DISCOURSE I. Of the Law of NATVRE .

How it doth appear that there is such a Law , What the general Contents of that Law are , And of what continuance its obligation is . A digression concerning mens misapprehensions in the matter of Nature's Law , and from whence those misapprehensions do proceed . Of what use the knowledge of Nature's Law is , after the superinducing the Laws of Moses and of Christ .

PRoposing to my self to entreat of the Decalogue , or Ten Commandments , according as the Catechism of the Church of England hath understood them , I foresee it necessary to premise somewhat concerning the Divine Laws in general , and then of the Ten Commandments in particular . For as that Catechism , though it restrains Gods holy will to the Ten Commandments , yet doth it upon supposition of their containing in them all other his Laws and Commandments ; so before we descend to the Explication of those Ten , it will be necessary to enquire , By what Authority they stand , how they come to oblige us , and what measures we are to proceed by in the Interpretation of them ?

Now the Laws of God are of two sorts , to wit , either Natural or Positive ; by the former whereof I understand such a Law or Laws as are founded upon natural principles , and investigable by them ; by the latter , such as have no other visible foundation , at least , than the meer good pleasure of God , and are therefore to be known only by revelation from himself .

The Law of Nature again hath these four things to be enquired into , which accordingly shall be the boundaries of my discourse concerning it .

1. How it doth appear that there is such a Law . 2. What the general Contents of that Law are . 3. Of what continuance the obligation thereof is . 4. Of what use the knowledge thereof is , after the superinducing the Laws of Moses and Christ .

I. It is very well observed by the judicious Hooker , and will be evident to any man that shall consult his own understanding , that all knowledge is at length resolved into such things as are clear and evident of themselves ; for all knowledge of things obscure being made by such things as are more known than the things we seek after , either it must terminate in such things as are clear and evident of themselves , or we can have no certain knowledge of any thing : That by which we endeavour to know any thing , requiring still something to manifest it , and so on in infinitum . Now though a resolution into things clear and evident of themselves be not always actually made , nor indeed necessary to be so , the intermediate principles of any Science coming by discourse to be as well known , as those things which are clear and evident of themselves ; yet being now to penetrate , as it were , into the very bottom of all Moral Truths , it will be requisite for us to dig so much the deeper , and deduce the being of the Law of Nature , if not from such principles as are the lowest in their kind , yet from such as are nearest to them . I have * * Explic. of the Apostles Creed . elsewhere shewn , and shall therefore now take it for granted , that there is such a thing as an Alwise and good God , that that God is the Creator and Sustainer of the world , and all things in it ; which being granted , it will follow , that there is a right in God to give Laws to his Creatures , in such things as are in their power , and suitable to their nature to execute . For what can be more rational , than that every one should have the disposal of those things which he is the Author of , and consequently , if God be the Author of all things , that he himself should have the command of them ? All therefore that will be requisite for us to enquire into , is , whether as God hath the power of giving Laws to his Creatures , and to man in particular , so he hath actually done it , and consigned him to the obedience of them ? Now for this we shall need no other proof , than that freedom of will , which God hath given to humane nature ; for being man is not carried by any inevitable necessity as other Creatures are , but left to the guidance of his own reason and will , either he must have a Rule set him to proceed by , or it shall be in his power , even by the consent of the Almighty , to disturb the order of Nature . Now forasmuch as it can be no way suitable to the wisdom of any one to put Creatures into a power , that I say not into a kind of necessity , to disturb his own orders and designs , therefore God being Alwise must necessarily have prevented this inconvenience , and given him a Rule to direct his will and operations . Again , being it appears not , that man at the first had any other revealed Law of God than that of not eating the forbidden Fruit , and many Nations of the World have no opportunity to know those Revelations he hath since made , it follows , that God hath implanted in the soul of each particular man a Law by which he is to act , or at least such principles from which he may deduce it . Lastly , forasmuch as there is in all men a conscience , excusing or commending them when they have done any thing they apprehend to be good , but disapproving and condemning them if they have done any thing which they believe to be evil ; it follows undeniably that there is a Rule , whereby our actions are to be guided . For if mankind were left at large , what ground could there be of his either applauding or condemning himself , for any supposed either virtuous or vitious actions ? Neither is it any prejudice to this inference , that mens consciences do oftentimes condemn them for those things that are no parts of the Law of Nature , or any other . For as we pretend not to infer the goodness or evil of any action in it self , from the consciences either acquitting or condemning the person that doth it , but only , that there is such a thing as good or evil : so cannot any reason be assigned of our consciences either accusing or condemning us , if the notion of good and evil were not planted in the soul of man by that God who formed it . For though tradition and education may perswade us to believe many things to be evil , which are in themselves not so , and consequently incline the conscience of him that committeth them , to condemn or disquiet him for so doing ; yet could they not ( unless they could build without a foundation ) incline the man to be troubled for it , but upon supposition that there is such a thing as evil . Again , when the main trouble of conscience proceeds from hence , even from the doing of those things which that assures us to be evil , what reason can be assigned of that trouble , if it were not a truth implanted in our hearts that we ought not to do those things which our conscience assureth us to be bad ? For as it is evident , no man could be troubled for acting against his conscience , but upon supposition of his being bound to follow the dictates of it : so is it not to be imagined , that that supposition could have any other root than Nature . For as for all frightful stories of Hell , and the like ( which men , who would be thought wise , would have the ground of all Religion ) even those themselves , if it be duly considered , will be found to receive their force and efficacy from the conscience's foreperswasion of good and evil , and particularly of its own obligation . For setting aside the nature of good and evil as meer fancies , and my conscience shall not so much be affrighted at the stories of vengeance , as at the shaking of a reed , because conscious of nothing that may deserve it . I conclude therefore with S. Paul in that excellent discourse of his upon this argument , Rom. 2.14 . That though the Gentiles have not the Law , that is to say no revealed one , yet they are a Law unto themselves , which shew the work of the Law written in their hearts , their consciences also bearing witness , and their thoughts in the mean while accusing or else excusing one another .

