A Vindication of the Moral Law and the Covenants, Moral treatise · Lecture 6
LECTURE. VI.
ROM. 2. 14, 15.
For when the Gentiles which know not the law, do the things of the law by nature, theſe having not the law, are a law unto themſelves: which ſhew the work of the law written in their hearts.
BEfore I handle the other places of Scripture that are brought by the Antinomians againſt the Law, it is my intent, for better methods ſake, and your more ſound inſtruction, to handle the whole Theology of the Law of God in the ſeverall diſtributions of it, and that poſitively, controverſally, and practically; and I ſhall begin firſt with the law of Nature, that God hath imprinted in us, and conſider of this two waies: 1. As it is a meere law; and ſecondly, As it was a covenant of works made with Adam: And then in time I ſhall ſpeak of the Morall Law given Moſes, which is the proper ſubject of theſe controverſies.
The Text I have read is a golden Mine, and deſerveth diligent digging and ſearching into: Therefore, for the better underſtanding of theſe words, let us anſwer theſe Queſtions:
1. Who are meant by the Gentiles here? It is ordinarily known, Who meant by Gentiles.that the Jewes did call all thoſe Gentiles that were not Jewes, by way of contempt; as the Greeks and Romans called all other nations Barbarians. Hence ſometimes in the Scripture the word is applyed to wicked men, though Jewes: as, Pſal. 2. Why doe the heathen rage? It may be interpreted of the Phariſees reſiſting Chriſt. Indeed, the Jewes will not confeſſe, that the word foreign Gentes, is any where applyed to them: but this is very falſe, for Geneſ. 17. Abraham is there ſaid to be the father of many nations, (foreign Gentes:) therefore they muſt either deny themſelves to be Abraham's ſeed, or elſe acknowledge this word belonging to them. But generally it ſignifieth thoſe that had not the Lawes of Moſes, nor did live by them. Therefore Gal. 2. 14. foreign, to live like a Gentile, is, not to obſerve the Lawes of Moſes: and in this ſenſe it is to be taken here; for the Apoſtles ſcope is to make good that great charge upon all mankinde, both Jew and Gentile, that naturally they are wholly in ſin; and God, being no accepter of perſons, will deſtroy the one as well as the other. And whereas it might be thought very hard to deale thus with the Gentile, becauſe no law was delivered unto him, as unto the Jew, the Apoſtle anſwereth that Objection in this place. But grant it be underſtood of ſuch Gentiles, then there is a greater Queſtion whether it be meant of the Gentiles abiding ſo, or the Gentiles converted and turned beleevers; for, that the Apoſtle ſpeaks of ſuch, moſt of the Latine Interpreters, both ancient and modern, doe affirme: and ſo the Greek Father, Chryſostome, and Eſtius, a learned Papiſt, doe think there are ſo many arguments for it, that it's certaine. I confeſſe, they bring many probable reaſons; but I will not trouble you with them: this ſeemeth a ſtrong argument againſt them, becauſe the Apoſtle ſpeaks of ſuch who are without a law, and a law to themſelves, which could not be true of Gentiles converted: we take the Apoſtle therefore to ſpeak of Gentiles abiding ſo; but in this ſenſe there is alſo a dangerous expoſition and a ſound one. The poyſonous interpretation is of the Pelagians, who underſtand the law written in their hearts, in the ſame ſenſe as it is uſed, Jerem. 33. even ſuch a fulfilling of the law which will attaine to ſalvation; and this they hold the Heathens by the law and help of nature did ſufficiently: But this is to overthrow the doctrine of Grace and Chriſt. Therefore the ſound interpretation is of the Gentiles indeed, but yet to underſtand the law written in their hearts, onelyonly of thoſe relicts of naturall reaſon and conſcience, which was in the Heathens, as is to be proved anon.
The 2d. Queſtion is eaſily anſwered, How they are ſaid to be How the Gentiles are ſaid to be without a Law.without a law; to wit, without a written law, as the Jewes had; ſo that we may ſay, they had a law without a law; a law written, but not declared.
