DA 396 .A3M4 1818 ■h x K £mBfi* ^6* ib*° ^ ** °Jl®i ♦° ****** "°-W ,^o. *o o A <\ .0 v- ^ sjMfiZz;* A DISCOURSE, CONCERNING UNLIMITED SUBMISSION AND NON-RKSI3TANCE TO THE WITH SOME REFLECTIONS ON THE nESISTANCE MADE TO King CHARLES I. And on the ANNIVERSARY OF HIS DEATH: a which the Mysterious Doctrine of that Prince's Saintship and Martyrdom is unriddled : ^he ?ub?tance of which, was delivered in a Sermon preached in the West Meeting House, fti Boston, on the Lord's Day after the 30th ef January, 1749 — 50. PUBLISHED AT THK REttU^T OF THE nEARERS, BY JONATHAN^tAYHEW, A. M. Pastor of the West Church in Boston. Fear GOD, honor the King St. Paul. He that ruleth over Men raust be just, ruling in the fear of GOD. Prophet Samuel. I have said, ye are GODS — but ye shall die like Men, and fall like one of the Pri7ices. — King David. Quid memoreminfandas cades ? Quid facta Tyranni Kffera ? Dii Capiti ipsius GENERiauK rescnent. JVecnon, Threicius longa cum veste Sackrdos, Obloquilor. Rom. Vat. Prin. BOSTON t Printed and sold by 1). Fowle, in Qjteen Street, 1750. V J BOSTON: RE-PRINTED BY HALL & GOS3, Congress S/reef, second Boom over the Post Office. 1818. •/ •As M'+ 181? THE LIBRARY] | •» CONGRESS I Washington! PREFACE. THE ensuing discourse is the last of three up- on the same subject, with some little alterations and additions. It is hoped that hut few will think the subject of it, an improper one to be discoursed on in the pulpit, under a notion that this is preaching politics, instead of CHRIST. However, to remove all prejudices of this sort, I beg it maybe remember- ed, that "all scripture — is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for CORRECTION, for instruction in righteousness,"* "Why, then, should not those parts of scripture which relate to civil government, be examined and explained from the desk, as well as others? Obedience to the civil magistrate is a christian duty : and if so, why should not the nature, grounds and extent of it be considered in a christian assembly ? Besides, if it he said, that it is out of character for a christian minister to meddle with such a subject, this censure will at last fall upon the holy apostles. They write upon it in their epistles to christian churches : and surely it. cannot be deem- ed either criminal or impertinent, to attempt an ex* planation of their doctrine. It was the near approach of the thirtieth of Jan- uarys that turned my thoughts to this subject : on which solemnity, the slavish doctrine of passive obe- dience and non-resistance, is often warmly asserted ; and the dissenters from the established church, repre- sented not only as schismati.es. (with more of triumph than of truth, and of choler than Christianity) but al- so as persons of seditious, traitorous and rebellious principles — GOD be thanked, one may, in any part of the British dominions, speak freely (if a decent regard be paid to those in authority) both of gov- ernment and rcligio\i ; and even give some broad hints, that he is engaged on the side of Liberty, the BIBLE and Common Sense, in opposition to Tyran- ny, PRIEST-CRAFT and Nonsense, without being in danger either of the Bastile or the Inquisition : — Though there will always be some interested politi- •2 p *t. m. i«. VI eians, contracted bigots, and hypocritical zealots for a parly, to take offence at such freedoms. Their censure is praise : their praise is infamy — A spirit of domination is always to be guarded against, both in church and state, even in times of the greatest security ; such as the present is amongst US ; at least as to the latter. Those nations who are now groaning under the iron sceptre of tyranny, were once free. So they might probably have remain- ed, by a seasonable caution against despotic meas- ures. Civil tyranny is usually small in its beginning, like "the drop of a bucket,'''* till at length, likea mighty torrent, or the raging waves of the sea, it bears down ail before it, and deluges whole countries and empires. Thus it is as to ecclesiastical tyranny also, — the most cruel, intolerable and impious, of any. From small beginnings, "it exalts itself above all that is called GOD, "and that is worshipped."! People have no security against being unmercifully priest-ridden, but by keeping all imperious BISH- OPS and other CLERGYMEN who love to "lord it over God's heritage," from getting ihc'wj'oot into the stirrup at all. Let them be once fairly moun- ted, and their " beasts, the laity,"}: may prance and flounce about to no purpose : and they will at length, be so jaded and hacked by these reverend jockics, that they will not even have spirits enough to com- plain, that their hacks are galled : or, like Balaam's ass, to "rebuke the madness of the prophet."§ ^ "The mystery of iniquity began to work"*fj even in the days of some of the apostles. But the king- dom of Anti-christ Mas then in one respect, like the kingdom of heaven, however different in all others. It was "as a grain of mustard-seed."* This grain was* sown in Italy, that fruitful field : and though it were "the least of all seeds," it soon became a mighty tree. It has, long since, overspread and darkened the greatest part of Christendom, so that, we may apply to it, what is said of the tree which Nebuchadnezzar saw in his vision — "The height thereof reacheth unto heaven, and the sight there- of, to the end of all the earth— And THE BEASTS OF THE FIELD have shadow under it." . Tyran- *Isa. x\. 1.5. t2 Thes. ii. 4. "Mr. Leslie. «2 Fet. ii. 16. 12 Thes. ii. 7, *Matt. iiii. 31', ny brings ignorance and brutality along with it. It degrades men from their just rank, into the elass of brutes. It damps their spirits. It suppresses arts. It extinguishes every spark of noble ardor and gen- erosity in the breasts of those who are enslaved by it. It makes naturally strong aiuTgreat minds, fee- ble and little ; and triumphs over the ruins of virtue and humanity. This is true of tyranny in every shape. There can be nothing great and good, where its influence reaches. For which reason it becomes every friend to truth and human kind, every lover of God and the christian religion, to bear a part in opposing this hateful monster. It was a desire to contribute a mite towards carrying on a war against this common enemy, that produced the following discourse. And if it serve in any measure, to keep up a spirit of civil and religious liberty amongst us, my end is answered. — There are virtuous and can- did men in all sects ; all such are to be esteemed : there are also vicious men and bigots in all sects ', and all sueh ought to be despised. "To virtue only and her friends, a friend; The world beside may murmur or commend, Know, all the distant din that world can keep, fiolls o'er my grotto, and hut sooths my sleep." Pope. JONATHAN MAYHEW. CONCERNING UNLIMITED SUBMISSION AND NON-RESISTANCE TO THE HIGHER POWERS. Rom. xiii. 1, 8. 1. Let every soul be subject unto the higher -powers. Far there is no power but of God; the poivcrs that be, arc or- dained of God. 2. Whosoever therefore resist eth the poiver, resistelh the irdinanee of God ; and they that resist, shall receive to hemselvcs damnation. 3. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to tlic vil. Wilt thou then not be of raid of the power ? J)o that vhich is good, and thoushalt have praise of the same .* 4. For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But f thou do that which is evil, be afraid ; for he bearelh not he sword in vain : For he is the minister of God, a rcveng- r to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. 5. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for vrath, but also far conscience sake. 6. For, for this cause pay you tribute also : For they are 7od's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing, 7. Bender therefore to all their dues : tribute to whom ributc is due; custom, to whom custom ; fear, to whom fear ; wnor to whom honor. T is evident thai the a/lair of civil government may [ properly fall under a moral and religious consideration) it least so far forth as it relates to the general nature md end o( magistracy, and to the grounds and extent )f that submission which persons of a private charac- ter, ought to yield to those who are vested with au- thority. This must be allowed by all who acknowl- sdge the^ divine original of christanity. For although there be11 the magistrates4hen in the world, were heathen, implacable enemies to christi- anitv : so that to give them authority in i^ligious matters, would have been, iu eifect, to give them authority to extirpate the christian religion, and to es- tablish the idolatries and superstitions of paganism. And can any one reasona- bly suppose, that the apostle had any intention to extend the_auihority of rulers, beyond concerns merely civil and political, to the overthrowing of that reli- •■iuu which he himself was so zealous in propagating' 1 But it is natural for 'those whose religion cannot be supported upon the fooling cf reason an lastly, that those civil rulers to whom the apos* tie enjoins subjection, are the persons in possession ; the powers that be ; those who are actually vested with authority.