in one’s Religion, after having bin silenc’d by a Controvertist, is no mark of Obstinacy.
Evidence, a relative Quality.
Chapter II. Second Objection, The Literal Sense appears odious, only by our judging of the ways of God from those of Men. Tho the State that Men are in, when they act from Passion, seems likely to lead ’em to wrong Judgments, it does not follow but God, by the wonderful Issues of his Providence, may accomplish his own Work. The Fallacy of this Thought, and what are the ordinary Effects of Persecution.
Confutation of those who may have recourse to the Maxim, That the ways of God are not as our ways.
Difference between the Clay us’d to cure bodily Blindness, and Persecution to cure spiritual.
Proof drawn from its being unlawful to do wrong to a Man in order to correct his Vices.
Experience proves, that Persecutions are not an occasional Cause establish’d by God for Illumination.
A general Review of the Effects of Persecution.
Opposition between the Maxims of the Papists of France, and those of England.
Reflection of Montagne upon the Punishment of the Rack.
Observation of Mezeray on the Martyrdom of Anne du Bourg.
<xi> Chapter III. Third Objection: They aggravate the matter maliciously, by representing the Constraint enjoin’d by Jesus Christ, under the Idea of Scaffolds, Wheel, and Gibbet; whereas they shou’d only talk of Fines, Banishment, and other petty Grievances. The Absurdity of this Excuse; and supposing the literal Sense, That capital Punishments are much more reasonable than the Law-Quirks, Pillorys, and Captivitys made use of in France.
First Proof: That supposing the Sense of Constraint, Fire and Faggot wou’d be lawful against the Erroneous.
Second Proof, drawn from the Usefulness of Punishments for increasing the number of that Communion on which side they are imploy’d.
The French Authors are in no condition to reproach the Spaniards upon the Inquisition.
A new Apology for the bloodiest Persecutions, particularly that of the Duke d’ Alva, supposing the Sense of Constraint.
Remarks against Alexander a French Monk.
Absurditys of Justus Lipsius, in his Treatise de una Religione.
A Dilemma of Tertullian against moderate Persecutors.
Martyrdom of the Emperor of Trebizond.
Chapter IV. The Fourth Objection: We can’t condemn the literal Sense of the words, Compel ’em to come in, but we must at the same time condemn those Laws which God gave the Jews, and the Conduct of the Prophets on several occasions. The Disparity, and particular Reasons for giving the Old Law, which don’t take place under the Gospel.
Objection drawn from the Example of Moses, answer’d.
’Tis not irregular for a Legislator to make two Laws, one of which shall obstruct the Execution of the other.
<xii> Idolatry was not punish’d by the Laws of Moses, otherwise than as Sedition against the State.
Reflection on the Conduct of Elias.
Four Differences between the Laws of Moses, and those of the Gospel.
Chapter V. The fifth Objection: Protestants can’t reject the literal Sense of the Parable, without condemning the wisest Emperors and Fathers of the Church, and without condemning themselves; since they in some places don’t tolerate other Religions, and have sometimes punish’d Hereticks with Death: Servetus for example. The Illusion they are under who make this Objection. Particular Reasons against tolerating Papists.
A Confutation of what is objected from the Example of the antient Emperors.
The Weakness of the Emperor Theodosius, and his Prostitution to the Clergy.
Considerations on the Conduct of those Protestant Princes who tolerate but one Religion.
Sovereigns may prohibit the teaching of any thing contrary to the Civil Constitution.
Upon this foot it may be permitted to make Laws against Popery.
Comparison of a Non-Toleration of Papists and of Protestants.
Reflection on a Passage of the Edict revoking that of Nants.
Several Degrees of Non-Toleration consider’d.
Chapter VI. Sixth Objection: The Doctrine of Toleration can’t chuse but throw the State into all kinds of Confusion, and produce a horrid Medly of Sects, to the Scandal of Christianity. The Answer. In what sense Princes ought to be nursing Fathers to the Church.
Obscurity of our Knowledg.
<xiii> If Diversity of Religions causes Evil to the State, it’s intirely owing to Non-Toleration.
Duty of a Sovereign with respect to Innovators.
How he ought to be a Nursing-Father to the Church.
