Sermons Preached on Romans 8, Chapter 9

Sermons Preached on Romans 8 · Chapter 9

p. 251ROM. 8.3, 4.

For what the Law could not do, in that it was weak through the fleſh, God ſending his own Son, in the likeneſs of ſinful fleſh, and for ſin condemned ſin in the fleſh:

That the Righteouſneſs of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the fleſh, but after the Spirit.

CHAP. IX. Of the Laws inability to juſtify & ſave.

High and glorious Matter contained in theſe two Verſes. Of their Coherence with what went before. The difference amongſt Expoſitors about that. The General ſenſe and meaning of the Words. The various Readings and Explications of them. They are divided into Five Parts. There's a Complication in them of the ſeveral Cauſes of the Sinners Juſtification and Salvation. The Firſt Branch of the Text inſiſted upon, What the Law. &c. Four things obſerved in it. Of its Literal Expoſition. What is here meant by Law? What that was which the Law could not do? How 'tis ſaid to be weak? What the Fleſh is by which 'tis weakened? The whole matter drawn p. 252into one Obſervation. Of the Special matter of the Laws impotency, as it refers to Juſtification and Salvation. Three Grounds or Demonſtrations of its impotency:

1. It requires more than what the fal'n Creature can perform.

2. It doth not give what the fal'n Creature needs.

3. It cannot make reparation for what the fal'n Creature bath done.

Uſe 1. To humble us, becauſe we have a Nature in us by which Gods own Law is thus weakened: where ſome thing is ſaid againſt the Power of Nature. Uſe 2. Firſt, To vindicate the Honor of the Law, notwithſtanding the Weakneſs charg'd upon it. Secondly, The Laws Obligation not to be caſt off becauſe of this. Thirdly, Nor yet is it to be look'd upon as altogether weak or uſeleſs. Uſe 3. To take men off from expecting Righteouſneſs and Life from and by the Law. Uſe 4. To ſtir up Believers to adore the Love and Mercy of God, in ſending his Son, when the Law was under an utter inability to juſtifie and ſave.

High and glorious things contained in theſe Verſes.OUr Apoſtle here (Eagle-like) ſoar's aloft and riſes up in his diſcourſe to the moſt ſublime truths of the Goſpel. Theſe two Verſes ſet things before us ſo high and glorious, as may fill Heaven and Earth, Angels and Men with amazement and aſtoniſhment. Here's the whole Goſpel ſum'd up in a few words, contracted and brought into a narrow compaſs: here's in one view Man undone and Man recover'd; the depths of the Creatures miſery and the heights of Gods Mercy, in a ſhort abridgement. Here's Gods ſending his Son: which ſurely was the greateſt thing that ever he did (it being the higheſt contrivance of his infinite Wiſdom, and the higheſt product of his infinite Love). Here's this Son ſent in our fleſh; the firſt and the great Myſtery of the Goſpel (for it comes in the front of the Goſpel-Myſteries 1 Tim. 3.16.). Here's ſin condemn'd and the Sinner acquitted; the Law repreſented as impoſſible for us to keep, yet fulfilled for us in a moſt ſtrange and wonderful manner, as Chriſt hath done and ſuffered that for us which we were utterly unable to do and ſuffer our ſelves. O the**Eph. 3.18.Eph 3:18 bredths, lengths, depths, heights of the Wiſdom, Mercy, Juſtice, p. 253Holineſs of God! for all theſe ſeveral Attributes in what is here ſet forth, do concur and ſhine forth in their greateſt luſtre. Who can hear or read theſe two Verſes (with due conſideration), and not be in a divine tranſport and extaſie? for the truth is, whatever is ſhort of the moſt raiſed workings in the Soul, is too low for the glorious things here ſpoken of.

The Coherence of them with what goes before.We muſt firſt enquire into their Coherence or Connexion with what goes before. They are a further proof or confirmation of the main Propoſition laid down in the firſt Verſe, [there is no condemnation to them that are in Chriſt Jeſus]. That which might endanger as to Condemnation, was Sin: and there are two things in Sin to endanger about it, its Power and Guilt: therefore the Apoſtle ſhews, how ſuch who are in Chriſt are freed from both of theſe. As to the taking away its Power, that is ſpoken to in the ſecond Verſe: The Law of the Spirit of Life, in Chriſt Jeſus, hath made me free from the Law of Sin, &c. As to the taking away its Guilt, that he ſpeaks to in theſe two Verſes; [What the Law could not do, &c.] As if the Apoſtle had ſaid, If any thing could condemn God's people, it would be Sin; but that cannot, for tis condemn'd it ſelf: Chriſt (or God by him) hath condemned Sin, and ſo the Sinner himſelf ſhall not be condemned by it, or for it. The guilt of Sin being expiated, and the Sinner made righteous upon the imputation of Chriſts Obedience and Satisfaction, (which are the two things here aſſerted); ſurely there is, there can be no condemnation to thoſe who have an intereſt in this Grace. And this I judge to be the chief ſcope and proper reference of the Words; which I will endeavour to clear up a little further.

The Coherence further cleeredThe Believers Non-condemnation (as you have heard) is brought about, partly by Sanctification (in which the ſtrength and dominion of Sin is broken), and partly by Juſtification (in which the guilt of Sin is done away and not imputed). The Firſt of theſe, is done by the Spirit in the heart within, in the putting forth of his mighty power in the work of Regeneration; [the Law of the Spirit of Life, &c.] The Second, is done by the Son for the perſon without, in that Propitiatory Sacrifice which he offered up to God; upon which God is atoned, reconciled, ſatisfied, and ſo doth acquit the Sinner. Now the Apoſtle having ſpoken to that act which is proper to the Spirit (Verſ. 2.), he here expreſly ſpeaks to that which was proper to, and to be effected by the Son; [God ſending his Son in the, &c.] And he ſpeaks of condemning ſin for ſin, (that is) for Chriſt's being a Sacrifice for Sin; and therefore this muſt p. 254properly and ſtrictly refer to Juſtification, rather than to Sanctification. Yet I would not be too nice, for as (in a large ſenſe) the Law of ſin in the foregoing Verſe, may point to the guilt as well as to the power of ſin; ſo here (in a large ſenſe too), the condemning of ſin may point to the aboliſhing of the power, as well as to the expiating of the guilt of ſin. Expoſitors take in both, and I would not ſtraighten the Words more than needs, (though yet I conceive, in their main and primary intendment they refer to what is done in Juſtification). The Apoſtles Argument then ſtands thus, To them for whom God ſent his Son (all other ways being impoſſible), for ſin to condemn ſin, and in their ſtead to fulfil the righteouſneſs of the Law, to them there is no Condemnation: But for Believers and ſuch who are in Chriſt, God upon theſe terms ſent his Son; therefore to them there is no Condemnation. I ſhall follow thoſe**Nunc ſequitur expolitio vel illuſtratio probationis, qùod ſcilicet Dominus gratuitâ ſuâ miſericordiâ nos in Chriſto juſtificavit, id quod Legi erat impoſsibile. Calvin. Duobus argumentis conſolationem de indemnitate piis confirmavit; quorum prius fuit, quod Lex Spiritus, &c. Alterum, quod Deus miſſo filio ſuo, &c. Pareus. Jam accedit ad probationem ſententiae prioris, quae fuit de juſtificatione; nempe credentes in Chriſtum eſſe juſtificatos ſeu nullam eſſe eis condemnationem. Piſcat. in Paraphr. Obſervandum ſententiam hanc non cohaerere cum proximè praecedente, ſed cum priore membro verſiculi primi. Id. in Schol: (Vide Cajet. in locum). Quorum causâ Deus Pater miſit Filium ſuum coaeternum in carne conſpicuum fieri, iis nulla eſt condemnatio; at qui noſtrâ causâ &c. Gryn: (See Dutch Annot.) Interpreters who make the main Scope and drift of the words to lie in this.

I know there are**Firmamentum eſt in hoc verſu ſuperioris concluſionis, &c. Beza. Pertinent iſta declarationis vice ad id quod dixit, ſe per legem Spiritus, &c. et transfert totius hujus negotii cauſam & meritum in gratiam Dei. Muſcul. He proves the foreſaid making free, becauſe that God being reconciled by Chriſts death, he hath taken away from ſin that power, which he had granted it over man for a puniſhment of his firſt tranſgreſſion. Deod. Hic affertur ratio, quâ oſtenditur iſtum Dei Spiritum liberatorem nobis donatum eſſe &c. Pet Mart. Ratio ſuperioris ſententiae, quâ explicat Apoſtolus quomodo Lex Spiritus, &c. Juſtin. Hic Verſus continet aetiologiam item que exegeſin eorum quae verſu ſecundo dicta fuerunt. Vorſt. So Staplet. Streſo, R…lloc: &c. Several who go another way; they making the Words to be rather the further explication or continuation of that Matter which is laid down in the Second Verſe. The Saints are made free from the law of ſin and death, how is that brought about? why thus, God ſent his Son into the World, by whom he is reconciled to them; being reconcil'd, upon this he hath taken away from Sin that commanding power that it had before, aboliſhed its ſtrength, deveſted it of its former dominion and regency; and this they make to be the condemning of ſin in the Text. p. 255Well! I will not now object any thing againſt this Interpetation; (hereafter I ſhall ſpeak more to it, when I come to the more particular opening of the Clauſe, And for ſin condemned ſin); only at preſent give me leave to prefer the former.

The words conſider'd in themſelves. Their general ſenſe and meaning.Let us now conſider the Words in themſelves. As to their general Senſe and Meaning, 'tis plainly this (though ſomewhat more darkly expreſs'd),**Quod impoſſibile erat logi, Deus in Chriſto fecit. Anſelm. Mens Apoſtoli hoc loco eſt (etſi verbis obſcurioribus expreſſa), id nobis praeſtitum per gratiam quod Lex praeſtare non potuit. Eſtius. foreign. Theophyl. What the Law (it ſtanding in ſuch circumſtances) could not do, for the guilty, undone Sinner, that God through Chriſt hath fully done for him: this is that plain Truth which they reſolve themſelves into.

