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
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
satisfaction where he hath done wrong Thus our Saviour also Mat. 5. If thou remember any man have ought against thee leave thy gift at the Altar and go and be reconciled It is a known saying of Austin Non remittitur peccatum nisi restituatur ablatum The sinne is not remitted unlesse what thou hast unjustly taken be restored And it is a most wretched perverting of the sense which an Antinomian makes Reconcil with God pag 90. that this reconciliation is to be made of man to man but not true in respect of God to man and whereas the same Authour speaks of Zacheus that he did beleeve first and afterwards made restitution which pag. 91. he cals an example beyond all exception let him the second time consider Zacheus his expression and he will see it nothing to his purpose The words are in the present tense Luke 19.8 Behold Lord the half of my goods I give to the poor and if I have wronged any man I give him four-fold Now either Zacheus means this of his former life past or else he declares his ready and prepared will for the time to come and there are Interpreters of both sides and which way soever you expound it it overthroweth the adversaries tenent For if it be understood of his course of life formely past then it goeth clear against him If of his readinesse of minde for the future it makes nothing for him For although by this it will appear That Zacheus did joyfully receive Christ before he made actuall restitution yet not before he had a preparednesse and resolution of heart to do it And certainly Zacheus speaking thus to Christ Behold I give cannot but be understood that this penitent frame of heart was upon him before he said so If Zacheus speaks this of his former course of life then he doth manifest this not in a way of pride or oftentation but to see whether Christ would command him to do otherwise so that he might be thought to say this for instruction sake to be directed for the future 6. As there must necessarily be more sorrow and will be greater terrors from the Lord so there is also required greater and stronger actâ— of faith whereby pardon may be applied For the agony and temptation being greater the strength of faith also must proportionably be encreased Hence we see the incestuous person was almost overwhelmed so great a matter was it to exercise faith when God was apprehended thus angry and certainly if faith be a grace so difficultly put forth even for the least sin What conflicts must there needs be when nothing but mountains are in the way and great gulfs apprehended between pardon and him The mariner doth need more skill and strength in a tempest then in a calm and the souldier must shew more courage in the midst of a furious battell then when all things are quiet Thus you see wherein a great difference is to be made Now there are some particulars wherein a beleever repenting is to make no difference at all And that is in these things First There is no difference in respect of the efficient cause Gods grace in pardoning The godly man is not to think that God can more easily pardon lesse sins then great sins No all these are equally pardoned by him Even as in the earth though there be great and high mountains in respect of other hâ—ls yet both them and these are meerly as a paâ—ctum in respect of the heavens So although some sins exceed others in guilt divers waies yet all of them in respect of Gods grace are but as a drop before the Sun which is quickly dried up Hence when God proclaimeth himself in all his goodnesse he is described to be a God pardoning iniquity transgression and sinne And thus Isaiah 1. he can make sins as red as scarlet as white as snow So that compared to Gods grace there is no difference at all Nor secondly may any difference be made in respect of the meritorious cause which is Christs obedience and sufferings For that cleanseth away great sinnes as well as small And certainly when we consider of what infinite value and worth the sufferings of him who is God as well as man do amount to the beleeving soul need not wonder if Christ do away one as well as the other In the Red Sea the stoutest and most valiant Champion was drowned as well as the meanest souldier He is the Lamb that takes away the sins of the world and his bloud is said to cleanse us from all our iniquities Here is no difference made from one sin as well as another So that although thy great sins require greater humiliation yet not a greater Mediator then Christ is Thou must pour out more tears but Christ needs not pour out more bloud so that in respect of Christs righteousnesse applied the least and the