a man hath broken the Law and therefore cannot be a direct and absolute precept of the Law I say a direct or absolute precept of the Law in its prime intention Repentance is not But a consequent hypothetical indirect precept it is of a second intention That is upon supposition a man hath once transgressed the Law he is implicitly bound by the same Law to repent as Repentance signifies a cessation from sin and a return to the duty of obedience Otherwise a man might be discharged from the obligation of the Law by breaking it Rom. 4. 1 Joh. 3. And then he that had sinned once could sin no more because where there is no Law there is no transgression But that Law that binds a man to perpetual obedience doth not only bind a man from sinning once but supposing that he hath done so it must needs oblige him to cease from continuing in his sin But properly and directly Repentance is a precept of the Gospel directed to the transgressors of the Law as a remedy for the breach of it and a condition of pardon not allowed by the Original Law And therefore it is not a precept only but a priviledg peculiar to the Gospel being a gracious dispensation and mitigation of the rigour of the Law Act. 11.18 God hath granted to the Gentiles repentance unto life That a sinner upon his repentance through Faith in a Mediator that hath expiated his sins should obtain remission of his sin and be discharged from the penalty of the Law is a new grant grace and priviledg of the second Covenant The difference therefore between the first and second Covenant lies not in the common sense of those general terms Do this and live as if the second Covenant required nothing at all to be done which is contrary to our Text and all those which have been alledged for the explication thereof but partly in the special signification of the Word this and partly in a gracious promise of Grace sufficient to enable a man to perform what ever is to be understood by that word this which cannot be so interpreted as to signifie the same thing in reference to both Covenants Because though something be required to be done as a Condition of the new Covenant as well as of the old yet not the same For something was required in the old which is not in the new and something is required in the new which was not in the old and something is required in both For instance The old Covenant indispensably required perfect innocence in an entire fulfilling the whole Law written in the heart of man or declared or to be declared by divine Revelations leaving no place for any such thing as Repentance to be admitted for a Remedy of Sin But this perfect Innocence is so far from being required in the new Covenant as the very Supposition of it prevents and destroyes the end and design of the New which imports a plain contradiction to such sinless innocence In as much as the new Covenant is nothing else but a Remedy provided by the grace of God for the want of such innocence Were it possible to perform the condition of the old Covenant the new could have no place because that supposeth a man a transgressor of the old And if now it were possible for any man to obey the whole Law without any new transgression yet he that is already a sinner Rom. 5.18 19. as all men are by the first transgression could not be saved by that Covenant because his being so renders him incapable of pleading performance of the Condition thereof This therefore is a main difference between the two Covenants The first exacts perfect Obedience and Innocence the second admits Repentance A second difference of these Covenants is in the first and principal Article of the new Covenant which is consigned upon the Condition of Faith in Jesus Christ as a Saviour to save us from our Sins Which also imports a plain Repugnance to the Condition of the first in as much as it implies a violation of it Faith in a Saviour to save us from our Sins could be no precept of the old Covenant because that doth neither declare nor admit any such Saviour These are two main things whereby the two Covenants are distinguished in their Conditions and it is not requisite in this place to name any more But with these Differences there is also something common to both and that is the general Obligation of Obedience to the Commandments according to the express words of our Saviour before alledged If thou wilt enter into Life keep the Commandments And this I take to be a duty of such necessity as could not be discharged or dispensed with by any positive Will or Covenant of God upon any Consideration whatsoever No not upon that of a most perfect satisfaction for the breach of the Law with an intire fulfilling of it by a Surety for and in the stead of the Transgressors I say that neither upon this nor any other Consideration the Duty of Obedience to the Moral Law of God could be discharged or dispensed with For these Reasons 1. Because such a discharge or dispensation is contrary to the Soveraignty of God which importeth an Authority to command all Creatures that are capable of receiving and obeying any commands This Authority being essential to the Divine Nature He cannot devest himself of by any positive Will no more than he can destroy his own Essence But to discharge a Creature capable of the duty of Obedience from all obligation thereunto were to put off that Authority because Where there is no obligation to obedience there can be no authority to command If therefore God should discharge a Creature of his duty of Obeying his Commands he should thereby quit his Soveraignty over that Creature which is altogether impossible 2. Because such a liberty granted to any part of mankind is contrary to the Justice and Holiness of God in as much as it implies a licence and toleration of the utmost wickedness that could be committed by them that had obtain'd this liberty For where there is no restraint put upon the wills of men by any binding law there must needs be the utmost of license 3. Because this Liberty is contrary to the nature of Man as he is a Reasonable Creature Because as he is reasonable he is capable of receiving Commands and Laws from his Creator and as he is a Creature he is naturally bound to be subject to them The relation of a Creature naturally importing such a debt of subjection to the Creator as can never be discharged 4. And lastly Because there are some Divine Laws which are in themselves indispensable to a reasonable Creature Such is that which is commonly called the Moral Law in the strictest sense signifying not all Precepts that concern the manners of men but the same thing with the Law of Nature and right Reason Which as it teacheth a distinction
