absolutely but limitedly if so be they did refuse the conditions of peace I therefore incline to those who think it a perverse addition of the Scribes and Pharisees yet am not able to say the other is false 3. Whether our Saviour doe oppose himself here to others as a Law giver or as an Interpreter cleansing away the mud and filth from the fountain And this indeed is worthy the disquisition for this Chapter hath been taken by the Manichees and Marcionites of old and by other erroneous persons of late to countenance great errours for some have said that the Author of the Old Testament and the New Testament are contrary some have said that the New Testament or the Gospel containeth more exact and spirituall duties then the Old Hence they conclude that many things were lawfull then which are not now and they instance in Magistracy resisting of injuries swearing and loving of our enemies and many counsels of perfection added And this is a very necessary Question for hereby will be laid open the excellency of the Law when it shall be seen that Jesus Christ setting aside the positive precepts of Baptisme and the Lords Supper c. commanded no new duty but all was a duty before that is now Now that our Saviour doth only interpret and not adde new Lawes will appeare 1. From that protestation and solemne affirmation he makes Christ does only interpret the old adds no new Lawes before hee cometh to instruct the hearers about their duties Think not that I came to destroy the Law but to fulfill it Now although it be true that Christ may be said to fulfill the Law diverse waies yet I think he speakes here most principally for his doctrinall fulfilling it for he opposeth teaching the Law to breaking of the Law and if this be so then our Saviours intent was that hee came not to teach them any new duty to which they were not obliged before onely hee would better explicate the Law to them that so they might be sensible of sinne more then they were and discover themselves to be fouler and more abominable then ever they judged themselves Thus Theophylact As a painter doth not destroy the old lineaments onely makes them more glorious and beautifull so did Christ about the Law In the next place Christ did not adde new duties which were not commanded in the Law because the Law is perfect and they were bound not to adde to it or detract from it Therefore we are not to continue a more excellent way of duty then that prescribed there Indeed the Gospel doth infinitely exceede in regard of the remedy prescribed for afflicted sinners and the glorious manifestation of his grace and goodnesse but if we speak of holy and spirituall duties there cannot be a more excellent way of holinesse this being an idea and representation of the glorious nature of God 3. That nothing can be added to the Law appeareth by that Commandement of loving God with all our heart and soule Now there can be nothing greater then this and this command is not only indicative of an end which we are to aime at but also preceptive of all the meanes which tend thereunto And lastly our Saviour saith not Except your righteousnesse exceed that of Moses his Law or which was delivered by him but that of the Scribes and Pharisees implying by that plainly his intent was to detect and discover those formall and hypocriticall waies which they pleased themselves in when indeed they never understood the marrow and excellency of the Law Question 4. What was the opinion received among the Pharisees The Pharisees were of opinion that the Law did only reach the outward man and forbid outward acts concerning the Commandements of God That you may know the just ground our Saviour had thus to expound the Law it will be manifest if you consider the generall opinion received among the Jewes about the sense of the Commandements and that was The Law did onely reach to the outward man did only forbid outward acts and that there was no sinne before God in our hearts though we delighted in and purposed the outward acts if they were not outwardly committed And this we may gather by Paul that all the while he was bewitched with Pharisaicall principles he did not understand inward lust to be sinne and as famous as it is false is that exposition brought by the Learned of Kimchy upon that Psalme 66. 18. If I regard iniquity in my heart hee will not heare he makes this strange meaning of it If I regard iniquity onely in my heart so that it break not forth into outward act the Lord will not heare that is heare so as to impute it or account it a sin And thus it is observed of Josephus that he derideth Polybius the noble historian because he attributed the death of Antiochus to sacriledge onely in his purpose and will which he thought could not be that a man having a purpose onely to sinne should be punished by God for it But the Heathens did herein exceed the Pharisees fecit quisque quantum voluit its Seneca's saying And indeed it s no wonder if the Pharisees did thus corrupt Scripture for its a doctrine we all naturally incline unto not to take notice or ever be humbled for heart-sinnes if so be they break not out into acts Oh what an hell may thy heart be when thy outward man is not defiled Good is that passage 2 Chron. 22. 