The various Readings of them.I find ſome conſiderable difference amongſt Expoſitors in the Reading of them.**Mihi locum hunc pro virili meâ perpendenti, videtur aliquid verborum deeſſe ad explendam ſententiam, veluti ſi ſic legamus; Nam quod Lex Moſaica non potuit juxta partem carnalem; ſecundum quam imbecillis erat & inefficax, hoc Deus [praeſtitit] miſſo Filio ſuo, qui Spiritualem Legis partem abſolvit. Eraſm. Subaudiendum verbum praeſtitit, aut aliquid ſimile. Eſtius. Omninó videtur foreign verbum foreign aut ſimile. Piſcat. Ut huic malo fuccurreretur (tale quid enim neceſſario intelligendum eſt) Staplet. Antid p. 626. Sanè conjunctio (Et) poſtulare videtur, ut aliquid ſubaudiatur, ut ſenſus ſit, perfecit id Deus quod Lex efficere non poterat. Juſtin: Subaudiendum videtur [praeſtitit], aut aliquid hujuſmodi. Bucer. To the ſame purpoſe Salmer. tom. 13. p. 531. Catharin Vorſt. Muſcul. Heming. &c. Some, would have a Word inſerted, as foreign, fecit, praeſtitit; thus, What the Law could not do, in that it was weak through the fleſh, God [did], he ſending his own Son &c. They conceive, with the addition of this one Word the ſence would be more clear, and the words would run much more ſmooth: but††Hoc ſupplementum non eſt neceſſarium. Tolet. &c. Sed non eſt opus, et Socinus Haereticus illud ad ſuam blaſphemiam trahit. Pareus. Mihi videtur aliter contextus optime fluere. Calv. Others will not admit of this addition.

**Unâ tantùm Conjunctione expunctâ, nullo praeterea opus eſt ſupplemento. Soto (with divers others).Some again would have the Conjunctive particle [foreign, and] and for ſin, &c. to be expung'd; apprehending that it makes the Words to be more obſcure. They would have us read them thus, [what the Law, &c. God ſending his own Son in the likeneſs of ſinful fleſh, for ſin condemned ſin in the fleſh]. But this too is not approved of, for††Copula foreign Eraſmum decèpit, ut inſereret verbum praeſtitit, egó veró amplificandi causâ poſitam ſuiſſe ſentio. Calv. Calvin lays a great ſtreſs upon that particle, as heightning the matter ſpoken of: [and for ſin] 'tis as much as Yea or Even for p. 256ſin condemned ſin, &c. 'Tis not a Pleonaſm or ſuperfluous word, but 'tis particula intenſiva, to ſhow the greatneſs and ſtrangeneſs of the thing ſpoken of. 'Tis not omitted by any of the Greek Scholiaſts; and I ſee no reaſon why we ſhould put it out.

Tolet would ſolve all

1ſt. by adding ſome illative word, as ideò, igitur, &c.

2dly. by turning the Participle [ſending] into the Verb [ſent];

(of which hereafter).

Take the Words in the groſs (as I am now conſidering of them), I think our Tranſlators render them very well; and there will be no neceſſity either to add to them, or to take from them. Only 'tis neceſſary that you make this Variation or Addition; whereas 'tis ſaid [and for ſin condemned ſin], reade [and by a Sin-offering or Sacrifice for Sin, condemned Sin]. And ſo they will run thus, For what the Law could not do, in that it was weak through the fleſh, God ſending (or ſent) his own Son in the likeneſs of ſinful fleſh, and [by a Sacrifice] for Sin condemned Sin in the fleſh: That the righteouſneſs, &c.

There are great difficulties in their ſeveral branches and parts; but they ſhall be opened as I go over them in their order.

The Words divided into Five Parts.If you take them in pieces, you have theſe Five things in them;

1. 'Tis here imply'd, That ſomething was to be done in order to the Recovery, Juſtification, Salvation of the loſt Sinner

2. Here's an expreſs aſſertion of the weakneſs, inability of the Law, to do what was to be done; with the true cauſe of that inability of the Law: [What the Law could not do, in that it was weak through the fleſh].

3. The Way and Method which the wiſe and gracious God took upon this, that He might effectually do that which the Law could not de: [He ſent his own Son in the likeneſs of ſinful fleſh].

4. The double Effect produced by this, or the double End and deſign of God in this ſending of his Son: [for ſin he condemned ſin in the fleſh; That the righteouſneſs of the Law might be fulfilled].

5. The deſcription of the perſons who have an intereſt in all this Grace: [who walk not after the fleſh, but after the Spirit].

We have in the whole, a Complication of the ſeveral Cauſes of the Sinner's Juſtification and Redemption. Here's a Complication of the Cauſes of the Sinners Juſtification and Salvation.Here's the Deficient Cauſe [the Law]; Here's the Principal Efficient Cauſe [God the Father]; here's the Subordinate Agent (I mean with reſpect to the Father) or the Meritorious Cauſe, [Chriſt the Son]; the Formal and alſo the Material Cauſe, [for ſin condemning ſin p. 257in the fleſh]; the Final Cauſe, the Finis foreign [that the Righteouſneſs of the Law might be fulfilled], and the Finis foreign [in us, who walk not after the fleſh, but &c.] Here I bring in the Words [for ſin condemned ſin] under another Head of Cauſes than that laid down but now in the diviſion of the words; but that I may do well enough, becauſe they will bear diverſe cauſal reſpects.

I begin with the Cauſa deficiens; which comes in alſo as the Procatartick or impulſiue Cauſe, as that which moved God to ſend his Son, (viz.) the weakneſs and impotency of the Law to help the loſt Sinner.

The firſt Branch of the Words pitch'd upon. Four things obſerved in it.For what the Law could not do, in that it was weak through the fleſh]. Here obſerve,

1. The thing ſpoken of, [the Law].

2. That which is aſſerted concerning this Law, [it could not do].

3. The ground or reaſon of this its inability to do, [in that it was weak].

4. The aſſignation of the true Cauſe of its weakneſs, (viz.) the fleſh; [in that it was weak through the fleſh]: it could not do becauſe it was weak, and it was weak becauſe of the Fleſh.

I will a little inſiſt upon the Literal Explication of this Branch, and then come to the matter contained in it.

The literal explication of the Words.[For what the Law could not do]: In the Greek 'tis foreign; which, if you render word for word, runs thus, For the impoſſible of the Law, or the invalid of the Law, (ſo**Quod invalidum erat Legis. De Reſur. carnis Cap. 46. Tertullian renders it). The Senſe and meaning of the expreſſion is plain enough; our Tranſlation gives us that very well, What the Law could not do: but the form and manner of it in the Original (eſpecially when 'tis turn'd into our language), is ſomewhat harſh and unuſual.

Interpreters, for the opening of the Phraſe and the cleering up of the connexion of the matter, do ſeveral wayes Comment upon the Words. Some bring in this firſt Paragraph under a Parentheſis; but that ſignifies but little one way or another.**foreign impotentiâ Legis exiſtente. Beza. Mihi placet, ut foreign Nominativus poſitus ſit abſolutè loco Genitivi, ut ſenſus ſit, cum enim effet impoſſibile, &c. Eraſm. Fateri neceſſe eſt Panli orationem mutilam eſſe & imperfectam, nifi dicamus, foreign poſitum eſſe abſolute loco ſecundi Caſus, quo Graeci eo firmè modo utuntur quo Latini Caſu auferendi &c. Juſtin. Some, would read it abſolutely, and change the Nominative Caſe into the Genitive, (the Greeks uſing that Caſe as the Latines do the Ablative in that p. 258form of expreſſion); thus, for foreign, they turn it foreign or foreign, the Law being unable, in that it was weak through the fleſh, God ſent, &c. Some, take it in the Accuſative Caſe, and put in the word foreign; the impoſſible part of the Law God performed or made good by the ſending of Chriſt. Some, change the foreign into foreign, putting in foreign(foreign); what was the impoſſible of the Law (or to the Law) that God ſupplied by the ſending of his Son: (this comes neereſt to our Tranſlation).**Impoſſible legis: i. e. impoſſibilitas implendae legis ex eo procedebat, quoniam Lex infirma erat per Carnem. Tolet. Some, make the impoſſibile Legis to be taken Subſtantivè, for impoſſibilitas implendae Legis; which impoſſibility of fulfilling the Law proceeded from hence, becauſe the Law was weak through the fleſh. ‖‖So Camerarius. foreign Articâ conſtructione uſitatà accipi commodè poteſt, pro foreign. Beza. Propter impotentiam Legis, eò quod per camem erat infirmata Pare.Some tell us, the Words are an Atticiſm, and they make a double Atticiſm in them; 'tis firſt foreign for foreign, and then 'tis foreign for foreign. Then the ſenſe of them runs thus; For the impotency and inability (or becauſe of the impotency and inability of the Law), therefore God ſent his Son. The**Quùm impotens eſſet Lex propter infirmitatem carnis &c. V. Syr. Ob defectum virium legis, quo laborabat in carne &c V. Arab. Et cum impotentes cramus ad praeſtandum mandata legis &c. V. Ethiop. Ancient Verſions bring it in with a Since or Becauſe; Since there was an utter impoſſibility or inability in the Law to juſtifie or recover loſt man, therefore God pitch'd upon another way, (viz.) the Incarnation, Obedience, Satisfaction of his own Son. I thought it not amiſs, to put down theſe ſeveral Explications and Readings of the Words, for the ſatisfaction of more inquiſitive perſons concerning the Expreſſion it ſelf, and the Coherence of the Matter: but as to the plain Senſe, that our Tranſlators (as I ſaid before) give us very well; For what the Law could not do, (or becauſe of the Laws inability to do), in that it was weak through the fleſh, therefore God ſent his Son, &c.

The Sum of the Words in Two Propoſi ions.I paſs from the Letter of the Words to the Matter contain'd in them; and that may be ſum'd up in theſe Two Propoſitions:

1. There was ſomething to be done by and for the Sinner,1. Prop. which the Law could not do: it was under an impoſſibility of doing it.