of Good and Evil contained in the nature of some actions antecedent to any positive or express Law of God or man so doth it indispensably oblige to the practical observation thereof 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This is that effect of the Law written in the Heart Rom. 2.15 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which cannot be blotted out by any abrogation without blotting out the reason that is the nature of man That which is in it self Evil cannot without contradiction become indifferent or lawful But that which is not restrained or forbidden by any binding Law must needs be lawful Therefore the opinion of Libertines and Antinomians affirming Christians under the Gospel to be discharged from the duty of Obedience to any Law or Command of God as such is not only false and heretical but also impossible to be true in as much as it imports a repugnancy to the nature both of God and man and all distinction of Good and Evil and withall it evacuates all pardon of sin by concluding an impossibility of committing it For where no Law is there can be no Transgression I conclude therefore that the duty of Obedience to the Moral Law is common to both Covenants And that when Saint Paul saith We are not under the Law but under Grace Rom. 6.15 his meaning cannot be that we are not under any Obligation of the Law but that we are not under the rigorous Exaction of the Law requiring perfect obedience without affording either pardon for any Offences against it or any sufficient aid of Grace to perform it Christians by the Covenant of Grace which now they are under are delivered from that desperate state which the Law leaves them in that are under it being relieved by a double Grace first of pardon of Sin upon Repentance and secondly of ability through the assistance of God's Spirit to yield such obedience to the Law as will be accepted And so to the Objection of the burthen of that Obedience which by the premisses hath been asserted necessary to Salvation I answer That God's accepting by the new Covenant Repentance joyned with Faith in Christ instead of perfect Obedience required in the old is a sufficienu abatement of the intolerableness of the old yoke and as ample a dispensation as could be afforded to Sinners to qualifie them for salvation which will further appear upon these Considerations 1. That Repentance supposing men to be sinners admitted by the Covenant of Grace for the Condition of Salvation affords a remedy for Sin and a capacity of Life to them that by the old Covenant are absolutely excluded from all hopes thereof 2. That Reformation of life and future obedience which Repentance signifies is not the same which the Law exacts that is not absolute and perfect without any manner of defect Not the not-sinning at all but the not wilfully and presumptuously sinning and abiding therein impenitently after the receiving * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the knowledge or acknowledgment of the truth Heb. 10.26 A sincere desire and faithful indeavour of obedience is accepted for Repentance which may consist with some such things as the Law condemns as sins of ignorance not affected sins of Infirmity and surreption Imperfection in the performance of duty sincerely indeavoured with many frailties which a Christian labours under and against but cannot perfectly overcome Such things as these although as transgressions of the pure and perfect Law of God they have the nature of sin yet by the tenor of the new Covenant and through the mercy of God in Christ the Mediator thereof they shall not be imputed to the penitent sinner that by a true Faith layes hold upon that Mediator So that there be some sins which do not make void the effect and benefit of Repentance but are consistent with the truth of it and a regenerate state But because it is difficult to determine precisely and exclusively what they are it concerns every true penitent to take as much heed as he can of all sin and not to presume of any indulgence for the least that can be avoided by him And whiles it is said that some kinds of sin are consistent with such a Repentance as is available to salvation it is implyed that others are not so and such are all gross wilful and presumptuous sins But 3. Neither do such sins as these after a man hath once truly repented exclude a sinner from the benefit of the Gospel But are still capable of the same remedie which is allowed for all sorts of sin which a man is found guilty of before his first Conversion Although such sins do evacuate the benefit of his former repentance so far as to render him uncapable of expecting or claiming the Remission of them thereby suspending his pardon for the present till he hath renewed his repentance or repaired the breach of it Herein consists the abundance of Gospel-grace and the benefit of repentance that it is never out-dated not being restrained to one general pardon as the Novatians heretically taught nor limited to any number of Repetitions There is no sin at any time unpardonable under the Condition of Repentance For that against the Holy Ghost is supposed to be so upon this account only that it excludes that Grace by which a man should be inabled to repent These three things relating to the doctrine of Repentance duly considered I conceive to be sufficient to answer the Objection before suggested Especially if that be added which I take to be agreeable to the doctrine of the Gospel viz That whosoever imbraceth this second Covenant shall be sufficiently inabled by the grace thereof that is by the Spirit of Christ that helps him though not to keep the whole Law exactly and perfectly without sin yet to do all things which by that Covenant are required of him to work out his own salvation This sufficiency of Grace I take to be supposed in the Exhortation of my Text and confirmed by the Reason that follows after it For it is God that worketh in you to will and to do of his good pleasure Of which afterward Thus far we have proceeded towards the resolution of that great Question What is to be done by him that desires to work out his own salvation from the distinct Answer of our blessed Saviour and two of his Apostles to the same Question Believe in the Lord Jesus saith Saint Paul Repent saith St. Peter Keep the Commandments saith our Saviour These three Answers comprehending whatever is required of a Christian in order to his salvation might suffice for a complete Answer to that Question But considering the infinite weight and moment of the Question some further Enlargement of the Answer from 3. or 4. selected Texts is not to be counted superfluous And the first of these additional Texts shall be that of the Apostle St. Peter urging the same Exhortation with that in our Text in other words 2 Pet. 1.5 And besides this giving all diligence add