II. The being of the Law of Nature being thus demonstrated , enquire we in the second place , what the Precepts thereof are ; I do not mean to give account of every particular one ( for that were both an infinite and needless task ) but of the more general ones , from which the other may be easily deduced . Now there are two ways of investigating any truths , as the forementioned Hooker hath well observed ; the one by the causes which constitute it , the other by the signs and tokens which attend it . The latter of these is without doubt the most easie , but withall the most fallible , and therefore quitting that at present , I shall chuse rather to pitch upon the former , and exemplifie the Precepts of this Law by it . Now there are three things wherein our duty is comprehended , according to those several relations we stand in ; our duty to God , our Neighbour , and our selves . I begin with the last of these because nearest to us , and therefore in all probability most easie to be discerned by us , where the first capital Precept , that presents it self to us , is the preservation of our selves . Now that this is a Precept of that Law , which we call the Law of Nature , beside our own natural propension to it , will appear from God's giving us a being , and means to support it . For as the destruction of our being is a direct contradiction to that order which he hath set in Nature ; so our neglect to preserve it , is , though not a direct , yet a consequential contradiction to that provision which he hath made for us in the world . For what design can we suppose God to have had , principally and chiefly I mean , in those good things he hath given us , but the support of our being by them ? If then it were the design of the Almighty , in the good things of this world , that we should receive support and comfort by them , if this design of his appear from the nature of the things themselves ; the preservation of our selves is a branch of that Law , and we consequently transgressors of it if we neglect it . But from hence we may collect , what we are to think of all self-murthers , excesses , or neglects : for if the preservation of our selves be a duty incumbent on us by the Law of our Creation , then must that be a sin which either destroys , or impairs , or neglects it , and consequently , all laying violent hands upon our selves , all intemperance , and sloth , and idleness . From the duty we owe to our selves , ascend we to that which is terminated in God , and see whether there be any footsteps of such a one in that Law whereof we are speaking . Now there are two things wherein our duty to God may be comprehended , our honouring him and obeying him . The former of these is evident from that excellency , which the soul , assisted with the bare light of reason , may discern in God . For being it is a clear dictate of the light of reason , that whatsoever is excellent is to be honoured ; God as being the most excellent essence , yea the fountain of all others excellencies , must be much more so , by how much he transcends all others . But from hence it is evident what we are to think , not only of all manifest contempts of him , but of adopting any thing else into equal honour with him ; for being God is not only to be honoured , but to be honoured also above all other beings , because so far surpassing them ; the adopting of any other into the like honour , must be a diminution of his , and consequently a breach of this fundamental Law , as well as of that which saith , Thou shalt have no other Gods beside me . The same is no less evident concerning that other branch of our duty to God , even our yielding obedience to all his commands ; for being ( as was before shown ) God is our maker and sustainer , he has a right to our obedience , and consequently , we a necessity of obeying him . But from hence will follow , not only our yielding obedience to all other the Laws of Nature , but to all positive and revealed ones ; for being the command of God is that which challenges our obedience , and not the manner whereby it is made known to us , whatsoever appears to be such must be equally our duty , whether engraven in Tables of stone , as that of Moses was , or in the more noble Tables of our heart , as this of Nature . The only thing now remaining to be proved , is what we commonly call our duty to our Neighbour , and may be comprised in these two generals , the giving to every man that which is his own , and where that is requisite , the ministring to them of ours . The former whereof as it is so plain , that it hardly admits of any proof , so both the one and the other receive sufficient confirmation from our natural desire of receiving the like charity and justice from others ; for being ( as the forementioned Hooker well observeth ) those things which are equal , must needs all have one measure , if I cannot but wish to receive all justice and requisite charity from the hands of others , I cannot but think it reasonable to afford it ; and I must either condemn my own desires , and that nature from whence they flow , or think other mens as necessary to be complyed with .