greatest sinner are pardoned both alike neither is it blasphemy though the Papists judge it so to say Mary Magdalen and the Virgin Mary are both justified alike 3. Neither may we make any difference in the means of pardon thus farre as if our merit and satisfaction were to goe to the pardon of one and not of the other We are to shew greater sorrow more means are to be used yet we are not to judge these actions of ours as having any worth or dignity in them for reconciliation so that after we have done all we must confesse It's grace only that pardons And this is the more to be observed because it is hard not to do any thing extraordinarily in a way of pardon and not presently to rest upon this as if it had some worth in it But certainly if so be it be the goodnesse of God meerly to forgive us our farthings it is much more his liberality to pardon our pounds and if by our own strength we cannot remove a straw how shall we a beam But in the primitive times the Church being severe against grosse offenders appointed more solemn and extraordinary duties of humiliation for satisfaction to the Church of God in point of scandal and in processe of time these were taught to be satisfactory even to God himself 4. Neither may this difference be made as if lesse sins might consist with the grace of Justification but such grosse sins did wholly exclude out of that state For there are some who pleade for the distinction of mortall and veniall sins in this sense veniall are all those which may stand with the favour and grace of God to the person so failing but mortall are such which though a man hath been justified yet being committed will cast him out of this sonship Such a distinction Musculus acknowledgeth loc com de peccato and others but this supposeth a totall apostasie from grace which I have already disproved As the Ark was made of that wood which would not be corrupt or putrifie so is the Church of God in
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
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
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
formally a sin so that its both a sin and the cause of sin and the effect of sin at the same time Now in this particular lieth the greatest part of the difficulty in the doctrine of forgivenes of sin for here sin is in the godly and truly so yet for all that it doth not condemn The Papists finding by experience such motions of original sin in us yet do say they are only penal effects and remain as opportunities by spiritual combate to increase the Crown of glory and this they urge as impossible they should be sins and yet not condemn the godly because guilt is inseparable from sin And the Antinomian doth expresly stumble at this stone Dr Crisps Serm. vol. 2. p. 92. For my part saith he I do not think as some do that guilt differs from sin but that it is sin it self They are but two words expressing the same thing Now if it were so that sin and guilt or the ordination of it to punishment were the same thing there could be no sin in the godly It is true guilt cannot be but where sin hath been yet guilt of punishment may be removed when the sin is past But this the Author doth shew that sin was so laid on Christ that from that time he ceaseth to be a sinner any more Thou art not a Thief a Murderer when as you have part in Christ p. 89. ut supra But of this hereafter 5. When a sin is forgiven it is totally and perfectly forgiven This is to be considered in the next place for when the Antinomian would have us so diligently consider that place Jer. 50.20 where God saith noneâ—â— â—â— If I say this were all his meaning sin shall be as if it had never been in respect of condemnation he shall be as surely freed from hell as if he had never sinned all this is true But they have a further meaning and that is That the sin was so laid upon Christ that the sinner ceaseth to be a sinner as if because a surety payeth the debt of some lend bankrupt that very paiment would make him cease to be a bankrupt that is false yet God doth so forgive sin that it can be forgiven no more perfectly then it is Those sins cannot be forgiven any more then they are which is matter of infinite comfort and as it is totally so irrevocably God will not revive them again Hence are those expressions of blotting them out of throwing them into the depth of the sea and howsoever that Parable Mat. 18. which speaks of the Master forgiving a servant so many talents yet upon the servants cruelty to some of his fellows his master calleth him to account and throweth him in prison for his former debts howsoever I say this be brought by some to prove that sins forgiven may upon after-iniquities be charged