The Doctrine of the Sabbath, Thesis 100 – Thesis 107
Thesis 100.
If they that say a Beleever is not to act by vertue of a command, do mean this only, viz. That he is not to act by vertue of the bare letter and externall words and syllables of it, they then speak truely, for such kinde of acting is rather witchery than Christianity, to place power and vertue in bare characters and letters, which though mighty and powerfull by the spirit, yet are empty and powerlesse without it: But if their meaning be that wee are not to act by vertue of any command in any sense, then the assertion is both pernicious and perilous, for the Lord Iesus being the foreign, or first subject of all grace and gracious efficacy and power; hence its true, wee are not to make the command of God the first principle of our obedience, for this is proper unto Christ by the Spirit, Iohn 5.40. Iohn 16.13, 14. 2. Tim. 2.1. Ephes. 6.10. Rom. 8.2. But because the Lord Iesus conveyes by his Spirit vertue and efficacy through his word, not onelyonly words of promise, but also words of command (as is evident, Ier. 3.22. Acts 2.38, 41. Mat. 9.9. Psalme 19.8.) Hence it is that a Beleever is bound to act from a command, though not as from a first, yet as from a second principle, though not as from the first efficient, yet as from an instrument in the hand of Christ, who in commanding of the duty works by it, and enables to it; and therefore we see Abraham comes out of his owne Countrey, because called and commanded of God to follow him he knew not whither, Heb 11.8. And Peter cast his net into the …, meerely because he was commanded, Luke 5.5. And David desired, Oh that my heart were directed to keep thy precepts, because God had commanded, Psa. 119.45. There is a vertue, a vis or efficacy in the finall cause, as well as in the efficient to produce the effect, and every wise agent is bound to act by vertue or for the sake of his utmost and last end. Now the naked commandment of the Lord, may bee and should be the chiefe motive and last end of our obedience to his highnesse; for whatever is done meerely because of Gods command, is done for his glory (which glory should be our utmost end in all our obedience:) And hence it is that that obedience is most absolute and sincere (whether it be in doing or suffering the will of God) which is done meerely in respect of commandment and will of God; when the soule can truely say, Lord, I should never submit to such a yoke but meerely for thy sake, and because it's thy will and thou dost command it: What is it to love Christ? but to seek to please him and to give contentment to him; What is it to seek to give contentment to him, but to give contentment to his heart or his will? and what is his will, but the will of his commandment? If therefore it bee unlawfull to act by vertue of a command, then it is unlawfull, 1. To love Christ, 2. To be sincere before Christ. 3. Or to act for the glory of Christ. And hence it is that let a man do the most glorious things in the world out of his owne supposed good end (as the blind Papists doe in their will-works and superstitions) which God never commanded, nay let him doe all things which the law of God requires, give his goods to the poore, and his body to bee burnt, and yet not doe these things because commanded, let him then quit himselfe from hypocrisie and himselfe from being a deep hypocrite in all these if he can: Surely those who straine at this gnat, viz. not to doe a duty because commanded, will make no bones of swallowing down this camell, viz. not to forsake sinne, because 'tis forbidden, and whosoever shall forsake sinne from any other ground, shewes manifestly hereby that hee hath little conscience of Gods command; I know the love of Christ should make a Christian forsake every sin, but the last resolution and reason thereof is because his love forbids us to continue in sinne; for to act by vertue of a command, is not to act onelyonly as a creature to God considered as a Creator, but by vertue of the will and commandment of God in a Redeemer, with whom a Beleever hath now to doe.
Thesis 101.
To act therefore by vertue of a command, and by vertue of Christs Spirit, are subordinate one to another, not opposite one against another…, as these men carry it. This caution being ever remembred, that such acting bee not to make our selves just, but because we are already just in Christ; not that hereby wee might get life, but because we have life given us already; not to pacifie Gods justice, but to please his mercy, being pacified toward us by Christ already; for as Iunius well observes a great difference between placare Deum, Iun. Thes. de bon. oper.and placere Deo, i. between pacifying God and pleasing God, for Christs bloud onelyonly can pacifie justice when it is provoked, but when revenging justice is pacified, mercy may be pleased with the sincere and humble obedience of sons, Col. 1.10. Heb. 13.21. When a Beleever is once justified hee cannot be made more just by all his obedience, nor lesse just by all his sins in point of justification, which is perfected at once: but he who is perfectly justified is but imperfectly sanctified, and in this respect may more or lesse please God or displease him, be more just or lesse just and holy before him: It is I confesse a secret but a common sinne in many, to seek to pacifie God (when they perceive or feare his anger) by some obedience of their own, and so to seek for that in themselves chiefely which they should seek for in Christ, and for that in the Law which is onelyonly to be found in the Gospel; but corrupt practises in others should not breed (as usually they doe) corrupt opinions in us, and to cast off the law from being a rule of pleasing God, because it is no rule to us of pacifying of God: For if wee speak of revenging (not fatherly) anger, Christs bloud can onelyonly pacifie that, and when that is pacified and God is satisfied, our obedience now pleaseth him and his mercy accepts it as very pleasing, the rule of which is the precious law of God.
