Before I advance arguments to prove that justification in the sight of God precedes the first exercise of true repentance, it will be necessary, in order to prevent any misconstruction of what is to be stated, that the following remarks be premised:

(1) Justification, considered as an immanent act of God, or as the eternal and unchangeable will of God to justify His elect upon the ground of a righteousness fulfilled by Christ and imputed to them, has been by judicious divines called active justification (Witsius, The Economy of the Covenants , Book 2, Chap. 7). But justification, viewed as terminating on the persons and in the consciences of believers, has been styled passive justification. The former precedes both the principle and the first acting of true repentance. The latter takes place after regeneration, when the principle of repentance takes root in the soul but before that repentance is actually exercised. This last is the justification, which is often mentioned in Scripture as the privilege of believers, and which is brought to pass by the instrumentality of faith (Rom 3:28; Gal 2:16). It is justification in this sense only that I am to consider, in its connection with the exercise of true repentance.

(2) The pardon of sin is a part of justification. When God is said to pardon the sins of believers, it is to be understood, first, of the act of His free grace in bringing them into an unalterable state of justification by means of faith (Col 3:13); secondly, of the intimations, or the encouraging sense, which the Lord graciously affords them of their state of justification (Psa 32:5); and thirdly, it is to be understood of the removal of that guilt which binds them over to those chastisements for sin which are the effects of fatherly anger. The first is included in justification, and it goes before the first exercise of evangelical repentance. The second and third do not go before, but they follow after that exercise. The first exercise of true repentance follows the forgiveness of sin in the first sense; but it goes before it in the second and third.

(3) Repentance, as has been already stated, must always be the sinner's duty. To deny that it is his duty to sorrow for sin, and to turn from it, would be to vindicate rebellion against the Most High. The Lord Jesus has not only said, "Repent" (Rev 3:19), but has said again and again, "Except ye repent, ye shall perish" (Luke 13:3,5).

(4) The exercise of true repentance is indispensably requisite, in all who are capable of it, as a means, without which none may expect the comfortable enjoyment of communion with God either in time or in eternity. It is a necessary means of spiritual consolation, and also of preparation for the perfection of eternal life.

(5) The word repentance, in the Scripture, sometimes expresses the whole of that change which takes place in the conversion of a sinner to God. In this sense it includes faith in Jesus Christ as well as godly sorrow for sin, and sincere endeavours to yield new obedience. It would therefore be wrong to say of repentance in this its large acceptation, that the first exercise of it is either after faith or justification. It is only of the first exercise of true repentance, taken in its strict sense, as distinct from faith and consequent upon it, that I am to speak.

(6) When I say that the first exercise of true repentance is after justification, I speak not of the order of time, but only of the order of nature; for no justified person is, or can be impenitent.

(7) It is not of the seed or principle of evangelical repentance that I am to treat, but only of the exercise of it. The seed, root, or principle of true repentance, implanted at regeneration, is before justification, or the judicial pardon of sin; but the formal exercise of that repentance is, as will be shewn, after it.

(8) The exercise of repentance is either legal or evangelical. It is either under the influence of the law as a covenant of works, and the domination of a legal spirit; or under the influence of the covenant of grace, and of an evangelical spirit. It is readily granted that legal repentance is exercised before justification; but not that which is evangelical. The first exercise of evangelical repentance does not in order of nature go before, but comes after, justification or the judicial pardon of sin.

This doctrine being understood according to these positions, I now proceed to evince the truth and importance of it by the following arguments:

1. The first exercise of true repentance is not prior to justification in the sight of God; because there can be no acceptable performance of any good work, before this justification.

