In Chap. I. he shews that there cannot be two independent powers in the same society [for effecting the same purpose]. Independent power is supreme: there cannot be two such at the same time, [over the same persons] either about the same or different things; not about the same, because by one power a man may be obliged to do a thing and by the other forbid to do it.-Nor about different things; for then he might be obliged to be, at the same time, at different places, and to do things opposite and contrary. T

Who can suppose that the God of order could ever involve us in such inextricable difficulties?-Ecclesiastical power would be continually interfering with civil. If the civil magistrate cannot deprive an Ecclesiastic, he cannot put him to death; because in deprivation of life, is included deprivation of all offices and employs.-The Druids, who got the sole power of excommunication to themselves, by virtue of it governed all things. It is unjust for two independent powers to judge about the same things; for this would subject the same persons to undergo two trials; and be punished twice for the same crime. If there be two different independent governors, the civil governor could have no more power over the subject on a civil account, than the other on an ecclesiastical. Nor could they hinder one another of the obedience due to each; and consequently, the magistrate could not deprive one of his life or liberty, or use any other restraining method; because this must, either for ever or for a time, rob the ecclesiastical governor of a subject; to whom he has, at all times, an independent right. They must needs destroy each other's power, and free men from all subjection to either.

In Chapter iv. he shews there is no immutable form of church discipline. The only way, he says, to prove this or that form of church discipline, in this or that place, to be Divine, is to shew that it is there the fittest for the end it is designed to promote. The same garment may as well serve children and men, as the same regimen can fit people for all times and circumstances. MEANS TO AN END ARE OF A MUTABLE NATURE. Were this but granted, we should have no more quarrels about modes, and forms, and ceremonies. There would be no uncharitableness, hatred, or persecution: but the Christian religion would, as it was designed, render all its votaries wonderfully happy. Christianity is a religion, not only to last to the end of the world, but in time to extend to all the nations of it, considering how widely different the nations are, in all circumstances and respects, there can be no particular form of church polity, which must not, some where or other, be prejudicial to the end it was instituted for [elswhere].

And

Chapter v. shews that the clergy's endeavouring at an independent power, not only prevents the further spreading of the gospel, but is the cause of its having already lost so much ground. This doctrine of Imperium in imperio, he says, would have been used by the

For an instance see the Case of John Sagar, No. VI. p. 90; who was excommunicated for non-appearance by the Ecclesiastical, at a time when he was shut up in prison by the Civil power.

Emperors as an argument to justify their usage of the Christians. This doctrine prejudices infidels against Christianity. "T was this independent power, was the chief occasion that Christianity lost so many fair provinces she once possessed (which became an easy prey to the barbarous nations) and made the conquered submit to the conquerors. Had it not been for the ambition of the bishops, in continually fighting against one another for dominion, with their anathemas and excommunications, so senseless a religion as that of the Alcoran could never have taken such deep root; or spread itself so far and wide in so short a time. And as this independent power occasioned Mahometism in the East, so it produced Popery in the West.

Chap. vi. vii. viii. shew that it is most destructive to the interest of religion, and the cause of the corruptions under which Christianity labours, that [when vested] in any set of clergymen, it makes all reformation unlawful, except where those who are supposed to have this power do consent. And that it has been the occasion of infinite mischief to the Christian world.-He says that it is plain that according to the measure of it which the Clergy have reached in any place, the people have been proportionably impoverished and ruined.

Chap. ix. shews that the hypothesis of none being capable of governing the Church except Bishops; and that none can be Bishops except those who derive their power by a continued and uninterrupted succession in the Catholic Church from the Apostles, DESTROYS THE VERY BEING OF THE CHURCH.-When men do not think it sufficient for salvation to be united to Christ by true faith, and to one another by Christian love, leaving every community to form what Ecclesiastical government they think fit; but make it necessary to the very being of Christianity, to be united by some one external head or government, which is to be the centre of Catholic union and communion, he cannot see how a Popedom can be avoided: And he shews that the Clergy have maintained such maxims, in order to oblige people to yield an implicit faith and blind obedience to their dictates." "Upon the whole (Calamy says) 1 should be glad to see a good answer to the book upon the Jure Divino bottom of any one particular form of Church government." Calamy. Hist. additions to Life of Baxter : Chap. xix.

ART. VI. FABLES IN VERSE, &c.-CONTINUED.

This little Apologue seems to have given origin to the common saying of 'taking time by the forelock.

The Frogs against the Sun.+

When bright-haired Phœbus once was said
T' have chosen a partner for his bed,
So loudly did the Frogs complain,
That all Olympus heard with pain.

The wonder was, how they should share
In th' issue of this great affair-
But hear the reason of their prayer!
"One Sun," the poor petitioners cry,
"One summer every pond can dry :

66

Let, then, his family increase,

"Our very name, 'tis plain, must cease.

Now (not to let sage Æsop down)

Put we a sequel of our own,

As in his ring a nobler stone.

