be As a childe whose coat is a little dirty hath it not presently washed but when he falls wholly all over in the dirt this may be the cause of the washing of it so that they are preparations only so far as God intendeth them 6. All determination to one doth not take away that naturall liberty This will further cleere the truth for it may be thought strange that there should be this freedome of will in a man and yet thus determined to one sin onely whereas it 's plaine a determination to one kind of acts good or evill doth not take away liberty God can onely will that which is good and so the Angels and Saints confirmed in happinesse yet they doe this freely and so the Divels will that which is wicked onely It 's true some exclaime at such passages but that is onely because they are prepossessed with a false opinion about liberty for a determination to one may arise from perfection as well as naturall imperfection It is from Gods absolute perfection that hee is determined to will onely good and when Adam did will to sin against God it did not arise from the liberty of his will but his mutability There is a naturall necessity such which determineth a thing to one and that is imperfection but a necessity of immutability in that which is good is a glorious perfection The Learned speak of a three-fold liberty 1. From misery such as the Saints shall have in heaven 2. From sin to which is opposed that freedome to righteousnesse of which our Saviour speaketh Then are yee free indeed when the Son hath made you free and of which Austine Tunc est liberum quando liberatum 3. From naturall necessity and thus also man though hee be necessarily carried on to sin yet it is not by a naturall necessity as beasts are but there is Reason and Will in him when he doth thus transgresse onely you must take notice that this determination of our Will onely to sin is the losse of that perfection we had in Adam and doth not arise from the primaeve constitution of the will but by Adams fall and so is meerly accidentall to it 7. Nor doth it take away that willingnesse or delight in sin which we are inevitably carried out unto For now if man were carried out to sin against his will and his delight then there might be some shew of pleading for him but it is not so he sinneth as willingly and as electively in respect of his corrupt heart as if there were no necessity brought upon him Therefore that is good of Bernards The necessity takes not away the willingnesse of it nor the willingnesse of it the necessity It 's both an hand-maid and so free and which is to be wondered eoque magis ancilla quò magis libera Hence therefore no wicked or ungodly man can have any excuse for himselfe to say the fates or necessity drove him for besides that by his fault he hath cast himselfe into this necessity and so is as if a man in debt who was once able to pay but by his wilfull prodigall courses hath spent all should think to be excused because he cannot pay Besides I say this just and full answer this also is to be said that no man sins constrainedly but every one is carried on with that delight to sin as if he were independent upon any providence or predefinitive permissive decrees of God or any such corrupt necessity within him Hereby he pitieth not himselfe hee seeth not his undone estate nihil miserius misero non miserante scipsum Hence it is that a mans whole damnation is to be ascribed to himselfe Wee ourselves have destroyed our owne soules wee cannot cast it upon Gods decrees And this is necessarily to be urged because of that naturall corruption in us with Adam to cast our sinne upon God 8. A man may acknowledge grace and give much to it and yet not give the totall efficacy unto it This is a maine particular to consider for Pelagius and Arminius and Papists all doe acknowledge grace Pelagius it 's noted of him that hee did foure times incrustate his opinion and held grace in every one of them Hee did gratiae vocabulo uti ad frangendum invidiam as you heard before yea by this meanes hee deceived all the Easterne Churches and they acquitted him when he said thus If any man deny grace to be necessary to every good act wee doe let him be an anathema So Papists and Arminians they all acknowledge grace but not grace enough Gratia non est gratia nisi sit omni modo gratuita As for example First they acknowledge grace to be onely as an universall help which must be made effectuall by the particular will of man so that grace is efficacious with them not by any inward vertue of it self antecedaneous to and independent upon the Will but eventually only because the will doth yeeld and therefore Bellarmine compareth it to Sol homo generant hominem one as the universall cause the other as the particular cause Thus grace and free-will produce a good action grace as the generall cause and free-will as the particular but how derogatory is this to grace how can our actions be said to be the fruit of grace For If I should aske Who is the father of such a man it would be very hard to say The Sun in the firmament so it would be as absurd to say Grace regenerated and converted this man Again they make grace a partiall cause only so that it stirreth up our naturall strength to work this or that good thing and therefore we are synergists or co-co-workers with God in the work of conversion but this supposeth us not dead in sinne 9. Men may naturally performe the outward act of a commandement Now though we be thus corrupt yet for all that men by nature may doe that outward act which is commanded by God or abstaine from the matter prohibited Thus Alexander abstained from the Virgins hee took captives which is so much related in stories and many other famous instances of the Heathens though some indeed think they had a speciall helpe and aide from God to doe that but here the Apostle in the Text is cleare They doe by nature the things of the law Some doe not like that dictinction They may doe the substance of the work but not the manner of a good worke because they think the substance doth comprehend that indeed which makes a good work howsoever they agree that the externall act may be done Thus Ahab hee externally humbled himselfe and some think that Uriah which Esay calls The faithfull witnesse he took to him to be the same with him that brought in the Altar of Damascus so that though he was an idolater and an ungodly man yet hee was reputed a faithfull man in his word And certainly this is something to make many men inexcusable They may
