the flesh yee shall die So Except yee repent yee shall all likewise perish Such places are so frequent that its a wonder an Antinomian can passe them all over and alwaies speake of those places which declare Gods grace to us but not our duty to him Without holinesse no man can see God now by the Antinomians argument as a man may be justified while he is wicked and doth abide so so also he may be glorified and saved for this is their principle that Christ hath purchased justification glory and salvation for us even though sinners and enemies 6. They are in their owne nature a defence against sinne and corruption 6. Because they are a defence against sin If we doe but consider the nature of these graces though imperfect yet that will pleade for the necessity of them Ephes 6. 14 16. There you have some graces a shield and some a breast-plate now every souldier knoweth the necessity of these in time of war It s true the Apostle speaks of the might of the Lord and prayer must be joyned to these but yet the principall doth not oppose the instrumentall Hence Rom. 13. they are called the weapons of the light It s Luthers observation He doth not call the works of darknesse the weapons of darknesse but good workes he doth call weapons quia bonis operibus debemus uti tanquam armis to resist Satan and hee calls them the weapons of light because they are from God the fountaine of light and because they are according to Scripture the true light although Drusius thinketh light is here used for victory as Jud. 5. 31. Psal 132. 17 18. and so the word is used of Homer and Marcellinus speakes of an ancient custome when at supper time the children brought in the candles they cryed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 7. They are necessary by a naturall connexion with faith and the 7. Because necessary by a naturall connexion with faith and the Spirit of God Spirit of God Hence it 's called faith which worketh by love The Papist Lorinus thinketh we speak a contradiction because sometimes wee say faith only justifieth sometimes that unlesse our faith be working it cannot justifie us but here is no contradiction for it 's onely thus Faith which is a living faith doth justifie though not as it doth live for faith hath two notable acts 1. To apprehend and lay hold upon Christ and thus it justifieth 2. To purifie and cleanse the heart and to stirre up other graces and thus it doth not And thus Paul and James may be reconciled for James brings that very passage to prove Abraham was not justified by faith alone which Paul brings to prove he was because one intends to shew that his faith was a working faith and the other that that alone did concurre to justifie and thus in this sense some learned men say Good workes are necessary to preserve a man in the state of justification although they doe not immediatly concurre to that act as in a man although his shoulders and breast doe not concurre immediatly to the act of seing yet if a mans eye and head were not knit to those parts hee could not see and so though the fire doe not burne as it is light yet it could not burne unlesse it were so for it supposeth then the subject would be destroyed It s a saying of John Husse Vbi bona opera non apparent ad extra ibi fides non est ad intra Therefore as Christ while he remained the second Person was invisible but when hee was incarnated then he became visible so must thy faith be incarnated into works and it must become flesh as it were 8. They are necessary by debt and obligation So that God by his 8 By debt and obligation soveraignty might have commanded all obedience from man though he should give him no reward of eternall life Therefore David did well argue that we cannot merit at Gods hand because the more good we are enabled to doe we are the more beholding to God Hence it is that we are his servants Servus non est persona sed res and we are more servants to God then the meerest slave can be to man for we have our being and power to work from him And this obligation is so perpetuall and necessary that no covenant of grace can abolish it for gratia non destruit naturam 9. By command of God This is the will of God your sanctification 9. By command of God 1 Thes 43. Rom. 12. 2. So that you may prove what is that good and acceptable will of God And thus the Law of God still remaineth as a rule and directory And thus Paul professed hee delighted in the Law of God in his inward man and that place Rom. 12. presseth our renovation comparing us to a sacrifice implying we are consecrated and set apart to him a dog or a swine might not be offered to God And the word Offer doth imply our readinesse and alacrity He also addeth many epithets to the will of God that so we may be moved to rejoyce in it There is therefore no disputing or arguing against the will of God If our Saviour Mat. 5. saith He shall be least in the Kingdome of heaven that breaketh the least commandement how much more inexcusable is the Antinomian who teacheth the abolition of all of them 10. They are necessary by way of comfort to our selves And this 10. By way of comfort to our selves opposeth many Antinomian passages who forbid us to take any peace by our holinesse Now it 's true to take them so as to put confidence in them to take comfort from them as a cause that cannot be for who can look upon any thing he doth with that boldnesse It was a desperate speech of Panigarola a Papist as Rivet relates who called it folly to put confidence onely in Christs bloud We know no godly man satisfieth his owne heart in any thing he doth much lesse can he the will of God We cannot at the same time say Lord forgive me and Pay me what thou owest yet these good workes though imperfect may be a great comfort unto us as the testimony of Gods eternall love to us Thus did Hezekiah 2 Kings 20. 3. Hezekiah is not there a proud Pharisee but a thankfull acknowledger of what is in him and some consider that this temptation might fall upon Hezekiah that when he had laboured to demolish all those superstitions and now became dangerously sick that he had not done well therefore he comforts himselfe in his heart that he did those things with not that he meant an absolute perfect heart but sincere and comparatively perfect Hence it 's observed the word I have walked is in Hiphil I have made my selfe to walke implying the dulnesse and sluggishnesse and aversnesse he found in his heart to that duty so that prayer being as one calls it well Speculum animi the soules glasse
acknowledge grace necessary to every good act all the day long let him be an anathema and this faire colour did deceive the Easterne Churches that they did acquit him But Austine and others observed that hee did gratiae vocabulo uti ad frangendam invidiam even as the Papists doe at this time therefore if they say Thy patience is grace Thy hope is grace and therefore by grace thou art saved say This is not the Gospel-grace the Scripture-grace by which sinnes are pardoned and wee saved 2. It opposeth Christ in his fulnesse It makes an halfe-Christ 2. Opposeth the fulnesse of Christ Thus the false Apostles made Christ void and fell off from him Neither will this serve to say that the Apostle speakes of the ceremoniall law for as wee told you though the differences about the Jewish ceremonies were the occasion of those differences in the primitive times yet the Apostle goeth from the hypothesis to the thesis even to all workes whatsoever and therefore excludes Abrahams and Davids workes from justification Now Christ would be no Christ if workes were our righteousnesse because the righteousnesse by the faith of Christ is opposed to Pauls owne righteousnesse and this is called the righteousnesse of God Yea this is said to be made righteousnesse unto us and hee is called the Lord our righteousnesse and howsoever Bellarmine would understand these phrases causally as when God is called the Lord our salvation yet wee shall shew you it cannot be so therefore if thy workes justifie thee what needs a Christ Can thy graces be a Christ 3. It destroyeth the true doctrine of Justification I shall not 3. Destroyes the true doctrine of Justification lanch into this Ocean at this time only consider how the Scripture speaks of it as not infusing what is perfect but forgiving what is imperfect as in David Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth no sinne I shall not at this time dispute whether there be two parts of Justification one positive in respect of the terme to which called Imputation of Christs righteousnesse the other negative in respect of the terme from which Not accounting sin This later I onely presse Therefore What is it to be justified Not to have holinesse accepted of us but our sins remitted Justitia nostra est indulgentia tua Domine Now what a comfortable plea is this for an humbled soul O Lord it is not the question what good I have but what evill thou wilt forget It is not to finde righteous workes in me but to passe by the unrighteousnesse in me What can satisfie thy soul if this will not do Is not this as I told you with Chrysostome to stand upon a spring rising higher and higher 4. It quite overthroweth justifying faith for when Christ and 4. Overthrows justifying faith grace is overthrowne this also must fall to the ground There are these three maine concurrent causes to our justification The grace of God as the efficient Christ as the meritorious and faith as the instrumentall and although one of these causes be more excellent then the other the efficient then the instrumentall yet all are equally necessary to that effect of justification That faith doth instrumentally justifie I here take it for granted As for the Antinomian who holdeth it before faith and thinketh the argument from Infants will plainly prove it I shall shew the contrary in its due time onely this is enough that an instrumentall particle is attributed to it By faith in his bloud and By faith in his Name and justified By faith It is true it 's never said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for faith as if there were dignity or merit in it but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now to set up workes is to oppose faith as the Apostle argueth therefore faith as it is a worke is to be opposed to it selfe as its an instrument justifying 5. It quite discourageth a broken-hearted sinner taking away peace 5. Discourageth the broken-hearted sinner with God the effect of justification and glorying in tribulations If you consider Chapt. 