that should not be found to contradict the law of God.

Ren

"der to Cæsar," said he, "the things which are Cæsar's, and "to God the things which are God's." Far from affecting any secular power himself, he refused a royalty of this sort, when the people would have conferred it, and would not take upon him to decide in a matter of civil right and property, though desired. "Man," said he to the person who applied to him, "who made me a judge or a divider over you?" Then he said to the people, "Take heed and beware of covetousness;”supporting his admonition, as usual, by an affecting parable. It was the end of his institution to purify the heart, and his lessons were ever calculated for extirpating the seeds of evil that remained there. In a similar manner, when the disciples privately contended among themselves who should be greatest, he took occasion to warn them against ambition. Jesus calling to him a child, placed him in the midst of them, and said, "Verily I say unto you, unless ye be converted," quite changed in your notions and conceptions of things, "and become as "children, ye shall never enter the kingdom of heaven. Who"soever, therefore, shall become humble as this child, shall be "the greatest there." The same maxims were warmly inculcated by his apostles ; and in their time, under the happy influence of their instructions, generally prevailed among Christians.

Now indeed was formed a community of the disciples of Jesus, which was called his church,-a word that denotes no more than society or assembly, and is sometimes used in the New Testament with evident analogy to the common use, to signify the whole community of Christians considered as one body, of which Christ is denominated the head, and sometimes only a particular congregation of Christians. In this general society, founded in the unity of their faith, their hope, their love, cemented, as it were, by a communion, or joint participation, as occasion offered, in religious offices, in adoration, in baptism, and in the commemoration of the sufferings of their Lord, preserved by a most friendly intercourse, and by frequent instructions, admonitions, reproofs when necessary, and even by the exclusion of those who had violated such powerful and solemn engagements in all this, I say, there was nothing that interfered with the temporal powers. They claimed no jurisdiction

over the person, the liberty, or the property of any man. And if they expelled out of their own society, and, on satisfying their conditions, re-admitted those who had been expelled, they did in this only exercise a right, which (if we may compare great things with small, and heavenly things with earthly,) any private company, like a knot of artists or philosophers, may freely exercise; namely, to give the benefit of their own company and conversation to whom, and on what terms, they judge proper; a right which can never justly be considered as in the least infringing on the secular powers. The Christians every where acknowledged themselves the subjects of the state, whether monarchical or republican, absolute or free, under which they lived; entitled to the same privileges with their fellow-subjects, and bound as much as any of them (I might say more, in respect of the peculiar obligation which their religion laid them under,) to the observance of the laws of their country. They pleaded no exemption but in one case; a case wherein every man, though not a Christian, has a natural title to exemption; that is, not to obey a law which is unjust in itself, and which he is persuaded in his conscience to be so. But in regard to rights merely of a personal or private nature over which the individual has a greater power, far from being pertinacious asserters of these, they held it for an invariable maxim, that it, is much better to suffer wrong, than either to commit or to avenge it. This, in my judgment, is the true footing on which the apostolical church stood in relation to the secular powers. To what causes the wonderful change afterwards produced, ought to be attributed, I intend to make the subject of another prelection.

LECTURE III.

I CONCLUDED the last discourse I gave you on the subject of Sacred History, with an account of the origin and primitive nature of the Christian church. I observed to you, that, being founded in the concurrence of its members in the faith of the doctrine, and the observance of the precepts of Christ their common Lord, and being supported by brotherly affection one to another, as well as ardent zeal for the happiness of the whole, it was in no respect calculated to interfere with the rights of princes, or afford matter of umbrage or jealousy to the secular powers. But what God makes upright, man al- · ways corrupts by his inventions. This was the case of the human species itself. This was the case of the first religion, call it traditional, or call it natural, which, in process of time, did, in the different nations of the earth, degenerate into the grossest idolatry and abominations. And as to what has been communicated since by written revelation, this was certainly the case of the preceding or Mosaical institution. And this, upon inquiry, will be found to have been eminently the case of the present or Christian dispensation.