upon a man yet the ground is not sufficient For first The main scope only of a Parable is Argumentative The Fathers do fitly represent Parables to many things to a Knife whose edge doth only cut yet the back helps to that to a Plow whose Plow-shear only cuts yet the wood is subservient so in a Parable the main scope and intent is only argumentative the other parts are but like so many shadows or flourishes in the picture to make it more glorious now this instance was not mainly intended by our Saviour but forgivenesse of one another so that this part doth only shew what is in use amongst men or what sin doth deserve at Gods hands not that God revoketh his pardon or repenteth that ever he hath forgiven us but this is more expresly answered afterwards 6. Though sin be forgiven yet there may be the sense of Gods displeasure still for as though God doth forgive there are many calamities and pressures upon the godly so though Christ hath born the agonies that do belong unto sin yet some scalding drops of them do fall upon the godly not that the godly is by these to satisfie the justice of God but that hereby we might feel the bitternes of sin what wormwood and gall is in it that so we may take heed for the future and that we may by some proportion think on and admire the great love of Christ to us in undergoing such wrath Didst thou not judge the least of his anger falling upon thee more terrible then all the pains and miseries that ever thou wast plunged into And by this then thou mayest stand amazed and wondering at this infinite love of Christ to stand under this burden for thee David is a pregnant instance for the truth of this As when Saul was angry with Jonathan and run a Javelin at him he escaped and that run into the wall so the wrath of God which was violently to fall upon thee missed thee and ran into Christ But the sense of Gods displeasure for sin may be retained in us two wayes 1. Servilely and slavishly whereby we run from the promise and Christ and have secret grudgings and repinings against God this is sinfull for us to do 2. There is a filial apprehending of Gods displeasure though we are perswaded of the pardon this is good and necessary as we see in David who made that Psalm of Repentance Psal 51. though he had his absolution from his sin Tears in the soul by the former way are like the water of the Sea salt and brackish but those in the latter are sweet like the rain of the Clouds falling down on the earth 7. No wicked man ever hath any sin forgiven him for seeing remission of sins is either a part or fruit of Justification no wicked man is more capable of the one then the other Indeed we may read concerning wicked men Ahab and the Israelites when they have humbled themselves though externally and hypocritically yet God hath removed those judgements which were imminent upon them and thus far their sins have been forgiven them but God did not at the same time take off the curse and condemnation due to them Though they were delivered from outward calamity yet not from hell and wrath This therefore doth demonstrate the wofull condition of wicked men that have not one farthing of all their debts they owe to God paid but are liable to account for the least sins and it must needs be so for Christ the true and only paimaster of his peoples debts doth not own them so that when their sins shall be sought for every one in all the aggravations of it will be found out 8. This remission of sin is onely to the repenting believing sinner To the repentant Act. 5.31 To give repentance to Israel and forgivenesse of sins So Luk. 44.47 That repentance and forgivenesse of sins should be preached in his name Act. 8.22 Repent and pray if the thoughts of thy heart may be forgiven thee 1 Joh. 1.9 If we confesse our sins he is faithfull to forgive c. These and
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
those that are godly and dear to him with the condition and punishment of Hypocrites and Apostates as Heb. 6. See another instance 1 Cor. 4.4 I know nothing by my self yet am I not thereby justified for it is God that judgeth me where the Apostle doth not speak of an Anabaptistical perfection as if Paul knew no sin by himself but his meaning is to be restrained to the faithfull dispensation of the office committed to him in which though he had not perfection yet his conscience did not accuse him of grosse negligence or unfaithfulnes but for all this he doth not think himself justified by any godlines in him and why so because God judgeth him who takes notice of and is offended with more sins then he understands by himself so that Paul doth acknowledge God to see sin in him and therefore he cannot be justified by