The exercise of evangelical repentance is evidently a good work, a work which is formally as well as materially good. The description of a good work in Scripture plainly agrees to it. A good work is a work that pleases God. But the exercise of true repentance is a work which highly pleases Him. When Ephraim thus repented, Jehovah said of him, "Is Ephraim my dear son? is he a pleasant child?" (Jer 31:20). And says the Psalmist, "The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise" (51:17). It may be called an evangelical work, not indeed as if it were not required in the moral law, but as it, and every other good work, is performed in reliance on the righteousness and grace of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Now good works do not go before, but follow justification in the sight of God. The members of the Synod of Dort, in the 24th Article of their Confession, say, "We are justified by faith in Christ, and that before we do good works: otherwise they could not be good works, any more than the fruit of a tree can be good before the tree itself be good." The Westminster Confession of Faith says, "Good works are fruits and evidences of a true and lively faith." "The persons of believers being accepted through Christ, their good works are also accepted in Him." The truth of this position is evident, by observing that, according to the covenant of grace, Divine acceptance begins with the person of the believer, and then goes on to his performances. God's acceptance of this person as righteous, in the act of justification, is, in order of nature, before His acceptance of any of his works. The first exercise of true repentance is a work spiritually good and acceptable to God; and therefore, it must follow the acceptance of the person as righteous, in justification. We read that, "The Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offering" (Gen 4:4) -first, unto Abel himself, and then to his offering. The same order is abundantly evident from these words of our apostle: "Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another...that we should bring forth fruit unto God" (Rom 7:4).

Now the first, as well as the progressive, exercise of true repentance, is doubtless included in bringing forth fruit unto God. But our spiritual marriage to Christ is necessary to our bringing forth fruit unto God. In this spiritual marriage, we are dead to the law by the body of Christ; that is, we are justified, and so are delivered from the law as a covenant, by virtue of the righteousness which Christ fulfilled in our nature received by faith. Previous to this blessed change of state, the only fruit that we bring forth, is "fruit unto death"; the only repentance that we exercise is that selfish, slavish, legal repentance, to which we are impelled by the terrors of the law and the dominion of a legal temper. The same order is also evident from the following words: "Sin shall not have dominion over you; for ye are not under the law, but under grace" (Rom 6:14). From these words we see that, while a man is under the law as a covenant of works, that is, while he is not brought into a state of justification, he is under the dominion of sin; and therefore he is utterly incapable of doing any work which is acceptable to God. According to this delightful passage, a man must not be under the law as a covenant, but under grace; that is, he must be justified freely by the grace of God, in order to the first exercise of that repentance which is spiritually good and acceptable to God.

2. This notion that the exercise of true repentance is previously necessary to the reception of pardon in justification, detracts from the grace of God as manifested in the offers and promises of the glorious Gospel.

In the Gospel, pardon of sin through Christ is freely offered to sinners indiscriminately, and is promised immediately to those who believe. "Through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins" (Acts 10:43). Some have insisted that sinners should not come empty-handed to Christ, but that they should bring something with them, especially the exercise of true repentance, if they would obtain the pardon of sin. But how are they to attain the exercise of true repentance, before the forgiveness of sin? They have no power of themselves to repent sincerely. Surely, while they are viewing themselves as still excluded from the pardoning mercy of God, they have not the smallest ground to expect that He will give them grace to exercise such repentance as will be acceptable to Him. From what quarter can they hope for grace to repent, whilst as yet their iniquities are unpardoned, and God is viewed as their enemy?

The gospel teaches needy sinners to come as sinners, to come empty-handed to the market of free grace for the remission of sins and all the other blessings of a free salvation (Isa 55:1; Rev 22:17; Acts 16:31). But he is far from coming empty-handed who brings the exercise of true repentance with him. If any say that faith, which he is understood to bring with him, is still something; it must be observed that, in the affair of justification, faith is not considered either as an inherent quality, or as a work, but only as the sinner's receiving the gift of that surety-righteousness, by which he is justified. "Therefore it is of faith," says our apostle, "that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed" (Rom 4:16). Repentance is in this respect very different. There is no spiritual grace which has more of the nature of giving, than true repentance, for it is a turning of the whole man from the love and practice of sin to the love and practice of holiness. There is nothing, therefore, to which a convinced sinner should be farther from allowing any place, among the means of his justification in the sight of God. The abettors of the opinion in question would do well to consider whether, instead of the covenant of grace, they are not taking up with a sort of covenant of works, the tenor of which is, "Do this: turn sincerely from all sin to God, though thou canst not turn perfectly, and thou shalt live in His favour." This scheme is evidently of the same nature as that of the covenant of works; for in both, doing is the previous condition of acceptance with God. The difference between the doing in the one, and the doing in the other, as to the degree of obedience, makes no difference in the nature of the two schemes. The one is manifestly a covenant of works, as well as the other. The learned Samuel Rutherford, accordingly, says, "We would beware of Mr B.'s order of setting repentance, and works of new obedience, before justification; which is indeed a new covenant of works."

