{"number":199,"title":"THE TENTH COMMANDEMENT","part":"THE THIRD PART OF MANS THANKFVLNES","questions":[113,114,115],"paragraphs":[],"clauses":[],"items":[],"text":"*Thov shalt not couet thy neighbours house, nor his wife, nor his seruant, nor his maid, nor his Oxe, nor his Asse, not any thing that is his.*\n\n*The scope and ende of this commandement is a rightnesse and inward obedience of all our Affections towardes God and our neighbour,* which must also be obserued in the other cōmandements. Neither yet is this commandement superfluous: *because it is added to the former commandments, to be a declaration of them,* & that vniuersall, because this is spoken of the whole in generall: and furder, it is also added, *to be as a rule & leuill, according to which wee must take and measure the inwarde obedience of all the other commaundements.* For in this commaundement is commanded originall iustice or righteousnesse towardes God & our neighbour, which is the true knowledge of God in our mind, & a power, inclination, & desire in our will, & heart, & in all our parts, to obay God, & his knowen will, and to performe vnto our neighbour for gods sake al duties required, & to regard & maintaine his safety & welfare.\n\n*Vnto orinall iustice, originall sinne, or concupiscence is repugnaunt,* which is an inordinate appetite, or a corrupt inclination & pronenesse, in the minde, will, & heart, contrarie to God, and desiring those thinges, that God forbiddeth in his Law; which ensued vpon the fall of our first parents, and was from thē deriued to all their posteritie, so deprauing and corrupting their whole nature, that all by reason of this corruption are become obnoxious to the euerlasting wrath of God, neither are able to doe ought that is pleasing to God, except pardon be graunted for the sonne of God, the Mediator, and our nature be renued by the holy Ghost.\n\n*Of originall iustice towardes our neighbour there are two extremes:* 1. In the defect, *Original sinne* towardes our neighbour, which is a desire and wishing of those thinges, which hurt our neighbour. 2. In the excesse, *Jnordinate loue of our neighbour,* when for his sake we neglect God. We are heere to obserue, *that not onelie corrupt inclinations are sinnes, but also the thinking of euil is sinne,* to wit, as the thinking of euill ioined with a desire of doing it. Now *that concupiscence is euil and sinne, albeit it be borne with vs,* there is no doubt. For, we are not to iudge according to nature, but according to the lawe, whether a thing bee sinne or no, be it or be it not borne with vs.\n\n*The Pelagians denied concupiscence to be sin.* But Paul saith the contrarie, *Roman.* 7.7. *J had not knowen concupiscence (or lust) except the law had said, Thou shalt not lust.* Their obiections are these.\n\n1 Obiect. *Natural things are not sins. Concupiscence is a natural thing. Therefore it is no sin.* Ans. There is a fallacy of the accident in the Minor. For concupiscence was not before the fal, but ensued after the fal. Againe, this word *Naturall,* hath a diuers construction. For in the Maior it signifieth a good thing created of God in nature, to wit, mans appetite before the fall, which was not contrarie to the Lawe. In the Minor it signifieth a thing, which wee haue not of nature, but which we purchased vnto vs after the fall. Replie. *An affection or appetite, euen in nature now corrupted, to desire good things, and eschue hurtfull things is not sin. But such is concupiscence. Therefore it is no sinne.* Aunswere. An Inclination whether it bee according to Gods lawe, or inordinate, which is mooued towardes such thinges as displease God, is sinne. To desire the fruit of a tree, is naturall: but as it was desired of Eue, beeing forbidden of God, it was sinne. *But originall sinne and concupiscence differ.* For concupiscence is a propension to those things which are forbidden by the lawe. *Originall sinne* is the guilt of all mankind, the want of the knowledge and will of God.\n\n2 Obiection. *That which is not in our power to cause either to bee in vs, or not to be in vs, is no sinne. Concupiscence is not in our power. Therefore it is no sinne.* Aunswere. The Maior is true; except wee haue lost that power through our owne fault: otherwise it is false. For God requiring of vs vnpossible things, doth not iniurie vs, because hee commaunded them, when they were possible. Neither hath he nowe lost his right of requiring that of vs which hee left with vs.\n\n3 Obiection. *In Baptisme sinne is taken away. Therefore concupiscence is not sinne in those that are baptized.* Aunswere. The guilt of sinne is taken awaie in baptisme, but not the corruption or inclination to sinne.\n\n4 Obiection. *Sinne maketh men obnoxious to the wrath of God. Concupiscence doth not make the regenerate obnoxious to Gods wrath. Therefore concupiscence is no sinne.* Aunswere. Concupiscence dooth not make the regenerate obnoxious to the wrath of God, that is, by reason of the grace of God: but this commeth not thereof, as if concupiscence were no sinne. For neither doe other sinnes condemne the regenerate. And this is it that the School-men say: *The Formal of sinne is taken away, and the Material remaineth.*\n\n5 Obiect. *Where the formall of sinne is taken away, there also the thing it selfe is taken awaie, that is, the material of sinne, or sinne it selfe: But in baptisme the formal of sinne is taken awaie. Therefore sin it selfe is taken away in Baptisme.* Answere. There is a double formal of sinne. 