5. of Rom. you will find that peace onely comes this way yea and to glory in tribulations for ver 1. being justified by faith we have peace with God Alas what patience what repentance what paines and religious duties can procure thee peace with God Can that which would damne save Can that which would work woe in thee comfort thee Vae etiam laudabili vitae erit saith Austin as you heard Woe to the most worthy life that is if it should be judged strictly by God And then mark the object of this peace Peace with God Take a Pharisee take a morall or a formall man he may have a great deale of peace because of his duties and good heart yet this is not a peace with God so also for glorying in tribulations how can this be If all a mans glory were for himselfe would not every affliction rather break him saying This is the fruit of my sin 6. It brings men into themselves And this is very dangerous 6. Brings men into themselves A man may not onely exclude Christ from his soule by grosse sins but by selfe-confidences You are they which justifie your selves And so the Jewes they would not submit to their owne righteousnesse see how afraid Paul is to be found in his owne righteousnesse Beza puts an emphasis upon this word Found implying that justice and the Law and so the wrath of God is pursuing and seeking after man Where is that man that offends God and transgresseth his Law Where is that man that doth not pray or heare as he should doe Now saith Paul I would not be found in mine owne righteousnesse And this made Luther say Take heed not onely of thy sins but also of thy good duties Now if this were all the wine that the Antinomian would drink in Christs cellar if this were all the hony that he would have in Christs hive none would contradict it but we shall shew you the dangerous inferences they make from hence turning that which would be a rod into a serpent 7. It overthroweth the doctrine of imputation and reckoning righteousnesse 7. Overthrowes the doctrine of imputed righteousnesse to us which is spoken of Rom. 4. and in other places I know how this point is vexed divers waies but this is enough for us If righteousnesse were in us and properly ours what need a righteousnesse be reckoned and imputed to us The Papist maketh imputative and putative and imaginary all one Who can say A lame man say they goeth right because he hath other mens shooes Who can say A deformed Thersites is a faire Absalom because of borrowed beauty But these are easily refuted by Scripture and we shall shew you Christs righteousnesse is as really ours as if it were inherent They differ not in reality but in the manner of being ours Now here the Antinomian and Papist agree in the inferences they
make from this doctrine If Christs righteousnesse be ours then there is no sin in us seen by God then we are as righteous as Christ argueth the Antinomian and this absurdity the Papists would put on us 8. It keeps a man in a slavish servile way in all his duties For 8 Keeps a man slavish in all his duties how must that man be needs tossed up and downe which hath no other ground of peace then the works of grace How is the humble heart soon made proud how is the heavenly heart soon become earthly Now you may see the Scripture speaking much against doubting and feares and James 1. it is made the canker-worme that devoureth all our duties Therefore the Scripture doth name some words that doe oppose this Evangelicall temper of sons as Be not afraid but beleeve so Why doubted ye the word signifieth to be in bivio that a man cannot tell which waies to take to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be carried up and downe as meteors in the aire Now how can a man be bold by any thing that is his By faith we have confidence and boldnesse faith is confidence and faith works confidence but faith whose object is Christ not any thing of ours it 's made the first word also we can speak when we are made sons to cry Abba Father 9. A man may as lawfully joyne Saints or Angels in his mediation 9. Joynes a mans owne graces to Christs mediation with Christ as graces Why is that doctrine of making Angels and Saints mediators and intercessors so odious but because it joyneth Christ and others together in that great work Dost not thou the like when thou joynest thy love and grace with Christs obedience The Papist saith Let such and such an holy Saint save me and thou sayest Let my holy love let my holy repentance save me What advantage then hast thou if thou criest downe Saints and then makest thy selfe one in a Popish way Could therefore thy graces speak they would say as the Angell to John that would worship him Worship thou God worship thou Christ put thy trust in Christ he hath onely borne our sins so as to take them away and therefore as grosse Idolatry makes the works of God a god so doth more subtle Idolatry make the workes of Christ a Christ 10. It overthroweth the grace of hope When faith is destroyed 10. Overthrowes hope then also hope is This grace of hope is the great support of a Christian now if it be placed in Christ and the promises it is as firme as faith therefore saith the Apostle of hope Rom. 5. It makes not ashamed but if it were an hope in our selves how often should wee be confounded That is good of Austine Noli sperare de te sed de Deo tuo nam si speras de te anima tua conturbatur ad te quia nondum invenit unde sit secura de te It 's an ignorant distinction among Papists that they may have a certainty of hope but not of faith in matters of salvation whereas they have both the like certainty and differ onely thus faith doth for the present receive the things promised and hope keeps up the heart against all difficulties till it come to enjoy them Now to have such an hope as the Papists define partim è gratia Dei and partim à meritis nostris proveniens must needs be destructive 11. It taketh away the glory due to God in this great work of Justification 11. Robs God of his glory If you have not meat or drink but by God shall you have pardon of sin without him Abraham beleeved and gave God glory We are apt to account beleeving no glory to God but could wee mortifie our corruptions more and more could wee exhaust and spend our selves yet this is no more to give glory to God then when we beleeve Now it is good to possesse Christians with this principle To beleeve in Christ is to give glory to Christ we naturally would think to go far on pilgrimages to macerate our bodies were likelier waies for our salvation but this would be mans glory more then Gods glory Therefore how did that wretched Monk dying blasphemously say Redde mihi aternam vitam quam debes 12. It maketh sin and the first Adam more and greater for condemnation 12. Makes more in sin to damne then in Christ to save then Christ for salvation Now the Apostle Rom. 5. makes the opposition and sheweth that the gift is far above the transgression Therefore take thy sins in all the aggravations of them there is not more in them to damne then in Christ to save Why should sin be an heavie sin a great sin and Christ not also a wonderfull saving Christ When we say The guilt of sin is infinite that is only infinite objectivè but now Christs merits and obedience are infinite meritoriè they have from the dignity of the person an infinite worth in them and therefore as sin is exceeding sinfull so let Christ be an exceeding Christ and grace exceeding grace 13. It overthroweth the true doctrine of sanctification which declareth 13. Overthrowes the doctrine of sanctification it to be inchoate and imperfect that our faith hath much unbeliefe in it our best gold much drosse our wine much water It is true both the Papists and the Antinomian agree in this errour that because sin is covered therefore there can be no sin seen in the godly that the soul in this life is without spot and wrinckle but they doe it upon different grounds whereas Paul Rom. 7. doth abundantly destroy that principle How blasphemous is that direction of the Papists to men dying who are to pray thus Conjunge Domine obsequium meum cum omnibus qua Christus passus est pro me And how absurd is that doctrine Si bona opera sunt magis bona quà m mala opera mala fortiùs merentur vitam aternam 14. It taketh away the true doctrine of the Law as if that were 14. Takes away the doctrine of the Law possible to be kept For works could not justifie us unlesse they were answerable to that righteousnesse which God commands but Rom. 3. that which was impossible for the Law Christ hath fulfilled in us 15. It overthroweth the consideration of a man while he is justified 15. Overthroweth the consideration of man while he is justified For they look upon him as godly but the Scripture as ungodly Rom. 4. who justifieth the ungodly Some by ungodly meane any prophane man whereas it is rather one that is not perfectly godly for Abraham is here made the ungodly person I know it is explained otherwise but certainly this is most genuine Use 1. Of Instruction How uncharitably and falsly many men charge it generally upon our godly Ministers that they are nothing but Justitiaries and Legall Preachers For do not all sound and godly Ministers hold forth this Christ this righteousnesse
