If, with his slender knowledge of God, Nebuchadnezzar supposed that the erection of this colossal statue would be pleasing to God, as a visible expression of the monarch's allegiance, or would serve to remind men of their religious obligation, so far the deed. would be in itself praiseworthy. But when he proceeded further to compel a rigid conformity to his mode of offering worship, he trenched upon the rights of Deity - he invaded the sacred territory of conscience.

I. COERCION IN RELIGION PROCEEDS FROM LUST OF POWER, It may, in a few cases, arise from a mistaken idea of personal duty; but if the motive be searched to its source, it will be found to spring from this corrupt fount - the lust of power. Nebuchadnezzar, like an Oriental despot, had complete control over the persons, the property, and the lives of his subjects; but this lust for power grew by what it fed on. Like the horseleech, it was ever crying, "Give, give!" He craved to have control over the thoughts, beliefs, and religious acts of his people. He would carry his sceptre, if he might, into the inner realm of conscience, and sway the nations as he pleased. Hence he commanded the attendance and the religious homage of all who held any authority under him, to the end that these might, in their turn, exact a similar obedience from the people. The sovereignty of love is always a boon; the sovereignty of personal will is more or less a bane.

"... man, proud man!
Drest in a little brief authority... .
Plays such fantastic tricks before high heaven,
As make the angels weep."

II. COERCION IN RELIGION IS A USURPATION OF DIVINE RIGHTS. "The powers that exist are ordained of God," yet only for limited and well-defined ends. Monarchs and judges stand in God's stead to preserve society from anarchy and injury; but over the interior life - over thought and affection and worship - they can have no dominion whatever. To bind and to loose men's beliefs by authority is an impossibility. There is another sceptre before which heart and conscience are constrained to bow. There is another tribunal before which kings and subjects must alike appear. No verdict of acquittal which a human monarch can give will serve as a passport to the favour of the Most High! Every one of the human race must give account "of himself unto God." "To our own Master we stand or fall."

III. COERCION IN RELIGION DEGRADES THE TRUE DIGNITY OF RELIGION. True religion is nothing less than the purest love of the human heart pouring itself out, in service or in speech, unto the living God; and if love must ever be spontaneous and free, in order to be love at all, so must be the piety of the human soul. Spontaneity is a necessity in religion. If compulsion be employed, its essence evaporates, its spirit disappears. It degenerates into formality. In the hands of an ambitious monarch, religion becomes a piece of state machinery; it is draggled in the mire of kingcraft. The pomp of state ceremonial - scenic splendour, displays of music - only degrade Religion, under pretence of doing her homage. The atmosphere in which she most flourishes is not the heated atmosphere of royal palaces, but the atmosphere of tranquil liberty. You may cast (lead metals into moulds, and fashion them into what shape you please; but life refuses to be moulded after the caprice or art of man: it follows laws which are enshrined within itself. You may clip and cut a dead tree into any form you like, but a living tree will soon laugh at all your attempts to give it shape. True religion is the outgrowth of the truest life of the soul. To make it conformable to human law is simply to destroy it.

