The True Doctrine of Justification Asserted and Vindicated, Lecture 25
LECTURE XXV.
PSAL. 32.1, 2.
Bleſſed is he whoſe tranſgression is forgiven, whoſe ſinne is covered.
Blessed is the man to whom the LORD imputeth not iniquity.
DAvid is ſtiled by ſome Ancients, The Divine Orpheus, by whoſe muſick the wilde beaſts, evil men, may be made tame: and certainly his materiall Harp was not more efficacious to drive out Sauls evil ſpirit, then his Pſalms are ſanctified means to expell all corrupt affections in us. And although all Scripture be equally excellent in reſpect of the Authour, yea, and of the matter abſolutely conſidered, yet in reſpect of us, our direction or conſolation by reaſon of our preſent eſtate, one place of Scripture may be preferred before another: in which ſenſe Junius interprets thoſe Pſalms, that have their inſcription, A Pſalm of Degrees, A Pſalm of Excellencies, as the Hebrew word will bear it. Now this Pſalm I am upon, may juſtly be ſo ſtiled, becauſe it hath a peculiar uſefulneſſe to thoſe who are exerciſed about the guilt of ſinne; for here we have David like an anatomy, opened, that we may be inſtructed. Hence the title of the Pſalm is Maſchil, which is as much as giving inſtruction, and it is obſerved by Commentators, this is prefixed commonly to thoſe Pſalms that have ſome choice, eminent Doctrine, eſpecially about afflictions, as this hath, about Davids guilt and trouble under ſin, and alſo his pardon of it.
The Hebrews call this Pſalm foreign Cor, The heart of David, becauſe he is ſo affected with Gods diſpleaſure for ſinne, and the excellency of the pardon. Therefore you muſt conceive the Text to be uttered by David, as one groaning and heavily preſſed with the weight of his ſinne, and crying out, Oh how bleſſed and happy are they, that have theis ſinnes forgiven them!
In which words you have pardon of ſin deſcribed.The text contains a deſcription of the pardon of ſin,
Firſt, From ſeverall expreſſions to magnifie the mercy,1 From ſeveral expreſſions to magnifie the mercy of it. Sins forgiven, covered, not imputed. It is much to conſider how ancient Interpreters have made a difference between the ſins enumerated; as if there were divers kindes, or at leaſt degrees of ſinne enumerated; and hereupon alſo they make a difference between forgiving, covering and imputing, as if one were more then the other; but we are rather to take it according to the Scripture-cuſtome, which doth uſe for amplification ſake, to ſay the ſame thing in divers words, and this is autology, but not tautology. The difference that is, is from the ſeverall metaphors that are in the words. As the firſt word doth ſignifie the taking away of ſin, which is a burrhen, bleſſed is he that is eaſed of ſuch a weight. The ſecond, which is covering, doth ſuppoſe the loathſome filthineſſe of ſin in the eyes of God, and therefore by grace is taken out of his ſight. The third, not imputing or reckoning, is a metaphor ſuppoſing ſinne a debt, and God in his account will not ſet it upon our ſcore, ſo that the ſeverall expreſſions are wonderfully comfortable, if ſinne trouble thee as an heavy weight on thee, pardoning is the eaſing and taking off this burden; if ſinne make thee to judge thy ſelf loathſome, thou canſt not endure thy ſelf, pardon of ſin is covering of it; if ſin put thee in ſuch a debt to God, that thou knoweſt not how to ſatisfie, pardon is not imputing.
