wholsome lawes to govern men by and 2dly By their practice at least of some of them according to those lawes And secondly internally by their consciences in the comfort or feare they had there Observat There is a law of Nature written in mens hearts And if this be not abolished but that a beleever is bound to follow the direction and obligation of it how can the Antinomian thinke that the Morall Law in respect of the mandatory power of it ceaseth Now because I intend a methodicall Tractate of the severall kindes of Gods Law you might expect I should say much about Lawes in generall but because many have written large Volumes especially the School-men and it cannot be denyed but that good rationall matter is delivered by them yet because it would not be so pertinent to my scope I forbeare I will not therefore examine the Etymology of the words that signifie a Law whether Lex in the Latine come of legendo because it was written to be read though that be not alwaies necessary or of ligando because a law binds to obedience or of deligendo because it selects some precepts nor concerning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek whether it come of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is improbable or of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because it destributes to every one that which is right neither the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which some make to come of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to instruct and teach others of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that signifieth a disposition or compiling of things together as lawes use to be In the next place I will not trouble you with the desinition of a law whether it be an act or habit or the soule it selfe onely this is good to take notice of against a fundamentall errour of the Antinomian about a law in generall for they conceive it impossible but that the damning act of a law must be where the commanding act of a law is and this is frequently urged as I shewed the last time Therefore observe that there are only two things goe to the essence of a law I speak not of externall causes and that is first Direction secondly Obligation 1. Direction therefore a law is a rule hence the Law of God is compared to a light And Prov. 20. 27. there is a notable expression of the law of Nature It 's a candle of the Lord searching the inwards of the belly So it is observed that the Chaldee word for a law is as much as light The second essentiall constitute of a law is Obligation for therein lyeth the essence of a sinne that it breaketh this law which supposeth the obligatory force of it In the next place there are two Consequents of the Law which are ad bene esse that the Law may be the better obeyed and this indeed turneth the law into a covenant which is another notion upon it as afterwards is to be shewen Now as for the sanction of the Law by way of a promise that is a meere free thing God by reason of that dominion which he had over man might have commanded his obedience and yet never have made a promise of eternall life unto him And as for the other consequent act of the law to curse and punish this is but an accidentall act and not necessary to a law for it cometh in upon supposition of transgression and therefore as we may say of a Magistrate He was a just and compleat Magistrate for his time though he put forth no punitive justice if there be no malefactors offending so it is about a law a law is a compleat law obliging though it doe not actually curse as in the confirmed Angels it never had any more then obligatory and mandatory acts upon them for that they were under a law is plaine because otherwise they could not have sinned for where there is no law Rom. 4. 15. there is no transgression If therefore the Antinomian were rectified in this principle which is very true and plaine he would quickly be satisfied but of this more in another place But we come to the particulars of the doctrine the pressing of which will serve much against the Antinomian Therefore for the better understanding of this Law of Nature consider these particulars 1. The nature of it in which it doth consist and that is in those The Law of Nature consists in those common notions which are ingraffed in all mens hearts common notions and maximes which are ingraffed in all mens hearts and these are some of them speculative that there is a God and some practicall that good is to be imbraced and evill to be avoided and therefore Aquinas saith well that what principles of Sciences are in things of demonstration the same are these rules of nature in practicals therefore we cannot give any reasons of them but as the Sun manifests it selfe by its owne light so doe these Hence Chrysostome observeth well that God forbidding murder and other sins giveth no reason of it because its naturall but speaking of the seventh day why that in particular was to be observed he giveth a reason because on the seventh day the Lord rested not but that the seventh day is morall as some have denyed but because it s not morall naturall onely morall positive as the Learned shew 2. The difference of its being in Adam and in us This is necessary Some fragments onely of this Law left in us to observe for it was perfectly implanted in Adams heart but we have onely some fragments and a meere shadow of it left in us The whole Law of Nature as it was perfectly instructing us the will of God was then communicated to him and howsoever God for good reasons hereafter to be mentioned did give besides that law of Nature a positive law to try his obedience yet the other cannot be denied to be in him seeing he was made after Gods image in righteousnesse and holinesse and otherwise Adam had been destitute of the light of reason and without a conscience Therefore it 's a most impudent thing in Socinus to deny that Adam had any such law or precept and that hee could not lye or commit any other sin though hee would for it may not be doubted but that if Adam had told a lye or murdered Eve it had been a sin as well as to eate of the forbidden fruit 3. The naturall impression of it in us We have it by nature it 's Those common notions in which this law consists are in us by nature not a superadded work of God to put this into us This assertion is much opposed by Flaccus Illyricus who out of his vehement desire to aggravate originall sin in us and to shew how destitute we are of the image of God doth labour to shew that those common notions and dictates of conscience are infused de novo into us and that we have none of these by nature in
the precepts of the morall Law for they were the chiefest and indeed the whole word of God is an organ and instrument of Gods Spirit for instruction reformation and to make a man perfect to every good work It 's an unreasonable thing to separate the Law from the Spirit of God and then compare it with the Gospel for if you doe take the Gospel even that promise Christ came to save sinners without the Spirit it worketh no more yea it 's a dead letter as well as the Law Therefore Calvin well called Lex corpus and the Spirit anima now accedat anima ad corpus and it 's a living reasonable man But now as when we say A man discourses A man understands this is ratione animae not corporis so when we say A man is quickened by the Law of God to obedience this is not by reason of the Law but of the Spirit of God But of this anon 4. It s good in respect of the sanction of it for it 's accompanied 4. The Law is good in respect of its sanction with promises and that not only temporall as Command 5. but also spirituall Command 2. where God is said to pardon to many generations and therefore the Law doth include Christ secondarily and occasionally though not primarily as hereafter shall be shewed It 's true the righteousnesse of the Law and that of the Gospel differ toto coelo we must place one in suprema parte coeli and the other in ima parte terrae as Luther speaks to that effect and it 's one of the hardest taskes in all divinity to give them their bounds and then to cleare how the Apostle doth oppose them and how not We know it was the cursed errour of the Manichees and Marcionites that the Law was onely carnall and had onely carnall promises whereas it 's evident that the Fathers had the same faith for substance as we have It 's true if we take Law and Gospel in this strict difference as some Divines doe that all the precepts wheresoever they are must be under the Law and all the promises be reduced to the Gospel whether in Old or New Testament in which sense Divines then say Lex jubet Gratia juvat and Lex imperat and Fides impetrat then the Law can have no sanction by promise But where can this be shewed in Scripture 5. In respect of the acts of it You may call them either acts 5. In respect of the acts of it or ends I shall acts And thus a law hath divers acts 1. Declarative to lay down what is the will of God 2. To command obedience to this will declared 3. Either to invite by promises or compell by threatnings 4. To condemne the transgressors and this use the Law is acknowledged by all to have against ungodly and wicked men and some of these cannot be denied even to the godly I wonder much at an Antinomian authour that saith * Assert of free grace pag. 31. It cannot be a law unlesse it also be a cursing law for besides that the same authour doth acknowledge the morall Law to be a rule to the beleever and regula hath vim praecepti as well as doctrinae what will he say to the law given to Adam who as yet was righteous and innocent and therefore could not be cursing or condemning of him It 's true if we take cursing or condemning potentially so a law is alwaies condemning but for the actuall cursing that is not necessary for such a transgressour that hath a surety in his room 6. In respect of the end of it Rom. 16. 4. Christ is the end of the 6. In respect of the end Law By reason of the different use of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there are different conjectures some make it no more then extremitas or terminus because the ceremoniall Law ended in Christ Others make it finis complementi the fulnesse of the Law is Christ Others adde finis intentionis or scopi to it so that by these the meaning is The Law did intend Christ in all its ceremonialls and moralls that as there was not the least ceremony which did lead to Christ so not the least iota or apex in the morall Law but it did also aime at him Therefore saith Calvin upon this place Habemus insignem locum quòd Lex omnibus suis partibu◠in Christum respiciat Imò quicquid Lex docet quicquid praecipit quicquid promittit Christum pro scope habet What had it been for a Jew to pray to God if Christ had not been in that prayer to love God if Christ had not been in that love yet here is as great a difference between the Gospel as is between direction and exhibition between a school-master and a father he is an unwise childe that will make a school-master his father Whether this be a proper intention of the Law you shall have hereafter 7. In respect of the adjuncts of it which the Scripture attributeth 7. In respect of the adjuncts to it And it 's observable that even where the Apostle doth most urge against the Law as if it were so farre from bettering men that it makes them the worse yet there he praiseth it calling it good and spirituall Now I see it called spirituall in a two-fold sense 1. Effectivè because it did by Gods Spirit quicken to spirituall life even as the Apostle in the opposition calls himselfe carnall because the power of corruption within did work carnall and sinfull motions in him But I shall expound it spirituall 2. Formaliter formally because the nature and extent of it is spirituall for it forbids the sins of the spirit not onely externall sins it forbids thy spirit pride thy spirit envie Even as God is the father of spirits so is the Law the law of spirits Hence it 's compared by James to a glasse which will shew the least spot in the face and will not flatter but if thou hast wrinckles and deformities there they will be seen so that there is no such way to bring Pharisaicall and Morall men out of love with themselves as to set this glasse before them 8. In respect of the use of it and that to the ungodly and to the 8. In respect of the use of it beleever 1. To the ungodly it hath this use 1. To restraine and limit sin And certainly though it should 1. Because it restraines and limits sin in the ungodly not reach to renovation and changing of mens hearts yet here is a great deale of good that it 's an outward whip and scourge to men whereby they are kept in honest discipline and this made the Apostle say The Law was added because of transgressions The people of Israel by their being in the wildernesse having forgotten God and being prone to Idolatry the Lord he added this Law as a restraint upon them Even as you see upon mad-men and those that are possessed
this way of justification Do not all our Protestant authours maintain this truth as that which discerneth us from Heathens Jewes Papists and others in the world May not these things be heard in our Sermons daily Vse 2. It is not every kind of denying the Law and setting up of Christ and Grace is presently Antinomianisme Luther writing upon Genesis handling that sin of Adam in eating of the forbidden fruit speaketh of a Fanatique as hee calls him that denied Adam could sinne because the Law is not given to the righteous Now saith Bellarmine this is an argument satis aptè deductum ex principiis Lutheranorum because they deny the Law to a righteous man Here you see he chargeth Antinomianisme upon Luther but of these things more hereafter Vse 3. To take heed of using the Law for our justification It 's an unwarranted way you cannot find comfort there Therefore let Christ be made the matter of your righteousnesse and comfort more then he hath been You know the posts that were not sprinckled with bloud were sure to be destroyed and so are all those persons and duties that have not Christ upon them Christ is the propitiation and the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used for covering and propitiating of sinne is Genes 6. used of the pitch or plaister whereby the wood of the Arke was so fastened that no water could get in and it doth well resemble the atonement made by Christ whereby we are so covered that the waters of Gods wrath cannot enter upon us And doe not thinke to beleeve in Christ a contemptible and unlikely way for it is not because of the dignity of faith but by Christ You see the hyssop or whatsoever it was which did sprinkle the bloud was a contemptible herb yet the instrument of much deliverance LECTURE III. 1 TIM 1. 8 9. Knowing the Law is good if a man use it lawfully IT is my intent after the cleare proofe of Justification by the grace of God and not of workes to shew how corrupt the Antinomian is in his inferences hence from and this being done I shall shew you the necessity of holy and good workes notwithstanding But before I come to handle some of their dangerous errours in this point let me premise something As 1. How cautelous and wary the Ministers of God ought to be in this Ministers ought so to set forth grace and defend good workes as thereby to give the Enemy neither cause of exception nor insultation matter so to set forth grace as not to give just exception to the popish caviller and so to defend holy works as not to give the Antinomian cause of insultation While our Protestant authors were diligent in digging out that precious gold of justification by free-grace out of the mine of the Scripture see what Canons the Councell of Trent made against them as Antinomian Can. 19. If any man shall say Decem praecepta nihil ad Christianos pertinere anathema sit Againe Can. 20. Si quis dixerit hominem justificatum non teneri ad observantiam mandatorum sed tantùm ad credendum anathema sit Againe Can. 21. Si quis dixerit Christum Jesum datum fuisse hominibus ut redemptorem cui fidant non autem ut legislatorem cui obediant anathema sit You may gather by these their Canons that wee hold such opinions as indeed the Antinomian doth but our Writers answer Here they grossely mistake us and if this were all the controversie we should quickly agree It is no wonder then if it be so hard to preach free-grace and not provoke the Papist or on the otherside to preach good workes of the Law and not offend the Antinomian 2. There have been dangerous assertions about good works even by those that were no Antinomians out of a great zeale for the grace of God against Papists These indeed for ought I can learne did no waies joyne with the Antinomians but in this point there is too much affinity There were rigid Lutherans called Flactans who as they did goe too far at least in their expressions about originall corruption for there are those that doe excuse them so also they went too high against good workes Therefore instead of that position maintained by the orthodox Bona opera sunt necessaria ad salutem they held Bona opera sunt perniciosa ad salutem The occasion of this division was the book called The Interim which Charles the Emperour would have brought into the Germane Churches In that booke was this passage Good works are necessary to salvation to which Melancthon and others assented not understanding a necessity of merit or efficiency but of presence but Flacius Illyricus and his followers would not taking many high expressions out of Luther even as the Antinomians doe for their ground Hence also Zanchy because in his writings he had such passages as these No man growen up can be saved unlesse he give himself to good works and walke in them One Hinckellman a Lutheran doth endeavour by a troope of nine Arguments to tread down this assertion of Zanchy which he calls Calviniana 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as a most manifest error Now if all this were spoken to take men off from that generall secret sin of putting confidence in the good works we do it were more tolerable in which sense we applaud that of Luther Cave non tantùm ab operibus malis sed etiam à bonis and that of another man who said hee got more good by his sins then his graces But these speeches must be soundly understood We also love that of Austine Omnia mandata tua facta deputantur quando quicquid non fit ignoscitur 3. That if the incommodious yea and erroneous passages in Antinomian Authors were used for some reasons hereafter to be mentioned it were the more tolerable but that seemes not to be There is more poyson then can be concocted in them But if this were their ground of many unsavory assertions among them meerly their want of clear judgement to expresse themselves so that they thinke more orthodoxly then they write then they might be excused as being in a logomachy but with this proviso as Austine said of them that used the word fatum in a good sense Mentem teneant sed linguam corrigant Now that there may be injudiciousnesse in them as a cause in part of some of their erroneous passages will appeare in that they frequently speake contradictions This is a passage often but very dangerous that Let a man be a wicked man even as high as enmity it selfe can make a man yet while he is thus wicked and while he is no better his sins are pardoned and he justified Yet now in other passages Though a man be never so wicked yet if hee come to Christ if he will take Christ his sinnes are pardoned now what a contradiction is here To be wicked and while he is wicked and while he is no better and yet to take
at this time not against the Antinomianisme in thy judgement onely but in thine heart also As Luther said Every man hath a Pope in his belly so every man hath an Antinomian Paul found his flesh rebelling against the Law of God reconcile the Law and the Gospel Justification and Holinesse Follow holinesse as earnestly as if thou hadst nothing to help thee but that and yet rely upon Christs merits as fully as if thou hadst no holinesse at all And what though thy intent be onely to set up Christ and Grace yet a corrupted opinion may soon corrupt a mans life as rheume falling from the head doth putrefie the lungs and other vitall parts LECTURE V. 1 TIM 1. 9. Knowing this that the Law is not made for a righteous man WE are at this time to demolish one of the strongest holds that the Adversary hath For it may be supposed that the eighth verse cannot be so much against them as the ninth is for them Therefore Austin observeth well The Apostle saith he joyning two things as it were contrary together doth monere movere both admonish and provoke the Reader to find out the true answer to this question how both of them can be true We must therefore say to these places as Moses did to the two Israelites fighting Why fall you out seeing you are brethren Austin improveth the objection thus If the Law be good when used lawfully and none but the righteous man can use it lawfully how then should it not be but to him who onely can make the true use of it Therefore for the better understanding of these words let us consider who they are that are said to know and secondly what is said to be knowne The subject knowing is here in this Verse in the singular number in the Verse before in the plurall it 's therefore doubted whether this be affirmed of the same persons or no. Some Expositoâ—s think those in the eighth and these in the ninth are the same and that the Apostle doth change the number from the plurall to the singular which is very frequent in Scripture as Galat. 6. 1. Others as Salmeron make a mysticall reason in the changing Because saith he there are but few that know the Law is not made for the righteous therefore hee speaketh in the singular number There is a second kind of Interpreters and they do not make this spoken of the same but understand this word as a qualification of him that doth rightly use the Law Thus The Law is good if a man use it lawfully and he useth it lawfully that knoweth it 's not made for the righteous Which of these interpretations you take is not much materiall onely this is good to observe that the Apostle using these words We know and Knowing doth imply what understanding all Christians ought to have in the nature of the Law Secondly let us consider what Law he here speaks of Some have understood it of the ceremoniall Law because of Christs death that was to be abolished and because all the ceremonies of the Law were convictions of sins and hand-writings against those that used them But this cannot be for circumcision was commanded to Abraham a righteous man and so to all the godly under the Old Testament and the persons who are opposed to the righteous man are such who transgresse the Morall Law Others that do understand it of the Morall Law apply it to the repetition and renovation of it by Moses for the Law being at first made to Adam upon his fall wickednesse by degrees did arise to such an height that the Law was added because of transgressions as Paul speaketh But we may understand it of the Morall Law generally onely take notice of this that the Apostle doth not here undertake a theologicall handling of the use of the Law for that he doth in other places but he brings it in as a generall sentence to be accoÌ„modated to his particular meaning concerning the righteous man here Wee must not interpret it of one absolutely righteous but one that is so quoad conatum and desiderium for the people of God are called righteous because of the righteousnesse that is in them although they be not justified by it The Antinomian and Papist doe both concurre in this error though upon different grounds that our righteousnesse and workes are perfect and therefore doe apply those places A people without spot or wrinkle c. to the people of God in this life and that not onely in justification but in sanctification also As saith the Antinomian in a dark dungeon when the doore is opened and the sun-light come in though that be dark in it selfe yet it is made all light by the sun Or As water in a red glasse though that be not red yet by reason of the glasse it lookes all red so though we be filthy in our selves yet all that God seeth in us lookes as Christs not onely in justification but sanctification This is to be confuted hereafter Thirdly let us take notice how the Antinomian explaineth this place and what hee meanes by this Text. The old Antinomian Islebius Agricola states the question thus Whether the Law be to a righteous man as a teacher ruler commander and requirer of obedience actively Or Whether the righteous man doth indeed the works of the Law but that is passivè the Law is wrought by him but the Law doth not work on him So then the question is not Whether the things of the Law be done for they say the righteous man is active to the Law and not that to him but Whether when these things are done they are done by a godly man admonished instructed and commanded by the Law of God And this they deny As for the later Antinomian he speaketh very uncertainly and inconsistently Sometimes he grants the Law is a rule but very hardly and seldome then presently kicketh all downe againe For saith he it cannot be conceived that it should rule but also it should reigne and therefore think it impossible that one act of the Law should be without the other The damnatory power of the Law is inseparable from it Can you put your conscience under the mandatory power and yet keep it from the damnatory Assertion of Grace page 33. Againe the same Author page 31. If it be true that the Law cannot condemne it is no more a Law saith Luther I say not that you have dealt as uncourteously with the Law as did that King with Davids servants who cut off their garments by the midst but you have done worse for even Joab-like under friendly words you have destroyed the life and soul of the Law You can as well take your Appendices from the Law as you terme them and yet let it remaine a true law as you can take the braines and heart of a man and yet leave him a man still By this it appeareth that if the Law doth not curse a man neither can it command
us And a godly man in his Book of Temptations holdeth the same opinion Illyricus indeed hath many probable arguments for his opinion but he goeth upon a false supposition that the Apostle his scope is to compare a Gentile supposed onely to doe the Law and not asserted to doe it before a Jew who was an hearer of the Law but not a doer of it therefore to debase the Jew he saith the Apostle speaketh conditionally to this purpose If an Heathen should keep the Law though he be not circumcised yet he would be preferred before you not saith he that the Apostle meaneth assertively and positively that any such doe and therefore presseth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is a particle of the Subjunctive Mood and is equivalent to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If the Gentiles c. But his supposition is false for the Apostles scope is to shew that the Gentile hath no excuse if God condemne him because hee hath a law in himselfe as appeareth verse 12. As for the other consideration of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though Erasmus render it cum fecerint yet that particle is applied to the Indicative Mood as well as the Subjunctive It cannot therefore be true which hee saith that the Apostle speaketh such great things of men by nature that if they were true it would necessarily justifie all Pelagianisme I shall not speak of his many arguments against naturall principles and knowledge of a God for he doth in effect at last yeeld to it 4. The extent of it And here it 's very hard to measure out the bounds of the law of Nature for some have judged that to be condemned by the law of Nature which others have thought the law of Nature approveth so true is that of Tertullian Legens Naturae opiniones suas vecant They call their opinions the law of Nature There are foure waies of bounding this law 1. Some make it those generall things wherein man and beast agree Foure bounds of the law of Nature as defence of it self and desire of life but by this meanes that of naturall honesty and righteousnesse would be excluded for a beast is not capable of any sin or obligation by a law And howsoever that be much disputed upon Why God would have the beast killed that killed a man yet to omit the thoughts of many about it that was not because a beast could be tyed by a law but God to shew the horridnesse of the fact would have the very instrument punished 2. Some bound it by the custome of Nations that is jus Gentium but that is so diversified that a sin with some was a vertue with others 3. Some doe bind it by reason in every man but this is very uncertaine and one mans reason is contrary to anothers and one mans conscience is larger then anothers even as it is with measures in divers countries though they have the fame name as a bushell c. yet they are different in quantity one is larger then another Lastly Others bound it by the will of God declared and manifested first to Noah in seven precepts and afterwards to Moses in the ten Commandements but these extend the law of Nature not onely to first principles but conclusions also deduced from thence 5. The obligation of it when the law of Nature doth bind And The obligation of the law of Nature is from God that is from God the authour of it God onely is under no law Every beleever though justified by Christ is under the Morall Law of Moses as also the law of Nature but now this law of Nature doth not so properly bind as it's mans reason or conscience as that it is the Vicegerent of God or a command from him and thus Cain by the law of Nature found a tye upon him not to sin and guilt because he did sin in murdering his brother although there was no Morall Law as yet given It is true indeed our Divines doe well reprove the Papists for calling all that time from Adam to Moses a state or law of Nature and this the Papists doe that therefore to offer sacrifice unto God may be proved from the law of Nature whereas those sacrifices being done in faith had the word of God otherwise we were bound still to offer Lambs or Kids to God which they deny 6. The perpetuity of this obligation This Law can never be abrogated The obligation of the law of Nature is perpetuall and immutable And herein we may demand of the Antinomian Whether the law of Nature doe bind a beleever or no Whether he be bound to obey the dictates of his naturall conscience Suppose a beleever hath his naturall conscience dictating to him This sin he may not doe is he not obliged hereunto not onely from the matter for that he grants but as it is a law and command of God implanted in his sonle I know there is a difference between the law of Nature and the ten Commandements as may be shewed hereafter but yet they agree in this that they are a rule immutable and of perpetuall obligation Therefore think not that because he dyed to free you from the curse of the Law that therefore you are freed from the obedience unto the law naturall or delivered by Moses To deny this is to deny that a beleever is bound to obey the sure dictates of a naturall conscience I know we are not alwaies bound to follow what conscience suggests for that is obscured and darkened but I speak of those dictates which are naturally knowne Other particulars as The insufficiency of it to direct in worship as also to save men I doe put off and make application of what hath been delivered Use 1. Of Instruction against the Antinomian who must needs overthrow the directive and obligative force of the law of Nature as well as that of Moses Doth not even Nature teach you saith the Apostle Now if a man may not care for Moses teaching need he care for Nature teaching It is true I told you sometimes they grant the Law to be a rule but then afterwards they speak such things as are absolutely inconsistent with it There were some as Wâ—ndelinus reports Swencfeldians that held a man was never truly mortified till he had put out all sense of conscience for sin if his conscience troubled him that was his imperfection he was not mortified enough I should doe the Antinomians wrong if I should say they deliver such things in their books but let them consider whether some of their Positions will not carry them neer such a dangerous rock For if the Law have nothing to doe with mee in respect of the mandatory part of it then if I be troubled for the breach of it it is my weaknesse because I am not enough in Christ Vse 2. Of Reproofe to those who live against this Law Sins that are against the law of Nature doe most terrifie How many live in such sins
to be shewed 4. How can God upbraid or reprove men for their transgressions Necessity of sinning hinders not the delight and willingnesse man hath in sin and consequently God may reprove him for his transgressions if they could doe no other waies This also seemeth very strange if men can doe no otherwise Is not this as ridiculous to threaten them as that of Xerxes who menaced the sea I answer No because still whatsoever man offends in it 's properly his fault and truly his sin for whatsoever he sinneth in he doth it voluntarily and with much delight and is therefore the freer in sin by how much the more he delights in it And this Austin would diligently inculcate that so no man might think to cast his faults upon God There is no man forced to sin but hee doth it with all his inclination and delight How farre voluntarinesse is requisite to the nature of a sin at least actuall though not to originall is not now to be determined for we all acknowledge that this necessity of sinning in every man doth not hinder the delight and willingnesse he hath in it at the same time Nor should this be thought so absurd for even Aristotle saith * Cap. 5. l. 3. Ethie ad Nicom that though men at first may choose whether they will be wicked or no yet if once habituated they cannot but be evill and yet for all that this doth not excuse but aggravate If an Ethiopian can change his skin saith the Prophet then may you doe good who have accustomed your selves to doe evill The Oake while it was a little plant might be pulled up but when it 's growne into its full breadth and height none can move it Now if it be thus of an habit how much more of originall sin which is the depravation of the nature And howsoever Austin was shye of calling it naturale malum for fear of the Manichees yet sometimes he would doe it Well therefore doth the Scripture use those sharp reprofes and upbraidings because there is no man a sinner or a damner of himselfe but it is by his owne fault and withall these serve to be a goad and a sharp thorne in the sinners side whereby he is made restlesse in his sin 5. To what purpose are exhortations and admonitions Though Though God works all our good in us yet exhortations are the instrument whereby he works it the other answers might serve for this yet something may be specially answered here which is that though God work all our good in us and for us yet it is not upon us as stockes or stones but he dealeth sutably to our natures with arguments and reasons And if you say To what purpose Is it any more then if the Sun should shine or a candle be held out to a blind man Yes because these exhortations and the word of God read or preached are that instrument by which God will work these things Therefore you are not to look upon preaching as a meere exhortation but as a sanctified medium or instrument by which God worketh that he exhorteth unto Sometimes indeed we reade that God hath sent his Prophets to exhort those whom yet he knew would not hearken Thus he sent Moses to bid Pharaoh let the people of Israel go and thus the Prophets did preach when they could not beleeve because of the deafnesse and blindnesse upon them But unto the godly these are operative meanes and practicall even as when God said Let there be light and there was light or when Christ said Lazarus come forth of the grave And this by the way should keep you from despising the most plaine ministery or preaching that is for a Sermon doth not work upon your hearts as it is thus elegant thus admirable but as it is an instrument of God appointed to such an end Even as Austin said The conduits of water though one might be in the shape of an Angell another of a beast yet the water doth refresh as it is water not as it comes from such a conduit or the seed that is throwne into the ground fructifieth even that which comes from a plaine hand as well as that which may have golden rings or jewels upon it not but that the Minister is to improve his gifts Qui dedit Petrum piscatorem dedit Cyprianum rhetorem but only to shew whence the power of God is Bonorum ingoniorum insignis est indoles in verbis verum amare non verba Quid obest clavis lignea quando nihil aliud quaerimus nisi patere clausum 6. The Scripture makes conversion and repentance to be our acts How conversion and repentance may be said to be our acts as well as the effects of Gods grace And this cannot be denied but that we are the subject who being acti agimus enabled by grace doe work for grace cannot be but in an intelligent subject As before the Manna fell upon the ground there fell a dew which say Interpreters was preparatory to constringe and bind the earth that it might receive the Manna so doth reason and liberty qualifie the subject that it is passively capable of grace but when enabled by grace it is made active also These be places indeed have stuck much upon some which hath made them demand Why if those promises of God converting us doe prove conversion to be his act should not other places also which bid us turne unto the Lord prove that it is our act The answer is easie none deny but that to beleeve and to turne unto God are our acts we cannot beleeve without the mind and will That of Austin is strong and good If because it 's said Not of him that willeth and runneth but of him that sheweth mercy man is made a partiall cause with God then we may as well say Not in him that sheweth mercy but in him that runneth and willeth But the Question is Whether we can doe this of our selves with grace Or Whether grace onely enable us to doe it That distinction of Bernards is very cleere The heart of a man is the subjectum in quo but not à quo the subject in which not from which this grace proceedeth Therefore you are not to conceive when grace doth enable the mind and will to turne unto God as if those motions of grace had such an impression upon the heart as when the seale imprints a stamp upon the wax or when wine is poured into the vessell where the subject recipient doth not move or stirre at all Nor is it as when Balaam's Asse spake or as when a stone is throwne into a place nor as an enthusiasticall or arreptitious motion as those that spake oracles and understood not Nor as those that are possessed of Satan which did many things wherein the mind and will had no action at all but the Spirit of God inclineth the Will and Affections to their proper object Nor is the Antinomians similitude sound that