* There is one very important and interesting point, which remains to be inquired into; namely, the extent of that subjection to the higher powers, which is here enjoined as a duty upon all christians. Some have thought it warrantable and glorious, to disobey the civ- il powers in certain circumstances ; and, in cases of very great and general oppression, when humble re- monstrances fail of having any effect ; and when the public welfare cannot be otherwise provided for and se- cured, to rice unanimously even against the sovereign iiimself, in order to redress their grievances ; to vindi- cate their natural and legal rights ; to break the yoke *This musi be understood with this proviso, that they do not grossly abuse their power and trust, but exorcise it for the good of those that are governed. Who these persons were, whether Aero, fcc. or not, the apostle does net say ; but leaves it to be determined by those to whom he writes. God docs not interpose in a miraculous way, tc point out the persons who shall bear rule, and to whom subjection is due. And as to the unalienable, indefeasible right of primogeniture, (he scriptures art entirely silent, or rather plainly, contradict ll: Saul being the Sist king among the Israelites ; and appointed to the royal dignity, during his own father's lifc-time : and he was succeeded, or rather superseded by David, the last born among many brethren — Now if God lias not invariably determined this matte;, it must, of course, be determined by men. And if it be determined by mm, it must be determined either in the way of force, or of compact, And which of these is the most equitable, can be no question. 16 of tyranny, and tree themselves and posterity from itfc glorious servitude and rum. It is upon this principle that many royal oppressors have been driven from their thrones into banishment; and many slain by the hands of their subjects. It was upon this principle that Tar- quin was expelled from Rome; and Julius Ccesar, the conqueror of the world, arid the tyrant of his country, out off in the senate house. It was upon this princi- ple, that king Charles I, was beheaded before his own banqueting house. It was upon this principle, that king James II. was made to fly that country which he aimed at enslaving J And upon this principle was that revolution brought about, which has been so fruitful of happy consequences to Great-Britain. But, in oppo- sition to this principle, it has often been asserted, that the scripture m general (and the passage under consid- eration in particular) makes all resistance to princes a crime, in any case whatever.— If they turn tyrants, and become the common oppressors of those, whose welfare they ought to regard with a paternal affection, we must not pretend to light ourselves, unless it be by prayers and tears and humble intreaties : And if these methods fail of procuring redress, we must not have recourse to any other, but all culTer ourselves to be robbed and butchered at the pleasure of the Lord's anointed ; lest we should incur the sin of rebellion, and the punishment of damnation. For he has God's authority and commission to bear him out in the worst of crimes, so far that he may not be withstood or con- trolled. Now whether we are obliged to yield such, an absolute submission to our prince : or whether dis- obedience and resistance may not be justifiable in some cases, notwithstanding any thing in the passage before us, is an inquiry in which we are all concerned ; and this is the inquiry which is the main design of the present discourse. Now there does not seem to be any necessity of supposing} that an absolute, unlimited obedience. 17 t\ bother active or passive, is here enjoined, merely for this reason, that the precept is delivered in absolute terms; Avithout any exception or intimation expressly mentioned. We are enjoined; (ver. 1.) to he subject to the higher powers : and (ver. 5.) to be subject for conscience sake. And because these expressions are absolute and unlimited, (or more properly, general) some have inferred, that the subjection required in them, must be absolute and unlimited also: At least so far forth as to make passive obedience and non-re- sistance, a duty in all. cases whatever, if not active obedience likewise. Though, by the way, there iy here no distinction made betwixt active and passive obedience; and if either of them be required in an unlimited sense, the other must be required in the* same sense also, by virtue of the present argument; because the expressions are equally absolute with re- spect to both. But that unlimited obedience of any Jsort, cannot be argued merely from the indefinite ex- pressions in which obedience is enjoined, appears from ,hence, that expressions of the same nature, frequent- ly occur in scripture, upon which it is confessed on all (hands, that no such absolute and unlimited sense ought. to be put. For example, Love not the world ; neither the things that are in the world; *Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth; \Take therefore no thought for the morrow ;% are precepts expressed in at least equally absolute and unlimited terms : but it is generally allowed that they are to be understood with certain restrictions and limitations ; some degree of love to the world, and the things of it, being allow- able. Nor, indeed, do the Right Reverend Fathers in God, and other dignified clergymen of the established •church, seem to be altogether averse to admitting of [restrictions in the latter case, how warm soever any of them may be against restrictions, and limitations., to the case of submission to authority,whether civil or jecclesiastical. It is worth remarking also, that patience * 1 John ii. Id. tMaft. vi. IS. % Matt, v\ 34. ! 3 18 and submission under private injuries, are enjoined im much more peremptory and absolute terras, than any that are used with regard to submission to the injus- tice and oppression of civil rulers. Thus, I say unto you, that ye resist not evil ; but whosoever shall smite thee on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if any man will sue thee at t/ie law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also. And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile with him, go with him twain* Any man may be detied to produce such strong ex- pressions in favor of a passive and tame submission to unjust, tyrannical rulers, as are here used to enforce submission to private injuries. But how few are there that understand those expressions literally ? And the reason why they do not, is because (with submission to the auakers) common sense shows that they were not intended to be so understood. But to instance, in some scripture precepts which are more directly to the point in hand. — Children are commanded to obey their parents, and servants their masters, in as absolute and unlimited terms as subjects are here commanded to obey their civil rulers. Thus this same apostle — Children obey your parents in the Lord ;for this is right. Honor thy father and mother* which is the first commandment with promise. — Servants be obedient to them that are your masters, according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, with singleness of your heart as unto Christ.]' Thus also wives are command- ed to be obedient to their husbands — Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as CHRIST IS THE HEAD OF THE CHURCH.— Therefore, as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands IN EVERY THING. J In all these cases, submission is required in terms (at least) as absolute and universal, as are ever used with respect to rulers and subjects. But who supposes that the apostle ever intended to teach, that children, ser- *Mat; v. 39, 40, 41. fEph. yi. I, Sec. +Fph. v, 22, 23, 24. vants and wives, should, in all cases whatever, obey their parents, masters and husbands respectively, never making any opposition to their will, even although they should require them to break the commandments of God, or should causelessly make an attempt upon their lives ? No one puts such a sense upon these expres- sions, however absolute and unlimited. Why then should it be supposed, that the apostle designed to teach universal obedience, whether active or passive, to the higher powers, merely because his precepts are delivered in absolute and unlimited terms ? And if this be a good argument in one case, why is it not in others also? If it be said, that resistance and disobedience to the higher powers, is here said positively to be a sin, so also is the disobedience of children to parents ; ser- vants, to masters ; and wives, to husbands, in other places of scripture. But the question still remains, whether in all these cases, there be not some excep- tions ? In the three latter, it is allowed there are. And from hence it follows, that barely the use of ab- solute expressions, is no proof, that obedience to civil rulers, is, in all cases, a duty ; or resistance, in all cases, a sin. I should not have thought it worth while to take any notice at all of this argument, had it not been much insisted upon by some of the advocates for passive obedience and non-resistance : For it is, in it- self, perfectly trifling; and rendered considerable, only by the stress that has been laid upon it for want of better. There is, indeed, one passage in the New-Testament, where it may seem, at first view, that an unlimited sub- mission to civil rulers, is enjoined. — Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's salcc.% — To every ordinance oj man. — However, this expression is no stronger than that before taken notice of, with rela- tion to the duty of wives — So let the wives be subject to their own husbands— IN EVERY THING. Bin *1 Pet ; 2. 13. 