ARTICLE XVI.

Of Sin after Baptism.

Not every deadly an willingly committed after Baptifm is the an against the Holy Gholf, and unpardonable. Wherefore the grant of zepentance is not to be denied to fuch as fall into in after Baptifm. After we have received the Holy Ghoff, we map depart from grace given, and fall into an, and by the grace of God we map azife again and amend out Lives. And therefore they are to be condemned, which fap they can no może fin as long as they live heze, oz denp the place of forgiveness to fuch as truly zepent.

THIS Article, as it relates to the fect of the Novatians

of old, fo it is probable it was made a part of our doctrine, upon the account of fome of the enthusiasts, who at that time, as well as fome do in our days, might boast their perfection, and join with that part of the character of a Pharifee, this other of an unreasonable rigour of cenfure and punishment againft offenders. By deadly fin in the Article, we are not to understand fuch fins as in the Church of Rome are called mortal, in oppofition to others that are venial: as if fome fins, though offences against God, and violations of his law, could be of their own nature fuch flight things, that they deferved only temporal punishment, and were to be expiated by fome piece of penance or devotion, or the communication of the merits of others. The Scripture no where teaches us to think so flightly of the majefty of God, or of his Law. Gal. iii. 10. There is a curfe upon every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the Law to do them: and the fame curse must have been on us all, if Chrift had not redeemed us from it: The wages of fin is death. And St. James afferts, that there is fuch a complication of all the precepts of the Law of God, both with one another, Jam. ii. 1o, and with the authority of the Lawgiver, that he who of fends in one point is guilty of all. So fince God has in his word given us fuch dreadful apprehenfions of his wrath, and of the guilt of fin, we dare not foften these to a degree below the majefty of the eternal God, and the dignity of his moft holy laws. But, after all, we are far

11.

from

from the conceit of the Stoics, who made all fins alike. ART. We acknowledge that fome fins of ignorance and infir- XVI. mity may confift with a state of grace; which is either quite destroyed, or at least much eclipfed and clouded by other fins, that are more heinous in their nature, and more deliberately gone about. It is in this fenfe that

the word deadly fin is to be understood in the Article : for though in the ftrictness of juftice every fin is deadly, yet in the difpenfation of the Gospel, thofe fins are only deadly, that do deeply wound the confcience, and that drive away grace.

Another term in the Article needs alfo to be a little explained; the fin against the Holy Ghost; concerning which, fince there is fo fevere a fentence pronounced by Chrift, it is neceffary that it be rightly understood; and that can only be done by confidering the occafion of those words, as well as the words themselves. Chrift wrought fuch miracles in the fight of his enemies, that when there was no room left for any other cavil, they betook themfelves to that, that he did not caft out devils but by Beelze- Matt. xii. bub, the prince of devils. And this was the occafion that 24, 31. led our Saviour to speak of the fin or blafphemy against the Holy Ghoft. It was their rejecting the cleareft evidence that God could give to prove any thing by: the power by which those miracles were wrought, and which was afterwards communicated to the Apoftles, is called through the whole New Teftament, the Holy Ghoft. By which is not to be meant here the third Perfon of the Trinity, but the wonderful effufion of thofe extraordinary gifts and powers that were then communicated, the economy and difpenfation of which is faid to be derived from that one Spirit. This was the utmost proof that could be given of truth: and when men fet themselves to blafpheme this, and to afcribe the works of Chrift to a collufion with the devil, they did thereby fo wilfully oppofe God, and reproach his power, they did fo ftifle their own conviction, and fet themselves against the conviction of others, that nothing could be done farther for their conviction; this being the highest degree of evidence and proof: and this was fo high an indignity to God, when he defcended fo far to fatisfy their fcruples, that it was not to be par doned; as their impenitence and incredulity was fo`obftinate as not to be overcome.

Upon this occafion given, our Saviour makes a difference between their blafpheming him, and, instead of owning him to be the Meffias, calling him a deceiver, a glutton, and a wine-bibber; of which, upon hearing his

0 2

doctrine,

ART. doctrine, and feeing his life, they were still guilty. This XVI. was indeed a great fin, but yet there were means left of convincing them of the truth of his being the great prophet fent of God; and by these they might be fo far prevailed on as to repent and believe, and so to obtain pardon: but when they had those means fet before them; when they faw plain and uncontefted miracles done before them; and when, instead of yielding to them, they fet up fuch an oppofition to them, which might have been as reasonably faid of every miracle that could have been wrought, then it was not poffible to convince them. This is an impious rejecting of the highest method that God himfelf uses for proving a thing to us. The fcorn put upon it, as it flows from a nature fo depraved, that it cannot be wrought on, fo it is a fin not to be pardoned. All things of extreme feverity in a doctrine that is fo full of grace and mercy as the Gospel is, ought to be restrained as much as may be. From thence we infer, that those dreadful words of our Saviour's ought to be restrained to the fubject to which they are applied, and ought not to be carried farther. Since miracles have ceased, no man is any more capable of this fin.