Art of Logick or extraordinary perfection of Reason which they are not obliged to have In this Case the ignorance of those practicab Precepts so obscurely revealed in holy Scripture may be inculpable as I suppose 3. Where the ignorance is inculpable the doubt is so too 4. Inculpable ignorance as well concomitant as causal doth excuse the Act that is done with it though contrary to a Precept from sin not onely a tanto but à toto I use the term inculpable rather than invincible because it is more clear and less liable to cavil Nor are those terms equivalent For both some ignorance may be invincible in some circumstances which is not inculpable and some ignorance may be inculpable which is not simply invincible for to render ignorance inculpable it is not necessary that it was not to be prevented by any possible industry but it sufficeth that it doth not proceed from the neglect of any means that a man was bound to have used or from any other fault of the ignorant person Inculpable ignorance I say excuseth any action that is done with it from sin as well à tanto as à toto and as well when it is barely concomitant as when it is causal This conclusion is disagreeable to the ordinary resolution of the Schools and yet seems to be true upon this reason because inculpable ignorance barreth the Obligation of a positive law which cannot oblige till it be so promulged as obligeth all them that are to be bound by it to the knowledge thereof And though actual knowledge of a law be not necessary to the obligation of it yet promulgation is and that such as is sufficient to take off all excuse of ignorance and therefore to render it not inculpable And where there is no law actually obliging there can be no sin Therefore inculpable ignorance as well of the law as of the fact excuseth from sin and that not onely when that ignorance is a cause sine qua non of the action which a man would not do if he knew of the law but also when the ignorance doth onely accompany the action which a man would have done though he had known the Law The disposition of the will to do such an evil action though it were known to be so is indeed a sin but the action it self cannot be a sin whilst it is not forbidden to the Agent by any obliging law To apply these Propositions to the Question premised seeing all manner of doubt proceeds from ignorance and that ignorance may be inculpable and where the ignorance is inculpable so is the doubt and inculpable igrance of a law takes away the Obligation and therefore excuseth from sin it seems to follow that when a man is inculpably ignorant of any such law as forbids the action which he deliberates about he may act with perswasion concerning the lawfulness thereof to him Though he should have some reason to doubt whether such a Law may not be For whether there be or there be not if he be inculpably ignorant of it it obliges him not And therefore he is at libertie to act or forbear according to reason and may do either of Faith that is though he doubts upon some uncertain account not obliging his belief whether the action to be done be not forbidden by some Law of God yet if he be inculpably ignorant of the Law it doth not oblige him and therefore leaves him free till he be so far instructed as he can plead no inculpable ignorance As for Example Suppose the Law forbidding an action be no where in Scripture set forth expresly and the onely evidence thereof depends upon doubtful interpretations of Scripture or subtle consequences disputed and denyed by good and learned men of equal credit and not declared or determin'd by any Authoritie of the Church In this Case I being no competent judge of the Controversie may suppose myself inculpably ignorant of that Law as well as I am of other verities and points of belief that have no other or no better evidence of Scripture whilst yet pretensions of reasons not cogent together with the Opinions of Learned men may be sufficient to make me doubt as well of the uncertain Precepts as of other verities I inquire now whether notwithstanding this doubt I may not act in Faith that is believing it still lawful for me to do this action whether in it self it be forbidden or not forbidden because the Law whereby it is forbidden if it be so under this inculpable ignorance doth not yet oblige me and if I believe my self not obliged by a law I may act in Faith that is with perswasion that I am free whether my ignorance be in truth inculpable or not yet if I be perswaded that it is so its certain I may have the same perswasion concerning the lawfulness of the action that I do against no other law than that whereof I think my self inculpably ignorant It is true if my ignorance be not inculpable I shall sin in this action but shall notwithstanding act in Faith notwithstanding my doubt whilst that doubt is not whether it be lawful for me to do this action in this case of ignorance for that would impart a contradiction to my Faith or perswasion that it is but onely whether there be not some law forbidding the action in general and obliging all that know it or should know it but not obliging me as I suppose because I am as yet ignorant thereof and that as I believe inculpably But here it is to be considered that although it be certain by the express words of the Apostle That whatsoever is not of faith is sin yet it doth not follow that whatsoever is of faith is not sin For then St. Paul had not sinned whilst he persecuted the Church for he saith I verily thought with my self that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus Acts 26.9 And therefore though a man notwithstanding such a doubt as hath been declared may act in Faith which was the onely thing indeavoured to be proved yet it will not follow that he sins not except his ignorance be inculpable And if he onely believes that it is so he may likewise for that reason believe that it is no sin but can have no more certainly of the innocencie of his act than he hath of the inculpableness of his ignorance If this Hypothesis seem to destroy the second Principle before delivered with the resolutions of the Cases made upon it I answer 1. As before was intimated that that Principle in those indefinite termes wherein it is first laid down was taken up upon the common presumption of the universal truth of it and the respective resolutions supposing it were accordingly framed But 2. If that Principle be restrained as I understand it to such a doubt as is made not onely concerning the being of a positive Law but concerning the Obligation of it to me that is if I doubt whether the