26. Hezekiah humbled himselfe for the pride of his heart Certainly as God who is a spirit doth most love spirit-graces so he doth most abhorre spirit-sinnes The Schools doe well observe that outward sins are majoris infamiae but inward heart-sinnes are majoris reatûs as we see in the divels And from this corruption in our nature ariseth that poysonous principle in Popery which is also in all formall Protestants That the commands of God doe onely forbid the voluntary omssion of outward acts whereas our Saviours explication will find every man to be a murderer an adulterer c. Now our Saviours explications of the Law goe upon those grounds which are observed by all sound Divines viz. 1. That the Law is spirituall and forbids not onely the fruit and branches of sinne but even the root it selfe and fountaine And 2. that wheresoever any sinne is forbidden and in what latitude soever the contrary good things are commanded and in that proportionable latitude This therefore considered may make every man tremble and be afraid of his owne heart and with him to cry out Gehenna sum Domine I am a very hell it selfe Let us not therefore be afraid of preaching the Law as we see Christ here doth for this is the great engine to beate downe the formality and Pharisaisme that is in people And thus I come to raise the Doctrine which is that The Law Doctr. of God is such a perfect rule of life that Christ added no new precept
to be understood that it was lawfull for a man who had his eye or teeth 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 judgement 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 even death it self may be inflicted upon offenders capitall punishments to be inflicted upon some offenders There are those that say It doth not stand with the goodnesse and meaknesse of a Gospel-spirit to put any man to death for any crime whatsoever But the falsenesse hereof doth appeare 1. In 1. Because commanded by God that its 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. Whosoever sheddeth mans blood by man shall his blood be shed 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 foretell say they what will befall the murderer not what a Magistrate is bound to doe 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 indefinitely Hee that sheddeth mans blood his blood shall be shed but he addeth by man it shall be shed Therefore howsoever a great * Grotius 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 capitall punishments or that the Romans for a while did use no heavier punishment then deportation or banishment wee 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 onely so but hee addeth a more severe punishment to that man that shall kill Cain then was due to the killing of any man This hath made some wonder but the answer is very easie that where God for some speciall reasons doth prohibit such a fact if that be notwithstanding committed it is to be accounted more hainous And 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 doe for speciall reasons and another what the common Law of Nature and the perpetuall Law of God requireth A seccond Argument for capitall punishments under the Gospel 2. Because it is the Magistrates office 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 3. Because practis'd under the Gospel upon Ananias and Sapphira and so not repugnant to it 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 Gods glory 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 Object 1 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 Sol. 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 Object 2 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 Sol. punishments only as a minister he laboured to bring them unto repentance both the woman and the accusers And whereas again it 's objected that this way of putting to Object 3 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 Sol. salvation of the malefactors souls as much as in them lyeth but if they do 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 and obstinacy in their own hearts And in that we see a
obligation which cometh by Christ is still upon us And this is enough to overthrow the Antinomian who pleadeth for the totall abrogation of the Law Thus you see that if this should be granted yet the Law should be kept up in its full vigour and force as much as if it were continued by Moses But I conceive that this position goeth upon a false ground as if our Saviour Matth. 5. did there take away the obligation by Moses and put a new sanction upon it by his own authority as if he should have said The Law shall no longer binde you as it is Moses his Law but as it is mine Now this seemeth to overthrow the whole scope of our Saviour which is to shew that he did not come to destroy the Law And therefore he doth not take upon him to be a new Law-giver but an Interpreter of the old Law by Moses This I intend to handle God willing in that Question Whether Christ hath appointed any new duties that were not in the Law before Only this seemeth to be very cleare that our Saviour there doth but interpret the old Law and vindicate it from corrupt glosses and not either make a new Law or intend a new confirmation of the old Law Secondly Consider in what sense we say that the Law doth binde us in regard of Moses And First this may be understood reduplicatively as if it did The Law given by Moses doth not bind us in regard of Moses bind because of Moses so that whatsoever is of Moses his ministery doth belong to us and this is very false and contrary to the whole current of Scripture for then the Ceremoniall Law would also binde us because à quatenus ad omne valet consequentia The Law given by Moses as written for the Church of God and intended for good to Christians in the N. Testament is binding so that you must not understand it in this sense Secondly you may understand it thus that Moses as a Pen-man of the Scripture writing this down for the Church of God did by this intend good to Christians in the New Testament and this cannot be well denyed by any that do hold the Old Testament doth belong to Christians for why should not