he saith The promise or the Gospel and not the Law is the seed or doctrine of our new birth Assert of grace page 163. Now here are ambiguites as first the promise or Gospel for by this hee seemeth to decide a great Question that whatsoever is a promise in the Scripture that belongs to the Gospel and whatsoever is not that but a command or threatning that belongs to the Law whereas this needeth a great discussion 2. The state of the Question is not about the Gospel or the Law as they are both a doctrine in the Scripture but about the Spirit of God working by one or the other and the not attending to this makes the arguments so confounded 3. Hee saith it 's not the seed of the new birth whereas conversion or regeneration is made the writing of the Law in the heart and Mat. 13. The Word of God in generall is compared to seed sowen that brings forth different fruit as was said before but to let this passe The first instance that is brought cometh from John 17. v. 17. Instance 1 Sanctifie them through thy truth thy Word is truth Where saith the Authour to sanctifie is to separate any thing from a common use and to consecrate it to God and applied here to man includeth two things 1. Justification by the communication of Christs perfect holinesse whereby the beleever is presented holy and without blame to God 2. An inward renewing and changeing purifying the heart and life by degrees c. pag. 165. I answer 1. The word sanctifie when applied to men doth Answer 1 not onely signifie justification or renovation but setting a part to some peculiar office and charge and there are Learned men who take this to be the meaning of Christs prayer here That as the Priests and Levites who were to enter into the sanctuary did first wash their hands and feet being also cloathed with goodly garments so the Apostles are here prayed for by our Saviour that they may be fitted for their great charge And thus Chrysostome you have a parallel place Jer. 1. 5. Before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee and I ordained thee a Prophet unto the Nations And this exposition is confirmed by the manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in truth so they reade it and mention not the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is not in some copies so that they take it as an expression opposing the sanctification of the Priests which was by legall types and shadowes But that which doth especially confirme this exposition seemeth to be the two verses following As thou hast sent mee into the world so have I also sent them into the world and for their sakes I sanctifie my selfe that they also may be sanctified through the truth Now sanctification as it comprehends justification and renovation cannot be applied to Christ but it must signifie the segregating and setting apart himselfe for the office of the Mediatour Besides if sanctification doe here include justification how by the Antinomian principle can our Saviour pray for the justification of those who are already justified But in the next place grant that interpretation of sanctification Answer 2 for renovation how doth this prove that the Law is not used instrumentally For our Saviours argument is universall thy word is truth And may not this be affirmed of the Law as well as the Gospel Doth not David speaking of the Law call it pure and cleane that is true having no falshood in it Yea it is thought probable by a learned man that this speech of our Saviours is taken out of Psal 119. 142. where are these words Gerbard expresly Thy Law is the truth Where the word Law cannot exclude the Morall Law though it may include more The next instance is Tit. 2. ver 11 12. For the grace of God that Instance 2 bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men teaching us that denying ungodlinesse and wordly lusts c. I answer All this may be granted and nothing makes against Answ this opinion for none deny the Gospel to be the instrument of holinesse But is not here a contradiction The Author before made the Gospel and a Promise all one whereas here it doth command holinesse and godlinesse Is not this with the Papists to make the Gospel a new Law Let him reconcile himself In the next place he doth ambiguously put into the argument the word effectually which is not in the Text for although God doth by his grace in the Gospel effectually move those that are elected to Godlinesse yet Scripture and experience sheweth that where the grace of the Gospel hath appeared thus teaching men yet all are not effectually turned unto holinesse from their worldly lusts Besides the argument may be retorted upon him What word teacheth to deny all ungodlinesse that sanctifieth instructeth but the Law doth so insomuch that the Psalmist saith Psal 119. A young man whose lusts are strongest and temptations most violent may be cleansed by attending thereunto only you must alwayes take notice of the preheminency of the Gospel above the Law for the Law could never have any such good effect upon the heart of man were it not for the gracious Promise by Christ Therefore all the godly men in the Old Testament that received benefit by the Morall Law in studying of it and meditating upon it did depend upon the Gospel or the grace of God in Christ as appeareth by David praying so often to be quickned by Gods Law And here by the way let me take notice of a remarkable passage of Peter Martyr in his Comment on the seventh Chapter of the Epistle to the Rom. ver 14. where speaking of the great commendation the Psalmist gives the Law of God that it converts the soul and we may adde those places of inlightning the minde that they clense 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 Instance 3 which all is answered is from Gal. 3. 2. Received ye the Spirit by Answ the works of the Law or by the hearing of faith that is of the Three Errours to be taken heed of in opening Gal. 3. 2. 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 Errour 1 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
the precepts of the morall Law for they were the chiefest and indeed the whole word of God is an organ and instrument of Gods Spirit for instruction reformation and to make a man perfect to every good work It 's an unreasonable thing to separate the Law from the Spirit of God and then compare it with the Gospel for if you doe take the Gospel even that promise Christ came to save sinners without the Spirit it worketh no more yea it 's a dead letter as well as the Law Therefore Calvin well called Lex corpus and the Spirit anima now accedat anima ad corpus and it 's a living reasonable man But now as when we say A man discourses A man understands this is ratione animae not corporis so when we say A man is quickened by the Law of God to obedience this is not by reason of the Law but of the Spirit of God But of this anon 4. It s good in respect of the sanction of it for it 's accompanied 4. The Law is good in respect of its sanction with promises and that not only temporall as Command 5. but also spirituall Command 2. where God is said to pardon to many generations and therefore the Law doth include Christ secondarily and occasionally though not primarily as hereafter shall be shewed It 's true the righteousnesse of the Law and that of the Gospel differ toto coelo we must place one in suprema parte coeli and the other in ima parte terrae as Luther speaks to that effect and it 's one of the hardest taskes in all divinity to give them their bounds and then to cleare how the Apostle doth oppose them and how not We know it was the cursed errour of the Manichees and Marcionites that the Law was onely carnall and had onely carnall promises whereas it 's evident that the Fathers had the same faith for substance as we have It 's true if we take Law and Gospel in this strict difference as some Divines doe that all the precepts wheresoever they are must be under the Law and all the promises be reduced to the Gospel whether in Old or New Testament in which sense Divines then say Lex jubet Gratia juvat and Lex imperat and Fides impetrat then the Law can have no sanction by promise But where can this be shewed in Scripture 5. In respect of the acts of it You may call them either acts 5. In respect of the acts of it or ends I shall acts And thus a law hath divers acts 1. Declarative to lay down what is the will of God 2. To command obedience to this will declared 3. Either to invite by promises or compell by threatnings 4. To condemne the transgressors and this use the Law is acknowledged by all to have against ungodly and wicked men and some of these cannot be denied even to the godly I wonder much at an Antinomian authour that saith * Assert of free grace pag. 31. It cannot be a law unlesse it also be a cursing law for besides that the same authour doth acknowledge the morall Law to be a rule to the beleever and regula hath vim praecepti as well as doctrinae what will he say to the law given to Adam who as yet was righteous and innocent and therefore could not be cursing or condemning of him It 's true if we take cursing or condemning potentially so a law is alwaies condemning but for the actuall cursing that is not necessary for such a transgressour that hath a surety in his room 6. In respect of the end of it Rom. 16. 4. Christ is the end of the 6. In respect of the end Law By reason of the different use of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there are different conjectures some make it no more then extremitas or terminus because the ceremoniall Law ended in Christ Others make it finis complementi the fulnesse of the Law is Christ Others adde finis intentionis or scopi to it so that by these the meaning is The Law did intend Christ in all its ceremonialls and moralls that as there was not the least ceremony which did lead to Christ so not the least iota or apex in the morall Law but it did also aime at him Therefore saith Calvin upon this place Habemus insignem locum quòd Lex omnibus suis partibu◠in Christum respiciat Imò quicquid Lex docet quicquid praecipit quicquid promittit Christum pro scope habet What had it been for a Jew to pray to God if Christ had not been in that prayer to love God if Christ had not been in that love yet here is as great a difference between the Gospel as is between direction and exhibition between a school-master and a father he is an unwise childe that will make a school-master his father Whether this be a proper intention of the Law you shall have hereafter 7. In respect of the adjuncts of it which the Scripture attributeth 7. In respect of the adjuncts to it And it 's observable that even where the Apostle doth most urge against the Law as if it were so farre from bettering men that it makes them the worse yet there he praiseth it calling it good and spirituall Now I see it called spirituall in a two-fold sense 1. Effectivè because it did by Gods Spirit quicken to spirituall life even as the Apostle in the opposition calls himselfe carnall because the power of corruption within did work carnall and sinfull motions in him But I shall expound it spirituall 2. Formaliter formally because the nature and extent of it is spirituall for it forbids the sins of the spirit not onely externall sins it forbids thy spirit pride thy spirit envie Even as God is the father of spirits so is the Law the law of spirits Hence it 's compared by James to a glasse which will shew the least spot in the face and will not flatter but if thou hast wrinckles and deformities there they will be seen so that there is no such way to bring Pharisaicall and Morall men out of love with themselves as to set this glasse before them 8. In respect of the use of it and that to the ungodly and to the 8. In respect of the use of it beleever 1. To the ungodly it hath this use 1. To restraine and limit sin And certainly though it should 1. Because it restraines and limits sin in the ungodly not reach to renovation and changing of mens hearts yet here is a great deale of good that it 's an outward whip and scourge to men whereby they are kept in honest discipline and this made the Apostle say The Law was added because of transgressions The people of Israel by their being in the wildernesse having forgotten God and being prone to Idolatry the Lord he added this Law as a restraint upon them Even as you see upon mad-men and those that are possessed
