punishment to be a favour and blessing of God 3. Not many or more sinnes but one caused death One onely David begotten in lawfull wedlock That this one sinne is not lesse in the godly nor greater in the wicked Death was appointed for one sinne onely of one person onely 4. This one person onely was Man this Man that sinned that one sinne was Adam Strange and curious speculations that Eve sinned not that sinne for which man-kinde was appointed to death 5. Two Schoole-speculations propounded The second handled at large as expounding the former and determined against the Schoolmen themselves viz. That the children of innocent Adam had been born confirm'd in grace The censure of Vives upon these and the like points A part of his censure censured 1. COncerning Death I mean in this place to touch onely the strange medly that is mixed in it of Sower Sweet The sowernes or bitternes of death is discerned because that manner of secession or departure is onely painfull whereas all other approaches unto glorie all other stairs steps and means inducing to blessednes are void of pain Let us see it exemplified in Enoch He walked with God and was not for God took him Genes 5.24 His manner of not-being as he was before whatsoever it were or howsoever was never held painfull Secondly the chariot of fire and the horses of fire which parted Eliah and Elisha both asunder 2. Kings 2.11 hurt neither of them Elijah saith the place went up by a whirlwinde into heaven the very form of words implying a willing-easie ascent nor did the whirlwinde molest him or pain him though Ecclesiasticus 48.9 it is said it was a whirlwinde of fire Christs Transfiguration comes next to be considered It was a true representation of that bodilie glorie which at the recollection retribution of all Saints God will adorn and cloth the faithfull withall Christ shewing them the mark at which they ought to shoot for we also are to be fashioned or configured to his transfiguration Philip. 3.21 * Qualis futurus est tempore judicandi talis Apostolis apparuit As he is to be at the time of judging such did he appeare to the Apostles saith Hierom on Matth. 17. And let not man think he lost his old form and face saith he or took a body spirituall or aëriall the splendor of his face was seen and the whitenes of his vestments described * Non substantia tollitur sed gloria commutatur The substance is not taken away but the glory is changed Or that I may utter it in Theophylacts words on Mark 9.2 By the transfiguration so Oecolampadius should translate it understand not the change of character and lineaments but the character remaining such as it was before an increase was made of unspeakable light This admirable light not coming from without to him as it did to Moses but flowing from his divinitie into his humane soul from it into his body and from it into his very clothes will you say his clothes were changed saith S. Hierom His raiment became shining exceeding white as snow so as no fuller on earth can white them Mark 9.3 And his face did shine as the Sunne Matth. 17.2 What S. Chrysostom saith of the spirituall bodies of the Saints I will much more rather say of Christs body transfigured for if starre differeth from starre in glorie man from man much more shall Christ shine above all other men by infinite degrees They shall shine as the Sunne not because they shall not exceed the splendor of the sunne Aquin part 3. q. 45. art 2. but because we see nothing more bright then the sunne he took the comparison thence And this shining saith Aquinas * Fuit gloriae claritas essentialiter licèt non secundum modum cùm suerit per modum transeuntis passionis was essentially a claritie of glory though not in the manner seeing it was by way of a transient passion as the aire is inlightned of the sunne whereas * Ad corpus glorificatum redundat claritas ab anima sicut qualitas quaedam permanens to a glorified body claritie from the soul doth accrue as some permanent qualitie Which essentiall claritie Christ had from his nativitie yea from his first conception yet by dispensation he ecclipsed it ever till he had accomplished our redemption except at this time when appeared a brightnes of glory though not a brightnes of a glorious body not imaginary unlesse you take imaginary as synonymall with representative but reall though transitorie Can any one think that herein was any pain or rather not infinite pleasure The beholders rejoyced they could not do so at the pain of Christ If there were any pain or grief it would rather have been so at the withdrawing of his unusuall claritie which not being likely the manifestation of this claritie at this transfiguration was lesse likely to be painfull The fourth and last kinde of degree to happines is translation not onely as Enoch was translated from one life to an other kinde of life but such a translation as should have been of Adam if he had not sinned and shall be of such as shall be alive at Christs coming Adams translation had been sine media morte Nor was his slumber painfull nor solutio continui at the drawing out of his rib nor the closing of the flesh again nor is it likely there was in Adams side any scar the badge of pain and sorrow much lesse should he have had pain at his translation Pain is the grand-child of sinne the daughter of punishment from both which the estate of innocency was priviledged Every thing in the Creation was very good Genes 1.31 Every tree was pleasant to the sight and good for food Genes 2.9 and could the tree of life cause pain By tasting the fruit thereof Adam and his ofspring had come to an higher and more unchangeable happines The middesse was then proportionate to the beginning and to the end Sorrow was part of the curse innocency could not feel pain much lesse shall eternall happines and should the tree of life have caused pain Then were there little difference between it and the tree of knowledge of good and evill Or what difference in that point would there be between Adams death which was painfull and his translation if it should have been painfull As concerning the translation of them that shall be found alive at the last day I am thus conceited That there shall be no true and reall separation of their souls from their bodies at least so much as concerneth the righteous That they shall be changed That they shall put on immortalitie If it be delightfull now to our bodies to receive ease shall it be painfull to be clothed with incorruptibility It shall be done in a moment in the twinkling of an eye 2. Cor. 5.4 Nolumus expoliari saith the Apostle shewing the unwillingnes of men to die sed supervestiri
