Monarchy -- Early works to 1800; Political science -- Early works to 1800; United States -- Politics and government -- 1775-1783
This accounts for the continuation of monarchy; neither do
the characters of the few good kings which have lived since, either
sanctify the title, or blot out the sinfulness of the origin; the
high encomium given of David takes no notice of him officially as a
king, but only as a man after God's own heart. Nevertheless the
People refused to obey the voice of Samuel, and they said, Nay, but
we will have a king over us, that we may be like all the nations,
and that our king may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our
battles. Samuel continued to reason with them, but to no purpose; he
set before them their ingratitude, but all would not avail; and
seeing them fully bent on their folly, he cried out, I will call
unto the Lord, and he shall send thunder and rain (which then was a
punishment, being in the time of wheat harvest) that ye may perceive
and see that your wickedness is great which ye have done in the
sight of the Lord, in asking you a king. So Samuel called unto the
Lord, and the Lord sent thunder and rain that day, and all the
people greatly feared the Lord and Samuel. 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 our sins this evil, to ask a king. These
portions of scripture are direct and positive. They admit of no
equivocal construction. That the Almighty hath here entered his
protest against monarchical government is true, or the scripture is
false. And a man hath good reason to believe that there is as much
of king-craft, as priest-craft, in withholding the scripture from
the public in Popish countries. For monarchy in every instance is
the Popery of government.
To the evil of monarchy we have added that of hereditary succession;
and as the first is a degradation and lessening of ourselves, so the
second, claimed as a matter of right, is an insult and an imposition
on posterity. For all men being originally equals, no one by birth
could have a right to set up his own family in perpetual preference
to all others for ever, and though himself might deserve some decent
degree of honors of his cotemporaries, yet his descendants might be
far too unworthy to inherit them. One of the strongest natural
proofs of the folly of hereditary right in kings, is, that nature
disapproves it, otherwise she would not so frequently turn it into
ridicule by giving mankind an ass for a lion.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account