This distinction will overthrow all the Objections against the negative. Nor may it be any wonder that the Apostle should consider the Law so differently, seeing there is nothing more ordinary with Paul in his Epistle, and that in these very controversies, then to do so: as for example, take this instance, Rom. 10. ver. 5, 6. where Paul describeth the righteousness of the Law from those words, Do this and live, which is said to have reference to Levit. 18. 5. but we find this in effect, Deut 30. v. 16. yet from this very Chapter the Apostle describeth the righteousness which is by faith: And Beza doth acknowledge, that that which Moses speaks of the Law, Paul doth apply to the Gospel: Now how can this be reconciled, unless we distinguish between the general doctrine of Moses which was delivered unto the people in the circumstantial administrations of it, and the particular doctrine about the Law, taken in a limited and abstracted consideration? Only this take notice of, that although the Law were a Covenant of grace, yet the righteousness of works and faith differ as much as heaven and earth. But the Papists, they make this difference: The righteousness of the Law (saith Stapleton, Antid. in hunc locum) is that which we of our own power have and do by the knowledge and understanding of the Law: but the righteousness of faith, they make the righteousness of the Law, to which we are enabled by grace through Christ: So that they compare not these two together, as two contraries, (in which sense Paul doth) but as an imperfect righteousness with a perfect. But we know, that the Apostle excludeth the works of David & Abraham, that they did in obedience to the Law, to which they were enabled by grace; so necessary is it in matter of justification and pardon to exclude all ⟨p. 234⟩works, any thing that is ours; Tolle te à te, impedis te, said Augustine well. Nor doth it avail us, that this grace in us is from God, because the Apostle makes the opposition wholly between any thing that is ours, howsoever we come by it, and that of faith in Christ. Having thus explained the state of the Question, I come to the arguments to prove the affirmative: And thus I shall order them;
This distinction will overthrow all the Objections against the negative. Nor may it be any wonder that the Apostle should consider the Law so differently, seeing there is nothing more ordinary with Paul in his Epistle, and that in these very controversies, then to doe so: as for example, take this instance, Rom. 10. ver. 5, 6. where Paul describeth the righteousnesse of the Law from those words, Doe this and live, which is said to have reference to Levit. 18. 5. but we find this in effect, Deut 30. v. 16. yet from this very Chapter the Apostle describeth the righteousnesse which is by faith: And Beza doth acknowledg, that that which Moses speakes of the Law, Paul doth apply to the Gospel: Now how can this be reconciled, unlesse wee distinguish between the generall doctrine of Moses which was delivered unto the people in the circumstantiall administrations of it, and the particular doctrine about the Law, taken in a limited and abstracted consideration? Onely this take notice of, that although the Law were a Covenant of grace, yet the righteousnesse of works and faith differ as much as heaven and earth. But the Papists, they make this difference: The righteousnesse of the Law (saith Stapleton, Antid. in hunc locum) is that which we of our owne power have and doe by the knowledge and understanding of the Law: but the righteousnesse of faith, they make the righteousnesse of the Law, to which wee are enabled by grace through Christ: So that they compare not these two together, as two contraries, (in which sense Paul doth) but as an imperfect righteousnesse with a perfect. But we know, that the Apostle excludeth the workes of David & Abraham, that they did in obedience to the Law, to which they were enabled by grace; so necessary is it in matter of justification and pardon to exclude all ⟨p. 234⟩workes, any thing that is ours; Tolle te à te, impedis te, said Austine well. Nor doth it availe us, that this grace in us is from God, because the Apostle makes the opposition wholy between any thing that is ours, howsoever we come by it, and that of faith in Christ. Having thus explained the state of the Question, I come to the arguments to prove the affirmative: And thus I shall order them;
