of the commandments, and their authority from Scripture. We call them the ten commandments, not only because they have been usually divided into that number, but because they were at first so delivered by God himself; and are accordingly so called by Moses, as you will see in the 34th chapter of Exodus, ver. 28: And he wrote on the table the words of the covenant, the ten commandments. And also in Deut. iv. 13: And he declared unto you his commandments, which he commanded you to perform, even TEN commandments. And he wrote them upon the tables of stone. These then are "the SAME WHICH “ GOD SPAKE IN THE TWENTIETH CHAPTER OF Ex"ODUS, SAYING, I AM THE LORD THY GOD, WHO BROUGHT THEE OUT OF THE LAND OF EGYPT, OUT OF THE HOUSE OF BONDAGE;" as we have it taught us in our Catechism, and which is the sanction, or divine authority, that Moses always brings, when he is preaching obedience to this law to the people.

66

As to the more general reference of these commandments, they relate chiefly to the two great branches of our duty; as it describes what we owe to God, and to our NEIGHBOUR.. This, I say, is a more general division of these commandments; for the authority of which we advance our blessed Saviour's own words, in Matt. xxii. 37: Jesus said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with

all thy soul, and with all thy mind: this is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it-Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself; or, in other words, Do unto all men as thou wouldest be done by. To this general division, indeed, God himself seems to have had regard, when he commanded Moses to prepare two tables for them, on the one of which were to be engraven those commandments which concern our duty towards God; and on the other, those which contain our duty towards our neighbour. This is evident from Exodus, xxxi. 18, And God gave Moses two tables of the testimony, tables of stone written with the finger of God. In the 32d chapter, verse 19, we read that Moses, in his anger at the idolatry of the people, broke these two tables beneath the mount; and chapter xxxiv. verse 1, he received another command to hew out two tables of stone like unto the first. From this history we are taught a due reverence to the authority of the moral law, and the particular distinction of the two tables.

Respecting the number of the commandments in each table, this point has furnished an important dispute between the church of Rome and us; and though nothing is further from my design, than to mix controversy in these Lectures, yet it is of great moment just to observe to you, in this place, that by the Roman Catho

lics making only three commandments in the first table instead of four, they thereby would endeavour to lessen the public attention to the second commandment, which is so positively directed again image-worship (one of the greatest errors of the Romish church), and accordingly they have joined it to the first, making but one of the two; and indeed for this end, they oftentimes wholly leave it out, in their books of devotion.

Now, it is very clear, that the first and second commandments have different purposes in view, and therefore cannot with any propriety be considered as one. Besides, in so doing, they are obliged to divide the last commandment into two, otherwise the number ten could not be preserved; whereas it may as well be divided in six, as into two, if it can be proved, that the different parts it contains, ought to be divided into separate commands, in order the better to clear and enforce the observance of the distinct particulars; for, at this rate, Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, will be ONE; Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, will be two, and so on clearly to six, at least; and the last general expression of "nor ANY thing that is his," might be easily multiplied to a hundred more. So much, then, for a short view of this error.

What is essential to all, is perfectly plain, and not doubted by any, viz. that the first table

ends with the fourth commandment, respecting the sabbath-day; and the second table begins with that which requires us to honour our father and mother. After all, it is not of much consequence how the different precepts are divided, so as none are omitted, altered, or mutilated; and that we observe and perform what they strictly contain. That is a rule which cannot be evaded or mistaken, and leaves no room for any essential error.

But that you may have a perfect understanding of the general design of these commandments, and of every division of them, that is proper to be noticed, before we enter upon a more particular consideration of their contents, it will be necessary to observe, that, in setting forth our duty to God and our neighbour, they likewise include one grand branch of our Christian duty not yet mentioned, and that is, our duty to ourselves; for any one must be sensible, that all those duties which come under that description, have a manifest regard, more or less, to these two, and may be reckoned under the offices relating to them. And since there is no duty that concerns our own holiness and happiness, but what is required by God of us to fit us for his service and final acceptance; it cannot be denied but that the first commandment alone will take in whatsoever of this kind may seem wanting in the whole; for since, if we love

God strictly, according to the commandment (that is, with all our heart, and soul, and mind, and strength), we shall never be found wanting in any of that attention to our own conduct, which may justly be termed our duty towards ourselves.

Now, respecting the other division, or rather distinction of these commandments, there is one which may serve to impress a thorough sense of their peculiar nature and universal obligation. Some of them are what we call positive, that is, declare what we are to DO. Such, for example, is the fourth commandment of the first table, and the fifth of the second. Others, again, are what we call of the negative kind; that is, showing us what we are to avoid or leave undone, as are all the others of both tables. And though at first sight this distinction may not seem of such great consequence to mention, yet the contrary will appear from the following observation; since,

First, the positive commands differ greatly with respect to the obligations to obedience. For, though they are always in force, and consequently do oblige all who have any concern with them, as long as they are under their power, yet they do not extend to all persons, nor oblige at all times, equally with the others. For example; to honour our father and mother, is a duty of eternal obligation: but then many