secular and spiritual government, saying, | treason,-for a design to subvert, or in "Render unto Cæsar the things which some way interfere with, the established be Cæsar's, and unto God the things government. To this charge, it is plain which be God's," so, now, before Pilate, Pilate understood Him to plead not He asserts his claim to be a King, but guilty; and gave credit to his plea declares that "his kingdom is not of this Pilate, therefore, must have taken the world," and that, accordingly, his ser- declaration that Christ's "kingdom is not vants were not allowed to fight for Him; of this world," as amounting to a renunand He further describes his kingly office ciation of all secular coercion,-all forto consist in "bearing witness of the cible measures in behalf of his religion. truth." "Every one that is of the truth," And we cannot without imputing to our said He, "heareth (i. e. obeyeth) my blessed Lord a fraudulent evasion, supvoice."* pose Him to have really meant any thing different from the sense which he knew his words conveyed. Such is the conclusion which I cannot but think any man must come to who is not seeking, as in the interpretation of an Act of Parliament, for any sense most to his own purpose, that the words can be made to bear, however remote that may be from the known design of the Legislator; but who, with reverential love, is seeking with simplicity and in earnest to learn what is the description that Christ gave of his kingdom.

The result was that Pilate acquitted Him; declaring publicly that he "found no fault at all in Him." It is plain, therefore, that he must have believedor at least professed to believe-both that the declarations of Jesus were true, and that they amounted to a total disavowal of all interference with the secular government, by Himself, or his followers, as such.

Much ingenuity has been expended, I must needs say, has been wasted,-in drawing out from our Lord's expressions before Pilate, every sense that his words But the ingenuity which has been (as can be found capable of bearing; while I said before) wasted in trying to explain a man of little or no ingenuity, but of our Lord's words in some other way, has plain good sense and sincerity of pur- been called forth by a desire to escape pose, seeking in simplicity to learn what Jesus really did mean, can hardly, I should think, fail of that meaning, if he does but keep in mind the occasion on which He was speaking, and the sense in which He must have known that his language would be understood. The occasion on which He spoke was when on his trial before a Roman governor, for

✦ He came to establish a Kingdom of Truth; that is, not a kingdom whose subjects should embrace on compulsion what is in itself true, and consequently should be adherents of truth by accident; but a kingdom whose subjects should have been admitted as such in consequence of their being "of the truth" that is, men honestly disposed to embrace, and "obey the truth," whatever

it might be, that God should reveal: agreeably to what our Lord has elsewhere declared, that "if any man will do (bé, is, willing to do) the will of my Father, he shall know the doctrine, &c."

some of the consequences which follow from taking them in their simple and obvious sense. Those who are seeking not really to learn the true sense of our Lord's declarations, but to reconcile them with the conduct of some Christian States, and to justify the employment of secular force in behalf of Religion, are driven to some ingenious special-pleading from them such a sense as may suit their on the words employed, in order to draw own purpose.

And all this ingenuity is (as I said before) wasted; because even supposing it proved that the words which Jesus uttered are, in themselves, capable of bearing some other meaning, still, nothing is gained (supposing our object is, not to evade, but to understand Scripture) if that meaning be one which could not have been so understood at the time, or which would have been one utterly foreign to the occasion and irrelevant to the question that was to be tried.

Those who explain Christ's declaration of his having "come into the world to bear witness of the truth," in some sense in itself intelligible, but quite unconnected with the inquiry He was answering, as to his being "a King," seem to forget that what he said must have had not only § 10. For instance, I have heard it said some meaning, but some meaning pertinent to that our Lord's description of his kingdom the occasion; and this they seem as much at a as "not of this world" meant merely loss for as Pilate himself; who exclaimed, "What that He claimed to possess a spiritual dois truth?" not from being ignorant of the meaning minion (as undoubtedly He did) over the of the word, but from perceiving no connexion between "truth" and the inquiry respecting the souls of men, and to be the distributor of claim to regal office.-See Essay I., 2d series. the rewards and judgments of the other

world. And such certainly is his claim: | false religion. In short, at the time when but the essential point, with a view to the Christ stood before Pilate, his kingdom trial then going on, was, that this was his was not of this world, "because" (I am only claim. He did not merely claim spi- citing the words of one of the most ceritual dominion, but he also renounced lebrated ancient divines)" that prophecy temporal. He declared not merely that was not yet fulfilled, 'Be wise now, therehis kingdom is of the next world; but that fore, O ye kings, be learned, ye that are it is not of this world. judges of the earth; serve the Lord with fear;"" the rulers of the earth, he adds, were at that time opposed to the Gospel; the Apostles and other early disciples were unable to compel men to conform to the true faith; and therefore it was that the secular arm was not yet called to aid against the Church's enemies.

