so what was wanting in their former estate might be supply'd by them in their following one For as it is not easie to suppose that the corruptible body should so far stupefie the Soul as to hinder it from emerging in time out of sleep in which it may seem to have been cast and accordingly from calling to mind what had been before transacted within it Because though the Body may be some hindrance to the faculties of the Soul yet it doth not hinder them from coming in time to exert their proper operations So it is much less easie to suppose that God should not however bring to it's memory its past State and Actions by which it offended against him Partly to make it sensible of its former guilt and God's choosing to punish it by thrusting it into a Body and partly to make it so much the more careful to break off from those sins by which it had before offended him These as they are the only imaginable ends why God should thrust an offending Soul into such a Body so being perfectly lost to that Soul in which there is no consciousness of it's former state and of those enormities which were contracted in it I conclude therefore that whatever may be said as to this particular concerning Original Sin yet it did not take its rise from the evil acts or habits of the Soul in any praexistent estate and nothing therefore left to us to resolve it into but the depravedness of those from whom we all descended and from whom it is transmitted to particular Souls and Persons I deny not indeed that even this Account is not without its difficulties and such as it will be hard if not impossible perfectly to assoile I deny not farther that those difficulties are much enhanc'd by the ignorance we are under concerning the Original of humane Souls and which whilst we continue under it will not be easie for us to shew how that depravedness of Nature should pass from them to us But as those difficulties are no ways comparable to the difficulties of two of the former even those which resolve Original Sin into the malignity of some evil spirit or the pravity of matter So they can much less be thought to be of force against the testimony of the Scripture if that as I shall afterwards shew favour its arising from the pravity of our first Parents Partly because the thing in question is a matter of fact and therefore to be determin'd rather by testimony than the force of reason and partly because the testimony of Scripture is the most Authentick one as being no other than the testimony of God. Now that there wants not sufficient evidence from thence that that Original Sin whereof we speak ariseth from the pravity of those from whom we first descended will appear if these three things can be made out First that the sin of all mankind enter'd in by Adam Secondly that it enter'd in by Adam not meerly as the first that committed it or tempted other Men by his ill example to do the like but as more or less the cause of all their sins by his own Thirdly that he became the cause of all their sins through his by depraving thereby his own Nature and then communicating that depravation to those that descended from him That the Sin of all Mankind enter'd in by Adam will need no other proof than that known Text of S. Paul (p) Rom. 5.12 even that by one Man sin enter'd into the World and death by sin and so death passed through unto all Men for that all have sinned For as we cannot well interpret the word sin of any other than the sin of all Men because there is nothing in the Text to limit it to any particular Man's so much less when S. Paul doth afterwards affirm that that death which enter'd in by it passed thorough unto all Men for that or because all had sinned by the means of him That as it makes death to pass upon all Men with respect to their several sins and consequently their several sins to be the immediate door by which it enters so making those several sins therefore to be included in that sin which he before affirmed to be the cause of that death and together with it to have enter'd in by Adam But because among those at least by whom the Scripture is acknowledg'd the question is not so much whether all sin enter'd by Adam but after what manner it enter'd by him And because till that be known we cannot speak with any certainty concerning the derivation of the corruptness of our Natures from that of our first Parents or Parent Therefore pass we on to shew according to the method before laid down that as the sin of all Mankind enter'd in by Adam so it enter'd in by him not as some have vainly deem'd meerly as one who first committed it or tempted others by his example to do the like but as one also yea especially who by the malignant influence of his sin was more or less the cause of all those sins that followed it That the sin of all Mankind enter'd not in by Adam either meerly or principally as one who first committed it will need no other proof than his being not the first committer of sin even in this sublunary World but that Serpent who tempted our first Parents to it For as he and his fellow Angels sinned before them in those glorious seats in which they were first bestow'd So he sinned also before them here by that temptation which he suggested to them and without which they had not fallen from their integrity Which as it is an evidence of sin 's not entring in by Adam in that sense and consequently that that was not the sense intended by S. Paul So is the more to be considered because S. John attributes this entrance of sin to the Devil (q) 1 Joh. 3.8 yea makes all the committers of sin to be therefore of him But besides that Adam was not the first of those that sinned and we therefore not so to understand S. Paul when describing sin as entring by him Neither was he the first of humane kind that sinned which will be a yet farther prejudice to the former surmise For as we learn from the story of the Fall (r) Gen. 3.6 yea from this very Apostle elsewhere (Å¿) 1 Tim. 2.14 Adam was not deceiv'd that is to say was not the first that was so but the Woman being deceiv'd was in the transgression Which what is it but to say that sin did not enter in by Adam in that sense and consequently that that was not the sense intended by the Apostle in it Only if it be said and more than that cannot be said in it that we are not so to understand S. Paul when describing sin as entring by Adam as not also to suppose him to connote the Partner both of his Bed and of his transgression As I
will not be forward to deny the suggestion altogether because believing them both to have contributed to the production of our transgressions as well as Nature so I cannot forbear to say upon the account of that which follows that we ought to consider Adam as the more especial instrument in it Because S. Paul not only represents him (t) Rom. 5.14 in particular as the Type or Figure of him that was to come but both describes him all along under the notion of one Man (u) Rom. 5.12.15 16. c. yea makes a great part of the likeness that was between him and Christ to consist in it Which could by no means have been proper if he had meant no other by sin's entring in by Adam than entring in by him as one of the first committers of it For in this sense Eve must necessarily have had the preeminence because not only offending before her Husband but tempting even him to do the same From that first sense therefore pass we to the second and which indeed is both more antient and plausible than the former For as it is as old as that Pelagius (w) Vid. Voss Hist Pelag. li. 2. parte 2. Thes 1. who first call'd Original Sin in question so it allows the sin of Adam to have had an influence upon other Men's sins as well as to have given beginning to the being of it But that it hath as little solidity or pertinency to the words whereunto it is apply'd will appear if we reflect upon the sequel of S. Paul's Discourse or the subject matter of that which is offered as the interpretation of it For is there any reason to think without which that interpretation can be of no avail that Adam by his sin tempted all his posterity to offend Nay is there not reason enough to believe that that example of his contributed little to Men's following sins yea contributed nothing at all to many of them For how many Men have there been to whom the knowledge of his sin never reach'd How many are there yet who are under the same ignorance or may hereafter be And must not these therefore be look'd upon as exempted from the influence of his ill example and consequently if their sins entred in by Adam be acknowledg'd to have entred some other way And though the same be not to be said of those to whom the Scriptures have come because those are not without the knowledge of his sin nor incapable of being influenc'd by his example Yet is there as little reason to think that that example of his contributes much to their sins or indeed ever did to theirs who lived nearer to him and so were more likely to have been inflicted by him