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
sin in the beleever is in the sight of God 69 17 How Gods anger manifesteth it self upon his children when they sinne pag. 75 18 What kinde of sins God is displeased with 79 19 How God manifesteth his displeasure against his people in spirituall and eternall things 82 20 How the Antinomian would prove that God doth not see sinne in a justified person 88 21 How the Antinomian distinguisheth between Gods knowing and seeing of sin ibid. 22 How seeing is attributed to God 89 23 How Gods knowledge and ours do differ ibid. 24 How the Antinomians are contrary to themselves 93 25 How farre Gods taking notice of sinne so as to punish it is subject to the meer liberty of his will 95 26 How freedome may be extended to God 96 27 How the attributes of God and the actions of them differ in respect of freedome 97 28 How Gods justice essentially and the effects of it differ 100 29 How Christ satisfied God 101 30 How afflictions on Beleevers can agree with Gods justice ibid. 31 Why sins are called debts 105 32 What in sin is a debt ibid. 33 What is meant by that petition Forgive us 113 34 Whether we pray for the pardon it self or for the sense thereof only 4 Reasons proving the affirmative 116 35 What is implied in the petition Forgive us our debts 121 1 In the subject who doth pray ibid. 2 In the matter praied for 126 3 In the person to whom we pray 128 36 How sin a considered 130 37 How all sin is voluntary 132 38 Whether sin be an infinite evil 138 39 What remission of sin is 139 40 Why repentance and faith is pressed as necessary 146 41 How our repentance consists with Gods free grace in pardoning of sin 147 42 How many doe mistake concerning repentance p. 150 43 Why God requires repentance seeing it is no cause of pardon 157 44 Why repentance wrought by the spirit of God is not enough to remove sin in the guilt of it 161 45 Why repentance should not be as great a good and as much honour God as sin is an evil 163 46 What harm comes to God by sin ibid. 47 What kinde of act Forgivenesse of sin is and whether it be antecedent to our faith and repentance 166 48 Whether justification precede faith and repentance 176 49 Whether infants have actuall faith and are Beleevers 181 50 How we are sinners in Adam 185 51 How an elect person unconverted and a reprobate differ and what kinde of love election is 188 52 Whether in that petition Forgive us our debts we pray for pardon or for assurance only 196 53 Why God doth sometimes pardon sinne not acquainting the person with it 200 54 What directions should be given to a soul under temptation about pardon of sin 203 55 Whether a Beleever repenting is to make difference between a great sin and a lesser 205 56 What is meant by covering of sin 216 57 How God by pardoning sin is sâ—id to cover it 217 58 Whether the phrase of Gods covering sin imply that he doth not see it 219 59 How sins being in justified persons can stand with the omnisciency truth and holinesse of God 220 60 How God doth see sin in beleevers when they have the righteousnesse of Christ to cover it 221 61 How a face is attributed to God 226 62 What sins Gods children may fall into 230 63 How the sinnes of Gods people and of the reprobate differ 234 64 How farre grosse sinnes make a breach upon justification 236 65 Why the guilt of new grosse sinnes doth not take away justification p. 245 66 Whether God in pardoning doth not forgive all sins together 246 67 Wherein the compleatnesse of the pardon of sin at the day of judgement consists 262 68 Whether the sins of Gods people shall be manifested at the last day 264 69 Whether we are justified in Christ before we beleeve as we are accounted sinners in Adam before we actually sinned 186 70 Whether reconciliation purchased by Christs death doth necessarily inferre justification before faith 190 OF JUSTIFICATION LECTURE I. ROM 3.24 25. Being justified freely by his Grace c. THE Apostle in the words precedent laid down two Propositions to debase man and all his works that so he might make way for the exaltation of that grace of justification here spoken of The first Proposition is that By the deeds of the Law no flesh shall be justified in his sight where two things are observable 1. That he cals every man by the word Flesh which is emphaticall to beat down that pride and tumor which was in the Jews 2. He addeth in his sight which supposeth that though our righteousnesse among men may be very glorious yet before God it is unworthy The other Proposition is that All come short of the glory of God Some do make it a Metaphor from those in a race who fall short of the prize Whether by the glory of God be meant the image of God and that righteousnesse first put into us or eternall life or which is most probable matter of glorying and boasting before God which the Apostle speaks of afterwards is not much materiall Now the Apostle having described our condition to be thus miserable he commends the Grace of God in justifying of us which is decyphered most exactly in a few words so that you have in the Text a most compendious delineation of justification First There is the benefit set down being justified Secondly The efficient cause Gods Grace and here we have a two-fold impulsive cause one inward denoted in the word Freely the other outward in the meritorious cause Christs death which is further illustrated by the appointment of God for this end 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Some understand this of Gods manifestation as if it were spoken to oppose the propitiatory in the Ark which was left hidden some to the whole polity in the Old Testament which in the Legal shadows and the Prophets predictions did declare Christ Others upon better ground refer it to the Decree of God This death of Christ is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which denoteth both the action it self as also the effect and benefit which cometh by it Chrysostome observeth that it is called redemption and not a simple emption because we were the Lords once but by our sins became slaves to Satan and now God doth make us his again In the third place you have the instrumentall cause Faith in his bloud this is that Hysop that doth sprinkle the bloud though it be contemptible in it self yet it is instrumentall for a great good and hereby is denoted That Faith hath a peculiar nature in this work of Justification which no other grace hath for none saith Love in his bloud or Patience in his bloud Lastly here is the final cause To declare the righteousnesse of God for the remission of sins past Some observe those words sins past as implying no sinne is
