In 1683, that is, soon after the colonization of Pennsylvania, the founder of the colony held a "council and consultation" with some of the Indians. In the course of the interview it appeared that these savages believed in a state of future retribution; and they described their simple ideas of the respective states of the good and bad. The vices that they enumerated as those which would consign them to punishment, are remarkable, inasmuch as they so nearly correspond to similar enumerations in the Christian Scriptures. They were theft, swearing, lying, whoring, murder, and the like;"'* and the New Testament affirms that those who are guilty of adultery, fornication, lying, theft, murder, etc., shall not inherit the kingdom of God. The same writer having on his travels met with some Indians, stopped and gave them some good and serious advices. "They wept," says he, "and tears ran down their naked bodies. They smote their hands upon their breasts and said, 'The Good man here told them what I said was all good.'"†

But reasonings such as these are in reality not necessary to the support of the truth of the immediate communication of the will of God; because if the variations in men's notions of right and wrong were greater than they are, they would not impeach the existence of that communication. In the first place, we never affirm that the Deity communicates all his law to every man : and in the second place, it is sufficiently certain that multitudes know his laws, and yet neglect to fulfill them.

If, in conclusion, it should be asked, What assistance can be yielded, in the investigation of publicly authorized rules of virtue, by the discussions of the present chapter? we answer, Very little. But when it is asked, John Richardson's Life.

† Ibid.

Of what importance are they as illustrating the principles of morality? we answer, Very much. If there be two sources from which it has pleased God to enable mankind to know His will-a law written externally, and a law communicated to the heart-it is evident that both must be regarded as principles of morality, and that, in a work like the present, both should be illustrated as such. It is incidental to the latter mode of moral guidance, that it is little adapted to the formation of external rules: but it is of high and solemn importance to our species for the secret direction of the individual man.

ESSAY I.

PART II.

SUBORDINATE MEANS OF DISCOVERING THE DIVINE WILL.

CHAPTER I.

THE LAW OF THE LAND.

Its authority-Limits to its authority-Morality sometimes prohibits what the law permits.

The authority of civil government as a director of individual conduct, is explicitly asserted in the Christian Scriptures:-" Be subject to principalities and powers-Obey magistrates, "*"Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man 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."† By this general sanction of civil government, a multitude of questions respecting human duty are at once decided. In ordinary cases, he upon whom the magistrate imposes a law needs not to seek for knowledge of his duty upon the subject from a higher source. The Divine will is sufficiently indicated by the fact that the magistrate commands. Obedience to the law is obedience to the expressed will of God. He who, in the payment of a tax to support the just exercise of government, conforms to the law of the land, as truly obeys the Divine will, as if the Deity had regulated questions of taxation, by express rules.

In thus founding the authority of civil government upon the precepts of revelation, we refer to the ultimate, and for that reason to the most proper sanction. Not, indeed, that if revelation had been silent, the obligation of obedience might not have been deduced from other considerations. The utility of government -its tendency to promote the order and happiness of society-powerfully recommend its authority; so powerfully indeed, that it is probable that the worst government which ever existed, was incomparably better than none; and we shall hereafter have occasion to see that considerations of utility involve actual moral obligation.

The purity and practical excellence of the motives to civil obedience which are proposed in the Christian Scriptures, are especially worthy of regard. "Submit for the Lord's sake." "Be subject, not only for wrath, but for conscience' sake." Submission for wrath's sake, that is, from fear of penalty, implies a very inferior motive to submission upon grounds of principle and duty; and as to practical excellence, who cannot perceive that he who regulates his obedience by the motives of Christianity, acts more worthily, and honorably, and consistently, than he who is influenced only by fear of penalties? The man who obeys the laws for conscience' sake, will obey always; alike when disobedience would be unpunished and unknown, as when it would be detected the next hour. The magistrate has a security for such a man's fidelity, which no other motive can supply. A smuggler will import his kegs. if there is no danger of a seizure-a Christian will not buy the brandy though no one knows it but himself.

It is to be observed, that the obligation of civil obedience is enforced, whether the particular command of the law is in itself sanctioned by morality or not. Antecedently to the existence of the law of the magis

trate respecting the importation of brandy, it was of no consequence in the view of morality whether brandy was imported or not; but the prohibition of the magistrate involves a moral obligation to refrain. Other doctrine has been held; and it has been asserted, that unless the particular law is enforced by morality, it does not become obligatory by the command of the state. But if this were true—if no law was obligatory that was not previously enjoined by morality, no moral obligation would result from the law of the land. Such a question is surely set at rest by, "Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man."

The

But the authority of civil government is a subordinate authority. If, from any cause, the magistrate enjoins that which is prohibited by the moral law, the duty of obedience is withdrawn. "All human authority ceases at the point where obedience becomes criminal." reason is simple; that when the magistrate enjoins what is criminal, he has exceeded his power: "the minister of of God" has gone beyond his commission. There is, in our day, no such thing as a moral plenipotentiary.

Upon these principles, the first teachers of Christianity acted when the rulers "called them, and commanded them not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus."-" Whether," they replied, "it be right in the sight of God, to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye." They accordingly "entered into the temple early in the morning and taught :" and when, subsequently, they were again brought before the council and interrogated, they replied, "We ought to obey God rather than men ; and notwithstanding the renewed command of the council, "daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ." Nor let any one suppose * See Godwin's Political Justice.

+

† Acts iv. 18.

Acts v. 29, 42.