Regula vitæ the rule of the law vnder the Gospel. Containing a discovery of the pestiferous sect of libertines, antinomians, and sonnes of Belial, lately sprung up both to destroy the law, and disturbe the faith of the Gospell: wherein is manifestly proved, that God seeth sinne in iustified persons. By Thomas Taylor Dr. of Divinity, and pastour of S. Mary Aldermanbury, London.

CHAP. 10.

Resolving sundry other obje∣ctions alledged to prove the abolition of the Law.

OBIECT. 6.

To whom all the commanding power of the Law, under paine of the curse, and the enjoyning of good workes for justifica∣tion: as also to whom the con∣demning power of the Law is abolished and ceased, to them the Law is altogether made void, and abrogated. But to beleevers both such commanding power, and con∣demning power is ceased. And therefore, &c.

And thus they further ex∣plaine it. Suppose a justified man commit adultery, or murther, or be drunke, the Law of God can take no hold of him, nor the just God can

punish him by the Law, being utterly abrogated to such a person.

Answ. The former propo∣sicion is apparently false for the Law both for ma••ter and forme stands in force to justified per∣sons, and retaineth on them a commanding power, and en∣joineth on them good works, although the manner of com∣manding in the rigor of it is to them abated: for how ord••••••∣rily did Christ and his Apostles command the workes of the Law to beleevers, and that un¦der strait penalties read Math. 5. and 6. Chap. and telleth his followers that when they have done so farre as they can all the things of the Law; they have done what was their duty, and that they were bound unto, Luke 17. 10.

2. These confused men di∣stinguish not betweene the

condemning power of the Law and the Law it selfe; yet this distinction cutteth the si••ewes of this obiection: for can it prove the Law itselfe abolished, because the condemning pow∣er of it is to some removed by Christ? or if certaine uses of the Law bee abolished, as in way of righteousnesse, life and salvation; or in way of ter∣rifying, accusing, or condem∣ning the iustified by faith: must therfore the Law it selfe, and all other uses of it be abolished.

3. What beleever conceives himselfe under the comman∣ding power of the Law, to bee iustified by it? or to expect to stand righteous before God by their obedience? as these men vainely dreame: no they have other ends of their obedience to the commandements of the Law. As,

1. To testifie their indeavor in obeying the righteous Law and will of God, and their con∣formity

to his image in the same.

2. Not for the justification of their persons, for that is onely by Christs compleat obedience made theirs by faith; but for the testification of their iustifying faith: according to the directi∣on of the Apostle, Iam. 2. 20. Shew me thy faith by thy works.

3. Not for the attaining of salvation by the dutie done; but to attaine a comfortable assu∣rance of it •• Pet. 1. 10. Give all dilligence to make your election sure. How may we? for if wee doe these things &c.

4 Not to merrit any thing, but to encourage themselves in the way of obedience, by cast∣ing eye on the blessed remune∣ration freely promised, and per∣formed to duties of love to God, and man; begun and per∣fected by faith in Christ. Heb. 11▪ 26. Moses had respect to the recompence of reward. Yea our Lord himselfe, for the joy that

was set before him endured the crosse and despised the shame. Heb. 12. 2. All these are other ends which beleevers propoūd to themselves in their obedi∣ence then to be justified by it.

4. I answer, it is utterly false and wicked, that Gods Law ta∣keth no hold of a justified per∣son committing hatefull sinnes, as of murder, adultery and the like. For although Christ have freed him from the curse and vengeance, and the eternall damnation of his sinne. Rom. 8. 1. Yet may the Law take hold on him for a stinging correcti∣on, and a sharp punishment ac∣cording to the scandall of his sin. Did not the Law take hold on David, when with so many other evills; Gods sword was upon his house for ever, for his scandalous sins? Did not Gods Law lay hold on Moses & Aa∣ron, then whom none was more faithfull in Gods house; when

for sinne they lay under sharpe rebukes, and chastisement, and were barred the land of Cana∣an?

Object. But these were ex∣amples in the old testament, be∣fore Christs death.