2 From the adjunct of rem…ſſion, viz. bleſſedneſſe.Secondly, This is deſcribed from the adjunct, adherent to remiſſion of ſinne, viz. bleſſedneſſe. The Apoſtle, Rom. 4, alledgeth this place to prove, That a man hath righteouſneſſe imputed to him without works, But the pertinency of the Apoſtles argument is diſputed of: for how doth it from this place follow, that a man hath righteouſneſſe imputed to him without works? This is as if a man ſhould argue, He is a rich man, becauſe his debts are forgiven, which is a non ſequitur, becauſe they are two diſtinct things. This makes Piſcator and Wotton, with others, to make justification to be nothing but remiſſion of ſins, and that imputation of righteouſneſſe, and remiſſion of ſins are the ſelf ſame thing; a man being therefore accounted righteous becauſe his ſins are not imputed unto him. Hence they deny that the Scripture ever ſaith Chriſts righteouſneſſe is imputed unto us, although in ſome ſenſe they grant, it may be ſaid ſo, inaſmuch as by his death for us, he purchaſed remiſſion of ſin, which is our righteouſneſſe. This is to be conſidered of, when we ſpeak of the other part of juſtification, viz.. imputation of Chriſts righteouſneſſe. Although they that are for imputed righteouſneſſe, ſay, The Argument is good, which Paul uſeth, becauſe imputing of righteouſneſſe is immediatly contrary to the imputing of ſinne; and therefore Paul might argue righteouſneſſe imputed, from ſinne remitted, even as we truly argue, The night is not, therefore the day is, becauſe darkneſſe and light are immediate contraries, and the ſubject muſt neceſſarily have one of them.
Laſtly, This forgiveneſſe of ſin is deſcribed from the ſubject, in whom it is, viz. in him, in whoſe heart there is no guile; that is, who doth not cover his ſins by not confeſſing, and not repenting of them, as David acknowledgeth he did for a while.
Obſervations raiſed from the Text.From the Text I ſhall raiſe ſuch Obſervations as are to my particular ſcope. As,
Firſt, That forgiveneſſe of ſin is a covering of ſin.
This truth deſerveth a diligent unfolding, becauſe the miſtake about it hath brought forth dangerous errours in two extremities, The one of the Papiſt, That becauſe it is covered, Therefore there is no ſinne at all in the godly, otherwiſe God could not but ſee it, and hate it, as Pererius and others argue. The other of the Antinomian, who inferre from thence, That therefore God ſeeth not ſinne, or taketh notice of it in juſtified perſons, as Eaton.
To underſtand this aright, take notice,1 That forgiveneſs of ſin is a covering of ſin What is meant by covering of ſinne. That to cover is a metaphorical expreſſion, and we muſt not ſqueeze it too much, leſt bloud come out in stead of milk: Some make the metaphor from filthy, loathſome objects, which are covered from our eyes, as dead carcaſes are buried under the ground; ſome from garments that are put upon us to cover our nakedneſſe, ſome from the Aegyptians that were drowned in the Red Sea, and ſo covered with water; ſome from a great gulf in the earth, that is filled up and covered with earth injected into it. Laſtly, ſome make it an alluſive expreſſion to the Mercy-ſeat, over which was a covering, which might ſignifie Gods grace, through and in Chriſt, aboliſhing our ſinnes. Hence the Apoſtle attributes foreign, and foreign, to Chriſt and his bloud▪ which is given to the Mercy-ſeat; We may not ſtrive for any of theſe Metaphors, they all in the generall tend to ſhew this, That God when be pardoneth, doth not look upon us as ſinners, but deals with us, as if we had never ſinned at all: as it is here made bleſſedneſſe to have ſinne covered, ſo it is made a woe and miſery, Nehem▪ 4.5. not to have ſinne covered, as Nehemiah praieth againſt Sanballat and Tobiah, This expreſſion is alſo uſed, Pſal. 85.2.
In the next place we may conſider in what ſenſe God doth cover ſin when he pardons, and in what he doth not.How God by p…rd…n is ſaid to cover ſin.
