4. In the way of worship required under each administration. For under that which was legal, it seemed good unto God to ap- _ point a great number of outward rites, ceremonies, and observances; and these, as they were dark in their signification, as also in their use and ends, so were they, by reason of their nature, number, and the “severe penalties under which they were enjoined, grievous and bur- densome to be observed. But the way of worship under the gospel is spiritual, rational, and plainly subservient unto the ends of the covenant itself; so as that the use, ends, benefits, and advantages of it are evident unto all.
5. In the extent of the dispensation of the grace of God; for this is greatly enlarged under the gospel. For under the old testament it was upon the matter confined unto the posterity of Abraham ac- cording to the flesh; but under the new testament it extends itself unto all nations under heaven.
Sundry other things are usually added by our divines unto the same purpose. See Calvin. Institut. lib, ii, cap. xi.; Martyr. Loc. Com. loc. 16, sect. 2; Bucan. loc. 22, ete.
The Lutherans, on the other side, insist on two arguments to prove, that not a twofold administration of the same covenant, but that two covenants substantially distinct, are intended in this dis- course of the apostle,
74 AN EXPOSITION OF THE [CHAP. VIII.
1. Because in the Scripture they are often so called, and com- pared with one another, and sometimes opposed unto one another; the first and the last, the new and the old.
2. Because the covenant of grace in Christ is eternal, immutable, always the same, obnoxious unto no alteration, no change or abro- gation; neither can these things be spoken of it with respect unto any administration of it, as they are spoken of the old covenant.
To state our thoughts aright in this matter, and to give what light we can unto the truth, the things ensuing may be ob- served :—
1. When we speak of the “old covenant,” we intend not the cove- nant of works made with Adam, and his whole posterity in him; concerning which there is no difference or difficulty, whether it be a distinct covenant from the new or no.
2. When we speak of the “new covenant,” we do not intend the covenant of grace absolutely, as though that were not before in being and efficacy, before the introduction of that which is promised in this place. For it was always the same, as to the substance of it, from the beginning. It passed through the whole dispensation of times before the law, and under the law, of the same nature and efficacy, unalterable, “everlasting, ordered in all things, and sure.” All who contend about these things, the Socinians only excepted, do grant that the covenant of grace, considered absolutely,—that is, the promise of grace in and by Jesus Christ,—was the only way and means of salvation unto the church, from the first entrance of sin. But for two reasons it is not expressly called a covenant, without respect unto any other things, nor was it so under the old testament. When God renewed the promise of it unto Abraham, he is said to make a covenant with him; and he did so, but it was with respect unto other things, especially the proceeding of the promised Seed from his loins. But absolutely under the old testament it consisted only in a promise; and as such only is proposed in the Scripture, Acts ii. 39; Heb. vi. 14-16. The apostle indeed says, that the covenant was confirmed of God in Christ, before the giving of the law, Gal. iii. 17. And so it was, not absolutely in itself, but in the promise and benefits of it. The vowodeo/a, or full legal establishment of it, whence it became formally a covenant unto the whole church, was future only, and a promise under the old testament; for it wanted two things thereunto:—
(1.) It wanted its solemn confirmation and establishment, by the blood of the only sacrifice which belonged unto it. Before this was done in the death of Christ, it had not the formal nature of a cove- nant or a testament, as our apostle proves, Heb. ix. 15-23. For neither, as he shows in that place, would the law given at Sinai have been a covenant, had it not been confirmed with the blood of |
VER. 6.] EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 75
’ sacrifices. Wherefore the promise was not before a formal and solemn covenant.
(2.) This was wanting, that it was not the spring, rule, and measure of all the worship of the church. This doth belong unto every covenant, properly so called, that God makes with the church, that it be the entire rule of all the worship that God requires of tt; which is that which they are to restipulate in their entrance into cove- nant with God. But so the covenant of grace was not under the old testament; for God did require of the church many duties of worship that did not, belong thereunto, But now, under the new testament, this covenant, with its own seals and appointments, is the only rule and measure of all acceptable worship. Wherefore the new covenant promised i in the Scripture, and here opposed unto the old, is not the promise of grace, mercy, life, and salvation by Christ, absolutely considered, but as it had the formal nature of a covenant given unto it, in its establishment by the death of Christ, the procuring cause of all its benefits, and the declaring of it to be the only rule of worship and obedience unto the church. So that although by “the covenant of grace,” we ofttimes understand no more but the way of life, grace, mercy, and salvation by Christ; yet by “the new covenant,” we intend its actual establishment in the death of Christ, with that blessed way of worship which by it is settled in the church.