with drossy errors or the childrens necessary food mingled with destructive poyson Truth is a Depositum Aristotle doth rationally conclude That it is a greater injustice to deny a little thing deposited then a great summe that we are indebted for because he that depositeth any thing in our custody trusteth in us as a faithfull friend the other expecteth only justice from us Now of all points of Divinity there is none that with more profit and comfort we may labour in then in that oâ— Justification which is stiled by some articulus stantis cadentis ecclesiae The Church stands or fals as the truth of this is asserted and a modest sober vindication of this point from contrary errors will not hinder but much advantage the affectionate part of a man even as the Bee is helped by her sting to make honey Gods way of Justification is for the truth of it above naturall reason and therefore there is required a supernatural Revelation to manifest it Insomuch that the Divine Authority of the Scripture is in nothing more irradiant then in the discovery of this glorious way of our Justification But it hath been a stumbling block and a rock of offence to many mens hearts who look for a Philosophicall Justification or righteousnesse of works either wholly issuing from our free will as they suppose or partly from it and partly from the grace of God and on this hand have erred the Pelagians Papists Arminians and Socinians But while the Orthodox have been diligent to keep this fountain pure from the filth those Philistims daily threw in There arose up another error on the right hand which the Apostle Paul in his Epistles doth many times Antidote agaâ—nst viz. such a setting up of Free-Grace in Justification that should make the Law as to all purposes uselesse and while it extolleth prâ—viledges debases duties That as the Arminians on the one side think it most absurd that the same thing should be officium requisitum donum promissum a duty required on our part and yet a gift promised on Gods part So on the other side the Antinomian cannot at the same time see the fulnesse of Grace only in blotting out our sins and yet at the same time A necessity of repentance without which this Justification could not be obtained Hence it is they fix their Meditations and Discourses upon the promissory part of the Scripture not at the same time attending to the preceptive part But whether it be their weaknesse or their wilfulnesse they seem to be upon those passages of Scripture which speak of Gods grace and Christs satisfaction as David in Sauls arms which were an hinderance not an advantage to him Men destitute of sound knowledge and Learning should be afraid lest they doe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Pet. 3.16 wrest the Scripture and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to their own destruction It is no lesse a sin saith Oecumenius to torture the Scripture by perverse interpretation then it was to torment and Crucifie the very bodies of the Apostles but to how many ignorant men attempting beyond their strength in Controversies of Divinity hath that faln out which did to one Lucian speaks of who finding Orpheus his harp consecrated to Apollo in a certain Temple bribed the Priest of the Temple thinking to make the same melody which Orpheus used to do which he attempting through his ignorance made such an horrid sound that it inraged all the dogs neer him which presently fell on him and tore him in pieces It is therefore good for men in all humility and modesty not to think of themselves above what they ought or to affect to be Doctors before indeed they have been Disciples But to my matter in hand I shall briefly give an account of my method in this Treatise Whereas in Justification many things are considerable the efficient and impulsive Cause Gods grace the meritorious Cause Christs satisfaction the instrumentall Cause Faith and evâ—ry one of these hath many Debates upon it by Learned men Yet I have insisted upon that whereâ—n the nature of it doth consist and because that is made by some two fold partly in remission of sins partly in imputation of Christs righteousnesse this Discourse is wholly upon the former indeavouring to clear all the Doctrinal and Practical doubts that are of greatest consequence in this matter And if God should blesse this part with any good successe to establish the mindes of those that waver I shall with Gods assistance proceed to the other point viz. The Imputation of Christs righteousnesse the mistaking of which point is no mean cause of Antinomianism I am not ignorant how subject to blindnesse and severall imperfections the best of men are whereby through after-thoughts they see such an argument might have been more strongly managed and such expressions better ordered insomuch that most men may say as Luther said of his Books He could like Saturn eat up his own children It is also to be considered how difficult it is with pure ends and godly intentions aiming only at the glory of God and edification of others to undertake such a businesse as this is therefore in all these exercises it is good to go out of our selves depending upon the strength of God only and not to boast as if we had not received Tutius vivitur quando totum Deo damus Et in nihilo gloriandum est quia nihil nostrum est One thing more I am to inform thee of which is that in the former part of this treatise I have more remisly spoken of Justification in the generall because that will more pertinently be handled in the other point of imputed righteousnesse and have indeavoured more vigorously to prosecute the other part which is wholly spent about pardon of sin These things premised I leave thee to the Lord who teacheth his children to profit Thine in Christ Jesus Anthony Burgess THE CONTENTS WHy the doctrine of justification ought to be kept pure pag. 3 2 Propositions clearing the nature of justification 3 4 3 What is implied in justification 6 7 4 What cautions are to be observed to conceive the nature of justification 14 5 Wherein justification consists 17 6 Propositions for the understanding remission of sins 18 7 How sins may be said to be forgiven ibid. 8 How sin is to be considered when it is said to be forgiven 19 9 What it is to have sin forgiven 20 10 How afflictions come upon Gods people after their sin is pardoned 24 11 Whether God corrects his people for sin 26 12 How the Antinomians prove that God doth not chastise his people for their sins 34 13 Whether any absurdities follow upon that doctrine that God doth correct his people for their sins 39 14 What errors the Antinomians hold concerning remission of sinne 43 15 How it may be proved that God doth see sin in a beleever so as to be offended with it 53 16 How great the guilt of
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
foundation is extrinsecal as when a mans debt is discharged by his Surety he hath his real benefit is discharged and released out of Prison as if it had been his own personal payment Now when God doth this he goeth not against that text To Justifie the ungodly for its an abomination to do so because it 's against Law but when God doth not impute sin because of the satisfaction of Christ intervening that is most consentaneous and agreeable to Justice There is one word more equivalent and that is reconciliation some indeed make this an effect of Justification some make reconciliation the general and remission of sin a particular part but we need not be curious where Justification is there is reconciliation and this doth suppose that those who were at discord before are now made friends and where can friendship be more prized then with God Having laid down these introductory Propositions which describe most of the matter or nature of Justification I shall now come to shew wherein it doth particularly consist wherein the true nature is onely let me premâ—se two or three Cautions 1. We must not confound those things which may be consequent or concomitant to justification with justification it self for many things may necessarily be together and yet one not be the other so Justification is necessarily joyned with Renovation yet a man is not justified in having a new nature put into him The water hath both moistness and coldness in it yet it doth not wash away spots as it is cold but as it is moist We will not enter into dispute as some of the Schoolmen have and concluded affirmatively Whether God may not accept of a sinner to eternall life without any inward change of that mans heart It is enough that by Scripture we know he doth not 2. To place our justification in any thing that is ours or we do is altogether derogatory to the righteousnesse and worth of Christ. Some there are who place it partly in our righteousness and partly in the obedience of Christ supplying that which is defective in us some of late have placed it in our Faith as if that were our righteousnesse and not for any worth or dignity of Faith but God out of his meer good pleasure say they hath appointed Faith to be that to man fallen which universal righteousnesse would have been to Adam and hence it is that they will not allow any trope or metonymie in that phrase Abraham beleeved and it was imputed to him for righteousness But here appeareth no lesse pride and arrogancy in this then the opinion of the Papists and in some respects it doth charge God worse as is to be shewed in handling of that point Therefore let us take heed how by our distinctions we put any thing with Christs righteousness in this great work 3. In searching out the nature of Justification we must not only look to the future but that which is past For suppose a man should be renewed to a full perfection in this life yet that absolute compleat holiness could not justifie him from his sins past Those committed before would still presse him down though he were now for the present without any spot at all Therefore though now there were no defects no frailties in thee yet who shall satisfie the Justice of God for that which is past though there were but the least guilt of the least sin there is no Sampson strong enough to bear the weight of it but Christ himself 4. The Orthodox sometimes make the nature of Justification in remission of sin sometimes in imputation of Christs righteousness which made Bellarmine charge them though falsly with different opinions for some make these the same motion it 's called remission of sin as it respecteth the term from which but imputation of righteousnesse as it respecteth the term to which even say they as the same motion is the expulsion of darknes and the introduction of light But I rather conceive them different and look upon one as the ground of the other remission of sin grounded upon the imputation of Christs righteousnesse so that his righteousnesse imputed to us is supposed to be in the order before sin forgiven and although among men where righteousnesse is imputed or a man pronounced just there is or can be no remission of sin yet it is otherwise here because righteousness is not so imputed unto us as that it is inherent in us so among men the more a man is forgiven the lesse he is Justified because forgivenesse supposeth him faulty yet it is not so in our Justification before God Lastly We must not confound Iustification with the manifestation and declaration of it in our hearts and consciences This is the rock at which the Antinomian doth so often split he supposeth Justification to be from all eternity and that therefore a man is Justified before he doth beleeve Faith only justifying by evidence and declaration to our consciences but this is to confound the decree of God and its execution as shall be proved Hence it is a dangerous thing though some excellent men have done it to make Faith a full perswasion of our Justification for this supposeth Justification before Faith It is one thing to be Justified and another thing to be assured of it It is true we cannot have any peace and comfort nor can we so rejoyce in and praise God though we are justified unlesse we know it also LECTURE III. ROM 3.24 25. Being Iustified freely by his grace c. JUstification consisteth in these two particulars Remission of sin and Imputation of righteousnesse Indeed here is diversity of expressions among the learned as you have already heard some thinking the whole nature of Justification to be only in Remission of sin and therefore make it the same with Imputation of righteousnesse others make one the ground of the other some make Imputation of righteousnes the efficient or meritorious cause of our Justification and Remission of sin the only form of our Justification others make Remission of sin the effect only of Justification But howsoever we call these two things yet this will be made plain that God in Justification vouchsafeth these two priviledges to the person justified First He forgiveth his sins Secondly He imputeth righteousnesse or rather this latter is the ground of the former as I shew'd before That Justification is remission of sins is generally received the great Question is about imputation of Christs righteousnes but of that afterwards only here may be a Doubt how we can properly say That Justification is pardon of sin for a man is not justified in that he is pardoned but rather it supposeth him guilty It is true Remission of sin doth suppose a man faulty in himself but because Christ did take our sins upon him and we are accepted of through him as our Surety therefore may remission of sin be well called Justification Indeed
