The works of the Reverend and learned John Lightfoot D. D., late Master of Katherine Hall in Cambridge such as were, and such as never before were printed : in two volumes : with the authors life and large and useful tables to each volume : also three maps : one of the temple drawn by the author himself, the others of Jervsalem and the Holy Land drawn according to the author's chorography, with a description collected out of his writings.

A SERMON PREACHED upon

EXODUS XX. 5.

For I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the Fathers upon the Children unto the third and fourth genera∣tion of them that hate me.

THE first Commandment with threatning, as Paul saith, the first of the second Table was the first with promise, Ephes. VI. And the threatning is most properly affixed to the Command against Idola∣try. Because God hath a special enmity and quarrel against Idola∣try, as one of the greatest derogations to his honour, that can be in the World.

Observe in the Prophets the great complaint against the people is for Idolatry and unrighteousness. The former the great injury done to God, the later to Men: the former the height of Impie∣ty, the later of Uncharitableness. When man is bound to love his neighbour as himself, to shew him mercy, to be helpful to him, and useful to him in all ways of charity; how high an iniquity is it to defraud, undermine, oppress, and deal injuriously with him? And when bound to worship God alone, as the great, dreadful and glorious Creator of Heaven and Earth, and all things in them; how abominable a wickedness is it to give this honour to a piece of wood, a stock or stone of our own framing?

How God detests this, he hath uttered abundantly in Scripture, partly, by proclaim∣ing Idols to be abominable to him: Deut. VII. 25. and XXVII. 15. And by giving them names of the greatest abomination: Vanities, 1 King. XVI. 26. Jer. XIV. 22. Lyes, Esa. XLIV. 20. Jer. X. 14. And so is that to be understood, Rev. XXII. 15. Without are Dogs and Sorcerers, and Whoremongers, and Murtherers, and Idolaters, and whosoever loveth, and maketh a lye. Jonah putteth both the names together, Jonah II. 8. They that observe ly∣ing vanities. Nay the very name of abomination it self is given them, 1 King. XI. 7. Nay the very name of Devils is given them, Deut. XXXII. 17. 1 Cor. X. 20. And as thus in his word he hath shewed his detestation against Idols and Idolatry; so hath he also in his providence, by those fearful judgments that he hath shewed against them that have been Idolatrous. Witness Jeroboam and his house: Ahab and his▪ rooted out, and de∣voured by this deadly canker: themselves, and their posterity undone, according to the threatning here, Visiting the sins of the Fathers upon the children.

It were a wonder, and thing of amazement, that the Church of Rome should ever be so zealous for Images, were it not that there is something more behind the curtains, than is seen. They distinguish betwixt an Image and an Idol; and say, They worship not the Image, but before it only for a memorandum. But to omit the vanity of such a distinction, which hath been abundantly confuted by our Divines, where is their care of that rule of the Apostle, To avoid all appearance of evil? Certainly, if there be not the appearance of Idolatry in worshipping before an Image, what call you the appearance of Idolatry? The Heathen persecutors of old thought their turn served, if they could bring Christi∣ans to cast a little incense into the fire before an Idol. Here the Christians might have pleaded, it was not in worship to Idols, but to please their Masters: but they saw in it so much appearance of Idolatry, that they gave up their lives rather, than to consent to such an appearance of evil.

But that that is behind the curtains with the Papists is covetousness, and gain of mony. And if it were not that, I make no question, but they would be f••r cooler in pleading

for their Images, than they are. It is upon very good reason that the Apostle calls Cove∣tousness Idolatry, for it is not only making mony our God, but it is the very Father and Mother of Idolatry. This is it that hath made these men so bold with adoring of Images: so bold as to take away this Commandment against Idolatry out of the Ten, though a Command so needful, so dreadful, and that hath so terrible a threatning with it, For I the Lord thy God am a jealous God.

A Command, that one might wonder at, but that you can never enough wonder at the wickedness of mens hearts.

