Page:History of Freedom.djvu/230

 186

ESSAYS ON LIBERTY

connection of the opinions on toleration held by the Pro- testant reformers. No man's sentiments on the rightfulne s of religious persecution will be affected by the theories we have described, and they have no bearing \vhatever on doctrinal controversy. Those who-in agreement with the principle of the early Church, that men are free in matters of conscience - condemn all intolerance, will censure Catholics and Protestants alike. Those who pursue the same principle one step farther and practically invert it, by insisting on the right and duty not only of professing but of extending the truth, must, as it seems to us, approve the conduct both of Protestants and Catholics, unless they make the justice of the persecution depend on the truth of the doctrine defended, in which case they will divide on both sides. Such persons, again, as are more strongly impressed with the cruelty of actual execu- tions than with the danger of false theories, may concen- trate their indignation on the Catholics of Languedoc and Spain; while those \vho judge principles, not by the accidental details attending their practical realisation, but by the reasoning on which they are founded, will arrive at a verdict adverse to the Protestants. These comparative inquiries, however, have little serious interest. If we give our admiration to tolerance, we must remember that the Spanish Moors and the Turks in Europe have been more tolerant than the Christians; and if we admit the prin- ciple of intolerance, and judge its application by particular conditions, we are bound to ackno\vledge that the Romans had better reason for persecution than any modern State, since their elnpire was involved in the decline of the old religion, with which it was bound up, whereas no Christian polity has been subverted by the mere presence of religious dissent. The comparison is, moreover, entirely unreason- able, for there is nothing in common between Catholic and Protestant intolerance. The Church began with the prin- ciple of liberty, both as her claim and as her rule; and external circumstances forced intolerance upon her, after her spirit of unity had triulnphed, in spite both of the freedom she proclaimed and of the persecutions she