many other places do abundantly prove that there is not forgivenes but where there is repentance Therefore look upon all those doctrines as false and dangerous which make justification to be before it Not that we do with Papists make any merit or causality in repentance or that we limit it to such a measure and quantity of repentance nor as if we made it the condition of the Covenant of Grace but only the way without which not the cause for which remission of sins is not obtained neither can there be any instance given of men forgiven without this repentance and the same likewise is affirmed of faith though faith is in another notion then repentance this being the instrument to apply and receive it But of this hereafter 9. This remission of sin is not limited to persons times or the quantity and quality of sins Indeed the sin against the holy Ghost cannot be forgiven we will not explain that cannot by difficulty as if indeed it might be forgiven but very hardly The ordinary answer is that therefore it cannot be forgiven because the person so sinning will not confesse humble himself and seek pardon God is described by pardoning iniquity transgressions and sins Christ is said to take away the sin of the world David and Peters sins were voluntary yet God forgave them LECTURE IV. ROM 3.24 25. Being Iustified freely by his grace c. THe Doctrine about remission of sin being thus particularly declared we come to that great Question How afflictions come upon the godly after the pardon of their sins For the Antinomian goeth into one extremity and the Papist into another so true is that of Tertullian Christ is alwayes crucified between two thieves that is Truth suffers between two extream errors Therefore in prosecuting this point which is of great practical concernment I will lay down First What the Antinomian saith Secondly What the Papist And lastly What the Orthodox The Antinomian in his book called the Honey-Comb of Justification explaineth himself in these particulars by which you may judge that his Honey is Gall. Having made this Objection to himself That the children of God are corrected by God therefore he seeth sin in them maketh a large Answer Distinguishing first of afflictions calling some Legal and some Evangelical and then he distinguisheth of Persons making some unconverted others converted the unconverted again he makes to be either such as are reprobate or else elected now saith he the legal crosses have a two-fold operation either vindicative or corrective Vindicative are such afflictions as God executeth upon the wicked and reprobates in which sense God is called the God of vengeance Corrective are such lashes of the Law as are executed upon those persons that are the children of God by election but not yet converted and so under the Law therefore these afflictions are not in wrath to confound them but in mercy to prepare them to their conversion for God seeing sins in them layeth crosses upon them Now these elect persons he cals unconverted actively and declaratively in a very ambiguous and suspicious manner as if conversion were from all eternity as well as Justification so that as they say a man in time is justified only declaratively being indeed so from all eternity thus he must be said to be converted and if this be true then it will likewise follow that a man in heaven is glorified likewise onely declaratively but actually and indeed glorified from all eternity even while he is in this miserable house of clay In the next place he comes to Evangelical crosses which fall upon them that are actively and declaratively as he cals it converted and these he denieth expresly to be for their sins for this were saith he to deny Christs satisfactory punishment because by his death we have not one spot of sin in us therefore he makes them to be only the tryal of their faith and to exercise their faith so that by his divinity when a godly man is afflicted the flesh would indeed perswade a man hath sin in him but this is to try whether thou canst beleeve thou art cleansed from sin for all these afflictions Therefore if any man yield to this temptation viz. that he hath sin in him when he is afflicted what is this saith he but to deny Christ and his bloud Think you this to be the voice of the Scriptures Hence he laboureth to shew that twelve absurdities would follow from this doctrine of Gods afflicting his children for their sins the strength of which shall be in his place considered I have now only laid down his judgement and he makes the Doctrine of the Protestants opposing this to be Popish and confounding the Law and the Gospel together Hence intending the Protestant Authors and Ministers he saith They paint God like an angry father ever seeing sin in us and ever standing with a rod and staff in his hand lifted up over our heads with which by reason he seeth sins in us he is ever ready though not to strike us down yet to crack our crowns and sorely to whip us whereas the Gospel describeth him to be not only a loving Father but also our well-pleased Father at perfect peace with us so that the upshot of his position is to shew that they are taskmasters and do degenerate to the legall teaching in the Old Testament whosoever preach that God doth correct Believers for their sins and I have saith he somewhat the more largely hunted this Fox because it is so nourished not only by the Papists but also some of us Protestants who by lisping the language of Ashdod do undermine the very roots of the Lords vine And that you may see it is not one mans judgement amongst them see what their great General saith in a Sermon pag. 162. Know this that at that instant when God brings afflictions upon thee he doth not remember any sin of thine they are not in his thoughts towards thee Again whatsoever things befall the children of God are not punishments for sins they are not remembrances of sin and if men or Angels shall endeavor to contradict this let them be accounted as they deserve Thus the Antinomian The Papist goeth into another extremity for thus they hold Bellar de poen lib. 4. cap. 1 2. That when God hath forgiven a sin yet it is according to his Justice that the sinner should suffer or do something to satisfie this justice not in respect of the sin as it is against God for although some say so yet others reject it but in respect of some temporal punishment either in this life or in the life to come which is the ground of Purgatory And that this may be made good they say When God doth forgive a sin he doth not presently remit the temporal punishment therefore men may by some satisfactory penalties voluntarily taken upon themselves rescue themselves from these temporal punishments Now this is a
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.
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
Blesse the Lord O my soul who forgiveth all thine iniquities This particular assurance inlarged his heart to praises But although this be part of the sense in this Petition yet this is not all we pray for as the Antinomian contends for we pray principally for the real exhibition of pardon and secondarily for the Declaration and manifestation of it in our consciences Their conceit is That God from all eternity hath pardoned our sins past present and to come and that when we believe or repent our sins are pardoned declaratively only to our conscience they being forgiven before This I shall handle in a Question by it self Only I shall lay down some few Arguments to prove that we do not only pray for assurance and manifestation of pardon but also for pardon it self The reasons are these First We might by the same rule interpret all the other Petitions in regard of Declaration only and not exhibition when we pray for sanctification and glorification in that Petition Thy Kingdom come it might be as well said that we were sanctified and glorified from all eternity and therefore when we are converted or saved in heaven this is but to our sense and feeling This Argument seemeth to be so strong against them that they have confest A man is already glorified while he is upon earth most absurdly confounding the Decrees of God from eternity to do things with the executions of them in time How ridiculous would it be to expound that Petition Give us our daily bread thus Not that God should give us daily bread but only make us to see and feel that he hath given it us A second reason is from the nature of forgivenesse of sin When sinne is pardoned it is said to be blotted out now that blotting out is not only from a mans conscience and feeling but more immediately out of Gods Book So that when God doth forgive he doth cancel those debts which are in his Book and not only the guilt that lieth upon our hearts therefore these are very separable the one from the other A man may feel no weight or burden of sin upon him and yet it stand in fiery Characters against him in Gods Book and on the contrary a sin may be blotted out there yet be very heavy and terrible in a mans feeling and apprehension so sin pardoned is said to be covered or hid not in respect of us as if it were taken from our sight but from Gods sight and he is said to cast our sins behinde his back not ours The third reason This Explication as the whole sense of the Petition would overthrow all other places of Scripture which make no pardon of sin to be but where the subject hath such qualifications as this in the Text of forgiving others it is not indeed put as a cause or merit but yet it is as a qualification of the subject therefore our Saviour repeateth this again Except ye forgive others neither will my heavenly Father forgive you So Act. 10.43 Whosoever believeth on him shall have remission of sins Rom. 3.15 He is a propitiation through faith in his bloud here faith is made an instrument to apply and bring that pardon to the soul which it had not before So 1 Joh. 1.9 If we confesse our sins he is faithfull and just to forgive us our sins By these and the like Scriptures it is plain That remission of sin is given us only in the use of these graces not that hereby we merit at Gods hand or that God is tied to these wayes but it is here as in the Sacraments he hath tied himself to convey his graces in no other chanels or conduits then he hath appointed Lastly This would make no difference between sins repented of and not repented of for if they be all pardoned from eternity then sins that are humbled for and that are unhumbled for have the like consideration on Gods part and I may feel the pardon of the latter though not repented of as well as the former yea I may have the sense of the pardon of all the sins I shall commit for the future and so whereas I pray for daily bread not to-morrow bread I shall here beg for the sense of the pardon not only of my sins to day but tomorrow and the next year But I never read that God made such a Jubile as one Pope did who promised a plenary Indulgence not only for sins past but afore-hand also for all sins to come God doth not antidate his pardon before the sin be committed or repented of but of this more largely in time 6. We pray That as God doth forgive the sin so also he would release the punishments and take away all the wrath that doth belong to it It is a mockery which Papists make about pardon as if indeed God did pardon the sin but the punishment that abideth still and we must work out a release from that by our own selves It is true as we have proved God though he doth pardon sin yet he may grievously afflict but these are fatherly chastisements not judicial punishments but in this Prayer we desire also that as the sins are removed so also whatsoever troubles afflictions and chastisements do remain that they also may be taken away that as the gulf of hell is removed so every cloud also may be dispelled 7. In this Petition we pray That God would deliver us from those effects of sin which God hath immutably set upon it such as are sicknesses death and corruption For although God by vertue of the Covenant of Grace hath promised a perfect pardon of sin yet we cannot come to a full enjoyment of all those priviledges which remission of sin doth bring till we be freed from death and corruption So that as long as there is the death and grave still sin hath some power We therefore pray that whatsoever mortality and corruption sin hath brought in it may be taken away and we made fit for eternal life which is the consequent of pardon of sin for you must know that pardon is not a meer privative mercy freeing us from Gods wrath but there is also a positive investing of us with a title to everlasting life and glory only our corruptibility hinders us from the actual possession of that which we have a right unto we therefore pray That as God removed our sins so he would also remove all the sad effects and mischievous fruit which came in by it 8. We pray not only for pardon of sin but also for the good concomitants and effects of it which are Peace with God and Joy in the holy Ghost Rom. 5.1 Hence Luther speaketh of a twofold pardon one secret and hidden when he forgiveth sins but the people of God do not feel or regard it The other is open and experimental now both these condonations are necessary The first saith he is more bitter and troublesome but more
