sed a kind of circumcision of the heart, which he would not give till that time," Sum. Theol. c. 53. § 7. But what is that circumcision of the heart here promised? Let us hear the learned author himself, when professedly commenting on this place. By circumcision of the heart we are here to understand, whatever answers to circumcision, as a figure, and is contained in God's covenant, except those things that do not belong to this life," Ultim. Mos. § 334. And more clearly still: "To sum up the whole briefly, the circumcision of the heart here promised, ver. 6 is regeneration by the Spirit of adoption. Above all it signifies regeneration, or sanctification by the Spirit of faith and the love of God. Secondly, it denotes consolation in hope of eternal life, by the expiation of Christ," ibid. § 336, 337, 338. From these quotations, if duly connected, arises this argument: The circumcision of the heart promised Deut. xxx. 6. is a benefit of the New Testament, which God did not bestow till then but regeneration by the Spirit of adoption, or sanctification by the Spirit of faith, and of the love of God, and consolation in hope of eternal life by the expiation of Christ, is the circumcision of the heart there promised: therefore such regeneration or sanctification, and consolation in hope of eternal life, is a benefit of the New Testament, which God did not bestow before that time. This conclusion necessarily follows from the premisses, when placed in due order. But the premisses are the very words of

the learned author.

XVII. And yet he does not admit the conclusion; but protests against it. And the fathers had both: for they could not, without the Spirit of God, 1 Cor. xii. 3. and the creation of a clean heart, Psal. li. 10. and the circumcision of the heart, call Christ Lord, as David does, Psal. cx. 1. And they had the hope and joy of sal

vation, Gen. xlix. 18. Psal. li. 12. xvii. 15. & xlix. 15. Ibid. § 339. If any can reconcile these things, I own I cannot. There is only one way of getting clear; namely, by making a distinction in regeneration, sanctification, and consolation in hope of eternal life; as that there is a certain regeneration by the Spirit of adoption; another from something else, than from that Spirit: a certain sanctification by the Spirit of faith and love of God; another not: a certain consolation in the hope of eternal life by the expiation of Christ; another from some other way. The former of these are indeed peculiar to the New Testament; and the latter belong to the old. But these very learned persons must excuse me, if I confidently affirm, I never learned from scripture of any regeneration, but what is from the Spirit of adoption; any sanctification, but what is from the Spirit of faith and love; any hope of eternal life, but what is by the expiation of Christ, either to be made, or already made.

XVIII. What does he then intend, when he denies, that the fathers had circumcision of heart? I know not whether, in what I am to say, I shall express the whole of his meaning but I had rather err on this side, in not saying the whole, than in charging the author with what either he has not said, or I have not sufficiently understood. "It It appears," says he, "that here a spiritual grace is signified, in some measure common to those under both testaments, but in its fulness peculiar to those under the new and that thus something is promised to be superadded to what they had received, peculiar to the New Testament." Ibid. § 335. They had therefore regeneration, sanctification, and consolation, but in some measure only. But what is there to be superadded to what they had received? That must be some third thing, even that which the circumcision

of the heart denotes ; namely, "The removing the vail from the eyes, and the yoke from the conscience, in order to serve God without the fear of death in liberty and joy. For in circumcision the taking away the fleshy substance doubtless signifies freedom from the yoke of such a law." Ibid. § 340.

XIX. But we distinctly offer the following considerations against such intricate notions. 1. Thus the circumcision of the heart is a blessing of the covenant of grace as such, and equally belongs to believers of both testaments. Which we make, appear thus. The foreskin of the heart always signifies in scripture that impurity and depravation, which is naturally inherent in the soul, and is increased by repeated evil actions : but the circumcision of the heart is nothing but the taking away that foreskin, that is, that depravation; which is done by regeneration and sanctification. This Moses declares, Deut. x. 16. Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiff-necked. And Paul, in like manner, Col. ii. 11. describes the circumcision of the heart, which is done without hands, to be the putting off the body of the sins of the flesh. But that this was the privilege of believers in all ages, appears from this, because without it none can be a Jew, whose praise is of God, Rom. ii. 28, 29. that, in consequence of the covenant of grace, there were always such. And as circumcision of the heart is this very regeneration and sanctification, without which none can see God, we must of necessity say, that it is the privilege of all those that were saved at any time. A greater or less degree of sanctification alters not the species. Nor do I imagine, any believer at this time will, even as to the degrees of sanctification, claim to himself a superiority above David, or Moses, or Abraham. Who then will ascribe the circumcision

But none will deny,

of the heart to himself, and refuse it to those heroes, who were also partakers of the same grace with them, though not in an equal degree?

XX. 2. Besides, to understand, by circumcision of the heart, the removing of the vail and yoke, or, which is the same, the abrogation of the ceremonies, is contrary to all sound divinity and reason. For, 1. Let but one single testimony of scripture be produced, where the Holy Spirit thus explains it. 2. We are, on the contrary, taught, that circumcision was, as it were, the entrance to the observance of that law, in which it was a yoke, Gal. v. 3. How then could it signify to the Israelites, on their receiving it, the abrogation of that yoke? 3. Circumcision itself was a great part of the yoke, Acts xv. 5. compared with ver. 10. Besides,

what is more absurd, than that the receiving the yoke should signify the removal of it? What sacramental analogy is there here? 4. As there is a relation between circumcision and uncircumcision, if circumcision be the abrogation of the ceremonies, it necessarily follows that the ceremonies themselves are the foreskin, or uncircumcision of the heart, than which what can be more contrary to scripture-language? 5. If it be objected, that the ceremonial law is called a carnal commandment, Heb. vii. 16. therefore its abrogation was fitly prefigured by cutting away a small part of the flesh; I shall invert the argument, and conclude, therefore it hath its confirmation in that act, which, if any thing, should be accounted among the carnal, as it was performed in the flesh; wherefore it is also called the covenant of God in the flesh of the descendents of Abraham, Gen. xvii. 13.

For the apostle calls that commandment carnal, which, as to the external rites, is performed not in the spirit or mind, but in the memVOL. III.

I i

bers of the body. Otherwise it might, with equal reason, be said, that the killing and burning the sacrifices prefigured the abrogation of the carnal ceremonies which is unworthy divines. There was indeed that in circumcision, as also in the other ceremonies, which might discover imperfection, and give hope of a more joyful time, and presignify, that when that time should come, the ceremonies were to be abrogated; yet the thing signified was not the abrogation of the same.

XXI. 3. And though sometimes circumcision of the heart was the same thing as taking away the vail and yoke; yet it is not promised in that sense, Deut. xxx. 6. For God himself explains it otherwise in the following words, which run thus: And Jehovah thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love Jehovah thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayst live. That circumcision therefore is meant, whose immediate effect is the sincere love of God, and the more remote, life or salvation. Now, what is this but regeneration, or sanctification, without which there can neither be the love of God, nor life? But both may be, where the vail and yoke of ceremonies are not yet removed. The Jewish doctors also agree, that here sanctification is meant; though they give it too great an extent, and think that a perfect sanctification is here promised. We shall not scruple to transcribe a few things out of Moses Gerundensis. "Their heart will desire nothing, but what, in every respect, is virtuous. And this is the circumcision mentioned here. For concupiscence and appetite are the foreskin of the heart: but to circumcise the heart is to set it free from that appetite and concupis

cence."