Page images

crated from common uses. So the Consecration of the Levites is called a separating them from the Congregation of Israel to bring them near to God, Numb. xvi. 9. Deut. x. 8, 9. And the Consecration of iitfrcw is likewise called a Separation, 1 Chron. xxiji. 13. So also the Consecration of the Temple Musicians, 1 Chron. xxv. 1. The lame is the style concerning the Consecration of a Nazarite, Numb. vi. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 13, 21. And the Head of his Consecration, v. 9. is the fame with the ise^</ of his Separation, v. 18. So for more eminent degrees of Holiness within the Holy Seed themselves. The lame Phrase is used concerning that Consecration by which the Holy Seed, of which I am speaking, became £ta£p. Thus Moses: So Jball we be separated, I and thy People, from all the People that are upon the face of the Earth, Exod. xxxiii. 16. And ye stall be holy unto me: for I the Lord am holy, and have severed you from other People, that ye should be mine, Lev. xx. 26. I am the Lord your God, which have separated you from other People, v. 24. The duty of Holiness on their part answered the Holiness to which God had been pleased to admit them. For God's Holiness is, in very many places, given as a reason why they also ought to be holy. As therefore Gcd had made them holy by separating them in his care from all Nations of the Earth, by dealing with them so as he had aot dealt with any other Nation: So the Holiness, which was their duty, must be supposed to oblige them also to separate themselves from all those same Nations from whom God had been pleased to separate them, that is, from all other Nations whatsoever. So therefore this word must be understood in Ezra and Nehemiah, in their atH 2 tonement

tonement for their mingling the Holy Seed. The reason, at leatt, holds universally, that they must have separated from all Wives and Children oi other Nations, if they would have God own them for his own peculiar People. §. xxxvi. So it was in the old Peculium. And the ReaTjie fame Rea- y^;^ in the New Testament plainly supposes,

mtofk Go- thatthe ""A is the in the A7fw Peculium spel, concern- also. I do not mean that all Nations but oaw, jn^ all who are whilst they continue in their National Difiinbutoftheex- Qwns^ ^k, in God's account, unclean, as the munion If the case was l^e'u That confinement was indeed true Church, against the whole design of the Revelations of the Gospel, by which the new Peculium was settled. But, concerning the external Body of the new Peculium, as confederated by our Sacraments, the fame Reasonings are allowed in the New Testament that were made use of concerning the Israelitijh Nation in the Old. This I have shewn in the forementioned Passages of St. Pauss Epistles to the Corinthians. Yer this could not have been, unless this Body had succeeded the old Peculium in that greatest privilege of all, of being the only holy Body -in the World; which must consequently make all Marriages out of this Body, to be a mingling the Holy Seed with that which was in God's account, unholy. Accordingly, all the Epithets : of the old Peculium are by St. Peter ascribed to •the Orthodox Communion. They are called a chosen Generation, a Royal Priesthood, an Holy . Nation, a peculiar People, i Sr. Pet. ii. 9. Yet in this Holy Nation there were some who were redeemed out oj every Kindred, and Tongue, and People, and Nation, Rev. v. 9. Why are they still called a Nation, but to let us understand that all the privileges which belonged to the old Peculium as a single Nation^ agreed also to ....» » . . the

the new Peculium, though now consisting of several Nations? But this, if it be so, must make this Body alone holy, andallP<?/y2w.rwho are not Members of thk Body, therefore unborn God's fight, because they are not Memrs of this holy Body. The fame must be necessarily supposed in the forementioned Antitheta of St. Paul. He supposes the Consort which is not of the new Peculium, to be in a state of Unrighteousness and Darkness, to be under the powet of Belial, to be inhabited by Idols, for that very reason, because they were not in the new Peculium. On this account he obliges the Members of the true Peculium to be separate, to renounce such Marriages, if they would have him own them for his own Sons and Daughters. Plainly implying, that, such Marriages were a mingling and debasing of his own Seed as well as that of the holy Patriarchs, as I have also already observed. And this is perfectly agreeable to the whole series of the Reasoning of the New Testament. St. John allows no Communion with the Father and the Son, but by a visible Communion with himself and his other fellow Apostles, i Eph. i. ?. And he allows no Life, no Light, no Truth, but in that fame Communion. On the contrary, he implies that; all who are out of it, are for that reason, in Darkness, in Death, and in Error. He neyer admits of any middle state, but supposes every one who is not in one of these Dispensations, for that reason, to be under the other. And indeed St. Paul's word «.Ww, contains all that were out of the true new Peculium; not' only the Heathen Idolaters, but but also those of the old abrogated Peculium, \ who did riot own the Righteousness which was «(. 'sriVes'f. It took in also all the Heresies then V * H 3 known,