IV. COERCION IN RELIGION MAKES MEN BIGOTS, HYPOCRITES, OR MARTYRS. You will find in every empire, men and women who are ready to yield compliance to royal mandates in the sphere of religion: but these are always persons of slender faith, or persons having no faith at all. Unworthy motives in crowds act upon the mind to induce servile obedience. All the motives which appeal to present advantage, and to self-interest in its lower forms, will be ranged upon that side. To retain official rank, to secure royal favour, to gain emolument, multitudes have always been ready to hide their real opinions or have forbidden convictions to mature in the conscience. They have stultified their manhood, starved their soul, and sold their immortal birthright for a mess of pottage. This has been the effect of coercion upon one class of the community. On another class the effect has been to produce unbelief in all religious truth - cold, blank atheism. If religion (say they) can only be propagated by the lash and the sword, it is not worth propagating at all. If the treat God cannot maintain his own authority and rule without the aid of human violence, surely it is best to believe that there is no God! Such is the argument of many whom coercion has hardened and embittered. And on a third class of society the effect of coercion is martyrdom. Men and women who prize truth more than present convenience, who honour God more than they honour men, - these firmly decline the mandates of human authority in the sphere of religion. Come what may, they must be obedient to conviction and to conscience. They are bound by a prior obligation to follow the Spirit of truth whithersoever it leads. A voice speaks to them direct from heaven; and, let kings rave and storm as they please, they yield their first deference to the heavenly command. After all, a human king is but a fellow-worm, and it is an ignoble thing to steer our life-course according to the changing whims of pompous princes. And the result of honest resistance to religious tyranny has always been suffering - the rack, the flame, the prison, the gibbet. - D.

