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 transprosed.  
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 myself 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to Inscriptions of this nature, and that there is nothing here of the wont strain of Epistles Dedicatory, I should have superseded the Dedicating of this at all.  
Sir, you have been so happy in your choice of the Themes that you have designed to Illustrate and Vindicate; and so matchless in the performance of what you have undertaken, that whoever hath a Reverence for Religion, oweth you not only thanks, but Veneration. Whilst others combat Atheism with Drollery and satire, you have encountered 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 owe a Homage to Sir Charles Wols●ley for employing himself about so 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 myself, 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 Style 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, that by recommending the Subject to your care, I might thereby call forth a Person of so strong and clear a Judgement, so Masculine and Celebrated an Eloquence, as well to rescue so excellent a Theme from so short a Reason and dull a Pen as mine, as to vindicate it from the declamatory assaults of such whose skill and strength lies next to their Railing in their Rhetoric 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 welcome 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 advantageously serve both Truth and your own Fame; The Accession of Light derivable from so great Accomplishments to that, will infallibly reflect a lustre, upon yourself. 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 yourself to your Friends, and raised your estimate among such as have the honour and happiness to know you, but withal you have obliged strangers to pay you a Veneration, and won yourself a number of secret Votaries and unknown admirers, among whom I presume to reckon myself, 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 gratify the Entreaties of a Bookseller, such men's 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 loath to have trusted so great a Concern in so weak hands. No one is responsible for it but myself; whatever mistakes, failures, etc. are in it, I am only accountable for them. As for the main of the Discourse I leave it to stand or fall as it shall be found in the judgement 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 gilded. Nor do I despise any thing more than Rhetoric putting an Ostracism upon Logic; though otherwise I like the meat the 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 stuffed with satire 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, Monkey, Crop, Smutty Lubber, Dastard Craven, Mushroom, Coward, Judas, Crocodile, Hunger-starved 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 Employs in his Country, and Untainted Conversation, Rivals at least the bestower of them. Men of all Persuasions are scandalised at this way of writing. 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 myself 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 meddling with his Comfortable Importance; yet I cannot imagine upon what Motives he hopes to justify his treating J. O. with so much Pride, Petulancy, Wrath, Rancour, Revenge, Scurrility, Reviling and Railing, as I think is not to be matched again; especially being a Person not only 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 only mistaken, but had grossly prevaricated; and therefore instead of defaming and maligning his Monitor, he ought to have thanked him: nor is there a greater injustice in the World, than to make that a Quarrel which is really an Obligation. It is a new way of securing ourselves from Opponents, to overlook 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, etc. (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 when judged conducive to interest? or may we indulge ourselves 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 than 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 Neighbour from Slander, will not be wanting, as opportunity serves, of acquitting themselves therein. In the mean time he may satisfy 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 men's Pride and Malice knew no bounds, and single Sacrifices were too little to satisfy their Insolence and Revenge, a whole Kingdom 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 whole Nation must be arraigned. It is come to pass (says a late Author) that the Scots from their antipathy to Bishops are become the most Barbarous People of all Europe, so as that they will not have any Traffic 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, etc. 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 Bishop's Cannons. Only I wonder how other Nations have escaped the same misfortune, or are all the Foreign Protestant Churches involved in the same Unhappiness? It were easy to be tart and severe upon this occasion, but I shall leave it to the Wisdom of Authority in vindication of the Honour of Religion, a Nobility famous for whatsoever is truly Great and Honourable, and a Ministry no less Learned than Pious, to chasten this Excess of Insolence.   
OF Moral Virtue & Grace.  

CHAP. I.  
The Occasion of this Discourse. Terms here occurring unfolded. What meant by Virtue; What by Moral and Morality. The import of Grace, so far as it hath any concern in the ensuing Debate. The Question stated.  
Sect. 1.  
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, men's deluding themselves with an Imaginary Romantic pretence of Grace and Faith, 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, etc. by which we are assisted to live soberly to ourselves, righteously towards our neighbour, or answerably to the dependence 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, etc. 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 Virtue and Obedience. These are the men who set virtue 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 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 virtues, 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 virtue (saith a late Author) is not only 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 virtue itself, or the use of those means and instruments that contribute to it. Eccles. polit. p. 69. All Religion is either virtue itself, or some of its instruments; and the whole duty of man consists in being virtuous: ibid. p. 71. There is nothing beyond the bounds of moral virtue, but Chimeras 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. 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 virtue & 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, quickenings and influences of the Holy Ghost, as Enthusiastic dreams, canting phrases, & the fumes of Religious madness. To be born again, and to have a new spiritual life, is a fantastic 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 tides of the humours of the body, and the mere 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 engrafted in him, is called a rolling 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 damage done to the souls of men by each of them, hath led me to this undertaking. On the one hand to separate grace from virtue, 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 rules of Morality; as is alleged, 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 fabric 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 fastened upon him; def. & continuat. p. 313. of a foolish and half-witted fellow, upon the account of his deductions, they being neither strained 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 Judgements and Consciences in those things may not be unacceptable: and the rather, because not only of some difficulty in setting forth the due lines, measures, and bounds of Virtue 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 Virtue and Morality; Grace and Religion; these being the terms of the Question to be Discoursed and Decided; nor without a settling the Notion and Conception of these, can any thing of this Argument be duly understood.  
Virtue is a term seldom occurring in the Scripture. In the Old Testament we have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chajil, several times rendered by our interpreters Virtuous, viz. Ruth, 3.11. Prov. 12.4. Prov. 31.10. and once Virtuously, namely, Prov. 21.29. but indeed the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath no such signification as that we now use to express by Virtue: it properly signifies Courageous, strenuous, industrious, diligent; strength, valour, activity of body and mind, etc. 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 Virtuous Woman? The 70. translate it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; Munster, Pagnin, fortem: Jun. & Tremel. Piscator, Mercer, Castalio, strenuam. Prov. 31.29. Many Daughters have done Virtuously. 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. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 virtue, 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 alleging, Laurentius 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 sense vulgarly received. 1 Pet. 2.9. we render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Praises, and Dr. Hammond paraphraseth the place thus; That you may set forth and illustrate Christ's 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, etc. and so cannot bear the sense commonly there put upon it: D. Hammond rendereth it by Courage, Fortitude, Manhood; 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 virtue, 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 etc. However it must be Acknowledged though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Virtue may possibly be used in the Scripture in the sense vulgarly put upon it; that originally we are indebted to the Schools of the Philosophers for it, and aught therefore to address ourselves to them for the sense and meaning of it.  
If in this matter than we consult the Philosophers, we shall find 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Virtue, used in a twofold signification. First to signify 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 Virtue 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 styled the common Law; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the common law is right Reason. Laert. in Zenon. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; Law is Right Reason, commanding such things as aught to be done, and forbidding such things as ought not to be done; was the definition that the Stoics 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 enjoining 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 styled, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; 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 design 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, and Right Reason another: Sat. 14. Now any habit, promptitude or facility of acting conformably to this law of right Reason, they called it Virtue. Thus the Pythagoreans defined Virtue to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a habit of which ought to be done: or of what Reason conducts, and leads us to; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; Virtue 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, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. An elective habit consisting in mediocrity in things relating to us, defined by reason etc. Eth. lib. 2. cap. 6. This is acknowledged by our late Author, Eccl. polit. p. 68 The practice of virtue (saith he) consists in living suitably 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 styled the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, good order of the Soul: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The music of the Soul. And herein they stated the Souls sanity, beauty, harmony etc. Hence Pythagoras and from him Plato defined 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, virtue to be the harmony of the Soul. Plat. in Phaed.  
Secondly, Virtue 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 styled them virtues; 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 virtue being once used to signify the conformity of our mind unto the law of Reason; it is thence applied to express the agreeableness of our actions unto the same law. And these are the alone acceptations of virtue which can claim any room in the present debate; all other signification put upon it, being foreign to the matter we have in hand. By consulting then the original Authors of this term, we have found it appropriate 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 Virtue. 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 Virtues to men. Hence Plato in his Meno discourseth at large that Virtue 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 persuaded: all the Stoics affirmed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Virtue was teachable. This was what they meant by their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; self-power and absolute freewill to Good; their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, good Nature or Seeds of Virtue in Nature. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; Virtues 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 Virtue: 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: having semina quaedam utrarumque rerum 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 acknowledge themselves indebted to Jupiter for life and estate, yet as to the honour of being virtuous, 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 Virtue the greater, for being of a long standing, Ep. 73. But he adds 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 Virtue, as may be seen at large, lib. 2. Eth. cap. 1 & 2. Yea some flew higher, contending Virtue not only in the principles and Seeds of it to be an appurtenance of our Nature, but to be formally inlaid 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 etc. That we are naturally good and upright. In a word, the Original Authors of this Term neither knew nor acknowledged any other Virtue, save that whose alone measure was Reason; and power of operation, natural strength. He that desires to see more of this may consult Plutarch's Dissertation entitled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that Virtue is teachable: And Stobeus Serm. 101. Now how suitable soever this Idea of Virtue already assigned be to Humane Nature considered as innocent, yet falling upon it as corrupt, 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 dogmata of the one are nothing but a transcript of the sentiments of the other; Instances lie 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 great. 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 Virtue, there was not one of them but still discerned a darkness to have benighted the mind, and a feebleness to have arrested the Soul with respect to all virtuous operations. This Plato called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, an evil in nature; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a bad nature; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a natural evil etc. 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'. Plato tells us how that the Soul, by being thrust down into the body 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 man's blindness and proclivity to evil; yet the thing itself they were sensible of. It is a remarkable passage of Aristotle, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: What the Eyes 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 stepmother, animo prono ad libidines, with our Souls bend upon Lusts. Cicer. apud August. count. 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 athletic sound Constitution: which consisted in virtuous 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 Stoics and Platonists made the chief end of Philosophy to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to live according to Virtue, 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 ideas and Images, and a fixed aversation to Virtue▪ contracted by false Opinions and corrupt Hypotheses. He refers 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 they defined Practical Philosophy (in contra-distinction from Theoretical) to be effective of Virtue; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Thus the whole design of moral Philosophy, was to arrive at Virtue, and thereby to attain happiness. Other means of compassing both, they neither know nor looked after. How insufficient it was for either of those, will be hereafter declared: I shall only 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. Epict. Enchir. cap. 72. You may see Seneca to the same purpose Epist 111.  