you may gather what was a comfort to him Thus Paul 2 Tim. 4. I have fought a good fight c. It is true those words A crowne of righteousnesse The just Judge and Render doe not prove any merits in Paul as the Papists plead but yet Paul declareth this to keep up his heart against all discouragements We are not therefore to take comfort from them so as to rest in them but so as to praise God thereby It 's a good way nesciendo seire that so we may praise God for them and sciendo nescire that so we may be humble in our selves 11. They are necessary in respect of God both in that he is hereby 11. Because God is glorified by them pleased and also glorified When we say They are necessary in respect of God we understand it declaratively to set forth his glory for when God is said to be the end of all our actions and goodness he is not finis indigentiae an end that needs them but finis assimilationis an end that perfects those things in making them like him Now two waies they relate to God 1. God is hereby pleased so the Apostle Hebr. 13. He is well pleased So that as Leah though blear-eyed yet when shee was fruitfull in children said Now my husband will love mee so may Faith say Now God will love me when it abounds in the fruits of righteousnesse for our godly actions please God though imperfect onely the ground is because our persons were first reconciled with God Secondly they referre to God so as to glorifie him as his name is blasphemed when we walke in all wickednesse It 's true it 's Gods grace to account of this as his glory seeing it 's so defective 12. They are necessary in regard of others Matth. 5. 17. Let your 12. Because others are benefited thereby light shine before men He doth not there encourage vain-glory but he propounds the true end of our visible holinesse for godlinesse being light it ought not to be under a bushell Hence both in the Tabernacle and Temple the light was placed in the midst and it ought to extend to others that hereby they may glorifie God in heaven As when we see an excellent picture we doe not praise that so much as the Artificer who made it We ought so to walk that men should glorifie God who hath made us so heavenly so humble so mortified Hierome said of Austin that he did diligere Christum habitantem in Augustino so ought we to walk that others may love Christ dwelling in us 1 Pet. 3. 1. it 's an exhortation to wives so to walke that their husbands may be won to the Lord. Thou prayest for thy husband in a carnall condition thou wouldst have him go heare such a Minister and such Sermons see that thy life also may convert him The Apostle by the phrase without the word meaneth the publick preaching so that the wives life may preach to him all the day and that same phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth imply 1. the great prize that every mans soule is worth 2. the delight that they ought to take in converting of others even the same that merchants doe in their trade 13. Holinesse and godlinesse inherent is the end of our faith and justification 13. Because godlinesse inherent is the end of our faith and justification and that is the meaning of our Divines who say Charity or Love of God is the end of faith because God hath appointed this way of justification by faith till he hath brought us into eternall glory and there we have perfect inherent holinesse though even then the glory and honour of all that shall be given to Christ Now indeed it hath pleased God to take another way for our acceptation then shall be hereafter not but that God might if he had pleased have given us such a measure of grace inherent whereby we might have obtained eternall life being without sin and conformable to his will but this way hath pleased his wisdome that so Christ and Grace may be exalted and we for our sins debased in our selves Therefore good is that of Anselme Terret me tota vita mea nam apparet mihi aut peccatum aut tota sterilitas Onely this may make for the excellency of Sanctification that therefore is Christ and Grace and Justification and all that at last we may be made perfectly holy Now some Divines have gone further but I cannot go along with them As 1. Those that doe give them causality and efficiencie of our justification and salvation And if they should use the word Efficiency in a large sense it might be true but dangerous but otherwise to take Efficient strictly they cannot for so was the covenant of workes at first Adams obedience would not have meritoriously but efficiently procured his happinesse Hence by the Apostle faith is not included as works are rejected for they are rejected as efficients of our salvation but faith is included as the instrumentall and passive receiving of it 2. Some learned men have said Though good workes doe not merit eternall life for that is wholly purchased by Christs death yet say they accidentall degrees of glory our godlinesse may obtaine but that is not safe for first it 's questioned by some whether there be such degrees at all or no but grant it yet even that must be of grace as well as others Lastly some hold our temporall mercies to come to us by a covenant of workes but not our spirituall this also is hard for we may have these good things either by Christ or else by the forbearance of God who doth not take the advantage against us for our sins I shall say no more of this then by answering a main doubt Object If good workes be still necessarily requisite why then is not the covenant of grace still a covenant of works not as at first in Adam when they were to be perfect and entire but by grace pardoning the imperfection of them in which sense the Arminians affirme it Answ Although good workes be requisite in the man justified or saved yet it 's not a covenant of workes but faith and the reason is because faith onely is the instrument that receiveth justification and eternall life and good workes are to qualifie the subject beleeving but not the instrument to receive the covenant so that faith onely is the condition that doth receive the covenant but yet that a man beleeve is required the change of the whole man and that faith onely hath such a receiving nature shall be proved hereafter God willing Use Of exhortation to take heed you turne not the grace of God into licentiousnesse suspect all doctrines that teach comfort but not duty labour indeed to be a spirituall Anatomist dividing between having godlinesse and trusting in it but take heed of separating Sanctification from Justification Be not a Pharisee nor yet a Publican so that I shall exhort thee
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
strict rule of things to be done by way of command but denoteth any heavenly doctrine whether it be promise or precept He that distinguisheth well teacheth well Now I observe a great neglect of this in the books written about these points and indeed the reason why some can so hardly endure the word Law is because they attend to the use of the word in English or the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Lex as it is defined by Tully and Aristotle which understand it a strict rule onely of things to be done and that by way of meere command But now the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth comprehend more for that doth not only signifie strictly what is to be done but it denoteth largely any heavenly doctrine whether it be promise or precept and hence it is that the Apostle calleth it The law of faith which in some sense would be a contradiction and in some places where the word Law is used absolutely it s much questioned whether he mean the Law or the Gospel and the reason why he calls it a law of faith is not as Chrysostome would have it because hereby he would sweeten the Gospel and for the words sake make it more pleasing to them but happily in a meere Hebraisme as signifying that in generall which doth declare and teach the will of God The Hebrewes have a more strict word for precept and that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet some say this also sometimes signifieth a promise Psal 133. 3. There the Lord commanded a blessing i. e. promised so John 12. 50. his commandement i. e. his promise is life everlasting So then if we would attend to the Hebrew words it would not so trouble us to heare that it is good But yet the use of the word Law is very generall sometimes it signifieth any part of The acceptions of the word Law in Scripture are divers the Old Testament John 10. It is said in the Law You are gods And that is in the Psalmes Sometimes the Law and the Prophets are made all the books of the Old Testament sometimes the Law and the Psalmes are distinguished sometimes it is used for the ceremoniall law onely Hebr. 10. 1. The Law having a shadow of things to come sometimes it is used synecdochically for some acts of the Law onely as Galat. 