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,…

Thus you see there is no kind of crime, which the people of God, through their own neglect, may not fall into. And as for that other Question, Whether they may not frequently commit the same sins? We have examples in Scripture for the Affirmative, only the greater Doubt is, Whether after a thorough and deep Humiliation they may relapse in the same sins? But although we scarce have any instances of such in the Scripture, yet Gods command upon us to receive a brother seventy seven times offending, if he repent, may keep up the heart of such a sinner against despair, because goodness and love is in him as in the Ocean; in us, as in the stream only.

Thus you see there is no kinde of crime, which the people of God, through their own neglect, may not fall into. And as for that other Question, Whether they may not frequently commit the same sins? We have examples in Scripture for the Affirmative, onely the greater Doubt is, Whether after a thorow and deep Humiliation they may relapse in the same sins? But although we scarce have any instances of such in the Scripture, yet Gods command upon us to receive a brother seventy seven times offending, if he repent, may keep up the heart of such a sinner against despair, because goodnesse and love is in him as in the Ocean; in us, as in the stream only.

¹The second thing considerable is, What kind of sins these are? whether they may be called sins of infirmity, though so atrocious in their nature, or reigning sins? Now herein godly Divines have differing expressions, though they mean the same thing. Zan•hy in his Thesis of the perseverance of the Saints ⟨p. 231⟩doth industriously assert, That all the sins which elect Believers fall into, are sins of infirmity. Thus he calls Davids and Peters: His main ground is, Because every regenerate man hath a two-fold principle within, the flesh and the spirit, both which fight one against the other: by which means they are never carried out to a full consent and purpose in any sin they commit. Hence he denieth they can be called reigning sins, or sins against conscience, that waste conscience, or that are from resolved purpose within. He giveth an instance from Jonah, and the Mariners; We know the Mariners had not any intent at first to throw Jonah into the Sea; again they rowed and used all their utmost endeavour to preserve him: Lastly, they pray to their gods, if possibly, they may not be necessitated to drown him. Now in all this, the Mariners, though they did throw him into the Sea, with their will and consent, yet they did it very unwillingly also. Thus, saith he, Jonah, in this respect, is like Christ, or grace in the hearts of Gods people. And first, the people of God have no purpose to cast him out. Again, they use their diligent care in temptations not to do it. Lastly, they beseech and importune God they may never fall so foully: Therefore if at any time they are overtaken, it is with an unwilling willingness. Thus he. Neither is it any marvel if he judge so; When Bucer thought an Elect man, ever before ever he be converted, doth not sin with that full consent as reprobate wicked men do, but have many motions to the contrary. Now although Peter in his denial of Christ, might be thought with unwillingness and reluctancy to do what he did, yet it is hard to say, David, who so deliberated and plotted to accomplish his wickedness, did it not with some full consent at that time. And it may seem hard to call all the sins of the godly, sins of infirmity; Therefore others will grant them the name of reigning sins, but with this limitation, that this is not a total reigning: sin reigneth as a tyrant over them, not as a King;