III. From what hath been said concerning the Law of Nature , it is evident , thirdly , that this Law is unchangeable , or at least must continue of force so long as our nature doth ; for being ( as was before said ) rooted in Nature , and flowing from natural causes , it must consequently have the same continuance with those causes from whence it flows . Thus , for example , to give every man that which is his own , is so a duty that it can never cease to be so ; as in like manner , to offer violence to no man , not to take away any mans life or substance . Indeed it sometimes happens , that there seems to be a change in this Law , as in those known instances of the Israelites spoiling the Aegyptians , and Abrahams sacrificing his innocent Son . But if it be well considered , it will be found that there is not so much a change made in the Law , as in the matter about which it is conversant ; for God having a paramount power over the Creatures , and never so parting with it , as not to reserve to himself a liberty to withdraw it at pleasure , whatsoever he commands to be taken away , doth thereby cease to be that persons whose it was before , and consequently it is no violation of that Law , which commands the giving every man his own , to disrobe such a person of it . The like is to be said concerning Abrahams sacrificing his Son , or the Magistrates putting a Malefactor to death ; for it being not simply murther to take away a mans life , but to take it away either without commission from God , or without any just motive ; Abrahams sacrificing his Son , and the Magistrates putting a man to death , is no breach of that Law which forbids murther : Because the former did what he did by commission from God , who is absolute Lord of the Creatures ; and the Magistrate puts Malefactors to death , by virtue of that general Commission , which impowers those that are in Authority , to execute vengeance upon all that do evil . By which solution all pretence is taken away , of drawing those actions into example , and particularly that of spoiling the Aegyptians . For it being evident from the Scripture , that whatsoever any man , how wicked soever , acquires by the ordinary course of Gods providence , is truly and properly his , and no diminution of that appearing but by an express command from God , as the Israelites had to spoil the Aegyptians ; to take any thing away from such a person , without that command , is truly and properly to take away that which is anothers , and consequently eternally sinful , because that Law , of which it is a transgression , is eternal .

But here a question may not impertinently be made , and I shall the rather intend it , because the resolution thereof may confer somewhat to the clearing of that which follows ; to wit , how it comes to pass that this Law of Nature hath not only been so much disobeyed , but so much misunderstood by those who were under the obligation of it ; for flowing ( as I have before said ) from natural principles , the truth whereof is evident to all , and being also ( as was now shewn ) eternally obligatory to all mankind , it may seem a wonder how this Law should be so strangely misunderstood , as experience tells us it hath been : The Romans , a polite and civilized people , accounting it no injury to invade the Territories of their Neighbours , as the whole Heathen world strangely offending against that fundamental Law , which forbids the adopting of any Creature into equal honour with the Almighty . In answer to which , we are first to know , that though the first principles of natural knowledge carry sufficient evidence in themselves , and accordingly have been with great consent acknowledged by all ( whence it is , that no Nation almost hath been so barbarous as not to own a God , and that God is to be worshipped ) yet the deductions from those principles , which are no less a part of that Law , require some care and intention in those that make them ; which the world , generally slothful , not being over forward to use , it is no wonder if men have many times erred in several particulars thereof ; for let the truth , we are to know , be built upon never so certain and evident principles , yea upon such as are no less evident , than that the whole is greater than the part , yet , if we attend not to the consequences of those principles , we may erre in our apprehensions about them , even as he who hath a light to guide him , may either stumble or wander out of his way , if he do not advert to those bright rays that stream from it . 2. But there is yet a more weighty cause of mens misapprehensions in those things which are the Precepts of this great Law ; and that is the depravedness of their wills and affections , and their earnest pursuit of such things as promise them any present pleasure or advantage ; for finding sin to minister to these , and themselves strongly enclined to obtain them , the desire of so doing makes them first willing to believe that , which leads to them , to be no impiety , and then actually to believe it none ; for as Minutius Felix speaks , facilè credimus quae volumus , we easily believe that which we desire to be , our passion for any present enjoyment either wholly stifling or suppressing the dictates of right reason , which should keep us from the pursuing of it . 3. Lastly , ( which S. Paul expresly affirms , * * Rom. 1.28 . and is in truth the best account of this difficulty ) the Heathen world liking not to retain God in their knowledge , nor those Precepts of his which this great Law contain'd , it is no wonder if he gave them over , not only to vile affections , but also to a reprobate and brutish mind ; for how can it be but extremely just , to withdraw the light from those who shut their eyes against it when they have it , and to make that their punishment , which was their own choice ?