the godly are by way of tryal and temptation upon them and because of the good that is in them of these the Apostle James speaks when he bids them count it all joy when they fall into divers temptations of these Paul speaks when he saith he will rejoyce in his infirmities so that the persecutions and miseries which come upon them are an Argument of the good in them more then of the evils as the tree that is ful of fruit hath its boughs more broken then that which is barren and the Pyrates watch for the ship that is fraughted with gold And thus a martyr comforted himself That though he had many sins for which he deserved death yet he thanked God that his enemies did not attend to them but to the good that was in him and for that he suffered so then all the grievances upon the godly are not of the same nature Sixtly The afflictions for sins upon the godly do differ much from those that are upon the wicked This we also grant that when God doth punish the godly and the wicked for their sins though the punishment for the matter of it may be alike yet they differ in other respects very much as in the cause from which one cometh from a God hating their persons the other from anger indeed but the anger of a father Hence secondly they differ in the fittedness of these afflictions to do good God doth moderate these afflictions to his people that thereby grace may be increased but to the reprobate they are no more to their good then the flames of hell-fire are to the damned The Butcher he cuts the flesh far otherwise then the Chirurgion saith August Again in the end they differ All afflictions to the godly are like the beating of cloathes in the Sun with a rod to get out the dust and moths but it is not so with the wicked many other differences practical Divines prove out of the Scripture Seventhly Yet God doth in reference to the sins of his people though forgiven sometimes chastise them This is proved 1. From the Scripture that makes their sin the cause of their trouble Thus of David Because thou saith Nathan 2 Sam. 12.14 hast given great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme the childe also that is born of thee shall die Thus God speaks to all the godly in Solomon 2 Sam. 7.14 15. I will be his father and he shall be my son if he commit iniquity I will chasten him with the rod of men but my mercy will I not take away In these places sin is expresly made the cause of those afflictions and it is a poor evasion to say this was in the Old Testament for was not the chastisement of the godly mens peace in the Old Testament laid upon Christ as well as in the New but their folly herein and their contradiction to themselves will be abundantly shewed in answering their objections 2. In the places that do assert Gods judging of his people and rebuking of them and they are divers 1 Cor. 11. For this cause many are sick and weak where again you have not only the affliction but the cause why viz. irreverent prophaning of that Sacrament Thus James 5.14 Is any man sick Let him call for the Elders and let them pray for him and if he have committed sins saith the Text they shall be forgiven him There is none but hath committed sins yet the Apostle makes such an if because he speaks of such sins that may provoke God to lay that sicknesse upon him Thus in the Old Testament Psal 99.8 Thou forgavest them though thou tookâ—st vengeance on their inventions Here the Psalmist cals the chastisements upon those whose sins were forgiven vengeance as in other places his anger is said to smoak against the sheep of his pasture but we must not understand it of vengeance strictly so called as if God would satisfie his justice out of their sufferings 3. From the incouragement to duties by temporal Arguments and threats of temporal afflictions If the godly have these goads then certainly as they may conclude their temporal mercies to be the fruit of their godlinesse which hath the promise of this life and the life to come so they may conclude that their afflictions are the effects of their evil waies which have the threatning of this life and the life to come only here is this difference that the outward good mercies are not from their godlinesse by way of merit or causality but their afflictions are so because of their sins Hence the Apostle urgeth the godly Heb. 12.19 with this that even our God is a consuming fire Thus 1 Pet. 3.10 11. He that will love life and see good daies let him eschue evil and do good So that the Scripture pressing to holinesse because of outward good mercies and to keep from sin because of external evils and pressing these to the godly doth evidently declare this truth and certainly the Apostle speaking of the godly Rom. 8.10 saith the body is dead because of sin for by body Beza doth well understand our mortal body and not the mass of sin as some interpret it 4. From the comparison God useth concerning his afflictions upon his people and that is to be a father in that act correcting of them Thus Heb. 12.6 7 8 9 10 11 12. compare this with Rev. 3.19 As many as I love I rebuke now rebuke is alwaies for some fault and this is further cleared because he makes this conclusion be zealous therefore and repent therefore sin was precedent Now in these places God compareth himself to a Father and beleevers to children and we all know that fathers never correct but for sin it would be ridiculous to say the father whips the childe from sin not for sin It is true he doth it from sin by way of prevention to the future yet for sin also The Antinomian saith this is spoken of many beleevers together where some were not converted but this is weak because the persons whom he reproveth God is said to love them and they are children not bastards Again he saith There is no sin mentioned therefore it was not for sin But I answer the very comparison of God with a Father correcting his childe doth evidently argue it was for sin though it be not expressed 5. From the command not to despise or to make little account of Gods afflictions but to humble our selves and search out our waies Why should this be spoken but because they are for our sins Heb. 12.5 Despise not the chastening of God neither faint when thou art rebuked of him Where two things may seem to be forbidden though some make them all one one not to faint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a metaphore from those who faint in the race through languor and dissolution of minde The other is in the other extream not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to despise or to
