The Pennsylvania gazette — Philadelphia, Pa., 1776-04-10 00:00:00, page 1

To the PEOPLE of Pennsylvania.
LETTER VI.
IN the conclusion of my last letter, I charged the au
thor of Common Sense with perverting the fcrip
t^re, in his account of the origin of the JewiJb
Monarchy. I proceed to offer some remarks in sup
port of that charge.
" Monarchy," fays he (meaning probably the institu
tion of Monarchy)" is ranked in scripture as one of the
" fins of Jews, for which a curse in reserve is denounced
" againf tthem. The history of that tranfadion" (either
the tranfa&ion of Monarchy, or the tranfuffion of de
nouncing a curse in reserve) " is worth attending to."
This confufed proposition he endeavours to establish,
by a commentary (upon ift Samuel, chap. 8.) full as far
fetch'd and ridiculous, as he will probably fay mine is
upon the prophecy of Mount-Seir, But this matter mult
be treated more ferioufy, for the fake of a country, in
which (God be thanked) the fcriptnres are read and re
garded with that reverence, which is due to a revelation
from Heaven. I must, therefore, endeavour to refeue
out of our author's hands that portion of the sacred hi- b
story which be has converted into a libel against the civil
constitution of Great-Britain; and show in what sense
the passage has been universally received, as well by the
Jews toemfeives, as by Commentators,-venerable for their'
piety and learning, in every chriftian country.
The Jews were long privileged with a peculiar form of
government, called a Theocracy, under which the “ Al
- mighty either stirred up some person, by an immediate
" firnification of his will, to be their Judge, or, when
" there was none, ruled their proceedings himfelf, by
" Urim and Tbummim, directing what course they were
" to follow in the public concerns of the nation."*
But they were of an ungovernable temper, fond of pomp
2$ well as dominion over their neighbours, and being dis
gusted with the mifeondud tof Samuel's sons, whom, in
his old age, he had made his Assistant-Judges over Israel,
they came to him, and entreated him to appoint a King,'
who might rule their nation, and avenge them of the
Philistines. Samuel, deeply afflicted at the impious design
they entertained of rejecting the Divine Government,
prays the Almighty for direction, who authorifes him to
hearken to their voice, for they have not rejected thee, but
they have rejected me (fays God) that I fbould not reign
oger them. H, dfuinftr/wTs Samuel to end 1 >f''^
,rotefl against them for their folly and ingratitude, in pre
ferring a human to a divine government; and to saw
them the manner of the King that foal! reign over them,
since they desired a King to judge them like all the nations.
Now, all the nations, which they knew, were ruled by
Kings, whose arbitrary will flood in the place of
Law; and it appears also that the Jews, fuice the day
that the, were brought out of Egypt, had still retained
a particular hankering after the cuttoms of that country.
The Almighty therefore, by his Prophet, not only ligni
fies his displeasure against all such arbitrary rulers, but
against every people who would impiously and foolishly
prefer such a government to one immediately under him
felf, where, in his Providence, he might think fit to ap
point such a one. And so far I have no difference with
our author. But Samuel proceeds further to reason with
the Jews, and in the 12th chapter reminds them of the
many deliverances which God had given them by the
hand's of their Judges, Moses, Jepthah, Gideon, 6c.
having with a strong hand brought them out of Egypt ;
having fubdned the Assyrians, Ammonites, Moabites and
Philistines before them ; and that, for all this, they pre
ferred a government, even after the most corrupt models,
to his just and righteous government. And, to convince
them still further of their folly and ingratitude, the Pro
phet appeals to a signal which he would give them from
Heaven. He accordingly calls down an uncommon storm
in the midst of harvest, and the astonished multitude cry
out —We HAVE ADDED TO OUR SINS THIS EVIL TO ASK
us A King.