with divels we put heavie chaines and fetters that they may doe no hurt so the Lord laid the Law upon the people of Israel to keep them in from impietie The Apostle useth a word shut up as in a dungeon but that is to another sense It was Chrysostomes comparison As a great man suspecting his wife appoints Eunuchs to look to her and keep her so did God being jealous over the Jewes appoint these lawes 2. To curse and condemne and in this respect it poureth all 2. Because it condemnes them its fury upon the ungodly The Law to the godly by Christ is like a Serpent with a sting pulled out but now to the wicked the sting of sinne is the Law and therefore the condition of that man who is thus under it is unspeakably miserable The curse of it is the sore displeasure of God and that for every breach of it and if men that have broken onely mens lawes be yet so much afraid that they hide themselves and keep close when yet no man or Judge can damne them or throw them into hell what cause is there to feare that Law-giver who is able to destroy soule and body Therefore consider thou prophane man are not thy oaths are not thy lusts against Gods Law You had better have all the men in the world your enemy then the Law of God It 's a spirituall enemy and therefore the terrours of it are spirituall as well as the duties Let not your lives be Antinomians no more then opinions Oh that I could confute this Antinomianisme also such a mans life and conversation was against GODS Law but now it 's not 2. To Beleevers it hath this use 1. To excite and quicken them 1. It quickens the godly against sin and corruption against all sinne and corruption for howsoever the Scripture saith Against such there is no law and The Law is not made to the righteous yet because none of the godly are perfectly righteous and there is none but may complaine of his dull love and his faint delight in holy things therefore the Law of God by commanding doth quicken him How short is this of that which God cōmands not that a man is to look for justification by this or to make these in stead of a Christ to him but for other ends Hence Psal 1. and Psal 19. and 119. who can deny that they belong to the godly now as well as heretofore Have not beleevers now crookednesse hypocrisie luke-warmnesse You know not onely the unruly colt that is yet untamed but the horse that is broken hath a bit and bridle also and so not onely the ungodly but even the godly whose hearts have been much broken and tamed doe yet need a bridle Nè Spiritum sessorem excutiant And if men should be so peremptorie as to say they doe not need this it 's not because they doe not need it for they need it most but because they doe not feele it 2. To enlighten and discover unto them daily more and more heart-sinne 2. It discovers sin unto them and soule-sinne This use the Apostle speaketh of Rom. 7. per totum for how should a man come to know the depth of originall sinne all the sinfull motions flowing from it but by the Law and therefore that is observed by Divines the Apostle saith he had not knowne sinne but by the Law intimating thereby that the Law of nature was so obliterated and darkened that it could not shew a man the least part of his wickednesse Seneca who had more light then others yet he saith Erras si tecum vitia nasci putas supervenerunt ingesta sunt And so Pelagius his assertion was that tam sine vitio quà m sine virtute nascimur And you see all Popery to this day holds those motions of heart not consented to to be no sins but necessary conditions arising from our constitution and such as Adam had in innocency Therefore the people of God see and are humbled for that wickednesse which others take no notice of This will satisfie man but not Gods Law 3. To drive them out of all their owne power and righteousnesse 3. It makes them disclaim all their owne righteousness And this is another good consequence for when they see all to come short of the Law that the earth is not more distant from heaven then they from that righteousnesse this makes them to goe out of all their prayers and all their duties as you see Paul Rom. 7. he consented to the Law and he delighted in it but he could not reach to the righteousnesse of it and therefore crieth out Oh wretched man that I am How apt are the holiest to be proud and secure as David and Peter even as the wormes and wasps eat the sweetest apples and fruit but this will keep thee low How absurd then are they that say The preaching of the Law is to make men trust in themselves and to adhere to their owne righteousnesse for there is no such way to see a mans beggery and guilt as by shewing the strictnesse of the Law For what makes a Papist so selfe-confident that his hope is partly in grace and partly in merits but because they hold they are able to keep the Law God forbid saith a Papist that we should enjoy heaven as of meere almes to us no we have it by conquest Whence is all this but because they give not the Law its due 4. Hereby to quicken them to an higher price and esteem of Christ 4. It makes them set an higher value of Christ and his benefits and the benefits by him So Paul in that great agony of his striving with his corruption being like a living man tyed to a dead carkasse his living faith to dead unbeliefe 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 1. The Law according to the use of the word in the Scripture is not onely a
Father hath commanded me so I you John 15. 10. If you keep my commandements and abide in love c. And indeed if it were not a commandement it could not be called an obedience of Christ for that doth relate to a command Now this I inferre hence that to doe a thing out of obedience to a command because a command doth not inferre want of love although I grant that the commandement was not laid upon Christ as on us either to direct him or quicken him Besides all the people of God have divers relations upon which their obedience lyeth they are Gods servants and that doth imply obedientiam servi though not obedientiam servilem Againe a Beleever may look to the reward and yet have a spirit of love how much rather look to the command of God A godly man may have amorem mercedis though not amorem mercenarium And lastly there is no godly man but he hath in part some unwillingnesse to good things and therefore needs the Law not onely to direct but to exhort and goad forward Even as I said the tamed horse needeth a spur as well as the unbroken colt 4. Though Christ hath obeyed the Law fully yet that doth not exempt 4. Christs Obedience exempts not us from ours us from our obedience to it for other ends then he did it And I think that if the Antinomian did fully inform himselfe in this thing there were an agreement for we all ought to be zealous against those Pharisaicall and Popish practices of setting up any thing in us though wrought by the grace of God as the matter of our justification But herein they do not distinguish or well argue The works of the Law do not justifie therefore they are needlesse or not requisite for say they if Christ hath fully obeyed the righteousnesse of the Law and that is made ours therefore it is not what ours is but what Christs is And I have heard some doubt whether the maintaining of Christs active obedience imputed to us doth not necessarily imply Antinomianisme but of that more hereafter onely let them lay a parallel with Christs passive obedience He satisfied the curse and threatning of the Law and thereby hath freed us from all punishment yet the Beleevers have afflictions for other ends so doe we the works of Gods Law for other ends then Christ did them A fifth caution or limitation shall be this to distinguish between 5. Beleevers sins condemned though not their persons a Beleever and his personall acts For howsoever the Law doth not curse or condemne him in regard of his state yet those particular sins he commits it condemnes them and they are guilty of Gods wrath though this guilt doth not redound upon the person Therefore it is a very wide comparison of * Dr. Crisp one that a man under grace hath no more to doe with the Law then an English-man hath with the lawes of Spaine or Turkie For howsoever every Beleever be in a state of grace so that his person is justified yet being but in part regenerated so farre as his sinnes are committed they are threatned and condemned in him as well as in another for there is a simple guilt of sin and a guilt redundant upon the person 6. That the Law is not therefore to be decryed because we have no 6. Inability to keep the Law exempts not from obedience to it power to keep the Law For so we have no power to obey the Gospell It is an expression an Antinomian * Dr. Crisp useth The Law saith he speaketh to thee if troubled for sin Doe this and live Now this is as if a Judge should bid a malefactor If you will not be hanged take all England and carry it upon your shoulders into the West Indies What comfort were this Now doth not the Gospel when it bids a man beleeve speak as impossible a thing to a mans power It 's true God doth not give such a measure of grace as is able to fulfill the Law but we have faith enough evangelically to justifie us But that is extraneous to this matter in hand It followes therefore that the Law taken most strictly and the Gospel differ in other considerations then in this 7. They do not distinguish between that which is primarily and per 7. The Law though primarily it requireth perfect holinesse yet it excludes not a Mediatour se in the Law and that which is occasionally It cannot be denied but the Decalogue requireth primarily a perfect holinesse as all lawes require exactnesse but yet it doth not exclude a Mediatour The Law saith Doe this and live and it doth not say None else shall doe this for thee and then thou shalt live For if so then it had been injustice in God to have given us a Christ I therefore much wonder at one who in his book speaks thus The Law doth not onely deprive us of comfort but it will let no body else speak a word of comfort because it is a rigid keeper and he confirmeth it by that place Galat. 