The true doctrine of justification asserted and vindicated, from the errors of Papists, Arminians,…The true doctrine of justification asserted and vindicated, from the errours of Papists, Arminians,…

¹In the next place, let us consider what is Popery in this point, The Papists, as Bellarmine, lib. de Justif. c. 7. say with the Antinomian, That forgiveness of sin is the quite abolishing of it, and that whether it be original or actual, so that no sin abideth any more in a man so justified, till he falls from it; and saith Bellarmine, If the Scripture would have invented words on purpose, to show that sin is quite extinguished, it could not use other then it doth, ⟨p. 45⟩and they think it impossible to conceive, that there should be sin in a man, and yet justified; for this is (say they) to make him at the same time a child of God and the devil, The devil to dwell in him by sin, and Christ by Justification. Thus they distinguish not between sin reigning and sin being. Though sin be in a godly man, yet it neither hath vim damnatricem or dominatricem, condemning power, or reigning power. Now its wonder the Papists should conceive this so impossible, when they hold that the godly have venial sins, which yet are truly sins, and so by their own argument God must hate and punish them, yet God doth not break off his friendship for all that: now compare these two errors together in their agreement and difference.

¹In the next place, let us consider what is Popery in this point, The Papists, as Bellarmine, lib. de Justif. c. 7. say with the Antinomian, That forgivenesse of sin is the quite abolishing of it, and that whether it be original or actual, so that no sin abideth any more in a man so justified, till he fals from it; and saith Bellarmine, If the Scripture would have invented words on purpose, to shew that sin is quite extinguished, it could not use other then it doth, ⟨p. 45⟩and they think it impossible to conceive, that there should be sin in a man, and yet justified; for this is (say they) to make him at the same time a childe of God and the devil, The devil to dwell in him by sin, and Christ by Justification. Thus they distinguish not between sin reigning and sin being. Though sin be in a godly man, yet it neither hath vim damnatricem or dominatricem, condemning power, or reigning power. Now its wonder the Papists should conceive this so impossible, when they hold that the godly have venial sins, which yet are truly sins, and so by their own argument God must hate and punish them, yet God doth not break off his friendship for all that: now compare these two errors together in their agreement and difference.