the gospel also. And this the Holy Ghost in the apostles did for a while bear withal. But now whereas the whole service of the tabernacle was of itself fallen down, and become as useless, so of no force, its obliging power ceasing in its accomplishment by Christ; and whereas the time was drawing near, wherein God by his providence would utterly remove it, the inconsistency of it with the gospel-state of the church was now fully to be declared,

This therefore our apostle grants, that there was such a repugnancy between the law and the gospel, as to the ends of righteousness and divine worship, as that one of them must of necessity be parted withal. Wherefore the whole controversy turning on this hinge, it was highly incumbent on him to manifest and prove, that the law did now cease, according to the appointment of God; and that God had of old designed, foretold and promised that so it should do, and be abolished, on the introduction of that which was the end and substance of it. And this I look on as the greatest trial the faith of men ever had in the concerns of religion; namely, to believe that God should take away, abolish, and leave as dead and useless, that whole system of solemn worship, which he had appointed in so glorious a manner, and accepted for so many generations. But yet, as we are to acquiesce in the sovereign pleasure of God, made known by revelation against all reasonings of our own whatsoever; so it must be confessed, that faith was greatly bespoken and prepared by the nature, end and use of all those institutions, which more than intimated, that they were appointed only for a time, and served to introduce a more glorious dispensation of divine wisdom and grace.

The proof therefore of the utter cessation of the law, the apostle enters on by the invincible argument, whose foundation or proposition is laid in this verse, and the especial parts of it are explained, confirmed and vindicated in those that follow. And in his ensuing discourse his principal design is to prove, that the church is so far from being a loser, or disadvantaged by this change, as that she receiveth thereby the highest privilege, and greatest blessing that in this world she is capable of.

In the words of this verse there is a supposition of the change of the priesthood, as that which was proved before, and an inference from thence to a necessity of the change of the law.

Μετατιθεμένης της ἱερωσύνης, • the priesthood being changed ;' that is, the priesthood of Levi appointed and exercised under the law. MiraTidung, translato, mutato; so some read, transferred,' translated;' some changed.' The former do not reach the whole sense intended. For the office of the priesthood may be transferred from one person to another, from one family to another, yea, from one tribe to another; and yet the priesthood, as to the

kind and nature of it, continue the same. This, our apostle af terwards mentions, ver. 13, 14. as a part of his argument to prove the priesthood itself to be changed. But this it doth not absolutely, seeing it is possible that the office may be transferred from one tribe to another, and yet not be changed as to its nature. But the proof lies in this, that Moses in the institution of the priesthood, made no mention of the tribe of Judah, and therefore, if that office be transferred unto that tribe, it must be of another kind than that before instituted. And on this supposition, that which he intends to prove, follows evidently upon the translation of the priesthood. For all the sacred services and worship which the law required, were so confined, or at least had such respect unto the Levitical priesthood, as that no part of it, no sacred duty could be performed, on a supposition of taking away the priesthood from that tribe and family. For whereas the whole of their worship consisted in the service and sacrifices of the tabernacle, God had appointed, that whosoever did draw nigh unto the performance of any of these services, that was not of the seed of Aaron, should be cut off and destroyed. Wherefore, upon a supposition of the ceasing or changing of the priesthood in that family, the whole Jaw of ordinances became unpracticable, useless, and lost its power; especially seeing there was no provision made in the law itself for a priesthood in any other tribe. Besides, such was the contexture of the law, and such the sanction of it, "cursed is he who continueth not in all things written in the law to do them," that if any thing be taken out of it, if its order be disturbed, if any alteration be made, or any transgression be dispensed withal, or exempted from the curse, the whole fabric must of necessity fall to the ground.

But yet it is not a mere transferring of the priesthood from one tribe to another, that is here intended by the apostle. For there is such a change of the priesthood, as there is of the law. But the change of the law was an airs, a disannulling' or abolishing, as is affirmed, ver. 18. Such, therefore, must the change of the priesthood be, and so it was. The priesthood was changed, in that one kind of it was utterly abolished, and another introduced. So was the Levitical priesthood changed, as that the other priest which came with his office in the room thereof, could not be called or said to be after the order of Aaron, but was of another kind, typed out by Melchisedec. It may therefore be inquired, on what grounds this priesthood was to be so abolished, or how it appears that so it is, and by what means it was actually taken away.

That it was so to be abolished, the apostle proves, 1. Because before the institution of that priesthood, there was another far more excellent, namely, that of Melchisedec. 2. That

the Holy Ghost had declared that the introduction of that more excellent priesthood for a season, was to prefigure and represent another priesthood that was afterwards to be established. And this could not be that of Levi, seeing God doth not make use of that which is more excellent, to figure or repre sent that which is inferior thereunto. Another priesthood, therefore, must arise, and be granted unto the church in an swer unto that type. 3. That it was impossible that this new priest after the order of Melchisedec, should be consistent with that of Levi, or that it should be continued after that was brought in. For, First, He was to be of another tribe, as he immediately proves. Secondly, Because his priesthood and sacrifice were to be of another kind than that of Levi, which he demonstrates at large in the ensuing chapters. Thirdly, Be cause on the other hand, the priesthood of Aaron, 1. Could never accomplish and effect the true and proper ends of the priesthood, which the church stood in need of, and without which, it could not be consummated. And, 2. Was in its own nature, offices, works and duties, inconsistent with any priesthood, that was not of its own order. It must therefore be abolished.

