dead carkasse his living faith to dead unbelief his humility to loathsome pride see what a conclusion he makes I thank God through Jesus Christ It 's true many times the people of God out of the sense of their sinne are driven off from Christ but this is not the Scriptures direction That holds out riches in Christ for thy poverty righteousnesse in Christ for thy guilt peace in Christ for thy terrour And in this consideration it is that many times Luther hath such hyperbolicall speeches about the Law and about sinne All is spoken against a Christians opposing the Law to the Gospel so as if the discovering of the one did quite drive from the other And this is the reason why Papists and formall Christians never heartily and vehemently prize Christ taking up every crumb that falls from his table they are Christs to themselves and self-saviours I deny not but the preaching of Christ and about grace may also make us prize grace and Christ but such is our corruption that all is little enough Let me adde these cautions 1. It 's of great consequence in what sense we use the Word Law He that distinguisheth well teacheth well Now I observe a great neglect of this in the books written about these points and indeed the reason why some can so hardly endure the word Law is because they attend to the use of the word in English or the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Lex as it is defined by Tully and Aristotle which understand it a strict rule only of things to be done and that by way of meere command But now the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth comprehend more for that doth not only signifie strictly what is to be done but it denoteth largely any heavenly doctrine whether it be promise or precept and hence it is that the Apostle calleth it The law of faith which in some sense would be a contradiction and in some places where the word Law is used absolutely it 's much questioned whether he mean the Law or the Gospel and the reason why he calls it a law of faith is not as Chrysostome would have it because hereby he would sweeten the Gospel and for the words sake make it more pleasing to them but happily in a meere Hebraisme as signifying that in generall which doth declare and teach the will of God The Hebrewes have a more strict word for precept and that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet some say this also sometimes signifieth a Promise Psal 133. 3. There the Lord commanded a blessing i. e. promised so John 12. 50. his commandement i. e. his promise is life everlasting So then if we would attend to the Hebrew words it would not so trouble us to heare that it is good But yet the use of the word Law is very generall sometimes it signifieth any part of the Old Testament John 10. It is said in the Law Ye are gods And that is in the Psalmes Sometimes the Law and the Prophets are made all the books of the Old Testament sometimes the Law and the Psalmes are distinguished sometimes it is used for the ceremoniall law only Hebr. 10. 1. The Law having a shadow of things to come sometimes it is used synecdochically for some acts of the Law only as Galat. 5. Against such there is no law sometimes it is used for that whole oiconomy and peculiar dispensation of Gods worship unto the Jewes in which sense it is said to be untill John but grace and truth by Jesus Christ sometimes it is used in the sense of the Jewes as without Christ And thus the Apostle generally in the Epistle to the Romans and Galatians Indeed this is a dispute between Papists and us In what sense the Law is taken for the Papists would have it understood onely of the ceremoniall law But we answer that the beginning of the dispute was about the observation of those legall ceremonies as necessary to salvation But the Apostle goeth from the hypothesis to the thesis and sheweth that not only those ordinances but no other works may be put in Christs roome Therefore the Antinomian before he speaks any thing against or about the Law he must shew in what sense the Apostle useth it Sometimes it is taken strictly for the five books of Moses yea it is thought of many that book of the Law so often mentioned in Scripture which was kept with so much diligence was onely that book called Deuteronomy and commonly it is taken most strictly for the ten Commandements Now the different use of this word breeds all this obscurity and the Apostle argueth against it in one sense and pleadeth for it in another 2. The Law must not be separated from the Spirit of God The Law is only light to the understanding the Spirit of God must circumcise the heart to love it and delight in it otherwise that is true of Gods Law which Aristotle 2. Polit. cap. 2. said of all humane Lawes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it 's not able of it self to make good and honest Citizens This is a principle alwayes to be carried along with you for the whole Word of God is the instrument and organ of spirituall life and the Law is part of this Word of God This I proved before nay should the Morall Law be quite abolished yet it would not be for this end because the Spirit of God did not use it as an instrument of life for we see all sides grant that circumcision and the sacraments are argued against by the Apostle as being against our Salvation and damnable in their own use now yet in the old Testament those sacraments of Circumcision and the Paschall Lamb were spirituall meanes of faith as truly as Baptisme and the Lords Supper are It is true there is a difference in the degree of Gods grace by them but not in the truth and therefore our Divines do well consute the Papists who hold those sacraments onely typicall of ours and not to be really exhibitive of grace as these are in the New Testament Therefore if the Apostles arguing against the Morall Law would prove it no instrument of Gods Spirit for our good the same would hold also in Circumcision and all those sacraments and therefore at least for that time they must grant it a help to Christ and grace as well as Circumcision was If you say Why then doth the Apostle argue against the works of the Morall Law I answer Because the Jewes rested in them without Christ and it is the fault of our people they turn the Gospel into the Law and we may say Whosoever seeks to be saved by his Baptisme he falls off from Christ 3. To doe a thing out of obedience to the Law and yet by love and delight doe not oppose one another About this I see a perpetuall mistake To lead a man by the Law is slavish it 's servile say they a Beleever is carried by