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
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
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
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
this world Hence our Saviour cals it The day of our redemption upon the coming whereof they are to lift up their heads The Observation is That a compleat and full absolution from all sin is not enjoyed till the day of judgement The Beleevers have not a full discharge till then we are in this life continually subject to new sins and so to new guilt whereby arise new fears so that the soul hath not a full rest from all till that final absolution be pronounced at the day of judgement Before we shew the grounds whereby it may appear that the remission of our sins is not fully compleated till then we must lay down some Propositions by way of a grand work First The Scripture not only in this priviledge of remission of our sin but in others also makes the complement and fulness of them to be at the day of judgement Redemption is the totall summe as it were of all our mercies and we are partakers of it in this life Col. 1.14 Rom. 3.24 Yet the Scripture cals the day of judgement when we shall rise out of our graves in a peculiar and eminent manner the day of redemption Ephes 1.7 Ephes 4.30 because at that day will be the utmost and last effects of our redemption Adoption that also is a priviledge we receive in this life yea a learned man Forbes in his book where he handleth the order of Gods graces makes adoption as I take it to be the first and to go before justification yet the Apostle Rom. 8.23 calleth the last day the day of adoption Hence 1 Joh. 3.2 the Apostle though he saith We are now the sons of God yet he saith it doth not appear what we shall be because the glory God at the last day will put upon us is so farre transcendent and superlative to what now we are Thus Mat. 19.28 the last day is also called the day of regeneration unto the people of God yet in this life they partake of that grace but because then is the full perfection and manifestation of it therefore the Scripture cals it the day of regeneration Even as the Apostle Act. 13.33 applieth that passage of the Psalm to Christs resurrection This day have I begotten thee because then was such a solemn and publique declaration that he was the Son of God No marvel then if the Scripture do also call the day of judgement a time when sins shall be blotted out because then is the publique absolution of the godly and according to philosophy motions receive their names from the term to which they tend Secondly Howsoever Justification be said to consist in pardon of sin yet there is a great difference between the one and the other for Justification besides the pardon of sin doth connote a state that the subject is put into viz. A state of favour being reconciled with God Hence it is that this state cannot be reiterated often no more then a wife after that first entrance into the relation is frequently made a wife In this sense the Scripture alwaies speaks of it as connoting a state or condition the subject is put into as well as a peculiar priviledge vouchsafed to such It is true There are indeed learned men who think Justification may be reiterated as you heard Peter Martyr and Bucer Others call it a continued action as conservation But although there is a continuance of Justification and the godly are preserved in that estate yet we cannot say God doth renew Justification daily as he doth pardon of sin There are some that think the Scripture gives a ground for a second Justification or the continuing and encreasing of it and bring those places Tit. 3.5 6 7. Rev. 22.11 The learned and excellent Interpreter Ludovicus de Dieu in Cap. 8. of the Romans vers 4. largely pleadeth for a two-fold Justification The first he makes to be the imputing of Christs righteousness to us received by faith which is altogether perfect and is the cause of pardon of sins The second he makes an effect of the former whereby through the grace of God regenerating we are conformable unto that love in part and are day by day more and more justified and shall be fully so when perfection comes of which Justification he saith these texts speak Jam. 2.21 24. Revel 22.11 Mat. 11.37 1 King 8.32 This two-fold Justification he makes to differ toto coelo from the Papists whose first is founded upon the merit of congruity the second upon the merit of condignity But the discussing of this will be more proper in the other part viz. of imputed righteousness Austin seemeth to hold Justification a frequent and continued act lib. 2. contra Julianum cap. 8. When we are heard in that prayer Forgive us our sins we need saith he such a remission daily what progress soever we have made in our second Justification He speaks also of a Justification hujus vitae which he cals minorem the lesser and another plenam and perfectam full and perfect which belongs to the state of glory Tract 4. in Joannem lib. de spiritu lit cap. ultim But the more exact handling of this will be in the place above-mentioned It seemeth more consonant to Scripture if we say That Justification is a state we were once put into which is not repeated over and over as often as sin is forgiven neither can it admit of increase or decrease so that a man should be more or less justified for even David while he was in that state of suspension was not less justified though the effects of Justification were less upon him It is true in some sense learned men say Justification may increase viz. extensivè not intensivè as they express it by way of extension when more sins are pardoned not intensively in its own nature Even as the soul of a man in its information of the body admits of no increase intensively but it doth extensively the more the parts of the body grow the further doth its information extend But of these things more in their proper place Thirdly Howsoever an absolution shall be compleated at the day of judgement yet our justification shall not abide in such a way as it is in this life Now our Justification is by pardon of sin and a righteousness without us imputed to us which is instrumentally applied by faith but this way shall then cease for having perfect righteousness inherent in our selves we shall need no covering It is true the glory and honour of all this will redound upon Christ and he shall not be the less glorified because he hath then brought us to the full end of all his sufferings I know some may doubt whether any righteousness but that which is infinite can please God and therefore as some think the Angels were accepted of God through Christ though perfect so it may of the Saints in heaven but I see no ground for this This seemeth to be undoubted That the
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
fit nisi revelante spiritu per fidem aeternum Dei propositum de sua salute Who is a righteous man but he that returneth love to God for Gods loving of him And how can this be but by Gods Spirit revealing his purpose of Election concerning the just mans Salvation Use of Instruction Doth the apprehension of great pardon breed great Humiliation then we may see the necessity of that Ministery and preaching which doth discover the depth length and breadth of sin They take the best way to set up grace and magnifie Christ who do amplifie the pollution of sin in us Now that we may come to be convinced how much God doth forgive us two points are much to be insisted upon 1. The Doctrine of original corruption for thereby we shall see our selves guilty of more sins then ever we thought of a man without this Scripture-light is like one in a dark dungeon which is full of Serpents Toads and all venemous creatures but is not able to see any of them and so thinks himself without any danger at all If therefore thou wouldst see how much is forgiven reckon up all the debts thou owest The mercy and skill of the Physician will then appear when the worst of thy disease is made manifest A second Point much to be pressed is the pure strict and exact obligation of the law which being set as a pure glass before thee all thy deformities will appear In this sense it is good to be a legal Preacher and a legal Hearer often that so knowing the holiness of the Law and our imperfection we may esteem the more of Gods Grace in pardoning so much As God in the outward passages of his providence doth therefore suffer one trouble to follow another like so many waves that so the greater their calamities have been his wisdom power and goodness may be the more conspicuous in delivering of them Thus it is also in his spiritual administrations he will not reveal the riches of Grace but to the poor in spirit nor will he give ease and refreshment but to those that are heavy laden and burdened And this is the reason why a Pharisee a formalist a moral man a self-righteous man doth not love Christ as converted Publicans and sinners do Use second of Admonition to those who have sinned much and so have had much forgiven them let such know their expences of practised grace must be according to the receipts of justifying Grace Let such know the pardon of many sins is a talent to be greatly improved As thou hast abounded in many sins and God in many pardons so do thou in much thankfulness How thankful would we be to a man who hath delivered us often from a temporal death but behold a greater love is manifested here Thou who hast it may be been the chiefest sinner of many thousands be now the chiefest Believer of many thousands If thou hast been a great sinner and art not now a great actour and spiritual merchant negotiating for God fear the truth of thy grace much love should be like much fire that consumes all dross quicken up thy self with such thoughts as these Lord who was more plunged into sin then I whose diseases were greater then mine It may be thousands and thousands for less and fewer sins then I have committed are now taking their portion in hell O Lord this thy overflowing goodness doth overcome me oh that I had the hearts of all men and Angels to praise thee FINIS THE TABLE A FIve absurdities objected by the Antinomians which they say will follow from the Doctrine that God afflicts his people for sin vindicated p. 39 40 41 What kinde of act forgivenesse is and whether it be antecedent to our faith and repentance 166 167 There are no accidents in God ib. How afflictions come upon the godly after pardon of sin 24 God doth not alwayes afflict with reference to sin 28 The afflictions of the godly are not legal but evangelical and why 39 How afflictions on believers agree with the justice of God 101 It is a great aggravation to the sins of Gods people that they have been committed in his sight 53 54 Aggravations and diminutions of sin 206 208 The unsound Answers of the Antinomian about the afflictions of the godly 24 25 The Antinomian contrary to himself 33 34 93 Three Arguments of the Antinomian answered 34 35 36 37 The Antinomians answer to and evasion of certain Scriptures answered 53 How the anger of God is shewed toward the the sins of his people 76 77 78 The Antinomian Arguments answered 176 to 193 Arguments proving that God doth see sin in the justified so as to be offended with it 53 Seven Arguments proving our faith and repentance antecedents of Justification 169 to 172 Three Reasons proving that Assurance of pardon is apt to kindle spiritual affections in us 269 270 B Sins committed after Baptism pardonable 126 127 Christ is the advocate of Believers after Justification 66 67 Bellarmines objection answered 115 How sin is a blot in the soul 136 When sins are blotted out 158 C A three-fold cause of Justification Efficient Meritorious Instrumental 2 The people of God are not cast off for their sins 232 It is one thing to change the will and another to will a change 193 It is no derogation from Christ that sin is in a believer 40 What the bloud of Christ doth meritoriously cleanse the Spirit doth efficaciously 57 Wherein the compleatness of the pardon of sin at the day of Judgement consists 259 260 Six comfortable considerations gathered from certain Scriptures 49 â—0 It is of great consequence to have the Doctrine of Justification kept pure and why 3 A two-fold condition of faith pag. 191 192 Comfort to the children of God 263 Pardon of sin is a continued act 115 What is meant by covering sin 216 217 1 What is 2 What is not implied in that phrase of covering sin 217 218 219 How sin being in the regenerate yet covered will stand with the omnisciency truth and holiness of God 220 221 Whether God doth see sin when he hath covered it 219 220 D Eternal Death deserved by every sin 206 What in sin is a Debt 105 Sins called a Debt in a four-fold respect 105 106 There is a great difference between original and actual sin and wherein they differ 20 There is great difference in the calamities of the godly 28 The afflictions of the godly and the wicked for sin how differ 29 The difference between a godly man troubled in conscience and a man damned in hell 82 A two-fold difference between actions immanent and transient 166 167 168 An elect person and a reprobate how they are alike differ 188 Whether a difference ought to be made between great and little sins Six Propositions clearing the same 206. to 212 A Christian is to make a difference of sins six wayes 208 209 210 Four things wherein a Christian
