Aduersary of the Morall Law. [...]. ‘SIr, you may well thinke me slacke in performance of my promise, and not vnlike but you in respect thereof thinke that I faint in the cause: but it is farre other­wise with me, for the more that I consider of it, the more I am confirmed in the truth of it, and the more I discerne the many errors that rise out of the ignorance of the true difference betweene the Law and the Gospell.’

Answer. Sir, how slacke you haue beene in performance of your promise I know not, but it seemes you haue made some recompence of your slacknesse by your surenesse (as you thinke) that you might iustifie and make good the common prouerbe, Though I be slow, yet am I sure. And I wish you had beene as prouident to bestow your studies well, as you are confident that your cause is good; or that your confidence be not greater then either your cause, or your handling of it can wel afford; for what is there in this your cause, viz. ‘[In the Church of Christ since his death, the whole law of Moses is wholly abolished and abrogated]’ that can assure you of any warrant for the truth of it? and what is there in your manner of dealing in it, that can bring [Page 7] you any comfort, or breed so great confidence in the so resolute defence of the same? Had you drawne your pen, and sharpened your stile either against the August. Quaest. Ʋeter. & Nov. Te­stam. quaest. 69. Ce­remoniall Law, that it is wholly vanished (as a shadow) because the Body is exhibited; and abolished (as a type) because the truth is come Christ Iesus; or a­gainst the Et cont. Ada­mant. cap. 16. Iudiciall, that it is abrogated also, so farre as it was peculiar to the Mosaicall and Iewish policy: you might peraduenture haue found some sorry See Dana. in August. de Haere­sib. Centur. 2^•. Aduersarie else-where, both of former and of latter times, but the most iudicious Diuines both ancient and moderne, you should haue found your surest friends. Nay further, had you beene of opinion, that euen the Morall law as it was giuen by God to Moses, and by Moses to the Church of the Iewes, is now in some circumstances of time, place, persons, tables, Testament, manner, measure, terror, rigor, and the like, Ʋide Cal. Har­mo. in 4. Lib. Mosis p. 442, 443, 444. See these Fathers Iren. aduers. Hae­res. Lib. 4. cap. 21. &c. Numquid haec de­cologi praecepta ces­sasse dicenda sunt? Absit, inquit Au­gustin. Quaest Vet. & Nov. Test. cap. 69. & in Gal. cap. 3. altered and changed in the Church of Christ since his death: you would not I thinke haue found many (if any at all) much differing and dissenting from you. But seeing you haue drawne out your sword (such as it is) against the whole Law of Moses, not against the Ceremoniall and Iudiciall only, but euen against the Morall also, and that, not to alter or change it in some circumstance, but to abrogate and abolish the very substance of it, and that not in part, but wholly too; I know not the man that will stand with you, strike one stroake for you, or bid you so much as God speed in this cause, or course. Numb. 12. When Aaron and Miriam rose against Moses in great bitternesse both of spirit and speech, the Lord tooke them vp sharply with this re­buke, My seruant Moses is faithfull in all my house, how then were yee not afraid to speake against my seruant Moses? I make no doubt but euen at this day the Lord doth reckon of the Morall Law as of his seruant, yea and doth esteeme it in his vse a faithfull seruant in his Church also: how then were not you afraid to [Page 8] speake, to write, to fight with all the wit and power you haue against the whole body of the Morall Law? and that not onely to weaken the credit and power of it, but vtterly to abolish the very substance and being of it therewithall? Seemeth it a small matter in your eies, absolutely to abolish both Ceremoniall and Iu­diciall Law, Lex Christianis est thesaurus abscō ­ditus &c. vide Ire­nae. advers. Haer. lib. 4. cap. 43. which yet retaine a Bulling. advers. Anabap. lib. 2. cap. 15. & lib. 4. cap. 4. spirituall and morall equity, and as they are part of Gods Word shall endure for euer, but you must needs deale in like sort with the Morall Law also? You are farre I hope from Ester. 3.5, 6. Hamans minde, though in this your courses be not much vnlike: he thought scorne to lay hands on Mordecai alone, therefore he sought to destroy the whole people of the Iewes in one day: and you thinke scorne to abolish the Ceremoniall and Iudici­all law alone, and therefore you seeke to destroy the whole Morall Law of God also. If Ierem. 11.19. Ieremie held them to bee of a cruell disposition, that deuised de­uices against him, saying, Let vs destroy the tree with the fruit thereof, and let vs cut him off from the land of the liuing, that his name be no more remembred: of what disposition then shall wee take you to be, that would cut downe this tree of Gods Law, together with the fruit thereof, first Manu formato­ris nostri, in ipsis cordibus nostris ve­ritas scripsit, Quod tibi non vis fieri, ne feceris alteri. Vi­de August. in Psal. 57. vers. 1. planted in Paradise in the heart of Adam, some roots whereof doe yet re­maine in the naturall man, which being Lex Dei in cor­dibus scribitur, non quia per naturam praeventa sit gratia, sed quia per grati­am reparata est na­tura. Vide August. de vera Innocent. cap. 258. trans­planted by grace into the heart of the regenerate and spirituall, and there rooted by faith, watered by the word, and warmed by the spirit, doe yeeld sweet fruits of righteousnesse and holinesse to the praise and glory of God by Christ Iesus. But seeing we cannot stay your hand, let vs see if we can take away the dint of your stroake, and abate the edge of your axe, wherewith you strike to destroy the whole Morall Law. Wherein howsoeuer we may faile, yet are we well assured, that rather shall the head fly from the helue, and both fall into the bottomlesse pit, and you [Page 9] cry out and confesse, as once one of the sonnes of the 2 Kings 6.5. Prophets did in such a case, Alas master, it was but borrowed, than euer this tree of the Morall law of God shall be hewen downe by your hands.

And first I cannot but admire againe your high conceit of your selfe, great confidence in your cause, and setled resolution to Elati, sibi pla­centes, Hypocritae, quaestus gratiâ, & inanis gloriae, ope­rantes. Omnes hi decidunt à verita­te, alienum ignem afferentes ad alta­re Dei, i. alienas do­ctrinas. Vide Iren. aduersus Haeres. lib. 4. cap. 43. stand stoutly to the defence of it; for whereas your friend to whom you write might thinke that by reason of your slacknesse, you did faint in the cause (as you obiect for him) you answer for your selfe in these words: ‘But it is farre otherwise with me, for the more that I consider of it, the more I am confirmed in the truth of it, and the more I discerne of the many errors that arise out of the ignorance of the true difference betweene the Law and the Gospell.’ Bigge words, messengers of a braue heart. Your cause (concerning the whole abolishing of the whole Mo­rall Law) is now no longer a bare assertion, but a setled perswasion, for you are confirmed in the truth of it, neither came you vnto this by any light opinion, but by mature deliberation [for you haue more and more considered of it] and this consideration hath brought you with it, a greater measure of illumina­tion, for by the light of this truth you are able to di­scerne many errors which (by reason of their blinde ignorance) none else can see, but such as you thinke good to lend your spectacles vnto, to discouer them. And from all these ariseth your courage and resolution, that it is so farre from you to faint in the cause, that be­ing more and more confirmed in the truth of it, you are now fully resolued to set your best wits, and your friends aworke stoutly to maintaine and defend it. But what said the 1 King. 20.11. King of Israel to the King of Syria, Let not him that girdeth on his harnesse, boast himselfe as he that putteth it off. Be not so confident that your building will stand, vnlesse the foundation be sure, and the frame sound and good. If the Luc. 6.48, 49. foundation [Page 10] be [...]and, and the frame 1 Cor. 3.11, 12, 13, 14, 15. hay and stubble, it will neuer abide the touch, much lesse the force either of water or of fire. Many there are that build Castles in the aire, and thinke them to be turrets of truth and forts of defence: But when the Lord shall awaken them out of their dreame, and anoint their eies with the Reu. 3.18. eie-salues of grace and 1 Ioh. 2.27. truth, they shall then see that what they built was but vpon the sand of fancie, not vpon the rocke of Faith, and their whole frame more like the Gen. 11.4, 9. Tower of Babel, then the fort of Cant. 4.4. Sion. For as Prou. 18.11. the Rich mans riches are his strong tower, but only in his owne imagination; so are the poore mans fancies his fortresses of faith and truth, but alas only in his owne Rom. 1.21. 2 Cor. 10.5. vaine conceit and opinion.

But to make way vnto your matter, you seeme to giue some reason of this your great confidence and re­solution, [...]. ‘because (say you) the ignorance of the true difference betweene the Law and the Gospell, doth breed many errors which you haue discerned, and the true knowledge of this difference keepeth all Christian doctrine in its proper vse.’ And for this you cite Luther on Galat. 3 21. Answer. Your ignorance of this difference hath bred this your error touching the vtter abolishing of the Morall Law, as Irena. advers. Haeres. lib. 3. cap. 12. Et ea quae est sec. Mosen Lex, & Gratia Noui Test. utraque apta tem­poribus, ad utilita­tem humani gene­ris, ab uno & eo­dem praestita Deo. Irenaeus advers. Heres lib. 3. cap. 12. Ierenaeus obserued of the Marci­onists: Omnes qui sunt malae sententiae, Mosis legem diffimilem & contrariam Euangelij doctrina arbitrantes, jam non sunt conversi ut differentiae utrinsque Testamen­ti inquirerent causas. You shall anon haue a particular answer to your owne reason. But first of all, seeing you haue appealed vnto Luther, vnto Luther shall you goe. That which you alledge out of him on Gal. 3.21. we doe willingly acknowledge as good, and wholsome doctrine; which how little it will stand you in stead, nay how much rather it stands against your opinion, you shall heare by and by, if first wee may heare Luther plainly deliuer his iudgement touching the abolishing or continuing of the morall Law. Writing vpon the [Page 11] same Epistle and chapter which you cite, and vers. 24. he hath (as you may reade) these words: The Luth. in Gal. 3. vers. 24. true vse of the Law is to teach me, that I am brought to the knowledge of my sinne and humbled, that so I may come vnto Christ and be iustified by faith. But faith is neither Law nor worke, but an assured confidence which apprehendeth Christ who is the end of the Law, Rom. 10. And how? not that he hath abolished the old Law, and giuen a New, or that he is a Iudge that must be pacified by workes, as the Papists haue taught, but he is the end of the Law to all those that beleeue, that is to say, euery one that beleeueth in him is righ­teous, and the Law shall neuer accuse him; The Law then is good, holy and iust, so that a man vse it as he should doe. By which euidence we may iustly giue sentence both against your opinion (for the whole a­bolishing of the whole Morall Law) and against your allegation also out of Luther, vpon whom you would father the base and bastard fruit of your owne braine, to make it either more plausible or more probable by this meanes:Seuen Obseruati­ons out of Luthers allegation. for may we not hence most euidently con­clude that Luthers iudgement concerning the Morall Law is this: first, that it is not abolished: secondly, that it is of good vse: thirdly, that it serueth to bring vs to the knowledge and sense of sinne: fourthly, that it driueth vs out of our selues and our owne righteous­nesse which is of the Law, to seeke for righteousnesse by faith in Christ only: fiftly,Jrenaeus is of the same iudgement for establishing the Morall Law. In lege & in Eu­angelio primum & maximum prae­ceptum est, Dilige­re Dominum Deum ex toto corde. Ire­naeus advers. Ha­res. lib. 3. cap. 25, 26 that Christ hath not a­bolished the old Law: sixtly, that the Law may be said to be at an end in Christ, because as it cannot iusti­fie, so can it not iustly accuse or terrifie any that are righteous by faith in him: lastly, that the Gospell doth not abolish the nature and right vse of the Law, (for according to the Apostle, the Law is holy, iust, and good) but only taketh out of the hearts of true belee­uers the accusing and accursing power of it. Which points being so apparantly contrarie to your position. [Page 12] I haue the more fully and distinctly set downe for your better satisfaction, that you may either let fall your opi­nion, seeing you haue Luthers both heart and hand a­gainst it, or else neuer run againe vnder his wing to seeke for any succour or shelter for the same. I now come vnto your reason which you seeme to alledge for your so great confidence in this cause: [...]. namely, ‘Because the ignorance of the true difference betweene the Law and the Gospell doth breed many errors, which you say you haue already discerned, and the true knowledge of this difference keepeth all Christian do­ctrine in its proper vse.’

Answer. In which words what doe you else but establish that which you goe about to abolish? For whiles you say you discerne many errors to arise out of the ignorance, and much good to come in, by the knowledge of the difference betweene the Law and the Gospell, doe you not see your owne error and ignorance herein also, that laying it downe in your position for sound and true doctrine [that the whole law of Moses is wholly abolished] you notwithstanding doe acknowledge not only that the Ergo Lex Crea­toris etiam ab Ad­versario probata est: nec dispeadium sed compendium ab eo consecuta est. Tertul. advers. Marcion. lib. 5. cap. 4. Law is, but also that it is of good, and great vse, pulling downe with the one hand that which you haue built, or would build with the other: for if the whole Law of Moses be abolished, then the igno­rance of it will breed no error, nor the knowledge of it can build no truth: for young Logicians can tell vs, that Non entis non est actio nee scientia.

Againe, if the whole Law be wholly abolished, it is not possible it should be distinguished by any diffe­rence from the Gospell; for as Non entis non est scientia, so Non entis non est differentia. What difference can be designed betwixt that which is not, and that which is, that which is wholly abolished, and that which is esta­blished? ‘If you say as before, that the difference of the Law from the Gospell may be knowne and acknowledg­ed, and be of good and great vse; then I say you are too [Page 13] bold in your assertion to maintaine that the whole Law is wholly abolished:’ for if this were true, you leaue the Law neither breath nor being, neither nature nor vse, neither substance nor circumstance, neither diffe­rence nor [...]. Diog. Laert. lib. 9. p. 694. Accidence; neither place in the booke of God, nor so much as a nights lodging vnder the roofe of the Church of God. Which to affirme because it were both absurd and impious, I hope vpon better aduice you will see, and acknowledge, that your point was cut out too long and too large, when you thus set it "downe. The point is this, That the whole Law of Mo­ses "is wholly abolished: & the rather, because you haue now cut it shorter & narrower with your owne hands, telling vs that it is not abolished [for it is] nor wholly abolished [for it is of good vse] it hath essence and diffe­rence, and may be knowne, and not onely knowne in it selfe, but distinguished from the Gospell, and the distinct knowledge hereof so profitable and needfull, that the ignorance hereof is a mother of many errors dangerous and hurtful. If I acknowledge this with you for a truth, then must you acknowledge with me your position for an error, and if you will haue your position [That the whole Law is wholly abolished] to be true, then is all this that you haue spoken of the profitable and necessa­ry knowledge of the difference of the Law and the Gos­pell false. You seeme to boast that you faint not in the cause, and that you are confirmed in the truth of it, but consider I pray you, whether you faile not in your Hieron. adversus Ruffin. p. 218. course, seeing you doe not onely trip and interfere, but stumble and fall at your first setting forth: Statim de portu egrediens navem impegit. So said Ie­rome to Ruffin, & I vnto you. Cic. Tuscul. lib. 1. Is the truth diuided, or doth the truth differ from it selfe. Statim de portu egrediens navem impegit. So said Ie­rome to Ruffin, & I vnto you. Cic. Tuscul. lib. 1. I see a man may take a fall though he doe not faint; and thinke himselfe confirmed in the truth, when he is vnsetled in vncertainties, and diuided from it. Pugnantia te loqui non vides? ubi est acumen tuum? But to recouer your selfe againe you say, Luther agreeth with you in this point: How should Luther agree with him that can­not [Page 14] agree with himselfe? But how or wherein doth he agree with you? Antinom. ‘That the point is of great consequence, and very necessary to be knowne of all that truly seeke Christ Iesus.’ Answer. What point? his, or yours? His point is, That the knowledge of the difference of the offices of the Law and Gospell is of good and great vse, for preseruing of true Christian doctrine, for iudging of all kinde of life and lawes of men, and for triall of spirits: And all this we willingly grant, & assent vnto. And how I pray you "doth this point agree with yours; [That the whole Law "of Moses is wholly abolished?] Nay doth it not rather pull yours in peeces, and wholly deuoure your whole Law, and your wholly too? As Exod. 7.12 Aarons rod deuou­red the rods of the Inchanters of Aegypt? Luthers rod hath this truth written vpon it, The Law of Moses is of great and good vse; therfore it deuoures yours which "beares engrauen vpon it this error, The whole Law of "Moses is wholly abolished. But take you good leaue to make your owne Argument your selfe, and let vs see of what strength and consequence it will be. ‘Luther (say you) Antinom. affirmeth that the Law of Moses is of good and great vse, for preseruing of true Christian doctrine, for iudging of all kinde of life and lawes of men, and for tri­all of spirits:’ Therefore you conclude that he agreeth with you in this point; ‘That the whole Law of Moses is wholly abolished.’ Answere. As much agreement there may be betwixt fire and water, light and darknesse, truth and error, as betwixt his Antecedent, and your conse­quent. Will you see what life and light, sinewes and ioynts it hath, by another like vnto it. The Ancient Canons of the 4. first generall 1. Concil. Nicen. 2. Constantinop. 3. Ephesin. & 4. Chalcedon. Ʋide Euseb. de vita Con­stant. lib. 3. cap. 7. Theodoret. Eccles. Hist. lib. 5. cap. 6. & 9. Euagr. Histor. Eccles. lib. 2. cap. 4. Counsells are of great and good vse, for preseruing of true doctrine, for iudg­ing all kinde of life, lawes, and opinions of men, and for triall of spirits. Ergo, All the Canons of the first 4. generall Counsels are wholly abolished and abrogated. What connexion is here betwixt the Antecedent, and the consequent? Would not the cleane contrarie be [Page 15] more necessarily concluded; Ergo, All the Canons of the 4. first generall Councels are yet in force, and nei­ther wholly nor in part abolished, nor abrogated. Non Cicero lib 4. A­cad. quast. ovum ovo similius quàm Servilius Servilio: One egge is not more like another, then this Argument is like to yours. And what thinke you of this; Luther himselfe on Gal. 3. (the same chapter which you alledge for you) doth most euidently fight against you.Luth. on Gal. 3. fol. 131, 152. There is (saith he) a double vse of the Law, the first vse is to bridle the wicked and to restraine sinne, as men vse to restraine Lions and Beares with bonds and chaines, that they teare and di­uoure not euery thing they meet. And this he calleth a ci­uill vse of the Law. Another vse of the Law is diuine and spirituall, which is (as Paul saith) to increase transgressi­on, i. o reueale vnto man his sinne, his blindnes, his mise­rie, his impietie, his ignorance, hatred and contempt of God, death, hell, iudgement, and the deserued wrath of God. Of this vse the Apostle intreateth notably in the 7. to the Romans. Luther you see doth otherwise iudge of colours then you doe: certainly either your eyes were not matches, or your spectacles not of the same, nor so true a sight as his were. You say the whole Law is wholly abolished: he saith, and not onely faith it, but proueth it by Scripture too, That it is not wholly abo­lished, but hath yet his double vse both ciuill and spi­rituall. Quint. Orat. Instit. lib. 5. cap. 12. Asc [...]nius Paedi. in Cic. Orat. pro M. Scauro. Valerius Max, lib. 3. cap. 7. Q. Varus Hispanus Marcum Scaurum Prin­cipem Senatus, socios in arma, ait, concitasse: Marcus Scaurus princeps Senatus negat: vtri vos, Quirites conve­nit credere? You (I know not who) say, that Luther a Captaine of the Lords hoast, hath both stirred vp others, and taken armes himselfe for the abolishing of the whole Morall Law; Luther a leader of the Lords armies doth vtterly denie it; whether of you two should now be better credited let the Christian reader iudge. But it may be you take hold of this, that Lu­ther mentioneth the Luth. on Gal. 4.27. fol. 222. abolishing of the Law, saying it is necessary to know and vnderstand well the do­ctrine [Page 16] of the abolishment of the Law, &c. Gal. 4.27. Men that are in danger of falling or drowning, will catch at any thing which may seeme to helpe them, al­though it be vtterly vnable to doe them any good. So said Hieron. advers. Ruffin. Apol. lib. 2. Ierome of Ruffinus, Tantum me diligit ut raptus turbine & in profundum dimersus, meum potissimum in­vadat pedem, ut mecum aut liberetur aut pereat. You catch at this word Abolishment of the Law, and yet it will neither stay you, nor stand you in any stead, for Luther speakes only of the abolishing of certaine vses of the Law, as, for righteousnesse, iustification, life and saluation, for terrifying, accusing, condemning those that are iustified by faith in Christ Iesus; so farre he acknowledgeth, and we with him, that the Calu. de usu legis. Harmon. in 4. Libros Mosis. p. 442 August. de Spiritu & litera. cap. 4. & 5. & 10. Morall Law for these offices and vses is abolished. The very light and euidence of the opposition, which in the same sentence he maketh betwixt Moses and Christ, workes and faith, seruitude by the Law, and libertie by the Gospell, iustification and condemnation, ter­rors and conflicts of conscience, and sound and cer­taine consolation of the same, might haue manifested and made knowne thus much vnto you, had you been as carefull to seeke the truth of his doctrine, and to taste his true meaning in it, as you were willing to feed your owne fancie only with the bare letters, and leaues of it. Tertul. Scorpi­ [...]c. advers. Gnostic. cap. 7. Tertullian saith, Verba non sono solo sapiunt, sed & sensu: nec auribus tantùm audienda sunt, sed & mentibus. As Hieron. in Gal. 1. Non in verbis sed in sensu, non in su­perficie sed in me­dulla, non in sermo­num folijs sed in radice rationis. pag. 162. Ierome said of the sense of the Scrip­ture, it is not in cortice orationis, sed in radice rationis, so may we say of mens writings, we must seeke for the meaning, by the matter as well as by the letter; and lend our eares to listen and obserue what they desire to speake, and not make them speake only what we desire to heare; vnlesse we will be like little children who hauing some fancie running in their heads, imagine the bells to ring and sing as they thinke and speake. Let me in loue aduise you, when you alledge an Au­thor [Page 17] to giue euidence for any point, bring not in testem sine testimonio, a man that hath nothing to say for you, much more take heed you call not in such to speake in your cause, as are opposites and aduersaries vnto it, and cannot but speake what they haue heard and seene, and set both heart and hand against you. Let Luther your first witnesse second my aduice, and if you will suffer him to speake, he will discouer your strange dea­ling, in bringing him to giue euidence against his conscience, and to speake to your minde that which he neuer meant. Luth. on Gal. 4.27. p. 223. In the very next page to the words which you alledge as his opinion, that the whole Law of Moses is wholly abolished, he thus cleereth himselfe: We say that the Morall Law, or the law of the ten Com­mandements hath no power to accuse and terrifie the con­science in which Christ Iesus raigneth by his grace, for he hath abolished the power thereof. Marke well his words. What hath Christ abolished? The power of the Mo­rall Law, not the Law it selfe, nor the whole Law wholly, but the power of it: and what power? not all power, but the power of accusing, terrifying and con­demning: and in whom hath it lost this power? not in the wicked, vnregenerate, and reprobate, but in that conscience in which Christ raigneth by his grace. And in the page following Luth. on Gal. 4.27. p. 223. b. he hath these words to the same purpose; When our sinne is pardoned through Christ who is Lord of the Law, the Law being a seruant, hath no more power to accuse and condemne vs for sinne, and wee are now made free, forasmuch as the Sonne hath deliuered vs from bondage. And in this sense both he, and we, doe acknowledge that the Law is wholly abolished to them that beleeue in Christ Iesus, notwithstanding, Prosectò illam Dei legem, non so­lum illi tunc popu­lo, verùm etiam nunc Nobis, ad in­stituendam rectè vitam necessariam, nemo dubitaverit. Aug. Lib. 3. contra duas Epistol. Pel. ad Bonifac. cap. 4. & lib. 4. cap. 5. it remaineth still in force for some speciall offices and vses, both against the wicked, and for the godly, and that not only to driue them vn­to Christ, vpon sight and sense of their miserie, to seeke for releefe in his obedience; but to direct them [Page 18] also how to walke aright in the waies of God, when they are once come vnto him. Yea and further also, (because in many things we sinne all, and there is no man that sinneth not) the best of Gods children, euen after their effectuall calling and conuersion, stand in need of some of the Hieron. Augusti­no Tom. 2. p. 341. offices of the Law, as 1. to know the Rom. 7.7. nature and qualitie, manner and measure of their sinne by the Iam. 1.23.25. glasse of the law, for as Paul knew that concupiscence (euen without consent) was sinne, be­cause the Law (that is, the tenth Commandement) saith, Thou shalt not couet: so he that will finde out his sinne, must discouer it by the light, and measure it by the line of Gods law, for sinne (saith 1 Iohn 3.4. Iohn) is trans­gression of the Law, 1 Ioh. 3.4. and Paul affirmeth, that where no Law is, there is no transgression, Rom. 4.15.2. It serueth also to Ad hoc lex data est, ut superbo suam infirmitatem nota faceret, &c. vide plura apud Aug. de poenit medicina c. 1. conuince the conscience, to afflict the heart, to breake the spirits & subdue the pride euen of godly and gratious men, and all this only to humble them, not to discourage them, to make them to remember and consider whence and whither they are Reu. 2.5. fallen, that they may repent, doe their first workes, and recouer their first loue, and that in the sense of their miserie (when the Lord shall powre the Zach. 12.10. spirit of Grace and supplications vpon them) they may looke vpon him whom they haue pierced, and mourning ouer him, may seeke and sue for mercy and refreshing from him alone that hath promised to heale the Isay 61.1. broken hearted, to ease the burdened, and to Math. 11.28. refresh them that are tired with the labour, or wearied in the waies of sinne. Thus did the Luk. 15.18, 19. Prodigall, I will goe vnto my father. Thus did Adulterous Hos. 2.7. Israel, I will returne vnto my first husband, for then was it better with me then now, Hos. 2.7. And hereunto Luth. on Gal. 3.19. fol. 154. b. Luther giueth further testimonie, Gal. 3.19. The Law is as a glasse that sheweth vnto a man himselfe, that he is a sinner, guiltie of death, and worthy of Gods euerlasting wrath and indignation. To what end serueth this humbling, this bruising and bea­ting [Page 19] downe by this hammer, the Law I meane? To this end, that we may haue an enterance vnto grace. So then the So also saith Aug. epist. 89. ad Hilarium. Iubet ideo ut facere jussa conati, & in nostra infirmitate sub lege fatigati adjutorium gratiae poscere no­verimus. vide etiā August. Tract. 17. in Joh. Law is a Minister that prepareth the way to Grace, for God is the God of the humble, the miserable, the afflict­ed, &c. Can there be any more plaine & pregnant eui­dence to conuince you of error in this your opinion [That the whole Law is wholly abolished] then this which is given in against you, by your owne witnesse, that it is not only yet continued, but also for so necessa­rie vses, offices, and seruices, for euer established? euen so long as there shall be any need for a sinner to be humbled, and of a Veniat Medicus & sanet aegrotes. Medicus quis est? Dominus noster Je­sus Christus. — — August. in Eua. Ioh. Tract. 3. Sauiour to be sought vnto. And yet if all this be too little, hearken to his admonition, and obserue his protestation touching this particular, and you shall yet haue a more ample and effectuall sa­tisfaction and conuiction in the same. Luth. on Gal. 3.19. fol. 153. b. Luther on Gal. 3.19. Here I admonish (saith he) all such as feare God, and especially such as shall become teachers of o­thers hereafter, that they diligently learne out of Paul, to vnderstand the true and proper vse of the Law, which, I feare after our time will be trodden vnder foot, and vtterly abolished by the enemies of the truth. Hearken I pray you to this admonition, and trie the truth of your opinion by these foure points contained in it. 1. That yet there is a true and proper vse of the Law. 2. That Paul the Apostle doth teach what the true and proper vse of the Law is. 3. That all that feare God, especi­ally Ministers, ought to learne it, as he doth teach it. 4. That they are enemies of the truth, that goe about to tread it vnder foot and to abolish it. And now obserue his protestation: Luth. on Gal. cap. 3.19. fo. 154. a. Forasmuch as we teach those things both diligently and faithfully, we doe therefore plainly testifie, that we reiect not the Law and workes, as our Aduersaries doe falsly accuse vs, but we doe altoge­ther establish the Law, and require the workes thereof, and we say that the Law is good and profitable. Put your position in the ballance and scale with this prote­station, [Page 20] and it will be found lighter then vanitie it selfe: For first whereas you say the law is abrogated, as if it were now of no vse at all, Luther saith, it is good and profitable. Secondly, where you say the whole Law is wholly abolished (as if you would place it in the same condition with Rahels children for which she mourned because they were not) Luther saith, We doe altogether establish the Law, and require the workes of it. Thirdly, whereas you charge Luther to be one that goeth about to abolish or reiect the Law, he takes you for no friend, but for an Aduersary in so doing, and reckons no other of your allegation out of him, but as a false accusation laid against him.

