A37049:105
A practical exposition of the X. Commandments with a resolution of several momentous questions and cases of conscience.
London: printed for Dorman Newman, 1675
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
1 They differ, I say first, in the End or account upon which they are performed; we are not to perform duties that life, pardon, or enjoying of God may be meritoriously obtained by them, but to testify our r aspect to him who hath provided these freely for us, that we should not r •st in duties which are engraven on these Covenant-Blessings.
1 They differ, I say first, in the End or account upon which they are performed; we are not to perform duties that life, pardon, or enjoying of God may be meritoriously obtained by them, but to testifie our r •spect to him who hath provided these freely for us, that we should not r •st in duties which are engraven on these Covenant-Blessings.
2 They differ in the Principle by which we act them; 'tis not in our own strength, as the works of the first Covenant were to be performed, but in the strength of Grace, and by virtue of the promises of Sanctification comprehended in the s •cond Covenant, 2 Cor. 7.1.
2 They differ in the Principle by which we act them; 'tis not in our own strength, as the works of the first Covenant were to be performed, but in the strength of Grace, and by vertue of the promises of Sanctification comprehended in the s •cond Covenant, 2 Cor. 7.1.
3 They differ as to the manner of their acceptation, duties by the first Covenant are to abide their trial upon the account of their own worth, and the inherent perfection that is in them, and accordingly will be accepted or rejected, as they are conform or disconform to the perf •ct Rule of Gods Law; but by the second Covenant, the acceptation of our performances, prayers, praises, are founded on Christs Righteousness, and Gods mercy in him, in whom only they are sweet-smelling Sacrifices, and accepted as our persons are, for he hath made us to be accepted as to both only in the beloved, Eph. 1.4.
3 They differ as to the manner of their acceptation, duties by the first Covenant are to abide their tryal upon the account of their own worth, and the inherent perfection that is in them, and accordingly will be accepted or rejected, as they are conform or disconform to the perf •ct Rule of Gods Law; but by the second Covenant, the acceptation of our performances, prayers, praises, are founded on Christs Righteousness, and Gods mercy in him, in whom only they are sweet-smelling Sacrifices, and accepted as our persons are, for he hath made us to be accepted as to both only in the beloved, Eph. 1.4.
4 They differ in respect of the motive from which they proceed; for the great motive of our obedience in the Covenant of Grace, is not fear of threatenings and wrath in case of disobedience, which by the Covenant of Works is the main thing sways men to duties, nor is it a purchase of Heaven to themselves by their holiness, which also by that Covenant is a predominant motive of mens obedience, but it is love and gratitude, and that not simply to God as Creator, but as Redeemer, as the Text here showeth, I brought thee out of the House of B •ndage, it is that we may set forth the praises of him who called us, and that we may glorify him that has bought us: where Duties have these qualifications, they are consist •nt with Grace, and subservient to it; but when those are wanting or excluded. Christ is wronged, and men turn legal, and in so far fall from and overturn Grace.
4 They differ in respect of the motive from which they proceed; for the great motive of our obedience in the Covenant of Grace, is not fear of threatnings and wrath in case of disobedience, which by the Covenant of Works is the main thing sways men to duties, nor is it a purchase of Heaven to themselves by their holiness, which also by that Covenant is a predominant motive of mens obedience, but it is love and gratitude, and that not simply to God as Creator, but as Redeemer, as the Text here sheweth, I brought thee out of the House of B •ndage, it is that we may set forth the praises of him who called us, and that we may glorifie him that has bought us: where Duties have these qualifications, they are consist •nt with Grace, and subservient to it; but when those are wanting or excluded. Christ is wronged, and men turn legal, and in so far fall from and overturn Grace.
These Conclusions as necessary Caveats being laid down, we ⟨p. 6⟩shall propose these distinctions for clearing of them.