§ 4. The signification of virtue, 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 controversy 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 inquire; 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 borrowed from Menander, the whole sentence being an jambick 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; Aristotle's books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gave the principal rise to this word. Quintilian denies that there is any Latin 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 exotic 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 nature. ort. etc. verae Theolog. lib. 1. digress. & lib. 6. a pag. 509. ad p. 521. However it being now universally taken up, and having harboured itself both in the minds and discourses of men; it would be in vain for us to contend against it; we shall sufficiently approve ourselves, if we can manifest the just acceptation of it. Moral as it relates to virtue 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 virtue 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 virtue; Then for as much as in all true affirmative propositions there must be an identity betwixt the subject and the predicate, Moral must relate only to an observation of these things, and a practice of those duties, which virtue refers to, namely, an observance of what Reason without any superadded declaration can conduct us in, and natural endowments and self acquirements enable 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. Or, if we should choose to decide the import of Moral as it refers to Virtue, 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 virtue, can be of no larger extent than Moral as referred to law is. Seeing then it were against ordinary sense and the custom of mankind, to style every law of practical obedience moral; it is no less irrational to style the conformity of our minds and actions to those laws by the name of Moral Virtues. A Second signification put upon Moral as it hath reference to Virtue 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 judge this to be the reason; either because the Philosophers in their writings vulgarly called Ethics and Morals, do principally treat of the duties which men own to themselves, and one another; which are likewise the subject of the Second Table: or because they discourse of those only, with any consistency to reason, and comme●●dableness; while in the mean time in what soever we own immediately to God, the imaginations are vain, and their sentiment dark and ludicrous. But this acceptation of Moral Virtues 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 Virtue, or to that Law which is so denominated; We must admit it a greater latitude of signification, than merely to imply Second-Table duties. If we judge of its import by its 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Virtue, we must then allow it the same largeness of sense 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 own 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 Virtues ought not to be confined to the observation of the precepts of the Second Table. Or if 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 sense which Moral as it belongs to virtue is capable of; namely, to declare those habits and operations of the mind required by the law of creation. And this sense of Moral will prove either stricter or larger according as we take the measure of the term, from virtue, or from law. If we define the meaning of it by its habitude to virtue, 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 sense 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 discerning them by Reason yea or not▪ Now this being the most comprehensive notion of moral virtues, or duties of morality, that any one who have treated those things with exactness have pitched on: and being the largest sense, 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 virtues 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 one's, 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, etc. Which Evangelical Virtues they call supernatural, partly because they are Supra debitum naturae, beyond what was required 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 wrapped up in an expression of a late Author; I dare say he speaks dissonantly to what either Fathers or Schoolmen ever said, while he affirms that in the primitive Ages of Christianity, the righteousness of Faith only employed a higher pitch of moral goodness; Def. & Continuat. p. 305.306. I say moreover, that there are not only Evangelical Virtues contended for as distinct from the moral ones we have been unfolding: but they also mention moral Virtues 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 amazed at a late Author that dare tell us; that Evangelical Graces are the same for substance with Evangelical Virtues, and Evangelical Virtues 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 Virtue 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 Virtue and Evangelical Grace; Def. & Continuat p. 304. I who know myself 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 ourselves: and though the controversy 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 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 Specific Difference was to be called a Specific 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 Specific 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 chief in reference to the acts which proceed from Acquired Habits, and are found in unregenerate men; whether the Specific 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 other sort, to be only 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● theme I am treating lay me under no necessity o● declaring myself on either side in th● controversy, 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 Virtue 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● habit, which are not in the act of the o●ther: as when they proceed from different Principles, are exerted with respects t● different ends, and influenced by different motives; I should not scruple to call that: Specific Physical difference, and shoul● hope to justify myself by Philosophy as well as Divinity in doing so. There is only one thing more that I intent here to subjoin; namely, that whereas Suarez contend● that without grace there may be and are some Dispositions to true habits of Virtue, though he confess at the same time that Perfect and Firm habits of Moral Virtue, Sine Gratia acquiri non possint, cannot be acquired without grace; lib. 1. de great. cap. 7. n. 20. Which though much more modest than what is alleged by our late Author, yet jansenius 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 chief unfolds. As we have then confined ourselves to the Philosophers in the declaring the meaning of Virtue and Morality, they being the first Authors and users of those terms; so we judge 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 Theme 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 called 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 itself 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 hath abounded unto many, Rom. 5.15. And if by Grace, than it is no more by works; otherwise Grace is no more Grace, etc. 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, etc. 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 taste Death for every Man, Heb. 2.9. There are innumerable places where it is thus used. And from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Grace in this sense, 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 profane Author: Nor is it matter of any Wonder, they being wholly ignorant of the thing it denotes. From 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this acceptation comes likewise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, gratuitously 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 God's 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. 2 lie. It is applied 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 Schoolmen c●ll Gratia operans, and Gratia praeveniens, Effectual and preventing Grace, Gal. 1.15. When it pleased God, who separated me from my Mother's Womb, and called me by his Grace, to reveal his Son in me, etc. 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 styles adjutorium quo, in contra-distinction from the former, which he calls adjutorium sine quo non, lib. de Correp. & Grat. cap. 12. And the Schoolmen 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 gratiam 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 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 Author's 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 minds and souls of men, whereby they became habitually disposed for God. This ●s styled by Divines Gratia habitualis, habitual 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 custom or ●ong use. Erasmus renders it, propter as●uetudinem. Vulg. pro assuetudine. Bez. proper habitum. Our old translation had it, ●y Reason of Custom: 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 Custom 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 Recovery. The first is styled 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● Physic do. This acceptation of Grace i● frequent in the Scripture, Joh. 1.14 The Word was made flesh, and dwelled amon● us full of Grace and truth, ibid. v. 16. O● his fullness 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 etc. 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 intimate 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; ●nd he said unto me, my Grace is sufficient 〈◊〉 thee, for my strength is made perfect in ●●akness. And, Heb. 4.16. Let us therefore 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 undergo, 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 procede 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▪ but to intimate the Principle whence 〈◊〉 relieving of others should flow; 1 Cor. 1●3. Whomsoever ye 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 utterance and knowledge, 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 occur in other Author's expressive only of benev●●lence, without relation to a vital renewe● principle, whence in order to an acceptation 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.  
These are all the acceptations of Grace, ●hich have any affinity to the present subject. I know not whether all this will ●ot be called Gaudy Metaphors, childish allegories, Spiritual Divinity, a prating of ●●rases, empty schemes of Speech: But ●esides that all these acceptations and dis●●nctions have been received by Fathers, schoolmen, and Divines of all ages and persuasions; we have found them also warranted by the Holy text: so that to impeach any one of them, is not only to arraign Divines of all sorts, but to remonstrate to the Scripture itself. The Terms ●hen being thus opened and explained: The Question to be debated is, Whether Moral Virtue be all one with Grace? Whether Morality and Holiness be Universally the same thing? Or, whether the whole of that Obedience which we own 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. Supposing an observation of all the duties mankind was obliged to by the said Law, 〈◊〉 he could have laid no claim to immortals 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 man's 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 knowledge of moral Duti●● 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 only attended with, but it is the principle of all moral Virtue. 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 nearer approach to the matter itself. And that what is afterwards to be offered may be the more clearly apprehended; and the lines, measures, & principles of Virtue 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, so of no less influence, to the enlightening 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 commensurate they appear either equal or unequal. As in mysterial and sensible things we judge of the●● straightness & 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 judge 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 morality 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 Virtue and Vice to be things only Arbitrary, founded alone in the imaginations of men, did nevertheless acknowledge man to be a free agent, and that liberty is inseparable from every Humane ●ction. Freedom intrinsically 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 action; and partly extrinsical, viz. as it devotee's 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 action's indifferent and variable, the Di●●ne Will: But the formal and immediate Rule of both is Law. No action 〈◊〉 otherwise Good or Bad, than as it is ●●ther enjoined or forbidden. It is impossible to conceive any action or omission to be a duty, abstracting from obligation; 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 transgression of the Law: An illegality or deviation ●●om law. To which accords that of Paul, Rom. 4 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Where no Law is, there is no transgression It is a great mistake (which yet I find to● many guilty of) to make either the object or circumstance of an auction, 
In hoc hallucinantur I●s●ite f●re omnes. vid. V●s●. di●p. 57 Compt. didst. 84. Sect. 2. the act. Ham.  the rule of its Mo●rality; or to constitute them the measure wh● we judge an action goo● or evil. An action is ●ot otherwise Goo● or Evil with respect to its circumstances then as clothed with them it is either pr●●hibited or enjoined. 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 immediate 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● 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 constitution of his nature, and his Habitude to God as his Maker; that he should be accordingly bound to love, reverence and ●●rve him that made him so, this being 〈◊〉 only Reasonable subjection. But for●●much as not only Pyrrho, Epicurus, etc. ●f old; but Hobbs and some other wild, atheistically disposed persons of late, have managed an opposition to all natural Laws: contending that all things are in themselves indifferent; that Moral Good and Evil, result only from men's voluntary restraining and limiting of themselves; and ●ow that antecedently to the constitutions, appointments and custom of Societies, ●here is neither Virtue nor Vice, Turpitude 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 thus, I shall discourse this head a little 〈◊〉 amply.  