are and why it 's called the Morall Law It is plaine by Exod. 20. and cap. 21. All the lawes that the Jewes had were then given to Moses to deliver unto the people onely that which we call the Morall Law had the great preheminency being twice written by God himselfe in tables of stone Now the whole body of these lawes is according to the matter and object divided into Morall Ceremoniall and Judiciall We will not meddle with the Queries that may be made about this division We may without any danger receive it and that Law which we are to treat upon is the Morall Law And here it must be acknowledged that the different use of the word Morall hath bred many perplexities yea in whatsoever controversie it hath been used it hath caused mistakes The word Morall or Morally is used in the controversie of the Sabbath in the question about converting grace in the doctrine of the Sacraments about their efficacy and causality and so in this question about a Law what makes it morall Now in this present doubt howsoever the word Morall beareth no such force in the notation of it it being as much as that which directeth and obligeth about manners and so applicable even to the Judiciall and Ceremoniall and these are in a sense commanded in the Morall Law though they be not perpetuall as to denote that which is perpetuall and alwaies obliging yet thus it is meant here when we speak of a thing morall as opposite to that which is binding but for a time 3. Whether this law repeated by Moses be the same with the Law The Law of Moses differs from the law of Nature of Nature implanted in us And this is taken for granted by many but certainly there may be given many great differences between them for First if he speak of the Law of Nature implanted in Adam at 1. In respect of power of binding first or as now degenerated and almost defaced in us whatsoever is by that law injoyned doth reach unto all and binde all though there be no promulgation of such things unto them But now the Morall Law in some things that are positive and determined by the will of God meerly did not binde all the nations in the world for howsoever the command for the Sabbath day was perpetuall yet it did not binde the Gentiles who never heard of that determined time by God so that there are more things expressed in that then in the law of Nature Besides in the second place The Morall Law given by God 2 The breach of the Law given by Moses is a greater sin then the breach of the law of Nature doth induce a new obligation from the command of it so that though the matter of it and of the law of Nature agree in many things yet he that breaketh these Commandements now doth sin more hainously then hee that is an Heathen or Pagan because by Gods command there cometh a further obligation and tye upon him In the third place in the Morall Law is required justifying 3. The Morall Law requires justifying faith and repentance and contains more particulars in it then the law of Nature faith and repentance as is to be proved when I come to speak of it as a Covenant which could not be in the Law given to Adam so the second Commandment requireth the particular worship of God insomuch that all the Ceremoniall Law yea our Sacraments are commanded in the second Commandement it being of a very spirituall and comprehensive nature so that although the Morall Law hath many things which are also contained in the law of Nature yet the Morall Law hath more particulars then can be in that Hence you see the Apostle saith he had not knowne lust to be sin had not the Law said so although he had the law of Nature to convince him of sin 4. Why it was now added The time when it was added appeareth The Law was given when the Israelites were in the wildernes and not sooner by the 18. Chapter to wit when the people of Israel were in the Wildernesse and had now come to their twelfth station in Mount Sinai That reason which Philo giveth because the Lawes of God are to be learnt in a Wildernesse seeing there we cannot be hindred by the multitude is no waies solid Two reasons there may be why now and not sooner or later God gave this Law First because the people of Israel coming out of Egypt had 1. Because being come out of Egypt they were to be restrain'd of their impiety and idolatry defiled themselves with their waies and we see while they were in their journie in the Wildernesse what horrible grosse impieties they plunged themselves into therefore God to restraine their impietie and idolatry giveth them this Law to represse all that insolency so Rom. 5. and Gal. 3. The Law came because of transgressions But Secondly I conceive the great and proper reason why God at 2. Because they were now to grow into a Common-wealth this time rather then another gave the Law was because now they began to be a great people they were to enter into Canaan and to set up a Common-wealth and therefore God makes them lawes for he was their King in a speciall manner insomuch that all their lawes even politicall were divine and therefore the Magistrates could not dispense in their lawes as now Governours may in their lawes of the Common-wealth which are meerly so because then they should dispensare de jure alieno which is not lawfull This therefore was the proper reason why God at this time set up the whole body of their Lawes because they were now to grow into a Common-wealth Hence Josephus calls the Common-wealth of the Jewes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a place where God was the Governour 5. Whether this Law was not before in the Church of God And The Law not onely was but was publickly preached in the Church before Moses certainly hee that should thinke this Law was not in the Church of God before Moses his administration of it should greatly erre Murder was a sin before as appeareth by Gods words to Cain yea the very anger it selfe that goeth before murder So all the outward worship of God as when it 's said This began man to call upon the Name of the Lord so that the Church of God never was nor ever shall be without this Law And when we say the Law was before Moses I doe not meane only that it was written in the hearts of men but it was publikely preached in the ministry that the Church did then enjoy as appeareth by Noah's preaching to the old world and Gods striving with men then by his word So that we may say the Decalogue is Adams and Abrahams and Noahs and Christs and the Apostles as well as of Moses Indeed there was speciall reason as you heard why at that time there should be a speciall
is to be observed against the Antinomians who to disparage the Law may say that was written in stones what good can that doe May we not also say The doctrine of the Gospel that is written in paper and what can that doe 7. But Christ doth perpetually continue as a rule and law to them 7. Yet that it continues to them as a rule appeares Which may thus appeare 1. From the different phrases that the Apostle useth concerning the Ceremoniall Law which are no where applyed to the Morall Law 1. From the different Phrases used concerning the ceremoniall Law And these Chemnitius doth diligently reckon up 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ephes 2. 14. So again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 7. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 antiquare 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 senescere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 evanescere Heb. 8. ult 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 abrogatio Heb. 7. 18. Now saith he these words are not used of the Morall Law that it is changed or waxeth old or is abrogated which doe denote a mutation in the Law but when it speakes of the Morall Law it saith We are dead to it We are redeemed from the curse of it Which phrases doe imply the change to be made in us and not in the Law If therefore the Antinomians could bring such places that would prove it were as unlawfull for us to love the Lord because the Morall Law commands it as we can prove it unlawfull to circumcise or to offer sacrifices then they would doe something for their purpose 2. From the sanctification and holinesse that is required of the 2. From that holinesse that it requires of the beleever beleever which is nothing but conformity to the Law so that when we reade the Apostle speaking against the Law yet that he did not meane this of the Law as a rule and as obliging us to the obedience thereof will easily appeare For when the Apostle Gal. 5. 4. had vehemently informed them of their wofull condition who would be justified by the Law yet ver 13. and 14. pressing them not to use their liberty as an occasion to the flesh he giveth this reason For all the Law is fulfilled in one word even in this Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy selfe What doth the Apostle use contradictions in the same Chapter Presse them to obey the Law and yet reprove them for desiring to be under it No certainly but when they would seek justification by the Law then he reproveth them and when on the other side they would refuse obedience to the Law then he admonisheth them to the contrary As for their distinguishing between the matter of the Law and the Law we have already proved it to be a contradiction 3. In that disobedience to it is still a sinne in the beleever For 3 In that disobedience is still a sin there can be no sinne unlesse it be a transgression of a Law as the Apostle John defineth sinne Now then when David commits adultery when Peter denyeth Christ are not these sinnes in them If so is not Davids sinne a sinne because it is against such and such a Commandement As for their evasion it is a sinne against the Law as in the hand of Christ and so against the love of Christ and no otherwayes this cannot hold for then there should be no sinnes but sinnes of unkindnesse or unthankfulnesse As this Law is in the hand of Christ so murder is a sin of unkindnesse but as it is against the Law simply in it self so it is a sinne of such kinde as murder and not of another kinde so that the consideration of Christs love may indeed be a great motive to obey the commands of God yet that doth not hinder the command it selfe from obliging and binding of us as it is the will of the Law-giver But of this distinction more in its place 4. From the difference of the Morall Law and the other lawes 4. Because it differs from other Lawes in respect of causes of abrogation Three reasons why the Ceremoniall Law should be abrogated in respect of the causes of abrogation There can be very good reasons given why the Ceremoniall Law should be abrogated which can no wayes agree to the Morall as First The Ceremoniall Law had not for its object that which is perpetuall and in it self holinesse To circumcise and to offer sacrifice these things were not in themselves holy and good nor is the leaving of them a sinne whereas the matter of the Morall Law is perpetually good and the not doing of it is necessarily a sinne I speake of that matter which Divines call morall naturall Again The Ceremoniall Law was typicall and did shadow forth Christ to come Now when he was come there was no use of these ceremonies And lastly The Jewes and the Gentiles were to consociate into one body and no difference be made between them Now to effect this it was necessary that partition-wall should be pulled down for as long as that stood they could not joyn in one LECTURE XXIII ROM 3. 31. Do we then make void the Law yea we establish it I Shall not stand upon any more arguments to prove the perpetuall obligation of the Morall Law because this is abundantly maintained in that assertion already proved that the Morall Law as given by Moses doth still oblige us I come therefore to those places of Scripture which seeme to Places of Scripture seeming to hold forth the duration of the Morall Law for a time only answered hold forth the duration of the Morall Law for a prefixed time only even as the ceremoniall Law doth I shall select the most remarkable places and in answering of them we shall see the other fully cleared And I will begin with that Luke 16. 16. The Law and the Prophets were untill John It should therefore seeme that the Law was to continue but untill Johns time I will not here stand to dispute whether John Baptist was to be reckoned under the Old Testament or the New only take notice that we cannot make a third different estate wherein the Covenant of grace should be dispensed as an Antinomian author doth for our Saviour seemeth fully to conclude that he did belong to the Old Testament therefore he saith The least in the kingdome of heaven is greater then he * Minimum maximi est maju◠maximo minimi Although in this respect he was greater then any of the Prophets that went before him that he did not prophesie of a Messias to come but pointed with his hand to him who was already come And as for the text it self none can prove that the Law was to be abrogated when John Baptist came for lest any should by that expression think so our Saviour addeth Heaven and earth shall sooner passe away then that one title should fall to the ground Therefore the meaning is that the Law in respect of the typicall part of it as it did
is said to fill the Law in respect of the Pharisees who by their corrupt glosses had evacuated it And one of his reasons which hee brings to prove his assertion makes most against him viz. Except your righteousnesse exceed the righteousnesse of the Scribes and Pharisees c. This maketh against him because our Saviour doth not say Except your righteousnesse exceed the righteousnesse of the Law and the Prophets which hee must have said if his opinion were true but of the Scribes and Pharisees who had corrupted the text with their false glosses I will not consider his other reasons for they are so weak that he seemeth to be afraid of them And certainly it would be strange Divinity to say that a Jew might have lusted after a woman in his heart and not have sinned but now it would be sin in a Christian The second particular difference is in respect of the measure of grace The measure of grace ordinarily greater in the Gospel then under the Law Hence the Scripture speakes as if they had under the Old Testament none at all meerly because there was not such a plentifull effusion of his Spirit upon them not but that if wee consider some particular persons they might have such degrees of grace that few under the Gospel can be compared unto them as Abraham and David but this was not according to the ordinary dispensation of his graces then So that as one starre differeth from another in glory thus did the Church of the Jewes from that of Christians They had drops but we have the fountaine they had glimmerings but wee have the sun it selfe Now as these are priviledges so they are also great engagements for more eminent knowledge and holinesse then was in those dayes But all that the Prophets reproved in their people ignorance self-confidence resting upon externall duties c. the same may we in our hearers 3. Their condition was more servile All things did presse The Jews under the Law were in a more servile condition then Christians under the Gospel more to fear and bondage then now among us Hence the Apostle Gal. 4. 30. compareth their condition to the sons of the bond-woman Hence Austine makes Timor and Amor the difference of the two Testaments God met man sinning in the Law as he did Adam with terrour charging sin upon him but under the Gospel as the father did the prodigall son coming home to him See Hebr. 12. this difference considered by Paul Yee are not come to Mount Sinai c. Onely you must rightly understand this The Jewes had a two-fold consideration one as being servile and another of them as sonnes but under age so that they were not wholly excluded from the spirit of Adoption yea the Apostle saith That the Promises and Adoption did belong unto them and David doth appropriate God unto himselfe as his God in his prayer which argued hee had the Spirit of Adoption inabling him to call Abba Father Now as they were more obnoxious to an inward bondage so they were under an outward bondage also opposite unto which is that Christian liberty Paul speakes of whereby the yoke of all those ceremonious burdens is taken off them and Paul doth vehemently and fervidly dispute against those that would introduce them In the asserting of this difference one scruple is to be removed which is this How could the Jewes be said to be in more servitude then the Christians meerly because of those ceremonies and sacrifices for seeing they were commanded by God and had spirituall significations they did thereby become helpes unto their faith and were exercises of their piety As under the Gospel none can say that the Sacraments are a burden and tend to bondage because they are visible signes But rather God doth hereby condescend in his great love unto us for as Chrysostome observeth if wee had been incorporeall God would not then have appointed visible Sacraments no more then hee doth to Angels but now consisting of soul and body he doth institute some things in an accommodated way to help us and to promote our faith But this may be answered that although they were spirituall in signification yet they being many and requiring much bodily labour they could not be observed without much difficulty and therefore no Priest or Levite that was spiritually minded in those dayes but would rather choose to exercise the ministery under the Gospel then to busie himself in the killing of beasts and fleaing of them which was their duty to doe Therefore well did Austine observe the love of God in appointing for us Sacraments fewer in number easier in observation and more cleare in signification Againe those bodily exercises did rather fit those that were children and were more convenient to that low condition then unto the full age of the Church and Sacraments though they be an help yet they suppose some imbecillity in the subject therefore in heaven there shall be none at all Onely take notice that Popery having introduced so many ceremonious observations and such a multitude of Church-precepts hath made the times of the Gospel to be the times of noneage againe This also discovereth that such are not spirituall that delight in ceremoniall waies and the more men fixe their heart upon sensible observations the lesse they partake of spirituall I will instance but in a fourth because these differences are The continuation of the Law was last but till the coming of Christ given by most that treate on this subject and that shall be the continuance and abode of it The Law in that Mosaicall administration was to indure but till Christ the fulnesse came and then as the scaffolds are pulled downe when the house is built so were all those externall ordinances to be abolished when Christ himselfe came A candle is superfluous when the sun appeareth A School-master is not necessary to those that have obtained perfect knowledge Milke is not comely for those who live on solide meat The chaffe preserves the corne but when the corne is gathered the chaffe is thrown away And when the fruit cometh the flower falleth to the ground And in this sense the Apostle Heb. 7. doth argue against it saying it could bring nothing to perfection Neither could any of those purifications work any good and spiritual effect It behoved therefore that a Christ should be exhibited which would work all those spirituall mercies for us Hence had there been no farther proceeding but wee must alwaies have stayed in such offerings and sacrifices it had been impossible for ever that God should have been pleased with us It is therefore in this respect that it was to be antiquated and a better covenant to come in the roome of it The Apostle calleth those things Heb. 10. a shadow Now a shadow that doth shew a man but yet the shadow that doth not live or eate or speake so those sacrifices they shadowed out Christ but yet they could not exhibite the
be extended both to the matter as some to teach no other thing or to the manner as others not to teach in another way Not to teach nova no nor yet novè The rule is Qui fingit nova verba nova gignit dogmata And it was Melancthons wish that men did not onely teach the same things but in iisdem verbis in iisdem syllabis The second part of injunction is higher then the former Though they doe not teach other things yet they must not spend their gifts in an uselesse way as to give heed to fables This they apply to the Jewes who had a world of fictions It is true we finde the Fathers Gregory Nazianzen and others use sometimes a fable in their Orations to denote some morall matter but such the Jewes did not use As they must not give heed to fables so neither to endlesse genealogies We see a good use made of genealogies in the Scriptures but here is reproved the sinfull use of them as those Grammarians among the Heathens that spent their time about Hecuba's mother or Achilles pedigree and what it was that the Syren's sung And these he calls endlesse because vaine curiosity is more unruly then the waves of the sea it hath no limiting Hitherto shalt thou go and no further Now mark the Apostle condemneth all these because they doe not edifie The shell-fish among the Jewes was accounted uncleane because it had but a little meat and a great deale of labour to get it and this is true of all doctrines which have no profit in them The Apostle therefore tells us what is the true use of the Law the end of the precept Scultetus who hath it out of Chrysostome makes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to be the law but the ministery or preaching and so the Apostle useth the word ver 3. But grant it be so yet they all agree he speaks of the law strictly taken afterwards The Apostle therefore reproving these false teachers that did turne bread into stones and fish into serpents the good law into unprofitablenesse lest this should be thought to traduce the law he addeth We know as if that were without question to all So that there is a position The Law is good and a supposition If a man use it lawfully with a correction The Law is not made to the righteous As Austin said It was hard to speake for free-will and not to deny free-grace or free-grace and not to deny free-will so it 's hard to give the Law its due and not to seem to prejudice the Gospel or the Gospel and not to prejudice the Law For take but these two Verses Videtur Apostolus pugnantia dicere saith Martyr For seeing none can use the Law well but a righteous man how then is not the Law given to him But this knot shall be untyed in its proper place I shall at this time handle the first proposition that is conditionall only I might insist upon opening the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Law For I conceive the neglect of the different use of this doth breed many errours for there is a law that we are to be Antinomians or contrary to and there is a law that we must submit to But of this I will speak in one particular caution Observ 1. The Law of God is good if a man use it lawfully Observ 2. which is implyed that the Law of God may be used unlawfully The Law is good 1. In respect of the matter of it therein contained 1. The Law is good in respect of the matter for if you take the spirituall interpretation of it you will finde all the matter exceeding good to love God to trust in him c. how good are they Yea there is no duty now required of us but is contained there Therefore Peter Martyr did well resemble the Decalogue to the ten Predicaments that as there is nothing hath a being in nature but what may be reduced to one of those ten so neither is there any Christian duty but what is comprehended in one of these And if Tully durst say that the law of the twelve Tables did exceed all the libraries of Philosophers both in weight of authority and fruitfulnesse of matter how much rather is this true of Gods Law I know it 's disputed Whether justifying faith be commanded in the Law here are different opinions but when I handle this Question Whether the Law of Moses and that which was ingraffed in Adams heart in innocency be all one it will be proper to speak of that Peter Martyr handling the division of the ten Commandements how the number should be made up makes that which is commonly called the Preface I am the Lord thy God which are words of a Covenant to be the first Commandment and if so then must justifying faith be enjoyned there And thus did some of the Fathers though those words are onely enunciative and not preceptive 2. In respect of the authority stamped upon it by God whereby it becomes 2. In respect of the authority of it a rule unto us The former is agreed on by all and I see few that dare openly deny the other for seeing the matter is intrinsecally and eternally good it cannot but be commanded by God though not to justifie for that is separable from it There are some things that are justa because Deus vult as in all positive things and then there are other things just and therefore God wills them though even they are also just because they are consonant to that eternall justice and goodnesse in himselfe so that indeed it is so farre from being true that the Law which hath Gods authority stampt on it for a rule and so is mandatum should be abrogated that it is impossible nè per Deum quidem for then God should deny his own justice and goodnesse therefore we doe justly abhorre those blasphemous Questions among the School-men An Deus possit mandare odium sui c. for it's impossible Therefore we see Matth. 5. that our Saviour is so farre from abrogating it that he sheweth the spirituall extent of the mandatory power of the Law farre beyond Pharisees expectation and thus James urgeth the authority of the Law-giver 3. It s good instrumentally as used by Gods Spirit for good I know 3. It 's instrumentally good it 's disputed by some Whether the Law and the preaching of it is used as an instrument by the Spirit of God for conversion But that will be an entire Question in it selfe onely thus much at this time The Spirit of God doth use the Law to quicken up the heart of a beleever unto his duty Psal 119. Thou hast quickened mee by thy precepts And so Psal 19. The Law of the Lord enlightneth the simple and by them thy servant is fore-warn'd of sinne You will say The word Law is taken largely there for all precepts and testimonies It 's true but it 's not exclusive of
with divels we put heavie chaines and fetters that they may doe no hurt so the Lord laid the Law upon the people of Israel to keep them in from impietie The Apostle useth a word shut up as in a dungeon but that is to another sense It was Chrysostomes comparison As a great man suspecting his wife appoints Eunuchs to look to her and keep her so did God being jealous over the Jewes appoint these lawes 2. To curse and condemne and in this respect it poureth all 2. Because it condemnes them its fury upon the ungodly The Law to the godly by Christ is like a Serpent with a sting pulled out but now to the wicked the sting of sinne is the Law and therefore the condition of that man who is thus under it is unspeakably miserable The curse of it is the sore displeasure of God and that for every breach of it and if men that have broken onely mens lawes be yet so much afraid that they hide themselves and keep close when yet no man or Judge can damne them or throw them into hell what cause is there to feare that Law-giver who is able to destroy soule and body Therefore consider thou prophane man are not thy oaths are not thy lusts against Gods Law You had better have all the men in the world your enemy then the Law of God It 's a spirituall enemy and therefore the terrours of it are spirituall as well as the duties Let not your lives be Antinomians no more then opinions Oh that I could confute this Antinomianisme also such a mans life and conversation was against GODS Law but now it 's not 2. To Beleevers it hath this use 1. To excite and quicken them 1. It quickens the godly against sin and corruption against all sinne and corruption for howsoever the Scripture saith Against such there is no law and The Law is not made to the righteous yet because none of the godly are perfectly righteous and there is none but may complaine of his dull love and his faint delight in holy things therefore the Law of God by commanding doth quicken him How short is this of that which God cōmands not that a man is to look for justification by this or to make these in stead of a Christ to him but for other ends Hence Psal 1. and Psal 19. and 119. who can deny that they belong to the godly now as well as heretofore Have not beleevers now crookednesse hypocrisie luke-warmnesse You know not onely the unruly colt that is yet untamed but the horse that is broken hath a bit and bridle also and so not onely the ungodly but even the godly whose hearts have been much broken and tamed doe yet need a bridle Nè Spiritum sessorem excutiant And if men should be so peremptorie as to say they doe not need this it 's not because they doe not need it for they need it most but because they doe not feele it 2. To enlighten and discover unto them daily more and more heart-sinne 2. It discovers sin unto them and soule-sinne This use the Apostle speaketh of Rom. 7. per totum for how should a man come to know the depth of originall sinne all the sinfull motions flowing from it but by the Law and therefore that is observed by Divines the Apostle saith he had not knowne sinne but by the Law intimating thereby that the Law of nature was so obliterated and darkened that it could not shew a man the least part of his wickednesse Seneca who had more light then others yet he saith Erras si tecum vitia nasci putas supervenerunt ingesta sunt And so Pelagius his assertion was that tam sine vitio quà m sine virtute nascimur And you see all Popery to this day holds those motions of heart not consented to to be no sins but necessary conditions arising from our constitution and such as Adam had in innocency Therefore the people of God see and are humbled for that wickednesse which others take no notice of This will satisfie man but not Gods Law 3. To drive them out of all their owne power and righteousnesse 3. It makes them disclaim all their owne righteousness And this is another good consequence for when they see all to come short of the Law that the earth is not more distant from heaven then they from that righteousnesse this makes them to goe out of all their prayers and all their duties as you see Paul Rom. 7. he consented to the Law and he delighted in it but he could not reach to the righteousnesse of it and therefore crieth out Oh wretched man that I am How apt are the holiest to be proud and secure as David and Peter even as the wormes and wasps eat the sweetest apples and fruit but this will keep thee low How absurd then are they that say The preaching of the Law is to make men trust in themselves and to adhere to their owne righteousnesse for there is no such way to see a mans beggery and guilt as by shewing the strictnesse of the Law For what makes a Papist so selfe-confident that his hope is partly in grace and partly in merits but because they hold they are able to keep the Law God forbid saith a Papist that we should enjoy heaven as of meere almes to us no we have it by conquest Whence is all this but because they give not the Law its due 4. Hereby to quicken them to an higher price and esteem of Christ 4. It makes them set an higher value of Christ and his benefits and the benefits by him So Paul in that great agony of his striving with his corruption being like a living man tyed to a dead carkasse his living faith to dead unbeliefe his humility to loathsome pride see what a conclusion he makes I thank God through Jesus Christ. It 's true many times the people of God out of the sense of their sinne are driven off from Christ but this is not the Scriptures direction That holds out riches in Christ for thy poverty righteousnesse in Christ for thy guilt peace in Christ for thy terrour And in this consideration it is that many times Luther hath such hyperbolicall speeches about the Law and about sinne All is spoken against a Christians opposing the Law to the Gospel so as if the discovering of the one did quite drive from the other And this is the reason why Papists and formall Christians never heartily and vehemently prize Christ taking up every crumb that falls from his table they are Christs to themselves and self-saviours I deny not but the preaching of Christ and about grace may also make us prize grace and Christ but such is our corruption that all is little enough Let me adde these cautions 1. It 's of great consequence in what sense we use the word Law 1. The Law according to the use of the word in the Scripture is not onely a
