Adam when they were to be perfect and entire but by grace pardoning the imperfection of them in which sense the Arminians affirme it Answ Although good workes be requisite in the man justified or saved yet it 's not a Covenant of workes but faith and the reason is because faith only is the instrument that receiveth justification and eternall life and good workes are to qualifie the subject beleeving but not the instrument to receive the covenant so that faith onely is the condition that doth receive the covenant but yet that a man beleeve is required the change of the whole man and that faith onely hath such a receiving nature shall be proved hereafter God willing Use Of exhortation to take heed you turne not the grace of God into licentiousnesse suspect all doctrines that teach comfort but not duty labour indeed to be a spirituall Anatomist dividing between having godlinesse and trusting in it but take heed of Separating Sanctification from Justification Be not a Pharisee nor yet a Publican so that I shall exhort thee 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 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 finde 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 Expositors thinke 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 he 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 sinnes 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 accommodated to his particular meaning concerning the righteous man here We 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 errour though upon different grounds that our righteousness and works are perfect and therefore do 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 self 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 looks 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 he 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 down again For
delight in Thus the wayes of God are said to be perfect Deut. 32. that is the works of the Lord and thus when it 's applyed to men if signifieth any religion doctrine manners actions or course of life 2 Pet. 2. 2 15 21. So that good works are both our way and imployment for an imployment and way in this sense are all one Thus Matth. 7. 17. Strait is the way that leadeth to life What is this but the work of grace and godlinesse for as for that exposition of the same author to understand it of Christ as if he were strait because men do account him so and therefore would adde works to him this is to compell Scripture to go two miles with us that would not go one and then by the opposition not wickedness but the devil himself would be the broad way 2. Denying the presence of them in the person justified And truly this is so dangerous that I know not how charity can excuse it It is such a naevus that ubera charitatis cannot tegere cover it For thus saith the Authour expresly speaking of that of Paul Therefore we conclude a man is justified without the deeds of the Law Here saith he the Apostle doth not only exclude works from having any power operative to concurre in the laying iniquities upon Christ but excludes all manner of works men can doe to be present and existent in persons when God doth justifie them And he instanceth of a generall pardon for theeves and traitors Now saith he one may take the pardon as well as another And so speaking upon that place He hath received gifts for men even for the rebellious he concludes that therefore though a man doe rebell actually from time to time and doe practise this rebellion yet though this person do thus the hatefulnesse thereof is laid upon Christ Is not this such a doctrine that must needs please an ungodly heart 3. In the denying of gaining any thing by them even any peace of heart or losing it by them Now this goeth contrary to Scripture Thus page 139. the Antinomian saith The businesse we are to do is this that though there be sinnes committed yet there is no peace broken because the breach of peace is satisfied in Christ there is a reparation of the damage before the damage it self be committed And again page 241. If God come to reckon with beleevers for sinne either he must aske something of them or not If not why are they troubled If so then God cannot bring a new reckoning And in other places If a man look to get any thing by his graces he will have nothing but knocks To answer these it is true if a man should look by any repentance or grace to have Heaven and pardon as a cause or merit this were to be ignorant of the imperfection of all our graces and the glorious greatnesse of those mercies What proportion hath our faith or godly sorrow with the everlasting favour and good pleasure of God But first the Scripture useth severe and sharp threatnings even unto the godly where they neglect to repent or goe on in sin Rom. 8. 13. If ye live after the flesh you shall die especially consider that place Hebr. 12. two last verses the Apostle alludeth to that place Deut. 4. and he saith Our God as well as the God of the Jewes who appeared in terrour is a consuming fire Now then if the Scripture threatens thus to men living in sin if they doe not they may finde comfort Secondly Our holy duties they have a promise of pardon and eternall life though not because of their worth yet to their presence and therefore may the godly rejoyce when they finde them in themselves Lastly their ground is still upon that false bottome Because our sinnes are laid upon Christ. What then they may be laid upon us in other respects to heale us to know how bitter a thing it is to sinne against God God doth here as Joseph with his brethren he caused them to be bound and to be put in gaoles as if now they were to smart for their former impiety 4. In denying them to be signes and testimonies of grace or Christ dwelling in us And here indeed one would wonder to see how laborious an Author is to prove that no inherent graces can be signes and he selects three instances Of universality of obedience Of sincerity and love to the brethren concluding that there are two evidences only one revealing which is the Spirit of God immediately the other receiving and that is faith Now in answering of this we may shew briefly how many weak props this discourse leaneth upon 1. In confounding the instrumentall evidencing with the efficient Not holy works say they but the Spirit Here he doth oppose subordinates Subordinata non sunt opponenda sed componenda As if a man should say We see not by the beames or reflection of the Sun but the Sun Certainly every man is in darknesse and like Hagar seeth not a fountaine though neare her till her eyes be opened Thus it is in grace 2. We say that a Christian in time of darknesse and temptation is not to go by signes and marks but obedientially to trust in God as David calls upon his soul often and the word is emphaticall signifying such a relying or holding as a man doth that is falling down into a pit irrecoverably 3. His Arguments against sincerity and universality of obedience goe upon two false grounds 1. That a man cannot distinguish himself from hypocrites which is contrary to the Scriptures exhortation 2. That there can be no assurance but upon a full and compleat work of godlinesse All which are popish arguments 4. All those arguments will hold as strongly against faith for Are there not many beleevers for a season Is there not a faith that indureth but for a while May not then a man as soon know the sincerity of his heart as the truth of his faith Now let us consider their grounds for this strange assertion 1. Because Roman 4. it is said that God justifieth the ungodly Now this hath a two-fold answer 1. That which our Divines doe commonly give that these words are not to be understood in sensu composito but diviso and antecedenter he that was ungodly is being justified made godly also though that godlinesse doe not justifie him Therefore they compare these passages with those of making the blinde to see and deafe to heare not that they did see while they were blind but those that were blind doe now see and this is true and good But I shall secondly answer it with some learned men that ungodly there is meant of such who are so in their nature considered having not an absolute righteousnesse yet at the same time beleevers even as Abraham was and faith of the ungodly man is accounted to him for righteousnesse So then the subject of justification is a sinner yet a
the Jews doth hinder them from the glory of the Law which was Christ And that this is so doth appeare viz. where the Israelite is denied to look stedfastly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word in my Text to the end of that ministery which was to be abolished and that end was Christ so that this Text doth fully prove my intent which is that Christ was in some measure a glorious object in the administration of the Law but the vail upon the Israelites heart hindered the sight of it Now saith Paul when it shall turn as we translate or rather when they shall turn for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is observed to be used alwayes of persons and though the word be in the singular number in the originall yet according to the custome of Scripture it may be understood plurally because he speaks of a collective body When saith the Text this turning shall be the vail shall be taken away or rather as Camero well observeth in the present tense It is taken away for you cannot conceive that the Jews shall be first turned unto God and the vail afterwards to be taken away but they both are together I will give another instance that Christ was the end of intention or aime in the dispensation of the Law from Galat. 3. 