may be acceptable in Jesus Christ. If I perish I perish I have deserved it but I will hope for mercy till thy mercy hath a limit till thy goodness can be numbred O my God let me not perish thou hast no pleasure in my death and it is impossible for man to suffer thy extremest wrath Who can dwell with the everlasting burning O my God let me dwell safely in the embraces of thy sweetest mercy Amen Amen Amen CHAP. IV. Of Concupiscence and Original Sin and whether or no or how far we are bound to repent of it SECT I. 1. ORIGINAL sin is so called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or figuratively meaning the sin of Adam which was committed in the Original of mankind by our first Parent and which hath influence upon all his posterity Nascuntur non propriè sed originalitèr peccatores So S. Austin and therefore S. Ignatius calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the old impiety that which was in the original or first Parent of mankind 2. This sin brought upon Adam all that God threatned but no more A certainty of dying together with the proper effects and affections of mortality was inflicted on him and he was reduced to the condition of his own nature and then begat sons and daughters in his own likeness that is in the proper temper and constitution of mortal men For as God was not bound to give what he never promised viz. an immortal duration and abode in this life so neither does it appear in that angry entercourse that God had with Adam that he took from him or us any of our natural perfections but his graces only 3. Man being left in this state of pure Naturals could not by his own strength arrive to a supernatural end which was typified in his being cast out of Paradise and the guarding it with the flaming sword of a Cherub For eternal life being an end above our natural proportion cannot be acquir'd by any natural means Neither Adam nor any of his posterity could by any actions or holiness obtain Heaven by desert or by any natural efficiency for it is a gift still and it is neque currentis neque operantis neither of him that runneth nor of him that worketh but of God who freely gives it to such persons whom he also by other gifts and graces hath dispos'd toward the reception of it 4. What gifts and graces or supernatural endowments God gave to Adam in his state of Innocence we know not God hath no where told us and of things unrevealed we commonly make wild conjectures But after his fall we find no sign of any thing but of a common man And therefore as it was with him so it is with us our nature cannot go to Heaven without the helps of the Divine grace so neither could his and whether he had them or no it is certain we have receiving more by the second Adam than we did lose by the first and the sons of God are now spiritual which he never was that we can find 5. But concerning the sin of Adam tragical things are spoken it destroyed his original righteousness and lost it to us for ever it corrupted his nature and corrupted ours and brought upon him and not him only but on us also who thought of no such thing an inevitable necessity of sinning making it as natural to us to sin as to be hungry or to be sick and die and the conâ—equent of these things is saddest of all we are born enemies of God sons of wrath and heirs of eternal damnation 6. In the meditation of these sad stories I shall separate the certain from the uncertain that which is reveal'd from that which is presum'd that which is reasonable from that which makes too bold reflexions upon Godâ— honour and the reputation of his justice and his goodness I shall do it in the words of the Apostle from whence men commonly dispute in this Question right or wrong according as it happens 7. By one man sin came into the world That sin entred into the world by Adam is therefore certain because he was the first man and unless he had never sinn'd it must needs enter by him for it comes in first by the first and Death by sin that is Death which at first was the condition of nature became a punishment upon that account just as it was to the Serpent to creep upon his belly and to the Woman to be subject to her Husband These things were so before and would have been so for the Apostle pressing the duty of subjection gives two reasons why the woman was to obey One of them only was derived from this sin the other was the prerogative of creation for Adam was first formed then Eve so that before her fall she was to have been subject to her husband because she was later in being she was a minor and therefore under subjection she was also the weaker vessel But it had not been a curse and if any of them had been hindred by grace and favour by Gods anger they were now left to fall back to the condition of their nature 8. Death passed upon all men That is upon all the old world who were drowned in the floud of the Divine vengeance and who did sin after the similitude of Adam And therefore S. Paul adds that for the reason In as much as all men have sinned If all men have sinned upon their own account as it is certain they have then these words can very well mean that Adam first sinned and all his sons and daughters sinned after him and so died in their own sin by a death which at first and in the whole constitution of affairs is natural and a death which their own sins deserved but yet which was hastned or ascertained upon them the rather for the sin of their progenitor Sin propagated upon that root and vicious example or rather from that beginning not from that cause but dum ita peccant similiter moriuntur If they sin so then so shall they die so S. Hierome 9. But this is not thought sufficient and men do usually affirm that we are formally and properly made sinners by Adam and in him we all by interpretation sinned and therefore think these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 forasmuch as all men have sinned ought to be expounded thus Death passed upon all men In whom all men have sinned meaning that in Adam we really sinn'd and God does truly and justly impute his sin to us to make us as guilty as he that did it and as much punish'd and liable to eternal damnation And all the great force of this fancy relies upon this exposition of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie in him 10. Concerning which there will be the less need of a laborious inquiry if it be observed that the words being read Forasmuch as all men have sinned beat a fair and clear discourse and very intelligible if it be
sinned he should have been immortal by grace that is by the use of the Tree of life and now being driven from the place where the Tree grew was left in his own natural constitution that is to be sick and die without that remedy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He was mortal of himself and we are mortal from him Peccando Adam posteros morti subjecit universos huic delicto obnoxios reddit said Justin Martyr Adam by his sin made all his posterity liable to the sin and subjected them to death One explicates the other and therefore S. Cyprian calls Original sin Malum domesticum contagium mortis antiquae primâ nativitate contractum His sin infected us with death and this infection we derive in our birth that is we are born mortal Adams sin was imputed to us unto a natural death in him we are sinners as in him we die But this sin is not real and inherent but imputed only to such a degree So S. Cyprian affirms most expresly infans recens natus nihil peccavit nisi quòd secundum Adam carnalitèr natus contagium mortis antiquae primâ nativitate contraxit An infant hath not sinn'd save only that being carnally born of Adam in his first birth he hath contracted the contagion of the old death 20. This evil which is the condition of all our natures viz. to die was to some a punishment but to others not so It was a punishment to all that sinn'd both before Moses and since upon the first it fell as a consequent of Gods anger upon Adam as I before discours'd upon the latter it fell as a consequent of that anger which was threatned in Moses law But to those who sinned not at all as Infants and Innocents it was merely a condition of their nature and no more a punishment than to be a child is It was a punishment of Adams sin because by his sin humane Nature became disrob'd of their preternatural immortality and therefore upon that account they die but as it related to the persons it was not a punishment not an evil afflicted for their sin or any guiltiness of their own properly so called 21. We find nothing else in Scripture express'd to be the effect of Adams sin and beyond this without authority we must not go Other things are said but I find no warrant for them in that sence they are usually suppos'd and some of them in no sence at all The particulars commonly reckoned are that from Adam we derive an Original ignorance a proneness to sin a natural malice a fomes or nest of sin imprinted and plac'd in our souls a loss of our wills liberty and nothing is left but a liberty to sin which liberty upon the summ of affairs is expounded to be a necessity to sin and the effect of all is we are born heirs of damnation 22. Concerning Original or Natural ignorance it is true we derive it from our Parents I mean we are born with it but I do not know that any man thinks that if Adam had not sinn'd that sin Cain should have been wise as soon as his Navel had been cut Neither can we guess at what degree of knowledge Adam had before his fall Certainly if he had had so great a knowledge it is not likely he would so cheaply have sold himself and all his hopes out of a greedy appetite to get some knowledge But concerning his posterity indeed it is true a child cannot speak at first nor understand and if as Plato said all our knowledge is nothing but memory it is no wonder a child is born without knowledge But so it is in the wisest men in the world they also when they see or hear a thing first think it strange and could not know it till they saw or heard it Now this state of ignorance we derive from Adam as we do our Nature which is a state of ignorance and all manner of imperfection but whether it was not imperfect and apt to fall into forbidden instances even before his fall we may best guess at by the event for if he had not had a rebellious appetite and an inclination to forbidden things by what could he have been tempted and how could it have come to pass that he should sin Indeed this Nature was made worse by sin and became devested of whatsoever it had extraordinary and was left naked and mere and therefore it is not only an Original imperfection which we inherit but in the sence now explicated it is also an Original corruption And this is all As natural death by his sin became a curse so our natural imperfection became natural corruption and that is Original sin Death and imperfection we derive from Adam but both were natural to us but by him they became actual and penal and by him they became worse as by every evil act every principle of evil is improv'd And in this sence this Article is affirmed by all the Doctors of the ancient Church We are miserable really sinners in account or effect that properly this improperly and are faln into so sad a state of things which we also every day make worse that we did need a Saviour to redeem us from it For in Original sin we are to consider the principle and the effects The principle is the actual sin of Adam This being to certain purposes by Gods absolute dominion imputed to us hath brought upon us a necessity of dying and all the affections of mortality which although they were natural yet would by grace have been hindred Another evil there is upon us and that is Concupiscence this also is natural but it was actual before the fall it was in Adam and tempted him This also from him is derived to us and is by many causes made worse by him and by our selves And this is the whole state of Original sin so far as is fairly warrantable But for the other particulars the case is wholly differing The sin of Adam neither made us 1. Heirs of damnation Nor 2. Naturally and necessarily vicious 23. I. It could not make us Heirs of damnation This I shall the less need to insist upon because of it self it seems so horrid to impute to the goodness and justice of God to be author of so great a calamity to Innocents that S. Austins followers have generally left him in that point and have descended to this lesser proportion that Original sin damns only to the eternal loss of the sight of Gods glorious face But to this I say these things 24. I. That there are many Divines which believe this alone to be the worm that never dies and the fire that never goeth out that is in effect this and the anguish for this is all the Hell of the damned And unless infants remain infants in the resurrection too which no man that I know affirms or unless they be senseless and inapprehensive it is not to be imagined but that all that know
Rom. 5.12 As by one man sin entred into the world and Death by sin and so death passed upon all men for that all have sinned i. e. As by the disobedience of Adam sin had its beginning and by sin death that is the sentence and preparations the solennities and addresses of death sickness calamity dâ—â—inution of strengths Old age misfortunes and all the affections of Mortality for the destroying of our temporal life and so this mortality and condition or state of death passed actually upon all mankind for Adam being thrown out of Paradise and forced to live with his Children where they had no Trees of Life as he had in Paradise was remanded to his mortal natural state and therefore death passed upon them mortally seized on all for that all have sinned that is the sin was reckoned to all not to make them guilty like Adam but Adams sin passed upon all imprinting this real calamity on us all But yet death descended also upon Adams Posterity for their own sins for since all did sin all should die But some Greek copies leave out the second 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which indeed seems superfluous and of no signification but then the sence is cleareâ— and the following words are the second part of a similitude As by one man sin entred into the world and death by sin So death passed upon all men for that all have sinned But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies neutrally And the meaning is As Adam died in his own sin So death passed upon all men for their own sin in the sin which they sinned in that sin they died As it did at first to Adam by whom sin first entred and by sin death so death passed upon all men upon whom sin passed that is in the same method they who did sin should die But then he does not seem to say that all did sin for he presently subjoyns that death reigned even upon those who did not sin after the similitude of Adams transgression but this was upon another account as appears in the following words But others expound 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie masculinely and to relate to Adam viz. that in him we all sinned Now although this is less consonant to the mind of the Apostle and is harsh and improper both in the language and in the sence yet if it were so it could mean but this that the sin of Adam was of Universal obligation and in him we are reckoned as sinners obnoxious to his sentence for by his sin humane Nature was reduced to its own mortality 13. For until the law sin was in the World but sin is not imputed where there is no law And marvel not that Death did presently descend on all mankind even before a Law was given them with an appendant penalty viz. With the express intermination of death For they did do actions unnatural and vile enough but yet these things which afterwards upon the publication of the Law were imputed to them upon their personal account even unto death were not yet so imputed For Nature alone gives Rules but does not directly bind to penalties But death came upon them before the Law for Adams sin for with him God being angry was pleased to curse him also in his Posterity and leave them also in their mere natural condition to which yet they disposed themselves and had deserved but too much by committing evil things to which things although before the law death was not threatned yet for the anger which God had against mankind he left that death which he threatned to Adam expresly by implication to fall upon the Posterity 14. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression who is the figure of him which was to come And therefore it was that death reigned from Adam to Moses from the first law to the second from the time that a Law was given to one man till the time a Law was given to one Nation and although men had not sinned so grievously as Adam did who had no excuse many helps excellent endowments mighty advantages trifling temptations communication with God himself no disorder in his faculties free will perfect immunity from violence Original righteousness perfect power over his faculties yet those men such as Abel and Seth Noah and Abraham Isaac and Jacob Joseph and Benjamin who sinned less and in the midst of all their disadvantages were left to fall under the same sentence But it is to be observed that these words even over them that had not sinned according to some Interpretations are to be put into a Parenthesis and the following words after the similitude of Adams transgression are an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and to be referred to the first words thus Death reigned from Adam to Moses after the similitude of Adams transgression that is as it was at first so it was afterwards death reigned upon men who had not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression that is like as it did in the transgression of Adam so it did afterward they in their innocence died as Adam did in his sin and prevarication and this was in the similitude of Adam As they who obtain salvation obtain it in the similitude of Christ or by a conformity to Christ so they 〈◊〉 die do die in the likeness of Adam Christ and Adam being the two representatives of mankind For this besides that it was the present Oeconomy of the Divine Providence and Government it did also like Janus look 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it looked forwards as well as backwards and became a type of Christ or of him that was to come For as from Adam evil did descend upon his natural Children upon the account of Gods entercourse with Adam so did good descend upon the spiritual Children of the second Adam 15. But not as the offence so also is the free gift for if through the offence of one many be dead much more the grace of God and the gift by grace which is by one man Jesus Christ hath abounded unto many This should have been the latter part of a similitude but upon further consideration it is found that as in Adam we die so in Christ we live and much rather and much more therefore I cannot say as by one man vers 12. so by one man vers 15. But much more for not as the offence so also is the free gift for the offence of one did run over unto many and those many even as it were all except Enoch or some very few more of whom mention peradventure is not made are already dead upon that account but when God comes by Jesus Christ to shew mercy to mankind he does it in much more abundance he may be angry to the third and fourth generation in them that hate him but he will shew mercy unto thousands of them that love him to a thousand generations and in ten thousand degrees
are fallible yet when they bring evidence of holy Writ their assertions are infallible and not to be contradicted I am bound to reply that when they do so whether they be infallible or no I will believe them because then though they might yet they are not deceived But as evidence of holy Writ had been sufficient without their authority so without such evidence their authority is nothing But then My Lord their citing and urging the words of S. Paul Rom. 5.12 is so far from being an evident probation of their Article that nothing is to me a surer argument of their fallibility than the urging of that which evidently makes nothing for them but much against them As 1. Affirming expresly that death was the event of Adam's sin the whole event for it names no other temporal death according to that saying of S. Paul 1 Cor. 15. In Adam we all die And 2. Affirming this process of death to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is and ought to be taken to be the allay or condition of the condemnation It became a punishment to them only who did sin but upon them also inflicted for Adam's sake A like expression to which is in the Psalms Psalm 106.32 33. They angred him also at the waters of strife so that he punished Moses for their sakes Here was plainly a traduction of evil from the Nation to Moses their relative For their sakes he was punished but yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for as much as Moses had sinn'd for so it follows because they provoked his spirit so that he spake unadvisedly with his lips So it is between Adam and us He sinn'd and God was highly displeased This displeasure went further than upon Adam's sin for though that only was threatned with death yet the sins of his children which were not so threatned became so punished and they were by nature heirs of wrath and damnation that is for his sake our sins inherited his curse The curse that was specially and only threatned to him we when we sinn'd did inherit for his sake So that it is not so properly to be called Original Sin as an Original curse upon our sin To this purpose we have also another example of God transmitting the curse from one to another Both were sinners but one was the Original of the curse or punishment So said the Prophet to the wife of Jeroboam 1 Kings 14.16 He shall give Israel up because of the sins of Jeroboam who did sin and who made Israel to sin Jeroboam was the root of the sin and of the curse Here it was also that I may use the words of the Apostle that by the sin of one man Jeroboam sin went out into all Israel and the curse captivity or death by sin and so death went upon all men of Israel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in as much as all men of Israel have sinned If these men had not sinned they had not been punished I cannot say they had not been afflicted for David's child was smitten for his fathers fault but though they did sin yet unless their root and principal had sinned possibly they should not have so been punished For his sake the punishment came Upon the same account it may be that we may inherit the damnation or curse for Adam's sake though we deserve it yet it being transmitted from Adam and not particularly threatned to the first posterity we were his heirs the heirs of death deriving from him an Original curse but due also if God so pleased to our sins And this is the full sence of the 12. verse and the effect of the phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But your Lordship is pleased to object that though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 does once signifie For as much as yet three times it signifies in or by To this I would be content to submit if the observation could be verified and be material when it were true But besides that it is so used in 2 Cor. 5.4 your Lordship may please to see it used as not only my self but indeed most men and particularly the Church of England does read it and expound it in Mat. 26.50 And yet if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the same with in or by if it be rendred word for word yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 twice in the Scripture signifies for as much as as you may read Rom. 8.3 and Heb. 2.18 So that here are two places besides this in question and two more ex abundanti to shew that if it were not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but said in words expresly as you would have it in the meaning yet even so neither the thing nor any part of the thing could be evicted against me and lastly if it were not only said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but that that sence of it were admitted which is desired and that it did mean in or by in this very place yet the Question were not at all the nearer to be concluded against me For I grant that it is true in him we are all sinners as it is true that in him we all die that is for his sake we are us'd as sinners being miserable really but sinners in account and effect as I have largely discoursed in my book But then for the place here in question it is so certain that it signifies the same thing as our Church reads it that it is not sence without it but a violent breach of the period without precedent or reason And after all I have looked upon those places where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is said to signifie in or by and in one of them I find it so Mat. 2.4 but in Acts 3.16 and Phil. 1.3 I find it not at all in any sence but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 indeed is used for in or by in that of the Acts and in the other it signifies at or upon but if all were granted that is pretended to it no way prejudices my cause as I have already proved Next to these your Lordship seems a little more zealous and decretory in the Question upon the confidence of the 17 18 and 19. Verses of the 5. Chapter to the Romans The summ of which as your Lordship most ingeniously summs it up is this As by one many were made sinners so by one many were made righteous that by Adam this by Christ. But by Christ we are made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 just not by imputation only but effectively and to real purposes therefore by Adam we are really made sinners And this your Lordship confirms by the observation of the sence of two words here used by the Apostle The first is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies a sentence of guilt or punishment for sin and this sin to be theirs upon whom the condemnation comes because God punishes none but for their own sin Ezek. 18.2 From the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 clear from sin so your Lordship renders
