of no personal concurrence to such deformity Yet not so neither but that it justly is denominated Sin from the very nature and effects of it For seeing whatever is in the Will must be good or evil and if the Will be found crooked perverse or averse to that it ought to incline to this is contrary to Gods institution and Law and whence ever this proceeds from an immediate act of our own or by traduction from others seeing it is found in the Will it must needs be contrary and consequently odious to God and in conclusion sinful Again as the fountain poisons and corrupts all streams flowing from thence so the Will being thus corrupt and naturally thus ill inclined all the other defects even in his body as well as soul contracted by this fall are as so many deformities in man which render him deservedly hated of God seeing such disparity and unlikeness to the worse to that which he first fram'd Thirdly Original sin in Man hath this more of disorder in it that it not only is a corruption of the will and thereby a deformity and vitiosity in the inferiour parts and faculties but it is of ill consequence For if this depravation went no farther than that evil born with us if it stand there and wrought no more evil the nature of it had been less sinful and more tolerable but being of an active nature and having taken up the chiefest room in the soul of Man it disposeth and impelleth to more mischief in actual transgressions As a Garrison held by a Rebel doth not only offend Sacred Majesty by standing out against him it self but when it finds it self strong enough and hath opportunity sallies out and makes invasion upon its proper Soveraign and offers actual and active violence against him So by this Original Evil first possessing the Soul doth Concupiscence stir and act by outward practises contrary to the Law and Will of God And therefore when St. Austin saith alledged by the corrupters of this Doctrine of Original Corruption They are born not properly but originally evil he no wayes contradicts his own Doctrine whereby he most of all farther explained and maintained this Original sin being the first that gave the name Original to that Pravity in man For true it is that that only is called properly Original Sin which Adam and Eve in person committed and were not subject to by nature as their Posterity are because it was the first in respect of mankind as well in order of time as nature and causality Again though this be traduced unto us his Off-spring and be the cause and fountain of all other sins actually committed afterward and for the same causes may rightly be called Original yet considering that this Evil thus vitiating our nature had no consent of our personal will we neither understood it nor any wayes affected it it cannot be so properly called sin as others which we act knowingly and willingly our selves For nothing is in strict way a sin which we do not consent unto in some manner either immediately or in its remoter causes And this doth yet farther appear because no man is bound to repent properly of Original sin Proper Repentance being an Act contrarying and reversing so far as in us lyes some evil by us done and not suffered involuntarily But Original sin is rather suffered than acted by the children of Adam Yet though in the severst sense we cannot be said to repent of Original sin we are bound to exercise some Act of Repentance for the same As grief and sorrow of mind and heart for the evil we lye under Confession and Recognition of our sad state before God Imploration of his mercie and favour to remove the same from us and restore us to our pristine innocencie and integrity For this those many places of Scripture describing this Evil do seem to require at our hand And no where doth the Scripture more fully declare this unto us than in the Fifth Chapter of the Epistle to the Romans which because Socinus and such as plough with his Heifer and are tickled with his pretty phansies in eluding the Apostles meaning and the constant interpretation of the most Ancient and Modern Expositours we shall more particularly consider It is undeniable that St. Paul Rom. 5. amplifying the grace of God and benefits unto mankind even the Gentiles by Christ Jesus doth there make a comparision from the Twelfth verse to the end of the Chapter of the first and second Adam and of the Evil we sustained by the first Man Adam and the benefits we receive by the second Man Christ To this he supposes the ground of his Comparison which is this that By one v. 12. man Sin entred into the world and death by Sin and so death passed upon all men for that all have sinned This is made no more of than that Adam being the first Man in the world and sinning Sin must needs enter first into the world by him if he sinned first and that death followed upon that sin of Adam But if this be all how come the effects to exceed the cause and death to extend farther than sin For it is not only said that death entred into the world in seizing upon that single Malefactour Adam but So death passed upon all men for that all have sinned where two things are to be noted First the note of dependance and consequence So. For if St. Paul had meant that Adam by himself and only for himself introduced death wherefore serves the tearm So which is a certain indication of the manner how death came into the world upon all persons and as much as if it had been said Adam first sinning and bringing death into the world so it was that this death fell upon all men for that all have sinned Now it is certain that all that dye have not sinned personally and therefore Secondly the Note So must also ralate to the Cause of that death which was sin and is as much as Adam sinning his Posterity also sinned and became obnoxious to death For to say as some eminently learned and useful otherwise in their Doctrine of Repentance Death passed upon all i. e. say they Upon all the whole world who were drowned in the floud of Divine vengeance and who did sin after the similitude of Adam is as much as if another Scholiaâ—t like him had said That is upon all Senacheribs Armies before Jerusalem in the dayes of Hezekiah or Upon all the Romans in the battle of Canna with Hannibal For it is certain that all men dye and it is no less certain that all men without exception died not in the floud And therefore what is added upon these words In as much as all have sinned that by them is meant All have sinned upon their own account we have already shown that it is not absolutely true and therefore cannot be St. Pauls meaning For all that dye have not as did Adam or following Adams
which Seneca noted but could give no reason of No man saith he is of a good mind before he is of a bad one we are all prevented And in the same place he saith No body is with difficulty reduced to Nature but he that hath made a defection from it Now supposing that God made all things perfect and instituted the nature of man more inclinable to acts agreeable to that perfection than to the contrary whence can it come that contrariwise Man naturally inclineth to that which is base and unworthy and is hardly taken off that corrupt way of acting contrary to reason and vertue and reduced to a perfection becoming his Institution and End but that the very principle of his nature is hurt and the root corrupt And because nothing can be Author of its own Principles by which it subsists no man can be said by his own act to have corrupted them Indeed we say a Man is of corrupt Principles when he hath contracted some evil habits disposing to wickedness but that is accessorie and not innate to him And if it be farther urged That no man can be guilty by anothers fault nor corrupted by anothers principle it is answered as before so long as it is only that others and not his own in some degree For as Thomas hath distinguished There is a Principle of Nature and a Principle of a Person and a Sin of Nature and a Sin of a Person Adam had not only principles whereby he himself subsisted but also was the principle of all his Successours So that Original sin was as well the sin of the one as the other So that from the depraved will of Adam as the first principle of all came the corruption of the Will of all Whereupon speaking strictly as we have said this Original sin is not properly sin in the Infant but a want of Original Justice seizing him and exposing him to destruction as Thomas and Catharinus also have taught which two are the effects of the sin of Adam upon himself and children but the very formal Reason of sin in his Posterity For where as some say It is natural Concupiscence moving to Evil and others That it is the absence of Divine Justice and Grace they differ rather in the niceties of speech than in the matter it self For to me it seems that the loss of Divine Perfection and Grace superadded to the nature of Man whereby he was abundantly able to secure himself and glorifie God in that state of happiness most neerly expresses the nature of it as in the sons of Adam For in Adam himself it was actual disobedience but Concupiscence inordinate doth rather express the consequence of it For upon that desolation in the soul of Man quickly arose a disorder of the inferiour Affections which by a general name is called Concupiscence or Lust by the Apostle in his Seventh Chapter to the Romans And Natural it is called because as out of the cursed ground sprang up briers thorns weeds and thistles where more useful fruit of the earth was intended so upon this curse of mans soul Evil motions arose to the hurrying him to Actual sin being themselves really sinful Again it is observable for the true resolution of the Question That there is commonly an ambiguity in this tearm Concupiscence it being sometimes taken for the act and exercise of that vitious principle in man fallen and sometimes for the Pravitie and degenerate temper of the soul making it prone to actual sins This latter is that which is properly called Original Sin though more properly Original unholiness or want of that instituted Integrity with which man was at first endowed and in it three things are to be considered First the privation of Supernatural Good Secondly Proneness to unnatural Evil against God Thirdly Odiousness and Culpableness before God who must needs be offended at the sight of so much deformity in his Creature contrary to his first Institution of it and Intention though this evil habitude should never break out into actual Rebellion against him by the exercise or putting it in execution by actual Concupiscence against the Law of God St. James seemeth Jam. 1. 