First, One would wonder that ever such a Command should need: Thou shalt not wor∣ship a stock or stone: nor make that thy God, which thine own hands have made. Reason, and light of nature, and common sense one would think, should so cry this down to men that have their wits about them, that there might not any such Command from God be needful. You may see how the Spirit of God does stand as it were wondring at the sot∣tishness of those that make and worship Idols, in Esa. Chap. XL. and three or four Chap∣ters forward. And did you see a Heathen, or do you see a Papist, worshipping and bow∣ing down to the stock of a tree, as he calls it there; whether have you more cause to mourn to see God so dishonoured, or to think what a stock, and stupid thing sinful man is become, to pray to, or trust in a piece of wood or stone?

Secondly, One might wonder, that such a Law given should be so broken. A Law so easie to keep, and in so sensless a thing to break it: Of all sins, what easier to avoid, than falling down to the stock of a tree? And yet how were men infatuated with it, as the Heathen and Israel were continually. Who would have thought, that Israel having seen the wonders in Egypt, and the glory of God at Sinai, should ever, especially so sud∣denly, have worshipped a golden Calf, and said, These are thy Gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the Land of Egypt?

What monstruous madness, and senslesness is there in this Idolatry? That 1. Whereas God made man, for man to think that he can make a God. 2. Man that can see and hear, and speak and stir, to think that his help should lye in that that can neither see, nor hear, nor speak, nor stir. 3. For a man to fall down before that that he can cast into the fire, water, dirt, and trample under feet, and the Image not able to say, What doest thou? 4. It being in the power of man to make his image in the likeness of man or beast, then when it is made to think it hath power over him, and he to owe homage, and du∣ty, and sacrifice and devotion to it. So brutish, foolish, besotted a thing is man, when left unto himself, and his own wisdom.

And therefore there was need of such a Commandment against such sottishness; and of tyes and terrors added to affrighten men from the folly: as there are two, you see, in the words I have read.

• I. That God proclaims himself a jealous God.
• II. That he professeth, he visiteth the fathers upon the children.

I. It is no wonder God proclaims himself a jealous God in this case, when the love, ser∣vice and worship, due to him, is given to an Idol, to a piece of wood or stone, silver or gold. Conceive in your hearts, what jealousie is, and you will find it no wonder, he is so in this case, or indeed in any other, where his honour is given away, and bestowed upon any creature. This title is oft given him in Scripture; and if we well consider what jealousie is in man or woman, we will read terror in the tittle, when God giveth it to himself.

He professeth it to be his Name, Exod. XXXIV. 14. The Lord, whose name is jealous, is a jealous God. Read it again, and tremble, The Lord, whose Name is Jealous, is a jealous God. Moses glosses upon it with a gloss of more terror, Deut. IV. 25. The Lord thy God is a consuming fire, even a jealous God. As if he had said, Does any ask, what Gods jea∣lousie means? It means a consuming fire. And so the Prophet Zephany explains it also, Chap. I. 18. The whole land shall be devoured by the fire of his jealousie. And again, Chap III. 8. For all the Earth shall be devoured by the fire of my jealousie. What fire was that, that devoured Sodom, and Gomorrha? The fire of Gods jealousie. What fire was that, that consumed Jerusalem, and laid it in ashes? Was it the fire the Chaldeans put to it at the first sacking of it, and the Romans at the second? No, it was indeed the fire of Gods jealousie. What is that that consumeth ungodly men, as stubble; that unquench∣able fire, that devoureth the chaff, when God cometh to purge his floor? It is the fire of Gods jealousie. The Prophet Nahum doth yet clear it further, Chap. I. 2. God is jealous, and the Lord revengeth; the Lord revengeth and is furious: the Lord will take vengeance of his adversaries, and reserveth wrath for his enemies. The rest of the verse is an expositi∣on of the first clause, God is jealous. What means that? And read the first clause in the Text, I the Lord thy God am a jealous God. What means that? An avenging God, a God that avengeth in fury, that taketh vengeance on his adversaries, and reserveth wrath and vengeance in store for his enemies, and them that hate him.

But that we may view Gods jealousie the better, and with the more dread and trem∣bling (and oh! that we could ever feelingly consider, that the Lord our God is a jealous God) let us first consider the nature of jealousie in men or women, and by that arise to apprehend, what this jealousie is in God.