3. 23. But how short this is appeareth 1. Because what the Apostle calleth the Law here he called the Scripture in generall before 2. He speaketh it generally of all under that forme of Moses his regiment so that the Fathers should have no comfort by that meanes Use 1. Of instruction How dangerous an errour it is to deny The Law though it cannot justifie us is notwithstanding good and not to be rejected the Law for is it good and may it be used well then take we heed of rejecting it What because it is not good for justification is it in no sense else good Is not gold good because you cannot eat on it and feed on it as you do meat Take the precept of the Gospel yea take the Gospel acts as To beleeve this as it is a work doth not justifie Therefore that opinion which makes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere to justifie may as well take in other acts of obedience But because faith as it is a work doth not justifie doe you therefore reject beleeving A man may abuse all the ordinances of the Gospel as well as the Law The man that thinks the very outward work of baptism the very outward work of receiving a sacrament will justifie him doth as much dishonour God as a Jew that thought circumcision or the sacrifices did justifie him You may quickly turn all the Gospel into the Law in that sense you may as well say What need I pray what need I repent it cannot justifie me as to deny the Law because it cannot Use 2. How vaine a thing it is to advance grace and Christ Grace and Christ not to be advanced oppositely to the Law oppositely to the Law nay they that destroy one destroy also the other Who prizeth the city of refuge so much as the malefactour that is pursued by guilt Who desireth the brasen Serpent but
a great part of it they make it commonitory and not obligatory and the power of man they make to be the rule of his duty whereas it is plaine by Scripture that that measure of grace which God giveth any man upon earth is not answerable to the duty commanded there It is true Hierome said It was blasphemy to say God commanded any thing impossible but in this sense impossible absolutely so that man could never have fulfilled it 5. When they doe oppose it to Christ. And this was the Jewes 5. When they oppose it to Christ fundamentall errour and under this notion doth the Apostle argue against it in his Epistles to the Romans and Galatians And howsoever they would have compounded Christ and the Law together yet this composition was to make opposition There can be no more two Suns in the firmament then two things to justifie Therefore the reconciliation of the Law and Christ cannot be in matter of justification by way of mixture but yet one is antecedaneous and subordinate to the other and is no more to be opposed then the end to the meanes Nor is it any wonder that the Law through errour may be opposed to Christ seeing that Christ may be opposed to Christ as in Popery Christ sanctifying is opposed to Christ justifying for when we charge them with derogating from Christ in holding our graces doe justifie Nay say they we set him up more then you for we hold He doth make us holy That this holinesse doth justifie Thus you see Christ in his works is opposed to Christ in his justifying And here by the way you may see that that onely is the best way of advancing Christ or grace which is in a Scripture way and not what is possible for us to think as the Papists doe 6. When they look for justification by it and this is a dangerous 6. When they expect justification by it and desperate errour this is that which reigneth in Popery this is that inbred canker-worme that eateth in the hearts of all naturally They know not a Gospel-righteousnesse and for this end they reade the Law they heare it preached onely that they may be selfe-saviours And certainly for this two-fold end I may think God suffers this Antinomian errour to grow first That Ministers may humble themselves they have not set forth Christ and grace in all the glory of it If Bernard said he did not love to reade Tully because he could not reade the Name of Christ there how much rather may we say that in many Sermons in many a mans ministery the drift and end of all his preaching is not that Christ may be advanced And in Christians in Protestants it is a farre greater sin then in Papists for it is well observed by Peter Martyr that the Apostle doth deale more mildly in the Epistle to the Romans then in the Epistle to the Galatians and the reason is because the Galatians were at first well instructed in the matter of justification but afterwards did mixe other things with Christ therefore he thunders against them I desire to know nothing saith Paul 1 Corinth 2. but Jesus Christ and him crucified And secondly another end may be to have these truths beaten out more As The deity of Christ because of the Arrians and Grace in predestination and conversion by the Pelagians so The grace of justification because not onely of Papists but Antinomians And certainly these things were much pressed by Luther at first as appeares in his Epistle to the Galatians but perceiving how this good doctrine was abused he speaks in his Commentary on Genesis which was one of his last workes much against Antinomists But yet because generally people are fallen into a formality of truthes it 's good to set up Christ And the poyson of this opinion will be seen in these things 1. It overthroweth the nature of grace And this holdeth against 1. Justification by the Law overthrowes the nature of grace the workes of the Gospel as well as those of the Law Take notice of this that justification by workes doth not onely exclude the workes of the Law but all workes of the Gospel yea and the workes of grace also Hence you see the opposition is of works and of grace Here the Apostle makes an immediate opposition whereas the Papist would say Paul hath a non sequitur for datur tertium workes of and by grace But workes doe therefore oppose grace because the frequent acception of it in the Scripture is for the favour of God without us not any thing in us I will not deny but that the word grace is used for the effects of it inherent holinesse wrought in us as in that place Grow in grace and knowledge but yet commonly grace is used for the favour of God And the ignorance of the use of the word in Scripture makes them so extoll inherent holinesse as if that were the grace which should save us As saith the Papist a bird cannot fly without wings the fish swimme without scales the Sculler without his oare cannot get to the haven so without this grace wee cannot fly into heaven and that as the meritorius cause But this is ignorance of the word grace and so the troubles and unbeliefe of the godly heart because it is not so holy as it would be cometh from the mistake of the word grace I shall anticipate my selfe in another subject if I should tell you how comprehensive this word is implying no merit or causality on our part for acceptance but the cleane contrary and therefore for God to deale with us in grace is more then in love for Adam if he had continued righteous he had been partaker of life this had been the gift of God but not by the grace of God as it is strictly taken for Adam was not in a contrary condition to life I will not trouble you with Pareus his apprehension that thinketh Adams righteousnesse could not be called grace therefore reproveth Bellarmine for his title De gratia primi hominis neither will hee acknowledge those habits of holinesse in Christ to be called grace because there was not a contrary disposition in his nature to it as it is in ours And this also Cameron presseth that besides the indebitum which grace implyeth in every subject there is also a demeritum of the contrary Thus then justification is of grace because thy holinesse doth not onely not deserve this but the cleane contrary Now what a cordiall may this be to the broken heart exercised with its sinnes How may the sicke say There I finde health the poore say There I finde riches And as for the Papists who say they set up grace and they acknowledge grace yet first it must be set downe in what sense wee take grace It is not every man that talketh of grace doth therefore set up Scripture-grace Who knoweth not that the Pelagians set up grace They determined that whosoever did not
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 Vse 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 hee calls him that denied 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 Vse 3. To take heed of using the Law for our justification It 's an unwarranted way you cannot find 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 sprinckled 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 Arke 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 doe not thinke to beleeve in Christ a contemptible and unlikely way for it is not because of the dignity 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 of much 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 workes 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 workes 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 Ministers ought so to set forth grace and defend good workes as thereby to give the Enemy neither cause of exception nor insultation 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 Decem praecepta nihil ad Christianos pertinere anathema sit Againe Can. 20. Si quis dixerit hominem justificatum non teneri ad observantiam mandatorum sed tantùm ad credendum anathema sit Againe Can. 21. 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 wee 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 otherside to preach good workes 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 learne did no waies joyne with the Antinomians but in this point there is too much affinity There were rigid Lutherans called Flactans 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 workes Therefore instead of that position maintained by the orthodox Bona opera sunt necessaria ad salutem they held 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 booke 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 growen up can be saved unlesse he give himself to good works and walke in them One Hinckellman a Lutheran doth endeavour by a troope of nine Arguments to tread down this assertion of Zanchy which he calls Calviniana 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as a most manifest error Now if all this were spoken to take men off from that generall secret sin of putting confidence in the good works we do it were more tolerable in which sense we applaud that of Luther Cave non tantùm ab operibus malis sed etiam à bonis and that of another man who said hee got more good by his sins then his graces But these speeches must be soundly understood We also love that of Austine Omnia mandata tua facta deputantur quando quicquid non fit ignoscitur 3. That if 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 seemes not to be There is more poyson 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 thinke 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 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 selfe 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 hee 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