5. Against such there is no law sometimes it is used for that whole oiconomy and peculiar dispensation of Gods worship unto the Jewes in which sense it is said to be untill John but grace and truth by Christ Jesus sometimes it is used in the sense of the Jewes as without Christ And thus the Apostle generally in the Epistle to the Romans and Galatians Indeed this is a dispute between Papists and us In what sense the Law is taken for the Papists would have it understood onely of the ceremoniall law But we answer that the beginning of the dispute was about the observation of those legall ceremonies as necessary to salvation But the Apostle goeth from the hypothesis to the thesis and sheweth that not onely those ordinances but no other works may be put in Christs roome Therefore the Antinomian before he speaks any thing against or about the Law he must shew in what sense the Apostle useth it Sometimes it is taken strictly for the five bookes of Moses yea it is thought of many that book of the Law so often mentioned in Scripture which was kept with so much diligence was onely that book called Denteronomy and commonly it is taken most strictly for the ten Commandements Now the different use of this word breeds all this obscurity and the Apostle argueth against it in one sense and pleadeth for it in another 2. The Law must not be separated from the Spirit of God This is 2. The Law and the Spirit of God must not be separated a principle alwaies to be carried along with you for the whole Word of God is the instrument and organ of spirituall life and the Law is part of this Word of God This I proved before nay should the Morall Law be quite abolished yet it would not be for this end because the Spirit of God did not use it as an instrument of life for we see all sides grant that circumcision and the sacraments are argued against by the Apostle as being against our salvation and damnable in their owne use now yet in the Old Testament those sacraments of Circumcision and the Paschall Lamb were spirituall meanes of faith as truly as Baptisme and the Lords Supper are It is true there is a difference in the degree of Gods grace by them but not in the truth and therefore our Divines doe well confute the Papists who hold those sacraments onely typicall of ours and not to be really exhibitive of grace as these are in the New Testament Therefore if the Apostles arguing against the Morall Law would prove it no instrument of Gods Spirit for our good the same would hold also in Circumcision and all those sacraments and therefore at least for that time they must grant it a help to Christ and grace as well as Circumcision was If you say Why then doth the Apostle argue against the works of the Morall Law I answer Because the Jewes rested in them without Christ and it is the fault of our people they turne the Gospel into the Law and we may say Whosoever seeks to be saved by his Baptisme he falls off from Christ 3. To doe a thing out of obedience to the Law and yet by love 3. Obedience and love oppose not one another and delight doe not oppose one another About this I see a perpetuall mistake To lead a man by the Law is slavish it 's servile say they a Beleever is carried by love he needs no law and I shall shew you Chrysostome hath some such hyperbolicall expressions upon the words following The Law is not put for the righteous But this is very weak to oppose the efficient cause and the rule together for the Spirit of God worketh the heart to love and delight in that which he commandeth Take an instance in Adam While he stood he did obey out of love and yet because of the command also We may illustrate it by Moses his mother You know she was hired and commanded by Pharaoh's daughter to nurse Moses which was her own childe now she did this out of love to Moses her childe yet did obey Pharaoh's daughters commandement upon her also so concerning Christ there was a commandement laid upon Christ to fulfill the Law for us yet he did it out of love It is disputed Whether Christ had a command laid upon him by the Father strictly so called and howsoever the Arrians from the grant of this did inferre Christs absolute inferiority to the Father yet our orthodox Divines doe conclude it because of the many places of Scripture which prove it Acts 7. 37. John 14. 31. As my
the glorious image of God put into us for of the later as it is informed by Scripture it is no question Now this is absolutely necessary two waies 1. As a passive qualification of the subject for faith for there cannot be faith in a stone or in a beast no more then there can be sin in them Therefore Reason or the light of Nature makes man in a passive capacity fit for grace although hee hath no active ability for it And when he is compared to a stone it is not in the former sense but the later And secondly it 's necessary by way of an instrument for we cannot beleeve unlesse we understand whether knowledge be an act ingredient into the essence of faith or whether it be prerequisite all hold there must be an act of the understanding one way or other going to beleeve Hence knowledge is put for faith and Hebr. 11. By saith we understand Thus it is necessary as an instrument 3. There is nothing true in Divinity that doth crosse the truth of Though some divine truths may transcend the reach of Nature none doe crosse the truth thereof as it is the remnant of Gods image Nature as it 's the remnant of Gods image This indeed is hard to cleere in many points of Divinity as in the doctrine of the Trinity and the doctrine of Christs Incarnation which seemeth paradoxall to Reason of whom Tertullian lib. 5. de carne Christi cap. 5. thus Natus est Dei Filius non pudet quia pudendum est Mortuus est Dei Filius prorsus credibile est quia ineptum Sepultus resurrexit certum est quia impossibile Yet seeing the Apostle calls the naturall knowledge of a man Truth and all truth is from God which waies soever it come there can therefore be no contradiction between it And hereupon our Divines doe when they have confuted the Poposh doctrine of Transubstantiation by Scripture shew also that for a body to be in two places is against the principles of Nature They indeed call for faith in this point and Lapide upon these words Hoc est corpus meum saith If Christ should aske me at the day of judgment Why did you beleeve the bread to be the body of Christ I will answer This text if I be deceived These words have deceived me But we must compare place with place and Scripture with Scripture As for the doctrine of the Trinity though it be above Reason and we cannot look into that mysterie no more then an Owle can into the Sun Faith and the light of Nature go to the knowledge of the same thing different waies beames yet it is not against it 4. The same object may be knowne by the light of Nature and by the light of Faith This may easily be understood I may know there is a God by the light of Nature and I may beleeve it because the Scripture faith so so Hebr. 11. I may by faith understand the Word was made and by arguments know it was made and this is called faith by James The divels beleeve that is they have an evident intuitive knowledge of God and feel it by experience not that they have faith for that is a supernaturall gift wrought by God and hath accompanying it pia affectio to him that speaketh as the first truth Faith therefore and the light of Nature goe to the knowledge of the same thing different waies faith doth because of the testimony and divine revelation of God the light of Nature doth because of arguments in the thing it selfe by discourse And faith is not a dianoeticall or discursive act of the understanding but its simple and apprehensive 5. Though Reason and the light of Nature be necessary yet it is not The light of Nature a necessary instrument but no Judge in matters of Faith a Judge in matters of faith The Lutheran seemeth to depresse Reason too much and the Socinian exalteth it too high They make it not onely an instrument but a Judge and thereupon they reject the greatest mysteries of Religion I know some have endeavoured to shew that Religio est summa ratio and there are excellent men that have proved the truth of the Christian Religion by Reason and certainly if we can by Reason prove there is any Religion at all we may by the same Reason prove that the Christian Religion is the true one But who doth not see how uncertaine Reason is in comparison of Faith I doe not therefore like that assertion of one who affects to be a great Rationalist it is Chillingworth that saith We therefore receive the Scriptures to be the Word of God because we have the greatest Reason that this is the Word of God But we must not confound the instrument and the Judge holy truthes they are Scripture truthes though hammered out by Reason As the Smith that takes golden plate and beates it into what shape he pleaseth his hammer doth not make it gold but onely gold of such a shape And thus also Reason doth not make a truth divine onely holds it forth and declareth it in such a way 6. It s altogether insufficient to prescribe or set downe any worship of Nature insufficient to prescribe divine Worship God Hence God doth so often forbid us to walk after our owne imaginations and to doe that which we shall choose The Apostle calleth it Will-worship when a mans Will is the meere cause of it Now its true men are more apt to admire this as we see in the Pharisees and Papists they dote upon their Traditions more then Gods Institutions Hence Raymundus a Papist speaking of the Masse It is saith he as full of mysteries as the sea is full of drops of water as the heaven hath Angels as the firmament hath starres and the earth little crummes of sand But what saith our Saviour Luk. 18. that which is highly esteemed before men is abomination before God That word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is applied to idols and false-worship It s true indeed even in worship light of Nature and prudence is instrumentally required to order the Institutions of God but as Reason may not make a new Article of Faith so neither a new part of worship Now Natures in sufficiency is described in these three reasonings 1. To have all the worship of God sensible and pleasing to the eye It 1. Because it would have all the worship of God sensible and pleasing to the eie was well called by Parisiensis a madness in some who doubted not to say The Church was better ruled by the inventions of men then by the Scriptures The people of Israel would have sensible gods that they might see them and certainly men doe as much delight in sensible pompous worship as children doe in gay babies therefore the Prophet speaketh of their goodly images But all this ariseth because they are ignorant of spirituall worship and cannot tell how to make spirituall advantage from God