legall and one that was not affected with the goodnesse of God to him It is true if a man obey God out of love to any thing more then God or equally with God this is unlawfull according to that Minus te amat qui tecum Domine aliquid amat 3. That hereby Adams obedience might be the more willing and free An absolute law might seeme to extort obedience but a covenant and agreement makes it to appeare more free and willing as if Adam would have obeyed though there could have been no obligation upon him to doe it 5. Consider that the nature of this Covenant was of works and not of faith It was not said to Adam Beleeve and have life eternall but Obey even perfect and entire obedience It is true indeed there was faith of adherence and dependance upon God in his promise and word and this faith doth not imply any imperfection of the state of the subject as sinfull which justifying faith doth for it was in Christ who in his temptations and tryalls did trust in God And what the Old Testament calls trusting the New calls beleeving yea some say that this kind of faith shall be in heaven viz a dependance upon God for the continuance of that happinesse which they doe enjoy This faith therefore Adam had but in that Covenant it was considered as a gracious act and work of the soul not as it is now an organ or instrument to receive and apply Christ With us indeed there is justifying faith and repentance which keeps up a Christians life as the Naturalists say the calor innatus and humidum radicale doe the naturall life Faith is like the calor innatus and Repentance is like the humidum radicals and as the Philosopher saith if the innate heat devoure too much the radicall moisture or the radicall moisture too much the heat there breed presently diseases so it is with us if beleeving make a man repent lesse or repenting make a man beleeve the lesse this turneth to a distemper Yet though it were a Covenant of works it cannot be said to be of merit Adam though in innocency could not merit that happinesse which God would bestow upon him first because the enjoying of God in which Adams happinesse did consist was such a good as did farre exceed the power and ability of man It 's an infinite good and all that is done by us is finite And then in the next place Because even then Adam was not able to obey any command of God without the help of God Though some will not call it grace because they suppose that onely cometh by Christ yet all they that are orthodox do acknowledge a necessity of Gods enabling Adam to that which was good else he would have failed Now then if by the help of God Adam was strengthned to do the good he did he was so farre from meriting thereby that indeed he was the more obliged to God 6. God who entred into this Covenant with him is to be considered as already pleased and a friend with him not as a reconciled Father through Christ Therefore here needed no Mediatour nor comfort because the soul could not be terrified with any sin Here needed not one to be either medius to take both natures or Mediatour to performe the offices of such an one In this estate that speech of Luthers was true which he denieth in ours Dens est absolute considerandus Adam dealt with him as absolutely considered not relatively with us God without Christ is a consuming fire and we are combustible matter chaffe and straw we are loathsome to God and God terrible to us but Adam he was Deo proximo amicus Paradisi colonus as Tertullian and therefore was in familiarity and communion with him But although there was not that ordered administration and working of the three Persons in this Covenant of works yet all these did work in it Hence the second Person though not as incarnated or to be incarnated yet he with the Father did cause all righteousnesse in Adam and so the holy Ghost he was the worker of holinesse in Adam though not as the holy Spirit of Christ purchased by his death for his Church yet as the third Person so that it is an unlikely assertion which one maintains That the Trinity was not revealed in this Covenant to Adam so that this sheweth a vast difference between that Covenant in innocency and this of grace What ado is here for the troubled soul to have any good thoughts of God to have any faith in him as reconciled but then Adam had no fear nor doubt about it 7. This Covenant did suppose in Adam a power being assisted by God to keep it and therefore that which is now impossible to us waâ— possible to him And certainly if there had been a necessity to sin it would have been either from his nature or from the devill Not from his nature for then he would have excused himself by this when he endeavoured to clear himself But Tertullian speakâ— wittily Nunquam figulo suo dixit Non prudenter definxisti me rudis admodum haereticus fuit non obaudiit non tamen blasphemavit creatorem lib. 2. ad Mar. cap. 2. Nor could any necessity arise from the devill whose temptations cannot reach beyond a moral swasion Therefore our Divines doe well argue that if God did not work in our conversion beyond a morall swasion he should no further cause a work good then Satan doth evil Nor could this necessity be of God who made him good and righteous nor would God subtract his gifts from him before he sinned seeing his fall was the cause of his defection not Gods deserting of him the cause of his fall Therefore although God did not give Adam such an help that de facto would hinder hiâ— fall yet he gave him so much that might and ought to preventâ— it And upon this ground it is that we answer all those cavills why God doth command of us that which is impossible for us to doe for the things commanded are not impossible in themselves but when required of Adam he had power to keep them but he sinned away that power from himself and us Neither is God bound as the Arminians fancy to give every one power to beleeve and repent because Adam in innocency had not ability to doe these for he had them eminently and virtually though not formally But more of these things in the Covenant of grace Use 1. To admire with thankfulnesse Gods way of dealing with us his creatures that he condescends to a promise-way to a covenant-way There is no naturall or Morall necessity that God should doe thus We are his and he might require an obedience without any covenanting but yet to shew his love and goodnesse he condescends to this way Beloved not onely we corrupted and our duties might be rejected not onely we in our persons might be abashed but had we all that
