himselfe If any shall alledge the latter sense I answer That Gods application of pardon is pardon or Gods renewed application of pardon is neither more nor lesse but plainly this viz. Gods bestowing a new pardon or in the phrase of the Prophet Isaiah chap. 55.7 his multiplying to pardon or his pardoning again and again These things I say considered I have thought meet to forbear the use of that expression A renewed application of pardon and in stead thereof to say New pardons I am not ignorant likewise that some Divines in stead of saying There is an actual obligation of the sinner by or immediately upon the commission of sin to damnation they sometimes say There is an aptitude in all sin to damn the sinner which phrase as being more mollifying it was once in my thoughts to have used and accordingly to have expressed Gods particular and new pardons by his hindring or obstructing the foresaid aptitude of such particular and new sins from taking effect in the actual obligation of a sinner to damnation But upon a due consideration of this expression I found as I thought and still do think just cause to wave and decline the use of it that expression being as much as to say I should have fallen out if I had not been reconciled or I should have been wounded if I had not been healed or I had been bound and tyed if I had not been loosed and untyed or a sinner should have been obliged to suffer if he had not been pardoned These two last phrases I confesse in a sense are true and for that purpose may be used viz. I had been still bound and tyed if I had not been losed and untyed or A sinner should have been still obliged to suffer if he had not been pardoned importing that time was when the sinner or person now loosed untied and pardoned was actually tied bound and obliged to suffer Neverthelesse without the supposal of a sinners precedaneous actual obligation to suffer the foresaid expressions are intolerable because pardon doth not prevent the sinners obligation to suffer no more then healing doth prevent wounding or loosing doth prevent binding but alwayes followes after it in order of Nature at least if not in time as the remedy thereof The premises being duly weighed I can perceive no just cause why any person under what pretence soever should bee offended for my asserting as is before asserted viz. That new sins do bring a new obligation to punishment which obligation must bee dissolved or taken off by a new pardon CHAP. XX. That all sins past present or to come are not at once actually pardoned That no sin is from eternity actually pardoned An Objection answered That no sin is actually pardoned till the sinner be in a capacity of receiving or enjoying it What those things are which do put a sinner into a capacity of actual pardon declared in their particulars together with Reasons for the remarkablenesse of the same An Objection answered with a vindicating of that assertion in Rom. 4.17 wherein God is said to call the things that are not as though they were from Antinomian purposes CONSECT XIII 13. IT followes That all sins past present and to come are not forgiven at once Had the Authours and Abettors of the contrary Opinion viz. That all sins past present and to come are at once actually remitted and that from eternity either rightly knowne or duly considered the nature of forgiveness of sin what it is and wherein it doth consist then doubtless they would not have owned an opinion so absurd and irrational for they who do understand that forgivenesse of sin doth consist in Gods taking off the obligation to punishment and punishment it self and yet will affirm That all sins past present and to come are at once remitted must consequently affirm That a man may be disobliged afore he is obliged loosed afore bound set at liberty afore captivated or imprisoned and that punishment is taken off afore it be inflicted and laid on then which to affirme or imply what is more inconsistent with sense and reason Neverthelesse because there hath beene some very Learned and Pious men who have adhered to this opinion that all sins past present and to come are forgiven at once and that from eternity I shal for the more satisfaction subjoin certain propositions partly in the way of concession and paâ—tly in the way of exception As to the former I grant that at what time God did will or purpose to pardon any one sinne yea any one elect sinner he did at that instant time will or purpose to pardon all and every sin all and every sinner and this hee did will and purpose from all eternity for Gods will or purpose being his essence it cannot therefore be said that hee did ever begin to will or purpose any thing 2. When Christ Jesus did purchase the pardon of any one sin or sinner he did purchase the pardon of all and every sin and sinner and this was actually done when he died upon the crosse Heb. 10. 12 14. Albeit in such a sense as Abraham is said to have offered up Isaac Heb. 11.17 viz. in regard of his purpose readinesse and resolution to offer him in such a sense it may be said that Christ did long before offer himselfe hee being willing thereunto and resolved thereupon which said willingnesse and resolution in him was to such intents and effects accepted with God as if he had actually accomplished his said will and resolution Whence that common saying Christs sufferings were effectuall afore they were effected 3. When God did promise pardon to any one sinne or sinner he did promise the pardon of all sins * I mean of all sins that shall be pardoned for there are some sins that never shal be pardoned as final impenitency or the final non-performance of the conditions of the Gospel and the sin against the Holy Ghost and unto these sins God doth not promise any pardon upon any terms and sinners and that upon the selfe same terms viz. of repenting believing converting from sin That Gospel promise I will be your God or whosoever believeth in Christ shall receive remission of sinnes doth at once hold forth the pardon of all sinne which said promise it selfe may in a sense be stiled a sinners pardon even as the instrument or writing under the Kings hand and Seale is called the Kings pardon which said promise also may be stiled a complete and full pardon for as much as it wants nothing to make it in its kind a perfect and legall discharge from all sins the pardon of all sins as well as of any one sin being therein promised to sinners so that what person soever hath a right by faith unto the said Gospel grant or promise of pardon hath right to the pardon of all his sins in these three respects viz. In respect of Gods purpose of Christs purchase and of the Gospel-promise We may be said to
effects thereof such are the various names or expressions of Gods pardon or not pardon of sin For example As sin is stiled filthiness or uncleanness 2 Cor. 7.1 Rom. 6.19 So the pardon of sin is stiled washing cleansing covering purging away As sin is the souls sickness or disease in which sense some Expositors do understand that in Psal 103.3 Who forgiveth all thy sins and healeth all thy diseases Or as sin doth wound the sinner so pardon is stiled Healing As sin maketh us guilty so the pardon of sin is stiled Gods not imputing it his not laying it to our charge and his not pardoning us is said to be his not cleering us or holding us guiltless As sin makes us wretched and miserable so pardon of sin is stiled Gods being merciful to the sin or sinner As sin is stiled a Debt making us lyable to God in such sort as Debtors to their Creditors so Gods pardoning mercy is said to be his blotting out our sins casting them into the depths of the sea And in this sort allusivè the Apostles phrase in the Text which is now before us seemes to be the express word being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a word most frequently used by other of the Evangelists and Apostles which word doth signify to dismiss leave let alone absolve send away release or set at liberty Mat. 4.20 and 18.27 being twice used in one verse Luke 4.18 though it be rendred in different English words viz. Deliverance and setting at liberty It seems to be a Metaphor taken from those who are loosened from their bonds or delivered out of prison into which they were cast for their Debts or misdemeanors To proceed As the sinner by committing sin doth as it