2. Therefore the Law could not thus do, 2. Prop:becauſe it was weak through the fleſh.

p. 259For the better underſtanding of which Propoſitions, 4 Queſtions anſwered.it will be neceſſary to reſolve theſe Four Queſtions:

1. Of what Law doth the Apoſtle here ſpeak?

2. What was the [foreign], that which the Law could not do?

3. How is the Law ſaid to be weak?

4. What is meant by the [Fleſh] from which the Laws weakneſs proceeds?

Firſt, Of what Law doth the Apoſtle here ſpeak, 1. Queſt. What Law is here meant?when he ſaith What the Law could not do?

I anſwer, Of Gods own Law, and that too in its ſtrict and proper acceptation.Anſw. For the Word [Law] is taken ſometimes in an improper, alluſive, Metaphorical notion; as in the Verſe foregoing, where you read of the Law of the Spirit and of the Law of Sin, (which is nothing but the power and commanding efficacy of the Spirit and of Sin). But here in this Verſe 'tis to be taken in the ſtrict and proper notion of a Law; (viz.) as it notes that declaration or revelation which God (the great Law-giver) hath made of his Will, therein binding and obliging the reaſonable creature to duty. I know Some underſtand the Law here of that**Lex mentis quae impleri non poterat propter carnem peccati. Tolet. Crediderim ego, non hic legem Moſis, ſed legem illam mentis accipiendam eſſe. Juſtin. Poteſt & de lege mentis intelligi, quam ſupra dixit velle facere bonum, ſed per infirmitatem & fragilitatem carnis implere non poſſe. Orig. Law of the Mind ſpoken of Chap. 7.23; which lies in ſtrong propenſions, efficacious and commanding impulſions to what is holy and good, ſpringing from the Sanctifi'd nature in regenerate perſons: But I conceive this interpretation is not ſo genuine, nor ſo well ſuiting with the Apoſtles Scope in the words; where he is treating not of the Law which is in ſome perſons, but of the Law which is impoſed upon all; of that Law the righteouſneſs of which was to be fulfilled (as it follows Verſ. 4.): and therefore it muſt be underſtood of Gods own Law, that being it which Chriſt was to fulfil and ſatisfie, and not any other Law.

Since then the Words point to the Law of God, we muſt bring the Queſtion into a narrower compaſs; and enquire What Law of God is here ſpoken of? For anſwer to which (that I may as much as I can avoid unneceſſary excurſions), I ſhall only ſay this; That 'tis either that Primitive Law which God impos'd upon Adam (and in him upon all mankind), upon the keeping of which he promiſed Life, upon the breaking of which he threatned death, (it being the Summary of the Covenant of Works): Or elſe, 'tis that Law which God gave the people of Iſrael from Mount Sinai, p. 260namely the Decalogue or Moral Law. Which Law was but a new draught of the Law firſt made with Adam; for that being by his Fall much defac'd, nay almoſt quite obliterated (as it was written in his heart), it pleas'd the Lord to copy it out again and to write it afreſh (in Tables of Stone) in fair and legible Characters. And this too was a Scheme or Tranſcript and Summary of the Covenant of Works, firſt made with Adam, (though it was not given to the people of Iſrael purely and abſolutely as the Covenant of Works, for in reference to its end and deſign there was much in it of the Covenant of Grace). For Matter and Subſtance they were both but one and the ſame Law; the Terms and Conditions of both were the ſame,**Rom. 10.5.Rom 10:5 Do and Live: but there were certain appendixes of Grace to the Moral Law, which were not in that made with Adam in the ſtate of innocency (as is fully made out by ſeveral **Camero de tripl. Foedere. Coceius de Foedere. Bulkely on the Covenant. p. 57.Writers upon the Covenant); ſo that it was a mixt thing, there being ſomething in it of the Covenant of Works, and ſomething alſo of the Covenant of Grace. Now the Law conſidered as firſt given to Adam, and then as renewed to the people of Iſrael, ſo far as in both it was the Covenant of Works, is the Law here ſpoken of; as being concluded under an impoſſibility of doing what was requiſite to be done. 'Twas not the Ceremonial Law which the Apoſtle here had in his eye, but the**Legem dicit, non praecepta Sacrificicrum, et caetera quae erant umbra uſ que ad tempus Chriſti data, ſed illam quam &c. Hieron. Quare nihil eſt quod quiſquam cavilletur, illud quod Paulus ait, Impoſſibile fuiſſe Legi, non ad Moralem ſed ad Ceremonias referri. P. Martyr. Moral Law it ſelf: which (if it was neceſſary) might be evinc'd by ſeveral Conſiderations; but this one is enough, he ſpeaks of that Law the righteouſneſs of which was to be fulfilled in Believers, (For Law in the 3 verſe muſt be expounded by Law in the 4 verſe); now 'tis the righteouſneſs of the Moral Law which is fulfilled in us; Ergo. 'Tis very true, Paul inſiſting upon the Laws weakneſs doth ſometimes direct his diſcourſe to the Ceremonial, and ſometimes to the Moral Law; and it would be of great uſe to us to underſtand his Epiſtles, if we could exactly hit upon the true notion of that Law of which he occaſionally ſpeaks: but undoubtedly here 'twas the Moral Law (as the Covenant of Works), of which he affirmeth that it could not do &c. Let this ſuffice for anſwer to the Firſt Queſtion.

The Second is,2d. Queſt. What is the thing which the Law could not do? What doth this impoſſible of the Law refer to? or what is the thing in Special which the Law could not do?

To this 'tis anſwered ſeveral wayes: You read (verſ. 1.) of exemption from condemnation, now this the Law could not do: the Law (in ſeparation from Chriſt and eſpecially in oppoſition to Chriſt) p. 261can condemn millions, but it cannot ſave one perſon from condemnation; (thus**&c. nempe condemnationem ab homine auferre. Piſcat. Some do open it). You read (verſ. 2.) of being made free from the Law of ſin and death; herein too was the Law impotent, it might lay ſome reſtraints upon ſin but it could never bring down the power of Sin: (††Aptiſſimus mihi ſenſus videtur, ut illa verba non modo ſequentia, ſed multo magis praecedentia reſpiciant &c. ut in carnis contumaciam domandam vires non haberet. Contz. Some apply it to this). There is the bleſſed empire or regency of the Spirit over the Fleſh, as alſo the full and perfect obeying of the Laws commands: neither of theſe could the Law effect; (ſo‖‖Duo quantum ad propoſitum ſpectar ſubordinata ſunt, quae Lex nequit efficere; Alterum eſt Dominium Spiritus ſuper carnem, alterum hinc conſequens eſt, perfecta praeceptorum Legis executio. Cajet. Cajetaine opens it). There is the amendment and reformation of the life and manners: this the Law could not do; (this explication††Dr. Hammond. Some ſix upon). The Text ſpeaks of the condemning of ſin: this the Law could not do, it can condemn the Sinner but it cannot (in a way of expiation) condemn ſin it ſelf; (So**Quae erat impoſſibilitas Legis? nempe id facere, quod Deus deinde fecit in Carne Filii ſui, condemnare peccatum. Lud. De Dieu. De Dieu paraphraſeth upon it).‖‖Quid eſt illud, quod legi erat praeſtitu impoſſibile? Abolere peccatum, & reddere juſtos, liberare à jure peccati & mortis, dare ut juſtitia, quam docebat & exigebat, in nobis impleretur. Muſcul. Muſculus puts many things together; What is it (ſaith he) that was impoſſible to the Law? he anſwers, to aboliſh ſin, to make righteous, to free from the Law of Sin and Death, to give that the righteouſneſs which it taught and exacted, ſhould be fulfilled in us.

All theſe ſeveral explications are very true; but further, there's the reconciling of God and the Sinner, the atoning and propitiating of an incenſed God, the ſatisfying of infinite juſtice, the paying of vaſt debts contracted, the juſtifying of the guilty, the giving of a right and title to Heaven, (with many other ſuch-like great things). Now the Law was under an impoſſibility of doing or effecting any of theſe; inſomuch that God muſt ſend his Son, or no**foreign. Athan. Significat Legem fuiſſe imbecillem & invalidam ad juſtificandom hominem. Peter. Diſp. 3. in c. 8. ad Rom. juſtification, no reconciliation, no atonement, no ſatisfaction, no paiment, no pardon, no righteouſneſs, no ſalvation: (which will be by and by particularly made out, in the two moſt eminent branches of the Laws impotency.)

I muſt mind you, that I am in all this ſpeaking of the Moral Law: The inability of the Ceremonial Law (abſtracted from Chriſt, who was the pith and marrow, and who put energy and efficacy into all the types, rites, ſhadows of that Law), I ſay, its p. 262inability to do any thing (further than to point or direct and lead to Chriſt), is eaſily granted. 'Tis the very thing which the Apoſtle largely inſiſts upon the proof of, in his excellent Epiſtle to the Hebrews: Chap. 7.18, 19. For there is verily a diſannulling of the Commandment going before, for [the weakneſs] and unprofitableneſs thereof; for the Law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did, by the which we draw nigh unto God. Heb. 9.9. Which was a figure for the time then preſent, in which were offered both gifts and ſacrifices, that [could not] make him that did the ſervice perfect, as pertaining to the conſcience. So Heb. 10.1. For the Law having a ſhadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, [can never] with thoſe Sacrifices which they offered year by year continualy, make the commers thereunto perfect: (foreign, here's a total negation of the power of the Ceremonial Law). And that Law had its foreign alſo, for the Apoſtle adds (verſ. 4.), it is not poſſible [foreign] that the blood of Bulls and Goats ſhould take away ſins: thus it was with that Law (of which 'tis very clear Paul ſpeaks in theſe places). And it was but little better with the Moral Law it ſelf (though that was a far higher and better Law); even this was and is as weak as the former. This very Law which is ſo much for doing, which requires and commands the creature to be ſo much in doing, it ſelf can do little or nothing. The loſt Sinner hath great things to be done by him and for him; but in all theſe, the Moral Law (though God's own Law and an excellent Law) cannot (without Chriſt) give the leaſt help or aſſiſtance to him.

The Third Enquiry is,3d Queſt. How the Law is ſaid to be weak? What is the weakneſs of the Law here ſpoken of?