Antinom.But if Luther will not serue your turne, you can make a fresh supplie by Tossanus and Gualter, whom you haue set to stand in subsidiis paulo post principium: And what helpe can you haue from them, that speake nothing more in your cause, nay much lesse (if lesse can be) then Luther did; for where Tossan. in 2. Cor. cap. 3. Tossanus saith, Licet unus sit Deus, & una semper fuerit Ecclesia, idemque substantiâ foedus, varia tamen hujus dispensatio fuit, ut aliter agitur cum homine in infantia, aliter in a­dolescentia, aliter in matura aetate; and you would here­upon conclude, that the whole law of Moses is there­fore wholly abolished; Answer. doe you not see how feeble and weake this collection and conclusion is? The words themselues besides the light which the Simile addeth thereunto, might haue shewne you so much at the first view, if you had with any heed and diligence looked vpon them: for when he granteth that the So doth Aug. contra Adversa. Leg. lib. 1. cap. 17. Couenant both before and since the comming of Christ for sub­stance is the same, differing only in the manner of dis­pensation,Novum Testam. in veteri est figura­tum, & Vetus in Novo est reuelatū. Vide Hyper. in Heb. cap. 3. p. 158. or administration, doth he not plainly confirme the contrarie to your conclusion? viz. "Therefore the whole Law of Moses since the death of "Christ is wholly abolished: For how can that which for substance is the same, be said to be wholly abolished? [Page 21] And how can that be wholly abolished, which only in some circumstance is altered & changed? An vtter abo­lition argues a destruction of the substance. A diuers dispensation intimates only an alteration of that which for substance remaineth the same still. And this the Simile which he annexeth may teach you, vnlesse you will denie that Samuel 1 Sam 3.1. standing before Eli, is not the same Samuel which his mother Hannah 1 Sam. 1.23. nursed, be­cause he is now of riper age, weareth a linnen Ephod, and eateth of the Priests portion, whereas then he was a Babe in a childes coat, and had no other meat but milke which he sucked from his mothers brests. After this manner saith Tossanus may we iudge of the Coue­nant, Idem Deus, eadem semper Ecclesia, idémque sub­stantiâ foedus. But God our Father dealeth with his Church as with his childe. In her Ezek. 16. infancie hee feedeth her with 1 Cor. 3.2. milke, in her riper age with Heb. 5.14. strong meat, or as a father nourtureth his sonne in his minority, He keepes him vnder Gal. 4.1. Tutors though he be Lord of all, but when the time appointed of the Father is come, he sets him at libertie, and puts him in possession of the inheritance prouided for him. The Iewes were as the Lords childe, Exod. 4.22. Israel is my first borne, heires of the same promises, and hauing interest in the same 1 Cor. 10.1, 2, 3. Couenant of grace with vs, but they were but in their Gal. 4.3. infancie and minoritie in comparison of the Church vnder the Gospell, fed with carnall and with earthly things, and vnder the regiment of Moses Lawes, and Ceremonies, as vnder so many seuere Tu­tors, and sharpe Gal. 3.24. Schoolemasters, taught as it were, the principles of Religion by Heb. 10.1. Types and figures kept Gal. 4.9. in bondage vnder the rudiments of the world, pres­sed and oppressed with an intolerable Acts 15.10. Vide Iustin. M. Dialog. cum Try­phone Iudeo. burden of Le­gall and Leuiticall rites and ordinances, and all this to breake the spirits of a [...]. Iustin Mart. Dial. cum Tryphon. Jud. p. 205. stiffnecked people, to con­uince them of all vnrighteousnesse, to humble them by the rigour of the Law, and the terror of the Curse, [Page 22] and either to lead or driue them to seeke for life and li­bertie, righteousnesse and happinesse in Christ alone, as he was darkly shadowed vnto them in their ceremo­nies and sacrifices, and in the fulnesse of time should be exhibited in great power and vertue, beautie and glorie. To this very purpose doth the same Tossanus alledge out of 1 Cor. 2. and 2 Cor. 3. That the Gospell hath his proper and peculiar glorie, and that aboue the Law. Cùm non sit literale solum Ministerium aliquod jubens, sed conjunctam habeat efficaciam & [...] spi­ritus sancti. Which we willingly yeeld and assent vn­to, seeing the law contained in the 10. Commande­ments did exact absolute obedience, but gaue neither promise nor power of grace to performe it: But the Gospell in the Heb. 8.10. Couenant of grace, requiring vs to Marc. 1.15. repent, and beleeue the Gospell, promiseth and powreth out vpon vs the spirit Ezek. 36.26, 27. Zach. 12.10. of grace to worke this repen­tance and faith in vs, and to cause vs to walke in his Statutes, and to keepe vs that we doe not depart from him any more. And in this sense the Apostle saith of the Rom. 6.14. Romans and all true beleeuers, You are not vnder the Lex j [...]bere novit, Gratia juvare. Aug. ad Innocent. Epist. 95. Law, but vnder grace. As it he had said, neither doth the Lord now vrge, nor doe you now accept of the Law, vpon the former condition (Doe this and liue) as if we were to seeke iustification and saluation by the workes of it, but the Lord hath left it, and we receiue it as Psal. 119.105. A light vnto our feet, and a lanthorne to o [...]r steps, that being his Ephes. 2.10. workemanship in our new birth created vnto good workes, which God hath ordained that we should walke in them, we might haue some good helpe by the law Rom. 12.2. Rom. 13.9, 10. to proue what is the good and acceptable will of God, and so viewing our faces in this Iam 1.23, 25. Glasse, and in that also of the Tit. 2.11. grace of God which hath appeared vnto vs, we might learne to deny vngodlinesse and worldly lusts, and to liue religiously, soberly and righteously in this pre­sent world. Thus may you see that the testimonie which Tossanus is brought in to giue on your behalfe, will [Page 23] not stand you in any stead to procure any credit or to adde any strength vnto your cause; and as little either comfort or helpe doth that afford you which Antinom. Gualt. in Gal 3. ver. 20. you al­ledge out of Gualter to the same (that is as I conceiue) to as little or no purpose; for in the place you cite on Gal. 3.19, 20. speaking of the Law, Quae duravit ad tempus, quamdiu ejus usus fuit; he meaneth the old Testament or Mosaicall gouernment, which consist­eth in the substance of the Ceremoniall, and in some circumstances of the Morall Law; and this (we grant) was but to endure for See Tertullian [...]dvers. Iudaeos cap. 3.4.5 6. a time, viz. vntill the comming of Christ. Which to be the true sense and meaning of the words, appeareth most euidently by three opposite clauses, which follow in the very words which you al­ledge. 1. At Gualt. in Gal 3.19, 20. nunc novi Testamenti tempus est] there­fore he speaketh in the former words of the old Testa­ment.Haec Occonomia abrogatur. Bez. in Gal. 3.24. & in Gal. 4.1. 2. Quando lex & Prophetae Euangelio cedunt] therefore he speaketh of the Mosaicall gouernment; the Ceremonies and Circumstances whereof, were all abolished, and all the Prophecies thereof accomplished at the comming of him that was the Heb. 10.1. Ioh. 1.17. truth of those Types, the substance of those Col. 2.17. shadowes, yea the aime and Rom 10.4. end of the Law and the Prophets, Christ Iesus. 3. Vt tam gentibus, quàm Iudaeorum reliquijs in regnum Dei vim facientibus locum dent,] therefore he meaneth, not (as you would haue him) that the Morall Law is wholly abolished, but only so much of Moses Law, as made any difference betwixt Ephes. 2.14, 15. Col. 2.14.17. Iewes and Gentiles, or might proue any hinderance to their happie enterance into the kingdome of God, so much only is vanished away as a cloud, or mist, at the rising of the Malac. 4.2. Sunne of righteousnesse, in the Rom. 13.12, 13. day of the Gospell. But it may be you reckon of these whom hitherto you haue set forth, as if they were but milites levis armaturae, scouts or light horsemen, to try the coast and to make a flourish. Now you begin to plant your great Ord­nance, to muster your men, range your Armie, and to [Page 24] charge the enemy with a sharpe assault for the vtter abolishing of the whole Morall Law. For the effecting whereof Antinomus. you are bold to say; ‘1. That the Fortunam Pri­ami cantabo, & nobile bellum. Quid dignum tan­to feret hic promis­ser hiatu? Horat. de Arte Poetica. whole Epistle to the Galatians importeth so much. 2. That the whole Epistle to the Hebrewes is to the same purpose. 3. That the practise of the Apostles in all their Epistles confirmeth the same, seeing they neuer ground any ex­hortation vpon Moses Law, nor vse any forme of com­mandements, much lesse make any allusion to Moses Law or the ten commandements:’ and so you goe on with fourth, and fift, &c. vntill you haue made vp a full dozen. The mother of Iudg. 5.28. Sisera trusting too much in her sonnes valour, his chariots, and his men of warre, fed her fancy with a conceit, nay with an assurance of a ioyous and glorious victory; Why is his chariot so long a comming? Why tarry the wheeles of his chariot? Her Iudg. 5.29, 30. wise Ladies answered her, yea she returned answer to her selfe, Haue they not sped? haue they not diuided the prey, to euery man a Damosell or two, to Sisera a prey of diuers colours? But yet for all this Sisera being cut short of his life, by Iudg. 5.24. Iael the wife of Heber, the mother of Sisera also came short of her hope, and the successe of that warre was nothing answerable to the confidence and conceit which she had, and held of it. I feare me, the conceit of your great preparation, together with the confidence in your men and munition, hath bred in you not much vnlike both spirits and speeches in this conflict, and it may be some of your wise friends (as her wise Ladies) haue beene ready enough to soothe you vp with some answer, answerable to your present humour: Yea (rather then faile) you will returne an­swer to your owne words: Great helps breed great hopes. What? Shall we not speed? shall we not diuide the prey? shall not this conflict end in a conquest? and shall we not obtaine honours and fauours, as a prey of diuers colours? If your conceit be such and so high, take heed, both you and it doe not take a fall? [Page 25] Iudg. 5.26, 27.A hammer and a naile in the hand of a weake woman, if the Lord will giue wisdome and strength to handle them aright, may quickly dispatch Sisera, dash his mo­thers hopes, and turne all his, and her ioyes into sor­rowes, and their glory into shame. And is not my word, saith the Lord, as an hammer Ierem. 23.29., and are not the words of the wise (that is, such as speake according to this word) as Eccles. 12.11. nailes fastened by the Masters of the assemblies? What though there be want of wisdome in the head, and of strength in the hand of him that shall vse them, yet he that standeth in Gods 2 Chron. 20.15. cause, and fetcheth his Ier. 23.22. Ephes. 6.11.13. weapons out of the Lords Armory, and commeth in the 1 Sam. 17.45. name of the Lord against his aduersary, may rest assured that the Lord will manifest his wisdome in foo­lishnesse, and perfect his 2 Cor. 12.9.10. strength in weaknesse, and that he will so teach his Psal. 144.1. hands to fight, and his fingers to warre, that as the 2 Chro. 20.15.17.20. battle is, so shall the victory be the Lords also. In this confidence alone I haue entred this encounter and am come forth into the field against you. The mounting of your great ordnance with so "great words, The whole Epistle to the Galathians, &c.

‘The Parturient mon­tes, nascetur ridi­culus mus. Horat. de Art. poetica. whole Epistle to the Heb. the practise of all the Apostles in all their Epistles, &c.’ doth not so much amate me as amaze me. I doe not so much feare the danger as wonder at the manner of your dealing. The peeces which you mention, I acknowledge, and reue­rence as some of the Lords great ordnance: but all the powder and shot that you haue giuen them, can make them neither speake nor do any thing against the truth, but for the truth. You haue mounted them too high, and haue ouercharged them too much, so that whiles you would discharge them against one of the bulwarks of Sion, you ouer-shoot your marke, and cause them with greater force to recoile vpon your little Babel, which you haue built to make you a name in the earth, inter filios terrae, among the sonnes of the earth.

Antinomus.You say, ‘The whole Epistle to the Gal. importeth so [Page 26] much, for (say you) It is the generall Argument of the same. Doth the whole Epistle to the Galath. import, that in the Church of Christ since his death, The whole law of Moses is wholly abolished and abrogated?’ Or is this the generall Argument of the same? Answer. What if that Epistle neither in whole nor in part doe import so much? What if that which you say of the whole aboli­shing of the whole law of Moses, be neither the gene­rall Argument of the whole Epistle, nor any speciall or particular Argument of any part or parcell of the same?The Argument of the Epistle to the Galatians. It is very likely that what you affirme herein, you haue rather taken vpon trust, than vpon triall; for had you but searched into the Epistle it selfe for the sub­ject and speciall scope of it, and well considered the estate of that Church, at that time, when the Apostle writ vnto it, you might haue easily vnderstood, that the purpose of the Apostle, was not to proue that the whole law of Moses was wholly abolished; but that only in the matter of iustification by faith in Christ, the law of Moses neither Ceremoniall nor Morall, could stand them in any stead. For wheras at that time, Hieron. in Ep. ad Galat. cap. 1. August. p [...]aefat. in Epist. ad Gal. certaine false teachers had laboured to withdraw the minde and hearts of the Galatians, from that sincerity of the Gospell (touching the righteousnesse of faith in Christ alone) which Paul had taught them, by inducing and perswading them to entertaine the Ceremonies of the law of Moses, as necessary to justification and saluation; and so to ioine the worke of the law with faith in Christ: Paul being much troubled at their backsli­ding, and desiring to recouer and recall them to their former standing, directeth this Epistle vnto them; wherein as he justifieth both his calling to be an Apo­stle, and the Doctrine of faith in Christ alone for justi­fication and saluation, to be of God and not of men, so he euidently proueth, that by the workes of the law no flesh can be justified, that Tertullian also justifieth this, that not the abro­gation of the mo­rall, but of the ce­remoniall law, is the Argument of the Epistle to the Galat. Sed quae velit intelligi ele­menta, primas scili­cet literas legis ipse declarat, di [...]s obser­vatis & annos, & sabbata opinor, & coe [...]as pu [...]as, & j [...]j [...]nia, & d [...]s magnos: cessare enim ab bis sicut à circumcisione opor­tebat. vide Tertul. advers. Marcion. lib. 5. cap. 4. See also Justin Mart. Dial. um Tryph. Iudaeo. Circumcision, new Moones, Iewish Sabbaths, and all other ceremonies, [Page 27] types, and figures of Moses law, (leading as a Schoole-master vnto Christ) were now abolished, and that if either Iew, or Gentile, did either entertaine or main­taine them as necessary to saluation, mingling Law and Gospell, faith and workes, types and truth, Moses and CHRIST together, for our acceptation and reconci­liation with God, they did not only abase themselues in returning vnto beggerly rudiments, and putting them­selues vnder their former yoake of bondage, but they did further (as farre as lay in them) make void the death of Christ, and fall from Grace; whereupon he exhorteth them to stand fast in that liberty wherewith Christ hath made them free, and so to vse their li­berty that it be not any aduantage to the flesh, but that they may serue one another by loue, Galat. Chapters 2. 3. 4. 5.

That this is the scope and drift of the Apostle, and the speciall Argument and subiect of the Epistle to the Galat. if the Text it selfe, which I haue cited, doe not make it euident, or the Testimony which I haue giuen thereof, seeme to you to be insufficient,Hieron. praefat. in Epist. ad Galat. I pray you admit of the euidence that two or three more eminent and more ancient witnesses will giue in vnto this point. Hierom. in Prooem. in Epist. ad Gal. Sciatis eandem esse materiam, & Epistolae Pauli ad Galatas, See Tertul. againe more plainly de­termining of the Argument of the Epistle to the Gal. Principalem adver­sus Iudaismum epi­stol [...]m nos quoque confitemur quae Galata [...] docet: ubi Apostolus in Christo post Iohannem re­velato, vetera infir­mat, nova vero confirmat. Tertull. lib. 5. adver. Marc. cap. 2. & quae ad Ro­manos scripta est. Nullus quidem Apostoli sermo est, vel per epistolam, vel praesentis, in quo non laboret docere antiquae legis onera deposita, & omnia illa quae in typis & imaginibus praecesserunt, i. otium sabbati, circumcisio­nis injuriam, calendarum, & trium per annum solemnita­tum recursus, scrupulositatem ciborum, & per dies sin­gulos lavacra iterum sordidanda, gratiâ Euangelij sub­repente cessasse, quam non sanguis victimarum, sed sides animae credentis impleret. Et paulò post scribit Aposto­lus ad eos qui ex gentibus fidem Euangelij receperant, & rursum retrò lapsi quorundam fuerant authoritate deterriti, asserentium, Petrum quoque & Iacobum, & [Page 28] totas Iudaeae Ecclesias Euangelium Christi, cum lege ve­terimiscuisse: ipsum etiam Paulum aliud in Iudea facere, aliud nationibus praedicare, & frustra eos in crucif [...]rum credere, si id negligendum putarent, quod Apostolorum principes observarent.

By this you may perceiue, that Saint Hierom taketh the Argument of the Epistle to the Galatians, to be the same with the Argument of the Epistle to the Romans; wherein the Apostle proueth, that by the workes of the law, whether Ceremoniall or Morall, no flesh can be justified before God; vsing the same words in both Rom. 3.20.28. and Gal. 2.16. And this he vrgeth as the principall scope of the Epistle to the Galat. That Paul laboureth to reproue them for their declining from the simplicity of the Gospell vnto Iewish Cere­monies, teaching them that Circumcision, their new Moones, solemne Feasts, and all other their Legall Ser­uices and Sacrifices were vtterly abolished, and in no sort to be mingled with the Gospell. I say therefore in a word with Saint Ierome, Onera See Aug. lib. 4. cont. duas Epist. Pelag. ad Bonif. c. 5. legis Ceremonialis esse deposita, & opera legis Moralis in justificatione pec­catoris esse perpetuò deponenda. And if you shall ob­iect as you doe, ‘Doe you not then make void and abolish the Law through faith,’ I answer with Rom. 3.31. Paul, one greater than Ierom, God forbid, yea we establish the Law. And if S. Paul establish the Law, how dare you goe about to abolish it?

Chrysost. in Epist. ad Gal. cap. 1. Chrysostome also gathereth the Argument of the Epistle to the Galatians, out of Gal. 5.2.4. I Paul say vnto you, That if yee be circumcised Christ shall profit you nothing; and againe, Whosoeuer of you are justified by the Law, yee are fallen from grace: Whereupon he inquireth, Quid igitur tandem hoc erat; and immedi­ately answereth, Qui ex Iudaeis crediderant partim oc­cupati persuasione August. is of the same minde, in praef [...]t. in Epist. ad Galat. Iudaismi, partim inanis gloriae fiti temulenti, dum sibi doctorum cupiunt parare dignitatem authoritatem (que), profecti ad Galatas docuerunt, illis opus [Page 29] esse circumcisione, servanda sabbata & novilunta, nec to­lerandum esse Paulum, qui harum rerum tolleret observa­tionem: Nam Petrus, Iacobus, ac Iohannes, haec (ut aie­bant) non prohibebant, &c. And a little after he addeth, Proinde cùm cerneret totum Galatorum gentem inflam­matam, ac periculosum incendium adversus illorum Eccle­siam excitatum esse; scribit Epistolam ad universos ad ista respondens, &c. Compare your Assertion with Chrysostomes opinion, and you shall finde that the Ar­gument of the Epistle to the Galatians is not (as you would haue it) that the whole Law of Moses is wholly abolished, but that the Ceremoniall Law is ceased, and may not in any sort be ioyned with the Gospell; and that the workes of the Law, both Ceremoniall and Mo­rall, are for euer in the matter of justification and salua­tion disinabled and discarded. Theodor in Arg. Epist. ad Galat. Theodoret is of the same minde, with Chrysostome, and setteth downe the Argument of the Epistle to the Galatians, in almost the same words. Oecumenius in Arg. Epist. ad Gal. Oecumenius also to the very same purpose saith, Quum benè decti ab Apostolo Galatae fuis­sent, sincere (que) in Christum credidissent, peregrè profecto Apostolo, sic à nonnullis surrepti sunt, ut circumciderentur, Apostolus scribit ad eos, redarguit cos quod stultè egerint, & immutati fu [...]nt: [...]isserit de lege, & de ea quae secundū Abraham est, side, argumentatur (que) tum ex lege ipsa, tum exuxoribus ipfius Abrahae allegoricè sumptis, quod & um­bra & circumcisio ipsa ad tempus usque data fuit, & Christi adventu superva [...]aea facta. By the judgement of Oecumenius therefore, touching the Argument of the Epistle to the Galatians, your judgement being put in the scale with it, will be found to be too light, there being no dispute (in his opinion) for the whole abo­lishing of the whole Law of Moses, Morall as well as Ceremoniall, (as you would haue it) but only for the abrogation of the Ceremoniall, now that Christ is come in the flesh (as he doth deliuer it) and we willingly assent vnto it. Agreeable hereunto is the judgement of [Page 30] Au ust. lib. contr. Faustum. Augustine, Ambros. in Epi. ad Galat. cap. 1. Ambrose, H [...]r. in Psal. 118. [...]. Hilary, Beda. in Arg. Epist. ad Gal. Beda, Iustin. Mart. in Dial. cum Tryphon. Iustin Martyr, whose testimonies I haue not leasure to set downe at large, the places I haue quoted, you may search if you desire to see; Only I pray you consider, what Erasm. in Arg. Epist. ad Gal. Erasmus whom you alledge so often and com­mend so much, hath himselfe set downe concerning the Argument of the Epistle to the Galatians. Agit in hac Epistola quod nusquam non agit, ut à legis Mosaeicae servitute, invitet ad Euangelij gratiam: and afterwards, Demonstrat legem Mosaicam ad tempus modò fuisse da­tam, & ad unum Christum illum, spectasse omnia: and lest you should mistake his meaning, as if he comprised the Morall Law herein together with the Ceremoniall, he sheweth euidently by the words following, that he meanes only the Ceremoniall and not the Morall Law: And therefore he addeth: In illa [Mosaica lege] fuisse carnem, in Euangelio spiritum; in illa umbras, in Euan­gelio lucem; in illa imagines, in Euangelio veritatem; in illa ser vitutem, in Euangelio libertatem. Could you see thus much in Erasmus, and that vpon the Argument of the Epistle to the Galatians, so directly crossing that which you affirme, and not rest satisfied there­withall, to the altering of your opinion, touching the Argument of the same Epistle? Or were you so vnaduised, that you would not your selfe aduise with one of your best friends, what his opinion were of this Argument, and yet commend him vnto others to seeke, and take aduice and satisfaction from him in this point? But we will leaue you to aduise better with Erasmus, if yet you will take paines to looke vpon him, and come now to consider what counsell or comfort you haue from Caluin, Beza, Perkins, Parraeus, whom I guesse by your quotations you haue consulted withall. These Antinomus. you alledge, to proue that the Morall Law is wholly abolished as well as the Ceremoniall, as if they had interpreted that place of Gal. 3.19.22.23. to that purpose. Answer. Let vs examine your witnesses, and see if [Page 31] the euidence they bring in, will serue your turne. You cite Caluin. Instit. lib. 3.19.4. Caluin hath not one word for the whole abolishing of the Morall Law in that place; he only sheweth that the faithfull are now freed by Christ from the yoake and rigour of the Law, that now they obey the Law not as constrained by force, or compelled by feare, but as of a willing and ready minde, induced thereunto by loue, knowing that they come to God as children to a father, that will in Christ accept of their obedience to the Law, albeit they come farre short of that perfection which the Law requireth in rigour at their hands: and this he maketh manifest by one precept of the Law: Legis praeceptum est, ut diligamus Deum ex toto corde, ex tota anima, &c. This, saith he, the best cannot doe in that perfection that the Law requireth, Volunt, aspirant, conantur, sed nihil eâ quâ decet perfectione faciunt: What then? he Caluin. Instit. lib. 3. cap. 19. sect. 5. answereth in the next section, That when poore soules shall perceiue that (being freed from the seuere exaction and rigour of the Law) paterna leuitate se à Deo appellari; hilares & magna alacritate vocanti re­spondebunt, & ducentem sequentur. Is there one word or syllable in all this, tending to the vtter abolishing of the Morall Law? Nay is there not much to the con­trary? For doth he that saith, we are freed from the ri­gour, yoke, and bondage of the Law, affirme (in so saying) that the Morall Law is wholly abolished, or are we therefore discharged of all obedience to the Law altogether, because by faith in Christs obedience, we stand not charged with the exact and rigorous obser­uation of the same? Doth not Caluin. Instit. lib. 3. cap. 19 sect. 4. Caluin himselfe in this very section which you alledge, giue instance in one precept of the Morall Law as now in force and of great vse, for beleeuers to frame their hearts and liues in obedience thereunto? Doth he not say plainly, Legis praeceptum est ut diligamus Deum? He doth not say (as it seemes you would haue him) Legis praeceptum [Page 32] fuit, as implying the Law was once, but now is not; as, Virg. Aeneid. li. 2. fuit Ilium, & ingens gloria Teucrorum, sed jam seges est ubi Troia fuit; or as Tullie also could say: Cicer. Tuscul. quaest. lib. 1. Triste vocabulum [fui] subest enim haec vis, habuit non habet: but he saith [legis praeceptum est] as being yet still in force [ut diligamus Deum] as binding him­selfe and all the faithfull, to a filiall and cheerefull, not to a rigorous and seruile obedience in the duties of it. But seeing you haue done Caluin so great wrong, as contrary to his minde and meaning, yea to his words and writing, to charge him with that he neuer wrote, spoke, nor thought, will you doe him that fauour, as to let him speake for himselfe, and deliuer his owne opinion, in his owne words, whether he be of your minde or no, touching the vtter abolishing of the whole Morall Law? Neque hinc rectè quis colligat (saith Caluin. Instit. lib. 3. cap. 19. sect. 2. he, hauing proued that the Law hath no place nor power in the justification of a sinner before God) legem fidelibus supervacaneam esse, quos non id [...]o docere & hortari, & stimulare ad bonum definit, tamet si apud Dei tribunal in eorum conscientijs locum non habet: and he addeth a little afterward, In hoc fitum est legis offi­cium, ut eos officij sui admonendo ad sanctitatis & in­nocentiae studium excitet. Me thinkes Caluin seemeth to frame his speech of purpose, as if he meant to answer one in your coat, and to meet with your opinion, though he were neuer acquainted with your person. For you will haue the whole Morall Law to be wholly abolished; he blames the very conceit of such as thinke it needlesse or superfluous; indeed he acknowledgeth that it is of no force for our justification, but confesseth withall, that it is of great vse for edification and san­ctification. You will haue it not only ceased, but abro­gated, as hauing neither any office nor vse: he saith, it is so farre from being abrogated, that yet it doth not cease to teach, to exhort, and to pricke the faithfull vn­der the Gospell, forward vnto that which is good, [Page 33] and testifieth that it is a speciall office of the Law, by admonishing them of their duty, to stirre them vp vn­to holinesse of life. You say, ‘The whole Epistle to the Galatians, and the generall Argument of it importeth, that the whole Morall Law is wholly abolished:’ and he to the cleane contrary, addeth these to his former words: Caluin. Instit. lib. 3. cap. 19. sect. 3. In hoc cardine totum fere argumentum Epi­stolae ad Galatas vertitur; giuing vs thereby to vnder­stand, that by the Argument of the Epistle to the Ga­latians, the Morall Law is not abolished, but in spe­ciall office and vse, euen now and for euer in the daies of the Gospell to be continued. The words I haue cited out of Caluin, I haue not fetcht very farre, being so neere neighbours to the place whence you tooke yours. Yours out of the fourth section,Caluin. Instit. lib. 3. cap. 19. sect. 4. & sect. 2. &. 3. where yet you haue nothing which makes for you, and mine out of the second & third section, where you may see almost euery line is drawen to my hand, cleane ouerthwart and crosse vnto your opinion. What may a man (that would willingly thinke well of you) thinke of your dealing in this allegation? Did you reade the fourth, and not the second nor third sections? That had beene great negligence, especially, there being so necessary dependance one vpon another: Did you reade them and not vnderstand them, taking that to be for you, which was altogether against you? That had beene too grosse ignorance. Did you reade and vnderstand, that Caluin in those sections had nothing to confirme, but much to confute your opinion? And would you not­withstanding, beare vs in hand that he stood as firme on your side, as you had set him faire in your margent? This were wilfully to shut your eies against the light, and to endanger the comfort of a good conscience. Which of these faults you are fallen into, I leaue to your second thoughts to consider, and to amend what you finde amisse. Thus we leaue Caluin, who doth nei­ther proue, nor approue your opinion, but plainly [Page 34] reproues it rather. Let vs now examine Beza Antinomus. your next witnesse, and see if his testimony will stand you in any stead, for the vtter abolishing of the Morall Law. Answer. In the place which you alledge in Galat. 3.22. he speaketh something of the abrogation of the Cere­moniall, but not a word of the abolition of the Morall Law: his words will witnesse what I say, and conuince you of no small fault in this allegation also. Beza in Gal. 3.22. Antea docuerat (saith he) legem ceremonialem abrogatam esse, tum quatenus nos arguebat peccati, ac mortis per trans­gressiones, tum quatenus fuerat ipsius damnationis ex­ternum Chirographum: Nunc autem eandem ceremoni­alem legem considerans (ut promissionum Euangelica­rum suo tempore exhibendarum umbram & figuram) docet, illam quoque hoc respectu cessasse, &c. What could be said more distinctly, or more effectually, for expounding that very verse of the abrogation of the Ceremoniall, which you say, he expounds of the abo­lishing of the Morall Law? Beza Beza in Gal. 3.23. saith, That the Apostle vnderstands the Ceremoniall Law in this 23. verse, and that (being but a shadow and figure of the promises of the Gospell) it ceased when Christ was exhibited: and you say (how truly let others judge) that the same Beza saith, that the same verse is to be vnderstood of the Morall Law, and that he proueth thereby, that the whole Morall Law is wholly aboli­shed. There may be as much agreement betwixt light and darknesse, fire and water, truth and errour, as be­twixt Beza his Assertion and your Allegation in this point. But will you with patience heare his opinion direct and downe-right, not for the abolishing, but for the establishing of the Morall Law? Quid igitur, saith Beza in 2 Cor. 3.11. he, writing vpon 2. Corinth. 3.11. Num lex abolita? sanè, quod ad ceremonias attinet, cessavit. At enim di­ces, num hac in parte abolitum est Mosis ministerium? minimè verò, semper enim sunt homines ad Euangelium praedicatione legis praeparandi. You may here see, if you [Page 35] will but turne your eie aside vnto this place, that he is so farre from thinking the Morall Law to be abolished, that he answereth that obiection, and so dasheth out the braines of your opinion with a minimè verò, and further affirmeth, that the Vide Bez. Theol. Epist. Epist. 10. p. 104. Law is to be preached as frequently and necessarily as men are to be prepared for the receiuing of the Gospell. Consider also what the same Beza in 1 Epist. Joh cap. 2.7. Lex posita est re­gendae sanctorum vitae &c. Est igitur damnan­da Antinomorum & Libertinorum detestanda [...]esis, Bez. in 1. Tim. cap 1. v. 9. Beza saith, writing vpon 1. Iohn. 2.7. A New Commandement I write vnto you: there he putting a difference betwixt the Morall Law and the Gospell, saith, Lex quid sit faciendum, Euangelium quid sit cre­dendum docet: sciendum est igitur sic esse haec duo distin­cta, ut tamen unum alteri subserviat. Nec enim Euange­lio lex aboletur, quatenus quod rectum est praecipit, sed duntaxat quatenus mortem omnibus ipsam perfectè non praestantibus minatur. Lex mortis terrore nos monet ut de vita in Euangelio quaerenda cogitemus, lex jam nobis suavis est seccundùm interiorem hominem magister, sicut copiosè docet Apostolus, Rom. 6.7.8. capitibus. Hinc illud toties à Christo iteratum de Deo & proximo diligendo mandatum. I pray you consider these particulars out of this testimony, and tell me then whether Beza be with you, or ouer-against you. 1. That the Law and Gos­pell are distinguished, but neither of them both aboli­shed. 2. The Law and the Gospell doe mutually serue one another in their seuerall offices and vses. 3. The Law is not abolished by the Gospell, but established by the same. 4. The Law to them that are in Christ,See Bez. Epist. Theolog. Ep. 20. of the vse of the Morall Law euen for Christians, at large. is a sweet Master or Teacher, in whose lessons and instru­ctions they delight in the inner man. 5. That all these offices and vses of the Morall Law, are warranted and confirmed by the authenticall Authority of Christ himselfe, and his Apostle Paul. All these points being set downe by Beza so sound and sufficient for establi­shing the Law, are as so many strong Arguments to conuince you of errour, that goe about to abolish it; and as so many rebukes also of your vnaduised and in­jurious [Page 36] dealing with so worthy a Diuine, whom you will needs draw in, to speake to your minde, though neuer so contrary to his owne true meaning. Let vs now come to heare your third witnesse [M^r. Perkins] whether he can speake any more to the matter than Caluine and Beza haue already done. Antinomus. You cite him on the Galatians. Answer. 3.11.23. And tell me I pray you, what you haue found here for the whole abolishing of the Morall Law? Vpon these words, verse 11. No man is justified by the Law: Perkins in Gal. 3.11. he saith, that by the Law is meant, not onely the Ceremoniall, but also the Iudi­ciall, and the Morall Law, and that Paul enlargeth his disputation, from one part to the whole Law. And he giueth a good reason why he would abrogate the vse of the Morall Law, as well as of the Ceremoniall, in the matter of justification: for they (saith he) which thought Ceremonies necessary to justification, would much more thinke Morall duties necessary. All this we willingly acknowledge with M^r. Perkins: What would you conclude hence? Is this your Argument from this place? No man can be justified by the workes nei­ther of the Ceremoniall nor of the Morall Law, ergo, the whole Morall Law is abrogated wholly as well as the Ceremoniall Law. We grant the Antecedent, and deny the Consequence, or Argument. For how doth this follow, The Morall Law doth not justifie, ergo, it doth not instruct nor edifie? vnlesse it had no other neither office nor vse, but that alone. Will you see the fallacy, [...], by another of the like stampe? 1 Sam. 8.7. Samuel hath ceased to rule, correct, condemne the people as a Iudge; ergo, 1 Sam. 12.23, 24. Samuel hath ceased to pray for the people, and to teach and shew them the good and right way, as a Prophet: Or to vse the Apostles comparison, A Gal. 4.1. Gal. 3.24. Schoolemaster ceaseth to nurture, and keepe his scholer vnder the rod, and in the rudiments of Gram­mar as a childe, ergo, he hath no sufficiencie nor abi­lity [Page 37] to teach him greater or better things, being now of riper age.

But to leaue this Argument weake and feeble as it is, shall I be bold to aske you a question? Doe you reade and alledge your Authors for satisfaction or conten­tion, for colouring and countenancing of an error, or for searching and lifting out the truth? I would gladly if I might safely, conceiue the best; but it seemes strange vnto me, that seeing Perk. on Gal. 3.12. M^r. Perkins in the very next leafe, vpon the 12. that is, the very next verse, hath so plaine and euident sentences to confute you, that euer you durst alledge any thing out of him, as standing with you or for you. His words be these: I say that the law written in our hearts, is still the law of Moses. And againe, Since mans fall, the Lord repeates the Law for weighty causes: 1. To teach vs that the Law is of a constant and vnchangeable nature: 2. To aduertise vs of our weaknesse, and shew vs what we cannot doe: 3. To put vs in minde that we must still humble our selues vnder the hand of God, after we haue begunne by grace to obey the Law, because euen then we come farre short in doing the things which the Law requireth at our hands. Who would once imagine that a man fearing God, and bearing an honest minde to learne and seeke out the truth, would not haue sought and seene a little farther into M^r. Perkins, before he would or durst haue produced him for a witnesse against himselfe, and against the truth also. If all this be not yet sufficient, will you for your full satisfaction, heare his finall de­termination of the question. He proposeth it thus; Perk. on Gal. 3.23. p. 251. How farre forth is the Law abrogated? and answe­reth this. The Morall Law is abrogated in respect of the Church, and them that beleeue, three waies: First, in re­gard of justification, and this Paul proues at large in this Epistle: Secondly, in respect of the malediction, or curse, Rom. 8.1. Thirdly, in respect of rigour; for in them which are in Christ, God accepts the endeuour to obey, for [Page 38] obedience it selfe. Neuerthelesse, the Law as it is the rule of good life, is vnchangeable and admits no abrogation, and Christ by his death did in this regard establish it, Rom. 3.31. What say you now to these words of M^r. Per­kins? Doth he determine the question with you and for you, that the Morall Law is wholly abolished, or doth he not plainly resolue to the contrary, that as it is the rule of good life it is vnchangeable, and for euer by the death of Christ established.

Antinomus.Your next Testimony is out of Paraeus, in Argu­mentum Epist. ad Galatas, and in other places vpon that Epistle. Answer. I haue not that Booke by me, but vnlesse Paraeus be much contrary to himselfe (which I cannot so easily conceiue of so judicious a Diuine) you shall see I haue reason to thinke that vpon the Galatians he speaketh nothing for your opinion, seeing vpon the Hebrewes, Cap. 8. pag. 400. 401. Paraeus in Heb. 8. p. 400. 401. he purposely and aduisedly writeth so much against it. Lex Moralis (saith he) est aeterna justiciae norma; and then he sheweth how farre the Old Testament is abrogated. 1. Quantum ad doctrinae spiritualis gratiae circumstan­tiam de futuro. 2. Deinde quantum ad conditionem im­possibilem perfectae obedientiae. 3. Quantum ad onus le­galium rituum, & sacerdotij Levitici. Denique quan­tum ad jugum politie Mosaicae, populi Iudaici cervicibus impositum. Whereupon he inferreth thus, Vnde Mani­chaeonum & fanaticorum refutatur error, qui abrogatio­nem veteris Testamenti non folum ad tria illa, sed ad le­gem etiam moralem malè trahebant; and a little after he addeth, De Lege Morali, & de Mosis atque Propheta­rum libris & doctrina, aeternitatem agnoscimus, de riti­bus & politia minimè. By this you may euidently per­ceiue, that Paraeus is of opinion, that howsoeuer the Ceremoniall and Iudiciall Lawes of Moses be abroga­ted, yet the Morall Law is perpetuall and eternall, and that they are men tainted with heresie or frensie, that would draw the Morall Law into the same estate of [Page 39] abrogation with them. And if you will looke backe a little to the seuenth Chapter and sixteenth verse of the same Epistle, you may see as much as this, and some­what more. Paraeus in Heb. cap. 7. ver. 16.18. Obiter hic annotemus discrimen legis Mo­ralis & Ceremonialis. Illa perpetua & spiritualis est, ista caeduca & carnalis fuit: And againe vpon verse 18. Probat nunc legis abrogationem inde pendentem. Et est taecita occupatio: Quicquid sacerdotio fiat, lex Dei est immutabilis. Id inquit, non nego, de lege Morali, nunc verò loquor de praecepto carnali, lege Ceremoniali. See more in Pa­raeus, in Ep. Rom. cap. 3.8.31. & cap. 7.7. Nam Valen­ti [...]ani. &c. And this may sustice to cleare Paraeus, that what you haue taken, you haue mistaken from him, as approuing your opinion vpon the Galatians, which you see he dis­proueth on the Epistle to the Hebrewes. Let vs now proceed to that which followeth.