For beside that a sin so chastis'd as that was was not very likely to draw their thoughts towards it and therefore as little likely to tempt them to the imitation of it Beside that many of them might have no actual consideration of it as no doubt many now have not even when they offend in the like kind They might have been influenc'd and no doubt were by other sins of his as much or more than by his first transgression or by the ill examples of those that were nearer to them rather than by any of his In fine they might have been and no doubt often were influenced by the baits of pleasure or profit and thereby drawn aside from their integrity These having been as apt to influence them as the example of that sin by which their several offences are suppos'd to have entred into the World. And I shall only add that as that sense cannot therefore be reasonably impos'd if we regard as no doubt we ought the subject matter of it So we shall find as little encouragement for it from the sequel of his Discourse whose words are now under consideration For beside that he himself may seem sufficiently to obviate it by affirming presently after (x) Rom. 5.14 that there were many of those that sinned that did not nor well could sin after the similitude of Adam's transgression because knowing nothing at all of any such positive law as he transgress'd It is the main design of his Discourse to compare the good that Christ brought by his obedience with the hurt which that type of his did by his transgression Which comparison had been but a frigid one if all the hurt that Adam did us was by the force of his ill example Because it is certain that Christ's obedience was of a much more efficacious influence in the kind of it as well as in the degree and would therefore rather have been vilified than any way illustrated or commended by the comparison if the malign influence of Adam's sin had reach'd no farther than that of an example I conclude therefore that what ever was meant by sin's entring in by Adam yet something more was meant by it than its entring by him either as the first committer of it or as one who by his ill example tempted others to do the like And indeed as the instance but now alledg'd even the likeness that is between Adam's sin and Christ's obedience makes it but reasonable to look upon all sin as entring also by Adam as more or less the cause of it so it stands yet more confirm'd by what S. Paul affirms in the ninteenth verse especially as it lies in the Original The purport thereof being that Men are constituted sinners by his disobedience yea that they are so constituted sinners by it as Men are constituted righteous by the obedience of Christ For though the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may in themselves be capable of a softer sense and accordingly signifie no more than Men's being reputed and us'd as sinners upon the account of that transgression which Adam committed Yet I see not how that sense can be thought to fit them here or indeed any other than that of constituting or making Men sinners Partly because their being constituted sinners by Adam's disobedience is rendred by S. Paul (y) Rom. 5.18 19. as the reason of their condemnation by it and ought therefore to be distinguished from it And partly because they are said to be constituted sinners by Adam's disobedience as they who belong to Christ are constituted righteous by his obedience For the obedience of Christ procuring Men's being really righteous as well as their being reputed such yea procuring their being really righteous in some measure that they may be so accounted of and us'd What can be more reasonable than to think that that disobedience of Adam which is affirmed to be like it is of the same causality and accordingly constitutes or makes Men sinners as well as accounted of as such One only thing remains towards the clearing of the matter in hand even the derivation of the corruptness of our Nature from that of our first Parent or Parents And that is that as all sin entred in by Adam as more
or less the cause of it by his own so he became the cause of it by his own by thereby depraving his own Nature first and then communicating that depravation to those that descended from him Of the former whereof as there cannot well be any doubt considering the hainousness of that sin which he committed That as it could not but occasion the withdrawing of the Divine Grace from Adam so neither but draw after it the depravation of his Nature as which receiv'd all its rectitude from the other so there will be as little doubt of the latter if we compare what S. Paul here saith concerning Adam's being the cause of all our sins by his own with what he afterward saith * Rom. 7.17 20. concerning Men's falling into actual sin by vertue of an evil principle that dwelleth in them For if all actual sin proceed immediately from such an evil principle that evil principle must be also from Adam as without which otherwise he could not be the cause of our sins by his own nor constitute us sinners by it IV. I will not be over positive in defining by what means this evil principle is convey'd because I am not well assur'd how our very Nature is It shall suffice me to represent what may tend in some measure toward the clearing of it That Original sin cleaving to our nature from the first beginnings of it must consequently be conveyed to us by the same general means by which our nature is even by natural generation yea that the Scripture teacheth us so to reason where it affirms Men to be conceiv'd in sin (z) Psal 51.5 to become flesh by being born †Joh. 3.6 of flesh and unclean * Job 14.4 by being brought out of those Parents that are so That though the more particular means by which Original Sin is convey'd cannot with any certainty be assign'd because it is alike uncertain whether those Souls in which it is most reasonable to place it be either traduced or immediately created yet there would not be any uncertainty as to this particular if we believ'd the Souls of Men to be traduc'd as several of the Antients †Vid. Vossi Hist Pelag. Lib. 2. Parte 3. Thes 1. and not a few of the Moderns have believ'd For so it would not only not be difficult to apprehend the particular means of the others conveyance but almost impossible to overlook them because making it to pass together with those Souls to which it adheres and diffuse it self from thence to those Bodies to which they are united That though the traduction of Souls be not without its difficulties and such as I shall not be so vain as to attempt the solution of yet it is in that particular but of the same condition with the immediate Creation of them that I say not also less exceptionable as to the business of Original Sin In fine That as it hath nothing from Scripture to prejudice the belief of it as appears by the solutions which have been long since (a) Hotham's Introd to the Trent Philosophy given to the Objections from it So it seems to me much more agreeable to that account which it gives of the Creation and indeed to the Nature of a Parent For what can be more clear from the Story of the Creation than that God designed once for all to Create all the Beings which he intended leaving them and particularly Man to carry on the Succession by those productive principles which he had planted in them For if so what should hinder us from believing but that Men produce their like after the same manner that other Creatures do and by the same Divine Benediction and concurrence Sure I am as they will otherwise fall short of the powers of inferiour beings as well as be an anomalie in the Creation so they will be but very imperfectly in the condition of Parents because contributing only to that part which is the least considerable in their Posterity Only as I list not to contend about any thing of which I my self am not more strongly persuaded So I shall leave it to those whom the immediate creation of Souls better pleaseth to make their advantage of it and satisfie themselves from it concerning the means of Original Sin 's conveyance Which if they do they shall do more than the great S. Augustin could after all his travails in this Argument Because professing that he could not find either by reading or praying or reasoning (b) Ep. 157. ad Optatum how Original Sin could be defended with the opinion of the Creation of Souls V. I may not dismiss the Argugument that is now before us or indeed so much as attend to the consideration of those Objections that are made against it before I have also enquir'd whether that which hath the name of Original Sin be truly and properly such and not rather so stiled in respect of that first sin from which it proceeded or in respect of those sins to which it leads For beside that that Church whose Catechism I have chosen to explain leads us to the consideration of it because both there and elsewhere (c) Art. of Relig. 