trusting in the Law p. 21. 6. What is required to the essence of a godly man in reference to obedience p. 39. 7. Wherein are good works necessary p. 40. 41. 8. Whether the Law have a directive regulating and informing power over a godly man p. 55. 9. How the Law is said to be written in mans heart p. 60. 10. Wherein the Law of Nature doth consist p. 62. 11. Of what use is the light of Nature p. 68. 12. Whether the light of Nature be sufficient to judge in matters of faith or to prescribe divine worship p. 73. 74. 13. Whether a man can by the light of Nature and by the consideration of the creatures come to know there is a God p. 76. 14. Whether the Masterie of the Trinitie and of the Incarnation of Christ can be found out as a truth by the light of Nature p. 79. 15. Whether the light of Nature be sufficient to salvation p. 80. 16. Whether that be true of the Papists which hold that the sacrifices the Patriarchs offered to God were by the meere light of Nature p. 81. 17. Whether originall sin can be found out by the meere light of Nature or whether it is onely a meere matter of faith that we are thus polluted p. 82. 18. What is the meaning of that grand rule of Nature which our Saviour repeateth That which you would not have other men doe to you doe not you to them p. 82. 83. 19. 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 p. 83. 20. What a man cannot doe by the power of Nature p. 86. 87. 21. Whether there are any antecedaneous works upon the heart before grace p. 88. 22. Whether a man by the power of nature be able to work any good thing page 86. 87. 23. Why God would give a positive law to Adam beside the naturall law in his heart p. 106. 24. Whether the positive law to Adam would have obliged all his posterity p. 108. 25. How the threatning was fulfilled upon him when he did eat of the forbidden fruit p. 109. 26. Whether Adam was mortall before the eating of the forbidden fruit p. 110. 27. Whether upon this threatning Thou shalt die can be fixed that cursed opinion of the mortality of the whole man in soul as well as body p. 111. 28. Whether Image or Likenesse doe signifie the same thing p. 114. 29. Wherein doth this Image consist p. 115. 30. What are the properties of that righteousnesse and holinesse that was fixed in Adams heart p. 119. 31. Whether this righteousnesse was naturall to Adam or no. p. 120. 32. Whether justifying faith was then in Adam or whether faith and repentance are now parts of that Image p. 120. 33. Whether the Image of God shall be restored to us in this life p. 121. 34. Whether God did enter into covenant with Adam p. 122. 35. How God can be said to covenant or enter into a promise with man p. 126. 36. Why God will deale with man in a covenant way rather then in a meere absolute supreme way p. 127. 37. Whether there can be any such distinction made of Adam while innocent so as to be considered either in his naturalls or supernaturalls p. 132. 38. Whether Christ did intervene in his help to Adam so that he needed Christ in that estate p. 133. 39. Whether the tree of Life was a sacrament of Christ to Adam or no. p. 136. 40. Whether there was any revelation unto Adam of a Christ p. 136. 41. Whether the state of reparation be more excellent then that in innocency p. 137. 42. Whether we may be now by Christ said to be more righteous then Adam p. 138. 43. Whether that which God requireth of us be greater then that demanded of Adam in the state of innocency p. 138. 44. Whether Adams immortality in the estate of innocency be not different from that which shall be in heaven p. 139. 45. What Law this delivered in Mount Sinai is and what kinde of lawes there are and why it 's called the Morall Law p. 147. 46. Whether this Law repeated by Moses be the same with the law of nature implanted in us p. 148. 47. Why God did then and not sooner give this Law unto his people p. 149. 48. Whether this Law was not before in the Church of God p. 150. 49. Why God gave the Morall Law p. 151. 50. Whether the ten Commandements as given by Moses doe belong to and bind us Christians or no. p. 165. 51. Whether Christ did adde any thing unto the Law p. 177. 52. Whether Christ did forbid all swearing p. 185. 53. Whether under the Gospel death or any capitall punishment may be inflicted for some offences p. 188. 189. 54. Whether the Law be an instrument of true sanctification p. 195. 55. Whether Christ have abrogated the Morall Law p. 208. 56. Whether the Law was a Covenant that God made with his people of Israel p. 230. 57. Whether the Law be a Covenant of grace p. 232. 58. Wherein the Law and Gospel doe oppose or differ from each other under which is handled the false differences between the Law and Gospel made by Anabaptists Papists and Antinomians p. 239. 59. Why God appointed such various and different administrations p. 256. 60. Whether the Gospel preach repentance or no. p. 260. 61. Whether the Law command faith p. 262. 62. How Christ is the end of the Law p. 266. VINDICIAE LEGIS OR The Vindication of the Law called MORALL LECTURE I. 1 Tim. 1. 8 9. Knowing the Law is good if a man use it lawfully THis Epistle to Timothy may be called Paul's Directory for the Church of God and in the first place he enjoyneth Timothy to preserve the Truth against all false teachers as he himselfe doth in all his Epistles Though he derived much hatred upon his person thereby yet this was his comfort and glory as Hierome wrote to Austin when he had vindicated the Truth against Pelagians Quod signum majoris gloriae est omnes haeretici te detestantur It is a signe of thy greater glory that all heretiques hate thee His injunction to Timothy begins ver 3. Charge them not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Erasmus translates it not to follow another doctrine as if it did belong to the followers but the words afterwards Teachers of the Law doe plainly refute that Now the word may 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 new things no nor yet novè after a new manner 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 in the same very words and syllables The second part of injunction is higher then the
arguments p. 86 Nature cannot dispose or prepare a mans self for justification or sanctification p. 87. proved by four reasons p. 87. 88 All works of meere Nature are sins before God proved by foure Reasons p. 92 The Etymology of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 60 O. COrrupt glosses of the Pharisees concerning oathes reproved p. 187 Promissory oathes dangerous p. 186 The obedience of the Saints implies obedientiam servi though not obedientiam servilem p. 14 Christs active obedience to the Law imputed to beleevers p. 271 The obligation of the law of Nature is from God p. 64 Gods promises are obligations to himself not to us p. 127 Why the old Covenant is called old p. 241 How an opinion may corrupt the life p. 49 Whether Originall sin may be found out by the meere light of Nature p. 82 P. PAlemon converted from his drunkenness by Plato's Lecture which he came to deride p. 70 Papists make three false differences betwixt the Law and the Gospel p. 243 Paul and James reconciled in the point of justification p. 44 The perpetuity of the obligation of the law of Nature p. 64 A distinction of a three-fold piety confuted p. 80 The Law of God by Moses is so perfect a rule that Christ added no new precept to it p. 179 Different phrases used concerning the Ceremoniall law which are never applyed to the Morall law p. 2â—0 The opinion of the Pharisees concerning the Law p. 178 Why besides the Morall law a Positive law was given to Adam in innocency Two Reasons p. 106. 107 The Positive law did lay an obligation on Adams posterity p. 108 The seven Precepts of Noah What the Thalmudists speake concerning them p. 145 It 's a generall Rule that the pressing of morall duties by the Prophets in the Old Testament is but as an explanation of the Law p. 180 The Primitive Christians held it unlawfull to kill in defence p. 193 Capitall punishments lawfull in the New Testament p. 188. 189 To what purpose are exhortations to them who have no power to obey p. 98 Popery in a great part Antinomianisme page 276 R. WHy a Reason is rendred by God for the fourth Commandement rather then others p. 170 Remission of sinnes under the law plenary as well as under the Gospel proved against the Antinomian p. 246. 247. 248 Repentance how taken p. 260. 261 Resemblances of the Trinity coÌ„futed p. 79. 80 Every Rule hath vim praecepti as well as doctrinae p. 6 To do a duty because of reward promised is not slavish and unlawfull p. 128 Revenge forbidden in the Old Testament as strictly as in the New p. 192. 193 Righteousnesse of the Law and Gospel differ much p. 5 Whether we may be now said by Christ to be more righteous then Adam in innocency p. 138 The Law of Retaliation Matth. 7. 12. opened p. 82 The properties of the righteousnesse at first fixed in Adams heart p. 119 Whether righteousnesse were naturall to Adam p. 120 S. THe Sabbath in innocency not typicall of Christ p. 137 Satan cannot work beyond a morall perswasion as God doth in conversion p. 130 What the word Sanctifie implies p. 203. 204 How the Jewes were in more servitude then Christians p. 255 Sinners outward which are majoris infamiae Sinners inward which are majoris reatus p. 179 Sincerity taken two waies p. 265 Socinians and Papists make additions in the Gospel besides what was in the Law p. 242. 243 Why the shell-fish was unclean to the Jewes p. 2 Law called spirituall in a two-fold sense 1. Effective 2. Formaliter p. 7 How the state of innocency excelled the state of reparation in rectitude immortality and outward felicity p. 137 The state of reparation excells the state of innocency in certainty of perseverance ib. Eudoxus said he was made to behold the sun p. 77 Summe of all heavenly doctrine reduced to three heads Credenda Speranda Facienda p. 252 253 Symbolicall precept p. 104 T. TEaching nova novè p. 2 Tully said that the Law of the twelve Tables did exceed all the libraries of Philosophers both in weight of authority and fruitfulnesse of matter p. 3. 4 The Threatnings of the Gospel against those who reject Christ arise from the Law joyned in practicall use with the Gospel p. 261 Tree of knowledge p. 105 Whether the Tree of life was a Sacrament of Christ to Adam or no. p. 136 No truth in Divinity doth crosse the truth of nature p. 72 Doctor Tayler his Report of Antinomianisme p. 278 V. THe reason of the variety of Gods administrations in the two T. p. 256 A two fold Unbelief Negative which damnes none Positive which damnes many p. 81 Unbelief a sinne against the Law as well as against the Gospel p. 262 How God justifies the ungodly p. 36. 37 W. MInisters ought to be wary so to set out grace as not to give just exceptions to the Papists and so to defend holy works as not to give the Antinomians cause of insultation p. 29. 30 Warre lawfull under the Gospel p. 191 Will serious and efficacious the distinction examined p. 107 How the Word in generall is the instrument of conversion p. 197. 198. Two Rules about it proved p. 199 Word how used p. 145 Works denyed by the Antinomians to be a way to heaven p. 33 There have been dangerous assertions concerning works even by those who were no Antinomians out of a great zeal for the grace of God against Papists p. 30 The presence of good works in the person justified denied by the Antinomians p. 34. They deny any gain or losse to come by them No peace of conscience comes by doing good works nor lost by omitting them p. 34. which is confuted ibid. They deny good works to be signes or testimonies of grace p. 35. Confuted ibid. Upon what grounds are the people of God to be zealous of good works p. 38 The Antinomian erreth two contrary waies about good works p. 39 Distinction betwixt saying that good works are necessary to justified persons and that they are necessary to justification p. 40 Good works necessary upon 13. grounds p. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. A Table of divers Texts of Scripture which are opened or vindicated by this TREATISE Genesis Chap. Ver. Page 1 26 113 2 17 122 Exodus 20 1 145 34 27. 28 161 Leviticus 6 2. 3 246 16 16 247 Numbers 13 23 215 Deuteronomy 4 13 229 30 11 97 32 4 33 33 3 157 1 Samuel 4 17 240 2 Sam. 1. 10 240 1 Kings 8. 9 163 2 Kings 20. 3 45 Psalme 1. 19. 119 9 68 18 37 50 2 157 Isaiah 65. 1 248 Jeremiah 16 14. 15 172 50 20 244 Ezek. 16.  244 Daniel 9. 14 244 Zech. 13. 1 244 Matthew 5 17 46. 273  21. 22 174 7 17 33  12 82 12 28 157 Mark 13 7 265 16 15 240 Luke 11 20 157 16 16 223 John 1 9 78 8 7 190 14 31 14 15
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 die 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 God-head 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 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 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 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 speaks of such most of the Latine Interpreters both ancient and modern 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 seemeth 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 speak of Gentiles abiding so but in this sense there is also a dangerous 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 sound 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 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 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 work 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 do refuse that distinction of a morall good and theologicall because every morall good ought to be theologicall 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 enabled by grace but this is shewed to be improbable By nature therefore we may understand that naturall 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 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 propenfity 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 Chap. 1. 19. The last Question is How they declare this Law written in their hearts And that is first externally two waies 1. By making good and wholesome lawes to govern men by and 2. 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 think 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 distributes 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 definition of a law whether it be an act or habit or the soul 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 shewn 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 trangression 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 oblieging though it do 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 there is no transgression If therefore the Antinomian were rectified in this principle which is very true and plain he would quickly be satisfied but of this more in another place But wee 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 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 it 's 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 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 denyed 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 the like 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 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 wee have none of these by nature in 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 Apostle's 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 Legem Naturae opiniones suas vocant 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 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 same 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 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 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 soule 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 alwayes bound to follow what conscience suggests for that is obscured and darkened but I speak of those dictates which are naturally known Other particulars as The insufficiency of it to direct in worship as also to save men I do 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 Wendelinus reports Swencfeldians that held a man was never truly mortified till he had put out all sense of conscience for sinne 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
hard thing to mans reason that the greater part of the world being Pagans and Heathens with all their infants should be excluded from heaven Hence because Vedelius a learned man did make it an aggravation of Gods grace to him to chuse and call him when so many thousand thousands of pagan-infants are damned this speech as being full of horridnesse a scoffing Remonstrant takes and sets it forth odiously in the Frontispice of his Book But though our Reason is offended yet we must judge according to the way of the Scripture which makes Christ the onely way for salvation If 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 Unbelief 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 Unbelief which they only 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 meere 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 himself 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 alwayes 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 hear-say from the people of God and also Satan is alwayes imitating of God in his institutions And howsoever the destructive mutation or change of the thing which is alwayes 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 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 she should soare up into heaven And so Tully he saith Cum primùm nascimur in omni continuò pravitate versamur much like that of the Scripture The Imagination of the thoughts of a mans heart is onely evil and that continually But Aristotle of whom one said wickedly and falsly 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 we 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 only be known by Scripture-light Therefore the Apostle Rom. 7. saith he had not known lust to be sin had not the Law said Thou shalt not last The sixth Question is What is the meaning of that grand rule of 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 he 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 we may live as we pray according to that good rule of the Platonist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 How would this subdue all those proud envious censorious and inimicitious carriages to one another But now when we speake of doing that to another which we 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
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 own nature but indifferent and only evil because prohibited So that in the words you have the object of this negative precept described two wayes first by that which is proper to it the tree of knowledge of good and evil 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 engraven 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 wee 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 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 and apt and Eph. 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 hee did yet fall it was because hee 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 hee 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 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 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 Adams obedience might be the more tryed and be manifested to be obedience For as Austine 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 Austine 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 unbelief were in this sin yet this was properly his sin 3. Why God would make this law seeing he fore-knew his fall and 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 if the Owle would look into the Sun or the Pigmee measure the Pyramides
for that which is meer mandative and preceptive without any promise at all And in this sense most of those assertions which the Learned have concerning the difference between the Law and the Gospel are to be understood for if you take as for the most part they do all the precepts and threatnings scattered up down in the Scripture to be properly the Law and then all the gracious promises wheresoever they are to be the Gospel then it s no marvell if the Law have many hard expressions cast upon it Now this shall be handled on purpose in a distinct question by it self because I see many excellent men peremptory for this difference but I much question whether it will hold or no. 2. What Law this delivered in Mount Sinai is and what kindes of laws there are and why it s called the Morall Law It is plain by Exod. 20. cap. 21. All the laws that the Jews had were then given to Moses to deliver unto the people only that which we call the Morall Law had the great preheminency being twice written by God himself in tables of stone Now the whole body of these laws 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 Moral 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 Moral 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 Moral Law though they be not perpetuall as to denote that which is perpetual and alwaies obliging yet thus it is meant here when we speak of a thing moral as opposite to that which is binding but for a time 3. Whether this law repeated by Moses be the same with the Law 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 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 Moral 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 Moral Law given by God 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 Commandments now doth sin more hainously then he 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 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 Commandment 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 known 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 by the 18. Chapter to wit when the people of Israel were in the Wilderness 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 Wilderness 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 Aegypt had defiled themselves with their waies and we see while they were in their journie in the Wilderness what horrible gross impieties they plunged themselves into therefore God to restraine their impietie and idolatry giveth them this Law to repress all that insolency so Rom 5. and Gal. 3. The Law came because of transgressions Hence Theophilact observeth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It was added signifieth that the Law was not primarily and for it 's own sake given as the promises were but to restrain transgressions then over flowing But Secondly I conceive the great and proper reason why God at 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 dispence 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 Jews 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a place where God was the Governour 5. Whether this Law was not before in the Church of God And certainly he that should think this Law was not in the Church of God before Moses his administration of it should gratly 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 Then 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 do not meane only that it was written in the hearts of men but
