These, they say, in that place of Ezekiel, God calls ordinances that were not good, and judgments whereby they should not live, as being imposed on the people in the way of punishment. And with respect unto these they say it is, that the apostle affirms the commandment was weak and unprofitable.

But as the application of this exposition unto this passage in the apostle's discourse, is not consistent with the design of it, as will afterwards appear, so indeed the exposition itself is not defensible. For it is plain, that by the laws and statutes mentioned, ver. 11. not any part of them, but the whole system of ordinances and commandments, which God gave by Moses, is intended. And the two words in the text, pn and DVD, do express the whole law, ceremonial and judicial. And it was not from this or that part, but from the whole law, that the people, as far as they were carnal, looked for righteousness and salvation, Rom. x. 5. Gal. iii. 12. And as these laws and statutes, mentioned ver. 11. contained the whole law given by Moses, so those intended, ver. 25. whereof it is said, that they were not good, nor could they live in the keeping of them, cannot be the laws and statutes of God considered in themselves. For it is inconsistent with the holiness, goodness, and wisdom of God, to give laws, which in themselves and their own nature, should not be good, but evil. Nor, on supposition that he had given them statutes that were not good, and judgments wherein they should not live, could he plead, as he doth, that his ways were equal, and that their ways were unequal. For in these laws, he evidently promised that those who did them should live therein. Where is the equality, equity, and righteousness, if it were otherwise? Wherefore, if the statutes of God be intended in the place, it must be with respect unto the people, their unbelief and obstinacy, that it is said of them, that they were not good; being made useless unto them by reason of sin. In that sense the apostle says, that "the commandment which was ordained unto life, he found to be unto death," Rom. vii. 10. But I rather judge, that having charged the people with neglect and contempt of the laws and judgments of God which were good, God's giving them up judicially unto ways of idolatry and false worship, which they made as laws and judgments unto themselves, and willingly walked after the commandment, as Hos. v. 11. is here so expressed. But there is no ground for such a distinction between the laws and judg ments of God in themselves, that some of them should be good, and some of them should be not good; that in some of them men might live, but not in others.

Secondly, I answer, that the whole law may be considered two ways. First, Absolutely in itself. Secondly, With respect,

1. Unto the end for which it was given; 2. Unto the persons to whom it was given.

First, Considering the law in itself, no reflection can be made upon it, because it was an effect of the wisdom, holiness, and truth of God. But in the respects mentioned, it manifests its own weakness and unprofitableness. For they were sinners to whom it was given, and both defiled and guilty, antecedently unto the giving of this law, being so by nature, and thereon children of wrath. Two things they stood in need of in this condition.

1. Sanctification by an inherent purity and holiness, with a complete righteousness from thence. This the moral law was at first the rule and measure of, and would have always effected it by its observance. It could never indeed take away any defilement of sin from the soul, but it could have prevented any such defilement. But now, with respect unto the persons to whom it was given, it became weak and unprofitable unto any such end. It became so, saith the apostle, by reason of the flesh, Rom. viii. 3. For although in itself it was a perfect rule of righteousness, Rom. x. 5. Gal. iii. 12. 21. yet it could not be a cause or means of righteousness unto them, who were disabled by the entrance of sin to comply with it, and fulfil it. Wherefore the moral law, which was in itself efficacious and useful, was now become unto sinners, as unto the ends of holiness and righteousness, weak and unprofitable: for" by the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified.'

2. Sinners do stand in need of the expiation of sin; for being actually guilty already, it is to no purpose to think of a righteousness for the future, unless their present guilt be first expiated. Hereof there is not the least intimation in the moral law. It hath nothing in it, nor accompanying of it, that respects the guilt of sin, but the curse only. This therefore was to be expected from the ceremonial law, and the various ways of atonement therein provided, or no way at all. But this of themselves they could not effect. They did indeed represent and prefigure what would so do, but of themselves they were insufficient unto any such end. For it is not possible, as our apostle speaks, that "the blood of bulls and goats should take away sin," ch. x. 5. And this law may be considered three ways. 1. In opposition unto Christ, without respect to its typical signification, under which notion it was now adhered unto by the unbelieving Hebrews. This being no state of it by divine appointment, it became thereby not only of no use unto them, but the occasion of their ruin. 2. In competition and conjunction with Christ; and so it was adhered unto by many of these Hebrews who believed the gospel. And this also was a state not designed for it, seeing it was appointed only to the

time of reformation, and therefore was not only useless, but noxious and hurtful. 3. In subordination unto Christ to typi fy and represent what was to be obtained in him alone; so during its own season it was of use unto that end, but yet could never effect the things which it did represent. And in this state doth the apostle pronounce it weak and unprofitable, namely, on a supposition that atonement and expiation of sin was actually to be made, which it could not reach unto.

Secondly, But it may be yet farther inquired, Why God did give this law unto the people, which, although good in itself, yet because of the condition of the people, it could not attain the end which was intended. The apostle gives so full an answer unto this inquiry, that we need not farther to insist upon it. For he giveth two reasons why God gave this law. First, he saith it was " added because of transgression, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made," Gal. iii. 19. It had a manifold necessary respect unto transgression. As, 1. To discover the nature of sin, that the consciences of men might be made sensible thereof. 2. To coerce and restrain it by its prohibition and threatenings, that it might not run out into such an excess as to deluge the whole church. 3. To represent the way and means, though obscurely, whereby sin might be expiated. And these things were of so great use, that the very being of the church depended on them. Secondly, There was another reason for it, which he declares in the same place, ver. 23, 24. It was "to shut up men under a sense of the guilt of sin," and so with some severity drive them out of themselves, and from all expectation of a righteousness by their own works, that so they might be brought unto Christ, first in the promise, and then as he was actually exhibited.

