Vindiciæ legis & fœderis

That the Law required perfect working, under pain of the Curse; accepted no short Endeavours, admitted no Repentance, and gave no Strength. But finding me here pleading for the Law, you think you find me in a Contradiction to that Doctrine.

The Words I own, the Contradiction I positively deny; for I speak not there and here ad idem: For in that Sermon, and in those very Words you cite, I speak against the Law, not as God intended it, when he added it to the Promise, but as ⟨p. 135⟩the Ignorance and Infidelity of unregenerate Men make it to themselves a Covenant of Works, by looking upon it as the very rule and reason of their Justification before God. This was the Stumbling Stone at which all Legal Justiciaries then did, and still do stumble, Rom. 9. 31, 32, 33. In this Sense the Apostle in his Epistles to the Romans and Galatians argues against the Law, and so do I in the Words you cite; but vindicate the Law in the very same Sermon you mention, as consistent with, and subservient to Christ, in the former Sense; and there tell you, The Law sends us to Christ to be justified, and Christ sends us back to the Law to be regulated. The very same double Sense of the Law you will find in this Discourse, and from the mistaken end and abuse of the Law, which the Apostle so vehemently opposeth, I here prove against you, that the Law in this Sense cannot consist with, or be added to the Promise, and therefore make it my Medium to prove against you, That the true Nature and Denomination of the Sinai Law can never be found in this Sense of it, but it must be estimated and denominated from the Purpose and Intention of God, which I have proved ⟨p. 136⟩to be Evangelical. Try your skill to fasten a Contradiction betwixt my Words in that Sermon and this Discourse. I know you would be glad to find the shadow of one, to make some small Excuse or Atonement for the many faults of that nature you have here committed.