‘There is a word Antinomus. you say Galat. 3 19. mistranslated in most vulgar translations, which drawes many men away, Serueth; Wherefore then Serueth the Law? Neither the Greeke (you say) nor any Latine transla­tion hath it.’ If neither the Greeke nor any Latine translation haue it, Answer. then it may (peraduenture) be ad­ded amisse, but mistranslated (as you say) it cannot be. And why doth not this word Serueth, serue your turne? Because (forsooth) it is in the Present Tense, Serueth, and not in the Preterimperfect Tense, Serued, Where­fore then [serued] the Law? And why would you haue it [serued] and not serueth? Because I guesse you would haue all men to know, that the Law was of some force and vse in times past, but now is of neither for the time present, and so [serued] in the time past, serueth your purpose very well for the present busi­nesse. But be it as you would haue it, serued; is serued either in the Greeke or any Latine translation? or doth not the Law now in the daies of the Gospell, serue to the reuealing, conuincing, and condemning of trans­gressions, as before it serued to the same end and vse in the daies of the Law? or suppose it serued more [Page 40] then to that end than now it serueth; serueth it now therefore to no other vse at all? But you say, ‘Many haue beene drawen awry by this word [serueth:]’ Surely you are the first that euer I heard either make any ex­ception against it, or stand in any danger or feare of it. And Beza in Gal. 3.19. Beza whom you alledge, may be vnderstood to take it rather in the Present, than in the Preterim-perfect Tense: Quorsum igitur lata lex est, and, Quum lex posita sit hominibus redarguendis: Implying thereby, not only whereunto the Law serued when it was first ordained, but that it Vide Beza in 1. Ep. Tim. cap. 1. v. 9. Finis legis est cha­ritas. [...]. 1. Tim. cap. 1. v. 9. serueth yet to the same vse in some respect, though in diuers things the vse be changed. Not vnlike vnto this, you say, is in Rom. 3.20. Commeth or is, By the Law commeth the knowledge of sinne, which being read [came] or [was] of the time past, maketh (you say) the sense good. Not vnlike vnto that, is this indeed, i. of as little either weight or worth. And why may not, [...], be thus trans­lated; For by the Law [commeth] the knowledge of sinne, but must needs be rendred thus, For by the Law [came or was] the knowledge of sinne? You haue your reason, I hope, in readinesse; for if the former stand in the present time, then your opinion must needs fall presently: for then there is a present vse of the Law to discouer sinne. But if that fall and the latter come in his stead, then you conceiue hope that your opinion for the abolishing of the Law, being now in danger of falling, shall hence haue a prop to stay it vp withall; and what a one I pray you? why surely a sorry one, either this or none; By the Law [came or was] the knowledge of sinne, Ergo, the Law is now abolished, and by the Law commeth not now any knowledge of sinne. This is indeed (as you said truly) not vnlike the other; the Law serued for restraining, or condemning transgressions, ergo, now it serueth neither for these nor for any other vse at all. But doth not the Apostle proue by the Law whether written in Tables of stone, [Page 41] or in Rom. 2.15. Tables of the heart, that both Iewes and Gen­tiles are Rom. 3.19, 20. all vnder sin; not only that they had beene, but that euen then at that present they were. And was not this in the time of the Gospell, and doth he not conuince them all of sinne, by the present vse of the Law? Obserue what he saith verse 19. Now we know that whatsoeuer the Law, [...], it speaketh to them that are vnder the Law. Doth he not vse the present time, for the manifesting of the present vse of the Law, three times together in this verse, and concludeth in the next, That therefore by the deeds of the Law no flesh shall be justified in his sight, because by the Law commeth, or is, the knowledge of sinne. So Beza in Rom. 3.19, 20. Beza on this place doth expound it; and Paraeus in Rom. 3. v. 20. Paraeus rendreth the words thus: Per legem habetur agniti [...] peccati; whence he concludeth, ergo, non justi­tia; and Caluin. in Rom. 3.20. & alibi. Quid enim quaeso ist. sibi volunt te­gem propter trans­gressiones positam esse, Gal. 3.19. per legem esse cognitio­nem peccati, Rom. 3.20. legem, pecca­tum efficere. See Caluin. Instit. lib. 2. cap. 5. sect. 6. See Aug. lib. de Spiritu & litera, cap. 13. Caluin giues the sense of these words, Per legem agnitio peccati, to be this, Lex convincit nos peccati & damnationis. You see then these learned men take these words otherwise than you doe; That by the Law commeth [not came] or is [not was] the acknow­ledgement of sinne. As for that which you alledge out of Galath. 4.1. I must confesse, I neither know how it maketh any thing at all for your point or purpose, nor can I conceiue, what you meane to goe about to make so large proofe of that which no man doth deny. What here you write, hath neither dependance nor consequence, neither ioints nor sinewes; much like vnto a shadow, which hauing some proportion of a mans body, hath yet neither life nor substance in it: For what if we yeeld you all this, that the Apostle by the Heire in his minority, meaneth the Church of the Iewes before Christ, and by the same in his riper age, the Church of Christ since his death? What is there here, I say not of any power, but of any colour to proue the abolishing of the Morall Law? Is the Morall Law therefore wholly abolished, because the Mosaicall [Page 42] regiment in Rites and Ceremonies, in Types and Fi­gures, in Legall burdens, and Leuiticall seruices, toge­ther with the rigour and terror of the Law, is now cea­sed and abrogated? You might as well say the Heire when he was a childe was kept in, vnder sharpe and seuere Tutors and Gouernors, but being now come to age, he may now liue as he list: Or, the Church in her infancie was in bondage to the Ceremoniall Law, therefore in her riper age she is not bound to obey ei­ther God or man, by the duties of the Morall Law. I could wish, you would aduisedly consider what our SAVIOVR CHRIST himselfe saith; I came not to Est igitur dam­nanda Antinomo­rum & libertino­rum detestanda hae­resis, saith Bez. in 1 Tim. 1.9. and so say I. destroy the Law, but to Mat. 5.17, 18, 19. fulfill it; and whosoeuer he be that shall breake one of the least of these Commandements, and shall teach others so to doe, he shall be called the least in the kingdome of heauen; but whosoeuer shall doe and teach them, he shall be called great in the kingdome of hea­uen. And remember againe what S. Paul hath once told you already: Rom. 3.31. Doe we make void the Law by faith? God forbid, nay rather we establish the Law. Christians indeed, are freed from the bondage and burdens of the Law of Moses, but yet must they take vpon them Mat. 11.23, 29, 30. Christ his yoke and burden, for his yoke is easie, and his burden light. Yea they are charged to beare one anothers burdens, and so to fulfill the Gal. 6.2. Law of Christ; that their faith may Gal. 5.6.13. worke by loue, and they by loue serue one another, and so shew that they delight in the Rom. 7.22. Law of God concerning the inner man, Luc. 1.74, 75. seruing the Lord in righteousnesse and holinesse all the daies of their liues, that is, according to both the Tables of the Morall Law. Touching your quotation out of Socrat. Eccl. Hist. lib. 5. cap. 21. I haue seene what he saith, but can see nothing for the abolishing of the Morall Law. He blameth them that contend so much for Iewish Ce­remonies, keeping of Easter, obseruing Daies and Moneths, as neuer hauing well considered, that Quando religio Iudaica erat in Christianam commutata, [Page 43] accurat. is illas Mosaicae legis observationes, & rerum fu­turarum figuras penitus evannisse; and so vrgeth that out of Galath. 4.21. against them. But what will you say, if out of the same Chapter, I bring you some eui­dence, that Socrates doth not abolish, but establish the Morall Law? Socrates Eccles. Hist. lib. 5. c. p. 21. Apostolis propositum fuit, non ut leges de festis diebus celebrandis sancirent, sed ut rectè vivendi rationis, & pietatis nobis authores essent: The Apostles, saith Socrates, neuer purposed to make lawes for holy­daies, but to teach vs both by words and writing the way of godlinesse and good liuing. And did not the Apostles this, especially by vrging and applying the duties of the Morall Law in both Tables vnto Christi­ans, both for their persons and callings? Reade and consider, Rom. 1.2.6.7 12.13. Cap. 1 Tim. 1. 2 Tim. 3. Ephes. 5.6. Chapters. Moreouer, Socrates in the same Chapter, complaineth of the Churches of the Gentiles, for the breaking of the Morall Law and violating the Acts 15.20. Apostles Commandement, Acts 15. Caeterum non­nulli his neglectis omnem scortationem rem quidem indif­ferentem arbitrantur, sed tamen de di [...]bus sestis tanquam de vita decertant, Dei Vide Iunium de polit. Mosis cap. 8. col. 1552. praecepta evertunt, ipsis sibi leges sanciunt. In which words, doth he not blame such as professing themselues to be Christians, did yet account fornication (which is a breach of the seuenth Comman­dement in the Morall Law) to be a thing indifferent, and so following their owne lust, did ouerthrow Gods Law? You haue gained nothing then by your allega­tion out of Socrates, but lost more than you lookt for, at his hands: And as little haue you got by that which you take from M^r. Perkins againe, out of Galat. 4.3.Antinomus. who as you say, setteth it out very fully. What is that which he setteth out so fully? The abrogation of the Morall Law? If you meane that, Answer. (as that you must meane, if you meane to speake to the purpose) then you offer him too too hard measure againe, to charge him with that he neuer spake, and to gather that he [Page 44] neuer scattered. Or is it, that the Church vnder the Law, was but as the Heire in his minority, but the Church vnder the Gospell, as the Heire come to age? If this be your meaning, we acknowledge he handleth this point of difference betwixt them very fully, and as many other Diuines also doe, very soundly too. But what of all this? M^r. Perk. on Gal. 4.3. Perkins saith, The Fathers of the Old Testament, were children in respect of vs, two waies: First, in regard of the Mosaicall gouernment, be­cause they were kept in subjection to more Lawes than we: Secondly, in regard of reuelation, because God hath reuea­led more to vs than to them. And this he saith truly and well. Is there any thing here to be found for the vtter abolishing of the Morall Law? If there be, why doe you not shew it? If there be not, why make you such a vaine flourish for it?

Haue you yet any more to say out of the Epistle to the Galatians? Antinomus. Yes it seemes you yet looke for some helpe from Luther vpon Galat. 4.1. where you say, ‘He acknowledgeth an end of the Law at the comming of Christ, Answer. but doth not fully handle it so.’ Me thinkes you haue no great confidence in this allegation; Luther, I doubt, hath not so fully handled the matter, as to ful­fill your minde in it. You know right well, that Luth on. Gal. 4.1. See Muscul. in Mat. 5.17. Lu­ther speaking of the ending of the Law two waies; First, at the comming of Christ in the flesh at the time appointed of his Father, Galat. 4.4. Secondly, at the comming of Christ vnto vs daily by his Spirit; doth only meane such an end of the Law, As that when Christ is come into our hearts by faith, the Law hath not that dominion ouer vs, to accuse, to terrifie, to kill, to condemne vs spiritually, and before God, as formerly it had: And all this we acknowledge may well be, and yet the Mo­rall Law be of good and great vse still. Antinomus. ‘But though Luther did not fully handle it so, yet it is plaine (you say) that the Apostles meaning was so:’ Answer. And I say, that if the Apostles meaning were so plaine, as you will [Page 45] haue it, (to wit, that the Morall Law is vtterly at an end) then might this our labour be plainly at an end also. But because some others (it may be) cannot see this so plainly as you can, we desire it may be made a little more plaine vnto vs: For, the reasons which Antinomus. you ren­der; ‘That the Apostle writeth not particularly to true beleeuers alone amongst the Galatians (as you say, he did to the Romans, Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossi­ans) but without distinction of true beleeuers from others, to them that professed Christ, calling them bre­thren, and that (as you affirme) he sheweth them all, that they are now no more vnder the Law, Cap. 4.1. by the Simile of an Heire, and after by an Allegory of the free woman and the bond, and that Cap. 5. he exhorteth them to stand fast in that liberty.’ These reasons I say, Answer. doe not make it plaine, that the Apostles meaning was in, or by the Epistle to the Galatians, to put an absolute end to the Morall Law, for the vtter abolishing of the same (as you would haue it) but that the Gal. 2.16. Cap. 3.11, 12, 13. workes of the Law, whether Morall or Ceremoniall, in the mat­ter of our justification before God, and saluation by faith in Christ, are vtterly to be excluded, and aban­doned, and that by Gal. 3.26. Cap. 5.1. faith in Christ alone, the Galati­ans and all other true Christians, are freed and set at Iren. aduers. Haer. lib. 4. cap. 5. liberty, as from the burden and bondage of the Ce­remoniall Law, so from the rigour and terror, domi­nion and malediction of the Morall also. Gal. 5.1. And this is the liberty wherewith Christ hath made them free, and wherein the Apostle exhorteth them to stand fast, and not to be againe intangled in the yoke of bondage. That this is the true sense and meaning of the Apostle, it is most manifest and plaine, by that his earnest and zealous protestation, which immediately he annexeth: Behold I Gal. 5.2, 3, 4, 5. See Tertullian ad­vers. Marcion. lib. 4. cap. 33. lib. 5. cap. 2.3.4. that the Law is fulfilled in Christ, not aboli­shed by Christ. Paul say vnto you, that if you be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing: For I testifie againe to eue­ry man that is circumcised, that he is a debter to the whole Law. Christ is become of no effect vnto you, whosoeuer of [Page 46] you are justified by the Law, yee are fallen from grace. For we through the spirit, wait for the hope of righteous­nesse by faith, &c. Thus farre we haue followed your steps in the Epistle to the Galatians, where we haue not left you so much as the breadth of a foot, to ground or settle your opinion vpon. Now you flie to the Epistle to the Hebrewes, where you looke for succour and shel­ter as in a City of refuge; for you say, ‘The whole See Zanch. judgement of the Argument of the Hebr. Zanch. in Hos. cap. 2. p. 45. Epistle is for your purpose:’ But we will pursue you with the sword of the Lord, and of Iudg. 7.18. Gideon, i. The word of God, and the writings of the Lord his In Epist. ad Heb. principalis proposi­tio est, Ceremo­nias veteris legis esse abrogatas. Chemloc. de lege, Caluin. Instit. lib. 2. cap. 11. sect. 7. Wor­thies, and doubt not but we shall either draw or driue you thence also.

Is the whole Epistle to the Hebrewes to the same pur­pose? viz. For the vtter abolishing of the whole Mo­rall Law, for hauing any being or well being, any office or vse in the Church of Christ? It seemes indeed you haue taken possession of the gates, the middle and the vtmost parts thereof, as if all the forts and fences, the turrets and towers, were your owne already. But shall we make an assault, and try what right or reason you haue so to doe? Antinomus. Your first reason of so bold a speech, is this; ‘In the very first verse he opposeth the speaking of Christ to all that were afore him, he being Heire of all things, whom the Angels must worship, and the heauens and earth must vanish, Answer. but he must remaine.’ And what makes this for your purpose? Is the Morall Law therefore abolished, because Christ is opposed to all that went or were before him? Or is this an opposi­tion of contrariety or of disparity? Doth the speaking of God by Christ argue an abolishing, and not rather an accomplishing of all that was spoken before him? Or can any man with any shew or shadow of reason in­ferre, that because in former times God spake [...] and [...], by the Prophets in visions and dreames, by ceremonies and sacrifices, by reuelations and prophesies, by thunderings and lightnings, and [Page 47] the like, and by all these more darkly and obscurely, not so effectually, spiritually, and comfortably, as in the latter daies he hath done by his Sonne; Can any man, I say, inferre hereupon, that the Morall Law is wholly abolished? Nay hath not Haec omnia non dissolventis erant legem, sed adim­plentis, & dilatan­tis in nobis, Iren. advers. Haeres. li. 4. cap. 27. Christ from his blessed mouth charged vs not once to thinke that he came to destroy the Law? He came not to destroy it, but to fulfill it: And doth not he renew the beauty and vigor of the Law, when he doth cleare it, and deliuer it from the foolish and false glosses of the Pharisies, and commends the duties thereof to the practise of his owne followers and Disciples? Besides all this, seeing Christ in this first verse, is as you alledge, opposed to the Prophets, you may by as good reason conclude, that all the sacred Records of the Prophets are now cancelled and cast out of the Church by the comming of Christ, in whom they were accomplished, as that, the Morall Law first written by the finger of God, is now vtterly abolished, because by Christ himselfe it was fulfilled, and if by that which followeth [the hea­uens and earth must vanish, but he remaine] you meane, that the Morall Law must needs vtterly perish if Christ remaine, remember then I pray, that Christ himselfe hath said the like of the Morall Law, which the Apo­stles said of him; Heauen and earth shall passe, but one iot or tittle of the Law shall not passe, till all be fulfilled. Vpon which words, Bulling. in Mat. 5.18. Bullinger saith, Per collationem rerum maximè stabilium & immotarum, significavit perpetuam legis constantiam. Calu. in Mat. 5.18. Caluine, Bez. Muscul. Vitus Theod. Perk. on the same. Beza, Mus­culus, Vitus Theodorus, Perkins, are all of the same minde, writing vpon the same place. Of these I will only mention M^r. Perkins his words. The meaning of this verse, saith he, is, That the Law of God is vnchange­able, not only in the whole, but for euery part thereof, and the fulfilling thereof shall neuer haue an end. But you goe forward, and out of cap. 3. Antinomus. you say, ‘Moses was his seruant.’ It is true, Answer. and so were all the holy men of [Page 48] God that penned the rest of the holy Scriptures too; What then? must it needs follow, that because Christ is come as Lord, in, and ouer his owne house, (which is his Heb. 3.6. Church) that he hath disallowed and disanul­led whatsoeuer Moses or others of his seruants haue done before him? This were enough to shake the very foundation of the wals of Sion, and to lay leuell with the ground the stately palaces of Ierusalem. What they haue done, either in, or for the building of Gods house, touching the substance and essentiall parts thereof, whether Ephes. 2.20. Heb. 6.1, 2. foundation of faith, or Phil. 3.16. Gal. 6.16. rule of life, that Christ himselfe tels you againe, he came not to destroy; though they were but his seruants in the house, and he Lord ouer it, yet thinke not, saith he, that I am come to destroy, either the Law, which is the Iam. 2.8.12. rule of life, or the 2 Pet. 1.19, 20. Prophets, which are a part of the foundation of faith. He came not to abolish, but to Bez. Epist. Theo­logic. 20. pag. 104. establish these things. But why did you alledge only the former part of the verse, [Moses was a Seruant] and not the latter [for a testimony of those things which should be spoken after] to shew what seruice the Apostle speakes of in this place? Why? there was a reason in it, for the latter words speaking of Moses seruice in the matters of the Ceremoniall Law, (as Paraeus and other worthy Diuines doe giue the meaning of them) the al­ledging of these would haue quite maid your Market in that, for which you brought in the former, namely, to the ouerthrow and abolishing of the Morall Law. As for that you adde,Antinomus. out of Hebrewes Cap. 8. ‘He is the Mediator of a better Testament, which being the New, he abrogateth the Old, Ierem. 31.31. And that by the Old is meant, as you say, that which was written in the Tables of Stone, Answer. Deut. 4.13.’ I answer with re­uerend Bez. in Heb. 8.6. Tertul. advers. Iudaeos, cap. 3.4.5.6. & advers. Marcion. lib. 5. c. 4. Beza, That Christ is said to be the Mediator of a better Couenant, hauing better promises; Nempe quoniam figurabant ritus Levitici, quod ipsi non praesta­bant, cum credentium animos ad Christum venturum, [Page 49] sive ad novum pactum remitterent. He opposeth the Euangelicall Couenant to the Leuiticall, as the better to the worse, the New vnto the Old, entring into the comparison of the Old and transitory Testament, be­ing but for a time (whereof the Leuiticall Priests were Mediators) with the New, (the euerlasting Mediator whereof is Christ) to shew that this was not only bet­ter than that in all respects, but also that that was abro­gated by this. This proueth not then the absolute abro­gation of the Morall Law, as you intend it, but only the abolishing of the Leuiticall Priesthood, with all their Mosaicall Sacrifices and Ceremonies, as by the words going before, ver. 4, 5, 6, 7.Heb. 8.4, 5, 6, 7. you may plainly see the Apostle meant it.Antinomus. And because you appeale to the Geneua Note vpon Ierem. 31.31. as approuing your exposition of that which out of Hebrewes 8. you alledge for the abrogating of the Morall Law, Answer. we are content to turne aside with you thither also, not refu­sing the censure or sentence which as vmpire it shall giue in this matter.Tertull. expoun­deth this place Ier. 31. v. 31. of the abolishing of the Ceremoniall, and not of the Morall Law, Lib. advers. Judaos c. 3. Vpon these words (I will make a New Couenant, Ier. 31.31.) the Geneua Note is this, Though the Couenant of Redemption made to the Fathers, and this which was giuen after, seeme diuers, yet they are all one, and grounded on Iesus Christ, saue that this is called New, because of the manifestation of Christ, and the abundant graces of the Holy Ghost, giuen vnto the Church vnder the Gospell. May not this Note giue you notice of thus much; That the Diuines of Geneua, making but one Couenant, both in the daies of the Law, and in the daies of the Gospell, doe only acknow­ledge an alteration thereof in some circumstances of manner, measure, persons, places, times, and types, meanes, and ministers, and the like, and that partly in the Morall, but especially in the whole In Epistol. Theol. 8. Bez. & Epist. 20. Vide Caluin. Instit. lib. 2. cap. 11. sect. 7. in hunc locum ex Ierem. 31.31. Ceremoniall Law; but doe not so much as intimate any vtter aboli­tion of any part of the substance of it, whether concer­ning the foundation of faith, or rule of life? And how [Page 50] then doe you imagine can the Geneua Note make for your purpose, to proue by this place the abrogation and vtter abolition of the Morall Law? To giue some weight vnto your light opinion and sleight exposition of this place, you haue burdened your margent with a multitude of witnesses, as if they had now iointly set­led and established you in the same: Not much vnlike me thinkes herein, vnto Philotus Cous mentioned by Athen. Dipnoso­phist. lib. 9. cap. 23. & lib. 12. cap. 29. Athenaus, who was of so light and slender a body, that he had weights of lead tied to his heeles, left by some blast or puft of winde, he should haue beene whirled and blowen away. But wherefore doe you beare vs in hand, that so great a cloud of witnesses as you haue painted your margent withall, doe all stand for you, and with you, in the vtter abolishing of the Morall Law? And yet you haue not drawen one drop from them all, to giue vs some taste of their vniforme consent with you in your opinion: Are they clouds without water? witnesses without testimonies? Titles without euidences? Like Apothecaries boxes, that beare goodly and faire names without, but haue not a drugge nor a dram of any thing that is good within? The Authors which you name, I acknowledge to be good men, and full of good things, as 2 Cor. 4.7. Vessels of the Sanctuary, trusted with the Lords treasure, and im­ployed for their 2 Tim. 2.27. Masters vse: And I haue sought, and searcht Caluin. Vatah. Tremel. Musc. Zanch. Hipp. &c. their Caluin. Vatah. Tremel. Musc. Zanch. Hipp. &c. storehouses, with what diligence for the time I could; yet can I finde none of your leauen in their lumpe, nor any of their Gold to gild your drosse. Shall I deale plainly and fairely with you? I will make you a free and franke offer. Set me downe the Testimonies of the Authors which you alledge for the vtter abolishing of the Morall Law, set them downe, I say, [totidem verbis] and if, of the two and twenty which you name in your margent, I doe not proue, that one and twenty are vtterly against you, I will acknow­ledge you victor, and yeeld you the whole cause with­out [Page 51] more adoe. Cicero de Orat. Tully saith, That an Orator as well as a Warrior must doe something, ad specimen, non ad vul­nus, something for a flourish, not all for fight; and so it seemes you doe, though not as a glozing Orator, yet as a Teren. in Eun. Act. 4. sc. 7. bragging Souldier, you braue vs as with a troupe of horse and foot, and then they be but shadowes in stead of souldiers; much like those images of men which (as Jul. Frontin. lib. 3. stratag. cap. 8. Iulius Frontius recordeth) Cyrus the King of Persia besieging the City of Sardis did put vpon long Poles and armed them like Persian souldiers, and set them vpon one side of the City as an Army of men, to delude and terrifie Craesus and the Citizens there­withall. Now surely if any should be so credulous as to beleeue, or so timorous as to feare, that all these Au­thors are armed souldiers, which you haue set vp in the margent, as vpon one side of your City to defend your cause, I would haue him answered only with the words of Iudg. 9.36. Zebul to Gaal, Iudg. 9. Thou seest the shadowes of the Mountaines, as if they were men. But now to leaue your shadowes, and to deale with the substance of that which you thinke yet remaineth in the Epistle to the Hebrews, for the vtter abolishing of the Morall Law; Antinomus. You vrge, ‘That because the Tables of Stone wherein the Morall Law was written, were remoued with the Tabernacle, and other like Adjuncts, therfore the Mo­rall Law is vtterly abolished.’ Answer. And who taught you this Logicke, to reason à remotione Accidentis, ad re­motionem subjecti? Must it needs follow, that because the Tables of Stone wherein the Law was written be abolished, that therefore the Law it selfe is vtterly abo­lished together with them? Were the Tables of Stone so essentiall to the Morall Law, that it had neither birth before them, nor being after them? Nay was it not written in the Tables of the heart, first in the state of Primordialis lex data est Adae, & Euae in paradiso, quasi matrix om­nium praeceptorum Dei, Tertul. advers Iudaeos cap. 2. ibi lege plura de lege. Innocencie, as in faire and golden Characters, and continued after the fall as the Law of Nature, but as it were in dimme and darke letters; and yet more plainly [Page 52] August. quaest. Vet. & No. Test. quaest. 4. renewed to Gen. 17.1. & 18.19. Abraham and the Patriarkes, before it was euer written in Tables of Stone, for the more ma­nifest direction and conuiction of the August. quaest. Vet. & No. Test. quaest. 4. Iewes? And hath not the Lord according to the Couenant of Grace, changed the Tables of Stone into the fleshie August. de vera Innocentia ca. 258. Tables of our hearts, the killing letter into the quick­ning spirit, not putting out, but putting in, his August. de spir. & litera, cap. 14. & 21. lawes into our minde, and writing them by his Spirit vpon our hearts, and so causing vs to walke in his Statutes? And hath he not done all this, that as Luc. 1.74, 75. Zachary spea­keth, We might serue him according to his Law, with­out feare, in righteousnesse and holinesse (the summe and substance of both Matt. 22.37.39. Tables) all the daies of our life? How then doth the remouing of the Tables of Stone, proue vnto vs the remouall of the Law written in them? Nay, if the remouing of the Tables of Stone, would proue the abolishing of the Law written in them, then the Morall Law was abolished not only, as you say, after Christs death, but many hundred yeeres before Christs birth. For in the Second Temple, there was not the Arke of the Testimonie wherein the Ta­bles were kept, nor the Tables themselues neither: As not onely Joseph. lib. 5. de Bello Iudai. cap. 14. Iosephus and the Petrus Galat. de Arcanis Catholicae verit. lib. 4. cap. 9. Iewish Rabbins, with others, Morn. de veri­tate Chr. Relig. cap. 29. Phil. Morn. De veritate Rel. Ludov. Vives de veritate Chr. fidei lib. 3. cap. 11. Lud. Viv. de verit. Christ. fid. lib. 3. doe record, but the sacred 2 King. 24.13. Story also beareth witnesse, seeing all the Vessels of the Temple, and all the precious Instruments thereof that were of gold (as the Ex. 15.11. Arke it selfe was, wherein the Tables of Stone were kept) were all carried away to Babel, either in the former Captiuities of Iehojachim, and Ieconiah, or the last which was the worst, of 2 Chron. 36.7.10.18.19. Ze­dekiah when the City was sackt, the Temple spoiled, and both by the Chaldaeans burnt with fire. Besides all this, it is most certaine that as the Arke of the Coue­nant, and the parts of it, the Cherubins, and the Pro­pitiatorie Couering, or Mercy Seat, were all Ceremo­nies, and Types of CHRIST, and shadowes of good [Page 53] things to come in the daies of the Gospell, so was both the writing of the Law in Tables of Stone, and the putting of those Tables (being the Deut. 9.9, 11. Tables of the Legall Couenant) in the Deut. 10.5. Arke, which was there­fore called the Deut. 10.8. Arke of the Couenant; these also I say, were Typicall and Ceremoniall, but the Law it selfe, both before, and then, and now, and for euer was, and is, and shall be Morall still. To make this a little more plaine. The Arke was a figure of Christ, and a pledge of Gods gracious Numb. 7.89. presence, where he promised to speake with his people, and whereunto he called them to speake with him: This did signifie, that there could be no intercourse of mercies and duties be­twixt God and vs, but in and by Matt. 3.17. Christ alone. The Exod. 25.21. Deut. 10.8. Tables of the Couenant were put in this Arke and kept in it, to signifie, not only that all the treasures of wisdome and knowledge were hid in Col. 2.3. Christ, but that the Law of God is fulfilled, and the justice of God satisfied, and the wrath of God appeased, in and by 2 Cor. 5.18, 21. Act. 4.12. Christ alone. These Tables were of Stone, Exod. 34.1, 4. hauing the Law of God written by the Deut. 9.10. finger of God in them, to signifie that in the New Couenant, he would change our hearts of stone, into Ezek. 36.26, 27. hearts of flesh, and write his lawes by the 2 Cor. 3. [...] finger of his spirit in the fleshy Ta­bles of our hearts, and both cause vs to walke in his Statutes, and also accept of our obedience in Christ Iesus. The Arke when the Tables of the Law were put in it, had a Exo. 25.17, 21.Propitiatory Couering put vpon it, Exodus 25. This did signifie another part of the Couenant, That in Christ alone the Lord will couer Heb. 8.10, 12. Rom. 3.25. and be mercifull to our sinnes, and remember our iniquities no more, Hebr. 8.10, 11. Rom. 3.1 Ioh. 2. Vpon the Propitiatory or Mercy Seat, were the two Exod. 25.20. Cherubins looking downe into the Arke: this did signifie, That as the holy Heb. 1.14. Angels were appointed to be ministring Spirits, for the good of them that are Heires of salua­tion, so doe they desire and delight to 1 Pet. 1.12. looke into [Page 54] Christ and his Church, and the mysterie of the Gospell reuealed in the same. Now these things considered; this I say, That so farre as these Tables of the Coue­nant had any thing Ceremoniall in them, or any thing concerning other circumstances, of persons, time, place, terror, rigour, and the like, being pecu­liar to the Church of the Iewes in that estate of the Mosaicall Pedagogie; so farre I say, they are Temporalli ho­rum administratio fuit, Iren. advers. Haeres. lib. 4. cap. 8. remo­ued together with the Arke and Altar, Tabernacle and Temple, and other Leuiticall Sacrifices and Ceremo­nies, Iudaicall types and rites whatsoeuer. But the Morall Law contained in the Ten Commandements, could not be Ceremoniall, no more than a substance can be a shadow, (for then should Morall and Ceremo­niall haue beene confounded, whereas euen by their writing in Tables of Stone, and that by the finger of God they were distinguished) neither was there then any thing for the substance of it, nor is now, (as now it stands vpon record in the Booke of God) but it doth concerne vs as well as them, according to that of the Apostle, We know that the Law is good, if a man vse it lawfully: and therefore, though the Tables of Stone be remoued, the Age, Marcion, omnésque jam com­miserones & coodi­biles ejus Haeretici, quid audebitis di­cere? Resciditnè Christus priora prae­cepta, Non occi­dendi, non adulte­randi, non furandi, &c. An & illa servavit & quod deerat adjecit? vide Tertull. adver. Marcion. li. 4. ca. 36. Morall Law is yet continued, and hath (exceptis excipiendis) his proper vse and force still. That which you draw from Mount Sinai, hath not strength enough to withdraw all vse of the Morall Law from Mount Sion. The Heb. 12.12, 13. Apostle enforceth his ex­hortation vnto Christian obedience and patience, vn­der the Metaphors of lifting vp their hands that hang downe, and their feeble knees (the better to enable them to resist, and hold out in running the race that is set before them) by Arguments drawen from the com­fortable and admirable priuiledge of the Gospell and kingdome of Grace, farre aboue those which the He­brewes themselues had, vnder the regiment of Moses, in the estate of the Law. This you say truly, and we doe acknowledge, ‘That greater mercies require [Page 55] greater duties:’ But when you say, ‘He doth not presse his exhortation by the Law giuen in Mount Sinai,’ you are conuinced of a grosse vntruth, by the two last Heb. 12.28, 29. ver­ses of the same Chapter, where the Apostle presseth this exhortation [Let vs haue grace to serue God ac­ceptably with reuerence and godly feare] by an Argu­ment drawen from the Law, Deut. 4.24. viz. Antinomus. For our God is a consuming fire. That which the Heb. 12.26, 27. Apostle al­legeth out of Agg. 2.6. Aggai, and you vrge out of both, con­cerning things that are shaken, may indeed shake in peeces all the Iewish Ceremonies and Sacrifices (as most Diuines doe agree.) But the Gospell is so farre from shaking the Morall Law in that manner, that it doth rather ioine, and shake [...]. Vide Iustin Mart. Quaest. & Resp. ad Orthod. p. 354. hands with it, as if, that which is spoken in another place, were also verified in them: Mercy and truth are met together, righteous­nesse and peace doe kisse each other. So farre therefore as the Lord hath ioined them together, let no man be so bold as to seeke or sue out a Bill of Bez. Theol. Ep. Ep. 20. p. 103. diuorce to put them asunder.