2Q the true solution of this difficulty (if it be one) is this • bj every ordinance of man,* is not meant every command of the. civil magistrate without exception; but every order of magistrate^ appointed by man ; — whether supe- rior or inferior : For so the apostle explains himself in the very next words — Whether it be to the Icing as supreme, or to governors, as unto them that are sent, &c But although the apostle has not subjoined any such ex- planation, the reason of the thing itself would have obliged us to limit the expression [every ordinance of 3?itw]to such human ordinances and commands,as are not inconsistent with the ordinances and commands of God; the supreme lawgiver ; or with any other higher, and antecedent obligations. It is to be observed, in the next place, that as the duty of universal obedience and non-resistance to the higher powers, cannot be argued from the absolute un- limited expressions which the apostle here uses; so neither can it be argued from the scope and drift of his reasoning, considered with relation to the persons he was here opposing. As was observed above, there were some professed christians in the apostolic age, who disclaimed all magistracy and civil authority in general, dispising government and speaking evil of dig- nities ; some under a nonon that Jezvs ought not to be under the jurisdiction oi Gentile rulers ; and others, that they were set free from the temporal powers, by • iirist. JNow it is with perona of this licentious opin- ion and character, that the apostle is concerned. And all that was directly to his point, was to show that they were bound to submit to magistracy in general. This is a circumstance very material to be taken notice of, in order to ascertain the sense of the apostle. For this being considered, it is sufficient to account for all that he says concerning the the duty of subjection, and the sin of resistance, to the higher powers, without f; Literally., every human institution, or appointment. By which manner of expression the apostle plainly intimates, that rulers derive their authority immediately, uot from God, but fro:a mzn- 21 having recourse to the doctrine of unlimited submis- sion and passive obedience, in all cases whatever. Were it known that those in opposition to whom the apostle wrote, allowed of civil authority in genera!, and only asserted that there were some cases in which obe- dience and non-resistance, were not a duty, there would, then, indeed, be reason for interpreting this pas- sage as containing the doctrine of unlimited obedience, and non-resistance, as it must, in this case, be supposed to have been levelled against such as denied that doc- trine. But since it is certain that there were persons who vainly imagined, that civil government, in general, was not to be regarded by them, it is most reasonable to suppose, that the apostle designed his discourse only against them. And agreeably to this supposition, we find that he argues the usefulness of civil magis- tracy in general ; its agreeableness to the will and purpose of God, who is over all; and so deduces from hence, the obligation of submission to it. But it will not follow, that because civil government is, in gener- al, a good institution, and necessary to the peace and happiness of human society, therefore there are no supposeablc cases in which resistance to it can be in- nocent. So that the duty of unlimited obedience, whether active or passive, can be argued, neither from the manner of expression here used, nor from the gen- eral scope and design of the passage. And if Ave attend to the nature of the argument with which the apostle here enforces the duty of submission ro the higher powers, we shall find it to be such an one. as concludes not in favour of submision to all who bear the title of rulers, in common ; but only, to those who actually perform the duty of rulers, by exercising a rea- sonable and just authority.for the good of human society. This is a point which it will be proper to enlarge upon ; because the question before us turns very much upon the truth or falsehood of this position. It is obvious, then, in general, that the civil rulers whom the apostle 2-Z here speaks of, and obedience to whom he presses upon christians as a duty, are good rulers,* such as are in the exercise of their office and power, benefactors to society. Such they are described to be,throughout this passage. Thus it is said, that they are not a terror to good works, but to the evil ; that they are God's min- isters for good ; revengers to extute wrath upon him that doeth evil ; and that they attend continually upon this very thing. St. Peter gives the same account of rulers : They are for a praise to them that do well, and pie punishment of evil doers. \ It is manifest that this character and description of rulers, agrees only to sucli as are rulers in fact, as well as in name: to such as govern well, and act agreeably to their office. And ihe apostle's argument for submission to rulers, is wholly built and grounded upon a presumption that they do in fact answer this character ; and is of no force at all upon the supposition of the contrary. If rulers are a terror to good works, and not to the evil ; if they are not ministers for good to society \ but for evil and distress, by violence and oppression; if they execute wrath upon sober, peaceable persons, who do their duty as members of society; and suffer rich and hon- orable knaves to escape with impunity; if instead o£ at- tending continually upon the good work of advancing the public welfare, they attend only upon the gratifica- tion of their own lust and pride, and ambition, to the destruction of the public welfare ; if this be the case, it is plain that the apostle's argument for submission docs not reach them ; they are not the same, but dif- ferent persons from those whem he characterizes ; and who must be obeyed according to his reasoning. — Let me illustrate the apostle's argument, by the fol- lowing similitude : (it is no matter how far it is from any thing which has, in fact, happened in the world.) Suppose, then, it was allowed, in general, that the * By good rulers, are not intended such as are good in a moral or religious, but only in a political, sense ; those who perform their duty so far as their office extends ; and so far as civil society, as such, is concerned in their actions. tSec thr. 3d. and part of the 4th. JVer. 4th. latter part. 21 end of civil government will be frustrated And what reason is there for submitting to that government, which does by no means answer I lie design of govern- ment ? Wherefore ye must needs be subject not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake* Here the apostle argues the duty of a cheerful and conscientious sub- mission to civil government, from the nature and end of magistracy as he had before laid it down, 1. e. as the design of it was to punish evil doers, and to sup- port and encourage such as do well ; and as it must, if so exercised, be agreeable to the will of God. But how does what he here says, prove the duty of a cheer- ful and conscientious subjection to those who forfeit the character of rulers? to those who encourage the had, and discourage the good ? The argument hero used no mote proves it to be a sin to resist such rulers, than it does, to resist the devil, that lie may fee from us.-\ For one is as truly the minister of God as the other. For, for this cause pay you tribute also ; for they are God's ministers, attending' continually upon this very tlung.% Here the apostle argues the duty of paying taxes, from this consideration, that those who perform the duty of rulers, are continually attending upon the public welfare. But how does this argument conclude for paying taxes to such princes as are con- tinually endeavoring to ruin the public? And especial- ly when such payment would facilitate and promote this wicked design ! Render therefore to all their dues ; tribute, to whom tribute is due ; custom, to whom cus- tom ; fear, to whom fear ; honor, to whom honor. \\ Here the apostle sums up what he had been saying concern- ing the duty of subjects to rulers. And his argument stands thus — "Since magistrates who execute their of- fice well, are common benefactors to society, and may, in that respect, be properly styled the ministers and ordinance of God ; and since they are constantly em- ployed in the service of the public, it becomes you to pay them tribute and custom ; and to reverence, *Y>r. 5. tJame»iv. 7. ^Ver. G. Wei 1. 28 honor, and submit to them in the execution of their respective offices." This is apparently good reason- ing. But does this argument conclude for the duty of paying tribute, custom, reverence, honor and obedience to such persons as (although they bear the title of ru- lers) use all their power to hurt and injure the public ? such as are not God's ministers, but Satan's ? such as do not take care of, and attend upon the public inter- est, but their own, to the ruin of the public ? that is, in short, to such as have no natural and just claim at all to tribute, custom, reverence, honor and obedience ? It is to be hoped that those who have any regard to the apostle's character as an inspired writer, or even as a man of common understanding, will not present him as reasoning in such a loose incoherent manner ; and drawing conclusions which have not the least rela- tion to his premises. For what can be more absurd than an argument thus framed ? "Rulers are, by their office, bound to consult the public welfare and the good of society : therefore you are bound to pay them tribute, to honor, and submit to them, even when they destroy the public welfare,and are a common pest to society,by acting in direct contradiction to the nature and end of their office." Thus, upon a careful review of the apostle's rea- soning in this passage, it appears that his arguments to enforce submission, are of such a nature, as to con- clude only in favor of submission to such rulers as he himself describes ; i- e. such as rule for the good of so- ciety, which is