this person doe thus the hatefullnesse thereof is laid upon Christ Is not this such a doctrine that must needes please an ungodly heart 3. In the denying of gaining any thing by them even any peace of 3. They deny any gaine or losse to come by them heart or losing it by them Now this goeth contrary to Scripture Thus page 139. the Antinomian saith The businesse we are to doe is this that though there be sinnes committed yet there is no peace broken because the breach of peace is satisfied in Christ there is a reparation of the damage before the damage it selfe be committed And againe page 241. If God come to reckon with beleevers for sinne either he must aske something of them or not If not why are they troubled If so then God cannot bring a new reckoning And in other places If a man look to get any thing by his graces hee will have nothing but knocks To answer these it is true if a man should look by any repentance or grace to have heaven and pardon as a cause or merit this were to be ignorant of the imperfection of all our graces and the glorious greatnesse of those mercies What proportion hath our faith or godly sorrow with the everlasting favour and good pleasure of God But first the Scripture useth severe and sharp threatnings even unto the godly where they neglect to repent or goe on in sin Rom. 8. 13. If yee live after the flesh you shall die especially consider that place Hebr. 12. two last verses the Apostle alludeth to that place Deut. 4. and he saith Our God as well as the God of the Jewes who appeared in terrour is a consuming fire Now then if the Scripture threatens thus to men living in sin if they doe not they may finde comfort 2 dly Our holy duties they have a promise of pardon and eternall life though not because of their worth yet to their presence and therefore may the godly rejoyce when they finde them in themselves Lastly their ground is still upon that false bottome Because our sins are laid upon Christ What then they may be laid upon us in other respects to heale us to know how bitter a thing it is to sinne against God God doth here as Joseph with his brethren he caused them to be bound and to be put in goales as if now they were to smart for their former impiety 4. They deny them to be signes of grace 4. In denying them to be signes and testimonies of grace or Christ dwelling in us And here indeed one would wonder to see how laborious an Author is to prove that no inherent graces can be signes and he selects three instances Of universality of obedience Of sincerity and love to the brethren concluding that there are two evidences onely one revealing which is the Spirit of God immediatly the other receiving and that is faith Now in answering of this wee may shew briefly how many weak props this discourse leaneth upon 1. In confounding the instrumentall evidencing with the efficient Not holy works say they but the Spirit Here he doth oppose subordinates Subordinata non sunt opponenda sed componenda As if a man should say We see not by the beames or reflection of the Sun but the Sun Certainly every man is in darknesse and like Hagar seeth not a fountaine though neare her till her eyes be opened Thus it is in grace 2. We say that a Christian in time of darknesse and temptation is not to goe by signes and markes but obedientially to trust in God as David calls upon his soul often and the word is emphaticall signifying such a relying or holding as a man doth that is falling down into a pit irrecoverably 3. His Arguments against sincerity and universality of obedience goe upon two false grounds 1. That a man cannot distinguish himselfe from hypocrites which is contrary to the Scriptures exhortation 2. That there can be no assurance but upon a full and compleat work of godlinesse All which are popish arguments 4. All those arguments will hold as strongly against faith for Are there not many beleevers for a season Is there not a faith that indureth but for a while May not then a man as soone know the sincerity of his heart as the truth of his faith Now let us consider their grounds for this strange assertion 1. Because Roman 4. it is said that God justifieth the ungodly How God may be said to justifie the ungodly Now this hath a two-fold answer 1. That which our Divines doe commonly give that these words are not to be understood in sensu composito but diviso and antecedenter he that was ungodly is being justified made godly also though that godlinesse doe not justifie him Therefore they compare these passages with those of making the blind to see and deafe to heare not that they did see while they were blind but those that were blind doe now see and this is true and good But I shall secondly answer it with some learned men that ungodly there is meant of such who are so in their nature considered having not an absolute righteousnesse yet at the same time beleevers even as Abraham was and faith of the ungodly man is accounted to him for righteousnesse So then the subject of justification is a sinner yet a 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 not 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 unfound 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 onely to justifie but save us now will they hence therefore inferre that profane men living
and loved him and said he was not farre from the Kingdome of heaven that is the life hee lived was not farre from the Kingdome of heaven yet this was no preparation in it selfe to it nay he may be further off as two high hills may be neere in the tops to one another but the bottomes some miles asunder And this is so great a matter that great sins are made by God a preparation to some mans conversion which yet of themselves they could never 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 Determination to one kind of acts takes not away 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 he 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 A three-fold liberty 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 ye free indeed when the Son hath made you free and of which Austin Tunc est liberum quando liberatum 3. From naturall necessity and thus also man though he 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 wee 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 Determination to sin takes not away that delight in sin which man is inevitably carried out unto 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 himself into this necessity and so is as if a man in debt who was once able to pay but by his willfull 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 seipsum Hence it is that a mans whole damnation is to be ascribed to himselfe Wee our selves have destroyed our owne soules we 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 Much may be ascribed to grace and yet the totall efficacy not given unto it not give the totall efficacy unto it This is amaine particular to consider for Pelagius and Arminius and Papists all doe aknowledge grace Pelagius it s noted of him that hee did foure times incrustate his opinion and held grace in every one of them He did gratiae vocabulo uti ad frangendum invidiam 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 selfe 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 Againe they make grace a partiall cause onely so that it stirreth up our naturall strength to worke this or that good thing and therefore we are synergists or co-workers with God in the worke of conversion but this supposeth us not dead in sinne 9. Men may naturally performe the outward act of a commandement The outward act of a commandement may be performed by the power of Nature 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 he took captives which is so much related in stories and many other famous instances of the Heathens though some indeed think
to be shewed 4. How can God upbraid or reprove men for their transgressions Necessity of sinning hinders not the delight and willingnesse man hath in sin and consequently God may reprove him for his transgressions if they could doe no other waies This also seemeth very strange if men can doe no otherwise Is not this as ridiculous to threaten them as that of Xerxes who menaced the sea I answer No because still whatsoever man offends in it 's properly his fault and truly his sin for whatsoever he sinneth in he doth it voluntarily and with much delight and is therefore the freer in sin by how much the more he delights in it And this Austin would diligently inculcate that so no man might think to cast his faults upon God There is no man forced to sin but hee doth it with all his inclination and delight How farre voluntarinesse is requisite to the nature of a sin at least actuall though not to originall is not now to be determined for we all acknowledge that this necessity of sinning in every man doth not hinder the delight and willingnesse he hath in it at the same time Nor should this be thought so absurd for even Aristotle saith * Cap. 5. l. 3. Ethie ad Nicom that though men at first may choose whether they will be wicked or no yet if once habituated they cannot but be evill and yet for all that this doth not excuse but aggravate If an Ethiopian can change his skin saith the Prophet then may you doe good who have accustomed your selves to doe evill The Oake while it was a little plant might be pulled up but when it 's growne into its full breadth and height none can move it Now if it be thus of an habit how much more of originall sin which is the depravation of the nature And howsoever Austin was shye of calling it naturale malum for fear of the Manichees yet sometimes he would doe it Well therefore