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 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
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
his iniquities such as he could not stand under now to pardon is to take this weight off so Gen. 4.13 My sin is greater then can be born or taken away i.e. forgiven again If thou dost well is not Levatio that is pardon and ease It is then no marvel if forgivenes of sin be accounted such a blessed thing by those who truly feel the burden of their iniquities Hence you have it excellently Zech. 3.9 10. made the cause of all quietnesse and content when their sins were pardoned then they called to their neighbours to sit under their fig-trees And well doth Calvin call this The chief hinge of Religion and the truth of this Doctrine is to be sought out with all care for what quietnesse can a man have till he know what judgement or esteem the Lord hath of him and in what manner it is wrought Another expression of it is called covering of sin there are two words for this the one is Chasah and is used properly of such a thing that is put between the object and the eye Numb 9.15 It is used of the Cloud that covered the tabernacle it s applied to a Garment or any other thing that doth cover Gen. 3.21 It s applied to God covering Adams nakednesse Hence a learned man thinks those skins were of beasts sacrificed which did prefigure Christ and God by this covering would as by an outward Symbol teach them by whom their sins should be covered and to this an allusion seemeth to be Rev. 3.18 I counsel thee to buy of me white garments that thy nakednesse may not appear A like word is Caphar which signifieth covering with pitch or the like which doth so cleave to the thing it covereth that it can hardly be removed It s applied Exod. 15.27 to the propitiatory or covering made of pure gold wherein God shewed himself gracious It is used Levit. 16.30 The word also is used of the pitching of the Ark and as that pitch kept the waters from coming in so doth the bloud of Christ our sins from overflowing us and this doth excellently describe the nature of pardoning of sin God doth as it were hide it from us he will not punish it but you must not stretch this word too far with the Antinomian as if indeed God did not take notice of them for Davids when it was covered yet was visited afterwards by God but it s covered so far as that it shall not condemn We do not therefore as the Antinomian saith make God peep under the covering again but we say the word is a Metaphor and must not be understood grosly and palpably as if there were any real thing put before the eyes of God that he could not behold our sins but only that God will not finally condemn us for sin Furthermore when a sin is pardoned it is said to be hid from Gods eyes as if God did not know it Jer. 16.17 The Hebrew word Zaphan is applied to the Northern part of the world because it is hidden from the heat of the Sun Hence Joseph is called Gen. 41.45 Zapthnath paaneah because he was a revealer of hidden things Those iniquities therefore which are so often before thee they are as it were hidden from God Another is Mechah and I will name no more which is to blot out or wipe out a Metaphor from those who cancel or blot out their debts when once discharged Now besides these verbal expressions you have many real phrases that do declare this great mercy as Micah 7.19 He will subdue our iniquities and thou wilt cast them into the bottom of the sea where the Prophet doth admire the goodnesse and freenesse of God herein Who is a God like thee passing by iniquity subduing sins The word implieth that our sins were as our enemies the guilt of them did inslave us and keep us like vassals in fear but now they are mastered And further He throweth them in the bottom of the sea there is no more memory or footsteps of them as when the Aegyptians were drowned in the bottom of the sea they could never hurt the Israelites more Thus God doth to thy sins when they are pardoned Another expression you have Isa 44.22 some expound it thus As the Sun rising doth make the thick clouds to vanish away and there is nothing but serenity to be seen so it is with God pardoning but Junius understands it thus As the thick cloud dissolved into rain washeth away the soil and filth of the earth so will the Lord in pardoning take away that noisomnesse and offence their sins made Consider Hezekiahs expression Isa 38.17 Thou hast cast all my sins behinde thy back It is an expression from men who when they will not regard a thing cast it behinde their backs and thus God doth not as if he did not take notice to chastise for them but they shall not have their proper effect which is to condemn And these expressions are very necessary to a contrite heart which is apt to imagine God as alwaies beholding his sins and sending forth his judgements because of them whereas it must be as a foundation laid That God is gracious and mercifull not only in the generall but even to us in particular The last I will pitch upon is Psal 13.12 As far as the East is from the West so far hath he removed our sins from us where the Psalmist makes Gods mercies as much above our sins as heaven is above earth and lest the guilt of sin should hinder the descent of it he makes God to throw away our sins from him as far as it can be Thus you see how abundant the Scripture is in describing this mercy of mercies This mercy which if not injoyed every thing our beds our fields and houses will be an hell to us The summe of these words and phrases amounteth to these comfortable considerations First That God pardoneth sin and removeth the guilt of it totally and perfectly so that a sin cannot be more forgiven then it is not that all the pollution of sin is likewise totally taken away for that would contradict other places of Scripture which say sin is still in us but only the condemning power is subdued and therefore this doctrine doth afford as much comfort as any Antinomian would desire and yet doth not fall foul with other places of Scripture Those sins committed by thee and repented of are as absolutely forgiven as can be desired they can be no better pardoned if thou wast in heaven or hadst perfect righteousness bestowed upon thee It hath pleased God that the guilt of thy sin should be perfectly remitted though the power be not fully mortified Secondly These phrases imply That its Gods meer act without us which doth expell the guilt of sin not any thing done in us or by us and therefore thou art not to build thy hope of pardon upon any work of Regeneration or Mortification within thee but Gods goodnesse without
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
if he be a Beleever the wages due to his sin is only temporal chastisements but to a wicked man it 's eternal death I say this is not safe for although a Beleevers sin shall not actually damn him yet God hath made the same Law to both and repentance as a means is prescribed so that we may by supposition say If the wicked man repent his sin shall not damn him If the justified person do not his sin will damn him It 's true it is not proper to say of sin in the abstract it shall be damned no more then that grace shall be saved but we are to say the person shall be damned or saved Yet the guilt of the sin will cause the guilt of the person if not taken off by Christ as the meritorious and faith as the instrumentall cause The sins then of Beleevers and ungodly are both alike only that the guilt of them doth not redound upon the persons alike is because the one takes the way appointed by God to obtain pardon and the other doth not Not that the godly man makes himself to differ from the wicked but all is the work of grace In some respects the sins of godly men are more offensive to God then those of wicked men because committed against more light and more experience of the sweetnesse of Gods love and the bitternesâ—e of sin What is the cause Heb. 10.28 29 30. the Apostle maketh the condition of a wilfull Apostate to be so dreadfull but because of the excellency of the object in the Gospel above that in the Law If he that despised Moses his Law died without mercy of how much sorer punishment suppose ye shall he be thought worthy c. Observe that interposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 think ye do you not easily think that such sins offend God more Now although the truly sanctified can never fall into such a condition totally and finally yet their sins committed wilfully against the Gospel are gradually and in some measure of such a nature and therefore they fall terribly into the hands of the living God when they so sin against him and consider how that the Apostle speaks these things even to them of whom he hoped better things and things that accompany salvation Heb. 6. If therefore we see a godly man who hath tasted much of Gods favour play the prodigall walk loosely we may and ought notwithstanding Antinomian positions powerfully and severely set home these places of Scripture upon his conscience And observe how in the New Testament the Apostle alledgeth two places out of the Old Vengeance belongeth to me Deut. 32.35 and the Lord will judge his people Psal 135.14 To judge is to avenge so that the people of God have those considerations in their sins to provoke God which wicked men cannot have and therefore have the same motives to humble them as the Apostle argueth To which of the Angels said he Sit at my right hand c. so may we To what wicked man hath God poured out his love revealed himself kindly as unto the godly therefore do they neglect the greater mercies LECTURE X. JEREMIAH 50.20 In those daies and at that time the iniquity of Iudah shall be sought for c. LEt us in the next place consider the particulars wherein Gods eye of anger doth manifest it self upon his own children if sinning against him The effect of his wrath may be considered in that which is temporal or spiritual or eternal in all these Gods anger doth bring forth in one respect or other For the temporal objects take notice of these particulars first When they sin against God they are involved in the common and ordinary afflictions which do usually accompany sin in the wicked Thus 1 Cor. 11.30 for their unworthy receiving of the Sacrament and some even of those were godly as appeareth v. 32. many were weak and sickly weak were such as did languish and sickly is more such as had diseases on them now these were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 strokes from God and therefore came from his anger for their sins Though the Lords Supper consist of a twofold bread the one earthly for the body the other heavenly the bread of life for the soul yet both body and soul did miserably decay because of unworthy receiving This Table being as Chrysostom said mensa Aquilarum not Graculorum food for Eagles not Jaies As therefore those children who have fainting diseases upon them and do secretly eat salt oatmeal c. though they have never such excellent food at their fathers table yet thrive not but look pale and consuming so it was with the Corinthians by reason of their corruptions they inclined to death though they fed on the bread of life Now that these bodily diseases are the common issue and fruit of sin appeareth Lev. 26.16 Deut. 28.22 grace therefore of justification can give no Supesedeas to any disease that shall arrest a believer offending but are the wicked in Consumptions Agues Feavers for their sins so are the godly yea the people of God are in these calamities before the wicked Amos 3.2 You only have I known of all the Families of the earth therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities I have known you that is acknowledged ye for mine see what that is Exod. 19.5 A peculiar treasure unto me above all people The Hebrew word signifieth that which is dear and pretious and to be desired of all This is aggravated by what followeth for all the earth is mine that is seeing there are so many nations in the world over whom I have full power and dominion how great is Gods goodnesse in taking you for his above others now mark the Prophets reason because I have done this therefore I will visit you for your iniquities for to all your other wickednesses you adde an ingratefull heart So there is another place 1 Pet. 4.17 where God is said to judge them before others and this hath been a great offence to the godly It is time that is a seasonable opportunity by the decree and appointment of God for judgement that is chastisements for former sins which are called judgements because they are publique testimonies and manifestations of Gods anger against sins and are to put the godly in minde of their sins only it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the original The word is used even of the godly 1 Cor. 11.31 32. 1 Pet. 4.6 By the house of God he meaneth the true Members of the Church and whereas he saith it begins in them he thereby intimates that the godly in this life are more exposed to afflictions for sin then the wicked are and this made David and Jeremy so expostulate with God in this matter so that the godly in their afflictions ought to say as that widow of Sarepta 2 Kin. 17.18 This is to call my sin to remembrance It is thought the Apostle though he doth not