the only end of their institution. Com- mon tyrants, and public oppressors, are not entitled to obedience from their subjects, by virtue of any thing here laid down by the inspired apostle. I now add farther, that the apostle's argument is so far from proving it to be the duty of people to obey, and submit to such rulers as act in contradiction to the public good,t and so to the design of their office, that + This does not intend, their acting so in a few particular instantes, which the best of rulers may do through mistake, kc. but their acting so habitually ; 29 :; proves the direct contrary. For, please to observe. :hat if the end of all civil government, be the good of society ; if this be the thing that is aimed at in con- stituting civil rulers; and if the motive and argument lor submission to government, be taken from the ap- parent usefulness of civil authority, it follows, that when no such good end can be answered by submission, there remains no argument or motive to enforce it ; ii instead of this good end's being brought about by sub- mission^ contrary end is brought about,and the ruin and misery of society effected by it ; here is a plain and posi- tive reason against submission in all such cases, should they ever happen. And therefore, in such cases, a regard to the public welfare, ought to make us with- hold from our rulers that obedience and subjection which it would, otherwise, be our duty to render to them. If it be our duty, for example, to obey our king, merely for this reason, that he rules for the pub- lic welfare, (which is the only argument the apostle makes use of) it follows, by a parity of reason, thai when he turns tyrant, and makes his subjects his prey to devour and to destroy, instead of his charge to de- defend and cherish, we are bound to throw off our allegiance to him, and to resist ; and that ac- cording to the tenor of the apostle's argument in this passage. Not to discontinue our allegi- ance, in this case, would be to join with the sov- ereign in promoting the slavery and misery of that society, the welfare of which, we ourselves, as well as our sovereign, are indispensably obliged to secure and promote, as far as in us lies. It is true the apostle puts no case of such a tyrannical prince ; but by his grounding his argument for submission wholly upon the good of civil society ; it is plain he implicitly author- ises, and even requires us to make resistance, whenever this shall be necessary to the public safety and hap piness. Let me make use of this easy and familiar and in a manner which plainly shows, (hat they aim at makiug tifceimelvea jreat, by the ruin of their subjects. similitude to illustrate the point in hand — Sfcroposer God requires a family of children, to obey their father and not to resist him ; and enforces his command with this argument ; that the superintendence and care and authority of a just and kind parent, will contribute to the happiness of the whole family ; so that they ought to obey him for then 1 own sakes more than for his : Suppose this parent at length runs distracted, and at- tempts, in his mad fit, to cut all his children's throats : Now, in this ease, is not the reason before assigned, why these children should obey their parent while h® continued of a sound mind, namely, their common good* a reason equally conclusive for disobeying and resist- ing him, since he is become delirious,and attempts their ruin ? It makes no alteration in argument, whether this parent, property speaking, loses his reason, or does, while he retains his understanding, that which is as fatal in its consequences, as any thing he could do, were he really deprived of it, This similitude needs n& formal application — But it ought to be remembered, that if the duty of universal obedience and non-resistance to our kins » © or prince, can be argued from this passage, the same unlimited submission under a republican, or any other form of government ; and even to all the subordinate powers in any particular state, can be proved by it as well : which is more than those who alledge it for the mentioned purpose, would be willing should be inferred from it. So that this passage does not an- swer their purpose ; but really overthrows and con- futes if. This matter deserves to be more particular- ly considered. — The advocates for unlimited submis- sion and passive obedience, do, if I mistake not, al- ways speak with reference to kingly or monarchical government, as distinguished from all other forms ; and, with reference to submitting to the will of the kin^, in distinction from all subordinate officers, act- ing beyond their commission, and the authority which they have received from the crown. It is not pre- 31 tended that any person besides kings, have a divine right to do what they please, so that no one may re- sist them, without incurring the ijuilt of factiousness and rebellion. It' any other supreme powers oppress the people, it is generally allowed, that the people mav get redress, by resistance, it' other methods prove ineffectual. And if any officers m a kingly govern crnment, go beyond the limits ot' that power which they have derived from the crown, (the supposed original source of all power and authority in the state) and attempt, illegally, to take away the. propcrtie? and lives of their fellow-subjects, they may be forci- ily resisted, at least till application can be made to the crown. But as to the sovereign himself, he mav not be resisted in any case ; nor any of his officers, while they confine themselves within the bounds which he has prescribed to them. This is, I think, a true sketch of the principles of those who defend the doctrine of passive obedience and non-resistance. Now there is nothing in scripture which supports this scheme of political principles. As to the passage un- der consideration, the apostle here speaks of civil ru! ers m general ; of all persons in common, vested with authority for the good of society, without any partic- ular reference to one form of government, more than to another ; or to the supreme power in any particu- lar state, more than to subordinate powers. The apostle does not concern himself with the different forms of government.'!' This he supposes left intire- t The essence of government (I mean good government ; and this is the a;)';/ government which the apostle treats of in this passage) consists in the making and executing of good laut — laws attempered to the common felicitv »f the governed. And if this be, in fact, done, it is evidently, in itself, a thine of no consequence at all, what the particular form of government is ; — wheth- er the legislative and executive power be lodged in one and (lie tame person or in different persons ; — whether in one person, whom we call an absolute mon- arch ; —whether in a few, so as to constitute an aristocracy ; — whether in many, so as to constitute a rupublic ; or whether in three co-ordinate branches in such manner as to make the government partake something of each of these forms ; and to be, at the same time, essentially different from them all. If the end be attained, it is enough. But no form of government seems to be so un- likely to accomplish this end, as absolute monarchy — Nor is there any one that has so little pretence t« a divine original, unless it be in this sense, that 'V to human prudence and discretion. Now the con- lequence of this is, that unlimited and passive obedi- ence, is no more enjoined in this passage, under mo- narchical government ; or to the supreme power in .uiv state, than under all other species of government, which answer the end of government ; or, to all the subordinate degrees of civil authority, from the high- est to the lowest. Those, therefore, who would from 'his passage infer the guilt of resisting kings, in all cases whatever, though acting ever so contrary to the design of their ollice, must, if they will be consis- tent, go much farther, and infer from it the guilt of resistance under all other forms of government ; and of resisting any petty officer in the state though acting beyond his commission, in the most arbitrary, illegal manner possible. The argument holds equally Strong in both cases. All civil rulers, as such, arc the ordi~ iiance and minsters of God ; and they are all, by the nature of their office, and in their respective spheres and stations, bound to consult the public welfare. With the same reason therefore, that any deny un- limited and passive obedience to be here enjoined un- der a republic or aristocrasy, or any other established form of civil government ; or to subordinate powers, acting in an illegal and oppressive manner : (with the ,,ame reason) others may deny, that such obedience is enjoined to a king or monarch, or any civil power whatever. For the apostle says nothing that is pecu- liar to kings ; what he says, extends equally to all other persons whatever, vested with any civil office. They are all, in exactly the same sense, the ordinance of God ; and the ministers of God ; and obedience is equally enjoined to be paid to them all. For, as the apostle expresses it, there is NO POWER but of God : And we are required to render to ALL their DUES ; GoA first introduced it into, and thereby overturned, the common wealth of Israel* as a curse upon that people for their folly and wickedness, particularly iu desirivg «uch a government. (See t Sam. viii. chap.) Just so God, be. fore, sent Quails amongst them, as & plague, and a curse, and not as a blessing, ■Vumb. chap. xi. and not MOKE than their DUES. And what these dues are, and to whom they are to be rendered, the apostle sayeth not; bat leaves to the reason and