When the disciples in populous cities began to multiply, as no association of imperfect creatures will ever be found, in all respects, perfect, it is by no means strange, that sometimes differences and interferings should arise between individuals concerning matters of property and civil right. These differences occasioned law-suits before the ordinary judges, who were Pagans. Law-suits, as might be expected, not only occasioned, to the great prejudice of charity, heart-burnings among themselves, but tended to bring a scandal on the profession, whose criterion or badge had been expressly declared by their Master to be their mutual love. Examples there were of these mis chiefs as early as the times of the apostles, particularly at Ca

66

rinth, a city abounding in wealth and luxury. The apostle Paul, effectually to remedy this evil, and to prevent the scandal and hurt which must arise from its continuance, first expostulates with the Corinthians (1 Cor. vi. 1, &c.) on the nature and dignity of their Christian vocation, to which it would be much more suitable patiently to suffer injuries, than, with so imminent a risk of charity, to endeavour to obtain redress :-" Why do ye not rather," says he, "take wrong? Why do ye not ra"ther suffer yourselves to be defrauded?" And even should the injury appear too great to be entirely overlooked, he enjoins them, and with them doubtless all Christians in the like circumstances, to submit those differences which should unhappily arise among them, to arbitrators chosen from among themselves. By this expedient a double end would be answered: the parties would, by the mediation of their brethren, be more easily con→ ciliated to each other, and the reproach of the heathen would be prevented. It is evident that in this there was no encroachment on the province of the magistrate. A similar practice, ever since the Babylonish captivity, had obtained among the Jews in all the countries through which they were dispersed. To put an end to differences, either by compromise or by arbitration, is the exercise of a natural right, which all civil esta→ blishments acknowledge, and which most of them shew a disposition to encourage and promote. Jars and quarrels are universally admitted to be evils, though unavoidable in the present lapsed condition of human nature. Judicatories are erected to put an end betimes to these evils. The litigation of the parties, though a bad consequence, is permitted solely to prevent a worse. But no human polity commands men to be litigious. The less a man is so, he is the better subject of the state. The apostle's aim is to crush strife as early as possible, and to prevent an ill effect, though not the worst effect, of private differences; to wit, public contention in courts of law. His advice is such as every good man, every lover of peace, and therefore every good citizen, would very readily give to the members of any society in which he had a concern. It was, besides, perfectly suitable to the peaceable maxims of his great master: "Resist not evil. Agree with thine adversary quick→ ly whilst thou art in the way with him." And, "Blessed

are the peace-makers, for they shall be called the children of "God."

Let it be remarked further, that those primitive and chosen arbiters claimed no coercive power of any kind over their fellowChristians. The judgment they pronounced was very properly termed, in primitive times, the judgment of charity or love. By this principle alone were the judges influenced (without salary or emoluments) to undertake the office: by this principle alone were the parties disposed to submit to the sentence: and by this principle alone, where an injury had been committed, the offender was induced, as far as possible, to make reparation, and the offended as readily to grant forgiveness. No mention do we find of bailiffs, or tipstaves, fines, imprisonments, or distraining of goods. As their principal view in examining and deciding such questions was the radical cure of the evil, that is, of every thing that might look like animosity or discontent among the disciples of Christ; they neither had, nor desired to have any other means of enforcing their decisions, than such as the love of peace and union, and the interest of the common cause, necessarily gave them. To have applied, as umpires in Christian states are wont, for the interposition of the secular arm to enforce their decrees, would have been recurring to that very evil, for the prevention of which they had been nominated as judges by their brethren.

It deserves also to be taken notice of, that the apostle, far from taking upon him to assign this office of terminating their differences to such as he might think properly qualified, does not so much as recommend, or even mention to them any individual, or any class of men. On the contrary, he leaves the matter entirely to their own free choice. And indeed it was proper it should be so. This expedient is recommended purely from the charitable and prudential considerations of decency and peace. These could not be promoted otherwise than by the people's perfect confidence, not only in the equity but in the abilities of the persons to be entrusted, who therefore doubtless ought to be of their electing. Besides, it would have ill suited the genuine but spiritual dignity of the apostolic office, for Paul, so unlike the examples given by his Lord, to have assumed an authoritative diction in matters merely tem→