Father hath commanded me so I you John 15. 10. If you keep my commandements and abide in love c. And indeed if it were not a commandement it could not be called an obedience of Christ for that doth relate to a command Now this I inferre hence that to doe a thing out of obedience to a command because a command doth not inferre want of love although I grant that the commandement was not laid upon Christ as on us either to direct him or quicken him Besides all the people of God have divers relations upon which their obedience lyeth they are Gods servants and that doth imply obedientiam servi though not obedientiam servilem Againe a Beleever may look to the reward and yet have a spirit of love how much rather look to the command of God A godly man may have amorem mercedis though not amorem mercenarium And lastly there is no godly man but he hath in part some unwillingnesse to good things and therefore needs the Law not onely to direct but to exhort and goad forward Even as I said the tamed horse needeth a spur as well as the unbroken colt 4. Though Christ hath obeyed the Law fully yet that doth not exempt 4. Christs Obedience exempts not us from ours us from our obedience to it for other ends then he did it And I think that if the Antinomian did fully inform himselfe in this thing there were an agreement for we all ought to be zealous against those Pharisaicall and Popish practices of setting up any thing in us though wrought by the grace of God as the matter of our justification But herein they do not distinguish or well argue The works of the Law do not justifie therefore they are needlesse or not requisite for say they if Christ hath fully obeyed the righteousnesse of the Law and that is made ours therefore it is not what ours is but what Christs is And I have heard some doubt whether the maintaining of Christs active obedience imputed to us doth not necessarily imply Antinomianisme but of that more hereafter onely let them lay a parallel with Christs passive obedience He satisfied the curse and threatning of the Law and thereby hath freed us from all punishment yet the Beleevers have afflictions for other ends so doe we the works of Gods Law for other ends then Christ did them A fifth caution or limitation shall be this to distinguish between 5. Beleevers sins condemned though not their persons a Beleever and his personall acts For howsoever the Law doth not curse or condemne him in regard of his state yet those particular sins he commits it condemnes them and they are guilty of Gods wrath though this guilt doth not redound upon the person Therefore it is a very wide comparison of * Dr. Crisp one that a man under grace hath no more to doe with the Law then an English-man hath with the lawes of Spaine or Turkie For howsoever every Beleever be in a state of grace so that his person is justified yet being but in part regenerated so farre as his sinnes are committed they are threatned and condemned in him as well as in another for there is a simple guilt of sin and a guilt redundant upon the person 6. That the Law is not therefore to be decryed because we have no 6. Inability to keep the Law exempts not from obedience to it power to keep the Law For so we have no power to obey the Gospell It is an expression an Antinomian * Dr. Crisp useth The Law saith he speaketh to thee if troubled for sin Doe this and live Now this is as if a Judge should bid a malefactor If you will not be hanged take all England and carry it upon your shoulders into the West Indies What comfort were this Now doth not the Gospel when it bids a man beleeve speak as impossible a thing to a mans power It 's true God doth not give such a measure of grace as is able to fulfill the Law but we have faith enough evangelically to justifie us But that is extraneous to this matter in hand It followes therefore that the Law taken most strictly and the Gospel differ in other considerations then in this 7. They do not distinguish between that which is primarily and per 7. The Law though primarily it requireth perfect holinesse yet it excludes not a Mediatour se in the Law and that which is occasionally It cannot be denied but the Decalogue requireth primarily a perfect holinesse as all lawes require exactnesse but yet it doth not exclude a Mediatour The Law saith Doe this and live and it doth not say None else shall doe this for thee and then thou shalt live For if so then it had been injustice in God to have given us a Christ I therefore much wonder at one who in his book speaks thus The Law doth not onely deprive us of comfort but it will let no body else speak a word of comfort because it is a rigid keeper and he confirmeth it by that place Galat. 3. 23. But how short this is appeareth 1. Because what the Apostle calleth the Law here he called the Scripture in generall before 2. He speaketh it generally of all under that forme of Moses his regiment so that the Fathers should have no comfort by that meanes Use 1. Of instruction How dangerous an errour it is to deny The Law though it cannot justifie us is notwithstanding good and not to be rejected the Law for is it good and may it be used well then take we heed of rejecting it What because it is not good for justification is it in no sense else good Is not gold good because you cannot eat on it and feed on it as you do meat Take the precept of the Gospel yea take the Gospel acts as To beleeve this as it is a work doth not justifie Therefore that opinion which makes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere to justifie may as well take in other acts of obedience But because faith as it is a work doth not justifie doe you therefore reject beleeving A man may abuse all the ordinances of the Gospel as well as the Law The man that thinks the very outward work of baptism the very outward work of receiving a sacrament will justifie him doth as much dishonour God as a Jew that thought circumcision or the sacrifices did justifie him You may quickly turn all the Gospel into the Law in that sense you may as well say What need I pray what need I repent it cannot justifie me as to deny the Law because it cannot Use 2. How vaine a thing it is to advance grace and Christ Grace and Christ not to be advanced oppositely to the Law oppositely to the Law nay they that destroy one destroy also the other Who prizeth the city of refuge so much as the malefactour that is pursued by guilt Who desireth the brasen Serpent but
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
of our Saviour in a sense which some explaine it in I come not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance By repentance they meane conversion and by the righteous not Pharisees but such as are already converted Now that these interpretations much agreeing in one may the better be assented to consider some parallel places of Scripture Galat. 5. 23. speaking of the fruits of the spirit Against such there is no law The Law was not made to these to condemne them or accuse them so that what is said of the actions and graces of the godly may be applyed to the godly themselves You may take another parallel Rom. 13. 3. Rulers are not a terrour to good works but to evill Wouldst thou not be afraid of them doe no evill And thus the Apostle to shew how the grace of love was wrought in the Thessalonians hearts I need not saith he write to you to love for you have been taught of God to doe this His very saying I need not write was a writing so that these expressions doe hold forth no more then that the godly so farre as they are regenerate doe delight in the Law of God and it is not a terrour to them And if because the godly have an ingenuous free spirit to doe what is good he need not the Law directing or regulating it would follow as well he needed not the whole Scripture he needed not the Gospel that calls upon him to beleeve because faith is implanted in his heart This rock cannot be avoided And therefore upon this ground because the godly are made holy in themselves the Swencfeldians did deny the whole Scripture to be needfull to a man that hath the Spirit And that which the Antinomian doth limit to the Law It is a killing letter they apply to the whole Scripture and I cannot see how they can escape this argument Hence Chrysostome that spake so hyperbolically about the Law speaks as high about the Scriptures themselves We ought to have the word of God engraven in our hearts so that there should be no need of Scripture And Austin speakes of some that had attained to such holinesse that they lived without a Bible Now who doth not see what a damnable and dangerous position this would be That the Law must needs have a directive regulating and informing power over a godly man will appeare in these two particulars 1. We cannot discerne the true worship of God from superstition 1. The true worship of God cannot be discerned from false but by the Law and idolatry but by the first and second Commandement It is true many places in Scripture speak against false worship but to know when it is a false worship the second Commandement is a speciall director How do the orthodox Writers prove Images unlawfull how doe they prove that the setting up any part or meanes of worship which the Lord hath not commanded is unlawfull but by the second Commandement And certainly the want of exact knowledge in the latitude of this Commandement brought in all idolatry and superstition And we shall shew you God willing in time that the Decalogue is not onely Moses his ten Commandements but it 's Christs ten Commandements and the Apostles ten Commandements as well as his 2. Another instance at this time is in comparing the depth of 2. The depth of sin cannot be discovered without it the Law and the depth of our sinne together There is a great deale more spirituall excellency and holinesse commanded in the Law of God the Decalogue then we can reach unto Therefore we are to study into it more and more Open mine eyes that I may understand the wonderfull things of thy Law thus David prayeth though godly and his eyes were in a great measure opened by the Spirit of God And as there is a depth in the Law so a depth in our originall and native sinne There is a great deale more flith in us then we can or doe discover Psal 19. Who can understand his errours Cleanse me from secret sins Therefore there being such a world of filth in thy carnall heart what need is there of the spirituall and holy Law to make thee see thy selfe thus polluted and abominable Certainly a godly man groweth partly by discovering that pride that deadnesse that filth in his soule he never thought of or was acquainted with The practicall use that is to be made of this Scripture explained is to pray and labour for such a free heavenly heart that the Law of God and all the precepts of it may not be a terrour to you but sweetnesse and delight Oh how I love thy Law cryeth David he could not expresse it And againe My soule breaketh in the longing after thy judgements In another place he and Job doe account of them above their necessary food you do not hale and drag an hungry or thirsty man to his bread and water I doe not speak this but that it 's lawfull to eye the reward as Moses and Christ did yea and to fear God for who can think that the Scripture using these motives would stirre up in us sinfull and unlawfull affections but yet such ought to be the filiall and son-like affections to God and his will that we ought to love and delight in his Commandements because they are his as the poore son loveth his father though he hath no lordship or rich inheritance to give him There is this difference between a free and violent motion a free motion is that which is done for its owne selfe sake a violent is that which cometh from an outward principle the patient helping it not forward at all Let not to pray to beleeve to love God be violent motions in you Where faith worketh by love this maketh all duties rellish this overcometh all difficulties The Lacedemonians when they went to war did sacrifice to Love because love only could make hardship and wounds and death it selfe easie Doe thou therefore pray that the love of God may be shed abroad in thine heart and consider these two things 1. How the Law laid upon Christ to dye and suffer for thee was not a burthen or terrour to him How doth he witnesse this by crying out With desire I have desired to drink of this cup Think with thy self If Christ had been as unwilling to dye for me as I to pray to him to be patient to be holy what had become of my soule If Christ therefore said of that Law to be a Mediatour for thee Lo I come to doe thy will O God thy Law is within mine heart how much rather ought this to be true of thee in any thing thou shalt doe for him Thou hast not so much to part with for him as he for thee What is thy life and wealth to the glory of his Godhead which was laid aside for a while And then secondly consider how that men love lusts for lusts sake they love the world because of the
world Now evill is not so much evill as good is good sin is not so much sin as God is God and Christ is Christ If therefore a profane man because of his carnall heart can love his sin though it cost him hell because of the sweetnesse in it shall not the godly heart love the things of God because of the excellency in them But these things may be more enlarged in another place LECTURE VI. ROM 2. 14 15. For when the Gentiles which know not the law do the things of the law by nature these having not the law are a law unto themselves which shew the work of the law written in their hearts BEfore I handle the other places of Scripture that are brought by the Antinomians against the Law it is my intent for better methods sake and your more sound instruction to handle the whole theology of the Law of God in the severall distributions of it and that positively controversally and practically and I shall begin first with the law of Nature that God hath imprinted in us and consider of this two waies 1. As it is a meere law and secondly As it was a covenant of works made with Adam And then in time I shall speak of the Morall Law given by Moses which is the proper subject of these controversies The Text I have read is a golden Mine and deserveth diligent digging and searching into Therefore for the better understanding of these words let us answer these Questions 1. Who are meant by the Gentiles here It is ordinarily known Who meant by Gentiles that the Jewes did call all those Gentiles that were not Jewes by way of contempt as the Greeks and Romans called all other nations Barbarians Hence sometimes in the Scripture the word is applyed to wicked men though Jewes as Psal 2. Why doe the heathen rage It may be interpreted of the Pharisees resisting Christ Indeed the Jewes will not confesse that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gentes is any where applyed to them but this is very false for Genes 17. Abraham is there said to be the father of many nations 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gentes therefore they must either deny themselves to be Abraham's seed or else acknowledge this word belonging to them But generally it signifieth those that had not the Lawes of Moses nor did live by them Therefore Gal. 2. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to live like a Gentile is not to observe the Lawes of Moses and in this sense it is to be taken here for the Apostles scope is to make good that great charge upon all mankinde both Jew and Gentile that naturally they are wholly in sin and God being no accepter of persons will destroy the one as well as the other And whereas it might be thought very hard to deale thus with the Gentile because no law was delivered unto him as unto the the Jew the Apostle answereth that objection in this place But grant it be understood of such Gentiles then there is a greater question whether it be meant of the Gentiles abiding so or the Gentiles converted and turned beleevers for that the Apostle speakes of such most of the Latine Interpreters both ancient and moderne doe affirme and so the Greek Father Chrysostome and Estius a learned Papist doe think there are so many arguments for it that it 's certaine I confesse they bring many probable reasons but I will not trouble you with them this seeemeth a strong argument against them because the Apostle speaks of such who are without a law and a law to themselves which could not be true of Gentiles converted we take the Apostle therefore to speake of Gentiles abiding so but in this sense there is also a dangerons exposition and a sound one The poysonous interpretation is of the Pelagians who understand the law written in their hearts in the same sense as it is used Jerem 33. even such a fulfilling of the law which will attaine to salvation and this they hold the Heathens by the law and help of nature did sufficiently But this is to overthrow the doctrine of Grace and Christ Therefore the said interpretation is of the Gentiles indeed but yet to understand the law written in their hearts onely of those relicts of naturall reason and conscience which was in the Heathens as is to be proved anon The 2d. Question is easily answered How they are said to be How the Gentiles are said to be without a law without a law to wit without a written law as the Jewes had so that we may say they had a law without a law a law written but not declared The 3d. Question In what sense they are said to doe the things of How said to do the things of the law by nature the law and that by nature To doe the things of the law is not meant universally of all the Heathens for the Apostle shewed how most of them lived in the Chapter before nor secondly universally in regard of the matter contained in the law but some externall acts as Aristides and Socrates with others And here it s disputed Whether a meere Heathen can doe any worke morally good But wee answer No for every action ought to have a supernaturall end viz. the glory of God which they did not aime at therefore we doe refuse that distinction of a morall good and theologicall because every morall good ought to be theologicall The distinction of Morall and Theologicall good rejected they may do that good matter of the law though not well And as for the manner how by nature those Interpreters that understand this Text of Gentiles beleevers say Nature is not here opposed to Grace but to the law written by Moses and therefore make it nature inabled by grace but this is shewed to be improbable By nature therefore we may understand that naturall What is here meant by Nature light of conscience whereby they judged and performed some externall acts though these were done by the help of God The next Question is How this Law is said to be written in their hearts You must not with Austine compare this place with that gracious promise in Jeremy of God writing his law in the hearts of his people There is therefore a two-fold writing in the A two-fold writing of the Law in mens hearts and which here meant hearts of men the first of knowledge and judgement whereby they apprehend what is good and bad the second is in the will and affections by giving a propensity and delight with some measure of strength to do this upon good grounds This later is spoken of by the Prophet in the covenant of Grace and the former is to be understood here as will appeare if you compare this with Chapt. 1. 19. The last Question is How they declare this Law written in their The Law written in mens hearts two waies hearts And that is first externally two waies 1. By making good and
that the law of Nature condemneth Doth not Nature condemne lying couzening in your trades lusts and uncleannesse How many Trades-men are there that need not a Paul Even Tully in his Book of Offices will condemne their lying sophisticate wares and unlawfull gaine It 's much how far they saw this way Sins against naturall conscience are called Crying sins and though men have repented of them yet how long is it ere faith can still their cry Have not many Heathens been faithfull and just in their dealings It 's true that man hath not godlinesse enough who hath naturall honesty therefore there are many spirituall sins that he never humbleth himselfe for as Paul saith he knew not the motions of his heart to be sin Hence men are to be exhorted to get further light and more tendernesse then a naturall conscience can ever attaine unto Neverthelesse if men so live as if they had not this Law in their hearts they are the more inexcusable Are there not men who call themselves Christians that yet the very Heathens will condemne at that great day Vse 3. Why it is so hard to beleeve in the Lord Christ because here is nothing of nature in it it 's all supernaturall The Papists say we make an easie way to heaven for let a man be never so great a sinner yet if he doe but beleeve all is well Now the people of God sensible of their sin find nothing harder for it 's in the law of Nature they should not lye or steale but that they should beleeve in Christ for pardon when labouring under their offences here nature doth not help at all I acknowledge it 's a dispute among Divines Whether in that law implanted in Adams heart there was not also a power to beleeve in Christ when revealed But of that hereafter but the orthodox deny that he had explicite justifying faith for that was repugnant to the condition he was in But the thing I intend is to shew how supernaturall and hidden the way of beleeving is No marvell therefore if it be made such a peculiar worke of the Spirit to convince of this sin LECTURE VII ROM 2. 14. For when the Gentiles which have not the law doe by nature the things of the law c. THe Doctrine already gathered from these words is that The Gentiles have a law of Nature written in their hearts Which law doth consist partly in light and knowledge of speculative principles and partly in practice and obedience to practicall principles So then from hence we may consider first Of the light of Nature and then secondly Of the power of Nature and from both these we may have profitable matter and also may confute some dangerous errours which have poysoned too many I shall begin therefore with the light of Nature or Reason and shall endeavour to shew the Necessity of it and yet the Insufficiency of it It is not such a starre that can lead us to Christ In the first place take notice that this light of Nature may be considered in a three-fold respect First As it 's a relict or remnant of the image of God for howsoever The light of Nature is a remnant of Gods image the image of God did primarily consist in righteousness and true holinesse yet secondarily it did also comprehend the powers and faculties of the reasonable soule in the acts thereof And this later part abideth It is true this light of Nature comparatively to that of faith is but as a glow-worme to the Sun yet some light and irradiation it hath God when he made man had so excellently wrought his owne image in him that man could not fall unlesse that were also destroyed as they write of Phidias who made Alexanders statue yet had wrought his owne picture so artificially in it that none could break Alexanders statue but he must also spoile Phidias his image who was the maker of it And thus it is in Adams fall yet there remaineth some light still which the Apostle calleth Rom. 1. Truth he vouchsafeth that name to it They detaine the truth in unrighteousnesse Now this moon-light or glimmering of Nature is of a threefold use 1. For societies and publike Common-wealths whereby they have 1. The light of Nature usefull and necessary for the making of wholsome lawes in Common-wealths made wholsome lawes It 's wonderfull to consider how excellent the Heathens have been therein Thus Chrysostome speaking how the most excellent men need the counsell of others instanceth in Jethro's advice to Moses about choosing assistant officers That great man Moses saith he who was so potent in words and workes who was the friend of God which commanded the creatures was helped in counsell by Jethro his father-in-law an obscure man and a Barbarian Although to speak the truth Jethro when he gave this counsell was not so but had the knowledge of the true God 2. This light of nature serveth for the instigation and provocation 2. It instigateth to good duties towards God and man of men to many good actions and duties towards God and man Hence still observe that phrase They detaine reason and naturall light is bound as a prisoner by the chaines of lusts and sinfull affections which thing Aristotle doth fully set forth in his incontinent person whom he describeth to have a right opinion in the generall about that which is good yet being too much affected to some particular pleasure or profit by that meanes the better part is over-borne and therefore Aristotle saith the better part of the mind did provoke to better things This agreeth with that of Paul And as they bound captivated practicall truths towards man so they also imprisoned them about God Plato had the knowledge of one God yet he dared not to communicate it to the vulgar Therefore saith he Opificem universorum neque invenire facile neque inventum in vulgus promulgare tutum Here for feare of the people he detained this truth And Austin hath a most excellent chapter cap. 10. lib. 6. de Civit. to shew how Seneca kept the truth in unrighteousnesse he speaks of a Book Seneca wrote which now is lost against Superstitions where hee doth most freely and boldly write against the practices of their worship but saith Austin Libertas affuit scribenti non viventi I will name some passages because they are applicable to Popish Idolatry as well as Paganish Immortales does in materia vilissima immobili dedicant Numina vocant quae si spiritu accepto subitò occurrerent monstra haberentur Faciunt tam indecora honestis tam indigna liberis tam dissimillima sanis ut nemo fuerit dubitaturus furere cos si cum paucioribus furerent nunc sanitatis patrocinium est insanientium turba But Seneca when he had spoken thus and much more in the scorne of those gods what doth he resolve upon that his wise man shall doe in those times In animi religione non habeat sed in
so be it could be proved as Zwinglius held that Christ did communicate himself to some Heathens then it were another matter I will not bring all the places they stand upon that which is mainely urged is Act. 10. of Cornelius his prayers were accepted and saith Peter Now I perceive c. But this proceedeth from a meere mistake for Cornelius had the implicite knowledge and faith of Christ and had received the doctrine of the Messias though he was ignorant of Christ that individuall Person And as for that worshipping of him in every Nation that is not to be understood of men abiding so but whereas before it was limited to the Jewes now God would receive all that should come to him of what Nation soever There is a two-fold Unbeliefe one Negative and for this no Heathen is damned He is not condemned because he doth not beleeve in Christ but for his originall and actuall sinnes Secondly there is Positive Unbeliefe which they onely are guilty of who live under the meanes of the Gospel The fourth Question is Whether that be true of the Papists which hold that the sacrifices the Patriarchs offered to God were by The Patriarchs did not offer sacrifices by the light of Nature but God revealed his will to Adam to be so worshipped the meer light of Nature For so saith Lessius Lex Naturae obstringit suadet c. the Law of Nature both bindeth and dictateth all to offer sacrifices to God therefore they make it necessary that there should be a sacrifice now under the New Testament offered unto God And upon this ground Lessius saith it is lawfull for the Indians to offer up sacrifices unto God according to their way and custome And making this doubt to himselfe How shall they doe for a Priest He answereth that as a common-wealth may appoint a Governour to rule over them and to whom they will submit in all things so may it appoint a Priest to officiate in all things for them This is strange for a Papist to say who doteth so much upon succession as if where that is not there could be no ministery Now in this case he gives the people a power to make a Priest But howsoever it may be by the light of Nature that God is religiously to be worshipped yet it must be onely instituted worship that can please him And thus much Socrates an Heathen said That God must onely be worshipped in that way wherein he hath declared his will to be so Seeing therefore Abel and so others offered in faith and faith doth alwaies relate to some testimony and word it is necessary to hold that God did reveale to Adam his will to be worshipped by those externall sacrifices and the oblations of them It is true almost all the Heathens offered sacrifices unto their gods but this they did as having it at first by heare-say from the people of God and also Satan is alwaies imitating of God in his institutions And howsoever the destructive mutation or change of the thing which is alwaies necessary to a sacrifice doth argue and is a signe of subjection and deepest humiliation yet how should Nature prescribe that the demonstration of our submission must be in such a kind or way The fifth Question is Whether originall sin can be found out by Originall sin can onely be truely known by Scripture-light the meere light of Nature Or Whether it is onely a meere matter of faith that we are thus polluted It is true the learned Mornay labours to prove by naturall reason our pollution and sheweth how many of the ancient Platonists doe agree in this That the soule is now vassalled to sense and affections and that her wings are cut whereby shee should so are up into heaven And so Tully he saith Cum primùm nascimur in omni continuò pravitate versa mur much like that of the Scripture The Imagination of the thoughts of a mans heart is onely evill and that continually But Aristotle of whom one said wickedly and falsely that he was the same in Naturals which Christ was in Supernaturals he makes a man to be obrasa tabula without sin or vertue though indeed it doth incline ad meliora Tully affirmeth also that there are semina innata virtutum in us onely wee overcome them presently Thus also Seneca Erras si tecum nasci vitia putas supervenerunt ingesta sunt as I said before Here we see the wisest of the Philosophers speaking against it Hence Julian the Pelagian heaped many sentences out of the chiefest Philosophers against any such corruption of nature But Austine answered It was not much matter what they said seeing they were ignorant of these things The truth is by nature we may discover a great languishment and infirmity come upon us but the true nature of this and how it came about can onely be knowne by Scripture-light Therefore the Apostle Rom. 7. saith he had not knowne lust to be sin had not the Law said Thou shalt not lust The sixth Question is What is the meaning of that grand rule of Matth. 19. 12. expounded Nature which our Saviour also repeateth That which you would not have other men doe to you doe not you to them Matth. 7. 12. It is reported of Alexander Severus that he did much delight in this saying which hee had from the Jewes or Christians and our Saviour addeth this that This is the Law and the Prophets so that it is a great thing even for Christians to keep to this principle Men may pray and exercise religious duties and yet not doe this therefore the Apostle addeth this to prayer so that wee may live as wee pray according to that good rule of the Platonish 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 How would this subdue all those proud envious censorious and inimicitious carriages to one another But Communion of all things no precept of Nature and the Apostles practice of it was onely occasionall not binding to posterity now when wee speake of doing that to another which wee would have done to our selves it is to be understood of a right and well-regulated will not corrupted or depraved The seventh Question is Whether the practice of the Apostles making all their goods common was according to the precept of Nature and so binding all to such a practice For there have been and still are those that hold this But now that communion of all things is not jure Naturae appeareth in that theft is a sin against the Morall Law which could not be if division of goods were not according to the law of Nature Indeed by Nature all things were common but then it was Natures dictate to divide them as Aristotle sheweth in many reasons against Plato What would have been in innocency if Adam had stood whether a common right to all things or a divided propriety I speak of goods is hard to say But as for the practice of the Church of Jerusalem
gave to Saul a spirit of government from his owne meere good will without any respect to Saul And how many men of parts have been so far from being blest because of these naturall endowments that they have turned their wedge of gold into an idoll to worship it Vse 1. To extoll the work of grace for the initiall progressive and consummative work of conversion for by all that hath been said you have seen the weaknesse of nature and the power of grace the strength of our disease and the necessity of a physician How uncomfortable will it be when thou diest to commit thy soule to that grace which thou hast disputed against And be not content with giving something to it unlesse thou give all to it Grace that justifieth Grace that sanctifieth Grace that saveth Vse 2. Not to abuse the doctrine of grace to idlenesse or negligence You see how both these promises and precepts grace and duties may be reconciled And as not to negligence so not to curious disputes doe not so trouble your selves about the doctrine of grace that you feele not the power of grace in your hearts and doe not so far dispute about your naturall corruption and how deep you are in it as not to labour to get out of it Austin compareth this to one who being fallen into a great pit his friend asked him how he came in Nay saith he rather seek how to get me out And thus doe ye in these matters of sin wherein you are wholly plunged LECTURE XI GENES 2. 17. But of the tree of knowledge of good and evill thou mayest not eate for in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die WE come now in order to the law God gave Adam and this may be considered two waies First as a Law secondly as a Covenant We will handle it first in the former notion Now because the law God gave Adam was partly naturall and partly positive both which did goe to the making up of that covenant I shall handle both those distinctly and first let us consider Gods positive law in the text which is also called by Divines a symbolicall precept because the obedience unto it was a symbolum or outward testimony of our homage and service to God And the object of this command is not a thing good or bad in its owne nature but indifferent and onely evill because prohibited So that in the words you have the object of this negative precept described two waies first by that which is proper to it the tree of knowledge of good and evill secondly by that which is accidentall to it viz. death infallibly upon the eating of it And that this commandement might be the better received in the Verse before God giveth a large commission to eate of any other tree besides this When God made this world as a great house he puts man into it as his tenant and by this tryall of obedience he must acknowledge his Land-lord That Adam did eate in the state of innocency and was hungry doth appeare by this text onely hunger was not in him as it is in us with paine and trouble The difficulties must be handled in the opening of the doctrine which is That God besides the naturall law ingraven in Adams heart did give a positive law to try his obedience The doubts in explicating of this point are 1. What is meant by the tree of knowledge of good and evill And here certainly we must take heed of being too curious lest as it was Adams sin to eate of it so it may be our curiosity to dive too farre into the knowledge of it Now when I aske what is meant by it I doe not understand what kind of fruit or tree it was whether apple or fig that cannot be determined but why it had that name The Rabbins who have as many foolish dreames about the Old Testament as the Friars about the New conceive Adam and Eve to be created without the use of reason and that this tree was to accelerate it And indeed the Socinians border upon this opinion for they say Adam and Eve were created very * Tanta suit Adami recens conditi stupiditas ut major in infantes cadere non posiit simple and weak in understanding and say they it 's impossible to conceive that if Adams soule were created so adorned with all knowledge and graces as the firmament is bespangled with stars how he should come to eate of the forbidden fruit or to sin against God But both these are false That he had perfect knowledge appeareth in his giving names to the creatures and to Eve so fitting The tree of knowledge why so called and apt and Ephes 3 the image of God is said to have a renewed mind and that though thus knowing he did yet sin and though thus holy he did yet fall it was because he was not perfectly confirmed but mutable Indeed Divines doe much labour to expresse how his sin did begin whether in the Will first or in the Understanding but that is impertinent to this matter That which is the most received both by Austin and others is that it was so called not from any effect but from the event because it did indeed experimentally make to know good and evill and so it 's usuall in Scripture to call that by a name which it had afterward Now though this be generally received and cannot well be rejected yet certainly it may be further said that it was not called so by the meere event but by the divine decree and appointment of God as being given to be a boundary and limit to Adam that he should not desire to know more or otherwise then God had appointed 2. Why God would give a positive law besides that of the naturall God besides the naturall law ingraven in Adams heart did give a positive law law in his heart There are these reasons commonly given 1. That hereby Gods dominion and power over man might be the more acknowledged for to obey the naturall law might be a necessary condition and not an act of the Will Even as the Heathens doe abstaine from many sins not because forbidden by 1. That the power which God had over him might be the more eminently held forth God but as dissonant to their naturall reason And even among Christians there is a great deale of difference between good actions that are done because God commands and because of a naturall conscience These two principles make the same actions to differ in their whole nature Therefore God would try Adam by some positive law that so the dominion and power which God had over him might be the more eminently held forth and therefore Adam in this was not to consider the greatnesse or goodnesse of the matter but the will of the commander 2. Another reason which floweth from the former is that so 2. To try and manifest Adams obedience Adams obedience might be the more tryed and
