In the fourth place we come to lay downe those things that may cleare the meaning of the Apostle: and first know, that humane Authors, who yet have acknowledged the help of precepts, doe speak thus much of a righteous man, onely to shew this, that he doth that which is righteous, for love of righteousnesse, not for feare of punishment: As Aquinas said of his love to God, Amo, quia amo; & amo, ut amem. Thus Seneca, Ad Legem esse bonum exiguum est: It’s a poore small thing to be good onely according to the law. And so Aristotle, lib. 3. Polit. cap. 9. sheweth how a righteous man would be good, though there were no law; as they say of a Magistrate, he ought to be […], a living law. Thus Socrates said of the Civill Law, […] And Plato, Polit. 3. […], It is not fit to command or make lawes for those that are good. These Sayings are not altogether true, yet they have some kinde of truth in them. Hence it was that Antisthenes said, A wise man was not bound by any lawes: And Demonax told a Lawyer, that all their lawes would come to nothing; for good men did not need them, and wicked men would not be the better for them. And as the Heathens have said thus, so the Fathers: Hierome, What needs the Law say to a righteous man, Thou shalt not kill, to whom it’s not permitted to be angry? Yet we see David, though a righteous man, needed this precept. But especially Chrysostome, even from these words, doth wonderfully hyperbolize, A righteous man needs not the Law, no not teaching or admonishing; yea, he disdaines to be warned by it, he doth not wait or stay to learn of it. As therefore a Musician or Grammarian, that hath these arts within him, scorns the Grammar, or to go to look to the rules; so doth a righteous man. Now these are but hyperbole’s; for what godly man is there, that needs not the Word as a light, that needs it not as a goad? Indeed, in heaven the godly shall not need the Law; no more shall they the Gospel, or the whole Word of God.

2. There are three interpretations which come very neere one another, and all doe well help to the clearing of the Apostle. 1. Some learned men lay an emphasis in the word [Made] […]. It is not made to a godly man as a burden, he hath a love and a delight¹ in it; Lex est posita, sed non imposita: He doth not say, Justi non habent legem, aut sunt sine lege; sed non imminet eis tanquam flagellum, it’s not like a whip to them. The wicked wish there were no Law, and cry out as he, Utinam hoc esset non peccare! The righteous man is rather in the Law, then under it. It’s true, the word […] in the generall doth signifie no more then to lye, or be, or is; therefore, in Athenaeus, Ulpianus was called […], because of his frequent questions, […]; where such or such a word might be found: but yet sometimes it signifieth to be laid to a thing, as to destroy it; so Matth. 3. 10. The axe is laid to the root of the tree, […] in the originall, and so […], is for as much as […], posita for opposita, as we say positus obex. Now this is to be understood so farre forth as he is righteous, otherwise the things of God are many times a burden to a godly man. Let us not oppose then the works of the Law, and the works of the Spirit, Grace and Gospel; for the same actions are the works of the Law ratione objecti, in respect of the object; and the works of the Spirit ratione efficientis, in respect of the efficient. Indeed the Scripture opposeth Grace and Works, and Faith and Works, but in a clean other sense then the Antinomian, in time is to be shewed.

The second interpretation is of the damnatory and cursing part² of the Law: The Law is not made to the beleever so, as he should abide under the cursing, and condemning power of it: and in this sense we are frequently denied to be under the Law. It’s true, the godly are under the desert of the curse of the Law, but not the actuall curse, and condemnation: Nor doth it therefore follow, that there is no Law, because it doth not curse; for it’s a good rule in Divinity, à remotione actûs secundi in subjecto impediti, non valet argumentum ad remotionem actûs primi; from the removall of an act or operation, the argument doth not hold to the removing of the thing it self: as it did not follow, The fire did not burn the three Worthies, therefore there was no fire; God did hinder the act: And if that could be in naturall agents, which work naturally, how much rather in morall causes, such as the Law is of condemnation, which works according to the appointment of God? So then the Law is not to curse or condemne the righteous man.

The last interpretation is, that the Law was not made because of righteous men, but unrighteous. Had Adam continued in innocency,³ there had not been such a solemne declaration of Moses his Law; for it had been graven in their hearts: Therefore, though God gave a positive law to Adam, for the tryall of his obedience, and to shew his homage; yet he did not give the Morall Law to him by outward prescript, though it was given to him in another sense: and so the phrase shall be like that Proverb, E malis moribus bonae leges nascuntur, Good lawes arise from evil manners: And certainly lawes, in the restraining and changing power of them upon the lives of men, are not for such who are already holy, but those that need to be made holy; and so it may be like that of our Saviour in a sense which some explaine it in, I come not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance. By repentance they meane conversion, and by the righteous, not Pharisees, but such as are already converted. Thus Tacitus Annal. 15. Usu probatum est leges egregias ex aliorum delictis gigni, &c. Nam culpa quam poena, tempore prior; emendari quam peccare posterius est; excellent Lawes are made, because of other mens delinquencies; The fault goeth before the punishment, and sinne before the amendment.