prevent others doing of Evil. To omit a necessary Duty is a present certain Evil the Scandal that may be taken thereby is but accidental and contingent though it be probable Love both to God and our selves requires that if God must be dishonoured it should rather be by another than by a man's self Besides the omission of such Actions gives generally as great or a greater Scandal to others as it removes from some Were the Case so that a far greater Sin and Dishonour to God were like to be done by occasion of this Action than that Omission would be yet were we not allowed much less bound thus to prevent it Because there is no possible Consideration which can license much less oblige a man to Sin The least Sin is not to be done to prevent the greatest Q. 2. But what if the Action be only good and commendable and not absolutely commanded For such Actions I think may be admitted as well under the Gospel as in the Free-will Offerings and voluntary Vows under the Law without yielding the Doctrine of Supererogation If such Actions have an appearance of Evil to others whether are they to be omitted for that only Reason Answ If that Brother who is suspected to be scandalized by such an Action be truly weak that is uninstructed and not proud wilful or obstinate and if that Scandal cannot be sufficiently prevented by instruction and due means of rectifying his judgment I think the Action should for the present be omitted Because all Actions commanded in their kind are not alwaies necessary to be performed according to the common Rule 〈◊〉 the School concerning affirmative Precepts nâ— binding ad Semper that is at every time Indeed the general Precepts of Believing and Fearinâ— God and Loving Him and our Neighbours dâ— bind both semper and ad semper that is at aâ— times but then it is to the Habits not to the elicâ—â— much less imperate Acts of these Vertues that man is alwayes bound It is not necessary becauâ—â— not possible for a man alwayes to Elicit the Act of Faith Fear or Love but the Disposition aâ— Habits must never be wanting nor can be in good Christian And if Acts commanded mâ— for some Reasons be omitted at some times bâ— cause they bind not to all times then much mâ— may such Acts as being not commanded though good are not necessary at any time be omitted some time 2. Because as before was said â—â—ctions not only indifferent but good in themselves may become Evil by some Circumstances amongst which this may fall out to be one 3. Because the doing of such a good Action not commanded may bring more dishonour to God by the scandal of it than it will do honour by the doing of it And though we may not do the least Evil to prevent the greatest yet may we omit a less good when it is not commanded to promote a greater 4. Lastly that general Rule that God will have mercy and not Sacrifice may be applied to this Case where the Soul of my Brother is probably indangered by my voluntary Sacrifice But Q. 3. What if the Act that hath an appearance of Evil to Bretheren which are truly weak be barely lawful and indifferent in it self neither commanded nor yet good in its Nature or Kind but yet necessary for the preservation of a man's Life Liberty Estate or Credit and cannot be omitted without notable prejudice and hazard to a man's self in these Interests Whether is a man bound to redeem the Scandal of his Brethren with such hazard or prejudice to himself or his Family The Arguments producible for the affirmative in this Question are to be drawn 1. From the Consideration of God's Dishonour which by the Sin of another occasioned by this Act of mine will be procured 2. From the Debt of Charity to the Souls of our Neighbours For the glory of God and the salvation of our Bretheren ought to be preferred before any temporal Interest of our own Answ It is certainly true that the high regard which a man owes to these two things will oblige a Christian to do his indeavour to prevent the impeachment of them and therefore bind him to use such prudential means as he is able to prevent the danger of Sin in another which may be done without forbearing the Action which his necessity or just interest doth so much require Had the Corinthians for want of other Meat been in danger to have starved or by not eating this any otherwise hazarded their Lives I think they had not been absolutely bound to abstain by the Apostle's meaning in the Directions which here he gives them which do not suppose them under any such Extremity but only invited to the Meat In that Case of Danger I think To have protested against all respect and honour to the Idol might have acquitted them from the Scandal and made their eating that Meat in such a case lawful though the Apostle hath not expressed any such Exception because there was no occasion for it And though there were an express Apostolical Interdict against eating things offered to Idols Acts 15. which was one of the esteemed Precepts of Noah yet it appears by S. Paul's Discourses in the preceding Verses of this Chapter and elsewhere upon the same Theme that it was but a temporal or provisionâ— Edict not obliging beyond the necessity of thaâ— Case whereupon it was made And this I think iâ— the Warrant by which most Christians do not now hold themselves obliged by the same Edict to abstain from eating of Bloud or things made thereof which yet was observed in the Church for soâ—â— Centuries and forbidden by some Councils It is hard to think that another man's Erroâ—â— or weakness especially when a sufficient Remedy thereof is offered by me should restrain me of such use of my lawful liberty as is necessary to my own preservation If I were bound to redeem every accidental dishonour to God or hurt to my neighbour's souls by the loss of those benefits which Gods Providence affords me it would be scarce possible to enjoy them at all But for a conclusion to this point of Scandal the full and exact handling whereof agrees not with the model of a Sermon I shall only adde a short Inquiry into some of the reasons or causes whereby men are induced to imitate others in things against their own conscience the discovery whereof will be useful to resolve some questions in this case I shall name but two which are both grounded upon the mistake of the imitator Herein I shall take leave to borrow something both of sense D. H. H. and words from a late reverend Author who hath learnedly discoursed upon this Question 1. One reason whereby people are sometimes incouraged to do that which is against their own conscience is from their own mistake of the action or intention of him whom they imitate thinking him to do or intend that which he doth not Thus