Answ. And are not belee∣vers in the new testament sub∣ject to the same law, and penall statues of correction? Were not examples of the old Testa∣ment examples to us that wee should not sinne as they sinned? How could we sin as they did, if we were not under the same Law? Or what else but the law taketh hold on beleevers in the new testament, when for the unworthy use of the Lords or∣dinances they are judged of the Lord, even for this cause, saith the Apostle. Object. Some say, they were hypocrites that were judged. Answ. As if they be hypocrites that must not be condemned with the world.

5. But of all their assertions, tha•• is a•• blinde as bo••de, That if God call a beleever to ac∣count for the breach of his Law: hee may say, God hath nothing to doe to call him to account: hee may refuse to be tried in that Court. If God shall say, leave such a sinne▪ or be damned; doe such a duty, a••d ••e saved: he may say, We will doe neither the one nor the other on these tearmes. Well may he say, and more, that his tongue lets fall unseemely tearmes: and it hides his na∣kednesse but a little to droppe out, that his meaning is, that God hath nothing to doe to call a beleever into the court of nature. For howsoever hee will teach God what hee hath to doe, or what he hath not to doe; he might long since have beene taught, that God will require of us even that righte∣ousnesse which he put into our

nature: and that is a talent which we must be countable for as well as any other.

OBIECT. 7.

Those that have the spirit of God for their rule, and doe all by a free spirit, they neede not the Law to rule or urge thē: to them it is vaine and need∣lesse. But all beleevers have the spirit to rule them; and they doe all by a free spirit. Therefore.

Answ. The former proposi∣tion is false, that those that have the spirit to rule them, have no neede or use of the Law: and as grosse to conceive the spi∣rit and the Law contrary: which are indeed inseperable: for the Law is the instrument, the Spirit is the workmaster; the Law is the rule, the Spi∣rit the applier of that rule.

The spirit is so farre from de∣stroying the Law, that he wri∣teth it in the inner parts, he ad∣deth clearenesse and light unto unto it; he worketh love and delight unto it.

2. It was ever the wicked conceit of Libertine Enthusi∣asts, that the spirit worketh our obedience immediately, and by himselfe alone, rejecting all meanes; whereas he worketh it in us ordinarily by the word, the Law and the Gospell. Ioh. 16. 13. The spirit sent to be∣leevers, shall not speake of him∣selfe: but whatsoever hee shall heare, that shall he speake. He is in himselfe the spirit of illumi∣nation, but enlighteneth belee∣vers by shewing them what is to be done by the Law, and what is to be beleeved by the Gospell.

3. Is the spirit therefore a free spirit, because hee frees us from the Law? no verily, but

because he sets us free to the performance of it. This reason holy David gives us, Psal: 119. 32. I will then runne the way of thy commandements, when thou hast enlarged or set mee free. Or is that the duty of a free and willing subject to cast off the lawes of his King? No but most freely and willingly to obey his Law: and this is the freedome wrought by the free spirit in free and ingenious Christians.

4. To say, we obey God by by the spirit without a Law or a commandement, is a meere non sence: for is any obedi∣ence without a Law? Is not our rule to doe onely what the Lord commandeth? what can be more ridiculous than for a subject to professe obedience to his Prince, but yet hee will not be under any Law? And to say they obey of love, and yet obey no commandement, is as

fond and false. 1 Ioh: 53. This is the love of God, that we keepe his commandements, and his commandements are not grie∣vous Ioh: 14. 15. If ye love me, keepe my commandements: love must ever looke to the com∣mandement.

OBIECT. 8.

Those that are under the Law of Christ, are not under the Morall Law. But Belee∣vers are under the Law of Christ, Gal: 6. 2. and so ful∣fill the Law of Christ. Ther∣fore.

And thus doe they further unfold themselves, that wee may understand them: consi∣der (say they) men as crea∣tures in their naturall being, thus are they under the Mo∣rall Law given by their Cre∣atour: But consider them as redeemed and new creatures, they are freed from that Law,

and onely tyed to precepts taught by Christ in the Gos∣pell: which teacheth to deny ungodlines and worldly lusts, and to live soberly justly and godly in this present world: Tit: 2. 11.

Answ. Here is a whole bun∣dle of errours to be untied.

