the precepts of the morall Law for they were the chiefest and indeed the whole word of God is an organ and instrument of Gods Spirit for instruction reformation and to make a man perfect to every good work It 's an unreasonable thing to separate the Law from the Spirit of God and then compare it with the Gospel for if you doe take the Gospel even that promise Christ came to save sinners without the Spirit it worketh no more yea it 's a dead letter as well as the Law Therefore Calvin well called Lex corpus and the Spirit anima now accedat anima ad corpus and it 's a living reasonable man But now as when we say A man discourses A man understands this is ratione animae not corporis so when we say A man is quickened by the Law of God to obedience this is not by reason of the Law but of the Spirit of God But of this anon 4. It s good in respect of the sanction of it for it 's accompanied 4. The Law is good in respect of its sanction with promises and that not only temporall as Command 5. but also spirituall Command 2. where God is said to pardon to many generations and therefore the Law doth include Christ secondarily and occasionally though not primarily as hereafter shall be shewed It 's true the righteousnesse of the Law and that of the Gospel differ toto coelo we must place one in suprema parte coeli and the other in ima parte terrae as Luther speaks to that effect and it 's one of the hardest taskes in all divinity to give them their bounds and then to cleare how the Apostle doth oppose them and how not We know it was the cursed errour of the Manichees and Marcionites that the Law was onely carnall and had onely carnall promises whereas it 's evident that the Fathers had the same faith for substance as we have It 's true if we take Law and Gospel in this strict difference as some Divines doe that all the precepts wheresoever they are must be under the Law and all the promises be reduced to the Gospel whether in Old or New Testament in which sense Divines then say Lex jubet Gratia juvat and Lex imperat and Fides impetrat then the Law can have no sanction by promise But where can this be shewed in Scripture 5. In respect of the acts of it You may call them either acts 5. In respect of the acts of it or ends I shall acts And thus a law hath divers acts 1. Declarative to lay down what is the will of God 2. To command obedience to this will declared 3. Either to invite by promises or compell by threatnings 4. To condemne the transgressors and this use the Law is acknowledged by all to have against ungodly and wicked men and some of these cannot be denied even to the godly I wonder much at an Antinomian authour that saith * Assert of free grace pag. 31. It cannot be a law unlesse it also be a cursing law for besides that the same authour doth acknowledge the morall Law to be a rule to the beleever and regula hath vim praecepti as well as doctrinae what will he say to the law given to Adam who as yet was righteous and innocent and therefore could not be cursing or condemning of him It 's true if we take cursing or condemning potentially so a law is alwaies condemning but for the actuall cursing that is not necessary for such a transgressour that hath a surety in his room 6. In respect of the end of it Rom. 16. 4. Christ is the end of the 6. In respect of the end Law By reason of the different use of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there are different conjectures some make it no more then extremitas or terminus because the ceremoniall Law ended in Christ Others make it finis complementi the fulnesse of the Law is Christ Others adde finis intentionis or scopi to it so that by these the meaning is The Law did intend Christ in all its ceremonialls and moralls that as there was not the least ceremony which did lead to Christ so not the least iota or apex in the morall Law but it did also aime at him Therefore saith Calvin upon this place Habemus insignem locum quòd Lex omnibus suis partibu◠in Christum respiciat Imò quicquid Lex docet quicquid praecipit quicquid promittit Christum pro scope habet What had it been for a Jew to pray to God if Christ had not been in that prayer to love God if Christ had not been in that love yet here is as great a difference between the Gospel as is between direction and exhibition between a school-master and a father he is an unwise childe that will make a school-master his father Whether this be a proper intention of the Law you shall have hereafter 7. In respect of the adjuncts of it which the Scripture attributeth 7. In respect of the adjuncts to it And it 's observable that even where the Apostle doth most urge against the Law as if it were so farre from bettering men that it makes them the worse yet there he praiseth it calling it good and spirituall Now I see it called spirituall in a two-fold sense 1. Effectivè because it did by Gods Spirit quicken to spirituall life even as the Apostle in the opposition calls himselfe carnall because the power of corruption within did work carnall and sinfull motions in him But I shall expound it spirituall 2. Formaliter formally because the nature and extent of it is spirituall for it forbids the sins of the spirit not onely externall sins it forbids thy spirit pride thy spirit envie Even as God is the father of spirits so is the Law the law of spirits Hence it 's compared by James to a glasse which will shew the least spot in the face and will not flatter but if thou hast wrinckles and deformities there they will be seen so that there is no such way to bring Pharisaicall and Morall men out of love with themselves as to set this glasse before them 8. In respect of the use of it and that to the ungodly and to the 8. In respect of the use of it beleever 1. To the ungodly it hath this use 1. To restraine and limit sin And certainly though it should 1. Because it restraines and limits sin in the ungodly not reach to renovation and changing of mens hearts yet here is a great deale of good that it 's an outward whip and scourge to men whereby they are kept in honest discipline and this made the Apostle say The Law was added because of transgressions The people of Israel by their being in the wildernesse having forgotten God and being prone to Idolatry the Lord he added this Law as a restraint upon them Even as you see upon mad-men and those that are possessed
strict rule of things to be done by way of command but denoteth any heavenly doctrine whether it be promise or precept He that distinguisheth well teacheth well Now I observe a great neglect of this in the books written about these points and indeed the reason why some can so hardly endure the word Law is because they attend to the use of the word in English or the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Lex as it is defined by Tully and Aristotle which understand it a strict rule onely of things to be done and that by way of meere command But now the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth comprehend more for that doth not only signifie strictly what is to be done but it denoteth largely any heavenly doctrine whether it be promise or precept and hence it is that the Apostle calleth it The law of faith which in some sense would be a contradiction and in some places where the word Law is used absolutely it s much questioned whether he mean the Law or the Gospel and the reason why he calls it a law of faith is not as Chrysostome would have it because hereby he would sweeten the Gospel and for the words sake make it more pleasing to them but happily in a meere Hebraisme as signifying that in generall which doth declare and teach the will of God The Hebrewes have a more strict word for precept and that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet some say this also sometimes signifieth a promise Psal 133. 3. There the Lord commanded a blessing i. e. promised so John 12. 50. his commandement i. e. his promise is life everlasting So then if we would attend to the Hebrew words it would not so trouble us to heare that it is good But yet the use of the word Law is very generall sometimes it signifieth any part of The acceptions of the word Law in Scripture are divers the Old Testament John 10. It is said in the Law You are gods And that is in the Psalmes Sometimes the Law and the Prophets are made all the books of the Old Testament sometimes the Law and the Psalmes are distinguished sometimes it is used for the ceremoniall law onely Hebr. 10. 1. The Law having a shadow of things to come sometimes it is used synecdochically for some acts of the Law onely as Galat. 5. Against such there is no law sometimes it is used for that whole oiconomy and peculiar dispensation of Gods worship unto the Jewes in which sense it is said to be untill John but grace and truth by Christ Jesus sometimes it is used in the sense of the Jewes as without Christ And thus the Apostle generally in the Epistle to the Romans and Galatians Indeed this is a dispute between Papists and us In what sense the Law is taken for the Papists would have it understood onely of the ceremoniall law But we answer that the beginning of the dispute was about the observation of those legall ceremonies as necessary to salvation But the Apostle goeth from the hypothesis to the thesis and sheweth that not onely those ordinances but no other works may be put in Christs roome Therefore the Antinomian before he speaks any thing against or about the Law he must shew in what sense the Apostle useth it Sometimes it is taken strictly for the five bookes of Moses yea it is thought of many that book of the Law so often mentioned in Scripture which was kept with so much diligence was onely that book called Denteronomy and commonly it is taken most strictly for the ten Commandements Now the different use of this word breeds all this obscurity and the Apostle argueth against it in one sense and pleadeth for it in another 2. The Law must not be separated from the Spirit of God This is 2. The Law and the Spirit of God must not be separated a principle alwaies to be carried along with you for the whole Word of God is the instrument and organ of spirituall life and the Law is part of this Word of God This I proved before nay should the Morall Law be quite abolished yet it would not be for this end because the Spirit of God did not use it as an instrument of life for we see all sides grant that circumcision and the sacraments are argued against by the Apostle as being against our salvation and damnable in their owne use now yet in the Old Testament those sacraments of Circumcision and the Paschall Lamb were spirituall meanes of faith as truly as Baptisme and the Lords Supper are It is true there is a difference in the degree of Gods grace by them but not in the truth and therefore our Divines doe well confute the Papists who hold those sacraments onely typicall of ours and not to be really exhibitive of grace as these are in the New Testament Therefore if the Apostles arguing against the Morall Law would prove it no instrument of Gods Spirit for our good the same would hold also in Circumcision and all those sacraments and therefore at least for that time they must grant it a help to Christ and grace as well as Circumcision was If you say Why then doth the Apostle argue against the works of the Morall Law I answer Because the Jewes rested in them without Christ and it is the fault of our people they turne the Gospel into the Law and we may say Whosoever seeks to be saved by his Baptisme he falls off from Christ 3. To doe a thing out of obedience to the Law and yet by love 3. Obedience and love oppose not one another and delight doe not oppose one another About this I see a perpetuall mistake To lead a man by the Law is slavish it 's servile say they a Beleever is carried by love he needs no law and I shall shew you Chrysostome hath some such hyperbolicall expressions upon the words following The Law is not put for the righteous But this is very weak to oppose the efficient cause and the rule together for the Spirit of God worketh the heart to love and delight in that which he commandeth Take an instance in Adam While he stood he did obey out of love and yet because of the command also We may illustrate it by Moses his mother You know she was hired and commanded by Pharaoh's daughter to nurse Moses which was her own childe now she did this out of love to Moses her childe yet did obey Pharaoh's daughters commandement upon her also so concerning Christ there was a commandement laid upon Christ to fulfill the Law for us yet he did it out of love It is disputed Whether Christ had a command laid upon him by the Father strictly so called and howsoever the Arrians from the grant of this did inferre Christs absolute inferiority to the Father yet our orthodox Divines doe conclude it because of the many places of Scripture which prove it Acts 7. 37. John 14. 31. As my
Martyr that in causes and effects there is a kinde of circle one increasing the other As the clouds arise from the vapours then these fall down again and make vapours only you must acknowledge one first cause which had not its being from the other and this is the Spirit of God which at first did work faith The second errour is of the Papists that maketh this difference Errour 2 between the Law and the Gospel That the same thing is called the Law while it is without the Spirit and when it hath the Spirit it is called the Gospel This is to confound the Law and Gospel and bring in Justification by works The third is of the Socinian mentioned afterwards These rocks avoided we come to consider the place and first I Errour 3 may demand Whether any under the Old Testament were made partakers of Gods Spirit or no If they were how came they by it There can be no other way said but that God did give his Spirit in all those publique Ordinances unto the beleeving Israelites so that although they did in some measure obey the Law yet they did it not by the power of the Law but by the power of Grace Again in the next place which hath alwaies much prevailed with me did not the people of God receive the Grace of God offered in the Sacraments at that time We constantly maintain against the Papists that our Sacraments and theirs differ not for substance Therefore in Circumcision and the Paschall Lamb they were made partakers of Christ as well as we yet the Apostle doth as much exclude Circumcision and those Jewish Ordinances from Grace as any thing else Therefore that there may be no contradiction in Scripture some other way is to be thought upon about the exposition of these words Some there are therefore that doe understand by the Spirit the wonderfull and miraculous works of Gods Spirit for this was reserved till the times of the Messias and by these miracles his doctrine was confirmed to be from Heaven and to this sense the fifth verse speaketh very expresly and Beza doth confesse that this is the principall scope of the Apostle though he will not exclude the other gracious works of Gods Spirit And if this should be the meaning it were nothing to our purpose Again thus it may be explained as by faith is meant the doctrine of faith so by the works of the Law is to be understood the doctrine of the works of the Law which the false Apostles taught namely that Christ was not enough to justification unlesse the works of the Law were put in as a cause also And if this should be the sense of the Text then it was cleare that the Galathians were not made partakers of Gods Spirit by the corrupt doctrine that was taught them alate by their seducers but before while they did receive the pure doctrine of Christ and therefore it was their folly having begun in the spirit to end in the flesh This may be a probable interpretation But that which I shall stand upon is this The Jewes and false Apostles they looked upon the Law as sufficient to save them without Christ consider Rom. 2. 17 18 19. or when they went furthest they joyned Christ and the observance of the Morall Law equally together for justification and salvation whereas the Law separated from Christ did nothing but accuse and condemne not being able to help the soul at all Therefore it was a vain thing in them to hope for any such grace or benefit as they did by it So that the Apostles scope is not absolutely to argue against the benefit of the Law which David and Moses did so much commend but against it in the sense as the Jewes did commonly doat upon it which was to have justification by it alone or at the best when they put the Law and Christ together Now both these we disclaime either that God doth use the Law for our justification or that of it self it is able to stirre up the least godly affection in us More places of Scripture are brought against this but they will come in more fitly under the notion of the Law as a covenant Thus therefore I shall conclude this point acknowledgeing that many learned and orthodoxe men speak otherwise and that there is a difficulty in clearing every particular about this Question but as yet that which I have delivered carrieth the more probability with me and I will give one text more which I have not yet mentioned and that is Act. 7. 38. where the Morall Law that Moses is said to receive that he might give the Israelites is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the lively Oracles that is not verba vitae but verba viva vivificantia so that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is as much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 giving life not that we could have life by vertue of any obedience to them but when we by grace are inabled to obey them God out of his mercy bestoweth eternall life Let me also adde this that I the rather incline to this opinion because I see the Socinians urging these places or the like where justification and faith is said to be by Christ and the Gospel that they wholly deny that any such thing as grace and justification was under the Law and wonder how any should be so blind as not to see that these priviledges were revealed first by Christ in the Gospel under the new Covenant whereas it is plain that the Apostle instanceth in Abraham and David who lived under the Law as a schoole-master for the same kinde of justification as ours is And thus I come to another Question which is the proper and immediate ground of strife between the Antinomian and us and from whence they have their name and that is the abrogation of the Morall Law And howsoever I have already delivered many things that doe confirme the perpetuall obligation of it yet I did it not then so directly and professedly as now I shall The Text I have chosen being a very fit foundation to build such a structure upon I will therefore open The Text opened the words and proceed as time shall suffer The Apostle Paul having laid down in verses preceding the nature of justification so exactly that we may finde all the causes efficient meritorious formall instrumentall and finall described as also the consequent of this truth which is the excluding of all self-confidence and boasting in what we doe he draweth a conclusion or inference ver 26. And this conclusion is laid down first affirmatively and positively A man is justified by faith the Phrases 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are all equivalent with the Apostle And then to prevent all errours and cavils he doth secondly lay it down exclusively without works And this proposition he doth extend to the Jewes and Gentiles also from the unity or onenesse of God
which is not to be understood of the unity of his Essence but Will and Promise Now when all this is asserted he maketh an objection which is usuall with him in this Epistle and he doth it for this end to take away the calumny and reproach cast upon him by his adversaries as one that would destroy the Law The objection then is this propounded by way of interrogation to affect the more Doe we make voide the Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Apostle used this word in this Chapter ver 3. and it signifieth to make empty and voide so that the Law shall be of no use or operation Now to this the Apostle answereth negatively by words of defiance and detestation God forbid So that by this expression you see how intolerable that doctrine ought to be unto the people of God that would take away the Law And the Apostle doth not only defie this objection but addeth we establish the Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Metaphor from those that doe corroborate and make firm a pillar or any such thing that was falling It hath much troubled Interpreters how Paul could say he established the Law especially considering those many places in his Epistles which seeme to abrogate it Some understand it thus That the righteousnesse of faith hath it's witnesse from the Law and Prophets as ver 21. in this Chapter so that in this sense they make the Law established because that which was witnessed therein doth now come to passe Even as our Saviour said Moses did beare witnesse of him But this interpretation doth not come up to the Apostles meaning Those that limit this speech to the Ceremoniall Law do easily interpret it thus That the ceremonies and types were fulfilled in Christ who being the substance and body they are all now fulfilled in him But the Apostle comprehends the Morall Law under the word Law The Papists they make the Gospel a new Law and they compare it with the old Law having the Spirit as two things differing only gradually so that they say the old Law is established by the new as the childhood is established by elder age which is not by abolition but perfection That which I see the Orthodoxe pitch upon is that the Law The Law established three wayes by the Gospel is established three wayes by the Gospel First whereas the Law did threaten death to every transgressor this is established in Christ who satisfied the justice of God Secondly in that the Law requireth perfect obedience this is also fulfilled in Christ Now this is a matter worth discussion Whether the righteousnesse we are yet justified by be the righteousnesse of the Law For those learned men that are against the imputation of Christs active obedience they urge this argument which seemeth to carry much strength with it That if Christs active obedience be made ours and we justified by that then are we still justified by the works of the Law and so the righteousnesse of faith and works is all one faith in us and works in Christ If therefore active obedience be made ours as I conceive the truth to be in that doctrine then we may easily see the Law is established Thirdly but lastly which I take to be the truth and Austin heretofore interpreteth it so the Law is established because by the Gospel we obtain grace in some measure to fulfill the Law so that we still keep the Law in the preceptive and informative part of it and doe obtaine by faith in Christ obedience in some degree to it which obedience also though it be not the Covenant of grace yet is the way to Salvation LECTURE XXII ROM 3. 31. Doe we then make voide the Law THis Text is already explained and there are two Observations doe naturally arise from it as first That it is an 'T is hard to set up Christ and grace and not be thought to destroy the Law hard thing so to set up Christ and grace as not thereby be thought to destroy the Law Thus was Paul misunderstood by some and so the Antinomians not rightly understanding in what latitude the Orthodoxe in their disputations against Popery did oppose the Law to the Gospel were thereby plunged into a dangerous errour But on this point I will not insist The second doctrine is that which I intend namely That the doctrine The doctrine of Christ and grace doth establish the Law of Christ and grace in the highest and fullest manner doth not overthrow but establish the Law And this doctrine will directly lead us to lay our hands on the chiefe pillars of that house which the Antinomians have built The Question then at this time to be discussed is Whether the Law be abrogated or no by Christ to the beleevers under the Gospel And this Question I will answer by severall propositions that may conduce to the clearing of the truth for it would seeme as if the Scripture held out contradictions in this point In my Text it 's denyed that the Apostles doe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 make void the Law yet 2 Cor. 3. 11. The Apostle speaking of the Law hath this passage If that which be done away 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where the word is expresly used that yet here is denyed so Ephes 2. 14. Christ is described 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that maketh voide the hand-writing against us And in that place the Apostle useth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when yet Mat. 5. he denyed that he came 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to dissolve the Law Grave therefore and serious is Ghimnitius his admonition In all other things generall words beget confusion and obscurity but in the doctrine of the abrogation of the Law they are very dangerous unlesse it be distinctly explained how it is abrogated In the first place therefore consider That about a Law there Interpretation dispensation c. affections of a Law are these affections if I may call them so There is an Interpretation a dispensation or relaxation and these differ from an abrogation for the former doe suppose the Law still standing in force though mitigated but abrogation is then properly when a Law is totally taken away And this abrogation ariseth sometimes from the expresse constitution at first which did limit and prescribe the time of the lawes continuance sometimes by an expresse revoking and repealing of it by that authority which made it sometimes by adding to that repeale an expresse law commanding the contrary Now it may be easily proved that the Ceremoniall and Judiciall lawes they are abrogated by expresse repeale The Judiciall Law 1 Pet. 2. 13. where they are commanded to be subject to every ordination of man and this was long foretold Genes 49. 10. The Law-giver shall be taken from Judah The Ceremoniall Law that is also expresly repealed Act. 15. and in other places not that these were ill or that they did come from an ill author but because the fulnesse and substance of
2. 27. Shall not uncircumcision 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if it fullfill the Law So James 2. 8. If you fullfill the royall Law In this sense Aristotle called the soul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as that which did perfect And the sacrifices before marriage which was the consummation of that neere bond or because of the cost then bestowed were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Erasmus takes it in this sense here and doth translate it perfection for which Beza doth reprove him saying he doth not remember that the word is so used any where But that place 1 Tim. 7. 5. The end of the commandement is charity may seeme to confirme this sense for certainly that phrase is no more then that in another place Love is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the fullfilling of the Law Therefore I think this is a great part of the meaning here Christ is the end that is the perfection the fullnesse of the Law Yet I shall take in also the end of intention or a scope unto which the Law-giver aimed when hee gave the Law and this will be shewed in the particulars The doctrine is That Christ is the end of the Law for righteousnesse to every beleever For the opening of this consider 1. That an end may be taken either for that of consumption and abolition or for that of perfection and confirming Finis interficiens and finis perficiens as Austine called it Now in the former sense Christ was the end of the Ceremoniall Law the end abolishing although that was also an end of perfection to them and so some understand it of the Ceremoniall Law and the Prophesies They all shadowed out Christ and ended in him And this indeed is a truth but it is not pertinent to the scope of the Apostle who speaketh of such a Law that the Jewes expected righteousnesse by in the performing of it which must be the Morall Law only Now when we speak of the Morall Law having Christ for the end of it then in the second place that may be considered two waies 1. Either rigidly and in an abstracted consideration from the administration The Law as it is considered rigidly and in the abstract so Christ is not the end thereof unless it be by accident of it as it doth require perfect obedience and condemning those that have it not now in this sense Christ cannot be the scope or end of the Law but it is meerly by accident and occasionall that a soule abased and condemned by the Law doth seek out for a Christ onely you must know that the Law even so taken doth not exclude a Christ It requireth indeed a perfect righteousnesse of our owne yet if we bring the righteousnesse of a surety though this be not commanded by the Law yet it is not against the Law or excluded by it otherwise it would have been unjustice in God to have accepted of Christ our surety for us 2. Or else the Law may be taken in a more large way for the administration As the Law is taken largely for the administration of it by Moses so Christ was intended directly of it by Moses in all the particulars of it and thus Christ was intended directly and not by accident that is God when hee gave the Law to the people of Israel did intend that the sense of their impossibility to keep it and infinite danger accrewing thereby to them should make them desire and seek out for Christ which the Jewes generally not understanding or neglecting did thereby like Adam goe to make fig-leaves for their covering of their nakednesse their empty externall obedience According to this purpose Aquinas hath a good distinction about an end That an End is two-fold Either such to which a thing doth naturally incline of it selfe Or secondly That which becometh an end by the meere appointment and ordination of some Agent Now the end of the Law to which naturally it inclineth is eternall life to be obtained by a perfect righteousnesse in us but the instituted and appointed end which God the Law-giver made in the promulgation of it was the Lord Christ So that whatsoever the Law commanded promised or threatned it was to stirre up the Israelites unto Christ They were not to rest in those precepts or duties but to go on to Christ so that a beleever was not to take joy with any thing in the Law till he came to Christ and when he had found him he was to seek no further but to abide there Now this indeed was a very difficult duty because every man naturally would be his own Christ and Saviour And what is the reason that under the Gospel beleevers are still so hardly perswaded to rest only on Christ for righteousnesse but because of that secret selfe dependance within them Having premised these things I come to shew how Christ is Christ is the end of intention in the dispensation of the Law the end of the Law taken largely in the ministry of Moses And in the first place Christ was the scope and end of intentention God by giving so holy a Law requiring such perfect obedience would thereby humble and debase the Israelites so that thereby they should the more earnestly flye unto Christ even as the Israelite stung by a serpent would presently cast his eyes upon the brasen Serpent It is true Christ was more obscurely and darkly held forth there yet not so but that it was a duty to search out for Christ in all those administrations And this you have fully set forth in that Allegory which Paul maketh 2 Corinth 3. 7. I shall explaine that place because it may be wrested 2 Cer. 3. 7. opened by the Antinomian as if because that kind of ministery which was by Moses was to be done away and evacuated therefore the preaching of the Law were also to be abrogated but that is The ministery of the Gospel more excellent then that of the Law in three respects far from the Apostles scope for the Apostle his intent there is to shew the excellency of the ministery of the Gospel above that of the Law and that in three respects 1. In regard one is the ministery of death and condemnation the 1. Because it is the ministery of life and righteousness the Law of death and condemnation other of life and righteousnesse Therefore the one is called Letter and the other Spirit Now this you must understand warily taking the Law nakedly and in it selfe without the Spirit of God and the Gospel with the Spirit for as Beza well observeth if you take the Gospel without Gods Spirit that also is the ministration of death because it is as impossible for us to beleeve as it is to obey the Law by our owne power only life and spirit is attributed to the Gospel and not to the Law because Christ who is the authour of the Gospel is the fountaine of life and when any good is wrought by