14. to justifie this distinction where he saith Every man is tempted when he is drawn away of his own lusts and enticed This gives us the original Lust or Concupiscence which inclines and moves to sin and to this is it to be imputed that a man so easily is withdrawn from truth and righteousness and noble acts becoming his high nature He goeth on Then when Lust hath conceived it bringeth forth Sin c. that is when the Radical Concupiscence or Concupiscibleness in man becomes impregnated and matured by outward opportunities and occasions of sinning it bringeth forth into outward act sin and the event and consequence of this sin is death So that the innate Lust lurking in the Soul and not actuated by outward occasions either inwardly to effect and desire or outwardly to act sin is not properly sin but metonymically only either as it is the effect of Adams sin or the cause of our sins but it is properly odious to God and exposing us to his heavy wrath so far at least as is seen in the deprivation of that be atitude to which man was at first designed And this exactly agrees with the nature of that sin For as that which was in Adam was actual disobedience in his Posterity is only want of that perfection which was due to their nature So Adam not only incurred the loss of that bliss he was capable of and in the ready way to enjoy but likewise the punishment of Sense answerable to his Sin of Commission and his Posterity was made subject to the punishment and loss of Gods favour and that bliss they were in Adam once ordained unto But when their Sins become Actual they are subject to punishment of Pain and torment for the same And by this the way is well prepared to make answer to that common doubt concerning the effect of Baptism and the state of the Regenerate in reference to Original sin and Concupiscence viz. whether Concupiscence remaining after Baptism in the Regenerate be sin or not Scriptures are alledged with great colour on both sides It is observed by Bishop Davenant that St. Paul calls Original Concupiscence sin in fourteen Davenant Deâ—â—rm â— several places in his sixth seventh and eighth Chapter to the Romans which if so Original sin it self must needs be oftner mentioned in Scripture than will be granted by many For mine own particular I see none of those places so exprest in the description of it that the law of Sin the Body Lex Peccati est violentiâ— consuctudinis qua trabit tenetur etiam invitus animus â—â— merito quo in cam volens illabitur Aug. in Confess Lib 3 c. 5. of Sin the Law of the Members the Lust of the Mind and Flesh and some other expressions to the same effect may not be
it Chap. V. Of the proper Acts of God Creation and Preservation or Providence What is Creation That God created all things And how Of the Ministers of Gods Providence towards Inferiour Creatures the Angels of God Their nature and office towards man especially Chap. VI. Of the Works of God in this visible World Of the Six dayes work of God All things are good which were made by God Chap. VII Of the Creation of man in particular according to the Image of God Of the Constitution of him and of the Original of his Soul contrary to Philosophers and the Errors of Origen concerning it The Image wherein it consists principally Chap. VIII Of the Second General Act of God towards the Creature especially Man his Providence Aristotles Opinion and Epicurus his rejected What is Providence Three things propounded of Providence And first the Ground of it the knowledge of God How God knoweth all things future as present Of Necessity and Contingencies how they may consist with Gods Omniscience Chap. IX The method of enquiring into the Nature and Attributes of God Vorstius his grounds of distinguishing the Attributes of God from his Nature examined Of the Decrees of God depending on his Understanding and Will Of knowledge of Intelligence Vision and the supposed Middle knowledge The Impertinency of this middle knowledge invented in God How free Agents can be known by God in their uncertain choice Indifferent actions in respect of Man not so in respect of God All vision in God supposes certainty in the thing known Chap. X. Four Doubts cleared concerning the Knowledge and Decrees of God and free Agents and contingent Effects How man that infallibly acts is responsable for his Actions The frivolous Evasion of the said difficulties by them of Dort Chap. XI Of the Execution of Gods Providence in the Predestination and Reprobation of Man How the Decrees and Providence of God are distinguished The Reason and Method of Gods Decrees Righteousness is the effect and not cause of Predestination to Life Predestination diversly taken in Scripture as also Election and Vocation God predestinates no man simply to Death without consideration of Evil foregoing as Calvin and some others would have it Chap. XII Of Gods Providence in the Reprobation and Damnation of Man Preterition is without any cause personal but the corruption of the Mass of Humane Nature Damnation alwayes supposes sin Chap. XIII The occasion of treating of sin here What sin is What Evil Monstrousness in things natural and Evil in moral things illustrate each other Sin no positive or real thing God the direct cause of no evil St. Paul in his Epistle to the Romans makes nothing for the contra-Remonstrants literally and primarily taken Chap. XIV Of Sin more particularly And first of the fall of Adam Of Original Sin wherein it consisteth and how it is traduced from Father to Children The Proofs of it The nature and evils of it And that it is cured in Baptism That Natural Concupiscence hath not the nature of Sin after Baptism Chap. XV. Of the Restitution of Man after sin The Means and Motives thereunto In what manner Christs Mediation was necessary to the reconciling of Man to God Socinus his Opinion of Christs mediation refuted That Christ truely and properly satisfied by his Death and Passion for us Chap. XVI Of the Nature and Person of the Mediatour between God and Man In the beginning was the Word proved to be spoken of Christ and that he had a being before he was incarnate The Union of two Natures in Christ explained Christ a Mediatour by his Person and by his Office and this by his Sacrificing himself The Scriptures proving this Chap. XVII How Christ was Mediatour according to both Natures Calvins Opinion and others stated Of the effect of Christs Mediation and the extent thereof Of the Designation and Application of Christs death Of the sufficiencie and efficacie of Christs death How Christs death becomes effectual to all The necessity of Gods Grace to incline the will of man to embrace Christ Of the efficacie as well as sufficiencie of Gods Grace on the Will of Man Several Gradations observed in the Grace of God Chap. XVIII Of the effect and benefit of Christs Mediation in suffering and rising again seen in the Resurrection of Man The necessity of believing a Resurrection The Reasons and Scriptural Testimonies proving a Resurrection Objections against the same answered Chap. XIX Of the most perfect effect of Christs Mediation in the salvation of man Several senses of Salvation noted That Salvation is immediately after death to them that truly dye in Christ And that there is no grounds in Antiquity or Scripture for that middle State called Purgatory The Proofs answered Of the Consequent of Roman Purgatory Indulgences The novelty groundlesness and gross abuse of them The Conclusion of the first part of this Introduction The Contents of the Second Part c. Chap. I. OF the worship of God wherein the Second Part of Christian Religion consists Of the necessity of worshipping God It is natural to worship God Socinus holding the contrary confuted Of the name of Religion the Nature of Religious worship wherein it consisteth Chap. II. Of the two parts of Divine worship Inward and Outward The Proof of Outward worship as due to God and that it is both due and acceptable to God Several Reasons proving bodily worship of God agreeable to him Wherein this bodily worship chiefly consists Certain Directions for bodily worship Exceptions against it answered Chap. III. Of the second thing considerable in Divine worship viz. The state wherein we serve God What is a state The formal cause of a state Divine Vowes What is a Vow The proper matter of Vows Evangelical Councils That it is lawful and useful to make Vows under the Gospel contrary to Peter Martyr The nature of Vowes explained Chap. IV. Of the matter of Vows in particular And first of the Virginal state that it is both possible and landable And that it is lawful to vow Celibacie or Widowhood No Presidents in the Old Testament favouring Virginity The Virgin Mary vowed not Virginity no Votary before the Annunciation Chap. V. Of the second State of special serving God the Clerical State or Ministerial Of the necessity and liberty of singleness of Life in a Clergy-man The Opinion and custom of Antiquity concerning it That it is in the power of the Church at this day to restrain or permit the marriage of Priests The Conveniences and Inconveniences of wedded Life in Priests Chrysostom's Judgment of Marriage and Virginity recited Chap. VI. Of the third State of serving God a Life Monastical That it is not only lawful but may be profitable also The Exceptions of Mr. Perkins against it examined The abuses of Monastical Life touched That it is lawful to vow such a kind of Life duly regulated Chap. VII Of Religious worship the third thing considerable in it viz. The Exercise of it in the several kinds
example sinned Infants dying prove the contrary Yet I cannot deny but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may have another signification than is given by some who would have it as much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in whom and not as our Translation hath it faithfully In as much This the Apostles doctrine is confirmed by what follows For until the Law sin was in the world but sin is not imputed when there is no v. 13. 14. Law Nevertheless sin reigning from Adam to Moses even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression These words as by very many and in diverse manners so by the same hand are thus hal'd to this erroneous construction St. Paul does not speak of all mankind as if the Evil occasioned by Adams sin did descend for ever upon that account but it had a limited effect and reached only to those who were in the interval between Adam and Moses But the more exact and literal enquiry into the Apostles meaning will quite overthrow this presumptuous conjecture which is occasioned from a mis-translation or mis-understanding of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both which signifying the same thing i. e. Until are thought to be intended exclusively of the time to come when they as the like do but intend such a tearm signally as a most considerable Period and not as the ultimate they drive at As 't is commonly understood of Josephs not Matth. 