may easily see which of these two Justification or Remission of sinne is The first and proper difference is this An immanent action is that which abides in God so that it works no reall effect without As when God doth meerly know or understand a thing but a transient action is when a positive change is made thereby in a creature as in Creation c. So that we may conclude of all Gods actions which do relate to believers only predestination is an immanent act of God and all the rest Justification Regeneration Glorification are transient acts for Predestination though it be an act of God choosing such an one to happinesse yet it doth not work any reall change or positive effect in a man unlesse we understand it virtually for it is the cause of all those transient actions that are wrought in time Howsoever therefore Justification be called by some an immanent action and so made to go before Faith and Repentance as if Faith were onely a declaration and signe of pardon of sinne from all eternity yet that cannot be made good as is to be shewed A second difference floweth from the other An immanent action is from eternity and the same with Gods essence but a transient action is the same with the effect produced Hence the Orthodox maintain That Gods decrees are the same with his nature Hence when we speak of Gods willing such a thing it is no more then his divine Essence with an habitude and respect to such objects Gods Decrees are no more then God decreeing Gods will no more then God willing otherwise the simpliciy of Gods nature will be overthrown and those volitions of God will be created entities and so must be created by other new volitions and so in infinitum as Spanheimius well argueth only the later part seemeth not to be strong or sufficient because when man willeth he doth not will that by a new volition and so in infinitum and why then would such a thing follow in God Besides its no such absurdity in the actings of the soul to hold a progresse in infinitum thus far that it doth not determinately pitch or end at such an act It is one thing to have things distinguished in God and another thing for us to conceive distinctly of them The former is false The later is true and necessary But with transient actions it is otherwise they being the same with the effects produced are in time And this is a perpetual mistake in the Antinomian to confound Gods Decree and Purpose to justifie with Justification Gods immanent action from all eternity with that transient which is done in time Whereas if they should do thus in matters of Sanctification and Glorification it would be absurd to every mans experience whereas indeed a man may as truly say That his body is glorified from all eternity as that his sins are forgiven from all eternity And certainly Scripture speaks for one as well as the other when it saith Whom he hath justified them he hath glorified By these two differences you may see That pardon of sin is a transient action and so Justification also partly because it leaveth a positive real effect upon a man justified he that was in the state of hatred is hereby in a state of love and friendship he hath peace with God now that once was at variance with him Now when we say There is a change made in a man by Justification it is not meant of an inward absolute and physical one such as is in Sanctification when of unholy we are made holy but morall and relative as when one is made a Magistrate or husband and wife partly because this is done to us in time whereas immanent actions were from all eternity and therefore it would be absurd to pray for them as it is ridiculous for a man to pray he may be predestinated or elected Some indeed have spoken of Predestination as actus continuus a continued act and so with them it is good Divinity Si non sis praedestinatus ora ut praedestineris If thou beest not predestinated pray that thou maiest be but this is corrupt doctrine and much opposeth the Scripture which doth frequently commend election from the eternity of it that it was before the foundations of the world were laid whereas now for pardon of sinne it is our duty to pray that God would do it for us This being thus cleared we come to answer the next Question depending upon this viz. Whether God doth justifie or forgive our sins before we believe or repent and our answer is negative That God doth not Although there are many who are pertinacious that he doth and so they make Faith not an instrumental cause to apply pardon but only a perswasion that sin is pardoned and thus repentance shall not be a condition to qualifie the subject to obtain forgiveness but a sign to manifest that sin is forgiven This Question is of great practical concernment and therefore to establish you in the truth consider these Arguments 1. The Scripture speaks of a state of wrath and condemnation that all are in before they be justified or pardoned Therefore the believers sins were not from all eternity forgiven for if there were a time viz. before his Regeneration and Conversion that he was a childe of wrath under the guilt and punishment of sin then he could not be at the same time in the favour of God and peace with him Now the Scripture doth plentifully shew That even believers before their Regeneration are detained in such bonds and chains of guilt and Gods displeasure Ephes 2.1 2 3. There the Apostle speaking to the converted Ephesians telleth them of the wretched and cursed condition they were once in and he reckons himself amongst them saying They were children of wrath and that even as others were So that there is no difference between a godly man unconverted and a wicked man for that present state for both are under the power of Satan both walk in disobedience both are workers of iniquity and so both are children of wrath It is true the godly man is predestinated and so shall be brought out of this state and the other left in it But predestination as is more largely to be shewed being an immanent act in God doth denote no positive effect for the present of love upon the person and therefore he being not justified hath his sins imputed to him lying upon him and therefore by the Psalmists argument not a blessed man This also 1 Cor. 6.9 10 11. The Apostle saith of some Corinthians That they were such as abiding in that state could not inherit the kingdom of God and such were some of you but ye are washed but ye are justified Therefore there was a time when these Corinthians were not justified but had their sins abiding on them Likewise all the places of Scripture which speak of Gods wrath upon wicked men and that
that controversie The opponent it may be knoweth that there are some who say Christ or the Spirit of Christ is first in us by way of a moving or preparing principle and afterwards as a principle inhabiting and dwelling in us That as some say Anima fabricat sibi domicilium the soul makes its body to lodge in it works first efficiently that afterwards it may formally so they say Christ doth in us As the silk-worm prepareth those silken lodgings for her self to rest in So that according to the judgement of these men Christ or his Spirit doth efficiently work in us the act of believing by which act Christ is received to dwell in us And in this way Christ hath no union with us till we do believe He worketh indeed in us before but not as united to us Now according to this opinion the answer were easie That we are not in Christ till we do beleeve Though Christ be in us as working in us and upon us Yea faith would first be wrought and then Christ with his benefits of justification c. would be vouchsafed to us but there are Reasons why it is not safe to go this way And indeed that Charta magna or grand promise for regeneration doth evidently argue the habits or internall principles of grace are before the actions of grace Ezek 36.26 God takes away the heart of stone and giveth a new heart an heart of flesh which is the principle of grace and afterwards causeth them to walk in his Commandments which is the effect of grace But secondly which doth fully answer the Objection It is true our being ingraffed into Christ is the root and fountain of faith and of Justification too but yet so that these being correlates faith and Justification they both flow from the root together though with this order that faith is to be conceived in order of nature before Justification that being the instrument to receive it though both be together in time Therefore the major Proposition should be thus regulated He that is in Christ doth believe and is justified or believing is justified for Justification as our Glorification though it flow from Christ yet it is in that order and time which God hath appointed Neither is it any new thing in Philosophy to say Those causes which produce an effect though they be in time together yet are mutually before one another in order of nature in divers respects to their severall causalities Christ is in us and we in Christ Christ is in us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by way of gift and actual working