A26862:402
Aphorisms of justification, with their explication annexed wherein also is opened the nature of…Aphorismes of justification, with their explication annexed wherein also is opened the nature of…
Aphorisms of justification, with their explication annexed wherein also is opened the nature of the covenants, satisfaction, righteousness, faith, works, &c. : published especially for the use of the church of Kidderminster in Worcestershire / by their unworthy teacher Ri. Baxter.Aphorismes of justification, with their explication annexed wherein also is opened the nature of the covenants, satisfaction, righteousnesse, faith, works, &c. : published especially for the use of the church of Kederminster in Worcestershire / by their unworthy teacher Ri. Baxter.
Hague: printed by Abraham Brown, 1655
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.
EXPLICATION.
Here you may see 1. That pardon of sin, and this Justification in Law, are not punctually and precisely alone: 2. And yet the difference is very small. The chief difference lieth in this, That the Terminus a quo of Remission, is the obligation to punishment; but the Terminus of Justification, (or the evil that it formally and directly doth free us from,) is the Laws Accusation and Condemnation: Now though the difference between these two be very narrow, and rather respective then real, yet a plain difference there is: For though it be one and the same Commination of the Law, by which men are both obliged to punishment, accused as guilty, and condemned for that guilt, yet these are not all one, though it is also true, that they all stand or fall together.
HEre you may see 1. That pardon of sin, and this Iustification in Law, are not punctually and precisely alone: 2. And yet the difference is very small. The chief difference lyeth in this, That the Terminus a quo of Remission, is the obligation to punishment; but the Terminus of Iustification, (or the evil that it formally and directly doth free us from,) is the Laws Accusation and Condemnation: Now though the difference between these two be very narrow, and rather respective then reall, yet a plain difference there is: For though it be one and the same Commination of the Law, by which men are both obliged to punishment, accused as guilty, and condemned for that guilt, yet these are not all one, though it is also true, that they all stand or fall together.
That pardon is most properly the removing of the Obligation, and that Justification is the removing of Accusation and Condemnation in the Law, will be evident to those that have read what Divines have written at large concerning the signification of the words, especially such that have skill in Law, which is a great advantage in this doctrine of Justification: Therefore as Mr. Wotton, and Mr. Goodwin do a little mistake in making pardon of sin to be the formal cause of Justification,