The word is foreign,Anſw. which is uſed to ſet forth any debility or weakneſs whether it be natural or praeternatural, (as being occaſioned by ſome bodily diſeaſe or diſtemper, (in which Senſe 'tis often uſed in the New Teſtament). 'Tis applied here to the Law; and 'tis brought in as the ground of its foreign before mentioned. Elſe where the Apoſtle uſes it, he ſpeaks of the [foreign] the weakneſs of the Commandment, Heb. 7.18. And ſpeaking of the ordinances, rites, injunctions of the Ceremonial Law, he calls them [foreign] weak and beggarly elements, Gal. 4.9. Here in the Text an higher Law was in his eye, and yet he attributes weakneſs to it alſo: it could not do becauſe it was weak, and it was weak becauſe it could not do, (for theſe two do reciprocally open and prove each the other).

p. 263And let me add, that this weakneſs of the Law is not**foreign ex quâ foreign naſcitur, virium non imbecillitatem, ſed omnem deſtitutionem declarat. Beza. Non dicit, quod Legi erat grave & difficile, ſed quod &c. quibus ſanè verbis adimit Legi in univerſum juſtificandi vim &c. Muſcul. Infirmitatem Legis accipe, quomodo ſolet uſurpare Apoſtolus vocabulum foreign, non tantùm pro modicâ imbecillitate verùm pro impotentiâ; ut ſignificet Legem nihil prorſus momenti habere ad conferendam juſtitiam. Calv. Quamquam per verbum infirmari foreign ab Interprete verſum ſit, vis tamen illius verbi Graecè potius ſignificat vires nullas quam imbecillas. Salmer. tom. 13. p. 532. gradual or partial but total: 'tis not the having of a leſſer ſtrength but 'tis the negation of all ſtrength; 'tis ſo weak, that it hath no power at all to accompliſh what is here intended. The Apoſtle carries it up to an impoſſibility: he doth not ſay, it was ſomewhat hard or difficult for the Law to do thus and thus, or that it could do ſomething though but imperfectly; but he ſays this was impoſſible to it as being utterly above its power and ability. A man that is weak may do ſomething, though he cannot do it vigorouſly, exactly, and throughly: but now (as to Juſtification and Salvation) the Law (conſidered in its ſelf) is ſo weak, that it can do nothing; it cannot have the leaſt influence into theſe effects (further than as God is pleaſed to make uſe of it in a preparatory or directive manner). Its weakneſs as to the great things of the Goſpel, is like the weakneſs of the body when 'tis dead; 1 Cor.15.43. It is ſown in weakneſs [foreign, 'tis the ſame word with that in the Text concerning the Law], it is raiſed in power: a dead body is ſo weak that it cannot put forth one vital act; it may be weak in part whilſt it lives, but when 'tis dead it lies under a total weakneſs: Such is the weakneſs or impotency of the Law, in reference to the taking away of guilt and the making of a perſon righteous before God.

Fourthly,4th Queſt. What are we to underſtand by Fleſh? It will be query'd What the Fleſh is here by which the Law is made thus weak?

The word [Fleſh] occurs thrice in this Verſe, &c.Anſw. in that it was weak through the Fleſh, God ſent his Son in the likeneſs of ſinful Fleſh, and for ſin condemned ſin in the Fleſh: As 'tis us'd in the firſt place, it carries in it a very different ſenſe from what it doth in the two following places; (and tis not unuſual in holy Writ, for one and the ſame Word in one and the ſame Verſe to be taken in different ſenſes; as you may ſee Matth. 26.29. Matth. 8.22.) When 'tis ſaid the Law was weak through the Fleſh, here Fleſh is taken Morally for the corrupt nature in man: but when 'tis ſaid, God ſent his Son in the likeneſs of ſinful Fleſh (and ſo on), there Fleſh is taken Phyſically for the humane nature of Chriſt. But to come to the buſineſs in hand! The Law was weak [through the Fleſh]: By this p. 264Fleſh the Manichees of old underſtood the very being and ſubſtance of Fleſh; that which conſtitutes the body in man: but this interpretation is rejected by all. Origen (with ſome others) expounds it of the**Puto quod ſtance of Fleſh; that which Legem M…ſis in duas partes Apoſtolus dividat, & aliud in eâ carnem, aliud Spiritum nominat; et illam quidem obſervantiam quae ſecundum literam geritur, ſenſum caruis appellat, illam verò quae accipitur ſpiritualitèr, Spiritum nominat—Impoſſibile Legis cò quod &c. Intellectus qui ſecundum literam eſt accipi poteſt, ipſe enim impoſſibilis erat &c. Orig. Vel per carnem infumabatur Lex, i. e. per carnalem intellectum, et per carnalem obſervantiam erat imbecilla, non per ſeipſam. Anſelm. Per Carnem, h. e. Per carnalem Legis intelligentiam, ſive carnis infirmitatem, cui deerat Evangelica Gratia. Eraſm. Origenes Per Carnem intelligit craſſam, literalem, et carnalem Legis intelligentiam; at que etiam Legis infirmitatem in eò collocat, quod impoſſibile fuer it Legis Ceremonias omnes ſecundum Carnem (i.e.) ſecundum Literam obſervare. A. Lapide. Ceremonial Law, with reſpect to the groſs and literal ſenſe and meaning of that Law: Now 'tis true (as hath been already obſerved), that that Law may be ſtiled Fleſh becauſe it lay very much in fleſhly things; 'tis called the Law of a carnal commandment, Heb. 7.16; it ſtood only in meats, and drinks, and divers waſhings, and carnal ordinances, impoſed till the time of reformation, Heb. 9.10. And 'tis alſo moſt true, that they who looked no further than the fleſhly part the letter of that Law, who did haerere in cortice and only rodere literarum oſſa (as the Jews did); to them it muſt needs be weak, and unable to bring about any Evangelical and ſaving good. But this is not the Law (as you have heard) which the Apoſtle here doth mainly intend:**Diſtinguit hoc loco impuriſſimus ille ſcriptor Legem in Carnem et Spiritum &c. Beza in loc. Beza is very ſharp againſt Origen for this his expoſition of the fleſh. Cajetaine interprets it of the Carnal ſtate of the Jews under the Law; they being in that ſtate by means thereof to them the Law was weak: But (as to this explication) our learned ‖‖Dr. Hammond in Annot. (a)Annotator well obſerves, that Fleſh here is not ſo properly the State of men under the Law, as that which is the means by which occaſionally the Law became weak and unable to reſtrain men, (viz.) the carnal or fleſhly appetite which is ſo contrary to the propoſals of the Law; therefore he expounds it by that: (and††Caro (i.e.) carnales Judaeorum affectus vires ejus retuderant. Act. 13.38. Heb 9.15. Grot.Acts 13:38Heb 9:15 Grotius before him went the ſame way). The fulleſt and beſt interpretation of this Fleſh and that which is moſt**Per Carnem: i. e. vitiatam hominis naturam Piſcat. &c. i.e. Per camis deſideria, et per fomitem vitiorum qui eſt in came. Anſelm. Ideo lex infirma eſt, quia in vitiatam naturam incurrit. P. Mart. Quum vel Legem infirmatam fuiſſe &c. nemo ſibi finget damnari hic ſubſtantiam carnis aut naturam corporis, nam haec à Deo creata ſunt bona; ſed per Carnem intelligit pravitatem & corruptionem, quae per lapſum Adami tranſivit in noſtrum genus. Idem. generally followed, is this; 'tis the corrupt, ſinful depraved nature that is in p. 265fal'n man: O this is that which puts ſuch a weakneſs and inability upon the Law, to help and recover the undone Sinner! 'tis by this that the Law is ſo infeebled and debilitated as to its production of any ſpiritual or ſaving effects. The Apoſtle layes it upon this, the Law could not do [in that] it was weak through the fleſh, (that is) becauſe it was weak through the Fleſh: For the [foreign] is**foreign valet hic Ruia more Hebraico. Grot. Cauſal; therefore 'tis uſually rendred here by quia, quoniam, quandoquidem, eò quod &c. And ſo it is in other places, as Heb. 2.18. For [in that] he himſelf hath ſuffered [foreign, becauſe he hath ſuffered], being tempted he is able to ſuccor them that are tempted: 'tis as much as the foreign Rom. 5.12. Sometimes indeed 'tis only expreſſive of ſuch a time or ſtate or condition; as Mar. 2.19. Can the children of the Bride-chamber faſt while the Bridegroom is with them? (foreign): Sometimes again 'tis rendred by [whereas], as 1 Pet. 2.12. 1 Pet. 3.16; but here in the Text 'tis taken cauſally.

Let it then be obſerved, that the**Impotentia legis &c. non fuit ex ipſa Lege, quaſi juſtificare homines eam praeſtantes nequiret, ſed ex carne (h. e.) ex corruptione naturae humanae, quae hominem reddit impotentem ad praeſtandam legem. Pare us. Non infirmitatem illi impingit quaſi intrinſecus inhaerentem, ſed quaſi extrinſecus ratione carnis ei adjacentem. Soto. weakneſs. of the Law is not properly inherent or from the Law it ſelf, only 'tis adventitious, accidental, and from the ſtate and condition of the Subject with whom it hath to do. 'Tis the wickedneſs. of mans Nature which is the ſole cauſe of the Law's weakneſs. If Man was the ſame now that at firſt he was, the Law would be the ſame too now that at firſt it was; and have the ſame power and ability that then it had; but he being fallen now the Law is weak'ned. 'Tis not (I ſay) from any intrinſick defect or weakneſs in the Law, but only becauſe it meets with a Subject in which there is Fleſh, a depraved nature; and ſo it cannot do that which before it did when the Nature was holy and good. When Man was in the ſtate of innocency, the Law (Sampſon like) was in its full ſtrength and could do whatever was proper to it; yea, (as to it ſelf) it is able yet to do the ſame; but the caſe with us is altered: we cannot now fulfil this Law nor come up to what it requires of us, and therefore 'tis weak. True, the Apoſtle layes it upon the weakneſs of the Law, he ſaith it was weak; but then he tells you what was the ground of that weakneſs, namely our Feſh. The Law is only weak to us becauſe we are weak to it: the ſtrongeſt Sword in a weak hand can do but little execution; the brighteſt Sun cannot give light to a blind eye, (not from any impotency in it ſelf; but meerly from the p. 266incapacity of the Subject): and that's the caſe in the Law's foreign with reſpect to the Sinner. Pray obſerve, the Law ſtrengthens Sin and Sin weakens the Law: 1 Cor. 15.56. The ſtrength of Sin is the Law; (viz.) as the Law gives it a killing and condemning power, and as (through man's corruption) it makes Sin to be more active, impetuous and boyſtrous; thus Sin is ſtrengthned by the Law: But then the weakneſs of the Law is Sin, for becauſe of that it cannot now do what formerly it could.