these 4. Origen says that the Christian people drinketh the blood of Christ and the flesh of the word of God is true food What then so say we too but it is Spiritual food and we drink the blood Spiritually He says nothing against that but very much for it as I have in several places remarked already 5. But how can this expound the other words Christian people eat Christs flesh and drink his blood therefore when Origen says the material part the Symbolical body of Christ is eaten naturally and cast into the draught he means not the body of Christ in his material part but the accidents of bread the colour the taste the quantity these are cast out by the belly Verily a goodly argument if a man could guess in what mood and figure it could conclude 6. When a man speaks distinctly and particularly it is certain he is easier to be understood in his particular and minute meaning than when he speaks generally But here he distinguishes a part from a part one sence from another the body in one sence from the body in another therefore these words are to expound the more general and not they to expound these unless the general be more particular than that that is distinguished into kinds that is unless the general be a particular and the particular be a general 7. Amalarius was so amus'd with these words and discourse of Origen that his understanding grew giddy and he did not know whether the body of Christ were invisibly taken up into Heaven or kept till our death in the body or expired at letting of blood or exhal'd in air or spit out or breath'd forth our Lord saying That which enters into the mouth descends into the belly and so goes forth into the draught The man was willing to be of the new opinion of the Real Presence because it began to be the mode of the Age. But his folly was soberly reproved by a Synod at Carisiacum about the time of Pope Gregory the Fourth where the difficulty of Origens argument was better answered and the Article determined that the bread and wine are spiritually made the body of Christ which being a meat of the mind and not of the belly is not corrupted but remaineth unto everlasting life 8. To expound these words of the accidents of bread only and say that they enter into the belly and go forth in the draught is a device of them that care not what they say for 1. It makes that the ejectamentum or excrement of the body should consist of colour and quantity without any substance 2. It makes a man to be nourished by accidents and so not only one substance to be changed into another but that accidents are changed into substances which must be if they nourish the body and pass in latrinam and then beyond the device of Transubstantiation we have another production from Africa a transaccidentisubstantiation a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 3. It makes accidents to have all the affections of substances as motion substantial corruption alteration that is not to be accidents but substances For matter and form are substances and those that integrate all physical and compound substances but till yesterday it was never heard that accidents could Yea but magnitude is a material quality and ground or subject of the accidents So it is said but it is nonsence For besides that magnitude is not a quality but a quantity neither can it be properly or truly said to be material but imperfectly because it is an affection of matter and however it is a contradiction to say that it is the ground of qualities for an accident cannot be the fundamentum the ground or subject of an accident that is the formality and definition of a substance as every young scholar hath read in Aristotles Categories so that to say that it is the ground of accidents is to say that accidents are subjected in magnitude that is that magnitude is neither a quantity nor quality but a substance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 An accident always subsists in a subject says Porphyrie 9. This answer cannot be fitted to the words of Origen for that which he calls the quid materiale or the material part in the Sacrament he calls it the Symbolical body which cannot be affirmed of accidents because there is no likeness between the accidents the colour the shape the figure the roundness the weight the magnitude of the host or wafer and Christs body and therefore to call the accidents a Symbolical body is to call it an unsymbolical Symbol an unlike similitude a representment without analogy But if he means the consecrated bread the whole action of consecration distribution sumption manducation this is the Symbolical body according to the words of S. Paul He that drinks this cup and eats this bread represents the Lords death it is the figure of Christs crucified body of his passion and our redemption 10. It is a strange expression to call accidents a body 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 says Aristotle a body may be called white but the definition or reason of the accident can never be affirmed of a body I conclude that this argument out of the words of our blessed Saviour urged also and affirmed by Origen do prove that Christs body is in the Sacrament only to be eaten in a Spiritual sence not at all in a Natural lest that consequent be the event of it which to affirm of Christs glorified body in the natural and proper sence were very blasphemy 2. The next argument from Scripture is taken from Christs departing from this world his going from us the ascension of his body and soul into Heaven his not being with us his being contained in the Heavens So said our blessed Saviour Vnless I go hence the Comforter cannot come and I go to prepare a place for you The poor ye have always but me ye have not always S. Peter affirms of him that the Heavens must receive him till the time of restitution of all things Now how these things can be true of Christ according to his humane nature that is a circumscribed body and a definite soul is the question And to this the answer is the same in effect which is given by the Roman Doctors and by the Vbiquitaries whom they call Hereticks These men say Christs humane nature is every where actually by reason of his hypostatical union with the Deity which is every where the Romanists say no it is not actually every where but it may be where and is in as many places as he please for although he be in Heaven yet so is God too and yet God is upon earth eodem modo says Bellarmine in the same manner the Man Christ although he be in Heaven yet also he can be out of Heaven where he please he can be in Heaven and out of Heaven Now these two opinions are concentred in the main impossibility that is that Christs body can
were press'd in the Council of Florence by Pope Eugenius and by their necessity how unwillingly they consented how ambiguously they answered how they protested against having that half-consent put into the Instrument of Union how they were yet constrain'd to it by their Chiefs being obnoxious to the Pope how a while after they dissolv'd that Union and to this day refuse to own this Doctrine are things so notoriously known that they need no further declaration We add this only to make the conviction more manifest We have thought fit to annex some few but very clear testimonies of Antiquity expresly destroying the new Doctrine of Purgatory Saint Cyprian saith Quando istinc excessum fuerit nullus jam locus poenitentiae est nullus satisfactionis effectus When we are gone from hence there is no place left for repentance and no effect of satisfaction Saint Dionysius call the extremity of death 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The end of all our Agonies and affirms That the Holy men of God rest in joy and in never-failing hopes and are come to the end of their holy combates Saint Justin Martyr affirms That when the soul is departed from the body 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 presently there is a separation made of the just and unjust The unjust are by Angels born into places which they have deserv'd but the souls of the just into Paradise where they have the conversation of Angels and Archangels Saint Ambrose saith That Death is a Haven of rest and makes not our condition worse but according as it finds every man so it reserves him to the judgment that is to come The same is affirmed by Saint Hilary c Saint Macarius and divers others they speak but of two states after death of the just and the unjust These are plac'd in horrible Regions reserv'd to the judgment of the great day the other have their souls carried by Quires of Angels into places of Rest. Saint Gregory Nazianzen expresly affirms That after this life there is no purgation For after Christ's ascension into Heaven the souls of all Saints are with Christ saith Gennadius and going from the body they go to Christ expecting the resurrection of their body with it to pass into the perfection of perpetual bliss and this he delivers as the Doctrine of the Catholick Church In what place soever a man is taken at his death of light or darkness of wickedness or vertue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same order and in the same degree either in light with the just and with Christ the great King or in darkness with the unjust and with the Prince of Darkness said Olympiodorus And lastly we recite the words of Saint Leo one of the Popes of Rome speaking of the Penitents who had not perform'd all their penances But if any one of them for whom we pray unto the Lord being interrupted by any obstacles falls from the gift of the present Indulgence viz. of Ecclesiastical Absolution and before he arrive at the appointed remedies that is before he hath perform'd his penances or satisfactions ends his temporal life that which remaining in the body he hath not receiv'd when he is devested of his body he cannot obtain He knew not of the new devices of paying in Purgatory what they paid not here and of being cleansed there who were not clean here And how these words or any of the precedent are reconcileable with the Doctrines of Purgatory hath not yet entred into our imagination To conclude this particular We complain greatly that this Doctrine which in all the parts of it is uncertain and in the late additions to it in Rome is certainly false is yet with all the faults of it passed into an Article of Faith by the Council of Trent But besides what hath been said it will be more than sufficient to oppose against it these clearest words of Scripture Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth even so saith the Spirit that they may rest from their labours If all the dead that die in Christ be at rest and are in no more affliction or labours then the Doctrine of the horrible pains of Purgatory is as false as it is uncomfortable To these words we add the saying of Christ and we rely upon it He that heareth my word and believeth on him that sent me hath eternal life and cometh not into judgment but passeth from death unto life If so then not into the judgment of Purgatory If the servant of Christ passeth from death to life then not from death to the terminable pains of a part of Hell They that have eternal life suffer no intermedial punishment judgment or condemnation after death for death and life are the whole progression according to the Doctrine of Christ and Him we chuse to follow SECT V. THE Doctrine of Transubstantiation is so far from being Primitive and Apostolick that we know the very time it began to be own'd publickly for an Opinion and the very Council in which it was said to be passed into a publick Doctrine and by what arts it was promoted and by what persons it was introduc'd For all the world knows that by their own parties by Scotus Ocham Biel Fisher Bishop of Rochester and divers others whom Bellarmine calls most learned and most acute men it was declared that the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is not expressed in the Canon of the Bible that in the Scriptures there is no place so express as without the Churches Declaration to compel us to admit of Transubstantiation and therefore at least it is to be suspected of novelty But further we know it was but a disputable Question in the ninth and tenth Ages after Christ that it was not pretended to be an Article of Faith till the Lateran Council in the time of Pope Innocent the Third one thousand two hundred years and more after Christ that since that pretended determination divers of the chiefest Teachers of their own side have been no more satisfied of the ground of it than they were before but still have publickly affirm'd that the Article is not express'd in Scripture particularly Johannes de Bassolis Cardinal Cajetan and Melchior Canus besides those above reckon'd And therefore if it was not express'd in Scripture it will be too clear that they made their Articles of their own heads for they could not declare it to be there if it was not and if it was there but obscurely then it ought to be taught accordingly and at most it could be but a probable Doctrine and not certain as an Article of Faith But that we may put it past argument and probability it is certain that as the Doctrine was not taught in Scripture expresly so it was not at all taught as a Catholick Doctrine or an Article of the Faith by the Primitive Ages of the Church Now for this we need no proof
recentiores ut ex concilio Florentino apparet And Alphonsus à Castro saith Unto this very day Purgatory is not believ'd by the Greeks And no less can be imagined since their prime and most learned Prelate besides what he did in the Council did also after the Council publish an Encyclical Epistle against the definition of the Council as may be seen in Binius his narrative of the Council of Florence By all which appears how notoriously scandalous is the imputation of falsehood laid upon the Dissuasive by this objector who by this time is warm with writing and grows uncivil being like a baited Bull beaten into choler with his own tail and angred by his own objections But the next charge is higher it was not only doubted of in S. Austins time and since but the Roman doctrine of Purgatory without any hesitation or doubting is against the express doctrines deliverd by divers of the Ancient Fathers and to this purpose some were remark'd in the Dissuasive which I shall now verefie and add others very plain and very considerable S. Cyprian exhorts Demetrianus to turn to Christ while this world lasts saying that after we are dead there is no place of repentance no place of satisfaction To this the letter answers It is not said when we are dead but when you are dead meaning that this is spoken to heathens not to Christians As if quando istinc excessum fuerit being spoken impersonally does not mean indefinitely all the world and certainly it may as well one as the other Christians as well as Heathens for Christians may be in the state of deadly sin and aversion from God as well as Heathens and then this admonition and reason fits them as well as the other E. W. answers that S. Cyprian means that after death there is no meritorious satisfaction he says true indeed there is none that is meritorious neither before nor after death but this will not serve his turn for S. Cyprian says that after death there is none at all no place of Satisfaction of any kind whatsoever no place of wholsome repentance And therefore it is vain to say that this Council was only given to Demetrianus who was a Heathen for if he had been a Christian he would or at least might have us'd the same argument not to put any part of his duty off upon confidence of any thing to be done or suffered after this life For his argument is this this is the time of repentance after death it is not now you may satisfie that is appease the Divine anger after this life is ended nothing of this can be done For S. Cyprian does not speak this dispensativè or by relation to this particular case but assertivè he affirms expresly speaking to the same Demetrian that when this life is finished we are divided either to the dwellings of death or of immortality And that we may see this is not spoken of impenitent Pagans only as the letter to a friend dreams S. Cyprian renews the same caution and advice to the lapsed Christians O ye my Brethen let every one confess his sin while he that hath sinn'd is yet in this world while his confession can be admitted while satisfaction and pardon made by the Priests is grateful with God If there had been any thought of the Roman Purgatory in S. Cyprians time he could not in better words have impugned it than here he does All that have sinn'd must here look to it here they must confess here beg pardon here make amends and satisfie afterwards neither one nor the other shall be admitted Now if to Christians also there is granted no leave to repent no means to satisfie no means of pardon after this life these words are so various and comprehensive that they include all cases and it is plain S. Cyprian speaks it indefinitely there is no place of repentance no place of satisfaction none at all neither to Heathens nor to Christians But now let these words be set against the Roman doctrine viz. that there is a place called Purgatory in which the souls tormented do satisfie and come not out thence till they have paid viz. by sufferings or by suffrages the utmost farthing and then see which we will follow for they differ in all the points of the Compass And these men do nothing but betray the weakness of their cause by expounding S. Cyprian to the sence of new distinctions made but yesterday in the forges of the Schools And indeed the whole affair upon which the answer of Bellarmine relies which these men have translated to their own use is unreasonable For is it a likely business that when men have committed great crimes they shall be pardon'd here by confession and the ministeries of the Church c. and yet that the venial sins though confess'd in the general and as well as they can be and the party absolved yet there should be prepared for their expiation the intolerable torments of hell fire for a very long time and that for the greater sins for which men have agreed with their adversary in the way and the Adversary hath forgiven them yet that for these also they should be cast into prison from whence they shall not come till the utmost farthing be paid that is against the design of our Blessed Saviours Counsel for if that be the case then though we and our adversaries are agreed upon the main and the debt forgiven yet nevertheless we may be delivered to the tormentors But then concerning the sence of S. Cyprian in this particular no man can doubt that shall have but read his excellent treatise of mortality that he could not did not admit of Purgatory after death before the day of judgment for he often said it in that excellent treatise which he made to comfort and strengthen Christians against the fear of death that immediately after death we go to God or the Devil And therefore it is for him only to fear to die who is not willing to go to Christ and he only is to be unwilling to go to Christ who believes not that he begins to reign with Christ. That we in the mean time die we pass over by death to immortality It is not a going forth but a pass over and when our temporal course is run a going over to immortality Let us embrace that day which assigns every one of us to our dwelling and restores those which are snatch'd from hence and are disintangled from the snares of the world to Paradise and the Heavenly kingdom There are here many other things so plainly spoken to this purpose that I wonder any Papist should read that treatise and not be cur'd of his infirmity To the same purpose is that of S. Dionys calling death the end of holy agonies and therefore it is to be suppos'd they have no more agonies to run through immediately after death To this E. W. answers that S.
