have　been　worse　men　than　they　themselves　are；　ought　to　remember　that
  one　of　those　persecutors　was　Saint　Paul。
  Let　us　add　one　more　example；　the　most　striking　of　all；　if　the
  impressiveness　of　an　error　is　measured　by　the　wisdom　and　virtue　of　him
  who　falls　into　it。　If　ever　any　one；　possessed　of　power；　had　grounds
  for　thinking　himself　the　best　and　most　enlightened　among　his
  contemporaries；　it　was　the　Emperor　Marcus　Aurelius。　Absolute　monarch
  of　the　whole　civilised　world；　he　preserved　through　life　not　only　the
  most　unblemished　justice；　but　what　was　less　to　be　expected　from　his
  Stoical　breeding；　the　tenderest　heart。　The　few　failings　which　are
  attributed　to　him　were　all　on　the　side　of　indulgence：　while　his
  writings；　the　highest　ethical　product　of　the　ancient　mind；　differ
  scarcely　perceptibly；　if　they　differ　at　all；　from　the　most
  characteristic　teachings　of　Christ。　This　man；　a　better　Christian　in
  all　but　the　dogmatic　sense　of　the　word　than　almost　any　of　the
  ostensibly　Christian　sovereigns　who　have　since　reigned；　persecuted
  Christianity。　Placed　at　the　summit　of　all　the　previous　attainments
  of　humanity；　with　an　open；　unfettered　intellect；　and　a　character　which
  led　him　of　himself　to　embody　in　his　moral　writings　the　Christian
  ideal；　he　yet　failed　to　see　that　Christianity　was　to　be　a　good　and　not
  an　evil　to　the　world；　with　his　duties　to　which　he　was　so　deeply
  penetrated。　Existing　society　he　knew　to　be　in　a　deplorable　state。
  But　such　as　it　was；　he　saw；　or　thought　he　saw；　that　it　was　held
  together；　and　prevented　from　being　worse；　by　belief　and　reverence　of
  the　received　divinities。　As　a　ruler　of　mankind；　he　deemed　it　his
  duty　not　to　suffer　society　to　fall　in　pieces；　and　saw　not　how；　if
  its　existing　ties　were　removed；　any　others　could　be　formed　which　could
  again　knit　it　together。　The　new　religion　openly　aimed　at　dissolving
  these　ties：　unless；　therefore；　it　was　his　duty　to　adopt　that　religion；
  it　seemed　to　be　his　duty　to　put　it　down。　Inasmuch　then　as　the　theology
  of　Christianity　did　not　appear　to　him　true　or　of　divine　origin；
  inasmuch　as　this　strange　history　of　a　crucified　God　was　not　credible
  to　him；　and　a　system　which　purported　to　rest　entirely　upon　a
  foundation　to　him　so　wholly　unbelievable；　could　not　be　foreseen　by　him
  to　be　that　renovating　agency　which；　after　all　abatements；　it　has　in
  fact　proved　to　be；　the　gentlest　and　most　amiable　of　philosophers　and
  rulers；　under　a　solemn　sense　of　duty；　authorised　the　persecution　of
  Christianity。
  To　my　mind　this　is　one　of　the　most　tragical　facts　in　all　history。　It
  is　a　bitter　thought；　how　different　a　thing　the　Christianity　of　the
  world　might　have　been；　if　the　Christian　faith　had　been　adopted　as
  the　religion　of　the　empire　under　the　auspices　of　Marcus　Aurelius
  instead　of　those　of　Constantine。　But　it　would　be　equally　unjust　to　him
  and　false　to　truth　to　deny；　that　no　one　plea　which　can　be　urged　for
  punishing　anti…Christian　teaching　was　wanting　to　Marcus　Aurelius　for
  punishing；　as　he　did；　the　propagation　of　Christianity。　No　Christian
  more　firmly　believes　that　Atheism　is　false；　and　tends　to　the
  dissolution　of　society；　than　Marcus　Aurelius　believed　the　same
  things　of　Christianity；　he　who；　of　all　men　then　living；　might　have
  been　thought　the　most　capable　of　appreciating　it。　Unless　any　one　who
  approves　of　punishment　for　the　promulgation　of　opinions；　flatters
  himself　that　he　is　a　wiser　and　better　man　than　Marcus　Aurelius…　more
  deeply　versed　in　the　wisdom　of　his　time；　more　elevated　in　his
  intellect　above　it…　more　earnest　in　his　search　for　truth；　or　more
  single…minded　in　his　devotion　to　it　when　found；　let　him　abstain　from
  that　assumption　of　the　joint　infallibility　of　himself　and　the
  multitude；　which　the　great　Antoninus　made　with　so　unfortunate　a
  result。
  Aware　of　the　impossibility　of　defending　the　use　of　punishment　for
  restraining　irreligious　opinions　by　any　argument　which　will　not
  justify　Marcus　Antoninus；　the　enemies　of　religious　freedom；　when
  hard　pressed；　occasionally　accept　this　consequence；　and　say；　with
  Dr。　Johnson；　that　the　persecutors　of　Christianity　were　in　the　right；
  that　persecution　is　an　ordeal　through　which　truth　ought　to　pass；　and
  always　passes　successfully；　legal　penalties　being；　in　the　end；
  powerless　against　truth；　though　sometimes　beneficially　effective
  against　mischievous　errors。　This　is　a　form　of　the　argument　for