proper state of the Question not Whether Moses was a Minister or a Mediator to the Christians as well as the Jewes for that is clearly false but Whether when he delivered the ten Commandements he intended only the Jewes and not all that should be converted hereafter It is true the people of Israel were the people to whom this Law was immediately promulged but yet the Question is Whether others as they came under the promulgation of it were not bound to receive it as well as Jews So that we must conceive of Moses as receiving the Morall Law for the Church of God perpetually but the other Lawes in a peculiar and more appropriated way to the Jewes For the Church of the Jewes may be considered in their proper peculiar way as wherein most of their ordinances were typicall and so Moses a typicall Mediator or Secondly as an Academy or Schoole or Library wherein the true doctrine about God and his will was preserved as also the interpretations of this given by the Prophets then living and in this latter sense what they did they did for us as well as for the Jewes And that this may be the more cleared to you you may consider the Morall Law to binde two wayes 1. In regard of the matter and so whatsoever in it is the Law of Nature doth oblige all and thus as the Law of Nature it did binde the Jewes before the promulgation of it upon Mount Sinai 2. Or you may consider it secondly to binde in regard of the preceptive authority and command which is put upon it for when a Law is promulged by a Messenger then there cometh a new obligation upon it and therefore Moses a Minister and Servant of God delivering this Law to them did bring an obligation upon the people Now the Question is Whether this obligation was temporary or perpetuall I incline to that opinion which Pareus also doth that it is perpetuall and so doth Bellarmine and Vasquez 3. Howsoever Rivet seemeth to make no great matter in this Question if so be that we hold the Law obligeth in regard of the matter though we deny it binding in regard of the promulgation of it by Moses howsoever I say he thinkes it a Logomachy and of no great consequence yet certainly it is For although they professe themselves against the Antinomists and do say The Law still obligeth because of Christs confirmation of it yet the Antinomians do professe they do not differ here from them but they say the Law bindeth in regard of the matter and as it is in the hand of Jesus Christ It is true this expression of theirs is contradicted by them and necessarily it must be so for Islebius and the old Antinomians with the latter also do not only speake against the Law as binding by Moses but the bona opera the good works which are the matter of the Law as appeareth in their dangerous positions about good works which heretofore I have examined but truly take the Antinomian in their former expressions and I do not yet understand how those Orthodox Divines differ from them And therefore if it can be made good without any forcing or constraining the Scripture that God when he gave the ten Commandements for I speak of the Morall Law only by Moses did intend an obligation perpetuall of the Jewes and all others converted to him then will the Antinomian errour fall more clearly to the ground only when I bring my Arguments for the affirmative you must still remember in what sense the Question is stated and that I speak not of the whole latitude of the Ministery of Moses And in the first place I bring this Argument which much prevaileth with me If so be the Ceremoniall Law as given by Moses had still obliged Christians though there could be no obligation from the matter had it not been revoked and abolished then the Morall Law given by Moses must still oblige though it did not binde in respect of the matter unlesse we can shew where it is repealed For the further clearing of this you may consider that this was the great Question which did so much trouble the Church in her infancy Whether Gentiles converted were bound to keep up the Ceremoniall Law Whether they were bound to circumcise and to use all those legall purifications Now how are these Questions decided but thus That they were but the shadows and Christ the fulnesse was come and therefore they were to cease And thus for the Judiciall Laws because they were given to them as a politick body that polity ceasing which was the principall the accessory falls with it so that the Ceremoniall Law in the judgement of all had still bound Christians were there not speciall revocations of these commands and were there not reasons for their expiration from the very nature of them Now no such thing can be affirmed by the Morall Law for the matter of that is perpetuall and there are no places of Scripture that do abrogate it And if you say that the Apostle in some places speaking of the Law seemeth to take in Morall as well as Ceremoniall I answer it thus The question which was first started up and troubled the Church was meerly about Ceremonies as appeareth Act 15. and their opinion was that by the usage of this Ceremoniall worship they were justified either wholly excluding Christ or joyning him together with the Ceremoniall Law Now it 's true the Apostles in demolishing this errour do ex abundanti shew that not onely the works of the Ceremoniall Law but neither of the Morall Law do justifie but that benefit we have by Christ onely Therefore the Apostles when they bring in the Morall Law in the dispute they do it in respect of justification not obligation for the maine Question was Whether the Ceremoniall Law did still oblige and their additionall errour was that if it did oblige we should still be justified by the performance of those acts so that the Apostles do not joyn the Morall and Ceremoniall Law in the issue of obligation for though the Jewes would have held they were not justified by them yet they might not have practised them but in regard of justification and this is the first Argument The second Argument is from the Scripture urging the Morall Law upon Gentiles converted as obliging of them with the ground and reason of it which is that they were our fathers so that the Jews and Christians beleeving are looked upon as one people Now that the Scripture urgeth the Morall Law upon Heathens converted as a commandment heretofore delivered is plain When Paul writeth to the Romans chap. 13. 8 9. he telleth them Love is the fulfilling of the Law and thereupon reckons up the commandments which were given by Moses Thus when he writeth to the Ephesians that were not Jews cap. 6. 2. he urgeth children to honour their father and mother because it 's the first Commandment with promise Now
this was wholly from Moses and could be no other way And this is further evident by James chap. 2. 8 10. in his Epistle which is generall and so to Gentiles converted as well as to the Jews Now mark those two expressions v. 8. If you fulfill the royall Law according to the Scriptures that is of Moses where the second Table containeth our love to our neighbour and then v. 10. He that said Do not commit adultery said also Do not kill where you see he makes the Argument not in the matter but in the Author who was God by Moses to the people of Israel And if you say Why should these Commandments reach to them I answer because as it is to be shewed in answering the objections against this truth the Jews and we are looked upon as one people Observe that place 1 Cor. 10. The Apostle writing to the Corinthians saith Our fathers were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and sea c. Now how could this be true of the Corinthians but only because since they beleeved they were looked upon as one The third Argument is from the obligation upon us to keep the Sabbath day This is a full Argument to me that the Morall Law given by Moses doth binde us Christians for supposing that opinion which is abundantly proved by the Orthodox that the Sabbath day is perpetuall and that by vertue of the fourth Commandment we cannot then but gather that the Commandments as given by Moses do binde us For here their distinction will not hold of binding ratione materiae by reason of the matter and ratione ministerii by reason of the ministry for the seventh day cannot binde from the matter of it there being nothing in nature why the seventh rather then the fifth should oblige but only from the meer Command of God for that day and yet it will not follow that we are bound to keep the Jewish seventh day as the Learned shew in that controversie Now then those that deny the Law as given by Moses must needs conclude that we keep the Sabbath day at the best but from the grounds of the New-Testament and not from the fourth Command at all And howsoever it be no argument to build upon yet all Churches have kept the morall Law with the Preface to it and have it in their Catechismes as supposing it to belong unto us And when those prophane opinions and licentious doctrines came up against the Sabbath Day did not all learned and sound men look upon it as taking away one of the Commandments Therefore that distinction of theirs The Morall Law bindes as the Law of Nature but not as the Law of Moses doth no wayes hold for the Sabbath day cannot be from the Law of Nature in regard of the determinate time but hath its morality and perpetuity from the meere positive Commandment of God The fourth Argument from Reason that it is very incongruous to have a temporary obligation upon a perpetuall duty How probable can it be that God delivering the Law by Moses should intend a temporary obligation only when the matter is perpetualy As if it had been thus ordered You shall have no other gods but till Moses his time You shall not murder or commit adultery but till his ministry lasteth and then that obligation must cease and a new obligation come upon you Why should we conceive that when the matter is necessary and perpetuall God would alter and change the obligations None can give a probable reason for any such alteration Indeed that they should circumcise or offer sacrifices till Moses ministry lasted onely there is great reason to be given thus Austin well answered Porphyrius that objected God was worshipped otherwayes in the Old-Testament then in the New That is no matter saith Austin if that which be worshipped be the true object though it be worshipped divers waves when appointed by him no more then when the same thing is pronounced in divers Languages The fifth Argument If the Law by Moses do not binde us then the explication of it by the other Prophets doth not also belong unto us For this you must know that Moses in other places doth explane this Law and Davids Psalmes and Solomons Proverbs as also the Prophesies of the Prophets so farre as they are Morall are nothing but explications of the Morall Law Now what a wide doore will here be open to overthrow the Old-Testament If I bring that place Deut. 32. 46. Set your hearts upon these words which I testifie to you this day because it is your life c. to urge Christians to keep the Commandments of the Lord it may be replyed What is that to us we have nothing to do with Moses The matter indeed doth belong to us as it is in the New-Testament but as it is there written so we have nothing to do with it And by this meanes all our Texts and proofes which are brought in our Sermons may be rejected And therefore Dominicus à Soto who is among the Papists for the negative expresly saith lib. 2. de Just jure quaest 5. Art 4. that no place can be brought out of the books of the Old-Testament unto Christians as in respect of the obliging force of it This is plainly to overthrow the Old-Testament Now let us consider what are the chiefest Arguments which they bring for the support of this opinion that the Law as given by Moses doth not binde Christians And first they urge the Preface I am the Lord thy God which brought thee out of Egypt This doth not belonge to us because we nor our fathers ever were in Egypt say they further The temporall Promise to keep the Law doth not belong to us therefore Ephes chap. 6 2. when Paul urgeth that Commandment with Promise he doth not keep to the Promise particularly that thy life may be long in the land the Lord thy God shall give thee but speakes generally first by adding something that it may be well with thee which was not in the first Promise then secondly by detracting saying only that thou mayest live long upon the earth in generall Now to the Preface some answer thus That we may be said literally to be in Egypt and they goe upon this ground that we are made one with the people of the Jewes and they bring the eleventh of the Romanes to prove this where the Gentiles are said to be graffed in so that they become of the same stock And it is plane that the Beleevers are Abrahams seed and then by this interpretation whatsoever mercy was vouchsafed unto them we are to account it as ours This cannot well be rejected but yet I shall not pitch upon this Others therefore they say That this bondage was typicall of our spirituall bondage and the deliverance out of it was typicall of our deliverance from Hell But this is not so literall an interpretation as I desire though I think
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 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 selfe none can prove that the Law was to be abrogated when John Baptist came for least 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 shadow forth and prefigure a Christ so it was to cease Therefore the Law and the Prophets are put together as agreeing in one general 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 immediatly to cease only from that time they began to vanish The next place of Scripture is that famous instance so much urged 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 was the proper state of the Question in those dayes And that appeareth Act. 1. 5. 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 mistery 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 do 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 That the Apostle argueth against the Law in their abused sense of it is plain because when he speaks of it in it's own nature he commends it and extols it The Jewes because they had the Law given them in such a Divine and glorious manner attributing too much to themselves thought by the obedience to this alone without Christ to be justified as appeareth Rom 10. 1. Hence the Apostle speaketh against it in their sense looking for Justification by it as if a learned man confuting some Philosophers which do hold that the second causes do work by their own proper strength without any concourse of God he must in his arguments suppose such a power of the second cause which the adversary pleadeth for in his minde and in expressions sometimes yet none can gather from that therefore there is such a power in the second causes 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 speaks 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 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 seem to abolish the Law and do 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 Under 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 do enjoy 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
p 46 Free-will by nature p. 85 Arguments for free-will answered p. 94. 95 G. GEnealogies how usefull and how vain Page 2 How the Gentiles are said to be without a Law p. 59 Who are meant by the word Gentiles p. 58 The Gospel and Law may be compared in a double respect p. 239. 240 The word Gospel taken two wayes p. 240 Whether the Gospel be absolute or no. p. 259 Gospel taken strictly is not a doctrine of Repentance or holy works p. 262 All Good morally is good theologically p. 59 Good works how taken p. 39 Foure things required to the essence of good works ibid. The word Grace used sometimes for the effects of grace but more commonly for the favour of God p. 21 Grace is more then love p. 22 Grace implyeth indebitum and demeritum of the contrary as Cameron observes ibid. What grace the Pelagians acknowledge ib. Much may be ascribed to grace and yet the totall efficacy not given to it p. 91 H. A Two-fold writing of the law in the heart p. 60 The properties of holinesse fixed at first in Adams heart p. 119 Humiliation comes by the Gospel as an object by the Law as that which commands such affections to those objects p. 263 I. IMage and likeness signifie one thing p. 114 An Image four-fold ibid. Wherein the Image of God in man consists p. 115. 116. 117 A Thing said to be immortall four wayes p. 110 The Injudiciousnesse of the Antinomians p. 31 Whether Adams immortality in innocency be not different from that which shall be in heaven p. 139 Some things just because God wills them other things are just and therefore God wills them p. 4 The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere justifies no more in it self then other acts of obedience p. 16 Expecting justification by the Law very dangerous Fifteen evils which follow thereupon mentioned p. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27 Islebius Captain of the Antinomians in Luthers daies p. 276 How the justification of the Gospel may stand with the good works of the Law done by grace p. 39 Paul and James reconciled in the point of justification page 44 K. KIngdome of Heaven not mentioned in all the Old Testament p. 253 How Kingdome of Heaven is taken in Mat. 5. 17. p. 274 L. HOw the Law is good in eight respects p. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Four acts of the Law p. 6. The two-fold use of the Law to the ungodly p. 8. A four-fold use of the Law to the godly p. 9 Cautions concerning the Law p. 11 1. The word Law diversly taken ibid. p. 147. 226 2. The Law must not be separated from the Spirit p. 12 3. To do a cōmand out of obedience to the Law and out of love are not opposite p. 13 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 p. 14 5. The Law condemnes a beleevers sinne though not his person p. 15 6. Inability to keep the Law exempts not from obedience to it ibid. 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. 55 The derivation of the word Lex p. 60 Two things necessary to the essence of a Law p. 61 How the Law becomes a Covenant ibid. The division of Lawes in generall and why the morall Law is so called p. 147 The Law of Moses differs from the Law of Nature in three respects p. 148. 149 Why the Law was given in the wilderness ib. That the Law was in the Church before Moses p. 150 Three ends of the promulgation of the Law p. 150. 151 The Law of Moses a perfect Rule p. 152 Three differences betwixt the Judiciall Ceremoniall and Morall Law p. 155 Generall observations about the Law and the time of the delivery of the Law pag. 155. 156. 157. c. Three observations concerning the preparation to the delivery of the Law p. 155 Whether the law as given by Moses do belong to us Christians p. 165. proved p. 168. Objections answered p. 173 Though the Law as given by Moses did not belong to Christians yet the doctrine of the Antinomians holds not p. 165 Christ in the Gospel onely interprets the old Law and doth not adde new proved by four reasons p. 177. 178 The Law is spirituall in the Old Testament as in the New proved by eight instances p. 180. 181. c. The Law may be instrumentall to worke sanctification and conversion pag. 195. 3. Cautions about it ib. 196. proved by six reasons p. 199. 200. Objections answered p. 202 The Law is established three wayes by the Gospel p. 210 Three affections belonging to a Law p. 211 Three parts in the Law p. 213 Those phrases considered Of the Law and Without the Law and under the Law and In the Law p. 226 A two-fold being under the Law ibid. False differences given by some betwixt the Law and the Gospel p. 242 Law and Gospel united in the Ministery p. 261 Law opposed and oppugned two waies Directly Interpretatively page 274 Law opposed interpretatively three waies p. 275 Law by men abrogated or made void three waies ibid. A three-fold liberty p. 90 A three-fold light p. 115 M. MInistery of the Gospel more excellent then that of the Law in three respects p. 267 Moses in his zeal breaking the Tables vindicated from rashnesse and sinfull perturbation p. 160 The opinion of souls mortality confuted p. 111. 112 Adam was under the morall Law in innocency What 's meant by the word morall p. 148 Morall Law bindes two waies p. 166. 167 That the Morall Law perpetually continues a rule and Law proved by four Reasons p. 220. 221 Objections against the continuance of the morall Law answered p. 223 Morall Law having Christ for the end of it may be considered two wayes p. 266 Marcionites and Manichees the first Hereticks that opposed the Law p. 275 N. WHat is meant by the word Nature in Scripture p. 59. 60 There is a law of Nature written in mens hearts p. 60 Wherein the law of Nature consists p. 62 Four bounds of the law of Nature p. 63 Light of Nature considered in a three-fold respect p. 67 A three-fold use of the light of Nature p. 68 The light of Nature obscured three waies p. 71 The light of Nature is necessary though insufficient in religious and morall things p. 72. It 's necessary two waies ib. See p. 85. 86. 92 The light of Nature no Judge in matters of faith p. 73 It 's no prescriber of divine worship p. 74 Natures insufficiency described in three reasonings ibid. The Mystery of the Trinity and Incarnation of Christ cannot be found out by the light of Nature p. 79 How farre nature will reach in some other things p. 81. 82. 83 Man by the power of Nature wholly unable to performe good actions proved by 3.
