The following sermon was delivered by Samuel West at Boston before the Council and House of Representatives.
Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work.
The great Creator, having designed the human race for society, has made
us dependent on one another for happiness. He has so constituted us that
it becomes both our duty and interest to seek the public good; and that we
may be the more firmly engaged to promote each other's welfare, the Deity
has endowed us with tender and social affections, with generous and
benevolent principles; hence the pain that we feel in seeing an object of
distress; hence the satisfaction that arises in relieving the afflictions, and
the superior pleasure which we experience in communicating happiness to
the miserable. The Deity has also invested us with moral powers and
faculties, by which we are enabled to discern the difference between right
and wrong, truth and falsehood, good and evil: hence the approbation of
mind that arises upon doing a good action, and the remorse of conscience
which we experience when we counteract the moral sense and do that
which is evil. This proves that, in what is commonly called a state of
nature, we are the subjects of the divine law and government; that the
Deity is our supreme magistrate, who has written his law in our hearts,
and will reward or punish us according as we obey or disobey his
commands. Had the human race uniformly persevered in a state of moral
rectitude, there would have been little or no need of any other law
besides that which is written in the heart,--for every one in such a state
would be a law unto himself. There could be no occasion for enacting or
enforcing of penal laws; for such are "not made for the righteous man, but
for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly, and for sinners, for the
unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for
manslayers, for whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with
mankind, for men-stealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be
any other thing that is contrary to" moral rectitude and the happiness of
mankind. The necessity of forming ourselves into politic bodies, and
granting to our rulers a power to enact laws for the public safety, and to
enforce them by proper penalties, arises from our being in a fallen and
degenerate state. The slightest view of the present state and condition of
the human race is abundantly sufficient to convince any person of
common sense and common honesty that civil government is absolutely
necessary for the peace and safety of mankind; and, consequently, that all
good magistrates, while they faithfully discharge the trust reposed in
them, ought to be religiously and conscientiously obeyed. An enemy to
good government is an enemy not only to his country, but to all mankind;
for he plainly shows himself to be divested of those tender and social
sentiments which are characteristic of a human temper, even of that
generous and benevolent disposition which is the peculiar glory of a
rational creature. An enemy to good government has degraded himself
below the rank and dignity of a man, and deserves too be classed with
the lower creation. Hence we find that wise and good men, of all nations
and religions, have ever inculcated subjection to good government, and
have borne their testimony against the licentious disturbers of the public
peace.
Nor has Christianity been deficient in this capital point. We find our
blessed Saviour directing the Jews to render to Caesar the things that
were Caesar's; and the apostles and the first preachers of the gospel not
only exhibited a good example of subjection to the magistrate, in all
things that were just and lawful, but they have also, in several places in
the New Testament, strongly enjoined upon Christians the duty of
submission to that government under which Providence had placed them.
Hence we find that those who despise government, and are not afraid to
speak evil of dignities, are, by the apostles Peter and Jude, classed
among those presumptuous, self-willed sinners that are reserved to the
judgment ofo the great day. And the apostle Paul judged submission to
civil government to be a matter of such great importance, that he
thought it worth his while to charge Titus to put his hearers in mind to
be submissive to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be
ready to every good work; as much as to say, none can be ready to
every good work, or be properly disposed to perform those actions that
tend to promote the public good, who do not obey magistrates, and who
do not become good subjects of civil government. If, then, obedience to
the civil magistrates is so essential to the character of a Christian, that
without it he cannot be disposed to perform those good works that are
necessary for the welfare of mankind,---if the despisers of governments
are those presumptuous, self-willed sinners who are reserved to the
judgment of the great day,---it is certainly a matter of the utmost
importance to us all to be thoroughly acquainted with the nature and
extent of our duty, that we may yield the obedience required; for it is
impossible that we should properly discharge a duty when we are
strangers to the nature and extent of it.
In order, therefore, that we may form a right judgment of the duty
enjoined in our text, I shall consider the nature and design of civil
government, and shall show that the same principles which oblige us to
submit to government do equally oblige us to resist tyranny; or that
tyranny and magistracy are so opposed to each other that where the one
begins the other ends. I shall then apply the present discourse to the
grand controversy that at this day subsists between Great Britain and
the American colonies.
That we may understand the nature and design of civil government, and
discover the foundation of the magistrate's authority to command, and
the duty of subjects to obey, it is necessary to derive civil government
from its original, in order to which we must consider what "state all
men are naturally in, and that is (as Mr. Locke observes) a state of
perfect freedom to order all their actions, and dispose of their
possessions and persons as they think fit, within the bounds of the law
of nature, without asking leave or depending upon the will of any man."
It is a state wherein all are equal,---no one having a right to control
another, or oppose him in what he does, unless it be in his own defence,
or in the defence of those that, being injured, stand in need of his
assistance.
Had men persevered in a state of moral rectitude, every one would have
been disposed to follow the law of nature, and pursue the general good.
In such a state, the wisest and most experienced would undoubtedly be
chosen to guide and direct those of less wisdom and experience than
themselves,---there being nothing else that could afford the least show
or appearance of any one's having the superiority oor precedency over
another; for the dictates of conscience and the precepts of natural law
being uniformly and regularly obeyed, men would only need to be
informed what things were most fit and prudent to be done in those
cases where their inexperiience or want of acquaintance left their minds
in doubt what was the wisest and most regular method for them to
pursue. In such cases it would be necessary for them to advise with
those who were wiser and more experienced than themselves. But these
advisers could claim no authority to compel or to use any forcible
measures to oblige any one to comply with their direction or advice.
There could be no occasion for the exertion of such a power; for every
man, being under the government of right reason, would immediately
feel himself constrained to comply with everything that appeared
reasonable or fit to be done, or that would any way tend to promote the
general good. This would have been the happy state of mankind had they
closely adhered to the law of nature, and persevered in their primitive
state.
Thus we see that a state of nature, though it be a state of perfect
freedom, yet is very far from a state of licentiousness. The law of nature
gives men noright to do anything that is immoral, or contrary of the will
of God, and injurious to their fellow-creatures; for a state of nature is
properly a state of law and government, even a government founded upon
the unchangeable nature of the Deity, and a law resulting from the eternal
fitness of things. Sooner shall heaven and earth pass away, and the whole
frame of nature be dissolved, than any part even the smallest iota, of this
law shall ever be abrogated; it is unchangeable as the Deity himself,
being a transcript of his moral perfections. A revelation, pretending to be
from God, that contradicts any part of natural law, ought immediately to
be rejected as an imposture; for the Deity cannot make a law contrary to
the law of nature without acting contrary to Himself,---a thing in the
strictest sense impossible for that which implies contradiction is not an
object of the divine power. Had this subject been properly attended to and
understood, the world had remained free from a multitude of absurd and
pernicious principles, which have been industriously propagated by artful
and designing men, both in politics and divinity. The doctrine of
non-resistance and unlimited passive obedience to the worst of tyrants
could never have found credit among mankind had the voice of reason
been hearkened to for a guide, because such a doctrine would
immediately have been discerned to be contrary to natural law.
In a state of nature we have a right to make the persons that have
injured us repair the damages that they have done us; and it is just in us
to inflict suchpunishment upon them as is necessary to restrain them
from doing the like for the future,---the whole end and design of
punishing being either to reclaim the individual punished, or to deter
others from being guilty of similar crimes. Whenever punishment exceeds
these bounds it becomes cruelty and revenge, and directly contrary to the
law of nature. Our wants and necessities being such as to render it
impossible in most cases to enjoy life in any tolerable degree without
entering into society, and there being innumerable cases wherein we need
the assistance of others, which it not afforded we should very soon
perish; hence the law of nature requires that we should endeavor to help
one another to the utmost of our power in all cases where our assistance
is necessary. It is our duty to endeavor always to promote the general
good; to do to all as we would be willing to be done by were we in their
circumstances; to do justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly before
God. These are some of the laws of nature which every man in the world
is bound to observe, and which whoever violates exposes himself to the
resentment of mankind, the lashes of his own conscience, and the
judgment of Heaven. This plainly shows that the highest state of liberty
subjects us to the law of nature and the government of God. The most
perfect freedom consists in obeying the dictates of right reason, and
submitting to natural law.When a man goes beyond or contrary to the law
of nature and reason, he becomes the slave of base passions and vile
lusts; he introduces confusion and disorder into society, and brings
misery and destruction upon himself. This, therefore, cannot be called a
state of freedom, but a state of the vilest slavery and the most dreadful
bondage. The servants of sin and corruption are subjected to the worst
kind of tyranny in the universe. Hence we conclude that where
licentiousness begins, liberty ends.