That there have been some, who either through a supine negligence in not ex●●●cising their faculties, or, through have defiled and darkened their Reasons by co●●verse with sin, have lost the sense 〈◊〉 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 denied 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 laws 〈◊〉 different places, it thence follows that the●● 〈◊〉 nothing in itself, 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 descent from him; Ubi dicit nihil esse ●ustum naturâ; where Epicurus affirmeth, ●hat by nature or natural law there is nothing just and honest. And this indeed necessarily follows from Epicurus his discharging 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 stand and fall together. With those already produced doth Mr. Hobbs fully agree; Ubi nulla Respublica, nihil injustum; where there is no Commonwealth, 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 itself, nor any common law constituting what is naturally just and unjust: but all things 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 entered into a state of civil Government the●● was not any thing just or unjust; forasmuch as just & unjust are the relatives of human Laws; every action being in itself 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; whatever 〈◊〉 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, etc. The dictates of Reason concerning vice and virtue, 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 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 subjoin some further collateral proofs of it, as so many evidences a posteriori; by which we hope not only to vindicate ourselves 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: whatever he is in himself, He is by the necessity of his Nature, and by consequence he cannot approve or disapprove otherwise than as may be consonant and agreeable to the Attributes of Wisdom 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 congruous to him as an other, is at once to Blas●pheme him and to establish contradictions the Philosopher well styles him, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; an eternal Law inclining on every hand to what is just and equal, Arist. d● mundo. cap. 16. There are many things the goodness and badness of which, depend not so much on God's 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 〈◊〉 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 himself, or render rational Creatures unreasonable. And if at any time we acknowledge the Divine Will the measure of ●hat is Good and Evil, we do not understand 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 arbitrary and Unlimited; but because 〈◊〉 can will nothing unbecoming his Puri●y. The Manichees themselves understood Sin to be so thwart to the Nature ●f a God that is Good, that they framed 〈◊〉 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 beyond 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 dependence on him, and what was not. We do not say that we are brought forth with actual congenite notions of Good and Evil; with labels of Virtues and Vices append● to our minds. This were to establish 〈◊〉 Platonic 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 exerce in comparing such acts and their object it is impossible but that we should perceive some Acts to be congruous, and others 〈◊〉 be incongruous: Namely, that it is 〈◊〉 that we should love God, and unequal 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 question without razing the foundations of M●●thematicks as well as of Ethics; 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 judgement of Reason a● the other do. There is that proportion betwixt some acts and their objects, and ●hat disproportion betwixt others: That ●hen ever we are led to particular considerations of them, and to pronounce 〈◊〉 sentiments concerning them; we cannot without a manifest repugnance to our natural Powers judge otherwise of them, 〈◊〉 have other conceptions about them, ●ut that the one sort of Acts (whether 〈◊〉 Mind, or Tongue, or Hand) are unequal, and the other equal. These are ●hat the Philosophers called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ●●mmon Notions, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, anticipations, 〈◊〉 previous Images of the moral Beauty ●nd congruity, or deformity and incongruity of things in the Soul. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the rudimental Principles of the Rational Nature. There are 〈◊〉 well indubitable maxims of Reason, ●elating to Moral Practice, as there are ●elating to Science: and these not only stand ●pproved by the universal assent of mankind, 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, etc. Than that of whomsoever we hold our Being's, 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 ourselves, etc. 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 Characters wrought into the essential Co●●position of our Nature. And beside 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 themselves. In a word the Effluvia of the rankest and worst-scented Body, do not strike more harshly upon the olfactory-Orga● nor carry a greater incongruity to th● Nerves of that Sensatory; than what we call moral Evil, doth to the intellectual faculty. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; There are some things ●hich all men think, or wherein all Men agree, and that is common Right or Injustice by Nature; although Men be not combined 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 men's 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 dependence 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 dependence we have on him. God having made man with faculties, necessarily judging so and so; He is in truth the Author of those judgements, by having created the faculties, which necessarily make them; Now whatever judgement God makes a man with, must needs be a Law from Go● given to man, nor can he ever departed fro● it, without gainsaying, and so offending Him that was the Author of it. Whatever judgement God makes a man with, concer●●ing either himself, or other things; it 〈◊〉 God's judgement: and whatsoever is his judgement, is a law to man, nor can he neglect 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 own 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 jews 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 enjoined) these having 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 show the ●ork of the Law (that which the Law instructs about, and obligeth to) Written in ●●eir Hearts: Rom. 2.14, 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; ●ational Being's do in the light and through ●he conduct of Reason, choose and pursue ●●ose very things, which the law of God the Divine Law) enjoins: 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 engrafted in rational Being's 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 itself cannot expunge. The Fourth and last is this; that God for the securing the honour of his own wisdom and sanctity, the ma●●●taining his rectorship, and the preserving the dependence 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 ludicrous things. Tacite permittitur, quod 〈◊〉 ultione prohibetur; what is forbidden without a Sanction, is silently and implicitly a●●lowed; Tertul. Where there is no penal●● denounced against disobedience, Government is but an empty notion. The fear 〈◊〉 punishment is the great medium of Mo●● Government: coaction and force wou●● overthrow obedience, and leave neither room for Virtue nor Vice in the worl● The means of swaying us, must be accom●modated to the nature of our Being's; no● are rational Creatures to be otherwise in●fluenced than by fear and hope. Th●● Ruler governs at the courtesy 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; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; plutarch. As every law than 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 reflecting on itself 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 Conscience. If there be no Law constituting ●he distinction of good and evil in men's ●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 regret 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 judge who will accordingly proceed with us. Whe●e ●here is sense of guilt and a fear of wrath, it is impossible to preclude Law, the 〈◊〉 being the Correlate of the other. 〈◊〉 that there is in every man a Conscience a● engraft apprehensions of hope and fear, 〈◊〉 need no other proof of it, than to appe●● every man's experience.  
Conscia mens ut cuique sua est, ita 〈◊〉 cipit intra  
Pectora pro facto spemque metumque  
The Apostle tells us that even 〈◊〉 who had not revealed Law, and were 〈◊〉 filled with all unrighteousness, fornicat●●● wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; 〈◊〉 were full of envy, murder, debate, 〈◊〉 malignity, etc. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Yet they knew the judgement 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 ●●ings either not determined by humane ●●ws, or not cognizable by them, men 〈◊〉 themselves in the closerts 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 sense of the distinction of good and evil, and accordingly 〈◊〉 in way of fear or hope, suitably to 〈◊〉 course that is steered, and that these 〈◊〉 apprehensions are neither accidental frights, nor delusions cunningly 〈◊〉 upon Mankind, may be further 〈◊〉 by a brief consideration of these 〈◊〉 things: (1) The perplexity that haunts 〈◊〉 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 oppressed,  
Carry about his Witness in his Breast.   
(2) the lashes and scourges the sinner heels for such things as the world is so far from punishing, that it doth rather reward ●hem. The crimes committed with the applause 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 〈◊〉 allege 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 myself Tormented; 〈◊〉 eton. in his life: and likewise Tacitus 〈◊〉. lib. 6. cap. 6. Who takes occas●●● thence to add, that if the Hearts of 〈◊〉 Lay in view, we should see 〈◊〉 they are Flayed and Torn with lashes 〈◊〉 scourges: si recludantur Tyrannorum 〈◊〉, posse aspici laniatus & ictus.  — Tormentaque sera Gehennae Anticipat, patiturque suos mens con●●manes. 
(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 Terrors; Job 18.4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of all Dreadfuls be most Dreadful, as Aristotle styles 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, than 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 would admit, we have endeavour 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 mischievous The first shall be the universal conse●● Mankind in this matter. Where 〈◊〉 there at any time been a Nation or Peo●●● that did not acknowledge a distinction 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 excess 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: ●en have not at any time been nor yet 〈◊〉 of this mind. For athing is not the less 〈◊〉 because some either through sottishness, 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 crossness, as loving to run Counter to the common sense of Mankind. And for others, I question not but they are sunk into this bruitishness, either from supineness and sloth in not exercising their faculties 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 Minds with prejudices and undue apprehensions. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Now we are to judge 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 lib. 1. Polit. That is the Law of Nature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; 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 contrary that men of Distempered and depraved ●●●d●rstandings think otherwise; for he dot● not mistake who calls Honey sweet, though sick and diseased Persons be not of 〈◊〉 judgement. 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, than all humane Laws signify 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, ●or needs any one to continue longer ●oyal, that he hopes to mend his con●●●ion by turning Rebel. Nor doth it office to plead Promises, Pacts and Covenants to the contrary. For if it be not 〈◊〉 itself a duty to keep one's 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 enjoining Subjection and Obedience to Magistrates in whatsoever they justly command; The Second is, the Law of Man under the Character of Just; from both of which results the obligat●●● of Conscience to such a Law. In a 〈◊〉 if there be no Natural Law, than 〈◊〉 ever hath either Wit enough to 〈◊〉 Humane Laws, or Power and Strength enough to despise them, is innocent; 〈◊〉 do men deserve punishment for be●●wicked; only it is their unhappiness 〈◊〉 they are weak, and cannot protect themselves in their Villainies. The Third 〈◊〉 this, supposing all things originally 〈◊〉 in themselves indifferent, as there can no sin in disobeying the justest La● of the Commonwealth, so no 〈◊〉 can offend by despising and transgressing 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 itself good and a duty to belie●● God, (because of his Veracity) whensoever 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 mastiffs of credibility, that a Divine declar●●tion 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 itself, nor any thing that is in itself bad; than it is not an evil to despise the Authority of God, nor is any man obliged to obey him further than he himself pleaseth and judgeth for his interest; the Authority of God being, according to the principles we are dealing with, a mere precarious thing.  
The Fourth and last that I shall name is this; If all things be in themselves adiaphorous, 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 Virtues▪ to be adjudged Vices, and Vices to come into the place of Virtues. Yea a man may be bound to 〈◊〉 his opinion of Truth, Honestly, Ver●● Justice, etc. 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 Falsehood to morrow; and what he ●●●tertain's as Religion in one place he 〈◊〉 detest as Irreligion in an other: Nor it more lawful to worship Christ in En●●land, than it is to worship Mahomet in 〈◊〉 Levant: Nor do the idolatrous heathy 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; than it is lawful 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 is there only Law, where the civil power hath made it so, saith Hobbs, Leviath. cap. 24. The Magistrate can only define what is Scripture 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. justinian, lib. 1. Institut. But though the consideration of 〈◊〉 things in Brute creatures, to which the●● are directed by instinct, may conduced 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 sufficient Indication of Natural Laws For Bru● creatures being under no Law at all, it 〈◊〉 unreasonable and ridiculous to judge of 〈◊〉 is a Law of Nature, and what is not, 〈◊〉 them.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 
They devour one another because they hav● not 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 show the horridness of the fact of murder, not the ●●ligation of the beast to Law; nor is it ●●tended as a punishment to it, but to de●●re God's 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 for the Lawfulness of the like cop●lations in Men. The Poet hath determined much better in this case, than the abovenamed Philosophers.  
— Coeunt amimalia nullo  
Caetera delicto, nec habetur turpe juvencae  
Ferre patrem tergo; fit equo sua filia conjunx.  Ovid. 
