A77854:447
Vindiciæ legis
Vindiciæ legis: or, A vindication of the moral law and the covenants, from the errors of papists, Arminians, Socinians, and more especially, Antinomians. In XXIX. lectures, preached at Laurence-Jury, London. / By Anthony Burgess, preacher of Gods Word.Vindiciæ legis: or, A vindication of the morall law and the covenants, from the errours of papists, Arminians, Socinians, and more especially, Antinomians. In XXIX. lectures, preached at Laurence-Jury, London. / By Anthony Burgess, preacher of Gods Word.
London: printed by James Young for Thomas Underhill, 1646
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
And, in the first place, I bring this Argument, (which much Argum. 1 prevaileth with me:) If so be the Ceremonial Law, as given by Moses, had still obliged Christians, though there could be no obligation from the matter, had it not been revoked and abolished; then the Moral Law given by Moses must still oblige, though it did not bind in respect of the matter, unless we can show where it is repealed. For the further clearing of this, you may consider, that this ⟨p. 160⟩was the great Question, which did so much trouble the Church in her infancy, Whether Gentiles converted were bound to keep up the Ceremonial Law? Whether they were bound to circumcise, and to use all those legal purifications? Now how are these Questions decided, but thus? That they were but the shadows, and Christ the fullness was come, and therefore they were to cease.
And, in the first place, I bring this Argument, (which much Argum. 1 prevaileth with me:) If so be the Ceremoniall Law, as given by Moses, had still obliged Christians, though there could be no obligation from the matter, had it not been revoked and abolished; then the Morall Law given by Moses must still oblige, though it did not binde in respect of the matter, unlesse we can shew where it is repealed. For the further clearing of this, you may consider, that this ⟨p. 160⟩was the great Question, which did so much trouble the Church in her infancy, Whether Gentiles converted were bound to keep up the Ceremoniall Law? Whether they were bound to circumcise, and to use all those legall purifications? Now how are these Questions decided, but thus? That they were but the shadowes, and Christ the fulnesse was come, and therefore they were to cease.
And thus for the Judicial Laws, because they were given to them as a politic body, that polity ceasing, which was the principal, the accessory falls with it; so that the Ceremonial Law, in the judgement of all, had still bound Christians, were there not special revocations of these commands, and were there not reasons for their expiration from the very nature of them. Now no such thing can be affirmed by the Moral Law; for the matter of that is perpetual, and there are no places of Scripture that do abrogate it. And, if you say, that the Apostle in some places, speaking of the Law, seemeth to take in Moral, as well as Ceremonial, I answer it thus: The question which was first started up, and troubled the Church, was merely about Ceremonies, as appeareth