Thesis 102.
They that say the law is our rule as it is given by Christ, but not as it was given by Moses, doe speak niceties, at least ambiguities; for if the Lord Christ give the law to a Beleever as his rule, why should any then raise a dust, and affirme that the law is not our rule? For the Law may be considered either materially, or in it selfe, as it containes the matter of the Covenant of works: and thus considered, a Beleever is not to be regulated by it, for he is wholly free from it as a covenant of life; or it may be considered finally, or rather relatively, as it stood in relation and reference unto the people of the God of Abraham, who were already under Abrahams Covenant, which was a Covenant of free-grace, viz. To be his God and the God of his seed, Gen. 17.7. And in this latter respect the law, as it was given by Moses, was given by Christ in Moses, and therefore the rule of love toward man (commanded by Moses) is called the law of Christ, Gal. 6.2. For the law as it was applyed to this people, doth not run thus, viz. Doe all this, and then I will be your God and redeemer (for this is a Covenant of workes) but thus, viz. I am the Lord thy God (viz. by Abrahams Covenant) who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, and house of bondage, Therefore thou shalt doe all this. If therefore the law delivered by Moses, was delivered by Christ in Moses, then there is no reason to set Christ and Moses together by the eares, in this respect I now speake of, and to affirme that the law, not as delivered by Moses, but as given by Christ, is our law and rule.
Thesis 103.
The law therefore which containes in it selfe absolutely considered (which Luther cals Moses Mosissimus) the Covenant of works, yet relatively considered as it was delivered by Moses to a people under a Covenant of grace (which the same Author cals Moses Aaronicus) so it is not to bee considered onelyonly as a Covenant of workes, and therefore for any to affirme that the law is no Covenant of works, as it is delivered on Mount Sion, and by Jesus Christ, and that it is a Covenant of works onelyonly, as it is delivered on Mount Sinai and by Moses, is a bold assertion both unsafe and unsound: For if as it was delivered on Mount Sinai, it was delivered to a people under a Covenant of grace, then it was not delivered to them onelyonly as a Covenant of workes, for then a people under a Covenant of grace, may againe come under a Covenant of works, to disanull that Covenant of grace, but the Apostle expressely affirmes the quite contrary, and shewes that the Covenant made with Ahraham and his seed (which was to be a God to them, Gen. 17.7.) and which was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law which was foure hundred and thirty yeares after▪ cannot disanull, Gal. 3.17. Now that the people were under a Covenant of grace when the law was delivered on Mount Sinai, let the Preface of the ten Commandments determine, wherein Gods first words are words of grace, I am the Lord thy God, &c. and therefore thou shalt have no other Gods but mee, &c. I know Paraeus, Zanchy and others affirme, that the law is abrogated as it was in the hands of Moses, but not as it is in the hand of Christ, but their meaning is at sometime in respect of the manner of administration of the Law under Moses, and when they speake of the morall law simply considered, yet it never entred into their hearts, that the law as delivered on mount Sinai was delivered onelyonly as a Covenant of works, as some would maintain.
Thesis 104.