Others judge 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 knowledge 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. 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 oppose that what hath been accounted unce one nation, hath been held for virtue ●●nother. The Athenians punished theft, 〈◊〉 the Egyptians & Lacedæmonians allowe● When God forbade the jews the imitate of the customs of their neighbouring Nuncheons, He reckons up vile and abominate 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 Nurture, than the Law of Nature itself. The Law of Nature is not so much a Law which 〈◊〉 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 funchesses 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 knowledge of that proportion only be deduction, and long haran●●●es of argumentation. By the Law of 〈◊〉 than we understand the whole Law 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 controversy, 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 lies 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 Original Law; not at all differing in its nature from what was imposed on man in innocency; but distinguished only in the 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 knowledge 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 men's 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 darkened the mind and disordered the creation, have attained to a full and perfect knowledge of 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 knowledge of the invisible Being, and First cause, by the effects of his Power Wisdom and Goodness; of knowing as much of God as was needful for our living to him and our dependence 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 knowledge, 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 ourselves and all things to his will. The Second was the consideration of ourselves, that amphibious kind of Nature we are made with (it is Hierocles' 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 would have arisen a plenary and steady knowledge 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 ourselves to the Animal life etc. A third way was, an ability of penetrating more fully (than now we can) into the natures of the several creatures, their fabrics, 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 job. 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 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 mushrooms 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 divers 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 neighbours. 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 God's order and method in the Works of Creation. As the works of God themselves were to be instructive unto man not only of the Being, Power, Wisdom, 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 form then Eve; 1 Tim. 2.12, 13. Christ himself establisheth Monogamy 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 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 resides in us now, seems defective and insufficient to direct us unto the knowledge 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 Ruins 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 virtue and vice, even in such things, as, according to All, come under the Sanction of the Law of Creation: Witness the Idolatry, Uncleanness, Rapine etc. 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 tinctured 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 enjoin 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 Wisdom, 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 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 says in the like case: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; to ascribe our wickedness to necessity, is to justify ourselves 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 endowed 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 styled 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 Governor, and was under such and such Laws. Lo this only have I found, that God made man upright, Eccles. 7.29. i e. endowed with divine Wisdom to understand his duty, and with perfect ability to perform the same. And this is principally intended Gen. 1.26. Where God says Let us make man in our Image, after our own likeness. For the likeness of man to God consists chief 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 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 State and Law we were made in and under) consisted our ability of living to God, in an observance of the Law of Creation, commonly styled 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 style 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 knowledge 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 mere object of God's 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 God's Dominion which is nothing else but a right of disposing his Creatures according to his own pleasure in way's becoming Holiness, Justice & Goodness, 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 overbalanced with an extreme and infinite misery it becomes an unhappiness, and can be no longer eligible. While we are then asserting the Sovereignty 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 extreme 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, merely out of will and pleasure. The Savage allowances in the Heathen Worship, have been always 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 forbidden! 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 Sunbeam, 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 acting conformably to Reason would have been a sure and momentous one. Whatever calamities God in Sovereignty 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 rendered 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 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 Wisdom 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 lose 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 reinstate 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 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 itself▪ 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 Mere will, and for his pleasure Rev. 4.11. He had full power arbitrariously to destroy the Being's he had conferred. The whole interest that we have in ourselves, is from the free gift of our maker, and by resuming what he hath given, he may cancel that interest when he pleaseth. Nor is God's donation of being to the Creatures any silent contract (as is alleged 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 virtue of their Being's 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 itself. (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. God's raising us out of nothing by his alone power and goodness, and furnishing us with those 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 proceeds from one who is vested with Power and Right not to bestow it. Nor do we pay 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 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 recompense 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 dependence on him, by obedience to the Law of their Creation: This doth abundantly testify 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. whatever accrueth to us either from intrinsic Equity, or Essential Goodness, we neither need, nor do derive it from Grant 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 sixth verse to the end, and Heb. 12.24. All essentials to the constitution of a Covenant, occur in 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 enlivened dust. So it enhanceth the guilt of the first transgression, being as well against Love as Sovereignty, 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 whatever should be the Event on Man's Part. Though he trusteth us with the manage of our own happiness, yet he would not trust us with the manage 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, 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, etc. 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 ourselves in reference to the tenor of that Transaction; Though misery would have fallen out to be our Lot, yet no detriment would have arisen thereby to the honour of God's 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 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 mere 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, etc. so long as those continue, the Sanction of that Law must continue. whatever 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 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, styled 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 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, threatening future death, but the Law of Faith: That the promises and threaten 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, threatening 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 privilege, 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 whatever courses they pursue, or whatever sins they are found in the practice of; yet eternal Death they are not obnoxious to. Instead therefore of pitying and bewailing the condition of the 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 threatening 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 threatening 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 threatening eternal Death, but the Law of Faith, than Christ never died to free any from wrath to come. For it is nonsense 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 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 rectify some prevailing opinions, etc. 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 man's discourse, if the cohaesion were not necessary and clear. I reckon it an Unmanly, as well as an Unchristian 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 comes 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 virtues (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. etc. I shall not at present meddle 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 meddling 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 persuasion 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 sense depend upon them, He adds a little after; fit tamen interdum ut in his actibus de quibus 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 itself 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, quip 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 immovable unalterable Law, which we call the Law of Nature, Andron. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; Nothing determined by Nature can be any ways altered. Arist. lib. 2. Eth. Hence he styles the Laws of Nature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, immovable and immutable. For the further demonstration of this; we desire 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 Sovereign is. Hence, mere idiots, 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 says, 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 always a duty in itself, and the Law requiring it unalterable, yet antecedently to my entering 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 own 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 easy 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, 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 befell us in relation to it, as it was ratified into a 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 itself. The Soul at first was a lucid orb, embellished with all the Rays of light, created 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in knowledge, Col. 3.10. in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 true holiness, Eph. 4.24. that is, in sanctitate voluntatis veritatem ●mplectentis; Cocc. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Holy with Wisdom, Plat. in theat. But Alas! an Universal darkness hath arrested us: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; The eye of the Soul is drowned or immersed in the barbaric 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 died Wool 
— Nec amissos colores  
Lana refert medicata fuco;  is applicable to the Soul deprived of the Image of God, and tinctured 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. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, darkened 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 Mind is now like an Icterical Organ, which imagineth all the objects of sight tinctured 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 man's 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 Wisdom and Goodness, and our duty to Him, ourselves, and others was at first visible. The present calamitous scene of things not only with reference to Brute Animals, but inanimate Being's doth strangely impose upon our easy 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 Judgement and enslave our Wills, we are at once not only 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, Darkness, Weakness, Corruption, etc. that man was thus sunk into; yet retaining still his Faculties, he retained likewise some knowledge of the Duties he was obliged to by the Law of Nature, and in the virtue 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 Virtue. 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, Candour, Fidelity, Justice, etc. We who pretend ourselves 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 styles 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 only 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 (says he) for a woeful guesser; no man living beside thyself could ever have had the ill fortune to pitch upon the Scribes and Pharisees for Moral Philosophers, etc. This I dare say, that on whatever 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 bade not known Lust, except the Law had said, thou shalt not Covet. Were the Pharisees defective in the true end of obedience, designing instead of God's 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. whatever 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' Demons? Did not the most eminent of them neglect the conduct and guidance of sober reason, and addict themselves to Magic 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 it as to the substance and material part thereof, was never gain-saied by any who understood whereof he spoke, and what he affirmed. This we also acknowledge to be in itself desirable, praiseworthy, of wonderful advantage to humane societies, and that which seldom 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 Augustine's, 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 virtue 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 Sovereignty of God again. If an end was not to have been put to obedience, by the immediate 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 Sovereign 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 complied 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 virtue 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 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 Virtues 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 only 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 only 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.  
§ 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 ago determined this: Do we then make void the Law through Faith? God forbidden; yea, we establish the Law, Rom. 3.31. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 make void: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies inutilem, inanem, ignavam, omnibus viribus destitutam reddere; to render idle, fruitless, destitute of all binding power, to evacuate the obligation of a 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 Democraty 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 than 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 itself exacts: but than 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 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 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 than 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 ourselves, and the truth is not in us; 1 John 1.8. It Naturally follow's that by the Deeds 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 grossly err, 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. the justif. cap. 14. The whole of which as it is false, so it is absurd and nonsensical. 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 one lie in a subordination to the other. And seeing that the Gospel in all its superstructions 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 complete 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 Lawgiver; But he no where superinduceth any New Moral Duty 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 rebuked the false expositions put upon the Decalogue by those who both then, and for a considerable time before sat in Moses' 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 is perfect, Psal. 19.7. Not only essentially perfect, in respect of its purity and holiness, but integrally in respect of its plenitude and fullness. 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 thyself any Graven Image, is meant, Thou shalt not institute Symbolical ceremonies; or that by thou shalt not Murder, alms and fraternal Correption are enjoined, etc. 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 Blow: Therefore I shall irritate no man, only recommend those who desire farther confirmation in this matter, to such who have debated the Socinian Controversies. Now with respect to Christ's 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 easy 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 virtue of the Law of Faith, and God's Mercy and Faithfulness therein displayed and declared, that an ability is ministered to us of performing any part of Moral Obedience, so as to be accepted 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 fullness, we receive Grace for Grace, Joh. 1.16, 17. (3.) Though the Original Law continue both to claim 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, & fly to the hope set before us, Heb. 6.18. Rom. 8.1. Notwithstanding 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 itself, 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 means in the hand of the Spirit, to conduct us to Christ and God through him. Hence it is styled our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Schoolmaster to bring us to Christ, Gal. 3.24. And Christ is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The end of the Law for Righteousness, etc. 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 steadfastly look 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to the end of that which is abolished; To that which God aimed at in, and by the Mosaic 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.  
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 enjoins the tendering 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 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 virtue 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 intent a little farther to treat.  
