Imagens das páginas

that, after writing two books, he should still insist on so foolish a paralogism *, That God's giving up his office of civil Chief, was a necessary consequence of the People's demanding it. For, that they did demand it, I acknowledge. Let us consider then this whole matter a little more attentively.

Samuel (and I desire the Deists would take notice of it) had now, by a wise and painful direction of affairs, restored the purity of Religion, and rescued bis Nation from the power of the Philistines, and their other hostile neighbo:rs; against whom they were utterly unable to make head when he entered upon the public Administration. At this very time, the People, debauched, as usual, by power and prosperity, took the pretence of the corrupt conduct of the Prophet's two sous t, to go in a tumultuary manner, and demand a King. But the secret spring of their rebellion was the ambition of their leaders; who could live no longer without the splendour of a regal Court and Houshold; GIVE ME (say they, as the Prophet Hosea interprets their insolent demud) A KING'AND PRINCES; where every one of tliem might shine a distinguished Otlicer of State. They could get nothing when their affairs led them to their Judges' poor residence, in the Schools of the Prophets, but the Gift of the Holy Spiritį; which a Courtier, I presume, would not prize even at the rate Simon Magus held it, of a paltry piece of

money, un roi qui les jugeât souverainement, & qui commandât leurs armées, au lien qu'auparavant Dieu lui-même le faişort, par le ministere des juges, qu'il suscitoit de temps en temps au milieu d'Israël. .- En ce sens il faut entendre absolument les paroles de Dieu dans Samuël, afin que je ne regne point sur eux, p. 121.

However, foolish as it is, the Reader hath- seen, how a late Sermonizer has borrowed it, and how little force he has added

[ocr errors]


to it.

† 1 Sam. viii. 5. and xii. 12. $Chap. x, 10. and chap. xix,

Chap. xiii. ver, 10,

money.---This it was, and this only, that inade their demand criminal. For thic chusing Regal rather than Aristocratic Viccroys was a thing plainly indulged to them by the Law of Moscs, in the following allmonition: Jl hen thou art cane into the lan which the Lord thy God giveth thce, and shalt possess. it, and shalt daelt #hercin, und shult say, Lüill set a King over me, like as the nations that are about me; Thou shalt in any poise. sct him King over thee, whom the LORD TIT GOD SHALL CHCSE: one from amongst thy Brethren shalt thou set King over thee : Thou anayest not sct « Stranger over thee, which is not thy brother* The plain meaning of which caution is, that they should takç care, when they demanded a king, that they thought of none other than such a king who was to be God's DEPUTY. As therefore Court-ambition only was in the wicked view of the Ringleadçrs of these malecontents, and no foolish fcars for the State, or hopes of bettering the public Administration ; it is cvident to all acquainted with the genius of this Tine and People, that compliance with their demaid must have ended in the utter destruction of the Mosaic ReliLion as well as LAW. But it was Gop's purpose to keep them SEPARATE, in order to preserve the memory of hiaself amidst an idolatrous World. And this not being to be done but by the preservation of their Religion and Law, we must needs conclude that he would not give way to their rebellious demand.

And what we are brought to conclude froin the reason of the thing, the history of this transaction clçarly enough contirins. For it having now informed dis how God consented to give this People a king; Po shew us, that he had not cast off the Government, But only transferred the immediate Administration to * Deut. xvii, 14, 15,

a Deputy,

a Deputy, and consequently that their King was his Viceroy; it tells us next, how He was pleased to bring them to repentance in an extraordinary way; the . gracious method he commonly employed when he intended to pardon. Samuel asseinbled the People * ; and to convince them of their crime in demanding 4 King, called down the present vengeance of their offended God in a storm of thunder and rain at the time of wheat-harvest t. This sudden desolation brings them to a sense of their guilt, and they implore mercy and forgiveness: “ And all the People said " unto Samuel, Pray for thy servants unto the Lord

thy God, that we die not: for we have added unto " all our sins this evil, to ask us a king. And Samuel " said unto the People, l'car not; (ye have done all " this wickedness : yet turn not aside from following " the Lord, but serve the Lord with all your heart'; " and turn ye not aside: for then should you go after " vain things which cannot profit nor deliver ; for they

are vain :) For the Lord will not forsake his People " for his great Name's sake: because it hath pleased 5 the Lord to make you his People I." Here, we see, they repent, are pardoned, and received again into Grace, as appears by the concluding promise, that the Theocratic forin should be continued. They are ready to give up their King, and yet a regal character is insituted.' The plain conclusion from all this is, that their King was givey, and, now at least, received as God's DEPUTY.

