Chapter 9

CHAP. IX.

That this Opinion of the Gospel's being a New Law, too much agrees with the Popish and Arminian Doctrines, proved by several Instances out of their Authors.

SINCE Popery and Arminianism, under various Names, and in pursuit of different Ends, make the same stated Opposition to the Design of the Gospel; every Opinion which agrees with their Errors, deserves to be suspiciously regarded, and is unworthy of any favourable reception. If it then doth appear that this Doctrine of the Gospel's being a new Law, hath been strongly maintained by the Romish Church in several Ages, as that which lays the surest Foundation for that dear Article of their Faith, the Merit of Works; and hath all been zealously espoused by the Arminians and Socinians, as a most effectual Engine to overthrow Justification by the imputed Righteousness of Christ: Then all who love Jesus the Redeemer, or are careful of their own Salvation by him, will be very wary of giving a welcome Entertainment to this new Law. That the Doctors of the Romish Church have all along asserted the Gospel to be a new Law, will be evident from a few Instances.

SINCE Popery and Arminianism, under various Names, and in pursuit of different Ends, make the same stated Opposition to the Design of the Gospel; every Opinion which agrees with their Errors, deserves to be suspiciously regarded, and is unworthy of any favourable reception. If it then doth appear that this Doctrine of the Gospel's being a new Law, hath been strongly maintain'd by the Romish Church in several Ages, as that which lays the surest Foundation for that dear Article of their Faith, the Merit of Works; and hath all been zealously espoused by the Arminians and Socinians, as a most effectual Engine to overthrow Justification by the imputed Righteousness of Christ: Then all who love Jesus the Redeemer, or are careful of their own Salvation by him, will be very wary of giving a welcome Entertainment to this new Law. That the Doctors of the Romish Church have all along asserted the Gospel to be a new Law, will be evident from a few Instances.

Petrus Lombardus, the Master of the Sentences, who flourished An. Dom. 1141. explaining the Difference between the Old Law, and the New Law the Gospel. ^aThe Precepts of them (says he) are different as to Ceremonials: For as to Morals they are the same, but are more fully contained in the Gospel.

Petrus Lombardus, the Master of the Sentences, who flourish'd An. Dom. 1141. explaining the Difference between the Old Law, and the New Law the Gospel. ^aThe Precepts of them (says he) are different as to Ceremonials: For as to Morals they are the same, but are more fully contain'd in the Gospel.

1. aPraecepta etiam diversa quantum ad Ceremonialia: Nam quantum ad moralia sunt eadem, sed plenius in Evangelio continentur. Petrus Lombard. lib. 3. Sentent. Dist. 4. pag. 681. Edit. in 8o. Mogunt. 1632.

Alexander Alensis who lived Anno Dom. 1230. resolving that Question, Whether the Observance of the Old or New Law be the most burdensome? says,^b That the Precepts of the Gospel, simply and absolutely, are more difficult, and of a greater Burden than the Precepts of the Mosaical Law.

Alexander Alensis who liv'd Anno Dom. 1230. resolving that Question, Whether the Observance of the Old or New Law be the most burdensome? says,^b That the Precepts of the Gospel, simply and absolutely, are more difficult, and of a greater Burden than the Precepts of the Mosaical Law.

1. bTametsi Evangelii praecepta simpliciter difficiliora sint, majorisque oneris praeceptis Mosaicae Legis, &c. Alex. Alens. Sum. Theol. par. 3. Quaest. 28. Memb. 4. Art. 1. pag. 193. Col. Agr. 1622.

Gulielmus Altissiodorensis, who flourished Anno Dom. 1240. resolves the same Question, with this Distinction;^c The Difficulty or Weight is twofold, ⟨p. 70⟩one Carnal, the other Spiritual. As to the Carnal Burdensomness, the old Law was heavier than the Gospel; but as to the Spiritual Difficulty, the new Law is more difficult.