Denis means that death is the end of all the agonies of this life A goodly note and never revealed till then and now as if this were a good argument to encourage men to contend bravely and not to fear death because when they are once dead they shall no more be troubled with the troubles of this life indeed you may go to worse and death may let you into a state of being as bad as hell and of greater torments than all the pains of this world put together amount to But to let alone such ridiculous subterfuges see the words of S. Dionys They that live a holy life looking to the true promises of God as if they were to behold the truth it self in that resurrection which is according to it with firm and true hope and in a Divine joy come to the sleep of death as to an end of all holy contentions now certainly if the doctrine of Purgatory were true and that they who had contended here and for all their troubles in this world were yet in a tolerable condition should be told that now they shall go to worse he that should tell them so would be but one of Jobs comforters No the servant of God coming to the end of his own troubles viz. by death is filled with holy gladness and with much rejoycing ascends to the way of Divine regeneration viz. to immortality which word can hardly mean that they shall be tormented a great while in hell fire The words of Justin Martyr or whoever is the Author of those Questions and Answers imputed to him affirms that presently after the departure of the soul from the body a distinction is made between the just and the unjust for they are brought by Angels to places worthy of them the souls of the just to Paradise where they have the conversation and sight of Angels and Archangels but the souls of the unrighteous to the places in Hades the invisible region or Hell Against these words because they pinch severely E. W. thinks himself bound to say something and therefore 1. whereas Justin Martyr says after our departure presently there is a separation made he answers that Justin Matyr means here to speak of the two final states after the day of judgment for so it seems he understands 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or presently after death to mean the day of judgment of the time of which neither men nor Angels know any thing And whereas Justin Martyr says that presently the souls of the righteous go to Paradise E. W. answers 2. That Justin does not say that all just souls are carried presently into Heaven no Justin says into Paradise true but let it be remembred that it is so a part of Heaven as limbus infantum is by themselves call'd a part of hell that is a place of bliss the region of the blessed But 3. Justin says that presently there is a separation made but he says not that the souls of the righteous are carried to Paradise That 's the next answer which the very words of Justin do contradict There is presently a separation made of the just and unjust for they are by the Angels carried to the places they have deserved This is the separation which is made one is carried to Paradise the other to a place in hell But these being such pitiful offers at answering the Gentleman tries another way and says 4. That this affirmative of Justin contradicts another saying of Justin which I cited out of Sixtus Senensis that Justin Martyr and many other of the Fathers affirm'd that the souls of men are kept in secret receptacles reserved unto the sentence of the great day and that before then no man receives according to his works done in this life To this I answer that one opinion does not contradict another for though the Fathers believ'd that they who die in the Lord rest from their labours and are in blessed places and have antepasts of joy and comforts yet in those places they are reserv'd unto the judgment of the great day The intermedial joy or sorrow respectively of the just and unjust does but antedate the final sentence and as the comforts of Gods spirit in this life are indeed graces of God and rewards of Piety as the torments of an evil conscience are the wages of impiety yet as these do not hinder but that the great reward is given at dooms-day and not before so neither do the joys which the righteous have in the interval They can both consist together and are generally affirm'd by very many of the Greek and Latin Fathers And methinks this Gentleman might have learn'd from Sixtus Senensis how to have reconcil'd these two opinions for he quotes him saying there is a double beatitude the one imperfect of soul only the other consummate and perfect of soul and body The first the Fathers call'd by several names of Sinus Abrahae Atrium Dei sub Altare c. The other perfect joy the glory of the resurrection c. But it matters not what is said or how it be contradicted so it seem but to serve a present turn But at last if nothing of this will do these words are not the words of Justin for he is not the Author of the Questions and Answers ad orthodoxos To which I answer it matters not whether they be Justins or no But they are put together in the collection of his works and they are generally called his and cited under his name and made use of by Bellarmine when he supposes them to be to his purpose However the Author is Ancient and Orthodox and so esteem'd in the Church and in this particular speaks according to the doctrine of the more Ancient Doctors well but how is this against Purgatory says E. W. for they may be in secret receptacles after they have been in Purgatory To this I answer that he dares not teach that for doctrine in the Church of Rome who believes that the souls deliver'd out of Purgatory go immediately to the heaven of the Blessed and therefore if his book had been worth the perusing by the Censors of books he might have been questioned and followed Mr. Whites fortune And he adds it might be afterwards according to Origens opinion that is Purgatory might be after the day of judgment for so Origen held that all the fires are Purgatory and the Devils themselves should be sav'd Thus this poor Gentleman thinking it necessary to answer one argument against Purgatory brought in the Dissuasive cares not to answer by a condemned heresie rather than reason shall be taught by any son of the Church of England But however the very words of the Fathers cross his slippery answers so that they thrust him into a corner for in these receptacles the godly have joy and they enter into them as soon as they die and abide there till the day of judgment S. Ambrose is so full pertinent and material to
if he had foreseen he should have been written against by so learned an adversary But to let them agree as well as they can the words of Eusebius out of his last chapter I translated as well as I could the Greek words I have set in the Margent that every one that understands may see I did him right and indeed to do my Adversary right when he goes about to change not to mend the translation he only changes the order of the words but in nothing does he mend his own matter by it for he acknowledges the main Question viz. that the memory of Christs sacrifice is to be celebrated in certain signs on the Table but then that l may do my self right and the question too whosoever translated these words for this Gentleman hath abused him and made him to render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if it were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and hath made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be governed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is so far off it and hath no relation to it and not to be governed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with which it is joyn'd and hath made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be governed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when it hath a substantive of its own 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and he repeats 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 once more than it is in the words of Eusebius only because he would not have the Reader suppose that Eusebius call'd the consecrated Elements the symbols of the body and blood But this fraud was too much studied to be excusable upon the stock of humane infirmity or an innocent perswasion But that I may satisfie the Reader in this Question so far as the testimony and doctrine of Eusebius can extend he hath these words fully to our purpose First our Lord and Saviour and then after him his Priests of all Nations celebrating the spiritual sacrifice according to the Ecclesiastick Laws by the bread and the wine signifie the mysteries of his body and healing blood And again By the wine which is the symbol of his blood he purges the old sins of them who were baptized into his death and believe in his blood Again he gave to his Disciples the symbols of the divine Oeconomy commanding them to make the image figure or representation of his own body And Again He received not the sacrifices of blood nor the slaying of divers beasts instituted in the Law of Moses but ordained we should use bread the symbol of his own body So far I thought fit to set down the words of Eusebius to convince my Adversary that Eusebius is none of theirs but he is wholly ours in the doctrine of the Sacrament S. Macarius is cited in the Disswasive in these words In the Church is offered bread and wine the Antitype of his flesh and blood and they that partake of the bread that appears do spiritually eat the flesh of Christ. A. L. saith Macarius saith not so but rather the contrary viz. bread and wine exhibiting the Exemplar or an antitype his flesh and blood Now although I do not suppose many learned or good men will concern themselves with what this little man says yet I cannot but note that they who gave him this answer may be asham'd for here is a double satisfaction in this little answer First he puts in the word exhibiting of his own head there being no such word in S. Macarius in the words quoted 2. He makes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be put with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by way of apposition expresly against the mind of S. Macarius and against the very Grammar of his words And after all he studies to abuse his Author and yet gets no good by it himself for if it were in the words as he hath invented it or some body else for him yet it makes against him as much saying bread and wine exhibite Christs body which is indeed true though not here said by the Saint but is directly against the Roman article because it confesses that to be bread and wine by which Christs body is exhibited to us but much more is the whole testimony of S. Macarius which in the Disswasive are translated exactly as the Reader may see by the Greek words cited in the Margent There now only remains the authority of S. Austin which this Gentleman would fain snatch from the Church of England and assert to his own party I cited five places out of S. Austin to the last of which but one he gives this answer that S. Austin hath no such words in that book that is in the Tenth book against Faustus the Manichee Concerning which I am to inform the Gentleman a little better These words that which by all men is called a sacrifice is the sign of the true sacrifice are in the tenth book of S. Austin de C. D. cap. 5. and make a distinct quotation and ought by the Printer to have been divided by a colume as the other But the following words in which the flesh of Christ after his assumption is celebrated by the Sacrament of remembrance are in the 20. book cap. 21. against Faustus the Manichee All these words and divers others of S. Austin I knit together in a close order like a continued discourse but all of them are S. Austins words as appears in the places set down in the Margent But this Gentleman car'd not for what was said by S. Austin he was as well pleased that a figure was false Printed but to the words he hath nothing to say To the first of the other four only he makes this crude answer that S. Austin denied not the real eating of Christs body in the Eucharist but only the eating it in that gross carnal and sensible manner as the Capharnaites conceiv'd To which I reply that it is true that upon occasion of this error S. Austin did speak those words and although the Roman error be not so gross and dull as that of the Capharnaites yet it was as false as unreasonable and as impossible And be the occasion of the words what they are or can be yet upon this occasion S. Austin spake words which as well confute the Roman error as the Capharnaitical For it is not only false which the men of Capernaum dreamt of but the antithesis to this is that which S. Austin urges and which comes home to our question I have commended to you a Sacrament which being spiritually understood shall quicken you But because S. Austin was the most diligent expounder of this mystery among all the Fathers I will gratifie my Adversary or rather indeed my Unprejudicate Readers by giving some other very clear and unanswerable evidences of the doctrine of S. Austin agreeing perfectly with that of our Church At this time after manifest token of our liberty hath shin'd in the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ we are not burdened with the heavy operation of signs
the world 2. John Damascen and Germanus Bishop of C. P. who wrote for the worship of images and are the most learned of all the Greeks that were abu'sd in this Question yet they never urg'd this authority of S. Basil which would have been more to their purpose than all that they said beside 3. The first mention of this is in an Epistle of Pope Adrian to the Emperors in the seventh Synod and that makes the business more suspicious that when the Greek writers knew nothing of it a Latin Bishop a stranger not very well skill'd in Antiquity should find this out which no man ever saw before him nor since in any Copy of S. Basils works But in the second Nicene Council such forgeries as these were many and notorious S. Gregory the Great is there quoted as Author of an Epistle de veneratione imaginum when it is notorious it was writ by Gregory III. and there were many Basils and any one of that name would serve to give countenance to the error of the second Nicene Synod but in S. Basil the Great there is not one word like it And therefore they who set forth S. Basils works at Paris 1618. who either could not or ought not to have been ignorant of so vile a cheat were infinitely to blame to publish this as the issue of the right S. Basil without any mark of difference or note of inquiry There is also another saying of S. Basil of which the Roman writers make much and the words are by Damascen imputed to the Great S. Basil Imaginis honor exemplum transit which indeed S. Basil speaks only of the statues of the Emperors and of that civil honour which by consent and custome of the world did pass to the Emperor and he accepted it so but this is no argument for religious images put up to the honour of God he says not the honour of any such image passes to God for God hath declar'd against it as will appear in the following periods and therefore from hence the Church of Rome can have no argument no fair pretence and yet upon this very account and the too much complying with the Heathen rites and manners and the secular customs of the Empire the veneration of images came into Churches But suppose it be admitted to be true yet although this may do some countenance to Thomas aquinas and Bonaventures way of worshipping the image and the sampler with the same worship yet this can never be urg'd by all those more moderate Papists who make the worship to an image of a lower kind For if it be not the same worship then they that worship images worship God and his Saints by the image not as they deserve but give to them no more than the image it self deserves let them take which part they please so that they will but publickly own it But let this be as it will and let it be granted true that the honour done to the image can pass to the sampler yet this is but an arbitrary thing and a King may esteem it so if he please but if the King forbids any image to be made of him and counts it a dishonour to him then I hope it is and that 's the case now for God hath forbidden any such way of passing honour to him by an image of him and he hath forbidden it in the second Commandment and this is confessed by Vasquez So that upon this account for all the pretence of the same motion to the image and the sampler to pass such a worship to God is no better than the doing as the Heathen did when they worshipped Mercury by throwing stones at him Another authority brought by E. W. for veneration of images is from Athanasius but himself damns it in the Margent with and without ingenuity for ingenuously saying that he does not affirm it to be the Great Athanasius yet most disingenuously he adds valeat quantum valere potest that is they that will be cosened let them And indeed these Questions and Answers to Antiochus are notoriously spurious for in them are quoted S. Epiphanius and Gregory Nyssen Chrysostom Scala Johannis Maximus and Nicephorus who were after Athanasius and the book is rejected by Delrio by Sixtus Senensis and Possevine But with such stuff as this the Roman Doctors are forc'd to build their Babel and E. W. in page 56. quotes the same book against me for worshipping the Cross together with another spurious piece de Cruce passione Domini which Nannius a very learned man of their own and professor at Lovaine rejects as it is to be seen in his Nuncupatory Epistle Yea but S. Chrysostoms Liturgy is very clear for it is said that the Priest turns himself to our Saviours picture and bows his head before the picture and says this prayer These words indeed are very plain but it is not plain that these are S. Chysostom's words for there are none such in S. Chrysostoms Liturgy in the Editions of it by Claudius de Saintes or Morellus and Claudius Espencaeus acknowledges with great truth and ingenuity that this Liturgy begun and compos'd by S. Chrysostom was inlarged by many things put into it according to the variety of times And it is evidently so because divers persons are there commemorated who liv'd after the death of Chrysostom as Cyrillus Euthymius Sabas and Johannes Eleemosynarius whereof the last but one lived 126. years the last 213. years after S. Chrysostom Now how likely nay how certain it is that this very passage was not put in by S. Chrysostom but is of later interpolation let all the world judge by that known saying of S. Chrysostom Quid enim est vilius atque humilius homine ante res inanimatas se incurvante saxa venerante What in the world is baser and more abject than to see a man worshipping stones and bowing himself before inanimate things These are his great authorities which are now come to nothing what he hath from them who came after these I shall leave to him to make his best of them for about the time of Gregory some began to worship images and some to break them the latter of which he reproves and the former he condemns what it was afterwards all the world knows But now having clear'd the Question from the trifling arguments of my adversaries I shall observe some things fit to be considered in this matter of images 1. It came at first from a very base and unworthy stock I have already pointed at this but now I shall explain it more fully it came from Simon Magus and his crew Theodoret says that the followers of Simon brought in the worship of images viz. of Simon in the shape of Jupiter and Helena in the figure of Minerva but S. Austin says that Simon Magus himself imagines suam cujusdam meretricis quam sibi sociam scelerum fecerat discipulis suis praebuisse adorandas E. W.