1 We would distinguish betwixt a Law and a Covenant, or betwixt this Law, considered as a Law, and as a Covenant; a Law doth necessarily imply no more than 1. To direct. 2. To command, enforcing that obedience by Authority; a Covenant doth further necessarily imply promises made upon some condition, or threatenings added if such a condition be not performed: now this Law may be considered without the consideration of a Covenant, for it was free to God to have added, or not to have added promises, and the threatenings (upon supposition the Law had been kept) might never have taken effect; but the first two are essential to the Law, the last two, to Believers, are made void through Christ; in which sense it is said, that by him we are freed from the Law as a Covenant, so that Believers life depends not on the promises annexed to the Law, nor are they in danger by the threatenings adjoined to it: Hence we are to advert when the Covenant of Works is spoken of, that by it is not meant this Law simply, but the Law propounded as the condition of obtaining life by the obedience of it; in which respect it was only so formally given to Adam: This then is the first distinction betwixt the Law, and the Covenant of Works.
1 We would distinguish betwixt a Law and a Covenant, or betwixt this Law, considered as a Law, and as a Covenant; a Law doth necessarily imply no more than 1. To direct. 2. To command, inforcing that obedience by Authority; a Covenant doth further necessarily imply promises made upon some condition, or threatnings added if such a condition be not performed: now this Law may be considered without the consideration of a Covenant, for it was free to God to have added, or not to have added promises, and the threatnings (upon supposition the Law had been kept) might never have taken effect; but the first two are essential to the Law, the last two, to Believers, are made void through Christ; in which sense it is said, that by him we are freed from the Law as a Covenant, so that Believers life depends not on the promises annexed to the Law, nor are they in danger by the threatnings adjoyned to it: Hence we are to advert when the Covenant of Works is spoken of, that by it is not meaned this Law simply, but the Law propounded as the condition of obtaining life by the obedience of it; in which respect it was only so formally given to Adam: This then is the first distinction betwixt the Law, and the Covenant of Works.
2 Distinguish betwixt these Ten Commandments simply and strictly taken in the matter of them, and more complexly in their full Administration, with Pr •face, Promises, Sacrifices, &c. in the first sense th •y are a Law having the matter, but not the form of the Covenant of Works: so Moses by it is said to describe such righteousness as the Covenant of Works doth require, yet he doth not propound it as the righteousness they were to rely on, but his scope is to put them to a Mediator, by revealing sin through the Law, Rom. 10.3. In the second sense it is a Covenant of Grace, that same in substance with the Covenant made with Abraham, and with the Covenant made with Beli •vers now, but differing in its Administration.
2 Distinguish betwixt these Ten Commandments simply and strictly taken in the matter of them, and more complexly in their full Administration, with Pr •face, Promises, Sacrifices, &c. in the first sense th •y are a Law having the matter, but not the form of the Covenant of Works: so Moses by it is said to describe such righteousness as the Covenant of Works doth require, yet he doth not propound it as the righteousness they were to relye on, but his scope is to put them to a Mediator, by revealing sin through the Law, Rom. 10.3. In the second sense it is a Covenant of Grace, that same in substance with the Covenant made with Abraham, and with the Covenant made with Beli •vers now, but differing in its Administration.
3 Distinguish betwixt Gods intention in giving, and the Believers in Israel their making use of this Law; and the carnal multitude among that people their way of receiving it, and corrupt abusing it contrary to the Lords mind: In the first sense it was a Covenant of Grace, in the second, it turn •d to be a Covenant of Works t • them; and therefore it is that the Lord rejects ⟨p. 7⟩as we may see Isaiah 1.13. 66. 2. 3. Jer. 7.22.) their Sacrifices and Services as not commanded, b cause rested on by them to the •r •judice of Grace, and contrary to the strain and scope of this Law complexly considered.
3 Distinguish betwixt Gods intention in giving, and the Believers in Israel their making use of this Law; and the carnal multitude among that people their way of receiving it, and corrupt abusing it contrary to the Lords mind: In the first sense it was a Covenant of Grace, in the second, it turn •d to be a Covenant of Works t • them; and therefore it is that the Lord rejects ⟨p. 7⟩as we may see Isaiah 1.13. 66. 2. 3. Jer. 7.22.) their Sacrifices and Services as not commanded, b •cause rested on by them to the •r •judice of Grace, and contrary to the strain and scope of this Law complexly considered.