con- sciences ot" men to determine. Thus it appears, that the common argument, ground- ed upon this passage, in favor of universal and pas- sive obedience, really overthrows itself, by proving too mucK, if it proves any thing at all; namely, that no civil officer is, in any case whatever, to be resisted, though acting in express contradiction to the design of his cilice ; which no man, in his senses, ever did, or can assert. If we calmly consider the nature of the thing itself, nothing can well be imagined more directly contrary to common sense, than to suppose that millions of peo- ple should be subjected to the arbitrary, precarious pleasure of one single, man ; (who has naturally no su- periority over them in point of authority) so that their estates, and every thing that is valuable in life, and even their lives also, shall be absolutely at his disposal, if he happens to be wanton and capricious enough to demand I hem. What unprejudiced man can think, that God made ALL to be thus subservient to the law- less pleasure and phrenzy of ONE, so ihat it shall al- ways be a sin to resist him ! Nothing but the most plain and express revelation from heaven could make a so- ber, impartial man believe such a monstrous,unaccount- able doctrine, and, indeed, the thing itself, appears so shocking — so out of all proportion, that it may be questioned, whether all the miracles that ever were wrought, could make it credible, that this doctrine really came from God. At present, there is not the least syllable in scripture which gives any countenance to it. The hereditary, indefeasible, divine right of kings, and the doctrine of non-resistance, which is built upon the supposition of such a right, are altogether as fabulous arid chimerical, as transubstantiation ; or any of the most absurd reveries of ancient or modern vissionaries. These notions are fetched neither from divine rela- M tion, nor human reason; and if they are derived from neither of those sources, it is not much matter from whence they come, or whither they ffo. Only it is a pity that such doctrines should be propagated in society, to raise factions and rebellions, as we sec they have, in fact, been both in the lasL and in the present RSIGN. But then, if unlimited submission and passive obe- dience to the higher powers, in all possible cases, be not a duty, it will be asked, u How far are we obliged to submit? If we may innocently disobey and resist in some cases, why not in all? Where shall we stop? What is the measure of our duty ? This doctrine tends to the total dissolution of civil government ; and to introduce such scenes of wild anarchy and confusion, ai are more fatal to society than the worst of tyranny.' After this manner, some men object : and in- deed, this is the most plausible thing that can be said in favor of such an absolute submission as they plead ior. But the worst (or rather the best) of it, is, that there is very little strength or solidity in it. For simi- lar difficulties may be raised with respect to almost every duty of natural and revealed religion. — To in- stance only in two, both of which are near a kin, and indeed exactlj parallel, to the case before us. It is unquestionably the duty of children to submit to their parents ; and of servants, to their masters. But no one asserts, that it is their duty to obey, and submit; to them, in all supposeable cases ; or universally, a sin to resist them. Now does this tend to subvert the just authority of parents and masters ? Or to introduce confusion and anarchy into private families ? No. How then does the same principle tend to unhinge the gov- ernment of that larger family, the body politic ? We know, in general, that children and servants are oblig- ed to obey their parents and masters respectively. We know also, with equal certainty, that they are not obliged to submit to them in all things, without excep- tion ; but may,in some cases, reasonably, and therefore innocently, resist them. These principles are ac- knowledged upon all hands, whatever difficulty there 35 may be in fixing the exact limits of submission. Now thcra is at least as much difficulty in stating the meas- ure of duty in these two cases, as in the case of rul- ers and subjects. So that this is really no objection, at least no reasonable one, against resistance to the higher powers: Or, if it is one, it will hold equally against resistance in the other cases mentioned. — It is indeed true, that turbulent, vicious-minded men, may take occasion from this principle, that their rulers may, in some cases, be lawfully resisted, to raise fac- tions and disturbances in the state ; and to make resist- ance where resistance is needless, and therefore, sin- ful. But is it not equally true, that children and ser- vants of turbulent, vicious minds,, may take occasion from this principle, that parents and masters may, in some cases be lawfully resisted, to resist when resist- ance is unnecessary, and therefore, criminal ? Is the principle in either case false in itself, merely because it may be abused ; and applied to legitimate disobe- dience and resistance in those instances, to which it ought not to be applied ? According to this way of arguing, there will be no true principles in the world ; for there are none but what may be wrested and per- verted to serve bnd purposes, either through the weakness or wickedness of men.t tWE may very safely assert these (wo things in general, without underminoV ing; government : One is, That no civil rulers are to be obeyed when they enjoin thing? that are inconsistent with the commands of God : All such disobedience is lawful and glorious ; particularly, if persons refuse to comply with any legal establishment of religion, because it is a gross perversion and corruption (as to doctrine, worship and discipline) of a pure and divine religion, brought from heaven to earth by the Son of God, (the only King and Head of the christian church, and propagated through the world by his inspired apostles. All com- mands running counter to the declared will of the supreme legislator of heaven and earth, are null and void : And therefore disobedience to them is a duty, not a crime. (See the marginal note, page 12.) Another thing that may be asserted with equal truth and safety, is, that no government is to be submitted to, at the expence of that which is the sole end of all government — the common good and safety of society. Because, to submit, in this case, if it should eve- happen, would evidently be to set up the means as more valuable, and above iheeni .• than which there cannot be a greater solecism and contradiction. The only reason of the institution of civil government, and the only rational ground of submission to it, is the common safety and utility. If therefore, iu any ca^e, tiie common safety and utility would not be promoted by submission to government, but the contrary, there is no ground or motive for obedience and submission, but, for (he contrary. Whoever considers the nature of civil government, roust, indeed, fcc sensible 'hat a great degree otimpKeil conj'daice. must unavoidably be placed in ti:ose 36 A People, really oppressed to a great degree by their sovereign, cannot well be insensible when tbej are so oppressed. And such a people (if 1 may al- lnde to an ancient fablej have, like the hope rian fruit, a DRAGON for their protector and guardian : Nor would they have any reason to mourn, if some HER- CULES should appear to dispatch him. — For a nation that bear rule : This is implied in the very notion of authority's bemg original- ly a trust, committed by the people, to those who are vested with it, as all just and righteous authority is ; all besides, is mere lawless force and usurpation ; neither God nor nature, having given any man a right of dominion over any society, independently o^ that society's approbation and consent to be govern- ed by him. — Now as all men are fallible, it cannot be supposed that the public afLirs of any state, should be always administered in the best manner possible, even by persons of the greatest wisdom and integrity. Nor is it sufficient to legitimate disobedience to the higher powers that they are not so administered ; or that they are, in some instances, very ill managed ; for upon this principle, it is scarcely supposeable that any government at all, could he supported, or subsist. Such a principle manifestly tends to the dissolution of government ; and to throw all things into confusion and anarchy. — But it is equally evident, upon the other hand, that those in authority may abuse their trust and power to such a degree, that neither the law of reason, nor of religion, requires, that any obedience or submission should be paid to them : but on the contrary, that they should be totally discarded ; and the authority which they were be- fore vested with, transferred to others, who may exercise it more to those good purposes for which it is given. — Nor is this principle, that resistance to the higher powers, is, in some extraordinary cases, justifiable, so liable to abuse, as many persons seem to apprehend it. For although there will he always some petulant, querulous men, in every state — men of factious, turbulent and carp- ing dispositions, — glad to lay hold of any trifle to justify an 1 legitimate their caballing against their rulers, and other seditious practices ; yet there arc, com- paratively speaking, but few men of this contemptible character. It does not appear but that mankind, in general, have a disposition to be as submissive and passive, and tame under government, as they ought to be. Witness a great, if not the greatest part of the known