doth the Scripture use those sharp reprofes and upbraidings because there is no man a sinner or a damner of himselfe but it is by his owne fault and withall these serve to be a goad and a sharp thorne in the sinners side whereby he is made restlesse in his sin 5. To what purpose are exhortations and admonitions Though Though God works all our good in us yet exhortations are the instrument whereby he works it the other answers might serve for this yet something may be specially answered here which is that though God work all our good in us and for us yet it is not upon us as stockes or stones but he dealeth sutably to our natures with arguments and reasons And if you say To what purpose Is it any more then if the Sun should shine or a candle be held out to a blind man Yes because these exhortations and the word of God read or preached are that instrument by which God will work these things Therefore you are not to look upon preaching as a meere exhortation but as a sanctified medium or instrument by which God worketh that he exhorteth unto Sometimes indeed we reade that God hath sent his Prophets to exhort those whom yet he knew would not hearken Thus he sent Moses to bid Pharaoh let the people of Israel go and thus the Prophets did preach when they could not beleeve because of the deafnesse and blindnesse upon them But unto the godly these are operative meanes and practicall even as when God said Let there be light and there was light or when Christ said Lazarus come forth of the grave And this by the way should keep you from despising the most plaine ministery or preaching that is for a Sermon doth not work upon your hearts as it is thus elegant thus admirable but as it is an instrument of God appointed to such an end Even as Austin said The conduits of water though one might be in the shape of an Angell another of a beast yet the water doth refresh as it is water not as it comes from such a conduit or the seed that is throwne into the ground fructifieth even that which comes from a plaine hand as well as that which may have golden rings or jewels upon it not but that the Minister is to improve his gifts Qui dedit Petrum piscatorem dedit Cyprianum rhetorem but only to shew whence the power of God is Bonorum ingoniorum insignis est indoles in verbis verum amare non verba Quid obest clavis lignea quando nihil aliud quaerimus nisi patere clausum 6. The Scripture makes conversion and repentance to be our acts How conversion and repentance may be said to be our acts as well as the effects of Gods grace And this cannot be denied but that we are the subject who being acti agimus enabled by grace doe work for grace cannot be but in an intelligent subject As before the Manna fell upon the ground there fell a dew which say Interpreters was preparatory to constringe and bind the earth that it might receive the Manna so doth reason and liberty qualifie the subject that it is passively capable of grace but when enabled by grace it is made active also These be places indeed have stuck much upon some which hath made them demand Why if those promises of God converting us doe prove conversion to be his act should not other places also which bid us turne unto the Lord prove that it is our act The answer is easie none deny but that to beleeve and to turne unto God are our acts we cannot beleeve without the mind and will That of Austin is strong and good If because it 's said Not of him that willeth and runneth but of him that sheweth mercy man is made a partiall cause with God then we may as well say Not in him that sheweth mercy but in him that runneth and willeth But the Question is Whether we can doe this of our selves with grace Or Whether grace onely enable us to doe it That distinction of Bernards is very cleere The heart of a man is the subjectum in quo but not à quo the subject in which not from which this grace proceedeth Therefore you are not to conceive when grace doth enable the mind and will to turne unto God as if those motions of grace had such an impression upon the heart as when the seale imprints a stamp upon the wax or when wine is poured into the vessell where the subject recipient doth not move or stirre at all Nor is it as when Balaam's Asse spake or as when a stone is throwne into a place nor as an enthusiasticall or arreptitious motion as those that spake oracles and understood not Nor as those that are possessed of Satan which did many things wherein the mind and will had no action at all but the Spirit of God inclineth the Will and Affections to their proper object Nor is the Antinomians similitude sound that
other considerations It was the opinion of Osiander that therefore wee are said to be made after the iof God because we are made after the likenesse of that humane nature which the second Person in Trinity was to assume and this hath been preached alate as probable but that may hereafter be confuted when wee come to handle that Question Whether Christ as a Mediatour was knowne and considered of in the state of innocency 3. Let us consider in what that image or likenesse doth consist The image of God in Adam consisted in the severall perfections and qualifications in his soule Where not standing upon the rationall soule of a man which we call the remote image of God in which sense we are forbid to kill a man or to curse a man because he is made after the image of God we may take notice of the severall perfections and qualifications in Adams soul As 1. In his Understanding there was 1. In his Vnderstanding was exact knowledge of divine and natural things an exact knowledge of divine and naturall things Of divine because otherwise he could not have loved God if hee had not known him nor could hee be said to be made very good Hence some make a three-fold light 1. That of imediate knowledge which Adam had 2. The light of faith which the regenerate have 3. The light of glory which the Saints in heaven have Now how great is this perfection Even Aristotle said that a little knowledge though conjecturall about heavenly things is to be preferred above much knowledge though certains about inferiour things How glorious must Adams estate be when his Understanding was made thus perfect And then for inferiour things the creatures his knowledge appeareth in the giving of Names to all the creatures and especially unto Evo Adam indeed did not know all things yea he might grow in experimentall knowledge but all things that were necessary for him created to such an happy end to know those he did but to know that he should fall and that Christ would be a Mediatour these things he could not unlesse it were by revelation which is not supposed to be made unto him So to know those things which were of ornament and beauty to his soule cannot be denied him Thus was Adam created excellent in intellectuall abilities for sapience knowing God for science knowing the creatures and for prudence exquisite in all things to be done 2. His Will which is the universall appetite of the whole man 2. His Will was wonderfully good and furnished with many habits of goodnesse which is like the supreme orbe that carrieth the inferiour with the power of it this was wonderfully good furnished with severall habits of goodnesse as the firmament with stars for in it was a propensity to all good Ephes 4. 24. It 's called righteousnesse and true holinesse and Eccl. 7. 29. God made man upright His Will was not bad or not good that is indifferent but very good The imaginations of the thoughts of his heart were only good and that continually And certainly if David Job and others who have this image restored in them but in part doe yet delight in Gods will how much more must Adam who when he would doe good found no evill present with him He could not say as we must Lord I beleeve help my unbeliefe Lord I love help my want of love He could not complaine as that man Libenter bonus esse vellem sed cogitationes meae non patiuntur Yet though his Will was thus good he needed help from God to be able to doe any good thing I know there are some learned Divines as Pareus that doe deny the holinesse Adam had or the help God gave Adam to be truly and properly called grace righteousnesse they will call it and the gift of God but not grace Therefore Pareus reproveth Bellarmine for stiling his Book De gratia primi hominis and his reason is because the Scripture makes that onely grace which comes by Christ and when the subject is in a contrary condition as we are but it was not so with Adam but I cannot tell whether this be worth the while to dispute This is certaine 1. that Adam could not persevere or continue in obedience to God without help from God Nor secondly was he confirmed in a state of goodnesse as the Angels are yea as every godly man now is through Christ and therefore being mutable we may well conceive a possibility of his falling though made thus holy 3. In his Affections 1. These tempests and waves were under the 3. In his Affections regularity and subjection command of that holinesse They were to Adam as wings to the bird as wheels to the chariot and he was not as Actaeon devoured of those that followed him as it is with us for if you consider Affections in the rise of them they did not move or stirre but when holinesse commanded them This is proved in that he was made right Therefore there could not any Affection stirre or move irregularly as it 's said of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he troubled himselfe There were indeed Affections moving in Christ and so in Adam but they were as cleane water moved in a cleare glasse but in us they are as water stirred in a muddy place which casteth great desilement Adam therefore being made right he could set his Affections as the Artificer doth his clock to make it strike when and what he will 2. These Affections are subjected in regard of the continuance of them When our Affections and Passions are raised how hardly are they composed againe how are we angry and sin how doe we grieve and sin whereas in the state of innocency they were so under the nurture of it that as we command our dogs to fetch and carry and to lay downe so could Adam then doe bid come fetch such an object and then bid it to lay downe againe 3. In regard of the degrees of them We are so corrupted that we cannot love but we over-love we cannot grieve but we over-grieve All our heat is presently feaverish but it was then far otherwise Now then by this righteousnesse you may perceive the glorious image that God put upon us and apply it to us who are banished not onely out of a place of Paradise but out of all these inward abilities and who can deplore our estate enough Thus was the Morall Law written in his heart and what the command is for direction that he was for conversation And howsoever the Socinians deny this law written in his heart yet acknowledging he had a conscience which had dictates of that which was good and righteous it amounts almost to as much Nor is it any matter though we reade not of any such outward law given to him nor is it necessary to make such a Question Whether the breach of the Morall Law would have undone Adam and his posterity as well as the transgression of