The law of nature is a perfect standard and measure of action for beings
that persevere in a state of moral rectitude; but the case is far different
with us, who are in a fallen and degenerate estate. We have a law in our
members which is continually warring against the law of the mind, by
which we often become enslaved to the basest lusts, and are brought into
bondage to the vilest passions. The strong propensities of our animal
nature often overcome the sober dictates of reason and conscience, and
betray us into actions injurious to the public and destructive of the
safety and happiness of society. Men of unbridled lusts, were they not
restrained by the power of the civil magistrate, would spread horror and
desolation all around them. This makes it absolutely necessary that
societies should form themselves into politic bodies, that they
may enact laws for the public safety, and appoint particular penalties for
the violation of their laws, and invest a suitable number of persons with
authority to put in execution and enforce the laws of the state, in order
that wicked men may be restrained from doing mischief to their
fellow-creatures, that the injured may have their rights restored to them,
that the virtuous may be encouraged in doing good, and that every member
of society may be protected and secured in the peaceable, quiet
possession and enjoyment of all those liberties and privileges which the
Deity has bestowed upon him; i.e., that he may safely enjoy and pursue
whatever he chooses, that is consistent with the public good. This shows
that the end and design of civil government cannot be to deprive men of
their liberty or take away their freedom; but, on the contrary, the true
design of civil government is to protect men in the enjoyment of liberty.
From hence it follows that tyranny and arbitrary power are utterly
inconsistent with and subversive of the very end and design of civil
government, and directly contrary to natural law, which is the true
foundation of civil government and all politic law. Consequently, the
authority of a tyrant is of itself null and void; for as no man can have a
right to act contrary to the law of nature, it is impossible that any
individual, or even the greatest number of men, can confer a right upon
another of which they themselves are not possessed; i.e., no body of
men can justly and lawfully authorize any person to tyrannize over and
enslave his fellow-creatures, or do anything contrary to equity and
goodness. As magistrates have no authority but what they derive from
the people, whenever they act contrary to the public good, and pursue
measures destructive of the peace and safety of the community, they
forfeit their right to govern the people. Civil rulers and magistrates are
properly of human creation; they are set up by the people to be the
guardians of their rights, and to secure their persons from being injured
or oppressed,---the safety of the public being the supreme law of the
state, by which the magistrates are to be governed, and which they
are to consult upon all occasions. The modes of administration may be
very different, and the forms of government may vary from each other in
different ages and nations; but, under every form, the end of civil
government is the same, and cannot vary; it is like the laws of the
Medes and Persians--it altereth not.
Though magistrates are to consider themselves as the servants of the
people, seeing from them it is that they derive their powers and
authority, yet they may also be considered as the ministers of God
ordained by him for the good of mankind; for, under him, as the
Supreme Magistrate of the universe, they are to act: and it is God who
has not only declared in his word what are the necessary qualifications
of a ruler, but who also raised up and qualifies men for such an
important station. The magistrate may also, in a more strict and proper
sense, be said to be ordained of God, because reason, which is the
voice of God, plainly requires such an order of men to be appointed for
the public good. Now, whatever right reason requires as necessary to be
done is as much the will and law of God as though it were enjoined us
by an immediate revelation from heaven, or commanded in the sacred
Scriptures.
From this account of the origin, nature, and design of civil government,
we may be very easily led into a thorough knowledge of our duty; we
may see the reason why we are bound to obey magistrates, viz., because
they are the ministers of God for good unto the people. While, therefore,
they rule in the fear of God, and while they promote the welfare of the
state,--i.e., while they act in the character of magistrates,--it is the
indispensable duty of all to submit to them, and to oppose a turbulent,
factious, and libertine spirit, whenever and wherever it discovers itself.
When a people have by their free consent conferred upon a number of
men a power to rule and govern them, they are bound to obey them.
Hence disobedience becomes a breach of faith; it is violating a
constitution of their own appointing, and breaking a compact for which
they ought to have the most sacred regard. Such a conduct discovers
so base and disingenuous a temper of mind, that it must expose them to
contempt in the judgment of all the sober, thinking part of mankind.
Subjects are bound to obey lawful magistrates by every tender tie of
human nature, which disposes us to consult the public good, and to seek
the good of our brethren, our wives, our children, our friends and
acquaintance; for he that opposes lawful authority does really oppose the
safety and happiness of his fellow-creatures. A factious, seditious person,
that opposes good government, is a monster in nature; for he is an enemy
to his own species, and destitute of the sentiments of humanity.
Subjects are also bound to obey magistrates, for conscience' sake, out of
regard to the divine authority, and out of obedience to the will of God;
for if magistrates are the ministers of God, we cannot disobey them
without being disobedient to the law of God; and this extends to all men
in authority, from the highest ruler to the lowest officer in the state. To
oppose them when in the exercise of lawful authority is an act of
disobedience to the Deity, and, as such, will be punished by him. It will,
doubtless, be readily granted by every honest man that we ought
cheerfully to obey the magistrate, and submit to all such regulations of
government as tend to promote the public good; but as this general
definition may be liable to be misconstrued, and every man may think
himself at liberty to disregard any laws that do not suit his interest,
humor, or fancy, I would observe that, in a multitude of cases, many
of us, for want of being properly acquainted with affairs of state, may
be very improper judges of particular laws, whether they are just or not.
In such cases it becomes us, as good members of society, peaceably
and conscientiously to submit, though we cannot see the reasonableness
of every law to which we submit, and that for this plain reason: if any
number of men should take it upon themselves to oppose authority for
acts, which may be really necessary for the public safety, only because
they do not see the reasonableness of them, the direct consequence will
be introducing confusion and anarchy into the state.
It is also necessary that the minor part should submit to the major; e.g.,
when legislators have enacted a set of laws which are highly approved
by a large majority of the community as tending to promote the public
good, in this case, if a small number of persons are so unhappy as to
view the matter in a very different point of light from the public, though
they have an undoubted right to show the reasons of their dissent from
the judgment of the public, and may lawfully use all proper arguments to
convince the public of what they judge to be an error, yet, if they fail in
their attempt, and the majority still continue to approve of the laws that
are enacted, it is the duty of those few that dissent peaceably and for
conscience's sake to submit to the public judgment, unless something is
required of them which they judge would be sinful for them to comply
with; for in that case they ought to obey the dictates of their own
consciences rather than any human authority whatever. Perhaps, also,
some cases of intolerable oppression, where compliance would bring on
inevitable ruin and destruction, may justly warrant the few to refuse
submission to what they judge inconsistent with their peace and safety;
for the law of self-preservation will always justify opposing a cruel and
tyrannical imposition, except where opposition is attended with greater
evils than submission, which is frequently the case where a few are
oppressed by a large and powerful majority. Except the above-named
cases, the minor ought always to submit to the major; otherwise, there
can be no peace nor harmony in society. And, besides, it is the major
part of a community that have the sole right of establishing a
constitution and authorizing magistrates; and consequently it is only the
major part of the community that can claim the right of altering the
constitution, and displacing the magistrates; for certainly common sense
will tell us that it requires as great an authority to set aside a
constitution as there was at first to establish it. The collective body,
not a few individuals, ought to constitute the supreme authority of the
state.
The only difficulty remaining is to determine when a people may claim
a right of forming themselves into a body politic, and assume the powers
of legislation. In order to determine this point, we are to remember that
all men being by nature equal, all the members of a community have a
natural right to assemble themselves together, and act and vote for such
regulations as they judge are necessary for the good of the whole. But
when a community is become very numerous, it is very difficult, and in
many cases impossible, for all to meet together to regulate the affairs of
the state; hence comes the necessity of appointing delegates to
represent the people in a general assembly. And this ought to be looked
upon as a sacred and inalienable right, of which a people cannot justly
divest themselves, and which no human authority can in equity ever take
from them, viz., that not one be obliged to submit to any law except
such as are made either by himself or by his representative.
If representation and legislation are inseparably connected, it follows,
that when great numbers have emigrated into a foreign land, and are so
far removed from the parent state that they neither are or can be properly
represented by the government from which they have emigrated, that then
nature itself points out the necessity of their assuming to themselves the
powers of legislation; and they have a right to consider themselves as a
separate state from the other, and, as such, to form themselves into a
body politic.
In the next place, when a people find themselves cruelly oppressed by
the parent state, they have an undoubted right to throw off the yoke, and
assert their liberty, if they find good reason to judge that they have
sufficient power and strength to maintain their ground in defending their
just rights against their oppressors; for, in this case, by the law of
self-preservation, which is the first law of nature, they have not only an
undoubted right, but it is their indispensable duty, if they cannot be
redressed any other way, to renounce all submission to the government
that has oppressed them, and set up an independent state of their own,
even though they may be vastly inferior in numbers too the state that
has oppressed them. When either of the aforesaid cases takes place, and
more especially when both concur, no rational man, I imagine, can have
any doubt in his own mind whether such a people have a right to form
themselves into a body politic, and assume to themselves all the powers
of a free state. For, can it be rational to suppose that a people should be
subjected to the tyranny of a set of men who are perfect strangers to
them, and cannot be supposed to have that fellow-feeling for them that
we generally have for those with whom we are connected and acquainted;
and, besides, through their unacquaintedness with the circumstances of
the people over whom they claim the right of jurisdiction, are utterly
unable to judge, in a multitude of cases, which is best for them?
