Did John Gill Deny "Duty Faith"?

Here is what Gill wrote in his commentary on Romans 10: 5. (emphasis mine)

"that the man which doth those things, shall live by them, or "in them"; and which is to be seen in Leviticus 18:5, "ye shall therefore keep my statutes and my judgments, which if a man do, he shall live in them"; from whence it appears, that by "those things" a man is to do, are meant the statutes and judgments of God, not the ordinances of the ceremonial, but the precepts of the moral law; and that the righteousness of the law lies in "doing" and keeping those statutes, not merely externally, but internally, with all the heart, and soul, and strength; the law requires love to God, fear of him, and faith in him, and an inward disposition of the mind towards him, and a conformity of heart and nature to his law, as well as outward obedience; and all this is to be done perfectly and completely in every punctilio the law requires, otherwise no life is to be expected, nor any righteousness to be had by it."

It seems clear to me that Gill upheld "duty faith" in this citation. Am I misreading him?