The blessed Gospel affords an ample warrant to any sinner of mankind who hears it, to receive the free offer which it makes of pardon in and through Christ, immediately upon hearing and understanding the import of it. But according to the false doctrine in question, no man can have a warrant for doing so, till he is satisfied that he has attained the exercise of true repentance. It is laid down by the apostle Paul, as an established maxim, that "whatsoever is not of faith is sin" (Rom 14:23); that is, if we do any thing, whilst we doubt in our conscience whether it be agreeable to the will of God or not, it is sin. It is evident from the context that the apostle speaks there of the faith of God's command. Suppose, then, that a convinced sinner believes the pardon of sin to be offered in the Gospel to none but the true penitent; and, suppose that he is doubting of himself, whether he be such an one or not; he cannot, in that case, without sin, embrace the offered pardon. To him it is forbidden fruit. Nay, before he so much as attempts to receive it, his conscience must be satisfied that his repentance has all the marks which distinguish a true and evangelical repentance from a false and legal repentance. And as it is impossible for a man to discern any thing spiritually good in himself, previous to his first acts of saving faith, he will never be able, according to the self-righteous opinion in question, to find his way to the offered pardon.

But how can this consist with the Gospel of Christ which represents justification and eternal life as gifts of immensely free grace, and declares that whosoever will is welcome to take the water of life freely (Rev 22:17)? In the gospel the sinner is directed, first to attempt the immediate acting of true faith in order to attain the exercise of evangelical repentance, but not to attempt the exercise of this repentance in order to warrant the acting of that faith. Justifying and saving faith is the mean of true repentance, and this repentance is not the mean, but the end of that faith.

If any should try to counter this argument, and say that, whilst I hold faith to be the only mean of receiving pardon, a man's assurance of the reality of his faith is as necessary, in order to his embracing of the Gospel-offer, as his assurance of the truth of his repentance, on the scheme in question: I would answer by remarking that there is a vast difference between the priority of the exercise of true repentance to pardon, on that scheme, and the priority of the acting of faith, as the mean of receiving pardon. In the former case, the exercise of true repentance is required as a previous qualification, distinct from the reception of the Gospel-offer of pardon; and therefore it must be sinful for a man to attempt embracing this offer, until he be satisfied that he has attained that qualification. But in the latter case, true faith is not a qualification previously required, in order to the embracing of the offer of pardon, but is itself the very act of embracing this offer. It is a receiving of pardon, as it is a receiving of Jesus Christ and His righteousness, exhibited in the Gospel-offer. Here, the previous consciousness that we have believed cannot be held necessary, in order to the reception of pardon; unless we would think and speak so absurdly as to say that the consciousness of our having already received a benefit is necessary in order to our act of receiving it.

3. The first exercise of true repentance is not before justification in the sight of God, because it is not previous to the first acting of justifying faith.

It will not be necessary to say much in illustrating this argument, as it was explained and confirmed in a preceeding chapter.

If the exercise of true repentance be not before that of justifying faith, it is not before the pardon of sin in justification. For faith, and justification in the sight of God, are so immediately and closely connected that no other spiritual grace or holy exercise can be considered as coming between them. But if the exercise of true repentance were, in order of nature, after that of justifying faith, and yet before justification, then the exercise of true repentance would come in between faith and justification. It might then be said, in opposition to the apostle Paul, that a man is justified by repentance rather than by faith, as in that case, repentance would be connected more immediately with justification than with faith. Then it might be affirmed that, as repentance is the nearest mean of justification, it should be regarded as the most important and noble one. For it is highly reasonable to prefer the immediate and nearest mean, before the one which is intermediate and remote. Hence it would come to pass that, in the pardon of sin, the exercise of repentance should be considered as the more noble and important mean. Should a convinced and alarmed sinner say that he attempts to believe, and to rely immediately on Jesus Christ for pardon, this question, according to that self righteous scheme, must be put to him: Do you repent sincerely of all your sins? Your acting of faith cannot obtain pardon, without the exercise of genuine repentance. Thus, then, the exercise of true repentance, as a mean of attaining the pardon of sin, is preferable to the acting of faith; since without it, faith can do nothing. How absurd is all this, and how far from being the doctrine of the Gospel!

