A Vindication of the Moral Law and the Covenants, Moral treatise · Lecture 7
LECTURE VII.
ROM. 2. 14.
For when the Gentiles, which have not the Law, doe by nature the things of the law, &c.
THe Doctrine already gathered from theſe words is, that, The Gentiles have a law of Nature written in their hearts: Which law doth conſiſt partly in light and knowledge of ſpeculative principles; and partly in practice and obedience to practicall principles. So then from hence we may conſider, firſt, Of the light of Nature, and then ſecondly, Of the power of Nature; and from both theſe we may have profitable matter, and alſo may confute ſome dangerous errours, which have poiſoned too many. I ſhall begin therefore with the light of Nature, or Reaſon, and ſhall endeavour to ſhew the Neceſſity of it, and yet the Inſufficiency of it: It is not ſuch a ſtarre that can lead us to Chriſt.
In the firſt place take notice, that this light of Nature may be conſidered in a three-fold reſpect:
Firſt, As it's a relict or remnant of the image of God: for, howſoever The light of Nature is a remnant of Gods image.the image of God did primarily conſiſt in righteouſneſs and true holineſſe; yet ſecondarily it did alſo comprehend the powers and faculties of the reaſonable ſoule in the acts thereof: And this later part abideth. It is true, this light of Nature, comparatively to that of faith, is but as a glow-worme to the Sun; yet ſome light and irradiation it hath. God, when he made man, had ſo excellently wrought his owne image in him, that man could not fall, unleſſe that were alſo deſtroyed; as they write of Phidias, who made Alexanders ſtatue, yet had wrought his own picture ſo artificially in it, that none could break Alexanders ſtatue, but he muſt alſo ſpoile Phidias his image, who was the maker of it: And thus it is in Adams fall, yet there remaineth ſome light ſtill, which the Apoſtle calleth (Rom. 1.) Truth; he vouchſafeth that name to it, They detain the truth in unrighteouſneſſe. Now this moon-light or glimmering of Nature is of a three-fold uſe:
1. For ſocieties and publike Common-wealths, whereby they have 1. The light of Nature uſefull and neceſſary for the making of wholſome lawes in Common-wealths.made wholſome lawes. It's wonderfull to conſider, how excellent the Heathens have been therein. Thus Chryſoſtome, ſpeaking how the moſt excellent men need the counſell of others, inſtanceth in Jethro's advice to Moſes, about chooſing aſſiſtant officers: That great man Moſes (ſaith he) who was ſo potent in words and workes, who was the friend of God, which commanded the creatures, was helped incounſell by Jethro his father-in-law, an obſcure man, and a Barbarian: Although, to ſpeak the truth, Jethro, when he gave this counſell, was not ſo, but had the knowledge of the true God.
2. This light of nature ſerveth for the inſtigation and provocation 2. It inſtigateth to good duties towards God and man.of men to many good actions and duties towards God and man. Hence ſtill obſerve that phraſe, They detain: reaſon and naturall light is bound, as a priſoner, by the chaines of luſts and ſinfull affections; which thing Ariſtotle doth fully ſet forth in his incontinent perſon, whom he deſcribeth to have a right opinion in the generall about that which is good; yet, being too much affected to ſome particular pleaſure or profit, by that meanes the better part is over-born: and therefore Ariſtotle ſaith, the better part of the minde did provoke to better things. This agreeth with that of Paul. And as they bound captivated practicall truths towards man, ſo they alſo impriſoned them about God. Plato had the knowledge of one God, yet he dared not to communicate it to the vulgar: Therefore (ſaith he) Opificem univerſorum ne que invenire facile, ne que inventum in vulgus promulgare tutum: It was not eaſie to finde out the Maker of the world, nor yet ſafe to make known to the people him, when he was found out. Here for feare of the people, he detained this truth. And Auſtin hath a moſt excellent chapter, cap. 10. lib. 6. de Civit. to ſhew how Seneca kept the truth in unrighteouſneſſe: he ſpeaks of a Book Seneca wrote (which now is loſt) againſt Superſtitions, where he doth moſt freely and boldly write againſt the practices of their worſhip; but, ſaith Auſtin, He had liberty in his writing, but not in his life, Libertas affuit ſcribenti, non viventi. I will