be manifested to be obedience For as Austin speaking of himselfe in confessing his wickednesse that though he had no need or temptation to sin yet to be a sinner he delighted in that Nulla alia causa malitiae nisi malitia so on the contrary it 's an excellent aggravation of obedience when there is nulla alia causa obedientiae nisi obedientia so that the forbearing to eate was not from any sin in the action but from the will of the law-giver And Austin doth well explaine this If a man saith he forbid another to touch such an herb because it 's poyson this herb is contrary to a mans health whether it be forbidden or no Or if a man forbid a thing because it will be an hinderance to him that forbiddeth as to take away a mans mony or goods here it 's forbidden because it would be losse to him that forbiddeth but if a man forbids that which is neither of these waies hurtfull therefore it 's forbidden because bonum obedientiae per se malum inobedientiae per se monstraretur And this is also further to be observed that though the obedience unto this positive law be far inferiour unto that of the morall law because the object of one is inwardly good and the object of the other rather a profession of obedience then obedience yet the disobedience unto the positive law is no lesse hainous then that to the morall law because hereby man doth professedly acknowledge he will not submit to God Even as a vassall that is to pay such homage a yeare if he wilfully refuse it doth yearly acknowledge his refractorinesse Hence the Apostle doth expresly call Adams sin disobedience Rom. 5. not in a generall sense as every sin is disobedience but specifically it was strictly taken the sin of disobedience he did by that act cast off the dominion and power that God had over him as much as in him lay and though pride and unbeliefe were in this sin yet this was properly his sin 3. Why God would make this law seeing he fore-knew his fall and The proper essentiall end of the positive law was to exercise Adams obedience abuse of it For such is the profane boldnesse of many men that would have a reason of all Gods actions whereas this is as * Altitudinem consilii ejus penetrare non possum longè supra vires meas esse confiteor August if the Owle would look into the Sun or the Pigmee measure the Pyramides Although this may be answered without that of Pauls Who art thou O man c. for God did not give him this law to make him fall Adam had power to stand Therefore the proper essentiall end of this commandement was to exercise Adams obedience Hence there was no iniquity or unrighteousnesse in God Bellarmine doth confesse that God may doe that which if man should doe he sinned as for instance Man is bound to hinder him from sin that he knoweth would doe it if it lay in his power but God is not so tyed both because he hath the chiefe providence it 's fit he should let causes work according to their nature and therefore Adam being created free he might sin as well as not sin as also because God can work evill things out of good and lastly because God if he should hinder all evill things there would many good things be wanting to the world for there is nothing which some doe not abuse The English Divines in the Synod of Dort held that God had a serious will of saving all men but not an efficacious will of saving all Thus differing from the Arminians on one side and from some Protestant Authours on the other side and their great instance of the possibility of a serious will and not efficacious is this of Gods to Adam seriously willing him to stand and withall giving him ability to stand yet it was not such an efficacious will as de facto did make him stand for no question God could have confirmed the will of Adam in good as well as that of the Angels and the glorified Saints in heaven But concerning the truth of this their assertion we are to enquire in its time For that errour much spreads and the Antinomian cannot by his principles avoid that Christ intentionally died and so offereth his grace to all But for the matter in hand if by a serious will be meant a will of approbation and complacency yea and efficiency in some sense no question but God did seriously will his standing when he gave that commandement And howsoever Adam did fall because he had not such help that would in the event make him stand yet God did not withdraw or deny any help unto him whereby he was inabled to obey God To deny Adam that help which should indeed make him stand was no necessary requisite at all on Gods part But secondly that of Austins is good God would not have suffered sin to be if he could not have wrought greater good then sin was evill not that God needed sin to shew his glory for he needed no glory from the creature but it pleased him to permit sin that so thereby the riches of his grace and goodnesse might be manifested unto the children of his love And if Arminians will not be satisfied with these Scripture considerations we will say as Austin to the Hereticks Illi garriant nos credamus Let them prate while we beleeve 5. Whether this law would have obliged all posterity And certainly The positive law did lay an obligation upon Adam posterity we must conclude that this positive command was universall and that Adam is here taken collectively for although that Adam was the person to whom this command was given yet it was not personall but to Adam as an head or common person Hence Rom. 5. all are said to sin in him for whether it be in him or in as much as all have sinned it cometh to the same purpose for how could all be said to have sinned but because they were in him And this is also further to be proved by the commination In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt dye now all the posterity of Adam dyeth hereby Besides the same reasons which prove a conveniency for a positive law besides the naturall for Adam doe also inferre for Adams posterity It is true some Divines that doe hold a positive law would have been yet seem to be afraid to affirme fully that the posterity of Adam would have been tryed with the very same commandement of eating the forbidden fruit but I see no cause of questioning it Now all this will be further cleared when we come to shew that this is not meerly a law but a covenant and so by that meanes there is a communicating of Adams sin unto his posterity And indeed if God had not dealt in a covenant way in this thing there could be no more reason why Adams sin should be made ours
other considerations It was the opinion of Osiander that therefore wee are said to be made after the iof God because we are made after the likenesse of that humane nature which the second Person in Trinity was to assume and this hath been preached alate as probable but that may hereafter be confuted when wee come to handle that Question Whether Christ as a Mediatour was knowne and considered of in the state of innocency 3. Let us consider in what that image or likenesse doth consist The image of God in Adam consisted in the severall perfections and qualifications in his soule Where not standing upon the rationall soule of a man which we call the remote image of God in which sense we are forbid to kill a man or to curse a man because he is made after the image of God we may take notice of the severall perfections and qualifications in Adams soul As 1. In his Understanding there was 1. In his Vnderstanding was exact knowledge of divine and natural things an exact knowledge of divine and naturall things Of divine because otherwise he could not have loved God if hee had not known him nor could hee be said to be made very good Hence some make a three-fold light 1. That of imediate knowledge which Adam had 2. The light of faith which the regenerate have 3. The light of glory which the Saints in heaven have Now how great is this perfection Even Aristotle said that a little knowledge though conjecturall about heavenly things is to be preferred above much knowledge though certains about inferiour things How glorious must Adams estate be when his Understanding was made thus perfect And then for inferiour things the creatures his knowledge appeareth in the giving of Names to all the creatures and especially unto Evo Adam indeed did not know all things yea he might grow in experimentall knowledge but all things that were necessary for him created to such an happy end to know those he did but to know that he should fall and that Christ would be a Mediatour these things he could not unlesse it were by revelation which is not supposed to be made unto him So to know those things which were of ornament and beauty to his soule cannot be denied him Thus was Adam created excellent in intellectuall abilities for sapience knowing God for science knowing the creatures and for prudence exquisite in all things to be done 2. His Will which is the universall appetite of the whole man 2. His Will was wonderfully good and furnished with many habits of goodnesse which is like the supreme orbe that carrieth the inferiour with the power of it this was wonderfully good furnished with severall habits of goodnesse as the firmament with stars for in it was a propensity to all good Ephes 4. 24. It 's called righteousnesse and true holinesse and Eccl. 7. 29. God made man upright His Will was not bad or not good that is indifferent but very good The imaginations of the thoughts of his heart were only good and that continually And certainly if David Job and others who have this image restored in them but in part doe yet delight in Gods will how much more must Adam who when he would doe good found no evill present with him He could not say as we must Lord I beleeve help my unbeliefe Lord I love help my want of love He could not complaine as that man Libenter bonus esse vellem sed cogitationes meae non patiuntur Yet though his Will was thus good he needed help from God to be able to doe any good thing I know there are some learned Divines as Pareus that doe deny the holinesse Adam had or the help God gave Adam to be truly and properly called grace righteousnesse they will call it and the gift of God but not grace Therefore Pareus reproveth Bellarmine for stiling his Book De gratia primi hominis and his reason is because the Scripture makes that onely grace which comes by Christ and when the subject is in a contrary condition as we are but it was not so with Adam but I cannot tell whether this be worth the while to dispute This is certaine 1. that Adam could not persevere or continue in obedience to God without help from God Nor secondly was he confirmed in a state of goodnesse as the Angels are yea as every godly man now is through Christ and therefore being mutable we may well conceive a possibility of his falling though made thus holy 3. In his Affections 1. These tempests and waves were under the 3. In his Affections regularity and subjection command of that holinesse They were to Adam as wings to the bird as wheels to the chariot and he was not as Actaeon devoured of those that followed him as it is with us for if you consider Affections in the rise of them they did not move or stirre but when holinesse commanded them This is proved in that he was made right Therefore there could not any Affection stirre or move irregularly as it 's said of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he troubled himselfe There were indeed Affections moving in Christ and so in Adam but they were as cleane water moved in a cleare glasse but in us they are as water stirred in a muddy place which casteth great desilement Adam therefore being made right he could set his Affections as the Artificer doth his clock to make it strike when and what he will 2. These Affections are subjected in regard of the continuance of them When our Affections and Passions are raised how hardly are they composed againe how are we angry and sin how doe we grieve and sin whereas in the state of innocency they were so under the nurture of it that as we command our dogs to fetch and carry and to lay downe so could Adam then doe bid come fetch such an object and then bid it to lay downe againe 3. In regard of the degrees of them We are so corrupted that we cannot love but we over-love we cannot grieve but we over-grieve All our heat is presently feaverish but it was then far otherwise Now then by this righteousnesse you may perceive the glorious image that God put upon us and apply it to us who are banished not onely out of a place of Paradise but out of all these inward abilities and who can deplore our estate enough Thus was the Morall Law written in his heart and what the command is for direction that he was for conversation And howsoever the Socinians deny this law written in his heart yet acknowledging he had a conscience which had dictates of that which was good and righteous it amounts almost to as much Nor is it any matter though we reade not of any such outward law given to him nor is it necessary to make such a Question Whether the breach of the Morall Law would have undone Adam and his posterity as well as the transgression of
to beleeve so far as it did not imply an imperfection in the subject and repentance are now parts of that image This is a dispute among Arminians who plead Adam had not a power to beleeve in Christ and therefore it 's unjust in God to require faith of us who never had power in Adam to doe it The Answer is easie that Adam had power to beleeve so farre as it did not imply an imperfection in the subject It was a greater power then to beleeve in Christ and therefore it was from the defect of an object that he could not doe it as Adam had love in him yet there could be no miserable objects in that state to shew his love As for that other Question Whether repentance be part of the Repentance as it flowes from a regenerate nature reductively the image of God image of God Answ So far forth as it denoteth an imperfection in the subject it cannot be the image of God for we doe not resemble God in these things yet as it floweth from a regenerated nature so far it is reductively the image of God 3. Whether this shall be restored to us in this life againe Howsoever Gods image not fully repaired in us in this life we are said to be partakers of the divine nature and to be renewed in the image of God yet we shall not in this life have it fully repaired God hath declared his will in this and therefore are those stubs of sin and imperfection left in us that we might be low in our selves bewaile our losse and long for that heaven where the soule shall be made holy and the body immortall yet for all this we are to pray for the full abolition of sin in this life because Gods will and our duty to be holy as he is holy is the ground of our prayer and not his decree for to have such or such things done Yea this corruption is so far rooted in us now that it is not cleansed out of us by meere death but by cinerifaction consuming the body to ashes for we know Lazarus and others that dyed being restored againe to life yet could not be thought to have the image of God perfectly as they were obnoxious to sin and death Use 1. To humble our selves under this great losse Consider what we were and what we are how holy once how unholy now and here who can but take up bitter mourning Shall we lament because we are banished from houses and habitations because we have lost our estates and comforts and shall we not be affected here This argueth us to be carnall more then spirituall we have lost a father a friend and we wring our hands we cry We are undone and though we have lost God and his image all happinesse thereby yet we lay it not to heart Oh think what a glorious thing it was to enjoy God without any interruption no proud heart no earthly heart no lazie heart to grapple with see it in Paul Oh miserable man that I am c. Basil compareth Paul to a man thrown off his horse and dragg'd after him and he crieth out for help so is Paul throwne downe by his corruptions and dragged after them Use 2. To magnifie the grace of God in Christ which is more potent to save us then Adams sin can be to destroy us This is of comfort to the godly Rom. 5. the Apostle on purpose makes a comparison between them and sheweth the preheminency of one to save above the other to destroy There is more in Christ to save then in Adam to damne Christs obedience is a greater good then Adams sin is an evill It 's more honour to God then this is or can be a dishonour Let not then sin be great in thy thoughts in thy conscience in thy feares and grace small and weak As the time hath been when thy heart hath felt the gall and wormwood of sin so let it be to feele the power of Christ As thy soule hath said By one man sin so let it say By one man life LECTURE XIII GENES 2. 17. In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt die I Have already handled this Text as it containeth a law given to Adam by God as a soveraigne Lord over him now I shall re-assume this Text and consider it as part of a Covenant which God did enter into with Adam and his posterity for these two things a Law and a Covenant arise from different grounds The Law is from God as supreme and having absolute power and so requiring subjection the other ariseth from the love and goodnesse of God whereby he doth sweeten and mollifie that power of his and ingageth himselfe to reward that obedience which were otherwise due though God should never recompence it The words therefore being heretofore explained and the Text eas'd of all difficulties I observe this Doctrine That Doctr. God did not onely as a Law-giver injoyne obedience unto Adam but The covenant with Adam before the fall more obscurely laid downe then the covenant of grace after the fall as a loving God did also enter into covenant with him And for the opening of this you must take these Considerations 1. That this covenant with Adam in the state of innocency is more obscurely laid downe then the covenant of grace after the fall for afterwards you have the expresse name of the Covenant and the solemne entring into it by both parties but this Covenant made with Adam must only be gathered by deduction and consequence This Text cometh the neerest to a Covenant because here is the threatning expressed and so by consequent some good thing promised to obedience We are not therefore to be so rigid as to call for expresse places which doe name this Covenant for that which is necessarily and immediately drawne from Scripture is as truly Scripture as that which is expresly contained in it Now there are these grounds to prove God dealt in these commandements by way of Covenant 1. From the evill threatned and the good promised For while That God dealt with Adam by way of Covenant appeares 1. From evill threatned and good promised there is a meere command so long it is a law onely but when it is further confirmed by promises and threatnings then it becomes a Covenant And if that position be true of some which maketh the tree of life a sacrament then here was not onely nudum pactum a meer covenant but a seale also to confirme it And certainly being God was not bound to give Adam eternall life if he did obey seeing he owed obedience to God under the title of a creature it was of his meere goodnesse to become ingaged in a promise for this I know it 's a Question by some Whether Adam upon his obedience should have been translated into heaven or confirmed onely in that naturall life which was marvellous happy But either way would have been by meere promise of God not by any
promulgation of it and a solemn repetition but yet the Law did perpetually sound in the Church ever since it was a Church And this consideration will make much to set forth the excellency of it it being a perpetuall meanes and instrument which God hath used in his Church for information of duty conviction of sin and exhortation to all holinesse So that men who speak against the use of the Law and the preaching of it doe oppose the universall way of the Church of God in the Old and New Testament 6. The end why God gave this law to them I spake before of the The ends of the promulgation of the Law were end why he gave it then now I speake of the finall cause in generall and here I shall not speak of it in reference to Christ or Justification that is to be thought on when we handle it as a Covenant but only as it was an absolute rule or law And here it will be a great errour to think the promulgation of it had but one end for there were many ends 1. Because much corruption had now seised upon mankind 1. That the Israelites might see what holinesse was required of them and the people of Israel had lived long without the publick worship and service of God it was necessary to have this law enjoyned them that they might see farre more purity and holinesse required of them then otherwise they would be perswaded of 2. By this meanes they would come to know sinne as the A 2. That they might come to know sin and be humbled postle speakes and so be deeply humbled in themselves the law of God being a cleare light to manifest those inward heart-sins and soule-lusts that crawle in us as so many toads and serpents which we could never discover before 3. Hereby was shadowed forth the excellent and holy nature 3. To shadow out unto them the excellent and holy nature of God of God as also what purity was accepted by him and how we should be holy as he himself is holy for the law is holy as God is holy It s nothing but an expression and draught of that great purity which is in his nature insomuch that it s accounted the great wisedome of that people of Israel to have such lawes and the very nations themselves should admire at it 7. The great goodnesse and favour of God in delivering this law to The delivering of this Law to the Israelites was a great mercy unto them them And this comes fitly in the next place to consider of that it was an infinite mercy of God to that people to give them this law Hence Deut. 9. and in other places how often doth God presse them with this love of his in giving them those commandements And that it was not for their sakes or because of any merit in them but because he loved them So David Psal 147. hee hath not done so to other nations And to this may be referred all the benefits that the Psalmist and Prophets doe make to come by the law of God insomuch that it is a very great ingratitude and unthankfulnes unto God when people cry down the Law and the preaching of it That which God speakes of as a great mercy to a people these doe reject Nor because that God hath vouchsafed greater expressions of his love to us in these latter dayes therefore may those former mercies be forgotten by us seeing the Law doth belong unto us for those ends it was given to the Jewes now under the Gospel as is to be proved as much as unto them And therefore you cannot reade one commandement in the spirituall explication of it for the law is spirituall but you have cause to blesse God saying Lord what are we that thy will should be so clearly and purely manifested to us above what it is to Heathens yea and Papists with many others Therefore beloved it is not enough for you to be no Antinomian but you are to blesse God and praise him for it that it s read and opened in our congregations 8. The perfection of this law containing a perfect rule of all things The Law of Moses is a perfect rule belonging to God or man And here againe I shall not speak of it as a covenant but meerly as its a rule of obedience And thus though it be short yet it s so perfect that it containeth all that is to be done or omitted by us Insomuch that all the Prophets and Apostles doe but adde the explication of the Law if it be not taken in too strict a sense Hence is that commandement of not adding to it or detracting from it And in what sense the Apostle speakes against it calling it the killing letter and the ministration of death working wrath is to be shewed hereafter When our Saviour Matth. 5. gave those severall precepts he did not adde them as new unto the Morall Law but did vindicate that from the corrupt glosses and interpretations of the Pharisees is is to be proved Indeed it may seem hard to say that Christ and justifying faith the doctrine of the Trinity is included in this promulgation of the Law but it is to be proved that all these were then comprehended in the administration of it though more obscurely Nor will this be to confound the Law and the Gospel as some may think This law therefore and rule of life which God gave the people of Israel and to all us Christians in them is so perfect and full that there is nothing necessary to the duty and worship of God which is not here commanded nor no sin to be avoided which is not here forbidden And this made Peter Martyr as you heard compare it to the ten Predicaments Vse Of Admonition to take heed how we vilifie or contemne this Law of God either doctrinally or practically Doctrinally so the Marcionites and the Manichees and Basilides whereof some have said it was carnall yea that it was from a Divell and that it was given to the Jewes for their destruction because it 's said to worke wrath and to be the instrument of death And those opinions and expressions of the Antinomians about it are very dangerous What shall we revile that which is Gods great mercy to a people Because the Jewes and Papists doe abuse the Law and the works of it to justification shall it not therefore have its proper place and dignity How sacred are the lawes of a Common-wealth which yet are made by men But this is by the wise God Take heed therefore of such phrases An Old-Testament-spirit and His Sermon is nothing but an explication of the Law For it ought much to rejoyce thee to heare that pure and excellent image of Gods holinesse opened How mayest thou delight to have that purity enjoyned which will make thee loath thy selfe prize Christ and Grace more and be a quick goad to all holinesse And if you say Here is nothing
of Christ all this while I answer That is false as is to be proved if the Law be not taken very strictly And besides the Law and the Gospel are not to be severed but they mutually put a fresh relish and taste upon each other And shall no mercy be esteemed but what is the Gospel Thou art thankfull for temporall mercies and yet they are not the Gospel but this is a spirituall mercy LECTURE XVI EXOD. 20. 1. God spake these words saying c. I Have already begun the discourse about the Morall Law and shall at this time consider those historicall passages which we meet with in the promulgation of it that so the excellency of it may hereby be more knowne for whosoever shall diligently observe all the circumstances of the history of the Law he shall find that God did put glory upon it and howsoever the Apostle Hebr. 12. and 2 Corinth 3. doth preferre the Gospel above this ministration of Moses yet absolutely in it selfe it was greatly honoured by God In the generall therefore you may take notice that therefore did God so solemnly and with great majesty 1. The Law was given with great majesty thereby to procure the greater authority to it give the Law that so the greater authority may thereby be procured to it Hence it is related of many Heathens that they have feigned some familiarity with their gods when they made their lawes that so the people might with greater awe and reverence receive them Thus Numa feigned his discourse with the goddesse Aegâ—ria for his lawes and it 's related of Pythagoras that he had a tamed Eagle which he would cause to come flying to him to make people think his sentences were delivered from heaven to him If lawes of men might well be called by Demosthenes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 how much rather this Law of God It 's but a conceit of Prospers that Judaei were so called because they received Jus Dei the Law of God It 's further also to be observed in the generall that God hath alwaies had apparitions sutable to the matter in hand Thus hee appeared in a burning bush to Moses like an armed man to Jusua and with all signes of majesty and a great God being to deliver lawes to the people that they might see how potent he was to be avenged for every breach Againe in the next place take also this generall Observation That although the Judiciall and Ceremoniall lawes were given There is a difference between the Morall Judiciall and Ceremoniall Law notwithstanding they were given at the same time at the same time with the Morall Law yet there is a difference between them And this is to be taken notice of lest any should think what will this discourse make for the honour of the Morall Law more then the other lawes It 's true these three kinds of lawes agree in the common efficient cause which was God and in the minister or mediatour which was Moses in the subject which was the people of Israel and all and every one of them as also in the common effects of binding and obliging them to obedience and to punish the bold offenders against them But herein the Morall Law is preheminent 1. In that it The Morall Law more excellent them the Judiciall and Ceremoniall in three respects is a foundation of the other lawes and they are reduceable to it 2. This was to abide alwaies not the other 3. This was immediately written by God and commanded to be kept in the Ark which the other were not Lastly observe these two things in the generall about the God humbled the Israelites before he gave them his Law time of the delivery of the Law First God did not give them his Law till he had deeply humbled them and it may be now Christ will not settle his ordinances with us till he hath brought us low And secondly Before they come unto the Land of promise God God settled his worship before he gave them Canaan settleth his worship and lawes When he hath done this then he bids them Deut. 2. 1. Goe towards Canaan This sheweth A people cannot have Canaan till the things of God be settled But we come to the remarkable parts of the history of the promulgation of this Law and first you may consider the great and diligent preparation of the people to heare it Exod. 1. 9. for Preparation required before the hearing of the Law first They were to sanctifie themselves and to wash their clothes This indeed was peculiar unto those times yet God did thereby require the cleansing and sanctification of their hearts The superstitious 1. The people must sanctifie themselves imitating of this was among the Gentiles who used to wash that they may goe to sacrifice Plaut in Aulul Act. 3. scen 6. yea this superstition was brought into the Church Chrysost Hom. 52. in Mat. We see saith he this custome confirmed in many Churches that many study diligently how they may come to Church with their hands washt and white garments And Tert. cap. 11. de Orat. Hae sunt vera mundiciae non quas plerique superstitiosè curant ad omnem orationem etiam cum lavacro totius corporis aquam sumentes but this by the way God did hereby signifie what purity and holinesse of heart should be in them to receive his Law The second thing requisite was to set bounds so that none 2. They must not touch the Mount might touch the Mount It 's a violent perverting of Scripture which the popish Canons have applying this allegorically to a lay-man if he reade or medle with the Scripture whereas not only a beast but not the Priests themselves should touch this mountain and hereby God would have men keep within their bounds and not to be too curious The Doctrine of the Trinity of Predestination are such a mountain that a man must keep at the bottome of it and not climb up The third thing was not to come at their wives Some do referre 3. Nor come at their wives this to those women that were legally polluted but it may be well understood of their conjugall abstinence not as a thing sinfull but that hereby God would have them put off not only affections to all sinnes but all lawfull things so that this preparation for three dayes doth make much for the excellency of the Law and sheweth how spirituall we should be in the receiving of it 2. The Declaration of Majesty and greatnesse upon the delivery 2. The Law was given with great Majesty that so the people might be raised up to reverence the Law-giver of it For although it must be granted that this was an accommodated way to the Law that did convince of sinne and terrifie hence the Apostle Heb. 12. 18 19 c. preferreth the ministration of the Gospel above it yet this also was a true cause why thundrings and terrours did accompany the promulgation of
