I now add, farther, that the apostle's argument is so far from proving it to be the duty of people to obey, and submit to, such rulers as act in contradiction to the public good, and so to the design of their office, that it proves the direct contrary.

Summary

The quote suggests that the argument made by the apostle does not in any way support the idea that people have an obligation to obey and submit to rulers who go against the principles of the common good and the purpose of their positions. Instead, it argues the opposite, implying that individuals are not obliged to follow such rulers.

Topics