and we are in Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by way of receiving and both these are necessary as appeareth Joh. 15.5 and both are together in time yet so that in order of nature Christs being in us is before our being in him and the ground of all our comfort and fruit is not because we are in him but he in us even as the branch beareth fruit not because it is in the Vine but because the Vine is in it communicating efficacy to it Thus also faith and Justification are together yet so as one is produced by the other we are not justified and therefore believe but we believe and are therefore justified Lastly This may be retorted upon the opponent who as was alleadged before denieth any actual reconciliation till we do believe But may not we strike the adversary with his own reason in this manner He that is in Christ is actually reconciled But we must be in Christ before we do believe Therefore we must be actually reconciled before we do believe I pass over the third and reserve the fourth and sixth Argument being all one for the next Lecture because in them is matter worthy of a large consideration I come therefore to the fifth Argument which is taken from the collation between the first Adam and second out of Rom. 5.18 19. From whence is argued As in the first Adam we are accounted sinners before any thing done on our part so in the second Adam we are to be justified before any thing wrought in us This the opponent doth much triumph in but without cause as the answer will manifest And in the first place we cannot but reject those Expositors of that text fore-quoted who understand us to be sinners in Adam only by imitation or by propagation meerly as from a corrupted fountain but we suppose it to be by imputation Adam by Gods Covenant being an universal person and so as Austin said Omnes ille unus homo fuerunt All were that one man And therefore these do not rise up to the full scope of the text who parallel Christ and Adam only as two roots Origens or fountains for there must be a further consideration of them as two common persons for our immediate fathers are a corrupted root and we are corrupted by them yet their sins are not made ours as Adams was Hence the Apostle laieth the whole transgression upon one as by one mans disobedience c. Those that deny imputation of Adams sin as the Pelagians of old and Erasmus with others of late do not relish that translation of those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in whom all have sinned but prefer the other Forasmuch as all have sinned in him but both come to the same sense and howsoever Erasmus say that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a dative case must be understood causally yet that is not universally true for Mar. 2.4 there is mention made of the bed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in which the paralytique lay it would be ridiculous to translate that inasmuch So Act. 2. Be baptized 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the name Heb. 9. Those ordinances consisted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in meats We therefore grant That Adams sin was ours by imputation before we had any actual consent to it In which sense Bernard called it Alienum nostrum anothers sin and ours yea it is so farre from being ours by consent that if a man on purpose should now will that Adams sin should be his this would not make Adams sin imputed to him it would be a new actual sin in the man it would not be Adams sin imputed to him Now although all this be concluded upon yet it followeth not that therefore we are justified in Christ before we believe I acknowledge some eminent Divines have pressed this comparison but there is a vast difference in this very act of imputation and the ground of it for supposing the Covenant at first made with Adam all his posterity by a naturall way are involved in his guilt and so whether they will or no antecedently to their own acts they are obnoxious to this guilt Hence all men none excepted that are propagated in a natural way are thus corrupted but in Christ we are by a supernatural way and none are made his but such as beleeve in him and he doth not represent any to God as his members till
is not to make a difference of sin 212 213 A three-fold difference between the sins of a godly and wicked man 232 233 Seeing and knowing how they differ 90 No difference to our capacity between Gods seeing and knowing 91 A two-fold difference between Gods forgiving our sins and our forgiving others 113 114. The Properties of God and the actions of them how they differ p. 97 Justification and pardon of sinne how they differ 257 The sense of Gods displeasure for sin may be retained in us two wayes servilely filially 22 The Antinomian distinction examined 89 90 Believers have not a full discharge from sin till the day of Judgement 256 It is the duty of justified persons to pray for pardon and for forgiveness of sin 113 It is the duty of Believers to repent of sinne that it may be pardoned and why 114 E Election is Amor ordinativus non oâ—llâ—tiâ—us 188 In what sense an elect man before conversion is loved of God â—88 God hath other ends then to satisfie his Justice when he afflicts his people 26 There are many errors about Justification and the danger of them 4 The ground of Popish errors about Justification 5 The errors of Papists Antinomians concerning remission of sinne 43 44 45 The errors of the Saints displeasing to God 80 81 Who they are which do esteem of pardon of sin and why 221 222 Why Creation and Justification are not from Eternity 167 How sin doth and how it doth not expell the Grace of Justification 243 F How the word Face is attributed to God 226 All men called flesh 1 A two-fold Faith in all Petitions Applicative Fiducial 61 Forgivenes is the removing the guilt though not the nature of sin 45 Prayer for and faith in God for forgiveness may well stand together 62 God doth reiterate forgivenss of sin 127 Christians ought to pray for forgiveness and in what sense 129. from 113. to 116 Forbearance of punishment differs from forgiveness 143 144 What forgiveness of sin is 214 Whether God in forgiving sin doth forgive all sin together 244 245 The meaning of the Petition Forgive us our Debts declared in eight particulars 113 to 118 How freedom is extended to God 96 G The Glory of God what 2 The nature of Gospel-grace 253 Great sins as weâ—l as lesser are forgiven the godly 51 Two considerations which will much help us to see the greatness of our sins 204 Gross sins procure wrath to the godly 208 Gross sins exclude from the society of the Church ibid. Gross sins require many conditions before pardoned 209 Gross sins require a more intense act of faith to apply pardon 210 A godly man falling into gross sins is under sequestration though not ejection 238 Why the guilt of new gross sins doth not take away Justification 243 244 H Hay and stubble 1 Cor. 3. what 81 Humiliation and Repentance denied by the Antinomians 59 125 A Christian is to be humbled more for gross sins then ordinary infirmities 208 209 Hyperbolical expressions of the Fathers 250 I Five things implied from the subject praying Forgive us our debts Mat. 6.12 1. That all are sinners 2. A sense of sin 3. Godly sorrow 4. Earnestnesse and perseveâ—ance until we obtain 5. Constant renewed acts of faith 121 to 125 Three things implied in the object matter Mat. 6.12 125 126 The act of imputation and the ground of it how they differ 185 There is a two-fold impulsive cause of Justification 2 Justification what it implieth 6 How Infants are justified whether without faith or no 181 182 183 How Christ is in us and we in him 184 A man is not justified untill he doth repent and believe 12 Wherein Justification consists 17 How Justification can be said to be the pardon of sin ibid. Whether the Justification of Believers be the same under the old and new Testament 62 How sin is injurious to God 164 How we are justified before faith 177 Justification and faith are correlatives 183 God cannot in Justice but punish sinners 98 The Justice of God admits of a surety 200 The Justice of God essentially ad intra and the effects ad extra how differ ibid. Four Propositions shewing the nature and time of a believers Justification 257 258 259 Justification is not reiterated 115 K Gods Knowledge and ours how they differ 89 90 L How Gods taking notice of sin to punish it is subject to the meer Liberty of his will 95. to 102 God takes notice of little sins 79 M Whether the sins of Gods people shall be manifested at the last day 261 262 The Ministers of God commanded to binde and retain sins 65 The spirit doth mortifie our sins 56 External and spiritual mortification how differing 57 Sin is mortified in us not only declaratively but really ibid. N The Nature of Justification 116 117 The nature of sin what and how expressed in Scripture 130 131 132 The nature of the sins of Gods people 230 231 Faith and Repentance how necessary to the pardon of sin 140 141 God takes notice of the sins of believers 60 1â—9 O The answering