It becomes me not to say what particular form of government is best for
a community,--whether a pure democracy, aristocracy, monarchy, or a
mixture of all the three simple forms. They have all their advantages and
disadvantages, and when they are properly administered may, any of
them, answer the design of civil government tolerably. Permit me,
however, to say, that an unlimited, absolute monarchy, and an aristocracy
not subject to the control of the people, are two of the most exceptionable
forms of government: firstly, because in neither of them is there a proper
representation of the people; and, secondly, because each of them being
entirely independent of the people, they are very apt to degenerate into
tyranny. However, in this imperfect state, we cannot expect to have
government formed upon such a basis but that it may be perverted by bad
men to evil purposes. A wise and good man would be very loth to
undermine a constitution that was once fixed and established, although he
might discover many imperfections in it; and nothing short of the most
urgent necessity would ever induce him to consent too it; because the
unhinging a people from a form of government to which they had been
long accustomed might throw them into such a state of anarchy and
confusion as might terminate in their destruction, or perhaps, in the end,
subject them to the worst kind of tyranny.
Having thus shown the nature, end, and design of civil government, and
pointed out the reasons why subjects are bound to obey magistrates,--viz.,
because in so doing they both consult their own happiness as individuals,
and also promote the public good and the safety of the state,---I proceed,
in the next place, to show that the same principles that oblige us to
submit to civil government do also equally oblige us, where we have
power and ability, to resist and oppose tyranny; and that where tyranny
begins government ends. For, if magistrates have no authority but what
they derive from the people; if they are properly of human creation; if the
whole end and design of their institution is to promote the general good,
and to secure to men their just rights,--it will follow, that when they act
contrary to the end and design of their creation they cease being
magistrates, and the people which gave them their authority have the right
to take it from them again. This is a very plain dictate of common sense,
which universally obtains in all similar cases; for who is there that,
having employed a number of men to do a particular piece of work for him,
but what would judge that he had a right too dismiss them from his
service when he found that they went directly contrary to his orders, and
that, instead of accomplishing the business he had set them about, they
would infallibly ruin and destroy it? If, then, men, in the common affairs
of life, always judge that they have a right to dismiss from their service
such persons as counteract their plans and designs, though the damage
will affect only a few individuals, much more must the body politic have
a right to depose any persons, though appointed to the highest place of
power and authority, when they find that they are unfaithful to the trust
reposed in them, and that, instead of consulting the general good, they
are disturbing the peace of society by making laws cruel and oppressive,
and by depriving the subjects of their just rights and privileges. Whoever
pretends to deny this proposition must give up all pretence of being
master of that common sense and reason by which the Deity has
distinguished us from the brutal herd.
As our duty of obedience to the magistrate is founded upon our obligation
to promote the general good, our readiness to obey lawful authority will
always arise in proportion to the love and regard that we have for the
welfare of the public; and the same love and regard for the public will
inspire us with as strong a zeal to oppose tyranny as we have to obey
magistracy. Our obligation to promote the public good extends as much to
the opposing every exertion of arbitrary power that is injurious to the
state as it does to the submitting to good and wholesome laws. No man,
therefore, can be a good member of the community that is not as zealous
to oppose tyranny as he is ready to obey magistracy. A slavish
submission to tyranny is a proof of a very sordid and base mind. Such a
person cannot be under the influence of any generous human sentiments,
nor have a tender regard for mankind.
Further: if magistrates are no farther ministers of God than they promote
the good of the community, then obedience to them neither is nor can be
unlimited; for it would imply a gross absurdity to assert that, when
magistrates are ordained by the people solely for the purpose of being
beneficial to the state, they must be obeyed when they are seeking to
ruin and destroy it. This would imply that men were bound too act
against the great law of self-preservation, and to contribute their
assistance to their own ruin and destruction, in order that they may
please and gratify the greatest monsters in nature, who are violating the
laws of God and destroying the rights of mankind. Unlimited submission
and obedience is due to none but God alone. He has an absolute right to
command; he alone has an uncontrollable sovereignty over us, because he
alone is unchangeably good; he never will nor can require of us,
consistent with his nature and attributes, anything that is not fit and
reasonable; his commands are all just and good; and to suppose that he
has given to any particular set of men a power to require obedience to
that which is unreasonable, cruel, and unjust, is robbing the Deity of his
justice and goodness, in which consists the peculiar glory of the divine
character, and it is representing him under the horrid character of a
tyrant.
If magistrates are ministers of God only because the law of God and
reason points out the necessity of such an institution for the good of
mankind, it follows, that whenever they pursue measures directly
destructive of the public good they cease being God's ministers, they
forfeit their right to obedience from the subject, they become the pests of
society, and the community is under the strongest obligation of duty, both
to God and to its own members, to resist and oppose them, which will be
so far from resisting the ordinance of God that it will be strictly obeying
his commands. To suppose otherwise will imply that the Deity requires of
us an obedience that is self-contradictory and absurd, and that one part of
his law is directly contrary to the other, i. e., while he commands us to
pursue virtue and the general good, he does at the same time require us to
persecute virtue, and betray the general good, by enjoining us obedience to
the wicked commands of tyrannical oppressors. Can any one not lost to the
principles of humanity undertake to defend such absurd sentiments as
these? As the public safety is the first and grand law of society, so no
community can have a right to invest the magistrate with any power or
authority that will enable him to act against the welfare of the state and
the good of the whole. If men have at any time wickedly and foolishly
given up their just rights into the hands of the magistrate, such acts are
null and void, of course; to suppose otherwise will imply that we have a
right to invest the magistrate with a power to act contrary to the law of
God,--which is as much as to say that we are not the subjects of divine
law and government. What has been said is, I apprehend, abundantly
sufficient to show that tyrants are no magistrates, or that whenever
magistrates abuse their power and authority to the subverting the public
happiness, their authority immediately ceases, and that it not only
becomes lawful, but an indispensable duty to oppose them; that the
principle of self-preservation, the affection and duty that we owe to our
country, and the obedience we owe the Deity, do all require us to oppose
tyranny.
If it be asked, Who are the proper judges to determine when rulers are
guilty of tyranny and oppression? I answer, the public. Not a few
disaffected individuals, but the collective body that invests rulers with
their power and authority, so it is the collective body that has the sole
right of judging whether rulers act up to the end of their institution or
not. Great regard ought always to be paid to the judgment of the public.
It is true the public may be imposed upon by a misrepresentation of
facts; but this may be said of the public, which cannot always be said
of individuals, viz., that thepublic is always willing to be rightly
informed, and when it has proper matter of conviction laid before it
its judgment is always right.
This account of the nature and design of civil government, which is so
clearly suggested to us by the plain principles of common sense and
reason, is abundantly confirmed by the sacred Scriptures, even by those
very texts which have been brought by men of slavish principles to
establish the absurd doctrine of unlimited passive obedience and
non-resistance, as will abundantly appear by examining the two most
noted texts that are commonly brought to support the strange doctrine of
passive obedience. The first that I shall cite is in 1 Peter 2:13, 14:
"Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man,"---or, rather, as the
words ought to be rendered from the Greek, submit yourselves to every
human creation, or human constitution,---"for the Lord's sake, whether
it be to the king as supreme, or unto governors, as unto them that are
sent by him for the punishment of evil-doers, and for the praise of
them that do well." Here we see that the apostle asserts that
magistracy is of human creation or appointment; that is, that
magistrates have no power or authority but what they derive from the
people; that this power they are to exert for the punishment of evil-doers,
and for the praise of them that do well; i. e., the end and design of
the appointment of magistrates is to restrain wicked men, by proper
penalties, from injuring society, and to encourage and honor the virtuous
and obedient. Upon this account Christians are to submit to them for the
Lord's sake; which is as if he had said, Though magistrates are of mere
human appointment, and can claim no power or authority but what they
derive from the people, yet, as they are ordained by men to promote the
general good by punishing evil-doers and by rewarding and encouraging
the virtuous and obedient, you ought to submit to them out of a sacred
regard to the divine authority; for as they, in the faithful discharge of
their office, do fulfill the will of God, so ye, by submitting to them, do
fulfil the divine command. If the only reason assigned by the apostle
why magistrates should be obeyed out of a regard to the divine authority
is because they punish the wicked and encourage the good, it follows, that
when they punish the virtuous and encourage the vicious we have a right
to refuse yielding any submission or obedience to them; i. e., whenever
they act contrary to the end and design of their institution, they forfeit
their authority to govern the people, and the reason for submitting to them,
out of regard to the divine authority, immediately ceases; and they being
only of human appointment, the authority which the people gave them the
public have a right to take from them, and to confer it upon those who are
more worthy. So far is this text from favoring arbitrary principles, that
there is nothing in it but what is consistent with and favorable to the
highest liberty that any man can wish to enjoy; for this text requires us to
submit to the magistrate no further than he is the encourager and protector
of virtue and the punisher of vice; and this is consistent with all that
liberty which the Deity has bestowed upon us.