1. God is ſaid therefore to cover ſinne from his eyes, becauſe he will not take notice of it in juſtified perſons to puniſh it with wrath and condemnation, although it be not ſo covered, as that God doth not ſee it to be angry with it, and chaſtiſe beleevers for it. yet it is ſo covered, as that he doth not ſee it to condemn beleevers for it. We do not therefore make God to cover ſinne (as an Antinomian ſaith we do) as if a man ſhould cover a thing with a net, where the object is ſtill ſeen, Honey comb, pag 57. but as to Gods hatred and revengefull condemnation, ſo it is wholly covered; and therefore thoſe expreſſions of taking away, blotting out of ſinne, &c. do fully imply, that God giveth not an half pardon, but that he taketh away the offence, and whatſoever puniſhment (properly ſo called) belongs unto it.
2. It doth imply, That God when he hath thus forgiven, deals with a man as no more in that particular a ſinner. Therefore David after his murder and adultery are waſhed away, he is as white as ſnow in reſpect of thoſe actuall ſinnes; and every true beleever repenting, is bound to beleeve, that God doth this graciouſly and gloriouſly to him, That he is no more in Gods account that loathſome leper and unclean perſon he was.
It doth imply, That God by degrees and in his due time will cover the beleevers ſins, as from his own eyes, ſo from the beleevers eyes. So that the guilt of conſcience, thoſe arrows of the Almighty, ſhall not alwaies ſtick in his heart. Thus as mans love to another, covers a multitude of ſinnes, he will not mention, charge or upbraid the party with them; ſo doth Gods love cover the multitude of beleevers ſins committed by them, dealing with them as reconciled perſons, not upbraiding of them but beſtowing all encouraging mercies upon them; ſo that if we improve this phraſe of covering ſin no further, we ſhall ſplit on no rock, and yett he ſoul have as much comfort as it can rationally deſire.
Some particulars not extended to in this phraſe of covering ſin.In the next place, hear what it doth not reach to, and wherein the phraſe is abuſed: As
1. When we dream of ſuch covering of ſinne, as that ſinne is wholly taken away; ſo that no reliques of original corruption abide in us. Thus the Papiſts, We muſt not (ſay they) ſuppoſe ſuch a covering as if ſinne were ſtill there, only God will not impute it, but it is ſuch a covering as is a blotting ſinne out. Now for actual ſinne, we grant covering to be a blotting it out; but for original ſin, in the luſts thereof, We ſay, they are ſtill in the godly, and properly ſins, only covered, becauſe not imputed to them: for the grace of regeneration, though it cut the hair of ſinne, as Dalilah did Samſons, yet it groweth again, as long as the root is there.
2. We may not conceive ſinne covered in this ſenſe, as if we by our ſubſequent good actions did cover ſinne, ſo ſome have expounded holy works to be the garment that covers our nakedneſſe, but this would be our covering, and not Gods covering▪ whereas the Pſalmiſt attributes it to God, Pſa. 85.2. Therefore that Expoſition will not hold, which ſome bring out of Austin, explaining this covering of ſinne, as Emplaſtrum tegit vulnus, the Plaiſter covers the ſore, by healing of it: for although healing grace accompany juſtification, yet it is not juſtification.
3. We may not conceive it ſaid to be covered in this ſenſe, As if God when he had pardoned, did not yet ſtill retain anger againſt the perſons ſinning, and ſo chastiſe them. Though this doctrine be much pleaded for, yet Scripture is evident againſt it. David had ſin covered, yet God would not let the ſword depart from his houſe. Thus Job aweth himſelf againſt ſinne with this conſideration, That God would ſee it in him, and take notice of it, Job 10.14. If I ſinne, thou markeſt me (God ſeeth ſin in Job) and thou wilt not acquit me from mine iniquity; and Cha. 14.16, 17. he ſaith, God doth watch over his ſin, and ſeal it up in a bag. Let not then the people of God delude themſelves into ſecurity, by any falſe doctrine; and what woful concluſions there are of a godly mans peace, when he fals into a groſſe ſin, I ſhall handle in another Queſtion.
