Ir becomes me to state, what those who heard it will perceive, that this Sermon has been somewhat altered from what it was as preached, not at all in respect to any principle or position, but by the enlargement upon some points, which the time allotted to a Sunday's Discourse forbade in its delivery. Let me further say, that I have yielded with no little reluctance to the request for its publication, a reluctance which has been overcome, in part, by the known fact that its views have been greatly misrepresented, unintentionally or otherwise; and also in the hope, perhaps a presumptuous one, that it may do something in helping to guide some few minds with regard to the subject it discusses. The temerity, as it may seem to some, of publishing views opposed to those of so many who have the respect and confidence of the community, I do not feel. Truth is independent of persons. It is not received of men, though they may help us to obtain it. Whatever there may be of it in these humble pages, is not mine, but God's.

SERMON.

ROMANS, XIII. 1, 2.

LET EVERY SOUL BE SUBJECT UNTO 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."

CIVIL government exists by Divine appointment, and is therefore to be respected and obeyed. Such is the abstract proposition which this passage includes and presents. It is a proposition which reason and common sense confirm and indorse. Natural religion, in this particular, has no controversy with revealed. In order to perceive how plainly this is so, let us fix, for a moment, on another proposition, lying back of this, namely, civil society is of Divine appointment. The propositions are not identical, inasmuch as society must, at some time, have existed without government. Civil society is of Divine appointment is an institution of God. And this is evident, in the fact of those original instincts in man, leading him directly, we may say impelling him,

to such result; in the fact, also, that society is essential to the development and well-being of the individual and the race. Man isolated from his fellows, living by and to himself, with that only which his individual strength and talent might supply, if he continued to exist at all, would do so at a most wretched rate. All the progress of the race, all its advances in whatever makes life most desirable, for its higher as well as its inferior ends, has been conditioned upon the existence of society. Society, then, is of Divine appointment. It is written, in these facts, as by the finger of God. And if this be so, then Government is of Divine appointment, inasmuch as society cannot fulfill its ends, cannot exist to any good purpose, without it. The very idea of civil society supposes the surrender, in certain directions, and to a certain extent, of individual rights, and the suppression of individual impulses and desires, in submission to a general, constituted authority, and for the sake of benefits not otherwise to be secured. And if civil government be of Divine appointment, it follows, that obedience to its authority and laws is a sacred obligation. The conclusion is so very obvious, that I cannot conceive of its being gainsayed. I do not know that it is, as a general proposition. There is no difficulty, I apprehend, as to the abstract rule. The difficulty is in relation to specific cases which come under it; for the rule, general and universal

as is its principle, has its limitations and exceptions. No one would say, that obedience to civil government was a sacred obligation in all cases whatever it might command. Were it to command, for instance, that parents should cruelly maim or torture their children, or teach them any gross immorality, or that people generally should practise theft, or utter profanity, or the like,—who would say that it was a sacred obligation to obey it, as regards these things? Where, then, if limit there be, does that limit lie? By what principle is it defined? We want a principle, something which shall keep us from being driven hither and thither, now towards this conclusion and now towards that, as others may urge us by their reasoning, or their rhetoric, or their sophistries. We want a principle, which we can see to be a true one, and by which each may judge, in the premises, for himself. There are times when we are liable to be blinded to the clearest principles, which, at other times, and in other circumstances, we see as such; when, by reason of the mental confusedness caused by self-interest, or prejudice, or passion, or a view to consequences, the strongest intellects fail to perceive, what, to the ingenuous mind of childhood, knowing nothing of these distorting media, is plainly evident. We all need to be on our guard against influences existing on either side of the question now before us no longer a mere ethical abstraction—