The other text which I shall mention, and which has been made use of by
the favorers of arbitrary government as their great sheet-anchor and main
support, is in Romans 13, the first six verses: "Let every soul be subject
to the higher powers; for there is no power but of God. The powers that
be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth
the ordinance of God; and they that resist shall receive to themselves
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
shalt have praise of the same: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to
execute wrath upon him that doth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be
subject not only for wrath, but also for conscience' sake. For, for this
cause pay you tribute also; for they are God's ministers, attending
continually upon this very thing." A very little attention, I apprehend, will
be sufficient to show that this text is so far from favoring arbitrary
government, that, on the contrary, it strongly holds forth the principles of
true liberty. Subjection to the higher powers is enjoined by the apostle
because there is no power but of God; the powers that be are ordained of
God; consequently, to resist the power is to resist the ordinance of God:
and he repeatedly declares that the ruler is the minister of God. Now,
before we can say whether this text makes for or against the doctrine of
unlimited passive obedience, we must find out in what sense the apostle
affirms that magistracy is the ordinance of God, and what he intends
when he calls the ruler the minister of God.
I can think but of three possible senses in which magistracy can with any
propriety be called God's ordinance, or in which rulers can be said to be
ordained of God as his ministers. The first is a plain declaration from the
word of God that such a one and his descendants are, and shall be, the
only true and lawful magistrates: thus we find in Scripture the kingdom of
Judah to be settled by divine appointment in the family of David. Or,
Secondly, by an immediate commission from God, ordering and appointing
such a one by name to be the ruler over the people: thus Saul and David
were immediately appointed by God to be kings over Israel. Or,
Thirdly, Magistracy may be called the ordinance of God, and rulers may be
called the ministers of God, because the nature and reason of things,
which is the law of God, requires such an institution for the preservation
and safety of civil society. In the two first senses the apostle cannot be
supposed to affirm that magistracy is God's ordinance, for neither he nor
any of the sacred writers have entailed the magistracy to any one
particular family under the gospel dispensation. Neither does he nor any of
the inspired writers give us the least hint that any person should ever be
immediately commissioned from God to bear rule over the people. The
third sense, then, is the only sense in which the apostle can be supposed
to affirm that the magistrate is the minister of God, and that magistracy
is the ordinance of God; viz., that the nature and reason of things require
such an institution for the preservation and safety of mankind. Now, if this
be the only sense in which the apostle affirms that mafistrates are
ordained of God as his ministers, resistance must be criminal only so far
forth as they are the ministers of God, i. e., while they act up to the end
of the institution, and ceases being criminal when they cease being the
ministers of God, i.e., when they act contrary to the general good, and
seek to destroy the liberties of the people.
That we have gotten the apostle's sense of magistracy being the ordinance
of God, will plainly appear from the text itself; for, after having asserted
that to resist the power is to resist the ordinance of God, and they that
resist shall receive to themselves damnation, he immediately adds as the
reason of this assertion, "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 shalt have praise of the same: for he is the minister of God to
thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth
not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute
wrath upon him that doth evil." Here is a plain declaration of the sense in
which he asserts that the authority of the magistrate is ordained of God,
viz., because rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil;
therefore we ought to dread offending them, for we cannot offend them but
by doing evil; and if we do evil we have just reason to fear their power;
for they bear not the sword in vain, but in this case the magistrate is a
revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil: but is we are found
doers of that which is good, we have no reason to fear the authority of
the magistrate; for in this case, instead of being punished, we shall be
protected and encouraged. The reason why the magistrate is called the
minister of God is because he is to protect, encourage, and honor them
that do well, and to punish them that do evil; therefore it is our duty to
submit to them, not merely for fear of being punished by them, but out of
regard to the divine authority, under which they are deputed to execute
judgement and to do justice. For this reason, according to the apostle,
tribute is to be paid them, because, as the ministers of God, their whole
business is to protect every man in the enjoyment of his just rights and
privileges, and to punish every evil-doer.
If the apostle, then, asserts that rulers are ordained of God only because
they are a terror to evil works and a praise to them that do well; if they
are ministers of God only because they encourage virtue and punish vice;
if for this reason only they are to be obeyed for conscience' sake; if the
sole reason why they have a right to tribute is because they devote
themselves wholly to the business of securing to men their just rights,
and to the punishing of evil-doers,--it follows, by undeniable
consequence, that when they become the pests of human society, when
they promote and encourage evil-doers, and become a terror to good
works, they then cease being the ordinance of God; they are no longer
rulers nor ministers of God; they are so far from being the powers that
are ordained of God that they become the ministers of the powers of
darkness, and it is so far from being a crime to resist them, that in
many cases it may be highly criminal in the sight of Heaven to refuse
resisting and opposing them to the utmost of our power; or, in other
words, that the same reasons that require us to obey the ordinance
of God, do equally oblige us, when we have power and opportunity, to
oppose and resist the ordinance of Satan.
Hence we see that the apostle Paul, instead of being a friend to
tyranny and arbitrary government, turns out to be a strong advocate for
the just rights of mankind, and is for our enjoying all that liberty with
which God has invested us; for no power (according to the apostle) is
ordained of God but what is an encourager of every good and virtuous
action,---"Do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the
same." No man need to be afraid of this power which is ordained of
God who does nothing but what is agreeable to the law of God; for this
power will not restrain us from exercising any liberty which the Deity
has granted us; for the minister of God is to restrain us from nothing
but the doing of that which is evil, and to this we have no right. To
practise evil is not liberty, but licentiousness. Can we conceive of a
more perfect, equitable, and generous plan of government that this which
the apostle has laid down, viz., to have rulers appointed over us to
encourage us to every good and virtuous action, to defend and protect us
in our just rights and privileges, and to grant us everything that can
tend to promote our true interest and happiness; to restrain every
licentious action, and to punish every one that would injure or harm us;
to become a terror of evil-doers; to make and execute such just and
righteous laws as shall effectually deter and hinder men from the
commission of evil, and to attend continually upon this very thing; to
make it their constant care and study, day and night, to promote the
good and welfare of the community, and to oppose all evil practices?
Deservedly may such rulers be called the ministers of God for good.
They carry on the same benevolent design towards the community which
the great Governor of the universe does towards his whole creation.
'Tis the indispensable duty of a people to pay tribute, and to afford an
easy and comfortable subsistence to such rulers, because they are the
ministers of God, who are continually laboring and employing their time
for the good of the community. He that resists such magistrates does,
in a very emphatical sense, resist the ordinance of God; he is an enemy
to mankind, odious to God, and justly incurs the sentence of
condemnation from the great Judge of quick and dead. Obedience to such
magistrates is yielding obedience to the will of God, and, therefore,
ought to be performed from a sacred regard to the divine authority.
For any one from hence to infer that the apostle enjoins in this text
unlimited obedience to the worst of tyrants, and that he pronounces
damnation upon those that resist the arbitrary measures of such pests of
society, is just as good sense as if one should affirm, that because the
Scripture enjoins us obedience to the laws of God, therefore we may not
oppose the power of darkness; or because we are commanded to submit
to the ordinance of God, therefore we may not resist the ministers of
Satan. Such wild work must be made with the apostle before he can be
brought to speak the language of oppression! It is as plain, I think, as
words can make it, that, according to this text, no tyrant can be a ruler;
for the apostle's definition of a ruler is, that he is not a terror to good
works, but to the evil; and that he is one who is to praise and encourage
those that do well. Whenever, then, the ruler uncourages them that do
evil, and is a terror to those that do well,--i. e., as soon as he becomes
a tyrant,---he forfeits his authority to govern, and becomes the minister
of Satan, and, as such, ought to be opposed.
I know it is said that the magistrates were, at the time when the apostle
wrote, heathens, and that Nero, that monster of tyranny, was then Emperor
of Rome; that therefore the apostle, by enjoining submission to the powers
that then were, does require unlimited obedience to be yielded to the
worst of tyrants. Now, not to insist upon what has been often observed,
viz., that this epistle was written most probably about the beginning of
Nero's reign, at which time he was a very humane and merciful prince, did
everything that was generous and benevolent to the public, and showed
every act of mercy and tenderness to particulars, and therefore might at
that time justly deserve the character of the minister of God for good to
the people,--I say, waiving this, we will suppose that this epistle was
written after that Nero was become a monster of tyranny and wickedness;
it will by no means follow from thence that the apostle meant to enjoin
unlimited subjection to such an authority, or that he intended to affirm
that such a cruel, despotic authority was the ordinance of God. The plain,
obvious sense of his words, as we have already seen, forbids such a
construction to be put upon them, for they plainly imply a strong
abhorrence and disapprobation of such a character, and clearly prove that
Nero, so far forth as he was a tyrant, could not be the minister of God,
nor have a right to claim submission from the people; so that this ought,
perhaps, rather to be viewed as a severe satire upon Nero, than as
enjoining any submission to him.