6. affirming it to have the nature of a Sin to make us the Children of Wrath and to deserve God's Wrath and Damnation The resolution of it is of no small moment toward the right stating of our duty and the valuableness of that remedy which Christianity hath provided for it For neither otherwise can we look upon Original Sin as any proper matter for our Repentance whatsoever it may be for our lamentation nor upon Baptism as bringing any other pardon to Infants than that of the Sin of their first Parents and which they who look upon Original Sin as rather our unhappiness than fault are generally as far from charging them with This only would be premis'd for the better understanding of it that by Sin is not meant any actual transgression of a Law for no Man was ever so absurd as to affirm that concerning Original Sin but that which is contrary to a Law in the nature of an evil habit and both imports an absence of that Righteousness which ought to be in us and an inclination to those evils from which we ought to be averse This as it is no less the transgression of a Law than any actual sin is so making the person in whom it is as obnoxious to punishment and consequently to be look'd upon as yet more properly a sin Now that that which we call Original Sin is really such in this latter notion will appear if these two things be considered First that the Scripture gives it the title of sin Secondly that it represents it as such upon the account of our being obliged by the Law of God to have in us a contrary temper That the Scripture gives that whereof we speak the title of sin is evident from those Texts which we before made use
it More particularly where he affirmeth that both Jews and Gentiles (h) Rom. 3.9 are all under sin That though the former may seem of all others to have been most free from it yet the Law (i) Rom. 19. had not stuck to affirm that ther was none (k) Rom. 10 c. righteous even among them no not one That there was none that understood none that sought after God That they were all gone out of the way they were altogether become unprofitable that there was none that did good no not one In fine that all the World must thereby (l) Rom. 19. be look'd upon as guilty before God because as he afterward (m) Rom. 23. speaks all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. But so the same Scripture did long before declare with an addition of all Men's being under a perpetual course of sin as well as in some measure tainted with it It being not only the voice of God concerning that part of Mankind that liv'd before the flood that every imagination (n) Gen. 6.5 of the thought of their heart was only evil continually but alike intimated by him concerning that part which was to follow even to the end of the World. For affirming as he doth (o) Gen. 8.21 that he would not any more drown the World because the imagination of Man's heart is evil from his youth he both supposeth that Mankind would again give occasion to it by their evil imaginations as without which otherwise there could be no occasion for God's suspending it and that Mankind would do so also in every individual and Generation of it The former because he speaks of the imaginations of Mankind in the general and which are therefore to be extended to all the individuals of it The latter because if any Generation of Men were likely to be free from those imaginations there would so far forth have been no need of his declaring that he would not drown the World because no ground for bringing it on the Inhabitants thereof But therefore as we have reason to believe from the places before recited that the World always was and will be under sin yea under a constant course of it So we shall be yet more confirmed in it if we compare the latter place with the former as the likeness that is between them will oblige us to do There being not a more apt sense of that latter Speech of God than that he would not again drown the Earth because he knew the imaginations of Men would be as evil as they had before been and he therefore if he were dispos'd to take that vengeance to bring a flood often upon it to the no profit of those that inhabited it as well as to the defacing of the Earth it self Which will make the condition of Man to be so sinful that it cannot be otherwise unless by some powerful means delivered from it 2. But so also may we inferr from thence which was the second thing to be prov'd that all Men are under sin from the time they begin to be in a capacity to offend That as it affirms the imagination of Men's heart to be evil so to be evil from their Youth and as I should therefore think from the time they begin to be in a capacity to be guilty of it Not that that Age to which we are wont to give the denomination of Youth is the first wherein Mankind begins to be in a capacity to offend for there is but too much evidence of that in the riper years of Childhood but that we cannot well understand that Text of any other youthful Period than that wherein Mankind begins to be in a capacity to reason and consequently also to offend Partly because the word we render Youth is sometime us'd even for infancy (p) Judges 13.7 Exod. 2.6 and ought not therefore without manifest reason to be removed too far from it But more especially because it is the manifest design of God in the place we speak of to aggravate the evil of Men's imaginations from the earliness thereof and that earliness therefore to be carried as high as the capacity Men are in to imagine evil will suffer the doing of it 3. Now as nothing therefore can be wanting toward the proof of Original Corruption than that they who are so universally and so early under sin are so also from an inward principle and such an inward principle too as was derived to them from their birth so we shall not it may be need any other proof of that than their being so universally and early under the other The former of these perswading Men's being under sin from some inward principle the latter from such an inward principle as is deriv'd to them from their Birth That I make Men's being so universally under sin an argument of their being so from some inward principle is because as so general an effect must be supposed to have some general Cause so no external Cause how general soever can be supposed to produce it without the assistance of the other As will appear if we consider the force of example and which as it is the most general and the most effectual external Cause that can be assign'd so is that into which they who deny the Corruption of Nature are wont to resolve the universality of sin For neither first is even Example of so great force as infallibly and universally to draw Men to the imitation of it For some Men are Vertuous even when they have an ill example before them and others as Vitious where they have a good Neither secondly hath it any force but what it receives from Men's aptness to imitate those with whom they converse Which as it will make it necessary for us to have recourse to an inward principle even for those effects which are produc'd by the mediation of example so make our very aptness to imitate the evil examples of others a branch of that inward principle which we affirm to be the cause of so universal an impiety Only because we are yet upon Scripture proofs and which the more express they are so much the more convictive Therefore I shall yet more particularly endeavour to evince from thence that as all Men are under sin so they are so by an innate principle But so S. Paul gives us clearly enough to understand because both asserting such a principle and that all actual sins are the issues of it The former where he represents even the Man who was under the conviction of the Law and who therefore might be suppos'd to be most free from the contagion of sin as Carnal yea sold under it (q) Rom. 7.14 as one who had sin dwelling in him for so he affirms no less than twice (r) Rom. 17.20 and as one too who had a law in his members (Å¿) Rom. 23 that warred against the law of his mind or as he afterwards entitles