10 17 17 203 Acts. 7 37 14  38 208 Romanes 1 18 68  19 77 2 14. 15 57  27 265 3 27 238  31 202 4 5 36  14 237 5 1 24  6. 8. 10 37 6 15 224 7 1. 2 227  per totum 9 8 11 38  13   29. 30 36 13 12 43 12 1 44 14 22 281 1 Corinthians 2 14  7 37 85 9 20 226 15 10 94 2 Corinthians 3 7 267 3 11 211 6 16 38 Galat. 3. 2 205  18   23 16  23. 24 269 4 24 157 5 23 54 5 5. 4. 13. 14 221 5 20 279 Ephesians 1 10 140. 134 2 14 211  15 212 3 12 38 6 2 171  14. 16 43 Philip. 3. 9 218 1 Thes 2. 16 265 1 Timothy 1 8. 9 17 1 9 49 4 8 42 7 5 265 2 Timothy 4 8 41 Titus 2 11. 12 204  14 40 Hebrewes 6 18 218 9 4 163  7 247  13. 14 245 10 17 244 11 16 253 12 5. 6. 7. 8 245  ult 34 Jam. 2. 8 265 1 Peter 3. 1 46 2 Peter 1 10 42  19 252 2 2. 15. 21 33 FINIS 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clem. Alex. The Text opened 1. The Law is good in respect of the matter 2. In respect of the authority of it 3. It 's instrumentally good 4. The Law is good in respect of its sanction 5. In respect of the acts of it * Assert of free grace pag. 31. 6. In respect of the end 7. In respect of the adjuncts 8. In respect of the use of it 1. Because it restrains and limits sin in the ungodly 2. Because it condemnes them 1. It quickens the godly against sin and corruption 2. It discovers sin unto them 3. It makes them disclaim all their own righteousnes 4. It makes them set an higher value of Christ and his benefits 1. The Law according to the use of the word in the Scripture is not onely a strict 〈◊〉 of things to be done by way of command but denoteth any heavenly doctrine whether it be promise or precept The acceptions of the word Law in Scripture are divers 2. The Law and the Spirit of God must not be separated 3. Obedience and love oppose not one another 4. Christs obedience exempts not us from ours 5. Beleevers sins condemned though not their persons * Dr Crisp 6. Inability to keep the Law exempts not from obedience to it * Dr Crisp 7. The Law though primarily it requireth perfect holinesse yet it excludes not a Mediatour The Law though it cannot justifie us is notwithstanding good and not to be rejected Grace and Christ not to be advanced oppositely to the Law The abuse of the Law no derogation to it 1. The Law is abused when converted to unprofitable disputes 2. When in the handling of it respect is had to worldly ends 3. When men deny it 4. When they misinterpret it 5. When they oppose it to Christ 6. When they expect justification by it 1. Justification by the Law overthrowes the nature of grace 2. Opposeth the fulnesse of Christ 3. Destroyes the true doctrine of Justification 4. Overthrows justifying faith 5. Discourageth the broken-hearted sinner 6. Brings men into themselves 7. Overthrowes the doctriâ—e of imputed righteousnesse 8. Keeps a man slavish in all his duties 9. Joyns a mans own graces to Christs mediation 10. Overthrowes hope 11. Robs God of his glory 12. Makes more in sin to damne then in Christ to save 13. Overthrowes the doctrine of sanctification 14. Takes away the doctrine of the Law 15. Overthroweth the consideration of man while he is justified Ministers ought so to set forth grace and defend good works as thereby to give the Enemy neither cause of exception nor insultation 1. Antinomians deny works to be a way to heaven 2. They deny their presence in the person justified 3. They deny any gain or losse to come by them 4. They deny them to be signes of grace How God may be said to justifie the ungodly Foure things required to the essence of good works Good works are necessary 1. Because they are the fruit of Christs death 2. Because in respect of evill workes there is some Analogy between heaven and them 3. Because a promise is made unto them 4. Because testimonies assuring us of our election 5. Because we cannot be saved without them 6. Because they are a defence against sinâ— 7. Because necessary by a naturall connexion with faith and the Spirit of God 8. By debt obligation 9. By command of God 1 Thes 4. 3. Rom. 12. 2. 10. By way of comfort to our selves 11. Because God is glorified by them 12. Because others are benefited thereby 13. Because godlinesse inherent is the end of our faith and justification The Law to a godly man is a delight not a burden The godly are under the desert of the curse but not the actuall condemnation of the Law The Law in the restraining power thereof was not made for the righteous but unrighteous 1. The true worship of God cannot be diseerned from false but by the Law 2. The depth of sin cannot be discovered without it Who meant by Gentiles How the Gentiles are said to be without a Law How said to do the things of the Law by nature The distinction of Morall and Theologicall good rejected What is here meant by Nature A two-fold writing of the Law in mens hearts and which here meant The law written in mens hearts two waies Rom. 4. 15. The Law of Nature consists in those common notions which are ingraffed in all mens hearts Some fragments onely of this Law left in us Those common notions in which this law consists are in us by nature Foure bounds of the law of Nature The obligation of the law of Nature is from God The obligation of the law of nature is perpetual and immutable The light of Nature is a remnant of Gods image 1. The light of Nature usefull and necessary for the making of wholsome lawes in Common-wealths 2. It instigateth to good duties towards God and man 3. It makes men inexcusable The light of Nature as corrupted by sin is an enemy to God and goodnes The light of Nature obscured three wayes The light of Nature inform'd by Gods Word an excellent help The light of Nature as it is a relict of Gods image is necessary in religious and morall things and that two wayes Though some divine truths may transcend the reach of Nature none do crosse the truth thereof as it is the remnant of Gods image Faith and the light of Nature go to the knowledge of the same thing different wayes The light of Nature a necessary instrument but no Judge in matters of Faith Nature insufficient to prescribe divine Worship 1. Because it would have all the worship of God sensible and pleasing to the eyes 2. Because it 's prone to appoint mediatours between
righteous then Adam What God requireth of us is not greater then what he demanded of Adam in innocency Adams immortality in the state of innocency different from and short of that which shall be in heaven 1. What meant by words 2. Nothing to be added or taken from them 3. God the Author of this Law 4. The manner of delivering it Doctr. The word Law is capable of diverse senses and significations Of the division of Laws in general and why the Morall so called The Law of Moses differs from the law of Nature 1. In respect of power of binding 2. The breach of the Law given by Moses is a greater sin then the breach of the law of Nature 3. The Morall Law requires justifying faith and repentance and contains more particulars in it then the law of Nature The Law was given when the Israelites were in the wilderness and not sooner 1. Because being come out of Aegypt they were to be restrained of their impiety and idolatry 2. Because they were now to grow into a Common-wealth The Law not only was but was publikely preached in the Church before Moses The ends of the promulgation of the Law were 1. That the Israelites might see what holiness was required of them 2. That they might come to knâ—w sin and be humbled 3. To shadow out unto them the excellent and holy nature of God The delivering of this Law to the Israelites 〈…〉 at mâ—â—â—â— unto them The Law of Moses is a perfect rule 1. The Law was given with great majesty thereby to procure the greater authority to it There is a difference between the Morall Iudiciall and Ceremoniall Law notwithstanding they were given at the same time The Morall Law more excellent then the Iudiciall and Ceremoniall in three respects God humbled the Israelites before he gave them his Law God setled his worship before he gave them Canaan Preparation required before the hearing of the Law 1. The people must sanctifie themselves 2. They must not touch the Mount 3. Nor come at their wives 2. The Law was given with great Majesty that so the people might be raised up to reverence the Law-giver 3. The Law was written by God in Tables of stone to denote the dignity and perpetuity of it What meant by the finger of God a Iob 19. 24. 4 The Israelites notwithstanding the delivery of this Law was with power and Maiesty quickly broke it 5. Moses his abode in the Mount procured authority both to himself and the Law 6. Moses his breaking of the Tables intimates that justification is not to be had by them Moses his zeal in breaking the Tables vindicated from rashnesse and sinful perturbation of minde 7. Gods manifestation of his glory unto Moses makes for his honour 8. Though the writing of the second Tables was Gods work yet the forming and polishing them was the work of Moses 9. The extraordinary glory that was upon Moses argues the administration of the Law to be glorious 10. The preservation of the Law in the Ark makes much for the glory of it Seeing God hath put such marks of glory upon the Law let us take heed of disparaging it The doctrine of the Antinomians heterodox though the Law as given by Moses did not binde Christians The Law given by Moses doth not bind us in regard of Moses The Law given by Moses as written for the Church of God and intended for good to Christians in the New Testament is binding Though the people of Israel were the present subject to whom the Morall Law was given yet the Observation thereof was intended for the Church of God perpetually The Morall Law is binding 1. In Regard of the matter of it 2. In regard of the preceptive authority put upon it The obligation of the Morall Law perpetuall proved by severall Arguments Argum. 1. Argum. 2. Argum. 3. Argum. 4. Argum. 5. Arguments of the Antinomians whereby they would prove that the Law as given by Moses does not bind Christians examined answered Argum. 1. Answ 1. Answ 2. Answ 3. Argum. 2. Answ Though the Law given by Moses doth not belong to us in all the particulars of the administration of it yet in the obliging power of it it does Take heed of rejecting the Law as given by Moses a What is mean by It hath been said by them of old b VVho meant by those of old Those precepts said to be of old are the Law and words Moses Christ does only interpret the old adds no new laws The Pharisees were of opinion that the law did only reach the outward man and forbid out ward acts Doctr. 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 2. The Law preferred inward graces before outward duties All the duties required by the Law were to be done 1. In Faith 2. In love Love to God in as great a measure commanded by the Law as by the Gospel In all our addresses to God it required spirituall motives It required joy in God above all things else It required perfection of the subject object degrees c. The Law instrumentall to work grace in us as well as the Gospel It is the duty of Ministers to be diligent in preaching and expounding the Law Swearing neither absolutely unlawfull not universally forbidden by our Saviour with reasons why Corrupt glosses of the Pharisees touching Swaring reproved In what sense the words An eye for an eye A tooth for a tooth are to be taken Capitall punishments even death it selfe may be inflicted upon Ofsenders 1. Because commanded by God * Grotius 2. Because it is the Magistrates office 3. Because practis'd under the Gospel upon Ananias and Sapphira and so not repugnant to it Object 1. Sol. Object 2. Sol. Object 3. Sol. Warre allowed by Christ under the Gospel Two causes for which the Primitive Christians might decline warre All men naturally prone ta revenge injuries The primitive Christians held it unlawfull for a man in his own defence to kill the invader Revenge as strictly forbidden in the Old Test as in the New Private revenge unlawfull and forbidden by our Saviour The preach ing of the Law not onely preparatively but being blessed by God instrumentally works the conversion of men The Law without Christ cannot work to regeneration The Law may be blessed to conversion yet the matter of it can neither be ground of justification or consolation to us The Scripture in generall is a medium working by Christ to our conversion The word read or preached concurres obejctively onely to mans conversion All the benefits conveyed to the soul by the preaching of the word are efficiently from Gods Spirit The VVord without the Spirit cannot convert us and why Six Arguments to prove the Law and the preaching of it means of Conversion 1. 2. 3. Use Pray for the benefit of 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 So Tertullian of Valentinus Multas introduxit fabulas we see here the word fable in an ill sense Therefore Grotius cannot be excused who calleth our Saviours Parables fables as that of the Prodigall who spent his portion Haec sabula saith he nos decet quod omnes ortu sunt filii Dei where both his words and matter are very offensive to the truth 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 Heeuba's mother or Achilles pedegree 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 goe and no further Although some referre genealogy not so much to persons as things for that the Jewes called genealogy when one thing was fained to flow from and as it were to be begotten of another therefore saith one Paul ver 5. gives a short but profitable genealogy when he makes a good conscience to flow from a faith unfained 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 deal 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 ministry or preaching and so the Apostle useth the word v. 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 turn 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 speak 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 seeme to prejudice the Gospel or the Gospel and not to prejudice the Law For take but these two Verses Videtur Apostolus pugnantia dicere The Apostle seemeth to speake contradictions 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 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 that is consequentially or reductively 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 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 only enunciative and not preceptive But more determinatively of this in its place 2. In respect of the authority stamped upon it by God whereby it becomes 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 himself 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 edium 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 The obligation by the Law is eternall and immutable insomuch that it doth absolutely imply a contradiction that there should be in mans nature an holinesse or righteousnesse without a law or subjection to the command of God Hence it is a dangerous opinion of some who say the holinesse of our natures is not commanded by the Law but of our actions and so not originall sinne but onely actuall sinne shall be forbidden by the Decalogue 3.
the nature and extent of it is spirituall for it forbids the sins of the spirit not only 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 wrinkles 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 beleever 1. To the ungodly it hath this use 1. To restrain and limit sin And certainly though it should not reach to renovation and changing of mens hearts yet here is a great deale of good that it 's an outward whip and scourge to men whereby they are kept in honest discipline and this made the Apostle say The Law was added because of transgressions The people of Israel by their being in the wildernesse having forgotten God and being prone to Idolatry the Lord he added this Law as a restraint upon them Even as you see upon mad-men and those that are possessed with devils 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 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 soul 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 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 complain 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 commands 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 only the unruly colt that is yet untamed but the horse that is broken hath a bit and bridle also and so not only the ungodly but even the godly whose hearts have been much broken and tamed doe yet need a bridle Lest they should cast off the Spirit of God that would govern them 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 do not feele it 2. To enlighten and discover unto them daily more and more heart-sinne and soul-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 It is thy errour to think sins were born with thee no they afterwards came upon thee Erras si tecum vitia nasci putas supervenerunt ingesta sunt And so Pelagius his assertion was that We are born as well without vice as virtue 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 own power and righteousnesse 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 worms 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 own 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 self-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 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
whether some of their Positions will not carry them neere such a dangerous rock For if the Law have nothing to doe with me 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 Use 2. Of Reproofe to those who live against this Law Sins that are against the Law of Nature do most terrifie How many live in such sins 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 gain It 's much how farre they saw this way Sinnes against naturall conscience are called Crying sinnes 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 who hath only naturall honesty therefore there are many spirituall sinnes that he never humbleth himself for as Paul saith he knew not the motions of his heart to be sinne Hence men are to be exhorted to get further light and more tendernesse then a naturall conscience can ever attain 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 Use 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 work of the Spirit to convince of this sinne 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 poisoned 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 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 own 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 detain the truth in unrighteousnesse Now this moon-light or glimmering of Nature is of a three-fold use 1. For societies and publike Common-wealths whereby they have 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 incounsell by Jethro his father-in-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 of men to many good actions and duties towards God and man Hence still observe that phrase They detain 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-born and therefore Aristotle saith the better part of the minde 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 It was not easie to finde out the Maker of the world nor yet safe to make known to the people him when he was found out 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 he doth most freely and boldly write against the practices of their worship but saith Austin He had liberty in his writing but not in his life Libertas affuit scribenti non viventi I will name some passages because they are applicable to Popish Idolatry as well as Paganish They dedicate their gods in most base materialls and call them gods which if taking life they should meet us on a sudden we
by the Scriptures The people of Israel would have sensible gods that they might see them and certainly men doe as much delight in sensible pompous worship as children do in gay babies therefore the Prophet speaketh of their goodly images But all this ariseth because they are ignorant of spirituall worship and cannot tell how to make spirituall advantage from God It was well said by one that A superstitious man is Gods flutterer and not his friend he is more officious then needs and where a man is busie ubi non oportet said Tertullian he is negligent ubi oportet Such carnall sensible worshippers are well compared to those that because they have no children delight in birds and dogs so because they have no true graces of the Spirit of God they delight in these imitations 2. To appoint mediatours between us and God This was the great Argument of the Heathens they thought themselves unworthy and therefore appointed others to mediate between them and God which Argument of the Heathens some of the Fathers wrote against But doe not the Papists the same thing Doe not they tell us Petitioners at the Court doe not addresse themselves immediately to the Prince but get Favourites to speak for them so must we to God And therefore Salmeron doth give some reasons why it 's more piety and religion to pray to God and Saints together then to God alone But is not this to forget Christ our head who is made neerer to us then Angels are And indeed Angels are reconciled to us by Christ If therefore we follow the light of Nature thus we shall fall into the ditch at last and superstition is never more dangerous then when it 's coloured over with the specious colours of Arguments 3. To doe all by way of compensation and satisfaction to God Upon this ground were all the sacrifices of the Heathens And is not all this with Popery Doe they not make all penall things compensative If they pray that is meritorious if they fast that is satisfactory Hence ariseth that seeming not to spare the flesh Col. 3. ult and the Apostle saith it hath a shew of wisdome But the more like any actions are to worship and wisdome and are not so the more loathsome they are as in an Ape that which makes an Ape so much deformed and loathsome is because it is so like a man and is not a man Use Of Instruction What hath made the idolatry of the Church of Rome so like Paganish and Ethnicall idolatry Even because they followed their light the light of Nature and Reason Look over all their Paganish gods and they have answerable saints As the Heathens had their Ceres and Bacchus and Aesculapius insomuch that Varro said Discendum fuisset quâ de causâ quisque deorum avocandus esset nè à Libero aqua à Lympho vinum optaretur so here they have their St. Martin for the vineyard Christopher for suddaine death Nicholas for mariners c. And this was done at first they say to gain the Heathens but the contrary fell out Let us then follow the light of Nature no further then we ought let her be an hand-maid not a mistresse And then we must take heed of going against her where she doth truly direct Are there not many not only unchristian but also unnaturall actions let us remember that LECTURE VIII ROM 2. 14. For the Gentiles c. YOu have heard of two things considerable in the law of Nature the knowledge or light of it and the power or ability of it We shall God willing at this time prosecute the doctrine of the former part and the taske we have at this time is to answer some Questions about the light of Nature for as there are some who depresse it too much so there are others advance it too high The Philosophers called the Christians Credentes by way of reproach because they did not argue by reason but receive upon trust and there are some who doe not indeed with Abilardus make faith aestimatio a fancy yet they make it ratio Let us see therefore what this light can doe by way of answer to some Questions onely not to answer all The first Question Whether a man can by the light of Nature and by the consideration of the creatures come to know there is a God This is denyed by Socinians and others Indeed Bellarmine chargeth tenets to this effect upon Calvin but that which the Protestant Authours hold is that he may indeed have a knowledge that there is a God but what this God is whether he be one and what his attributes are they cannot so reach to Nihil Deo notius nihil ignotius otherwise they say there is no naturall Atheist in opinion though many in affections desiring there were no God As Tully argueth let us take heed how we bring this opinion into the world that there is a God lest hereby we bring a great slavery and feare upon our selves Are there not many Polititians have too much of this poison in their hearts But of this more anon Onely that there is such a knowledge naturall appeareth by some places as first Rom. 1. 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That which may be knowne of God for there are some things that by Nature could never be known as the Trinity and Incarnation of Christ Now this knowledge is by the book of the creatures This whole universe may be called the lay-mens book Rebus pro speculo utamur we may see the power and wisdome of God in them Tully hath a good comparison As a man that seeth and readeth a book and observeth how every letter is put together to make an harmonious sense must needs gather that all those letters did not fall together by chance but that there was a wise authour in the composing of them so it 's in the world which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 none can think such a sweet compagination of all the parts of it should come together meerly accidentally It 's said to be the speech of one Antony much spoken of in Ecclesiasticall story that he called the world a great volume and the heaven and water and earth were the pages and leaves the starres and living creatures were the letters in those pages and how glorious a letter is the Sun when Eudoxus said he was made onely to behold it The wayes and arguments by which Naturalists have proved this have not been by demonstrations à priori for that is impossible but by the effects As a man that cannot see the Sun in it self it is so dazeling doth look upon it in a bason of water thus we who cannot know God in himself know him in the creatures The second proof is from Psal 19. compared with Rom. 10. where the Psalmist makes the creatures so many tongues speaking a God yea the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 eructat doth signifie the plenty and serenity as also the fluid eloquence of the
