Tomline on Article XVI: Of Sin after Baptism

J HIS article is directed against the Montanists, Novatians, Anabaptists, and others, who denied the efficacy of repentance in certain cases ; and also against those who contended that men could not possibly be guilty of sin after they had once received the Holy Ghost, or divine grace. In the preceding article we noticed a sect of Chris- tians who maintain the peccability of Christ, and

»« in

[…]

in this article we have to argue against those who contend for the impeccability of man. Bat before we proceed to explain the propositions contained in this article, it may be right to in- quire into what is meant by the Sin against ilab Holy Ghost, which occurs in the former part of it. Divines are by no means agreed concern- ing this sin. I shall state what appears to me to be intended by it, and refer those, who wish to see the different opinions which have been en- tertained upon this difficult and disputed pcnnt, to Archbishop Tillotson, Bishop Pearson, and Dr. Whitby.

The sin of blasphemy against the Holy Ghost is mentioned in tfie three first Gospels. We learn from St. Matthew and St. Mark, that the Jews, who had seen Christ cure many dsemoniacs, being unable to deny the reality of these miracles, asserted that he derived his power of casting out devils from Beelzebub the prince of the devils. Our Saviour, after pointing out the absurdity of such an imputation, added, according to St. Matthew, ” All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven imto men, but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him ; but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost,

it

[…]

it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come (a).” St Mark’s words are, ” All sins shdl be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewithsoever they shall blaspheme; but he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation (by Upon another occasion, when no imputation of the above kind seems to have been alleged against our Sa- viour, St. Luke tells us that Christ declared that, ” Whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of Man, it shall be foigiven him ; but imto him that blasphemetfa against die Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven fc^.” It thus appears, that all the three Evangelists agree in representing the sin or blas- phemy against the Holy Ghost as a crime which would not be forgiven; but no one of them affirms thatthose, who had ascribed Christ’s power of cast- ing out devils to Beelzebub, had been guilty of that sin ; and in St Luke it is not mentioned that any such charge had been made. Our Saviour, accolrd- ing to the account in St Matthew and St Mark, endeavoured ta convince the Jews of their eitbr ; but so far from accusing them of having com- mitted an unpardonable sin in what they had said

concerning

(a) Ma£t. c. 12. v. 31 and 32.

(b) Mark,, c. 3. v. 28 and 29. (e) Luke, c. 12. v. 10.

VOL. ir. V

[…]

concerning him, he declares that, ” Whosoever speketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgpiven him,” that is, whatever reproaches men may utter against the Son of man during bis Hiinistry, however they may calumniate the au- thority upon which he acts, it is still possible that hereafter they may repent and believe, and all their sins may be forgiven them; but the reviling (tfae Holy Ghost is described as an offence of a fieur more heiaous nature : ’ The blasphemy against liie Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.** — He that shall blasphmie against the Hefy Ghost, hath never […] Unto hiii that blasphemeth agnst the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven.” — It is plain that dns sin against the Holy Ghost could not be cimi- mitted while our Saviour was upon earth, since he always speaks of the Holy Ghost as not being to come till after his ascension into heaven (d). A few days after that great event, the descent of the Holy Ghost enabled the Apostles to work miracles, and communicated to them a variety of other supernatural gifts. If men should ascribe these powers to Beelzebub, or in any respect reject their authority, they would blaspheme the Holy Ghost, from whom they were derived ; and that sin would be unpardonable because this

was

(d) John, c. 7. V, 39. c. 16. v. 7.

[…]

was the completion of the evkteiice of the divine authority of Christ end his feligion ; and they who Rted these last means of conviction, cold have no other opportunity of being brou to faith in Christy the only appointed oxidition of pardbn and fiorgiveness. The greater hrinous* neae of the sin of tiiese men would consist in their rejecting a greater body of testimony ; for they are sufsed to be acqiminted with the rentredion of our Saviour from the dead ; with his ascisioh into heaven ; with the miraculoas descent of the Hdy Ghost, and with the supers natural powers which it communicated ; cireum- stances, all of which were enforced by the Apos- ties when tfa preached the Gospd ; but none of which could be known to those who refused to acknowledge Jesus as the Messiah during his actual ministry. Though this was a reat siq, it was not an unpardonable one ; it might be atxmed for by subsequent bdief, by yielding to sobsequeift testimony. But, on the other hand, they who finally rgected the accumulated and oompietn evidence of Jesus being the Messii ae eiiiibited by die inspired Apostles, precluded themsdves fimtn the possibUity of convicticMi, her eause no farther testimony would be affiirded them ; and consequently, there ben no means of repentance, thi would he incapahle of for** gveness and redemption.

V 2 Thui

29a Krpositian 0/ the [part iii.

Thus it appears that tlie sin against the Holy Ghost consisted in finally rejecting the Gospel, as preached by the Apostles, who confirmed the truth of the doctrine which they taught ” by signs and wonders, and divers miracles and gifts of the Holy Ghost (e).” And it was unpardonable because this was the consummation of the proofs afforded to the men of that generation of the divine mission of Christ. This sin was mani- festly distinct from all other sins ; it indicated an invincible obstinacy of mind, an impious and unalterable determination to refuse the ofiered mercy of God.

As a farther illustration of this subject, I will transcribe Dr. Doddridge’s paraphrase of die above passages in the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark : ” I therefore give you the most solemn and compassionate warning of your danger, for you are on the brink of the most dreadful preci- pice. That malignity of heart which leads you to ascribe these works of mine to a confederacy with Satan, may incline you to pass the same impious sentence on the greatest and fullest con- firmation which is to be given to my Gospel, by the effusion of the Spirit on my followers ; and therefore to prevent, if possible, such guilt and min, verily I say unto you, that all other sins :shall be forgiven to the children of men, and

even (e) Heb. c. 2. v. 4.