absolutely in it selfe as if that were to be done away but the particular administration and dispensation of it that was no more to continue who all grant Now the Antinomian confounds the Law with the administration of it This glory and shining that was upon Moses was as it may seem probable communicated unto him when he beheld the glory of God How long it continued is not certaine that hath no probability of the Rabbins who hold it did continue all his life time The Vulgar Translation makes it horned Cornuta hence the Painters pictured Moses with hornes but the word that signifieth an horne is also for to glitter and shine as also those rayes of light might be cast forth from Moses his face like hornes This was so glorious that he was forced to put a vaile upon his face when he spake to the people Now the Text saith Moses did not know his face shone It 's an excellent thing when God puts a great deale of glory upon a man and he doth not know it Gregory applyeth this of Moses to Ministers that as Moses because the people could not endure the glorious light of his face put a vaile upon it that so the people might converse with him thus the Minister whose parts and scholarship is far above the people should put on a vaile by condescending to the people But the Apostle maketh another mysticall meaning wherein the hard things shall in time God willing be opened 10. The custody and preservation of the Law in the Ark. And 10. The preservation of the Law in the Arke makes much for the glory of it this shall be the last Observation that will tend to the excellency of the Law As this one was written by the immediate hand of God so was it onely commanded to be preserved in the Ark. Now here is a great dispute in matter of history for 1 Kin. 8. 9. it's expresly said that in the Ark there was nothing save the tables of stone but Hebr. 9. 4. there is joyned Aarons rod and the pot of Manna Those that for this respect would reject the Epistle to the Hebrewes as of no authority are too bold and insolent Some think we cannot reconcile them yet the Scripture is true onely our understandings are weak Some think that at first God commanded those two to be laid with the tables of the Covenant but when the Temple was built by Solomon then all were laid aside by themselves and therefore say they that the history of the Kings speaketh of it as a new thing Some as Piscator make in to be as much as coram before or hard by and so they say the pot and rod were by the Ark. But I shall close with that of Junius who observes that the relative is in the feminine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so doth not relate to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Arke the word immediately going before but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tabernacle In which Tabernacle And this is frequent in the Scripture to doe so And this though it may be capable of some objection yet doth excellently reconcile the truth of the history with Paul Now how long these Tables of stone were kept and what became of them at last we have no certainty This proveth the great glory God did put upon the Law above any thing else which I intended in all these historicall observations Vse 1. Of Instruction How willing God was to put markes Seeing God hath put such marks of glory upon the Law let us take heed of disparaging it of glory and perpetuity upon the Law and therefore we are to take heed of disparaging it For how necessary is it to have this Law promulged if it were possible as terribly in our congregations as it was on Mount Sinai This would make the very Antinomians find the power of the Law and be afraid to reject it Certainly as the Physician doth not purge the bodies till he hath made them fluid and prepared so may not the Ministers of Christ apply grace and the promises thereof to men of Epicurean or Pharisaicall spirits till they be humbled by the discovery of sin which is made by the Law And I doubt it may fall out with an Antinomian who accounts sin nothing in the beleever because of justification as with one Dionysius a Stoick as I take it who held that paine was nothing but being once sick and tortured with the stone in the kidnies cried out that all which he had writ about Paine was false for now he found it was something So it may fall out that a man who hath writ and preached that God seeth no sinne in a beleever may sometime or other be so awed and troubled by God that he shall cry out All that he preached about this he now findes to be false Therefore let those that have disparaged or despised it see their sinne and give it its due dignity They report of Stesichorus that when in some words he had disparaged Helena's beauty he was struck blind but afterwards when he praised her again he obtain'd the use of seeing It may be because thou hast not set forth the due excellency of the Law God hath taken away thy eye-sight not to see the beauty of it but begin with David to set forth the excellent benefits of it and then thou mayest see more glory in it then ever LECTURE XVII EXOD. 20. 1. And God spake all these words saying c. WE have already considered those historicall Observations which are in the delivery of the Law and improved them to the dignity and excellency thereof I now come to the handling of those Questions which make much to the clearing of the truths about it that are now doubted of And first of all it may be demanded To what purpose is this discourse about the Law given by Moses Are we Jewes Doth that belong to us Hath not Christ abolished the Law Is not Moses with his Ministery now at an end It is therefore worth the inquiry Whether the ten Commandements as given by Moses doe belong to us Christians or no And in the answering of this Question I will lay down some Propositions by way of Preface and then bring arguments for the affirmative The doctrine of the Antinomians heterodoxe though the Law as given by Moses did not binde Christians First therefore Though it should be granted that the Morall Law as given by Moses doth not belong to us Christians yet the doctrine of the Antinomians would not hold for there are some learned and solid Divines as Zanchy and Rivet and many Papists as Suarez and Medina which hold the Law as delivered by Moses not to belong to us and yet are expresly against Antinomists for they say that howsoever the Law doth not binde under that notion as Mosaicall yet it binds because it is confirmed by Christ so that although the first obligation ceaseth and we have nothing to doe with Moses now yet the second
absolutely but limitedly if so be they did refuse the conditions of peace I therefore incline to those who think it a perverse addition of the Scribes and Pharisees yet am not able to say the other is false 3. Whether our Saviour doe oppose himself here to others as a Law giver or as an Interpreter cleansing away the mud and filth from the fountain And this indeed is worthy the disquisition for this Chapter hath been taken by the Manichees and Marcionites of old and by other erroneous persons of late to countenance great errours for some have said that the Author of the Old Testament and the New Testament are contrary some have said that the New Testament or the Gospel containeth more exact and spirituall duties then the Old Hence they conclude that many things were lawfull then which are not now and they instance in Magistracy resisting of injuries swearing and loving of our enemies and many counsels of perfection added And this is a very necessary Question for hereby will be laid open the excellency of the Law when it shall be seen that Jesus Christ setting aside the positive precepts of Baptisme and the Lords Supper c. commanded no new duty but all was a duty before that is now Now that our Saviour doth only interpret and not adde new Lawes will appeare 1. From that protestation and solemne affirmation he makes Christ does only interpret the old adds no new Lawes before hee cometh to instruct the hearers about their duties Think not that I came to destroy the Law but to fulfill it Now although it be true that Christ may be said to fulfill the Law diverse waies yet I think he speakes here most principally for his doctrinall fulfilling it for he opposeth teaching the Law to breaking of the Law and if this be so then our Saviours intent was that hee came not to teach them any new duty to which they were not obliged before onely hee would better explicate the Law to them that so they might be sensible of sinne more then they were and discover themselves to be fouler and more abominable then ever they judged themselves Thus Theophylact As a painter doth not destroy the old lineaments onely makes them more glorious and beautifull so did Christ about the Law In the next place Christ did not adde new duties which were not commanded in the Law because the Law is perfect and they were bound not to adde to it or detract from it Therefore we are not to continue a more excellent way of duty then that prescribed there Indeed the Gospel doth infinitely exceede in regard of the remedy prescribed for afflicted sinners and the glorious manifestation of his grace and goodnesse but if we speak of holy and spirituall duties there cannot be a more excellent way of holinesse this being an idea and representation of the glorious nature of God 3. That nothing can be added to the Law appeareth by that Commandement of loving God with all our heart and soule Now there can be nothing greater then this and this command is not only indicative of an end which we are to aime at but also preceptive of all the meanes which tend thereunto And lastly our Saviour saith not Except your righteousnesse exceed that of Moses his Law or which was delivered by him but that of the Scribes and Pharisees implying by that plainly his intent was to detect and discover those formall and hypocriticall waies which they pleased themselves in when indeed they never understood the marrow and excellency of the Law Question 4. What was the opinion received among the Pharisees The Pharisees were of opinion that the Law did only reach the outward man and forbid outward acts concerning the Commandements of God That you may know the just ground our Saviour had thus to expound the Law it will be manifest if you consider the generall opinion received among the Jewes about the sense of the Commandements and that was The Law did onely reach to the outward man did only forbid outward acts and that there was no sinne before God in our hearts though we delighted in and purposed the outward acts if they were not outwardly committed And this we may gather by Paul that all the while he was bewitched with Pharisaicall principles he did not understand inward lust to be sinne and as famous as it is false is that exposition brought by the Learned of Kimchy upon that Psalme 66. 18. If I regard iniquity in my heart hee will not heare he makes this strange meaning of it If I regard iniquity onely in my heart so that it break not forth into outward act the Lord will not heare that is heare so as to impute it or account it a sin And thus it is observed of Josephus that he derideth Polybius the noble historian because he attributed the death of Antiochus to sacriledge onely in his purpose and will which he thought could not be that a man having a purpose onely to sinne should be punished by God for it But the Heathens did herein exceed the Pharisees fecit quisque quantum voluit its Seneca's saying And indeed it s no wonder if the Pharisees did thus corrupt Scripture for its a doctrine we all naturally incline unto not to take notice or ever be humbled for heart-sinnes if so be they break not out into acts Oh what an hell may thy heart be when thy outward man is not defiled Good is that passage 2 Chron. 22. 26. Hezekiah humbled himselfe for the pride of his heart Certainly as God who is a spirit doth most love spirit-graces so he doth most abhorre spirit-sinnes The Schools doe well observe that outward sins are majoris infamiae but inward heart-sinnes are majoris reatûs as we see in the divels And from this corruption in our nature ariseth that poysonous principle in Popery which is also in all formall Protestants That the commands of God doe onely forbid the voluntary omssion of outward acts whereas our Saviours explication will find every man to be a murderer an adulterer c. Now our Saviours explications of the Law goe upon those grounds which are observed by all sound Divines viz. 1. That the Law is spirituall and forbids not onely the fruit and branches of sinne but even the root it selfe and fountaine And 2. that wheresoever any sinne is forbidden and in what latitude soever the contrary good things are commanded and in that proportionable latitude This therefore considered may make every man tremble and be afraid of his owne heart and with him to cry out Gehenna sum Domine I am a very hell it selfe Let us not therefore be afraid of preaching the Law as we see Christ here doth for this is the great engine to beate downe the formality and Pharisaisme that is in people And thus I come to raise the Doctrine which is that The Law Doctr. of God is such a perfect rule of life that Christ added no new precept
or duty unto it But even as the Prophets before did onely explicate the Law when they pressed morall duties so also Christ and the Apostles when they urge men unto holy duties they are the same commanded heretofore I doe not speak of Sacraments or the outward positive worship which is otherwise then was in the Old Testament they had Circumcision and we have Baptisme No specificall difference of the duties in the old Testament from those of the New but only graduall in their manifestation The Law did not only command the outward duty but required the worship of the heart but of the morall duties required of us It is true in the Old Testament many things were expressed more grosly and carnally which the people for the most part understood carnally yet the duties then commanded were as spirituall as now There is onely a graduall difference in the manifestation of the duties no specificall difference of the duties themselves And that this may appeare the more to the dignity and excellency of the Law I will instance in particulars First The Law of God required the heart-worship and service That this may be understood take this for a generall rule which is not denied by any That when there are any morall duties pressed in the Old Testament the Prophets doe it as explainers of the Law they doe but unfold and draw out that Arras which was folded together before This being premised then consider those places in the Old Testament that call for the heart Thus Pro. 3. 1. Let thine heart keep my commandements So Pro. 23. 26. My sonne give me thine heart So that all the duties then performed which were without the heart and inward man were not regarded God required then heart-prayer and heart-humiliation It s true the people for the most part understood all carnally and grosly thinking the outward duty commanded onely and that is no marvell for doe not people even in these times of the Gospel look to the externall duty not examining whether they pray or humble themselves according as the Word speaks of such duties Thus David was very sensible of his heart-neglect when he prayed Unite my heart to feare thy Name and are not the people of God still under the same temptations They would pray they would humble themselves but oh how they want an heart That is so divided and distracted that if after any duty we should put that question to it as God did to Satan From whence comest thou it would returne Satans answer From compassing the earth 2. It preferred duties of Mortification and Sanctification before 2. The Law preferred inward graces before outward duties religious outward duties This you shall see frequently pressed and inculcated by the Prophets Isaiah 1. how doth God abhorre there all their solemne duties making them abominable even like carrion and all because they did not wash them and make them cleane So David saith A broken and contrite heart it was more then any burnt offering now under the times of the Gospel This is an high duty and few reach unto it Doth not the Apostle reprove the Corinthians for desiring gifts rather then graces and abilities of parts rather then holinesse So that this is an excellent duty prescribed by Gods Law that to be able to mortifie our affections to have sanctified natures is more then to have Seraphicall knowledge and Cherubinicall affections in any duty Who then can be against the preaching of the Law when it s such an excellent and pure rule holding forth such precious holinesse 3. It required all our duties to be done All the duties required by the Law were to be done 1. In faith for who can think that when God required in the first Table having him for their God that hereby was not commanded faith and trusting in him as a God in Covenant who 1. In Faith would pardon sinne How could the Jewes love God or pray unto him acceptably if they had not faith in him Therefore the Law is to be considered most strictly as it containeth nothing but precepts of things to be done in which sense it s sometimes though seldome taken And 2. more largely as it had the Preface and Promises added unto it and so it did necessarily require justifying faith for it cannot be conceived that when God commanded the people of Israel by Moses to worship him and to acknowledge him as their God but that his will was they should beleeve on him as a Father But more of this when wee speak of the Law as a Covenant 2. In love and this is so much commanded by the Law that 2. In Love Christ makes the summe of the Law to be in these two things love of God and of our neighbour Therefore I wonder at the Antinomian who is so apt to oppose the doing of things in love and doing of them by the Law together for doth not the Law of God command every duty to be in love to pray in love to God to beare afflictions in love to God Yea by the law wee are to love God because hee hath given Christ for us for the Law commands us to love God for whatsoever benefits he bestoweth upon us now if we are to love him for temporall benefits much more for spirituall It is true the dispensation of the Law was in a terrible way and did gender to bondage but the doctrine of the Law that was for love and the more any Jew did any thing in love to God the more conformable he was to Gods Law 4. It required such an heavenly heart that we are to love God more Love to God in as great a measure commanded by the Law as by the Gospel then any thing else It did not only require love to God but also it commanded it in such a preheminency as that none under the times of the Gospel can doe an higher duty or expression of love than then was commanded suppose a man be a Martyr will lose his life for Gods cause this is an obedience to the first Commandement When our Saviour saith He that loveth father or mother more then me is not worthy of me he commands no higher thing of any Christian then every Jew was bound to do Hence Levi was so commended because in executing of Justice he knew not father or mother and it must needs be so for what can be more then all and yet God requires all the minde all the heart all the strength not that we were bound to love God in quantum est diligibilis for so God only can love himself but nihil supra aequè or contra 5. It required spirituall motives for all our solemne addresses unto In all our addresses to God it required spirituall motives him There are some men who look upon all the Jewes under the Old Testament as so many bruit beasts that did only minde earthly things and that as children are allured by Apples and Nuts rather
against the children of thy people but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy self What can be clearer then this to subdue those waves and tempests that doe rise in our hearts So Prov. 24. 29. Say not I will doe to him as he hath done to me I will render to the man according to his work here also revengefull expressions and resolutions are forbidden yea the reason why we are forbidden to avenge our selves given by Paul Rom. 12. 19. because vengeance belongs unto God is that which was drawn from the Old Testament In stead therefore of disputing let us seriously set upon the practise of the duty and the rather because it 's sweeter then honey it self to our corrupt hearts and at this time this sinne doth much rage every where Lastly Our Saviour doth not here forbid a lawfull publique revenge Private revenge unlawfull and forbidden by our Saviour but a private one This distinction of publique and private revenge being unknowne to the Fathers in the Primitive times made them runne into very hard and incommodious expressions some giving occasion hereby of that distinction of counsels and precepts others as Austin making the revenge allowed in the Old Testament to be peculiar to the dispensation of those times Hence when one Volusianus objected to him that the Doctrine of Christ did not agree to the manners of a Common-wealth he answereth by comparing the Precept of Christ with that of Caesars That he used to forget nothing but injuries Now this doth not indeed speake according to the scope of our Saviour here who is giving rules to private Christians not to publique Magistrates Now that there is such a distinction as this appeareth plain thus Paul Rom. 12. 18. exhorteth Christians not to avenge themselves because vengeance belongs to God yet Chap. 13. speaking of the Magistrate ver 4. he saith He is the avenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil so then there is revenge and a revenger which is not God nor yet our selves but the Magistrate yet the revenge that the Magistrate inflicteth may well be called the vengeance of God because it 's Gods appointment he should doe it Thus Numb 31. 3. Arme your selves and avenge the Lord on the Midianites so 2 Chron. 19. You execute the judgements of the Lord and not of men yet for all this you must know that Magistrates may have revengefull affections in them even when they execute justice and so people when they implore the Magistrates aid it may not be out of zeale to justice and love to the publique good but because of private affections and carnall dispositions And oh the blessednesse that would accrew to the Common-wealth if all were carried in their severall places upon this publique ground Having therefore dispatched briefely these controversies I come to another wherein the Antinomian doth directly derogate from the profitable effect and benefit of the Law This therefore is an assertion which an Antinomian Authour maintaineth that the Law is not an instrument of true sanctification and that The preaching of the Law not onely preparatively but being blessed by God instrumentally workes the conversion of men the promise or the Gospel is the seed and doctrine of our â—ew birth and for this he bringeth many arguments and the judgements of diverse learned men Assertion of grace pag 163. And it may not be denyed but that many speeches might fall from some men which might seem to comply with that opinion I shall now labour to maintaine the positive part viz. that the Law of God preached may be blessed by him instrumentally to worke the conversion of men and it is necessary to make this good for were the contrary true it would be a Ministers duty in great part to lay aside the preaching of the Morall Law as not instrumentall or subservient to that maine end of the Ministery which is the conversion of soules Nor can I yeeld to that that the preaching of the Law workes onely preparatorily or some terrours about sinne and can goe no further but I suppose that Jesus Christ hath obtained of God by his death that such efficacy and vertue should goe forth in the Ministery that whether it be by Law or Gospel he preacheth the soules of men may be healed and converted thereupon Onely two things must be premised First that the Law could never work to regeneration were it The Law with out Christ cannot worke to regeneration not for the Gospel-promise Had not God graciously promised to give a new heart through Christ there had been no way to make any thing effectuall that we preach out of the Law so that for instance while a Minister preaching of any Commandement doth thereby mould and new frame the heart all this benefit comes by Christ who therefore died and ascended into Heaven that so the things wee preach may be advantagious to our soules so that there never was in the Church of God meere pure Law or meere pure Gospel But they have been subservient to each other in the great work of Conversion I know it 's of great consequence to give an exact difference between the Law and the Gospel It is well said of Luther Qui scit inter Legem Evangelium discernere gratias agaâ— Deo sciat se esse Theologum but I shall not medle with that now This is that which I assert That as to the point of a mans conversion God may make the opening of the Morall Law instrumentully to concurre thereunto onely this cometh by Christ. The second thing which I premise is this that howsoever the The Law may be bless'd to conversion yet the matter of it can neither be ground of justification or consolation to us Law preached may be blest to conversion yet the matter of it cannot be the ground of our justification adoption or consolation so that when a man doth repent and turne unto God from his sins he cannot have hope or consolation in any thing he doth but it must be in the promise of the Gospel so that the difference of the Law and Gospel lyeth not in this as some doe assigne that one is the instrument of grace and the other not for God useth both as I shall shew but in this that the holinesse wrought in us by preaching of the Word of God whether it be Law or Gospel doth not justifie us but this favour is in an evangelicall manner by forgiving whatsoever is irregular in us and communicating Christ his righteousnesse to us Therefore let us not confound the Law or Gospel nor yet make them so contrary in their natures and effects that where one is the other cannot be To these two there is also a third thing to be premised and that is how the Word of God in generall is a medium or instrumentall The Scripture in generall is a medium working by Christ to our conversion to our conversion For the clearing of this well must needs discover that
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
then when a beleever walketh not according to his duty he sinneth and to sinne the curse is due so that this evasion will no wayes help them for still an obligation or bond lyeth upon them which if broken they are made obnoxious unto the Law of God Again to say the matter of the Law bindeth but yet not as a Law is a meer contradiction for what is a Law but such an object held forth by the command and will of a superiour Then I demand whether love to God being the object or matter held forth have not also Gods will passing upon it that it should bind According to the Antinomian asserttion it should be true that love to God should bind us because the matter it self is good but not because God willeth us to love him Nay they must necessarily deny the will of God obliging us in the Law to love him for a law is nothing but the will of the Law-giver that such things should be obeyed or avoided And if there were any colour for that distinction between the matter of the Law binding and not the Law it would only hold in that matter which is perpetually and necessarily good as To love God To honour parents but in that matter which is only good by some positive divine institution as Keeping of the Lords Day there we must say that the Law binds vi as a Law and not meerly from the matter of the Law 5. The Law is no more abrogated to a beleever under the Old Testament The Law equally abrogated to beleevers under the Old and New Testament then to one under the New This assertion will much discover the falsenesse of the adversaries opinion for they carry it as if the Law were abrogated only to the beleevers under the Gospel Now how can this ever be made good for either they must deny that there were any beleevers under the Old Testament or if they were then they are freed from the Law as much as any now Indeed if you take the Law for the whole administration of the Covenant in the Old Testament we grant that it was pedagoricall and more servile so that a beleever under the Old Testament did not meet with such cleare and evident dispensations of love as a beleever under the Gospel yet in respect of justification and salvation the Law was the same to them as to us and to us as to them We doe not deny but that the administration of the later covenant is farre more glorious then that of the former and that we enjoy many priviledges which they did not then but whatsoever is necessary and essentiall to justification or salvation they were made partakers of them as well as we The ordinary resemblance of theirs and our happinesse is by those two spoken of Numb 13. 23. that bare upon the staffe the cluster of grapes from the land of Canaan If then we speake of the Law in regard of the essentiall parts of it which are directing commanding threatning promising life upon perfect obedience These are either still equally in power or else equally abrogated unto all beleevers whether under the Old or New Testament Let them therefore consider whether the arguments against beleevers subjection under the New Testament be not also equally as strong against those that are under the Old Therefore it is wild Divinity of an Antinomian in Chap. 6. of the Honey-combe of free justification who makes three different estates of the Church one under the Law and another under John Baptist. and a third under the Gospel Now he compareth these together and sheweth how we under the Gospel exceed those of the Law that were godly and among other things there are two notorious falshoods as first That God indeed saw sinne in the beleevers of the Old Testament but not in those of the New But how absurd and contradictory to the Author himself is this assertion For was not that place which they so much urge God seeth not iniquity in Jacob spoken of the Church in the Old Testament And besides if the godly were then in Christ doth it not necessarily follow by his principles that God must see no sinne in them This I bring not as if there were any truth in that opinion of God his seeing no sinne in beleevers whether of the Old or New Testament but only to manifest their absurd contradictions The second difference he makes is That God seeing sinne in those of the Old Testament did therefore punish them and afflict them for sinne but he doth not this under the Gospel Hereupon he sheweth how Moses for a word was strucken with death and so Jonah Vzzah Eli these had sudden punishments upon them Hence also saith he came there terrible famines upon them Now who seeth not how weak and absurd these arguments are For doth not the Apostle 1 Cor. 11. speaking of those under the New Testament that some were sick and some did sleep and that they were judged of the Lord were not Ananias and Sapphira stricken dead immediately Are there not famines pestilence and the bloudy warre upon men under the Gospel Besides these assertions are contradictions to themselves for if their arguments from Gods Law and from Christ prove the quite taking away of sinne and the punishments of it then it holdeth as firmly for all beleevers as for some 6. The arguments of the Antinomian for the greater part which Antinomian Arguments mostly overthrow the use of the Law both to beleevers and unbeleevers they urge doe not only overthrow the use of it to beleevers but also unbeleevers This also is good to be attended unto for the Apostle in many places where he speakes of the Law as a Schoolmaster and the continuance of it for a time doth not speake comparatively of a beleever with an unbeleever but of the state of the Gospel and the state of the Old Testament so that as a wicked man may not circumcise or take up the sacrifices so neither may he use the Morall Law as commonly the Jewes did which was as distinct from Christ and as if that of it self were able alone to save Therefore I wonder why the Antinomians bring many of their arguments to prove that a beleever is freed from the Law for certainly most of those places will inferre that unbeleevers also under the New Testament are for the Apostle for the most part doth argue against that state of the Church and administrations that were used formerly as in the 1 Cor. 3. when the Apostle makes the administration of the Law to be death and of the Gospel life Here he speaketh not of particular persons but of the generall state under the Gospel So in Gal. 2. and 3. Chapters he argueth against the whole dispensation of the Law and makes it equally abrogated unto all And it may probably be thought that that famous expression of the Apostle ye are not under the Law but under grace is not only to be understood of
every particular beleever but generally of the whole dispensation of the Gospel under the New Testament 7. We will grant that to a beleever the Law is as it were abrogated The Law to a beleever is abrogated in these particulars 1. In respect of Justification Though I say mitigation might 1. In respect of justification be properly here used yet we will call it abrogation with the Orthodox because to the godly it is in some sense so And that which is most remarkable and most comfortable is in respect of justification for now a beleever is not to expect acceptation at the throne of grace in himself or any thing that he doth but by relying on Christ The Papists they say this is the way to make men idle and lazy doing in this matter as Saul did who made a Law that none should eate of any thing and so Jonathan must not taste of the honey Saul indeed thought hereby to have the more enemies killed but Jonathan told him that if they had been suffered to eate more honey they should have been more revived and inabled to destroy their adversaries Thus the Papists they forbid us to eat of this honey this precious comfort in Christ as if thereby we should be hindered in our pursute against sinne whereas indeed it is the only strength and power against them 2. Condemnation and a curse Thus still the condition of a beleever 2. In respect of condemnation is made unspeakably happy Rom. 1. There is no condemnation And Christ became a curse for us so that by this meanes the gracious soule hath daily matter of incouragement arguing in prayer thus O Lord though my sinnes deserve a curse yet Christ his obedience doth not Though I might be better yet Christ needeth not to be better O Lord though I have sinned away my own power to doe good yet not Christs power to save Heb. 6. 18. you have a phrase there flying for a refuge doth excellently shew forth the nature of a godly man who is pursued by sinne as a malefactor was for his murder and he runneth to Christ for refuge and so Beza understands that expression of the Apostle Phil. 3. 9. And be found in him which implyeth the justice of God searching out for him but he is in Christ Now when we say he is freed from condemnation that is to be understood actually not potentially There is matter of condemnation though not condemnation it selfe 3. Rigid obedience This is another particular wherein the 3. In respect of rigid obedience Orthodoxe declare the abrogation of the Law but this must warily be understood for Christ hath not obtained at Gods hands by his death that the Law should not oblige and tye us unto a perfect obedience for this we maintain against Papists that it 's a sinne in beleevers they doe not obey the Law of God to the utmost perfection of it And therefore hold it impossible for a beleever to fulfill the Law But yet we say this mercy is obtained by Christ that our obedience unto the Law which is but inchoate and imperfect is yet accepted of in and through Christ for if there were only the Law and no Christ or grace It is not any obedience though sincere unlesse perfect would be entertained by God Neither would any repentance or sorrow be accepted of but the Law strictly so taken would deale as the Judge to the malefactor who being condemned by the Law though he cry out in the anguish of his spirit that he is grieved for what he hath done yet the Law doth not pardon him 4. It is not a terrour to the godly nor are they slavishly compelled 4. In respect of terrour and slavish obedience to the obedience of it And in this sense they are denyed to be under the Law But this also must be rightly understood for there is in the godly an unregenerate or carnall part as well as a regenerate and spirituall See Rom. 7. 22 25. with my minds I serve the Law of God but with my flesh the Law of sinne Now although it be true that the Law in the terrible compelling part of it be not necessary to him so farre as he is regenerate yet in regard that he hath much flesh and corruption in him therefore it is that the Scripture doth use threatnings as so many sharpe goads to provoke them in the waies of piety But what godly man is there whose spirit is so willing alwayes that he doth not finde his flesh untoward and backward unto any holy duty How many times doe they need that Christ should draw them and also that the Law should draw them So that there is great use of preaching the Law even to beleevers still as that which may instrumentally quicken and excite them to their duty Qui dicit se amare legem mentitur nescit quid dicat Tam enim amamus legem quam homicida carcerem said Luther and this is true of us so farre as we are corrupt 5. It doth not work or increase sinne in them as in the wicked The 5. In respect of the increase of sin Apostle Rom. 7. 8. complaineth of this bitter effect of the Law of God that it made him the worse The more spirituall and supernaturall that was the more did his carnall and corrupt heart rage against it so that the more the Law would damme up the torrent of sinfull lusts the higher did they swell Now this sad issue was not to be ascribed to the Law but to Paul's corruption As in the Dropsie it is not the water or beere if frequently drunk that is to be blamed for the increase of the disease but the ill distemper in the body Now in the godly because there is a new nature and a principle of love and delight in the Law of God wrought in him his corruption doth not increase and biggen by the Law but is rather subdued and quelled although sometimes even in the godly it may work such wofull effects And this also take notice of that as the commandement of the Law so also the Promises of the Gospel doe only stirre up evil in the heart totally unsanctified 6. It is abrogated in many accessaries and circumstantials Even 6. In respect of many Circumstantials the Morall Law considered in some particulars is abrogated totally as in the manner of writing which was in tables of stone We know the first tables were broken and what became of the last or how long they continued none can tell and this makes Paul use that opposition 2 Cor. 3. 3. Not in tables of stone but in the fleshly tables of the heart Although this you must know that the doctrine of the Gospel as written with inke and paper doth no more availe for any spirituall working then the Law written in tables Therefore the Apostle useth in that verse this phrase Not written with inke as well as Not in tables of stone And this