It is also worthy to be observed that the apostle prudently waived
mentioning any particular persons that were then in power, as it might
have been construed in an invidious light, and exposed the primitive
Christians to the severe resentments of the men that were then in power.
He only in general requires submission to the higher powers, because the
powers that be are ordained of God. Now, though the emperor might at that
time be such a tyrant that he could with no propriety be said to be
ordained of God, yet it would be somewhat strange if there were no men
in power among the Romans that acted up to the character of good
magistrates, and that deserved to be esteemed as the ministers of God
for good unto the people. If there were any such, notwithstanding the
tyranny of Nero, the apostle might with great propriety enjoin submission
to those powers that were ordained of God, and by so particularly pointing
out the end and design of magistrates, and giving his definition of a ruler,
he might design to show that neither Nero, nor any other tyrant, ought to
be esteemed as the minister of God. Or, rather,--which appears to me to
be the true sense,--the apostle meant to speak of magistracy in general,
without any reference to the emperor, or any other person in power, that
was then at Rome; and the meaning of this passage is as if he had said,
It is the duty of every Christian to be a good subject of civil government,
for the power and authority of the civil magistrate are from God; for the
powers that be are ordained of God; i. e., the authority of the magistrates
that are now either at Rome or elsewhere is ordained of the Deity.
Wherever you find any lawful magistrates, remember, they are of divine
ordination. But that you understand what I mean when I say that
magistrates are of divine ordination, I will show you how you may discern
who are lawfull magistrates, and ordained of God, from those who are not.
Those only are to be esteemed lawful magistrates, and ordained of God,
who pursue the public good by honoring and encouraging those that do well
and punishing all that do evil. Such, and such only, wherever they are to
be found, are the ministers of God for good: to resist such is resisting the
ordinance of God, and exposing yourselves to the divine wrath and
condemnation.
In either of these senses the text cannot make anything in favor of
arbitrary government. Nor could he with any propriety tell them that they
need not be afraid of the power so long as they did that which was good,
if he meant to recommend an unlimited submission to a tyrannical Nero;
for the best characters were the likeliest to fall a sacrifice to his malice.
And, besides, such an injunction would be directly contrary to his own
practice, and the practice of the primitive Christians, who refused to
comply with the sinful commands of men in power; their answer in such
cases being this, We ought to obey God rather than men. Hence the apostle
Paul himself suffered many cruel persecutions because he would not renounce
Christianity, but persisted in opposing the idolatrous worship of the pagan
world.
This text, being rescued from the absurd interpretations which the favorers
of arbitrary government have put upon it, turns out to be a noble confirmation
of that free and generous plan of government which the law of nature and
reason points out to us. Nor can we desire a more equitable plan of
government than what the apostle has here laid down; for, if we consult our
happiness and real good, we can never wish for an unreasonable liberty, viz.,
a freedom to do evil, which, according to the apostle, is the only thing that
the magistrate is to refrain us from. To have a liberty to do whatever is fit,
reasonable, or good, is the highest degree of freedom that rational beings can
possess. And how honorable a station are those men placed in, by the
providence of God, whose business it is to secure to men this rational
liberty, and to promote the happiness and welfare of society, by suppressing
vice and immorality, and by honoring and encouraging everything that is
honorable, virtuous, and praiseworthy! Such magistrates ought to be honored
and obeyed as the ministers of God and the servants of the King of Heaven.
Can we conceive of a larger and more generous plan of government than this
of the apostle? Or can we find words more plainly expressive of a
disapprobation of an arbitrary and tyrannical government? I never read this
text without admiring the beauty and nervousness of it; and I can hardly
conceive how he could express more ideas in so few words than he has
done. We see here, in one view, the honor that belongs to the magistrate,
because he is ordained of God for the public good. We have his duty
pointed out, viz., to honor and encourage the virtuous, to promote the real
good of the community, and to punish all wicked and injurious persons.
We are taught the duty of the subject, viz., to obey the magistrate for
conscience' sake, because he is ordained of God; and that rulers, being
continually employed under God for our good, are to be generously
maintained by the paying them tribute; and that disobedience to rulers
is highly criminal, and will expose us to the divine wrath. The liberty
of the subject is also clearly asserted, viz., that subjects are to be
allowed to do everything that is in itself just and right, and are only
to be restrained from being guilty of wrong actions. It is also strongly
implied, that when rulers become oppressive to the subject and injurious
to the state, their authority, their respect, their maintenance, and the
duty of submitting to them, must immediately cease; they are then to
be considered as the ministers of Satan, and, as such, it becomes
our indispensable duty to resist and oppose them.
Thus we see that both reason and revelation perfectly agree in
pointing out the nature, end, and design of government, viz., that it
is to promote the welfare and happiness of the community; and that
subjects have a right to do everything that is good, praiseworthy, and
consistent with the good of the community, and are only to be
restrained when they do evil and are injurious either to individuals or
the whole community; and that they ought to submit to every law
that is beneficial to the community for conscience's sake, although it
may in some measure interfere with their private interest; for every
good man will be ready to forego his private interest for the sake of
being beneficial to the public. Reason and revelation, we see, do both
teach us that our obedience to rulers is not unlimited, but that
resistance is not only allowable, but an indispensable duty in the case
of intolerable tyranny and oppression. From both reason and revelation
we learn that, as the public safety is the supreme law of the state,--
being the true standard and measure by which we are to judge whether
any law or body of laws are just or not,--so legislatures have a right
to make, and require subjection to, any set of laws that have a tendency
to promote the good of the community.
Our governors have a right to take every proper method to form
the minds of their subjects so that they may become good members
of society. The great difference that we may observe among the several
classes of mankind arises chiefly from their education and their laws:
hence men become virtuous or vicious, good commonwealthsmen or
the contrary, generous, noble, and courageous, or base, mean-spirited,
and cowardly, according to the impression that they have received
from the government that they are under, together with their education
and the methods that have been practised by their leaders to form
their minds in early life. Hence the necessity of good laws to encourage
every noble and virtuous sentiment, to suppress vice and immorality,
to promote industry, and to punish idleness, that parent of innumerable
evils; to promote arts and sciences, and to banish ignorance from
among mankind.
And as nothing tends like religion and the fear of God to make men good
members of the commonwealth, it is the duty of magistrates to become
the patrons and promoters of religion and piety, and to make suitable
laws for the maintaining public worship, and decently supporting the
teachers of religion. Such laws, I apprehend, are absolutely necessary
for the well-being of civil society. Such laws may be made, consistent
with all that liberty of conscience which every good member of society
ought to be possessed of; for, as there are few, if any, religious
societies among us but what profess to believe and practise all the
great duties of religion and morality that are necessary for the
well-being of society and the safety of the state, let every one be
allowed to attend worship in his own society, or in that way that he
judges most agreeable to the will of God, and let him be obliged to
contribute his assistance to the supporting and defraying the necessary
charges of his own meeting. In this case no one can have any right
to complain that he is deprived of liberty of conscience, seeing that he
has a right to choose and freely attend that worship that appears to
him to be most agreeable to the will of God; and it must be very
unreasonable for him to object against being obliged to contribute his
part towards the support of that worship which he has chosen.
Whether some such method as this might not tend, in a very eminent
manner, to promote the peace and welfare of society, I must leave
to the wisdom of our legislators to determine; be sure it would take
off some of the most popular objections against being obliged by law
to support public worship while the law restricts that support only
to one denomination.
But for the civil authority to pretend to establish particular modes
of faith and forms of worship, and to punish all that deviate from
the standard which our superiors have set up, is attended with the
most pernicious consequences to society. It cramps all free and
rational inquiry, fills the world with hypocrits and superstitious
bigots--nay, with infidels and skeptics; it exposes men of religion
and conscience to the rage and malice of fiery, blind zealots, and
dissolves every tender tie of human nature; in short, it introduces
confusion and every evil work. And I cannot but look upon it as a
peculiar blessing of Heaven that we live in a land where every one
can freely deliver his sentiments upon religious subjects, and have
the privilege of worshipping God according to the dictates of his
own conscience without any molestation or disturbance,--a
privilege which I hope we shall ever keep up and strenuously
maintain. No principles ought ever to be discountenanced by civil
authority but such as tend to the subversion of the state. So long
as a man is a good member of society, he is accountable to God
alone for his religious sentiments; but when men are found
disturbers of the public peace, stirring up sedition, or practising
against the state, no pretence of religion or conscience ought to
screen them from being brought to condign punishment. But then,
as the end and design of punishment is either to make restitution
to the injured or to restrain men from committing the like crimes
for the future, so, when these important ends are answered, the
punishment ought to cease; for whatever is inflicted upon a man
under the notion of punishment, but is properly cruelty and base
revenge.
