A SOBER ENQUIRY INTO The Nature, Measure, and Principle of Moral Virtue, Its distinction from Gospel-Holiness.

WITH Reflections upon what occurs disserviceable to Truth and Religion in this matter, in three late Books, VIZ. Ecclesiastical Policy. Defence and Continuation. AND Reproof to the Rehearsal transpros'd.

By R. F.

Vnus tamen scrupulus habet animam meam, ne sub ob­tentu priscae literaturae caput erigere tentet Paga­nismus.

Erasm.

London, Printed for D. Newman at the Kings-Arms in the Poultry, 1673.

TO Sir CHARLES WOLSELEY, Baronet.

SIR,

DEdications are so often abused to flattery, commenced upon so low motives, and so unsutably addres­sed, that unless they be rescued from these vulgar abuses, they will deser­vedly grow into contempt. And indeed were it not that I am conscious to my self both of the congruousness of this Ad­dress, and that I am influenced by none of those inducements that commonly pre­vail to Inscriptions of this nature, and that there is nothing here of the wonted strain of Epistles Dedicatory, I should have superceded the Dedicating of this at all.

Sir, you have been so happy in your choice of the Theams that you have de­signed to Illustrate and Vindicate; and so matchless in the performance of what [Page] you have undertaken, that whoever hath a Reverence for Religion, oweth you not only thanks, but Veneration. Whilst others combat Atheism with Drollery and Satyr, you have encountred it with De­monstration; and whilst they only mock and jeer the Atheists, you have baffled and refuted them. By vindicating also the Scriptures to their Divine Author you have justified our belief of them: Whilst you degrade Reason from that Supreme Judicature that some would erect it into, you have rightly vested it in whatever be­longs to it as an Instrument of discerning and conduct. As he must either have a de­sign to betray Religion or Himself who oweth it to any thing less than a rational choice; So he must have very irreverent apprehensions of the Authority and Vera­city of God, who will embrace nothing but what himself can frame adequate No­tions of. Whereas then the Socinian on the one hand, and the Papist and lazy Pro­testant on the other, rendered it necessary that both the Reasonablness of Scripture-Belief, and yet the mystery of Particular Doctrines should be equally asserted and secured: We ow a Homage to Sir Charles Wols [...]ley for employing himself about so [Page] Noble a Subject, and without incurring the censure both of injustice and ingrati­tude, we cannot but acknowledge his suc­cess in it. And truly the testifying my own thankfulness was the main, though I cannot say the only incentive to this Ad­dress.

For having, Sir, assumed the liberty to arraign the Writings and some of the No­tions of a Person considerable at least for his confidence, self-esteem, & the contempt which he treats all men with; that he may not think himself ill dealt withal to be fallen upon by so mean a Man, and so illiterate a Divine as my self, I am willing to do him that right as to refer the Um­pirage of the Debate between him and me, to a Person as far above either of us in Learning as in Quality. And if he should decline your Award, as I am confident he dare not stand the Verdict of so Competent and Impartial a Judge, I have the satis­faction of having committed the whole Cause into such hands, as wherein soever either as to Argument or Stile I am de­fective, knows how to substitute better in their Room. And I acknowledge this to have been one reason among others for the prefixing your Name to the ensuing Dis­course, [Page] that by recommending the Subject to your care, I might thereby call forth a Person of so strong and clear a Judgment, so Masculine and Celebrated an Elo­quence, as well to rescue so excellent a Theam from so short a Reason and dull a Pen as mine, as to vindicate it from the declamatory assaults of such whose skil and strength lies next to their Railing in their Rhetorick and Picquancy.

There is one thing more, Sir, that contri­buted to the concerning your name in this Dedication, namely to tell you, that where­as you have promised an account of the admirable contrivement of saving Men by Jesus Christ, we can no longer excuse the delay of it. It would have been welcom and useful before, but it is now become neces­sary. The Opinions brought to the Bar in the following Discourse, are modest and innocent in comparison of some others vented by the same Author, viz. That small sins God takes no notice of, and that great Sins Repentance expiates them. Religion as well as your own Promise challenge from you that you would help to check this growing boldness; Nor do I know a Sub­ject wherein you may more advantagiously serve both Truth and your own Fame; [Page] The Accession of Light derivable from so great Accomplishments to that, will in­fallibly reflect a luster, upon your self. Sir, whilst most Books serve only to betray their Authors to an universal contempt, and to expose their pride and folly, which might have been concealed, had not themselves taken a course to divulge it; you have al­ready by your Writings not only further endeared your self to your Friends, and raised your estimate among such as have the honour and happiness to know you, but withall you have obliged strangers to pay you a Veneration, and won your self a number of secret Votaries and unknown admirers, among whom I presume to rec­kon my self, and am,

SIR, Your most faithful, and most humble Servant, R. F.

To the Reader.

HAving in the following Treatise menti­oned the motives that induced me to this Undertaking, I shall not entertain thee here with what thou wilt meet with hereafter. On­ly this I may say, that as it was not to grati­fie the Entreaties of a Bookseller, such mens Importunity weighing little with me, if the Advantage and Interest of others be not con­cerned; so neither was it upon the solicitation of Friends, who perhaps had they known of it before it had proceeded too far, would have been loth to have trusted so great a Concern in so weak hands. No one is responsible for it but my self; whatever mistakes, failures, &c. are in it, I am onely accountable for them. As for the main of the Discourse I leave it to stand or fall as it shall be found in the judgment of Christians and Scholars. I know I have not been able to wed the Graces to the Muses; it satisfies me if the Sword have a good Edge, though the Handle of it be not so well gilt. Nor do I despise any thing more than Rhetorick putting an Ostracism upon Logick; though otherwise I like the meat the [Page] better for having a pleasant Sauce. I hope I may say that the whole is managed in a Spirit of Meekness and Terms of Modesty. I am none of those who affect to be offensive, or who endeavour to grow remarkable by being saucy. There is nothing more disgusts me in the Writings of others than to find them stuft with Satyr and Scurrility. Men do but disserve their own designs by writing huffing­ly; nor will any one that is wise judge the worse of a Cause by finding it reviled and slandered. Clown, Yelper, Despicable-Scribler, Buffoon, Coloss of Brass, Mr. Insolence, Impudent Fop, Whelp, Monky, Crop, Smutty Lubber, Dastard Craven, Mushrome, Coward, Judas, Crocodile, Hunger-starv'd Whelp of a Country Vi­car, (not to mention a thousand more Epi­thets of this complexion, which occur in a late Book) do ill become the extraction and civility of a Gentleman, the Education of a Scholar, the Morality of a Philosopher, the Religion of a Christian, and the Profession of a Divine to give to any, especially to a Person who for his Birth, Breeding, Natural and acquired Accomplishments, Honourable Employes in his Country, and Untainted Conversation, Rivals at least the bestower of them. Men of all Per­swasions are scandalized at this way of wri­ting. [Page] Nor will any credit accrue to the Cause and Party in whose favour we meet with no­thing but Insolence, Malice and Calumny. I do not interest my self in the Transproser's Quarrel, h [...] is able himself, if he think it needful, to give the [...]prover due correction for his Folly and Impudence. But suppose that (abating the unhandsome terms, which I am confident when his head is cooler the very Au­thor cannot but condemn) something might be pleaded for his keenness against A. M. be­ing a sacrifice to Revenge rather than Truth, for medling with his Comfortable Impor­tance; yet I cannot imagine upon what Mo­tives he hopes to justifie his treating J. O. with so much Pride, Petulancy, Wrath, Ran­cour, Revenge, Scurrility, Reviling and Rai­ling, as I think is not to be match'd again; especially being a Person not onely second to none for Learning and Modesty, but who for what appears had given him no offence, unless it were that by a sober Reply to his First Book he had furnished him with an occasion of re­ctifying some things, wherein he was not onely mistaken, but had grosly prevaricated; and therefore instead of defaming and maligning his Monitor, he ought to have thank'd him: nor is there a greater injustice in the World, than to make that a Quarrel which is really [Page] an Obligation. It is a new way of securing our selves from Opponents, to over-look the Cause, and spend our Indignation upon the Person of our Adversary, and to fetch our De­fence from the Dung-Cart and Oyster-Boats, instead of the St [...]a and Academy. It had been enough to allow him neither Wit nor Sincerity, to grant him neither Ability nor Patience to write Sense or Reason; to remand him to the Ferula, to make his Mittimus for Bedlam; and, in gratitude for old kindnesses, to undertake the providing him a dark Lodging and clean Straw; to reproach him with a hundred abusive tales and defaming stories: but over and above all this to render him at least suspected, if not odious to Rulers; he must not only have an address fathered on him, to which he was both an utter Stranger, and his known avowed Principle's always repugnant; but in pursuance of that Calumny he must be represented as an Ene­my to the present Government, and bound in Conscience to abhor and oppose Mo­narchy, &c. (See Repr. to the Rehears. p. 422, 423.) So that unless Magistrates will be wanting to their own security, here is an Object presented them not only to employ their Rods, but Axes upon. Haec mi Pater [...]e di­cere aequum fuit? Is it lawful to calumniate [Page] when judged conducive to interest? or may we indulge our selves in detraction and slan­der, in hopes of promoting our design by it? For I cannot conceive but that the Author of this accusation fully understood him to be innocent whom he impeached, and if it would have served his end could better then I have laid the Saddle upon the right Horse. I know there needs none to vindicate that worthy Person but himself, or rather he needs not do it, carrying a justification in this matter in the hearts of all that know him, who understand­ing themselves bound to defend the Reputati­on of their Neighbor from Slander, will not be wanting, as opportunity serves, of acquitting themselves therein. In the mean time he may satisfie himself in having Plato's Re­serve, who being told of some who had de­famed him, 'Tis no matter, said he, I will live so that none shall believe them.

But as if Mens Pride and Malice knew no bounds, and single Sacrifices were too little to satisfie their Insolence and Revenge, a whole Kingdome must be made a Victim to their Wrath, Rage, and Ambition: As if it were not enough to slander particular Per­sons; the Honour, Learning, Language, and Religion of a whol Nation must be arraign'd. It is come to pass (sayes a late Author) that [Page] the Scots from their antipathy to Bishops are become the most Barbarous People of all Europe, so as that they will not have any Traffick with any other Countries for fear of corrupting their Language & Gen­tility, though that is little better than wild Irish, & they little better than Jack-Gentle­men. And though they have some dark and general Notions of Christianity still remaining among them, yet are they since their Picque against Bishops, fallen into such Rudeness and Ignorance, that they have scarce any knowledge at all of the particular Articles of their Faith, and Precepts of their Religion. Repr. to the Rehears. pag. 502. It would seem by this Gentleman, that Faith, Virtue, &c. are to be measured by respect to the Mitre and Crosier-Staff; and that subjection to Prelacy is the only standard of Learning, Righteousness, Gentility and Good-Breeding: And that it is not the belief of the Bible and Obedience to the Gospel that doth constitute us Christi­ans, but submission to the Bishops Cannons. Only I wonder how other Nations have esca­ped the same misfortune, or are all the Foreign Protestant Churches involved in the same [Page] Unhappiness? It were easie to be tart and severe upon this occasion, but I shall leave it to the Wisdome of Authority in vindication of the Honour of Religion, a Nobility famous for whatsoever is truly Great and Honorable, and a Ministry no less Learned than Pious, to chasten this Excess of Insolence.

[Page 1]OF Moral Uertue & Grace.

CHAP. I.
Sect. 1.

The Occasion of this Discourse. Terms here occurring unfolded. What meant by Ver­tue; What by Moral and Morality. The import of Grace, so far as it hath any concern in the ensuing Debate. The Question stated.

AMong other Methods and Arts pursued and improved to the disservice of the Souls of men, and the subversion of the Truth as it is in Jesus; there are two, which though opposite to one ano­ther, are yet equally of a malignant influ­ence upon Religion. The First is, mens deluding themselves with an Imaginary Romantick pretence of Grace and Faith, [Page 2] and consequently, that their conditions with [...]eference to their everlasting interests are secure; while in the mean time their hearts and minds are strangers to, and void of all those Dispositions, Qualities, Habits, &c. by which we are assisted to live soberly to our selves, righteously towards our neigh­bour, or answerably to the dependance we have on, or the relations we stand in unto God: whence it naturally & by a kind of ne­cessity comes to pass, that they are wholly estranged in their lives from that Sobriety, Temperance, Justice, Equity, Devotion, Humility, Gratitude, Meekness, &c. they should be in the exercise of. These men presume themselves into Salvation, and claim happiness on the boldness of their be­lief; nor do they apply themselves to con­quer heaven otherwise than in the alone virtue of their imagination. If they can but arrive at so much impudence as to vote themselves Saints, they think that they are acquitted from all care of Vertue and Obe­dience. These are the men who set vertue and grace at odds, who frame to themselves a Religion not only empty of, but inconsi­stent with real goodness: the unhappy off­spring of those whom the Apostle James encounters, Cap. 2. vers. 14. to the end. The [Page 3] Second is, That some having obtained of themselves, endeavour to prevail with o­thers, to renounce and seclude all infused principles (commonly called grace) with the subjective influences of the Spirit, and to erect in the room thereof acquired ha­bits, natural dispositions, innate abilities, and moral vertues, as the whole of that, in the strength of which we may live acceptably to God, and acquire a fitness and title to im­mortality and life. Moral vertue (saith a late Author) is not onely the most material and useful part of all Religion, but the ultimate end of all its other duties: And all true Reli­gion can consist in nothing else, but either the practice of vertue it self, or the use of those means and instruments that contribute to it. Eccles. polit. p. 69. All Religion is either vertue it self, or some of its instruments; and the whole duty of man consists in being ver­tuous: ibid. p. 71. There is nothing beyond the bounds of moral vertue, but Chimera's and flying Dragons, illusions of fancy & im­postures of Enthusiasm; Idem def. & conti­nuat. p. 338, 339. Hence he challengeth any man to give him a notion of grace distinct from morality, affirming, that if grace be not included in morality, that it is at best but a phantasm and an imaginary thing; Eccles. [Page 4] polit. p. 71. and again, that the spirit of God, and the grace of Christ, when used as distinct from moral abilities & performances, signify nothing; def. & continuat. p. 343. Thus ver­tue & grace are not only made co-incident; morality and Religion in its utmost latitude made convertible terms: but in the pur­suance of these Notions, men are acted to vent all manner of contempt against the Spirit of God, deriding the inward opera­tions, quicknings and influences of the Holy Ghost, as Enthusiastick dreams, canting phrases, & the fumes of Religious madness. To be born again, and to have a new spiritual life, is a phantastick jargon, unless it only signify to become a new moral man, (saith the former Author) def. & continuat. p. 343, 344. All the pretended intercourse betwixt Christ & a believing soul, in way of discove­ries, manifestations, spiritual refreshments, withdrawings, d [...]sertions, is nothing but the ebbs and tydes of the humours of the body, and the meer results of a natural and mechanical Enthusiasm; nor otherwise intelligible, than by the laws of mechanism, as the motion of the heart, and the circulation of the blood are: ibid. p. 339▪ 340, 341, 342. Hence to de­scribe conversion, by our being united to Christ, and ingrafted in him, is called a rowl­ing [Page 5] up and down in ambiguous phrases, and canting in general expressions of Scripture, without any concern for their true sense and meaning; ibid. p. 343.

The consideration of the inconsistency of these principles with truth, the affront offered to the Gospel, and dammage done to the souls of men by each of them, hath led me to this undertaking. On the one hand to separate grace from vertue, and to set faith and morality at variance, cannot but furnish men Atheistically and irreligi­ously disposed, with occasion of Blasphe­ming that worthy name by which we are called: it being too much the custom of pre­judiced & disingenuous persons to reflect the scandals which arise either from the doctrines or conversations of professors, on that Holy and innocent Religion, which they (though but hypocritically) do pro­fess. On the other hand, to swallow up the whole of Religion in morality, seems a plain renouncing of the Gospel, and shapen par­ticularly to befriend men in such a design. For if the Gospel be nothing but a restitution of the Religion of Nature; as the aforesaid Author affirms, def. & continuat. p. 316. And if the Christian institution doth not in­troduce any new duties distinct from the eter­nal [Page 6] rules of Morality; as is alledged, def. & continuat. p. 305. I see not, but that whoever would act consistently to these principles, he must needs proceed to a plain renunciation of all the instituted duties of the Gospel, (which is to overturn the whole fabrick of Christianity) & confine himself to the De­calogue; that being a plain and full system of the law of nature, and a sufficient transcript of the duties we were obliged to by the rule of Creation. Nor, supposing that Martin Sidelius was not mistaken in his hypothesis, that all Religion consists in morality alone; (The same opinion with that asserted by a late Author;) can I censure him for what he thereupon proceeded to, namely, the renouncing the Gospel: Nor doth he de­serve the character fastned upon him; def. & continuat. p. 313. of a foolish and half-witted fellow, upon the account of his de­ductions, they being neither streined nor absurd, but clear and natural; whatever he demerited upon the score of his pre­mises.

These among other Considerations, having swayed me to this undertaking; I would hope, that an endeavour of in­structing the minds of Men, and of con­tributing to the conduct of their Judg­ments [Page 7] and Consciences in those things may not be unacceptable: and the ra­ther, because not onely of some dif­ficulty in setting forth the due lines, mea­sures, and bounds of Vertue and Grace; the describing their mutual Relations, and the subordination of the one to the other: But, because there is very little extant upon the subject, at least with respect to the end, and in the manner that it is here managed. Nor indeed was any thing of this nature thought necessary in a Nation where the Gospel is embraced, till the Debates and Discourses of some have of late made it so.

§ 2. To avoid all Ambiguity, Darkness and Prevarication, it will be needful ere we make any further proceed, that we fix the meaning and import of Vertue and Morality; Grace and Religion; these be­ing the terms of the Question to be Dis­coursed and Decided; nor without a set­ling the Notion and Conception of these, can any thing of this Argument be duly understood.

Vertue is a term seldome occuring in the Scripture. In the Old Testament we have [...] Chajil, several times rendred by our interpreters Vertuous, viz. Ruth, [Page 8] 3.11. Prov. 12.4. Prov. 31.10. and once Vertuously, namely, Prov. 21.29. but indeed the word [...] hath no such signi­fication as that we now use to express by Vertue: it properly signifies Courage­ous, strenuous, industrious, diligent; strength, valour, activity of body and mind, &c. And accordingly the Septuagint in none of the preceding places, nor elsewhere, trans­late [...] by [...]. Prov. 12.4. The 70 render it [...]. Jun. & Trem [...]l. Mercer, Piscator, strenua; Pagnin fortis; industri­ous, diligent, sirenuous. Prov. 31.10. who can find a Vertuous Woman? The 70. trans­late it [...]; Munster, Pagnin, fortem: Jun. & Tremel. Piscator, Mercer, Castalio, strenuam. Prov. 31.29. Many Daughters have done Vertuously. The 70. turn it, [...], have gotten Wealth: So Munster, Pagnin, paraverunt sibi opes. Jun. & Trem. Mercer, Piscator, gesserunt se strenue, have done, or ap­proved themselves industriously. Ruth. 3.11. The 70. translate it, [...], a woman of courage, activity. [...] vertue, is very rarely met with in the N. T. I do not say, that it occurs not at all there, in so affirm­ing, Valla mistook; nor do I say that it occurs but thrice, for in so alledging, Lau­rentius [Page 9] was overseen: But I think I may affirm that it is to be found but four times in the whole New Testament, viz. Phil. 4.8. 1 Pet. 2.9. 2 Pet. 1.3. and 2 Pet. 1.5. In any of which places I much question whether it ought to be interpre­ted in the sence vulgarly received. 1 Pet. 2.9. we render [...] Praises, and Dr. Hammond paraphraseth the place thus; That you may set forth and illustrate Christs powerful and gracious Workings, who hath wrought so glorious and blessed a Change in you. 2 Pet. 1.5. it plainly signifies a pecu­liar disposition of mind distinct from Faith, Patience, Temperance, &c. and so cannot bear the sence commonly there put upon it: D. Hammond rendreth it by Cou­rage, Fortitude, Man-hood; and that a­greeably enough to the derivation com­monly given of the word from [...] Mars, Bellum, War. In a word the foresaid An­notator acknowledgeth that it no where in the N. T. signifieth probity of mind or what we now understand by vertue, un­less it be Phil. 4.8. where I think the con­text if narrowly viewed, will lead us to render it rather as the Syriack hath done, by any work Glorious or Honourable &c. However it must be Acknowledged [Page 10] though [...] Vertue may possibly be used in the Scripture in the sence vulgarly put upon it; that originally we are indebted to the School's of the Philosophers for it, and ought therefore to address our selves to them for the sence and meaning of it.

If in this matter then we consult the Philosophers, we shall find [...] Vertue, u­sed in a twofold signification. First to signifie a habit or facility of working or acting conformably to the Law of Right Reason. The alone moral measure of hu­mane actions known or acknowledged by the Philosophers was Reason. Hence Aristotle having stated the form and es­sence of Vertue in a mediocrity; he ex­plain's Mediocrity to be that which Right Reason teacheth; [...]; Eth. lib. 6. cap. 1. and lib. 2. cap. 6. he defines [...], mediocrity, to be that which is [...]; circum­scribed by Reason. They knew no other measure of moral Good and Evil but Reason; and this they stiled the common Law; [...], the common law is right Reason. Laert. in Zenon. [...]; Law is Right [Page 11] Reason, commanding such things as ought to be done, and forbidding such things as ought not to be done; was the definition that the Stoicks gave of Law. To which agrees the description given by Tully; that it is recta & à numine Deorum tracta ratio, imperans honesta & prohibens contraria; Right Rea­son derived to us from God enjoyning things honest, and forbidding things dishonest: Phi­lipp. 12. & lib. 1. de Legib. & lib. 1. de nat. Deor. [...]; To obey Reason and to obey God is all one, saith Hierocles on the Pythagorean golden Verses: ver. 29. This they called the Royal Law, [...], Right Reason is the Royal law; Plato in his Minos. This they likewise stiled, [...], the Law of being; Plato ibid. Where I suppose by [...], of being. He means the Law of Nature, the Law common to all men: For so Aristotle defines that which he calls common Law in contra­distinction from the Law which he calls pri­vate; [...]: Common Law is that which is according to Nature. Re­tor. lib. 1. cap. 14. Nor is there any thing more common than to express their obedience to the Law of Reason, by their following the conduct of Na­ture [Page 12] [...]; to live agreea­ble to Nature: Epict. [...]. If we observe Nature as our rule ordering our conversation according to right Rea­son, and agreeably to our Nature, we shall perform what in all things becomes us: Hierocles on the golden Verses of the Pytha­goreans. ver. 13. To which accords that of Seneca, propositum nostrum est secun­dum naturam vivere; our purpose and de­signe is to live according to Nature; E­pist. 5. and beata est ergo vita conveniens naturae suae: A happy life is such as is a­greeable to Nature; Senec. de vitâ beata cap. 3. & idem est beate vivere & secun­dum naturam; it is all one to live happily and to live according to Nature; idem ibid. cap. 8.

—haec duri immota Catonis
Secta fuit, servare modum, finemque tenere,
Naturamque sequi: — saith Lucan.

In all which places and many more which might be produced, nothing is meant by nature, but the law of reason: for as Juvenal saith, Nunquam aliud Natura, aliud sapien­tia dicit; Nature doth not teach one thing, [Page 13] and Right Reason another: Sat. 14. Now any habit, promptitude or facility of acting conformably to this law of right Reason, they called it Vertue. Thus the Pythagore­ans defined Vertue to be [...], a habit of which ought to be done: or of what Reason conducts, and leads us to; [...]; Vertue is nothing else but a habit of decency: Theag. lib. de Virtut. Ari­stotle describes it to be [...], A readiness of acting according to right Reason; Eth. lib. 6. cap. 13. And more fully that it is, [...], &c. An elective habit consisting in mediocrity in things re­lating to us, defined by reason &c. Eth. lib. 2. cap. 6. This is acknowledged by our late Author, Eccl. polit. p. 68. The practice of vertue (saith he) consists in living suta­bly to the dictates of Reason and nature. And def. & continuat p. 315, 316. All men are agreed that the real end of Religion is the happiness and perfection of mankind; and this end is obtained by living up to the dictates of Reason, and according to the laws of nature. This promptitude and fa­cility of acting conformably to the dictates of Reason, the Philosophers stiled the [Page 14] [...], good order of the Soul: [...] The musick of the Soul. And herein they stated the Souls sanity, beauty, harmony &c. Hence Pythagoras and from him Plato defined [...], vertue to be the harmony of the Soul. Plat. in Phaed.

Secondly, Vertue is used by Philosophers to denote any act which because of its con­formity to Reason is Morally good. What­ever actions were found agreeable and con­formable to Reason, they stiled them ver­tues; and on the contrary, any act that was morally evil, they called it vice; stating withal the obliquity of vice in a difformity to Reason, [...]; Vice is a Practice against right Reason; Plato. [...], somewhat besides or be­yond reason, Arist. Eth. lib. 1. cap. 13. [...]; vice is a transgression against right Reason; Stob. Serm. 1. The denomination of vertue be­ing once used to signify the conformity of our mind unto the law of Reason; it is thence applyed to express the agreeable­ness of our actions unto the same law. And these are the alone acceptations of vertu [...] which can claim any room in the present debate; all other signification put upon it, being forreign to the matter we have in [Page 15] hand. By consulting then the original Authors of this term, we have found it ap­propriat and fixed to express the confor­mity of our minds and Actions, its Habit's and Operations to the Law of Reason; and this must carefully be attended to in the whole of our future proceed.

§ 3 With reference to these habit's it is further needful to be observed, that though they be not affirmed to be essential to our Natures, nor to proceed by way of emanation from them, nor to be congenite and connate with us; it is yet contended that there are those igniculi and semina, sparks and seeds naturally in all men which may be maturated and improved by fre­quent repetition of Acts into habit's of Vertue. It is true all the Philosophers were not of this mind, some of the wisest of them acknowledging a Divine interpo­sure in the communication of Vertues to men. Hence Plato in his Meno discour­seth at large that Vertue comes by a [...] a Divine infusion. And that it is [...] neither from nature, nor teachable. See Maximus Tyrius disser­tat. 22. and the Dialogue between Alcibi­ades and Socrates in Plato. But the gene­rality of them were otherwise perswa­ded: [Page 16] all the Stoicks affirmed [...] that Vertue was teachable. This was what they meant by their [...], their [...]; self-power and absolute free-will to Good; their [...], good Nature or Seeds of Vertue in Nature. [...]; Vertues are acquired by a rational government of ones self, and by good Education; whereas Vices spring and proceed from the contrary; Sallust. [...]. Beata vita causa & firmamentum est sibi fidere: the alone foundation and source of Happiness is for a man to trust to himself; Sen. Ep. 31. Omnibus natura fundamentum dedit semenque virtutum: omnes ad omnia ista nati sumus: cum ir­ritator accessit, tunc illa animi bona velut sopita excitantur; Seneca. Nature hath bestowed on every one the Seeds and means of Vertue: We are all born disposed to these things: and whensoever excited thereunto by a praeceptor, those dormant en­dowments display themselves. The passage of Apuleius lib. de philosoph. is pat to this purpose; viz. That man by Nature is neither good nor bad▪ but alike indif­ferent and equally disposed to either: have­ing semina quaedam utrarumque rerum [Page 17] cum nascendi origine copulata, quae edu­cationis disciplina debeant emicare; conge­nite with him some Seeds of each, which e­ducation maturates, & excites. Hence though they used to acknowledg themselvs indebted to Jupiter for life and estate, yet as to the honour of being vertuous, they would neither allow him, nor any other to have a share with them in it. It was up­on this account that Seneca thought it not enough that his Vertuoso should vie per­fection and happiness with God himself; Deus non vincit sapientem felicitate, eti­amsi vincit aetate; non est virtus major quae longior: God doth not excel a wise man in happiness, but only in duration; nor is Vertue the greater, for being of a long standing, Ep. 73. But he add's elsewhere, est aliquid quo sapiens antecedat Deum, ille enim naturae beneficio non suo sapiens est; there is something wherein a wise man chal­lengeth the precedence of God, for as much as God is good only through the advantage of his Nature, but the wise man is so, through his own study and endeavour, E­pist. 3. Of the same complexion are all the notions of Aristotle with respect to the attainment and acquisition of Ver­tue, as may be seen at large, lib. 2. Eth. [Page 18] cap. 1 & 2. Yea some flew higher, conten­ding Vertue not only in the principles and Seeds of it to be an appurtenance of our Nature, but to be formally inlay'd into us: Hence that of Cleanthes, [...]; That a wise man is such by Na­ture and not by institution. To which ac­cords that of Cicero, justos quidem natur [...] nos esse factos &c. That we are naturally good and upright. In a word, the Origi­nal Authors of this Term neither knew nor acknowledged any other Vertue, save that whose alone measure was Reason; and power of operation, natural strength. He that desires to see more of this may consult Plutarchs Dissertation entituled [...], that Vertue is teachable: And Stobeus Serm. 101. Now how sui­table soever this Idea of Vertue already assigned be to Humane Nature conside­red as innocent, yet falling upon it as cor­rup [...], it hath proved of no better use than to keep men off from Christ and the Co­venant of Grace, and to lead them to live upon,In potestate habeo ju­stum esse & justum non esse. The common say­ing of the Pelagians: Dubitari non potest inesse quid [...]m omni animae na­turaliter virtutum se­mina. Cass. and trust to a Covenant of Works. From these, and no o­ther principles sprung Pelagianism: and the [Page 19] dogmata of the one are nothing but a tran­script of the sentiments of the other; In­stances ly at hand, if it were needful to produce them. The Pelagians recta Ratio is all one with the Phi­losophers [...].In Ipsâ enim naturâ inserta sunt velut semi­na, quae a [...]ditu & vo­luntate exculta fructifi­cant—testimonium cre­atoris. Comment. in Epist. fathered (but falsely) on Ambrose. The virtutum semina are asserted equally by both: See Aug. de grat. Christi. cap. 18. And Jansenius his Augu­stinus, lib. 4. de heres. Pelag. cap. 7.

After all the claim put in by any to right Reason and Seeds of Vertue, there was not one of them but still discern'd a darkness to have benighted the mind, and a fee­bleness to have arrested the Soul with re­spect to all vertuous operations. This Plato called [...], an evil in nature; [...], a bad nature; [...], a natural evil &c. It is true, the source and real cause of this darkness of the Soul, and its prone­ness to forbidden instances they rightly knew not; and accordingly they generally imputed it to the Body. [...], That the Body was the foun­tain of the Souls misery; is a noted saying of Pythagoras's. Plato tells us how that the Soul, by being thrust down into the body [Page 20] suffered a [...], lost its wings; both in his Phaed. & in his Timaeus. Hence nothing more common with them, than to call [...], the Body the Sepulchre of the Soul. The very Poet hath it,

Hinc metuunt, cupiuntque, dolent, gau­dentque, nec auras

Respiciunt, clausae tenebris & Carcere cae­co.

Virg.

Who hath a mind to it, may see more in Plotinus, lib. 8. Enneadis. Hierocles in aurea carmina, vers. 56. However though they were ignorant of the true cause of mans blindness and proclivity to evil; yet the thing it self they were sensible of. It is a remarkable passage of Aristotle, [...]: What the Eies of Owls and Bats are with respect to the meridian Light: such are our minds and understandings with reference to those things, which even by nature are most manifest: lib. 2. [...]. Nature hath brought us forth, not as a Mother, but as a step-Mother, animo prono ad libidines, with our Souls bent upon Lusts. Cicer. a­pud [Page 21] August. cont. jul. lib. 4. Now against this they sought relief from Philosophy: Other means by which they might be assisted to answer the end and Law of their Creation they knew not. Moralis Phi­losophia caput est, ut scias quibus ad vi­tam beatam perveniri rationibus possit. The sum and scope of moral Philosophy is, that we may know how to obtain and ar­rive at blessedness: Apul. de Philosoph. Thus the Pythagoreans made the chief end of moral Philosophy to be the curing the Soul of its [...], its sick diseased passions; and to bring it to an [...] and [...], a healthy Complexion, a perfect Temperament, an athletick sound Constitution: which consisted in vertuous Dispositions and Actions. Socrates the great Author of moral Philosophy, pro­posed to himself as its end the correcting and regulating of Manners: and from him both the Stoicks and Platonists made the chief end of Philosophy to be [...], to live according to Vertue, Hence Seneca discoursing the fountains and causes of prevarication in manners, and having reduced them to two Heads, a natural proclivity in the mind to be tainted and led aside with false idea's and [Page 22] Images, and a fixed aversation to Vertue▪ contracted by false Opinions and corrupt Hypotheses. He refer's us to Philoso­phy as that which can alone administer relief to us; affirming that the Precepts of Philosophy do sufficiently assist us to cure and remedy both the former evils: utrumque decreta Philosophiae faciunt; Epist. 94. And a little after in the same Epistle he hath this expression, Quid autem Philo­sophia nisi vitae lex? What else is Philoso­phy but a law of Life? Animae morbis medetur, it cures the diseases of the Soul, saith Apul. de Philosoph. Facere docet Phi­losophia, it teacheth us how to live; Sen. Ep. 20. [...]: The end of Philosophy is assimilati­on to God; Ammon. on Arist. Categ. [...]: it ad­vanceth the Soul into the Divine like­ness, Hierocl. praefat in aurea Carmina. [...], Philosophy is the purification and perfecti­on of Humanity; Hierocl. ibid. Hoc mihi Philosophia promittat, ut me Deo parem faciat, Let Philosophy minister this to me, that it render me equal to God, Sen. Ep. 48 See more to this purpose in him passim, and in Plato in his Euthyd. According­ly [Page 23] they defined Practical Philosophy (in contra-distinction from Theoretical) to be effective of Vertue; [...]. Thus the whole de­signe of moral Philosophy, was to arrive at Vertue, and thereby to attain happiness. Other means of compassing both, they neither know nor look'd after. How in­sufficient it was for either of those, will be hereafter declared: I shall onely inti­mate at present, that through this, Philoso­phy became a snare to them, & as to the ge­nerality of them they proved of all men the greatest enemies to the righteousness and grace of God by Christ: for be­ing [...], vessels filled with arrogancy, self-estimation and presump­tion as Timon said of them: Enmity and aversation to the means appointed of God for the healing & renewing our natures, the pardoning and forgiving of us our sins, fixed their roots in their very minds. What lies in greater opposition to a meetness and idoneity for the Kingdom of God, than the description given by themselves of a Philo­sopher: [...]: The constitution and image of a Philosopher is to expect good, as well as fear evil only from him­self. [Page 24] Epict. Enchir. cap. 72. You may see Seneca to the same purpose Epist 111.

§ 4. The signification of vertue, so far as the first Authors of that Term instruct us concerning it, being sufficiently laid open: The next Word whose sense we are to fix is Moral: a Term that hath bred perplexi­ties, and occasioned mistakes in whatso­ever controversie it hath been used. We meet with it in the controversy of the Sab­baths; in the disputations about converting grace; in the question of humane power to good; in the doctrine concerning the cau­sality and efficacy of the Sacraments; and in this question which we have now under debate; in all which it is liable to ambigu­ity, and so apt to breed confusion, dark­ness and prevarication. Concerning the meaning of it in other controversies, we are not concerned at present to enquire; it will be enough for us, if we can clearly settle the import of it as it takes up a room in the question before us. The word Moral hath as little in footing the Scripture yea less than the former. [...], manners, whence Moral is derived, if I mistake not, occurs not at all in the 70. Nor do we meet with it but once in the whole N. T. viz. 1 Cor. 15.33. And there it is plain­ly [Page 25] borrowed from Menander, the whole sentence being an Iambick verse out of a Comedy of his. It proceeded out of the same Mint that the former term did, and we are beholding to the schools of the Philo­sophers for it; Aristotles books [...] gave the principal rise to this word. Quinti­lian denies that there is any Latine word by which [...] & [...] can be expressed; lib. 6. cap. 3. But Tully renders them by mores, manners, Lib de fato; and Orat. de lege Agrariâ ad Quirites. The School­men brought this exotick phrase, as they did many other, first into Divinity. And it must be acknowledged of most of them, that they seem to have traded more in the writings of the philosophers, than in the sacred Scriptures; and to have taken their measures of the notions and apprehensions of things, rather from Aristotle than the Bible. You may see this laid open at length both as to matter of fact and the mis­chievous consequences which have ensued thereupon, by that great and incompara­ble man Dr. Owen, De natur. ort. &c. ve­rae Theolog. lib. 1. digress. & lib. 6. a pag. 509. ad p. 521. However it being now universally taken up, and having harboured it self both in the minds and discourses of [Page 26] men; it would be in vain for us to contend against it; we shall sufficiently approve our selves, if we can manifest the just ac­ceptation of it. Moral as it relates to ver­tue is capable at most but of a threefold signification. First, to denote the confor­mity of our minds and actions to the whole law of God regulating our practical obedi­ence. But this description, whether we take our measure from vertue to which it is an adjunct, and of which it is predicated; or from law which first claiming the De­nomination of Moral, doth afterwards im­part it to certain habits of the mind, and its operations, is much too large. If we de­termine of the meaning of it by vertue; Then for as much as in all true affirmative propositions there must be an identity be­twixt the subject and the predicate, Moral must relate onely to an observation of these things, and a practice of those duties, which vertue refer's to, namely, an obser­vance of what Reason without any super­added declaration can conduct us in, and natural endowments and self acquirements inable us to the performance of. Nor could the first Authors of this Term mean any more by it, being at once strangers to all external Revelation, & Subjective grace. [Page 27] Or, if we should choose to decide the im­port of Moral as it refers to Vertue, by taking our measure of its signification from Law as that to which the stile of Moral pri­marily belongs, and by analogy only to habits and operations; we shall still find that the foresaid signification of Moral is too wide: for according to this method of proceed, Moral as referred to vertue, can be of no larger extent than Moral as re­ferred to law is. Seeing then it were a­gainst ordinary sense and the custome of mankind, to stile every law of practical obedience moral; it is no less irrational to stile the conformity of our minds and actions to those laws by the name of Moral Vertues. A Second signification put upon Moral as it hath reference to Vertue is to intimate thereby the observation of the precepts of the Second table of the deca­logue: and this is the common acceptation of it among practical Divines; whereof I judg this to be the reason; either because the Philosophers in their writings vulgarly called Ethicks and Morals, do principally treat of the duties which men owe to them­selves, and one another; which are like­wise the subject of the Second Table: or because they discourse of those only, with [Page 28] any consistency to reason, and comme [...]dableness; while in the mean time in what soever we owe immediately to God, the imaginations are vain, and their sentiment dark and ludicrous. But this acceptatio [...] of Moral Vertues I take to be as much to [...] narrow as the former was wide; nor d [...] any that handle these matters accurately so straiten and restrain them. For whe­ther we state the meaning of Moral by its Habitude to Vertue, or to that Law which is so denominated; We must admit it a greater latitude of signification, than meer­ly to imply Second-Table duties. If we judg of its import by its [...] to Vertue, we must then allow it the same largeness of sence wh [...]ch we allow that, namely to declare whatsoever is required of us by the Law of Nature in the Light of Reason: and I suppose it will be readily acknowledged that there are some duties which we owe immediately to God, and which respect him alone as their object, that can be de­monstrated by principles drawn from Na­ture, and the foundations and grounds of them discovered in the Light of Reason; and by consequence Moral Vertues ought not to be confined to the observation of the precepts of the Second Table. Or if [Page 29] we determine the sense of Moral by its [...] and Relation to that law which is so called, and with respect to conformity to which, the Habit's and Operations of our minds are afterwards denominated Moral: it will with the same evidence follow, that the Duties of Morality consist not alone in obeying the commandments of the Se­cond Table; forasmuch as the Precepts of the First constitute a part of the Moral Law as well as these of the Second do.

There is a Third sence which Moral as it belongs to vertue is capable of; namely, to declare those habits and operations of the mind required by the law of creation. And this sence of Moral will prove either stricter or larger according as we take the measure of the term, from vertue, or from law. If we define the meaning of it by its habitude to vertue, it will then signify only those duties that we are under the obligation of by the law of creation, which we are able to discover by the light of Rea­son; But if we determine the sence of it by that law which is commonly called moral, it will then express all those duties either to God or Man, which we are obliged to by the rule of creation; whether there re­side in man in his lapsed state an ability of [Page 30] discerning them by Reason yea or not▪ Now this being the most comprehensive notion of moral vertues, or duties of mo­rality, that any one who have treated those things with exactness have pitched on: and being the largest sence, which in any propriety of Speech the Term can be used in; I shall be willing to admit this as the true notion and idea of it. Morality then consist [...] in an observance of the precepts of the law of our creation, & that by the alone strength and improvement of our natural abilities, whether the particular duties we are under the sanction of by the foresaid law, be dis­coverable by and in the light of Reason, yea or not.

§ 5. Besides, these moral vertues where­of we have been discoursing, and whose nature we have fixed and stated; There is frequent mention in Christian writers both ancient and modern, not only of E­vangelical ones, which they make specifi­cally and essentially different, both Quoad Substantiam & Quoad modum from the former; as may be seen in Aquin. prim. 2. quest. 62. Banes in 2m. 2•. passim, &c. Which Evangelical Vertues they call su­pernatural, partly because they are Supra debitum naturae, beyond what was required [Page 31] by the law of creation, and partly because viribus naturae acquiri non possunt, they are not attainable by the strength and endea­vours of Nature. These are not my words but Becanus the Jesuits sum. Theol. Scho­last. p. 238. Among those they reckon faith in Christ. So that not to mention the other heterodoxies wrapt up in an expres­sion of a late Author; I dare say he speak's dissonantly to what either Fathers or School-men ever said, while he af­firms that in the primitive Ages of Chri­stianity, the righteousness of Faith one­ly implyed a higher pitch of moral goodness; Def. & Continuat. p. 305.306. I say moreover, that there are not onely Evan­gelical Vertues contended for as distinct from the moral ones we have been unfol­ding: but they also mention moral Ver­tues infused, different from the other mo­ral ones which are only acquired: so Aquinas prim. secund. quest 63. act. 3. & 4. And these by the very Jesuits are confessed to differ specifically from one an other quoad modum; while moreover they are acknowledged by the Dominicans to differ essentially quoad substantiam; see Alvarez. de auxil. lib. 7. disp. 65. So that I cannot but be amased at a late [Page 32] Author that dare tell us; that Evan­gelical Graces are the same for substance with Evangelical Vertues, and Evange­lical Vertues the same with moral ones, Def. & Continuat. p. 305. And I must needs say that he hath betrayed Igno­rance or something worse, in reckoning the distinction of moral Vertue from Grace among the tricks and frenzies of a new-fangled Divinity that was scarcely heard of fifty Years ago, Def. & Continuat. p. 307. And whereas he challengeth that great Man who replied to his first Book, to produce one ancient Author that makes any difference between the nature of mo­ral Vertue and Evangelical Grace; Def. & Continuat p. 304. I who know my self unworthy to be mentioned in one day either as to Reading or Learning with that Reverend Person, am able if need were, to produce him a hundred. It is not many Years ago, that the like question was debated with some warmth by persons of great learning among our selves: and though the controversie was not concer­ning a specifical difference, betwixt the acquired habits which are in unregenerate men, and the infused habits which are in believers; nor yet whether the acts pro­ceeding [Page 33] from infused habits differ essenti­ally from those acts which proceed from ac­quired habits; the parties contending be­ing herein at full agreement: but the a­lone quarrel was, whether this Specifick Difference was to be called a Specifick Phy­sical difference, or a Moral only: yea the debate was not so much about the Habits of the one sort, and the Habits of the o­ther, a Specifick difference even in Kind be­ing as good as on all sides acknowledged; for as much as the roots and principles of the one, were confessed by both parties to be Physically different from the roots and principles of the other; but the contest was chiefly in reference to the acts which proceed from Acquired Habits, and are found in unregenerate men; whether the Specifick difference between them and the acts which proceed from infused habits, be only Moral or also Physical? Now though this was the whole and the alone ground of quarrel between the contending parties, yet we remember what keen re­sentments appeared in some learned men against a holy and worthy person, for his stating the difference betwixt the Acts of the one sort of Habits, and the acts of the [Page 32] [...] [Page 33] [...] [Page 34] other sort, to be onl [...] Gradual or a Specific Moral difference.See Dr. Kendal's Sancti sanciti digress. against Mr. B. & Dur­ham on the Revel. from p. 125. to 145. Th [...] theam I am treating lay me under no necessity o [...] declaring my self on either side in th [...] controversie, nor was that my design i [...] mentioning of it; all that I intended wa [...] to intimate how novel the doctrine of th [...] universal coincidence of Moral Vertue an [...] Grace is; and what entertainment it wa [...] likely to have met with, if it had bee [...] started some Years sooner. Yet I care no [...] if I add, that where there are positive qua [...]lifications concurring in the act of the on [...] habite, which are not in the act of the o [...]ther: as when they proceed from differen [...] Principles, are exerted with respects t [...] different ends, and influenced by differen [...] motives; I should not scruple to call that: Specifick Physical difference, and shoul [...] hope to justify my self by Philosophy as well as Divinity in doing so. There is only one thing more that I intend here to sub­join; namely, that whereas Suarez contend [...] that without grace there may be and are some Dispositions to true habits of Vertue, though he confess at the same time that [Page 35] Perfect and Firm habits of Moral Vertue, Sine Gratia acquiri non possint, cannot be ac­quired without grace; lib. 1. de grat. cap. 7. n. 20. Which though much more modest than what is alledged by our late Author, yet Iansenius for that alone notion severe­ly rebukes him. See his Augustinus de stat. nat. laps. lib. 4. p. 238, 239.