Zealous and jealous are comprehended under one and the same word in the Hebrew Tongue: and Zealousness and jealousie are uttered in that Language in the very same syl∣lables: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifies both. In those allegations out of Zephany, The land shall be devou∣red 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, by the fire of his jealousie: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, by the fire of my jealousie. Now the same word is used elsewhere in a sense most sweet and comfortable. That whereas it comes in some places like Elias his fire, and earthquake and wind, that rent the Rocks in terror and dreadfulness; in other places it comes like the still voice, in sweetness and comfort. In Esa. IX. 6, 7. Where he is speaking of Christ, his Names and Kingdom, that he should be called Wonderful, Counseller, &c. And that of the encrease of his government, and peace there should be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his Kingdom, to order and establish it with judgment and justice from henceforth, ever for ever, he concludes, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, The zeal of the Lord of Hosts will perform this. And so Esa. XXXVII. 32. where he promiseth comfortable things to his distressed people, and saith, Out of Jerusalem shall go forth a remnant, and concludes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Zeal of the Lord of Hosts shall do this. And one for all, Esa. LXIII. 15. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Where is thy zeal, thy strength, and the sound∣ing of thy bowels?

In zeal is a fervent tincture of Love. The zeal of thy house hath eaten me up: that is, the fervent Love I have to thy house. And in jealousie is a high tincture of Love. And accordingly Love and Jealousie are joyned, and made as one thing, Cant. VIII. 6. In zeal is Love, and forwarding that we are zealous of. In jealousie, Love and anger at that that provokes to jealousie. A man is jealous of his wife, or the wife of her husband; the bottom of it is Love, but the top is Anger. The bottom Love? How? It is said, that jealousie is too much Love. But that rule fails. For a man may be jealous of his wife he loves not. And yet the bottom of jealousie is love. For a man, though he love not the person of his wife, yet he loves to have the affection of his wife intirely to himself: and cannot endure, that her affections, that are due to him, should be given to another, but disdains it, and is angry at it.

By this we may conceive of the jealousie of God, only adding the observation of that expression that is so frequent, viz. Gods complaining that his people went a whoring from him, Hos. I. 2. The Land hath committed great whoredom in departing from the Lord: and so went a whoring after other Gods. God takes it in anger and disdain, that men should give away those hearts, affections, that love and service, that is due to God, to any thing besides God. God doth very oft title the Church of Israel his children, and oft his wife, that he had married to himself, Jer. III. 1. He had taken them for his wife, she had played the harlot with many lovers, yet if she would return, he would take her again. So Hos. III. 1. and in divers other places. And the expression is very proper: for he had forsaken all other Nations, and clave only to her.

I shall not insist to shew, how far the parallel fits any Christian Nation, that God hath taken more peculiarly to himself by the administration of his Covenant among them. Nor shall I insist to shew how far England may be called the spouse of God, by his choise. It is undenyable that we have all married our selves to God by our Baptismal Covenant, and by our Sacramental, and other engagements. And then, what doth the Lord require of us, but that we should be faithful to our husband, and not give our selves, our hearts and affections to any thing besides him: not our worship to an Idol, not our affections to the World, our hearts to pleasure or profit, or earthly vanities; which is to go a who∣ring from our husband? The Lord our God is a jealous God: and what can we expect, if we serve him so, but that his jealousie will break out in fire and vengeance?

By his Law concerning jealousie twixt man and wife, he hath shewed thee, O man, what thou mayest expect twixt thee and God, Numb. V. 12. to the end. He appointed that the suspected wife be brought to trial, undertakes to work a miracle for her discove∣ry; and if guilty, upon drinking the bitter waters, her belly was to swell, her thigh to rot, and she to become a curse. And doth not the Lord discover, whether thy heart hath played the whore, and will he not bitterly punish in his own cause, as he did in the cause of men?

But to return to Gods jealousie against the sin of Idolatry particularly, as this title of his, that he is a jealous God, is peculiarly affixed to the Command against Idolatry. And here I shall shew some particular evidences and instances of Gods jealousie against this sin. And I shall name three passages of the Spirit of God in his style in Scripture, by which he doth hint his distast, and abominating of this sin of Idolatry: and three passages of God in his providence and disposal, that intimate the same: and all such as are not obvi∣ously observed by every Reader of Scripture.