From this account of civil government we learn that the business
of magistrates is weighty and important. It requires both wisdom and
integrity. When either are wanting, government will be poorly
administered; more especially if our governors are men of loose morals
and abandoned principles; for if a man is not faithful to God and his
own soul, how can we expect that he will be faithful to the public?
There was a great deal of propriety in the advice that Jethro gave to
Moses to provide able men,--men of truth, that feared God, and that
hated covetousness,--and to appoint them for rulers over the people.
For it certainly implies a very gross absurdity to suppose that those
who are ordained of God, or that the ministers of God should be despisers
of the divine commands. David, the man after God's own heart, makes
piety a necessary qualification in a ruler: "He that ruleth over men
(says he) must be just, ruling in the fear of God." It is necessary it
should be so, for the welfare and happiness of the state; for, to say
nothing of the venality and corruption, of the tyranny and oppression,
that will take place under unjust rulers, barely their vicious and
irregular lives will have a most pernicious effect upon the lives and
manners of their subjects: their authority becomes despicable in the
opinion of discerning men. And, besides, with what face can they
make or execute laws against vices which they practise with greediness?
A people that have a right of choosing their magistrates are criminally
guilty in the sight of Heaven when they are governed by caprice and
humor, or are influenced by bribery to choose magistrates that are
irreligious men, who are devoid of sentiment, and of bad morals and
base lives. Men cannot be sufficiently sensible what a curse they may
bring upon themselves and their posterity by foolishly and wickedly
choosing men of abandoned characters and profligate lives for their
magistrates and rulers.
We have already seen that magistrates who rule in the fear of
God ought not only to be obeyed as the ministers of God, but that
they ought also to be handsomely supported, that they may cheerfully
and freely attend upon the duties of their station; for it is a great
shame and disgrace to society to see men that serve the public laboring
under indigent and needy circumstances; and, besides, it is a maxim
of eternal truth that the laborer is worthy of his reward.
It is also a great duty incumbent on people to treat those in
authority with all becoming honor and respect,--to be very careful of
casting any aspersion upon their characters. To despise government,
and to speak evil of dignities, is represented in Scripture as one of the
worst of characters; and it was an injunction of Moses, "Thou shalt
not speak evil of the ruler of thy people." Great mischief may ensue
upon reviling the character of good rulers; for the unthinking herd of
mankind are very apt to give ear to scandal, and when it falls upon
men in power, it brings their authority into contempt, lessens their
influence, and disheartens them from doing that service to the
community of which they are capable; whereas, when they are properly
honored, and treated with that respect which is due to their station,
it inspires them with courage and noble ardor to serve the public:
their influence among the people is strengthened, and their authority
becomes firmly established. We ought to remember that they are men
like to ourselves, liable to the same imperfections and infirmities with
the rest of us, and therefore, so long as they aim at the public good,
their mistakes, misapprehensions, and infirmities, ought to be treated
with the utmost humanity and tenderness.
But though I would recommend to all Christians, as a part of the duty
that they owe to magistrates, to treat them with proper honor and
respect, none can reasonably suppose that I mean that they ought to
be flattered in their vices, or honored and caressed while they are
seeking to undermine and ruin the state; for this would be wickedly
betraying our just rights, and we should be guilty of our own
destruction. We ought ever to persevere with firmness and fortitude
in maintaining and contending for all that liberty that the Diety has
granted us. It is our duty to be ever watchful over our just rights,
and not suffer them to be wrested out of our hands by any of the
artifices of tyrannical oppressors. But there is a wide difference
between being jealous of our rights, when we have the strongest
reason to conclude that they are invaded by our rulers, and being
unreasonably suspicious of men that are zealously endeavoring to
support the constitution, only because we do not thoroughly comprehend
all their designs. The first argues a noble and generous mind; the other,
a low and base spirit.
Thus have I considered the nature of the duty enjoined in the text, and
have endeavored to show that the same principles that require obedience
to lawful magistrates do also require us to resist tyrants; this I have
confirmed from reason and Scripture.
It was with a particular view to the present unhappy controversy that
subsists between us and Great Britain that I chose to discourse upon
the nature and design of government, and the rights and duties both
of governors and governed, that so, justly understanding our rights and
privileges, we may stand firm in our opposition to ministerial tyranny,
while at the same time we pay all proper obedience and submission to
our lawful magistrates; and that, while we are contending for liberty,
we may avoid running into licentiousness; and that we may preserve
the due medium between submitting to tyranny and running into
ararchy. I acknowledge that I have undertaken a difficult task; but,
as it appeared to me, the present state of affairs loudly called for such
a discourse; and, therefore, I hope the wise, the generous, and the
good, will candidly receive my good intentions to serve the public. I
shall now apply this discourse to the grand controversy that at this day
subsists between Great Britain and the American colonies.
And here, in the first place, I cannot but take notice how wonderfully
Providence has smiled upon us by causing the several colonies to unite
so firmly together against the tyranny of Great Britain, though differing
from each other in their particular interest, forms of government, modes
of worship, and particular customs and manners, besides several
animosities that had subsisted among them. That, under these
circumstances, such a union should take place as we now behold, was
a thing that might rather have been wished than hoped for.
And, in the next place, who could have thought that, when our charter
was vacated, when we became destitute of any legislative authority, and
when our courts of justice in many parts of the country were stopped,
so that we could neither make nor execute laws upon offenders,--who,
I say, would have thought, that in such a situation the people should
behave so peaceably, and maintain such good order and harmony among
themselves? This is a plain proof that they, having not the civil law to
regulate themselves by, became a law unto themselves; and by their
conduct they have shown that they were regulated by the law of God
written in their hearts. This is the Lord's doing, and it ought to be
marvellous in our eyes.
From what has been said in this discourse, it will appear that we are
in the way of our duty in opposing the tyranny of Great Britain; for,
if unlimited submission is not due to any human power, if we have an
undoubted right to oppose and resist a set of tyrants that are subverting
our just rights and priviledges, there cannot remain a doubt in any man,
that will calmly attend to reason, whether we have a right to resist and
oppose the arbitrary measures of the King and Parliament; for it is plain
to demonstration, nay, it is in a manner self-evident, that they have
been and are endeavoring to deprive us not only of the priviledges of
Englishmen, and our charter rights, but they have endeavored to deprive
us of what is much more sacred, viz., the priviledges of men and
Christians; i.e., they are robbing us of the inalienable rights that the
God of nature has given us as men and rational beings, and has
confirmed to us in his written word as Christians and disciples of that
Jesus who came to redeem us from the bondage of sin and the tyranny
of Satan, and to grant us the most perfect freedom, even the glorious
liberty of the sons and children of God; that here they have endeavored
to deprive us of the sacred charter of the King of Heaven. But we have
this for our consolation: the Lord reigneth; he governs the world in
righteousness, and will avenge the cause of the oppressed when they
cry unto him. We have made our appeal to Heaven, and we cannot doubt
but that the Judge of all the earth will do right.
Need I upon this occasion descend to particulars? Can any one be
ignorant what the things are of which we complain? Does not every one
know that the King and Parliament have assumed the right to tax us
without our consent? And can any one be so lost to the principles of
humanity and common sense as not to view their conduct in this affair
as a very grievous imposition? Reason and equity require that no one
be obliged to pay a tax that he has never consented to, either by
himself or by his representative. But, as Divine Providence has placed
us at so great a distance from Great Britain that we neither are nor can
be properly represented in the British Parliament, it is a plain proof
that the Deity designed that we should have the powers of legislation
and taxation among ourselves; for can any suppose it to be reasonable
that a set of men that are perfect strangers to us should have the
uncontrollable right to lay the most heavy and grievous burdens upon us
that they please, purely to gratify their unbounded avarice and luxury?
Must we be obliged to perish with cold and hunger to maintain them in
idleness, in all kinds of debauchery and dissipation? But if they have
the right to take our property from us without our consent, we must be
wholly at their mercy for our food and raiment, and we know by sad
experience that their tender mercies are cruel.