children confirmed in grace and yet generate which he denieth Because the supposed priviledge of the All-gracious Virgin doth not derogate from the glorie of our most blessed Redeemer I will not contradict it though it maketh her more perfect then God made Adam and Eve in their integritie Lastly why might not generating parents be confirmed in grace when in the act there should have been no turpitude no salacious motion no lascivious titillation and those members might have been used without any itch of ticklish pleasure as our hands and feet and some other parts are now Reade S. Augustine De Civit. 14.24 and 26. most fully of these things Unto Estius his second reason which is this Angels were not ordained to blessednes but by the merit of their free-will and man was not first to be placed at the goal or end but in the way I answer Every Angel was to stand or fall by his own proper actuall free-will Man was unlike to them therein Adams actuall consent for us stood exactly for the actuall consent of each Angel for no Angel fell in Lucifer as we did in Adam But to the second branch of his argument I confesse with Aquine * Anim a hominis Angelussimiliter ad bea titudinâ—m ordinantur The soul of man and an Angel are alike ordained to blessednes The way was necessarie before the goal the means before the end But I must adde Adam was in the way and we in the way by him and in him and as he brought us out of the way by his straying by-path so by his undeviation we had been kept in the way More might be added but the Question hath swollen above its banks already I must be brief though I be obscure What Hugo and Lombard require was performed by Adam for us Though Estius in this point maketh God like an hard task-master and man a meer journy-man yet much was given to him who deserved little even for one onely and the easiest houres work So might God have done to us for his promise unto Adams obedience for us In that estate perhaps he needed no merit challenging due reward as there shall be no new recompense for desert after we are glorified But if merit had had place it might after confirmation in grace have procured speedier translation to an unchangeable life the accidentals of beatitude might have been increased in us as they shall be in the Angels of light though long since they were confirmed in grace Scotus objecteth The children of innocent Adam should have been Viatores in the way to happines therefore they might have been sinners I answer Viator is considered according to a twofold estate First for him that walketh in a slippery and dangerous way where he may be in or out Thus was Adam Viator thus were we Viatores in Adam before his fall and thus we could have sinned yea did sinne which is more then Scotus his argument evinceth Secondly Viator is taken according to the estate of him who walketh in a good sure way where no by-path can be made Thus we being confirmed should have been Viatores and yet could not have been sinners and herein we had been like to blessed Angels yea the same man might have been Viator in one regard and Comprehensor in an other respect at the same time So was Christ so had Adam and his children been upon confirmation in goodnes not that they should have had that plenitude of comprehension which is to be enjoyed after the generall judgement but such a comprehension which had been agreeable to that present estate though susceptible of degrees and capable of more perfection where Comprehensor is synonymous with beatus onely but not beatissimus The same Scotus further reasoneth thus The grace confirmed by the Merit of Christ in Baptisme or other Sacraments confirm not the receiver Therefore much lesse should any Merit of any parent or childe have confirmed us in justice I answer The confirmation had rather been from Gods gracious promise to Adam and his seed then from any merit properly so called Secondly The graces of Christ exhibited in the Sacraments of initiation and corroboration shall draw us up to an infallible confirmation in the estate of glorie where we shall have more comfort delight and good by Christ then we had harm by Adam if he had not fallen of which hereafter To some arguments and authorities for my opinion some answers are shaped by the Schoolmen I will loose the argument from S. Gregorie because it ingendereth more questions when this is too copiously handled already Anselm speaketh home for me if ever man spake Aquinas saith He did it opining not affirming Yet he saw the reason which induced Anselm to that Assertion Scotus also slubbereth over the authoritie of Anselm winking as it seemeth when he should have read the direct words * Dion De Divinis Nominibus cap. 4. Dionysius saith Bonum est potentius malo Good hath more power and vertue then evill But say I for the sinne of the first man came a necessitie of sinning upon all his children Therefore if he had stood there should have been a necessitie of not sinning Scotus answereth in the first place as if Dionysius were to be understood of a great Evill and a little Good which plainely that Father never meant Secondly he jumpeth in sense with Aquine and both do answer That we are not so necessitated to sinning that we can not return to justice and Adams sinne was not cause of our confirmation in evill I reply we are so necessitated by our nature that of our selves and from our selves we can not return to justice We are obstinate and confirmed in evill in regard of our own disabilities though not confirmed in evill nor obstinate if we consider the powerfull mercy of God And this is enough to make the argument hold good There should have been a necessitie of not sinning of our part otherwise Evill should have been more powerfull then Good which is the contradictorie to Dionysius For we can not but sinne of our selves and are obstinate though we are not so obstinate as the damned nor should have been so confirmed by Adam as the glorified shall be Unto our argument drawn from the similitude of Angelicall reward Aquinas answereth Men and Angels are not alike I reply We were both like in some things and unlike in other but in this we had been like That as the Angels were confirmed presently upon their first obedience so had Adam been confirmed and we in him For God loved not Man worse then the Angels For Christ verily took not on him the nature of Angels but he took on him the seed of Abraham Heb. 2.16 Scotus yeeldes himself captive to the force of this reason save onely that he opineth That every one of Adams children should as well as Adam have been confirmed in grace upon their actuall overcoming of the first temptation suggested unto them whereas I
us prove That originall sinne is not the concupiscence of the flesh See this confuted by * Bell. De Amiss Gratiae 4.12 Bellarmine by this argument If LVST were the cause of originall sinne he should have the greater sinne who was conceived in greater LVST which is manifestly false since originall sinne is equall in all men See other arguments well used to that purpose by Bellarmine in that place yet is he amisse * De Sacramento Baptismi 1.9 elsewhere in the answer unto the tenth argument of the Anabaptists For saith he * Originale peccatum non est materia poeniten tiae nemo enim rectè poe uitentiam agit ejus peccati quod ipse non commisit quod in ejus potestate non suit Originale autem peccatum non ipsi commisimus sed trahimus ab Adam per naturalem propagationem undâ— diâ—itur de insantibus Rom. 9 11. Originall sinne is no matter of repentance for a man doth not well repent of that sinne which he hath not committed himself and which was not in his power Now we have not our selves committed originall sinne but we draw it from Adam by naturall propagation whereupon it is said Rom. 9.11 of Esau and Jacob THEY HAD DONE NEITHER GOOD NOR EVIL First I answer to the place of Scripture confessing it is spoken of Esau wicked Esau that he had done no evill and of Jacob good Jacob that he had done no good Again it is spoken of both of them before they were born But secondly it is spoken of actuall sinnes and actuall goodnes that neither did Jacob good actuall good any good in the wombe nor Esau any actuall evil For the bodily organs are not so fitted that they exercise such actions as produce good or evil The words do evince so much 