1. ult knowing Mary until she had brought forth her first-born And this will be evident to him that compareth the use of those words in the thirteenth and fourteenth verses and the drift of the Apostle which plainly to discover will satisfie any doubter and answer all objections and other glosses It is this here as generally to lay before the Jewes to whom St. Paul principally designs his discourse the imperfection of that Law which was by Moses delivered unto them and upon which they so confidently rest that neither the Law of God written in mens hearts before Moses nor the Law then lately delivered by Christ was of any account with them but Moses his Law must carry it from all Justification must be by that and the Vertue of the Messias himself depended on that So that in effect they thought nothing sin but what transgressed the Law of Moses St. Paul argues against this saying For until the Law sin was in the world but sin is not imputed when there is no Law which is as much as to have said Ye ought not so much to stand upon your Mosaical Law For that is not the only judge or tryal of sin seeing sin was in the world until the Law that is all the time from Adam to your Law but sin is not imputed when there is no Law but sin was imputed and punished too For v. 14. death reigned from Adam to Moses Now if there was such punishment as death then surely there must be a Transgression and if there be such a Transgression there must be also a Law which is so transgressed And therefore if such a Law then surely Moses his Law was not that only Law nor most ancient Now to draw nearer to our present Case on whom fell this punishment of death the Apostle answers On all without exception Even on them which could only be doubted of that had not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression What is meant by this That is saith our Authour Who sinned not so capitally For to sin like Adam is used as a tragical and high expression Hos 6. 7. They like men have sinned in the Hebrew it is Like Adam Of this I grant thus much That Adams sin was the greatest that ever was committed since all things duly weighed and therefore it may well stand for a most heinous sin and therefore Job likewise saith by way of abhorrence and purgation If I covered my sin as Adam Job 31 33. One main circumstance aggravating Adams sin was that he would have hid it as himself out of Gods eyes and defended himself when he was convinced but how he repented the Scripture is silent But that the degree of sin cannot be the ground of comparison but the very nature of sin and kind is plain from the subject thus punished by death For had they been only men of years who could choose the good and refuse the evil then indeed less might have been objected against that interpretation but it being manifest that death reigned over Infants also who committed no sin as did Adam therefore another sense must be found which answers the full intent of the Apostles argument and it can be no other than this That by similitude here he means the like in nature and not only in degree For Infants who are punished with death have not sinned as did Adam Adams sin was a sin properly so called and Actual but Children who dye sin not so but are subject to that we call Original sin which being such a corruption as defaceth the Image of God and as it were clips his Royal Coyn and allayes it with baser mettal than he ordained man to consist of may cause him justly to be rejected Nay which is much more and granted surely unadvisedly as inconsistently with the principles of this Authour the guilt of Adams Actual sin as in himself was such that it discended to the sons of him before the Floud For sayes he They indeed in rigour did themselves deserve it but if it had not been for that provocation by Adam they who sinned not so bad and had not been so severely and expresly threatened had not suffered so severely This is more than what the strictest defenders of Original sin dare affirm viz. That God should take an occasion of punishing one man for anothers fault when he did in no manner partake of the sin Surely if nothing of the Offence had descended to the Posterity of Adam nothing of the punishment should have touched them Next to the comparison here made by the Apostle between acts of Adam and the acts of Christ and the effects and events of one and the other is the comparison between the persons to whom these on both sides extended and sheweth that the remedy by Christ was proportionable altogether to the mischief occasioned by Adam For saith the Apostle As by the offense of One judgment came upon All men to condemnation even so by the Righteousness of One the free gift came upon All men unto justification Rom. 5. 18 19. of life For as by one mans disobedience many were made sinners so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous There seems in these two verses to be some contrariety in that first it is said that Judgment came upon all and the Free gift upon all and yet afterward there is a restriction unto many and not all concerned in the sin Therefore it is to be observed That in the first place the
understood as well of an evil habit and inveterate custome acquired of sinning which is wont to give Law to the Reason and Mind of Man as of Original sin we now speak of contra-distinct to it were it not that the stream of Ancient and Modern Interpreters hath given another sense not with modesty to be opposed Therefore yielding those many places to be meant of Concupiscence natural we are to distinguish answerable to what is abovesaid with the Bishop between Inhabiting Concupiscence and Actual Concupiscence And herein a little vary from him if he doth mean that those places are to be applyed to Concupiscence resident only and not actuated But of this latter he seems to speak and no doubt so is St. Paul to be understood and not of the other And without all doubt Concupiscence coming to act inwardly in the mind by coveting only inordinately or outwardly by executing the evil purposes of the mind are sin even in the most Regenerate And when this becomes a habit then it is called by St. Paul to the Romans The Old Man and the Body of Sin But when the Rom. 6 6. remains of that inhabiting Concupiscence which only can be properly called Original never come after the death and burial with Christ in baptism as the Apostle speaks often to recover new life and motions by Rom. 6. 3 4. Colos 2. 12. Gal. 3. 27. conceiving new warmth from outward temptations as in Infants dying before they come to be actual sinners and in those of riper years immediately after their baptism it cannot properly be said to be sin or to expose to damnation as all sin properly so called doth St. Austin quoted by that learned Bishop plainly affirmeth thus much saying Tale Aug. lib. 6. c. 5. In Julian tantum malum and such and-so great Evil as that Original only because it is in a man would oblige us to death and drag us to the last death but that its chain was broken in baptism All this we subscribe to and do profess that the hold Original sin had over us is loosed by Baptism Yet we profess with Thomas also quoted that when ever such Concupiscence comes into the Will be it of Regenerate or Unregenerate it puts on the nature of sin But we suppose the remains of that Original Evil to contain themselves where Baptism left them and not to proceed farther For this God certainly hates I mean progress of Concupiscence and as it is well argued God cannot hate any thing but sin But after Regeneration by Baptism or restauration to the vertue and power of Baptism and the benefit thereof by Repentance the Sin in kind as Lust Envie Murder Malice is odious unto God but as it relates to the Person once guilty of it it is no longer odious unto God why because it is covered it is pardoned it is not imputed it is as if it had not been For otherwise it could not be said Blessed is the man whose transgression Psal 32. 1 2. is forgiven whose sin is covered Blessed is the man unto whom the Lord imputeth not iniquity and in whose spirit there is no guile But St. Paul to the Corinthians having recited those notorious sins unto which unmortified and unregenerate men were subject and guilty of adds And such were some 1 Cor. 6. 11. of you but ye are washed but ye are sactified but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of his Grace Meaning that upon their conversion unto Christ their washing in Baptism their having received the Holy Ghost they were acquitted from their former sins and judged innocent and pure before him And the Author to the Hebrews tells us Hebr. 9. 26. how Christ as an High Priest once in the end of the world hath appeared to put away sin by the Sacrifice of himself And to what end should any man multiply Texts to prove this to them who will affirm that all sin is damnable and grant that the Regenerate are not in a state of Damnation then surely they are not properly sinners or guilty I speak of the state of Remission and Absolution and as such as all Infants baptised are And the grown Christian because he may and is most prone to incur new sins after such absolution and purgation is not therefore to be said not to have been truly absolution and purgation is not therefore to be said not to have been truly freed from the guilt of sin passed before his baptism and thorow repentance For that this may happen experience and the testimony of St Peter witnesseth For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world 2. Pet. 2. 20. through the knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ they are again entangled therein and overcome the latter end is worse with them than the beginning And what do they but in effect come off from their opinion of sinfulness in that Concupiscibleness rather than Concupiscence in the Regenerate who after all plainly grant that there is no guilt remaining in it of it self and thus answer the argument which proveth that it is no such sin as they hold because Original sin is the death of the soul and makes a man an enemy to God but Concupiscence in the Regenerate doth not this thus Original sin doth not cause spiritual death but only as it is linked with guilt but pardon being obtained in Baptism the guilt is taken away and makes not any man lyable to wrath but as he is found in the old Adam so soon as a man is of the number of the Regenerate he is found in the new Adam i. e. in Christ Now would it be known how any thing of the true nature of sin may be separated from guilt which is too hard for me to apprehend they being so intimately coupled together and convertible that as there cannot be conceived any guilt without sin so neither any sin without guilt And if they say the guilt is done away in Baptism or Repentance I will say the sin is done away too and maintain it If they had distinguished between the effects and fruits of Original sin and the sin it self the matter had been much plainer and easier and by their manner of proceeding in this Question it should seem they only drive at this For I grant what they allow that Baptism doth not free from all corruption of Original sin such as are blindness of the Mind and debility of the Will to embrace good entirely and infirmities of the body which by a Metonymie are called sin sometimes but the guilt it must necessarily or do nothing at all but what Calvine and Perkins and Cartwright and many dancing after their Pipe to the scandal of the Sacraments and the Reformation admit us into the outward communion of the Church and signifie the pardon of our sins from all eternity without including Baptism or Repentance which is made no more then a sign too I conclude this