First, To mention the passages of the Holy Ghost's stile in reference to this sin.

I. Observe, That in 2 Sam. XI. 21. who smote Abimelech the son of Jerubbosheth? Abi∣melech was the son of Jerubbaal, or Gedeon, as you may see, Judg. IX. where you have Abimelechs story. Why then does the Holy Ghost here misname Gedeon, and instead of Jerubbaal call him Jerubbosheth? The reason is, because Baal was the general name of an Idol, and the Holy Ghost in detestation of Idolatry changeth the name Baal, which sig∣nifieth a Lord, into Bosheth, which signifies Shame. And he calleth Gedeon, Jerubbosheth, instead of Jerubbaal, because Gedeon had made an Idol, that all Israel went a whoring af∣ter, Judg. VIII. 27.

Of the same observation is that, that the son of Saul, whom his father named Eshbaal, the Holy Ghost in his story nameth Ishbosheth. You have a large story of Ishbosheth Sauls son, in 2 Sam. II. Now look among Sauls sons where they be reckoned, and you find no such name; 1 Chron. VIII. 33. Saul begat Jonathan, and Malchishna, and Abinadab, and Eshbaal. That Eshbaal is he, whom the Holy Ghost in his story calls Ishbosheth, as detest∣ing the name Baal, the name of an Idol: changing it into the name Bosheth, shame. As the same Holy Ghost explains himself, and this matter, Jer. XI. 13. According to the num∣ber of the streets of Jerusalem, have ye set up Altars to that Shame, even Altars to burn in∣cense to Baal.

II. In reading Revelations, VII. where the Sealed of the Lord of the twelve Tribes are mentioned and numbred, have you observed that the Tribe of Dan is wanting, and the Tribe of Ephraim not named? You will find Manasses there, but not Ephraim by name, but Joseph instead of Ephraim, vers. 8. And what is the reason of this? Publick Idolatry first began in Dan, Judg. XVIII. And the golden Calves were set up by Jero∣boam of Ephraim; and the one in Ephraim and the other in Dan. And the Holy Ghost doth point as it were with the finger at those Idolatries, and shew his distast and abhor∣ring of them, when he will not so much as name the names where they began, among the Lords sealed for salvation.

III. As here mention is made of visiting to the third and fourth generation, observe that passage, Matth. I. 8. and see whether the stile of the Holy Ghost do not hint the very same thing: Joram begat Ozias. Now look in the story of the Kings and Chronicles, and you will find, that Joram begat Ahaziah, and Ahaziah Joash, and Joash Amaziah, and Amaziah Ozias. So that here three descents are wanting or dashed out: and Ozias is grand child to Joram in the fifth generation. What is the reason? Look into the story of Joram, and you will find that he married the daughter of Ahab, the great Idolater, and that he walked in the Idolatries of Ahab, 2 King. VIII. 18. And here the Holy Ghost to hint his distast of such Idolatry, blots out his children to the third, nay fourth generation, out of the Line and Genealogy of our Saviour.

These and other things of the like nature, may be observed in the very stile and dialect the Holy Ghost useth in Scripture. Whereby he setteth a brand upon Idolatry, and Idols, as things odious, and abominable, and abhorred of God in special manner.

Shall I also give you three like passages of Providence, which it may be all of you have not observed in your reading; which speak the same thing and proclaim the jealousie of God against Idolatry?

I. Observe that Deut. IX. 21. And I took your sin, the Calf which ye had made, and burnt it with fire, and stamped it, and ground it very small, until it was as small as dust, and I cast the dust thereof into the brook, that descended out of the mount. And why all this ado, to burn, stamp, grind it? And why cast the dust into the brook, and not on the earth or into the air? Why not into the dunghil rather than into the water, that the people must drink? By this very thing God would shew, that he was a jealous God against Ido∣latry, by putting the people to the very same trial for this Idolatry, that the wife suspect∣ed of Adultery was to be put to by the jealous husband, Numb. V. she was put to drink water and dust, and if she proved guilty, her belly swelled, and her thigh rotted, and so gave plain evidence of her guilt. So in this cases Moses bids the Levites, Exod. XXXII. 13. Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour. Now how could they know who had committed Idolatry among so many hundred thousands? How could they pick out the men that were guilty? Why, the dis∣covery is in the very same way. The people drink the water, in which was the dust of the Calf, and thereupon those that were guilty, their bellies swelled, and some other mi∣raculous evidence was given, whereby they were discovered, and whereby God discove∣red himself to be a jealous God, visiting the sins of Idolaters.

