A Vindication of the Moral Law and the Covenants, Moral treatise · Lecture 5
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 onelyonly 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: onelyonly 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; onelyonly 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 onelyonly 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 onelyonly 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, 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. Again, 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 ſoule of the Law. You can as well take your Appendices from the Law, as you terme them, and yet let it remain a true Law; as you can take the brains 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 a man, according to their opinion. The ſame Author again, pag. 5. He dare not truſt a beleever to walk without his keeper [the Law,] as if he judged no otherwiſe of him then of a malefactor in Newgate, who would kill and rob if his Jaylor were not with him: Thus they are onelyonly kept within the compaſſe of the Law, but are not keepers of it. Yet, at another time, the ſame Author calls it a ſlander, to ſay, that they deny the Law. Now, who can reconcile theſe contradictions? Nor is this ſhufling and uncertainty any new thing; for the old and firſt Antinomian did many times promiſe amendment, and yet afterwards fell to his errour again; after that he condemned his errour, and recanted his errour in a publike Auditory, and printed his revocation, yet, when Luther was dead, hee relapſed into that errour: ſo hard a thing it is to get poiſon out, when it's once ſwallowed downe.
In the fourth place we come to lay downe thoſe things that may cleare the meaning of the Apoſtle: and firſt know, that humane Authors, who yet have acknowledged the help of precepts, doe ſpeak thus much of a righteous man, onelyonly to ſhew this, that he doth that which is righteous, for love of righteouſneſſe, not for feare of puniſhment: As Aquinas ſaid of his love to God, Amo, quia amo; & amo, ut amem. Thus Seneca, Ad Legem eſſe bonum exiguum est: It's a poore ſmall thing to be good onelyonly according to the law. And ſo Aristotle, lib. 3. Polit. cap. 9. ſheweth how a righteous man would be good, though there were no law; as they ſay of a Magiſtrate, he ought to be foreign, a living law. Thus Socrates ſaid of the Civill Law, foreign And Plato, Polit. 3. foreign, It is not fit to command or make lawes for thoſe that are good. Theſe Sayings are not altogether true, yet they have ſome kinde of truth in them. Hence it was that Antiſthenes ſaid, A wiſe man was not bound by any lawes: And Demonax told a Lawyer, that all their lawes would come to nothing; for good men did not need them, and wicked men would not be the better for them. And as the Heathens have ſaid thus, ſo the Fathers: Hierome, What needs the Law ſay to a righteous man, Thou ſhalt not kill, to whom it's not permitted to be angry? Yet we ſee David, though a righteous man, needed this precept. But eſpecially Chryſoſtome, even from theſe words, doth wonderfully hyperbolize, A righteous man needs not the Law, no not teaching or admoniſhing; yea, he diſdaines to be warned by it, he doth not wait or ſtay to learn of it. As therefore a Muſician or Grammarian, that hath theſe arts within him, ſcorns the Grammar, or to go to look to the rules; ſo doth a righteous man. Now theſe are but hyperbole's; for what godly man is there, that needs not the Word as a light, that needs it not as a goad? Indeed, in heaven the godly ſhall not need the Law; no more ſhall they the Goſpel, or the whole Word of God.
2. There are three interpretations which come very neere one another, and all doe well help to the clearing of the Apoſtle. 1. Some learned men lay an emphaſis in the word [Made] foreign. It is not made to a godly man as a burden, he hath a love and a delight The Law to a godly man is a delight, not a burden.in it; Lex eſt poſita, ſed non impoſita: He doth not ſay, Juſti non habent legem, aut ſunt ſine lege; ſed non imminet eis tanquam flagellum, it's not like a whip to them. The wicked wiſh there were no Law, and cry out as he, Utinam hoc eſſet non peccare! The righteous man is rather in the Law, then under it. It's true, the word [foreign] in the generall doth ſignifie no more then to lye, or be, or is; therefore, in Athenaeus, Ulpianus was called foreign, becauſe of his frequent queſtions, foreign; where ſuch or ſuch a word might be found: but yet ſometimes it ſignifieth to be laid to a thing, as to deſtroy it; ſo Matth. 3. 10. The axe is laid to the root of the tree, foreign in the originall, and ſo foreign, is for as much as foreign, poſita for oppoſita, as we ſay poſitus obex. Now this is to be underſtood ſo farre forth as he is righteous, otherwiſe the things of God are many times a burden to a godly man. Let us not oppoſe then the works of the Law, and the works of the Spirit, Grace and Goſpel; for the ſame actions are the works of the Law ratione objecti, in reſpect of the object; and the works of the Spirit ratione efficientis, in reſpect of the efficient. Indeed the Scripture oppoſeth Grace and Works, and Faith and Works, but in a clean other ſenſe then the Antinomian, in time is to be ſhewed.