the books of Moses belong to us as well as the books of the Prophets Though indeed this be denyed by all those that are for the negative Thirdly therefore we may understand it thus that God Though the people of Israel were the present subject to whom the Morall Law was given yet the observation therof was intended for the Church of God perpetually when he gave the ten Commandements by Moses to the people of Israel though they were the present subject to whom he spake yet he did intend an obligation by these Lawes not only upon the Jewes but also all other Nations that should be converted and come to imbrace their Religion And this is indeed the very 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 Jewes 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 The Morall Law is binding 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 1. In regard of the matter of 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 2. In regard of the preceptive authority put upon it 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 The obligation of the Morall Law perpetuall proved by severall Arguments 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 doe say The Law still obligeth because of Christs confirmation of it yet the Antinomians doe professe they doe 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 doe 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 speake not of the whole latitude of the Ministry of Moses And in the first place I bring this Argument which much Argum. 1 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 shadowes and Christ the fulnesse was come and therefore they were to cease And thus for the Judiciall Lawes because they were given to them as a politick bodie 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 doe 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 doe ex abundanti shew that not onely the works of the Ceremoniall Law but neither of the Morall Law doe justifie but that benefit we have by Christ onely Therefore the Apostles when they bring in the Morall Law in the dispute they doe 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 doe not joyne 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 Argum. 2 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 Jewes and Christians beleeving are looked upon as one people Now that the Scripture urgeth the Morall Law upon Heathens converted as a commandement heretofore delivered is plaine 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 commandements which were given by Moses Thus when he writeth to the Ephesians that were not Jewes cap. 6. 2. he urgeth children to honour their father and mother because it 's the first Commandement 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 Jewes 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 Doe not commit adultery said also Doe 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 Commandements reach to them I answer because as it is to be shewed in answering the objections against this truth the Jewes 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 the 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 Argum. 3 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 Commandement we cannot then but gather that the Commandements as given by Moses doe binde us For here their distinction will not hold of binding ratione materia 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 Commandements 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 Commandement of God The fourth Argument from Reason that it is very incongruous Argum. 4 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 perpetuall 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 only there is great reason to be given and thus Austin well answered Porphyrius that objected God was worshipped otherwayes in the old Testament then in the New That
or duty unto it But even as the Prophets before did onely explicate the Law when they pressed morall duties so also Christ and the Apostles when they urge men unto holy duties they are the same commanded heretofore I doe not speak of Sacraments or the outward positive worship which is otherwise then was in the Old Testament they had Circumcision and we have Baptisme No specificall difference of the duties in the old Testament from those of the New but only graduall in their manifestation The Law did not only command the outward duty but required the worship of the heart but of the morall duties required of us It is true in the Old Testament many things were expressed more grosly and carnally which the people for the most part understood carnally yet the duties then commanded were as spirituall as now There is onely a graduall difference in the manifestation of the duties no specificall difference of the duties themselves And that this may appeare the more to the dignity and excellency of the Law I will instance in particulars First The Law of God required the heart-worship and service That this may be understood take this for a generall rule which is not denied by any That when there are any morall duties pressed in the Old Testament the Prophets doe it as explainers of the Law they doe but unfold and draw out that Arras which was folded together before This being premised then consider those places in the Old Testament that call for the heart Thus Pro. 3. 1. Let thine heart keep my commandements So Pro. 23. 