23 24. We were kept under the Law till Faith came Wherefore the Law was our School-master to bring us unto Christ In which words not the Morall Law simply taken but the whole dispensation of the Jews is compared to the instruction of a School master Now as a School-master doth not only beat or correct but teach also and direct Thus the Law did not only severely curb and keep from sin but did also teach Christ Hence we are said to be kept under the Law which although some make an expression from the strict keeping and watching which souldiers in a garrison use to make yet a learned man makes it to denote the duty of a School master as one who is to give an account of such committed to his charge In which sense Cain said Am I my brothers keeper The Law then as a School-master did not only threaten and curse or like the Egyptian task-masters beat and strike because the work was not done but did shew where power and help was to be had viz. from Christ only In the second place Christ is the end of perfection to the Law for the end of the Law being to justifie and to bring to eternall life this could not be attained by our own power and industry not by any defect of the Law but by reason of our infirmity Therefore Christ he hath brought about this intent of the Law that we should be justified and have life If the end of humane laws be to make good and honest men much rather is the end of the Morall Law appointed by God himself But the Law is so far from making us good as that it worketh in us all evill which effect of the Law in himself the Apostle acknowledgeth so that as good food and nourishment received by a diseased stomack doth increase the disease more according to that rule Corpora impura quantò magis nutrias deteriora reddis thus it is in every man by nature The Law which is for holiness and life becometh to cause sin and death Christ therefore that the Law may have its end he taketh our nature upon him that the righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us 3. Christ is the end of perfection of the Law in that the meere knowledge of the Law with the externall obedience only to it was not availeable to any benefit Therefore Christ vouchsafeth his holy spirit unto us regenerating of us whereby we come in part to obey the Law of God So that the people of God have a righteousness or holiness of works but it is imperfect and so not enabling us to justification and in this sense it is that the people of God are said to keep Gods commandements So then whereas our condition was so by sin that we were neither able non willing to obey the Law of God in the least degree Christ doth give us grace and cureth us so far that we are said to walk in his Law Now herein was the great mistake of the Jews they gloried and boasted of the Law but how Of the knowledge of it and externall observation without looking to Christ and this was to glory in the shadow without the substance 4. Christ is the end of perfection of the Law in that his righteousness and obedience unto the Law is made ours and so in him as our surety we fulfill the Law I know this assertion hath many learned and godly adversaries but as far as I can see yet the Scripture seemeth to hold it forth Rom. 5. There is a parallel made of the first Adam and his off spring with Christ the second Adam and his seed and the Apostle proveth that we are made righteous by Christ as sinners in him which was partly by imputation so 2 Corinth 5. ult as Christ is made our sin by imputation so we his righteousness So Rom. 8. 3 4. That which was impossible to the Law God sent his Son that the righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit I know there are answers made to these places but the proper discussion of them will be in the handling of justification only here is an obvious Objection If the righteousness of Christ be made ours so that we may be said to fulfill the Law then we are still justified by a covenant of works and so there is no new covenant of grace I answer Learned men as Beza and Perkins have affirmed that we obtaine eternall life according to that rule Doe this and live because of Christs fulfilling the Law as our surety for the imputation of it doth not make it cease to be our real righteousness though it be not our inherent righteousness But I see not why we need grant the consequence viz. Because Christs fulfilling of the Law is made ours therefore we have eternall life by the Law and the reason is because this righteousness of Christs is not ours by working but by beleeving Now the Law in that command Do this and live did require our personall working and righteousness so that we cannot be said to have salvation by that rule because it is not the righteousness which we in person have wrought and this will fully appear if you consider in the next place the subject to whom Christ is made righteousness and that is to him that beleeveth he doth not say to him that worketh so that we have not eternall life by our Do this but by beleeving or resting upon Christ his Do this And this phrase doth plainly exclude Stapletons and other Papists observations on this place as if the righteousness by faith or
à bonis and that of another man who said he got more good by his sins then his graces But these speeches must be soundly understood We also love that of Austin All the Commands are accounted as if thou hadst done them when what is not done is forgiven Omnia mandata tua facta deputantur quando quicquid non fit ignoscitur 3. That is the incommodious yea and erroneous passages in Antinomian Authors were used for some reasons hereafter to be mentioned it were the more tolerable but that seems not to be There is more poison then can be concocted in them But if this were their ground of many unsavory assertions among them meerly their want of clear judgement to expresse themselves so that they think more orthodoxly then they write then they might be excused as being in a logomachy but with this proviso as Austine said of them that used the word fatum in a good sense Let them hold their opinion but correct their expressions Mentem teneant sed linguam corrigant Now that there may be injudiciousnesse in them as a cause in part of some of their erroneous passages will appeare in that they frequently speake contradictions This is a passage often but very dangerous that Let a man be a wicked man even as high as enmity it self can make a man yet while he is thus wicked and while he is no better his sins are pardoned and he justified Yet now in other passages Though a man be never so wicked yet if he come to Christ if he will take Christ his sinnes are pardoned now what a contradiction is here To be wicked and while he is wicked and while he is no better and yet to take Christ unlesse they hold that to take Christ or to come to him be no good thing at all But happily more of their contradictions hereafter Their injudiciousnesse and weaknesse doth also appear that when they have laid down such a truth as every godly Author hath they have so many words about it and doe so commend it as if they had found a Philosophers Stone or a Phenix as if the Reader should presently cry out and say Behold a greater then Solomon is here and yet it is but that which every Writer almost hath Again their injudiciousnesse doth appeare in that they minde only the promissory part of the Scripture and doe stand very little upon the mandatory part There are five or six places such as Christ came to save that which was lost and He hath laid on him the iniquities of us all c. these are over and over again But you shall seldome or never have these places urged Make your calling and election sure Work out your salvation with feare and trembling whereas all Scripture is given for our use Therefore 1. If weaknesse were all the ground of this controversie the danger were not so great Or 2ly If the end and aime they had were only to put men off from glorying in themselves to deny the concurrence of works to the act of justification If their desire were that men should not as Michal put an image in Davids roome so neither that Christians should put their works in Christs stead thus farre it might be excusable but then their books and their aimes cannot be reconciled Or If 3ly their maine drift was only to shew that good works follow a justified person and that they doe not antecede here would be no opposition but they deny the presence of them in time Or 4ly If the question were about preparatory works to justification and conversion though for my part I think there are such with those limitations that hereafter may be given to them this also were not so hainous Or fifthly If the dispute were onely upon the space of time between a profane mans profanenesse and his justification or the quantity of his sorrow these things were of another debate I do acknowledge that the Christian Religion was matter of offence to the Heathens in that they taught Though a man had never been so wicked yet if he did receive Christ he should be pardoned and how soon this may be done it is as God pleaseth but there is an alteration of the mans nature at that time also and Chrysostome indeed hath such a passage upon that Scripture The righteous shall live by faith Rom. 1. by faith onely a man hath remission of sins Now saith he this is a Paradox to humane reason that he who was an adulterer a murderer should presently be accounted righteous if he doe beleeve in Christ but this differs from the Antinomian assertion as much as heaven from hell So it 's related in Ecclesiasticall history of Constantine the Great that when he had killed many of his kindred yea and was counselled also to murder his own son repenting of these hainous crimes askt Sopater the Philosopher who succeeded Plotinus in teaching him Whether there could be any expiation for those sins The Philosopher said No afterwards he asked the Christian Bishops and they said I if he would beleeve in Christ This was feigned to make our Religion odious Or sixthly If it were to shew that there cannot be assurance before justification or that to relye upon Christ for pardon it is not necessary I should know whether I have truly repented or no This were also of another nature Therefore let us see what prejudiciall inferences they gather from this doctrine of Justification I know the proper place of handling this will come when we speak of that point but yet to give some antidote against their errours I will name some few as 1. Denying them to be a way to heaven Thus one expresly Sect. 4. on Christ being a way pag. 68. It is a received conceit among many persons that our obedience is a way to heaven though it be not causa yet it's via ad regnum Now this he labours to confute As for the speech it self Divines have it out of Bernard where among other encomium's of good works calling them Seeds of hope incentives of love signes of hidden Predestination and presages of future happinesse Spei quaedam seminaria charitatis incentiva occultae Praedestinationis indicia futurae felicitatis praesagia he addeth this The way to the Kingdome not the cause of reigning Via regni non causa regnandi Now it 's true that they are not a way in that sense that Christ is called a Way no more then the spirituall life of a Christian is life in that sense Christ stileth himself Life for here he understands it of himself as the causall and meritorious way Therefore there are Articles added to every one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that which followeth makes it cleare No man can come to the Father but by me Object Oh but say they our works are our businesse and imployment not our way Sol. I answer when we call them a way it 's a metaphor and such a metaphor that the Scripture doth often
