so others on the right hand are mistaken, and think that their sins are not sins of infirmity, but of a worse nature, when indeed they are: and that upon these accounts:

Because they sin knowingly.

Because they fall into the same sin again and again, and do lie therein.

Because they fall into the sin after admonition.

Oh, saith one, I fear my sin is no sin of infirmity, for I sin knowingly, and with deliberation; I sin against my knowledge, and against my conscience, and therefore my sin, can be no sin of infirmity.

But for answer hereunto, you must know, it is one thing for a man to sin knowingly, and another thing for a man to sin out of knowledge, or against his knowledge. As in the case of ignorance; it is one thing for a man to sin ignoranter, and another thing to sin ex ignorantia. A man sins ignorrantly when ignorance is the companion of his sin only: a man sins out of ignorance, when ignorance is the only cause of his sin, and not the companion only. As for example: Suppose a man be in fight, in a great battle, and he kill another; he kills him because he did not know him, if he had known him in the battle, he would not have killed him ; here his ignorance is not the companion only, but the cause of it so that it is one thing to sin ignorantly, and another thing to sin out of ignorance. A man sins ignorantly, when ignorance is the companion of his fact: a man sins out of ignorance, when ignorance is the cause of it. So a man sins knowingly, when knowledge is the companion of his fact: but a man sins out of knowledge, or he sins against knowledge, when knowledge is the cause thereof; as when a man doth use his knowledge to make distinctions and shifts for his sin, whereby he is emboldened to it, and continues in it. Knowledge is sometimes only a companion of sin; as when a man knows that the first risings of sin are evil; this knowledge is no cause of them, but merely a companion: sometimes knowledge is the cause of sin; as when a man doth know that his way is naught, and he doth deliberately consult and devise excuses and lies to hide the same; here his knowledge is the cause of those sinful excuses, and the man doth not only sin knowingly and with knowledge, but out of knowledge, and against his knowledge; and this cannot

stand with infirmity, but the former may: for the disciples knew that it was evil for them to sleep; yet their sin was a sin of infirmity.*

Oh, but I fear that my sin is no sin of infirmity, because I fall into it again and again, and do lie in it.

But do ye know what it is to lie in sin? there is much mistake about lying in sin. Possibly a man may lie in a sin, yet never fall into the gross acts thereof; he may lie in the breach of the seventh commandment, and yet never commit the gross act of adultery; he may lie in the sin of covetousness, yet never be any great oppressor. So on the other side, a man may possibly fall divers times into the same sin, and yet not lie therein; for properly a man is said to lie in sin, when he doth continue in it, and not purge it out; so he that is born of God sinneth not, because his heart is as a fountain or spring, that purifies itself from that dirt and filth of sin which doth fall into it: but as the apostle speaks, "The whole world lies in wickedness;" why? because a wicked man's heart is as a lake or standing pool, which keeps all that dirt which is thrown into it. Now if you do thus keep and lie in your sin, why do you so complain? this your complaining argues that there is some purging out, and therefore you do not lie in sin.

Oh, but I fear my sin cannot be a sin of infirmity, because I fall into it after I have been admonished of the evil of it. To that I say no more, but desire you to consider the instance that is here before you. The disciples slept, our Lord and Saviour Christ comes and wakens them; yea, and he chides them too: "What (saith he) cannot ye watch with me one hour! watch and pray;" and yet they slept again: and he comes and wakens them again, and admonisheth them again, and yet they slept again. Possibly, therefore, a man may fall into the same sin again and again, yea, even after * Adrian. sic definit peccatum ex infirmitate, est actus vel omissio culpabilis sine deliberatione propter passionis impetum facta: hac tamen definitione non complectitur omne peccatum ex infirmitate; nam potest peccatum ex infirmitate accidere cum deliberatione imo vero ut sit peccatum debet esse aliqua deliberatio Vasquez. xii. Q. 77. A. 3.

Utrum sit possibile quod aliquis sciens ex infirmitate peccat.

Dicendum quod communiter ab omnibus ponitur aliqua peccata ex infirmitate committi quæ a peccatis ex ignorantia non distinguerentur nisi contingeret aliquem scientem es infirmitate peccare. Tho. Aquinas Quest. Disputat. de causa peccati. Art. ix. p. 96.

admonition, and yet it may be a sin of infirmity. Yet how many poor souls are there, that are mistaken here on the right hand, and do think that their sins are no sins of infirmity, when indeed they are.

But if there be such mistakes, how shall we then know whether our sins be sins of infirmity?

Negatively, That is no sin of infirmity, which is a gross, foul, scandalous sin, committed with deliberation and consultation. It is said of David, that he turned not aside to the right hand or to the left, save only in the matter of Uriah. It seems then, that in this matter he did turn aside; but why is it said that he turned aside here, and not in other things; did he not sin at other times? Yes, very often: but there is a difference between missing one's way, and turning aside out of one's way; a man may ignorantly miss his way, or unadvisedly, but he that turns aside out of his way, doth it voluntarily and deliberately: and so did David here in this case, and not in others; this act was a foul fact, which he was able and had strength to avoid, committed with much deliberation, and therefore it was no sin of infirmity. So that if a man's sin committed, be a gross, foul, scandalous sin, committed with deliberation and consultation, this is no sin of infirmity.