11o. Junii 1646. We the President and Fellows of Sion Colledge London earnestly desire Master Anthony Burgess to publish in print his elaborate and judicious Lectures upon the Law and the Covenants against the Antinomian Errours of these times which at our entreaty hee hath preached and for which wee give him most hearty thanks that so as well the Kingdome as this City may have the benefit of those his learned labours Dated at Sion Colledge the 11th of June 1646. at a generall meeting of the Ministers of London there Arthur Jackson President in the name and by the appointment of the rest VINDICIAE LEGIS OR A Vindication of the MORALL LAW AND THE COVENANTS From the Errours of Papists Arminians Socinians and more especially Antinomians In XXIX LECTURES preached at Laurence-Jury London By Anthony Burgess Preacher of Gods Word LONDON Printed by James Young for Thomas Underhill at the Signe of the Bible in Wood-street 1646. TO THE Truly pious and worthily honoured Lady the Lady RUTH SCUDAMORE Honoured Madam I Have observed your Ladiship carefull in two things to improve the duty commanded in the Law and to imbrace the promise tendered in the Gospel the former hath been a spurre to holinesse the latter a curb to unbeliefe The consideration of this together with the remembrance of those manifold favours which your Ladiship hath plentifully vouchsafed to me and mine hath provoked me to dedicate this Treatise unto you which although it hath much controversall matter in it yet it is not without many practicall directions and consolations It hath been Gods goodnesse unto you that although in these times of calamities your portion hath been one of the afflictions in Paul's Catalogue without settled aboad yet God hath left your mind fixed and immoveable in the truth being enabled to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 magnifie grace in the highest manner out of the reall sense of your necessity and unworthinesse yet to avoid Antinomianisme and on the other side to be punctuall and exact in the duties of mortification and holinesse yet to take heed of Pharisaicall Popery And indeed this is the right sense when we are so diligent in working out our salvation with feare and trembling as if there were no grace to justifie and yet so resting and beleeving in the grace of Christ as if no good thing had been done by us Madam goe on with the assistance of God and account the things of grace more excellent then the things of parts and while others rejoyce in opinions and new notions about faith and holinesse do you delight in the things themselves The Lord keep his best wine for you in the later end of your age and give you to see the fruit of your prayers a settled reformation in the Church that so when your time shall come you may depart in peace feeling much of the power and love of God living and much more of them dying Septemb. 21. 1646. Madam this is the prayer of your Ladiships humble servant in the Lord Anthony Burgess TO THE READER READER IF the Father said true that Books were the fruit of the mind as children are of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clem. Alex. body naturall affection must compell mee as she did for Moses to provide some Ark for the safety of this Book lest it perish And I know no better way then to give thee some account of the matter and method of it if thou vouchsafe to peruse it For the matter of it it is chiefly improved to maintaine the dignitie and use of the Morall Law against late errours about it and thereupon I have been forced to consult more with those books that are filled with such poyson then to peruse those Authors that have maintained the truth and I found the looking upon their Heterodoxies a speciall help to propagate and confirme the truth as that Roman Painter curiously drew the picture of an Horse by constant looking upon an Asse avoiding whatsoever he saw ridiculous or deformed in him I acknowledge this work above my strength it being a subject not much handled by former writers and so I could not be guilty of that fault 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but I say as Austin Ego parvas vires habeo sed Dei Verbum magnas habet I have small strength but the Word and Truth of God hath great power None is more unwilling then my selfe to come in print but because hee that writeth good Books doth retia salutis expandere spread the nets of salvation to catch some men in and the good workes of such will last as long as their Bookes live I have hardened my selfe and overcome mine owne temper to publish to the world these conceptions of mine I have not affected to appeare in this Book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 about words and phrases because it 's controversall matter and so fitter to be represented to the understanding in naked unaffected explications then curiously adorned to please fancy Yea I have grudged at words as being too long and cumbersome desiring if possible to conveigh my sense in as briefe a manner as may be lest any that comes to look for fruit should find the leaves too broad and so cover it from sight And this endeavouring of brevity will make the matter seem too obscure and abrupt till there be a familiar acquaintance with my way My method is after some generall discourses about the usefulnesse of the Law more particularly to handle it as given to Adam and afterwards as promulgated by Moses to the people of Israel and herein I have taken in all the materiall questions that Papists Arminians Socinians and more especially Antinomians have started up In all this I have endeavoured to give the Law its due and the Gospel its due remembring that of Luther Qui scit inter Legem Evangelium distinguere gratias agat Deo sciat se esse Theologum It is the allegoricall interpretation of one Writer that the great feasting and musick which was used at the reconciliation of the father to his prodigall son did signifie the sweet harmonie and agreement between Law and Gospel If this were so then some doe represent the elder brother that grudge and murmure at this excellent accord If any adversary shall assault this Book I shall not be solicitous to answer it because I endeavoured so to state the question that at the same time truth might be maintained and falshood demolished and he that is so blind that he cannot see by the light of one Sun would not see any more if there were a thousand Suns THE CONTENTS 1 IN what respects the Law may be said to be good page 3. 2 Of what use the Law is to the ungodly p. 7. 3 Of what use the Law is to beleevers p. 8. 4 How many waies the Law may be abused p. 16. 5 What are the consequences of trusting in the Law p. 20. 6 What is required to the essence of a godly man in reference
be extended both to the matter as some to teach no other thing or to the manner as others not to teach in another way Not to teach nova no nor yet novè The rule is Qui fingit nova verba nova gignit dogmata And it was Melancthons wish that men did not onely teach the same things but in iisdem verbis in iisdem syllabis The second part of injunction is higher then the former Though they doe not teach other things yet they must not spend their gifts in an uselesse way as to give heed to fables This they apply to the Jewes who had a world of fictions It is true we finde the Fathers Gregory Nazianzen and others use sometimes a fable in their Orations to denote some morall matter but such the Jewes did not use As they must not give heed to fables so neither to endlesse genealogies We see a good use made of genealogies in the Scriptures but here is reproved the sinfull use of them as those Grammarians among the Heathens that spent their time about Hecuba's mother or Achilles pedigree and what it was that the Syren's sung And these he calls endlesse because vaine curiosity is more unruly then the waves of the sea it hath no limiting Hitherto shalt thou go and no further Now mark the Apostle condemneth all these because they doe not edifie The shell-fish among the Jewes was accounted uncleane because it had but a little meat and a great deale of labour to get it and this is true of all doctrines which have no profit in them The Apostle therefore tells us what is the true use of the Law the end of the precept Scultetus who hath it out of Chrysostome makes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to be the law but the ministery or preaching and so the Apostle useth the word ver 3. But grant it be so yet they all agree he speaks of the law strictly taken afterwards The Apostle therefore reproving these false teachers that did turne bread into stones and fish into serpents the good law into unprofitablenesse lest this should be thought to traduce the law he addeth We know as if that were without question to all So that there is a position The Law is good and a supposition If a man use it lawfully with a correction The Law is not made to the righteous As Austin said It was hard to speake for free-will and not to deny free-grace or free-grace and not to deny free-will so it 's hard to give the Law its due and not to seem to prejudice the Gospel or the Gospel and not to prejudice the Law For take but these two Verses Videtur Apostolus pugnantia dicere saith Martyr For seeing none can use the Law well but a righteous man how then is not the Law given to him But this knot shall be untyed in its proper place I shall at this time handle the first proposition that is conditionall only I might insist upon opening the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Law For I conceive the neglect of the different use of this doth breed many errours for there is a law that we are to be Antinomians or contrary to and there is a law that we must submit to But of this I will speak in one particular caution Observ 1. The Law of God is good if a man use it lawfully Observ 2. which is implyed that the Law of God may be used unlawfully The Law is good 1. In respect of the matter of it therein contained 1. The Law is good in respect of the matter for if you take the spirituall interpretation of it you will finde all the matter exceeding good to love God to trust in him c. how good are they Yea there is no duty now required of us but is contained there Therefore Peter Martyr did well resemble the Decalogue to the ten Predicaments that as there is nothing hath a being in nature but what may be reduced to one of those ten so neither is there any Christian duty but what is comprehended in one of these And if Tully durst say that the law of the twelve Tables did exceed all the libraries of Philosophers both in weight of authority and fruitfulnesse of matter how much rather is this true of Gods Law I know it 's disputed Whether justifying faith be commanded in the Law here are different opinions but when I handle this Question Whether the Law of Moses and that which was ingraffed in Adams heart in innocency be all one it will be proper to speak of that Peter Martyr handling the division of the ten Commandements how the number should be made up makes that which is commonly called the Preface I am the Lord thy God which are words of a Covenant to be the first Commandment and if so then must justifying faith be enjoyned there And thus did some of the Fathers though those words are onely enunciative and not preceptive 2. In respect of the authority stamped upon it by God whereby it becomes 2. In respect of the authority of it a rule unto us The former is agreed on by all and I see few that dare openly deny the other for seeing the matter is intrinsecally and eternally good it cannot but be commanded by God though not to justifie for that is separable from it There are some things that are justa because Deus vult as in all positive things and then there are other things just and therefore God wills them though even they are also just because they are consonant to that eternall justice and goodnesse in himselfe so that indeed it is so farre from being true that the Law which hath Gods authority stampt on it for a rule and so is mandatum should be abrogated that it is impossible nè per Deum quidem for then God should deny his own justice and goodnesse therefore we doe justly abhorre those blasphemous Questions among the School-men An Deus possit mandare odium sui c. for it's impossible Therefore we see Matth. 5. that our Saviour is so farre from abrogating it that he sheweth the spirituall extent of the mandatory power of the Law farre beyond Pharisees expectation and thus James urgeth the authority of the Law-giver 3. It s good instrumentally as used by Gods Spirit for good I know 3. It 's instrumentally good it 's disputed by some Whether the Law and the preaching of it is used as an instrument by the Spirit of God for conversion But that will be an entire Question in it selfe onely thus much at this time The Spirit of God doth use the Law to quicken up the heart of a beleever unto his duty Psal 119. Thou hast quickened mee by thy precepts And so Psal 19. The Law of the Lord enlightneth the simple and by them thy servant is fore-warn'd of sinne You will say The word Law is taken largely there for all precepts and testimonies It 's true but it 's not exclusive of
with divels we put heavie chaines and fetters that they may doe no hurt so the Lord laid the Law upon the people of Israel to keep them in from impietie The Apostle useth a word shut up as in a dungeon but that is to another sense It was Chrysostomes comparison As a great man suspecting his wife appoints Eunuchs to look to her and keep her so did God being jealous over the Jewes appoint these lawes 2. To curse and condemne and in this respect it poureth all 2. Because it condemnes them its fury upon the ungodly The Law to the godly by Christ is like a Serpent with a sting pulled out but now to the wicked the sting of sinne is the Law and therefore the condition of that man who is thus under it is unspeakably miserable The curse of it is the sore displeasure of God and that for every breach of it and if men that have broken onely mens lawes be yet so much afraid that they hide themselves and keep close when yet no man or Judge can damne them or throw them into hell what cause is there to feare that Law-giver who is able to destroy soule and body Therefore consider thou prophane man are not thy oaths are not thy lusts against Gods Law You had better have all the men in the world your enemy then the Law of God It 's a spirituall enemy and therefore the terrours of it are spirituall as well as the duties Let not your lives be Antinomians no more then opinions Oh that I could confute this Antinomianisme also such a mans life and conversation was against GODS Law but now it 's not 2. To Beleevers it hath this use 1. To excite and quicken them 1. It quickens the godly against sin and corruption against all sinne and corruption for howsoever the Scripture saith Against such there is no law and The Law is not made to the righteous yet because none of the godly are perfectly righteous and there is none but may complaine of his dull love and his faint delight in holy things therefore the Law of God by commanding doth quicken him How short is this of that which God cōmands not that a man is to look for justification by this or to make these in stead of a Christ to him but for other ends Hence Psal 1. and Psal 19. and 119. who can deny that they belong to the godly now as well as heretofore Have not beleevers now crookednesse hypocrisie luke-warmnesse You know not onely the unruly colt that is yet untamed but the horse that is broken hath a bit and bridle also and so not onely the ungodly but even the godly whose hearts have been much broken and tamed doe yet need a bridle Nè Spiritum sessorem excutiant And if men should be so peremptorie as to say they doe not need this it 's not because they doe not need it for they need it most but because they doe not feele it 2. To enlighten and discover unto them daily more and more heart-sinne 2. It discovers sin unto them and soule-sinne This use the Apostle speaketh of Rom. 7. per totum for how should a man come to know the depth of originall sinne all the sinfull motions flowing from it but by the Law and therefore that is observed by Divines the Apostle saith he had not knowne sinne but by the Law intimating thereby that the Law of nature was so obliterated and darkened that it could not shew a man the least part of his wickednesse Seneca who had more light then others yet he saith Erras si tecum vitia nasci putas supervenerunt ingesta sunt And so Pelagius his assertion was that tam sine vitio quà m sine virtute nascimur And you see all Popery to this day holds those motions of heart not consented to to be no sins but necessary conditions arising from our constitution and such as Adam had in innocency Therefore the people of God see and are humbled for that wickednesse which others take no notice of This will satisfie man but not Gods Law 3. To drive them out of all their owne power and righteousnesse 3. It makes them disclaim all their owne righteousness And this is another good consequence for when they see all to come short of the Law that the earth is not more distant from heaven then they from that righteousnesse this makes them to goe out of all their prayers and all their duties as you see Paul Rom. 7. he consented to the Law and he delighted in it but he could not reach to the righteousnesse of it and therefore crieth out Oh wretched man that I am How apt are the holiest to be proud and secure as David and Peter even as the wormes and wasps eat the sweetest apples and fruit but this will keep thee low How absurd then are they that say The preaching of the Law is to make men trust in themselves and to adhere to their owne righteousnesse for there is no such way to see a mans beggery and guilt as by shewing the strictnesse of the Law For what makes a Papist so selfe-confident that his hope is partly in grace and partly in merits but because they hold they are able to keep the Law God forbid saith a Papist that we should enjoy heaven as of meere almes to us no we have it by conquest Whence is all this but because they give not the Law its due 4. Hereby to quicken them to an higher price and esteem of Christ 4. It makes them set an higher value of Christ and his benefits and the benefits by him So Paul in that great agony of his striving with his corruption being like a living man tyed to a dead carkasse his living faith to dead unbeliefe his humility to loathsome pride see what a conclusion he makes I thank God through Jesus Christ. It 's true many times the people of God out of the sense of their sinne are driven off from Christ but this is not the Scriptures direction That holds out riches in Christ for thy poverty righteousnesse in Christ for thy guilt peace in Christ for thy terrour And in this consideration it is that many times Luther hath such hyperbolicall speeches about the Law and about sinne All is spoken against a Christians opposing the Law to the Gospel so as if the discovering of the one did quite drive from the other And this is the reason why Papists and formall Christians never heartily and vehemently prize Christ taking up every crumb that falls from his table they are Christs to themselves and self-saviours I deny not but the preaching of Christ and about grace may also make us prize grace and Christ but such is our corruption that all is little enough Let me adde these cautions 1. It 's of great consequence in what sense we use the word Law 1. The Law according to the use of the word in the Scripture is not onely a
Father hath commanded me so I you John 15. 10. If you keep my commandements and abide in love c. And indeed if it were not a commandement it could not be called an obedience of Christ for that doth relate to a command Now this I inferre hence that to doe a thing out of obedience to a command because a command doth not inferre want of love although I grant that the commandement was not laid upon Christ as on us either to direct him or quicken him Besides all the people of God have divers relations upon which their obedience lyeth they are Gods servants and that doth imply obedientiam servi though not obedientiam servilem Againe a Beleever may look to the reward and yet have a spirit of love how much rather look to the command of God A godly man may have amorem mercedis though not amorem mercenarium And lastly there is no godly man but he hath in part some unwillingnesse to good things and therefore needs the Law not onely to direct but to exhort and goad forward Even as I said the tamed horse needeth a spur as well as the unbroken colt 4. Though Christ hath obeyed the Law fully yet that doth not exempt 4. Christs Obedience exempts not us from ours us from our obedience to it for other ends then he did it And I think that if the Antinomian did fully inform himselfe in this thing there were an agreement for we all ought to be zealous against those Pharisaicall and Popish practices of setting up any thing in us though wrought by the grace of God as the matter of our justification But herein they do not distinguish or well argue The works of the Law do not justifie therefore they are needlesse or not requisite for say they if Christ hath fully obeyed the righteousnesse of the Law and that is made ours therefore it is not what ours is but what Christs is And I have heard some doubt whether the maintaining of Christs active obedience imputed to us doth not necessarily imply Antinomianisme but of that more hereafter onely let them lay a parallel with Christs passive obedience He satisfied the curse and threatning of the Law and thereby hath freed us from all punishment yet the Beleevers have afflictions for other ends so doe we the works of Gods Law for other ends then Christ did them A fifth caution or limitation shall be this to distinguish between 5. Beleevers sins condemned though not their persons a Beleever and his personall acts For howsoever the Law doth not curse or condemne him in regard of his state yet those particular sins he commits it condemnes them and they are guilty of Gods wrath though this guilt doth not redound upon the person Therefore it is a very wide comparison of * Dr. Crisp one that a man under grace hath no more to doe with the Law then an English-man hath with the lawes of Spaine or Turkie For howsoever every Beleever be in a state of grace so that his person is justified yet being but in part regenerated so farre as his sinnes are committed they are threatned and condemned in him as well as in another for there is a simple guilt of sin and a guilt redundant upon the person 6. That the Law is not therefore to be decryed because we have no 6. Inability to keep the Law exempts not from obedience to it power to keep the Law For so we have no power to obey the Gospell It is an expression an Antinomian * Dr. Crisp useth The Law saith he speaketh to thee if troubled for sin Doe this and live Now this is as if a Judge should bid a malefactor If you will not be hanged take all England and carry it upon your shoulders into the West Indies What comfort were this Now doth not the Gospel when it bids a man beleeve speak as impossible a thing to a mans power It 's true God doth not give such a measure of grace as is able to fulfill the Law but we have faith enough evangelically to justifie us But that is extraneous to this matter in hand It followes therefore that the Law taken most strictly and the Gospel differ in other considerations then in this 7. They do not distinguish between that which is primarily and per 7. The Law though primarily it requireth perfect holinesse yet it excludes not a Mediatour se in the Law and that which is occasionally It cannot be denied but the Decalogue requireth primarily a perfect holinesse as all lawes require exactnesse but yet it doth not exclude a Mediatour The Law saith Doe this and live and it doth not say None else shall doe this for thee and then thou shalt live For if so then it had been injustice in God to have given us a Christ I therefore much wonder at one who in his book speaks thus The Law doth not onely deprive us of comfort but it will let no body else speak a word of comfort because it is a rigid keeper and he confirmeth it by that place Galat. 3. 23. But how short this is appeareth 1. Because what the Apostle calleth the Law here he called the Scripture in generall before 2. He speaketh it generally of all under that forme of Moses his regiment so that the Fathers should have no comfort by that meanes Use 1. Of instruction How dangerous an errour it is to deny The Law though it cannot justifie us is notwithstanding good and not to be rejected the Law for is it good and may it be used well then take we heed of rejecting it What because it is not good for justification is it in no sense else good Is not gold good because you cannot eat on it and feed on it as you do meat Take the precept of the Gospel yea take the Gospel acts as To beleeve this as it is a work doth not justifie Therefore that opinion which makes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere to justifie may as well take in other acts of obedience But because faith as it is a work doth not justifie doe you therefore reject beleeving A man may abuse all the ordinances of the Gospel as well as the Law The man that thinks the very outward work of baptism the very outward work of receiving a sacrament will justifie him doth as much dishonour God as a Jew that thought circumcision or the sacrifices did justifie him You may quickly turn all the Gospel into the Law in that sense you may as well say What need I pray what need I repent it cannot justifie me as to deny the Law because it cannot Use 2. How vaine a thing it is to advance grace and Christ Grace and Christ not to be advanced oppositely to the Law oppositely to the Law nay they that destroy one destroy also the other Who prizeth the city of refuge so much as the malefactour that is pursued by guilt Who desireth the brasen Serpent but
he that is stung If Christ be the end of the Law how is he contrary to it And if Christ and the Law could be under the Old Testament why not under the new It is true to use the Law otherwise then God hath appointed it 's no marvell if it hurt us if it poyson us as those that kept the Manna otherwise then they should it turned to wormes But if you use it so as Christ is the dearer and grace the more welcome to thee then thou dost well The Law bids thee love God withall thine heart and soule doth not this bid thee goe to Christ Hast thou any strength to doe it And what thou dost being enabled by grace is that perfect Vae etiam laudabili vitae ei c. said Austin make therefore a right use of the Law and then thou wilt set up Christ and grace in thine heart as well as in thy mouth Now thou holdst free-grace as an opinion it may be but then all within thee will acknowledge it LECTURE II. 1 TIM 1. 8 9. Knowing the Law is good if a man use it lawfully IN these words you have heard 1. the position The Law is good 2. the supposition If a man use it lawfully Now this know in the generall that this is no more derogative The abuse of the Law no derogation to it to the Law that it is such a bonum quo aliquis malè uti potest then God or Christ or the Gospel or Free-grace are for all may turne this hony into gall yea an Antinomian may set up his preaching of grace as a work more eminent and so trust to that more then Christ I doe acknowledge that of Chrysostome to be very good speaking of the love of God in Christ and raised up in admiration of it Oh saith hee I am like a man digging in a deep spring I stand here and the water riseth up upon me and I stand there and still the water riseth upon me So it is in the love of Christ and the Gospel the poore broken heart may find unsearchable treasures there but yet this must not be used to the prejudice of the Law neither And take this as a Prologue galeatus to all I shall say That because the Law may be used unlawfully it is no more derogation then to the Gospel Wo be to the whole Land for the abuse of the Gospel is it not the matter of death to many I shall shew the generall waies of abusing the Law 1. That in the Text when men turne it unto unfruitfull and unprofitable 1. The Law is abused when converted to unprofitable disputes disputes and this the Apostle doth here mainly intend Cui bono must be the question made of any dispute about the Law and therefore if I should in this exercise I have undertaken handle any frivolous or unprofitable disputes this were to use the Law unlawfully and therefore let Ministers take heed that be not true of them which one dreamed about the Schoolmen that he thought them all like a man eating an hard stone when pure manchet was by Besides he preacheth the Law unprofitably not onely that darkeneth it with obscure questions but that doth not teach Christ by it and I see not but that Ministers may be humbled that they have pressed religious duties but not so as to set up Christ and hereby people have been content with duties and sacraments though no Christ in them But as all the vessels were to be of pure gold in the Temple so ought all our duties to be of pure and meere Christ for acceptation 2. When men look to carnall and worldly respects in the handling 2. When in the handling of it respect is had to worldly ends of it This is also to use the Law unlawfully And thus the Priests and the Jewes did as thereby to make a living and to have temporall blessings And it is no wonder that the Law may be used so seeing the doctrine of Christ is so abused There are as Nazianzen saith well 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christ-merchants and Christ-hucksters that hope as Judas did for carnall ends by Christ Therefore so we are to handle Law and Gospel not as thereby to make parties or to get applause but of a godly love and zeale to truth It was an honest complaint of a Popish writer Wee saith hee handle the Scripture tantùm ut nos pascat vestiat that we might onely live and be cloathed by it And how doe we all fall short of Paul as Acts 20. where hee was preaching night and day with great affections and desired no mans gold or silver how well might Chrysostome call him Angelus torrestris Cor Pauli est cor Christi 3. When men would quite overthrow it or deny it Thus the Marcionites 3. When men deny it and Manichees of old and others of late though upon other grounds Now the ground of their errour are the many places of Scripture that seem to deny the Law and I doe acknowledge it is hard to get the true sense of those places without diligence and therefore Austin said well as to that purpose if I mistake not They are not so much the simple as the negligent that are deceived herein and as Chrysostome saith A friend that is acquainted with his friend will get out the meaning of a letter or phrase which another could not that is a stranger so it is here in the Scripture Now two things let such consider 1. That as there are places that seem to overthrow it so there are also many places that do confirme it yea the Apostle makes objections against himselfe as if he did disanull it and then answers with an absit as if it were an horrid thing to doe so 2. That they must take the Apostle in the particular sense he intends it It is a good rule Quaelibet res eâ capienda est parte quâ capi debet You doe not take a sword by the edge but the handle nor a vessell by the body but the eare and so this doctrine of the Law not in every part but where the Apostle would have you take it 4. When they doe ill interpret it And herein all Popish Authors 4. When they misinterpret it are in an high degree to be reproved for they limit exceedingly the spirituall meaning thereof even as the Pharisees understood it only of externall acts and therefore our Saviour Matthew 5. did not make new commands or counsells there as Popish Expositors dreame but did throw away all that earth which the Philistims had tumbled into that spring And this was so generall a mistake that it was a great while ere Paul did understand the strictnesse of it This discovers a world of sin in a man which he was ignorant of before The Papists they also use it unlawfully in that corrupt glosse as if it might be kept so farre forth as it 's obligatory In