But Father Simon is at length provoked into a Rcason, and that, to say tlac truth, no weak one. God, he obseryes, kept the election of their King in his own hands ş. * 1 Sain. xii. + Chap. xii. 17, 18. i Sam. sii. 19. & seq.

une preuve même qu'il ne cessoit pas d'être leur chef par cette election, c'est qu'il s'en rend le maître. Reponse aux Sentimens, P. 55


[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

But this, Le Clerc says, proves nothing. How so? Because, according to this reasoning, we should be obliged to say that God oftener discharged the func: tions of Ciril chief in the idolatrous realm of the ten Tribes than in that of Judah: for that was elective, this, hereditary *. And what if we do? Where will be the barm of it? The two kingdoms made up but one Commonwealth ; of which God, as Head, governed by two Viceroys. And if he oftener acted immediately in the kingdom of Israel, there was a plain reason for it; Its inhabitants were more given to idolatrous worship; and needed more the frequency

an extraordinary restraint. And, in effect, we find he did interfere greatly in other instances, as well as in the election of their Kings..

In truth, F. Simon seemed to see as-little into the force of the observation (that God reserved the choice of their King to himself) when he urged it, as M. Le Clerc did, when he despised it: yet it is strongly conclusive for the continuation of the Theocracy. For had the visible King which the Israelites demanded been granted to them, that is, a King in his own right, sovereign, and at the head of a new Constitutiçn, or indeed, any other than a Viceroy to the King of the Thcocracy, the choice of him would have been reserved to the People. It was a natural right; and more than that, a right which God did not think fit to

* Pour ce que dit N1. Simon, que Dieu se rend maitre de l'elec. tion des Rois, il ne s'ensuit nullement qu'il continuât d'être pour cela chef politiqne de la republique d'Israël; puisque si cela étoit, il faudroit dire que Dien faisoit beaucoup plus souvent les fuitetions de chef de l'etat dar:s le royaume Idolatre des dix tribes, que dans celui de Juda. Car ce derniere royaume étoit hereditaire, & étoit possedé par

la maison de David, sans qu'il fut besoin d'aucune election, au licu qu'il le fit plusieurs elections dans celui des kix tribes. Defense des Sentimens, pp. 121, 122,


[ocr errors]

take from them, when he first accepted the regal office for himself. But if the People have, by natural Law, a right to chuse their own King, that King hath, b's civil Law, a prerogative to chuse his own Deputy: When we see him therefore-exercise this prerogative; we may be assured that the King chosen was no othey than his Deputy, as SOVEREIGN of the Theocracy But to return to the two Combatants. Here the Dispute ended; and for farther satisfaction, Le Clers refers us to a book of Spencer's, written professedly upon this very subject* It is his tract De Theocra tia Judaica. What is to be found there, besides the arguments which Le Clerc has borrowed from it, and which have been considered already, I shall now with some reluctance inform the Reader.

This treatise is by no means in the number of those on which Spencer raised his reputation. He á wrong hypothesis; he uses weak arguments; and he is confused and inconsistent in bis assertions.

1. He thinks the Thcocracy was established by degrees t, and abrogated by degrees. A conceit highly absurd, as God was the Lawgiver, and Supreme Magistrate of the Jews.-He thinks the first step to its introduction was their protection at the Red Sea g;


goes on

* Il n'est pas necessaire que je m'arrête d'avantage à cela, après ce qu'én a dit le savant Spencer dans un traité qu'il a fait expres sur cette matiere. Lib.i. de Legg. Heb. Rit. Det. des Sent. p. 120. t

Neminem in sacris literis vel mediocriter versatum latere potest Theocratium in ipso rerum Israeliticarum exordio aliquatenus obtinuisse, aut árune autem non nisi gradatim & post legein in Sinai datam pervenisse. Vol. I. p. 239.

Cum autem regiminis hujus, non simul & semel, sed per gradus quosdam, jacturam fecerint, placet hic veritatis fugientis vestigia gradatim premere. - Id. ib:

Gradum primum ad potestatem regiam obtinendam fecisse videtur Deus; cuq gentem Israeliticam insigni illo potentiæ &


« AnteriorContinuar »