Understanding
the Westminster
The second edition of Understanding the Westminster
Most of the
Vindiciae Legis article has been left unchanged but some new paragraphs and
citations have been added. The discussion of Anthony Burgess’ position on the
judicial law has been rewritten in the interests of clarity.
Some
notable additions are an extra citation from Cawdrey and Palmer’s Sabbatum
Redivum and a footnote with citations from several continental divines
showing that, like many puritans, they also believed in a twofold judicial law.
This view of the law recognized a division into:
1. Laws
of particular equity (or juris particularis) which were intended specially for
the Jewish nation, but nevertheless had some grounding in general equity;
2.
Laws
of general i.e. common equity (or juris communis) which were perpetually
binding on all nations, Jews and Gentiles alike.
Vindiciae
Legis demonstrates that it is not possible to understand WCF 19.4, and
indeed WCF 19.5, without taking the two divisions of the judicial law
into account.
4 comments:
I read it. It's very informative. But who is Vindiciae Legis?
"Vindiciae" means "retribution" or "indictment" in Latin, and Legis means "of the law".
First commenter,
Vindiciae Legis is someone who, for at least the time being, wants to be anonymous.
impossible for it to be Theonomic when it eviscerates the Law for a general obedience.
Post a Comment