II. A second passage is that about the battel at Gibeah, Judg. XX. concerning which let us first take up the words of Deborah, Chap. V. 8. (For though the history of that war is set many Chapters after the story of Deborah, yet was it a great while before her, as might be shewed by many evidences, if I would stand upon it) They chose new gods,

saith she, then was war in the gates; Was there a sheild or spear seen among forty thousand in Is∣rael? No sooner Idolatry, but vengeance; no sooner new gods, but war in the gates: and war with a witness, that destroyed forty thousand of Israel, and above twenty thousand of Benjamin.

She speaks but of forty thousand that perished, as if no sheild or spear had been among them all, whereas in all there fell sixty five thousand. But she hints the sad slaughter of Israel; which was sent by God, and encouraged by him to go against Benjamin: and yet when they went to battel, they fell forty thousand. Strange! to be sent by God, and yet miscarry: to be encouraged by God, and yet fall! Oh, they had chosen new gods, and thence this miscarriage. The Tribe of Dan had set up Idolatry, and all Israel quiet, and stir not against it, and so become partakers of it. But when a Whore hath some unhan∣som and hard usage at Gibeah, then all Israel is suddenly up in arms to revenge her quar∣rel. Zeal for a Whore to revenge her quarrel against Gibeah, but not zeal for the Lord to revenge his quarrel against Idolatry. And therefore God takes the cause into his own hand, and shews himself a jealous God against Idolatry, and caused forty thousand to fall in battel, though he had sent, and encouraged them to it.

III. A third passage let be that, which yet comes more near the Text: nay seems not only to come up to it, but to go beyond it: and that is Exod. XXXII. 34. where after the sin of the golden Calf, and the Levites slaying three thousand men; yet God still hath some anger in store for that sin, and saith, Nevertheless in the day, when I visit, I will visit their sin upon them. When? The Jews say, That in every scourge and judgment that came upon them, there was a remembrance and a lash for the golden Calf. And S. Stephen speaks no less, or more, in Act. VII. 41, 42. They made a Calf in those days, and offered sacrifice unto the Idol, &c. Then God turned and gave them up to worship the host of Heaven, &c. This speaks God a jealous God against Idolatry, and seems to speak, that he visits the sins of the Fathers upon the children beyond the third and fourth generation succeeding. To which thing we shall speak in course in handling of the words. To which now we are come.

II. Then, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, &c. All the question and scruple about the thing is Quo jure. Where is Gods justice in this to visit the sins of him that sinned upon him, that sinneth not; sins of the fathers upon the children, who proba∣bly were never witting or assenting to the Fathers sin? It is Gods strict commandment to men, Deut. XXIV. 16. The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers, but every man shall be put to death for his own sin. And doth not he go contrary to that rule himself, when he visits the sins of the fathers upon the children? And it is his proclaiming again, Ezek. XVIII. 4. Behold all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine, the soul that sinneth it shall dye. And doth he not warp from that assertion, when children are punished for the sins of their Fathers?

That God should impute the sin of Adam to all his posterity, hath been cavilled at in antient times by some Hereticks; and in these later some are not well satisfied about the matter, and cannot, or will not see how God is just in it. Visiting sins unto the third and fourth generation sounds something harsh, this far more; visiting the sin of the first Father upon all generations. Shall he condemn millions of millions for the fault they never committed, charge upon them the crime they never consented to? I shall not stay my dis∣course upon this. The answer is ready: in Adam was all mankind: in his Covenant was enwrapped all humane nature: and the violation of that Covenant was the sin and guilt of whole humane nature.

But we shall speak to other kind of examples, that come nearer to the sense of the words before us. And these are of two sorts, viz. in reference to the body or outward condition, or to the soul, or inward.