But because we were not willing to submit to such an unrighteous and
cruel decree,--though we modestly complained and humbly petitioned
for a redress of our grievances,--instead of hearing our complaints,
and granting our requests, they have gone on to add iniquity to
transgression, by making several cruel and unrighteous acts. Who can
forget the cruel act to block up the harbor of Boston, whereby thousands
of innocent persons must have been inevitably ruined had they not been
supported by the continent? Who can forget the act for vacating our
charter, together with many other cruel acts which it is needless to
mention? But, not being able to accomplish their wicked purposes by
mere acts of Parliament, they have proceeded to commence open
hostilities against us, and have endeavored to destroy us by fire and
sword. Our towns they have burnt, our brethren they have slain, our
vessels they have taken, and our goods they have spoiled. And, after
all this wanton exertion of arbitrary power, is there the man that has
any of the feeling of humanity left who is not fired with a noble
indignation against such merciless tyrants, who have not only brought
upon us all the horrors of a civil war, but have also added a piece of
barbarity unknown to Turks and Mohammedan infidels, yea, such as
would be abhorred and detested by the savages of the wilderness,--I
mean their cruelly forcing our brethren whom they have taken prisoners,
without any distinction of whig or tory, to serve on board their ships
of war, thereby obliging them to take up arms against their own
countrymen, and to fight against their brethren, their wives, and their
children, and to assist in plundering their own estates! This, my
brethren, is done by men who call themselves Christians, against
their Christian brethren,--against men who till now gloried in the
name of Englishmen, and who were ever ready to spend their lives
and fortunes in the defence of British rights. Tell it not in Gath,
publish it not in the streets of Askelon, lest it cause our enemies
to rejoice and our adversaries to triumph! Such a conduct as this
brings a great reproach upon the profession of Christianity; nay, it
is a great scandal even to human nature itself.
It would be highly criminal not to feel a due resentment against such
tyrannical monsters. It is an indispensable duty, my brethren, which
we owe to God and our country, to rouse up and bestir ourselves, and,
being animated with a noble zeal for the sacred cause of liberty, to
defend our lives and fortunes, even to the shedding the last drop of
blood. The love of our country, the tender affection that we have for
our wives and children, the regard we ought to have for unborn
posterity, yea, everything that is dear and sacred, do now loudly call
upon us to use our best endeavors to save our country. We must beat
our ploughshares into swords, and our pruning-hooks into spears, and
learn the art of self-defence against our enemies. To be careless and
remiss, or to neglect the cause of our country through the base motives
of avarice and self-interest, will expose us not only to the resentments
of our fellow-creatures, but to the displeasure of God Almighty; for to
such base wretches, in such a time as this, we may apply with the
utmost propriety that passage in Jeremiah xlviii. 10: "Cursed be he
that doth the work of the Lord deceitfully, and cursed be he that
keepeth back his sword from blood." To save our country from the
hands of our oppressors ought to be dearer to us even than our own
lives, and, next the eternal salvation of our own souls, is the thing
of the greatest importance,--a duty so sacred that it cannot justly be
dispensed with for the sake of our secular concerns. Doubtless for this
reason God has been pleased to manifest his anger against those who
have refused to assist their country against its cruel oppressors. Hence,
in a case similar to ours, when the Israelites were struggling to
deliver themselves from the tyranny of Jabin, the King of Canaan, we
find a most bitter curse denounced against those who refused to grant
their assistance in the common cause; see Judges v. 23: "Curse ye
Meroz, said the angel of the Lord, curse ye bitterly the inhabitants
thereof; because they came not to the help of the Lord, to the help
of the Lord against the mighty."
Now, if such a bitter curse is denounced against those who refused to
assist their country against its oppressors, what a dreadful doom are
those exposed to who have not only refused to assist their country in
this time of distress, but have, through motives of interest or
ambition, shown themselves enemies to their country by opposing us
in the measures that we have taken, and by openly favoring the British
Parliament! He that is so lost to humanity as to be willing to sacrifice
his country for the sake of avarice or ambition, has arrived to the
highest stage of wickedness that human nature is capable of, and
deserves a much worse name than I at present care to give him. But I
think I may with propriety say that such a person has forfeited his
right to human society, and that he ought to take up his abode, not
among the savage men, but among the savage beasts of the wilderness.
Nor can I wholly excuse from blame those timid persons who, through
their own cowardice, have been induced to favor our enemies, and have
refused to act in defence of their country; for a due sense of the ruin
and destruction that our enemies are bringing upon us is enough to
raise such a resentment in the human breast that would, I should think,
be sufficient to banish fear from the most timid male. And, besides, to
indulge cowardice in such a cause argues a want of faith in God; for
can he that firmly believes and relies upon the providence of God doubt
whether he will avenge the cause of the injured when they apply to him
for help? For my own part, when I consider the dispensations of
Providence towards this land ever since our fathers first settled in
Plymouth, I find abundant reason to conclude that the great Sovereign
of the universe has planted a vine in this American wilderness which
he has caused to take deep root, and it has filled the land, and that he
will never suffer it to be plucked up or destroyed.
Our fathers fled from the rage of prelatical tyranny and persecution, and
came into this land in order to enjoy liberty of conscience, and they
have increased to a great people. Many have been the interpositions of
Divine Providence on our behalf, both in our father's days and ours; and,
though we are now engaged in a war with Great Britain, yet we have
been prospered in a most wonderful manner. And can we think that he
who has thus far helped us will give us up into the hands of our
enemies? Certainly he that has begun to deliver us will continue to
show his mercy towards us, in saving us from the hands of our
enemies: he will not forsake us if we do not foresake him. Our cause
is so just and good that nothing can prevent our success but only our
sins. Could I see a spirit of repentance and reformation prevail through
the land, I should not have the least apprehension or fear of being
brought under the iron rod of slavery, even though all the powers of the
globe were combined against us. And though I confess that the
irreligion and profaneness which are so common among us gives
something of a damp to my spirits, yet I cannot help hoping, and even
believing, that Providence has designed this continent for to be the
asylum of liberty and true religion; for can we suppose that the God
who created us free agents, and designed that we should glorify and
serve him in this world that we might enjoy him forever hereafter, will
suffer liberty and true religion to be banished from off the face of the
earth? But do we not find that both religion and liberty seem to be
expiring and gasping for life in the other continent:--where, then, can
they find a harbor or place of refuge but in this?
There are some who pretend that it is against their consciences to
take up arms in defence of their country; but can any rational being
suppose that the Deity can require us to contradict the law of nature
which he has written in our hearts, a part of which I am sure is the
principle of self-defence, which strongly prompts us all to oppose
any power that would take away our lives, or the lives of our friends?
Now, for men to take pains to destroy the tender feelings of human
nature, and to eradicate the principles of self-preservation, and then
to persuade themselves that in so doing they submit to and obey the
will of God, is a plain proof how easily men may be led to pervert
the very first and plainest principles of reason and common sense, and
argues a gross corruption of the human mind. We find such persons
are very inconsistent with themselves; for no men are more zealous to
defend their property, and to secure their estates from the encroachments
of others, while they refuse to defend their persons, their wives, their
children, and their country, against the assaults of the enemy. We see
to what unaccountable lengths men will run when once they leave the
plain road of common sense, and violate the law which God has
written in the heart. Thus some have thought they did God service
when they unmercifully butchered and destroyed the lives of the
servants of God; while others, upon the contrary extreme, believe that
they please God while they sit still and quietly behold their friends
and brethren killed by their unmerciful enemies, without endeavoring
to defend or rescue them. The one is a sin of omission, and the other
is a sin of commission, and it may perhaps be difficult to say, under
certain circumstances, which is the most criminal in the sight of
Heaven. Of this I am sure, that they are, both of them, great violations
of the law of God.
Having thus endeavored to show the lawfulness and necessity of
defending ourselves against the tyranny of Great Britain, I would
observe that Providence seems plainly to point to us the expediency,
and even necessity, or our considering ourselves as an independent
state. For, not to consider the absurdity implied in making war against
a power to which we profess to own subjection, to pass by the
impracticability of our ever coming under subjection to Great Britain
upon fair and equitable terms, we may observe that the British
Parliament has virtually declared us an independent state by authorizing
their ships of war to seize all American property, wherever they can
find it, without making any distinction between the friends of
administration and those that have appeared in opposition to the acts
of Parliament. This is making us a distinct nation from themselves.
They can have no right any longer to style us rebels; for rebellion
implies a particular faction risen up in opposition to lawful authority,
and, as such, the factious party ought to be punished, while those
that remain loyal are to be protected. But when war is declared against
a whole community without distinction, and the property of each
party is declared to be seizable, this, if anything can be, is treating
us as an independent state. Now, if they are pleased to consider us as
in a state of independency, who can object against our considering
ourselves so too?
But while we are nobly opposing with our lives and estates the
tyranny of the British Parliament, let us not forget the duty which
we owe to our lawful magistrates; let us never mistake licentiousness
for liberty. The more we understand the principles of liberty, the
more readily shall we yield obedience to lawful authority; for no man
can oppose good government but he that is a stranger to true liberty.
