Richard Baxter's Catholic theology plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriors who,…Richard Baxter's Catholick theologie plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriours who,…

II. God never gave a Law, no not to the Jews, only to convince them that they could not keep it; but to be the Rule of their obedience; And the Just did keep it in sincerity. But the Law of Moses as separated by the ignorant Jews from the promise and grace of Christ could not be kept by any to Justification. To say that Christs Laws now have no higher end than to tell us that we cannot keep them, is Antichristianity. Are we commanded to repent, believe, love God, only to tell us that we cannot do it? It's true, that without the Spirits help, we cannot. But it's as true, that the Command is the Rule of our duty, and all the Gospel and Covenant of Grace, is the means of exciting us to our duty, by which the Spirit worketh in us faith, repentance, love and obedience. But, saith Jansenius, the Law of Christ is to humble men in the sense of their disability, and drive them to seek to Christ for his grace. I answer▪ 1. Is not humbling men, and driving them to Christ, a good effect? If so, then his Law is the means of all that good. 2. Were the Gospel and all the Apostles Epistles written only to drive men to Christ, and not to edify them and make them perfect to salvation? Were not the Precepts of Love and Holiness means of working Love and Holiness in men? Is not the Word the seed that begetteth men to eternal life? and is not the receiving of this seed into good and honest hearts, made by Christ the cause of holiness and salvation? Were not the Disciples clean by the word that Christ spake to them? and doth he not say, that his Word was spirit and life, as being the concause of the Spirits vivification? He that never received more benefit by Christs Doctrine, Law and Gospel, than to be convinced that he cannot believe, repent, obey or love God, hath not yet the benefit which they are principally intended for.

II. God never gave a Law, no not to the Jews, only to convince them that they could not keep it; but to be the Rule of their obedience; And the Just did keep it in sincerity. But the Law of Moses as separated by the ignorant Jews from the promise and grace of Christ could not be kept by any to Justification. To say that Christs Laws now have no higher end than to tell us that we cannot keep them, is Antichristianity. Are we commanded to repent, believe, love God, only to tell us that we cannot do it? It's true, that without the Spirits help, we cannot. But it's as true, that the Command is the Rule of our duty, and all the Gospel and Covenant of Grace, is the means of exciting us to our duty, by which the Spirit worketh in us faith, repentance, love and obedience. But, saith Jansenius, the Law of Christ is to humble men in the sense of their disability, and drive them to seek to Christ for his grace. I answer 1. Is not humbling men, and driving them to Christ, a good effect? If so, then his Law is the means of all that good. 2. Were the Gospel and all the Apostles Epistles written only to drive men to Christ, and not to edifie them and make them perfect to salvation? Were not the Precepts of Love and Holiness means of working Love and Holiness in men? Is not the Word the seed that begetteth men to eternal life? and is not the receiving of this seed into good and honest hearts, made by Christ the cause of holiness and salvation? Were not the Disciples clean by the word that Christ spake to them? and doth he not say, that his Word was spirit and life, as being the concause of the Spirits vivification? He that never received more benefit by Christs Doctrine, Law and Gospel, than to be convinced that he cannot believe, repent, obey or love God, hath not yet the benefit which they are principally intended for.