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 practically working no good nor evil Yet though God depended not upon their works as the Apostle there argueth for all that they might and did commit originall sinne and in it were conceived and the promise was made to Rebecca after she conceived Genes 25.23 It being then manifest that the place of the Apostle affordeth no patrociny to Bellarmine I say originall sinne is in part the matter of Repentance otherwise David in his chiefest penitentiall Psalme 51.5 would not have charged himself with that sinne nor needed not so vehemently to call for mercy Again we may be said to commit originall sinne and originall sinne to have been in our power as we were in Adam as we would have done the like and the like against Adam as Adam did against us if we had stood in Adams place as he did stand in our stead Thirdly our will was in his will what he did we did Bellarmines Philosophie here swalloweth up his Divinitie Fourthly he must not take committere strictly for a full free deliberate action of commission nor trahere strictly for a meer passion but as I shall make it appear there is some little inclination from the matter to the form of the body to the soul as also of the soul to the body and that the soul is neither as a block or stone on the one side to receive durt and be integrally passive nor yet so active as to make the originall sinne to be actuall So that it neither properly committeth nor properly contracteth draweth or receiveth originall sinne and yet in a large sense may be said both to commit and to receive Fifthly if Bellarmine be punctilious for the terms himself is faultie For he saith * Trahimus ab Adam originale peccatum We do attract originall sinne from Adam Is there any attraction on our part if there be no action Or is action or attraction without some kinde of commission Sixthly hath the whole Church of God prayed for the remission aswell of originall sinne as of actuall if it be not the matter of repentance Or needeth not one unbaptized till he come of age repent before Baptisme for his originall sinne Lastly why are children baptized but that originall sinne is matter of repentance To set all things better in order and to cleare all mists you are to know that there is wonderfull mistaking and ambiguitie whil'st originall sinne is confounded with Adams actuall sinne and one taken for another whil'st the cause is undistinguished from the effect when indeed there is a great traverse between them 2 Somewhat according to the new Masters of method the efficient cause of Adams sinne was both outward and inward Outward Remote Outward Propinque Remote Principall Satan Remote Instrumentall the Serpent Outward propinque was Eve the principall Outward propinque was The apple was the instrumentall cause The inward efficient cause was first the faculties of the soul which we may terme the principium activum and was more remote then the ill use of these faculties the misimploying of his free-will which you may stile principium actuale and was the more propinque cause But the cause efficient of originall sinne was outwardly the actuall sinne of Adam inwardly the conjunction of the soul after the propagation of nature The matter of Adams sinne subjectivè was the whole person and nature of Adam and his posteritie descending from him per viam seminalem objectivè the liking touching and eating of the forbidden fruit The matter of originall sinne subjectivè is all of our nature and every one of mankinde secundum se totum totum sui coming the ordinarie way of generation in so much that all and every of the faculties of the soul and bodie of all and every one of us is subject to all and every sinne which hath been or may ever hereafter be committed and this cometh onely from this originall sinne and the inclination wrapped up in it The matter objectivè is both carentia justitiae originalis debitae inesse and the vices contrarie unto it now filling up its room and stead Formalis ratio of Adams first sinne was aversion from God the ratio materialis was his conversion to a changeable good saith * Stapl. De Originali Peccato 1.12 Stapleton both these are knit up in one disobedience And so the formall cause of Adams sinne was disobedience the formall cause of our originall sinne is the deformitie and corruption of nature falne and propagated inclining to sinne so soon as is possible and without a divine hand of restraint as much as is possible The end of Adams sinne was in his intention primarily To know good and evill secundarily to prefer temporals before spirituals whil'st indeed he esteemed the Bonum apparens before the Bonum verum revera or reale In mankinde after him no end can be found of originall sinne since we contract it when we have nullum verum aspectum respectum intuitum vel-sinem For Finis bonum convertuntur There is no end of evill per se sed ex accidenti and so Gods Glory is the supreme end of all sinne The effects of Adams actuall
to the bodie Thirdly what say you to pride of heart and secret Atheisme Is the proud mans and Atheists bodie and bloud infected with these prodigies Again If such people be wholly forgiven and their sinnes by repentance blotted out are they now in their bodie seed and bloud which are wiped out of their soul and suppose he beget a sonne between the Atheisme and repentance shall his childe be damned while the repentant Atheist is saved should not he rather communicate his later repentance then his former Atheisme But let us weigh the words a little nearer f Peccatorum quae aliquis parens committit labes ceu contagium redundat in ejus corpus sanguinem per ejus sanguinem semen in filios The blot and as it were contagion of sinnes which the father commits redounds upon his bodie and bloud and by his bloud and seed to the sonnes What bloud is corrupted all or onely that which was made seed and of seed what seed all seed or onely that which is fruitfull Suppose a father begets a sonne with the seed which was in his bodie yer his sinne was committed how doth his sinne viciate his bloud or his bloud the preformed seed If seed and bloud be properly vicious then any ejaculation of seed or letting of bloud should emptie people of their sinnes or stains in them inherent and sinne should no longer be a privation but a positive thing Moreover when they say That by the fathers bloud and seed the blot and as it were contagion is transfused into the sonnes they speak without reason or sense For the blot and as it were contagion are transfused if transfused at all into the wombe of their mother which hath a preexistence and not into the children themselves who have no preexistence The vessell is before any thing can be poured into it how then can sinne be yoted by the fathers bloud seed into the childe that had no being The last passage is this The childrens bodies are first infected by these stains or actuall sinnes their souls after defiled by their bodies If by the word infected they mean really truly properly and actually infected I remit them to the place where I have proved that the Embryo without a reasonable soul is not cannot be sinfull If they would be expounded of a pronitude to evil or inclinations tending that way when the soul is united they have made much ado about nothing a meer logomachy retaining the old sense and using noveltie of terms Again if I should yeeld That the seed of one man is proner to one vice then an other according to the vivid strength