1. *The guilt,* that is, the appointing of it to punishment, which guilt is taken awaie. 2. *The repugnancie with the Law, and an inclination to sin,* which abideth.\n\nNOW we haue expounded the Decalogue or Ten cōmaundements, there are two Questions as yet remaining concerning the Lawe, which haue beene heretofore handled, and now are brieflie to be run ouer againe. 1. *Howe the Law is possible, or, How men may keepe it.* 2. *What is the vse of the Lawe, since in this life we are not able to fulfill it.* S. Ierome saith: *Let him be accursed who saith the Lawe is vnpossible; to wit, with grace in Christ.* And againe, *Let him be accursed, who saith the Law is possible, that is, without grace.*\n\n## 1 How the Law is possible\n\nThat this Question maie the better be vnderstoode, *we are to distinguish the nature of mā, as it was first entire & vncorrupt, and afterwardes fallen, and againe restored. Vnto nature entire and vncorrupt the whole Lawe,* as touching al parts and degrees thereof, *is possible,* as vnto Angels. Vnto the regenerate who haue nature restored againe, the Lawe is possible. 1. *As concerning outward order and discipline.* 2. *By the benefite of iustification and regeneration,* both which benefites wee obtaine by faith. 3. *As touching the beginning of inwarde and outward obedience in this life,* 1. Ioh. 5.3. Likewise *as concerning the imputation of Christes iustice,* in whom is our victorie. Hee that without the beginning of obedience, that is, without regeneration, glorieth that hee knoweth and worshippeth God, is a lier. *But the Law is vnpossible to the regenerate, in respect of God, that is, as touching the perfect inward and outwarde obedience of the Law.* For they fulfil not the Lawe perfectly, because they doe many things contrary to the Lawe. *And those things also, which they doe according to the Law, are vnperfect.* For in the regenerate are many sinnes yet remaining, *as original sinne, many actual sinnes, ignoraunces, omissions, infirmities:* which their sins thēselues notwithstāding acknowledge and bewaile. Therefore *regenerate sinners differ much from vnregenerate sinners.* And this difference is threefolde. 1. *The purpose in God himselfe of sauing the regenerat.* 2. *The certaine final repentaunce of the regenerat.* 3. *Euen in the very sinnes of the regenerate there remaineth some beginning of true faith & conuersion. The wicked and vnregenerate, in whom is nature fallen, but not restored, haue neither whole obedience, nor the beginning of obedience.*\n\n## 2 What is the vse of the Law\n\nSaint Paul teacheth two vses of the Law, in his Epistle to the Galathians. 1. *The knowledge of sinne.* 2. *That it is a Schoole-Master vnto Christ.* In nature vncorrupted the vses of the Law were, 1. *Conformitie with God.* 2. *A good conscience.* In nature corrupted the vses or endes of the Lawe are, 1. *Mainteinaunce of order and discipline as wel in the regenerate, as vnregenerate.* 2. *That we maie know that God is, and what he is.* 3. *The knowledge of sinne.* 4. *A preparing to despaire in the reprobate.* 5. *A meane, whereby repentance maie be kindled and encreased in Gods chosen.* 6. *A leuil or rule of liuing vnto the faithful, and that whereunto we must tend and shoot, as vnto our mark.* The Law then hath his vse both before and after conuersion. *It is profitable for the acknowledgement of sinne and repentaunce; because it is a rule vnto vs, whereunto we are to frame our life and thankefulnes.* Likewise, *it is a glasse vnto vs, wherein wee maie see our wantes, that so our renuing encreasing, our praieng also maie encrease,* whereby we desire more & more to be conformed vnto God and his Law.\n\nThe obiections, whereby the aduersaries endeuor to prooue that there is no vse of the lawe vnto christians, are these. 1 *That which cannot be kept, ought not to bee taught, because it profiteth nothing. The Law cannot be kept; Therefore the Lawe ought not to be taught.* Aunswere. The Maior is false. For the Law is to be taught, that we maie striue and endeuour to come as neere as we can vnto it. Obiection. 2. *Hee that commaundeth vnpossible things, commaundeth vnprofitable thinges; God commaundeth the Lawe, which is vnpossible; Therefore God commaundeth vnprofitable things.* Aunswere. He commaundeth vnprofitable thinges, who commandeth vnpossible thinges, that is, 1. *Jf they be simply vnpossible.* 2. *Jf they be alwaies vnpossible.* 3. *If there be no other vses of this commaunding, but that those things be done which are commaunded.* Now we haue heard before which are the endes of the Lawe; for which ends of the law before declared, God wil haue both the Law to be commanded, and vs to be taught the same. Obiection. 3. *What God wil not giue vs, and so what wee are not able to attaine vnto, that wee maie not desire. God wil not giue vs perfect fulfilling of the Law in this life. Therefore we ought not to desire perfectly to fulfil the Lawe.* Aunswere. Wee ought not to craue or desire that which God will not giue vs; that is, except God wil vs to desire it. But God willeth vs to craue in this life, and to desire the perfect fulfilling of the Law, 1. *Because he wil at length effectuate it in those that desire it:* & therefore hee will giue it vs after this life, if wee desire the same here truly and from our heart. 2. *That we may now goe forward in godlinesse,* and that the studie of liuing according to the prescript of Gods law may bee daiely more and more kindled and confirmed in vs. 3. *That by this desire of fulfilling the Lawe, God maie exercise vs in repentance and obedience.*"}