monstrates their insufficiency to the ends sought after.-Wherefore, those of the Roman church, who would give countenance unto the sacrifice of the mass, by affirming that it is not another sacrifice, but the very same that Christ himself offered, do prove, if the argument of the apostle here insisted on be good and cogent, an insufficiency in the sacrifice, of Christ for the expiation of sin. For so he affirms it is with all sacrifices that are to be repeated, whereof he esteems the repetition itself, a sufficient demonstration.

Obs. VIII. God alone limiteth the ends and efficacy of his own institutions. It may be said, that if these sacrifices did not make perfect them that came unto God by them, then their so coming unto him, was lost labour, and to no purpose. But there were other ends and other uses of this their coming to God, as we have declared; and unto them all, they were effectual. There never was, their never shall be, any loss in what is done according to the command of God. Other things, however we may esteem them, are but hay and stubble, which have no power or efficacy unto any spiritual ends.

έχειν

VER. 2, 3.—Επει αν επαυσαντο προσφερόμεναι, δια το μηδεμιαν επι συνειδησιν ἁμαρτιων τους λατρεύοντας, ἅπαξ κεκαθαρμενους. Αλλ' εν ανταις αναμνησις ἁμαρτιών κατ' ενιαυτον.

The Syriac translation refers that to the persons, which is affirmed of their offerings,, for if they had been perfect, or made perfect,' referring to what went before, that they were not made

they would have long since ceased ,כבר דין אתניחו מן קורבניהון,perfect

or rested from their oblations,' or offerings. They would have offered them no more.' And although it doth not at all express rovç λarpevovras, which follows in the verse; yet it regulates the sense of the whole by that word, as it more plainly declares in rendering the

מטל דלא מכיל טריא הות להון תארתהון בחטהא לאילין דחדא,following words

Because their conscience would no more have tossed or disquieted them for their sins, who had at one time been purified;' which is a good exposition, though not an exact translation of the words. And so it renders the next verse, 'but in these sacrifices their sins are remembered, called to mind every year.' Ежε av eжavσavτo, many ancient copies add the negative, ουκ ; επει ουκ αν, whereof we shall speak immediately. Ene. Vul. Alioquin, and so others generally; of the word, see ch. ix. 26, 'for if so.' Επαυσαντο προσφερόμεναι, cessassent (semel) oblata, they would have ceased being once offered.' Most render the participle by the infinitive mood, desiissent offerri, 'they would have ceased to be offered.' Tous λarpevovras, cultores, 'the worshippers' sacrificantes, 'the sacrificers,' say some, I think improperly, both as to the proper sense of the word and the things intended. The priests only, properly, were sacrificantes, but the people are here intended. Κεκαθαρμένου, MS. κεκαθαρισμένους, mundati, purificati, purgati, 'cleansed, purified, purged.' Aia to undeμlav Exεiv ετι συνειδησιν ἁμαρτιων. Ideo quod nullam habent ultrà conscientiam peccati. Vul. Lat. ideo quòd for propterea, peccati for peccatorum. Nullorum peccatorum amplius sibi essent conscii. Bez. They should

no more be conscious to themselves of any sin.' The sense is given in the Syriac before mentioned. Arab. "They would have made no more mention of the commemoration of sins,' with respect to the words following. Avauvnois. Syr. But in these they remembered their sins.' Recommemoratio, repetita mentio, 'A calling to remembrance by acknowledgment.'

ουκ

There is, as was observed, a different reading in the ancient copies of the first words in the second verse. The Syriac and the Vulgar Latin takes no notice of the negative particle oux, but read the words positively, then would they have ceased.' Those who follow other copies, takes our for ovx, non for nonne, and render the words interrogatively, as doth our translation, for then would they not have ceased?' that is, they would have done so. And then επει αv, is to be rendered adversatively by alioquin, as it is by most, 'for otherwise.' But it may be rendered casually by 'for then,' if an interrogation be allowed. But the sense is the same in both readings, as we shall see.

VER. 2.—For otherwise they would have ceased to be offered; because that the worshippers once purged, should have had no more conscience of sins.

