acterized as minding earthly things, and no longer bear the image of the earthly upon your soul as well as upon your body, go daily by sacred meditation, to Mount Calvary, and while all the mysteries of redeeming love, as concentrated in the cross, there meet the eye of faith, and the visions of celestial glory, seen most distinctly from that spot, attract and fix the transported gaze of hope, you will see the beauty of the earth fade away before you amidst the splendour of a more excellent glory, and feel the love of the world die within you, under the power of a stronger and a holier affection.

CHAPTER IX.

ON THE CONDUCT OF PROFESSORS IN REFERENCE TO POLITICS.

IN attempting to settle the difficult question of the extent to which a Christian may carry his active concern, in the affairs of civil government, or what are technically called politics, two things must be borne in mind: First, that civil government and Christianity, though altogether distinct in their nature and design, are not opposed to each other. The latter acquaints us with our religious duties, or in other words, how we may serve God here, and obtain eternal salvation beyond the grave; while civil government, though sanctioned and enforced as to its general principle by the New Testament, is altogether, as to its specific arrangements, a provision of human skill, to secure tranquillity and freedom, during our continuance in the present life. Between institutions," says Mr. Hall, "so different in their nature and object, it is plain no real opposition can subsist; and if they are ever represented in this light, or held to be inconsistent with each other, it must proceed from an ignorance of their respective genius and functions." It is manifest then, that there is nothing in politics as such, that is incompatible with the strictest profession of Christianity. Secondly: It is of importance to recollect the peculiar nature of that constitution or system of civil government under

66

which our lot is cast, and which is of a compound nature, including a very large admixture and influence of popular interference. The people, as well as the Monarch and the Peers, are the depositaries of political power, and have a share in the government of the country. They, by their representatives in the Commons, assist in making the laws by which the realm is ruled. They have, therefore, a legal right to interfere, and a right, which is in fact in the view of the constitution, indefeasible. Their interference, when constitutionally exerted, is no stepping out of their place, no usurpation, no invasion of the rights and prerogatives of the rulers. Things were different when the epistles of Paul and Peter were written. There was but the shadow of popular influence left in the Roman Government; the power had passed away from the people, and they had little or no opportunity of intermeddling with the affairs of government, except in the way of insurrection and riot, which, of course, Christianity forbade, and enjoined upon those of them who had received the gospel, a submission to the powers that were. Its in junctions on this subject, are strict and explicit, as may be seen by consulting Rom. xiii, and I Peter, ii. But surely those passages can never be justly stretched, in a free country, and under a government admitting of popular interference, to forbid the exercise of those rights with which the subject is invested by the constitution. Even allowing that passive obedience, and unresisting submission were the duty of the inhabitants of a country that is under a despotic government, it cannot be proved that those who are in legal possession of popular rights, should renounce them, and give up all active concern in civil affairs. However difficult it may be to ascertain in what way and to what extent it would be lawful for the Chris

tian inhabitants of Austria or Russia, to exert themselves to obtain a free government, and thus make politics a matter of practical solicitude, there can be no such difficulty as to the lawful interference, lawful both in the view of Christianity and the constitution, of the Christian inhabitants of Great Britain, for it belongs to them of right.

But perhaps it will be said, the question is not about the right of an Englishman's interference, for this is allowed by all: but the expediency of a Christian's troubling himself about these matters. It appears to me, that to a certain extent, popular rights are popular duties. Every enfranchised person is, by his representative, not only the subject of law, but the maker of law; and it is not only his privilege, but his duty, to seek, constitutionally, the repeal of bad laws, the improvement of defective ones, and the making of good ones. As we are governed by laws, and not merely by men, it is of immense consequence what laws are enacted; and the country, that is, all present and future generations, have a claim upon every Englishman, for his influence in seeking that our legislative code might be as conducive as can be to the welfare of the nation. Is it nothing to a Christian-ought it to be nothing, what kind of laws are made? Legislation takes cognizance of every interest he has in the world, and unless he is to give up all that concerns his individual and social rights, his domestic comforts, and his trac; he ought to pay some attention to the affairs of civil government. He does not cease to be a citizen, when he becomes a Christian; nor does he go out of the world, when he enters the church. Religion, when it comes to his heart in power and authority, finds him a member of society, enjoying many civil privileges, and performing many

duties, and for which he is not now disqualified, not from which is he released by the new and more sacred obligation that he has undertaken to discharge. If we could conceive that civil affairs generally, are too earthly for the spiritual nature that he has now assumed to attend to, there is at least one view of them of transcendent importance to him, even as a Christian; I mean their connexion with the great subject of civil and religious freedom. Now, even allowing that civil liberty is a subject too earthly and too exciting, leading too often to the arena, and disfiguring our piety too much with the dust of political controversy; a subject which brings us too much into parties far removed from the influence of religion; what shall we say of religious freedom, a blessing so important to the comfortable discharge of the duties of our holy calling, and also to the leisure and opportunity necessary for promulgating religion? This is a blessing worth infinitely more to us than all our insular or continental colonies in the East or Western Indies, in Africa or in America. This precious deposit, bought by the martyr's blood, and worth even the price that millions have thus paid for it, is in our keeping under God, and ought we not to watch it well? We are trustees of this benefit for all future generations. But can we keep it in the absence of civil liberty? Is it to be abandoned, then, by those very men who most need the blessing, and are most dependant upon it, for their enjoyment and safety

While, therefore, a professor, is under solemn obligations to be a loyal subject, or to submit to the king, and honour him as the executive branch of the constitution; he is also bound to be a patriotic member of the social body, by giving his practical support to the legislative branch. He is to be obedient to the