which it is founded. It is the affection of love which is the source of all acceptable obedience.

Secondly, One species is used to denote all the different species of the same sin or duty; that is, when one form of a particular sin is forbidden, all the forms of that sin are forbidden; and when one form of a particular duty is enjoined, all the forms of that duty are also enjoined. The law says, "Thou shalt no. kill;" but we must not limit this precept to the prohibition of actual murder alone. It forbids, at the same time, all injuries offered to the person of another, all malice and revenge, and all the expressions of malignant feeling. Our Saviour has authorized this explanation: "Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and, whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment; and whosoever shall say unto his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council; but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell-fire." The law says, "Thou shalt not commit adultery;" but besides the sin specified, it forbids incest, fornication, unnatural lusts, and not these alone, but all sensual desires. "Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her, hath committed adultery with her already in his heart."† On the other hand, when we are commanded to have no other gods before God, we are commanded not only to acknowledge that he alone is the living and true God, but to make him the object of all the love, and reverence, and confidence, to which his infinite excellencies give him an unquestionable title. When he commands us to love our neighbour as ourselves, he commands us to esteem him for his virtues, to be grateful to him for his kindness, to sympathize with him in his infirmities, to comfort him in his sorrows, to assist him in difficulties; in a word, to perform all the good offices which love naturally suggests, and by which its sincerity is expressed.

In the third place, Negative precepts are contained in affirmative, and affirmative precepts in negative. When any duty is enjoined, the contrary sin is forbidden; and when any sin is forbidden, the contrary duty is enjoined. It has been said, that as in the Scriptures there are more things than words, so in the precepts and prohibitions there is more than the words express. The law is not to be subjected to that kind of interpretation which brings any thing out of any thing; but its sense is to be diligently explored. As the good prescribed by the law cannot be performed unless the opposite evil be guarded against, nor the evil prohibited be avoided unless the opposite good be performed, it follows, that negative precepts include the affirmative, and affirmative precepts the negative. When the law forbids us to steal, or take away unjustly the property of our neighbour, it requires us to promote his temporal interests, as far as we have ability and opportunity. When it forbids us to kill, or unjustly to deprive him of life, it commands us to use the means of preserving his life, to give him the counsel, the warnings, and the assistance which are necessary for his safety. In these cases, affirmative precepts are included in the negative. When the law commands us to honour our parents, it forbids neglect of them, contempt for them, or the doing of any thing which may be injurious or offensive to them. When it commands us to sanctify the Sabbath, it forbids all worldly employments and recreations, and every thing, in a word, which is inconsistent with the sacred rest and holiness of the day. In these instances, the negative precepts are included in the affirmative. It appears from the precepts of both kinds, that the duty of men consists not simply in abstinence from evil, but also in the practice of good; and we may farther infer, that the law of God is exceedingly broad, extending its authority in every direction, and ́subjecting the whole of human life to its control.

In the fourth place, When the law forbids a sin, it forbids all the causes of it; and when it enjoins a duty, it enjoins also the means by which we shall be enabled to perform it. Thus, when it prohibits uncleanness, it prohibits drunkenness and gluttony, and all the provocatives of the sensual appetites; when it prohibits theft, it prohibits covetous desires and idleness, which may prompt us to steal, by reducing us to want; when it enjoins justice, it enjoins diligence in business, prudence in conducting our affairs, and economy, that we may be able to satisfy every lawful demand upon us. And hence it follows, that if a man has brought himself by indolence, folly, and extravagance, into such a situation that he cannot pay his debts, he is not so much to be pitied as to be condemned, and instead of calling him unfortunate, we should say that he is criminal.

In the fifth place, Negative precepts are always binding, but positive precepts oblige only in certain circumstances. It is never lawful to murder, to steal, to commit adultery, to bear false witness against our neighbour. No situation can occur in which a man shall be permitted to do any of these things. The strongest temptations will not exculpate him. These precepts never bend to circumstances; a man is bound to refrain, although he should expose himself to the loss of his life. Positive precepts bind us always when the duties which they enjoin may be performed; but certain conditions are supposed, which may be wanting, and there are fit seasons, which do not always occur. We are required to honour our parents; but as the obligation ceases when they die, so, during their life, we cannot give them the usual tokens of honour, when we are removed to a distance from them. We ought to minister to the wants of the indigent; but to do so is not our duty, if we are ourselves so poor that we have nothing to spare. We ought to worship God, but we cannot be constantly engaged in acts of devotion. We must spend much of our time in prosecuting our business, and in conversing with our fellow-men about necessary affairs. The command requires us to worship him only at the stated times, and on such other occasions as are suggested by the state of our own minds, and the circumstances in which we are placed. It has been justly remarked, that the positive precept concerning love to God must be excepted, which is obligatory at all times; there being no season, place, or state, in which it is not our duty to love him with all our heart. We may make the same remark concerning love to our neighbour, which is also binding at all times; and the observation which has been made respecting positive precepts, relates only to the particular modes of expressing our love to both.