and able disposition of the parents as they say bastards are more healthie and more salacious then other people as retaining part of that spiritfull vigour in which they were begotten yet is originall sinne the same in every one alike in all parts and every way and the likenesse to the parents in wickednes is most remotely ascribed to the seed but properly to originall sinne as to the inward cause and to the parents ill breeding them or to bad companie or custome or to the remembrance of their parents sinne which is a powerfull president in corrupt nature as to the outward cause For a wicked childe is as like a thousand other wicked men if not more like in behaviour then to his father yet this proceedeth not from their seed but from originall sinne But to the more distinct handling of this point this seventh and last Proposition First I will prove That the personall sinnes of all our forefathers are not derived to us Secondly That not the sinnes from the third and fourth generation are propagated Thirdly That the personall sinnes of our immediate parents are not transfused And so it will arise of it self that no personall sinnes are communicated In the second place I shall bring to light the authorities on our side But before I begin either let me briefly remove an objection Bucer and Martyr teach saith Zanchius that by this doctrine the transfusion of originall sinne is more confirmed I answer That Gods truth hath no need of mans lie to uphold it Cicero said well g Perspicuitas argumentatione elevatur Perspicuitie is lessened by argumentation For what is more beleeved more known to Christians then that originall sinne is traduced Weak arguments do often prejudice a good cause and while Bucer and Martyr would seem to confirm that truth which neither Jew Turk nor Christian doubt of let them take heed lest when they say actuall sinnes are traduced they give occasion to the world to think that humane souls are not created but traducted so by consequent bring in the mortalitie of the soul For it hath been confidently averred by learned men That if the souls be traducted they are mortall But of this hereafter Concerning the first branch these arguments confirm it If the actuall sinnes of all our forefathers be communicated to their posteritie then they that are the more ancient are still the better and the last people of this world shall absolutely by nature be worst But it is not so for Pagans and Infidels now should be many thousand times worse then the first infidels which is not so as is seen by experience Secondly then we might truely say O happy Cain happier by nature then Abel the righteous since Adam and Eve did manifoldly sinne between Cains and Abels generations yea happier then Abraham and the Patriarchs just Job and the Prophets the Apostles and Evangelists since thou hast fewer sinnes to answer for then any in the world Happier is all the drowned world in this regard then the dayes since Christ But to say so is new Divinity Therefore all sinnes of actually transgressing parents are not communicated Secondly God dealeth not so rigourously with mankinde as he did with the devils Verily he took not on him the nature of Angels but took on him the seed of Abraham Heb. 2.16 whereby he magnifieth Gods mercy to man above that to the rebellious spirits but he should or did deal worse with mankinde at least with the damned then with them if all the personall sinnes of our progenitours be communicated to all us For each of them bare onely but their own sinnes and none did beare one anothers sinne further then they actually partaked with it And this can not be otherwise for both their sinne was pride and their nature uncapable of propagation or communication of sinne unlesse it be by reall and present consenting or partaking Lastly They all fell together the second or third instant of their creation saith the School Suddenly the devil of Lucifer became Coluber of Oriens Occidens of Hesperus Vesper He abode not in the truth Joh. 8.44 Satan fell from heaven like lightning where lightning is not said to fall from heaven but he saw 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luk. 10.18 Satan falling as suddenly from heaven as
were begotten and conceived was an unclean thing saith Bishop Bilson as Job calleth it saying Who can make a clean thing of an unclean Job 14.4 It is also corruptible that is saith he full of corruption as Peter nameth it when he saith Born again not of corruptible seed 1 Peter 1.23 of which we were born of our parents Thirdly The Apostle calleth our flesh The flesh of sinne Rom. 8.3 If by these places he takes uncleannesse corruption and sinne improperly for such ill dispositions as seed bloud and livelesse flesh is capable of the Question is ended I confesse all But he understandeth uncleannesse corruption and sinne properly The title of his pages 174. and 175. is this Mans flesh is defiled in conception before the soul is created and infused And in the body of his Discourse he enlargeth it as in his Conclusion to the Reader at the end of his Sermons pag. 252. he first propoundeth it and citeth Ambrose to assist him saying * Priùs incipit inhomine macula quà m vita Amnr. Apolog. David cap. 11. Pollution sooner beginneth in man then life Now the soul is the life of the body then if pollution cleave to the flesh before life come and consequently before the soul come whencesoever it cometh it is evident that Adams flesh defileth and so condemneth us So farre he None of these proofs reach home to cleare this That sinne true sinne proper sinne originall sinne or actuall is in the seed or bloud or flesh before the reasonable soul be united Neither did that learned Bishop consider that it can not be called our originall uncleannesse pollution or sinne till we have originem that is till our soul hath its first being in the body He erreth to say Pollution cleaveth to the flesh before life cometh and more erreth saying Adams flesh defileth and condemneth us if he make the flesh subject to condemnation before its life and union of the soul For then many thousand abortions should be damned which never had rationall soul annexed to them As for Ambrose * Whitak De Origin Peccato 1.4 Whitaker thus citeth him from the same Book and Chapter * Antequam nafcimur maculamur contagio antequam usuram lucis originis ipsiut accipimus injuriam Before we be born we are stained with contagion before we enjoy the light we receive the injurie of our verie beginning Ambrose saith not We have sinne ere we have life but We are conceived in iniquity which is true and confest if we take conception largely so Ambrose taketh macula for such inclination to evill as is in the seed potentially maculative Concerning the place of Job First Job saith not The seed is unclean but Quis dabit mundum ex immundo Which may have reference to the person or the nature of the unclean father Secondly it may be a parallell with that of Job 25.4 How can he be clean that is born of awoman yea the starres are not pure in his sight vers 5. Lastly things may be said to be unclean that have no sinne Ask the unclean beasts and they will justifie it and the trees will send forth this truth as leaves Levit. 