The 3d. Queſtion, In what ſenſe they are ſaid to doe the things of How ſaid to do the things of the Law by nature.the law, and that by nature. To doe the things of the law is not meant univerſally of all the Heathens, for the Apoſtle ſhewed how moſt of them lived in the Chapter before: nor ſecondly univerſally in regard of the matter contained in the law, but ſome externall acts, as Ariſtides and Socrates, with others. And here it's diſputed, Whether a meere Heathen can doe any work morally good? But wee anſwer, No: for every action ought to have a ſupernaturall end, viz. the glory of God, which they did not aime at; therefore we do refuſe that diſtinction of a morall good, The diſtinction of Morall and Theologicall good rejected.and theologicall, becauſe every morall good ought to be theologicall: they may do that good matter of the law, though not well. And as for the manner how, by nature; thoſe Interpreters that underſtand this Text of Gentiles beleevers, ſay, Nature is not here oppoſed to Grace, but to the law written by Moſes; and therefore make it nature enabled by grace: but this is ſhewed to be improbable. By nature therefore we may underſtand that naturall What is here meant by Nature.light of conſcience, whereby they judged and performed ſome externall acts, though theſe were done by the help of God.
The next Queſtion is, How this Law is ſaid to be written in their hearts? You muſt not, with Auſtine, compare this place with that gracious promiſe in Jeremy, of God writing his law in the hearts of his people. There is therefore a two-fold writing in the A two-fold writing of the Law in mens hearts, and which here meant.hearts of men; the firſt, of knowledge and judgement, whereby they apprehend what is good and bad: the ſecond is in the will and affections, by giving a propenfity and delight, with ſome meaſure of ſtrength, to do this upon good grounds. This later is ſpoken of by the Prophet in the covenant of Grace, and the former is to be underſtood here, as will appeare, if you compare this with Chap. 1. 19.
The laſt Queſtion is, How they declare this Law written in their The law written in mens hearts two waies.hearts? And that is firſt externally, two waies: 1. By making good and wholeſome lawes to govern men by; and 2. By their practice, at leaſt of ſome of them, according to thoſe lawes: And ſecondly internally, by their conſciences, in the comfort or feare they had there.
Obſervat. There is a law of Nature written in mens hearts. And if this be not aboliſhed, but that a beleever is bound to follow the direction and obligation of it, how can the Antinomian think that the Morall Law, in reſpect of the mandatory power of it, ceaſeth? Now, becauſe I intend a methodicall Tractate of the ſeverall kindes of Gods Law, you might expect I ſhould ſay much about Lawes in generall; but becauſe many have written large Volumes, eſpecially the School-men, and it cannot be denyed but that good rationall matter is delivered by them; yet, becauſe it would not be ſo pertinent to my ſcope, I forbeare. I will not therefore examine the Etymology of the words that ſignifie a Law; whether Lex in the Latine come of legendo becauſe it was written to be read (though that be not alwaies neceſſary;) or of ligando, becauſe a law binds to obedience; or of deligendo, becauſe it ſelects ſome precepts: nor concerning foreign in the Greek, whether it come of foreign, which is improbable; or of foreign, becauſe it diſtributes to every one that which is right: neither the Hebrew word foreign, which ſome make to come of foreign, to instruct and teach; others of the word foreign, that ſignifieth a diſpoſition, or compiling of things together as lawes uſe to be. In the next place, I will not trouble you with the definition of a law, whether it be an act, or habit, or the ſoul it ſelfe: onelyonly this is good to take notice of, againſt a fundamentall errour of the Antinomian, about a law in generall; for they conceive it impoſſible but that the damning act of a law muſt be where the commanding act of a law is, and this is frequently urged (as I ſhewed the laſt time:) Therefore obſerve, that there are only two things goe to the eſſence of a law, (I ſpeak not of externall cauſes) and that is, firſt, Direction, ſecondly, Obligation: 1. Direction, therefore a law is a rule; hence the law of God is compared to a light. And, Prov. 20. 