§ 6. The last Term to be explained, and whose signification, so far as it hath any concern in this discourse, we are to deter­mine, is Grace. Now this being a word which we are peculiarly indebted to the Scripture for: It is but just and reasona­ble, yea it is necessary, that we should take the measure of our conceptions and notions about it from what the Word of God delivers to us concerning it. It is true [...], which in the N. T. we commonly render Grace, occurs in other Authors, but not in any of the principal senses that the Scripture instructs us of There is not one of the Philosophers who gives us the least acquaintance with those notions of Grace, which the Gospel chiefly unfolds. As we have then confined our selves to the Philo­sophers in the declaring the meaning of Vertue and Morality, they being the first Authors and users of those terms; so we [Page 36] judg it but equal, that both we and others should be limited to the Scripture in our conceptions about Grace.

[...], Grace, is a word of various acceptati­on: to discourse the several senses in which it is used, would be both tedious, and in a great part alien to the Theam in hand. I shall therefore only meddle with such significati­ons of it, as are either properly applicable to, or have some affinity with the design I pur­sue. Grace then is taken either actively, or passively; the first is call'd Gratia gratis dans, Giving Grace: The second, Gratia gratis data, Grace Given. Now each of these doth also admit variety of significations. The first, or Giving Grace, doth eminently resolve it self into one of three acceptations. It is used, (1) to intimate the purpose, design and con­trivance of Divine Goodness, Wisdom and Love, as the source and spring of our whole recovery, together with all the means and instruments of it: Or to declare the favour of God towards sinners, in recovering them from sin and wrath by Jesus Christ. Being justified freely by his Grace through the Re­demption that is in Jesus Christ, Rom. 3.24. For if through the offence of one▪ many be dead: much more the Grace of God, and the gift by Grace, which is by one man Jesus Christ [Page 37] hath abounded unto many, Rom. 5.15. And if by Grace, then it is no more by works; other­wise Grace is no more Grace, &c. Rom. 11.6. Having predestinated us unto the adop­tion of Children by Jesus Christ to him­self, according to the good pleasure of his Will: To the praise of the Glory of his Grace, &c. Ephes. 1.5, 6. But we see Jesus who was made a little lower than the Angels, for the suffering of Death, Crow­ned with Glory and Honour, that he by the Grace of God should tast Death for e­very Man, Heb. 2.9. There are innume­rable places where it is thus used. And from [...] Grace in this sence, comes [...], Gratiâ aliquem dono, gratiâ afficio, charum reddo, gratis acceptum facio: Gra­ciously to accept, freely to receive into fa­vour. To the praise of the Glory of his Grace, [...]; wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved; Ephe. 1.6. Non tamen propte­rea Grecum non est; sed [...], Graecis­simum, cum Sp. S. metam à pr [...]phanis sibi praesigi non sinat. Schmi [...]ius. [...] doth not, so far as I know, occur in any prophane Author: Nor is it matter of any Wonder, they being wholly ignorant of the thing it denotes. From [...] in this acceptation comes likewise [...], gra­tuitously [Page 38] or frankly to give or forgive▪ [...]; Forgiving one another even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you, Eph. 4.32. [...]; having (freely) forgiven you all trespasses, Col. 2.13. [...], remitto mulctam apud; Graecos Authores. And for as much as the Gospel is the Word of Gods Grace, Act. 14.20, 24. unfolding, bringing into Light and displaying this Grace and favour of God to sinners by Jesus Christ. It is therefore frequently expressed by the term Grace; Receive not the Grace of God in vain, 2 Cor. 6.1. Who­soever of you are justified by the Law, you are fallen from Grace; (i. e. Renounce the Gos­pel, and the favour of God therein declar­ed) Gal. 5.4. See also Tit. 2.11. Jud. 4. 2ly. It is applyed to express the effectual working of the Spirit of God, imprinting his Image on the Souls of men, and thereby elevating, moulding and disposing them to comply savingly with the Gospel. This the School-men c [...]ll Gratia operans, and Gratia praeveniens, Effectual and preventing Grace, Gal. 1.15. When it pleased God, who separa­ted me from my Mothers Womb, and called me by his Grace, to reveal his Son in me, &c. [Page 39] 1 Cor. 15.10. By the Grace of God I am what I am; and his Grace which was bestowed on me was not in vain, but I laboured more a­bundantly than they all, yet not I, but the Grace of God which was with me. Hence the Holy Ghost is called the Spirit of Grace, Zech. 12.10. Heb. 10.29. Yea, [...], the Spirit is once and again put for Grace: These be they who separate themselves, sensual, ha­ving not the Spirit, Jud. 19. see Luk. 1.80. 3dly. It is made use of to declare the actual, energetical working of the Spirit, exciting, assisting, and enabling to every Gospel-per­formance; working both to Will, and to Do. This Austin stiles adjutorium quo, in contra-distinction from the former, which he calls adjutorium sine quo non, lib. de Correp. & Grat. cap. 12. And the School-men call it Gratia co-operans; Gra­tia adjuvans; gratia Nulla in homine bona fiunt quae non facit homo; nulla v [...]rò facit h [...]mo quae non D [...]us praesta [...] ut fa­ciat homo. Concil. Arau­ [...]ic. can. 20. Cassi sunt omnes mo [...]us si à gratiā non adjuven­tur, & nulli si non exci­tentur. Bern. ap­plicans & determinans ad agendum: Grace de­termining the Will to act. And in Scripture-phrase it is called, The Lords upholding us by his free Spirit, Psal. 51.12. The holding us up, Psal. 119.117. The enlarging our heart, Psal. 119.32. The [Page 40] standing by and strengthening us, 2 Tim. 4.17. Bona & conversa voluntas adjuvatur, Sed perversa & convertenda plusquam adju­vatur. Spiritus aliter adjuvat inhabitans, a­liter nondum inhabitans: inhabitans adjuvat fideles, nondum inhabitans adjuvat ut sint fideles.

Secondly, Grace is taken passively for Grace given, and in this passive accep­tation, it admits likewise variety of signifi­cations. (1.) It is put for favour and accep­tance either with God or men. The Angel said unto her, fear not Mary; for thou hast found [...], favour with God, Luk. 1.30. The same with [...] high­ly favoured, v. 29. And Jesus increased in Wisdom and Stature [...], and favour with God and man; Luk. 2.52. Thou hast found Grace in my sight, says God to Moses, Exod. 33.12. where the 70 ren­der it by [...]. So Acts 47. having favour with all the people, [...]. Nor are other Authors strangers to this acceptation of [...], wit­ness that passage of Herodian; [...]; by courage and skill in shooting he obtained favour with the people, lib. 1. Secondly, it is used to denote a quality impressed on the [Page 41] minds and souls of men, whereby they be­came habitually disposed for God. This [...]s stiled by Divines Gratia habitualis, habi­ [...]ual Grace. It is true, Habit and Habitual [...]re no Scripture-terms. [...] Habit occurs [...]ut once in the N. T. viz. Heb. 5.14. [...]; and there it signifies custome or [...]ong use. Erasmus renders it, propter as­ [...]uetudinem. Vulg. pro assuetudine. Bez. prop­ [...]er habitum. Our old translation had it, [...]y Reason of Custome: The New hath it, [...]y Reason of Use. The word is peculiar to Philosophers, and with them it denotes a promptitude and facility of acting acquired and contracted by Custome or frequent re­petition of acts. [...]; a disposition through length of time connatural, Ammon. Quintilian translates [...], firma quaedam facilitas, a cer­tain stable facility. Instit. Orat. l. 10. cap. 1. From Philosophy the Term is transferred to Divinity, and as applied to Grace is put to declare the Image of God communi­cated to & imprinted on the soul, by which it is elevated, adapted and brought into a disposedness of living to and acting for Him. Now this Habitual Grace is two­fold; Gratia sani hominis, and Gratia aegroti, the Grace of innocency and the Grace of [Page 42] Recovery. The first is stiled by Austin n [...]turae sanitas, animae sanitas, adjutorium rob [...]ris naturalis; The Health of the soul, th [...] concreated aid communicated at first to and with our Nature: the Second he call [...] Gratia medicinalis, medicinale salvatori auxilium; Medicinal Grace, the Souls cure▪ These two differ no less than health an [...] Physick do. This acceptation of Grace i [...] frequent in the Scripture, Joh. 1.14 The Word was made flesh, and dwelt amon [...] us full of Grace and truth, ibid. v. 16. O [...] his fulness have all we received and Grac [...] for Grace, Eph. 4 7. Unto every one of u [...] is given Grace, according to the measure o [...] the gift of Christ &c. This is the [...] The Divine Nature whereof we are mad [...] partakers; 2 Pet. 1.4. The [...] the Image of his Son to which we are pre [...]destinated to be conformed, Rom. 8.29 The [...]; the Image of him that created us, Col. 3.10.

Thirdly; It is used Passively to intimat [...] those actual supplies of ability and strength which from time to time are ministre [...] unto us. This Austin calls adjutorium actio [...]nis, in contradistinction from the forme [...] which he calls adjutorium possibilitatis. This is the import of it, 2. Cor. 12.9; [Page 43] [...]nd he said unto me, my Grace is sufficient [...] thee, for my strength is made perfect in [...]akness. And, Heb. 4.16. Let us there­ [...]re come boldly unto the throne of Grace, [...] we may obtain mercy and find Grace to [...] in time of need. Through this it is [...] we are not at any time tempted beyond [...]hat we are enabled to encounter and un­ [...]rgo, 1 Cor. 10.13. And according [...] the proportion of assistance afforded us [...] this kind, we are more or less vigorous [...] duty, victorious over temptations, en­ [...]rged in our communion with God.

Fourthly, it is made use of to express [...]ose acts and operations of ours, which pro­ [...]eed both from habitual and actual Grace. Col. 4.6. Let your Speech be always [...], with Grace; i. e. Gracious, pious, [...]uch as may appear to be from Grace. Col. [...].16. Singing [...], with Grace in [...]our heart: i. e. after the manner of pious persons. Eph. 4.29. Let no corrupt com­munication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, [...], that it may Minister Grace unto the Hearers; i. e. some spiritual advan­tage. And I suppose the Apostle in his using [...] for Contribution, intended not only to declare the freeness of the donation▪ [Page 44] but to intimate the Principle whence [...] relieving of others should flow; 1 Cor. 1 [...]3. Whomsoever yee shall approve by [...] letters, them will I send to bring [...] your Liberality to Jerusalem. 2 Cor. [...]6, 7. We desire Titus that as he had beg [...] so he would also finish in you [...] the same Grace also. Therefore as ye [...] bound in every thing, in faith, in utteranc [...] and knowledg, and in all diligence, and [...] your love to us; see that ye abound [...], in this Grace also. Nor is it a [...] exception of any import, that [...] occu [...] in other Authors expressive only of benev [...]lence, without relation to a vital renewe [...] principle, whence in order to an acceptatio [...] with God, it ought to proceed: as in tha [...] of Aristole [...]; That is charity, whe [...] he that hath, relieveth him that wants, Rhe [...] lib. 2. cap. 9. For alas! How should they look farther than the Substance of th [...] action, who as they did not throughly un­derstand the corruption of Nature, so they knew nothing aright of the renovation of it. But their use of a word or phrase is no ground for the circumscribing and confi­ning the Holy Ghost in the application of them.

[Page 45]These are all the acceptations of Grace, [...]hich have any affinity to the present [...]ubject. I know not whether all this will [...]ot be called Gawdy Metaphors, childish [...]llegories, Spiritual Divinity, a prating of [...]rases, empty schemes of Speech: But [...]esides that all these acceptations and dis­ [...]nctions have been received by Fathers, [...]choolmen, and Divines of all ages and [...]erswasions; we have found them also [...]arranted by the Holy text: so that to im­ [...]each any one of them, is not only to ar­ [...]aign Divines of all sorts, but to remon­ [...]trate to the Scripture it self. The Terms [...]hen being thus open'd and explain'd: The Question to be debated is, Whether Mo­ral Vertue be all one with Grace? Whether Morality and Holiness be Universally the same thing? Or, whether the whole of that Obedience which we owe to God, be nothing else but the practice of Moral Du­ties? Now the negative is that whereof we undertake the defence and justification in the following Chapters.

CHAP. II.

Several things premised in order to [...] decision and the determination of [...] question. 1. All Moral actions receive th [...] denomination of Good or Bad, from their c [...]formity or difformity to some Rule. 2. [...] alone Rule of Morality is Law. 3. Man o [...]ginally created under the Sanction o [...] Law. 4. The nature of that Law, with [...] manner of its promulgation. 5. Man end [...]ed at first with strength and ability, for [...] observance of all the Precepts of it. 6. S [...]posing an observation of all the duties m [...]kind was obliged to by the said Law, [...] he could have lay'd no claim to immorta [...] and [...]ife without a superadded stipulat [...] from God. 7. The Law of Creation bei [...] ratified into a Covenant, God took [...] therein to secure his own Glory what ev [...] should be the event on mans part. 8. [...] through the fall forfeiting all title to Li [...] abode nevertheless under the obligation▪ [...] the Law of his Creation. 9. Every Law [...] Nature is of an unchangeable obligati [...] 10. A twofold mischief with refere [...] to that Law, arrested mankind through [...] fall. 11. Some knowledg of moral Duti [...] [Page 47] and an ability to perform the substance of [...]hem, still retained. 12. The introduction of a remedial Law, with the relations and duties which thence emerge. 13. The sub­ordination which the Law of Creation is put in to the Law of Grace. 14. Our in­ [...]ptitude to the Duties required in the reme­dial Law, and the Nature of it. 15. Grace communicated to us, to relieve us against this impotency. 16. where ever it is wrought, it is not onely attended with, but it is the principle of all moral Vertue. 17. Through the renovation, and assistance of Divine Grace, such an observation of the com­mands of God is possible, as according to the Law of Faith, doth entitle us to Life.

§. 1. HAving in the former Chapter sufficiently explained the terms, belonging to the question under con­sideration; we now proceed to make a neerer approach to the matter it self. And that what is afterwards to be offered may be the more clearly apprehended; and the lines, measures, & principles of Vertue and Grace the more duly stated: I shall in this Chapter propose and endeavour to esta­blish several conclusions; which, as they are of considerable import in themselves, [Page 48] so of no less influence, to the enlightnin [...] of what we have undertaken.

First then; All moral actions become Good [...] Bad from their agreeableness or disagreeable [...]ness to some Rule, which is as their meas [...] and standard, to which being commensur [...] they appear either equal or unequal. As in m [...]terial and sensible things we judg of the [...] streightness & crookedness, by their agree [...]ment or disagreement to a material rul [...] which is the measure of their Rectitude an [...] Obliquity: so in things Moral, we judg whe [...]ther a thing or action be Good or Evil, b [...] their agreement or disagreement to som [...] moral Rule. For an Action then to b [...] good or bad, it imports two things; th [...] entity of the Action, & the Rule to whic [...] it is commensurate. They greatly mis [...]take who state the mora [...]lity of an action,As Compton doth; de bonitate & malitiâ humanorum actuum, Disp. 89. Sect. 1. N. 4. formally to consist in its being spontaneous, voluntary and free; for though no action can be Moral that is not free; ye [...] its morality doth not lie formally in its free [...]dom. Hence those very Philosophers who made Vertue and Vice to be thing [...] only Arbitrary, founded alone in the ima­ginations of men, did nevertheless ac­knowledg [Page 49] man to be a free agent, and that [...]iberty is inseparable from every Humane [...]ction. Freedom intrinsecally belongs to e­ [...]ery action, as it is an human action; where­ [...]s morality is but partly intrinsecal, namely [...]s it imports and includes the entity of the [...]ction; and partly extrinsecal, viz. as it de­ [...]otes the measure by which it is regulated.

§ 2. The second thing we premise is, That [...]he immediate and formal Rule of Moral [...]ood or evil, is Law, or the constitution of the Rector as to what shall be due. I [...]ant that the fundamental measure of [...]ctions unchangeably Good or Evil, is [...] Divine Nature; and of things and [...]ctions indifferent and variable, the Di­ [...]ne Will: But the formal and imme­ [...]ate Rule of both is Law. No action [...] otherwise Good or Bad, than as it is [...]ther enjoyned or forbidden. It is im­ [...]ossible to conceive any action or omis­ [...]on to be a duty, abstracting from ob­ [...]gation; and it is as impossible to con­ [...]ive obligation, secluding Law. This [...]nd's abundantly confirmed by that of [...]he Apostle John, 1 Epist. chap. 3. ver. [...]. [...]; Sin is the transgres­ [...]on of the Law: An illegality or deviation [...]om law. To which accords that of Paul, [Page 50] Rom. 4 15. [...] Where no Law is, there is no transgressio [...] It is a great mistake (which yet I find to [...] many guilty of) to make either the objec [...] or circumstance of an a [...]ction,In hoc hallucinantur I [...]s [...]ite f [...]re omnes. vid. V [...]s [...]. di [...]p. 57. Compt. dist. 84. Sect. 2. de act. Ham. the rule of its Mo [...]rality; or to constitu [...] them the measure wh [...] we judg an action goo [...] or evil. An action is [...]ot otherwise Goo [...] or Evil with respect to its circumstances then as cloathed with them it is either pr [...]hibited or enjoyned. It is true the cir [...]cumstances of an action, conduce and co [...]tribute towards the discerning and defi [...]ing when it is forbidden & when comman [...]ded; when allowed and when disallowed But still, the Law, permitting and enjoy [...]ning the action in such cases and circum [...]stances; disapproving and prohibiting it i [...] other; is the proper and immediat Rule o [...] its morality.

§ 3. The Third premise it this; that ma [...] being created a rational creature, was u [...]der the Sanction of a law. It is a contra [...]diction for man to be such a creature as h [...] is, and not to be obliged to love, fear an [...] obey God. All creatures according t [...] their respective and several natures, an [...] [Page 51] necessarily subject to him that made them, [...]t is impossible that whatever owes its en­ [...]re being to God, should not also be in [...] suitable subjection to him. Man then [...]eing a Rational creature, must owe God [...] rational subjection; and on supposition, [...]hat his being is of such a Species and kind, [...] necessarily follow's from the constitu­ [...]on of his nature, and his Habitude to God as his Maker; that he should be ac­ [...]ordingly bound to love, reverence and [...]rve him that made him so, this being [...] only Reasonable subjection. But for­ [...]much as not only Pyrrho, Epicurus, &c. [...]f old; but Hobbs and some other wild, [...]theistically disposed persons of late, have [...]anaged an opposition to all natural Laws: [...]ontending that all things are in them­ [...]elves indifferent; that Moral Good and Evil, result only from mens voluntary re­ [...]training and limiting of themselves; and [...]ow that antecedently to the constitutions, [...]ppointments and custom's of Societies, [...]here is neither Vertue nor Vice, Turpi­ [...]ude nor Honesty, justice nor injustice: That there are no laws of Right and Wrong previous to the laws of the Com­monwealth, but that all men are at liberty to do as they please. I say matters standing [Page 52] thus, I shall discourse this head a little [...] amply.

That there have been some, who eith [...] through a supine negligence in not ex [...]cising their faculties, or, through have defiled and darkned their Reasons by co [...]verse with sin, have lost the sence [...] distinction of Good and evil; as well [...] memoir's of ancient times, as the sad [...]perience of our own, do evidently [...] Diogenes Laertius, in the life of Pyrrho [...] us, that he denyed any thing to be just unjust [...], by nature. But that all this were so only, [...], by positive law [...] Custom.

Nec Natura potest justo secernere [...] quum;

There is no difference betwixt what [...] call good, and what, evil, by nature.

[...]
[...],
[...]
[...].

Forasmuch as there are different lawes [...] different places, it thence follows that the [...] [Page 53] [...] nothing in it self, honest or dishonest: but that according to occasion, the same thing, may be sometimes the one, and sometimes [...]he other. In Fragmentis Pythagoreorum, [...]nter opuscula edita a D. Theoph. Gale. Se­ [...]eca (as well as others) chargeth the same [...]pon Epicurus, and saith that therein he will dissent from him; Ubi dicit nihil esse [...]ustum naturâ; where Epicurus affirmeth, [...]hat by nature or natural law there is no­ [...]hing just and honest. And this indeed [...]ecessarily follows from Epicurus his dis­ [...]harging God from the Government of the World. For if there be no Government, [...]here is no law; and if no law there is nei­ther moral Good nor Evil: As Good and Evil are relatives to law; so is law the [...]elative of Government: and all these [...]tand and fall together. With those al­ready produced doth Mr. Hobbs fully a­gree; Ubi nulla Respublica, nihil injustum; where there is no Common-wealth, there is nothing unjust, Leviath. p. 72. Nihil absolutè bonum est aut malum, neque est re­gula ulla communis boni aut mali, à naturâ objectorum petenda; verum à personâ ubi Respublica non est, vel in republicâ a Ma­gistratu: There is nothing good or evil in it self, nor any common law constituting what [Page 54] is naturally just and unjust: but all thing [...] are to be measured by what every man judg­eth fit where there is no civil Government and by the laws of Society, where there [...] one: Leviath. cap. 6. p. 64. Ante impen [...] justum & injustum non extitere, ut quor [...] Natura ad mandatum est relativa, act [...]oq [...] omnis suâ naturâ est adiaphora; Before me entred into a state of civil Government the [...] was not any thing just or unjust; forasmu [...] as just & unjust are the relatives of huma [...] Laws; every action being in it self indiff [...]rent: de cive, cap. 12. Thence he de­fine's sin to be quod quis fecerit, omiser [...] dixerit vel voluerit contra rationem civit [...] ­tis, i. e. contra leges civiles; what-ever [...] man saith, or doth against the laws of th [...] Society, of which he is a member; lib. [...] homine, cap. 14. Sect. 17. Rationis dict [...] mina ex usu hominum leges vocantur, im­propriè vero; cum solum Theoremata & conclusiones sunt, de eo quod ad propriam con­servationem & tutelam aliquid confert, &c. The dictates of Reason concerning vice and vertue, men use to call by the name of Law's but improperly; For they are but conclusions or deductions concerning what conduceth t [...] the conservation and defence of themselves: Whereas law properly is the word of some [Page 55] man who by right hath command over others: Leviath. cap. 15. Now this hypothesis, as false, absurd and thwart to all the first principles of Reason, as it is, being become the darling of too many in those unhappy [...]imes, and those contrary-minded laughed at as easy and credulous persons: We [...]hall first unfold and state the principles upon which our conclusion bears, which will be so many demonstrations of it a priori, and then we will subjoyn some further col­ [...]ateral proofs of it, as so many evidences a posteriori; by which we hope not only to vindicate our selves from the imputation of easiness of belief, and credulity that we are charged with; but withal to declare that we are of another humour than those men we have to do with, who embrace any no­tion how precarious soever, if it do but serve a design.

The Principles then upon which, as so many Pillars, we build our assertion of a natural Law, may be reduced to four. The first is this: There are some things in themselves dissonant and incongruous to the Divine Nature, and that dependence we have on God. The perfections of God are not arbitrary adjuncts, to be put off and on at pleasure: what-ever he is in himself, [Page 56] He is by the necessity of his Nature, and by consequence he cannot approve or disap­prove otherwise than as may be consonan [...] and agreeable to the Attributes of Wis­dome and Sanctity, which are fundamen­tal Laws of his Being. The Holiness o [...] God is that essential perfection of his Be­ing whereby he cannot but act suitably to the Dignity of his own Rational Na­ture. To imagine one thing as congr [...] ­ous to him as an other, is at once to Blas [...]pheme him and to establish contradictions the Philosopher well stiles him, [...]; an eternal Law inclining on eve­ry hand to what is just and equal, Arist. d [...] mundo. cap. 16. There are many thing [...] the goodness and badness of which, de­pend not so much on Gods Will as his Nature. There is that congruity in some things to the Being of God, and that in­congruity in others, that he cannot allow the one and disallow the other, without ceasing to be what he is. That some things are loathsome to him, is not from the de­terminations of his Will, but from the Sanctity of his Essence. Thou art of purer Eyes, than to behold iniquity, and canst not look on evil saith the Prophet, Heb. 1.13. Indeed nothing properly good, is so [Page 57] [...] positive Sanction and Precept, but [...] the result of Gods own being and the [...]bitude we stand in to him, from which [...] can no more swerve than destroy him­ [...]lf, or render rational Creatures unrea­ [...]nable. And if at any time we acknow­ [...]dg the Divine Will the measure of [...]hat is Good and Evil, we do not un­ [...]erstand it with respect to its Soveraign­ [...] and Arbitrariness, but with respect to [...] Sanctity and Holiness: what ever he [...]ills is Good not because his Will is [...]rbitrary and Unlimited; but because [...] can will nothing unbecoming his Puri­ [...]y. The Manichees themselves under­ [...]ood Sin to be so thwart to the Nature [...]f a God that is Good, that they fram'd [...] supreme Evil, to salve the intro­ [...]uction of it. And to suppose all things [...]o be alike equal to the Divine Being is [...]o blaspheme and prevaricate in a degree [...]eyond what they did. The second is this, God creating Man a rational Creature, en­dowed him with Faculties and Powers ca­pable of knowing what was congruous to the Nature of God and his dependance on him, and what was not. We do not say that we are brought forth with actual con­genite notions of Good and Evil; with [Page 58] labels of Vertues and Vices append [...] to our minds. This were to establish [...] Platonick preexistence, and that all kno [...]ledge is by Reminiscency. But our m [...]ning is, that we are furnished with [...] Faculties, which if we exert and exerc [...] in comparing such acts and their objec [...] it is impossible but that we should percei [...] some Acts to be congruous, and others [...] be incongruous: Namely, that it is [...] that we should love God, and uneq [...] that we should hate him. Now that [...] minds can compare Acts and their o [...]jects together, and discern whether th [...] are equal or unequal, is evident from [...] daily operations of our faculties: [...] doth this depend totally upon the [...] but upon the essential rectitude of the [...] which no man can call into questio [...] without razing the foundations of M [...]thematicks as well as of Ethicks; and ma [...] as well say, that the Determinations whic [...] men make upon the plainest Demonstr [...]tions of Geometry, depend not upon th [...] certainty of the rational faculty; as [...] say, that their determinations about Go [...] and Evil do not do so: For the one [...] as connate to the judgment of Reason a [...] the other do. There is that proportion [Page 59] [...]etwixt some acts and their objects, and [...]hat disproportion betwixt others: That [...]hen ever we are led to particular con­ [...]derations of them, and to pronounce [...] sentiments concerning them; we can­ [...]ot without a manifest repugnance to our [...]atural Powers judg otherwise of them, [...] have other conceptions about them, [...]ut that the one sort of Acts (whether [...] Mind, or Tongue, or Hand) are un­ [...]qual, and the other equal. These are [...]hat the Philosophers called [...], [...]mmon Notions, [...], anticipations, [...] previous Images of the moral Beauty [...]nd congruity, or deformity and incon­ [...]uity of things in the Soul. The [...], the rudimental Princi­ [...]les of the Rational Nature. There are [...] well indubitable maximes of Reason, [...]elating to Moral Practice, as there are [...]elating to Science: and these not only stand [...]pproved by the universal assent of man­ [...]ind, but they demonstrate themselves [...] their agreeableness to the Rational Fa­culty. It is not more certain, that one [...]nd the same thing cannot at once be and [...]ot be; That if equals be substracted from equals, what remains will be equal, &c. Than that of whomsoever we hold our Be­ings, [Page 60] Him we ought to love and [...] That God being Veracious, is to be bel [...]ved; That we are to do by others as [...] would be done by our selves, &c. And [...] deny these is in effect to deny Man to [...] Rational: for as much as the faculty [...] call Reason exists in us necessarily [...] these Opinions. Now these Deter [...]nations, being the natural Issues of [...] Souls in their rational exercise, in co [...]paring Acts with their objects, come to [...] called ingraft-Notions and universal C [...]racters wrought into the essential Co [...]position of our Nature. And besid [...] what we have already said, to demonstra [...] that some things being compared [...] the Holy Nature of God, and the rel [...]tion that we stand in to him, are intri [...]secally Good, and other things intrins [...]cally Evil: It is inconsistent with the pe [...]fections of the Divine Being, partic [...]larly with his Sanctity, Veracity an [...] Goodness, to prepossess us with such con [...]ceptions of things, as are not to b [...] found in the Nature of the things them [...]selves. In a word the Effluvia of the ran [...]kest and worst-scented Body, do not strik [...] more harshly upon the olfactory-Orga [...] nor carry a greater incongruity to th [...] [Page 61] Nerves of that Sensatory; than what we call moral Evil, doth to the intellectual [...]aculty. [...]; There are some things [...]hich all men think, or wherein all Men agree, and that is common Right or In­ [...]ustice by Nature; although Men be not [...]ombined into Societies, nor under any Covenants one to an other, Arist. Rhet. [...]ib. 1. c. 14. Paul tells us that there are some [...]hings which are [...], [...]ust and honest in all Mens esteem; Rom. 12.17.

The Third is this; There being some [...]hings so differenced in themselves with [...]espect to the nature of God, and our de­pendance on Him (as hath been said;) and man being created capable of knowing what is so: It is impossible that God should allow us to pursue what is contrary to his na­ture, and the Relation we stand in to him; or to neglect what is agreeable to it, and the dependance we have on him. God having made man with faculties, necessarily judg­ing so and so; He is in truth the Author of those judgments, by having created the faculties, which necessarily make them; Now what-ever judgment God makes a [Page 62] man with, must needs be a Law from Go [...] given to man, nor can he ever depart fro [...] it, without gainsaying, and so offendi [...] Him that was the Author of it. Whatev [...] judgment God makes a man with, concer [...]ing either himself, or other things; it [...] Gods judgment: and whatsoever is his judg [...]ment, is a law to man, nor can he negle [...] or oppose it without sin; being in his exi [...]stence made with a necessary subjection t [...] God. Such and such dictates being the n [...]tural operations of our minds, the Being [...] essential Constitution of which, in right re [...]soning we owe to God; we cannot but estee [...] them the voice of God within us and conse [...]quently his law to us: saith Sr. Ch. Wolseley o [...] Scripture belief, p. 32, 33. And accor [...]dingly these dictates of right Reason, wit [...] the Superadded act of conscience, are stile [...] by the Apostle, the Law written in the heart [...] [...]; For when the Gentiles whic [...] have not the Law, (viz. in writing as the Iews had) do by Nature (natural light or the dictates of right Reason) the things con­tained in the Law (those things which the Moral Law of Moses enjoyned) these ha­ving [Page 63] not a Law, (a written Law, or a Law [...]ade known to them by Revelation) are a [...]aw to themselves: (have the Law of na­ [...]re congenite with them) Which shew the [...]ork of the Law (that which the Law in­ [...]ucts about, and obligeth to) Written in [...]eir Hearts: Rom. 2.14, 15. [...]; [...]ational Beings do in the light and through [...]he conduct of Reason, chuse and pursue [...]ose very things, which the law of God the Divine Law) enjoyns: saith Hierocles [...] vers. 29. Pythag. Sponte sua sine lege [...]dem, rectumque colebant; as the Poet [...]ith. Hierocles in vers. 63. & 64 Py­ [...]hag. assigns this as the cause, why men [...]o not escape the entanglements of lust [...]nd passion; [...]; because they attend not [...]o those common notions of Good and Evil, which the Creator hath ingrafted in rational Beings for their conduct and Government. It is of this Law that Austin speaks lib. 2. confess. cap. 4. Lex Scripta in cordibus ho­minum, quam ne ipsa delet iniquitas; A Law written in our hearts, which sin it self cannot expunge. The Fourth and last is this; that God for the securing the honour of [Page 64] his own wisdome and sanctity, the ma [...]taining his rectorship, and the preservi [...] the dependance of his creature upon hi [...] annexed to this natural Law, in case of me [...] failure a penalty. The constituting of the [...]ness of punishment, on supposition of tra [...]gression, doth so necessarily belong [...] Laws, that without it they are but lu [...]crous things. Tacite permittitur, quod [...] ultione prohibetur; what is forbidden wit [...]out a Sanction, is silently and implicitely a [...]lowed; Tertul. Where there is no penal [...] denounced against disobedience, Gover [...]ment is but an empty notion. The fear [...] punishment is the great medium of Mo [...] Government: coaction and force wou [...] overthrow obedience, and leave neithe [...] room for Vertue nor Vice in the worl [...] The means of swaying us, must be accom [...]modated to the nature of our Beings; no [...] are rational Creatures to be otherwise in [...]fluenced than by fear and hope. Th [...] Ruler governs at the courtesie of his Sub [...]jects, who permits them to rebel with im [...]punity. Not only the Poets placed [...] in the throne with Jupiter for the punish­ment of disobedience: but the Moralist makes Justice to wait on God, to avenge him on those that Transgress his Law; [...] [Page 65] [...]; [...]lutarch. As every law then must have penalty annexed to it, so had this of which [...]e are treating: [...]: Their conscience also bearing [...]itness, and their thoughts in the mean [...]hile accusing or else excusing one another; saith the Apostle, Rom. 2.15. of those [...]ho were under no other law than the law of Nature. Conscience is properly nothing else; but the soul reflect [...]ng on it self and actions, and judging of both according to Law: Now where there is no Law there [...]an be no guilt, and where there is no possibility of guilt, there can be no Con­ [...]cience. If there be no Law constituting [...]he distinction of good and evil in mens [...]ctions; Men can neither do well nor ill: and by consequence can have no inward [...]lace in the sense of one course of life, nor r [...]gret on the score of an other. Where all things are indifferent, there can be nei­ther joy nor grief through reflection on what a man doth. All the actings of Con­science relate to a Law under the Sanction of which we are, and suppose a judg who will accordingly proceed with us. Whe [...]e [...]here is sense of guilt and a fear of wrath, [Page 66] it is impossible to preclude Law, the [...] being the Correlate of the other. [...] that there is in every man a Conscience a [...] ingraft apprehensions of hope and fear, [...] need no other proof of it, than to appe [...] every mans experience.

Conscia mens ut cuique sua est, ita [...] cipit intra
Pectora pro facto spemque metumque

The Apostle tells us that even [...] who had no revealed Law, and were [...] filled with all unrighteousness, fornicat [...] wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; [...] were full of envy, murther, debate, [...] malignity, &c. [...] Yet they knew the judgment of God ( [...] which God hath constituted and deno [...]ced) that they who commit such things worthy of death; Rom. 1.29, 30, 31, 3 [...]

—Prima est haec ultio qu [...]
Judice nemo nocens absolvitur, imp [...] quamvis
Gratia fallacis Praetoris vicerit urnam.

It is in reference to this Law, that [Page 67] [...]ings either not determined by humane [...]ws, or not cognizable by them, men [...] themselves in the closets of their own [...]asts. The actings of Conscience with [...]pect to Law, and our being judged by [...], and that there is such a faculty in us, is propossest with the sence of the distin­ [...]ion of good and evil, and accordingly [...] in way of fear or hope, suitably to [...] course that is steered, and that these [...] apprehensions are neither acciden­ [...]al frights, nor delusions cunningly [...] upon Mankind, may be further [...] by a brief consideration of these [...] things: (1) The perplexity that haunt's [...] soul on the commission of secret sins, [...]ich as others do not know so they can­ [...]t punish. Now even in reference to these [...]oth the sinner:

Nocte dieque suum gest [...]re in pectore testem.
—Day and Night opprest,
Carry about his Witness in his Breast.

(2) the lashes and scourges the sinner [...]eel's for such things as the world is so far from punishing, that it doth rather reward [...]hem. The crimes committed with the ap­plause [Page 68] and gratulation of the world, do [...] escape the censure and condemnation conscience.

—Qui stimulos adhibet, torre [...] flagellis.

(3.) That those who through Pow [...] and Greatness, have been above [...] punishment of others, have yet fou [...] tormentor in their own Breasts. I [...] alleadg no other Witness, than Tibet [...] his confession in an Epistle to the Sen [...] Dij me Deaeque omnes pejus perdant, [...] quotidiê me perire sentio: Let all [...] Gods and Goddesses torment me worse, [...] I every day feel my self Tormented; [...] eton. in his life: and likewise Tacitus [...]. lib. 6. cap. 6. Who take's occas [...] thence to add, that if the Hearts of [...] Lay in view, we should see [...] they are Flayd and Torn with lashes [...] scourges: si recludantur Tyrannorum [...], posse aspici laniatus & ictus.

—Tormentaque sera Gehennae Anticipat, patiturque suos mens con [...]manes.

[Page 69](4.) That when Men are going out of [...]he World, and the reach of punishment [...]re; That then the fear of punishment [...]ost revives in them. The approach of [...]eath which sets out of danger from [...]en, fills with the greatest trembling with respect to punishment from God. [...]pon this account among others is Death [...]lled the King of Terrours; Job 18.4. [...], of all Dreadfuls be most Dreadful, as Aristotle stiles it.

Hinc metus in vita paenarum pro male­factis est insignibus insignis.

(5.) That those who with all their S [...]ill, endeavour to disband their fears, cannot get rid of them. Hence that of Cotta in Cicero concerning Epicurus; [...] quenquam vidi, qui magis ea quae ti­ [...]enda esse negaret timeret; mortem dico & Deos: I never knew one (saith he) that stood more in fear of those things, which he reckoned to minister no ground for it, namely Death and God, then he did; de [...]at. Deor. lib. 1. And these are the foun­dations upon which the existence of a natural Law bears: and from which so [...]ar as the brevity we are obliged to stu­dy [Page 70] would admit, we have endeavo [...] to demonstrate it.

I shall now add some further consid [...] ­tions, for the Existence of a Law of [...] ­ture, as so many Arguments there posteriori; by which I hope to mak [...] further appear that the contrary hy [...]thesis is both absurd and mischiev [...] The first shall be the universal conse [...] Man-kind in this matter. Where [...] there at any time been a Nation or Peo [...] that did not acknowledg a distinctio [...] Good and Evil? They might and often prevaricate in the defining [...] was Good and what was Bad; but [...] Universally agreed in this, that all thi [...] were not naturally alike. Of this [...] Plato de legib. Cicero de legib. & de off [...] ­is; & Arist. Rhet. lib. 1. cap. 14. omit others. We meet with no N [...] ­on so barbarous, but we find ackn [...]ledged Principles, as well as exces [...] instances of Morality amongst the [...] Now de quo omnium Natura consenti [...] verum esse necesse est; Wherein all [...] agree that cannot be otherwise than [...] saith Cicero. [...] every Man holds to be so is so: old He [...]clitus. Nor is it sufficient to reply that: [Page 71] [...]en have not at any time been nor yet [...] of this mind. For athing is not the less [...] because some either through sottish­ [...]ss, wilfulness or depravedness of Mind [...]pose it. There have been some who h [...]ve contradicted the first Principles of Science, affirming that one and the same t [...]ing may at the same time be, and may not [...]e; as well as there have been others [...]ho have opposed the first Theorems of Moral Doctrine. Nor is it improbable, [...] that some people talk so out of cros­ness, as loving to run Counter to the common sence of Mankind. And for o­thers, I question not but they are sunk into this bruitishness, either from supine­ [...]ess and sloth in not exercising their facul­ [...]ies to consider the habitude of things, and to compare Acts with their objects; or else through too great familiarity with Sin, which hath tinctured their Souls with false Colours, and filled their Mindes with prejudices and undue apprehensions. [...]: Now we are to judg of what is natural from those who live according to the dictates of Reason; and not from those whose Minds are deprav­ed by Lust and Passion: saith Aristotle [Page 72] lib. 1. Polit. That is the Law of Natur [...] [...]; Which prevails among Men gove [...]ned by Reason, not that which prevails [...]mongst p [...]rsons debauched. Mich. Ep [...] ad Nicomachia. For as Andronicus inf [...]meth us; [...]: The [...] of Nature is unchangeable among such [...] are of a sound and healthful Mind, [...] doth it make any thing to the contrar [...] that men of Distempered and depraved [...]d [...]rstandings think otherwise; for he dot [...] not mistake who call's Honey sweet, thoug [...] sick and diseased Persons be not of [...] judgment. The Second is this; that there be no Law of Nature constitu­ting what is Good and what is Evil, an [...]tecedently to Pacts and Agreements a [...]mongst Men, then all humane Laws sig­nifie in Effect just nothing. For if there be no antecedent obligation binding to obey the just Laws and constitutions of the Commonwealth, then may they at any time be broken without Sin: and Rebellion will be as lawful as obedience, [Page 73] [...]or needs any one to continue longer [...]oyal, that he hopes to mend his con­ [...]ion by turning Rebel. Nor doth it [...]ffice to plead Promises, Pacts and Co­ [...]enants to the contrary. For if it be not [...] it self a duty to keep ones Word, and [...]o perform what a man hath promised, [...]hen are promises but W [...]ths to be bro­ken at pleasure, and serve for nothing [...]ut to impose on the easiness of good-natured men. According to this Hypo­thesis we are discoursing against, no Man is bound to be honest if he can once hope to promote his interest by being otherwise: and we may be either True or False, Just or Unjust as we find it most for our turns. All Humane Laws, suppose the Law of Nature; And seeing Reve­lation extends not to every place, where Humane Laws are in force, that Civil Laws do at all oblige, must be resolved into Natural Law. Obligation of Con­science with respect to the Laws of Men, is a conclusion deduced from two Pre­mises; whereof the First is, the Law of Nature enjoyning Subjection and Obedi­ence to Magistrates in whatsoever they justly command; The Second is, the Law of Man under the Character of Just; [Page 74] from both of which results the obligat [...] of Conscience to such a Law. In a [...] if there be no Natural Law, then [...] ever hath either Wit enough to [...] Humane Laws, or Power and Strength [...]nough to despise them, is innocent; [...] do men deserve punishment for be [...]wicked; only it is their unhappiness [...] they are weak, and cannot protect the [...]selves in their Villanies. The Third [...] this, supposing all things originally [...] in themselves indifferent, as there can no sin in disobeying the justest La [...] of the Common-Wealth, so no [...] can offend by despising and transgr [...]sing the Laws of God. Yea, precluding [...]tural Law, it is not possible for God to [...] an obligation upon us by any positive La [...] and that upon two accouts: (First) in [...] after the clearest Revelation and prom [...]gation of it, I am still at liberty to belie [...] whether it be a law from God or not. U [...]less it be in it self good and a duty to belie [...] God, (because of his Vera [...]ity) whensoev [...] he declares himself; it will be still a ma [...]ter of courtesy to believe it to be a [...] from God notwithstanding that it come a [...]compained with all the evidences and m [...]tives of credibility, that a Divine declar [...]tion [Page 75] is capable of being attended with. (Se­ [...]ondly) because supposing we should be [...] courteous, as to believe God to be the Author of such and such Laws, & that it is with all his will & command, that upon our Allegiance to our maker and the greatest [...]enalty that angry God can inflict, or finite creatures undergo, that we be found in the practice and pursuit of such and such things: I say, supposing all this, it still re­mains a matter of liberty and indifferency whether we will obey him or not. For if there be not any thing that is Good in it self, nor any thing that is in it self bad; then it is not an evil to despise the Autho­rity of God, nor is any man obliged to o­bey him further then he himself pleaseth and judgeth for his interest; the Authori­ty of God being, according to the princi­ples we are dealing with, a meer precarious thing.

The Fourth and last that I shall name is this; If all things be in themselves ad [...]a­phorous, and good and evil be only regulated by customs and civil constitutions; Then if men please they may invert the whole moral frame of things, and make what the world hath hitherto thought Vertues▪ to be adjudged Vices, and Vices to come into the place of [Page 76] Vertues. Yea a man may be bound to [...] his opinion of Truth, Honestly, Ver [...] Justice, &c. both according as he chan [...]eth his Country, and according as the [...] Laws of the Nation where he lives [...] alter: So that what is Truth to day, [...] be Falshood to morrow; and what he [...]tertain's as Religion in one place he [...] detest as Irreligion in an other: Nor it more lawfull to worship Christ in En [...]land, than it is to worship Mahomet in [...] Levant: Nor do the idolatrous heath [...] adore a stock or a stone, upon weaker re [...]sons or worse motives, than we do the Go [...] that made the World. For as Tully sai [...] well; Si populorum jussi [...], si Princip [...] decretis. si sententiis judicum jura co [...]stituerentur; jus est latrocinari, jus adulte­erari, si haec suffragis aut scitis multitudi­nis probarentur: If justice be regulated b [...] the Sanctions of the People, the decrees o [...] Princes or the opinions of judges; then it is lawfull to rob, to commit adultery, when [...]soever these things come to be established by the acts and ordinances of the civil power. de Legib, lib. 1. This inference is so na­tural and clear, that the Authors of the Hy­pothesis we are examining have granted no less. The Scripture of the new Testament [Page 77] is there only Law, where the civil power hath made it so, saith Hobbs, Leviath. cap. 24. The Magistrate can only define what is Scrip­ [...]ure and what is not; saith the same Author [...]n the same Book. That the Scripture ob­ligeth any man is to be ascribed to the Au­thorty of the civil power; nor are we bound to obey the laws of Christ, if they be repug­nant to the Laws of the Land; idem ibid. All which a man of any Reason as well as Conscience, must have an abhorrency for. And indeed these things pursued to their true issues, will be found so far from be­friending any Religion, that they are sha­pen to overthrow all Religion. And this for the third pr [...]mise, that man was created at first under the Sanction of a Law.