be he no where affirms but saith expresly I do not therefore affirm because I oppose it not But the supream folly of cutting off scores hundreds and thousands of years of torments by Indulgences upon earth was such an imposture as could never enter into the head of any of the sober Ancients and not to be endured amongst Christians Many are the Suffrages of the Fathers to that of the word of God Blessed are the dead which dye in the Lord from henceforth yea saith the Spirit Rev. 14. 13. that they may rest from their Labours and their works do follow them Implying a direct and comfortable passage from this miserable to that happy life in heaven And whereas they say That they who go to Purgatory may be said to dye in Christ because they shall at length be delivered by Christ How can that stand with such excessive pains there suffered to which none on earth are equal either in degree or continuance How can these wretched souls be said to rest from their labours and sorrows Must they not make God a mocker of his servants in comforting them against their affections in this world by telling them they shall one day be delivered from them and go to greater in Purgatory Besides What grounds do they find in the Word of God or the word of the primitiye Fathers which makes a a twofold state in Christ One of them who by Saintly lives pass immediately to bliss Another of them who are in a middle state and are partly miserable and partly blessed But to their prime argument the Answer is easie We are not generally purged wholly from sin nor have we made full satisfaction of punishments for our sins in this Life unless by Martyrdom or some heroical and eminent Sanctity Both are false which are here supposed First That Martyrdom for Christ or the most holy and exemplary life lead here in this world do so perfectly purge us that we need not further cleansing Again it is denyed that true and sincere repentance acted in this life both in forsaking sin and in true conversion unto God sufficeth not to purge us from all our sins in this life as to the guilt and penalty of them and the odious stain rendring the soul unaccepted to God though men arive not to the perfection of Martyrdom or the eminencie of Sanctity attainable here as St. John witnesseth But if we walk in the light as he is in the light 1 John 1. 7. we have fellowship one with another and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin He doth not here intend to speak of the supreamest sanctity only but of that general state of grace and holy life in which whoever is the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth him from all his sins and dying in that state needs no more cleansing to make him capable of entring immediately into everlasting bliss which is far from all torment though not so consummate as to be capable of no addition at the Resurrection when the Body shall be re-united to the Soul Nor doth this take away what of prerogatives is justly due to Martyrdom or eminent Holiness in this Life because there remains proper to them first a greater measure of comfortable assurance of Gods favour and bliss hereafter and a much greater and higher degree of glory when possessed than inferiour degrees of holiness here can lay claim to And this is sufficient encouragement next to the pure intention of holiness it self and Gods glory to any Christian to abound in good works knowing that his 1 Cor. 15. labour is not in vain in the Lord. And thus much of those we call Aequivocal Sacraments and improper For though all true Sacraments are ordinarily necessary to salvation yet all things ordinarily necessary to salvation are not Sacraments as Repentance which in its nature consisting of true Contrition of heart and conversion unto God and thereby putting us into capacity of mercy from God is not pretended to be a Sacrament until the Priest acteth his part towards the Penitent And if Contrition thus understood or Repentance be no Sacrament surely neither can Confession or Satisfactions which are said to be parts of Repentance be Sacraments nothing being in the parts which may not be in the whole But so moderate sound Consecration of Arch-Bishops and Bishops a course hath our Church taken as to call them Sacramentals as being above the order of general acts and duties of Piety and not amounting to the dignity of the two proper ones Baptism and the Eucharist CHAP. XL Of Baptism The Author Form Matter and Manner of Administration of it The General necessity of it The Efficacy in five things Of Rebaptization that it is a prophanation but no evacuation of the former Of the Character in Baptism MANY Acceptations are found of the word Baptism in Holy Scripture which I leave to others who have collected them and betake my self to the thing it self commonly understood by it And thus Baptism is a Sacrament of the New Testament instituted by Christ consisting of the outward signs of Water and the Word and the inward Grace of Regeneration and remission of sins and outward Communion with the Church of Christ all which I conceive to be contained in our Church Catechism where it is first described by its outward Sign to be Water wherein the Party is baptized in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost And by its inward Grace to be A death unto sin and a new birth unto righteousness for being by nature born in sin we are hereby made the Children of Grace This Sacrament then of baptism is said truly to succeed that of Circumcision and to have the same Spiritual effect upon the Spiritual and inward man which that had over the Outward The agreement and difference between which two will sufficiently appear from the comparing of this as we now shall explain it with that which we shall do by considering the Form the Matter The Subject The Efficacy and the Minister of Baptism The Form we have propounded to us by Christ when he first instituted the same and commanded his Disciples to go and teach all nations baptizing Mat. 28. 19. them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost teaching them to observe all things whatever I have commanded you From whence it doth appear that taking Baptism simply for the Act it consisteth in that form of words here prescribed by Christ and the outward Action of baptizing with Water But taken more Concretely and complexly for all things concurring to that Sacrament essentially It is a Covenant made between God and Man whereby is promised on Gods part remission of sins and salvation and on mans part Faith and Observation of the terms of the Gospel as St. Mark more expresly hath it He that believeth Mar. 16. 16. Eph. 2. 12. and is baptized shall be
saved but he that believeth not shall be damned This Covenant was typified by the Sacrament of Circumcision made between God and Abraham with his seed thus This is my Covenant Gen. 17. 10. which ye shall keep between me and you and thy seed after thee Every Man-child among you shall be circumcised c. And this was yet more cleerly prophesied of by Ezekiel saying Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you and Ezek. 36. 35 ye shall be clean from all your filthiness and from all your Idols will I cleanse you And as with men that is no sure Covenant which doth not consist of proper matter mutually passed from one Party to another and of due form of words thereunto required So neither is that proper Baptism which makes no express or implicite stipulation between God and man and that with that form of words and Action by Christ enjoyned And the Matter of this Sacrament is expressed already to be water by many places of Scripture as Mat. 3. 6 11. Joh. 1. 26. Joh. 3. 23. Act. 8. 36 c. And having none other mentioned by Christ we are not so much to argue presumptuously of insufficiency of that Element to effect so great matters upon the soul and thence conclude That it is unlikely God should be so rigorous to exact indispensably a little water or cause the party to perish in his sins for 1. This way of reasoning holds no less against Gods severe imposition of Circumcision which was the cutting off of a small pitifull piece of Flesh and yet that omitted God threatneth positively to cut off the soul of the child from his people Exod. 17. 14. 2. This takes away the Liberty and power of God to dispose of his Graces upon what terms he pleases for the manner of conveying whereof he may choose what means he pleases though never so improbable to sense to attain such ends that it may appear the vertue is not in the thing so much as God 3. God in such Cases doth not so much tye himself as tie us He doth indeed oblige himself to those means himself hath ordained but not confine so himself to them that he cannot or may not work the same effect without them Yet as he so restrains that he threatens wrath and makes no promise at all but upon our dutiful observation of such his Prescriptions But as when a man not by any wilful neglect or disesteem of the usefulness of this Sacrament shall by invincible necessity be detained from it with a fervent desire to be partakers of it God by his abundant Grace may supply the want of it In like manner where there is no proper natural water to be had rather then the solemnity should wholly be omitted and denied to one earnestly craving the same Use may be made of that which comes nearest to it so of a nature cleansing But this needs farther determination to put out of doubt than any private Doctour can give For we read in Scripture of no other element though in Ecclesiastical History we do than water And there appears no greater inconvenience Pallad Lausic Historiâ or ill consequence for men to be brought to that extremity for want of natural water than to want the general means of Christianity itself or Children to die unbaptized But the manner of applying this water to the party baptized by Immersion or dipping into the water or by Aspersion or Sprinkling and that thrice or once only is not much to be insisted upon For though 't is undeniable that it was a general Ablution by sinking the Baptized into the water as St. Paul intimateth when he speaketh of being buried with Christ in Rom. 6. 4. Col. 2. 12. Math. 3. 16. Act. 8. 38. Baptism that as Christ was laid under the earth after his death so Christians under the water and were buried unto sin And other phrases of Scripture which speak of ascending out of the waters and descending into the waters Yet that any washing by aspersion or sprinkling sufficed appears from the Analogy between the Sacramental Purgations of the Old Law and the New For as infinite places certifie us the blood of the Sacrifices and waters of Purification were to be sprinkled on the Persons therein concerned And so the end of the Sacrament of Baptism is to signify and conferr Grace on the baptized by such outward Elements to Exod. 29. 2. Levit. 14. 