The sense of Gods displeasure as a father may well stand together with an assurance that for all this he is no enemy A childe that bitterly crieth out because of his fathers chastisements yet even then hath that hope and comfort which he would not have if fallen into the hands or rage of an enemy that would kill him Hence it is that we presse all believers though sorely punished for their sins as their own hearts can tell them yet they must never pass such a sentence Now God is become my enemy he deals with me as with a Judas as with a Cain these we say are sinful inferences but they may conclude thus God though a loving father is now very angry and much displeased with me Distinguish then between a peace that doth oppose the hatred of God to a sinner as an enemy and a peace which doth oppose only the frowns of a father and this objection is answered I will acknowledge the people of God are apt under his sore displeasure not to discern between a father and an enemy They have much adoe to keep up this in their hearts God he smites he frowns he chides yet he is a father still but this is their temptation and weaknesse and we are apt to endeavour some kinde of compensation to God in our troubles for sin therefore it was a most blessed thing when God at the Reformation out of Popery caused this truth to break out That punishments for sin were not satisfactory to God but fatherly chastisements Thus you have this answered and as for that which followeth we glory in tribulations the Apostle must be limited to those which fall upon us for professing of Christ and his truth In these we may glory as the souldier doth of his marks and wounds he hath received in the wars for a good cause and to this purpose we told you in one Proposition That there was a great difference between those troubles that fell upon us because of the good in us and those which come upon us because of the evil in us What glory is it saith Peter 1 Pet. 2.20 if ye be buffeted for your faults Now who can deny but that even a godly man may fall into some hainous crime for which he may receive a sentence of death This man though he may rejoice in God who doth pardon the sin to him yet he can no more glory of this tribulation then a childe doth of whipping for his faults Another place of Scripture is Isa 53.5 The chastisement of our peace was upon him and with his stripes we are healed This Text of Scripture is again and again pressed by them and certainly it is more sweet then the Honey or Honey-Comb but truly they do with it as the thieves with the man of Jericho leave it half dead and much wounded First Let us open the place and then see how far they are from the meaning The Prophet Isaiah in this Chapter may be called as we said before the fifth Evangelist for he seemeth rather to write an History of Christ then make a prophecie of him Among other passages these two are to our purpose 1. That the chastisement of our peace was upon him by Peace here Calvin doth well understand not that of quietnes in the conscience but a reconciliation made with God through his sufferings And it is observed by some how emphatical the Scripture is in that Pronoun He He hath born and He hath been wounded The second follows With his stripes we are healed Some think that this is spoken to debase that condition Christ so voluntarily put himself in that so his love might appear the more to us it being an allusion to the State of servants who used to be chastised by their lords The phrase is the same with that He hath born our griefs or diseases which Matth. 8.17 is applied to Christs healing of diseases and 1 Pet. 2. to that suffering upon the Crosse And well may this be because the outward healing of diseases was a Symbole or Testimony of his inward healing Although Grotius observeth That Christ is therefore said to bear our diseases when he cured them because of the great pains and travell he took therein for it was after Sun-set and the multitude did much throng him so then by the words you see the whole price of our peace laid upon Christ and by him all evils both temporall and spirituall removed but what is this to the purpose Yes say they here our chastisements are laid upon Christ therefore we have none for sin but 1. if this proved any thing it will be more then the Antinomians will yield for it would infer that there are no chastisements at all either for sin or no sin now the Antinomians cannot deny and experience confuteth them but that the godly have afflictions though as they say not for sin and this will inevitably follow by their argument for as they would prove from hence they have no sin at all not only sin that will not condem as the Orthodox say but even no sin so it will by the same reason follow that believers have no chastisements at all I do not say not for sin but none at all But Secondly The Antinomian in that place pag. 129. doth fully answer himself All chastisement saith he for sin needfull for the making perfect peace between God and his justified children was laid upon him very true Therefore say we though these chastisements be for sin yet they are not upon the godly as upon Christ they are not to satisfie Gods justice to work a reconciliation but only to humble them in themselves and make them the better feel how much they are beholding to Christ who bore so much wrath for them To say therefore as the Papists Christ by his death did only remove the spirituall evil and we by our sufferings must take away the temporall punishment this would indeed be derogatory to Christ and take off in a great measure from his glory A Third place brought in to maintain their errour is James 1.2 3 4 5. Count it matter of all joy when you shall fall into divers temptations therefore saith he they are not for sin because they are matters of joy and mark how he baptizeth goeth on the Author crosses and afflictions as it were with a new name taken from the nature of the change of them through the Gospel calling them temptations and trials But mark the ignorance of the adversary rather then the name of afflictions for Is it peculiar to beleevers under the Gospel that their afflictions are tryals what then will he return to that place Deut. 8.2 God saith the afflictions upon the people of Israel for fourty years in the wildernesse and they were not all beleevers much lesse beleevers under the Gospel were to humble them and prove or try them And Jer. 9.7 God speaking of the Israelites saith He will melt them and try them See
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