for me Conjunge Domine obsequium meum cum omnibus quae Christus passus est pro me And how absurd is that doctrine Si bona opera sunt magis bona quà m mala opera mala fortiùs merentur vitam aeternam 14. It taketh away the true doctrine of the Law as if that were possible to be kept For works could not justifie us unlesse they were answerable to that righteousnesse which God commands but Rom. 3. that which was impossible for the Law Christ hath fulfilled in us 15. It overthroweth the consideration of a man while he is justified For they look upon him as godly but the Scripture as ungodly Rom. 4. who justifieth the ungodly Some by ungodly meane any prophane man whereas it is rather one that is not perfectly godly for Abraham is here made the ungodly person I know it is explained otherwise but certainly this is most genuine Use 1. Of Instruction How uncharitably and falsly many men charge it generally upon our godly Ministers that they are nothing but Justitiaries and Legall Preachers For do not all sound and godly Ministers hold forth this Christ this righteousnesse this way of justification Do not all our Protestant authours maintain this truth as that which discerneth us from Heathens Jewes Papists and others in the world May not these things be heard in our Sermons daily Use 2. It is not every kind of denying the Law and setting up of Christ and Grace is presently Antinomianisme Luther writing upon Genesis handling that sin of Adam in eating of the forbidden fruit speaketh of a Fanatique as he calls him that denyed Adam could sinne because the Law is not given to the righteous Now saith Bellarmine this is an argument satis aptè deductum ex principiis Lutheranorum because they deny the Law to a righteous man Here you see he chargeth Antinomianisme upon Luther but of these things more hereafter Use 3. To take heed of using the Law for our justification It 's an unwarranted way you cannot finde comfort there Therefore let Christ be made the matter of your righteousnesse and comfort more then he hath been You know the posts that were not sprinkled with bloud were sure to be destroyed and so are all those persons and duties that have not Christ upon them Christ is the propitiation and the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used for covering and propitiating of sinne is Genes 6. used of the pitch or plaister whereby the wood of the Ark was so fastened that no water could get in and it doth well resemble the atonement made by Christ whereby we are so covered that the waters of Gods wrath cannot enter upon us And do not think to beleeve in Christ a contemptible and unlikely way for it is not because of the dignitie of faith but by Christ You see the Hyssop or whatsoever it was which did sprinkle the bloud was a contemptible herb yet the instrument to represent great deliverance LECTURE III. 1 TIM 1. 8 9. Knowing the Law is good if a man use it lawfully IT is my intent after the cleare proofe of Justification by the grace of God and not of works to shew how corrupt the Antinomian is in his inferences hence-from and this being done I shall shew you the necessity of holy and good works notwithstanding But before I come to handle some of their dangerous errours in this point let me premise something As 1. How cautelous and wary the Ministers of God ought to be in this matter so to set forth grace as not to give just exception to the popish caviller and so to defend holy works as not to give the Antinomian cause of insultation While our Protestant authors were diligent in digging out that precious gold of justification by free-grace out of the mine of the Scripture see what Canons the Councell of Trent made against them as Antinomian Can. 19. If any man shall say The ten Precepts belong nothing at all to Christians let him be accursed Decem praecepta nihil ad Christianos pertinere anathema sit Again Can. 20. If any man shall hold that a justified person is not bound to the observation of the Commandements but only to believe let him be accursed Si quis dixerit hominem justificatum non teneri ad observantiam mandatorum sed tantùm ad credendum anathema sit Again Can. 21. If any shall hold Christ Jesus to be given unto men as a Redeemer in whom they are to trust but not as a Law-giver whom they are to obey let him be accursed Si quis dixerit Christum Jesum datum fuisse hominibus ut redemptorem cui fidant non autem ut legislatorem cui obediant anathema sit You may gather by these their Canons that we hold such opinions as indeed the Antinomian-doth but our Writers answer Here they grossely mistake us and if this were all the controversie we should quickly agree It is no wonder then if it be so hard to preach free-grace and not provoke the Papist or on the other side to preach good works of the Law and not offend the Antinomian 2. There have been dangerous assertions about good works even by those that were no Antinomians out of a great zeale for the grace of God against Papists These indeed for ought I can learn did no wayes joyn with the Antinomians but in this point there is too much affinity There were rigid Lutherans called Flacians who as they did goe too far at least in their expressions about originall corruption for there are those that doe excuse them so also they went too high against good works Therefore in stead of that position maintained by the Orthodox Good works are necessary to salvation Bona opera sunt necessaria ad salutem they held Good works are pernicious to salvation Bona opera sunt perniciosa ad salutem The occasion of this division was the book called The Interim which Charles the Emperour would have brought into the Germane Churches In that book was this passage Good works are necessary to salvation to which Melancthon and others assented not understanding a necessity of merit or efficiency but of presence but Flacius Illyricus and his followers would not taking many high expressions out of Luther even as the Antinomians doe for their ground Hence also Zanchy because in his writings he had such passages as these No man grown up can be saved unlesse he give himself to good works and walk in them One Hinckellman a Lutheran doth endeavour by a troop of nine Arguments to tread downe this assertion of Zanchy which he calls Calviniana 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as a most manifest errour Now if all this were spoken to take men off from that generall secret sin of putting confidence in the good works we doe it were more tolerable in which sense we applaud that of Luther Take heed not only of evil works but of good Cave non tantùm ab operibus malis sed etiam