In fact, the mere assertion of his spiritual dominion, and one extending beyond the grave, would have been, at that time, and in reference to the charge brought against Him, wholly irrelevant, and foreign to the question. He was charged with "speaking against Cæsar,”—with making Himself King in opposition to the Roman Emperor. The Jews expected (as Pilate could hardly have been ignorant) a Christ who should be a heaven-sent "King of the Jews," possessing both temporal and spiritual authority; a kingdom, both of this world and of the next: for the great mass of the nation believed in a future state. Any man claiming to be such a king of the Jews, would evidently be an opponent of the Roman government. His spiritual pretensions, the Romans did not concern themselves about. It was the assumption of temporal power that threatened danger to the Empire; and it was of this assumption that Jesus was accused: did He not distinctly deny it? There was no question about the rewards and punishments of another world. The question was, whether He did or did not design to claim, for Himself, or his followers as such, any kind of secular empire:* could any words have disclaimed it more strongly than those He used? And can any one in his senses seriously believe that when Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world," He meant to be understood as saying that his kingdom was not only of this world, but of the next world too.

Now, without entering into the question whether our Lord's words could, in themselves, bear such a meaning, let us confine ourselves to the principle we set out with, and merely consider whether He could possibly have meant to be so understood. For this, we should observe, would clearly have been to plead guilty to the charge. It mattered nothing to the Roman Government whether it were Jesus Himself, or his followers that should revolt against Cæsar's power, and set up a rival kingdom. And therefore, when our Lord himself, and afterwards Paul and the other Apostles, defended themselves against the imputation of seditious designs, it is impossible they could have meant to be understood as merely disclaiming such designs for the present, and renouncing temporal dominion only for themselves, personally, but reserving for their followers, when these should have become strong enough, the right to establish by force a Christian political ascendency, and to put down all other religions. To have defended themselves against their accusers by acknowledging the very designs which those accusers imputed to them, would have been downright insanity.

No, I have heard it said by some But such absurdities as would, in any other expounders,-He did mean to dis- other subject, revolt every man of comclaim all temporal dominion for Himself mon sense, are sometimes tolerated in personally and at that time; but that, the interpretations of Scripture, that are hereafter, when the kingdoms of this framed in order to serve a purpose. For world should become kingdoms of the instance, suppose some emissaries of Lord," and when "kings should become the Pretender in the last century, or, nursing fathers" of his Church, when in later times, of the French revolu"the Church should be in its complete tionists, or of the Chartists, or any set developement by being perfectly identified of revolutionists of the present day, to with the State, then, all those Christians go about the country proclaiming and who should have attained power, should disseminating their principles, and then exercise that power in enforcing the profession of his Gospel, and in putting down idolatry, infidelity, heresy, dissent, and all

* See Appendix, Note (A.)

to be arrested and brought to trial for sedition: can any one conceive them defending themselves against the charge, by pleading that they did not intend that they themselves, but that their disciples,

should obtain the government of the unto all their due," were not equally country, and enforce their principles; applicable to the duties either of Subjec that they aimed at the possession and the or of Prince! monopoly of civil rights* and privileges, not for themselves, but for their successors; that they did not mean to take up arms till they should have collected a sufficient number of followers; and that they taught all men to yield obedience to the existing government till they should be strong enough to overthrow it? Who does not see at once that to urge such a plea would convince every one of their being madmen? And yet this is what must be imputed to Jesus and his disciples, by any one who can suppose that they meant to be understood by the Roman magistrates as merely disclaiming all interference with civil government, till they should become numerous enough to enforce the claim;-all resort to secular coercion in religious matters, till they should have strength to employ it effectually-all political monopoly, till they should be in a condition to maintain it by a strong hand.

Jesus then, it is plain, when He said "My kingdom is not of this world," could not have meant to be understood as implying that it should be so hereafter.

One of the modes in which it has been attempted to explain away the teaching of Christ and his Apostles, is by representing them as inculcating only the duty of Subjects towards Governors, and not meaning that the same principles should be applied in reference to the duty of Governors towards Subjects: so that though Christians were to "be subject, for conscience' sake," even to idolatrous rulers (as long as nothing at variance with Christian duty was enjoined) the right was reserved, it seems, to Christians, whenever they might obtain political power, to employ this in forcibly maintaining and propagating their own religion, and securing to its professors a monopoly of civil rights. As if a citizen, of whatever persuasion, had not the same claim to the rights of a citizen, that a ruler, of whatever persuasion, has to the rights of a ruler! As if the Christian principles implied in "render unto Cæsar the things that are Cæsar's" ... "render

* See Appendix, Note (A.)