  religious　intolerance　sufficiently　remarkable　not　to　be　passed　without
  notice。
  A　theory　which　maintains　that　truth　may　justifiably　be　persecuted
  because　persecution　cannot　possibly　do　it　any　harm；　cannot　be
  charged　with　being　intentionally　hostile　to　the　reception　of　new
  truths；　but　we　cannot　commend　the　generosity　of　its　dealing　with　the
  persons　to　whom　mankind　are　indebted　for　them。　To　discover　to　the
  world　something　which　deeply　concerns　it；　and　of　which　it　was
  previously　ignorant；　to　prove　to　it　that　it　had　been　mistaken　on
  some　vital　point　of　temporal　or　spiritual　interest；　is　as　important
  a　service　as　a　human　being　can　render　to　his　fellow　creatures；　and
  in　certain　cases；　as　in　those　of　the　early　Christians　and　of　the
  Reformers；　those　who　think　with　Dr。　Johnson　believe　it　to　have　been
  the　most　precious　gift　which　could　be　bestowed　on　mankind。　That　the
  authors　of　such　splendid　benefits　should　be　requited　by　martyrdom；
  that　their　reward　should　be　to　be　dealt　with　as　the　vilest　of
  criminals；　is　not；　upon　this　theory；　a　deplorable　error　and
  misfortune；　for　which　humanity　should　mourn　in　sackcloth　and　ashes；
  but　the　normal　and　justifiable　state　of　things。　The　propounder　of　a
  new　truth；　according　to　this　doctrine；　should　stand　as　stood；　in　the
  legislation　of　the　Locrians；　the　proposer　of　a　new　law；　with　a
  halter　round　his　neck；　to　be　instantly　tightened　if　the　public
  assembly　did　not；　on　hearing　his　reasons；　then　and　there　adopt　his
  proposition。　People　who　defend　this　mode　of　treating　benefactors
  cannot　be　supposed　to　set　much　value　on　the　benefit；　and　I　believe
  this　view　of　the　subject　is　mostly　confined　to　the　sort　of　persons　who
  think　that　new　truths　may　have　been　desirable　once；　but　that　we　have
  had　enough　of　them　now。
  But；　indeed；　the　dictum　that　truth　always　triumphs　over
  persecution　is　one　of　those　pleasant　falsehoods　which　men　repeat　after
  one　another　till　they　pass　into　commonplaces；　but　which　all　experience
  refutes。　History　teems　with　instances　of　truth　put　down　by
  persecution。　If　not　suppressed　for　ever；　it　may　be　thrown　back　for
  centuries。　To　speak　only　of　religious　opinions：　the　Reformation
  broke　out　at　least　twenty　times　before　Luther；　and　was　put　down。
  Arnold　of　Brescia　was　put　down。　Fra　Dolcino　was　put　down。　Savonarola
  was　put　down。　The　Albigeois　were　put　down。　The　Vaudois　were　put
  down。　The　Lollards　were　put　down。　The　Hussites　were　put　down。　Even
  after　the　era　of　Luther；　wherever　persecution　was　persisted　in；　it　was
  successful。　In　Spain；　Italy；　Flanders；　the　Austrian　empire；
  Protestantism　was　rooted　out；　and；　most　likely；　would　have　been　so
  in　England；　had　Queen　Mary　lived；　or　Queen　Elizabeth　died。　Persecution
  has　always　succeeded；　save　where　the　heretics　were　too　strong　a
  party　to　be　effectually　persecuted。　No　reasonable　person　can　doubt
  that　Christianity　might　have　been　extirpated　in　the　Roman　Empire。　It
  spread；　and　became　predominant；　because　the　persecutions　were　only
  occasional；　lasting　but　a　short　time；　and　separated　by　long
  intervals　of　almost　undisturbed　propagandism。　It　is　a　piece　of　idle
  sentimentality　that　truth；　merely　as　truth；　has　any　inherent　power
  denied　to　error　of　prevailing　against　the　dungeon　and　the　stake。　Men
  are　not　more　zealous　for　truth　than　they　often　are　for　error；　and　a
  sufficient　application　of　legal　or　even　of　social　penalties　will
  generally　succeed　in　stopping　the　propagation　of　either。　The　real
  advantage　which　truth　has　consists　in　this；　that　when　an　opinion　is
  true；　it　may　be　extinguished　once；　twice；　or　many　times；　but　in　the
  course　of　ages　there　will　generally　be　found　persons　to　rediscover　it；
  until　some　one　of　its　reappearances　falls　on　a　time　when　from
  favourable　circumstances　it　escapes　persecution　until　it　has　made　such
  head　as　to　withstand　all　subsequent　attempts　to　suppress　it。
  It　will　be　said；　that　we　do　not　now　put　to　death　the　introducers
  of　new　opinions：　we　are　not　like　our　fathers　who　slew　the　prophets；　we
  even　build　sepulchres　to　them。　It　is　true　we　no　longer　put　heretics　to
  death；　and　the　amount　of　penal　infliction　which　modern　feeling　would
  probably　tolerate；　even　against　the　most　obnoxious　opinions；　is　not
  sufficient　to　extirpate　them。　But　let　us　not　flatter　ourselves　that　we
  are　yet　free　from　the　stain　even　of　legal　persecution。　Penalties　for
  opinion；　or　at　least　for