beleever Now it 's impossible that a man should be a beleever and his heart not purified Acts 15. for whole Christ is the object of his faith who is received not onely to justifie but to sanctifie Hence Rom. 8. where the Apostle seemeth to make an exact order he begins with Prescience that is approbative and complacentiall nâ—â— in a Popish or Arminian sense then Predestination then Calling then Justification then Glorification I will not trouble you with the dispute in which place Sanctification is meant Now the Antinomian he goeth upon that as true which the Papist would calumniate us with That a profane ungodly man if beleeving shall be justified We say this proposition supposeth an impossibility that faith in Christ or closing with him can stand with those sins because faith purifieth the heart By faith Christ dwells in our hearts Ephes 3. Therefore those expressions of the Antinomians are very dangerous and unsound and doe indeed confirme the Papists calumnies Another place they much stand upon is Rom. 5. Christ dyed for us while we were enemies while we were sinners But 1. if Christ dyed for us while we were enemies why doe they say That if a man be as great an enemy as enmity it selfe can make a man if he be willing to take Christ and to close with Christ he shall be pardoned which we say is a contradiction For how can an enemy to Christ close with Christ So that this would prove more then in some places they would seem to allow Besides Christ dyed not only to justifie but save us now will they hence therefore inferre that profane men living so and dying so shall be saved And indeed the grand principle That Christ hath purchased and obtained all graces antecedently to us in their sense will as necessarily inferre that a drunkard abiding a drunkard shall be saved as well as justified But thirdly to answer that place When it is said that Christ dyed and rose again for sinners you must know that this is the meritorious cause of our pardon and salvation but besides this cause there are other causes instrumentall that go to the whole work of Justification Therefore some Divines as they speak of a conversion passive and active so also of a justification active and passive and passive they call when not onely the meritorious cause but the instrument applying is also present then the person is justified Now these speak of Christs death as an universall meritorious cause without any application of Christs death unto this or that soule Therefore still you must carry this along with you that to that grand mercy of justification something is requisite as the efficient viz. the grace of God something as meritorious viz. Christs suffering something as instrumentall viz. faith and one is as necessary as the other I will but mention one place more and that is Psal 68. 18. Thou hast received gifts even for the rebellious also that the Lord God may dwell among them Here they insist much upon this yea for the rebellious and saith the Author pag. 411. Seeing God cannot dwell where iniquity is Christ received gifts for men that the Lord God might dwell among the rebellious and by this meanes God can dwell with those persons that doe act the rebellion because all the hatefulnesse of it is transacted from those persons upon the back of Christ. And saith the same Author pag. 412. The holy Ghost doth not say that the Lord takes rebellious persons and gifts and prepares them and then will come and dwell with them but even then while they are rebellious without any stop the Lord Christ hath received gifts for them that the Lord God may dwell among them Is not all this strange Though the same Authour presse sanctification never so much in other places yet certainly such principles as these overthrow it But as for this place it will be the greatest adversary they have against them if you consider the scope of it for there the Psalmist speaks of the fruit and power of Christs Ascension as appeareth Ephes 3. whereby gifts were given to men that so even the most rebellious might be converted and changed by this ministery so that this is clean contrary And besides those words with them or among them are not in the Hebrew therefore some referre them to the rebellious and make Jah in the Hebrew and Elohim in the Vocative case even for the rebellious O Lord God to inhabit as that of Esay The Wolfe and the Lamb shall dwell together Some referre it to Gods dwelling yet doe not understand it of his dwelling with them but of his dwelling i. e. fixing the Arke after the enemies are subdued But take our Edition to be the best as it seemeth to be yet it must be meant of rebels changed by his Spirit for the Scripture useth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Gods dwelling in men but still converted Rom. 8. 11. Ephes 3. 12. 2 Cor. 6. 16. LECTURE IV. 1 TIM 1. 8 9. Knowing the Law is good if a man use it lawfully HAving confuted some dangerous inferences that the Antinomian makes from that precious doctrine of Justification I shall at this time answer only one question Upon what grounds are the people of God to be zealous of good workes for it 's very hard to repent to love to be patient or fruitfull and not to doe them for this end to justifie us And howsoever theologically and in the notion we may make a great difference between holinesse as a way or meanes and as a cause or merit of salvation yet practically the heart doth not use to distinguish so subtilely Therefore although I intend not to handle the whole doctrine of Sanctification or new obedience at this time yet I should leave my discourse imperfect if I did not informe you how good works of the Law done by grace and justification of the Gospel may stand together First therefore take notice what we meane by good works We take not good works strictly for the works of charity or liberality nor for any externall actions of religion which may be done where the heart is not cleansed much lesse for the Popish good workes of supererogation but for the graces of Gods Spirit in us and the actions flowing from them For usually with the Papists and Popish persons good works are commonly called those superstitious and supererogant workes which God never commanded or if God hath commanded them they mean them as externall and sensible such as Coming to Church and Receiving of Sacraments not internall and spirituall faith and a contrite spirit which are the soule of all duties and if these be not there the outward duties are like clothes upon a dead man that cannot warme him because there is no life within Therefore much is required even to the essence of a godly work though it be not perfect in degrees As 1. It must be commanded by God 2. It
must be wrought in us by the Spirit of God All the unregenerate mans actions his prayers and services are sinnes 3. It must flow from an inward principle of grace or a supernaturall being in the soule whereby a man is a new creature 4. The end must be Gods glory That which the most refined man can doe is but a glow-worm not a starre So that then onely is the work good when being answerable to the rule it 's from God and through God and to God 2. That the Antinomian erreth two contrary wayes about good works Sometimes they speak very erroneously and grosly about them Thus Islebius Agricola the first Antinomian that was who afterwards joyned with others in making that wicked Book called The Interim and his followers deliver these Positions That saying of Peter Make your calling and election sure is dictum inutile an unprofitable saying and Peter did not understand Christian liberty So again As soon as thou once beginnest to thinke how men should live godlily and modestly presently thou hast wandered from the Gospel And again The Law and works only belong to the Court of Rome Then on the other side they lift them up so high that by reason of Christs righteousnesse imputed to us they hold all our workes perfect and so apply that place Ephes 1. Christs clensing his Church so as to be without spot or wrinkle even pure in this life They tell us not onely of a righteousnesse or justification by imputation but also Saintship and holinesse by this obedience of Christ And hence it is that God seeth no sin in beleevers This is a dangerous position and although they have Similies to illustrate and distinctions to qualifie it yet when I speak of imputed righteousnesse there will be the proper place to shew the dangerous falshood of them 3. You must in the discourse you shall heare concerning the necessity of good works carefully distinguish between these two Propositions Good workes are necessary to beleevers to justified persons or to those that shall be saved and this Good works are necessary to justification and salvation Howsoever this later is true in some sense yet because the words carry as if holinesse had some effect immediately upon our justification and salvation therefore I do wholly assent to those learned men that think in these two cases we should not use such a Proposition 1. When we deale with adversaries especially Papists in disputation for then we ought to speak exactly Therefore the Fathers would not use the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Virgin Mary lest they should seem to yeeld to Nestorius who denyed her to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The second case is in our sermons and exhortations to people for what common hearer is there that upon such a speech doth not conceive that they are so necessary as that they immediately work our justification The former proposition holds them offices and duties in the persons justified the other as conditions effecting justification 4. These good works ought to be done or are necessary upon these grounds 1. They are the fruit and end of Christs death Titus 2. 