IV. The fourth and last thing comes now to be discussed , to wit , What is the usefulness of this Law ? A question which may seem the more necessary to be asked after the superinducing of the Law of Moses , and that of Christ . In answer to which I say , 1. That though these later Laws should acquaint us with every thing , that the Law of Nature contains , yet would not that Law be unnecessary to be looked into ; for being given by God , as the others were , and continuing in full force and virtue , the same reason and piety , which obligeth us to the consideration of those , will put us upon the consideration of this . 2. Again , though the Laws of Moses and of Christ should contain all the same Precepts , which the Law of Nature doth , yet the reasonableness of those Precepts appearing mostly , if not only , from this , the consideration thereof cannot but be exceeding useful ; as well for the commendation of the equity of him that gave them , as for the more vigorous stirring up our selves to yield obedience to them ; for when Law comes assisted with reason , it doth not only convince but perswade , and makes us embrace as well as bear our Fetters . 3. There is yet another reason , and a much more forcible one , of our study of Natures Law ; for beside that no reason obligeth us to think all things set down so clearly in the other , as not to stand in need of some assistance from this light , in the explication of moral duties ; the Law of Moses and Christ both presuppose some things known from this great fundamental Law : for urging the several Precepts therein contained , not so much from the reasonableness of the things themselves , as the authority of God that gave them , and the mighty works whereby he gave witness to those that published them ; they must consequently suppose it known from Natures Law , that there is a God and Providence , and that that God is to be believed and obeyed . Whilst others therefore , with no less danger to themselves , than with folly and unreasonableness , despise this Candle of the Lord , let us on the contrary contemplate and adore it , as being assured , that though it be not the Sun , yet it is the Phosphorus to it , and both foretells and points at it .

DISC. II. Of the positive Laws of God , and particularly of the Law of Moses .

The positive Laws of God are either such as were given to man in the state of Innocency , or such as were given to him since his fall . That the Law concerning the not eating of the Tree of Knowledge , is of the former number , What the reason of the giving of it was , and of what concernment it is to us . The like enquired concerning the Law of Eve's becoming subject to her Husband , and of his being obliged to labour ; both which are shewn to be of universal and perpetual Obligation . Of the Laws given to Noah , and particularly concerning that of not eating Blood , which is shewn not to be of present Obligation . A digression concerning the reason and use of Positive Laws , and particularly of such , the matter whereof is moral . Of the Authority and Obligation of the Law of Moses , and from whence our primary Obligation thereto ariseth . In what instances , and in what measure the Law of Moses doth now oblige .

I Said in the beginning of my last , that the Laws of God were of two sorts , to wit , either Natural or Positive : By the former whereof I told you , you were to understand such Laws as were founded upon natural principles , and knowable by them ; by the latter , such as are founded upon the meer good pleasure of God , and consequently to be known only by revelation from himself ; for though the matter of some Positive Laws be the same with that of the Law of Nature , and consequently those at least may seem to have the same foundation and deduction with it ; yet as that matter is a part of those Precepts which we call Positive , so it is founded upon his meer good pleasure that gave them , and consequently knowable to us , not by their own inward light , but by such outward means as he shall be pleased to manifest them by . Thus for example , Though I may know from the light of Nature , that I ought not to have any other gods besides the true , nor adopt any other person into equal honour with him ; yet , as this was part of the Law given in Mount Sinai , so it depended upon his alone good will and pleasure , and consequently could not be known , but by his own publick Declaration , and those Writings which have transmitted it unto us .

Now the Positive Laws of God , we are now in order to entreat of , may be reduced to two heads , 1. The former whereof were given to man in the state of innocency , 2. The latter , since his fall from it .

I. If we look upon man in the state of innocency , so we shall find he had a Positive Law imposed upon him ; the Scripture telling us of an express Command of God , Not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil , which he had placed in the midst of the Garden of Eden , Gen. 2.17 . Now there are two things which will be requisite to be enquired into concerning this Law , and which therefore I shall endeavour the resolution of . 1. What necessity or expedience there was of giving such a Law ? And , 2. How this Law concerns us ? The ground of the former Query , is that perfection which seems to be in the Law of Nature before given . For if ( as I have before shewn ) this gives direction to us in all cases relating either to God , our Neighbour , or our selves , if this Law was at that time clear and manifest to him to whom it was given , what need was there of adding to it another Law ? and such as had nothing to commend it to our first Parents , but the authority and pleasure of him that gave it ? But to this the answer is easie ; and that is , That God therefore gave it , not as a supplement of Natures Law , which needed it not , but that he might thereby have a firmer proof of mans obedience to himself . For the Law of Nature containing such things , as ought in reason to be done , though there were no Command of God prescribing them , our Obedience thereto might proceed rather from compliance with our own reason , than with his Command who gave it . But giving a Law , the matter whereof had nothing to commend it , but the authority of him who gave it , obedience thereto could proceed from no other consideration , and consequently must be the surest proof of our obedience . The same is to be said , in some measure , of Gods making Positive Laws concerning those things which were prescribed by that of Nature ; for Gods Positive or Revealed Laws exacting our obedience , upon the score of his authority that gave them , we cannot satisfie those Laws , but by having a principal regard to his Command who imposed them on us . Having thus shewn the expediency of Gods giving that Positive Law concerning the not eating of the Tree of Knowledge , proceed we in the next place to shew how this Law concern us ; which is a Query no less necessary than the former ; for if this Law concern not us , the consideration thereof in this place must be very impertinent , because enquiring into our own obligation and duty . In answer therefore to this I say , 1. That this Law being given to Adam , not only in his personal capacity , but as he was the representative of all mankind , ( as appears from the Scriptures charging the guilt of it upon all that descended from his loins ) this Law must be consequently supposed to have been obligatory to us , as well as to him to whom it was immediately given . 2. Again being it is a dictate of Natures Law , not only that we should yield obedience to his commands , but also , where we fail , repent of the breach of them ; the Law of abstaining from the Tree of Knowledge , as being a Law of Gods to us , must consequently so far concern us , as to oblige us to repent of the breach of it .