Thus I have anſwered the Four Queſtions propounded; under which I have cleared up the Words, and alſo (in part) the Matter contained in them. Which being done, I might from the whole **The whole matter in the Words drawn into one Obſervation.raiſe this Obſervation, That the Law, yea the Moral Law it ſelf, though it was an excellent Law, the Law of Gods own making, and deſign'd by him for high and excellent ends; yet it having now to do with fallen man, with Sinners that have Fleſh (a corrupt nature) in them, it is become weak and altogether unable to juſtifie and ſave.

I muſt not enter upon any large proſecution of this Point; yet let me ſpeak ſomething to it, both to fill up what I have hitherto but juſt touch'd upon, and alſo to ſupply what as yet I have ſaid nothing to. There are but Two Things which I would further open:

1. The Special Matter of the Laws weakneſs.

2. The Grounds or Demonſtrations of the Laws weakneſs.

The Laws inability to juſtifie and ſave.For the Firſt the Special Matter of the Laws weakneſs, that will be cleared up

1. With reſpect to Juſtification.

2. With reſpect to Salvation and Eternal Life. What the Law could not do in that it was weak: what was the thing particularly which the Law could not do? what did its weakneſs eſpecially refer to? Anſw. The Scripture mainly fixes it upon theſe Two things, it could not juſtifie, it could not eternally ſave. There are indeed many other things (ſome of which have been already hinted) which the Law could not do; but theſe two are moſt uſually inſtanc'd in in the Word when it ſpeaks of or would ſet forth the Laws weakneſs.

1. The Law (upon its terms of doing and working) ever ſince mans Fall alwayes was, and yet is, unable to juſtifie: it may poſſibly attempt ſuch a thing (or rather the Sinner may look for ſuch a thing from it), but it cannot carry it on to any good iſſue. This (I conceive) Pauls thoughts were in ſpecial upon, when he ſays p. 267what the Law could not do: For 'tis the Sinners juſtification which he in this place is diſcourſing of; and he firſt begins with the Law as being impotent and inſufficient to accompliſh this juſtification. God by Chriſt condemned ſin (i. e. he aboliſh'd and cut off Sins Guilt), and by him he brought about a righteouſneſs for the Sinner; but the doing of this by the Law was a thing altogether impoſſible: that could not make the Creature to ceaſe to be guilty or to become righteous. The proving of this truth was elſewhere his main buſineſs: as namely in the 3d, 4th, 5th Chapters of this Epiſtle, where he doth profeſſedly and largely inſiſt upon it. That one place is a ſufficient proof of it, Chapt. 3.20. Therefore by the deeds of the Law, there ſhall no fleſh be juſtified in his ſight; for by the Law is the knowledge of Sin. He purſues the ſame Argument in his Epiſtle to the Galatians, where he goes over it again and again. Gal. 2.16, 21. Knowing that a man is not juſtified by the works of the Law, but by the faith of Jeſus Chriſt, even we have believed in Jeſus Chriſt, that we might be juſtified by the faith of Chriſt, and not by the works of the Law: for by the works of the Law ſhall no fleſh be juſtified. I do not fruſtrate the Grace of God: for if righteouſneſs come by the Law, then Chriſt is dead in vain. Gal. 3.11, 21, 22. But that no man is juſtified by the Law in the ſight of God, it is evident: for, The juſt ſhall live by faith.—Is the Law then againſt the promiſes of God? God forbid.! for if there had been a Law given which could have given life, verily righteouſneſs ſhould have been by the Law. But the Scripture hath concluded all under Sin, that the promiſe by faith of Jeſus Chriſt, might be given to them that believe. So alſo in his Sermon at Antioch, Acts 13.39. By him all that believe are juſtified from all things, from which ye could not be juſtified by the Law of Moſes. How full and poſitive are the Scriptures in the denial of any power to the Law to juſtifie! It can diſcover Sin, accuſe and judge for Sin, but it cannot expiate Sin or make a man righteous before God. There is indeed the righteouſneſs of the Law, and (upon that) righteouſneſs by the Law; but that now is altogether unattainable further than as 'tis brought about and accompliſhed in the hands of Chriſt; the Law in Chriſts hands can do great things, but in ours it can do nothing.

So alſo the Law is weak in reference to Eternal life. It could not do (i. e.) it could not ſave; it never yet (as ſeparated from Chriſt) carried one Sinner to Heaven: 'tis above the ability of the Law to ſave one. Soul. Conſider it as the Covenant of works ſo its language is Do and Live, Rom. 10.5. For Moſes p. 268deſcribeth the righteouſneſs of the Law, that the man which doth theſe things ſhall live by them: Now man in his lapſed ſtate cannot do according to the Laws demands, therefore by it there's no Life for him. Had he continued in the ſtate of innocency: he had been able to have done all which the Law required, and ſo would have attained Life by it in the way of doing; but now the caſe is altered. If Salvation depended upon the Creatures perfect and perſonal obedience not a man would be ſaved. There muſt indeed be Obedience to the Law or no Salvation; but ſhould it be that very Obedience which the Law calls for, and as the Law calls for it (viz.) as the condition of the firſt Covenant, this would make ſalvation abſolutely impoſſible. You know, Moſes brought Iſrael to the borders of the Holy Land but Joſhua muſt lead them into it: ſo the Law (as God uſes it in ſubſerviency to the Goſpel), may do ſomething toward the ſaving of a poor creature; but 'tis the alone Merit and Obedience of the Lord Jeſus (applyed by Faith), which muſt put the Sinner into the poſſeſſion of the Heavenly Reſt. That which now ſaves, is Chriſt not Moſes, the Goſpel not the Law, believing not doing, (I mean only in the old Covenant ſenſe). So much for the Matter of the Laws impotency.

The Grounds or Demonſtrations of the Laws inability to juſtifie and ſave.Secondly: Let me give you the Grounds, or (if you will) the Demonſtrations of the Laws impotency and weakneſs to juſtifie and ſave: He inſtance in Three.

1. It requires that which the Creature cannot perform. Before the Law do any great thing for a perſon it muſt firſt be exactly fulfill'd; for that's its way, the terms and condition which it ſtands upon: and 'tis as high in theſe terms now as ever it was, for though man hath loſt his power, the Law hath not loſt its rigor; it doth not ſink or fall in its demands becauſe of mans inability to anſwer them. Though the Sinner be as the poor broken debtor, utterly undone, yet the Law will not compound with him or abate him any thing, but 'twill have full payment of the whole debt. Now this in ſtatu lapſo (as I ſhall ſhew when I come to the 4th verſe) is**Unde ſequitur plus in lege praecipi, quam praeſtando ſimus, quia ſi pares eſſemus implendae Legi, fruſtra aliunde effet quaeſitum remedium. Calvin. Hic locus efficaciſſime convincit juſtificationem non eſſe ex opcribus, &c. P. Martyr. Non implet Legem infirmitas mea, ſed landat Legem voluntas mea. Auguſt. impoſſible: None (but ſuch an one as Chriſt) could thus anſwer the Laws demands. For nothing will ſerve it below perfection: inherent righteouſneſs, actual obedience, all muſt be perfect or elſe the Law deſpiſes them. The Goſpel accepts of Sincerity but the Law will 'bate nothing of perfection; p. 269if there be but the leaſt failure, all is ſpoiled. Gal. 3.10. For as many as are of the works of the Law, are under the curſe: for it is written, Curſed is every one that continueth not [in all things] which are written in the book of the Law to do them. Jam. 2.1…. For who, ſoever ſhall keep the whole Law, and yet offend [in one point] he is guilty of all.—And is it thus? are theſe the terms and demands of the Law? what then can it do? (or rather what can we do)? it muſt needs be weak to us Becauſe (in theſe rigors) we are ſo weak to it; it cannot do much for us becauſe we can do but little to it; it cannot do what we deſire becauſe we cannot do what it demands. O how exceeding ſhort do the beſt come of the high meaſures of the Law!(a)(a)Prov. 20.9.Prov 20:9 Who can ſay, I have made my heart clean, I am pure from my ſin? (b)(b)Jam. 3.2.Jas 3:2In many things we offend all. (c)(c)Eccleſ. 7.20Eccl 7:20There is not a juſt man upon earth that doth good, and ſinneth not: (d)(d)Iſa. 64.6.Isa 64:6Our very righteouſneſs is as a polluted ragge: (e)(e)Job. 9.2, 3.Job 9:2Job 9:3How ſhould man be juſt with God? If he will contend with him, he cannot anſwer him one of a thouſand: If I juſtifie my ſelf, mine own mouth ſhall condemn me, if I ſay I am perfect, it ſhall alſo prove me perverſe. (See Job 15.14, 15, 16. Job 25.4, 5, 6.)**Pſal. 130.3.Ps 130:3 If thou Lord ſhouldſt mark iniquities, O Lord, who ſhall ſtand? ††Pſal. 143.2. Quis melior Prophetâ dequo dixit Deus, Inveni virum ſecundum cor meum, et tamen ipſe neceſſe habuit dicere Deo, Ne imres in judicium cum ſervo tuo. Bernard. in Annunt. Mariae. Sine peccato qui ſe vivere exiſtimet, non id agit ut peccatum non habeat, ſed ut veniam non accipiat. August. Enchirid. In peſſimis aliquid boni, et in optimis non nihil peſſimi, ſolus homo ſine peccato Chriſtus. Tertul.Ps 143:2Enter not into judgment with thy ſervant; for in thy ſight ſhall no man living be juſtified.