First, Was not that hard measure, as you may think, that when Corah, Dathan and Abiram, the Parents only had sinned, that not only they should go down quick into the pit, but their houses also, and all that appertained to them? Numb. XVI. 32. The like, that when Achan only was in the transgression, that his sons and daughters, and his very cattel should be put to death, as well as he? Josh. VII. 24.

Secondly, Seems it not hard measure, that when that generation at the building of Babel had only sinned against God in that design for setting up Idolatry, that not only they should be given up to Idolatry, and blindness; but the Heathen, their posterity, to scores of generations? The like, that when that generation only had sinned in murther∣ing Christ, not only they should bear the guilt of his blood, but their posterity through so many ages.

For the unfolding of Gods dealings in these things particularly, let me first move this general consideration.

What care Parents had need to take, that they sin not so, as to leave sin and guilt and a curse upon their children, and posterity. Among their cares to leave them well, as the word in the world goes, i. e. rich, to be sure to take this care, that while they leave them well, they leave them not ill. Sin not for thy childrens sake, that they smart not for thy faults, when thou art gone. I mention two sins particularly that may draw misery, and entail a curse upon the posterity, cursing their children, and unconscionably scraping a cursed estate together to leave to their children.

Now to assert the Justice of God in this case of visiting the iniquity of the fathers, &c. either for these sins or others: whereas it seems a wrong to the children. Consider these things.

• I. It is most just with God to punish wicked men in their dearest delights, that judg∣ment may come home to them to the quick: to take away the delight of their Eyes and Heart, that punishment may make them smart in the tenderest part. And when Pa∣rents are so fond of that part of themselves, their children, that they will venture soul and body and all to Hell for the advancement of their children, is it any injustice in God to lash them in that part, that is most tender and delicate to them?
• II. I might speak, that it appertains to divine justice in special manner to frustrate the designs of ungodly men, and to have them in derision, and to shew that they are but fools. To take the wise in their craftiness, and to bring their deep plotted counsels and de∣vises to nought. How frequently doth Scripture harp upon this string? Do I need to cite places, Job V. 12, 13. He disappointeth the devices of the crafty, &c. He taketh the wise in their own craftiness, and the counsil of the froward is carried headlong, Luke I. 51. He scattereth the proud, saith the holy Virgin: as if she pointed at the proud design of building Babel, which the Lord blasted: and scattered these proud plotters into all quar∣ters of the Earth. Places to this purpose are abundant.

Now when an unconscionable Gripe lays his design deep, by all means right or wrong, (he cares not) to advance his posterity, and to build them up an house, though in blood and injury; and accounts all cocksure: that divine Eye and Justice that sits in Heaven, laughs at his designs, and hath his Counsils in derision. The man saith, I will lay land to land, and house to house, and my children shall be great, and rich and prosperous in the World, and I will build up a family of renown. But divine Justice saith, I will dash such confidence, and lay such unjust and unconscionable undertakings in the dust; that men may know, that there is a God, and that he is righteous, that judgeth the Earth. Arise, Lord, let not such men prevail; let such heathenish contrivers be judged in thy sight.

But all this while, still the objection lyes: That this is indeed justice to the Father, but where is justice to the Son, who sinned not, nor was partaker in his Fathers wicked∣ness?

For answer to which, we must first take up the last word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of them that hate me. But who are meant, Parents or Children? Nay, who are those that hate God? Question the World through, and there is not a man upon Earth, but he will deny and disclaim this. But surely the Scripture speaks not in vain, when it speaks so much of the haters of God, as it doth. That ungodly men are meant, there is no doubt, and in what sense they are said to hate God, we may take occasion to speak hereafter. Our present questi∣on is, when it speaks of them, that hate him, whether he means Parents or Children, or both? I may very truly answer, both. And the meaning ariseth to this, Visiting the sins of the Fathers, that hate God upon the Children that hate God: of wicked Parents upon wicked Children.

