The case of resistance of the supreme powers stated and resolved according to the doctrine of the Holy Scriptures by Will. Sherlock ...

CHAP. III. What we may learn from our Sa∣viour's Practice about NON∣RESISTANCE. (Book 3)

HAving seen what the Doctrine of our Saviour was, let us now con∣sider his Practice. And we need not doubt but our Saviour lived, as he preacht. He taught his Disciples by his example, as well as by his Laws. His Life was the best Comment upon his Sermons, was a visible Lecture of uni∣versal Righteousness and goodness; and it is impossible to conceive a more per∣fect and absolute example of Subjection and Non-resistance, than our Saviour has set us.

When our Saviour appeared in the world, the Iews were very weary of the Roman yoke, and in earnest expecta∣tion of their Messias, who, as they thought, would restore the Kingdom again unto Israel; and this expectation of their Messias, whom they mistook for a Tem∣poral

Prince, made them very apt to joyn with any one, who pretended to be the Messias, and to rebel against the Roman government. Such most likely were Theudas and Iudas of Galilee, of whom we have mention, 5 Acts 36, 37. and it is not impossible but the Aegypti∣an, who led 4000 men into the wilder∣ness, 2 Acts 38. either pretended to be the Messias, or some fore-runner of him: to be sure, such were those false Christs, and false Prophets, of whom our Savi∣our warns his Disciples, 24 Matth. 23. Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo here is Christ, or there, believe it not.

This being the temper of the Iewish Nation at that time, so extreamly incli∣ned to Seditions, and Rebellion against the Roman powers, how easie had it been for our Saviour, had he pleased, to have made himself very potent and formi∣dable! how easie could he have gained even the Scribes and Pharisees to his party, (whose great quarrel was at his meanness and poverty) would he once have declared himself a Temporal Prince, and invaded the Throne! But he was so far from this, that when he perceived the people had an intention to take him by force and make him a King, he with∣drew

himself privately from them, and departed into a mountain himself alone, 6 Iohn 15. and yet I presume, there might have been as many plausible pre∣tences to have justifyed a Rebellion then, as ever there were in any Nation since. He had at that time fed five thousand men, besides women and children, with five barley loaves and two small fishes; and what a formidable Enemy would he have been, who could Victual an Army by Miracles, and could, when he pleased, conquer by the same miraculous power also! this the people, whom he had mi∣raculously fed, were very sensible of and did hence conclude, that he was the Pro∣phet that should come into the world, and that it was time to take him; and set him upon the Throne: but though our Saviour was indeed the Messias, yet he was not such a Messias, as they expect∣ed; he was not a Temporal Prince, and therefore would not countenance their Rebellion against Coesar, though it were to make himself a King.

It is sufficiently known, that Christ submitted to the most unjust sentence, to the most ignominious and painful death, rather than resist the higher powers, though he could so easily have called for

Legions of Angels to his rescue. But he went as a lamb to the slaughter, and as the sheep before the shearer is dumb so he opened not his mouth: when he was reviled, he reviled not again; when he suffered he threatned not, but committed himself to him who judgeth righteously. He rebuked Peter, when he drew his Sword in his defence, and tells Pilate the reason, why he was so easily apprehended, and used at their pleasure, without any resistance and op∣position, though he had been formerly attended with such crouds of his Disci∣ples; Because he was no Temporal Prince, and therefore did not require his Disci∣ples to fight for him, as other Temporal Princes used to do. Iesus answered, My Kingdom is not of this world: if my King∣dom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delive∣red to the Iews; but now is my Kingdom not from hence, 18 Iohn 36. Which plainly shews, that our Saviour's sub∣jection was not matter of force and con∣straint, because he wanted power to re∣sist; but it was matter of choice, that which was most agreeable to the nature of his Kingdom, which was not to be pro∣pagated by carnal weapons, but by suf∣fering and death.