Gulielmus Altissiodorensis, who flourish'd Anno Dom. 1240. resolves the same Question, with this Distinction;^c The Difficulty or Weight is twofold, ⟨p. 70⟩one Carnal, the other Spiritual. As to the Carnal Burdensomness, the old Law was heavier than the Gospel; but as to the Spiritual Difficulty, the new Law is more difficult.

1. cDuplex est difficultas five gravitas, una carnalis, alia spiritualis: Quantum ad carnalem gravitatem gravior erat Lex vetus quam Evangelium, sed quantum ad difficultatem spiritualem Lex nova difficilior. Guil. Altissiod. Sum. in Sentent. lib. 4. Fol. 243. pag. 2 Paris. 1500.

Albertus Magnus, who lived Anno Dom. 1260. clearing, how tho the Letter of the Law kills, yet the Spirit makes alive.^d The Spirit (says he) is the Grace of the Spirit, in which the Holy Ghost is given; and this is given in the making of the new Law, not in that of the Old.

1. dSpiritus est gratia spiritus, in quâ datur spiritus sanctus: & haec datur in Legislatione novâ, non veteri. Albert. Magn. Come. in lib. 3. Sentent. Dist. 4. Art. 4. pag. 419. Tom. 15. oper. Ed à Jammy, Lugd. 1651.Spiritus est gratia spiritus, in quâ datur spiritus sanctus: & haec datur in Legislatione novâ, non veteri. Albert. Magn. Com. in lib. 3. Sentent. Dist. 4. Art. 4. pag. 419. Tom. 15. oper. Ed à Jammy, Lugd. 1651.

Thomas Aquinas, who lived Anno Dom. 1265. in resolving that Question, Whether the new Law can justify a Man? positively affirms, That^e the Evangelical Law, since it is the Grace it self of the Holy Spirit, doth necessarily justify a Man.

1. eLex Evangelica, cum sit ipsa spiritus sancti gratia, necessariò hominem justificat. Aquin. Sum. prim. second. Qu. 106. Art. 2. pag. 199. Col. Agr. 1622.Lex Evangelica, cum sit ipsa spiritus sancti gratia, necessariò hominem justificat. Aquin. Sum. prim. secund. Qu. 106. Art. 2. pag. 199. Col. Agr. 1622.

Joannes Duns Scotus, who flourished Anno Dom. 1300. explaining how the new Law is easier to be obeyed than the old One, tho it hath all the Moral Precepts of that with the superaddition of new Ones:^f But (says he) on the Part of the new Law, the Multitude and Efficacy of the Aids doth more alleviate the Difficulty of its Moral Precepts.

Joannes Dunscotus, who flourish'd Anno Dom. 1300. explaining how the new Law is easier to be obey'd than the old One, tho it hath all the Moral Precepts of that with the superaddition of new Ones:^f But (says he) on the Part of the new Law, the Multitude and Efficacy of the Aids doth more alleviate the Difficulty of its Moral Precepts.

1. fEx parte autem Legis novae plus alleviat multitudo, & efficacia auxiliorum, &c. Scotus in lib. 3. Sentent. Dist. 40.

Raynerius de Pisis, who also flourished Anno Dom. 1300. discourseth largely about this new Law, and its Excellence and eminent Prerogative above the old One:^g Which new Law (says he) hath four notable and excellent Conditions; for it is a Law of Charity, of Liberty, Facility, and Necessity; and with a tedious prolixness he insists on all those Particulars.

Raynerius de Pisis, who also flourish'd Anno Dom. 1300. discourseth largely about this new Law, and its Excellence and eminent Prerogative above the old One:^g Which new Law (says he) hath four notable and excellent Conditions; for it is a Law of Charity, of Liberty, Facility, and Necessity; and with a tedious prolixness he insists on all those Particulars.

1. gQuae quidem Lex nova quatuor notabiles & excellentes conditiones habet. Est enim Lex Charitatis, Libertatis, Facilitatis, Necessitatis. Rayner. de Pisis Pantheol. Tom. 2. Cap. 109. de Lege pag. 116. Edit. in 4o. Brixiae, 1580.