of Objections sometimes profitable 41 42 Antinomian Objections and distinctions discussed 88. to 102 An Obligation to punishment follows sinne long before committed 137 139 False Opinions liable to the anger of God proved 80 81 Habitual original sin how truly it may be called sin 132 The original of justification and assurance 171 172 173 The Orthodox truth concerning afflictions upon a justified person against the errors of Antinomians and Papists â—6 P Pardon of sin is not only privative bâ—t positive 118 Five Reasons proving that the sense of pardon doth not beget carnal security 267. Five Reasons why God doth sometimes pardon sin and not manifest it to the soul 199 200 Whether the sins of believers be pardoned before they be committed 246 Eight Arguments proving they are not 247 to 253 Three Directions to a soul tempted about the pardon of sin 122 Our sins are perfectly pardoned in this life 258 Whether God by his absolute power may not pardon sin without the graces of faith and repentance 148 Peace with God what it is 34 35 Whether in that Petition Mat. 5.12 we pray for pardon and assurance 116 117 196 Four Reasons proving that we pray for the pardon it self and not only for assurance 196 Four sorts of men praying for pardon and the manner of their praying 195 196 197 Four Reasons proving that not only assurance but the pardon it self is to be prayed for 197 Who are the best Preachers of Christ and the Gospel 122 The Promises of God require an holy and humble walking 172 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what is signifieth 2 Thirteen Propositions to clear the nature of Justification 3. to 13 Nine Propositions for the understanding the nature of pardon of sin 18. to 22 Seven Propositions laid down to clear the truth of that assertion that God doth afflict his people as a Father 27 28 29 30 A
foundation is extrinsecal as when a mans debt is discharged by his Surety he hath his real benefit is discharged and released out of Prison as if it had been his own personal payment Now when God doth this he goeth not against that text To Justifie the ungodly for its an abomination to do so because it 's against Law but when God doth not impute sin because of the satisfaction of Christ intervening that is most consentaneous and agreeable to Justice There is one word more equivalent and that is reconciliation some indeed make this an effect of Justification some make reconciliation the general and remission of sin a particular part but we need not be curious where Justification is there is reconciliation and this doth suppose that those who were at discord before are now made friends and where can friendship be more prized then with God Having laid down these introductory Propositions which describe most of the matter or nature of Justification I shall now come to shew wherein it doth particularly consist wherein the true nature is onely let me premâ—se two or three Cautions 1. We must not confound those things which may be consequent or concomitant to justification with justification it self for many things may necessarily be together and yet one not be the other so Justification is necessarily joyned with Renovation yet a man is not justified in having a new nature put into him The water hath both moistness and coldness in it yet it doth not wash away spots as it is cold but as it is moist We will not enter into dispute as some of the Schoolmen have and concluded affirmatively Whether God may not accept of a sinner to eternall life without any inward change of that mans heart It is enough that by Scripture we know he doth not 2. To place our justification in any thing that is ours or we do is altogether derogatory to the righteousnesse and worth of Christ. Some there are who place it partly in our righteousness and partly in the obedience of Christ supplying that which is defective in us some of late have placed it in our Faith as if that were our righteousnesse and not for any worth or dignity of Faith but God out of his meer good pleasure say they hath appointed Faith to be that to man fallen which universal righteousnesse would have been to Adam and hence it is that they will not allow any trope or metonymie in that phrase Abraham beleeved and it was imputed to him for righteousness But here appeareth no lesse pride and arrogancy in this then the opinion of the Papists and in some respects it doth charge God worse as is to be shewed in handling of that point Therefore let us take heed how by our distinctions we put any thing with Christs righteousness in this great work 3. In searching out the nature of Justification we must not only look to the future but that which is past For suppose a man should be renewed to a full perfection in this life yet that absolute compleat holiness could not justifie him from his sins past Those committed before would still presse him down though he were now for the present without any spot at all Therefore though now there were no defects no frailties in thee yet who shall satisfie the Justice of God for that which is past though there were but the least guilt of the least sin there is no Sampson strong enough to bear the weight of it but Christ himself 4. The Orthodox sometimes make the nature of Justification in remission of sin sometimes in imputation of Christs righteousness which made Bellarmine charge them though falsly with different opinions for some make these the same motion it 's called remission of sin as it respecteth the term from which but imputation of righteousnesse as it respecteth the term to which even say they as the same motion is the expulsion of darknes and the introduction of light But I rather conceive them different and look upon one as the ground of the other remission of sin grounded upon the imputation of Christs righteousnesse so that his righteousnesse imputed to us is supposed to be in the order before sin forgiven and although among men where righteousnesse is imputed or a man pronounced just there is or can be no remission of sin yet it is otherwise here because righteousness is not so imputed unto us as that it is inherent in us so among men the more a man is forgiven the lesse he is Justified because forgivenesse supposeth him faulty yet it is not so in our Justification before God Lastly We must not confound Iustification with the manifestation and declaration of it in our hearts and consciences This is the rock at which the Antinomian doth so often split he supposeth Justification to be from all eternity and that therefore a man is Justified before he doth beleeve Faith only justifying by evidence and declaration to our consciences but this is to confound the decree of God and its execution as shall be proved Hence it is a dangerous thing though some excellent men have done it to make Faith a full perswasion of our Justification for this supposeth Justification before Faith It is one thing to be Justified and another thing to be assured of it It is true we cannot have any peace and comfort nor can we so rejoyce in and praise God though we are justified unlesse we know it also LECTURE III. ROM 3.24 25. Being Iustified freely by his grace c. JUstification consisteth in these two particulars Remission of sin and Imputation of righteousnesse Indeed here is diversity of expressions among the learned as you have already heard some thinking the whole nature of Justification to be only in Remission of sin and therefore make it the same with Imputation of righteousnesse others make one the ground of the other some make Imputation of righteousnes the efficient or meritorious cause of our Justification and Remission of sin the only form of our Justification others make Remission of sin the effect only of Justification But howsoever we call these two things yet this will be made plain that God in Justification vouchsafeth these two priviledges to the person justified First He forgiveth his sins Secondly He imputeth righteousnesse or rather this latter is the ground of the former as I shew'd before That Justification is remission of sins is generally received the great Question is about imputation of Christs righteousnes but of that afterwards only here may be a Doubt how we can properly say That Justification is pardon of sin for a man is not justified in that he is pardoned but rather it supposeth him guilty It is true Remission of sin doth suppose a man faulty in himself but because Christ did take our sins upon him and we are accepted of through him as our Surety therefore may remission of sin be well called Justification Indeed