The words contain a confirmation, by a new argument, of what was affirmed in the verse foregoing. And it is taken from the frequent repetitions of those sacrifices. The thing to be proved is the insufficiency of the law to perfect the worshippers by its sacrifices. This he proves in the foregoing verse, from the formal cause of that insufficiency, which is, that in them all it had but a shadow of good things to come,' and so could not effect that which was to be done, only by the good things themselves. Here the same truth is proved ab effectu or a signo, from a demonstrative sign and evidence of it in their repetition. The present argument therefore of the apostle is taken from a sign of the impotency and insufficiency which he had before asserted. There is, as was observed, a variety in the original copies, some having the negative particle ouk, others omitting it. If that note of negation be allowed, the words are to be read by way of interrogation, ‘would they not have ceased to be offered? that is, they would have done so, or, God would not have appointed the repetition of them. If it be omitted, the assertion is positive, they would have then ceased to be offered,' there was no reason for their continuance, nor would God have appointed it. And the notes of the inference, Eπ av, are applicable to either reading; for then in that case, on this supposition that they could perfect the worshippers, would they not?' or they would have ceased to be offered. Επαυσαντο προσφερομεναι, “ There would have been rest given to them,' a stop put to their offering. That is, God would have appointed them to have been offered once and no more. So the apostle observes signally of the sacrifice of Christ, that he once offered himself; that he offered once for all; because by one offering, and that once offered, he did perfect them that were sanctified, or dedicated to God thereby. That which the apostle designs to prove, is, that they did not by their own force and efficacy, for ever perfect the

church, or bring it to the state of justification, sanctification, and acceptance with God, which was designed to it, with all the privileges and spiritual worship belonging to that state. That this they did not do, he declares in the words following, by a notable instance included in their repetition. For all means of any sort, as such, do cease when their end is attained. The continuance of their use is an evidence that the end proposed is not effected.

In opposition to this argument in general it may be said, that this reiteration or repetition of them was not because they did not perfectly. expiate sins, the sins of the offerers, all that they had committed and were guilty of before their offering; but because those for whom they were offered, did again contract the guilt of sin, and so stood in need of a renewed expiation hereof.

In answer to this objection, which may be laid against the foundation of the apostle's argument, I say, there are two things in the expiation of sin. First. The effects of the sacrifice towards God in making atonement. Secondly. The application of those effects to our consciences. The apostle treats not of the latter, or the means of the application of the effects and benefits of the expiation of sin to our consciences, which may be many and frequently repeated. Of this nature are still all the ordinances of the gospel, and so also are our own faith and repentance. The principal end in particular of that great ordinance of the supper of the Lord, which by his own command is frequently to be repeated, and ever was so in the church, is to make application to us of the virtue and efficacy of the sacrifice of Christ in his death. For a renewed participation of the thing signified, is the only use of the frequent repetition of the sign. So renewed acts of faith and repentance, are continually necessary on the incursions of new acts of sin and defilement. But by none of these is there any atonement made for sin, or an expiation of it; only the one the great sacrifice of atonement, is applied to us, not to be repeated by us. But the apostle treats only of that we mentioned in the first place; the efficacy of sacrifices to make reconciliation and atonement for sin before God, which the Jews expected from them. And actings towards God need no repetition, to make application of them to him. Wherefore, God himself, being the only object of sacrifices for the expiation of sin, what cannot be effected towards him and with him by one and at once, can never be done by repetition of the same.

Supposing, therefore, the end of sacrifices to be the making of atonement with God for sin, and the procurement of all the privileges wherewith it is accompanied, which was the faith of the Jews concerning them; and the repetition of them doth invincibly prove, that they could not of themselves effect what they were applied to, or used for; especially considering that this repetition of them was enjoined to be perpetual, whilst the law continued in force. If they could at any time have perfected the worshippers, they would have ceased to be offered,' for to what end should that continuance serve? To abide in a show or pretence of doing that which is done already, doth no way answer the wisdom of divine institutions.

And we may see herein, both the obstinacy, and miserable state thereon, of the present Jews. The law doth plainly declare, that without atonement by blood there is no remission of sins to be obtained. This they expect by the sacrifices of the law, and their frequent repetition, not by any thing which was more perfect, and which they did represent. But all these they have been utterly deprived of for many generations, and therefore must all of them on their own principles die in their sins and under the curse. The woful superstitious follies whereby they endeavour to supply the want of those sacrifices, are nothing but so many evidences of their obstinate blindness.

And it is hence also evident, that the superstition of the church of Rome in their mass, wherein they pretend to offer, and every day to repeat, a propitiatory sacrifice for the sins of the living and the dead, doth evidently demonstrate that they disbelieve the efficacy of the one sacrifice of Christ, as once offered, for the expiation of sin. For if it be so, it can neither be repeated, nor any other used for that end, if we believe the apostle.