Thus haue you seene and felt too, if you be not dark­ned in your minde by prejudice and selfe-conceit, and so strangely hardened (which God forbid) against all touch of truth, what sorry successe you haue had, in discharging your many Arguments out of the whole Epistle to the Galatians, and out of the whole Epistle to the Hebrewes, notwithstanding all the powder and shot which you haue borrowed from so many men, or rather by fraud and force haue taken from them. We come now vnto your third great Argument, namely, the practise of the Apostels in all their Epistles; which you seeme to me to haue both mounted higher and charged deeper, as a principall peece of Ordnance, for this speciall seruice of battery and beating downe to the ground, not only the wals and windowes, but the stateliest and strongest towers and bulwarkes of the Morall Law. Antinomus. You say, ‘The practise of the Apostles [Page 56] in all their Epistles, vseth brotherly exhortations, still calling them brethren:’ This English I vnderstand not, but I conceiue you would say, Answer. That, It is the practise of the Apostles in all their Epistles, to vse brotherly exhortations, still calling them to whom they write, Brethren. And what of that I pray you? Is the pra­ctise of the Apostles therefore against the Morall Law, because in their Epistles they vse brotherly exhortati­ons, and call them to whom they write, Brethren? Why then, belike Moses himselfe both spake and wrote against the Morall Law, when endeuouring to keepe men in obedience to the sixt Commandement, he vsed brotherly exhortations, and called them bre­thren; Act. 7.26. Exod. 2.13. Sirs you are brethren, why doe you wrong one to another? Act. 7.26. And tels vs, not only that they two were brethren, but hath left it vpon record, that they were also his brethren, Exod. 2.12. Exod. 2. And Lot also (like enough) practised somewhat against the Morall Law, when labouring to preuent the villany of the Sodo­mites in the breach of the seuenth Commandement, he vsed brotherly exhortations, calling them brethren, saying, Gen. 19.7. I pray you Brethren, doe not so wickedly. I had thought, that neither the name of Brethren, nor bro­therly exhortations, had beene so peculiarly appro­priate to the Gospell, but that both might be vsed for the furtherance of the duties, and restraint of the breaches of the Morall Law. Neither are rebukes, or threats, (in my opinion) so proper to the Law, that they may not haue their place and vse in the Gospell also. Ahab was neuer a whit the better, because he could say, (in foolish pitie) of King Benhadad; Is he yet aliue? he is my 1 King. 20.32. Brother. For there is August. ad Ma­cedon. Ep. 64. Sicuti est aliquando mise­ricordia puniens, ita & crudelitas parcens. crudeli­tas parcens. Nor was Paul euer the worse, because he wrote so sharply to the 1 Cor. 5.3, 4, 5, 13. Corinthians, and dealt so se­uerely with the incestuous person, as to deliuer him vp to Satan; for there is misericordia puniens. The Apo­stles in their Epistles haue not only oile to supple, but [Page 57] wine to search; imitating that good Luc. 10.34. Samaritane that vsed both, in the cure of the wounded man: Neither doe they alwaies apply milde lenities, but sometimes sharpe corrasiues, to their ill affected, or afflicted pati­ents. Could you obserue, that the Apostle calleth the Galathians ten times Brethren in that Epistle, and could you take no notice of the sharpe and bitter re­bukes and reproofes, which he vseth against them? Gal. 3.1, 3. O foolish Galathians, who hath bewitched you? Are yee so foolish? I am Gal. 4.11, 20. afraid of you. I stand in doubt of you. Gal. 4.9. How turne you againe to beggerly rudiments? Behold I Gal. 5.2, 3, 4. Paul say vnto you, that if you be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. Christ is become of none effect vnto you whosoeuer of you are justified by the Law; you are fallen from grace. I Gal. 5.12. would they were euen cut off which trouble you; yea if he were an Gal. 1.8, 9. Angell from heauen let him be accursed. Haue not these ten re­bukes, almost ten times as much acrimony and tart­nesse, as the naming of them ten times brethren hath lenity and mildnesse? Paul a Preacher of the Gospell, knew there was vse of both, and at this present saw, that euen the Galathians (his Gal. 4.12, 19. brethren and his little children) had need of both, although a people that had receiued and did professe the Gospell. If then your reason be good; ‘The practise of the Apostles stands against the Morall Law, because they vse in their Epi­stles brotherly exhortations to them to whom they write, and call them brethren;’ then the practise of the Apostles stands against the Gospell also, because in the same Epistles, they oftentimes rebuke them as wicked, and threaten them sometimes as accursed creatures. But Antinomus. you say, ‘They ground their exhortations, nei­ther vpon Moses Law, nor vpon any other Commande­ment, but on the mercies of God in Christ, as may be seene in all their Epistles.’ Now certainly, Answer. this is one of the strangest and boldest speeches that euer I heard, from any man bearing the name of a true Christian, [Page 58] and making some shew of reading and learning as you doe. Are you such a stranger in the Epistles of the Apostles, that you could yet neuer finde any of their exhortations, grounded on the Commandements and terrors of the Law? And dare you be so bold as to say, ‘They are all grounded only on the mercies of God in Christ? And that this may be seene also in all their Epistles?’ Haue you read, Rom. 12.1. Rom. 12.1. I beseech you Brethren by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a liuing sacrifice, &c. And haue you not read in the same Apostle, 2 Tim. 4.1. 2 Tim. 4.1. I charge thee before God, and the Lord Iesus Christ, who shall judge the quicke and the dead at his appearing, preach the Word, &c. Rom. 11.22. He that bids vs, behold the goodnesse of the Lord, bids vs behold his seuerity also; vnto the Iewes that fell seuerity, but towards vs goodnesse, if we continue in his goodnesse, otherwise we are threatned to be cut off also: And, Some (as Ep. Iud. v. 23. Iude speaketh) we must deale withall in compassion, and by the looking for of the mercy of our Lord Iesus Christ vnto eternall life; and others we must saue by feare, plucking them as brands halfe burnt, out of the fire. He that exhorteth vs to Col. 3.13. Forbeare and forgiue one another (if any haue a qua­rell against any) and that vpon this ground of Gods mercy in Christ [euen as Christ for gaue vs,] Col. 3.13. doth likewise exhort vs, Not to Rom. 12.19. auenge our selues, but rather to giue place vnto wrath, vpon another ground of Gods justice, and that taken out of the Law, Deut. 32.35. [for it is written, vengeance is mine, and I will repay it saith the Lord.] He that saith of the Ministers of the Gospell, as of 2 Cor. 5.20. Ambassadors of peace, We beseech you in Christs stead, to be reconciled vnto God, saith also (being himselfe one of the same) as an Herauld of Armes: 2 Cor. 5.10, 11. We must all appeare before the judgement seat of Christ, to giue an account of whatsoeuer we haue done in our bodies, be it good or euill: knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we perswade men, 2 Cor. 5. [Page 59] All their perswasions and exhortations then, you may see, are not in all their Epistles grounded (as you say) vpon mercy, but some vpon justice; not all vpon loue, but some vpon feare; not all vpon the promises of the Gospell, but some vpon the threatnings of the Law, against all disobedience both to Law and Gospell: According to that of the Apostle Iud. Ep. v. 14, 15. Iude: Behold the Lord commeth with ten thousand of his Saints, to execute judgement vpon all, and to conuince all that are vngodly among them, of all their vngodly deeds, which they haue vngodly committed, and of all their hard speeches, which vngodly sinners haue spoke against him: And that also of the Apostle 2 Cor. 10.5, 6. See Tertull. on this place, 2 Thess. 1.8, 9. lib. 5. adver. Marc. cap. 16. Vide etiam Zanch. in 2 Thess. 1.8, 9. Paul; We haue in readinesse to take ven­geance of all disobedience, 2 Cor. 10.5. which the Lord Iesus shall accomplish, when he shall be reuealed from heauen, with his mighty Angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and obey not the Gospell of our Lord Iesus Christ, who shal be punis [...]ed with euerlasting destruction from the presence of th [...] [...]ord, and from the glory of his power, 2 Thess. 1.7, 8 [...] Had you aduisedly considered these and other such like passages in the Epistles of the Apostles, you would either neuer haue thought what you haue said before, or neuer for very shame haue written that which followeth after, viz. ‘And though sometimes,Antinomus. yea often they vse the Imperatiue mood, and some words of Commandement, yet they are so tempered with mildnesse (you say) and without penalty, as that there is no forme of Comman­dements, much lesse any allusion to Moses Law, or the Ten Commandements.’ So tempered with mildnesse, Answer. and without penalty? Now surely, I wonder in what temper you were when these things ranne in your head, or fell from your hand! Had you forgotten, that the Apostle did as well sharply threaten the 1 Cor. 4.21. Corin­thians with a rod, as mildly offer to come vnto them in loue, and in the spirit of meeknesse? Or did you not consider, that the same Apostle doth not alwaies as [Page 60] it were stroake their heads, and commend them in tearmes of loue, but (as occasion requireth) some­times strikes their naked consciences, with some sharpe rebukes, and threats, some bitter taunts, and terrors, as with the twigs and ierks of his rod also? He that saith, 1 Cor. 11. 1 Cor. 11.2. Now I praise you Brethren, that yee re­member me in all things, and keepe the ordinances as I deliuered them to you; taketh them vp more sharply for the abuse of the Sacrament euen in the 1 Cor. 11.22. same Chapter, verse 22. What? haue yee not houses to eat and to drinke in? Or despise yee the Church of God, and shame them that haue not? What shall I say vnto you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not. And he that in another 1 Cor 4.14. place saith, I write not these things to shame you, but as my beloued sonnes I admonish you, 1 Cor. 4. doth he not afterwards vpon just occasion, more sharply rebuke them? I speake to your 1 Cor 6.5. 1 Cor. 15.34. shame; Is it so that there is not a wise man amongst you? no not one that shall be able to judge betweene his brethren? And againe, Some haue not the knowledge of God, I speake this to your shame, 1 Cor. 15.34. Are not these words as sharpe and tart, as the former are milde and gentle? Is there not a burning fire of zeale in the latter, as well as a warming fire of loue in the former? Fire I acknow­ledge in both, and holy fire too, but yet of a different degree and temper; the one milder, and the other sharper, and both of speciall vse in their time and place. In distilling of flowers and hearbes, a soft fire will serue the turne, which in melting of mettles will doe no good at all. And although according to the common Prouerbe, A soft fire will make sweet Malt, yet must it be a hot fire to make good Hos. 7.6, 7, 8. bread, or good Exod. 1.14. bricke. This wisdome God hath giuen the Isa. 28.26, 27, 28. Hus­bandman, to beat out Fitches with a staffe, and Cum­min with a rod, but to thresh with a threshing Instru­ment, and to turne the Cart wheele ouer the stronger graine, that the bread Corne may be bruised and fitted [Page 61] for present vse. And this wisdome God hath giuen his Isa. 28.26. 1 Cor. 3.9. 2 Pet. 3.15. Apostles as his chiefe Husbandmen, that in dea­ling with his people which are Gods husbandry, they should vse both mildnesse and sharpnesse, lenity and seuerity, a staffe, or a threshing instrument, as the na­ture or quality of the seed, soyle, or season, shall require. But who would not thinke (to heare and take your words) that all the Epistles were so full of milde spee­ches and sweet exhortations, that there were not any sharpe rebukes, much lesse any ironicall taunts, and least of all any terrible threats at all, to be found in all, or any one of them? For Antinomus. you will haue, ‘All to be mildnesse without any sharpnesse; all, but commanding words without any forme of Commandements; all, mercies and promises, without any penalty or punish­ment; no vrging of any precept of the Law, no not so much as an allusion to Moses Law, or the Ten Com­mandements.’ And all this you vrge, to this end, to proue, ‘That now in the daies of the Gospell, the whole Morall Law is wholly abolished.’ Answer. When the people would teach the Prophets to speake, and forbid the Seers to see; saying, Prophecy not vnto vs right things, but speake vnto vs smooth things, prophecy deceits: The Prophet Isa. 30.8, 9, 10. The Apostles doe reproue sins, and threaten sinners, out of the Morall Law. See [...]. Ran. Ceasu. Praelect. 183. p. col. 861. 862. 863. Isay was charged, to write it in a Table, and to note it in a Booke, that it might be for the time to come, euen for euer and euer: That this is a rebellious people, lying children that will not heare the Law of the Lord. If you goe about to teach the Apostles to speake, and forbid these Seers to see, saying, They neither com­mand seuerely, nor rebuke sharply, nor threaten terri­bly: i. They Prophecy no right things vnto vs, but speake all smooth things vnto vs; all mildnesse, no sharpnesse; all mercy, no judgement; all promises, no penalties; all words of commanding, but no forme of Commandements; all loue and fauour, but no rigour nor terror; take heed, lest your sinne be not written as with a Ier. 17.1. pen of a Diamond before the Lord, and the [Page 62] censure thereof also, (for you, your leaders, and fol­lowers,) made as remarkable for the time to come, as euer it was vpon the Iewes, and euen in the same words: This is a rebellious people, lying children, (and that euen for the same reason) Because you stand so much against the Law of the Lord. But to proceed yet a little further, for your better conuiction and satisfa­ction in this point. If I shall shew you out of the Epi­stles of the Apostles, not only The Apostle S. Iohn proueth ha­tred of our Bre­thren to be a sin, because it is a breach of the Mo­rall Law, viz. [Murther] offen­ding against the sixt Commande­ment, and so doth not only proue it, but reproue it al­so, 1 Ioh. 3.14, 15. as deseruing death, and depri­uing vs of eternal life. So doth Paul also, rebuke and threaten Coue­tousnesse, because it is Idolatry, a breach of the first Commandement. sharpe rebukes, (as you haue heard some already) but some bitter and iro­nicall taunts, many serious and seuere Commande­ments, for auoiding of the sinnes and performing of the duties of the Morall Law, many terrible threat­nings of dreadfull judgements and curses, and that not only by way of allusion, but by plaine allegation of the Morall Law: If (I say) I shall shew you all these out of the Epistles, will you then honestly and ingenu­ously confesse your error, (hauing so boldly affirmed the contrary) and so rest satisfied with the truth in this particular? Vpon this subject a man might gather enough to fill a Volume, and might spend more daies then I can spare houres for this businesse. A touch of some, and a taste of others, shall serue the turne. When the Apostle 1 Cor. 4.8. Paul saw the Corinthians swolne and puffed vp with a vaine and insolent conceit of their owne excellency, as now boasting of their gifts; and, that being now full by their elegant and eloquent Teachers, they began as it were, to loath the hony combe of the Word in Pauls preaching: he wisely labours to let out this winde of vanity, with an ironicall and bitter rebuke, as sharpe and piercing as the point of a speare or sword. Now (saith he) yee are full, now yee are rich, now yee haue reigned as Kings without vs: we are fooles for Christs sake, but yee are wise in Christ; 1 Cor. 4.10. we are weake, but yee are strong; yee are ho­nourable, but we are despised. Some Quintil. Instit. Orat. lib. 6. cap. 3. & lib. 9. cap. 2. learned men doe hold, that this and such like ironicall Lyra in 1 Cor. 4.8. Ironicè loquitur ut ostendat prae­sumptionem corum derisibilem. derisions, are [Page 63] the sharpest and seuerest reprehensions: Like vnto that of our Sauiour Christ, Mar. 7. where sharply re­prouing the ceremonious and superstitious Pharisies, for preferring their humane Ordinances before Gods Commandements; Full [...]. Rajn. Cen­sur. pra [...]ect. 169. See Beza advers. Sycoph. p. 136. ut Amos. 4 4. [...]e Be­thel, & peccate. well, saith Mar. 7.9, 10. he, doe yee re­ject the Commandements of God, that yee may keepe your owne Traditions. For Moses said, Honour thy Father and Mother, and yee say, It is Corban, &c. Or like vnto that bitter mocke of 1 King. 18.27. Elijah, against the worship­pers of Baal, 1 King. 18.27. Cry aloud, for he is a God, either he is talking, or he is pursuing, or he is in a journey, or peraduenture he sleepeth and must be awaked. The same Apostle Paul also, warning the Philippians of false Teachers, of wicked liuers, and of them of the Circumcision that were amongst them, doth he not rate such persons as Dogs, and scoffingly tearme their Circumcision Concision? saying, Beware of Phil. 3.2.3. Dogs, beware of euill workers, beware of the Concision; and doth not the same Apostle giue direction vnto Tit. 1.11. [...]. Titus, to muzzell and stop the mouthes of such Dogs, and branding the Cretians with reprochfull names, by a Verse alleged out of Epimenides, one of their owne Poets:

Tit. 1.13. He alloweth of this testimony as true, and thereupon chargeth Titus, to rebuke them [...], cuttingly, or sharply, that they may be sound in the faith. As if he would haue Titus, to vse these sharpe reproofes and re­proches, as Chirurgions sometimes doe their keene ra­sors, to cut away all brutish and base sinnes, (as either dead or proud flesh) that so they might be cured of their errors, and made sound in the knowledge and profession of the Gospell of Christ Iesus. By all which bitter taunts, sharpe reproches, and cutting rebukes, any that hath either sight or sense, may plainly see, and [Page 64] perceiue, that all Pauls Epistles are not tempered with such mildnesse, as you haue ignorantly and rashly affir­med, (as if there were not so much, as any taste of tart­nesse or sharpnesse in them at all) But that Paul re­taining his 2 Cor. 13.10. 1 Cor. 4.21. Apostolicall liberty (sometimes to smite with his rod of rebuke and censure, as well as to speake in the spirit of meeknesse) did not only him­selfe (inflamed with holy and heauenly zeale) rebuke sharply, reproch bitterly, and reproue grieuously; but did also charge Tit. 1.13. 2 Tim. 4.2. others of Gods Ministers seuerely (as occasion should require) so to doe. And all this he did with a wise heart, and mercifull hand, to humble the people of God, not to discourage them, for 2 Cor. 10.8. & 13.10. edifica­tion, not vnto destruction, to make them sound in judgement, and holy in affection and conuersation.

Now, whereas Antinomus. you say further, ‘That there is no forme of Commandement in the Epistles, no penalty, no vrging of the Morall Law, nay not so much as any allu­sion vnto Moses Law, or the Ten Commandements:’ I say no more, Answer. but let vs search the records, and the very sight of the Euidence will I hope conuince your con­science of too much blindnesse and boldnesse in these also. Turne me therefore I pray you, vnto 1 Tim 6. I 1 Tim. 6.13, 14. giue thee charge in the sight of God, who quickneth all things, and before Iesus Christ, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession, that thou keepe this Commandement without spot, vnrebukeable vntill the comming of our Lord Iesus Christ. And vnto 2 Tim. 4.1. I 2 Tim. 4.1. charge thee before God, and the Lord Iesus Christ, who shall judge the quicke and the dead at his appearing and his kingdome: Preach the word, be instant in season and out of season, reproue, rebuke, exhort, with all long suffering, and Doctrine. See also 2 Tim. 2.14. 2 Tim. 2.14. Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord, that they striue not about words to no purpose, but to the subuerting of the hearers. Consider now these places, and tell me I pray you, if the Apostle doe [Page 65] not in these words as seuerely and seriously charge Ti­mothy to keepe the Commandement which he had giuen him, for the duties of his person and calling, as euer did Moses the people of Israel for obseruing of the Commandement of the Law, when Deut. 30.11, 15, 18, 19. he said, This Commandement which I command thee this day, is not hidden from thee, &c. Behold I call heauen and earth to record this day against you, that I haue set before you life and death, blessing and cursing. For whereas Moses calleth heauen and earth only to record against Israel, Paul conuents Timothy, as it were before the Lord of heauen and earth, and doth not only command him with all authority, but charge him with all seuerity, That as euer he would haue any benefit by Christ as his 1 Tim. 6.13, 14. Redeemer [witnessing a good confession before Pon­tius Pilate] or would euer render vp his account vnto him [as a 2 Tim. 4.1, 2. Iudge] with joy at his appearing, he should be carefull and faithfull in keeping his Com­mandements. Looke also vpon 1 Cor. 7.10. 1 Cor. 7.10. And vnto the maried I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: And vpon Ephes. 4.17. This I say therefore and testifie in the Lord, that yee henceforth walke, not as other Gentiles walke, in the vanity of their minde. And 2 Thessalon. 3.6.10.12. 2 Thess. 3.6, 10, 12. Now we command you brethren, in the name of our Lord Iesus Christ, that you withdraw your selues from euery Brother that walketh disorderly. And that also, 1 Tim. 6. 1 Tim. 6.25. I charge thee before God, and before the Lord Iesus Christ, and before the elect Angels, that thou ob­serue these things. Consider, I pray you, these places aduisedly, and tell me whether you haue not erred too too grossely, in saying so confidently, ‘That although in the Epistles of the Apostles, there were some words of commanding, yet was there not so much as a forme of Commandement in them,’ seeing you haue here many and worthy Commandements, both for matter and forme in full measure. But you say,Antinomus. ‘They are without [Page 66] penalty:’ Answer. For answer vnto that, Tell me I beseech you, whether you doe not reckon the threatnings of Rom. 6.21, 23. Death, Rom. 14.23. Damnation, the Ephes. 5.6. Wrath of God, the 2 Thess. 1.8. Vengeance of God, 1 Cor. 3.17. Destruction, 1 Cor. 11.32, 34. Condemnation, 1 Tim. 6.9. Perdition, flaming fire, Iud. v. 7, 8. Eternall fire, and such like, (against ignorant, disobedient, vngodly, and vnbeleeuing persons, such as know not God, and obey not the Gospell of our Lord Iesus Christ) to be penalties, and not only penalties, but dreadfull judgements, yea the very ter­rors of God that fight against such sinnes and sinners. If you say, they be, (as you must needs, if you will say the truth) then were you deluded with a lying vanity, and (which is worse) would delude others also there­withall, when you said and set it downe; ‘That the Commandements of the Apostles in their Epistles, were without penalty.’ Aug. contra Ada­mant. Manich. ca. 3. Sacrae Scripturae non temerarios & superbos accusatores, sed & pios & diligentes lectores desiderant, August. I maruell, whether euer you read that terrible sentence, 1 Cor. 16. If any man 1 Cor. 16.22. loue not the Lord Iesus Christ, let him be Anathema maranatha. If you did, doe but tell me by what Argument the Apo­stle doth here vrge and enforce the loue of Christ Iesus, whether by promise of mercy, or threatning of pe­nalty? Or whether here be not as dreadfull a curse threatned against those that doe not loue the Lord Ie­sus Christ, as there is [Ephes. 6.24.] a gratious pro­mise made to all that doe; viz. Ephes. 6.24. Grace be with all them that loue the Lord Iesus Christ in sincerity. It were ab­surd and impious to deny, that here is a promise of a blessing to them that loue him, and as impious and ab­surd it is to say, that the other denounceth no terrible penalty to them that loue him not: For the very words themselues, Anathema maranatha, doe import an execrable curse, such as the Lord when he commeth in Ecce autem quòd & in clausula tri­bunal Christi com­minatur, utique Iudicis & vltoris, in Rom. 14.10. Tertull. advers. Ma [...]i. lib. 5. ca. 14. judgement shall inflict vpon all wicked reprobates, being separated from Christs presence, and cast into vtter darknesse. So Paul vseth the word [...], [Page 67] Rom. 9.3. Gal. 1.8. as Accursed, and 1 Cor. 12.3. for Execrable: And the other Cornel. Pertram. praefat. in Gram. Heb. & Syriac. Maranatha, consists of two Syriack words, [...] which properly signifieth, Dominus noster, and [...] venit, The Lord commeth. Which words, being the beginning of Enochs Pro­phecy, cited by Iude, as containing the dreadfull judge­ment of God at the last day, against all the wicked and vngodly, were vsually taken vp by the Iewes, as they are here by Paul, to expresse the Bez. in 1 Cor. 16.22. Aug. Ep. 78. great Curse (which is hopelesse, helplesse, and endlesse) as their portion and just recompence, which doe not loue the Lord Iesus.

In the next place, you proceed from euill to worse, when you say, ‘There is not so much as any allusion vnto Moses Law, or the Ten Commandements, in all the Epistles.’ When Peter, liking well of the ease and peace, beauty and glory of Mount Tabor, made a Luc. 9.31, 32, 33. mo­tion for building of Tabernacles, that they that were there might dwell there, saying, Master it is good for vs to be here: The Holy Ghost hath obserued, That he was heauy with sleepe, and wist not what he said. Surely me thinkes, in such a like minde and mood were you, when falling into a dreame of Mount Sion, and liking well of the fancies that ranne in your head; of grace, and peace, mercy, and mildnesse, promises, and gentle exhortations, all tending to life and glory, you haue laboured to build this your Tabernacle for a place of rest, and said in your heart, It is good to be here, vn­willing altogether to heare any mention of Mount Sinai, or of any allusion to the Morall Law: But we will beare with your weaknesse, and plead your excuse; The spirit of (sleepe, or) slumber was vpon you, and you wist not what you either did, or said: For had you beene well awakened, and your eies well opened, you might haue seene in the most, if not in all the Epi­stles, not only some allusions, but many allegations out of the Ten See Iam. 2.8, 9, 10, 11, 12. & 4.10, 11. Commandements, or See Iam. 2.8, 9, 10, 11, 12. & 4.10, 11. Morall Law. [Page 68] Doth not the Apostle, in the Epistle to the Romans, make often mention of the Morall Law? Rom. 3.20. By the Law commeth the knowledge of sinne, Rom. 3. Rom. 4.31. Doe we then abrogate the Law by faith? God forbid, nay rather we establish the Law, Rom. 4.31. Rom. 7.7, 12, 22, 23. See Tertull. vpon these and other places of the Epi­stle to the Rom. 7. Quia lex pecca­tum? Absit: Eru­besce Marcion. Ab­sit. Abhominatur Apostolus crimina­tionem legis: ô summum praeco­nium legis. Tertull. aduers. Marcion. lib. 5. cap. 13. I had not knowne sinne but by the Law, for I had not knowne lust, except the Law had said, Thou shalt not couet: wherefore the Law is holy, and the Commandement, i. the tenth Commandement, is holy, just, and good. I delight in the Law of God after the inner man. So then in my minde I serue the Law of God, but with the flesh the law of sinne, Rom. 7.7, 12, 22, 25. Are not these plaine allegations of the Law, more than bare allusions? And doe not these pregnant Testimonies graciously establish the nature and vse of the Morall Law, which you most wickedly goe about to abolish? Will you yet see more euident, for better satisfaction and assurance? Owe nothing to any man, saith the Apostle, but to loue one another. Loue is a Christian duty, you will not deny, 1 Cor. 13. By what argument or reason doth he presse them hereunto? Euen by a sound Argument drawen from Gods Law; For he that loueth another hath fulfilled the Law, (he meaneth partibus non gradibus) and what Law he sheweth, by reckning vp the seuerall Commande­ments of the second Table: For this saith Rom. 13.8, 9. See Paraeus in Rom. 13.8, 9. & Aug. de spirit. & lit. cap. 14.21. he, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steale, Thou shalt not beare false witnesse, Thou shalt not couet, and if there be any other Commandement, it is brieflie comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt loue thy neighbour as thy selfe; Loue worketh no ill to his neighbour, therefore loue is the fulfilling of the Law. May you not now Erubesce Marc. Abhominatur Apo­stolus criminatio­nem legis. blush at your bold ignorance, to say, and that with such confidence, ‘That in all the Epistles, there is not so much as any allusion to the Mo­rall Law or Ten Commandements, seeing there is here so expresse mention of the same?’ And what will you say to that exhortation of the Apostle to the Ephesians? [Page 69] Children Ephes. 6.1, 2. obey your Parents in the Lord, for this is right: And how doth he enforce this duty, and proue the equity of the same? Doth he not plainly alledge the first Commandement of the second Table, and the promise annexed thereto, for this end and purpose? saying, Honor thy father and mother, (which is the first Commandement with promise) that it may be well with thee, and thou maist liue long on the earth? The eui­dence of this one place is such and so sufficient to con­uince you of grosse blindnesse in this particular, that I will not seeke any further for more lights, but only leaue this in your hand, and pray that the scales may fall from your eies, that you may see the truth by it.

I come now to the reason which you render of all this:Antinomus. ‘For it is the goodnesse of God (say you) that leadeth to repentance, Rom. 2.4. &c. 2 Pet. 3.9. and not the thundering of the Law.’ To this I answer, Answer. That the goodnesse of God indeed doth lead vs to re­pentance, according to that which you alledge out of Rom. 2.4. But, where you absolutely exclude the thun­dering of the Law, as of no vse nor force in this busi­nesse, tell me I pray you, what you thinke of the very next verse; Rom. 2.4, 5. But thou after thy hardnesse and impeni­tent heart, treasurest vp vnto thy selfe wrath against the day of wrath, and reuelation of the righteous judgement of God, who will render to euery man according to his deeds. Whether are these any thunderings of the Law or no? Euery word hath his weight. Wrath of God, day of wrath, righteous judgement of God, just recom­pence, according to the worke so shall the wages be. If the goodnesse of God leade vnto repentance, doe not these threatnings driue vnto it? If the mercies of God moue vs to obedience, doe not the terrors of God re­moue vs and withdraw vs from impenitency and pro­fanenesse? Nay, doth not the Apostle in the same place, for this very end, ioine them both together; Rom. 2.7, 8, 9, 10. Indigna­tion and wrath, tribulation and anguish vpon euery soule of [Page 70] man that doth euill, of the Iew first, and also of the Gen­tile; but glory, honour, and peace, to euery man that wor­keth good, to the Iew first, and also to the Gentile? As for that which Antinomus. you alledge also out of 2 Pet. 3.9. The long suffering of the Lord to vs ward, 2 Pet. 3.9. not willing that any should perish, but that all shall come to repen­tance: I acknowledge it as a point of the mercy and truth of God. Answer. But whereas you would haue this long suffering, to be the only meanes without all threat­nings or terrors to bring vs to this repentance; looke backe I pray you, to the 2 Pet. 3.5, 6, 7. 5, 6, 7. verses of the same Chapter, and be not willingly ignorant of the judge­ments of God there mentioned, by the ouerflowing of waters, whereby the Old world perished, and by the burning and flaming fire, whereunto this world is reser­ued against the day of judgement and perdition of vngodly men: And looke forwards also to the very next words following, viz. 2 Pet. 3.10. But the day of the Lord will come as a theefe in the night, in which the heauens shall passe away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with feruent heat, the earth also, and the workes that are therein shall be burnt vp. And tell me whether these threatnings of the Day of the Lord, be not as terrible as the lightnings and thunderings at the giuing of the Law; the seeing and hearing whereof made Exod. 19. Heb. 12.18, 19, 21. Moses to say, I exceedingly feare and tremble. And if you thinke these be not vrged to leade vs or draw vs to re­pentance, then consider I beseech you, what vse and application the Apostle makes hereof, euen vnto all the faithfull, in the words following: 2 Pet. 3.11. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolued, what manner of persons ought we to be in all holy conuersation and godlinesse. Now for conclusion of this point; Let vs heare how the Author to the Hebrewes doth vrge vs, To prouoke one another to loue and to good workes. This he doth, not only by the boldnesse or liberty which we haue to enter into the Holiest by the Heb. 10.19. bloud of Iesus, but also by [Page 71] the Heb. 10.27. looking for of judgement, and fiery indignation, which shall deuoure the aduersaries. And this he enfor­ceth further, not only by an allusion, but by a mani­fest allegation of Moses Law. Heb. 10.28, 29. He that despised Mo­ses Law, died without mercy, vnder two or three witnes­ses. Of how much sorer punishment shall he be thought wor­thy, who hath trodden vnder foot the Sonne of God, &c. For we know him that hath said, Heb. 10.30.31. Vengeance belongeth vnto me, I will recompence, saith the Lord: and againe, The Lord shall judge his people. It is a fearefull thing to fall into the hands of the liuing God.

And this shall suffice for answer to your third gene­rall Argument, drawen from the practise of the Apo­stles in all their Epistles.

Your fourth Argument is this: Argument. 4 Antinomus. ‘Wheresoeuer the Holy Ghost handleth the abrogation of the Law, there is neuer any exception of the Morall.’