a great part of it they make it commonitory and not obligatory and the power of man they make to be the rule of his duty whereas it is plaine by Scripture that that measure of grace which God giveth any man upon earth is not answerable to the duty commanded there It is true Hierome said It was blasphemy to say God commanded any thing impossible but in this sense impossible absolutely so that man could never have fulfilled it 5. When they doe oppose it to Christ. And this was the Jewes 5. When they oppose it to Christ fundamentall errour and under this notion doth the Apostle argue against it in his Epistles to the Romans and Galatians And howsoever they would have compounded Christ and the Law together yet this composition was to make opposition There can be no more two Suns in the firmament then two things to justifie Therefore the reconciliation of the Law and Christ cannot be in matter of justification by way of mixture but yet one is antecedaneous and subordinate to the other and is no more to be opposed then the end to the meanes Nor is it any wonder that the Law through errour may be opposed to Christ seeing that Christ may be opposed to Christ as in Popery Christ sanctifying is opposed to Christ justifying for when we charge them with derogating from Christ in holding our graces doe justifie Nay say they we set him up more then you for we hold He doth make us holy That this holinesse doth justifie Thus you see Christ in his works is opposed to Christ in his justifying And here by the way you may see that that onely is the best way of advancing Christ or grace which is in a Scripture way and not what is possible for us to think as the Papists doe 6. When they look for justification by it and this is a dangerous 6. When they expect justification by it and desperate errour this is that which reigneth in Popery this is that inbred canker-worme that eateth in the hearts of all naturally They know not a Gospel-righteousnesse and for this end they reade the Law they heare it preached onely that they may be selfe-saviours And certainly for this two-fold end I may think God suffers this Antinomian errour to grow first That Ministers may humble themselves they have not set forth Christ and grace in all the glory of it If Bernard said he did not love to reade Tully because he could not reade the Name of Christ there how much rather may we say that in many Sermons in many a mans ministery the drift and end of all his preaching is not that Christ may be advanced And in Christians in Protestants it is a farre greater sin then in Papists for it is well observed by Peter Martyr that the Apostle doth deale more mildly in the Epistle to the Romans then in the Epistle to the Galatians and the reason is because the Galatians were at first well instructed in the matter of justification but afterwards did mixe other things with Christ therefore he thunders against them I desire to know nothing saith Paul 1 Corinth 2. but Jesus Christ and him crucified And secondly another end may be to have these truths beaten out more As The deity of Christ because of the Arrians and Grace in predestination and conversion by the Pelagians so The grace of justification because not onely of Papists but Antinomians And certainly these things were much pressed by Luther at first as appeares in his Epistle to the Galatians but perceiving how this good doctrine was abused he speaks in his Commentary on Genesis which was one of his last workes much against Antinomists But yet because generally people are fallen into a formality of truthes it 's good to set up Christ And the poyson of this opinion will be seen in these things 1. It overthroweth the nature of grace And this holdeth against 1. Justification by the Law overthrowes the nature of grace the workes of the Gospel as well as those of the Law Take notice of this that justification by workes doth not onely exclude the workes of the Law but all workes of the Gospel yea and the workes of grace also Hence you see the opposition is of works and of grace Here the Apostle makes an immediate opposition whereas the Papist would say Paul hath a non sequitur for datur tertium workes of and by grace But workes doe therefore oppose grace because the frequent acception of it in the Scripture is for the favour of God without us not any thing in us I will not deny but that the word grace is used for the effects of it inherent holinesse wrought in us as in that place Grow in grace and knowledge but yet commonly grace is used for the favour of God And the ignorance of the use of the word in Scripture makes them so extoll inherent holinesse as if that were the grace which should save us As saith the Papist a bird cannot fly without wings the fish swimme without scales the Sculler without his oare cannot get to the haven so without this grace wee cannot fly into heaven and that as the meritorius cause But this is ignorance of the word grace and so the troubles and unbeliefe of the godly heart because it is not so holy as it would be cometh from the mistake of the word grace I shall anticipate my selfe in another subject if I should tell you how comprehensive this word is implying no merit or causality on our part for acceptance but the cleane contrary and therefore for God to deale with us in grace is more then in love for Adam if he had continued righteous he had been partaker of life this had been the gift of God but not by the grace of God as it is strictly taken for Adam was not in a contrary condition to life I will not trouble you with Pareus his apprehension that thinketh Adams righteousnesse could not be called grace therefore reproveth Bellarmine for his title De gratia primi hominis neither will hee acknowledge those habits of holinesse in Christ to be called grace because there was not a contrary disposition in his nature to it as it is in ours And this also Cameron presseth that besides the indebitum which grace implyeth in every subject there is also a demeritum of the contrary Thus then justification is of grace because thy holinesse doth not onely not deserve this but the cleane contrary Now what a cordiall may this be to the broken heart exercised with its sinnes How may the sicke say There I finde health the poore say There I finde riches And as for the Papists who say they set up grace and they acknowledge grace yet first it must be set downe in what sense wee take grace It is not every man that talketh of grace doth therefore set up Scripture-grace Who knoweth not that the Pelagians set up grace They determined that whosoever did not
acknowledge grace necessary to every good act all the day long let him be an anathema and this faire colour did deceive the Easterne Churches that they did acquit him But Austine and others observed that hee did gratiae vocabulo uti ad frangendam invidiam even as the Papists doe at this time therefore if they say Thy patience is grace Thy hope is grace and therefore by grace thou art saved say This is not the Gospel-grace the Scripture-grace by which sinnes are pardoned and wee saved 2. It opposeth Christ in his fulnesse It makes an halfe-Christ 2. Opposeth the fulnesse of Christ Thus the false Apostles made Christ void and fell off from him Neither will this serve to say that the Apostle speakes of the ceremoniall law for as wee told you though the differences about the Jewish ceremonies were the occasion of those differences in the primitive times yet the Apostle goeth from the hypothesis to the thesis even to all workes whatsoever and therefore excludes Abrahams and Davids workes from justification Now Christ would be no Christ if workes were our righteousnesse because the righteousnesse by the faith of Christ is opposed to Pauls owne righteousnesse and this is called the righteousnesse of God Yea this is said to be made righteousnesse unto us and hee is called the Lord our righteousnesse and howsoever Bellarmine would understand these phrases causally as when God is called the Lord our salvation yet wee shall shew you it cannot be so therefore if thy workes justifie thee what needs a Christ Can thy graces be a Christ 3. It destroyeth the true doctrine of Justification I shall not 3. Destroyes the true doctrine of Justification lanch into this Ocean at this time only consider how the Scripture speaks of it as not infusing what is perfect but forgiving what is imperfect as in David Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth no sinne I shall not at this time dispute whether there be two parts of Justification one positive in respect of the terme to which called Imputation of Christs righteousnesse the other negative in respect of the terme from which Not accounting sin This later I onely presse Therefore What is it to be justified Not to have holinesse accepted of us but our sins remitted Justitia nostra est indulgentia tua Domine Now what a comfortable plea is this for an humbled soul O Lord it is not the question what good I have but what evill thou wilt forget It is not to finde righteous workes in me but to passe by the unrighteousnesse in me What can satisfie thy soul if this will not do Is not this as I told you with Chrysostome to stand upon a spring rising higher and higher 4. It quite overthroweth justifying faith for when Christ and 4. Overthrows justifying faith grace is overthrowne this also must fall to the ground There are these three maine concurrent causes to our justification The grace of God as the efficient Christ as the meritorious and faith as the instrumentall and although one of these causes be more excellent then the other the efficient then the instrumentall yet all are equally necessary to that effect of justification That faith doth instrumentally justifie I here take it for granted As for the Antinomian who holdeth it before faith and thinketh the argument from Infants will plainly prove it I shall shew the contrary in its due time onely this is enough that an instrumentall particle is attributed to it By faith in his bloud and By faith in his Name and justified By faith It is true it 's never said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for faith as if there were dignity or merit in it but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now to set up workes is to oppose faith as the Apostle argueth therefore faith as it is a worke is to be opposed to it selfe as its an instrument justifying 5. It quite discourageth a broken-hearted sinner taking away peace 5. Discourageth the broken-hearted sinner with God the effect of justification and glorying in tribulations If you consider Chapt. 5. of Rom. you will find that peace onely comes this way yea and to glory in tribulations for ver 1. being justified by faith we have peace with God Alas what patience what repentance what paines and religious duties can procure thee peace with God Can that which would damne save Can that which would work woe in thee comfort thee Vae etiam laudabili vitae erit saith Austin as you heard Woe to the most worthy life that is if it should be judged strictly by God And then mark the object of this peace Peace with God Take a Pharisee take a morall or a formall man he may have a great deale of peace because of his duties and good heart yet this is not a peace with God so also for glorying in tribulations how can this be If all a mans glory were for himselfe would not every affliction rather break him saying This is the fruit of my sin 6. It brings men into themselves And this is very dangerous 6. Brings men into themselves A man may not onely exclude Christ from his soule by grosse sins but by selfe-confidences You are they which justifie your selves And so the Jewes they would not submit to their owne righteousnesse see how afraid Paul is to be found in his owne righteousnesse Beza puts an emphasis upon this word Found implying that justice and the Law and so the wrath of God is pursuing and seeking after man Where is that man that offends God and transgresseth his Law Where is that man that doth not pray or heare as he should doe Now saith Paul I would not be found in mine owne righteousnesse And this made Luther say Take heed not onely of thy sins but also of thy good duties Now if this were all the wine that the Antinomian would drink in Christs cellar if this were all the hony that he would have in Christs hive none would contradict it but we shall shew you the dangerous inferences they make from hence turning that which would be a rod into a serpent 7. It overthroweth the doctrine of imputation and reckoning righteousnesse 7. Overthrowes the doctrine of imputed righteousnesse to us which is spoken of Rom. 4. and in other places I know how this point is vexed divers waies but this is enough for us If righteousnesse were in us and properly ours what need a righteousnesse be reckoned and imputed to us The Papist maketh imputative and putative and imaginary all one Who can say A lame man say they goeth right because he hath other mens shooes Who can say A deformed Thersites is a faire Absalom because of borrowed beauty But these are easily refuted by Scripture and we shall shew you Christs righteousnesse is as really ours as if it were inherent They differ not in reality but in the manner of being ours Now here the Antinomian and Papist agree in the inferences they
at this time not against the Antinomianisme in thy judgement onely but in thine heart also As Luther said Every man hath a Pope in his belly so every man hath an Antinomian Paul found his flesh rebelling against the Law of God reconcile the Law and the Gospel Justification and Holinesse Follow holinesse as earnestly as if thou hadst nothing to help thee but that and yet rely upon Christs merits as fully as if thou hadst no holinesse at all And what though thy intent be onely to set up Christ and Grace yet a corrupted opinion may soon corrupt a mans life as rheume falling from the head doth putrefie the lungs and other vitall parts LECTURE V. 1 TIM 1. 9. Knowing this that the Law is not made for a righteous man WE are at this time to demolish one of the strongest holds that the Adversary hath For it may be supposed that the eighth verse cannot be so much against them as the ninth is for them Therefore Austin observeth well The Apostle saith he joyning two things as it were contrary together doth monere movere both admonish and provoke the Reader to find out the true answer to this question how both of them can be true We must therefore say to these places as Moses did to the two Israelites fighting Why fall you out seeing you are brethren Austin improveth the objection thus If the Law be good when used lawfully and none but the righteous man can use it lawfully how then should it not be but to him who onely can make the true use of it Therefore for the better understanding of these words let us consider who they are that are said to know and secondly what is said to be knowne The subject knowing is here in this Verse in the singular number in the Verse before in the plurall it 's therefore doubted whether this be affirmed of the same persons or no. Some Expositoâ—s think those in the eighth and these in the ninth are the same and that the Apostle doth change the number from the plurall to the singular which is very frequent in Scripture as Galat. 6. 1. Others as Salmeron make a mysticall reason in the changing Because saith he there are but few that know the Law is not made for the righteous therefore hee speaketh in the singular number There is a second kind of Interpreters and they do not make this spoken of the same but understand this word as a qualification of him that doth rightly use the Law Thus The Law is good if a man use it lawfully and he useth it lawfully that knoweth it 's not made for the righteous Which of these interpretations you take is not much materiall onely this is good to observe that the Apostle using these words We know and Knowing doth imply what understanding all Christians ought to have in the nature of the Law Secondly let us consider what Law he here speaks of Some have understood it of the ceremoniall Law because of Christs death that was to be abolished and because all the ceremonies of the Law were convictions of sins and hand-writings against those that used them But this cannot be for circumcision was commanded to Abraham a righteous man and so to all the godly under the Old Testament and the persons who are opposed to the righteous man are such who transgresse the Morall Law Others that do understand it of the Morall Law apply it to the repetition and renovation of it by Moses for the Law being at first made to Adam upon his fall wickednesse by degrees did arise to such an height that the Law was added because of transgressions as Paul speaketh But we may understand it of the Morall Law generally onely take notice of this that the Apostle doth not here undertake a theologicall handling of the use of the Law for that he doth in other places but he brings it in as a generall sentence to be accoÌ„modated to his particular meaning concerning the righteous man here Wee must not interpret it of one absolutely righteous but one that is so quoad conatum and desiderium for the people of God are called righteous because of the righteousnesse that is in them although they be not justified by it The Antinomian and Papist doe both concurre in this error though upon different grounds that our righteousnesse and workes are perfect and therefore doe apply those places A people without spot or wrinkle c. to the people of God in this life and that not onely in justification but in sanctification also As saith the Antinomian in a dark dungeon when the doore is opened and the sun-light come in though that be dark in it selfe yet it is made all light by the sun Or As water in a red glasse though that be not red yet by reason of the glasse it lookes all red so though we be filthy in our selves yet all that God seeth in us lookes as Christs not onely in justification but sanctification This is to be confuted hereafter Thirdly let us take notice how the Antinomian explaineth this place and what hee meanes by this Text. The old Antinomian Islebius Agricola states the question thus Whether the Law be to a righteous man as a teacher ruler commander and requirer of obedience actively Or Whether the righteous man doth indeed the works of the Law but that is passivè the Law is wrought by him but the Law doth not work on him So then the question is not Whether the things of the Law be done for they say the righteous man is active to the Law and not that to him but Whether when these things are done they are done by a godly man admonished instructed and commanded by the Law of God And this they deny As for the later Antinomian he speaketh very uncertainly and inconsistently Sometimes he grants the Law is a rule but very hardly and seldome then presently kicketh all downe againe For saith he it cannot be conceived that it should rule but also it should reigne and therefore think it impossible that one act of the Law should be without the other The damnatory power of the Law is inseparable from it Can you put your conscience under the mandatory power and yet keep it from the damnatory Assertion of Grace page 33. Againe the same Author page 31. If it be true that the Law cannot condemne it is no more a Law saith Luther I say not that you have dealt as uncourteously with the Law as did that King with Davids servants who cut off their garments by the midst but you have done worse for even Joab-like under friendly words you have destroyed the life and soul of the Law You can as well take your Appendices from the Law as you terme them and yet let it remaine a true law as you can take the braines and heart of a man and yet leave him a man still By this it appeareth that if the Law doth not curse a man neither can it command
of our Saviour in a sense which some explaine it in I come not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance By repentance they meane conversion and by the righteous not Pharisees but such as are already converted Now that these interpretations much agreeing in one may the better be assented to consider some parallel places of Scripture Galat. 5. 23. speaking of the fruits of the spirit Against such there is no law The Law was not made to these to condemne them or accuse them so that what is said of the actions and graces of the godly may be applyed to the godly themselves You may take another parallel Rom. 13. 3. Rulers are not a terrour to good works but to evill Wouldst thou not be afraid of them doe no evill And thus the Apostle to shew how the grace of love was wrought in the Thessalonians hearts I need not saith he write to you to love for you have been taught of God to doe this His very saying I need not write was a writing so that these expressions doe hold forth no more then that the godly so farre as they are regenerate doe delight in the Law of God and it is not a terrour to them And if because the godly have an ingenuous free spirit to doe what is good he need not the Law directing or regulating it would follow as well he needed not the whole Scripture he needed not the Gospel that calls upon him to beleeve because faith is implanted in his heart This rock cannot be avoided And therefore upon this ground because the godly are made holy in themselves the Swencfeldians did deny the whole Scripture to be needfull to a man that hath the Spirit And that which the Antinomian doth limit to the Law It is a killing letter they apply to the whole Scripture and I cannot see how they can escape this argument Hence Chrysostome that spake so hyperbolically about the Law speaks as high about the Scriptures themselves We ought to have the word of God engraven in our hearts so that there should be no need of Scripture And Austin speakes of some that had attained to such holinesse that they lived without a Bible Now who doth not see what a damnable and dangerous position this would be That the Law must needs have a directive regulating and informing power over a godly man will appeare in these two particulars 1. We cannot discerne the true worship of God from superstition 1. The true worship of God cannot be discerned from false but by the Law and idolatry but by the first and second Commandement It is true many places in Scripture speak against false worship but to know when it is a false worship the second Commandement is a speciall director How do the orthodox Writers prove Images unlawfull how doe they prove that the setting up any part or meanes of worship which the Lord hath not commanded is unlawfull but by the second Commandement And certainly the want of exact knowledge in the latitude of this Commandement brought in all idolatry and superstition And we shall shew you God willing in time that the Decalogue is not onely Moses his ten Commandements but it 's Christs ten Commandements and the Apostles ten Commandements as well as his 2. Another instance at this time is in comparing the depth of 2. The depth of sin cannot be discovered without it the Law and the depth of our sinne together There is a great deale more spirituall excellency and holinesse commanded in the Law of God the Decalogue then we can reach unto Therefore we are to study into it more and more Open mine eyes that I may understand the wonderfull things of thy Law thus David prayeth though godly and his eyes were in a great measure opened by the Spirit of God And as there is a depth in the Law so a depth in our originall and native sinne There is a great deale more flith in us then we can or doe discover Psal 19. Who can understand his errours Cleanse me from secret sins Therefore there being such a world of filth in thy carnall heart what need is there of the spirituall and holy Law to make thee see thy selfe thus polluted and abominable Certainly a godly man groweth partly by discovering that pride that deadnesse that filth in his soule he never thought of or was acquainted with The practicall use that is to be made of this Scripture explained is to pray and labour for such a free heavenly heart that the Law of God and all the precepts of it may not be a terrour to you but sweetnesse and delight Oh how I love thy Law cryeth David he could not expresse it And againe My soule breaketh in the longing after thy judgements In another place he and Job doe account of them above their necessary food you do not hale and drag an hungry or thirsty man to his bread and water I doe not speak this but that it 's lawfull to eye the reward as Moses and Christ did yea and to fear God for who can think that the Scripture using these motives would stirre up in us sinfull and unlawfull affections but yet such ought to be the filiall and son-like affections to God and his will that we ought to love and delight in his Commandements because they are his as the poore son loveth his father though he hath no lordship or rich inheritance to give him There is this difference between a free and violent motion a free motion is that which is done for its owne selfe sake a violent is that which cometh from an outward principle the patient helping it not forward at all Let not to pray to beleeve to love God be violent motions in you Where faith worketh by love this maketh all duties rellish this overcometh all difficulties The Lacedemonians when they went to war did sacrifice to Love because love only could make hardship and wounds and death it selfe easie Doe thou therefore pray that the love of God may be shed abroad in thine heart and consider these two things 1. How the Law laid upon Christ to dye and suffer for thee was not a burthen or terrour to him How doth he witnesse this by crying out With desire I have desired to drink of this cup Think with thy self If Christ had been as unwilling to dye for me as I to pray to him to be patient to be holy what had become of my soule If Christ therefore said of that Law to be a Mediatour for thee Lo I come to doe thy will O God thy Law is within mine heart how much rather ought this to be true of thee in any thing thou shalt doe for him Thou hast not so much to part with for him as he for thee What is thy life and wealth to the glory of his Godhead which was laid aside for a while And then secondly consider how that men love lusts for lusts sake they love the world because of the
world Now evill is not so much evill as good is good sin is not so much sin as God is God and Christ is Christ If therefore a profane man because of his carnall heart can love his sin though it cost him hell because of the sweetnesse in it shall not the godly heart love the things of God because of the excellency in them But these things may be more enlarged in another place LECTURE VI. ROM 2. 14 15. For when the Gentiles which know not the law do the things of the law by nature these having not the law are a law unto themselves which shew the work of the law written in their hearts BEfore I handle the other places of Scripture that are brought by the Antinomians against the Law it is my intent for better methods sake and your more sound instruction to handle the whole theology of the Law of God in the severall distributions of it and that positively controversally and practically and I shall begin first with the law of Nature that God hath imprinted in us and consider of this two waies 1. As it is a meere law and secondly As it was a covenant of works made with Adam And then in time I shall speak of the Morall Law given by Moses which is the proper subject of these controversies The Text I have read is a golden Mine and deserveth diligent digging and searching into Therefore for the better understanding of these words let us answer these Questions 1. Who are meant by the Gentiles here It is ordinarily known Who meant by Gentiles that the Jewes did call all those Gentiles that were not Jewes by way of contempt as the Greeks and Romans called all other nations Barbarians Hence sometimes in the Scripture the word is applyed to wicked men though Jewes as Psal 2. Why doe the heathen rage It may be interpreted of the Pharisees resisting Christ Indeed the Jewes will not confesse that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gentes is any where applyed to them but this is very false for Genes 17. Abraham is there said to be the father of many nations 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gentes therefore they must either deny themselves to be Abraham's seed or else acknowledge this word belonging to them But generally it signifieth those that had not the Lawes of Moses nor did live by them Therefore Gal. 2. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to live like a Gentile is not to observe the Lawes of Moses and in this sense it is to be taken here for the Apostles scope is to make good that great charge upon all mankinde both Jew and Gentile that naturally they are wholly in sin and God being no accepter of persons will destroy the one as well as the other And whereas it might be thought very hard to deale thus with the Gentile because no law was delivered unto him as unto the the Jew the Apostle answereth that objection in this place But grant it be understood of such Gentiles then there is a greater question whether it be meant of the Gentiles abiding so or the Gentiles converted and turned beleevers for that the Apostle speakes of such most of the Latine Interpreters both ancient and moderne doe affirme and so the Greek Father Chrysostome and Estius a learned Papist doe think there are so many arguments for it that it 's certaine I confesse they bring many probable reasons but I will not trouble you with them this seeemeth a strong argument against them because the Apostle speaks of such who are without a law and a law to themselves which could not be true of Gentiles converted we take the Apostle therefore to speake of Gentiles abiding so but in this sense there is also a dangerons exposition and a sound one The poysonous interpretation is of the Pelagians who understand the law written in their hearts in the same sense as it is used Jerem 33. even such a fulfilling of the law which will attaine to salvation and this they hold the Heathens by the law and help of nature did sufficiently But this is to overthrow the doctrine of Grace and Christ Therefore the said interpretation is of the Gentiles indeed but yet to understand the law written in their hearts onely of those relicts of naturall reason and conscience which was in the Heathens as is to be proved anon The 2d. Question is easily answered How they are said to be How the Gentiles are said to be without a law without a law to wit without a written law as the Jewes had so that we may say they had a law without a law a law written but not declared The 3d. Question In what sense they are said to doe the things of How said to do the things of the law by nature the law and that by nature To doe the things of the law is not meant universally of all the Heathens for the Apostle shewed how most of them lived in the Chapter before nor secondly universally in regard of the matter contained in the law but some externall acts as Aristides and Socrates with others And here it s disputed Whether a meere Heathen can doe any worke morally good But wee answer No for every action ought to have a supernaturall end viz. the glory of God which they did not aime at therefore we doe refuse that distinction of a morall good and theologicall because every morall good ought to be theologicall The distinction of Morall and Theologicall good rejected they may do that good matter of the law though not well And as for the manner how by nature those Interpreters that understand this Text of Gentiles beleevers say Nature is not here opposed to Grace but to the law written by Moses and therefore make it nature inabled by grace but this is shewed to be improbable By nature therefore we may understand that naturall What is here meant by Nature light of conscience whereby they judged and performed some externall acts though these were done by the help of God The next Question is How this Law is said to be written in their hearts You must not with Austine compare this place with that gracious promise in Jeremy of God writing his law in the hearts of his people There is therefore a two-fold writing in the A two-fold writing of the Law in mens hearts and which here meant hearts of men the first of knowledge and judgement whereby they apprehend what is good and bad the second is in the will and affections by giving a propensity and delight with some measure of strength to do this upon good grounds This later is spoken of by the Prophet in the covenant of Grace and the former is to be understood here as will appeare if you compare this with Chapt. 1. 19. The last Question is How they declare this Law written in their The Law written in mens hearts two waies hearts And that is first externally two waies 1. By making good and