that men should do unto you do you unto them likewise And though this Self-love be no where commanded in express terms because it needed not yet the immediate effects and instances of it are As when we are commanded to lay up for our selves treasures in Heaven to seek those things which are above to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling to use all diligence to make our Calling and Election sure c. But to return from this Digression Though it be manifest by the premised discourse and without it by the direct light and law of nature That there is a kind of self-love which is more than innocent and consequently which can be no impediment to that love of God which is to be exercised in the seeking of his glory but may be subordinate and subservient thereunto Yet that which is commonly understood by the name of self-love is indeed the greatest Enemie to the love of God And the seeking our Selves inordinately is in truth the only thing that diverts us from the seeking of God and his Glory For though a man may be turn'd aside from his duty of obedience to God by an irregular love or fear of men And though the pleasing of men be an ordinary temptation to that which is displeasing to God yet both that love and fear of men is reducible to self-love as its principle and end And this vitious Self-love though it be not the only thing which is understood by the name of Original sin yet may it fitly enough be so called in as much as upon strict examination it may be found to b◠the root and original of all actual sin both of omission and commission So that in what degree 〈◊〉 man is able to overcome this Lett in such degre◠he is free and prepared to seek and serve the glor◠of God And he that is throughly willing and able to deny himself shall find nothing to lett him from serving of God And yet so true it is that whiles God wills us 〈◊〉 have such an universal respect to his glory as 〈◊〉 expressed in this Rule he doth not inhibit us the love of our selvs that upon a right understanding 〈◊〉 the matter it will be evident to a true believer That he loves himself best that loves God better And this is most manifest upon the account of that finall happiness which is promised in the life to come to them that love God And because this is the chief and highest interest of a believer it is certain that the best way to secure and promote a man◠own interest is to secure the Interest of Gods glory with the utmost of fide lity and holy zeal Secondly He that hath such a true respect to Gods glory as this Text requires will be grieved at and for the dishonour of God whether it be done by himself or by others 1. As oft as his conscience shall charge him with the doing of any thing contrary to the glory of God he will be heartily grieved for it And this is that which the Apostle calls Godly sorrow or sorrow according to God namely that only whereby a man is sorry for the displeasing or dishonouring of God Godly Sorrow is the Scripture-name for that which the Schools call Contrition and is the proper effect and therefore an infallible signe of love to God A carnal man and he that is worse a reprobate and a devil may be grieved for sin as it is the cause of Mischief or misery to himself but not at all as it is dishonourable and offensive to God The carnall man's sorrow which he pretends for his sin is not so much nay not at all indeed for the sin as such but for the events and consequences thereof which he either feels or fears And yet this is the only sorrow which the School Doctors understand by the term of Attrition which some of them maintain to be sufficient to Salvation if it be joyned with Absolution or but the Vote of it By which Doctrine all necessity of love to God or respect to his glory is perfectly excluded 2. But whosoever hath a true respect to the glory of God will not only be grieved for his own sinnes but also for the sins of others upon the same account because thereby God is dishonoured Psal 119. 136. Rivers of tears run down mine eyes because they keep not thy Law and v. 158. I beheld the transgressors and was grieved because they kept not thy word Other mens sins were his sorrows He was more grieved for other mens sins than they were for their own Lot in Sodom was vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked 2 Pet. 2.7 8. A faithfull servant or well disposed Son cannot indure to see and hear his Master or Father dishonoured Nor will any true friend be unconcern'd in the reproach of his friend He therefore that hath the patience to stand by and hear or see the Name of God blasphemed or his holy Will violated without any sentiments of displeasure can neither be the servant child nor friend of God And he that hath any intire affection to the glory of God will desire and indeavour as much as in him lies to prevent the impeachment thereof by others as well as by himself and that not only by removing of scandal as in the case of the Corinthians which Saint Paul here speaks of but by all the offices of spiritual charity viz. by admonishing reproving exhorting counselling c. and by performing all the duties of his place towards such as relate unto him He that truly loves God will desire as many rivals and make as many friends for God as he is able 3. He that is truly desirous of and solicitous for the promoting and maintaining God's glory will rejoyce in it more than in any thing else If God be glorified in any thing that is his he will rejoyce in it more than at the improvement thereof to any advantage of his own He will not be contented only but glad God is glorified though no other end of his be served nor benefit ariseth to himself yea though it be with the crossing of his own interest though he suffers much by a good action yet his heart is comforted and abundantly satisfied in the Glory of God And not only when God is glorified by his own doings or sufferings will a godly man rejoice but likewise to see the same event procured by others whosoever they be He that is truly good would have other men better than himself And he is no Saint indeed that envies an other should deservedly obtain that name Phil. 1.18 Moses out of his zeal for Gods glory Num. 11.29 wished that all the Lords people were Prophets Hezekiah rejoyced to see the liberality and forwardness of the people for the service of God 2 Chron. 29.36 and 31.8 David was glad when they said unto him Come let us go into the house of the Lord Psal 122.1 4.