Therefore in different respects we may say That pardon of sin is an utter abolition of it and it is not an utter abolition of it It is an utter abolition of it as it doth reflect upon the person making him guilty and obliging him actually to condemnation in this respect a man is as free as if he had never sinned but if you speak of the inherency of sin and the effects of original corruption that do abide in all which are also truly and properly sins so pardon of sin is not an utter abolition and although Christ wrought no semiplenam curationem as is observed no half-cures upon any diseased persons but whom he healed he healed perfectly yet he works by degrees in the grace of Sanctification as he did perfect the world by severall degrees successively and not as Austin thought all at once So that this particular viz. That forgiveness is a perfect abolition of sin in the former consideration is of transcendent comfort to the believers and indeed it is impossible that sin should be forgiven divisibly and by parts so a man should be at the same time under the favour of God and under his hatred which is impossible Thou therefore who art a believer hast cause to rejoyce for this perfect work of remission of thy sins past wherein nothing more is or can be done for thy good and consolation Do not think it is with God as with men who say indeed They forgive with all their heart yet retain their secret inward hatred as much as before Indeed the pain of sin may roul and tumble in thy conscience a long while after though it be forgiven we see so in David as the sea which hath been enraged by tempests and windes though they be quiet yet the sea will roar and make a noise a long time after The heart of a man awakened and pierced with the guilt of sin doth not quickly and easily compose it self again Prop. 2. It is one thing for God to forgive and another thing not to exact and demand punishments As we see among men a Judge many times through fear or otherwise when Justice is obstructed doth not call such a malefactour to an account but deferreth it yet for all that the man is not acquitted so it is often to be seen in Gods providence There are multitudes of sinners who after their transgressions committed are not onely without punishment but enjoy great prosperity and much outward successe yet these men are not pardoned they have no acquittance from God This hath been such a temptation to David Jeremiah and others of Gods people that they have many times staggered through unbelief But men may have their punishments deferred their damnation may sleep or linger but it is not taken off Let not men therefore delude themselves with vain hopes as if their sins were forgiven because not yet punished No there must be some positive gracious act of God to acquit thee else thy sins are alive to condemn thee Examine thy self therefore whether thy peace comfort plenty be a fruit of Gods forbearance meerly or of his acquittance This later is alwayes an act of his gracious mercy but the other may be a terrible fruit of his hatred against thee insomuch that thou hadst better wander up and down like Cain fearing every thing will kill thee or damn thee then be in such security Prop. 3. A godly man may account not only himself bound to thank God for the pardon of those sins he hath committed but he is to acknowledge so many pardons as by the grace of God he hath been preserved from sin And if a believer enter into this consideration how will it overwhelm him So often as God hath preserved thee from such and such sins which thy own heart or temptations would have inclined thee to God hath virtually given thee so many pardons That God preserved David from killing Nabal and his Family here was interpretatively as great mercy as in the expresse forgiving of the murder of Vriah It is a rule of Divines Plures sunt gratiae privativae quà m positivae There are more preventing graces then positive The keeping of evils from us is more then the good he bestoweth on us Therefore Austin observed well that as Paul said By the grace of God I am what I am So he might also have said By the grace of God I am not what I am not Though therefore we are not so sensible of preventing mercies as of positive yet a due and right consideration of Gods love in this matter might much inflame our hearts Say therefore O Lord I blesse thee not onely for the pardon of those sins I have committed but also for thy goodnesse in preserving me from those many thousands I was prone to fall into which is in effect the pardon of so many Prop. 4. Remission of sin is not to be considered meerly as removing of evil but also as bestowing of good It is not only ablativa mali but collativa boni it is not a meer negation of punishment due to us but a plentifull vouchsafing of many gracious favours to us such as a Sonship and a right to eternal life as also Peace with God and Communion with him God also never pardons any sin but where he sanctifieth the nature of such an one Indeed it will be worth the enquiry Whether this connexion of pardon of sin with inherent holiness arise from a natural neâ—essity so that one cannot be without the other or whether it be by the meer positive will and appointment of God for the present this is enough God hath revealed he will never dis join these Prop. 5. Iâ— every sin there are as to the purpose of Justification these two things considerable the offence that is done to God whereby he is displeased and the obligation of the man so offending him to eternal condemnation Now remission of sin doth wholly lie in removing of these two so that when God doth will neither to punish or to be offended with the person then he is said to forgive We must not therefore speak of two kinds of remissions one remission of the punishment another of the offence and fault for this is one remission and God never doth the one without the other It is true there remain paternal and medicinal chastisements after sin is forgiven but no offence or punishment strictly so taken What kinde of act this remission is whether immanent or transient is to be shewed in the next Question Prop. 6. From the former Proposition this followeth That sin in the guilt of it is not remitted by any act that we do but it is a meer act of God So that neither the grace of repentance or love of God is that which removeth guilt out of the soul but it is something in God onely It is the opinion of many Papists That God in pardoning doth onely inable to repent for sin and then the guilt of