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
beleever Now it 's impossible that a man should be a beleever and his heart not purified Acts 15. for whole Christ is the object of his faith who is received not onely to justifie but to sanctifie Hence Rom. 8. where the Apostle seemeth to make an exact order he begins with Prescience that is approbative and complacentiall nâ—â— in a Popish or Arminian sense then Predestination then Calling then Justification then Glorification I will not trouble you with the dispute in which place Sanctification is meant Now the Antinomian he goeth upon that as true which the Papist would calumniate us with That a profane ungodly man if beleeving shall be justified We say this proposition supposeth an impossibility that faith in Christ or closing with him can stand with those sins because faith purifieth the heart By faith Christ dwells in our hearts Ephes 3. Therefore those expressions of the Antinomians are very dangerous and unsound and doe indeed confirme the Papists calumnies Another place they much stand upon is Rom. 5. Christ dyed for us while we were enemies while we were sinners But 1. if Christ dyed for us while we were enemies why doe they say That if a man be as great an enemy as enmity it selfe can make a man if he be willing to take Christ and to close with Christ he shall be pardoned which we say is a contradiction For how can an enemy to Christ close with Christ So that this would prove more then in some places they would seem to allow Besides Christ dyed not only to justifie but save us now will they hence therefore inferre that profane men living so and dying so shall be saved And indeed the grand principle That Christ hath purchased and obtained all graces antecedently to us in their sense will as necessarily inferre that a drunkard abiding a drunkard shall be saved as well as justified But thirdly to answer that place When it is said that Christ dyed and rose again for sinners you must know that this is the meritorious cause of our pardon and salvation but besides this cause there are other causes instrumentall that go to the whole work of Justification Therefore some Divines as they speak of a conversion passive and active so also of a justification active and passive and passive they call when not onely the meritorious cause but the instrument applying is also present then the person is justified Now these speak of Christs death as an universall meritorious cause without any application of Christs death unto this or that soule Therefore still you must carry this along with you that to that grand mercy of justification something is requisite as the efficient viz. the grace of God something as meritorious viz. Christs suffering something as instrumentall viz. faith and one is as necessary as the other I will but mention one place more and that is Psal 68. 18. Thou hast received gifts even for the rebellious also that the Lord God may dwell among them Here they insist much upon this yea for the rebellious and saith the Author pag. 411. Seeing God cannot dwell where iniquity is Christ received gifts for men that the Lord God might dwell among the rebellious and by this meanes God can dwell with those persons that doe act the rebellion because all the hatefulnesse of it is transacted from those persons upon the back of Christ. And saith the same Author pag. 412. The holy Ghost doth not say that the Lord takes rebellious persons and gifts and prepares them and then will come and dwell with them but even then while they are rebellious without any stop the Lord Christ hath received gifts for them that the Lord God may dwell among them Is not all this strange Though the same Authour presse sanctification never so much in other places yet certainly such principles as these overthrow it But as for this place it will be the greatest adversary they have against them if you consider the scope of it for there the Psalmist speaks of the fruit and power of Christs Ascension as appeareth Ephes 3. whereby gifts were given to men that so even the most rebellious might be converted and changed by this ministery so that this is clean contrary And besides those words with them or among them are not in the Hebrew therefore some referre them to the rebellious and make Jah in the Hebrew and Elohim in the Vocative case even for the rebellious O Lord God to inhabit as that of Esay The Wolfe and the Lamb shall dwell together Some referre it to Gods dwelling yet doe not understand it of his dwelling with them but of his dwelling i. e. fixing the Arke after the enemies are subdued But take our Edition to be the best as it seemeth to be yet it must be meant of rebels changed by his Spirit for the Scripture useth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Gods dwelling in men but still converted Rom. 8. 11. Ephes 3. 12. 2 Cor. 6. 16. LECTURE IV. 1 TIM 1. 8 9. Knowing the Law is good if a man use it lawfully HAving confuted some dangerous inferences that the Antinomian makes from that precious doctrine of Justification I shall at this time answer only one question Upon what grounds are the people of God to be zealous of good workes for it 's very hard to repent to love to be patient or fruitfull and not to doe them for this end to justifie us And howsoever theologically and in the notion we may make a great difference between holinesse as a way or meanes and as a cause or merit of salvation yet practically the heart doth not use to distinguish so subtilely Therefore although I intend not to handle the whole doctrine of Sanctification or new obedience at this time yet I should leave my discourse imperfect if I did not informe you how good works of the Law done by grace and justification of the Gospel may stand together First therefore take notice what we meane by good works We take not good works strictly for the works of charity or liberality nor for any externall actions of religion which may be done where the heart is not cleansed much lesse for the Popish good workes of supererogation but for the graces of Gods Spirit in us and the actions flowing from them For usually with the Papists and Popish persons good works are commonly called those superstitious and supererogant workes which God never commanded or if God hath commanded them they mean them as externall and sensible such as Coming to Church and Receiving of Sacraments not internall and spirituall faith and a contrite spirit which are the soule of all duties and if these be not there the outward duties are like clothes upon a dead man that cannot warme him because there is no life within Therefore much is required even to the essence of a godly work though it be not perfect in degrees As 1. It must be commanded by God 2. It
