ROM. 2. 14, 15.
BEfore I handle the other places of Scripture that are brought by the Antinomians against the Law, it is my intent, for better methods sake, and your more sound instruction, to handle the whole Theology of the Law of God in the severall distributions of it, and that positively, controversally, and practically; and I shall begin first with the law of Nature, that God hath imprinted in us, and consider of this two waies: 1. As it is a meere law; and secondly, As it was a covenant of works made with Adam: And then in time I shall speak of the Morall Law given Moses, which is the proper subject of these controversies.
The Text I have read is a golden Mine, and deserveth diligent digging and searching into: Therefore, for the better understanding of these words, let us answer these Questions:
- Who are meant by the Gentiles here? It is ordinarily known,1 that the Jewes did call all those Gentiles that were not Jewes, by way of contempt; as the Greeks and Romans called all other nations Barbarians. Hence sometimes in the Scripture the word is applyed to wicked men, though Jewes: as, Psal. 2. Why doe the heathen rage? It may be interpreted of the Pharisees resisting Christ. Indeed, the Jewes will not confesse, that the word […] Gentes, is any where applyed to them: but this is very false, for Genes. 17. Abraham is there said to be the father of many nations, ([…] Gentes:) therefore they must either deny themselves to be Abraham’s seed, or else acknowledge this word belonging to them. But generally it signifieth those that had not the Lawes of Moses, nor did live by them. Therefore Gal. 2. 14. […], to live like a Gentile, is, not to observe the Lawes of Moses: and in this sense it is to be taken here; for the Apostles scope is to make good that great charge upon all mankinde, both Jew and Gentile, that naturally they are wholly in sin; and God, being no accepter of persons, will destroy the one as well as the other. And whereas it might be thought very hard to deale thus with the Gentile, because no law was delivered unto him, as unto the Jew, the Apostle answereth that Objection in this place. But grant it be understood of such Gentiles, then there is a greater Question whether it be meant of the Gentiles abiding so, or the Gentiles converted and turned beleevers; for, that the Apostle speaks of such, most of the Latine Interpreters, both ancient and modern, doe affirme: and so the Greek Father, Chrysostome, and Estius, a learned Papist, doe think there are so many arguments for it, that it’s certaine. I confesse, they bring many probable reasons; but I will not trouble you with them: this seemeth a strong argument against them, because the Apostle speaks of such who are without a law, and a law to themselves, which could not be true of Gentiles converted: we take the Apostle therefore to speak of Gentiles abiding so; but in this sense there is also a dangerous exposition and a sound one. The poysonous interpretation is of the Pelagians, who understand the law written in their hearts, in the same sense as it is used, Jerem. 33. even such a fulfilling of the law which will attaine to salvation; and this they hold the Heathens by the law and help of nature did sufficiently: But this is to overthrow the doctrine of Grace and Christ. Therefore the sound interpretation is of the Gentiles indeed, but yet to understand the law written in their hearts, onely of those relicts of naturall reason and conscience, which was in the Heathens, as is to be proved anon.
The 2d. Question is easily answered, How they are said to be2 without a law; to wit, without a written law, as the Jewes had; so that we may say, they had a law without a law; a law written, but not declared.
The 3d. Question, In what sense they are said to doe the things of3 the law, and that by nature. To doe the things of the law is not meant universally of all the Heathens, for the Apostle shewed how most of them lived in the Chapter before: nor secondly universally in regard of the matter contained in the law, but some externall acts, as Aristides and Socrates, with others. And here it’s disputed, Whether a meere Heathen can doe any work morally good? But wee answer, No: for every action ought to have a supernaturall end, viz. the glory of God, which they did not aime at; therefore we do refuse that distinction of a morall good,4 and theologicall, because every morall good ought to be theologicall: they may do that good matter of the law, though not well. And as for the manner how, by nature; those Interpreters that understand this Text of Gentiles beleevers, say, Nature is not here opposed to Grace, but to the law written by Moses; and therefore make it nature enabled by grace: but this is shewed to be improbable. By nature therefore we may understand that naturall5 light of conscience, whereby they judged and performed some externall acts, though these were done by the help of God.