19.23 24. The fruit of the trees planted shall be as uncircumcised or unclean unto you three yeares it shall not be eaten of but in the fourth yeare it shall be holy to praise the Lord withall yet was not the fruit sinfull it self but quoadusum The place of S. Peter is answered by the same Apostle 1 Pet. 1.18 Silver and gold are things corruptible yet these creatures as creatures are good in themselves though they are causes of most sinnes yet have no sinne many other corruptible things as heaven earth are void of all sinne As concerning the place of the Apostle S. Paul I answer it is apparent he speaketh of flesh after the soul is united which is nothing to our Question and therefore a most impertinent proof of the Bishop Lastly the Reverend Bishop bringeth this objection against himself How could David say he was conceived in sinne when at the conception he had neither soul nor body His main answer is With God nothing is more frequent then to call those things that are not as though they were Rom. 4.17 and speaketh in Scriptures of things to come as if they were past or present David and Job call that seed which was prepared to be the matter of their bodies by the names of themselves because it could not be altered what God had appointed But the void conceptions of women which miscarry before the body be framed never had either life or soul and so neither name nor kinde but perish as other superfluous burdens and repletions of the body So he I reply that I may not question the worthy Bishop about the meaning of that place Rom. 4.17 He hath made a great stirre to little purpose since he maketh many conceptions void of finne or punishment like superfluous burdens and repletions of the body which none ever said to have sinned Secondly which is the better answer to the place of the Psalmist to say as the Bishop doth Conceptions which come to nothing are not sinfull but such as may have souls are sinfull before they have souls whereby he splitteth himself on this rock That a perfect conception susceptible of a soul and aborsed casually before the unition with the soul is sinfull and liable to account or to answer with me That sinne and iniquity in the place of the Psalmist is taken for the aptitude to sinne which is in the matter or els conception is taken in its latitude for our time in the mothers wombe and so true original sinne not to be in the body without a soul Aquine saith * Quum sola creatura rationalis sit susceptiva culpae ante infusionem animae rationalis proles concepta non est peccato obnoxia Aquin. part 3. Quaest 27. art 2. in corp art Sith none but the reasonable creature is susceptible of fault the childe conceived is not subject to sinne before the infusion of a reasonable soul Whitaker saith well * Carnem nihil concupiscere sine anima nec doctus nec doctus dubitat ut loquar cum Augustino Quid enim caro iâ—animis a trunco differt Whitak De Origin Peccato 3.1 That the flesh covets nothing without the soul neither the learned nor the unlearned doubts that I may speak with Augustine For what doth the inanimate flesh differ from a stock And I hope the Bishop will not say A block or a stock hath sinne Moreover after thousands of sinnes committed in the body and by and with the body yet the body separated from the soul hath no sinne is not sinfull much lesse is sinne and shall the seed in the wombe be called sinfull or sinne as Kemnitius or Luther calleth it before it is warmed with life or enlivened with a soul Lastly in our very Creed conception is used with libertie and
q Qui dissolvit pactum numquid essugiet He that breaketh his covenant shall he escape unpunished S. Hierome truely thus concludeth r Etiam inter hostes servanda fides est Even among enemies faith is to be kept adding a divine caution which compriseth our cause ſ Non considerandum cui sed per quem juraveris Multò enim fidelior est ille qui propter nomen Dei tibi credidit deceptus est te qui per occasionem divinae Majestatis hosts tuo imò jam amico es molitus insidias It is not to be considered to whom but by whom thou hast sworn For he is much more faithfull who for the name of God beleeved thee and was deceived then thou who didst circumvent thine enemie yea now thy friend by abusing Gods sacred Majestie I acknowledge that S. Hierome speaketh of oaths between Kings or such as have been enemies but the reasons reach and extend themselves even to the causes of private men Lying fraud or any collusion by mentall reservation or verball equivocation is wholly to be secluded and abhorred when an oath is taken prudent silence in diverse cases is admitted Yea but if an examinate be adjured shall he then be silent still silent I answer I would have him imitate our blessed Saviour who saying nothing at divers times insomuch that the governour marvelled greatly Matth. 27.14 yet when the high priest said * Matth. 26.63 I adjure thee by the living God that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ the sonne of God though he knew it would cost him his life he concealed not the truth And in such an adjuration upon Religion the examinate is bound to give an account of his faith and to witnesse a good confession though to the expense of his bloud t Contra Marcionem lib. 4. pag. 286. Tertullian seems to be more scrupulous in lesser matters saying u Justa digna praescriptio est in omni quaestione ad propositum interrogationis pertinere debere sensum responsionis Aliud consulenti aliud respondere dementis est It is a just and worthy rule that in every question the answer should be applied to the same sense purpose to which the interrogation is made To answer of one thing when he is asked of another is the part of a mad man Again x Sensus responsionis non est ad aliud dirigendus quà m ad propositum interrogationis quò magìs absit à Christo quod nè homini quidem convenit The sense of the answer is not to be directed to any other thing then that which was propounded in the interrogation So farre is that from Christ which beseems not a meer man So he I answer first Tertullian speaketh of questions in Divinitie to instruct the soul and there it were sinne to delude the simple questionist Secondly he speaketh of questions extra jactum teli cùm aries murum non percusserit of questions not concerning great danger life or limme which doth somewhat vary the case Thirdly an homonymous answer of verball equivocation doth both correspond to the sense of the question which is all that Tertullian requireth and implieth also a second sense which may be understood by an intelligent hearer which in a mentall reservation is impossible to be unlocked opened and cleared except by an hand divine Fourthly Tertullian cannot be thought to condemn verball equivocation the daintie use whereof makes almost as great a difference between a wise man and an idiot as between an idiot and a beast and none but wise men can use it with comfort and delight And the wiser men be as their hearts by divers thoughts are deeper then the fools so their words are more abstruse bivious multivious What writings under heaven of finite men have or can have such multiplicity of meanings as are in Scripture comprised under the words dictated by an infinite Spirit whose whole intire exact depths the meer creature never knew fully and perfectly If I might have my desire quoth S. Augustine I had rather speak in words whose divers senses might give content to divers people of different apprehensions then in words that can have one sense onely The second thing I would commend unto this examinate is to give faire language to his Judges Let him not be bold and malapert nor use clamorous opposition Let not the ignorant Syllogize in Barbara Darii Ferio or marre his cause by ill handling