it converts the soul and we may adde those places of inlightning the minde that they cleanse a mans way c. he maketh this Question Whether the Law doth ever obtain such effects or no And he answereth affirmatively that it doth but then when it 's written not in tables but in the hearts and bowels of men so that he conceiveth the Spirit of God doth use the Law instrumentally so that he writeth it in our hearts And this is all we so contend for A third and last instance out of Scripture in answering of which all is answered is from Gal. 3. 2. Received ye the Spirit by the works of the Law or by the hearing of faith that is of the Gospel the doctrine of faith In the opening of this text we must take heed of three errours First of those who hold we have faith first before we have the Spirit for how can we come to have faith By our own reason and will This were to make it no work of God The Apostle therefore certainly speakes of the increase of the graces of the Spirit for it is well observed by Peter Martyr that in causes and effects there is a kinde of circle one increasing the other As the clouds arise from the vapours then these fall down again make vapours only you must acknowledge one first cause which had not it's being from the other and this is the Spirit of God which at first did work faith The second errour is of the Papists that maketh this difference between the Law and the Gospel That the same thing is called the Law while it is without the Spirit and when it hath the Spirit it is called the Gospel This is to confound the Law and Gospel and bring in Justification by works The third is of the Socinian mentioned afterwards These rocks avoided we come to consider the place and first I may demand Whether any under the Old-Testament were made partakers of Gods Spirit or no If they were how came they by it There can be no other way said but that God did give his Spirit in all those publique Ordinances unto the beleeving Israelites so that although they did in some measure obey the Law yet they did it not by the power of the Law but by the power of Grace Again in the next place which hath alwaies much prevailed with me did not the people of God receive the Grace of God offered in the Sacraments at that time We constantly maintain against the Papists that our Sacraments and theirs differ not for substance Therefore in Circumcision and the Paschall Lamb they were made partakers of Christ as well as we yet the Apostle doth as much exclude Circumcision and those Jewish Ordinances from Grace as any thing else Therefore that there may be no contradiction in Scripture some other way is to be thought upon about the exposition of these words Some there are therefore that doe understand by the Spirit the wonderfull and miraculous works of Gods Spirit for this was reserved till the times of the Messias and by these miracles his Doctrine was confirmed to be from Heaven and to this sense the fifth verse speaketh very expresly and Beza doth confesse that this is the principall scope of the Apostle though he will not exclude the other gracious works of Gods Spirit And if this should be the meaning it were nothing to our purpose Again thus it may be explained as by faith is meant the doctrine of faith so by the works of the Law is to be understood the doctrine of the works of the Law which the false Apostles taught namely that Christ was not enough to justification unlesse the works of the Law were put in as a cause also And if this should be the sense of the Text then it was cleare that the Galathians were not made partakers of Gods Spirit by the corrupt doctrine that was taught them alate by their seducers but before while they did receive the pure doctrine of Christ and therefore it was their folly having begun in the spirit to end in the flesh This may be a probable interpretation But that which I shall stand upon is this The Jewes and false Apostles they looked upon the Law as sufficient to save them without Christ consider Rom 2. 17 18 19. or when they went furthest they joyned Christ and the observance of the Morall Law equally together for justification and salvation whereas the Law separated from Christ did nothing but accuse and condemne not being able to help the soul at all Therefore it was a vain thing in them to hope for any such grace or benefit as they did by it So that the Apostles scope is not absolutely to argue against the benefit of the Law which David and Moses did so much commend but against it in the sense as the Jewes did commonly dote upon it which was to have justification by it alone or at the best when they put the Law and Christ together Now both these we disclaime either that God doth use the Law for our justification or that of it selfe it is able to stirre up the least godly affection in us More places of Scripture are brought against this but they will come in more fitly under the notion of the Law as a covenant Thus therefore I shall conclude this point acknowledgeing that many learned and orthodox men speake otherwise and that there is a difficulty in clearing every particular about this Question but as yet that which I have delivered earrieth the more probability with me and I will give one Text more which I have not yet mentioned and that is Act. 7. 38. where the Morall Law that Moses is said to receive that he might give the Isrealites is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the lively Oracles that is not verba vitae but verba viva vivificantia so that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is as much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 giving life not that we could have life by vertue of any obedience to them but when we by grace are inabled to obey them God out of his mercy bestoweth eternall life Let me also adde this that I the rather incline to this opinion because I see the Socinians urging these places or the like where justification and faith is said to be by Christ and the Gospel that they wholly deny that any such thing as grace and justification was under the Law and wonder how any should be so blind as not to see that these priviledges were revealed first by Christ in the Gospel under the new Covenant whereas it is plain that the Apostle instanceth in Abraham and David who lived under the Law as a schoole master for the same kinde of justification as ours is And thus I come to another Question which is the proper and immediate ground of strife between the Antinomian and us and from whence they have their name and that is the abrogation of the Morall Law And