Aristotle sheweth in many reasons against Plato What would have been in innocency if Adam had stood whether a common right to all things or a divided propriety I speak of goods is hard to say But as for the practice of the Church of Jerusalem that was occasionall and necessary therefore not to be a ground for perpetuall command for other Churches did it not as appeareth by the almes that were gathered nor was it laid necessarily upon all to sell what they had as appeareth by Paul's speech to Ananias Use 1. If God be so angry with those that abuse naturall light how much rather then with such who also abuse Gospel light These doe not put light under a bushell but under a dung-hill There are many that are Solifugae as Bats and Owles are In one Chapter God is said three times to deliver them up because they did not glorifie God according to Natures light how much more then according to the Gospels light Gravis est lux conscientiae said Seneca but gravior est lux Evangelii The light of the Ministery and Word must needs be more troublesome to thy sinfull wayes Use 2. Of Examination whether even among Christians may not be found men no better then Heathens Now such are 1. Ignorant people how few have any knowledge of God 2. Violent adherers to former Idololatricall courses taken up by fore-fathers There is this difference between an Idolater and a true Beleever The Beleever is like those creatures that you can make nothing lye on their backs unlesse it be fastened by some Scripture or reason but the Heathen is like the Camell that had a back for burdens on purpose so that any idolatry he would bear though it were not tyed on by arguments 3. Such as are inordinately distracted about the things of this world Matth. 6. After these things doe the Heathens seek Hast thou not much of an Heathen in thee 4. Such as rage at Christ and his reformation Psal 2. Why doe the Heathens rage LECTURE IX ROM 2. 14. For the Gentiles doe by nature the things of the law WE have handled those things that concern the light and conduct of Nature now we shall speak of that which belongs to the ability and power of Nature for herein are two extreme errours one of the Pelagian Papist and Arminian with others who lift up this power too high The enemies of grace lurk under the praises of nature Sub laudibus Naturae latent inimici gratiae and the other of the Antinomians who seem to deny all the preparatory works upon the heart of a man holding that Christ immediately communicateth himselfe to grosse sinners abiding so and though they hold us passive at the first receiving of Christ which all orthodox do yet they expresse it in an unsound sense comparing God unto a Physician that doth violently open the sick mans throat and poure down his physick whether he will or no whereas God though he doth convert fortiter yet he doth it also suaviter Now for the full clearing of our inability to any good thing we will lay down these Propositions 1. There is a naturall power of free-will left in us Free-will is not indeed a Scripture name but meerly ecclesiasticall and hath been so abused that Calvin wished the very name of it were quite exploded but if we speak of the quid sit and not the quid possit the being of it and not the working of it we must necessarily acknowledge it The neerest expression to the word Free-will is that 1 Cor. 7. 37. having 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 power over his own will but generally the Scripture useth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is as much as we intend There is in all men naturally that power whereby through the help of Reason he chooseth this and refuseth another-thing only this must not be extended to the things of grace Now to say what this Free-will is is very hard Perkins following some Schoole-men maketh it a mixed power of the Understanding and the Will others a third reall distinct power from them but it may probably be thought that it is nothing but the will in electing or refusing such things so that we call it the Will in those things it 's necessarily carried out to as to will what is good and not sin as sin and then Free-will when it 's carried out to those things that are not necessarily connexed with it Even as in the Understanding while the Understanding doth consider first Principles it 's called Intellectus while Conclusions that are gathered from them it 's called Ratio Therefore our Adversaries do but calumniate us when they say we turn men into beasts for we hold the Understanding going before and the Will after and this is more then a meere spontaneous inclination in things naturall Therefore it is that we do not bid the fire burn or perswade an horse to goe because there is not Understanding or Will in these things as there is in a man 2. This which is left in us is not able to performe naturall actions without the generall help of God That which we have acknowledged to be in a man naturally must still be limited to his proper sphere to naturall and civill actions or some externally religious duties but even then we must acknowledge a generall help or assistance of God without which we could not doe any naturall thing so that place in the Acts In him we live and move and have our being by which we prove that God doth not onely give us the principles of being and moving but we move in him i. e. by him Therefore Hierome did well reprove the Pelagians that thought without the generall aide of God a man might move his finger or write and speak There have beem some who have thought that all which God doth for us in our naturall actions is onely to give the principles and power o◠actions and then afterwards we need no further aide then mee◠preservation of our being no concourse or aide of God helping us in the action Thus Durand of old and one Dodo of late who hath written a Book onely to that purpose but the place abovesaid doth evidently convince it and we see that God did hinder the fire from burning the three Worthies though he did preserve the fire at the same time in the power of burning which could not be otherwise then by denying his actuall aide to the working of the fire For to say that the reason was because of Gods doing something upon their bodies were to make the miracle there where the Scripture doth not lay it If you aske then why this may not be called a speciall help of God as well as that whereby we are inabled to beleeve or repent I answer there is a great deal of difference 1. Because this generall aide is necessary to wicked actions in regard of their positive nature as well
forbeare those acts of grosse impiety which they doe supposing they have not customarily or by the just judgement of God throwne themselves into the power of such sins not that this will helpe to save them onely their punishment will be lesse Thus Fabricius and Camillus saith Austin will be lesse punished then Verres or Cataline not because these were holy but because they were lesse wicked minora vitia virtutes vocamus I know it 's a question Whether a godly man can doe more good then he doth or lesse evill then he doth but this may be handled in the controversall part we speak now of a wicked man who can doe no good at all unlesse in the externall act Yet 10. All that they doe is a sin before God This is an antidote to the former Whatsoever they have done though for the matter glorious yet they were but glorious sins for 1. They could not come from faith or one reconciled with God and the person must be first accepted before the action Heb. 11. Without faith it 's impossible to please God 2. It could not come from a regenerate nature and therefore the tree not being good the fruit was also bad It 's not in Divinity as in Morall Philosophy where justa justè agendo fimus justi but we have the esse or being first and then the operari It 's a question worth the disputing Whether the grace of God works the act of beleeving and other graces in us first and then by them we receive the habits The Papists and Arminians and some others go that way but it is not consonant to Scripture as may be shewed hereafter 3. They could not be good if you regard the end They could do nothing for the glory of God This made Theophylact say Wee could not instance in one good Heatken for that which they did was for their vain-glory carnalis cupiditas non aliâ fauatur one divell did but cast out another and if they did intend some particular good end as to relieve the miserable to help the commonwealth this was not enough for the ultimate and chief end ought to be intended by them Lastly There is no promise of God made to any thing a man doth that hath not faith Ahab indeed and Nebuchadnezzar had temporall rewards but in what sense I shall shew in answering the Objections Use To bewaile the wofull condition of man by nature How is every bird in the aire and beast in the field in a better naturall condition then they are This is worse then to be blind to be lame for our soules are all blind lame deafe yea and dead in sin What a sad thing is it to be all the day and yeare long damning our soules If we eat or drink we sin if we buy or sell we sin And consider that sin is the greatest evill and that onely which God loaths and abhorres Let all thou doest therefore terrifie thee and make thee to tremble let this make thee cry for grace as the poore blind and lame did that they might be healed And because you doe not feele this or are unwilling to be heard therefore you are the more miserable Nolunt phrenetici ligari lethargici excitari LECTURE X. ROM 2. 14. For if the Gentiles doe by nature the things of the law c. WE have already positively and plainly so farre as wee conceived necessary declared and proved the truth about the power and ability of a man by Nature to doe that which is good now it remaineth we should antidote against those Objections that doe militate against this truth and that indeed with much shew of reason for never have men been more witty then when they have undertaken to be the patrons of Nature But Austin well called it vitreum acumen the more it glitters the easier it 's broken The Heathens are very obstinate in propugning mans power Onely sluggards need Gods help Ignavis opus est auxilio divino saith Seneca the Tragedian and so the other Seneca It is the gist of the gods that we live but our own doing that we live well Deorum quidem munus esse quòd vivimus nostrum verò quòd bene sancteque vivimus and that of Tully is very arrogant lib. 3. de nat deorum Quia sibi quisque virtutem acquirit neminem è sapientibus unquam de ea gratias Deo egisse and saith he Wee are praised for our vertue which could not be if it were the gift of God and not of our selves But how different are the holy men in the Scripture from these wise men of the world who when they have been enabled by God to doe any good thing have not taken the glory of it to themselves And as Joab did about Rabbah when he had taken it sent to David to come and take all the glory so doe they say Not I but the grace of God 1 Corinth 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to be understood which was present with mee not which did work with mee Finst therefore they say If so be we are not able to doe any thing towards our salvation this is to turn men into stockes and stones or beasts and so no difference between them and us But we say Although those similitudes the Scripture holds forth doe prove our inability for that which is good yet they must not be made alike in all things It 's true to convert men is to make children unto Abraham out of stones yet we must not think that is therefore an universall likenesse between men and stones For first consider this vast dissimilitude In stones and beasts there is no passive capacity of grace but in man there is We say there is a power for grace in a mans nature and the Papists say there is a power only they say it 's an active power though remote we say 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 wee 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 hee hath not lost the faculties themselves therefore though he be theologically dead yet hee 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 wee may grant those objections that if a man had not this free-will
if you doe 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 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 wee shall see anon But to make u◠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 hee not also promise to doe for us as to circumcise our hearts and to walk in his commandements How much better is that of Austius 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 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 hee would touch the heavens with his singer 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 wee 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 self to such a subject but becomes impossible accidentally through a mans fault Now for a man to be commanded that which through his own fault he becometh unable to do is no illusion or cruelty If a creditor require his debt of a bankrupt who hath prodigally spent all and made himself 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 beyond a duty required or power ever given 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 himself 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 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 do almost say so but the truth is the Law as is to be shewed against the generall mistake if it was not in it self 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 to be shewed 4. How can God upbraid or reprove men for their transgressions if they could doe no other wayes This also seemeth very strange if men can do 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 sinne but he doth it with all his inclination and delight How farre voluntarinesse is requisite to the nature of a sinne 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 that though men at first may choose whether they will be wicked or no yet if once habituated they cannot but be evil 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 evil The
legall and one that was not affected with the goodnesse of God to him It is true if a man obey God out of love to any thing more then God or equally with God this is unlawfull according to that Minus te amat qui tecum Domine aliquid amat 3. That hereby Adams obedience might be the more willing and free An absolute law might seeme to extort obedience but a covenant and agreement makes it to appeare more free and willing as if Adam would have obeyed though there could have been no obligation upon him to doe it 5. Consider that the nature of this Covenant was of works and not of faith It was not said to Adam Beleeve and have life eternall but Obey even perfect and entire obedience It is true indeed there was faith of adherence and dependance upon God in his promise and word and this faith doth not imply any imperfection of the state of the subject as sinfull which justifying faith doth for it was in Christ who in his temptations and tryalls did trust in God And what the Old Testament calls trusting the New calls beleeving yea some say that this kind of faith shall be in heaven viz a dependance upon God for the continuance of that happinesse which they doe enjoy This faith therefore Adam had but in that Covenant it was considered as a gracious act and work of the soul not as it is now an organ or instrument to receive and apply Christ With us indeed there is justifying faith and repentance which keeps up a Christians life as the Naturalists say the calor innatus and humidum radicale doe the naturall life Faith is like the calor innatus and Repentance is like the humidum radicals and as the Philosopher saith if the innate heat devoure too much the radicall moisture or the radicall moisture too much the heat there breed presently diseases so it is with us if beleeving make a man repent lesse or repenting make a man beleeve the lesse this turneth to a distemper Yet though it were a Covenant of works it cannot be said to be of merit Adam though in innocency could not merit that happinesse which God would bestow upon him first because the enjoying of God in which Adams happinesse did consist was such a good as did farre exceed the power and ability of man It 's an infinite good and all that is done by us is finite And then in the next place Because even then Adam was not able to obey any command of God without the help of God Though some will not call it grace because they suppose that onely cometh by Christ yet all they that are orthodox do acknowledge a necessity of Gods enabling Adam to that which was good else he would have failed Now then if by the help of God Adam was strengthned to do the good he did he was so farre from meriting thereby that indeed he was the more obliged to God 6. God who entred into this Covenant with him is to be considered as already pleased and a friend with him not as a reconciled Father through Christ Therefore here needed no Mediatour nor comfort because the soul could not be terrified with any sin Here needed not one to be either medius to take both natures or Mediatour to performe the offices of such an one In this estate that speech of Luthers was true which he denieth in ours Dens est absolute considerandus Adam dealt with him as absolutely considered not relatively with us God without Christ is a consuming fire and we are combustible matter chaffe and straw we are loathsome to God and God terrible to us but Adam he was Deo proximo amicus Paradisi colonus as Tertullian and therefore was in familiarity and communion with him But although there was not that ordered administration and working of the three Persons in this Covenant of works yet all these did work in it Hence the second Person though not as incarnated or to be incarnated yet he with the Father did cause all righteousnesse in Adam and so the holy Ghost he was the worker of holinesse in Adam though not as the holy Spirit of Christ purchased by his death for his Church yet as the third Person so that it is an unlikely assertion which one maintains That the Trinity was not revealed in this Covenant to Adam so that this sheweth a vast difference between that Covenant in innocency and this of grace What ado is here for the troubled soul to have any good thoughts of God to have any faith in him as reconciled but then Adam had no fear nor doubt about it 7. This Covenant did suppose in Adam a power being assisted by God to keep it and therefore that which is now impossible to us waâ— possible to him And certainly if there had been a necessity to sin it would have been either from his nature or from the devill Not from his nature for then he would have excused himself by this when he endeavoured to clear himself But Tertullian speakâ— wittily Nunquam figulo suo dixit Non prudenter definxisti me rudis admodum haereticus fuit non obaudiit non tamen blasphemavit creatorem lib. 2. ad Mar. cap. 2. Nor could any necessity arise from the devill whose temptations cannot reach beyond a moral swasion Therefore our Divines doe well argue that if God did not work in our conversion beyond a morall swasion he should no further cause a work good then Satan doth evil Nor could this necessity be of God who made him good and righteous nor would God subtract his gifts from him before he sinned seeing his fall was the cause of his defection not Gods deserting of him the cause of his fall Therefore although God did not give Adam such an help that de facto would hinder hiâ— fall yet he gave him so much that might and ought to preventâ— it And upon this ground it is that we answer all those cavills why God doth command of us that which is impossible for us to doe for the things commanded are not impossible in themselves but when required of Adam he had power to keep them but he sinned away that power from himself and us Neither is God bound as the Arminians fancy to give every one power to beleeve and repent because Adam in innocency had not ability to doe these for he had them eminently and virtually though not formally But more of these things in the Covenant of grace Use 1. To admire with thankfulnesse Gods way of dealing with us his creatures that he condescends to a promise-way to a covenant-way There is no naturall or Morall necessity that God should doe thus We are his and he might require an obedience without any covenanting but yet to shew his love and goodnesse he condescends to this way Beloved not onely we corrupted and our duties might be rejected not onely we in our persons might be abashed but had we all that