us And a godly man in his Book of Temptations holdeth the same opinion Illyricus indeed hath many probable arguments for his opinion but he goeth upon a false supposition that the Apostle his scope is to compare a Gentile supposed onely to doe the Law and not asserted to doe it before a Jew who was an hearer of the Law but not a doer of it therefore to debase the Jew he saith the Apostle speaketh conditionally to this purpose If an Heathen should keep the Law though he be not circumcised yet he would be preferred before you not saith he that the Apostle meaneth assertively and positively that any such doe and therefore presseth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is a particle of the Subjunctive Mood and is equivalent to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If the Gentiles c. But his supposition is false for the Apostles scope is to shew that the Gentile hath no excuse if God condemne him because hee hath a law in himselfe as appeareth verse 12. As for the other consideration of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though Erasmus render it cum fecerint yet that particle is applied to the Indicative Mood as well as the Subjunctive It cannot therefore be true which hee saith that the Apostle speaketh such great things of men by nature that if they were true it would necessarily justifie all Pelagianisme I shall not speak of his many arguments against naturall principles and knowledge of a God for he doth in effect at last yeeld to it 4. The extent of it And here it 's very hard to measure out the bounds of the law of Nature for some have judged that to be condemned by the law of Nature which others have thought the law of Nature approveth so true is that of Tertullian Legens Naturae opiniones suas vecant They call their opinions the law of Nature There are foure waies of bounding this law 1. Some make it those generall things wherein man and beast agree Foure bounds of the law of Nature as defence of it self and desire of life but by this meanes that of naturall honesty and righteousnesse would be excluded for a beast is not capable of any sin or obligation by a law And howsoever that be much disputed upon Why God would have the beast killed that killed a man yet to omit the thoughts of many about it that was not because a beast could be tyed by a law but God to shew the horridnesse of the fact would have the very instrument punished 2. Some bound it by the custome of Nations that is jus Gentium but that is so diversified that a sin with some was a vertue with others 3. Some doe bind it by reason in every man but this is very uncertaine and one mans reason is contrary to anothers and one mans conscience is larger then anothers even as it is with measures in divers countries though they have the fame name as a bushell c. yet they are different in quantity one is larger then another Lastly Others bound it by the will of God declared and manifested first to Noah in seven precepts and afterwards to Moses in the ten Commandements but these extend the law of Nature not onely to first principles but conclusions also deduced from thence 5. The obligation of it when the law of Nature doth bind And The obligation of the law of Nature is from God that is from God the authour of it God onely is under no law Every beleever though justified by Christ is under the Morall Law of Moses as also the law of Nature but now this law of Nature doth not so properly bind as it's mans reason or conscience as that it is the Vicegerent of God or a command from him and thus Cain by the law of Nature found a tye upon him not to sin and guilt because he did sin in murdering his brother although there was no Morall Law as yet given It is true indeed our Divines doe well reprove the Papists for calling all that time from Adam to Moses a state or law of Nature and this the Papists doe that therefore to offer sacrifice unto God may be proved from the law of Nature whereas those sacrifices being done in faith had the word of God otherwise we were bound still to offer Lambs or Kids to God which they deny 6. The perpetuity of this obligation This Law can never be abrogated The obligation of the law of Nature is perpetuall and immutable And herein we may demand of the Antinomian Whether the law of Nature doe bind a beleever or no Whether he be bound to obey the dictates of his naturall conscience Suppose a beleever hath his naturall conscience dictating to him This sin he may not doe is he not obliged hereunto not onely from the matter for that he grants but as it is a law and command of God implanted in his sonle I know there is a difference between the law of Nature and the ten Commandements as may be shewed hereafter but yet they agree in this that they are a rule immutable and of perpetuall obligation Therefore think not that because he dyed to free you from the curse of the Law that therefore you are freed from the obedience unto the law naturall or delivered by Moses To deny this is to deny that a beleever is bound to obey the sure dictates of a naturall conscience I know we are not alwaies bound to follow what conscience suggests for that is obscured and darkened but I speak of those dictates which are naturally knowne Other particulars as The insufficiency of it to direct in worship as also to save men I doe put off and make application of what hath been delivered Use 1. Of Instruction against the Antinomian who must needs overthrow the directive and obligative force of the law of Nature as well as that of Moses Doth not even Nature teach you saith the Apostle Now if a man may not care for Moses teaching need he care for Nature teaching It is true I told you sometimes they grant the Law to be a rule but then afterwards they speak such things as are absolutely inconsistent with it There were some as Wâ—ndelinus reports Swencfeldians that held a man was never truly mortified till he had put out all sense of conscience for sin if his conscience troubled him that was his imperfection he was not mortified enough I should doe the Antinomians wrong if I should say they deliver such things in their books but let them consider whether some of their Positions will not carry them neer such a dangerous rock For if the Law have nothing to doe with mee in respect of the mandatory part of it then if I be troubled for the breach of it it is my weaknesse because I am not enough in Christ Vse 2. Of Reproofe to those who live against this Law Sins that are against the law of Nature doe most terrifie How many live in such sins
so be it could be proved as Zwinglius held that Christ did communicate himself to some Heathens then it were another matter I will not bring all the places they stand upon that which is mainely urged is Act. 10. of Cornelius his prayers were accepted and saith Peter Now I perceive c. But this proceedeth from a meere mistake for Cornelius had the implicite knowledge and faith of Christ and had received the doctrine of the Messias though he was ignorant of Christ that individuall Person And as for that worshipping of him in every Nation that is not to be understood of men abiding so but whereas before it was limited to the Jewes now God would receive all that should come to him of what Nation soever There is a two-fold Unbeliefe one Negative and for this no Heathen is damned He is not condemned because he doth not beleeve in Christ but for his originall and actuall sinnes Secondly there is Positive Unbeliefe which they onely are guilty of who live under the meanes of the Gospel The fourth Question is Whether that be true of the Papists which hold that the sacrifices the Patriarchs offered to God were by The Patriarchs did not offer sacrifices by the light of Nature but God revealed his will to Adam to be so worshipped the meer light of Nature For so saith Lessius Lex Naturae obstringit suadet c. the Law of Nature both bindeth and dictateth all to offer sacrifices to God therefore they make it necessary that there should be a sacrifice now under the New Testament offered unto God And upon this ground Lessius saith it is lawfull for the Indians to offer up sacrifices unto God according to their way and custome And making this doubt to himselfe How shall they doe for a Priest He answereth that as a common-wealth may appoint a Governour to rule over them and to whom they will submit in all things so may it appoint a Priest to officiate in all things for them This is strange for a Papist to say who doteth so much upon succession as if where that is not there could be no ministery Now in this case he gives the people a power to make a Priest But howsoever it may be by the light of Nature that God is religiously to be worshipped yet it must be onely instituted worship that can please him And thus much Socrates an Heathen said That God must onely be worshipped in that way wherein he hath declared his will to be so Seeing therefore Abel and so others offered in faith and faith doth alwaies relate to some testimony and word it is necessary to hold that God did reveale to Adam his will to be worshipped by those externall sacrifices and the oblations of them It is true almost all the Heathens offered sacrifices unto their gods but this they did as having it at first by heare-say from the people of God and also Satan is alwaies imitating of God in his institutions And howsoever the destructive mutation or change of the thing which is alwaies necessary to a sacrifice doth argue and is a signe of subjection and deepest humiliation yet how should Nature prescribe that the demonstration of our submission must be in such a kind or way The fifth Question is Whether originall sin can be found out by Originall sin can onely be truely known by Scripture-light the meere light of Nature Or Whether it is onely a meere matter of faith that we are thus polluted It is true the learned Mornay labours to prove by naturall reason our pollution and sheweth how many of the ancient Platonists doe agree in this That the soule is now vassalled to sense and affections and that her wings are cut whereby shee should so are up into heaven And so Tully he saith Cum primùm nascimur in omni continuò pravitate versa mur much like that of the Scripture The Imagination of the thoughts of a mans heart is onely evill and that continually But Aristotle of whom one said wickedly and falsely that he was the same in Naturals which Christ was in Supernaturals he makes a man to be obrasa tabula without sin or vertue though indeed it doth incline ad meliora Tully affirmeth also that there are semina innata virtutum in us onely wee overcome them presently Thus also Seneca Erras si tecum nasci vitia putas supervenerunt ingesta sunt as I said before Here we see the wisest of the Philosophers speaking against it Hence Julian the Pelagian heaped many sentences out of the chiefest Philosophers against any such corruption of nature But Austine answered It was not much matter what they said seeing they were ignorant of these things The truth is by nature we may discover a great languishment and infirmity come upon us but the true nature of this and how it came about can onely be knowne by Scripture-light Therefore the Apostle Rom. 7. saith he had not knowne lust to be sin had not the Law said Thou shalt not lust The sixth Question is What is the meaning of that grand rule of Matth. 19. 12. expounded Nature which our Saviour also repeateth That which you would not have other men doe to you doe not you to them Matth. 7. 12. It is reported of Alexander Severus that he did much delight in this saying which hee had from the Jewes or Christians and our Saviour addeth this that This is the Law and the Prophets so that it is a great thing even for Christians to keep to this principle Men may pray and exercise religious duties and yet not doe this therefore the Apostle addeth this to prayer so that wee may live as wee pray according to that good rule of the Platonish 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 How would this subdue all those proud envious censorious and inimicitious carriages to one another But Communion of all things no precept of Nature and the Apostles practice of it was onely occasionall not binding to posterity now when wee speake of doing that to another which wee would have done to our selves it is to be understood of a right and well-regulated will not corrupted or depraved The seventh Question is Whether the practice of the Apostles making all their goods common was according to the precept of Nature and so binding all to such a practice For there have been and still are those that hold this But now that communion of all things is not jure Naturae appeareth in that theft is a sin against the Morall Law which could not be if division of goods were not according to the law of Nature Indeed by Nature all things were common but then it was Natures dictate to divide them as Aristotle sheweth in many reasons against Plato What would have been in innocency if Adam had stood whether a common right to all things or a divided propriety I speak of goods is hard to say But as for the practice of the Church of Jerusalem
they had a speciall help and aide from God to doe that but here the Apostle in the Text is cleare They doe by nature the things of the law Some doe not like that distinction They may doe the substance of the worke but not the manner of a good worke because they think the substance doth comprehend that indeed which makes a good work howsoever they agree that the externall act may be done Thus Ahab hee externally humbled himselfe and some think that Uriah which Esay calls The faithfull witnesse he took to him to be the same with him that brought in the Altar of Damascus so that though he was an idolater and an ungodly man yet he was reputed a faithfull man in his word And certainly this is something to make many men inexcusable They may forbear 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 help to save them onely their punishment will be lesse Thus Fabritius and Camillus saith Austin will be lesse punished then Verres or Catiline 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 Whatsoever meere naturall men do is sin before God because 1. The act wants faith the person reconciliation with God 2. It proceeds not from a regenerate nature 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 3. 'T is not done in reference to Gods glory nothing for the glory of God This made Theophylact say Wee could not instance in one good Heathen for that which they did was for their vain-glory carnalis cupidit as non aliâ sanatur one divell did but cast out another and if they did intend some particular good end as to relieve the miserable to help the common-wealth this was not enough for the ultimate and chiefe end ought to be intended by them 4. There is no promise annexed to any act that wants saith 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 dost 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 we 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 Ignavis opus est auxilio divino saith Seneca the Tragedian and so the other Seneca Deorum quidem munus esse quod vivimus nostrum verò quòd bene sanctâ—que 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 We 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 which worketh in mee for so 1 Cor. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to be understood which was present with mee not which did work with mee First therefore they say If so be we are not able to doe any thing There is in mans nature a passive capacity of grace which is not in stones and beasts towards our salvation this is to turne men into stockes and stones or beasts 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 onely 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 we may consider these degrees in the creatures 1. There is an inclination to such an act as in the fire to burne 2. A spontaneous inclination to some acts accompanied with sense and sensible apprehensions as in beasts 3. A willing inclination accompanied with reason or judgement and this is in man Now because man is thus affected therefore God in converting though he doth it by a potent work yet by arguments which we never use to horses or brute beasts and although man hath lost that rectitude in his will and mind yet he hath not lost the faculties themselves therefore though he be theologically dead yet he is ethically alive being to be wrought upon by arguments Hence is that saying To will is of nature To will well of grace To will ill of corrupt nature Hence we may grant those objections that if a man had not this free-will if you do not extend it to good things there could be no conversion or obedience for grace doth not destroy but perfect nature 2. This putteth men upon speaking and preaching contradictions To presse a duty and yet to acknowledge Gods grace or gift to do it is no contradiction For so some have said that the Calvinists though they be Calvinists in their Doctrines yet they are Arminians in their Uses And they say How incongruous is it to tell us we can doe nothing of our selves and then to make this use Therefore let us seek out for the grace of Christ But to answer 1. This contradiction may be cast as well upon Christ and Paul Take Christ for an instance John 6. in that Sermon he bade the Jewes labour for that meat that perisheth not and yet at the same time said None can come unto mee except my Father draw him Might not the Arminian say How can these two things stand together So John 15. our Saviour telleth them Without him they can doe nothing and yet at the same time he exhorteth them to abide in him and keep his commandements So Paul take two instances from him Rom. cap. 9. cap. 11. The Apostle there sheweth God will have mercy on whom he will have mercy and that it is not of him that runneth or willeth but of God that calleth yet he bids them that stand take heed lest they fall and Be not high-minded but feare So Phil. 2. 12 13. Work out your salvation with feare and trembling for it 's God that worketh in you both to will and to doe This reason in their sense would quite overthrow the former Nay say they it being attributed thus to God and to man it seemeth both doe it How this may be answered we shall see anon But to make us speak contradictions because we presse a duty and yet acknowledge Gods grace or gift to doe it is to make a perpetuall discord between precepts and promises For the same things which God commands us to doe doth he not also promise to doe for us as to circumcise our hearts and to walk in his commandements How much better is that of Austins O man in Gods precepts acknowledge what thou oughtest to doe in his promises acknowledge that thou canst not doe it But 2. we may returne upon them that their Sermons and Prayers are contradictions they say they can doe it and then they pray God they may doe it They say the Will may receive the grace of God and may obey God calling and then they pray God would make them obey his calling as much as to say O Lord make me to obey if I will 3. This evacuateth the whole nature of Gods precepts and commands Mans inability to observe Gods precepts maketh not void the nature of the precepts because this inability proceeded from mans owne fault A thing said to be impossible three waies For say they Is not this to make God mock us as if wee should bid the blind man see or tell a dwarfe if he would touch the heavens with his finger he should have so much mony Now to this many things are to be said as first If these things were absolutely and simply impossible that which they say would be true but a thing may be said to be impossible three waies 1. Simply and universally even to the power of God and so all those things are that imply a contradiction and this impossibility ariseth from the nature of the thing not from any defect in God Yea we may say with one Potentissimè-hoc Deus non potest 2. There may be a thing impossible in its kind as for Adam to reach the heavens for a man to work above naturall causes 3. That which is possible in it selfe to such a subject but becomes impossible accidentally through a mans fault Now for a man to be commanded that which through his owne fault he becometh unable to doe is no illusion or cruelty If a creditor require his debt of a bankrupt who hath prodigally spent all and made himselfe unable to pay what unrighteousnesse is this Therefore they are but odious instances of touching the skies of bidding blind men to see for this Rule observe Whatsoever is so impossible that it is extra officium debitum and potentiam unquam datam that indeed were absurd to presse upon men Again consider that the commands of God doe imply if any power then more then they will acknowledge for they suppose a man can doe all of himselfe without the grace of God and therefore indeed the old Pelagian and the new Socinian speak more consonantly then these that divide it between grace and the power of man Lastly The commands of God are for many other ends as to convince Gods commands though they be not a measure of our power may serve to convince humble c. and humble though they be not a measure or rule of our power That place Deut. 30. 11. is much urged by the adversary where Moses seemeth to declare the easinesse of that command and certainly it hath a very great shew for as for that answer That Moses speaketh of the easinesse of knowing and not fulfilling Calvin doth not stand upon it and indeed of our selves we are not able to know the Law of God The answer then to this may be taken out of Rom. 10. 11. That howsoever Moses speaks of the Law yet Paul interprets it of the Gospel What then Doth Paul pervert the scope of Moses Some doe almost say so but the truth is the Law as is to be shewed against the generall mistake if it was not in it selfe a covenant of grace yet it was given Evangelically and to Evangelicall purposes which made the Apostle alledge that place and therefore the Antinomian doth wholly mistake in setting up the Law as some horrid Gorgon or Medusa's head as is
are and why it 's called the Morall Law It is plaine by Exod. 20. and cap. 21. All the lawes that the Jewes had were then given to Moses to deliver unto the people onely that which we call the Morall Law had the great preheminency being twice written by God himselfe in tables of stone Now the whole body of these lawes is according to the matter and object divided into Morall Ceremoniall and Judiciall We will not meddle with the Queries that may be made about this division We may without any danger receive it and that Law which we are to treat upon is the Morall Law And here it must be acknowledged that the different use of the word Morall hath bred many perplexities yea in whatsoever controversie it hath been used it hath caused mistakes The word Morall or Morally is used in the controversie of the Sabbath in the question about converting grace in the doctrine of the Sacraments about their efficacy and causality and so in this question about a Law what makes it morall Now in this present doubt howsoever the word Morall beareth no such force in the notation of it it being as much as that which directeth and obligeth about manners and so applicable even to the Judiciall and Ceremoniall and these are in a sense commanded in the Morall Law though they be not perpetuall as to denote that which is perpetuall and alwaies obliging yet thus it is meant here when we speak of a thing morall as opposite to that which is binding but for a time 3. Whether this law repeated by Moses be the same with the Law The Law of Moses differs from the law of Nature of Nature implanted in us And this is taken for granted by many but certainly there may be given many great differences between them for First if he speak of the Law of Nature implanted in Adam at 1. In respect of power of binding first or as now degenerated and almost defaced in us whatsoever is by that law injoyned doth reach unto all and binde all though there be no promulgation of such things unto them But now the Morall Law in some things that are positive and determined by the will of God meerly did not binde all the nations in the world for howsoever the command for the Sabbath day was perpetuall yet it did not binde the Gentiles who never heard of that determined time by God so that there are more things expressed in that then in the law of Nature Besides in the second place The Morall Law given by God 2 The breach of the Law given by Moses is a greater sin then the breach of the law of Nature doth induce a new obligation from the command of it so that though the matter of it and of the law of Nature agree in many things yet he that breaketh these Commandements now doth sin more hainously then hee that is an Heathen or Pagan because by Gods command there cometh a further obligation and tye upon him In the third place in the Morall Law is required justifying 3. The Morall Law requires justifying faith and repentance and contains more particulars in it then the law of Nature faith and repentance as is to be proved when I come to speak of it as a Covenant which could not be in the Law given to Adam so the second Commandment requireth the particular worship of God insomuch that all the Ceremoniall Law yea our Sacraments are commanded in the second Commandement it being of a very spirituall and comprehensive nature so that although the Morall Law hath many things which are also contained in the law of Nature yet the Morall Law hath more particulars then can be in that Hence you see the Apostle saith he had not knowne lust to be sin had not the Law said so although he had the law of Nature to convince him of sin 4. Why it was now added The time when it was added appeareth The Law was given when the Israelites were in the wildernes and not sooner by the 18. Chapter to wit when the people of Israel were in the Wildernesse and had now come to their twelfth station in Mount Sinai That reason which Philo giveth because the Lawes of God are to be learnt in a Wildernesse seeing there we cannot be hindred by the multitude is no waies solid Two reasons there may be why now and not sooner or later God gave this Law First because the people of Israel coming out of Egypt had 1. Because being come out of Egypt they were to be restrain'd of their impiety and idolatry defiled themselves with their waies and we see while they were in their journie in the Wildernesse what horrible grosse impieties they plunged themselves into therefore God to restraine their impietie and idolatry giveth them this Law to represse all that insolency so Rom. 5. and Gal. 3. The Law came because of transgressions But Secondly I conceive the great and proper reason why God at 2. Because they were now to grow into a Common-wealth this time rather then another gave the Law was because now they began to be a great people they were to enter into Canaan and to set up a Common-wealth and therefore God makes them lawes for he was their King in a speciall manner insomuch that all their lawes even politicall were divine and therefore the Magistrates could not dispense in their lawes as now Governours may in their lawes of the Common-wealth which are meerly so because then they should dispensare de jure alieno which is not lawfull This therefore was the proper reason why God at this time set up the whole body of their Lawes because they were now to grow into a Common-wealth Hence Josephus calls the Common-wealth of the Jewes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a place where God was the Governour 5. Whether this Law was not before in the Church of God And The Law not onely was but was publickly preached in the Church before Moses certainly hee that should thinke this Law was not in the Church of God before Moses his administration of it should greatly erre Murder was a sin before as appeareth by Gods words to Cain yea the very anger it selfe that goeth before murder So all the outward worship of God as when it 's said This began man to call upon the Name of the Lord so that the Church of God never was nor ever shall be without this Law And when we say the Law was before Moses I doe not meane only that it was written in the hearts of men but it was publikely preached in the ministry that the Church did then enjoy as appeareth by Noah's preaching to the old world and Gods striving with men then by his word So that we may say the Decalogue is Adams and Abrahams and Noahs and Christs and the Apostles as well as of Moses Indeed there was speciall reason as you heard why at that time there should be a speciall
promulgation of it and a solemn repetition but yet the Law did perpetually sound in the Church ever since it was a Church And this consideration will make much to set forth the excellency of it it being a perpetuall meanes and instrument which God hath used in his Church for information of duty conviction of sin and exhortation to all holinesse So that men who speak against the use of the Law and the preaching of it doe oppose the universall way of the Church of God in the Old and New Testament 6. The end why God gave this law to them I spake before of the The ends of the promulgation of the Law were end why he gave it then now I speake of the finall cause in generall and here I shall not speak of it in reference to Christ or Justification that is to be thought on when we handle it as a Covenant but only as it was an absolute rule or law And here it will be a great errour to think the promulgation of it had but one end for there were many ends 1. Because much corruption had now seised upon mankind 1. That the Israelites might see what holinesse was required of them and the people of Israel had lived long without the publick worship and service of God it was necessary to have this law enjoyned them that they might see farre more purity and holinesse required of them then otherwise they would be perswaded of 2. By this meanes they would come to know sinne as the A 2. That they might come to know sin and be humbled postle speakes and so be deeply humbled in themselves the law of God being a cleare light to manifest those inward heart-sins and soule-lusts that crawle in us as so many toads and serpents which we could never discover before 3. Hereby was shadowed forth the excellent and holy nature 3. To shadow out unto them the excellent and holy nature of God of God as also what purity was accepted by him and how we should be holy as he himself is holy for the law is holy as God is holy It s nothing but an expression and draught of that great purity which is in his nature insomuch that it s accounted the great wisedome of that people of Israel to have such lawes and the very nations themselves should admire at it 7. The great goodnesse and favour of God in delivering this law to The delivering of this Law to the Israelites was a great mercy unto them them And this comes fitly in the next place to consider of that it was an infinite mercy of God to that people to give them this law Hence Deut. 9. and in other places how often doth God presse them with this love of his in giving them those commandements And that it was not for their sakes or because of any merit in them but because he loved them So David Psal 147. hee hath not done so to other nations And to this may be referred all the benefits that the Psalmist and Prophets doe make to come by the law of God insomuch that it is a very great ingratitude and unthankfulnes unto God when people cry down the Law and the preaching of it That which God speakes of as a great mercy to a people these doe reject Nor because that God hath vouchsafed greater expressions of his love to us in these latter dayes therefore may those former mercies be forgotten by us seeing the Law doth belong unto us for those ends it was given to the Jewes now under the Gospel as is to be proved as much as unto them And therefore you cannot reade one commandement in the spirituall explication of it for the law is spirituall but you have cause to blesse God saying Lord what are we that thy will should be so clearly and purely manifested to us above what it is to Heathens yea and Papists with many others Therefore beloved it is not enough for you to be no Antinomian but you are to blesse God and praise him for it that it s read and opened in our congregations 8. The perfection of this law containing a perfect rule of all things The Law of Moses is a perfect rule belonging to God or man And here againe I shall not speak of it as a covenant but meerly as its a rule of obedience And thus though it be short yet it s so perfect that it containeth all that is to be done or omitted by us Insomuch that all the Prophets and Apostles doe but adde the explication of the Law if it be not taken in too strict a sense Hence is that commandement of not adding to it or detracting from it And in what sense the Apostle speakes against it calling it the killing letter and the ministration of death working wrath is to be shewed hereafter When our Saviour Matth. 5. gave those severall precepts he did not adde them as new unto the Morall Law but did vindicate that from the corrupt glosses and interpretations of the Pharisees is is to be proved Indeed it may seem hard to say that Christ and justifying faith the doctrine of the Trinity is included in this promulgation of the Law but it is to be proved that all these were then comprehended in the administration of it though more obscurely Nor will this be to confound the Law and the Gospel as some may think This law therefore and rule of life which God gave the people of Israel and to all us Christians in them is so perfect and full that there is nothing necessary to the duty and worship of God which is not here commanded nor no sin to be avoided which is not here forbidden And this made Peter Martyr as you heard compare it to the ten Predicaments Vse Of Admonition to take heed how we vilifie or contemne this Law of God either doctrinally or practically Doctrinally so the Marcionites and the Manichees and Basilides whereof some have said it was carnall yea that it was from a Divell and that it was given to the Jewes for their destruction because it 's said to worke wrath and to be the instrument of death And those opinions and expressions of the Antinomians about it are very dangerous What shall we revile that which is Gods great mercy to a people Because the Jewes and Papists doe abuse the Law and the works of it to justification shall it not therefore have its proper place and dignity How sacred are the lawes of a Common-wealth which yet are made by men But this is by the wise God Take heed therefore of such phrases An Old-Testament-spirit and His Sermon is nothing but an explication of the Law For it ought much to rejoyce thee to heare that pure and excellent image of Gods holinesse opened How mayest thou delight to have that purity enjoyned which will make thee loath thy selfe prize Christ and Grace more and be a quick goad to all holinesse And if you say Here is nothing