must necessarily be grace included although indeed it was very obscure and dark And it is to be observed that the Apostle doth as much argue against circumcision and even all the Ceremoniall Law as the Morall yea the first rise of the cōtroversie was from that Now all must confesse that circumcision and the sacrifices did not oppose Christ or grace but rather included them And this hath been alwaies a very strong argument to perswade me for the affirmative It is true the Jewes they rested upon these and did not look to Christ but so do our Christians in these times upon the Sacraments and other duties 5. This will appear from the visible seale to ratifie this Covenant which you heard was by sacrifices and sprinkling the people with blood And this did signifie Christ for Christ he also was the Mediatour of this Covenant seeing that reconciliation cannot possibly be made with a sinner through the Mediation of any mortall man When therefore Moses is called the Mediatour it is to be understood typically even as the sacrifices did wash away sin typically And indeed if it had been a Covenant of works there needed no Mediatour either typicall or real some think Christ likewise was the Angell spoke of Act. 7. with whom Moses was in the wildernesse and it is probable Now if Christ was the Mediatour of the Law as a Covenant the Antinomian distinction must fall to the ground that makes the Law as in the hand of Moses and not in the hand of Christ whereas on Mount Sinai the Law was in the hand of Christ 6. If the Law were the same Covenant with that oath which God made to Isaac then it must needs be a Covenant of grace But we shall finde that God when he gave this Law to them makes it an argument of his love and grace to them and therefore remembers what he had promised to Abraham Deut. 7. 12. Wherefore it shall come to passe if ye hearken to these judgements and do them that the Lord thy God shall keep unto thee the Covenant the mercy which he sware unto thy fathers And certainly if the Law had been a Covenant of works God had fully abrogated and broken his Covenant and Promise of grace which he made with Abraham and his seed Therefore when the Apostle Gal. 3. 18. opposeth the Law and the promise together making the inheritance by one not the other it is to be understood according to the distinction before mentioned of the Law taken in a most strict and limited sense for it is plain that Moses in the administration of this Law had regard to the Covenant and Promise yea made it the same with it Now to all this there are strong objections made from those places of Scripture where the Law and faith or the promise are so directly opposed as Rom. 10. before quoted so Gal. 3. 18. Rom 4. 14. so likewise from those places where the Law is said to be the ministery of death and to work wrath Now to these places I answer these things First that if they should be rigidly and universally true then that doctrine of the Socinians would plainly prevaile who from these places of Scripture do urge that there was no grace or faith nor nothing of Christ vouchsafed unto the Jewes whereas they reade they had the Adoption though the state was a state of bondage In the second place consider that as it is said of the Law it worketh death so the Gospel is said to be the savour of death and men are said to have no sin if Christ had not come yea they are said to partake of more grievous judgements who despised Christ then those that despised the Law of Moses so that this effect of the Law was meerly accidentall through our corruption only here is the difference God doth not vouchsafe any such grace as whereby we can have justification in a strict legall way but he doth whereby we may obtain it in an Evangelicall way Thirdly consider that the Apostle speaketh these derogatory passages as they may seem to be as well of the Ceremoniall Law yet all do acknowledge here was Christ and grace held forth Fourthly much of these places is true in a respective sense according to the interpretation of the Jew who taking these without Christ make it a killing letter even as if we should the doctrine of the Gospel without the grace of Christ And certainly if any Jew had stood up and said to Moses Why do you say you give us the doctrine of life it 's nothing but a killing letter and the ministery of death would he not have been judged a blasphemer against the Law of Moses The Apostle therefore must understand it as seperated yea and opposed to Christ and his grace And lastly we are still to retain that distinction of the Law in a more large sense as delivered by Moses and a more strict sense as it consisteth in precepts threatnings and promises upon a condition impossible to us which is the fulfilling of the Law in a perfect manner LECTVRE XXV ROM 3. 27. Where is boasting then It is excluded By what law of works Nay but of faith THe Apostle delivered in the words before most compendiously and fully the whole doctrine of justification in the severall causes of it from whence in this verse he inferreth a conclusion against all boasting in a mans self which he manageth by short interrogations that so he might the more subdue that selfe confidence in us Where is boasting saith he This is to be applyed universally both to Jew and Gentile but especially to the Jew who gloried most herein and Chrysostome makes this the reason why Christ deferred so long put off his coming in the flesh viz. that our humane pride might be debased for if at first he had come unto us men would not have found such an absolute necessity of a Saviour The second Question is by what Law boasting is excluded and this is answered first negatively not by the Law of works Secondly positively by the law of faith The Apostle by the law of works meaneth the doctrine of works prescribing them as the condition of our justification and salvation and he saith works in the plurall number because one or two good works though perfectly done if that were possible would not satisfie the Law for our acceptation unlesse there were a continuall and universall practise of them both for parts and degrees and he cals the doctrine of faith the law of faith either because as Chrysostome saith he would sweeten and indeare the Gospel to the Jewes by giving it a name which they loved or as Beza he speaks here mimetically according to the sense of the Jewes as when John 6. he calleth Faith a work because the Jewes asked What should they do Now we have in the Scripture two lively comments upon both these parts of the Text. The Pharisee mentioning what he did reckoning