highest punishment such as are idle words and the like Now first I suppose that the two latter will be sound to be both one For either God hath not forbidden idleness or falseness or he hath made no restraint at all upon words but left us at liberty to talk as we please for if he hath in this case made a law then idle words either cannot pretend to an excuse or it must be for the smalness of the matter or else it must fall in with the first and be excused because they cannot always be attended to 29. Now concerning the first sort of venial sins it is not a kind of sins but a manner of making all sins venial that is apt for pardon for by the imperfection of the agent or the act all great sins in their matter may become little in their malice and guilt Now these are those which Divines call sins of infirmity and of them I shall give an account in a distinct Chapter under that title 30. Concerning the second i. e. sins venial for the smalness of the matter I know none such For if the matter be a particular that God hath expresly commanded or forbidden respectively it is not little but all one to him as that which we call the greatest But if the particular be wholly relating to our neighbour the smalness of the matter does not absolutely make the sin venial for amongst us nothing is absolutely great or absolutely little but in comparison with something else and if a vile person had robb'd the poor woman that offered two mites to the treasury of the Temple he had undone her a farthing there was all her substance so that the smalness of the matter is not directly an excuse If a man had robb'd a rich man of a farthing he had not indeed done him so great a mischief but how if the rich man was not willing to part with his farthing but would be angry at the injury is it not a sin because the theft was small No man questions but it is It follows therefore that the smalness of the matter cannot make a sin venial but where there is a leave expresly given or justly presumed and if it be so in a great matter it is as little a sin as if the matter were small that is none at all 31. But now concerning the third which the Roman Schools dream of sins venial in their own nature and in their whole kind that is it which I have been disputing against all this while and shall now further conclude against by arguments more practical and moral For if we consider what are those particulars which these men call venial sins in their whole kind and nature we shall find that Christ and they give measures differing from each other The Catalogues of them I will take from the Fathers not that they ever thought these things to be in their nature venial for they that think so of them are strangers to their writings and to this purpose Bellarmine hath not brought one testimony pertinent and home to the question but because they reckon such Catalogues of venial sins which demonstrate that they do mean sins made venial by accident by mens infirmity by Gods grace by pardon by repentance and not such which are so in their own nature But the thing it self will be its own proof 32. S. Austin reckons Vanas cachinnationes in escis aviditatem immoderatiorem appetitum in vendendis emendis rebus charitatis vilitatis vota perversa usum matrimonii ad libidinem judicia apud infideles agitare Dicere fratri Fatue Vain laughter greediness in meat an immoderate or ungovern'd appetite perverse desires of dearness and cheapness in buying and selling commodities the use of marriage to lustfulness and inordination to go to law before the unbelievers to call our brother Fool. S. Hierome reckons jestings anger and injurious words Caesarius Arelatensis the Bishop reckons excess in eating and drinking idle words importune silence to exasperate an importunate begger to omit the fasts of the Church sleepiness or immoderate sleeping the use of a wife to lustfulness to omit the visitation of the sick and of prisoners and to neglect to reconcile them that are at variance too much severity or harshness to our family or too great indulgence flattery talkings in the Church poor men to eat too much when they are brought rarely to a good table forswearings unwary perjury slander or reproaches rash judgment hatred sudden anger envy evil concupiscence filthy thoughts the lust of the eyes the voluptuousness of the ears or the itch of hearing the speaking filthy words and indeed he reckons almost all the common sins of mankind S. Bernard reckons stultiloquium vaniloquium otiosè dicta facta cogitata talking vainly talking like a fool idle or vain thoughts words and deeds These are the usual Catalogues and if any be reckoned they must be these for many times some of these are least consented to most involuntary most ready less avoidable of the lightest effect of an eternal return incurable in the whole and therefore plead the most probably and are the soonest likely to prevail for pardon but yet they cannot pretend to need no pardon or to fear no damnation For our blessed Saviour says it of him that speaks an angry word that he shall be guilty of hell fire Now since we find such as these reckon'd in the Catalogue of venial sins and S. Austin in particular calls that venial to which our blessed Saviour threatned hell fire it is certain he must not mean that it is in its own nature venial but damnable as any other but it is venial that is prepared for pardon upon other contingencies and causes of which I shall afterwards give account In the mean time I consider 33. VI. When God appointed in the Law expiatory Sacrifices for sins although there was enough to signifie that there is difference in the degrees of sin yet because they were eodem sanguine eluenda and without shedding of blood there was no remission they were reckon'd in the same acounts of death and the Divine anger And it is manifest that by the severities and curse of the Law no sin could escape For cursed is he that continues not in every thing written in the law to do them The Law was a Covenant of Works and exact measures There were no venial sins by vertue of that Covenant for there was no remission and without the death of Christ we could not be eased of this state of danger Since therefore that any sin is venial or pardonable is only owing to the grace of God to the death of Christ and this death pardons all upon the condition of Faith and Repentance and pardons none without it it follows that though sins differ in degree yet they differ not in their natural and essential order to death The man that commits any sin dies if he repents not and he that does
repent timely and effectually dies for none The wages of sin is death of sin indefinitely and therefore of all sin and all death for there is no more distinction of sin than death only when death is threatned indefinitely that death is to be understood which is properly and specifically threatned in that Covenant where the death is named as death temporal in the Law death eternal under the Gospel 34. And thus it appears in a very material instance relating to this question for when our blessed Saviour had threatned the degrees of anger he did it by apportioning several pains hereafter of one sort to the several degrees of the same sin here which he expresses by the several inflictions passed upon Criminals by the Houses of Judgment among the Jews Now it is observable that to the least of these sins Christ assigns a punishment just proportionable to that which the gloss of the Pharisees and the Law it self did to them that committed Murther which was capital He shall be guilty of judgment so we read it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so it is in the Greek He shall be guilty in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is in the Court of Judgment the Assembly of the twenty three Elders and there his punishment was death but the gentlest manner of it the decapitation or smiting him through with the sword and therefore the least punishment hereafter answering to death here can mean no less than death hereafter * And so also was the second 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he that calls Racha shall be guilty that is shall be used as one that stands guilty in the Sanhedrim or Council meaning that he is to die too but with a severer execution by stoning to death this was the greatest punishment by the houses of judgment for Crucifixion was the Roman manner These two already signifie Hell in a less degree but as certainly and evidently as the third For though we read Hell-fire in the third sentence only yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no otherwise signifies Hell than the other two by analogy and proportionable representment The cause of the mistake is this When Christ was pleased to add yet a further degree of punishment in hell to a further degree of anger and reproach the Jews having no greater than that of stoning by the judgment of the Sanhedrim or Council he would borrow his expression from that which they and their Fathers too well understood a barbarous custome of the Phoenicians of burning children alive in the valley of Hinnom which in succession of time the Hellenists called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not much unlike the Hebrew word and because by our blessed Lord it was used to signifie or represent the greatest pains of hell that were spoken of in that gradation the Christians took the word and made it to be its appellative and to signifie the state or place of the damned just as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the garden of Eden is called Paradise But it was no more intended that this should signifie Hell than that any of the other two should The word it self never did so before but that and the other two were taken as being the most fearful things amongst them here to represent the degrees of the most intolerable state hereafter just as damnation is called death the second death that because we fear the first as the worst of present evils we may be affrighted with the apprehensions of the latter From this authority it follows that as in the Law no sins were venial but by repentance and sacrifice so neither in the Gospel are they not in their own nature not by the more holy Covenant of the Gospel but by repentance and mortification For the Gospel hath with greater severity laid restraint upon these minutes and little particles of action and passion and therefore if in the law every transgression was exacted we cannot reasonably think that the least parts of duty which the Gospel superadded with a new and severer caution as great and greater than that by which the law exacted the greatest Commandments can be broken with indemnity or without the highest danger The law exacted all its smallest minutes and therefore so does the Gospel as being a Covenant of greater holiness But as in the law for the smaller transgressions there was an assignment of expiatory rites so is there in the Gospel of a ready repentance and a prepared mercy 37. VII Lastly those sins which men in health are bound to avoid those sins for which Christ did shed his most precious blood those sins which a dying man is bound to ask pardon for though he hopes not or desires not to escape temporal death certain it is that those sins are in their nature and in the Oeconomy or dispensation of the Divine threatnings damnable For what can the dying man fear but death eternal and if he be bound to repent and ask pardon even for the smallest sins which he can remember in order to what pardon can that repentance be but of the eternal pain to which every sin by its own demerit naturally descends If he must repent and ask pardon when he hopes not or desires not the temporal it is certain he must repent only that he may obtain the eternal And they that will think otherwise will also find themselves deceiv'd in this * For if the damned souls in hell are punish'd for all their sins then the unpardon'd venial sins are there also smarted for But so it is and so we are taught in the doctrine of our great Master If we agreee not while we are in the way we shall be cast into the eternal prison and shall not depart thence till we have paid the uttermost farthing that is ever for our smallest sins if they be unremitted men shall pay in hell their horrible Symbol of damnation And this is confessed on all hands that they who fall into hell pay their sorrows there even for all But it is pretended that this is only by accident not by the first intention of the Divine justice because it happens that they are subjected in such persons who for other sins not for these go to hell Well! yet let it be considered whether or no do not the smallest unremitted sins increase the torments of hell in their proportion If they do not then they are not at all punished in hell for if without them the perishing soul is equally punished then for them there is no punishment at all But if they do increase the pains as it is certain they do then to them properly and for their own malignity and demerit a portion of eternal pains is assigned Now if God punishes them in hell then they deserv'd hell if they be damnable in their event then they were so in their merit for God never punishes any sin more than it deserves though he often does less But to say that this is
our selves slander reproach and the like yet because they are extreamly common they are such to which if a continual pardon were not offered Gods numbers would be infinitely lessened In this sence every sin is venial excepting the three Capitals reckoned in Tertullian Idolatry Murther and Adultery every thing but the sin against the Holy Ghost and its branches reckoned in Pacianus every thing but the seven deadly sins in others Now according to the degree and malignity of the sin or its abatement by any lessening circumstance or intervening considerations so it puts on its degrees of veniality or being pardonable Every sin hath some degree of being venial till it arrives at the unpardonable state and then none is But every sin that hath many degrees of Venial hath also some degrees of Damnable So that to enquire what venial sins can stand with the state of grace is to ask how long a man may sin before he shall be damn'd how long will God still forbear him how long he will continue to give him leave to repent For a sin is venial upon no other acount but of Repentance If Venial be taken for pardonable it is true that many circumstances make it so more or less that is whatever makes the sin greater or less makes it more or less venial and of these I shall give account in the Chapter of sins of Infirmity But if by Venial we mean actually pardon'd or not exacted Nothing makes a sin venial but Repentance and that makes every sin to be so Therefore 45. V. Some sins are admitted by holy persons and yet they still continue holy not that any of these sins is permitted to them nor that God cannot as justly exact them of his servants as of his enemies nor that in the Covenant of the Gospel they are not imputable nor that their being in Gods favour hides them for God is most impatient of any remaining evil in his children But the only reasonable account of it is because the state of grace is a state of Repentance these sins are those which as Pacianus expresses it contrariis emendata proficiunt they can be helped by contrary actions and the good man does perpetually watch against them he opposes a good against every evil that is in effect he uses them just as he uses the greatest that ever he committed Thus the good man when he reproves a sinning person over-acts his anger and is transported to undecency though it be for God Some are over zealous some are phantastick and too apt to opinion which in little degrees of inordination are not so soon discernible A good man may be over-joyd or too much pleas'd with his recreation or be too passionate at the death of a child or in a sudden anger go beyond the evenness of a wise Christian and yet be a good man still and a friend of God his son and his servant but then these things happen in despite of all his care and observation and when he does espy any of these obliquities he is troubled at it and seeks to amend it and therefore these things are venial that is pitied and excused because they are unavoible but avoided as much as they well can all things considered and God does not exact them of him because the good man exacts them of himself * These being the Rules of Doctrine we are to practise accordingly To which add the following measures 46. VI. This difference in sins of Mortal and Venial that is greater and less is not to be considered by us but by God alone and cannot have influence upon us to any good purposes For 1. We do not always know by what particular measures they are lessened In general we know some proportions of them but when we come to particulars we may easily be deceived but can very hardly be exact S. Austin said the same thing Quae sint levia quae gravia peecata non humano sed Divino sunt pensanda judicio God only not man can tell which sins are great and which little For since we see them equally forbidden we must with equal care avoid them all Indeed if the case should be so put that we must either commit Sacrilege or tell a spiteful lie kill a man or speak unclean words then it might be of use to us to consider which is the greater which is less that of evils we might choose the less but this case can never be for no man is ever brought to that necessity that he must choose one sin for he can choose to die before he shall do either and that 's the worst that he can be put to And therefore though right reason and experience and some general lines of Religion mark out some actions as criminal and leave others under a general and indefinite condemnation yet it is in order to repentance and amends when such things are done not to greater caution directly of avoiding them in the days of temptation for of two infiniâ—ies in the same kind one cannot be bigger than the other We are tied with the biggest care to avoid every sin and bigger than the biggest we find not This only For the avoiding of the greatest sins there are more arguments from without and sometimes more instruments and ministeries of caution and prevention are to be used than in lesser sins but it is because fewer will serve in one than in another but all that is needful must be used in all but there is no difference in our choice that can be considerable for we must never choose either and therefore beforehand to compare them together whereof neither is to be preferred before the other is to lay a snare for our selves and make us apt to one by undervaluing it and calling it less than others that affright us more Indeed when the sin is done to measure it may be of use as I shall shew but to do it beforehand hath danger in it of being tempted and more than a danger of being deceived For our hearts deceive us our purposes are complicated and we know not which end is principally intended nor by what argument amongst many we were finally determin'd or which is the prevailing ingredient nor are we competent Judges of our own strengths and we can do more than we think we can and we remember not that the temptation which prevails was sought for by our selves nor can we separate necessity from choice our consent from our being betrayed nor tell whether our fort is given up because we would do so or because we could not help it Who can tell whether he could not stand one assault more and if he had whether or no the temptation would not have left him The ways of consent are not always direct and if they be crooked we see them not And after all this if we were able yet we are not willing to judge right with truth and with severity something for our selves something for excuse something for pride a