name ſome paſſages, becauſe they are applicable to Popiſh Idolatry, as well as Paganiſh. They dedicate their gods in moſt baſe materialls, and call them gods, which if taking life, they ſhould meet us on a ſudden, we ſhould judge them monſters. They doe things ſo unſeemly grave men, ſo unworthy free-men, ſo unlike wiſe ſound men, that no man would doubt but that they were mad, if there were but few of them, whereas now the multitude of thoſe that are thus mad is a patronage to them; Immortales deos in materia viliſſima & immobili dedicant—Numina vocant, quae ſi ſpiritu accepto ſubitò occurrerent, monſtra haberentur—Faciunt tam indecor a honeſtis, tam indigna liberis, tam diſſimillima ſanis, ut nemo fuerit dubitaturus furere eos, ſi cum paucioribus furerent; nunc ſanitatis patrocinium est inſanientium turba. But Seneca, when he had ſpoken thus, and much more, in the ſcorn of thoſe gods, what doth he reſolve upon that his wiſe man ſhall doe in thoſe times? Let him not religiouſly account of them in his minde, but feigne them in his outward acts, In animi religione non habeat, ſed in actibus fingat. And again, All which things a wiſe man will obſerve, as commanded by Law, not as acceptable to God, Quae omnia ſapiens ſer vabit tanquam legibus juſſa, non diis grata. And further, Iſtam ignobilem deorum turbam, quam longo aevo longa ſuperstitio congeſſit, ſic adorabimus, ut meminerimus cultum ejus ad morem magis pertinere quam rem. Some ſay, Seneca was coetaneous with Paul, and that he had Paul's Epiſtles; might he not (if ſo) ſee himſelf deſcribed in this phraſe, detaining the truth in unrighteouſneſſe? But how well doth Auſtin in the ſame place ſtigmatize him? He worſhipped, what he reproved; did, what he argued againſt; adored, what he blamed; Colebat, quod reprehendebat; agebat, quod arguebat; quod culpabat, adorabat. And are there not many ſuch Popiſh ſpirits, that know their ſuperſtitions and falſhoods, yet, becauſe of long cuſtome, will not leave them? What elſe was the meaning of Domitianus Calderinus, when, ſpeaking of going to Maſſe, he ſaid, Eamus ad communem errorem? And ſo it was a ſpeech of a diſputing Sophiſter, Sic dico quando ſum in ſcholis, ſed, penes nos ſit, aliter ſentio. You ſee then by this, that naturall truth would encline to better actions, but it is ſuppreſſed. When I ſay, naturall light enclineth the heart to good, it is to be underſtood by way of object meerly, ſhewing what is to be deſired, not that we have any ſtrength naturally to what is good. If you aske why truth, apprehended by naturall light, ſhould be leſſe efficacious to alter and new-mould the heart and life, then truth received by faith (for in the Scripture we reade of wonderfull converſions; and the Heathens have but one ſtory that they much boaſt of, of one Palemon (if I miſtake not) who was a great drunkard, and came to deride Socrates, while he was reading his diſcourſe to his ſcholars, but was ſo changed by that lecture, that he left off his drunkenneſſe: This alteration was only in the skin, and not in the vitalls. What then ſhould be the difference?) I anſwer, not that one truth in it ſelfe is ſtronger then another, but the difference is in medio, or instrumento, the inſtrument to receive this truth. When Nature receives a truth, it's but with a dimme eye, and a palſie-hand; but when we receive it by faith, that is accompanyed with the power and might of the holy Ghoſt. The influence of truth by naturall light, is like that of the Moon, wateriſh and weak, never able to ripen any thing; but that of faith is like the influence of the Sun, that doth heat, and ſoon bring to maturity.
3. The laſt uſe of this naturall light is, to make men inexcuſable; 3. It makes men inexcuſable.for, ſeeing they did not glorifie God according to their knowledge, for that they are juſtly condemned. This indeed is not the onelyonly uſe of the light of Nature, as ſome ſay; but it is a main one, Rom. 1. 20. not that this is the end of God, in putting theſe principles into us, but it falleth out by our ſinfulneſs. But how are they inexcuſable, if they could not glorifie God by nature, as they ought? Some anſwer, the Apoſtle ſpeaks of excuſe in regard of knowledge: but if you underſtand it of power, it is true; for by our fault we are unable, and none went ſo farre as naturally they were able. And thus Nature is conſidered in the firſt place.