AUT. XVI.] Thirty-nine Articleg. 2gS

even all the other blasphemies with which they shall blaspheme, but the blasphemy against the Spirit of God, in this most Glorious dispensation of it, shall not be for^ven to those impious and incorrigible men, who shall dare to impute to diabolical operation those glorious works of di- vine power and goodness. And I add, that who- soever speaks a contemptuous and impious word, even against the Son of man himself, while here on earth, in this obscure form, he may possibly be brought to repentance for’ it, and so it shall be forgiven him; and consequently even your case, bad as it is, is not entirely hopeless ; but whosoever shall maliciously speak any thing of this nature against the Holy Spirit, when the grand dispensation of it shall open in those mi- raculous ^fts and operations that will be attended with the most evident demonstrations of his mighty power, it shall never be forgiven him at all, either in this world or in that which is to come ; hut he is obnoxious to eternal damnation, and must irrecoverably sink into it ; nor will all the grace of the Gospel, in its fullest display, afford a re- medy for so aggravated a crime, or furnish him with means for his conviction and recovery.’*

We now proceed to explain the article itself.

St. Paul tells us, that ^’ the wages of sin is

death (f) :” and therefore, though all sins are by

no ( f) Rom. c. 6. V. 23.

u 3

J94 ^^xpontion of the [part hi;

no means equal, every sin may be oonsidered as deadfy in its nature. In this article a mora heinous sort of sin seems to be understood, im- plying a known and deliberate transgression of Iho kiWs of God, and not merely a sin of ignorance or infirmity. But even in that sense, not evebt

iilly appears from what has been just now said concerning that particular sin ; and there seems to be no ground \h Scripture for considering any dree or species of sin as at this time necessarily unpardonable, or beyond the efficacy of sincfeve repentance. When St. John says, that there is a sin unto death (g)y” it is supposed that k means the sin against the Holy Ghost, which, if our interpretation be right, was confined to tfaa time of the Apostles, and which is the only sin to which forgiveness is denied in the New Testament ” The doors,” says Clement of Alex* andria, are open to every one, who in truth, and with his whole heart, returns to God ; and the Fath most wiBingly receives a son, who truly tpaits.” Thiis is the general tenor of Scriptars in wluch all m are invited to rentance wilii out any discrimination or exception. And we are told, eveft under the Mosaic disfnsaftion,

(g) 1 John, c. 5. V. 16.

[…]

that ’^ thou^ our sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow ; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool (h).” And the exhortations to amendment and reformation con- tamed in the EfMStles, are all addressed to persons who had been already baptized, and who had been guilty of faults or sins subsequent to their baptism.

Wherefore the grant of repentance IS not to be denied to such as fall into SIN AFTER BAPTISM. It wus observed in the b^inning of this article, that there have been at difierent periods of Ae Christian church, several sects, whidi denied the efficacy of repentance ; but I am not aware that there is now any sect, at least in this country, which maintains that doctrine.

Afthottgh the Holy Ghost purifies our minds, and assists and co-opemtes with us in the per- formance of our duty, yet he does not entirdy take away the corruption and infirmity of our nature, nor does he destroy our free^agency; and conseqUCTtly, after we have received the

HOLT ghost, we MAY DEPART FROM GRACE GIVEN Cl^, AND FA2.L INTO SIN. But aS We

may

(h) Isa. c I. y. \S*

(%) The Puritans, in the beginning of the reign of kii)g James the FtrsC, ware sensibie that this doctrine of the defectibility of grace, was incomisteDt with

u 4 their

[…]

kny relapse from virtue unto wickedness, so we

MAY RISE AGAIN AND AMEND OUR LIVES; WC

may return to a sense of our duty, and again yield obedience to the influence of God s holy Spirit: and therefore they are to be con- demned WHO SAY they can NO MORE SIN AS

” As those,” says bishop Pearson, ” who are re- cdived into the church by the sacrament of bap- tism, receive the remission of their sins, of which they were guilty before they were baptized ; so after they are thus made members of the church, they receive remission of their future sins by their repentance. Christ, who hath left us a pattern of prayer, hath thereby taught us for ever to implore and beg the forgiveness of our sins ; that as we, through the frailty of our nature, are always subject unto sin, so we should always exercise the acts of repentance, and for ever seek the favour of God. This then is the com- fort of the Gospel, that as it discovereth sin within us, so it propoundeth a remedy unto us.

^ While

their opinion of absolute predestination, and therefore they desired that these words, ” though not finally,” might be added to the words of the article, ” we may depart from grace given ;” but the king and bishops would not allow any such addition. — See the Hampton Court Conference.

ART* XVI.] Uiirty-nine Articles^ 297

While we are in this life encompassed with flesh, while the allurements of the world, while the stratagems of Satan, while the infirmities and corruptions of our nature betray us to the trans- gression of the law of God, we are always subject to ofi’end : whence, whosoever saith that he has no sin, is a liar (k)^ contradicting himself, and contracting iniquity by pretending innocency : and so long as we can offend, so long we may apply ourselves unto God by repentance, and be re- newed by his grace, and pardoned by hit mercy (I)”

(k) 1 John, c. I. T. 10. and c. 2. t. 4. (I) Pearson on the Creed, Art. v. 10.

298 Exposition of tht [part in.