the Sacrament or our Saviour had professed to prescribe or direct the whole form of the Administration of it But as it is notorious enough that the Church of England doth not represent the sign of the Cross as pertaining to the Essence of the Sacrament because administring it after Baptism first given yea after the mention of the Minister's receiving the baptized person into the Congregation of Christ's flock So our Saviour is so far from prescribing the whole external form of its Administration that he hath left us to the general tenour of his Doctrine and the directions of our own reason even for those things that are more material yea for such as are directed (u) See the Directory in the Administration of Baptism by those very Men who cry out against us for adding to Christ's Institution For where I beseech you is there any prescription of other words concerning Baptism than what is imply'd in that short belief into which he commands to Baptize Where to admonish all that are present to look back to their own Baptism and to repent of the violations of the Covenant they made with God in it Where any directions for requiring the Parent of the Child to bring him up in the nurture of the Lord yea to require the Parents solemn promise for the performance of it Nay where which is of all others the most material any Prayer to Almighty God for the sanctifying of the Water he is going to make use of and which I no way doubt is necessary to the Consecration of it All that the Institution of Baptism represents to us being the baptizing those that offer themselves to it in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Now if our Saviour hath not professed to prescribe even as to the things before directed but left Men to the general conduct of his Doctrine and the guidance of their own reason What appearance is there as to his prescribing after what external form and order all these things were to be done and which if he hath not there is no doubt the Governours of the Church may order as they shall see fit yea do so without any fear of being thought to charge his Institutions with imperfection They being not to be thought to do so who prescribe rules concerning those things which the Institutions of Christ profess not to give perfect directions in The only thing which hath occasion'd Men's misapprehensions first and then their passing so severe a Censure upon humane prescriptions in this kind is an hasty opinion they have taken up of Christ's being as particular in directing the external management of sacred Duties as Moses appears to have been as to the services of the Law. For which yet they have had no other pretence than a misapplied Text of the Author to the Hebrews (w) Heb. 3.2 even Christ's being as faithful in that house of God which was committed to his charge as Moses was in his But beside that there appear not any such particular directions from God to our Saviour as there were sometime given to Moses and our Saviour therefore not to be look'd upon as unfaithful for not reaching out such particular directions to us Besides that if our Saviour did not furnish such particular directions yet he hath furnished his Church with a far greater portion of his Spirit and which may serve to it as a guide to fit those Services for its respective members Beside lastly that the Services he enjoyn'd because to be exercised among people of several Nations and humours were not capable as to circumstances of such strict limitations as that which was to be exercised in one single Nation only There is nothing more evident to those that read the Scriptures than that Christ hath given no such particular directions and all Arguments from Christ's fidelity therefore of no more avail in this affair than those which the Papists are wont to draw from the wisdom and goodness of God toward the proving of an Infallible Guide For as no wise Man will be perswaded by such Arguments against the Testimony of his own senses which assure him of the errours of those whom they would have to be Infallible So no considering Man will be perswaded by the other into a belief of those particular directions which are not any where to be seen nor which they themselves who maintain those directions have yet been able to shew For when they have said all they can toward the evincing of their Conclusion the utmost they are able to prove is that Christ hath given some general directions concerning the Administration of religious Offices and which as it doth not prejudge the giving of more particular ones so doth much less make them to reflect any imperfection upon the Institution of Christ because pretending not to concern it self about them One other Charge there is which is more peculiar to the sign of the Cross and that is its being a relique of Popery or giving too much countenance to the Papists abuses of it But as they who advance the former of these make Popery much more Antient than it is for the advantage of Protestantism to allow It being certain from Tertullian (x) De Coronâ— cap. 3. that this Ceremony was in use in his time in almost all the actions they set about So our Church hath taken care to prevent in its own Members all misapplications of it or the giving the least encouragement to those that are made of it by others Partly by confining the use of it to the Administration of Baptism and partly by representing it as only a token of Men's being not ashamed to own the Faith and reproaches of him who suffered upon it Which is certainly a more proper course to discountenance Popery than it can be thought to be to remove the use of it altogether Because at the same time we disavow the errors of that we shew by our Practice our allowance of the Ceremony it self and together therewith our accordance with the Primitive Church which is the only plausible thing the Papists have to boulster up their own cause or reproach us with the neglect of A DIGRESSION Concerning ORIGINAL SIN By way of PREPARATION TO THE Following Discourses The Contents Of the ground of the present Digression concerning Original Sin and enquiry thereupon made what Original Sin is Which is shewn in the General to be such a corruption of the Nature of every Man that is naturally engendered of the off-spring of Adam whereby it becomes averse from every thing that is good and inclinable to every thing that is evil The nature of that corruption more particularly enquir'd into and shewn by probable Arguments to be no other than a Privation of a Supernatural Grace That there is such a thing as we have before described evidenced at large from the Scripture and that evidence farther strengthned by the experience we have of its effects and the
worst of sins the greatest actual sinner cannot deserve more punishment than he who offends in a far less degree Because all demerit ariseth from the pravity of the will which is not more or less for the meer absence or presence of God's restraining Grace So the greatest actual sinner cannot become obnoxious to punishment upon the score of any other Corruption than that of Nature That as it makes all his actual sins to be necessary and therefore in reason to bear the whole blame and punishment so receiving no new aggravation from the want of that restraining Grace which might have withheld the party from them in as much as that want if it be a fault is no less the result of his natural corruption than his actual offences are But therefore also as we cannot look upon natural corruption as determining Men to all their actual errours without taking away all diversity between the demerits of natural Men yea making natural Corruption the only proper ground of their punishment so they who do so will be found to contradict the declarations of the Scripture as well as the allowed practice of the World. For why if there be no difference between the demerits of natural Men should those that are in Authority mete out different punishments to them according to the different degrees or kinds of those offences which they commit Nay why should the Scripture affirm that it shall be more tolerable for some sinners (b) Matt. 11.22 24. than for others at the great day of judgment That as it is a judgment of righteousness so being consequently to mete out equal punishments to all sinners if there be but an equality in their demerits Again if natural Corruption be upon the matter the only proper ground of punishment as it must of necessity be if it be the unavoidable cause of actual sins How comes the Scripture to declare that God will reward every Man according to his works (c) Rom. 2.6 yea the wicked (d) Rom. 2.8 according to his works as well as the righteous according to theirs For if natural Corruption be the only proper ground of punishment the works of Men in propriety of Speech can have no concernment in it and much less as the Scripture declares be the principal object of judgment and therefore of that punishment which it shall award The utmost in my opinion that can be said in this particular is that as Men by the Corruption of their Nature are averse from every thing that is good so that averseness will indispose those in whom that Corruption abides to all good actions whatsoever and infallibly take them off from them where either some work of God upon their minds doth not thrust them on to them or the comeliness or profitableness thereof shall not more strongly impel them to the practice of them The former whereof will make the consent of such persons even to those good actions which they perform incomplete and imperfect and indeed a consent to them rather as expedient than good whence it is that our Church (e) Art. 13. represents them as having the nature of sins The latter cause them to neglect all such as are not in a manner thrust upon them by God or have not one of the former motives to incite them to the practice of them yea present to their minds when they ought to make use of them Which will occasion