the five Articles of that Faith which a late Author hath endeavoured to prove to be as Catholick as Reason it self And therefore was never left out in any Religion that hath obtain'd in the World Nor was ever denied by any Philosophers that acknowledg'd the immortality of the Soul and any Life after this No Religion can be made out to be rational in the Theorie much less perswaded into Practice without the establishment of this Principle which being established doth certainly inferre a necessity of keeping Godâ—s Commandments in order to the hopes of eternal Life which was the thing to be demonstrated But against this Doctrine many things may be objected as 1. That it seems to evacuate the distinction of the old and new Covenants by confounding the condition of them which by this Hypothesis seems to be the same viz. Do this and Live 2. That it layes a burthen upon Christians as heavie as that which the Jews were never able to bear and gives occasion for the Disciples Question Who then can be saved 3. That it seems to contradict Saint Paul's Doctrine of Justification by Faith Rom. 4.44 without Works 4. And to favour the Popish Doctrine of Merit These Objections will be most conveniently answered after we have considered the third Text from whence we designed to complete the Answer to that great Question What we should do to be saved A Question put to Saint Peter and the rest of the Apostles by the Jews Acts 2.38.39 Now when they heard this they were pricked in their heart and said unto Peter and to the rest of the Apostles Men and Bretheren what shall we do Then Peter said unto them Repent and be baptized c. The necessity of Baptism to Salvation grounded upon the words of our Saviour John 3.5 6. is not here to be discussed because it can have no place â—n that Work to which the Apostle exhorts Chriâ—ians already baptized But that other Injunction which is joyned with it being a special part of the end and signification of Baptism viz. to Repent is a main part of that Work or Business by which a man is to work out his own salvation As appears by many other Texts of Scripture wherein the necessity of Repentance to Salvation is expresly taught It was the first Evangelical Precept the very first word whereby the Gospel began to be preached both by the fore-runner John the Baptist and by our Saviour himself Matth. 3.2 and 4.17 So John began his preaching in the Wilderness saying Repent ye for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand In like manner Jesus began to preach and to say Repent for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand Intimating that whosoever desired any part in that Kingdom must qualifie himself for it by Repentance It was the end of our Saviour's coming into the World as himself faith Matth. 9.13 I am come to call Sinners to Repentance And when he left the World to the teaching of his Apostles his Appointment was that Repentance and Remission of Sin should be preached in his name among all Nations Luk. 24.47 For Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour to give Repentance to Israel and Remission of Sin Acts 5.31 Not willing that any should perish but that all should come to Repentance 2 Pet. 3.9 In these and many other Texts the intire condition of Salvation is expressed by this term of Repentance which is therefore called Reptenance unto Life and Repentance to salvation Acts 11.18 2 Cor. 7.10 The equity and necessity of this condition unto the Remission of Sin is not as I conceive grounded upon any arbitrary or positive Will oâ— God supernaturally revealed but hath its foundation in the Law of Nature and Reason Foâ— natural Reason if it be not grosly corrupted by Self-love or perverted and abused by Superstitions instructions will certainly teach a man this Lessons That to qualifie him for and render him capable of a Pardon Luk. 17.3 for any wilful offence if it be but against a man it is necessary he should Repent the doing of it Because the want of this Repentance supposeth the justification of the Offence or at least a wilful continuance in it which makes the pardon without it to imply an allowance or toleration of the Offence and makes the offended party to be reconciled as well to the iniquity of the Offender as to his Person Which being perfectly unreasonable shews the indispensableness of this qualification for the salvation of a Sinner which supposeth the remission of his Sin Hereupon it is to be believed that Heathens by the light of natural Reason as oft as they would attend unto it could not but understand the necessity of Repentance for the averting God's anger and the hope of pardon for such gross Crimes as their Consciences were terrified with And though they might conclude more than probably from the Goodness of God essentially included in the notion of his Being and sufficiently declared by his Works that he was reconcilable to sinners upon some terms or other yet to believe him willing to pardon foul iniquities without exacting the Repentance of the Offenders was such an absurdity as could not be entertained without notorious corruption of their Reason But by the History we have of their Religion it appears they were so much abused with prescription of other wayes and means of expiating their sins to wit by Sacrifices ritual Purgations and Lustrations suggested by their covetous Priests that there is indeed little mention of this Doctrine of Repentance amongst them The very word being rarely to be found in their books And no marvel they should be disposed to listen after other ways of purging their sins which were recontilable with retaining the practice seeing the whole mass of corrupt Nature is found to be as averse to the remedy of Repentance as it is prone to the Sin that needs it It was the delusion and the hypocrisie of the Jewes to trust to other Remedies of Sin with neglect of this as we find by the frequent complaints of the Prophets Nor are Christians any better affected to this wholsome Cure for Sin but every whit as much inclined to elude the necessity of it or at least to cheat their own Souls in the hypocritical pretence of it But the more Evidence there is for the necessity of Repentance unto Salvation the more necessary it is to have a right Notion of the Nature of it Because the mistake in this point is no less dangerous than in that of Faith Nor are men less apt to be deceived in the one than in the other And if there be indeed an indispensable necessity of Repentance as well as Faith unto Salvation the carnal mind is not so sollicitous to find out the truest as the easiest notion of them both that is such a one sa is practicable with the least restraint to his lusts or most consisteâ— with his licentious liberty Such a notion
