But we in the United States are not better than our neighbors. Man is the same everywhere, but for education.
And this brings us to the great, practical lesson, to which end all that has thus far been detailed has been directed.
Americans! no matter of what nation you came, consider this lesson.
We have ignored and thrown aside the priestly fable of an anointment by a man conferring an hereditary right to rule his brother man, by any family. This jus divinum regum is an absurdity, practically discarded by those who assert it. What divine right has been granted either to Napoleon the Great, or to Napoleon the little? Whence came it? By whose hands? How is it preserved? Is not the same religious power ready to crown a Bourbon one day, and, in spite of the hereditary jus divinum already granted, crown a Corsican (who has waded through blood to his throne) the next day; over the very rights of the Bourbon, who relies on that jus divinum as his title?
A divine right (if any) is here granted to both—to the Bourbon, and to the Corsican. Can truth contradict itself? If there be a contradiction must there not be error somewhere?
This jus divinum that began with the deification of Nimrod, is still perpetuated though in other hands.
But we must look into this a little further.
II. Although the Theocracy in the days of Moses was of temporary duration, and human power afterward asserted a kingly right, was that divine right ever preserved? If divine, it is immutable. Does history show this? When Titus conquered Jerusalem, does not Jewish history tell us the voice was heard saying, "Let us go hence?"
III. History shows, among men, two classes who have governed others:—