7. which the vertue of the Sacrament not consisting in the nature of the thing but in the Institution of God greater quantity can conduce no more then less provided so small quantity be not taken which should hide and hinder the significancy of the Elements And besides Gods rule being I will have mercy and not Sacrifice and never intending to save the Soul by such means as in common probability may destroy the Body the condition of some persons being so frail and weak and of some Climates so hard and hurtful he is pleased to accept the most safe way the substance of the duty being entirely observed And such persons are not only Infants but the Sick and very Aged too who were baptized with water and that upon a necessity of entring into the Kingdome For could scarce any thing betray Calvine with his Followers such as Perkins and Cartwright more to suspicion of insolence and singularity than his seeking to elude the plain precept of Christ concerning Elemental not Spiritual water Job 3. 5. 6. and washing only contrary to the universal consent of all Catholicks and Hereticks before him as if he had taken the rise of his Fancy from these two famous Anabaptists Balthazar and Satelare in Germany who Cassand Praefar ad Anabaptist Mat. 19. 13. 14. reading in the Scripture one Ground of Paedobaptism to be Christs saying Suffer little Children to come unto me for of them is the Kingdom of heaven interpreted the same of Children in Spirit and not in Age with the like probability both And of the subject of Baptism or the persons to be baptized and capable of that Sacrament this in sum may be said out of the Scripture as the foundation of all as even now out of St. John Unless a man be born Tit. 3. 5. of water and the Holy Ghost he shall not enter into the Kingdom of God And St. Paul to Titus saith that According to his mercy he saved us by the washing of Regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost And to the Corinthians 1 Cor. 12. 13 Cap. 12. For by one Spirit we are all baptized into one Body c. And the like is comprehended in that General Law of Christ given to his Disciples to be Executed Matthew 28. 29. Now from these general Rules laid down by Christ in his word a just and particular inference may be made to the entitling Children to a Right in this Sacrament it being a Rule which holds no less in Divine than Humane Laws That where the Law
is the direct Authour of sin to prepare men to damnation as he is of good acts leading to life and glory These contain two great errours to be liked of no good Christian for any mans great name in Religion or Reformation For it is first certain that though sometimes in Scripture the same name may be ascribed to Gods Providence in both yet it is in a far different sense as the Relation that Gods hand and power Quia universa ista Massa meritò damnata est conâ—umeliam debitam reddit justitia honorem indebitum reddit gratia Aug. in sixto Epist 105. hath towards things of a Positive and real Nature differs much from that it hath towards things of nature Negative and Privative Supposing then at present the Fall of Man into sin and his liableness to the due wages or reward of sin which necessarily follows thereupon and the Mass as they call it of mankind to be corrupted throughout whatever is excepted to the contrary there appears no reason why God out of his absolute Right and Liberty might not have neglected the whole and suffer'd it to perish rather than design'd it to ruin Here then cometh in the discriminating will and hand of God Some part of this he leaves and some he chooses Some part he ordaineth especially and directly to Life and Grace and others suffering to fall into deserved ruin he is said to destine or predestinate to perish and sometimes not only upon the stock of original pravity odious sufficiently unto God to provoke to that but by actual and personal impieties and errours naturally tending to such ends So that as it is necessary there should be an hand to lift a man up who is fallen down and maimed but no necessity that any hand should keep him down or cast him lower in like manner to the raising of any part of that depraved Lump it was absolutely necessary Gods Divine assistance should put to its saving hand and these are said to be ordained especially to Grace and Life but suspending only and denying the like grace and favour to others he is said sometimes to ordain to death and sin such though speaking strictly it be no more than not ordaining to the contrary For it is much the like case as to form of speech which we use in Humane and Divine matters He saith Christ that is not with me is against me Matth. 12. 30. and he that gathereth not with me scattereth And our Saviour Christ rebuking the superstitious and morose Jews preferring their Sabbath before the life of a man saith I will ask you one thing Is it lawful Luke 6. 9. on the Sabbath dayes to do good or to do Evill to save life or to destroy it implying hereby that it had been to destroy this impotent Creature not to deliver him from the evil he was in So likewise speaking after the phrase and opinion of men which the Scriptures do no less than humane Authours God is said to be against a man when he is not for him and to destroy him when he saveth not his life as Lactantius in a certain Qui succurrere perituro potest si non succurrerit occidit Lactan. place writeth thus He that may help one that is ready to perish and doth not help him he slayes him And if God may be said actually to destroy such by withdrawing or with-holding his saving Grace denying his favour may he not be said reasonably and soberly to ordain such to destruction when only he doth not ordain him to Salvation There are two things which may seem to cross this One that an imputation may seem to fall on God that he doth not that himself being much more pitiful and good by nature to his Creatures than they are to one another which he requireth under pain of his displeasure that men should do to one another viz. relieve in necessity This is no hard matter to answer seeing the case is quite different and we know no such law that is or can be upon God to do all the good he can unto the Creature as there is upon man to do so to his brother But Man himself is not tyed by God to do a favour to other whereby dammage should ensue unto himself And much less God obliged to shew mercy in such manner that he might suffer in his Justice or dominion over his creature which are more conspicuous yea and his Mercy too as to the Degree though not extent of it in adjudging some to their demerits while he rescues others from the like misery The other objection which is principally Calvines above touched is That by this God should act unreasonably not propounding a certain end to himself if he did not directly design the punishment of his Creature but as we have said indirectly and obliquely as if God had in some Actions no direct and peremptory intention but this doth not follow For no doubt but God had a direct and positive end in creating every particular thing and especially man And that intention was agreeable altogether to his own Nature and his own Works which were all good good to both one and other And to glorifie man and be glorified by him in giving him immortality and life and that without exception but yet not without condition which condition being on mans part violated What hinders but Gods secondary end and intention should be to return the fruits of mans doings upon himself and that without exception For as St. Paul saith Rom. 3. 23. All have sinned and come short of the glory of God And all were in a state of Desertion and Reprobation But what if God pleases seeing his Creature fallen to decay to make it over again in Christ Jesus and propound 2 Cor. 5. 17. to himself a new and another end A man hath a fair handsome and well-going horse he chooseth him to himself to ride on but he falls lame and is turn'd off He recovers him and puts him to his former use and ends Is here any lightness or inconstancie in the owner Are not all these things very reasonable Could there be any such unreasonableness as to make one general and positive decree that come what will his horse shall serve him to ride on So undoubtedly the general Decree and first in nature and order next to Gods glory was in the creation of man that he should serve him to his glory and to the benefit of himself But Man mutilating himself and becoming unserviceable to God his Owner and Master was not the Decree of God very wise and just ordaining him to be a cast-a-way so long as he continued in that state And then recovering him by the Mediation of Christ to ordain as many as took their cure to life everlasting and glory and those who were incurable or not cured to everlasting death this latter is plainly attributed to God by St. Jude telling us of some who were before ordained to condemnation
Family is gone out the house falls into disorder and so finding it he sentences his servants to their several punishments or may turn them out of doors So God having the liberty to depart from his Creature at his pleasure in this way of Preterition whether Supralapsarian or Sublapsarian there doth upon that spring up from it evil and disorder in the soul contrary to Gods will revealed which he reflecting upon may safely and justly decree to entertain it in his favour no longer but reprobating it adjudge it to the punishment deserved God doth not therefore primarily as some have boldly delivered propound to himself the positive pains and ruine of any Creature no inducement no grounds going before but he may very well in a negative sense be said to reprobate it not affording those preservatives needfull to its security This doth sufficiently appear in the first act of his Reprobation of men and Angels whom without all doubt he could have preserved in their original state but he freely refused and they both freely chose to leave him and expose themselves to his severest judgement which was by this positive Reprobation to bring them under the effects of their sins damnation So that they who deny any cause out of God of his first Reprobation do not deny a cause sufficient of his second and positive but the Devils and those men as are signaliz'd Reprobates are undoubtedly the free and full authors of Gods reprobating them and condemning them in this manner Of the Angels St. Peter and Jude speak expresly rendring 2 Pet. 2. 4. their offences a reason why God proceeded so against them and not the simple will of him God spared not the Angels that sinned but cast them down to Hell and delivered them to chains of darkness to be reserved unto judgment And the same is repeated by St. Jude And when God saith Jude 6. Gen. 2. 17. in hie Covenant with Adam In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely dye he implyeth the reason of his Decree to punishment to be sin And when the Wise man exhorteth saying Seek not death in the error of your life Wisd 1. 