II. From such Law , or Laws , as were given to man in the state of innocency , pass we to those which were given to him after his fall . Where

1. The first that presents it self , is that command of God concerning the Womans being subject to her Husband , Gen. 3.16 . Vnto the Woman he said , I will greatly multiply thy sorrows and conception . In sorrow shalt thou bring forth children , and thy desire shall be to thy Husband , and he shall rule over thee . For though it be true , that this was spoken more particularly to Eve , upon occasion of her transgressing Gods Command : yet as the Curse wherewith this Command is accompanied , was manifestly intended for all of the Female Sex ; so it is no less evident , as for that reason , so for the capacity the Woman was in , that the Command was likewise intended . For being Eve was the representative of all Woman-kind , as well as the Wife of Adam , whatsoever Command was given to her , must be supposed to belong to all of her Sex and condition . And accordingly S. Paul doth not only urge this obedience upon the Corinthian Women in reference to the Law , 1 Cor. 14.34 . but yet more particularly , 1 Tim. 1.14 . upon the account of this Command , that was given to Eve ; for having before said , that he suffered not a Woman to teach , nor to usurp authority over the man , but to be in silence , he adds , as a reason of it , because Adam was not deceived , but the Woman being deceived was in the transgression . Which being the very reason why God gave the forementioned Command to Eve , of being subject to her Husband , it is evident that , when in the Epistle to the Corinthians he saith , that they are commanded to be under obedience , as also saith the Law , his meaning was of that Law which was given to Eve , and consequently that that Law is obligatory to all . The same is to be said of the other positive Law .

2. The second is that which was given to Adam , upon the account of his disobedience , Gen. 3.19 . In the sweat of thy brow shalt thou eat bread , until thou return unto the ground ; for that that was a Command , as well as a Curse , is evident from the 23. verse , where we find God sending forth the man from the Garden of Eden , to till the ground from whence he was taken . Now forasmuch as Adam was the representative of mankind , as of whose blood all Nations were made , forasmuch as he is here considered , not under the relation of a Husband , but a man , nor is there any thing in the Precept to determine it to him , whatsoever is given in command to him , must be supposed to be intended to all persons according to their capacities and degrees . And indeed , as in the Laws of men , such are presumed to oblige the Generations following , which have nothing in them to restrain them to the present ; so there is the same reason to believe that Law of God , which was given to him from whom we are descended , to oblige us also , if there be nothing in it to determine it to him alone ; for it being neither suitable to the majesty , nor agreeable to the custom of Law-givers , to renew their Laws , as often as the persons change that are under them , that which is directed to one Generation , must be presumed to concern the next , and so on to succeeding Ages . Lastly , for there is something particular to the former Laws , which is not common to all others , the subjection of the Woman , and the laboriousness of the Man , being founded upon the transgression of our first Parents , which the Scripture affirms to be imputed unto us , those duties themselves must consequently appertain to us , as well as those transgressions do .