This brief account of the weakness and unprofitableness of the law, whereon it was disannulled and taken away, may at present suffice. The consideration of some other things in particular will afterwards occur to us. Only in our passage we may a little examine, or reflect on the senses that some others have given unto these words.

Schlictingius, in his comment on the next verse, gives this account of the sate of the law. Lex expiationem concedebat leviorum de'ictorum, idque ratione pœnæ alicujus arbitrariæ tantùm : gravioribus autem peccatis quibus mortis pænam fixerat, nullam reliquerat veniam, maledictionis fulmen vibrans in omnes qui gravius peccassent. But these things are neither accommodate unto the purpose of the apostle, nor true in themselves. For, 1. The law denounced the curse equally unto every transgression, be it small or great: "Cursed is he who continueth not in all things." 2. It expiated absolutely no sin small nor great, by its own power and efficacy; neither did it properly take away any pit

nishment temporal or eternal. That some sins were punished with death, and some were not, belonged unto the polity of the government erected among that people. But, 3. As unto the expiation of sin, the law had an equal respect unto all the sins of believers, great and small: it typically represented the expiation of them all in the sacrifice of Christ, and so confirmed their faith as to the forgiveness of sin, but farther it could not proceed.

And Grotius on the place. Non perduxit homines ad justitiam illam veram et internam, sed intra ritus et facta externa_constitit : Promissa terrestria non operantur mortis contemptum, sed eum operatur melior spes vitæ æternæ et cælestis. Which is thus enlarged by another: The Mosaical law got no man freedom from sin, was able to give no man strength to fulfil the will of God, and could not purchase pardon for any that had broken it. This therefore was to be done now afterwards by the gospel, which gives more sublime and plain promises of pardon of sin, which the law could not promise, of an eternal and heavenly life to all true penitent believers; which gracious tenders now made by Christ, give us a freedom of access unto God, and confidence to come and expect such mercy from him.' Answ. 1. What is here spoken, if it intend the law in itself, and its carnal ordinances without any respect unto the Lord Christ and his mediation, may in some sense be true. For in itself it could neither justify nor sanctify the worshippers, nor spiritually or eternally expiate sin. But, 2. Under the law, and by it, there was a dispensation of the covenant of grace, which was accompanied with promises of eternal life. For it did not only repeat and re-inforce the promise inseparably annexed unto the law of creation, "Do this and live," but it had also other promises of spiritual and eternal things annexed unto it, as it contained a legal dispensation of the first promise or the covenant of grace. But, 3. The opposition here made by the apostle is not between the precepts of the law and the precepts of the gospel, the promises of the law and the promises of the gospel, outward righteousness and inward obedience; but between the efficacy of the law unto righteousness and salvation, by the priesthood and sacrifices ordained therein, on the one hand, and the priesthood of Christ, with his sacrifice which was promised before, and now manifested in the gospel, on the other. And herein he doth not only shew the preference and dignity of the latter above the former, but also that the former of itself could do nothing unto these ends; but whereas they had represented the accomplishment of them for a season, and so directed the faith of the church unto what was future, that now being come and exhibited, it was of no more use nor advantage, nor meet to be retained. VOL..V...

Ii.

Thus then was the law disannulled; and it was so actually by the means before mentioned. But that the church might not be surprised, there were many warnings given of it before it came to pass. As, 1. A mark was put upon it from the very beginning, that it had not a perpetuity in its nature, nor inseparably annexed unto it. For it had no small presignification in it, that immediately upon the giving of it as a covenant with that people, they brake the covenant in making the golden calf in Horeb, and thereon Moses brake the tables of stone wherein the law was written. Had God intended that this law should have been perpetual, he would not have suffered its first constitution to have been accompanied with an express emblem of its disånnulling. 2. Moses expressly foretels, that after the giving of the law, God would provoke them to jealousy by a foolish people, Deut. xxxii. 21. Rom. x. 19. that is, by the calling of the Gentiles, whereon the wall of partition that was between them, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances, was of necessity to be taken out of the way. 3. The prophets frequently declared, that it was of itself utterly insufficient for the expiation of sin, or the sanctification of sinners, and thereon preferred moral obedience above all its institutions; whence it necessarily follows, that seeing God did intend a riuris, or state of perfection for his church, that this law was at last to be disannulled. 4. All the promises concerning the coming of Christ as the end of the law, did declare its station in the church not to be perpetual; especially that insisted on by our apostle, of his being a priest after the order of Melchisedec. 5. The promises and predictions are express, that a new covenant should be established with the church, unto the removal of the old, whereof we must treat in the next chapter. By all these ways was the church of the Hebrews forewarned, that the time would come, when the whole Mosaic law, as to its legal or covenant efficacy, should be disannulled, unto the unspeakable advantage of the church. And we may hence observe,

Obs. IV. The introduction into the church of what is better and more full of grace, in the same kind with what went before, doth disannul what so preceded; but the bringing in of that which is not better, which doth not communicate more grace, doth not do so. Thus our apostle expressly disputes, that the bringing in of the law four hundred years after the giving of the promise,, did not evacuate, or any way enervate the promise. And the sole reason hereof was, because the promise had more grace and privilege in it, than the law had. But here the bringing in of another priesthood, because it was filled with more effectual grace and mercy, utterly disannulled that which was instituted before. And as we may hence learn the care and kindness of God unto the church, so also our own duty in adhering with constant obedience unto the institutions