Secondly, You may conſider it as corrupted and obſcured by ſin: The light of Nature, as corrupted by ſin, is an enemy to God and goodnes.And in this ſenſe it's no help, but a deſperate enemy to what is good: and the more reaſon this way, the more oppoſition to God: and thus it fell out with all the great naturall Luminiſts; they became vain in their reaſonings, the more they enquired and ſearched, the further off they were from what is true, 1 Cor. 2. 14. The naturall man perceiveth not the things of God: foreign, is not a man carnall and groſſe in ſinne, but a ſouly man, one that doth excolere animam, ſuch as Tully and Ariſtotle. Now the wiſer theſe men were, the vainer they were. Chryſoſtome's compariſon doth well agree with them: As if (ſaith he) a king ſhould give much money to a ſervant that by it he ſhould make his family more glorious, and he goeth preſently and ſpends all his money upon whores and bawds. Thus did the Heathens: As Auſtin wrote to a man of great parts, Ornari abs te Diabolus quaerit, The Divell ſeeks to be adorned by thee.
Hence Egypt, that is accounted the mother of Sciences, and Moſes in regard of knowledge is preferred before the Egyptians; yet that was the ſeat alſo of Idolaters: and ſo the Aſtronomers, who lifted up themſelves above others in their knowledge of heavenly things, brought in thoſe monſters into heaven, and attributed worſhip to them, and in their worſhip of their gods they added many feaſts and ſports. Thus they invented an happineſſe, which Auſtin calleth Scyllaeum bonum, conſiſting of humane and brutiſh parts. If you aske how this naturall light The light of Nature obſcured three wayes.cometh to be thus obſcured; I anſwer, three waies: 1. By ill education. This is like the firſt concoction, or the firſt ſettling of the limbs of a man. Secondly, By long cuſtome and degeneration. Hence ſome Nations have by their publike lawes allowed groſſe ſins lawfull; as ſome Nations have allowed robberies, ſome inceſt, ſome that all old men ſhould be thrown down headlong a ſteep hill. Thirdly, By the juſt judgement of God; therefore three times in Rom. 1. God is ſaid to give them up to ſin.
Thirdly, You may ſpeak of Nature as informed, and enlightened The light of Nature inform'd by Gods Word an excellent help.by Gods Word: and while it's thus, you need not caſt this Hagar out of doores. Let Scripture and the Word of God lay the foundation ſtone, and then Reaſon may build upon it. It is Stella his compariſon: It is with Faith and Reaſon, as with the mould that is at the root of the barren and fruitleſſe tree; take the mould out, and throw in muck or other compoſt, and then put the mould in, it will much help the tree, which hindered it before. Thus, lay aſide Reaſon at firſt, and then receive truths by Faith; and afterwards improve them by Reaſon, and it will excellently help. Divine truths are not founded upon Reaſon, but Scripture; yet Reaſon may bear them up: as you ſee the elme or wall bear up the vine, but the elme or wall doth not bring forth the fruit; onelyonly the vine doth that. As long therefore as the light of Nature is not the rule, but ruled and ſquared by Gods Word, ſo long it cannot deceive us.
The ſecond grand conſideration is, That the light of Nature is The light of Nature, as it is a relict of Gods image is neceſſary in religious and morall things, and that two wayes.neceſſary in religious and morall things, though it be not ſufficient. We ſpeak of the light of Nature in the firſt conſideration, as it is the reſidue of the glorious image of God put into us (for of the later, as it is informed by Scripture, it is no queſtion.) Now this is abſolutely neceſſary two wayes: 1. As a paſſive qualification of the ſubject for faith; for, there cannot be faith in a ſtone, or in a beaſt, no more then there can be ſin in them: Therefore Reaſon, or the light of Nature, makes man in a paſſive capacity fit for grace; although he hath no active ability for it: And, when he is compared to a ſtone, it is not in the former ſenſe, but the later. And ſecondly, it's neceſſary by way of an inſtrument; for we cannot beleeve, unleſſe we underſtand whether knowledge be an act ingredient into the eſſence of faith, or whether it be prerequiſite: all hold there muſt be an act of the underſtanding, one way or other, going to beleeve. Hence knowledge is put for faith, and Hebr. 11. By faith we underſtand. Thus it is neceſſary as an inſtrument.
