feffion well obferves, 'In matters of weight and 'moment, an oath is warranted by the word of God, under the New Teftament, as well as un

nor the ninth, in lying to his neighbour. Had he murdered his neighbour previous to his fuppofed oath, he would in fome fenfe have broke one commandment only, the fixth; but now he breaks the third, fixth, and ninth commandments. His fin is highly aggravated; for, as our Larger Catechifm expreffeth it, Queft. 151. it breaks many commandments.

In many cafes a man's fimple affertion is judged too weak to be trusted something stronger must be given to terminate the ftrife, viz. an oath. Herein men agree to call in a third party, even the great God, to witness the truth. Deeming it infuf ficient to abide by the second table of the law only, they go back to the firft; from the ninth commandment to the third, for the confirmation of what they say. To God they appeal as the omniscient witnefs, and the almighty Judge. But if fuch an appeal do not ftrengthen the obligation to do as they have faid, to what purpose is it made? What is it but a taking the name of the Lord in vain? How would it found to hear a man, after having given his great oath, faying to himself, or telling fome confidential friend, Though I have fworn, yet my oath lays me under no greater obligation than before: I am no more bound by it, than I was before it.' The judge, and the party concerned, would readily and juftly conclude that they had had to do with a deceiver. They thought they had a fir mer hold of him by his oath; but now they find it otherwise: For he is perfuaded that his oath lays him under no new, no further obligation.

The doctrine of our ftandards concerning the facraments throws light on the prefent queftion. The facram efpecially in the Lord's fupper, is a deed of the

his eating and drinking in remembrance

Now, it is evident, that

fuch an act or

The fupp

•ther eng

viz.

⚫der the Old,' chap za iz

Now, a fume are no flated times appoined in EVOLV we are to fwear in G i nader run we ate

nature.

to fwear to him. And thus it is with respect to fafting and thanksgiving; none of these duties are of a stated, but of an occafional, or extraordinary And here again we have the fuffrage of the venerable Affembly at Westminster, Confeff. chap. xxi. fect. 5. Befides religious oaths and vows, folemn faftings and thanksgivings, upon Special occafions, are, in their feveral times and feafons, to be used in an holy and religious manner.'

while the venerable affembly at Westminster thought it no falecifm to fay, that by our baptism we are bound to maintain fuch a warfare: we are bound by the law, and by our baptism

too.

The doctrine of obligation arising from the facramental act, with respect to moral duties, is of great antiquity in the church. About seventy years after the death of our bleffed Lord, Pliny the younger, writing to Trajan the Roman Emperor, and giv ing him an account of his procedure in fuppreffing the Chriftians, tells him, that they affirmed the whole of their offence, or mistake, lay in this, that they used to affemble on a stated day before it was light, and to fing together an hymn to • Chrift as God, and to bind themselves by a facrament, feque facramento cbftringere, not to any wickednefs, but that they ⚫ would not commit thefts, robberies, or adulteries; that they would not break their word; nor, when called, deny a pledge.' Plin. Ep. Lib. x. Ep. 97.

If an obligation to duty arife from the creature's deed in communicating, why not from his deed in exprefly vowing? A vow concerning morals, either lays us under an obligation, or not: medium there is none. If it lay us under any obligation, call it a new kind, or a new degree of obligation, it amounts to much the fame. An obligation it is; and being pofterior to that arifing immediately from the law, it may, in that view be called a fuper added tie. If the vow lay us under no obligation, the confequences are obvious. If vows do not bind, they cannot be broken; and if fo, broken vows are a chimera, and they unwife who, with tears, lament them.

The oaths or covenants into which the Old-Teftament church entered, were not at stated times, but at feafons pointed out by holy providence, and wifely obferved by the people of God.

What is always lawful, however, cannot but be fometimes expedient.

Suppofe, therefore, that in these our degenerate days, there fhould be a very univerfal effufion of the holy Spirit; and that in confequence of this, the bulk and body of the nation should confess their grievous backflidings, abjure the abominations of Popery, and spontaneously enter into an oath to keep God's law, would any man deliberately fay, that here they were going off the line of duty? For my part, I durft not for, a thousand worlds. As nothing but the out-pouring of the Spirit can rightly dispose an individual to join himself to the, Lord, and to vow a vow unto him; fo, to this alone, and to no coercive measures, can the proper origin of national covenanting be affigned.But this brings us to confider

The fecond prophecy we had in view, and it runs thus, I will pour water upon him that is thirsty, and floods upon the dry ground: I will four my Spirit upon thy feed, and my bleffing upon thine offspring. They fball Spring up as among the grafs, as willows by the water-courfes. One hall fay, I am the Lord's: an another fhall call himself by the name of Jacob: and another shall fubfcribe with his hand unto the Lord, and furname himself by the name of Ifrael, Ifa. xliv. 3, 4, 5. Here the believing feed are represented, not only as faying with the mouth, but alfo as fubferibing with their hand, that they are the Lord's.

1

Allowing that the defcription fhould be metaphorical, ftill it is certain, that their practice would not have been described under a metaphor which implied any thing unlawful or abfurd. After all, I fee no impropriety in understanding the fubfcription here, as literally, as that affertion, I am the Lord's. We are never to depart from the literal fense of fcripture without neceffity; of which there is not the smallest shadow here. Now, if one may fubfcribe with his hand unto the Lord, why may not many in a conjunct body? If perfonal covenanting be lawful, why not national?

But to be a little more particular in illuftrating this prophecy, we obferve, that in the words there is a manifest gradation: For, in the first Hemiftich it is, One fhall fay, I am the Lord's; and another fball call himself by the name of Jacob: but the laft runs, And another fball SUBSCRIBE with his hand unto the Lord; and fball SURNAME himself by the name of Ifrael. — As writing is a greater fecurity, than what is merely verbal; fo it is more to fubfcribe with the hand unto the Lord, than to fay I am his. A furname is added for the fake of greater honour, or distinction, Mark iii. 16, 17. Acts xii. 25. and xv. 37.; and Ifrael was the new name given to victorious Jacob, Gen. xxxii. 28. The meaning of the paffage is evidently this, that the spiritual, the bleffed people, the Ifraelites indeed, fhall testify their loyalty to God, and their love to his cause, in the strongest manner. They fhall not only say that they are the Lord's; profeffing that they are no more their own, but wholly his, devoted to his fervice, and determined to obey him, as fubjects