Again, the first exercise of evangelical repentance, as it is distinguished from that of justifying faith, comes necessarily in order of nature after it. It is true, as has been remarked already, that the word repentance in Scripture sometimes expresses the whole of that change which takes place in the conversion of a sinner to God. In this sense it includes faith in Jesus Christ. Now it would be improper to say of repentance in this view, that it is after the acting of faith in Christ. Yet it remains true, that the exercise of true repentance taken in a strict sense, as denoting godly sorrow for sin and sincere endeavours after new obedience, is distinct from the acting of justifying faith, and in order of nature follows it. And although, in this sense, repentance is implied in faith, as an effect is implied in its cause, yet it cannot from this be inferred, that the exercise of the former is not, in order of nature, after that of the latter. The fruit of a tree may be said to have always been seminally, or as to its principles, in the tree; yet none, on that account, will hesitate to say that the fruit, as to its natural order, is after the tree.

To pretend that we may exercise true repentance before the first acting of faith in Jesus Christ, is contrary to all those passages of Scripture which assert the necessity of faith in order to our living, standing, or walking in a spiritual manner; or in order to our performing any other duty in a manner acceptable to God (Gal 2:20; 2 Cor 1:24; 5:7; Heb 11:6; John 15:4,5). It is true, as already hinted, that repentance is, in some passages, mentioned before faith (Mark 1:15; Acts 20:21). But things are not mentioned in Scripture, always according to the order of nature. For instance, it is not according to that order that, in 2 Peter 1:10, the calling of believers is put before their election; and that, in the apostolic benediction, 2 Corinthians 13:14, the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ is put before the love of the Father. So in the places in which repentance is mentioned before faith, what is intended is not to shew the natural order; but rather, first to propose repentance as the end, and then faith, as the instituted means of compassing that end.

I conclude, then, that as the first exercise of true repentance is after the first acting of faith in Christ, so it is after the pardon of sin in justification, which is received by faith only.

4. The first exercise of evangelical repentance is not before the pardon of sin in the act of justification, because it is not before the exercise of supreme love to God in Christ.

That the exercise of true repentance is not prior to the exercise of love to God, but on the contrary, springs from this exercise, appears from the example of the penitent woman, recorded in Luke 7:37-48. Whilst Jesus was sitting at meat in a Pharisee's house, a woman who was a sinner "stood at his feet behind him weeping, and began to wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment." Her tears were tears of godly sorrow for her many sins; and our Lord, whose judgment is always according to truth, said that they flowed from love. She loved much; and her tears, as well as the several instances of her singular attention to our Lord at that time, sprang from love to Him. The exercise of true repentance, then, proceed from unfeigned love to God; and so, in order of nature, is posterior to it. Hence is this injunction of the Psalmist, "Ye that love the Lord hate evil" (Psa 97:10). Hatred of evil, which is a part of evangelical repentance, is a consequence and a sure proof of genuine love to the Lord. No sorrow for sin, nor hatred of it, nor turning from it, belongs to true repentance, but that which proceeds from, and follows, unfeigned love to Christ and to God in Him.

Now, while the exercise of true repentance flows from supreme love to God, the exercise of this love proceeds, under the sanctifying influences of the Holy Spirit, from the forgiveness of sins in justification. That it does so is evident from our Lord's parable of the two debtors, in the place already referred to. For, by this parable He shews plainly that, as an effect is still according to its cause so our love to God will be according to the forgiveness of our sins, received by faith. In this sense we are to understand what our Lord said to the Pharisee respecting the woman: "I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much." The conjunction, for , does not always denote the cause of a thing, but sometimes the effect and evidence of it (`That the woman's love,' says Ames, `is here pointed out as the effect of the pardon of her sins, is evident from the whole discourse.'); as when we say, "The spring is come, for the plants begin to bud," so the Lord Jesus said to His disciples, "the Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me" (John 16:27), that is, your love to me is an effect and evidence of the Father's love to you.

