and the latter, that they understood the oath in a manner consistent with their conscientious views. But where had been "the resisting to blood striving against sin"-" where the faith and patience of the saints?" Without a very plain and public disclaimer, a man must be considered as holding what his words and actions naturally mean; and it must be a very strong case indeed where he is warranted even with such a disclaimer, to use words and do actions which naturally mean the very reverse of what he thinks and feels. To do so in any case, is to endanger" the simplicity and godly sincerity" with which Christians should have their conversation in the world. Habitually to do so would be to destroy them. With regard to the conclusions which others draw from such conduct, there is some difficulty in speaking decidedly. That is a point not easily settled; for it is not easy to arrive, with any thing like certainty, in many cases, at what these conclusions are. When a man's conduct and his professions are at apparent variance, it will depend on circumstances whether the one or the other be viewed as expressive of his real principles, or whether the conclusion come to, be not, the apparently not unreasonable one, that the man has no principles at all. At any rate, in the case before us, if a man habitually profess to disapprove of civil establishments of religion, and yet habitually do what is naturally expressive of approbation of themthe impression made on the public mind will undoubtedly be, that whatever he may profess, he does not believe them to be the decidedly bad thing which his neighbour does, whose profession and whose practice on this subject obviously correspond. The respect which is due to straightforward consistency, he does not deserve, and he will not receive, either from friends or from enemies. NOTE XLIV. CONDUCT OF OUR COVENANTING ANCESTORS IN REFERENCE TO TAXES EXACTED FOR PURPOSES RECKONED SINFUL BY THOSE ON WHOM THEY WERE IMPOSED. The reference in the text is to the conduct of a portion of our covenanting ancestors, who refused to pay "the cess," imposed by the Convention of Estates of the kingdom of Scotland, in 1678, for the purpose of "enabling his majesty to put down dangerous field conventicles."-The following is the account which "the honest chronicler," Wodrow, gives of the result of passing the act imposing the cess; and it is to be remembered, if the historian had a bias, it was not in favour of the refusers to pay the cess. "This act divided those who were already disjointed, and the debates, about the lawfulness or unlawfulness of paying the cess here imposed, were not few. Upon the one hand, it was strongly urged, that the payment of this cess was an active concurrence with the persecutors in their bearing down of the Lord's work in the land, and it was said, it was much the same whether this was done by the sword or the purse. Upon the other side, it was reasoned, that since violence was both expected and used, it appeared more advisable, by a piece of money, to preserve themselves and their families alive, and their substance in their hands for better uses, than by an absolute refusal to give an occasion, and afford a legal pretext to the collector's cruelty, to destroy all and take as much as would raise and maintain two armies. It was added, that paying cess in this case was not spontaneous, but involuntary and forced, and therefore to be excused, a person in such circumstances being rather a sufferer than an actor; and though it would be certainly sinful in a merchant to throw his goods into the sea in fair weather, yet it becomes his duty to lighten the ship that he may save his life in a storm. Some of very good parts and great piety were upon both sides of this debate, and the heats and heights among ministers, preachers, and people, were not small. The banished ministers in Holland were warmly against paying this assessment; and such ministers here who were of the same sentiments, preached against the paying of it, and some of the hearers violently pressed ministers to preach against it, while those of the other side asked how they would keep it and much more out of the soldier's hand? Against paying it the example of one of the primitive Christians was much urged, who having rashly demolished an idol temple, chose to suffer martyrdom, before he would rebuild it. Those who were for paying it as the lesser evil of suffering, were silent till the clamour and heat was a little over, and used to declare, that if in their judgment they had been against paying it, they would have advised people to retire and leave the country. Some few did pay it with a declaration, and chose the middle way betwixt paying it without any testimony against what was evil in it, and refusing to pay it at all."-Wodrow's History, Book ii. Chap. xiii. vol. ii. p. 491. 8vo. Glasgow, 1829. Those who refused to pay the cess seem to have acted not only the most consistent part on the principles of sound ethics; but also to have followed out the path chalked out by the famous reforming General Assembly in 1648. When the Scottish Parliament, in that year, resolved to carry war into England, and called for support, both by men and money, from the nation, a number of officers refused to serve; and many refused to pay the tax for defraying the expenses of the war. In these circumstances, the General Assembly published an elaborate and eloquent declaration, in which, while they disclaim all disloyaltie or undutifulness to the King's Majesty, and also factious disposition," they call on all under their authority, in cautious words, but which, in the circumstances of the case, cannot be misunderstood, "so to respect and honour authority, as that they be not the servants of men, nor give obedience to the will and authority of rulers, in any thing which may not consist with the word of God, but stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made them free, and obey God rather than men,"-charging them "that they do not concur in, nor any way assist this present engagement, as they would not partake of other men's sins, and so receive of their plagues; but that, by the grace and assistance of Christ, they stedfastly resolve to suffer the rod of the wicked, and the utmost which wicked men's malice can afflict them with, rather than put forth their hand to iniquity."