this ;

the Beast also was to be pur to death: the most renowned Selden gives a very full, and satisfactory accompt of it out of the Jewish Writings, and does clearly evidence that the meaning was not

that the Beast was guilty of a crime, and bad violated a Law, and therefore was to be condemned, and put to death; buc it was in order to the happinesse,and welfare of men: for Bestia cum homine concumbens was to be ston'd; partly because it was the occasion of so foul a fad, and so fatal a punishment unto man; and partly that the sight, and presence of the obje& mighe noć repeat so prodigious a crime in the choughts of

men, nor renew the

memory ofic, nor continue the disgrace of him, that died for ir. But there was another different reason in Bove cornu.peta: for there, as Maimonides tells us, in his Moreb Nebuchim, 'cwas ad pænam exigendam à Domino: che putting of that to death was a punishment to the Owner for noe looking to it better for I cannot at all consent to the fancy of the fewes, which Josephus mentions, Μηδ' εις το φών ευχgησε η καταξιωμα. Alcbough the forenamed Critickgive a better sense of it, then 'cis likely the Author ever intended, Non in alimentum sumi debuit, unde scilicet in Domini commodum cederet: but how such an Interpretation can be extracted out of ouzensio as TCOD)'; is not easily to be imagined; for those words of Josephus plainly imply, that the fewes thought such an Ox could not yield wholfome nourishment; or, at the best, they look'd upon ic as an unclean Beast, which was not to be eaten: which indeed was a fond, and weak conceit of them, but they had many such, which yet the learned Author loves to excuse, our of his great favour, and indulgence to them. Yet, which is very remarkable, if the Ox had kill'd a Gentile, they did noc pucit'to deach. It seems it would yield wholfome nourishment for all that. But this we are sure of, that as God does not take care for Oxen, (which the acute Suarez does very well understand of Cura Ligislativa; for otherwise God hath a Providential care even of them) so neither does he take care for the punishment of Oxen, but cis wriccen for his Israel's fake, to whom he hater subjected chefe Creatures, and put them under their feet.

Neither yet can the proper end of a Punishment agree to sensie tive Creatures; for all Punistiment is švence vs ayats, as Plato {peaks õk ire xa fo xarxeyiñou, is 38 70 yyorós d'yinntoy isay fort. 'Tis

F

not in the power of Punishment to recall what is past, but to prevent what's possible. And that wile Muralist, Senica,does almost translate Plato verbatim; Nemo prudens punit, quia peccatum eft, sed nè peccetur: Revocari enim præterita non poluni, fut ura probis bentur.

So chat the end of all Punishment is either in compensationem, which is: umið se'l turó regis fi's tò tô nuwport U ovuçizgu'avabi@guirn, 'cis in utilitatem ejus, contra quem peccatum est: or else cis in eo mendationem, and so in utilitatem peccantis; in respect of which that elegant Moralist Plutarcb, ftiles punishment ia 7siias fuxñis, and Hierocles calls it icreixào zooupács: or else it is in exemplum, in utilitatem aliorum; ins é moi essons wurão teht, vej 006 wrzus, as the Greek Oratour speaks; the same, which God speaks by Moses, that Israel may hear, and fear: and thus Punishment does ara leiga ματίζων.

But none of these ends are applyable to sensitive Creatures; for there is no more satisfa£tion to Justice in inflicting an evilí upon them, tben there is in the ruining of inanimate Beings, in demolishing of Cities, or Temples for Idolatry; which is onely for the good of them, that can take notice of it: for otherwise, as chat grave Moralist, Seneca , has it, Quam ftultum eft his irasci,

qua iram noftram nec meruerunt, nec sentiunt: No fatisfa&tion is to be had from such things, as are not apprehensive of Punishment. And therefore Annihilation, though a great evil, yer wants this sting, and aggravation of a Punishment; for a Creature is not fenfible of it.

Much leffe can you think, that a Punishment has any power to mend, or meliorate sensitive Beings, or to give Example co ocbers amongst them.