And when our Saviour has set us such an example as this, it is wonderful to me, that any, who call themselves his Disciples, can think it lawful to Rebel a∣gainst their Prince, and defend them∣selves from the most unjust violence by a more unjust resistance. But there are few men, who are contented to follow Christ to the Cross; they do not like that part of his example, and are wil∣ling to perswade themselves, that they are not bound to imitate it. And there are two things, which I find urged by some men to this purpose, which must be briefly considered.

1. That it is no wonder, that Christ suffered patiently and quietly without resisting the most unjust violence, because he came into the world to die, and to make his Soul an offering for sin. And how could so innocent a person die, but by the hands of unjust and Tyrannical powers? and it was inconsistent with his design of dying for sin, to resist and op∣pose. This is the account our Saviour himself gives of his patient suffering. When St. Peter drew his Sword in his defence, he tells him, Thinkest thou, that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve

Legions of Angels? But how then shall the Scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be? 26 Matth. 43. 54. And the cup which my Father has given me, shall I not drink it? 18 Iohn 11. But what is this now to us? our Saviour did not resist the most unjust and Tyrannical powers, because God had decreed he should die by their hands, and he came into the world for this very purpose; but has God as peremptorily decreed, that we must suffer also by unjust violence? were we born for this very end, to suffer death by Herods and Pontius Pilates? to be the slaves and Vassals, the scorn and the Triumph of insolent Tyrants? certainly God had a greater care and re∣gard for Mankind than so: and then our case is very different from our Saviour's; and though he died patiently, we may defend our Lives, and our Liberties, which are as dear as our Lives, if we can.

2. And therefore they add, that Christ took upon himself the person not only of a private man, but of a servant, that he might make us free, and that not only as to our Spiritual, but as to our Civil Liberties, as the Virgin Mary sings▪ He hath shewed strength with his arm, he hath scattered the proud in the imaginati∣on

of their heart: he hath put down the mighty from their seats, and hath exalted them of low degree, 1 Luke 51, 52. which they think, does not signifie that Christ has established Tyrants in their Thrones, and subjected Christians to the vilest slavery. As Christ has taught us by his example to bear servitude and sufferings with an equal mind, when we cannot help it; so he has not forbid us to vindicate and recover our natural rights and liberties, when we can, accor∣ding to the express direction of St. Paul, Art thou called being a servant? care not for it: but if thou mayest be made free, use it rather. Ye are bought with a price, be not ye the servants of men, 1 Cor. 7. 21, 23.

Now in answer to this, we may con∣sider in general, that if all this proves any thing, it proves, that Christ did not intend, that his sufferings should be an example to us: and yet St. Peter expresly tells us, that he did; Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that we should follow his steps: & wherein we must imitate Christ in suffering, he tells us in the same place, viz. in suffering wrong∣fully, in taking it patiently, when we do well, and suffer for it, 1 Pet. 2. 19, 20, 21.

And I think St. Peter's Authority in this case is better then all the Arguments that can be urged against it; and there∣fore whether we could answer these Ar∣guments or no, yet it is evident, that they are not good, because they prove that which is manifestly false, that Christ is not our Example in suffering, when St. Peter tells us, that he is: but yet it is a mighty satisfaction, not only to know, that an Argument is false, but to discover, wherein the fallacy consists; and therefore I shall give a more parti∣cular answer to these objections.

1. As for their first Argument, that Christ came into the world on purpose to die as a sacrifice for sin, and therefore it was inconsistent with his design, and the person he undertook, to resist and oppose, had it been never so lawful to resist; I grant it is very true, but yet this does not prove, that he cannot be our example in suffering. For,

1. This is not the only reason our Sa∣viour gives of his Non-resistance, and pa∣tient suffering. He gives Peter ano∣ther reason, Because it is unlawful to draw the Sword against a just Authori∣ty, though our cause be never so just: Put up thy Sword again into his place, for

all they that take the sword shall perish by the sword; which I have already explain∣ed to you at large. So that our Saviour acknowledges it as unlawful to resist a lawful Authority, as it was inconsistent with his design of dying for the sins of men; and herein certainly he is fit to be our example, in not resisting a law∣ful Authority in his own defence.