3. From these Precepts given to our first Parents , pass we to those which were given to Noah and his Sons , who after the Flood were under the same capacity ; that is to say , the Representatives of all mankind , because all mankind was then in them . Now there are two positive , or revealed Laws , which the Scripture informs us to have been given to Noah , a prohibition of murther , with a command to put him to death that should be guilty of it , and a like prohibition of eating flesh with the life or blood , Gen. 9.4 . and so on . Of the former of these being obligatory to us , there can be no doubt , as because they to whom it was given were the Representatives of mankind , so because the substance of that Law is natural ; the Precepts of the Law of Nature both forbidding murther , and setling a Magistracy to punish it . The greatest question will be concerning the latter , even that of not eating blood . For though the Precept be ceremonial , yet it doth not follow , because the ceremonial Law of Moses is abrogated , that therefore that also must be : for ( as S. Paul speaks concerning Circumcision ) this being not of Moses but of the Fathers , yea of those Fathers which were the Representatives of all mankind , the abolishing of that doth not necessarily draw with it the abolishing of the other . Again it is manifest , that as many Nations of the posterity of Noah did carefully abstain from blood , so the Jews admitted none even to the priviledge of being Proselytes of the Gates , ( which was the lowest form of their Religion ) without an obligation from them to observe it . Which is no more than what we find prescribed by God himself , Lev. 17.10 . It is evident , 3. That though the Apostles and Elders of Jerusalem eased the Gentile Christians of Circumcision , yet they laid this Precept upon them of abstaining from blood , Acts 15.20 . And accordingly , the Latine Church for above a thousand years , and the Greek Church unto this day do religiously abstain from it . To return now an answer to this difficulty : Where first , I shall readily confess , that this being a Law given to Noah and his Sons , the then Representatives of mankind , it was consequently to oblige all mankind , till it should be repealed . I shall make no difficulty , 2. To grant , that the abolition of the Ceremonial Law of Moses , doth not necessarily draw with it the abolishing of the other , because in time before it . But then 3. I say , that it is manifest enough that the Precept was repealed by Christ ; and I alledge for my saying to that of S. Paul to the Romans c. 14.14 . and a like passage 1 Tim. 4.4 . In the former whereof , speaking of meats , it is said , that he both knows and is perswaded by the Lord Jesus , that there is nothing unclean of it self ; but to him that thinketh any thing to be unclean , to him it is unclean . In the latter , That every creature of God is good , and nothing to be refused , if it be received with thanksgiving . I know what hath been said , and therefore I am willing to obviate it , that , when it is affirmed by S. Paul that nothing is unclean of it self , as in like manner , that every creature of God is good , we are to understand both of things in their own nature , and abstracting from any positive Law . But how weak this evasion is , it is no hard matter for him to discern , who reads on but to the last clause of each of the forequoted Texts ; For when , in the former , the phrase unclean of it self is not opposed to that which is so by positive prohibition , but to that only which becomes so by a mans erroneous thinking it to be so ; For I know ( saith he ) and am perswaded by the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean of it self , but ( or rather * * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . unless ) to him that thinketh it to be unclean , to him it is unclean ; And in the other , after he had said that every creature of God is good , and nothing to be refused , if it be received with thanksgiving , what doubt can remain , but that it is lawful to partake of any , as to any positive Precept of God to the contrary ? For if nothing be unclean , but by the erroneous conscience of him that takes it , or some such accident ; and again every creature of God is so good as not to be refused , provided it be received with thanksgiving ; either there is no positive Law against the partaking of it , or it shall be lawful for us to partake of it though there be . If it be farther remanded , Why , if this Precept of Noah be abrogated , the Apostles should notwithstanding press the observation of it upon the Gentile Christians ? I answer , Not because the Precept continued to oblige , but in respect to such of the Jews as had embraced the Christian Religion , who , in those first times of Christianity , were so addicted to the Rites in which they had been brought up , that unless the Gentile Christians had complyed with them in some things ( those especially which were contained in the Precepts of Noah , which they had all along thought of absolute necessity ) they would have gone near to have fallen off from the Christian Faith . Neither is this said without proof , even from that Council it self ; S. James , whose advice the Council followed in their Decree , giving this as the reason why he would have the Apostles write to the Gentile Christians to abstain from things strangled and from blood , even because Moses hath of old time them that preach him , being read in the Synagogue every Sabbath day , Acts 15.21 . that is to say , because such of the Jews , as had embraced Christianity , knew by the weekly reading of the Books of Moses , that those things were there forbidden even to Noah and his Sons , and could not therefore but be much startled at the neglect of them . The result of the premises is this , that whatsoever Laws were given either to our first Parents , or Noah , the Representatives of mankind , do oblige all that descend from them , unless peculiar to their persons , or abrogated by a latter Law .

4. Having considered the Precepts given to Adam and Noah , and shewn their obligatoriness to us , the order of the Scripture leads us to the Law of Moses , and particularly to that part of it which is contained in the Ten Commandments . But because it may be demanded ( as before concerning that Law given to Adam in the state of innocency ) what expediency there was of giving these and other revealed Laws ? and no place can be so proper for the resolution of that question as this , because lying as it were in the confines of those primitive Laws , and that of Moses , to each of which it is to be applyed ; I will , before I proceed to say any thing of the Law of Moses in particular , return an answer to that demand . Two things I have before observed to be the matter of those Laws which God hath superadded to the Law of Nature ; either 1. such as are Ritual and Ceremonial , or 2. Moral and Natural . As to the former of these , there may seem to be a double reason of Gods superadding them to the Law of Nature ; 1. The first whereof is , that they might be a memento to us of the more substantial Precepts of God ; for being , through the depravedness of Nature , not only apt to forget our duty , but to immerse our selves in the things of sense , it seemed but requisite , that even those sensible things should be so fitted , as to bring the other to our remembrance . And hence no doubt the forbidding of blood to Noah and his posterity , the many purifications and washings enjoined the Jews ; in which , as in so many Emblems or Pictures , the world that then was , might plainly behold the abhorrency they were to have for the sin of murther , and that purity of soul wherewith they ought to approach their Maker . 2. The second reason of Gods superadding positive ceremonious Precepts to the Law of Nature and Reason , was that they might be not only as a memento of , but as a fence to those substantial Precepts which he had before given . A thing which those ceremonial Precepts did no doubt serve most excellently for , among those persons to whom they were given : For when men were taught to have blood in so great an abhorrency , as to abstain even from the blood of Beasts , they could not but be thereby kept in a greater apprehension of shedding the blood of man , in whom the image of God resides . But because ( as I have before said ) this ceremonial Precept ceaseth to oblige us , as in like manner those of Moses ; Christ , as he has introduced a different dispensation as to the main , so he has supplyed the want of those helps , by the more liberal effusion of his Spirit . I will therefore proceed to such positive Laws of the Old Testament , the matter whereof is Moral and Natural . Now the reason of Gods superadding these Laws to that of Nature , and forbidding those things by positive Laws , which were before forbidden by the other , may appear from what hath been heretofore said , concerning the difficulty of discovering the Precepts of Natures Law , and the depravedness of humane nature ; for being the Precepts of the Law of Nature are not easily to be discerned , and man , partly through evil principles , partly through the corruptness of his will and affections , is become unable to discern them , it seemed but necessary , that those Laws should be proposed anew to him , and he taught that by revelation from Heaven , which his own reason either could not at all , or not so easily discover . Thus when Moses had broken the two Tables of stone , wherein God had written the Ten Commandments , and thereby defaced the characters thereof , the same reason , which prompted him to write them at the first , prompted him to write them a second time , and renew that which Moses had defaced . Which as it was , no doubt , a just obligation to the Jews , to be doubly thankful to the Almighty ; so ought it to be no less to us that God hath written that Law in his Word , which he had before graven in the Tables of our hearts ; these Tables being defaced , not by an angry Moses , but by our selves , and by our own either neglect or perversness .