14. It 's a full place The Apostle there sheweth that the whole fruit and benefit of Christs redemption is lost by those that live not holily There are two things in our sins 1. The guilt and that Christ doth redeem us from 2. The filth and that he doth purifie from If Christ redeem thee from the guilt of thy lusts hee will purifie thee from the noisomenesse of them And mark a two-fold end of this purification that we may be a peculiar people This word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hierome saith he sought for among humane authours and could not finde it therefore some think the Seventy feigned this and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It answers to the Hebrew word Segullah and signifieth that which is precious and excellent got also with much labour so that this holinesse this repentance of thine it cost Christ deare And the other effect is zealous of good workes The Greek Fathers observe the Apostle doth not say followers but zealous that doth imply great alacrity and affection And lest men should think we should onely preach of Christ and grace These things speak saith he and exhort And Calvin thinketh the last words Let no man despise thee spoken to the people because they are for the most part of delicate eares and cannot abide plaine words of mortification 2. There is some kind of Analogicall relation between them and heaven comparatively with evill works So those places where it 's said If wee confesse our sins he is not onely faithfull but also just to forgive us our iniquities So 2 Tim. 4. 8. a Crowne of righteousnesse which the righteous Judge c. These words doe not imply any condignity or efficiency in the good things wee doe but an ordinability of them to eternall life so that evill and wicked workes they cannot be ordained to everlasting life but these may Hence some Divines say That though godlinesse be not meritorious nor causall of salvation yet it may be a motive as they instance If a King should give great preferment to one that should salute him in a morning this salutation were neither meritorious nor causall of that preferment but a meer motive arising from the good pleasure of the King And thus much they think that particle for I was an hungry doth imply So that God having appointed holinesse the way and salvation the end hence there ariseth a relation between one and the other 3. There is a promise made to them 1 Tim. 4. 8. Godlinesse hath the promises as it is in the Originall because there are many promises scattered up and down in the Word of God so that to every godly action thou doest there is a promise of eternall life And hereby though God be not a debtor to thee yet he is to himselfe and to his owne faithfulnesse Reddis debita nulli debens cryed Austine so that the godly may say Oh Lord it was free for thee before thou hadst promised whether thou wouldst give me heaven or no but now the word is out of thy mouth not but that we deserve the contrary onely the Lord is faithfull therefore saith David I will mention thy righteousnesse i. e. faithfulnesse onely and the Apostle This is a faithfull saying and worthy of all acceptation This made them labour and suffer shame If you aske How then is not the Gospel a Covenant of workes That in brief shall be answered afterwards 4. They are Testimonies whereby our election is made sure 2 Pet. 1. ver 10. Make your calling and election sure The Vulgar Translator interposeth those words per bona opera and complaineth of Luther as putting this out of the Text because it made against him but it 's no part of Scripture Now observe the emphasis of the Apostle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 first they must be very
legall and one that was not affected with the goodnesse of God to him It is true if a man obey God out of love to any thing more then God or equally with God this is unlawfull according to that Minus te amat qui tecum Domine aliquid amat 3. That hereby Adams obedience might be the more willing and free An absolute law might seeme to extort obedience but a covenant and agreement makes it to appeare more free and willing as if Adam would have obeyed though there could have been no obligation upon him to doe it 5. Consider that the nature of this Covenant was of works and not of faith It was not said to Adam Beleeve and have life eternall but Obey even perfect and entire obedience It is true indeed there was faith of adherence and dependance upon God in his promise and word and this faith doth not imply any imperfection of the state of the subject as sinfull which justifying faith doth for it was in Christ who in his temptations and tryalls did trust in God And what the Old Testament calls trusting the New calls beleeving yea some say that this kind of faith shall be in heaven viz a dependance upon God for the continuance of that happinesse which they doe enjoy This faith therefore Adam had but in that Covenant it was considered as a gracious act and work of the soul not as it is now an organ or instrument to receive and apply Christ With us indeed there is justifying faith and repentance which keeps up a Christians life as the Naturalists say the calor innatus and humidum radicale doe the naturall life Faith is like the calor innatus and Repentance is like the humidum radicals and as the Philosopher saith if the innate heat devoure too much the radicall moisture or the radicall moisture too much the heat there breed presently diseases so it is with us if beleeving make a man repent lesse or repenting make a man beleeve the lesse this turneth to a distemper Yet though it were a Covenant of works it cannot be said to be of merit Adam though in innocency could not merit that happinesse which God would bestow upon him first because the enjoying of God in which Adams happinesse did consist was such a good as did farre exceed the power and ability of man It 's an infinite good and all that is done by us is finite And then in the next place Because even then Adam was not able to obey any command of God without the help of God Though some will not call it grace because they suppose that onely cometh by Christ yet all they that are orthodox do acknowledge a necessity of Gods enabling Adam to that which was good else he would have failed Now then if by the help of God Adam was strengthned to do the good he did he was so farre from meriting thereby that indeed he was the more obliged to God 6. God who entred into this Covenant with him is to be considered as already pleased and a friend with him not as a reconciled Father through Christ Therefore here needed no Mediatour nor comfort because the soul could not be terrified with any sin Here needed not one to be either medius to take both natures or Mediatour to performe the offices of such an one In this estate that speech of Luthers was true which he denieth in ours Dens est absolute considerandus Adam dealt with him as absolutely considered not relatively with us God without Christ is a consuming fire and we are combustible matter chaffe and straw we are loathsome to God and God terrible to us but Adam he was Deo proximo amicus Paradisi colonus as Tertullian and therefore was in familiarity and communion with him But although there was not that ordered administration and working of the three Persons in this Covenant of works yet all these did work in it Hence the second Person though not as incarnated or to be incarnated yet he with the Father did cause all righteousnesse in Adam and so the holy Ghost he was the worker of holinesse in Adam though not as the holy Spirit of Christ purchased by his death for his Church yet as the third Person so that it is an unlikely assertion which one maintains That the Trinity was not revealed in this Covenant to Adam so that this sheweth a vast difference between that Covenant in innocency and this of grace What ado is here for the troubled soul to have any good thoughts of God to have any faith in him as reconciled but then Adam had no fear nor doubt about it 7. This Covenant did suppose in Adam a power being assisted by God to keep it and therefore that which is now impossible to us waâ— possible to him And certainly if there had been a necessity to sin it would have been either from his nature or from the devill Not from his nature for then he would have excused himself by this when he endeavoured to clear himself But Tertullian speakâ— wittily Nunquam figulo suo dixit Non prudenter definxisti me rudis admodum haereticus fuit non obaudiit non tamen blasphemavit creatorem lib. 2. ad Mar. cap. 2. Nor could any necessity arise from the devill whose temptations cannot reach beyond a moral swasion Therefore our Divines doe well argue that if God did not work in our conversion beyond a morall swasion he should no further cause a work good then Satan doth evil Nor could this necessity be of God who made him good and righteous nor would God subtract his gifts from him before he sinned seeing his fall was the cause of his defection not Gods deserting of him the cause of his fall Therefore although God did not give Adam such an help that de facto would hinder hiâ— fall yet he gave him so much that might and ought to preventâ— it And upon this ground it is that we answer all those cavills why God doth command of us that which is impossible for us to doe for the things commanded are not impossible in themselves but when required of Adam he had power to keep them but he sinned away that power from himself and us Neither is God bound as the Arminians fancy to give every one power to beleeve and repent because Adam in innocency had not ability to doe these for he had them eminently and virtually though not formally But more of these things in the Covenant of grace Use 1. To admire with thankfulnesse Gods way of dealing with us his creatures that he condescends to a promise-way to a covenant-way There is no naturall or Morall necessity that God should doe thus We are his and he might require an obedience without any covenanting but yet to shew his love and goodnesse he condescends to this way Beloved not onely we corrupted and our duties might be rejected not onely we in our persons might be abashed but had we all that
