CHA P. IV.

Of the Duty of Civil Obedience as stated in the Chriftian Scriptures.

WE

E affirm, that as to the extent of our civil rights and obligations, Chriftianity hath left us where the found us that she hath neither altered, nor ascertained it -that the New Teftament contains not one paffage, which fairly interpreted, affords either argument or objection applicable to any conclufions upon the fubject, that are deduced from the law and religion of nature.

The only paffages which have been feriously alledged in the controverfy, or which it is neceffary for us to ftate and examine, are the two following; the one extracted from St. Paul's Epiftle to the Romans, the other from the First General Epistle of St. Peter.

VOL. II.

M

ROMANS

ROMANS Xiii. 1–7.

'Let every foul be fubje& unto the high er powers. For there is no power but of God; the powers that be, are ordained of 'God. Whofoever therefore refifteth the

·

power, refifteth the ordinance of God: ' and they that refift, shall receive to them'felves damnation. For rulers are not a

terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? Do that which is good, and thou fhalt have "praise of the fame: for he is the minifter ⚫ of God to thee for good. But if thou do 'that which is evil, be afraid; for he bear• eth not the fword in vain: for he is the minifter of God, a revenger to execute "wrath upon him that doeth evil. Where⚫ fore ye muft needs be fubject, not only 'for wrath, but also for confcience fake. For, for this caufe pay you tribute alfo: for they are God's minifters, attending

continually upon this very thing. Ren'der therefore to all their dues: tribute 'to whom tribute is due, cuftom to whom cuftom, fear to whom fear, honour to • whom honour,'

1. PETER . 13-18.

'Submit yourselves to every ordinance

· of

of man for the Lord's fake: whether it be to the King as fupreme; or unto Go*vernors, as unto them that are sent by him ' for the punishment of evil doers, and for the praise of them that do well. For fo is the will of God, that with well-doing ye may put to filence the ignorance of foolish men as free, and not using your

liberty for a cloak of maliciousness, but as the fervants of God.'

To comprehend the proper import of thefe inftructions, let the reader reflect, that upon the fubject of civil obedience there are two queftions; the firft, whether to obey government be a moral duty and obligation upon the confcience at all the fecond, how far, and to what cafes, that obedience ought to extend; that these two queftions, are fo diftir,guishable in the imagination, that it is poffible to treat of the one, without any thought of the other; and laftly, that if expreffions which relats to one of these questions be transferred and applied to the other, it is with great danger of giving them a fignification very m the author's meaning. This diftinction is not only poffible, but natural. If I met with a perfon, whe, appear.

different fro

ed to entertain doubts, whether civil obedience were a moral duty which ought to be voluntarily discharged, or whether it were not a mere fubmiffion to force, like that, which we yield to a robber, who holds a piftol to our breaft; I fhould reprefent to him the use and offices of civil government, the end and the neceffity of civil fubjection; or, if I preferred a different theory, I should explain to him the social compact, urge him with the obligation and the equity of his implied promise, and tacit confent to be governed by the laws of the ftate from which he received protection; or I should argue, perhaps, that Nature herself dictated the law of fubordination, when the planted within us an inclination to affociate with our fpecies, and framed us with capacities fo various and unequal. From whatever principle I fet out, I fhould labour to infer from it this conclufion, that obedience to the ftate, is to be numbered amongst the re'lative duties of human life, for the tranfgreffion of which, we shall be accounta"ble at the tribunal of divine justice, whe'ther the magiftrate, be able to punish us 'for it or not;' and being arrived at this conclufion, I should stop, having delivered

،

the

the conclufion itfelf, and throughout the whole argument expreffed the obedience, which I inculculated, in the moft general, and unqualified terms, all refervations and reftrictions being fuperfluous, and foreign to the doubts I was employed to remove.

If in a fhort time afterwards, I fhould be accofted by the fame perfon, with complaints of public grievances and apprehenfions of exorbitant taxes, of acts of cruelty and oppreffion, of tyrannical encroachments upon the ancient or ftipulated rights of the people, and should be confulted whether it were lawful to revolt, or justifiable to join in an attempt to shake off the yoke, and provide against the approaching danger, by open refiftance; I fhould certainly confider myself as having a case and queftion before me very different from the former. I fhould now define and difcriminate. I should reply, that if public expepediency be the foundation, it is alfo the measure of civil obedience; that the obligation of fubjects and fovereigns is reciprocal; that the duty of allegiance, whether it be founded in utility or compact, is neither unlimited nor unconditional;---that peace may be purchased too dear; that patience

becomes