2. The Law doth not give what the Creature **Lex Moyſi quamvis ſpiritualis eſſet, quia tamen non adjuvabat intus per gratiam, lex …rat infirma et imbecillis ob ſtatum carnalem hominum, in quo relinquebat illos. Cajet. Non quod ipſa infirma ſit, ſed quod infirmos faciat, minando poenam, nec adjuvando per gratiam. Anſelm. Lex Praeterquam quod peccati rationem aperiebat, nihil praeterea auxilii praeſtabat ſpiritui adverſus carnem, et ideo ne que ſufficiebat ad juſtificandum, ne que ad perficienda Legis opera. Soto.needs: it asks above his ſtrength and gives below his want. He muſt have Grace, Sanctification, Holineſs, &c. but will the Law help him to theſe? no! 'tis high in the commanding of them but that's all, it doth not work them in the ſoul; it asks very high but gives very low. 'Tis holy it ſelf but it cannot make others holy; it can diſcover ſin but it cannot mortifie ſin (as the glaſs diſcovers the ſpots and blemiſhes in the face; but doth not remove them). The Law is a††2 Cor. 3.6.2 Cor 3:6 killing thing, but 'tis of the Sinner not of the Sin: it hath by accident, by reaſon of the Fleſh here ſpoken of a quite other effect; for it doth rather**Non de legis praeſtatione hic agitur, ſed de ipſius vi in noſtris immutandis animis, & ad illud Legis praeſcriptum efformandis, utpote quae corruptionem illam in qua naſcinſur non modo non ſanet, ſed augeat potius. Beza. enliven, increaſe, and irritate ſin, (as Water meeting with p. 270oppoſition grows the more fierce and violent; and the Diſeaſe the more 'tis check'd by the medicine the more it rages). Paul found in himſelf this ſad effect of the Law, Rom. 7.8. But ſin taking occaſion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiſcence: for without the Law ſin was dead. Moreover, the Law calls for duty but it gives no **Per-Legem non adjutorium ſed noſtri mali indicium & monitorium habemus. Lu…her.ſtrength for the performance of it, (Pharaoh-like who exacted brick but allowed no ſtraw). The Goſpel helps where it commands, the Law commands but helps not: Lex jubet, Evangelium juvat; (remember I ſtill ſpeak of the Law as it ſtands in oppoſition to the Goſpel, and as 'tis the matter and tranſcript of the firſt Covenant). It neither pardons what it forbids, for doth it inable to do what it injoyns; and much of the foreign impotency of the Law lies in theſe**Neceſſarius fuit adventus Chriſti, qui Legi ſuppetias ferret &c. Nam illa quidem rectè docuerat &c. Verùm adhuc duo erant neceſſaria quae Lex conferre non potuit, 1. ut condonentur ea quae contra ejus precepta admiſſa fuerint: 2. ut vires hominis corroborentur, quibus poſſit Legis juſſa perficere. P. Martyr. two things. Take a particular inſtance, great is the Sinners need of Faith; for without this, no juſtification, no peace with God, no heaven; 'tis the Goſpel-condition on which all depends. Now the Law knows nothing of this Faith; nay, 'tis diametrically oppoſite to it, 'tis ſo far from working it that it hinders it to its utmoſt. 'Tis all for working, for doing; Gal. 3.12. And the Law is not of Faith: but the man that doth them ſhall live in them. Believing belongs only to the Goſpel; therefore that is ſtiled the Law of Works, and this the Law of Faith, Rom. 3.27. If Faith come under the Law, 'tis only that Faith which is a General Faith, or as 'tis a part of Obedience, not as the Condition of Goſpel-grace. The Law therefore not helping as to theſe things (ſo indiſpenſably neceſſary for Grace here and hereafter), what can it do for the loſt Sinner?

3dly. The Law could not do, becauſe it could not heal that breach which Sin had made betwixt God and the Sinner. It ſtill looks forwards, and is alwayes calling for perfect Obedience; but what if Sin hath been committed for the time paſt? O there the Law is weak! It can make no reparation for what is paſt; as to that, all it ſayes to the guilty perſon is (as they to Judas) what is that to me? ſee **Matth. 27.4.Matt 27:4thou to that. Suppoſe the Sinner could for the future come up to a full conformity to the Law and in every thing anſwer its higheſt commands, Suppoſe him now to arrive at ſuch a pitch of perfection that he ſhould do nothing which this Law forbids, and do every thing which this Law commands: yet (ſuppoſing the Fall from God and the Guilt thereby contracted, or p. 271any one ſin committed), the Law would be weak and the creature could not thereby be juſtified; the reaſon is, becauſe here is now reparation and ſatisfaction to be made for what is paſt, which to make is impoſſible to the Law. This perfect Obedience (preſent and future) might do the work was it not for what is paſt; but guilt hath been contracted, God hath been offended, his firſt Covenant violated; therefore there muſt be reparation made to him for this. Now this the Law cannot do nor the Creature upon the terms of the Law; for all that he can arrive at is but perfect obedience and that is his duty; he's under an obligation to it and therefore by it he can make no ſatisfaction for what is paſt: this is but the paying of the preſent debt which can quit nothing of the former ſcore. This is very well if we look forward but what becomes of us when we look backward? So that the Apoſtle did very deſervedly thus ſpeak of the Law, what the Law could not do, &c. So much for the opening of the matter held forth in theſe Words; let me cloſe this Head with ſome Application.

Uſe 1. To humble us in the ſenſe of our Fleſh, by which the Law is weakened.Firſt, Here's matter of deep humiliation to us. How ſhould we lament that ſinful Nature, that Fleſh which is in all of us! we all come into the world under a ſad and woful depravation of nature: Well! ſuppoſe we do, what of this? O this ſhould bitterly be bewailed by us becauſe by reaſon of this the Law is weak; that it cannot do that for us which otherwiſe it could and would have done. As we were created at the firſt before our Nature was corrupted, we were ſtrong to the Law and the Law ſtrong to us; we could fulfil its higheſt demands and it could fulfil our higheſt deſires; we were able to keep it and it was able to ſave us; its perfect righteouſneſs was not above us and we had been righteous in that righteouſneſs. But now 'tis far otherwiſe; Sin hath got into us, our Natures are now depraved and vitiated, inſomuch that even from this Law it ſelf we can look for nothing: 'tis upon our degeneracy weak'ned to us to all intents and purpoſes; and is not this ſad? O that there ſhould be ſuch Natures in us as even to debilitate and weaken Gods own bleſſed Law! And would to God the ſad effects of the Fleſh in us ſtaid here! but it goes further: it doth not only bring a weakneſſ upon the Law but upon the Goſpel too. The Goſpel it ſelf (the new and remedial Law) though it be the **Rom. 1.16.Rom 1:16power of God, yet it would be altogether ineffectual to our juſtification and ſalvation, if God did not accompany it with a mighty power. It tenders and holds forth that in Chriſt which is every way ſufficient for theſe great things; yet p. 272we ſhould be never the better for it, this too could not do, if God (in ſpight of all oppoſition from our curſed Natures) did not over-powre us to believe, to cloſe with Chriſt, to accept of reſtoring Grace in the way of the Goſpel. Truly if God ſhould leave us to our ſelves, and ſhould not reſcue us from the power of Natural corruption, neither Law nor Goſpel could do our work; notwithſtanding both we ſhould periſh for ever. Should not this be greatly bewailed and lamented by us? that Sin ſhould be ſor rooted in our Nature and have ſuch a ſtrength in us, as that it ſhould be too hard both for Law and Goſpel, and bring both under an inability to do us good?

And is it ſo? I might then from hence infer, that certainly in the fal'n Creature the power of Nature is very low, nay, that (with reſpect to the keeping and fulfilling of the Law) 'tis quite loſt. Pelagius of old (with whom Some in latter ages do almoſt concur, only they put a better varniſh upon their Opinions) held, that though Nature by the Fall is ſomewhat weakened and impair'd in its ſtrength, yet ſtill it can do great things; yea, (eſpecially with ſome ordinary aſſiſtance) it may enable a man to fulfil the Law of God. Now againſt this the**Quid hic dicent Naturalium virium praedicatores ac doctores? Reddant rationem quare per camem infirma fuerit Lex Dei; ita ut neceſſuas humanae ſalutis opus habuerit miſſione Chriſti &c. Si virtus & judicium rationis tam potens eſt, ut quae bona praecipiuntur, agnoſcat, approbet, & praeſtare valeat, quomodo in illis non potuit qui ſub paedagogio Legis fuerunt? &c. Muſcul. Paulus ait Legem ſine Chriſto infirmam eſſe, iſti aiunt, nos priuſquam ſunus participes Chriſti poſſe bene operari, & obtemperare Legi Dei. P. Marty…. Argument in the Text is conſiderable: is the Law weak and yet is the Sinner ſtrong? is that under an impoſſibility and yet is (this and that) poſſible to the creature? The Fleſh is but extraneous to the Law and yet by reaſon of that it cannot do; but 'tis inherent in the Sinner and yet he can do, what more abſurd! Eſpecially it being conſidered, that the Laws weakneſs is not attributed to it in reſpect of it ſelf, but only in reſpect of us; ſo that if we now could perfectly obey, perform, keep the Law, its foreign would then ceaſe; and if ſo, why was Chriſt ſent? (but no more of this).

Secondly,Uſe 2. To vindicate the honour of the Law, and to obviate bad Inferences, &c. 'Tis neceſſary that I ſhould vindicate the honour of the Law, and obviate thoſe miſtakes and bad inferences which ſome poſſibly may run upon from what hath been ſpoken. Three things therefore let me ſay to you:

1: Notwithſtanding this weakneſs of the Law, yet keep up high thoughts of it and give it that honour and reverence which is due to it.

'Tis weak indeed, but yet remember whoſe Law it is; as alſo p. 273what an excellent Law it is in it ſelf: 'tis a perfect draught or model and delineation of Original righteouſneſs, 'tis the meaſure, ſtandard, teſt of that purity and perfection which man would have had in the ſtate of innocency; yea, 'tis the copy, tranſcript, exemplar of Gods own holineſs, (for God framed and modelled this Law according to his own purity and ſanctity). And let us be what we will, ſtill the Law (in it ſelf) is all this and the ſame that ever it was (though we be not ſo). And therefore we ſhould adore and reverence and magnifie it, though now to us accidentally it be thus weak.