yet if he be unmoveably constant let him say I cannot dispute but I can die let him not provoke the Judge by words or actions ill advised Eulalia being a girle about 12 yeares old did spit in the face of the Judge that he might the rather condemn her The answer of Hannah 1. Samuel 1.15 c. when she was in bitternesse of soul to the misjudgeing and uncharitably zealous Priest Eli was as a sweet incense in the nostrils of God and is a good lesson for all to take out when they are called before the Magistrates though hard measure were offered How long wilt thou be drunken quoth he put away thy wine from thee And she answered No my lord I am a woman of a sorrowfull spirit I have drunk neither wine nor strong drink c. Count not thine handmaid for a daughter of Belial The manner of answering may be sinfull though the matter be good froward behaviour never benefitteth a cause but a gentle answer pacifieth wrath Proverbs 15.1 Taunting recrimination argueth a distempered spirit in the gall of bitternesse How humbly did our blessed Saviour behave himself under the hands of unjust Judges How constantly zealously and boldly because they were inspired immediately from God did the Apostles Act. 4. plead for themselves yet without malapertnesse or irreverence S. Paul his speech to the high priest exacteth a larger discourse Acts. 23.5 Paul said I knew not brethren that he was the high priest Some think that S. Paul knew Ananias to be high priest when he called him painted wall I answer if so it were this is no fit example for sawcinesse to be used in our times towards Magistrates For first if S. Paul did know him he might speak though not as a Prophet yet illuminated and inspired from God which now is not in use Secondly he might speak as a Prophet foredivining an evil end to Ananias as indeed it came to passe saith y Homil. 6. de Laudibus Pauli Chrysostom If any one of them who now revile Magistracy have the spirit prophetical denouncing contingent future things which yet end in accomplishment I will not call him a sawcy presumptuous fellow Thirdly though divers learned men think the contrary and that he spake by an Irony when he said I knew not yet I perswade my self that S. Paul in truth knew not when he spake Ananias to be the high priest for these reasons First because he seemeth to put on the spirit of mildnesse towards them that stood
that is sought out and drawn into judgement and answereth as he ought to do truly without mentall reservation modestly and as befitteth him to answer unto his superiours if he receive no satisfaction in his conscience and his Judges doom him worthy to die what shall he now do Shall he be over-ruled by his superiours both spirituall and temporall doing as they do and thinking as they think shall he go against the dictates of his own conscience or shall he adventure his bloud and life What my self would do by Gods grace I will prescribe unto another First before I would sacrifice my life I would once more recollect my former thoughts for humblenesse and diligently consider whether the matters for which I am to suffer death be abstruse depths beyond my reach or capacity If they be very intricate I have cause to think that I am an unfit man to judge of things which I know not and cannot comprehend 2. Cor. 10 13 c. Secondly I would in this case before expense of bloud bring my intentions to the touchstone call to minde that good intentions alone cannot excuse me before God but good intentions well grounded and regulated S. Paul with good intentions persecuted the Church and was injurious but he did it ignorantly in unbelief 1. Tim. 1.13 where an ill belief though meaning well is counted unbelief In a good intention S. Peter would have disswaded our Saviour from death but he was called Satan for it Matth. 16.23 though Christ had blessed him before and promised him excellent gifts vers 17 c. I cannot think but they who offered their children unto Moloch did think they served God rightly though indeed they served the Devil yet God saith Levit. 20.3 I will set my face against that man and will cut him off from among his people The priests of Baal who cut themselves after their manner with knives and lancers till the bloud gushed out upon them 1. King 18.28 did they not follow the ill guide of a misled conscience did they not think they were in the right do not millions of Turks Jews and of Pagans go to the Devil though they perswade themselves they be in the onely true way do not many think that to be constancie which in truth is obstinacie and that to be knowledge which is ignorant self-love There is great resemblance and manifold likely hood between some truth and some errour and the mistake is easie and there is a great difference between opinion and sound belief Thirdly I would endeavour to think humbly of my self and as the Apostle adviseth to preferre others before me I would ruminate on that which the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 13.3 Though I give my bodie to be burned and have not charity it profiteth me nothing And shewing what he meaneth by charity addeth Charity suffereth long and is kinde charity envieth not charity is not rash or vaunteth not it self is not puffed up doth not behave it self unseemly So that he who behaveth himself unseemly who is puffed up who vaunteth himself or is rash who envieth and is unkinde and hasty hath not charity And though he give his bodie to be burned his death profiteth him nothing saith the Apostle Examine therefore and again I say examine thine own heart if thou finde any one of these sinnes beforenamed reigning in thee then know there is a spot in the sacrifice And till that be washed away rased out or reformed thou must suspect thy self and mayest well be dubious Self-conceit is a branch of pride pride never agreed with charity and no death profiteth a man any thing who hath not charity Oh but this enfeebleth the resolution of confessours and stoopeth down the constancy of martyrs to pendulousnesse it maketh them draw their hands back from the plough and to look backward to Sodom with lots wife No no my discourse intends onely to dull the edge of singularity to stop the mouths of pridie undertakers and ignorant praters to put a bridle into the teeth of such as revile Magistracie to reduce people to humblenesse and such thoughts as these If many may be deceived how much easier may I If the more learned be awrie how shall I be sure I am right They have souls to answer as well as I and charity bids me think they would not damn their own souls by damning mine have I alone a sound rectified conscience Self-deniall is a better schoolmaster to true knowledge then presumption An acceptable martyr is a reasonable sacrifice and an acceptable sacrifice is a reasonable martyr A conscience not founded on good causes not strengthened with understanding is like a fair house built on the sands a very apple of Sodom a painted sepulchre which appeares beautifull outward but is within full of dead mens bones and of all uncleannesse Matth. 