shadow forth and prefigure a Christ so it was to cease Therefore the Law and the Prophets are put together as agreeing in one generall thing which is to foretell of Christ and to typifie him And this will be clearer if you compare Matth. 11. 13. with this of Luke where it is thus set down All the prophets and the Law prophesied unto John whereby it is cleare that he speakes of the typicall part of the Law yet not so as if the Ceremonies were then immediately to cease only from that time they began to vanish The next place of Scripture is that famous instance so much vexed in this controversie Rom. 6. 15. For you are not under the Law but under grace Now to open this consider these things 1. In what sense the Apostle argueth against the Law and what The Apostle argueth against the Law in comparison of Christ was the proper state of the Question in those dayes And that appeareth Act. 15. where you have a relation made of some beleeving Jewes that were of the sect of the Pharisees who pressed the necessity of Circumcision and so would joyn the ministery of Moses and Christ together Now it seemeth though the Apostles in this Councell had condemned that opinion yet there were many that would still revive this errour and therefore the Apostle in this Epistle to the Romans and in that to the Galathians doth reprove this false doctrine and labour much against it Stapleton and other papists they think that the controversie was only about the Ceremoniall Law and this they doe to maintain their justification by the works of the Law when wrought by grace But though it must be granted that the doubts about keeping the Ceremoniall Law were the occasion of that great difference and the most principall thing in question yet the Apostle to set forth the fulnesse of grace and Christ doth extend his arguments and instances even to the Morall Law for the Jewes did generally think that the knowledge and observation of the Morall Law without Christ was enough for their peace and comfort And if they could perswade themselves that the externall performing of the Ceremoniall Law was enough to make them acceptable with God though they lived in grosse disobedience to the Morall Law as Isai 1. alibi it many times appeareth they did how much more when they lived a life externally conformable to the Morall Law must they needs be secure of their favour with God And in this sense it is that the Apostle speakes seemingly derogatory to the Law because they took it without Christ Even as he calleth the ceremonies beggerly elements when yet we know they were signes of an Evangelicall grace 2. That the Apostle useth the word Law in divers senses which hath been the occasion of so much difficulty in this point Now in most of those places where the Law seemeth to be abolished it is taken in one of these two senses Either first synecdochically The word Law taken in a two-fold sense the Law put for part of the Law to wit for that part which actually condemneth and accuseth as when the Apostle saith Against such there is no Law here he speaketh as if there were nothing in a Law but condemnation whereas we may say A Law is for a thing by way of direction and prescription as well as against a thing by accusation Or secondly the word Law is put for the ministery of Moses which dispensation was farre inferiour unto the ministery of the Gospel And in this sense the Apostle doth much use it in the Epistle to the Galathians and in the Epistle to the Hebrewes So that here is a continuall mistake when the Antinomians heap place upon place which seeme to abolish the Law and doe not first declare what Law and in what sense those places are to be expounded 3. Consider these Phrases Of the Law Without the Law These Phrases Of the Law Without the Law Vnder the Law and In the Law explained Vnder the Law and In the Law Without the Law is two wayes First he is without the Law that is without the knowledge and understanding of it Thus the Gentiles are without the Law And secondly Without the Law that is without the sense and experience of the accusing and terrifying power of the Law and thus Paul Rom. 7. said when the Law came he died Now the godly though they are denied to be under the Law yet they are not said to be without the Law for if the Morall Law were no more obliging beleevers now then it was Heathens or Gentiles before they ever heard of it both in respect of knowledge and observation of it then might beleevers be said to be without the Law And to this Without the Law is opposed In the Law Rom. 2. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the vulgar In legem Beza Cum lege It signifieth those that doe injoy the Law and yet sinne against it And much to this purpose is that Phrase Of the Law Rom. 4. 14. which sometimes is as much as Of the Circumcision to wit those that are initiated into the Ministery of Moses but in other places it signifieth as much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the opposite to it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as in this 4. of the Rom. and ver 14. where the Apostle declaring that the promise made to Abraham was not of the Law he cannot meane the Law of Moses for all know that was long after but he meanes what 's done in obedience to the Morall Law so farre as it was then revealed The Apostle useth also another phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 By the Law which is to be understood in this sense by works done in conformity to the Law and in this sense the Apostle urgeth that righteousnesse or the promise are not by the Law But all the difficulty in this controversie is about the phrase Vnder the Law Therefore take notice 4. There is a voluntary being under the Law as Christs was and A two-fold being under the Law there is to be under it in an ill sense A voluntary and willing obedience unto the Law is acceptable And thus the Apostle 1 Cor. 9. 20. The Apostle saith he was made to some as under the Law though there indeed he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but that is added because of the ceremoniall part of the Law Therefore he calleth himselfe excellently 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though a godly man be not properly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And he addeth to Christ lest they should think that he spoke of the whole Law the ceremoniall part of it which was abolished by Christ so that a godly man in a well explained sense may be said to be under the Law but yet because the Apostle useth it for the most part in an ill sense as here in the text and in that place tell me ye that desire to be under
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
eternall life nor nothing of the Spirit of God till Christ came Hence they say the Gospel began with Christ and deny that the promise of a Christ or Messias to come is ever called the Gospel but the reall exhibition of him only This is false for although this promise be sometimes called Act. 7. 17. Act. 13. 32. the promise made to the fathers yet it is sometimes also called the Gospel Rom. 1. 2. Rom. 10. 14 15. And there are cleare places to confute this wicked errour as the Apostle instancing in Abraham and David for justification and remission of sinnes which were spirituall mercies and that eternall life was not unknown to them appeareth by our Saviours injunction commanding them to search the Scriptures for in them they hope for eternall life John 11. 39. Thus also they had hope and knowledge of a resurrection as appeareth Act. 24. 14. therefore our Saviour proved the resurrection out of a speech of Gods to Moses And howsoever Mercer as I take it thinke that exposition probable about Jobs profession of his knowledge that his Redeemer liveth and that he shall see him at the last day which make his meaning to be of Jobs perswasion of his restitution unto outward peace and health again yet there are some passages in his expression that seeme plainly to hold out the contrary Though therefore we grant that that state was the state of children and so carried by sensible objects very much yet there was under these temporall good things spirituall held forth Hence the Apostle 1 Cor. 10. maketh the Jewes to have the same spirituall matter and benefit in their Sacraments which we partake of In the next place let us consider the false difference of the Papists 2. Of Papists and they have the Socinians also agreeing with them in some things First they make this a great difference that Christ under the 1. That Christ hath added more perfect Lawes under the New Testament New Testament hath added more perfect Lawes and sound counsells then were before as Wilfull poverty Vowed chastity and the Socinians they labour to shew how Christ hath added to every precept of the Decalogue and they begin with the first that he hath added to it these things 1. A command to prayer whereas in the Old Testament though godly men did pray yet say they impudently there was no command and then Christ say they did not onely command to pray but gave a prescript forme of prayer The second thing added say they is to call upon Christ as a Mediatour in our prayers which they in the Old Testament did not And thus they goe on over all the Commandements shewing what new things Christ hath added Smal. refut Thes pag. 228. But I have already shewed that Christ never added any morall duty which was not commanded before The second difference of the Papists is to make the Law and 2. That the Law and Gospel are capable of no opposite consideration the Gospel capable of no opposite consideration no not in any strict sense but to hold both a Covenant of workes and that the Fathers under the Old Testament and those under the New were both justified by fulfilling the Law of God And herein lyeth that grosse error whereby Christ and grace are evacuated But the falshood of this shall be evinced God willing when wee speak of the Law and Gospel strictly which the Papists upon a dangerous errour call the Old Law and the New Lastly the Papists make a third difference that under the 3. That the Fathers that died under the Old Testament went not immediatly to heaven Old Testament the Fathers that dyed went not immediately to heaven therefore say they wee doe not say Saint Jeremiah or Saint Isaiah but after Christs death then a way was opened for them and us Hence is that saying Sanguis Christi est clavis Paradisi but this is sufficiently confuted in the Popish controversies I come therefore to the Antinomian difference and there I 3. Of Antinomians That God saw sinne in the beleevers of the Old Testament not of the New find such an one that I am confident was never heard of before in the world It is in the Honey-comb of Justification pag. 117. God saith hee saw sinne in the beleevers of the Old Testament but not in these of the New And his Reason is because the glory of free Justification was not so much revealed the vaile was not removed What a weak reason is this Did the lesse or more revelation of free Justification make God justifie the lesse freely It had been a good argument to prove that the people of God in the Old Testament did not know this doctrine so clearly as those in the New but that God should see the more or lesse because of this is a strange Consequence The places of Scripture which hee brings Zech. 13. 1. Dan. 9. 14. would make more to the purpose of a Socinian that there is no pardon of sinne and eternall life but under the Gospel rather then for the Antinomian and one of his places hee brings Jer. 50. ver 20. maketh the contrary true for there God promiseth pardon of sinne not to the beleevers under the Gospel but to that residue of the Jewes which God would bring backe from captivity as the context evidently sheweth so the place Heb. 10. 17. how grosly is it applyed unto the beleevers of the Gospel onely for had not the godly under the Old Testament the Law written in their hearts and had they not the same cause to take away their sinnes viz Christs bloud as well as we under the Gospel His second reason is God saw sinne in them because they were children that had need of a rod but he sees none in us because full growne heires What a strange reason is this for parents commonly see lesse sinne in their children while young then when growne up and their childishnes doth more excuse them And although children onely have a rod for their faults yet men growne up they have more terrible punishments Hence the Apostle threatens beleevers that despise Christ with punishment above those that despised Moses His third Reason is because they under the Law were under a School-master therefore he seeth sinne in them but none in us being no longer under a School-master But here is no solidity in this Reason for first the chiefest worke of a School-master is to teach and guide and so they are said to be under the Law as a School-master that so they may be prepared for Christ and thus it is a good argument to Christians under the Gospel that their lives should be fuller of wisedome and grown graces then the Jewes because they are not under a School-master as children As if one should say to a young man that is taken from the Grammar-schoole and transplanted in the University that he should take heed he doth not speak false Latine now for hee is not in
a Grammar-schoole now but in an University Thus you see the chiefe notion of a School-master is to prepare and guide his correcting is accidentall yea if wee may beleeve Quintilian a master in this kind he is against the School-masters beating of boyes as that which would make them of a servile disposition But Solomon giveth better rules Grant therefore that this is to be understood of knockes and blowes which they had what can we say under the Gospel that wee are children freed from the rod though wee have not a School-master yet wee have a father to correct us Heb. 12. 5 6 7 8. Doe we not in that place find a plaine contradiction of this doctrine For the Apostle doth there alledge a place of the Old Testament to us now under the Gospel And certainly afflictions are as necessary to the godly now as fire to the drossy vessell and filing to the rusty iron As the scourging and beating of the garment with a sticke beateth out the mothes and the dust so doe troubles and adversities corruptions from the children of God The fourth reason why God saw sin in them was Because they were not made perfect according to the conscience Hebr. 9. 13 14. Who would not think that the Authour were some Papist or Socinian for if the Text prove any thing to his purpose it will evince that the godly then were made partakers of no more then a legall bodily cleansing But as for the place that is miserably arrested for the Apostle his intent is to shew that the godly then could not obtaine righteousnesse by any of those sacrifices and therefore the good they enjoyed was from Christ the true sacrifice so that unlesse he will deny Christs bloud to be effectuall and operative in the Old Testament this reason must fall to the ground Other reasons hee brings which are to the same purpose and therefore may easily be overthrowne as That God saw no sin in them because their Preachers did not open the kingdome of heaven but hee seeth none in us because the least of our Ministers doe bring us into this kingdome Every one may see the weaknesse here for it supposeth that God did not so fully pardon and forgive because the doctrine of these things was not so clearly preached If the Authours arguments had been that Christ dyed not so fully for them or that Christ his righteousnesse was not so fully imputed unto them then there had been some probability Thus you see this false difference also I do not medle with that opinion Of seeing sin in the beleevers because it is not the proper place I find other differences between the Law and the Gospel made by another Antinomian and they are in a Sermon upon the two Covenants of grace where the Author having truely asserted that God did transact with the Jewes in a Covenant of grace yet hee makes that Covenant and this under the Gospel 2. That the Covenant God made with the Jews and this under the Gospel are two distinct Covenants to be two distinct Covenants They are not saith hee pag. 45. one and the same Covenant diversly administred but they are two distinct Covenants His arguments are because they are called Old and New But those names inforce no essentiall difference The Commandement of love is called an old Commandement and a new yet it is the same for essence so likewise the termes of a good and better doe imply no more then a graduall difference in their excellency But that which I shall especially animadvert upon is the differences hee giveth between these two Covenants of grace so really distinguished as hee supposeth and in this matter the Authour speaketh much error in a few lines The first difference assigned by him is in respect of remission 3. That Plenary remission of sins under the Gospel not so under the Law because no sacrifice save for sins of ignorance of sinnes but he goeth on other grounds then the Hony-combe doth They had not saith he a plenary remission of all sorts of sinnes There were sacrifices for sinnes of ignorance but not for other sinnes that were done presumptuously and if no sacrifices were admitted then consequently no pardon obtained but under the Gospel Christs bloud cleanseth from all sin pag. 54. Now here is an heape of falshoods First that all the legall sacrifices were only for sinnes of meer Confut. 1. All Sacrifices were not only for sins of ignorance ignorance This is also an errour among Sociniaus but Levit. 6. 2 3. there is a sacrifice appointed for him that shall lye and sweare falsly in detaining of his neighbours goods and this could not be but a sinne of knowledge This is also abundantly confirmed in Levit. 16. where the feast of expiation and atonement is made for all the sinnes of the people ver 16. He shall make an atonement because of the uncleannesse of the children of Israel and because of their transgressions in all their sinnes So ver 21. He shall confesse over the live goat all the iniquities of the children of Israel and all their transgressions in all their sinnes Thus ver 30. That ye may be cleane from all your sinnes before the Lord and ver 34. This shall be an atonement for the children of Israel once a yeare for all their sinnes Thus you see the Scripture speakes plainly for all their sinnes yet the Antinomian speakes as boldly as if nothing were truer that there were sacrifices for some sorts of sinnes only So that you are wisely to judge of such books and not beleeve every confident expression It 's true the Apostle calls these sinnes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 9. 7. we translate it errours for the Apostle doth not meane sinnes committed out of meere ignorance but all kinde of sinnes as appeareth by Levit. 16. but therefore are all sinnes called so because omnis malus ignorat There being no sinne which doth not proceede from some errour in the practicall judgement for although a man sin wilfully and advisedly so that there is Nulla alia causa malitiae nisi malitia as Austin speakes of some of his sinnes yet there is even then an errour in that mans conscience But in the second place grant that there were no legall sacrifices 2. No legall sacrifice therefore no remission of sin inconsequent appointed for some sinnes as indeed particular sacrifices were commonly for sinnes either of ignorance or if wilfull not of such an high and morall guilt particular I say for that feast of expiation was generall yet there is no consequence in the world that therefore there was no pardon to be sued out How foolish then were David and Manasses in suing out pardon for their bloud-guiltinesse if there were no such thing allowed by God How grosse is this errour If this doctrine were true then most of those that are reckoned as godly in the Old Testament could have no pardon because many of them did fall into such
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
perpetuall truth ever since Adams fall and it was as efficacious to those before his death as after therefore hee is called a Lamb slaine from the beginning of the world although the Socinians would pervert and wrest that place Lastly I dony that even under the Gospel that all sinnes are forgiven to the justified person at once He is indeed put into a state of justification whereby no condemnation will fall upon him yet his sinnes are not forgiven before they are committed and repented of And for this purpose wee pray for the daily pardon of them which is not to be understood of the meere declaration or assurance of the pardon but for the pardon it self But this shall be on purpose spoken to in the matter of Justification The forenamed Authour hath some other differences but they are confuted already for the substance of them LECTURE XXVI ROM 3. 27. Where is boasting then It is excluded By what law of workes Nay but by the law of faith WEe have confuted the false differences and now come to lay downe the true between the Law and the Gospel taken in a larger sense And first you must know that the difference is not essentiall or The difference between the Law and the Gospel is not essentiall but accidentall onely substantiall but accidentall so that the division of the Testament or Covenant into the Old and New is not a division of the Genus into its opposite Species but of the subject according to its severall accidentall administrations both on Gods part and on mans It is true the Lutheran Divines they doe expresly oppose the Calvinists herein maintaining the Covenant given by Moses to be a Covenant of workes and so directly contrary to the Covenant of grace Indeed they acknowledge that the Fathers were justified by Christ and had the same way of salvation with us onely they make that Covenant of Moses to be a superadded thing to the Promise holding forth a condition of perfect righteousnesse unto the Jewes that they might be convinced of their owne folly in their self-righteousnesse But I think it is already cleared that Moses his Covenant was a Covenant of grace and the right unfolding the word Law and Gospel doth easily take away that difference which seemeth to be among the Learned in this point for certainly the godly Jewes did not rest in the Sacrifices or Sacraments but by faith did really enjoy Christ in them as well as wee in ours Christ was figured by the Mercy-seat Now as both the Cherubims looked to that so both the people of the Jewes and Gentiles did eye and looke to Christ For although Christ had not assumed our flesh then yet the fruit and benefit of his incarnation was then communicated because of the decree and promise of God 1 Pet. 1. 20. 2. This difference is more particularly seen in respect of the degrees Heavenly objects more clearly revealed in the N. Testament then in the Old of perspicuity and clearnesse in the revelation of heavenly objects Hence 2 Pet. 1. 19. the light in the Old Testament is compared to the light in the night-time and that in the New to the light of the sun in the day The summe of all heavenly doctrine is reduced to these three heads credenda speranda facienda Now if you consider the objects of faith or things to be beleeved 1. It is so for the credenda they were more obscurely delivered to them The doctrine of the Trinity the Incarnation of Christ and the Resurrection these things were but in a dark manner delivered yet according to the measure of that light then held forth they were bound to beleeve those things so that as Moses had a veile upon him thus also his doctrine had and as the knowledge we have here is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in respect of that in heaven so that in the Old Testament may be said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in respect of that in the New As it is thus for the credenda things to be beleeved so it is also 2. For the speranda for the speranda things hoped for The opinion of the Socinians and others is very wicked which makes them before Christ onely to hope in temporall good things and the notion of the Papists observing that the Church under the New Testament is called ecclesia but never synagoge and the meeting of the Jewes called alwaies synagoge but never ecclesia doth suppose that the Jewes were gathered together as so many beasts rather then called together as men But this notion is judged false and they instance Heb. 10. and James 2. where the Church of the Christians is called synagoge although Cameron Praelect de eccles pag. 66. doth industriously labour to prove that the Apostles did purposely abstaine from the word synagoge in reference to Christians but his reason is not that the Papists urge for howsoever the good things promised were for the most part temporall and carnall yet these figured spirituall and heavenly It 's Austins obseruation shewing that the Jewes should first be allured by temporall mercies and afterwards the Christians by spirituall As saith he first that which is animall and then that which is spirituall The first man was of the earth earthly the second man was of heaven heavenly Thus wee may say of the Jew and the Christian That which was animall was first and then that which is spirituall Hence Heb. 11. 16. Abraham and others are said to seek an heavenly country so that although it be true which Austine as I remember said though you look over the whole book of the Old Testament yet you shall never find the kingdome of heaven mentioned there yet wee see David making God his portion and professing that hee hath nothing in heaven but him which argueth that they looked farther then meere outward mercies These good things promised to the Jewes were figurative so that as a man consisteth of a soule and body thus also doth the promises there is the kernell and the shell but the Jewes for the most part looked onely to the outward Hence Christ when hee opened those things to his Disciples did like a kind father that breaketh the shell and giveth the kernell to his children In the third place there are facienda things to be done Now 3. For the facienda although it be true as I have proved that Christ hath added no new command to the Law of Moses and whatsoever is a sin now in morall things was also then yet the doctrine of these things was not so full penetrating and cleare as now under the Gospel There is a dangerous book called The Practicall Catechisme that venteth much Socinian poyson and in this particular among other things that Christ added to the Law and perfected it filled up some vacuities in it Certainly the Law of God being perfect and to which nothing must be added cannot be said to have vacuities in it and Christ
broken hearts stung with sinne The Priest and the Levite they passe by not pitying of him But now the Subject to whom the Gospel is given is a broken hearted sinner one that feeleth himselfe ready to be covered over with all confusion one that lyeth wounded in conscience crying for some oyle to be poured into his wounds Oh! what miserable comforters then must all Popish and Socinian Doctors be who will advise the sinfull tempted man to seek out works for the Law which is as uncomfortable as to bid a sicke diseased man get some of the Philosophers stone or to eate a piece of a Phoenix and then and not till then hee shall be in ease Lastly The Law differeth in the forme of it from the Gospel The 5. The Law conditionall the Gospel absolute Law is conditionall but the Gospel absolute I find this Question a very troublesome one Whether the Gospel be absolute or no Whether Gospel be a doctrine of workes Whether it hath precepts or threatnings Now the meaning of this Question is not Whether the Gospel be so absolute that it requireth not faith as a condition Or Whether it be so absolute as that it excludeth all repentance and holinesse hee is an infant in Scripture that thinketh so But Whether the Gospel doth promise eternall life to a man for any dignity intention merit work or any disposition in us under any distinction or notion whatsoever or only to faith apprehending Christ. Now the Answer is that if we take the Gospel largely for the doctrine of Christ and the Apostles there is no question but they pressed duty of mortification and sanctification threatning those that do not so but if you take the Gospel strictly then it holdeth forth nothing but remission of sinnes through Christ not requiring any other duty as a condition or using any threatning words thereunto But then it may be demanded To which is repentance reduced Is it a duty of the Law or a duty of the Gospel Of the Law strictly taken it cannot be because that admitteth none Must it not therefore be of the Gospel And I find in this particular different either expressions or opinions and generally the Lutheran Divines doe oppose the Antinomians upon this very ground that the Gospel is not a Sermon of repentance nor doth exhort thereunto but it must be had from the Law which doth prepare them for Christ I shall therefore because this was the foundation of Antinomianisme and it had its rise from hence handle the next day this Question Whether the Gospel doth command repentance or no. Or Whether it be onely from the Law LECTURE XXVII ROM 3. 27. Where is boasting then It is excluded By what law of works Nay but by the law of faith I Proceed to the handling of this Question Whether the Gospel preach repentance or no seeing this made the great commotion at first between the Orthodoxe and Antinomians I shall despatch this in few words 1. The word Repentance is taken sometimes largely and sometimes Repentance strictly taken is distinguished from Faith strictly when it is taken largely it comprehends faith in it and is the whole turning unto God Rev. 2. 5. sometimes it is used strictly for sorrow about sinne and so distinguished from faith Thus they repented not that they might beleeve and faith and repentance are put together Now all the while a man hath trouble and sorrow for sinne without faith it is like the body without the soule yea it carrieth a man with Cain and Judas into the very pit of despaire when a man seeth how much is against him and not how much is for him it cannot but crush and weigh him downe to the ground The teares of repentance are like those waters very bitter till Christ sweeten them 2. Consider this that the Law was never meerly and solely administred The Law and the Gospel are inseparably united in the Word and Ministery nor yet the Gospel but they are twinnes that are inseparably united in the Word and Ministery Howsoever strictly taken there is a vaste gulfe of opposition between each other yet in their use they become exceeding subservient and helpfull mutually It is not good for the Law to be alone nor yet the Gospel Now the old Antinomians they taught repentance by the Gospel onely that so the Law might be wholly excluded thus they did not consider what usefull subserviency they had to one another The Law directeth commandeth and humbleth The Gospel that comforteth refresheth and supporteth And it is a great wisedome in a Christian when hee hath an eye upon both Many are cast down because they onely consider the perfection of the Law and their in ability thereunto On the other side some grow secure and loose by attending to free grace onely I doe acknowledge that free grace will melt the heart into kindnes and the fire will melt as well as the hammer batter into pieces but yet even this cannot be done without some use of the Law 3. Therefore being there is such a neare linck between both these Faith and Repentance are wrought both by the Law and the Gospel in their practicall use wee need not with some Learned men make two Commandements of the Gospel onely to wit the Command to beleeve and the other Command to repent neither need we with others make these Commands Appendices to the Gospel but conclude thus that seeing Faith and Repentance have something initiall in them and something consummative in them therefore they are both wrought by Law and Gospel also so that as they say there is a legall repentance and an evangelicall so we may say there is a legall faith which consists in beleeving of the threatnings and the terrours of the Lord and there is an evangelicall faith which is in applying of Christ in the Promises So that legall faith and repentance may be called so initially and when it is evangelicall it may be said to be consummate If therefore you aske Whether Faith and Repentance be by the Law or by the Gospel I answer It is by both and that these must not be separated one from the other in the command of these duties Hence fourthly unbeliefe is a sin against the Law as well as against Unbeliefe a sin against the Law as well as the Gospel the Gospel Indeed the Gospel that doth manifest and declare the object of justifying faith but the Law condemneth him that doth not beleeve in him Therefore Moses and the Law is said to beare witnesse of Christ and to accuse the Jewes for refusing the Messias The Law that requireth beliefe in whatsoever God shall reveale The Gospel that makes known Christ and then the Law this as it were enlightened by the Gospel doth fasten a command upon us to beleeve in Christ This is true if you take the Law strictly and separately from Moses his administration of it but if you take it largely as it was delivered by Moses then
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.