The Cardinal, Petrus Aureolus, who flourished Anno Dom. 1317. gives eight Differences between the new Law and the Old; and among the rest assigns this, That^h the old Law commanded, but afforded no Aid, it was intent on the Letter which kills; but the New gives Spirit and Grace, which quickens.

The Cardinal, Petrus Aureolus, who flourish'd Anno Dom. 1317. gives eight Differences between the new Law and the Old; and among the rest assigns this, That^h the old Law commanded, but afforded no Aid, it was intent on the Letter which kills; but the New gives Spirit and Grace, which quickens.

1. hAntiqua (viz. Lex) imperabat, sed auxilium non praebebat, attendebat literam, quae occidit: Nova spiritum, & gratiam, quae vivificat. Aureolus in lib. 3. Sentent. Dist. 40. Quaest. ult. pag. 451. Tom. 2. Romae, 1605.

ⁱThat the new Law frees us from the Burdens of the old Law, is true, (says Durandus à S. Porciano, who lived Anno Dom. 1320.) both because it imposeth on us fewer Burdens, and also lighter, and which belong to the Cure of the Disease of Sin, and to the preservation of Spiritual Health.

ⁱThat the new Law frees us from the Burdens of the old Law, is true, (says Durandus à S. Porciano, who liv'd Anno Dom. 1320.) both because it imposeth on us fewer Burdens, and also lighter, and which belong to the Cure of the Disease of Sin, and to the preservation of Spiritual Health.

1. iQuod Lex nova liberat ab oneribus veteris Legis verum est, tum quia imponit onera pauciora, tum etiam leviora, & quae pertinent ad curationem morbi peccati, & ad conservationem sanitatis spiritualis. Durand. in Sent. lib. 4. Dist. 1. Qu. 2. pag. 646. Lugd. 1587.

^kThere are two Parts of the Divine Law, both the Old and the New, (says Dionysius Carthusianus, who lived Anno Dom. 1450.) viz. Testimonies and Precepts; Testimonies concern things to be believed, Precepts those which are to be done.

^kThere are two Parts of the Divine Law, both the Old and the New, (says Dionysius Carthusianus, who lived Anno Dom. 1450.) viz. Testimonies and Precepts; Testimonies concern things to be believ'd, Precepts those which are to be done.

1. kDuae namque sunt partes Legis Divinae tam vetustae, quam novae, videlicet testimonia, & praecepta. Testimonia pertinent ad credenda, Praecepta ad operanda. Dionys. Carthus. in lib. 3. Sentent. Dist. 40. Qu. 2. pag. 330. Venet. 1584.

Dominicus Soto, who was Father Confessor to the French King Francis I. Anno Dom. 1535. disputes largely about the New Law, or the Evangelical Law; and among other things he tells us, That^l it is a Law proper to Christians, when the Moral Law, written on the Hearts of Men, belongs to all Nations. That this Law is the Gospel it self.

1. lLex Evangelica Christianorum est propria, Lex vero invita universis communiter intionibus pater.—Lex haec ipsissimum est Evangelium. Domin. Soto de Justic. & Jure, lib. 2. Quaest. 7. Art. 1. Fol. 61. pag. 1. Lugd. 1582.

And then determining that Question, Whether this new Evangelical Law hath the Virtue of justifying a Man? he decides it in these two Propositions; ^m1. The Evangelical Law, if its pure Instructions and Commands, and Substance of its Works be considered, doth no more in it self justify than the old Law, or the Law of Nature it self. 2. The Evangelical Law, if its internal Virtue is considered, justifies a Man.

And then determining that Question, Whether this new Evangelical Law hath the Virtue of justifying a Man? he decides it in these two Propositions; ^m1. The Evangelical Law, if its pure Instructions and Commands, and Substance of its Works be considered, doth no more in it self justify than the old Law, or the Law of Nature it self. 2. The Evangelical Law, if its internal Virtue is consider'd, justifies a Man.