regard of their positive nature as well as to good 2. God doth this in the way of his Providence as a Creatour the other he doth in the way of Predestination as a father in Christ 3. The other aide may be said to be due as our Divines speak of originall righteousnesse upon a supposition that a man is made a creature to do such actions yet not properly a debt but that for our sin we are deprived of it but this speciall help of grace cannot be called so 3. It is wholly unable to work any good thing All this while we Man by the power of nature wholly unable to performe good actions have considered the power of man but as in the lower region and if you doe consider him in reference to good things so he hath no power or will or free-will at all but as Austin said before Luther it 's servum arbitrium a servant and inslaved will to sin onely Indeed we have not lost our understandings or our wills but to know or will that which is good is wholly lost Though we have not lost the will yet we have the rectitude in that will whereby we should encline to good And this may be proved from many Arguments 1. From all those places of Scripture which declare our estate 1. Because our natures are full of sin and corruption to be full of sin and corruption and altogether wicked Now Doe men gather grapes of thornes or figs of thistles Hence the Father compareth us well to the ship in a tempest that is destitute of a Pilot we are dashed continually upon rocks though this speak of the negative onely not the positive corruption 2. All those places which speak of grace and conversion and 2. Because grace and conversion are the work of God regeneration as the work of God As for those places where we are said to repent and to turne unto God in time we shall cleare only these Texts prove that all the good things we doe they are the workes of the Lord not that God beleeveth or repenteth in us but he worketh those actions in us efficiently which we doe formally and vitally 3. All those places whereby glory and praise is to be given 3. Because glory is to be given to God onely not to our selves unto God onely and not unto our selves What hast thou thou hast not received We are to glory in nothing because no good thing is ours Therefore we bring forth good things as Sarahs dead womb brought forth a child it was not a child of nature but a child of the meere promise thus are all our graces And indeed if we could either in whole or part work our own conversion wee might thanke God and our wils But how absurd would this be Lord I thank thee for the turning of my heart when I was willing to turne it 4. It cannot prepare or dispose it selfe for the grace of justification Nature of it selfe cannot dispose for justification or sanctification and the reasons why or sanctification As it cannot immediatly work any good thing so neither can a naturall man dispose or prepare himself for the great works of grace There is no truth in such an assertion Let man doe what he can naturally God will meet him graciously and the reasons are plaine 1. Because no naturall thing is in it selfe an order or a disposition to a supernaturall thing for they differ in their whole kind and nature Hence it is that we never read of any Heathens that by the improvement of a naturall light had supernaturall vouchsafed unto them 2. Those places that speak of our totall corruption intensively onely evill and extensively all the thoughts of a man are evill and protensively continually do sufficiently declare that we cannot prepare our selves to meet God 3. If wee could prepare or dispose ourselves to grace then the greatest cause of glory would still be in a mans owne selfe For Why doth Peter repent and not Judas Because may some say he disposed and set himselfe to repent and not Judas But still here is the Question Why did Peter set himselfe to repent and not Judas Here it must be ultimately resolved either into the grace of God or the will of man 4. All those similitudes that the Scripture useth do illustrate this thing We are not said to be blind or lame but dead in sin now did Lazarus prepare himself to rise So it s called Regeneration Can a man dispose himself to have life I know these comparisons must not be extended too far yet the Scripture using such expressions to declare our utter inability we may well press those breasts of the Scripture so far and bring out no blood The parched earth doth not dispose it selfe for the raine nor doth the cold ice of it selfe thaw which is the Fathers Similie Yet fifthly We may hold truly some antecedaneous workes upon the There are and may be some preparatory and antecedaneous workes upon the heart before justification or sanctification heart before those graces be bestowed on us This take to antidote against the Antinomian who speaks constantly of the soule taking Christ even while it 's a grievous polluted soule as if there were no polishing of this crooked timber and rough stone but even taken out of the quarry and so immediately put into the building Those in the Acts that were pricked in heart were yet bid to repent and so they cried out What shall we doe to be saved The sick feeleth his burden before he cometh for ease so that a grosse sinner is not immediately put out of his vile waies into Christ onely these limitations you must take 1. That all these things sight of sin trembling for feare confused desires they are the workes of Gods grace moving us they doe not come from our owne naturall strength 2. These are not absolutely necessary in every one We know how Matthew and Lydia did follow Christ and God saith he was found of some that did not seek him Paul was in a most cursed indisposition when the Lord called him but generally God takes this way 3. These are not necessary antecedents so as the grace of conversion doth necessarily follow Wee reade of Cain and Judas troubled for sin These are a wildernesse that a man may dye in and never goe into Canaan There may be throes and pangs when yet no childe but wind is to be delivered Hence a people that have been civill have not been called but Publicans and Harlots The object of election is for the most part few for number infirme for power and sinfull for conversation though in the godly these are needles that will draw in the threed yet this state must not be called a third middle estate between regenerate and unregenerate as some feigne Lastly none of these workings can be called so properly preparations or dispositions in themselves but onely intentionally in God Our Saviour looked on a young man
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
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
which is not to be understood of the unity of his Essence but Will and Promise Now when all this is asserted he maketh an objection which is usuall with him in this Epistle and he doth it for this end to take away the calumny and reproach cast upon him by his adversaries as one that would destroy the Law The objection then is this propounded by way of interrogation to affect the more Doe we make voide the Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Apostle used this word in this Chapter ver 3. and it signifieth to make empty and voide so that the Law shall be of no use or operation Now to this the Apostle answereth negatively by words of defiance and detestation God forbid So that by this expression you see how intolerable that doctrine ought to be unto the people of God that would take away the Law And the Apostle doth not only defie this objection but addeth we establish the Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Metaphor from those that doe corroborate and make firm a pillar or any such thing that was falling It hath much troubled Interpreters how Paul could say he established the Law especially considering those many places in his Epistles which seeme to abrogate it Some understand it thus That the righteousnesse of faith hath it's witnesse from the Law and Prophets as ver 21. in this Chapter so that in this sense they make the Law established because that which was witnessed therein doth now come to passe Even as our Saviour said Moses did beare witnesse of him But this interpretation doth not come up to the Apostles meaning Those that limit this speech to the Ceremoniall Law do easily interpret it thus That the ceremonies and types were fulfilled in Christ who being the substance and body they are all now fulfilled in him But the Apostle comprehends the Morall Law under the word Law The Papists they make the Gospel a new Law and they compare it with the old Law having the Spirit as two things differing only gradually so that they say the old Law is established by the new as the childhood is established by elder age which is not by abolition but perfection That which I see the Orthodoxe pitch upon is that the Law The Law established three wayes by the Gospel is established three wayes by the Gospel First whereas the Law did threaten death to every transgressor this is established in Christ who satisfied the justice of God Secondly in that the Law requireth perfect obedience this is also fulfilled in Christ Now this is a matter worth discussion Whether the righteousnesse we are yet justified by be the righteousnesse of the Law For those learned men that are against the imputation of Christs active obedience they urge this argument which seemeth to carry much strength with it That if Christs active obedience be made ours and we justified by that then are we still justified by the works of the Law and so the righteousnesse of faith and works is all one faith in us and works in Christ If therefore active obedience be made ours as I conceive the truth to be in that doctrine then we may easily see the Law is established Thirdly but lastly which I take to be the truth and Austin heretofore interpreteth it so the Law is established because by the Gospel we obtain grace in some measure to fulfill the Law so that we still keep the Law in the preceptive and informative part of it and doe obtaine by faith in Christ obedience in some degree to it which obedience also though it be not the Covenant of grace yet is the way to Salvation LECTURE XXII ROM 3. 