Aristotle sheweth in many reasons against Plato What would have been in innocency if Adam had stood whether a common right to all things or a divided propriety I speak of goods is hard to say But as for the practice of the Church of Jerusalem that was occasionall and necessary therefore not to be a ground for perpetuall command for other Churches did it not as appeareth by the almes that were gathered nor was it laid necessarily upon all to sell what they had as appeareth by Paul's speech to Ananias Use 1. If God be so angry with those that abuse naturall light how much rather then with such who also abuse Gospel light These doe not put light under a bushell but under a dung-hill There are many that are Solifugae as Bats and Owles are In one Chapter God is said three times to deliver them up because they did not glorifie God according to Natures light how much more then according to the Gospels light Gravis est lux conscientiae said Seneca but gravior est lux Evangelii The light of the Ministery and Word must needs be more troublesome to thy sinfull wayes Use 2. Of Examination whether even among Christians may not be found men no better then Heathens Now such are 1. Ignorant people how few have any knowledge of God 2. Violent adherers to former Idololatricall courses taken up by fore-fathers There is this difference between an Idolater and a true Beleever The Beleever is like those creatures that you can make nothing lye on their backs unlesse it be fastened by some Scripture or reason but the Heathen is like the Camell that had a back for burdens on purpose so that any idolatry he would bear though it were not tyed on by arguments 3. Such as are inordinately distracted about the things of this world Matth. 6. After these things doe the Heathens seek Hast thou not much of an Heathen in thee 4. Such as rage at Christ and his reformation Psal 2. Why doe the Heathens rage LECTURE IX ROM 2. 14. For the Gentiles doe by nature the things of the law WE have handled those things that concern the light and conduct of Nature now we shall speak of that which belongs to the ability and power of Nature for herein are two extreme errours one of the Pelagian Papist and Arminian with others who lift up this power too high The enemies of grace lurk under the praises of nature Sub laudibus Naturae latent inimici gratiae and the other of the Antinomians who seem to deny all the preparatory works upon the heart of a man holding that Christ immediately communicateth himselfe to grosse sinners abiding so and though they hold us passive at the first receiving of Christ which all orthodox do yet they expresse it in an unsound sense comparing God unto a Physician that doth violently open the sick mans throat and poure down his physick whether he will or no whereas God though he doth convert fortiter yet he doth it also suaviter Now for the full clearing of our inability to any good thing we will lay down these Propositions 1. There is a naturall power of free-will left in us Free-will is not indeed a Scripture name but meerly ecclesiasticall and hath been so abused that Calvin wished the very name of it were quite exploded but if we speak of the quid sit and not the quid possit the being of it and not the working of it we must necessarily acknowledge it The neerest expression to the word Free-will is that 1 Cor. 7. 37. having 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 power over his own will but generally the Scripture useth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is as much as we intend There is in all men naturally that power whereby through the help of Reason he chooseth this and refuseth another-thing only this must not be extended to the things of grace Now to say what this Free-will is is very hard Perkins following some Schoole-men maketh it a mixed power of the Understanding and the Will others a third reall distinct power from them but it may probably be thought that it is nothing but the will in electing or refusing such things so that we call it the Will in those things it 's necessarily carried out to as to will what is good and not sin as sin and then Free-will when it 's carried out to those things that are not necessarily connexed with it Even as in the Understanding while the Understanding doth consider first Principles it 's called Intellectus while Conclusions that are gathered from them it 's called Ratio Therefore our Adversaries do but calumniate us when they say we turn men into beasts for we hold the Understanding going before and the Will after and this is more then a meere spontaneous inclination in things naturall Therefore it is that we do not bid the fire burn or perswade an horse to goe because there is not Understanding or Will in these things as there is in a man 2. This which is left in us is not able to performe naturall actions without the generall help of God That which we have acknowledged to be in a man naturally