to make him judge for himself If this be manifestly contradictious and impossible as it must be acknowledged to be then every one sees that it is so far from being evidently true that whoever punishes any one in Matters of Religion to make him consider takes upon him to
judge for another what is Right in Matters of Religion that it is repugnant and absurd to say that any man who punishes another to make him consider does at the same time take upon him to judge for that person in any matter whatsoever Thus you see with how little reason you say that by granting that the Magistrate misapplies his Power when he punishes those who have the Right on their side I grant all that the Author contends for Indeed if I had said that the Magistrate does therefore in that Case misapply his Power because whoever punishes any one in matters of Religion to make him consider takes upon him to judge for him what is Right in matters of Religion you had had some ground for what you say But that is no Reason of mine but aâ— Assumption or Supposition of yours and a very bad one too as I hope has been sufficiently shewn My following words which are the last you take notice of are these And all the hurt that comes to them by it is onely the suffering some tolerable Inconveniencies for their following the Light of their own Reason and the Dictates of their own Consciences which certainly is no such Mischief to Mankind aâ— to make it more eligible that there should be no such Poweâ— 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 That is that every man should be suffer'd quietly and withouâ— the least molestation either to take no care at all of his Soul iâ— he be so pleas'd or in doing it to follow his own groundless Prejudices or unaccountable Humour or any crafty Seducer whom he may think fit to take for his Guide Which words you set down at large but instead of contradicting them or offering to shew that the Mischief spoken of is such as makes it more eligible c you onely demand Why should not the care of every man's Soul be left to himself rather than the Magistrateâ— Is the Magistrate like to be more concern'd for it Is the Magistrate like to take more care of it c. As if not to leave the care of every man's Soul to himself alone were as you express it afterwards to take the care of men's Souls from themselves Or as if to vest a Power in the Magistrate to procure as much as in him lies i.e. as far as it can be procured by convenient Penalties that men take such care of their Souls as they ought to do were to leave the care of their Souls to the Magistrate rather than to themselves Which no man but your self will imagine I acknowledge as freely as you can do that as every man is more concern'd than any man else can be so he is likewise more obliged to take care of his Soul and that no man can by any means be discharged of the care of his Soul which when all is done will never be saved but by his own care of it But do I contradict any thing of this when I say that the care of every man's Soul ought not to be left to himself alone or that it is the Interest of Mankind that the Magistrate be entrusted and obliged to take care as far as lies in him that no man neglect his own Soul I thought I confess that every man was in some sort charged with the care of his Neigbour's Soul But in your way of reasoning he that affirms this takes away the care of every man's Soul from himself and leaves it to his Neighbour rather than to himself But if this be plainly absurd as every one sees it is then so it must be likewise to say that he that vests such a Power as we here speak of in the Magistrate takes away the care of mens Souls from themselves and places it in the Magistrate rather than in themselves What trifling then is it to say here If you cannot lay your hand upon your Heart and say all this viz. that the Magistrate is like to be more concern'd for other men's Souls than themselves c. What then will be got by the change For 't is plain here is no such change as you would insinuate but the care of Souls which I assert to the Magistrate is so far from discharging any man of the care of his own Soul or lessening his obligation to it that it serves to no other purpose in the world but to bring men who otherwise would not to consider and do what the Interest of their Souls obliges them to 'T is therefore manifest that the thing here to be consider'd is not Whether the Magistrate be like to be more concern'd for other men's Souls or to take more care of them than themselves nor Whether he be commonly more careful of his own Soul than other men are of theirs nor Whether he be less exposed in matters of Religion to Prejudices Humours and crafty Seducers then other men nor yet Whether he be not more in danger to be in the wrong than other men in regard that he never meets with the great and onely Antidote of mine as you call it against Errâ—r which I here call Molestation But the Point upon which this matter turns is onely this Whether the Salvation of Souls be not better provided for if the Magistrate be obliged to procure as much as in him lies that every man take such care as he ought of his Soul than if he be not so obliged but the care of every man's Soul be left to himself alone Which certainly any man of common Sense may easily determine For as you will not I suppose deny but God has more amply provided for the Salvation of your own Soul by obliging your Neighbour as well as your self to take care of it though 't is possible your Neighbour may not be more concern'd for it than your self or may not be more careful of his own Soul than you are of yours or may be no less exposed in matters of Religion to Prejudices c. than you are Because if you are your self wanting to your own Soul it is more likely that you will be brought to take care of it if your Neighbour be obliged to admonish and exhort you to it than if he be not though it may fall out that he will not do what he is obliged to do in that case So I think it cannot be denied but the Salvation of all men's Souls is better provided for if besides the obligation which every man has to take care of his own Soul and that which every man's Neighbour has likewise to do it the Magistrate also be entrusted and obliged to see that no man neglect his Soul then it would be if every man were left to himself in this matter Because though we should admit that the Magistrate is not like to be or is not ordinarily more concern'd for other men's Souls than they themselves are c. it is