2. I grant, it had not been agreeable to the Person which our Saviour took, to have avoided death by a forcible re∣sistance; but then our Saviour volunta∣rily took such a Person, as was fit to be an example to us. His Person and his Religion were very well suited to each other; a meek, humble, suffering person, to be an example of a meek, humble and suffering Religion. His person and ex∣ternal circumstances of his appearance were on purpose fitted to his Religion; and it is none of the least wonders of the Divine wisdom, that the work of our redemption was accomplisht in such a mysterious way, as at once made our Saviour the Author of our redemption, and an example of all the graces and vertues of the Christian life.

Might not these men, if they pleased, by the same Argument prove, that

Christ is not to be our example in meek∣ness and poverty, and contempt of this world, and forgiving enemies, &c. be∣cause he came into the world on this design, not to be ministred unto, but to mi∣nister? He chose a mean and low for∣tune▪ and all the affronts and indignities he suffered, were part of his voluntary humiliation, and therefore it became him to bear them patiently, and to forgive them, as much as it did to die patiently by wicked hands; but there is not the same reason for us to do so: and thus it will be hard to find any thing, wherein Christ is to be our example, because the very reason of his coming into the world, the manner and circumstances of his ap∣pearance, all that he did and suffered, may be resolved into the decree and appoint∣ment of God, and his voluntary under∣taking, and the accomplishment of an∣cient Types and Prophecies; and there∣fore he is no more to be an example to us, than a man who acts the part of a beggar or of a Prince, is to be an exam∣ple to all that see him.

But methinks it is worth considering, why Christ chose such a person as this. Why he was born of mean and obscure parents, and chose a poor and industrious

life, and an accursed and infamous death? was it impossible for Infinite wisdom to have laid a more glorious and trium∣phant scene of our redemption? was there no possible way, but the condes∣cension and sufferings of his own Son? Let those say that, who dare venture to determine, what infinite wisdom can do. It is enough for me to know, that Christ took such a mean and suffering person upon him, because it was most a∣greeable to the Religion, which he preacht, and of which he was to be an example; and therefore though Christ suffered for other reasons, and to other ends and purposes, than we do or can suffer, yet his sufferings are an exam∣ple to us, because God chose to save and redeem us by the sufferings of his Son, not only that he might expiate our sins by his blood, but also that he might be an example to us of meekness, and pa∣tience, and submission to the Divine will, and subjection to government, even in the most unjust and infamous suffe∣rings.

3. We may consider further, that Christ's suffering in obedience to the will and appointment of God, does not make him unfit to be our example. For

though God has not so peremptorily de∣creed, that all Christians should suffer, as he did that Christ should suffer, yet whenever we are called forth to suffer, (as we always are, when we cannot avoid suffering without resisting a lawful Au∣thority) our sufferings are as much the ef∣fects of God's decree and appointment, as the sufferings of Christ were; and in such cases every Christian may, and ought to say, as his Lord did, The Cup which my Father hath given me▪ shall I not drink it? Thus St. Peter expresly tells the Chri∣stians to whom he wrote, and gives it as a reason, why they should suffer pa∣tiently, even for doing well. For even hereunto were you called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that we should follow his steps, 1 Pet. 2. 21. Now calling in the New Testament signi∣fies the choice and election of God, and al∣ways supposes a divine decree, appoint∣ment, and constitution, as the foundation of it. Thus St. Paul tells us, that the gifts and calling (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) of God are with∣out repentance, 11 Rom. 29. that is, that decree he made to choose the pe∣sterity of Abraham for his people, which still intitled all those of them to the blessings of the Gospel, who would be∣lieve