from the beginning if upon thy sick weak and mortall body It was not thus from the beginning Now here is no way to keep up the heart but by looking to Christ Though thou hast lost the image of God yet he is the expresse image of his Father Though thou hast not perfect righteousnesse he hath Whatsoever thy losse and evil be by the first Adam thy gain and good may be by the last Adam Admire herein the mysteries of Gods grace and love What may we not expect for temporalls if needfull when he is thus gracious in spiritualls Are riches subsistence equall to Christ Use 2. Of Exhortation not to rest in any estate but that of restauration again The word as you heard Ephes 1. 10. to gather doth imply that all mankind is like an house fallen down lying in its rubbish and ruines Let us not therefore stay in this condition It 's a condition of sinne of wrath Oh much better never to have been born then to be thus How happy are all the irrationall creatures in their estate above us if not repaired by Christ And know that to be restored again to this image of God is a great and rare blessing few partake of it Holinesse must be as inwardly rooted and settled in thee as ever sinne and corruption hath soaked into thee Thou didst drink iniquity like water doest thou now as the Hart pant after the water-brooks The resurrection of the soul must be in this life It was sinfull proud but it 's raised an holy humble soule LECTVRE XV. EXOD. 20. 1. And God spake all these words saying c. HAving handled the Law given to Adam in innocency both absolutely as it is a Law and relatively as a Covenant we now proceed to speak of that Law given by God through the ministery of Moses to the people of Israel which is the great subject in controversie between the Antinomians and us There were indeed Precepts and Laws given before Moses Hence the Learned speak much of Noah's Precepts The Talmudists say as Cuneus relates that these seven Precepts of Noah did contain such an exact rule of righteousness that whosoever did not know them the Israelites were commanded to kill But because these are impertinent to my scope I pass them by And in the handling of this Law of Moses I will use my former method considering the Law absolutely in it self and then relatively as a Covenant for as God you have heard hath suffered other errours about the Deity of Christ and the Trinity and the grace of God therefore to break forth that the truth about them may be more cleared and manifested so happily the Law will be more extolled in its dignity and excellency then ever by those opinions which would overthrow it The Text upon which most of the matter I have to say shall be grounded are the words now read unto you that are an introduction to the Law containing briefly 1. The nature of the matter delivered which is called Words so Deut 4. ten words hence it s called the Decalogue Now the Hebrew word is used not for a word meerly as we say one word for so the ten Commandments are more then ten words but it signifieth a concise and brief sentence by way of command Hence it s translated sometimes by the Septuagint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Deut. 17. 19. and sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psal 118. 57. so in the New Testament that which is called by Mark 7. 13. the word of God is by Matthew named the commandment of God So Paul also Gal. 5. 14. The whole Law is fulfilled in one word that is one brief sentence by way of command 2. You have the note of universality All these words to shew that nothing may be added to them or diminished onely here is a difficulty for Deut. 5. where these things are repeated again by Moses there some things are transposed and some words are changed But this may be answered easily that the Scripture doth frequently use a liberty in changing of words when it repeateth the same thing onely it doth not alter the sense And happily this may be to confute that superstitious opinion of the Jews who are ready to dream of miraculous mysteries in every letter 3. There is the efficient cause of this in the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This word is used in the plurall as some of the Learned observe defectively and is to be supplied thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to denote the excellency of God as they say the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for excellentissima fera By the Septuagint its translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because saith a learned man they interpreting this for the Grecians and the wise men amongst them attributing the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to those that are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore they would use a word to shew that he who gave the Law was Lord even over all those Now God is here described to be the author of these Laws that so the greater authority may be procured to them Hence all Law-givers have endeavoured to perswade the people that they had their Laws from God 4. You have the manner of delivering them God spake them saying which is not to be understood as if God were a body and had organs of speaking but only that he formed a voice in the air Now here ariseth a great difficulty because of Acts 7. where he that spake to Moses on Mount Sinai is called the Angel This maketh the Papists and Grotius go upon a dangerous foundation That God did not immediatly deliver the Law but an Angel who is therefore called God and assumes unto himself the name Jehovah because he did represent the person of God But this is confuted by the learned I shall not preface any further but raise this Doctrine That God delivered a Law to the people of Israel by the hand or ministry of Moses I shall God willing handle this point doctrinally in all the Theological considerations about the Law and First you must still remember that the word Law may be used in divers senses and before this or that be asserted of it you must clear in what sense you speak of the Law Not to trouble you again with the several acceptions of the word which you must have alwaies in your eye take notice at the present of what a large or restrained signification the word Law is capable of for we may either take the word Law for the whole dispensation and promulgation of the Commandments Morall Judiciall and Ceremoniall Or else more strictly for that part which we call the Morall Law yet with the preface and promises added to it and in both these respects the Law was given as a Covenant of grace which is to be proved in due time Or else most strictly
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 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 holiness So that men who speak against the use of the Law and the preaching of it do 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 end why he gave it then now I speak 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 and the people of Israel had lived long without the publick worship and service of God it was necessary to have this law enioyned them that they might see far more purity and holiness required of them then otherwise they would be perswaded of 2. By this meanes they would come to know sin as the Apostle speakes and so be deeply humbled in themselvs the law of God being a cleare light to manifest those inward heart-sins and soul-lusts that crawl in us as so many toads and serpents which we could never discover before 3. Hereby was shadowed forth the excellent and holy nature of God as also what purity was accepted by him and how we should be holy as he himselfe is holy for the law is holy as God is holy It s nothing but an expression 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 goodness and favour of God in delivering this law to 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 press them with this love of his in giving them those commandments And that it was not for their sakes or because of any merit in them but because he loved them So David Psal 147. he hath not done so to other Nations Hosea also aggravates this mercy Hos 8. 12. I have written unto him the great things of my Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 amplitudines legis meae where the Prophet makes the Law a precious gift deposited in the Jews hands And to this may be referred all the benifits that the Psalmist and Prophets do make to come by the law of God insomuch that it is a very great ingratitude and unthankfulness unto God when people cry down the Law and the preaching of it That which God speaks of as a great mercy to a people they do 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 Jews now under the Gospel as is to be proved as much as unto them And therefore you cannot reade one commandment in the spirituall explication of it for the law is spirituall but you have cause to bless 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 bless 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 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 do but adde the explication of the Law if it be not taken in too strict a sense Hence is that commandment of not adding to it or detracting from it And in what sense the Apostle speakes against it calling it the killing letter the ministration of death working wrath is to be shewed hereafter When our Saviour Mat. 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 as 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 wil 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 Use 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 Devil and that it was given to the Jews for their destruction because it 's said to work 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 Jews and Papists do abuse the Law and the works of it to justification shall it not therefore have its proper place and dignity How sacred are the laws 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 hear that
to overcome the heart of the stoutest And in this nature we are still to suppose the Law preached to us for howsoever all that terrour be past yet the effect of it ought to abide upon every man so far forth as corruption abideth in him for what man is there whose pride lukewarmness or any sinfull corruption needs not this awakening It 's said Exod. 19. 18. God descended upon the mount Sinai in a smoak of fire and a cloud all was to shew the incomprehensible Majesty of God as also his terrour to wicked men and in this respect the dispensation of the Gospel was of greater sweetness Hence Gal 4. 24. the Apostle makes this mount Sinai to be Agar generating to bondage This I say must be granted if you speake comparatively with Gospel-dispensations but yet the Psalmist speakes of this absolutely in it selfe as a great mercy Psal 50. 2. Out of Sion the perfection of beauty God hath shined and the fire about him did signifie his glorious splendour as also his power to overthrow his enemies and consume them so Psal 96. All the earth is bid to rejoyce at the Lords reigning which is described by his solemne giving of the Law which the Church is to rejoyce at yea ver 7. it is applyed to Christ Heb. 7. though the Apostle followes the Septuagint so that if you take these things absolutely they are lookt upon as mercies yea and applyed to Christ And it is made a wonderfull mercy to them that God did thus familiarly reveale himselfe to them Deut. 4. 7. and Deut. 5. 4. yea learned men think that Christ the Son of God did in the shape of a man deliver this Law to Moses and speake familiarly with him but especially see Deut. 33. 3. where the word loving signifies imbracing by way of protection in the bosome The gifts of the holy Ghost were given with fiery tongues and a mighty rushing wind so that the Gospel is fire as well as the Law 3. Gods immediate writing of these with his own fingers in tables of stone Exod. 31. 18. Which honour was not vouchsafed to the other Lawes Now by the Finger of God howsoever some of the Fathers have understood the holy Ghost and because the Finger is of the same essence with the body infer the holy Ghost to be of the same nature with God yet this conceit is not solid although Luke 11. 20. that wich is called the finger of God Matth. 12. 28. called the Spirit of God We must therefore understand it of the power and operation of God who caused those words to be written there The matter upon which this is writen is said to be tables of stone The Rabbins conceit saying that because it is said of stone in the singular number that therefore it was but one table which sometimes did appeare as one sometimes as two is not worth the confuting That which is here to be considered and makes much to the dignity of the Law is that it was written by God upon tables of stone to shew the perpetuity and stability of it And howsoever this of it selfe be not a demonstrative argument to establish the perpetuity of the Law against any Antinomian yet it may prevaile with any reasonable man Hence Law-givers that have laboured the stability of their lawes caused them to be ingraven in Brass or Marble so Pliny lib 3◠ca. 9. speakes of brassie tables ad perpetuitatem monumentorum Plato as Rhodoginus reports lib. 25. cap. 2. thought that Lawes should be written in tabulis cupressinis quod futuras putabat aeterniores quà m aereas It is true there is also a mysticall signification which is not to be rejected because the Apostle alludes to it that hereby was signified the hardness of the Jews heart which could not easily receive that impression of the Law Hence the excellency of the Gospel doth appear in that it is by grace wrought in the hearts of men But yet this is not so to be understood as if God did not in the old Testament even then write his Law in the hearts of men Therefore that Promise of the Gospel mentioned by Jeremiah is not to be understood exclusively as if God did not at all write his Law in their hearts but comparatively 4. The sad breaking of this Law by the people of Israel As the Law given by God to Adam was immediately broken so this Law given in such a powerfull manner to keep the Israelites in an holy fear and reverence yet how soon was it forgotten by them For upon Moses his delay they presently fell into idolatry Some think they thought Moses was dead and therefore they desired some visible god among them as the Egyptians had and because they worshiped Apis an Oxe hence they made a Calfe wherein their wickedness was exceeding great though against the truth some Rabbins excuse them from idolatry because they did immediately upon the promulgation of the Law when they had so solemnly promised obedience fall into this sin and not only so but worshipped it and gave the glory of all the benefits they injoyed unto this not as if they were so simple as to think this a god but to worship the true God by this And this confuteth all those distinctions that Idolaters use especially Papists about their false worship We are not to follow our own hearts but the Word As the childe in the womb liveth by fetching nourishment by the navell only from the mother so doth the Church by fetching instruction and direction from Christ 5. The time of Moses his abode on the Mount This also is observable in the story for hereby God did not only procure great ground of Authority for Moses among the people but also unto the Law And therefore as some compare the time of giving the Law with the effusion of the gifts of the holy Ghost in the Gospel making the former to be the fiftieth day of their egresse out of Egypt called Pentecost so at the same time the holy Ghost was given to the Church Thus also they compare Moses forty dayes upon the Mount with our Saviours forty days in the wilderness when he was tempted It was certainly a miraculous preservation of Moses that he should be there so long and neither eat nor drink But this example of Moses with that of our Saviours is very vainly and unwarrantably brought for fasting in Lent 6. Moses his zeal against this their idolatry and breaking of the Tables When Moses came down he saw how the people had transgressed the Law of God which so moved him that in his zeal he brake the Tables that were first made This certainly was by the immediate ordering of God to signifie that this could not be a way of justification for them and indeed to hold that the Law can justifie is so great an errour that we are all Antinomians in this sense One hath said that the Law was like the tree of knowledge of
those titles of commendation which are due to it now in what sense the Law is said to be ordained by Angels is hard to say That you may the better understand this place compare with it Act. 7. v. 53. Who have received the Law by the disposition of Angels Heb. 2. 2. If the word spoken by Angels was stedfast c. Deut. 33. 2. The Lord came from Sinai with ten thousands of Saints from his right hand went a fiery law for them though this seemeth to refer to the people of Israel rather then the Angels But the Septuagint interpret it of Angels In the Greek we have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is as much as command sanction and ordaining as Rom. 13. 2. The ordinance of God so then the sence of the places put together amounts to thus much That Iesus Christ Act 7. 38. Who is the Angel that spake to Moses in the mount and the same which appeared to him in the bush ver 35 being accompanied with thousands of Angels did from the midst of them give Moses this law and Jesus Christ is here called the Angel because of his outward apparition like one The Sanctuary did express this giving of the Law for their God sate between the Cherubims and from the midst of them uttered his Oracles for Moses was commanded to build the Tabernacie according to the pattern as he saw in the Mount and that is the meaning of the Psal 68. 8. The chariots of God are twenty thousand Angels the Lord is in the miâ—st of them Sinaâ— is in â—he holy place So a learned man Deiu interpreteth it that is God doth in the Sanctuary from the Cherubims deliver his Oracles as he did the Law on Mount Sinai from between Angels and thus you have this fully explained In the next place you have the remote cause by the hand of a Mediator Some understand this of Moses that he was the Mediator in giving the Law between God and the Iews and so that Text Deut. 5. 5. where Moses is said to stand between the Lord and them may seem to confirm this interpretation and Moses indeed may be said to be a Mediator typically as the sacrifices were types of Christs blood and as he is called Act. 7. 35. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Redeemer though Beza and our English Bible renders it a deliverer But many interpreters understand it of Christ that he was the Mediator in the Law and indeed the words following seem to approve of this for saith the Apostle a Mediator is not a Mediator of one that is of those that are one in consent and accord but of those that dissent now Moses could not be truly and really a Mediator between God and the people of Israel when God was angry with them for their sins Besides the Law as is to be shewed is a Covenant of grace and Christ onely can be the Mediator in such a Covenant by way of Office because he only is Medius in his nature Beza indeed brings Arguments against this interpretation but they seem not strong enough to remove this sense given neither doth this phrase by the hand which is an Hebraisme denote alwaies ministery and inferiority but sometimes power and strength but more of this in the explication of the doctrine Obser It was a great honour put upon the Law in that it was delivered by Christ accompanied with thousands of Angels There was never any such glorious Senate or Parliament as this Assembly was wherein the Law wâ—â— enacted Iesus Christ himself being the Speaker and by how much the mâ—â—â— glory God put upon it the greater is the sin of those Doctrines which do dâ—rogate from it Indeed though Christ gave the Law yet the Apostle make the preheminency of the Gospel far above it because Christ gave the Law onely in the form of an Angel but he gave the gospel when made man whereby was manifested the glory not of Angels but of the onely begotten Son of God how carefull then should men be lest they offend or transgress that Law which hath such sacred authority It is a wonder to see how men are afraid to break mans Law which yet cannot damn but tremble not at all in the offending of that Law-giver who is only able to save or destroy For the opening of this consider First that Iesus Christ is the Angel that gave this Law as the chief captain of all those Angels that did accompany him For Act. 7. 35. It is the same that appeared to Moses in the bush God the Father hath committed the whole Government and guidance of the redemption of that people of Israel into the hands of Christ Hence Isa 6. 3. 9. he is called the Angel of the Covenant because he made that Covenant of the Law with his people on mount Sinai This is the Angel that Exod. 33. 2. God said he would send before them to drive out the Nations of the land and v 14. there he is called the face of God or his presence which should go before them and you have a notable place Exod. 23. 20. I will send an Angel before thee to keep thee in the way and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared beware of him provoke him not for he will not pardon your transgressions for my name is in him by this it is clear that it was Iesus Christ who was subservient to the Father in this whole work of Redemption out of Aegypt Grotius in the explication of the Decalogue judgeth it a grievous errour to hold that the second person in the Trinity was the Angel who gave this Law and indeed all the Socinians deny this because they say Christ had no subsistency before his Incarnation some Papists also think it to be a created Angel but he must needs be God because this Angel beginneth thus in the promulgation of the Law I am the Lord thy God which brought thee out of the land of Aegypt Neither wil that serve for an answer which Grotius saith that the Angel cals himself the God that brought them out of Aegypt because he is an Embassador and speaks in the name of the Lord for were not the Prophets Gods Embassadors yet their language was Thus saith the Lord they never appropriated the name of Iehovah to themselves whereas this Angel is called Iehovah and 1 Cor. 10. 9. The Iews are said to tempt Christ because he was the Angel that did deliver them by Moses It is disputed whether when any Angel appeared who was also God that it was also the Son of God so that in the Old Testament the Father and the Holy ghost never appeared but the Son only Austin thought it a question worth the deciding when he spent a great part of his second book of the Trinity in handling of it Many of the ancient Fathers thought that it was the Son onely that appeared so that all the apparitions which were to Adam to Abraham to Moses the God
received among the Jews about the sense of the Commandments and that was The Law did onely reach to the outward man did only forbid outward acts and that there was no sin 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 sin and as famous as it is false is that exposition brought by the Learned of Kimchy upon that Psalm 66. 18. If I regard iniquity in my heart he will not hear 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 hear that is hear 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 sin 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 sins 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 himself for the pride of his heart Certainly as God who is a spirit doth most love spirit-graces so he doth most abhor spirit-sins The Schools do well observe that outward sins are majoris infamiae of greater reproach but inward heart-sins are majois reatûs of greater guilt as we see in the devils And from this corruption in our nature ariseth that poisonous principle in Popery which is also in all formall Protestants That the commands of God do onely forbid the voluntary omission of outward acts whereas our Saviours explication will finde every man to be a murderer an adulterer c. Now our Saviours explications of the Law go upon those grounds which are observed by all sound Divines viz. 1. That the Law is spirituall and for bids not onely the fruit and branches of sin but even the root it self and fountain And 2. that wheresoever any sin 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 own heart and with him to cry out Gehenna sum Domine I am a very hell it self Let us not therefore be afraid of preaching the Law as we see Christ here doth for this is the great engine to beat bown the formality and Pharisaisme that is in people And thus I come to raise the Doctrine which is that The Law 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 do 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 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 do it as explainers of the Law they do 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 do 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 commest thou it would returne Satans answer From compassing the earth 2. It preferred duties of Mortification and Sanctification before 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 clean 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 is such an excellent and pure rule holding forth such precious holinesse 3. It required all our duies 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 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 is sometimes though seldom taken And 2. more largely as it had the Preface and Promises