it self it is plain by all those places of Scripture which make repentance requisite to pardon Ezek. 14.6 Ezek. 18.30 Mat. 3.2 Luk. 13.3 The learned Dr Twisse Vind. grat p. 18. confesseth that there are Arguments on both sides in the Scripture Sometimes he saith Pardon of sin is subjoyned to confession and repentance of which sort he confesseth there are more frequent and expresse places but yet sometimes remission of sin already obtained is made an argument to move to repentance and he instanceth in David and Mary Magdalen who did abundantly and plentifully break out into tears upon the sense of pardon But these instances are not to the purpose for David repented of his wicked ness before Nathan told him That his sin was taken away and his penitential Psalm was not made so much for the first pardon of his sin as the confirming and assuring of him in his pardon Thus it was also with Mary Magdalen But more of this in time 4. There is a necessity of Repentance if we would have pardon both by a necessity of precept or command as also by a necessity of means and a way Whatsoever is necessary Necessitate medii by a necessity of means or a way is also necessary by a necessity of command though not è contra That repentance is necessary by way of a command is plain by the places fore-quoted and in innumerable other places I do not handle the case Whether an actual or explicite repentance be necessary to salvation of every sinner but I speak in the general It is disputed Whether it be a natural precept or a meer positive command and if it be a natural or moral command to which command it is reduced Those that would have it under the command of Thou shalt not kill as if there were commanded a care of our souls that they should not be damned are ignorant of the true limits and bounds of the several Commandments It s disputed also When this time of repentance doth binde It is a wonder that some should limit it only to times of danger and fear of death Certainly this command binds as soon as ever a man hath sinned Venenata inducias non patiuntur A man that hath swallowed down poison is not to linger but presently to expell it And one that is wounded who lieth bleeding doth presently dispatch with all readinesse for Physitians to have his bloud stopt and thus ought men to take the first opportunity Hence in that famous miracle wrought at the pool of Bethesda not the second or third but he that stept first into it was the only man that was healed As repentance is thus necessary by way of command so also by way of means for the Spirit of God worketh this in a man to qualifie him for this pardon So that although there be no causality condignity or merit in our repentance yet it is of that nature that God doth ordain and appoint it a way for pardon So that the command for repentance is not like those positive commands of the Sacraments wherein the will of the Law-giver is meerly the ground of the duty but there is also a fitnesse in the thing it should be so even as among men nature teacheth That the injurious person should be sorry and ask forgivenesse before he be pardoned 5. Concerning this duty of repentance there are two extream practical mistakes the one is of the prophane secure man who makes every empty and heartlesse invocation of mercy to be the repentance spoken of in the Scripture whereas repentance is a duty compounded of many ingredients and so many things go to the very essence yea the lowest degree of godly sorrow that by Scripture-rules we may say Repentance is rarely to be seen any where for if you do regard the nature of it it is a broken and a contrite heart Now how little of the heart is in most mens humiliations Men being Humiliati magis quam humiles as Bernard said humbled and brought low by the hand of God rather then humble and lowly in their own souls Again if you consider the efficient cause it is from the Spirit of God the spring of sorrow must arise from this hill Zech. 12. Rom. 8. Further if you consider the motive it must be because God is displeased and offended because sin is against an holy law and so of a staining and polluting nature Lastly If you consider the effect and fruit of repentance it is an advised forsaking and utter abandoning of all those lusts and iniquities in whose fetters they were before chained so that a man repenting and turned unto God differs as much from himself once a sinner as a Lazarus raised up and walking differs from himself dead and putrifying in the grave Do not thou then whose heart is not contrite who dost continually lick up the vomit of thy sin promise to thy self repentance No thou art far from this duty as yet On the other side There is a contrary mistake and that is sometimes by the godly soul and such as truly fear God They think not repentance enough unlesse it be enlarged to such a measure and quantity of sorrow as also extended to such a space of time and by this means because they cannot tell when they have sorrowed enough or when their hearts are broken as they should be they are kept in perpetual labyrinths and often through impatience do with Luther in such a temptation Wish they never had been made men but any creatures rather because of the doubts yea the hell they feel within themselves Now although it be most profitable bitterly to bewail our sins and to limit no time yet a Christian is not to think Pardon doth not belong to him because his sorrow is not so great and sensible for sin as he desireth it David indeed doth not only in his soul but even bodily expresse many tears yea rivers because of his sin and other mens sins yet it is a good rule That the people of God if they have sorrow in the chiefest manner appretiativè though not intensivè by way of judgment and esteem so that they had rather any affliction should befall them then to sin against God if this be in them though they have not such sensible intense affections they may be comforted When the Apostle John makes this argument He that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen how shall he love God whom he hath not seen implieth That things of sense do more move us then matter of faith David made a bitter out-cry upon the death of Absolom with sad expressions Would to God I had died for thee O Absolom my son my son c. But when Nathan told him of his Adultery and Murder though he confessed his sin yet we reade not that he made such sensible lamentation Thus Hierom writeth of a godly woman Paula that at the death of her children would be so dejected that she did hardly escape death yet
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