But doth not this weakneſs reflect diſparagement and diſhonour upon the Law? Anſw. No, not in the leaſt. Two things will ſufficiently vindicate it as to any ſuch reflections: 1. The Apoſtle only ſays of it that 'twas weak: he chargeth nothing upon it but only weakneſs. He doth not ſay that 'twas any way impure or unholy or unrighteous, (he affirms the contrary**Rom. 7.12.Rom 7:12 The Law is holy, and juſt and good); only he ſaith 'twas weak. This the**foreign &c. foreign. Chryſoſt. foreign &c. Oecum. Theophyl. to the ſame purpoſe foreign. Theodor. Greek Expoſitors take notice of and from it apologize for the Law.

2. 'Tis weak, but how comes it to be ſo? why,**Ne legem incuſare videatur culpam rejicit in carnem. i. e. concupiſcentiam, quae fomes eſt peccati. Eſtius. Vide quanta arte Legem ſimul extollit, deprimit, & excuſat: deprimit, cum dicit quod non potuit peccatum damnare; excuſat, cum dicit hoc non accidiſſe ejus vitio ſed camis potius; extollit quàm maximè, cum co…cludit Chriſtum adveniſſe ut Legi contra carnem ſubſidium ferret. Muſſus. Transfert legis impotentiam aliò ut Legem abſolvat à culpá, quam dat carni (viz.) noſtrae, i. e. corruptae noſtrae naturae. Muſcul. Ne quis parum honorificè Legem impotentíae argui putaret, vel hoc reſtringeret ad Ceremonias, expreſſit nominatim Paulus defectum illum non à Legis eſſe vitio, ſed Carnis noſtrae corruptelâ, Calvin. through our Fleſh: 'tis not ſo in and from it ſelf but only through our depraved nature; 'tis meerly by accident et aliundè that it lies under this impotency. The Law is not to be blamed but we: had not we finn'd, the Law would have been ſtill as able and mighty in its operations as ever it was; did it but meet with the ſame ſubject, it would ſoon appear that it hath the ſame power which it had before Adam fell: So that (I ſay) the Law is not at all in the fault, but only we becauſe of the Fleſh. Obſerve here the wiſdom and care of our Apoſtle, where-ever he ſeems to tax the Law there he will be ſure to vindicate it: As where he ſpeaks of its irritating of corruption, p. 274he there layes the blame upon his own wicked nature, not at all upon the holy Law: Rom. 7.8, 9, 10, 11. Sin taking occaſion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiſcence: for without the Law ſin was dead. For I was alive without the Law once, but when the commandment came Sin revived, and I died. And the commandment which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. For Sin taking occaſion by the commandment deceived me, and by it ſlew me. Yet verſ. 12, 13, 14. The Law is holy, and the commandment holy, and juſt, and good: Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid! But Sin that it might appear Sin, working death in me by that which is good, that Sin by the commandment might become exceeding ſinful. For we know that the Law is ſpiritual, but I am carnal ſold under ſin. And thus we ſhould carry it with reſpect to the Laws weakneſs: O in it ſelf 'tis mighty and powerful, but there is ſin in us by which only the Law is made weak, there therefore the blame muſt lye. Could we but get rid of this Sin we ſhould ſoon find what a mighty thing the Law is; ſo mighty that nothing would be too high or too hard for it.

2: Secondly, Take heed that you do not caſt off the Law upon this pretence. 'Tis indeed weak (as to ſuch ends), but yet 'tis a Law and that which is obligatory to all (even to Believers themſelves under the Goſpel State and Covenant). Shall we becauſe of this weakneſs (eſpecially it being occaſioned by our ſelves) caſt off the Law? and pretend that we are not under the obligation of it? we muſt not ſo argue. Obſerve it in the Apoſtle, even when he was proving the weakneſs of the Law as to Juſtification and ſhewing that God had found out another way for that (viz.) the way of Faith, yet foreſeeing that ſome might run themſelves upon this rock, and infer from hence that they had nothing to do with the Law; he therefore adds,**Rom. 3.31.Rom 3:31 Do we then make void the Law through Faith? God forbid! yea we eſtabliſh the Law (in its proper place and Sphere). The Creature as a creature is under a natural (and therefore indiſpenſable) obligation to this Law; ſo as that nothing can exempt him from that obligation. It commands to love, fear, ſerve, honour, obey God; wherein it obliges ſo ſtrongly, that God himſelf (with reverence be it ſpoken) cannot free the creature from its obligation to theſe duties. True indeed, Believers are not under the curſe, rigor, or bondage of this Law, or under it as it is the condition of life: but they are (and it cannot be otherwiſe) under the obligation of its commands as to an holy life. There may be (and bleſſed be God there is) a great change as to circumſtances, a p. 275great relaxation as to the Laws rigors, ſeveritys and penaltys; but for the main duties of Obedience and Holineſs, it is eternally obligatory and never to be abrogated. O therefore do not look upon your ſelves as made free from this Law, though it be weak and unable to juſtifie and ſave you! it can damne (upon the breaking of it) though it cannot ſave (by the keeping of it).

3: Thirdly, Neither muſt you upon this look upon the Law as altogether weak, or uſeleſs. I ſay, not as altogether weak; for though as to ſome things it be under a total impotency, yet as to other things it ſtill retains its priſtine power. It cannot take away ſin, or make righteous, or give life (which it promis'd at firſt and for which it was appointed, for the commandment was ordained to life Rom. 7.10); here's the weak ſide of the Law, as to theſe 'tis foreign: But as to the commanding of duty, the directing and regulating of the life, the threatning of puniſhment upon the violation of it; here it can do whatever it did before. The Laws preceptive and punitive part (where 'tis not taken off by Chriſt) are yet in their full ſtrength; only as to the promiſſory part of it (viz. its promiſing life upon the condition of perfect Obedience), there 'tis at a loſs. In a word, its authority to oblige to duty or puniſhment is the ſame that ever it was, but its ability to give righteouſneſs or life (in which reſpects only the Apoſtle here ſpeaks of it) is not the ſame. If God open this Law to you and ſet it home upon your Conſciences, you will find it hath yet a very great ſtrength and efficacy in it: let it not therefore be altogether weak in your eye.

Nor altogether uſeleſs. For Some will be ready to ſay, if the Law be thus weak then what uſe is there of it? to what end doth it ſerve? what is to be looked for from that which can do ſo little for us? But do not you thus reaſon! For though the Law be not of uſe to you as to Juſtification, I mean in a way of immediate influence upon the Act or State, (a remoter influence it may have); yet in other reſpects 'tis of great and admirable uſe: (viz.) as a Monitor to excite to duty, as a Rule to direct and guide you in your courſe, as a Glaſs to diſcover ſin, as a Bridle to reſtrain ſin, as an Hatchet to break the hard heart, as a **Gal. 3.24.Gal 3:24Schoole-maſter to whip you to Chriſt. The Lord Jeſus indeed hath taken Sin-pardoning, God-atoning, Juſtice-ſatisfying, Soul-ſaving work into his own hands, (he would not truſt this in the hands of the Law any longer, becauſe he knew the weakneſs of it); but for other work, the awakening and convincing of a Sinner, the terrifying of the ſecure, the humbling of the p. 276proud, the preparing of the Soul to cloſe with Chriſt, (though this laſt act be only eventual and accidental as to the Law), all this work (I ſay) yet lies upon the Law. Be you who you will, Believers or unbelievers, regenerate or unregenerate, the Law is of marvellous uſe to you. 'Tis a rule to all whether they be good or bad, and (as ſo) none are exempted from it, (as is by ſeveral Divines ſufficiently proved againſt the Antinomiſts); and it hath too, very good and uſeful effects upon all, whether called or uncalled, Saints or Sinners. Our Apoſtle who here doth ſo much depreſs the Law in reſpect of Juſtification, doth elſewhere in other reſpects ſpeak much of its uſefulneſs: Rom. 3.19. Now we know that what things ſoever the Law ſaith, it ſaith to them who are under the Law, that every mouth may be ſtopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Rom. 7.7. What ſhall we ſay then? is the Law ſin? God forbid! Nay, I had not known ſin, but by the Law: for I had not known luſt, except the Law had ſaid, Thou ſhalt not covet. Gal. 3.19, 24. Wherefore then ſerveth the Law? it was added becauſe of tranſgreſſions, till the Seed ſhould come to whom the Promiſe was made, and it was ordained by Angels in the hand of a Mediator: Wherefore the Law was our School-maſter to bring us unto Chriſt, that we might be juſtified by faith. I muſt not launch out into this vaſt Ocean; you have variety of**Taytor's Reg. Vitae. Burg. Vind. Legis. Boltons Bounds &c. Baxter (in ſeveral Treat.) with divers Others. Faceſſat longè ex animis noſtris profana iſta Opinio, Legem non eſte regulam; Eſt enim inflexibilis vivendi regula. Calvin. Treatiſes upon this Argument, (namely) to prove that the Law is ſtill a Rule, and ſtill very uſeful in thoſe great effects which have been mentioned: (I refer you to them for further ſatisfaction). This I only touch upon as it lies in my way, both that I may prevent dangerous miſtakes, and alſo ſhew you how you are to carry it towards the Law. O let it be highly eſteemed, reverenced, honoured by you! yea, bleſs God for it, for though indeed 'tis weak and unprofitable (as the Covenant of Works), yet as 'tis a Rule, and as it produces ſuch effects upon the Conſcience, ſo 'tis of great uſe and highly beneficial. (So much for the 2d Ʋſe).

Thirdly,Uſe 3. Was the Law thus unable to do for the Sinner what was neceſſary to be done? then never look for Righteouſneſs and Life from and by the Law. For as to theſe, it cannot do your work unleſs you could do its work, it cannot juſtifie or ſave you unleſs you could perfectly obey and fulfil it. O pray expect little from it (nay, nothing at all in this way)! you cannot anſwer its expectations and it cannot anſwer yours. It highly concerns every man in the world to make ſure of righteouſneſs and life; but where are theſe to be had? only in Chriſt in the way of believing, not in the Law in the way of doing. We would fain make the Law ſtronger p. 277than indeed it is; and 'tis natural to us to look for a righteouſneſs from it becauſe there was our righteouſneſs at firſt, and that ſuits beſt with the pride of our hearts. Man is not ſo averſe to the Law in point of obedience, but he is as apt to reſt upon the Law for Heaven and Happineſs; if he can but do ſomething which the Law requires, O this he looks upon as a ſufficient Righteouſneſs and as a good Plea for Heaven. Eſpecially when Conſcience is a little awakened then the poor Creature betakes himſelf to his doing, to his obedience to the Law; and this he thinks will do his work (till God lets him ſee his great miſtake). As 'tis**Hoſ. 5.13.Hos 5:13 ſaid When Ephraim ſaw his ſickneſs, and Judab ſaw his wound, then went Ephraim to the Aſſyrian, and ſent to King Jareb, yet could he not heal you, nor cure you of your wound: juſt ſo 'tis with the convinced Sinner in reference to the Law, both as to his practiſe and alſo as to his ſucceſs.

