41

LETTER IV.

THE SCRIPTURAL LIMIT OF AUTHORITY.

MY DEAR

WHAT is the scriptural limit set to the authority of the ruler, whether civil or ecclesiastical, in imposing ordinances upon christian men?

There is a limit, and that limit is the Bible itself. The christian authority of the ruler is derived from parts of the Bible; when therefore the ruler enacts any law, or decrees any ceremony which is contrary to other parts of the Bible, he arraigns his own charter. He can no longer claim the authority of Scripture as the basis of his own authority, and of course it ceases to be a scriptural duty to obey him. But so long as the laws and ceremonies introduced by the ruler

are confined to matters which the Bible has left undetermined, or wholly unnoticed, they are to be obeyed, for conscience sake, by all christian men.

Suppose a father to entrust his sons to the care of a tutor, giving at the same time to both them and the tutor, a written list of directions for the regulation of their lives suppose the list to consist of one hundred items, one of which was, Obey your tutor; and suppose also the letter to contain an address from the father to the tutor, saying, As God entrusted these children to my care, even so do I entrust them to your care. The children, thus supplied with a dead letter of infallible directions, and a living fallible guide invested with authority to give them additional directions, would be in a condition resembling that of the christian laity. When the tutor issued a command, those children, if wise and dutiful, would first examine whether their tutor's command contradicted any of the remaining ninety and nine instructions of their father. If it did not, they would say, We are bound for conscience sake to our father, to obey this. His

letter fully warrants our tutor to require such obedience. But if their tutor's command did contradict any of the instructions in their father's letter, then they would say, Our tutor has forgotten his proper place; he has no authority over us except what he derives from this letter: now he is going against the letter, and therefore, for conscience sake to our father, we must refuse to obey him.

"A great difference is here to be made. between those rules that both church and state ought to set to themselves in their enacting of such matters, and the measures of the obedience of subjects. The only question in the point of obedience must be—LAWFUL or UNLAWFUL. For expedient or inexpedient ought never to be brought into question as to the point of obedience; since no inexpediency whatsoever can balance the breaking of order, and the dissolving the constitution and society..... But those in whose hands the making of those rules is put, ought to carry their thoughts much farther: they ought to consider well the genius of the christian religion..... Yet in this matter no certain or mathematical rules can be given. Every

person concerned in the management of this authority, must act as he will answer it to God and to the church; for he must be at liberty in applying general rules to particular times and cases.' "Now since there is not any one thing that Christ has enjoined more solemnly and more frequently than love and charity, union and agreement, amongst his disciples; since we are also required to assemble ourselves together, to constitute ourselves in a body, both for worshipping God jointly, and for maintaining order and love among the society of Christians; we ought to acquiesce in such rules as have been agreed upon by common consent, and which are recommended to us by long practice, and that are established by those who have the lawful authority over us. Nor can we assign any other bounds to our submission in this case, than those that the gospel has limited. We must obey God rather than man; and we must in the first place render to God the things that are God's, and then give to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar's. So that if either church or state have power to make rules and laws in such matters, they must have

this extent given them, that till they break in upon the laws of God and the gospel, we must be bound to obey them. A mean cannot be put here: either they have no power at all, or they have a power that must go to every thing that is not forbidden by any law of God.

This is the only measure that

can be given in this matter."*

But this, after all, is to make us the judges? In this one point undoubtedly it

is. And to this end is the Bible put into our hands, not as an all-sufficient guide, to supersede a living voice, a delegated authority, and a discretionary power; but as a rectifier, an infallible standard, in opposition to which, christian governors ought not to command, nor christian men to obey. Upon this one point, whether a law or ceremony is, or is not, contradictory to the Bible, let every man judge dispassionately, and decide at his peril, in the sight of God. But let no man imagine that he has any scriptural right to disobey a law of the state, or disregard a ceremony of the church, (however he may personally dislike it, or however inex

* Burnet on the Articles. Art. XX.