1. mPrime conclusio est: Lex Evangelica, si pura documenta & mandata, atque opetum substantiam consideres, non magis per se justificat, quam vetus, vel Lex ipsa naturae.—Secunda conclusio: Lex Evangelica, si internam ejus virtutem mediteris, hominem justificat. Id. Ibid. Quaest. 7. Art. 2. Fol. 61. pag. 2.

Albertus Pighius, who lived at the same Time, speaking of the Cup in the Sacrament:ⁿ This is the Cup, (says he) not of that old Testament, which was then presently to be disannulled, but of the New and Eternal Covenant, of the new Law promulgated in a new manner.

Albertus Pighius, who lived at the same Time, speaking of the Cup in the Sacrament:ⁿ This is the Cup, (says he) not of that old Testament, which was then presently to be disannull'd, but of the New and Eternal Covenant, of the new Law promulgated in a new manner.

1. nNon veteris illius, & tunc continuò evacuandi, sed novi & aeterai Testamenti, novae Legis, novo more promulgatae. Alb. Pighius, de Hierarch Ecclesiast. lib. 1. cap. 2. Fol. 7. pag. 1. Col. Agr. 1558.

If we go to the more Modern Doctors of the Church of Rome, who lived in this present Age, we shall find that they all write in the same Strain. ⟨p. 72⟩^oBut the Law, says Estius, (showing the Difference between the two Laws) accompanied with Grace, such as the new Law is understood to be, doth not only show what is to be done, but doth administer Spirit and Virtue, by which what is given in Precept may be fulfilled.

If we go to the more Modern Doctors of the Church of Rome, who liv'd in this present Age, we shall find that they all write in the same Strain. ⟨p. 72⟩^oBut the Law, says Estius, (shewing the Difference between the two Laws) accompanied with Grace, such as the new Law is understood to be, doth not only shew what is to be done, but doth administer Spirit and Virtue, by which what is given in Precept may be fulfill'd.

1. oLex autem gratiâ comitata, cujusmodi intelligitur Lex nova, non tantum quid sit agendum, ostendit, verum etiam spiritum & virtutem subministrat, quâ quod praecipitur, impleatur. Estius, in lib. 3. Sentent. Dist. 40. §. 4. pag. 159. Tom. 1. Duac. 1616.

Suarez, who for strength of Mind, and clearness of Thought, is the best of all the Schoolmen, spends the whole tenth Book of his large Volume about Laws, to explain the Nature of this new Evangelical Law. He at the very first lays down these two Assertions.^p 1. That Christ was not only a Redeemer but a true and proper Legislator. 2. That the Law of Christ, or the new Law, is a true and most proper preceptive Law.

1. pDicendum verò primò est Christum dominum non solum suisse redemptorem, sed etiam fuisse verum, & proprium Legis latorem.—Dico secundo Lex Christi seu Lex nova, est vera ac propriissima Lex praeceptiva. Suarez. de Legibus, lib. 10. cap. 2. pag. 696, 697. Mogunt. 1619.

And then afterward assoiling that Difficulty, How this his new Law can justify, since it consists in Precepts as well as the Old, and so could have no more justifying Virtue in it than that:^q But to this Difficulty (says he) there is also a common Answer, That Grace doth agree to the new Law in it self, and as proper to it: but it was not joined to the old preceding Laws from their own force and Virtue, and as proper to them, but with respect to the Law of Grace: And therefore Justification is simply attributed to the Law of Grace, but not to the former Laws.—For this Reason therefore the Spirit of Grace is said to be proper to the new Law, because this new Law was given in which the Author of Grace was now come, and consummated the Redemption of Men, and merited Grace for all. Yes, he himself is the Author, both of this Law and of Grace.

And then afterward assoiling that Difficulty, How this his new Law can justify, since it consists in Precepts as well as the Old, and so could have no more justifying Virtue in it than that:^q But to this Difficulty (says he) there is also a common Answer, That Grace doth agree to the new Law in it self, and as proper to it: but it was not join'd to the old preceding Laws from their own force and Virtue, and as proper to them, but with respect to the Law of Grace: And therefore Justification is simply attributed to the Law of Grace, but not to the former Laws.—For this Reason therefore the Spirit of Grace is said to be proper to the new Law, because this new Law was given in which the Author of Grace was now come, and consummated the Redemption of Men, and merited Grace for all. Yes, he himself is the Author, both of this Law and of Grace.