First then. The terms of the Gospel, together with the foundations on which they bear, were not discernible by Natural Light. They take their alone Rise in the sovereign 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 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 styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a mystery; see Math. 13.11. Rom. 16.25. Eph. 1.9. & 6.19. 1 Cor. 4.1. etc. 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 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 persuaded 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 by some other means; not the first, for as much as there is not one jota of the incarnation, death, satisfaction, etc. 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, etc. I would ask the Disciples of Amyrald, whether the works of God do naturally, and by a virtue intrinsical to them, declare this Placability of God, and Pardonableness of Sin on Faith and Repentance; or whether they do it by virtue 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 Wives not being instantly destroyed upon the commission of 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 persuasion 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 very much, nor accords with infinite Wisdom which adapts one thing to another. Of all the defenders of Universal objective Grace, they spoke 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 dazzle the eye, than those things of the Gospel from which all our pardon and peace flows, do overmatch our understandings. The Natural man (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the man of a large inte●●ect) Receiveth not (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, non est capax, is not adapted, a metaphor, 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 persuaded of the infallibility of 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 Wisdom 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 ment 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 ground for the certainty of particular Doctrines, that our understandings can rest in. Jansenius therefore says well, that quemadmodum intellectus Philosophic 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 remembering 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 privation 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, 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 persuasion of them, they are lose 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 whither; 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 persuasion 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 knowledge of Gospel-mysteries is not affective. They 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 tasteless are the great truths of the Gospel to unregenerate souls, and how faint are the Rays of Gospel-Light! The mind being depraved by impure and vicious tinctures, it doth not relish the things which it is even persuaded of. Unless a man (saith Christ) be born again, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he cannot see (know or understand) the Kingdom 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. They lie out of the Gust and true perception of a Carnal man. For as to discern Rationally is to perceive it in the virtue 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 ment hominis proficiscuntur, collatae, defectum Rationalis facultatis arguunt; similiter etc. 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 knowledge of divine truths is not transformative Their assent is accompanied with a disaffected heart to the things they assent to. Under all the embellishments of knowledge, 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 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 Engrafted 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 ourselves 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 Mediator and Surety (Joh. 5.40. Joh. 6.35, 37.) And without the Father's drawing i e. without an efficacious work of God engaging the Soul in a most sweet but powerful manner 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 Suasion 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 slumbering 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 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 styled a Moral, or a Natural Impotency is for the most part but a strife about words. There is a perfect harmony as to 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 men's apprehensions. I hearty 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 inquire 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 intimated; All that lies upon our hand, is to inquire 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 easy to demonstrate from what our Divines have proved against the Papists, viz. That 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 such Metaphors and Similitudes as are of a familiar and easy perception, and to wave others which possibly may be more Emphatical: I shall only take notice that the Holy Ghost upon this occasion frequently styles 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 enlightened 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 style 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 controversy 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 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 intent in effect no more, were easy to demonstrate, if that now lay before us. All that we intent 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 justify what he pretends to be conducted in, by 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 Satan 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 Enthusiastic frenzies 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, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in demonstration of the Spirit and of Power, 1 Cor. 2.4. whenever the Holy Ghost by a vital presence persuades 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, etc. Joh. 16.8. He will manage it in way of demonstration. Now the Topics 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 Sovereignty. Partly the promises of the Word, which as they are in their Nature suitable to the immaterial quality of our 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 pledge of the Spirit. Partly the threaten 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 itself, 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 softened and rendered pliant, 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; whatever impresseth or affecteth 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 knowledge 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 enlightening 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 all the heave and stir 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, inavis 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 form in the soul, there is thereby begotten a promptitude and readiness of acting according to the Law of Creation. So that wherever there is Grace, there is Virtue also. 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 dependence 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 enableth 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 virtuous conversation is a certain concomitant & effect of renewing Grace. However immoral men may be antecedently to their being born of God, yet afterwards virtue 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 German 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 Virtue that I know of, from setting them at odds, that they Unanimously affirm, that where there is not Virtue 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 Humanity, and Grace without good Nature, or good Manners, Eccles. Polit. p. 74. see also Def. & Continuat. p. 308. & 338. etc.  
§. 17. An Obedience to the Law of Creation, answerable to the Original and proper form and tenor 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 noncompliance 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 inquire 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 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 ourselves, 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.  
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 ourselves. There is a fullness 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, etc. are exceeding useful hereunto. Here mainly lies a Believers Province, and the attainment is not only possible but easy; 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 ourselves, not to slander the provisions of the Gospel.  
Fourthly: In the virtue of Gods furnishing us with a principle of Grace, the heart is immediately 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 harkening to temptations; we be not so uniform in our Obedience, nor at all times alike disposed to Holy exercises; yet partly from the struggle and workings of the vital seed itself▪ and partly through the supplies ministered 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 Christ's yoke is an easy 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 its subjective in Man not a sufficient Rule of Moral ones. (7.) Considered as objective 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 doeth all the Obedience we own to God, consist in Moral Virtue. 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, & 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 Virtue. This is granted by a late Author: The practice of Virtue (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 styled Right Reason, The Light of Nature. The Philosophers who were the primitive Authors of the Term Virtue, knew no other Rule by which it was to be regulated, but Reason: This they made the alone 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of virtue's Mediocrity. The Mediocrity of Virtue (saith Aristotle) is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as Right Reason dictates, Eth. lib. 3 cap. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Virtue 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 mere practice of Virtue; but that there is something beyond the bounds of Moral Virtue, besides Chimeras and flying Dragons. 
Eccl. Pol. p. 69. def. and continuat. p. 338, 339. ibid. p. 315.  And that the Christian Institution is not a mere 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 man's 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 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 own 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 ourselves from the practical obedience that emergeth from it. Our obeying the Sovereign will of God, doth not only suppose his Veracity in every Revelation of his will concerning our Duty, but a distinct knowledge 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 falls 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 premises: or that it should inform us of the superstructures, when it hath no knowledge 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 discerned; yet such is the present Darkness and pravity of our minds, that without the assistance of a Revelation, they only puzzle, misled, or leave us sceptical about them. Of this kind are the Articles relating to the Production and Fabric of the World; the Origine of Evil; the Corruption of Humane Nature; the Ingress of Death etc. 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 Truth's depending on mere 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 encouragement and practice of virtue, and suppression of vice. A knowledge 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 Gild, 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 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 mere Reason arose ever to any clear persuasion & 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 misled 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 Apology of a late Author, that intending a comprehensive scheme of the practical Duties of Religion he purposely omitted articles of mere belief, as impertinent to the matter and design of his enquiry; Def. & Continuat. p. 326. For besides that there are no Articles of Mere Belief, every one being adapted more or less to influence our conversation either towards 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 mankind in their inducements of venerating the Deity, yet they acknowledge that we ought to venerate Him. Never any that confessed a Supreme Being, but they also confessed that such an honour as worship, aught to be paid him. This is indelible in every man's Nature, & without divesting ourselves of our faculties, we cannot gainsay it. Nor do we deny in the second place, but that we may arise by the Light of Reason to that knowledge 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 civet. 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, etc. the Savage Sacrifices to Moloch, Saturn, etc. 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 expressly 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 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 fetched from the Delphic 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 of civil Society by some inspirations, as indeed they did; hence they believed Zaleucus the Locrian to have derived his from Minerva; Lycurgus the Lacedaemonian 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 easy to know what God will be pleased with, unless we be either immediately instructed by God ourselves, or taught by some person whom God hath conversed with, or arrive at the knowledge 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 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 engrafted in their Natures; yet as to what concerns their Worship, being destitute of all command, authorising 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.  
Imprimis; First, i. e. praecipuè & ante omnia d● operam sacrificiis; chief 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 Virtuous and Religious ourselves, Arist. Rhetor. Vis Deos propitiare? Bonus esto; satis illos coluit quisquis imitatus est: wouldst thou appease and reconcile the Gods? be Virtuous; 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 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 after-ages 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, etc. 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 Ancient Nations used no Images, yea some abhorred them, whereas latter Nations, especially the Grecians abounded in them. The issues of Right 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 Eulogies 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 Saviour's 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 think of, in railing at him in the most scurrilous terms he could invent, and in wishing all the Curses and Imprecations to befall 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 writ a●ter, I dare say that Hercules was not less concerned at the revile of the Countryman, (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 Kettles, some upon Bucklers and Helmets, and others jingling Chains and Cymbals? Was not it pleasant to hear their howl and inarticulate yell 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 smutted and besmeared, peruncti 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. Seru.  
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 knowledge 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 Mediator, and of our Reconciliation through Faith in his Blood, must needs make wild addresses, and worship he neither knows Whom, nor 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 Mosaic 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 itself, 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 Sacrifices may not only contribute to a farther enlightening 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 choice 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 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 〈◊〉 enjoined or instituted in the Law of Moses, but that the institution of them is to be fetched 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 engrafted 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 persuaded. Nullum est naturale praeceptum, ex quo sufficienter ●●lligi possit determinationem 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 justify 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 grant 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. whatever 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, 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 immediately 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 grateful resentments of their minds, for the obligations of God's 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 pleasure of men, who thereby intended to express their thankfulness to God for the benefits He bestowed on them. As we (says 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 (says 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 persuasion. Multi Hebraei sentiunt sacrificia prius ab hominum ingenio excogitata, quam a Deo jussa: lib. 5. de verit. Christ. Rel. Videatur etiam Seld. de jure nature. 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 accustomed to them, it had not been easy to have weaned them from them: comment● in Pentateuch. I have quoted these testimonies to show 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 persuade us def. & continuat, p. 426. That on the contrary the opinion which himself embraceth received its first countenance from them; And may indeed be reckoned among the rest of the fables, of which they are impleadable as the Authors. Of the same judgement were some of the ancient Fathers, as to the Original of Sacrifices. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: chrysostom speaking of Abel; having (says 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 judgement, 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 persuasion to the same purpose. For in matters of this Nature naked testimonies signify 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 testify their Homage to God, have but two things to allege 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 signify their Homage and Thankfulness to the Author of all their happiness, than by presenting him with some of the choicest portions of his own gifts in acknowledgement of that bounty and providence that had bestowed them, Def. & Contin. p. 421. For Answer, I readily grant it to be a Dictate of Humane Nature, that God ought to be Worshipped; And I withal acknowledge that it is agreeable to the Reason and Sense 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 own 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, 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, whatever flows from the Divine Nature and the Attributes of God, the obligation to it is indissoluble, nor can we be superseded the performance of it. And by consequence the Worshipping of God by Sacrifices should both have obliged mankind in the state of innocence, 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 magnify 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 ourselves, hath the authorisation of 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 Symptom 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 expressly and in terminis recorded, 'tis enough that it be colligible from the Scripture. I know no Logic that will allow the sequel, That because the command of a thing is not registered in so many words, that therefore the thing itself 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 subjoin 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 Seven as a Holy Sabbath to the Lord; and there is an express determination founded on God's 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, etc. 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, etc. To affirm that there was no Divine Command for the Religion of Sacrifices, because the Command is not expressly 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 satisfy Sceptics and prejudiced 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 fetched from the Antediluvian distinction of clean and unclean Animals, Gen. 7.2. Of every clean Beast thou shalt take to thee by seven, 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, 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, etc. 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 Patriarches 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 the Species of Creatures they were to present him. That Discretion, Wisdom, 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 persuasion 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 they had. For First; This could give them no assurance that the offering these things by destroying them, would be acceptable. There being other ways in which they might be improved to his honour, 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 Being's, as for any other fruits of his Bounty. And as I question not but that Humane Sacrifices entered 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 suspense 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 the chance of performing a thing which possibly may be wellpleasing 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 itself, it were a crime to do it. For to commit what we judge offensive to the Deity, tramples as much on the Respect we own to God, as if the thing itself 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▪ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; It's 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 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 ourselves 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 reprovable 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 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 men's own device and choice. The Third Argument in proof of the Divine Institution of Sacrifices, may be fetched from the consideration of that peace, welfare, inward consolation, etc. which in the adoration of God by the offering of Sacrifices, all mankkind, especially the Patriarches 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 virtue of the Action itself, 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, than 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 nonsense 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 itself, and in the virtue of the mere offering; They did that (1) which God expressly 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, weakened, can still instruct us that the blood of sheep or Oxen is too mean a trifle to satisfy 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 satisfy 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 etc. Abel and Cain may be reckoned among the First that 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 assigned 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 own 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 Topics. 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 verse, 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. By 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we may either understand Expectation according to that of the Seventy Psal. 39.7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Expectatio mea in te est; And the● the sense 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● rendering 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 discernible either by sense 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 the Apostle expressly 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 bottomed, and by which 'tis warranted; If we will speak coherently, we must likewise acknowledge that Abel's Faith had the same Authority to rest on. Not only the tenor 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 God, Heb. 5.1.4. and consequently that the Patriarches 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 foregoing Arguments, are not like to be influenced by any thing I am further able to subjoin.  