Observe the contrary clause, Shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me. Where first, we may see some answer to the question just now moved, who are haters of God? viz. They that love him not; for there is no medium. The opposites are not, that love him, and love him not; but that love him, and hate him. They that love him not, hate him. Secondly, That which we would observe is, That his shewing mercy to thousands of them that love him, implies that every one loves him, that partakes of mercy. So Visiting the iniquity of the Fathers upon the Children unto the third and fourth generation, implies that every generation hates him, that is so visited, viz. when Children imitate the wickedness of their Parents. And so God states the point, Ezek. XVIII. First, He begins with a righteous man, vers. 5. and speaks of the particulars of his godliness, hath not eaten upon the Mountains, &c. and concludes, He is just, he shall live, vers. 9. Then at vers. 10. he proposeth the case, that if such a good man beget a bad son, a robber, a shedder of blood, &c. And of him he concludes, He shall surely dye, and his blood shall be upon him, vers. 13. Then at vers. 14. he proposeth the case of that wicked mans son, that is not wicked like the father, that seeth all his Fathers sins, which he hath done, and considereth, and doth not such like, &c. He concludes, vers. 17. He shall not dye for the iniquity of his Father, he shall surely live. His Fathers sins shall not be visited on him, if he follow not his

Fathers iniquity, vers. 20. The soul that sinneth shall dye, the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righte∣ous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

So that first, no son is damned for the iniquity of his father, (we speak not of the guilt of Adams sin charged on his posterity, which is another case) but every one that is damned, is damned for his own sin. For so I take the word Dye in the Prophet, He shall dye his blood shall be upon him. A good son to be damned for the sin of a bad father, were to speak the ways of God very unequal indeed; and God contradicts that all along the Chapter. Nay a bad son is not damned for the sin of his father neither: nor does any such thing fall under the notion of Gods visiting the sins of the fathers upon the children. Because every one that is damned, is damned for his own sin.

And secondly, God visiteth not the sin of the fathers upon the Souls of the children. God never made a Soul sinful, because his father was wicked. Nay God never made, or could make any Soul sinful, because he cannot be the Author of sin. Nay God never ac∣counted a child wicked, because his father was wicked. For thus Ezekiah had been un∣done, the good child of Ahaz as wicked a father, as who was most wicked. We spake of the Heathen given up to Idolatry, because of the first rebellion at Babel; and the Jews given up to blindness, because of the murther of Christ. But neither damned, nor accounted wicked any Heathen or Jews, that walked not in the same steps of those their wicked Predecessors in their blindness, Idolatry or Unbelief, or other sins. So that

Thirdly, Gods visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, &c. means by some bodily or external punishment. Whereby the son is punished for his own sins, as well as his Parents. And the meaning of the passage is, that when God comes to visit the sins of wicked children upon them, he remembers the iniquity of their Parents also against them, even in the third or fourth generation.

Shall I give you an instance in the sins of a good father so visited upon wicked children, which may clear the visiting of the sins of a bad father upon wicked children? God had told David, that because of his killing Uriah with the sword, that the sword should never depart from his house, 2 Sam. XII. 10. So his son Amnon perished by the sword, his son Adonijah by the sword, and his son Absalom in as violent a manner. Did not God re∣member Davids sin, and his own threatning in this? And yet did not all these perish for their own sins? God visited their sin, and withal remembred their fathers sin against them al∣so. God damned none of them for Davids sin. Nor did God repute them sinful for Davids sin: but if they were damned, they were damned for their own sin, and were reputed sinners in the sight of God for their own sin. Yet in the external punishment that fell upon them, there was a remembrance of their Fathers sin also. Hophni and Phinehas perished together in battel: their fathers sin was visited upon them, which he is charged with 1 Sam. II. 29. That he honoured his sons more than God. And yet they perished for their own sin. If they were damned, they were damned for their own sin, and not their fathers: and were re∣puted wicked in the sight of God for their own sin, and not their fathers. And yet in the external punishment that fell upon them, their fathers sin was called to remembrance.

Objection, But many a child is punished for his fathers sin, that it may be is a good child; or at least is free and innocent from the sin of his father. Jeroboams son was taken away in his prime, 1 King. XIV. was not that for Jeroboams sin, that God cut off his child: and he a good son, and that had not consented to his fathers sin, vers. 13. In him there is sound some good thing towards the Lord God of Israel? Here was justice indeed against the father, but where was it to the son, to cut him off so soon? So Davids child begot in adultery must dye for Davids sin, and what had the poor child offended? Many first born in Egypt, it is like, were not guilty of their fathers cruelty towards Israel, and yet they must all go to it, they must dye.