Here our author ereds his standard, and here he com
pliments himfelf with the mockery of triumph. " These
" portions of scripture (fays he, in all the assurance of
" infallibility) are direct and positive. They admit of no
« equivocal conftrudion. That the Almighty hath here
“ entered bis protest against monarchial government
" is true, or the scripture is falfe." —But I will take the
liberty to fay, that the scripture is true, and that this au
thor's inference is horribly falfe; nay, further, that from
the whole spirit of the passage, as well as the reason of
things, it is to be inferred that the Almighty would have
as strongly expressed his displeasure against the Jews, had
they rejected his government for one of their own ap
pointment, whether it had been Monarchial or Demo
cratical —to be administered by one man or a thousand
men.
The author had said before, that Samuel did not shew
the manner of any “ particular King, but the general
" manner of the Kings of the earth, whom Israel was so
“ eagerly copying after." If he means to confine him
felf to these Kings, I have given them to him, to make
the best of them. But if he means to argue from parti
culars to generals, and to make the old Prophet extend
his proteJl against all future monarchial governments, such
as were to subsist some thousands of years afterwards,
however limited and mixt, particularly that of Great-
Britain (which must certainly be our author's meaning, or
he proves nothing to his purpose) I fay then, if this be
his meaning, I cannot so easily part with him. For in
this lies our whole difference, and the particular case of
the Jews cannot be applied to any other nation, in this in
stance, as none else was ever in Similar circumstances.
Acherley, in his Britannic Constitutions (and I think
our author borrows some of his principles, where they
can serve bis purpose) fays exprefly —" That the nations
* Lowth'j Commentaries.
The Pennsylvania
Containing the Frejheft Ad-
:4pril 10, 1776.
" round about Israel invested their Kings with absolute
" power —and that it is a wild imagination to fay, that
" the Ifraelitifh Kings, who were but copies (of these
" Kings) should, either in their election or power, be a
" pattern to Great- Britain." — “ There cannot be found,
" either in the Old or New Testament, any particular
" description of the race of men, which are or ever were
" Kings of this nation." —How then can there be a scrip
ture proteJl against a race of men > who are not even de
scribed in scripture ? * Mark that, Common Sense.
Let me add one authority mors, from a Commentator
at least as good as our author, and who, nevertheless,
flatly contradicts him —I mean the celebrated Grotius.
He tells us that Samuel, in this passage, does not speak
of what our author calls the “ general manner of Kings,"
or the just and honefl right of a King to do such things ;
because his right is otherwise described elsewhere, as shall
lie fnew'n. The Prophet only speaks of such a right as
the Kings round about Israel had acquired, which Was
not a true right; for such is not the lignification of the
original word MiJbpat, but such an action as (being
founded in might and violence) hath the effectum juris,
or comes in the place" of right.
Grotius, I fear, is too learned for us inferior writers
fScriptures minorurn gentium) to follow him in this place.
But Sidney, that great martyr to liberty, adopts the fame
explanation. " Samuel's words, fays he, are acknow
" lodged by all interpreters, who were not malicious or
'' mrid, to be a diffusion of the Jews from their wicked
" purpose ; not a description of what a King might jufly
" do, by virtue of his office, but what those, who should
" be set up against God and his law, would do when
" they Should have the power in their hands."
Both Grotius and Sidney are well warranted in this in
terpretation, not only by the Hebrew text, but other clear
passages of scripture, and particularly the 17th chapter of
Deuteronomy, where, with the approbation ofHeaven, the
duty of a good King is described and limited. The Jews
commonly underwood this chapter as containing an abso
lute promise from Heaven of a royal government, and a
fufficient authority for the request made to Samuel more
than three hundred years afterwards. Others understood
it conditionally, —that if they did reject the divine go
vernment, and set up one of their own appointment,
God would permit them, but the ; Gng should be chosen
butte Marnier, and \< ith the quaffiaticns, in that chap
ter described. All this, however, they disregarded, when
they diked an arbitrary King, like those of their neigh
bouring nations ; and therefore, it is demonstratively cer
tain that Samuel, in entering his protef against such
Kings, did not protest against Kings or monarchial go
vernments generally. Either this remark is true, or one
part of scripture is a dired contradiction to the other.
But let the passage to which I refer speak for itfelf.