affection and turning of bowels within him proclaim this truth as David did What is said of Pauls Epistles is also true of Davids Psalms Nunquam Davidis mentem intelliges nisi prius Davidis spiritum imbiberis You can never fully understand Davids meaning unlesse you be possessed with Davids spirit Now that you may be moved hereunto consider the motive in the Text and the means to get it The motive is blessednesse a man is never an happy man till his sinnes be pardoned What makes hell and damnation but meerly not forgivenesse thy wealth thy greatnesse thy honours cannot bring that happinesse to thee which remission of sins doth Hence this is the cause of all other blessednesse And observe here is a great deal of difference between this place Blessed is the man whose sinnes are pardoned and those Texts where he is said to be blessed that feareth alwaies or he is said to be blessed that walketh not in the waies of the wicked for in the Text is shewed the cause or fountain of blessednesse viz. remission of sinne but in other places there is only deciphered who they are that are blessed A man that feareth is blessed but his fear is not the cause of his blessednesse A man that liveth godly is blessed but his godlinesse is not the cause of his blessednesse but his pardon of sin makes him blessed in all his graces Thou art blessed not because thou praiest hearest livest holily but because God doth forgive all thy sins and imperfections in these duties If therefore your graces your holy duties are not the cause of your blessednesse never think your outward mercies can be The means to obtain this is in the Text by having no guile in the heart that is by not hiding our sins but repenting of them and confessing them to God For this saith David every one shall pray unto thee in an acceptable time for this that is for this remission and because thou wast so ready to forgive when I said I will confesse my sin Therefore shall every one seek to thee where by the way let none abuse that place vers 5. David said he would confesse and God forgave it David did but say it and God pardoned it so some have descanted upon it But to say there according to the use of the Hebrew word in some places is firmly to purpose and decree so resolvedly that he will be diligent in the practice of iâ— Doe not therefore think that a meer lip-labour is that brokennesse and contrition of spirit which God requireth as the means to pardon LECTURE XXVI PSAL. 51.9 Hide thy face from my sinnes and blot out all mine iniquities YOu have heard of the peculiar usefulnesse of the Psalms in respect of our conditions or temptatians What some Authours I know not upon what ground have said of the manna that it had the taste of all delicate meats in it and gave a respective rellish to what every palate desired this may be truly affirmed of the Psalms they have a respective direction or comfort to every ones affliction or temptation Hence they have been called by some the little Bible or the Bible of the Bible for although all the stars be of a quintessâ—ntiall matter as the Philosophers say yet one star differs from another in glory And this Psalm among the rest hath no mean excellency or usefullnâ—sse it being a spirituall Apothecaries shop wherein are choice antidotes against the guilt and filth of sin so that every one may say that of this Psalm which Luther of another O Psalme Tueris meus Psalmus Thou shalt be my Psalm The occasion of this Psalm is set down very diligently and punctually in the inscription it was made when Nathan reproved David for his adultery after he had gone in to Bathsheba The Hebrew word is translated in the time past and so those that excuse Naaman 2 King 5.18 translate those words wherein Naaman begs for pardon for his bowing down in the house of Rimmon in the time past Thus pardon thy servant when my master went into the house of Rimmon-and I bowed my self And they bring this inscription of the Psalm to confirm such a translation We are in this Psalm to look upon humbledâ—or â—or his grievous sins as a Job sitting upon the dunghil abhorring himself because of the ulcers and loathsomenesse upon him or like a wretched Lazarus full of sores lying at Gods throne who is rich in mercy For mercy is the scope of the Psalm which he praieth for in the negative effects of it such as blotting out of his favour c. and in the positive effects thereof such as creating a new heart filling him with joy and gladnesse c. And this Petition is enforced with several arguments from Gods multitude of mercies from his confession and acknowledgement with a ready submission to all Gods chastisements from the pronenesse of every one to sin because of that original corruption seated in him from the good effect this pardon shall work upon him he will teach transgressours Gods waies so that his sinnes as well as his graces shall instruct others My Text is a praier about that negative effect of mercy which is expressed in two Petitions to the same purpose The first is Hide thy face from my sins The Scriptures give a face to God in a two-fold sense There is the face of his favour and his love This David in the 11th verse praieth God would not take from him And there is the face of his anger and his indignation This David perceiveth upon him and against him wherefore he desireth God would hide it from him So that it is an expression from a guilty person who cannot endure the just Judge should look upon him or rather from a childe offending who cannot bear the frowns of his father casting his eyes upon him David hath that filth and guilt now upon him which he knoweth God cannot behold but with much wrath and indignation therefore he praieth God would not look on him You see here David acknowledging That God doth see and take notice of the sins of justified persons in a most provoked manner This praier is expressed to the same sense in the next Petition Blot out all mine iniquities wherein consider the mercy praied for Blot out a metaphor as you have heard from merchants that cancell their debts or as the Suâ—doth dissipate and cause the cloud to vanish 2. The extent of the object all my iniquities Whether this extend to future sins so that all sins past present and futâ—re are pardoned together shall be considered in the second place From the first Petition Observe That God seeth and taketh notice of in a most angry and provoked manner the hainous and gross sins which a Believer hath plunged himself into For this reason David praieth God would turn away his eyes and face from him even as the sore eyes desire to have the light removed as being unable to