§. 5. We have already shown that the whole of Obedience which we own 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 in the thing itself previous to the Command rendering 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 enjoined 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 only they to whom they were immediately given. Such was the Duty of Abraham's leaving his Father's 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, etc. 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 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 mankind 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 practise 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 trial 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 Man's Nature; further than that he was obliged by his Nature to do whatsoever God enjoined 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 Sovereignty; Natural Light can no ways be supposed 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 mankind; 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 Virtue; and that the practice of Virtue 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 virtue of them, we are under Obligation to several Duties: I shall, God willing, evince when I come to show the insufficiency of the Law of Nature as its Objective in the Decalogue, as to being the measure of the whole Obedience we own to God.  
§. 6. That there are Natural Laws as well as positive; and that the latter are but accessions to the former, we have elsewhere demonstrated. Now these Laws being styled Natural, non respectu Objecti, not because of their object, many of the Duties we are under the Sanction of by them referring immediately to God; but respectu 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, etc. The Laws of Pagan Commonwealths, especially the Republics of Greece and Rome; the virtuous actions of persons not enlightened by Revelation, of all ranks and qualities, such as Socrates, Aristides, Ph●cion, Cato, and many others not easy to be recounted, show that men left to the mere conduct of Natural Light can attain a better insight into the Duties of Nature, than of Religion, and know more of Virtue 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 Virtue than Divinity. Their Sentiments for the conduct of conservation being for the most part Rational and Generous, whereas their Theological Notions are either obscure, uncertain, or romantic. 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 Godhead. Though not only the Being, but the Unity of the Divine Nature be witnessed to by every man's Reason, and we need only exercise our faculties against Polytheism as well as Atheism: Yet the Universality of mankind, setting aside those who had the benefit of a supernatural Revelation, not only sunk into the belief and adoration of a plurality of Gods; but into the worshipping those for Gods, whom to acknowledge for such is more irrational than to believe that there is none at all. There was scarcely any thing animate or inanimate, 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 worshippest 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.  
effigies sacri ni●et aur●a Cercopitheci,  
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! etc.—  Juven. Satyr. 15. Thus Rendered 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 gorged is trembled at.  
The long-tailed Monkey's golden form shines there:  
There Sea-fish, River-fish is worshipped here.  
Whole Cities to the Hound, their prayers address.  
To strike a Leek, or Onion with the edge  
of the presumptuous teeth is Sacrilege.  
O Blessed people, in whose Gardens spring  
Your Gods.—  The great Gods whom they adored, they could tell a thousand debaucheries of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉▪  
Hence many of them from the example of their Gods, encouraged themselves in all kind of Villainy. 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 sky,  
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 says, 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 proclaimed them, vid. Plutarch. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. It's but to consult the Apostle, Rom. 1.23. And he will inform us what excellent Being's they were which men left to the guidance of depraved and darkened Reason owned & worshipped for Gods. Nor do I question but that several persons branded of old with the name of Atheists, were only contemners of the Gods of their Countrymen; or at least it was the ill opinion they had of their own Gods which led them to a total denial 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 mankind, 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 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● breasts, it might have resolved them tha● God would not be served by such obscene Rites, as such who were sober among themselves were ashamed 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, 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 victim were so far from being wellpleasing to God, that they were a great provocation to him. And yet this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 prevailed universally for a long time in the World. Not only the Scythians, Phoenicians, Carthaginians, and other less civilised Nations; but the Grecians & Romans were immersed 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. etc. Theolog. etc. 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 inquire into these impieties. However this is enough to declare that Reason is a very lubricous, uncertain and fallacious Rule of the Obedience we own 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 thoughts detested those savage 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 own 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 persuasion o● these things, we cannot expect that me● should either pursue Virtue, or avoid Vice. The Doctrines of an Immortality and Future Estate are so necessarily presupposed to the practice of Virtue, 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 judgement to come, and the persuasion 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 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 inquire 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 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 wild Notions, as could have no great influence upon men's lives. Their Infernal Regions were not very likely to disengage men from the pleasures of Animal life; nor their Elysian Fields to prevail with them to a course of mortification. And indeed though every man's 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, choose Virtue when we see it encompassed with the greatest calamities, & avoid evil when we find prosperity attending it; Reason could never have helped 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 show the insufficiency of Natural Light, as to the being the measure of the whole obedience we own to God, according to the Law of Creation. By demonstrating its 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 practic, but mistook in the Theory of the most obvious Duties of Moral Good and Evil. The Lacedæmonians (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 Sodomy, nor doth Aristotle (mentioning it) discommend it. The Romans gave husband's 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. Among some of the Indians their Princes are not permitted the conjugal embraces of their wives, till their Priests have deflowered them. Plato was for establishing a community of women in his Commonwealth. Both Socrates and Cato could make a trade of their wife's 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 Stoics overthrew true patience which consists in an humble acquiescence in the will of God, by stating it in an unpracticable Apathy. 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 Sovereignty and wisdom of God who sends and orders them. The Foundations on which their indifferency as to all foreign contingencies, and seeming bravery under the most importunate evils bore; viz. that they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not within the confines of our power, and that murmur 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 avail us; but we are to forbear murmuring because it is unlawful. Nor is it sufficient to justify 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 virtues, hath not so much as a Room in all the Ethics of the Philosophers: yea pride is recommended amongst their chiefest virtues. 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 ourselves 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 esteemed 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 Stoic to vaunt himself the only Rich Man, and that he alone was noble, he did not only vie perfection with God, but preferred himself before him. The Indian brahmin's vouched themselves for Gods; Yea the very Academics who professed they knew nothing; and the Cynics who made it a great part of their business to deride the pride of others, abounded in self-esteem. To this Pride which universally possessed 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 piece clipped of from God, as Phil● Platonising styles it. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as An●toninus calls 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 thyself 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 Lecherous Jupiter, a Thievish Mercury, a Drunken Bacchus, or a Bloody Mars etc. The Natural issue of worshipping such Gods was either to grow vile in imitation of them; or to slight and detest them, as practising that which every man should be ashamed 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 pleads in justification of Brutus and Cassius for killing Cesar, may serve to Authorize the Murder of any Magistrate, if the Actors can but persuade 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 shall 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, and invading the jurisdiction which belongs to God, who only hath power to dispose of us. I acknowledge that some of them were better illuminated in this matter than others. Hence that of Plato 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; The Soul is in the body as Soldiers in a garrison, from whence they may not withdraw or fly without his order and direction that placed them there; in Phaedon. Vetat Dominans in nobis Deus, injussu hin● nos suo discedere; Cicer. Tuscul. lib. 1. Therefore Aristotle saith well, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; To choose 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 Stoics 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 misery 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 in necessitate ultimâ facit, sed cum primum illi ceperit suspecta esse fortuna. Nihil existimat suâ refer 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, etc. who all dipped 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 Virtue: 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 adequate Rule of Moral Virtue.  
In further confirmation of the defectiveness of Natural Light for the Regulation of Moral Obedience, I shall in the fift and last place observe, that all who were under the conduct of mere Reason, mistake in the End of Obedience, which is as much under the Sanction of Law, as the substance of Duty is. For as Augustin says well▪ Noveris itaque non officiis, sed finibus 〈◊〉 vitiis discernendas esse virtutes; Virtues 〈◊〉 not so much distinguished 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 Respect to God specifies every Virtue 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, Governor, and Happiness, all our actions ought to be directed to the glorifying of him. Now where are any among the Heathen Moralists, or among those that acted under the conduct of mere 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 Virtue subservient only to their own praise, applause and glory. What the Poet says of Brutus' kill 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 Virtue in order to pleasure, and only 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 Agent, with the consequent of the action and made the Reward annexed by God 〈◊〉 Virtue, to intercept the Glory which in 〈◊〉 their thoughts and deeds they should hav● endeavoured to bring to Him. Those who spoke most magnificently of Virtue▪ held it desirable only for itself; affirming that the actions and offices of Virtue were to be pursued merely 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 honour of its Model. Yea▪ not only the Will of God, but his Nature requires, that whatever derives from him, either as its idea or source, should be ultimately resolved and terminated in him as its Centre. Secondly, It is most false that either Habit or Act can be Rationally chosen, or finally rested in for itself: But either some benefit to ourselves and friends, or the honour and glory of some other must 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 ourselves brutish and irrational. Though Brutus was as far tinctured with a persuasion that Virtue 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 proclaimed Virtue 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 Virtues are sought only 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 Virtues which a man thinks he hath, if they be not referred to God, they are Vices rather than Virtues, de Civit. Dei lib. 9 cap. 25. vide Jansen. de Stat. Nature. laps. lib. 4. cap. 11, 12, 13. It appears then from the whole of what we have 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 Virtue.  
§. 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 thought of the Wisdom of the Legislator, but judge it a complete Measure of all Moral Offices and performances, seeing God designed it for a Law of Morality. For, as Plato says, it belongs to a Lawgiver not only to have an eye to a few things, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but to have an Universal respect to all, and to every Virtue: de legib. 10. Nor can this be denied of the supreme Rector (presupposing him supernaturally to reveal a Law of Manners) without reflection 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 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 inquire 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 myself in that Controversy, 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 Virtue of a Natural Law.  
I crave also to have it observed, That the Decalogue may be considered either as it is a mere Draught and Delineation of the Law of Creation; or as having annexed to it a Remedial Law, to which in its most exacting Rigour 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 appertained 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 Virtue of the Covenant of Works, and in Reference to the mere 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 own to God, either in the way of Natural, 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 chief stipulations of our performing the conditions of it; So both the constituting & practising of them had been unsuitable to the Old Testament economy. The like may be said concerning those obligations which we are manumitted and set free from, which the Mosaic Church were under the Sanction of.  