Our Lord's meaning in the parable is plainly this: the person who is forgiven most will love most. But that poor woman, and not Simon the Pharisee, loves most. Therefore she is the person who is forgiven most. Her love is a full proof that her sins, how many soever they have been, are all graciously forgiven. As to the mean or instrument by which this woman received the forgiveness of her sins, our Lord informs us what it was, when He said to her, "Thy faith hath saved thee,"-thy faith, not thy repentance, nor thy tears. Chemnitius, commenting on the story, says well: `From the fruits of love, our Lord shows that the sins of this woman were forgiven. When He had said, "Her sins are forgiven; for she loved much," he immediately adds (to prevent the mistake of His meaning, with regard to the order of cause and effect), "But to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little." He declares again and again that remission of sin goes before, and that love follows. Having said, "The creditor frankly forgave them both," He adds, "Which of them will love him most?" Here it is observable, that the expression, will love him , is in the future tense; whereas the expression, he forgave them , is in the preterite or past tense; intimating that a person's love to God follows the remission of sins, as the future follows the past. Here Christ shows us whence true love to Him springs... Hence it is, that unless the gospel, which proclaims a free grant of the forgiveness of sins, be received by faith, the true love of God can neither enter into, nor abide in any soul.'

Although a man does not begin to exercise true repentance before the pardon of his sins in justification, yet he may begin the exercise of it before he attains a distinct sense of his being already in a justified state. The influence of pardoning mercy, apprehended by faith, will produce true love to God, and the exercise of evangelical repentance, not indeed before the sinner has been justified, but before he has attained a comfortable sense of his justification. Thus the woman's repentance, above mentioned, which followed the forgiveness of her sins, was before the comfortable sense of this forgiveness, arising from our Lord's intimation of it (Luke 7:48), by saying to her, "Thy sins are forgiven"; and by adding, "Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace."

Thus it is plain that unfeigned love to God is a fruit of the forgiveness of sin in justification, and therefore follows it; but the first exercise of true repentance flows from that love, and so, in order of nature, is after it. Therefore the first exercise of true repentance follows the pardon of sin in the act of justification. The former is an inseparable consequence of the latter. Justifying faith works by love, and love produces the exercise of evangelical repentance.

5. That the pardon of sin in justification goes before the first exercise of evangelical repentance is most agreeable to the order in which God has promised to bestow these inestimable blessings upon His people.

His promises of them run thus: "I have blotted out, as a thick cloud, thy transgressions, and as a cloud thy sins: return unto me; for I have redeemed thee" (Isa 44:22). "I will establish my covenant with thee...That thou mayest remember, and be confounded, and never open thy mouth any more because of thy shame, when I am pacified toward thee for all that thou hast done, saith the Lord God" (Ezek 16:62,63). "I will sprinkle clean water upon you," that is, the blood of Messiah, for the remission of sins, and "ye shall be clean," judicially absolved from every charge of guilt.* "A new heart also will I give you...I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them" (Ezek 36:26,27). "Then shall ye remember your own evil ways, and your doings that were not good, and shall loathe yourselves in your own sight for your iniquities and for your abominations" (Ezek 36:31). "I will heal their backsliding: Ephraim shall say, What have I to do any more with idols?" (Hosea 14:4,8). No exercise of repentance is described in these passages, but what follows is the forgiveness of sin. This is the native order of these blessings; and none should attempt to disturb or invert it.

*Ezekiel 36:25. It is proper to understand this as a promise of the remission of sin; as being a blessing distinct from regeneration and sanctification promised in the two verses immediately following.

The argument from these passages is, not only that the state of justification is mentioned before the exercise of true repentance; but that the latter is represented as the native effect of the former. The grace of Jehovah toward Israel, manifested in His being pacified toward them for all that they have done, fills them with penitential shame and self-loathing. Ephraim's resolution to have no more to do with idols is the native consequence or effect of the healing of his backsliding. The consequence of Jehovah's sprinkling of clean water upon them, and making them clean, is that they remember their own evil ways, and their doings that were not good, and loathe themselves in their own sight. That a legal repentance, proceeding from legal convictions and a dread of Divine judgments, goes before justification is readily granted. But that any exercise of evangelical repentance, of that spiritual repentance which the Lord secures to His people in those promises, goes before it, has never been proved.

