as superiors, and the care and concern which it is supposed they naturally have for their welfare, as a part of themselves. Moreover, by this they pay a deference to their wisdom and judgment, as being superior in age, and probably, in wisdom, as well as relation. And this ought to be done out of a sense of gratitude for past favours received; and prudence will, for the most part, dictate as much, especially when they depend on them for present, or expect future advantages from them. This is also an expedient to maintain love and peace in families, which is oftentimes broken by the contrary practice. And it may be farther recommended, from the laudable examples hereof in good men; as Isaac, who submitted to the direction of his father Abraham herein; and Jacob, Gen. xxiv. who was determined by the consent of Laban, chap. xxix. Many more instances might be given to the same purpose. And, on the other hand, Esau's contrary practice hereunto is recorded in scripture, as a vile instance of disobedience; which was a grief of mind unto Isaac and to Rebekah, chap. xxvi. 35. And it was, doubtless, an argument that he had no regard to God or religion.

Nevertheless, this obligation is not without some exceptions; for,

[1.] We do not speak of parents that are so far deprived of judgment, that they are not fit to determine this matter; nor,

[2.] Such as have divested themselves of the natural affection of parents, and entertaining an ungrounded prejudice against some of their children, are endeavouring to expose them to ruin, that they may shew more kindness to others. These forfeit that right, which is otherwise founded in na

ture.

[3.] If parents, by refusing to comply with the desire of their children, plainly, in the judgment of the wisest of men, obstruct their happiness, and the glory of God herein. Or, if they have no reason for their not complying, or the reason given is contrary to the laws of God, or the common sense of all impartial judges; especially if the affair took its first rise from them, and afterwards they changed their mind, without sufficient ground. This, without doubt, lessens, or it may be so circumstanced, that it wholly takes away the charge of sin in the child, in acting contrary to the will of his parents, and fastens the guilt on them.

[4.] The case is vastly different, when applied to children who are so far from being dependent on their parents, that they depend on them. Nevertheless, in this case, some deference and respect ought to be paid to them; and as it is the children's duty, it may be their interest so to do; since we can hardly suppose, that parents, who depend on their children,

would oppose their happiness, in an affair that is apparently contrary to their own interest, if they did not think that they had sufficient reason for it; which ought to be duly weighed, that it may be known, whether their advice is expedient to be complied with, or no. And if in this, or any other instance, children are obliged to act contrary to the will of their parents; they ought to satisfy them, that it is not out of contempt to their authority, but a conscientious regard to the glory of God; and that it is conducive to their happiness, in the opi nion of the wisest and best of men.

2. We shall now consider the duty of servants to their mas ters. This depends upon, and is limited by the contract, which first brought them into that relation, the not fulfilling whereof, renders them guilty of unfaithfulness. And it is no less an instance of immorality, for them to rob them of that time, which they have engaged to serve, than it is to take away any part of their estate. But more particularly,

(1.) Servants ought to behave themselves, in their calling, with industry, being as much concerned for their masters interest as their own. Thus Joseph, though a foreigner, and one who does not appear to have expected any reward for his service, but a maintenance, served Potiphar. In the like manner Jacob served Laban, though an unjust, severe and unrighteous master. This may lead us to enquire concerning the duty of servants, when their masters are froward, passionate, and unreasonable in their demands, which renders their service very irksome and unpleasant; but let it be considered in this case,

[1.] That, the master's passion, which is his sin, ought not to draw forth the corruption of his servant; for, sin indulged by one, is no excuse for its being committed by another. The apostle Peter supposes the case under our present consideration, and gives this advice; Servants be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward, 1 Pet. ii. 18.

[2.] If the master's demands are unreasonable, the servant must know the extent of his contract and obligation, which he must, in justice, fulfil as unto Christ, Eph. vi. 5,-8. And, as for those services that are reckoned unreasonable, and not agreeable to the contract. These, if demanded, are rather to be referred to the determination of others, since persons are apt to be partial in judging in their own cause.

There seems, indeed, to be an exception to this, in some instances, which we find in scripture, of the unlimited obedience of servants under the ceremonial law, which was not founded in, nor the result of any contract between their mas→ ters and them; accordingly we read, that persons became servants,

1st, Through poverty; by reason of which, they sold themselves for the payment of debts. In this case there was a kind of contract, indeed; and the service to be performed ought, (pursuant to the law of God and nature,) to have been agreeable to, and adjusted by the value of the debt contracted.

24, Prisoners taken in war, were treated as servants, and, as such, sold to others. In this case, all the children that were born to them, during their servitude, were the property of the master; and these are called home-born servants, who had not so much liberty allowed them as when they were servants by mutual compact, as is most common among us; in which case both parties are bound by this agreement.

3. We proceed to consider the duty of the members of a common-wealth, or body-politic, to their lawful magistrates, as the apostle says, Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers, Rom. xiii. 1. Here we may observe,

(1.) The necessity and the end of civil government. This will appear, if we consider mankind in general, as prone to be influenced by those passions, which are not entirely under the conduct of reason, and, if no check were given to them, would prove injurious to societies. We may also observe, that God has, in his law, ordained certain punishments to be inflicted, with a design to restrain those corruptions, and to keep the world in order. And that this end may more effectually be answered, it is necessary, that some should be set over others, to administer justice, in chastising the guilty, and defending the innocent; otherwise the world would be filled with confusion, and men would commit sin with impunity; and more resemble brute creatures than those that are endowed with reason, and as such, capable of moral government; as it is said when there was no king in Israel, every man did that which was right in his own eyes, Judges xxi, 25.