-The Principal Acts of the General Assembly, convened at Edinburgh, July 12, 1648, pp. 21, 23. Folio. Edin. 1648. The following judgment respecting the conduct of those who, from conscientious principles, scruple about paying a tax imposed for a purpose which they think sinful, seems much more consistent with sound sense, as well as Christian charity, than that which pronounces it "rebellion against Christ."-" In the present, and all like cases, it is highly of the concernment of all men to be careful and circumspectly cautious, when the case comes to be stated upon suffering or not suffering, in examining well whether the cause whereby a man shuns suffering be of God, and not to take plausibilities for demonstrations; seeing the flesh is not only ready to inculcate that doctrine, spare thyself, but is most witty of invention to plead for what will afford ease, and as unwilling to listen to what would, if attended to, expose us to the malice and rage of rigorous enemies: It being always more becoming the professors of the gospel, and the followers of our Lord Jesus, who must walk to heaven bearing his cross, to abstain, at all hazards, when the case is doubtful, than to rush forward upon an uncertainty, when it is not evident that they have God's approbation in doing so. Yea, suppose a person erred to his own hurt, in the first case through weakness, yet it would argue much more sincerity and uprightness towards God, and is done with less danger than in the other. And as many as walk according to these rules are like to have the peace of the Israel of God, to compense whatever of trouble or loss they may meet with in the world, when others shall not have this bird of Paradise to sing in their bosom."-A Hind let Loose, 1687, pp. 709, 710. What the section of Covenanters, referred to above-who "suffered more for their adherence to the Covenanted Church of Scotland, and for their opposition to all its deformations and defections than any party within the land,"-held on the general subject of the limits of civil obedience, and what they had to say in defence of their opinions, are very strikingly brought out in the following account of the examination of SHIELDS, perhaps the ablest of their leaders, before the Scottish Prelates, as most graphically described by himself in his interesting Autobiography. The extract is instructive in a variety of points of view. These prelates answer to Jerome's description of the Empeperor Decius" Hostis callidus,-animas cupiebat jugulare, non corpora," which Shields very appropriately prefixes as a motto to his book. - 66 MY CONFERENCE WITH THE PRELATES, MAY 5TH, 1685. "When I came into the chamber where they were in the councilhouse, I found three of them sitting, being (as I was informed since), the two Arch-prelates of St Andrews and Glasgow, and the Prelate of Dunkell. After a while's silence, one of them had a harangue, seeking leave first of the rest, to this purpose, that such was the respect and regard they had to my life, and youth, &c., and unfeigned desire of my better information, and being brought off these dangerous notions, so dangerous both for life and conscience, that though they were called to wait on weightier matters, yet they were content to postpone all to the desire they had of my advantage at this time; and, therefore, as they understood, I stuck upon some points of conscience, very ticklish and disputable, which yet may be, I had not duly considered; so they hoped I would not throw away my life upon these things out of a humour of obstinacy, and refuse what reason they would offer for my conviction; for, for that end this conference was appointed. "The harangue was prolix to this purpose; and I was never very prompt or skilful in making extemporary answers; yet the Lord helped me to say something to the effect following:-I first prefaced, that I must needs decline giving them their usual titles, and that I hope they did not expect them from me, nor would not be offended at my forbearance; for I durst not make use of any such compellations as might signify my respect to, or approbation of their office. They answered, they could bear with that from me, though they believed they were in cases to justifie and maintain their titles before the world or against it,—somewhat to that purpose. "Then I proceeded to tell them, that [it] was not my business, at present to dispute points of state with them: I was a Presbyterian, and did own all Presbyterian principles, and should be content to offer what light I had for them, or to hear what they had to say against any of them; but I believed their purpose was, which was also my desire, to restrict their discourse to those that rendered me so obnoxious, and on which my sufferings were stated, and for these I offered them freely, that if they could produce better arguments against them from Scripture or reason of any convincing force, than I had for them, I should be content to lay them down, but desired that they should not cajole me into a blind implicitness, by authority or arguments taken therefrom; and promised that then they should not find me either obstinate, or disingenuous, or standing upon any humour or honour, for I had none to look to but honesty. "They professed with protestations a great tenderness to conscience in things wherein the conscience was concerned, but that those things that I endangered myself for, were small and disputable,— no ways fundamental. I thanked them for any regard they had for my life, which also, I did value much, for I told them I had not lived so long, and though I had been much afflicted, I had not been so devoid of the comforts of life, as to be weary of it, or throw it away for nothing. And though these truths I maintained were comparatively not so material as some others, yet to me the least hoof or concern of truth, was more valuable than life, or all interests of the world, and that I did not think them small, but great matters to me. If they were doubtful or disputable to me, I durst not throw away my life so confidently for them; but now, the denying or doubting of them were a manifest doing violence to conscience. I will rather suffer all violence before I do that; but yet I will lay myself open for your information. 66 They told me, I might have reason to suspect my own opinion, being but a young man, and to be supposed not so well acquaint with those controversies, nor of so mature a judgement to assert things in contradiction to so many eminent and learned men in all ages. I confessed the supposition was rational upon these grounds, but I had Ee |