Self-denial being thus, as we see, the Catholic Design both of Law *and Gospel, it must needs have some Influence, more or less on every Virtue we can practise. 'Tis no marvel then, our Saviour makes it here the only Fundamental, or, if ye will, [Greek or Hebrew], the Probatum est of a Christian, since,2 as the Wife-man said of keeping the Law, we may well say of this Doctrine, It is totum hominis, Amans whole Duty, to fulfil it. Wherefore else is it, that all things, now under the Gospel, go so by Contraries? To Exalt, we must abase our selves: To be the First, we must become last of all: To be strong, we must become weak: To be wise, we must become Fools: To subdue our enemies, we must love them: To save our Lives, we must lose them, with many such like. Wherefore, ⟨p. 8⟩I say is it, but because we are now to work out our salvation by Self-denial; that is, by such a way as pulls down our high thoughts, that thwarts our perverse Principles, that so God only may be exalted, and as at first he was so, may at last become All in all? 3Wherefore was it, that all the Precepts of the Decalogue were penned in a Negative form, none in the Affirmative, but the two Middle ones, the more strictly to oblige us to them, but because they were calculated for our Lapsed estate? For hereby God taught us, that our Obedience to it now was to proceed (not as formerly:) first via remotionis, then via positionis: First by way of the Removal of Self-love, before it could proceed to the production of works of Love: 4first by flying that which is evil, before we can come to do that which is good. Whereupon we may well conjecture that, had Adam persevered Innocent, and the Moral Law then been written, as it was since, all its Precepts had been penned in the Affirmative. Does not Isaiah tell us, Chap. 27. Ver. 9. [Greek or Hebrew] This is all the fruit, to take away our sin? If then no sin, but proceeds out of Self-love, as is most certain, and so no Virtue to supplant it, but proceeds from self-denial, then is this Virtue of Self-denial, the only fruit of our Religion. And so much appears in the words next following in that place: for how does he mean our sins should be taken away, but when even the Holiest stones of the Altar should become as Chalk-stones [Greek or Hebrew] pulverizated or beaten asunder;
Self-denyall being thus, as we see, the Catholique Designe both of Law *and Gospel, it must needs have some Influence, more or lesse on every Vertue we can practise. 'Tis no marvaile then, our Saviour makes it here the onely Fundamentall, or, if ye will, 〈non-Latin alphabet〉, the Probatum est of a Christian, since,2 as the Wife-man said of keeping the Law, we may well say of this Doctrine, It is totum hominis, Amans whole Duty, to fulfill it. Wherefore else is it, that all things, now under the Gospel, goe so by Contraries? To Exalt, we must abase our selves: To be the First, we must become last of all: To be strong, we must become weak: To be wise, we must become Fooles: To subdue our enemies, we must love them: To save our Lives, we must lose them, with many such like. Wherefore, ⟨p. 8⟩I say is it, but because we are now to worke out our salvation by Self-deniall; that is, by such a way as pulls downe our high thoughts, that thwarts our perverse Principles, that so God onely may be exalted, and as at first he was so, may at last become All in all? 3Wherefore was it, that all the Precepts of the Decalogue were penn'd in a Negative forme, none in the Affirmative, but the two Middle ones, the more strictly to oblige us to them, but because they were calculated for our Lapst estate? For hereby God taught us, that our Obedience to it now was to proceed (not as formerly:) first via remotionis, then via positionis: First by way of the Removall of Self-love, before it could proceed to the production of works of Love: 4first by flying that which is evill, before we can come to doe that which is good. Whereupon we may well conjecture that, had Adam persevered Innocent, and the Morall Law then been written, as it was since, all its Precepts had beene penn'd in the Affirmative. Does not Esay tell us, Chap. 27. Ver. 9. 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 This is all the fruit, to take away our sinne? If then no sinne, but proceeds out of Self-love, as is most certaine, and so no Vertue to supplant it, but proceeds from self-denyall, then is this Vertue of Self-denyall, the onely fruit of our Religion. And so much appeares in the words next following in that place: for how does he meane our sinnes should be taken away, but when even the Holiest stones of the Altar should become as Chalke-stones pulverizated or beaten asunder;
- *See below in the fifth Point in the Margin.See below in the fift Point in the Margent.
- 2Eccles. 12.13. Quod caput est rerum quas lex praescripsit Jësu? crucem subire, semet a se abdicere. H. Grot. in Instit. puer.
- 31 Cor. 15.28.
- 4Psaline 34.14.