1. The proposition is false, that beleevers who are under the Law of Christ, are not un∣der the Morall Law; seeing the Law of Christ is for substance the same with the Morall Law: for what is the Law of Christ in the place alledged, but the doctrine, precept, and com∣mandement of Christ enjoy∣ning the love of our brethren, & bearing their burden: which the Apostle opposeth not to the Morall Law, (as these se∣ctaries doe) but enjoyneth it as a more necessary Law, than all that heape of ceremonies to

which the false Apostles would have brought them backe: a∣gainst whom he strengtheneth the beleevers of that Church, through that whole Epistle.

2. It is frivolous and popish to conceive the Gospell a new Law: for is not the covenant of grace the same in the old Te∣stament, and new? and did not the holy men in the olde Te∣stament, Mose•• David, Samu∣el, Daniel, and the rest enjoy the same covenant with us or were they saved by another Gospell than we? or did not they frame their lives to the same sobriety, righteousnes and holinesse that we doe?

2 Did not the Apostles preach and write the Gospell? Yet 1. Ioh. 2, 7. they professe: We write no new commandement, but the old which yee have had from the beginning. And what was that, but the same which was writ∣ten in mans nature before the

fall, and after written by Gods finger in tables of stone: which same commandement, though he call a new commandement in the next verse; that is not, because it is another in the sub∣stance, but the same law of love renewed, and reinforced upon new grounds by Christ the great Law-giver. And ratified both by his owne doctrine and example, and in this new man∣ner it was never urged before.

3. So farre is the Law of Christ fro•• 〈…〉〈…〉 morall law 〈…〉〈…〉 according that 〈…〉〈…〉 of S. August. The Law knowes to command, but the Gospell to assist to the com∣mandement. True it is, that Christ abolished all Lawes that made difference betweene man and man, Iew and Gentile, Eph. 2 14. Yea and the Morall Law, so farre, as it made difference be∣tweene God & man beleeving.

And 2. as it is opposed to the Gospell: And 3. as it hindreth entrance into the kingdome to beleevers. And 4. as any thing in it was accidentall, significa∣tive, circumstantiall or tempo∣all. But all matters substantiall, essentiall and eternall, Christ by his Law hath confirmed to continue for ever. This harmo∣ny of the Morall Law and Christs Law, judicious Calvin in his harmony avoucheth, The whole Law (saith hee) agreeth with the Gospel both in condem∣ning the sa••e vices, and com∣manding the same vertues. And if this be so, then certainly it destroyes not the Law. And Pare••s on Rom: 10. 14. saith, They erre that thinke the Law repugneth Christ in the Gospel.

4. It is little under blas∣phemie, that they oppose the Father, and the Sonne, as if they had diverse wills▪ divers rules, or contrary Lawes; wher∣as

the Son professet••, that hee spake nothing from himselfe, but from the Father▪ Ioh. 5. 16: Besides, how doth ignorance befoole them, in ••e••ling us that Christ as 〈◊〉〈◊〉 hath loo∣sed us from the obedience of the Morall Law due to our Creator? For is not God the Redeemer the same with God the Creator? Is any honour due to the Father for creation, that is not due to the Sonne for cre∣ation? Ioh: 5. 23. That all men should honour the Sonne as they honour the Father: or is any ho∣nor due to the Son for redemp∣tion, that is not due to the Fa∣ther for redempt ••? Did not God the Father give up his Son for our our redemption: & shall not we well requite him in ca∣sting off all duty belonging to him as our Creator? Or can the addition of the greatest & most singular benefit that we are ca∣pable of, loose us from our for∣mer duty, or rather tie us faster?

Certainely the gift of Christ for our Redemption, doubleth, and fastneth the bond of love and dutie betweene our creator and us, but no whit doth slacke or loosen it. Such poore shiftes, and doubts are they driven un to, as a silly hare close followed, and hard runne.

Notes

• Non est ••e∣cesse nos ab obedientia Legis libe∣ra••••, quin Legis ali∣quod mu∣nus abrog••∣tur. Whitak ••••••tra Dur. pag: 714.
• 1 Cor: 10. 6.
• 1 Cor. 11.
• L••x••u••ere no rit, gra∣tia i••var••▪ Epist 95 ad Innocent.
• Teta Lex est consentanea cum doctri∣na Evan∣gelij, de vi tijs vitan∣dis, et vir∣tutibus par∣sequendis. page 443. Errant qui putant Le∣gem repug∣nare Christo▪