§ 4. The Fourth thing we are to declare, is the nature of this Law that man was crea­ted under the obligation of; and the man­ner of its Promulgation. Learned men do wonderfully differ, and some of them stran­gely prevaricate, in stating the Measure of natural Law and in defining what Laws are natural. Some would have that only to be a natural Law; quod Natura docuit omnia ainimantia, which beasts are taught by instinct. Iustinian, lib. 1. Institut. [Page 78] But though the consideration of [...] things in Brute creatures, to which the [...] are directed by instinct, may conduce [...] instruct men what becomes us that are Ra [...]tional; particularly Parents may learn th [...] obligation they are under to their childre [...] and the care they ought to take for the [...] education and subsistence in the worl [...] from the [...] or Natural Affection whi [...] we find in Brute Animals, to their young yet this is no certain, much less sufficie [...] Indication of Natural Laws For Bru [...] creatures being under no Law at all, it [...] unreasonable and ridiculous to judg of [...] is a Law of Nature, and what is not, [...] them.

[...].

They devour one another because they hav [...] no right nor law amongst them: says He­siod. Beasts may do hurt but they canno [...] sin. They may exercise cruelty in pur­suing the satisfaction of their appetites but they cannot be injurious. And there­fore when God commands that the bea [...] which hath killed a man should be put to death, Exod. 21.28 It is to shew the horridness of the fact of murther, not the [Page 79] [...]ligation of the beast to Law; nor is it [...]tended as a punishment to it, but to de­ [...]re Gods detestation of the like in us. [...]here are many things generally practised [...] the Brute Animals, the imitation of [...]hich would be abominable in men. That which in us would be incest, is not so in them: For I suppose there are few of Dio­genes and Chrysippus mind; who, from the example of Cocks Treadding their own [...]ames, in fer the Lawfulness of the like co­p [...]lations in Men. The Poet hath determi­ned much better in this case, then the a­bove-named Philosophers.

—Coeunt amimalia nullo
Caetera delicto, nec habetur turpe Iuvencae
Ferre patrem tergo; fit equo sua filia con­junx.
Ovid.

Others judg of the Law of Nature, by the consent and harmony of Mankind: what men universally agree in is accounted by some, if not the only, at least the best medium of arriving at a sure knowledg of the law of nature. In re consensio omnium gentium jus natura putanda est. The con­sent of all nations in any thing, is to be thought the Law of Nature; Cicero. 1. Tus­culan. [Page 80] But neither is this a sure indicat [...] of Natural Laws; nor shall a Person [...] attain to satisfaction in this method of p [...]ceed. For the Laws and customs of [...] have been so different and oppos [...] that what hath been accounted v [...]ce one nation, hath been held for vertue [...]nother. The Athenians punished theft, [...] the Egyptians & Lacedemonians allowe [...] When God forbade the Iews the imitat [...] of the customs of their neighbouring N [...]tions, He reckon's up vile and abomina [...] lusts as their national customs; Deut. [...] 30, 31.14.1, 2.18.10, 11. There [...] been vices not only countenanced, but [...] commended by Laws in the wisest and b [...] policyed Commonwealths of the Worl [...] In the Third Place, the dictates of rig [...] Reason are contended for by others to [...] the Law of Nature. Lex est ratio insita [...] Naturâ, quae jubet ea quae facienda sunt, pr [...]hibet que contraria Law is natural: Reas [...] commanding what ought to be done, [...] forbidding the contrary: Cicer. de Legi [...] lib. 1. But I cannot acquiesce in this ac­count either. For right Reason is rathe [...] the instrument of discerning the Law of N [...]ture, than the Law of Nature it self. The Law of Nature is not so much a Law which [Page 81] [...] nature, prescribes unto us, as a law [...]scribed unto our nature. It is the table which this law was originally written, and exercising of which in its rational func­ [...]s we came to understand it. Law [...]he will of the Rector signified, but this [...] knowing and perceiving of it: and [...]his our Reason was originally [...] But Alas! Reason is now so [...] by sin, and misled by prejudice, [...] and self-interest; that it frequently [...] Evil Good, and Good Evil.

Hence men pretend to right Reason in [...] contradictory: Nor do we in any [...] find the great improvers of [...] at greater variance one with another, [...] about what is just and what is unjust. [...] man determining as humour, [...], lust, or profit swaye's him: but [...] of this chap. 3. Though there be [...] evident congruity betwixt some acts [...] their objects, that if we exercise our [...] in comparing the one with the [...], it is impossible but that we should discern it: yet there are others, wherein we arrive at the knowledg of that propor­ [...]n only be deduction, and long haran­ [...]es of argumentation. By the Law of [...] then we understand the whole Law [Page 82] given by God at first unto our Natures: Whereof our Reasons exercising them­selves in the consideration of the Nature of God, our own Nature, the relation we were created in to him, the habitude we stood in to our Fellow-Creatures, and the Divine method and order in the pro­duction of all; was a sufficient Instrumen­tal conveyance while we abode in the state of Integrity. It is true, since the fall it is otherwise, many Dictates of the Law of Nature being grown inevident, obscure, subject to controversie, not easy, if at all, to be defined, without the advantage and assistance of Scripture-light. There are various degrees of evidence in those things which relate and appertain to the Law of Nature: in some the Moral congruity be­twixt the Act and the Object is manifest & apparent; in other it lye's more remote and out of view: So that now the only sure, universal, perfect System of natural Law, is the Decalogue of Moses: This is a true draught of what by the Law of Creation we were under the Sanction of; A transcript and written impression of the whole Originall Law; not at all differing in its nature from what was imposed on man in innocency; but distinguished only in the [Page 83] the manner of its Promulgation; that which was formerly internal and subjective, be­ing now external and objective. But though we affirm that never any since the fall did so act his Reason, as to compre­hend Universally the Law of Nature, with the bounds and consequences of it: yet we also readily grant that our Reason at first was a sufficient Instrument of con­veying the knowledg of the whole Law of Nature to us. Seeing then that no man can justly come under obligation by a Law, unless it be sufficiently promulgated, pro­mulgation being an essential qualification of a Law; for Law can have influence upon none that do not know it. Leges quae con­stringunt hominum vitas, intelligi ab om­nibus debent: Those Laws which have in­fluence upon mens lives ought to be under­stood by all, say Civilians. We shall in the next place therefore endeavour to lay open the several fountains, in which the whole Law of Nature was at first fully understood.

Now there were Five ways which our Rational Faculties exercising themselves in, should before that sin had darkned the mind and disordered the creation, have attained to a full and perfect knowledg of [Page 84] the Law of Creation by. The First was by considering the nature of God and the ha­bitude we stood into him, as our Creator, Pre­server and Benefactor. There was in man­kind an ability of soul, of ascending unto the knowledg of the invisible Being, and First cause, by the effects of his Power Wisdome and Goodness; of knowing as much of God as was needful for our liv­ing to him and our dependance on him in that state and under that Covenant that we then stood. From which there could not but have resulted a clearer and more dis­tinct knowledg, than we can now imagine, of that love, Gratitude, Reverence which we owed to him; and these would have been attended with a recognition of our own nothingness, a dependant frame of spirit, and a resignation of our selves and all things to his will. The Second was the consideration of our selves, that amphibious kind of Nature we are made with (it is Hiero­cles's expression) being allied in our consti­tution and make to several Species of creatures. And the observing the Subor­dinations of the parts of our Composition one to another: That the Animal and sen­sitive powers are to be governed by the Intellectual and Rational. From which [Page 85] would have arisen a plenary and steady knowledg of the unsuitableness of earthly things to constitute us happy. That our Blessedness lay not in the pleasing of our senses, and gratification of our Animal part. In a word, that the Soul was to be principally regarded, and that Reason was to be our only conductor: which I suppose was enough to have precluded all intempe­rance▪ incontinence and, the subjecting of our selves to the Animal life &c. A third way was, an ability of penetrating more fully (than now we can) into the natures of the several creatures, their fabricks, order­ly operations, various instincts, relations both to us and one an other: in all which as in a glass, much of our duty, had we a­bode in the state of integrity, would have become plain and evident to us. If not­withstanding the fall and all that darkness and confusion which hath ensued there­upon; We abide still directed to the crea­tures for the learning many parts of our duty: See Iob. 12.7. Prov. 6.6. Jer. 8.7. Deut. 32.11. Should we not have been capable of learning more from them and that more clearly and distinctly, when there was no tincture of sin or shadow of darkness on the mind, nor fallacious [Page 86] medium in the whole Creation. A Fourth was, an ability of mind of knowing the Re­lation which we stood in one to another. How that we were not self-sufficient, but brought forth under a necessity of mutual assistances: and that we could not subsist without the mutual aids of love and friend­ship. That we arose not like mushromes out of the earth, nor were digged out of parsly-beds, neither came into the World by a fortuitous Original; That we sprung not Originally from diverse Stocks, much less were created at first multitude of us to­gether: But that the whole race of man­kind was propagated from one single Root. That each of us was intended as a part of the Rational System, and made for society and fellowship. From all which we should have been able by easy deductions and short dependencies to have argued out the whole of those duties we are under the Sanction of, either to parents, children, or neigbours. In a word, doing as we would be done by; which epitomiseth the whole duty that one man oweth to another, would have proved the natural issue of the foregoing considerations. The Fifth and last way was, through observing Gods or­der and method in the Works of Creation. [Page 87] As the works of God themselves were to be instructive unto man not only of the Being, Power, Wisdome, and Goodness of God, but of the Moral duties that God expected from us: Psal. 19.1. Rom. 1.20, 21. So God's Order and Method in the Production and Disposal of his Works into their several Relations and Subordinations, was likewise intended to be instructive to mankind, and it was the will of God that we should learn our duty thereby. Thus the Preeminence of the man over the Woman is confirmed by the Apostle from the order of the Creation; I suffer not, (saith he) the Woman to usurp over the man, for Adam was first formed then Eve; 1 Tim. 2.12, 13. Christ himself establisheth Mono­g [...]my upon the same foundation, namely God's Method of Creation at first. From the beginning of the Creation he made them Male & Female; for this cause shall a Man cleave to his Wife, and they two shall be one flesh; Marc. 10.6, 38. Thus also with respect to God's order in the Creation, did the obser­vation of the Sabbath become a part of the Law of Nature: And on the seventh Day God ended his Work which he had made; and he rested on the Seventh Day from all his Work which he had made; and God [Page 88] blessed the Seventh Day, sanctified it, because that in it he had rested from all his work,See Dr. Owen of Sacred Rest; Ex [...] ­ [...]cit [...]. which he had created and made, Gen. 2, 2, 3. All these in­stances do fully evidence, that there was both a sufficiency of objective light in the things themselves to instruct man into his duty, and of Subjective light in man to discern & improve it to the ends aforesaid. Nor doth it at all weaken what is said, that the Light of Reason as it reside's in us now, seems defective and insufficient to direct us unto the knowledg and observance of these things. For, it is enough, that we have proved them to have been originally de­signed by God for these ends; and that there is ground and evidence in the things them­selves to conduct to them. Nor is the ex­ [...]ent and effects of Primitive light to be measured by the [...] or Ruines of it which remain in us since the fall. Alas! our present light is faint, Languid, Scant, Superficial, Distracted, leaving us under uncertain guesses, dubious hallucinations, exposing us to fallacious and delusive ap­pearances, unable to minister due indica­tions of vertue and vice, even in such things, as, according to All, come under [Page 89] the Sanction of the Law of Creation: Witness the Idolatry, Uncleanness, Rapi­ne &c. that Nations and Persons pretend­ing to the greatest improvement of Reason and natural Light, have lived in. But Original Light was pure, clear, cer­tain, not tinctur'd with false images and colours, nor darkness by lust and sensuality; capable if it had been exercised and atten­ded to, of preserving us secure as well from Doubt, as Error.

§ 5. God having thus prescribed a Law to man, the Notices of which lay suffici­ently plain in the exercising of his facul­ties: He also endowed him with a proportio­nate strength for the observance of the precepts of that Law. That a law be obli­gatory it is necessary that it enjoyn nothing but what is possible to be performed. That none can be bound to impossibilities is an indubitable axiom. It is not consistent with the Wisdome, Justice, Righteousness, and Goodness of God to command that which we never had strength for the performance of, nor can he call men to account for what was never in their power to do. He can­not expostulate with men for their sins, if he created them destitute of the means and power of obedience. In such a case we [Page 90] might be pitied, but could not be blamed. In a word, this were to charge our sins upon God in a degree beyond what the as­serters of fate and destiny ever did. I may usurp therefore what the Philosopher say's in the like case: [...]; to ascribe our wickedness to necessity, is to justifie our selves and to con­demn God: Sal [...]st. de diis & mundo cap. 9. An ability then of answering the Law of Creation, man must at first have been en­dow'd with. What this was, and the na­ture of it, is next to be declared. God then having created man, He not only made him a Rational Creature furnished with a soul of an immaterial and immortal nature, which was his essential perfection, and did perfect him in genere Physico, as he was such a particular being in the universe: which may be stiled the Natural Image of God in man: Being in its spiritual immor­tal nature a representation of the Divine nature, and is accordingly alluded to under that notion by the Holy Ghost, Gen. 9.6. But besides, He impressed a Rectitude on the soul of man, perfecting him in Genere Morali, as he stood in Relation to God as his Rector and Governour, and was under [Page 91] such and such Laws. Lo this only have I found, that God made man upright, Eccles. 7.29. i. e. endowed with divine Wisdome to understand his duty, and with perfect abi­lity to perform the same. And this is prin­cipally intended Gen. 1.26. Where God saye's Let us make man in our Image, after our own likeness. For the likeness of man to God consists chiefly in purity: Be ye Holy, as I am holy, 1 Pet. 1.15. And be ye per­fect even as your Father which is in Hea­ven is perfect: Mat. 5.48. A moral re­semblance can in both these places, only be understood. And that this is the pri­mary & proper intendment of that phrase, our being created in the Image of God; The Apostle Paul in more than one place, doth confirm: Put ye on the new man which after God is created in Righteousness and true Holiness, Eph. 4.24. with Col. 3.10. And this we may call the Moral Image of God in man, not only because it consists in Moral perfections, answerable to what we conceive in God under that no­tion, but especially because it adapts and qualifies us for the observance of the Law of Morality appointed us as the Rule of our living to Him. Now this Moral Image, though it was no part of our essence, nor [Page 92] belonged inseparably to our faculties, nor did our being Rational creatures consist in it; yet it was not only concreated with Humane nature, consentaneous to it, and perfective of it; but was in the state of Creation naturally due: considering the end man was made for, and the duties which were required of Him. Had God sent man out of his hand without this Divine impressed I­mage,Si hoc adjutorium vel Angelo vel homini, cum primùm facti sunt, D [...]fuisset, quoniam non talis natura facta erat, [...]t sine Divino adjutorio posse [...] manere si vellet, non uti que suâ culpâ ce­cidissent. Adjutorium quippe defuiss [...]t sine qu [...] manere non possent. Aug. de corr. et Grat. cap. 11. he had not had that goodness which 'tis necessary every work of God should have, & which the Holy Ghost tells us that every work of God had: And God saw every thing that he had made, and behold it was very Good. Gen. 1.31. That is every Creature was not only fur­nished with such perfections as might Ren­der it a Being of such a species and kind in the creation; but besides was endowed with whatever might qualify and adapt it to the ends, that it was made for. In this superadded rectitude & image (I mean su­peradded with respect to our essence; but Na­tural as well as connate with to the respect [Page 93] State and Law we were made in and under) con [...]isted our ability of living to God, in an observance of the Law of Creation, commonly stiled the Law of Nature. Nor could man even in the State of innocency have so lived to God in the single strength of his Rational faculties as to be accepted with him. Natural Grace (I stile it so not with respect to the kind but the dueness) was as necessary in order to our observing the Law of Creation then, as Supernatural is to the obeying the Law of faith now. This I would have due heed given to, for­asmuch as there will be considerable occa­sion to improve it afterwards.

§ 6. Though man was created under the Sanction, and in the knowledg of a Law and every way qualified and adapted for the keeping of it, had he not been wanting to himself: Yet if we consider him precisely as under the Law of Creation without any farther stipulation from God; he was the meer object of Gods Dominion, made at his will and for his pleasure, and annihilable by the same will, to which he owed his subsistence. I readily grant that Gods Dominion which is nothing else but a right of disposing his Creatures according to his own pleasure in way's becoming Holiness, Justice & Good­ness, [Page 94] did no way Warrant him to damn them without the intervention of sin. For this were to inflict a torment on them out­weighing the Good of existence which he had given them. If God should create a Creature only to make it miserable, in stead of bestowing a benefit on it, He would do it the greatest injury he possibly could. Though bare existence be a term of per­fection, yet when it is over-ballanced with an extream and infinite misery it becomes an unhappiness, and can be no longer eli­gible. While we are then asserting the Soveraignty of God, we would not affront his Justice and Goodness. Now to reduce an innocent Creature into a worse estate than that out of which it was taken, we can­not but esteem it inconsistent both with the Justice and Goodness, which essentially be­long to the supreme Being. Nor can we once admit into our thoughts that he whose ways are weight and measure, can inflict on any an extream and endless torment, with­out the consideration of an antecedent crime: There is nothing more repugnant to the notions of justice and equity than to damn a harmless Creature, meerly out of will and pleasure. The Savage allowan­ces in the Heathen Worship, have been [Page 95] alway's reckoned a just impeachment of the Deity of those they adored; and shall we admit a worse Barbarity to be an appen­dage of the Dominion of the Holy Jeho­vah? God forbid! Nor do I in the second place deny, but that tranquillity and sere­nity of mind would have necessarily accom­panied Rectitude and Obedience. Light is not more inseparable from a Sun-beam, than pleasure and peace of Soul is from a state of purity and uprightness. The o­bedient Soul [...]asts its own acts, and keeps a Jubilee in its self. Had there been no o­ther reward annexed to Obedience, the pleasure of [...]cting conformably to Reason would have been a sure and momentous one. Whatever calamities God in So­veraignty might have inflicted on us, and whatever comforts of life, he could have taken from us, yet anxiety and remorse would never have arrested us. Yea the continual recognition of that nothingness, out of which by the arbitrary fiat of our Creator we were taken, would have ren­dred all our thoughts of reducibleness back into that state again, both satisfactory and delightful. The apprehensions of our disposableness at the will of our Maker, would not have grated upon our innocent [Page 96] mind. In a word, we should have esteemed the very observance of the Law of Crea­tion, a considerable reward. And the in­nocent soul should have been satisfied from its self. For as the Poet saith.

Ipsa quidem virtus sibi pulcherrimamer­ces. Sil.

It is likewise confessed that there is a great condecency, and admirable suitableness in it to Divine Wisdome and Goodness; that a perfect, and spotless innocency should be attended with a happy and unafflicted life: But yet all that carries such a proportion is not necessary. For there is an admirable condecency to Divine Sapience and Benig­nity, that the whole race of mankind should not be utterly lost: that God should not loose active glory in way of thanksgiving and praise from a whole Species of Rational Creatures: and yet I suppose it will not be affirmed that God was obliged to re-instate fallen man in all the circumstances of that felicity, which by his disobedience to the Law of his Creation he had forfeited. Surely no property of the Divine Nature had been impeachable, had God suffered Mankind to perish under the guilt they had [Page 97] wilfully contracted. All that I contend for then is this, that had not God ratified the Law of Creation into a Covenant, and thereby set bounds to his own Dominion, we could have had no foundation of ex­pecting any thing from him, after the ut­most & exactest of obedience, save the plea­sure of having performed it. There is no property in God which antecedently to his own pleasure, obligeth him to remunerate our obedience; nor precluding a Covenant could we warrantably have expected any such thing from him. First, not his Justice ▪ For (1) There is strict Distributive Justice observed, where God taketh no more a­way than he freely gave. Every superior Authority, if it hath not abridged it self▪ by some promise or Covenant, hath still liberty to revoke all the free issues of its own power and bounty. Where benefits are freely bestowed, there the Donor re­tain's a right of rescinding his own dona­tions. God having therefore made us of his Meer will, and for his pleasure Rev. 4.11. He had full power arbitrariously to destroy the Beings he had conferred. The whole interest that we have in our selves, is from the free gift of our maker, and by resuming what he hath given, he may cancel that [Page 98] interest when he pleaseth. Nor is God's donation of being to the Creatures any silent contract (as is alledged by the Au­thor of Deus Justificatus, p. 266) That He will never destroy them: For we have the experience of Brute Animals to the con­trary, who in the vertue of their Beings conferred on them, cannot plead a title to continuance. Perceptive capacities they have as well as we, though not of that kind; and are allowed Gratifications suitable to them; yet this hinders not, but that with­out the least fault in them or injury in God, they are at once deprived both of the De­lights of the Animal life, and of Being it self. (2) For Commutative Justice, there neither is nor can be any such thing be­twixt God and Creatures. For that sup­poseth an equality between what is perfor­med and what is received; and only there, where there is an equalitas dati & accepti can Commutative Justice take place. We can therefore neither plead nor enter a claim upon this foundation, unless we could have brought as much benefit to God as we had received as well in his conferring our beings on us, as in the after-reward. Gods raising us out of nothing by his alone power and goodness, and furnishing us with those [Page 99] faculties which made us fit for Moral Go­vernment, did sufficiently entitle him to the utmost service we could perform, with­out laying him under any obligation in point of Justice of remunerating it when we had done. Merit from a Creature to its Creator is a Contradiction not only to Scripture, Job. 22.3. &. 35.7. but to Reason. I am sure that of the Apostle is enough to render it indubitable; For if A­braham were justified by Works, he hath whereof to glory, but not before God; Rom. 4.2. Justification could not be strictly merited, no not by works. The very Law of Works excluded glorying before God: and let me add, that the Law of Faith ex­cludes not only that, but also glorying be­fore men; which is enough if carefully attended to, to overthrow some of the chiefest Pelagian and Arminian notions.

Secondly, not his Mercy and Goodness; forasmuch as all the effects of Goodness, (as Goodness is taken for Beneficence and Bounty, which is the only proper notion of it here) are free and elective. And indeed it is necessary it should be so: Because no kindness can oblige, but what proceed's from one who is vested with Power and Right not to bestow it. Nor do we pay [Page 100] thanks for what is derived to us by the ne­cessity of an Agents Nature, but only for what arriveth with us from the choice of his will. Though the Holy and Rational nature of God determines him as to Moral Good, without the least infringement of his liberty; yet the case is not the same in reference to Physical good; There being no property in God obliging him to pro­duce all the creatures he can, and to do them all the Good he is able: But the ap­plication of his Omnipotence and exercise of his Beneficence depend as to both on the choice of his will. To drive the opposite notion to its issue, would prove the world to have been if not from eternity, at least many Myriads of ages sooner than it was? and that every Creature is as perfect, as it was possible for Omnipotent power and infinite Fecundity to make it, and that that there are no more Creatures possible than what are already: with a hundred ab­surdities more, which contradict not only Reason but Experience.

I shall Subjoin but one thing farther in proof of the conclusion I am establishing, but in my Opinion such a one as may stop the mouths of the Amyraldians in this par­ticular, who affirm that for the bare per­formance [Page 101] of what was ante­cedently our duty,Amyr [...]ld. in A­nimadve [...]s. Speciai­bus contra Spanhe­mium. part. 4 ad Ero [...]ema 13. God is not only obliged to conti­nue our existence, but to recompence us with the re­ward of Heaven and Eternity. And it is this, namely that Gods Covenanting with mankind in the state of integrity to reward them provided that they persevered in their dependance on him, by obedience to the Law of their Creation: This doth abun­dantly testifie that He was under no antece­dent obligation to it. For the very Na­ture of a Covenant and Covenanting suppo­seth the thing Covenanted about to be free and in his power to do or forbear that makes the Covenant. Where there is an Eter­nal and natural necessity, a Covenant is not only superfluous but absurd. What-e­ver accrueth to us either from intrinsick E­quity, or Essential Goodness, we neither need, nor do derive it from Graunt and A­greement. Now that there was such a Covenant no man that hath read either his Bible, and believes it, or a System of Divi­nity, though but a Dutch one, can deny▪ However see Heb. 8. from the sixt verse to the end, and Heb. 12.24. All essentials to the constitution of a Covenant, occur in [Page 102] that transaction, as might be with ease e­vinced, if we did but suspect that it came into question. Now all this as it declares the wonderful condescension of God, that He should humble himself to set bounds to his own Dominion, and come to terms of agreement with a puff of precarious breath, and a little enliven'd dust. So it enhanceth the guilt of the first transgression, being as well against Love as Soveraignty, an act not only of Rebellion but Ingrati­tude.

§ 7. Seventhly: God having ratified the Law of Creation into a Covenant by annex­ing a Reward to the observance and keep­ing of it: He took special care therein for the preserving and securing his own Glory what-ever should be the Event on Mans Part. Though he trusteth us with the man­nage of our own happiness, yet he would not trust us with the mannage of his Glo­ry. In case we should make an invasion on his Honour, by transgressing the Law of our Creation, and violating the terms prescribed us; He did not leave himself to the necessity of retrieving it, but pro­vided for it in his first transaction with mankind. Though▪ the felicity of the Creature depend necessarily on its obedi­ence, [Page 103] yet the Glory of God doth not. God having then in the Covenant of Works provided for the exaltation of the Glory of his Faithfulness, and Goodness in the rewarding of man, had he persevered in obedience to the Law appointed him; He likewise in the same Covenant, by constituting a penalty proportionable in his Justice to the demerit of sin; took care for the securing of his Glory in the exaltation of his Holiness, Righteousness, Rectorship, &c. in the punishment of man, supposing him to transgress the terms prescribed him. However things should fall out, no prejudice was to ensue there­on to God's Glory. Had he therefore left us to stand or fall accordingly as we should demean our selves in reference to the tenor of that Transaction; Though misery would have fallen out to be our Lot, yet no d [...]triment would have arisen thereby to the honour of Gods Perfecti­ons of Government. On the one hand then, as man, supposing his perseverance in integrity, had gro [...]nd afforded him of ex­pecting good things from God on the ac­count of his Fidelity and Righteousness; his promise making life a debt, though even in that case God did not become properly [Page 104] a debtor to us; but what he was of that kind, was to his own Veracity▪ Which made one say Reddit debita nihil debens, donat debita nihil pendens. So on the other hand, being once fallen the whole of our recovery can have had its rise in nothing but in the free and meer mercy of God. For had he left us in our forlorn state, He had lost no more honour by us, than he doth by the Angels who kept not their first Habitation.

§ 8. Man falling and thereupon forfeiting all that title to life which he had settled on him by the Covenant we have been discoursing of, abode nevertheless still under the obli­gation of the Law of Creation. For that resulting from the Nature of God, and the Nature of man, and the relation that man stood in to God as hi [...] Creator, &c. so long as those continue, the Sanction of that Law must continue. What-ever obliga­tion ariseth upon us from our Nature must be as perpetual as our Nature is. Now though the Lapse hath deprived us of the Rectitude of our Natures, yet it hath ta­ken nothing from us that is essential to our constitution as men. Though we be trans­formed into Beasts and Demons in a Moral sense, yet not in a Physical. Though we [Page 105] have lost our Souls legally in that they are obnoxious to, & under the wrath of God; yet we are not brought forth deprived of them, nor of any thing essentially belong­ing to them. Such a loss would render us unfit for Moral Government, nor should we be so any longer men, or that species of the Creation, which supposing that we are at all, we necessarily must be. What we have said in proof of a Natural Law §. 3. is all applicable to that we have now in hand; so that all farther confirmation of it might have been here superseded. But having met with a late Book of one Mr. George Bull, stiled Harmonia Apostolica, and therein with some principles altogether incon­sistent with the proposition we have now asserted; it will not be amiss to prosecute it a little farther. Now the doctrines in the foresaid Author, subversive of what we have been affirming are mainly two. (First) That there is no Law of God now re­quiring perfect obedience, or that any man is bound to live free from sin; and his reason is, quod justitiae Divinae repugnet, ut quis­quam ad plane impossibilia▪ (sub periculo pre­sertim aeternae mortis) teneatur. Because it is repugnant to the Righteousness of God, that any man should be obliged to that which [Page 106] is impossible. And that a spotless, sinless life is so to every one in the circumstances we now stand. Dissertat. poste [...]. cap. 7. p. 105, 106.

(2.) That there is no Law now in being, threatning future death, but the Law of Faith: That the promises and threatnings of the Law of Moses were only Temporal and Earthly, p. 210. If either of these be true, that which I have affirmed must needs be false. A refutation of these is so far then from being superfluous, that it is a necessary service to the design which I have in hand.

First then, If there be no Law now in Being, threatning future death, but the Law of Faith, then of all men in the world, the condition of the Heathen is the most eligi­ble; And the enjoyment of the Gospel is so far from being a priviledg, that it is a snare. For, seeing where no Law is, there is no transgression, Rom. 4.15. Then, for as much as the Gentiles are not under the obligation of the Law of Faith▪ it na­turally follows, that what-ever courses they pursue, or what-ever sins they are found in the practice of; yet eternal Death they are not obnoxious to. Instead therefore of pit­tying and bewailing the condition of the [Page 107] Gentiles for their want of the Gospel, we ought rather to lament their case that have it, being brought only thereby under a ha­zard of Damnation, which antecedently they were free from.

Secondly, If there be no Law threatning Eternal Death, but the Law of Faith, then is there no such thing as forgiveness and re­mission of sin in the world. The Reason is plain, because all pardon supposeth guilt; nor can any properly be discharged from that to which he is not obnoxious. Now the Gospel denounceth damnation only against final Impenitency and Unbelief; As on the one hand, therefore, these are neither pardoned, nor pardonable; so on the o­ther hand, if there be no Law threatning eternal death, besides the Gospel, then is there no other sin that we either need, or are capable of having forgiven; And by consequence there is no such thing as remission of sin in the World.

Thirdly, If there be no Law threatning eternal Death, but the Law of Faith, then Christ never dyed to free any from wrath to come. For it is non-sence to say that he hath freed us from the Curse of the Gospel; yea, it is a Repugnancy, unless you will introduce another Gospel to re­lieve [Page 108] against the terms of this; nor will that serve the turn, unless you likewise find a­nother Mediator to out-merit this. If Christ then have at all delivered us from wrath to come, it must be that of the Law; and if so, there must be a Law besides the Gospel, that denounceth future wrath, vid. Gal. 3.13.

Fourthly, To say that there is no Law now in Being, requiring perfect Obedience, and that no man is bound to live wholly free from Sin, is in plain English to affirm a contradiction. For, There being nothing that is sin, but what is forbid, or what we are under obligation against; (all sin being a transgression of some Law, 1 Joh. 3, 4.) To say that no man is bound to live free from sin, is to tell us that he is not obliged to that, that he is obliged to. See Mr. Tru­man his endeavour to rectifie some prevail­ing opinions, &c. pag. 4. & 14. I know well enough that some of these Conse­quences are things which the foresaid Au­thor doth plainly detest, but they are na­turally the issue and birth of his Assertions. For I would not fasten an odious inference upon any mans discourse, if the cohaesion were not necessary and clear. I reckon it an Unmanly, as well as an Unchristian [Page 106] thing to wring conclusions out of others premises. Nor would I drive the doc­trine of any, farther than it is apt to go, and with the greatest Gentleness may be led.

§. 9. That we are still under the San­ction of the Law of Creation hath been al­ready demonstrated. That which come's next to be declared, is, How that every Law of nature is of an Unchangeable obligation. A late Author tell's us, that there are Rules of Moral Good and Evil, which are altera­ble according to the accidents, changes and conditions of humane life. Eccles. polit. p. 83. And accordingly a power is pleaded to belong to the Magistrate over the consci­ences of men, in the essential duties of Mo­rality; Eccles. polit. 68. And it is affirmed that He hath power to make that a particular of the Divine Law, that God hath not made so; ibid. p. 80. And from the power of the Magistrate over the consciences of men in Moral vertues (which our Author tell's [...] are the most weighty & essential parts of Re­ligion) the like power is challenged as apper­taining to him over our consciences in refe­rence to Divine Worship; Eccles. polit. p. 67, 77, 78: & def. & continuat. p. 356, 357, 358, 371. &c. I shall not at present med­dle [Page 110] with his Consequence, nor indeed can I without a digression: Though I think it easy upon the Grounds that he states the Al­terableness of Natural Laws, to evidence the impertinency and incoherence of it. For if either the matters of worship be already stated by God; or if God should have pre­cluded the magistrate by a declaration of his will, as to medling in this matter, and bequeathed that trust into other hands; his Consequence falls to the ground. But it is the Antecedent that I am to deal with, and it is some comfort to me, that there are men of equal learning with the foresaid Author, who have been of a perswasion widely dif­ferent from his. Grotius a person of some account in his day, and who will continue so while Learning is had in reputation, judged otherwise in this matter: Est au­tem jus naturale adeo immutabile ut ne a Deo quidem mutari queat; De jure Belli & Pacis lib. 1. cap. 1. §. 10 Natural Right (or Law) is so unchangeable that it cannot be altered by God himself. And that it may appear that he mean's those Rules of Good and Evil, which have reference to con­tracts and positive Laws, and in some sence depend upon them, He adds a little after; fit tamen interdum ut in his actibus de quibus [Page 111] j [...]s Naturae aliquid c [...]nstituit, imag [...] quaedam mutationis fallat incautos, cum reverà non jus naturae mutetur quod immutabile est, sed res de qua j [...]s naturae constituit, quaeque mu­tationem recipit. It comes to pass sometimes, that a kind of resemblance and shadow of change in those acts which the Law of nature hath determined and unalterably fixed, im­poseth upon unwary men, While indeed the Law it self is not at all altered as being im­mutable, but the things which the Law re­gulates and about which it determines, un­dergo an alteration. ibid. It was of this Law that Philo gives us this character: Lex corrumpi nescia, quippe ab immortali natur [...] insculpta in immortali intellectu; A Law neither subject to decay nor abrogation, being engraven by the Immortal God into an immortal soul. [...]; in men or not distracted there remains an immovea­ble unalterable Law, which we call the Law of Nature, Andron. [...]; Nothing determined by Nature can be any wayes altered. Arist. lib. 2. Eth. Hence he stiles the Laws of Nature [...], immoveable and immutable. For the further demonstration of this; we de­sire [Page 112] it may be observed, that Law is nothing else but the will of the Rector constituting our duty, [...]: Hi­erocl. made known to us by sufficient promulgation. Now in order to the obtaining a significa­tion of the Rector's will enacting what he exacts of us. (1) a Rational faculty and a free use of it is necessary, that being the only instrument by which we discern what the will of the Soveraign is. Hence, meer ideots, children, and men totally deprived of the use and benefit of Reason are under the actual Sanction of no law, Not that there is any cessation, abrogation, or alteration of Law thereon, but because through the incapacity of the subject, it was never the Rector's will in those circumstances to ob­lige them. For as Plutarch say's, there are some [...]; distempers & infirmities of soul which do Unman us. (2) Our obliga­tion as to the exercise and discharge of some Natural duties, is by the Law of Nature only bound upon us, on supposition of some fundamenta or relations and circumstances that we are brought into. Now though the thing be alway's a duty in it self, and the Law requiring it unalterable, yet an­tecedently [Page 113] to my entring into that Rela­tion or those circumstances, it was not my actual Duty. For example, the Law com­manding a Husband to love and cherish his Wife, or a Father to provide for his Chil­dren, is immutable and invariable; though in order to my being under the sanction of it, as to the actual discharge of these du­ties, it is needful that I have a Wife and a Child: Si creditor quod ei debeo acceptum ferat, jam solvere non tencor, non quia jus Naturae desierit praecipere solvendum quod de­beo, sed quia quod debeb am deberi desiit: If a Creditor should forgive me what I owe and am justly indebted to him, I stand no longer under Obligation to payment, not because the Law of Nature ceaseth to command me to pay my just debt, but because that which was a debt is no longer so, Grot. de jure belli & pacis, lib. 1. cap. 1. §. 10. By what hath been said 'tis easie to discover how weak and im­pertinent the Ecclesiastical Politician is in all the instances he brings of Natural Laws alterable as circumstances do require▪ or as the Magistrate thinks fit. It is well, if upon every times changing our condition, or upon every humour of the Magistrates altering the civil penalty of a moral crime, the Law of Nature must change also. Yea, [Page 114] according to the rate that any Laws of Na­ture are alterable, I will undertake to prove that they are all so. We readily grant that a man by putting himself into new circum­stances, or new relations, is thereon oblig­ed to performance of many duties which as so circumstantiated he was not bound unto before, but we altogether deny that, there­fore the Laws of Nature suffer the least al­teration; and the Reason is, because they did never bind to such duties, but on sup­position of such Relations and Circumstan­ces. In a word, the whole Law of Nature bearing upon the Nature of God, and the Nature of Man, while these are unchange­able, it is unchangeable. It is strange that we should envy the Pope to dispense with a Natural Law, if the Magistrate at pleasure may.

§ 10. That mankind notwithstanding the fall abode still under the obligation of the Law of Creation, and that every Precept of the Law of nature is of an unchangea­ble & unalterable obligation, hath been al­ready unfolded and made Good. The evils which overtook us through the lapse in refe­rence to that Law, come next to be disclosed and manifested. And besides what befel us in relation to it, as it was ratified into a [Page 115] Covenant, whereof I shall not now treat; there were two mischiefs arrested us in re­ference to it, under the reduplication of its being a Law; namely, Darkness and Ignorance, that we do neither clearly nor fully discern it; and Weakness and Enmity whence we neither can nor care to keep it.

First Darkness and Ignorance; and these are grown upon us two ways. (1) From an Eclipse of primigenial light in the mind it self. The Soul at first was a lucid orb, em­bellished with all the Rayes of light, cre­ated [...] in knowledg, Col. 3.10. in [...] true holiness, Eph. 4.24. that is, in sanctitate voluntatis veritatem [...]mplectentis; Cocc. [...], Holy with Wisdome, Plat. in theat. But Alas! an Universal darkness hath arrested us: [...]; The eye of the Soul is drowned or immersed in the barbarick gulf of Igno­rance: Plat. de Repub. lib. 7. The con­created beams of light are lost and vanish­ed. There remain none of those Radii So­lis, or lucida tela diei. What the Poet says of dyed Wool

—Nec amissos colores
Lana refert medicata fuco;

[Page 116] is applicable to the Soul deprived of the I­mage of God, and tinctur'd with Sin and Lust. [...], There is none that un­derstandeth, Rom. 3.11. We are born [...], without Understanding, Rom. 1.31. [...] blind, 2 Pet. 1.9. [...], darkned or benighted in our minds, Eph. 4.8. [...], darkness, Joh. 1.5. Our light is not only too dim to preserve us from the mistakes of Error and Ignorance, but abus­eth us with false representations. The Minde is now like an Icterical Organ, which imagineth all the objects of sight tinctur'd with false colours. (2.) This Ig­norance of the Law of Nature, may be partly ascribed to that disorder and confusi­on which have invaded the Creation; [...]. The Creature is sub­jected to Vanity, Rom. 8.20. An [...] or disorder hath overspread the Universe through the Curse inflicted upon the Cre­ation for mans sin; objective mediums are become in a great measure both dark and fallacious. They have lost much of that fulgor, by which the glory of God's Wis­dome and Goodness, and our duty to Him, our selves, and others was at first visible. The present calamitous scene of things not only with reference to Brute Animals, but [Page 117] inanimate Beings doth strangely impose up­on our easie and distorted minds.

Secondly, Weakness and pravity hath arrested us in all our faculties, so that we are neither able nor careful to observe and perform what we know. Impotency and corruption cleave to our very Natures, by the loss of that Rectitude which was concreated with us, and impressed upon our faculties; the subordination and subjecti­on of the appetite to Reason, is in a great measure lost likewise; so that the animal life doth now sway us; our passion doth both baffle our Judgment and enslave our Wills, we are at once not onely weak, but corrupt; Impotent and averse to Good, and propense and disposed to evil. As darkness doth naturally ensue on the with­drawment of light, or as lameness doth ne­cessarily attend the interruption of the Loco-Motive-faculty; so doth inability and aversation to good, and positive inclination and adaptedness to evil, ensue on the loss of that Rectitude which disposed us to live to God. Ungodly and without strength, is the just and due Character of every one of the Posterity of Adam. But more of this chapt. 4.

§ 11. Notwithstanding the Ignorance, [Page 118] Darkness, Weakness, Corruption, &c. that man was thus sunk into; yet retaining still his Faculties, he retain'd likewise some knowledg of the Duties he was obliged to by the Law of Nature, and in the vertue of his abiding, still endowed with Intellective and Elective powers, he continued likewise able for the performance of the substance of these duties, and that in his own strength. A promptitude, readiness, and facility of act­ing in reference to these, is what we com­monly call Moral Vertue. And in many of them did some of the Heathen excel. It were to be wished, that as to Graveness of deportment, Amiableness of Conver­sation, Moderation in the pursuit and use of the Creatures, Acquiescence in the dis­pose they were brought into, Candor, Fi­delity, Justice, &c. We who pretend our selves Christians did but equal them; And as appears by what Paul asserts of himself, The Pharisees were eminent in many of the instances of Morality; Hence what he expresseth, Phil. 3.5. by being in refe­rence to the Law a Pharisee; he stiles v. 6. Being touching the Righteousness of the Law blameless. And now I must either contradict the Apostle, or take the liberty of differing from a late Author, who not [Page 119] onely assumes a confidence, wherein none have preceded him, of divesting them from all title to Moral Righteousness, but at­taques withal, and that in a very pert and clamorous manner, the Wisdom, Honesty, and Conscience of a Learned man, for but presuming to say that the Pharisees were a People Morally Righteous: See def. & continuat. p. 350, 351. Go thy way (saies he) for a woful guesser; no man living be­side thy self could ever have had the ill for­tune to pitch upon the Scribes and Pharisees for Moral Philosophers, &c. This I dare say, that on what-ever evidence the Pharisees are condemned in their claim to Moral Righteousness, there is the same reason why the Philosophers should be cast also. Did the Pharisees paraphrase the Law, as regarding only the external act, without deriving the Sanction of it to the mind, in­tention, and disposition? The Heathen Moralists were no less guilty herein, than they; which made Tertullian say of their Moral Philosophy, non exscindit vitia sed abscondit; it cutteth not off, but covereth vice [...], lib. 3. cap. 25. See Rom. 7.7. I bad not known Lust, except the Law had said, thou shalt not Covet. Were the Pharisees defective in the true end of obedience, de­signing [Page 120] instead of Gods glory, ostentation and applause? The best of the Philoso­phers were herein also criminal, which made Austin say, that cupiditas laudis hu­manae, was that, quae ad facta compulit mi­randa Romanos. Pride had as much lea­vened the Spirit and way of the Philoso­pher, as of the Pharisee. What-ever gros­ser vices they abandoned, Pride was conge­nial to them. Hence Antisthenes seeing a Vessel wherein Plato's Vomit lay, said, I see Plato's bile here, but I see not his Pride; meaning that his Pride stuck closer to him, than to be vomited up. Curius, though he supped upon roots, yet Ambition was his sauce. Diogenes in censuring Plato's Pride by trampling on his Carpets, discovered his own. Did the Pharisees pretend to communion with God? Did not the Phi­losophers the same? What else was the meaning of Socrates's Demons? Did not the most eminent of them neglect the con­duct and guidance of sober reason, and ad­dict themselves to Magick and Divination! Witness as well Pythagoras as those of the new Academy. But to wave the further prosecution of this. An ability, notwith­standing the fall, of discerning some consi­derable part of our duty, and of perform­ing [Page 121] it as to the substance and material part thereof, was never gain-sai'd by any who understood whereof he spake, and what he affirmed. This we also acknowledg to be in it self desireable, praise-worthy, of won­derful advantage to humane societies, and that which seldome misseth its reward in this World. However it is always thus far useful to its Authors, quod minus puniantur in die judicii, that I may use a saying of Au­gustines, lib. 4. contra Julian. cap. 3.