must still be limited to his proper sphere to naturall and civill actions or some externally religious duties but even then we must acknowledge a generall help or assistance of God without which we could not doe any naturall thing so that place in the Acts In him we live and move and have our being by which we prove that God doth not onely give us the principles of being and moving but we move in him i. e. by him Therefore Hierome did well reprove the Pelagians that thought without the generall aide of God a man might move his finger or write and speak There have beem some who have thought that all which God doth for us in our naturall actions is onely to give the principles and power o◠actions and then afterwards we need no further aide then mee◠preservation of our being no concourse or aide of God helping us in the action Thus Durand of old and one Dodo of late who hath written a Book onely to that purpose but the place abovesaid doth evidently convince it and we see that God did hinder the fire from burning the three Worthies though he did preserve the fire at the same time in the power of burning which could not be otherwise then by denying his actuall aide to the working of the fire For to say that the reason was because of Gods doing something upon their bodies were to make the miracle there where the Scripture doth not lay it If you aske then why this may not be called a speciall help of God as well as that whereby we are inabled to beleeve or repent I answer there is a great deal of difference 1. Because this generall aide is necessary to wicked actions in regard of their positive nature as well
those titles of commendation which are due to it now in what sense the Law is said to be ordained by Angels is hard to say That you may the better understand this place compare with it Act. 7. v. 53. Who have received the Law by the disposition of Angels Heb. 2. 2. If the word spoken by Angels was stedfast c. Deut. 33. 2. The Lord came from Sinai with ten thousands of Saints from his right hand went a fiery law for them though this seemeth to refer to the people of Israel rather then the Angels But the Septuagint interpret it of Angels In the Greek we have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is as much as command sanction and ordaining as Rom. 13. 2. The ordinance of God so then the sence of the places put together amounts to thus much That Iesus Christ Act 7. 38. Who is the Angel that spake to Moses in the mount and the same which appeared to him in the bush ver 35 being accompanied with thousands of Angels did from the midst of them give Moses this law and Jesus Christ is here called the Angel because of his outward apparition like one The Sanctuary did express this giving of the Law for their God sate between the Cherubims and from the midst of them uttered his Oracles for Moses was commanded to build the Tabernacie according to the pattern as he saw in the Mount and that is the meaning of the Psal 68. 8. The chariots of God are twenty thousand Angels the Lord is in the miâ—st of them Sinaâ— is in â—he holy place So a learned man Deiu interpreteth it that is God doth in the Sanctuary from the Cherubims deliver his Oracles as he did the Law on Mount Sinai from between Angels and thus you have this fully explained In the next place you have the remote cause by the hand of a Mediator Some understand this of Moses that he was the Mediator in giving the Law between God and the Iews and so that Text Deut. 5. 5. where Moses is said to stand between the Lord and them may seem to confirm this interpretation and Moses indeed may be said to be a Mediator typically as the sacrifices were types of Christs blood and as he is called Act. 7. 35. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Redeemer though Beza and our English Bible renders it a deliverer But many interpreters understand it of Christ that he was the Mediator in the Law and indeed the words following seem to approve of this for saith the Apostle a Mediator is not a Mediator of one that is of those that are one in consent and accord but of those that dissent now Moses could not be truly and really a Mediator between God and the people of Israel when God was angry with them for their sins Besides the Law as is to be shewed is a Covenant of grace and Christ onely can be the Mediator in such a Covenant by way of Office because he only is Medius in his nature Beza indeed brings Arguments against this interpretation but they seem not strong enough to remove this sense given neither doth this phrase by the hand which is an Hebraisme denote alwaies ministery and inferiority but sometimes power and strength but more of this in the explication of the doctrine Obser It was a great honour put upon the Law in that it was delivered by Christ accompanied with thousands of Angels There was never any such glorious Senate or Parliament as this Assembly was wherein the Law wâ—â— enacted Iesus Christ himself being the Speaker and by how much the mâ—â—â— glory God put upon it the greater is the sin of those Doctrines which do dâ—rogate from it Indeed though Christ gave the Law yet the Apostle make the preheminency of the Gospel far above it because Christ gave the Law onely in the form of an Angel but he gave the gospel when made man whereby was manifested the glory not of Angels but of the onely begotten Son of God how carefull then should men be lest they offend or transgress that Law which hath such sacred authority It is a wonder to see how men are afraid to break mans Law which yet cannot damn but tremble not at all in the offending of that Law-giver who is only able to save or destroy For the opening of this consider First that Iesus Christ is the Angel that gave this Law as the chief captain of all those Angels that did accompany him For Act. 7. 