This is vtterly vntrue; Answer. for where the Holy Ghost handleth the abrogation of the Law, it is either first,The abrogation of the Law hand­led diuers waies. First, in the mat­ter of Saluation. Secondly, in the matter of justifi­cation. in the matter of Saluation, as Acts 15.1, 10. and there in the same Chapter, the Morall Law is excepted, because abstaining from Idolatries and Fornication (being breaches of the first and second Table of the Morall Law) is there inioined as from things of necessity to be refrained, Acts 15.28. Or secondly, in the matter of justification, as Rom. 3.28. We conclude, saith the Apo­stle, that a man is justified by faith without the workes of the Law: and yet there also vnto that obiection [Doe we then make void the Law through faith] he answereth as it were with detestation, God forbid, yea we establish the Law, Rom. 3.31. So in the like Argument, in the Epistle to the Galathians, where he doth vtterly abo­lish the Law for righteousnesse, in the Gal. 2.16. Rom. 3.28, 31. act of justifi­cation, he doth yet establish the vse of the Morall Law, for leading a godly and Christian life, when he telleth vs, that Faith Gal. 5.6. worketh by loue, and by loue we are bound to Gal. 5.13. serue one another, and the rule of loue [Page 72] is the Morall Law, which he there vrgeth, as a bond euen now in full force and vertue, binding all Christi­ans to obedience, when he addeth this reason: For all the Gal. 3.14. Law is fulfilled in one word, euen in this, Thou shalt loue thy neighbour as thy selfe, Leuit. 19.18. Matt. 22.39. And is not this an euident exception of the Morall Law made by the Holy Ghost, and that euen in the same Epistle, nay in the same Chapter, where he hand­leth the abrogation of the Law also?Thirdly, the abrogation of the Law is handled, as it was a wall of partition. Or thirdly, the Holy Ghost handleth the abrogation of the Law, as it was a wall of Ephes. 2.13, 14, 15. partition betwixt Iewes and Gentiles, as Ephes. 2.13, 14, 15. and yet in the same Epistle he requireth and vrgeth the duties of the Morall Law; as, Ephes. 4.24, 25, 26, 28. Cast off lying and speake the truth: Be angry and sinne not: Labour with your hands and steale not: Ephes. 5.2, 3, 4, 5, 6. Walke in loue and hate not: flie fornication and all vncleannesse and name it not: And all this to be done vpon promise and penalty, as euer they will haue any inheritance in the kingdome of God, or auoid the danger of the wrath of God. Nay further, to cut off all occasion of cauill, as if one should obiect, That these duties are not vrged for obedience to the Morall Law, but to the Gospell, the Apostle by a special direction of the Holy Ghost, doth in expresse words (exhorting children to obey their Parents) make mention of the Ephes. 6.1, 2. first Comman­dement with promise, and setteth downe both precept and promise out of the Morall Law, as yet of speciall force to draw them thereunto: And yet we doe not say, that these duties are either so vrged vpon vs, or performed by vs, as duties of the Law for righteous­nesse, to liue by them, Rom. 10.5. but as fruits of the righteousnesse of faith in the Gospell, discerned and measured by the Law, yet not by the rigour, but by the Rom. 12.2. & 13.8, 9. tenor of it, offered also and accepted only in the obe­dience of Christ Iesus, who according to his Couenant, hath put his Heb. 8.10. & 10.16. Lawes in our mindes, and written them by the finger of his Spirit, not in Tables of stone, but [Page 73] in the 2 Cor. 3.3. fleshy Tables of our hearts, That (as the Apostle speaketh) the righteousnesse of the Law might be Rom. 8.1, 4. fulfilled in vs who walke not after the flesh, but after the spirit: Or fourthly,Fourthly, the abrogation of the Law is handled, touching Iewish obseruation. the abrogation of the Law is handled, as touching Col. 2.16, 17. Iewish and superstitious obser­uations, Col. 2.16, 17. and typicall signification sha­dowing Heb. 10.1. forth good things to come, as Hebr. 10.1. And yet in both these Epistles, where the law of car­nall Commandements, i. the Ceremoniall Law, is cancelled and abolished, the Commandements of the Law which is spirituall (namely the Morall Law) are confirmed and established, as euidently appeareth by the plentifull and powerfull exhortations and injuncti­ons, for the performance of both generall and speciall duties of the Morall Law. As for example, Col. 3.14. Col. 3.12, 14. Aboue all things put on loue, which is the bond of per­fectnesse. Heb. 10.24. Heb. 10.24. Let vs consider one another to prouoke vnto lsue and good workes: And Rom. 13.8, 9. loue (you haue already heard) is the fulfilling of the Law; and when Gal. 5.6. faith worketh by loue, faith worketh by the rule of the Law; and he that walketh in loue, Gal. 6.16. wal­keth by the line of the Law: Which may yet be fur­ther seene, by those speciall duties of Superiours and inferiours appertaining to the fift Commandement; as of husbands and wiues, parents and children, gouer­nours and seruants, Col. 3. & 4. and Heb. 13. men­tioned and vrged out of the Morall Law, in both places.

By this time you may perceiue, that euen in the same places, where the Holy Ghost handleth the abro­gation of the Law, there is (contrary to your assertion) some exception of the Morall Law. Nay I say more, that wheresoeuer the Holy Ghost handleth the full and finall abrogation of the Law, for all exercise in Gods worship or vse in the Church of Christ, there he euer giueth instance in the Ceremoniall Law, and neuer either mentioneth or meaneth the Morall Law. And [Page 74] againe, where he handleth the abrogation of the Law, only in some circumstances, or for some particular ends or vses, he sometimes ioineth the Morall and the Ce­remoniall Aug. in Epist. ad Galat. cap. 3. Calu. in Rom. 3.20. both together, as Rom. 3. and Gal. 2. & 3. Rom. 3.28. By the workes of the Law (whether Morall or Cere­moniall) Gal. 3.16. no flesh shall be justified. Gal. 3.19. The Law was gi­uen because of transgressions. Gal. 3.24. The Law was our Schoole­master vnto Christ. Take then whether of these you like best. If in handling the full and finall abrogation of the Law, you say, there is no exception of the Mo­rall, and thereupon inferre, that the whole Morall Law is wholly abrogated; why may not I as well conclude the cleane contrary, In handling the full and finall abrogation of the Law, there is no mention made of the Morall, therefore the whole Morall Law is not wholly abrogated, but rather established and confir­med. And if you say, that in handling the abrogation of the Law, touching some circumstances only, or some particular ends or vses, there is no exception of Morall, and therefore the whole Morall Law is wholly abolished; then I say, that your Antecedent is too weake to inferre this Consequent, and fitter a great deale to serue my turne against you (if it be of any force at all) in this conclusion; ergo, The Morall Law in some circumstances, and for some ends and vses on­ly, is abrogated: and so you faile of your proofe and purpose, labouring thereby to proue, that the whole Morall Law is wholly abolished.

Argument. 5 Let vs now see if your fift Argument be of any bet­ter proofe or power, for the vtter abolishing of the Mo­rall Law.

Antinomus. ‘Moses Law was giuen only to the Iewes, Exod. 19.3, 4. &c. and 20.2, 12. Deut. 4.1. and 5.1. with di­uers other Testimonies to the same purpose, ergo, The whole Morall Law is wholly now abolished.’

Answer. I answer, first, If by Moses Law, you meane the whole body and bulke of the Ceremoniall, Iudiciall, [Page 75] and Morall Law, and also, that both for circumstance and substance, tearme and time, end and vse, persons and things, it was thus giuen to the Iewes only: then is this your Antecedent false; for howsoeuer these were first and principally charged and imposed vpon the Iewes, as his Exod. 19.5. peculiar people; the Zanch. in Hos. cap. 2.44.45. Ceremonials for Gods worship, the Iudicials for ciuill gouernment, and the Morall Law for some speciall circumstances and vses, more binding that people vnto God in the forme of a Couenant, than any other people in the world besides: Yet were not all Exod. 12.38. Vide August. Ep. 49. quaest. 2. Cum enim nonnulli com­memorantur, &c. other people or persons so excluded or debarred, but that if they did renounce their Idolatry, and would become Proselytes, entertaining the Exod. 12.44, 48, 49. See Beza in Mart. 23.15. of Prose­lytes. [...]. Rajn. Thes. 4. pag. 113. Iewish Religion, they were receiued into the fellowship of the Couenant, and that by Gods speciall Commandement, and made partakers of the Seales and benefits thereof, together with the Iewes accordingly. So were the mixt multitude that came out of Egypt with the Israelites, the seruant bought with money, and the stranger and sojourner, were ad­mitted to the Passeouer (if they would first be circum­cised) and then they were accepted into the Church, as if they had beene borne in the land. Exod. 12.49. One Law shall be to him that is home borne and to the stranger that sojourneth amongst you, and that not only for the Ce­remoniall, but euen for the Morall also, as is expresly set downe in the fourth Commandement, where both Magistrate in Assembly and Master of a family stand charged, to looke that the Exod. 20.10. stranger within the gates doe keepe holy the Sabbath day.

Secondly, If by the Law of Moses you meane the Doctrine of Moses, which as a holy Prophet he hath written and set downe vpon record in his fiue Bookes, and which Christ himselfe alledgeth by the name of the Law of Luk. 24.44. Moses, as testifying of himselfe and his suffe­rings, Luke 24.44. I say, the Law of Moses in this sense, was giuen as well vnto vs of the Gentiles, as to [Page 76] them of the Iewes, seeing Whatsoeuer is Rom. 15.4. written, is written for our instruction and edification: And Paul himselfe made this vse of the Act. 28.23, 28, 30, 31. Law, when being at Rome, vnto such as came vnto his lodging, He expoun­ded and testified the kingdome of God, perswading them concerning Iesus, both out of the Puerilis error est (saith Fla [...]. Illyric.) libros legales nihil continere quod ad Euang [...]lium spe­ctat suspicari. Clau. Scrip. par. 2. p. 30. Law of Moses, and out of the Prophets; and this he did not only to the Iewes, but to the Gentiles also, Acts 28.30, 31.

Thirdly, If by the Law of Moses, you meane the Ceremoniall obseruations which Moses by Comman­dement from the Lord, prescribed to the Iewes, as the manner and forme of his solemne Worship, and as Fi­gures and Types of good things to come in Christ (as the Euangelists and Apostles doe vsually, when they Act. 15.5. & 13.38. Luk. 2.22. speake of the Law of Moses) then I say, The Law of Moses in this sense, was giuen vnto the Iewes only, not only as a partition wall betwixt them and the Gen­tiles, but as a yoke to restraine them, a Col. 2.13, 14, 15. hand-writing to conuince and condemne them, and as a sharpe and seuere Gal. 3.24. Schoolemaster, to driue them to seeke for helpe and Mal. 4.2. healing vnder his wings, who was and is, the Ioh. 1.17. truth of those types, and Col. 2.17. substance of those Heb. 10.1. sha­dowes, Christ Iesus. But the Law of Moses in this sense, will doe you but little seruice, to the drawing in of your conclusion, for the vtter abolishing of the Mo­rall Law.

Fourthly, If by the Law of Moses, you vnderstand the Morall Law or Ten Commandements (as needs you must, if you will dispute ad idem, or speake to any purpose) then why might you not as well haue set it so downe, and dealt plainly, as wrap vp your meaning in such ambiguity and obscurity, and that not only in this Argument, but in fiue or six of those also which follow after? We will then take your Argument, as we thinke you intend it,Antinomus. to be this: The Morall Law was giuen only to the Iewes; ergo, The Morall Law in the Church of Christ, since the death of Christ, is [Page 77] wholly abolished. If the Antecedent were sound, Answer. the consequent would doe well enough to serue your turne. But how doe you proue that the Morall Law was giuen only to the Iewes? I must guesse at your proofes by your places which you quote (as I con­ceiue) for this purpose; for you put me to fish for your meaning, out of ‘Exod. 19.3, 4, and Exod. 20.2, 12.Antinomus. Deut. 4.1. and 5.1. and 7.6. and 14.2. and 26.16. and 33.4. Psal. 147.19, 20. Psal. 103.7. Psa. 81.4, 5, 8.’ All which places I haue searcht, and seene, and will now tell you what I haue found by fishing in them. That of Exod. 19.2, 3,Exod. 19.1, 2, 3, 4, 5. &c. you seeme to vrge on this manner; ‘Moses had charge from God to speake to the house of Iacob and to the children of Israel: If yee will obey my voice and keepe my Couenant, then yee shall be a peculiar treasure vnto me aboue all people, and yee shall be vnto me a kingdome of priests and an holy nation; and hereupon you would inferre, that the Morall Law was giuen vnto the Iewes only. Answer. ’ That the Morall Law for the manner of deliuery, promulgation, and diuers circumstances, of persons, times, places, and forme of Legall Couenant, was peculiar to the Iewish Nation, we doe now againe (as often before) most wil­lingly acknowledge. Moses was to the Iewes a Deut. 18.18. Pro­phet to teach them, a Ioh. 1.17. Lawgiuer to gouerne them, a messenger and Gal. 3.10, 19. Mediator to deale betwixt God and them, Gal. 3.10, 19. a rigorous exactor of absolute obedience, a Heb. 2.2. & 10. seuere auenger of all disobedience,28, 29. yea he was a mi­nister of 2 Cor. 3.7, 9, 14. condemnation to all them that could not see through the veile that was vpon his face, into the end of the Law Christ Iesus; and thus the Iewes euen vn­till this day (the veile remaining yet vpon their hearts in the reading of the Old Testament) will needs be Ioh. 9.28. Moses disciples still. But as thus the Law was giuen vnto them by Moses, so was Iob. 1.17. grace and truth, with the true end and vse of the Law, brought vnto vs by Christ Iesus, who being our Act. 3, 22, 23. Prophet, Iam. 4.12. Lawgiuer, [Page 78] Act. 5.31. Prince, and Heb. 8.1. Priest, Malac. 3.1. Messenger, and Heb. 8.6. Mediator of a better Couenant, our Heb. 7.22. surety, and Matt. 1.21. Sauiour from all our sinnes, hath redeemed vs from this Iewish Paeda­gogie and bondage Gal. 4.4. of the Law, and yet hath accor­ding to his Couenant, Heb. 8.10. put his lawes into our mindes, and written them in our hearts, by the finger 2 Cor. 3.3. of his spirit, and reckoneth and accounteth vs (as much as euer he did the Iewes) to be now his 1 Pet. 2.9, 10. peculiar people, a chosen generation, a royall priesthood, or a kingdome of priests, a holy nation, his 2 Cor. 6.18. sonnes and daughters, children of Abraham according to the Rom. 9.7, 8. faith, though not according to the flesh, Heb. 8.8. the house of Iacob, the house of Iudah, and Gal. 6.16. the Israel of God. By which titles, dignities, and priuiledges, the Apostles Peter and Paul and others, doe call vs of the Gentiles, to obey the Commandements of the Morall Law, euen now in the daies of the Gospell, as Moses did the Iewes in the place which you alledge (Exod. 19.2, 3, 4, 5.) by the same meanes at the giuing of the Law. For example, because we are a 1 Pet. 2.9, 12. compare with Exod. 19.2, 3, 4, 5. and Tit. 2.14. with Deut. 7.7. and Ezek. 36.26, 27. with Iam. 2.8, 10, 12. chosen generation, a royall priest­hood, &c. therefore we must be of honest conuersation, 1 Pet. 2.9, 12. because we are his peculiar people, therefore we must be zealous of good workes, Tit. 2.14. because we are the Israel of God, we must therefore walke according to this rule; because he hath put his lawes and his spirit in our hearts, therefore we must so speake and so doe, as they that shall be judged by the Law of liberty. Of all these we may say, as S. Iohn 1 Ioh. 2.7. saith of the Commandement of loue, (which is the summe of the Law) Brethren, we write no new Commandement vn­to you, but the old Commandements which yee had from the beginning. These are no new Commandements of the Gospell, but the old Commandements of the Mo­rall Law renewed in the Gospell: In which respect, we may say againe with S. Iohn, 1 Ioh. 2.8. A new Commande­ment, or, these are new Commandements, which we write vnto you: And as Christ Ioh. 13.34. himselfe said in the [Page 79] same sense, A new Commandement giue I vnto you, that yee loue one another: which yet was an old Commande­ment, enioined by Leuit. 19.18. Moses in the Morall Law, and now only renewed and reenforced by Christ in the Gospell, who came not (as you imagine) Matt. 5.17. to destroy the Morall Law, but to fulfill it, to repaire the breaches and renew the beauty of it: These things thus consi­dered, we say plainly, That whatsoeuer appertained vnto Moses his literall, carnall, legall, personall, and terrible ministration, or promulgation of the Morall Law, that, together with all the circumstances thereof, was peculiar to the Iewes only, and we now make no claime to any part or parcell of it: But whatsoeuer was then in the Decalogue or Deut. 1.13. Ten words of God, substantiall, morall, spirituall, just, and good, teaching and prescribing all duties of Matt. 22.37, 38, 39, 40. loue to God and man; that, we say (for ought yet we see) is Matt. 5.18. perpetuall, and remaineth still Rom. 13.8, 9, 10. in force and vse for Iam. 2.12. vs, as the Morall Law of God, recorded by Moses as a Ioh. 5.46, 47. pen-man of the Holy Ghost, expounded by the Matt. 22.40. Prophets, Matt. 3.15. & 5.17. ful­filled, Matt. 5.19, 22, 28, 34, 39, 44. renewed, and Ioh. 13.34. established by Matt. 5.19. Christ him­selfe; Act. 28.23. preached and Rom. 7. & 13. Iam. 2.10, pressed by the holy Apostles, vpon 11, 12. all that beare the name of Christ and professe the Gospell, and so further to be published and vrged by the Matt. 28.20. See Bez. Epist. Theol. Ep. 20.104. Ministers of the Gospell, as occasion shall re­quire, euen vnto the Matt. 28.20. See Bez. Epist. Theol. Ep. 20.104. end of the world. Neither doe we now receiue the Morall Law as Moses disciples, to the same end, and vpon the same tearmes as did the Iewes; but as the disciples of Christ, who is our Iam. 4.12. Law­giuer, who hath taken away the 2 Cor. 3.14. veile from Moses his face, and hath so reuealed by his spirit, both the image of God, and the good and acceptable Rom. 12.2. will of God in the Morall Law, through the Eph. 5.8, 9, 10. light of the Gospell; that now we all as with open 2 Cor. 3.17, 18. face beholding (as in a glasse) the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory; and being enabled by his spirit, which he hath (according to his Ezek. 36.26, 27. 2 Cor. 3.17. Coue­nant) [Page 80] put within vs, to walke in his statutes, and to doe his will; we delight in the Law of God after the in­ward man. Rom. 7.22. and shew our loue to God in keeping his Ioh. 14.15. Commandements, which now are not 1 Ioh. 5.3. grieuous, as they were in the letter to the Iewes, but easie and Matt. 11.30. light, as Christ hath made them by his spi­rit vnto vs; they being driuen and enforced to obedi­ence by the spirit of Rom. 8.15. bondage and feare, we drawne and allured thereunto by the 2 Cor. 3.17. spirit of liberty and loue; they vnder the Morall Law as a Law of Gal. 3.24. cruell tyranny, and we vnder it only as vnder a Iam. 2.8, 12. royall Law of liberty: So that as the Ioh. 4.42. Samaritans, which formerly had beleeued the report of the woman, concerning Christ the Sauiour of the world, when once they heard him themselues, said vnto her; Now we beleeue, not because of thy saying, for we haue heard him our selues, and know that this indeed is the Christ the Saui­our of the world: So may we say concerning our obedi­ence to the Morall Law; Now we obey, not because Moses did in that manner and measure charge and command the Iewes to keepe the Morall Law; but, because we haue heard the Law-giuer himselfe, whose voice then Heb. 12.26, 27. shooke the earth, and hath yet once more shaken not only the earth but the heauen (in remouing those things that may be shaken) confirming the Mo­rall Law vnto vs, Matt. 5.22, 28, 34, clearing it from the false glosses of the Pharisies, 39, 44. opening the true meaning of it to his disciples, requiring a 2 Cor. 8, 12. 2 Cor. 9.7. willing and vpright, not an absolute and perfect obedience vnto it, and giuing Phil. 2.13. 2 Cor. 9.8. 2 Cor. 8.16. ability to doe what he requires, vnto all that beleeue, and obey the Gospell; and yet further, both threatning a Matt. 5.19. judgement vnto all whosoeuer they be, that shall wilfully breake one of the least of the Commande­ments, and shall teach others so; and promising a bles­sing vnto all that shall willingly doe them, and teach the same to other men accordingly.

Antinomus.But it may be, you thinke the Morall Law was [Page 81] giuen to the Iewes only, because there be some reasons (vrged to enforce obedience thereunto) which may seeme to belong only vnto that people and no other, to which purpose (as I conceiue) you alledge Exod. 20.2, 12. where mention is made of their deliuerance out of Egypt, and their inheritance in the land of Canaan. To this I answer, That we doe not deny, but, Answer. as the Morall Law was deliuered both by word and writing to the Iewes as then they stood, there were in it some things, touching the personall estate and condition of that people, which were temporall and peculiar to that people only. Such was the late blessing of God in their wonderfull deliuerance our of the land Exod. 20.2, 12. of Egypt, and out of the house of bondage, (being but Exod. 19.1. three monethes before the giuing of the Law) which being yet so fresh in their memories, and the remembrance thereof so sweet vnto them, was held in the wisdome of God (considering their dulnesse vnto holy duties) to be as a spurre, or a goad, to quicken them and pro­uoke them to yeeld obedience vnto the Morall Law, both in generall, (as in the Preface to the Law, in this and other places which you alledge) and in Deut. 5.14, 15. speciall to the fourth Commandement, in keeping of the Sab­bath day, Deut. 5.14, 15. And yet we know for cer­taine, that this reason taken from their deliuerance out of Egypt, was temporall only, and not perpetuall; both because the Lord doth charge the children of Israel, vpon their deliuerance out of the Babylonian captiuity, to say no more, The Lord liueth which brought vp the children of Israel Ier. 16.13, 14, 15. out of the land of Egypt, but, The Lord liueth which brought vp the chil­dren of Israel out of the land of the North: and also be­cause the deliuerance out of Egypt, being literally and personally taken in these places, could binde no more of the children of Israel to heare and obey the Law, but only them, that in their owne persons ware so de­liuered, and with their owne eares Exod. 20.1, 2. heard the voice of [Page 82] God, speaking all the words of the Law vnto them; and so, not only the force of this reason (taken from their deliuerance out of Egypt) but the Law it selfe also for which it is vrged, should both haue fallen together with the carkases of those that fell in the wildernesse, seeing Num. 14.29, 30. not one of all those that in their owne persons were deliuered out of Egypt, and heard the voice of the Lord in the giuing of the Law (except Caleb and Iosuah) did euer enter into the holy Land. You see then, that the particular conueniency of this reason, taken from their deliuerance out of Egypt, will not binde the Morall Law in absolute propriety to the Iewes, nei­ther only,☜ nor alwaies: And also, that, not so much the speciall quality of the benefit, as the generall equity of the same,See Muscul. loc. com. in Explicat. primi praecepti. is to be weighed and considered in this reason: for if corporall deliuerances were, or else might haue beene of some force to draw carnall Israel to heare and obey the Morall Law; why are not, or ought not spirituall deliuerances be of like effect and power, to preuaile with all Beleeuers, the Rom. 9.6. Gal. 6.16. true Israel of God, to the same purpose? And who doubteth, but a Minister of the Gospell, to draw the people of God to performe the duties of piety and charity in the first and second Table, might by analogy and like equi­ty, preach and proclaime; Thus faith the Lord, heare ô Israel, I am the Lord thy God, which haue deliuered thee from the Col. 1.13. power of darknesse, and translated thee into the kingdome of the Sonne of my loue: Thou shalt haue no 1 Cor. 8.6. other Gods before me, &c. Especially, seeing there was neuer any Ioh. 3.16. mercy matchable with this mercy; neuer 1 Ioh. 4.9. Ioh. 15.13. any loue like vnto this loue, the Lord being more Rom. 5.8. gracious and glorious in this de­liuerance, than in any other since the beginning of the world whatsoeuer. And yet in so doing, (for ought I see) he should not offer any violence to the Morall Law, not any wrong to the Lawgiuer, no more than if he had said, Heare ô Christians, The Tit. 2.11. grace of God that [Page 83] bringeth saluation to all men hath appeared, and teacheth vs, that denying vngodlinesse and worldly lusts, we should liue soberly, and righteously, and godly, in this present world, which is the summe Armin. disput. de peccato actua. thes. 8. sect. 4. and substance of the whole Morall Law.

As for that promise of long life and prosperity,Exod. 20.12. annexed to the fifth Commandement, Exod. 20.12. which Antinomus. you vrge, as if it were appropriated only to the Land of Canaan, that you might binde fast the Mo­rall Law vnto the Iewes onely; The Apostle Paul, Answer. Ephes. 6.2. shall giue you (vpon the same ground of generall equity) an effectuall and full answer there­unto. For, pressing and perswading there, diuers du­ties of the Morall Law, he requireth and allureth children to honour and obey their Parents, both by precept and by promise of the first Commandement of the second Table: Children, saith he,Ephes. 6.1, 2. obey your Parents in the Lord, for this is right: Honor thy father and mo­ther, which is the first Commandement with promise, that it may be well with thee, and thou maiest liue long on the earth. The precept he setteth downe in the same words, as it is written in the Law, Exod. 20.12. The promise he a little changeth, not in the substance and quality of it, but in the circumstance of persons and place, and that according to the rule of generall equity and conueniency, for the better vnderstanding and en­ioying of the same. The substance and quality of the promise, to such children as honour and obey their Pa­rents, is one and the same, be they Iewes or Gentiles, viz. long life and a prosperous estate in this world, and this is perpetuall as the precept it selfe is. The cir­cumstances of persons and place, are different in both places. For in the giuing of the Law, Exod. 20.12.Exod. 20.12. the promise was at that time directed to the people of the Iewes, to be made good in the Land of Canaan; running in this tenor, That thy daies may be long in the Land which the Lord thy God giueth thee. But in the [Page 84] renewing and applying of the Law, in and since the dayes of Christ, the promise is directed to all belee­uers, both Iewes and Gentiles, as the Apostle doth here deliuer it to the Ephesians in these tearmes, That it may be well with thee, and that thou maist liue long (not only in Canaan or in Ephesus) but on the earth, i. whatsoeuer thy estate, or wheresoeuer thy abiding be. How opposite and contrary to the Apostles judgement and dealing, is your position and opinion? You will needs wholly abolish the whole Morall Law, the Apo­stle doth establish it; you will needs haue it to be giuen to the Iewes only, the Apostle saith it belongeth to the Gentiles also; you will needs abolish the pre­cept, because of some circumstance wanting now in the promise, the Apostle passing by or letting fall the circumstance, (as temporall) preserueth and main­taineth the substance and equity of them both as per­petuall; you will needs restraine and confine the blessing of long and happy daies vnto Canaan, the Apostle doth extend and enlarge it to euery City and Countrey, to euery corner and quarter of the earth, euen ouer the vniuersall world.

Let this suffice for answer to the scriptures which you haue brought out of the 19. and 20. Chapters of Exodus; Antinomus. as for the rest which you heape vp out of Deuteronomy and the Psalmes, to the number of a do­zen more (being all one in substance with the former) and diuers of them the very same in the same words: Me thinks you deale as wisely herein, Answer. as if hauing of­fered to pay a shilling in two sixpences, you should (to shew your store of siluer) draw out twelue single pence also, to discharge the summe, as reckoning the payment to be better in many peeces than in few; be­cause the shew and flourish is not so great in few, as in many. But seeing it is so ordinary with you to deli­uer in your Scriptures, and Testimonies, by number, rather than by measure, and so to carry out or couer an [Page 85] error, with some colour and shew of truth, I will fol­low you no further in this maze, but either put you ouer for answer vnto that which I haue answered to the former of like nature, or else giue you ouer to runne round in your owne circle, vntill you waxe giddy with your owne conceit, and course, as many others of like temper haue done before you. Those which you al­ledge out of the New Testament, some of them are flat against you, and not one of them will proue your point, ‘That the Morall Law was giuen to the Iewes only.’ That of Matthew 10.6. I send, and 15.24.Matt. 10.6. Matt. 15.24. See Calu Instit. li. 2. cap. 11. sect. 12. I am not sent but vnto the lost sheepe of the house of Is­rael, would serue with greater shew of probability, to proue that the Gospell was not sent vnto the Gentiles, than that the Law was giuen only to the Iewes: How­beit, the meaning of Christ is not to binde himselfe or the Gospell only to the Iewes, and to exclude the Gen­tiles, but that for his personall ministration he was first, and so they Act. 13.46. principally to offer the bread of life to the Iewes being Gods children, and so to seeke the lost sheepe of the house of Israel. And albeit he com­manded his Apostles for a season, that they should not go into the way of the Gentiles, but vnto the lost sheepe of the house of Israel, yet after his resurrection, when he renew­ed their commission, he gaue them in charge, to goe and teach Matt. 28.19, 20. all Nations, baptizing them in the name of the Fa­ther, the Sonne, and the Holy Ghost. The Apostles were first indeed to offer the food of the Gospell vnto the Iewes, but when they as wanton or wicked children turned away their food from them, they waxed bold, and said, Loe, Act. 13.46. we turne vnto the Gentiles; that the Prophecy of Isaiah might so be fulfilled in all this; Out of Isa. 2.3. Sion shall goe forth a Law, and the word of the Lord from Ierusalem, Isaiah 2.3.

As for that of Acts 14.16. How doth this follow?Antinomus. The Lord in times past suffered all Nations to walke in their owne waies, Ergo, the Morall Law was giuen to [Page 86] the Iewes only, for the time past, and not vnto vs of the Gentiles for the time present. Answer. For although the Gentiles had not the Law Rom. 2.15. written in Tables of stone, to teach them to walke in the waies of God, so euident­ly as the Iewes had; yet had they the effect of the Law written in their hearts in times past; but now since the daies of the Gospell, the beleeuers of the Gentiles haue the same Morall Law written in the fleshy 2 Cor. 3.3. Ta­bles of their heart, by the finger of Gods Spirit, with much clearer light Act. 2.17, 18. of knowledge in their mindes, and much greater power of grace in their hearts Heb. 8.10, 11. and liues, than euer the Iewes that first had it written in Tables of stone had. For proofe whereof, if other Scriptures were silent, yet those which you produce for your selfe, will speake enough to serue my turne, Rom. 7.14. and 3.19. and 9.4, 5, 6, 7, 8. Hebr. 1.2, 2. For, if the Morall Law be Rom. 7.14. spirituall, if it Rom. 3.19. conuince the whole world as guilty before God, if it belong vn­to the true Rom. 9.4, 5, 6, 7, 8. Israel, the children of Abraham, Rom. 9.6, 7. compared with Hebr. 8.10. and if God hath in these last daies spoken Heb. 1.1, 2. more plainly, and opened his will more effectually by his Sonne, (as the Scrip­tures you alledge beare witnesse with me) then haue we that are beleeuers of the Gentiles, the Morall Law of God, both in a clearer light of 1 Ioh. 2.27. knowledge in our mindes, and in a greaterPhil. 1.9, 10, 11. power of grace in our hearts and liues, than euer the body of the people of the See Muscul. loc. com. de leg. cap. de lege spiritus, & Vrsin. de lege diui­na. p. 278, 279. Iewes had, which if it be true, then haue you spunne a faire threed, who drawing out a line, and twisting a cord, to binde the Morall Law vpon the Iewes on­ly, haue (before you were aware) made them both of that length, and strength, that they reach vnto, and binde it vpon the Gentiles also.

I come now vnto the Testimonies of learned men, whose names and writings you pretend for your cause, and peruert, to your owne purpose, as being of the same minde, and wrapt in the same error with you, [Page 87] ‘That the Morall Law was giuen to the Iewes only.’ But take heed whilst you beare men in hand, that you haue witnesse from them, lest vpon due search, you your selfe be found to beare false witnesse against them. Let vs make triall of your dealing with some of the most judicious and religious of them. And first, for Caluine, I haue read the Epistle, Calu. Epist. 58. That Christ is the end of the Law; but as you cite no sentence, so can I finde no syllable to proue that the Morall Law was giuen to the Iewes only; he that must finde out what you set him to seeke, especially in so large a field, had need to plow with your heifer, and to haue some more particular markes of your meaning, to lead him thereunto. But although I found not what I sought, yet in seeking, I found what I there sought not, viz. That Caluine speaking of the Ceremonies and Sacri­fices of the Law, hath these words: Lex nihil adduxit ad pèrfectionem, tantum instar Gal. 3.24. paedagogi, dirigebat & deducebat ad Christum, qui legis ipsius finis Rom. 10.4. est & complementum, vt tradit Apostolus. Now it may be, that you finding these words in Caluine, (that Christ is the end of the Law) did imagine that Christ had made an vtter end of the Morall as well as of the Ce­remoniall Law, either not knowing or not obseruing that there is an Christus, finis perficiens, non in­terficiens. Aug. in Ioh. Tract. 55. end of accomplishment, as well as an end of abolishment. Christ hath both accomplished and abolished the Ceremoniall Law; the Morall Law he hath accomplished but not abolished. That which See Calu. Ep. 58. was imperfect in both, touching the Legall Coue­nant for righteousnesse by the workes of both, is abo­lished in both, and only perfected in him, who for righteousnesse is the end of both, CHRIST IESVS, to all that beleeue in his name, Rom. 10.4. Vpon which place, Paraeus in Rom. 10.14. Paraeus hath these words: Consens [...] legis & Christi hinc apparet, & errant qui putant legem repug­nare Christo, Christum abol [...] legem: Hence appea­reth, saith he, the consent of the Law and Christ; and [Page 88] they are deceiued that thinke the Law is contrary vnto Christ, or that Christ doth abolish the Law.