were arm his sin against himself or as sin hath a power accrewing to it as I may so say to do us mischief by vertue of the Law 's commination for which cause the Law is said to be the strength of sin 1 Cor. 15.56 so Gods pardoning sin is said to be his subduing our sin or giving victory to the sinner over his sin 1 Cor. 15 57. Thanks be to God who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ As sin makes us obnoxious to Gods hatred and abhorring so Gods pardoning the sinner is said to be Gods gracious receiving the sinner Hos 14.2 Take away all iniquity and receive us graciously And contrarily Gods not pardoning us is said to be his not accepting us 2. Let it be observed and considered that the most of the said various expressions are allusive Translations or metaphorical being spoken of God after the manner of men in them Deus humanum dicit God doth condescend to our capacity he doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to use the Apostles phrase 1 Cor. 4.6 he doth in a figure transfer the said things and expressions from us to himself whereby to assist us in our weakness e. g. it being usual with men when they do forgive to forget God therefore forgiving sin is said not to remember it and it being usual with men when they threaten to be revenged to say to their adversary Well I 'll be sure to remember you I 'll never forget this injury and affront so long as I live Gods not pardoning therefore is said to be Gods not forgetting sin or his remembring sin Again Men when they do forgive being moved with inward pity and compassion as was the father of the Prodigal upon the sight of his relenting Son Gods forgiving us therefore is said to be his having compassion on us Mic. 7 19. Gods compassion Quoad terminum or terminativè is the self same with forgivenesse of sin but being considered connotativè it doth farther intimate the rise of pardon or the inward moving cause together with the external occasion therof viz. Mans misery and Gods free love and mercy Gods compassion being verbum con-significans This latter particular being duly observed and considered it will appear how wary and cautious we should be in the Interpretations of the said Metaphorical phrases and how needful it is therein to observe the Apostles rule in another case viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 12.3 We must beware how we do in our conceptions about the said phrases supra sentire that we do not understand more in them then is fit or in reason possible to be understood we must be careful not to sense them above their scope and intendment but ever to interpret them in a modest moderate and sober sense that the words may be the words of truth as indeed they are the sense must be the sense of sobernesse For want of observing of due caution in the sober construction of the said phrases it may in a sort be said unto many a one as to him in the Poet Quem recitas mens est O Fidentine libellus Sed malè dum recitas incipit esse tuns Thus may the Lord say unto many amongst us who do misconstrue such metaphorical phrases as Gods casting sin behind his back his blotting it out his not remembring it stretching them beyond their due scope and intendment and as it were gathering that in and from them which God never strawed viz. The words as uttered by me are my words and true Scripture but as over-sensed and misunderstood by you they are your own and no part of any Scripture of mine Quest What Rules are to be observed for the safer better and right understanding of the foresaid Metaphorical phrases Answ These three 1. The like rule which is given us for the sensing of Parables and similitudes is here to be observed that is to observe their true scope and intendment and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as is the Apostles word 2 Cor 10.14 not to wretch and tenter them beyond that scantling or to stretch them beyond the measure of their said scope and intendment It s a common saying Similitudo non currit quatuor and as the learned Stegman doth learnedly expresse it Parabolae nihil probant ratione circumferentiae sed tantum ratione centri the like may be said concerning the foresaid expressions If we respect them in their circumference in such a latitude of sense as they sound to our ears they prove nothing the sense of them being to be confined to their center i.e. their bare scope and drift that look how really a man forgives an offence when he hath forgotten it so really doth God forgive 2. We are here to interpret as Saint Paul elsewhere directs us to prophesie viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 12.6 according to the Analogy of faith and so as that the said phrases may hold proportion and correspondency with other Scriptures This indeed is a general rule to be observed in the expounding of any place of Scripture and it is in the present businesse especially to be made use of viz. to compare Scripture with Scripture and to make the sense of one Scripture coherent with another and to preserve
the harmony of the whole that so all Scripture being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 breathed by God as the word signifies 2 Tim. 3.16 we may not make God to utter hot and cold with the same breath I mean to speak contradictions or to be contradictious to himself 3 We are to calculate as I may so say our sense and constructions of the said phrases according to the meridian of the Divine Nature I mean we are to construe them in no other sense then the Essence Nature and Properties of the Godhead or Deity will permit It is an old and good rule given by one of the Greek Fathers Theodoret as I remember that those things which are spoken of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are to be understood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Those things which are spoken of God after the manner of men are to be understood in a sense becoming God condecent of or to his divine properties and excellencies These rules are the rather to be observed because of their consequence I mean the momentous consequence of observing or not observing them For as the careful heeding of them is a special preservative that our Table become not a snare to us I mean That our conceptions of God and the things of God be not occasionally perverted by those very expressions which were intended of God as means to help and assist our understandings touching him and them so the not-observing of them is one main cause as I am perswaded of much errour in those of the Antinomian party who do hold in a sense most intolerable and blasphemous that God sees no sin in Believers whose sins are pardoned and that he doth not in any sort remember them of which I shall have occasion to speak more particularly and largely afterwards CHAP. IV. What forgiveness of sin is not laid down in four negative Propositions HAving intimated as Chap. 1. in the way of Proeme or Preface that sacred phraseology or varity of phrase whereby forgivenesse of sin together with its contrary viz. non-forgiveness is expressed in the sacred Scriptures both of the Old and N. Testament I will in the next place set down what is as to me seemeth the true resolution of the matter in question and this I will endeavor to do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 declaring 1. Negatively What the pardon of sin is not 2. Affirmatively What it is according to the true scope purport or intent of the aforesaid various expressions For the former then bee it known 1. Gods pardoning a sin or sinner is not his freeing the sinner from the very fact of sin Not so for this is impossible ex natura rei it is I say a thing simply impossible implying a palpable contradiction What is once done can never be undone or rendred not done That which is once past cannot by the power of God be made or rendred not past in so saying I would be understood in sensu compositiva for although whatsoever is done or past might by the power of God have been prevented and in such a divided sense might never have been done or come to passe yet being once done and past it cannot be undone recalled or rendred not come to passe it being a flat contradiction that a thing should be done and not done past and not past come to passe and not come to passe 2. It is not Gods freeing a sinner from the fault of sin i.e. the faultinesse