35. It is the same that appeared to Moses in the bush God the Father hath committed the whole Government and guidance of the redemption of that people of Israel into the hands of Christ Hence Isa 6. 3. 9. he is called the Angel of the Covenant because he made that Covenant of the Law with his people on mount Sinai This is the Angel that Exod. 33. 2. God said he would send before them to drive out the Nations of the land and v 14. there he is called the face of God or his presence which should go before them and you have a notable place Exod. 23. 20. I will send an Angel before thee to keep thee in the way and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared beware of him provoke him not for he will not pardon your transgressions for my name is in him by this it is clear that it was Iesus Christ who was subservient to the Father in this whole work of Redemption out of Aegypt Grotius in the explication of the Decalogue judgeth it a grievous errour to hold that the second person in the Trinity was the Angel who gave this Law and indeed all the Socinians deny this because they say Christ had no subsistency before his Incarnation some Papists also think it to be a created Angel but he must needs be God because this Angel beginneth thus in the promulgation of the Law I am the Lord thy God which brought thee out of the land of Aegypt Neither wil that serve for an answer which Grotius saith that the Angel cals himself the God that brought them out of Aegypt because he is an Embassador and speaks in the name of the Lord for were not the Prophets Gods Embassadors yet their language was Thus saith the Lord they never appropriated the name of Iehovah to themselves whereas this Angel is called Iehovah and 1 Cor. 10. 9. The Iews are said to tempt Christ because he was the Angel that did deliver them by Moses It is disputed whether when any Angel appeared who was also God that it was also the Son of God so that in the Old Testament the Father and the Holy ghost never appeared but the Son only Austin thought it a question worth the deciding when he spent a great part of his second book of the Trinity in handling of it Many of the ancient Fathers thought that it was the Son onely that appeared so that all the apparitions which were to Adam to Abraham to Moses the God
Sapiens est cui res sapiunt pro ut sunt he is a wise man to whom things do taste and relish as they are divine and holy things as holy earthly things as earthly and fading then certainly by this Law of God there was true wisdome prescribed Other arguments Moses doth bring as The great authority God put upon the Law The great mercy in giving it to them rather then another Nation And the verse I have read belongs to that argument which proveth the dignity and glorious authority of the Law from the manner of delivering it Which Law he declareth to us by the name and title of a Covenant Now this take notice of that the word Covenant to omit other significations is taken sometimes syecdochially for part of the Covenant as it is here in these words The Doctrine I will insist upon is That the Law was delivered by God on Mount Sinai in a Covenant way Or The Law was a Covenant that God made with the people of Israel This will appeare in that it hath the name of a Covenant and the reall properties of a Covenant 1. The name of a Covenant 2 King 18. 12. Because they obeyed not the voyce of the Lord their God but transgressed his Covenant and all that Moses the servant of God commanded Deut 17. 2. If there be found any that hath wrought wickednesse in transgressing the Covenant which was the ten Commandements as appeareth ver 3. And more expresly 2 Chro. 6. 11. In it have I put the Arke wherein is the Covenant of the Lord that he made with the children of Israel Yea if we would speake exactly and strictly the books of Moses and the Prophets cannot be so well called the Old Covenant or Testament as this doctrine that was then delivered on Mount Sinai with all the administrations thereof as appeareth Heb 7. chap. 8. Even as when the Apostle saith 2 Cor. 3. 6. God hath made us able ministers of the New Testament he doth not meane the writings or books but the Gospel or Covenant of grace Take but one place more where the Law is called a Covenant and that is Jer. 11. 2 3 4. 2. In the next place you may see the reall properties of a Covenant which are a mutuall consent and stipulation on both sides See a full relation of this Exod 3 24. from the 3. v. to the 9 th The Apostle relateth this history Heb. 9. wherein learned Interpreters observe many difficulties but I shall not meddle with them In the words quoted out of Exodus you see these things which belong to a Covenant First there is God himselfe expressing his consent and willingnesse to be their God if they will keep such Commandements there and then delivered to them ver 3. Secondly you have the peoples full consent and ready willingnesse to obey them ver 3. ver 7. Thirdly because Covenants used to be written down for a memoriall unto posterity therefore we see Moses writing the precepts down in a book Fourthly because Covenants used to be confirmed by some outward visible signes especially by killing of beasts and offering them in sacrifice therefore we have this also done and halfe of the blood was sprinkled on the Altar to denote Gods entring into Covenant and the people also were sprinckled with blood to shew their voluntary covenanting Thus we have reall covenanting when the Law is given So also you may see this in effect Deut. 29. 10 11 12 13. where it's expresly said that they stood to enter into Covenant with God that he may establish them to be a people unto himself and that he may be a God unto them Again you have this clearly in Deut. 26. 