Antinomus.Your next quotation of Caluine Rom. 3.19. telleth vs, ‘That whereas the Iewes would needs put off all those rebukes and threats of the Law, from themselues vnto the Gentiles, the Apostle doth there apply the Law to them particularly; Calu. in Rom. 3.19. Ne ad solas Gentes restringant, quae in ipsos promiscuè competunt, Lest they should restraine vnto the Gentiles only, those things which did belong vn­to them both together.’ Answer. Now, as there the Iewes were blamed for restraining the Law vnto the Gentiles, so are you here to be rebuked, for restraining the Law vn­to the Iewes only, especially out of this place, where the Law is said to Rom. 3.19. [...]. stop euery mouth, i. to conuince both Iewes and Gentiles of sinne, in such a manner as that they can haue nothing to plead for their clearing or just defence, and not only so, but to hold fast the whole world as liable to Gods curse for the breach of it. If you haue aduisedly read the other Calu. Instit. lib. 2. cap. 1. sect. 1. & li. 2. cap. 11. sect. 11. places and Chapters of Caluine, Instit. lib. 2. cap. 1. & lib. 2. nay if you haue but read the very contents of the Chapters, and 13.14.16. and 17. sections, you cannot but sinne against knowledge and conscience too, in citing these places as making for you, which stand in open force and fight against you. For albeit Caluine doth acknow­ledge, that both the Morall and Ceremoniall Law were giuen vnto the Iewes, which no man doth deny; yet doth he not say, that the Morall Law was giuen vnto the Iewes only, which is that which you affirme. And although he grant, as we doe, that the Cere­moniall Law is now by Christ abolished, yet doth he manifestly proue, that the Morall Law doth yet continue and retaine some speciall force See Bez. Theol. Ep. Ep. 20. p. 103.104. and vse still, which is that which you deny. I referre you to the same Booke of his Calu. Instit. lib. 2. cap. 7. sect. 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. Institutions which you al­ledge, and section 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. of the seuenth Chapter.

Ad Sacramenta pertinent, Circum­cisio carnis, Sabba­tum temporale, ne­omenia: Ad mores autem, non occides, non machaberis. Augustine in Galat. 3. hath nothing that I can finde, to proue that the Morall Law was giuen to the Iewes only: something he hath to the cleane contrary. For distinguishing the workes of the Law, into Cere­moniall and Morall, Nunquid ergo potest Apostolus non curare, &c. Aug. in Gal. 3. he demandeth, whether the Apostle could as little care, whether a Christian were a murtherer, an adulterer; whether he were chaste, and innocent, as he careth not, whether he be circumci­sed, or vncircumcised in the flesh? By which his de­mand it may euidently appeare, that howsoeuer he thought the workes of the Ceremoniall Law were now ceased, yet he thought also, that the workes of the Morall Law were now to be practised, and so the Morall Law it selfe not to be giuen to the Iewes only, but still to be continued amongst Christians also. See Aug. contr. Advers. leg. & proph. lib. 2. cap. 7.

Erasmus in his Paraph. in Gal. 3.14. speaketh of the Ceremoniall Law, which he faith, was giuen vn­to the Iewes, as a Schoolemaster to a rude people; Vt paulatim proficientes ad Christum perducerentur, à quo solo veram expectarent justitiam, pristinis diffisi cere­monijs. And how will this proue, that the Morall Law was giuen vnto the Iewes only? But doth he Erasm. on Rom. 2.14, 15. not say in his Paraphrase on Romans 2. that the Gentiles were à lege Mosaica alienae? Yes he doth, and he tels you what he meaneth, when he addeth; Nullo Mosaicae le­gis praescripto monebantur, but only had rem legis, non tabulis sed mentibus inscriptam: Antinomus. ‘They were not admo­nished what to doe, and what to leaue vndone, by any prescript of Moses, but only had the substance or ef­fect of the Law engrauen, not in Tables, but in their hearts.’ And what of all this? Answer. Is this a good Argu­ment, The Gentiles that were strangers from the life of God, were strangers from the written Law of God; Ergo, The Morall Law was giuen vnto the Iewes only, and not vnto vs Christians of the Gentiles, no more than vnto those that were without God and without [Page 90] Christ before vs? Ad Graecas Ca­lendas. When you proue this Argument to be good, I will acknowledge your skill to be grea­ter, and your cause to be better, than it doth yet proue to be. The like answer and offer I make to the quota­tions out of Erasmus in Rom. 5.13. and 7.1.

Antinomus.That which you bring out of Zanch. de fide cap. 13. sect. 7. Zanch. de fide cap. 13. sect. 7. is spoken of Moses Law, opposed to the Gospell, as may appeare by the differences which there he setteth downe betwixt them, and so he saith it was giuen to the Iewes only. Answer. But you doe him wrong, to cite him for a witnesse to your bill put vp against the Morall Law, as belonging to the Iewes only, whereas in the very Zanch. de fide cap. 13. sect. 8. next section (which it seemes you tooke not paines to reade) he testifieth to all the world; That, in as much as the Doctrine of the Gospell requireth repentance and holinesse of life, and that we should liue soberly, Vide Caluin. Har. in 4. lib. Mosis p. 443. righteously, and godly in this present world; Eatenus etiam non tollit legem de moribus, so farre forth it doth not take away the Morall Law: and he giueth a good reason hereof, Tota enim consentanea est cum doctrina Euangelij de vitijs vitandis & virtutibus per­sequendis: For the Morall Law is wholly agreeable to the Doctrine of the Gospell, concerning the eschewing of vices, and ensuing of vertues.

Antinomus. Bucan. loc. 22. quaest. 18. Bucanus 22. loc. 18. q. saith, That the old Coue­nant did properly belong vnto Abraham, and his poste­rity the Israelites, but the New vnto all Nations. And what will you inferre hereupon? That the Mo­rall Law was giuen only to the Iewes, and doth not now at all belong vnto vs? If this be your Argument, I say, Answer. as you haue not changed your Bowe, so you haue chosen an arrow of the same flight and feather, with those which you haue shot before; as much able to hurt the sides of the Morall Law, as a rush is able to pierce a rocke. A strange man you are, and as strange a course you hold: there are few Diuines, that doe so fully and distinctly set downe the differences betwixt [Page 91] the Law and the Gospell, and the seuerall vses of the Morall Law, euen now amongst Christians, as Bucan. loc. 22. & loc. 19. & 20. & 21. Bu­canus doth, and yet dare you be so bold, as to piddle and picke out something out of his writings, (and those the very same, which testifie against you) as though he had giuen you his hand, or lent you his sword, to strike one stroake at least in your behalfe. Reade ouer Bucan. loc. 22. againe, and loc. 19. and 20. and 21. and tell me at your leasure, whether then you thinke him to be a man of your minde, for the vtter abolishing of the whole Morall Law: In the meane time, take I pray you, one note out of the same Bucan loc. 19. quaest. 28. Bucan. loc. 19. for your admonition. It is the error of the Let Antinomus view his face in this glasse. Antinomians and Libertines (saith he) to thinke that Christians haue now no vse of the Morall Law of God, nor that the Decalogue is to be preached in the Christian Church, because the faithfull are regene­rate by the spirit. I know not whether you be of this number, but I feare me you are much of their tem­per. Hiero. August. Tom. 2. pag. 341. Manichaeus & Marcion destruebant Legem, quam & sanctam, & spiritualem, juxta Apostolum novimus, saith Hierome.

Paraeus in Rom. 3.19. you haue mistaken; there is no­thing in that place to serue your turne: and Perkins in Gal. 3.23. hath beene cleared before. I only adde, that if you will be pleased to reade and receiue that which M^r. Perkins hath written vpon that Chapter, nay vpon that verse, touching the nature and vse of the Morall Law, I am of opinion, you will neuer looke hereafter, that M^r. Perkins will euer be brought to open his mouth in this businesse any more.

‘But Moses Law (you say in your sixt Argument) was giuen to continue till Christs death at the most,Antinomus. Argument. 6 Luk. 16.16. Rom. 7.1. Ergo, the whole Morall Law is now wholly abrogated and abolished.’ Answer. And I say for answer, That if by Moses Law you meane the Morall Law (as in the former Argument I haue shewen that [Page 92] you must and ought) then is your Antecedent false; if by Moses Law,August. contr. duas Epist. Pelag. ad Bonif. lib. 3. cap. 4. you vnderstand the whole body of the Ceremoniall, Iudiciall, and Morall Law, as it was giuen to the Iewes in that their estate of minority, and legall seruility, then I grant your Antecedent, and de­ny your Consequent. The Scripture which you al­ledge out of Luk. 16.16. (The Luc. 16.16. Law and the Pro­phets were vntill Iohn) may as well proue that the Prophets are now of no force,☞ as that the Morall Law is now of no vse. The meaning thereof is this; That whereas the Ioh. 5.16. Law and the Act. 3.24. Prophets did testifie, promise, signifie, and prophecie of Christ to come, and all this but more darkly Rom. 16.25, 26. and obscurely, few ta­king any great notice thereof vntill the daies of Iohn: yet now (Christ being come in Iohns daies) Iohn bea­reth better witnesse of his comming, not only seeing him with his owne eies, but shewing him, and Ioh. 1.29. poin­ting him out as it were with the finger vnto others, yea Ioh. 1.32, 33, 34, &c. See Calu. Instit. lib. 2. cap. [...].16. & cap. 11. sect. 5. preaching him to be the true Messiah, promised be­fore, now exhibited; figured in Ceremonies before more darkly, now manifested in his owne person more clearely; seene and sought after but of a few be­fore, but now so followed and flockt vnto, that since the time of Iohns preaching of the kingdome of God, The Luk. 16.16. Matt. 11.12. kingdome of God suffereth violence, and euery man presseth into it. This Scripture then may proue, that vpon Iohns preaching of Christ (Behold the Ioh. 1.29, 36. lambe of God, that taketh away the sinnes of the world) all Ceremonies and Prophecies, concerning Christ to come, were now accomplished, and the Morall Law by him, and in him alone, to be fulfilled, which we wil­lingly grant, but not, that ‘the Tertull. ex­pounding this place, Luk. 16.16. saith, Legis & Prophetarum ordo exindè cessavit, per adimpletionem non per destructionem, lib. 4. c [...]nt. Mar. cap. 33. whole Morall Law is wholly abolished,’ which is that which you willingly would, but yet cannot proue.

For euidence and assurance of this which I say, I need seeke no further than your owne witnesses, Lu­ther, Erasmus, Caluine, Perkins, Paraeus, who all in the [Page 93] very places you alledge (speaking of the continuance of Moses Law only [...]ntill Christs death) doe plainly auouch this, only of the Iewish Paedagogy, the Ce­remoniall Law in types and shadowes, the letter of the Law, the rigour and terror of the Law, the burden and seruility of the Law, &c. but not one of all speakes one word of the vtter abolishing of the Morall Law together therewithall.

Luther saith, Christ is the end of the Law, Rom. 10.Luth. on Gal. 3.24, 25. p. 173. And how? not that he hath abolished the old Law, and giuen a new, but he is the end of the Law to all that be­leeue, that is to say, euery one that beleeueth in him is righteous, and the Law shall neuer accuse him, Luth. in Gal. 3.24. And albeit he speake of the abolishing of the Law by Christs death, pag. 6. yet let his owne words cleare his owne meaning in the page following.Luth. on Gal. 3. v. 25. p. 174. As touching the conscience we are fully deliuered from the Law; and therefore that Schoolemaster must not rule in it, that is, he must not afflict it with his terrors, threat­nings, and captiuity, for Christ hath remoued all these offices of the Law out of the conscience, putting out the hand-writing that was against vs, Col. 2.

Erasmus in Rom. 7.1. speaketh only of the Ceremo­niall Law.Antinomus. At Mosis lex quoniam typis & C [...]remonijs Christum adumbrabat, ad tempus aliquod tantùm data est, donec exoriente luce cederent umbrae, Answer. & apparenti­bus veris facesserent simulachra verorum. Erasmus in Gal. 3.19, 25. & in Gal. 4.1. To the like purpose he hath the like words in Gal. 3.19, 25. & 4.1. but neither word nor syllable for the absolute abro­gation of the Morall Law, either at, or after Christs death.

Caluine writing vpon Gal. 3.23. saith, The Apostle compares the Law to a prison, when he saith, before faith came we were kept vnder the Law, shut vp vnto the faith which should afterwards be reuealed: and a little after, he sheweth what is meant by faith, and what Law that is whereof the Apostle speaketh, saying, Fides, hic, pro­priè [Page 94] significat plenam revelationem eorum quae tunc late­bant sub obscuritate umbrarum legis: Calu. in Gal. 3. v. 23. Faith in this place, doth signifie a full reuelation of those things which then did lie hid, vnder the darknesse of the shadowes of the Law. And writing upon verse 25.Calu. in Gal. 3. v. 25. Vide Zanch. in Hosea. cap. 2. p. 45. col. 1. he directly proposeth and answereth the question in hand. Quaeritur an lex ita sit abrogata, vt nihil ad nos pertineat. Respondeo: Legem quatenus regula est benè vivendi, & fraenum quo in timore Domini retinemur, & stimulus ad corri­gendam pigritiam carnis nostra, denique quatenus utilis est ad docendum, corrigendum, &c. hodiè non minùs va­lere, quam olim, manere (que) intactam. Now surely, I doe wonder how you could euer with any honesty produce M^r. Caluine, and cite this very verse, for abolishing the Morall Law at Christs death, (as his opinion) see­ing he doth so directly resolue and determine, for the establishing of the right vse of the same Morall Law, (euen before your owne eies) and that vnto the worlds end? What should I say? either your blindnesse is palpable, or your boldnesse most intolerable, in this strange dealing.

Perkins on Gal. 3.19. abused. Ʋide Calu. de usu Legis Harmon. in 4. lib. Mos. p. 442.443.After the same manner doe you deale with M^r. Per­kins, who writing vpon Gal. 3.19. moueth this que­stion: Whether the Law serue to reueale sinne, after the comming of Christ, for Paul saith, it was added for transgressions, till Christ; and answereth, The Law serueth to reueale sinne, euen to the end of the world; yet in respect of the Legall or Mosaicall manner of re­uealing sinne, it is added but till Christ. M^r. Perkins doth acknowledge there is vse of the Morall Law, euen vnto the end of the world, and you will needs haue him to be on your side, and to say as you say, ‘That it did continue but till Christs death at the most.’

Paraeus in Rom. 10. p. 1043. & in Rom. 3.20.Lastly, Paraeus findes no more fauour, nor receiues any better measure at your hands, as he that hath list and leasure may see, in Rom. 10. pag. 1043. 1002. in Rom. 5.20.

Thus are you well and worthily beaten with your owne rod, though not in that seuerity which your in­jurious dealing with so worthy men doth deserue: for I hold it much better to conuince and instruct, in the spirit of meeknesse, than to reproue and rebuke, with too much acrimony and sharpnesse, vnlesse a man be forced ad urendum & secandum, when no other mil­der meanes will serue the turne; as sometimes euen the best and gentlest Chirurgions are constrained to doe.

Your seuenth Argument followeth, Argument. 7 feeble and faint as it is: Quia velut carne spoliatos artus ostendit, as Quintil. Instit. Orat. lib. 5. cap. 12. Quintilian saith of such an Argument, Instit. Orat. lib. 5. ‘It was instituted to be a Schoolemaster to the people of God, till the comming of Christ, Galath. 3.24. Ergo, The Morall Law is now vtterly abolished.’

Is there any sinewes or joints, nay is there any life or soule in this Argument? What if the Law were gi­uen as a Gal. 3.24. Schoolemaster to the Iewes? is therefore the Morall Law of no force nor vse to vs Christians of the Gentiles? But I demand, what Law is it which you say was instituted as a Schoolemaster vnto the Iewes? If you say the Ceremoniall, we grant that it was a Schoolemaster, not only teaching obscurely, by signes and sacrifices, types and figures, that Tota Legis Occo­nomia rudis quae­dam erat disciplina, rudibus conaeniens, Beza in rude people of the Iewes, in their non-age to looke vnto Christ to come, but also conuincing and condemning them se­uerely of all manner of sinne, and keeping them con­tinually vnder the rod and whip, in Gal. 4.3. the bondage of seruants, (as an heire in his minority is vnder sharpe Gal. 4.1. Caluin. Jnstit. li. 2. ca. 11. sect. 2.5. tutors and gouernors though he be lord of all) that so they might be driuen to looke and long for the time of release and liberty in Christ, appointed by the Father. If you meane the Morall Law, we doe not deny, but for the manner of deliuery, measure of obedience, forme of Legall Couenant, rigour in exacting, terror in threatning, and seuerity in accusing and condem­ning, [Page 96] (as it was in Moses hand the 2 Cor. 3.7, 9. ministery of con­demnation, and a killing letter) it was then to the Iewes a sharpe and seuere Gal. 3.24. Schoolemaster to driue them vnto Christ Iesus, not directly, as teaching, pointing out, or promising Christ vnto them, but in­directly, and as it were occasionally, forcing them by Ioh. 3.14. sorrow, and feare, and despaire of their owne righte­ousnesse, (for obtaining life by the Law) to cast about, and seeke for some remedy and releefe elsewhere (as sicke men enquire for a Matt. 9.12. Physitian, and such as are wounded seeke for a Chirurgion) which because it could no where be found vnder heauen, but Act. 4.10, 11, 12. See Calu. de usu Legis in Harmo. in 4. lib. Mos. p. 442.443. only in Christ Iesus, they were occasioned by the Law, to flie vnto the Gospell, and enforced as it were, to appeale from Moses vnto CHRIST, resting and relying vp­on him alone (who hath Mal. 4.3. healing vnder his wings) for Luk. 4.18. binding vp all their Ad justitiam Christi lex mora­lis homines revo­cabat, ut ad medi­cum, Bez. in Rom. 3.21. wounds, and curing all spirituall maladies and miseries whatsoeuer. And thus also for the substance, though not for euery circum­stance according to the Iewish Paedagogie, the Morall Law (as we haue often said before) hath yet in the Church of Christ some speciall vse, and office still, and that not only for the wicked to humble them, but euen for the godly to conuince them, to rebuke them, to stirre them, and spurre them vp to all holy duties, and to teach and instruct them what to doe, and what to leaue vndone, euen after they are called to beleeue, and liue in Christ Iesus. To this purpose, Luth. on Gal. 3.24. See Calu. sum­ma legis in Harmo. in 4. lib. Mos. p. 440.441. Luther speaketh most excellently vpon Gal. 3.24. [The Law was our Schoolemaster vnto Christ] The Law doth not only ter­rifie and torment (as the foolish Schoolemaster beateth his schollers, and teacheth them nothing) but with his rods he driueth vs vnto Christ, like as a good Schoolemaster instructeth and exerciseth his schollers in reading and writing, to the end they may come to the knowledge of good letters, and other profitable things, that afterwards they may haue delight in doing of that, which before [Page 97] being constrained vnto, they did against their wils: and a little after he addeth; The true vse of the Law, is to teach me, that I a [...] [...]rought to the knowledge of my sinne, and humbled, that so I may come vnto Christ, and be justified by faith, &c.

That which you alledge out of August. de Doctr. Christi. cap. 6. August. de Doct. Christ. cap. 6. helpeth you nothing in this businesse, for he speaketh only of the Iewish Paedagogie, in their Sacrifices and Ceremonies, which their estate, he cal­leth servitutem, & custodiam tanquam sub paedagogo puerorum, and tearmeth their Ceremonies, signa, say­ing they were signa quae temporaliter erant imposita ser­vientibus. And what is this to the abrogation of the Morall Law?

Beza in Gal. 3.23. & 4.1, 3. againe abused. Puerilis est jactan­tiae, accusando il­lustres homines, nomini suo famam quarere. Hieron. Ep. 13. Beza you doe abuse againe: he mentioneth the Ceremoniall Law only in both places, Gal. 3.23. and Gal. 4.1.3. Nunc eandem Ceremonialem Legem confi­derans ut Euangelicarum promissionum umbram & figu­ram, docet illam quoque hoc respectu cessasse, quam compa­rat cum paedagogo, & postea cum tutore, Gal. 4.1. And will you inferre vpon this; Beza saith, The Cereme­niall Law which to the Iewes was a Schoolemaster and Tutor, vnto Christ, is now ceased; Ergo, The Morall Law is vtterly abolished since the death of Christ?

The place of M^r. Perkins, Galath. 3.23. hath beene cleared before; let me now stop your mouth once for all, for euer mentioning M^r. Perkins name, as being of your opinion, for the vtter abolishing of the Morall Law; and I will not goe far to fetch a stoppell, but euen to the other side of the leafe which you haue quoted. Perk. on Gal. 3.23. Seeing faith is now come (saith he) it may be demanded, what is the guard whereby we are kept now? Answ. The precepts of the Morall Law. The sayings of the wise are as nailes and stakes, fastened to range men in the compasse of their duties, Eccles. 12.11. If this stoppell will not serue, your mouth is huge wide, & till you send me the measure of it, I shall not fit it right to serue your turne.

Antinomus.Vnto your eighth, ninth, and tenth, short Arguments, I will make no long answer: Argument. 8, 9, 10. they being all of one na­ture, may receiue one manner of satisfaction and reso­lution. The Aug. ad Bonif. cont. duas Epist. Pelag. lib. 3. cap. 4. Law of Moses as it was giuen vnto the Iewes in the letter, for the outward forme of Legall Couenant in Mount Sinai, Answer. is resembled to Hagar, that bringeth forth children vnto bondage (as she did Is­mael) and being giuen in such horror and terror, bestoweth nothing but the spirit of feare vpon her children. And in this regard, we say, It is the old, and no part of the new Couenant,See Muscul. loc. Com. de Discrim. Veteris & Nov. Iestam. that is, of the Gospell, which on the contrary, bringeth forth children vnto spirituall liberty, (as Sarah did Izaacke) and bestow­eth vpon them the spirit of Adoption, making them heires of promise, and fellow-heires annexed with Christ Iesus. But what is all this to the vtter aboli­shing of the Morall Law? Such things as were but ac­cidentall or Zanch. in Hos. cap. 2. p. 45. col. 1. accessory to the Couenant made with Abraham, or to the promulgation or administration of the Legall Couenant amongst the Iewes, are all abo­lished. But the Morall Law, which for substance was euer the same rule of righteousnesse, before the fall, before the Muscul. loc. de foedere Dei. p. 144. Law giuen by Moses, and before the pub­lishing of the Gospell by Christ Iesus, was then, and is yet still of good and great Vrsin. de lege divina. p. 278. vse in the Church of God. For as the Aug. Ep. 49. ad Deog [...]at. Couenant of Grace, made betwixt God and man in Christ Iesus, was euer since the fall, one and the same, in the daies of Adam, Abraham, Mo­ses, and of Christ and his Apostles, though the admi­nistration thereof was diuers, according to the diffe­rent ages and estates of God, Church and children: so the Morall Law of God, was euer the rule of obedi­ence, in all those times, for all duties of loue to God and man, and shall so continue together with the Gospell, euen vnto the end of the world, although it was not alwaies either deliuered vnto, or vrged (af­ter the same manner) vpon Gods people. Abraham [Page 99] Vide Zanch. in Hos. c. 2. p. 44. col. 2. Paraeus in Rom. 2. v. 25. Gen. 17.1. before the Law written, hauing a portion of this Co­uenant, was charged to walke before God, and to be vpright. I demand, by what rule must Abraham thus walke? Doubtlesse by the rule of the Morall Law writ­ten in his heart, and by the word and will of God, re­uealed by his Spirit. Moses, Dauid, Samuel, Daniel, and all other holy Prophets and holy men, in the daies of the Law, were in the same Hyper. in Heb. cap. 3.1 Cor. 10.1, 2, 3. Aug. cont. duas Ep. pelag. lib. 3. ad Bonis. cap. 4. Couenant of Grace by faith in Christ Iesus; and yet, as (during the time of the Iewish Paedagogy) they conformed them­selues in the outward worship of God, to the Ceremo­niall Law, looking by faith vnto Christ, the Col. 2.17. substance of those Heb. 10.1. shadowes; so did they frame their affections and actions, for a sober, righteous, and holy life, ac­cording to the Morall Law, which yet they did not follow for righteousnesse, to be justified and saued by the workes of it (as the greatest number of the Rom. 10.3, 4, 5. Iewes did) but because they knew that the Law of God was a Psal. 119.105. light vnto their feet, and a lampe vnto their paths, and God did call them to the Law and to the Isai. 8.16, 20. Testi­mony, and charged the Prophet, to binde vp the Te­stimony and to seale vp the Law amongst his disciples, Isa. 8.16.20. So likewise hath our Sauiour Christ and his Apostles, (the 2 Pet. 1.19. night of darke Ceremonies being dispelled by the bright day of the Gospell) continued and Matt. 5. cap. & 22. cap. v. 36, 37, 38, 39, 40. Gal. 5.14. Iam. 2.8, 9. established the Morall Law of God being now a part of his written word and reuealed will, to be for euer vnto all Christians the rule of life, and the line of loue, by which we must measure out all our duties and seruices of piety towards God, and charity towards men, before him, and his, for euer. In which regard, loue which is the summe of the Law, is said by the Apostle 1 Ioh. 2.7, 8. Iohn, and by Ioh. 13.34. Ioh. 14.15. Ioh. 15.10, 11, 13. Christ himselfe, to be both an Old Commandement, and a New; an Old Comman­dement, because the duties of loue were euer enioyned and required from the beginning; and a New, be­cause the same Law of loue, was vpon new grounds of [Page 100] loue, both renewed and reenforced by Christ him­selfe the Lawgiuer.

Argument. 10 Now whereas in your tenth Argument, you seeme to conclude, ‘That because the Morall Law was giuen with manifest tokens of Gods wrath,Antinomus. in great terror, and is called a fiery Law, Deut. 33.2. therefore it was giuen to the Iewes only, and so consequently is now vt­terly abolished, Answer. and belongs not now vnto vs:’ Might you not as well and wisely, i. indeed, as absurdly, con­clude also, that because the Day of the Promulgation of the Gospell, is called by the Prophet Ioel, and by Ioel 2.28. Peter, The great and terrible day of the Lord, a day wherein the Lord will shew Act. 2.16, 17. wonders in heauen aboue, and signes in the earth beneath; bloud, and fire, and va­por of smoke; when the Sunne shall be turned into dark­nesse, and the Moone into bloud, therefore the Gospell (sure) being giuen, and the Holy Ghost being sent with such manifest tokens of Gods wrath (as also by a Act. 2.2, 3, &c. rushing and mighty winde, and fiery tongues, which did make many amazed, and (as it were) at their wits end) doe both belong vnto them that were then pre­sent, whether Iewes or Proselytes; but neither of them vnto vs Christians, to whom no such fiery feares and bloudy terrors doe belong at all. For, shall not the like causes in the like case, produce and bring forth the like effects? Or shall fires and feares, proue the abo­lishing of the Law, when the like meanes are vsed (by the wisdome of God) for the publishing and establishing of the Gospell?

Argument. 11 But let vs now heare your eleuenth Argument, if it can speake any thing more directly to the point and purpose,Antinomus. than his fellowes haue done. ‘I cannot finde (say you) that saluation was euer promised to him that should keepe the Law.’ Answer. And what then I pray you? will you needs inferre hereupon, that the Morall Law is vtterly now abolished? What true Christian doth now seeke for saluation, by the keeping of the [Page 101] Law? Or who is he that maintaineth the vse of the Morall Law for this purpose? How often haue we told you, That we looke for saluation, and justifica­tion, by the Rom. 3.24, 25, 28. righteousnesse of faith in Christ Iesus, and not by the keeping or fulfilling of the Phil. 3.9. Morall Law? If the Morall Law indeed, had no other vse but this you speake of, then had your Argument spoken something to the purpose; but seeing it is vrged and vsed by vs, as a chrystall glasse of Gods will, to disco­uer vnto vs the spirituall blemishes and beauties of our hearts and liues, and as a guide to teach vs to walke in his waies, telling vs what to doe and what to leaue vndone; and seeing it hath many other speciall Vide Calu. de usu Legis in Harmo. in 4. lib. Mos. p. 442, 443. offi­ces, (as formerly you haue heard) both for Gods glo­ry and our good, we can neuer yeeld this vnto you for a sound Argument, That therefore the Morall Law is now wholly abolished, because you cannot finde that saluation was euer promised to the keeping of it. But tell me in good earnest, could you neuer finde, that euer saluation was promised to the keeping of the Law? Haue you not read Leuit. 18.5. what is written in the Law? You shall keepe my Statutes and my judgements, which if a man doe he shall liue in them. Or doe you thinke, (as someBasilidiani, Pepu­siani, Adamit. Danaeus in Augu. Haeres. Heretikes haue done) that this and the like promises made vnto the Iewes, concerne only the comforts of this temporall, and not the blessing of eternall life? Thinke you what you list, it greatly skils not, so long as we know that the most judicious and religious Calu. Harmo. in 4. lib. Mos. pag. 445. 450. August. contr. Faust. lib. 4. cap. 2. Diuines, euen such as are pillars in the house of God doe thinke otherwise, the Scripture bea­ring witnesse to their opinion herein, when it tels vs, That in the keeping of the Law, there is a Psal. 19.11. Eccles. 1.2. & 2.11. Psal. 119.1, 2. great re­ward, a reward of greater weight and worth, than any or all earthly things (being but vanity and vexation of spirit) can afford; this being the best end of all, and the whole man, both for his duty and felicity, to feare God and to keepe his Commandements. For, Blessed are [Page 102] they that are vndefiled in the way, who walke in the Law of the Lord: and blessed are they that keepe his Testi­monies, and seeke him with their whole heart. Came this blessednesse then (may you say) vpon any, or could euer any attaine vnto it by the workes of the Law? I answer, Neuer any either did or could attaine vnto this blessednesse of eternall life, by their keeping August. lib. 4. cont. duas Epist. Pelagian. ad Bonif. cap. 5. of the Law, by reason of their wants, and weak­nesses, defectiue, and imperfect obedience vnto the same; but all that euer were, are, or shall be so blessed, must attaine thereunto only by the righteousnesse of Phil. 3.9. faith, in the absolute and perfect obedience of Christ Iesus. And yet notwithstanding, that which you say you could neuer finde, we haue now not only found out for you, but brought it to your hand, viz. (that saluation hath beene promised to him which should keepe the Law) whosoeuer he were that could fulfill it in all things accordingly. A further proofe whereof, you may yet take if you please, from the answere of our Luk. 10.28. Matt. 19.16, &c. Sauiour to the Scribe, or Lawyer, demanding of him what he should doe to inherit eternall life? What is written in the Leuit. 18.5. Ezek. 10.11. Law, saith he, how readest thou? And when the Lawyer had answered, out of the Law, Thou shalt loue the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soule, and with all thy strength, and with all thy minde, and thy neighbour as thy selfe: Christ replied vn­to him, Thou hast answered right, this doe and thou shalt liue. In which words, our Sauiour Christ doth both expound the promise made in the Law, to the keeping of the Law, viz. [doe this and liue] not of this tem­porall, but of Luk. 10.25, 28. Rom. 10.5. Gal. 3.12. eternall life; and also maketh him­selfe, a promise of Saluation to him that would keepe the Law, if so be he could doe it accordingly: Cer­tainly it is strange to me, that you could neuer finde out thus much before, seeing both Moses and the Pro­phets, Christ and his Apostles, haue laid it downe so plainly before your face, that had your eies beene in [Page 103] your head (as a wise mans are) nay had they beene but in your heeles, you might haue runne and read, seene and found, the [...]. Rajn. Censu [...] Praelect. 183. col. 862. promise of saluation made vn­to him that should keepe the Law, both in the old and new Testament. The Mark. 8.24. blinde man in the Gospell, that had but a little glimmering light and sight, saw men walking as trees; and you that would be loth to be reckoned amongst the blinde or [...]. 2 Pet. 1.9. Gen. 21.15, 19. purblinde, can­not see wood for trees, but like Agar cry out, you can finde no water, and yet the well lieth open be­fore your eies. But it may be, though the well were open, yet your eies were shut, (as hers also were) that she could not see till the Lord had opened them, which I pray, the Lord may doe for you also, and then shall you see more plainly, both this and other points of Gods truth, which though you haue sought, yet haue you not seene, and though you haue groped after them, yet haue you not found them, because the Lord hath hid them from your eies.

I come now vnto your last Argument,Of such Argu­ments as these your dozen are, Quintilian spea­keth thus; Si non possunt valere, quia magna non sunt: valebunt (forsan) quia multa sunt. Orat. Instit. lib. 5. cap. 12. which makes vp the full dozen. ‘Repentance (you say) is a part of the Gospell,’ Rom. 2.4. 2 Pet. 3.9. It is, And what doe you collect or conclude hence? Ergo, the Morall Law is vtterly abolished. Of what force this your Ar­gument is, you may see by the like. The Prodigals returning to his Father, was a part of his reconciliation with him; Ergo, his humiliation vpon the sense and sight of his sinne, was of no vse at all for that purpose. Remission of sinne from God, is a part of justification; Ergo, confession of sinne to God, is now of no vse at all. The promises of grace are a part of the Gospell; Ergo, the precepts of the Law of God are no rules of obedience in the daies of the Gospell. If these Argu­ments be firme and sound, then such is this of yours also; but if they be so feeble and weake, that they haue no strength either to beare or bring forth a good conclusion, then must I take yours in this cause for [Page 104] the like, vntill you can shew me some difference or dislike betwixt them: for what though repentance, See Lactan. li. 6. de vero cultu. cap. 24. de vocab [...], p. 377. [...]. [...], (being taken for our [...]. Rom. 12.2. effectuall renoua­tion, [...]. Tit. 3.5. regeneration, [...]. Act. 15.13. conuersion, [...]. Rom. 6.4. newnesse of life, turning from our sinnes to embrace and obey the Gospell) be indeed a part of the Gospell, (because none can come vnto this, but they that haue the Act. 2.18. spi­rit of grace powred vpon them, and the word of grace Iam. 1.18, 21. ingraffed in them, and the Ephes. 2.8. Phil. 1.29. gift of grace to beleeue and obey the Gospell bestowed vpon them) yet neuer­thelesse, this maketh nothing against the speciall offices and vses of the Morall Law, either for the Act. 2.37. conuiction of sinners, or direction of Saints, to prepare them for repentance, by Act. 2.37. pricking of their Psal. 19.7, 8, 9, 10. 2 King. 22.19. hearts, or to bring forth fruits worthy of Mat. 3.2, 8, 10, 12. repentance, for the well ordering of their liues. The Law hath his vse, to worke Mat. 27.3. Vide Bez. in Mat. 3.2. & in Act. 5.31. [...], poenitentiam: The Gospell his force, to worke 2 Tim. 2.25. [...], resipiscentiam; and both are needfull for Christians, euen at this present, as former­ly they haue euer beene.