12. and pull not upon your selves destruction with your own hands he doth necessarily imply a direct cause in Man of his own ruine And the words 13. following exempt God from any hand in such things as the Author For God saith he made not death neither hath he pleasure in the destruction of the living And here come in that in its due place though it were not intended of a spiritual or eternal destruction O Israel thou hast destroyed thy self For though without any supposition taken from the Creature God may pass him over and deny him grace and glory yet doth he not design any man directly to damnation but upon supposition of sin going before And from this state of things may competent reconciliation be made to the seeming oppositions of Scripture and to St. Austin himself The Scriptures say Because thou hast rejected knowledg I will also reject thee And Hos 4. 6. Mat. 23. 37. Luk. 8. 18. by St. Matthew How often would I have gathered thy children together even as a Hen gathereth her chickens under her wings and ye would not And Whosoever hath not from him shall be taken even that which he seemeth to have And St. John Ye will not come unto me that ye might have life And in the Joh. 5. 40. Act. 13. 46. Acts Paul and Barnahas It was necessary that the Word of God should first have been spoken unto you but seeing ye put it from you and judge your selves unworthy of everlasting life And St. Peter God is not willing that any 2 pet 3. 9. Isa 5. 3 4. should perish c. And amongst others that of the Prophet Esay must not be forgot And now O Inhabitants of Jerusalem and men of Judah judge I pray you betwixt me and my Vineyard What could I have done more to my Vineyard that I have not done in it All which places and divers more do charge man altogether with his own misery On the other side in that Gen. 1. 26. the Scriptures tell us how God made man according to his own image whereof freedom of will was no small portion And in Deuteronomy Ye Deut. 29. 2. have seen all that the Lord aid before your eyes in the land of Egypt unto Pharoah and unto all his servants and to all Land Yet the Lord hath not 4. given you an heart to perceive and eyes to see and ears to hear unto this day And in Jeremy Turn thou me O Lord and I shall be turned And Ezekiel Jer. 31. 18. Lam. 5. 41. Ezek. 36. 26. I will give you a new heart also and a new spirit will I put into you and will take away the stony heart of your flesh and will give you an heart of flesh And St. Matthew All men cannot receive this saying save they to whom it Mat. 19. 11. Joh. 6. 44. Joh. 12. 39 40. is given And Christ in St. John saith No man can come unto me except the Father who hath sent me draw him And elsewhere Therefore they could not believe because Esaias said again He hath blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts And the whole ninth Chapter to the Romans mightily Rom. 9. 16. favours this side of which the substance seems to be contained in this one Verse So then it is not of him that willeth nor of him that runneth but of God that sheweth mercy And to the Philippians To will and to do is of Phil. 2. 13. God These with others seem to deny liberty of will to man and to ascribe the reason of good and evil to which man is subject to God as the author making man rather passive under both To that of Free-will we may speak by and by To the present case taking in also what St. Austin saith God doth not forsake but where he is forsaken which may ill consist with what he so largely and often delivers on the other side we answer by the help of the former distinction of simple Preterition and direct Reprobation and the effect of it damnation viz. That the foresaid places suppose an evil affection in the parties so rejected by God and are to be interpreted of his just determination to punish sin and hard-heartedness in them But the incapacity of Grace and Conversion and Salvation are meant by the latter Texts proceeding from the sole Preterition of God refusing to prevent the evil and malignity of mens wills which for want of that preventing Grace do certainly tend to evil and are incurable of themselves But upon this I see divers shrewd Objections to arise as First That by this with-holding of Gods Grace his Preterition there is brought a necessity upon mans will to evil and his indifferency to life and death quite taken away as all use of the means of Grace To this
Apostle speaks of the state of Evil or Condemnation in the next of the state of Restitution and Justification For as all persons were included in the Condemnation of Adam so were all included in the Justification of Christ But as of all them only some many were through his disobedience made Sinners that is became such sinners as not to return to actual Righteousness and Salvation so by the obedience of Christ not all who were called and chosen came to Life and Holiness but many only were made Righteous actually and not all Or if we take the word Sin as he of whom we speak doth not so much for the real inward vitiousness of the soul but for any outward defect and which is yet more for the Punishment of Sin in which sense the Sacrifice for sin was called Sin in the Old Law and Christ in the New Testament is said to be made Sin for us that is a Sacrifice for Sin so that to be made sinners should import as much as to be made lyable to the punishment of sin the matter is the same But because this Authour not only inclines to the Opinion of Pelagius and of Socinus after him making the corruption of nature nothing and therefore exempting Infants from any such natural infection as we here suppose but uses the same evasion of Imitation of Adams sin and not propagation as the original of all Evil to us therefore let us hear what St. Austins argument was against that Opinion If saies he the Apostle spake Aug. Epist 87. of Sin by imitation and not propagation entring into the world he could not have said that by one Man Sin entred into the world but rather by the Devil for he sinned before man and as the Wiseman saith Through envie Wisd 2. 24. of the Devil came death into the world And Christ tells us how aptly the Devil may be said to propagate sin by imitation as well as Adam thus reprehending the Jews Ye are of your Father the Devil and the Lusts of John 8. 44. your Father ye will do he was a murderer from the beginning and abode not in the truth because there is no truth in him when he speaketh a lye he speaketh it of his own for he is a lyar and the Father of it And when St. Paul saith We were by nature the children of wrath as well Ephes 2. 3. Psalm 51. 5. as others And the Psalmist Behold I was shapen in iniquity and in Sin did my mother conceive me that these places must be accounted hyperbolical and not to have a proper sense is the special evasion of Modern Wits not comparable to Ancienter Judgments more simply understanding them I know a more colourable interpretation is made by others who interpret Conceiving in sin as relating to the Parents and not to the Children But this is less probable than the ordinary and obvious sense applying it to David For though it may be probable enough that Parents may offend in acts of Procreation and so the child may be said to be conceived by them in sin yet David being at the speaking of these words in deepest repentance for his own sins cannot be said to leave off that subject and to confess the sins of others and charge his parents with that which concerned him not Again when he says He was shapen in iniquity nothing could he say more intimately to signifie his proper state at the time of his first conception But the Scriptures do not only barely say we are originally thus infected and sinful but by the effects and certain other indications declare the same The first and chiefest of which may be Death and punishments sticking close to infants at their birth and even before they come into the world Now the Law of God being unalterable that punishment should follow and not go before sin it must be that somewhat of the nature of sin must prepare the way for such sufferings Secondly That all men come to years of discretion are effected with Actual sin few of the opposers of Original sin deny But according to Reason and Scripture both the fountain being so infected and corrupted whatever flows from it must of necessity partake of the same evil For Job 14. 4. Jam. 3 11 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Anâ—ae Gazaei Thâ—â—â—hrastus Biblioth P P. pag. 392. To. 8. Non eniâ— es ex â—â—lis qui modo nova quaedam gannire câ—perunt dicentes nullum reatum esse ex Adam tractum qui per baptisâ—um in infante sâ—lvatur Aug. Epist 28. Hieronymo Ad neminem ante bona mens â—enit quam mala Omnes prâ—â—ccupati sumus Sen. Ep. 50. Nemo difficulter ad naturam reducitur nisi qui ab â—a defecit ibid. who saith Job can bring a clean thing out of an unclean not one And St. James Doth a fountain send forth at the same place sweet water and bitter Can a fig-tree my brethren bear olive-berries either a vine figs so can no fountain yield both salt water and fresh From whence it follows by way of just Analogy That the Fountain being corrupt there must be derived to the Rivolets the like unsoundness And thirdly we see this by experience that both bodily and mental infirmities and disorders are traduced from Father to Son in actual Evils as the Gout Stone and Leprosie are transinitted to posterity from the Father and Anger and other passions in like manner It may as well be said That the Son hath the Gout and halts by imitation and not by propagation as that such other affections which are common to Father and Son so proceed Fourthly The Argument which St. Augustine could never by the Pelagians be answered taken from Baptism For this they could not deny but the Church universally practised Paeda-baptism that is held an opinion manifested in practise that Children were capable of that Sacrament and received the benefit of it however some particular persons deferred the same and held it of use unto them for the entring into the Kingdom of Heaven Therefore surely there must be some impediment and that impediment could be nothing but what hath the nature of sin in it therefore they bring sin with them into the World Pelagius had a good mind indeed as Austin observed to have denyed the use of Baptism but as bold as he and his great second Julian of Capua was the general Judgment of the Church declared in the practise of it put a stop to his inclinations but Socinus bolder than any Heretick before him sticks at no such thing but flatly denyes the use of it to all but such as are converted newly to the Christian Faith as in the times of the Apostles This was freely and roundly invented and uttered and which suffices alone to convince us of the former errour denying Original Sin which was alwayes held a principal cause of Baptism Lastly Thus much may be observed by natural Reason to the confirmation of Original Sin