Neither fourthly, may we conceive of ſin covered, in a carnall groſſe manner, As if there were ſomething interpoſed between Gods eyes and ſinne; as if a mans face were covered with an hat, or a candle put under a buſhell. The Antinomians ſimilitude is groſſe and carnall, Honey-comb, pag. 275. as a man looking thorow a red glaſſe, ſeeth the water all red within it, ſo God looking upon us in Chriſt, ſeeth nothing but the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt, and no ſin at all; for the reaſon why our ſenſes judge water red thorow a red glaſſe, is, becauſe it depends upon the fitneſſe of a medium, and that being indiſpoſed, the eye is deceived; but God in looking upon us, doth not depend upon any intervening thing; and indeed Gods ſeeing of ſin in this point, is not ſo much an act of his underſtanding, as of his will, decreeing to puniſh ſin, or not to puniſh it▪ So that this ſimilitude doth no waies hold, for God in this matter of forgiving or puniſhing ſinne, is not to be looked upon as a natural agent, but voluntary. So that all theſe things rightly underſtood, we may take that which is good and comfortable, leaving that which is corrupt and falſe.
Whether the phraſe of Gods covering ſinne, favour the errour, That God ſeeth not ſinne in beleevers. Anſwer negative.And if the Queſtion be made, Whether the phraſe of covering ſinne, make for that errour, That God doth not ſee ſin in beleevers offending?
I anſwer, No, by no means; for theſe Reaſons,
Firſt, Gods covering of ſinne is to be limited only to condemnation, as I have proved; Davids ſinne was at the ſame time open to God, and covered; open to fatherly chaſtiſements, covered to revengefull condemnation. God did ſee it as a Father to be angry with him, not as a Judge to hate him.
2. Becauſe this covering is limited to thoſe ſins which are pa…, and repented of; not to new ſins committed; they are not covered without a new gracious act of Gods favour. David before this ſinne committed that is ſpoken of in the Pſalm, he had his former ſinnes covered, but this was not covered, till he did acknowledge it, and then ſaith he, Thou forgaveſt the iniquity of my ſinne: Though therefore God ſhould not ſee the ſinnes paſt, yet the new ones committed, they are taken notice of by him.
3. Becauſe though God hath covered them, yet God may, and doth ſometimes afflict his people for their ſins, ſo that they cannot be in every ſenſe ſaid to be covered: But I have ſpoken largely of this already.
Two Objections anſwered.Two material Objections are to be anſwered, and then I ſhall proceed.
Object. 1.The firſt is, If ſinne be in the regenerate, yet covered and not imputed, How will this stand with the omniſciency, truth and holineſſe of God? His omniſciency, for he cannot but ſee ſinne if it be there: His truth, for God, muſt needs judge of things as they are; if therefore ſinne be there, he muſt judge it to be there, otherwiſe we make him like the wicked who covers ſin, he will not acknowledge it to be there: Now what truth is this, to ſay of a regenerate man, he is cleanſed and waſhed from all his evil, and yet his evil is in him? This the learned among the Papiſts doe much urge, Pererius, Tiriuus, &c. At moſt (ſaith Suarez de justificatione) it makes remiſſion of ſin to be nothing but a remiſſion of the puniſhment, not of the offence or fault. The very ſame is urged by Antinomiſts. Laſtly, How doth it conſiſt with Gods holineſſe; for he muſt needs hate ſinne in whomſoever he findes it; and therefore for the Saints to have ſin in them, and yet God not to impute it to them, ſeemeth a contradiction.