1. qAd diffitultatem est Responsio communis; gratiam convenire Legi novae quasi per se, & ex propris; antiquioribus vero Legibus non ex vi illarum, seu per se fuisse conjunctam, sed per respectum ad Legem gratiae. Et ideo Legi gratiae simpliciter tribui justificationem non verò superioribus Legibus.—Ob hanc ergo rationem spiritus gratiae dicitur esse proprius Legis novae quia data est eo tempore, in quo jam Author gratiae advenit, & redemptionem hominum consummavit, gratiamque omnibus meruit. Imo idem ipse est Author hujus regis, & gratiae. Idem. Ibid. cap. 5. pag. 712.

I will name one more, the Cardinal Bellarmine, who as he fiercely opposed the Doctrine of Grace, revived by the first Reformers, he earnestly sat himself to assert the Gospel to be a new Law. And as he knew very well, that he could not maintain the Merit of Works and Justification by them, without this Assertion of the Gospel's being a new Law, he begins his fourth Book ⟨p. 73⟩of Justification which is concerning the Righteousness of Works, with eager Endeavours to vindicate this Assertion against the Protestants. Among other things, too long here to relate, he tells us; That^r indeed if we speak of the Grace of the New Testament, the Law is not distinguished from the Gospel in this, that the Law requires Works, but the Gospel doth not require Works: But in that the Law teacheth what is to be done, the Gospel affords Strength to do it. So that according to him, the new Law tho requiring Works, is yet a Law of Grace, because accompanied with Grace.

I will name one more, the Cardinal Bellarmine, who as he fiercely oppos'd the Doctrine of Grace, reviv'd by the first Reformers, he earnestly sat himself to assert the Gospel to be a new Law. And as he knew very well, that he could not maintain the Merit of Works and Justification by them, without this Assertion of the Gospel's being a new Law, he begins his fourth Book ⟨p. 73⟩of Justification which is concerning the Righteousness of Works, with eager Endeavours to vindicate this Assertion against the Protestants. Among other things, too long here to relate, he tells us; That^r indeed if we speak of the Grace of the New Testament, the Law is not distinguish'd from the Gospel in this, that the Law requires Works, but the Gospel doth not require Works: But in that the Law teacheth what is to be done, the Gospel affords Strength to do it. So that according to him, the new Law tho requiring Works, is yet a Law of Grace, because accompanied with Grace.

1. rEt quidem si loquamur de Gratiâ Novi Testamenti, non distinguitur Lex ab Evangelio: Quod Lex requirat opera, Evangelium non requirat opera; sed quod Lex doceat quid sit faciendum, Evangelium praebeat vires ad faciendum. Bellarm. de Justif. lib. 4. cap. 2. pag. 1011. In Tom. 4. Controv. Colon. Agrip. 1619.

Thus it is evident, that for many past Ages down to our own, this Opinion of the Gospel's being a new Law was the constant Doctrine of the Anti-christian Church, and eagerly maintained to support the Merit of Works. The Socinians and Arminians, as they joined with the Church of Rome in denying the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, so they readily embraced this Figment of the new Law; under the covert of which, they introduced an Evangelical Righteousness of our own in conformity to it, by which we are to be justified. I shall not be large in prosecuting this Business, because my Reverend and Learned Brother, Mr. Stephen Lob, will do it sufficiently. I will only offer two fair Evidences; the one of Socinus himself, the other of Episcopius. ^sTho Christ (saith Socinus) hath his Law, and promulgated it in the Name of God to the World; yet is he not called simply a Law-giver, since his Law was nothing else but a Complement, and Perfection of the Mosaical Law: nor indeed did he chiefly come into the World for that End, that he might make Laws, and be our Legislator; but that he might save us, for which End also he gave to us his Law.^t The Remonstrants confess (says Episcopius) that they are delighted with that Manner of Speaking, [viz. that Christ is a certain new Law-giver] not because it savours of this or that Author, much less because they borrowed it from Socinus; but because it is the Phrase of God, and of Scripture, and because it is the Heart and Marrow of all Religion; ⟨p. 74⟩and they believe nothing to be more necessary, than that it should be believed that Christ is the Maker of a new Law.