By all this you fee, that amongst all irrational Beings there is no arouía, and therefore no eluapnia, and therefore no truweiz: from whence it also flows, that the Law of Nature is built upon Reason:

There is some good so proportionable, and nutrimental to the Being of man, and some evil lo venemous, and destructive to his Nature as that the Good of Nature does sufficiently antidote and fortifie bim against the one, and does maintain, and sweecen bis Elence with the other. There is so much Harmony in föme actions, as chat the Soul must needs dance at them; and there is

5

а

fach an barsh discord, and jarring in others, as that the Soul can, not endure them.

Therefore the learned Grotius does thus describe the Law of Nature, fm Naturale e't di&latum rectæ Rationis, indicans, actui alicui, ex ejus convenientia, vel disconvenientia cum ipsa natura Rationali, inese Moralim turpitudinem, ant neceffitatem Moralem;

confequenter ab Authore Nature ,ipso Dio, talem actum aut vetari, aut præcipi. Which i fhall thus render; "The Law of *Nature is a streaming out of Light from the Candle of the Lord, powerfully discovering such a deformity in some evill, as that "an intellectual eye must needs abhor it; and such a command'ing beaucy in some good, as that a rational Bring must needs be enamour'd with it; and so plainly shewing, that God stamp'd,

and seald the one with his command, and branded the other 'with his disliking

Chrysostome makes mention of this Nóu puolxo's, and does very Rhetorically enlarge himself upon it in his twelfth, and thirteenth Orations liei Ardedu treno where he tells us, that it is 'aunt's x16 vi sõois os ranăr, rj a s roubrzare a Radical, and fundas mental knowledge, planted in the Being of Man, budding, and blossoming in firft principles, flourishing, and bringiug forth fruit, spreading it self into all the fair, and goodly branches of Morality, under the shadow of which the Soul may fit with much complacency and delight. And, as he pours out himself very . fuently, Ου χρεία του λόγων, ευ διδασκάλων, πόνων, και καμαTaro There's no need of Oratory to allure men to it, you need not heap up Arguments to convince them of it: No need of an Interpreter to acquaint them with ir: No need of the mind's Spinning, or toyling,or (weating for the attaining of it; it grows Spontaneously, ic bubbles up freely, it shines out clearfully, and pleasantly, it was so visible, as that the most infant-age of the World could spell it out, and read ic without a Teacher: š Mæūrus, é oegentai, į Anglisul, as he goes on: 'twas long extant before Moses was born, long before Aaron rung his golden Bells, before there was a Prophet, or a fudge in Israel. Men knew ic os xo'tay TEXTã ou Y Hféro 1 deyirs. They had a Bible of God's . own printing, they had this Scripture of God within them. By this Candle of the Lord, Adam, and Eve discovered their own folly, and nakedness; this Candle flamed in Cain's conscience, and F 2

cbis Law was proclaimed in his heart with as much terror, as
'twas publish'd irom Mount Sinai, which hilld him with those fu-
rious reflexions for his unnatural Murder. Enoch, when he
walk'd with God, walk'd by this light, by this rule. Noah, the
Preachr of Righteousnesle, took this Law for bis Text. Nay, you
may see some print of this Law upon the bard heart of a Pharaoh,
when he cries out, The LORD is righteous, but I, and my pea-
ple have finined. Hence it was, that God, when he gave his Law
afresh, gave it in such a compendious Brachygraphy, be wrot ic
as it were in Characters, 'Ou pardons, 'Ou morred' seis, 'Ou xaéters,
without any explication, or amplificacion acall

. He onely en-
joyned it with an Imperatorius brevity, he knows there was e,
nough in the breasts of men to convince them of it, and to coma
ment upon it, oncly in the Second Command there is added an insa
forcement, because his people were excessively prone to the viola-
tion of it and in that of the Sabbath there is given an expofitiin of
it, because in all irs circumstances it was not founded in Natural
Light. So that in Plutarchs language the Decalogue would be
called vóu opuphac70, Gold in the Lump; whereas other Law-
givers use to beat it thinner. Of this Law, as 'tis printed by
Nature, Pbilo speaks very excellently; Nép. diatonis ó-
Jos niyo, it was to deros, ho deinds donze aduan's co xaprodors,
ή τήλαις αψύχοις, αλλ' α' αθανάτε συστος άφθαρτα αθενατο δια-
volą tu madais. “Right reason (faith hej is that fix'd, and un-
.

