Sidor som bilder
PDF
ePub

SERM. there being no Hopes of Pardon or JuftiVII. fication from it but upon strict Obedience,

the Gospel steps in to fupply the Defects of the Law, not to exclude the Morality of it, or make Good Works lefs neceffary than they were before, but to make them truely useful by a Covenant of Grace; that makes large Allowances for the Infirmities of Human Nature, accepting of Repentance instead of Innocence, and fo juftifies us from all Things, from which we could not be justify'd by the Law of Mofes : For Good Works were not more neceffary under the Law, than they are under the Gospel; but there being no Provision made by the Law, as it is a Covenant of Works, to pardon our Infirmities, as there is in the Gospel, as it is a Covenant of Grace, therefore we cannot be justify'd by the Law of Moses.

The Law having two Acceptations, when it is opposed to the Gospel, it is not oppofed barely as a Law, but as a Covenant. And the whole Defign of it taken in its largest Senfe being to bring us unto Chrift, one Part of it ceafed of Course

Courfe, when Chrift, who is the End ofSERM. the Law, was come; the other is to con- VII. I tinue in full Force for ever. As to the Word Faith, taken in a Gofpel-Senfe, it is not to be understood only as a Belief of - the Gospel of Chrift, exclufive of good Works, fuch as St. James mentions, as availing to Juftification, and fuch as St. Paul, when he talks of a juftifying Faith, comprehends under the Word Faith; but it is to be understood fo as to be always join'd with Good Works; and fo it includes the Doctrine of Faith or the Gospel.

[ocr errors]

The Law and the Gofpel being thus stated, they don't differ as to Good Works, any further than as the one is an Improvement of the other, nor do they oppofe each other as a Rule, but as these. Works are made a Covenant, and are deftitute of that difpenfing Power of altering the Conditions of that Covenant, which the Gospel is poffefs'd of. And therefore when we find Good Works mention'd in Scripture, as neceffary to Justification, as we do very often in St. James, we are not by him to understand those Works

S

SERM. Works, which the Jews held in Oppofition VII. to Faith, or those which the Jewish Con

verts held equally in Conjunction with it, but those Works only, which are infeparable from it. Otherwise St. Peter, when he talks of St. Paul's Epiftles, that there are fome Things in them hard to be underftood, which the Unlearn'd and Unstable wreft, meaning, as is fuppofed, the Doctrine of Juftification, which was mifinterpreted by fome to be by Faith without Works, would be guilty of the fame Fault, when he exhorts to add to Faith, as in fufficient of itself, Virtue, and to Virtue Knowledge, Temperance, Patience &c. and when he fays, that by Good Works, we are to make our Calling and Election fure.

And therefore the Works of the Law, as it is made a Covenant, can't be thofe Works, which accompany Faith, which belong to a Covenant establish'd upon better Promises, and is therefore call'd a better Covenant; and fo could not justify the Performers of them, and make them

that

[ocr errors]

that Seed of Abraham to whom the SERM. VII.

Bleffing was promised.

But tho' the Law thus confider'd can't justify us, does it therefore follow that our Obligations to the Moral Law are made void thro' Faith? God forbid. To object this is to fhew an Ignorance of the Law and the Gospel too. For to say, that because the Law, confider'd as the whole Law of Mofes, will not justify us, that therefore that Part of it, which is call'd the Moral Law, is made null and void; or else if we put it this way, to say, that because that Part of the Law of Mofes, which is call'd the Moral Law, will not justify us of itself, that therefore it is not at all neceffary towards it, is to argue very confufedly and inconfiftently: For tho the moral Law itself is not binding as a Covenant, as I have already proved, yet it will by no Means follow from thence, that it is not binding as a Rule of Life. It has ftill the Force of a Moral Rule, because there still remains the fame Reason for it; and is the fame in all Refpects as before, ! except in this one, that an exact Obe

dience

SER M. dience to it is not made a neceffary ConVII. dition of Salvation, but Repentance is accepted inftead of it.

But however, if we are ftill bound to obey the Moral Law, very likely it may be objected, how then is the Gospel a better Covenant, or the Gofpel Difpenfation eafier, fince the Law remains in Force as much now as it did before? The anfwering this Objection rightly, I hope, will very much illuftrate the Matter, and put it in a clear Light. If we confider the Gospel, as a Moral Rule, in the fame Senfe as we do the Law, it is not at all eafier than the Law; because the fame Duties are ftill binding upon us as before, and many more, as I fhall fhew under the next Head: For the Gofpel is not under a Difpenfation as a Law, or a Rule, but as a Covenant; and it is easier than the Law no otherwise, than as it is an easier Covenant; but if we confider it likewife as a Covenant, then it is of great Advantage to us, where the Law as a Covenant is defective, and has a difpenfing Power which the Law has not,

and

« FöregåendeFortsätt »