§. 12. Man having brought himself into the condition of weakness and corruption already declared; and having by sin lost all title to life in the vertue of the Cove­nant first made with him; yet still conti­nuing under obligation to all the duties of the Law of Nature, and obnoxious to the Wrath and Curse of God upon the least faileur: God might here have left him, and have glorified himself in the same way and method upon the posterity of Adam, as he hath done upon the Angels that sinned. No property of his nature, no word of pro­mise bound him to the contrary. The terms of the first Covenant being violated, all was devolved upon the Soveraignty of God again. If an end was not to have been put to obedience, by the immediate [Page 122] destruction and perishing of the Creature; yet at the least an end was put to God's ac­ceptance of any Moral service from the seed of Adam; and they lay under an ut­ter incapacity of performing any such ser­vice as might with respect to the nature and quality of it be accepted with Him. Matters being thus, God out of his Sove­raign pleasure, and infinite free Grace, pro­posed a Remedying-Law, treating with us upon New terms, and giving us a New standing in a Covenant-Grace. And here­in he engaged his Veracity, providing we complyed with the overtures now made us, for the pardoning of our sins, the deliver­ing us from Wrath to come, and the stating us at last in the happy enjoyment of him­self. Now in the vertue of this transaction, there arose New Relations betwixt God and us, with new duties thereon. So that henceforth the Law of Creation was but one part of the Rule of that obedience we owed to God, the condition of the New Covenant making up the other part of it. Whoever then shall now state the whole of Religion in Moral duties, bids a plain de­fiance to the Gospel, either by telling us that there is no Remedial Law at all, or that the terms of it are universally the same [Page 123] with the terms of the Old Covenant. Of this complexion are several expressions in a late Author, viz. That Religion, for the substance of it, is the same Now, as it was in the state of Innocence. For as then the whole duty of man consisted in the practice of all those Moral Vertues that arose from his Natural Relation to God, so all that is super­induced upon us since the fall, is but helps and contrivances to supply our Natural de­fects, and recover our decayed powers, and restore us to a better ability to discharge those duties we stand engaged to by the Law of our Nature, and the design of our Creation. So that the Christian Institution is not for the substance of it any new Religion, but onely a more perfect digest of the eternal Rules of Nature and Right Reason. All its additions to the Eternal and Unchangeable Laws of Nature, are but onely means and instruments to discover their Obligation, Def. & Conti­nuat. p. 315. That there are Duties to which we stand obliged by the Law of Faith, which we were not under the di­rect, immediate Sanction of by the Law of Creation; yea, the repugnancy of them to our Original state, and the habitude we were at first placed in to God, shall be after­wards (God willing) demonstrated, cap. 3.

[Page 124]§ 13. The Relation and habitude of the Original Law to the Law of Faith, is that which bespeaks our next enquiry. The present existence of neither of them can be called into question; for, without the o­verthrowing the Nature of God, the Na­ture of Man, and the Decalogue of Moses, we cannot suspect the Being and Obligati­on of the first. Nor can the existence of the second fall under debate, without dis­claiming the Gospel, not only in all the conditions of it, but our hopes by it. A consistency betwixt them must also be granted, it being unbecoming and repug­nant to the Wisdom of God to keep in e­stablishment two several Laws, whereof the one is wholly subversive of the other; nor can Subjects in justice and equity be at one and the same time obliged to Laws which neither in their demands nor designs are consistent one with another.

The Apostle hath long agoe determined this: Do we then make voyd the Law through Faith? God forbid; yea, we establish the Law, Rom. 3.31. [...] make voyd: [...] signifies inutilem, inanem, ignavam, omnibus viribus destitutam reddere; to ren­der idle, fruitless, destitute of all binding power, to evacuate the obligation of a [Page 125] thing, [...]: That through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, Heb. 2.15. [...] we establish; legem sta­tuimus, vulg. stabilimus, i. e. firmam & efficacem reddimus; Bez. We fix and settle it in its Sanction and force. Think not that I am come to destroy the Law (saith Christ) I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil, Mat. 5.17. [...]: whereas [...] signifies to dis­solve the obligation of the Law, to abolish and abrogate it; [...], to over­throw the Democratie or popular Govern­ment; Homer. [...], leges tollere, to e­vacuate or cancel Laws often in Greek Au­thors. So [...] being put in opposition to [...], signifies to maintain the obli­gation of the Law; consistent then they are. Yet coordinate they can not be, their terms being not only different but opposite. It is true each of them in their own kind, sense and way, requires perfect obedience; For no Law can remit what it self exacts: but then it is only perfect obedience to its own demands. And with respect to its own terms the Gospel is as strict as the Law. As the one denounceth Eternal death to all [Page 126] those who transgress its terms, so doth the other to all those who violate its. He that [...]ailes in Repentance from dead works, Faith towards Jesus Christ, and sincere o­bedience to the Moral Law is left as reme­diless by the Covenant of grace; as he that fails in obedience to the Law of Crea­tion is brought and left under the curse by the Covenant of Works. Only the terms of the one are not so severe and strict as the terms of the other; The Remedying Law being purposely introduced for the pardon­ing our trespasses against the Original Law. The Law threatens death absolutely, repent or not repent: The Gospel threatens that the legal curse shall be executed except we repent. And herein they are not only so distinct and different, but distant and oppo­site in their demands the one to the other; that whoever pleads on a personal fulfilling the terms of the one, is not at all capable of pleading on the terms of the other. The Subject of justification by the Original Law must be one perfectly innocent; The man that doth these things shall live by them, Rom 10.5. Whereas the Subject of justi­fication by the Remedying Law, must be supposed a sinner and a criminal; They that be whole need not a Physician, but they that [Page 127] are sick: I am not come to call the Righ­teous, but sinners to repentance, Mat. 9.12.13. The Original Law both as it was first Subjective in our natures, and as it is now Objective in the Decalogue to our natures, requires perfect obedience: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine Heart, and with all thy Soul, and with all thy Strength; Deut. 6.5. Moses describeth the Righteous­ness which is of the Law that the man which doth those things, shall live by them; Rom. 10.5. And accordingly in case of the least faileur, it denounceth eternal death; Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the Law to do them; Gal. 3.10. Nor can sin­cere obedience give any title to life, by the Law of Creation: all the Right that it states us in to happiness is by the Law of Faith. The obedience which gives a claim to life by the Original Law, must be per­fect, and perpetual as well as sincere: See­ing then none of the sons of Adam even in their best state, doth good and sinneth not, Eccl. 7.20. 1 Kings. 8.46. But in many things we offend all; Jam. 3.2. And if we should say that we have no sin we deceive our selves, and the truth is not in us; 1 John 1.8. It Naturally follow's that by the Deeds [Page 128] of the Law, there shall no flesh be justified in God's sight, Rom. 3.20. But that as many as are under the works of the Law, are un­der the curse, Gal. 3.10. The Papists do here grosly erre, by affirming that Mankind is still able perfectly to keep the Original Law. But in order to this they are neces­sitated to hold that some sins are in their own Nature venial, and that they are not contra sed praeter legem, against, but besides the Law; Bellarmin. lib. 4. de justif. cap. 14. The whole of which as it is false, so it is absurd and non-sensical. For if they be against no Law, they are not at all sins, but acts in themselves indifferent and Law­ful. And if they be violations of any Law of God, i. e. if they be at all sins they de­merit eternal death; That being the pe­nalty annexed by God to the breach of e­very command; Rom. 6.23. Gal. 3.10. Deut 27.26. Rom. 2.9. Besides did we remain able to fulfil & observe the Law of Creation perfectly, there could be no place nor room for the Law of Grace; For (as the Apostle saith) if there had been a Law given, which could have given life, verily Righteousness should have been by the Law; Gal. 3.21. It being then impossible that they should be Coordinate, it remains that the [Page 129] one lye in a subordination to the other. And seeing that the Gospel in all its super-structions supposeth the Original Law still in Being, though not Universally to the same ends that it first served; and for as much as the Law of Faith is provided and introduced of God, to minister relief a­gainst the Law of Nature; it likewise ap­pears that the Original Law is now brought into a subserviency and subordination to the Remedial-Law. How and wherein this is, shall be farther laid open.

First then; Our Lord Jesus hath in the Gospel adapted the Decalogue (which is a compleat transcript of the Natural Law) to be the alone measure of Moral Rectitude and Obedience. Though the Gospel strengthen the Duties of Morality by new Motives, and improve them upon New Principles, yet it no where gives us any New Precepts of Moral Goodness. It is true, Christ once and again, particularly in the fifth of Matthew, vindicates the Moral Law from the corrupt glosses and flesh-pleasing expo­sitions of the Scribes and Pharisees, who had restrained and perverted it from, and besides the meaning of the Law, and the intent of the Law-giver; But he no where superinduceth any New Moral Du­ty [Page 130] that was not designed in the Sanction of it at first. He hath retrived the old Rules of Nature from the evil customs of the World, and rebuk'd the false expositions put upon the Decalogue by those who both then, and for a considerable time before sat in Moses's Chair. But he hath no where made new additions to them by putting his last hand (as some men take upon them to say) to an imperfect draught. And in­deed, to affirm that the Decalogue was an imperfect and defective edition of the Na­tural Law, is to assert that which no way ac­cords with the design of God's Wisdom and Goodness in giving it. For God's in­tendment in giving the Law of the Ten Commandments, being to relieve us a­gainst the Darkness of Moral Good and E­vil, which had seized us by the Fall; we must suppose it a sufficient draught of the Original Law of Morality, otherwise we must conclude it not proportionable and adequate to the end it was given for, which to assert, is no less than an impeachment of the divine Sapience, Faithfulness and Goodness. Nor doth the bringing up such a report upon the Moral Law, accord with that account which the Scripture eve­ry where gives of it; The Law of the Lord [Page 131] is perfect, Psal. 19.7. Not onely essenti­ally perfect, in respect of its purity and ho­liness, but integrally in respect of its pleni­tude and fulness. As it is in nothing su­perfluous which it ought not to have, nei­ther is it deficient in any thing that it ought to have. Thy Commandment is ex­ceeding broad, Psal. 119.96. This it could not be, if it were not a perfect mea­sure of all Moral Duties. Shall I add that the institution of New Moral pre­cepts seems not at all consonant to the de­sign that Christ came upon. The Holy Ghost entirely allots the giving of the Law to Moses, telling us that the work, errand, and business of Christ was of another Na­ture: The Law came by Moses, but Grace and Truth came by Jesus Christ, Joh. 1.17. Christ's work was to bring into further light the Law of Faith, and to redeem us from the Curse of the Moral Law; not to augment the number of Natural Duties. This may suffice to perstringe among o­thers a late Author, whose words are, that the Decalogue was never intended for a perfect System of the Moral Law. That [...]e cannot imagine, that by thou shalt not make to thy self any Graven Image, is meant, Thou shalt not institute Symbolical ceremo­nies; [Page 132] or that by thou shalt not Murther, alms and fraternal Correption are enjoyned, &c. Def. & Continuat, p. 312. It is likely, that he and those of his persuasion would take it ill if I should tell them with whose Heifer they here Plow: Therefore I shall irritate no man, onely recommend those who desire farther confirmation in this matter, to such who have debated the Socinian Controversies. Now with re­spect to Christs having made the Moral Law of the Family of the Christian Reli­gion in the place already assigned it, a threefold subordination of that to this, is easie to be manifested. (1.) That it is up­on the alone score of the Law of Grace, that God will accept any service at the hands of Sinners: For though the Law, as to the Obligation of it, remain still in force, and for the substance of it, will do so to all Eternity; yet that God will accept the service of Sinners, is to be wholly attribu­ted to God's transaction with them in the Covenant of Grace by Jesus Christ. (2.) It is in the alone vertue of the Law of Faith, and God's Mercy and Faithfulness therein displayed and declared, that an abi­lity is ministred to us of performing any part of Moral Obedience, so as to be ac­cepted [Page 133] with the Lord, and afforded ground of expecting a reward thereupon. This Grace comes not by Moses: The Law as such, administers no strength for the per­formance of what it requires; this comes alone by Jesus Christ, out of whose fulness, we receive Grace for Grace, Joh. 1.16, 17. (3.) Though the Original Law continue both to claym perfect Obedience, and to threaten Death in case of the least faileur, yet because of the introduction of the Law of grace over it, the penalty shall not be exe­cuted, provided we be sincere Christians, & flie to the hope set before us, Heb. 6.18. Rom. 8.1. Not-withstanding both our mani­fest faileurs in that Obedience which the Law exacts, and its severe denunciation of wrath upon the least sin, yet our condition is not left hopeless, providing we fulfil the terms of the Law of Grace.

Secondly. The Original Law is brought into subserviency to the Law of Grace in this. That though in it self, and abstract­edly considered, it be only shapen to drive us from God, and to fill us with thoughts of fear and flight, and accordingly that was the effect of it upon Adam as soon as he had sinned; yet through the introduction of the Remedying-Law, it is become a blessed [Page 134] means in the hand of the Spirit, to conduct us to Christ and God through him. Hence it is stiled our [...] Schoolmaster to bring us to Christ, Gal. 3.24. And Christ is called [...], The end of the Law for Righteousness, &c. Rom. 10.4. The scope and drift of the Law; He, to whom the Law guides and conducts: Thus the word is used likewise elsewhere, [...]; Now the end (i. e. finis in­tentionis, the scope) of the Commandment is Charity, 2 Tim. 1.5. And not as Moses, who put a vail over his face, that the Chil­dren could not stedfastly look [...], to the end of that which is abolish­ed; To that which God aym'd at in, and by the Mosaick Ceremonies, 2 Cor. 3.13. That Righteousness which the Law be­coming weak through the flesh cannot con­fer upon us, Rom. 8.3. It conducts and leads us to Christ for the obtaining of. This is a blessed subserviency, that all that is frightful and perplexing in the Original Law, whether the amazing strictness of its precepts, or the severe dreadfulness of its denunciations, is made contributory and influential to bring us to Christ, and to God by him.

[Page 135] Thirdly. Herein also is the Original Law subjected and made subservient to the Law of Grace: That Faith in the Messiah is constituted an ingredient in every Mo­ral act in order to its acceptance with God; 'tis this which mainly gives every action its Moral specification. Though the foun­dation of all Moral Duties be laid in the Law of Nature; yet the practice of every Duty, with respect to acceptance with God since the fall, is regulated by that great posi­tive Law of the New Covenant which en­joyns the tendring of all things through the Messiah. Now the manner of perfor­mance being an essential ingredient into the determination of the Moral quality of an action, and the New Covenant deter­mining this as the manner in which every Moral action ought to be performed; it na­turally follows, that Faith in Jesus Christ is become an ingredient into, and a part of every Moral Duty.

§ 14. Having intimated the introduction of a Remedying-Law, and the subordinati­on of the Original Law thereunto: That which we are next to address to, is the un­folding our impotency and inability for the performance of the Duties and Conditions of this Law of Grace. We here suppose, that [Page 136] the New Covenant hath its terms and con­ditions as well as the Old. Every Cove­nant of God, made with us, as with parties Covenanting, doth by vertue of the Na­ture of the thing, require some perfor­mance or other of us antecedently to our having an interest in, and benefit by the promises of that stipulation. We take like­wise for granted, that Repentance towards God, and Faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ, Act. 20.21. are the terms and conditions of the New Covenant. The state and condition of Weakness, Alienati­on and Enmity, that we are in to these great Duties of the Gospel, is what I in­tend a little farther to treat.

First then. The terms of the Gospel, to­gether with the foundations on which they bear, were not discernable by Natural Light. They take their alone Rise in the soveraign will and pleasure of God, nor is there any medium by which we can know the free determinations of the Divine Will, but his own Declaration. These things have no foundation in the imagination of any Creature. They are [...] things not possible to be found out by sense or reason: It is only Faith on the Word of God that gives [...] evidence and convincing de­monstration [Page 137] of them, and that begets an [...] or confidence and full assurance con­cerning them, Heb. 11.1. Hence it is that the Gospel is so often stiled [...] a mystery; see Math. 13.11. Rom. 16.25. Eph. 1.9. & 6.19. 1 Cor. 4.1. &c. Some take the word to be of a Hebrew O­riginal, and to be equivalent to [...] or [...] a secret, or a thing hidden; others derive it from [...] nicto, clausos oculos ha­beo. Whencesoever we fetch it, the un­searchableness and hiddenness of the Gos­pel is intended in it. The New Covenant both in the Doctrines and Duties of it, lies in a higher Region than humane Reason in its most daring flight can mount to. The matters and concerns of it, are omni inge­nio altiora, out of the reach of Reason to discern, till brought nigh by the Revelati­on of them in the Gospel, [...]; The world by all their Natural and Metaphysical Wisdom, knew not God, viz. as reconciling Sinners to himself by Christ, till by the Gospel, and the Preaching of it, he made it known, 1 Cor. 1.21. How should it come under the Apprehensions of men, when it lay out of the reach of the Angelical Understand­ing, Eph. 3.10? Unto Principalities and [Page 138] Powers in Heavenly places is made known by the Church, the manifold Wisdom of God. Had it not been for God's revealing it to the Church, the Angels themselves had a­bode in everlasting ignorance of it. There are no footsteps of it in the whole Creati­on, nor evidence of it in the works of Pro­vidence. The Placability of God through Christ is no part of the [...]. of that which maybe known of God, by the things that are made. Alas! How shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? Rom. 10.14. That sin is pardonable, we can only learn it there, where we are taught how it is actually pardoned. Before we can be sure of the Reconcileableness of God, or the re­missableness of Sin upon Faith and Repen­tance: We must first be perswaded of one of these three: (1.) Either that God both can & will forgive Sin without any satisfaction: But this according to the Amyraldians themselves, contradicts that idea of Righte­ousness, Holiness, and Justice which we have of God. Or (2.) That the Sinner himself can make satisfaction▪ but that is repugnant to Natural light as much (if not more) than the former. Or (3.) That God hath found out a way of satisfying himself, and that either by the death of his Son, or [Page 139] by some other means; not the first, for as much as there is not one Iota of the incar­nation, death, satisfaction, &c. of Christ, in the whole book of Creation and Provi­dence; neither the second, because not­withstanding the advantages which we, through the enjoyments of the Scripture have beyond the Heathen▪ of knowing what could have been, and what could not have been, we are yet so far from any clear cer­tain grounds of believing the possibility of Salvation in any other way, that we are fur­nished with very momentous arguments to the contrary. Besides, if I should not not be counted Young, Raw, Petulant, &c. I would ask the Disciples of Amyrald, whe­ther the works of God do naturally, and by a vertue intrinsecal to them, declare this Placability of God, and Pardonableness of Sin on Faith and Repentance; or whether they do it by vertue of a Divine Instituti­on? If they affirm the last, pray how come the Heathens without a Revelation ac­quainted with that Institution? Where, and by whom had God told the world so much? If they assert the first, which alone carries probability in it: Then (1.) Adam from his own, and his Wifes not being in­stantly destroyed upon the commission of [Page 140] Sin, had sufficient assurance of the Placa­bility of God, and pardonableness of Sin, previously unto, and abstracting from all promulgation of the Covenant of Grace. (2.) How is it, that seeing there are in the Government of the World as manifest in­stances of God's severity, as his Lenity, that forgetting all thoughts of the Wrath and Anger of God, they should only possess a perswasion of his Mercy and Kindness. (3.) Suppose that God had preserved the Creation in Being, without transacting with Sinners in a Covenant of Grace (which I think implies no Contra­diction,) pray what then of the Placable­ness and Compassion of God could it have taught us? In a word, all the Notices which the Heathen have, or at any time had of the Reconcileableness of God, they had it by Tradition from the Church, nor do they resolve themselves into any other Original. Shall I add in the last place, that I never understood the consistency of the Amyraldian Hypothesis, either with the Wisdom or Goodness of God. A Re­concileableness on terms which (according to those we are dealing with) men neither will, nor can come up to, and where there is no provision for their relief, signifies not [Page 141] very much, nor accords with infinite Wis­dom which adapts one thing to another. Of all the defenders of Universal objective Grace, they spake most coherently, who affirmed the Heathens to have been saved by Philosophy, as well as the Jews were by the Law, or we by the Gospel. vid. Clem. Alexand. Strom. lib. 7. Just. Mart. Apolog. 2.

Secondly: such is the disproportion be­twixt our intellectual faculties and the great objects of the Gospel, that they can neither fathom nor bear the Majesty of the doctrines of the New Covenant, though they be never so clearly revealed The Sun doth not more overpower and dazle the eye, than those things of the Gospel from which all our pardon and peace flow's, do overmatch our understandings. The Natural man ( [...] the man of a large inte [...]ect) Receiveth not ( [...], non est capax, is not adapted, a metaphore, saith Beza, taken from a small vessel, which cannot admit any large body into it) the things of the Spirit of God ( [...] in contradistinction from the [...].) We may gather cockles on the shore, but we cannot dive to the bottom of these depths. It is enough that we are perswaded of the infallibility of [Page 142] the Testimony, we must not hope to com­prehend the things testified. Our work is not so much to look after the evidence of the things themselves, as the Evidence of the Revelation of them. And herein we have an instance of the Love, Care, and Wisdome of God that what is most incom­prehensible in its own Nature, is above all other things revealed in terms most plain and intelligible. The obscurity of the My­sterious truths of the New Covenant is not to be reflected on the darkness of the Declaration, but is to be ascribed to the Majesty of the things declared. Est enim objectum ita sublime, ut a mente nostra per­fectè comprehendi nequeat, non etiamsi ca­reret omni labe: tantae scilicet rei creatura modus capax non est: The things are in themselves so sublime, that were our under­standings pure and unspotted they could not be grasped or comprehended; Our f [...]ite ca­pacities bearing no proportion to them; A­myrald. Therefore, as one says, sicut in Logicis argumentum facit fidem, sit in Theo­logicis fides facit argumentum: as demon­stration begets faith in Philosophy, so faith be­gets assurance in Divinity; Alex. A [...]ens. The Scripture of whose Divineness we have all the evidence that is possible, is the truest [Page 143] ground for the certainty of particular Doc­trines, that our understandings can rest in. Jansenius therefore say's well, that quemad­modum intellectus Philosophi [...] suscipiend [...] propria facultas est, ita memoria Theologia. Ille quippe intellecta principia penetrando Philosoph [...]m facit; haec, ea quae sibi script [...] a [...]t praedicatione tradita sunt recordando, Theologum Christanum: As the understand­ing is the proper faculty for Philosophy, so is the memory for Theology: for as that by pe­netrating into the Principles of things makes a Philosopher, so this by remembring what it meets with in, and hear [...] from the Word, maketh a Divine; Tom. 2. lib. pro [...]m. cap. 4. pag. 4.

Thirdly, There is not only a Physical dis­proportion through the finiteness of our fa­culties, betwixt us & the objects of the Gos­pel, but there is also a contracted adventi­tious Moral ineptitude, through the priv [...] ­tion and loss of that Rectitude which was at first concreated with us. I grant that the Doctrines of the Gospel being attended with so great subjective and objective evi­dence of their truth, neither indwelling lust nor practical immorality can prove a total bar to the assenting to them. Unregene­rate men may perceive the truth of Scrip­ture-Propositions, [Page 144] as well as of those of Humane Authors; The word revealing things as clearly, and being accompanied with more & stronger motives of credibili­ty than any other writings are. But through want of a Vital alliance to the things they are conversant about, there is a Threefold unhappiness such men labour under. (1.) They are Sceptical and fluctuating in the belief of Gospel-truths. Every temptation can fetch them off. In stead of a firm set­tledness of mind in the perswasion of them, they are loose and Aporetical. Their as­sents are weak and vanishing. Divine truths having no cognation with the subject they are in, they are easily blown away or wither; whatever certainty be in the object, there is little in the Mind. They want the full assurance of understanding of the Myste­ry of God, and of the Father, and of Christ. No man (saith the Apostle) can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost: 1 Cor. 12.3. He cannot say and pro­fess it from a full perswasion of heart, till the Holy Ghost have taught it him, See Heb. 11.1. And remember the notion we have already given of the design and mean­ing of those words. (2) Their knowledg of Gospel-mysteries is not affective. They [Page 145] do not savour the things they assent to. Ob­jects have quite an other aspect to an unre­generate person, than they have to one that is renewed in the Spirit of his mind; and the act of seeing is of a different kind. How tastless are the great truths of the Gospel to unregenerate souls, and how faint are the Rayes of Gospel-Light! The mind being deprav'd by impure and vitious tinctures, it doth not relish the things which it is even perswaded of. Unless a man (saith Christ) be born again, [...] he cannot see (know or understand) the Kingdome of Heaven (the mysteries and doctrines of the Gospel.) Hence it is that the believing soul, though otherwise sim­ple and ignorant, hath an insight into the things of God, which the Learned, whose hearts are not connaturalized to the Gos­pel, have not. It is one thing to know in the Light of Reason, and another thing to know in the Light of the Spirit. There­fore the doctrines of the new Covenant being [...], Spiritualiter▪ res divinas cognos­cere est eas agnosce­re judicio, ductu & illuminatione Spiritûs; sicut animaliter, vel rationaliter cognoscere aliquid est ex ju­dicio rationis cognoscere, Musc. ad. 1 Cor. 2. Animalis ho­mo intelligi [...] quidem vocabula & aliquot sententias: S [...]iritua­lem autem corum sensum▪ percipere & fidem [...]is habere no [...] potest. Par. ad. 1 Cor. 2▪ 14. Spiritually discerned; 1 Cor. 2.14. [Page 146] They lye out of the Gust and true percep­tion of a Carnal man. For as to discern Rationally is to perceive it in the vertue of a Rational Principle, and through the influ­ence of Reason: So to discern a thing Spi­ritually, is to do it by a Spiritual Principle and through the illumination of the Holy Ghost. It is an excellent expression of Amyralds. Quod sicut operationes omnium animantium, quantumvis subtilissimae, ni­hilominus cum iis quae a mente hominis profi­ciscuntur, collatae, defectum Rationalis fa­cultatis arguunt; similiter &c. that as the operations of Brutes how sagacious soever they be, yet being compared with the operations of men, do manifest a want of a faculty in them, that we are endowed with; so the sublimest actions of Natural men, being compared with the operations of such as are born of God do as plainly argue the lack of a faculty in those which these have. Thes. Salm Tom. 1. p. 139. (3.) Their knowledg of divine truths is not transformative Their as­sent is accompanied with a disaffected heart to the things they assent to. Under all the imbellishments of knowledg, they are not attempered into the likeness of what they believe and profess. Their hearts are not changed into the vital Image of truth, but [Page 147] remain Animal and Brutish, notwithstanding all the Notions their heads are fraught with. They are not cast [...], into the form and mo [...]ld of the doctrine they believe. Their hearts and affections are not framed into the similitude and figure of it. The Word is not [...] an Ingrafted Word, turning the whole stock into its own nature and likeness. But they do [...], hold or imprison the truth in unrighteousness. Inest homini sanct [...] legis scientia, nec [...]amen sanatur vitiosa concupis­centia. Aug. lib. de gest. Pelag. cap. 7. see Rom. 7.8.

Fourthly. Because of Weakness through the loss of the Divine Image; and because of Enmity through indwelling lust; we are al­together unable in our selves savingly to com­ply with the terms of the Gospel. There is an [...] a want of power in every one of us to those things. No man can come to me except the Father draw him: Joh. 6.44. To come is as much as to own Christ as the sealed and Anointed of God, and to be­lieve in him as the alone Mediatour and Surety (Joh. 5.40. Joh. 6.35, 37.) And without the Fathers drawing i. e. without an efficacious work of God ingaging the Soul in a most sweet but powerful manner [Page 148] no one will be ever found in the practice and exercise of those things. There is both that disproportion of faculty, and that wicked aversation from the terms of the Gospel in every one; which only the Di­vine Spirit can relieve and conquer. Ob­jective grace or the Moral Swasion of the word is not enough, we need also subjective Grace and a new principle. What a dead man is to vital operations, that every one by Nature is to Spiritual acts. The soul is not more necessary to the body, for the functions of Life, Sense, and Reason; than the Spirit of life in the New Birth is to all ho­ly performances. We not only need insinu­ations of Spiritual light to awaken our slum­bring minds, but to elevate and dispose them for the due perception of the things of God; nor do we only need grace to court our perverse wills, but to determine them to the choice of holiness. An impotency is acknowledged by all who measure their conceptions about these things, either by the declaration of the Word, or the Univer­sal experience of Mankind. The Natural man [...] cannot know the things of the Spirit of God, because they are spiri­tually discerned; 1 Cor. 2.14. The Carnal mind; [...] (the wisdom of the [Page 149] flesh, i. e. the best thoughts, affections, in­clinations and motions of the mind of a Natural man; [...] being as much as homo corruptus, Joh. 3.6. Gen. 6.3.) is Enmi­ty against God, [...] in the abstract: For it is not subject to the Law of God, neither indeed can be, [...], Rom. 8.7.

Fifthly; How this impotency is now to be called, is not of so great consequence as some men make it. For on the one hand all are agreed, that it consists not in a Deprivation of any Essential Power or Faculty of our Rational Being: This Spanhemius as well as Amyrald, Twiss as well as Truman are at an accord in. And it is granted likewise on the other hand, that it is not only Congenite with us, and so in that sense Natural, wherein we are said to be by Nature the Children of Wrath; but farther, that it implies both á want of con­created Rectitude, and a connate pravity and aversation from God; and that it is only God who can overcome our oppositi­on, and relieve our weakness; and that secluding his work upon the soul, we nei­ther will nor can comply savingly with the terms of the Gospel: so that whether it ought to be stiled a Moral, or a Natural Im­potency is for the most part but a strife about words. There is a perfect harmony as to [Page 150] the sense and meaning, the alone contest is about the manner of expressing and phrasing it. Philosophy is only concerned in it, not Divinity. Nor is the question, who speaks most truly, but who speaks most properly. It is the dispute of Divines, not of Divinity. The terms might have been avoided without prejudice to truth; Nor do I know any reason for the use of them, but to confound mens apprehensi­ons. I heartily wish that those Learned persons who have made so great a noise a­bout Moral and Natural power, would have been so ingenuous as to have told the World that they impeached no man of er­ror, but only of solecism, and that their ad­versaries were as sound in the matter con­tended about, as themselves, only that they had not the luck of declaring it in so apt words: as this would have contributed more to the peace of the Church, so here­by private Christians would have judged their concern but small in these debates. But seeing for Reasons that I think not fit to enquire into, this needful Advertisement hath been neglected, I hope it will not prove an unacceptable service that we have here suggested it; presupposing then that Agreement in the Main which hath been [Page 151] intimated; All that lies upon our hand, is to enquire who express themselves most Philosophically in this matter. And though I must confess that [...],Dion. Halicarn. apt words are of great im­port to a clear apprehension of things; yet I must withal add, that I am no friend to a [...], or a co [...]ning of new terms when old ones will serve the turn. And I am so far from seeing any solid ground, why in the matter and case before us, we should wave the word Natural for the word Moral; that I think there is a great deal of reason for the contrary. (1.) The most likely way of arriving at a distinctness of under­standing our present inability, is by consi­dering what at first was communicated to us, and for what ends; and according to this method of proceed, I would argue thus. That impotency which consists in the want of a principle not only concreated with us, but Naturally due to our undefiled Natures in order to our living acceptably to God, may I think not unfitly be called a Natural Impotency; and that the impoten­cy under consideration, is such, were easie to demonstrate from what our Divines have proved against the Papists, viz. That [Page 152] Grace was Natural to man at first, not Su­pernatural. (2.) As the strength and malignancy of a Disease is best known by the powerful remedies which are necessary to conquer it; So the quality of our inabi­lity will be best understood by considering the Nature of the means which can relieve us against it. That inability then, which Moral means are not sufficient to relieve us against, is more than a Moral inability; Now that Moral means are not sufficient to relieve us against the impotency we labour under, might be easily proved by produ­cing the arguments for Inward Efficacious Grace, against those who admit only a Mo­ral Suasion; but this I suppose sufficiently done against Pelagian, Jesuits, and Armi­nians; and in the matter both of the ne­cessity of efficacious Grace, and the way in which it is wrought we have both Amy­rald and Truman harmonizing with us. (3.) Let us measure our thoughts by the report which the Scripture makes of our inability, and we shall find abundant cause of judging it a Natural Impotency. For the better clearing of this, we may observe that in order to our readier conceiving our ineptness and indisposition to the things of God, the Lord is pleased to represent it un­der [Page 153] such Metaphors and Similitudes as are of a familiar and easie perception, and to wave others which possibly may be more Emphatical: I shall only take notice that the Holy Ghost upon this occasion frequent­ly stiles us Blind. Now Blindness properly is affirmed of the eyes of the body, and thence transferred to the Soul. As we do not call him blind, who wants a visible object,Intellectus humanus non est id qu [...]d in ocu­lis corporis est facul­tas videndi; cui satis est si lux ex [...]erna offe­ratur, Muscul. in Isa. 42. Caecitas est pri­vatio Luminis interni: cui tamen deest ex­ternum, privatur qui­dem actu videndi, cui vero internum de­est privatur potentiâ videndi, quantum ad organum spectat. Strang. de Volunt. Dei lib. [...]4. cap. 8. or who wants an en­lightned medium, nor yet who wilfully shuts his eyes in the Meridian shine, but him that wants an Organ; so in spiri­tual things we are not to stile him Blind, who by shutting his eyes pre­cludes the light, but he only is so that wants the faculty of seeing. Other arguments to this purpose I super­sede at present; for the pursuing of this controversie is not that which we are much concerned in. And indeed, while such an [...] is on all hands acknowledg­ed, which only the immediate, inward, efficacious working of the Spirit of God [Page 154] can relieve us against; other debates are of small moment. Only, seeing [...]; Nature requires that words be adapt­ed to Conceptions, not Con­ceptions moulded to words. Dionys. Halicarn. I will always prefer [...] a clear expression to that which is doubtful and equivocal, which I reckon Moral Im­potency to be.

§. 15. The necessity of Grace for the suc­couring us under, and relieving us against this impotency is pleaded by all: But it is withal too true, that under the most spe­cious pretences of it, there is nothing more meant by some, but our Natural faculties, or at most the Objective assistances of the Holy Ghost in the Gospel. That all the Jesuits and Arminians intend in effect no more, were easie to demonstrate, if that now lay before us. All that we intend on this head at present, we shall reduce to three conclusions.

First: The operation of the Holy Ghost up­on our faculties, is always in agreement with, and in conjunction with the Word. We allow no man to pretend to the gui­dance of the Spirit, who cannot justifie what he pretends to be conducted in, by [Page 155] some Scripture-Text. The inward energy of the Holy Ghost, presupposeth the out­ward teaching of the Scripture. There is always a sweet harmony betwixt the sub­jective and objective teaching of the same Spirit, Jam. 1.18. Rom. 10.17. As up­on the one hand, tolle Spiritum a verbo, & remanet mortua litera; so on the other hand, tolle Verbum a Spiritu & non amplius remanet Spiritus Dei sed Sathanae potius; Take away the Spirit from the Word, and the Word is but a dead Letter; so take away the Word from the Spirit, and it is not the Spi­rit of God, but of Sathan rather; Heming. in Rom. 11.27. And therefore we re­quire both an assiduous study of the Word, and an examination of all impressions by it, 1 Joh. 4.1. 1 Thes. 5.21. As less will not secure us from unaccountable impulses, so there is no fear of Enthusiastick phren­zies where this method is attended to.

Secondly: There are th [...]se arguments impressed on the Scriptures, as are e­very way fit to sway our Rational minds. The Spirit doth not hurry us against Light and Reason, but leads us by discovering a prevailing evidence in the things that it frames and moulds us to. There is con­viction goes along with the Spirits efficacy, [Page 156] [...], in demonstra­tion of the Spirit and of Power, 1 Cor. 2.4. When-ever the Holy Ghost by a vital pre­sence perswades the soul to disengage it from sin, and attract it to holiness, he doth it in a way that is congruous to our Nature, & the soul divorceth that, and espouseth this upon plenary conviction. Flecti [...] Deus vo­luntates non invitas, sed volentes; August. He doth not reduce us to himself by over­throwing our Wills, but by the irradiations of truth and efficacy of Grace he makes us willing. The Spirit when he comes, [...] he will convince the world of Sin and of Righteousness, &c. Joh. 16.8. He will manage it in way of demonstration. Now the Topicks of these Arguments are partly the precepts of the Word, which are all holy, just, and good; agreeable to the Dictates of Reason, and the distinguishing taste we retain of Good and Evil. Approv­ing themselves to our understandings, if they be not enslaved to our lusts and sensu­al appetites. Courting us to our interest, as well as obliging us to our duty. Argu­ing the Mercy of the Legislator, as well as his Soveraignty. Partly the promises of the Word, which as they are in their Nature suitable to the immaterial quality of our [Page 157] souls, and in their duration to their perpe­tuity and immortality. So they are pro­pounded to us upon the strongest grounds and motives which can engage our hopes and faith; namely, the Promise and Oath of God; the death and merit of Christ, the earnest and pledg of the Spirit. Partly the threatnings of the Word, which as they are dreadful in reference to things they denounce, whether we consider the Nature of them or their continuance; so they are unavoidable unless we repent and believe.

Thirdly; There is an immediate powerful operation upon the Soul it self, by which our Opposition is conquered, our impotency re­lieved, our faculties healed, and elevated to concur as vital principles of Faith and New Obedience. There is a secret [...] or powerful working on the Soul, by which the darkness that did benight us is dis­pelled, our minds irradiated with beams of light, our wills softned and rend [...]ed ply­ant, and our affections purified and chang­ed. The faculties being one individual entity both with one another, and with the Soul, only receiving various denominati­ons according to its exertions to different objects; what-ever impresseth or affecteth [Page 158] the Soul, so as to dispose it to one operati­on, disposeth it proportionably to all. This is called the saving us by the washing of Re­generation and renewing of the Holy Ghost, Tit. 3.5. The Creating us again to good works, Eph. 2.10. The shining into our hearts, to give the light of the knowledg of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ, 2 Cor. 4.6. The giving us an under­standing to know Him that is True, 1 Joh. 5.20. The enlightning the eyes of our Un­derstanding, Eph. 1.18. The working in us to will and to do, Phil. 2.12. The writing the Law in our hearts, Jer. 3 [...].33. Hence we are said to be born of the Spirit, Joh. 3.5. To be [...] taught of God, Joh. 6.45. To receive an Unction from the Holy One, 1 Joh. 2.20. This is the New man, which after God, is Created in Righte­ousness and true Holiness, Eph. 4.23, 24. This is our [...] being made partakers of the Divine Nature, 2 Pet. 1.4. This is a vital Law, Rom. 8.2. The Spirit of God dwelling in us, Rom. 8.9. By this we become of quick understanding in the fear of the Lord, Isa. 11.33. This restoreth the Soul to an athletique healthi­ness, like leaven ferments it into its own Nature, and by a vital antipathy crosseth [Page 159] all the heavings and stirrings of Lust in it. And where this inward working is with­held, outward teaching signifies little. Sonus verborum nostrorum aures percutit, Magister [...]tus est. Nolite putare quenquam hominem discere ab homine. Admonere possumus per strepitum vocis nostra; si non intus sit qui doceat, inauis fit strepitus noster; The sound of our words strike the ear, but the teacher is within. No man learns of ano­ther the things of God. We may admonish, but all is in vain, unless he be within that in­structs, August. Per vocem non instruitur quando mens per spiritum non Ungitur; Where there is not the inward anointing▪ there is no saving in­struction received by the outward Ministry of the Word, Gregorius voca [...], allocutionem intim [...] inspirationis, quae humanam mentem contingendo suble­vat. Greg. Homil. 30. in Evang. There is an actual influence of the Spirit both irradiating the word, and ele­vating the faculty; otherwise nothing is truly attained.

§ 16. A New Principle being thus for­med in the soul, there is thereby begotten a promptitude and readiness of acting accor­ding to the Law of Creation. So that where­ever there is Grace, there is Vertue also. [Page 160] Grace is our Medicine by which our Aversa­tion and Weakness in reference to the Ori­ginal Law is removed and healed; and proportionably to that measure of it we are made partakers of, we are brought under an inclination and into an aptitude of obeying the Primitive Law. There is hereby an [...] a restoring us in Christ as our head to our primitive dependance on God, Eph. 1.10. Through him we are not only recovered to a state of favour but reduced to a subject posture. The Soul is now brought into a due subordination to God as its Maker, Preserver, and Rector. In stead of adhering to the Creatures and pur­suing the gratification of the animal life, God becomes our great end and the plea­sing him in all things our main study and endeavour. According as the will of God becomes known, it is spontaneously embra­ced, and complacentially rested in. The Grace of God not only teacheth, but ina­bleth us to deny Ungodliness and Worldly lusts, and to live soberly, righteously and God­lily in this present world, Tit. 2.11, 12. Exemplariness in all vertuous conversation is a certain concomitant & effect of renew­ing Grace. However immoral men may be antecedently to their being born of God, [Page 161] yet afterwards vertue is a chief part of their endeavour and study, 1 Cor. 6.11. If any then pretending to Grace do either in their doctrines encourage immorality as the Nicolaitans and Marcionites of old, and some Germane Antinomians of late; or in their practice be void of sobriety and ho­nesty: Let the persons so teaching and walking bear the imputation of it; but let not Religion in General be reflected on. So far are all the Advocates of Grace as di­stinct from Moral Vertue that I know of, from setting them at odds, that they Unani­mously affirm, that where there is not Ver­tue there can be no Grace, and that none can be truly Devout, that is not highly Moral. It is true, our renovation being carried on but by degrees, and there being remains of indwelling and unmortified lust in the best, there is not one, but at some time or other is transported less or more to undue objects. But so far as any one is imbued with the spirit of life, and born of God, he sinneth not, because his seed remain­eth in him, 1 Joh. 3.9. It is a most slan­derous imputation therefore which a late Author fast'neth upon the Nonconfor­mists, that they have brought into fashion a Godliness without Religion, Zeal without [Page 162] Humanity, and Grace without good Nature, or good Manners, Eccles. Polit. p. 74. see also Def. & Continuat. p. 308. & 338. &c.

§. 17. An Obedience to the Law of Creation, answerable to the Origi­nal and proper form and tenour of it, we have already demonstrated to be in the lapsed state impossible. For as it is a contradiction to make that not to have been, which hath been, so is it to sup­pose a conformity in him who hath sinned, to that Law, which in its primitive Sanction requireth every man to be sinless. Yet this Law being still continued, not only as the Rule that God will judge every man by, who through non-compliance with the terms of the Gospel, is not relieved by the Law of Faith: But also as the Rule of that obedience, which with some attempera­tions introduced by the Indulgence and Mitigation of the New Covenant, God continues to exact of every one that shall enter into life. It will not be amiss to enquire briefly into the Nature and degree of that obedience, and to state the ability we enjoy through Christ of performing it.

First then; Sincere Obedience to the whole Law of Creation is not only still re­quired, but it is required under the penalty [Page 163] of Damnation. Though the Gospel relieve us from the sentence of the Law on faileur of perfect obedience, yet it ministers no such relief where there is a want of sincere Obedience. An endeavour to walk in all the Moral Commandments of God, with a performance of the superadded Duties which respect the Mediator, is the qualifica­tion required in every one that would escape legal Wrath. And if it were not thus, the most wicked might lay claim to Pardon and Salvation as well as the most Holy. And the Gospel in stead of being an engagement to duty, were an indul­gence to sin: Christ is the Author of Sal­vation to none but to them who thus obey him, Heb. 5.9. And that we may not here deceive our selves, and think that we are sincere, when we are not, I will only mention two things, leaving the prosecu­tion of them to practical discourses. (1.) That to live in the constant allowed neglect of any duty, or prosecution of any sin is inconsistent with sincerity, 1 Joh. 3.6, 10. Rom. 6.12, 14, 20. (2.) There are some sins which the very falling into, argues the heart never to have been up­right with God, 1 Joh. 5.16, 17, 18.

[Page 164] Secondly: Improvement in all habits of Grace, and degrees of Holiness, with endea­vours after a most exact strictness are like­wise required of us. Be ye perfect as your Fa­ther which is in Heaven is perfect, see 2 Pet. 1.5, 6, 7, 8. 2 Pet. 3.18. 2 Cor. 7.1. And though damnation be not de­nounced here in case of faileur, yet hereup­on we miss much comfortable communion with God, are liable to the withdrawments of the sense of his love, and are exposed to what paternal castigations he thinks fit in his Wisdom to inflict, Psal. 89.31, 32, 33.

Thirdly: There is provision made in the New Covenant for the promotion of our strength and growth, if we be not wanting to our selves. There is a fulness of Grace in Christ, out of which we have ascertain­ment of supply, providing we attend unto the means appointed for the Communica­tion of it. An unshaken Faith in the power of God, and in the assistance of the Spirit, a watching unto prayer with diligence and constancy, Meditation of the ugliness of every sin and amiableness of Universal Righteousness, &c. are exceeding useful hereunto. Here mainly lies a Believers Province, and the attainment is not onely [Page 165] possible but easie; if sloth, negligence, love of ease, indulgence to the flesh, super­ficialness in Duty, unbelief of the pro­mises, do not preclude and bar us. But then we are only to blame our selves, not to slander the provisions of the Gospel.

Fourthly: In the vertue of Gods furnish­ing us with a principle of Grace, the heart is immediatly imbued with a sincere Love to God, and becomes habitually inclined to walk in his Laws. Obedience is connatural to the New principle. And though through remains of indwelling sin, and the souls hearkning to temptations; we be not so uniform in our Obedience, nor at all times alike disposed to Holy exercises; yet partly from the struglings and workings of the vital seed it self▪ and partly through the supplies ministred by the Spirit, accor­ding to our exigences, we are so far secur­ed, that we shall not disannul the Cove­nant; see 1 Joh. 3.9. Jer. 32.42. 1 Cor. 10.13. 1 Pet. 1.5. So that now upon the whole Christs yoke is an easie yoke, Math. 11.30. nor are his Commandments grie­vous, 1 Joh. 5.3.