It may therefore be inquired, how the priesthood was changed, or that of the house of Levi taken away. And I say, as the apostle directs, it was done by the appointment of God. For his introduction of another priest, when it was actually accomplished, had the force of a repealing law. The institution of the former was abrogated thereby, without any other constitution. For as unto its use, it did hence cease of itself. It had no more to do, its work was at an end, and its services were of no advantage to the church: For the sign of what is to come, is set aside, and ceaseth to be a sign, when the thing signified is brought in. Yea, the continuance of it would give a testimony against itself. And as to its right, this new institution of God, applied by his own authority unto it in its proper season, took it away. 2. The application of the authority of God, in the institution of a new priesthood to take away the old, was made by the Holy Ghost, in the revelation of the will of God by the gospel, wherein the ceasing of it was declared. And sundry things may be observed concerning this abolishing of it.

Obs. I. Notwithstanding the great and many provocations of them by whom it was exercised and discharged, yet God took it not away, until it had accomplished the end whereunto it was designed. Neither the wickedness of the people, nor of the priests themselves, could provoke the Lord to revoke his institution, until the appointed end of it was come. And it is no small part of the blindness of the present Jews, to think that God would so utterly abolish his own ordinance, as they must

acknowledge he hath done, if he would have it to be of any longer use in the church. For sixteen hundred years, they have not had any priest among them, nor is it possible they should according unto the law, if they were actually restored unto their own pretended right in Canaan. For they have utterly lost the distinction of tribes among them, nor can any of them in the least pretend they are of the lineage of the priests. And for any one to usurp that office who is not lineally descended from Aaron, they own to be an abomination. As, therefore, they know not how to look for a Messiah from the tribe of Judah, seeing all sacred genealogy is at an end; no more can they look for a priest of the house of Aaron. Now this end of it, was the bringing in of a better hope, or the promised seed, who, according to the promise, was to come to the second temple, and, therefore, whilst that priesthood continued. 2. God took it not away till he brought in that which was more excellent, glorious and advantageous unto the church, namely, the Priesthood of Christ. And if this be not received through their unbelief, they alone are the cause of their being losers by this alteration. 3. In abundant patience and condescension, with respect unto that interest which it had in the consciences of men from his institution, God did not utterly lay it aside in a day, after which, it should be absolutely unlawful to comply with it. But God took it away by degrees, as shall afterwards be declared.

Obs. II. That the efficacy of all ordinances or institutions of worship, depends on the will of God alone. Whilst it was his will that the priesthood should abide in the family of Levi, it was useful and effectual unto all the ends whereunto it was designed. But when he would make an alteration therein, it was in vain for any to look for either benefit or advantage by it. And although we are not now to expect any change in the institutions of divine worship, yet all our expectations from them, are to be resolved into the will of God.

Obs. III. Divine institutions cease not without an express divine abrogation.-Where they are once granted and erected by the authority of God, they can never cease without an express act of the same authority taking of them away. So was it with the institutions of the Aaronical priesthood, as the apostle declares. And this one consideration, is enough to confirm the grant of the initial seal of the covenant unto the present seed of believers, which was once given by God himself, in the way of an institution, and never by him revoked.

Obs. IV. God will never abrogate or take away any institution or ordinance of worship, unto the loss or disadvantage of the church. He would not remove or abolish the priesthood of

Levi, until that which was incomparably more excellent, was introduced and established.

Obs. V. God in his wisdom so ordered all things, that the taking away of the priesthood of the law, gave it its greatest. glory. For it ceased not, before it had fully and absolutely ac complished the end whereunto it was designed, which is the glory and perfection of any ordinance: even the mediation of Christ himself shall cease, when all the ends of it are fulfilled. And this end of the priesthood was most glorious; namely, the bringing in that of Christ, and therein of the eternal salvation of the church. And what more honourable issue could it come unto? The Jews, by their pretended adherence unto it, are they which cast the highest dishonour upon it; for they own that it is laid aside, at least that it hath been so for sixteen hundred years, and yet neither the end of it effected, nor any thing brought in by it, unto the greater advantage of the church.

The next thing considerable in these words, is the inference which the apostle makes from his assertion and the proof of it: 'there is made of necessity, a change also of the law.' Everyxs, of necessity.' It is not a note of the necessity of the inference from the proposition in the way of argument, but the necessary dependance of the things mentioned, the one on the other. For whereas the whole administration of the law, so far as it concerned the expiation of sin by sacrifices, and the solemn worship of God in the tabernacle or temple, depended absolutely on, and was confined unto the Aaronical priesthood, so as that without it, no one sacrifice could be offered unto God, nor any ordinance of divine worship be observed; that priesthood being abolished and taken out of the way, the law itself of necessity and unavoidably ceaseth and becometh useless. It doth so, I say, as unto all the proper ends of it, as a law obligatory unto the duties required in it.

Wherefore, there is also u Mitations, a change of the law; that is, an abolition of it. For it is a change of the same nature with the change of the priesthood; which, as we have shewed, was its abolition and taking away. And how this came to pass, the word yra declares, there is made a change.' It did indeed necessarily follow on the change of the priesthood; yet not so, but that there was an act of the will and authority of God on the law itself. God made this change, and he alone could do it; that he would do so, and did so, the apostle proves in this and the verses following. So is the law of commandments contained in ordinances taken out of the way, being nailed unto the cross of Christ, where he left it completely accomplished.

But moreover, the law in its institution was an instructive