These terms being thus explained, the queftion in the Article is now to be explained. There are words in St. John's Epiftle, and elsewhere, that feem to import, that men born of God, that is to fay, baptized or regenerated 1 John iii. Chriftians, fin not: Whofoever abideth in him, finneth not: 6, 9. v. 18. Whosoever finneth hath not feen him, neither known him: Whofoever is born of God doth not commit fin, for his feed remaineth in him; and he cannot fin, for he is born of God. This is again repeated in the end of that Epiftle, together with these words, He that is begotten of God keepeth himfelf, and that wicked one toucheth him not. As thefe words feem to import that a true Chriftian fins not, fo in the Heb. vi. 4. Epistle to the Hebrews it is faid to be impoffible to renew again, by repentance, thofe who fall away, after they had been once enlightened, and had tafted of the heavenly gift, had been made partakers of the Holy Ghoft, and had tafted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come. Upon thefe expreffions, and fome others, though not quite of their force, it was, that in the primitive Church, fome that fell after baptifm were caft out of the communion of the Church; and though they were not cut off from all hopes of the mercy of God, yet they were never reftored to the peace of the Church; this was done in Tertullian's time, if what he fays on this fubject is not to be reckoned as a piece of his Montanifm.

5, 6.

But

XVI.

But foon after there were great contefts upon this ART. head, while the Novatians withdrew from the communion of the Church, and believed it was defiled by the receiving of apoftates into it: though that was not done fo eafily as fomne proposed, but after a long feparation and a fevere course of penance. Upon this followed all those penitentiary Canons concerning the feveral measures and degrees of penance, and that not only for acts of apoftaly from the Chriftian religion, but for all other crying fins. According to what has been already faid upon the former Articles, it has appeared, that the fanctification of regenerated men is not fo perfected in this life, but that there is ftill a mixture of defects and imperfections left in them and the state of the new covenant is a continuance of repentance and remiffion of fins; for as oft as one fins, if he repents truly of it, and forfakes his fins, there is a ftanding offer of the pardon of all fins; and therefore Chrift has taught us to pray daily, Forgive us our fins. If there were but one general pardon offered in baptifin, this would fignify little to those who feel their infirmities, and the fins that do fo eafily befet them, fo apt to return upon them. It was no wonder if the entertaining this conceit brought in a fuperftitious error in practice among the ancient Chriftians, of delaying baptifm till death; as hoping that all fins were then certainly pardoned: a much more dangerous error than even the fatal one of trusting to a death-bed repentance. For baptifm might have been more easily compaffed; and there was more offered in the way of argument for building upon it, than has been offered at for a death-bed repentance.

St. Peter's denial, his repentance, and his being reftored to his apoftolical dignity, feem to be recorded, partly on this account, to encourage us, even after the moft heinous offences, to return to God, and never to reckon our condition defperate, were our fins ever so many, but as we find our hearts hardened in them into an obftinate impenitency. Our Saviour has made our pardoning the offences that others commit against us, the measure upon which we may expect pardon from God; and he being asked, what limits he fet to the number of the faults that we were bound to pardon, by the day, if feven was not enough, he carried it up to feventy times Seven, a vast number, far beyond the number of offences that any man will in all probability commit against another in a day. But if they fhould grow up to all that vaft number of 490, yet if our brother still turns again and Luke xvii. repents, we are ftill bound to forgive. Now fince this is 4

03

joined

35.

XVI.

us.

ART. joined with what he declared, that if we pardoned our brother his offences, our heavenly Father would alfo forgive us, then we may depend upon this, that according to the Matt. xviii. fincerity of our repentance, our fins are always forgiven And if this is the nature of the new Covenant, then the Church, which is a fociety formed upon it, muft proportion the rules both of her communion and cenfure to thofe fet in the Gofpel: a heinous fin must give us a deeper forrow, and higher degrees of repentance; fcandals must alfo be taken off and forgiven, when the offending perfons have repaired the offence that was given by them, with fuitable degrees of forrow. St. Paul in the beginnings of Chriftianity, in which it being yet tender and not well known to the world, was more apt to be both blemished and corrupted, did yet order the Corinthians to receive back into their communion the inceftu1 Cor. v. 5. ous perfon, whom by his own directions they had delivered to Satan; they had excommunicated him, and, by way of reverse to the gifts of the Holy Ghoft poured out upon all Chriftians, he was poffeffed or haunted with an evil fpirit: and yet as St. Paul declares that he forgave him, fo he orders them to forgive him likewife; and he gives a reason for this conduct, from the common princi2 Cor. ii. 7. ples of pity and humanity, left he should be fwallowed up by overmuch forrow. What is in that place mentioned only in a particular inftance, is extended to a general rule Gal. vi. 1. in the Epistle to the Galatians: If any one is overtaken in a fault, ye which are fpiritual restore fuch a one in the fpirit of meeknefs, confidering thyself, left thou also be tempted. Where both the fuppofition that is made, and the reason that is given, do plainly infinuate that all men are fubject to their feveral infirmities; so that every man may overtaken in faults. The charge, given to Timothy and 2 Tim. iv. 2. Titus to rebuke and exhort, does fuppofe that Chriftians, Tit. i. 13. and even Bifhops and Deacons, were fubject to faults that might deferve correction.

I John v. 16.

be

In that paffage cited out of St. John's Epiftle, as mention is made of a fin unto death, for which they were not to pray, fo mention is made both there and in St. James's Jam. v. 15, Epiftle of fins for which they were to pray, and which upon

16.

their prayers were to be forgiven. All which places do not only exprefs this to be the tenor of the new Covenant, that the fins of regenerated perfons were to be pardoned in it, but they are alfo clear precedents and rules for the Churches to follow them in their difcipline. And therefore those words in St. John, that a man born of God doth not and cannot fin, must be understood in a larger

fenfe,