of two parts; both containing accusations of a very serious nature, and such as were calculated to render those who were the objects of them, odious to the people, and obnoxious to the magistrates. The first part was directed against Paul and Silas in particular; the second against the Christians in general.

Let us separately consider these two parts of the Charge, and enquire into the truth and justice with which they were respectively urged.

First, then, the accusation brought against Paul and Silas was contained in these words: "These that have turned the world upside down, are come hither also." Now it cannot be denied that there was a sense, in which this Charge might with some plausibility have been shown to be true. These Apostles had for some time been the preachers of a doctrine, the avowed and actual tendency of which, was to produce a moral change in the world; to bring about a great revolution in the hearts and lives of mankind. The aim and design of their ministry had been to promote the Kingdom of Christ to draw off men's affections from the things of this world, and to direct them to heavenly objects, to lead them to deny and mortify those corrupt inclinations, desires, and passions, under the influence of which they had hi

therto lived, and to implant and strengthen in them new and holy principles, which might be productive of a suitable improvement in their lives. This was the object which Paul and Silas had hitherto been labouring to promote in the different places, where they had exercised their ministry: and in this sense it might perhaps be said; so far as their object had been attained, that they "had turned the world upside down."― But this was not the sense in which their accusers made the Charge. They obviously did not allude to any change of this kind; to any moral reformation which had been effected. It was evidently their intention in charging the Apostles with "having turned the world upside down," to represent them as the enemies of civil and social order; the abettors and promoters of confusion, insubordination, and anarchy. It was evidently intended to represent them as persons, whose principles and practices were directly opposed to the peace and happiness of society: as persons, who had made it their business to wage war with the established rights and liberties of mankind; who had too successfully carried their point in other places; and were now come to Thessalonica for the purpose of prosecuting the same mischievous design. Such was the substance and meaning of the Charge. But where was the

foundation for it? With what truth, and justice was it urged? By what proofs was it substantiated? What facts were adduced in support of it?

If we look at the account of St. Paul's previous ministry, we shall find nothing to countenance such an accusation. At Antioch, at Iconium, and at Lystra, neither his conduct, nor his doctrine had been such, as to give the slightest ground for the Charge now brought against him. It was true indeed, that at the neighbouring city of Philippi, both he, and Silas, on an accusation of the same nature with that in the text, had been beaten with stripes and cast into prison. But what had been the result? The magistrates, convinced of the injustice. of the proceedings, had themselves come to the prison, and had "besought the Apostles, and brought them out." And as to their conduct at Thessalonica itself, we are incidentally furnished with very decisive proofs of the utter groundlessness of the Charge in the text. The following extracts from the two Epistles, which St. Paul shortly after sent to the Church in that city, evidently show, how totally different, during his residence there, had been the tendency of his preaching and practice, from that, which it was now attempted to impute to him. "We beseech you, brethren, that

ye study to be quiet and to do your own business, and to work with your own hands (as we commanded you), that ye may walk honestly towards them that are without." * "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which ye received of us. For yourselves know how ye ought to follow us: for we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you, neither did we eat any man's bread for nought: but wrought with labour and travel night and day, that we might not be chargeable to any of you. Not because we have not power, but to make ourselves an ensample, that you may follow us. For when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat. For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busy-bodies. Now them that are such, we command and exhort by our Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread."+-Surely commands and exhortations of this nature, were not the language of One, who was endeavouring to introduce confusion and disorder: while the manner in which the Apostle here refers to the instructions which he had given, * 1 Thess. iv. 10, 11, 12. † 2 Thess. iii. 6—12,

and to the example, which he had himself set, while living at Thessalonica, furnishes additional proof, (if additional proof were wanting,) how void of foundation, how destitute of truth and justice was the Charge brought against him of " turning the world upside down."-Let us proceed, then,

Secondly, to the other part of the accusation in the text, which was directed against the Christians in general. This part was comprehended in the following words, "These all do contrary to the decrees of Cesar, saying that there is another King, one Jesus. As the first part of the Charge was calculated to represent the Apostles as promoters of anarchy and confusion; so this second was designed to represent their followers as enemies to the state, disloyal to the Roman Emperor, and rebels to his authority. For this is evidently the crime which it was intended to fix on them. They say that there is another King, one Jesus." Another King in whose service they are engaged; under whose banner they are enlisted; to whom they have ' vowed allegiance and submission. And how then,' it was insinuated, can they ⚫ be true subjects of the Emperor ? Where

6

is their fidelity to him? Where is their • obedience to his decrees, which forbid any • rival in the throne, and require universal