Thus it is evident, that for many past Ages down to our own, this Opinion of the Gospel's being a new Law was the constant Doctrine of the Anti-christian Church, and eagerly maintain'd to support the Merit of Works. The Socinians and Arminians, as they join'd with the Church of Rome in denying the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, so they readily embrac'd this Figment of the new Law; under the covert of which, they introduc'd an Evangelical Righteousness of our own in conformity to it, by which we are to be justified. I shall not be large in prosecuting this Business, because my Revernd and Learned Brother, Mr. Stephen Lobb, will do it sufficiently. I will only offer two fair Evidences; the one of Socinus himself, the other of Episcopius.

It is plain then that this Assertion of the Gospel's being a new Law, is a Popish, and Socinian, and Arminian Doctrine. What then shall I brand my Reverend Brother with any of these hated Names? No, I am so far from doing it, that I do not so much as think him to be on the Side of any of the three Parties, tho he is so liberal in bestowing Titles of Dishonour upon those who differ from him, as to call them Antinomians; and so by virtue of an hard Word, to name them the greatest Villains which can live upon Earth.

I know very well that the Papists, together with asserting the Gospel to be a Law, assert the Merit of Works; which is disclaimed by my Brother, and yet is really included in his Hypothesis: For what is Merit, but when the Reward is due to some Work done? And now if the Gospel be in that respect a Law, that it requires Duties as Conditions of having a Claim to its Blessings, and promises them to the Performance of those Conditions, then to them performed, tho of never so little Consideration, the Blessings must be given not as the Fruits of mere Grace, but as the Results of a just Debt. However, tho the Opinion is not professedly so rank as Popery, and Arminianism; yet in the least Nearness to those destructive Errors there is Danger, and within the very Confines dwell Plagues and Death. The People cannot then with too much Zeal, be warned of the hazardous Approaches which lead them on to be betrayed into the Enemies Camp. They understand not the Niceties of Controversy, and of Errors so refined that they escape their discerning they are not afraid, and yet all the while the Venom works more desperately for being subtilized, and the invisible Spirits of it mortally seize their Brains, when they startled at the sight of the Poison offered in its grosser Bulk. I hope then my Reverend Brother, and all others, will pardon me if my Love to the Truth hath stirred me with some just Indignation against the Opinions, which favour those dangerous Errors concerning Justification by Works, and if I have been moved to represent them in their own exact Shape and natural Colours. For tho I will not avow these newly advanced Doctrines to be rank Popery, and Arminianism; yet I must say, that they want but little of taking that Degree, and that even in this respect they are the more hurtful. For when a gross Error is wire-drawn to a slender Thread, it is the more mischievous in being not easily discernible, since so it slides insensibly into the Minds of the Unwary. What tho the Merit of good Works is disclaimed; what tho the Socinian and Arminian Inferences from the Gospel's being a new Law, are disowned; yet would it not be better for the Preservation of the Truth in its Purity, and for the Safety of the Souls of the People, to forbear such Phrases and Modes of Speech, which by the Enemies of the Gospel are made use of to very ill Purposes?