and sinfulnesse of sin It is not Peccata non peccata facere or Peccata pro non peccatis habere taking the phrase according to its simple and absolute import and not with a quasi or tanquam which doth much qualifie and alter the sense of the expression I say Pardon of sin is not so to be taken for this also is impossible ex natura rei and doth implicare involve a contradiction viz. That a fact should be faulty and not faulty a sin and not a sin for take away sinfulnesse from a fact and it doth no longer remain sinful It is therefore to be observed That a sin pardoned is as well a sin yea as much a sin i.e. every whit as sinful as ever it was before the pardon of it When a Prince or State doth pardon a Delinquent or Malefactor they do not yea they cannot thereby make them of Delinquents no Delinquents or of Malefactors no Malefactors To clear one e. g. an accused person from the fact or faultiness of the fact wherewith he is charged is one thing and to pardon a person so accused is another God by doing the latter doth not do and therefore cannot be said to do the former When a sinner therefore is pardoned we must not conceive that he is thereby made innocent again 3. Gods pardoning a sin or sinner is not his freeing them from the simple guilt and desert I mean their guiltiness and deserving of punishment I use these latter words to explain the former For though the word Reatus or Guilt be a word much in use both in Authours and in our Sermons yet is it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ambiguous and of doubtful construction being sometimes taken for the deserving of punishment and sometimes for the punishment it self deserved and sometimes for both Yea in such various senses I take the word to be used in the Text at least in the Translation of sundry Scriptures For example Num. 35.27 Where it being laid down as a Law That if the Revenger of blood finding the man-slayer without the borders of the city of Refuge shall there kill the slayer he shall not be guilty of blood that is as I conceive he doth not deserve or incur the desert of punishment neither shall he suffer for it Deut. 21.9 Where God commanding that the City-Inhabitants next to any place where an unknowne murder was committed being commanded to offer a certain peculiar Sacrifice Prov. 30.10 Lest he curse thee and thou be found guilty i.e. Lest thou sin suffer deservedly otherwise the curse causelesse shall not come and is not therefore to be feared God doth there promise that they shall put away the guilt of innocent blood from among them that is as I conceive the punishment which the shedding of that innocent blood did deserve Levit. 5.5 where it being declared in what special cases a soul should be guilty I conceive that by guilt there is meant as sin it self so the deserving of punishment However I may be mistaken in the exact sense of the forenamed Scriptures about which I list not to contend with any men of a contrary mind yet sure I am that the word Guilt as commonly used is sometimes taken for the bare deserving of punishment and sometimes for the punishment it self deserved which two the Schoolmen do usually distinguish the former being by them stiled Reatus Simplex simple guilt and the latter * Yet not as excluding but as including the sinners obligation to punishmâ—â—â— of which more distinctly I shall speak
to define or state the differences betwixt punishments properly and improperly so called which latter they stile chastisements they tell us that chastisements are inflicted à Deo Patre not Judice by God not as a Judge but as a Father Whereas I think that the sufferings of the godly are inflicted by God both as a Father and as a Judge also for why otherwise are such sufferings stiled judgments or why else should the Saints in so suffering be said as indeed they are to be judged of the Lord. 1 Cor. 11. ult Isa 26.8 In stead therefore of saying that the sufferings of the Saints are inflicted by God Tanquam patre non judice I should choose to say rather Tanquam judice patrizante they being paternall judgments or fatherly punishments 2. Whereas some say that the punishments of the wicked are for sin but the chastisements of the godly are from sin I find no such difference warranted in the word the contrary thereunto being plainly therein asserted viz. that God doth punish the godly for or because of their sins 2 King 24.3 Surely at the command of the Lord came this upon Judah for the sins of Manasseh and also for the innocent blood which he shed 2 Sam. 12.14 Howbeit because by this thy deede thou hast given occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme the child also that is borne unto thee shall surely die 1 Cor. 11.30 For this cause many are sickly among you and many sleep Rev. 2.4 I have somewhat to say unto thee because thou hast left thy first love Yea I adde that the temporal punishments of the wicked are not only for but also in some sense from sin in that the use which they ought to make of them is their repentance and amendment unto which God doth as by lively voice cal them for otherwise we cannot well conceive how the obstinacy and impenitency of men should be aggravated by Gods judgments Thence that expression Mic 7.9 Hear the red yea one special intent or end of Gods inflicting judgment on some wicked men is that all the wicked may take warning or that they may heare and feare and do no more so wickedly Deut 17 23. thence did the heathen resemble Gods judgments to thunder and lightning the end thereof being thus viz. Vt poena ad paucos terror ad amnes perveniat 3. Whereas some distinguish betwixt chastisements and punishments saying that these do proceed from the wrath and justice of God but thosê only from his love I see no warrant for such a difference seeing Scripture doth plainly tell us that the sufferings of the Saints are inflicted by an angry God and by vertue of the justword and threatning of God For what reason else were there for the Saints under sufferings to acknowledge the displeasure and justice of God as frequently we find they did and according as it was no doubt their duty to doe See Ezra 9.13 14. Dan. 9.12 13. Neh. 9.33 And why else is the wrath of God said to be kindled against his owne people and in special against Aaron the Saint of the Lord Deut. 9.26 in stead therfore of saying that the sufferings of the wicked are inflicted by Gods wrath and justice but of the godly by his love I should choose to say that the sufferings of the wicked comparatively with the suffrings of the godly do proceed from pure wrath justice but the sufferings of the godly from wrath and justice mixed with fatherly love and mercy I say comparatively with the sufferings of the godly the sufferings of the wicked doe proceede from pure wrath and justice for if wee compare the sufferings of the wicked here with their sufferings in hel I suppose that we cannot say that their sufferings here doe so purely proceed from Gods justice or from his pure justice in such sort as doe their sufferings in hell and that for the reason aforesaid viz. because their repentance and amendment is one gracious and direct end of their sufferings of many of their sufferings at least in this life And because what I have here delivered is objected against by the Antinomians I shall endeavour to cleere and vindicate the same from their exceptions and objections as followeth Ob. Christ hath fully satisfied Gods justice and how then can the sufferings of the Saints proceed from his justice or for sin Ans The sufferings of the Saints and Christs perfect satisfaction for sin are not incompossible but may very wel stand together the coexistance whereof that it may the better appeare the following answers are to me considerable and as I hope wil prove as to my self so to others satisfactory 1. Notwithstanding the sufferings of the Saints are from Gods justice yet are they not for the satisfaction of his justice in any such sense as Christs sufferings were Had the sufferings of the Saints been inflicted by God and endured by them for the satisfaction of divine justice in such a sense the objection had been of considerable force not otherwise Now I say the sufferings of the Saints are not either inflicted by God or endured by the Saints to satisfie Gods justice in any such sense as wherein Scripture