17 18. where it is said Thou hast avouched the Lord this day to be thy God and to walke in his wayes And the Lord hath avouched thee this day to be his peculiar people So that it 's very plain the Law was given as a Covenant yea the Apostle cals it a Testament for howsoever some have disliked that distinction of the Old and New Testament especially as applied to the books writings of the holy Pen-men of Scripture thinking as Austin they may be better called the Old and New Instruments because they are authenticall and confirmed by sufficient witnesses As Tertullian cals the Bible Nostra digesta from the Lawyers and others called it Our Pandects from them also yet 1 Cor. 3. doth warrant such a distinction Only the question is how this Covenant can be called properly a Testament because Christ died not twice and there cannot be a Testament without the death of a Testator But the answer is that there was a typicall death of Christ in the sacrifices and that was ground enough to make the Covenant to be called a Testament Having proved it is a Covenant all the difficulty remaineth in declaring what Covenant it is for here is much difference of judgements even with the Learned and Orthodox and this doth arise from the different places of the Scripture which although they be not contrary one to another yet the weaknesse of our understandings is many times overmastered by some places Some as you have heard make it a Covenant of workes others a mixt Covenant some a subservient Covenant but I am perswaded to goe with those who hold it to be a Covenant of grace and indeed it is very easie to bring strong arguments for the affirmative but then there will be some difficulty to answer such places as are brought for the negative and if the affirmative prove true the dignity and excellency of the Law will appeare the more Now before I come to the arguments which induce me hereunto consider in what sense it may be explained that it is a Covenant of grace Some explaine it thus that it was indeed a Covenant of grace but the Jewes by their corrupt understanding made it a Covenant of workes and so opposed it unto Christ and therefore say they the Apostle argueth against the Law as making it to oppose the promises and grace not that it did so but only in regard of the Jewes corrupt minds who made an opposition where there was none This hath some truth in it but it is not full Some make the Law to be a Covenant of grace but very obscurely and therefore they hold the Gospel and the Law to be the same differing only as the acorne while it is in the huske and the oke when it 's branched out into a tall tree Now if this should be understood in a Popish sense as if the righteousnesse of the Law and the Gospel were all one in which sense the Papists speake of the old Law and the new it would be very dangerous and directly thwarting the Scripture Some explain it thus God say they had a primary or antecedent will in giving of the Law or a secondary and consequent His primary will was to hold out perfect and exact
11o. Junii 1646. WE the President and Fellowes of Sion Colledge London earnestly desire Master Anthony Burgess to publish in print his elaborate and judicious Lectures upon the Law and the Covenants against the Antinomian Errours of these times which at our entreaty hee hath preached and for which wee give him most hearty thanks that so as well the Kingdome as this City may have the benefit of those his learned labours Dated at Sion Colledge the 11th of June 1646. at a generall meeting of the Ministers of London there Arthur Jackson President in the name and by the appointment of the rest VINDICIAE LEGIS OR A Vindication of the MORALL LAW AND THE COVENANTS From the Errours of Papists Arminians Socinians and more especially Antinomians In XXX LECTURES preached at Laurence-Jury London The second Edition corrected and augmented By Anthony Burgess Preacher of Gods Word LONDON Printed by James Young for Thomas Underhill at the Signe of the Bible in Wood-street 1647. TO THE Truly pious and worthily honoured Lady the Lady RUTH SCUDAMORE Honoured Madam I Have observed your Ladiship carefull in two things to improve the duty commanded in the Law and to imbrace the promise tendered in the Gospel the former hath been a spurre to holinesse the latter a curb to unbeliefe The consideration of this together with the remembrance of those manifold favours which your Ladiship hath plentifully vouchsafed to me and mine hath provoked me to dedicate this Treatise unto you which although it hath much controversall matter in it yet it is not without many practicall Directions and Consolations It hath been Gods goodnesse unto you that although in these times of calamities your portion hath been one of the afflictions in Paul's Catalogue without settled aboad yet God hath lest your minde fixed and immoveable in the truth being enabled to magnifie Grace in the highest manner out of the reall sense of your necessity and unworthinesse yet to avoid Antinomianisme and on the other side to be punctuall and exact in the duties of mortification and holinesse yet to take heed of Pharisaicall Popery And indeed this is the right sense when we are so diligent in working out our salvation with feare and trembling as if there were no grace to justifie and yet so resting and beleeving in the grace of Christ as if no good thing had been done by us Madam goe on with the assistance of God and account the things of grace more excellent then the things of parts and while others rejoyce in opinions and new notions about faith and holinesse doe you delight in the things themselves The Lord keep his best wine for you in the later end of your age and give you to see the fruit of your Prayers a settled reformation in the Church that so when your time shall come you may depart in peace feeling much of the power and love of God living and much more of them dying Madam this is the prayer of your Ladiships humble servant in the Lord Anthony Burgess Septemb. 