of Christ all this while I answer That is false as is to be proved if the Law be not taken very strictly And besides the Law and the Gospel are not to be severed but they mutually put a fresh relish and taste upon each other And shall no mercy be esteemed but what is the Gospel Thou art thankfull for temporall mercies and yet they are not the Gospel but this is a spirituall mercy LECTURE XVI EXOD. 20. 1. God spake these words saying c. I Have already begun the discourse about the Morall Law and shall at this time consider those historicall passages which we meet with in the promulgation of it that so the excellency of it may hereby be more knowne for whosoever shall diligently observe all the circumstances of the history of the Law he shall find that God did put glory upon it and howsoever the Apostle Hebr. 12. and 2 Corinth 3. doth preferre the Gospel above this ministration of Moses yet absolutely in it selfe it was greatly honoured by God In the generall therefore you may take notice that therefore did God so solemnly and with great majesty 1. The Law was given with great majesty thereby to procure the greater authority to it give the Law that so the greater authority may thereby be procured to it Hence it is related of many Heathens that they have feigned some familiarity with their gods when they made their lawes that so the people might with greater awe and reverence receive them Thus Numa feigned his discourse with the goddesse Aegâ—ria for his lawes and it 's related of Pythagoras that he had a tamed Eagle which he would cause to come flying to him to make people think his sentences were delivered from heaven to him If lawes of men might well be called by Demosthenes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 how much rather this Law of God It 's but a conceit of Prospers that Judaei were so called because they received Jus Dei the Law of God It 's further also to be observed in the generall that God hath alwaies had apparitions sutable to the matter in hand Thus hee appeared in a burning bush to Moses like an armed man to Jusua and with all signes of majesty and a great God being to deliver lawes to the people that they might see how potent he was to be avenged for every breach Againe in the next place take also this generall Observation That although the Judiciall and Ceremoniall lawes were given There is a difference between the Morall Judiciall and Ceremoniall Law notwithstanding they were given at the same time at the same time with the Morall Law yet there is a difference between them And this is to be taken notice of lest any should think what will this discourse make for the honour of the Morall Law more then the other lawes It 's true these three kinds of lawes agree in the common efficient cause which was God and in the minister or mediatour which was Moses in the subject which was the people of Israel and all and every one of them as also in the common effects of binding and obliging them to obedience and to punish the bold offenders against them But herein the Morall Law is preheminent 1. In that it The Morall Law more excellent them the Judiciall and Ceremoniall in three respects is a foundation of the other lawes and they are reduceable to it 2. This was to abide alwaies not the other 3. This was immediately written by God and commanded to be kept in the Ark which the other were not Lastly observe these two things in the generall about the God humbled the Israelites before he gave them his Law time of the delivery of the Law First God did not give them his Law till he had deeply humbled them and it may be now Christ will not settle his ordinances with us till he hath brought us low And secondly Before they come unto the Land of promise God God settled his worship before he gave them Canaan settleth his worship and lawes When he hath done this then he bids them Deut. 2. 1. Goe towards Canaan This sheweth A people cannot have Canaan till the things of God be settled But we come to the remarkable parts of the history of the promulgation of this Law and first you may consider the great and diligent preparation of the people to heare it Exod. 1. 9. for Preparation required before the hearing of the Law first They were to sanctifie themselves and to wash their clothes This indeed was peculiar unto those times yet God did thereby require the cleansing and sanctification of their hearts The superstitious 1. The people must sanctifie themselves imitating of this was among the Gentiles who used to wash that they may goe to sacrifice Plaut in Aulul Act. 3. scen 6. yea this superstition was brought into the Church Chrysost Hom. 52. in Mat. We see saith he this custome confirmed in many Churches that many study diligently how they may come to Church with their hands washt and white garments And Tert. cap. 11. de Orat. Hae sunt vera mundiciae non quas plerique superstitiosè curant ad omnem orationem etiam cum lavacro totius corporis aquam sumentes but this by the way God did hereby signifie what purity and holinesse of heart should be in them to receive his Law The second thing requisite was to set bounds so that none 2. They must not touch the Mount might touch the Mount It 's a violent perverting of Scripture which the popish Canons have applying this allegorically to a lay-man if he reade or medle with the Scripture whereas not only a beast but not the Priests themselves should touch this mountain and hereby God would have men keep within their bounds and not to be too curious The Doctrine of the Trinity of Predestination are such a mountain that a man must keep at the bottome of it and not climb up The third thing was not to come at their wives Some do referre 3. Nor come at their wives this to those women that were legally polluted but it may be well understood of their conjugall abstinence not as a thing sinfull but that hereby God would have them put off not only affections to all sinnes but all lawfull things so that this preparation for three dayes doth make much for the excellency of the Law and sheweth how spirituall we should be in the receiving of it 2. The Declaration of Majesty and greatnesse upon the delivery 2. The Law was given with great Majesty that so the people might be raised up to reverence the Law-giver of it For although it must be granted that this was an accommodated way to the Law that did convince of sinne and terrifie hence the Apostle Heb. 12. 18 19 c. preferreth the ministration of the Gospel above it yet this also was a true cause why thundrings and terrours did accompany the promulgation of
it that so the people might be raised up to fear and reverence of the Law-giver Hence Rev. 4. 5. God is described in his Majestie sitting upon his throne and lightnings with thunders proceeding from him Now it 's very probable that these were raised by God in an extraordinary manner 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 farre forth as corruption abideth in him for what man is there whose pride lukewarmnesse or any sinfull corruption needs not this awakening It 's said Exod. 19. 18. God descended upon the mount Sinai in a smoake 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 sweetnesse 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 resolutely in it self 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 himself 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 spake 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 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 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 inferre the holy Ghost to be of the same nature with God yet this conceit is not solid yet Luke 11. 20. that which is called the finger of God is 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 written 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 worthy 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 Brasse or a Marble so Pliny lib. 39. ca. 9. Job 19. 14. speakes of brassie tables ad perpetuitatem monimentorum and Plato as Rhodoginus reports lib. 25. cap. 2. thought that Lawes should be written in tabulis cupressinis quod futuras putabat aterniores 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 hardnesse of the Jewes heart which could not easily receive that impression of the Law Hence the excellency of the Gospel doth appeare 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 4. The Israelites notwithstanding the delivery of this Law was with power and Majesty quickly broke it 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 worship'd Apis an Oxe hence they made a Calfe wherein their wickednesse 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 solemnely promised obedience fall into this sinne and not only so but worshipp'd 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 wombe 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 5. Moses his abode in the Mount procured authority both to himself and the Law 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 dayes in the wildernesse when he was tempted It was certainly a miraculous preservation of Moses that he should be there so long and neither eate nor drinke But this example of
Moses with that of our Saviours is very vainly and unwarrantably brought for fasting in Lent 6. Moses his zeale against this their idolatry and breaking of the 6. Moses his breaking of the Tables intimates that justification is not to be had by them Tables When Moses came down he saw how the people had transgressed the Law of God which so moved him that in his zeale 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 sence One hath said that the Law was like the tree of knowledge of good and evill but the Gospel that is like the tree of life yet this must be rightly understood for God useth the Law as he doth his whole Word to beget and increase the life of grace in us only this life is not that which can justifie us and in this effect of the Law to increase life David doth often commend it Now some have attributed this to Moses as a sin accounting Moses his zeale in breaking the Tables vindicated from rashnesse and sinfull perturbation of minde it his impatiency and rashnesse to break the Tables They acknowledge it to be a good zeale for the maine onely they think here was some strange fire as well as the fire of the Sanctuary But although this excandescency of Moses was sudden yet I see not why it should be attributed as rashnesse in him to break the Tables for he had brought those Tables as a signe of their Covenant stricken with God but now they having broken it by their Idolatry it was very just to have the Tables broken in the eyes of the people that so they might see how God was alienated from them so that we think he did it not with any sinfull perturbation of mind but an holy zeale God hereby also ordering that they should understand God would enter into a new Covenant with them which made Austin cry out O ira prophetica animus non perturbatus sed illuminatus 7. Moses his petition unto God for his presence and the manifestation 7. Gods manifestation of his glory unto Moses makes for his honour of Gods glory unto him with Gods answer Howsoever this doth not immediately concerne the promulgation of the Law yet because it 's inserted before the reparation of the Tables againe and maketh for the honour which God put upon Moses while he was settling the lawes of Israel we will give a touch at it Cap. 33. ver 12. Moses desireth Gods presence to be with him in conducting of the people of Israel and as a signe whereby he might be confirmed of his presence he desireth to see Gods glory It is hard to say what was Moses his petition in this thing I cannot be of their mind who make this onely a vision and nothing really acted nor of theirs who think that Moses desired to see the essence of God I will not dispute that Question Whether the bodily eyes of a man may be lifted up to that perfection as to see God who is a spirit Nor can I think that they attaine to the truth who think by the glory of God to be meant the reasons and grounds of Gods mercies and in particular his providence to the Israelites and by the back-parts which Moses was allowed to see the effects themselves of his mercy and providence as if God intended to shew Moses his wonderfull effects but not the reasons of them Nor lastly That Moses desired to see the humanity of Christ in glory like that vision of transfiguration therefore I judge this most literall that although it 's said ver 11. that Moses spake with God face to face which argueth familiarity yet for all that even then God was clothed as it were in a cloud interposing it selfe Now Moses he desireth that God would manifest himselfe in a more sensible visible and glorious way of an outward shape even as before he would have knowne Gods Name Now God in part answereth him and in part denieth him shewing such a glorious object that yet he was not able to see but where the light was lesse intense 8. The reparation of the Tables againe And here is some difference 8. Though the writing of the second Tables was Gods work yet the forming and polishing them was the work of Moses between the former and the later Tables The former God provided both for the shape and the writing as you heard but here the forming or polishing of the Table is Moses his work and the writing is Gods The first is said expresly Exod. 34. 1. Go hew thee two Tables of stone like the former and I will write upon these Tables Here is the second expresly So Deut. 10. 1 2 3. so that the writing of the Law on the second Tables was as immediately Gods work as the former but not the polishing or preparing of the Tables Onely there is one place of Scripture which troubleth the Learned much that seemeth to oppose this and to make the writing upon the second Table to be immediately the act of Moses and mediately onely of God because he commanded and directed Moses to doe so The place that seemeth to oppose this is Exod. 34. 27 28. I confesse if we look into the coherence of these Texts we shall find some things difficult But two things will help to cleare it first that the things which Moses did write were not the ten Commandements but the severall precepts that were by way of explication and then the second thing is that whereas the 28. verse seemeth to speak of the same subject Moses yet the two former predicates are to be attributed to him viz. his staying with God forty dayes and nights and his neither eating nor drinking all that while Then the third predicate is to be given to God viz. writing upon the ten Commandements for it 's ordinary with the Hebrewes to referre the relative to some remote subject and not the neerest and this may untye that knot There is this remarkable that though the former Tables were broken yet now God enters into a Covenant of grace with them as appeareth by proclaiming himselfe long-suffering and gracious but yet God causeth the ten Commandements to be written againe for them implying that these may very well stand with a Covenant of grace which opposeth the Antinomian 9. The extraordinary glory that was upon Moses This is a considerable 9. The extraordinary glory that was upon Moses argues the administration of the Law to be glorious passage for the Apostle speaking of this 2 Cor. 3. doth acknowledge the ministration of the Law to have a great deale of glory but yet such as was to vanish Where by the way take notice against the Antinomian that the Apostle doth not there speak of the Law
absolutely in it selfe as if that were to be done away but the particular administration and dispensation of it that was no more to continue who all grant Now the Antinomian confounds the Law with the administration of it This glory and shining that was upon Moses was as it may seem probable communicated unto him when he beheld the glory of God How long it continued is not certaine that hath no probability of the Rabbins who hold it did continue all his life time The Vulgar Translation makes it horned Cornuta hence the Painters pictured Moses with hornes but the word that signifieth an horne is also for to glitter and shine as also those rayes of light might be cast forth from Moses his face like hornes This was so glorious that he was forced to put a vaile upon his face when he spake to the people Now the Text saith Moses did not know his face shone It 's an excellent thing when God puts a great deale of glory upon a man and he doth not know it Gregory applyeth this of Moses to Ministers that as Moses because the people could not endure the glorious light of his face put a vaile upon it that so the people might converse with him thus the Minister whose parts and scholarship is far above the people should put on a vaile by condescending to the people But the Apostle maketh another mysticall meaning wherein the hard things shall in time God willing be opened 10. The custody and preservation of the Law in the Ark. And 10. The preservation of the Law in the Arke makes much for the glory of it this shall be the last Observation that will tend to the excellency of the Law As this one was written by the immediate hand of God so was it onely commanded to be preserved in the Ark. Now here is a great dispute in matter of history for 1 Kin. 8. 9. it's expresly said that in the Ark there was nothing save the tables of stone but Hebr. 9. 4. there is joyned Aarons rod and the pot of Manna Those that for this respect would reject the Epistle to the Hebrewes as of no authority are too bold and insolent Some think we cannot reconcile them yet the Scripture is true onely our understandings are weak Some think that at first God commanded those two to be laid with the tables of the Covenant but when the Temple was built by Solomon then all were laid aside by themselves and therefore say they that the history of the Kings speaketh of it as a new thing Some as Piscator make in to be as much as coram before or hard by and so they say the pot and rod were by the Ark. But I shall close with that of Junius who observes that the relative is in the feminine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so doth not relate to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Arke the word immediately going before but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tabernacle In which Tabernacle And this is frequent in the Scripture to doe so And this though it may be capable of some objection yet doth excellently reconcile the truth of the history with Paul Now how long these Tables of stone were kept and what became of them at last we have no certainty This proveth the great glory God did put upon the Law above any thing else which I intended in all these historicall observations Vse 1. Of Instruction How willing God was to put markes Seeing God hath put such marks of glory upon the Law let us take heed of disparaging it of glory and perpetuity upon the Law and therefore we are to take heed of disparaging it For how necessary is it to have this Law promulged if it were possible as terribly in our congregations as it was on Mount Sinai This would make the very Antinomians find the power of the Law and be afraid to reject it Certainly as the Physician doth not purge the bodies till he hath made them fluid and prepared so may not the Ministers of Christ apply grace and the promises thereof to men of Epicurean or Pharisaicall spirits till they be humbled by the discovery of sin which is made by the Law And I doubt it may fall out with an Antinomian who accounts sin nothing in the beleever because of justification as with one Dionysius a Stoick as I take it who held that paine was nothing but being once sick and tortured with the stone in the kidnies cried out that all which he had writ about Paine was false for now he found it was something So it may fall out that a man who hath writ and preached that God seeth no sinne in a beleever may sometime or other be so awed and troubled by God that he shall cry out All that he preached about this he now findes to be false Therefore let those that have disparaged or despised it see their sinne and give it its due dignity They report of Stesichorus that when in some words he had disparaged Helena's beauty he was struck blind but afterwards when he praised her again he obtain'd the use of seeing It may be because thou hast not set forth the due excellency of the Law God hath taken away thy eye-sight not to see the beauty of it but begin with David to set forth the excellent benefits of it and then thou mayest see more glory in it then ever LECTURE XVII EXOD. 20. 1. And God spake all these words saying c. WE have already considered those historicall Observations which are in the delivery of the Law and improved them to the dignity and excellency thereof I now come to the handling of those Questions which make much to the clearing of the truths about it that are now doubted of And first of all it may be demanded To what purpose is this discourse about the Law given by Moses Are we Jewes Doth that belong to us Hath not Christ abolished the Law Is not Moses with his Ministery now at an end It is therefore worth the inquiry Whether the ten Commandements as given by Moses doe belong to us Christians or no And in the answering of this Question I will lay down some Propositions by way of Preface and then bring arguments for the affirmative The doctrine of the Antinomians heterodoxe though the Law as given by Moses did not binde Christians First therefore Though it should be granted that the Morall Law as given by Moses doth not belong to us Christians yet the doctrine of the Antinomians would not hold for there are some learned and solid Divines as Zanchy and Rivet and many Papists as Suarez and Medina which hold the Law as delivered by Moses not to belong to us and yet are expresly against Antinomists for they say that howsoever the Law doth not binde under that notion as Mosaicall yet it binds because it is confirmed by Christ so that although the first obligation ceaseth and we have nothing to doe with Moses now yet the second
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
them was now come of whom the ceremonies were a shadow Yet still you must remember that while they were commanded of God they were the exercises of faith and piety and God did dispense grace in the use of them only they were beggarly and empty to such who trusted in them and neglected Christ Nor doth this assertion contradict that of the Apostle Ephes 2. 15. where he cals those ordinances enmity and decrees against us for those ceremonies may be considered two wayes first as they were signes of Gods grace and favour and secondly as they were demonstrative of a duty which we were tyed unto but could not performe and in this sense all those purifications and cleansings were against us Thus we see these lawes in every consideration made voide so that it is not now an indifferent thing to use them though we would not put our trust in them but sinfull Hence I cannot see how that of Luther is true upon Gal. 2. who saith He beleeveth that if the Jewes beleeving had observed the Law and Circumcision in that manner which the Apostles permitted them that Judaisme had yet stood and that all the world should have received the ceremonies of the Jewes In the second place if we would speake exactly and properly We may say that the Morall Law is mitigated as to our persons but 't is not abrogated We cannot say in any good sense that the Morall Law is abrogated at all It is true indeed our learned Writers shew that the Law is abrogated in respect of justification condemnation and rigour of obedience all which I shall instance in afterwards but if a man would speake rigidly he cannot say it is abrogated Wee may say it 's mitigated as to our persons though Christ our surety did fully undergoe it for if God had taken away the Law so that man nor his surety had been under the curse of it or should have obeyed it then had it been properly abrogated whereas now seeing our surety was bound to satisfie it and perfectly to obey it and we still obliged to conforme unto it we cannot so properly in the generall say it was abrogated Therefore we may more properly say that there is a change and alteration in us towards the Law then that the Law is changed or abrogated Hence observe though the Apostle denyeth that he doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 make voide the Law yet he useth this expression Rom. 7. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we are freed or abrogated from the Law rather then that is abrogated Thus it is if we would speake properly yet because the satisfaction and obedience is by Christ and not by us we may say that it is abrogated to us so that we may not look for remission of sins or justification by it But you must still distinguish when we speake of the Law some parts of it from the whole some parts of the Law may be abolished and yet not the whole nature of it for there is in the Law these parts First the Commands Three parts in the Law Secondly the Promises of life to him that doth them and thirdly the threatnings of eternall wrath to him that faileth in the least Now the Morall Law though it be abrogated in respect of the two later to a beleever yet in respect of the former it doth still abide yea and will continue in Heaven it self And we have already proved against the Antinomians that one part of the Law may abide when the other doth not The Law is abolished as it is a Covenant but not as it is a Rule The third proposition Those that say the Law is abolished as it is foedus but not as it is regula say true The Law may be considered as it is a Covenant or as it is an absolute Rule requiring conformity unto it Now it may be truly granted that the Law is abolished in the former notion though not in the later only in expressing this Covenant there is difference among the Learned some make the Law a Covenant of works and upon that ground that it is abrogated others call it a subservient covenant to the covenant of grace and make it only occasionally as it were introduced to put more luster and splendour upon grace Others call it a mixt covenant of workes and grace but that is hardly to be understood as possible much lesse as true I therefore think that opinion true as shall be hereafter shewed that the The Law given by Moses a Covenant of grace Law given by Moses was a Covenant of grace and that God did not since man fallen ever transact with him in any other Covenant but that of grace Though indeed this Covenant of grace did breake out more clearly in succession of ages according to the wise dispensation of Gods good pleasure So then the Law as a Covenant though of grace is abrogated because though there be still the same essence of the former and later covenant yet the administration of the former is altogether antiquated This fully appeareth in Heb. 7. 18 19. and again Heb. 8. 7 8. whosoever therefore expects life and justification by the Law he sets up the covenant of works again Nor is it any advantage to say these workes are the workes of grace and wrought by Christs Spirit for still if we were justified by doing whatsoever the works were yet it would be in such a way as Adam was though with some difference We therefore doe desire to lift up our voices as vehemently as any Antinomian against self-Justiciaries against pharisaicall popish formal men that say unto the good workes they doe These are thy Christ These are thy Jesus oh my soul In matter of Justification we would have all of Pauls Spirit to know nothing but Christ crucified to account all things dung and drosse We desire to bewaile and abundantly to bewaile the little need and want that people feel of Christ in all their duties We are troubled that any can be quiet in their duties and performances and doe not cry out None but Christ None but Christ All this we plead for and preach only we hold the Law as a rule still to walk by though not a Covenant of works to be justified by 4. The Antinomian distinction of the Law abolished as a Law but It is an absurd contradiction to say the matter of a Law bindeth but not as a Law still abiding in respect of the matter of it is a contradiction This is a rock that the adversary hath daily refuge unto The Law saith the Antinomian in the matter of it so farre as I know was never denyed to be the rule according to which a beleever is to walk and live Therefore I take the contrary imputation to be an impudent slander Asser of grace pag. 170. But to reply if they hold the matter of the Law to be a rule how can they shelter themselves from their own argument for if the matter oblige