in Christ. Thus the state of Chri∣stianity is our calling, and holy calling, 2 Tim. 1. 9. 3 Heb. 1. because it is the way and means God hath chosen and ap∣pointed for the Salvation of Mankind: and Christians are often stiled the Called, because God has now decreed to chuse all the sincere Disciples of Christ, as he formerly did the posterity of Abraham, to be his peculiar people; and through∣out the Scriptures of the New Testa∣ment, God is never said to call, nor any one to be called of God, but with respect to some divine decree and constitution; and therefore when St. Peter tells the Christians, that they are called to suffer, it signifies that God has appointed them to it, by his positive will and decree.

This St. Paul discourses more at large in his Epistle to the Romans, and com∣forts them under their sufferings from this very consideration, that the suffe∣rings which they underwent, were not the effects of meer chance and accident, nor of the wickedness and injustice of men, nor barely of Gods permission, but of his decree and appointment; and therefore they might certainly con∣clude, that what ever their sufferings were, they should turn to their good,

8 Rom. 28, 29, 30. And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them that are called accor∣ding to his purpose, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to those who are called, that is, to suffer, which is the argument the Apostle is discoursing of, according to his will and pleasure and appointment.

Sufferings are not for the good of all profest Christians, for they may tempt Hypocrites to renounce their Religion, and great and severe sufferings may be too powerful a temptation for weak though sincere Christians; and there∣fore when the rage and malice of men boils and swells, God sets bounds to it, and does not suffer these persecutions and afflictions promiscuously to light up∣on all Christians, but exerciseth a very particular providence in chusing out fit persons to suffer, in directing the storm and tempest of Persecution to fall where he pleases, upon such Persons, who are armed with saith and patience to resist its fury, and to bear and conquer its rage. And such persons, who are thus ap∣pointed, who are thus called by God to suffer, shall be sure to conquer, and to receive the reward of Conquerours. For thus the Apostle adds, For whom he

did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the Image of his Son, that he might be the first-born among many brethren. This conformity to the Image of Christ in this place, does plainly sig∣nifie a conformity to him in sufferings, as is evident from the whole scope of the place. Some persons it seems there are, whom God does predestinate or fore-appoint to be conformed to the suf∣ferings of Christ: for this is not the actual portion of all Christians, though it is the condition of our Discipleship; and they are those whom he did fore∣know. Now the fore-knowledge of God includes his choice and election; he chuses out of the body of Christians, some fit persons to make his Martyrs and Confessors, to be examples of Faith and Patience and Courage to the world, And whom he did predestinate, them he al∣so called; and whom he called, them he al∣so justified; and whom he justified▪ them he also glorified; that is, those persons whom God thus chuses, and preordains to suf∣fer as Christ did, in time he calls forth to suffer; and when he does so he justifies them, that is, he brings them off with triumph and victory, and owns and ap∣plauds their Faith and Patience. For

so 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sometimes signifies; and there∣fore to be justified, is expounded by to conquer and overcome▪ 3 Rom. 4. That thou mightest be justified (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged. And indeed this is properly to be justified in any trial or combate, to overcome and conquer; and that God who gives the victory, gives the reward too; and whom he justifies, them he also glorifies: which seems to refer not to those rewards which are common to all Chri∣stians, but to some peculiar degree of glory, which is prepared for such Con∣querours, as the Apostle speaks; If so be, that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together, 17 v.

So that though God has not made us slaves and vassals to the humour of every Tyrant, yet all the afflictions and suffe∣rings of Christians, especially those, which befal them on the account of Re∣ligion, are as particularly ordered and determined by God, as the sufferings of Christ himself were: and therefore there is no difference upon this account be∣tween the sufferings of Christ, and the sufferings of his Disciples; and there∣fore though Christ came into the world on purpose to suffer in obedience to the

Divine will, this does not make him ever the less fit to be an example to us. Nay, his obedience to the will of God in suffering the hardest things from the most unjust and Tyrannical powers, is an example to us of the same patient suffering, and submission to the will of God.