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 and make vapours only you must acknowledge one first cause which had not its 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 Errour 2 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 Errour 3 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 doat 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 self 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 orthodoxe men speak otherwise and that there is a difficulty in clearing every particular about this Question but as yet that which I have delivered carrieth 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 Israelites 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 howsoever I have already delivered many things that doe confirme the perpetuall obligation of it yet I did it not then so directly and professedly as now I shall The Text I have chosen being a very fit foundation to build such a structure upon I will therefore open The Text opened the words and proceed as time shall suffer The Apostle Paul having laid down in verses preceding the nature of justification so exactly that we may finde all the causes efficient meritorious formall instrumentall and finall described as also the consequent of this truth which is the excluding of all self-confidence and boasting in what we doe he draweth a conclusion or inference ver 26. And this conclusion is laid down first affirmatively and positively A man is justified by faith the Phrases 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are all equivalent with the Apostle And then to prevent all errours and cavils he doth secondly lay it down exclusively without works And this proposition he doth extend to the Jewes and Gentiles also from the unity or onenesse of God
them was now come of whom the ceremonies were a shadow Yet still you must remember that while they were commanded of God they were the exercises of faith and piety and God did dispense grace in the use of them only they were beggarly and empty to such who trusted in them and neglected Christ Nor doth this assertion contradict that of the Apostle Ephes 2. 15. where he cals those ordinances enmity and decrees against us for those ceremonies may be considered two wayes first as they were signes of Gods grace and favour and secondly as they were demonstrative of a duty which we were tyed unto but could not performe and in this sense all those purifications and cleansings were against us Thus we see these lawes in every consideration made voide so that it is not now an indifferent thing to use them though we would not put our trust in them but sinfull Hence I cannot see how that of Luther is true upon Gal. 2. who saith He beleeveth that if the Jewes beleeving had observed the Law and Circumcision in that manner which the Apostles permitted them that Judaisme had yet stood and that all the world should have received the ceremonies of the Jewes In the second place if we would speake exactly and properly We may say that the Morall Law is mitigated as to our persons but 't is not abrogated We cannot say in any good sense that the Morall Law is abrogated at all It is true indeed our learned Writers shew that the Law is abrogated in respect of justification condemnation and rigour of obedience all which I shall instance in afterwards but if a man would speake rigidly he cannot say it is abrogated Wee may say it 's mitigated as to our persons though Christ our surety did fully undergoe it for if God had taken away the Law so that man nor his surety had been under the curse of it or should have obeyed it then had it been properly abrogated whereas now seeing our surety was bound to satisfie it and perfectly to obey it and we still obliged to conforme unto it we cannot so properly in the generall say it was abrogated Therefore we may more properly say that there is a change and alteration in us towards the Law then that the Law is changed or abrogated Hence observe though the Apostle denyeth that he doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 make voide the Law yet he useth this expression Rom. 7. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we are freed or abrogated from the Law rather then that is abrogated Thus it is if we would speake properly yet because the satisfaction and obedience is by Christ and not by us we may say that it is abrogated to us so that we may not look for remission of sins or justification by it But you must still distinguish when we speake of the Law some parts of it from the whole some parts of the Law may be abolished and yet not the whole nature of it for there is in the Law these parts First the Commands Three parts in the Law Secondly the Promises of life to him that doth them and thirdly the threatnings of eternall wrath to him that faileth in the least Now the Morall Law though it be abrogated in respect of the two later to a beleever yet in respect of the former it doth still abide yea and will continue in Heaven it self And we have already proved against the Antinomians that one part of the Law may abide when the other doth not The Law is abolished as it is a Covenant but not as it is a Rule The third proposition Those that say the Law is abolished as it is foedus but not as it is regula say true The Law may be considered as it is a Covenant or as it is an absolute Rule requiring conformity unto it Now it may be truly granted that the Law is abolished in the former notion though not in the later only in expressing this Covenant there is difference among the Learned some make the Law a Covenant of works and upon that ground that it is abrogated others call it a subservient covenant to the covenant of grace and make it only occasionally as it were introduced to put more luster and splendour upon grace Others call it a mixt covenant of workes and grace but that is hardly to be understood as possible much lesse as true I therefore think that opinion true as shall be hereafter shewed that the The Law given by Moses a Covenant of grace Law given by Moses was a Covenant of grace and that God did not since man fallen ever transact with him in any other Covenant but that of grace Though indeed this Covenant of grace did breake out more clearly in succession of ages according to the wise dispensation of Gods good pleasure So then the Law as a Covenant though of grace is abrogated because though there be still the same essence of the former and later covenant yet the administration of the former is altogether antiquated This fully appeareth in Heb. 7. 18 19. and again Heb. 8. 7 8. whosoever therefore expects life and justification by the Law he sets up the covenant of works again Nor is it any advantage to say these workes are the workes of grace and wrought by Christs Spirit for still if we were justified by doing whatsoever the works were yet it would be in such a way as Adam was though with some difference We therefore doe desire to lift up our voices as vehemently as any Antinomian against self-Justiciaries against pharisaicall popish formal men that say unto the good workes they doe These are thy Christ These are thy Jesus oh my soul In matter of Justification we would have all of Pauls Spirit to know nothing but Christ crucified to account all things dung and drosse We desire to bewaile and abundantly to bewaile the little need and want that people feel of Christ in all their duties We are troubled that any can be quiet in their duties and performances and doe not cry out None but Christ None but Christ All this we plead for and preach only we hold the Law as a rule still to walk by though not a Covenant of works to be justified by 4. The Antinomian distinction of the Law abolished as a Law but It is an absurd contradiction to say the matter of a Law bindeth but not as a Law still abiding in respect of the matter of it is a contradiction This is a rock that the adversary hath daily refuge unto The Law saith the Antinomian in the matter of it so farre as I know was never denyed to be the rule according to which a beleever is to walk and live Therefore I take the contrary imputation to be an impudent slander Asser of grace pag. 170. But to reply if they hold the matter of the Law to be a rule how can they shelter themselves from their own argument for if the matter oblige
sense the Law and Gospel doe oppose and thwart one another And this matter I undertake because hereby the nature of the Gospel and the Law will be much discovered It is an errour saith Calvin lib. 2. Instit cap. 9. in those who doe never otherwise compare the Gospel with the Law then the merit of works with the free imputation of righteousnesse and saith he this Antithesis or opposition is not to be refused because the Apostle doth many times make them contrary meaning by the Law that rule of life whereby God doth require of us that which is his own giving us no ground of hope unlesse in every respect we keep the Law but saith he quum de totâ lege agitur when he speakes of the Law more largely taken he makes them to differ only in respect of clearer manifestation or as Pareus saith of the old and new Covenant they differ not essentially but as we say the old and new Moon Therefore before I come to shew the exact opposition take The Law and the Gospel may be compared one with another in a double respect notice of two things as a foundation first that the Law and the Gospel may be compared one with another either in respect of the grace God gave under the Old Testament and the New and then they differ only gradually for they under the Law did enjoy grace and the Spirit of God though Socinians deny it although indeed in respect of the Gospel it may comparatively be said no spirit and no grace as when it is said The holy Ghost was not yet given because it was not so plentifully given Or secondly the doctrine of the Law in the meere preceptive nature of it may be compared with the doctrine of the Gospel having the grace of God annexed unto it and going along with it Now this is in some respects an unequall comparison for if you take the doctrine or letter of the Gospel without the grace of God that letter may be said to kill as well as the letter of the Law only this is the reason why we cannot say The Spirit of God or grace or life is by the Law because whatsoever spirituall good was vouchsafed to the Jewes it is not of the Law but of the grace of God or the Gospel Therefore whensoever we compare Law and Gospel together we must be sure to make the parallel equall and to take them so oppositely that we may not give the one more advantage or lesse then the nature of it doth crave and desire In the second place therefore in this controversie still remember The different use of the word Law carefully to be observed to carry along with you the different use of the word Law as to this point for if you take Law strictly and yet make it a Covenant of grace you confound the righteousnesse of works and of faith together as the Papists doe but if largely then there may be an happy reconciliation For the better opening of this consider that as the word What meant by Law taken largely and what strictly Law so the word Gospel may be taken largely or strictly We will not trouble you with the many significations of the word or whether it be used any where of a sorrowfull message as well as glad newes as some say in two places it is used 1 Sam. 4. 