expresly mention a place yet he takes this out of the Doctrine of the old Testament for so God did begin first with his people Isa 10.12 Jer. 25.17 18. Ezek. 9.6 begin at my Sanctuary Ezek. 21.4 There God in publique calamities maketh no difference between the righteous and the ungodly now this is so great that the Apostle saith the righteous is hardly saved The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used of those things that with much labour are brought about Act. 14.18 Act. 27.7 These tribulations are so great that they almost destroy the godly themselves see also Jam. 5.13 Is any sick where the godly man is supposed to be sick and the cause if he hath committed sin that is such sins as were the causes of that disease they shall be forgiven him so that even justified persons afflicted by diseases are to inquire what sins the Lord would humble them for and to labour that the sicknesse of the body be the sanctified occasion of the health of the soul 2. Gods anger is seen in bringing extraordinary and unusual calamities upon them because of their sins so that they have strange punishments which even the wicked do many times escape Jonah who endeavoured to flie from Gods face and that he might easily have done by Antinomian Doctrine with what a prodigious judgement was he overtaken Jonah 2. The Prophet cals it the belly of hell and how deeply his soul was afflicted under that punishment appeareth in that he saith his soul fainted within him and he concluded he was cast out of Gods sight He that voluntarily ran from Gods presence doth now bewail that he is cast from it He makes the Whales belly an house of praier and this came up to God in his holy Temple that is Heaven You see by this that God prepareth strange judgements sometimes for those that offend him though his children so in that 1 Cor. 11.30 when he saith that many of the Corinthians were dead for their unworthy receiving it is to be understood of an immature and untimely death they did not live out to the term of those daies that according to natural causes they might have done so that it is the same with being cut off in the old Testament Exod. 12.15 Whosoever did eat the Passeover with leaven was to be cut off from Israel Therefore even godly men may procure to themselves untimely deaths and may provoke God to cut them off in the midst of their years 3. Yea further God may not only afflict them in an extraordinary manner but even strike them with sudden death and that while their sins are upon them I will not instance in Ananias and Saphira nor in Nadab and Abihu though some have thought charitably of them we have a clear instance in Vzzah wherein Gods anger was so apparent by striking him suddenly dead that the thing is said to displease David 2 Sam. 6.7 The anger of God was kindled against Vzzah and he smote him for his error His error was not because he was not a Levite for its plain he was but because they put the Ark upon a new cart whereas they should have carried it upon their shoulders although its thought the carrying of the Ark was limited only to the Levites that were the sons of Kohath and that no other Levite might touch the Ark which if so then it was a second offence against the Law because he touched it and indeed this seemeth to be the proper cause because it was a personal fault of Vzzah whereas the putting of it on a new cart was the error of others besides him Thus Vzzah in his very sins is stricken dead you have likewise another sad example of Ely Lege historiam ne fias historia 1 Sam 4.18 Because he failed in the measure of zeal about the reproof of his sons therefore he fell backward and broke his neck Ely manifested his pious affections in submitting to the hand of God punishing and in being more affected with the publique calamity then his own private yet this is his sad Tragical end 4. Gods anger doth not limit it self to them only but it reacheth even to their children and to those that are dear to them Thus Davids childe is stricken dead for his sin and thus Flies daughter gives up the ghost with sad grief The family both of David and Ely have remarkable calamities following them and all because of their sins When any of Elies posterity shall be forced to crouch for a morsell of bread this is a Memento of Elies sin Here a man may see the seed of the righteous begging bread but for their Parents sins Therefore that of David Psal 36. must not be understood universally That this calamity may the more wound his heart God telleth him what he will do to his house after his death if any were left alive it should be like that indulgence to Cain to carry up and down a token of Gods displeasure and if you ask for how long should this anger of God endure 1 Sam. 3.14 His iniquity must not be purged away from that house for ever Well may the Scripture say that whosoever heareth this judgement of God his ears shall tingle By this instance how watchfull should godly parents be lest for their sins committed a curse should cleave to the family for many generations I acknowledge these calamities as they fel upon Ely a godly man so they were wholsome medicines and fatherly corrections but as they came on his wicked children or posterity continuing in wickednesse so they were strictly and properly punishments Lastly These temporal evils will reach even to the publique Church and State wherein they live so that the sins of godly men may help to pull down publique judgements Thus it was with Hezekiah for his unthankfulnes and pride there was wrath upon Judah and Jerusalem 2 Chron. 32.25 so Davids sin in numbring the people it was the death of many thousand in Israel for Elies sin the Israelites are slain in the Army and the Ark is taken Hence you have Esay Daniel and Ezra joining themselves in the number with others who made publike confessions of their sins upon daies of humiliation It is therefore a cursed and secure opinion that faith the godly when they keep Fast-daies do it not because they have any sins that God punisheth bâ—t because of wicked men The Scripture doth manifeâ—t the contrary and the holiest men living do bring some sparks and fire-brands to increase the wrath of God and therefore they ought to bring their buckets for the quenching of it The aggravation of this anger will appear if you consider what kinde of sins they have been for which God hath been so sore displeased and in them enumerated or instanced in you may perceive they were the Belzebub-sins the first-born of iniquities Vzzah failed only in the order God had appointed what he did was out of care and a good intention yet the Lord
it when it is there Propos 4. In respect of Gods liberty and freedom there is great difference between the attributes of God as also the exercises and actions of them There are some properties that require no object for their exercise but they make it thus the omnipotency of God doth not finde but make its object Again there are others which though they require an object yet not any condition or circumstance in it so the wisdom of God can and doth order every object let it be what it will be to a glorious end It ordered an harmonious world out of a Chaos he made all things qua omnipotens as omnipotent and ordered them all qua sapiens as a wise God But then there are other attributes which though essential to him yet cannot be exercised but where the objects are so and so conditionated as that mercy of God whereby he doth forgive sins requireth an object penitent and believing so that Justice of God whereby it is punitive and vindicative of sin requireth an object that is a sinner and impenitent Now in the actions about the objects of the former sort God is every way free he might have created the world or not have created it but in the actions of the latter sort though he be also free yet not so as to use Justice or not Justice when there is an object with its due condition As now it was free to God whether he would make man or no it was free for him whether he would permit man to fall or no but when fallen not free whether he would be just or no Thus God is free whether he will procure or prepare an object of justice but then when he hath so prepared an object then he is not loosned from the obligation of Justice To procure an object of Justice ariseth from the Soveraignty and meer freedom of God Hence Gods permission of sin or reprobation negative which is the passing by of some are not acts of Justice properly so called but condemnation for sin is truly and properly Justice The former arise from Gods supream dominion and freedom When an Object of Justice is there is an obligation to execute the same upon it but not when an object of mercy is because its necessary to mercy that it should be indebita but to justice debita I do not here intend to meddle with that Question Whether God absolutely might not have let sin go unpunished and yet forgive it as we see men can This is disputed even among the Orthodox some are for the Negative as Pisâ—ator Lubertus c. Others for the Affirmative as Davenant Twist c. but the proper place for this will be when we speak of Christs satisfaction nor yet with that other of the Schoolmen Whether God may absolutely accept of a sinner to pardon and eternal life though he do not regenerate or sanctifie him these are to be handled in their proper place You see by this delivered how far the actions of Gods Justice may be said to be free or not free Propos 5. Whatsoever may be said in an absolute sense about Gods Justice yet since that threatning promulged In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt die the death God cannot in Iustice but punish sinners Though it be in his freedom whether he will give thee a being or no yet if thou art an obstinate sinner it is not in his freedom whether he will damn thee or no so that as God cannot but love that Image of his holinesse where he seeth it so he cannot but hate the contrary wheresoever it is though that hatred shall not alwayes fall upon the person in whom it is because removed by Christ It is Camerons opinion That the word Iustitia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when attributed to God doth alwayes signifie Goodnesse Salvation Redemption but never in the Scripture saith he doth it denote an affection in God whereby he avengeth himself upon sinners but that the words Ira and Iudicium Anger and Iudgement expresse this But though the word signifie so sometimes yet in some places it must needs mean this disposition in God Psal 9.5 1 Tim. 4.8 2 Thess 1.6 so that in some sense we may with several Orthodox men say Iustice is essential to God Sin is not indeed Physically contrary to God as water is to fire for if it were so God would not suffer it to be because he is an infinite good as if there were infinite fire or light there could not be any water or darknesse but it is morally contrary to him Hab. 1. Thou art of purer eyes then to behold iniquity even sins against any positive command of God that are sins only because prohibited they are thus far against his nature and not his will only because it is against his nature to have his will and commands disobeyed in any thing he being the supream and most holy Lawgiver If God did only punish sin because he will and not because he is essentially just there could no true cause be given why Heathens should have terrour in their consciences after sins committed seeing the Word is not revealed unto them declaring Gods will and when the Scripture speaks of God punishing sins it doth not attribute it to Gods meer will because he will do so but to his Iustice Rev. 16.5 7. Thus Exod. 24. God is described by this property Not acquitting the guilty Now when we say God cannot but punish sin with death since the promulgation of the threatning that is not so to be understood as if then only the tie and obligation of Iustice came upon God but it was from eternity for as God did in time reveal this threatning so he did from all eternity will this threatning and so therefore from all eternity it was just with God to punish a sinner neither could he forgive him without a satisfaction This is diligently to be observed because men speak sometimes as if vindicative Iustice were then only due when the actual threatning was whereas the executions of God in time are as his decrees were from eternity and truly we should not give way to such Disputes Whether God could have pardoned absolutely or provided any other way and remedy when we see God pitching upon this and the Scripture only revealing this Hence the Scripture commandeth us to eschew sins not meerly because of his will onely but because he is holy in his nature Lev. 11.44 Josh 24.19 It is true Gods hatred and displicency of sin cannot but be yet the destination of it actually to punishment comes in some sense under his liberty Prop. 6. Though God cannot but take notice of sin so as to punish it yet it is under his freedom whether he will punish it in their own persons or in a surety and by this means the wisdom of God found out an excellent temperament of Iustice and Mercy so that the one doth not oppose the other notwithstanding Gods justice