26. My sonne give me thine heart So that all the duties then performed which were without the heart and inward man were not regarded God required then heart-prayer and heart-humiliation It s true the people for the most part understood all carnally and grosly thinking the outward duty commanded onely and that is no marvell for doe not people even in these times of the Gospel look to the externall duty not examining whether they pray or humble themselves according as the Word speaks of such duties Thus David was very sensible of his heart-neglect when he prayed Unite my heart to feare thy Name and are not the people of God still under the same temptations They would pray they would humble themselves but oh how they want an heart That is so divided and distracted that if after any duty we should put that question to it as God did to Satan From whence comest thou it would returne Satans answer From compassing the earth 2. It preferred duties of Mortification and Sanctification before 2. The Law preferred inward graces before outward duties religious outward duties This you shall see frequently pressed and inculcated by the Prophets Isaiah 1. how doth God abhorre there all their solemne duties making them abominable even like carrion and all because they did not wash them and make them cleane So David saith A broken and contrite heart it was more then any burnt offering now under the times of the Gospel This is an high duty and few reach unto it Doth not the Apostle reprove the Corinthians for desiring gifts rather then graces and abilities of parts rather then holinesse So that this is an excellent duty prescribed by Gods Law that to be able to mortifie our affections to have sanctified natures is more then to have Seraphicall knowledge and Cherubinicall affections in any duty Who then can be against the preaching of the Law when it s such an excellent and pure rule holding forth such precious holinesse 3. It required all our duties to be done All the duties required by the Law were to be done 1. In faith for who can think that when God required in the first Table having him for their God that hereby was not commanded faith and trusting in him as a God in Covenant who 1. In Faith would pardon sinne How could the Jewes love God or pray unto him acceptably if they had not faith in him Therefore the Law is to be considered most strictly as it containeth nothing but precepts of things to be done in which sense it s sometimes though seldome taken And 2. more largely as it had the Preface and Promises added unto it and so it did necessarily require justifying faith for it cannot be conceived that when God commanded the people of Israel by Moses to worship him and to acknowledge him as their God but that his will was they should beleeve on him as a Father But more of this when wee speak of the Law as a Covenant 2. In love and this is so much commanded by the Law that 2. In Love Christ makes the summe of the Law to be in these two things love of God and of our neighbour Therefore I wonder at the Antinomian who is so apt to oppose the doing of things in love and doing of them by the Law together for doth not the Law of God command every duty to be in love to pray in love to God to beare afflictions in love to God Yea by the law wee are to love God because hee hath given Christ for us for the Law commands us to love God for whatsoever benefits he bestoweth upon us now if we are to love him for temporall benefits much more for spirituall It is true the dispensation of the Law was in a terrible way and did gender to bondage but the doctrine of the Law that was for love and the more any Jew did any thing in love to God the more conformable he was to Gods Law 4. It required such an heavenly heart that we are to love God more Love to God in as great a measure commanded by the Law as by the Gospel then any thing else It did not only require love to God but also it commanded it in such a preheminency as that none under the times of the Gospel can doe an higher duty or expression of love than then was commanded suppose a man be a Martyr will lose his life for Gods cause this is an obedience to the first Commandement When our Saviour saith He that loveth father or mother more then me is not worthy of me he commands no higher thing of any Christian then every Jew was bound to do Hence Levi was so commended because in executing of Justice he knew not father or mother and it must needs be so for what can be more then all and yet God requires all the minde all the heart all the strength not that we were bound to love God in quantum est diligibilis for so God only can love himself but nihil supra aequè or contra 5. It required spirituall motives for all our solemne addresses unto In all our addresses to God it required spirituall motives him There are some men who look upon all the Jewes under the Old Testament as so many bruit beasts that did only minde earthly things and that as children are allured by Apples and Nuts rather
be extended both to the matter as some to teach no other thing or to the manner as others not to teach in another way Not to teach nova no nor yet novè The rule is Qui fingit nova verba nova gignit dogmata And it was Melancthons wish that men did not onely teach the same things but in iisdem verbis in iisdem syllabis The second part of injunction is higher then the former Though they doe not teach other things yet they must not spend their gifts in an uselesse way as to give heed to fables This they apply to the Jewes who had a world of fictions It is true we finde the Fathers Gregory Nazianzen and others use sometimes a fable in their Orations to denote some morall matter but such the Jewes did not use As they must not give heed to fables so neither to endlesse genealogies We see a good use made of genealogies in the Scriptures but here is reproved the sinfull use of them as those Grammarians among the Heathens that spent their time about Hecuba's mother or Achilles