17. 2 Sam. 1. 10. according to that rule of Mercers Non infrequens esse specialia verba interdum generaliter sumi It is enough to our purpose that in the Scripture it is sometimes taken more largely and sometimes more strictly when it 's taken largely it signifieth the whole doctrine that the Apostles were to preach Mar. 16. 15. Preach the Gospel to every creature and so Mar. 1. 1. The beginning of the Gospel i. e. the doctrine and preaching of Christ Or else it is taken most strictly as when Luke 2. 10. Behold I bring you glad tydings c. In which strict sense it 's called the Gospel of peace and of the grace of God So that as you see the word Law is taken differently largely and strictly thus also is the word Gospel Now it 's a great dispute Whether the command of repentance belong unto the Gospel or no I finde the Lutherans Antinomians and Calvinists to speake differently but of that when we take the Law and Gospel in their most strict sense Bellarmine bringeth it as an argument that the Protestants doe deny the necessity of good works because they hold that the Gospel hath no precepts or threatnings in it lib. 4. de Justif cap. 2. And he urgeth against them that Cap. 1. ad Rom. where the wrath of God is said to be revealed from heaven in the Gospel but as is to be shewed he there doth mistake the state of the controversie taking the word Gospel in a larger sense then they intended Thus on the other side Islebius the father of the Antinomians he taught that repentance was not to be pressed from the Decalogue but from the Gospel and that to preserve the purity of doctrine we ought to resist all those who teach the Gospel must not be preached but to those who were made contrite by the Law whereas the right unfolding of the word Gospel would make up quickly those breaches The Law therefore and the Gospel admitting of such a different acception I shall first shew the opposition between the Law and Gospel taken in their large sense and then in the limited sense And this is worth the while because this is the foundation of all our comfort if rightly understood Now the Question in this larger sense is the same with the difference between the Old and New Testament or Covenant wherein the Learned speake very differently and as to my apprehension much confusedly I shall not examine whether that be the reason of calling it Old and New which Austin Chemnitius and others urge because it presseth the old man and condemneth that whereas the new incourageth and comforteth new I rather take it to be so called because the old was to cease and vanish away being before the other in time Now in my method I will lay down the false differences and then name the true The false differences are first of the Anabaptists and Socinians False differences between the Law and the Gospel who make all that lived under the Law to have nothing but temporall earthly blessings in their knowledge and affections And for this they are very resolute granting indeed that 1. Of Anabaptists and Socinians affirming That they under the Law in the Old Testament enjoyed only temporall blessings Christ and eternall things were promised in the Old Testament but they were not enjoyed by any till the New Testament whereupon they say that grace and salvation was not till Christ came And the places which the Antinomians bring for beleevers under the New Testament they take rigidly and universally as if there had been no
grosse sinnes for which there was no particular sacrifice appointed 3. Again under the New Testament is there not the sinne 3. The sinne against the holy Ghost under the Gospel not cleansed by Christs bloud against the holy Ghost for which no pardon is promised Not indeed but that Christs bloud is sufficient to take away the guilt of it and Gods mercy is able to pardon it and to give repentance to those that have committed it but he hath declared he will not But saith the Author under the Gospel it is said The bloud of Christ cleanseth us from all sinne Now if the Jewes would have brought all their estates to have been admitted to bring a sacrifice for such or such a sinne they could not have done it I reply What if they could bring no sacrifice could they not therefore have pardon Why then doth God proclaime himselfe to them a God gracious forgiving iniquity transgression and sinne Why doth he Isai 1. call upon Jerusalem to repent of her whoredomes murders saying If their sinnes were as scarlet they should be made as white as snow This errour is such a dead fly that it is enough to spoile the Authors whole boxe of ointment Besides was not that true ever since Adams fall as well as under the Gospel Christs bloud cleansing from all sinne I cannot see how any but a Socinian will deny it 4. Another difference that the Author makes about remission 4. That under the old Covenant God gave not remission of sins to any but upon antecedent conditions not so under the Gospel of sinnes to them and us under the Gospel is as strange and false as the former It is this God did not give the grace of remission of sinnes to any under the old Covenant but upon antecedent conditions they were to be at cost for sacrifices How doth this agree with his former reason if he meane it universally They were to confesse their sinnes to the Priests yea in some cases to fast but now under the Gospel there is no antecedent doing of any thing to the participation of the Covenant But in this difference also there is much absurd falshood and contradiction to himself Contradiction I say for he bringeth Ezek. 16. where God speakes to the Church that while she was in her bloud he said to her Live therefore there was no antecedent condition But what man of reason doth not see that God speakes there of the Church of the Jewes as appeareth through the whole Chapter Therefore it makes strongly against the Author that she had no preparations so that other place Isai 65. 1. I am found of them that sought not for me grant that it be a prophesie of the Gentiles yet was it not also true of the Jewes before God called them Did the Jewes first seek God or God them How often doth God tell them that the good he did to them was for his own names sake and not any thing in them Again if these things were required as antecedent qualifications in them for the remission of sinnes then all those arguments will hold true upon them which they would fasten as injuries to Christ and grace upon us If say they we must repent and humble our selves and so have pardon this is to cast off Christ this is to make an idoll of our own righteousnesse c. It seemeth the Jewes under the Old Testament might doe all these things without blame A Jew might say My services my sacrifices my prayers will doe something to the remission of my sinnes but a Christian may not The Author urgeth also that place While we are enemies we were reconciled to God but doth not this hold true of the Jewes Did they first make themselves friends with God What is this but to hold the doctrine of free-will and works in the time of the Law and the doctrine of grace under the new only As for faith whether that be a condition or not I shall not here medle only this is plain it was required of them under the old Covenant in the same maner as it is of us now A third difference made as to remission of sinnes is this Their 5. That remission of sinnes under the Law was successively and imperfect under the Gospel at once and perfect remission of sinnes was gradatim successively drops by drops If a man had sinned and offered sacrifice then that sinne was pardoned but this did not extend to future ignorance that was not pardoned till a new sacrifice Therefore the Apostle saith there was a remembrance of sinne but Christ by one sacrifice once offered hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified To this I answer 1. That this difference grew upon this supposition as if the sacrifice offered did by its own vertue take away sinne For if we suppose as we must that Christ the true sacrifice was represented in every sacrifice and all the vertue and benefit to come from Christs bloud and not the bloud of the sacrifices then could that take away all sinnes as well as some sinnes unlesse the Author were a Socinian denying the efficacy of Christs bloud at all under the Old Testament he can never expedite himself from this Again this contradicts themselves for the reason why they say faith doth not justifie but evidence and declare it onely is because Gods love and free grace to justifie is from all eternity and therefore no sins past or future can hinder this Now I aske whether God did not justifie David and the godly in those dayes from all eternity as they speake and if hee did why should not all their sinnes be remitted fully once as well as the sins of beleevers under the Gospel Certainly the Apostle brings David for an instance of justification and remission of sins as well under the New Testament which doth suppose that we are justified and have our sinnes pardoned in the like manner In the meane while let me set one Antinomian to overthrow another for one of that way brings many arguments to prove that we are justified and so have all our sinnes done away before we beleeve Now if all sins are done away then there is no successive remission Well then you shall observe most of the arguments hold for the beleevers under the Old Testament as well as New for they are elected as well as wee God laid their sins upon Christ as well as ours If God love us to day and hate us to morrow let Arminians heare and wonder why they should be blamed that say Wee may love God to day and hate him to morrow Now all these reasons will fall foule upon this Antinomian whose errour I confute and hee must necessarily hold that the godly had but halfe pardons yea that they were loved one day and hated the next Again consider that the place of the Apostle urged by him for his errour viz. Christ offering himselfe once for all to perfect those that are sanctified is of a