this world Hence our Saviour cals it The day of our redemption upon the coming whereof they are to lift up their heads The Observation is That a compleat and full absolution from all sin is not enjoyed till the day of judgement The Beleevers have not a full discharge till then we are in this life continually subject to new sins and so to new guilt whereby arise new fears so that the soul hath not a full rest from all till that final absolution be pronounced at the day of judgement Before we shew the grounds whereby it may appear that the remission of our sins is not fully compleated till then we must lay down some Propositions by way of a grand work First The Scripture not only in this priviledge of remission of our sin but in others also makes the complement and fulness of them to be at the day of judgement Redemption is the totall summe as it were of all our mercies and we are partakers of it in this life Col. 1.14 Rom. 3.24 Yet the Scripture cals the day of judgement when we shall rise out of our graves in a peculiar and eminent manner the day of redemption Ephes 1.7 Ephes 4.30 because at that day will be the utmost and last effects of our redemption Adoption that also is a priviledge we receive in this life yea a learned man Forbes in his book where he handleth the order of Gods graces makes adoption as I take it to be the first and to go before justification yet the Apostle Rom. 8.23 calleth the last day the day of adoption Hence 1 Joh. 3.2 the Apostle though he saith We are now the sons of God yet he saith it doth not appear what we shall be because the glory God at the last day will put upon us is so farre transcendent and superlative to what now we are Thus Mat. 19.28 the last day is also called the day of regeneration unto the people of God yet in this life they partake of that grace but because then is the full perfection and manifestation of it therefore the Scripture cals it the day of regeneration Even as the Apostle Act. 13.33 applieth that passage of the Psalm to Christs resurrection This day have I begotten thee because then was such a solemn and publique declaration that he was the Son of God No marvel then if the Scripture do also call the day of judgement a time when sins shall be blotted out because then is the publique absolution of the godly and according to philosophy motions receive their names from the term to which they tend Secondly Howsoever Justification be said to consist in pardon of sin yet there is a great difference between the one and the other for Justification besides the pardon of sin doth connote a state that the subject is put into viz. A state of favour being reconciled with God Hence it is that this state cannot be reiterated often no more then a wife after that first entrance into the relation is frequently made a wife In this sense the Scripture alwaies speaks of it as connoting a state or condition the subject is put into as well as a peculiar priviledge vouchsafed to such It is true There are indeed learned men who think Justification may be reiterated as you heard Peter Martyr and Bucer Others call it a continued action as conservation But although there is a continuance of Justification and the godly are preserved in that estate yet we cannot say God doth renew Justification daily as he doth pardon of sin There are some that think the Scripture gives a ground for a second Justification or the continuing and encreasing of it and bring those places Tit. 3.5 6 7. Rev. 22.11 The learned and excellent Interpreter Ludovicus de Dieu in Cap. 8. of the Romans vers 4. largely pleadeth for a two-fold Justification The first he makes to be the imputing of Christs righteousness to us received by faith which is altogether perfect and is the cause of pardon of sins The second he makes an effect of the former whereby through the grace of God regenerating we are conformable unto that love in part and are day by day more and more justified and shall be fully so when perfection comes of which Justification he saith these texts speak Jam. 2.21 24. Revel 22.11 Mat. 11.37 1 King 8.32 This two-fold Justification he makes to differ toto coelo from the Papists whose first is founded upon the merit of congruity the second upon the merit of condignity But the discussing of this will be more proper in the other part viz. of imputed righteousness Austin seemeth to hold Justification a frequent and continued act lib. 2. contra Julianum cap. 8. When we are heard in that prayer Forgive us our sins we need saith he such a remission daily what progress soever we have made in our second Justification He speaks also of a Justification hujus vitae which he cals minorem the lesser and another plenam and perfectam full and perfect which belongs to the state of glory Tract 4. in Joannem lib. de spiritu lit cap. ultim But the more exact handling of this will be in the place above-mentioned It seemeth more consonant to Scripture if we say That Justification is a state we were once put into which is not repeated over and over as often as sin is forgiven neither can it admit of increase or decrease so that a man should be more or less justified for even David while he was in that state of suspension was not less justified though the effects of Justification were less upon him It is true in some sense learned men say Justification may increase viz. extensivè not intensivè as they express it by way of extension when more sins are pardoned not intensively in its own nature Even as the soul of a man in its information of the body admits of no increase intensively but it doth extensively the more the parts of the body grow the further doth its information extend But of these things more in their proper place Thirdly Howsoever an absolution shall be compleated at the day of judgement yet our justification shall not abide in such a way as it is in this life Now our Justification is by pardon of sin and a righteousness without us imputed to us which is instrumentally applied by faith but this way shall then cease for having perfect righteousness inherent in our selves we shall need no covering It is true the glory and honour of all this will redound upon Christ and he shall not be the less glorified because he hath then brought us to the full end of all his sufferings I know some may doubt whether any righteousness but that which is infinite can please God and therefore as some think the Angels were accepted of God through Christ though perfect so it may of the Saints in heaven but I see no ground for this This seemeth to be undoubted That the
pardon can never be called an inherent righteousnesse or a qualitative Justice but rather it opposeth it but it may be called a Legal or Judicial righteousnesse because God for the obedience and satisfaction of Christ doth account of us as righteous having pardoned our sin and withall imputing Christs righteousnesse to us both which make up our Justification For the understanding therefore of the first particular viz. Remission of sins take these Propositions which will be the foundation upon which many material questions will be built 1. That forgivenes of sin is possible there may be and is such a thing Hence in that ancient Creed we are said to believe a remission of sins where faith is described not in the meer historical acts of it but fiducial the remission of my sins Now this is some stay to a troubled sinner that his sins may be forgiven whereas the devils cannot God no where saying to them Repent and believe And although Salmeron holdeth that God gave the lapsed Angels space to repent before they were peremptorily adjudged unto their everlasting torments yet he hath scarce a guide or companion in that opinion were not therefore this true that there is such a thing in the Church of God as forgivenes of sin How much better had it been for us if we had never been born 2. Consider That a sin may be said to be forgiven divers wayes First in the decree and purpose of God as Christ is called the Lamb slain from the beginning Though I do not know where the Scripture useth such an expression yet the Antinomians build much upon it Secondly A sin may be said to be forgiven in Christ meritoriously when God laid the sins of his people upon him which the Prophet Isaiah doth describe as plainly Isa 53. as any Evangelist hence some have called Isaiah the fifth Evangelist Now you must not conclude such a mans sins are pardoned because they are laid upon Christ a long while ago which is the Antinomians perpetual panalogizing for to this effect of remission of sin there go more causes besides the meritorious faith the instrumental cause which is as necessary in its kinde 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 do believe for as the grace of God which is the efficient cause of pardon doth not make a sin compleatly forgiven without the meritorious cause so neither doth the meritorious without the instrumental but there is a necessity of the presence and the co-operation of all these Thirdly A sin is said to be pardoned when the guilt is taken away and this is properly Remission of iniquities Fourthly Sin is pardoned in our sense and feeling when God takes away all our fears and doubts giving us an assurance of his love And lastly Sin is forgiven when the temporal affliction is removed and in this sense the Scripture doth much use the word forgivenesse of sins and his not pardoning is when he will punish 3. There are several things considerable in sin when we say it is forgiven First In sin there is a privation of that innocency which he had before as when a