in his watch then God awakens him with a judgment sent with much mercy 38. VII But sometimes a temporal death happens to good men so overtaken It happened so to Moses and Aaron for their fault at the waters of Massah and Meribah to the Prophet of Judah that came to cry out against the Altar in Bethel to Vzzah for touching the Ark with unhallowed fingers though he did it in zeal to the Corinthians who had not observed decent measures in receiving the holy Sacrament and thus it happened say some of the ancient Doctors to Ananias and Sapphira God took a fine of them also salvo contenemento their main stake being secured Culpam hanc miserorum morte piabant There is in these instances this difference Moses and Aaron were not smitten in their sin but for it and as is not doubted after they had repented but Vzzah and the Prophet and Ananias and Sapphira and the Corinthians died not only for their sin but in it too and yet it is hoped Gods anger went no further than that death because in every such person who lives well and yet is overtaken in a fault there is much of infirmity and imperfection of choice even when there are some degrees of wilfulness and a wicked heart And though it be easie to suppose that such persons in the beginning of that judgment and the approach of that death did morally retract the sinful action by an act of repentance and that upon that account they found the effect of the Divine mercies by the blood of the Lamb who was slain from the beginning of the world yet if it should happen that any of them die so suddenly as not to have power to exercise one act of repentance though the case be harder yet it is to be hoped that even the habitual repentance and hatred of sin by which they pleased God in the greater portions of their life will have some influence upon this also But this case is but seldom and Gods mercies are very great and glorious but because there is in this case no warrant and this case may happen oftner than it does even to any one that sins one wilful sin it is enough to all considering persons to make them fear but the fool sinneth and is confident 39. VIII But if such overtaken persons do live then Gods Dispensation is all mercy even though he strikes the sinner for he does it for good For God is merciful and knows our weaknesses our natural and circumstant follies he therefore recalls the sinning man he strikes him sharply or he corrects him gently or he calls upon him hastily as God please or as the man needs The man is fallen from the favour or grace of God but I say fallen only from one step of grace and God is more ready to receive him than the man is to return and provided that he repent speedily and neither add a new crime nor neglect this his state of grace was but allayed and disordered not broken in pieces or destroyed 40. IX I find this thing rarely well discoursed of by some of the ancient Doctors of the Church Tertullians words are excellent words to this purpose Licet perisse dicatur erit de perditionis genere retractare quia ovis non moriendo sed errando drachma non intereundo sed latitando perierunt Ita licet dici perisse quod salvum est That may be said to be lost which is missing and the sheep that went astray was also lost and so was the groat which yet was but laid aside it was so lost that it was found again And thus that may be said to have perish'd which yet is safe Perit igitur fidelis elapsus in spectaculum quadrigarii furoris gladiatorii cruoris scenicae foeditatis Xisticae vanitatis in lusus in convivia saecularis solennitatis in officium in Ministerium alienae idololatriae aliquas artes adhibuit curiositatis in verbum ancipitis negotiationis impegit ob tale quid extra gregem datus est vel ipse fortè irâ tumore emulatione quod denique saepe fit dedignatione castigationis abrupit debet requiri atque revocari The Christian is in some sort perished who sins by beholding bloody or unchaste spectacles who ministers to the sins of others who offends by anger emulation rage and swelling too severe animadversions this man must be sought for and called back but this man is not quite lost Quod potest recuperari non perit nisi foris perseveravit Benè interpretaberis parabolam viventem adhuc revocans peccatorem That which may be recovered is but as it were lost unless it remains abroad and returns not to the place from whence it wandred 41. To the same purpose S. Cyprian and S. Ambrose discourse of the Parable of him that fell among the thieves and was wounded and half dead Such are they who in times of persecution fell away into dissimulation Nec putemus mortuos esse sed magis semianimes jacere eos quos persecutione funestâ sauciatos videmus qui si in totum mortui essent nunquam de eisdem postmodùm Confessores Martyres fierent For if these were quite dead you should not find of them to return to life and to become Martyrs and Confessors for that faith which through weakness they did seemingly abjure These men therefore were but wounded and half dead for they still keep the faith they preserve their title to the Covenant and the Promises of the Gospel and the grace of Repentance Quam fidem qui habet vitam habet saith S. Ambrose He that hath this faith hath life that is he is not excluded from pardon whom therefore peradventure the good Samaritan does not pass by because he finds there is life in him some principle by which he may live again Now as it was in the matter of Faith so it is of Charity and the other graces Every act of sin takes away something from the contrary grace but if the root abides in the ground the plant is still alive and may bring forth fruit again But he only is dead who hath thrown God off for ever or intirely with his very heart So S. Ambrose To be dead in trespasses and sins which is the phrase of S. Paul is the same with that expression of S. John of sinning a sin unto death that is habitual refractory pertinacious and incorrigible sinners in whom there is scarce any hopes or sign of life These are they upon whom as S. Paul's expression is the wrath of God is come upon them to the uttermost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto death so was their sin it was a sin unto death so is their punishment The result of these considerations is this He that commits one act of a wilful sin hath provoked God to anger which whether it will be final or no we cannot know but by the event by his forbearing us and calling
severely forbids every single action of sin so with greater caution he provides that we be not guilty of a sinful habit Let not sin reign in your mortal bodies we must not be servants of sin not sold under sin that sin have no dominion over us That is not only that we do not repeat the actions of sin but that we be not enslaved to it under the power of it of such a lost liberty that we cannot resist the temptation For he that is so is guilty before God although no temptation comes Such are they whom S. Peter notes that cannot cease from sin And indeed we cannot but confess the reasonableness of this For all men hate such persons whose minds are habitually averse from them who watch for opportunities to do them evil offices who lose none that are offer'd who seek for more who delight in our displeasure who oftentimes effect what they maliciously will Saul was Davids enemy even when he was asleep For the evil will and the contradicting mind and the spiteful heart are worse than the crooked or injurious hand And as grace is a principle of good so is this of evil and therefore as the one denominates the subject gracious so the other sinful both of them inherent that given by God this introduc'd by our own unworthiness * He that sins in a single act does an injury to God but he that does it habitually he that cannot do otherwise is his essential enemy The first is like an offending servant who deserves to be thrown away but in a vicious habit there is an antipathy The Man is Gods enemy as a Wolf to the Lamb as the Hyaena to the Dog He that commits a single sin hath stain'd his skin and thrown dirt upon it but an habitual sinner is an Ethiop and must be stay'd alive before his blackness will disappear 28. VIII A man is called just or unjust by reason of his disposition to and preparation for an act and therefore much more for the habit Paratum est cor meum Deus O God my heart is ready my heart is ready and S. John had the reward of Martyrdom because he was ready to die for his Lord though he was not permitted and S. Austin affirms that the continency of Abraham was as certainly crown'd as the continence of John it being as acceptable to God to have a chast spirit as a virgin body that is habitual continence being as pleasing as actual Thus a man may be a Persecutor or a Murtherer if he have a heart ready to do it and if a lustful soul be an Adulteress because the desire is a sin it follows that the habit is a particular state of sin distinct from the act because it is a state of vicious desires And as a body may be said to be lustful though it be asleep or eating without the sense of actual urtications and violence by reason of its constitution so may the soul by the reason of its habit that is its vicious principle and base effect of sin be hated by God and condemn'd upon that account 29. So that a habit is not only distinct from its acts in the manner of being as Rhetorick from Logick in Zeno as a fist from a palm as a bird from the egg and the flower from the gemm but a habit differs from its acts as an effect from the cause as a distinct principle from another as a pregnant Daughter from a teeming Mother as a Conclusion from its Premises as a state of aversation from God from a single act of provocation 30. IX If the habit had not an irregularity in it distinct from the sin then it were not necessary to persevere in holiness by a constant regular course but we were to be judg'd by the number of single actions and he only who did more bad than good actions should perish which was affirmed by the Pharisees of old and then we were to live or die by chance and opportunity by actions and not by the will by the outward and not by the inward man then there could be no such thing necessary as the Kingdom of Grace Christs Empire and Dominion in the soul then we can belong to God without belonging to his Kingdom and we might be in God though the Kingdom of God were not in us For without this we might do many single actions of vertue and it might happen that these might be more than the single actions of sin even though the habit and affection and state of sin remain Now if the case may be so as in the particular instance that the mans final condition shall not be determin'd by single actions it must be by habits and states and principles of actions and therefore these must have in them a proper good and bad respectively by which the man shall be judg'd distinct from the actions by which he shall not in the present case be judg'd All which considerations being put together do unanswerably put us upon this conclusion That a habit of sin is that state of evil by which we are enemies to God and slaves of Satan by which we are strangers from the Covenant of Grace and consign'd to the portion of Devils and therefore as a Corollory of all we are bound under pain of a new sin to rise up instantly after every fall to repent speedily for every sin not to let the Sun go down upon our wrath nor rise upon our lust nor run his course upon our covetousness or ambition For not only every period of impenitence is a period of danger and eternal death may enter but it is an aggravation of our folly a continuing to provoke God a further aberration from the rule a departure from life it is a growing in sin a progression towards final impenitence to obduration and Apostasie it is a tempting God and a despising of his grace it is all the way presumption and a dwelling in sin by delight and obedience that is it is a conjugation of new evils and new degrees of evil As pertinacy makes error to be heresie and impenitence makes little sins unite and become deadly and perseverance causes good to be crowned and evil to be unpardonable So is the habit of viciousness the confirmation of our danger and solennities of death the investiture and security of our horrible inheritance 31. The summ is this Every single sin is a high calamity it is a shame and it is a danger in one instant it makes us liable to Gods severe anger But a vicious habit is a conjugation of many actions every one of which is highly damnable and besides that union which is formally an aggravation of the evils there is superinduc'd upon the will and all its ministring faculties a viciousness and pravity which makes evil to be belov'd and chosen and God to be hated and despis'd A vicious habit hath in it all the Physical Metaphysical and Moral degrees of which it can be capable
from the severities of Religion let me live by the measures of thy law not by the evil example and disguises of the world Renew a right spirit within me and cast me not away from thy presence lest I should retire to the works of darkness and enter into those horrible regions where the light of thy countenance never shineth II. I AM ashamed O Lord I am ashamed that I have dishonoured so excellent a Creation Thou didst make us upright and create us in innocence And when thou didst see us unable to stand in thy sight and that we could never endure to be judged by the Covenant of works thou didst renew thy mercies to us in the new Covenant of Jesus Christ and now we have no excuse nothing to plead for our selves much less against thee but thou art holy and pure and just and merciful Make me to be like thee holy as thou art holy merciful as our Heavenly Father is merciful obedient as our holy Saviour Jesus meek and charitable temperate and chaste humble and patient according to that holy example that my sins may be pardoned by his death and my spirit renewed by his Spirit that passing from sin to grace from ignorance to the knowledge and love of God and of his Son Jesus Christ I may pass from death to life from sorrow to joy from Earth to Heaven from the present state of misery and imperfection to the glorious inheritance prepar'd for the Saints and Sons of light the children of the new birth the brethren of our Lord and Brother our Judge and our Advocate our Blessed Saviour and Redeemer JESVS Amen A Prayer to be said by a Matron in behalf of her Husband and Family that a blessing may descend upon their posterity I. O Eternal God our most merciful Lord and gracious Father thou art my guide the light of mine eyes the joy of my heart the author of my hope and the object of my love and worshippings thou relievest all my needs and determin'st all my doubts and art an eternal fountain of blessing open and running over to all thirsty and weary souls that come and cry to thee for mercy and refreshment Have mercy upon thy servant and relieve my fears and sorrows and the great necessities of my family for thou alone O Lord canst do it II. FIT and adorn every one of us with a holy and a religious spirit and give a double portion to thy servant my dear Husband Give him a wise heart a prudent severe and indulgent care over the children which thou hast given us His heart is in thy hand and the events of all things are in thy disposition Make it a great part of his care to promote the spiritual and eternal interest of his children and not to neglect their temporal relations and necessities but to provide states of life for them in which with fair advantages they may live chearfully serve thee diligently promote the interest of the Christian family in all their capacities that they may be always blessed and always innocent devout and pious and may be graciously accepted by thee to pardon and grace and glory through Jesus Christ. Amen III. BLESS O Lord my Sons with excellent understandings love of holy and noble things sweet dispositions innocent deportment diligent souls chaste healthful and temperate bodies holy and religious spirits that they may live to thy glory and be useful in their capacities to the servants of God and all their neighbours and the Relatives of their conversation Bless my Daughters with a humble and a modest carriage and excellent meekness a great love of holy things a severe chastity a constant holy and passionate Religion O my God never suffer them to fall into folly and the sad effects of a wanton loose and indiscreet spirit possess their fancies with holy affections be thou the covering of their eyes and the great object of their hopes and all their desires Blessed Lord thou disposest all things sweetly by thy providence thou guidest them excellently by thy wisdom thou unitest all circumstances and changes wonderfully by thy power and by thy power makest all things work for the good of thy servants Be pleased so to dispose my Daughters that if thou shouldest call them to the state of a married life they may not dishonour their Family nor grieve their Parents nor displease thee but that thou wilt so dispose of their persons and the accidents and circumstances of that state that it may be a state of holiness to the Lord and blessing to thy servants And until thy wisdom shall know it fit to bring things so to pass let them live with all purity spending their time religiously and usefully O most blessed Lord enable their dear father with proportionable abilities and opportunities of doing his duty and charities towards them and them with great obedience and duty toward him and all of us with a love toward thee above all things in the world that our portion may be in love and in thy blessings through Jesus Christ our dearest Lord and most gracious Redeemer IV. O MY God pardon thy servant pity my infirmities hear the passionate desires of thy humble servant in thee alone is my trust my heart and all my wishes are towards thee Thou hast commanded me to pray to thee in all needs thou hast made gracious promises to hear and accept me and I will never leave importuning thy glorious Majesty humbly passionately confidently till thou hast heard and accepted the prayer of thy servant Amen dearest Lord for thy mercy sake hear thy servant Amen TO The Right Reverend Father in God JOHN WARNER D.D. and late Lord Bishop of Rochester MY LORD I NOW see cause to wish that I had given to your Lordship the trouble of reading my papers of Original Sin before their publication for though I have said all that which I found material in the Question yet I perceive that it had been fitting I had spoken some things less material so to prevent the apprehensions that some have of this doctrine that it is of a sence differing from the usual expressions of the Church of England However my Lord since your Lordship is pleased to be careful not only of truth and Gods glory but desirous also that even all of us should speak the same thing and understand each other without Jealousies or severer censures I have now obeyed your Counsel and done all my part towards the asserting the truth and securing charity and unity Professing with all truth and ingenuity that I would rather die than either willingly give occasion or countenance to a Schism in the Church of England and I would suffer much evil before I would displease my dear Brethren in the service of Jesus and in the ministeries of the Church But as I have not given just cause of offence to any so I pray that they may not be offended unjustly lest the fault lie on them whose persons I so much love