world, who are nowgroaniug, but not mur- muring, under the heavy yoke of tyranny ! While those who govern, do it with any tolerable degree of moderation and justice, and, in any good measure act up to their office and character, by being public benefactors ; the people will generally be easy and peaceable ; and be rather inclined to flatter and adore, than to insult and resist them. Nor was there ever any general complaint against any administration, which tasted long, but what there was good reason for. ' J i 1 people find themselves greatly abused and oppressed by their governors, they are not apt to complain ; and whenever they do, in fact, find themselves thus abused and oppressed, they must be stupid not to complain. T« say that sub- jects in general, are not proper judges when their governors oppress them, and play the tyrant; and when they defend their rights, administer justice, impar- tially, and promote the public welfare, is as great treason as ever man uttered ; it is treason, — not against one single man, but the state — against the whole body politic ; — "'tis treason against mankind ; — 'tis treason against common sense ; — "'tis treason against GOD. And this impious principle lays the foundation for justifying all the tyranny and oppression that every any prince was guilty of The people know for what end they set up, and maintain, their governors ; and they are the proper judges when they execute their trust as they ought to doit; — when their prince exercises an equitable and paternal authority over them ; — when from a prince and common father, he exalts himself into n tyrant — when from subjects and children, he degrades them into the ola<=s of slaves « — plunders them, makes them his prey, and unnaturally sports himself with their lives and fortunes. 37 thus abused to arise unanimously, and to resist their prince, even to the dethroning him, is not eriminal ; but a reasonable way of vindicating their liberties and hist rights ; it is making use of the means, and the. onlv means, which God has put into their power, lor mutual and self defence. And it would be highly criminal in them, not to make use of th's meane. It would be stupid tameness, and unaccountable follv, for whole nations to suffer one unreasonable, ambitious and cruel man, to wanton and riot in their misery; And in such a case it would, of the two, be more ra- tional to suppose, that they that did NOT resist, than that they who did, would receive to themselves damnation. OF KING CHARLES'S SAINTSHIP AND MARTYRDOM. THIS naturally brings us to make some reflections upon the resistance which was made about a century since, to that unhappy prince, KING CHARLES I. ; and upon the ANNIVERSARY of his death. This is a point which I should not have concerned myself , about, were it not that some men continue to speak of iit, even to this day, with a great deal of warmth and zeal ; and in such a manner as to undermine all the principles of LIBERTY, whether civil or religious, and to introduce the most abject slavery both in church and state ; so that it is become a matter of universal concern. — What I have to offer upon this subject, will be comprised in a short answer to the j following queries ; viz. For what reason the resistance to king Charles the First, was made ? By whom it w r as made ? Whether this resistance was REBELLION, f or not ? + X. R. T «ppnk of rebellion, 1rpa«=on, raintship, martyrdom. Sec. throughout litis discourse, only in the scriptural and theological senst. 1 know not how th*e '••- defines them j the study o( that not beiDg my employment— 38 How the vdunioersanj of king Charles's death c.ame at first to be solemnized as a day of fasting and hu- miliation ? And lastly, Why those of the episcopal clergy who are very high in the principles of ecclesiastical authority, con- tinue to speak of this unhappy man, as a great SAINT and a MARTYR ? For what reason, then, was the resistance to king Charles, made ? The general answer to this enquiry is, that it was on account of the tyranny and oppres- sion of his reign. Not a great while after his acces- sion to the throne, he married a French catholic ; and with her seemed to have wedded the politics, if not the religion of France, also. For afterwards, during a reign, or rather a tyranny of many years, he gov- erned in a perfectly wild and arbitrary manner, pav- ing no regard to the constitution and the laws of the kingdom, by which the power of the crown was limit- ed ; or to the solemn oath which he had taken at his coronation. It would be endless, as well as needless, to give a particular account of all the illegal and des- potic measures which he took in his administration j — partly from his own natural lust of power, and part- ly from the influence of wicked councellors and minis- ters. — He committed many illustrious members of both houses of parliament, to the Tower, for opposing his arbitrary schemes. — He levied many taxes upon the people without consent of parliament; — and then imprisoned great numbers of the principal merchants and gentry for not paying them. — He erected, or at least revived, several new and arbitrary courts, in which the most unheard-of barbarities were commit- ted v. ith his knowledge and approbation. — He sup- ported that more than fiend, arch-bishop Laud and the clergy of his stamp, in all their church tyranny and hellish cruelties — He authorised a book in favor of sports upon the Lord's day ; and several clergy- men were persecuted by him and the mentioned pious bishop, for not reading it to the people alter divine service. — When the parliament complained to him of i 39 the arbitrary proceedings of his corrupt ministers, he told that august body, in a rough, domineering, un- princely maimer, that he wondered any one should be so foolish and insolent as to think that lie would part with the meanest of his servants upon their account — He refused to call any parliament at all for the space of twelve years together, during all which time, he governed in an absolute, lawless, and despotic manner — He took all opportunities to encourage the papists, and to promote then* to the highest offices of honor and trust. — He (probably) abetted the horrid massa- cre in Ireland, in which two hundred thousand pro- [testautg were butchered by the Roman Catholics. — He sent a large sum of money, which he had raised :bv his arbitrary taxes, into Germany, to raise foreign •troops, in order to force more arbitrary taxes upon his subjects. — He not only by a long series of actions, 'but also in plain terms, asserted an absolute uncon- jtroulable power ; saying even in one of his speeches ! to parliament, that as it was blasphemy to dispute what God might do ; so it was sedition in subjects to 'dispute what the king might do. — Towards the end lot his tyranny,he came to the House of Commons with ;ki armed force,t and demanded five of its principal ^members to be delivered up to him. — And this was a ipreiude, to that unnatural war, which he soon after jlevicd against his own dutiful subjects ; whom he was ibound by all the laws of honor, humanity, piety, and il might add, of interest also, to defend and cherish with a paternal affection — I have only time to hint jat these facts in a general way, all which, and many Imorc of the same tenor, may be proved by good au- thorities : So that the figurative language which St. \Jokn uses, concerning the just and beneficent deeds of lour blessed Saviour, may be applied to the unright - icons? and execrable deeds of this prince, viz. jina', \thcrc are also many other things v;hick king Charles did it he which, if they should be written every one, I suppose {that even the world itself, could not contain the books that t Historians are not agreed, what number of solciieri attended him in ih')\ ' monstrous invasion of the priviledges of parliament — Some say 300, gome 1400 : And the author of The history of the kings cf Holland, says 500. 40 should be written.* Now it was on account of king Charles's thus assuming a power above the laws, in direct contradiction to his coronation-oath, and gov- erning the greatest part of his time, in the most arbi- trary oppressive manner ; it was upon this account, that that resistance was made to. him, which, at length, issued in the loss of his crown, and of that head which was unworthy to wear it. But by whom was this resistance made ? Not by a private junto ; — - not by a small seditious party j — not by a Jew desparadoes, who, to mend their fortunes, would embroil the state ; — but by the LORDS and COMMONS of England. It was they that almost unanimously opposed the king's measures for overturn- ing the constitution, and changing that free and happv government into a wretched, absolute monarchy. It was they, that when the king was about levying forces against his subjects, in order to make himself absolute, commissioned officers, and raised an army to defend themselves and the public : And it was they that main- lainedthc war against him all along, till he was made a prisoner. This is indisputable. Though it was not properly speaking, the parliament, but the army, which put him to death afterwards. And it ought to be freely acknowledged, that most of their proceed- ings, in order to get this matter eifected, and par- ticularly the court by which the king was at last tried and condemned, was little better than a mere mocke- ry of justice. — The next question which naturally arises, is, wheth- er this resistance which was made to the king by the Parhapicnt, was properly rebellion, or not ? The an- swer to which is plain, that it was not ; but a moil righteous and glorious stand, made in defence of the natural and legal rights of the people, against the nat- ural and illegal encroachments of arbitrary power. Nor was this a rash and too sudden opposition. The nation had been patient under the oppsessions of the crown, even to long suffering ; — for a course of many "John xsi, 25. 