21. 1646. TO THE READER READER IF the Father said true that Books were the fruit of the mind as children are of the body naturall affection must compell me as she did for Moses to provide some Ark for the safety of this Book lest it perish And I know no better way then to give thee some account of the matter and method of it if thou vouchsafe to peruse it For the matter of it it is chiefly improved to maintain the dignitie and use of the Morall Law against late errours about it and thereupon I have been forced to consult more with those books that are filled with such poyson then to peruse those Authors that have maintained the truth and I found the looking upon their Heterodoxies a speciall help to propagate and confirme the truth as that Romane Painter curiously drew the picture of an Horse by constant looking upon an Asse avoiding whatsoever he saw ridiculous or deformed in him I acknowledge this work above my strength it being a subject not much handled by former writers and so I could not be guilty of that fault 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but I say as Austin Ego parvas vires habeo sed Dei Verbum magnas habet I have small strength but the Word and Truth of God hath great power None is more unwilling then my self to come in print but because he that writeth good Books doth retia salutis expandere spread the nets of salvation to catch some men in and the good works of such will last as long as their Books live I have hardened my selfe and overcome mine owne temper to publish to the world these conceptions of mine I have not affected to appeare in this Book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 about words and phrases because it 's controversall matter and so fitter to be represented to the understanding in naked unaffected explications then curiously adorned to please fancy Yea I have grudged at words as being too long and cumbersome desiring if possible to conveigh my sense in as briefe a manner as may be lest any that comes to look for fruit should finde the leaves too broad and so cover it from sight And this endeavouring of brevity will make the matter seeme too obscure and abrupt till there be a familiar acquaintance with my way My method is after some generall discourses about the usefulnesse of the Law more particularly to handle it as given to Adam and afterwards as promulgated by Moses to the people of Israel and herein I have taken in all the materiall questions that Papists Arminians Socinians and more especially Antinomians have started up In all this I have endeavoured to give the Law its due and the Gospel its due remembring that of Luther Qui soit inter Legem Evangelium distinguere gratias agat Deo sciat se esse Theologum He that knoweth how to distinguish between Law and Gospel let him give thanks to God and know he is a Divine It is the allegoricall interpretation of one Writer that the great feasting and musick which was used at the reconciliation of the Father to his Prodigall son did signifie the sweet harmonie and agreement between Law and Gospel If this were so then some doe represent the elder brother that grudge and murmure at this excellent accord If any adversary shall assault this Book I shall not be solicitous to answer it because I endeavoured so to state the question that at the same time truth might be maintained and falshood demolished I am preparing for thy view another Discourse about Justification which precious Doctrine hath also been much sowred by the leaven of Antinomian opinions THE CONTENTS 1. IN what respects the Law may be said to be good page 3. 4. 2. Of what use the Law is to the ungodly p. 8. 3. Of what use the Law is to beleevers p. 9. 4. How many wayes the Law may be abused p. 17. 5. What are the consequences of
à bonis and that of another man who said he got more good by his sins then his graces But these speeches must be soundly understood We also love that of Austin All the Commands are accounted as if thou hadst done them when what is not done is forgiven Omnia mandata tua facta deputantur quando quicquid non fit ignoscitur 3. That is the incommodious yea and erroneous passages in Antinomian Authors were used for some reasons hereafter to be mentioned it were the more tolerable but that seems not to be There is more poison then can be concocted in them But if this were their ground of many unsavory assertions among them meerly their want of clear judgement to expresse themselves so that they think more orthodoxly then they write then they might be excused as being in a logomachy but with this proviso as Austine said of them that used the word fatum in a good sense Let them hold their opinion but correct their expressions Mentem teneant sed linguam corrigant Now that there may be injudiciousnesse in them as a cause in part of some of their erroneous passages will appeare in that they frequently speake contradictions This is a passage often but very dangerous that Let a man be a wicked man even as high as enmity it self can make a man yet while he is thus wicked and while he is no better his sins are pardoned and he justified Yet now in other passages Though a man be never so wicked yet if he come to Christ if he will take Christ his sinnes are pardoned now what a contradiction is here To be wicked and while he is wicked and while he is no better and yet to take Christ unlesse they hold that to take Christ or to come to him be no good thing at all But happily more of