who writing to have one Nicias sent to him that was accused used this expression 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nicias if he have done no wrong absolve him if he have absolve him for my sake but howsoever absolve him or set him free And in this sense forgivenesse of sins may well be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but in the Scripture it seemeth rather to be an expression from those that are loosned out of their bonds for their debts and therefore frequently is applied to the forgiving of debts Mat. 18.25 27 32. and this is more notably set down Luk. 4.18 to preach to captives or prisoners 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 freedom or forgivenesse of sin and so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall be as much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to loosen bonds as the word is used Luke 16.26 Acts 27.40 Therefore howsoever Grotius thinks the word to remit to be a metaphor from those who part with or leave a thing that they might retain yet it seemeth rather to be taken from releasing of debts and loosning of bonds in which the conscience of a sinner was tied being bound to answer at the Tribunal of God Hence the Scripture useth several names to expresse pardon of sin according to the several titles that sin hath in the Scripture As sins are Debita Debts so God doth forgive as they are Sordes a filth and loathsomnesse so God doth cover them as they are vincula bonds so he doth remit them As they are debts written down in a book so he blots them out As they make us miserable and wretched so he is mercifull and propitious in removing of them A second word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Col. 2.13 Having forgiven you all trespasses Col. 3.13 Even as Christ forgave us Now this word doth excellently signifie the fountain and the effect of pardon The fountain that it cometh from the meer grace and favour of God There is nothing in us to merit or satisfie God with Therefore howsoever there be a necessity of faith and repentance yea and God will not forgive sin in persons grown up but where these are yet these are no meritorious causes nor can they satisfie God for all that offence and dishonour which our sins have cast upon him And this may encourage the broken heart who feeleth a load of sin upon it self and hath nothing to bring unto God remember the root and fountain of all forgivenesse is grace which is so far from supposing any worth of condignity in thee for pardon that it rather implieth the contrary And as it doth imply grace thus in the fountain so also acceptablenesse and joy too in the party to whom sin is forgiven So that there can be nothing in the world more welcome or a greater matter of joy then to bring this glad tidings and indeed therefore is the Gospel called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because it preacheth the glad tidings of Gods love and reconciliation thorow Christ with a sinner A third word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thus the Publican prayed Luk. 18.3 Some derive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because we desire to look on those to whom we are propitious But this word doth more immediately relate to the bloud of Christ as the way by which God becomes thus pacified So that as the other words set up the grace of God in pardoning so this the merits and satisfaction of Christ 1 Joh. 2.2 1 Joh. 4.10 Rom. 3.25 Heb. 2.17 In which places the appeasment of God towards us is attributed to the bloud of Christ Therefore if we put the former words and these together we may see an admirable temperament and mixture of grace and justice in forgiving of sins The former places exclude Popish Doctrines The later Socinian blasphemies A fourth word may be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to obtain mercy For although the Scripture apply this to all the benefits and mercies of God yet Paul applieth it more particularly to pardon of sin 1 Tim. 1.13 and when Dives prayed Luk. 16.24 Father Abraham 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 have mercy on me and so by consequent to be removed from that place of torment Hence in that form of prayer which Paul useth by way of salutation there are these three words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But this word is more expresly used for this end in the grand Covenant and Promise for pardon of sin Heb. 8.12 For I will be mercifull to their iniquities c. This is so comprehensive a Petition that it seemeth to be a generally received form of prayer in the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yea the wiser among the Heathens used this prayer as appeareth by Arrianus epist. diss lib. 2. cap. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now this word supposeth 1. The party praying for pardon to look upon himself as in a most miserable and undone estate that no outward calamity or evil lieth so heavily upon him as his sins do And then secondly on Gods part it supposeth that he doth not only pardon but that even his bowels yearn within him when he doth forgive Hence Luk. 1.78 they are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the bowels of mercy This goodnesse of God is excellently represented in the father of the Prodigal Luk. 15.20 Therefore how great a sinne is unbelief and refusing to have good thoughts of God when God hath manifested himself thus gracious The last word I shall mention though there be others that are used is by way of negation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 4.8 2 Cor. 5.9 And this is a metaphor from those that cast up their accounts and account so much upon such an one for debt Now by this word is shewn the terrible nature of sin as also that howsoever for a while we may live jollily care for nothing and be in security yet God will one day cast up his accounts and charge such and such debts upon us but if so be the Lord will not impute them to us and account them upon our score this will be our blessednesse And thus you have heard the most choice and principal words the holy Ghost expresseth our forgivenesse by We proceed 1. Proposition Lay this down as a foundation That when God doth pardon sin he takes it away so as that the party acquitted is no more looked upon as a snner All the expressions about pardon amount to thus much even as when one accused of theft and murder in the Common-wealth and is legally acquitted by the Judge he is no more reputed a thief or murderer Therefore it is a calumny of the Papists as if we held That a man is a sinner after God hath pardoned him It is true we say That sin doth remain in a man though he be justified and that sin hath a desert of condemnation with it but where God hath pardoned there he doth not look upon that man as a sinner but as a just man
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
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
the Scripture but the same entire mercy Now although this be true yet how few do reform their judgements in this point and thereupon they come to put that upon their grace within them which belongs to grace without them Use of Instruction That there may be an happy reconciliation and accord between Gods grace in forgiving and mans duty in repenting one need not be preached to justle out the other All error is an extremity of some truth and therefore it is hard to discover truth because its difficult to find out where the bounds are that truth parts from error Let not therefore a Christian so relie upon his repentance as if there were no Covenant of grace no bloud of Christ to procure an atonement so neither let him extol these causes to the extinguishing of his duties To stir up to this duty of repentance as that without which pardon of sin cannot be obtained There is no such free grace nor Gospel-mercy that doth supersede a broken and contrite heart Christ was broken for thy sins yet that will not excuse thee from a broken heart for them also Christ was wounded and a man of sorrow for thy sins yet that will not take ofâ— thy wounds and sorrow also Indeed if these were able to satisfie Gods wrath or to make an atonement then Christ was wounded and became a man of sorrows in vain for God doth not require a two-fold satisfaction but we are wounded for sin upon other grounds then Christ was we mourn for other causes then he did and consider thou that art afraid to grieve here for sin how little is this to that which thou shalt be forced to grieve for hereafter Thou art unwilling to be burdened here but oh how easie is that to the load thou must stand under hereafter This Bernard urged When saith he we urge men to repent they say this is durus sermo an hard speech who can bear it But you are deceived when God shall say Depart ye cursed into everlasting fire This is indeed an hard speech And account that repentance is as much as the bringing of a man to his wits and minde again All the while thy sins are not a burden to thee thou art in blindenesse even as the childe as long as it is in the dark womb weeps not but as soon as ever it cometh into the light then it crieth As long as thou liest in the womb of darknesse and ignorance thou mournest not but when God shall open thy eyes to see thy estate and the aggravation of thy sins then thou wilt burst out into sorrow LECTURE XIX MAT. 6.12 And forgive us our debts IT hath been shewed That there is an happy accord between Gods grace in pardoning and our duty in repenting In bounding of which you have heard the Scripture excludes all merit and causality from our repentance and gives the glory of all to Gods grace and Christs bloud Before I leave this point it will be necessary to answer some practical Objections for there is a great miscarriage in many about this very duty of repentance If they be asked How they hope to be saved they will reply by their repentance Thus they make that their Ark and city of refuge they look upon that as the brazen serpent and not Jesus Christ And it is no wonder if this be so among ignorant people when the most learned amongst the Papists do give such power and merit unto repentance Insomuch that Vasques saith He wonders at those Catholikes who have such low and despicable thoughts of the righteousnesse in us as that it should not exclude sin without any new favour or pardon of God as if the enabling us to repent did expel the guilt of sin as fire doth water by a natural necessity The first Objection therefore may be To what purpose doth God require Repentance seeing it is no cause of pardon Why may not God forgive sin as well without this sorrow of ours for if it have no efficacy of it self to deliver from the guilt of sin then sin might be pardoned as well without it as with it for if the Spirit of God prepareth us for pardon by exciting and stirring up Repentance this Repentance must have some respect of causality to pardon or else to what purpose it is wrought It is hard therefore to see the necessity of Repentance unlesse it have such effects Insiste fortitèr poenitentiae inhaere tanquam naufragus tabulae said Ambrose And this efficacy all are pronâ— to give to Repentance Now to answer this lay first this foundation That God doth indispensably require repentance of all Act. 17.30 where not only the command of repentance is made known but the goodnesse of God in pressing this duty for whereas God hath neglected and passed over the former times of ignorance by not revealing any such command unto them now by the general spreading of the Gospel he doth For howsoever we translate it winked at as also Beza doth yet Dieu upon the place sheweth more probably that it signifieth Gods anger and indignation to them and therefore hid the means of salvation from them This grace is also required of the godly sinning 2 Cor. 7.9 1O Revel 2.16 Tertullian subtilly but not solidly saith God first dedicated repentance in his own self for before God said It repenteth me that I have made man the name of repentance was not heard But we know that God cannot in a proper sense be said to repent because there is no ignorance in his understanding or mutability in his will But to answer Why God doth require it this in the first place might be enough Because it is his will and command Bonum est poenitere an non quid revolvis Deus praecipit said Tertulâ—ian Is it good to repent or not Why doubtest thou Hath not God commanded it It is Gods will to joyn pardon and repentance together Though there were no more connexion between these two then by that meer appointment of God we were bound up to do it As we see in the Sacraments God hath promised such spirituall grace in the holy use and application of such outward signs where there is no naturall connexion at all between the grace and the sign but the union comes by the meer institution and command of God Although the conjoyning of pardon with repentance be more then from a meer positive command there is an aptnesse and fitnesse in the thing it self Now God in commanding of this doth not because he needed it or as if he could not do otherwise for if a man may forgive another that hath injured him although he do not grieve or be troubled for such an offence why may not God if we speak of absolute power Thy tears therefore and thy repentance they make not God more happy neither are they required for Gods good but for thy own good Neither doth God require them as if they should make up any defect or