41 years ; and there was no rational hope of redress in any other way. — Resistance was absolutely necessary, in order to preserve the nation from slavery, misery and ruin. And whoso proper to make this resistance, as the Lords and Commons; — the whole representative body of the people ; — guardians of the public welfare; and each of which, was, in point of legislation, vested with an equal, co-ordinate power, with that of the crown ?* Here were two branches of the legislature against one ; — two of which, had law and equity, and the constitution on their side, against one which was impiously attempting to overturn law and equity, and the constitution ; and to exercise a wanton li- centious sovereignty over the properties, conscien- ces and lives of all the people : — Such a sovereignty as some inconsiderately ascribe to the Supreme Gov- ernor of the world. — 1 say, inconsiderately ; because God himself does not govern in an absolutely arbitrary and despotic manner. The power of this Almighty King (I speak it not without caution and reverence ; * The English constitution is originally and essentially free. The charac- ter which ./. Ccusar and Tacitus both give of the ancient Brilains so long ago, is, That iheywere extremely jealous of tlieir liberties, as well as a people of a martial spirit. Nor have there been wanting frequent instances and proofs of the same glorious spirit (in fcolh respects) remaining in their posterity ever since. — in the struggles they have made for liberty, both against foreign and domestic tyrants. — Their kings hold their title to the throne, solely by giant of parlia- ment ; i. e. in other words, by the voluntary consent of the people. And, Rgreeably hereto, the prerogative and rights of the crown are stated, defined and limited by law ; and that as truly and strictly as the rights of any inferior officer in the state ; or indeed, of any private subject. And it is only in this respect, that it can be said, that " the king can do wrong." Being restrained by the law, he cannot, while he confines himself within those just limits which the law prescribes to him as the measure of his authority, injure and oppress the subject. — The king, in his coronation oath, swears to exercise only such a power as the constitution gives him : And the subject, in the oath of allegiance, swears only to obey him in the exercise of such a power. The king is as much bound by his oath, not to infringe the legal rights of the people, as the peoplt- are bound to yield subjection to him. From whence it follows, that as soon as the prince sets himself up above law, he loses the king in the tyrant : he does to all intents and purposes, unking himself, by actuig out of, and beyond, that sphere which the constitution allows him to move in. And in such cases, he has no more right to be obeyed, than any inferior officer who acts beyond his commission. The subjects 1 obligation to alleeinace then ceases of course : and to resist him, is no more rebelliim, than to resist any foreign invader. There ia an essential difference betwixt government and tyranny ; at least under such a constitution as the English. The former consists in ruling according to law and equity ; the latter in ruling contrary to law and equity. So also, there is an essential difference betwixt resisting a tyrant, and rebellion ; the fornu c fc 6 42 the power of this Almighty King) is limited by law ; not indeed, by acts of Parliament, but by the eternal laws of truth, wisdom and equity ; and the everlasting tables of right reason ; — tables that cannot be repealed, or thrown down and broken like those of Moses. — But king Charles sat himself up above all these, as much as he did above the written laws of the realm ; and made mere humor and caprice, which are no rule at all, the only rule and measure of his administration. And now, is it not perfectly ridiculous to call resis- tance to such a tyrant, by the name of rebellion ? — the grand rebellion ? Even that parliament, which brought king Charles II. to the throne, and which run loyally mad, severely reproved one of their own mem- bers for condemning the proceedings of that parlia- ment which first took up arms against the former king. And upon the same principles that the proceedings of this parliament may be censured as wicked and re- bellious ; the proceedings of those, who since opposed king; James II. and brought the Prince of Orange to the throne, may be censured as wicked and rebellious also. The cases are parallel. — But whatever some men may think, it is to be hoped that for their own sakes, they will not dare to speak against the REVO- LUTION, upon the justice and legality of which, de- pends (in part) his present MAJESTY'S right to the throne. If it be said, that although the parliament which first opposed king Charles's measures, and at length took up arms against him, were not guilty of rebellion ; yet certainly those persons were, who condemned, and put him to death ; even this perhaps is not true. For he had, in fact, unkinged himself long before, and had forfeited his title to the allegiance of the people. So that those who put him to death, were, at most, only guilty of murder ; which, indeed, is bad enough, a just and reasonable self-defence ; the latter consists in resisting a prince whose administration is just and legal ; and this is what demonstrates it a crime. — Now it is evident, that king Charleses government was illegal, and very op- pressive, through the greatest part of his reign : And, therefore, to resist him, was no more rebellion, than to oppose any foreign invader, or any other do- mestic opprcssser. 43 it they were rcall y guilty of that ; (which is at least disputable.) Cromwell, and those who were princi- pally concerned in the (nominal) king's death, might possibly have been very wicked and designing men. Nor shall I say any thing in vindication of the reign- ing hypocrisy oi' those times, or of Cromwell's male- administration during the interregnum : (for it is truth, and not a parly, that I am speaking for.) But still it may be said, that Cromwell and his adherents were not, properly speaking, guilty of rebellion ; because he whom they beheaded was not, properly speaking, their king ; but a lawless tyrant. — Much less, are the whole body of the nation at that time to be charged with rebellion on that account ; for it was no nation- al act ; it was not done by a. free parliament. And much less still, is the nation at present, to be charged with the great sin of rebellion, for what their ancestors did, (or rather did NOT) a century ago. But how came (he anniversary of king Charl &"$ death, to be solemnized as a day of fasting and humilia- 1 tion ? The true answer in brief, to which enquiry, is, 1 that this fast was instituted by Way of court and com- I pliment to king Charles II. upon the restoration- All were desirous of making their court to him ; of in- gratiating themselves ; and of making him forget what had been done in opposition to his father., so as not to revenge it. To effect this, they ran into the ; most extravagant professions of affection and loyalty to him, insomuch that he himself said, that it was a j mad and hair brained loyalty which they professed. | And amongst other strange things, which his first par- liament did, they ordered the Thirtieth of January (the day on which his father was beheaded) to be kept as a day of solemn humiliation, to deprecate the judge- ments of heaven for the rebellion which the nation had been guilty of, in that which was no national thing ; and which was not rebellion in them that did it. — Thus they soothed and flattered their new king, at the ex- pence of their liberties : — And wore ready to yield ujj freely to Charles II. all that enormous power, which 41 they had justly resisted Charles I, for usurping to ium* self. Thf: last query mentioned, was. Why those of the episcopal clergy who are very high in the principles ot' ecclesiastical authority,, continue to speak of this unhap- py prince as a great Saint and a Martyr? This, we know, is what they constantly do, especially upon the 30th of January ; a day sacred to the extolling of him, and to the reproaching of those who are not of the established church. Out of the same mouth on this day,. proceed eth blessing and cursing f\ therewith bless they their God, even Charles/awrf therewith curse they the dis- senters : And their tongue can no man tame ; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison. King Charles is, up- on this solemnity, frequently compared to our Lord Je- sus Christ, both in respect of the holiness of his life, and the greatness and injustice of his sufferings ; and it is a wonder they do not add something- concerning the merits of his death also — But blessed saint and roy- al martyr, are as humble titles as any that are thought worthy of him. Now this may, at first view, well appear to be a very strange phenomenon. For king Charles was real- ly a man black with guilt and laden with iniquity,^ as appears by his crimes before mentioned. He lived a tyrant ; and it was tlhe oppression and violence of his reign, that brought him to his untimely and vio- lent end at last. Now what of saintship or martyrdom is there in all this ! What of saintship is there in encouraging people to profane the Lord's Day ? What of saintship in falsehood and perjury ? W r hat of saintship in repeated robberies and depre- dations ? What of saintship in throwing real saints, and glorious patriots, into goals? What of saintship in overturning an excellent civil constitution ; — and proud- ly grasping at an illegal and monstrous power? What of saintship in the murder of thousands of innocent people ; and involving a nation in all the calamities of a civil war? And what of martyrdom is there, in a man's bringing an immature and violent death upon Warn. iii. 8, 9, 10. [jUai, i. 4. 