12. 24 who was Moses in like manner Christ is called the Mediatour of a New Covenant in the Epistle to the Hebrews because the tearms of that Covenant were obtained of God by Christ and that Covenant was delivered unto him to manage and transact Another Act of Christs mediation was by Prayers and Supplications as it is in the Epistle to the Hebrews Who in the dayes of his Flesh when he had offered up Prayers and Supplications with Hebr. 5. 7. strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death was heard in that he feared And in this respect he is called our Advocate by St. John saying If any man sin we have an Advocate with the Father Jesus 1 John 2. 1. Christ the Righteous A third Act of Christ in his mediation related to Man by offering to him the tearms and means of Reconciliation in knowledge and sanctification and moving him to accept of so favourable free and gracious tearms of Reconciliation as the doctrine of the Gospel presented to him thus fully expressed by St. Paul All things are of God who hath 2 Cor. 5. 18. reconciled us unto himself in Jesus Christ and hath given unto us the ministry of reconciliation To wit that God was in Christ reconciling the World unto himself not imputing their trespasses unto them and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation Now then we are Embassadours for Christ as though God did beseech you by us we pray you in Christs stead be ye reconciled unto God But the second way of Mediation and Reconciliation is that which is most proper to Christ the former being communicable to man in some sense namely as the received power and authority from Christ as is even now shewed to minister in Christs stead as inferiour Instruments under him And this is by making himself a Sacrifice and Satisfaction for sin according to that of St. Paul to Timothy There is one God and one Mediatour between 1 Tim. 2. 5 6. God and Men the Man Christ Jesus Who gave himself a ransom for all to be testified in due time And to the Ephesians he saith And walk Ephes 5. 2. in love as Christ also hath loved us and given himself for us an Offering and a Sacrifice to God for a sweet smelling savour And when he saith For he hath made him to be sin for us who knew no sin it is manifest that sin in the 2 Cor. 5. 21. first place is used according to the Hebrew word for a Sacrifice for sin Now nothing can be more frivolous in the ears of rational men or more sacrilegious in Gods ears than to draw this to such a kind of figurative speech as Socinus and his Fellows do as should imply an occasionalness and exemplariness only in Christs death to take away sin and not to satisfie Gods Justice for them And so to satisfie as a Doctour showing us the way and as a President leading us the way towards peace with God This I say can in no propriety of speech be the meaning of holy Writ assuring us first That Christ was a Propitiation for us as Romans 3. Whom God hath Rom. 3. 25. 1 John 2. 2. Ephes 2. 16. set forth as a Propitiation through Faith in his bloud And St. John He is the Propitiation for our sins And St. Paul to the Ephesians tells us how he became such a propitiation for us That he might reconcile both unto God in one Body by the Cross having slain the enmity thereby Is Reconciliation of God and Man and that by delivering up his body to death upon the Cross no more than to give us good instructions how to serve God so as to reconcile our selves to him Is slaying the enmity or extinguishing the enemy to us the Devil or the Enmity which was between God and us no more than by good example to direct us how so to do Saint Paul likewise to the Romans plainly affirmeth that he reconciled us to God Rom. 5. 10. by his death Secondly Who by purging us or any man else could understand before these dayes no more than good words and counsels But St. Paul sayes he By himself purged our sins And that we may see that St. Hebr. 1. 3. Paul was far from any such intention and forced sense as is modernly imposed on him he writes thus also It was therefore necessary that the paterns of Heb. 9. 22 23. things in the heavens should be purified with these but the heavenly things themselves with better Sacrifices than these For Christ c. The meaning of which words must necessarily be this that whereas the errors and sins under the Law which were paterns or types of the Gospel were expiated by bloud and sacrifices But the heavenly things were purged by better things i. e. The Sacrifice of Christ Therefore if it cannot be said that such things were purified only by good precepts and documents given but real bloud was shed for that purpose Real though much better and more precious bloud was shed for the expiation and purification the sins of the Gospel which bloud was Christs And thirdly how most abusively must the tearms Redeeming and Redemption and Redeemer be used by the Scripture beyond all other writings or speeches if it signifies not a real recovery or purchase of somewhat lost or necessary to one Now such expressions applyed to Christs mediation are so plain and frequent that it may seem superfluous to recite them St. Matthew saith The Son of Man came to give his life a Matth. 20. 28. Titus 2. 14. 1 Pet. 1. 18 19. ransome for many St. Paul saith He gave himself for us that he might redeem us from all iniquity St. Peter by his comparison used sheweth what manner of purchase it was saying Ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things as silver and gold from your vain conversation received by tradition from your Fathers but with the precious bloud of Christ as of a Lamb without blemish without spot But redemption with silver and gold is proper and expiation by the bloud of Lambs was proper and real therefore also must the redemption by the bloud of Christ be so too And in the Epistle Heb. 9. 12. 13 14 to the Hebrews is the like comparison used most aptly and at large Fourthly the tearms Offering and Sacrifice so often ascribe unto Christ must needs import more then verbal or exemplary mediation divers of which places we have noted before to which we may adde what in the Hebrews is directly Hebr. 7. 27. spoken of Christ Who needed not daily as their High Priests to offer up Sacrifice first for his own sins and then for the peoples for this he did once when he offered up himself And St. Paul to the Corinthians Christ our Passover 1 Cor. 5. 7. John 1. 29. is offered for us And St. John The Lamb of God that taketh away the sin
of the dead Secondly St. John in the Revelations clears this saying Write blessed Rev. 14. 13. are the dead which dye in the Lord from henceforth for they rest from their labour and their works follow them Their works follow them without the least mention or insinuation of being vegetated and enabled so to do with the prayers of the living And they rest from their labours without being toyled wasted and tormented with worse miseries than ever they suffered upon earth The evasion which is here borrowed from Anselme upon the words which yet in truth are no more Anselm's than the Comments under his name upon the Epistles but Herveus Natalis his living above two hundred years after Anselme that here we are to understand the time of the Resurrection might be accepted for true it is then shall the due reward be rendered to every mans works if this excluded the other For let our adversaries say whether all consideration of good works be deferred until the Resurrection Is it not in reference to them that some men are committed to Purgatory only while others immediately go to hell That some mens pains in Purgatory are gentle and light others more grievous and some mens shorter and some longer even of themselves without the help of their friends upon earth Why then must we needs understand this following of good works to be at the day of Judgment only and not in just proportion the whole time going before And therefore is that elusion we touched of being meant of perfect Men and Martyrs only rested on as the surer of the two and that from De Victore and Haymon It is true he doth speak of such but it can only be said and not proved that he speaks of such only Dying in the Lord being of far greater extent and not upon mens pleasures and the exigencie of a corrupt cause limited But distrust that these devises will not satisfie hath driven a great Champion of this Purgatory into another plainer but much more absurd answer of his own viz. That some men dye absolutely in the Lord as Martyrs c. and some men partly in the Lord and partly not in the Lord This is congruous indeed to the opinion resolved to be maintained and belike St. Augustine gives ground hereunto who in a certain Epistle saith that some men in this life are partly the Sons of Christ and partly the Sons of this world This Augustine might speak in reference to the imperfection of the state of Grace and Sonship here which will admit of some mixture of worldliness and weakness with Grace and Sanctification but doth St. Austine any where say that upon this any man is partly the child of God and partly the child of the Devil at the same time or that at the same time he is in a state of Grace and a state of Sin or reconciled to God and not reconciled This is a new invention but very suitable to the third state after this life Purgatory and both of equal truth The place of Ecclesiastes Where the tree falleth there it shall be brought against a middle state I confess hath besides the most natural sense a sense which may be aimed at besides the denyal of any middle state but that by indifferent interpreters it hath been applyed to the immutableness of mans state at his death is certain For in truth Purgatory as commended to us is a quite different state from that of bliss as a state of torment must be from a state of bliss Fourthly The Holy Scriptures teach us that The bloud of Jesus Christ 1 John 1. 7. John 5. 24. cleanseth us from all our sins and that He that heareth Christs word and believeth on him that sent him hath everlasting life and shall not come into death but is passed from death unto life And we may note that Life simply taken is never used for any other state but that of happiness in holy Scripture and therefore these two states only being mentioned in Scripture it is sufficient to conclude that no more are to be added For were it so that nothing in Scripture were directly spoken against this opinion it would no more avail the defenders of it then it would any other Heretical Invention which might be yet framed without any direct opposition from thence Now the Scriptural reasons against this we make to be these in brief First that as well Scripture as Philosophy to which they assent who introduced these Purgative Flames truly hold that all spiritual purgation and sanctification must have the consent and co-operation of the will to produce any spiritual effect in the soul but the Will after death elects not merits not nor demerits i. e. deserves neither good nor evil but is fixed to the state in which it is But if sin be remaining in the separate soul it must necessarily have its seat principally in the will which is the formal principle of all good and evil And there can be no change in the will of the deceased as to the choise of good or evil simply but only as to the more full and absolute captivating of the same in the admiration of good or pertinacie in evil Therefore the Prayers of the living not having any influence upon the will or affections at that time to change them for the best or correct the pravity of them cannot avail to the meliorating of the soul in reference to its sanctity or impurity Again No corporeal cause can be effectual upon the spirit of Man immediately while it is disjoyned from the body to the cleansing of spiritual stains But the relicts of sin are spiritual and not corporal pollutions and therefore no flames of Purgatory can mundifie the soul so as to render it more innocent and fit for heaven But the flames of Purgatory are sensible and properly material And it is not said that the suffrage of the living obtain remission of sins for the afflicted in Purgatory but only deliver them from punishments there suffered Thirdly All sins being committed in the person of a Man consisting of body and soul must be accounted for as they were acted in the Person and not only in the one Part of him neither can any sin be said to be forgiven the soul without the body which was committed in soul and body together nor can the soul be purged and not the person nor the person and not the body but the body lies unconcerned untouched all this while by such tormenting remedies and therefore there is no probability of any such semi-purgation of the soul which should avail to the benefit and salvation of the whole And therefore the souls of the damned suffering the pains of Hell fire immediately after their departure from the body are not awhit the better for what they suffer Neither can this be alledged to invalidate the other because that in God punishing the souls of the Reprobates without their bodies is no unjustice but rather a