31. Doe we then make voide the Law THis Text is already explained and there are two Observations doe naturally arise from it as first That it is an 'T is hard to set up Christ and grace and not be thought to destroy the Law hard thing so to set up Christ and grace as not thereby be thought to destroy the Law Thus was Paul misunderstood by some and so the Antinomians not rightly understanding in what latitude the Orthodoxe in their disputations against Popery did oppose the Law to the Gospel were thereby plunged into a dangerous errour But on this point I will not insist The second doctrine is that which I intend namely That the doctrine The doctrine of Christ and grace doth establish the Law of Christ and grace in the highest and fullest manner doth not overthrow but establish the Law And this doctrine will directly lead us to lay our hands on the chiefe pillars of that house which the Antinomians have built The Question then at this time to be discussed is Whether the Law be abrogated or no by Christ to the beleevers under the Gospel And this Question I will answer by severall propositions that may conduce to the clearing of the truth for it would seeme as if the Scripture held out contradictions in this point In my Text it 's denyed that the Apostles doe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 make void the Law yet 2 Cor. 3. 11. The Apostle speaking of the Law hath this passage If that which be done away 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where the word is expresly used that yet here is denyed so Ephes 2. 14. Christ is described 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that maketh voide the hand-writing against us And in that place the Apostle useth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when yet Mat. 5. he denyed that he came 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to dissolve the Law Grave therefore and serious is Ghimnitius his admonition In all other things generall words beget confusion and obscurity but in the doctrine of the abrogation of the Law they are very dangerous unlesse it be distinctly explained how it is abrogated In the first place therefore consider That about a Law there Interpretation dispensation c. affections of a Law are these affections if I may call them so There is an Interpretation a dispensation or relaxation and these differ from an abrogation for the former doe suppose the Law still standing in force though mitigated but abrogation is then properly when a Law is totally taken away And this abrogation ariseth sometimes from the expresse constitution at first which did limit and prescribe the time of the lawes continuance sometimes by an expresse revoking and repealing of it by that authority which made it sometimes by adding to that repeale an expresse law commanding the contrary Now it may be easily proved that the Ceremoniall and Judiciall lawes they are abrogated by expresse repeale The Judiciall Law 1 Pet. 2. 13. where they are commanded to be subject to every ordination of man and this was long foretold Genes 49. 10. The Law-giver shall be taken from Judah The Ceremoniall Law that is also expresly repealed Act. 15. and in other places not that these were ill or that they did come from an ill author but because the fulnesse and substance of
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
the Law though Law there be used for the whole Ministery of Moses and not of the Morall Law let us consider in what sense this is denyed to the godly 5. That interpretation of some though of solid judgement The commonly received sense of that Phrase Not to be under the Law rejected who make the phrase Not to be under the Law to be as much as Not under the curse of the Law or Not obnoxious to the guilt by it seemeth not to agree with the context I know this is generally received as the sense of the place and there is this argument urged for it because the Apostle maketh an objection from hence Shall we sinne because we are not under the Law but under grace Therefore it should seeme that the Law is taken for the condemning power of it and grace for pardoning and free justification but because the Apostle is here speaking of sanctification both in this Chapter and the Chapter following I preferre Beza's interpretation which makes the being under the Beza's interpretation of the phrase approv'd Law to be the same in sense with under sinne for the Apostle speaking of himselfe as carnall Chap. 7. saith that the Law wrought in him all manner of evil and this indeed is the work of the Law in every unregenerate man so that the more the Law is applyed to him the more doth his corruption break forth Now then this is the Apostles argument Let not sinne reigne in you for now you are not under the Law stirring up sinne and provoking it in you but under grace not justifying or pardoning as properly and immediately meant here though they were under that also but sanctifying and healing And the Apostle maketh the objection following What then shall we sinne because we are not under the Law because the phrase was ambiguous and might be thought to have such a sense as the Libertines make it to have to wit to doe every thing as we please without any controule by any Law and in this explication we shall see a sweet harmony in the context The third instance is Rom. 7. especially in the beginning of the Chapter but the answer to the former Objection will also cleare this because the Apostle continueth in the same matter explaining what it is to be under the Law by a similitude from a wife married to an husband who is bound to him so long as he liveth but when he dyeth she is free Now in the reddition of the similitude there is some difference among Commentators but I take it thus Sinne which by the Law doth irritate and provoke our corruptions that is the former husband the soule had and lusts they are the children hereof but when we are regenerated then Christ becomes the husband of the godly soule so that they are deceived who make the Morall Law the husband but sinne is properly the husband And if you will say the Morall Law you must understand it in this sense only as it doth inflame the heart to all evil therefore the Apostle as is well observed by the Learned doth not say the Law is dead but we are dead for indeed the Law is never so much alive as in the godly who doe constantly obey it and live accordingly to it This will also serve for that place Gal. 5. 18. If ye be led by the spirit ye are not under the Law That is under the Law forcibly compelling Austin distinguisheth of foure states of men those who are Ante legens and these commit sinne without knowledge of it Sub lege and these commit it with some fighting but are overcome Sub gratia and these doe fight and shall overcome and Sub pace these we may make to be those in heaven LECTURE XXIIII DEUT. 4. 13. And he declared unto you his Covenant which he commanded you to performe even ten Commandements c. I Have already handled the Law as it is a Rule and now come to consider of it as a Covenant that so the whole Law may be fully understood I shall not be long upon this though the matter be large and difficult though the subject be like the Land of Canaan yet there are many Gyants and great Objections in the way I will rather handle it positively then controversally for I doe not finde in any point of Divinity learned men so confused and perplexed being like Abrahams Ram hung in a bush of briars and brambles by the head as here That I may methodically proceed observe the context of this verse and the scope Moses being to perswade the people of Israel to obedience Arguments used by Moses to perswade obedience to the Law of the Law useth severall forcible arguments As ver 1. The good and profitable issue thereof which is to live and possesse the land not as if this mercy were only temporall but by this was represented eternall life in heaven A second argument is from the perfection of it that nothing may be added to it or detracted from it The third argument is from the great wisdome and understanding they shall hold forth hereby to all other Nations there being no people under the sunne that had such holy and perfect lawes as they had and if that be true of Bernard Sapiens est cui res sapiunt prout sunt hee is a wise man to whom things doe tast and relish as they are divine and holy things as holy earthy things as earthly and fading then certainly by this Law of God there was true wisedome prescribed Other arguments Moses doth bring as The great authority God put upon the Law The great mercy in giving it to them rather then another Nation And the verse I have read belongs to that argument which proveth the dignity and glorious authority of the Law from the manner of delivering it Which Law hee declareth to us by the name and title of a Covenant Now this take notice of that the word Covenant to omit other significations is taken sometimes synecdochically for part of the Covenant as it is here in these words The Doctrine I will insist upon is That the Law was delivered That the Law God delivered to Israel was a Covenant appears by God on Mount Sinai in a Covenant-way Or The Law was a Covenant that God made with the people of Israel This will appeare in that it hath the name of a Covenant and the reall properties of a Covenant 1. The name of a Covenant 2 King 18. 12. Because they obeyed 1. In that it hath the name of a Covenant not the voice of the Lord their God but transgressed his Covenant and all that Moses the servant of God commanded Deut. 17. 2. If there be found any that hath worught wickednesse in transgressing the Covenant which was the ten Commandements as appeareth ver 3. And more expresly 2 Chro. 6. 11. In it have I put the Arke wherein is the Covenant of the Lord that he made with the children