arguments p. 86 Nature cannot dispose or prepare a mans self for justification or sanctification p. 87. proved by four reasons p. 87. 88 All works of meere Nature are sins before God proved by foure Reasons p. 92 The Etymology of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 60 O. COrrupt glosses of the Pharisees concerning oathes reproved p. 187 Promissory oathes dangerous p. 186 The obedience of the Saints implies obedientiam servi though not obedientiam servilem p. 14 Christs active obedience to the Law imputed to beleevers p. 271 The obligation of the law of Nature is from God p. 64 Gods promises are obligations to himself not to us p. 127 Why the old Covenant is called old p. 241 How an opinion may corrupt the life p. 49 Whether Originall sin may be found out by the meere light of Nature p. 82 P. PAlemon converted from his drunkenness by Plato's Lecture which he came to deride p. 70 Papists make three false differences betwixt the Law and the Gospel p. 243 Paul and James reconciled in the point of justification p. 44 The perpetuity of the obligation of the law of Nature p. 64 A distinction of a three-fold piety confuted p. 80 The Law of God by Moses is so perfect a rule that Christ added no new precept to it p. 179 Different phrases used concerning the Ceremoniall law which are never applyed to the Morall law p. 2â—0 The opinion of the Pharisees concerning the Law p. 178 Why besides the Morall law a Positive law was given to Adam in innocency Two Reasons p. 106. 107 The Positive law did lay an obligation on Adams posterity p. 108 The seven Precepts of Noah What the Thalmudists speake concerning them p. 145 It 's a generall Rule that the pressing of morall duties by the Prophets in the Old Testament is but as an explanation of the Law p. 180 The Primitive Christians held it unlawfull to kill in defence p. 193 Capitall punishments lawfull in the New Testament p. 188. 189 To what purpose are exhortations to them who have no power to obey p. 98 Popery in a great part Antinomianisme page 276 R. WHy a Reason is rendred by God for the fourth Commandement rather then others p. 170 Remission of sinnes under the law plenary as well as under the Gospel proved against the Antinomian p. 246. 247. 248 Repentance how taken p. 260. 261 Resemblances of the Trinity coÌ„futed p. 79. 80 Every Rule hath vim praecepti as well as doctrinae p. 6 To do a duty because of reward promised is not slavish and unlawfull p. 128 Revenge forbidden in the Old Testament as strictly as in the New p. 192. 193 Righteousnesse of the Law and Gospel differ much p. 5 Whether we may be now said by Christ to be more righteous then Adam in innocency p. 138 The Law of Retaliation Matth. 7. 12. opened p. 82 The properties of the righteousnesse at first fixed in Adams heart p. 119 Whether righteousnesse were naturall to Adam p. 120 S. THe Sabbath in innocency not typicall of Christ p. 137 Satan cannot work beyond a morall perswasion as God doth in conversion p. 130 What the word Sanctifie implies p. 203. 204 How the Jewes were in more servitude then Christians p. 255 Sinners outward which are majoris infamiae Sinners inward which are majoris reatus p. 179 Sincerity taken two waies p. 265 Socinians and Papists make additions in the Gospel besides what was in the Law p. 242. 243 Why the shell-fish was unclean to the Jewes p. 2 Law called spirituall in a two-fold sense 1. Effective 2. Formaliter p. 7 How the state of innocency excelled the state of reparation in rectitude immortality and outward felicity p. 137 The state of reparation excells the state of innocency in certainty of perseverance ib. Eudoxus said he was made to behold the sun p. 77 Summe of all heavenly doctrine reduced to three heads Credenda Speranda Facienda p. 252 253 Symbolicall precept p. 104 T. TEaching nova novè p. 2 Tully said that the Law of the twelve Tables did exceed all the libraries of Philosophers both in weight of authority and fruitfulnesse of matter p. 3. 4 The Threatnings of the Gospel against those who reject Christ arise from the Law joyned in practicall use with the Gospel p. 261 Tree of knowledge p. 105 Whether the Tree of life was a Sacrament of Christ to Adam or no. p. 136 No truth in Divinity doth crosse the truth of nature p. 72 Doctor Tayler his Report of Antinomianisme p. 278 V. THe reason of the variety of Gods administrations in the two T. p. 256 A two fold Unbelief Negative which damnes none Positive which damnes many p. 81 Unbelief a sinne against the Law as well as against the Gospel p. 262 How God justifies the ungodly p. 36. 37 W. MInisters ought to be wary so to set out grace as not to give just exceptions to the Papists and so to defend holy works as not to give the Antinomians cause of insultation p. 29. 30 Warre lawfull under the Gospel p. 191 Will serious and efficacious the distinction examined p. 107 How the Word in generall is the instrument of conversion p. 197. 198. Two Rules about it proved p. 199 Word how used p. 145 Works denyed by the Antinomians to be a way to heaven p. 33 There have been dangerous assertions concerning works even by those who were no Antinomians out of a great zeal for the grace of God against Papists p. 30 The presence of good works in the person justified denied by the Antinomians p. 34. They deny any gain or losse to come by them No peace of conscience comes by doing good works nor lost by omitting them p. 34. which is confuted ibid. They deny good works to be signes or testimonies of grace p. 35. Confuted ibid. Upon what grounds are the people of God to be zealous of good works p. 38 The Antinomian erreth two contrary waies about good works p. 39 Distinction betwixt saying that good works are necessary to justified persons and that they are necessary to justification p. 40 Good works necessary upon 13. grounds p. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. A Table of divers Texts of Scripture which are opened or vindicated by this TREATISE Genesis Chap. Ver. Page 1 26 113 2 17 122 Exodus 20 1 145 34 27. 28 161 Leviticus 6 2. 3 246 16 16 247 Numbers 13 23 215 Deuteronomy 4 13 229 30 11 97 32 4 33 33 3 157 1 Samuel 4 17 240 2 Sam. 1. 10 240 1 Kings 8. 9 163 2 Kings 20. 3 45 Psalme 1. 19. 119 9 68 18 37 50 2 157 Isaiah 65. 1 248 Jeremiah 16 14. 15 172 50 20 244 Ezek. 16.  244 Daniel 9. 14 244 Zech. 13. 1 244 Matthew 5 17 46. 273  21. 22 174 7 17 33  12 82 12 28 157 Mark 13 7 265 16 15 240 Luke 11 20 157 16 16 223 John 1 9 78 8 7 190 14 31 14 15