pedigree and what it was that the Syren's sung And these he calls endlesse because vaine curiosity is more unruly then the waves of the sea it hath no limiting Hitherto shalt thou go and no further Now mark the Apostle condemneth all these because they doe not edifie The shell-fish among the Jewes was accounted uncleane because it had but a little meat and a great deale of labour to get it and this is true of all doctrines which have no profit in them The Apostle therefore tells us what is the true use of the Law the end of the precept Scultetus who hath it out of Chrysostome makes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to be the law but the ministery or preaching and so the Apostle useth the word ver 3. But grant it be so yet they all agree he speaks of the law strictly taken afterwards The Apostle therefore reproving these false teachers that did turne bread into stones and fish into serpents the good law into unprofitablenesse lest this should be thought to traduce the law he addeth We know as if that were without question to all So that there is a position The Law is good and a supposition If a man use it lawfully with a correction The Law is not made to the righteous As Austin said It was hard to speake for free-will and not to deny free-grace or free-grace and not to deny free-will so it 's hard to give the Law its due and not to seem to prejudice the Gospel or the Gospel and not to prejudice the Law For take but these two Verses Videtur Apostolus pugnantia dicere saith Martyr For seeing none can use the Law well but a righteous man how then is not the Law given to him But this knot shall be untyed in its proper place I shall at this time handle the first proposition that is conditionall only I might insist upon opening the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Law For I conceive the neglect of the different use of this doth breed many errours for there is a law that we are to be Antinomians or contrary to and there is a law that we must submit to But of this I will speak in one particular caution Observ 1. The Law of God is good if a man use it lawfully Observ 2. which is implyed that the Law of God may be used unlawfully The Law is good 1. In respect of the matter of it therein contained 1. The Law is good in respect of the matter for if you take the spirituall interpretation of it you will finde all the matter exceeding good to love God to trust in him c. how good are they Yea there is no duty now required of us but is contained there Therefore Peter Martyr did well resemble the Decalogue to the ten Predicaments that as there is nothing hath a being in nature but what may be reduced to one of those ten so neither is there any Christian duty but what is comprehended in one of these And if Tully durst say that the law of the twelve Tables did exceed all the libraries of Philosophers both in weight of authority and fruitfulnesse of matter how much rather is this true of Gods Law I know it 's disputed Whether justifying faith be commanded in the Law here are different opinions but when I handle this Question Whether the Law of Moses and that which was ingraffed in Adams heart in innocency be all one it will be proper to speak of that Peter Martyr handling the division of the ten Commandements how the number should be made up makes that which is commonly called the Preface I am the Lord thy God which are words of a Covenant to be the first Commandment and if so then must justifying faith be enjoyned there And thus did some of the Fathers though those words are onely enunciative and not preceptive 2. In respect of the authority stamped upon it by God whereby it becomes 2. In respect of the authority of it a rule unto us The former is agreed on by all and I see few that dare openly deny the other for seeing the matter is intrinsecally and eternally good it cannot but be commanded by God though not to justifie for that is separable from it There are some things that are justa because Deus vult as in all positive things and then there are other things just and therefore God wills them though even they are also just because they are consonant to that eternall justice and goodnesse in himselfe so that indeed it is so farre from being true that the Law which hath Gods authority stampt on it for a rule and so is mandatum should be abrogated that it is impossible nè per Deum quidem for then God should deny his own justice and goodnesse therefore we doe justly abhorre those blasphemous Questions among the School-men An Deus possit mandare odium sui c. for it's impossible Therefore we see Matth. 5. that our Saviour is so farre from abrogating it that he sheweth the spirituall extent of the mandatory power of the Law farre beyond Pharisees expectation and thus James urgeth the authority of the Law-giver 3. It s good instrumentally as used by Gods Spirit for good I know 3. It 's instrumentally good it 's disputed by some Whether the Law and the preaching of it is used as an instrument by the Spirit of God for conversion But that will be an entire Question in it selfe onely thus much at this time The Spirit of God doth use the Law to quicken up the heart of a beleever unto his duty Psal 119. Thou hast quickened mee by thy precepts And so Psal 19. The Law of the Lord enlightneth the simple and by them thy servant is fore-warn'd of sinne You will say The word Law is taken largely there for all precepts and testimonies It 's true but it 's not exclusive of