the Law it cometh from the spirit of Christ The second excellency is in regard of continuance and duration The 2. Because of its duration it being to abide alwaies but the ministery of Moses to be abolished ministery of Moses was to be made void and abolished which is to be understood of that Jewish pedagogy not of every part of it for the Morall as given by Moses doth still oblige us Christians as hath been already proved but the ministery of the Gospel is to abide alwaies that is there is no new ministery to succeed that of the Gospel although in heaven all shall cease The third difference is in regard of glory God caused some materiall 3. Because the glory that cometh by the Gospel is spirituall that which shone upon Moses but materiall glory to shine upon Moses while he gave the Law hereby to procure the greater authority and majesty to the Law but that glory which cometh by the Gospel is spirituall and farre more transcendent bringing us at last into eternall glory So that the former glory seemeth to be nothing in comparison of this Even as the light of a candle or torch seemeth to be nothing saith Theophylact when the light of the Sun ariseth Now the Apostle handling these things doth occasionally open an allegory which had not Paul by the Spirit of God found out we neither could or ought to have done it And the consideration of that will serve much for my present matter I know divers men have divers thoughts about exposition of this place so that there seemeth to be a veile upon the Text as well as upon Moses his face But I shall plainly understand it thus Moses his face What signified by the shining of Moses his face shining when he was with God and coming from him doth signifie the glory and excellency of the Law as in respect of Gods counsells and intentions for although the Law did seem to hold out nothing but temporall mercies devoid of Christ and heaven yet as in respect of Gods intention it was farre otherwise Now saith the Apostle The Jewes were not able to fixe their eyes upon this glory that is the carnall Israelites did not behold Christ in the ministery of Moses because a veile is upon their hearts The Apostle makes the veile upon Moses to be a type of the blindnesse and hardnesse of heart in the Israelite so that as the veile upon Moses covered the glory of his face so the veile of blindnesse and stupidity upon the heart of the Jewes doth hinder them from the glory of the Law which was Christ And that this is so doth appeare viz. where the Israelite is denied to look stedfastly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word in my Text to the end of that ministery which was to be abolished and that end was Christ so that this Text doth fully prove my intent which is that Christ was in some measure a glorious object in the administration of the Law but the veile upon the Israelites heart hindered the sight of it Now saith Paul when it shall turne as we translate or rather when they shall turn for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is observed to be used alwaies of persons and though the word be in the singular number in the originall yet according to the custome of Scripture it may be understood plurally because he speaks of a collective body When saith the Text this turning shall be the veile shall be taken away or rather as Camero well observeth in the present tense It is taken away for you cannot conceive that the Jewes shall be first turned unto God and the veile afterwards to be taken away but they both are together I will give another instance that Christ was the end of intention or aime in the dispensation of the Law from Galat. 3. 23 24. We were kept under the Law till Faith came Wherefore the Law was our School-master to bring us unto Christ In which words not the Morall Law simply taken but the whole dispensation of the Jewes is compared to the instruction of a School-master Now as a School-master doth not only beat or correct but teach also and direct Thus the Law did not only severely curb and keep from sin but did also teach Christ Hence we are said to be kept under the Law which although some make an expression from the strict keeping and watching which souldiers in a garrison use to make yet a learned man makes it to denote the duty of a School-master as one who is to give an account of such committed to his charge In which sense Cain said Am I my brothers keeper The Law then as a School-master did not only threaten and curse or like the Egyptian task-masters beat and strike because the work was not done but did shew where power and help was to be had viz. from Christ only In the second place Christ is the end of perfection to the Law for 2. Christ is the end of perfection to the Law the end of the Law being to justifie and to bring to eternall life this could not be attained by our owne power and industry not by any defect of the Law but by reason of our infirmity Therefore Christ he hath brought about this intent of the Law that we should be justified and have life If the end of humane lawes be to make good and honest men much rather is the end of the Morall Law appointed by God himselfe But the Law is so far from making us good as that it worketh in us all evill which effect of the Law in himselfe the Apostle acknowledgeth so that as good food and nourishment received by a diseased stomack doth increase the disease more according to that rule Corpora impura quantò magis nutrias deteriora reddis thus it is in every man by nature The Law which is for holinesse and life becometh to cause sinne and death Christ therefore that the Law may have its end he taketh our nature upon him that the righteousnesse of the Law might be fulfilled in us 3. Christ is the end of perfection of the Law in that the meere 3. Christ is the end of perfection of the Law in vouchsafing as his Spirit that we may obey it knowledge of the Law with the externall obedience onely to it was not available to any benefit Therefore Christ vouchsafeth his holy Spirit unto us regenerating of us whereby we come in part to obey the Law of God So that the people of God have a righteousnesse or holinesse of works but it is imperfect and so not inabling us to justification and in this sense it is that the people of God are said to keep Gods commandements So then whereas our condition was so by sin that we were neither able nor willing to obey the Law of God in the least degree Christ doth give us grace and cureth us so far that we are said to walk in his Law Now herein
was the great mistake of the Jewes they gloried and boasted of the Law but how of the knowledge of it and externall observation without looking to Christ and this was to glory in the shadow without the substance 4. Christ is the end of perfection of the Law in that his righteousnesse 4. Christ is the end of perfection of the Law in that his obedience to it is made ours and obedience unto the Law is made ours and so in him as our surety we fulfill the Law I know this assertion hath many learned and godly adversaries but as farae as I can see yet the Scripture seemeth to hold it forth Rom. 5. There is a parallel made of the first Adam and his off-spring with Christ the second Adam and his seed and the Apostle proveth that we are made righteous by Christ as sinners in him which was partly by imputation so 2 Corinth 5. ult as Christ is made our sin by imputation so we his righteousnesse So Rom. 8. 3 4. That which was impossible to the Law Christ sent his Son that the righteousnesse of the Law might be fulfilled in us who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit I know there are answers made to these places but the proper discussion of them will be in the handling of justification only here is an obvious Objection If the righteousnesse Object of Christ be made ours so that we may be said to fulfill the Law then we are still justified by a covenant of works and so there is no new covenant of grace I answer Learned men as Beza and Perkins Answ have affirmed that we obtaine eternall life according to that rule Doe this and live because of Christs fulfilling the Law as our surety for the imputation of it doth not make it cease to be our reall righteousnesse though it be not our inherent righteousnesse But I see not why we need grant the consequence viz. Because Christs fulfilling of the Law is made ours therefore we have eternall life by the Law and the reason is because this righteousnesse of Christs is not ours by working but by beleeving Now the Law in that command Doe this and live did require our personall working and righteousnesse so that we cannot be said to have salvation by that rule because it is not the righteousnesse which we in person have wrought and this will fully appeare if you consider in the next place the subject to whom Christ is made righteousnesse and that is to him that The beleever is the subject to whom Christ is made righteousnesse beleeveth he doth not say to him that worketh so that we have not eternall life by our Doe this but by beleeving or resting upon Christ his Doe this And this phrase doth plainly exclude Stapletons and other Papists observations on this place as if the righteousnesse by faith or of Christ were the same in kind with the righteousnesse of works differing only gradually as an infant and a growne man for if so the Apostle would have said working and not beleeving It is a great skill in Divinity to amplifie this righteousnesse of faith without works so as neither the Papist or the Antinomian may incourage themselves thereby but of that in some other place As you take notice of the subject Beleever so the universality every one which doth take in both Jew and Gentile Therefore the Jew could not or ought not to think that those externall rites and observations could bring them to a true righteousnesse Lastly consider in the Text for what end Christ is thus the Righteousness is the end for which Christ is thus the perfection of the Law perfection of the Law and that is for righteousnesse The proper seat of handling this is in the doctrine of Justification only let me briefly answer a Question made by some Whether the righteousnesse of faith or that we have by Christ be the same in nature with the righteousnesse of workes and of the Law Stapleton saith They must needs be one because the Law will direct to no other righteousnesse then that of its owne It is true the Law strictly taken will not properly and perse direct to any righteousnesse but that which the Law requireth yet by accident and indirectly it may yea as it was given by Moses it did directly and properly intend Christ though not primarily as some think but finding us unable to attaine to its owne righteousnesse did then lead us unto Christ Yet these two righteousnesses are divers rather then contrary unlesse in respect of justification and so indeed its impossible to be justified by both those waies otherwise they are both together in the same subject yea a righteousnesse of faith doth necessarily draw along with it in the same subject a righteousnesse of works though it be imperfect and so insufficient to justifie Vse Is Christ the end of the Law for righteousnesse then The beleever hath great cause to blesse God for providing such a righteousness for him let the beleever blesse and praise God for providing a righteousnesse and such a righteousnesse for him How destitute and naked was thy condition Had justice taken thee by the throat and bid thee pay what thou owest thou couldst not have returned that answer Let mee alone and I will pay thee all Neither Angels nor men could provide this righteousnesse for thee Doest thou thank God for providing clothes for thy body food for thy belly an house for habitation Oh above all thank him that he hath provided a righteousnesse for thy soule Thou troubled soule because of sin thou thinkest with thy selfe Oh if I had no sin if I were guilty of no corruption how well were it O ye glorious Angels and Saints ye are happy because ye have a righteousnesse Why doest thou not consider that God hath found out for thee even for thee in this world a righteousnesse whereby thou art accepted of him Againe consider it is such a righteousnesse that satisfieth and pleaseth God Thy holinesse cannot content him for justification but that of Christ can As the light of the Stars and Moon cannot dispell totally the darknesse of the night only the light of the Sun can doe that LECTURE XXIX MAT. 5. 17. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandements and shall teach men so shall be called the least in the Kingdome of heaven OUr Saviour being to vindicate the Law from all corrupt The Text opened glosses of the Pharisees he doth in the first place as Chrysostome thinketh remove the odium that might be cast upon him as if he did indeed destroy the Law for it was then generally received that only was Law which the Pharisees declared to be so And this he doth ver 17. Think not that I am come to destroy the Law The reason he giveth is from the perpetuall nature of the Law heaven and earth the whole world shall sooner fall into pieces then any tittle of that And the
Prophets are here joyned to the Law not so much in regard of their predictions as because they were Interpreters of the Law The second reason is from that evill which shall befall him that doth break it and here he nameth a two-fold Antinomianisme one in life and practise the other in doctrine That in practise is aggravated though it be one of the least commandements They are called least either because the Pharisees thought them so or else indeed because all the commands of God were not concerning duties of the same consequence The other in doctrine is expressed in those words And teach men so I cannot consent to Beza's interpretation making this teaching to be by example and life or else 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 although as if the meaning were He that doth break in his practice my commandement although he doe teach them in doctrine There is no necessity of offering such violence to the Text. But if we interpret it of doctrinall breaking it will very well agree with the Pharisees who made void the commandements of God by the doctrines of men The evill that shall befall such is in those words He shall be called the least in the Kingdome of heaven Called is put for is or be He shall be the least By Kingdome of heaven What meant by Kingdome of heaven some understand that Kingdome of glory in heaven and by least meane nullus none he shall not at all enter into the Kingdome of heaven Others by Kingdome of heaven doe understand the Church of God and so they expresse it when there shall be a reformation in the Church and truth should break forth which was presently to come to passe then those corrupt teachers who would poyson men should be discovered and then they should be least that is of no account even as it fell out to the Pharisees though for a while they were highly esteemed among men I forbeare to touch upon that Question hotly disputed with some Whether our Saviour doe in this discourse meane onely the Morall Law or the Ceremoniall also as being not to my purpose That it is meant chiefly of the Morall Law appeareth by the instances which Christ giveth From the Text thus opened I observe That any doctrine which teacheth the abrogation or dissolution Doctr. of the Law is highly offensive unto God The doctrines of men may either directly or covertly overthrow the Law Covertly three waies For the opening of this consider that the doctrines of men may either directly and with an open face overthrow the Law as the Marcionites and Manichees did or else interpretatively and more covertly and that is done three waies 1. When they make not the Law of God to be so full and extensive 1. When they make it not so extensive in its obligation as it is in its obligation as indeed it is and thus the Pharisees they made void the Law when they affirmed outward acts to be only sins and thus the Papists doe in part when they make the Law no further to oblige then it is possible for us to keep it These doctrines doe in tantum though not in totum destroy the Law 2. When men hold such principles that will necessarily by way of 2. When they hold principles by necessary consequence inforcing the abrogation of it consequence inforce the abrogation of the Law And thus though some Antinomians doe expresly and boldly assert the abolishing of it at least to beleevers yet those that have more learning and warinesse doe disclaime it and account it a calumny but even at the same time while they doe disclaime it as it is to be shewed presently they hold such assertions as doe necessarily inferre the abrogation of it 3. The Law may be doctrinally dissolved by pressing such duties 3. When they presse such duties upon men as will necessaitate them to break the commandements of God upon men whereby they will be necessitated to break the commandements of God Thus when the Pharisees taught that whatsoever vow was made concerning any gift they were bound to doe it though thereby they were dis-inabled to honour their parents And this is most remarkably seen in the Church of Rome who by the multitude and necessity of observation of their Church precepts and constitutions make men to break the plaine commandements of God Now I shall briefly instance generally about those errours that dissolve Gods Law and then more particularly about the Antinomian doctrine The first Hereticks that opposed it were the Marcionites and The Marcionites and Manichees the first oppugners of the Law Manichees Marcion whom Tertullian calls Mus ponticus because of his arroding and gnawing the Scripture to make it serviceable to his errours he among other errours broacheth this That the old Law as he calls it was evill and that it came from an evill god To him in this opinion succeeded Manes who truly might be so called because of his madnesse although his followers to take away that reproach called him Mannichaus as much as one that poured forth Manna as some affirme This mans errours though they were very grosse yet so propagated that it was two hundred yeares ere they were quieted These and their followers all agreed in this to reject this Law of God There were also Hereticks called Anomi as it were sine lege but their errour was to think that they could by their knowledge comprehend the divine nature And they gave so much to this their faith that they held Whosoever should imbrace it though he committed hainous and atrocious sins yet they should doe him no hurt Epiphan lib. 3. Haeres 36. But to let passe these we may say Popery is in a great part Antinomianisme And Antichrist he is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that lawlesse One for is not their doctrine that the Pope may dispense with the Lawes of God and that the Pope and Christ have the same Consistory Antinomianisme And in particular we may instance in their taking away the second Commandement out of some Catechismes because it forbiddeth the worshipping of Images Hence Vasquez one of their Goliahs doth expresly maintaine that the second Commandement did belong only to the Jewes and so not obliging us Christians thinking it impossible to answer our arguments against their Image-worship if that be acknowledged still in force Is there not also a generation of men who doe by doctrine deny the fourth Commandement How many late books and practices have been for that opinion but hath it not fallen out according to the later exposition of my Text that they are the least in the Kingdome of heaven men of little account now in the Church while reforming I might likewise speak of some Anabaptists for there are of that sect that disclaime the opinion who overthrow the fifth Commandement by denying Magistracy lawfull for Christians But I will range no further The Antinomians doe more fall against this Text
then any in that they doe not only by doctrine teach the dis-obligation of the least commandement but of all even of the whole Law This doth appeare true in the first Antinomians in Luthers time of whom Islebius was the captaine he was a School-master and also Professor of Divinity at Islebia It seemeth he was a man like a reed shaken with every wind for first he defended with the Orthodox the Saxon Confession of Faith but afterwards was one of those that compiled the Book called the Interim When Luther admonished him of his errour he promised amendment but for all that secretly scattered his errour which made Luther set forth publikely six solemne disputations against the Antinomians that are to be seen in his workes which argueth the impudency of those that would make Luther on their side By these disputations of Luthers he was convinced and revoked his errour publishing his recantation in print yet when Luther was dead this Euripus did fall into his old errour and publikely defended it Now how justly they might be called Antinomists or as Luther sometimes Nomomachists appeareth by these Propositions which they publikely scattered about in their papers as 1. That the Law is not worthy to be called the word of God Positions of Antinomians 2. To heare the word of God and so to live is a consequence of the Law 3. Repentance is not to be taught out of the Decalogue or any Law of Moses but from the violation of the Son of God in the Gospel 4. We are with all our might to resist those who teach the Gospel is not to be preached but to those whose hearts are first made contrite by the Law These are Propositions of theirs set downe by Luther against which he had his disputations Vol. 1. Thusselberge lib. contra Antin pag. 38. relateth more as 1. The Law doth not shew good works neither is it to be preached that we may doe them 2. The Law is not given to Christians therefore they are not to be reproved by the Law 3. The Preachers under the Gospel are onely to preach the Gospel not the Law because Christ did not say Preach the Law but Gospel to every creature 4. The Legall Sermons of the Prophets doe not at all belong to us 5. To say that the Law is a rule of good works is blasphemy in Divinity Thus you see how directly these oppose the Law and therefore come under our Saviours condemnation in the Text yet at other times the proper state of the Question between the Orthodox and Antinomists seemeth to be not Whether a godly man doe not delight in the Law and doe the workes of the Law but Whether he doth it Lege docente urgente mandante the Law teaching urging and commanding As for the later Antinomians Doctor Taylor and Mr. Burton who preached and wrote against them doe record the same opinions of them Doctor Taylor in his Preface to his Book against them saith One preached that the whole Law since Christs death is wholly abrogated and abolished Another That to teach obedience to the Law is Popery Another That to doe any thing because God commands us or to forbeare any sin because God forbids us is a signe of a morall man and of a dead and unsound Christian Others deliver That the Law is not to be preached and they that doe so are Legall Preachers Master Burton also in his Book against them affirmeth they divided all that made up the body of the Church of England into Hogs or Dogs Hogs were such that despised justification living in their swinish lusts Dogs such who sought to be justified by their works Hee tells of one of their disciples that said Away with this scurvie sanctification and that there is no difference between godly here and in their state of glory but only in sense and apprehension Many other unsavoury assertions are named by those Authors but these may suffice to give a taste of their opinions for it is elegantly spoken by Irenaeus in such falshoods as these are lib. 2. c. 34. adversus Haereses We need not drink up the whole sea to taste whether the water be salt but as a statue that is made of clay yet outwardly so gilded that it seemeth to be gold if any man take a piece of it in his hand and discover what it is doth make every one know what the whole statue is so it is in this case For my part I am acquainted with them no other waies but by their Books which they have written and in those every errour is more warily dressed then in secret There I find that sometimes they yeeld the Law to be a rule of life yea they judge it a calumny to be called Antinomists and if so their adversaries may be better called Antifidians And it cannot be denied but that in some parts of their Books there are wholsome and good passages as in a wood or forest full of shrubs and brambles there may be some violets and primroses yet for all this in the very places where they deny this assertion as theirs they must be forced to acknowledge it The Author of the Assertion of Free-grace who doth expresly touch upon these things and disclaimes the opinion against the Law pag. 4. and pag. 6. yet he affirmeth there such principles from whence this conclusion will necessarily follow For first he makes no reall difference either in Scripture or use of words between the Law reigning and ruling so that if the Law rule a man it reigneth over him Now then they deny that the Law doth reigne over a beleever and so do the Orthodox also therefore they must needs hold that it cannot be a rule unto him And then pag. 5. whereas Doctor Taylor had said The Apostle doth not loose a Christian from the obedience to the Law or rule thereof he addes He dare not trust a beleever without his keeper as if he judged no otherwise of him then of a malefactor of Newgate who would rob and kill if his Gaoler be not with him Againe this is most cleere by what hee saith pag. 31. hee refuteth that distinction of being under the mandatory power of the Law but not the damnatory hee makes these things inseparable and as impossible for the Law to be a Law and have not both these as to take the braines and heart from a man and yet leave him a man still Now then seeing he denieth and so doe all Protestant Writers that a beleever is under the damnatory power of the Law he must also deny he is under the mandatory because saith he this is inseparable I will in the next place give some Antidotes against this opinion Antidotes against Antinomian errours and the Authors thereof Luther calleth them Hostes Legis Organa Satanae he saith their doctrine is more to be taken heed of then that of the Papists for the Papists they teach a false or imperfect repentance but the Antinomians take all away