27. there is a notable expreſſion of the law of Nature, It's a candle of the Lord, ſearching the inwards of the belly. So it is obſerved, that the Chaldee word for a law, is as much as light. The ſecond eſſentiall conſtitute of a law is, Obligation, for therein lyeth the eſſence of a ſinne, that it breaketh this law, which ſuppoſeth the obligatory force of it. In the next place there are two Conſequents of the Law which are ad bene eſſe, that the Law may be the better obeyed; and this indeed turneth the law into a covenant, which is another notion upon it, as afterwards is to be ſhewn. Now as for the ſanction of the law by way of a promiſe, that is a meere free thing; God, by reaſon of that dominion which he had over man, might have commanded his obedience, and yet never have made a promiſe of eternall life unto him. And as for the other conſequent act of the law, to curſe, and puniſh, this is but an accidentall act, and not neceſſary to a law; for it cometh in upon ſuppoſition of trangreſſion: and therefore, as we may ſay of a Magiſtrate, He was a juſt and compleat Magiſtrate for his time, though he put forth no punitive juſtice, if there be no malefactors offending; ſo it is about a law, a law is a compleat law oblieging, though it do not actually curſe: as in the confirmed Angels, it never had any more then obligatory, and mandatory acts upon them; for that they were under a law is plaine, becauſe otherwiſe they could not have ſinned, for where there is no law, there is no tranſgreſſion. If therefore the Antinomian were rectified Rom. 4. 15.in this principle, which is very true and plain, he would quickly be ſatisfied: but of this more in another place. But wee come to the particulars of the doctrine, the preſſing of which will ſerve much againſt the Antinomian. Therefore, for the better underſtanding of this Law of Nature, conſider theſe particulars:
1. The nature of it in which it doth conſiſt, and that is in thoſe common notions and maximes, which are ingraffed in all mens The Law of Nature conſiſts in thoſe common notions which are ingraffed in all mens hearts.hearts: and theſe are ſome of them ſpeculative, that there is a God; and ſome practicall, that good is to be imbraced, and evill to be avoided: and therefore Aquinas ſaith well, that what principles of Sciences are in things of demonſtration, the ſame are theſe rules of nature in practicals: therefore we cannot give any reaſons of them; but, as the Sun manifeſts it ſelfe by its owne light, ſo doe theſe. Hence Chryſoſtome obſerveth well, that God, forbidding murder, and other ſins, giveth no reaſon of it, becauſe it's naturall: but, ſpeaking of the ſeventh day, why that in particular was to be obſerved, he giveth a reaſon, becauſe on the ſeventh day the Lord reſted, not but that the ſeventh day is morall, (as ſome have denyed.) but becauſe it's not morall naturall, onelyonly morall poſitive, as the Learned ſhew.
2. The difference of its being in Adam and in us. This is neceſſary Some fragments onelyonly of this Law left in us.to obſerve; for it was perfectly implanted in Adams heart, but we have onelyonly ſome fragments, and a meere ſhadow of it left in us. The whole Law of Nature, as it was perfectly inſtructing us the will of God, was then communicated to him: and howſoever God, for good reaſons hereafter to be mentioned, did give, beſides that law of Nature, a poſitive law to try his obedience; yet the other cannot be denyed to be in him, ſeeing he was made after Gods image, in righteouſneſſe, and holineſſe, and otherwiſe Adam had been deſtitute of the light of reaſon, and without a conſcience. Therefore it's a moſt impudent thing in Socinus, to deny that Adam had any ſuch law or precept, and that hee could not lye, or commit any other ſin though hee would; for, it may not be doubted, but that if Adam had told a lye, or the like, it had been a ſin, as well as to eate of the forbidden Thoſe common notions, in which this law conſiſts, are in us by nature.fruit.