any thing inherent and this made Bernard say excellently Tutior est justitia donata quam inhaerens Imputed righteousnes is safer to relie upon then inherent Think it therefore a small thing to be acquitted by Antinomian principles when it is God that judgeth and whatsoever the Adversary speaketh about a righteousnesse of Christ communicated unto us so that thereby God seeth no sin yet because they say he seeth no sin in us inherently they must conclude for some perfect inherent righteousnes Lastly Ps 19. David crying out Who can understand his errors prayeth thereupon Cleanse thou me from secret sins and this doth imply that there were many sins that David had which were loathsome and foul in Gods eyes though undiscovered by himself and therefore he would have God wash him and make him clean A seventh rank of Arguments shall be from those places wherein God hath commanded Ministers to binde and retain the sins of scandalous offenders and hath promised to ratifie that in heaven which they according to his will do on earth Experience witnesseth that a justified person may fall into some scandalous sin whereby the whole Congregation may be much offended and God highly provoked Now in this case God hath commanded the Ministers of the Gospel to binde to retain such a mans sins till he doth repent This binding is not by way of authority but ministerial declaration effectual application of Gods threatnings in his Word to such a person sinning and when this is done God hath promised that all this shal be ratified and made good in Heaven against that man Now how can God make good the Ministers threatnings applied to that godly man if he take not notice and be not offended with the person so hainously sinning The places that prove such a binding of sin and Gods ratifying of their sentence are Joh. 20.23 Mat. 16.19 Mat. 18.18 Can any man say that when a godly man is cast out of Gods family the seals of Gods grace denied him and he delivered up to Satan that God is not angry with him yea is not he bound then to apprehend God estranged from him when a godly man is excommunicated he is not only cast out from the externall Church-society but likewise there is a deprivation from internal communion with Christ not as if he were cut off from the purpose or decree of Gods election or as if the habitual seed of grace were quite extinct in him but only as the outward seals of Gods favour are denied him so also doth God being angry with him deny him any inward testimonies of his favour and it would not be faith against sense as the Adversary cals it but presumption against Scripture to say God was at that time well pleased with him yea Divines say Synopsis puri Theol. dis 48. that there is a conditional exclusion of the person so offending from future glory for the Church threatens him that as they judge him now and bid him depart from their society so if he do not repent Christ at the last day will command him to depart from his presence and the holy Angels according to that of Tertul. in Apologetico Summum futuri judicii praejudicium est si quis it a deliquerit ut à communicatione orationis conventus omnis sancti commeroii relegetur The eighth kinde of Arguments is from those places where Christ is said still to be an Advocate and to make Intercession for believers after they are justified which would be altogether needless if God did not take notice of their sins and were ready to charge them upon believers ' consider the places 1 Joh. 2.1 Heb. 7.25 In the former place John having said That Christs bloud cleanseth us from all sin a place the Antinomian much urgeth not considering that at the same time the Apostle ver 9. requireth confession and shame in our selves if we would have pardon in the first verse of the second Chapter he saith He writes these things that they should not sin all true doctrine about Christ and free-grace tendeth to the demolishing and not incouraging of sin but the Apostle supposeth such fragility that we will sin and therefore speaketh of a remedy If we sin we have an Advocate now this makes several wayes against the Antinomian First That sins committed after our Justification need an Advocate it is not enough that we were once justified our new sins would condemn us for all that were it not for Christ Secondly In that Christ is an Advocate it supposeth That though God be a Father to his people yet he is also a Judge and that he so taketh notice of and is displeased with their sins that did not Christ intercede and deprecate the wrath of God it would utterly consume them Thou therefore who sayest God the Father is not offended why then doth Christ perform the Office of an Advocate If thy sins be not brought