A Second Discourse of the Religion of England, Section 17
SECT. XVII.
Of DISSENTERS of Narrower Principles, and of TOLERATION.
THE Latitude discoursed in the former Treatise, is unjustly impeached, as providing onelyonly for the Presbyterians, and relinquishing all other Dissenters; for it comprehends within the Establishment, those of all sorts that are of Principles congruous to stated Order in the Church; so that no sort is excluded, whose Principles make them capable. And was this Capacity any where restrained to the Presbyterians? Some Nonconformists are for Moderated Episcopacy, after the form of the Ancient Churches; and divers others, as to particular forms of Government, are Latitudinarians; and others there are besides these, who would live peaceably under the present Hierarchy, might they be spared from the personal profession or practice of some things which they think unlawful or doubtful.
Moreover, beyond the Established Order, the Latitude includes a Toleration for those that are of sound Faith, and good Life, but have taken up some Principles of Church-Government less congruous to National Settlement. I cannot yeeld to that position, That only Necessity can give colour to Toleration, for that it is by the confession of all, one of those things that are not good in their nature. I suppose that Christians bearing with one another in tolerable differences, is a branch of Brotherly Love; and therefore Charity, as well as Necessity, may plead for this Way of Indulgence.
But it is objected, That we want an instance of the safety of Toleration, in any Nation where the Supreme Governour had not a standing Army to circumscribe and confine the Heats of Dissenters in Religion, to their own breasts, and keep off the destructive Effects of Schism.
Let me reply, That this Maxime, That no Toleration of Dissenters, howsoever regulated, can be safely granted by the Supreme Governour that hath not a standing Army, makes little for the Safety and Liberty of true Religion. The Protestants that live under the Princes of the Roman Faith, are little beholding to one that publisheth to the World, That those Princes can with safety tolerate them no longer then they keep up a standing Army to keep off the destructive effects of that which they call Schism. One may see by this and other instances, what bias the Judgment hath, by the Zeal of a Party, and how it is brought to assert such things as may expose the true Religion to the danger of Suppression or Extirpation in many Countries. But hath the French King less assurance of the Loyalty of His Protestant Subjects, then of the Roman-Catholicks? Would a Necessity be laid upon Him to maintain constant Forces to keep the Protestants in obedience, when he could rule the rest of his People without such Terror? Or is Toleration the reason of a standing Army in the United Provinces of the Netherlands? In this Latitude no other Toleration is pleaded for, then what can be made safe and secure by the ordinary ways of Legal Government.
Both Duty and Interest obligeth all sorts to proceed as far as it is possible in complying with their Superiors; and if the uncontrolable Power of Conscience inforce them to lye without the Pale of the Established Order, they should deem that Exclusion their great Unhappiness. But so it is, that Prudent and Pious men may be of exceeding Narrow Principles about Church-Order and Fellowship. Christian Charity pleadeth for Indulgence towards them; and we hope Political Prudence doth not gainsay it. For although their Way may fall far short of setling a Nation, yet they may have Spirits and Principles very consistent with Publike Tranquility. And their Indulgence may be obtained by a good Understanding and Confidence between Them and the Higher Powers, the Clemency of the One shewing Favour in that extent which the Publike Order may safely tolerate; and the Humility and Discretion of the Other, causing them to prise the Favour, and to use it rightly. That such Condescention and Clemency should be used on the One side, and such Humility and Modesty on the Other, why should it seem impossible? For the One may see, that by granting some Limited Liberty, the Protection of Christs Flock, and the Satisfaction of well-minded Subjects may become more Universal: And the Other may likewise see, that a smaller Party, and those of Narrow Principles, are of themselves in no wise proportionable to the State of this Nation; and therefore that they cannot well subsist, but in conjunction with, and subordination unto an Establishment more commensurate to the whole Body of the People. This necessary Subordination, may beget a mutual Confidence and Security. If it be said, The Tolerated Party may become Dangerous or Suspected, it is always supposed that they stand by their Good Behaviour, and the Rulers Favour. But they are not like to prove Dangerous, if the Establishment be large enough. For the Narrowness thereof makes the Dissenters numerous, and still encreaseth their Number.