It is true, none of us in particular can know that God has decreed, that we shall suffer such or such things, and from such or such hands, as our Saviour did; but yet this we know, that it is God's will and pleasure, that we should patiently endure those sufferings, which we cannot avoid without sin; and since he has forbid us by express Laws to re∣sist the higher powers, whatever suffe∣rings cannot be avoided without resist∣ance, it is God's will and pleasure, that we should submit to them. And since none of these sufferings, which are una∣voidable to us, befal us without the par∣ticular decree and appointment of God, we have reason in imitation of our great Master, to submit to them with the same cheerfulness and self-resignation as he did.

There is something indeed in the ex∣ample of our Saviour, which in our

circumstances we are not bound to imi∣tate. For he punctually knowing, what God's will and pleasure was concerning him, voluntarily chose that condition, which he so well knew, God had allot∣ted for him. He freely chose a mean and servile fortune, he chose suffering and death; when his time of offering up himself was come, he went up to Ierusalem on purpose to die there: but we are not bound to choose poverty and disgrace and suffering, we are not bound voluntarily to deliver up our selves into the hands of Tyrants and Per∣secutours, who thirst after our Blood. We may and ought to use all just and ho∣nest arts to make our condition easie and comfortable in the world, and to avoid the rage and fury of bloody men, be∣cause we cannot tell, that it is the will and appointment of God, that we shall suffer, till our sufferings are unavoidable▪ and then when we must either suffer or sin, when we must either renounce our Religion, or resist the powers, we must embrace suffering and death, as that por∣tion, which God has allotted for us.

I shall onely observe, by the way, what a mighty security this is to all good Christians, how absolute or tyran∣nical

soever the power be under which they live; that they are safe in God's hands, and all the Powers of men and Devils cannot touch them, till God by a positive decree appoints and orders their suffering. There could not be greater nor more absolute Tyrants than the Roman Emperours were at this time, and yet they had no power over the mean∣est Christian, but by an express commis∣sion from Heaven. This is the special priviledge of the Christian Church a∣bove the rest of mankind, that they are God's peculiar care and charge; that he does not permit any sufferings or persecutions to befal them, but what he himself orders and appoints. It is a great security to the World, that there is no evil happens to men but what God permits, and that he permits no∣thing but what he can over-rule to wise and good ends; but it is a greater happiness to have our condition imme∣diately allotted by God. God may permit a great many evils to befal us in anger and displeasure; but when he takes us into his immediate protection, and under his own government, what∣ever evils he appoints for us, whoever are the instruments of them, are cer∣tainly

for our good: and therefore there is no such danger in the Doctrine of Non-resistance, as some men imagine. How absolute soever this may be thought to render Princes, sincere Christians can suffer nothing by it: for they shall suf∣fer nothing, more nor less, than what God appoints for them to suffer.

2. It is also urged against the obli∣gation of our Saviour's example to suf∣fer as he did, that Christ by his state of servitude and sufferings, has purchas'd liberty for us; and that not onely a spi∣ritual and internal, but an external and civil liberty. We are no longer bound to submit to usurping and tyrannical powers, when we have strength and power to deliver our selves from that necessity. There is no help for it, but men who are weak and unable to resist, must obey and suffer; but this is mat∣ter of force, not of duty: We are now bought with a price, and therefore must not chuse a state of subjection and ser∣vitude to men.

1. Now in answer to this, we may consider first, that this obedience and subjection to Soveraign Princes, either was a duty before Christ's appearing in the world, or it was not. If it were

not, then our deliverance from this sub∣jection to Princes, is no part of that li∣berty which Christ has purchas'd for us, because it was the natural right of mankind before; and therefore there was no need of Christ's dying to pur∣chase this, which he cannot give us a greater right to than we had before his death. If subjection and Non-resistance were our duty before, and ceases to be our duty now, then Christ by his death has cancelled the obligations of our du∣ty, and purchas'd a liberty and freedom not to do that now which by the Laws of God or Nature we were bound to do before; that is, Christ by his death has abrogated not onely the Ceremonial, but some Moral Laws; which I shew'd you before was contrary to the nature and designe of his undertaking.

