even from thefe we might have hoped foon to be relieved; had not fome among us, by taking part in the meafures of fedition, given occafion for government to consider us all as turbulent and factious men. I hope they may ftill be undeceived: and, if diffenters will but shew themfelves good fubjects, the tolerant genius of our conftitution will gradually operate towards placing us upon an equal footing with our fellow subjects in all political respects *. It also deferves the particular confideration of the friends of divine revelation, that our conftitution bears a nearer refemblance than any other on earth to that of the Jewish nation, which was framed by God himself. They had their kings, as we have; and their monarchy, like ours, was hereditary, in David's family. Their government, likewife, had its ariftocratic branch, in the fanhedrim, or great council of feventy-two. And that there was fomething democratic

in

It may be thought ftrange that this tolerant genius of the confitution fhould be mentioned as an advantage by a Seceder; feeing, in our teflimony, we mention it as a particular grievance, that, in the year 1712, an almost boundless toleration was granted, &c.! But any perfon who will give himself the trouble to read that article of our teftimony will fee, that our reafons for finding fault with that toleration were its tendency "to weaken the government and difcipline of the "church; and its being intended to strengthen and fupport a party "who had openly efpoufed the interest of a popish Pretender,-and "whofe meetings were feminaries of difaffection to our fovereign King "George, and the Proteftant fucceffion." On the fame grounds it was reprobated by the commiffion of the General Affembly, as appears by their address to the Queen that year. Besides, that toleration might juftly be found fault with: as containing a bare suspension of the penal laws in certain cafes; and as procceding upon the fuppofition that the civil powers have a right to punish men for their religious principles. They who, either formerly or more lately, have attempted to render Seceders obnoxious to government, as an intolerant fect, fworn

to

in their conftitution is plain; from thofe affemblies of the people that were held about the affair of the Levite's concubine, about the bringing up of the Ark to Jerufalem,-about Rehoboam's fucceffion; and on other fimilar occafions. Thus it is manifeft that the Jewish con ftitution was a mixed monarchy, as ours is. Their kings, though they had no legislative authority,—their laws being given by God himself,-yet had more power than our kings have, as might be made to appear in va rious inftances. And their popular affemblies only met occafionally whereas our Parliament must meet every year, or elfe the whole bufinefs of government must ftand ftill. In thefe, and fome other refpects, our go, vernment is even more favourable to the people than theirs was: and yet it would amount to blafphemy to fay, that their form of government, planned by Divine Wisdom and Goodness, was fubverfive of true liberty, or of any of the common or unalienable rights of men. Whatever other men think or fay about the British constitution,

to extirpate with fire and fword all who differ from them in their religious principles ;-muft have little acquaintance either with Seceders or their principles. They have the honour to be the first society who have fet the doctrine of toleration upon its proper foundation, in the effential difference between the kingdom of Christ and the kingdoms of this world. Our opinion is, that all members of the church of Christ fhould exert themselves, in their respective stations, to extirpate all false doctrines, and all finful practices, by a proper use of the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. But, that heretics, or the profeffors of a falfe religion, while peaceable members of civil fociety, are to be extirpated by penal laws, and by cfvil pains and punishments;-is a doctrine that we abhor. The office of civil magistrates being founded in the law of nature,-they can have no right to interpofe their authority in matters of pure revelation; or to punish any perfon for having views different from their own, in such matters.

conftitution, Seceders, I trust, will reflect, that it has undergone no change to the worse, fince their principles concerning it were clearly ftated, and laid before the world; in the Declaration and Defence, fubjoined to the Affociate Prefbytery's anfwers to Mr Nairn. We have always born teftimony against fome things in the united conftitution of the two kingdoms: particularly against its incorporating the church with the state; making the kingdom of Chrift an appendage of the kingdoms of this world; against the absurdity of establishing one mode of religion in England, and another in Scotland; and against allowing a temporal lordship, and a place in the legiflature, to the English bifhops as office-bearers of the church; contrary to the exprefs command of Chrift*. Against these, and other evils of a fimilar nature, both in the conftitution and adminiftration, relative to the church and religion, our teftimony has never given offence to government.

This ftrengthens our obligation to adhere, with equal firmnefs to our declared principles, relative to the civil part of our conftitution; as contained in the pamphlet above referred to, where, "the prefbytery affirms, that "we ought to acknowledge the prefent civil authority "over these nations, and fubjection thereunto, in law"ful commands." This is the principle, in defence of which the whole book is compofed. In an act of prefbytery fubjoined to it, they thus exprefs themselves : "The prefbytery do hereby condemn the dangerous ex"treme of impugning the prefent civil authority over "these nations, and fubjection thereunto in lawful commands, as contrary to the plain tenor of fcripture,

" and

* Luke xxii. 25.

" and to the known principles of this church in her "confeflion and covenants, and of all other reformed "churches;" as well as "the dangerous extreme of e

spousing principles in favours of propagating religion

by offenfive arms; contrary to that difpofition which "ought to be in all the followers of Chrift, who came "not to destroy mens lives, but to fave them." Perhaps it may be pleaded, that as this act of prefbytery was never a term of Chriftian communion among us, private persons in our communion are not bound to adhere to it. But furely their acceding to our communion implies fuch an acquiefcence in all our known principles, as not to disturb the peace of the church by a public oppofition to them. And, if this argument have any weight, with regard to private Chriftians, it cannot apply to office-bearers; for every minifter among us, and every elder, publicly and folemnly declares, that he is "fatisfied with, and purposes to adhere unto and main"tain the principles about the present civil government, "which are declared and maintained in" the above mentioned pamphlet *.

The affociate fynod is ftill more explicit in their approbation of the political constitution of Great Britain, in an act paffed by them, on occasion of the accession of his prefent Majefty, on the 16th of April 1761, in which they exprefs themselves thus, "The fynod do hereby a" gree in declaring, that they can yield to none of their fellow-fubjects in prizing the civil government under "which they live, as the beft modelled government "throughout the known world; in refpect to the me

cr

mory of our late fovereign King George II. as one of "the best of kings, of the mildest administration, who "rules

* See Formula, Q. 11th.

"ruled over us as the common father of his people; in "thankfulness for the peaceable acceffion of our present "fovereign King George III. to the throne of these "kingdoms; in a firm refolution to fupport and live "dutifully under his government, in our feveral stations "and capacities, according to the word of God, and "our received and known principles founded thereon,

to which we are bound by folemn covenant; in an "inviolable attachment to the Proteftant fucceffion, in "the illuftrious family of Hanover; and in a full pur"pose still to maintain these principles among the peo❝ple under their inspection."

Upon these principles Seceders have hitherto conducted themselves. It is well known, that when an attack was made upon the conftitution, by the Pretender and his adherents, in 1745, Seceders, minitters, and people, to a man, were stedfast in their adherence to it: and of them took arms in its defence. I trust the body of them, whatever may be the cafe with individuals, will be as ready to defend it against the rage of popular clamour as against the antiquated claims of hereditary right.

many

But it shall be left to themselves to determine, how far those men act like Seçeders, or in agreeableness to the principles above expreffed, who encourage or join themselves to focieties and affociations, under whatever fpecious names, erected and maintained for the purpose of oppofing the measures of government, and even of fubverting the conftitution, I know this intention is now denied; because they dare no longer avow it. But what elfe could be their defign? What else can it be to this day? Why did they send addresses of congratulation to the French convention? Why did they exert themfelves to propagate books, in which our conftitution was

held