such persons for the most part to neglect all good actions where there is not place for serious thoughts as in cases of surprise or where they have not been habituated to the practice of vertue or to the consideration of the comeliness or profitableness thereof But as where there is place for serious thoughts there may be place also for the former motives to impel Men to the practice of that from which they are otherwise sufficiently averse So it is not unlikely that the minds of those who have been before habituated to the practice or contemplation of Vertue may be thrust on by the former motives to pursue many things that are good yea acquit themselves singularly in them Of which yet if any doubt be made we have the laudable example of several Heathens to convince us thereof and who because Heathen cannot be supposed to be free from the power of natural Corruption or to be thrust on by other motives than the former to the doing of such actions from which they are naturally so averse In like manner As Men by the Corruption of their Nature are inclin'd to every thing that is evil as well as averse from every thing that is good So that inclination will dispose those in whom it is to an allowance of all evil actions and infallibly betray them into them where God's restraining Grace doth not withhold them or the indecency or dangerous consequences of the other do not alike keep them back The former whereof will make their abstaining even from those evil actions which they avoid to be but an imperfect abstinence from them and indeed an abstinence from them rather as inexpedient than evil The latter cause them to fall into all such from which they are not restrain'd by God or by a present and intense consideration of the indecency or danger of them Which will occasion such persons for the most part to fall into all evil actions where there is not room for serious thoughts as in cases of surprise or where they have not been habituated to the avoiding of vice or the consideration of the indecency or dangerousness thereof But as where there is room for serious thoughts there may also be place for the former reasons to take them off from the practice of that to which they are otherwise sufficiently inclin'd So it is not unlikely that the minds of those who have been before habituated to the avoiding of Vice or the consideration of the indecency or dangerousness thereof may be taken off by the former reasons from the pursuit of evil things yea acquit themselves singularly in it As is farther evident from the resistance that hath been made by several Heathens to all the temptations of sin and who because Heathen cannot be suppos'd either to have been free from natural Corruption or to have been taken off by other means than the former from the doing of those evil actions to which they were so strongly inclin'd But because what we have hitherto said concerning the Corruption of our Nature doth rather tend to shew what effects it hath upon us than what that Corruption is And because that word whereby we have chosen to express it is but a Metaphorical one and will therefore serve yet less clearly to declare the thing intended by it Therefore it may seem but reasonable to enquire yet farther what it is and wherein it doth consist as without which we shall discourse but imperfectly concerning it Now as that question cannot otherwise be solv'd than by the knowledge of that Estate of
it a law of sin The latter where he represents that carnality and sinful captivity under which the Jew was as the cause of his doing what he would not (t) Rom. 15. and omitting what he would That sin which dwelt in him as doing all the evil (u) Rom. 17.20 he committed And that law that was in his members as warring against the law of his mind (w) Rom. 23. and bringing him into Captivity unto the law of sin For what more could be said on the one hand to shew the thing S. Paul there speaks of to be an inward evil principle and which because even in those who were under the Law is much more to be supposed in the Gentiles Or what more on the other to shew that evil principle to be the parent of our actual sins yea that which gives being to them all And I know nothing to take off the force of it but a supposition of St. Paul's speaking in that place of Evil habits and which as they must be confessed to be of the same pernicious efficacy with Original Corruption so to have been for the most part the condition both of Jew and Gentile before they came to be overtaken by the Gospel But how first supposing the Apostle to have spoken only of evil habits for nothing hinders us from assigning them a part in that Body of sin How first I say doth that agree with the account he before gave concerning sins entring in (x) Rom. 5.12 by Adam and our being constituted (y) Rom. 19. sinners by him For though Original Corruption may come from him yet evil habits can be only from our selves and consequently those sins that flow from them How secondly supposing none but evil habits to be here intended can we make that Body or law of sin whereof S. Paul speaks to be the portion of all that are under an obligation to Baptism as that Apostle plainly supposeth when he makes the design of Baptism (z) Rom. 6.6 to be the destruction of it For to say nothing at present concerning the case of Infants because the best evidence of their Obligation to Baptism is the Corruption of their Nature and that Obligation therefore rather to be prov'd from Natural Corruption than Natural Corruption from it Neither can it be deny'd even from the Commandment * Mat. 28.19 that our Saviour gave concerning Baptism that all adult persons are under an Obligation to it nor therefore but that they carry about them that body of sin which Baptism was intended for the destruction of But so all adult persons cannot be supposed to do if that body of sin be no other than evil habits Because it must be sometime after that maturity of theirs before they can come to those evil habits or therefore to be under an Obligation to that Sacrament which is to destroy it In fine how supposing none but evil habits to be intended by that body or law of sin whereof the Apostle speaks can we give an account of so holy and just a Law as that of Moses is stirring †Rom. 7.9 Concupiscence in those that are under it and not rather hindring it from coming to effect For as nothing hinders the proposing of that Law before such persons come to any evil habits and therefore also before there is any thing in them to stir them up to such a Concupiscence So nothing can hinder that Law when duly proposed to them from preventing all such Concupiscence as it was the design of the Lawgiver to forbid Because as the persons we speak of must be supposed to be without any contrariety in their Nature to the matter of that Law which is propos'd So they must also be suppos'd to be in that state wherein God had set them and because God cannot be thought to place Men in any other estate than that of uprightness in such a state as will make them willing to listen to the divine Laws and receive their directions from them By which means the divine Laws shall rather keep Men's Concupiscence from coming to effect than give any occasion for the stirring of it I conclude therefore from that as well as the former arguments that the evil principle spoken of by S. Paul cannot be evil habits and consequently nothing more left to us to demonstrate than that it is derived to us from our Birth or rather from our Conception in the Womb which is all that is affirmed concerning Original Corruption Now that that evil principle whereof we speak is derived to us from our Birth will become at least probable from what was before said concerning the earliness of Men's being under sin yea their being so as the Scripture instructs us even from their Youth For as it is hard to believe that all Men should be so early under sin if it were not from some inward principle that was antecedent to that Age For what should otherwise hinder some of them at least from preserving their integrity for some time especially supposing as that tender Age maketh it reasonable to suppose a more peculiar watchfulness of the Divine Providence over it So it will be much more hard to believe supposing that evil principle to be antecedent to their Youth that it should not be derived to them from their Conception and Birth The Ages preceding that being not in a capacity to produce in themselves such an evil principle and therefore to be suppos'd to have had it transmitted to them together with their Nature and so also by the same means and from the same time in which that their Nature was And indeed as even the tenderest age falls under death and not unreasonably therefore concluded to be some way or other under sin if as S. Paul †Rom. 5.12 speaks death enter'd by it and so pass'd upon all Men for that all have sinned So there want not some places of Scripture which do yet more directly evince that the first beginnings of our Nature are tainted with that of which we speak Of this sort I reckon that of Job (a) Job 14.4 which is so commonly apply'd to this affair even his demanding of God with reference to himself (b) Job 1 c. and all other Men who could bring a clean thing out of an unclean and thereby therefore intimating that it was not to be done For as it is manifest from his alledging that the better to countenance his own expostulation concerning God's bringing him into judgment that by the unavoidable uncleanness there intimated must be meant a sinful one as which alone could either dispose him to such actions as could be a proper matter for judgment or be alledged in bar to a severe one So it is alike manifest from Job's asking who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean that Men are not only so unclean in their Nature but that they become so by those evil principles out of which they are brought and so