so uncertain and many things may fall out and this is very probable Only if you understand it the former way you must not take it so as if an oath were such a lawfull thing as that it is propter se appetendum but only as physick is which is sometimes necessary for another thing Thus therefore having cleared that our Saviour intendeth no higher thing then that was lawfull before give me leave to reprove the common practise among men who say they are Christians about swearing If you observe men in their discourse in their trading do they carry themselves so as if Christ had said Sweare not at all and not rather as if he said Sweare alwayes and altogether Oh therefore that this common customary way of swearing which doth so directly oppose Christ were wholy laid aside The very Heathens will condemne us herein and among the Heathens ex animisui sententià was in stead of an oath It seemeth this custome of swearing in discourse hath been of old for Chrysostome and Austin are very vehement against it in their Sermons Now let us proceed There are some who from those words of our Saviour spoken ver 38 39 40 41. do gather that now under the Gospel it 's not lawfull 1. To put any man to death for any fault whatsoever 2. That it 's not lawfull to warre 3. Not to go to law in any case 4. Not to seek to a Magistrate for the defence of our selves Therefore in these opinions they thinke they hold forth much of Christian meeknesse and patience but before we come to the particulars let us consider in what sense it'a said An eye for an eye A tooth for a tooth This kind of Law was an ancient one among other Nations Aristotle cals it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And we read of a double retaliation one Pythagoricall which was wicked and ungodly holding that if a man did thieve from one the same might thieve from him again The other Mosaicall which was good and had justice in it Onely the Question is Whether this be literally to be understood that it was lawfull for a man who had his eye or tooth struck out by another to desire of the Judge that he who did this violence should also have his eye or tooth beaten out You may reade the Law Exod. 21. 23. and how it ought to be moderated by Judges private men not being left to revenge themselves Deut. 19. 19. This Law was not given as one wickedly saith to indulge the childish condition of the Jewes as being apt to revenge and therefore makes it an imperfect Law saying that many lawes of men were more perfect lawes but it was given against private revenge and the end was that justice might be done Now some have said this law was literally observed and that a man who was wounded by another hee himselfe was wounded againe But I doe rather thinke that the command in the letter of it was not observed but that a recompence was made according to the judgment of the Judge for the losse and it would have been a very hard thing if one man had wounded another to inflict just such a wound neither deeper nor broader nor doing no more hurt upon the man who offered violence Wee therefore come to the Questions And first concerning capitall punishments to be inflicted upon some offenders There are those that say It doth not stand with the goodnesse and meeknesse of a Gospel-spirit to put any man to death for any crime whatsoever But the falsenesse hereof doth appeare 1. In that it 's a command of God from the beginning with a perpetuall reason added to it that he who was guilty of murder should be put to death so that at least in this case there ought to be a capitall punishment Now the command that God gave is Gen. 9. 6. Whatsoever sheddeth mans blood by man shall his blood beshed and there is the reason given of it because the image of God viz. in his soule is in him To elude this they say that this is not a command but a meere prediction God doth here fore-tell say they what will befall the murderer not what a Magistrate is bound to do But that is a meere evasion for why should God fore-tell this but because it was a duty to be done Therefore it 's not said indefinitly He that sheddeth mans blood his blood shall be shed but he addeth by man it shall be shed Therefore howsoever a great Scholar saith that those are deceived who think capitall punishments are appointed by the Law of Nature or any perpetuall Law of God yet this place demonstrateth the contrary neither is it any matter that Plato would have reduced into his common-wealth the abrogation of capital punishments or that the Romans for a while did use no heavier punishment then deportation or banishment we must live by commands and not by examples especially humane It's instanced in Cain who though he killed his brother Abel yet God did not destroy him It must be granted that Gods indulgence to Cain was very great for he doth not only spare his life but sets a marke upon him to preserve him what this was they are most to be commended who dare not determine it because the Scripture is silent in it and not only so but he addeth a more severe punishment to that man that shall kill Cain then was due to the killing of any man Although it may be thought God in suffering Cain to live was not so much indulgent as severe in suffering him to be an instance of his displeasure against him to all the world As Psal 59. 11. Slay them not saith the Psalmist lest my people forget so that it is one thing what God may do for speciall reasons and another what the common Law of Nature and the perpetuall Law of God requireth A second Argument for capitall punishents under the Gospel is from the Magistrates office who Rom. 13. is said not to beare the sword in vaine Now the sword doth imply a power of life and death and therefore Paul said If I have done any thing worthy of death implying there were some things that did deserve it Lastly that to put to death men for faults is not repugnant to the spirit of the Gospel appeareth by the judgement upon Ananias and Sapphira You cannot reade of a-more severe expression under the Law then that was of the Gospel so that as we are indeed to labour for the meeknes and patience of a Christian yet we are not to forget zeale for Godsglory and the publick good it being cruelty to the good to spare the bad and if we would pity such a man offending we must much more pity the common-wealth That which is objected to this is 1. The rebuke that our Saviour gave to his Disciples when they would have had fire come downe from heaven They are reproved upon this ground because they knew not what spirit they
were of Now say they this spirit is the spirit of the New Testament which is opposed to the Spirit of Elias in the Old The answer is obvious that Christ doth not there oppose the Spirit of the New Testament the Old together but their spirit and Elias his spirit What Elias did he was moved unto by the Spirit of God not for any private revenge but that the glory of God might be illustrated Now this fire of theirs was rash and vindicative It was not elementary fire but culinary nourished by low and unworthy considerations In the next place they urge the fact of our Saviour John 8. to the adulteresse where he doth not proceed to the stoning of her but rather freeth her The answer is that Christ in his first coming was not as a Judge and therefore did not take upon him to medle in temporall punishments only as a minister he laboured to bring them unto repentance both the woman and the accusers And whereas againe it 's objected that this way of putting to death is against charity and love of mens souls because many are put to death without any seeming repentance which is presently to send them to Hell The answer is that all Magistrates they are to take care for the salvation of the melefactors soules as much as in them lyeth but if they doe perish in their sins this ariseth not from justice done which is rather to bring them in mind of their sins and to humble them but it cometh from the frowardnesse obstinacy in their owne hearts And in that we see a Magistracy confirmed in the Gospel we need not require an expresse command in the New Testament for the putting of some malefactors to death The third thing which they say was allowed in the Law but forbid by Christ in the Gospel is Warre And certainly we may reade in Antiquity that the Christians did refuse warre but not universally for there were Christian souldiers only there were some peculiar causes why in those times the Christians might decline it As first because in their military oath there was a calling upon a heathen god and their banners lifted up were polluted with idolatry And secondly because they should be forced sometimes to be instruments in accomplishing the Emperours Edicts against the Christians which they would not do Now if we bring places out of the Old-Testament for the lawfulnesse of warrs they care not for say they the laws of Nature and of Moses are to be reformed by the Lawes of Christ God indeed say they gave the Jewes in the Old-Testament leave to fight because they had a temporall inheritance and possession given them which they could not keep but by force of armes now under the New-Testament God hath not done so to his people Thus they say but this is a shift for we know Abraham by a meere law of nature went to war and delivered his nephew Lot being oppressed by enemies By that Warre is allowed by Christ appeareth plainly by comparing 1. Tim. 2. 3. and Rom. 13. where the Apostle would have us pray for Magistrates supposeth that while they are Magistrates they may be Christians and come to the faith so that thereby we may live a quiet and godly life under them now how can this be unlesse they draw their sword upon offenders And if they cannot in an ordinary legall way be brought to judgement then by force of Armes The second knowne argument is from Luke 3. where John Baptist counselleth the souldiers not to lay downe their office but to look to such duties as were necessary to them in that place and which is to be observed these were mercenary souldiers as it is thought they were at that time As for the Objections they are taken from such considerations as will be examined in the next particular only the Orthodox that do hold war lawfull they do acknowledge many rules necessary for the godly and holy managing of it and it is an hard thing to have an holy camp and this made Austin say in regard of the concomitant evils of it that Omne bellum etiam justum esse detestandum yet not but he thought it necessary to have it used when it concerned the glory of God and the good of the publique LECTVRE XX. MATTH 5. 21 22. Ye have heard it hath been said by them of old c. THere remain two Questions more to be decided in this businesse concerning Christs interpretation of the Law of Moses The one is about the lawfulnesse of repelling force by force The other about applying our selves to the Magistrate to defend us against the injury and violence of others Now that I may not be tedious in the discussing of these I will lay down fome few grounds that serve to the clearing of the truth herein and so proceed to other matter although as you have heard this tendeth much to the dignity and excellency of the Law First therefore take notice that there is in all a cursed pronenesse to do things by way of revenge Insomuch that there is not one in a thousand that doth rise up in practise to this excellent way and rule of patience The Heathens they thought to revenge our selves was lawfull Thus Tully It is the first office of Justice to hurt no body unlesse first provoked by injury O quam simplicem veramque sententiam saith Lactantius duorum verborm adjectione corrupit But Seneca he was against this Immane verbum est ultio and Qui ulsciscitur excusatiùs peccat Now whatsoever the thoughts of men may be about the lawfulnesse it 's certain the practises of men are much contaminated this way In State and Civil matters in Church matters what a revengefull spirit breatheth in men This certainly cometh much short of our Saviours Directions There is no injury or violence offered unto thee but in stead of revengefull affections there may be holy mortifying thoughts in thee As when Sheba cursed David see how that brought him to the sense of sinne to look up unto God more then to the instrument All defamations and reproaches may serve to make thy graces more splendent As Plutarch observeth the Gardener planteth his unsavory herbs Garlike and Onyons neer his sweetest Roses that so the smell thereof may be the more prized That was an excellent temper of Calvin when reviled by Luther he said Etiamsi Lutherus millies me diabolum vocet ego tamen illum insignem Domini servum agnosco Although Luther call me a thousand times a Divell yet I acknowledge him an eminent servant of God Why is it that there are such suspicions heart-burnings defamations of one another hard speeches and censures but because this lesson of Christ is not learned by us 2. Consider this that the primitive Christians have gone very farr in this Question holding it unlawfull to defend a mans self from another who would kill us by killing of the Invader Austin saith he
God may make the opening of the Morall Law instrumentally to concur thereunto onely this cometh by Christ The second thing which I premise is this that howsoever the Law preached may be blest to conversion yet the matter of it cannot be the ground of our justification or adoption so that when a man doth repent turn 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 lieth not in this as some do 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 to our conversion For the clearing of this well must needs discover that the Law of God being part of Gods word doth convert as well as the Gospel and this must needs be the opinion of all sound Divines whatsoever may fall from them at other times as appeareth by their common answer to the Papists Question If the Law and the commands thereof be impossible to what purpose then doth he command them why doth he bid us turne to him when we cannot Then we answer that these commandements are not onely informing of a duty but they are practicall and operative means appointed by God to work at least in some degree that which is commanded Hence those commands are compared by the Learned to that command of our Saviour to Lazarus that he should rise up and walk It doth also further appeare in those ends they assigne of Gods revealing the Law viz. to make us see as in a glasse our Deformity to be humbled before God to be affrighted out of our selves to seek for grace in Christ now can the meer Law of it selfe do this doth not grace work this in us by the preaching of the Law and is not this the initiall grace of conversion as Austin said Tract 12. in Johan cumcaeperit tibi displicere quod fecisti inde incipiunt bona opera tua quia accusas mala operatua Initium operum bonorum est confessio malorum The beginning of good in us is the accusation of that which is bad Therefore for the clearing of this generall take notice 1. That the word of God as it is read or preached worketh no further then objectively to the conversion of a man if considered in it self Take it I say in it self not animated by the Spirit of God and the utmost effect it can reach unto is to work onely as an object upon the Understanding And in this sense it is that the Scripture is compared to a light Now we know the Sun giveth light by way of an object it doth not give a seeing eye to a blind man It is a noble Queston in Divinity Seeing regeneration is attributed both to the word and to Baptisme how one worketh it differently from the other Or If both work it why is not one superfluous Now concerning the word preached we may more easily answer then about the Sacraments viz. that it works by way of an object upon the soul of a man and were it not set home by the Spirit of God this is the furthest worke it could obtaine And this doth plainly appeare in that the word of God doth only convert those who are able to heare and understand And the word of God being thus of it selfe onely a directive and informative rule hence it 's compared to the Pilots Compasse to Theseus his thred leading us in the Circean gardens of this world and therefore take away the Spirit of God and we may say the whole Scripture is a letter killing yea that which we call the Gospel Preach the promises of the Gospel a thousand times over they convey no grace if the spirit of God be not there effectually Indeed if the communicating of grace were inseparably annexed to the preaching of the Gospel then that were of some consequence which is objected by the Antinomian But sad experience sheweth that notwithstanding the large promises of grace to overflow like a fountain whereas in the Old Testament it was by drops only yet the greater part to whom the grace of God is offered are not converted Therefore in the next place consider this Whatsoever good effects or benefit is conveyed to the soul by the preaching of the Law or the Gospel it 's efficiently from Gods Spirit so that we must not take the Law without the Spirit of God and then compare it with the Gospel having the Spirit of God for that is unequall And by the same reason I may preferre the Law sometimes before the Gospel for I may suppose a Minister opening the duties of the Law as Christ doth here in this Chapter and the Spirit of God accompanying this to change the heart of a man and on the otherside one preaching the Gospel in the greatest glory of it yet not accompanyed with Gods Spirit there may not be the least degree of grace wrought in any hearer Therefore I cannot well understand that the Law indeed that sheweth us our duty but the Gospel that giveth us grace to do it for if you take the Gospel for the Promises preached how many are there that heare these that yet receive no benefit by them and on the other side if the Law setting forth our duty be accompanyed with Gods Spirit that may instrumentally work in us an ability to our duty and without the Spirit the Gospel cannot do it It is true if this were the meaning that had there been only Law there could never have been any grace vouchsafed but it is by reason of Christ and so the Promises of the Gospel that any good is brought to the soules and so the Law worketh as a medium to our Conversion by Christ If I say this be the meaning then it 's true but the obscure and unclear expressing of this giveth an occasion to the Antinomian errour Now that the Scripture as it is written or preached without the Spirit of God cannot convert us is plain partly because then the devils and great men of parts which do understand the letter of the Scripture better then others would be sooner converted partly because the Scripture so far as it 's a word read or preached cannot reach to the heart to alter and change that Hence the Word of God though it be compared to a sword yet
it 's called a Sword of the Spirit Ephes 6. 17. Yet although this be true we must not fall into that extream errour of some who therefore deny the necessity of the Scripture and would have us wholly depend upon the Spirit of God saying The Scripture is a creature and we must not give too much to a creature for the Spirit is the efficient and the Word is the subordinate and these two must not be opposed but composed one with the other Now having cleared this generall I bring these Arguments to prove the Law and the preaching of it the means of Conversion 1. That which is attributed to the whole word of God as it is Gods word ought not to be denyed to any part of it Now this is made the property of the whole Word of God to be the instrument of Conversion 2 Tim. 3. 16. where you have the manifold effects of Gods word To reprove to correct to instruct in righteousness that the man of God may be thorowly furnished to every good work Now mark the universality of this All Scripture whether you take all collectively or distributively it will not invalidate this argument because every part of Scripture hath it's partiall ability and fitnesse for these effects here mentioned Thus Math 13. the Word of God in generall is compared to seed fown that bringeth forth fruit see also Heb. 4. 12. 2. The second Argument is taken from those places where the Law is expresly named to be instrumentall in this great work Not to name that place of Rom. 7. 14. where the Law is called spirituall in this respect as well as in others because it is that which works spiritually in us as Paul was carnall because he worked carnally The places are cleare out of the 119. Psal and Psal 19. 7. The Law of God is perfect converting the soul It is true some understand the converting of the soul to be as much as the reviving of it as if the soul were ready to swoune away through the troubles thereof but then the Law doth revive them again and comfort them and according to this sense they take Law largely as comprehending the Gospell but it seemeth hard to expound that phrase in such a manner That therefore which the Antinomian doth object against this place is that the Hebrew word doth signifie largely any doctrine and so may comprehend the whole Word of God But this is easily answered First the same Hebrew word is commonly used for the Law when it is strictly taken and therefore this maketh more against them that the word Law in the Hebrew notion doth not signifie such a commanding terrifying and damning thing but rather that which doth instruct and informe But in the next place grant that the Word hath such an extensive and comprehensive sense yet it doth not exclude the Morall Law but doth alwayes include Can any man think when David commends the Law of God that he meaneth all the Word of God but the Morall Law when indeed that was the greatest part of it at that time 3. That opinion which would make Christ not take an instrumentall way for the conversion of men in his first Sermon wherein he was very large that must not be asserted but to hold that the preaching of the Law is not a Medium to conversion must needs be to say that Christ did not take the neerest way to convert his hearers for if you consider that Sermon it 's principally spent in the opening of the Morall Law and pressing the duties thereof and how can we thinke but that our Saviour judged this profitable and soul-saving matter Nor can I see why it should be said to be only the occasion and not medium if powerfully set home by Gods Spirit 4. If the Law of God have that objectively in it that may work exceedingly upon the heart when set home by Gods Spirit then it may be used instrumentally as well as the Gospell but it hath objectively such a nature in it which doth appeare by Davids approving and delighting in Gods Law by Paul Rom. 7. who delighted in the Law of God When therefore a Minister setteth forth the lovely purity and excellency of the matter of the Law how it resembleth the nature of God why may not the Spirit of God in the exercise hereof raise up the heart and affections to be more and more in love with it If the Heathen said of Vertue that if it could be seen with corporall eyes the beauty thereof would ravish men how much more may this be true of the purity and holinesse of the Law 5. If the Ceremoniall Law the Sacraments and Sacrifices were blessed by Gods Spirit while they were commanded to be used for the strengthening and increase of grace notwithstanding the deadly nature of them now then the Morall Law may also be blessed by God for spirituall effects seeing it standeth still in force Let the Use then of this be by way of admonition that in stead of disputing about or against the Law that we would pray to have the savory benefit and fruit of it in our souls Urge God with that Promise of writing his Law in our heart Be thou so farre from being an Antinomian that thou hast thy heart and life full of this holy Law of God Not that the matter of the Law can be the ground of thy Justification but yet it is thy Sanctification What is Regeneration but the writing of the Morall Law in thy heart This is that Image of God which Adam was created in Oh therefore that we could see more of this holy Law in the hearts and lives of men that the Law of God might be in mens mindes inlightning them in their wils and affections inflaming and kindling of them LECTVRE XXI ROM 3. 31. Do we then make void the Law through faith God forbid But we rather establish the Law I Shall in the next place discusse that famous Question about the abrogating of the Morall Law only I must answer to some Objections that are made against the former position That the Law may be used by God in the preaching of it to mans Conversion in the sense explained which if not attended unto may make the assertion seem harsh and incredible But before I answer the Objections let us consider a great mistake of the Antinomian author Assert of grace pag. 171. where he makes the very ground why they are charged with Antinomianisme to be because they do not hold the Law to be used by God instrumentally for the conversion of men Certainly this is a great mistake for there are many learned men who hold the work of the Law by the power of Gods Spirit to be no more then preparatory yet for all that do peremptorily maintain the use and the obligation of the Law in respect of believers Therefore they are not in this respect condemned for that errour Another consideration that I will propound is this
mitigated but Abrogation is then properly when a Law is totally taken away And this Abrogation ariseth sometimes from the expresse constitution at first which did limit and prescribe the time of the lawes continuance sometimes by an expresse revoking and repealing of it by that authority which made it sometimes by adding to that repeale an expresse law commanding the contrary Now it may be easily proved that the Ceremoniall and Judiciall lawes they are abrogated by expresse repeale The Judiciall Law 1 Pet. 2. 13. where they are commanded to be subject to every ordination of man and this was long foretold Genes 49. 10. The Law-giver shall be taken from Judah The Ceremoniall Law that is also expresly repealed Act. 15. and in other places not that these were ill or that they did come from an ill author but because the fulnesse and substance of them was now come of whom the ceremonies were a shadow Yet still you must remember that while they were commanded of God they were the exercises of faith and piety God did dispense grace in the use of them only they were beggarly and empty to such who trusted in them 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 void 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 sath 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 Jews In the second place if we would speake exactly and properly 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 in 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 its 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 void 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 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 selfe And we have already proved against the Antinomians that one part of the Law may abide when the other doth not 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 works 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 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 formall 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 do not cry out None but Christ None but Christ All this we pleade 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 still abiding in respect of the matter of it