That which I undertake the Justification of is this, that the Decalogue as it is a mere 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 afraid too many, as being weary of it, are ready to do. For, First, if the Decalogue as it is a mere new Edition of the Original Law of nature, be the sole and only Measure of Religion, than 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, only it is so called with 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 judgement of others. As in the State of Innocence the whole Duty of man consisted in the practice of all those Moral Virtues, 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. etc. 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 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 people's 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 men's 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 & Methods of Regeneration, (i. e. conviction and contrition etc.) 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 lose from the Enclosures of the Spirit of Bondage, and creep out from those dark Retirements, wherein the Law detained them, into the light of the Gospel and the liberty of the Spirit of Adoption: p. 309, 310. However I can justify the forementioned steps and degrees of Repentance both by Scripture and Reason. Now this, the Moral Law as 'tis a mere summary of the Law of Nature neither knows nor allows; I confess the Law of Creation obliging us to love God with all our Heart, Soul and Strength, and in all things to approve ourselves 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 thinks no other language but the thundering of wrath against the transgressor. 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; knows nothing at all of it. It is true there is a general 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 Virtue, that a late Author is pleased to scoff at Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, not only by styling it in mockage, the dear darling Article of the Religion of Sinners, Def. & Contin. p. 322. but by representing what the Scripture everywhere 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. 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 Virtue) 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 own to God.   

CHAP. IU.  
(1) The Principle in the strength of which Moral virtues 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 Judgement of a late Author as to this particular Inquired into, and found coincident with the former. (4) Several Things laid down in order to the better discussion of the extent of the promised power. (5) What we may arrive at in the mere strength, and through the improvement of our Natural Abilities distinctly proposed. (6) The deficiencies that occur in those Duties which Men in the virtue 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 & 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.  judicium 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 ourselves for the acquisition of virtue, saith Cicero. de Nat. Deor. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The adeption of virtue 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 virtue; idem ibid. There is nothing more absurd, saith Tully, than to affirm that men may of their own accord be vicious & also not virtuous; Academ. Quest. 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 thanked God for being virtuous, etc. de Nat. Deor. That this was the general opinion of the Philosophers, we have demonstrated more fully, chapped. 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 laid claim to more. As for those expressions which we meet with in the Platonists, concerning the Divine Infusion of Virtue; It may be easily replied, that they had these Notions either immediately from the Sacred Oracles, or from some who understood the Jewish Traditions, or else that being convinced of their own ineptitude to Virtue, 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, I dare undertake to produce as many testimonies out of the Platonists for the acquisition of Virtue as for the infusion of it; which argues that they were wholly at a loss about the attainment of it; And that they alleged 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 satisfy themselves in their inquiries 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 Virtue; but for any active subjective Principle of it besides connate ability, they were so far from allowing it, that they looked 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 own only our lives to them▪ but are obliged to Philosophy that we live virtuously; he adds, cujus scientiam (puta Philosophiae) nulli dederunt, facultatem omnibus, whereof they have communicated the 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 Virtue, was Moral Philosophy, as we have demonstrated, chap. 1. § 3. Now this, take it in all the parts & kinds of it, whether Dogmatic, wherein the Aristotelians excelled; or Exhortative, wherein the Stoics 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 mere 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 Heresy, 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 Virtues 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 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 seemed 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 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, etc. 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 entered our charge, and 'tis incumbent upon us to make it good. Some possibly may think it enough to justify the foregoing imputation, that our Author making the whole of practical Religion to consist in Moral Virtue, and that Grace and Virtue are but different names of the same thing, That therefore, seeing the Original Authors of those terms will have all Virtue to proceed from the strength 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 World's 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 signify 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, and raised up the Dead, with the power of Election and freewill. 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 myself ready to show in the taking the measure of another's, and therefore avoiding 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 styled Graces, because they were the effects of mere favour, 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 styled 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 Energy and cooperation of the Holy Ghost. In the same manner as these Abilities bestowed upon the Apostles without the concurrence of their own industry were called gifts, though now they might be more properly expressed by other Names, notwithstanding that we own 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 Eloquence and Rhetoric; Def. & Contin. p. 329, 330. If these expressions, being duly considered, do not justify what I have entered in charge against the said Author, I shall be ready not only to acknowledge 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 expressly 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 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 privileged with. The inducements to Virtue 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 Rhetoric are; and if that be the reason why in propriety of speech, those ought not now to be called Graces, no more than these aught to be styled 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 Physicians, etc. by inspiration, 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 men's 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 subjoin 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 Virtue and Grace) is plainly this: That in the days of the Apostles, the Divine Spirit proved itself 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 joining in with our Understandings and leading us forward by the Rules of Reason and Sobriety, by threaten, and by promises, by instructing our faculties in 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 falsehood bended together, that 'tis difficult for a common Reader to discern the leaven and poisonous ferment that is wrapped 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 immediately and effectually upon the Souls of men. We attribute no such violent motion to God's 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 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 threaten, 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 God's 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 ministering Arguments of Conviction to them: For that was the alone end of miracles, and that is our Author's intendment by the Spirits proceeding in an humane way. Now this supposeth the whole subjective power to reside naturally in ourselves, and that all the assistances of the Spirit, serve only to excite it, and to awaken us to exert 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 Racou. Minister ad Crell. Nun 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. Racou. 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 itself, whose Power and Ability is such, that it can determine itself 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, quippiam diversum ab ipso verbo; The Holy Spirit that is required to make the Word effectual, is nothing but the Word itself; 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 count. Meisner. de Servo Arbitrio. p. 88 Non requiritur supernaturale lumen, potentiae superinfusum, mentem elevans ad intelligendum & credendum Scriptures; There is no supernatural infused light necessary for the understanding and believing of the Scriptures; (he understands a Salvific knowledge and belief of them) Episcop. disp. 5. Thes. 3. An ulla actio Spiritus immediata in mentem aut voluntatem necessaria sit aut in Scriptures 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. Nihil obstat quo minus vel sola grati● Moralis homines Animales Spirituales reddat. Nothing hinders, but that men may be regenerate in the alone Virtue 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 expressly affirms, That if he did not believe the influences of the Spirit upon the minds of men, he behoved to explode the Lords Prayer itself 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 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 mystery 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 styled Grace, but what affinity hath this to the inward engraft principle that we are enquiring 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 extol 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 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 Virtue, 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 Gild, 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 styled another Nature, and not much amiss, the power and efficacy of it being so great. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Custom is an ascititious Nature say both Aristot. and Galen. Tanta est corruptela malae consuetudinis ut ab ea tanquam igniculi extinguantur a Naturâ dati, exorianturque contraria vitia: so great is the infection of evil custom, that the seeds of virtue communicated to us by Nature are choked 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 Virtue becomes distasteful 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.  
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 knowledge 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, etc. 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 enjoyed 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 any, or all the writings of the Philosophers. Moral Virtues 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 virtue. In a word, 'tis only the Bible that gives us a complete systeme of the Laws of Nature, and therefore, we who live under the dispensation of the Gospel, have an advantage even of Moral Obedience ministered 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 enforced under severer penalties than either Virgil or Homer in their Romantic description of Tartarus ever dreamed of. Nor is there in all the Ethics 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 Virtue, 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 under the conduct of mere Reason were capable of being.  
Thirdly, How great soever the inability derived to, and entailed 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 bewail 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 merely 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 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 demonstrate, 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 Lucian's testimony of any significancy, the very best of them were stark naught. However I think there was neither slander 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 their Doctrines, they were at best but Fools in their Practice.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 apud Athene.  
What Seneca fasteneth 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 Satirists, 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 Antiremonstrants 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 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 judgements 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 sinner's 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 improve the power we are naturally vested with, is enough to stop the mouths of all Mankind. 'Tis plainly to trifle to dispute about the Consequent of a Hypothetical Proposition, relating to life and practice, when it is easy 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 chooseth 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 clothed with different names from the diversity of its operations. Yet the acts with respect to which the Soul is styled 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 choose, or pursue any thing, but what it first under the appellation of Understanding judgeth 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 consideration of things future so far as expedient. Hence no man desires or declines an object, but he can give a Reason for it. whatever 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 choose or refuse that whereof we have no idea at all (ignoti enim nulla cupido, nullum odium) so 'tis as impossible that we should choose 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 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 says, It is a ridiculous thing to impose precepts 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 satirical 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 Stoics and Chaldeans. Whereas the whole of those men's declamations builds upon a gross prevarication and mistake concerning the Nature of Liberty; They suppose Humane Freedom to consist in an aequilibrium to both extremes, 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 judgement, 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 itself conformably to its judgement, say 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. the great. & liber. arbit. contra Cassian. Illum 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc.  Determination to one Species 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) and yet his Will was only and ever determined to the choice 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 practise 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 Sovereignty 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 entire subjection to the Divine Will. For, as Austin says well, Voluntas Libera tanto erit liberior quanto sanior, etc. Epist. 89. The beautified 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 at the same time we would not do. The manacles by which we are held and enslaved, are nothing but our Practical judgement and choice; Coactus tua voluntate es, Thou art fettered by thy own Will, Aug. so that Seventhly;  
These considerations that men choose 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 God's withholding 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 Adam's sin, and comes entailed upon us as a Righteous Fruit of our first Father's Apostasy. 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 judgement against us. 'Tis our contempt, not disability that we shall be 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 Threaten of the Law have any prevailing influence upon us. It is our obstinacy and wicked aversation that undoes us. Wicked and Slothful 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 Threaten 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 its highest improvement it may arrive at, and as a clear fixing of this will be a service of some significancy in itself, 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, etc. Brute Animals are in neither sense 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 Dogms 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 operations. There is laid 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 many of the very Heathen; Their infidelity outdoing 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 Virtue: 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, etc. It were easy to expatiate upon this theme, and to create matter and occasion of shame to Christians, who suffer themselves to be thus outdone by Pagans. Our Religion comes behind their Morality; and our pretences of Grace are out-shone by their Virtue. 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 Virtue, is a high dishonour to God, and an enhancement of guilt upon ourselves; 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 damage ourselves. 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 falsely 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 virtuous life. 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 Virtue is the greatest prejudice to the entertainment of the Gospel; and that Grace and Virtue 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 Profane. No! we are so far from affirming, that the acting up to the principles of honesty is of itself 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 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 relied 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 reneved in the spirit of their minds towards 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 immediately 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, Fear, Humility, Trust, Submission to the Divine dispose upon the account of the Sovereignty of God. Of the second sort, are Prayer, Gratitude, Patience under the loss and withdrawment of temporal enjoyments, etc. 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 Governor 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, etc. 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 did Socrates by his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 intent any thing else save a due sense and acknowledgement 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 suitable. Mercy, Truth, Justice, Holiness, etc. are conceived in God under the Notion of Moral Virtues, 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 aught in all things to be our Rule and Pattern says Plato, de legis. lib. 4. It were easy to enlarge on the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we meet with in some of the ve●y Heathen, and which the consideration of the Moral perfections of God led them to. Power, Immensity, wisdom, Sovereignty etc. 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 begets an impression of trust, Subjection, Resignation etc. 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 administered according to excellent counsel, 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 losses and the like. And here, as a firm persuasions 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 persuasion 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 loss, 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. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. etc. 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 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 renewing 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 accompanied 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 and Dogmatically believe 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 itself 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 wisdom 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 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 Slothful and do not apply ourselves 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 Splendour, because the blind cannot 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 mere Natural Man is. Partly in that the renewed 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 both to an easy perceiving, and a steady adhering to it. The Soul finding the Counter part of that in the Word, which through its having received the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, it hath upon itself, becomes hereby qualified to a clearer discerning of Scripture Doctrines than otherwise it could be. Moreover, men may not only in the mere 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 administered especially in the Word, they may make a judgement 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 bewail 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 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 lodge their sins any where, than charge them upon themselves. Hence they Father that upon the infirmity of Nature, which proceeds from their sloth and wilful choice. Yea, they that complain most of the unsuitableness of their strength to Duties, never concern themselves to try whether they have strength to perform them yea or not. We resolve, first, not to practise, 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.  
