claims of a person of whose wisdom and worth he had reason to think highly. The claims are of such a kind, and the consequences of admitting them are so momentous, that even, with all these favorable presumptions, they are not to be admitted without satisfactory evidence; but they obviously deserve to be examined, and respectfully and diligently examined.

But this is not all. A person in a great measure ignorant of what true Christianity is, as a moral as well as a doctrinal system, may, without much difficulty, be persuaded by an ingenious sceptic or unbeliever, that that religion, like so many others, has originated in imposture or delusion, or in a mixture of both. It is to ignorance of Christianity, as its principal intellectual cause, that we are disposed to trace the fearfully extensive success of infidel philosophy among the nominal Christians of the continent of Europe in the period immediately preceding the French Revolution. But on a person well informed as to the moral part of Christianity, all such ingenious sophistry will be thrown away. He is in possession of information which satisfies him that all those hypotheses, on one or other of which the denial of the truth and divinity of Christianity must proceed, are altogether untenable. There is a character of uniform, sober, practical, good sense, belonging to the morality of the New Testament, which makes it one of the most improbable of all things, that its writers should have been the dupes either of their own imagination or of a designing impostor: and there is a sustained and apparently altogether unassumed and natural air of "simplicity and godly sincerity," which forbids us, except on the most satisfactory evidence, to admit that they who wore it were other than what they seem to be, honest men. To the question, Were the men who delivered these moral maxims, fools or knaves, or a mixture of both? Were they stupid dupes or wicked impostors? the only reasonable answer is, the thing is barely possible, it is in the very highest degree improbable. Evidence tenfold more strong than infidel philosophy has ever dreamed of, would be necessary to give anything like verisimilitude to any of these hypotheses, on one or other of which must be built the disproof of the claims of Christianity on the attention, and faith, and obedience of mankind.

There is still another aspect in which the morality of Christianity may be considered, in reference to the evidence of the Divine origin of that religion. Viewed in all its bearings, it seems to be of the nature of a moral miracle. Compare the morality of the New Testament with the morality of ancient philosophy; compare Jesus with Socrates; and Paul, and Peter, and James, and John, with Epictetus, or Plato, or Seneca, or Marcus Antoninus. The difference is prodigious; the superiority is immeasurable. Now, how are we to account for this difference, this superiority? On the supposition that the writers of the New Testament were uninspired men, we apprehend it is utterly unaccountable. Nothing but the admission, that they were men who spoke and wrote as they were moved by the Spirit of God, can enable us satisfactorily to explain the undoubted fact, that the purest and most perfect system of morality which the world has ever seen; the system that discovers the justest and widest views of the Divine character and government, and the deepest in

sight into the recesses of human nature, proceeded not from the philosophers of Egypt or of India, of Greece or of Rome, but from the carpenter of Nazareth and his uneducated disciples.1

Such thoughts naturally rise in the mind of every reflecting man, on reading such a passage as that of which our text forms a part, and are well fitted to strengthen our conviction, that we have not followed "cunningly devised fables," when we have yielded credence to the claims and doctrines of Jesus Christ and his apostles. It is, however, full time that we set ourselves to the consideration of the words which are to form the subject of our present discourse: 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. For so is the will of God, that with well-doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men."

The duty here enjoined, and the motive by which it is enforced, are obviously the two topics to which our attention must be successively directed in the sequel; but to illustrate either with advantage, it will be necessary to make a few remarks, having for their object to explain something that is obscure in the phraseology, and to disentangle something that is involved in the construction of the sentence which lies before us.

I.-INTRODUCTORY EXPLICATORY OBSERVATIONS.

3

The word rendered "ordinance," 2 is the term which is usually and properly rendered "creature." It is the word that occurs when the gospel is commanded to be “preached to every creature," and is said to have been "preached to every creature under heaven:" when the "whole creation," or "every creature," is said to "groan and travail in pain ;" and when every one who is in Christ is said to be “ a new creature." The literal rendering is, "Submit yourselves to every human creature. Some interpreters, most unsuccessfully, have attempted to explain the passage on the principle that this is its meaning here.4 Our translators, perceiving that the nature of things, equally with the scope of the passage, made such a version inadmissible, have given to the word a figurative signification. They consider it as equivalent to ordinance, or institution, or appointment, all of which are, as it were, the creatures of those who ordain, institute, or appoint them.5

Still, however, it seems a strange injunction, "Submit yourselves.