affirmes Christs sufferings to be alone satisfactory i. e. the sufferings of the Saints are no part of that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or price whereby a propitiation and attonement is made for sin and sinners And let it be noted that herein we differ from the Papists who do make the sufferings of the Saints in such a sense satisfactory to Gods justice as whereby they derogate from the all-sufficient satisfaction of Jesus Christ 2. The procurement of this priviledge viz. that the Saints should not at all suffer for their sins in this world was not a thing intended in or by the satisfaction of Christ so that in calling into question how farre forth or unto what intents and present effects the satisfaction of Christ was intended by God and actually to availe I say in calling this into question we cannot reasonably be thought to impeach the perfection of Christs satisfaction And let it be observed that I speake concerning the effects and fruits of Christs satisfaction according to the intention of himself and of his Father For albeit there be never so much intrinsecal worth or value imaginable in the sufferings of Christ I exclude not his active obedience from all ingrediency into his merits I conceive notwithstanding that his sufferings did not satisfie by a natural necessity but by reason of the voluntary compact and agreement betwixt God and him and consequently that he satisfied for no other intents and purposes then were agreed upon betwixt them Q. What did Christ by his satisfaction according to compact betwixt him and his father procure and purchase for or in behalf of the Saints Answ 1. Negatively not an actual present immunity from all manner of suffering for their sins or that they should be so farre priviledged as not
as to be displeased with them and to be incensed against them 2 Sam 11.27 Davids sin in the matter of Vriah is there said to displease God Dent. 9 20. God is there said to have been very angry with Aaron to have destroyed him 2. So farre as to checke and reprove them for their sins whereby he would have them take special notice that he doth remember them and these reproofes God doth convey sometimes in a most cutting and convincing way for proof hereof see Rev. 2.4 where the Church of Ephesus is reproved for her declining And 2 Sam 12.1 Where David is sharply taxed about the matter of Vriah 3. So farre as to threaten them with suffering for their sins and that 1. Conditionally except they repent Rev. 2.5 Remember from whence thou art fallen and repent and do thy first works or else I will come unto thee quickly and remove thy Candlestick 2. Absolutely notwithstanding they have or shall repent 2 Sam. 12 13 14. where David is threatned with the death of his child if any one shal say it is a prediction to speak properly rather then a commination it will make nothing against the intent and purpose for which I alledge it notwithstanding his professed repentance and the Prophets absolution of him as to the maine of pardon in the name of God related in the foregoing verse 4. God doth so farre remember the sinns of his people as actually to inflict punishment upon them for the same and that both while they live and when they are dead 1. While they live and that variously viz. not only by withholding and withdrawing those mercies and favours from them which otherwise would have been bestowed and continued but also by inflicting such evils upon them which otherwise he would not have inflicted as doth evidently appear and as David himselfe did know to his smart and cost 2 Sam. 12.8 9 10. 2. When they are dead viz. in their posterity successors and Subjects they being Parents Princes or Soveraignes as appeares undeniably in the instances of Eli Solomon and Manasses for which see 1 Sam. 3.13 14. 1 King 11.33 and 2 24 3 4. Thus doth God so farre remember the sins of his people as to smite them for the same not only with the rod of reproofe but also with the reproof of his rod it being the duty of Gods people under extraordinary sufferings to take notice that God doth thereby remember or take knowledge of their sins as did the widow of Zareptah by occasion of the unexpected death of her Sonne saying to the Prophet O thou man of God art thou come to call my sin into remembrance and tr slay my Sonne 1 King 17.18 And if their sins do not presently appear it s their duty to search for them and to pray to God to discover them unto us according to the example of Job chap. 10.3 13.23 Where he prayes to God to shew him wherefore he contended with him and according to the patterne of the Church Lam. 3.40 Exciting one another to search and try their waies 5. If as there be degrees of grace on earth so there be degrees of glory in heaven as is commonly and very probably conceived I see not but that it may be affirmed that God doth so farre remember the sinnes of his people particularly their backslidings and declinings in grace after their conversion as to deny unto them such an eminent degree of glory in heaven which otherwise had they been more circumspect and zealous they might have obtained or had attained unto they in meane time losing of the fulnesse of the reward to which purpose that of the Apostle may not unfitly be understood 2 Joh. 8. Look to your selves that we lose not the things which we have wrought but that we receive a full reward But I will not say that this is properly to be called punishment 2. In the next place I am to shew Negatively or in what sense God doth not remember the sins of his people and for that end be it knowne 1. God doth not in such fort remember the sins of his people as he doth remember the sins of the wicked whom he doth not pardon E. g 1. God doth not so remember the sins of his people as to punish them with or in such pure justice as hee doth punish the sins of the wicked but with or in justice tempered with fatherly love 2. He doth not punish them with revenge meerly judicial or purely vindictive I say revenge meerly judicial or purely vindictive and let it be observed 1. What I doe acknowledge 2. What I doe deny 1. I grant and acknowledge that the punishments which God doth inflict upon his people are in a sort vindictive they proceding from Gods justice and being inflicted for sin as was aforesaid and one end of the inflicting therof being to make the Saints to smart and for that cause I deny not but that such punishment which God doth inflict upon the Saints for their sins may be called and are called sometimes in Scripture vengeance and for which cause I doe fully assent unto Mr. Ainsworth's Exposition of that in Psalm 99.8 Thou wast a God that forgavest them though thou tookest vengance on their inventions Where that pious and Learned Textman doth interpret by vengeance not only the punishment that in proces of time was inflicted upon the body of the rebellious people but also what was inflicted upon Moses and Aaron for their miscarriages he comparing that of the Psalmist not onely with Num. 14.20 21 23. Exod. 32.14 34 35. but moreover with Num. 20.12 Deut. 3 23 24 25. in which latter places the punishment which God did inflict upon Moses and Aaron for their sins is recorded And here let it be observed that whereas some do distinguish betwixt chastisements and punishments meaning therby the sufferings of the godly and the wicked saying that chastisements are not vindictive I cannot assent thereunto for the reasons aforesaid and which I forgot to insert in its proper place where I spake concerning the difference betwixt chastisements and punishments 2. I deny that the punishments of the Saints are revenge meerly judicially or purely vindictive as are the punishments of the wicked and the reason is evident because they proceed not from pure justice and againe albeit Gods end in inflicting them be to make them smart for their sins neverthelesse this end of Gods justice is but in subordination unto other effectual ends of his mercy or in subordination to other gracious ends which God will actually effect thereby mercy therein rejoycing as I may so say against judgement Herein the revenge which God taketh upon a penitent sinner is like to that revenge which a penitent sinner doth sometimes take upon himselfe which is not purely vindictive but in part it being upon the maine medicinal and preventive 2 Cor. 7.11 Briefly whatsoever differences have beene or can be truly assigned betwixt the temporal punishments of the