But to all this the anſwer is eaſie. As for Gods omniſciency, none ſay, but by that God beholds ſinne, where it is; and in that ſenſe, ſinne is not at all ſaid to be covered, for he knoweth all in man. As for his truth, God doth judge as the thing is, for as he ſeeth ſinne, ſo he judgeth ſinne to be in them▪ and according to that eternal rule laid down, Pſal. 89.32, 33▪ He chaſtiſeth them with the rod, though he take not his loving kindeneſſe from them; ſo that God doth not judge things otherwiſe then they are. And as for his holineſſe, he is not only angry with their ſins, but alſo would proceed to their eternall condemnation, were it not for Chriſt, their ſurety, ſo that their ſins are puniſhed, though not in their own perſons. Neither is this a taking away of ſin only in reſpect of the puniſhment, but of the offence alſo, God being wholly reconciled with his people, though the corruption (which is removed by ſanctification, not juſtification) is by degrees purged away.
The ſecond Objection is, How can God ſee ſinne, ſeeing they have Chriſts righteouſneſſe, and there being no ſin in that, Object. 2.therefore God muſt look upon them as in Chriſt, which is without any ſin at all?
The anſwer is, that when we ſay, Chriſts righteouſneſſe is made theirs, it is not to be underſtood ſubjectively,Anſw. as if it were a quality inherent in them (for then indeed God could not ſee ſin in them) but relatively, he is their Mediatour, and by his obedience they are acquitted, ſo that the righteouſneſſe is in Chriſt, but by faith it becomes theirs, not formally, but as the merit for which God doth juſtifie them, and God doth account it to them as theirs; now this is no contradiction to be ſinfull in our ſelves, and yet at the ſame time acquitted by the righteouſneſſe of another. It is true, thoſe expreſſions of making Chriſts righteouſneſſe a formall righteouſneſſe, or as others, a materiall righteouſneſſe, and thoſe diſputations, Whether Chriſts active or paſſive obedience, both or either of them be imputed to us; hath much darkned the Queſtion: whereas if we conſider of it, as a relative righteouſneſſe performed by our Surety in our ſtead, the matter will be made much clearer: yet I ſpeak not this, as if Chriſts active obedience were not made ours, as in time may be ſhewed.
I come to the ſecond Obſervation out of the Text, which is,
Pardon of ſin duly valued by thoſe only who inwardly feel Gods anger againſt it.That thoſe only do eſteem pardon of ſinne as a bleſſedneſſe, who feel inwardly the anger of God for ſin.
David here in this Pſalm, being deeply wounded with the guilt of his ſin, judgeth not his kingdom, his wealth, his conqueſt over enemies an happy thing, but pardon of ſin.
Now the ground of this is, becauſe ſuch is our cuſtom (though it be our weakneſſe) to eſteem of mercies more carendo quàm habendo, by wanting of them, then having of them. The blinde man earneſtly deſireth ſight. The lame man prizeth ſound limbs. A people diſtreſſed with warre, and finding the bitterneſſe of it, commend peace. Thus it is here, a man afflicted and imbittered in his ſoul becauſe of ſin, he doth highly admire forgiveneſs, and accounts thoſe happy that walk in the ſenſe of Gods favour. Though innocency or freedom from ſin may be majus beneficium, a greater mercy then pardon and reparation, yet this is dulcius beneficium, a more ſweet mercy to the ſenſe and feeling of him, who enjoyeth it. Hence that Chriſt and the Goſpel might be exalted, God permitted ſin to be, and the Law is on purpoſe to diſcover ſin, and aggravate it, that Chriſt and his grace may be the more welcome.
Ʋſe 1.The Uſes of both points together, are,
Of the firſt Obſervation.1. From the former, Doth God in pardoning, cover ſinne? then with what boldneſſe may true faith triumph? Why is the godly penitent, as if his ſins were alwaies in bloudy characters before God? Why is he, as if there were no bloud of Chriſt, wherein theſe Egyptians are drowned? If thou hadſt never been a ſinner, thy heart would not have trembled. Is not forgiveneſs making of a ſin not to be, as you have heard? So that, as Rachel is mourning for her children, becauſe they are not; ſo maiſt thou be rejoycing, becauſe thy ſins are not, and although they be not covered out of thy ſight, yet if covered out of Gods ſight, that is thy bleſſedneſſe; better have them riſe up alwaies in thy conſcience, then once before God.