of to prove the being of it More particularly from that (d) Psa 51.5 which represents David as conceiv'd and born in sin and those (e) Rom. 7 17-20 which represent us all as having sin dwelling in us For these having been before shewn to speak of Original Sin make it evident that the Scripture gives it the title of Sin because in the former places representing it under that notion And though I will not from that only Topick conclude it to be properly such because the Scripture makes use of figurative expressions as well as proper yea doth so in this very particular whereof we speak for thus it sometimes gives the title of sin to that which is intended only as the punishment thereof yet as we may lawfully inferr from thence that there is more cause to believe Original Sin to be properly than figuratively such till the contrary thereof be made appear The proper sense being otherwise to be preferr'd before the figurative So that there can be no place for the figurative sense if that which is there represented as a sin be elsewhere represented as such upon the supposition of our being obliged to have in us the contrary temper Which that it is will appear from such Texts as do more immediately affirm it or such as affirm those things from which it may by good consequence be deduced Of the former sort I reckon that which is immediately subjoyn'd by David to the mention of his being conceiv'd in sin and brought forth in iniquity (f) Psa 51.6 Behold thou requirest truth in the inward parts and shalt or rather hast made me to understand wisdom secretly For as we cannot but look upon what is there said concerning God's requiring truth in the inward parts as spoken with relation to that sin whereof he before complains and to the mention whereof he subjoyns the mention of the other So neither considering it to have been his intent to aggravate his sinfulness before God but look upon it as also his intent to aggravate the sinfulness of his frame by that piety which God required of him Which suppos'd Original Sin will not only be found to be so entituled by the Scripture but to have had that name bestowed upon it upon the account of Men's obligation to the contrary and consequently to be truely and properly such And though there be not it may be many more Texts of that nature or which therefore can be thought so directly to affirm that it becometh the sin of those in whom it is upon the account of their obligation to the contrary Yet will it not be difficult to find others which do as clearly assert those things from which it may by good consequence be deduced Such as are those which make Original Sin to be a proper matter for confession yea to induce a guilt upon the person in whom it is But so the Prophet David doth plainly suppose in that very Psalm which we but now made use of Because not only confessing (g) Psa 51.5 the sinfulness of his Nature together with that of his external actions but begging of God immediately after that confession of his that he would purge him (h) Psa 51.7 with Hyssop from it For as we have no reason to exclude that from the matter of the desir'd purgation which immediately precedes the Prayer that is put up for it So much less reason to doubt after that Prayer for the purgation of it of its inducing a guilt upon the person in whom it is The use of Hyssop in the Old Law as appears by several places (i) Exo. 12.22 Lev. 14.6 in it and a consentient Text in the Epistle to the Hebrews (k) Heb. 9.19 c. being to sprinkle the Blood of the Sacrifices upon those who were any way obnoxious to its censures and so deliver them from the severity thereof For what other then could the Psalmist mean by that Prayer of his than that God would purge him from that and his other sins by the blood of an expiatory Sacrifice Or so meaning be thought to intimate more clearly than that that from which he desir'd to be purg'd stood in need of such a Sacrifice and consequently was no more without its guilt than his actual transgressions were Only if that notion may not be thought to be of sufficient clearness to build so important a Conclusion on it will not be difficult to strengthen it yet more by the word the Hebrew makes us of for purge and those Prayers which the Psalmist subjoyneth to it By the former because literally (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying a purification from sin by the latter because importing it to be his desire (m) Psal 51.7 8 9. that God would wash him from it that he would cause those bones that had been broken by it to rejoyce and in fine that he would hide his face from his sins and blot out all his iniquities These as they are known and usual expressions for the remission of sins and consequently importing the guilt of those to whom they are apply'd and their purification from it so with this farther reason to be so taken here because the Psalmist afterwards begs (n) Psal 51.10 that God would purifie him from the filth of them and renew a right spirit within him VI. Now though from what hath been said it be competently evident that the Doctrine of Original Sin is not without good Authority to warrant it yet because that Doctrine hath been impugned by the Pelagians of Old and since that by the followers of Socinus therefore it may not be amiss for the farther clearing of it to consider their Objections against it and either return a direct and satisfactory answer to them or at least shew that they ought not however to be admitted as a bar against what the Scripture hath said concerning it To begin with those Objections which respect the being of it or rather tend to shew that it hath no being in the World Which are either such as consider it as a simple corruption of humane Nature or such as do also consider it as a sinful one Of the former sort are those which represent it as a thing unconceivable how it should come into humane Nature which the better to persuade they alledge plausible reasons against all those means whereby it may be suppos'd to find admittance For these being destroy'd they think they may lawfully inferr that there is indeed no such depravation upon humane Nature Of what force those reasons are will be then more seasonable to enquire when I consider what is objected against the fountain of Original Corruption or the means by which it is convey'd At present it may suffice to say that of what force soever they may be thought to be yet they are not of sufficient force to destroy the being of Original Corruption which is the thing for which they are here alledg'd Partly because many things
may be yea be assur'd to us of the original or conveyance whereof we our selves are perfectly ignorant for who doubts of the being of humane Souls though he neither knows nor well can whether they be traduc'd or infus'd and partly because the testimony of Scripture with the experience we have of its effects is a much more forcible argument of the being of it than all the former reasons are of the other These being direct and immediate proofs of its existence whereas the other are only indirect and mediate From such objections therefore as consider Original Sin as a simple Corruption of humane Nature pass we to those which consider it also as sinful and which indeed seem most hardly to press upon it Such as are that all sin is the transgression of a Law which Original Sin seems not to be That it requires the consent of the will of him in whom it is which cannot well be affirm'd of that As in fine that the Scripture it self may seem to make that which we call Original Sin rather the Parent of Sin than sin it self because making sin to arise (o) James 1 13 c. from the conception and parturition of it As to what is objected from the forementioned Scripture it is either nothing at all to the purpose or very much against the purpose of those that alledge it Partly because by the sin there spoken of can be meant no other than actual sin and nothing therefore to be concluded from thence but that all actual sin is the product of Men's Lust and partly