It may be, many a covetous unconscionable wretch hath a son that is more honest, and yet the ill gotten estate moulders away, and comes to nothing with an invisible canker. Is here justice to the children, to smart thus for their fathers fault?

To this I answer, First, We are to consider children as part of their Parents; bone of their bone, and flesh of their flesh. And is it not justice in God to punish wicked Parents in what part of themselves he pleaseth? It seems as lawful as for a King to punish a Traitor in what part of his body, head or hand or foot, it seems best to him. If Je∣roboams hand wither for the sin of his whole Person, is it not just with God? And is it not a penalty upon the whole person? And upon this account it was not unjust with God, when David had sinned in numbring the people, to smite seventy thousand of the people; if you consider David as a general father to all the people; they part of him, as he was King, as being part of his Kingdom.

And such an answer, if I had not other to give, should I give to an Anabaptist, that asks me, why I baptize my child? I should answer, he is part of my self, and so it is fit he be baptized, because I am: otherwise all of my self is not baptized. And this gives

some reason of what the Apostle saith, That the child of a believing Father or Mother is holy, that is, is a Christian, for the believing Parents sake; because he is part of that Parent.

Secondly, There are some punishments, that descend, as I may say, naturally from Pa∣rents to Children: nay I may say, some sins that descend so naturally, that God should in∣vert the very course of nature, if they stuck not to the children. Original sin and guilt we derive not from our immediate Parents, but from our first Parent Adam: but some actual sins many children derive from their Parents. When Parents from their childrens in∣fancy let them run into lewd courses; and either give them example of such courses, or at least reprove and restrain them not; the children grow lewd and wicked. Whose sin is that lewdness? It is the childs: but it is the Parents also. And many a Parent sees the just punishment of his own fault upon himself in the miscarriage of his child, his com∣ing to fearful wickedness, and very oft to a fearful end. Elias lenity to his wretched sons, in not restraining them, and so Davids to Adonijah; did traduce and derive that sinful miscarriage into them. And God even visited that sin of the Parents upon the children in suffering them to grow so abominably sinful.

Many a Parent is guilty of this, and yet little considers it. When their children prove debauched, wild, riotous, they, it may be, will fret to see their expensive and destructive courses. But let them reflect upon themselves, and consider whether their children derive not that wickedness either from their Example, or want of care for their Christian edu∣cation. Is it any injustice in God, when Parents will have their children so brought up in wickedness, to let them be wicked: any injustice either to Parents or children, that it is so, when children will be so wicked, and Parents will let them be so?

So some punishments descend naturally from the sin of the Parent: as when children are made beggers by the riot, prodigal, lewd courses of the Parents; when a whoring lewd Parent gets the foul disease, and so traduceth it to his children; when an unconscionable getter of an Estate leaves it to his children, that like a Leprosie, a Canker, and a Curse sticks to it; and it cannot but rot and come to nothing. What should the justice of God do in this case? Bless a cursed Estate, preserve Children, that the Parents will infect, and keep them from beggery, whom Parents will make beggers? Shall God work miracles for these, that only work rebellion; and change the very course of the nature of things for them that will not change one lust?

Thirdly, We are to distinguish between punishments and trials. A good son of a bad father, may come into affliction because of his fathers sin: and yet that laid upon him not directly as a punishment, but trial. A good child of a prodigal, riotous or unconscionable father may come to poverty, when God aims it not as a judgment on him for his fathers sin, but for trial, and admonition to him against such sins. The father indeed is so pun∣ished, when his child comes to misery: but the affliction in the mean time is to the child for his good. The cutting off of Jeroboams son was a sad judgment to Jeroboam, because the only hopeful child he had was so taken away, but it was not intended as a punishment to his child, but in mercy to take him away from wrath to come: As in Esa. LVII. 1. The righteous are taken away from the evil to come.

Fourthly, and lastly, The proper meaning is, God visits upon evil children the sins of their fathers unto the third and fourth generation.

This leaves a lesson to Parents: That they would pity their children; and when they sin, think of them; and of the misery they entail upon them.