(Matt. v. 48.) Yet this does not prove that we can attain the same degree of perfection; it merely shows, that we should endeavour to imitate him as far as lies in our power.

b

2. This distinction may be observed with respect to the failings we find recorded, even of the best characters. Thus, Zacharias and Elizabeth are said to have been blameless, yet we find the former punished with dumbness for misbelieving the Angel's message. (Luke, i. 6, and 20.) Our Saviour's answer to the Virgin Mary, when she came into the temple, (Luke, ii. 49.,) and his reprimand at the marriage in Cana, (Jo. 2. 4.,) evidently imply some degree of error on her part. The Apostles, too, had their controversies about pre-eminence. (Matt. xx. 20.) St. Peter walked not uprightly in the Judaising controversy,

a See Field's Book of the Church, p. 293.; and Mason's Vind. of Ch. of Eng. and her lawful Min. 1. 5. c. 5. sec. 8.

66

b The Council of Trent, at the conclusion of the decree on original sin, adds these words: "This sacred Council declares, that they do not intend to comprehend in this decree, where it treats "of original sin, the blessed and immaculate Virgin Mary." See Conc. Trid. sess. 5. dec. de orig. pec. The Annotators on the Rhemish Testament go still further, and assert she never committed a venial sin in her life. See Rhem. Test. Annot. Col. i. 24., and Mark, iii. 33.

The Fathers ascribe Mary's conduct on this occasion, to a feeling of vain glory. See Chrysos. in John, Hom. 21., and August, de Symb. ad Cat. 1. 2. c. 5.

(Gal. ii. 14.) And Paul and Barnabas parted in anger about a trifle. These things are mentioned to evince the sinfulness of human nature in all but Christ, and plainly show, that when they are called perfect, it is not meant that they are absolutely free from error, but that their hearts are sincere and faithful, and their sincerity is imputed to them for righteousness.

ARTICLE XVI.

OF SIN AFTER BAPTISM.

NOT EVERY DEADLY SIN WILLINGLY COMMITTED AFTER BAPTISM, IS THE SIN AGAINST THE HOLY GHOST AND

UNPARDONABLE.

IT

WHEREFORE, THE GRANT OF RE

PENTANCE IS NOT TO
BE DENIED то SUCH AS
FALL INTO SIN AFTER BAPTISM. AFTER WE
HAVE RECEIVED THE HOLY GHOST, WE MAY DE-
PART FROM GRACE GIVEN, AND FALL INTO SIN,
AND BY THE GRACE OF GOD WE MAY ARISE AGAIN

AND AMEND OUR LIVES.

ARE TO BE CONDEMNED,

AND, THEREFORE, THEY
WHICH SAY THEY CAN

NO MORE SIN AS LONG AS THEY LIVE HERE, OR

DENY THE PLACE OF

TRULY REPENT.

FORGIVENESS TO SUCH AS

was held by the Novatians of old, that those who sinned after baptism should be excluded

a See Turretin's Inst. Theol. L. 17. Q. 2. sec. 14.

This sect was founded b Novatus, a presbyter of the Church

a

from the Church. At the time these Articles were compiled, there were some enthusiasts who adopted this doctrine, and added to it that of the sinless perfection of the regenerate. In opposition to these, perhaps, the present Article was framed, and accordingly contains two assertions:

I. The regenerate may depart from grace given, and fall into sin; and

II. Sins committed after baptism, should be forgiven to such as truly repent.

of Rome, who endeavoured in the year 250 to have himself elected Bishop of Rome, in opposition to Cornelius, and on his failure, separated himself from the communion of the Church. See Mosheim's Hist. cent. 3. p. 2. c. 5., and Lardner's Works, v. 3. p. 206.

a This tenet (together with others more impious) was held also by Montanus, a Phrygian, in the year 170. See Mosheim's Hist. cent. 2. p. 2. c. 5., and Lardner's Works, v. ix. p. 481. The same opinion, and that of the sinless perfection of the regenerate, were held by the Brownists, a sect of the Puritans. (See Gifford's Reply to Barrow and Greenwood, p. 96. Ed. Lond. 1591.) And by Melchior Hoffman, one of the principal doctors of the Anabaptists. See Bullinger adv. Anab. 1. 2. c. 13.

b Strype mentions some disturbances that took place in the year 1547, in consequence of the propagation of this tenet by the Anabaptists, who came over from Germany to England. To these, perhaps, Bishop Burnet alludes, which is rendered more probable from the fact, that the doctrine on which these sectaries grounded their severity to those who sinned after baptism, was that opposed in the Article, that every such sin was a blasphemy against the Holy Ghost. See Strype's Eccles. Mem. v. 2. p. 1. B. 1. c. 9. p. 110. Ed. Oxford,

I. The regenerate may depart from grace given, and fall into sin.

This is evident from the whole tenor of Scripture. 1. The denial of St. Peter is an example of the truth of it. 2. It is implied in St. Paul's direction" if any one is overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such a one in the spirit of meekness, considering thyself lest thou also be tempted." (Gal. vi. 1.) In this command, both the supposition that is made, and the reason that is given, plainly insinuate, that all are subject to their several infirmities, so that every man may be overtaken in faults. 3. The charge given to Timothy and Titus, to rebuke and exhort," implies that Christians, and even bishops and deacons, are subject to faults that might deserve correction. (2 Tim. iv. 2. and Tit.

i. 13.)

66

There are some texts, however, which seem to favour the contrary doctrine. Thus, in 1 John, iii. 6, it is said, "whosoever abideth in God, sinneth not:" "whosoever is born of God, doth not commit sin." But it is evident from what has been said, that these assertions are to be understood of men not living in the practice of known sins; nor continuing deliberately in that course of life.

II. The Article asserts, that sins committed after baptism, shall be forgiven to such as truly repent.

Before we proceed to the proof of this proposition, it will be necessary to explain the meaning of two phrases used in the Article. 1. Sins may be called deadly, either as in strictness of justice, deserving death, in which sense, all sins are deadly; or more particularly, those are called deadly which are of so heinous a nature, that they deeply wound the conscience, and drive away grace; in which latter sense the word is used in the Article. This distinction should be observed in opposition to the Church of Rome,a which holds that some sins are mortal, and others venial, that is, of so trifling a nature, that they may be expiated by some temporal infliction. The falsehood of this assertion is evident from the following texts: (1.) "Cursed is every

one that continueth not in all things which

are written in the book of the law to do them." (Gal. iii. 10.) This curse includes sin of every kind. (2.) Rom. vi. 23. "The wages of sin is death." (3.) St. James asserts, that there is such a complication of all the precepts of the law of God, both with one another, and with the authority of the lawgiver, that "he who offends in one point is guilty of all." (James ii. 10.) Hence we conclude, that all opposition to the commands of God, is worthy of death,

a See Conc. Trid. Sess. 14. c. 5. and Bellar. de Amiss. Grat. 1. 1.