3. There is nothing true in Divinity that doth croſſe the truth of Nature, as it's the remnant of Gods image. This indeed is hard to Though ſome divine truths may tranſcend the reach of Nature, none do croſſe the truth thereof, as it is the remnant of Gods image.cleere in many points of Divinity; as in the doctrine of the Trinity, and the doctrine of Chriſts Incarnation, which ſeemeth paradoxall to Reaſon; of whom Tertullian, lib. 5. de carne Chriſti, cap. 5. thus, Natus est Dei Filius, non pudet, quia pudendum eſt; Mortuus eſt Dei Filius, prorſus credibile eſt, quia ineptum; Sepultus reſurrexit, certum eſt, quia impoſſibile. Yet, ſeeing the Apoſtle calls the naturall knowledge of a man Truth, and all truth is from God, which wayes ſoever it come, there can therefore be no contradiction between it. And hereupon our Divines doe, when they have confuted the Popiſh doctrine of Tranſubſtantiation by Scripture, ſhew alſo, that for a body to be in two places, is againſt the principles of Nature. They indeed call for faith in this point: and Lapide, upon theſe words, Hoc est corpus meum, ſaith, If Chriſt ſhould aske me at the day of judgement, Why did you beleeve the bread to be the body of Christ? I will anſwer, This text, if I be deceived, Theſe words have deceived me. But we muſt compare place with place, and Scripture with Scripture. As for the doctrine of the Trinity, though it be above Reaſon, and we cannot look into that myſterie, no more then an Owle can into the Sun beames, yet it is not againſt it.
4. The ſame object may be known by the light of Nature, and by Faith and the light of Nature go to the knowledge of the ſame thing different wayes.the light of Faith. This may eaſily be underſtood: I may know there is a God by the light of Nature; and I may beleeve it, becauſe the Scripture ſaith ſo: ſo Hebr. 11. I may by faith underſtand the Word was made, and by arguments know it was made; and this is called faith, by James. The divels beleeve, that is, they have an evident intuitive knowledge of God, and feel it by experience; not that they have faith, for that is a ſupernaturall gift wrought by God, and hath accompanying it pia affectio, to him that ſpeaketh, as the firſt truth. Faith therefore, and the light of Nature go to the knowledge of the ſame thing different waies: faith doth, becauſe of the teſtimony and divine revelation of God; the light of Nature doth, becauſe of arguments in the thing it ſelf by diſcourſe. And faith is not a dianoeticall or diſcurſive act of the underſtanding, but it's ſimple and apprehenſive.
5. Though Reaſon and the light of Nature be neceſſary, yet it is not The light of Nature a neceſſary inſtrument, but no Judge in matters of Faith.a Judge in matters of faith. The Lutheran ſeemeth to depreſſe Reaſon too much, and the Socinian exalteth it too high: They make it not onelyonly an inſtrument, but a Judge; and thereupon they reject the greateſt myſteries of Religion. I know ſome have endeavoured to ſhew, that Religio eſt ſumma ratio; and there are excellent men that have proved the truth of the Chriſtian Religion by Reaſon: and certainly, if we can by Reaſon prove there is any Religion at all, we may by the ſame Reaſon prove that the Chriſtian Religion is the true one. But who doth not ſee how uncertaine Reaſon is in compariſon of Faith? I doe not therefore like that aſſertion of one, who affects to be a great Rationaliſt (it is Chillingworth) that ſaith, We therefore receive the Scriptures to be the Word of God, becauſe we have the greateſt Reaſon that this is the Word of God. But we muſt not confound the inſtrument and the Judge: holy truths, they are Scripture truths, though hammered out by Reaſon. As the Smith that takes golden plate, and beates it into what ſhape he pleaſeth, his hammer doth not make it gold, but only gold of ſuch a ſhape: And thus alſo Reaſon doth not make a truth divine, onelyonly holds it forth, and declareth it in ſuch a way.