as you heard makes God converting of a man to be as when a Physician poureth downe his potion into the sick-mans throat whether he will or no For it is most true that the Will in the illicite and immediate acts of it cannot be forced by any power whatsoever It's impossible that a man should beleeve unwillingly for to beleeve requireth an act of the Will The School-men dispute Whether feare or ignorance or lust doe not compell the Will and they doe rightly conclude that it cannot Therefore though a mans conversion be resisted by the corrupt heart and will of a man yet when it is overcome by the grace of God it turneth willingly unto him Therefore this argument though it seem strange yet we may say of it as he in another case Hoc argumentum non venit à Dea Suada 7. Then men may sit still and never stirre onely expecting when Gods working upon the heart of a sinner for conversion excludes not mans working grace shall come for if we have no power why are men exhorted to come to Christ and reade the word And indeed this hath so wrought upon some that they have not used any meanes at all but expect Gods providence to be a supplyer of all as Brentius if I mistake not relateth of an Anabaptist woman who invited many to supper and never provided any thing expecting God would doe it Now this Question is built upon a falshood as if a mans working were wholly excluded whereas you are to know that there are two kinds of holy things 1. There are holy things that are internally and essentially so and these we cannot doe without God John 15. Without me ye can doe nothing Austin observes the emphasis he doth not say No hard thing but nothing and he doth not say Perficere perfect but Facere you cannot doe it any way 2. There are holy actions externally so as to come to heare the word preached to reade and meditate upon the word experience teacheth that men have a naturall power to this witnesse those many Comments and learned Expositions that men without any grace have made upon the Scripture Now it 's true to doe any of these holily is Gods act The naturall man perceiveth not the things of God and God opened Lydia's heart But yet God converteth in the use of these meanes He will not ordinarily change the heart of any that doth not wait at the gates of wisdome Therefore God doth not work upon the heart as the Artificer useth his instrument but he commands to reade and hear and this is the organ or the meanes by which the Spirit of God will change his heart Now indeed when a man readeth or heareth any naturall or philosophicall truth he is able by these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 strength left in nature to comprehend them but he cannot in the same manner bring forth any thoughts or affections of heart sutable unto those spirituall mysteries laid open before him But now the patrons of Nature speak otherwise they say it is as if a man almost spent by a disease should receive physick and so that physick doth repaire and increase strength not infuse strength Or as a bird tyed by a string that hath a power to flye onely is outwardly hindered so that they suppose a latent power in Nature to be excited and stirred up by grace we say the power must be first infused 8. If they thus necessarily sin then they were not bound to pray nor Though wicked men cannot but sin in praying and hearing yet they are bound to these duties to come to hear the Word of God preached for then also they sin and no man is bound to sin Now to this the answer is clear that though a wicked man cannot but sin in praying and hearing yet hee is bound to these things and the reason is because that he sinneth in them it is meerly accidentall but the duty is a duty essentially in it selfe and a man must not omit that which is per se requisite for that which is accidentally forbidden so that his resolution should not be not to pray or to heare but deponere peccatum to lay downe his sin which corrupteth leaveneth and maketh sowre all he doth Besides there is lesse judgement to him that prayeth then to him that prayeth not although in some particular consideration his aggravation may be the greater 9. The Scripture doth say To him that hath shall be given God doth not bind himselfe to this way and when God distributed his talents it was to every one as he was able Matth. 25. If we answer to this that theologia symbolica non est argumentativa that is denied and is now a-late questioned although Austins and others comparisons about parables must needs be granted which are As in a picture there are lineaments and essentialls of it but besides these the shadowes and colours which are for meere ornament so in parables Or as others As in the musicall instrument onely the strings touched make the noise or tune yet they could not doe so unlesse fastened unto the wood so onely the scope of the parable is that which is argumentative though this principall have many accessaries joyned to it And thus we may say of that passage 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that it 's taken from the custome of men and goeth to make up the parable But let us consider it otherwise and Theophylact referreth it dangerously to our preparations and dispositions In the vessell saith he which I am to bring to God he poureth in his gift If I bring a little vessell he giveth a little gift if a great vessell he giveth a great gift But seeing that under the name of these talents be understood not onely dona sanctificantia but ministrantia and the Apostle saith expresly that the Spirit of God giveth these diversity of gifts as he pleaseth this wholly overthroweth that exposition Therefore the Papists Barradius and Maldonat doe confesse it makes onely ad ornatum non ad rem per parabolam significatam and that it 's taken from the custome of men who use indeed to look to the gifts of men their prudence and fidelity but we know by experience God did not so But if we make an argument of it then this disposition or capacity must be either supernaturall and then it 's the gift of God or if of naturall capacity as sometimes to him that hath excellent parts a prompt wit an happy memory God giveth the habit of Divinity for there is such a thing that is distinct from the habit of faith and a gift of interpreting Scripture although that naturall dexterity be a gift of God also but in another kind and then God doth not tye or bind himselfe to this way and therefore if we should say as some doe God gave the spirit of government to Moses because by nature he was most prudent and meek yet it 's not universally so because God