For all the ills that vex the state,
How freely do we blame the great!
And truly, while their projects range
From land to land,-in ceaseless change;
Though some, who fatten on the spoil,
May love this bustle and turmoil,—
The many, neither rich nor poor,
Who meet th' Assessor at the door,
(So oft he visits) find it hard
'Gainst bailiffs too to keep it barr'd:
Hence murmurs-and 'tis fair t' allow
A decent discontent to flow.

Yet, could we fathom all that's done,
(As Frogs, these spousals of the sun,)
See all the bearings of each case,
And its just consequences trace,

We still might cheap amendments spare:
Would not they see, too, and beware?
Futurity is not with man!-

Specious, nay faultless, be his plan,
To-morrow's sun shall give the lie

To the financial prophecy;

And, as the sun, betroth'd, ne'er marries,

Each project for the year miscarries.

Yet let us hope that Providence

Will make reverses our defence,
And, in his own good season, send
To our alarms as fair an end!

+ Written under a former Administration.

Communications may be addressed, POST PAID, "For the Editor of the Yorkshireman" at the Printer's, Pontefract; at Longman & Co's London, Baines & Newsome's, Leeds; and W. Simpson's, York.

THE

YORKSHIREMAN,

A

RELIGIOUS AND LITERARY JOURNAL

No. IX.

BY A FRIEND.

PRO PATRIA.

FIFTH DAY, 15th ELEVENTH Mo. 1832. PRICE 4d.

ART. I. On the Affirmation allowed by Law to the People called Quakers, in certain cases, in lieu of an Oath.

Concluded from page 74.

In my Fourth Number, where this subject commences, I declined entering on the question of swearing or refusing the oath, in reference to the most important point which it involves the apparent reason of the prohibition of oaths by Christ; and in further treating the matter in No. V., I promised to recur to the subject, on purely Scriptural principles, in a future part of the work; which is now to be done.

Under the imperfect moral code of the Mosaical dispensation, many things were suffered which the gospel absolutely prohibits. Christ saith, Matt. xix. 8, to the Jews, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your 9 wives. And doubtless it was for the same reason (as is said respecting the heathen, Acts xvii. 30, And the times of this ignorance God winked at ') that the retaliation of personal injuries, and the avenging of blood, were suffered; as well as the practice of war, and the establishing of covenants by an oath.

The exclusive national spirit could not, as yet, be done away: and the utmost men could attain to in the way of benevolence was, to love their neighbours. They were left, through the hardness of their hearts, to hate foreigners, and make war upon other nations, and exterminate them. The practice of lying was so intimately connected with this state of things, that it seemed necessary, in order to come at the truth on important occasions, that men should bind each other to it, under the heaviest penalties that could be imagined. And thus they bound, not only each other but themselves also, in the way of imprecation; of which we have some affecting instances in Scripture.

R

'So let the Gods do to me and more also [that is, take my life] if I make not thy life as the life of one of them [whom thou hast slain] by to-morrow about this time,' was the dreadful message of the heathen Jezebel to Elijah. Again, Job xxxi. 4, "Doth not he see my ways, and count all my steps? If I have walked with vanity, or if my foot hath hasted to deceit, (let me be weighed in an even balance, that God may know my integrity,) if my steps have turned out of the way, and my heart walked after mine eyes, and if any blot hath cleaved to my hands. Then let me sow and let another eat, and let my offspring be rooted out.' These, with many other imprecations, form the conclusion of the earnest declarations of Job, under his heavy and manifold afflictions. Nor were God's own people altogether clear of this practice, when under strong emotion of mind; though we find not much record of it. And Jonathan said unto David, Oh Lord God of Israel, when I have sounded my father, about to-morrow any time, or the third day, and behold, if there be good toward David, and I then send not unto thee and shew it thee, the Lord do so and much more to Jonathan,' [that is, withhold from him his counsel in time of need] 1 Sam. xx. 12, 13.

It is said, Heb. vi. 13-16, that when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself, saying, Surely in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thee for men verily swear by the greater [in authority or dignity], and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife.' This must have been in judicature, and before some one authorised to decide between them, as the magistrate, or the heads of the tribe; and so common was the practice that we find God himself condescending to confirm the faith of his servant Abraham by imitating it. But may be said also that men verily hate and destroy each other, and that God himself is pleased to speak of himself as an avenger; and as a destroyer of them that hate him. If these things are not to be pleaded as examples in justification of revenge and mutual destruction, ainong Christians, no more ought the other in favour of swearing. Í take it for granted, that the arguments I am about to adduce, will yet be suffered, by the generality of my readers, to apply to Britain as a Christian country, our preference of heathenism and Mohamedannism, in other parts of the King's dominions, notwithstanding.

it

I.

There are three degrees of asseveration,

Simple affirmation.

II. The calling of God to witness.

III. The wager of the oath, or the imprecation of a penalty upon the maker of the condition, if it be not fulfilled.

Christ positively interdicts to his disciples all but the first. He says, When you mean to affirm, say 'Yes'; and when you mean to deny, say, No-in the ancient phrase, 'Let your yea be yea, and your nay, nay; for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil ':—of evil in the mind of the person proposing or the person requiring it And his apostle, James, plainly prohibits the third, attaching moreover