1 A fuller illustration of these remarks on the bearing of christian morality on christian evidence, will be found in the author's Introductory Essay to Collins' edition of Venn's Complete Duty of Man.” 2 Κτίσις. 3 Mark xvi. 14. Col. i. 23. Rom. viii. 19–22. 2 Cor. v. 17. * Sherlock. Grotius conjectures that the original reading may have been kçioɛ. The κρίσει. conjecture is ingenious, but entirely unsupported. It is a most instructive fact, that, so far as I know, no mere conjecture as to the original text of the New Testament has ever been confirmed by subsequent examination of Codices.

5 Κτίσιν ἀνθρωπίνην τὰς ἀρχὰς λέγει τὰς χειροτονητὰς ὑπὸ τῶν βασιλέων, ἢ καὶ αὐτοὺς τοὺς βασι· λεῖς καθότι καὶ αὐτοὶ ὑπὸ ἀνθρώπων ἐτάχθησαν ἤτοι ἐτέθησαν, οἶδε γαρ ἡ γραφὴ καὶ τὴν θέσιν, κτίσιν kaλεïv.--ECUMENIUS.

to every human institution." Surely there are many human institutions or ordinances to which a Christian is not bound to submit ; surely there are not a few human institutions or ordinances to which a Christian is bound not to submit. The injunction plainly requires limitation: and we apprehend it receives it.

The concluding phrase of the 13th verse, "for the punishment of evil-doers, and for the praise of them who do well," is commonly connected with the words which immediately precede it, as if it were intended to express the object which the king, or supreme magistrate, has in view in appointing deputies. It appears to us far more natural to connect it with the word "ordinance;" and to view it as intended to define the particular class of human ordinances which the apostle refers to, when he commands Christians to be subject to every one of them. It is more than doubtful whether kings have always, or usually, had this as their object in appointing governors; but there can be no doubt this is the end of civil government, and is the reason why men are bound to submit to it. Submit yourselves to every human ordinance, for the punishment of evil-doers, and for the praise of them who do well." This does not require any change in the translation, it only requires you to place a comma after the words, "sent by him."

66

This command, "Submit yourselves to every human ordinance, for the punishment of evil-doers, and for the praise of them that do well," , as it were, the trunk of the injunction; the phrases, "for the Lord's sake," and "whether to the king, as supreme, and to governors, as those sent by him," are, as it were, branches that spring out of it. According to the genius of the English language, the precept would run thus: Submit yourselves, for the Lord's sake, to every ordinance of man, for the punishment of evil-doers, and the praise of them who do well, whether to the king, as supreme, or to governors, as to them who are sent by him.'

This mode of construing the passage, not only gives a definite reference to the very general term "ordinance," or institution; it also enables us to account for the apostle using the somewhat strange expression in reference to civil government, "ordinance of man, or human institution for the punishment of evil-doers, and the praise of them who do well." The persons immediately addressed by the apostles were Jews, or proselytes who had imbibed Jewish modes of thought. Jews held themselves bound to be subject to the Divine ordinance of civil magistracy, as laid down in their Scriptures. That ordinance, whether embodied in Moses or in the Judges, or in the Davidical Kings, they regarded as entitled to obedience; but as to human institutions for this purpose, they seem very generally to have doubted, and many of them to have explicitly denied, that they were obligatory on the chosen people of God. If they yielded obedience, it was rather as a matter of expediency than of obligation; they submitted "for wrath's sake," that is, to avoid punishment, rather than "for conscience' sake," that is, because God had so willed it. These views were very probably carried by many of the Jewish converts into their new profession; and there seems to be a peculiar propriety in the apostle, after having described their privileges and immunities

as Christians in such lofty language, borrowed from the peculiarities of the Jewish people under the former economy; after having represented them as "the chosen race, the kingdom of priests, the holy nation, the peculiar people, the people of God;" putting them in mind that those privileges were all of a spiritual nature, and that with regard to human institutions, and especially with regard to human institutions for the purposes of civil government, they were just on a level with the rest of mankind, with the rest of their fellow-citizens; possessed of the same rights, liable to the same obligations.

II. THE DUTY ENJOINED; SUBJECTION TO THE CIVIL GOVERNMENT, IN THE PERSONS OF ALL ITS LEGAL ADMINISTRATORS.

We are now prepared to proceed to consider the duty here enjoined on Christians: Subjection to the civil government of the country where they reside, in the persons of all its legal administrators. "Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man, for the punishment of evil-doers, and for the praise of them who do well: whether to the king, as supreme; or to governors, as those sent by him."

