The Christian Idea of Civil Government

8 dom in religion, there sprang, also, a protestantism in politics. At length it assumed the dignity of a philosophy, under the tuition of Locke, who published the theory of “ the Social Compact.” According to this philosopher, Society originated in a mutual agreement among individuals : magistrates derived their powers from the gift and appointment of the people : allegiance to the government was based on interest and selfish safety : Society was but an aggregation of single persons ; a conglomerate and not an organic thing: revolution was not only a right but a law: and majorities were supreme, while minorities were powerless. This theory of the Social Compact took root in France, where the pupils of Locke outran the precepts of their master, and enacted the bloody scenes of political tragedy with which the awful history of the French Revolution has made us familiar.* The philosophy of Locke was materialism. Bald and haggard, it had no spiritual beauty. Deriving all knowledge from the outward world; denying intuitive ideas, and dignifying the senses as the only channels of truth, that miserable philosophy left no place for spiritual facts, and utterly ignored the rule and presence of God in the world. It professed respect for the second table of the law, but put the first table out of sight. It was negatively atheistic, and worked out practical atheism in society. As a corollary in civil government, it decried capital punishment; because the magistrate, being endowed with no Divine vicegerency, but merely a fellow-citizen, was invested with no authority over the life of man. And yet, with singular inconsistency, it gave Note.—Locke was born in 1632, and died in 1704. As a proof of the good influence of the philosophy of Locke, historians attribute the settlement of the British Constitution, at the Revolution in 1688, largely to the principles and maxims of that philosopher. But as an instance both of the arrogancy and weakness of Locke, as a practical civilian, the fate of his political Constitution for South Carolina is significant. In 1669, the “ Proprietaries” of South Carolina applied to Locke and Shaftesbury for a Constitution for the colony. It was a queer medley; providing for a “nobility” of “Palatines,” “ Landgraves,” and “Caciques,” with biennial assemblies of the Legislature. It was promulgated by its author, (Locke,) as “immortal.” It was abrogated by the Proprietaries themselves, in April, 1693, after a life of less thana quarter of a century. It left the system of “ biennial assemblies,” with slight changes, as the only relic of that “ social compactunless we say it bequeathed a traditional and chronic discontent with existing governments, and a disposition to make fresh experiments in constitutions. As the Huguenots “were fully enfranchised, as though they had been free-born citizens,” May 1, 1691, (Statutes IL, 58-60, S. C.,) it is probable’that they were instrumental in overturning the “ fundamental constitution,” so Soon as they had acquired political power. See Bancroft’s History U. S., vol. III., pp. 10-16.

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM4ODY=