into the Court what need any pleading for thee In the other place Heb 7.25 The Apostle acknowledgeth a two-fold function of Christs Priestly Office The one is The offering up of himself for our sins The second is The continual Intercession for us which the Apostle Chap. 9.24 calleth Appearing before Gods face in our behalf now we must not so advance Christs sufferings in the taking away of sin so as to exclude the other part of his Priestly Office which is continually to plead our cause for us for the Apostle makes Christ to stand before the face of God as some great Favorite before an earthly Prince to plead in the behalf of those who are accused so that the Doctrine which denieth God seeing of sin in his people doth wholly overthrow Christs Intercession and the efficacy of it Concerning the manner of Christs Intercession it is not to be conceived in that way as he prayed here upon the earth but it is his holy will and expresse desire of his soul that God the Father should be reconciled with those for whom he hath shed his bloud and truly that point of Divinity viz. Christs affections and sympathizing with
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
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
of Instruction to the godly Observ It is the duty of justified persons to pray for forgivenesse of their sins The meaning of the Petition Forgive us c. 1 â—hat God wâ—uld not require of us the satisfaction of his justice for our sins 2 That God would lay our sins on Christ A two-fold diffâ—rence between Gods forgiving our sins and our forgiving others 3. As we pray for justification so for the continuance in it 4. We pray for daily renewed acts of pardon and imputation of Christs righteousnesse Bellâ—rmines objection answered 5. We pray for the sense of this pardon in our consciences more and more We pray for pardon it self and not for the sense thereof only Reasons proving this Reas 1. Reas â— Reas 3. Reas 4. 6 We pray that as God forgives the sin so he would release the punishmâ—nt 7 We pray to be delivered from the effects of sin 8 We pray for pardon and the concomitants thereof Three things implied in this Petition 1. On the part of the subject or he who praieth is implied 1 That all men are sinfull 2. A sense of sin within us 3 Godly sorrow for sin 4 Earnest perseverance till we obtain 5 Constant renewed acts of faith 3 In the object or matter praâ—ed for are implâ—ed 1 That fâ—rgâ—venâ—ss of sin may he had after Bâ—ptism 2 That a remission of great sins may be hoped for 3 That there is an iteration of pardon 3 In the person to whom we pray are implied 1 That God only can forgive sins 2 That he takes notice of sin Vse Sin considered â—our vvayes 1 Abstractedly in its own nature The nature of sin expressed in the severall names of it 2 In the definition of it Hovv all sin is voluntary 2 Of sin relating to the person sinning A man possibly may not or rather formâ—lly cannot intend sinne 3 The proper effâ—ct of sinne which is to make guilty Whence comes 1 A stâ—in upon the soâ—l taken out by sanctification Liv. de Rec. â— An oâ—â—igation to â—tâ—râ—â—l â—â—â—shment 〈◊〉 by reâ—ission Sin considered as an â—ffence to God Whether sin bâ— an infinite evil Vse What remission of sin is From the names of it Propos 1. Propos 2. Propos 3. Propos 4. Propos 5. Propos 6. Object Answ Vse How our duty of repentance consists with Gods free grace in remitting Propos 1. Propos 2. Propos 3. Propos 4. 5 Two great practical mistakes concerning repentance observed The first of the prophane man The second of the godly Propos 6. Propos 7. The scope of the whole Vse 1. Vse 2. Practical Objections concerning repentance Object 1. Of what use repentance may be Answ 1. Answ 2. Six Reasons of congruity betwixt repentance and remission Reas 1. Reas 2. Reas 3. Reas 4. Reas 5. The sixt Reason two â—old 1. In regard of Gods justice 2 In regard of his grace and mercy Object 2. Whether repentance of it self may not take away the guilt of sin Answ 1. Answ 2. Answ 3. Why repentance bears not the proportion in satisfaction that sin does in the offence Object 3. What harm to God in sin Answ By distinguishing Gods Attributes Vse 1. Vse 2. What kinde of act in God forgivenesse of sin is Two cautions concerning the workings of God 1. There are no accidents in him 2. No new will in him Differences between an immanent traâ—sient action 1. An immanent action produceth no outward effecâ— * Exâ—ra controversiam est remissionem peccatorum prout actâ—â— est in Dâ—o immanens antecedere nostram fidem resipiscentiam Twiss Vin. gr pag. 18. 2. An immanent action in God is from eternity Arguments proving our belâ—ef and repentance antecedents of justification Argum. 