do not make to the internal Happinesse of God yet he is pleased with this and commands it of men and threatens to punish where it is denied him and certainly we may not think the Scripture doth aggravate sinâ—e under this title as an injury to him as that which offends him and is disobedience unto him if so be there were not some Reality Besides the Necessity of Christs death by way of satisfaction doth necessarily argue That sinne is a reall offence and dishonour to him And lastly a sinner as much as lieth in him depriveth God of all his inward happinesse and glory insomuch that if it were possible God would be made lesse happy by our sins It is no thanks to a sinner that he is not but it ariseth from his infinite Perfection that he cannot Let the first Use be To commend Repentance in the necessity of it if ever we would have pardon God hath appointed no other way for thy healing Never perswade thy self of the pardon of sinne where sinne it self hath not been bitter to thee Besides where godly sorrow is there will be earnest prayer and heavenly ascensions of the soul unto God for his pardon Hence Zech. 12. The spirit of Prayer and Mourning is put together and Rom. 8. Prayer and groans unutterable As the fowls of the Heaven were at first created out of the water so do thy heavenly breathings after God arise from thy humbled and broken soul It is presumption to expect pardon for that sinne which hath not either actually or habitually been humbled for by thee If a man should expect health and life yet never eat or drink would you not say he tempted God and was a murderer of himself So if a man hope for pardon and yet never debase or loath himself repenting of his sins will you not â—â—y he is a murderer of his soul And be encouraged to it because God hath annexed such a gracious Promise to it He might have filled thee with sorrow here and hereafter It might be with thee as the damned Angels who have neither the grace of repentance nor the mercy of pardon 2. Not to trust in repentance but after all thy humiliations still to depend only upon Christ Though Christ died and was crucified yet he did not lose his strength and efficacy This was represented in that passage of Gods providence That a bone of his was a broken Relie therefore upon Christ wounded for sinne not upon thy own heart that is wounded use this but trust only in Christ Dependance upon Evangelical graces doth evacuate Christ as well as confidence in the Law A man may not only preach the Law and the duties thereof to the prejudice of Christs glory but also the duties and graces of the Gospel If a man relieth upon his repentance and believing he maketh Justification and Salvation to be of works though it be of faith for he makes his faith a work and gives that glory which belongs to Christ to his own repentance LECTURE XX. MAT. 6.12 And forgive us our Debts IT hath already been demonstrated at large How God doth remit or forgive sins We come now to shew What kinde of act forgivenesse of sin is and whether it be antecedent to our faith and repentance Both these Questions have a dependency one upon another and therefore must be handled together The first Doubt is What kinde of act in God forgivenesse of sin is Whether it be an immanent act in-dwelling and abiding in God or transient working some reall effect and change upon the creature Now in handling of this I shall not trouble you with that perplex Question so much vexed by the Schoolmen Whether a transient action be in the Agent or in the Patient but lay down some differences between an immanent action and a transient action only you must take notice that we are in meer darknesse and not able to comprehend how God is said to act or work For on the one side we must not hold that there are any accidents in God or that he can be a subject recipient of such because of his most pure and simple Essence so that whatsoever is in God is God And yet on the other side the Scripture doth represent God doing and working such mercies and judgements as seemeth good to him Only this some conclude of wherein others with some probability dissent that Gods knowledge and will is the cause of all things that are done so that there is not an executive power besides them whereby he doth this or that As we see there is in man though an Artificer wils such a thing to be done yet that is not existent till he hath wrought it but now God worketh all things by a meer command of his will as appeareth Gen. 1. God said Let there be light and there was light Here was Gods will to have it so no executing power distinct from that will Therefore it is a sure truth De Deo etiam vera dicere periculosum est It is dangerous to assert things though true of God and Tunc dignè Deum aestimamus cum inaestimabilem dicimus then do we rightly esteem of him when we judge him above our thoughts or esteem We must not therefore apprehend of God as having a new will to do a thing in time which he had not from eternity as Vorstius and others blaspheme but his will was from all eternity that such a thing be in time accomplished by his wisdome As for example in Creation God did not then begin to have a will to create but he had a will from all eternity that the world should exist in time and thus it is in Justification and Sanctification not that these effects are from eternity but Gods will is And if you ask Why seeing Gods will to create or justifie is from eternity Creation and Justification are not also from eternity The answer is because God is a free Agent and so his will is not a necessary cause of the thing for then it would be immediately as the Sun beams are necessarily as soon as the Sun is but it is a voluntary principle and so maketh the effect to be at the time he prescribeth As if there were an Artificer or Carpenter that could by his meer wiâ— cause an house to be reared up he might will this to be done in such and such a year long after his will of it to be So God when the world is made when a sinner is justified willed these things from all eternity and when they come to have a being these effects cause an extrinsecal denomination to be attributed to God which was not before as now he is a Creator and was not before now he justifieth and did not before There is no change made in God but the alteration is in the creature But of this more in its time Let us come to give the differences between an immanent action and a transient and then we
in Christ yet not for Christ Christ is the meritorious cause of Justification and Glorification but not of predestination that is meerly from his own self so that if Gods act of predestinating us be enough to instate us into all this favour and love what need is there of an atonement by Christs bloud and thus we may urge a Doctors Argument upon himself All the elect of God are justified but all the elect of God are elected antecedently to Christs merits therefore they are justified before Christs merits 7. If because it s said Ephes 2. That while we were dead Christ gave himself for us And Rom. 5. That he died for the ungodly it followeth Our sins are pardoned before we believe then it will also follow that all mens sins are pardoned For the Texts that speak thus of his dying for the ungodly and for enemies make no distinction of one from another And thus a Judas as well as a Peter is bound to believe his sins are pardoned Those that argue against all qualifications and say God requireth nothing of thee though lying in thy bloud must needs hold an universal promiscuous pardon of all and that such a sin as presumption is not possible for if I believe that Christ died to take away my sins though I walk in all disobedience yet that is not presumption but a duty It is true the Orthodox call upon those who lie groveling in their swinish lusts to come unto Christ and to believe in him but what is that faith Not a faith that sins are already pardoned but a faith relying on him for pardon which faith also at the same time cleanseth and purifieth the heart Therefore let us take those general Texts which speak of Christs dying to take away the sins of enemies and let any Antinomian give a true reason why one mans sin is pardoned rather then another and although to evade this they fall into another error holding Christ died for all yet that will not serve the turn unlesse they hold That all men shall actually be saved and none damned for those Texts speak of a benefit that is actually obtained for those in whose behalf he died And thus I have produced seven Arguments for the antecedency of our Faith and Repentance to our Justification as many in number as the fore-quoted Author brings against it Other grounds may be pleaded to this purpose when we shall demonstrate that all sins are not pardoned together Use Of Exhortation To avoid all presumption whether it be wrought in thee by thy own carnal heart or corrupt Teachers and that is when thou believest pardon any other way then in Scripture-bounds there is a Pharisaical presumption or Popish and there is an Antinomian or Publican presumption The former is when we hope for pardon partly by Christ and partly by our own works and merits The other is when we expect it though living and walking in sin Now it is hard to say whether of these is more derogatory to Christ The one sins in the excesse the other in the defect Be not therefore a Pharisee excluding Christ either in whole or in part from the cause of pardon Tutius vivimus quando totum Deo damus we live more safely when we give all unto God and take nothing unto our selves In the next place be not a Publican Think not to have Christ and Belial together expect not pardon for sin without repentance of it The world is filled with these two kinde of presumers some limit Gods grace and associate their performances with it Others extend it too far and conjoyn their lusts with it But as the Apostle saith If of works and of the Law then there is no grace So we may if of lusts and prophane impieties then there is also no grace We are therefore both to avoid sins and carnal confidence in our own righteousnesse if we would have Christ all in all In vain did Peter and Mary Magdalen pour out their souls with so much bitternesse if pardon of sin may be had without this It is Hieroms observation That in all Pauls Salutation Grace goeth before Peace for till Gods grace hath pardoned our sins we can have no peace and God doth not pardon but where he gives repentance Labour therefore for that which is indeed the good of thy soul viz. Pardon of sinne When the rich man in the Parable speaking of the corn in his barns said Soul take thine ease thou hast much good laid up for thee He spake as if he had porcinam animam the soul or life of an hog for what good is corn and wine to a mans soul Forgivenesse of sin and reconciliation with God that is the connatural and sutable good and happinesse for the soul LECTURE XXI MAT. 6.12 And forgive us our debts IT hath been proved That God doth not justifie or pardon a man till he doth believe and that the wrath of God abideth upon such an one It is necessary in the next place to answer those Objections which are propounded by the Adversaries because some of them carry a specious pretence with them And indeed the Antinomian with those Arguments he fetcheth from some places of Scripture is like David in Sauls Armour not able to improve them the weapons being too big for him But before I enter into the Conflict its worth the enquiry what the judgement of the Orthodox is in this point The Remonstrants Acta Synod p. 293. bring severall places out of our Authours Lubertus Smoutius Piscator and Others wherein they expresly say That God doth blot out our sins before we either believe or amend our lives and that this pardon doth antecede our knowledge of God Faith Conversion or Regeneration of the heart Thus also D. Twisse in the place before quoted Pemble also to this purpose pag. 24. The Elect saith he while unconverted they are then actually justified and freed from all sin by the death of Christ and so God esteems of them as free and having accepted of that satisfaction is actually reconciled to them But the falshood of this will appear in Answer to the sixth Argument When Grotius had distinguished of a two-fold remission a full remission and a lesse full remission holding this later kinde of remission to be given to impenitent sinners abusing two places of Scripture for this purpose Rom. 5. 10. 2 Cor. 5.19 Rivet confuteth him making it a sure truth That sins are not actually remitted but to those that repent and saith Quinam sunt ii qui volunt actu remissa peccata cuiquam ante conversionem certè nobis sunt ignoti Who are they that say sins are actually pardoned before conversion Certainly they are unknown to us Although we acknowledge the price of reconciliation and redemption to have been prepared for the elect from all eternity or in Gods purpose and intention remission of sins to have been ordained for them even as conversion which in his time by