Calu. in Act. 2.36. Caluine speaking of the last clause of Peters Ser­mon, wherein he chargeth the Iewes, that they had crucified Christ Iesus, saith, he did this, Vt majori conscientiae dolore tacti, ad remedium aspirarent, and so layeth open the hainousnesse of that sinne in these words: Cujus caedes, non crudelitatis modo & sceleris plena erat, sed etiam immanis adversus Deum perfidiae, sacrilegij, îngratitudinis, denique apostasiae testimonium: and then he giues in the next words, this reason of this course; Verum ita vulnerari oportuit ne ad quaerendam medicinam tardi essent. Here I doe demand, whence had the Iewes this sight and sense of so many sinnes in that one, of crucifying the Lord Iesus; as of cru­elty, wickednesse, perfidiousnesse, sacrilege, ingrati­tude against God, and apostasie from God? Whence had they that Act. 2.37. pricke in their hearts, and wound in their conscience for these sinnes? Had they no light [Page 105] by the Law to conuince them, no stroke by the Law to wound them? If sinne be a 1 Ioh. 3.4. transgression of the Law, and by the Law comes the Rom. 3.20. & knowledge of sinne, and if sinne be not 5.13. & 7.7. imputed nor pressed but by the Law, how can it be, but the Law had some hand in wounding and afflicting their hearts for these sinnes? and in opening their eies to see and discerne the same? I deny not, for I doubt not, but the Ioh. 16.8. Spirit as the fin­ger of God, had his especiall and principall worke in their humiliation and conuersion; that is not the question. The Spirit may worke by the 2 King 12.19. Law, to make vs sensible of sinne, and to cast vs downe vnder the weight of Gods wrath for it, as well as it may worke by the Isai. 61.1. Act. 10.43, 44. Gospell, to make vs looke vp vnto Christ, and to raise vs vp to some hope and assurance of the mercy of God, for pardon and forgiuenesse of the same. It is sufficient for me, both against your position and allegation, if in the worke of their re­pentance, containing both their Act. 26.18. Act. 3.19. 1 Thess. 1.9. Auersion from sinne, and their Conuersion vnto God, the Morall Law had any, either Lex facit ut non modò intelligam sed & cum morsu con­scientia sentiam, & experiar in me esse peccatum. Muscul. loc. com. de legib. p. 135. force or vse, which I am well assured any judicious and indifferent Reader by this which hath beene said, will judge, that it had.

When Dionysius (as Apollod. de Orig. deorum. lib. 3. p. 57. Apollodorus reporteth) had cast Lycurgus into a fury or frensie, he in that distem­per taking a hatchet in his hand, whiles he thought he had smitten downe the branch of a Vine, with the same hand and hatchet slew his owne sonne. What Dionysius he was, that cast you first into this fit or frensie, error or heresie, I know not; but it seemes, whiles you haue lift vp your hand and your hatchet, your skill and pen, to cut downe the Morall Law, a branch of Gods Vine, the dint and danger of the stroke, hath light vnawares vpon your owne soule, as his did vpon his owne sonne, though not absolutely to kill it, yet to wound it vnto death, vnlesse the Lord recouer it by giuing you repentance, and effectually cure it by pow­ring [Page 106] in the balme of his mercy and truth (which I pray he may doe) in the offerings and sufferings of Christ Iesus.2 Tim. 2.24, 25, 26.

Antinomus. Answer. Your many other Arguments which for breuity sake (as you say) or rather for leuity sake (as I con­ceiue) you omit, for vanity sake I see you must needs call vpon and that by name, as if you had in readinesse a fresh supply of armed men (in case of danger) to re­new the fight and win the field.Terent. Eun. Act. 4. Scen. 16. Simalio, Dorax, Syrisce, sequimini. C [...]do alios; ubi centurio est Sanga? & manipulus furum? Eccum adest. Vbi alij? Thus doe you well resemble bragging Thraso, behauing himselfe proudly, and brauing his aduersary vainly, both with that he hath, and also with that he hath not: For hauing brought out your best appointed forces in­to the field, you call on still, Vbi alij? as though there were yet so many, and so many, and many more be­hinde; whereas poore man, you haue not a man more, neither tag nor rag to follow you, seeing solus Sanio seruat domum. Take so much of this to your selfe and your former Arguments, as may best fit you; and reserue the rest for the other, which yet sit at home with Sanio to keepe the house.

Your reference to Musculus Common-places, giues no better satisfaction, now we haue taken the paines to view all the quarters and corners of those speciall places which you haue beene pleased to send vs vnto for that purpose. For if either you will stand vnto Musculus, or Musculus will not stand against him­selfe, you may and shall, euen there, and thence, receiue resolution to satisfie you, that there we finde no such satisfaction, as you haue dreamed may be found in those places.

He that seriously readeth, and aduisedly conside­reth, what Musculus hath written in the place, De abrogatione Legis Mosaicae, may easily perceiue both by the title and the text, that he principally aimeth at [Page 107] the abrogation of the Ceremoniall, and Iudiciall, and the Morall Law, only so farre, as it was Lex litera, Muscul. loc. com. de abrogatione Legis. Ma­gisterium Mosis, Ministerium Mosis, virtus peccati, litera occîdens, iram, maledictionem & mortem operans. And all this neither hurteth vs nor helpeth you, for the vtter abrogating of the whole Morall Law. For albeit, for these offices it may be said to be abolished to them that are true beleeuers in Christ Iesus, in which respect they are said, not to be vnder the Law but vn­der grace; yet for other vses and offices, the Morall Law is in force still, as to be a rule of obedience, to discouer corruptions and transgressions, to be a bridle of restraint vnto sinne and sinners,Muscul. loc. de vi & effica. Legis. Loc. de abrog. Legis. Dei enim similis quisque factus ipse Legem facilè im­plet, nec erit sub illa sed cum illa. August. lib. Exposit. quarundam propos. ex Epist. ad Rom. Cal. instit. lib. 2. cap. 7. sect. 13, 14. as Musculus in the same place and elsewhere doth acknowledge, alle­ging that out of the Romans, Shall we sinne, because we are not vnder the Law but vnder Grace? God forbid, and giuing vs thereby to vnderstand, that such as are in the state of grace, euen the sonnes of God, are ser­uants vnto the Law for obedience vnto righteousnesse, though they be freed from the law of sinne and death. They are not indeed vnder the Law, as a rigorous ex­actor, and terrible auenger, but they are vnder it, as a righteous commander, and holy conducter, to leade them in the waies of righteousnesse and holinesse. Agreeable hereunto, is that which Musculus inferreth hereupon, Qui Christianus est (saith he) etiamsi non sit sub Magisterio Mosis, propterea tamen non est liber ad faciendum ea quae sunt impia & injusta, adeoque & factu illicita. Now I would gladly know, seeing no­thing can be impious and vnjust, but that which is illicitum, vnlawfull; and nothing is sinne or vnlaw­full, but that which is knowne and acknowledged to be so, by the light and line of the Morall Law: how shall a Christian once imagine, that the Morall Law is to him wholly abolished, seeing he continually stands in need of it, as of a lanthorne vnto his feet, Psal. 119.105. Psal. 19.7, 8-11. and a light vnto his paths, and must haue daily recourse [Page 108] vnto it,Iam. 1.25. to see what is right and what is wrong, what he ought to doe, and what he ought to leaue vndone? And if here you reply,Tit. 2.12. that the Gospell teacheth vs to deny vngodlinesse and worldly lusts, and to liue godly, righte­ously, and soberly, in this present world: I answer, It is most true, that such as haue their eies enlightned with the light of the Gospell, and their hearts seasoned with the grace of it,Iam. 1.25. Rom. 7. Act. 26.9.20. Gal. 5.6. Gal. 5.22. looking into the glasse of the Morall Law, doe see more clearely into the beauty and glory of it, judge more wisely of things that differ in it, worke more effectually by loue in all the duties of it, renounce and resist more powerfully all the affections and acti­ons of sinne that rise against it, and make all the Com­mandements thereof more easie,Matt. 11.28, &c. Ephes. 6.1, 2, &c. Iam. 2.8, 9, 10, 11, 12. 2 Cor. 3.17. 1 Ioh. 5.3. and the burden more light, than otherwise it could be vnto them. All this the Gospell teacheth and worketh in vs, and for vs, but it teacheth all this, by the lines and lessons, pre­cepts and prohibitions, of the Morall Law, and wor­keth all this vpon the Morall grounds of loue in the Law, and walketh in obedience by the spirit of adop­tion and liberty, not in the spirit of feare and slauery. And therefore by all this, it may easily appeare, that so long as the Gospell is established, the Morall Law can neuer be wholly abolished. This conclusion receiueth further strength from another, made by Musculus himselfe in the same place,Muscul. loc. com. de abrogatione Legis. to the same end. Quare, Christianus faciens contra ea quae praecepta sunt in Deca­logo enormius peccat, quàm si sub lege constitutus face­ret, tam abest ut liber sit ab ijs quae illic praecipiuntur; etenim tamet si liber est à Mose, hand tamen liber est ab obedientia Christi, ac vera justitiae. In which sentence we may obserue these seuerall propositions, all seruing to maintaine the vse of the Morall Law amongst Christians. First, that the Decalogue, i. the Morall Law or Ten Commandements, being a part of the written word, and reuealed will of God, doth yet for the substance of it continue, and concerne all Christians. [Page 109] Secondly, that the precepts and prohibitions of the Decalogue, doe binde all Christians to allegeance and obedience. Thirdly, that a Christian doing any thing against the Decalogue or Morall Law, sinneth more grieuously vnder the Gospell, than any Iew commit­ting the same sinnes vnder the Law. Fourthly, that Christians doe not entertaine, nor maintaine the Mo­rall Law as Moses disciples, receiuing it and obeying it vpon the same conditions, and to the same ends, as Moses did deliuer it, and impose it vpon the Iewes; but as the disciples of Christ Iesus, who is the Lord of his house, and the only Lawgiuer for the well orde­ring of it. Now forasmuch as Christ testifieth of him­selfe, that he came not to destroy but to fulfill the Law,Matt 5.17, 18. clearing the beauty and renewing the spirituall vigor and vertue of it,Rom. 6.14, 15. Rom. 7.12. Matt. 5.19. Heb. 8.10. Iam. 2.8. taking away the terror and abating the burden and rigor, but not changing the nature, nor abolishing one iot of the substance of it: yea further, not only commending and commanding it to all his disciples, and in them to all true Christians,Accedente gratia, idipsum quod lex onerosè jusserat, jam sine ouere & libertissimè imple­mus. August. 83. quaest. quaest. 66. but put­ting it into our mindes, and writing it by the finger of his spirit in our hearts, and making it vnto vs a royall Law of liberty, not a yoke of bondage and feare; therefore doe we now willingly receiue and obey the Commandements thereof, and doe not now account them grieuous, but in Christ gracious, holy, just, and good; the duties whereof we desire and endeuour to performe with delight, knowing that our infirmities are couered, our wants supplied, our sinnes pardoned, and our seruices accepted, in the absolute and perfect obedience of him that did absolutely fulfill the Law for vs, that is, of Christ Iesus.Rom. 7.22. According vnto these grounds, we may say with Musculus; That although a Christian be free from Moses, yet is he not free from the obedience of Christ, nor of true righteousnesse; and if he be not free from the obedience of Christ [that is, such as both by precept and patterne, he taught [Page 110] and required, according to the precepts of the Morall Law] then is a Christian bound in the daies of the Gospell, to the obedience of the Morall Law: And if a Christian be not freed from the obedience of true righteousnesse [and the rule of true righteousnesse be the Morall Law] (as all Diuines doe agree, and as Christ and his Apostles haue taught the Churches) then is a Christian bound in the daies of the Gospell, to yeeld obedience vnto the Morall Law. Now if you be pleased to lay all these together, the reckoning will arise to another and a greater summe, than you imagi­ned or expected, at this time and place; and that, not to feed your fancy and serue your humour, for the vt­ter abrogation of the whole Morall Law, but to con­firme the contrary truth, for ratifying and establishing thereof amongst Christians, in the daies of the Gospell. Shall I trouble you yet with one other conclusion out of Musculus, for your further satisfaction, that he is not (for certaine) of your minde, for the vtter abro­gation of the Morall Law.Muscul. loc. com. de abrogatione Legis. Quare tam abest (saith he) ut damnemus usum Decalogi, ut admodum etiam laude­mus eorum studium & diligentiam, qui primi illum ad catechizandum neophytos vsurpandum esse judicarunt: We are so farre from condemning the vse of the Deca­logue, or Morall Law, that we doe much commend their care and diligence, which first did judge it fit to be vsed for catechizing nouices or the ruder sort in religion. By this you may see, how farre Musculus is gone from you, though you labour neuer so much to draw him to stand by your side, and to speake in your behalfe. He is farre from condemning the vse of the Morall Law; you are eager and hot in pursuing of it euen vnto death and vtter destruction: He will allow and com­mend the vse of it, and them that vse it too, for cate­chizing children or nouices in religion; there is nei­ther man woman nor childe, younger nor elder, that can intreat you, to giue them leaue or liberty, to haue [Page 111] any thing at all to doe with it. And here by the way I pray you be aduertised, that howsoeuer this allegation be sufficient to confute your opinion, yet doe not I so alledge it, as altogether to approue it, nor can I so ei­ther thinke or speake of the Decalogue or Morall Law, as here your Musculus doth write of it: for whereas he will not allow it any other place in the Church but in the Catechisme, nor the explication thereof to be needfull for any but for nouices and children; I am of opinion, that the ministry and industry of the most ju­dicious, religious, and best experienced Diuines, may well and worthily, profitably and comfortably be em­ployed, in seeking and searching out the infinite and admirable wisdome, together with other the deepe things of God, which are hid in the Morall Law, and that not only for their owne priuate instruction, but for the edification of the ripest and chiefest of Gods children. And whosoeuer he be, that thinks so little and so light knowledge of the Morall Law will serue the turne, that it is to be held only as milke for babes, and not as strong meat for men of riper age, I am afraid that as he doth depresse and abase the Law of God more than is meet, so doth he aduance himselfe too high aboue his pitch, being rashly puft vp in his fleshly minde, and knowing little or nothing in this particular as he ought to know. For howsoeuer it be true, that in the Morall Law there be some generall things so easie and shallow, that euen a little lambe may wade in them;Psal. 19.7. Psal. 119.18. yet considering the infinite variety of matter contained in the specials and particulars of the same, there are many things to be found of greater depth and difficulty, wherein a huge Elephant may swimme also. Otherwise I can hardly thinke, that euer the holy Prophets being all interpreters of the Morall Law, and Christ himselfe the Lawgiuer,Matt. 5. Iam. 4.12. best worthy and best able to expound and explaine the true meaning of it, and Christs Apostles who were [Page 112] taught by his spirit the true sense thereof, would euer either all or any of them, haue taken all or halfe that paines, in opening and applying, extending and en­larging,Execrandi igitur s [...]t Libertini, An­tino [...]i, & cateri Legem Moralem repudiantes. Thes. Geneu. thes. 28. clearing and explaining, vrging and enforcing, of the Morall Law, and that both by word and wri­ting, preaching and exhorting, as we know by their publike records they haue all done, and that amongst the Priests and Prophets, Doctors and Expounders of the Law, Scribes, and Pharisies, and Rabbines, such as professed the greatest skill and vnderstanding of the Law, if either all or any of them had beene of his minde, That it is sufficient for such as are more ripe in faith, to know this summe of the Law, Loue the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and thy neighbour as thy selfe, but for the ruder sort and nouices, it is meet that they be instructed in the Decalogue, being a more plaine forme of liuing, and fit for such persons only.

Antinomus.The other places of Musculus which you point your finger at, Answer. namely of the Couenant, of the diffe­rence of the Old and New Testament, of the abroga­tion of the Legall Sabbath, I haue read and perused, and finde nothing in all, or any of them (being rightly vnderstood) which I doe not willingly assent vnto. If you, vpon a more setled and serious reuiew of those places, shall yet imagine there is any thing in them which may seeme to sauour of your opinion, and beare any either colour or countenance, for the vtter abolishing of the whole Morall Law; when you shall be pleased to note out, and send vnto me the expresse words which you conceiue doe make for your pur­pose, you shall God willing haue a returne of a more particular and expresse answer vnto the same: Meane­while, I pray you now for your further satisfaction, to admit of this my reference also to Musculus his Com­mon-places, for establishing of the Morall Law, and the right vse thereof, seeing your reference for the vt­ter abolishing thereof, doth neither serue your turne, [Page 113] nor satisfie me at all. In that place de Legibus, Muscul. loc. com. de Legib. and those sections, de usu Legis Mosaicae, & de vi & effi­cacia Legis, he hath sufficiently expressed himselfe, that (howsoeuer his writing in other places might be taken or mistaken by others) yet he is of opinion,Muscul. de usu & effica. Legis. That the Morall Law is now in the daies of the Gospell of speciall vse and efficacy, euen for himselfe and others, for the godly and for the wicked, as men stand in the estate of nature, or in the state of grace. Now if it so fall out,Muscul. loc. com. in divisione Decalogi. that Musculus may seeme vnto you in those places which you haue mentioned and the like to crosse himselfe, and to be of another minde, concerning the continuance, office, and vse of the Morall Law amongst Christians, in the daies of the Gospell; what answer can be fitter both for him and you in this case, than the very same which he himselfe giues vnto Augustine, when he found him inconstant and differing from himselfe, in the diuision of the De­calogue: Quaso quomodo aequum esse poterit, ut unius, idque sibi ipsi non constantis authoritas omnibus alijs praeferetur? Deinde si placuit authoritas Augustini, quare non placuit in eo quod unà cum reliquis antiquio­ribus concorditer, magis quàm in eo quod & ab alijs, & à seipso diversum scripsit? How is it meet, I pray you, that the authority of one [Musculus alone] and he not agreeing with himselfe, should be preferred be­fore all other men? Againe, if Musculus his authority like you so well, why doth it not please you in that which he hath written agreeably and iointly with others more ancient, for the establishing of the Morall Law, rather than in that wherein he differs from others, and from himselfe also, for the vtter abolishing of the same?

Now, where you put vs ouer also vnto Zanchius, vpon Ephes. 2. v. 14, 15. de Legis Mosaicae abrogatione, ‘Where (you say) he disputeth the point very fully,Antinomus. yet he doth not plainly (say you) expound the places [Page 114] that seeme to contradict it:’ Answer. We must needs say, that Zanchius is little beholding vnto you for your al­legation, wherein you commend and discommend, approue and reproue, what he hath written, with one breath;Erasmus. Vno spiritu efflas calidum & frigidum: Like the Husbandman, that returning from his worke in a cold winters day to his dinner, did with one and the same breath, both warme his hands which he felt were too cold, and coole his pottage which he feared were too hot; which when the poore Satyr saw, he feared to dwell with him,Senec. lib. 2. de Benefic. Plant. in Aul. Altera manu fort lapidem, panem ostentat altera. Gregor. Theol. ad Euseb. Caesar. citat. ab Erasm. and fled from him. Seneca calleth such a benefit, panem lapidosum, and somewhere else I haue read the like fact reproued in words not much vnlike. Manus altera panem, altera fert lapidem: and in another Language, yet to the same purpose, [...]. as if a man should claw a mans head with one hand, and smite him on the cheeke with the other. And doe not you deale with Zanchius af­ter the same manner? you seeme to claw his head with this approbation ‘[he disputeth the point very fully]’ and presently you smite him on the cheeke with this rebuke ‘[he doth not plainly expound the places that seeme to contradict it].’ You say, ‘he disputeth the point very fully;’ but tell me, doth he de­termine the point for you? Doth he wholly abrogate the whole Morall Law, as you would haue vs to thinke of him? Or doth he only abrogate it in regard of some circumstances, preseruing the substance thereof intire still?Zanch. in Eph. 2. loc. de abrog. Legis. Nay doth he not first distinguish the whole Law of Moses, and diuide the Commandements thereof into mandata principalia, and mandata accessoria? The principall comprised in the Morall Law, the ac­cessory in the Ceremoniall and Iudiciall; the princi­pall continued, the accessory abolished; and then de­termine, That because in the Morall Law (as it was giuen by Moses to the Israelites) there were some [Page 115] things of circumstance, and some of substance, some essentiall, some accidentall, some temporall, some eter­nall: All such things as were matters of circumstance, accidentall, and temporall, in the Morall Law, as it was giuen by Moses, are vtterly abolished; but all such as were matters of substance, essentiall, and eternall, are so farre from being abolished, that they are for euer (being confirmed by Christ himselfe, Matth. 5. and Matth. 22. and by his Apostles, Tit. 2.11.) to be continued: Such are all and euery one of the Ten Commandements of the Morall Law, containing the expresse forme of Gods eternall will, and the summe and substance of all duties of piety to God in the first Table, and of charity towards men in the second:Vide etiam Thes. Geneu. thes. 28. All which, saith Zanchius, God required, from the begin­ning of the world before Moses; in the time of the Law by Moses; after Moses by the Prophets: Et nunc tandem in finem usque mundi, per Christum per (que) ejus Apostolos requisivit, & requirit à nobis: And now at length euen vnto the end of the world, by Christ and his Apostles, he hath required, and doth require of vs. And so a little after, he setteth downe his conclusion in flat opposition vnto your opinion; Constat hoc sensu legem simpliciter non esse abrogatam. It is euident, saith he, that in this sense the Morall Law is not simply, or wholly abrogated.Antinomus. But why doe you censure him for not expounding the places of Matth. 5. and Rom. 3. plainly? The plaine truth is, Answer. because his exposition is a buckler of defence against your weapons of opposition, which you haue taken vp against the Morall Law; you would thrust it tho­row with your speare or sword, vtterly to destroy it; and he opposeth a brestplate, and a shield of faith, taken out of the Lords armory, to saue the life of it. And is this the matter for which you blame him? Is this the fault whereof you accuse him?Cic. Orat. pro Sexto Rosc. Amerino. So I haue heard and read, that one C. Fimbria an audacious [Page 116] fellow, hauing at the funerall of C. Marius, caused Qu. Scaevola, a noble citizen of Rome, to be wounded, and finding afterwards that the wound was not so mortall but that he might happily recouer of it, did presently call Scaevola into question by course of Law; and when it was demanded of him, what he had against, or whereof he could accuse such a man, whom no man else could sufficiently commend; he answered in a furious passion, Quod non totum telum corpore re­cepisset; That receiuing a wound in his body, he had not receiued the whole weapon also euen vp vnto the hists.

Antinomus.But to amend what Zanchius hath done amisse, you say, you ‘will giue vs a taste out of Matt. 5.17. I am not come to destroy the Law but to fulfill it: Which place (you say) cannot be vnderstood of the forme of Moses Law, but of the matter of it, or of the Law of Nature.’ Why tell me, Answer. I pray you, what you vnderstand by the forme of Moses Law? Doe you meane, the inward or outward, the essentiall or accidentall, the tempo­rary or eternall, forme of the Morall Law? I hope you meane not the inward, essentiall, and eternall forme of it, which can neuer be seuered from the mat­ter of it, and the matter you say is perpetuall. If you meane then the outward forme, in the manner of deli­uery by Moses to the Israelites, together with all the circumstances of persons, time, place, and other acces­sories of the same, (as what else you should meane I cannot imagine) then let me taste your meaning I pray you a little better, by one or two demands touching this point and place. First, did not Christ come to destroy this outward forme of the Morall Law? Secondly, did Zanchius euer say otherwise,Zanch. in Ephes. 2. de abrogat. Legis. viz. that Christ came not to destroy the outward forme, i. the circumstances, and accessories of the Morall Law? Thirdly, doth not Zanchius auouch euidently the cleane contrary? Fourthly, why then doe you blame his exposition, as [Page 117] establishing the forme as well as the matter of the Mo­rall Law? Fiftly, how doe you that haue so long stood out against the Morall Law, for the absolute abrogating of it, euen the whole Law, and wholly too, now so come in vnto Zanchius, and others that haue stood for it, that you yeeld them and vs the whole substance and matter of the Morall Law to be in force still, and content your selfe only to carry away the shadowes, accessories, and circumstances of the same, to feed your fancy with an idle and adle conceit of a glorious victory. Egregiam verò laudem & spolia ampla tulisti. Virgil. Exhortat. ad Confi­liarios Regis Galliae. It is recorded of Paulus Vergerius, (a man very gra­cious with Pope Paul the third) that when he attemp­ted to write against Luther, he was so ouercome with the force of Luthers Arguments, that he changed his opinion and became a conuert of Luthers religion. I wish it were so well and no otherwise with you, that the Lord would giue you such a teachable and tractable heart and spirit, that whereas you haue read Zanchius, Luther, Caluine, and other Orthodoxall Writers, with a minde and purpose to draw them to your error, and so to call them in, both as witnesses and counsellors against the Morall Law, you may so be conuinced your selfe, by the euidence of the truth which they deliuer, and the force of the reasons which they render, for the continuance and maintenance of the Morall Law, that if hitherto you haue not, yet henceforth you may, renounce your error, and embrace the truth with them.

But I see you haue made your selfe a bolting hole, that by way of distinction you might haue an euasion. ‘For (say you) it cannot be denied,Antinomus. but the matter of the Decalogue, being the Law of Nature, is in force as it is the Law of Nature, and vnderstood Philosophi­cally; but how it can be in force Theologically vnder­stood, (for that (say you) is our question in hand) being we haue no warrant in Scripture for it, but the [Page 118] contrary, Answer. (you say) you cannot see.’ And I say, if the mist of Philosophy had not blinded the eies of your Theology, you might haue seene as much as this comes vnto, and more too. For I demand, First, may it not now be denied, that the whole Morall Law is wholly abrogated, as you affirme, seeing it cannot be denied but the matter of the Morall Law is yet of force, as you now confesse? Secondly, if the matter of the Morall Law be of force at this present, as the Law of Nature commanding; is not the forme also in force by our conformity thereunto in obeying? And thirdly, if both matter and forme (the essentiall parts of the Morall Law) be yet continued, [as it is the Law of Nature] that is, a naturall rule of righteousnesse and holinesse to such as are in the state of nature; is it therefore so depriued of all spirituall force and vse, that it cannot be also a spirituall rule of righteousnesse and holinesse, to such as are called to the estate of grace? Fourthly, shall Plato and Aristotle confine vs for teaching or learning of Naturall or Morall duties, to their Physicks, or Ethicks, their Naturall or Morall Philosophy? Or would you restraine Christians from hearkning to Moses and the Prophets, Christ and his Apostles, for their better instruction and direction in the same? Surely, if true beleeuers haue now no other benefit, nor vse of the Morall Law, but as it is the Law of Nature and Philosophically vnderstood; then is the Law (written so distinctly by Moses, a penman of the Holy Ghost) not written,Rom. 15.4. 2 Tim. 3.16. as other Scriptures are, for our learning. Then was Abrahams direction for reformation to no purpose;Luk. 16.29. They haue Moses and the Prophets, let them heare them. Then may infidels and heathens, see as farre into the nature and danger of sinne as true Christians can. Then may naturall rea­son be a light vnto our steps, and a lanthorne vnto our feet, without the Law written. And when all this proues true, then shall [...] proue [...], and your [Page 119] Naturall and Morall Philosophy, true Diuinity. Caluine writing de usu Legis, saith,Calu. in Deuter. Append. de usu Legis. Meritò vocatur bene & justè vivendi regula, atque hic finis Legis om­nibus fere notus est. Naturaliter quidem insculpta est boni & mali notitia hominibus, quò reddantur inexcu­sabiles. This last he speaketh of the Law of Nature, as common to all men, and seruing only to leaue them without excuse; and presently after he speaketh of the Morall Law, written by Moses, and giuen by God by a singular priuiledge to the Israelites and so to vs, as the Doctrine of good-liuing;Rom. 4.15. which albeit (as Paul saith) it be in it selfe holy, and the Commandement just and good, yet Asperum est (saith he) quod alibi dicit, le­gem iram operari, & propter transgressiones esse positam. Gal. 3.10, 19. And marke I pray you, to whom this is asperum, so sharpe and bitter, nempe hominibus profanis qui tantum Philosophicè judicant. Consider and obserue by this, that in Caluins judgement, they that will judge of the Morall Law Philosophically, they are such as are of­fended with it grieuously, and liue profanely. Consi­der also, that seeing the Doctrine of the Morall Law, deliuered expresly and distinctly in writing to the Isra­elites, was for that time a singular priuiledge and pledge of their adoption, aboue and before all other people, (if you will absolutely cancell this writing, and depriue vs of all lawfull vse of this Law, being so holy and heauenly a Doctrine and rule of good-liuing) consider I say, lest you make vs Christians in worse estate than the Iewes, and in as bad as the Gen­tiles, our priuiledge lesse than the Israelites according to the flesh, and our portion no better than theirs who are strangers from the life of God,Antinomus. according to the faith. ‘But (you say) how the Morall Law can be in force Theologically vnderstood, being no warrant in Scripture for it, you cannot see.’ Answer. If you wanted light only, some helpe might be had, but if you want sight too, we haue no faculty nor faith of miracles, to make [Page 120] a blinde man see; only we will lay the matter so plainly in open view, that he that can and will see, shall and may see, that which you say you cannot see. To this end it is very requisite that we sift out your meaning, what it is to vnderstand the Morall Law Theologically. By the opposition which you make of vnderstanding it Philosophically, and Theologically, it should seeme, that as they vnderstand it Philosophically, which vn­derstand it naturally by the light of naturall reason only,Rom. 2.15. without the written Word, or reuealed will of God, without any ordinary meanes of illumination, or instruction, and so beholding the matter of the Morall Law, but very darkly and confusedly, and fee­ling the worke in their hearts by their conscience wit­nessing, and their thoughts accusing or excusing one another, and their wils grudging and rebelling against the tenor of it: So doe they vnderstand the Morall Law Theologically, which besides the naturall light and sight of the Law, written by nature in their hearts, doe consider it and receiue it as the written Word of God, as an expresse forme of a principall part of the reuealed will of God, a right rule of direction for re­ligion, and religious conuersation, a portion of the Couenant of Grace, as it is written in our hearts by the finger of Gods Spirit, a part of Gods image which in the new man is created after God in righteousnesse and true holinesse; the knowledge whereof they attaine vnto by the word of Grace, and the sense and feeling of the worke thereof by the spirit of Grace, so behol­ding the beauty thereof more cleerely and distinctly, and feeling the power thereof more effectually, and obeying the precepts thereof more willingly, and looking for the acceptance of their imperfect obedi­ence, in and by the only perfect and absolute obedi­ence of Christ Iesus only. They that thus, I say, doe vnderstand the Morall Law to be in force in the daies of the Gospell, (as for ought I know the best Diuines [Page 121] and best Christians doe) doe vnderstand it Theologi­cally, which as yet, you say, you cannot see that you can doe.Iunius de Theolog. vera cap. 2. thes. 5. cap. 3.6. ca. 4. thes. 7. cap. 7. & cap. 8. Iunius that great Scholler and worthy Di­uine, in his Booke de Theologia, will helpe you to light your candle, if that will doe you any good in this your darknesse. He giues this definition of The­ology; Theologia est rerum divinarum sapientia: and this diuision; Theologia est [...] nimirum Dei ipsius sapientia, aut est [...] à Deo informata. And leauing the former rather to be adored than curiously inquired into, he afterwards subdiuides the latter to be Theolo­gia visionis, or Revelationis: and then he tels vs, that this Theologia revelationis, is either naturalis, or super­naturalis; and in handling these two, he worthily set­teth forth the weake sight and light of humane vnder­standing and reason, according to the principles and conclusions of the Law of Nature, and noteth the er­ror, obscurity, and insufficiency of this naturall wis­dome therewithall: And then a little after, he defines the absolute supernaturall Theology (which doth es­pecially concerne the present businesse) after this man­ner:Iunius de Theolog. vera ca. 12. thes. 23. Theologia absolutè dicta est sapientia rerum divi­narum secundum veritatem divinam à Deo inspirata, & per enuntiativum sermonem in Christo commissa ser­vis ejus, atque in Testamento Vetere & Novo per Pro­phetas, Apostolos, & Euangelistas consignata, quantum ejus hic nobis expedit revelari ad gloriam ipsius, & Ele­ctorum bonum. According to the tenor of this defi­nition of Theology, I will now proue vnto you if I can, that the Morall Law of God is now in force, be­ing vnderstood Theologically.