godly and the wicked so farre or in such a sense I doe assert that God doth not remember the sins of his people 2. God doth not so farre remember the sins of his people as to damne them or to punish them in hell for the same as hee will the wicked for their sins 2. God doth not in such sort remember the sins of his people now in times of the New Testament as he did remember the sins of his people in times of the Old Testament Quest How so and not so Answ Wheras in times of the Old Testament God did daily remember the sins of his people as being minded thereof by their frequent and daily sacrifices even as he was minded of his covenant with Noah in the behalfe of all flesh by the sight of the rainbow Gen. 9.12 13 14 15. and whereas God was put in mind of their sins by the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ upon the crosse hee doth * viz. Heb. 10.17 there signifie unto them that he would not remember their sins any more i.e. By the Levitical sacrifices for Christs death the antitype or substance of those sacrifices being come and accomplished the types or shadowes must now vanish or give place not yet by the death of Christ for it was not necessary that Christ should die often or more then once he having by himself once offered for ever perfected those that are sanctified and this being one special difference betwixt Jesus Christ a Priest after the order of Melchisedec and those Priests which were after Aarons order these being to offer daily sacrifices as memorials of sin but he being to offer but one and that one but once And this I take to be the true meaning of the Apostle in that of Hebrewes ch 10.17 18. as wil I presume appeare unto any intelligent reader who will impartially and without prejudice peruse the text and context in which respect I might have spared my large answer in shewing how farre forth God doth and doth not remember the sins of his people albeit as to other purposes and respects the reader I think hath no cause to judge my paines and labour therein to be amisse and needlesse And I shall adde as a third consectary and in the next place how and with what caution it behoveth us to interpret this phrase God not remembring our sinnes together with other phrases of the like straine or kind recorded in Scripture CHAP. IX Caution given as touching the interpretation of such Metaphoricall phrases whereby forgivenesse of sinne is expressed that we construe them warily and in a sober sense CONSECT III. 3. IT follows that in all such metaphorical phrases whereby the pardon of sin is expressed in Scripture E. g. Gods not seeing sin his not remembring it his covering it blotting it out hiding his face from it casting it behind his back and the like we must be wary and circumspect in their construction understanding them in a modest moderate and sober sense and not stretching them hower they sound beyond the due limits of their intended meaning so as to think soberly of God of our selves and sins I have already given certain rules or directives as touching the right interpretation of such phrases and shall need therefore in this place to say the lesse Onely I shall adde what followes as a reason or motive to double our caution and circumspection in the interpretation of the said phrases by saying That should we regard the bare sounds of such phrases or the phrases themselves barely as they sound without a due search into their true scope and sense which is apparently the fault of the Antinomians we may besides other monstrous and intolerable inferences as well conclude from other Scriptures where some of the like phrases are used that God doth pardon all the sins of every wicked man without any exception of sins or sinners as of any of the godly seeing it is expresly said that God is a God of purer eyes then to behold evil or to looke upon iniquity whatsoever or in whomsoever the iniquity and evil is Hab. 1.13 The meaning then of the forecited metaporicall phrases which do hold forth the pardon of sin is this not to stand upon the school-distinction concerning Gods seeing as it is taken in sensu simplici or modo merè intuitivo in sensu connotativo or connotantè which to this purpose is both considerable and satisfactory viz. That such sinners whose sins God is said not to see or remember but to blot out cover and cast behind his back shall be no more damned for their sins then if so be God did not behold them or had forgot them Or that such sinners shal as undoubtedly be saved from ther sinnes as from the greatest wrath to come at the day of judgment as if God had forgot them or as if their sins were covered and blotted utterly out of his sight CHAP. X. In what sense or how farre forth as true and false those common sayings of our Divines Sublatâ culpâ tollitur poena justificatio tollit omnia poenalia may or are to be construed and interpreted and in what sense to be rejected CONSECT IV. 4. IT followes in what sense or how far forth as true and not true to understand those common sayings of our Protestant Divines as well Calvinists as Lutherans Sublatâ culpâ tollitur poena And Justificatio tollit omnia poenalia 1. It is most true that seeing pardon of sinne is the taking off of the obligation to punishment and consequently punishment it self so farre forth as tollitur culpa tollitur etiam poena i.e. so far forth as sinne is pardoned so far forth the punishment of sin is taken away 2. As Poena is taken in a like sense with pardon viz. for punishment 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or in a signal sense viz. for everlasting punishment as opposite to life eternal or for punishment meerly and purely such as are the punishments of the wicked so it is most true Sublatâ culpâ tollitur poena And in the other sense that other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is true also Justificatio tollit omnia poenalia the word poenalia being taken in the sense immediately aforesaid 3. In such a sense as the Apostle asserts whom God hath justified them also hath he glorified Rom. 8.30 i.e. He hath alreadie glorified them in part and he will at last and in due time glorifie them fully and in such a sense we commonly say Positâ justificatione ponitur etiam glorificatio I say in such a sense the foresaid sayings Sublatâ culpâ tollitur poena justificatio tollit omnia poenalia are most unquestionably true i.e. A person justified or pardoned shall in due time citius serius sooner or latter at one time or other be delivered from all things penal or from all punishment due to his sins 2. If in the foresaid sayings we take justificatio for our justification immediately upon or at our first believing and
distinction CONSECT VI. 6. IT followes that we may safely distinguish the pardon of sinne how harsh and unsavorie soever the distinction may seeme in the sound thereof into totall and partial perfect and imperfect into Remissionem magis or minus plenariam for pardon of sinne being the taking off of the obligation to punishment and consequently punishment it selfe a man is no farther pardoned executivè and plenarily then his punishment is taken off which being sometimes more and sometimes lesse taken off we must needes say that pardon is somtimes more and sometimes lesse perfect CHAP. XIII That one and the same sinne may be more or lesse pardoned CONSECT VII 1. IT followes that one and the same sinne may be more or lesse pardoned because it may be more or lesse punished And the contrary assertion thereof though it be the assertion of our Divines See his book of justif p. 21. 19. 