then when a beleever walketh not according to his duty he sinneth and to sinne the curse is due so that this evasion will no wayes help them for still an obligation or bond lyeth upon them which if broken they are made obnoxious unto the Law of God Again to say the matter of the Law bindeth but yet not as a Law is a meer contradiction for what is a Law but such an object held forth by the command and will of a superiour Then I demand whether love to God being the object or matter held forth have not also Gods will passing upon it that it should bind According to the Antinomian asserttion it should be true that love to God should bind us because the matter it self is good but not because God willeth us to love him Nay they must necessarily deny the will of God obliging us in the Law to love him for a law is nothing but the will of the Law-giver that such things should be obeyed or avoided And if there were any colour for that distinction between the matter of the Law binding and not the Law it would only hold in that matter which is perpetually and necessarily good as To love God To honour parents but in that matter which is only good by some positive divine institution as Keeping of the Lords Day there we must say that the Law binds vi as a Law and not meerly from the matter of the Law 5. The Law is no more abrogated to a beleever under the Old Testament The Law equally abrogated to beleevers under the Old and New Testament then to one under the New This assertion will much discover the falsenesse of the adversaries opinion for they carry it as if the Law were abrogated only to the beleevers under the Gospel Now how can this ever be made good for either they must deny that there were any beleevers under the Old Testament or if they were then they are freed from the Law as much as any now Indeed if you take the Law for the whole administration of the Covenant in the Old Testament we grant that it was pedagoricall and more servile so that a beleever under the Old Testament did not meet with such cleare and evident dispensations of love as a beleever under the Gospel yet in respect of justification and salvation the Law was the same to them as to us and to us as to them We doe not deny but that the administration of the later covenant is farre more glorious then that of the former and that we enjoy many priviledges which they did not then but whatsoever is necessary and essentiall to justification or salvation they were made partakers of them as well as we The ordinary resemblance of theirs and our happinesse is by those two spoken of Numb 13. 23. that bare upon the staffe the cluster of grapes from the land of Canaan If then we speake of the Law in regard of the essentiall parts of it which are directing commanding threatning promising life upon perfect obedience These are either still equally in power or else equally abrogated unto all beleevers whether under the Old or New Testament Let them therefore consider whether the arguments against beleevers subjection under the New Testament be not also equally as strong against those that are under the Old Therefore it is wild Divinity of an Antinomian in Chap. 6. of the Honey-combe of free justification who makes three different estates of the Church one under the Law and another under John Baptist. and a third under the Gospel Now he compareth these together and sheweth how we under the Gospel exceed those of the Law that were godly and among other things there are two notorious falshoods as first That God indeed saw sinne in the beleevers of the Old Testament but not in those of the New But how absurd and contradictory to the Author himself is this assertion For was not that place which they so much urge God seeth not iniquity in Jacob spoken of the Church in the Old Testament And besides if the godly were then in Christ doth it not necessarily follow by his principles that God must see no sinne in them This I bring not as if there were any truth in that opinion of God his seeing no sinne in beleevers whether of the Old or New Testament but only to manifest their absurd contradictions The second difference he makes is That God seeing sinne in those of the Old Testament did therefore punish them and afflict them for sinne but he doth not this under the Gospel Hereupon he sheweth how Moses for a word was strucken with death and so Jonah Vzzah Eli these had sudden punishments upon them Hence also saith he came there terrible famines upon them Now who seeth not how weak and absurd these arguments are For doth not the Apostle 1 Cor. 11. speaking of those under the New Testament that some were sick and some did sleep and that they were judged of the Lord were not Ananias and Sapphira stricken dead immediately Are there not famines pestilence and the bloudy warre upon men under the Gospel Besides these assertions are contradictions to themselves for if their arguments from Gods Law and from Christ prove the quite taking away of sinne and the punishments of it then it holdeth as firmly for all beleevers as for some 6. The arguments of the Antinomian for the greater part which Antinomian Arguments mostly overthrow the use of the Law both to beleevers and unbeleevers they urge doe not only overthrow the use of it to beleevers but also unbeleevers This also is good to be attended unto for the Apostle in many places where he speakes of the Law as a Schoolmaster and the continuance of it for a time doth not speake comparatively of a beleever with an unbeleever but of the state of the Gospel and the state of the Old Testament so that as a wicked man may not circumcise or take up the sacrifices so neither may he use the Morall Law as commonly the Jewes did which was as distinct from Christ and as if that of it self were able alone to save Therefore I wonder why the Antinomians bring many of their arguments to prove that a beleever is freed from the Law for certainly most of those places will inferre that unbeleevers also under the New Testament are for the Apostle for the most part doth argue against that state of the Church and administrations that were used formerly as in the 1 Cor. 3. when the Apostle makes the administration of the Law to be death and of the Gospel life Here he speaketh not of particular persons but of the generall state under the Gospel So in Gal. 2. and 3. Chapters he argueth against the whole dispensation of the Law and makes it equally abrogated unto all And it may probably be thought that that famous expression of the Apostle ye are not under the Law but under grace is not only to be understood of
every particular beleever but generally of the whole dispensation of the Gospel under the New Testament 7. We will grant that to a beleever the Law is as it were abrogated The Law to a beleever is abrogated in these particulars 1. In respect of Justification Though I say mitigation might 1. In respect of justification be properly here used yet we will call it abrogation with the Orthodox because to the godly it is in some sense so And that which is most remarkable and most comfortable is in respect of justification for now a beleever is not to expect acceptation at the throne of grace in himself or any thing that he doth but by relying on Christ The Papists they say this is the way to make men idle and lazy doing in this matter as Saul did who made a Law that none should eate of any thing and so Jonathan must not taste of the honey Saul indeed thought hereby to have the more enemies killed but Jonathan told him that if they had been suffered to eate more honey they should have been more revived and inabled to destroy their adversaries Thus the Papists they forbid us to eat of this honey this precious comfort in Christ as if thereby we should be hindered in our pursute against sinne whereas indeed it is the only strength and power against them 2. Condemnation and a curse Thus still the condition of a beleever 2. In respect of condemnation is made unspeakably happy Rom. 1. There is no condemnation And Christ became a curse for us so that by this meanes the gracious soule hath daily matter of incouragement arguing in prayer thus O Lord though my sinnes deserve a curse yet Christ his obedience doth not Though I might be better yet Christ needeth not to be better O Lord though I have sinned away my own power to doe good yet not Christs power to save Heb. 6. 18. you have a phrase there flying for a refuge doth excellently shew forth the nature of a godly man who is pursued by sinne as a malefactor was for his murder and he runneth to Christ for refuge and so Beza understands that expression of the Apostle Phil. 3. 9. And be found in him which implyeth the justice of God searching out for him but he is in Christ Now when we say he is freed from condemnation that is to be understood actually not potentially There is matter of condemnation though not condemnation it selfe 3. Rigid obedience This is another particular wherein the 3. In respect of rigid obedience Orthodoxe declare the abrogation of the Law but this must warily be understood for Christ hath not obtained at Gods hands by his death that the Law should not oblige and tye us unto a perfect obedience for this we maintain against Papists that it 's a sinne in beleevers they doe not obey the Law of God to the utmost perfection of it And therefore hold it impossible for a beleever to fulfill the Law But yet we say this mercy is obtained by Christ that our obedience unto the Law which is but inchoate and imperfect is yet accepted of in and through Christ for if there were only the Law and no Christ or grace It is not any obedience though sincere unlesse perfect would be entertained by God Neither would any repentance or sorrow be accepted of but the Law strictly so taken would deale as the Judge to the malefactor who being condemned by the Law though he cry out in the anguish of his spirit that he is grieved for what he hath done yet the Law doth not pardon him 4. It is not a terrour to the godly nor are they slavishly compelled 4. In respect of terrour and slavish obedience to the obedience of it And in this sense they are denyed to be under the Law But this also must be rightly understood for there is in the godly an unregenerate or carnall part as well as a regenerate and spirituall See Rom. 7. 22 25. with my minds I serve the Law of God but with my flesh the Law of sinne Now although it be true that the Law in the terrible compelling part of it be not necessary to him so farre as he is regenerate yet in regard that he hath much flesh and corruption in him therefore it is that the Scripture doth use threatnings as so many sharpe goads to provoke them in the waies of piety But what godly man is there whose spirit is so willing alwayes that he doth not finde his flesh untoward and backward unto any holy duty How many times doe they need that Christ should draw them and also that the Law should draw them So that there is great use of preaching the Law even to beleevers still as that which may instrumentally quicken and excite them to their duty Qui dicit se amare legem mentitur nescit quid dicat Tam enim amamus legem quam homicida carcerem said Luther and this is true of us so farre as we are corrupt 5. It doth not work or increase sinne in them as in the wicked The 5. In respect of the increase of sin Apostle Rom. 7. 8. complaineth of this bitter effect of the Law of God that it made him the worse The more spirituall and supernaturall that was the more did his carnall and corrupt heart rage against it so that the more the Law would damme up the torrent of sinfull lusts the higher did they swell Now this sad issue was not to be ascribed to the Law but to Paul's corruption As in the Dropsie it is not the water or beere if frequently drunk that is to be blamed for the increase of the disease but the ill distemper in the body Now in the godly because there is a new nature and a principle of love and delight in the Law of God wrought in him his corruption doth not increase and biggen by the Law but is rather subdued and quelled although sometimes even in the godly it may work such wofull effects And this also take notice of that as the commandement of the Law so also the Promises of the Gospel doe only stirre up evil in the heart totally unsanctified 6. It is abrogated in many accessaries and circumstantials Even 6. In respect of many Circumstantials the Morall Law considered in some particulars is abrogated totally as in the manner of writing which was in tables of stone We know the first tables were broken and what became of the last or how long they continued none can tell and this makes Paul use that opposition 2 Cor. 3. 3. Not in tables of stone but in the fleshly tables of the heart Although this you must know that the doctrine of the Gospel as written with inke and paper doth no more availe for any spirituall working then the Law written in tables Therefore the Apostle useth in that verse this phrase Not written with inke as well as Not in tables of stone And this
is to be observed against the Antinomians who to disparage the Law may say that was written in stones what good can that doe May we not also say The doctrine of the Gospel that is written in paper and what can that doe 7. But Christ doth perpetually continue as a rule and law to them 7. Yet that it continues to them as a rule appeares Which may thus appeare 1. From the different phrases that the Apostle useth concerning the Ceremoniall Law which are no where applyed to the Morall Law 1. From the different Phrases used concerning the ceremoniall Law And these Chemnitius doth diligently reckon up 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ephes 2. 14. So again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 7. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 antiquare 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 senescere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 evanescere Heb. 8. ult 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 abrogatio Heb. 7. 18. Now saith he these words are not used of the Morall Law that it is changed or waxeth old or is abrogated which doe denote a mutation in the Law but when it speakes of the Morall Law it saith We are dead to it We are redeemed from the curse of it Which phrases doe imply the change to be made in us and not in the Law If therefore the Antinomians could bring such places that would prove it were as unlawfull for us to love the Lord because the Morall Law commands it as we can prove it unlawfull to circumcise or to offer sacrifices then they would doe something for their purpose 2. From the sanctification and holinesse that is required of the 2. From that holinesse that it requires of the beleever beleever which is nothing but conformity to the Law so that when we reade the Apostle speaking against the Law yet that he did not meane this of the Law as a rule and as obliging us to the obedience thereof will easily appeare For when the Apostle Gal. 5. 4. had vehemently informed them of their wofull condition who would be justified by the Law yet ver 13. and 14. pressing them not to use their liberty as an occasion to the flesh he giveth this reason For all the Law is fulfilled in one word even in this Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy selfe What doth the Apostle use contradictions in the same Chapter Presse them to obey the Law and yet reprove them for desiring to be under it No certainly but when they would seek justification by the Law then he reproveth them and when on the other side they would refuse obedience to the Law then he admonisheth them to the contrary As for their distinguishing between the matter of the Law and the Law we have already proved it to be a contradiction 3. In that disobedience to it is still a sinne in the beleever For 3 In that disobedience is still a sin there can be no sinne unlesse it be a transgression of a Law as the Apostle John defineth sinne Now then when David commits adultery when Peter denyeth Christ are not these sinnes in them If so is not Davids sinne a sinne because it is against such and such a Commandement As for their evasion it is a sinne against the Law as in the hand of Christ and so against the love of Christ and no otherwayes this cannot hold for then there should be no sinnes but sinnes of unkindnesse or unthankfulnesse As this Law is in the hand of Christ so murder is a sin of unkindnesse but as it is against the Law simply in it self so it is a sinne of such kinde as murder and not of another kinde so that the consideration of Christs love may indeed be a great motive to obey the commands of God yet that doth not hinder the command it selfe from obliging and binding of us as it is the will of the Law-giver But of this distinction more in its place 4. From the difference of the Morall Law and the other lawes 4. Because it differs from other Lawes in respect of causes of abrogation Three reasons why the Ceremoniall Law should be abrogated in respect of the causes of abrogation There can be very good reasons given why the Ceremoniall Law should be abrogated which can no wayes agree to the Morall as First The Ceremoniall Law had not for its object that which is perpetuall and in it self holinesse To circumcise and to offer sacrifice these things were not in themselves holy and good nor is the leaving of them a sinne whereas the matter of the Morall Law is perpetually good and the not doing of it is necessarily a sinne I speake of that matter which Divines call morall naturall Again The Ceremoniall Law was typicall and did shadow forth Christ to come Now when he was come there was no use of these ceremonies And lastly The Jewes and the Gentiles were to consociate into one body and no difference be made between them Now to effect this it was necessary that partition-wall should be pulled down for as long as that stood they could not joyn in one LECTURE XXIII ROM 3. 31. Do we then make void the Law yea we establish it I Shall not stand upon any more arguments to prove the perpetuall obligation of the Morall Law because this is abundantly maintained in that assertion already proved that the Morall Law as given by Moses doth still oblige us I come therefore to those places of Scripture which seeme to Places of Scripture seeming to hold forth the duration of the Morall Law for a time only answered hold forth the duration of the Morall Law for a prefixed time only even as the ceremoniall Law doth I shall select the most remarkable places and in answering of them we shall see the other fully cleared And I will begin with that Luke 16. 16. The Law and the Prophets were untill John It should therefore seeme that the Law was to continue but untill Johns time I will not here stand to dispute whether John Baptist was to be reckoned under the Old Testament or the New only take notice that we cannot make a third different estate wherein the Covenant of grace should be dispensed as an Antinomian author doth for our Saviour seemeth fully to conclude that he did belong to the Old Testament therefore he saith The least in the kingdome of heaven is greater then he * Minimum maximi est maju◠maximo minimi Although in this respect he was greater then any of the Prophets that went before him that he did not prophesie of a Messias to come but pointed with his hand to him who was already come And as for the text it self none can prove that the Law was to be abrogated when John Baptist came for lest any should by that expression think so our Saviour addeth Heaven and earth shall sooner passe away then that one title should fall to the ground Therefore the meaning is that the Law in respect of the typicall part of it as it did
shadow forth and prefigure a Christ so it was to cease Therefore the Law and the Prophets are put together as agreeing in one generall thing which is to foretell of Christ and to typifie him And this will be clearer if you compare Matth. 11. 13. with this of Luke where it is thus set down All the prophets and the Law prophesied unto John whereby it is cleare that he speakes of the typicall part of the Law yet not so as if the Ceremonies were then immediately to cease only from that time they began to vanish The next place of Scripture is that famous instance so much vexed in this controversie Rom. 6. 15. For you are not under the Law but under grace Now to open this consider these things 1. In what sense the Apostle argueth against the Law and what The Apostle argueth against the Law in comparison of Christ was the proper state of the Question in those dayes And that appeareth Act. 15. where you have a relation made of some beleeving Jewes that were of the sect of the Pharisees who pressed the necessity of Circumcision and so would joyn the ministery of Moses and Christ together Now it seemeth though the Apostles in this Councell had condemned that opinion yet there were many that would still revive this errour and therefore the Apostle in this Epistle to the Romans and in that to the Galathians doth reprove this false doctrine and labour much against it Stapleton and other papists they think that the controversie was only about the Ceremoniall Law and this they doe to maintain their justification by the works of the Law when wrought by grace But though it must be granted that the doubts about keeping the Ceremoniall Law were the occasion of that great difference and the most principall thing in question yet the Apostle to set forth the fulnesse of grace and Christ doth extend his arguments and instances even to the Morall Law for the Jewes did generally think that the knowledge and observation of the Morall Law without Christ was enough for their peace and comfort And if they could perswade themselves that the externall performing of the Ceremoniall Law was enough to make them acceptable with God though they lived in grosse disobedience to the Morall Law as Isai 1. alibi it many times appeareth they did how much more when they lived a life externally conformable to the Morall Law must they needs be secure of their favour with God And in this sense it is that the Apostle speakes seemingly derogatory to the Law because they took it without Christ Even as he calleth the ceremonies beggerly elements when yet we know they were signes of an Evangelicall grace 2. That the Apostle useth the word Law in divers senses which hath been the occasion of so much difficulty in this point Now in most of those places where the Law seemeth to be abolished it is taken in one of these two senses Either first synecdochically The word Law taken in a two-fold sense the Law put for part of the Law to wit for that part which actually condemneth and accuseth as when the Apostle saith Against such there is no Law here he speaketh as if there were nothing in a Law but condemnation whereas we may say A Law is for a thing by way of direction and prescription as well as against a thing by accusation Or secondly the word Law is put for the ministery of Moses which dispensation was farre inferiour unto the ministery of the Gospel And in this sense the Apostle doth much use it in the Epistle to the Galathians and in the Epistle to the Hebrewes So that here is a continuall mistake when the Antinomians heap place upon place which seeme to abolish the Law and doe not first declare what Law and in what sense those places are to be expounded 3. Consider these Phrases Of the Law Without the Law These Phrases Of the Law Without the Law Vnder the Law and In the Law explained Vnder the Law and In the Law Without the Law is two wayes First he is without the Law that is without the knowledge and understanding of it Thus the Gentiles are without the Law And secondly Without the Law that is without the sense and experience of the accusing and terrifying power of the Law and thus Paul Rom. 7. said when the Law came he died Now the godly though they are denied to be under the Law yet they are not said to be without the Law for if the Morall Law were no more obliging beleevers now then it was Heathens or Gentiles before they ever heard of it both in respect of knowledge and observation of it then might beleevers be said to be without the Law And to this Without the Law is opposed In the Law Rom. 2. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the vulgar In legem Beza Cum lege It signifieth those that doe injoy the Law and yet sinne against it And much to this purpose is that Phrase Of the Law Rom. 4. 14. which sometimes is as much as Of the Circumcision to wit those that are initiated into the Ministery of Moses but in other places it signifieth as much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the opposite to it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as in this 4. of the Rom. and ver 14. where the Apostle declaring that the promise made to Abraham was not of the Law he cannot meane the Law of Moses for all know that was long after but he meanes what 's done in obedience to the Morall Law so farre as it was then revealed The Apostle useth also another phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 By the Law which is to be understood in this sense by works done in conformity to the Law and in this sense the Apostle urgeth that righteousnesse or the promise are not by the Law But all the difficulty in this controversie is about the phrase Vnder the Law Therefore take notice 4. There is a voluntary being under the Law as Christs was and A two-fold being under the Law there is to be under it in an ill sense A voluntary and willing obedience unto the Law is acceptable And thus the Apostle 1 Cor. 9. 20. The Apostle saith he was made to some as under the Law though there indeed he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but that is added because of the ceremoniall part of the Law Therefore he calleth himselfe excellently 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though a godly man be not properly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And he addeth to Christ lest they should think that he spoke of the whole Law the ceremoniall part of it which was abolished by Christ so that a godly man in a well explained sense may be said to be under the Law but yet because the Apostle useth it for the most part in an ill sense as here in the text and in that place tell me ye that desire to be under
the Law though Law there be used for the whole Ministery of Moses and not of the Morall Law let us consider in what sense this is denyed to the godly 5. That interpretation of some though of solid judgement The commonly received sense of that Phrase Not to be under the Law rejected who make the phrase Not to be under the Law to be as much as Not under the curse of the Law or Not obnoxious to the guilt by it seemeth not to agree with the context I know this is generally received as the sense of the place and there is this argument urged for it because the Apostle maketh an objection from hence Shall we sinne because we are not under the Law but under grace Therefore it should seeme that the Law is taken for the condemning power of it and grace for pardoning and free justification but because the Apostle is here speaking of sanctification both in this Chapter and the Chapter following I preferre Beza's interpretation which makes the being under the Beza's interpretation of the phrase approv'd Law to be the same in sense with under sinne for the Apostle speaking of himselfe as carnall Chap. 7. saith that the Law wrought in him all manner of evil and this indeed is the work of the Law in every unregenerate man so that the more the Law is applyed to him the more doth his corruption break forth Now then this is the Apostles argument Let not sinne reigne in you for now you are not under the Law stirring up sinne and provoking it in you but under grace not justifying or pardoning as properly and immediately meant here though they were under that also but sanctifying and healing And the Apostle maketh the objection following What then shall we sinne because we are not under the Law because the phrase was ambiguous and might be thought to have such a sense as the Libertines make it to have to wit to doe every thing as we please without any controule by any Law and in this explication we shall see a sweet harmony in the context The third instance is Rom. 7. especially in the beginning of the Chapter but the answer to the former Objection will also cleare this because the Apostle continueth in the same matter explaining what it is to be under the Law by a similitude from a wife married to an husband who is bound to him so long as he liveth but when he dyeth she is free Now in the reddition of the similitude there is some difference among Commentators but I take it thus Sinne which by the Law doth irritate and provoke our corruptions that is the former husband the soule had and lusts they are the children hereof but when we are regenerated then Christ becomes the husband of the godly soule so that they are deceived who make the Morall Law the husband but sinne is properly the husband And if you will say the Morall Law you must understand it in this sense only as it doth inflame the heart to all evil therefore the Apostle as is well observed by the Learned doth not say the Law is dead but we are dead for indeed the Law is never so much alive as in the godly who doe constantly obey it and live accordingly to it This will also serve for that place Gal. 5. 18. If ye be led by the spirit ye are not under the Law That is under the Law forcibly compelling Austin distinguisheth of foure states of men those who are Ante legens and these commit sinne without knowledge of it Sub lege and these commit it with some fighting but are overcome Sub gratia and these doe fight and shall overcome and Sub pace these we may make to be those in heaven LECTURE XXIIII DEUT. 4. 13. And he declared unto you his Covenant which he commanded you to performe even ten Commandements c. I Have already handled the Law as it is a Rule and now come to consider of it as a Covenant that so the whole Law may be fully understood I shall not be long upon this though the matter be large and difficult though the subject be like the Land of Canaan yet there are many Gyants and great Objections in the way I will rather handle it positively then controversally for I doe not finde in any point of Divinity learned men so confused and perplexed being like Abrahams Ram hung in a bush of briars and brambles by the head as here That I may methodically proceed observe the context of this verse and the scope Moses being to perswade the people of Israel to obedience Arguments used by Moses to perswade obedience to the Law of the Law useth severall forcible arguments As ver 1. The good and profitable issue thereof which is to live and possesse the land not as if this mercy were only temporall but by this was represented eternall life in heaven A second argument is from the perfection of it that nothing may be added to it or detracted from it The third argument is from the great wisdome and understanding they shall hold forth hereby to all other Nations there being no people under the sunne that had such holy and perfect lawes as they had and if that be true of Bernard Sapiens est cui res sapiunt prout sunt hee is a wise man to whom things doe tast and relish as they are divine and holy things as holy earthy things as earthly and fading then certainly by this Law of God there was true wisedome prescribed Other arguments Moses doth bring as The great authority God put upon the Law The great mercy in giving it to them rather then another Nation And the verse I have read belongs to that argument which proveth the dignity and glorious authority of the Law from the manner of delivering it Which Law hee declareth to us by the name and title of a Covenant Now this take notice of that the word Covenant to omit other significations is taken sometimes synecdochically for part of the Covenant as it is here in these words The Doctrine I will insist upon is That the Law was delivered That the Law God delivered to Israel was a Covenant appears by God on Mount Sinai in a Covenant-way Or The Law was a Covenant that God made with the people of Israel This will appeare in that it hath the name of a Covenant and the reall properties of a Covenant 1. The name of a Covenant 2 King 18. 12. Because they obeyed 1. In that it hath the name of a Covenant not the voice of the Lord their God but transgressed his Covenant and all that Moses the servant of God commanded Deut. 17. 2. If there be found any that hath worught wickednesse in transgressing the Covenant which was the ten Commandements as appeareth ver 3. And more expresly 2 Chro. 6. 11. In it have I put the Arke wherein is the Covenant of the Lord that he made with the children