6. It's altogether inſufficient to preſcribe or ſet down any worſhip of Nature inſufficient to preſcribe divine Worſhip.God. Hence God doth ſo often forbid us to walk after our own imaginations, and to doe that which we ſhall chooſe. The Apoſtle calleth it Will-worſhip, when a mans Will is the meere cauſe of it. Now, it's true, men are more apt to admire this, as we ſee in the Phariſees and Papiſts; they dote upon their Traditions more then Gods Inſtitutions. Hence Raymundus, a Papiſt, ſpeaking of the Maſſe, It is (ſaith he) as full of mysteries, as the ſea is full of drops of water, as the heaven hath Angels, as the firmament hath ſtarres, and the earth little crummes of ſand. But what ſaith our Saviour, Luk. 18. that which is highly eſteemed before men, is abomination before God? That word, foreign, is applyed to idols and falſe-worſhip. It's true indeed, even in worſhip, light of Nature and prudence is inſtrumentally required to order the Inſtitutions of God; but as Reaſon may not make a new Article of Faith, ſo neither a new part of worſhip. Now Natures inſufficiency is deſcribed in theſe three reaſonings:
1. To have all the worſhip of God ſenſible and pleaſing to the eye. It 1. Becauſe it would have all the worſhip of God ſenſible and pleaſing to the eyeswas well called by Pariſienſis, a madneſſe in ſome, who doubted not to ſay, The Church was better ruled by the inventions of men then by the Scriptures. The people of Iſrael would have ſenſible gods, that they might ſee them: and certainly men doe as much delight in ſenſible pompous worſhip, as children do in gay babies; therefore the Prophet ſpeaketh of their goodly images. But all this ariſeth, becauſe they are ignorant of ſpirituall worſhip, and cannot tell how to make ſpirituall advantage from God. It was well ſaid by one, that A ſuperſtitious man is Gods flutterer, and not his friend; he is more officious then needs: and where a man is buſie ubi non oportet, (ſaid Tertullian) he is negligent ubi oportet. Such carnall ſenſible worſhippers are well compared to thoſe that, becauſe they have no children, delight in birds and dogs; ſo becauſe they have no true graces of the Spirit of God, they delight in theſe imitations.
2. To appoint mediatours between us and God. This was the 2. Becauſe it's prone to appoint mediatours between God and us.great Argument of the Heathens; they thought themſelves unworthy, and therefore appointed others to mediate between them and God; which Argument of the Heathens, ſome of the Fathers wrote againſt. But, doe not the Papiſts the ſame thing? Doe not they tell us, Petitioners at the Court doe not addreſſe themſelves immediately to the Prince, but get Favourites to ſpeak for them; ſo muſt we to God? And therefore Salmeron doth give ſome reaſons why it's more piety and religion to pray to God and Saints together, then to God alone. But is not this to forget Chriſt our head, who is made neerer to us then Angels are? And, indeed, Angels are reconciled to us by Chriſt. If therefore we follow the light of Nature thus, we ſhall fall into the ditch at laſt; and ſuperſtition is never more dangerous, then when it's coloured over with the ſpecious colours of Arguments.
3. To doe all by way of compenſation, and ſatisfaction to God. 3. Becauſe it performes all duties by way of compenſation & merit.Upon this ground were all the ſacrifices of the Heathens. And is not all this with Popery? Doe they not make all penall things compenſative? If they pray, that is meritorious; if they faſt, that is ſatisfactory. Hence ariſeth that ſeeming not to ſpare the fleſh, Col. 3. ult. and the Apoſtle ſaith, it hath a ſhew of wiſdome. But the more like any actions are to worſhip and wiſdome, and are not ſo, the more loathſome they are: as in an Ape, that which makes an Ape ſo much deformed and loathſome, is becauſe it is ſo like a man, and is not a man.
Uſe. Of Inſtruction. What hath made the idolatry of the Church of Rome ſo like Paganiſh and Ethnicall idolatry? Even becauſe they followed their light, the light of Nature and Reaſon. Look over all their Paganiſh gods, and they have anſwerable ſaints. As the Heathens had their Ceres, and Bacchus, and Aeſculapius; inſomuch that Varro ſaid, Diſcendum fuiſſet quâ de causâ quiſ que deorum avocandus eſſet, nè à Libero aqua, à Lympho vinum optaretur: ſo here, they have their St. Martin for the vineyard, Christopher for ſuddaine death, Nicholas for mariners, &c. And this was done at firſt, they ſay, to gain the Heathens; but the contrary fell out. Let us then follow the light of Nature no further then we ought; let her be an hand-maid, not a miſtreſſe. And then we muſt take heed of going againſt her where ſhe doth truly direct. Are there not many, not only unchriſtian, but alſo unnaturall actions? let us remember that.