The reason of positive Laws being thus discovered , pass we now on in the investigation of the Law of Moses , and particularly of the Ten Commandments ; concerning which you may remember I proposed to enquire into these three things , 1. By what Authority that Law stands . 2. How it comes to oblige us ; and 3. What measures we are to proced by in finding out the full importance of it .

1. To the first of these , or at least so far as the Decalogue is concerned , the Preface to it is a direct answer , telling us that God spake all these words ; and indeed , if any Law can pretend to be of divine Authority , this of the Ten Commandments certainly may . For first of all , when Moses had by the commandment of God assembled all the people of Israel near Mount Sinai , God by a voice from Heaven published all these Commandments in their ears , and with all the signs and demonstrations of his Majesty . Again , when the same people , terrified by the dreadful appearance of his Majesty , desired to have this Law delivered to them by Moses , God , in compliance with their desires , wrote the same words in two Tables of stone , and transmitted them by him unto the people , Exod. 31.8 . Lastly , when Moses had broken those two Tables , and thereby put God upon a necessity of transcribing them anew , he wrote upon other two Tables the same Ten Commandments , as you may see Deut. 10.4 . So that if the publishing of Commandments from Heaven , or writing them with his own finger , can entitle them to a divine Authority , the Law of the Ten Commandments certainly may , as being notified by both .