Now that these interpretations, much agreeing in one, may the better be assented to, consider some parallel places of Scripture: Galat. 5. 23. speaking of the fruits of the spirit, Against such there is no law; The Law was not made to these, to condemne them, or accuse them: so that what is said of the actions and graces of the godly, may be applyed to the godly themselves. You may take another parallel, Rom. 13. 3. Rulers are not a terrour to good works, but to evil: Wouldst thou not be afraid of them? doe no evil. And thus the Apostle, to shew how the grace of love was wrought in the Thessalonians hearts, I need not (saith he) write to you to love, for you have been taught of God to doe this: His very saying, I need not write, was a writing; so that these expressions doe hold forth no more, then that the godly, so farre as they are regenerate, doe delight in the Law of God, and it is not a terrour to them. And if because the godly have an ingenuous free spirit to doe what is good, he need not the Law directing or regulating; it would follow as well, he needed not the whole Scripture, he needed not the Gospel that calls upon him to beleeve, because faith is implanted in his heart. This rock cannot be avoided: And therefore upon this ground, because the godly are made holy in themselves, the Swencfeldians did deny the whole Scripture to be needfull to a man that hath the Spirit: And that which the Antinomian doth limit to the Law, It is a killing letter, they apply to the whole Scripture; and I cannot see how they can escape this argument. Hence Chrysostome that spake so hyperbolically about the Law, speaks as high about the Scriptures themselves, We ought to have the Word of God engraven in our hearts so, that there should be no need of Scripture: And Austin speakes of some, that had attained to such holinesse that they lived without a Bible. Now who doth not see what a damnable and dangerous position this would be?

That the Law must needs have a directive, regulating, and informing power over a godly man, will appeare in these two particulars:

1. We cannot discerne the true worship of God from superstition⁴ and idolatry, but by the first and second Commandement. It is true, many places in Scripture speak against false worship, but to know when it is a false worship, the second Commandement is a speciall director. How do the orthodox Writers prove Images unlawfull? how do they prove that the setting up any part or meanes of worship which the Lord hath not commanded is unlawfull, but by the second Commandement? And, certainly, the want of exact knowledge in the latitude of this Commandement brought in all idolatry and superstition. And we shall shew you (God willing, in time) that the Decalogue is not onely Moses his ten Commandements, but it’s Christs ten Commandements, and the Apostles ten Commandements as well as his.

2. Another instance at this time is, in comparing the depth of⁵ the Law, and the depth of our sinne together. There is a great deale more spirituall excellency and holinesse commanded in the Law of God, the Decalogue, then we can reach unto: Therefore we are to study into it more and more: Open mine eyes, that I may understand the wonderfull things of thy Law; thus David prayeth, though godly, and his eyes were in a great measure opened by the Spirit of God. And as there is a depth in the Law, so a depth in our originall and native sin: There is a great deale more filth in us, then we can or doe discover, Psal. 19. Who can understand his errours? Cleanse me from secret sins. Therefore, there being such a world of filth in thy carnall heart, what need is there of the spirituall and holy Law, to make thee see thy self thus polluted and abominable? Certainly, a godly man groweth partly by discovering that pride, that deadnesse, that filth in his soule he never thought of, or was acquainted with.

The practicall use that is to be made of this Scripture explained, is, to pray and labour for such a free heavenly heart, that the Law of God, and all the precepts of it may not be a terrour to you, but sweetnesse and delight. Oh how I love thy Law! cryeth David; he could not expresse it. And again, My soul breaketh in the longing after thy judgements. In another place, he and Job do account of them above their necessary food; you do not hale and drag an hungry or thirsty man to his bread and water: I doe not speak this, but that it’s lawfull to eye the reward, as Moses and Christ did; yea, and to fear God: for who can think that the Scripture, using these motives, would stirre up in us sinfull and unlawfull affections? but yet such ought to be the filiall and son-like affections to God and his will, that we ought to love and delight in his Commandements, because they are his; as the poore son loveth his father, though he hath no lordship or rich inheritance to give him.

There is this difference between a free and violent motion: a free motion is that which is done for its own selfe sake; a violent is that which cometh from an outward principle, the patient helping it not forward at all: Let not, to pray, to beleeve, to love God, be violent motions in you. Where faith worketh by love, this maketh all duties relish, thsi overcometh all difficulties. The Lacedemonians, when they went to war, did sacrifice to Love, because love only could make hardship, and wounds, and death it selfe easie. Doe thou therefore pray, that the love of God may be shed abroad in thine heart; and consider these two things: 1. How the Law laid upon Christ to dye, and suffer for thee, was not a burthen or terrour to him. How doth he witnesse this by crying out, With desire I have desired to drink of this cup? Think with thy self, If Christ had been as unwilling to die for me, as I to pray to him, to be patient, to be holy, what had become of my soule? If Christ therefore said of that Law, to be a Mediatour for thee, Lo, I come to doe thy will, O God, thy Law is within mine heart; how much rather ought this to be true of thee in any thing thou shalt doe for him? Thou hast not so much to part with for him, as he for thee. What is thy life and wealth to the glory of his God-head, which was laid aside for a while? And then secondly, consider how that men love lusts for lusts sake, they love the world because of the world. Now evill is not so much evill, as good is good; sin is not so much sin, as God is God, and Christ is Christ. If therefore a profane man, because of his carnall heart, can love his sin, though it cost him hell, because of the sweetnesse in it; shall not the godly heart love the things of God, because of the excellency in them? But these things may be more enlarged in another place.

Footnotes

1. The Law to a godly man is a delight, not a burden. ↩

2. The godly are under the desert of the curse, but not the actuall condemnation of the Law. ↩

3. The Law, in the restraining power thereof, was not made for the righteous, but unrighteous. ↩

4. 1. The true worship of God cannot be diseerned from false, but by the Law.
   ↩
5. 2. The depth of sin cannot be discovered without it.
   ↩