I know very well that the Papists, together with asserting the Gospel to be a Law, assert the Merit of Works; which is disclaim'd by my Brother, and yet is really included in his Hypothesis: For what is Merit, but when the Reward is due to some Work done? And now if the Gospel be in that respect a Law, that it requires Duties as Conditions of having a Claim to its Blessings, and promises them to the Performance of those Conditions, then to them perform'd, tho of never so little Consideration, the Blessings must be given not as the Fruits of meer Grace, but as the Results of a just Debt. However, tho the Opinion is not professedly so rank as Popery, and Arminianism; yet in the least Nearness to those destructive Errors there is Danger, and within the very Confines dwell Plagues and Death. The People cannot then with too much Zeal, be warned of the hazardous Approaches which lead them on to be betray'd into the Enemies Camp. They understand not the Niceties of Controversy, and of Errors so refin'd that they escape their discerning they are not afraid, and yet all the while the Venom works more desperately for being subtiliz'd, and the invisible Spirits of it mortally seize their Brains, when they startled at the sight of the Poison offer'd in its grosser Bulk. I hope then my Reverend Brother, and all others, will pardon me if my Love to the Truth hath stirr'd me with some just Indignation against the Opinions, which favour those dangerous Errors concerning Justification by Works, and if I have been moved to represent them in their own exact Shape and natural Colours. For tho I will not avow these newly advanc'd Doctrines to be rank Popery, and Arminianism; yet I must say, that they want but little of taking that Degree, and that even in this respect they are the more hurtful. For when a gross Error is wire-drawn to a slender Thred, it is the more mischievous in being not easily discernable, since so it slides insensibly into the Minds of the Unwary. What tho the Merit of good Works is disclaim'd; what tho the Socinian and Arminian Inferences from the Gospel's being a new Law, are disown'd; yet would it not be better for the Preservation of the Truth in its Purity, and for the Safety of the Souls of the People, to forbear such Phrases and Modes of Speech, which by the Enemies of the Gospel are made use of to very ill Purposes?

Let all of us be swayed by the Words of a Man, whose Memory we all love and revere: It is the admirable Beza; who writing against Claudius ⟨p. 75⟩de Xaintes, contests with him that the Gospel was not a new Law, nor ought so to be named;^u I confess (says he) that Paul makes mention in one place of the Law of Faith, which he opposeth to the Law of Works; but besides that the Name of Faith added takes away all Ambiguity, I say that neither so indeed doth that Place favour thee. I read in the same Apostle, the Law of Christ expressed, but meant for the Command of mutual Love renewed by Christ, to which is opposed the external, and especially the Pharisaical Observation of the Law. I deny that the perfect Law of Liberty, which James mentions, belongs to this naming of a new Law. But I remember that Calvin in one place uses your Phrase, but with an Interpretation added; and that too only, that all might understand what he would disprove in you. But do not think that I contend with you about a Trifle, tho some of the Ancient Fathers, as Augustine (which yet he did very rarely) attributed sometimes the Name of a Law, and indeed of a new, or second Law, to the New Testament or Gospel. That pernicious, and plainly detestable Error of your's, by which you take away the chief Difference of the Law and Gospel, makes me to judg that this Phrase, viz. [a new Law] unusual in the Scriptures, ought wholly to be thrust out of the Church.

Let all of us be sway'd by the Words of a Man, whose Memory we all love and revere: It is the admirable Beza; who writing against Claudius ⟨p. 75⟩de Xaintes, contests with him that the Gospel was not a new Law, nor ought so to be named;^u I confess (says he) that Paul makes mention in one place of the Law of Faith, which he opposeth to the Law of Works; but besides that the Name of Faith added takes away all Ambiguity, I say that neither so indeed doth that Place favour thee. I read in the same Apostle, the Law of Christ express'd, but meant for the Command of mutual Love renewed by Christ, to which is oppos'd the external, and especially the Pharisaical Observation of the Law. I deny that the perfect Law of Liberty, which James mentions, belongs to this naming of a new Law. But I remember that Calvin in one place uses your Phrase, but with an Interpretation added; and that too only, that all might understand what he would disprove in you. But do not think that I contend with you about a Triffle, tho some of the Antient Fathers, as Augustine (which yet he did very rarely) attributed sometimes the Name of a Law, and indeed of a new, or second Law, to the New Testament or Gospel. That pernicious, and plainly detestable Error of your's, by which you take away the chief Difference of the Law and Gospel, makes me to judg that this Phrase, viz. [a new Law] unusual in the Scriptures, ought wholly to be thrust out of the Church.

FINIS.