Though some will not call it grace because they suppose that onely cometh by Christ yet all they that are orthodox doe 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 doe 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 God entring into Covenant with Adam must be looked upon as one already pleased with him not as a reconciled Father through Christ as already pleased and a friend with him not as a reconciled Father through Christ Therefore here needed no Mediatour nor comfort because the soule 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 Deus est absolutè 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 workes 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 maintaines 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 soule to have any good thoughts of God to have any faith in Gods Covenant did suppose a power and possibility in Adam to keep it him as reconciled but then Adam had no feare 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 was possible to him And certainly if there had been a necessity to sin it would have been either from his nature or from the Divell Not from his nature for then he would have excused himselfe by this when he endeavoured to cleare himselfe But Tertullian speakes 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 Divell whose temptations cannot reach beyond a morall swasion Therefore our Divines doe well argue that if God did not work in our conversion beyond a morall swasion hee should no further cause a work good then Satan doth evill 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 his fall yet he gave him so much that might and ought to prevent 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 himselfe 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 Vse 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 innocency and purity which did once adorne our nature yet even then were we unprofitable to God and it was Gods goodnesse to receive it and to reward it Was then eternall life and happinesse a meere gift of God to Adam for his obedience and love what a free and meere gift then is salvation and eternall life to thee If Adam were not to put any trust in his duties if he could not challenge God for a reward how then shall we rely upon our performances that are so full of sin Use 2. Further to admire Gods exceeding grace to us that doth not hold us to this Covenant still That was a Covenant which did admit of no repentance though Adam and Eve had torne and rent their hearts out yet there was no hope or way for them till the Covenant of grace was revealed Beloved our condition might have been so that no teares no repentance could have helped us the way to salvation might have been as impossible as to the damned angels To be under the Covenant of works is as wofull as the poore malefactour condemned to death by the Judge according to the law he falls then upon his knees Good my lord spare mee it shall be a warning to mee I have a wife and small children O spare mee But saith the Judge I cannot spare you the Law condemnes you So it is here though man cry and roare yet you cannot be spared here is no promise or grace for you LECTURE XIV GENES 2. 17. In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt die the death HAving handled the Law of God both naturall and positive which was given to Adam absolutely as also relatively in the notion of a Covenant God made with Adam I shall put a period to this discourse about the state of innocency by handling severall Questions which will conduce much to the information of our judgement against the errours spread abroad at this time as also to the inlivening and inflaming of our affections practically These Questions therefore I shall endeavour to cleare 1. Whether there can be any such distinction made of Adam while innocent so as to be considered either in his naturalls or supernaturalls For this is affirmed by some that Adam may be considered in his meere naturalls without the help of grace and so he loveth God as his naturall
reall benefits by Christ As Elisha sent his servant with a staffe to raise up the Shunamites son but hee could doe nothing then cometh the Prophet himselfe and raiseth him up so it 's here Moses was like the Prophets servant hee went with a staffe to raise up those dead in sin but could not doe it without Christ Here may be one Question made upon these things and that is Why God appointed such various and different administrations This providence of God became a rocke to the Marcionites and Manichees insomuch that they denyed the same God to be Author of both the Testaments To answer this certainly God if hee pleased could have as clearly revealed Christ and poured out his Spirit giving eternall life as plentifully under the Law as under the Gospel But to aske why hee did thus would be as presumptuous and arrogant as to aske why hee created the world no sooner If the School-master teach the new beginner in another way then hee doth the proficient