that controversie The opponent it may be knoweth that there are some who say Christ or the Spirit of Christ is first in us by way of a moving or preparing principle and afterwards as a principle inhabiting and dwelling in us That as some say Anima fabricat sibi domicilium the soul makes its body to lodge in it works first efficiently that afterwards it may formally so they say Christ doth in us As the silk-worm prepareth those silken lodgings for her self to rest in So that according to the judgement of these men Christ or his Spirit doth efficiently work in us the act of believing by which act Christ is received to dwell in us And in this way Christ hath no union with us till we do believe He worketh indeed in us before but not as united to us Now according to this opinion the answer were easie That we are not in Christ till we do beleeve Though Christ be in us as working in us and upon us Yea faith would first be wrought and then Christ with his benefits of justification c. would be vouchsafed to us but there are Reasons why it is not safe to go this way And indeed that Charta magna or grand promise for regeneration doth evidently argue the habits or internall principles of grace are before the actions of grace Ezek 36.26 God takes away the heart of stone and giveth a new heart an heart of flesh which is the principle of grace and afterwards causeth them to walk in his Commandments which is the effect of grace But secondly which doth fully answer the Objection It is true our being ingraffed into Christ is the root and fountain of faith and of Justification too but yet so that these being correlates faith and Justification they both flow from the root together though with this order that faith is to be conceived in order of nature before Justification that being the instrument to receive it though both be together in time Therefore the major Proposition should be thus regulated He that is in Christ doth believe and is justified or believing is justified for Justification as our Glorification though it flow from Christ yet it is in that order and time which God hath appointed Neither is it any new thing in Philosophy to say Those causes which produce an effect though they be in time together yet are mutually before one another in order of nature in divers respects to their severall causalities Christ is in us and we in Christ Christ is in us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by way of gift and actual working and we are in Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by way of receiving and both these are necessary as appeareth Joh. 15.5 and both are together in time yet so that in order of nature Christs being in us is before our being in him and the ground of all our comfort and fruit is not because we are in him but he in us even as the branch beareth fruit not because it is in the Vine but because the Vine is in it communicating efficacy to it Thus also faith and Justification are together yet so as one is produced by the other we are not justified and therefore believe but we believe and are therefore justified Lastly This may be retorted upon the opponent who as was alleadged before denieth any actual reconciliation till we do believe But may not we strike the adversary with his own reason in this manner He that is in Christ is actually reconciled But we must be in Christ before we do believe Therefore we must be actually reconciled before we do believe I pass over the third and reserve the fourth and sixth Argument being all one for the next Lecture because in them is matter worthy of a large consideration I come therefore to the fifth Argument which is taken from the collation between the first Adam and second out of Rom. 5.18 19. From whence is argued As in the first Adam we are accounted sinners before any thing done on our part so in the second Adam we are to be justified before any thing wrought in us This the opponent doth much triumph in but without cause as the answer will manifest And in the first place we cannot but reject those Expositors of that text fore-quoted who understand us to be sinners in Adam only by imitation or by propagation meerly as from a corrupted fountain but we suppose it to be by imputation Adam by Gods Covenant being an universal person and so as Austin said Omnes ille unus homo fuerunt All were that one man And therefore these do not rise up to the full scope of the text who parallel Christ and Adam only as two roots Origens or fountains for there must be a further consideration of them as two common persons for our immediate fathers are a corrupted root and we are corrupted by them yet their sins are not made ours as Adams was Hence the Apostle laieth the whole transgression upon one as by one mans disobedience c. Those that deny imputation of Adams sin as the Pelagians of old and Erasmus with others of late do not relish that translation of those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in whom all have sinned but prefer the other Forasmuch as all have sinned in him but both come to the same sense and howsoever Erasmus say that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a dative case must be understood causally yet that is not universally true for Mar. 2.4 there is mention made of the bed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in which the paralytique lay it would be ridiculous to translate that inasmuch So Act. 2. Be baptized 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the name Heb. 9. Those ordinances consisted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in meats We therefore grant That Adams sin was ours by imputation before we had any actual consent to it In which sense Bernard called it Alienum nostrum anothers sin and ours yea it is so farre from being ours by consent that if a man on purpose should now will that Adams sin should be his this would not make Adams sin imputed to him it would be a new actual sin in the man it would not be Adams sin imputed to him Now although all this be concluded upon yet it followeth not that therefore we are justified in Christ before we believe I acknowledge some eminent Divines have pressed this comparison but there is a vast difference in this very act of imputation and the ground of it for supposing the Covenant at first made with Adam all his posterity by a naturall way are involved in his guilt and so whether they will or no antecedently to their own acts they are obnoxious to this guilt Hence all men none excepted that are propagated in a natural way are thus corrupted but in Christ we are by a supernatural way and none are made his but such as beleeve in him and he doth not represent any to God as his members till
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
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
Covenant of Grace as it promiseth pardon of sin so also a new heart and actual exercise of grace so that they shall walk in all Gods waies Now the way wherein pardon is to be had is repentance and faith We must not therefore conceive of the Covenant of Grace as promising pardon and forgiveness without any qualification in the subject this would contradict other places of Scripture Therefore in the Covenant of Grace some things are promised absolutely supposing nothing to go before such are regeneration the working of faith in us giving his holy Spirit to us and union with Christ 2. There are many priviledges in the Covenant of Grace and those are given where God hath wrought some former effects of his grace and suppose them to be such are Justification pardon of sin increase in grace Glorification all these things are promised in the Covenant of Grace but made good where there are the former effects of Gods grace wrought in them We do not therefâ—re say God doth not pardon sin unless repentance go before as if God needed repentance as if he could not do it without repentance as if repentance made God the better or made him amends These are idle calumnies cast upon this Doctrine in some Pamphlets But only God hath appointed one effect of his grace before another in order and he will not vouchsafe one before he hath wrought the other As for instance God hath appointed no unclean thing shall enter into the Kingdom of heaven God will not give glory where he hath not given grace If one should tragically exclaim upon this This is to make God need our graces This is to make grace meritorious with God This is to be a Papist a Formalist to make men rest in themselves you would presently judge this a vain weak cavill No less is it when we are charged thus for holding God will not forgive sin but to those that believe and repent It is not for any worth in what we do but because God will have an order and a method in his graces Justification where Repentance is Glorification where Holiness is It being not fit to give pearl unto swine nor childrens meat to dogs Fifthly If a man may believe his sins are pardoned before they be committed and so before repented of then he may have full joy and unspeakable boasting in God while he lieth wallowing in the midst of sins The reason of the consequence is this By such an act of faith we have peace with God and we glory in him This floweth as a proper effect of faith though it do not alway follow yet it may follow and happily it is our weakness if it doâ—â—â—ot And if so then it was Davids weakness to bâ— troubled about sin It was for want of a right considering of the Covenant of Grace that he had no joy in his heart and that his bones were broken The Adversary seeth the necessity of this consequent and therefore is not afraid to say That a justified person even when sin is most prevalent and the heart most hardened yet then can glory in Jesus Christ with a large heart breaking forth into thanksgivings Cornwel of Gospel-Repentance pag. 125. How contrary is this to Davids experience Psal 32. who while he humbled not himself for his sin found nothing but terrour and trouble in his own soul And certainly this Doctrine must be very distastfull to â—very gracious heart which shall make faith and assurance in the glorious effects of it amicably concording as it were with great and grievous sins And let the Adversary shew such an instance in all Scripture For as for his example in Paul Rom. 7. who found himself captivated unto sin doing the things he would not yet giving thanks to God through Jesus Christ this is clean contrary to him for Paul did greatly humble himself and was deeply sensible of this tyranny of sin which made him cry out O miserable man that I am who shall deliver me from this body of sin So that we cannot with any colour call him an hardened sinner Somnium narrare vigilantis est said Seneca and to complain of sin especially in the first motions and suggestions of it as Paul did argues a tender life of grace in him No less absurd is it to bring Habakkuk to patrocinate this great errour for although he said He would rejoyce in God and glory in his salvation Hab. 3.8 9. in the midst of Gods judgements upon the publike yet this doth not suppose any personal grievous sins he was fallen into Sixtly If sins be pardoned thus before committed and repented of then it would be in vain to pray for forgiveness of sin seeing it is already past This Argument as before was said Gomarus urged against Piscator explaining that Petition Forgive us our sins for the sense and assurance of it only in our hearts It is true we may pray for a thing that is past thus far for the continuance of it but not for the thing it self Although there can hardly be an instance in all Scripture given of such a Petition We do not reade of any prayer in Scripture that God would elect us and predestinate us yet that might admit of the same interpretation which they give for pardon of sin viz. To make us more assured and perswaded of it in our own hearts Hence when God speaks of pardon of sins he useth many times the future tense Jer. 31. I will forgive their iniquities which if pardoned before would be very difficult to say even as hard as if God should say I will predestinate and elect such men It is indeed often said That when we pray for pardon of sin we pray for the sense and feeling of it but let such that interpret so give any parallel place for such a sense yet we deny not as before hath been said but reductively this may be included in that Petition Seventhly If a mans future sins be already pardoned in a justified man then in a reprobate man all his future sins are actually condemned The consequence is firm upon that rule Eadem est ratio contrariorum there is the same reason of contraries Therefore if a mans future sins be pardoned before they be committed then a reprobate mans sins shall be punished before they be Now how contrary is this to Gods dispensation revealed in the Scripture Where can we finde any one man punished for a future sin Were not all the sins men are afflicted for in Gods Word because they had done them not because they were to do them Indeed the Scripture Matth. 5. sometimes makes the desires and lusts of the soul after sin to be the sin it self but that is because they are the proxime and immediate cause of such a sin but we are now speaking of future sins that it may be as yet have no preparation at all for them in any cause Eightly By what principles the Opponents can prove That God pardons sins future by
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