of Israel Yea if wee would speake exactly and strictly the bookes of Moses and the Prophets cannot be so well called the Old Covenant or Testament as this doctrine that was then delivered on Mount Sinai with all the administrations thereof as appeareth Heb. 7. chap. 8. Even as when the Apostle saith 2 Cor. 3. 6. God hath made us able ministers of the New Testament hee doth not meane the writings or bookes but the Gospel or Covenant of grace Take but one place more where the Law is called a Covenant and that is Jer. 11. 2 3 4. 2. In the next place you may see the reall properties of a Covenant 2. In that it hath the reall properties of a Covenant which are a mutuall consent consent and stipulation on both sides See a full relation of this Exod. 3. 24. from the 3 d. ver to the 9 th The Apostle relateth this history Heb. 9. wherein learned Interpreters observe many difficulties but I shall not medle with them In the words quoted out of Exodus you see these things which belong to a Covenant First there is God himselfe expressing his consent and willingnesse to be their God if they will keep such Commandements there and then delivered to them ver 3. Secondly you have the peoples full consent and ready willingnesse to obey them ver 3. ver 7. Thirdly because Covenants used to be written down for a memoriall unto posterity therefore wee see Moses writing the precepts down in a book Fourthly because Covenants used to be confirmed by some outward visible signes especially by killing of beasts and offering them in sacrifice therefore wee have this also done and halfe of the blood was sprinckled on the Altar to denote Gods entring into Covenant and the people also were sprinckled with blood to shew their voluntary covenanting Thus we have reall covenanting when the Law is given So also you may see this in effect Deut. 29. 10 11 12 13. where it's expresly said that they stood to enter into Covenant with God that hee may establish them to be a people unto himselfe and that hee may be a God unto them Againe you have this clearly in Deut. 26. 17 18. where it is said Thou hast avouched the Lord this day to be thy God and to walke in his waies And the Lord hath avouched thee this day to be his peculiar people So that it 's very plaine the Law was given as a Covenant yea the Apostle calls it a Testament for howsoever some have disliked that distinction of the Old and New Testament especially as applied to the bookes and writings of the holy Pen-men of Scripture thinking as Austin they may be better called the Old and New Instruments because they are authenticall and confirmed by sufficient witnesses As Tertullian calls the Bible Nostra digesta from the Lawyers and others called it Our Pandects from them also yet 1 Cor. 3. doth warrant such a distinction Onely the question is how this Covenant can be called properly a Testament because Christ died not twice and there cannot be a Testament without the death of a Testator But the answer is that there was a typicall death of Christ in the sacrifices and that was ground enough to make the Covenant to be called a Testament Having proved it is a Covenant all the difficulty remaineth The judgements of the Learned different in declaring what Covenant is here meant in declaring what Covenant it is for here is much difference of judgements even with the Learned and Orthodoxe and this doth arise from the different places of Scripture which although they be not contrary one to another yet the weaknesse of our understandings is many times overmastered by some places Some as you have heard make it a Covenant of workes others a mixt Covenant some a subservient Covenant but I am perswaded to goe with those who hold it to be a Covenant of grace and indeed it is very easie to bring strong arguments for the affirmative but then there will be some difficulty to answer such places as are brought for the negative and if the affirmative prove true the dignity and excellency of the Law will appeare the more Now before I come to the arguments which induce me hereunto consider in what sense it In what sense it may be a Covenant of grace explained may be explained that it is a Covenant of grace Some explaine it thus That it was indeed a Covenant of grace but the Jewes by their corrupt understanding made it a Covenant of workes and so opposed it unto Christ and therefore say they the Apostle argueth against the Law as making it to oppose the promises and grace not that it did so but only in regard of the Jewes corrupt minds who made an opposition where there was none This hath some truth in it but it is not full Some make the Law to be a Covenant of grace but very obscurely and therefore they hold the Gospel and the Law to be the same differing onely as the acorne while it is in the huske and the oke when it 's branched out into a tall tree Now if this should be understood in a popish sense as if the righteousnesse of the Law and the Gospel were all one in which sense the Papists speak of the old Law and the new it would be very dangerous and directly thwarting the Scripture Some explain it thus God say they had a primary or antecedent will in giving of the Law or a secundary and consequent His primary will was to hold out perfect and exact righteousnesse against which the Apostle argueth and proveth no man can be justified thereby but then God knowing mans impotency and inability did secondarily command repentance and promiseth a gracious acceptance through Christ and this may be very well received if it be not vexed with ill interpretations But lastly this way I shall go The Law as to this purpose may be considered more largely as that whole doctrine delivered on Mount Sinai with the preface and promises adjoyned and all things that may be reduced to it or more strictly as it is an abstracted rule of righteousnesse holding forth life upon no termes but perfect obedience Now take it in the former sense it was a Covenant of grace take it in the later sense as abstracted from Moses his administration of it and so it was not of grace but workes This distinction will overthrow all the Objections against the negative Nor may it be any wonder that the Apostle should consider the Law so differently seeing there is nothing more ordinary with Paul in his Epistles and that in these very controversies then to doe so as for example take this instance Rom. 10. ver 5 6. where Paul describeth the righteousness of the Law from those words Doe this and live which is said to have reference to Levit. 18. 5. but wee find this in effect Deut. 30. v. 16. yet from this very Chapter the
Apostle describeth the righteousnesse which is by faith And Beza doth acknowledge that that which Moses speakes of the law Paul doth apply to the Gospel Now how can this be reconciled unlesse wee distinguish between the generall doctrine of Moses which was delivered unto the people in all the circumstantiall administrations of it and the particular doctrine about the Law taken in a limited and abstracted consideration Onely this take notice of that although the Law were a Covenant of grace yet the righteousnesse of works and faith differ as much as heaven and earth But the Papists they make this difference The righteousnesse of the Law saith Stapleton Antid in hunc locum is that which wee of our owne power have and doc by the knowledge and understanding of the Law but the righteousnesse of faith they make the righteousnesse of the Law to which wee are enabled by grace through Christ So that they compare not these two together as two contraries in which sense Paul doth but as an imperfect righteousnesse with a perfect But we know that the Apostle excludeth the workes of David and Abraham that they did in obedience to the Law to which they were enabled by grace so necessary is it in matter of justification and pardon to exclude all workes any thing that is ours Tolle te à te impedis te said Austine well Nor doth it availe us that this grace in us is from God because the Apostle makes the opposition wholly between any thing that is ours howsoever we come by it and that of faith in Christ Having thus explained the state of the Question I come to the arguments to prove the affirmative And thus I shall order them The first shall be taken from the relation of the Covenanters Arguments proving the Law a Covenant of grace God on one part and the Israelites on the other God did not deale at this time as absolutely considered but as their God and Father Hence God saith hee is their God and when Christ quoteth the commanders Argum. 1 hee brings the preface Heare O Israel the Lord thy God is one And Rom. 9. 4. To the Israelites belong adoption and the glory and the covenants and the giving of the Law and the promises Now unlesse this were a Covenant of grace how could God be their God who were sinners Thus also if you consider the people of Israel into what relation they are taken this will much confirme the point Exod. 19. 5 6. If yee will obey my voice you shall be a peculiar treasure unto mee and yee shall be unto me a kingdome of Priests and an holy Nation which is applied by Peter to the people of God under the Gospel If therefore the Law had been a Covenant of workes how could such an agreement come between them 2. If wee consider the good things annexed unto this Covenant it must needes be a Covenant of grace for there wee have remission Argum. 2 and pardon of sinne whereas in the Covenant of workes there is no way for repentance or pardon In the second Commandement God is described to be one showing mercy unto thousands and by shewing mercy is meant pardon as appeareth by the contrary visiting iniquity Now doth the Law strictly taken receive any humbling and debasing of themselves no but curseth every one that doth not continue in all the things commanded and that with a full and perfect obedience Hence Exod. 34. ver 6 7. God proclaimeth himselfe in manifold attributes of being gracious and long-suffering keeping mercy for thousands and forgiving iniquity and this hee doth upon the renewing of the two Tables whereas if the people of Israel had been strictly held up to the Law as it required universall perfect obedience without any failing they must also necessarily have despaired and perished without any hope at all 3. If we consider the duties commanded in the Law so generally taken Argum. 3 it must needs be a Covenant of grace for what is the meaning of the first Commandement but to have one God in Christ our God by faith For if faith had not been on such termes commanded it had been impossible for them to love God or to pray unto God Must not the meaning then be to love and delight in God and to trust in him But how can this be without faith through Christ Hence some urge that the end of the commandement is love from faith unfeigned but because Scultetus doth very probably by commandement understand there The Apostles preaching and exhortation it being in the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Apostle using the word in that Epistle in the same sense I leave it It 's true there is no mention made of Christ or faith in the first Commandement but that is nothing for love also is not mentioned yet our Saviour discovers it there and so must faith and Christ be supposed there by necessary consequence And can we think that the people of Israel though indeed they were too confident in themselves yet when they took upon themselves to keep and observe the Law that the meaning was they would doe it without any spot or blemish by sinne or without the grace of God for pardon if they should at any time breake the Law 4. From the Ceremoniall Law All Divines say that this is reduced Argum. 4 to the Morall Law so that Sacrifices were commanded by vertue of the second Commandement Now wee all know that the Sacrifices were evangelicall and did hold forth remission of sinnes through the blood of Christ If therefore these were commanded by the Morall Law there must necessarily be grace included although indeed it was very obscure and darke And it is to be observed that the Apostle doth as much argue against circumcision and even all the Ceremoniall Law as the Morall yea the first rise of the cōtroversie was from that Now all must confesse that circumcision and the sacrifices did not oppose Christ or grace but rather included them And this hath been alwaies a very strong argument to perswade me for the affirmative It is true the Jewes they rested upon these and did not look to Christ but so doe our Christians in these times upon the Sacraments and other duties 5. This will appeare from the visible seale to ratifie this Covenant Argum. 5 which you heard was by sacrifices and sprinkling the people with bloud And this did signifie Christ for Christ he also was the Mediatour of this Covenant seeing that reconciliation cannot possibly be made with a sinner through the Mediation of any mortall man When therefore Moses is called the Mediatour it is to be understood typically even as the sacrifices did wash away sinne typically And indeed if it had been a Covenant of works there needed no Mediatour either typicall or reall some think Christ likewise was the Angel spoke of Act. 7. with whom Moses was in the wildernesse
and it is probable Now if Christ was the Mediatour of the Law as a Covenant the Antinomian distinction must fall to the ground that makes the Law as in the hand of Moses and not in the hand of Christ whereas on Mount Sinai the Law was in the hand of Christ 6. If the Law were the same Covenant with that oath which Argum. 6 God made to Isaac then it must needs be a Covenant of grace But we shall finde that God when he gave this Law to them makes it an argument of his love and grace to them and therefore remembers what he had promised to Abraham Deut. 7. 12. Wherefore it shall come to passe if ye hearken to these judgements and doe them that the Lord thy God shall keep unto thee the Covenant and the mercy which he sware unto thy fathers And certainly if the Law had been a Covenant of workes God had fully abrogated and broken his Covenant and Promise of grace which he made with Abraham and his seed Therefore when the Apostle Gal. 3. 18. opposeth the Law and the Promise together making the inheritance by one and not the other it is to be understood according to the distinction before mentioned of the Law taken in a most strict and limited sense for it is plain that Moses in the administration of this Law had regard to the Covenant and Promise yea made it the same with it Now to all this there are strong Objections made from those Objections impugning the former Arguments answered places of Scripture where the Law and faith or the Promise are so directly opposed as Rom. 10. before quoted so Gal. 3. 18. Rom. 4. 14. so likewise from those places where the Law is said to be the ministery of death and to work wrath Now to these places I answer these things First that if they should be rigidly and universally true then that doctrine of the Socinians would plainly prevaile who from these places of Scripture doe urge that there was no grace or faith nor nothing of Christ vouchsafed unto the Jewes whereas we reade they had the Adoption though the state was a state of bondage In the second place consider that as it is said of the Law it worketh death so the Gospel is said to be the savour of death and men are said to have no sinne if Christ had not come yea they are said to partake of more grievous judgements who despised Christ then those that despised the Law of Moses so that this effect of the Law was meerly accidentall through our corruption only here is the difference God doth not vouchsafe any such grace as whereby we can have justification in a strict legall way but he doth whereby we may obtain it in an Evangelicall way Thirdly consider that the Apostle speaketh these derogatory passages as they may seeme to be as well of the Ceremoniall Law yet all doe acknowledge here was Christ and grace held forth Fourthly much of these places is true in a respective sense according to the interpretation of the Jew who taking these without Christ make it a killing letter even as if we should the doctrine of the Gospel without the grace of Christ And certainly if any Jew had stood up and said to Moses Why doe you say you give us the doctrine of life it 's nothing but a killing letter and the ministry of death would he not have been judged a blasphemer against the Law of Moses The Apostle therefore must understand it as separated yea and opposed to Christ and his grace And lastly we are still to retain that distinction of the Law in a more large sense as delivered by Moses and a more strict sense as it consisteth in precepts threatnings and promises upon a condition impossible to us which is the fulfilling of the Law in a perfect manner LECTURE XXV ROM 3. 27. Where is boasting then It is excluded By what law of works Nay but by the law of faith THe Apostle delivered in the words before most compendiously The words opened and fully the whole doctrine of justification in the severall causes of it from whence in this verse he inferreth a conclusion against all boasting in a mans self which he manageth by short interrogations that so he might the more subdue that self confidence in us Where is boasting saith he This is to be applied universally both to Jew and Gentile but especially to the Jew who gloried most herein And Chrysostome makes this the reason why Christ deferred so long and put off his coming in the flesh viz. that our humane pride might be debased for if at first he had come unto us men would not have found such an absolute necessity of a Saviour The second Question is by what Law boasting is excluded and this is answered first negatively not by the Law of works Secondly positively by the law of faith The Apostle by the law of workes meaneth the doctrine of works prescribing them as the condition of our justification and salvation and he saith works in the plurall number because one or two good works though perfectly done if that were possible would not satisfie the Law for our acceptation unlesse there were a continuall and universall practise of them both for parts and degrees And he cals the doctrine of faith the law of faith either because as Chrysostome saith he would sweeten and indeare the Gospel to the Jewes by giving it a name which they loved or as Beza he speakes here mimetically according to the sense of the Jewes as when John 6. he calleth Faith a work because the Jewes asked What should they doe Now we have in the Scripture two lively comments upon both these parts of the Text. The Pharisee mentioning what he did reckoning up his works and never naming the grace of God is a boaster by the Law of workes but the Publican that looketh upon himself only as a sinner and so judgeth himselfe he excludeth all boasting by the law of faith The Papists they meane by workes here in the Text those The Papists corruptly glosse upon this Text. which goe before faith and they quote a good rule out of Gregory though to a foule errour Non per opera venitur ad fidem sed per fidem ad opera We doe not come by works to faith but by faith to works But this glosse of theirs corrupts the text because the Apostle in this controversie instanceth in Abraham shewing how he had not wherewith to glory in himself and therefore by beleeving gave glory to God If you aske why works do imply boasting though we be enabled thereunto by the grace of God The answer is ready because we attribute justification to that work of grace within us which yet is defective that is wholly to be given unto Christ The doctrine I shall pursue out of these words is That al Doctr. though the Law given by God to the Israelites was a Covenant of grace yet in some
sense the Law and Gospel doe oppose and thwart one another And this matter I undertake because hereby the nature of the Gospel and the Law will be much discovered It is an errour saith Calvin lib. 2. Instit cap. 9. in those who doe never otherwise compare the Gospel with the Law then the merit of works with the free imputation of righteousnesse and saith he this Antithesis or opposition is not to be refused because the Apostle doth many times make them contrary meaning by the Law that rule of life whereby God doth require of us that which is his own giving us no ground of hope unlesse in every respect we keep the Law but saith he quum de totâ lege agitur when he speakes of the Law more largely taken he makes them to differ only in respect of clearer manifestation or as Pareus saith of the old and new Covenant they differ not essentially but as we say the old and new Moon Therefore before I come to shew the exact opposition take The Law and the Gospel may be compared one with another in a double respect notice of two things as a foundation first that the Law and the Gospel may be compared one with another either in respect of the grace God gave under the Old Testament and the New and then they differ only gradually for they under the Law did enjoy grace and the Spirit of God though Socinians deny it although indeed in respect of the Gospel it may comparatively be said no spirit and no grace as when it is said The holy Ghost was not yet given because it was not so plentifully given Or secondly the doctrine of the Law in the meere preceptive nature of it may be compared with the doctrine of the Gospel having the grace of God annexed unto it and going along with it Now this is in some respects an unequall comparison for if you take the doctrine or letter of the Gospel without the grace of God that letter may be said to kill as well as the letter of the Law only this is the reason why we cannot say The Spirit of God or grace or life is by the Law because whatsoever spirituall good was vouchsafed to the Jewes it is not of the Law but of the grace of God or the Gospel Therefore whensoever we compare Law and Gospel together we must be sure to make the parallel equall and to take them so oppositely that we may not give the one more advantage or lesse then the nature of it doth crave and desire In the second place therefore in this controversie still remember The different use of the word Law carefully to be observed to carry along with you the different use of the word Law as to this point for if you take Law strictly and yet make it a Covenant of grace you confound the righteousnesse of works and of faith together as the Papists doe but if largely then there may be an happy reconciliation For the better opening of this consider that as the word What meant by Law taken largely and what strictly Law so the word Gospel may be taken largely or strictly We will not trouble you with the many significations of the word or whether it be used any where of a sorrowfull message as well as glad newes as some say in two places it is used 1 Sam. 4. 17. 2 Sam. 1. 10. according to that rule of Mercers Non infrequens esse specialia verba interdum generaliter sumi It is enough to our purpose that in the Scripture it is sometimes taken more largely and sometimes more strictly when it 's taken largely it signifieth the whole doctrine that the Apostles were to preach Mar. 16. 15. Preach the Gospel to every creature and so Mar. 1. 1. The beginning of the Gospel i. e. the doctrine and preaching of Christ Or else it is taken most strictly as when Luke 2. 10. Behold I bring you glad tydings c. In which strict sense it 's called the Gospel of peace and of the grace of God So that as you see the word Law is taken differently largely and strictly thus also is the word Gospel Now it 's a great dispute Whether the command of repentance belong unto the Gospel or no I finde the Lutherans Antinomians and Calvinists to speake differently but of that when we take the Law and Gospel in their most strict sense Bellarmine bringeth it as an argument that the Protestants doe deny the necessity of good works because they hold that the Gospel hath no precepts or threatnings in it lib. 4. de Justif cap. 2. And he urgeth against them that Cap. 1. ad Rom. where the wrath of God is said to be revealed from heaven in the Gospel but as is to be shewed he there doth mistake the state of the controversie taking the word Gospel in a larger sense then they intended Thus on the other side Islebius the father of the Antinomians he taught that repentance was not to be pressed from the Decalogue but from the Gospel and that to preserve the purity of doctrine we ought to resist all those who teach the Gospel must not be preached but to those who were made contrite by the Law whereas the right unfolding of the word Gospel would make up quickly those breaches The Law therefore and the Gospel admitting of such a different acception I shall first shew the opposition between the Law and Gospel taken in their large sense and then in the limited sense And this is worth the while because this is the foundation of all our comfort if rightly understood Now the Question in this larger sense is the same with the difference between the Old and New Testament or Covenant wherein the Learned speake very differently and as to my apprehension much confusedly I shall not examine whether that be the reason of calling it Old and New which Austin Chemnitius and others urge because it presseth the old man and condemneth that whereas the new incourageth and comforteth new I rather take it to be so called because the old was to cease and vanish away being before the other in time Now in my method I will lay down the false differences and then name the true The false differences are first of the Anabaptists and Socinians False differences between the Law and the Gospel who make all that lived under the Law to have nothing but temporall earthly blessings in their knowledge and affections And for this they are very resolute granting indeed that 1. Of Anabaptists and Socinians affirming That they under the Law in the Old Testament enjoyed only temporall blessings Christ and eternall things were promised in the Old Testament but they were not enjoyed by any till the New Testament whereupon they say that grace and salvation was not till Christ came And the places which the Antinomians bring for beleevers under the New Testament they take rigidly and universally as if there had been no
eternall life nor nothing of the Spirit of God till Christ came Hence they say the Gospel began with Christ and deny that the promise of a Christ or Messias to come is ever called the Gospel but the reall exhibition of him only This is false for although this promise be sometimes called Act. 7. 17. Act. 13. 32. the promise made to the fathers yet it is sometimes also called the Gospel Rom. 1. 2. Rom. 10. 14 15. And there are cleare places to confute this wicked errour as the Apostle instancing in Abraham and David for justification and remission of sinnes which were spirituall mercies and that eternall life was not unknown to them appeareth by our Saviours injunction commanding them to search the Scriptures for in them they hope for eternall life John 11. 39. Thus also they had hope and knowledge of a resurrection as appeareth Act. 24. 14. therefore our Saviour proved the resurrection out of a speech of Gods to Moses And howsoever Mercer as I take it thinke that exposition probable about Jobs profession of his knowledge that his Redeemer liveth and that he shall see him at the last day which make his meaning to be of Jobs perswasion of his restitution unto outward peace and health again yet there are some passages in his expression that seeme plainly to hold out the contrary Though therefore we grant that that state was the state of children and so carried by sensible objects very much yet there was under these temporall good things spirituall held forth Hence the Apostle 1 Cor. 10. maketh the Jewes to have the same spirituall matter and benefit in their Sacraments which we partake of In the next place let us consider the false difference of the Papists 2. Of Papists and they have the Socinians also agreeing with them in some things First they make this a great difference that Christ under the 1. That Christ hath added more perfect Lawes under the New Testament New Testament hath added more perfect Lawes and sound counsells then were before as Wilfull poverty Vowed chastity and the Socinians they labour to shew how Christ hath added to every precept of the Decalogue and they begin with the first that he hath added to it these things 1. A command to prayer whereas in the Old Testament though godly men did pray yet say they impudently there was no command and then Christ say they did not onely command to pray but gave a prescript forme of prayer The second thing added say they is to call upon Christ as a Mediatour in our prayers which they in the Old Testament did not And thus they goe on over all the Commandements shewing what new things Christ hath added Smal. refut Thes pag. 228. But I have already shewed that Christ never added any morall duty which was not commanded before The second difference of the Papists is to make the Law and 2. That the Law and Gospel are capable of no opposite consideration the Gospel capable of no opposite consideration no not in any strict sense but to hold both a Covenant of workes and that the Fathers under the Old Testament and those under the New were both justified by fulfilling the Law of God And herein lyeth that grosse error whereby Christ and grace are evacuated But the falshood of this shall be evinced God willing when wee speak of the Law and Gospel strictly which the Papists upon a dangerous errour call the Old Law and the New Lastly the Papists make a third difference that under the 3. That the Fathers that died under the Old Testament went not immediatly to heaven Old Testament the Fathers that dyed went not immediately to heaven therefore say they wee doe not say Saint Jeremiah or Saint Isaiah but after Christs death then a way was opened for them and us Hence is that saying Sanguis Christi est clavis Paradisi but this is sufficiently confuted in the Popish controversies I come therefore to the Antinomian difference and there I 3. Of Antinomians That God saw sinne in the beleevers of the Old Testament not of the New find such an one that I am confident was never heard of before in the world It is in the Honey-comb of Justification pag. 117. God saith hee saw sinne in the beleevers of the Old Testament but not in these of the New And his Reason is because the glory of free Justification was not so much revealed the vaile was not removed What a weak reason is this Did the lesse or more revelation of free Justification make God justifie the lesse freely It had been a good argument to prove that the people of God in the Old Testament did not know this doctrine so clearly as those in the New but that God should see the more or lesse because of this is a strange Consequence The places of Scripture which hee brings Zech. 13. 1. Dan. 9. 14. would make more to the purpose of a Socinian that there is no pardon of sinne and eternall life but under the Gospel rather then for the Antinomian and one of his places hee brings Jer. 50. ver 20. maketh the contrary true for there God promiseth pardon of sinne not to the beleevers under the Gospel but to that residue of the Jewes which God would bring backe from captivity as the context evidently sheweth so the place Heb. 10. 17. how grosly is it applyed unto the beleevers of the Gospel onely for had not the godly under the Old Testament the Law written in their hearts and had they not the same cause to take away their sinnes viz Christs bloud as well as we under the Gospel His second reason is God saw sinne in them because they were children that had need of a rod but he sees none in us because full growne heires What a strange reason is this for parents commonly see lesse sinne in their children while young then when growne up and their childishnes doth more excuse them And although children onely have a rod for their faults yet men growne up they have more terrible punishments Hence the Apostle threatens beleevers that despise Christ with punishment above those that despised Moses His third Reason is because they under the Law were under a School-master therefore he seeth sinne in them but none in us being no longer under a School-master But here is no solidity in this Reason for first the chiefest worke of a School-master is to teach and guide and so they are said to be under the Law as a School-master that so they may be prepared for Christ and thus it is a good argument to Christians under the Gospel that their lives should be fuller of wisedome and grown graces then the Jewes because they are not under a School-master as children As if one should say to a young man that is taken from the Grammar-schoole and transplanted in the University that he should take heed he doth not speak false Latine now for hee is not in