her self further appeareth in making her Hair heretofore the instrument of her pride and wantonness now a Towel to wipe his feet In the third place Christs love towards her is remarkable and in the general it is so great that the Pharisee puffed up with his own pride was offended at it not considering First That though she had been a sinner yet now she manifested Repentance And secondly That every commerce and communion with a sinner is not forbidden but that which is of incouragement or consent unto his sin but our Saviours was like the communion of a Physician with the Patient to heal and cure Hence our Saviour touched the leper whom he healed yet was not unclean because he touched him to restore him to health But as the people murmured because Moses married a Blackmore so the Pharisees grudged because Christ shewed mercy to sinners but Moses indeed could not make the Blackmore white whereas Christ doth purifie the defiled soul Now our Saviour doth aggravate his love to her First by a diligent enumeration of those several acts of service which she had exhibited to him not mentioning any of her former sins and all this he doth with an Antithesis or opposition to that carriage which the Pharisee had presented him with 2. To convince the Pharisee he declareth a Parable that so from his own mouth the Pharisee may judge her love to Christ to be greater then his In the last place his grace to her is further declared by pardoning her sins though so hainous which pardon is first declared unto the Pharisee in my Text and afterwards to the woman her self In my Text is the first promulgation of her pardon now because the words have some difficulty and the later part is brought to prove love to be a meritorious cause of Remission of sins two Questions are briefly to be resolved First When this womans sins were pardoned And the Answer is That as soon as ever she repented in her heart of her evil wayes and believed in Christ her sins were forgiven her for so God doth promise and this was before she came to Christ but she cometh to Christ for the more assurance of Pardon and not only so but that he should authoritatively absolve her from her sinne for Christ did more then declare her sins pardoned as appeareth by the standers by who with wonder made this question v. 49. Who is this that forgiveth sins also Whereas to declare the forgiveness of sin only any Minister may do as we read of Nathan to David 2 Sam. 12.13 So that her sins were pardoned by God before at the first time of her Faith and Repentance but now Christ as the Mediator doth particularly absolve her and that in her own conscience therefore he bids her Go in peace The second Question is Whether that expression Much is forgiven her for she loved much be causal as if her love were antecedent and a cause of her forgiveness or consequential only as an effect or sign of her forgiveness in this sense She loved much because God did forgive her many sins not she loved much and therefore God forgave her Here is a great and vast difference between these two many Papists are for the later the Protestants generally for the former and there is this cogent reason for it for that Christ doth not speak of Repentance or Love which should go before and be the cause of the pardon of sins is plain by the Parable he brings of a Creditor who forgave one Debtor more another Debtor less hereupon our Saviour asked the Pharisee Which of them will love him most Simon answered I suppose him to whom most was forgiven Now of such a love our Saviour speaketh when he mentioneth the woman which is clearly a love of Gratitude Because much was forgiven not an antecedent love of merit to procure pardon so that as from her actions of anointing and washing his feet by way of a sign or effect we gather her Faith and Love of Christ so by her Faith and Love as by a sign and effect it may be gathered that her sins are forgiven her But you may ask How could she come to know her sins were forgiven before Christ told her I answer By the promise of God made to every true Penitent and Believer though this assurance of hers was imperfect and therefore admitted of further degrees whereas then all this Repentance and Humiliation was not that sinne might be forgiven but from Faith that they were forgiven We may observe this That the sense and apprehension of pardon of sins already obtained doth not beget carnal security but a further mollifying and humbling of the heart in a gracious manner This is a practical truth of great concernment And for the opening of it take notice of this distinction as a foundation viz. That there is in Scripture a two-fold Repentance or Humiliation of the soul for sin the one antecedent and going before pardon and this the Scripture requireth as a necessary condition without which forgiveness of sin cannot be obtained of this Repentance the Scripture for the most part speaks Ezek 14.18 30. Mat. 3.2 Mark 6.12 Luk. 13.3 Act. 3.19 and generally in most places of Scripture In the second place there is an Humiliation of heart and brokenness of soul for sin arising from thâ— apprehension of Gods love in pardoning whereby we grieve that we should deal so unkindely with so good and gracious a God This though more rarely yet is sometimes spoken of in Scripture as first in this woman who out of the apprehension of Gods love in pardoning so much to her did pour out her soul in all wayes of thankfulness After this manner also was Davids Repentance Psal 51. for he was thus deeply affected after Nathan had told him His sin was taken away Although it doth appear by the Psalm also that he had not as yet that sense of pardon which did quiet his conscience This kinde of affection was also in Paul 1 Tim. 12 13 14 15 16. 1 Cor. 15.8 9. in which places the Apostle remembring his former sins confesseth them and acknowledgeth thereby his unworthinesse of all that grace and favour he had received so that the Apostle doth not there humble himself that he may obtain mercy but because he had obtained mercy The most eminent instance of this kinde of sorrow and shame is Ezek. 16.62 63. where God promiseth to establish his Covenant with them and then mark the event of this That thou mayâ—st remember and be confounded and never open thy mouth more because of thy shame when I am pacified towards thee So then both these kindes of Humiliations are to be owned and practised and therefore it is a false and dangerous error to acknowledge no other kinde of Repentance then the later The Papists will not acknowledge this later Humiliation at all because they deny all Faith and Assurance that a believer may have of