because that Text makes even actual sins to be the product of Men's Lust yea of such a lust as draweth them aside and enticeth them For who can well think the Parent of such Children to be of a better Nature than the Children themselves especially when she is described as giving birth to them by false and deceitful Arts Such Arts as those reflecting no great honour upon the Mother but on the contrary making her to be altogether as criminal as the other If therefore they who impugn Original Sin as such would do it with any advantage it must not be by Arguments drawn from Scripture which will rather hurt than profit them but by Arguments drawn from reason and particularly by such as represent Original Sin as no transgression of a Law and therefore no sin properly so call'd or as a thing which hath not the consent of the will of him in whom it is and therefore yet farther removed from it As concerning the former of these even that which represents Original Sin as no transgression of a Law I answer that they who so speak must deny it to be such either because it is no Act or because there is no Law which it can be suppos'd to be a transgression of If the former of these be their meaning I willingly grant what they alledge but I say withall that it will not from thence follow that it is no sin at all For if Men are obliged by the divine Law to a pious and innocent temper as well as not to swerve from it in their actions the want of that happy temper or the having a contrary one will be as much the transgression of a Law as the want of the same piety in their actions Which will consequently devolve the whole force of that Objection upon the supposition of there being no such Law of God which requires the former temper or which therefore Original Sin can be thought to be a transgression of But as I have already made it appear in some measure that there is in truth such a Law as requires a pious and innocent temper so I shall now endeavour to strengthen it by some more particular proofs and by answering those exceptions that are made against it In order to the former whereof we are to know that as the Law we speak of must be supposed to have been given to Adam as that too not only in his private but publick capacity and as he may be thought to have been the representative of all Mankind there being no other Law which can be suppos'd to concern us before we come to be in a capacity to apprehend and obey it so I shall endeavour to make it appear first that there was such a Law given to Adam and then that it was given to him not only in his private but publick capacity and as he may be thought to have been the representative of all Mankind Now that there was a Law given to Adam requiring a pious and innocent temper as well as the preserving that piety and innocency in his actions will need no other proof than God's creating him in it and the love he may be supposed to bear unto it For as we cannot think God would have ever intrusted such a Jewel with Adam if it had not been his intention that he should preserve and exercise it so much less when the holiness of the divine Nature persuades his love to it as well as the declarations of his word For what were this but to make God indifferent what became of his most excellent gifts which no wise person and much less so hearty a lover of them can be supposed to be If therefore there can be any doubt concerning the Law we speak of it must be as to its having been given to Adam in his publick capacity and as he may be suppos'd to have been the representative of all Mankind Which I shall endeavour to evince first by shewing what I mean by his publick capacity secondly by shewing that Adam was set in such a capacity and thirdly that the Law we speak of was given to him as considered in it By the publick capacity of Adam I mean such a one whereby as he was design'd to be the Father of all Mankind so God made him a kind of Trustee for it In order thereunto both giving him what he did for their benefit as well as his own and obliging him for their sakes as well as his own to see to the preservation of it and act agreeably to it Which if he did his Posterity as well as himself should have the benefit thereof and God's favour together with it but if not forfeit together with him what God had so bestow'd upon him and incurr the penalty of his displeasure Now that Adam was set in such a capacity which is the second thing to be demonstrated will appear from the Scriptures making him the cause of all Men's death by his offence and disobedience For the effects of another disobedience being not otherwise chargeable upon any Man than as that other may be suppos'd to be appointed to act for him If the effects of Adam's disobedience were to fall upon all his Posterity he also must be supposed to have been appointed to act for them and consequently to have been set in that publick capacity whereof I speak Which will leave nothing more for us to shew upon this
Now though it be hard to find any one Text of Scripture where that forgiveness whereof we speak is expresly attributed to Baptism Yet will it not be difficult to deduce it from that (q) Eph. 2.1 c. which I have before shewn to entreat of our becoming the children of wrath by nature as well as by the wickedness of our conversations For opposing to the corruption or rather deadness which accrues by both the quickning we have together with Christ and which quickning he elsewhere (r) Col. 2.12 as expresly affirms to be accomplished in us by Baptism Affirming moreover that quickning to bring salvation (ſ) Eph. 2 5-8 and peace (t) Eph. 14-17 and reconciliation (u) Eph. 16. for so he discourseth of it in the following Verses of that Chapter he must consequently make that quickning and the means of it to tend to the forgiveness of both and particularly of natural corruption Because as that quickning is by him oppos'd to both so it must in this particular be look'd upon as more peculiarly opposed to the latter because that is more peculiarly affirm'd to make Men the Children of wrath and vengeance Such evidence there is of the outward visible sign of Baptism being a means fitted by God to convey that forgiveness whereof we speak And we shall need no other proof than that of its being also a pledge to assure the baptized person of it For since God cannot be suppos'd to fit any thing for an end which he doth not on his part intend to accomplish by it He who knows himself to partake of that which is fitted by God to convey forgiveness of sin may know alike and be assur'd as to the part of God of his receiving that forgiveness as well as the outward means of its conveyance For which cause in my Discourse of its other inward and spiritual Graces I shall take notice only of that outward and visible sign as a means fitted by God to convey them because its being also a pledge may be easily deduced from it PART VI. Of Mortification of sin and Regeneration by Baptism The Contents Of the relation of the sign of Baptism to such inward and spiritual Graces as tend to free us from the pollution of sin or introduce the contrary purity And that relation shewn to be no less than that of a means whereby they are convey'd This evidenced as to the former even our death unto sin which is also explain'd from such Texts of Scripture as make mention of our being baptiz'd into it and buried by Baptism in it or from such as describe us as cleansed by the washing of it The like evidenc'd from the same Scripture concerning the latter even our new birth unto righteousness As that again farther clear'd as to this particular by the consentient Doctrine and practice of the Church by the opinion the Jews had of that Baptism which was a Type and exemplar of ours and the expressions of the Heathen concerning it The Doctrine of the Church more largely insisted upon and exemplified from Justin Martyr Tertullian and S. Cyprian I Have considered the sign of Baptism hitherto in its relation to Forgiveness that Grace which tends to free men from their guilt and is for that purpose convey'd by Baptism to us I come now to consider it in its relation to those which either tend to free them from the pollution of sin best known by the name of a Death unto it or to introduce the contrary righteousness and is call'd a new birth unto it Where again I shall shew in each of them that as the outward work of Baptism hath the relation of a sign unto them so it hath equally the relation of a means fitted by God to convey them and where it is duly receiv'd doth not fail to introduce them To begin as is but meet with that which hath the name of a Death unto sin because sin must be first subdu'd before the contrary quality can be introduc'd Where first I will enquire what we are to understand by it and then what evidence there is of the sign of Baptism's being fitted to convey it For the better understanding the former whereof we are to know that as Men by the corruption of their nature are inclined unto sin