mitigated but Abrogation is then properly when a Law is totally taken away And this Abrogation ariseth sometimes from the expresse constitution at first which did limit and prescribe the time of the lawes continuance sometimes by an expresse revoking and repealing of it by that authority which made it sometimes by adding to that repeale an expresse law commanding the contrary Now it may be easily proved that the Ceremoniall and Judiciall lawes they are abrogated by expresse repeale The Judiciall Law 1 Pet. 2. 13. where they are commanded to be subject to every ordination of man and this was long foretold Genes 49. 10. The Law-giver shall be taken from Judah The Ceremoniall Law that is also expresly repealed Act. 15. and in other places not that these were ill or that they did come from an ill author but because the fulnesse and substance of them was now come of whom the ceremonies were a shadow Yet still you must remember that while they were commanded of God they were the exercises of faith and piety God did dispense grace in the use of them only they were beggarly and empty to such who trusted in them neglected Christ Nor doth this assertion contradict that of the Apostle Ephes 2. 15. where he cals those ordinances enmity and decrees against us for those ceremonies may be considered two wayes first as they were signes of Gods grace and favour and secondly as they were demonstrative of a duty which we were tyed unto but could not performe and in this sense all those purifications and cleansings were against us Thus we see these lawes in every consideration made void so that it is not now an indifferent thing to use them though we would not put our trust in them but sinfull Hence I cannot see how that of Luther is true upon Gal. 2. who sath He beleeveth that if the Jewes beleeving had observed the Law and Circumcision in that manner which the Apostles permitted them that Judaisme had yet stood and that all the world should have received the ceremonies of the Jews In the second place if we would speake exactly and properly We cannot say in any good sense that the Morall Law is abrogated at all It is true indeed our learned Writers shew that the Law in abrogated in respect of justification condemnation and rigour of obedience all which I shall instance in afterwards but if a man would speake rigidly he cannot say it is abrogated Wee may say it 's mitigated as to our persons though Christ our surety did fully undergoe its for if God had taken away the Law so that man nor his surety had been under the curse of it or should have obeyed it then had it been properly abrogated whereas now seeing our surety was bound to satisfie it and perfectly to obey it and we still obliged to conforme unto it we cannot so properly in the generall say it was abrogated Therefore we may more properly say that there is a change and alteration in us towards the Law then that the Law is changed or abrogated Hence observe though the Apostle denyeth that he doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 make void the Law yet he useth this expression Rom. 7. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we are freed or abrogated from the Law rather then that is abrogated Thus it is if we would speake properly yet because the satisfaction and obedience is by Christ and not by us we may say that it is abrogated to us so that we may not look for remission of sins or justification by it But you must still distinguish when we speake of the Law some parts of it from the whole some parts of the Law may be abolished and yet not the whole nature of it for there is in the Law these parts First the Commands Secondly the Promises of life to him that doth them and thirdly the threatnings of eternall wrath to him that faileth in the least Now the Morall Law though it be abrogated in respect of the two later to a beleever yet in respect of the former it doth still abide yea and will continue in Heaven it selfe And we have already proved against the Antinomians that one part of the Law may abide when the other doth not The third proposition Those that say the Law is abolished as it is foedus but not as it is regula say true The Law may be considered as it is a Covenant or as it is an absolute Rule requiring conformity unto it Now it may be truly granted that the Law is abolished in the former notion though not in the later only in expressing this Covenant there is difference among the Learned some make the Law a Covenant of works and upon that ground that it is abrogated others call it a subservient covenant to the covenant of grace and make it only occasionally as it were introduced to put more luster and splendour upon grace Others call it a mixt covenant of works and grace but that is hardly to be understood as possible much lesse as true I therefore think that opinion true as shall be hereafter shewed that the Law given by Moses was a Covenant of grace and that God did not since man fallen ever transact with him in any other Covenant but that of grace Though indeed this Covenant of grace did breake out more clearly in succession of ages according to the wise dispensation of Gods good pleasure So then the Law as a Covenant though of grace is abrogated because though there be still the same essence of the former and later covenant yet the administration of the former is altogether antiquated This fully appeareth in Heb. 7. 18 19. and again Heb. 8. 7 8. whosoever therefore expects life and justification by the Law he sets up the covenant of works again Nor is it any advantage to say these workes are the workes of grace and wrought by Christs spirit for still if we were justified by doing whatsoever the works were yet it would be in such a way as Adam was though with some difference We therefore doe desire to lift up our voices as vehemently as any Antinomian against self Justiciaries against pharisaicall Popish formall men that say unto the good workes they doe These are thy Christ These are thy Jesus oh my soul In matter of Justification we would have all of Pauls Spirit to know nothing but Christ crucified to account all things dung and drosse We desire to bewaile and abundantly to bewaile the little need and want that people feel of Christ in all their duties We are troubled that any can be quiet in their duties and performances and do not cry out None but Christ None but Christ All this we pleade for and preach only we hold the Law as a rule still to walk by though not a Covenant of works to be justified by 4. The Antinomian distinction of the Law abolished as a Law but still abiding in respect of the matter of it
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 Epistle 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 righteousnesse of the Law from those words Doe this and live which is said to have reference to Levit. 18. 5. but we 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 acknowledg 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 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 we of our owne power have and doe 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 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 wholy 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 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 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 Ezod 19. 5 6. If yee will obey my voice you shall be a peculiar treasure unto me and yee shall be unto me a kingdom 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 works how could such an agreement come betweene them 2. If we consider the good things annexed unto this Covenant it must needs be a Covenant of grace for there we have remission and pardon of sinne whereas in the Covenant of workes there is no way for repentance or pardon In the second Commandment God is described to be one shewing 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 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 mercie for thousands and forgiving iniquity and this he 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 it must needs be a Covenant of grace for what is the meaning of the first Commandment but to have one God in Christ our God by faith For if faith had not been on such tearmes commanded it had been imposible 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 commandment is love from faith unfeigned but because Scultetus doth very probably by commandment 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 Commandment 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 do it without any spot or blemish by sinne or without the grace of God for pardon if they should at any time break the Law 4. From the Ceremoniall Law All Divines say that this is reduced to the Morall Law so that Sacrifices were commanded by vertue of the second Commandment Now we all know that the Sacrifices were evangelicall and did hold forth remission of sinns through the blood of Christ If therefore these were commanded by the Morall Law there