The description of civil government here given, first calls for consideration. It is described as an ordinance or institution for the punishment of all evil-doers, and the praise of them who do well.” The great design of civil government is, to protect the liberties, properties, and lives of mankind, living together in society. For this purpose, laws with suitable sanctions are enacted and executed, and officers are created for the enactment, promulgation, and execution of these laws. With reference to civil government, he and he only is an evil-doer who violates the law; and it is enough to entitle a man, in the estimation of the magistrate, to the appellation of one who does well, if he but obey the law. With sin, as sin, the magistrate has nothing to do. It is only when sin becomes crime, a violation of law, and infringement of civil order, that it comes under his cognizance. The design, then, of magistracy is "for the punishment of evil-doers," who break the laws enacted for the protection of liberty, property, reputation, and life; and "for the praise," that is, for the reward of those "who do well" by keeping these laws; giving them that protection and encouragement which, as has been very justly remarked, are the only rewards which good subjects can reasonably expect from their civil governors.1

Civil government is farther described as " an ordinance of man," or "a human institution," for this purpose. It is, indeed, the doctrine of the New Testament, that civil government, in one sense, and that an important one, is a Divine institution, an ordinance of God; but that doctrine, rightly understood, is in no way inconsistent with the doctrine that, in another sense, it is a human institution, the ordinance of man. Civil government is of God, so as to lay a foundation for a Divine moral obligation on those subject to it to yield obedience. Some have held that magistracy is of God merely as all things are of God, as the famine and the pestilence, as slavery and

1 "Reward cannot, properly, be the sanction of human laws.”—WARBURTON.

war, are of him. Those who take this view err by defect; for this could lay no foundation for a claim on obedience. Others err by excess, who hold that magistracy is a direct, express Divine institution. It does not stand on the same foundation as the priesthood under the law, or the christian ministry under the gospel. The magistracy of the Jews under the law was the result of a direct Divine appointment; but not the magistracy of any other people. It does not stand even on the same ground as marriage, which was formally instituted. It occupies similar ground with the social state, agriculture, or commerce. It naturally rises out of the constitution of men's minds, which is God's work, and the circumstances of their situation, which are the result of his providence; and it is highly conducive to the security and well-being of mankind, which we know must be agreeable to the will of Him whose nature, as well as name, is love, and whose tender mercies are over all his works.

All this is perfectly consistent with civil government being a human ordinance or institution. It is the work of man's faculties, called forth by the circumstances in which he is placed, out of which arises the variety of form which the general institution bears in different countries and in different ages: thus far it is the work of man; and it is the work of God, just inasmuch as he endows man with these faculties, and places him in the circumstances which call them forth to exertion. To borrow the illustration of one of the greatest of our writers on the subject of government: "To say, because civil magistracy is ordained of God, therefore it cannot be the ordinance. of man, is as if you said, ' God ordained the temple, therefore it was not built by masons; he ordained the snuffers, therefore they were not made by a smith." "

Now, the duty of Christians to this "human ordinance" of civil magistracy. is to "submit themselves" to it, practically to acknowledge its authority. It is the duty of a Christian to yield obedience to all laws of the government under which he lives, that are not inconsistent with the law of God. When the human ordinance contradicts the Divine ordinance, requiring us to do what God forbids, or forbidding us to do what God requires, the rule is plain: "We ought to obey God rather than man.”” 2

Nothing short of this, however, can warrant a Christian to withhold obedience from a law of the government under which, in the providence of God, he is placed; and even when conscience may compel him to non-obedience, he is quietly and patiently to suffer the penalty which the law imposes on his non-obedience. While obliged by the law of God in such a case not to obey the law of man, he is equally obliged, while the government continues to be acknowledged by the community of which he forms a part, not to resist it. He may, he ought to, use every means which the constitution of his country puts in his power to have the law improved; but while it continues in force, however unwise and iniquitous, if it does not reHarrington.

1

3

2 Acts v. 29.

3 "A timely, steady, and mild resistance, on legal grounds, to every unlawful stretch of power (as in the well-known case of the ship-money), will prove the most effectual means, if uniformly resorted to, for preventing the occurrence of those desperate and extreme cases, which call for violent and dangerous remedies."—ARCHBISHOP WHATELY.