23.27 My cautions are not remoraes of staying or withdrawing any man so farre as his knowledge can or doth aspire unto for so farre I allow them a judgement of discretion but necessary preparatives to the true perfect and glorious martyrdome He shall be no martyr in my estimate who without great motives runneth to death and posteth rashly to destruction But when pride with all her children singularity self-love vaunting rashnesse unseemly behaviour is cast out of the soul and the contrary graces the children of charitie possesse it then if thy conscience can no way be convicted if thou knowest thy cause to be good and the contrary to be apparently amisse follow not the multitude conform not thy self to the world keep thy conscience untainted poure out thy bloud unto death offer thy life and body as a reasonable sacrifice die and be a martyr be a martyr and be crowned crowned I say not onely with glory and immortality but with those gifts and aureolae which are prepared above others for true martyrs In this sort Whosoever shall confesse Christ before men him will Christ confesse also before his Father which is in heaven Matth. 10.32 The judgement of jurisdiction which is in superiours having authoritie and the judgement of direction which is in Pastours by way of eminency forbid not in this case the judgement of discretion which is and ought to be in every private man so farre as he hath discretion and knowledge or immediate inspirations of all which I would not have a man too presumptuous That which our Divines do term the judgement of discretion is in the words of z Contra Marcionem 4. post medium pag. 269. Tertullian Clavis Agnitionis He must never contrary this for this must he die What he knoweth let him as a good witnesse seal with his bloud if need be But in things beyond a simple mans capacitie I will say once more with a Serm. 20. de verbis Apostoli Augustine b Melior est fidelis ignorantia quà m temeraria scientia A faithfull ignorance is better then a rash knowledge In such things is he to be guided by his Pastours
the living God and not with penne and ink For though the sense and words of this Epistle to the Galatians be from God and most divine yet there is no reason to imagine that S. Paul intended to include that sense under these words Videte or Videtis qualibus literis scripsi vobis manu meâ You see how large a letter I have written to you with mine own hand But if the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie quantitie though S. Paul wrote in great letters and characters yet it might be a verie good and fair hand as there are few fairer writings then some where the letters are large and full drawn and I doubt not but he who gave them the extraordinary gift of tongues and languages did also as a necessarie appendant give them the power to write well those languages especially since their writings were to benefit more then their voices could reach unto We never reade that the holy Apostles Peter James or John were learned or could reade or write before their calling or learned it by degrees after their Apostleship yet they could and did write and as the Spirit guided their thoughts and words so did he their hands and they wrote both divinely for matter and as I think exquisitely for the manner yea more exquisitely then other men as being governed and actuated by the hand of God which is perfect in all his works And indeed the true sense of the place in my opinion toucheth not at the deformednesse of the characters or at the grand-greatnesse of them but at the length or prolixitie of the Epistle which is excellently rendered by our English You see how large a letter I have written as if S. Paul had spoke thus more at large I who before told you that we must not be weary of well-doing but must do good unto all men whilest we have time especially to the houshold of faith I say I my self have not been wearie in writing this Epistle though it be long and whilest I had time I have spent that time in doing you good by writing this letter by writing this long and large letter to you For though I have written longer Epistles yet I did rather subscribe to them and wrote not all of any one of them with mine own hand but you may take it as a token of my heartie love that I wrote all this Epistle my self You see how large a letter I have writ to you with mine own hand And this sense better answereth to the coherence then that of S. Hierom or of the other learned man whom S. Hierom wondered at So much for the third Lemma 8. I come now to the first Question viz. Whether it was necessarie that Scripture should be written for mens instruction That it was not absolutely necessarie must be confest for God might have used other means He is liberrimum agens the freest agent or rather ipsa libertas libertie it self not chained to fate nor bound in with nature or second causes Necessitie freedome of our will or indifferencie to either side and contingencie are the issues of his will Yea God did use other means in the law of nature for above 2450 yeares the Patriarchs were nourished with agraphall Tradition onely No word was ever written till God wrote the Law the two first Tables the work of the onely-wise Almightie The writing was the writing of God graven upon the Tables Exod. 32.16 Written with the finger of God Exod 31.18 The Jews say The book of Genesis was written by Moses before God wrote the Law For though God spake all the words of the Decalogue Exod. 20.1 c. yet he delivered not the Tables to Moses till Exod. 31.18 but Exod. 24.4 it is related that Moses wrote all the words of the Lord and vers 7. that he took the book of the Law and read it in the audience of the people Kemnitius answereth That the things are recorded per Anticipationem seu per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The last is recorded in the first place for the writing and dedication here mentioned were accomplished afterward Exod. 34.32 The pillar of stone and that other of brick which Josephus Antiq. 1.4 saith the children of Seth did write in before the floud were either fictions or antidated The prophesie of Enoch was not written by him as S. Augustine de Civit. 15.22 and Origen Hom. 28. in Num. think but Enoch prophesied Saying Jude 14. As the prophesie of Adam Genes 2.24 and of God himself Genes 3.15 both of them concerning Christ were spoken in Paradise not written and as the Apostles wrote not the Creed but delivered it onely vivâ voce by word of mouth saith Irenaeus 3.4 and Augustine de Fide Oper. cap. 9. and Ruffinus on the Creed and divers others so is it likely that Enochs prophesie was not written or rather was written long after it was spoken for writing was not so necessarie for the Patriarchs First because they were purer in minde saith Chrysostom Hom. 1. in Matth. And it is the fault of our corrupt nature and we may be rightly impleaded that ever there was any writing as may be gathered from Isidorus Peleusiota lib. 3. epist 106. Secondly the long lives of the Patriarchs supplied the room of writing for Methusalah who lived 240 yeares with Adam with the first Adam who was AETATIS ILLIUS EPISCOPUS Bishop of those times saith Kemnitius in Examine part 1. pag. 13. lived also 90 and odde yeares with Sem and Sem lived 50 yeares in Jacobs time by the calculation of Helvicus and there were not 200 yeares from Jacobs death to the writing of the Law Thirdly besides such aged venerable Prophets as were Adam Enoch Noah and Abraham who was an eminent instructer with authoritie and as it were with a Pretorian power Gen. 18.19 I know that Abraham will command his sonnes and his houshold after him that they keep the way of the Lord other Patriarchs knew the will of God by immediate revelation by dreams and visions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 At sundrie times and in divers manners Heb. 1.1 Gods speech was in stead of writing But when men grew more impure and upon the increase of sinne mans dayes were shortened God did withdraw himself and his familiar conversation was not so common but because their hearts of flesh were hardened in which was printed the law of nature by them even obliterated and they received new evil impressions in stonie hearts God himself wrote the Morall Law in two Tables of stone and Gods own handie-work being broken by the occasion of their sinne to shew that the Morall Law should continue for ever the broken Tables were removed and none knoweth what ever became of them and Moses was commanded to frame two new whole Tables of stone like the former Two extreams about the written word are here to be avoided The first is of the Papists who too much disgrace the Scripture at least comparatively