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 Gospell under the New Testament 7. We will grant that to a beleever the Law is as it were abrogated in these particulars 1. In respect of Justification Though I say mitigation might 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 matt er 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 pursuit 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 is made unspeakably happy Rom. 8. There is no condemnation And Christ became a curse for us so that by this means the gracious soul hath daily matter of incouragement arguing in prayer thus O Lord though my sins 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 do good yet not Christs power to save Heb. 6. 18. you have a phrase there flying for arefuge doth excellently shew forth the nature of a godly man who is pursued by sin 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 Orthodox 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 sin in beleevers they do 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 to the obedience of it And in this sense they are denied 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 minde I serve the Law of God but with my flesh the Law of sin Now although it be true that the Law in the terrible compelling part of it be not necessary to him so far as he is regenerate yet in regard 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 do 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 dicit Tà m enim amamus legem quà m homicida carcerem said Luther and this is true of us so far as we are corrupt He that saith he loveth the Law lyeth and knoweth not what he saith for we love the Law as a murtherer doth the Gaol 5. It doth not work or increase sin in them as in the wicked The 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 earnall and corrupt heart rage against it so that the more the Law would damm 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 Or as Chysolologus explaineth it Serm. 112. The greatnesse of the light doth not blind and hebetate the eyes for light was especially created of God for them but it is the infirmitie and weaknesse of the eyes which are not able to endure such clearnesse so the Law which of it's selfe is holy and just of fraile man requiring severe obedience doth more and more overwhelme him And in another place Serm. 115. As the thorns that are by the Axe cut downe do more and more sprout out so do corruptions while cut off by the Law because they remain fixed in the root of us 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 Thus Asa grew more enraged because reproved by the prophet for his wickednesse And this also take
up his works and never naming the grace of God is a boaster by the Law of works but the Publican that looketh upon himselfe only as a sinner and so judgeth himself he excludeth all boasting by the law of faith The Papists they mean by works here in the Text those which go before faith and they quote a good rule out of Gregory though to a foul errour Non per opera venitur ad fidem sed per fidem ad opera We do 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 ask 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 although the Law given by God to the Israelites was a Covenant of grace yet in some sense the Law and Gospel do oppose and thwart one another And this matter I undertake because hereby the nature of the Gospel and the Law will be much discovered It is an errour saith Calvin lib. 2. Instit cap. 9. in those who do never otherwise compare the Gospel with the Law then the merit of works with the free imputation of righteousness and saith he this Antithesis or opposition is not to be refused because the Apostle doth many times make them contrary meaning by the Law that rule of life whereby God doth require of us that which is his own given us no ground of hope unlesse in every respect we keep the Law but saith he quum de totâ lege agitur when he speaks of the Law more largely taken he makes them to differ only in respect of clearer manifestation or as Pareus saith of the old and new Covenant they differ not essentially but as we say the old and new Moon Therefore before I come to shew the exact opposition take notice of two things as a foundation first that the Law and the Gospel may be compared one with another either in respect of the grace God gave under the Old-Testament the New and then they differ onely gradually for they under the Law did enjoy grace and the Spirit of God though Socinians deny it although indeed in respect of the Gospel it may comparatively be said no spirit and no grace as when it is said The holy Ghost was not yet given because it was not so plentifully given Or secondly the doctrine of the Law in the meere preceptive nature of it may be compared with the doctrine of the Gospel having the grace of God annexed unto it and going along with it Now this is in some respects an unequall comparison for if you take the doctrine or letter of the Gospel without the grace of God that letter may be said to kill as well as the letter of the Law only this is the reason why we cannot say The Spirit of God or grace or life is by the Law because whatsoever spirituall good was vouchsafed to the Jewes it is not of the Law but of the grace of God or the Gospel Therefore whensoever we compare Law and Gospel together we must be sure to make the parallel equall and to take them so oppositely that we may not give the one more advantage or lesse then the nature of it doth crave and desire In the second place therefore in this controversie still remember to carry along with you the different use of the word Law as to this point for if you take Law strictly and yet make it a Covenant of grace you confound the righteousnesse of works and of faith together as the Papists do but if largely then there may be an happy reconciliation For the better opening of this consider that as the word Law so the word Gospel may be taken largely or strictly We will not trouble you with the many significations of the word or whether it be used any where of a sorrowfull message as well as glad newes as some say in two places it is used 1. Sam. 4. 17. 2 Sam. 1. 10. according to that rule of Mercers Non infrequens esse specialia verba interdum generaliter sumi It is enough to our purpose that in the Scripture it is sometimes taken more largely and sometimes more strictly when it 's taken largely it signifieth the whole doctrine that the Apostles were to preach Mar. 16. 15. Preach the Gospel to every creature so Mar. 1. 1. The beginning of the Gospel i. e. the doctrine preaching of Christ Or else it is taken most strictly as when Luke 2. 10. Behold I bring you glad tydings c. In which strict sence it 's called the Gospel of peace and of the grace of God So that you see the word Law is taken differently largely and strictly thus also is the word Gospel Now it 's a great dispute Whether the command of repentance belong unto the Gospel or no I finde the Lutherans Antinomians and Calvinists to speak differently but of that when we take the Law and Gospel in their most strict sense Bellarmine bringeth it as an argument that the Protestants do deny the necessity of good works because they hold that the Gospel hath no precepts or threatnings in it lib. 4. de Justif cap. 2. And he urgeth against them that Cap. 1. ad Rom. where the wrath of God is said to be revealed from heaven in the Gospel but as is to be shewed he there doth mistake the state of the controversie taking the word Gospel in a larger sense then they intended Thus on the other side Islebius the father of the Antinomians he taught that repentance was not to be pressed from the Decalogue but from the Gospel that to preserve the purity of doctrine we ought to resist all those who teach the Gospel must not be preached but to those who are made contrite by the Law whereas the right unfolding of the word Gospel would make up quickly those breaches The Law therefore and the Gospel admitting of such a different acception I shall first shew the opposition between the Law and the Gospel taken in their large sense and then in the limited sense And this is worth the while because this is the foundation of all our comfort if rightly understood Now the Question in this larger sense is the same with the difference between the Old and New-Testament or Covenant wherein the Learned speak very differently and as to my apprehension most confusedly I shall not examine whether that be the reason of calling it Old and New which Austin Chemnitius and others urge because it presseth the old man condemneth that whereas the new incourageth and comforteth new
and poured out his pirit giving eternall life as plentifully under the Law as under the Gospel But to aske why he did thus would be as presumptuous and arrogant as to aske why he created the world no sooner If the School-master teach the new beginner in another way then he doth the proficient in study no man doth blame his wisedom As in the Paschall Lamb they were to eate the flesh but to throw away the bones so in all matters of religion those things that are revealed and profitable we may feed upon and whatsoever is abstruse and difficult we may let goe Praestat per Deum nescire quia ipse non revelaverit quà m per hominem scire quia ipse praesumpserit Tert. de Anima Now to conclude I come to give the difference between the Law strictly taken as requiring exact and perfect obedience promising eternall life upon no other termes and the Gospel strictly taken as a solemne promulgation of Christ and his benefits to a broken sinner And the first is this The Law in some measure of it is made knowne by naturall light and so agreeable to a naturall conscience I say in some measure for there is much of the duty of the Law that is unknown to naturall consciences yet the most externall and outward duties are knowne and accordingly as the truth of them is discerned by naturall light so the will doth joyne with them as good to be done though not in a godly way But it is otherwise with the Gospel for the very truth of it must be wholy revealed by God so that no naturall acumen in the world could ever excogitate this wonderfull remedy of justification and salvation by Christ And as it is thus above knowledg so the heart is more averse from this way And by this you may see why it is such an hard thing to beleeve why the people of God are so hardly perswaded when loaden with guilt to roule their soules upon Christ The reasorris there is nothing in his natural conscience to further him in this duty Press a man against murder theft adultery here is naturall conscience joyning for this duty but urge him to beleeve this is altogether above nature Hence it is also that naturally we seek to be justified by the works we do so that to be justified by faith is another way then corrupted nature in us or right nature in Adam would have inclined unto Therefore let not the people of God be so discouraged in their agonies and combats about their unbeliefe Let them know that a little degree of faith is of great consequence And if he said that Christi anity was perpetua naturae violentia a perpetuall violence offered to nature this is most sure in a matter of faith We are as froward in rejecting of a promise as stubborn in refusing of a command The second difference is in the object matter The Law holdeth forth a perfect righteousness and will not admit of any other but the Gospel that condescends and brings pardon through Christ And this is the maine difference and in which they can never be made one Now the Papists Arminian Socinian and others do overthrow this grand and maine difference holding justification by works under some notion or other whereas the Apostle maketh an immediate opposition If of faith then not of works The Apostle doth not distinguish of works of nature and works of grace or works of grace perfect imperfect but speaketh absolutely so doth also exclude that subtile opinion of making faith to justifie as a work for the Apostle making an opposition between faith and works must necessarily take faith under such a notion as cannot be a work And this truth is that which is the pillar of the Church of God and that which differenceth us from Jews Turks Papists and many Hereticks The third difference is from the manner of obtaining the good thing promised He that shall obtain eternall life by the Law hath it of debt and by way of justice Rom. 4. 4. Not as if Adam in the state of innocency could have merited at Gods hands or as if God became in strict justice a debtor seeing Adam was beholding to God for all but in some sense it would have been so Hence boasting would not then have been excluded eternall life being the reward of those holy works which he should have done but now all is of grace through Christ our righteousness is meerly Gods indulgence not the holiness that is in us but the sinn pardoned makes us acceptable So that the broken contrite heart can never sufficiently admire the grace and goodness of God in the Gospel-way And no marvell if so be that Paul is so frequently ravished with the considerations thereof This may well be caIled good newes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And if our hearts were spiritually affected we should say How beautifull are the feet of those that bring these glad tydings The fourth difference is in respect of the subject The Law strictly taken is only for those who have a perfect and holy nature therefore it 's a Covenant as you heard of friendship and not of reconciliation so that there is no necessity of any Mediatour Indeed there is good use of urging it to proud Pharisaicall men to bring them out of love with themselves to gross sinners that their hearts might be broken seeing the curses belong to them yea to the godly also to teach them the faire copy they are to write after but in respect of justification by it and eternall life there is none can have that benefit but such who shall be found perfectly holy It was not Moses but the serpent that did heale so it is not the Law but Christ that can comfort broken hearts stung with sin The Priest and the Levite they pass 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 sick diseased man get some of the Philosophers stone or to eat a piece of a Phoenix and then and not till then he shall be in ease Lastly The Law differeth in the forme of it from the Gospel The 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 works 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 holiness he 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 largly for the doctrine of Christ and the Apostles there is no question but they pressed duty of mortification sanctification threatning those that do not so but if you take the Gospel strictly then it holdeth forth nothing but remission of sins 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 strictlytaken 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 do 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 it's rise from hence handle the next day this Question Whether the Gospel doth command repentance or no. Or Whether it be only from the Law LECTVRE 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 Gosspel preach repentance or no seeing this made the great commotion at first between the Orthodox and Antinomians I shall dispatch this in few words 1. The word Repentance is taken sometimes largely and sometimes strictly when it is taken largely it comprehends faith in it and is the whole turnign unto God Rev. 2. 5. sometimes it is used strictly for sorrow about sin 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 sin without faith it is like the body without the soul yea it carrieth a man with Cain and Judas into the very pit of dispair when a man seeth how much is against him and not how much is for him it cannot but crush and weigh him down to the ground The tears of repentance are like those waters very bitter till Christ sweeten them 2. Consider this that the Law was never meerly and solely administred nor yet the Gospel but they are twins that are inseparably united in the Word and Ministery Howsoever strictly taken there is a vast gulf 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 only that so the Law might be wholly excluded thus they did not consider what usefull subserviencie they had to one another The Law directeth commandeth and humbleth The Gospel that comforteth refresheth and supporteth And it is a great wisedom in a Christian when he hath an eye upon both Many are cast down because they only consider the perfection of the Law and their inability thereunto on the other side some grow secure and loose by attending to free-grace only I do acknowledge that free-grace will melt the heart into kindness 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 neer linck between both these in their practicall use we need not with some learned men make two Commandements of the Gospel only 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 initial 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 legal repentance and an evangelical so we may say there is a legal faith which consists in believing of the threatnings the terrours of the Lord and there is an evangelical faith which is in applying of Christ in the Promises So that legal faith and repentance may be called so initially and when it is evangelical 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 seperated one from the other in the command of these duties Hence fourthly unbeliefe is a sin against the Law as well as against the Gospel Indeed the Gospel that doth manifest and declare the object of justifying faith but the Law condemneth him that doth not believe in him therefore Moses and the Law is said to bear witness of Christ and to accuse the Jews for refusing the Messias The Law that requireth belief in whatsoever God shall reveal The Gospel that makes known Christ and then the Law is 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 seperately 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 is not a doctrine of repentance or holy works but a meere gracious promise of Christ to the broken heart for sin and doth comprehend no more then the glad tydings of a Saviour It is true learned men do 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 its only a promise of Christ and his benefits And in this sense we 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 Gospel so that he being already condemned by the Law for not beleeving in Christ he needeth to be condemned again by the Gospel If you say May not the sufferings
the Jews 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 vail upon the Israelites heart hindered the sight of it Now saith Paul when it shall turn as we translate or rather when they shall turn for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is observed to be used alwayes 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 vail shall be taken away or rather as Camero well observeth in the present tense It is taken away for you cannot conceive that the Jews shall be first turned unto God and the vail 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 Jews 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 the end of the Law being to justifie and to bring to eternall life this could not be attained by our own 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 laws be to make good and honest men much rather is the end of the Morall Law appointed by God himself But the Law is so far from making us good as that it worketh in us all evill which effect of the Law in himself 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 holiness and life becometh to cause sin and death Christ therefore that the Law may have its end he taketh our nature upon him that the righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us 3. Christ is the end of perfection of the Law in that the meere knowledge of the Law with the externall obedience only to it was not availeable 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 righteousness or holiness of works but it is imperfect and so not enabling 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 non 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 Jews 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 righteousness 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 far 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 righteousness So Rom. 8. 3 4. That which was impossible to the Law God sent his Son that the righteousness 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 righteousness 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 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 real righteousness though it be not our inherent righteousness 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 righteousness of Christs is not ours by working but by beleeving Now the Law in that command Do this and live did require our personall working and righteousness so that we cannot be said to have salvation by that rule because it is not the righteousness which we in person have wrought and this will fully appear if you consider in the next place the subject to whom Christ is made righteousness and that is to him that beleeveth he doth not say to him that worketh so that we have not eternall life by our Do this but by beleeving or resting upon Christ his Do this And this phrase doth plainly exclude Stapletons and other Papists observations on this place as if the righteousness by faith or