and poured out his pirit giving eternall life as plentifully under the Law as under the Gospel But to aske why he did thus would be as presumptuous and arrogant as to aske why he created the world no sooner If the School-master teach the new beginner in another way then he doth the proficient in study no man doth blame his wisedom As in the Paschall Lamb they were to eate the flesh but to throw away the bones so in all matters of religion those things that are revealed and profitable we may feed upon and whatsoever is abstruse and difficult we may let goe Praestat per Deum nescire quia ipse non revelaverit quà m per hominem scire quia ipse praesumpserit Tert. de Anima Now to conclude I come to give the difference between the Law strictly taken as requiring exact and perfect obedience promising eternall life upon no other termes and the Gospel strictly taken as a solemne promulgation of Christ and his benefits to a broken sinner And the first is this The Law in some measure of it is made knowne by naturall light and so agreeable to a naturall conscience I say in some measure for there is much of the duty of the Law that is unknown to naturall consciences yet the most externall and outward duties are knowne and accordingly as the truth of them is discerned by naturall light so the will doth joyne with them as good to be done though not in a godly way But it is otherwise with the Gospel for the very truth of it must be wholy revealed by God so that no naturall acumen in the world could ever excogitate this wonderfull remedy of justification and salvation by Christ And as it is thus above knowledg so the heart is more averse from this way And by this you may see why it is such an hard thing to beleeve why the people of God are so hardly perswaded when loaden with guilt to roule their soules upon Christ The reasorris there is nothing in his natural conscience to further him in this duty Press a man against murder theft adultery here is naturall conscience joyning for this duty but urge him to beleeve this is altogether above nature Hence it is also that naturally we seek to be justified by the works we do so that to be justified by faith is another way then corrupted nature in us or right nature in Adam would have inclined unto Therefore let not the people of God be so discouraged in their agonies and combats about their unbeliefe Let them know that a little degree of faith is of great consequence And if he said that Christi anity was perpetua naturae violentia a perpetuall violence offered to nature this is most sure in a matter of faith We are as froward in rejecting of a promise as stubborn in refusing of a command The second difference is in the object matter The Law holdeth forth a perfect righteousness and will not admit of any other but the Gospel that condescends and brings pardon through Christ And this is the maine difference and in which they can never be made one Now the Papists Arminian Socinian and others do overthrow this grand and maine difference holding justification by works under some notion or other whereas the Apostle maketh an immediate opposition If of faith then not of works The Apostle doth not distinguish of works of nature and works of grace or works of grace perfect imperfect but speaketh absolutely so doth also exclude that subtile opinion of making faith to justifie as a work for the Apostle making an opposition between faith and works must necessarily take faith under such a notion as cannot be a work And this truth is that which is the pillar of the Church of God and that which differenceth us from Jews Turks Papists and many Hereticks The third difference is from the manner of obtaining the good thing promised He that shall obtain eternall life by the Law hath it of debt and by way of justice Rom. 4. 4. Not as if Adam in the state of innocency could have merited at Gods hands or as if God became in strict justice a debtor seeing Adam was beholding to God for all but in some sense it would have been so Hence boasting would not then have been excluded eternall life being the reward of those holy works which he should have done but now all is of grace through Christ our righteousness is meerly Gods indulgence not the holiness that is in us but the sinn pardoned makes us acceptable So that the broken contrite heart can never sufficiently admire the grace and goodness of God in the Gospel-way And no marvell if so be that Paul is so frequently ravished with the considerations thereof This may well be caIled good newes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And if our hearts were spiritually affected we should say How beautifull are the feet of those that bring these glad tydings The fourth difference is in respect of the subject The Law strictly taken is only for those who have a perfect and holy nature therefore it 's a Covenant as you heard of friendship and not of reconciliation so that there is no necessity of any Mediatour Indeed there is good use of urging it to proud Pharisaicall men to bring them out of love with themselves to gross sinners that their hearts might be broken seeing the curses belong to them yea to the godly also to teach them the faire copy they are to write after but in respect of justification by it and eternall life there is none can have that benefit but such who shall be found perfectly holy It was not Moses but the serpent that did heale so it is not the Law but Christ that can comfort broken hearts stung with sin The Priest and the Levite they pass by not pitying of him But now the Subject to whom the Gospel is given is a broken hearted sinner one that feeleth himselfe ready to be covered over with all confusion one that lyeth wounded in conscience crying for some oyle to be poured into his wounds Oh! what miserable comforters then must all Popish and Socinian Doctors be who will advise the sinfull tempted man to seek out works for the Law which is as uncomfortable as to bid a sick diseased man get some of the Philosophers stone or to eat a piece of a Phoenix and then and not till then he shall be in ease Lastly The Law differeth in the forme of it from the Gospel The Law is conditionall but the Gospel absolute I find this Question a very troublesome one Whether the Gospel be absolute or no Whether Gospel be a doctrine of works Whether it hath precepts or threatnings Now the meaning of this Question is not Whether the Gospel be so absolute that it requireth not faith as a condition Or Whether it be so absolute as that it excludeth all repentance and holiness he is an infant in Scripture that
thinketh so But Whether the Gospel doth promise eternall life to a man for any dignity intention merit work or any disposition in us under any distinction or notion whatsoever or only to faith apprehending Christ Now the Answer is that if we take the Gospel largly for the doctrine of Christ and the Apostles there is no question but they pressed duty of mortification sanctification threatning those that do not so but if you take the Gospel strictly then it holdeth forth nothing but remission of sins through Christ not requiring any other duty as a condition or using any threatning words thereunto But then it may be demanded To which is repentance reduced Is it a duty of the Law or a duty of the Gospel Of the Law strictlytaken it cannot be because that admitteth none Must it not therefore be of the Gospel And I find in this particular different either expressions or opinions and generally the Lutheran Divines do oppose the Antinomians upon this very ground that the Gospel is not a Sermon of repentance nor doth exhort thereunto but it must be had from the Law which doth prepare them for Christ I shall therefore because this was the foundation of Antinomianisme and it had it's rise from hence handle the next day this Question Whether the Gospel doth command repentance or no. Or Whether it be only from the Law LECTVRE XXVII ROM 3. 27. Where is boasting then It is excluded By what law of works Nay but by the Law of faith I Proceed to the handling of this Question Whether the Gosspel preach repentance or no seeing this made the great commotion at first between the Orthodox and Antinomians I shall dispatch this in few words 1. The word Repentance is taken sometimes largely and sometimes strictly when it is taken largely it comprehends faith in it and is the whole turnign unto God Rev. 2. 