Apostle describeth the righteousnesse which is by faith And Beza doth acknowledge that that which Moses speakes of the law Paul doth apply to the Gospel Now how can this be reconciled unlesse wee distinguish between the generall doctrine of Moses which was delivered unto the people in all the circumstantiall administrations of it and the particular doctrine about the Law taken in a limited and abstracted consideration Onely this take notice of that although the Law were a Covenant of grace yet the righteousnesse of works and faith differ as much as heaven and earth But the Papists they make this difference The righteousnesse of the Law saith Stapleton Antid in hunc locum is that which wee of our owne power have and doc by the knowledge and understanding of the Law but the righteousnesse of faith they make the righteousnesse of the Law to which wee are enabled by grace through Christ So that they compare not these two together as two contraries in which sense Paul doth but as an imperfect righteousnesse with a perfect But we know that the Apostle excludeth the workes of David and Abraham that they did in obedience to the Law to which they were enabled by grace so necessary is it in matter of justification and pardon to exclude all workes any thing that is ours Tolle te à te impedis te said Austine well Nor doth it availe us that this grace in us is from God because the Apostle makes the opposition wholly between any thing that is ours howsoever we come by it and that of faith in Christ Having thus explained the state of the Question I come to the arguments to prove the affirmative And thus I shall order them The first shall be taken from the relation of the Covenanters Arguments proving the Law a Covenant of grace God on one part and the Israelites on the other God did not deale at this time as absolutely considered but as their God and Father Hence God saith hee is their God and when Christ quoteth the commanders Argum. 1 hee brings the preface Heare O Israel the Lord thy God is one And Rom. 9. 4. To the Israelites belong adoption and the glory and the covenants and the giving of the Law and the promises Now unlesse this were a Covenant of grace how could God be their God who were sinners Thus also if you consider the people of Israel into what relation they are taken this will much confirme the point Exod. 19. 5 6. If yee will obey my voice you shall be a peculiar treasure unto mee and yee shall be unto me a kingdome of Priests and an holy Nation which is applied by Peter to the people of God under the Gospel If therefore the Law had been a Covenant of workes how could such an agreement come between them 2. If wee consider the good things annexed unto this Covenant it must needes be a Covenant of grace for there wee have remission Argum. 2 and pardon of sinne whereas in the Covenant of workes there is no way for repentance or pardon In the second Commandement God is described to be one showing mercy unto thousands and by shewing mercy is meant pardon as appeareth by the contrary visiting iniquity Now doth the Law strictly taken receive any humbling and debasing of themselves no but curseth every one that doth not continue in all the things commanded and that with a full and perfect obedience Hence Exod. 34. ver 6 7. God proclaimeth himselfe in manifold attributes of being gracious and long-suffering keeping mercy for thousands and forgiving iniquity and this hee doth upon the renewing of the two Tables whereas if the people of Israel had been strictly held up to the Law as it required universall perfect obedience without any failing they must also necessarily have despaired and perished without any hope at all 3. If we consider the duties commanded in the Law so generally taken Argum. 3 it must needs be a Covenant of grace for what is the meaning of the first Commandement but to have one God in Christ our God by faith For if faith had not been on such termes commanded it had been impossible for them to love God or to pray unto God Must not the meaning then be to love and delight in God and to trust in him But how can this be without faith through Christ Hence some urge that the end of the commandement is love from faith unfeigned but because Scultetus doth very probably by commandement understand there The Apostles preaching and exhortation it being in the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Apostle using the word in that Epistle in the same sense I leave it It 's true there is no mention made of Christ or faith in the first Commandement but that is nothing for love also is not mentioned yet our Saviour discovers it there and so must faith and Christ be supposed there by necessary consequence And can we think that the people of Israel though indeed they were too confident in themselves yet when they took upon themselves to keep and observe the Law that the meaning was they would doe it without any spot or blemish by sinne or without the grace of God for pardon if they should at any time breake the Law 4. From the Ceremoniall Law All Divines say that this is reduced Argum. 4 to the Morall Law so that Sacrifices were commanded by vertue of the second Commandement Now wee all know that the Sacrifices were evangelicall and did hold forth remission of sinnes through the blood of Christ If therefore these were commanded by the Morall Law there must necessarily be grace included although indeed it was very obscure and darke And it is to be observed that the Apostle doth as much argue against circumcision and even all the Ceremoniall Law as the Morall yea the first rise of the cōtroversie was from that Now all must confesse that circumcision and the sacrifices did not oppose Christ or grace but rather included them And this hath been alwaies a very strong argument to perswade me for the affirmative It is true the Jewes they rested upon these and did not look to Christ but so doe our Christians in these times upon the Sacraments and other duties 5. This will appeare from the visible seale to ratifie this Covenant Argum. 5 which you heard was by sacrifices and sprinkling the people with bloud And this did signifie Christ for Christ he also was the Mediatour of this Covenant seeing that reconciliation cannot possibly be made with a sinner through the Mediation of any mortall man When therefore Moses is called the Mediatour it is to be understood typically even as the sacrifices did wash away sinne typically And indeed if it had been a Covenant of works there needed no Mediatour either typicall or reall some think Christ likewise was the Angel spoke of Act. 7. with whom Moses was in the wildernesse
and it is probable Now if Christ was the Mediatour of the Law as a Covenant the Antinomian distinction must fall to the ground that makes the Law as in the hand of Moses and not in the hand of Christ whereas on Mount Sinai the Law was in the hand of Christ 6. If the Law were the same Covenant with that oath which Argum. 6 God made to Isaac then it must needs be a Covenant of grace But we shall finde that God when he gave this Law to them makes it an argument of his love and grace to them and therefore remembers what he had promised to Abraham Deut. 7. 12. Wherefore it shall come to passe if ye hearken to these judgements and doe them that the Lord thy God shall keep unto thee the Covenant and the mercy which he sware unto thy fathers And certainly if the Law had been a Covenant of workes God had fully abrogated and broken his Covenant and Promise of grace which he made with Abraham and his seed Therefore when the Apostle Gal. 3. 18. opposeth the Law and the Promise together making the inheritance by one and not the other it is to be understood according to the distinction before mentioned of the Law taken in a most strict and limited sense for it is plain that Moses in the administration of this Law had regard to the Covenant and Promise yea made it the same with it Now to all this there are strong Objections made from those Objections impugning the former Arguments answered places of Scripture where the Law and faith or the Promise are so directly opposed as Rom. 10. before quoted so Gal. 3. 18. Rom. 4. 14. so likewise from those places where the Law is said to be the ministery of death and to work wrath Now to these places I answer these things First that if they should be rigidly and universally true then that doctrine of the Socinians would plainly prevaile who from these places of Scripture doe urge that there was no grace or faith nor nothing of Christ vouchsafed unto the Jewes whereas we reade they had the Adoption though the state was a state of bondage In the second place consider that as it is said of the Law it worketh death so the Gospel is said to be the savour of death and men are said to have no sinne if Christ had not come yea they are said to partake of more grievous judgements who despised Christ then those that despised the Law of Moses so that this effect of the Law was meerly accidentall through our corruption only here is the difference God doth not vouchsafe any such grace as whereby we can have justification in a strict legall way but he doth whereby we may obtain it in an Evangelicall way Thirdly consider that the Apostle speaketh these derogatory passages as they may seeme to be as well of the Ceremoniall Law yet all doe acknowledge here was Christ and grace held forth Fourthly much of these places is true in a respective sense according to the interpretation of the Jew who taking these without Christ make it a killing letter even as if we should the doctrine of the Gospel without the grace of Christ And certainly if any Jew had stood up and said to Moses Why doe you say you give us the doctrine of life it 's nothing but a killing letter and the ministry of death would he not have been judged a blasphemer against the Law of Moses The Apostle therefore must understand it as separated yea and opposed to Christ and his grace And lastly we are still to retain that distinction of the Law in a more large sense as delivered by Moses and a more strict sense as it consisteth in precepts threatnings and promises upon a condition impossible to us which is the fulfilling of the Law in a perfect manner LECTURE XXV ROM 3. 