of Christ were the same in kinde with the righteousness of works differing only gradually as an infant and a grown man for if so the Apostle would have said working and not beleeving It is a great skill in Divinity to amplifie this righteousness 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 righteousness Lastly consider in the Text for what end Christ is thus the perfection of the Law and that is for righteousness The proper seat of handling this is in the doctrine of Justification only let me briefly answer a Question made by some Whether the righteousness of faith or that we have by Christ be the same in nature with the righteousness of works and of the Law Stapleton saith They must needs be one because the Law will direct to no other righteousness then that of its own It it true the Law strictly taken will not properly and per se direct to any righteousness 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 attain to its own righteousness did then lead us unto Christ Yet these two righteousnesses are divers rather then contrary unless 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 righteousness of faith doth necessarily draw along with it in the same subject a righteousness of works though it be imperfect and so insufficient to justifie Use Is Christ the end of the Law for righteousness Then let the beleever bless and praise God for providing a righteousness and such a righteousness 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 me alone and I will pay thee all Neither Angels nor men could provide this righteousness for thee Dost thou thank God for providing clothes for thy body food for thy belly an house for habitation Oh above all thanke him that he hath provided a righteousness for thy soul Thou troubled soul 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 righteousness Why doest thou not consider that God hath found out for thee even for thee in this world a righteousness whereby thou art accepted of him Again consider it is such a righteousness that satisfieth and pleaseth God Thy holiness cannot content him for justification but that of Christ can As the light of the Stars and Moon cannot dispell totally the darkness of the night only the light of the Sun can do that LECTVRE 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 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 breake 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 commandments 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 commandment although he do 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 Kingdom 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 Kingdom of heaven do understand the Church of God and so they express it when there shall be a reformation in the Church and truth should break forth which was presently to come to pass 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 only the Morall Law or the Ceremoniall also as being not to my purpose That it is meant cheifly of the Morall Law appeareth by the instances which Christ giveth From the Text thus opened I observe That any doctrine which teacheth tho abrogation or dissolution of the Law is highly offensive unto God 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 exensiue in it's 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 do 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 consequence inforce the abrogation of the Law And thus though some Antinomians do expresly and boldly assert the abolishing of it at least to beleevers yet those that have more learning and wariness do disclaime it and account it a calumny but even at the same time while they do disclaime it as it is to be shewed presently they hold such assertions as do necessarily inferr the abrogation of it 3. The Law may be doctrinally dissolved by pressing such duties upon men whereby they will be necessitated to breake the commandments of God Thus when the Pharisees taught that whatsoever vow was made concerning any gift they were bound to do it though thereby they were disinabled 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 plain commandments 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 Manichees Marcion whom Tertullian calls Mus potincus 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 madness although his followers to take away that reproach called him Mannichaeus as much as one that poured forth Manna as some affirme This mans errours though they were very gross 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 somuch to this their faith that they held Whosoever should imy brace it though he committed hainous and atrocious sins yet thes should do him no hurt Epiphan lib. 3. Haeres 36. But to let pasthese we may say Popery is in a great part Antinomianisme And Antichrist he is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that lawless One for is not their doctrine that the Pope may dispense with the Laws 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 Carechismes because it forbiddeth the worshipping of Images Hence Vasquez one of their Goliahs doth expresly maintain that the second Commandement did belong only to the Jews 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 do by doctrine deny the fourth Commandement How many late books and practises 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 disclaim the opinion who overthrow the fifth Commandement by denying Magistracy lawfull for Christians But I will range no further The Antinomians do more fall against this Text then any in that they do 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 captain he was a School-master and also professor of Divinity at Islebia It seemeth he was a man like a reed shaken with every winde 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 solemn disputations against the Antinomians that are to be seen in his works 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 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. Sousselberge 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 do 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 Antinomists seemeth to be not Whether a godly man do not delight in the Law and do the works of the Law but Whether he doth it Lege docente urgente mandante the Law teaching urging and commanding As for the latter Antinomians Doctor Taylor and Mr. Burton who preached and wrote against them do 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 do 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 do 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
of Aristides who being demanded by the Emperour to speak to something propounded ex tempore answered Propound to day and I will answer to morrow 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We are not of those who vomit or spit out things suddenly but take time to be diligent and considering 5. When thou doest begin to encline to an opinion that differeth from the learned and godly be not too rash and precipitate in publishing it The Apostle giveth a good rule Rom. 14. Hast thou faith have it to thy self He doth not there command a man to equivocate or dissemble and deny a truth but not needlesly to professe it when it will be to the offence of others Cyprian reproving the rashnesse of those Christians that would goe on their own accord to the Heathen Magistrates professing themselves Christians whereby they were put to death hath a good and elegant speech Confiteri nos magis voluit quà m profiteri he doth confesse that doth it being asked and demanded he doth professe that doth it out of his own free accord 6. Consider that Antinomianisme is the onely way indeed to overthrow grace and Christ For he sets up free grace and Christ not who names it often in his Book or in the Pulpit but whose heart is inwardly and deeply affected with it Now who will most heartily and experimentally set up Christ and grace of these two i. Who urgeth no use of the Law who takes away the sense or bitternesse of sin who denieth humiliation or he who discovers his defects by the perfect rule of the Law whose soule is inbittered and humbled because of these defects Certainly this later will much more in heart and reall affections set up free grace FINIS THE TABLE A. THe Law abolished as a Covenant not as a Rule Page 213 The Law abrogated to beleevers in six particulars p. 217. 218. 219. 220 Three causes of the abrogation of the ceremoniall Law which agree not to the morall p. 222 Six abuses of the Law p. 17. 18. 19. 20 Conversion and Repentance are our acts as well as the effects of Gods grace p. 99 Whether Adam was mortall before his eating of the forbidden fruit p. 110 Whether Adam in his innocency can be considered in his naturalls or supernaturalls answered in two Positions p. 132 Whether Adam needed Christs help p. 133 Whether God required lesse of Adam then us p. 138 Amorem mercedis a Godly man may have in his obedience though not amorem mercenarium p. 14 What help the Angels had by Christ p. 134 Calvin's two Reasons why Angels needed Christs mediation ibid. Some Antecedaneous works upon the heart before grace be bestowed p. 88 Foure limitations concerning those antecedaneous works p. 88. 89 The first Antinomian p. 39 Antinomian Differences betwixt the Law and Gospel confuted p. 243. 246 The Antinomian why most inexcusable p. 45 The Antinomian distinction of the Law being abolished as a Law but still abiding in respect of the matter of it a contradiction p. 214 The Antinomian Arguments overthrow the use of the Law to unbeleevers as well as beleevers p. 217 The opinion of the old Antinomians p. 277 The word As taken variously p. 165 Antidotes against Antinomian errors p. 279 Antinomianisme is the onely way indeed to overthrow Christ and grace p. 281 B. A Blaspheming Monk p. 27 Blaspheming Papists ibid. The Lay-mans book is the whole universe p. 77 Master Burton his Report of Antinomians p. 278 C. A Cordiall for a broken heart p. 22. 23 Contradictions of the Antinomians p. 31 A Community of goods not taught by the law of Nature p. 83 Christs Incarnation cannot be supposed but upon supposition of Adams fall p. 135 It is an hard matter so to set up Christ and grace as not thereby to destroy the law p. 210 The doctrine of Christ and grace in the highest manner doth establish not overthrow the law p. 211 God entred into Covenant with Adam in giving him a law p. 122. 123 What a Covenant implyes p. 124 Why the Covenant of grace is not still a covenant of works seeing works are necessary p. 48 A Covenant of Friendship Reconciliation p. 124 No Covenant properly so called can be betwixt God and Man p. 126 How God can covenant with man ibid. Five Reasons why God would deal with man in a covenant-way rather then in an absolute way p. 127. 128 A vast difference betwixt the covenant in innocency and in grace p. 129. 130 The morall law delivered as a covenant proved p. 230 It hath the reall properties of a covenant ib. In what sense the law may be a covenant of grace explained p. 232. 233 Arguments proving the law a covenant of grace p. 234. 235. 236 Objections answered p. 237 Doctor Crisp confuted p. 15 Cursing taken two waies 1 Potentially so a law is alwaies condemning 2. Actually so a law is not ever condemning p. 6 D. DEcalogue resembled to the ten Predicaments by Martyr and why p. 3 The threatning of death to Adam if he did eat c. was fulfilled in that he became then mortall and in a state of death not naturall onely but spirituall and eternall also p. 109. 110 Determination to one takes not away naturall liberty nor willingnesse or delight in sin which we are inevitably carried unto p. 89. 90 Three generall waies of proving the Deity of Christ p. 133. 134 Foure differences not substantiall but accidentall betwixt the Law and the Gospel p. 251 c. Fire Differences betwixt the Law and Gospel strictly taken p. 257. 258. 259 c. All Doctrine reduced to three heads Credenda Speranda Facienda p. 252. 253. E. THe Papists notion concerning Ecclesia and Synagoge confuted p. 252 If the Antinomians end were only to put men off from glorying in themselves to deny the concurrence of workes to Justification it were more tolerable p. 31 but then their books and end were not reconcileable p. 32 Other ends which might make the Antinomians more excusable ibid. How Christ is the end of the law for righteousnesse p. 267 End taken two waies ibid. Four waies Christ is the perfective end of the Law p. 270. 271 Aquinas distinction of end p. 267 Eudoxus said hee was made to behold the sun p. 77 Exhortations to what purpose given to them who have no power of themselves to doe them p. 98 Errours in Doctrine damnable p. 279 F. FAbles and fictions how used by the Fathers p. 2 How Faith justifies p. 43 Two acts of Faith p. 44 Faith and Repentance wrought both by the Law and Gospel p. 261. 262 The same object may be known by the light of Faith and of Nature p. 73 Whether justifying Faith were in Adam at first p. 120 Faith of adherence and dependence in Adam in innocency and shall be in heaven p. 128 Adams faith considered as an act of the soul not as an organ to lay hold on Christ p. 129 Finger of God p. 157 Finis indigentiae assimilationis
God and us 3. Because it performes all duties by way of compensation merit That there is a God may be known by the light of Nature The mysterie of the Trinitie and the Incarnation of Christ cannot be found out by the light of Nature The light of Nature insufficient for salvation The Patriarchs did not offer sacrifices by the light of Nature but God revealed his will to Adam to be so worshipped Originall sin can onely be truly knowne by Scripture-light Matth. 17. 12. expounded Communion of all things no precept of Nature and the Apostles practise of it was only occasionall not binding to posterity God is more off ended with those that abuse Gospel light then those that abuse the light of Nature Three sorts of Christians little better then Heathens There is in man a natural power by the help of Reason to chuse or refuse this or that thing This naturall power in man not able to performe naturall actions without Gods generall assistance Man by the power of nature wholly unable to performe good actions 1. Because our natures are full of sin and corruption 2. Because grace and conversion are the work of God 3. Because glory is to be given to God onely not to our selves Nature of it self cannot dispose for justification or sanctification and the reasons why There are and may be some preparatory and antecedaneous works upon the heart before justification or sanctification Determination to one kind of acts takes not away liberty A threefold liberty Determination to sinne takes not away that delight in sinne which man is inevitably carried out unto Much may be ascribed to grace and yet the totall efficacy not given unto it The outward act of a commandement may be preformed by the power of Nature Whatsoever meere naturall men doe is sin before God because 1. The act wants faith the person reconciliation with God 2. It proceeds not from a regenerate nature 3. 'T is not done in reference to Gods glory 4 There is no promise annexed to any act that wants faith There is in mans nature a passive capacity of grace which is not in stones and beasts To presse a duty and yet to acknowledge Gods grace or gift to do it is no contradiction Mans inability to observe Gods precepts maketh not voâ—d the nature of the precepts because this in ability proceeded from mans owne fault A thing said to be impossible three waies Gods commands though they be not a measure of our power may serve to convince humble c. Necessity of sinning hinders not the delight and willingnesse man hath in sin and consequently God may reprove him for his transgressions * Cap. 5. l. 3. Ethic. ad Nicom Though God works all our good in us yet exhortations are the instrument wherby he works it How conversion and repentance may be said to be our acts Gods working upon the heart of a sinner for conversion excludes not mans working Though wicked men cannot but sinne in praying and hearing yet they are bound to these duties God doth not bind himself to this way * Tanta fuit Adami recens conditi stupiditas ut major in infantos cadere non postit The tree of knowledge why so called God besides the naturall law engraven in Adams heaâ—â— did give a positive law 1. That the power which God had over him might be the more eminently held forth 2. To try and manifest Adams obedience The proper essentiall end of the positive law was to exercise Adams obedience * Altitudinem consilii ejus penetrare non possum longè supra vires meas esse confiteor Aug. The positive law did lay an obligation upon Adams posterity Adam by eating the forbidden fruit became mortall and in the state of death not naturall onely but spirituall and eternall also Adam before his sin was immortall A thing may be said to be immortall foure wayes The mortality of the whole man cannot be evinced from this threatning In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt die Image and likenesse signifie one and the same thing An Image consists in likenesse to another pattern after which it is made A Four-fold image The image of God in Adam consisted in the severall perfections and qualifications in his soul 1. In his Understanding was exact knowledge of divine and naturall things 2. His Will was wonderfully good and furnished with many habits of goodnesse 3. In his Affections regularity and subjection 2. The image of God consisted in a freedome from all misery and danger 3. It consisted in that dominion and soveraignty Adam had over the creatures That righteousnesse and holiness fixed in Adam was 1. Originall 2. Universall 3. Harmonious 4. A perfection due unto him upon supposition of the end wherunto God made him Righteousness was a perfection sutable and connaturall to Adam Adam had power to beleeve so farre as it did not imply an imperfection in the subject Repentance as it flowes from a regenerate nature reductively the image of God Gods image not fully repaired in us in this life Doctr. The covenant with Adam before the fall more obscurely laid down then the covenant off grace after the fall That God dealt with Adam by way of Covenant appeares 1. From evil threatned and good promised 2. Because his posterity becomes guilty of his sin and obnoxious to his punishment A Covenant implies Gods decree will or promise to concerning his creatures whether rationall or irrationall God enters into Covenant with man by way of condescension makes promises unto him to confirme him in his hope and confidence in him God deales with man by way of covenant not of power 1. To indeare himself unto him 2. To incite man to more obedience 3. To make this obedience more willing and free The Covenant God made with Adam was of works not of faith God entring into Covenant with Adam must be looked upon as one already pleased with him not as a reconciled Father through Christ Gods Covenant did suppose a power and possibility in Adam to keep it 1. In Adam such qualities and actions may be considered as did flow from him as aliving creature endued with a rational soul 2 The principle and habit of righteousnesse was naturall to Adam but help from God to persevere supernaturall Adam in the state of innocency needed not Christ by way of reconciliation but of conservation in righteousnesse The obedience of Angels may be said to be imperfect negatively not privatively Christs incarnation cannot be supposed but upon supposition of Adams fall The tree of life was not a sacrament of Christ to Adam The Scripture doth not affirme any revelation of a Christ unto Adam The state of innocency excelled the state of reparation in rectitude immortality and outward felicity The state of reparation more happy then that of innocency in respect of the certainty of perseverance in the state of grace The imputation of Christs righteousness doth not inferre that therefore we are more
Law in our souls Conversion not wrought totally by the word read or preached but is to be attributed to the Covenant of grace in Christ Instance 1â— Answer 1. Answer 2. Gerhard Instance 2. Answ Instance 3. Answ Three Errours to be taken heed of in opening Gal 3. 2. Errour 1. Errour 2. Errour 3. The Text opened The Law established three wayes by the Gospel 'T is hard to set up Christ and grace and not be thought to destroy the Law The doctrine of Christ and grace doth establish the Law Interprtation dispensation c. affections of a Law We may say that the Morall Law is mitigated as to our persons but 't is not abrogated Three parts of the Law The Law is abolished as it is a Covenant but not as it is a Rule The Law given by Moses a Covenant of grace It is an absurd contradiction to say the matter of a Law bindeth but not as a Law The Law equally abrogated to beleevers under the Old and New Testament Antinomian Arguments mostly overthrow the use of the Law both to beleevers and unbelevers The Law to a beleever is abrogated 1. In respect of justification 2. In respect of condemnation 3. In respect of rigid obedience 4. In respect of tefrour and slavish obedience 5. In respect of the increase of sin 6. In respect of many Circumstantials 7. Yet that it continues to them as a rule appears 1. From the different phrases used concerning the ceremoniall Law 2. From that holinesse that it requires of the beleever 3. In that disobedience is still a sin 4. Because it differs from other lawes in respect of causes of abrogation Three reasons why the Ceremoniall Law should be abrogated Places of Scripture seeming to hold forth the duration of the Moral Law for a time only answered * Minimum maximi est majus maximo minimi The Apostle argueth against the Law in comparison of Christ The word Law taken in a two-fold sense These Phrases of the Law Without the Law under the Law and In the Law explained A two-fold being under the Law The commonly received sense of that Phrase Not to be under this Law rejected Beza's inrerpretation of the phrase approv'd Arguments used by Moses to perswade obedience to the Law That the Law God delivered to Israel was a Covenant appears 1. In that it haâ—h the name of a Covenant 2 In that it hath the reall properties of a Covenant The judgements of the Learned different in declaring what Covenant is here meant In what sense it may be a Covenant of grace explained Arguments proving the Law a Covenant of grace Argum. 1. Argum. 2. Argum. 3. Argum. 4. Argum. 5. Argum. 6. Obiections impugning the former Arguments answered The words opened The Papists corruptly glosse upon this Text. Doctr. The Law and the Gospel may be compared one with another in a double respect The different use of the word Law carefully to be observed What meant by Law taken largely and what strictly False differences between the Law and the Gospel 1. Of Anabaptists and Socinians affirming That they under the Law in the Old Testament enioyed only temporall blessings 2. Of Papists 1. That Christ hath added more perfect Laws under the New Testament 2. That the Law and Gospel are capable of no oposite consideration 3. That the Fathers that died under the Old Testament went not immedatly to heaven 3. Of Antinomians That God saw sin in the beleevers of the Old Testament not of the New 2. That the Covenant God made with the Iews this under the Gospel are two distinct Covenants 3. That Plenary remission of sins under the Gospel not so under the law because no sacrifice save for sins of ignorance Confut. 1. All Sacrifices were not only for sins of ignorance 2. No legall sâ—crifice therefore no remission oâ— sin in consequent 3. The sin against the holy Ghost under the Gospel not cleansed by Christs bloud 4. That under the old Covenant God gave not remission of sins to any but upon antecedent conditions not so under the Gospel 5 That remission of sinnes under the Law was successively and imperfect under the Gospel at once and perfect The difference between the Law and the Gospel is not essentiall but accidentall only Heavenly obiects more clearly revealed in the N. Testament then in the Old 1. It is so for the credenda 2. For the speranda 3. For the facienda The measure of grace ordinarily greater in the Gospel then under the Law The Iews under the Law were in a more servile condition then Christians under the Gospel The continuation of the Law was to last but till the coming of Christ Difference between the Law strictly taken and the Gospel strictly taken 1. The Law in some measure is known by the light of Nature but the truth of the Gospel must be wholly revealed by God 2. The Law requires perfect righteousness the Gospel brings pardon through Christ 3. If righteousness were by the Law eternall life were a debt but the Gospel holds it forth as Gods meere indulgence 4. The Law is only for those that have a perfect nature the Gospel for broken-hearted sinners 5. The Law conditional the Gospel absolute Repentance strictly taken is distinguished from Faith The Law and the Gospel are inseperably united in the Word and Ministery Faith and Repentance are wrought both by the Law and the Gospel Vnbeliefe a sin against the Law as well as the Gospel The Gospel taken strictly comprehends no more then the glad tidings of a Saviour Zeal that either wants knowledge or puffs up no good zeale Sincerity taken two waies The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what it signifieth The Law as it is considered rigidly and in the abstract so Christ is not the end thereof unless it be by accident As the Law is taken largely for the administration of it by Moses so Christ was intended directly Christ is the end of intention in the dispensation of the Law 2 Cot. 3. 7. opened The ministery of the Gospel more excellent then that of the Law in three respects 1. Because it is the ministery of life and righteousness the Law of death and condemnation 2. Because of its duration it being to abide alwayes but the ministery of Moses to be abolished 3. Because the glory that cometh by the Gospel is spirituall that which shone upon Moses but materiall What signified by the shining of Moses his face 2. Christ is the end of perfection to the Law 3. Christ is the end of perfection of the Law in vouchsafing us his Spirit that we may obey it 4. Christ is the end of perfection of the Law in that his obedience to it is made curs Object Aâ—sw The belâ—ever is the subject to whom Christ is made righteousness Righteousness is the end for which Christ is thus the perfection of the Law The beleever hath great cause to bless God for providing such a righteousness for him The Text opened What meant by Kingdom of heaven Doctr. The doctrines of men may either directly or covertly overthrow the Law Covertly there waies 1 When they make it not so extensive in its obligation as it is 2 VVhen they hold principles by necessary consequence inforcing the abrogation of it 3. VVhen they press such duties up on men as will necessitate them to break the commandements of God The Marcionites and Manichees the first oppugners of the Law Postions of Antinomians Antidotes against Antinomian errours 1. Be afraid of entertaining errours in doctrine as that which may damn thee 2. Look upon those places of Scripture where duties are commanded as well as those where Christ and grace are spoken of 3. Beware of affecting applause among the people 4. Get to be well grounded in the principles of Religion 5. Be not rash in publishing any new opinion 6. Antinomianisme overthrows Christ and grace