5. sometimes it is used strictly for sorrow about sin and so distinguished from faith Thus they repented not that they might beleeve and faith and repentance are put together Now all the while a man hath trouble and sorrow for sin without faith it is like the body without the soul yea it carrieth a man with Cain and Judas into the very pit of dispair when a man seeth how much is against him and not how much is for him it cannot but crush and weigh him down to the ground The tears of repentance are like those waters very bitter till Christ sweeten them 2. Consider this that the Law was never meerly and solely administred nor yet the Gospel but they are twins that are inseparably united in the Word and Ministery Howsoever strictly taken there is a vast gulf of opposition between each other yet in their use they become exceeding subservient and helpfull mutually It is not good for the Law to be alone nor yet the Gospel Now the old Antinomians they taught repentance by the Gospel only that so the Law might be wholly excluded thus they did not consider what usefull subserviencie they had to one another The Law directeth commandeth and humbleth The Gospel that comforteth refresheth and supporteth And it is a great wisedom in a Christian when he hath an eye upon both Many are cast down because they only consider the perfection of the Law and their inability thereunto on the other side some grow secure and loose by attending to free-grace only I do acknowledge that free-grace will melt the heart into kindness and the fire will melt as well as the hammer batter into pieces but yet even this cannot be done without some use of the Law 3. Therefore being there is such a neer linck between both these in their practicall use we need not with some learned men make two Commandements of the Gospel only to wit the command to beleeve and the other command to repent neither need we with others make these commands Appendices to the Gospel but conclude thus that seeing Faith and Repentance have something initial in them and something consummative in them therefore they are both wrought by Law and Gospel also so that as they say there is a legal repentance and an evangelical so we may say there is a legal faith which consists in believing of the threatnings the terrours of the Lord and there is an evangelical faith which is in applying of Christ in the Promises So that legal faith and repentance may be called so initially and when it is evangelical it may be said to be consummate If therefore you aske Whether Faith and Repentance be by the Law or by the Gospel I answer It is by both and that these must not be seperated one from the other in the command of these duties Hence fourthly unbeliefe is a sin against the Law as well as against the Gospel Indeed the Gospel that doth manifest and declare the object of justifying faith but the Law condemneth him that doth not believe in him therefore Moses and the Law is said to bear witness of Christ and to accuse the Jews for refusing the Messias The Law that requireth belief in whatsoever God shall reveal The Gospel that makes known Christ and then the Law is as it were enlightened by the Gospel doth fasten a command upon us to beleeve in Christ This is true if you take the Law strictly and seperately from Moses his administration of it but if you take it largely as it was delivered by Moses then faith in Christ was immediately commanded there though obscurely because as is proved it was a Covenant of grace You see then that as in the transfiguration there was Christ and Moses together in glory so likewise may the Law and the Gospel be together in their glory and it is through our folly when we make them practically to hinder one another Though all this be true yet if the Gospel be taken strictly it is not a doctrine of repentance or holy works but a meere gracious promise of Christ to the broken heart for sin and doth comprehend no more then the glad tydings of a Saviour It is true learned men do sometimes speak otherwise calling Faith and repentance the two Evangelicall commands but then they use the word more largely for the doctrine of Christ and the Apostles but in a strict sense its only a promise of Christ and his benefits And in this sense we may say the Gospel doth not terrifie or accuse Indeed there are wofull threatnings to him that rejecteth Christ yea more severe then to him that refused Moses but this ariseth from the Law joyned in practicall use with the Gospel And in this sense also it is said to be the savour of death unto many This ariseth not from the nature of the Gospel but from the Law that is enlightened by the Gospel so that he being already condemned by the Law for not beleeving in Christ he needeth to be condemned again by the Gospel If you say May not the sufferings
the scope of the Apostle who speaketh of such a Law that the Jews expected righteousness 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 wayes 1. Either rigidly and in an abstracted consideration from the administration 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 occasionall that a soul abased and condemned by the Law doth seek out for a Christ only you must know that the Law even so taken doth not exclude a Christ It requireth indeed a perfect righteousness of our own yet if we bring the righteousness 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 of it by Moses in all the particulars of it and thus Christ was intended directly and not by accident that is God when he 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 Jews generally not understanding or neglecting did thereby like Adam go to make fig-leaves for their covering of their nakedness 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 self 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 righteousness in us but the instituted and appointed end which God the Lawgiver made in the promulgation of it was the Lord Christ So that whatsoever the Law commanded promised or threatned it was to stir 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 belevers are still so hardly perswaded to rest only on Christ for righteousness but because of that secret selfe dependance within them Having premised these things I come to shew how Christ is the end of the Law taken largely in the ministry of Moses And in the first place Christ was the scope and end of intention 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 fly 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 explain that place because it may be wrested by the Antinomian as if because that kinde of ministery which was by Moses was to be done away and evacuated therefore the preaching of the Law was also to be abrogated but that is 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 other of life and righteousness Therefore the one is called Letter and the other Spirit Now this you must understand warily taking the Law nakedly and in it self 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 own power only life and spirit is attributed to the Gospel and not to the Law because Christ who is the author of the Gospel is the fountain of life and when any good is wrought by the Law it cometh from the spirit of Christ The second excellency is in regard of continuance and duration The 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 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 far 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 haue 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 vail upon the Text as well as upon Moses his face But I shall plainly understand it thus 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 far otherwise Now saith the Apostle The Jews were not able to fix their eyes upon this glory that is the carnall Israelites did not behold Christ in the ministery of Moses because a vail is upon their hearts The Apostle makes the vail upon Moses to be a type of the blindness and hardness of heart in the Israelite so that as the vail upon Moses covered the glory of his face so the vail of blindness and stupidity upon the heart of
God and us 3. Because it performes all duties by way of compensation merit That there is a God may be known by the light of Nature The mysterie of the Trinitie and the Incarnation of Christ cannot be found out by the light of Nature The light of Nature insufficient for salvation The Patriarchs did not offer sacrifices by the light of Nature but God revealed his will to Adam to be so worshipped Originall sin can onely be truly knowne by Scripture-light Matth. 17. 12. expounded Communion of all things no precept of Nature and the Apostles practise of it was only occasionall not binding to posterity God is more off ended with those that abuse Gospel light then those that abuse the light of Nature Three sorts of Christians little better then Heathens There is in man a natural power by the help of Reason to chuse or refuse this or that thing This naturall power in man not able to performe naturall actions without Gods generall assistance Man by the power of nature wholly unable to performe good actions 1. Because our natures are full of sin and corruption 2. Because grace and conversion are the work of God 3. Because glory is to be given to God onely not to our selves Nature of it self cannot dispose for justification or sanctification and the reasons why There are and may be some preparatory and antecedaneous works upon the heart before justification or sanctification Determination to one kind of acts takes not away liberty A threefold liberty Determination to sinne takes not away that delight in sinne which man is inevitably carried out unto Much may be ascribed to grace and yet the totall efficacy not given unto it The outward act of a commandement may be preformed by the power of Nature Whatsoever meere naturall men doe is sin before God because 1. The act wants faith the person reconciliation with God 2. It proceeds not from a regenerate nature 3. 