In the sixth place, 'There is another rule mentioned by Divines, which, however, is not directly to the purpose, as it does not help to interpret the law, but is intended to point out the relative importance of its duties. The rule is, that the precepts of the second table of the law must give place to those of the first, when both cannot be obeyed. The following instances have been given to illustrate the rule. The love of our relations must be subordinate to the love of God; and our Lord has said that we must hate father and mother, when fidelity to him requires us to do so.* Again, when the commands of our earthly superiors interfere with the commands of God, we must prefer the latter to the former. But these are rather apparent than real illustrations, because it will appear, on reflection, that in such cases there is no interference of duties. The authority of men over others is limited, and ceases the moment that it is exercised in requiring any thing unlawful. When the commands of parents and magistrates are opposed to the commands of God, there is no choice of duties; the will of God is the sole obligation which an enlightened conscience will acknowledge. Our duty to God and our duty to man must always be consistent, because the one is the measure of the other; and instead of talking loosely of a possible opposition between them, it is more accurate to say

Luke xiv. 26.

that, whatever human laws and customs may require from us, whatever natural affection or self-interest may prompt us to do, whatever our superiors may expect from us, their claims are unjust, and ought to be disregarded, when offence would be given to God by our compliance. As he is the First and the Last, so great that all other beings are as nothing when compared with him, we are always bound to sacrifice for his glory, all that is most tender and valuable in our connexion with our fellow-creatures. There can be no jarring moral obligations; and it is ignorance or inattention which makes them appear incompatible. We can never owe that to man which God claims for himself. Love to God

is the first and great commandment; and the second, or love to our neighbour, is subordinate, but not contrary to it. It is remarkable that a case mentioned in Scripture, in which one duty is made to yield to another, relates to the first table. What is positive in it, gives place to what is moral in the second, according to these words, "I will have mercy, and not sacrifice," or, "rather than sacrifice."* We are permitted to violate the rest of the Sabbath by works of mercy, for the relief and preservation of men and animals, and by works of necessity, as the preparation of our food, the extinguishing of fire, the carrying away of property exposed to an inundation, &c. Let it be observed, that the law of the Sabbath is not repealed in such cases, but admits these exceptions, that other duties which cannot be deferred may be performed. The exceptions, if I may speak so, are a part of the law.

Lastly, I shall briefly mention one other rule, that whatever the law requires us to do, we are bound to endeavour, in our several stations, to make others do. It is their duty to glorify God as well as ours; and zeal for his glory will excite us to use all lawful means that it may be promoted by them. This end is to be gained not only by our example, but by our instructions, and counsels, and entreaties, and reproofs, and by the proper exercise of our authority over those whom Providence has placed in subjection to us. Every man, for example, is bound to see the Sabbath sanctified by all under his roof; for thus says the law, "The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy man-servant, nor thy maid-servant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates."

These rules have been laid down for the interpretation of the law; and by the judicious application of them, with the assistance afforded by other passages of Scripture, we may deduce from the ten precepts of the decalogue all the duties which we owe to God and to man. It is a complete code of morality. As no man can attempt without impiety to take any thing from it, so there is no need that any thing should be added to it. When Socinians affirm that Christ has corrected and enlarged the law, they unjustly accuse it of imperfection in its original form; and they totally misapprehend the design of his commentaries upon it in the Gospels, which was not to new-model the law, but to free it from the corrupt interpretations which the Scribes had given of it, on the authority of tradition. He evidently recognized its perfection in his answer, formerly quoted, to the question, "Which is the first and great commandment?" and the Apostle Paul, who was enlightened by his Spirit, pronounced it to be "holy, just, and good."†

The obligation of the moral law is universal. All men, in every region of the earth, are subject to its authority. It was the law given to man at his creation, from which his subsequent apostasy could not release him; it is founded in relations which subsist wherever there are human beings endowed with reason and volition. The other laws given to the Jews were national and local. The ceremonial law could not be practised in all its parts but within narrow limits. The temple could not be resorted to on all necessary occasions, Matth. ix. 13. Matth. xxii. 37. Rom. vii. 12.