CHAP. III.

(1) The Question reassumed: Two Great Instruments of Duty; The measure regu­lating it, and the principle in the strength of which it is performed, The first of these discoursed in this chap. (2.) All that Relates to Religion, belongs, either to Faith or Obedience, so far as Natural Light is defective in being the measure of that, so far is it defective in being the measure of this. (3.) All Obedience re­fers either to Worship or Manners; Na­tural Light not the measure of Religious. Worship. (4.) An inquiry into the Ori­ginal of Sacrifices; not derived from the Light of Nature, nor taken up by Hu­mane Agreement; their foundation on a divine Institution justified at length. (5.) Manners either Regulated by Mo­ral Laws, or by Positive. Natural Light no Rule of positive Duties. (6.) As it's subjective in Man not a sufficient Rule of Moral ones. (7.) Considered as ob­jective [Page 167] in the Decalogue, only an ade­quate Rule of Moral performances, not of Instituted Religion.

§. 1. I Cannot think that I have di­gressed from the subject which I have undertaken, while I have been dis­coursing Principles which have so great an influence as well upon the due Understand­ing, as the right deciding of it. These be­ing then proposed and confirmed in the former Chapter; We are now not only at leisure, but somewhat better prepared for the prosecuting the assertion at first deli­vered, viz. That Morality doth not com­prehend the whole of practical Religion; nor do'th all the Obedience we owe to God, consist in Moral Vertue. For the clearer stating and determining of this, it must be observed that there are two great Instruments of Du­ty; the measure Regulating it, which we call Law, and the Principle in the strength of which it is to be performed, which we call Power. That directs and instructs us a­bout it; this adapts and qualifies us to the performance of it: By the first we are fur­nished with the means of knowing it; and by the second with strength to discharge it. Both these were at first concreated with, & [Page 168] subjective in our Natures. There resided in us Originally, not only an ability of mind, of discerning the whole of our Duty which the Law of Creation exacted of us, but a sufficient power to fulfil it. Whether since the Fall we abide qualified as to ei­ther of these, is yet farther to be debated. The first we shall Discuss in this Chapter, having designed the following for the exa­mination of the other.

We have already demonstrated the Law of Creation, commonly called the Law of Nature, to be the alone Rule and measure of Moral Vertue. This is grant­ed by a late Author: The practice of Ver­tue (saith he) consists in living suitably to the Dictates of Reason and Nature, Eccl. Polit. p. 68. Now the Law of Nature may be considered either as 'tis Subjective in man, or as 'tis Objective in the Decalogue. As 'tis Subjective in man, 'tis vulgarly stiled Right Reason, The Light of Nature. The Philosophers who were the primitive Authors of the Term Vertue, knew no o­ther Rule by which it was to be regulated, but Reason: This they made the alone [...] of vertues Mediocrity. The Medio­crity of Vertue (saith Aristotle) is, [...], as Right Reason dictates, Eth. [Page 169] lib. 3 cap. 8. [...], Vertue is a Habit measured by right Reason; idem Eth. lib. 4. cap. 3. Other testimo­nies to this purpose we have elsewhere pro­duced, viz. cap. 1. Now I affirm, that the Law of Nature is no sufficient Measure of Religion; and consequently that all Religion consists not in the meer practice of Vertue; but that there is something beyond the bounds of Moral Vertue, besides Chimera's and flying Dra­gons. Eccl. Pol. p. 69. def. and continuat. p. 338, 339. ibid. p. 315. And that the Chri­stian Institution is not a meer digest of the Eternal Rules of Nature & right Reason.

§. 2 All that Relates to Religion may be reduced either to faith or obedience; to what we are to believe, or what we are to perform. Faith and practice engross the whole of mans duty. Credenda & agenda constitute the System of Religion; nor are the Articles of our Creed less necessary than the precepts of the Decalogue. It is not there­fore the running after a Bubble of our own blowing, as a late Author phraseth it, def. & continuat, p. 326. To discourse the ob­ligation we are under to Articles of Belief. For as they constitute one entire part of Re­ligion, and are bound upon our souls by [Page 170] the same Authority, and under the same penalty with Moral services: So our assent to them and belief of them is not only a ne­cessary part of that Homage and Fealty we owe to God, but it is introductive of all the other operations and services we exert to­wards him. Every distinct act of obedience, supposeth a distinct act of faith with refe­rence to some Article or other. So far as we preclude any Article of faith from our Belief, we so far discharge our selves from the practical obedience that emergeth from it. Our obeying the Soveraign will of God, doth not only suppose his Veracity in every Revelation of his will concerning our Duty, but a distinct knowledg and fi­duciary assent to the several Articles from which it ariseth, and on which it attends. The Articles of our faith are not like the Theories of Philosophy which no way in­fluence obedience; but every Dogma in the Creed is subservient to, and authoriseth a practical Homage. So far then as Natural Light fals short of being a sufficient measure of the Credenda of Religion, so far doth it also fall short of being a Measure of the Agenda of it. Is it probable that it should direct us to the conclusions, when it is ig­norant of the premisses: or that it should [Page 171] inform us of the superstructures, when it hath no knowledg of the foundation? Though nothing proposed to our belief be repugnant to Reason; yet I hope we do not so far Socinianize as to deny but that there are some things above the reach and com­prehension of it. Some Articles of our Re­ligion, as they have no foundation at all in Nature by which they can be known or un­derstood, (such are the Doctrines of the Trinity, The Incarnation of the Son of God, The Resurrection of the dead, the Oeconomy of the Spirit, and the whole me­thod and means of our Recovery by Jesus Christ:) So being most plainly revealed, they exceed the Grasp of our minds as to the full comprehending of them. Though Reason be the great Instrument by which we come to discern what is Revealed for our belief; yet 'tis no way's the Formal Rea­son of believing them. Though we examine the Truth and certainty of Revelation by it, whether such a Declaration be from God, or not; yet it neither is, nor can be the Standard Regulating the things Re­vealed. There are other Doctrines, which though as to our perception of them, they have a foundation in Nature, and there be Natural Mediums by which they may be [Page 172] discerned; yet such is the present Dark­ness and pravity of our minds, that without the assistance of a Revelation, they only puzzle, mislead, or leave us sceptical about them. Of this kind are the Articles rela­ting to the Production and Fabrick of the World; the Origine of Evil; the Corrup­tion of Humane Nature; the Ingress of Death &c. Concerning which never any without a supernatural Revelation attained either to satisfaction or certainty. Much of that Homage and practical obedience which we pay to God, results from Truths depending on meer Revelations. Yea it were not difficult to demonstrate, tha [...] there is hardly one Article of Belief so fully and certainly known by Natural Light, as is requisite to a through incoura­gement and practice of vertue, and suppres­sion of vice. A knowledg of the Entrance of sin, the corruption of Nature, our ob­noxiousness to Punishment, together with an account of the means provided of God for the Removing of Guilt, and the bring­ing us to a Reconciliation with himself, are absolutely necessary to be understood, in order to the performance of the Duties of the Gospel. On these Heads doth the whole of Instituted Religion and Christian [Page 173] odedience depend. Now whatever dark and uncertain guesses, men through the ex­ercise and improvement of Natural Light may arrive at, as to some of those, yet no one left to the conduct of meer Reason arose ever to any clear perswasion & full certainty about them.See Amyrald his Treatise concerning Religions, from page 183, to 264. That Light wherewith every man is born, hath served the best improvers of it for lit­tle else, but to mislead them about these things. Nor needs there any other evidence of this, but the sad prevarications of the most knowing persons of the World, where a Revelation hath not been heard or recei­ved, concerning them. Forasmuch there­fore as Natural Light is every way uncapa­ble of instructing us in these Truths, it ne­cessarily follows that it can direct us unto none of the Duties which proceed from them. It is a poor Apologie of a late Au­thor, that intending a comprehensive scheme of the practical Duties of Religion he pur­posely omitted articles of meer belief, as im­pertinent to the matter and design of his en­quiry; Def. & Continuat. p. 326. For besides that there are no Articles of Meer Belief, every one being adapted more or less to influence our conversation either to­wards [Page 174] God or man: The doctrines repre­sented by the learned person whom he there reflects on, are such as ground the whole of Christian practice; and to exclude them the Scheme of Religion, is plainly to va­cate all the Duties which as Christians we are bound to.

§. 3. Whatsoever appertains to Obedi­ence, must be referred either to Worship, or Manners. To one of these branches do all the practical Duties of Religion belong. That which we advance to then in the next place, is, That the Light of Reason, or the Law of Nature, as it is subjective in man, is no due measure for the Regulating of Divine Worship. We do not deny but that Natural Light instructs us, That God is to be Worshipped. That there is such a Homage as Worship due from man to God, we need no other Assurance than what our Reason gives us. Though the School of Epicurus differ from the rest of man-kind in their inducements of vene­rating the Deity, yet they acknowledg that we ought to venerate Him. Never a­ny that confessed a Supreme Being, but they also confessed that such an honour as worship, ought to be paid him. This is inde­lible in every mans Nature, & without de­vesting [Page 175] our selves of our faculties, we can­not gain-say it. Nor do we deny in the second place, but that we may arise by the Light of Reason to that know­ledg of God,Primus est deor [...] cultus, Deos credere, deinde reddere illi [...] majestatem suam, red­dere Bonitatem sine quâ nulla majestas est. Sen. Epist. 95. Non tantum stoli­ditate, & monstrosi­tate simulachrorum, sed & sacrificiis ho­micidiorum, & coro­natione virilium p [...] ­dendorum, & merce­de stuprorum, & secti­one membrorum, & abscissione genitalium, & festis impurorum [...]bscaenorumque lud [...] ­rum, Deos veneraban­tur. Aug. lib. 7. de civit. Dei, cap. 27. as may suf­ficiently instruct us that some Media of Worship taken up by divers, are Unbecoming Rational Creatures to perform to­wards a Being of that Nature and Perfections that God is. The Ob­scene Rites, and La­scivious Ceremonies of the Heathen in their Worshipping of Bacchus, Pan, Flora, Cybele, &c. the Salvage Sacrifices to Moloch, Saturn, &c. are justly therefore charged as repugnant to Natural Light. Reason being derived from God as well as Scripture, whatever is found contradictory to the true principles of that, is as unsuita­ble to tender to God, as that which is ex­presly forbid by this. But that which I affirm, is, that the Law of Nature as it is subjective in man, can give no certain di­rections [Page 176] about the Worship of God: Nor can Reason define what outward mediums of worship God will be pleased with. All who have believed the Existence of a God, have supposed a declared Rule ne­cessary for the manner of serving him. No one ever judged that it was left to the arbi­trary determinations of Humane discretion, how God should be worshipped. Plato tells us that all Divine worship must be [...], regulated by the Will and Pleasure of God, and that in [...]; Laws concerning Divine matters must be fetcht from the Delphick Oracle, Plat. de Leg. That Nation or People can­not be assigned, where any worship was admitted, but what was founded on some pretence to Revelation. Greeks, Romans, Barbarians have all of them attributed the Origine of their mysteries to their Gods. It is true, they were all of them mistaken; but yet their Belief was founded on Rea­son, viz. that none can conceive aright of God, much less serve him as is meet, un­less he be instructed and directed by God himself. If they referred the invention of Arts and Sciences, and all things admirable to the Deity; and celebrated their Legi­slators as receiving their Laws for the regu­lation [Page 177] of civil Society by some inspirati­ons, as indeed they did; hence they be­lieved Zaleucus the Locrian to have de­rived his from Minerva; Lycurgus the La­cedemonian his from Apollo; Minos the Cretian, his from Jupiter; and Numa his from Aegeria: We have much more cause to suppose they should believe the imme­diate interposure of God in the communi­cation of Laws, for the regulation of Reli­gious performances. It's an observable ex­pression that I meet with in Jamblichus to this purpose, [...]; It is not easie to know what God will be pleased with, unless we be either immediatly instructed by God our selves, or taught by some person whom God hath conversed with, or arrive at the know­ledg of it by some Divine means or other; de vitâ Pythag. cap. 28. This their re­course to Oracles for the Regulation of their whole Sacra, doth confirm beyond all possibility of reply. And indeed where there is not some declaration from God, warranting what we perform to him in Worship, none of our services can be en­titled Obedience; for Obedience is the Relative of Command. Hence [...]hough [Page 178] we have cause to believe that God was pleased with the substance of the Moral per­formances of the Heathen, as being ground­ed upon a Law communicated with, and in­grafted in their Natures; yet as to what concerns their Worship, being destitute of all command, auth [...]izing either the Matter or the Manner of it, it was odious and abominable to him: Nor upon any o­ther account are some parts of it liable to detestation, being performed no question out of a good intention, and divers of their Rites not materially Evil. The insuffici­ency of Natural Light for the Regulation of Worship, might be farther confirmed by these three considerations. (1.) The great disagreement both as to Matter and Manner of Worship which we meet with among the highest pretenders to the con­duct of Reason. It is hard to be imagined into what diversity of opinions and practi­ces men left to the conduct of Natural Light, fell about the right way of Wor­shipping God. The most Universal medium of honour, by which the Pagan world made their approach to the Deity was Sacrifice.

Imprimis Venerare Deos, atque annua magna,
Sacra refer Cereri laetis operatus in her­bis.

[Page 179] Imprimis; First, i. e. praecipuè & ante omnia d [...] operam sacrificiis; chiefly and above all things, be sure to offer sacrifices, Servius in loc. Thence the Philosopher accounts all other Religious performances null if they were not attended with Sacrifices. [...]; Sallust. [...] ▪ cap. 16. And yet on the other hand, some of the greatest improvers of Reason that ever the World had, seem to have been no friends to Sacrifices in the Worship of God, [...]; We do not honour God by offering any thing to him, but by being fit to receive from him, Hierocl. in Carm. Aur. Pythag. in vers. 1. and 2. [...]; It is not decent to Worship the Gods with the cost of Sacrifices: We only honour them by being Vertuous and Religious our selves, Arist. Rhetor. Vis Deos propitiare? Bonus esto; satis illos coluit quisquis imitatus est: Wouldest thou appease and reconcile the Gods? be Vertu­ous; He honours them enough, that inmitates them; Senec. Ep. 95. And when the serving of God by Sacrifices had univer­sally obtained in the World, yet their dis­agreement [Page 180] was not at an end; but there still remained endless differences about the things they were to offer, and the manner of offering them. In the first Ages,Vid Porphyr [...] lib. 2. only inanimate things were offered, but in after­ages Animals were the prin­cipal things which they Sacrificed to their Deities. And according to the difference of their imaginary Gods, they made their approaches by Sacrificing Animals of diffe­rent Species. They offered Oxen to Apollo, Mars, Mercury, Hercules, &c. Barren Cows to Proserpina, young Heifers to Minerva, Swine to Ceres, Goats to Bacchus, Deer to Diana; concerning which Arnobius says excellently, Quae est enim causa, ut ille tauris Deus, haedis alius honoretur aut ovi­bus, hic lactantibus porculis, alter intonsis agnis: hic virginibus bubulis, ille sterili­bus vacculis: hic albentibus, ille atris: alter faeminci generis, alter vero animantibus masculinis, lib. 7. advers. gent The like diversity might be easily demonstrated as to all their other chief media of Wor­ship. The Antient Nations used no I­mages, yea some abhorr'd them, whereas latter Nations, especially the Grecians a­bounded in them. The issues of Right [Page 181] Reason are Uniform, and therefore seeing the pretenders to the conduct of it have been engaged in such different Methods and Mediums of Worship, it plainly fol­lows that the Light of Nature is not suffici­ent to instruct us about it.

The (2d.) Consideration may be ground­ed on the ridiculous Rites and Ceremo­nies of which their Worship consisted. Instances to this purpose there are innu­merable. Amongst those I reckon first their battologies and reiterated repetitions of the Names and Titles of their Deities, as if by Elogies they had a mind to whea­dle them. Of this we need no other proof, but what is recorded of the Worshippers of Baal, 1 King. 18.26. And our Saviours caution to his Disciple [...] Mat. 6.7. But if any should desire farther information in this particular, they may consult the Hymn sacred to Apollo recorded and illustrated with Notes by Alexander Brassicanus. The ceremony of worshipping Hercules at Lindos in Rhodes, is as notable an instance of foo­lery, distraction, & madness, as any that Hi­story affords. The Homage consisted in the Priests venting all the Reproaches he could against the supposed Deity, in bespatter­ing him with all the bad language he could [Page 182] think of, in railing at him in the most scur­rilous terms he could invent, and in wishing all the Curses and Imprecations to befal him, that his Wit could suggest to him vid. Lact. lib. 1. Instit. I know not whether some pretending to Sacred Orders, may not hereby think themselves Authorized to treat their Brethren, as that Pontife did his God. But if this be the pattern they write a [...]ter, I dare say that Hercules was not less concerned at the re­vilings of the Country-man, (which gave occasion to the Sacra we have been speak­ing of) whose Oxen he devoured; Than the Gentlemen whom they thus rudely handle, are at the ignominious titles be­stowed upon them. Was it not excellent to hear the Car [...]s and Coribantes when they went in procession, some of them drumming upon Kettels, some upon Buck­lers and Helmets, and others jingling Chains and Cymbals? Was not it pleasant to hear their howlings and inarticulate yel­lings in the Celebration of their Baccha­nals? and to omit the Ceremonies of Whipping and Lancing of themselves, which they usurped in their Sacra; was it not a pretty Rite of approaching their Dei­ties, all smut [...]ed and besmeared, peruncti [Page 183] f [...]cibus [...]ra, Horat. de Art. Poet. Was it possible that their Gods could deny them any thing, when they brought them Nose­gays, and decked their Images and Altars with Garlands. Who can forbear laugh­ing that considers the Media of their lustra­tions;

—Aliae panduntur inanes
Suspensae ad ventos, aliis sub gurgite vasto
Infestum eluitur scelus, aut exuritur igni,
Virg. Aeneid. 6. ubi vid. Serv.

A third Consideration for the eviction of the insufficiency of Natural Light to re­gulate us in the Worship of God, may be this; That the whole of Gospel-worship presupposeth not only a knowledg of the condition we are brought into by the fall, but of the means, method, and terms of ou [...] recovery; and by consequence, Natural Light being incompetent as to the instruct­ing us about these things, must needs be an insufficient measure of Religious Worship. Whoever approacheth God, ignorant of his own guilt, and of a Mediatour, and of our Reconciliation through Faith in his Blood, must needs make wilde addresses, and worship he neither knows Whom, nor [Page 184] How. A due Understanding of our con­dition by Nature, and the Way, Means, and Terms of our recovery by Christ, is that which can alone conduct us in a right honouring of God. Of the first of these, the highest improvers of Natural Light un­derstood but little, and of the second no­thing at all. There was not any Medium in the whole Creation that could give them certain assurance of the Remission of Sin, much less of the way and means of obtain­ta [...]ning the pardon of it. Upon the whole then of what we have here discoursed, I cannot but reckon it a very strange ex­pression which I meet with in a late Au­thor, viz. that in the Mosaick dispensation God took special care to prescribe the parti­cular Rites and Ceremonies of his Worship▪ not so much by reason of the necessity of the thing it self, as because of the sottishness and stupidity of that Age, Eccl. Pol. p. 103.

§. 4 I suppose I have said enough for the discharging Reason from being the measure of Religious Worship, and conse­quently from being the Standard whereby the whole of Religion is to be Regulated. Nor doth the present subject invite me to say any more on this head. Yet for as much as an Enquiry into the first Rise of [Page 185] Sacrifices may not only contribute to a far­ther enlightning and confirming of our for­mer assertion; but may also conduce to the decision of another question of as great moment, viz. whether any thing ought to be established as a part of Divine Worship▪ but what is authorized by some Revelation from God, I shall assume the liberty of discoursing a little the Original of Sacri­fices, not so much because it is a pretty subject, Def. & Contin. p. 421. as be­cause of the weight and consequence of it, and the affinity it hath with the subject I have undertaken to treat; and because I meet with a late Au­thor, who in order to the serving of an Hy­pothesis which he hath espoused, viz. That God hath left the management of his outward worship to the discretion of men, Eccl. Pol. p. 100. Is pleased to pitch upon Sacrifice, that ancient and universal medium of Di­vine Worship, as a proof and instance of it. This outward expression (saith he) of Divine Worship, notwithstanding its Universality and Antiquity, was only made choyce of by Good men, as a fit way of intimating the pious and grateful Resentments of their minds, and cannot in the least pretend to owe its Original to any Divine Institution, seeing there ap­pears [Page 186] not any shadow of a command for it, Eccl. Polit. p. 101. We have the same assertion renewed and repeated, Def. & Contin. p. 419. And an attempt made for the confirmation and vindication of it from thence, 10 p. 439.

There are three opinions among learned men concerning the first Origine and be­ginning of Sacrifices. Some derive them from the Obligation of the Law of Na­ture: This way do most of the Romanists steer.See to the same purpose, Tho [...]. part. 3. Sum. 9.60. Art. 3. Valent. lib. 1. de Sacrif. [...]iss. cap. 4. Paul. Brugens. in scrutinio Script. part. 2. dist. 3. cap. 11: Bellarmin tells us Sacri­ficia non ess [...] in lege Mo­sis instituta, sed ex leg [...] Naturae ortum habere▪ That Sacrifices are [...] enjoyned or instituted in the Law of Moses, but that the institution of them is to be fetcht from the Obligation of Natural Light, lib. 1. de Missa. cap. 20. That men ought to wor­ship God by Sacrifices, is primum quoddam principium à Deo nobis ingenitum; a first principle ingrafted into our Natures, idem ibid: But though most of the Divines of the Church of Rome be of this mind, yet I meet with some who are otherwise per­swaded. Nullum est naturale praeceptum, ex quo sufficienter [...]lligi possit determinatio­nem [Page 187] illius, ad talem [...], cultus sc▪ per sacrificium, esse omnino [...]ecessaria [...] ad m [...] ­rum honestatem; There is no precept of Na­ture, defining the mode of worshipping God by Sacrifices, to be a necessary part of our Obedience, Suarez. part. 3. Sum. Theolog. Ar [...]. 1. dist. 71. Sect. 8. The induce­ment leading the generality of the Divines of the Romish Communion to derive the institution of Sacrifice from the Obligation of Nature, is, that they may the better justi­fie the Sacrifice of the Mass. Nor upon any other account do they concern them­selves in this opinion▪ one fable requires another to uphold it; and indeed if we should yield them our being under an Ob­ligation from Nature, for our approaching God by Sacrifices; We must also graunt either the Sacrifice of the Mass, or we must substitute some other by which we conti­nue to pay our Natural Homage to God. For no supernatural Law can repeal a Na­tural. Revelation builds upon the Law of Nature, but can vacate neither the whole, nor any part of it. What-ever Obligation we are under by the Law of our Being, is inseparable from, and of the same continu­ance with it. But as there are no Rational arguments to engage our belief of the affir­mative, [Page 188] viz. that Sacrifices are appointed by the Law of Nature; so we are not destitute of proofs both from Reason and Scripture for the defence of the Negative. But this is not that which I am concerned in, for should the approaching of God by Sacrifices be resolved into the Law of Na­ture, it doth not at all disserve us; for, as upon the one hand it doth hence plainly follow that the institution of them accor­ding to this Hypothesis is immediatly de­rived from God; He being as much the Author of the Law of Nature, as he is of a­ny Law prescribed to the world by super­natural Revelation: So it no ways follows upon the other hand, that because the Law of Nature prescribes some parts of Wor­ship, that therefore it is the measure of all divine Worship.

The Second opinion is theirs, who deduce the Original of Sacrifices from the volun­tary choice of men: who by this arbitrary invention endeavour to express the grate­full resentments of their minds, for the ob­ligations of Gods Love and Bounty to them. Porphyrius, the only Pagan Philoso­pher who hath designedly handled the Ori­ginal of Sacrifices, resolve's the first begin­ning and Rise of them into the will and [Page 189] pleasure of men, who thereby intended to express their thankfulness to God for the be­nefits He bestowed on them. As we (saye's he) by some returns of bounty use to declare our gratitude for the kindnesses which other men confer upon us, [...] (i. e. [...]) [...]; So ought we (say's he) in testimony of thankfulness to the Gods, to offer first-fruits, to them. [...] lib. 2. Grotius tell's us that many of the Jews were of this perswasion. Multi Hebraei sentiunt sacrificia prius ab homi­num ingenio excogitata, quam a Deo jussa: lib. 5. de verit. Christ. Rel. Videatur etiam Seld. de jure natur. apud Gent. lib. 3. cap. 8. Nor are they therein mistaken, for Abra­vanel assign's this as the Reason of God's instituting Sacrifices, namely that the world being accustom'd to them, it had not been easy to have wean'd them from them: comment [...] in Pentateuch. I have quoted these testi­monies to shew that they who derive the Original of Sacrifices from the institution of God, are so far from doing it because of the Authority of the Jews and Easterlings as a late Author would perswade us def. & continuat, p. 426. That on the contrary the opinion which himself embraceth re­ceived its first countenance from them; [Page 190] And may indeed be reckoned among the rest of the fables, of which they are implea­dable as the Authors. Of the same judg­ment were some of the ancient Fathers, as to the Original of Sacrifices. [...]: Chrysostome speaking of A­bel; having (saies he) been taught by none, nor having any Law prescribed him, concerning the offering of first-fruits, of his own accord, moved only by the gratitude of a thankful mind, he offered Sa­crifice to God. [...]. Of all those who antecedently to the giving of the Law, sacrificed Beasts to God, no one did it by a Divine command; though it be certain that God did both accept their offering, and was well pleased with the offerers; in Resp. ad Orthodox. in operibus Justini ad interro­gatum 83. I need not add that the Socini­ans are Universally of the same judgment, the Reason why they are so, being through­ly understood. Nor will I quote the testi­monies which occur in Episcopius the Ar­minian and others of his perswasion to the [Page 191] same purpose. For in matters of this Na­ture naked testimonies signifie only to tell us what men thought▪ and ought to be of no further validity to engage our assent, than as they are grounded on proofs and rational motives. Now when we weigh the grounds of this opinion, we meet not with the least thing that can sway a Rational mind to sub­mit to it.

They who make Sacrifices an arbitrary invention of men to testifie their Homage to God, have but two things to alledg in confirmation and proof of it. (First,) That Divine Worship being a Dictate of Humane Nature, and it being agreeable to the Rea­son of mankind to express their sense of this Duty by outward Rites and significations▪ there could be no symbol more natural and obvious to the minds of men, whereby to sig­nifie their Homage and Thankfulness to the Author of all their happiness, than by pre­senting him with some of the choycest por­tions of his own gifts in acknowledgment of that bounty and providence that had bestow­ed them, Def. & Contin. p. 421. For Answer, I readily graunt it to be a Dictate of Humane Nature, that God ought to be Worshipped; And I withal acknowledg that it is agreeable to the Reason and Sense [Page 192] of mankind to express their sense of this duty by outward Rites and Significations; nor have any supposed Thoughts, Words, and Gestures to be alone a sufficient ex­pression of that Homage we owe to God. But two things I deny (1.) that precluding supernatural Revelation, man­kind (since the fall) have had any suffi­cient assurance that God would accept any Homage and Service from them at all. The principles on which that supposition is raised, are but two, and both of them un­able to bear that structure that is built upon them. The one is the consideration of the Benefits which the divine Bounty confers on us; but these being blended and out­weighed with so many calamities, with which our lives are attended, and there be­ing other ends besides the ascertaining his complacency in us, and our performances, for which God in his Wisdom might con­fer them, can give us no assurance, either of the acceptation of our persons or servi­ces. The other is the consideration of the Divine Goodness; But the consideration of his Justice being as ponderous to the contrary, this is as inept to beget an assu­rance of our acceptance with God as the former. Conscience through being guilty, [Page 193] being also suspicious, will hinder us in our expecting any thing from the Divine Goodness, by continually objecting his justice to us. But supposing we were suf­ficiently furnished with Notices of the Di­vine placability, and that he will accept a Homage from us; yet it still remains to be proved, that precluding a supernatural Re­velation we have any rational ground of belief that he will approve our manner of approach to him by Sacrifices. I know no perfection in the Divine Being to which they are Naturally suited; It is true I find a Late Author insinuating that the Religion of Sacrifices flows from the Nature and the Attributes of God, requiring no other disco­very than the Light, and no other determi­nation than the choice of natural Reason, def. and continuat. p. 427, 428. But I would fain know what property in the Di­vine Nature, the Religion of Sacrifices flows from. God is not capable of being fed or refreshed by the scent and smoke of them. [...]: lib. 2. Sect. 24. In­deed Porphyry tells us that a great many thought so, but I am sure it was a most foolish thought. And be­sides, what-ever flows from the Divine Nature and the Attributes of God, the ob­ligation [Page 194] to it is indissoluble, nor can we be superceded the performance of it. And by consequence the Worshipping of God by Sacrifices should both have obliged man­kind in the state of innocencie, and doth still indispensably oblige us: Nor can the Christian Institution vacate any Duty that flows from the Nature of God.

Indeed the mysterious and gracious Counsels of Gods will in reference to our recovery from Wrath by the Sacrifice of his Son, which he designed the bringing into light and the giving the world instruction a­bout by this Medium, render our being found in this Method of address to God, while the end proposed in it continued, very rational and justifiable; but abstracting from that, the mind of man can not entertain a more silly and ludicrous thought, than that we should thereby honour God in a due and suitable way. That we should adore and magnifie the Goodness and bounty of God in all the benefits we partake of; and that we should use them soberly and discreetly improving them into motives of cheerful­ness, humility and advantages of service both in communicating to the wants of o­thers, and being the more alacrous in obe­dience our selves, hath the authorisation of [Page 195] Reason for it, and becomes that habitude we stand in to God as Rational Creatures: But to reckon that the presenting God with slaughtered Animals, is the most natural Symptome of Homage that Rational Crea­tures can express their thankfulness to him by,Naturalis Ratio si recta esset sciret De [...] t [...]libus non indigere, neque ea à nobis requirere, R [...]vet. in cap. 4. Gen. Exercit. 22. Def. & contin. p. 431 I account it a sentiment only fit for them who never duly meditated what God is. And in my con­ceit, the missing of such an invention would have been so far from being flat stupidity that it would have argued a mind pregnant with generous thoughts of God.

The Second thing produced in proof that Sacrifices took their beginning from Humane Agreement, is because there appears not any shadow of command for them, when they were first practised▪ and to say that the expression of worship by Sacrifices was com­manded, though [...] is no where Recorded, is to take the liberty of saying any thing without proof or evidence. Eccl. Polit. p. 101. v. def. & contin. p. 428. To this I reply that 'tis not needful that every com­mand relating to institutions be expresly [Page 196] and in terminis recorded, 'tis enough that it be colligible from the Scripture. I know no Logick that will allow the sequel, That because the command of a thing is not re­gistred in so many words, that therefore the thing it self is not of Divine Original. The Reverend Person, who reviewed and animadverted on the Ecclesiastical Polity told him, that there was an Institution for the offering and burning Incense only with sacred fire taken from the Altar, and that the Priests were consumed with fire from be­fore the Lord for the neglect of it: Yet there is no express command in the whole Scrip­ture where that Institution is in terminis Recorded, p. 272. This our late Author takes no Notice of in his Def. & Contin. but passeth it in deep silence, as he doth all the most material things in the said Re­ply. I shall only subjoyn one instance more to the same purpose. The Obser­vation of the Christian or First day-Sab­bath, will be allowed I suppose to have a Warrant in the Revelation of the Word, yet there is not in the whole Gospel a Command in express Terms for the keep­ing of it. There is indeed a precept in the Decalogue for the observance of one day in [Page 197] Seven as a Holy Sabbath to the Lord; and there is an express determination founded on Gods Resting from his Works, for the keeping the last day of the Hebdomadal Revolution during the Old Testament Oeconomy, as a day of Sacred Rest. There are also various Arguments taken from the Creation of all things in and by Christ; his Finishing and Resting from all the Works of the New Creation in and by his Resurrection; his declaring that a Day of Rest accommodated to his own ceasing from his Works, remains now for Belie­vers: Together with the Apostolical ob­servation of the First Day of the week as a Sabbath to the Lord; God's blessing his People in their attendance on him from time to time on that Day; John Bap­tising it with the Name of [...], the Lord's Day, &c. All which do evince the change of the Day from the Seventh un­to the First, to be of Heavenly Original, and founded in Divine Authority: Yet there is not a Command [...] in the whole Sacred Code and Register for it. In a matter of so great antiquity as Sacri­fices when the Lord instructed his Church by Dreams, Visions, mental Impressions, audible voice, &c. To affirm that there [Page 198] was no Divine Command for the Religion of Sacrifices, because the Command is not expresly delivered, is a very unwary and bold assertion. It is enough for us if we can demonstrate that they acted not herein without a Divine Warrant, though we can­not assign the manner in which it was pre­scribed; and this we hope to make good to the satisfaction of all sober inquirers, but to satisfie Scepticks and prejudic'd per­sons who have no mind to be convinced, is more than any man can undertake.

The third Opinion then concerning the Original of Sacrifices, is theirs who deduce them from the Institution of God himself. And as this is the common sentiment of Protestant Divines, so 'tis attended with as much evidence as the Nature of a Thing at so great a distance doth require. The First Argument in confirmation of the Di­vine institution of Sacrifices may be fetcht from the Antediluvian distinction of clean and unclean Animals, Gen. 7.2. Of eve­ry clean Beast thou shalt take to thee by se­vens, the Male and his Female; and of Beasts that are not clean by two, Vid. Rivet. in Gen. 8. Exerci­tat. 55. the Male and his Fe­male. This distinction can have no other foundation, [Page 199] but that some Animals were allowed Sa­crifices, others not. Reason cannot in­struct us in the putting a difference in this particular, between one kind of Beasts and another. Hence the Heathen, who here­in pursued the conduct of Na­tural Light,See Sa [...]bert. de Sacrific. cap. 23. offered promis­cuously of all sorts, Horses, Mules, Camels, Asses, Dogs, yea Mice, &c. were all one to them in this matter, as other Brutes, yea Swine were preferred to Oxen and Sheep.

—Prima putatur
Ovid. lib. 15. Metam.
Hostia sus meruisse mori.—
Prima Ceres avidae gavisa est sanguine porcae
Ulta suas merita coede nocentis opes.
Id. lib. 1. Fast.

We have ground then to conceive that whence the Patriarchs had their light as to the Species and kind of Creatures which they were to offer, that thence also they derived the institution of Sacrifices them­selves. Nor is there any cause to con­ecture that God having left the great and material part of his Worship to their dis­cretion, should confine them in minu [...] things, or interpose in their direction a­bout [Page 200] the Species of Creatures they were to present him. That Discretion, Wisdome, and Light which was able to instruct them that the best Medium of honouring God, was by the Sacrifice of Animals to Him, was also able to tell them what kind of A­nimals he would accept at their hands. The second Argument for the Divine Instituti­on of Sacrifices, may be taken from the consideration of their acceptance with God. And this may be prosecuted (1) with respect to the acceptation that the Offerers promised themselves with the Lord in and by them; or (2) with respect to their being [...] a sweet savour, or an odour of sweetness unto the Lord. (1.) 'Tis certain that mankind proposed to them­selves acceptance with God in and by them; and without such a perswasion they would never have engaged in the perfor­mance of them. Now this they could have no indubitable certainty of, without a su­pernatural revelation: For who hath known the mind of the Lord, Rom. 11.34. Nor was it enough (as a late Author would make us believe, Eccl. Polit. p. 100.) to ascertain the Lords being well pleased with them, because they presented him with a portion of the best and most precious things [Page 201] they had. For First; This could give them no assurance that the offering these things by destroying them, would be ac­ceptable. There being other wayes in which they might be improved to his ho­nor, and that more congruously to the Na­ture of God, and the Relation of Rational Creatures which we stood in to him. Se­condly, by a parity of Reason, they should have offered themselves in the same manner, being as much indebted to God for their own Beings, as for any other fruits of his Bounty. And as I question not but that Humane Sacrifices entred in a great measure at this Door, so I know no Rea­son if there be any solidity in this plea, but that they are justifiable by the same pre­tence. We cannot but apprehend that, whenever any Religious action is to be performed, the mind will be in suspense whether it ought to be done or not. Let us then suppose the first commencers of ad­dress to God by Sacrifice, deliberating what they were to do. The Reasons in this case influencing their minds, behoved either to leave them in suspence about it; and if so, they ought wholly to have for­born it, it being better to forbear a thing out of fear to offend God, than to put it to [Page 202] the chance of performing a thing which possibly may be well-pleasing to him. Quod dubitas ne fecer [...]s is an unquestiona­ble axiom. Or the Reasons impeaching the thing as bad were the more ponderous; and if so, then granting the thing never so excellent in it self, it were a crime to do it. For to commit what we judge offen­sive to the Deity, tramples as much on the Respect we owe to God, as if the thing it self were in the number of what is most de­testable to him. He that acts in defiance of his Conscience, casts off all Reverence of God whose Deputy Conscience is▪ [...]; Its all one whether things be really Evil, or only appear so, for neither of them are to be done, saith Arist. Eth. lib. 4. cap. 9. Or lastly, the motives inducing to believe the thing good, were more numerous and weighty than the contrary: But even in this case it were impossible to act without exposing themselves to irremediable per­plexities. For where there is not a con­vincing certainty that the thing perform­ed is good, which without an Institution they could never have, every sinister acci­dent afterwards accosting them, would re­vive [Page 203] a suspicion in them that they had of­fended, and cause them to repent of what they had done with incredible remorse and regret. (2.) Let us consider Sacrifices not so much with respect to that acceptance which men promised themselves in and by them, as with regard to what God declares they were, viz. an Odour of sweetness un­to him. And if we will confine our selves here to the determination of the Scripture, I affirm, had Humane agreement been the foundation of their performance, this they could never have been. The reason of my assertion is this, because I find God censuring the arbitrary inventions of men in worship with the brand of [...] Will-wor­ship, Col. 22.3. [...] est cultus seu modus co­lendi Deum arbi­trio humano, sine Dei praecepto sus­cep [...]us, Rivet in Ex­od. 20, V [...]x Gr [...]ca it [...] so [...]at, q [...]asi quis dicat, spont [...]nea Religio, cum quis ul [...]ro sibi f [...]git Re­ligi [...]em, [...]rasm▪ in. Coloss. 2.23. Paulus Traditiones humanas [...] appellat, quasi f [...]ctas ex cujusque arbitr [...] religionis & piet [...]is Re­gulas, Dan, Isag. Christ. And [...] Superstition, Acts 25.19. Yea, when the worship was justly reproveable for some intrinsical evil, either in the matter or form of it, or in both; yet God in reproving it, taketh no no­tice of either of these, but [Page 204] insisted only upon this, that he command­ed it not, see Jer. 7.31. & 32.35. Deut. 17.2, 3. All which seem abundantly to witness that worship of humane device or contrivement is of an unpleasing resent­ment with God; and by consequence, the Religion of Sacrifices being of a sweet sa­vour unto the Lord, another original must be assigned it than mens own device and choyce. The Third Argument in proof of the Divine Institution of Sacrifices, may be fetcht from the consideration of that peace, welfare, inward consolation, &c. which in the adoration of God by the offer­ing of Sacrifices, all mankkind, especially the Patriarchs proposed to themselves. There is in all men a Natural Conscious­ness of sin, with an apprehension of punish­ment and Vengeance due for it. Hereup­on in all their addresses to the Deity, they endeavoured the procuring the pardon of sin, and peace with God, and the obtain­ing comfort in their own Consciences. This must be at least the subordinate end of the whole Religion of Sinners; nor other­wise do they act rationally with respect to the estate they know themselves in. Now they must promise themselves the attain­ment of these things, either in the vertue [Page 205] of the Action it self, or else through the application of some promise of God enti­tling them to such mercies upon a due per­formance of such services. If the Latter, then Sacrifices must necessarily be of a Heavenly Original. For where the Thing signified depends upon the alone Will and Pleasure of God, there the Symbol and sign of it depends upon his sole Will and Institution also. Though the sign materi­ally may have a Being in Nature, yet for­mally considered as 'tis the representation of such a gracious design, and of such a voluntary and free benefit; 'tis perfect nonsence to imagine that Natural Light can give any direction about it. But if they expected pardon of sin, and peace with God, and in their own Consciences from the bare Action it self, and in the vertue of the meer offering; They did that (1) which God expresly declares his abhorrence of. The Lord upon all occasions testifies his Detestation of Sacrifices, when Trusted to for Reconciliation and Remission of sin, Psal. 40.6. & 50.8, 9, 10, 11, 12. Mic. 6.6, 7. Heb. 10.1, 2, 3▪ 4. (2.) They acted repugnantly to Natural Light. Our Reason how much soever distempered, clouded, weakned, can still instruct us that [Page 206] the blood of sheep or Oxen is too mean a trifle to satisfie for an offence against God. He hath indeed mean thoughts both of God and Sin, who thinks that the Justice of God can be attoned, or the guilt of Sin expiated by the blood of a Calf or Lamb. What either proportion or Relation is there be­twixt Men and Beasts, that the Lives of the One should commute for the Lives of the Other! Men might sin at an easy rate, could the Death of a brute Animal satisfie for the offence. He is generally supposed to have been a Heathen, however he cloaths himself with the Name of one, that said;

Quum sis ipse nocens moritur cur victims prote?
Cato lib. 4. distich. 5.
Stultitia est morte alterius sperare salutem▪
Ne credas placare Deum cum c [...]de litatur.
a part of the 39 dist:

The Fourth Argument in justification of our assertion concerning the Rise of Sacri­fices from the Institution of God, I take from that of the Apostle Heb. 11.4 By Faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent Sacrifice than Cain &c. Abel and Cain may be reckon'd among the First that [Page 207] made their approach to God by Sacrifice: At least the first Notice we have of apply­ing to God by this Medium of Worship is in them. And the Reason here a [...]igned by the Holy Ghost, why the Lord when he rejected the Sacrifice of Cain had regard to that of Abel, is, because Abel offered his Sa­crifice by Faith. If we can then evince that the Faith here spoken of had respect unto the Testimony, Revealing, Commanding and Promising to accept them in that way of Homage and address; we shall in so do­ing, fully demonstrate that Sacrifices owe not their rise to Humane choice, but that they began upon the Warrant of a Divine Institution and precept. This we shall therefore attempt to make good by two Topicks. First, The Faith attributed to Abel, from which he receives the testimony of having offered an acceptable Sacrifice to God; must be of such a Nature and kind to which the Definition of Faith verse 1. may agree. The Apostles Description of Faith in the first vers, is, that which he plain­ly intends for the Regulation of the several Instances of it in the whole ensuing part of the chapter. Let us view then the defini­tion of Faith there laid down, and we shall find it to be [...]. [Page 208] [...]. By [...] we may either un­derstand Expectation according to that of the Seventy Psal. 39.7. [...]. Expectatio mea in te est; And the [...] the sence will be, that faith is the expecta­tion of things hoped for, which sounds bet­ter than our translation by Substance. Or we may render it Confidence agreeably to the import of the word 2 Cor. 9.4. 2 Cor. 11.17. Heb. 3.14. And then the mean­ing will be, that Faith is the Confidence of things hoped for. It is much at one which of these significations we here admit, ei­ther of them will render the definition of Faith clear and congruous: Whereas o [...] rendring it by Substance, makes it both obscure and harsh. [...] Evidence, Ar­gument, convincing demonstration as Hi [...] ­rome renders it: Certa ac clara intuitio, [...] sure and clear evidence [...] of things not seen, not discernable either by sence or Reason: Things out of the view of whatever is natural in us. Now this defi­nition is that which must Regulate every Instance of Faith in the whole Chapter; and by consequence every act ascribed to it, must have a Revelation, Command or pro­mise of God for its foundation, otherwise it should not be [...], which [Page 209] the Apostle expresly affirms it to be. (2.) The Faith ascribed to Abel is of the same Nature and kind with the Faith of o­thers whom the Apostle here mentions. Whereas then the Faith of every other Worthy recorded in the Chapter, doth in­fallibly suppose a Divine Revelation as that on which 'tis bottom'd, and by which 'tis warranted; If we will speak coherently, we must likewise acknowledg that Abels Faith had the same Authority to rest on. Not onely the tenour of the Apostles whole discourse induceth us to this belief, but we have a plain testimony, verse 39. to indubitate it to us, All these having obtain­ed a good Report through Faith, received not the promise. The same kind of Faith is predicated of all. And by their not re­ceiving the actual exhibition of the thing promised, which is the meaning of [...], is plainly intimated that they had a Divine Command or Promise to rest on in all these exercises of Faith there celebrated. A fift Argument in Confirmation of the Divine Original of Sacrifices might be taken from the consi­deration, that every Priest ought to be ordain­ed of God, and that no man taketh this ho­nour unto himself, but he that is called of [Page 210] God, Heb. 5.1.4. and consequently that the Patriarchs were authorised of God, o­therwise they had never assumed the Sa­cerdotal Office, which they did by their offering Sacrifices, these two being Re­lates. But I find I have been already too prolix upon this head, and they who can withstand the force of the fore-going Argu­ments, are not like to be influenced by any thing I am further able to subjoyne.