The ſecond interpretation is of the damnatory and curſing part The godly are under the deſert of the curſe, but not the actuall condemnation of the Law.of the Law: The Law is not made to the beleever ſo, as he ſhould abide under the curſing, and condemning power of it: and in this ſenſe we are frequently denied to be under the Law. It's true, the godly are under the deſert of the curſe of the Law, but not the actuall curſe, and condemnation: Nor doth it therefore follow, that there is no Law, becauſe it doth not curſe; for it's a good rule in Divinity, à remotione actûs ſecundi in ſubjecto impediti, non valet argumentum ad remotionem actûs primi; from the removall of an act or operation, the argument doth not hold to the removing of the thing it ſelf: as it did not follow, The fire did not burn the three Worthies, therefore there was no fire; God did hinder the act: And if that could be in naturall agents, which work naturally, how much rather in morall cauſes, ſuch as the Law is of condemnation, which works according to the appointment of God? So then the Law is not to curſe or condemne the righteous man.
The laſt interpretation is, that the Law was not made becauſe of righteous men, but unrighteous. Had Adam continued in innocency, The Law, in the reſtraining power thereof, was not made for the righteous, but unrighteous.there had not been ſuch a ſolemne declaration of Moſes his Law; for it had been graven in their hearts: Therefore, though God gave a poſitive law to Adam, for the tryall of his obedience, and to ſhew his homage; yet he did not give the Morall Law to him by outward preſcript, though it was given to him in another ſenſe: and ſo the phraſe ſhall be like that Proverb, E malis moribus bonae leges naſcuntur, Good lawes ariſe from evil manners: And certainly lawes, in the reſtraining and changing power of them upon the lives of men, are not for ſuch who are already holy, but thoſe that need to be made holy; and ſo it may be like that 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. Thus Tacitus Annal. 15. Uſu probatum eſt leges egregias ex aliorum delictis gigni, &c. Nam culpa quam poena, tempore prior; emendari quam peccare poſterius eſt; excellent Lawes are made, becauſe of other mens delinquencies; The fault goeth before the puniſhment, and ſinne before the amendment.
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 evil: Wouldſt thou not be afraid of them? doe no evil. 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 diſeerned 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 do 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 onelyonly 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 ſin: There is a great deale more filth 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 ſelf 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 again, My ſoul breaketh in the longing after thy judgements. In another place, he and Job do 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 own 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 reliſh, thsi 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 die for me, as I to pray to him, to be patient, to be holy, what had become of my ſoule? If Chriſt therefore ſaid of that Law, to be a Mediatour for thee, Lo, I come to doe thy will, O God, thy Law is within mine heart; how much rather ought this to be true of thee in any thing thou ſhalt doe for him? Thou haſt not ſo much to part with for him, as he for thee. What is thy life and wealth to the glory of his God-head, which was laid aſide for a while? And then ſecondly, conſider how that men love luſts for luſts ſake, they love the world becauſe of the world. Now evill is not ſo much evill, as good is good; ſin is not ſo much ſin, as God is God, and Chriſt is Chriſt. If therefore a profane man, becauſe of his carnall heart, can love his ſin, though it coſt him hell, becauſe of the ſweetneſſe in it; ſhall not the godly heart love the things of God, becauſe of the excellency in them? But theſe things may be more enlarged in another place.