2. It is strangely unaccountable, how obedience to any Law should abrogate and cancel it. How Christ by subjecti∣on to the higher powers, should for e∣ver after deliver his Disciples from the necessity of subjection, and make them free from the authority and govern∣ment of Princes, whenever they dislike their government. A typical Law may be fulfilled and receive its just accom∣plishment,

and then its obligation ceases. Thus the death of Christ fulfilled the Levitical sacrifices, and put an end to them: But the authority of a moral Law is confirmed and strengthened, not abrogated and disanulled by great ex∣amples. When Christ quietly and pa∣tiently submitted to the most unjust sentence, in obedience to lawful autho∣ritie, he either did well or ill in it: If he did ill, his example indeed is not to be imitated; but if he did well, how did his doing well deliver us from the obligation of doing well? Did his do∣ing well, make it ill for us to do as he did? Why did not his perfect and un∣sinning obedience as well deliver us from the obligation of all the other Laws of God, as from obedience and subjection to Princes?

The Antinomians indeed are so absurd as to say, that Christ fulfilled all righ∣teousness in our stead, and that every believer has fulfilled the Law in Christ; and therefore is not bound to fulfil it in his own person as a condition of life and salvation. But yet they are not so absurd as to say that Christ by the righ∣teousness of his life and death, has alter∣ed the nature of good and evil, and can∣celled

any one Law of God. The Law is in force still, and the dutie is the same; but the Law cannot take hold of them, nor exact a personal righteousness from them, because they have already fulfilled the Law in Christ. But now these men must say, that Christ has not onely fulfilled the Law of subjection and non-resistance, as a condition of salvation, but has cancelled it as a rule of life.

3. The death of Christ could not purchase any civil rights or liberties which we had not before, nor make a∣ny change in the external fortunes or conditions of men. The death of Christ is represented in Scripture either as an atonement or expiation of sin, or as the purchase and seal of the new Covenant. Now how does the death of Christ, by expiating our sins, deliver us from sub∣jection to our civil Governours? What connexion is there between the expia∣tion of our sins, and our freedom from the authoritie of Princes, that he who does one, must be supposed to do the o∣ther?

And as for the new Covenant, where does that grant any new franchises and liberties to subjects? Let them produce their new Charter to justifie their ex∣emption

from subjection to Princes; let them shew any one saying in the Go∣spel of our Saviour, if they can, to that purpose. What the Doctrine of Christ is, you have already heard; and when Christ died to confirm the new Cove∣nant in his bloud, it is absurd to say that he has purchased any liberties for us, but what he has expresly granted to us in his Gospel.

He does indeed promise libertie & free∣dom to his subjects, but it is a libertie of another nature; a libertie from the power and dominion of sin. Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free, 8 John 32. that is, the power of the Gospel-revelation should deliver them from the Empire of their lusts, and give them the true government and maste∣rie of themselves: And therefore he adds, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Who∣soever committeth sin, is the servant of sin. And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the son abideth for ever. If the son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed, 34, 35, 36 v.

But does not St. Paul advise the Co∣rinthians to assert even their civil and political freedom when they can, and that from this argument, that they are

the freemen of Christ? which seems to intimate, that there is such a connexion between our spiritual and civil Liber∣ties, that it does not become Christ's freemen to be slaves and servants unto men. 1 Cor. 7. 21, 22, 23 v. Art thou called, being a servant? care not for it: but if thou mayest be made free, use it ra∣ther. For he that is called in the Lord, being a servant, is the Lord's free man: likewise also he that is called, being free, is Christ's servant. Ye are bought with a price, be not the servants of men.