I know not how the oppression under which the Vaudois are now suffering (see the Pamphlet referred to in the Preface) can be objected to by Protestants who hold these principles, unless they renounce altogether the rule of doing as we would be done by.

And supposing (what is inconceivable that any such groundless and fanciful distinction had been in the mind of ou Lord and his Apostles, and moreover that they had meant the Roman magistrates so to understand them, and also that those magistrates had given them credit for sincerity, still, after all, nothing is gained by these suppositions: since there could be no security against a Christian's obtaining political power, or against a man's embracing Christianity who was already in power. And if this power was to be exerted in propagating the Religion by those coercive means which a civil magistrate is enabled to employ, no one in his senses can doubt, that had Christ and his Apostles been understood as acknowledging this, they would have been pleading guilty to the charges brought against them.*

§ 11. But had He then some hidden meaning, which He did not intend to be understood at the time? Did He design to convey one sense to the Roman governor, and another to his own disciples?-to reserve for his followers in future times, that power to enforce the acknowledgment of his gospel, which He pretended to disclaim.

It seems almost too shocking even to ask such a question: and yet it is but too true, that such, in substance, (however glossed over in words) must be the meaning attributed to our blessed Lord by those who would reconcile his decla rations before Pilate with that which they represent as the right and the duty of every Christian Governor. “The magis trate," they say, (I am giving the very words that have been employed,) "who restrains, coerces, and punishes any one who opposes the true faith, obeys the command of God:" and they contend that a Christian Governor is not only authorized, but bound, to secure to the professors of the true faith a monopoly of political power and civil rights. Now, to reconcile such doctrines with the declarations of Christ and his Apostles, a meaning must be attributed to those declarations which it would have been madness for them to have avowed at the time;-in short, a hidden meaning.

It is recorded of an ancient king of Egypt-one of the Ptolemies-that he

* See Essays on the Dangers, &c. pp. 210-13.

employed a celebrated architect to build a magnificent Light House, for the benefit of shipping, and ordered an inscription in honour of himself to be engraved on it; the architect, it is said, though inwardly coveting the honour of such a record for himself, was obliged to comply, but made the inscription on a plaster resembling stone, but of perishable substance: in the course of years this crumbled away; and the next generation saw another inscription, recording the name, not of the King, but of the architect, which had been secretly engraved on the durable stone below.

that the blessed Jesus Himself, who rebukes hypocrisy more strongly than perhaps any other sin, should be regarded by his professed followers as having pretended to disavow that which was his real design, and which He imparted to his Apostles; teaching them in like manner to keep the secret till they should be strong enough to assert the political supremacy of the Gospel, and to extirpate, or hold in subjection as vassals, all professors of false religions.

All this I say, might seem hardly credible, did not daily experience show us how easily (not only in this but in other cases also) even intelligent men are satisfied with the slightest pretences of argument-with the most extravagant conclusions-when they are seeking not really for instruction as to what they ought to do, but for a justification of what they are inclined to do. Such a bias of inclination is like the magnet which is said to have been once secretly placed near a ship's compass by a traitor who purposed to deliver the crew into the enemy's hands. All their diligence and skill in working the ship, and steering by this perverted compass, served only to further them on the wrong course.

Without presuming to pronounce judgment on the general moral character of others, I cannot forbear saying, for myself, that if I could believe Jesus to have been guilty of such subterfuges as I have been speaking of, 1 not only could not acknowledge Him as sent from God, but should reject Him with the deepest moral indignation.

Now, just such a device as this is attributed to our Lord and his Apostles by those who believe them to have designed that secular power should hereafter be called in to enforce the Christian Faith, though all such designs were apparently disavowed, in order to serve a present purpose. According to such interpreters, "My kingdom is not of this world" was only an inscription on the perishable plaster; the design of "coercing and punishing" by secular power all opponents of the true faith was, it seems, the engraving on the stone beneath, "Render unto Cæsar the things that be Cæsar's" was but the outward part of the inscription; the addition was an inner hidden engraving, directing that Christians, when become strong enough, should compel both Cæsar and his subjects, all Rulers and all citizens-either to acknowledge the true faith, or to forfeit their civil rights. It was the outside inscription only that ran thus, "Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man; **the powers that be are ordained of God:" the secret characters on the stone said, "Take care as soon as possible to make every ordinance of man submit to you," and to provide that none but those of your own body shall be in authority; and that they shall use that authority in enforcing the profession of your religion.* It might seem incredible, did we not know it to be the fact, that persons pro$12. It is in many respects importfessing a deep reverence for Christ and ant to observe and to keep in mind, to his Apostles as heaven-sent messengers, how great an extent both an obliquity of should attribute to them this double-deal- moral judgment, and a deficiency in the ing;-should believe them to have secret- reasoning-powers, will often affect, on ly entertained and taught the very views some one or two particular points, a man of which their adversaries accused them, who may be, on the whole, and in other and which they uniformly disclaimed: points, where his particular prejudices have not gained dominion, a person both morally and intellectually above the average. In the present case, for instance, one may find men of much intelligence

* Of this subject I have treated more fully in the "Essay on Persecution," 3d Series; and in Appendix E. and F. to "Essays on the Dangers," &c., 4th Series.