From these arguments it is evident that, in order of nature, justification in the sight of God, or forgiveness of sin in justification, precedes the first exercise of true repentance. But seeing the principle of evangelical repentance is implanted in the soul before justification, none is justified in the sight of God, but he who, in this sense, is already a true penitent. It is only the habit and the exercise of true repentance that follow the act of justification.

Is it true, then, that no sinner is pardoned but the penitent sinner, the sinner who has the principle of true repentance already in his heart? It plainly follows that no pardoned sinner can continue impenitent. He has already the root or principle of true repentance; and when he so believes as to be justified by faith, this principle will, under the sanctifying influences of the Holy Spirit, become a habit, and be excited to immediate exercise. Every man who is justified is entitled to sanctification, of which the habit and exercise of true repentance are essential parts. A pardoned sinner, then, cannot but exercise, and advance in the exercise of evangelical repentance.

From what has been said, the candid reader may see the meaning of this assertion of the apostle Paul, "[God] justifieth the ungodly" (Rom 4:5). The meaning cannot be that He justifies an unregenerate sinner. By the ungodly here is not meant the unregenerate, but the regenerate sinner, who has no legal godliness, no righteousness of his own pleadable in law, as a ground of justification in the sight of God. If this were not the meaning, it would follow that justification is before regeneration; contrary to the order mentioned by our apostle (Rom 8:30), and to that in the Shorter Catechism.

A legal ungodliness is in the regenerate sinner before justification by faith. He sees that he has no godliness, no righteousness of his own to rely on, as a ground of justification. That man is to be deemed ungodly who has no godliness that the omniscient Judge can admit as a ground of title to justification. Because he has not, before the righteousness of Jesus Christ be imputed to him, a perfect righteousness for justification, in the eye of the law he is ungodly, have what he will. If the sentence should pass upon him, on the ground of his principles of holiness, the Judge could not but find him, in the eye of the law, ungodly, and as such condemn him. Besides, God justifies him who hitherto was ungodly. The sense of the words may be the same as when our Lord said, "The blind see," and "the deaf hear" (Luke 7:22). His meaning cannot be that those persons were actually blind when they saw, or deaf when they heard; but that having been once so, they now saw and heard. In legal reckoning, that man is ungodly who has broken any of the commands of God's law. That the ungodly should be justified by his own righteousness is therefore a contradiction in the eye of the law; as much as if we should say that the same individual has at once broken the law, and perfectly kept it. For if he is in himself ungodly, where are his works of perfect righteousness? This view of the text under consideration is most agreeable to the apostle's design, which is, to guard the doctrine of justification by the free grace of God, against the errors of legal teachers.

Hence also it is manifest that the convinced sinner should attempt to believe that Christ died for the remission of his sins, in order to repent of them. No sinner can, in the exercise of true repentance, return to God, but by Christ the way; and none can return by Christ, otherwise than by believing in Him. The convinced sinner, then, should believe or trust that Jesus Christ died to take away his sins, in order to turn from them to God. He should rely on the consummate righteousness of Christ for the pardon of them, in order to hate and forsake them. It is only when he is enabled cordially to trust, that God puts away his iniquities from him, by remission, and that he is inclined and resolved, through grace, to put them away from himself, by evangelical repentance. "Let them that will," says a godly and judicious writer, "repent, that Christ may do for them; I shall desire always to believe what Christ hath done for me, that I may repent; not doubting but that the being instructed therein is the plain way to smiting on the thigh, and saying, What have I done?"

No sin is truly repented of, till it be pardoned; nor is the sinner ever melted so much into godly sorrow, as when he knows that his iniquities are forgiven. The faith of pardon melts the adamantine heart, makes the head waters, and the eyes a fountain of tears. It is by viewing our sins, by an appropriating faith, as laid upon the Lamb of God, and Him as pierced for them, that we attain the lively exercise of evangelical repentance. The more our hearts are enabled to trust that the Lord Jesus "was wounded for our transgressions, and was bruised for our iniquities," the more will we abhor them, and turn from the love and practice of them.