But there is a greater mystery intended by some in this phrase, as given by Christ, for their meaning is this, to wit, As Christ by his Spirit writes it in our hearts, Saltmarsh Overflowing of Christs bloud.not any way a rule as written by Moses: A Beleevers heart (saith Master Saltmarsh) is the very law of Commands, and the two Tables of Moses, and in this respect it becomes not (saith he) the glory of Christ to be beholding to any of the light upon Moses face. It seemes then that the law written is not to be a Christians rule, but onelyonly so farre as it is written in the heart, a most accursed assertion; for how and why did Christ Jesus himselfe resist temptation to sinne? was it not by cleaving to the written word? Matth. 44.10. and was not this done for our imitation? why did David and Christ Iesus delight to doe Gods will? was it not this, because it was written of them that so they should doe? Psa. 40.7, 8. Did not the law in their hearts make them thus cleave to the written law without? Why did Paul perswade Children to honour their parents? was it not, because this was the first Commandment with promise? Ephes. 6.2. had it not been more Evangelically spoken to perswade them rather to look to the law of Moses written on their hearts within, to direct them hereunto, rather than to be beholding for any light upon Moses face to direct them herein? how comes it to passe that Paul preacheth no other thing but what was in the old Testament of Moses and the Prophets, who were onelyonly the Interpreters of Moses? Acts 22.20. How is it that Christ himselfe borrowes light from Moses, Psalmes and all the Prophets, to cleare up his resurrection and suffering, Luke 24.27, 32▪ if no light must bee borrowed from the face of Moses? if indeed wee were perfect in this life as wee shall bee in heaven, there would then bee no need of the writings of the Apostles, Prophets, or Moses, of Law or Gospell, but we being but imperfectly enlightned, it's no lesse than extreame ingratitude and unthankfulnesse to preferre our owne imperfect and impure light, before that perfect, spotlesse and heavenly Law and counsels of God without us: which when the most perfect beleever doth see he may cry out with Paul, The Law is holy but I am carnall: what is this but painted Popery, to make the spirit within to be the supreame Iudge and superiour to the Spirit of God in the written word without? onelyonly they shrine it up in the Popes private Conclave and Kitchin, or somewhat worse, but these in a company of poore, imperfect, deluded, and perhaps corrupted men: it's true the Covenant of grace (strictly taken) in the Gospel, needs not to borrow any light from the Covenant of works in the Law, but yet for all this the grace of God appearing in the Gospel, will have us to walk worthy of God unto all well pleasing according to the Law, Tit. 2.12, 13. and to mourne bitterly that we are so unlike the will and image of God revealed in the Law, Rom. 7.23, 24.
Thesis 105.
The Apostle Paul as he sometimes condemnes works and sometime commends them, so he sometimes rejects the Law, and sometimes commends the Law, sometime hee would have Beleevers dye to the law, and sometime hee exhorts them to live in all holy obedience to it; the Apostle therefore must speak of the Law under various considerations, or else must speake Daggers and flat contradictions, and therefore of necessity wee are to consider the Law not alway under one respect, but variously; for consider the law as a Covenant of workes, or as the way unto or matter of our justification, and so works are condemned and the Law is rejected and abrogated, and so we are to die to the Law, but consider the Law as a rule of life to a person justified already, and so the Law is to be received, and works are to bee commended, and we are to live thereunto.
Thesis 106.
When the Gospel nakedly urgeth Beleevers to good workes and obedience to the Law, it is then considered onelyonly as a rule of life, but when wee meet with such Scriptures as set the Law and Christ, the Law and grace, the Law and promise, the Law and faith, &c. at opposition one against another, then the Law in such places is ever considered as a Covenant of life, from which we are wholly freed, and unto which we should be wholly dead, that we… may be married unto Christ, Rom. 7.4. hence therefore their arguings are feeble and weak, who would prove a Christian to be wholly free from the directive power of the Law, because a Christian is said not to be under the law but under grace, Rom. 6.14. and because the Law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ, Iohn 1.17. and because the inheritance is not by the law, but by promise and by faith, Gal. 3.12.18. for these and such like Scriptures speake of the law as standing in opposition to Christ, and therefore speake of it as of a Covenant of life, by which men seek to be justified: from which (we grant) a Beleever is wholly freed, and unto which hee is not bound, nay hee is bound to renounce it, and cast out this bond-woman, but all this doth not prove that he is free from it as his rule of life.
Thesis 107.
The Law and mans sinfull heart are quite opposite one to another, Rom. 7.9, 10, 11, 13. but when (through the grace of Christ) the heart is changed, so as there is a new nature or new man in a beleever, then there is a sweet agreement between this new nature and the Law, for (saith Paul) I delight in the Law of God in my inner man: it is therefore a most false assertion to say, that the old man of a Beleever is to be kept under the law, but the new man or new nature is above all Law, for though the new nature bee above it as a legall covenant, yet it never comes to be willingly under it as a rule untill now: an imperfect new nature is infinitely glad of the guidance of a holy and most perfect law. Psalme 119.140.