1. Argum. 2. Argum. 3. Arg. 4. * Den reconcil with God p. 25 Arg. 5. Arg. 6. Den. Arg. 3. to prove we are justified before vve believe Arg. 7. Vse Whether Justification precede faith and repentance Arguments for the affirmative From authority of orthodox men What the opinion above-said may mean That so expounded it seemeth but weak for thâ—se Reasons Reas 1. Reas 2. * Den recon of man with God p. 3 4. Reas 3. 1. Argument fâ—om Infants * Neither may this seem such a wonder seeiâ—g that the orthodox hold even in men growâ— up the first grace is wrought in us as meer patients our understandings wils no waies antecedently concurring to it so that the grace of God is then wrought in us without us Argum 2. Arg. 5. Answ Arg. 7. Ans 1. Answ 2. Answ 3. Answ 4. Answ 5. An elect person unconvâ—râ—ed and a reprobate in many things differ not As Argu. 4. and Argum. 6. Answ 1. Answ 2. Answ 3. A two fold condition of faith Arg. ult Answ Whether we pray here for Pardon or for Assurance of Pardon only The Answer to the Question propounded 1. Thâ—y who are assured of Pardon ought yet to pray 2. This Petition relates to four sorts of men 3 Assurance of pardon not the only thing prayed for proved by four Reasons Reas 1. Reas 2. Reas 3. Reas 4. The instance for the coâ—trary opinion answered Why God doth sometimes pardon sin not acquainting the sinner vvith it Reas 1. Reas 2. Reas 3. Reas 4. Reas 5. What directions should be given a soul under temptation about pardon of sin Direct 1. Direct 2. Direct 3. Whether in repentance the difference between great sins and Less is to be respected Propositions premised concerning this Quâ—stion The Question stated in these Propositions following 1. This difference is to be attended in suing for pardon 2. In respect of humiliation 3. Gross sins procure wrath and hinder the consolations of Gods Spirit 4. Gross sins exclude from the society of the faithful 3 Some gross sins requste mâ—ny conditions before pardon 6 Grosse sins require a more intense act of faith to apply pardon Some particulars wherein no difference is to be put between great and lesser sins 1. In respect of the efficient cause of pardon 2. Nor in respect of the meritorious cause 3 Neither in the means of pardon 4. No difference to be made as to the state of justâ—fication Illustration The text contains a description of the pardon of sin 1 From several expressions to magnifie the mercy of it 2 From the adjunct of remâ—ssion viz. blessednesse Observations raised from the Text. 1 That forgiveness of sin is a covering of sin What is meant by covering of sinne How God by pâ—rdâ—n is said to cover sin Some particulars not extended to in this phrase of covering sin Whether the phrase of Gods covering sinne favour the errour That God seeth not sinne in beleevers Answer negative Two Objections answered Object 1. Object 2. Answ Pardon of sin duly valued by those only who inwardly feel Gods anger against it Vse 1. Of the first Observation Vse 2. Vse 3. The text divided into tvvo Petitions A face attributed to God in a double sense Observation from the first Petition The aggravation of Davids sin in ten particulars The degrees of Davids repentance The teâ—t considered in theâ— What sins Gods children may fall into The sins of Gods people in what kinde to be ranked Differences between the sins of the godly and reprobate Differ 1. Differ 2. Differ 3. Vse How far grosse sins make a breach upon Justification Answered negatively The Question answered affirmatively Why the guilt of new grosâ—e sins doth not take avvay Justification The second Petition handled Whether God in pardoning do forgive all sins together Three things laid down by way of concession The Question held negatively upon these grounds Vse Observ Propositions laid down in prosecution of this Observatâ—on Wherein the compleatnesse of the pardon of sin at the day of judgement consisteth 1. In our sense of that pardon 2. In the accomplishment of all effects of pardon 3. Then no more iteration of pardon 4. Then justification shall be perfected Whether the sins of Gods people shâ—ll be manifested at the last day Vse 1. Vse 2. An Entrance into the Text from the consideration of the history Two Questions resolved for cleâ—ring the Text. Answ 1 When this Penitents sinne was pardoneâ— 2. Whether the expression in the text favour any causality in the Penitents love in reference to hâ—r pardon Observ 1. A two fold repeâ—taâ—ce in Scriptâ—re The Observation proved from Scripture By reason Further evidence from experience Vse 1. To press this use upon us two things especially to be insisted upon 1. The doctrine of oâ—iâ—inal coâ—ruption 2. The strict obligation of the Law Vse 2.