How far this indignant disgust may have been excited in the breasts of some who have taken for granted, on the authority of learned and zealous divines, that the interpretation I have been reprobating is to be received, and who may in consequence have rejected Christianity with abhorrence, it is for those who maintain such an interpretation carefully to consider.

misled by a fallacy which in the ordinary highest court at Athens; and expressed concerns of life every person of common his ardent wish to convert Agrippa, and sense would see through at once.

also all "who heard him that day." Yet Was it designed, they say, that Chris- neither Peter nor Paul ever thought of tians should never take any part in civil desiring the Centurion-the Governoraffairs;-should never be magistrates or the Judge and the King, to lay down their legislators, and thus partake of political offices, and renounce all concern with power? And if this is permitted, must secular business; nor did they ever dream they not, as civil magistrates, act on Chris- that their holding such offices when tian principles? No doubt; but they Christians, would make Christ's a "kingwould cease to act on Christian princi- dom of this world." They wished, and ples if they should employ the coercive they openly endeavoured, to make "the power of civil magistrates in the cause of kingdoms of this world the kingdoms of Christianity; if they should not only take the Lord," and "kings the nursing-faa part in civil affairs, but claim as Chris- thers of the Church," in the sense of tians, or as members of a particular Church, making the indivduals of every nation a monopoly of civil rights. It is this, and members of Christ;-of inducing kings this only, that tends to make Christ's and magistrates, and subjects too, to abkingdom a kingdom of this world.” stain from persecuting Christians, and to become Christians, and to act so as to induce others to follow their example.

Now this is a distinction which in all other cases is readily perceived by every man of common sense. For instance, there are many well-known Societies in this and in most other countries, which no one would call in any degree political Societies; such as Academies for the cultivation of mathematical and other sciences, Agricultural Societies,-Antiquarian Societies, and the like; now it would be reckoned silly even to ask respecting any one of these Secietics, whether the members of it were excluded from taking any part in civil affairs, and whether a magistrate or a legislator could be admitted as a member of it. Every one would see the absurdity of even entertaining any doubt on this point: and it would be reckoned no less silly to inquire whether the admission of such persons as members, constituted that Academy a political Society. It would at once be answered that the Society itself, and the members of it as such, had nothing to do with political, but only with scientific matters; and that though individual members of it might be also members of the legislature, the provinces of the two Societies, as Societies, of a scientific association, and a political community, are altogether distinct.

Now this is just the non-interference in political affairs which Christ and his Apostles professed, and taught, and carried into practice, in respect of the religion of the Gospel. As the Apostle Peter converted to the Faith Cornelius the Centurion, so likewise Paul, who avowed his practice of "witnessing both to small and great,"-converted Sergius Paulus the Roman Governor at Paphos, and Dionysius the Areopagite, a judge of the

It has been said that this passage respecting the "kingdoms of this world becoming the kingdoms of the Lord," de- ¦ scribes the Christian Church in its perfection, and "My kingdom is not of this world," describes it in its infancy. But what Jesus and his Apostles taught on this point, belongs, and ever did, and ever will belong, to the Christian Church in every stage alike; namely, that the Christian is to act, in all the relations in life, in whatever circumstances he is placed, on Christian principles. And what were the principles they inculcated? "Render unto Cæsar the things that are Cæsar's, and unto God the things that are God's :” "Render unto all their due; tribute to whom tribute is due; custom, to whom custom; fear, to whom fear; honour, to whom honour;" "Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man, for the Lord's sake:" "Ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience' sake," &c. Never was the Christian required to do less than conform to such principles; never will he be called on to do more.

If Sergius Paulus and other converted Roman governors had consulted Paul, whether they should use their power as Roman governors to put down Paganism by force, or if Dionysius, after having induced (suppose) the other judges of the Areopagus to embrace the Gospel, had proposed to the Apostle that that Court should sit in judgment on religious of

Some Millenarians understand this prophecy as referring to a temporal reign of Christ on earth. See "Scripture Revelations of a Future State." Lect. on Millennium.