143 261. as I think generally and in particular of that very learned and pious Divine Mr. Anthony Burges a man for sound judgment and School learning much renowned I say the contrary assertion viz. that one and the same sinne cannot be more or lesse pardoned I cannot assent unto but must needs by vertue of the premises professe yet humbly my dissent from CHAP. XIIII That no sinner is fully pardoned in this life nor yet afore the day of judgment CONSECT VIII 8 IT followes that however a believer is pardoned in this lsfe yet he is not fully pardoned til the day of judgment because he is not till that day of refreshing freed from all the sad effects and punishments of sin viz. death and the grave of corruption The premises considered do also give us to see a reason of that saying of Christ Mat. 12 32 And moreover plainly and easily to interpret the sense of it he saying that the sin against the H. Ghost shall not be forgiven neither in this world nor in the world to come And for that cause the day of judgment may as wel be stiled the day of Remission or Absolution as the day of Redemption as it is stiled Ephes 4.30 And for the same cause doth Saint Peter assert our sins to be blotted out in a signal sense viz fully and compleatly at and not before that Great and good day of the Lord Act. 3.19 there being certain remainders of grace to be brought unto the Saints at and not before the revelation of Jesus Christ for which till that time they are to wait and hope according to the counsel of the same Apostle 1 Pet. 1.13 And in this sense Saint Paul prayes to God that good Onesiphorus with his compassionate houshold may find mercy with the Lord at that day 2 Tim. 1.16 17 18. CHAP. XV. The difference betwixt remission of sinne and Sanctification commonly assigned that being said to be perfect in this life this imperfect rejected and refuted CONSECT IX 9. IT followes that the difference commonly said to be betwixt the remission of our sins and our sanctification that the one is perfect in this life the other is imperfect is a plain mistake and in very deed not a justifiable but a pardonable saying I mean an errour that stands in need of pardon and not of pardon only but also of amendment And besides the premises for a farther detecting and rectifying this mistake let it be considered that the selfe same reason which proves the imperfection of our sanctification in this life wil also prove the imperfection of our remission for the reason demonstrating the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that our sanctification is here imperfect is besides the testimony of Scripture the experimental sense of that Fomes peccati that Peccatum peccans or relicks of sin which doe still remaine in our natures which said sinne in being both sinne and punishment for which cause it may well be stiled in a peculiar sense peccatum puniens as well as peccans it being I say both a sin and the punishment of sin it must of necessity and infallibly follow from thence as I humbly conceive that a sinners remission or release from sinne is imperfect also And if any one shall except saying that a sinner even in this life hath right to perfect remission I answer looke what right a sinner hath in this life to perfect remission the same right he hath to glorification and to sanctification with the Saints made perfect so that in this respect there is no difference Briefly then If wee must believe either Scripture or our owne experience wee must acknowledge that our remission is in this life as well imperfect as is our sanctification CHAP. XVI That remission of sinne doth imply somewhat positive as well as privative and for that reason that it differs not from Justification as hath beene by some supposed CONSECT X. 10. IT followes that seeing Gods pardoning sinne is his not punishing it unto which I adde and that which all do acknowledge nemine contradicente that seeing punishments are either privative or positive if I may be allowed the latter expression notwithstanding the common saying Omne malum est formaliter quid privativum but my meaning is seeing punishments are either damni or sensus of losse or sense it wil I say follow from thence that the pardon of sinne is not only Ablativa mali but also Collativa boni as the Schoolemen expresse it or that the pardon of sinne is not only a privative but also a positive blessing and benefit i. e. it doth in the precise nature thereof import not only a freedome from the punishment of sense or from the bare suffering of paine and torment but it importeth also a restoring of the sinner to the positive enjoyment of such comforts or to the enjoyment of such positive comforts and to such a state of love friendship and favour with God as by his sins were lost and forfeited I speake this in humble dissent from those who do for this cause make justification to be more then forgivenesse of sinne in that as they say justification doth connote or connotate a state of favour that the subject or sinner is put into whereas I see not how we can acknowledge any state of favour which justification puts a sinner into which remission of sin doth not likewise invest him with or put him into as I shall have occasion to say againe and shall prove more at large in my progresse upon this subject in hand Only note that which is here said concerning pardon of sin is to be understood not concerning any of those three sorts of pardon which for distinction sake I stiled of the halfe blood those also being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nothing to the text in hand but of that kind of pardon which is by the Apostle promised in my present text 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so called CHAP. XVII That one and the same sinne may be said and that in a Scripture sense to be pardoned and not pardoned
ver 12.13 Then shall ye call upon mee and yee shall goe and pray unto mee and I will hearken unto you and yee shall seeke mee and find mee when ye shall search for mee with all your heart This the Prophet Daniel understood very well though the Antinomians of these times through the just judgment of God doe seeme so blinded as not to understand things of this nature as appears by his practice I have heard it as a tradition that petty Malefactors amongst us condemned to bee burnt in the hand were to suffer the hot iron til they prayed with a loud voice God save the King And do not the Antinomians deserve to ly under the afflicting hand of God till such time as they pray with the Psalmist saying Look up on my affliction and my pain forgive all my sinnes Psal 25.18 together with the ground rise and reason of it recorded Dan. 9. beg Because hee did know gods assured purpose by his promise therefore he set his face to the Lord God to seek by prayer and supplication yea with fasting sackcloth and ashes To seek God by prayer and fasting for the averting of what God hath threatned seems strange to none but to seek God by fasting and prayer for that which God hath promised infallibly to believers doth seeme so strange to Antinonians as that they account it a thing needlesse and ridiculous May God be pleased of his greatmercy to enlighten and reduce them 2. Be it considered that in the said fifth Petition of the Lords prayer we pray for forgivenesse of sinne not only as to be enjoyed after death but also in this life i.e. that present judgments which our sinnes might deservedly bring upon us may be prevented suspended moderated or if inflicted may be shortned sweetned removed sanctified and turned to our benefit for in these things as hath been already demonstrated doth consist partly the forgivenesse of sinne Now what intelligent Christian is there who will not acknowledge that they have need of such things as these viz. the preventing moderating removing sanctifying of temporall judgements and afflictions 3. Be it considered That as the Saints doe sinne daily more or lesse so their new sinns do bring a new obligation to punishment or else they could not be accounted sinners neither could they be pardoned as needing no pardon which said obligation they have need should be taken off by a particular pardon besides their first general pardon for that any sinne is pardoned afore it be committed I shal at large disprove in another Consectary for which said particular pardon a believer is according to his neede to pray to God hee having no assurance from God to obtaine either it or ought else without prayer such cause have wee to give the like counsel to the best among the godly as Simon Peter did to Simon Magus saying Repent and pray to God that thy daily sinnes may be forgiven thee 4. Be it considered which I think will generally be acknowledged that the sinnes of believers after conversion specially their more grosse false and eminent backslidings doe subject them meritoriously to the condemnation of the law and to the * Else why doth God threaten them upon their back sliding with the forfeiture of their former pardon Ezek. 18.24 Matth. 6 15. 