27. Where is boasting then It is excluded By what law of works Nay but by the law of faith THe Apostle delivered in the words before most compendiously The words opened and fully the whole doctrine of justification in the severall causes of it from whence in this verse he inferreth a conclusion against all boasting in a mans self which he manageth by short interrogations that so he might the more subdue that self confidence in us Where is boasting saith he This is to be applied universally both to Jew and Gentile but especially to the Jew who gloried most herein And Chrysostome makes this the reason why Christ deferred so long and put off his coming in the flesh viz. that our humane pride might be debased for if at first he had come unto us men would not have found such an absolute necessity of a Saviour The second Question is by what Law boasting is excluded and this is answered first negatively not by the Law of works Secondly positively by the law of faith The Apostle by the law of workes meaneth the doctrine of works prescribing them as the condition of our justification and salvation and he saith works in the plurall number because one or two good works though perfectly done if that were possible would not satisfie the Law for our acceptation unlesse there were a continuall and universall practise of them both for parts and degrees And he cals the doctrine of faith the law of faith either because as Chrysostome saith he would sweeten and indeare the Gospel to the Jewes by giving it a name which they loved or as Beza he speakes here mimetically according to the sense of the Jewes as when John 6. he calleth Faith a work because the Jewes asked What should they doe Now we have in the Scripture two lively comments upon both these parts of the Text. The Pharisee mentioning what he did reckoning up his works and never naming the grace of God is a boaster by the Law of workes but the Publican that looketh upon himself only as a sinner and so judgeth himselfe he excludeth all boasting by the law of faith The Papists they meane by workes here in the Text those The Papists corruptly glosse upon this Text. which goe before faith and they quote a good rule out of Gregory though to a foule errour Non per opera venitur ad fidem sed per fidem ad opera We doe not come by works to faith but by faith to works But this glosse of theirs corrupts the text because the Apostle in this controversie instanceth in Abraham shewing how he had not wherewith to glory in himself and therefore by beleeving gave glory to God If you aske why works do imply boasting though we be enabled thereunto by the grace of God The answer is ready because we attribute justification to that work of grace within us which yet is defective that is wholly to be given unto Christ The doctrine I shall pursue out of these words is That al Doctr. though the Law given by God to the Israelites was a Covenant of grace yet in some
reall benefits by Christ As Elisha sent his servant with a staffe to raise up the Shunamites son but hee could doe nothing then cometh the Prophet himselfe and raiseth him up so it 's here Moses was like the Prophets servant hee went with a staffe to raise up those dead in sin but could not doe it without Christ Here may be one Question made upon these things and that is Why God appointed such various and different administrations This providence of God became a rocke to the Marcionites and Manichees insomuch that they denyed the same God to be Author of both the Testaments To answer this certainly God if hee pleased could have as clearly revealed Christ and poured out his Spirit giving eternall life as plentifully under the Law as under the Gospel But to aske why hee did thus would be as presumptuous and arrogant as to aske why hee created the world no sooner If the School-master teach the new beginner in another way then hee doth the proficient in study no man doth blame his wisedome As in the Paschall Lamb they were to eate the flesh but to throw away the bones so in all matters of religion those things that are revealed and profitable wee may feed upon and whatsoever is abstruse and difficult we may let goe Praestat per Deum nescire quia ipse non revelaverit quà m per hominem scire quia ipse praesumpserit Tert. de Anima Now to conclude I come to give the difference between the Differences between the Law strictly taken and the Gospel strictly taken Law strictly taken as requiring exact and perfect obedience promising eternall life upon no other termes and the Gospel strictly taken as a solemne promulgation of Christ and his benefits to a broken sinner And the first is this The Law in some measure of it is made 1. The Law in some measure is known by the light of Nature but the truth of the Gospel must be wholly revealed by God knowne by naturall light and so agreeable to a naturall conscience I say in some measure for there is much of the duty of the Law that is unknowne to naturall consciences yet the most externall and outward duties are knowne and accordingly as the truth of them is discerned by naturall light so the will doth joyne with them as good to be done though not in a godly way But it is otherwise with the Gospel for the very truth of it must be wholly revealed by God so that no naturall acumen in the world could ever have excogitated this wonderfull remedy of justification and salvation by Christ And as it is thus above knowledge so the heart is more averse from this way And by this you may see why it is such an hard thing to beleeve why the people of God are so hardly perswaded when loaden with guilt to rowle their soules upon Christ The reason is there is nothing in his naturall conscience to further him in this duty Presse a man against murder theft adultery here is naturall conscience joyning for this duty but urge him to beleeve this is altogether above nature Hence it is also that naturally we seek to be justified by the workes wee doe so that to be justified by faith is another way then corrupted nature in us or right nature in Adam would have inclined unto Therefore let not the people of God be so discouraged in their agonies and combats about their unbeliefe Let them know that a little degree of faith is of great consequence And if he said that Christianity was perpetua naturae violentia a perpetuall violence offered to nature this is most sure in matter of faith Wee are as froward in rejecting of a promise as stubborne in refusing of a command The second difference is in the object matter The Law holdeth 2. The Law requires perfect righteousness the Gospel brings pardon through Christ forth a perfect righteousnesse and will not admit of any other but the Gospel that condescends and brings pardon through Christ. And this is the maine difference and in which they can never be made one Now the Papist Arminian Socinian and others do overthrow this grand and maine difference holding justification by works under some notion or other whereas the Apostle maketh an immediate opposition If of faith then not of works The Apostle doth not distinguish of works of nature and works of grace or works of grace perfect and imperfect but speaketh absolutely and so doth also exclude that subtile opinion of making faith to justifie as a work for the Apostle making an opposition between faith and works must necessarily take faith under such a notion as cannot be a work And this truth is that which is the pillar of the Church of God and that which differenceth us from Jewes Turkes Papists and many heretickes The third difference is from the manner of obtaining the good thing 3. If righteousnesse were by the Law eternall life were a debt but the Gospel holds it forth as Gods meere indulgence promised Hee that shall obtaine eternall life by the Law hath it of debt and by way of justice Rom. 4. 4. Not as if Adam in the state of innocency could have merited at Gods hands or as if God became in strict justice a debtor seeing Adam was beholding to God for all but in some sense it would have been so Hence boasting would not then have been excluded eternall life being the reward of those holy workes which he should have done but now all is of grace through Christ our righteousness is meerly Gods indulgence not the holinesse that is in us but the sinne pardoned makes us acceptable So that the broken contrite heart can never sufficiently admire the grace and goodnesse of God in the Gospel-way And no marvell if so be that Paul is so frequently ravished with the considerations thereof This may well be called good newes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And if our hearts were spiritually affected wee should say How beautifull are the feet of those that bring these glad tydings The fourth difference is in respect of the subject The Law strictly 4. The Law is only for those that have a perfect nature the Gospel for broken hearted sinners taken is onely for those who have a perfect and holy nature therefore it 's a Covenant as you heard of friendship and not of reconciliation so that there is no necessity of any Mediatour Indeed there is good use of urging it to proud Pharisaicall men to bring them out of love with themselves to grosse sinners that their hearts might be broken seeing the curses belong to them yea to the godly also to teach them the faire copy they are to write after but in respect of justification by it and eternall life there is none can have that benefit but such who shall be found perfectly holy It was not Moses but the serpent that did heale so it is not the Law but Christ that can comfort
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.