',
• shaken Law, not writ in perishing. paper by the Hand, or Pen
of a Creacure, nor graven like a dead leccer upon livelesse, and
decaying Pillars; but written with the point of a Diamond,
nay, with the finger of God himself in the heart of man. А
Deiry gave it an Imprimatur ; and an eternal Spirit grav'd it in
an immortal mind. So as, that I may borrow the expression of
the Apostle , the mind of man is guio, xj edalous of dangerous
Tou'm. And I take it in the very same sense, as tis to be took
ταύτης
of the Church; Tis a Pillar of this Truth, not to support it, but
to hold it forth ; Neither must I let slip a passage in Plutarch,
which is very near of kin to this of Philo; O Néu óx és Bor
βλίοις έξω γραμμβάνια, δε ξυλοις, αλλ' έμψυχο ών εωτων λες
go is curorov, rj mraegeun enfan, xj une non tl fuglue or épna
Lov irracovices. You may cake it thus: “This Royal Law of Nam
fure was never shut up in a Paper-prison, was never confind,

OB

* or limited to any outward lurface; but it was bravely fituated in the Centre of a Rativnal Bling, alwaies keeping the Soul company, guarding it, and guiding it; ruling all ics Subjectes, (evec

ry obedient Action) with a Scepter of Gold, and crushing in * pieces all its enemies (breaking every rebellious Action) with a Rod of Iron. You may hear the Lyrick singing out the praises of this Law in a very lofty train : Νόμο πάντων βασιλέως

: à θνα τε, και αθανάτων , έτε 'έγει βιαίως το δικαιώτατον ταρτατα

, gerei This Law, which is the Queen of Angelical, and Humane

Beings , does so rule, and dispose of them, as to bring about *Justice with a most high, and powerful, and yet with a moft Soft

a and delicate band.

You may hear Plato excellently discoursing of it, whilest he brings in a Sophifter dispucing against Socrates, and such an one, as would needs undertake to maintain this Principle, Tauza csava Ti'de múkol ozir, ön pois, jo vou. That there was an untunda ble antipathy between Nature, and Law; Tbar Laws were nothing but hominum infirmiorum comment a: That this was To nel 2017 eģtaTOO TÍNS OU Teas Mixclor, the most bright, and eminent fuftice of Nam ture, for men to rule according to Power, and according to no other Law; Thai o izuestep was oxfoftw, and ö Beanies. That all other Laws were rued busive outis Nay he calls them cheatings, and bewirckings, óx voti, a'm lewdai, they come (faies he) like pleafani Songs,

when as they are meer Charms, and incantatiBuc Socrates, after he had ftung this same Callicles with a few quick Intterrogations, pours out presently a great deal of boney, and fweetnefle,and plentifully thews chat most pleasant,and: conspiring Harmony, that is between Nature, and Law; That there's nothing more x over then a Law; Thar Law is found ded in Nature' ; That it is for the maintaining, and erinobling, and perfecting of Nature. Nay, as Plato tells us elsewhere, There's no way for men to happinesse; unlefte they follow me ixou se dogar, these steps of Rason, these foot-steps of Nature. This same λόγων Law Aristotle does more then once acknowledge, when he tels us of Náuting, and Nój O només a Pofitive Law with him is a more private Law,vol or very eau releʻor mange vor too bur Nature's Law is a more publick, and Catholick Law, fra üyegpa mach rão óucnogia a sus fociñ, which he proves to be a very Sovereign, and commanding Law;for thus he faies, 'O vój raglasixi sxe sureur, Ads

ons.