§. 5. We have already shewn that the whole of Obedience which we owe to God, belongs either to Worship or Man­ners: We have also declared the insuffici­ency of Natural Light for the Regulating of Worship. Our next task is to demon­strate the defectiveness of it as to the con­duct of Manners. Manners are either such Duties as in themselves are acceptable and good, or such as derive all their goodness from a Command; with respect to the first, revealed Laws are only declarative of the goodness of the Duty; The Absolute Bonity of it having an antecedent founda­tion in the Nature of God, the Nature of man, and the Relation that man stands in to God. But with reference to the second, supernatural Law is constitutive of the goodness of the Duty: There being no­thing [Page 211] in the thing it self previous to the Command rendring it so: And here though obedience be a Moral Duty, yet the Law prescribing it is not properly Mo­ral Law. For the Morality of Obedience ariseth not from the Nature of the Com­mand, but from the Relation we stand in to God, and the Dependence we have on him; whereas the Morality of Law hath its Reason in the Nature of God, and the congruity or incongruity of things enjoyn­ed or forbidden, to it. That there are acts of Obedience distinct from Natural Du­ties, which yet are not properly acts of Worship, might be demonstrated by innu­merable instances. Of this kind there are several Duties founded in personal com­mands, whereby none were obliged, but onely they to whom they were immediatly given. Such was the Duty of Abra­hams leaving his Fathers House, being built on a precept wherein he only was concerned. The like may be said of the Obligation laid on the young man in the Gospel of selling all that he had, &c. Of this sort also there are several Duties a­rising from Divine Laws which concerned only a particular Nation, and yet emerged not from Laws properly Ritual. Of which [Page 212] number we may reckon the Obligations proceeding from the Judicials given to the Jews, at least where the Reason of them was not Natural Equity. By these Laws they came under Obligations that the rest of man-kind were not concerned in. Yea they became bound to some things which setting aside the positive Law of God, could not have been lawfully done; and which at this day no Nation or Person can practice with Innocency, viz. The Marry­ing the Widow of a Brother, dead without Issue. Such Laws Gods Dominion over all men as his Creatures, authoriseth him to make, and that as a proof of his own ab­solute Prerogative, and for tryal of his Creatures obedience. Nor did God ever leave man since he first Created him singly to the Law of Nature for the payment of that Homage he owes him; but even to Adam in Innocency he thought fit to give a positive Law; a Law, which for the matter of it, had no foundation at all in Mans Nature; further than that he was obliged by his Nature to do whatsoever God enjoyned him. Now these Laws having their foundation in Institution, not in Nature: The Reason of them being not so much the Holiness of God, as his Sove­raignty; [Page 213] Natural Light can no ways be suppos'd a due measure of them, nor able to instruct about them. All that Obedi­ence that resolves into the Will of God, must suppose Revelation in that nothing else can discover its Obligation to man-kind; saith a late Author, Def. & continuat. p. 427. How consistently to himself in other pla­ces, where he tells that all Religion consists in nothing else but the practice of Vertue; and that the practice of Vertue consists in living suitably to the dictates of Reason and Nature; I leave to himself to declare. That there are positive Laws of God now in be­ing, and that in the vertue of them, we are under Obligation to several Duties: I shall, God willing, evince when I come to shew the insufficiency of the Law of Na­ture as it's Objective in the Decalogue, as to being the measure of the whole Obedience we owe to God.

§. 6. That there are Natural Laws as well as positive; and that the latter are but ac­cessions to the former, we have else-where demonstrated. Now these Laws being stiled Natural, non respectu Objecti, not because of their object, many of the Du­ties we are under the Sanction of by them referring immediatly to God; but re­spectu [Page 214] principii & medii per quod cognosci­mus, because communicated to our Na­ture, and cognoscible by Natural Light. If the Light of Nature alone be of signifi­cancy in any thing, 'tis here. And indeed the Writings of Heathen Philosophers such as Aristotle, Plato, Epictetus, Seneca, Plu­tarch, Cicero, Hierocles, Plotinus, &c. The Laws of Pagan Common-wealths, especi­ally the Republicks of Greece and Rome; the vertuous actions of persons not en­lightned by Revelation, of all ranks and qualities, such as Socrates, Aristides, Ph [...] ­cion, Cato, and many others not easie to be recounted, shew that men left to the meer conduct of Natural Light can attain a better insight into the Duties of Nature, than of Religion, and know more of Ver­tue than of Piety. For, as both Amyrald and Sir Charles Wolseley, besides others, observe, Cicero wrote to better purpose in his books de officiis, than he did in those de Naturâ Deorum. Yea, even the Plato­nists, the great Refiners of Religious Ce­remonies, who in stead of obscene and bar­barous usages, introduced civil and modest Rites; discoursed much better of Vertue than Divinity. Their Sentiments for the conduct of conservation being for the most [Page 215] part Rational and Generous, whereas their Theological Notions are either obscure, uncertain, or romantick. If we be then able to prove that Natural Light, or the Law of Nature as it is subjective in man since the Fall, is no sufficient measure of Moral Duties, or of those Duties we are under the Sanction of by the Law of Cre­ation, we shall get one step farther in our design; namely, that Natural Light is a very inadaequate measure of Religion.

In confirmation of this, I might in the first place take notice; how the great preten­ders to the conduct of Reason prevaricated in all those prime Laws of Nature which Relate to the Unity of the God-head. Though not onely the Being, but the U­nity of the Divine Nature be witnessed to by every mans Reason, and we need one­ly exercise our faculties against Polytheism as well as Atheism: Yet the Universality of man-kind, setting aside those who had the benefit of a supernatural Revelation, not onely sunk into the belief and adorati­on of a plurality of Gods; but into the worshipping those for Gods, whom to ac­knowledg for such is more irrational than to believe that there is none at all. There was scarcely any thing animate or in­animate, [Page 216] but by some or other became deified.

Quicquid Humus, Pelagus, Caelum, mirabile gignunt,
Id dixere Deos, Colles, Freta, Flumina, Flammas.
Aurel. lib. 1. contr. Symm.

Whom one Nation adored for God, a­nother derided and treated as a brutish and senseless Creature.

[...];
[...],
[...].
— [...] ▪

Thou adorest a Beast, but I Sacrifice it. Thou countest an E [...]l a Deity, but I esteem it dainty food. Thou worship'st a Dog, but I beat him, Athen. Deipnos. lib. 7.

Quis nescit Volusi Bythinice, qualia demens
Aegyptus portenta colit? Crocodilon adorat
Pars hac; illa pavet saturam serpentibus Ibin.
[...]ffigies sacri ni [...]et aur [...]a Cercopitheci,
[Page 217]Istic Aelur [...]s, hic piscem fluminis, illic
Oppida tota canem Venerantur.—
P [...]rrum [...]c cepe nef [...]s violare ac fr [...]ngere morsu:
O Sanctas gentes quibus h [...]c n [...]sc [...]ntur in in hortis
Numina! &c.—
Juven. Satyr. 15.

Thus Rendred by Sir Robert Stapleton.

Bythinicus, who knows not what portents
Mad Egypt deifies? this part presents
Devotion to the Crocodile; in that
Ibis, with Serpents gorg'd is trembled at.
The long-tayl'd Monkey's golden form shines there:
There Sea-fish, River-fish is worshipt here.
Whole Cities to the Hound, their prayers address.
To strike a Leek, or Onion with the edge
of the presumptuous teeth is Sacriledge.
O Blessed people, in whose Gardens spring
Your Gods.—

The great Gods whom they adored, they could tell a thousand debaucheries of ‘ [...] ▪’

[Page 218]Hence many of them from the example of their Gods, encouraged themselves in all kind of Villany. Eg [...] homuncio id non facerem, shall not I do what Jupiter did, saith the fellow in Terence. Hence En [...]ius brings in Africanus boasting;

Si fas caedendo caelestia scandere cuiquam est,
M [...] soli caeli maxima porta patet.
If killing can give title to the skye,
No man bids fairer for that place than I.

Others of them were hereby influenced to mock at all Religion: ‘Vana superstitio, Dea sola in pectore virtus.’

And indeed as Arn [...]bius saies, Recti [...]s multo est Deos esse non credere, quam esse il­los [...]les: It is much more Rational to be­lieve that there are no Gods at all, than that they are such as they proclaym'd them, vid. Plutarch. [...]. Its but to consult the Apostle, Rom. 1.23. And he will in­form us what excellent Beings they were which men left to the guidance of depraved and darkned Reason owned & worshipped for Gods. Nor do I question but that se­veral persons branded of old with the [Page 219] name of Atheists, were only contemners of the Gods of their Country-men; or at least it was the ill opinion they had of their own Gods which led them to a total denyal of the Deity; for being assured that they were none, and being at a loss to substi­tute the True One in their Room, they sunk into an imagination that there was none at all. Though I do not impeach Natural Light as altogether insufficient to have instructed them better, because here­in they crossed the dictates of the Rational faculty, and stupendiously prevaricated in what they might have known; yet it de­monstrates how inadaequate a Rule it is of the duties we were obliged to by the Law of C [...]ation, being inefficacious to regulate the great pretenders to the guidance of it, in things that lay plainest before it. And in­deed had not God disabused the World by Revelation, we have ground to think that man-kind, notwithstanding the faculty of Reason, would have still persevered in these corrupt opinions.

For the Eviction of the ineptitude of Natural Light to Regulate us in the Du­ties we are under the Sanction of, by the Law of Creation, I might in the second place observe the degeneracy of men left [Page 220] to the guidance of Reason, in the Matter of Worship, no less than in the Object of it. Nor shall I here accuse them for prevarica­tion in what they could not know, but for shameful defection in what they might. Though Reason could not tell them by what Media of Worship God would be ho­noured, yet it could in great measure have told them by what he would not. Ha [...] they but consulted the Oracle in their ow [...] breast [...], it might have resolved them tha [...] God would not be served by such obsce [...] Rites, as such who were sober among themselves were asham'd to be present a [...] which occasioned the Poet to say of Cat [...].

Cur in Theatrum Cato severe venisti?
An ideo tantum vener as ut exires?
Mart. Epigram. lib. 1. Ep. 1.

Suppose it were left to the discretion of men to agree about the Sacra, by which they were to worship God; and suppose also it were left to their liberty, that every different Nation might have its distinct and different Ceremonies of Worship▪ yet there are still fundamental Laws of Reason, to which if the Media and Rites of worship be not so exactly consonant, [Page 221] yet they ought not to be repugnant to them. The consideration of the Nature of God, the Relation that one man stands in to another, was enough to have instruct­ed the World, that Humane Victimes were so far from being well-pleasing to God, that they were a great provocation to him. And yet this [...] prevailed univer­sally for a long time in the World. Not onely the Scythians, Phenicians, Carthagi­nians, and other less civilised Nations; but the Grecians & Romans were immers'd in the guilt of offering Humane Sacrifices. See Euseb. Prepar. Evangel. lib. 4. Dr. Owen's Diatrib. de justit. Divin. cap. 4. & de Nat. Ort. &c. Theolog. &c. lib. 5. cap. 7. Saubert. de Sacrif. cap. 21. Grot. de verit. Relig. Christ. lib. 2. I confess I do not in this particular so much complain of their want of means of knowing better, as of their supineness and sloth in not exercising their faculties to enquire into these impie­ties. However this is enough to declare that Reason is a very lubricous, uncertain and fallacious Rule of the Obedience we owe to God by the Law of Nature, when it hath not secured the Magnifiers and Courters of it from so unnatural abomina­tions. Yea, even those who in their pri­vate [Page 222] thoughts detested those salvage Me­thods and Media of approach to God, do yet virtually commend them while they ad­vise every man to conform to the Rites and Religion of his own Country, which I am sure the very best of them did: [...]; Epict. Enchir. cap. 38.

In Justification of the former Assertion concerning the defectiveness of Natural Light to Regulate the Obedience we owe to God by the Law of Creation. I might in the third place, insist on the infidelity o [...] some, and scepticalness of other of the Philosophers about a future Life and State▪ It is certain that without a perswasion o [...] these things, we cannot expect that me [...] should either pursue Vertue, or avoid Vice. The Doctrines of an Immortality and Fu­ture Estate are so necessarily presupposed to the practice of Vertue, that he who i [...] not assured of the former, will scarcely be ever found in an exercise of the latter. E­radicate once out of the minds of men the belief of a future existence, a judgment to come, and the perswasion of rewards and punishments, and the issue will be that which both the Prophet and Apostle menti­ons; Let us eat and drink, for to morrow [Page 223] we shall die, Isa. 22.13. 1 Cor. 15.32. It will be hard to find any that will avoid fleshly gratifications, who disbelieve an existence after death. I cannot better ex­press the result of such an opinion than in the words of some of themselves.

Vivamus m [...]a Lesbia atque amemus;
Nobis cum semel occidit brevis h [...]ra,
Nox est perpetua una dormienda.
Catul.
Indulge genio, carpamus dulcia—
—Cinis & Manes & fabula fies;
Pers.

If we enquire then into the opinions of those who have given the best attendance to Reason for the direction of manners: We find some in the total disbelief of a fu­ture state, such were Epicurus, Pliny, Str [...] ­bo, and both the most, and the chiefest of their Poets, who I am sure had a greater influence upon the minds and lives of the vulgar, than the Philosophers had. Others speak ambiguously and doubtfully of it: A­ristotle, by what we can collect from his writings, was hugely uncertain about it; Socrates, if we may believe Plato, knew not how to be confident of it: Nor could Cicero get any farther, but that he judged [Page 224] it the more probable opinion. And they who seem to be most positive concerning it, describe the Rewards and Punishments of that future state under such silly and wilde Notions, as could have no great influence upon mens lives. Their Infernal Regions were not very likely to disengage men from the pleasures of Animal life; nor their Elysia [...] Fields to prevaile with them to a course of mortification. And indeed though every mans Reason may tell him that there is some future condition abiding us beyond this world; yet such a knowledge as may indubitate us concerning it, and give us such an acquaintance with the Nature and quality of the Rewards and Punishments of it, as may make us contemn the pleasures of life, chuse Vertue when we see it en­compassed with the greatest calamities, & a­void evil when we find prosperity attending it; Reason could never have helpt us to. But for this we are obliged to the Gospel, in which Life and Immortality are brought to light, 2 Tim. 1.10.

I shall in the fourth place endeavour to shew the insufficiency of Natural Light, as to the being the measure of the whole obe­dience we owe to God, according to the Law of Creation. By demonstrating its [Page 225] defectiveness in conducting the Heathen world in things o [...] the strictest and plainest Morality. This we shall do by producing a few examples wherein their most renow­ned Legislators, and famousest Philosophers have transgressed not only in the prac­tick, but mistook in the Theory of the most obvious Duties of Moral Good and Evil. The Lacedemonians (as I intimated be­fore) not only allowed but commended Theft. The Cyprians permitted young women to prostitute their bodies for the raising themselves portions. The Cretians made a Law to countenance Sodomie, nor doth Aristotle (mentioning it) discommend it. The Romans gave husbands liberty to kill their wives upon very frivolous occa­sions. And allowed Creditors not only to slay their Debtors, but to Torment them to death when they could not pay them. The Persians authorised Fathers to marry their own Daughters, and Mothers their Sons. Both the Egyptians and the Athenians made it lawful for Brothers to match with their Sisters. The Laws of the B [...]rbiscae commanded the Sons to knock their Fathers on the head when they came to Dotage. Hardly any Nation but allowed Robbery out of their own territories to be lawful. [Page 226] Among some of the Indians their Princes are not permitted the conjugal embraces of their wifes, till their Priests have deflow­red them. Plato was for establishing a com­munity of women in his Commonwealth. Both Socrates and Cato could make a trade of their wifes chastity, and let them out for gain and profit. Aristotle and Cicero be­sides several others recommend Revenge not only as just and lawful, but as gene­rous and noble. The Stoicks overthrew true patience which consist's in an humble acquiescence in the will of God, by stating it in an unpracticable Apathie. For Pati­ence lies not in confronting calamities and sinister accidents by a wilful stupidity; but in deeply sensing them, yet bearing them with a due Reverence and submission to the Soveraignty and wisdome of God who sends and order's them. The Foun­dations on which their indifferency as to all forreign contingencies, and seeming bra­very under the most importunate evils bore; viz. that they are [...] not within the confines of our power, and that mur­mure at them would be unprofitable; are too weak for the structure of true patience to be raised on. For it is not enough that we do not repine, because it will not availe us; [Page 227] but we are to forbear murmuring because it is unlawful. Nor is it sufficient to ju­stifie submission, because the things are be­yond our power to alter, but we ought to acquiesce in them, because they are the effects of a righteous providence, and carry in them a design of Love and Grace, if we do not defeat them. Humility, one of the most excellent and useful vertues, hath not so much as a Room in all the Ethicks of the Philosophers: yea pride is recommen­ded amongst their chiefest vertues. The consideration of the infinite perfections of the first Being, and our dependence on him both as to life and all the benefits of it, should make us contract and shrink into no­thing whensoever we compare our selves with God. Much more should the con­sideration of sin and guilt, familiarize us to self-abasement and prostration. But alas! As man in general never more esteem'd himself, than since he was miserable: So they that have least to be proud of, are most conceited. Of all men the Philosophers abounded in self-esteem and boasting, and that not only to a degree of immodesty, but impudence. As if it had not been enough for the Beggarly Stoick to vaunt himself the only Rich Man, and that he alone was [Page 228] noble, he did not only vie perfection with God, but preferr'd himself before him. The Indian Brachmans vouched themselves for Gods; Yea the very Academicks who professed they knew nothing; and the Cy­nicks who made it a great part of their business to deride the pride of others, a­bounded in self-esteem. To this Pride which universally possest them, I judge two things to have contributed exceedingly. (1) An apprehension they were imbued with, that the soul is a portion of the Deity [...], a peice clipt of from God, as Phil [...] Platonising stiles it. [...], as An [...]toninus call's it, lib. 5. § 27. [...] a Divine particle, idem lib. 2. [...] a part of God, Epict. Divinae particulae aur [...], Horat. Serm. lib. 2. And it was no ques­tion with respect to this, that Cicero both i [...] his Tusculan questions, and in his Book de Somn. Scip. saith, Deum scito te esse; Know thy self to be a God. A Second thing that con­tributed to it, were the wicked and ridicu­lous stories which went concerning the Gods whom they did adore: and indeed who would not prefer himself before a Let­cherous Jupiter, a Thievish Mercury, a Drunken Bacchus, or a Bloody Mars &c. The Natural issue of worshipping such [Page 229] Gods was either to grow vile in imitation of them; or to slight and detest them, as prac­tising that which every man should be as­ham'd of. Shall I add in the next place, that the Authority of Princes stood upon very unsafe terms, if the Obedience of Subjects were to be Regulated by the opinions of Philosophers. There is no [...] an assassination of any man in power, but what may be justified by examples commended in the most renowned Pagan writers. What Ci­cero who was no puny either in learning or Morality plead's in justification of Brutus and Cassius for killing Cesar, may serve to Authorise the Murther of any Magistrate, if the Actors can but perswade themselves to call him Tyrant. Had we nothing to conduct us in our Obedience and Loyalty, but the sentiments of Philosophers, no Prince could be secure either of his life or dignity. The last Instance wherein the Philosophers miserably prevaricated in a Matter of plain Morality, that I shal mention, is, their allowing an [...] or [...], Men inflicting violent hands on themselves. Holding our lives of God we are accountable to him for them; nor can any be their own executioners without offending both against the Commonwealth of which we are mem­bers, [Page 230] and invading the jurisdiction which belongs to God, who only hath power to dispose of us. I acknowledg that some of them were better illuminated in this matter than others. Hence that of Plato [...]; The Soul is in the body as Souldiers in a garrison, from whence they may not withdraw or fly without his order and direction that plac'd them there; in Phaedon. Vetat Dominans in nobis Deus, injussu hin [...] nos suo discedere; Cicer. Tuscul. lib. 1. There­fore Aristotle sayth well, [...]; To chuse death to avoid penury or Love or any thing that is calamitous, i [...] not the part of a stout man but of a coward; Eth. lib. 3. cap. 7. But the Stoicks who of all the Philosophers were the most re­nowned Moralists, held it not only lawful but an act of the highest fortitude to redeem themselves from the miserie of life by flying to death for shelter. Si necessitates ultim [...] inciderint, exibit è vitâ, & molestus sibi esse desinet; If miseries encompass thee, fly to death for Sanctuary: Sen. [...]p. 17. Sapi­ens vivit quantum debet, non quantum po­test: si multa occurrant molesta, & tran­quillitatem turbantia, se emittit, nec hoc tan­tum [Page 231] in necessitate ultimâ facit, sed cum pri­mum illi ceperit suspecta esse fortuna. Nihil existimat suâ referre ficiat finem, an acci­piat; idem Epist. 70. vid. Epist. 58.91.98. & M. Antonin. lib. 5. §. 29. ac E­pictet. lib. 1. cap. 29. & lib. 2. cap. 16. Nor were their practices dissonant from their sentiments; witness Democritus, Ze­no, Cleanthes, Cato, Brutus, Cassius, &c. who all dipt their hands in their own blood, acting therein both repugnantly to the in­stinct of self-preservation all men are by Nature imbued with, and below that true fortitude which all of them celebrated as a prime Vertue: For the Epigrammatists censure of Fannius doth perstringe them all alike.

Hostem cum fugeret se Fannius ipse peremit,
Hic rogo, non furor est, ne moriare mori?
Mart.

By these few instances we may easily perceive what a miserable condition the World had been in, even in reference to the most obvious duties of Morality, had mankind been left to the sole conduct of Natural Light; and by consequence that Humane Reason is not an adaequate Rule of Moral Vertue.

[Page 232]In further confirmation of the defective­ness of Natural Light for the Regulatio [...] of Moral Obedience, I shall in the fift and last place observe, that all who were under the conduct of meer Reason, mistook in the End of Obedience, which is as much under the Sanction of Law, as the substance of Duty is. For as Augustin sayes well▪ Noveris itaque non officiis, sed finibus [...] vitiis discernendas esse virtutes; Virtues [...] not so much distinguisht from Vices by th [...] entity of the act, as by the scope and intenti­on of the agent; advers. Julian. lib. 4. cap▪ 13. What Forms are in Natural Philoso­phy, that the End is in Moral. A Respec [...] to God specifies every Vertue and Duty [...] and wherever he is left out as the End, th [...] Act is torn from its Moral Form. W [...] might call it Fortitude and Patience in C [...]tili [...]e, that he could endure cold, hunger▪ and much watchfulness to overthrow his Country, were not the End necessary to the Moral denomination of every action. The first cause is the ultimate end of every Being; of and through whom we are, to him we ought to be and act. Seeing God is our Creator, Proprietor, Governour, and Happiness, all our actions ought to be directed to the glorifying of him. Now [Page 233] where are any among the Heathen Mora­lists, or among those that acted under the conduct of meer Reason, who proposed as the end of their Actions the glory of God. Their opinions about the Finis ultimus ho­minis, with reference to which Varro tells us there were 288 Sects of Philosophers, do abundantly evidence their faileur in this particular. Some made Vertue subservi­ent onely to their own praise, applause and glory. What the Poet says of Brutus's killing his own Sons, when they intended to overthrow the liberty of their Coun­try, ‘Vicit amor patriae laudumque immensa cupido;’ Is the most that can be pleaded as the aim of a great many of them. Others pursued Vertue in order to pleasure, and onely admired it on that account. Now supposing the pleasures they proposed to themselves were not so gross and sensual as is generally conceived, (though I know not how to acquit the School of Epicurus in this matter, notwithstanding all the Apo­logies that are made for them) yet their opinion is sufficiently culpable, in that they confounded the intention and scope of the [Page 234] Agent, with the consequent of the actio [...] and made the Reward annexed by God [...] Vertue, to intercept the Glory which in [...] their thoughts and deeds they should hav [...] endeavoured to bring to Him. Those who spake most magnificently of Vertue▪ held it desirable onely for it self; affirming that the actions and offices of Vertue were to be pursued meerly for the beauty and honesty that essentially belonged to them [...] Interrogas quid petam ex virtute? ipsam [...] nihil enim est melius; ipsa pretium sui est [...] Senec. de vit. beat. vid. etiam de Clement▪ cap. 1. & Epist. 113. But first, it is [...] palpable contradiction that any action or habit should be Morally beautiful, other­wise than as it respects God, whose Nature and Will is the measure of all its Moral pul­chritude; and therefore it ought to be re­ferred to the honor of its Model. Yea▪ not onely the Will of God, but his Nature requires, that what-ever derives from him, either as its idea or source, should be ulti­mately resolved and terminated in him as its Center. Secondly, It is most false that either Habit or Act can be Rationally cho­sen, or finally rested in for it self: But ei­ther some benefit to our selves and friends, or the honor and glory of some other must [Page 235] be proposed and intended by them. For as all Habits are desired in reference to actions and operations, so if in every action we design not an end in order to the attain­ment of which we so act, we declare our selves brutish and irrational. Though Brutus was as far tinctur'd with a persuasion that Vertue was its own End and Reward as any man else whatsoever; yet it is most certain that he reckoned upon the accrue­ment of something else by it, whereof judging himself disappointed, he proclaim'd Vertue to be but an empty Name; [...] I shall shut up this with a sentence or two of Au­stin, Virtutes cum ad seipsas referuntur, nec propter aliud expetuntur, inflatae ac superbae sunt: When Vertues are sought onely for themselves, they degenerate into Pride, and become Idols, and the prosecution of them is Idolatry. Proinde virtutes, quas sibi vi­detur habere homo, nisi ad Deum retulerit, etiam ipsa vitia sunt potius quam virtutes; Therefore the Vertues which a man thinks he hath, if they be not referred to God, they are Vices rather than Vertues, de Civit. Dei lib. 9. cap. 25. vide Jansen. de Stat. Na­tur. laps. lib. 4. cap. 11, 12, 13. It ap­pears then from the whole of what we have [Page 236] said, that the Law of Creation, or of Rea­son, as it is subjective in Man, is so far from being the Rule of Religion in its utmost la­titude, that it is not a sufficient measure of Moral Vertue.

§. 7. We come next to consider the Law of Nature, or Right Reason as 'tis Objective in the Decalogue, which we have declared to be a transcript of the Law of Creation, chap. 2. §. 4. and have also demonstrated its perfection and sufficien­cy for the Regulating the Duties we are under by the said Law, chap. 2. §. 13. We cannot without very unbecoming though [...]s of the Wisdome of the Legislator, but judge it a compleat Measure of all Moral Offices and performances, seeing God de­signed it for a Law of Morality. For, as Plato says, it belongs to a Law-giver not only to have an eye to a few things, [...], but to have an Universal respect to all, and to every Vertue: de legib. 10. Nor can this be denyed of the supreme Rector (presupposing him supernaturally to reveal a Law of Manners) without re­flexion both on his Nature and Govern­ment. We will allow the Orator to com­plain, latius patere officiorum quam Juris Regulam, That there is more belongs to our [Page 237] Duty, than ever was enacted by any Civil Law; but we dare not entertain the like thoughts of the Divine Law, especially when it was given by God for this very end, that we might be illuminated and con­ducted by it in the offices of Morality.

It is no part of my concern at present, to enquire whether the Decalogue compre­hend any more in it than a transcript of the Original Law; or whether besides its be­ing a Collection of Natural Laws, there may not be some positive precepts as well as arbitrary appendices added to it. It is e­nough to me that it contains an Epitome of the Dictates of Right Reason, and that 'tis a compendious Draught and Model of the Law of Nature; nor will I at this time in­terest my self in that Controversie, whe­ther there by any thing else required in it yea, or not. I withal readily grant, that Obedience to all the Duties of Instituted Religion is bound upon the Soul by the Law of the Ten Commandments, seeing that obligeth us to obey God in all the de­clared Instances of his Will. As there is nothing in positive Religion repugnant to any principle of Nature; so these very du­ties which do immediately fundate in Gods Will do challenge our obedience in the Vertue of a Natural Law.

[Page 238]I crave also to have it observed, That the Decalogue may be considered either as it is a meer Draught and Delineation of the Law of Creation; or as having annex­ed to it a Remedial Law, to which in its most exacting Rigor it was made subservi­ent. Though the Law of the Ten Com­mandments for the matter and substance of it be one and the same with the Law of Creation; being in this respect only Reno­vatio antiquae Legis, not Latio novae; and still Natural with reference to the things en­acted, though positive as to the manner of the promulgation: Yet, as given by Mo­ses, there is a Law of Grace couched in it, which no wise appertain'd to it as commu­nicated at first with our Natures. Hence the Lord in the very Preface of the Deca­logue, treats with them as their God, Exod. 20.1. i. e. as their everlasting Benefactor, which in the Vertue of the Covenant of Works, and in Reference to the meer Law of Creation, he neither was, nor could be since the first ingress of sin. In this sense David takes the Law in most of his Encomiums of it. And in this accep­tation I acknowledge the Law to be the measure of all the main Duties which we owe to God, either in the way of Natural, [Page 239] or Instituted Religion. It is true there are some Duties of peculiar New-Testament institution; but those as they are in them­selves of a subordinate Nature to the great demands of the Law of Faith, being chiefly stipulations of our performing the condi­tions of it; So both the constituting & practi­sing of them had been unsuitable to the Old Testament oeconomie. The like may be said concerning those obligations which we are manumitted and set free from, which the Mosaick Church were under the Sanc­tion of.

That which I undertake the Justification of is this, that the Decalogue as it is a meer transcript of the Law of nature, or right Rea­son, is not the measure of the whole of Reli­gion; nor, as it is Christian, of the most mo­mentous parts of it. Nor can the contrary be affirmed without renouncing of the Gospel, which I am afrai'd too many, as being weary of it, are ready to doe. For, First, if the Decalogue as it is a meer new Edition of the Original Law of nature, be the sole and only Measure of Religion, then the New Covenant is nothing but a re­petition of the Old. Yea, there is no such thing as a New Covenant with respect to the Terms of it, onely it is so called with [Page 240] respect to the manner of its Promulgation. For where the Terms and conditions vary not, neither do the Covenants vary. 'Tis their differing in their Demands, that gives them the Denomination of distinct Cove­nants. To assert a coincidency as to the whole preceptive part betwixt the two Co­venants, is in effect to bid us disclaim a great part of the Bible. What tendency some expressions of a late Author have this way, I shall refer to the judgment of o­thers. As in the State of Innocence the whole Duty of man consisted in the practice of all those Moral Vertues, that arose from his Natural Relation to God and man; so all that is superinduced upon us since the fall, is no­thing but helps and contrivances to supply our Natural defects and restore us to better a­bility, to discharge those duties we stand en­gaged to by the Law of our Nature, and the design of our Creation. &c. def. & contin. p. 315, 316. The supposition of sin does not bring in any New Religion, but only makes new circumstances and names of old things, and requires new helps and advan­tages to improve our Powers, and to encou­rage our Endeavours: And thus is the Law of Grace nothing but a Restitution of the Law of Nature; ibid. p. 324. Secondly there are [Page 241] several duties incumbent now upon us, which also constitute the chief part of our Christian Obedience, that the Decalogue as 'its a transcript of the Law of right Rea­son or of Nature▪ is perfectly a stranger to. For proof of this I shall only insist on Re­pentance towards God, and Faith towards Jesus Christ. I suppose it will be granted by most, that Repentance in all the parts and branches of it, viz. conviction of sin, Contrition for it, and conversion to God from it, are Duties we are all under the obligation of. I said by most, because of some expressions in a late Author which I can hardly reconcile with the account which the Scripture gives us of Repentance, or with that modesty which we ought to exercise in the things of God. The Fathers & first preach­ers of the Christian Faith, did not fill peoples heads, with scruples about the due degrees of Godly sorrow, and the certain symptoms of a through-Humiliation; def. & contin. p. 306, 307. And a little after, They (says he, meaning the Noncomformists) examine the truth and reality of mens conversion by their orderly passage through all the stages of con­viction; And unless a man be able to give an account of having observed and experi­enced in himself all their imaginary Rules & [Page 242] Methods of Regeneration, (i. e. conviction and contrition &c.) they immediately call into question his being a Child of God, and affright him with sad stories of having mis­carried of Grace and the New-Creature; And he is lost and undone for ever unless he begin all the work of conversion anew, and he must as it were re-enter into the Womb, & again pass through all the scenes & work­ings of conviction; in which state of forma­tion all new converts must continue the ap­pointed time, and when the days are accom­plished, they may then proceed to the next operation of the Spirit, i. e. to get a long­ing, panting, and breathing frame of soul, upon which follows the proper season of deli­very, and they may then break loose from the Enclosures of the Spirit of Bondage, and creep out from those dark Retirements, wherein the Law detain'd them, into the light of the Gospel and the liberty of the Spirit of Adoption: p. 309, 310. However I can justifie the forementioned steps and de­grees of Repentance both by Scripture and Reason. Now this, the Moral Law as 'tis a meer summary of the Law of Nature nei­ther know's nor allow's; I confess the Law of Creation obliging us to love God with all our Heart, Soul and Strength, and in all [Page 243] things to approve our selves perfect before him, doth by consequence in case of the least faileur oblige us to sorrow. And thus men wholly strangers to the renueing grace of the Covenant may repent: witness a­mong others Judas as to the act of betray­ing Christ. But to encourage us thereunto by any promise of acceptance, without which no man will ever be found in the due practice of it; Heb. 11.6. Or administer help for the performance of it; this it nei­ther doth, promiseth, nor can do or pro­mise. For being once violated, it know's no other language but the thundring of wrath against the transgressour. Now one and the same Covenant can not be capable of two such contrary clauses, as denouncing an inevitable curse on whosoever shall not observe the Law in all points, and promi­sing mercy to those that repent of the trans­gressions which the do commit. They like may be said of Faith. This is the great condition of the Gospel, Gal. 3.22. Act. 13.29. Rom. 10.9. One of the princi­pal Duties we are now obliged to; 1 Joh. 3.23. Joh. 6.29. Now this as 'tis the condition of Gospel-pardon, the Law is utterly unacquainted with; know's no­thing at all of it. It is true there is a general [Page 244] Faith terminating on the Existence, Au­thority, and Veracity of God, which comes under the Sanction of the Law of Creati­on. But Faith, as respecting a Mediator, and Gods treating with us through him, the Law is both ignorant of, and at enmity with, Gal. 3.12. The Law is not of Faith, Rom. 9.32, 33. Israel which followed after the Law of Righteousness, hath not attained to the Law of Righteousness; wherefore, because they sought it not by Faith, but as it were by the Works of the Law. I know not whe­ther it be upon this account, because Faith comes not smoothly enough within the compass of being a Moral Vertue, that a late Author is pleas'd to scoff at Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, not only by stiling it in mockage, the dear darling Article of the Religion of Sinners, Def. & Contin. p. 322. but by representing what the Scrip­ture every-where ascribes to it in such terms of Drollery, Scorn, and Contempt; that I tremble to transcribe them. They make (says he) a grievous noise of the LORD CHRIST, tell fine Romances of the secret amours betwixt the believing Soul and the LORD CHRIST, and prodigious stories of the miraculous feats of FAITH in the LORD CHRIST; Reproof to the Rehears. Trans­pros. [Page 245] p. 69. See also Def. & Contin. p. 135· 140. But while men believe their Bibles they are not to be jeered out of their Duty and Happiness. And this is all I shall dis­course of the first Instrument of Morality, viz. the measure of it; and I hope it ap­pears by what hath been offered, that the Law of Creation (which is the Alon [...] Rule of Moral Vertue) whether we take it subjectively, as it is in Man since the Fall; or objectively, as it is in the Decalogue; neither is, nor can be the Rule and Stan­dard of the whole obedience we owe to God.

CHAP. IV.

(1) The Principle in the strength of which Moral vertues are acquired, and moral a­ctions performed, taken into consideration. Determined by the Philosophers to be no­thing but our Faculties and the improve­ment of them by objective helps. (2) The same affirmed by the Pelagians. (3) The Judgment of a late Author as to this par­ticular Inquired into, and found coinci­dent with the former. (4) Several Things lay'd down in order to the better discussion of the extent of the promised power. (5) What we may arrive at in the meer strength, and through the improvement of our Natural Abilities distinctly proposed. (6) The deficiencies that occur in those Du­ties which Men in the vertue of the foresaid Principles do perform. (7) several Du­ties to which by the best improvement of Natural Abilities we cannot arise. (8) The Necessity of an infused Principle inferred thereupon and further demonstrated. (9) The whole concluded.

§. 1. The Rule & Measure of Moral Ha­bits [Page 247] & acts was in the former Chap. Enqui­red into; and if the reasons there produced hold good, they yield us this result, viz. that in order to our conduct in the Duties of Re­ligion there needs an other light than that of Nature. We come in the next place to consider the other great Instrument of Mo­rality, namely, The Principle in the strength and power of which Moral Habits are ac­quired and Moral actions performed. Now the Philosophers knew no other Principle of Mora­lity but innate ability and Natural Power.Natura beatis om­nibus esse dedit, si quis cognov [...]it uti. Claud. Iudici­um hoc omnium mortalium est, fortunam a Deo petendam, a seipso sumendam esse sapien­tiam; all men are agreed that as we are to ask external good things of God, so we are to trust only to our selves for the acquisi­tion of vertue, saith Cicero. de Nat. Deor. [...], The adeption of vertue is in our own power, saith. Alex. A­phrodis. lib. de fato § 27. As men attain skill in Trade's by discipline and exercise, [...], In the same manner do we attain Habits of vertue; idem ibid. There is nothing more absurd, saith Tully, than to affirm that men may of their own accord be vicious & also not vertuous; Academ. Quest. [Page 248] lib. 4. §. 39. And therefore he tells us elsewhere Neminem unquam acceptam Deo retulisse virtutem; propter virtutem e­nim jure laudamur, & de virtute recte glo­riamur, quod non contingeret si id donum à Deo non a n [...]bis haberemus, That no man ever thankt God for being vertuous, &c. de Nat. Deor. That this was the general opi­nion of the Philosophers, we have de­monstrated more fully, chapt. 1. §. 3. Be­ing unacquainted with the Revelation of the Word where supernatural and divinely communicated strength is only promised and unfolded; no better could be expect­ed from them, nor do I know upon what ground they could have lay'd claim to more. As for those expressions which we meet with in the Platonists, concerning the Divine Infusion of Vertue; It may be ea­sily reply'd, that they had these Notions ei­ther immediatly from the Sacred Oracles, or from some who understood the Jewish Traditions, or else that being convinced of their own ineptitude to Vertue, and not knowing whither to betake for relief, they referred themselves to the supreme cause, tanquam [...], as one who only could relieve them at a dead lift.

And if this answer be not thought suffici­ent, [Page 249] I dare undertake to produce as many testimonies out of the Platonists for the acquisition of Vertue as for the infusion of it; which argues that they were wholly at a loss about the attainment of it; And that they alledged a Divine Communication of it, not because of any foundation they had in the light of Nature for such a persuasi­on, but because they knew not how else to satisfie themselves in their enquiries about the adeption of it. 'Tis true, all the Phi­losophers contend for objective helps, by which we may be excited to exert our Na­tural strength for the adeption of Vertue; but for any active subjective Principle of it besides connate ability, they were so far from allowing it, that they lookt upon it as rather meriting scorn and laughter. Yea those very objective helps which they ap­plied to, were nothing else but the effects of their faculties, improving Natural Light and the first principles of Reason. Hence Seneca having said that we are more indebt­ed to Philosophy than to the Gods, for as much as we owe only our lives to them▪ but are obliged to Philosophy that we live vertu­ously; he adds, cujus scientiam (puta Phi­losophiae) nulli dederunt, facultatem omni­bus, whereof they have communicated the [Page 250] actual science to none, though they have given faculties and powers whereby it may be attained to all, Ep. 90. The great Ob­jective Medium they trusted to, for the get­ting of Vertue, was Moral Philosophy, as we have demonstrated, chap. 1. § 3. Now this, take it in all the parts & kinds of it, whe­ther Dogmatick, wherein the Aristotelians excelled; or Exhortative, wherein the Stoicks were most eminent; or Characte­ristical, wherein the Pythagoreans and Platonists transcended, was nothing but the product of Humane Reason improving Natural Light and congenite Notions. But for any subjective Principle besides their meer faculties they knew none.

§. 2. With the Philosophers do the Pe­lagian as to the substance at least of their Dogmata agree; Philosophy being the se­minary of the Pelagian Heresie, and their chiefest notions being derived from thence. Virtutes non infundi divinitus, sed bene vi­vendi consuetudine parari contendunt Pela­giani; The Pelagians affirm, saith Austin, that Vertues come not by divine Inspiration, or Infusion, but that they are acquired by a sober course of life, Epist. ad Demet. & lib. de gestis Pelag. cap. 14. Non esi liberum Arbitrium, si Dei indigeat auxilio, quoniam [Page 251] in pr [...]prid voluntate habet unusquisque fa­cere aliquid vel non facere; Did we need a­ny internal subjective assistance from God, humane freedom would be overthrown, a po­wer of acting and not acting belonging es­sentially to the Will; decima propositio affixa Pelag. in Concil. Diospolit. 'Tis true, they pretended to own Grace, but as Austin says, it was ut Gratiae vocabulo frangerent invidiam, That they might avoid envy and contradiction, and escape these imputati­ons that they were justly liable to; lib. de Grat. Christi. cap. 37. For by Grace they understood no more than Natural Power. Dei Gratiam (saith Austin concerning Pe­lagius) non appellat nisi Naturam, qua li­bero Arbitrio conditi sumus; lib. de Nat. & Grat. Notwithstanding the several al­terations and amendments which they seem'd to make in their opinion, yet as to the point of an inward subjective principle they never granted any more than the Es­sential faculties of our Nature. Both the adjutorium legis and the doctrina & exem­plum Christi, with which they palliated and glossed their opinion concerning the Grace of God, and which was the highest they ever arose in the explication of the Doctrine of Grace, are only external Mo­ral [Page 252] Principles: Neither the one, nor the o­ther have any alliance to an inward physi­cal Principle. Which made the Fathers of the Council of Carthage say justly of them, nullum relinquunt locum gratiae Christi qu [...] Christiani sumus, that they left no room for the Grace of Christ, &c. ad Innocent. Pap. And others say of them, totum quod Chri­stiani sumus nituntur evertere; that they endeavoured to overthrow the whole, by which we are Christians, Patres Concil. Milevit. ad eundem. apud August. Epist. 93.

