Thirdly, An absolute promise is also called 13, “a covenant,” the covenant of God: Isa. lix. 21, “As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the Lorp; My Spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth.” And God also calls his decree constitutive of the law of nature and its continuance his covenant: Jer. xxxill. 20, “Thus saith the Lorp; If ye can break my covenant of the day, and my covenant of the night, that there should not be day and night in their season.”
It is therefore certain that where God speaks of his covenant, we cannot conclude that whatever belongs unto a perfect, complete covenant is therein intended. And they do but deceive themselves who, from the name of a covenant between God and man, do con- clude always unto the nature and conditions of it; for the word is used in great variety, and what is intended by it must be learned from the subject-matter treated of, seeing there is no precept or promise of God but may be so called.
6. In the making of covenants between men, yea, in the covenant of God with men, ‘besides that they were always conceived “ verbis expressis,” there was some sign and token added, for their confirma- tion.” This was generally the slaying of some creature, and the dividing of it into parts, before mentioned. Hence “sancire foedus” and “sanctio foederis” are “a sanguine,” from the blood shed in their confirmation. Of the slaying of a beast there is mention in all who have spoken of ancient covenants. So was it in that be- tween the Romans and Albans, whose form is reported by Livy, as
VOL. XIX, 6
82 FEDERAL TRANSACTIONS BETWEEN [EXERC. XXVIII.
that whose tradition was of greatest antiquity among them. And there are likewise instances of the division of the slain beasts into two parts, like what we observed before concerning Abraham, and the princes of Judah in Jeremiah: O/ Modorrol év rote bpxmmootass naranbarrovres eis puixp& rodg Bots ras ovvdyxas émrosovyro, Herod. ;— “The Molossians in their confederations cut oxen into small pieces, and so entered into covenants.” And how these pieces or parts were disposed Livy declares, lib. xxxix.: “Prior pars ad dextram cum extis, posterior ad levam viz ponitur; inter hance divisam hostiam copie armate: traducuntur.” And hence it is that 13, which sig- nifies “to cut” or “divide,” is used in the Scripture absolutely for the making of a covenant, without any addition of 12, 1 Sam, xx. 16, 1 Kings viii. 9. And although such outward things did never be- long unto the essence of a covenant, yet were they useful significa- tions of fidelity, intended and accepted in the performance of what — was engaged in it; and therefore God himself never made a covenant with men but he always gave them a token and visible pledge thereof. And whosoever is interested in the covenant itself hath thereby a right unto and is obliged to the use of the sign or token, according to God’s appointment.
7. An absolutely complete covenant is a voluntary convention, pact, or agreement, between distinct persons, about the ordering and dis- posal of things in their power, unto their mutual concern and ad- vantage :—
(1.) Distinct persons are required unto a covenant, for it is a mu- tual compact. As “a mediator is not of one,’—that is, there must be several parties, and those at variance, or there is no room for the interposition of a mediator, Gal. iii. 20,—so a covenant, pro- perly so called, is not of one. In the large sense wherein 172 is taken, a man’s resolution in himself with respect unto any especial end or purpose may be called his covenant, as Job xxxi. 1, “ I made a covenant with mine eyes.”, And so God calleth his purpose or de- cree concerning the orderly course of nature in the instance before given. But a covenant, properly so called, is the convention or agree- ment of two persons or more.
(2.) This agreement must be voluntary and of choice upon the election of the terms convented about. Hence 12 is by some de- rived from 872, which signifies “ to choose” or “ elect;” for such choice is the foundation of all solemn covenants. What is properly so is founded on a free election of the terms of it, upon due consideration and aright judgment made of them. Hence, when one people is broken in war or subdued by another, who prescribe terms unto them, which they are forced as it were to accept for the present ne- cessity, it is but an imperfect covenant, and, as things are in the
SECT. 7, 8.] THE FATHER AND THE SON, 83
world, not like to be firm or stable. So some legates answered in the senate of Rome when their people were subdued, “ Pacem habebitis qualem dederitis; si bonam, firmam et stabilem, sin haud diuturnam.”
(3.) The matter of every righteous and complete covenant must be of things in the power of them who convent and agree about them; otherwise any, yea the most solemn compact, is vain and ineffectual. A son or daughter in their father’s house, and under his care, making a vow or covenant for the disposal of themselves, can give no force unto it, because they are not in their own power. Hence, when God invites and takes men into the covenant of grace, whereunto belongs a restipulation of faith and obedience, which are not abso- lutely in their own power, that the covenant may be firm and stable he takes upon himself to enable them thereunto; and the efficacy of his grace unto that purpose is of the nature of the covenant. Hence, when men enter into any compact wherein one party takes on itself the performance of that which the other thinks to be, but is not, really in its power, there is dolus malus in it, which enervates and disannuls the covenant itself. And many such compacts were re- scinded by the senate and people of Rome, which were made by their generals without their consent; as those with the Gauls who besieged the Capitol, and with the Samnites, at the Furce Caudine.