from the Church Rivet calls them Furores Antinomorum In the first place awe thy heart with a feare against errours in 1. Be afraid of entertaining errours in doctrine as that which may damne thee doctrine as that which may damne thee as well as an open grosse sin Consider that place Galat. 5. 20. where heresies are reckoned among those sins that are very grosse and doe exclude from the Kingdome of Heaven and that hee takes heresies there in a religious consideration is plaine because it 's made to differ from seditions strifes and variances Neither doe thou please thy selfe in that Question What is Heresie Tu Haereticus mihi ego tibi for the Apostle makes it there a manifest work of the flesh and 2 John 10. see how much afraid the people of God ought to be of any evill doctrine and there the Apostle calls evill doctrine evill deeds 2. Look to all the places of Scripture as well as some onely That 2. Look upon those places of Scripture where duties are commanded as well as those where Christ and grace are spoken of is a perpetuall fault among the Antinomians they onely pitch upon those places where Christ and his grace is spoken of but not of those Texts where duties are commanded especially those places of Scripture where the Law of God is wonderfully commended for the many reall benefits that come by it where likewise the perpetuity and eternity of it is much celebrated Lex Dei in aeternum manet vel implenda in damnatis vel impleta in beatis said Luther What a curb would it be unto this errour if they would consider with what an holy passion and zeale the Apostle doth deny that hee destroyeth the Law making this very objection to himselfe Doe we then make void the Law God forbid Now can we think that the Apostle who in the third Chapter to the Romans doth so vehemently deny that he destroyeth the Law should so much forget himselfe as in the fourth Chapter to abolish it No ordinary man would fall into such a contradiction 3. Doe not affect applause among people as having found some 3. Beware of affecting applause among the people new nigher way about Christ and grace then others have I have observed this itching humour in the Antinomian Sermons printed where they will call upon their hearers to mark it may be they shall heare that which they have not heard before when the thing is either false or if it be true is no more then ordinarily is taught by others But now when men desire to be applauded in the world they suggest to their inward disciples as if they had found out some new unheard thing and their followers broach it abroad and so they come to be exalted Thus they doe like Psaphon the Libyan It 's reported of him that he kept ten tame birds at home and taught them to sing Magnus deus Psaphon and when he had done so he let these birds flye into the woods and mountaines where all the other birds learned the same song of them which the Libyans perceiving and thinking it no plot but a divine accident decreed to sacrifice to Psaphon and to put him in the number of their gods 4. Get to be well grounded in the principles of Religion 4. Doe thou diligently study fundamentalls and the principles of Religion As the childe groweth crooked for not being well looked to at first and many errours do now spread themselves because men are not well catechised They build without a foundation It was a grave complaint of Maximus an Ecclesiasticall Writer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is a great matter to have a sound and accurate knowledge in matters of Religion It was a wise speech of Aristides who being demanded by the Emperour to speak to something propounded ex tempore answered Propound to day and I will answer to morrow 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We are not of those who vomit or spit out things suddenly but take time to be diligent and considering 5. When thou doest begin to encline to an opinion that differeth 5. Be not rash in publishing any new opinion from the learned and godly be not too rash and precipitate in publishing it The Apostle giveth a good rule Rom. 14. Hast thou faith have it to thy selfe He doth not there command a man to equivocate or dissemble and deny a truth but not needlesly to professe it when it will be to the offence of others Cyprian reproving the rashnesse of those Christians that would goe on their owne accord to the Heathen Magistrates professing themselves Christians whereby they were put to death hath a good and elegant speech Confiteri nos magis voluit quà m profiteri he doth confesse that doth it being asked and demanded he doth professe that doth it out of his owne free accord 6. Consider that Antinomianisme is the onely way indeed to overthrow 6. Antinomianisme overthrows Christ and grace grace and Christ For he sets up free grace and Christ not who names it often in his Book or in the Pulpit but whose heart is inwardly and deeply affected with it Now who will most heartily and experimentally set up Christ and grace of these two i. Who urgeth no use of the Law who takes away the sense or bitternesse of sin who denieth humiliation or he who discovers his defects by the perfect rule of the Law whose soule is inbittered and humbled because of these defects Certainly this later will much more in heart and reall affections set up free grace FINIS THE TABLE A. THe Law abolished as a Covenant not as a Rule Page 204 The Law abrogated to beleevers in six particulars p. 209. 210. 211 Three causes of the abrogation of the ceremoniall Law which agree not to the morall p. 213 Six abuses of the Law p. 16. 17. 18. 19 Conversion and Repentance are our acts as well as the effects of Gods grace p. 97 Whether Adam was mortall before his eating of the forbidden fruit p. 107 Whether Adam in his innocency can be considered in his naturalls or supernaturalls answered in two Positions p. 129 Whether Adam needed Christs help ibid p. 130. Whether God required lesse of Adam then us p. 135. Amorem mercedis a Godly man may have in his obedience though not amorem mercenarium p. 13 What help the Angels had by Christ p. 130 Calvines two Reasons why Angels needed Christs mediation ibid. Some Antecedaneous works upon the heart before grace be bestowed p. 86 Foure limitations concerning those antecedaneous works ibid. The first Antinomian p. 38 Antinomian Differences betwixt the Law and Gospel confuted p. 234. 236 The Antinomian why most inexcusable p. 43 The Antinomian distinction of the Law being abolished as a Law but still abiding in respect of the matter of it a contradiction p. 206 The Antinomian Arguments overthrow the use of the Law to unbeleevers as well as beleevers p. 208 The opinion of the
old Antinomians p. 267 The word As taken variously p. 157 Antidotes against Antinomian errors p. 269 Antinomianisme is the onely way indeed to overthrow Christ and grace p. 271 B A Blaspheming Monk p. 25 Blaspheming Papists p. 26 The Lay-mans book is the whole universe p. 75 Master Burton his Report of Antinomians p. 268 C A Cordiall for a broken heart p. 21. 22 Contradictions of the Antinomians p. 30 A Community of goods not taught by the law of Nature p. 81 Christs Incarnation cannot be supposed but upon supposition of Adams fall p. 132 It is an hard matter so to set up Christ and grace as not thereby to destroy the law p. 202 The doctrine of Christ and grace in the highest manner doth establish not overthrow the law ibid. God entred into Covenant with Adam in giving him a law p. 119. 120 What a Covenant implyes p. 121 Why the Covenane of grace is not still a covenant of workes seeing workes are necessary p. 46 A Covenant of Friendship p. 121 A Covenant of Reconciliation p. 121 No Covenant properly so called can be betwixt God and Man p. 122 How God can covenant with man p. 123 Five Reasons why God would deal with man in a covenant-way rather then in an absolute way p. 124. 125 A vast difference betwixt the covenant in innocency and in grace p. 126 The morall law delivered as a covenant proved p. 220 It hath the reall properties of a covenant p. 221 In what sense the law may be a covenant of grace explained p. 222. 223 Arguments proving the law a covenant of grace p. 224 225 226 Objections answered p. 227 Doctor Crisp confuted p. 13. 14 Cursing taken two waies 1 Potentially so a law is alwaies condemning 2. Actually so a law is not ever condemning p. 6 D DEcalogue resembled to the ten Predicaments by Martyr and why The threatning of death to Adam if he did eat c. was fulfilled in that he became then mortall and in a state of death not naturall onely but spirituall and eternall also p. 106. 107 Determination to one takes not away naturall liberty nor willingnesse or delight in sin which we are inevitably carried unto p. 88 Three generall waies of proving the Deity of Christ p. 130 Foure differences not substantiall but accidentall betwixt the law and the Gospell p. 241 c. Five Differences betwixt the Law and Gospell strictly taken pag. 247. 248. 249 c. All Doctrine reduced to three heads credenda speranda facienda p. 242 E THe Papists notion concerning Ecclesia and Synagoge confuted p. 242 If the Antinomians end were onely to put men off from glorying in themselves to deny the concurrence of workes to Justification it were more tolerable p. 30. but then their books and end were not reconciliable ibid. Other ends which might make the Antinomians more exousable p. 30. 31 How Christ is the end of the law for righteousnesse p. 25. 257 End taken two waies p. 256 Four waies Christ is the perfective end of the Law p. 260. 261 Aquinas distinction of end p. 257 Endâ—xus said hee was made to behold the sun p. 75 Exhortations to what purpose given to them who have no power of themselves to doe them p. 69 Errours in Doctrine damnable p. 269 F FAbles and fictions how used by the Fathers p. 2 How Faith justifies p. 42 Two acts of Faith ibid. Faith and Repentance wrought both by the Law and Gospel p. 252 The same object may be known by the light of Faith and of Nature p. 70 Whether justifying Faith were in Adam at first p. 117 Faith of adherence and dependence in Adam in innocency and shall be in heaven p. 125 Adams faith considered as an act of the soul not as an organ to lay hold on Christ p. 125 Finger of God p. 149 Finis indigentie assimilationis p. 44 Free-will by nature p. 82 Arguments for free-will answered p. 92. 93 G GEnealogies how usefull and how vaine page 2 How the Gentiles are said to be without a Law p. 57 Who are meant by the word Gentiles p. 56. 57 The Gospel and Law may be compared in a double respect p. 230 The word Gospel taken two waies ibid. Whether the Gospel be absolute or no. p. 249 Gospel taken strictly is not a doctrine of Repentance or holy workes p. 252 All Good morally is good theologically p. 58 Good workes how taken p. 37. 38 Foure things required to the effence of good workes p. 37. 38 The word Grace used sometimes for the effects of grace but more commonly for the favour of God p. 20 Grace is more then love ibid. Grace implyeth indebitum and demeritum of the contrary as Cameron observes p. 21 What grace the Pelagians acknowledge ibid. Much may be ascribed to grace and yet the totall efficacy not given to it p. 88 H A Two-fold writing of the law in the heart p. 58 The properties of holinesse fixed at first in Adams heart p. 116 Humiliation comes by the Gospel as an object by the Law as that which commands such affections to those objects page 253 I IMage and likenes signific one thing p. 111 An Image four-fold p. 111. 112 Wherein the Image of God in man consists page 112. 113. 114. 115 A Thing said to be immortal foure wayes p. 107. The Injudicionsnesse of the Antinomians pa. 30 Whether Adams immortality in innocency be not different from that which shall be in heaven p. 136. Some things just because God wills them other things are just and therefore God wills them pag. 4 The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere justifies no more in itselfe then other acts of obedience p. 15 Expecting justification by the Law very dangerous Fifteen evils which follow thereupon mentioned pag. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26 I siebius Captaine of the Antinomians in Luthers daies p. 266 How the justification of the Gospel may stand with the good workes of the Law done by grace p. 37 Paul and James reconciled in the point of justification page 42 K KIngdome of heaven not mentioned in all the O. T. p. 243 How Kingdome of heaven is taken in Mat. 5. 17. p. 264 L HOw the Law is good in eight respects p. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7 Four acts of the Law p. 5 The two-fold use of the Law to the ungodly p. 7. A four-fold use of the Law to the godly p. 8. 9 Cautions concerning the Law p. 10 1. The word Law diversly taken ibid. p. 139. 216 2. The Law must not be separated from the spirit p. 11 3. To doe a command out of obedience to the Law and out of love are not opposite p. 12 4. Christs obedience to the Law exempts not us from obedience our selves unlesse it be in respect to those ends for which he obeyed pag. 13 5. The Law condemnes a beleevers sinne though not his person ibid. 6. Inability to keep the Law exempts not from obedience to it p. 14 7 Distinguish betwixt what is
primarily and what is occasionally in the Law ibid. That the Law hath a directive regulating and informing power over a godly man p. 53 The derivation of the word Lex p. 59 Two things necessary to the essence of a Law ibidem How the Law becomes a Covenant ib. The division of Lawes in generall and why the morall Law is so called p. 140 The Law of Moses differs from the Law of Nature in three respects p. 140. 141 Why the Law was given in the wildernesse ibidem That the Law was in the Church before Moses p. 142 Three ends of the promulgation of the Law p. 143 The Law of Moses a perfect Rule p. 144 Three differences betwixt the Judiciall Ceremoniall and Morall Law p. 147 Generall observations about the Law and the time of the delivery of the Law pag. 147. 148. 149. c. Three observations concerning the preparation to the delivery of the Law p. 148 Whether the law as given by Moses do belong to us Christians p. 157. proved p. 159. Objections answered p. 163 Though the Law as given by Moses did not belong to Christians yet the doctrine of the Antinomians holds not page 156 Christ in the Gospel onely interprets the old Law and doth not adde new proved by four reasons p. 169. 170 The Law is spirituall in the Old Testament as in the New proved by eight instances p. 171. 172. c. The Law may be instrumentall to worke sanctification and conversion page 187. 3. Cautions about it ib. 188. proved by six reasons p. 191. 192. Objections answered p. 193 The Law is established three waies by the Gospel p. 201 Three affections belonging to a Law p. 203 Three parts in the Law p. 204 Those phrases considered of the Law and without the Law and under the Law and in the Law p. 216 A two-fold being under the Law p. 217 False differences given by some betwixt the Law and the Gospel p. 232 Law and Gospel united in the Ministery p. 251 Law opposed and oppugned two waies Directly Interpretatively page 264 Law opposed interpretatively three waies p. 265 Law by men abrogated or made void three waies ibid. A three-fold liberty p. 87 A three-fold light p. 112 M MInistery of the Gospel more excellent then that of the Law in three respects p. 257 Moses in his zeal breaking the Tables vindicated from rashnesse and sinfull perturbation p. 151 The opinion of souls-mortality confuted p. 108. 109 Adam was under the morall Law in innocency p. 61 What 's meant by the word morall p. 140 Morall Law bindes two waies p. 158 That the morall Law perpetually continues a rule and Law proved by four Reasons p. 212. 213 Objections against the continuance of the morall Law answered p. 214 Morall Law having Christ for the end of it may be considered two waies p. 256 Marcionites and Manichees the first Heretickes that opposed the Law p. 265 N WHat is meant by the word Nature in Scripture p. 58 There is a law of Nature written in mens hearts ibid. Wherein the law of Nature consists p. 59 Foure bounds of the law of Nature p. 62 Light of Nature considered in a three-fold respect p. 65. 68. 69 A three-fold use of the light of Nature p. 66 The light of Nature obscured three waies p. 69 The light of Nature is necessary though insufficient in religious and morall things p. 69. It 's necessary two waies p. 70. See p. 83. 84. 89 The light of Nature no Judge in matters of faith p. 71 It 's no prescriber of divine worship ibid. Natures insufficiency described in three reasonings p. 72 Th◠Mystery of the Trinity and Incarnation of Christ cannot be found out by the light of Nature p. 77 How farre nature will reach in some other things p. 79. 80. 81 Man by the power of Nature wholly unable to performe good actions proved by 3. arguments p. 84 Nature cannot dispose or prepare a mans selfe for justification or sanctification p. 85. proved by foure reasons ibid. All workes of meere Nature are sins before God proved by foure Reasons p. 90 The Etymology of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 59 O COrrupt glosses of the Pharisees concerning oathes reproved p. 178 Promissory oathes dangerous ibidem The obedience of the Saints implyes obedientiam servi though not obedientiam servilem p. 13 Christs active obedience to the Law imputed to beleevers p. 261 The obligation of the law of Nature is from God p. 62 Gods promises are obligations to himself not to us p. 123 Why the old Covenant is called old p. 231 How an opinion may corrupt the life p. 47 Whether Originall sin may be found out by the meere light of Nature p. 79 P PAlemon converted from his drunkenness by Plato's Lecture which he came to deride p. 67 Papists make three false differences betwixt the Law and the Gospel p. 233 Paul and James reconciled in the point of justification p. 42 The perpetuity of the obligation of the law of Nature p. 63 A distinction of a three-fold piety confuted p. 78 The Law of God by Moses is so perfect a rule that Christ added no new precept to it p. 171 Different phrases used concerning the Ceremoniall law which are never applied to the Morall law p. 212 The opinion of the Pharisees concerning the Law p. 170 Why besides the Morall law a Positive law was given to Adam in innocency Two Reasons p. 103. 104 The Positive law did lay an obligation on Adams posterity p. 105 The seven Precepts of Noah What the Thalmudists speake concerning them p. 137 It 's a generall Rule that the pressing of morall duties by the Prophets in the Old Testament is but as an explanation of the Law p. 172 The Primitive Christians held it unlawfull to kill in defence p. 185 Capitall punishments lawfull in the New Testament p. 181. 182 To what purpose are exhortations to them who have no power to obey p. 69 Popery in a great part Antinomianisme page 266 R WHy a Reason is rendred by God for the fourth Commandement rather then others p. 59 Remission of sinnes under the law plenary as well as under the Gospel proved against the Antinomian p. 236. 237. 238 Repentance how taken p. 250. 251 Resemblances of the Trinity confuted p. 77 Every Rule hath vim praecepti as well as doctrinae p. 5 To doe a duty because of reward promised is not slavish and unlawfull p. 124 Revenge forbidden in the Old Testament as strictly as in the New p. 185 Righteousnesse of the Law and Gospel differ much p. 5 Whether we may be now said by Christ to be more righteous then Adam in innocency p. 134 The Law of Retaliation Matth. 7. 12. opened p. 80 The properties of the righteousnesse at first fixed in Adams heart p. 116 Whether righteousnesse were naturall to Adam p. 117 S THe Sabbath in innocency not typicall of Christ p. 133 Satan cannot work beyond a morall perswasion as God doth in
conversion p. 127 What the word Sanctifie implies p. 194. 195 How the Jewes were in more servitude then Christians p. 245 Sins outward which are majoris infamiae inward which are majoris reatus page 171 Sincerity taken two waies p. 255 Socinians and Papists make additions in the Gospel besides what was in the Law p. 233 Why the shell-fish was unclean to the Jewes p. 2 Law called spirituall in a two-fold sense 1. effectiâ—â— 2. formaliter p. 6 How the state of innocency excelled the state of reparation in rectitude immortality and outward felicity p. 133. 134 The state of reparation excells the state of innocency in certainty of perseverance ibidem Eudoxus said hee was made to behold the sun p. 75 Summe of all heavenly doctrine reduced to three heads credenda speranda facienda pag. 242 Symbolicall precept p. 101 T TEaching nova novè p. 2 Tully said that the Law of the twelve Tables did exceed all the libraries of Philosophers both in weight of authority and fruitfulnesse of matter p. 3 The threatnings of the Gospel against those who reject Christ arise from the Law joyned in practicall use with the Gospel p. 252 Tree of knowledge 102. 103 Whether the Tree of life was a Sacrament of Christ to Adam or no. p. 130 No truth in Divinity doth crosse the truth of nature p. 70 Doctor Tayler his Report of Antinomianisme p. 268 V THe reason of the variety of Gods administrations in the two T. p. 246 A two-fold unbeliefe Negative which damnes none Positive which damnes many p. 78 Vnbelief a sinne against the Law as well as against the Gospel How God justifies the ungodly p. 34. 35 W MInisters ought to be wary so to set out grace as not to give just exceptions to the Papists and so to defend holy workes as not to give the Antinomians cause of insultation p. 28. 29 Warre lawfull under the Gospel p. 183 Will serious and efficacious the distinction examined p. 105 How the Word in generall is the instrument of conversion p. 188. 189. Two Rules about it proved p. 190 Word how used p. 138 Workes denied by the Antinomians to be away to hoâ—ven p. 31 There have been dangerous assertions concerning workes even by those who were no Antinomians out of a great zeal for the grace of God against Papists p. 29 The presence of good workes in the person justified denied by the Antinomians p. 32. They deny any gaine or losse to come by them No peace of conscience comes by doing good workes nor lost by omitting them p. 33. which is confuted ibid. They deny good works to be signes or testimonies of grace ibidâ—â— Confuted page 34 Upon what grounds are the people of God to be zealous of good works p. 37 The Antinomian erreth two contrary waies about good works p. 38 Distinction betwixt saying that good works are necessary to justifieâ— pâ—rsons and that they are necessary to justification p. 39 Good works necessary upon 13. grounds p. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45 A Table of divers Texts of Scripture which are opened or vindicated by this TREATISE Genesis Chap. Ver. Page 1 25 110. 111 2 17 119 Exodus 21 1 138 34 â—7 28 153 Leviticus 6 2. 3 236 16 16 237 Numbers 13 23 207 Deuteronomy 4 13 â—19 30 11 94 32  32 33 3 149 1 Samuel 4 17 230 2 Samuel 1 10 230 1 Kings â— 9 154 2 Kings 20 3 44 Psalme 1. 19. 119  8 68 18 36 50 2 49 Isaiah 6â— 1 238 Jeremiah 16 14. 15 114 50 20 234 Ezekiel 1â— Â 234 Daâ—let 9 14 234 Zechary 13 1 234 Matthew 5â— 17 45. 263  21. 22 166 7 17 32  12 80 12 28 149 Marke 13 7 255 16 15 231 Luke 11 20 149 16 16 214 John 1 9 76 8 7 182 14 31 12 15 10 17 19 194 Acts. 7 37 12  38 199 Romans 1 18 66  19 74 2 14. 15 56  27 255 3 27 228  31 193. 199 4 5 34  14 227 5 1 22  6. 8. 10 35 6 1â— 215 7 1. 2 218  6 205   8 per â—atum 8 11 37  13 33  29. 30 35 13 12 42 12 1 43 14 22 271 1 Corinthians 2 14 64 7 37 82 9 20 217 15 10 92 2 Corinthians 3 7 257 3 11 202 6 16 37 Galat. 3 2 19â— Â 18 214  23 14  23. 24 259 4 24 1â—9 5 23 53 5 5. 4. 13. 14 212 5 20 269 Ephesians 1 10 137. 131 2 14 202  15 203 3 12  6 2 163  14. 16 41 Philippians 3 9 210 1 Thessalonians 2 16 â—55 1 Timothy 1 8. 9 9 1 9 47 4 8 40 7 5 255 2 Timothy 4 8 40 Titus 2 11. 12 196  14 39 Hebrewes 6 18 209 9 4 155  7 237  13. 14 235 10 17 234 11 16 243 12 5. 6. 7. 8 235  ult 33 Jam. 2 8 255 1 Peter 3 1 45 2 Peter 1 10 41  19 242 â— 2. 15. 21 32 FINIS
only a passive There is a power to be converted to God which is not in stones or beasts they say there is a power to convert or turn to God here is a great difference Besides we may consider these degrees in the creatures 1. There is an inclination to such an act as in the fire to burne 2. A spontaneous inclination to some acts accompanied with sense and sensible apprehensions as in beasts 3. A willing inclination accompanied with reason or judgement and this is in man Now because man is thus affected therefore God in converting though he doth it by a potent work yet by arguments which we never use to horses or brute beasts and although man hath lost that rectitude in his will and mind yet he hath not lost the faculties themselves therefore though he be theologically dead yet he is ethically alive being to be wrought upon by arguments Hence is that saying To will is of nature To will well of grace To will ill of corrupt nature Hence we may grant those objections that if a man had not this free-will if you do not extend it to good things there could be no conversion or obedience for grace doth not destroy but perfect nature 2. This putteth men upon speaking and preaching contradictions To presse a duty and yet to acknowledge Gods grace or gift to do it is no contradiction For so some have said that the Calvinists though they be Calvinists in their Doctrines yet they are Arminians in their Uses And they say How incongruous is it to tell us we can doe nothing of our selves and then to make this use Therefore let us seek out for the grace of Christ But to answer 1. This contradiction may be cast as well upon Christ and Paul Take Christ for an instance John 6. in that Sermon he bade the Jewes labour for that meat that perisheth not and yet at the same time said None can come unto mee except my Father draw him Might not the Arminian say How can these two things stand together So John 15. our Saviour telleth them Without him they can doe nothing and yet at the same time he exhorteth them to abide in him and keep his commandements So Paul take two instances from him Rom. cap. 9. cap. 11. The Apostle there sheweth God will have mercy on whom he will have mercy and that it is not of him that runneth or willeth but of God that calleth yet he bids them that stand take heed lest they fall and Be not high-minded but feare So Phil. 2. 12 13. Work out your salvation with feare and trembling for it 's God that worketh in you both to will and to doe This reason in their sense would quite overthrow the former Nay say they it being attributed thus to God and to man it seemeth both doe it How this may be answered we shall see anon But to make us speak contradictions because we presse a duty and yet acknowledge Gods grace or gift to doe it is to make a perpetuall discord between precepts and promises For the same things which God commands us to doe doth he not also promise to doe for us as to circumcise our hearts and to walk in his commandements How much better is that of Austins O man in Gods precepts acknowledge what thou oughtest to doe in his promises acknowledge that thou canst not doe it But 2. we may returne upon them that their Sermons and Prayers are contradictions they say they can doe it and then they pray God they may doe it They say the Will may receive the grace of God and may obey God calling and then they pray God would make them obey his calling as much as to say O Lord make me to obey if I will 3. This evacuateth the whole nature of Gods precepts and commands Mans inability to observe Gods precepts maketh not void the nature of the precepts because this inability proceeded from mans owne fault A thing said to be impossible three waies For say they Is not this to make God mock us as if wee should bid the blind man see or tell a dwarfe if he would touch the heavens with his finger he should have so much mony Now to this many things are to be said as first If these things were absolutely and simply impossible that which they say would be true but a thing may be said to be impossible three waies 1. Simply and universally even to the power of God and so all those things are that imply a contradiction and this impossibility ariseth from the nature of the thing not from any defect in God Yea we may say with one Potentissimè-hoc Deus non potest 2. There may be a thing impossible in its kind as for Adam to reach the heavens for a man to work above naturall causes 3. That which is possible in it selfe to such a subject but becomes impossible accidentally through a mans fault Now for a man to be commanded that which through his owne fault he becometh unable to doe is no illusion or cruelty If a creditor require his debt of a bankrupt who hath prodigally spent all and made himselfe unable to pay what unrighteousnesse is this Therefore they are but odious instances of touching the skies of bidding blind men to see for this Rule observe Whatsoever is so impossible that it is extra officium debitum and potentiam unquam datam that indeed were absurd to presse upon men Again consider that the commands of God doe imply if any power then more then they will acknowledge for they suppose a man can doe all of himselfe without the grace of God and therefore indeed the old Pelagian and the new Socinian speak more consonantly then these that divide it between grace and the power of man Lastly The commands of God are for many other ends as to convince Gods commands though they be not a measure of our power may serve to convince humble c. and humble though they be not a measure or rule of our power That place Deut. 30. 11. is much urged by the adversary where Moses seemeth to declare the easinesse of that command and certainly it hath a very great shew for as for that answer That Moses speaketh of the easinesse of knowing and not fulfilling Calvin doth not stand upon it and indeed of our selves we are not able to know the Law of God The answer then to this may be taken out of Rom. 10. 11. That howsoever Moses speaks of the Law yet Paul interprets it of the Gospel What then Doth Paul pervert the scope of Moses Some doe almost say so but the truth is the Law as is to be shewed against the generall mistake if it was not in it selfe a covenant of grace yet it was given Evangelically and to Evangelicall purposes which made the Apostle alledge that place and therefore the Antinomian doth wholly mistake in setting up the Law as some horrid Gorgon or Medusa's head as is