18. lat See Mr. Burges of justification p. 242 243. forfeiture of that right which they had to the pardon of former sins by vertue of the Covenant and that these new sinnes do not de facto condemne a believer is to be ascribed to the Lord Christ by whose blood wee have an entrance into the Covenant of grace and a standing or continuance in it by his intercession Rom. 5.2 with Heb. 12.24 7.24 by which intercession the Covenant of forgivenesse or the promise of pardon is continued to be the believers discharge against all new sins and the remembrance of old Now have not believers need to pray to God that he would not take that advantage of their forfeiture of former pardon as justly hee might doe Yea is it not necessary that they should so doe as ever they doe expect that hee should not take the advantage of the said forfeiture For consider that as Jesus Christ doth intercede in heaven for the continuance of remission of sinne in the behalfe of the Saints so hee doth intercede and actually procure for them all such grace or graces as without which their pardon shall not be continued thence is he said to be exalted by God not only to give to Israel remission but also repentance not the former without the latter yea first repentance for sin and then remission of it Act. 5.31 Now what ground hath any believer to hope for the continuance of his pardon except he shal pray for it as Christ doth continue in heaven so he shall continue so long as he is on earth to make intercession for it I have been the larger in this particular not only for the reducing of the Antinomians in this point and for the information of certaine others who do think that assurance of pardon is the maine thing prayed for by believers in that Petition but moreover that every man understanding what he is to pray for and hath need to pray for in that behalf may be induced not only the more frequently but also the more feelingly and fervently to pray to the Lord for the same CHAP. XIX An answer to the three following questions 1. Doth God alwaies pardon a sinner instantly upon the confession of his sinnes 2. In what sense or how farre forth doth a sinner receive a present pardon immediately upon the confession of his sinnes 3. Whether a truly penitent and believing sinner having once confessed a sinne is at any time thereafter to confesse it in order to forgivenesse The affirmative to which last question is asserted and proved Certaine particulars added as Cautions for the preventing of mistakes and for the better understanding of the Authours true sense and meaning CONSECT XIII 13. THE premises being duly considered will assist and guide us in a right resolution of the following questions 1. Doth God alwaies pardon a sinner instantly upon the confession of his sinnes Or when shall the present promises of the text be made good to the sinner that confesseth his sins Answ Not fully for the present time or as soone as confession is made nor fully so long as he lives in this world but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as is the Apostles phrase Rom. 5.6 in due season and in Gods good tme Besides the reasons forecitied in evidence thereof I shall subjoine these two considerations 1. Remission of sinne being a grace or benefit purchased by the blood of Christ as our adoption and regeneration are why should it be thought more strange that we are not fully made partakers of remission afore the day of judgment then of adoption and regeneration And yet the truth is here and so it must bee
and thing yet had not been continued under some new name e. g. Apollinis tripos Concessus Apostolicus Aarons Brest-plate Vrim and Thummim Englands Oracle The Church Vertual or the like Notio secunda as unto whom all dissenting persons and parties both in our own and in all the Nations throughout the world might have had recourse for resolution in the great things and truthes of God But seeing that it was concluded by themselves that their company so constituted was no longer profitable to the Commonwealth I believe that Mr. Eyre is now convicted that their longer sitting was not like to be profitable for the Church whereupon I shall conclude that it was for want of foresight that Mr. Eyre did so far luxuriate in their high praises as to say That of any company of men on earth they were the fittest to umpire in such Theological Disputes as are betwixt him and his old School fellow Mr. Benjamin Woodbridg Let the second Negative Proposition be this viz. No sin is actually pardoned till a person bee made capable of it or put into a capacity of receiving or enjoying it This Proposition carries its owne evidence in the body or bowels of it for nothing is before it can be I shall therefore immediately apply my self to the resolution of the following Question Quest When is a person capable of receiving the actual pardon of his sins Or When are the Elect capable of receiving or actually enjoying that pardon which was so long since purposed purchased promised to and for them Answ 1. When they need it Quest When do they need it Answ When they are or do become sinners have committed sin or are guilty of sin Till sin be past pardon is to come To pardon sin before it is committed is to pardon sin that is no sin it is to pardon that which is not which is a contradiction and a meere impossibility for where there is no guilt there can be no pardon As a man is not capable of an Almes till he be miserable and indigent so nor of pardon till he be peccant Or as a man is not capable of a cure by Physick and Chyrurgery till he be sick and wounded so nor of pardon till he be sick of sin and wounded by it These similitudes are the rather apt because Gods pardoning sin is said to be his taking compassion on us Mic. 7.19 Luke 18. 13. God compassionate me a sinner saith the Publican and his healing us Isai 53.5 Hos 14.4 This is a remote capacity The next particular doth declare and set forth the sinners proximous or immediate capacity of pardon 2. Then are the Elect capable of actual pardon when they are in Gods way fit or fitted for it Quest When is that Answ When they see their sins I speak of persons adult or of ripe age confesse them repent for them believe in Christ See Act. 10.43 To him give all the Prophets witnesse that whosoever beleeveth in him shall receive remission of sins Luke 24.47 And that repentance and remission of sin should be preached in his name among all Nations Acts 5.31 Him hath God exalted to be a Prince and a Saviour to give repentance to Israel and remission of sin observe Repentance is given first and then remission As the ground is not capable of receiving the seed of the Husbandman till it be plowed so nor are the Elect capable of receiving the precious seed of pardon till the fallow ground of their hearts be plowed up by Repentance to speak in the metaphor of the Prophet Jeremy chap. 4.4 In this sense that saying of the Evangelist is most true according as by some it is interpreted John 1.16 Of his fulnesse we receive and grace for grace i. e. by reason of one grace we receive another even as the God of all grace doth give one grace in order to another e g. for or by reason of the grace of faith repentance and conversion all which were merited by Christ God gives us the grace of Remission according to that Proverbial saying among the Jewes and in this case appliable Habenti dabitur As God doth by Grace adapt or make us fit and meet for glory Col. 1.12 Giving thanks to the Father who hath made us meet for the inheritance among the Saints in light So by one grace God doth make us meet for receiving of another And as the Wedding Garment did fit and make meet the Guests for the Wedding Supper so doth Faith Repentance and new obedience being as the Wedding Garment fit or make meet the sinner for partaking in the pardon of his sins which is as the Wedding Supper This particular is the rather to be observed because it is useful as otherwise so specially for these two purposes 1. To prevent and redresse the presumption of impenitent and ungodly sinners who are apt to expect to reap where they have not sowed and to gather where they have not strawed I mean who do usually expect an harvest of comfort in the pardon of their sins and to reape in mercy when they have not sowen to themselves one seed the least mustard seed of grace or one