MAT 5. 17.
OUr Saviour being to vindicate the Law from all corrupt1 glosses of the Pharisees, he doth in the first place (as Chrysostome thinketh) remove the odium that might be cast upon him as if he did indeed destroy the Law; for it was then generally received, that only was Law, which the Pharisees declared to be so. And this he doth, ver. 17. Think not that I am come to destroy the Law. The reason he giveth, is from the perpetuall nature of the Law: heaven and earth, the whole world shall sooner fall into pieces, then any tittle of that. And the Prophets are here joyned to the Law, not so much in regard of their predictions, as because they were Interpreters of the Law. The second reason is from that evill which shall befall him, that doth breake it, and here he nameth a two-fold Antinomianisme; one in life and practise, the other in doctrine: That in practise is aggravated, though it be one of the least commandments. They are called least, either because the Pharisees thought them so, or else indeed, because all the commands of God were not concerning duties of the same consequence. The other in doctrine is expressed in those words, And teach men so. I cannot consent to Beza’s interpretation, making this teaching to be by example and life, or else […], to be put for […], although, as if the meaning were, He that doth break in his practice my commandment, although he do teach them in doctrine. There is no necessity of offering such violence to the Text. But if we interpret it of doctrinall breaking, it will very well agree with the Pharisees, who made void the commandements of God by the doctrines of men. The evill that shall befall such, is in those words, [He shall be called the least in the Kingdome of heaven.] Called is put for is. or be; He shall be the least. By Kingdom of heaven,2 some understand that Kingdome of glory in heaven; and by least, meane nullus, none: he shall not at all enter into the Kingdome of heaven.
Others by Kingdom of heaven do understand the Church of God, and so they express it, when there shall be a reformation in the Church, and truth should break forth, which was presently to come to pass, then those corrupt teachers, who would poyson men, should be discovered, and then they should be least, that is, of no account; even as it fell out to the Pharisees, though for a while they were highly esteemed among men. I forbeare to touch upon that Question hotly disputed with some, Whether our Saviour doe in this discourse meane only the3 Morall Law, or the Ceremoniall also, as being not to my purpose. That it is meant cheifly of the Morall Law, appeareth by the instances which Christ giveth. From the Text thus opened, I observe, That any doctrine, which teacheth tho abrogation or dissolution of the Law, is highly offensive unto God.
For the opening of this consider, that the doctrines of men may either directly, and with an open face overthrow the Law, as the Marcionites and Manichees did: or else interpretatively, and more covertly; and that is done three waies.
-
when they make not the Law of God to be so full and exensiue in it’s obligation, as indeed it is; and thus the Pharisees they made void the Law, when they affirmed outward acts to be only sins: and thus the Papists do in part when they make the Law no further to oblige, then it is possible for us to keep it. These doctrines doe in tantum, though not in totum destroy the Law.
-
When men hold such principles, that will necessarily by way of4 consequence inforce the abrogation of the Law. And thus, though some Antinomians do expresly and boldly assert the abolishing of it, at least to beleevers; yet those that have more learning and wariness, do disclaime it, and account it a calumny: but even at the same time, while they do disclaime it (as it is to be shewed presently) they hold such assertions, as do necessarily inferr the abrogation of it.
-
The Law may be doctrinally dissolved, by pressing such duties5 upon men, whereby they will be necessitated to breake the commandments of God. Thus when the Pharisees taught, that whatsoever vow was made concerning any gift, they were bound to do it, though thereby they were disinabled to honour their parents. And this is most remarkably seen in the Church of Rome, who, by the multitude and necessity of observation of their Church precepts and constitutions, make men to break the plain commandments of God. Now I shall briefly instance generally about those errours that dissolve Gods Law, and then more particularly about the Antinomian doctrine.