Whatsoeuer in it selfe is now diuine, the know­ledge whereof is diuine wisdome, inspired of God ac­cording to diuine truth, and by word in Christ com­mitted to his seruants, and in the Old and New Testa­ment ratified by the Prophets, Apostles, and Euange­lists, as much of it as here is meet to be reuealed vnto [Page 122] vs, to Gods glory and our good; That same is, and may be [according to the definition of Theology.] Theologically vnderstood, and is now in force so vn­derstood. But the Morall Law of God is diuine, and the knowledge thereof is diuine wisdome, inspired of God according to diuine truth, and by the Enunciatiue word in Christ committed to his seruants, and in the Old and New Testament ratified by the Prophets, Apostles, and Euangelists, as much of it as here is meet to be reuealed vnto vs to Gods glory and our good. Ergo, The Morall Law is and may be (accor­ding to the definition of Theology) Theologically vnderstood, and is now in force so vnderstood. The Major of this Syllogisme is euident by the definition of Theology; The Minor is made good by the Scrip­tures, and by the practise of Christ and his Apostles, and the judgement of the most judicious and Ortho­dox Diuines, as in euery branch thereof may be pro­ued by the Scriptures alledged, and by the testimonies before and after mentioned and produced. The Morall Law is diuine] because it is holy, Rom. 7.22, 24. spirituall, just, and good, Rom. 7.22, 24. The knowledge thereof is diuine wisdome] because it maketh the simple wise, Psal. 19. illighte­neth the eies, Psal. 119. and maketh Dauid wiser than his teachers, because it teaches the feare of God which is the begin­ning of wisdome, yea the end of all and whole man, feare God and keepe his Commandements, Psalm. 111.10. Psal. 112.1. Eccles. 12.13. It is inspired of God ac­cording to diuine truth] because God hath put it in our mindes, and written it in our hearts, by the finger of his spirit, Heb. 8.10. 2 Cor. 3.3, 17, 18. Nehe. 9.13, 14. And the things of God knoweth no man, but the spirit of God, which searcheth and reuealeth the deepe things of God, 1 Cor. 2.10, 11. And by the Enunciatiue word in Christ committed to his seruants] because it was giuen by audible voice, by word and writing vnto Moses, and by him to the Israelites, and so by and in [Page 123] Christ, a Prophet like vnto him, giuen also by word and writing vnto vs, Act. 7.38. Hebr. 11. Matth. 5.17, 18, &c. And in the Old and New Testament, rati­fied by the Prophets, Apostles, and Euangelists,] by Dauid, Psalm. 19.7, 8, 9. Psalm. 119. throughout, by Esay, Isa. 8.16.20. Seale vp the Law among my disci­ples, to the Law and to the Testimonie: by Matthew, Marke, Luke, Paul, Peter, Iames, and Iohn, Matt. 22.37, 38, 39, 40. Mark. 12.29, 30, 31. Luk. 10.26, 27. Act. 28.23. Rom. Chapters 2.3.4.7.13. 2 Pet. 2.15.21. Iam. 2.10, 11. 1 Ioh. 2.7, 8. & 3.23. and infinite other texts of Scripture which might be heaped vp to this purpose. And is not the end of the Law [for Gods glory and our good] justified out of the Scripture also? seeing by the light of the Law, shining in the works of the Law, God is glorified here, Matth. 5. Phil. 1.11. Luk. 1.75. and we when our faith worketh by loue, gather and get assurance that we shall be glorified here­after, Gal. 5.6. 2 Pet. 1 10, 11. Psal. 119.1. Iam. 1.25. And thus may you see, if you can see any thing at all, that the Major of this Syllogisme being granted, and euery branch of the Minor now proued, the conclusion against you must needs follow as necessarily inferred: That the Morall Law according to the definition of Theology, is and may be Theologically vnderstood, and is now in force so vnderstood. If yet you desire to heare what our Diuines speake also for this point, albeit I thinke you can finde none to speake a word against it, yet to doe you a pleasure, I will call in one or two sufficient witnesses to giue testimony thereunto.

Caluine hauing rebuked them that judge Philosophicè of the Morall Law,Calu. in Deut. in Append. de usu. Legis. pa. 441, 443. addeth these words, to shew there is now a Theologicall vse of it: Ille verò legis usus Theologicus est quia nihil aliud potest quàm detegendo nostram injustitiam, mortem duntaxat afferre. And as he sheweth, this is one Theologicall vse of the Law by discouering vnrighteousnesse, to bring vs in danger of [Page 124] death, so doth he afterwards in the same place, finde out another Theologicall vse of it: Vbi autem intus cordibus legem suam insculpsit, simul prodest exterior doctrina legis: sic enim filios suos gubernat spiritu re­generationis, ut simul tamen velit ad vocem quoque suam esse attentos & dociles: That so soone as the Lord hath written his Law in our hearts, then doth the doctrine of the Law doe vs good, making his children by his spirit more teachable and tractable to heare and obey his will.

Iunius also in his learned Booke de vera Theologia, brings in the Morall Law, jus Morale, as opposite to the Law of Nature, which he calleth, jus Naturae, and there very plainly auerreth, that the Morall Law is a principall or speciall part of the subject of true and sa­cred Theology.Fran. Iun. lib. de vera Theolog. cap. 13. thes. 24. His words be these: Hoc vero jus morum quo homines ad Deum oportet accedere, & sacrae voluntati ejus quàm maximè fieri potest conformari, sa­cra Theologia exponit perfectissimè. Now if sacred Theo­logy doe most perfectly expound the Morall Law, then is the Morall Law [Theologically vnderstood] yet in force, which you haue not yet the eies to see; and not in force only [as it is the Law of Nature] as you haue had the face and forehead to affirme. Now because you say, ‘There is no warrant in the Scripture for this, that the Morall Law Theologically vnderstood is yet in force, I pray you answer me directly to this one que­stion, which I hope will cleare the point in question;’ Did Saint Paul when he said, I had not knowne concu­piscence to be sinne, Rom. 7.7. except the Law had said, Thou shalt not couet: Did he vnderstand the Morall Law Philoso­phicè or Theologicè? You cannot say Philosophicè, for then he might haue knowne so much by the Law of Nature before his conuersion, hauing as he had a dou­ble helpe, the light of naturall reason, and the bene­fit of Gamaliels Doctrine, and yet he acknowledgeth that without the Law, sinne was dead, i. vntill he had a spirituall insight into the tenth Commandement, [Page 125] he had no manner of sense and feeling of concupis­cence to be sinne against it. Besides, neither Plato nor Aristotle, nor the wisest Moralists that euer wrote, could euer search into this depth, and finde out this truth of God, hid from the eie of Nature in the tenth Commandement, that inclinations to sinne, or moti­ons and imaginations of sinne without consent or delight, were to be accounted a breach of the Law, and worthy of death. If he then did not vnderstand the Law (when he so said) Philosophicè, I conclude, he must needs vnderstand it Theologicè, and so with­out question he did, speaking of it so diuinely, gra­ciously, and religiously, and disputing of the nature, and vse, fruits, and effects thereof, both in the estate of nature and in the estate of grace, so spiritually, so feelingly, and effectually.

For the other place, Rom. 3.31. which you except against, as not plainly expounded by Zanchius, Antinomus. ‘Because (you say) it may be vnderstood of the whole Law, as well Ceremoniall as any other, Answer. and that for the time past:’ Doe you not offer Zanchius some hard measure, in charging him to expound it of the Morall Law only, which he doth not, and the Apo­stle also, saying, ‘he speaketh of the time past,’ whereas the words which the Apostle vseth [...], and [...], are both of the time present? And doe you not see, how in yeelding this place to be meant of the Morall Law, though not of it only, you doe con­uince your selfe of an error, in going about to abolish the Morall Law, which by confessing the truth with the Apostle you doe now establish?

As for Erasmus, Antinomus. we haue seene enough of his minde already, and returned you more by way of recom­pence and satisfaction from his writings, than you will be willing to receiue either from his or our hands. Answer. And here you fall into a great commenda­tion of Erasmus, an impertinent and needlesse peece [Page 126] of seruice, and worthy no other answer than was once giuen in a like case;Plut. apoth. Lacon. in Antalcida. Quis quaso vituperat? But you say with some indignation, ‘His Paraphrase though commanded to be had in Churches, is too much neg­lected. That is a fault: And books (you say) of farre meaner quality are much esteemed.’ That I feare me is a scornfull flout. If you aime at the De­fence of the Apology of the Church of England, Iewels Defence of the Apology and his Reply. now commanded to be had in the Churches, consider I pray you there is roome enough for both, and though the Apology be admitted, yet the Paraphrase is not ex­cluded. Can you not thinke well and speake well of Erasmus his gold, but you must cast out some words of disgrace against our Iewel? Let the Ring and the Diamond haue either of them their due place and praise. If herein I misse of your meaning, beare with my mistaking, and hereafter either speake more plain­ly, or not so dangerously.

Antinomus.As for that which followeth, you bring me such confused stuffe, such shreds and peeces, gathered here and there out of Luther on Galath. Bez. 2 Cor. 3.11. August. de spirit. & lit. as is wonderfull! One Simile runnes after your fift section gone many a mile be­fore, another looks hard after the generall point, and then you conclude with an exhortation, and then (hauing made an end before you had done) you come in with a word or two to illustrate your second section. I cannot but conceiue that now your head grew mazy, Answer. or else hauing cut your garment too short, or put forth your arme further than your sleeue would reach, you runne and seeke about for peeces and patches, shreds and snips, to see if you can make vp that which you haue marred, neuer regarding how they sute with your stuffe for matter, or colour, so they may patch vp your coat and serue your turne in your owne imagination.

Luther on the Galathians, hath not so much by much [Page 127] as you say, for the abolishment of all Lawes by Christ. For in the first place, pag. 176.Luth. on Gal. pag. 176. a. b. he speaketh of the abolishing of the Iewish Ceremonies, where once one hath put on Christ Iesus: Where Christ is put on (saith he) there is neither Iew nor Circumcision, nor Ceremony of the Law any more. For Christ hath aboli­shed all the Lawes of Moses that euer were: he mea­neth all such as might accuse or terrifie a belee­uing conscience, and stand in opposition vnto CHRIST, as the words following doe manifestly declare.

And in the next place, pag. 177.Luth. on Gal. pag. 177. he speaketh of the abolishment of all Lawes indeed, but only in the mat­ter of justification before God, deseruing of grace and eternall life. Will you heare him deliuer his minde in his owne words? God hath indeed (saith he) many Ordinances, Lawes, Decrees, and kindes of life, but all these helpe nothing to deserue grace, and to obtaine eter­nall life. So many as are justified therefore, are justified not by the obseruation of mans Law, nor Gods Law, but by Christ alone, who hath abolished all Lawes. These be Luthers owne words. Now if you will needs con­clude hereupon, that Luther is of opinion that the whole Morall Law is wholly abolished, should you not deale injuriously with him, and deceitfully with vs? You haue beene already told of the fallacie, A dicto secundùm quid, ad dictum simpliciter: you haue here occasion to remember it againe.

Your last place of Luther, pag. 223.Luth. Galat. p. 223. hath beene answered before, and so hath that of Beza, in 2 Cor. 3.11. and that also which you repeat againe of the perpetuity of the Decalogue in Nature, and the perpetuity of it in Diuinity, vnto all which I say now no more, but if I cannot stay you, but you will needs Cramben bis coctam ponere, [...]. you shall not draw me to taste any more thereof, nec Actum agere.

One thing there is in the last clause, touching the perpetuity of the Decalogue in Nature, where you haue interlaced as an exception against the perpetuity of the fourth Commandement;Antinomus. ‘The Morall Law or Decalogue (say you) is perpetuall in nature, sa­uing the fourth Commandement.’ Answer. And why I pray you is not the fourth Commandement perpetuall in nature as well as the rest, if it be Morall as well as the rest? why is it only mortall and the rest perpetu­all?Deut. 4.12, 13. August. de spirit. & lit. cap. 14. If it be Ceremoniall absolutely, then how comes it to passe that it was deliuered by the voice of God, and written by the finger of God in Tables of Stone, being one amongst the rest of the Ten Com­mandements of the Morall Law, which are all perpe­tuall in nature? seeing nothing absolutely Ceremo­niall amongst all the Ordinances of Moses, was euer so deliuered, or so written? Againe, how can that be a Ceremony which was giuen of God vnto man in the estate of innocency,Gen. 2.2, 3. when yet there was no sinne, and so no need of a Sauiour, and therefore no vse for any Ceremony,Exod. 16.29. & Cap. 35.3. Ier. 17.21. Act. 1.12. Exod. 35.2, 3. to signifie or set forth either one or other. That there was something Ceremoniall in the fourth Commandement, as it was specially giuen by Moses to the Iewes in their Legall worship; as that Seuenth day which they did celebrate, their strict rest from all bodily labour, their Sabbath daies journey, their kind­ling of fire, &c. we doe not deny; but that therefore the fourth Commandement is not morall, nor perpe­tuall in Nature, this doth not nor you cannot proue. As for that which you alledge out of Augustine, August. de spirit. & lit. cap. 14. de spirit. & lit. cap. 14. [In decem praceptis, excepta Sabbati observatione, dicatur mihi, quid non, sit observandum à [Page 129] Christiano:] I cannot but wonder and wonder againe, that you going about to batter downe the fourth Commandement, and borrowing an Engin out of Augustine for that purpose, haue in your simplicity brought with you such a one, as doth not demolish, but vnderprop and establish all the rest of the Com­mandements of the Morall Law, to be now of force and vse, amongst all Christians. For I may say out of Augustine also as you doe:August. lib. 3. cont. Faustum. Dicatur mihi in decem praeceptis quid non sit à Christiano observandum? Let any man shew me what there is in the Ten Commande­ments of the Morall Law, which is not now to be obser­ued of all Christians? August. tractat. 20. in Iohan. As for the Sabbath which Au­gustine seemeth to except, he meaneth the Iewish and Legall Sabbath, taking it in the letter for corporall rest, and that figuratiuely, as signifying both a rest from sin (which he takes to be that servile opus, August. ad Inquisit. Ian. lib. 2. cap. 12. from which the Iewes must rest) and the heauenly rest also, of which he thinks the Sabbath was a type. And vnto this I say, Whatsoeuer Augustine can proue by the euidence of the Scripture, to be Ceremoniall and Iewish in the fourth Commandement, we will not challenge that to be morall nor perpetuall: But if he only say, the fourth Commandement is figuratiuely to be vnder­stood, and that no corporall rest from labour, but a spirituall rest from sinne is there signified and comman­ded, and that corporale ocium Sabbati, is not to be ob­serued of a Christian, because that figure is fulfilled in Christ, and yet doe not proue what he saies out of the Word of God; we will take that good leaue and liber­ty which elsewhere he hath giuen, not to beleeue it,August. ad Hieron. Epist. 19. August. adver. Cres­conium lib. 2. ca. 31. because he hath said it, but because he hath brought some probable reason or euidence of the Scripture to perswade vs of the truth of it, and vntill then to stand perswaded as we doe, that euen the fourth Comman­dement as well as the rest of the Morall Law (excep­ting some Iewish Ceremonies annexed thereunto) is [Page 130] yet in force, not only as the Law of Nature, and Phi­losophically considered, but Theologically and in true Diuinity, truly vnderstood. And here, we pray you, not to mistake vs in this point concerning Augustines judgement: he doth not absolutely abolish the fourth Commandement, in abrogating the Legall and Iewish Sabbath, but that he teacheth and maintaineth that though the day be changed,August. Epist. 119. ad Ianuar. cap. 12. & Epist. 86. ad Casulan [...]m. which was the seuenth obserued from, and for the Creation, yet the first day of the weeke succeeded it, in regard of Christs resur­rection, called dies Dominicus by S. Iohn, celebrated in holy duties by the Apostles;Iunius in Gen. c. 2. and that as Iunius saith, non humana traditione, sed Christi ipsius observatione atque instituto, and so commended to the Churches and receiued by them, as Augustine himselfe confesseth and declareth more at large elsewhere.

Antinomus.Now whereas you say, ‘That the Holy Ghost in the New Testament doth not exact naturall precepts, such as the Decalogue is, for that is fulfilled in one word Loue, Answer. Gal. 5.14.’ I answer hereunto, That if you haue as great felicity, as I see you haue facility to con­tradict your selfe, and to marre with one hand what you haue made with the other, you are worthy more pitty than blame, and haue more need at this present of a Physitian to purge you, than of a Diuine to an­swer you: Notwithstanding we will yet make triall, whether you can be sensible of your error, and see what you haue said or done amisse herein, by asking a question or two, and crauing your direct answer to the same. I demand then, Is not the Epistle to the Galathians a part of the New Testament?Gal. 1.1. Yes it is. And did not the Apostle Paul pen that Epistle by the instinct of the Holy Ghost?Gal. 5.13. No doubt he did. And did not the Holy Ghost by Paul, require and exact of the Galathians, Gal. 5.6. the duty of loue? Yes he did, for he commands them verse. 13.Rom. 13.8, 9, 10. To serue one another by loue. And is not this loue both a fruit of faith, and a duty [Page 131] of the Morall Law? Yes indeed it is both, for in this very Chapter,Gal. 5.6.14. the Holy Ghost testifieth that a true faith worketh by loue, verse 6. and in the 14. verse (erewhile alledged) telleth vs also, that this worke or duty of loue must be measured by the Morall Law, For (saith he) the whole Law is fulfilled in this, Thou shalt loue thy neighbour as thy selfe. Why now you haue dealt honestly, you haue answered directly and truly. Gather vp your seuerall answers now, and binde them vp in one proposition and you will finde that as [...], are [...],Sed sero sapiunt Phryges. your second thoughts are often wiser than the first, so your latter position is better and truer than your former opposi­tion. Your former opposition was, ‘That the Holy Ghost in the New Testament doth not exact naturall precepts, such as the Decalogue (or Morall Law) is, for that is fulfilled in one word, Loue, Gal. 5.14.’ and now your latter and truer position is this; That the Holy Ghost in the New Testament, euen in the Epistle to the Galathians, doth require loue, not as a naturall, but as a spirituall and morall duty, being both a fruit of faith, and the summe and substance of the whole Morall Law, Gal. 5.6. and 13.14.Gal. 5.6, 13.14. Certainly if your left hand be not better able to defend your selfe than your right hand hath beene to offend your aduersary, you will feele the smart of your owne weapon thus beaten downe vpon your owne head more sensibly hereafter in a better mood, than yet you can doe for the present, in your hot bloud.

As for that peece which you patch, and adde to the same sentence,Antinomus. ‘That none of the works of the spirit are properly commanded in the Decalogue.’ What? Answer. None of the works of the spirit commanded in the De­calogue properly? This is a proper lie with a witnesse. Tell me I pray you, are not the works of the spirit there commanded, where the works of the flesh are forbidden? Are not adultery, fornication, idolatry, [Page 132] witchcraft,Gal. 5.19, 20, 21. hatred, heresies, murther, drunkennesse, and the rest mentioned Gal. 5.19, 20, 21. Are not all these forbidden in the Law, and the contrary vertues or duties, as chastity, purity, piety, charity, &c. com­manded in the same also? Take the Law as Paul takes it, not as it stands in opposition to the Gospell, but as it stands in communion and conjunction with it, and the same spirit of truth speaketh in both, and requires spirituall duties in both,Phil. 1.11. as the fruits of righteousnesse and holinesse, to the praise and glory of God by Christ Iesus.Rom. 7.12, 14. Besides such as the Law it selfe is, namely spiri­tuall,Iam. 2.8, 9, 10, 11, 12. holy, just and good, such must also the works of the Law needs be. Lastly, S. Iames beares wit­nesse hereunto very plainly and effectually, saying, If you fulfill the royall Law according to the Scripture [Thou shalt loue thy neighbour as thy selfe] yee doe well. This the spirit speaketh vnto the Churches by Iames vpon the same ground of the Morall Law, and that not only in that generall summe of the second Ta­ble [Loue thy neighbour as thy selfe] but in mentio­ning some of the speciall Commandements, as, Doe not commit adultery, Doe not kill; prouing also that the Christians to whom he writes among the twelue Tribes now dispersed, stand now bound to obey the whole Morall Law. First, because if they faile in one point, they are guilty of all; as if they commit no adul­tery, yet if they kill, they are become transgressors of the Law. Secondly, because they are charged not only to shunne that which is euill, but to follow that which is good, and that according to this rule of the Morall Law,Iam. 2.12. as in the very next verse the spirit speaketh and commandeth: So speake yee and so doe, as they that shall be judged by the Law of liberty. I would you would take the paines to reade Augustines Epistle vnto Hierome, August. Epist. 29. ad Hiero. touching the exposition of this place of Saint Iames; you shall there I doubt not, finde him of an other minde than your selfe, for the continuing of the [Page 133] office and vse of the Morall Law, in binding all Christians to all duties of loue, euen in the daies of the Gospell, required in the same. The like you may also see in his first Booke, de doctrina Christiana, August. de Doct. Christ. lib. 1. cap. 30. in his Bookes de litera & spiritu, & contra adversarium Legis & Prophetarum.

And now hauing deliuered your selfe of your maine businesse,Antinomus. and rid your hands of that confused stuffe which stucke in your fingers, you are at leasure to bring vs in a Simile to illustrate, as you say, the con­clusion of your fift section, and another to illustrate the generall point. If your section and your point haue no greater light than your Similies bring them, Answer. they may both stumble and fall in the darke, for all the helpe that they shall haue by their meanes. I haue heard, that nullum Simile currit quatuor pedibus; no Simile runs vpon foure feet; but how shall that run, or goe, or stand, which being maimed and starke lame, hath neuer a sound neither legge nor foot at all?

If Venice and England, in your supposition, were vnder one and the same King and Gouernour, vnder the same Law and Lawgiuer, yet with some difference of circumstance, considering the diuersity of place, people, and condition, for a season, vntill the Kings sonne and heire take the gouernment more eminently and conspicuously vpon him, at which time he shall renew the former Lawes, remouing all difference of circumstance, and establishing the same Lawes in sub­stance, by writing them in fairer Tables, and confir­ming them by better both seales and witnesses, vnto them both as to one people: I would then know of you out of the depth of your English or Venetian policy, whe­ther now the Venetian Lawes being brought and read, either to condemne or acquit a man accused, or to giue direction for order and gouernment here with vs, we in England might not hold our selues bound by vertue [Page 134] of those Lawes to yeeld obedience thereunto accor­dingly, and yet not as vnto the Venetian Lawes (as for­merly they were in diuers circumstances imposed and exacted) but now as vnto the royall Law of one and the same King, who by one and the same Law, will rule and gouerne both Venice and England, as one and the same people. If you be pleased to take the light of this comparison in your hand, it will shew you (if your sight be any thing like) both the vanity and weaknesse of your conclusion in your fift section, and the darknesse and obscurity of your sorry Simile, which you haue brought to set a fairer glosse vpon the same.

Your other Simile which you bring to illustrate the generall point, hath I acknowledge much more light in it, if by the generall point you meane the Law giuen by Moses, as it stands in opposition against the Gospell, according to that of Iohn, Ioh. 1.17. The Law was giuen by Mo­ses, but grace and truth by Christ Iesus. For whether you vnderstand the Ceremoniall or Morall Law, or the Prophets, either as interpreters of the same, or fore­tellers of the good things to come imported by any of them,2 Pet. 1.19. it is most true (as you alledge out of 2 Pet. 1.19.) That the Doctrine of the Gospell doth as farre exceed for beauty, brightnesse, and glory, the Doctrine of Moses, and the Prophets, as the Sunne-light doth Starre-light,Mal. 4. Col. 2.17. 2 Cor. 3. Ioh. 12.46. and as the body doth the shadow, and the face of Christ the veile of Moses. In which res­pect Christ himselfe said of himselfe, That he was the true light that was come into the world, and that his disciples were happy and blessed that saw those things which they saw,Luk. 10.23, 24. and heard the things which they did heare, whereas many Kings and Prophets had not seene them, though they had desired to see them. And in regard hereof, he is termed by the Prophet Malachy, The Sunne of righteousnesse. Mal. 4.2. Isa. 9.1, 2. Ioh. 1.17. So then we say, They that sate in darknesse haue seene a great light, and vnto them that sate in the shadow of death, hath the light [Page 135] shined. Whatsoeuer was darknesse in Ceremony it is dispelled,Act. 3.24. whatsoeuer was a farre off in Prophecy it is fulfilled,Luk. 24.44. and whatsoeuer was a handwriting against vs in the Law of Moses, it is cancelled.Col. 2.14, 15. But what light doth this your Simile giue to the vtter abolishing of the whole Morall Law, which by the comming of Christ is not obscured, but more beautified,Rom. 3.31. and not abolished, but more established and confirmed?

In the next, but not in the last place (as me thinks in good manners according to due order it should haue done) comes in your conclusion, by way of exhorta­tion and Doctor-like direction ‘to all Christians,Antinomus. espe­cially Diuines, to take paines rightly to vnderstand the Doctrine of Christian liberty, &c.’ Answer. As if none but your selfe alone, were either so industrious or judici­ous, so studious or religious, as to haue taken any paines, or to haue gotten any knowledge like your selfe in all or any of these things. Knowledge puffeth vp, 1 Cor. 8.1. but loue edifieth, and if any man thinketh he knoweth any thing, he knowes nothing as he ought to know: and againe,Gal. 6.3. If any man thinke himselfe to be something when he is no­thing, he deceiueth himselfe. It had in my opinion sa­uoured of more humility and modesty, if you had, af­ter you had set downe your judgement and reasons for the vtter abolishing of the Morall Law, in meeknesse of wisdome submitted your selfe and your writings, to the judgement of the religious and judicious both Mi­nisters and people in our Churches,1 Cor. 14.32. (for euen the spi­rits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets) and not to haue cast such odious aspersions of ignorance and negligence, as you doe vpon them. For suppose some amongst many deserue so sharpe a censure and rebuke, yet I doubt not but euen they (seeing your grosse ignorance, great negligence, and I feare me, some things euen against knowledge and conscience too in these your owne writings) will quit you with this or the like answer: Et si nos quidem digni sumus hac [Page 136] contumelia, Maenius absertem Neuium cum car­pe [...]t, heus tu, Quidam ait, igno­ras te? Horat. Ser. lib. 1. sat. 3. tu omnium indignus qui faceres tamen: Although we haue deserued such a contumely or re­proofe as this, yet you of all others might worst doe it. For, Quis tulerit Graccos de seditione loquentes? Who can endure the turbulent and seditious Gracchi to speake against sedition? Or traiterous Athalia to cry out, treason, treason? Or a man that for want of light, or diligent looking to his waies, doth himselfe stumble and tumble, and fall dangerously oftentimes, to re­proch others (and some it may be, more vigilant and diligent than himselfe) with such ‘ignorance and neg­ligence,Antinomus. that they runne into strange questions, as men in darknesse stumbling at one thing, and catching hold of another thing that auailes them nothing.’ If these be not swelling words of vanity, Answer. I mistake both your spi­rit and speech; if they be, I desire you may see what is amisse and amend it, and learne to conceiue more hum­bly of your selfe, and more charitably of your brethren. As for the speciall points which you commend vnto our study and industry, viz. ‘The Doctrine of Christi­an liberty, the difference of the Law and the Gospell, and of the Old and New Testament, and of the Couenants of both, and so the right abrogation of Moses Law:’ I suppose there is not one of all those, but hath in hand­ling of this businesse beene already touched, and so hath giuen some light, both to discouer your error, or heresie, (if you hold it wilfully) in going about to abolish the whole Law of Moses, and that wholly too; and to cleare this truth also, that the Morall Law of God giuen by Moses to the Iewes, is not since the death of Christ, in the Churches of Christ, wholly abolished and abrogated, but is yet in force still, for many holy offices and spirituall vses, confirmed by Christ, and continued by his Apostles, for the good of Christs Church, euen vnto the worlds end. Now if you thinke that all that hath beene said and done, be not, nor cannot be of any such force with you, as to con­uince [Page 137] you of error, or to confirme this truth; it may be herein, the fault will proue rather yours than mine: For as Non est Oratoris persuadere; sed dicere quae ad persuadendum sunt idonea: It is not required of an Ora­tor to perswade, but to deliuer such things as in them­selues may be fit and auailable for perswading. So nei­ther can it be required of an Answerer, to satisfie a wrangling Disputer, but to giue what may serue for a sufficient satisfaction to his insufficient objection. Ezeckiel is commanded to speake,Ezek. 3.4.7. euen though Israel will not heare: And Paul doth charge Titus, Tit. 1.9.10. to ende­uour by some doctrine and exhortation, to be able to conuince the gainsayers, and to stop the mouthes of such as are [...], vnruly vaine-talkers, and deceiuers, subuerting whole houses, and teaching things they ought not, for filthy lucre sake. Vpon like occasion, and in a matter not much vnlike, I held my selfe charged after the same manner, to endeuour according to my ability, to conuince you of this your error, and to stop your mouth, if it may be, (which you haue opened so wide against the truth) with the witnesses and with the word of Truth. And this was I (after a sort) enforced to attempt, because I knew you had laboured by speaking and writing (if not for fil­thy lucre, yet for foolish humour sake) things which you ought not, not only to corrupt the mindes of the simple by words of deceit, but to subuert the hearts and houses of some of my neerest and dearest friends, with a great and pompous shew of reading and learning, which (had they not formerly beene better instructed and established in the true knowledge of Gods Word, both Law and Gospell) might easily haue bred some distraction in their mindes, and trouble in their hearts Pudet haec opprobria nobis & dici potuisse, & non potuisse refell [...]. I may truly say, I held it both sinne and shame, that so opprobrious things should be objected against the holy Law of God, and put into the bosomes of good [Page 138] and gracious people, as a parcell of Gods truth and a pledge of your loue; and not to be resisted by some en­counter,August. Bonis. Epist. 23. and refuted by some answer to the same. Re­spondi sicut existimo quaestionibus tuis, saith S. Augustine to Bonifacius, quantum attinet ad minus capaces, & ad contentiosos non satis; quantum autem ad pacatos & in­telligentes plus fortè quàm sat est. Let me speake vnto you in almost the same words, I haue answered as I thinke, your positions and oppositions against the Mo­rall Law of God; for such as are lesse capable and such as are contentious, not sufficiently enough neither for length nor strength, but for such as are tractable and teachable, peraduenture more than enough for both. And here, if the length of my answer procure me any blame, either with you or other of my friends, seeing your Pamphlet was but short, which drew the same from me; I must plead my just defence as Augustine did his to the same Bonifacius, requiring a briefe an­swer to some hard questions proposed vnto him: His literis (saith he) lectis & relectis & recordatus sum Ne­bridium amicum meum, qui valdè oderat, de quaestione magna responsionem brevem. In like manner hauing read ouer and ouer againe your short Pamphlet, and seeing the question was great, and quotations many and large, though your paper was not much nor long; I could not abide to frame a short answer, nay I must needs frame a long,August. Epist. 23. ad Bonif. to so large and great a question, and that for the same reason which moued Nebridius so to desire an answer at length in such a case: Because in matters obscure, ad pietatis doctrinam maximè perti­nentibus, especially appertaining to the Doctrine of piety (as this of the Morall Law especially doth) he that would diligently search and see into them, had need to enlarge himselfe and hold that course.

Concerning your last Will and Testament, and the light that it bringeth to your second section,Zanch. in Hos. I referre you to Zanchius in Hoseam, where you shall finde the [Page 139] like Simile, and withall a paire of snuffers to top your light that it may burne more clearly: And if that will not serue, you may haue Torchlight from Caluine, which I will now put into your hands before I leaue you, (you may see how loth I am to leaue you in the darke) whereby you may once more be admonished of your error, and the danger of it, and haue light enough to lead you vnto the truth, and prouoke you also to the entertaining and embracing of it. Speaking of the sweetnesse and lightsomnesse of the Morall Law, vnto all that can doe as Dauid did, i. finde and apprehend Christ the Mediator in the same: He addeth these words; Quod discernere dum imperiti quidam nesciunt, Caluin. Instit. lib. 2. cap. 7. sect. 12.13. totum Mosen animosè explodunt, duasque legis tabulas valere jubent: quia scilicet Christianis alienum esse ar­bitrantur adhaerere doctrinae quae mortis administrationem continet: Which different office and vse of the Law, saith Caluine, whiles some ignorant persons know not how to discerne, they doe boldly and couragiously hisse out all Moses Law, and bid farewell to the two Ta­bles of the Morall Law; because forsooth, they thinke it strange for Christians to cleaue vnto that Doctrine which containeth the administration of death or dam­nation in it. Mutato nomine de te fabula narratur. You may view your face in this glasse, and take euery word home with you to your owne house; and withall, take I pray along with you, what he addeth in detestation of this your opinion.Caluin. Instit. lib. 2. cap. 7. sect. 13. Facessat longe ex animis nostris pro­fana istac opinio: Let this profane opinion be farre re­moued from our mindes: And consider seriously I be­seech you, of that which he speaketh so resolutely, for the establishing of the Morall Law, as well as in the commendation of the vse of it. Quod si absolutum (saith he) in ea justitiae exemplar eminere nemo inficie­tur, aut nullam esse nobis rectè justeque vivendi regulam oportet, aut ab ea nefas est discedere: But if (saith Cal­uine) no man can deny, but that in the Morall Law [Page 140] there is manifestly to be seene a most absolute patterne of righteousnesse; either we must haue no rule at all of right and just liuing, or it is great wickednesse to de­part from the Morall Law. Certainly me thinks, to a reasonable and ingenuous man this might be sufficient satisfaction, for embracing the truth and relinquishing of so vnsound and vnsauoury an opinion. I could com­passe you about with a cloud of witnesses to this pur­pose: But it must be euen this Law of God, written in your heart by the finger of Gods Spirit, which through the power and grace of Christ shall helpe to illighten your eies to see the beauty, and conuert your soule to feele the vertue, euen of this Morall Law of God, which you now so oppose and oppugne, which I doubt not but in due time the Lord will doe, if (as I hope you doe) you belong vnto him. Meanewhile we will pray for you, and wait in patience, to see if peraduenture the Lord may giue you repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;2 Tim. 2.25, 26. that when you shall haue recouered your selfe out of this snare of Satan, and we shall heare or see that he which persecuted the Law in times past, doth now publish and professe obedience thereunto, we with other of Gods children that wish you well in Christ, may be prouoked by your light which may shine in the workes of loue the summe of the Law,Gal. 1.23.24. to reioice in your recouery, and to glorifie God in youre behalfe.