their contradictions hereafter Their injudiciousnesse and weaknesse doth also appear that when they have laid down such a truth as every godly Author hath they have so many words about it and doe so commend it as if they had found a Philosophers Stone or a Phenix as if the Reader should presently cry out and say Behold a greater then Solomon is here and yet it is but that which every Writer almost hath Again their injudiciousnesse doth appeare in that they minde only the promissory part of the Scripture and doe stand very little upon the mandatory part There are five or six places such as Christ came to save that which was lost and He hath laid on him the iniquities of us all c. these are over and over again But you shall seldome or never have these places urged Make your calling and election sure Work out your salvation with feare and trembling whereas all Scripture is given for our use Therefore 1. If weaknesse were all the ground of this controversie the danger were not so great Or 2ly If the end and aime they had were only to put men off from glorying in themselves to deny the concurrence of works to the act of justification If their desire were that men should not as Michal put an image in Davids roome so neither that Christians should put their works in Christs stead thus farre it might be excusable but then their books and their aimes cannot be reconciled Or If 3ly their maine drift was only to shew that good works follow a justified person and that they doe not antecede here would be no opposition but they deny the presence of them in time Or 4ly If the question were about preparatory works to justification and conversion though for my part I think there are such with those limitations that hereafter may be given to them this also were not so hainous Or fifthly If the dispute were onely upon the space of time between a profane mans profanenesse and his justification or the quantity of his sorrow these things were of another debate I do acknowledge that the Christian Religion was matter of offence to the Heathens in that they taught Though a man had never been so wicked yet if he did receive Christ he should be pardoned and how soon this may be done it is as God pleaseth but there is an alteration of the mans nature at that time also and Chrysostome indeed hath such a passage upon that Scripture The righteous shall live by faith Rom. 1. by faith onely a man hath remission of sins Now saith he this is a Paradox to humane reason that he who was an adulterer a murderer should presently be accounted righteous if he doe beleeve in Christ but this differs from the Antinomian assertion as much as heaven from hell So it 's related in Ecclesiasticall history of Constantine the Great that when he had killed many of his kindred yea and was counselled also to murder his own son repenting of these hainous crimes askt Sopater the Philosopher who succeeded Plotinus in teaching him Whether there could be any expiation for those sins The Philosopher said No afterwards he asked the Christian Bishops and they said I if he would beleeve in Christ This was feigned to make our Religion odious Or sixthly If it were to shew that there cannot be assurance before justification or that to relye upon Christ for pardon it is not necessary I should know whether I have truly repented or no This were also of another nature Therefore let us see what prejudiciall inferences they gather from this doctrine of Justification I know the proper place of handling this will come when we speak of that point but yet to give some antidote against their errours I will name some few as 1. Denying them to be a way to heaven Thus one expresly Sect. 4. on Christ being a way pag. 68. It is a received conceit among many persons that our obedience is a way to heaven though it be not causa yet it's via ad regnum Now this he labours to confute As for the speech it self Divines have it out of Bernard where among other encomium's of good works calling them Seeds of hope incentives of love signes of hidden Predestination and presages of future happinesse Spei quaedam seminaria charitatis incentiva occultae Praedestinationis indicia futurae felicitatis praesagia he addeth this The way to the Kingdome not the cause of reigning Via regni non causa regnandi Now it 's true that they are not a way in that sense that Christ is called a Way no more then the spirituall life of a Christian is life in that sense Christ stileth himself Life for here he understands it of himself as the causall and meritorious way Therefore there are Articles added to every one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that which followeth makes it cleare No man can come to the Father but by me Object Oh but say they our works are our businesse and imployment not our way Sol. I answer when we call them a way it 's a metaphor and such a metaphor that the Scripture doth often