Example God the Father is moved through the death of Christ to pardon the sins of such persons for whom he dieth This agreement is to be made good in that time they shall pitch upon in their transaction Now it pleased the Father that the benefits and fruits of Christs death should be applied unto the believer and not till he did believe though this faith be at the same time also a gift of God through Christ It is good therefore when we either call Election absolute or say Christ died absolutely to consider that Absolute may be taken as opposite to a Pre-requisite Condition which is to be fulfilled by us so that upon this Election and the fruits of Christs death shall depend or else Absolute may be taken as it opposeth any Means or Order which God hath appointed as the way to obtain the end and in this later sense it would be a grand absurdity to say Election is absolute or Christ died absolutely for if this were so the prophane Argument about Election would have truth in it If I be elected let me live never so wickedly I shall be saved And the Arminian Argument That every one were bound to believe that Christ died for him though wicked and abiding so would not well be avoided His last Argument is from the unchangeableness of Gods love If we are not justified in his sight before we believe then God did once hate us and afterwards love us And if this be so why should Arminians be blamed for saying We may be the children of God to day and the children of the devil to morrow Hence he concludes it as undoubted That God loved us first before we believe even when we were in our bloud In answering of this Argument several things are considerable First It must be readily granted That God is unchangeable Jam. 1.17 God is there compared to the Sunne and is therefore called the Father of Lights but yet is preferred before it because that hath Clouds sometimes cast over it and sometimes is in eclipse but there is change or shadow of change with him The Heathens have confessed this and so argued If God should change it would be either for better or worse for worse how could it be imagined for better then God were not absolutely perfect Most accursed therefore must Vorstius his blasphemy be who purposely pleads for mutability in God But secondly As this is easily to be confessed so the difficulty of those Arguments brought from the things which God doth in time and not from all Eternity have been very weighty upon some mens shoulders insomuch that they thought this the only way to salve all by saying That all things were from Eternity And certainly by the Antinomian Arguments we may as well plead for the Creation of all things from all Eternity as that we are justified from all Eternity for all are equally built upon this sandy foundation That because the things are done in time therefore there must be some new act of will or love in God which would imply God is mutable not loving to day and loving to morrow Therefore to avoid this they say All is from Eternity Origen who was called by an ancient Writer Centaur because of his monstrous opinions argued thus lib. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cap. 2. As there cannot be a father without a sonne or a Master and Lord without a possession so neither an omnipotent unless there be those things about which this power may be exercised Now although it be true That De Deo etiam vera dicere periculosum est because of the weakness of our Understandings to perceive his infinite lustre Yet thirdly It is well cleared by the Schoolmen That those relations which are attributed to God in time as a Creatour Father or Lord are not because of any new thing in God but in respect of the creatures so that when the world is created when a man is justified we say God who was not a Creator before is a Creator who was not a Father by grace is now by grace not because any new accident is in him but because there is a new effect in the creatures Thus if a man once the childe of wrath be now a son of Gods love the change is not in God but in the creature For the better clearing of this we are to take notice in the fourth place That it is one thing as Aquinas observeth Mutare voluntatem to change the Will and another thing Velle mutationem to Will a change By the same unchangeable Will we may Will several changes in an Object As the Physician without any change of his Will may will his Patient to take one kinde of Physick one day and another the third here he wils a change but doth not change his Will Thus God with the same Will decreed to permit in time such an elect man to be in a state of sin under the power of Satan and afterwards to call him out of this condition to justifie his person here indeed is a great change made in the man but none at all in God There is no new act in God which was not from all Eternity though every effect of this love of God was not from Eternity but in time Hence when our Divines argue against Arminians That if the Saints should apostatize Gods love would be changeable it is meant of Gods love of Election which is an absolute purpose and efficacious will to bring such a man to glory now although such a decree was free and so might not have been yet ex hypothesi supposing God hath made this decree it doth very truly follow That if that Saint should not be brought to glory God would be changeable And besides this immutability which may be called an immutability of his nature there is another of his Word and Promise whereby he hath graciously covenanted to put his fear in their heart that they shall never depart from him Now if any of the Saints should totally or finally apostatize Gods mutability would be seen in both those respects of his nature or will and of his truth and fidelity But the case is not the like when a man at his first conversion is made of a childe of wrath a childe of grace partly because there was no such absolute decree of God from Eternity that he should be for no space a childe of wrath but the clean contrary and partly because there is no such word or promise unto any unconverted person that he shall be in the favour of God but the Scripture declareth the clean contrary This duly considered will give a clear reason why it is no good Argument to say Such a man in his sins to day is a childe of wrath and converted to morrow is a son of grace Therefore God is changeable But on the other side if a man should argue An Elect man received into the state of grace may fall totally and finally Therefore God is