From what has been advanced it clearly appears that it is the immediate duty of every sinner who hears the Gospel to trust in Christ and His righteousness for justification. When he sincerely attempts this first duty, the exercise of true repentance will necessarily follow. When he believes in the Lord Jesus for justification, at the same time he trusts in Him for sanctification, for grace to enable him to repent of all his sins. And according to his faith it is unto him. The design of his justification is not to lay a foundation for his continuance in sin, but that he may "go and sin no more." It will be absolutely impossible for him to exercise evangelical repentance, till his sins be pardoned; for till they be forgiven, God is a consuming fire to him. The curse of the law abides on him, and intercepts the communication of that grace which is necessary to produce the exercise of true repentance. Was he wont to trust in himself, and in his own works? In order to exercise repentance unto life, his heart must turn to Jesus Christ for a better righteousness, and thereby for eternal life. It must turn from every false ground of hope, and rely only on Christ, looking not to his own penitential tears, nor to his own graces or duties; but "looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life" (Jude 21).

Let no sinner conclude that his exercise of repentance atones for his crimes, or entitles him in the smallest degree to the favour of God and the felicity of heaven. He must receive by faith the atonement made by the Lord Jesus, and have his sins all forgiven on the ground of it, before he can begin to exercise the least true repentance. He must receive also the gift of righteousness, and in justification be accepted as righteous, and so be entitled to the happiness of heaven, before he can begin the exercise of that repentance which is acceptable to God.

How then can his repentance atone for his iniquities, or entitle him to the favour of God and to the happiness of heaven? How can that evangelical repentance, which he is incapable of exercising till after his sins be all forgiven on the ground of an infinite atonement imputed to him, make atonement for them? How can that true repentance, which he cannot exercise until in justification he be already entitled to eternal life, entitle him to eternal life? Does not the consummate righteousness of Jesus Christ, imputed for justification, entitle the believer fully to it? What need is there, then, that his repentance should entitle him? How can that exercise of repentance which is the consequence of pardon, afford a previous title to pardon? or that which is a part of eternal life be a ground of right to eternal life?

As to that legal repentance which an alarmed sinner is supposed to exercise before faith and justification, and which is an abomination to the Lord-how can that which is itself sin, satisfy Divine justice for sin? How is it possible that that which merits eternal death, should at the same time merit for the sinner eternal life? How can that proud, that pharisaical penitence, on which the sinner depends for pardon of sin and a right to life, procure for him either the one or the other? O sinner, believe and repent, and that without delay; but do not in the least depend on your exercise of them, either for pardon of sin, or for a title to the smallest blessing from the Lord. Your immediate duty is, by the acting of faith, to receive Christ as Jehovah your Righteousness for justification, and to receive from His fulness that evangelical repentance which is included in sanctification. So shall you repent in such a manner as will please God.

From what has been said it is plain that the exercise of true repentance is necessary, in order to a believer's attaining the comfortable sense of pardon in justification. It is an evidence of his having received judicial pardon and so, is a mean of his attaining the assurance that he is already in a state of pardon. Although the exercise of true repentance is not requisite to the obtaining judicial remission, seeing faith alone is the instrument of receiving this, yet it is necessary if a man is to attain the assurance of Gospel blessings. It usually precedes a satisfying sense of judicial pardon. It was not till after the woman who washed our Lord's feet with tears, and wiped them with the hairs of her head, had thereby expressed that love and penitence which were the consequences of the pardon of her sins, that He intimated her pardon to her. He said to her, after her sins had been forgiven, and after she had exercised that repentance which was the evidence of her state of pardon, "Thy sins are forgiven... Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace" (Luke 7:48,50).

Would you then, believer, who are oppressed with doubts and fears respecting the remission of your sins, attain joyful intimations that they are all forgiven? O renew, and frequently renew, not only the acting of humble confidence in your adorable Redeemer for all His salvation, but also the exercise of evangelical repentance. Godly sorrow is sweet, is delicious sorrow. It is often attended by a delightful sense of redeeming love and of justifying grace. Whilst, with tears of sorrow and of gratitude, you praise a forgiving God and a bleeding Saviour, you realize this paradox: "sorrowful, yet always rejoicing." Your melting seasons of penitential sorrow will usually pave the way for your strongest and sweetest consolations.