of Aristides who being demanded by the Emperour to speak to something propounded ex tempore answered Propound to day and I will answer to morrow 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We are not of those who vomit or spit out things suddenly but take time to be diligent and considering 5. When thou doest begin to encline to an opinion that differeth from the learned and godly be not too rash and precipitate in publishing it The Apostle giveth a good rule Rom. 14. Hast thou faith have it to thy self He doth not there command a man to equivocate or dissemble and deny a truth but not needlesly to professe it when it will be to the offence of others Cyprian reproving the rashnesse of those Christians that would goe on their own accord to the Heathen Magistrates professing themselves Christians whereby they were put to death hath a good and elegant speech Confiteri nos magis voluit quà m profiteri he doth confesse that doth it being asked and demanded he doth professe that doth it out of his own free accord 6. Consider that Antinomianisme is the onely way indeed to overthrow grace and Christ For he sets up free grace and Christ not who names it often in his Book or in the Pulpit but whose heart is inwardly and deeply affected with it Now who will most heartily and experimentally set up Christ and grace of these two i. Who urgeth no use of the Law who takes away the sense or bitternesse of sin who denieth humiliation or he who discovers his defects by the perfect rule of the Law whose soule is inbittered and humbled because of these defects Certainly this later will much more in heart and reall affections set up free grace FINIS THE TABLE A. THe Law abolished as a Covenant not as a Rule Page 213 The Law abrogated to beleevers in six particulars p. 217. 218. 219. 220 Three causes of the abrogation of the ceremoniall Law which agree not to the morall p. 222 Six abuses of the Law p. 17. 18. 19. 20 Conversion and Repentance are our acts as well as the effects of Gods grace p. 99 Whether Adam was mortall before his eating of the forbidden fruit p. 110 Whether Adam in his innocency can be considered in his naturalls or supernaturalls answered in two Positions p. 132 Whether Adam needed Christs help p. 133 Whether God required lesse of Adam then us p. 138 Amorem mercedis a Godly man may have in his obedience though not amorem mercenarium p. 14 What help the Angels had by Christ p. 134 Calvin's two Reasons why Angels needed Christs mediation ibid. Some Antecedaneous works upon the heart before grace be bestowed p. 88 Foure limitations concerning those antecedaneous works p. 88. 89 The first Antinomian p. 39 Antinomian Differences betwixt the Law and Gospel confuted p. 243. 246 The Antinomian why most inexcusable p. 45 The Antinomian distinction of the Law being abolished as a Law but still abiding in respect of the matter of it a contradiction p. 214 The Antinomian Arguments overthrow the use of the Law to unbeleevers as well as beleevers p. 217 The opinion of the old Antinomians p. 277 The word As taken variously p. 165 Antidotes against Antinomian errors p. 279 Antinomianisme is the onely way indeed to overthrow Christ and grace p. 281 B. A Blaspheming Monk p. 27 Blaspheming Papists ibid. The Lay-mans book is the whole universe p. 77 Master Burton his Report of Antinomians p. 278 C. A Cordiall for a broken heart p. 22. 23 Contradictions of the Antinomians p. 31 A Community of goods not taught by the law of Nature p. 83 Christs Incarnation cannot be supposed but upon supposition of Adams fall p. 135 It is an hard matter so to set up Christ and grace as not thereby to destroy the law p. 210 The doctrine of Christ and grace in the highest manner doth establish not overthrow the law p. 211 God entred into Covenant with Adam in giving him a law p. 122. 123 What a Covenant implyes p. 124 Why the Covenant of grace is not still a covenant of works seeing works are necessary p. 48 A Covenant of Friendship Reconciliation p. 124 No Covenant properly so called can be betwixt God and Man p. 126 How God can covenant with man ibid. Five Reasons why God would deal with man in a covenant-way rather then in an absolute way p. 127. 128 A vast difference betwixt the covenant in innocency and in grace p. 129. 130 The morall law delivered as a covenant proved p. 230 It hath the reall properties of a covenant ib. In what sense the law may be a covenant of grace explained p. 232. 233 Arguments proving the law a covenant of grace p. 234. 235. 236 Objections answered p. 237 Doctor Crisp confuted p. 15 Cursing taken two waies 1 Potentially so a law is alwaies condemning 2. Actually so a law is not ever condemning p. 6 D. DEcalogue resembled to the ten Predicaments by Martyr and why p. 3 The threatning of death to Adam if he did eat c. was fulfilled in that he became then mortall and in a state of death not naturall onely but spirituall and eternall also p. 109. 110 Determination to one takes not away naturall liberty nor willingnesse or delight in sin which we are inevitably carried unto p. 89. 90 Three generall waies of proving the Deity of Christ p. 133. 134 Foure differences not substantiall but accidentall betwixt the Law and the Gospel p. 251 c. Fire Differences betwixt the Law and Gospel strictly taken p. 257. 258. 259 c. All Doctrine reduced to three heads Credenda Speranda Facienda p. 252. 253. E. THe Papists notion concerning Ecclesia and Synagoge confuted p. 252 If the Antinomians end were only to put men off from glorying in themselves to deny the concurrence of workes to Justification it were more tolerable p. 31 but then their books and end were not reconcileable p. 32 Other ends which might make the Antinomians more excusable ibid. How Christ is the end of the law for righteousnesse p. 267 End taken two waies ibid. Four waies Christ is the perfective end of the Law p. 270. 271 Aquinas distinction of end p. 267 Eudoxus said hee was made to behold the sun p. 77 Exhortations to what purpose given to them who have no power of themselves to doe them p. 98 Errours in Doctrine damnable p. 279 F. FAbles and fictions how used by the Fathers p. 2 How Faith justifies p. 43 Two acts of Faith p. 44 Faith and Repentance wrought both by the Law and Gospel p. 261. 262 The same object may be known by the light of Faith and of Nature p. 73 Whether justifying Faith were in Adam at first p. 120 Faith of adherence and dependence in Adam in innocency and shall be in heaven p. 128 Adams faith considered as an act of the soul not as an organ to lay hold on Christ p. 129 Finger of God p. 157 Finis indigentiae assimilationis