2. But because it is not enough to make a Law obligatory to us , that it hath God for its Author and Promulger , unless it do also appear to have been intended for our direction and obedience ; therefore before we proceed to infer our own obligation by it , we must enquire how it comes to do so , and what appearance there is of Gods intending it for our direction and obedience . And here in the first place , it is manifest enough , that what was before said concerning the Laws given to Adam and Noah , cannot have place in those given to Moses and the Israelites ; those being not Representatives of mankind , as Adam and Noah were , but only of the Jewish state . Now being the Gentiles were no part of that body , nor descended from the Authors of it , therefore what was given to them cannot be supposed to oblige us for that reason , and consequently some other ground must be looked out for our obligation to it . It is manifest , secondly , that as there is nothing in the persons , to whom this Law was given , to perswade our obligation to it , so is there much in the Law it self to perswade Gods designing it for the Jews alone ; for pressing , as he doth , obedience to this Law , upon the account of his delivering them out of Aegypt , he doth consequently restrain the Law it self to those who were benefited by it , which none but the Israelites were . And indeed , beside the Preface of the Almighty , and that of Moses before the same Commandments , Deut. 5.1 . Hear ( O Israel ) the statutes and judgments , which I speak in your ears this day ; it is the known exultation of that People , and of the most holy persons of it , that these Constitutions were peculiarly theirs ; for What Nation is there so great , ( saith Moses ) which hath statutes and judgments so righteous , as all this Law which I set before you this day , Deut. 4.8 ? And He sheweth ( saith the Psalmist ) his word unto Jacob , and his statutes and judgments unto Israel , he hath not dealt so with any Nation , and as for his judgments they have not known them , Psal. 147.19 , 20. And truly thus much must be yielded to the fore-quoted Texts , that the Law was intended for the Jews alone , whilst the Church was confined to Palestine ; but as there was to be a time , even by the Predictions of their own Prophets , when all Nations should flow unto it , Isa. 2.2 . So it is apparent , thirdly , from the same Prophet , That the Law was then proportionably to extend its dominion , and comprehend those new comers , as well as its ancient subjects ; the design of their thus flowing into the House of the God of Jacob being , that he might teach them of his ways , and they walk in his paths , as you may see v. 3. of that Chapter . And accordingly , as before this Law was thus to take effect , it was in reason to have a new promulgation suitable to the extent of its dominion ; so , if we consult the stories of those times , we shall find God was not wanting in making it known to the Gentile world ; partly by the dispersing of the Jews among them , but more especially by that signal act of his Providence in causing it to be translated by the Septuagint into Greek , which was then the most known Language of the Gentile World . By which means that Law , which was before shewn only unto Jacob , came unto the knowledge of the Heathen , from whom it had been so long concealed . Now though what hath been alledged from the Prophet Isay , and this universal Promulgation , be enough to establish what we have deduced from it : yet because it may conduce much to our satisfaction , to evidence it from the New Testament , which is the immediate rule of our belief and practice ; I will therefore , to remove all scruples , endeavour to shew from thence , that ( whatever it was , whilst the Church was confined to Jewry ) yet , after the coming in of the Gentiles , the Law was intended to take in them also , and oblige them to the several Precepts of it . To begin with the Ceremonial Law , because the most unlikely to concern us , and therefore , if well proved , of more force to conclude the like of others : Concerning which it may suffice to represent the use S. Paul makes of it , 1 Cor. 9.8 . Say I these things as a man , or saith not the Law the same also ? For it is written in the Law of Moses , thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the Oxe that treadeth out the Corn. Doth God take care for Oxen ? Or saith he it altogether for our sakes ? for our sakes no doubt this is written : that he that ploweth should plow in hope , and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope . For not only arguing ( as S. Paul there doth ) from a Ceremonial Precept to a Christian duty , but affirming expresly concerning that Precept , that it was written for the times of the Gospel , he thereby plainly shews , that though the force thereof were evacuated as to the Ceremony , yet it is obligatory as to the Moral , which it was chiefly designed to consign , and intended by God so to do . And therefore , if I were to prove in like manner the necessity of purifying our souls , before we betake our selves to the solemn Worship of God , as it is evident from this of S. Paul , that it were enough to alledge a Precept out of the Law , because written for us as well as for the Jews , so particularly from Gods frequent enjoining the Jews to wash themselves and their clothes , before they appeared before him ; for doth God take care of clean attire , or a smooth skin , any more than he doth of Oxen ? and if not , may not I as well conclude , that for our sakes no doubt this was written , that he that presents himself before the Lord should appear with a clean heart , with a soul no way stained by any unrepented sin ? Now if even Ceremonial Precepts were some way intended for us , much more those of a higher rank , the second thing to be demonstrated . For the further evidencing whereof , the first thing that I shall alledge is that of the same S. Paul , Eph. 6.1 . and so on . Children obey your Parents in the Lord , for this is right . Honour thy Father and thy Mother ( which is the first Commandment with promise ) that it may be well with thee , and thou mayest live long on the earth . For pressing upon the Ephesians not only the duty of honouring Parents , but also upon the account of the fifth Commandment , he thereby plainly sheweth , that it was intended to oblige them also , and in them , because they were Gentiles , all other Christians . In like manner , the same Apostle dehorting the Romans from the avenging of themselves , inforceth that dehortation from the Law of Moses Deut. 32.35 . for it is written ( saith he ) Vengeance is mine , I will repay , saith the Lord . And not contented with that , he backs it with another out of the Proverbs , c. 25.21 . where it is written in like manner , If thine enemy hunger feed him , if he thirst give him drink ; for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire upon his head , and the Lord shall reward thee . To all which if we add the same Apostles affirming , that whatsoever was written aforetime by way of comfort , was written for our learning , that we through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope , Rom. 15.4 . as in like manner , that what is storied of Gods judgments upon the Israelites was written for our admonition , to the intent we should not offend as they also did ; so we shall not need to doubt but that the Precepts of their Law were intended for our direction and obedience : For if Gods mercies and judgments upon them were written for our learning , no doubt but his Precepts were , as which the other were designed to inforce . Fourthly and lastly , though the Law of Moses did not oblige us by being given to the Israelites ; though in the primary intention thereof it were designed for the Israelites only , and consequently could not so induce an obligation upon any other : yet , as it was secondarily intended for the Gentile world , so soon as God should bring it into the Church , so ( which excludes all doubt of our obligation to it ) it was adopted by our Saviour into his Law , and by him both confirmed and fulfilled . But because that is too copious as well as too important an argument to find a room here , I will respite the handling thereof to the following Discourses , where I will fully and distinctly consider it .

These two things only would be added here , to prevent all mistakes , concerning our obligation to the Law of Moses , 1. That when I say it was intended to oblige us , and accordingly adopted by our Saviour into his Law , we understand it so far as it had no peculiar reference to Gods dispensation under the Law , or the Polity of the Jewish state : For as , upon the account of the former , I have discarded all ceremonial Rites , as which were intended only to serve to the administration of the Law , so I must also , upon the account of the latter , discard all those Precepts , which concerned the regulation of their State . 2. Again , when I say the Law of Moses was , though secondarily , intended to oblige us , and as such adopted by our Saviour ; my meaning is not to affirm an obligation to a perfect obedience , but to a sincere and earnest endeavour , and , where we fail , a due repentance and amendment . For though the first Covenant left no place for repentance and pardon , yet the Gospel doth , and hath accordingly ( as hath been elsewhere * * Explication of the Apostles Creed . shewn ) made forgiveness of sins one of the capital Articles of our Belief .