this state which he describes is the state of a carnal man under the corruption of his nature upon whom the law had done some change but had not cured him 3. That from this state of evil we are redeemed by the Spirit of Christ by the Grace of the Gospel and now a Child of God cannot complain this complaint 25. I. That he puts on the person of another by a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or translation as was usual with S. Paul in very many places of his Epistles is evident by his affirming that of the man whom he here describes which of himself were not true I was alive without the law once Of S. Paul's own person this was not true for he was bred and born under the law circumcised the eighth day an Hebrew of the Hebrews as touching the law a Pharisee he never was alive without the law But the Israelites were whom he therefore represents indefinitely under a single person the whole Nation before and under the law I was alive once without the law but when the Commandment came that is when the law was given sin revived and I died that is by occasion of the law sin grew stronger and prevailed 2. But concerning the Christian and his present condition he expresly makes it separate from that of being under the law and consequently under sin But now we are delivered from the law that being dead wherein we were held that we should serve in newness of the spirit and not in the oldness of the letter We are delivered It is plain that some sort of men are freed from that sad condition of things of which he there complains and if any be it must be the regenerate And so it is For the scope of the Apostle in this Chapter is to represent and prove that salvation is not to be had by the law but by Jesus Christ and that by that discipline men cannot be contain'd in their duty and therefore that it was necessary to forsake the law and to come to Christ. To this purpose he brings in a person complaining that under the discipline of the law he was still under the power of sin Now if this had been also true of a regenerate person of a Christian renewed by the Spirit of grace then it had been no advantage to have gone from the Law to Christ as to this argument for still the Christian would be under the same slavery which to be the condition of one under the law S. Paul was to urge as an argument to call them from Moses to Christ. 26. II. That this state which he now describes is the state of a carnal man under the corruption of his nature appears by his saying that sin had wrought in him all manner of concupiscence that sin revived and he died that the motions of sin which were by the law did work in the members to bring forth fruit unto death and that this was when we were in the flesh that he is carnal sold under sin that he is carried into captivity to the law of sin that sin dwells in him and is like another person doing or constraining him to do things against his mind that it is a State and a Government a Law and a Tyranny For that which I do I allow not plainly saying that this doing what we would not that is doing against our conscience upon the strength of passion and in obedience to the law of sin was the state of them who indeed were under the law but the effect of carnality and the viciousness of their natural and ungracious condition Here then is the description of a natural and carnal man He sins frequently he sins against his conscience he is carnal and sold under sin sin dwells in him and gives him laws he is a slave to sin and led into captivity Now if this could be the complaint of a regenerate man from what did Christ come to redeem us how did he take away our sins did he only take off the punishment and still leave us to wallow in the impurities and baser pleasures perpetually to rail upon our sins and yet perpetually to do them How did he come to bless us in turning every one of us from our iniquity How and in what sence could it be true which the Apostle affirms He did bear our sins in his own body on the tree that we being dead unto sin should live unto righteousness But this proposition I suppose my self to have sufficiently proved in the reproof of the first exposition of these words in question only I shall in present add the concurrent testimony of some Doctors of the Primitive Church Tertullian hath these words Nam etsi habitare bonum in carne suâ negavit sed secundum legem literae in quâ fuit secundum autem legem Spiritus cui nos annectit liberat ab infirmitate carnis Lex enim inquit Spiritus vitae manumisit te à lege delinquentiae mortis Licet enim ex parte ex Judaismo disputare videatur sed in nos dirigit integritatem plenitudinem disciplinarum propter quos laborantes in lege per carnem miserit Deus filium suum in similitudinem carnis delinquentiae propter delinquentiam damnaverit delinquentiam in carne Plainly he expounds this Chapter to be meant of a man under the law according to the law of the letter under which himself had been he denied any good to dwell in his flesh but according to the law of the Spirit under which we are plac'd he frees us from the infirmity of the flesh for he saith the law of the Spirit of life hath freed us from the law of sin and death Origen affirms that when S. Paul says I am carnal sold under sin Tanquam Doctor Ecclesiae personam in semetipsum suscipit infirmorum he takes upon him the person of the infirm that is of the carnal and says those words which themselves by way of excuse or apology use to speak But yet says he this person which S. Paul puts on although Christ does not dwell in him neither is his body the Temple of the holy Ghost yet he is not wholly a stranger from good but by his will and by his purpose he begins to look after good things But he cannot yet obtain to do them For there is such an infirmity in those who begin to be converted that is whose mind is convinc'd but their affections are not master'd that when they would presently do all good yet an effect did not follow their desires S. Chrysostom hath a large Commentary upon this Chapter and his sence is perfectly the same Propterea subnexuit dicens Ego verò carnalis sum hominem describens sub lege ante legem degentem S. Paul describes not himself but a man living under and before the law and of such a one he says but I am carnal Who please to see more
could not absolve such persons in plain speaking seems to mean that since the Church ministers nothing of her own but is the Minister of the Divine mercy she had no commission to promise pardon to such persons If God had promised pardon to such Criminals it is certain the Church was bound to preach it but if she could not declare preach or exhibite any such promise then there was no such promise and therefore their sending them to God was but a put off or a civil answer saying that God might do it if he please but he had not signified his pleasure concerning them and whether they who sinn'd so foully after Baptism were pardonable was no where revealed and therefore all the Ministers of Religion were bound to say they were unpardonable that is God never said he would pardon them which is the full sence of the word Vnpardonable For he that says any sin is unpardonable does not mean that God cannot pardon it but that he will not or that he hath not said he will 25. And upon the same account it seem'd unreasonable to S. Ambrose that the Church should impose penances and not release the penitents He complain'd of the Novatians for so doing Cùm utique veniam negando incentivum auferant poenitentiae The penitents could have little encouragement to perform the injunctions of their Confessors when after they had done them they should not be admitted to the Churches communion And indeed the case was hard when it should be remembred that whatsoever the Church did bind on Earth was bound in Heaven and if they retain'd them below God would do so above and therefore we find in Scripture that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to give repentance being the purpose of Christ's coming and the grace of the Gospel does mean to give the effect of Repentance that is pardon And since Gods method is such by giving the grace and admitting us to do the duty he consequently brings to that mercy which is the end of that duty it is fit that should also be the method of the Church 26. For the ballancing of this Consideration we are further to consider that though the Church had power to pardon in all things where God had declar'd he would yet because in some sins the malice was so great the scandal so intolerable the effect so mischievous the nature of them so contradictory to the excellent laws of Christianity the Church many times could not give a competent judgment whether any man that had committed great sins had made his amends and done a sufficient penance and the Church not knowing whether their Repentance was worthy and acceptable to God she could not pronounce their pardon that is she could not tell them whether upon those terms God had or would pardon them in the present disposition 27. For after great crimes the state of a sinner is very deplorable by reason of his uncertain pardon not that it is uncertain whether God will pardon the truly penitent but that it is uncertain who is so and all the ingredients into the judgment that is to be made are such things which men cannot well discern they cannot tell in what measures God will exact the Repentance what sorrow is sufficient what fruits acceptable what is expiatory and what rejected according to the saying of Solomon Who can say I have made my heart clean I am pure from my sin they cannot tell how long God will forbear at what time his anger is final and when he will refuse to hear or what aggravations of the crime God looks on nor can they make an estimate which is greater the example of the sin or the example of the punishment And therefore in such great cases the Church had reason to refuse to give pardon which she could minister neither certainly nor prudently nor as the case then stood safely or piously 28. But yet she enjoyn'd Penances that is all the solemnities of Repentance and to them the sinners stood bound in Earth and consequently in Heaven according to the words of our blessed Saviour but she bound them no further She intended charity and relief to them not ruine and death eternal On this she had no direct power and if the penitent were obedient to her Discipline then neither could they be prejudic'd by her indirect power she sent them to God for pardon and made them to prepare themselves accordingly Her injunction of Penances was medicinal and her refusing to admit them to the Communion was an act of caution fitted to the present necessities of the Church Nonnullae ideò poscunt poenitentiam ut statim sibi reddi communionem velint Hae non tam se solvere cupiunt quà m sacerdotem ligare Some demand penances that they may have speedy communion These do not so much desire themselves to be loosed as to have the Priest bound that is such hasty proceedings do not any good to the penitent but much hurt to him that ministers This the Primitive Church avoided and this was the whole effect which that Discipline had upon the souls of the penitents But for their Doctrine S. Austin is a sufficient witness Sed neque de ipsis â—riminibus quamlibet magnis remittendis in Sanctâ Ecclesiâ Dei desperanda est misericordia agentibus poenitentiam secundum modum sui cujusque peccati They ought not to despair of Gods mercy even to the greatest sinners if they be the greatest penitents that is if they repent according to the measure of their sins Only in the making their judgments concerning the measures of Repentance they differ'd from our practices Ecclesiastical Repentance and Absolution was not only an exercise of the duty and an assisting of the penitent in his return but it was also a warranting or ensuring the pardon which because in many cases the Church could not so well do she did better in not undertaking it that is in not pronouncing Absolution 29. For the pardon of sins committed after Baptism not being described in full measures and though it be sufficiently signifi'd that any sin may be pardon'd yet it not being told upon what conditions this or that great one shall the Church did well and warily not to be too forward for as S. Paul said I am conscious to my self in nothing yet I am not hereby justified so we may say in Repentance I have repented and do so but I am not hereby justified because that is a secret which until the day of Judgment we shall not understand for every repenting is not sufficient He that repents worthily let his sin be what it will shall certainly be pardon'd but after great crimes who does repent worthily is a matter of harder judgment than the manners of the present age will allow us to make and so secret that they thought it not amiss very often to be backward in pronouncing the Criminal absolved 30. But then all this whole affair must needs be a mighty arrest to
it before a sinner can be tied to it For to have displeased God is a great evil but what is it to me if it will bring no evil to me It is a Metaphysical and a Moral evil but unless it be also naturally and sensibly so it is not the object of a natural and proper grief It follows therefore that the state of a repenting person must have in it some more causes of sorrow than are usually taught or else in vain can they be called upon to weep and mourn for their sins Well may they wring their faces and their hands and put on black those disguises of passion and curtains of joy those ceremonies and shadows of rich widows and richer heirs by which they decently hide their secret smiles well may they rend their garments but upon this account they can never rend their hearts 7. For the stating of this Article it is considerable that there are several parts or periods of sorrow which are effected by several principles In the beginning of our repentance sometimes we feel cause enough to grieve For God smites many into repentance either a sharp sickness does awaken us or a calamity upon our house or the death of our dearest relative and they that find sin so heavily incumbent and to press their persons or fortunes with feet of lead will feel cause enough and need not to be disputed into a penitential sorrow They feel Gods anger and the evil effects of sin and that it brings sorrow and then the sorrow is justly great because we have done that evil which brings so sad a judgment 8. And in the same proportion there is always a natural cause of sorrow where there is a real cause of fear and so it is ever in the beginning of repentance and for ought we know it is for ever so and albeit the causes of fear lessen as the repentance does proceed yet it will never go quite off till hope it self be gone and passed into charity or at least into a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into that fulness of confidence which is given to few as the reward of a lasting and conspicuous holiness And the reason is plain For though it be certain in religion that whoever repents shall be pardoned yet it is a long time before any man hath repented worthily and it is as uncertain in what manner and in what measures and in what time God will give us pardon It is as easie to tell the very day in which a man first comes to the use of reason as to tell the very time in which we are accepted to final pardon The progressions of one being as divisible as the other and less discernible For reason gives many fair indications of it self whereas God keeps the secrets of this mercy in his sanctuary and draws not the curtain till the day of death or judgment 9. Add to this that our very repentances have many allays and imperfections and so hath our pardon And every one that sins hath so displeased God that he is become the subject of the Divine anger Death is the wages what death God please and therefore what evil soever God will inflict or his mortality can suffer and he that knows this hath cause to fear and he that fears hath cause to be grieved that he is fallen from that state of divine favour in which he stood secured with the guards of Angels and covered with Heaven it self as with a shield in which he was beloved of God and heir of all his glories 10. But they that describe repentance in short and obscure characters and make repentance and pardon to be the children of a minute and born and grown up quickly as a fly or a mushrome with the dew of a night or the tears of a morning making the labours of the one and the want of the other to expire sooner than the pleasures of a transient sin are so insensible of the sting of sin that indeed upon their grounds it will be impossible to have a real godly sorrow For though they have done evil yet by this doctrine they feel none and there is nothing remains as a cause of grief unless they will be sorrowful for that they have been pleased formerly and are now secured nothing remains before them or behind but the pleasure that they had and the present confidence and impunity and that 's no good instrument of sorrow Securitas delicti etiam libido est ejus Sin takes occasion by the law it self if there be no penalty annexed 11. But the first in-let of a godly sorrow which is the beginning of repentance is upon the stock of their present danger and state of evil into which by their sin they are fallen viz. when their guilt is manifest they see that they are become sons of death expos'd to the wrath of a provoked Deity whose anger will express it self when and how it please and for ought the man knows it may be the greatest and it may be intolerable and though his danger is imminent and certain yet his pardon is a great way off it may be Yea it may be No it must be hop'd for but it may be missed for it is upon conditions and they are or will seem very hard Sed ut valeas multa dolenda feres So that in the summ of affairs however that the greatest sinner and the smallest penitent are very apt and are taught by strange doctrines to flatter themselves into confidence and presumption yet he will have reason to mourn and weep when he shall consider that he is in so sad a condition that because his life is uncertain it is also uncertain whether or no he shall not be condemned to an eternal prison of flames so that every sinner hath the same reason to be sorrowful as he hath who from a great state of blessings and confidence is fallen into great fears and great dangers and a certain guilt and liableness of losing all he hath and suffering all that is insufferable They who state repentance otherwise cannot make it reasonable that a penitent should shed a tear And therefore it is no wonder that we so easily observe a great dulness and indifferency so many dry eyes and merry hearts in persons that pretend repentance it cannot more reasonably be attributed to any cause than to those trifling and easie propositions of men that destroy the causes of sorrow by lessening and taking off the opinion of danger But now that they are observed and reproved I hope the evil will be lessened But to proceed 12. II. Having now stated the reasonableness and causes of penitential sorrow the next inquity is into the nature and constitution of that sorrow For it is to be observed that penitential sorrow is not seated in the affections directly but in the understanding and is rather Odium than Dolor it is hatred of sin and detestation of it a nolition a renouncing and disclaiming it whose expression is a resolution never