3. The naturall impreſſion of it in us. We have it by nature; it's not a ſuperadded work of God to put this into us. This aſſertion is much oppoſed by Flaccus Illyricus, who, out of his vehement deſire to aggravate originall ſin in us, and to ſhew how deſtitute we are of the image of God, doth labour to ſhew, that thoſe common notions and dictates of conſcience are infuſed de novo into us, and that wee have none of theſe by nature in us. And a godly man, in his Book of Temptations, holdeth the ſame opinion. Illyricus indeed hath many probable arguments for his opinion, but he goeth upon a falſe ſuppoſition, that the Apoſtle his ſcope is, to compare a Gentile ſuppoſed onelyonly to doe the Law, and not aſſerted to doe it, before a Jew who was an hearer of the Law, but not a doer of it: therefore, to debaſe the Jew, he ſaith, the Apoſtle ſpeaketh conditionally, to this purpoſe, If an Heathen ſhould keep the Law, though he be not circumciſed, yet he would be preferred before you; not (ſaith he) that the Apostle meaneth aſſertively and poſitively that any ſuch doe: and therefore preſſeth the word foreign, which is a particle of the Subjunctive Mood, and is equivalent to foreign, If the Gentiles, &c. But his ſuppoſition is falſe; for the Apoſtle's ſcope is, to ſhew that the Gentile hath no excuſe if God condemne him, becauſe hee hath a law in himſelfe: as appeareth, verſe 12. As for the other conſideration of foreign, though Eraſmus render it [cum fecerint;] yet that particle is applied to the Indicative Mood, as well as the Subjunctive. It cannot therefore be true, which hee ſaith, that the Apoſtle ſpeaketh ſuch great things of men by nature, that if they were true, it would neceſſarily juſtifie all Pelagianiſme. I ſhall not ſpeak of his many arguments againſt naturall principles and knowledge of a God; for he doth in effect at laſt yeeld to it.
4. The extent of it. And here it's very hard to meaſure out the bounds of the law of Nature; for, ſome have judged that to be condemned by the law of Nature, which others have thought the law of Nature approveth: ſo true is that of Tertullian, Legem Naturae opiniones ſuas vocant, They call their opinions the law of Nature. There are foure waies of bounding this law.
1. Some make it thoſe generall things, wherein man and beaſt agree; Foure bounds of the law of Nature.as, defence of it ſelf, and deſire of life: but by this meanes, that of naturall honeſty and righteouſneſſe would be excluded; for, a beaſt is not capable of any ſin, or obligation by a law. And howſoever that be much diſputed upon, Why God would have the beaſt killed that killed a man; yet, to omit the thoughts of many about it, that was not becauſe a beaſt could be tyed by a law: but God, to ſhew the horridneſſe of the fact, would have the very inſtrument puniſhed.
2. Some bound it by the custome of Nations, that is, jus Gentium; but that is ſo diverſified, that a ſin with ſome was a vertue with others.
3. Some doe bind it by reaſon in every man: but this is very uncertaine, and one mans reaſon is contrary to anothers, and one mans conſcience is larger then anothers; even as it is with meaſures in divers countries, though they have the ſame name, as a buſhell, &c. yet they are different in quantity, one is larger then another.
Laſtly, Others bound it by the will of God, declared and manifeſted firſt to Noah in ſeven precepts, and afterwards to Moſes in the ten Commandements: but theſe extend the law of Nature not onelyonly to firſt principles, but concluſions alſo deduced from thence.
5. The obligation of it, when the law of Nature doth bind: And The obligation of the law of Nature is from God.that is from God the authour of it, God onelyonly is under no law. Every beleever, though juſtified by Chriſt, is under the Morall Law of Moſes, as alſo the law of Nature: but now this law of Nature doth not ſo properly bind, as it's mans reaſon or conſcience, as that it is the Vicegerent of God, or a command from him: and thus Cain by the law of Nature found a tye upon him not to ſin, and guilt becauſe he did ſin in murdering his brother, although there was no Morall Law as yet given. It is true, indeed, our Divines doe well reprove the Papiſts, for calling all that time from Adam to Moſes, a ſtate, or law of Nature: and this the Papiſts doe, that therefore to offer ſacrifice unto God may be proved from the law of Nature; whereas thoſe ſacrifices, being done in faith, had the word of God, otherwiſe we were bound ſtill to offer Lambs or Kids to God, which they deny.