When thou art come unto the land which the Lord thy God
giveth thee, and Jbalt fay, I will set a King over me, like
as all the nations that are about me; thou Jbalt in an,-wife
set him King over thee, whom the Lord thy God Jball CHUSE,
one from among th, brethren, not a Jlranger, &c. It is
further directed, that he shall not be given to covetous
ness, —nor multiply borfes, —nor wives to himfelf, —nor
greatly multiply to himfelf gold and fiver. —That when he
shall fit upon the throne of his kingdom, be fall write a
copy of the law in a bo^ (which it was understood he was
to do with his own hand.) —That this book shall be with
him (or always carried about him) and he Jball read
therein all the days of his life, that he ma, learn to fear the
Lord his God, to keep the words of the law, and make it
the rule of his government, as well as private life. If he
does this, God promises a blessing on his government, to
prolong bis days in bis kingdom, he, and his children, in
the midst of Israel. Does not this smell strong of monar
chy, and even of hereditary monarch,? Is not some fort
of approbation, yea and a blessing, promised to both,
when religiously administered, natwithftanding all that
this writer has said to the contrary?
But he has not the candour to compare scripture with
scripture; nor docs he give a lingle passage compleat,
and connected with the parts necessary to explain it —
a clear proof that other craft may be employed, as well as
King-craft and Priefl-craft, in “ with-holding the scrip
ture from the people," even in Proteflant countries. Had
our author proceeded a little further, or given the passages
compleat as he went along, it would have appeared that,
notwithstanding the just displeasure of the Almighty, and
hisproteft against the Jews for throwing off his righteous
government, yet, as mercy and forgivenefs are his chief
delight, and he knows that there is no perfection in man,
the matter was pretty amicably fettled at last, and the di
vine countenance was given to the establishment of mo
narchy, even in the person of Saul. God himfelf direft
.<d his election and appointment ; and to prepare him for
his office, gave him another heart, and also the spirit of
prophecy.
As to the thunder, storm in which our author exults, as
an absolute disapprobation of all monarchial government,
it was no more than a, sign called for by Samuel, to con
vince the people that he spoke in the name of the Lord.
But what did he fpealc in the verses immediately preceding?
Not, surely, that God had a particular quarrel with mo
narchial government, as such, and that “ blood would
attend it;"but rather the contrary—that since the Jews
would still inlift upon a government of their owe appoint
ment, the Almighty would yet give them a blessing under
that very form, upon condition of their obedience to his
Iav y* j f)' e '~ viil f^ r tbe Lord and serve him, and obey bis
voice, dec. then Jball both ye, and also the King that reign
eth over you, continue following the Lord; to which duty
^following the Lord a blessing is always promised in
Srrpture. But if you will not obey, &c. —the hand of tb e
* ' Mark tnat, Cato," is a favourite expression of our
author in the charafler of the forefter.
^^f • y" rJfh-^
GAZETTE.
vices, Foreign and Domefiic.
Lord shall be against you. So it would have been for dis
obedience had they not a/ked a King! and, immediately
after the thunder storm, Samuel confirms this doctrine,
and comforts the people. Fear not, said he; although
you have thus finned, tbe Lord will not forfake his Peo
ple. As for me, God forbid that I Jbculd fin against the
Lord and cease to pray for you. But I will injirukiyou in the
good and right way. Thus, it teems, a good and right
way was yet to be found under monarchial government.
From all which it is plain, that the Almighty had how
pardoned the Jetts; and tlie Prophet follows the exam
ple, promising still to proceed in the difeharge of his duty
among them, as a people yet in covenant with God. But,
as I hinted before, it did hot suit otar author's purpose to
take notice of such passages as these; and lie has been
guilty of still as great a perversion of Scripture concern
ing David, whom God undeniably approved of and ap
pointed to monarchial rule.
" The high encomium given to David, takes no notice
" of him officially as a King, but only as a man after
" God's own heart." 1 know the poor equivocation
which the author has here in reserve to offer, for his fay
ing that this character was not given to David officially at
a King, but as a man. It is true, that when Samuel firft
applied the character to David, he bad not yet entered
on his office; but when it was predicted that the kingdom
should not be continued in the family of Saul, because
he had violated the law, and intruded himfelf into the
Priests duty, which did not belong to him ; the Prophet
tells him, that tbe Lord hath fought him a man after bis
own heart, with the express design of making him the
iucceffor of Saul, on account of his excellent and God
like disposition. Tbe Lord hath commanded him (this man
after his efri heart) to foe Captain over bis people, because
THOU [Saul] hath not kept that which tbe Lord command
ed # thee. That one man is here rejected from being a
King, because of his disobedience to God, and another
chosen as his successor, because of his goodness of heart,
and regard to religion, “ is true, or scripture is falfe."