supersint quos peccasse poeniteat For all such fierce proceedings are either superstitious or desperate or indiscreet or the effect of a false perswasion concerning them that they are a direct service of God that they are simply necessary and severely enjoyn'd All which are to be rescinded or else the penances will be of more hurt than usefulness Those actions are to minister to repentance and therefore if they contradict any duty they destroy what they pretend to serve For penances as they relate to the sin that is committed is just to be measured as penitential sorrow is of which it is a signification and expression When the sorrow is natural sensitive pungent and material the penances will be so too A great sorrow refuses to eat to sleep to be chearful to be in company according as the degree is and as the circumstances of the persons are But sometimes sorrow is to be chosen and invited by arts and ministred to by external instruments and arguments of invitation and just so are the penances they are then to be chosen so as may make the person a sorrowful mourner to make him take no delight in sin but to conceive and to feel a just displeasure For if men feel no smart no real sorrow or pain for their sins they will be too much in love with it impunity is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the occasion and opportunity of sin as the Apostle intimates and they use to proceed in finishing the methods of sin and death who Non unquam reputant quantum sibi gaudia constant reckon their pleasures but never put any smart or danger or fears or sorrows into the balance But the injunction or susception of penances is a good instrument of repentance because a little evil takes off the pleasure of the biggest sin in many instances and we are too apprehensive of the present that this also becomes a great advantage to this ministery we refuse great and infinite pleasures hereafter so we may enjoy litâ—le and few and inconsiderable ones at present and we fear not the horrible pains of Hell so we may avoid a little trouble in our persons or our interest Therefore it is to be supposed that this way of undertaking a present punishment and smart for our sins unless every thing when it becomes religious is despoil'd of all its powers which it had in nature and what is reason here is not reason there will be of great effect and power against sin and be an excellent instrument of repentance But it must be so much and it must be no more for penances are like fire and water good so long as they are made to serve our needs but when they go beyond that they are not to be endured For since God in the severest of his anger does not punish one sin with another let not us do worse to our selves than the greatest wrath of God in this world will inflict upon us A sin cannot be a punishment from God For then it would be that God should be the Author of sin for he is of punishment If then any punishment be a sin that sin was unavoidable deriv'd from God and indeed it would be a contradiction to the nature of things to say that the same thing can in the same formality be a punishment and a sin that is an action and a passion voluntary as every sin is and involuntary as every punishment is that it should be done by us and yet against us by us and by another and by both intirely and since punishment is the compensation or the expiation of sin not the aggravation of the Divine anger it wâ—re very strange if God by punishing us should more provoke himself and instead of satisfying his justice or curing the man make his own anger infinite and the patiâ—nt much the worse Indeed it may happen that one sin may cause oâ— procure another not by the efficiency of God or any direct action of his but 1. Withdrawing those assistances which would have restrain'd a sinful progression 2. By suffering him to fall into evil temptation which is too hard for him consisting in his present voluntary indisposition 3. By the nature of sin it self which may either 1 effect a sin by accident as a great anger may by the withdrawing Gods restraining grace be permitted to pass to an act of murder or 2 it may dispose to others of like nature as one degree of lust brings in another or 3 it may minister matter of fuel to another sin as intemperance to uncleanness or 4 one sin may be the end of another aâ— covetousness may be the servant of luxury In all these ways one sin may be effected by another but in all these God is only conniving or at most takes off some of those helps which the man hath forfeited and God was not obliged to continue Thus God hardned Pharaohs heart even by way of object and occasion God hardned him by shewing him a mercy by taking off his fears when he remov'd the judgment and God ministred to him some hope that it be so still But God does not inflict the sin The mans own impious hands do that not because he cannot help it but because he chuses and delights in it * Now if God in justice to us will not punish one sin directly by another let not us in our penitential inflictions commit a sin in indignation against our sin for that is just as if a man out of impatience of pain in his side should dash his head against a wall 113. III. But if God pleases to inflict a punishment let us be careful to exchange iâ— into a penance by kissing the rod and entertaining the issues of the Divine justice by approbation of Gods proceeding and confession of our demerit and justification of God It was a pretty accident and mixture of providence and penance that hapned to the three accusers of Narcissus Bishop of Jerusalem They accused him falsly of some horrid crimes but in verification of their indictment bound themselves by a curse The first that if his accusation were false he might be burn'd to death The second that he might die of the Kings Evil The third that he might be blind God in his anger found out the two first and their curse hapned to them that delighted in 〈◊〉 and lâ—es The first was burnt alive in his own house and the second perished by the loathsome disease Which when the third espied and found Gods anger so hasty and so heavy so pressing and so certain he ran out to meet the rod of God and repented of his sin so deeply and wept so bitterly so continually that he became blind with weeping and the anger of God became an instance of repentance the judgment was sanctified and so passed into mercy and a pardon he did indeed meet with his curse but by the arts of repentance the curse became a blessing And so it may be to us Praeveniamus
the faults and failings of humanity It is a famous saying of St. Gregory That he had the four first Councils in esteem and veneration next to the four Evangelists I suppose it was because he did believe them to have proceeded according to rule and to have judged righteous judgment but why had not he the same opinion of other Councils too which were celebrated before his death for he lived after the fifth General not because they had not the same Authority for that which is warrant for one is warrant for all but because he was not so confident that they did their duty nor proceeded so without interest as the first four had done and the following Councils did never get that reputation which all the Catholick Church acknowledged due to the first four And in the next Order were the three following Generals for the Greeks and Latines did never jointly acknowledge but seven Generals to have been authentick in any sence because they were in no sence agreed that any more than seven had proceeded regularly and done their duty So that now the Question is not whether General Councils have a promise that the holy Ghost will assist them For every private man hath that promise that if he does his duty he shall be assisted sufficiently in order to that end to which he needs assistance and therefore much more shall General Councils in order to that end for which they convene and to which they need assistance that is in order to the conservation of the Faith for the doctrinal rules of good life and all that concerns the essential duty of a Christian but not in deciding Questions to satisfie contentions or curious or presumptuous spirits But now can the Bishops so convened be factious can they be abused with prejudice or transported with interests can they resist the holy Ghost can they extinguish the Spirit can they stop their ears and serve themselves upon the holy Spirit and the pretence of his assistances and cease to serve him upon themselves by captivating their understandings to his dictates and their wills to his precepts Is it necessary they should perform any condition is there any one duty for them to perform in these Assemblies a duty which they have power to do or not to do If so then they may fail of it and not do their duty And if the assistance of the holy Spirit be conditional then we have no more assurance that they are assisted than that they do their duty and do not sin 2. Now let us suppose what this duty is Certainly if the Gospel be hid it is hid to them that are lost and all that come to the knowledge of the truth must come to it by such means which are spiritual and holy dispositions in order to a holy and spiritual end They must be shod with the preparation of the Gospel of peace that is they must have peaceable and docible dispositions nothing with them that is violent and resolute to encounter those gentle and sweet assistances and the Rule they are to follow is the Rule which the holy Spirit hath consigned to the Catholick Church that is the holy Scripture either intirely or at least for the greater part of the Rule So that now if the Bishops be factious and prepossessed with perswasions depending upon interest it is certain they may judge amiss and if they recede from the Rule it is certain they do judge amiss And this I say upon their grounds who most advance the Authority of General Councils For if a General Council may err if a Pope confirm it not then most certainly if in any thing it recede from Scripture it does also err because that they are to expect the Popes confirmation they offer to prove from Scripture now if the Popes confirmation be required by authority of Scripture and that therefore the defailance of it does evacuate the Authority of the Council then also are the Councils Decrees invalid if they recede from any other part of Scripture So that Scripture is the Rule they are to follow and a man would have thought it had been needless to have proved it but that we are fallen into Ages in which no truth is certain no reason concluding nor is there any thing that can convince some men For Stapleton with extream boldness against the piety of Christendom against the publick sence of the ancient Church and the practice of all pious Assemblies of Bishops affirms the Decrees of a Council to be binding etiamsi non confirmetur ne probabilì testimonio Scripturarum nay though it be quite extra Scripturam but all wise and good men have ever said that sence which Saint Hilary expressed in these words Quae extra Evangelium sunt non defendam This was it which the good Emperour Constantine propounded to the Fathers met at Nice Libri Evangelici oracula Apostolorum veterum Prophetarum clarè nos instruunt quid sentiendum in Divinis And this is confessed by a sober man of the Roman Church it self the Cardinal of Cusa Oportet quòd omnia talia quae legere debent contineantur in Authoritatibus sacrarum Scripturarum Now then all the advantage I shall take from hence is this That if the Apostles commended them who examined their Sermons by their conformity to the Law and the Prophets and the men of Berea were accounted noble for searching the Scriptures whether those things which they taught were so or no I suppose it will not be denied but the Councils Decrees may also be tryed whether they be conform to Scripture yea or no and although no man can take cognisance and judge the Decrees of a Council pro Authoritate publicâ yet pro informatione privatâ they may the Authority of a Council is not greater than the Authority of the Apostles nor their dictates more sacred or authentick Now then put case a Council should recede from Scripture whether or no were we bound to believe its Decrees I only ask the Question For it were hard to be bound to believe what to our understanding seems contrary to that which we know to be the Word of God But if we may lawfully recede from the Councils Decrees in case they be contrariant to Scripture it is all that I require in this Question For if they be tyed to a Rule then they are to be examined and understood according to the Rule and then we are to give our selves that liberty of judgment which is requisite to distinguish us from beasts and to put us into a capacity of reasonable people following reasonable guides But however if it be certain that the Councils are to follow Scripture then if it be notorious that they do recede from Scripture we are sure we must obey God rather than men and then we are well enough For unless we are bound to shut our eyes and not to look upon the Sun if we may give our selves liberty to believe what seems most
for all that law of killing such false Prophets were permitted with impunity in the Synagogue as appears beyond exception in the great divisions and disputes between the Pharisees and the Sadducees I deny not but certain and known Idolatry or any other sort of practicall impiety with its principiant Doctrine may be punished corporally because it is no other but matter of fact but no matter of mere Opinion no errours that of themselves are not sins are to be persecuted or punished by death or corporal inflictions This is now to be proved 3. Secondly All the former Discourse is sufficient argument how easie it is for us in such matters to be deceived So long as Christian Religion was a simple profession of the Articles of Belief and a hearty prosecution of the rules of good life the fewness of the Articles and the clearness of the Rule was cause of the seldome prevarication But when Divinity is swelled up to so great a body when the several Questions which the peevishness and wantonness of sixteen Ages have commenced are concentred into one and from all these Questions something is drawn into the body of Theologie till it hath ascended up to the greatnesse of a mountain and the summe of Divinity collected by Aquinas makes a volume as great as was that of Livy mocked at in the Epigram Quem mea vix totum bibliotheca capit it is impossible for any industry to consider so many particulars in the infinite numbers of Questions as are necessary to be considered before we can with certainty determine any And after all the considerations which we can have in a whole Age we are not sure not to be deceived The obscurity of some Questions the nicity of some Articles the intricacy of some Revelations the variety of humane understandings the windings of Logick the tricks of adversaries the subtilty of Sophisters the ingagement of educations personal affections the portentous number of writers the infinity of Authorities the vastness of some arguments as consisting in enumeration of many particulars the uncertainty of others the several degrees of probability the difficulties of Scripture the invalidity of probation of Tradition the opposition of all exteriour arguments to each other and their open contestation the publick violence done to Authors and records the private arts and supplantings the falsifyings the indefatigable industry of some men to abuse all understandings and all perswasions into their own Opinions these and thousands more even all the difficulty of things and all the weaknesses of man and all the arts of the Devil have made it impossible for any man in so great variety of matter not to be deceived No man pretends to it but the Pope and no man is more deceived then he is in that very particular 4. Thirdly From hence proceeds a danger which is consequent to this proceeding for if we who are so apt to be deceived and so insecure in our resolution of Questions disputable should persecute a disagreeing person we are not sure we do not fight against God For if his Proposition be true and persecuted then because all Truth derives from God this proceeding is against God and therefore this is not to be done upon Gamaliel's ground lest peradventure we be found to fight against God of which because we can have no security at least in this case we have all the guilt of a doubtfull or an uncertain Conscience For if there be no security in the thing as I have largely proved the Conscience in such cases is as uncertain as the Question is and if it be not doubtfull where it is uncertain it is because the man is not wise but as confident as ignorant the first without reason and the second without excuse And it is very disproportionable for a man to persecute another certainly for a Proposition that if he were wise he would know is not certain at least the other person may innocently be uncertain of it If he be killed he is certainly killed but if he be called Heretick it is not so certain that he is an Heretick It were good therefore that proceedings were according to evidence and the rivers not swell over the banks nor a certain definitive sentence of Death passed upon such perswasions which cannot certainly be defined And this argument is of so much the more force because we see that the greatest persecutions that ever have been were against Truth even against Christianity itself and it was a prediction of our Blessed Saviour that persecution should be the lot of true believers And if we compute the experience of suffering Christendom and the prediction that Truth should suffer with those few instances of suffering Hereticks it is odds but persecution is on the wrong side and that it is errour and Heresie that is cruel and tyrannical especially since the Truth of Jesus Christ and of his Religion are so meek so charitable and so merciful And we may in this case exactly use the words of S. Paul But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the spirit even so it is now and so it ever will be till Christ's second coming 5. Fourthly Whoever persecutes a disagreeing person arms all the world against himself and all pious people of his own perswasion when the scales of Authority return to his adversary and attest his contradictory and then what can he urge for mercy for himself or his party that sheweth none to others If he says that he is to be spared because he believes true but the other was justly persecuted because he was in errour he is ridiculous For he is as confidently believed to be an Heretick as he believes his adversary such and whetheâ— he be or no being the thing in question of this he is not to be his own judge but he that hath Authority on his side will be sure to judge against him So that what either side can indifferently make use of it is good that neither would because neither side can with reason sufficiently doe it in prejudice of the other If a man will say that every man must take his adventure and if it happens Authority to be with him he will persecute his adversaries and if it turns against him he will bear it as well as he can and hope for a reward of Martyrdom and innocent suffering besides that this is so equal to be said of all sides and besides that this is a way to make an eternall disunion of hearts and charities and that it will make Christendom nothing but a shambles and a perpetuall butchery and as fast as mens wits grow wanton or confident or proud or abused so often there will be new executions and massacres besides all this it is most unreasonable and unjust as being contrariant to those Laws of Justice and Charity whereby we are bound with greater zeal to spare and preserve an innocent then to condemn a guilty person and there