10 17 17 203 Acts. 7 37 14  38 208 Romanes 1 18 68  19 77 2 14. 15 57  27 265 3 27 238  31 202 4 5 36  14 237 5 1 24  6. 8. 10 37 6 15 224 7 1. 2 227  per totum 9 8 11 38  13   29. 30 36 13 12 43 12 1 44 14 22 281 1 Corinthians 2 14  7 37 85 9 20 226 15 10 94 2 Corinthians 3 7 267 3 11 211 6 16 38 Galat. 3. 2 205  18   23 16  23. 24 269 4 24 157 5 23 54 5 5. 4. 13. 14 221 5 20 279 Ephesians 1 10 140. 134 2 14 211  15 212 3 12 38 6 2 171  14. 16 43 Philip. 3. 9 218 1 Thes 2. 16 265 1 Timothy 1 8. 9 17 1 9 49 4 8 42 7 5 265 2 Timothy 4 8 41 Titus 2 11. 12 204  14 40 Hebrewes 6 18 218 9 4 163  7 247  13. 14 245 10 17 244 11 16 253 12 5. 6. 7. 8 245  ult 34 Jam. 2. 8 265 1 Peter 3. 1 46 2 Peter 1 10 42  19 252 2 2. 15. 21 33 FINIS 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clem. Alex. The Text opened 1. The Law is good in respect of the matter 2. In respect of the authority of it 3. It 's instrumentally good 4. The Law is good in respect of its sanction 5. In respect of the acts of it * Assert of free grace pag. 31. 6. In respect of the end 7. In respect of the adjuncts 8. In respect of the use of it 1. Because it restrains and limits sin in the ungodly 2. Because it condemnes them 1. It quickens the godly against sin and corruption 2. It discovers sin unto them 3. It makes them disclaim all their own righteousnes 4. It makes them set an higher value of Christ and his benefits 1. The Law according to the use of the word in the Scripture is not onely a strict 〈◊〉 of things to be done by way of command but denoteth any heavenly doctrine whether it be promise or precept The acceptions of the word Law in Scripture are divers 2. The Law and the Spirit of God must not be separated 3. Obedience and love oppose not one another 4. Christs obedience exempts not us from ours 5. Beleevers sins condemned though not their persons * Dr Crisp 6. Inability to keep the Law exempts not from obedience to it * Dr Crisp 7. The Law though primarily it requireth perfect holinesse yet it excludes not a Mediatour The Law though it cannot justifie us is notwithstanding good and not to be rejected Grace and Christ not to be advanced oppositely to the Law The abuse of the Law no derogation to it 1. The Law is abused when converted to unprofitable disputes 2. When in the handling of it respect is had to worldly ends 3. When men deny it 4. When they misinterpret it 5. When they oppose it to Christ 6. When they expect justification by it 1. Justification by the Law overthrowes the nature of grace 2. Opposeth the fulnesse of Christ 3. Destroyes the true doctrine of Justification 4. Overthrows justifying faith 5. Discourageth the broken-hearted sinner 6. Brings men into themselves 7. Overthrowes the doctriâ—e of imputed righteousnesse 8. Keeps a man slavish in all his duties 9. Joyns a mans own graces to Christs mediation 10. Overthrowes hope 11. Robs God of his glory 12. Makes more in sin to damne then in Christ to save 13. Overthrowes the doctrine of sanctification 14. Takes away the doctrine of the Law 15. Overthroweth the consideration of man while he is justified Ministers ought so to set forth grace and defend good works as thereby to give the Enemy neither cause of exception nor insultation 1. Antinomians deny works to be a way to heaven 2. They deny their presence in the person justified 3. They deny any gain or losse to come by them 4. They deny them to be signes of grace How God may be said to justifie the ungodly Foure things required to the essence of good works Good works are necessary 1. Because they are the fruit of Christs death 2. Because in respect of evill workes there is some Analogy between heaven and them 3. Because a promise is made unto them 4. Because testimonies assuring us of our election 5. Because we cannot be saved without them 6. Because they are a defence against sinâ— 7. Because necessary by a naturall connexion with faith and the Spirit of God 8. By debt obligation 9. By command of God 1 Thes 4. 3. Rom. 12. 2. 10. By way of comfort to our selves 11. Because God is glorified by them 12. Because others are benefited thereby 13. Because godlinesse inherent is the end of our faith and justification The Law to a godly man is a delight not a burden The godly are under the desert of the curse but not the actuall condemnation of the Law The Law in the restraining power thereof was not made for the righteous but unrighteous 1. The true worship of God cannot be diseerned from false but by the Law 2. The depth of sin cannot be discovered without it Who meant by Gentiles How the Gentiles are said to be without a Law How said to do the things of the Law by nature The distinction of Morall and Theologicall good rejected What is here meant by Nature A two-fold writing of the Law in mens hearts and which here meant The law written in mens hearts two waies Rom. 4. 15. The Law of Nature consists in those common notions which are ingraffed in all mens hearts Some fragments onely of this Law left in us Those common notions in which this law consists are in us by nature Foure bounds of the law of Nature The obligation of the law of Nature is from God The obligation of the law of nature is perpetual and immutable The light of Nature is a remnant of Gods image 1. The light of Nature usefull and necessary for the making of wholsome lawes in Common-wealths 2. It instigateth to good duties towards God and man 3. It makes men inexcusable The light of Nature as corrupted by sin is an enemy to God and goodnes The light of Nature obscured three wayes The light of Nature inform'd by Gods Word an excellent help The light of Nature as it is a relict of Gods image is necessary in religious and morall things and that two wayes Though some divine truths may transcend the reach of Nature none do crosse the truth thereof as it is the remnant of Gods image Faith and the light of Nature go to the knowledge of the same thing different wayes The light of Nature a necessary instrument but no Judge in matters of Faith Nature insufficient to prescribe divine Worship 1. Because it would have all the worship of God sensible and pleasing to the eyes 2. Because it 's prone to appoint mediatours between