graine of righteousnesse to speak in the phrase of the prophet Hos ch 10.12 2. It is useful whereby to obviate or answer the common objection of the Antinomians wherby they would involve us as guilty of impeaching the freedom of Gods grace in the pardon of our sins because we affirme with the Scriptures that pardon of sinne cannot actually be enjoyed without the performance of such and such conditions the performance of which said conditions is notwithstanding of and cannot be without Gods free grace given to us and enabling us for that end and purpose I shall close this particular with the words of that very Learned and godly man Mr. Anthony Burges in his book of justification p. 18. There goe more causes to the pardon of sin besides the meritorious cause faith the instrumental cause which is as necessary in its kind for this great benefit as the meritorious cause is in its kind that though Christ hath born such a mans sins yet they are not pardoned till he doe believe for as the grace of God which is the efficient cause of pardon doth not make a sinne compleatly forgiven without the meritorious cause so neither doth the meritorious without the instrumental but there is a necessity of the presence and the cooperation of all these Caution Though I have not expresly made mention of the merits of Christ through his bloud shed in order to a sinners being made capable of pardon Neverthelesse 1. I doe acknowledg and let it be knowne that the intervention of his merits are necessary to the said sinners capability of pardon Whether his merits be so absolutely necessary hereunto as that God could not have pardoned a sinner without it although that be a question in the resolution whereof Learned and Godly men doe differ Mr. Owen the Learned Deane of
Christs Church hath in an elaborate tractate lately put forth endeavoured to prove the said absolute necessity of Christs satisfaction neverthelesse it is without all question that rebus sic stantibus c. according as things are now set and fixed by God and according to his will revealed in his Word no sinner can be pardoned without the intervention of Christs merits and satisfaction 2. In mentioning faith as that which puts the sinner into a capacity of pardon I have included the merits of Christs bloodshed his blood being the object of faith or that which faith doth lay hold and rest upon according to that of the Apostle Rom. 3.24 25. Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood to declare his righteousnesse for the remission of sinnes that are past through the forbearance of God Where let the Antinomian observe two things 1. Remission is of sins past mark past 2. Though justification and remission of sin be not otherwise then through Christs bloud yea through faith in his bloud neverthelesse it is a grace a free-grace Object If all sins past present and to come are not at once pardoned then Christ is not a perfect satisfier or hath not perfectly satisfied for our sins Answ This objection is a very weak one and for the weaknesse thereof I may well stile it a womans objection and I shall the rather so stile it because it was in very deed the objection which a certaine woman in these parts much perverted as it seems by Antinomian principles and frequenting as I have heard the teachings of such teachers as are sent abroad by the Church of Abbingdon objected in my hearing against the truth here asserted by mee viz that all sins past present and to come are not pardoned at once and albeit the said Sister did expresse as much confidence in her opinion to the contrary as if so be shee had beene inspired with a spirit infallible and did receive so little satisfaction by my answers as that she did plainly tell me to my face that my answers did make it apparent unto her that I was a person not as yet justified I shall neverthelesse set downe in this place the self same answers and no other answer then what I made unto her objection as now followes 1. I told her that shee might by a like reason infer that Christ Jesus is not a perfect Red emer seeing the Saints are not in this life perfectly redeemed from their sins but must waite for the accomplishment thereof till the day of judgement which for that cause is stiled the day of Redemption 2. I asked her whether shee would assert her selfe to be a Saint already in heaven actually singing Halelujah Shee answered no. Whereupon I told her that the glorification of believers is the fruit or benefit of Christs satisfaction and I had therefore as good reason upon this account to make the same objection against her viz that then Christ was not a perfect satisfier 3 Finally I told her that shee is carefully to distinguish betwixt the price which Christ paid for satisfaction or for our remission ransom or redemption and betwixt the fruits effects and benefits which the Saints do enjoy therby The former I told her was a price most perfect but the latter are not all at once in perfection bestowed upon us but by degrees and in Gods due time and way some now some then some in this life some at death and some not afore the day of judgement These answers I then thought and stil do think satisfactory but I doe find that the confidence of a woman possessed with Antinomian principles is insuperable The Lord in his great mercy pity those who are under strong delusions believing in lies and put some restraint upon such teachers as are purposely sent forth under pretence of propagating the Gospel to adulterate and corrupt it and to make merchandize of the souls of the simple whom with good words and fair speeches they do most pitifully and impiously beguile CHAP. XXI Caution given as touching a right understanding of the two following Propositions laid down by that very learned and pious Divine Mr. Anthony Burges in his Sermons concerning Justification viz. 1. No wicked man ever hath any sin forgiven him p. 22. 2. It is one thing for God to forgive and another thing for God not to demand and exact punishments p. 143. CONSECT XIV 14. IT followes which might have been more fitly inserted as the second Consectary how far forth or in what sense to understand those two Propositions of My. Burges in his Book of Justification 1. No wicked man ever hath any sin forgiven him p 22. 2. It is one thing for God to forgive and another thing not to exact and demand punishment p. 143. I have already proved That God is said sometimes to forgive the sins of wicked men as also That Gods punishing is said to be his not forgiving and his forgiving his not punishing so that the said Propositions being taken in their latitude as they sound cannot ageee with the truth of Scripture which that they may do it is necessary that we understand and restrain them unto that kind of forgivenesse which doth respect the disobliging or discharge of a sinner from eternal damnation for which respect and indeed for the prevention of much mistake in this Subject I should think it expedient for any one who undertaketh to write more at large concerning the nature of forgivenesse of sin to set downe almost in the first place this distinction viz. There is a twofold forgivenesse of sin plainly expressed in Scripture the one peculiar to the Saints which for that cause may well be stiled The remission of Gods Elect as for a like cause faith is stiled by the Apostle the faith of Gods Elect as Tit. 1.1 The other common to the Reprobate with the Elect Now I say the said Propositions are to be restrained to the former and are not to be extended to the latter kind of forgivenesse For my owne part I must needs say That Mr. Anthâ—ny Burges is a Gamaliel so hâ—â—h in my esteem as that I do judg my selfe unworthy to sit at his feet or to bear his Books and for that cause I am so unwilling in ought to expresse my dissent from him as rather then contradict so worthy an Author I should study to the uttermost of reason how to interpret all his sayings and assertions in a true sense and for that cause it was once in my mind to have interpreted the meaning of that Proposition of his p. 21. When a sin is forgiven it is totally and perfectly forgiven rather then to have declared my dissent from it I say it was in my mind to have interpreted that Proposition as barely intending a sinners discharge or disobligation from eternal damnation which I doubt not was the meaning of that