man is proud by that act of pride he is deprived of that innocency and freedom from that guilt which he had before This is properly true of Adam who lost his innocency by sinning It cannot be affirmed of us but in a limited sense thus far that when a man commits a sin that guilt may be charged upon him whereof he was innocent before Now when sin is forgiven the sense is not that he is made innocent again for that can never be helped but that it must be affirm'd such an one hath sin'd this cannot be repaired again It is true the Scripture useth such expressions That iniquity shall be sought for and there shall be found none Jer. 51.20 But that is in respect of the consequence of it We shal have as much joy and peace as if we had not sinned at all A 2d thing in sin is the dignity desert it hath of the wrath of God and this is inseparable from any sin if it be a sin there is a desert of damnation thus all the sins of the godly howsoever they shall not actually condemn them yet they have a desert of condemnation Thirdly There is the actual ordination and obligation of the person sinning to everlasting condemnation and forgivenes of sin doth properly lie in this not in taking away the desert of the guilt of sin but the actual ordination of it to condemnation Therefore its false that is affirmed by some that reatus est forma peccati guilt is the form of a sin for a sin may be truly a sin and yet this actual ordination of it to death taken away Fourthly There is in sin an offence done unto God or an enmity to him so that now he is displeased and this is taken away in some measure by forgivenesse yet so as his anger is not fully removed If we speak exactly God doth not punish his children yet as a Father he is angry with them and that makes him to chastise them though the sin be forgiven Fifthly In sinne is likewise a bloâ— or pollution whereby the soul loseth its former beauty and excellency and this is not removed by remission but by sanctification and renovation Hence it is ordinarily said that Justification hath a relative being only but Renovation an absolute inherent change And lastly In all sin there is an aversion from God either Habitual in Habitual sins or Actual in Actual and in this aversion from God the soul abideth till it be turned to him again as a man that turneth his back on the Sun continueth so till he turn himself again now Conversion and not Justification doth rectifie this so that by this you may see what it is to have a sin forgiven not the foulnes or the disformity of it to Gods Law removed nor yet the dignity and desert of Gods wrath no nor all kinde of anger from God but the actual ordination of it to condemnation 4. There is a great difference between original sin and actuals for that of original is much more perplexed in the matter of remission then those of actuals when an actual sin is committed the act is transient that is quickly passed away there remaineth only the guilt which sticketh till God by pardon doth remove it and then when he hath forgiven it there is all of that sin past But now in original sin it is otherwise for that corruption adhering to us cleaving to our nature like Ivie to the tree as the Father expresseth it though it be forgiven yet it still continueth and that not only as an exercise of our faith and prayers or by way of a penal languâ—r upon us but truly and
will lay no more then he will inable to bear Thirdly There is a two-fold trouble one that is holy and effectual for good such a trouble as that was which the Angel made in the pool of Bethesda and there is a trouble by way of torment driving from and raging at God now we all forbid this later neither will this Doctrine give any ground to such a distemper Lastly If a doctrine shall be branded for such an event as shall come through the corruptions of men then we may say their opinion will encourage believers or men that do presume they are so to act all manner of flagitious crimes and yet to have no fear that God will plague them for those things LECTURE VI. JER 50.20 In those dayes and at that time the iniquity of Judah shall be sought for and it shall not be found c. ALthough the Apostle say true 1 Tim. 6.4 that there is a doting about questions whereby the soul of a man is made sick and spiritually diseased as the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 implieth weakning and debilitating grace as much as fretting doth waste away the flesh and this is done when men encounter in controversies as beasts in their combats seeking only victory yet there may be such a doctrinal clearing of truth by answering of Objections that may tend much to edification both in knowledge and affections and by the striking of flint stones together there may flie out sparks enough to kindle godliness and zeal in our brest This I shall endeavour by Gods assistance in that necessary and famous question of Gods forgiving sin For to preach in crabbed controversies is like Gideon Judg. 8.16 to teach men with briars and thorns as the phrase there is The Antinomian placeth this Text in the fore-front for that absurd opinion God seeth no sin in persons justified if therefore their Goliah be slain the rest will speedily quit the field The words contain a gracious promise to Judah and Israel First To deliver them from their temporal evil They shall be brought out of their captivity into their own countrey again we need not dispute how many came back again it s enough this mercy was offered them howsoever they might neglect it Secondly Here is a promise to remove their spiritual evil which was the cause of the former God will pardon their sins and by this a profitable Doctrine is taught That a people ought to be more desirous of Gods pardon then of removal of their calamities whereas commonly like unwise diseased men we complain more of the Symptomes then of the disease it self The evil of sin depriveth us of an infinite good but the evil of afflictions only of a finite Now this promise is not to be stretched out only to the times of the Gospel but is particularly true of the Jews when removed out of their banishment yet not to be limited to that time only and howsoever the promise for pardon be general to all yet it is to be understood in this manner that to the wicked their sin was no farther forgiven then in this sense That their captivity was removed but to the true believers there was a real taking away of Gods wrath and displeasure from them The promise of pardon is described very emphatically and comfortably to the truly humbled Jews There shall be none of their sins and none shall be found when sought for This expression doth suppose a judicial inquiry as when God is said to make inquisition for bloud and to be found doth imply God judicially taking notice of a man to punish him so Rev. 20.15 In her was found the bloud of the Saints So Beza amplifieth that word Phil. 3.9 be found in him as if the justice of God were pursuing Paul as a malefactor and Christ was a City of refuge unto him Observation Remission of sin is such a taking of it away as if it had never been he that denieth sins forgiven to be quite removed denieth Pharaoh and his host to be drowned in the red Sea said Gregory This point practically improved is the treasure of a believers comfort But there is the Antinomian error on the right hand and the Popish on the left whereby a godly heart if not well instructed may when it cals for bread meet with a stone and when for fish with a serpent Therefore for the more orderly proceeding let us consider what the Antinomian saith then what the Papist and lastly what the truth is The Antinomians opinion may be discovered in these particulars 1. That a justified person having on Christs wedding garment hath thereby all his sins quite taken away from before God and so utterly abolished that we have not any spot of sin in the sight of God Honey-Comb of Justification pag. 24. cap. 3. per tot 2. This is extended by them pag. 27. not only to actuall sins but originall sins for we easily grant that in actuall sins if once forgiven there remaineth no more defilement but that he is made in that respect of remission as white as snow though there may remain a further disposition to evil by that sin once committed if renewing grace help not 3. This abolition of sin they understand both of the fault and the guilt so that God doth not only take away the punishment but both the form of the sin also is wholly removed so that there is neither punishment nor cause of punishment in one thus justified Hence they say there is no sin in the Church now and they expresse it thus As a Physician though he healeth a man yet he cannot take away the scars but God healeth sin so as no scar remaineth yea he giveth a fresh colour again They say likewise our sin is consumed as if one drop of water should be abolished by the heat of the Sun yea pag. 39. the Authour affirmeth that whosoever have not confidence in this one point that our sins are so taken away by Christ that God doth not see our sins in us without doubt are damned as long as they continue to rob the bloud of Christ of this honour Therefore saith he true Divinity teacheth that there is no sin in the Church any more 4. He distinguisheth p. 51. of a two-fold abolishing the one mystical and secret wrought only by Christ and his righteousnes The other grosse and palpable wrought by us by the help of Gods Spirit to our sense and feeling so that they grant sin in us and sin to be mortified but this is not in Gods sight although it be in our own 5. Whereas it might be and is objected God hath an all-seeing eye and therefore he cannot but see sin if it be in us They answer God indeed seeth all things saving that which he will not see but undertakes to abolish out of his sight and they distinguish of Gods knowing and his seeing p. 68 God knoweth believers sins but he doth not see them To