We proceed now to consider the advantage of civil government. It is in itself a blessing to mankind, when it does not degenerate into tyranny. So that good magistrates are a great instance of divine favour to a nation; as the queen of Sheba said to Solomon, Happy are thy men, and happy are these thy servants which stand continually before thee, and hear thy wis dom. Blessed be the Lord thy God, which delighted in thee, to set thee on his throne, to be king for the Lord thy God. Be cause thy God loved Israel, to establish them for ever, therefore made he thee king over them, to do judgment and justice, 2 Chron. ix, 7. 8. And it is included among the blessings of the gospel-state, that kings should be their nursing fathers, and their queens their nursing mothers, Isa. xlix. 23. Such are said, as David was, to be raised up, to fulfil the will of God, Acts xiii. 22.

Nevertheless, civil government may be so administered, that it may cease to be a blessing to the subjects. Thus Samuel describes the miserable estate of a people, whose kings endeavour to establish their own greatness by enslaving and plundering their subjects taking their sons and daughters by force, to be their servants; seizing their fields, their vineyards and olive-yards, and the tenth of their increase; which would oblige them to cry unto the Lord, because of their oppression, 1 Sam. viii. 11,-18. And we have an instance of this in Rehoboam, who was herein as remarkable for his want of conduct, as his father was for his excelling wisdom. His rough and ill-timed answer to his subjects, in which he gave them to expect nothing else but oppression and slavery, issued in the revolt of the ten tribes from his government, 1 Kings xii. 13, 14.

From this different method of the administration of civil government, whereby it rendered either a blessing or an afflic tion to the subjects; we may infer,

[1.] That when that which is in itself a blessing, is turned into a curse, this may be looked upon as a punishment inflict ed by God, for the iniquity of a people. Thus he says, I gave thee a king in mine anger, and took him away in wrath, Hosea xiii. 11.

[2.] We have great reason to be well-pleased with, and to bless God for the government we are under, as not being exposed to the slavery that some other nations are; who have no laws, but what result from the arbitrary will of their prince; and who can call nothing they have their own. This should make us prize the liberties we enjoy; and be a strong motiveto us to give due and cheerful obedience to our rightful and lawful sovereign, and all magistrates under him, who rule in righteousness, and are a terror to evil doers, but a praise to them that do well.

[3.] This affords matter of reproof to the restless tempers of those, who are under the mildest government; which is administered beyond all reasonable exception, our enemies themselves being judges, who would confess the same, were they not blinded with prejudice; which puts them upon betaking themselves to railery, instead of better arguments. These are reproved by the apostle, who speaks of some that walk after the flesh, in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, self-willed, they are not afraid to speak evil, even of dignities, 2 Pet. ii. 10. This leads us

To consider the honour that subjects owe to their lawful magistrates. Accordingly,

1st, They are highly to resent, and endeavour, in their several stations and capacities, to check the insolence of those wha

make bold with the character, and take the liberty to reproach their magistrates in common conversation; which is directly contrary to the law of God; that says, Curse not the king, no, not in thy thought, and curse not the rich in thy bed-chamber. For a bird of the air shall carry the voice; and that which hath wings shall tell the matter, Eccles. x. 20.

2dly, We are to support the honour of government, by paying those tributes which are lawfully exacted. Thus the apostle says, Render to all their due; tribute to whom tribue is due, custom to whom custom, fear to whom fear, honour to whom honour, Rom. xiii. 7.

3dly, We are to pray for a blessing from God, on the administration of our civil governors, that it may be under the divine direction, and tend to answer the great ends of government, viz. the glory of God, and the welfare of the subject. And here I cannot but observe, that no one on earth has a power of discharging subjects from their obedience to their lawful governors, who endeavour to rule them according to the laws of God and nature, and those fundamental constitutions that are agreeable thereto. Therefore it is a most detestable position advanced by the Papists, that the pope has a power to excommunicate and depose sovereign princes; though it does not appear that he has received any such authority from Christ, but herein intermeddles with a province that does not belong to him. For princes do not receive their crowns from him; and therefore are not to be deposed by him. In opposition hereunto, it may be alleged,

1st, That this is directly contrary to the temper of the blessed Jesus, and of the apostles, and primitive Christians; who did not encourage their followers to depose Heathen kings and emperors; but on the other hand, exhorted them to submit to them in all things, consistent with the glory of God, and the good of mankind; not only for wrath, but for conscience sake, ver. 5.

2dly, The church has no temporal sword committed to her, all its censures being spiritual. Temporal punishments are left in the hands of the civil magistrate; concerning whom, the apostle says, that he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain; for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil, ver. 4. On the other hand, when speaking concerning those, who have the government of ecclesiastical matters committed to them, he says, The weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God, to the pulling down of strong holds, 2 Cor. x. 24.

The arguments generally used by the Papists, to support the cause of rebellion, and their usurped power to depose