The remaining words of this verse confirm the argument insisted on, namely, that these sacrifices would have ceased to be offered, if they could have made the church perfect; for,' saith he, 'the worshippers being once purged, they should have had no more conscience of sin.' And we must inquire, 1. Who are intended by the worshippers. 2. What it is to be purged. 3. What is the effect of this purging, in 'having no more conscience of sins.' 4. How the apostle proves his intention hereby.

1. The worshippers, of λatεpevovTEC, are the same with of poopXoμEvoL, the comers,' in the verse foregoing. And in neither place the priests who offered the sacrifices, but the people for whom they were offered, are intended. They were the persons who made use of those sacrifices for the expiation of sin.

2. Concerning these persons it is supposed, that if the sacrifices of the law could make them perfect, then would they have been purged; wherefore καθαρίζεσθαι is the effect of τελειωσαι, ‘to be purged, of being made perfect.' For the apostle supposeth the negation of the latter, from the negation of the former. If the law did not make them perfect, then were they not purged.' This sacred кalapioμоç, respects either the guilt of sin, or the filth of it. The one is removed by justification, the other by sanctification. The one is the effect of the sacerdotal actings of Christ towards God in making atonement for sin, the other of the application of the virtue and efficacy of that sacrifice to our souls and consciences, whereby they are purged, cleansed, renewed, and changed. It is the purging of the first sort that is here intended; such a purging of sin as takes away the condemning power of sin from the conscience on the account of the guilt of it. If they had been purged, (as they would have been, had the law made the comers to its sacrifices perfect,) that is, if there had been a complete expiation of sin made for them.

And the supposition denied hath its qualification and limitation in the word ára, once.' By this word he expresseth the efficacy of the

6

sacrifice of Christ, which being one, at once effected what it was designed to. And it doth not design only the doing of a thing at one time, but the so doing of it as that it should never more be done.

3. That these worshippers were not thus purged by any of the sacrifices which were offered for them, the apostle proves from hence; because they had not the necessary effect and consequence of such a purification. For, if they had been so purged, dia to undeμav exelv eti Ovveidηoiv áμapriov, they would have had no more conscience of sins;' συνειδησιν ἁμαρτιων, but that they had so, he proves in the next verse, from the legal recognition that was made of them every year. And if they had no more conscience of sin, there would have been no need of offering sacrifices for their expiation any more.

1st. The introduction of the assertion is by the particles dia To, 'because that,' which directs unto the argument that is in the words, 'they would have ceased to be offered,' because their end would have been accomplished, and so themselves taken away.

2dly. On the supposition made, there would have been an alteration made in the state of the worshippers. When they came unto the sacrifices, they came with conscience of sin. This is unavoidable to a sinner, before expiation and atonement be made for it: afterwards, if they were purged, it should be so no more with them; they should no more have conscience of sin; μηδεμιαν έχειν ετι συνειδησιν. They should no more have conscience of sin; or rather, they should not any more, or farther, have any conscience of sins; or they should have no conscience of sins any more. The meaning of the word is singularly well expressed in the Syriac translation. They should have no conscience agitating, tossing, disquieting, perplexing for sins; no conscience judging and condemning their persons for the guilt of sin, so depriving them of solid peace with God. It is conscience with respect unto the guilt of sin, as it binds over the sinner unto punishment in the judgment of God. Now this is not to be measured by the apprehension of the sinner, but by the true causes and grounds of it. These lie herein alone, that sin was not perfectly expiated; for where this is not, there must be a conscience of sin, that is disquieting, judging, condemning for sin.

4. The apostle speaks on the one side and the other of them, who were really interested in the sacrifices whereunto they might trust for the expiation of sin. The way hereof as unto them of old, and the legal sacrifices, was the due attendance unto them, and performance of them, according unto God's institution. Hence are the persons so interested called the comers to them,' and 'the worshippers.' The way and means of our interest in the sacrifice of Christ is by faith only. In this state it often falls out that true believers have a conscience, judging and condemning them for sin, no less than they had under the law; but this trouble and power of conscience doth not arise from hence, that sin is not perfectly expiated by the sacrifice of Christ, but only from an apprehension that they have not a due interest in that sacrifice, and the benefits of it. Under the Old Testament, they questioned not their due interest in their sacrifices, which depended on the performance of the rites and ordinances of service belonging unto them; but