But what is it they would prove from these words? that our subjection to men is inconsistent with our freedom in Christ? that the Apostle expresly de∣nies. For he that is a servont, is Christ's freeman. Or that Christ, when he made us free, did deliver us from the subjection of men? not that neither. For he does not advise Christian servants to leave their masters, as he might and ought to have done, if Christ had be∣stowed this civil libertie on them; but he was so far from this, that when O∣nesimus had run away from his Master Philemon, and was converted by St. Paul, and proved very useful and serviceable in the ministrie, yet he would not de∣tain

him from his Master, without ask∣ing his leave: which occasioned the E∣pistle to Philemon, as you may see 10, 11, 12, &c. And in this place he ad∣vises the Christian servants not to be concerned at their being servants; which was no injury at all to their Chri∣stian libertie: But if they could procure their libertie by any fair and just means, they should chuse to do it; which is upon many accounts more desirable, e∣specially when Christians were servants to heathen Masters, as it often was in those days.

But does not the Apostle expresly tell them, Ye are bought with a price, be not ye the servants of men? Yes, he does: but sure this cannot signifie that servants should cast off the authoritie of their Masters. For that is directly contrary to what he had advised them before, and contrary to his own practice in the case of Onesimus, whom he sent back to his Master Philemon. But all that I understand by it, is this; that those Christian servants who could not obtain their freedom, should yet take care not to be servants to the lusts and passions of their Heathen Masters. For though a state of civil bondage and

slavery is not inconsistent with their Christian libertie, yet to be ministers and servants to the vices of men, is: And therefore when they lay under any such temptation (as Christians who served Heathen Masters could not long escape it) they must then remember that they are Christ's freemen, who were bought with a price; and there∣fore must neither be servants to their own lusts, nor to the lusts of other men. And the reason why I chuse this sence of the words, is this; because the Apostle opposes being bought with a price, that is, their being redeemed by Christ, or being Christ's freemen, to their being the servants of men, as inconsistent with each other. And therefore their being the servants of men, cannot be under∣stood of civil servitude, which he before had told them was not inconsistent with their Christian libertie, but of being ser∣vants to the vices of men.

But what now is all this to subjection to Soveraign Princes? Does the Apostle exhort the Christians too to throw off the civil powers? It was possible for a Christian servant to purchase his libertie, or to obtain it some other lawful ways; but how can subjects deliver themselves

from the authoritie of Princes? unless they go into some Country where there is no government, or resist and rebel a∣gainst the higher powers where they are: Neither of which is agreeable to our Apostles Doctrine, who would not allow servants to run away from their Masters, much less rebel against them to procure their libertie.

Nor was the case the same between Christian subjects and soveraign Princes, and between Masters and Servants; and therefore neither is the reason the same, why subjects should desire freedom from the higher powers. Servants in those days were slaves and vassals, and were kept in such constant attendance on their Masters, that it must needs be very difficult; besides the other temp∣tations they were exposed to, to gain a∣ny time or libertie for attending on Christian Worship, and the instructions of the Church. But Christian subjects are more at their own disposal, even under Heathen Princes; and have all that libertie, excepting the case of per∣secution, which is necessary for the pur∣poses of Religion; which yet is the one∣ly reason intimated here, why the Apo∣stle advises servants to procure their freedom, if they can.

To conclude this Argument; there were a sort of men, even in the Apostles days, who boasted mightily of their Christian libertie, and thought scorn for a Christian either to be a servant or a subject. For this reason St. Paul in this place instructs servants, that their Chri∣stian libertie is not injured by their being servants: for this reason are there such frequent directions to servants to obey their Masters. For this reason does St. Peter caution the Christians against this pretence of Christian libertie, which some abused then, as they do still, to the disturbance of civil governments; As free, but not using your liberty for a cloak of maliciousness, but as the servants of God.