It is manifest also from what has been argued, that when the Lord inflicts upon believers fatherly chastisement for their sins against Him, it is not commonly removed, till they renew, with deep concern, the exercise of faith and repentance. The exercise of true repentance, as well as of faith, is necessary to the believer's attainment of fatherly pardon, or of deliverance from the painful effects of his having provoked the anger of his heavenly Father. The reason of this is plain. The Lord's design in inflicting paternal strokes is that He may correct His disobedient child, or lead him to spiritual, evangelical, deep repentance. When, therefore, the Lord has inflicted fatherly strokes upon the believer for his offences, He will not remove them until, by the exercise of faith and repentance, the Christian amends his ways and his doings (Jer 7:3), and so answers His gracious design in inflicting them (Isa 27:9). When one sort prevails not, the Lord inflicts another, and perhaps a third, until, in the hand of His Holy Spirit, they become effectual. Not that the sin, upon the exercise of repentance, is immediately pardoned, and the chastisement removed. For the Lord, by inflicting paternal chastisements, has other designs to accomplish besides the repentance of the believer. For example, He intends that His injured honour should be vindicated, and that others may see and fear and do no more wickedly.

Believer, is it your desire to be in any degree exempted from the painful infliction of paternal chastisements? Be always on your guard, then, against the commission of any known sin, and the omission, even for once, of any known duty. Exercise frequently faith and repentance. Study to perform every duty, as well as to exercise every grace, with increasing spirituality. Thus you will "walk worthy of the Lord to all pleasing."

In conclusion: It may justly be inferred from what has been stated that faith and repentance are parts, as well as means of salvation. Faith, in one view of it, is the mean or instrument of vital union with Christ, and of communion with Him, in His righteousness and salvation. True repentance also, in one view, is an instituted mean of attaining the perfection of salvation; or rather, it is our walking in the way to the perfection of it. Faith and repentance, then, are doubtless to be urged on the hearers of the Gospel, as internal means of salvation. They are to be inculcated on believers as the means of advancing in holiness, and of attaining in due time to the perfection of holiness and happiness. In this view, the frequent exercise of them is required in the law. The more the true Christian uses these internal means of salvation, and the less he depends on his use of them, the more speedily will he advance toward perfection.

True faith and repentance, in another point of view, are essential parts of salvation. In the Gospel they are both promised as parts of eternal life or salvation. They are spiritual graces, implanted in the soul of an elect sinner at regeneration; and so they are parts of salvation in its commencement and progress in the soul. The more a believer makes progress in the habit and exercise of faith and repentance, the more does he advance in salvation from the power and practice of all sin. These spiritual graces are parts of salvation, or they are parts of true holiness, which is eternal life begun and advancing in the soul. Holiness is the happiness of the rational creature. To conceive of happiness without it would be a contradiction, seeing it is the main ingredient in all true happiness. To bring sinners to holiness, therefore, was, in subordination to the glory of God, the great design of Christ's undertaking.

To press holiness upon sinners, merely as the mean or way of attaining happiness, will lead them blindly to imagine that happiness is something distinct from holiness, and is to be procured by it. If holiness which includes faith and repentance be urged upon sinners, merely as the way or mean of attaining salvation, and never as the leading part of salvation, nor as the end to be aimed at, it will have a native tendency to put them upon doing for life, and not doing from life. It will encourage them to seek and to expect salvation according to a covenant of works, or to depend on their supposed faith, repentance, and holiness, as grounds of title to future happiness. Surely, there can be no impropriety or absurdity, in considering the same thing as a mean in one respect, and as an end in another. Holiness in this world is a mean of attaining to the perfection of it in heaven, as the end; and in this view it is distinct from the end. But then it is no less clear that it is not of a different nature from the perfect holiness or happiness of the saints in heaven, but is different from it only in degree. It is, therefore, in itself to be regarded as an end which every sinner ought to compass by appointed means, especially by the diligent exercise of faith and repentance.