VOL. II.-66

nor the three annual festivals be observed in Jerusalem by persons wnose usual residence was in the remote countries of Asia, Africa, and Europe. It does not appear that circumcision was incumbent upon any but the descendants of the twelve patriarchs, with whose father, Abraham, the covenant was made; nor is it to be supposed that if a heathen, at a great distance from Jerusalem, had attained to the knowledge of the true God, and became a devout worshipper of him, he was bound to conform to the Mosaic ritual, and that his sacrifices would not have been accepted if they were offered upon any other altar than that of Jerusalem. There is no doubt that then, as well as now, in every nation, he who feared God and wrought righteousness was accepted of him.* The peculiarity of the judicial law is still more unquestionable. It was the civil law of the Jews, intended solely for the government of their nation; to which, therefore, other nations were not more subject than men living in one country are at present subject to the laws of another. Nay, some things were enjoined upon the Jews, which by other nations are considered as unlawful; for example, the marriage of a widow to the brother of her deceased husband who had died without children. The ceremonial law is therefore abolished, as is also the judicial law, so far as it did not embody the moral precepts, which are of perpetual obligation. But while the authority of certain ordinances, religious and civil, extended only to the Jews, the decalogue is the law of all nations. Morality is not the subject of positive institution, and of human regulation. It is not determined by geographical boundaries, so that what is right on one side of a river or mountain is wrong on the other, and virtue and vice exchange characters according to changes of climate. Piety towards God, truth, justice, and charity towards men, and the exercise of temperance, or self-government, are duties in every country under heaven. The moral law is the rule of our present conduct, and will be the rule of our future judgment.

From what has been said, it is evident that the obligation of this law is perpetual. As it binds all men who at present exist, it will for the same reason bind all succeeding generations. It has constituted an essential part of all the divine dispensations. It was the rule of duty to man in his primeval state, and obedience to it was the condition of the covenant into which his Maker entered with him in the name of his posterity. It was solemnly promulgated to the Israelites from Sinai, and a curse was denounced upon every man who should not continue in all the things which were written in it to do them. Jesus Christ has adopted it into his religion, re-enacted it, if I may speak so, by his authority, and commanded all his disciples to conform to it. He came not to destroy, but to fulfil it; and as he himself obeyed its precepts, and submitted to its sanction, by dying in the room of his people, so he declared it to be his own law, and admonishes us that he will disown every man who neglects or violates its precepts, whatever respect he may profess for him. "Why call ye me Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?" There cannot be a more erroneous view of his religion than to suppose, that it sets men free from the obligations of morality. The error first made its appearance in the apostolic age, as we learn from the Epistle of James, which was written to refute those who expected to be saved by a faith not accompanied with works; and it has been adopted in succeeding ages, because it accords so well with the natural wish to enjoy impunity in sin. We pronounce the man to be a heretic who denies the Trinity, or the atonement, or original sin, or justification by faith, or the necessity of the influences of the Spirit; but be assured that there is not a greater heresy than to teach that by the gospel we are exempted from the authority of the law. It transforms the holy religion of Christ into a system of impurity; it turns the grace of God into licentiousness.

The moral law is an emanation from the holiness of God; and when it is imprinted upon our hearts by the Spirit, we are changed into the image of God. To produce this effect is the design of the death of Christ, of his ministrations in heaven, of the operations of grace, the institutions of the Gospel, and the dispensations of Providence. Only the half of the work of redemption is performed, when men are delivered from the punishment of sin: to emancipate them from its dominion, to eradicate the love of it, to render them obedient to God, to inspire them with a sacred respect to his will, this is the other half, and is surely of equal importance. And the whole design will be accomplished when grace shall triumph in the pardon of their sins, and the complete sanctification of their souls; and the love which the law requires shall reign without a rival in every heart, and shine in every action.

LECTURE CIII.

ON THE LAW OF GOD.

Division of the Decalogue into two Tables.--Statement of the Sins Forbidden and Duties Enjoined in the First, the Second, and the Third Commandments.

HAVING made some general observations upon the law, and laid down general rules to be observed in explaining it, I proceed to consider its precepts in their order.

It was originally written upon two tables, in order, it should seem, to distinguish the two classes of precepts which the decalogue contains. This is the only reason which we can conceive why it was engraven upon two tables rather than upon one. There have been different opinions, however, respecting the division of the precepts. Josephus assigns five to each table, and has been followed in this arrangement by one or two authors; but their mistake is evident. The precepts naturally fall under the two general heads of love to God and love to man; and to the first none properly belong but four, which immediately respect our Maker; the other six being the modes in which our love to man should be expressed. Besides, when the Apostle calls the fifth precept, "the first commandment with promise," we are sure that he does not mean that it is the first in the decalogue; and we must understand his words to import, that it held the first place in the second table delivered to Moses. Some assign to the first only three precepts, not by transferring the fourth to the second table, but by joining together the first and the second, because they consider the latter as a continuation of the former. This was the idea of some of the Fathers, and it has been adopted by the Church of Rome, for an obvious reason. Standing separately, it forbids the use of images in the worship of God, and plainly condemns the practice of that church; but viewed as an appendix to the first precept, it only forbids, as they pretend, the worship of the images of false gods; and, consequently, leaves them at liberty to worship the images which they have consecrated to the honour of the true God and his saints. They seem, however, to be sensible of the weakness of this argument, and for this reason have been accustomed to leave it out of their books which were intended for the inspection of the people, lest, being incapable of entering * Eph. vi. 2.