known of, as making Shipwreck of the Faiths 1 Tim.i. 19. as a departure from the Faith, iv. r. as erring from the faith, vi. 10. as overthrowing the laith, 2 Tim. ii. 18. as reprobate concerning the faith, iii. 8. I do not know of any avowed Schism, that openly frequented opposite Assemblies, in that earliest Age of" the Apostles. But, if there had been any, their very division from the Body of the ■mro}^ was sufficient to rank them among St. Paul's^tro/, whatsoever had been the cause of the Division, and how little soever it had concerned the common Faith. Thus it appears, that St. Pœuss Reasonings do extend to Dividers of all forts, that there could be no valid Marriages between them and the Members of the Orthothodox Communion. So clear it is, that only one Communion among Christians was then thought to have the whole Right of the new Peculium. So clear withal it is, that our present Latitudtnarian Motions are perfectly different from those of the purest Apostolical Age.

§. xxxvii. That really they are so, appears in this very Au who were Subject of my present Discourse. The reason palCommu-0" w^ Marriages were forbidden, was the nion, are rec- uncleanness and impurity of the Consort that / l-oned as un- was not of the Peculium, that is, of the Holy/ dean by igna- Seed. This made the mingling of the Holy

mystical Un- See* with ^m 10 be 2 tollution °f tne

cleanness, Seed it self. Whosoever therefore were, in which is al- the judgment of the Church, unclean,, are, sot lowed to have tnat very reason, uncapable of Ecclesiastical Gospel Mtrriages. But this is the cafe of Schismaticks also from Episcopal Communion. So the Apostolical Ignatius, who certainly knew the Apostles minds better by personal conversation with them, than any of our modern Innovators can possibly do by reasoning from the Writings of the Apostles at the distance of so many Ages. His words are very clear to this purpose :igmt. Ep. ad

'O hnis d-vaiitrnelv »f Kaft&ejt ebv' f_ o p oniif av Trail, n. 7.

i KuBctcps £2«0 These words are to be aided, as Dr. F^wj- has rightly observed, out of the old Translator, who is herein seconded by the Copy of the Interpolator also. The last words being the satve, made the omijfion very eafie in the transcriber of the Florentine Copy. And the following Words and Reasoning connect with these Words, and plainly suppose them designing to give an account in whatsense they were unclean who were not of the true Communion. Thus they conneft very pertinently, but not at all if these Words be omitted. So

he goes on: T£V Hr/P, 0 x*e<V &m<rK0Trx -o-f 5<r

T? <rmeiS'*<Ti, He that ts within the Altar h
clean: But he who is without it is not clean;
that is to fay, He who does any thing without
the Bishop, and the Presbytery, and the Dea-
cons, is not clean as to Conscience. This Phrase
M&*e}i Th aiwetHti i$ designed to express the
cleanness relating to the new Pcculium in op-
position to the cleanness required by the Mo-
saical Law. It can therefore have nothing to
do with any abrogated part of the Mosaical
Discipline, that cannot justifie any Reasoning .. .
from it under the Gospel. The Expression is >
the fame which is used in the Canonical Wri-
ters, and is there opposed to the external le-
gal Purifications. So K*8*^ <rw*i?*tif, i Tim.
iii. 9. 2 Tim«i. ?• is used in opposition to the
*dt&T*t * <r.*t*h, Heb. ix. 13. This Purity
therefore from dead Works, is asserted by the
Apostle to the Blood of Christ, v. 14. in allu-
fion to, the Ugal Purifications from deadBodies.

H*4 , He

« PreviousContinue »