THE SAINTS ENTRED INTO THE HOLY CITIE we must take THE HOLY CITIE to be Jerusalem b Ad distinctionem omnium civitatum quae tunc idolis serviebant to distinguish that citie from other cities all which did then give themselves to idolatrie applying it to the materiall Jerusalem which saith he from the time of Vespasian and Titus was no more called THE HOLY CITIE Moreover Paula and Eustochium or rather Hierom in their names ad Marcellam Tom. 1. fol. 59. citing the place of Many Saints c. adde remarkably c Nec statim Hiercsolyma coelestis sicut plerique ridiculè interpretantur in hoc loco intelligitur cùm signum nullum essè potuerit apud homines si corpora Sanctorum in coelesti Jerusalem visa sunt You must not presently understand the celestiall Jerusalem as most have ridiculously interpreted this place when it could be no signe nor token among men on earth if the bodies of the Saints were seen in the heavenly Jerusalem May I annex to this That if the whole land of Jurie be to this day called The holy Land nor will have other estimate of divers Nations in some regards till the worlds end then certainly the Metropoliticall citie thereof the famous and eminent Jerusalem might in those dayes be dignified with the title of The holy citie for many just regardable causes Again when it is said Act. 6.13 This man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words against this holy place they that said so were not in the Temple but in their Councel-house in the citie and the words have a true reference to the citie as well as to the Temple yea more because the Temple was within the citie and not è contrá Now their Councel-house was distant a good way from any part of the Temple and was built close by one wall of the citie and was called GASITH in Hebrew wherein seventie Senatours or ordinarie Judges called SANHEDRIM determined weighty causes and here they examined the Apostles Acts 4.7 and S. Stephen Act. 6.13 and 7.1 The citie which before was called Solyma was by Melchizedech named Hierosolyma that is The holy Solyma saith Josephus de bello Judaico 7.18 Let Josephus justifie upon what grounds he mongrelleth the name for neither did Melchizedech speak Greek nor doth the Hebrew incline to that sense yet is even that hotch-potch better to be digested then the impious and sottish fable of other Jews That Melchizedech having named the citie Salem and Abraham having called the mount Moriah in or about Jerusalem JEHOVA JIREH The Lord will see or provide Genes 22.14 God himself being unwilling to suffer a debate between the holy Melchizedech and Abraham the father of the faithfull umpired the businesse and of both their attributes or appellations compounded one word or name and calleth it thereafter Hierusalem Perhaps S. Hierom can hardly prove what he saith in his epistle to Dardanus de Terra promissionis Tom. 3.24 that the citie was first called Jebus and thencefrom Jerusalem rather then Jebusalem Euphoniae gratiâ that it might have a fair sound and good pronunication For there is mention of Jerusalem Judg. 1.8 yea before that Josh 10.3 long before David expelled the Jebusites and in the dayes of Melchizedech it was called Salem for Melchizedech was King of Salem Hebr. 7.1 Now that the Jebusites inhabited Jerusalem before the time of Melchizedech or that he should be King of the Jebusites inhabiting that place or that he should expell the Jebusites there commorant before him or how they repossessed it till Davids time or indeed that the name was given as S. Hierom opineth are matters onely of conjecture as not being backt with proofs sufficient Lastly if we be led with reason as I said before What should be the end of these Saints ascending to heaven Christ had no need of bodily service and we may not think that they were to bear witnesse in heaven of Christs resurrection for the triumphant Saints need no such proof or witnesses their beatificall vision and fruition exempteth them from doubting The living had more need to know by these Many the resurrection of Christ but by them the living knew nothing at all so farre as can be proved if this going into the holy citie be to be interpreted of the supernall Jerusalem But that the words are to be expounded of Jerusalem below the passage immediately following demonstrateth They went into the holy citie and appeared unto many Certainly if they had gone into heaven they must have appeared unto all there for as d Coelum est singulis â—otum omnibus unum No corner of heaven is hid from any so there all things present are seen face to face their matutine knowledge infinitely surpasseth our vespertine all and every one see all and every one present 3. Yet even from these very words They appeared unto many Maldonat gathereth that they did not appeare commonly or indifferently or generally to all from whence he inferreth If they arose to die again they would have appeared not to many as the Evangelist said they did but vulgò omnibus promiscuously to all I answer They appeared to all viz. All that met them saw them and saw them as men and as other men but not as newly raised men for so onely they appeared to Many as Christ himself did appeare Testibus praeordinatis à Deo Vnto witnesses chosen before of God Act. 10.41 so did they to such onely as God had appointed To evince this distinction let it be considered whether every one who saw Lazarus after his resurrection saw him as a raised man or as an ordinary man But if Lazarus might appeare commonly to all men and yet appeare unto Many onely as a man raised lately from the dead these Saints also might be seen and were seen of all that passed by and looked on them apparuerunt vulgò omnibus they appeared ordinarily to all and yet they might be seen not by all but onely appeare to Many as persons raised of purpose for holy ends And this opinion I hold to be more probable then that of Franciscus Lucas Brugensis on the place That onely unto some the raised did aliquando apparere aliquando disparere sicut Jesus Sometime appeare to some and sometimes vanish as our Saviour did I answer he had said somewhat if the resurrection had been of the same nature with Jesus his resurrection And as I dislike him not if by disparere he meaneth that they did not alwayes converse with the same men but changed company so if by it he understandeth a sudden vanishing from the sight of men and implyeth that the Many raised had a power to be visible and invisible at their pleasure till he bring proof to evince it he shall give me leave to parallell it to the fiction of Gyges and his ring whose broad beazil or insealing part if he turned to the palm of his hand he was forthwith invisible yet himself saw all