6. The perpetuity of this obligation. This Law can never be abrogated. The obligation of the law of nature is perpetual and immutable.And herein we may demand of the Antinomian, Whether the law of Nature doe bind a beleever, or no? Whether he be bound to obey the dictates of his naturall conſcience? Suppoſe a beleever hath his naturall conſcience dictating to him, This ſin he may not doe; is he not obliged hereunto not onelyonly from the matter (for that he grants,) but as it is a law and command of God implanted in his ſoule? I know there is a difference between the law of Nature, and the ten Commandements, as may be ſhewed hereafter; but yet they agree in this, that they are a rule immutable, and of perpetuall obligation. Therefore think not, that becauſe he dyed to free you from the curſe of the Law, that therefore you are freed from the obedience unto the law naturall, or delivered by Moſes. To deny this, is to deny that a beleever is bound to obey the ſure dictates of a naturall conſcience. I know we are not alwayes bound to follow what conſcience ſuggeſts, for that is obſcured and darkened; but I ſpeak of thoſe dictates which are naturally known.
Other particulars, as, The inſufficiency of it to direct in worſhip, as alſo, to ſave men, I do put off, and make application of what hath been delivered.
Uſe 1. Of Instruction, againſt the Antinomian, who muſt needs overthrow the directive and obligative force of the law of Nature, as well as that of Moſes; Doth not even Nature teach you (ſaith the Apoſtle?) Now if a man may not care for Moſes teaching, need he care for Nature teaching? It is true (I told you) ſometimes they grant the Law to be a rule, but then afterwards they ſpeak ſuch things as are abſolutely inconſiſtent with it.
There were ſome (as Wendelinus reports) Swencfeldians, that held a man was never truly mortified, till he had put out all ſenſe of conſcience for ſinne; if his conſcience troubled him, that was his imperfection, he was not mortified enough. I ſhould doe the Antinomians wrong, if I ſhould ſay, they deliver ſuch things in their books; but let them conſider, whether ſome of their Poſitions will not carry them neere ſuch a dangerous rock: For, if the Law have nothing to doe with me in reſpect of the mandatory part of it, then if I be troubled for the breach of it, it is my weakneſſe, becauſe I am not enough in Chriſt.
Uſe 2. Of Reproofe, to thoſe who live againſt this Law. Sins that are againſt the Law of Nature do moſt terrifie. How many live in ſuch ſins that the law of Nature condemneth? Doth not Nature condemne lying, couzening in your trades, luſts, and uncleanneſſe? How many Tradeſ-men are there that need not a Paul? Even Tully in his Book of Offices will condemne their lying, ſophiſticate wares, and unlawfull gain. It's much how farre they ſaw this way. Sinnes againſt naturall conſcience are called Crying ſinnes; and, though men have repented of them, yet how long is it ere faith can ſtill their cry? Have not many Heathens been faithfull and juſt in their dealings? It's true, that man hath not godlineſſe, who hath only naturall honeſty; therefore there are many ſpirituall ſinnes that he never humbleth himſelf for: as Paul ſaith, he knew not the motions of his heart to be ſinne. Hence men are to be exhorted to get further light, and more tenderneſſe then a naturall conſcience can ever attain unto. Nevertheleſſe, if men ſo live, as if they had not this Law in their hearts, they are the more inexcuſable: Are there not men who call themſelves Chriſtians, that yet the very Heathens will condemne at that great day?
Uſe 3. Why it is ſo hard to beleeve in the Lord Chriſt; becauſe here is nothing of nature in it, it's all ſupernaturall. The Papiſts ſay, we make an eaſie way to heaven; for, let a man be never ſo great a ſinner, yet if he doe but beleeve, all is well. Now the people of God, ſenſible of their ſin, find nothing harder for, it's in the law of Nature they ſhould not lye, or ſteale, but that they ſhould beleeve in Chriſt for pardon, when labouring under their offences, here nature doth not help at all. I acknowledge it's a diſpute among Divines, Whether in that law implanted in Adams heart, there was not alſo a power to beleeve in Christ, when revealed? But of that hereafter; but the orthodox deny, that he had explicite juſtifying faith, for that was repugnant to the condition he was in. But the thing I intend is, to ſhew how ſupernaturall and hidden the way of beleeving is. No marvell therefore if it be made ſuch a peculiar work of the Spirit, to convince of this ſinne.