But one greater than Samuel, even St. Paul, puts this
beyond all doubt, and appropriates the encomium to Da
vid not merely as a King eleA, but one aßually exercifng
tbe office. " When be bad removed him (fays the Apostle,
" meaning Saul) be railed up unto them David, to be their
" King, to whom also be gave tejiimony and said, I have
" found Doroid;, tbe son of Jefe, a man after mine own
" heart, which Jball fulfil all my will," namely, in his
character of a King.
Numerous are the passages of scripture which might be
brought to shew, that the Almighty approved of David
officially as a King, on account of his public virtues, and
that a divine blessing was given to the Jewish monarchy
under his direction. The reader may consult 2 Samuel,
v, 10, 12. —viii. 6. —i Kings, viii. 16 —Psalm Ixxviij. 70,
71, 72 —Psalm Ixxxix. 20, 28.
I have now done with our author on this head, and can
return one of his polite expressions.—" I despise him"
equally as a perverter of scripture, and of the funda
mental principles of mixt government. lam threatened
with being “ hunted from every lane and lurking hole."
Hunt on. I skulk in no such places, but keep the open
streets. “ Wait a little," fay others, —“ Cato will soon be
" found tripping, and stumbling upon Tory doctrine,
“ the divine right of Kings, non-refinance, and the like."
Well, gentlemen ! wait patiently till it so happens ;'.but
let me, in the mean time, have fair play. I claim it of
the public, as being engaged in a cause which is of the
utmost importance to them, as well as to myfelf; and
while I handle it decently, I can rely on their candor. I
have got over what some may have viewed as the most
thorny part of my way ; and, upon the whole matter, I
contend for this— That where a people are left to chife t/xir
own forms of government, as has been tbe case of all the
world for some thousand years, there is no particular de
nunciation of God's displeasure against an, form, whether
MONARCHIAL or DE MOCRATICAL, under which such a
people may think their civil bappinefs befl secured, and their
dut, to God befl performed.
Acherley fliall again shelter me in this conclusion,
which is the main purport of the present letter. “ Jesus
“ Christ left all the potentates of this world, and their
“ fubjeds, to decide their several rights by the temporal
“ laws of each nation —and never intimated what form
“ OF GOVERNMENT WAS MOST CONVENIENT OR ELIGI
“ ble." This directly contradicts our author, who fays
that the Almighty has entered his protest against the par
ticular form of monarch,. Yet Acherley was a good
whig, and desired to leave scripture out of the institu
tion of modern governments. It might be well for the
author of Common Sense to follow the example, in his
future works, without Birring up an old dispute, of which
our fathers were long since wearied.
It has been afked —why does not Cato come to the
point? He is but,et in the suburbs. Sofi ly, gentlemen. Ifthis
be true, why do you, who are in the citadel, make such
a noise, and betray such fears? Can you not let me pur
sue the siege in my own way ? I really thought that if I
could sap, or overturn your foundations, the aerial part
of your fabric would tumble to the ground. You call
on me to shew my plan ? I have done it, and mentioned,
as such, a fafe return to a connexion with our ancient
friends and kindred, accompanied with all the advantages
we have formerly experienced, and perhaps more ; which,
I trust, are things yet prafticable; or if it should prove
otherwise, we can lose nothing by the exercise of deli
beration and wisdom, in the mean while. But what have
you done? Although it was incumbent on you to have
shewn the advantages of ,our plan, to the great and re
fpedable number of good men who will always be averse
to changes, except in the last necessity; although you
ought to resolve their honest doubts, concerning their fu
ture fafety and peace, which have been plentifully thrown
[ Fer the Remainder fee tbe fourth Page. ]
Numb. 2468.