faith in Christ was immediately commanded there though obscurely because as is proved it was a Covenant of grace You see then that as in the transfiguration there was Christ and Moses together in glory so likewise may the Law and the Gospel be together in their glory and it is through our folly when we make them practically to hinder one another Though all this be true yet if the Gospel be taken strictly it The Gospel taken strictly comprehends no more then the glad tidings of a Saviour is not a doctrine of repentance or holy workes but a meere gracious promise of Christ to the broken heart for sin and doth comprehend no more then the glad tidings of a Saviour It is true learned men doe sometimes speak otherwise calling Faith and Repentance the two Evangelicall commands but then they use the word more largely for the doctrine of Christ and the Apostles but in a strict sense it 's onely a promise of Christ and his benefits And in this sense wee may say the Gospel doth not terrifie or accuse Indeed there are wofull threatnings to him that rejecteth Christ yea more severe then to him that refused Moses but this ariseth from the Law joyned in practicall use with the Gospel And in this sense also it is said to be the savour of death unto many This ariseth not from the nature of the Gospel but from the Law that is enlightened by the Gospell so that hee being already condemned by the Law for not beleeving in Christ hee needeth not to be condemned againe by the Gospel If you say May not the sufferings of Christ make us to repent of sinne and all the love hee shewed therein Doe not godly Ministers to work people into an hatred of sinne tell them the price of blood is in every sinne committed Is it not said that they shall look upon him whom they have pierced and mourne for their sinnes I answer all this is true but then these things work by way of an object not as a command and it is from the Law that we should shew our selves kind unto him who loved us unto death so that the object is indeed from the Gospel but the command to be affected with his death because of his kindnesse therein manifested doth arise from Gods Law Let therefore those who say that the preaching of the Gospel will humble men and break their hearts for their sinnes consider how that it is true by the Gospel as an object by the Law as that which commands such affections to those objects Let the use of this doctrine be to direct Christians in their practicall improvement of Law and Gospel without hindring each other There are many things in Christianity that the people of God make to oppose one another when yet they would promote each other if wisely ordered Thus they make their joy and trembling their faith and repentance their zeale and prudence the Law and Gospel to thwart one another whereas by spirituall wisdome they might unite them take the Law for a goade the Gospel for a cordiall from the one be instructed from the other be supported when thy heart is carelesse and dull run thither to be excited when thy soul is dejected and fearfull throw thy selfe into the armes of the Gospel The Law hath a lovelinesse in it as well as the Gospel the one is a pure character and image of the holinesse of God the other is of the mercy and goodnesse of God so that the consideration of either may wonderfully inflame thy affections and raise them up LECTURE XXVIII ROM 10. 4. For Christ is the end of the Law for righteousnesse to every one that beleeveth AS the Physitian saith Peter Martyr who intends to give strong physicke which may expell noxious humours in the diseased body doth prepare the body first by some potions to make it fluide and fit for operation so Paul being sharply to accuse the Jewes and to drive them out of their selfe-righteousnesse doth manifest his love to them sugaring the bitter pill that they might swallow it with more delight And this his love is manifested partly by his expression brethren partly by his affections and prayers my hearts desire and prayer The occasion of this his affection is the zeale that they have for God but in a wrong way As the skillfull husbandman that seeth a piece of ground full of weeds and brambles wisheth hee had that ground which by culture and tillage would be made very fruitfull Amo unde amputem said the Orator I love the wit that needs some pruning The luxuriancy is a signe of fertility This zeale was not a good zeale partly because it wanted Zeale that either wants knowledge or puffs up no good zeale knowledge and therefore was like Sampson without his eyes partly because it made them proud which the Apostle fully expresseth in two particulars 1. They sought to establish their owne righteousnesse They sought this did imply their willfull pride and arrogancy and to establish which supposeth their righteousnesse was weak and infirme ready to fall to the ground but they would set it up for all that as the Philistims would their Dagon though hee was tumbled downe before the Ark. 2. The Apostle expresseth it signally when hee saith They submitted not themselves to the righteousnesse of God In the originall They were not submitted in the passive signification which still supposeth the great arrogancy that is in a man naturally being unwilling to deny his owne righteousness and to take Christ for all This being so take notice by the way of a foule errour of the Antinomian who denying assurance and comfort by signes of grace laboureth to prove that an unregenerate man may have universall obedience and sincere obedience bringing this instance of the Jewes for sincere obedience But sincerity may be taken two wales First as it opposeth Sincerity taken two waies grosse hypocrisie and so indeed the Jewes zeale was not hypocriticall because they did not goe against their conscience or Secondly it may be taken for the truth of grace and so the Jewes zeale was not a true gracious zeale for the reasons above named Now my Text that is given as a reason why the Jewes did look to their owne righteousnesse and not that of Gods because they neglected Christ who is here said to be the end of the Law for righteousnesse The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth sometimes signifie The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what it signifieth the extreme and last end of a thing Thus Mark. 13. 7. The end is not yet so those who are against the calling of the nation of the Jewes bring that place 1 Thes 2. ver 16. Weath is come upon them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if there were no mercy to be expected But this may admit of another exposition Sometimes the word is used for perfection and fullfilling of a thing according to the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom.
conversion p. 127 What the word Sanctifie implies p. 194. 195 How the Jewes were in more servitude then Christians p. 245 Sins outward which are majoris infamiae inward which are majoris reatus page 171 Sincerity taken two waies p. 255 Socinians and Papists make additions in the Gospel besides what was in the Law p. 233 Why the shell-fish was unclean to the Jewes p. 2 Law called spirituall in a two-fold sense 1. effectiâ—â— 2. formaliter p. 6 How the state of innocency excelled the state of reparation in rectitude immortality and outward felicity p. 133. 134 The state of reparation excells the state of innocency in certainty of perseverance ibidem Eudoxus said hee was made to behold the sun p. 75 Summe of all heavenly doctrine reduced to three heads credenda speranda facienda pag. 242 Symbolicall precept p. 101 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 The threatnings of the Gospel against those who reject Christ arise from the Law joyned in practicall use with the Gospel p. 252 Tree of knowledge 102. 103 Whether the Tree of life was a Sacrament of Christ to Adam or no. p. 130 No truth in Divinity doth crosse the truth of nature p. 70 Doctor Tayler his Report of Antinomianisme p. 268 V THe reason of the variety of Gods administrations in the two T. p. 246 A two-fold unbeliefe Negative which damnes none Positive which damnes many p. 78 Vnbelief a sinne against the Law as well as against the Gospel How God justifies the ungodly p. 34. 35 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 workes as not to give the Antinomians cause of insultation p. 28. 29 Warre lawfull under the Gospel p. 183 Will serious and efficacious the distinction examined p. 105 How the Word in generall is the instrument of conversion p. 188. 189. Two Rules about it proved p. 190 Word how used p. 138 Workes denied by the Antinomians to be away to hoâ—ven p. 31 There have been dangerous assertions concerning workes even by those who were no Antinomians out of a great zeal for the grace of God against Papists p. 29 The presence of good workes in the person justified denied by the Antinomians p. 32. They deny any gaine or losse to come by them No peace of conscience comes by doing good workes nor lost by omitting them p. 33. which is confuted ibid. They deny good works to be signes or testimonies of grace ibidâ—â— Confuted page 34 Upon what grounds are the people of God to be zealous of good works p. 37 The Antinomian erreth two contrary waies about good works p. 38 Distinction betwixt saying that good works are necessary to justifieâ— pâ—rsons and that they are necessary to justification p. 39 Good works necessary upon 13. grounds p. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45 A Table of divers Texts of Scripture which are opened or vindicated by this TREATISE Genesis Chap. Ver. Page 1 25 110. 111 2 17 119 Exodus 21 1 138 34 â—7 28 153 Leviticus 6 2. 3 236 16 16 237 Numbers 13 23 207 Deuteronomy 4 13 â—19 30 11 94 32  32 33 3 149 1 Samuel 4 17 230 2 Samuel 1 10 230 1 Kings â— 9 154 2 Kings 20 3 44 Psalme 1. 19. 119  8 68 18 36 50 2 49 Isaiah 6â— 1 238 Jeremiah 16 14. 15 114 50 20 234 Ezekiel 1â— Â 234 Daâ—let 9 14 234 Zechary 13 1 234 Matthew 5â— 17 45. 263  21. 22 166 7 17 32  12 80 12 28 149 Marke 13 7 255 16 15 231 Luke 11 20 149 16 16 214 John 1 9 76 8 7 182 14 31 12 15 10 17 19 194 Acts. 7 37 12  38 199 Romans 1 18 66  19 74 2 14. 15 56  27 255 3 27 228  31 193. 199 4 5 34  14 227 5 1 22  6. 8. 10 35 6 1â— 215 7 1. 2 218  6 205   8 per â—atum 8 11 37  13 33  29. 30 35 13 12 42 12 1 43 14 22 271 1 Corinthians 2 14 64 7 37 82 9 20 217 15 10 92 2 Corinthians 3 7 257 3 11 202 6 16 37 Galat. 3 2 19â— Â 18 214  23 14  23. 24 259 4 24 1â—9 5 23 53 5 5. 4. 13. 14 212 5 20 269 Ephesians 1 10 137. 131 2 14 202  15 203 3 12  6 2 163  14. 16 41 Philippians 3 9 210 1 Thessalonians 2 16 â—55 1 Timothy 1 8. 9 9 1 9 47 4 8 40 7 5 255 2 Timothy 4 8 40 Titus 2 11. 12 196  14 39 Hebrewes 6 18 209 9 4 155  7 237  13. 14 235 10 17 234 11 16 243 12 5. 6. 7. 8 235  ult 33 Jam. 2 8 255 1 Peter 3 1 45 2 Peter 1 10 41  19 242 â— 2. 15. 21 32 FINIS