Let us ever check and restrain the factious disturbers of the peace;
whenever we meet with persons that are loth to submit to lawful
authority, let us treat them with the contempt which they deserve,
and even esteem them as the enemies of their country and the pests
of society. It is with peculiar pleasure that I reflect upon the peaceable
behavior of my countrymen at a time when the courts of justice were
stopped and the execution of laws suspended. It will certainly be
expected of a people that could behave so well when they had nothing
to restrain them but the laws written in their hearts, that they will
yield all ready and cheerful obedience to lawful authority. There is at
present the utmost need of guarding ourselves against a seditious and
factious temper; for when we are engaged with so powerful an enemy
from without, our political salvation, under God, does, in an eminent
manner, depend upon our being firmly united together in the bonds
of love to one another, and of due submission to lawful authority. I
hope we shall never give any just occasion to our adversaries to reproach
us as being men of turbulent dispositions and licentious principles,
that cannot bear to be restrained by good and wholesome laws, even
though they are of our own making, nor submit to rulers of our own
choosing. But I have reason to hope much better things of my
countrymen, though I thus speak. However, in this time of difficulty
and distress, we cannot be too much guarded against the least approaches
to discord and faction. Let us, while we are jealous of our rights, take
heed of unreasonable suspicions and evil surmises which have no proper
foundation; let us take heed lest we hurt the cause of liberty by
speaking evil of the ruler of the people.
Let us treat our rulers with all that honor and respect which the
dignity of their station requires; but let it be such an honor and
respect as is worthy of the sons of freedom to give. Let us ever abhor
the base arts that are used by fawning parasites and cringing courtiers,
who by their low artifices and base flatteries obtain offices and posts
which they are unqualified to sustain, and honors of which they are
unworthy, and oftentimes have a greater number of places assigned
them than any one person of the greatest abilities can ever properly
fill, by means of which the community becomes greatly injured, for
this reason, that many an important trust remains undischarged, and
many an honest and worthy member of society is deprived of those
honors and priviledges to which he has a just right, whilst the most
despicable, worthless courtier is loaded with honorable and profitable
commissions. In order to avoid this evil, I hope our legislators will
always despise flattery as something below the dignity of a rational
mind, and that they will ever scorn the man that will be corrupted
or take a bribe. And let us all resolve with ourselves that no motives
of interest, nor hopes of preferment shall ever induce us to act the
part of fawning courtiers towards men in power. Let the honor and
respect which we show our superiors be true and genuine, flowing
from a sincere and upright heart.
The honors that have been paid to arbitrary princes have often
been very hypocritical and insincere. Tyrants have been flattered in
their vices, and have often had an idolatrous reverence paid them. The
worst princes have been the most flattered and adored; and many such,
in the pagan world, assumed the title of gods, and had divine honors
paid them. This idolatrous reverence has ever been the inseparable
concomitant of arbitrary power and tyrannical government; for even
Christian princes, if they have not been adored under the character of
gods, yet the titles given them strongly savor of blasphemy, and the
reverence paid them is really idolatrous. What right has a poor sinful
worm of the dust to claim the title of his most sacred Majesty? Most
sacred certainly belongs only to God alone,--for there is none holy as
the Lord,--yet how common is it to see this title given to kings! And
how often have we been told that the king can do no wrong! Even
though he should be so foolish and wicked as hardly to be capable of
ever being in the right, yet still it must be asserted and maintained
that it is impossible for him to do wrong!
The cruel, savage disposition of tyrants, and the idolatrous
reverence that is paid them, are both most beautifully exhibited to
view by the apostle John in the Revelation, thirteenth chapter, from
the first to the tenth verse, where the apostle gives a description of a
horrible wild beast which he saw rise out of the sea, having seven
heads and ten horns, and upon his heads the names of blasphemy. By
heads are to be understood forms of government, and by blasphemy,
idolatry; so that it seems implied that there will be a degree of idolatry
in every form of tyrannical government. This beast is represented as
having the body of a leopard, the feet of a bear, and the mouth of a
lion; i.e., a horrible monster, possessed of the rage and fury of the
lion, the fierceness of the bear, and the swiftness of the leopard to
seize and devour its prey. Can words more strongly point out, or
exhibit in more lively colors, the exceeding rage, fury, and impetuosity
of tyrants, in their destroying and making havoc of mankind? To this
beast we find the dragon gave his power, seat, and great authority;
i. e., the devil constituted him to be his vicegerent on earth; this is
to denote that tyrants are the ministers of Satan, ordained by him for
the destruction of mankind.
Such a horrible monster, we should have thought, would have
been abhorred and detested of all mankind, and that all nations would
have joined their powers and forces together to oppose and utterly
destroy him from off the face of the earth; but, so far are they from
doing this, that, on the contrary, they are represented as worshipping
him (verse 8): "And all that dwell on the earth shall worship him,"
viz., all those "whose names are not written in the Lamb's book of
life;" i. e., the wicked world shall pay him an idolatrous reverence,
and worship him with a godlike adoration. What can in a more lively
manner show the gross stupidity and wickedness of mankind, in thus
tamely giving up their just rights into the hands of tyrannical monsters,
and in so readily paying them such an unlimited obedience as is due
to God alone?
We may observe, further, that these men are said (verse 4) to
"worship the dragon;"--not that it is to be supposed that they, in
direct terms, paid divine homage to Satan, but that the adoration paid
to the beast, who was Satan's viceregent, did ultimately center in
him. Hence we learn that those who pay an undue and sinful veneration
to tyrants are properly the servants of the devil; they are worshippers
of the prince of darkness, for in him all that undue homage and
adoration centres that is given to his ministers. Hence that terrible
denunciation of divine wrath against the worshippers of the beast and
his image: "If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive
his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drink of the
wine of the wrath of God which is poured out without mixture into
the cup of his indignation, and he shall be tormented with fire and
brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of
the Lamb; and the smoke of their torment ascendeth for ever and ever:
and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his
image, and who receive the mark of his name." We have here set
forth in the clearest manner, by the inspired apostle, God's abhorrence
of tyranny and tyrants, together with the idolatrous reverence that
their wretched subjects are wont to pay them, and the awful
denunciation of divine wrath against those who are guilty of this
undue obedience to tyrants.
Does it not, then, highly concern us all to stand fast in the liberty
wherewith Heaven hath made us free, and to strive to get the
victory over the beast and his image--over every species of tyranny?
Let us look upon a freedom from the power of tyrants as a blessing
that cannot be purchased too dear, and let us bless God that he has
so far delivered us from that idolatrous reverence which men are so
very apt to pay to arbitrary tyrants; and let us pray that he would be
pleased graciously to perfect the mercy he has begun to show us by
confounding the devices of our enemies and bringing their counsels
to nought, and by establishing our just rights and privileges upon
such a firm and lasting basis that the powers of earth and hell shall
not prevail against it.
Under God, every person in the community ought to contribute
his assistance to the bringing about so glorious and important an
event; but in a more eminent manner does this important business
belong to the gentlemen that are chosen to represent the people in
this General Assembly, including those that have been appointed
members of the Honorable Council Board.
Honored fathers, we look up to you, in this day of calamity and
distress, as the guardians of our invaded rights, and the defenders of
our liberties against British tyranny. You are called, in Providence,
to save your country from ruin. A trust is reposed in you of the highest
importance to the community that can be conceived of, its business
the most noble and grand, and a task the most arduous and difficult
to accomplish that ever engaged the human mind--I mean as to things
of the present life. But as you are engaged in the defence of a just and
righteous cause, you may with firmness of mind commit your cause
to God, and depend on his kind providence for direction and assistance.
You will have the fervent wishes and prayers of all good men that
God would crown all your labors with success, and direct you into
such measures as shall tend to promote the welfare and happiness of
the community, and afford you all that wisdom and prudence which
is necessary to regulate the affairs of state at this critical period.
Honored fathers of the House of Representatives: We trust to
your wisdom and goodness that you will be led to appoint such men
to be in council whom you know to be men of real principle, and
who are of unblemished lives; that have shown themselves zealous and
hearty friends to the liberties of America; and men that have the fear
of God before their eyes; for such only are men that can be depended
upon uniformly to pursue the general good.
My reverend fathers and brethren in the ministry will remember
that, according to our text, it is part of the work and business of a
gospel minister to teach his hearers the duty they owe to magistrates.
Let us, then, endeavor to explain the nature of their duty faithfully,
and show them the difference between liberty and licentiousness; and,
while we are animating them to oppose tyranny and arbitrary power,
let us inculcate upon them the duty of yielding due obedience to
lawful authority. In order to the right and faithful discharge of this
part of our ministry, it is necessary that we should thoroughly study
the law of nature, the rights of mankind, and the reciprocal duties of
governors and governed. By this means we shall be able to guard them
against the extremes of slavish submission to tyrants on one hand,
and of sedition and licentiousness on the other. We may, I apprehend,
attain a thorough acquaintance with the law of nature and the rights
of mankind, while we remain ignorant of many technical terms of
law, and are utterly unacquainted with the obscure and barbarous
Latin that was so much used in the ages of popish darkness and
superstition.
To conclude: While we are fighting for liberty, and striving
against tyranny, let us remember to fight the good fight of faith, and
earnestly seek to be delivered from that bondage of corruption which
we are brought into by sin, and that we may be made partakers of
the glorious liberty of the sons and children of God: which may the
Father of Mercies grant us all, throught Jesus Christ. AMEN.
![]() |
Courageous Lion He can be emailed at... Courageous Lion's Den |
![]() |