expresly mention a place yet he takes this out of the Doctrine of the old Testament for so God did begin first with his people Isa 10.12 Jer. 25.17 18. Ezek. 9.6 begin at my Sanctuary Ezek. 21.4 There God in publique calamities maketh no difference between the righteous and the ungodly now this is so great that the Apostle saith the righteous is hardly saved The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used of those things that with much labour are brought about Act. 14.18 Act. 27.7 These tribulations are so great that they almost destroy the godly themselves see also Jam. 5.13 Is any sick where the godly man is supposed to be sick and the cause if he hath committed sin that is such sins as were the causes of that disease they shall be forgiven him so that even justified persons afflicted by diseases are to inquire what sins the Lord would humble them for and to labour that the sicknesse of the body be the sanctified occasion of the health of the soul 2. Gods anger is seen in bringing extraordinary and unusual calamities upon them because of their sins so that they have strange punishments which even the wicked do many times escape Jonah who endeavoured to flie from Gods face and that he might easily have done by Antinomian Doctrine with what a prodigious judgement was he overtaken Jonah 2. The Prophet cals it the belly of hell and how deeply his soul was afflicted under that punishment appeareth in that he saith his soul fainted within him and he concluded he was cast out of Gods sight He that voluntarily ran from Gods presence doth now bewail that he is cast from it He makes the Whales belly an house of praier and this came up to God in his holy Temple that is Heaven You see by this that God prepareth strange judgements sometimes for those that offend him though his children so in that 1 Cor. 11.30 when he saith that many of the Corinthians were dead for their unworthy receiving it is to be understood of an immature and untimely death they did not live out to the term of those daies that according to natural causes they might have done so that it is the same with being cut off in the old Testament Exod. 12.15 Whosoever did eat the Passeover with leaven was to be cut off from Israel Therefore even godly men may procure to themselves untimely deaths and may provoke God to cut them off in the midst of their years 3. Yea further God may not only afflict them in an extraordinary manner but even strike them with sudden death and that while their sins are upon them I will not instance in Ananias and Saphira nor in Nadab and Abihu though some have thought charitably of them we have a clear instance in Vzzah wherein Gods anger was so apparent by striking him suddenly dead that the thing is said to displease David 2 Sam. 6.7 The anger of God was kindled against Vzzah and he smote him for his error His error was not because he was not a Levite for its plain he was but because they put the Ark upon a new cart whereas they should have carried it upon their shoulders although its thought the carrying of the Ark was limited only to the Levites that were the sons of Kohath and that no other Levite might touch the Ark which if so then it was a second offence against the Law because he touched it and indeed this seemeth to be the proper cause because it was a personal fault of Vzzah whereas the putting of it on a new cart was the error of others besides him Thus Vzzah in his very sins is stricken dead you have likewise another sad example of Ely Lege historiam ne fias historia 1 Sam 4.18 Because he failed in the measure of zeal about the reproof of his sons therefore he fell backward and broke his neck Ely manifested his pious affections in submitting to the hand of God punishing and in being more affected with the publique calamity then his own private yet this is his sad Tragical end 4. Gods anger doth not limit it self to them only but it reacheth even to their children and to those that are dear to them Thus Davids childe is stricken dead for his sin and thus Flies daughter gives up the ghost with sad grief The family both of David and Ely have remarkable calamities following them and all because of their sins When any of Elies posterity shall be forced to crouch for a morsell of bread this is a Memento of Elies sin Here a man may see the seed of the righteous begging bread but for their Parents sins Therefore that of David Psal 36. must not be understood universally That this calamity may the more wound his heart God telleth him what he will do to his house after his death if any were left alive it should be like that indulgence to Cain to carry up and down a token of Gods displeasure and if you ask for how long should this anger of God endure 1 Sam. 3.14 His iniquity must not be purged away from that house for ever Well may the Scripture say that whosoever heareth this judgement of God his ears shall tingle By this instance how watchfull should godly parents be lest for their sins committed a curse should cleave to the family for many generations I acknowledge these calamities as they fel upon Ely a godly man so they were wholsome medicines and fatherly corrections but as they came on his wicked children or posterity continuing in wickednesse so they were strictly and properly punishments Lastly These temporal evils will reach even to the publique Church and State wherein they live so that the sins of godly men may help to pull down publique judgements Thus it was with Hezekiah for his unthankfulnes and pride there was wrath upon Judah and Jerusalem 2 Chron. 32.25 so Davids sin in numbring the people it was the death of many thousand in Israel for Elies sin the Israelites are slain in the Army and the Ark is taken Hence you have Esay Daniel and Ezra joining themselves in the number with others who made publike confessions of their sins upon daies of humiliation It is therefore a cursed and secure opinion that faith the godly when they keep Fast-daies do it not because they have any sins that God punisheth bâ—t because of wicked men The Scripture doth manifeâ—t the contrary and the holiest men living do bring some sparks and fire-brands to increase the wrath of God and therefore they ought to bring their buckets for the quenching of it The aggravation of this anger will appear if you consider what kinde of sins they have been for which God hath been so sore displeased and in them enumerated or instanced in you may perceive they were the Belzebub-sins the first-born of iniquities Vzzah failed only in the order God had appointed what he did was out of care and a good intention yet the Lord
it is not reported that she found such grief for her sins So that as in corporal things a man would choose the tooth-ach rather then a pestilent feaver yet a man is more afflicted and pained at the tooth-ach or burning of his finger then at a feaver So it may be here a godly man would rather choose the losse of his children or dearest relations then lose the favour of God by his sinne yet it may be have more painfull grief in the one then the other Again it is to be observed That the Scripture requiring sorrow or repentance for sin doth not limit such a degree or such a length of time which if necessary would certainly have been prescribed 6. It cannot be denied but that the ancient Fathers have spoken hyperbolically of tears and repentance which phrases were the occasion of that corrupt doctrine in Popery Chrysostom compareth repentance to the fire which taketh away all rust of sin in us Basil cals it The medicine of the soul yea those things which God properly doth are attributed to tears and sorrow as if the water of the eyes were as satisfactory as the bloud of Christ his bloud is clean enough to purge us but our very tears need washing It is true indeed we reade of a promise made to those who turn from their evil wayes Ezek. 18.27 he shall save his soul alive but this is not the fruit of his repentance but the gift of God by promise It qualifieth the subject it hath no influence upon the priviledge Even as a man doth by the power of nature dispose and prepare the body to receive the soul but it is the work of God immediately to infuse it 7. Though therefore repentance be necessary to qualifie the subject yet we