If the sin be a ringleader unto other foul sins, it is no sin of infirmity. The ringleading sin is the most heinous sin. You shall observe, therefore, that when Samuel was raised up, (whether it was true Samuel, or false, I will not now debate,) when he was raised up by the witch of Endor, 1 Sam. xxviii., the only sin that Samuel lays to the charge of Saul, is this, ver. 18, that he obeyed not the voice of the Lord, in executing his fierce wrath upon Amalek: "Because thou obeyedst not the voice of the Lord, nor executedst his fierce wrath upon Amalek (saith Samuel), therefore hath the Lord done this thing unto thee this day. Moreover, the Lord will also deliver Israel with thee into the hands of the Philistines." If you read this story you shall find, that this only sin Samuel doth instance in. Saul had committed other sins, Saul had persecuted David, and out of malice, and had committed great sins; why doth Samuel instance in this sin above all other sins? but because this sin was the ringleading sin unto all the sins that Saul did commit; and therefore this is

charged upon him especially, as a great and a heinous sin. And you see how it is amongst men; if there be a rebellion or insurrection, they take the ringleader and hang up him, for say they, This is the great transgressor, for he is the ringleader. So amongst sins, the great sin is the ringleader; and therefore if your sin be a ringleader unto other foul sins, it is not a sin of infirmity.

A sin of presumption is not a sin of infirmity. Sins of presumption and sins of infirmity are set in opposition one to the other in Numb. xv. and Psalm xix. Now, I pray, when doth a man sin out of presumption, but when he sinneth because God is merciful; when he sinneth because his sin can and may stand with grace; when he sinneth because the sin is but an infirmity; when he sinneth because he shall repent afterwards? Now this is ordinary. I have read of a certain young man, who being admonished of the evil of his way and course, and pressed to leave his wickedness by the consideration of judgment, eternity and death a coming, that he said, Why tell ye me of these things; I will do well enough; for when death comes I will speak but three words, and will help all; and so he went on in the way of his sin: but in the end, coming to a bridge on horse-back, to go over a deep water, the horse stumbling, and he labouring to recover his horse, could not, but at last he let go the bridle, and gave up himself and horse to the waters, and was heard to say these three words: Diabolus capiat omnia: Devil take all. Here was three words indeed, and an example for all men who think to repent with a three word repentance at last, viz. Miserere mei Deus; Lord have mercy; to take heed by. Such is the end of presumption. And when a man doth therefore sin the rather because God is merciful, or because the sin is but a sin of infirmity, or because he hopes to repent afterward, or because his sin may and can stand with grace; this is a sin of presumption, and is no sin of infirmity: sins of presumption are no sins of infirmity.

Again, If the sin be a reigning sin, then it is no sin of infirmity, for when sin reigns, grace doth not; therefore saith the apostle, Rom. vi., "Let not sin have dominion over you, for ye are not under the law but under grace;" and when sin reigns it is in its full strength. Now a sin of infirmity is not therefore called infirmity because, as the schoolmen would, it

doth make a man infirm, by impeding and hindering the vital operations of the soul, for then all sins, and especially the greatest, should be sins of infirmity; but it is said to be a sin of infirmity, because it doth arise from weakness, the strength thereof being taken out and mortified; and therefore a reigning sin can be no sin of infirmity. Now sin reigneth in a man,

*

1. When it hath the command of his duties, his spiritual duties. When a master commands a servant from his meat, it argues that he rules over him; and if you see a man rise from his meat at the command of another, you say, Surely this man is the other's servant, for he was at dinner or supper, and the other did but speak or come by him, and he took his hat and cloak, and left all his meat, and followed him. So when a man shall sit down to duty, and he shall ordinarily be commanded from his duty by his sin, what doth this argue, but that his sin is his master, and doth rule and reign over him.

2. When men do yield the members of their bodies as weapons of unrighteousness unto sin, then sin reigns in them. "Let not sin reign in your mortal body (saith the apostle), that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof; neither yield ye your members as weapons of unrighteousness unto sin," Rom. vi. 12. 13.†

3. Sin reigns when it usually riseth by opposition. It was with sin as with grace; when grace is in power it riseth by opposition; "I will yet be more vile," saith David; and when the believing blind man was commanded to hold his peace, he cried so much the more, "Jesus, thou Son of Da

* Potest autem dici infirmitas in anima ad similitudinem infirmitatis corporis, dicitur autem corpus esse infirmum, quando debilitatur vel impeditur in executione propriæ operationis propter aliquam inordinationem partium corporis ita scil. quod humores et membra hominis non subdantur virtuti regitivæ et motivæ corporis, unde et membrum dicitur infirmum esse, quando non potest perficere operationem membri sani: unde et infirmitas animæ dicitur quando impeditur anima in propria operatione propter inordinationem partium ipsius, partes autem corporis dicuntur esse inordinatæ, quando non sequuntur ordinem naturæ ita et partes animæ dicantur esse inordinatæ quando non subduntur ordini rationis, &c. -Thom. Aquin. xii. quest. 77. art. 3.

+ Illicita delectationi si resistamus, si non consentiamus, si membra velut arma non ministremus non regnat peccatum in nostra mortali corpore peccatum enim ante regnum perdidit et sic perfit, in hac ergo vita, quantum ad sanctos attinet regnum perdit, in alia perit.—Augustin de Verbis Apost. Ser. 66.