wave reade have 4. l. 13. reade ever more l. 15. r. and it is 6. l. 33. r. mutual concurse 19. l. 5. r. bind 22. l. 11. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 23. l. 11. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 23. margin l. 18. r. ad Sect. 88.24 l. 4. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 26. l. 19. r. in the principle l. 22 23. r. who are not Rulers are 28. l. 57. r. into the judgement 35. l. 45. r. Adde to this Epist. before Episc. p. 2. l. 28. dele are 46. l. 11. r. procellosissimae 51. l. 18. r. were of the number 57. l. 33. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 79. l. 44. r. than Ecclesiae 90. l. 58. for hath r. have 101. l. 32. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ibid. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 122. l. 5. r. preside 133. l. 3. f. r quinque r. quique 135. l. 10. r. blundering 152. l. 47. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 52. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 162. l. 6. r. Sicut 165. l. 60. r. Aërians 167. l. 51. r. distinct 182. l. 42. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 184. l. 59. r. impossible 185. l. 38. r. suspects 190. l. 38. r. ineffective 191. l. 8. r. confutation l. 39. r. instrumenta 193. l. 53. r. Banquet 208. l. 55. r. Tropical 211. l. 49. r. body 218. l. 15. r. corradere l. 57. r. Statues 222. l. 60. r. conversing 232. l. 62. r. exitum 236. l. 57. r. in thesi 268. l. 46. r. Hoc est corpum meum Pref. to Dissuasive p. 3. l. 30. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 314. l. 24. r. weakens and. 320. l. 4. r. or no. 322. l. 53. r. is the true 328. l. 51. r. fil'd upon 352. l. 43. r. hath proved 356. l. 52. r. is it reasonable 397. l. 41. r. conciliariter 431. l. 43. r. baptized 438. l. 9. r. for no more 466. l. 37. r. infinite 469. l. 45. r. Sacrament 472. l. 20. r. publick 487. l. 47. r. judge 515. l. 55. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 518. l. 18. r. change 524. margin l. 24. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 525. l. 10 11. for satisfaction r. falsification 529. l. 46. r. no difference 534. l. 34. r. that made Hebrew 553. l. 32. for many r. man l. 40. r. nulli 572. l. 28. r. may be bold 579. l. 59. r. dispassionate 580. l. 16. r. impossible 596. l. 50. r. same chapter 617. l. 21. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 626. l. 46. r. unavoidable 632. marg l. 1. r. See chap. 8.676 l. 44. r. is so far 713. l. 28. r. inflicted 728. l. 61. for Ninth r. Tenth 735. l. 24. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 855. l. 39. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 872. l. 39. r. Nemo est tam prope tam procâ—lque nobis 873. l. 14. r. chiefs 903. l. 29. for healed r. treated 904. l. 3. r. treated like 952. l. 19. for subscribe r. prescribe 960. l. 43. r. Damasus 969. l. 7. r. higher 975. l. 13. r. reviews 982. l. 9. for useless r. useful 998. l. 3. r. causally THE END Books Printed and Reprinted for Richard Royston at the Angel in Amen-corner Written by Dr. JER TAYLOVR THE Great Exemplar of Sanctity and Holy life according to the Christian Institution Described in the History of the Life and Death of the ever-Blessed JESUS CHRIST the Saviour of the World With Considerations and Discourses upon the several parts of the Story and Prayers fitted to the several Mysteries In three Parts In Folio Ductor Dubitantium or The Rule of Conscience in all her general measures Serving as a great Instrument for the determination of Cases of Conscience In Folio 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Course of Sermons for all the Sundays of the Year Fitted to the great Necessities and for the supplying the wants of Preaching in many parts of this Nation With a Supplement of Eleven Sermons preached since His MAJESTIE's Restauration Whereunto is adjoyned a Discourse of the Divine Institution Necessity Sacredness and Separation of the Office Ministeriall With Rules and Advices to the Clergy In Folio The Rules of Holy Living and Dying in 8o. The Golden Grove in 12. being a choice Manuall of Prayers The Worthy Communicant Printed for John Martin in 8o. Written by Dr. HENRY HAMMOND in IV Volumes Vol. I. A Collection of Discourses chiefly Practicall In a large Folio newly printed Vol. II. A Collection of Discourses in Defense of the Church of England 1. Against the Romanists 2. Against other Adversaries Vol. III. A Paraphrase and Annotations upon all the Books of the New Testament Vol. IV. A Paraphrase and Annotations upon the Books of the Psalms A Paraphrase and Annotations upon the Ten first Chapters of the Proverbs M S. ΒΑΣΙΛΙΚΑ The Works of KING CHARLES the Martyr With a Collection of Declarations Treaties and other Papers concerning the Differences betwixt His said MAJESTY and His Two Houses of Parliament The Works of the Pious and profoundly-Learned M r Joseph Mede sometime Fellow of Christ's College in Cambridge in a large Folio The Christian Sacrifice 12. Advice to a Friend 12. By the Authour of the Devout Christian. Reflexions upon the Devotions of the Roman Church in large Octavo New A Friendly Debate between a Conformist and a Non-conformist the first and second Parts in Octavo Animadversions upon a Book intituled Fanaticism Fanatically Imputed to the Catholick Church by Dr. Stillingfleet and written by a Person of Honour New Colos. 3. Tortura Tâ—rti p. 142. Camb. Annal. A. D. 1560. 2 Chron. 29. Apoc. 15. Exod. 15. Psal. 145. Jer. 1â— 6 7 a De Spir. Sanct. c. 27. b Dâ— celebratione Missarum c. cuâ— Matâ—h c In gemma anum l. 1 c 86. d De Dâ—vin Offic. e Super Act. 20 Vna autem Sabba hi. f L. 8. c. 17. * Mystagog Catechis 5. Hâ—m 6. in 1 Epist. ad Tim. In Comment a Apologeta 14 b Ep. 59. ad Paulin. c Ep. 1. d De dogmat Eccles. cap. 30. e L. 1. de vocat gâ—nt c. 4. f In Commenâ— Institut Cleric â— 1. c. 32. 1 Tim. 2. Epist. 59. ad Paulin. q. 5. De instit Cleric lib. 1. c. 32. Acts and Monuments pag. 1385. pag. 1608 1565. pag. 1840. pag. 1844. alibi Pag. 1848 1649 1840. Contra haeres c. 7. Num. 6.23 * Directory Isocrat in Panathen Eccles. 5.2 Alex. ab Alex. l. 2. c. 14. Idem l. 4 c 17. ibid. In vita Proâ—resâ—i Ephes. 2.8 1 Cor. 12.9 2 Cor. 4.13 〈◊〉 Jud. v. 1.20 1 Tim. 4.14 2 Tim. 1.6 * So as that hereby they become not slothful and negligent in stirring up the gifts of Christ in them But that each one by meditation by taking heed c. may be careful to furnish his heart and tongue with further or other materials c. Preface to the Directory Rom. 8.26 * Eph. 5.18 19 ‖ Col. 3.16 Vid. Act. 19.21 16.7 8 9 10. Etiam Veteres Propheta disposuerunt se ad respondendum propheticé Et
the image of the Earthly we shall also bear the image of the Heavenly Now this I say That flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of Heaven neither doth corruption inherit incorruption This Discourse of the Apostle hath in it all these propositions which clearly state this whole Article There are two great heads of Mankind the two Adams the first and the second The first was framed with an earthly body the second had viz. after his resurrection when he had died unto sin once a spiritual body The first was Earthly the second is Heavenly From the first we derive an Earthly life from the second we obtain a Heavenly all that are born of the first are such as he was naturally but the effects of the Spirit came only upon them who are born of the second Adam From him who is earthly we could have no more than he was or had the spiritual life and consequently the Heavenly could not be derived from the first Adam but from Christ only All that are born of the first by that birth inherit nothing but temporal life and corruption but in the new birth only we derive a title to Heaven For flesh and blood that is whatsoever is born of Adam cannot inherit the Kingdom of God And they are injurious to Christ who think that from Adam we might have inherited immortality Christ was the Giver and Preacher of it he brought life and immortality to light through the Gospel It is a singular benefit given by God to mankind through Jesus Christ. 3. Upon the affirmation of these premises it follows That if Adam had stood yet from him we could not have by our natural generation obtained a title to our spiritual life nor by all the strengths of Adam have gone to Heaven Adam was not our representative to any of these purposes but in order to the perfection of a temporal life Christ only is and was from eternal ages designed to be the head of the Church and the fountain of spiritual life And this is it which is affirmed by some very eminent persons in the Church of God particularly by Junius and Tilenus that Christus est fundamentum totius praedestinationis all that are or ever were predestinated were predestinated in Christ Even Adam himself was predestinated in him and therefore from him if he had stood though we should have inherited a temporal happy life yet the Scripture speaks nothing of any other event Heaven was not promised to Adam himself therefore from him we could not have derived a title thither And therefore that inquity of the School-men Whether if Adam had not sinned Christ should have been incarnate was not an impertinent Question though they prosecuted it to weak purposes and with trifling arguments Scotus and his Scholars were for the affirmative and though I will not be decretory in it because the Scripture hath said nothing of it nor the Church delivered it yet to me it seems plainly the discourse of the Apostle now alledged That if Adam had not sinned yet that by Christ alone we should have obtained everlasting life Whether this had been dispensed by his Incarnation or some other way of oeconomy is not signified 4. But then if from Adam we should not have derived our title to Heaven though he had stood then neither by his Fall can we be said to have lost Heaven Heaven and Hell were to be administred by another method But then if it be enquired what evil we thence received I answer That the principal effect was the loss of that excellent condition in which God placed him and would have placed his posterity unless sin had entred He should have lived a long and lasting life till it had been time to remove him and very happy Instead of this he was thrown from those means which God had designed to this purpose that is Paradise and the trees of life he was turned into a place of labour and uneasiness of briars and thorns ill air and violent chances nova febrium terris incubuit cohors the woman was condemned to hard labour and travel and that which troubled her most obedience to her Husband his body was made frail and weak and sickly that is it was leâ—t such as it was made and left without remedies which were to have made it otherwise For that Adam was made mortal in his nature is infinitely certain and proved by his very eating and drinking his sleep and recreation by ingestion and egestion by breathing and generating his like which immortal substances never do and by the very tree of life which had not been needful if he should have had no need of it to repair his decaying strength and health 5. The effect of this consideration is this that all the product of Adam's sin was by despoiling him and consequently us of all the superadditions and graces brought upon his nature Even that which was threatned to him and in the narrative of that sad story expressed to be his punishment was no lessening of his nature but despoiling him of his supernaturals And therefore Manuel Pelaeologus calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the common driness of our nature and he adds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by our Fathers sin we fell from our Fathers graces Now according to the words of the Apostle As is the earthly such are they that are earthly that is all his posterity must be so as his nature was left in this there could be no injustice For if God might at first and all the way have made man with a necessity as well as a possibility of dying though men had not sinned then so also may he do if he did sin and so it was but this was effected by disrobing him of all the superadded excellencies with which God adorned and supported his natural life But this also I add that if even death it self came upon us without the alteration or diminution of our nature then so might sin because death was in re naturali but sin is not and therefore need not suppose that Adam's nature was spoiled to introduce that 6. As the sin of Adam brought hurt to the body directly so indirectly it brought hurt to the soul. For the evils upon the body as they are only felt by the soul so they grieve and tempt and provoke the soul to anger to sorrow to envy they make weariness in religious things cause desires for ease for pleasure and as these are by the body always desired so sometimes being forbidden by God they become sins and are always apt to it because the body being a natural agent tempts to all it can feel and have pleasure in And this is also observed and affirmed by S. Chrysostom and he often speaks it as if he were pleased in this explication of the Article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Together with death entred a whole troop of affections or passions For when the body became mortal then of necessity it did admit desires
or lust and anger and grief and all things else which need great constancy and wisdom lest the storm should drown reason in us in the gulf of sin For these affections or passions were not sin but the excess of them not being bridled did effect this The same he affirms in Homl. 11. ad 6. Rom. and the 12. Homil. on Rom. 7. And not much unlike this was that excellent discourse of Lactantius in his seventh Book de Divino praemio cap. 5. But Theodoret in his Commentaries upon the Romans follows the same discourse exactly And this way of explicating the entrance and facility of sin upon us is usual in antiquity affirming that because we derive a miserable and an afflicted body from Adam upon that stock sin enters Quae quia materiam peccati ex fomite carnis Consociata trahit nec non simul ipsa sodali Est incentivum peccaminis implicat ambas Vindex poena reas peccantes mente sub unâ PeccandÃque cremet socias cruciatibus aequis Because the soul joyned to the body draws from the society of the flesh incentives and arguments to sin therefore both of them are punished as being guilty by consociation But then thus it was also before the fall For by this it was that Adam fell So the same Prudentius Haec prima est natura animae sic condita simplex Decidit in vitium per sordida foedera carnis The soul was created simple and pure but fell into vice by the evil combination with the flesh But if at first the appetites and necessities and tendencies of the body when it was at ease and health and blessed did yet tempt the soul to forbidden instances much more will this be done when the body is miserable and afflicted uneasie and dying For even now we see by a sad experience that the afflicted and the miserable are not only apt to anger and envy but have many more desires and more weaknesses and consequently more aptnesses to sin in many instances than those who are less troubled And this is that which was said by Arnobius Proni ad culpas ad libidinis varios appetitus vitio sumus infirmitatis ingenitae By the fault of our natural infirmity we are prone to the appetites of lust and sins 7. From hence it follows that naturally a man cannot do or perform the Law of God because being so weak so tempted by his body and this life being the bodies day that is the time in which its appetites are properly prevailing to be born of Adam is to be born under sin that is under such inclinations to it that as no man will remain innocent so no man can of himself keep the Law of God Vendidit se prior ac per hoc omne semen subjectum est peccato Quamobrem infirmum esse hominem ad praecepta legis servanda said the Author of the Commentary on S. Paul's Epistles usually attributed to S. Ambrose But beyond this there are two things more considerable the one is that the soul of man being devested by Adam's fall by way of punishment of all those supernatural assistances which God put into it that which remained was a reasonable soul fitted for the actions of life and of reason but not of any thing that was supernatural For the soul being immerged in flesh feeling grief by participation of evils from the flesh hath and must needs have discourses in order to its own ease and comfort that is in order to the satisfaction of the bodies desires which because they are often contradicted restrained and curbed and commanded to be mortified and killed by the laws of God must of necessity make great inlets for sin for while reason judges of things in proportion to present interests and is less apprehensive of the proportions of those good things which are not the good things of this life but of another the reason abuses the will as the flesh abuses the reason And for this there is no remedy but the grace of God the holy Spirit to make us be born again to become spiritual that is to have new principles new appetites and new interests The other thing I was to note is this That as the Devil was busie to abuse mankind when he was fortified by many advantages and favours from God So now that man is naturally born naked and devested of those graces and advantages and hath an infirm sickly body and enters upon the actions of life through infancy and childhood and youth and folly and ignorance the Devil it is certain will not omit his opportunities but will with all his power possess and abuse mankind and upon the apprehension of this the Primitive Church used in the first admission of infants to the entrance of a new birth to a spiritual life pray against the power and frauds of the Devil and that brought in the ceremony of Exsufflation for ejecting of the Devil The ceremony was fond and weak but the opinion that introduced them was full of caution and prudence For as Optatus Milevitanus said Neminem fugit quod omnis homo qui nascitur quamvis de Christianis parentibus nascitur sine Spiritu immundo esse non possit quem necesse sit ante salutare lavacrum ab homine excludi ac separari It is but too likely the Devil will take advantages of our natural weaknesses and with his temptations and abuses enter upon children as soon as they enter upon choice and indeed prepossess them with imitating follies that may become customs of sinfulness before they become sins and therefore with rare wisdom it was done by the Church to prevent the Devils frauds and violences by an early Baptism and early offices 8. As a consequent of all this it comes to pass that we being born thus naked of the Divine grace thus naturally weak thus incumbred with a body of sin that is a body apt to tempt to forbidden instances and thus assaulted by the frauds and violences of the Devil all which are helped on by the evil guises of the world it is certain we cannot with all these disadvantages and loads soar up to Heaven but in the whole constitution of affairs are in sad dispositions to enter into the Devils portion and go to Hell Not that if we die before we consent to evil we shall perish but that we are evilly disposed to do actions that will deserve it and because if we die before our new birth we have nothing in us that can according to the revelations of God dispose us to Heaven according to these words of the Apostle In me that is in my flesh dwelleth no good thing But this infers not that in our flesh or that in our soul there is any sin properly inherent which makes God to be our present enemy that is the only or the principal thing I suppose my self to have so much reason to deny But that the state of the body is a