of Faith we met withall before and if there were not some other of Repentance as easie it were scarce possible for men to perswade themselves they have repented of their Sins without any actual sincere reformation of their lives Or to believe that the last hour of their lives is time enough for this work when they know such a reformation is altogether impossible But I am not in this place to enter upon the common place of Repentance or to discourse 〈◊〉 the various acceptions of the word My design iâ— only to shew what that Repentance is which iâ— necessary to be wrought out in order to a man's salvation And that will be learned most compendiously from a remarkable Text of Saint Pauls 2 Cor. 7.10 For godly Sorrow worketh Repentance to Salvation never to be repented of Where it is first to be observed that the rise or spring of Repentance is * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Godly Sorrow or â— Sorrow according to God which inports first a due sight and sense oâ— Sin secondly a hearty sorrow for it as it relatâ— to God that is as it is a transgression of the Law of God and so injurious and offensive â— Him and not only as it is noxious or perilous â— our selves There may be a true Godly sorrow as well foâ— the sufferings as the sins of others But the sorrow which is apt to bring forth repentance is a sorrow for our own sins And two things there are in Sin which are the just matter and motive of a Godly sorrow 1. The nature of it 2. The effects and consequents of it 1 Joh. 3.4 Rom. 2.15 The proper nature of sin is the transgression of Gods Law whether written in the Bible or in the Heart The Effects of sin do referre either to God or to our Selves and our Brethren Those which respect God are his displeasure and his dishonour For all sin is both displeasing and dishonourable to God upon the same account because it is a transgression of his will Those which respect our selves are â—ll manner of evils privative and positive that may accrue to us from sin either by the nature or by the punishment thereof Now albeit these â—atter events of sin be just matter of sorrow â—nd that sorrow may also conduce to the effect of â—epentance yet is not this properly called Godly sorrow because it is not a sorrow for Gods cause so â—uch as for our own And the root of it is self-â—ove rather than the love of God I conclude â—herefore that the proper object and motive of â—odly sorrow is sin as sin considered with â—â—e event that necessarily proceeds from it as such â—â—z the dishonour of God with his just displeasure â—hich being the greatest evil in the world is the â—â—â—test matter of Sorrow The glory of God and his â—â—vour are the most desirable good things and â—â—ght to be the highest ends that we should proâ—ound to our selves and most to be rejoyced in â—nd therefore the contraries of these things his â—ishonour and his displeasure ought above all â—â—ings to be averted and grieved for And the â—â—rrow for sin upon these considerations is the â—ost Godly sorrow because it implies a love to God with a conversion of our wills unto his will from which by sin it had been averted This is thaâ— Sorrow which is signified by the Scholastiâ— term of Contrition the abstract of the concreâ— word so oft used in Scripture Contrite to expresse the disposition of a penitent heart Thâ— Latin word Poenitere and the English to Repeâ— do first and most properly signifie to be sorry â— a thing done amiss And the word Repentanâ— in Scripture doth sometimes signifie no more thâ— this But in this Text and all others where 〈◊〉 hath the promise of salvation or remission of â— annexed to it Repentance hath a further signifiâ— tion Which is The second thing to be observed from â— Apostle's words towards the rectification of meâ— judgments concerning the notion of Christian Râ—pentance which is available to Salvation viz. that is not a bare sorrow for sin though it be a goesorrow much less every kind of sorrow A nâ— may have sorrow for sin more than enough aâ— yet be as far from repentance to Salvation as Juâ— was who is expresly said to have repented hâ—self Matth. 27.3 His heart was desperately 〈◊〉 mortally wounded with the sense of his â— and sorrow for it But a godly forrow it was â— that brings forth repentance to Salvation but â— quite contrary the sorrow of the world that brâ— forth death Act. 1.25 and hastened his dispâ— to his own place where there a good store of such penitents weeping and waing and gnashing their teeth without dâ— for their sins that brought them thither Judâ— case was indeed very miserable if we consider a repentance wherein there seems to be a distinct example of all three parts of the Scholastical repentance As first such a deep Attrition as by the Pontifician Doctrin seemed to want nothing to have turned it into Contrition but Absolution which considering his free and particular Confession the second part of his Repentance I have sinned in betraying innocent blood and that joyned with a voluntary satisfaction the third part in his bringing again the thirty pieces of silver was unmercifully denied him by the chief Priests Matth. 27.3 4 5. But Judas his conscience could not be satisfied much less his sin discharged with all this repentance which yet was a great deal more than that which is commonly presumed to be sufficient For most people think if their consciences be pricked with the sense of their sins so that they can say they are sorry for them let it be upon what consideration it will they are truly penitent especially if this sorrow be but distinguished from that of Judas by a presumptuous hope and confidence of pardon And much more if they can but deceive themselves into a present sleight purpose of some amendment of their lives Then they think they are out of danger and may build upon the promise of the Gospel for a certain Pardon Whereas by the necessary sense of this Text it is perfectly evident that the most sincere sorrow for sin is not in it self a compleat repentance but a cause and a preparative to it For Godly sorrow worketh repentance But the cause and the effect cannot be the same thing nothing can produce it self But because Godly sorrow if it be right will work repentance therefore it may in some case where there is no time for any works to be brought forth be accepted for Repentance upon the same account by which the will is accepted for the deed when it is a sincere firm and ratified Will which God only can judg of and which it is scarce possible for any man to know of himself without some reasonable trial And therefore there is small comfort for any man in a repentance that hath proceeded no farther God may