run into falshood when we make it a cause of pardon of sinne And thus ignorant and erroneous people do Ask why they hope to be saved or justified why they hope to have their sins pardoned they return this answer Because they have repented and because they lead a godly life Thus they put their trust and confidence in what they have done But the Scripture though it doth indispensably command repentance in every one yet the efficient cause of pardon is Gods grace and the meritorious is Christs bloud And if repentance come under the name of a cause it can be only of the material which doth qualifie the subject but hath no influence into the mercy it self We reade Luk. 7. that Mary Magdalen had many sins pardoned her because she loved much But the Parable of a Creditor which forgave debts that is brought by our Saviour to aggravate her kindnesse doth plainly shew That he speaks not of a love that was the cause of pardon of her sin but which was the effect of it Gods love melting her heart even as the Sun doth snow The highest expressions that we meet with in Scripture where pardon of sinne seemeth to be ascribed to godlinesse as a cause is Dan. 4.27 Break off thy iniquities by shewing mercy to the poor Here we would think that if a man would on purpose hold that doing of a good work would be a proper cause to remove sin he would use no other expression But first it appeareth by the context that Daniel giveth not this counsel in reference to Justification and the pardon of his sin so as to be accepted with God but to prolong and keep off that temporall judgement which was revealed in the vision as appeareth by those words If there may be a lengthening of thy tranquillity And we have the like instance in Ahab who prorogued his calamity by an external humiliation Again although the Vulgar translate it Redeem thy sins yet the Hebrew word doth properly signifie To break a thing as we translate it and although by a metaphor it be applied to redeem and deliver yet that is alwayes of men and persons not things especially it would be ridiculous to say Redeem thy sins so that the meaning is That whereas before Nebuchadnezzar had by injustice and oppression done much rapine and violence now Daniel counselleth him to break off such wicked wayes by the contrary expressions of love and chastity So that this place giveth not any spiritual mercy to repentance as the proper cause thereof 8. As repentance is thus necessary but not as a cause of pardon so neither is it required as that whereby we appease and satisfie God and this all Popery goeth upon yea and all Pharisaical spirits in their humiliation that by those afflictions and debasements of their souls they shall satisfie God and make him amends But this is so grosse that the more learned of the Papists are fain to mitigate the matter and say That satisfaction cannot be properly made to God by any thing we do because all we have and do is from God and therefore there must be an acceptation or covenant by way of gift interposed whereby we may be able to satisfie And then further they say There cannot be satisfaction made to gain the friendship of God which sin hath violated but to take away some thing of temporall punishment that belongs to sinne So that by all this which hath been delivered we may give repentance those just and true bounds which Gods Word doth assign to it and yet not give more then Gods Word doth Neither may we think it a nicety or subtilty to make a difference between a qualification and a cause for if we do not we take off the due glory that belongs to Christ and his merits and give it to the works we do and we do make Christ and his sufferings imperfect and insufficient and by this we may see in what sense grace inherent or sanctification doth expel sin for if we speak of the filth and pollution of sin so sanctifying grace expels it as light doth darknesse heat doth cold by a reall mutation and change So that God in sanctifying doth no more to expel the sin in the filth of it afterwards even as the Physitian needs to do no more to the removing of the leprosie then by producing a sound health in the body But when we speak of the guilt of sin it is not grace sanctifying within us that doth remove the guilt but grace justifying without us Insomuch that although a man after sin committed were perfectly sanctified yet that would not take off the guilt his sin had brought upon him So that although that man needed in such a case no further grace of sanctification to make him holy yet he needed the grace of remission to take away this guilt So that the guilt of sin doth not cease by a natural necessity upon the removing of the nature of the sin but upon a distinct and new act of Gods favour in forgiving for if this were so then Gods mercy in giving a repenting heart and his mercy in pardoning should not be two distinct mercies which yet are evidently distinguished by
they have no peace with God must needs be true of all godly men while unconverted He that believeth not hath not life and the wrath of God abideth on him and without faith it is impossible to please God Now who can deny but that this is true of Paul while no believer but an opposer of godlinesse The Psalmist also saith God is angry with the wicked every day Was not this true of Manasses before his conversion It must therefore be a very poisonous Doctrine to say That God is as well pleased with a man before his conversion as after 2. If the Scriptures limit this priviledge of Justification and pardon only to those subjects that are so and so qualified then till they be thus furnished they cannot enjoy those priviledges The places are many which testifie this Act. 3.19 Repent that your sins may be blotted out Therefore their sins stood uncancelled as so many Debts in Gods register Book till they did repent Act. 26.18 To turn them from darknesse to light from the power of Satan to God that they may receive forgivenesse of sins Therefore they had it not while under the power of darknesse 1 Joh. 1.9 If we confesse our sins he is faithfull and just to forgive us our sins which supposeth That God doth forgive our sins only when we confesse and forsake them Matth. 6.15 If ye forgive not neither will my heavenly Father forgive you It is in vain to number up more places for these do necessarily prove sinne is not forgiven till Faith and Repentance They do not indeed argue a causality or merit yet they infer a necessary presence in those that obtain pardon and do hold by the same proportion as those places which require Sanctification before Glorification 3. Where the Scripture requireth many things to the obtaining of any speciall benefit there that benefit cannot be said to be enjoyed till all those things be brought about Now the Word of God speaks of several things required to pardon of sin There is the Grace and mercy of God as the efficient cause Psal 51.1 Isa 43.25 Rom. 3.25 2. There is requisite the bloud of Christ as the meritorious cause for there can be no remission of sins without effusion of bloud Rom. 3.25 1 Cor. 15.3 Heb. 1.3 1 Joh. 4.10 3. There is Faith required as an instrumental cause Act. 26.18 Rom. 3.25 Now although an instrumentall cause have not that worth or excellency as the efficient and meritorious have yet it is as necessary in the way of an instrument as the others are in their respective causalities so that as a man may not from those places which speak of Gods grace inferre therefore remission of sins is before Christs death So neither may a man argue because Christ died to take away our sins therefore these are taken away before we believe So that this Argument may fully establish us We see the Scripture speaking of three causes cooperant to pardon of sin therefore I may not conclude the effect is wrought till all those causes be And as the Scripture speaks of these causes so as you heard of many qualifications in the subject Insomuch that it is so far from being a duty to believe our sins were pardoned from all eternity antecedently to faith and repentance that we are undoubtedly to believe they were not If the King proclaim a pardon to every one that shall humble himself and seek it out If the Physician prepare a potion for the patient to receive it shall any man say because of those causal preparations that either the one is pardoned or the other healed before their particular application of those things 4. If our sins be pardoned antecedently to our Faith and Repentance then all those effects which are inseparable in the least moment of time from Justification are also antecedent to our Faith and Repentance But it is evident by experience that is not so It is a clear truth That Sanctification of our natures is individually conjoyned one with the other So that although there be a priority of nature yet they are together in time God pardons no mans sins whom he doth not heal Rom. 8.1 1 Joh. 1.9 Psal 32.2 A man may be justified and not glorified but not justified and unregenerated Then if so a man shall be at the same time unconverted and converted at the same time a member