ized, since until then it is a mere possibility, not a power; but the form of this organization may be such as circumstances or the public judgment may select under the restrictions just indicated above. The State can never forfeit its existence; its form may, however, be subjected to modification or change; the men too, who exercise its authority, may violate their duty, and therefore forfeit their right to govern. If the laws of God are violated, it is not the act of the State, but the crime of the men who exercise its vast powers, and the sin and responsibility must and will rest upon them; hence they may be punished by expulsion, imprisonment, or even death, according to the degree of criminality; but the State does not cease to exist; it asserts its existence in the very act of passing sentence upon such offenders.

This view of the State defines clearly the duty of the citizen. The citizen is under a divine institution, working for divine ends; hence he is under a moral obligation to submit to the State and to obey its laws, so long as the State keeps within its legitimate authority. If we are under a moral obligation to yield obedience to the State, as a divine institution, so must we be morally bound to obey all its laws, since these laws are means employed to attain a divine end; if it is a duty to labor for an end, it is equally a duty to employ the proper means for the attainment of that end; laws are means for such an end, and hence we owe it to God, we are bound to God, we are obliged to act in conformity to these laws; we are morally bound to obey them.

It has been more than intimated that the State can have no morality. In one sense this is true; and in that sense, a church has no religion, a missionary society has no religion, a temperance society no morality; and yet each is organized to promote moral and religious ends, and all its officers are under obligation to act under a religious and moral obligation; so too the State is ordained for a moral purpose, for the accomplishment of moral ends, and every functionary, therefore, acts under a responsibility to God, the very

highest of all responsibility. If the officer of State thus acts under a high moral responsibility, no less does the citizen; since both officer and citizen are each in his sphere acting together for the accomplishment of the same high and holy end. The citizen then is morally bound to obey the legitimate laws of the State.

This has been admitted generally with reference to laws termed mala in se laws which were bad in themselves, the violation of which involved also a violation of God's positive laws; but it has been said that laws which were mala prohibita, were not morally binding; that the citizen could conscientiously disregard these laws, if he was willing to run the chance of incurring the penalty. Now these laws are said to be morally indifferent. Is this true? Can any thing be morally indifferent, which is adapted as a mean to bring about a great moral end? If we are bound to feed the poor, we are bound to pursue the means which will enable us to do it. If these laws are a necessary and suitable mean of carrying on the government, they are just as obligatory as any other law. The State cannot be carried on without a revenue, hence laws raising such a revenue are obligatory, as being the proper means to work out a divine end. A man then cannot conscientiously violate such a law, nor any other law which the State has lawfully enacted, since all laws work together for the same end. Nor is this all. A refusal to obey the law is an act of rebellion against the State itself; it is an act tending to defeat the action of the State, and to encourage resistance in others. Now this cannot be done without sin, since the effect of such resistance tends to a destruction of the State, to disorder, to social commotion, to defeat the very end for which the State exists. The citizen then is bound to obey the laws of the State of every kind; since, as a citizen, he acts still as a man, and as such is responsible to God for all he does, is still bound to employ the State for the advancement of God's plans, and this cannot be done unless every citizen is under a moral obligation to yield obedience to all the means properly adopted by the

State to carry out the great end. All its laws are but means to one and the same end. Nor does it matter if we think that the means adopted are not the best, since this question is rightly to be settled by the State, and when settled it becomes a legitimate mean, a binding law; beside, what right would the State have to punish me for disregarding a law which I was not morally bound to obey? This is to overlook the divine origin of the State, and in this respect to establish it upon force. Now force cannot create right, it can only enforce or violate it.

No good citizen can, therefore, refuse to obey a law properly enacted, without moral guilt, without sin, without exposing himself to the just indignation of Almighty God. If he does not like the law, if he doubts its policy, it matters not; he is bound, as a good citizen, wishing to set forth a good example, to yield it a cordial obedience.

This too is the scriptural doctrine of St. Paul, as stated by him in Romans, chap. xiii: "Let every man submit himself to the authorities of government, for all authority comes from God, and the authorities which now are, have been set in their place by God; therefore he who sets himself against the authority, resists the ordinances of God, and they who resist, will bring judgment on themselves. For the magistrate is God's minister to thee for good. But if thou art an evil doer, be afraid; for not by chance does he bear the sword (of justice), being a minister of God, appointed to do vengeance upon the guilty. Wherefore you must needs submit, not only for fear, but also for conscience sake; for this also is the cause why you pay tribute, because the authorities of government are officers of God's will, and His service is the end of their daily work." Here the whole moral aspect of the State is clearly and distinctly exhibited. It is founded by God, its officers are God's officers, servants to do His will, and work together with Him for the accomplishment of His plans and ends. Hence all are to obey, not through fear of punishment, but as a matter of conscientious

duty. This settles the question of moral obligation, so far as the opinion of St. Paul can settle it. He also places the paying of tribute or taxes as one of the duties of the citizen, thus exploding all pretense for the doctrine founded on the distinction of mala in se, and mala prohibita. He declares that even the Roman government which was then in existence, was established by God, and was, on this account, though administered by pagans, entitled to the obedience of the Christian. It will thus be seen that the doctrines of morality and revelation strictly correspond and beautifully harmonize, thereby evidencing that both rest upon the same foundation of divine truth, of divine appointment.

CHAPTER XXVI.

THE STATE-WHAT IT CANNOT DO.

FROM what has already been said, it follows that the State is not omnipotent, that it cannot do whatever it pleases, that it acts under limitations and restrictions, and hence that there are some things which the State cannot lawfully do. The State being founded upon the moral or divine law, is subject to that law, and must confine its action within such limits as that law draws around it. It is our present object to point out some of those things which the State cannot do, some of those restrictions under which it labors, and by which it is bound. We have already shown that there are personal and social rights and duties, and we shall follow this distinction in what we have to say in the ensuing discussion.

1. And first, then, of the right of the individual. The individual is a subject of the divine government, as well as a citizen of the State. The divine government is the paramount, and the State the subordinate authority or government; hence man is absolutely bound to obey the divine goyernment, and the State has no claim upon his obedience, except upon the condition that its claims are not in conflict with the claims of the paramount authority. The State, then, cannot interfere with the rights which the citizen holds from, and the duties which he owes to the divine government. God's claims must be paramount to every other possible claim,