Understanding Vid. Lett. p. 7. But if all the Reason for which the Author denies that Magistrates have any Commission or Authority to punish for Matters of Religion ends in the unfitness of Force to convince Men's Understanding as upon examination it will appear it does then the onely strength of that Letter may lie in that not withstanding that true Consequence 'T is true indeed the Author does say in the Page you quote that it does not appear that God has given any such Authority to one man over another as to compell any one to his Religion Wherein I believe no sober man will contradict him But supposing that by compelling any one to his Religion he means using any degree of Force in any manneâ— whatsoever to bring any one to his Religion What Reason I beseech you does he any where offer for his saying this but that which he gives us in the next Page where he expresly affirms that the Magistrate's Power extends not to the establishing any Articles of Faith or Forms of Worship by the Force of his Laâ—es for this reason viz. because Laws are of no force at all without Penalties and Penalties in this case are absolutely impertinent because they are not proper to convince the Mind because they are no way capable to produce the Belief of the Truth of any Articles of Faith or of the acceptableness to God of any outward Forms of Worship and because that Light and Evidence which onely can work a change in Men's Opinions can in no manner proceed from them Which I suppose you will acknowledge to be onely so many several Expressions of the unfitness of Force to convince men's Understanding Again say you If it be true that Magistrates being as liable to Error as the rest of Mankind their using of Force in matters of Religion would not at all advance the Salvation of Mankind allowing that even Force could work upon them and Magistrates had Authority to use it in Religion then the Argument you mention is not the onely one in that Letter of strength to prove the necessity of Toleration Vid. Let. p. 8. But you might have consider'd that this Argument from the Magistrate's being as liable to Error as the rest of Mankind concerns none but those who assert that every Magistrate has a Right to use Force to promote his own Religion whatever it be Which I think no man that has any Religion will assert And that for this reason I could not be obliged to consider it as a distinct Argument However where it came in my way I took as much notice of it as I thought it deserved As to the Argument as I have represented it you deny that the Fourth Proposition is any Proposition of the Author's to be found in the Pages I quote or any where else in the whole Letter either in those terms or in the sense I take it in And yet you immediately add that in the eighth Page which I quote the Author is shewing that the Magistrate has no Right to make use of Force in Matters of Religion for the Salvation of men's Souls And that the Reason he there gives for it is because Force hath no efficacy to convince men's Minds and that without a full perswasion of the Mind the Profession of the true Religion it self is not acceptable to God And then you set down the words of the Author to which I referr viz. Upon this ground I affirm that the Magistrate's Power extends not to the establishing any Articles of Faith or Forms of Worship by the force of his Laws For Laws are of no force without Penalties and Penalties in this case are absolutely impertinent because they are not proper to convince the Mind Now in what respect I beseech you are Penalties here affirm'd to be absolutely impertinent Is it not plain that the Author means they are so as used to bring men to believe any Articles of Faith or to approve any Forms of Worship And is not this exactly the Sense of the Fourth Proposition The other place of the Letter p. 27. to which I referr and which you here set down does clearly enough contain the same Sense and therefore I need not add any more words concerning it You add But in neither of those Passages nor any where else that I remember does the Author say that it is impossible that Force should any way at any time upon any Person by any Accident be useful towards the promoting of true Religion and the Salvation of Souls for that is it which you mean by utterly of no use By utterly of no use I mean the same thing which the Author does by absolutely impertinent And whether he does or does not say that it is impossible c. I am sure the least he can mean by saying that Penalties are absolutely impertinent is that they are so little serviceable towards the purpose we speak of that generally speaking they do at least as much harm as good For nothing less than that can make them absolutely impertinent And that is all that I mean by utterly useless You say further He does not deny that there is any thing which God in his Goodness does not or may not sometimes gratiously make use of towards the Salvation of men's Souls as our Saviour did of Clay and Spittle to cure Blindness and that so Force also may be sometimes useful But that which he denies and you grant is that Force has any proper Efficacy to enlighten the Understanding or produce Belief And from thence he inferrs that therefore the Magistrate cannot lawfully compell men in Matters of Religion 'T is true indeed I do grant that Force has no proper Efficacy to enlighten or convince the Understanding or to do the work of Reason and Arguments But must it needs be utterly useless or no otherwise useful for the promoting true Religion than Clay and Spittle are for curing Blindness unless it have the Efficacy of Reason and Arguments I confess I thought the usefulness of Force for the promoting the true Religion would sufficiently appear if it could but be shewn to be capable of doing any considerable service that way by procuring the Conviction of the Understanding though it be not it self capable to convince For certainly it is one thing to convince the Understanding and another to procure iâ—s Conviction The one indeed is peculiarly the work of Reason and Arguments but the other is done by whatever prevails with a man to consider and weigh those Reasons and Arguments which do convince his Understanding whether it be his own Inclination or the Advice of a Friend or the Command or Law of a Superior Now though I grant that Force has no proper Efficacy to enlighten the Understanding or produce Belief yet I assert withall that it has a proper Efficacy i.e. not a bare obediential Eâ—ficacy such as Clay and Spittle have in the hand of Omnipotence but a natural Efficacy as a