and yet more by the irregularity of their conversations so those inclinations are to the persons in whom they are as a principle of life to a living Creature and accordingly do both dispose them to act sutably thereto and make them brisk and vigorous in it Now as it cannot well be expected that where such inclinations prevail Men should pursue those things which piety and vertue prompt them to so it was the business of Philosophy first and afterwards of Religion if not wholly to destroy those inclinations yet at least to subdue them in such sort that they should be in a manner dead and the persons in whom they were so far forth dead also They neither finding in themselves the like inclinations to actual sin nor hurried on by them when they did How little able Philosophy was to contribute to so blessed an effect is not my business to shew nor indeed will there be any need of it after what I have elsewhere * Expl. of the Creed Art. I believe in the Holy Ghost said concerning the necessity of the divine Grace in order to it But as Christianity doth every where pretend to the doing of it and which is more both represents that effect under the name of a death unto sin and compares Men's thus dying with that natural death which our Saviour underwent so it may the more reasonably pretend to the producing of it because it also pretends to furnish Men with the power of his Grace to which such an effect cannot be suppos'd to be disproportionate The only thing in question as to our present concernment is whether as the outward work of Baptism hath undoubtedly the relation of a sign unto it so it hath also the relation of a means fitted by God for the conveying of it and what evidence there is of that relation Now there are two sorts of Texts which bear witness to this relation as well as to its having that more confessed relation of a sign Whereof the former entreat of this Grace under the title of a death unto sin the latter of a cleansing from it Of the former sort I reckon that well known place to the Romans where S. Paul doth not only suppose all true Christians †Rom. 6.2 to be dead to sin and accordingly argue from it the unfitness of their living any longer therein but affirm all that are baptized into Jesus Christ * Rom. 6.3 to be baptized into that death yea to be buried by Baptism (a) Rom. 6.4 into it to be planted together (b) Rom. 6.5 by that means in the likeness of Christs death and to have their old Man (c) Rom. 6.6 or
blessings and the means that was intended to exhibit them among us as the posterity of Abraham did their Children to the like blessings and that means which among them was intended for the exhibition of them II. The Baptism of Infants being thus made out from the Scripture and by such passages thereof also as cannot be easily avoided Pass we on to enquire what countenance it hath from Antiquity as which if it be any thing considerable will the more firmly establish it Where the first that I shall take notice of is a passage of Justin Martyr I do not mean what is commonly quoted out of his Questions and Answers ad Orthodoxos (r) Quaest 56. it being questionable enough (Å¿) Vid. Coci Censur quorund Script in Script Just Martyr whether that Book were his or at least as we now have it but what may be found in his second Aplogy (t) Pag. 62. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and concerning which there is not any the least controversie in the Church In which Apology speaking of the excellency of the Christian Law above that of any humane ones in setting bounds to the carnal desires of men he hath these words And there are many men and women of sixty and seventy years of Age who having from their Childhood been discipled unto Christ have all their time continued uncorrupt or Virgins And I boast that I can shew such among all sorts of men For why should we also speak of that innumerable multitude of men who have chang'd from intemperance and so have learnt these things For Christ called not the just or temperate to repentance but the ungodly and intemperate and unjust Which words to an unbiast Reader cannot well signifie less than Childrens being then baptiz'd into Christianity That Father not only making mention of certain persons who had from their childhood been discipled unto Christ which we know from our Saviour (u) Matt. 28.19 to have been effected by Baptism and continu'd too all their time uncorrupt or Virgins which yet is a comtent proof of their being baptiz'd when Children but opposing them to such persons as had chang'd from intemperance and rather learnt that purity afterward than been discipled into it at the very first That opposition of his making it yet more evident that he meant such persons as were discipled to Christ from their very childhood and before they were in a capacity of learning him and his doctrine by instruction To this is Justin Martyr subjoyn we another of Irenaeus which is yet more clear for the Baptism of Infants For Christ saith that Father (w) Omnes enim venit per semetipsum salvare Omnes inquam qui per eum renascuntur in Deum infantes parvulos pueros jâ—venes seniores Ideo per omnem venit aetatem infantibus infans factus sanctificans infantes in parvulis parvulus sanctificans hanc ipsam habentes aetatem Adv. haeres li.a.c. 39. came to save all persons by himself All I say who by him are born again to God Infants and little ones and Children and Young Men and Old Therefore he came in every Age and was made an Infant to Infants sanctifying Infants and a little one among little ones sanctifying those of that age c. Where we have him not only affirming Christ to have come to save Infants as well as others yea to have been made an Infant himself to sanctifie them which shews them in his opinion to have had a general right to the blessings of Christianity but speaking of several of them as born again unto God by Christ which is as much as to say baptiz'd That as it is the way by which all are to be so born even by the Doctrine of (x) Joh. 3. â— our Saviour so the way too by which the Antients apprehended it to be effected For thus where Justin Martyr intreats of the Baptism of those of his time he tells us (y) Apolog. 2. p. 93. 4. that they who were to partake of it were brought by the Christians to a place where water was and there regenerated after that manner of regeneration wherewith they themselves had been And to the same purpose also this very Irenaeus (z) Adv. haereâ— li. 1. c. 18. because not only attributing the same regeneration to it but representing it as the Doctrine of the Gnosticks as to that Baptism which they set up against our Saviour's that it was necessary for those who had received perfect knowledge to be so regenerated into that vertue or power which is above all things Which passage with the former one makes it yet more manifest that Irenaeus meant by such Infants as were born again by Christ unto God such as had been regenerated by Baptism and consequently that the Baptism of such was no stranger in his days I think I shall not need to insist upon the days of Tertullian because what the practice of that time was is evident from his disputing against Infant Baptism or at least advising to delay it There being no place for such a dispute or advice if the thing it self had not been then in use and in use too as he himself intimates in obedience to that precept of our Saviour which enjoyn'd the suffering little Children to come unto him in order to their partaking of his blessing and Kingdom And indeed as Origen who liv'd not long after him doth not only assert the same practice of infant Baptism but affirm * In Rom. 16. the Church to have receiv'd it as a Tradition from the Apostles So Tertullian's Scholar and great admirer S. Cyprian †Epist 59. gives such an ample testimony to it that I know not what need to be added to it For one Fidus having question'd him concerning the cause of Infants who he thought ought not to be baptiz'd till the eighth day according to the law of Circumcision S. Cyprian in a Council of sixty six Bishops made this following Answer to his demand That he and the whole Council that was with him had quite other thoughts of that affair they universally judging that the mercy and grace of God was to be deny'd to none that was born of men And again that if remission of sins were upon the faith of the parties given to the greatest Offenders neither was any of them debar'd from Baptism and grace how much less ought a new-born Infant to be debarred of it who had no other sin to answer for but what he drew from Adam and who came so much the more easily to receive pardon of sin because it was not his own proper sins but those of others that were to be forgiven him For which cause the opinion of the Council was that no one ought to be debar'd by them from Baptism and the Grace of God and that if that were to be observ'd and retain'd as to all persons whatsoever it was much more to be observ'd and retain'd as to Infants