4 Distinguish betwixt the Moral, and Ceremonial, and Judicial Law; the first concerns manners, and the right ordering of a Godly Conversation; and because these things are of perpetual equity and r •ctitude, the obligation of this Law as to that is perpetual; and therefore in the expounding of it, these two terms, Moral, and of Perpetual Auth •rity, are all one, and to be taken so. 2. The Judicial Law is for r •gulating outward Society, and for Government, and doth generally (excepting what was peculiar to the people of Israel) agree with the Moral Law; this as given to them is not perpetual, their policy being at an end. 3. The Ceremonial Law is in Ceremonies, Types, and Shadows, pointing at a Saviour to come; this is also abrogate, the substance being come; but there is this difference, that the Judicial Law is but M •rt •a, dead; and may, where 'tis thought fit, with the foregoing caution, be used under the New Testament; but the Ceremonial Law is Mortifera, deadly, and cannot without falling from grace, Gal. 5.2, 4. be revived.
5 When we speak of things Moral, we are to distinguish between things Naturally Moral, that is, such (as love to God and our Neighbour, and such like) which have an innate rectitude and holiness in them, which cannot be separate from them, and things positively Moral, that have their obligation by a special positive superadded Sanction, so that their rectitude flows not from the nature of the things themselves, as in the former: As for instance, in the fourth Commandment it is naturally Moral that God should be worshipped, Nature teacheth it; but that he is to be worshipped on such a day particularly, that comes to pass by virtue of his positive Command; the first cannot be altered, the second by the Lord may; but till he alter it, the Authority lies still on all, and it is equally sin to sin against any of them, though without the positive Sanction, there is no obligation naturally requiring obedience in some of them.
5 When we speak of things Moral, we are to distinguish between things Naturally Moral, that is, such (as love to God and our Neighbour, and such like) which have an innate rectitude and holiness in them, which cannot be separate from them, and things positively Moral, that have their obligation by a special positive superadded Sanction, so that their rectitude flows not from the nature of the things themselves, as in the former: As for instance, in the fourth Commandment it is naturally Moral that God should be worshipped, Nature teacheth it; but that he is to be worshipped on such a day particularly, that comes to pass by vertue of his positive Command; the first cannot be altered, the second by the Lord may; but till he alter it, the Authority lies still on all, and it is equally sin to sin against any of them, though without the positive Sanction, there is no obligation naturally requiring obedience in some of them.
6 The sixth distinction is of the Moral Law in two Tables, first and second; the first contains ou • immediate worship, service and obedience to God himself, and is comprehended in the ⟨p. 8⟩first four Commandments; th • s •cond contains our mediate obedience to God in all the duties we owe to other •, in the last six; they were at first so divided by the Lord hims •lf, for there are Ten in all, Deut. 4.13. From this distinction take notice; 1. That all the Commandm ants of the second Table are of like Authority with the first, God sp •ke all these words; yea, as it appears from Act. 7.28▪ it was our Lord Jesus. 2. The sins immediate •ly aga •nst the first Table, are gre •ter th •n those against the second; for this cause, Matth. 22.38. the first is called the First and Great Commandment: There •fore 3. In Morals (if th •y be things of the same nature) the duty •s of the second Table cede and give place to the duties of the first Table, when th •y cannot stand together; as in the case of love to God, and the exercise of love to our Father and Neighbour, Luke 14.26. Matth. 10.37. wh •n obedience to God, and obedience to our Superiors cannot consis , we are to obey God rather than man, Act, 4.19. and we are to love the Lord, and hate Father and Moth r,
7 The seventh distinction (which is ordinary) is of the Commandments into affirmative and negative, as ye see all the Commandments in the first T able are negatively set down, forbidding sin directly; Th •• shalt not have an, other gods, &c only the fourth is both negative and affirmative, forbidding sin, and commanding duty directly; as also the fi •th only, which is the first of the s •cond T able, is affi •mative, all the r •st are negative.
7 The seventh distinction (which is ordinary) is of the Commandments into affirmative and negative, as ye see all the Commandments in the first T •ble are negatively set down, •orbidding sin directly; Th •• shalt not have an, other gods, &c only the fourth is both negative and •ffirmative, •orbidding sin, and commanding duty directly; as also the fi •th only, which is the first of the s •cond T •ble, is affi •mative, all the r •st are negative.