Society, the union of the many for the interest of all, seems ever to have been a principal object of God's care and protection. His providence, in the order of nature, is manifestly directed to gather men together, to bind them to one another by the powerful bonds of mutual responsibility, and by the ineffaceable sentiments of justice and humanity. In the revealed or written law God has caused religion and society to advance together. He has, in a manner, amalgamated them with each other. In defining our obligations with respect to Himself, He has defined our mutual engagements towards each other. All the precepts of the decalogue tend to the general utility of mankind. The object of the Gospel is to make of all the inhabitants of the world but one single people — of that people but one family; and to imbue that family with but one single aspiration: "Holy Father, keep through Thine own name those whom Thou hast given Me, that they may be one as We are." And we may assert of Jesus Christ in reference to Society, what He asserted of Himself in reference to the ancient law, that He "did not come to destroy, but to fulfil." In fact, the intercourse which we carry on among ourselves gives birth to four descriptions of duty essential to the happiness of mankind, and to the tranquility of the social condition. Political duties, which are the foundations of society; magisterial duties, which are its security; charitable duties, which are its bonds; conventional duties, which are its elegancies. Now, it is religion alone that enforces and sanctifies those duties, and, therefore, it alone really protects the interests of society. Now, the error of all others prejudicial to society, and nevertheless an error which is very common, is to imagine that the various conditions existing in the world are no more than the result of chance or of necessity — that it is not necessary to refer to Divine wisdom for the explanation of the fact, that our wants once ascertained, it is perfectly natural that we should seek in the industry of others for those resources we cannot discover in ourselves — that this exchange of services has produced that variety of conditions into which society is divided — and that independently of Providence, nature has conferred authority upon the father of a family, strength given rule to kings, adulation created the influence of the great, the public safety suggested the office of the magistrate, luxury and appetite have been the parents of all the elegant arts. Would a father (and this is the title by which He delights to be called) forget his children, and leave their future prospects uncertain and wavering? No; and, therefore, religion displays to us His providence directed to abundantly supplying our wants and even luxuries. And how? Why, by means of that variety of social conditions, of which He alone is the Author. For what other Being than He, who from the discord of the elements called forth the harmony of the universe, could bind together and incorporate so many opposing influences, and direct them towards one only end? What other Being than He, who by means of a few grains of sand arrests the fury of the waves, could discipline so many furious passions, and fix the invisible limits which they cannot pass? Nevertheless, I cannot deny that there is a specious objection often urged to this fundamental truth; and that is, the great inequality of conditions among mankind. "Wherefore," it may be said, "wherefore is it that of the same clay are fashioned vessels of honour and vessels of dishonour? Why that immense distance that separates one man from another? Why so many enjoyments and so much liberty on the one hand, and so many privations and so much bondage on the other? Is God an accepter of persons?" What do you require Him to do? That He should establish complete equality amongst us? Let us suppose that He has done so, and nosy mark the consequences. We are all equally independent, equally powerful, equally great, equally rich. And now tell us of what advantage would that independence be to us. Should we be competent to supply all our own requirements, and should we have no need to apply to others to assist us in our necessity? Of what advantage would our power be to us? To what use could we apply it? Of what advantage would our grandeur be to us? Would it attract towards us one single particle of homage or of respect? Of what advantage would our riches be to us? how could we employ them? That complete equality once established even, would it last long? Would our ambition continue to be satisfied? Would it patiently endure so many equals? Would it not aspire to domination? And what restraint would be applicable to control it? We should all be rivals, and continually in a state of civil war. That complete equality once established, who amongst us would undertake to cultivate the ground, to supply the most pressing wants, to procure the ordinary necessaries of life? What law, what authority would there be to compel us to do so? We should perish in consequence of our greatness and abundance; we should obtain nothing but worthless superfluities while we were requiring actual food and shelter. In short, to make men all equally fortunate is but another term for rendering them all equally wretched. There must be a head of a state, that the state may escape the infliction of many tyrants; there must be great men, "princes and governors," to protect the weak; there must be warriors "and captains," to defend the country; there must be magistrates, "judges," "counsellors, and sheriffs," to prevent injustice, and to punish crime; there must be the rich, "the treasurers," to employ labour and to reward it; there must be the poor and needy, that the inconveniences which poverty entails may serve as a spur to indolence and a warning to sloth. Society rests upon these different states as upon buttresses that support it. Now, it would be perfectly superfluous in me to prove to you that labour is the condition on which society exists — that in certain respects even political commotions themselves are less dangerous than apathy and sloth — that happiness consists in the mutual understanding which should exist between various classes, who, acting in concert, and depending upon each other for an interchange of good offices, meet together by different roads which converge towards the same centre. Well, it is religion alone which imparts a true impetus to that activity, by the peculiar stress it lays upon the conscientious discharge of the various social duties — duties so peculiar to each separate condition, that every individual is required personally to fulfil them — so essential, that they will hold the foremost place in the examination, which at the last great day the Sovereign Judge will institute — so indispensable, that their absence implies an absence of piety as well, since "without holiness no man shall see the Lord." Does human policy watch as carefully over the interests of society? Does it rise up to protest with equal sternness against those indifferent spectators who reap abundantly in the field wherein they have not sown? Of the vast multitude of men of whom society is composed, how few serve it from other motives than ambition or emolument! The love of glory urges on the former, the thirst of riches influences the latter. Fortunately nature condemns from their very birth the greater number to struggle and to toil. And now observe the distinguishing glory of our holy faith. Not content with enjoining the fulfilment of the various social duties, it sets forth as well the manner in which those duties should be fulfilled. Is it no service to society that religion enjoins that the duties of the state be discharged with intelligence?" Abound in knowledge and in all diligence." And who can fail to feel how fatal to the interests of society would be the influence of those in power if destitute of the necessary knowledge? If they be warriors, in spite of their valour and intrepidity, to what dangers would they not expose their country? Or is it no service to society that religion enjoins that the duties of the state be discharged with decorum? "Study to be quiet, and to do your own business, and to work with your own hands, that ye may walk honestly towards them that are without." Or does religion confer no benefit on society when it enjoins, that the motive of action when we are serving our fellow-men should be a desire to please God — "not slothful in business, fervent in spirit, serving the Lord?" No other motive would be pure enough nor noble enough to elevate us above human considerations and our own self-interest. Were Christianity universally practised even there only where it is professed — were all mankind to regulate their conduct by the maxims of the Gospel, and careful to be guided by heavenly motives only; with God over all disposing everything according to His wisdom, regulating everything by His will, animating everything by His Spirit, enriching everything by His liberality, sanctifying everything by His grace, sustaining everything by His power — at the sight of a state of society like this, who would not be tempted to exclaim with Balaam, as he contemplated the camp of Israel, "How goodly are thy tents, O Jacob, and thy tabernacles, O Israel?"

(J. Jessopp, M.A.)