4b himself, by being wicked overmuch 9* Is there any such thins; as grace, without goodness ? As being a follower of Christ, without folio wing him ? As being his disci? pie, without learning of him to be just and beneficent ? Or, as saintship without sanctity ?t If not, I fear it will be hard to prove this man a saint. And verily, would be apt to suspect that that church must be but poorly stocked with saints and martyrs, which is forced to adopt such enormous sinners into her callendar, in order to swell the number. But to unravel this mystery of (nonsense as well as of) iniquity, which has already worked for a long time amongst us;| or, at least, to give the most probable so- lution of it; it is to be remembered, that king Charles, this burlesque upon saintship and martyrdom, though so great an oppressor, was a true friend to the Church; so true a friend to her, that he was very well affected towards the Roman Catholics ; and would, probably, have been very unwilling to unite Lambeth and Rome* This appears by his marrying a true daughter of that true mother of harlots ,-|| which he did with a dispen- sation from the Pope, that supreme BISHOP: to whom when he wrote, he gave the title of MOST HOLY FATHER. His queen was extremely bigotted to all the follies and superstitions, and to the hierarchy, of Rome ; and had a prodigious ascendency over him all his life. It Avas, in part, owing to this, that he (prob- ably) abetted the massacre of the protestants in /re- land ; that he assisted in extirpating the Ftcnch prot- ♦Ecles. vii. 17. Ms it any wonder that even persons who do not walk after their own /MJ/.t,shouId scoff at such saints as this, both in ihcjir.il and in the last days, even from ev- erlasting to everlasting ? 2 Pet. iii. 3, 4. — But perhaps it will be said, that these things are MYSTERIES, which (although very true in themselves) lay-under- standings cannot comprehend : Or, indeed, any other persons amongst us, be- sides those who being INWARDLY MOVED BY THE HOLY GHOST, have taken a trip across the Atlantic to obtain episcopal ordination and the in- dehble character. — However, if these consecrated gentlemen do not quite des- pair of us, it k hoped that, in the abundance of their charity, they wil! endeavor to ilhtcidalt these, dark points ; and, at the same time, explain the creed of an- other of their eminent «ai.7its, which we are told, that unless we believe faithful- ly, (i. e. helieringly) wc cannot be saved: which creed, (or rather riddle) not- withstanding all the labors nf the pious andmotaphyisical Dr Watcrlatid remains somewhat cenigmalicnl. still. + 2 Thess. ii. 7. II Rev. xvii. S. 46 estants at Rockelle ; that he all along encouraged 1 ?& viBis, and popishly effected clergymen, in preference to ail other persons, and that he upheld that monster oi wickedness, ARCHBISHOP LAUD, and the bishops of his stamp, in all their church-tyranny and diabolic- al cruelties. In return to h:s kindness and indulgence. in which respects, they caused many of the pulpits throughout the nation, to ring with the divine absolute, indefeasible right of kings ; with the praises of Charles and his reign; and with the damnable sin of resisting the Lord's an oin ted, let him do what he would. So that not Christ, but Charles, was commonly preached to -the people. — In plain English, there seems to have been an impious bargain struck up betwixt the sceptre and the surplice, for enslaving both the bodies and souls of men. The king appeared to be willing that the clergy should do what they would, — set up a mon- strous hierarchy like that of Rome, — a monstrous in- quisition like that of Spain or Portugal, — or any thing else which their own pride, and the devil's malice, could, prompt them to: Provided always, that the clergy would be tools to the crown ; that they would make the people believe, that kings had God's authority for breaking God's law; that they had a commission from heaven to seize the estates and lives of their subjects at pleasure ; and that it was a damnable sin to resist them, even when they did such tilings as deserved more than damnation. — This appears to be the true key for explaining the mysterious doctrine of king Charles's saintship and martyrdom. He was a saint, not because he was in his life, a good man, but a good churchman ; not because he was a lover of holiness, but the hierarchy ; not because he was a friend to Christ, but the Craft. And he was a martyr in his death, not because he bravely suffered death in the cause of truth and righteousness, but because he died an enemy to liberty and the rights of conscience ; i. e. not be- cause he died an enemy to sin, but dissenters. For these reasons it is that all bigotted clergymen, and friends to church-power, paint this man as a saint in life, though he was such a mighty, such a royal sinner ; 47 and as a martyr in his death, though he fell a sacrifice •only to his own ambition, avarice,and unbounded lust of power. Ant! from prostituting their praise upon king Charles, and offering him that incense which is not his due, it is natural for them to make a transition to the dissenters (as they commonly do) and to load them with that reproach which they do not deserve; thev feeing generally professed enemies both to civil and ecclesiastical tyranny. WE ate commonly charged, (upon the Thirtieth of January) with the guilt of put- ting the king to death, under a notion that it was our ancestors that did it ; and so we are represented in the blackest colours, not only as scismatics, but also as traitors and rebels, and all that is bad. And these lofty gentlemen usually rail upon this head, in such a manner as plainly shows, that they are either grossly ignorant of the history of those times which they speak of: or, which, is worse, that they are guilty of I he most shameful prevarication, slander and falsehood. — But every petty priest, with a roll and a. r gov}% thinks be must do something in imitation of his betters, in lawn, and show himself a true son of the church : And thus, through a foolish ambition, to appear considera- ble, they only render themselves contemptible. But suppose our fore-fathers did kill their mock Saint and Martyr, a century ago, what is that to us now ? If I mistake not, these gentlemen generally preach down the doctrine of the imputation of 'Adam's sin to his posterity, as absurd and unreasonable, not- withstanding they have solemnly subscribed what is equivalent to it in their own articles of religion. And therefore, one would hardly expect that they would lay the guilt of the kings death upon us, although our fore-fathers had been the only authors of it. But this conduct is much more surprising, when it does not ap- pear that our ancestors had any more hand in it than their own. — However, bigotry is sufficient to account tor this, and many other phenomena, which cannot be accounted for in any other way. Although the observation of this anniversary s<- to have been (at least) superstitious in its original ; 18 and although it is often abused to very bad purposes by the established clergy, as they servo themselves of it, to perpetuate strife, a party spirit, and divisions in the christian church ; yet it is to be hoped that one good end will be answered by it, quite contrary to their intention : It is to be hoped, that it will prove a standing memento, that Britons will not be slaves ; and a warning to all corrupt councellors and ministers, not to go too far in advising to arbitrary, despotic measures — To conclude : let us all learn to be free, and to be loyal. Let us not profess ourselves vessels to the law- less pleasure of any man on earth. But let us remember at the same time.government isaacffirf,and not to be tri- fled with. It is our happiness to live under the govern- ment of a Prince§ who is satisfied with ruling according to law as every other good prince will. We enjoy under his administration all the liberty that is proper and ex- pedient for us. It becomes us, therefore, to be content- ed, and dutiful subjects. Let us prize our freedom; but not use our liberty for a cloak of maliciousness * There are men who strike at liberty under the term licentiousness. There are others who aim at populari- ty under the disguise of patriotism. Be aware of both. Extremes are dangerous. There is at present amongst 7ts, perhaps, more danger of the latter, than of the former. For which reason I would exhort you to pay all due Regard to the government over us; to the KING and all in authority ; and to lead a quiet and peace- able life.^ And while I am speaking of loyalty to our earthly Prince, suffer me to put you in mind to be loyal also to the supreme RULER of the universe, by whom kings reign, and princes decree justice.^. To which king eternal, immortal, invisible, even to the ONLY WISE GOD,|| be all honor and praise, DO- MINION and thanksgiving, through JESUS CHRIST our LORD. AMEN. {GEORGE Ihe So ond. Tet, ii, 1ft. -I Tim. ii. 2. tProv. viii. 1 5. || Tim. f, 17. RD -70 "V Wfc r +& WW J" fe'- % A V- 1 #C>& OOBBS BROS. **. , LIBRARY BINDING ioEC i71< --V* ^\ \ I ST. AUGUSTINE .^j^LA. 4> ^§£^32084 LIBRARY OF CONGRESS | 020661 172 8