of Christ and a member of the devil and so as they say we are justified only declaratively in our own consciences so we shall be regenerated and converted only declaratively Again where sins are pardoned there is blessednesse as the Psalmist speaks then I may call Paul a blessed Persecutor Manasses a blessed murderer for they had no sin imputed to them at that time Besides those whose sins are pardoned may boldly go to the throne of grace and call God Father all which are contrary to the whole tenour of Scripture which expostulateth with men for taking his name or words into their mouth and hate to be reformed yet a Doctor of this Antinomian sour leaven affirmeth boldly That God doth love us as well before conversion as after That God did love Paul with as great a love when he persecuted the Church as when he preached the Gospel How must this devour up all godlinesse when I may have the same faith and confidence in God for pardon in the acting of flagitious crimes as well as out of them in prayer and humiliation and if he may have the same faith why not then the same consolations and joy in conscience 5. If Justification do antecede our Faith so that Faith doth only declare our pardon of sin then any other grace may be said to justifie as well as Faith For take any other grace repentance humility joy these are all the fruits of Gods Spirit and so demonstrate his election of us his justification of us But how unanswerably do the Orthodox prove a peculiar instrumental vertue in faith for pardon which others have not The Apostle expresseth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through faith in his bloud not love of his bloud and indeed the Apostle maintaineth that Gospel-position against false teachers viz. That we are justified by Faith not by works The Question was not Whether the works of the Law did justifie us declaratively only but causally So then by this Doctrine Faith must no more be called the hand or the eating and drinking of Christs body and bloud but only made a sign of such mercies 6. If pardon of sin be from all eternity going before our Faith and Repentance because of Gods election then it must also be antecedent to the death and obedience of Christ So that not only our tears but Christs bloud shall be excluded from this great favor The reason is plain Because Gods predestination and election is antecedent to Christ yea Christ is a fruit of our election so that the Orthodox maintain against Arminians though we be chosen
Scripture less loving is called hating sometimes as the Learned observe Neither doth this make any change in God it only denoteth a change in the creature as hereafter is to be shewed So that the gross mistake as if Eleâ—tion were all love actually and expresly and the confounding of the love of God as an immanent act in him with the effects of this love hath made several persons split upon rocks of errors But how love and anger are in God is more exactly to be examined when we speak of the meritorious cause of Justification which is Christs merits for indeed this Argument from Election will as well put in for a Justification before any consideration of Christ as well as of Faith if every thing be duely weighed as in that part God willing is to he shewed where also the distinctions about Gods love are to be considered of Some making a general love and a special love others a first love and a second or one flowing from the first others a love of benevolence or beneficence and of complacency But of these in their proper place We proceed and in the next place we will put his fourth and sixth Argument together being both grounded upon this That Christ by his death gave a full satisfaction to God and God accepted of it whereby Christ is said so often to take away our sins and we to be cleansed by his bloud This Argument made the learned Pemble pag. 25. to hold out Justification in Gods sight long before we were born as being then purchased by Christs death otherwise he thinks we must with the Arminians say Christ by his death made God placabilem reconcilable not placatum reconciled No saith he it is otherwise the ransome demanded 〈◊〉 paid and accepted full satisfaction to the divine Justice is given and taken all the sins of the Elect all actually pardoned This is a great oversight For first Though Christ did lay down a price and the Father accept of it yet both agreed in a way and order when this benefit should become theirs who are partakers of it and that is when they believe and repent Now Bonum est ex integris causis if God the Fathers Covenant be to give pardon for Christs sake to those that do believe which faith also is the fruit of Christs death then may we not separate Christ from faith no more then faith from Christ or God the Fathers love from both If Christ had died for such a man to have his sins pardoned whether he had faith in him or no then this Argment would have stood firm God then did accept of Christs death and becomes reconciled but in that order and way which he hath appointed 2. This Argument doth interfâ—re with that of Election for there pardon of sin doth take its rise from Election but here from the time God laid our sins upon Christ And indeed the Antinomians are at a variance amongst themselves some fetching the original of pardon from one way and some from another 3. We do not say That faith is the condition of Christs acquiring pardon but of the application of pardon Faith doth not make Christs merits to be merits or his satisfaction to be satisfaction This ariseth from the dignity and worth of Christ It would be an absurd thing to say That faith is the cause why God doth accept of Christs merits and receiveth a satisfaction by him This were to make the instrumental cause a meritorious cause The Arminians they make Christ to have purchased pardon upon condition of believing which believing they do not make a benefit by Christs death yea they say Nihil ineptius nibil vanius nothing is more foolish and vain then to do so Now this indeed is an execrable errour to hold Christ died only to make a way for reconciliation which reconciliation is wholly suspended upon a mans faith and that faith comes partly from a mans will and partly from grace not being the fruit of Christs death as wel as remission of sins it self But we say a far different thing Christ satisfied Gods wrath so that God becomes reconciled and gives pardon but in the method and way he hath appointed which is faith and this faith God will certainly work in his due time that so there may be an instrument to receive this pardon For the opening of this when it is said Christ satisfied Gods wrath this may have a different meaning either that Christ absolutely purchased reconciliation with the Father whether they believe or no without any condition at all as Joab obtained Absoloms reconciliation with David or Esther the Jews deliverance of Ahashuâ—rosh Or with a condition In the former sense it cannot be said because the fruits of Christs death are limited only to believers If with a condition then either Antecedent which is to be wrought by us that so we may be partakers of his death and that cannot be because it is said He died for us while sinners and enemies And this is Arminianism for by this means only a gate is set open for salvation but it may happen that no man may enter in or else this condition is Concomitant or consequent viz. A qualification wrought by the Spirit of Christ whereby we are enabled to receive of those benefits which come by his death And in this sense it is a truth and by this the foundation of the Opponent is totally razed For Christ took away the sins of those for whom he died and reconciled them to God and this absolutely if by it we understand any condition anteceding to be done by us but not absolutely if it exclude a condition that is consequently wrought by the Spirit of God to apply the fruits of Christs death so that the actual taking away of sins is not accomplished till the person for whom he died be united to him by Faith Hence the Scripture speaks differently about Christs death sometimes it saith He died for us sinners and enemies and in other places John 15.13 He layeth down his life for his friends and his sheep Joh. 17.19 He saith he prayeth and sanctifieth himself for those that shall believe in him viz. in a consequent sense for those who by faith shall lay hold on his death So that faith hath a two-fold condition the first of the time when sins are taken away by Christs death and that is when they believe 2. Of whom these priviledges are true and that is of such who do believe Now all this may be the further cleared if we consider what kinde of cause Christs death is to take away our sins It is a meritorious cause which is in the rank of moral causes of which the rule is not true Positâ causâ sequitur effectus The cause being the effect presently followeth This holdeth in natural causes which necessarily produce their effects but moral causes work according to the agreement and liberty of the Persons that are moved thereby As for