From the ſecond we may be inſtructed,Ʋſe 2. who are the b…ſt Preachers of Chriſt, and the grace of the Goſpel, who are Goſpel-Preachers, even ſuch who make deep inciſions and wounds firſt in mens conſciences by the Law. The only way for a Miniſter to make his auditors relliſh and ſavour of Chriſt and grace indeed, is to keep them in a godly ſenſe and apprehenſion of their infirmities. We are not in our firſt converſion only to have throbs and pangs after Gods grace, but alſo this hunger and thirſting after Chriſt, is to be kept up in the progreſſe of ſanctification: and therefore as thoſe Miniſters are to be blamed (if any ſuch) that do only preſſe duty, diſcover ſinne, but never ſet forth the fulneſſe of Chriſt: So they alſo are to be blamed, who only preſſe ſuch Texts as manifeſt Gods grace, but never open that iſſue and fountain of all filth that is within us. Both theſe tempered together, are like Aarons excellent compound.
The laſt Uſe of Exhortation, is,Ʋſe 3. to be ſo deeply humbled and tenderly affected within your ſelves, that all within you may cry out, Bleſſed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth no ſinne. O that every Auditour which heareth me this day, could with the ſame ſpirit, affection, and turning of bowels within him, proclaim this truth, as David did. What is ſaid of Pauls Epiſtles, is alſo true of Davids Pſalms, Nunquam Davidis mentem intelliges, niſi prius Davidis spiritum imbiberis. You can never fully underſtand Davids meaning, unleſſe you be poſſeſſed with Davids ſpirit. Now that you may be moved hereunto, conſider the motive in the Text, and the means to get it. The motive is bleſſedneſſe; a man is never an happy man, till his ſinnes be pardoned. What makes hell and damnation, but meerly not forgiveneſſe? thy wealth, thy greatneſſe, thy honours, cannot bring that happineſſe to thee which remiſſion of ſins doth. Hence this is the cauſe of all other bleſſedneſſe. And obſerve, here is a great deal of difference between this place, Bleſſed is the man whoſe ſinnes are pardoned, and thoſe Texts where he is ſaid to be bleſſed that feareth alwaies, or he is ſaid to be bleſſed that walketh not in the waies of the wicked, for in the Text is ſhewed the cauſe or fountain of bleſſedneſſe, viz. remiſſion of ſinne; but in other places there is only deciphered, who they are that are bleſſed. A man that feareth is bleſſed, but his fear is not the cauſe of his bleſſedneſſe. A man that liveth godly is bleſſed, but his godlineſſe is not the cauſe of his bleſſedneſſe, but his pardon of ſin makes him bleſſed in all his graces; Thou art bleſſed, not becauſe thou praieſt, heareſt, liveſt holily, but becauſe God doth forgive all thy ſins and imperfections in theſe duties. If therefore your graces, your holy duties are not the cauſe of your bleſſedneſſe, never think your outward mercies can be. The means to obtain this, is in the Text, by having no guile in the heart, that is, by not hiding our ſins, but repenting of them, and confeſſing them to God: For this (ſaith David) every one ſhall pray unto thee in an acceptable time; for this, that is, for this remiſſion, and becauſe thou waſt ſo ready to forgive, when I ſaid, I will confeſſe my ſin. Therefore ſhall every one ſeek to thee; where by the way, let none abuſe that place, verſ. 5. David ſaid he would confeſſe, and God forgave it: David did but ſay it, and God pardoned it; ſo ſome have deſcanted upon it. But to ſay, there, according to the uſe of the Hebrew word in ſome places, is firmly to purpoſe and decree ſo reſolvedly, that he will be diligent in the practice of i…. Doe not therefore think that a meer lip-labour is that brokenneſſe and contrition of ſpirit, which God requireth as the means to pardon.