'T is not done in reference to Gods glory 4 There is no promise annexed to any act that wants faith There is in mans nature a passive capacity of grace which is not in stones and beasts To presse a duty and yet to acknowledge Gods grace or gift to do it is no contradiction Mans inability to observe Gods precepts maketh not voâ—d the nature of the precepts because this in ability proceeded from mans owne fault A thing said to be impossible three waies Gods commands though they be not a measure of our power may serve to convince humble c. Necessity of sinning hinders not the delight and willingnesse man hath in sin and consequently God may reprove him for his transgressions * Cap. 5. l. 3. Ethic. ad Nicom Though God works all our good in us yet exhortations are the instrument wherby he works it How conversion and repentance may be said to be our acts Gods working upon the heart of a sinner for conversion excludes not mans working Though wicked men cannot but sinne in praying and hearing yet they are bound to these duties God doth not bind himself to this way * Tanta fuit Adami recens conditi stupiditas ut major in infantos cadere non postit The tree of knowledge why so called God besides the naturall law engraven in Adams heaâ—â— did give a positive law 1. That the power which God had over him might be the more eminently held forth 2. To try and manifest Adams obedience The proper essentiall end of the positive law was to exercise Adams obedience * Altitudinem consilii ejus penetrare non possum longè supra vires meas esse confiteor Aug. The positive law did lay an obligation upon Adams posterity Adam by eating the forbidden fruit became mortall and in the state of death not naturall onely but spirituall and eternall also Adam before his sin was immortall A thing may be said to be immortall foure wayes The mortality of the whole man cannot be evinced from this threatning In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt die Image and likenesse signifie one and the same thing An Image consists in likenesse to another pattern after which it is made A Four-fold image The image of God in Adam consisted in the severall perfections and qualifications in his soul 1. In his Understanding was exact knowledge of divine and naturall things 2. His Will was wonderfully good and furnished with many habits of goodnesse 3. In his Affections regularity and subjection 2. The image of God consisted in a freedome from all misery and danger 3. It consisted in that dominion and soveraignty Adam had over the creatures That righteousnesse and holiness fixed in Adam was 1. Originall 2. Universall 3. Harmonious 4. A perfection due unto him upon supposition of the end wherunto God made him Righteousness was a perfection sutable and connaturall to Adam Adam had power to beleeve so farre as it did not imply an imperfection in the subject Repentance as it flowes from a regenerate nature reductively the image of God Gods image not fully repaired in us in this life Doctr. The covenant with Adam before the fall more obscurely laid down then the covenant off grace after the fall That God dealt with Adam by way of Covenant appeares 1. From evil threatned and good promised 2. Because his posterity becomes guilty of his sin and obnoxious to his punishment A Covenant implies Gods decree will or promise to concerning his creatures whether rationall or irrationall God enters into Covenant with man by way of condescension makes promises unto him to confirme him in his hope and confidence in him God deales with man by way of covenant not of power 1. To indeare himself unto him 2. To incite man to more obedience 3. To make this obedience more willing and free The Covenant God made with Adam was of works not of faith God entring into Covenant with Adam must be looked upon as one already pleased with him not as a reconciled Father through Christ Gods Covenant did suppose a power and possibility in Adam to keep it 1. In Adam such qualities and actions may be considered as did flow from him as aliving creature endued with a rational soul 2 The principle and habit of righteousnesse was naturall to Adam but help from God to persevere supernaturall Adam in the state of innocency needed not Christ by way of reconciliation but of conservation in righteousnesse The obedience of Angels may be said to be imperfect negatively not privatively Christs incarnation cannot be supposed but upon supposition of Adams fall The tree of life was not a sacrament of Christ to Adam The Scripture doth not affirme any revelation of a Christ unto Adam The state of innocency excelled the state of reparation in rectitude immortality and outward felicity The state of reparation more happy then that of innocency in respect of the certainty of perseverance in the state of grace The imputation of Christs righteousness doth not inferre that therefore we are more
of Christ were the same in kinde with the righteousness of works differing only gradually as an infant and a grown man for if so the Apostle would have said working and not beleeving It is a great skill in Divinity to amplifie this righteousness of faith without works so as neither the Papist or the Antinomian may incourage themselves thereby but of that in some other place As you take notice of the subject Beleever so the universality every one which doth take in both Jew and Gentile Therefore the Jew could not or ought not to think that those externall Rites and observations could bring them to a true righteousness Lastly consider in the Text for what end Christ is thus the perfection of the Law and that is for righteousness The proper seat of handling this is in the doctrine of Justification only let me briefly answer a Question made by some Whether the righteousness of faith or that we have by Christ be the same in nature with the righteousness of works and of the Law Stapleton saith They must needs be one because the Law will direct to no other righteousness then that of its own It it true the Law strictly taken will not properly and per se direct to any righteousness but that which the Law requireth yet by accident and indirectly it may yea as it was given by Moses it did directly and properly intend Christ though not primarily as some think but finding us unable to attain to its own righteousness did then lead us unto Christ Yet these two righteousnesses are divers rather then contrary unless in respect of justification and so indeed its impossible to be justified by both those waies otherwise they are both together in the same subject yea a righteousness of faith doth necessarily draw along with it in the same subject a righteousness of works though it be imperfect and so insufficient to justifie Use Is Christ the end of the Law for righteousness Then let the beleever bless and praise God for providing a righteousness and such a righteousness for him How destitute and naked was thy condition Had justice taken thee by the throat and bid thee pay what thou owest thou couldst not have returned that answer Let me alone and I will pay thee all Neither Angels nor men could provide this righteousness for thee Dost thou thank God for providing clothes for thy body food for thy belly an house for habitation Oh above all thanke him that he hath provided a righteousness for thy soul Thou troubled soul because of sin thou thinkest with thy selfe Oh if I had no sin if I were guilty of no corruption how well were it O ye glorious Angels and Saints ye are happy because ye have a righteousness Why doest thou not consider that God hath found out for thee even for thee in this world a righteousness whereby thou art accepted of him Again consider it is such a righteousness that satisfieth and pleaseth God Thy holiness cannot content him for justification but that of Christ can As the light of the Stars and Moon cannot dispell totally the darkness of the night only the light of the Sun can do that LECTVRE XXIX MAT 5. 17. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandements and shall teach men so shall be called the least in the Kingdome of heaven OUr Saviour being to vindicate the Law from all corrupt glosses of the Pharisees he doth in the first place as Chrysostome thinketh remove the odium that might be cast upon him as if he did indeed destroy the Law for it was then generally received that only was Law which the Pharisees declared to be so And this he doth ver 17. Think not that I am come to destroy the Law The reason he giveth is from the perpetuall nature of the Law heaven and earth the whole world shall sooner fall into pieces then any tittle of that And the Prophets are here joyned to the Law not so much in regard of their predictions as because they were Interpreters of the Law The second reason is from that evill which shall befall him that doth breake it and here he nameth a two-fold Antinomianisme one in life and practise the other in doctrine That in practise is aggravated though it be one of the least commandments They are called least either because the Pharisees thought them so or else indeed because all the commands of God were not concerning duties of the same consequence The other in doctrine is expressed in those words And teach men so I cannot consent to Beza's interpretation making this teaching to be by example and life or else 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 although as if the meaning were He that doth break in his practice my commandment although he do teach them in doctrine There is no necessity of offering such violence to the Text. But if we interpret it of doctrinall breaking it will very well agree with the Pharisees who made void the commandements of God by the doctrines of men The evill that shall befall such is in those words He shall be called the least in the Kingdome of heaven Called is put for is or be He shall be the least By Kingdom of heaven some understand that Kingdome of glory in heaven and by least meane nullus none he shall not at all enter into the Kingdome of heaven Others by Kingdom of heaven do understand the Church of God and so they express it when there shall be a reformation in the Church and truth should break forth which was presently to come to pass then those corrupt teachers who would poyson men should be discovered and then they should be least that is of no account even as it fell out to the Pharisees though for a while they were highly esteemed among men I forbeare to touch upon that Question hotly disputed with some Whether our Saviour doe in this discourse meane only the Morall Law or the Ceremoniall also as being not to my purpose That it is meant cheifly of the Morall Law appeareth by the instances which Christ giveth From the Text thus opened I observe That any doctrine which teacheth tho abrogation or dissolution of the Law is highly offensive unto God For the opening of this consider that the doctrines of men may either directly and with an open face overthrow the Law as the Marcionites and Manichees did or else interpretatively and more covertly and that is done three waies 1. when they make not the Law of God to be so full and exensiue in it's obligation as indeed it is and thus the Pharisees they made void the Law when they affirmed outward acts to be only sins and thus the Papists do in part when they make the Law no further to oblige then it is possible for us to keep it These doctrines doe in tantum though not in totum destroy the Law 2. When men hold such principles that will