I would not be miſtaken (in what I have ſaid or ſhall further ſay), as if I did deſign to take off any from Obedience to the Law, God forbid! all that I aim at, is only to take men off from truſting in that obedience, and from leaning upon that as their Righteouſneſs. We ſhould be doers of the Law (for,**Rom. 2.13.Rom 2:13 not the hearers of the Law are just before God, but the doers of the Law ſhall be juſtified); yea, we ſhould go as far as ever we can in our endeavours after a Law-righteouſneſs; for though that be not ſufficient to juſtifie us before God, yet that muſt make us righteous in his eye**Vide Burg. of Juſtif. 2d. p. Serm. 22. p. 215. as to qualitative and inherent righteouſneſs: and ſo we are to underſtand that Text (with many others of the ſame import),**Deut. 6.25.Deut 6:25 It ſhall be our righteouſneſs, if we obſerve to do all theſe commandments before the Lord our God, as he hath commanded us. But yet when we have gone the furtheſt, the Righteouſneſs which we are to rely upon is only the Goſpel Righteouſneſs or the imputed Righteouſneſs of the Lord Jeſus; if we take up with any thing ſhort of that, we are**O nos miſeros, ſi vel tantillum noſtra ſalus baſi tam infirmá nitatur! Beza in 1 Joh. 1.8.1 John 1:8 miſerable and loſt for ever. As to the Law, is it thus weak (or rather are you thus weak) and yet will you bottom your expectation and confidence there? can you fulfil or ſatisfie it in its demands of perfect, perſonal, univerſal, conſtant Obedience? If you cannot (then which nothing more certain), it can never then do your buſineſs; nay, upon the leaſt failure it will be your enemy, to plead againſt you for the non-performance of its Conditions: and ſo, though it cannot as a Friend do you much good yet as an Enemy it can and will do you much hurt. What a ſad caſe is the legaliſt in? the Law condemns him becauſe he doth no more obey, and the Goſpel condemns him becauſe he doth no more believe; he's loſt on p. 278every hand, O this is woful! And yet how many precious Souls ſplit themſelves upon this rock! millions of men look no higher than the Law, that is the foundation upon which they build their confidence for Life and Salvation. Could we but get into them and be privy to the Grounds of their Hope, we ſhould find that 'tis not Chriſt and Faith in him but the Law and ſome imperfect Obedience thereunto upon which they bottom: they deal honeſtly, wrong no body, live unblameably, make ſome external Profeſſion, perform ſuch duties, are thus and thus charitable to the poor, &c. and hereupon they are confident of their Salvation. Now I deny not but that theſe are very good things (I wiſh there was more of them); yet when any reſt in them or upon them for Righteouſneſs and Life, they ſet them much too high; as good as they are, in reference to theſe great concerns they are no better than ſo many figg-leaves, which will not cover a Sinners nakedneſs when God ſhall come to reckon with him; whoſoever bottoms his truſt and confidence upon theſe, he builds upon the ſand and ſooner or later there will be a ſad downfal of all his Hopes:**Sordet in diſtrictione Judicis quod fulget in conſpectu operantis. Gregor. theſe are things which glitter in our eye but they are but courſe and mean things (without Chriſt) in Gods eye.

Sirs! I am upon a Point of as great importance as any that can be ſpoken to; and therefore give me leave to ſtay upon it a little, and to deal plainly and faithfully with you about it. I would feign leave every one of you upon a good bottom, built upon the Rock, that**Iſa. 28.16.Isa 28:16 ſure Foundation which will ſtand firm and ſteady in all winds and weather, having that anchor-hold which will abide under all ſtorms. And therefore let me prevail with you, to caſt off all Legal Confidence, and to rely, truſt, reſt upon nothing ſhort of Chriſt and his Righteouſneſs. Duties, Graces, Holineſs, Obedience, Good Works, all (in their proper places) are excellent things; but 'tis the alone Merit, Righteouſneſs, Satisfaction of Chriſt that muſt juſtifie and ſave you. Would you have that righteouſneſs which will bear the teſt at the great day? that righteouſneſs in which you may be able to ſtand before the diſquiſition of the righteous God? O then fly to Chriſt, to his imputed righteouſneſs, and there let all your truſt and relyance be placed! What is that One thing which the New-Teſtament-revelation mainly drives at? 'tis this, to carry Sinners from Moſes to Chriſt, from the way of the Law to the way of the Goſpel, from doing (as the Old-Covenant Condition and Ground of Life) to believing. The not underſtanding, receiving, embracing of this grand Truth, was the ſin and p. 279ruine of the Jewes; all that Chriſt and the Apoſtles could ſay or do, would not prevail with them to ſhake off their depending upon the Law; but ſtill they**Rom. 2.17.Rom 2:17 reſted in the Law, ††Rom. 9.31, 32.Rom 9:31Rom 9:32followed after the Law of Righteouſneſs, and ſought righteouſneſs not by Faith but as it were by the works of the Law; ‖‖Rom. 10.3.Rom 10:3they being ignorant of Gods righteouſneſs and going about to eſtabliſh their own righteouſneſs, would not ſubmit to the Righteouſneſs of God. O therefore how full, how earneſt was Paul in his dealings with them (and with others too), to undeceive and convince them about this! He ſaith, the whole matter of Righteouſneſs was now taken out of the Laws hands and put into the hands of Chriſt; **Rom. 10.4.Rom 10:4Chriſt is the end of the Law for righteouſneſs to every one that believeth: **Rom. 3.21, 22.Rom 3:21Rom 3:22Therefore by the deeds of the Law there ſhall no fleſh be juſtified in his ſight, &c. But now the Righteouſneſs of God without the Law is manifeſted, being witneſſed by the Law and Prophets: Even the Righteouſneſs of God which is by Faith of Jeſus Chriſt unto all, and upon all them that believe. He ſets down the miſerable ſtate of thoſe who would be reſting upon the Law, ſuch as were foreign (as he deſcribes them);**Gal. 3.10.Gal 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the Law are under the Curſe, for it is written, Curſed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the Law to do them. He tells them, by this they made the ſending, dying of Chriſt to be to no purpoſe; **Gal. 2.21.Gal 2:21I do not fruſtrate the Grace of God, for if Righteouſneſs come by the Law, then Chriſt is dead in vain: (ſee too Gal. 5.3, 4.) He tells them further, that God had ſuch a reſpect for his own Law that if righteouſneſs and Life had been poſſible by it, he would have taken no other way;**Gal. 3.21.Gal 3:21 If there had been a Law given which could have given Life, verily righteouſneſs ſhould have been by the Law: (But why do I give you a few gleanings when you your ſelves may go into the full field?) Now was all this ſpoken only to the Jews and Gentiles who lived at that time? doth it not concern us alſo? have not theſe ſeveral Conſiderations their ſtrength to us as well as to them?

To come neerer home! the Text tells us the Law could not do: will you not be convinced of the Laws inability to help you? ſo as to betake your ſelves to that better and effectual way of Juſtification and Salvation which God hath ſo graciouſly provided for you? The Law is weak (as weak now as ever.), but Chriſt is ſtrong (as ſtrong now as ever;) the Law can do nothing but Chriſt can do all. 'Till it pleaſes God to convince you of the Laws impoſſibility to make you righteous and happy, you'll never ſeek out p. 280after help in Chriſt or cloſe with him: for as Chriſt had never come to you, had it not been becauſe it was impoſſible for the Law to ſave you; ſo you will never come to him, till you ſee that 'tis impoſſible for the Law to ſave you: this is that which moved God to ſend Chriſt, and this is that which moves the Sinner to embrace Chriſt, and his way of Salvation. If this work of Conviction was but once paſs'd upon you, O you would ſoon quit the Law and all your Confidence would be bottom'd upon Chriſt. Well! ſhall I bring it to an head? here are two wayes ſet before you for Righteouſneſs and Life, the way of the Law and the way of the Goſpel, the way of Doing and the way of Believing; now which of theſe two will you chuſe? if the former, ſo as to venture your Souls upon what you can do, your caſe is deſperate; by this you plainly put your ſelves under the Covenant of Works, and there's nothing but periſhing (as things now ſtand with us) under that Covenant: if the latter, there is hope, nay certainty (ſuppoſing you cloſe with the Goſpel-way in a right Goſpel-manner) that it ſhall be well with you. Who would not now ſay with David **Pſal. 71.16.Ps 71:16I will make mention of thy righteouſneſs even of thine only? who would not with**Phil. 3.8, 9.Phil 3:8Phil 3:9 Paul count all but droſs and dung, that he may winne Chriſt, and be found in him, not having his own Righteouſneſs which is of the Law, but that which through the Faith of Chriſt, the Righteouſneſs which is of God by Faith.

4. Fourthly,Uſe. 4. See here the admirable love of God, and be greatly affected with it. The Law was weak, utterly unable to relieve us in our forlorn condition; as to that conclamatum eſt the caſe is deſperate: and now the merciful God finds out another way, pitches upon another courſe, hee'll ſee what that will do (the former failing); what's that? he ſent his own Son in the likeneſs, &c. O the infinite Love, Mercy, Compaſſion of God! The weaker was Gods Law, the ſtronger and higher was Gods love. O that he ſhould not let us all periſh under the Laws impotency! that he ſhould imploy One for our recovery who was every way able to do what the Law could not! how ſhould we adore his mercy in this? But this leads me to the following words in the Text, God ſent &c. where I ſhall have occaſion more fully to preſs this duty upon you. So much therefore for this Firſt Branch of the Words, What the Law could not do, in that it was weak through the Fleſh.