This disti action is not so to be understood, as if nothing were commanded or enjoined in negative Pr •c opts, or as i • nothing were fo •bidden in affirmative Pr •c opts ( •or whatever be expr •ss •d as forbidden the co •••ary is always in ply •d as command •d, and whatsoever is expr sly commanded, the contr •ry is always imp •yed as forbidden) b •t the disti action is taken from the manner of setting them down; conc •rning which, take th •s • Rules or G •neral Obs •rvations for your better understanding, many where •o • are in the larger Cat schism.
This disti •ction is not so to be understood, as if nothing were commanded or injoyned in negative Pr •c •pts, or as i • nothing were fo •bidden in affirmative Pr •c •pts ( •or whatever be expr •ss •d as forbidden the co •••ary is always in ply d as command d, and whatsoever is expr sly commanded, the contr ry is always imp yed as forbidden) b t the disti ction is taken from the manner of setting them down; conc rning which, take th s Rules or G neral Obs rvations for your better understanding, many wher o are in the larger Cat chisme.
1 Howev •r the Commandments be expressed, affirmatively or negatively, every one of them hath two parts; one affirmative, implied in negative Precepts, requiring the duties that are contr •ry to the si •s forbidden; another negative, implied in the affirmative Precepts, forbidding the sins that are contrary to the duties commanded; as for example the third Come •ndme •t, Thou shalt n •t take the Name of the Lord thy God in v •in; it implies a Command reverently to use his Name: So, to remember to keep Holy the Sabbath d •y, implies a Prohibition of profaning it▪ in which sense all the Commandments may in some respect be called negative (and so a part of the fourth Commandment is neg • tively expressed, Th •u shalt do no work) or affirmative; in which respect Christ c •mprehendeth all the neg •tiv •s under these two great affirmative Commandments, of love to God and our Neighbour, for every Commandment doth both enjoin and forbid; the like may be said of promises and threatenings, there b •ing in every promise a threatening, and in ev •ry threatening a promise conditionally implied: And this may be a reason why some Commandments are negatively expressed, some positively, to show us that both are comprehended.
1 Howev •r the Commandments be expressed, affirmatively or negatively, every one of them hath two parts; one affirmative, implyed in negative Precepts, requiring the duties that are contr •ry to the si •s forbidden; another negative, implyed in the affirmative Precepts, forbidding the sins that are contrary to the duties commanded; as for example the third Comm ndme t, Thou shalt n t take the Name of the Lord thy God in v in; it implies a Command reverently to use his Name: So, to remember to keep Holy the Sabbath d y, implies a Prohibition of prophaning it in which sense all the Commandments may in some respect be called negative (and so a part of the fourth Commandment is neg tively expressed, Th u shalt do no work) or affirmative; in which respect Christ c mprehendeth all the neg tiv s under these two great affirmative Commandments, of love to God and our Neighbour, for every Commandment doth both njoyn and forbid; the like may be said of promises and threatnings, there b ing in every promise a threatning, and in ev ry threatning a promise conditionally implyed: And this may be a reason why some Commandments are negatively expressed, some positively, to shew us that both are comprehended.
2 Though the positive Commandmen •, or (the positive p •rt of the Commandment) be of alike force and Authority with the negative, as to the obligation it layeth on us to duty, yet it doth not tie us to all occasions and times, as negatives do: Hence is that common Maxim, that affirmative Commands tie and oblige semper ever, that is, they never want their Authority, and we are never absolved from their obedience; but they do not oblige and tye ad semper, that is, in all differences of time we are not tied to the exercise of the duties enjoined; negatives again oblige both semper & ad semper, th •t is, always, and in all differences of time: For instance, in the third Commandment, the affirmative part is to use the Lords Name and Ordinances holily and reverently in prayer, r •ading and hearing, &c. So in the fourth Commandment we are r squired to sanctify the Sabbath, by waiting on Ordinances, &c. This makes these still duties, so as to pray, hear, &c. are still d •ties, but we are not to be, and should not be always exercised in these duties, for we must abound in other duty •s also of necessity, and mercy, we must eat, and sleep, &c. and when we sleep, we can neither act love, nor fear▪ Again, the negative ⟨p. 10⟩part is, not to profane the Lords Name in his Ordinances; this may not be done at any time: The reason of th • difference is this, bec •use in affi •mative • we are not always tied to the a ••s of Duties and Graces, but to the Disposition and H •bit. Habits are a Spiritual Quality, a (Vis) or Power •r fitting and enabling for bringing forth these acts, and for the bringing them forth in the due time and season, when they shall be called for; but in sinful things we are prohibited, not only the habits, but the acts also: the one is always and ever a sin, but the other is not always called for as duty. If any desire Rules to know when a duty is called for; as for instance, when we are to pray, hear, &c. it is hardly possible to be particular in this, yet we may try it by these Generals.