§. 3. With these doth the opinion of a late Author seem to coincide. Now for as much as this seems a charge of very great consequence, if it be found true, we shall search a little the more into his own writings for the proof of it. I know not whether we are to ascribe it to a design in the Author of clouding his Senti­ments, or to an affection of a declamatory and flourishing way of writing; but I am sure it is come to pass, that as well in this particular, as in some others, he hath not declared his conceptions with that accu­racy, perspicuity and clearness that was fit. But [...] The Die is thrown, we have entred our charge, and 'tis incumbent up­on [Page 253] us to make it good. Some possibly may think it enough to justifie the foregoing im­putation, that our Author making the whole of practical Religion to consist in Moral Ver­tue, and that Grace and Vertue are but diffe­rent names of the same thing, That there­fore, seeing the Original Authors of those terms will have all Vertue to proceed from the strenth and improvement of our Natu­ral abilities, he ought, if he will speak ei­ther consonantly to himself, or to them, to affirm the same. Others may perhaps reckon it for proof enough, that there are divers expressions scattered up and down his writings, which seem calculated for no other end, but to reflect tacit scorn and contempt upon the Spirit of God and his Work on the minds of men; such is that passage, Eccl. Polit. p. 57. Of the Worlds being filled with a buzz and noise of the Di­vine Spirit, and that Def. & Contin. p. 343. That the Spirit of God, and the Grace of Christ, when used as distinct from Moral a­bilities and performances signifie nothing. And that other, Reproof to the Rehears. Trans. p. 101. That 'tis an impertinent foppery to think of reconciling Gods Method of begetting Faith in the Elect by a power e­qual to that wherewith he Created the World, [Page 254] and raised up the Dead, with the power of E­lection and Free-will. But this method of proceed I wave, and therefore forbear pro­ducing several other expressions of a much worse complexion. The same candidness I desire from an Adversary in the repre­sentation of my own opinion, I profess my self ready to show in the taking the mea­sure of anothers, and therefore avoyding all collateral accidental expressions, how much so ever accommodated to serve my design, I shall confine my enquiry to those parts of his discourses, where he purposeth and designeth the giving an account of his Sentiments in this matter. Virtues (saith he) in the first ages of Christianity, were stiled Graces, because they were the effects of meer favor, whereas now they are the joynt-issues of our own industry, and the Spirit of God cooperating with our honest endeavours; and therefore they cannot now with so much propriety of speech be stiled Graces, because they are not matter of pure infusion, though they may be allowed the title still in some pro­portion, because they are in some proportion produced by the special Energie and coopera­tion of the Holy Ghost. In the same man­ner as these Abilities bestowed upon the A­postles without the concurrence of their own [Page 255] industry were called gifts, though now they might be more properly expressed by other Names, notwithstanding that we owe them to the Blessing of God upon our studies and en­deavours. And what was then the gift of Tongues, is now vulgarly called skill in Languages, and what was then the gift of utterance, is now the Art of El [...]quence and Rhetorique; Def. & Contin. p. 329, 330. If these expressions, being duely consider­ed, do not justifie what I have entred in charge against the said Author, I shall be ready not only to acknowledg my own ig­norance in judging of the sense and mean­ing of the commonest proposition, but to crave him pardon for having injured him in a matter of so great import, and to such a degree. Surely, if Grace be not a matter of pure infusion, as our Author expresly affirms that it is not▪ it can be nothing but an effect of our Essential powers, and of the improvement of our Reasons and Natural abilities. There is no other way besides one of these two, in which it can be obtained. To pretend any special Energy of the Holy Ghost in the production of Grace, distinct from an infusion of a new principle determining, elevating, and a­dapting our faculties to concur as vital prin­ciples [Page 256] in the performance of those acts, to which they were antecedently inept, is to allow Him at most but a Moral influence, which consists only in Objective Motives, in the begetting of it. 'Tis true, greater external helps do even in this respect fall to the share of those who live under the Gospel, than the Heathen were priviledg­ed with. The inducements to Vertue laid down in the word, vastly exceeding those proposed by Philosophers. But as for any active inward principle of Obedi­ence, There can be none according to the Hypothesis of our Author besides Natural Power. Again, If Graces be no other­wise attained, than skill in Languages, the art of Eloquence and Rhetorique are; and if that be the reason why in propriety of speech, those ought not now to be called Gra­ces, no more than these ought to be stiled Gifts; as our Author plainly affirms: It necessarily follows, that the only Principle of Grace and of all the obedience that proceeds from it, is nothing else but Na­tural Power, and connate ability of mind; for as much as no man lays claim to any higher principle for the acquisition of Arts but his Faculties. Men become not Phi­losophers or Physitians, &c. by inspirati­on, [Page 257] nor are any infused principles pretend­ed as necessary thereunto. The Blessing of God upon our studies and endeavours, implies no such thing as the communica­tion of Habits, of Learning and Science to us, but is by all that I know of, otherwise sensed and explained. Though this one passage be enough to lay open the mind of the foresaid Author in this matter; yet be­cause to discover some mens sentiments is sufficient to refute them; for as Hierome saith in a like case, Ecclesiae victoria est vos [...]perte dicere quod sentitis, sententias vestras prodidisse, super [...]sse est: Ep. ad. C [...]esiphon. I shall therefore subjoyn a few exp [...]essions more which I meet with to the same pur­pose in the foresaid book; In short (saith he) the whole state of this Question (being discoursing about the identity of Vertue and Grace) is plainly this: That in the days of the Apostles, the Divine Spirit prov­ed it self by some clear and unquestionable Miracle, and that was the rational evidenc [...] of its Truth and Divine Authority; but in our days it proceeds in an humane, and in a rational way joyning in with our Understand­ings and leading us forward by the Rules of Reason and Sobriety, by threatnings, and by promises, by instructing our faculties in [Page 258] the right perception of things, and by disco­vering a fuller evidence and stronger con­nexion of Truths, ibid. p. 334. Though any learned person will easily discover the drift and intendment of this passage, yet it be­ing so proposed, and containing such a mix­ture of truth and falshood bended toge­ther, that 'tis difficult for a common Rea­der to discern the leaven and poysonous ferment that is wrapt up in it; I shall take a farther survey of it. There are some men so accustomed to twist and interweave things of a heterogeneal nature one with a­nother, that it requires considerable skill to make a due separation and disposal of the several ingredients of their compositi­on to what they are shapen and designed to subserve. In the first place, I know none of all the Assertors of supernatural infused Grace, who pretend the overthrow of the Rules of Reason and Sobriety by Gods working immediatly and effectually upon the Souls of men. We attribute no such violent motion to Gods Spirit upon ours, as overthrow our powers and faculties. By a Communication of a vital principle, the Soul is attempered in its inward frame to the things its moved to. Through the introduction of the New Nature, our fa­culties [Page 259] are connaturalized to their duty. The Soul being irradiated with a Divine Light, and having a new strength trans­fused into it, is carried to its object out of choice, and upon conviction. Nor do I know any in the second place that preclude the use of promises and threatnings, or who affirm that the Spirit of God in the Regeneration and Renovation of Sin­ners, acts abstractedly from, and in­dependently on the Word. No; the dispensation of the Word, is Gods power un­to Salvation; the vehiculum spiritûs, the Chariot of the Spirit; the Seal by which he impresseth his Image. An attendence to the Reading and Preaching of it, is what they press every man earnestly to, and that all impulses be examined by it. That which I except against in this Paragraph of our Author, is this, that all allowed to the Spirit of God in his dealing with the Souls of men, is, that he acts only Objectively in ministring Arguments of Conviction to them: For that was the alone end of mira­cles, and that is our Authors intendment by the Spirits proceeding in an humane way. Now this supposeth the whole subjective power to reside naturally in our selves, and that all the assistances of the Spirit, serve only to excite it, and to awaken us to ex­ert [Page 260] our natural abilities: nor is this new; There are some others in whose writings our Author seems not a little conversant, who have gone before him in these appre­hensions. Novas autem qualitates creari, seu produci non est necesse. It is not necessa­ry that any new qualities should be created or produced in us; Stoinski coetus Racov. Minister ad Crell. Nonne ad credendum Evangelio, Spiritus S. interiori dono opus est? Nullo modo; Is not the inward opera­tion of the Holy Ghost necessary in order to our believing (he means savingly) the Gos­pel? by no means. Cateches. Racov. Est àutem probitas nihil aliud quam recté agendi studium, a recto rationis judicio pr [...] ­fectum; Holiness is nothing but an endea­vour of living uprightly in the strength of, and in the pursuance of Right Reason; V [...]l­kel. lib. 4. cap. 1. Causa proxima▪ probita­tis est ipsa voluntas seu arbitrium nostrum, cujus ea est vis ac potestas, ut in quam velit partem libere se i [...]clinet: The immediate cause of Holiness, is the Will it self, whose Power and Ability is such, that it can deter­mine it self to Good or Evil, as it pleaseth, Crell. Eth. Christian. lib. 2. cap. 2. Non est Spiritus Sanctus qui necessario requiritur ad vim & efficaci [...]m [...]verbo Dei concilian­dam, [Page 261] quippiam diversum ab ipso verbo; The Holy Spirit that is required to make the Word effectual, is nothing but the Word it self; Socin. de Justif. p. 27. Homo audito & in­tellecto Dei verbo sine ulla alia, nedum sol [...] speciali Spiritus Sancti operati [...]ne, potest se reipsa ad Deum convertere; Men through the help and assistance of the word heard and understood, may convert themselves to God, without any other, much less special opera­tion of the Holy Ghost; Schlichting cont. Meisner. de Servo Arbitrio. p. 88. Non requiritur supernaturale lumen, potentiae superinfusum, mentem elevans ad intelli­gendum & credendum Scripturis; There is no supernatural infused light necessary for the understanding and believing of the Scrip­tures; (he understands a Salvifick know­ledg and belief of them) Episcop. disp. 5. Thes. 3. An ulla actio Spiritus immediata in mentem aut voluntatem necessaria sit aut in Scriptur [...]s promittatur, ad hoc, ut quis cre­dere possit verbo extrinsecus proposito? ne­gativam tuebimur; whether besides the ex­ternal Promulgation of the Word, there be any immediate operation of the Spirit upon the Understanding or Will necessary? We undertake the defence of the Negative; idem in Thes. privatis ad Disput. 46. Co­rol. [Page 262] Nihil obstat quo minus vel sola grati [...] Moralis homines Animales Spirituales red­dat. Nothing hinders, but that men may be regenerate in the alone Vertue of Moral suasion; Grevinchov. Vim suam exerit Dei Spiritus qui illuminare mentes nostras dicitur, non quod novum lumen iis infun­dat. Volzog. de Script. Interpret. p. 254. Gratia neque nobis neque Scripturae novum lumen inserit, Velthuis. de usu Rationis, p. 70. Regeniti & non regeniti cognitio de rebus & mysteriis fidei non differt luminis ratione, idem. ibid. p. 9. I have been the more prolix in these citations, that we may the better understand whom in this mat­ter we have to conflict withal, and from whom these Notions are derived that are with so much confidence obtruded of late upon us.

If it be excepted that the person con­tended with, seems to allow a subjective principle of Grace distinct from▪ our Natu­ral faculties; For he expresly affirms, That if he did not believe the influences of the Spirit upon the minds of men, he behoved to explode the Lords Prayer it self as a foolish and insignificant Form, seeing the greatest part of its Petitions are things of that nature, as that they cannot be accomplished any other [Page 263] way than by the efficiency of the divine Spirit upon ours. Def. & Contin. p. 334. I Answer. (1.) 'Tis not unusual with some men both virtually and formally to contradict them­selves: And the Author whom we are replying upon seems to be endowed with a particular faculty that way, as might be justified in many instances. (2) 'Tis known that both the Pelagians and Socini­ans profess themselves the Friends and Patrons of Grace, and yet those who are acquainted with the mistery of their Prin­ciples, know that, saving the Revelation of God in the Scripture, they meant no more by Grace, but Nature and the Humane Faculties. — Fronte placent quae fine latent.

We readily grant that the Arguments proposed in the Scripture, may in a certain sense be stiled Grace, but what affinity hath this to the inward ingraft principle that we are inquiring after? It were too plain a de­fiance of the Gospel to renounce all inward Grace in express Terms; and yet as some, who seem to extoll grace exceeding­ly, explain it, no less is intended. See this proved by Mr. Trueman in his Discourse of Natural and Moral Impotency, a pag. 60. ad pag. 69. and in his other discourse con­cerning [Page 264] the Rectifying of some prevailing Opinions, a pag. 244. ad pag. 259.

§. 4. Having declared the Apprehensi­ons of the Philosophers and Others, con­cerning the Principle of Moral Vertue, namely, that both Habits and Acts pro­ceed from the strength and improvement of our Natural Abilities. Before we come to inquire, how far Natural Abilities se­conded with the assistance not only of Philoso­phy▪ but of Revelation, may carry men in Practical Obedience. There are several things of great import, both for the vindi­cating the Divine Goodness and Justice, and the convincing us of our Guilt, notwith­standing any Impotency which we labour naturally under, which I design a little to unfold as well as to propose. First then;

Notwithstanding any Congenite Original impotency that men labour under, They might do more in the discharge and performance of the Duties of practical obedience, were it not for contracted Evil Habits and customs. Custom in any thing is commonly stiled another Nature, and not much amiss, the power and efficacy of it being so great. [...], Custome is an ascititious Nature say both Aristot. and Galen. Tanta est corruptela malae consuetudinis ut ab ea [Page 265] tanquam igniculi extinguantur a Naturâ dati, exorianturque contraria vitia: so great is the infection of evil custom, that the seeds of vertue communicated to us by Nature are choaked by it, and vices contrary there­unto begotten; Cicer. A Habit in any thing is as Galen calls it [...], a lasting and hardly dissolvable dispositi­on. [...]. Long use and exercise becomes at last Nature, E­venus in Aristot. Consuetude in sin doth so corroborate men in it, that a vicious per­son cannot do well [...], even if he would; (which I suppose is no more but that he cannot obtain of himself to do it) Arist. ad Nicomach. lib. 3. Through an inveterate inclination of Will, men be­come so addicted to Evil, and so averse and disaffected to Good, that no Argu­ments to the contrary weigh with them. They grow so alienated by impure Habits, that all Vertue becomes distastful and wickedness grows a pleasure. Much of our Impotency to good is derived upon us by a familiarity with sin. Can the Ethi­opian change his skin? or the Leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do Evil, Jer. 13.23.

[Page 266]Secondly, They that have the Gospel are thereby brought into a considerable capacity of doing more than they that want it can. Nor do I mean this only extensively, that they are instructed about those duties whereof these are wholly Ignorant. For in that case God will proceed with men ac­cording to the measure of light that every one hath; and as Austin says of those with whom the knowledg of Christ and the Gospel never arrived, veniam habebunt propter infidelitatem, damnabuntur ver [...] propter peccata contra naturam; and a greater than Austin tells us, That as many as sinned without Law, shall also perish with­out Law, &c. as many as have sinned in the Law, shall be judged by the Law, Rom. 2.12. But I understand it with relation to those very Duties which the Heathen had some light concerning, and various helps for the performance of. For with respect to these, We, unto whom the Light of the glorious Gospel is come, have advantages infinitely beyond them who never enjoy'd that vouchsafement. The Declaration of our Duty is more clear as well as full. The Religion of Nature, and precepts of Moral goodness are unfolded with more perspicui­ty and plenitude in the Scriptures, than in [Page 267] any, or all the writings of the Philosophers. Moral Vertues were never so established by the Light of Reason, as they are by the Laws of the Gospel. Here is no crooked line, no impure mixture, nor Vice ob­truded for vertue. In a word, 'tis only the Bible that gives us a compleat systeme of the Laws of Nature, and therefore, we who live under the dispensation of the Gos­pel, have an advantage even of Moral O­bedience ministred unto us, that the Pagan world never had. Our Obedience is also endeared to us by nobler promises than the Pagan Philosophers were ever made ac­quainted with; and th [...]se promises are at­tended with all the motives of credibility. 'Tis likewise enforc'd under severer penal­ties than either Virgil or Homer in their Romantick description of Tartarus ever dream'd of. Nor is there in all the Ethicks of the Grecians and Romans such an induce­ment and incentive to practical Obedience, as the incarnation of the Son of God is; nor such a matchless pattern of Universal Vertue, as the life of the ever blessed Jesus sets before us. So that upon the whole, we, who have the light of the Scripture, are more inexcusable in our faileurs and crimi­nal in our miscarriages, than those who liv­ed [Page 268] under the conduct of meer Reason were capable of being.

Thirdly, How great soever the inability derived to, and entayl'd upon us by the Fall be, yet no man ever did what he might have done. We complain of weakness, but who acts the power he is imbued with? We palliate our disobedience by pre­tences of Impotency, but where is the man that ever exerted to the utmost the strength he had? We put fallacies upon our Souls by seeming to bewayle our want of strength, when in the mean time we neglect to exercise the Ability we are en­dowed with. Though we cannot accep­tably perform obedience, save from a re­newed principle, yet may we not be found in the discharge of the Material part of Duties? Though we cannot act holily as Saints, yet we may act Rationally as Men. Though we be meerly passive in the re­ception of the first Grace, yet may we not be found in an exercise of means prescrib­ed by God in order to it. We may read the Bible as well as a Romance, and hear a Sermon as well as see a Play. Do we serve the Providence of God for the obtaining of outward supplies, and may we not serve his promise for the receiving of Grace? Can [Page 269] we ask bread of God, and can we not beg his Spirit? It will be then seasonable to plead our weakness, when we have acted up to the utmost of our strength. Where is the man that can acquit himself from O­missions, which he might have prevented, and Commissions which he might have a­voided. As for the Heathen Philosophers, some of which are thought to have acted Natural Abilities to the utmost of what (with no better objective helps) they could arrive at; it were no difficult undertaking to demonstate, that as they wonderfully prevaricated in what by a due exercise of their Faculties they might have known, so they no ways answered what they knew and professed. Were Lucians testimony of any significancy, the very best of them were stark naught. However I think there was neither slaunder nor immodesty in that censure of his, that comparing their lives with their moral instructions, he found no harmony betwixt the one and the other; [...] in Menippo. Nor do I know any of them in reference to whom that of Anaxippus may not be ad­mitted, that how wise soever they were in [Page 270] their Doctrines, they were at best but Fools in their Practice.

[...]
[...]
[...] apud Athene.

What Seneca fastneth upon others of them, Quod probi esse desierunt cum docti e­vaserint, that they ceased to be Moral when they became Learned, I am sure holds true in an eminent degree of himself. I am not willing to offend the Manes of those anci­ent Heroes, otherwise I could not only from Poets and Satyrists, but from Histo­rians of credit, produce enough against them. So that Fourthly, There is no room for that question agitated with so much warmth betwixt the Remonstrants and Anti-Remonstrants whether Grace be due to those that improve Natural strength, for as much as never any did, or will improve it as they ought and might? It is true, it were not hard to be proved, that supposing men to do what they could, yet no one can chal­lenge Grace upon the foot of desert; and that God doth no where promise to give it upon the account of any antecedent either condignity or congruity in us. Meritis [Page 271] impii non gratia, sed paena debetur. Austin. Epist. 105. To him that hath shall be given, Math. 13.12. carries in it a plain other in­tendment than some men of prepossessed judgments would wrest from it. It relates at most to a bestowment of more of the same kind. Were the right and due use of the Talents of Nature, the rule and mea­sure according to which God proceeds in the dispensing of Grace, it would by the Rule of contraries follow that those who either through supiness or compliance with the inescations of the Animal life, fail in a due improvement of them, are to have no lot nor inheritance in any supernatural Do­nation. God promiseth sinners pardon if they believe, but in the Covenant made with us, he neither absolutely nor conditio­nally promiseth the Grace of believing to any. His purpose of giving Grace to some, amounts not to a promise claimable by any individual person. And as for the promise of a seed made to Christ, it respects as the condition of it, what He did, not what We do: Nor is it possible to understand who are within the verge of that promise, but by the event. But were there no o­ther Obex to hinder our challenging the communication of Grace, our neglect to [Page 272] improve the power we are naturally vest­ed with, is enough to stop the mouths of all Man-kind. 'Tis plainly to trifle to dis­pute about the Consequent of a Hypothetical Proposition, relating to life and practice, when it is easie to know that the Antece­dent which is the condition of its truth and establishment, will never come to pass.

5. Whatsoever men, notwithstanding their impotency, whether congenite or contracted, neglect to do in way of Duty, or practice in way of Sin, they do it upon Motives which to them seem Rational. The Will is [...] a Rational appetite, and always chus­eth or refuseth upon grounds and motives, though they often prove slight and fallaci­ous, though the understanding and [...]ill be not Faculties either really distinct from the Soul, or from one another, but one and the same entity cloathed with different names from the diversity of its operations. Yet the acts with respect to which the Soul is stiled Will, are not only different from those acts with reference to which it is called Understanding, but also dependant upon them. Nor doth the Soul under the denomination of Will either chuse, or pur­sue any thing, but what it first under the appellation of Understanding judgeth [Page 273] good, nor doth it refuse or decline any object, but what it first judgeth pro hic & nunc evil. And if it were otherwise, the Will were not a Rational Faculty, but should act bruitishly in all it doth. Accor­dingly [...] is well defined by some to be [...], a consider [...]i­on of things future so far as expedient. Hence no man desires or declines an ob­ject, but he can give a Reason for it. What-ever men do as men, 'tis upon Ar­guments and Reasons that prevail with them. Those actions are not Humane, and so not Moral which fall not under the conduct of the Understanding. As 'tis impossible we should chuse or refuse that whereof we have no idea at all (ignoti enim nulla cupido, nullum odium) so 'tis as im­possible that we should chuse and prosecute what is represented to us as Evil, or refuse and shun what is commended to us by the Understanding as Good; and therefore Sixthly.

Notwithstanding the servitude that wick­ed men are in to Brutal Lusts and sensual in­clinations and desires, yet they still retain that Liberty and Freedom of Will which be­longs to them as men. It is one thing to discourse against the Moral Rectitude of [Page 274] the Will, and another to impugn its Es­sential freedom. The contending against Pelagianisme does not necessarily run us up­on Manichaeisme. We readily acknowledge, that if we stood arrest­ed with an impotency impeaching our free­dom of acting,Quis non clamet stul­tum esse praecepta dare ei, cui liberum non est quod praecipitur facere? Aug. de fide cont. Ma­nich. cap 10. we could be no longer subjects of Moral Government. For as Austin sayes, It is a ridiculous thing to impose praecepts upon him, who enjoyeth not a liberty adapting him to obey them; and as he there adds, It were an Unrighteous thing to condemn us for doing that which we could not help. I am not ignorant what in­vective language, scurrilous reproaches, and satyrical terms some are accosted with, as if by asserting the necessity of the suc­cours of Divine Grace, and the inability of men to Good precluding the subjective influence and effectual assistance of the Ho­ly Ghost, they overthrew humane Liber­ty and introduced a Fate more irresistible than that of the Stoicks and Chaldeans. Whereas the whole of those mens decla­mations builds upon a gross prevarication and mistake concerning the Nature of Li­berty; They suppose Humane Free­dom [Page 275] to consist in an aequilibrium to both extreams, or in an absolute indifferen­cy of acting or not acting, or doing this or the contrary; Whereas it standeth on­ly in an acting conformably to the judg­ment, and in doing whatever one appre­hends that he ought. Nor did the Anci­ent Philosophers either own or know any other notion of liberty: For they under­stood by liberty only a Rational spontaneity, and therefore they make Freedom all one with Voluntariness. [...], Voluntary is that which hath its principle in him that acteth it, who likewise understandeth the particulars of what he acts, Arist. Eth. lib. 3. cap. 3. Nor doth he understand any more by the [...], by which he ex­plains liberty, but that these things are in our power, and we are free in our actings about them, to which we are carried by a Rational spontaneity, and a voluntary mo­tion. That is voluntary which moves and inclines it self conformably to its judgment, saye the Platonists. [...]; An­dr [...]n. Rh [...]d. lib. 3. cap. 1. [...] Arist. lib. 1. Metaph. [...]; Andr. Rh [...]d▪ ubi sup. H [...]c quis­que in potestate habere dicitur, quod si vult facit, si non [...]ult, non facit; Aug. lib. de Spirit. & lit. Liberum Arbitrium est re; sibi [...]placitae spontan [...]us appetitus, Prosp. lib. de grat. & liber. arbit. contra Cassian. Illu [...] in potestate ha­bemus, ad quod alienâ violen [...]iâ cogi non possumus, Rich. de Sancto Victore. Nor did the Greek Fathers mean any more by their [...], &c. De­termination to one Spe­cies [Page 276] of Moral actions doth not at all im­peach our Freedom. God is the prime Free Agent of all, and yet his liberty con­sists not in an arbitrary indifferency to the love of Good and Evil; but he is so deter­mined by the Rectitude and Sanctity of his Nature to a delectation in what is Good, that he is not capable of the least propension to an allowance of Evil. Num­quid, saith August. quia peccare non potest Deus, ideo liberum arbitrium habere ne­gandus est? Shall we say that God is not a Free Agent, because he cannot sin? de Civit. Dei lib. 22. cap. ult. God is most Free, because he is most Rational, and al­ways acts suitably to his own infinite Un­derstanding. The obedience of our Lord Jesus Christ being highly meritorious, be­hoved likewise in an eminent manner to be voluntary. (For no man praiseth or re­wards an action that is not spontaneous; no more than we do the fire for burning) [Page 277] and yet his Will was only and ever deter­mined to the choyce and pursuit of Good, nor could he fall under the least inclination to Evil without ceasing to be what he was, which was impossible. The same may be said of the Elect Angels, who through a confirmed Sanctity, are unchangeably Good, and yet they practice obedience with the highest Freedom, because upon the most rational conviction that they should do so, and that it's not only their duty up­on the account of the Soveraignty of God, who commands it, but because it is most congruous to, and becoming their Natures, and the Relations they stand in to God as intellectual Creatures. The Daemons al­so are by a self-Determination obdurately and irreclaimably wicked, and yet hereby do not cease to be Free Agents. Again, when the Saints arrive at consummated pu­rity, and are actually stated in glory, is it to be imagined that they shall remain in a dubious suspension between Good and E­vil, or in an equal propension to both? No! But though the liberty of our Souls be then dilated to its utmost dimensions, yet we shall from an eternal Principle stea­dily adhere to God; the perfected Under­standing influencing the whole man to an [Page 278] intire subjection to the Divine Will. For, as Austin sayes well, Voluntas Libera tanto erit liberior quanto sanior, &c. Epist. 89. The beatified Soul discovers that repugnan­cy in sin to the Rational Nature, that it can never be any more reconciled to it, or cast one favourable glance upon it. Once more, If the Essential idea of humane Freedom were an aequilibrious Disposition of the mind, then by how much holier a­ny man becomes, by so much the less Free he is, and by how much we grow disinslav­ed from sin, and breath in a freer air of ho­liness, by so much should our obedience receive the les [...] praise of God. Yea, the more Habituated in Evil any are, by so much should they be the less criminal; a decrease in point of culpableness and guilt necessarily ensuing upon every detraction from our Essential Liberty: In a word, li­berty of Will is an Essential proper­ty of the Soul of man, and a necessary adjunct of every Humane action. If we Will a thing, we Will it freely; si enim vo­lumus, libere volumus; as Austin saith. To Will, and to be Unwilling to Will, is a plain contradiction; for as Austin saith both acutely and solidly, non vellemus, si nollemus. We never do any thing, which [Page 279] at the same time we would not do. The manacles by which we are held and en­slaved, are nothing but our Practical judg­ment and choyce; Coactus tua voluntate es, Thou art fettered by thy own Will, Aug. so that Seventhly;

These considerations that men chuse to be wicked, love aversation from God, and ap­prove themselves in the disaffection of holi­ness, is vindication enough of all the judici­al procedures of God against sinners, whate­ver their Connate and Congenite impotency be. I wave at present the plea of Gods with-holding nothing from men that he is bound to give, and that there is nothing kept from us that belongs essentially to the Rational Nature; nor shall I plead, that whatever is now wanting to our perfection in esse Morali, is a just punishment of Adams sin, and comes entayl'd upon us as a Righ­teous Fruit of our first Fathers Apostacy. Though all these be true, and may be justi­fied against any opponent; but that which I insist on is this, That it's our Sloth and En­mity which the Lord threatneth and pu­nisheth, not our Weakness and Impotency. It is our Will-not, nor our Can not that a­riseth in judgment against us. 'Tis our contempt, not disability that we shall be [Page 280] arraigned for. We are so infatuated in the love of sin, wedded to the blandishments of the world, and enamoured on the titilla­tions of the Flesh, that neither the sug­gestions of Reason, the Promises of the Gospel, nor the Threatnings of the Law have any prevailing influence upon us. It is our obstinacy and wicked aversation that undoes us. Wicked and Sloathful is the due Character of every Unregenerate Sinner, Math. 25.26. They would not that I should Reign over them▪ Luc. 19.27. Those who were invited would not come, Math. 22.3. They hated knowledge, and did not choose the fear of the Lord, they would none of my Counsel, and despised all my Reproofs, Prov. 1.29. Sinners are so passionately in love with the inescations of the Animal life, that they are resolved upon pursuing the gratificati­ons of it. Is it not upon this account that both the Promises and Threatnings of the Word are proposed to us under the Redu­plication of our being obstinate and rebelli­ous? but alas! such is our loathsome wick­edness and affected wilfulness, that neither the one influence our Dread and Fear, nor the other our Love and Ingenuity.

§. 5. Having dispatched these prelimi­naries, we come now to state the extent of Natural Power, and to declare what in [Page 281] its highest improvement it may arrive at, and as a clear fixing of this will be a service of some significancy in it self, so it will ex­ceedingly contribute to our better proceed in what is behind, and facilitate the proof of the necessity of a superadded infused principle in order to our acting in the Du­ties of Practical Religion, so as to be ac­cepted with God. First then,

There is not only a passive capacity in our Faculties of receiving grace, but they are also capable of being elevated actively to concur as vital Principles in the exercise of Faith, Hope, Love, &c. Brute Animals are in neither sence capable of Grace; They can neither receive such Qualities as may dispose them for such operations, nor are they possessed of such Faculties as can be­come vital Principles of Religious acts. The potentia obedientialis lata, of many of the Schoolmen whether active or passive, is an irrational figment, and invented only to subserve the Dogm's of Transubstantiati­on, and the Sacraments producing Grace ex opere operato. But the Soul of Man, without the addition of any new Natural Powers, is both capable of receiving Grace, and of being elevated to concur as an Active vital principle of holy and Spiritual [Page 282] operations. There is lay'd in our Natures as we are men, a foundation, which through the Communication of a Divine Seed may be improved to the highest and holiest em­ployments. There is a Radical dispositi­on in us for Grace, nor doth the Divine Image overthrow, but perfect our Intel­lectual powers. Posse habere fidem, est na­turae hominum, saith Austin, de praedest. Sanct. cap. 5. As Grace was originally due to our Natures, so it is still agreeable to them. But though the Soul by being elevated and perfected by Grace becomes an active Vital Principle of holy operati­ons; yet in the reception of the first Grace it is purely passive, not cooperating in the least to the restitution of the Divine Image, no more than it did to the production of it in the primitive Creation. Nor doth this hinder, but that we both ought and may act in order to the obtaining of it, by being found in the exercise of those means pre­scribed by God for the Communication of it.

Secondly; The abilities of Nature pru­dently managed, and industriously improved, may carry men to a performance of the mate­rial parts of the Duties of the second Table. This we at once acknowledge and praise in [Page 283] many of the very Heathen; Their infideli­ty out-doing here the Faith of many Christi­ans, according to that of Minucius; non prae­stat fides quod praestitit infidelitas. Besides the experience of all ages, we have the Te­stimony of the Apostle in justification of this, Rom. 2.14. The Gentiles which have not the Law, do by Nature the things contained in the Law, as the Light of Rea­son informed them what they ought to do in most cases of this kind, so nothing ob­structed but that they might have done it. As many excellent instructions are to be met with in the writings of the Philosophers to this purpose; so the Heathen World (especially Greece and Rome) hath pro­duced a vast number of persons eminent, if not in most, at least in some one or other instance of Moral Vertue: Aristodis is fa­mous for justice; Epaminondas for Pru­dence; Curius for Temperance; Thrasi­bulus for Integrity and love for his Coun­try; Cimon for beneficence and liberality though of a low fortune; Timoleon for Moderation and Humility in a prosperous condition, &c. It were easie to expatiate upon this theam, and to create matter and occasion of shame to Christians, who suffer themselves to be thus out-done by Pagans. [Page 284] Our Religion comes behind their Morali­ty; and our pretences of Grace are out­shone by their Vertue. Suppose their abi­lity and strength proportionable to ours, yet our outward and objective helps so vastly exceeding all the means which they had of exciting and improving Natural Powers, to equal them only in Vertue, is a high dishonour to God, and an enhance­ment of guilt upon our selves; and to come behind them in any of the branches of Mo­rality, is openly to affront the provisions of the Gospel, and to cause that worthy Name by which we are called to be basphemed. Nor doth our profession of Christianity, while attended with a neglect of Moral performances, serve to any better purpose but to dishonour Christ and dammage our selves. And as we readily acknowledge, that men in the alone strength of Natural Abili­ties may proceed thus far in the practice of Moral Honesty & Righteousness, so I know no man that decryes these performances as things not only useless, but dangerous if void of Grace. As a late Au­thor falsly suggests, Eccl. pol. p. 73, & repr. to the rebers. p. 55. Or who affirms that it is better to be lewd and de­bauched, than to live an honest and vertuous life. [Page 285] No! we ascribe all due praise to them, and press them upon the Consciences of those we have to do with, both from the au­thority of God, the pulchritude and beauty that is in them, and their exceeding use­fulness not only to others, but even to the Authors of them. Nor do I know any that make Moral Goodness the greatest let to Conversion, or who say, that Vertue is the greatest prejudice to the entertainment of the Gospel; and that Grace and Vertue are inconsistent, Idem. Def. & contin. p. 34. Eccl. pol. p. 73. or that the Morally Righteous man is at a greater distance from Grace than the Prophane. No! we are so far from affirming, that the acting up to the principles of honesty is of it self an obstruction to the Conversion of any, that we reckon it to contribute exceedingly to the promoting of it; in that it begets a greater serenity and clearness in the mind for the discerning the excellency of the Doctrines and Duties of Religion, which men of Debauched lives are indisposed for. For sensuality & fleshly Lusts do debase the minds of men, darken their Reason, tin­cture their Souls with false colours, fill their Understandings with prejudice, that they have not the free use of their intellectual [Page 286] faculties, nor are they disposed for the Ex­excise of the acts of Reason about objects of Religion. Whereas persons disentan­gled from the tyranny of Lust and Passion, have not only their animal spirits purer and finer for the exercise of the noblest acts of Reason, but their minds are emancipated from many prepossessions & prejudices that sensual persons are in bondage to.

Two things indeed the persons reflect­ed upon do openly affirm and declare; first, That if Moral Righteousness be trusted to, and relyed on for the acceptation of our persons with God, and acquisition of a title to life, that in such a case it will not only infallibly hinder submission to the Righte­ousness of the Gospel, but that it will di­rectly overthrow it. Secondly; That di­vers men brought to an observation of the Duties of Morality, raise their whole ex­pectation of Salvation from thence; and both these they are ready to demonstrate the truth of from Scripture, The first be­ing also evinceable from Reason, and the second from Experience. Thence it is that they advise men not to think it enough that they are blameless before the World, but that they would look after the being reneued in the spirit of their minds towards [Page 287] God. Thence also they earnestly entreat them not to place their affiance in Moral Righteousness, and withal tell them, that there is more hope of scandalous Sinners than of such; for as much as those will sooner be prevailed with to leave their sins, than these to renounce their own Righteousness, in which they take Sanctu­ary to a neglect of the Righteousness of Christ by Faith. This I confidently affirm to be the sum of what is to be met with re­lating to this matter either in the Writings or Sermons of sober Non-Conformists; and I challenge the Author of the Ecclesia­stical Polity to deduce Logically from hence any of those scandalous Propositions which with so magisterial a confidence he affixeth to them.

Thirdly; Men as well destitute of the Word, as of Grace, may by a due attendance to Natural Light, and a careful improve­ment of first Notions, proceed likewise far in performing the substantial part of the imme­diate Duties of the first Table. Now the Duties of the first Table being such as re­fer immediatly to God, they either arise from the consideration of his Nature, or the consideration of his benefits bestowed upon us. Of the first sort are Veneration, [Page 288] Fear, Humility, Trust, Submission to the Divine dispose upon the account of the So­veraignty of God. Of the second sort, are Prayer, Gratitude, Patience under the loss and withdrawment of temporal enjoy­ments, &c. It is true, no man in the a­lone strength of Natural abilities either will or can perform any of these, or of the for­mer with all that dueness of circumstances as to obtain therein acceptation with God, yet with respect to the Material part of the Duties, they may be performed by men in their own strength without any special assistance of the Grace of God. If the Dis­ciples of Epicurus, though they neither ad­mitted God to be the Author of the World, nor the Governour of it, did yet plead a veneration to be due to Him for the alone excellency of his Nature; Have we not much more cause to believe that those Phi­losophers, who not only acknowledged his excellent perfection, but withal confessed him to be the Maker, Preserver, & Rector of all things, would be thereon induced to adore his Omnipotent Power and Infinite Sapience, &c. If no other Homage were to ensue on the cogitation of the Infinity of the Deity, admiration attended with hu­mility would naturally flow from it. Nor [Page 289] did Socrates by his [...] intend any thing else save a due sense and acknowledg­ment of our meanness, in the considera­tion of the infinite perfection of God. The Philosophers seem to have distinguish­ed the perfections of God into Moral and Physical. The first kind may be expressed by Optimus, the second by Maximus. Now the consideration of the perfections of each of these sorts in God, did no question in­fluence the Heathen Philosophers to per­formances in some degree sutable. Mercy, Truth, Justice, Holiness, &c. are con­ceived in God under the Notion of Moral Vertues, and the most refined of the Phi­losophers made it their design to imitate God in respect of those Moral perfections. [...] assim [...]lation to God in these things was their scope and dr [...]ft. They reckoned that no man honoured God, who did not thus imitate and resem­ble Him. [...], Hierocl. in carm. aur. [...] ▪ God ought in all things to be our Rule and Pat­tern saies Plato, de legis. lib. 4. It were easie to enlarge on the [...] which we meet with in some of the ve [...]y Heathen, and which the consideration of [Page 290] the Moral perfections of God led them to. Power, Immensity, wisedom, Soveraignty &c. are conceived in God under the No­tion of Physical Perfections, and though these be not imitable properly by us, yet a due consideration of them beget's an im­pression of trust, Subjection, Resignation &c. in the mind. And men by the very conduct of the Light of Reason, and in the strength of Natural Abilities may arise high in operations correspondent to a be­lief of such properties in God. That of Epic­tetus is remarkable to this purpose, you are to believe (saith he) [...]. Concerning the Gods That they are, and that they wisely and Righteously Govern the World, and that therefore they ought to be obeyed and submitted to cheerful­ly in all things. Seeing every thing is ad­ministred according to excellent counsell, En­chir. cap. 38.

There are others Duties referring im­mediately to God, which formally respect and arise from the consideration of his be­nefits, and these, as I intimated before, are Prayer, Gratitude, Patience under world­ly [Page 291] losses and the like. And here, as a firm perswasions that whatsoever we either are or have proceed, from the Divine Boun­ty and Goodness, will affect us with re­sentments of Love & Thankfulness, so the same perswasion will induce us in all our straits to make our wants known by pray­er to God, nor is there any consideration more adapted to quiet our minds under losse, than this likewise is. I do not now say that any of those duties (no more than the former) can be performed as they ought, without the special assistance of Grace, but this I say, that not only men de­stitute of Grace, but without the Revela­tion of the word, have been found in the exercise of many of them, and may be said to have discharged the material part of them; instances with respect, to divers are at hand. [...]. &c. Never say thou hast lost any thing, but that it is returned. Is thy son dead? he is only restored. Is thy inheritance taken from the? that also is returned. Epict. enchi. cap 15. And elsewhere [...], Let every thing be as the Gods think fit cap. 79, Excellent is that passage of Hie­rocles [Page 292] concerning the seconding all our own endeavours with prayers to God and the pursuing our prayers with diligent endea­vours of our own, [...]. In Carm. aur. More Testimonies both in these & other particulars might with facili­ty be produced, but that we are obliged by resolution unto brevity. Only I desire to subjoin that as there were many of the Hea­then yea of the very Philosophers who nei­ther improved their light, nor ability to the performance of any of these Duties, so there was not one of them who was found in a discharge so much as of the Material part of them all.

Fourthly, persons living under the dis­pensation of the word may not only without renuing Grace arise to a performance of the foregoing Duties in the way expressed, but they may be also found in the exercise of all the material acts of instituted Religion. They may not only assent to the Divinity of the Scripture in general (and indeed it is accompan [...]ed with so demonstrative evi­dences of its being divinely inspired, that who ever denies God to be the Original Author of it, must first renounce his Rea­son) But they may both Grammatically un­derstand [Page 293] and Dogmatically beleive the par­ticular doctrines of it. I do not say that they can spiritually either understood or sa­vour the great things of the word, but I know nothing to the contrary why they may not Historically understand and receive all the Dogms of Religion. The Bible as it is sufficiently plain to every unprejudiced ca­pacity in all the points necessary to salva­tion, so is there no part of it in it self unin­telligible. Though there be several Doc­trines in the Sacred Scriptures which we can neither comprehend, nor it may be re­concile to every received axiom of Philo­sophy, yet we may be easily convinced that they are the declarations of God; and that the meaning of the particular places where they are revealed, can be no other (sup­posing God by the revelation of the word to have designed our instruction) than what the generality of Christians contend for; God (if he please) can deliver his mind in as intelligible terms, as any of his crea­tures can; Nor is it consistent with Divine Goodness and wisedom to leave these things Unintelligible, which he hath made it our Duty to know. 'Tis true, God having so framed the Revelation of his will as to invite all enquirers, it was but convenient [Page 294] that as the Weakest have enough to instruct their ignorance; So the Acutest should have enough to exercise their parts: according to that of Austin, Magnifice, & Salubriter Sp. S. Scripturas modificeravit ut locis apti­oribus fami occurreret, obscurioribus autem fastidia detergeret: de doctr. Christ. cap 6. The Obscurity therefore charged upon the word is both a false and blasphemous impu­tation. The fault is only in us, not in the word, if it be not understood. We are either Slothfull and do not apply our selues to a diligent use of means for acquaintance with the great and mysterious truths of it. Or we mistake in the means, that we have recourse to; or we impeach the plainness of the word, while in the mean time it is our enmity at the purity of it that lies at the bottom: [...] Plat. in Phaed. The Tyranny of passions, the prejudices of education & sensual entanglements Ec­lipse in us that Light of Reason which the Fall hath left, and then having put out our eyes we com­plain that we cannot see, Just so as if one should accuse the sun for want of Splendor, because the blind cannot [Page 295] discern it. Or lastly, we judge things to be obscure in the Revelation of the Word, when all the obscurity lies in the greatness of the things Revealed. The declaration may be plain, when the things declared may be such as our Finite Understandings cannot form adequate Notions of them. And this I take to be the import of the [...], 2 Pet. 3.16. [...] relating to the Neuter [...] the things where­of Paul had discoursed, not to the Femi­nine [...], Epistles where he had treat­ed of them. Notwithstanding what hath been here asserted, I readily grant, that be­sides the spiritual perception of Divine Truths that the Regenerate Soul is adapted for, to which the Unrenued mind is totally inept; The Soul imbued with a Divine Unction, is wonderfully advantaged even for the Historical perception, and Dogma­tical belief of the Doctrines of the Scrip­ture, beyond what the meer Natural Man is. Partly in that the renued mind is de­fecated from those impure fogs which hugely prejudice the Understanding in the perception of Natural Truths, much more of Supernatural; partly in that Grace be­gets an [...] a vital cognation with Truth in the Soul, which wonderfully con­duceth [Page 296] both to an easie perceiving, and a steady adhearing to it. The Soul finding the Counter part of that in the Word, which through its having received the [...], it hath upon it self, becomes hereby qualified to a clearer discerning of Scripture Doctrines than otherwise it could be. Moreover, men may not only in the meer strength of their Natural Abilities read and Historically understand the Scripture, but by comparing the temper of their own hearts, with what both Reason and Scrip­ture instructs them of God and their Duty, and being awakened through the Argu­ments of conviction administred especially in the Word, they may make a judgment of their own state, and perceive the indis­posedness and disaffectedness of their hearts to God and Holiness; and thereup­on, may not only make essays towards the changing the frame of their minds, but finding their own inability to a through ef­fecting of it, they may bewaile the deplo­rableness of their case, make their ad­dresses to God for relief, implore his assistance, and attend upon those instituti­ons, appointments and means, in the use of which, God communicates his Grace and Spirit. We may go to Church as well as [Page 297] to the Exchange; attend upon a Sermon, as well as on a Lecture of Philosophy; ap­ply our thoughts to search out and discern the state of our Souls as well as the state of our Trade; beg relief of God under in­ward distresses, as well as when encom­passed with outward calamities. All these things are possible to, and lie within the verge of Natural Power. And herein lies our guilt and folly, that we stand complain­ing of our want of Power to do what we ought, while in the mean time we neglect the performance of what we may. Men would rather lodg their sins any where, than charge them upon themselves. Hence they Father that upon the infirmity of Nature, which proceeds from their sloth and wilfull choice. Yea, they that complain most of the unsuitableness of their strenth to Duties, never concern themselves to try whether they have strength to perform them yea or not. We resolve, first, not to practice, and then complain for want of A­bility. Slothful and Wicked Servant is the sentence we are all obnoxious to. Un­der colour of not being able to get rid of all sin, some men will set themselves against none.

[Page 298]§. 6. The extent of Natural Power be­ing briefly declared, and having granted what ought not to denied, neither is by a­ny who understand themselves or this con­troversie: We are in the next place to dis­course the imbecillity of Nature, and to deny what ought not to be granted. For our more distinct proceed in this, we shall first treat the defects that occur in those ve­ry duties, which as to the substance of them, men in the alone strength of their Natural Abilities, either do, or may discharge; purposing afterwards to enquire, whether there be not also some duties incumbent upon us, which even with respect to the Matter of them, men in the meer Vertue of the foresaid principles can no wise arise to a performance of.

