A01975:1140
A guide to go to GodA guide to goe to God
A guide to go to God: or, An explanation of the perfect pattern of prayer, the Lords prayer. By William Gouge, B. in D. and minister of Gods Word in Black-Friars LondonA guide to goe to God: or, An explanation of the perfect patterne of prayer, the Lords prayer. By William Gouge, B. in D. and minister of Gods Word in Black-Friers London
London: printed by G. Miller for Edward Brewster, 1626
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
But as our Adversaries use the distinction of venial and mortal sin,1 it cannot stand with the forenamed nature of ⟨p. 139⟩sin, implied under this Metaphor Debt. They say that many sins area venial, because they are pardonable of their own nature, and not worthy of damnation. They give these and such like instances of venial sins: Sudden motions of lust, banger, and envy: Immoderate laughter, an idle word, deceit in a small thing, as an half-penny, &c. Their great Champaign doth thus express the meaning of their Church in this point:4 Venial sin is in its own nature distinguished from mortal, and without any respect to predestination, or to the mercy of God, or to the state of the regenerate, it is of that kind, as it deserveth not eternal punishment. He inserteth these phrases (without respect to Predestination, or to the mercy of God, or to the state of the regenerate) because orthodoxall Divines have granted that the title venial, may be applied to sin in regard of Gods eternal predestination, and purpose to pardon sin, and in regard of the mercy of God, which is greater then the desert of sin, and in regard of the regenerate, whose faith gaineth an absolution for sin. To show therefore, that he and his heretical Church, whose cause he maintaineth, goeth beyond the limits of all truth, he rejecteth the fore-named limitations wherein truth is bounded: and will have venial sins to be of themselves in their own nature not worthy of damnation. In their sense, these two terms, Sin, Venial, are contradictory, Sin is (according to the doctrine of the Scripture) worthy of damnation. Venial (according to their sense) is not worthy fo damnation. 5To say therefore that sin is venial, is to say that worthy of damnation, is not worthy of damnation. But I demand, are their venial sins pleasing or displeasing to God? one of them they must be. A mean cannot be given betwixt these two contradictory terms, which is neither of them. They dare not say that venial sins are pleasing to God. Then do they displease him. If they displease him they offend an infinite goodness, an infinite excellency, an infinite Majesty, and in that respect are worthy of an infinite punishment.