1 Any affirmative Precept binds to present practice, when the duty r squired tends to God • glory, unto which every thing should be done (as 1 Cor. •0.31.) and when the omission of the duty may disho •our her •.
1 Any affirmative Precept binds to present practice, when the duty r •quired tends to God • glory, unto which every thing should be done (as 1 Cor. •0.31.) and when the omission of the duty may disho •our hir •.
6 The sixth distinction is of the Moral Law in two Tables, first and second; the first contains ou • immediate worship, service and obedience to God himself, and is comprehended in the ⟨p. 8⟩first four Commandments; th • s •cond contains our mediate obedience to God in all the duties we owe to other •, in the last six; they were at first so divided by the Lord hims •lf, for there are Ten in all, Deut. 4.13. From this distinction take notice; 1. That all the Commandm •nts of the second Table are of like Authority with the first, God sp •ke all these words; yea, as it appears from Act. 7.28▪ it was our Lord Jesus. 2. The sins immediat •ly aga •nst the first Table, are gre •ter th •n those against the second; for this cause, Matth. 22.38. the first is called the First and Great Commandment: Ther •fore 3. In Morals (if th •y be things of the same nature) the duti •s of the second Table cede and give place to the duties of the first Table, when th •y cannot stand together; as in the case of love to God, and the exercise of love to our Father and Neighbour, Luke 14.26. Matth. 10.37. wh •n obedience to God, and obedience to our Superiours cannot consis •, we are to obey God rather than man, Act, 4.19. and we are to love the Lord, and hate Father and Moth •r, Luke 14. •6. 4. Y •t take notice, that Ceremonials or positives of the first Table, for a time cede and give place to Morals in the second; as fo • •elieving or pr •s •rving our Neighbours life in hazard, we may trav •l on the Sabbath day, according to that Scriptur •, I will h •ve M •rcy and not Sacrifice • and the Sabbath was made fo • man, and not man for the Sabbath, &c.
2 Though the positive Commandmen •, or (the positive p •rt of the Commandment) be of alike force and Authority with the negative, as to the obligation it layeth on us to duty, yet it doth not tye us to all occasions and times, as negatives do: Hence is that common Maxim, that affirmative Commands tye and oblige semper ever, that is, they never want their Authority, and we are never absolved from their obedience; but they do not oblige and tye ad semper, that is, in all differences of time we are not tyed to the exercise of the duties enjoyned; negatives again oblige both semper & ad semper, th •t is, always, and in all differences of time: For instance, in the third Commandment, the affirmative part is to use the Lords Name and Ordinances holily and reverently in prayer, r •ading and hearing, &c. So in the fourth Commandment we are r •quired to sanctifie the Sabbath, by waiting on Ordinances, &c. This makes these still duties, so as to pray, hear, &c. are still d •ties, but we are not to be, and should not be always exercised in these duties, for we must abound in other duti •s also of necessity, and mercy, we must eat, and sleep, &c. and when we sleep, we can neither act love, nor fear▪ Again, the negative ⟨p. 10⟩part is, not to prophane the Lords Name in his Ordinances; this may not be done at any time: The reason of th • difference is this, bec •use in affi •mative • we are not always tyed to the a ••s of Duties and Graces, but to the Disposition and H •bit. Habits are a Spiritual Quality, a (Vis) or Pow •r fitting and enabling for bringing forth these acts, and for the bringing them forth in the due time and season, when they shall be called for; but in sinful things we are prohibited, not only the habits, but the acts also: the one is always and ever a sin, but the other is not always called for as duty. If any desire Rules to know when a duty is called for; as for instance, when we are to pray, hear, &c. it is hardly possible to be particular in this, yet we may try it by these Generals.