declare wherein the true notion and nature thereof doth consist viz. in turning unto God Repent and turn unto God the latter phrase is exegetical declaring the sense of the former To repent is to turn unto God which supposeth an aversion from God as the antecedent condition and posture of every penitent sinner And so much is signified by the name of a sinner Sin being nothing else but an aversion or turning away from God So that Repentance being the same thing with Conversion in Scripture-sense is a relative word having a double tearm of relation à quo ad quem from which and to which The latter is expressed by the Apostle in the forementioned words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Repent and turn unto God From whence it is called Repentance towards or unto God Act. 20.21 The former is signified by the same Apostle He. 6.1 Repentance from dead works that is from sinful works called dead works because they are the acts of a man Spiritually dead and destitute of Spiritual and Divine life These two things make up the intire signification of repentance viz. turning from sin as sin that is all known sin unto God that is unto the universal duty of obedience unto his will most fully and plainly expressed by the words of the Prophet Ezek. 18.21 But if the wicked man will turn from all his sin which he hath committed and keep all my statutes and do that which is lawful and right he shall surely live he shall not die This I take to be one of the plainest and compleatest descriptions of Repentance which is to be found in Scripture Wherein the same general duty is otherwise set forth in great variety of expression As to rent the heart to circumcise the foreskin of the heart to abhor our selves to cease to do evil and learn to do well To crucifie the old man and the flesh to mortifie the deeds of the body to cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of flesh and spirit and to perfect holiness in the fear of God to put off the old man and put on the new to cleanse our hands and purifie our hearts to deny all ungodliness and wordly lusts and to live soberly righteously and godly in this present world c. Wherunto the general termes of Regeneration Sanctification and the new Creature are materially equivalent These and many other expressions there are of the same general duty all of them signifying an essiectuall change of the whole man inward and out ward beginning in the mind or understanding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by which all humane affections and actions are governed from whence both Greek and Latin names are derived which primarily and properly signifie a change of the mind or intellectual part of the soul but are understood practically as before I shewed cencerning Faith and Knolwedg in Scripture-sense Thus is Repentance expressed by the Apostle to be a renewing in the spirit of the mind Eph. 4.2 3. Rom. 12.2 a transformation of a man by the renewing of the mind putting off the old man with his deeds Col. 3.10 and putting on the new man which is renewed in knowledg These expressions with other like do signifie this work of conversion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to begin in Repentance or the understanding the ruling faculty in a man the prime recipient of all grace which therfore is sometimes called light Eph. 5.8 Heb. 6.4 illumination and inlightning as on the contrary sin is termed darkness very frequently Repentance comprehending the whole work of grace is begun in the mind but hath its most proper effect and seat in the Will as sin also hath It is the effectual habitual conversion of the Will that makes out a true Repentance that being the only faculty which is capable of command and most directly and immediatly obliged to obey having also the power of commanding the affections and actions of the whole man And upon this account it is that Sorrow for and Confession of sin do sometimes signifie a true Repentance having the promise of pardon annexed to them because where they are sincere they do infer such a change in the Wil as amounts to Repentance For a true godly sorrow for sin as offensive to God and repugnant to his just and holy Will cannot be separated from a real purpose of forsaking the sin Because it is impossible for a man to be sincerely sorry for that which the Will allows either as already done or to be done hereafter And therefore also such confession of sin as proceeds from a godly sorrow doth necessarily imply a conversion or change of the Will which if it be so radicated and fixed as will prove effectual upon the trial which God only knows is nothing less than a true Repentance begun in the Heart But this may seem more than enough to have been spoken by way of Explication of so ordinary a Point whereunto therefore I shall add no more in this place but this one advertisement to apply it to my Text That seeing Repentance is a work of absolute necessity to Salvation whosoever desires to work out his own salvation must be careful to work out his Repentance which is done only by bringing forth fruits or works worthy of repentance which can be no other than the works of a holy life Seeing the work of Repentance can only be said to be begun by godly sorrow and confession of sin and that only when those things are joyned with a firm and sincere purpose of reformation it is evident that the entire duty can no otherwise be wrought out than by a constant and faithful performance of that godly purpose Having now laid down from Scripture the nature of Repentance I come to the Answer of the Objection before mentioned consisting of two Branches 1. That the urged necessity of obedience to the commandments as part of the condition of the New covenant destroies the distinction of it from the Old making both of them to in these general terms of Do this and live And the consequence of this is 2. That the burthen hereby laid upon Christians is intolerable in as much as the keeping of the Commandments is a yoak too heavy for the shoulders of lapsed nature though strengthened by grace My answer to this Objection shall be grounded upon the Doctrin of Repentance as that is no other than a peculiar precept and priviledg of the New Covenant Repentance as hath been shewn in the compleate sense of the word and extent of the duty requires obedience to the commandments as Faith also doth but not the same obedience which the Law requireth I say therefore that repentance is a precept of the second Covenant and not of the first a precept of the Gospel not of the Law as such For to repent supposeth Sin which by the condition of the first Covenant supposed to be made with man-kind in his innocency is indispensably excluded Repentance cannot become a duty till