§. 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 controversy: We are in the next place to discourse the imbecility 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 inquire, whether there be not also some duties incumbent upon us, which even with respect to the Matter of them, men in the mere Virtue 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 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 extrinsical 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 Ethics, 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, 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 aghast to find his Epistles brought upon the Stage to decide the difference between Moral and Physical Specification; Reprof. to the Rehearse. p. 99.100. Surely the thing is not so foreign, 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 exact, which is ambiguous, and the term all, seeing no man ever was, or will be so without Grace, I do undertake to justify the denial of it to be no less than Gross Pelagianism.  
Now that considered, with respect to our mere 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, styled 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. Something farther remains yet to be subjoined; 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 impressed 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 Analogy 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 styles it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 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 immediately impure and unclean. The mere 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 loathsomeness 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 expressly 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 says that carentia doni Originalis, 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 ourselves as a Crime, what was intended merely as a punishment is new, at least, crud● Divinity, Def. & Contin. p. 198. That it is not New, were easy to show 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 Adam's 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 Jesuit Bellarmine styles a heresy. But for the thing itself, 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 Baptism things with undue names, expressly sti●es it so, 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. Mere disasters render us the Objects of God's pity 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 predicament 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 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 Sunbeam, 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 Adam's mere 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 man's 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 lie in view, which to avoid prolixity, I at present wave. And as to our Author's Objection, That what is a Punishment cannot be a Crime. (1.) What if a clear solution could not be given to it? Shall we therefore renounce a truth so strongly confirmed? Nunquam ideo negandum quod apertum est, qui● comprehendi non potest quod occultum est, saith Austin, lib. the 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 dependence 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 and declared order for the propagation of Mankind. 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 Achitophel's and Judas' hangging themselves both the one and the other? Doth not God frequently threaten upon the commission of some sins, to relinquish men in way of judgement 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 easy 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 chargeable as a crime upon us. It is only in the virtue of the Remedial Covenant made in Christ as the Head of the New Creation, that we are renewed 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 laid open the pollution of our Faculties, and their unanswerableness to the holy Nature of God, and the Holiness implanted upon the Law, it is easy 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 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 sphere: 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 acknowledgement 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, says Luther, Ne jota quidem unum videri potest in Scriptures, 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 participate; So far only as we partake of the Spirit, who indicted 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 mere 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 Taste 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, ignorant, subject to mistakes, error, vain imaginations, but liable 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 mortify 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 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 aught 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 easy 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. 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 performs, 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 renewed to this Image again, a prevarication with respect 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 Sovereign, but Apostasy 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 ourselves, 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. men's 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 qualify it to the being to God's 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 God's glory is either necessary, or indeed possible, in every individual act; 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 sense. Their Virtues are but Virtutum similitudines, the Counterfeit of Virtues, 
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. count. 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 Virtues of the Heathen Philosophers nomen bonorum operum amittunt, si per bonum intelligatur quod est utile ad Vitam aeternam, Lose 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.  
§. 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 shown 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 mere virtue 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 ourselves new hearts, with what depends thereupon. That the Sanctifying of our Natures, and the being renewed 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 lies as far out of our sphere, as the production of the Soul doth out of that of an organised body. Was man merely passive in the reception of the Image of God impressed upon him at first, and is there not greater reason to be persuaded that he is merely passive in the new production and reception of it? Hence to testify 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 own 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 signify any thing, do import us merely passive in it. Of this complexion are the expressions of our being begotten again, Created, Quickened, etc. Did the scattered Atoms 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 foreign Agent? If 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 proclaim us inept and weak for the effecting of it? Doth he not entitle 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. etc. Now notwithstanding all this, to argue for an Ability in us to perform it, merely because it is prescribed us in way of Duty, is childish and trifling; is it not enough to justify 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 thy sensual earthly heart, thou art to implore his help, who is not only able, but willing to relieve and secure 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 successful. (4.) That these commands and exhortations of washing and making us clean, of getting a new heart, etc. 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 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 subtlety be perverted to another Intendment. Had God designed the declaring the Doctrine of an infused Subjective principle; I challenge any man to show 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 renewing and assisting Grace, which I suppose all Christians are found in the performance of, reconciliable with the denial and negation of such a Principle and so conferred. Surely in our applications and addresses to God, we pray not for Rational Faculties, nor merely for the enjoyment of the Gospel, but we pray especially, That God would Create in us a clean heart; that he would renew 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 something more than either Essential Powers or Objective Light. Therefore Austin says 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 that while we pretend to bless. God for quickening 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, etc. We do but mock and flatter him; For as Austin says, 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 ourselves, 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 didst 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 supersede all farther prosecution of it.  
§. 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 increased 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 Virtue 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 Virtue, or the instruments of it; and that those who pursue the acquisition of Grace and Spiritual Holiness over and above the common Virtues of Morality, do not engage their main industry and biggest endeavours in the pursuit of Dreams and Shadows, 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 men do; I shall take the liberty to say that however sound and Orthodox▪ by virtue 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 freedom of affixing what sense 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 precedent 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 judgement of the intelligent Reader, whether it ought not to 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 lives 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 intent it for a shelter for those vices which Philosophy would banish; nor design to protect Lusts and Passions under the privilege of it; as a late Author is pleased to charge us, Repr. to the Rehearse. 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 infused 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 Resurrection of the dead. To this purpose see Joh. 15.4, 5. 2 Cor. 3.5. Eph. 6.10. Phillip 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 whither, if separated and cut off from their source and stem. Demophil. the Pythagorean Philosopher.   
FINIS.  

ERRATA.  
Besides several Erratas of lesser moment, which the Author is not Solicitous about; there are some that spoil the Sense, which thou art Entreated 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. deal 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. deal Colon after Natural, and place it after contraria p. 81. l. ●. deal comma after Nature. p. 86. l. 13. r. a multitude. p. 89 l ●. r. darkened, p. 101. l. 7. deal that, p. 111. l. 21. deal 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 deal in, p. 214 l. ult. r. conversation, p. 224 l. ● r. of the, p. 226 l. 25 r. to murmur, p. 228 l. 17 r. particula aurae, p. 229 l. 25 r. men's, 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 Margin, 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 Sovereign Dominion of the Kings of Great Britain over all persons in all Causes, is asserted and vindicated: With an exact History of the Pope's intolerable 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 Majesty's Records in the Tower of London.  
A Description of the Four parts of 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, Coins, Weights and Measures of the chief places of Traffic 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 Sovereign 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 Complete Statesman, etc. By Leonard Willan, Esquire.  
A Relation in form of a Journal of the Voyage and Residence of King Charles the Second in Holland.  
Moors hominum, the Manners of Men described in sixteen Satyrs. by Juvenal; together with a large Comment, clearing the Author in every place wherein he seemed obscure, out of the Laws and Customs of the Romans, and the Latin 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, Archdeacon of St. Alban, etc. To which is added a Sermon preached at Paul's 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 Margin, 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 Estate with the Civil, are unfolded, by Hugh Davis, Ll. B. late Fellow of New College in Oxon.  
An English, French, Italian, Spanish Dictionary, by James Howel.  
Observations on Military 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 Majesty's 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 Proceed 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, 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 Man's Calling: or a Treatise of making Religion one's 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 deal with all men, in the choice of his Company, both of evil and good, in solitude, on a weekday, 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 showing 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.  
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 balance 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 Virtue and Value of Baptism. By Za. Crofton.  
The Quakers Spiritual Court proclaimed; being an exact Narrative of a 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, occasioned by the twelve Months fasting of Martha Tailor, the faimed Derbyshire 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 Unstinged: A Sermon preached 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 God's Judgements, Spiritual and Temporal: or, Sermons to call to Remembrance. By Nich. Lockier, Minister of the Gospel.  
A Plate for Mariners, or the Seaman's Preacher; delivered in several Sermons upon Jonah's Voyage. By R. Ryther, Preacher of God's Word at Wappin.  
The Gentlewoman's 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, Chambermaids, and all others that go to Service: The whole being an exact Rule for the Female Sex in general.  
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 showing 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.  
The Morning Seeker; showing 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 Judgement 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 Heroic Actions, out of the French.  
Published this Term, A somber Inquiry into the Nature, Measure, etc. of Morality, and its distinction from Gospel Holiness; in Answer to Eclesiastical Policy, Continuation, and Reproof to the Rehearsal Transprosed. 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 opened, or some Sermons concerning Faith. By Andrew Grace 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.  
The Mercury-Gallant, Containing many true and pleasant Relations of what passed at Paris, from the first of January 72. till the King's 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, etc. 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 God's Correcting-Providences. By James Sharp.  
Justification only upon a Satisfaction. By Robert Ferguson.  
The Christians great Interest: or the trial of a saving interest in Christ, with the way how to attain it. By W. Guthry, late Minister in Scotland.  
The virtue, vigour 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, Archbishop of Armagh, and Primate of Ireland.  
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.  
Blood for blood; being a true Narrative of that late horted murder 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 and others in his English and Latin 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 Insolences of a scandalous Libel, Printed under the Title of [An Extract out of the Register of the State's General of the United Provinces, upon the Memorial of Sir Geo. Downing, Envoy, etc.] And delivered by the Agent de Heyde for such, to several Public 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 Proceed 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.  
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 Fourpences Price.  

John Owen, D. D.  
Tho. Manton, D D.  
William Jenkyn.  
James Inns.  
Thomas Watson.  
Thomas Lye.  
Matthew Poole.  
Jo. Milward.  
John Chester.  
George Cockayn.  
Matthew 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.