The inward frame and disposition of the Soul, as it is the vital principle of Moral actions, is that which God in order to his acceptance of them, mainly measureth them by. Hence that of Christ himself, That a Corrupt Tree cannot bring forth good Fruit, Mat. 7.18. and that of the Apostle, that they who are in the Flesh, cannot please God, Rom. 8.8. But that to the unclean all things are unclean, Tit. 1.15. and that the end of the Commandment is Charity out [Page 299] of a pure heart, 1 Tim. 1.5. which occa­sioned Austin to say, non benè facit bonum qui non bonus facit; he performeth not an action, though never so materially good, well, who is not first Good himself, contr. Julian. lib. 4. cap. 3. And again, Quid enim po­testis facere boni, de corde non b [...]n [...]? What Good can you do who are not first Holy? Austin. lib. 4. ad Bonif. cap. 6. and again, non enim in te placet Deo nisi quod habes ex Deo, quod autem habes ex te displicet Deo 94 Serm. de temp. Though the Quality of the Principle be extrinsecal to the Phy­sical entity of an act, yet it is of its Moral Essence, and is as much of its Ethical Na­ture as any thing else whatsoever is. So that a late Author proclaims his ignorance, not only in Systematical Divinity, but in Christian Ethicks, while he laughs at the difference assigned between the Duties performed by one born of God, and the Ma­terial actions of the same physical kind done by one unrenued in the Spirit of his mind; telling us that this relates not to the Nature of the things themselves, but to the Principles from whence they issue; as if the principle had no influence upon the Moral denomination of an action, Def. & Con­tin. p. 335. Of the same complexion, [Page 300] and betraying the same ignorance, are those other expressions of his, where not only, with all imaginable contempt of a learned man, but with the highest irreve­rence towards the Word, he introduceth Paul as one, who if he should again revisit the Christian world, would stand agast to find his Epistles brought upon the Stage to decide the difference between Moral and Physical Specification; Reprof. to the Re­hers. p. 99.100. Surely the thing is not so forraign, either to other Sacred Writers, or to Paul himself, as that he should have cause to be startled at it. It was this alone that constituted the difference between the Sacrifice of Cain, and the Sacrifice of A­bel, Heb. 11.4. Doth not he inform us even with reference to himself, that whilst he was blameless, as to the material part of Duties, both of worship and manners, that yet through want of being performed from a due principle, they were loathsome to God, and became so afterwards to himself? Phil. 3.6, 7, 8. So far is it from being de­structive of all true and real Goodness (as the same Author chargeth it, Eccl. polit. p. 73.) to affirm that a man may be exact in all the Duties of Moral Goodness, and yet be a Graceless person; That abating the word [Page 301] exact, which is ambiguous, and the term all, seeing no man ever was, or will be so without Grace, I do undertake to justifie the denyal of it to be no less than Gross Pe­lagianism.

Now that considered, with respect to our meer faculties, and the best natural im­provement of them, we are without that Rectitude of heart, and conformity to the holiness of God implanted in his Law, which we ought to have; we shall, for the further manifestation of what we have as­serted, endeavour to lay open and evince. That over and above our being possessed of intellectual powers, we were also imbued with superadded principles, commonly, and that according to the Scripture, stiled the Divine Image in us; and that the de­sign of God in the communication of this to us, and the implantation of it upon our Natures, was, that we might be adapted to live to him; and that for the reaching and attaining this great End, such concre­ated principles were naturally due, hath been in all its several parts and branches demonstrated, chap. 2. §. 5. Of the loss of this Image, and what thereupon ensues, we have in part also treated in the same chap­ter, §. 10. Somthing farther remains yet [Page 302] to be subjoyned; namely, That by the loss of the Divine Images, there is imme­diately and formally in us an unanswerable­ness to the holy Nature of God, a diffor­mity both to the holiness implanted upon the Law, and that Sanctity that wa [...] at first imprinted in our Natures. God himself is the first Exemplar and Original Idea of all Holiness; He is the [...], the first Beauty. Holiness is in him essentially, And from him it is Transcribed on the Law, which is Holy, Just, and Good, Rom. 7.12. There is in the Law, as in a Copy, a Transcript of the Holiness of God. An­swerable to both these, there was at first a Rectitude and Holiness implanted in, and imprest upon our Natures. There was a concreated similitude in us to God, Gen. 1.26, 27. 'Tis true, That in us was not Uni­vocally the same with the Holiness that is in God. There cannot be an Identity in any thing between God and Creatures. But there was an Analogie betwixt the one and the other. Holiness is in God as his Nature and Essence; in us, as an accident adventitious to our beings, yet so, as that Originally it was both due to us, and that we were thereby fitly laid to be like him. Plato rightly stiles it [...], [Page 303] a sensible Image of the intelligible God, in Ti­maeo. Now this being concreated with us at first, the same Philosopher calls it [...], The Old Nature, in Crit. Now up­on the loss of this implanted Rectitude and Image, we became formally and immediat­ly impure and unclean. The meer loss and want of it is the very Deformity of the Soul. Hence the Scripture reports us to come all Unclean into the World, Joh. 14.4. and be born Flesh, Joh. 3.6. and to be shapen in Iniquity, Psal. 51.5. From this, even abstracting from any thing else, there results a loathsomness in our persons to God, and that doth naturally and by ne­cessity infer a detestation in God of what e­ver proceeds from us. Hence Austin ex­presly affirms privationem malam esse & per eam immundum fi [...]ri Spiritum. The ve­ry privation of Rectitude to be an Evil, and that thereupon the Soul becomes actually de­filed and unclean, lib. 1. de civitat. Dei cap. 10. And again, Naturae in tantum vitiosae sunt in quantum ab ejus a quo factae sunt arte discedunt, That so far as our Na­tures recede from what they were at first, so far they become tainted and impure, idem de lib. Arbitr. lib. 13. cap. 15. Yea, Bellarmin sayes that carentia doni Origina­lis, [Page 304] macula mentem Deo invisam reddens appellari potest; The loss of Original Recti­tude is a stain, rendering our Souls loath­some to God; de Amiss. Grat. & Stat. pec­cat. lib. 5. cap. 17. This serves to per­stringe a late Author who tells us, that a decayed and ill-addicted Nature, is not a Crime, but an Infelicity; That being an act of Gods Will, it can be no fault of ours, and that to impute to our selves as a Crime, what was intended meerly as a punishment is new, at least, crud [...] Divinity, Def. & Contin. p. 198. That it is not New, were easie to shew by innumerable Testimonies out of the Ancients. The Fathers generally be­ing at an agreement herein. And for the Crudeness of the Divinity of it, it is as de­fensible as the imputation of Adams particu­lar offence, which our Author contends for, and which is more, therein with Pighius, Salmeron, Catharinus, and some Armini­ans States the whole of Original sin, which even the Jesuite Bellarmine stiles a heresie. But for the thing it self, viz. that the want of the Divine Image, is not only an infeli­city, but a Crime, I shall [...] produce a few arguments in proof of it. (1.) The Scripture which useth not to Baptise things with undue names, expresly sti [...]es it so, [Page 305] see Psal. 51.5. Rom. 7.17. Heb. 12.1. (2.) That which renders us unclean, and by consequence loathsome and abominable to God, is in the strictest propriety of speak­ing a sin, seeing God hates nothing simply but sin, nor any thing but upon that ac­count. Meer disasters render us the Objects of Gods pitty and compassion, not of his Wrath & Hatred. Now that we are impure & hateful in the sight of God, upon the ac­count of the want of an inherent Rectitude hath been already declared. (3.) That which is opposite to Righteousness, can be nothing less than sin, these two only being immediate contraries; for punishment for­mally, as such is not in the same praedica­ment with Righteousness, and so cannot in propriety be its oppositum. (4.) The want of that which the Law requires, and which is naturally due and suitable to our Facul­ties, must necessarily be sin; for as much as only sin is a transgression of the Law. Now that the Law requireth Habitual Ho­liness or Rectitude of Nature, doth neces­sarily follow upon the consideration that the Sanction of it doth not only reach the outward and external Action, but the Heart and Principle. (5.) Every Inno­cent, Holy, and Undefiled Nature is at the [Page 306] least a subject suitable and disposed for Communion with God here, and Fruition of Him hereafter; but that Naturally we are not so, is written as with a Sun-beam, Rom. 8.8. Heb. 11.6. Joh. 3.6. (6.) That which dissolveth the subordination of the Rational Creature to God, and the Regular Harmony of the Soul in its actings, is surely sin, it lying in plain opposition to what we are especially obliged to; Now the impu­tation of Adams meer single transgression, precluding the corruption of our Nature could have no influence upon this, no more than the Rebellious act of a Father in the forfeiture of whose Estate the Son is in­volved, can have upon the Son, to the alie­nating him from his loyalty. But that the due subordination of Man to God, and the Harmony of the Soul in its actings is dis­solved, every mans experience will inform him; and if he please, he may learn it from the Philosophers, who generally tell us that it is [...], Natural to men to sin. Many more arguments to this purpose lye in view, which to avoid prolix­ity, I at present wave. And as to our Au­thors Objection, That what is a Punishment cannot be a Crime. (1.) What if a clear solution could not be given to it? Shall [Page 307] we therefore renounce a truth so strongly confirmed? Nunquam ideo negandum quod apertum est, qui [...] comprehendi non potest quod occultum est, saith Austin, lib. de per­sev. Sanct. cap. 14. Turatiocinare ego cre­dam. idem. I know not one Truth in Na­tural Philosophy, but I could muster some one or other objection against, that I think would puzzle our Author clearly to an­swer? Doth it become us to be more im­modest in our Divinity, than in Human Sciences? (2.) What if I should say that it is only a Crime, and not at all a Punish­ment? I have no less person than Placeus, not to name others, preceding me in it. Adam sinning, did thereby shake off his de­pendance on God, prefer a subordinate Good to him, and thereby divest himself of that rectitude of Nature he was vested with; upon a mutation, as to his chief End, there was a change in all his Moral Principles; And thus becoming corrupt himself, it was impossible that any but such as are corrupt should be begotten by him; That which is of Flesh, is Flesh; nor can any bring a clean thing out of an unclean. Nor supposing Adam to have sinned, could it fall out o­therwise without the substitution of a New Protoplast; and subversion of the designed [Page 308] and declared order for the propagation of Man-kind. But (3.) What hinders, but that one and the same thing materially con­sidered, may under different formal respects be both a Sin and a Punishment. Was not Achitophels and Judas's hanging them­selves both the one and the other? Doth not God frequently threaten upon the com­mission of some sins, to relinquish men in way of judgment to more; see 2 Thes. 2.10, 11. Rom. 1.21, 24, 26, 28. Not on­ly Philosophers will have sin to be al­so a punishment, but the very Poet could say,

Invidiâ Siculi non invenere Tyranni.
Majus tormentum. —

What absurdity to say, that Adam divesting himself of the Divine Image, God thereup­on suspends the immediate Universal per­fect restoring of it either to him, or his Po­sterity; and that as the denying to restore it is an act of Righteousness and Justice in God, so the want of it is nevertheless a sin in us. Is there any thing more easie to be proved, than that according to the tenor of the Old Covenant, it was impossible that it should be restored, & yet that by the tenor of that very Covenant, the want of it is [Page 309] chargeable as a crime upon us. It is only in the vertue of the Remedial Covenant made in Christ as the Head of the New Creation, that we are renued to the Image of God again; And yet had there never been such a Transaction, it had been still our Duty to have had it, and our sin to have been without it.

Having now made appear, that God in the taking the measure of us, and our acti­ons hath a regard not only to the matter of them, but the Rectitude of the Principles whence they proceed; and having lay'd open the pollution of our Faculties, and their unanswerableness to the holy Nature of God, and the Holiness implanted upon the Law, it is easie to infer an ataxy, disor­der, taint and moral defect in those very duties, which, as to the substance and matter of them we are in the Discharge of. This lies so plain, and doth so naturally en­sue upon the premises, that he must be of very mean intellectuals that doth not per­ceive and discover it. Yet that I may not be altogether wanting to the service of a Truth of such import, I shall briefly inti­mate what necessarily ensues hereupon, both with reference to the Credenda and Agenda of Religion, so far as we are con­versant [Page 310] in the Duties of either of them. First, with respect to the Credenda of it: Though in the alone strength, and through the im­provement of our Natural Powers we may Grammatically understand, and Dogmati­cally believe the Truths delivered in them: Yet (1.) We understand them not in that spiritual manner as we ought, for as much as nothing can act beyond its own sphear: Nor is there a due proportion between spi­ritual Objects and Natural Light. This made the Apostle say, That the Natural man cannot know the things of the Spirit of God, because they are Spiritually discerned, 1 Cor. 2.14. Hence notwithstanding the acknowledgment of an Objective perspicu­ity in the Scripture, Divines generally as­sert a Subjective darkness in the mind, and besides the Light impressed upon the Word, require an infusion of a principle of Light and sight into the Understand­ing. Without this, sayes Luther, Ne jota quidem unum videri potest in Scripturis, ea perspicacid quae salutaris est. Not one jot in the Scripture can be understood in a saving way, apud Rivet. Isagog ad Script. S. cap. 22. Hinc tantum quisque de sensu scriptuarum assequitur, quantum de spiritu qui eas inspi­r [...]vit participat; So far only as we partake of [Page 311] the Spirit, who indited the Scriptures, do we attain the true and spiritual sense of them, Paraeus in pr [...]aem. ad 1 Cor. 1. There­fore Baronius in his Philosophia Theologiae ancillans tells us, that Notitia Rerum The­ologicarum qua praediti sunt impii & non renati, non est Theologia proprie dicta, sed aequivocè dicitur Theologia. Exercit. 3. Art. 30. (2.) These very Truths which unrenued men are in the Historical belief of, they do not spiritually savour them. Believers are endowed with a Gust that o­thers know nothing of. They are other­wise affected by and with Gospel-Truths, than men of meer Natural Principles ei­ther are or can be; Quicquid recipitur, re­cipitur ad modum recipientis; The same food hath a different relish with one and the same person according as the Organ of Tast is well or ill affected. How insipid are the most comfortable doctrines of the Word to an Unrenued Soul, they find no relish in them, whilst on the other hand the mind in which there resides a Vital Prin­ciple, feels and experiments what he Histo­rically believes, see Psal. 119.103. 1 Cor. 2.12. Rom. 8.16. (3.) The mind being unrenued in its Habitude, frame, and dis­position, remains thereupon not only dark, [Page 312] ignorant, subject to mistakes, error, vain imaginations, but lyable to scepticism, un­setledness, and at last a total disbelief of the things of the Spirit of God. The cer­tainty of spiritual sensation and experience being not only beyond the certainty of Reason and Argumentation, but that wh [...]ch alone gives a clear comprehension of Di­vine Mysteries, and which only indubi­tates the Soul concerning them. He that hovereth in the profession of Gospel-Truths, and finds nothing of the Reality, Power, and Experience of them in himself, becomes thereby wonderfully disposed, not only to question the Truth of them, but to­tally to reject them. Nor is it imaginable how it should be otherwise, when he expe­rienceth nothing of all that he reads, hears, professeth, and hath been by education or force of Rational Arguments in the belief of. Being told that the Death of Christ will mortifie sin, and that men are Sancti­fied by the Word, and finding nothing of this in themselves, they are not only under a temptation hereby to disbelieve these particular Truths, but to disclaim the whole Revelation of the Word as a Fable.

And as these things, through the loss of the Divine Image, and that pollution which [Page 313] ensues in the Soul thereupon, do naturally accompany us with reference to the Cre­denda of Religion, notwithstanding our being in the Historical belief of them; so there are several things deducible from the same premises, with Relation to those A­genda of Religion in the performance of the material duties of which we are found. (1.) Nothing of all that is done, or per­formed, hath its rise in, or proceeds from a sincere, effectual, superlative love of God. That this ought to be the principle motive and inducement of our obedience, I sup­pose few will deny; and that where the foresaid pollution and disorder of Soul, through the loss of the Divine Image, is, this sincere superlative love to God is not, is of easie demonstration. I know some of the late Jesuits in their casuitical Divini­ty, affirm it to be enough if we be in the ob­servation of the Commandments, though without any affection towards God, or the Resignation of our hearts to him, provided that we do not hate him. But I hope no Protestant is yet arrived at this, and indeed I wonder how any, professing himself either a Christian or a Man, can entertain a per­suasion so subversive of all Religion, and repugnant as well to Reason as Scripture. [Page 314] I do not say that any man on earth hates God to that degree, as those in Hell do; nor do I assert that there is an explicit ha­tred of God in every act of an unrenued person; I believe otherwise: But this I affirm, that love to God is not the Univer­sal governing Principle of an Unregenerate man, nor is it exalted to that Degree in any action he performes, as to give him the de­nomination of a lover of God. Now it is the sincerity, prevalency, and perfection of love that among other things gives the Moral specification to Obedience. What­ever resemblance the performances of one destitute of this Love may have of holy and Religious obedience, yet all is loathsome to God, as wanting one chief ingredient of its constituent form. Nor is this love in a­ny one, in whom the Spirit of Christ dwells not, Gal. 5.22. 1 Joh. 4.7. Faith in Christ is the only root on which it grows, Gal. 5.6. [...], Faith is the alone Foundation of a Good Work, Clem. Alex. Strom. lib. 5. (2.) Through the loss of this Image of God, and the dis­order which necessarily ensues in the Soul thereupon; There is in all that we perform antecedently to our being renued to this Image again, a prevarication with respect [Page 315] to our true great and ultimate End. That the end of an action is under the Sanction of the Law, as well as the substance of the Duty, I have shown before Chap. 3. §. 6. God being our Author, is our Ultimate End also. It is impossible for God to pro­duce a Creature that is not according to its Nature and Qualifications, to be to Him, and for Him. The lapse not only involved in it, disobedience to God as our Sove­raign, but Apostacy from him, both as our Chief Good, and in point of seeking his Glory before our own gratification. Now till the Divine Image be restored, and a rectitude Recovered in our Souls again, we never so far return to God, as to make our selves, and all that we do refer to him as to our End; but there is still either some base, low, or crooked aim in all that we ad­dress to. Mens Ends will not rise higher than their Principles: He that acts only from self, will only act for self. The ob­ject of an action doth materially adapt and qualifie it to the being to Gods glory, but it is the Principle and intention of the A­gent that makes it formally to be so. And though I will not affirm that an explicit in­tention of Gods glory is either necessary, or indeed possible, in every individual act; [Page 316] yet I say that there ought to be an habitual tendency in the Soul after it, in every thing we apply to. Though the Traveller do not every step he takes, think of the place whither he is going, yet his aim is still at it, & it often revives upon his thoughts. Now through a prevarication, less or more, that is in the actings of every Unregenerate per­son, with reference to his End; the utmost of what he doth, is but Obedience in an E­quivocal sence. Their Virtues are but Virtutum similitudines, the Counterfeits of Ver­tues, Quicquid boni fit ab [...]omine & non propter h [...]c fit, propter qu [...]d fi­ert debere vera sapien­tia praecipit▪ et si [...]ffi­cio videatur bonum, ipso [...]on recto fine peccatum est, Aug. cont. Jul. lib. 4. & differ as much from Genuine Virtue, quantum distat a veri­tate mendacium, as a Lie doth from Truth, Prosp. lib. 3. de vita contempl. Hence Vossius tells us out of the Ancients, especially Austin, that the Vertues of the Heathen Philosophers nomen bonorum operum amittunt, si per bonum in­telligatur quod est utile ad Vitam aeternam, Loose the name of Good Works if they be judged by their Usefulness to the obtaining of Eternal life, Hist. Pelag. lib. 3. part. 3. Thes. 11.12.

[Page 317]§. 7. Having treated the defects which occur in the best actions that Natural men can perform, and declared their Unaccep­tableness to God thereupon; It remains to be shewn in the next place, that there are also some Duties under the Sanction of which we all are, which even with respect to the matter of them, no man in the meer vertue of Natural Principles can arise to a performance of. And of this kind I shall only mention that great Duty incumbent upon us of making to our selves new hearts, with what depends thereupon. That the Sancti­fying of our Natures, and the being renu­ed after the Image of God, is prescribed to us in way of Duty; The Scripture plainly and fully testifies: And yet, if we consult either the Scripture, or our own experience, we shall understand how totally unable we are for the discharge and accom­plishment of this great Duty. Though the New Creature be only an additional to our Natural Being, yet as to the Physical pro­duction of it, it lyes as far out of our sphear, as the production of the Soul doth out of that of an organised body. Was man meerly passive in the reception of the I­mage of God impressed upon him at first, and is there not greater reason to be per­suaded [Page 318] that he is meerly passive in the new production and reception of it? Hence to testifie our impotency, the Scripture re­ports us to be dead in Trespasses and Sins, Eph. 2.1.5. and that no man can come to Christ unless the Father draw him, Joh. 6.44. That we are neither begot again of Blood, nor of the will of the Flesh, nor of the will of Man, Joh. 1.13. We owe not our Regeneration either to the efficacy of o­thers, nor to the workings of our own wills. Hence the great Work and Duty of circumcising our hearts is expressed by such phrases, which, if they signifie any thing, do import us meerly passive in it. Of this complexion are the expressions of our being begotten again, Created, Quick­ned, &c. Did the scattered Atomes of matter frame themselves into the Machine of the Humane Body at first? Or do those Rudimental Principles conveyed for the formation of the Faetus in the Womb, dis­pose themselves into that orderly, admira­ble variety of texture, which fills us at once with amazement and thankfulness? Shall the dispersed particles, and corpuscles of dust, rendevouse and reassemble them­selves into their former frames, without the Physical interpose of a forraign Agent? If [Page 319] none of these be either true or possible, no more is it so, that man can convert him­self. Were we disposed qualified, quali­fied and suited to the accomplishment of this work, would God take it out of our hand, and rob us of the praise of it? Doth He not again and again proclaym us inept and weak for the effecting of it? Doth he not intitle himself the Author of it? Is not the Holy Spirit purchased by Christ, and promised by the Father to this End? The Scriptures bearing Testimony to this, are innumerable; see among others, Deut. 30.6. Ezek. 36.26, 27. Jer. 31.33. Jam. 1.18. Eph. 2.10. Tit. 3.5, 6. Phil. 2.13. &c. Now notwithstanding all this, to argue for an Ability in us to perform it, meerly be­cause it is prescribed us in way of Duty, is childish and trifling; is it not enough to justifie the prescription of it in way of Du­ty: (1.) That such a frame of heart ought to be in us, and that the want of it, is as much our sin, as our misery. (2.) That being awakened by the consideration of our duty, to a perception of our weakness. We ought thereupon to sue to God for strength. And therefore it is, that all precepts to this purpose are attended with answerable pro­mises. Finding that thou canst not change [Page 320] thy sensual earthly heart, thou art to im­plore his help, who is not only able, but willing to relieve and succour thee.

(3.) That God hereby excites us to do what we can, and to wait upon him in all those ways and means, which he hath pro­mised upon our sincere exercise to make successfull. (4.) That these commands and exhortations of washing and making us clean, of getting a new heart, &c. are not so much suited to us as weak as they are intended to us as stubborn, nor so much prescribed to us under the reduplication of our being unable, as of being Rebellious.

Si quis per Naturae vires bonum aliquod quod ad salu­tem pertinet vitae aeternae cogi­tare aut eligere, sive salutari, i. e. Evangelicae praedicatio­ni consentire posse confirmat, absque illuminatione & in­spiratione Spiritus Sancti qui dat omnibus suavitatem in con­sentiendo & credendo verita­ti, haeretico fallitur spiritu, non intelligen [...] vocem Dei in Evangelio dicentis▪ sine me nihil potestis Concil. Araus. Can. 7.§. 8. From what hath been deliver­ed in the two pre­ceding Paragraphs we may safely now infer the necessity of a superadded in­fused Principle in order to our living to God in the whole of practical Religi­on, and our being accepted with him. Nor is there any thing that the Scripture declares in more Em­phatical terms, the Holy Ghost foreseeing [Page 321] contradiction that would be made hereun­to. And by the same acts and methods that men endeavour to avoid the force of Scripture-Testimonies in this matter; there is not any Article of Faith that can be se­cure, but what ever the Holy Ghost hath delivered for the confirmation of the great­est Doctrines of the Christian Religion may with the like subtilty be perverted to another Intendment. Had God designed the declaring the Doctine of an infused Subjective principle; I challenge any man to shew me how it could have been more clearly and fully expressed than it is alrea­dy. The causes both Moral and Physical, the way and manner of its production and communication; the intrinsic subjective change that is thereby made and wrought in the frame, temper, and disposition of the Soul; the capacity that we are there­upon brought into of communion with God here, and enjoying him hereafter, to­gether with the effects that proceed thence in our Conversation and course of Living, both towards God and Man, are all held forth in the Scripture in terms most plain, full, and emphatical. Nor are the Prayers and Thanksgivings, with reference to re­nuing and assisting Grace, which I suppose [Page 322] all Christians are found in the performance of, reconciliable with the denyal and nega­tion of such a Principle and so conferred. Surely in our applications and addresses to God, we pray not for Rational Faculties, nor meerly for the enjoyment of the Gos­pel, but we pray especially, That God would Create in us a clean heart; that he would renue us in the Spirit of our minds; fulfil in us the work of Faith with power; work in us both to will and to do; all which argue a necessity of somthing more than ei­ther Essential Powers or Objective Light. Therefore Austin sayes well concerning the Pelagians, destruu [...]t orationes quas fa­cit Ecclesia sive pro infidelibus, & Doctri­nae Dei resistentibus, ut convertantur ad Deum; sive pro fidelibus ut augeatur iis fi­des & perseverent in eâ, Haeres. 80. and a­gain, cur petitur quod ad nostram pertinet po­testatem, si De [...]s non adjuvat voluntatem; idem de gr [...]t. Christi lib. 1. cap. 15. and once more, Quis optat, quod in potestate sic habet, ut ad faciendum nullo indigeat ad­jumento? idem de peccat. Merit. & Re­mis. lib. 2. cap. 6. The same may be said of Praise and Thanksgiving to God, with respect to Grace. For if there be no insused Principles; it will necessarily fol­low [Page 323] that while we pretend to bless. God for quickning us when we were dead in Tres­passes and Sins; for making us willing through a day of power; for the exceeding greatness of his power exerted towards us who believe; for the sanctifying us wholly in our Soul, Spirit, and Body, &c. We do but mock and flatter him; For as Austin sayes, Pro [...]s [...]s non gratias Deo agimus, sed nos agere fingimus, si unde illi gratias agimus, ipsum facere non putamus, Epist. 107. ad Vital [...]m. Shall I add, that to deny the in­fusion of a supernatural Vital Principle, or to affirm that the Spirit of God acts only to­wards us in way of Moral suasion, yea to grant no other inward operation, but what is Resistible and may be withstood, is in effect to ascribe all the difference that is betwixt one man and another to our selves, contrary to the express words of the Apo­stle, 1 Cor. 4.7. Who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou, that thou did'st not▪ Receive. But having already treated this, Chap. 2. §. 15. and seeing if what we have delivered in this Chapter hold good, this naturally follows; and being obliged to make an End, I su­percede all farther prosecution of it.

[Page 324]§. 9. I have now done with the theory and polemical part, & thought to have pro­ceeded to a practical improvement by way of Use of what hath been said; but the discourse being already drawn out and en­creased beyond what I at first intended: I shall therefore wave all that I had in that way designed to say. However I hope, that as I have finished what I mainly purposed, so I have in some measure performed what I undertook; namely, have justified that Mo­ral Vertue and Practical Religion are not universally coincident, but that there is some­thing else necessary in order to our living to God in all the Duties of obedience incumbent upon us, besides either Moral Vertue, or the instruments of it; and that those who pursue the acquisition of Grace and Spiritual Holi­ness over and above the common Vertues of Morality, do not engage their main industry and biggest endeavours in the pursuit of Dreams and Shaddows, as we are told, Def. & Continuat. p. 338. If any now upon the one hand, by obtruding a notion, and definition of Morality, supposing and in­cluding all that we have been contending for as necessary to Christian Obedience, shall thereupon affirm Morality and Holi­ness to be all one, as I find some learned [Page 325] men do; I shall take the liberty to say that however sound and Orthodox▪ by vertue of such an explication they manifest them­selves to be in Divinity, they do not declare that skill in Philosophy, which they would bear the world in hand that they are furnished with. It is Institution and vul­gar use of Terms that ought to fix and de­termine their signification; and whoever he be that retaining usual Terms will yet assume a freedome of affixing what sence he pleaseth to them, as he Usurps an Em­pire that is neither just not reasonable; so he not only makes way for endless L [...]g [...] ­machies, but leaves a president for con­founding and changing the state of any question in the world▪ and his Authority will be produced, when he is dead and gone, to the disservice of Truth; nor will it be difficult for witty men to render the sense he now pretends to use the Terms in, ridiculous and unmaintainable. If any up­on the other hand, submitting to the com­mon & received signification of the Words interested in the state of the Question we have been debating, shall still persevere in confounding Morality and Holiness; I dare now leave it to the judgment of the in­telligent Reader, whether it ought not to [Page 326] be ascribed to a wilful obstinacy, and an unreasonable humour which neither Au­thority nor demonstration were ever in­tended to conquer. I expect therefore no Proselyte where my Adversary is resolved to be peremptory and confident: It is suffi­cient I have said enough to shame and baffle him, and so I leave him to feast him­self with his own disease. Perit judicium cum res transit in affectum; Where the Un­derstanding i [...] bribed by Prejudice, Pride, and Interest, we cannot expect an impartial award. [...]; We embrace Opinions because of their affinity to the complexion of our minds, and their agreea­bleness to our lifes and manners, saith Arist. Metaph. lib. 1. To shut up all, let me en­treat those who contend for, and are in the belief of the necessity of an infusion of a New Vital Principle in order to our living acceptably to God, to labour to feel the power, and to express the efficacy of it in their hearts and lives. Let us make it ap­pear that we plead not for Grace, that it may be a Sanctuary either for ill Nature, or ill Manners, and that we do not intend it for a shelter for those vices which Philosophy would banish; nor design to protect Lusts [Page 327] and Passions under the priviledg of it; as a late Author is pleased to charge us, Repr. to the Rehers. pag. 60.61. Nor let us think it enough to have the frame of our spirits by some initial principles attempered to o­bedience; but let us act Faith on Christ for continued fresh supplies of the Spirit of Grace, both for the actuating and drawing into exercise the already in [...]used and in­stilled Principles, and the farther confirm­ing, strengthening, and consummating the Elemental Seeds, knowing that we have not already attained nor are already perfect, but that we are still to reach forth unto those things which are before us, if by any means we may attain the Resurrectio [...] of the dead. To this purpose see Joh. 15.4, 5. 2 Cor. 3.5. Eph. 6.10. Phil 4.13. [...]; Being born of God, and implan­ted in him, let us abide in him, as in our Root, seeing Streams, Plants, and Branches dry and wither, if separated and cut off from their source and stem. Demophil. the Pythago­rean Philosopher.

FINIS.

ERRATA.

Besides several Errata's of lesser moment, which the Author is not Solicitous about; there are some that spoil the Sense, which thou art Intreated to Correct as follows:

PAge 21. line 13. read [...]. p. 23. l. 8. r. know. p. 24. l. 24. r. footing in p. 40. l. 17 r. dele Comma after [...]. p. 61. l. 12. r. [...]. p. 73. l. 2. r. than. p. 75. l 7. r. an angry. p. 77. l. 28. r. animantia. p. l. 22. dele Colon after Natural, and place it after contraria p. 81. l. [...]. dele comma after Na­tur [...]. p. 86. l. 13. r. a multitude. p. 89 l [...]. r. darkned, p. 101. l. 7. dele that, p. 111. l. 21. dele or, ibid. l. 23 r. [...], p. 117 l. 7. put a period after Natures, p. 149 l. 3. r. [...]. p. 152 l. 17 r. Pelagians, p. 176 l. 12 dele in, p. 214 l. ult. r. conversation, p. 224 l. [...] r. of the, p. 226 l. 25 r. to murmure, p. 228 l. 17 r. particula aurae, p. 229 l. 25 r. Mens, p. 243 l. 21 The like, p. 269 l. 26 r. [...], p. 270 l. 5 r. [...], ibid. r. Athen. p. 276 l. 3, in the Margent, r. Est rei sive, p. 213 l. 19 r. Aristides.

BOOKS Sold by Dorman Newman, at the King's Arms in the Poultry.

Folio.

THe History of King John, King Henry the Second, and the most Illustrious K. Edward the First; wherein the ancient Soveraign Dominion of the Kings of Great Brittain over all persons in all Causes, is asserted and vindicated: With an exact History of the Popes intollerable Usurpation up­on the Liberties of the Kings and Sub­jects of England and Ireland. Collected out of the Ancient Records in the To­wer of London, by W. Prin, Esq of Lincolns-Inn, and Keeper of his Ma­jesties Records in the Tower of Lon­don.

A Description of the Four parts of [Page] the world, taken from the Works of Monsieur Sanson, Geographer to the French King; and other eminent Tra­vellers and Authors; to which is added the Commodities, Coyns, Weights and Measures of the chief places of Traffick in the world; illustrated with variety of useful and delightful Maps and Figures. By Richard Blome, Gent.

Memoires of the Lives, Actions, Suf­ferings and Deaths of those Excellent Personages that suffered for Allegiance to their Soveraign in our late intestine Wars, from the year 1637, to 1666; with the Life and Martyrdom of King Charles the First. By David Lloyd.

The Exact Politician, or Compleat States-man, &c. By Leonard Willan, Esquire.

A Relation in form of a Journal of the Voyage and Residence of King Charles the Second in Holland.

Mores hominum, the Manners of Men described in sixteen Satyrs. by Juvenal; together with a large Comment, clear­ing the Author in every place wherein [Page] he seemed obscure, out of the Laws and Customs of the Romans, and the Latine and Greek Histories. By Sir Robert Stapleton, Knight.

A Treatise of Justification. By George Downham, Dr. of D.

Fifty one Sermons, Preached by the Reverend Dr. Mark Frank, Master of Pembroke-Hall in Cambridg, Arch-Dea­con of St. Albans, &c. To which is add­ed a Sermon preached at Pauls Cross, Anno 1641. and then commanded to be Printed by King Charles the First.

Bentivolio and Urania, in six Books. By Nathaniel Ingelo, D. D.

The third Edition, wherein all the obscure words throughout the Book are interpreted in the Margent, which makes this much more delightful to read than the former.

De Jure Uniformitatis Ecclesiasticae, or three Books of the Rights belonging to an Uniformity in Churches, in which the chief things of the Laws of Nature and Nations, and of the Divine Law concerning the Consistency of the Ec­clesiastical [Page] Estate with the Civil, are un­folded, by Hugh Davis, Ll. B. late Fel­low of New Colledg in Oxon.

An English, French, Italian, Spanish Dictionary, by James Howel.

Observations on Millitary and Politi­cal Affairs, by the Honourable, George, Duke of Albemarle.

The manner of Exercising the Infan­try, as it's now practised in the Armies of his most Christian Majesty.

Quarto.

A Letter from Dr. Robert Wild to his Friend, Mr. J. J. upon occasion of his Majesties Declaration for Liberty of Conscience. Together with his Poetica Licentia and a friendly Debate between a Conformist and a Nonconformist.

The Dutch Remonstrance concern­ing the Proceedings and Practices of John de Wit, Pensionary, and Ruwaert Van Putten his Brother, with others of that Faction; Translated out of Dutch.

Brevia Parliamentaria Rediviva, [Page] in Thirteen Sections, by W. Prin.

A Plea for Indulgence ▪ by W. Prin.

Index Biblicus: or, an E [...]ct Concor­dance to the Holy Bible, according to the last Translation, by John Jackson, Mi­nister of the Gospel at Moulsea in Surrey.

The Christian Mans Calling: or a Treatise of making Religion ones Busi­ness: wherein the Christian is directed to perform in all Religious duties, Na­tural Actions, particular Vocations, Fa­mily directions; and in his own Recre­ations, in all Relations, in all Conditi­ons, in his dealings with all men, in the choice of his Company, both of evil and good, in solitude, on a week-day, from morning to night; in visiting the sick, and on a dying-bed, by G [...]o. Swinnock.

Mr. Caryl's Exposition on the Book of Job.

Gospel-Remission; or a Treatise shew­ing that true Blessedness consists in the pardon of sin. By Jeremiah Burroughs.

An Exposition of the Song of Solo­mon. By James Durham, late Minister in Glasgow.

[Page] The Real Christiaen: or a Treatise of Effectual Calling; wherein the work of God in drawing the Soul to Christ, being opened according to the Holy Scriptures; some things required by our late Divines, as necessary to a right Preparation for Chr [...]st, and a true clo­sing with Christ, which have caused, and do still cause much trouble to some seri­ous Christians, and are with due respects to those worthy men brought to the bal­lance of the Sanctuary, there weighed, and accordingly judged: to which is added a few words concerning Socini­anism. By Giles Firmin, sometimes Mi­nister at Shalford in Essex.

Mount Pisgah: or a Prospect of Hea­ven; being an Exposition on the fourth Chapter of the first Epistle of St. Paul to the Thessalonians. By Tho. Case, some­times Student in Christ-Church, Oxon, and Minister of the Gospel.

The Vertue and Value of Baptism. By Za. Crofton.

The Quakers Spiritual Court pro­claimed; being an exact Narrative of a [Page] New high Court of Justice; also sun­dry Errors and Corruptions amongst the Quakers, which were never till now made known to the wo [...]ld. By Nath. Smith, who was conversant among them fourteen Years.

A Discourse of Prodigious absti­nence, occasion'd by the twelve Months fasting of Martha Tayler, the faim'd Dar­by-shire Damsel; proving, that without any Miracle the texture of Humane bo­dies may be so altered, that Life may be long continued without the supplies of Meat and Drink. By John Reynolds.

A Grave for Controversies, between the Romanist and the Protestant, lately presented to the French King.

Large Octavo.

The Life and Death of that Excel­lent Minister of Christ, Mr. Joseph Allin. Also his Christian Letters, full of spiri­tual instructions. Published by several Ministers.

Death Unsting'd: A Sermon preach­ed [Page] at the Funeral of Tho. Mowsley an Apothecary, who died July 1669; with a brief Narrative of his Life and Death, also the manner of Gods dealing with him before and after his Conversi­on, drawn up by his own hand, and pub­lished by James Janeway, Minister of the Gospel.

Memorials of Gods Judgments, Spi­ritual and Temporal: or, Sermons to call to Remembrance. By Nich. Lockier, Minister of the Gospel.

A Plat for Marriners, or the Seamans Preacher; delivered in several Sermons upon Jonah's Voyage. By R. Ryther, Preacher of Gods Word at Wappin.

The Gentlewomans Companion; or, a Guide to the Female Sex: containing Directions of Behaviour, in all Places, Companies, Relations, and Conditions, from their Childhood down to Old age: With Letters and Discourses upon all occasions. Whereunto is added a Guide for Cook-maids, Dairy-maids, Chamber-maids, and all others that go to Service: The whole being an exact Rule for the Female Sex in general.

[Page]The present State of Russia, in a Letter to a Friend at London; Written by an Eminent Person, residing at the Great Tzars Court at Mosce, for the space of Nine years: Illustrated with m [...]ny Cop­per-plates.

Lazarus Redivivus: or, a discovery of the Trials and Triumphs that accompa­ny the work of God, in and about his people; with an Essay, tending to clear up those Mistakes men have about it; laid open in several Sermons. By Nicho. Blaky, Minister of the Gospel.

Heaven on Earth: or the best Friend in the worst times; to which is added a Sermon preached at the Funeral of Tho. Mowsley Apothecary. By Ja. Janeway.

The fulfilling of the Scriptures: or, an Essay shewing the exact Accomplish­ment of the word of God in his Works of Providence, performed, and to be per­formed; for confirming the Believers, and convincing the Atheists of these pre­sent times: Containing in the end a few Rare Histories of the Works and Ser­vants of God, in the Church of Scotland.

[Page] The Morning Seeker; shewing the be­nefit of being good betimes; with Di­rections to make sure work about early Religion. By John Rither.

A Discourse concerning Evangelical Love, Church-peace and Unity; with the Occasions and Reasons of present Differences and Divisions about things Sacred and Religious. By John Owen, D. D.

Small Octavo, and Twelves.

The Life and Death of Mr. Thom. Wilson, Minister of Maidstone, in the County of Kent. Drawn up by Mr. George Swinnock.

Hieragonisticon, or Corahs Doom; being an Answer to two Letters of In­quiry into the Grounds and Occasions of the Contempt of the Clergy and Religion.

The Comparison of Plato and Ari­stottle, with the Opinions of the Fathers on their Doctrine, and some Christi­an Reflections; together with Judg­ment [Page] on Alexander and Caesar, as al­so on Seneca, Plutarch and Petronius, out of the French.

Observations on the Poems of Ho­mer and Virgil: a Discourse represen­ting the Excellency of those Works, and the Perfection in general of all He­roick Actions, out of the French.

Published this Term, A somber In­quiry into the Nature, Measure, &c. of Morality, and it's distinction from Gos­pel Holiness; in Answer to Eclesiasti­cal Policy, Continuation, and Reproof to the Rehersal Transpros'd. By R. F.

Fellowship with God, or 28 Sermons on the first Epistle of John, chap. first and second. By Hugh Binning, late Mi­nister in Scotland.

The mystery of Faith open'd, or some Sermons concerning Faith. By Andrew Gray late Minister of Glasgow.

A Token for Children, being an ex­act account of the conversation, holy and exemplary lives and joyful deaths of several young Children. By James Janeway.

[Page]The Mercury-Gallant, Containing many true and pleasant Relations of what passed at Paris, from the first of January 72. till the Kings Deparure thence.

An Explanation, of the Assemblies shorter Catechism, wherein all the An­swers are taken abroad in, under Questi­ons and Answers, the Truths explain­ed, and proved by Reason and Scrip­ture; several Cases of Conscience resol­ved; some chief Controversies in Re­ligion stated, &c. By Tho. Vincent.

The Experiences of God's gracious declining; with Mrs. Elizabeth White, as they were written with her own hand, and found in her Closet after her decease.

A serious Caution against Impeni­tency, under Gods Correcting-Pro­vidences. By James Sharp.

Justification only upon a Satisfaction. By Robert Ferguson.

The Christians great Interest: or the tryal of a saving interest in Christ, with the way how to attain it. By W. Guthry, late Minister in Scotland.

[Page]The virtue, vigor and efficacy of the Promises displayed in their strength and glory. By Tho. Henderson

The History of Moderation; or the Life, Death, and Resurrection of Mode­ration, together with her Nativity, Coun­try, Pedigree, Kindred, and Character, Friends and also her Enemies.

A Guide to the true Religion: or, a Discourse directing to make a wise choice of that Religion Men venture their Salvation upon. By John Clappam.

Rebukes for sin, by God's burning anger; by the burning of London; by the burning of the world, and by the burning of the wicked in Hell-fire; to which is added a Discourse of Heart-fix­edness. By T. Dolittle.

Four Select Sermons, upon several Texts of Scripture, wherein the Will-worship and Idolatry of the Church of Rome is laid open, and confuted. By William Fenner.

The Life and Death of Dr. Ja. Usher, Arch-bishop of Armagh, and Primate of Ireland.

[Page]A most Comfortable & Christian Di­alogue between the Lord and the Soul. By W. Cooper Bishop of Galloway.

Mr. Ferguson on the Epistles to the Ga­latians and Ephesians.

Justification only upon a satisfaction, or the Necessity and Verity of the Sa­tisfaction of Christ, as the alone grounds of Remission of sin, asserted and opened against the Socinians. By R. Ferguson.

The Canons and Institutions of the Quakers, agreed upon at their General Assembly, at their new Theatre in Grace-Church-street.

A Synopsis of Quakerism: or, a Colle­ction of the Fundamental Errors of the Quakers. By Tho. Danson.

Bloud for bloud; being a true Nar­rative of that late horted murther com­mitted by Mary Cook upon her Child. By Nath. Partridge, with a Sermon on the same occasion.

Six several Treatises. By Nich. Lockier Minister of the Gospel.

Bonastis Vapulans: or, some Castigati­ons given to Mr. Durel, for fouling him­self [Page] and others in his English and Latine Book: By a Country Scholar.

A Discourse written by Sir G. Downing the King of Great Brittain's Envoy Ex­traordinary, to the States of the United Provinces: Vindicating his Royal Master from the Insolencies of a scandalous Li­bel, Printed under the Title of [An Ex­tract out of the Register of the States Ge­neral of the United Provinces, upon the Memorial of Sir Geo. Downing, Envoy, &c.] And delivered by the Agent de Heyde for such, to several Publick Mini­sters. Whereas no such Resolution was e­ver communicated to the said Envoy, nor any answer returned at all by their Lord­ships to the said Memorial.

Whereunto is added a Relation of some Former and Latter Proceedings of the Hollanders: By a meaner Hand.

The Assemblies works in 12o, with the large and smaller Catechisms.

Scotch Psalms alone, or with the Bible.

[Page]THese are to give Notice, That the Psalms of David in Meeter are newly Transla­ted, and Diligently Compared, with the Ori­ginal Text and former Translations, more smooth and agreeable to the Text than that of Tho. Sternhold, John Hopkins, or any other Extant in English; and do run with such a fluent Sweetness, That the Ministers whose Names are here-under Subscribed, have thought fit to Recommend it to all with whom they are Concerned; some of them having used it already, with great Comfort and Satisfaction: These Psalms are to be sold by Dorman Newman, at the King's A [...]mes in the Poultry, at One shilling Four­pence Price.

  • John Owen, D. D.
  • Tho. Manton, D D.
  • William Jenkyn.
  • James Jnnes.
  • Thomas Watson.
  • Thomas Lye.
  • Mathew Poole.
  • Jo. Milward.
  • John Chester.
  • George Cockayn.
  • Mathew Meade.
  • Robert Franklin.
  • Richard Mayo.
  • Hen. Langley, D.D.
  • Thomas Doolittle.
  • Thomas Vincent.
  • Nathaniel Vincent.
  • John Ryther.
  • William Thompson.
  • Nicholas Blaky.
  • Charles Morton.
  • Edmund Callamy.
  • William Carslake.
  • James Ganeway.
  • John Hicks.
  • John Baker.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.