On this page
-
Text (2)
-
Untitled Article
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
learned to do as we would be done by . If we were to persecute you for your opinion ^ , we should , for aught we know to the contrary , be persecuting truth instead of falsehood . Come , then , Jet us each enjoy the
freedom of our own mind , and equally participate of all social enjoyments . " Persecution was a word so odious , and toleration a word so generally embraced , that two opinions were not entertained on either ; and yet , strange
to tell , much difference had arisen upon the application of them . The question then , seemed first to be , What really was to be understood by toleration ? He thought that in defining this word , and conveying the ideas which he annexed to it , he
ought to go much farther than proving that it meant the total absence of persecution , and that to refuse to any jnan any civil right , and an equal participation of civil advantage , on account of his religious opinions , was in itself persecution .
On these general principles , he trusted that it was not necessary to dilate farther . The question now was , what was , and what was not toleration . In his own opinion , he declared that toleration ought to go beyond abstinence from persecution ; but on
his own opinion alone he did not rely . He would quote the sentiments of a very eminent man , Archdeacon Paley , who had declared himself to be a friend to a complete toleration of all Dissenters . The reverend divine , however , meant more than it was his intention at present to propose . His motion he confessed to be limited . A
future and a fitter period might be found to introduce a measure whose verge would be more ample , more extensive , and consequently more complete . Many persons opposed
unlimited toleratidn from an apprehension that it might prove injurious to the state . To such he begged leave to say , that they ought first to be well convinced that it really would produce that effect .
The most moderate and the most enlightened men in this country , and those , too , members of the establishment , were friends to general toleration . Indeed , the right honourable the chancellor of the exchequer himself last year stood pledged to support the principle of general toleration , and had said that it was a mat-
Untitled Article
ter not of favour , but of right , and that whether it should be granted , was only a question of justice . What was the principle of persecution ? The condemnation of a man before he h ; id
committed a breach of the law . A principle which compelled us to liv * in a constant state of hypocrisy towards God and man ; for it called on those who did not believe in the doctrines of the Church of England to give a constant attendance at divine service , and subscribe to the ceremonies of the Church . This was
commanding hypocrisy by authority . It was ordaining by law , that a man shall pursue that form of religion here which , in his mind , is to insure his eternal damnation hereafter . By this we said to a father : You shall not
teach your son that religion which in your soul you believe is to secure hif eternal happiness . You are to choose , either to teach him no religion at all , or to teach him that by which you believe he will be damned to eternity . This was the true spirit of persecution . And was it the fact ? Most
unquestionably it was the case in ths law with regard to Catholics . In ih& opinion of some ? there once was an occasion for these statutes ; in his opinion , there never was , nor would they have been adequate to the end proposed if there had ; but now there
was not the shadow of excuse , for it had ceased * The most dangerous periods , the reigns of Elizabeth and James , did not justify even one of the penal statutes that existed . If such times , therefore , did not justify them , what argument could be used for their existence now ?
Sometimes attempts were made to defend the principle of persecution , by considering it as a mode of preventing the mischief that might arise from a propagation of erroneous religious opinions ; it was alleged that it was the business of a statesman to
consider the effect of any religious opinion , and in that view , whatever appeared to him as dangerous to the state , he ought to prevent . The first part of this doctrine , namely , that of assuming any mode of religion to be
wrong , was begging the question ; but he must protest against the whole of this mode of argument . We had no right to construe what actions are to follow opinions . We should weigh actions before we pretend to judge of
Untitled Article
Charter James Pox . 6 SI
Untitled Article
yo * ,. x . 4 t
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Nov. 2, 1815, page 681, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1766/page/17/
-