of their general scope and merits. It is only the more prominent and able of these writings that can be particularised; and this, too, in a very brief and cursory manner. To have a tolerably correct abstract of the arguments on which these two great political principles rest, and the great interest attached to them, even at the present hour, are sufficient grounds of themselves for the adoption of this plan, which will likewise enable us to fill up discrepancies in the ordinary bearings of the subject, and to avoid frequent and needless repetitions.

The vital principle, then, of religious toleration or freedom, lay, as we have already stated, at the base of the Reformation, and it may, without any direct reference to particular religious sects or denominations, be expressed in the following words:-The liberty of the human conscience from all external and legislative restraints, and the right of every man to judge and act for himself in the concerns of religion, without the interference of human authority to coerce or control him. This is the form and substance of the axiom on which the entire fabric of religious toleration hinges.

As religious truth is the concern and business of every individual person, and as this concern lies immediately between the Creator and himself, it is requisite he should have and exercise a perfect liberty, and that in his belief and practice he should be in the fullest enjoyment of freedom, to think, judge, and act for himself. Every man's salvation is his own personal concern; every man's soul is in his own keeping. There can be no delegation of power here; no power to transfer the business in hand to any deputies or agents whatsoever. It is impossible that a matter

of this kind can be alienated; the thing is unnatural, and beyond the province of legislation.

Religion, then, is a gift which God has given to every one in particular. It is unquestionably subject to His influences and inspirations, but with respect to everything else, it is free and independent of worldly or temporal authority. No one should enter unwillingly or ignorantly into any religious order or community; neither ought any man, by virtue of any human right or power, be obliged to embrace a religion, or continue in it, or conform himself in everything to that which he has preferred to all others, by arms, or the authority of laws.

It is not less a man's privilege to quit a religion after having embraced it, than to profess it at first. Indeed, that person is unworthy of being a member of any spiritual society, who does not love the head of it with all his heart, and not with his lips only; who has not courage enough to follow him everywhere, and embrace that mode of worship which is the most sound and pure. He who chooses a religion, with a desire to procure all the high advantages which it promises, may, without injuring any one, reserve a right to himself to examine whether what it teaches be exactly conformable to the truth; and should he find it not to come up to the standard required for honest conviction, he has a perfect right to abandon it, if such be his wish or desire.

It does not follow from this, that those who enter any particular denomination of religious persons should have the privilege of absolutely doing everything according to their own whims and fancies. Whoever joins any such society should conform themselves to

its rules and doctrines. No body of men can subsist in a corporate capacity unless there be some kind of law and discipline among its members; and it is peculiarly incumbent on a school which professes to teach piety and virtue, to keep the privileges of liberty within the prescribed boundaries of honour and duty. A distinguished author says, "I would not have this misunderstood, as if I meant hereby to condemn all charitable admonitions and affectionate endeavours to reduce men from errors; which are indeed the greatest duty of a christian. Any one may employ as many exhortations and arguments as he pleases, towards promoting of another man's salvation. But all force and compulsion are to be forborne. Nothing is to be done imperiously. Nobody is obliged in that matter to yield obedience unto the admonitions or injunctions of another, further than he himself is persuaded. Every man in that has his supreme and absolute authority of judging for himself. And the reason is, because nobody else is concerned in it, nor can receive any prejudice from his conduct therein."

With the religious freedom of men, no pretensions or powers can warrantably intermeddle. Freedom of conscience is a hallowed inclosure; a sanctuary that ought not to be violated. Men, as moral and accountable agents, must be invested with freedom; their liberty, no less than their reasoning powers and their consciousness, is an essential element in their reponsibility. If they have to give an account to God for their opinions and actions they must be free to form the one, and to do the other. This is the basis of the divine government towards man, and the

* Locke.

foundation of all religion. Nothing can be a reasonable service to God except it be based on this principle.

Ecclesiastical power extends no further than that of giving counsel, exhortations, and peaceable instructions. When these have been all tried, and proved ineffective, then incorrigible members may be cut off from any religious community. This is all the punishment that can justly and reasonably be inflicted. If we transgress this limit, we go against nature and the true end and purposes of the theological union.

In a state of nature, that is, before laws and civil government were established, no man had any sovereign authority over the ideas his fellow-man might entertain on religious subjects. What right, then, have kings and princes over the consciences of their subjects? There is no colourable reason in giving the head of a state more power in religious matters than each person has in a state of nature.

The arguments for ecclesiastical and political authority, over matters of religious belief, are numerous, but we shall not formally enter into them, for they will come before us in other parts of this work. We shall, however, for the sake of method, enumerate the heads of a few of them.

1st,―The justice of authority, civil and sacred, for matters of faith and opinion, may be maintained from the consideration of the vital importance of salvation to those consciences which are constrained to it; and who think salvation is to be found but in the sacred books of scripture. 2nd,-A prince may not oblige us to submit to his own individual judgment, but to the

judgment of his public ministers of religion. 3rd,The glory of the Almighty is offended and tarnished by errors and schism in theology. 4th,-Coercion in matters of opinion is justified by the foul and wicked nature of errors in religion. 5th,-The good that is done to those that err, by the adoption of compulsion, is greater than any evil that arises from the exercise of authority. 6th,-Ecclesiastical authority is requisite to correct and remove that blind obstinacy which is bound up in the hearts of those who fall into erroneous theories and systems. 7th,-Authority is involved in every person's declaration, that it is a part of his duty to maintain and disseminate the true religion. 8th,There are laws in every community indispensably requisite to oblige men to practise virtue and abstain from vice, why not such laws restrain them in matters of religion? 9th,-It is evidently for the interests of the state, as an aggregate body, that religion should be placed under its protection and guidance. 10th,Disputes and contentions about religion create innumerable troubles and disorders in the bosom of the church, where all should be harmony, and christian feeling. And 11th,-All idolatrous and gross superstitions should, at least, be extirpated from society, that true and rational religion may not be corrupted or damaged.

On the other great leading idea, which the majority of political writers of this epoch attempted to develope and illustrate, that is, the right of resistance, we shall make a few brief and general observations as to the prominent bearings of the entire question.

The abstract reasons for physical resistance to bad governments are very numerous, but we shall only