events are not blotted out by mere length of time, but that as the Heathen Oracle said, Ὅρκου παῖς ἐστὶν ἀνώνυμος, οὐδ ̓ ἔπι χεῖρες, Οὐδὲ πόδες· κραιπνὸς δὲ μετέρχεται, εἰσόκε πᾶσαν ̓Ανδρὸς δ ̓ εὐόρκου γενεὴ μετόπισθεν ἀμείνων. it is, as is here urged, of practical moment, to reconsider our own views of the deeds of our fathers, to see, if the oath of allegiance were broken, that we bring not its terrible progeny upon our race and name, by persisting in "allowing the deeds of our fathers;" not as wishing to undo evil by evil towards man, but to efface it by repentance towards God: so shall that which naturally could not be effaced, but must work on its own fearful consequences, be effaced by His loving-kindness whose it is to "blot out transgressions." What has been done nationally amiss must be by the nation repented of; and if this is not in our power, at least we may repent of what any of us have done individually by "calling evil, good," and increase our peaceable submission and obedience to that Sovereign whom God has now placed over us, not as the instrument of man's will, but as " ordained of God." The question, then, is to be looked upon not as a theory, but as an earnest practical principle, involving practical consequences in submission to God and man. And if any be prejudiced against the doctrine, because it is opposed to the current notions of the day, let him consider how much besides of valuable truth will, in a superficial age, share the same fate. It is discarded, not because it has been disproved, but because it is "out of date," just as if eternal truth were a matter of Chronology; or as if any changes introduced by men could annul the ordinance of God. Dean Sherlock said, shortly before 1688, "the principles of rebellion are openly professed and taught, and the doctrine of Non-resistance and Passive Obedience "not confuted, but laughed out of countenance." (Dedication to "Case of resistance to the supreme powers stated and resolved according to the doctrine of the Holy Scriptures," 1684.) But they who think a duty laid down in Holy Scripture worthy their serious thought, will do well (apart from the bias of vulgar opinion, or the fear of possible consequences) to review in their own consciences, how notions which they have adopted, perhaps, because they are generally received, can consist with the plain meaning of the Word of God. This may be facilitated by the study of Dean Sherlock's book; who, for "the doctrine and practice of the Primitive Christians," refers to "that admirable discourse of Archbishop Ussher, about the power of the Prince and the obedience of the subject, which will not cost much money, nor take up much time to read." (Ib. pp. 2, 3.) Philosophers and politicians of the present day may be surprised to find, that Bp. Berkeley maintains the same doctrine, "on the principles of reason common to all mankind"." a Abp. Ussher's work is entitled "The power communicated by God to the Prince, and the obedience required of the subject, briefly laid down, and confirmed out of the holy Scriptures, the testimony of the primitive Church, the dictates of right reason, and the opinion of the wisest among heathen writers." It was written at the command of King Charles I, lost, for the time, " through the negligence or unfaithfulness" of the publisher, and finally published with a preface by Bp. Sanderson, in the reign of King Charles II. Bp. Berkeley's work is the substance of three sermons, preached at the College Chapel; his position is, "that there is an absolute unlimited non-resistance or passive obedience due to the supreme civil power wherever placed in any nation. The statements above made are altogether the same as those formally received by the Church in the Convocation of 1603-1610, in which they were "passed with one consent." (See Bp. Overall's Convocation-Book, p. 92.) The 28th Canon runs thus: "If any man therefore shall affirm, either that the subjects, when they shake off the yoke of their obedience to their Sovereigns, and set up a form of government among themselves, after their own humours, do not therein very wickedly; or that it is lawful for any bordering kings, through ambition and malice, to invade their neighbours; or that the Providence and goodness of God, in using of rebellions and oppressions to execute His justice against any king or country, doth mitigate or qualify the offences of any such rebels or oppressing kings; or that, when any such new forms of government, begun by rebellion, are after throughly settled, the authority in them is not of God; or that any who live within the territories of such new governments, are not bound to be subject to God's authority, which is there executed, but may rebel against the same; or that the Jews, either in Egypt or Babylon, might lawfully, for any cause, have taken arms against any of those kings, or have offered any violence to their persons; he doth greatly erre." The Convocation-Book itself is valuable also, as clearly and definitely tracing out the origin of Government from the Patriarchal form, instead of assuming any original social compact with the people. For the notion of the that the source of power came plain in Holy Scripture that it social compact presupposes from below, whereas it is was derived from above. Scripture knows but of two sources of power; 1. lawful, whereby the parental authority of the head of the family was gradually extended with the extension of the family, and so became patriarchal, which was in a sense regal; 2. unlawful, that of conquest, as Nimrod. But of any state of things wherein the people had power in their own hands, to give it to whom they would, and upon what conditions they would, it knows not. "If," says Bp. Sanderson, "we will but follow the clue of the Sacred History in the four first chapters of Genesis, it will fairly lead us out of these labyrinths," [viz. whether Government or Property were first in order of time, and whether Government were agreed upon to secure Property, or Property was assigned by Law and Government; in a word, whether Government came from above or below, was voluntarily adopted, or was the original constitution of things, and part of the primary ordinance of God.]" It is certain, that as soon as Adam was created, God gave to him as an universal monarch, not only dominion over all his fellow-creatures that were upon the face of the earth, but the government also of all the inferior world, and of all the men that after should be born into the world so long as he lived; so as whatsoever property any other persons afterwards had or could have in any thing in any part of the world, (as Cain and Abel, 'tis well known, had their properties in several, and distinct either from other,) they held it all of him, and had it originally by his gift or assignment either immediately or mediately. Whence we may also conclude, both in hypothesi, that Adam's government was before Cain's property; and in thesi, that undoubtedly government was before property. And we have great reason to believe that after the flood the sole government was at first in Noah, and whatsoever either property in any thing they possessed in several, or share in the government over any part of the world afterward any of his sons had, they had it by his sole allotment and authority, and transmitted the same to their posterity merely upon that account; without awaiting the election or consent of, or entering into any articles or capitulations with, the people that were to be governed by them. Those words in Gen. x. 32. seem to import as much, "These are the families of the sons of Noah in their generations after their nations: and by them were the nations divided in the earth after the flood." And so this supposed pact or contract, which maketh such a noise in the world, proveth to be but a squib, powder without shot, that giveth a crack, but vanisheth into air, and doth no execution." Preface, §. 18. In like manner, the Church in Convocation, laid as the basis of their statement the same historical view. Cap. 2. "To him that shall duly read the Scripture, it will be plain and evident, that the Son of God having created our first parents, and proposing to multiply their seed into many generations, for the replenishing of the world with their posterity, did give to Adam for his time, and to the rest of the patriarchs, and chief fathers successively before the flood, authority, power, and dominion over their children, and offspring, to rule and govern them; ordaining by the very law of nature, that their said children and offspring (begotten and brought up by them) should fear, reverence, honour, and obey them. Which power and authority before the flood, resting in the patriarchs, and in the chief fathers, because it had a very large extent, not only for the education of their said children and offspring, whilst they were young; but likewise for the |