in study no man doth blame his wisedome As in the Paschall Lamb they were to eate the flesh but to throw away the bones so in all matters of religion those things that are revealed and profitable wee may feed upon and whatsoever is abstruse and difficult we may let goe Praestat per Deum nescire quia ipse non revelaverit quà m per hominem scire quia ipse praesumpserit Tert. de Anima Now to conclude I come to give the difference between the Differences between the Law strictly taken and the Gospel strictly taken Law strictly taken as requiring exact and perfect obedience promising eternall life upon no other termes and the Gospel strictly taken as a solemne promulgation of Christ and his benefits to a broken sinner And the first is this The Law in some measure of it is made 1. The Law in some measure is known by the light of Nature but the truth of the Gospel must be wholly revealed by God knowne by naturall light and so agreeable to a naturall conscience I say in some measure for there is much of the duty of the Law that is unknowne to naturall consciences yet the most externall and outward duties are knowne and accordingly as the truth of them is discerned by naturall light so the will doth joyne with them as good to be done though not in a godly way But it is otherwise with the Gospel for the very truth of it must be wholly revealed by God so that no naturall acumen in the world could ever have excogitated this wonderfull remedy of justification and salvation by Christ And as it is thus above knowledge so the heart is more averse from this way And by this you may see why it is such an hard thing to beleeve why the people of God are so hardly perswaded when loaden with guilt to rowle their soules upon Christ The reason is there is nothing in his naturall conscience to further him in this duty Presse a man against murder theft adultery here is naturall conscience joyning for this duty but urge him to beleeve this is altogether above nature Hence it is also that naturally we seek to be justified by the workes wee doe so that to be justified by faith is another way then corrupted nature in us or right nature in Adam would have inclined unto Therefore let not the people of God be so discouraged in their agonies and combats about their unbeliefe Let them know that a little degree of faith is of great consequence And if he said that Christianity was perpetua naturae violentia a perpetuall violence offered to nature this is most sure in matter of faith Wee are as froward in rejecting of a promise as stubborne in refusing of a command The second difference is in the object matter The Law holdeth 2. The Law requires perfect righteousness the Gospel brings pardon through Christ forth a perfect righteousnesse and will not admit of any other but the Gospel that condescends and brings pardon through Christ. And this is the maine difference and in which they can never be made one Now the Papist Arminian Socinian and others do overthrow this grand and maine difference holding justification by works under some notion or other whereas the Apostle maketh an immediate opposition If of faith then not of works The Apostle doth not distinguish of works of nature and works of grace or works of grace perfect and imperfect but speaketh absolutely and so doth also exclude that subtile opinion of making faith to justifie as a work for the Apostle making an opposition between faith and works must necessarily take faith under such a notion as cannot be a work And this truth is that which is the pillar of the Church of God and that which differenceth us from Jewes Turkes Papists and many heretickes The third difference is from the manner of obtaining the good thing 3. If righteousnesse were by the Law eternall life were a debt but the Gospel holds it forth as Gods meere indulgence promised Hee that shall obtaine eternall life by the Law hath it of debt and by way of justice Rom. 4. 4. Not as if Adam in the state of innocency could have merited at Gods hands or as if God became in strict justice a debtor seeing Adam was beholding to God for all but in some sense it would have been so Hence boasting would not then have been excluded eternall life being the reward of those holy workes which he should have done but now all is of grace through Christ our righteousness is meerly Gods indulgence not the holinesse that is in us but the sinne pardoned makes us acceptable So that the broken contrite heart can never sufficiently admire the grace and goodnesse of God in the Gospel-way And no marvell if so be that Paul is so frequently ravished with the considerations thereof This may well be called good newes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And if our hearts were spiritually affected wee should say How beautifull are the feet of those that bring these glad tydings The fourth difference is in respect of the subject The Law strictly 4. The Law is only for those that have a perfect nature the Gospel for broken hearted sinners taken is onely for those who have a perfect and holy nature therefore it 's a Covenant as you heard of friendship and not of reconciliation so that there is no necessity of any Mediatour Indeed there is good use of urging it to proud Pharisaicall men to bring them out of love with themselves to grosse sinners that their hearts might be broken seeing the curses belong to them yea to the godly also to teach them the faire copy they are to write after but in respect of justification by it and eternall life there is none can have that benefit but such who shall be found perfectly holy It was not Moses but the serpent that did heale so it is not the Law but Christ that can comfort