is said to fill the Law in respect of the Pharisees who by their corrupt glosses had evacuated it And one of his reasons which hee brings to prove his assertion makes most against him viz. Except your righteousnesse exceed the righteousnesse of the Scribes and Pharisees c. This maketh against him because our Saviour doth not say Except your righteousnesse exceed the righteousnesse of the Law and the Prophets which hee must have said if his opinion were true but of the Scribes and Pharisees who had corrupted the text with their false glosses I will not consider his other reasons for they are so weak that he seemeth to be afraid of them And certainly it would be strange Divinity to say that a Jew might have lusted after a woman in his heart and not have sinned but now it would be sin in a Christian The second particular difference is in respect of the measure of grace The measure of grace ordinarily greater in the Gospel then under the Law Hence the Scripture speakes as if they had under the Old Testament none at all meerly because there was not such a plentifull effusion of his Spirit upon them not but that if wee consider some particular persons they might have such degrees of grace that few under the Gospel can be compared unto them as Abraham and David but this was not according to the ordinary dispensation of his graces then So that as one starre differeth from another in glory thus did the Church of the Jewes from that of Christians They had drops but we have the fountaine they had glimmerings but wee have the sun it selfe Now as these are priviledges so they are also great engagements for more eminent knowledge and holinesse then was in those dayes But all that the Prophets reproved in their people ignorance self-confidence resting upon externall duties c. the same may we in our hearers 3. Their condition was more servile All things did presse The Jews under the Law were in a more servile condition then Christians under the Gospel more to fear and bondage then now among us Hence the Apostle Gal. 4. 30. compareth their condition to the sons of the bond-woman Hence Austine makes Timor and Amor the difference of the two Testaments God met man sinning in the Law as he did Adam with terrour charging sin upon him but under the Gospel as the father did the prodigall son coming home to him See Hebr. 12. this difference considered by Paul Yee are not come to Mount Sinai c. Onely you must rightly understand this The Jewes had a two-fold consideration one as being servile and another of them as sonnes but under age so that they were not wholly excluded from the spirit of Adoption yea the Apostle saith That the Promises and Adoption did belong unto them and David doth appropriate God unto himselfe as his God in his prayer which argued hee had the Spirit of Adoption inabling him to call Abba Father Now as they were more obnoxious to an inward bondage so they were under an outward bondage also opposite unto which is that Christian liberty Paul speakes of whereby the yoke of all those ceremonious burdens is taken off them and Paul doth vehemently and fervidly dispute against those that would introduce them In the asserting of this difference one scruple is to be removed which is this How could the Jewes be said to be in more servitude then the Christians meerly because of those ceremonies and sacrifices for seeing they were commanded by God and had spirituall significations they did thereby become helpes unto their faith and were exercises of their piety As under the Gospel none can say that the Sacraments are a burden and tend to bondage because they are visible signes But rather God doth hereby condescend in his great love unto us for as Chrysostome observeth if wee had been incorporeall God would not then have appointed visible Sacraments no more then hee doth to Angels but now consisting of soul and body he doth institute some things in an accommodated way to help us and to promote our faith But this may be answered that although they were spirituall in signification yet they being many and requiring much bodily labour they could not be observed without much difficulty and therefore no Priest or Levite that was spiritually minded in those dayes but would rather choose to exercise the ministery under the Gospel then to busie himself in the killing of beasts and fleaing of them which was their duty to doe Therefore well did Austine observe the love of God in appointing for us Sacraments fewer in number easier in observation and more cleare in signification Againe those bodily exercises did rather fit those that were children and were more convenient to that low condition then unto the full age of the Church and Sacraments though they be an help yet they suppose some imbecillity in the subject therefore in heaven there shall be none at all Onely take notice that Popery having introduced so many ceremonious observations and such a multitude of Church-precepts hath made the times of the Gospel to be the times of noneage againe This also discovereth that such are not spirituall that delight in ceremoniall waies and the more men fixe their heart upon sensible observations the lesse they partake of spirituall I will instance but in a fourth because these differences are The continuation of the Law was last but till the coming of Christ given by most that treate on this subject and that shall be the continuance and abode of it The Law in that Mosaicall administration was to indure but till Christ the fulnesse came and then as the scaffolds are pulled downe when the house is built so were all those externall ordinances to be abolished when Christ himselfe came A candle is superfluous when the sun appeareth A School-master is not necessary to those that have obtained perfect knowledge Milke is not comely for those who live on solide meat The chaffe preserves the corne but when the corne is gathered the chaffe is thrown away And when the fruit cometh the flower falleth to the ground And in this sense the Apostle Heb. 7. doth argue against it saying it could bring nothing to perfection Neither could any of those purifications work any good and spiritual effect It behoved therefore that a Christ should be exhibited which would work all those spirituall mercies for us Hence had there been no farther proceeding but wee must alwaies have stayed in such offerings and sacrifices it had been impossible for ever that God should have been pleased with us It is therefore in this respect that it was to be antiquated and a better covenant to come in the roome of it The Apostle calleth those things Heb. 10. a shadow Now a shadow that doth shew a man but yet the shadow that doth not live or eate or speake so those sacrifices they shadowed out Christ but yet they could not exhibite the
the Law it cometh from the spirit of Christ The second excellency is in regard of continuance and duration The 2. Because of its duration it being to abide alwaies but the ministery of Moses to be abolished ministery of Moses was to be made void and abolished which is to be understood of that Jewish pedagogy not of every part of it for the Morall as given by Moses doth still oblige us Christians as hath been already proved but the ministery of the Gospel is to abide alwaies that is there is no new ministery to succeed that of the Gospel although in heaven all shall cease The third difference is in regard of glory God caused some materiall 3. Because the glory that cometh by the Gospel is spirituall that which shone upon Moses but materiall glory to shine upon Moses while he gave the Law hereby to procure the greater authority and majesty to the Law but that glory which cometh by the Gospel is spirituall and farre more transcendent bringing us at last into eternall glory So that the former glory seemeth to be nothing in comparison of this Even as the light of a candle or torch seemeth to be nothing saith Theophylact when the light of the Sun ariseth Now the Apostle handling these things doth occasionally open an allegory which had not Paul by the Spirit of God found out we neither could or ought to have done it And the consideration of that will serve much for my present matter I know divers men have divers thoughts about exposition of this place so that there seemeth to be a veile upon the Text as well as upon Moses his face But I shall plainly understand it thus Moses his face What signified by the shining of Moses his face shining when he was with God and coming from him doth signifie the glory and excellency of the Law as in respect of Gods counsells and intentions for although the Law did seem to hold out nothing but temporall mercies devoid of Christ and heaven yet as in respect of Gods intention it was farre otherwise Now saith the Apostle The Jewes were not able to fixe their eyes upon this glory that is the carnall Israelites did not behold Christ in the ministery of Moses because a veile is upon their hearts The Apostle makes the veile upon Moses to be a type of the blindnesse and hardnesse of heart in the Israelite so that as the veile upon Moses covered the glory of his face so the veile of blindnesse and stupidity upon the heart of the Jewes doth hinder them from the glory of the Law which was Christ And that this is so doth appeare viz. where the Israelite is denied to look stedfastly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word in my Text to the end of that ministery which was to be abolished and that end was Christ so that this Text doth fully prove my intent which is that Christ was in some measure a glorious object in the administration of the Law but the veile upon the Israelites heart hindered the sight of it Now saith Paul when it shall turne as we translate or rather when they shall turn for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is observed to be used alwaies of persons and though the word be in the singular number in the originall yet according to the custome of Scripture it may be understood plurally because he speaks of a collective body When saith the Text this turning shall be the veile shall be taken away or rather as Camero well observeth in the present tense It is taken away for you cannot conceive that the Jewes shall be first turned unto God and the veile afterwards to be taken away but they both are together I will give another instance that Christ was the end of intention or aime in the dispensation of the Law from Galat. 3. 23 24. We were kept under the Law till Faith came Wherefore the Law was our School-master to bring us unto Christ In which words not the Morall Law simply taken but the whole dispensation of the Jewes is compared to the instruction of a School-master Now as a School-master doth not only beat or correct but teach also and direct Thus the Law did not only severely curb and keep from sin but did also teach Christ Hence we are said to be kept under the Law which although some make an expression from the strict keeping and watching which souldiers in a garrison use to make yet a learned man makes it to denote the duty of a School-master as one who is to give an account of such committed to his charge In which sense Cain said Am I my brothers keeper The Law then as a School-master did not only threaten and curse or like the Egyptian task-masters beat and strike because the work was not done but did shew where power and help was to be had viz. from Christ only In the second place Christ is the end of perfection to the Law for 2. Christ is the end of perfection to the Law the end of the Law being to justifie and to bring to eternall life this could not be attained by our owne power and industry not by any defect of the Law but by reason of our infirmity Therefore Christ he hath brought about this intent of the Law that we should be justified and have life If the end of humane lawes be to make good and honest men much rather is the end of the Morall Law appointed by God himselfe But the Law is so far from making us good as that it worketh in us all evill which effect of the Law in himselfe the Apostle acknowledgeth so that as good food and nourishment received by a diseased stomack doth increase the disease more according to that rule Corpora impura quantò magis nutrias deteriora reddis thus it is in every man by nature The Law which is for holinesse and life becometh to cause sinne and death Christ therefore that the Law may have its end he taketh our nature upon him that the righteousnesse of the Law might be fulfilled in us 3. Christ is the end of perfection of the Law in that the meere 3. Christ is the end of perfection of the Law in vouchsafing as his Spirit that we may obey it knowledge of the Law with the externall obedience onely to it was not available to any benefit Therefore Christ vouchsafeth his holy Spirit unto us regenerating of us whereby we come in part to obey the Law of God So that the people of God have a righteousnesse or holinesse of works but it is imperfect and so not inabling us to justification and in this sense it is that the people of God are said to keep Gods commandements So then whereas our condition was so by sin that we were neither able nor willing to obey the Law of God in the least degree Christ doth give us grace and cureth us so far that we are said to walk in his Law Now herein
was the great mistake of the Jewes they gloried and boasted of the Law but how of the knowledge of it and externall observation without looking to Christ and this was to glory in the shadow without the substance 4. Christ is the end of perfection of the Law in that his righteousnesse 4. Christ is the end of perfection of the Law in that his obedience to it is made ours and obedience unto the Law is made ours and so in him as our surety we fulfill the Law I know this assertion hath many learned and godly adversaries but as farae as I can see yet the Scripture seemeth to hold it forth Rom. 5. There is a parallel made of the first Adam and his off-spring with Christ the second Adam and his seed and the Apostle proveth that we are made righteous by Christ as sinners in him which was partly by imputation so 2 Corinth 5. ult as Christ is made our sin by imputation so we his righteousnesse So Rom. 8. 3 4. That which was impossible to the Law Christ sent his Son that the righteousnesse of the Law might be fulfilled in us who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit I know there are answers made to these places but the proper discussion of them will be in the handling of justification only here is an obvious Objection If the righteousnesse Object of Christ be made ours so that we may be said to fulfill the Law then we are still justified by a covenant of works and so there is no new covenant of grace I answer Learned men as Beza and Perkins Answ have affirmed that we obtaine eternall life according to that rule Doe this and live because of Christs fulfilling the Law as our surety for the imputation of it doth not make it cease to be our reall righteousnesse though it be not our inherent righteousnesse But I see not why we need grant the consequence viz. Because Christs fulfilling of the Law is made ours therefore we have eternall life by the Law and the reason is because this righteousnesse of Christs is not ours by working but by beleeving Now the Law in that command Doe this and live did require our personall working and righteousnesse so that we cannot be said to have salvation by that rule because it is not the righteousnesse which we in person have wrought and this will fully appeare if you consider in the next place the subject to whom Christ is made righteousnesse and that is to him that The beleever is the subject to whom Christ is made righteousnesse beleeveth he doth not say to him that worketh so that we have not eternall life by our Doe this but by beleeving or resting upon Christ his Doe this And this phrase doth plainly exclude Stapletons and other Papists observations on this place as if the righteousnesse by faith or of Christ were the same in kind with the righteousnesse of works differing only gradually as an infant and a growne man for if so the Apostle would have said working and not beleeving It is a great skill in Divinity to amplifie this righteousnesse of faith without works so as neither the Papist or the Antinomian may incourage themselves thereby but of that in some other place As you take notice of the subject Beleever so the universality every one which doth take in both Jew and Gentile Therefore the Jew could not or ought not to think that those externall rites and observations could bring them to a true righteousnesse Lastly consider in the Text for what end Christ is thus the Righteousness is the end for which Christ is thus the perfection of the Law perfection of the Law and that is for righteousnesse The proper seat of handling this is in the doctrine of Justification only let me briefly answer a Question made by some Whether the righteousnesse of faith or that we have by Christ be the same in nature with the righteousnesse of workes and of the Law Stapleton saith They must needs be one because the Law will direct to no other righteousnesse then that of its owne It is true the Law strictly taken will not properly and perse direct to any righteousnesse but that which the Law requireth yet by accident and indirectly it may yea as it was given by Moses it did directly and properly intend Christ though not primarily as some think but finding us unable to attaine to its owne righteousnesse did then lead us unto Christ Yet these two righteousnesses are divers rather then contrary unlesse in respect of justification and so indeed its impossible to be justified by both those waies otherwise they are both together in the same subject yea a righteousnesse of faith doth necessarily draw along with it in the same subject a righteousnesse of works though it be imperfect and so insufficient to justifie Vse Is Christ the end of the Law for righteousnesse then The beleever hath great cause to blesse God for providing such a righteousness for him let the beleever blesse and praise God for providing a righteousnesse and such a righteousnesse for him How destitute and naked was thy condition Had justice taken thee by the throat and bid thee pay what thou owest thou couldst not have returned that answer Let mee alone and I will pay thee all Neither Angels nor men could provide this righteousnesse for thee Doest thou thank God for providing clothes for thy body food for thy belly an house for habitation Oh above all thank him that he hath provided a righteousnesse for thy soule Thou troubled soule because of sin thou thinkest with thy selfe Oh if I had no sin if I were guilty of no corruption how well were it O ye glorious Angels and Saints ye are happy because ye have a righteousnesse Why doest thou not consider that God hath found out for thee even for thee in this world a righteousnesse whereby thou art accepted of him Againe consider it is such a righteousnesse that satisfieth and pleaseth God Thy holinesse cannot content him for justification but that of Christ can As the light of the Stars and Moon cannot dispell totally the darknesse of the night only the light of the Sun can doe that LECTURE XXIX MAT. 5. 17. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandements and shall teach men so shall be called the least in the Kingdome of heaven OUr Saviour being to vindicate the Law from all corrupt The Text opened glosses of the Pharisees he doth in the first place as Chrysostome thinketh remove the odium that might be cast upon him as if he did indeed destroy the Law for it was then generally received that only was Law which the Pharisees declared to be so And this he doth ver 17. Think not that I am come to destroy the Law The reason he giveth is from the perpetuall nature of the Law heaven and earth the whole world shall sooner fall into pieces then any tittle of that And the
then any in that they doe not only by doctrine teach the dis-obligation of the least commandement but of all even of the whole Law This doth appeare true in the first Antinomians in Luthers time of whom Islebius was the captaine he was a School-master and also Professor of Divinity at Islebia It seemeth he was a man like a reed shaken with every wind for first he defended with the Orthodox the Saxon Confession of Faith but afterwards was one of those that compiled the Book called the Interim When Luther admonished him of his errour he promised amendment but for all that secretly scattered his errour which made Luther set forth publikely six solemne disputations against the Antinomians that are to be seen in his workes which argueth the impudency of those that would make Luther on their side By these disputations of Luthers he was convinced and revoked his errour publishing his recantation in print yet when Luther was dead this Euripus did fall into his old errour and publikely defended it Now how justly they might be called Antinomists or as Luther sometimes Nomomachists appeareth by these Propositions which they publikely scattered about in their papers as 1. That the Law is not worthy to be called the word of God Positions of Antinomians 2. To heare the word of God and so to live is a consequence of the Law 3. Repentance is not to be taught out of the Decalogue or any Law of Moses but from the violation of the Son of God in the Gospel 4. We are with all our might to resist those who teach the Gospel is not to be preached but to those whose hearts are first made contrite by the Law These are Propositions of theirs set downe by Luther against which he had his disputations Vol. 1. Thusselberge lib. contra Antin pag. 38. relateth more as 1. The Law doth not shew good works neither is it to be preached that we may doe them 2. The Law is not given to Christians therefore they are not to be reproved by the Law 3. The Preachers under the Gospel are onely to preach the Gospel not the Law because Christ did not say Preach the Law but Gospel to every creature 4. The Legall Sermons of the Prophets doe not at all belong to us 5. To say that the Law is a rule of good works is blasphemy in Divinity Thus you see how directly these oppose the Law and therefore come under our Saviours condemnation in the Text yet at other times the proper state of the Question between the Orthodox and Antinomists seemeth to be not Whether a godly man doe not delight in the Law and doe the workes of the Law but Whether he doth it Lege docente urgente mandante the Law teaching urging and commanding As for the later Antinomians Doctor Taylor and Mr. Burton who preached and wrote against them doe record the same opinions of them Doctor Taylor in his Preface to his Book against them saith One preached that the whole Law since Christs death is wholly abrogated and abolished Another That to teach obedience to the Law is Popery Another That to doe any thing because God commands us or to forbeare any sin because God forbids us is a signe of a morall man and of a dead and unsound Christian Others deliver That the Law is not to be preached and they that doe so are Legall Preachers Master Burton also in his Book against them affirmeth they divided all that made up the body of the Church of England into Hogs or Dogs Hogs were such that despised justification living in their swinish lusts Dogs such who sought to be justified by their works Hee tells of one of their disciples that said Away with this scurvie sanctification and that there is no difference between godly here and in their state of glory but only in sense and apprehension Many other unsavoury assertions are named by those Authors but these may suffice to give a taste of their opinions for it is elegantly spoken by Irenaeus in such falshoods as these are lib. 2. c. 34. adversus Haereses We need not drink up the whole sea to taste whether the water be salt but as a statue that is made of clay yet outwardly so gilded that it seemeth to be gold if any man take a piece of it in his hand and discover what it is doth make every one know what the whole statue is so it is in this case For my part I am acquainted with them no other waies but by their Books which they have written and in those every errour is more warily dressed then in secret There I find that sometimes they yeeld the Law to be a rule of life yea they judge it a calumny to be called Antinomists and if so their adversaries may be better called Antifidians And it cannot be denied but that in some parts of their Books there are wholsome and good passages as in a wood or forest full of shrubs and brambles there may be some violets and primroses yet for all this in the very places where they deny this assertion as theirs they must be forced to acknowledge it The Author of the Assertion of Free-grace who doth expresly touch upon these things and disclaimes the opinion against the Law pag. 4. and pag. 6. yet he affirmeth there such principles from whence this conclusion will necessarily follow For first he makes no reall difference either in Scripture or use of words between the Law reigning and ruling so that if the Law rule a man it reigneth over him Now then they deny that the Law doth reigne over a beleever and so do the Orthodox also therefore they must needs hold that it cannot be a rule unto him And then pag. 5. whereas Doctor Taylor had said The Apostle doth not loose a Christian from the obedience to the Law or rule thereof he addes He dare not trust a beleever without his keeper as if he judged no otherwise of him then of a malefactor of Newgate who would rob and kill if his Gaoler be not with him Againe this is most cleere by what hee saith pag. 31. hee refuteth that distinction of being under the mandatory power of the Law but not the damnatory hee makes these things inseparable and as impossible for the Law to be a Law and have not both these as to take the braines and heart from a man and yet leave him a man still Now then seeing he denieth and so doe all Protestant Writers that a beleever is under the damnatory power of the Law he must also deny he is under the mandatory because saith he this is inseparable I will in the next place give some Antidotes against this opinion Antidotes against Antinomian errours and the Authors thereof Luther calleth them Hostes Legis Organa Satanae he saith their doctrine is more to be taken heed of then that of the Papists for the Papists they teach a false or imperfect repentance but the Antinomians take all away
from the Church Rivet calls them Furores Antinomorum In the first place awe thy heart with a feare against errours in 1. Be afraid of entertaining errours in doctrine as that which may damne thee doctrine as that which may damne thee as well as an open grosse sin Consider that place Galat. 5. 20. where heresies are reckoned among those sins that are very grosse and doe exclude from the Kingdome of Heaven and that hee takes heresies there in a religious consideration is plaine because it 's made to differ from seditions strifes and variances Neither doe thou please thy selfe in that Question What is Heresie Tu Haereticus mihi ego tibi for the Apostle makes it there a manifest work of the flesh and 2 John 10. see how much afraid the people of God ought to be of any evill doctrine and there the Apostle calls evill doctrine evill deeds 2. Look to all the places of Scripture as well as some onely That 2. Look upon those places of Scripture where duties are commanded as well as those where Christ and grace are spoken of is a perpetuall fault among the Antinomians they onely pitch upon those places where Christ and his grace is spoken of but not of those Texts where duties are commanded especially those places of Scripture where the Law of God is wonderfully commended for the many reall benefits that come by it where likewise the perpetuity and eternity of it is much celebrated Lex Dei in aeternum manet vel implenda in damnatis vel impleta in beatis said Luther What a curb would it be unto this errour if they would consider with what an holy passion and zeale the Apostle doth deny that hee destroyeth the Law making this very objection to himselfe Doe we then make void the Law God forbid Now can we think that the Apostle who in the third Chapter to the Romans doth so vehemently deny that he destroyeth the Law should so much forget himselfe as in the fourth Chapter to abolish it No ordinary man would fall into such a contradiction 3. Doe not affect applause among people as having found some 3. Beware of affecting applause among the people new nigher way about Christ and grace then others have I have observed this itching humour in the Antinomian Sermons printed where they will call upon their hearers to mark it may be they shall heare that which they have not heard before when the thing is either false or if it be true is no more then ordinarily is taught by others But now when men desire to be applauded in the world they suggest to their inward disciples as if they had found out some new unheard thing and their followers broach it abroad and so they come to be exalted Thus they doe like Psaphon the Libyan It 's reported of him that he kept ten tame birds at home and taught them to sing Magnus deus Psaphon and when he had done so he let these birds flye into the woods and mountaines where all the other birds learned the same song of them which the Libyans perceiving and thinking it no plot but a divine accident decreed to sacrifice to Psaphon and to put him in the number of their gods 4. Get to be well grounded in the principles of Religion 4. Doe thou diligently study fundamentalls and the principles of Religion As the childe groweth crooked for not being well looked to at first and many errours do now spread themselves because men are not well catechised They build without a foundation It was a grave complaint of Maximus an Ecclesiasticall Writer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is a great matter to have a sound and accurate knowledge in matters of Religion It was a wise speech of Aristides who being demanded by the Emperour to speak to something propounded ex tempore answered Propound to day and I will answer to morrow 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We are not of those who vomit or spit out things suddenly but take time to be diligent and considering 5. When thou doest begin to encline to an opinion that differeth 5. Be not rash in publishing any new opinion from the learned and godly be not too rash and precipitate in publishing it The Apostle giveth a good rule Rom. 14. Hast thou faith have it to thy selfe He doth not there command a man to equivocate or dissemble and deny a truth but not needlesly to professe it when it will be to the offence of others Cyprian reproving the rashnesse of those Christians that would goe on their owne accord to the Heathen Magistrates professing themselves Christians whereby they were put to death hath a good and elegant speech Confiteri nos magis voluit quà m profiteri he doth confesse that doth it being asked and demanded he doth professe that doth it out of his owne free accord 6. Consider that Antinomianisme is the onely way indeed to overthrow 6. Antinomianisme overthrows Christ and grace grace and Christ For he sets up free grace and Christ not who names it often in his Book or in the Pulpit but whose heart is inwardly and deeply affected with it Now who will most heartily and experimentally set up Christ and grace of these two i. Who urgeth no use of the Law who takes away the sense or bitternesse of sin who denieth humiliation or he who discovers his defects by the perfect rule of the Law whose soule is inbittered and humbled because of these defects Certainly this later will much more in heart and reall affections set up free grace FINIS THE TABLE A. THe Law abolished as a Covenant not as a Rule Page 204 The Law abrogated to beleevers in six particulars p. 209. 210. 211 Three causes of the abrogation of the ceremoniall Law which agree not to the morall p. 213 Six abuses of the Law p. 16. 17. 18. 19 Conversion and Repentance are our acts as well as the effects of Gods grace p. 97 Whether Adam was mortall before his eating of the forbidden fruit p. 107 Whether Adam in his innocency can be considered in his naturalls or supernaturalls answered in two Positions p. 129 Whether Adam needed Christs help ibid p. 130. Whether God required lesse of Adam then us p. 135. Amorem mercedis a Godly man may have in his obedience though not amorem mercenarium p. 13 What help the Angels had by Christ p. 130 Calvines two Reasons why Angels needed Christs mediation ibid. Some Antecedaneous works upon the heart before grace be bestowed p. 86 Foure limitations concerning those antecedaneous works ibid. The first Antinomian p. 38 Antinomian Differences betwixt the Law and Gospel confuted p. 234. 236 The Antinomian why most inexcusable p. 43 The Antinomian distinction of the Law being abolished as a Law but still abiding in respect of the matter of it a contradiction p. 206 The Antinomian Arguments overthrow the use of the Law to unbeleevers as well as beleevers p. 208 The opinion of the