shalt not kill thy neighbour or another man but simply Thou shalt not kill And though indeed about the earliest dayes of the Persecution of the Church of Christ some men and more especially young women to prevent the abuses of their bodies cast themselves away and this was connived at by the Church yet upon more mature discussion and consideration of the notoriousness of the Fact it was condemned expresly by the Church nay for men needlesly and voluntarily to declare and publish themselves to be Christians and so to offer themselves to the Sword of the Magistrate was judged wicked and the practisers of it denyed to be Christians any farther than in name as appears in Clemens Alexandrinus And those Noble Persons Clem. Alex. l. 4. Strom. p. 481. 504. who are recorded in Scripture to have affected such deaths can be no more presidents for to justifie this sin than others other scandalous sins unless as St. Austin inclineth to believe answering the furious Donatists who out Aug. 1. c. 26. Civ Dei of mad zeal rather against the Church than for God were wont to destroy themselves they had some special instinct so to do from God as Sampson might be thought to have in that he was divinely assisted above his ordinary strength to pull down the house And besides his intention was not out of weariness or discontent of his life principally to destroy himself but the Enemies of God of himself and the people of God And there seems no great difficulty or inconveniencie to grant that a man may run himself into apparent danger of his life to bring a most notorious dammage to the Enemies of God and his Country though not upon his own head but by just Authority So that I make no doubt but Voetius determined the Voetius Select Disp Part 4. p. 256. Case of Conscience amiss denying that a man in desperation of saving himself and his ship of War from falling into the hands of his Enemies may with a good Conscience blow it up and all in it For all his arguments prove no more than that this a man may not do of himself because no man must slay himself but they prove not that a man may not do this by command and injunction of his Superiours in whose power his life is and to whom belongs his Vessel And what is said against a mans destroying his own life or his neighbours makes also against any maiming or mutilation of the body of himself or others though not ending in death The true reason of all which Recte dicitur inquit Socrates 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Plato in Phaedone is First because it is against a Law of Nature imprinted deeply by God himself in the minds of men yea all living creatures to study and endeavour their own preservation which Law is hereby directly broken Secondly No man is absolute Master of himself but first as Plato hath noted is as it were the Goods of God and then a Servant to his Country and therefore without Gods consent or his Countries by the Soveraign power discharges him of his duty and service towards it he is an Offender against both And hereunto pertains the high Crime of causing Abortion and Miscarriages of Women to hide their former sin And as the Fact it self is forbidden so all ordinary Causes tending thereunto as all evil and provoking language All evil affections as hatred anger malice and such like All assistance by conspiring counselling or acting outwardly are certainly forbidden Lastly as the thing it self and all evil acts and offices are forbidden so because the Righteousness of Christians must exceed that of Scribes and Pharisees as our Saviour Christ saith in St. Matthew therefore Christians Matth. 5. are obliged hereby to all reasonable and charitable acts of love friendship piety as well as justice conducing to the support and preservation and comfort of their brethren especially in Christ as St. Paul advises to the Galatians As we have therefore opportunity let us do good unto all men especially Gal. 6. 10. unto them who are of the houshold of Faith And herein he followed the Precept of Christ I say unto you Love your enemies bless them that curse Matth. 5. 44 you do good to them that hate you and pray for them which despitefully use you and persecute you That ye may be the Children of your Father which is in 45. heaven for he maketh c. And therefore by this Commandment are requiâ—ed of us all acts of Mercy as Visiting the sick and imprisoned Feeding the hungry Clothing the naked Ministring assistance by counsel and action to the oppressed Comfort to the dejected and such like Knowing and considering that they who as Goats stand at the Left hand of Christ at the last Day of Judgment shall not be condemned only for injuries and injustices done to others but because Christ in his members was an hungred and ye gave him no meat was thirsty and ye gave him no drink Matth. 25. 42 43. Was a stranger and ye took him not in naked and ye clothed him not sick and in prison and ye visited him not The Seventh Commandment interdicteth all uncleanness in these §. VII words Thou shalt not commit Adultery Which Philo Judaeus following herein the Septuagint and having no skill in the Hebrew or Original Tongue as hath been observed by learned men and is easily to be discerned by any Reader placeth before the Commandment Thou shalt not kill though in the Fifth Chapter of Deuteronomy where the Decalogue is repeated the order of the Original is observed which implyeth some Errour happening in Exodus For neither is the reason of Philo or Grotius inclining to that opinion valid viz. because Adultery is the greatest sin a man can commit against his neighbour For undoubtedly Murder is more heinous There is some variety in the New Testament in the reciting of this Command For Mark 10. 9. and Luke the 18. 20. the order of the Septuagint in Exodus is kept Matthew 19. 18. the order of Deuteronomy is followed which teaches that the diversity was ancient and that not stood scrupulously on But the putting of Thou shalt not steal before Thou shalt not commit adultery in Exodus 20. not approved by Philo or his Followers should make that place of Exodus more suspected of alteration than that of Deuteronomie But the matter not being great and that only concerning the Greek Translation the End and Contents of this Law are more seriously to be attended which may be conveniently reduced to these following heads First unclean thoughts and inward motions and dispositions and most of all Resolutions to offend in act being not hindered For this Christ our most pure President and holy Doctour condemns for adultery in the Heart Matth. 5. I say unto you that whosoever looketh on a woman to lust Matth. 5. 28. after her hath committed adultery with her in his
Christians to such sort of Meats as are now allowed For it was rather her act of Grace and Lenity to remit the one half of that ancient Severity commonly submitted unto in the earlier days of Christian Religion And who but ignorant and ill natur'd and nurtur'd children could turn her Lenity into Tyranny and make her curtesie a matter of calumny Nay which hath more disingenuity and absurdity while they fret and complain grievously that the Yoke as it is lyes too heavy upon them and presses them too hard to invert their spite and malice against it by arguing from the lightness and contemptibleness of such Fastings as consists only in abstinence from flesh saying It is no Fast which abstains not absolutely from all Meat This were indeed somewhat to the purpose if so be that the Church did at the same time command any man to eat fish or so much as hearbs or bread when she forbids flesh to be eaten Or that they who were able and did wholly abstain from Meats at such seasons did not more fulfill the intention of the Church then they who took the liberty left them of eating in some manner What temper and spirit do these men discover to themselves to be of who are alwayes in readiness to charge their Superiours either with folly or tyranny or impiety upon the same occasion and never been able to prove any one them Scotus and Biel Scotus lib. 4. Distinct 8. Biel Lect. 8. in Canon Missae after him distinguish of a Fast of Nature which is a total abstinence from all eating and drinking and of a Fast of the Church when a man eats but once a day and that according to the precept and mind of the Church Now if the Church hath invented a favourable distinction and sense to gratifie murmurers at the rigour of her Laws do they not requite her ingenuously who turn that also to her reproach Nay if another distinction be found which makes a Fast a Toto a Tanto and a Tali from the Whole from the Quantity and from the Quality of the Meats eaten hereby willing to condescend and bring down her Rules so low that all men may have somewhat to exercise themselves in according to their ability in the graces of Abstinence and Obedience who but such whose Religion impels them to be the worse for good usage and resolve to hear of nothing but their own inventions would clamour against their Governours for such moderation But when they are disappointed in their arguments and expectations to reduce all men and things to their own model their last Effort is to humble this kind of Fasting into a civil Constitution only and for a civil End according as an Act of Parliament misconstrued as hath more plainly and fully been declared by others hath misled them conceiving that the Fastings of our Church tend only to the encrease of Navigation or are intended for the good of beasts not of men But what hinders that the Church may have one end in her decrees and the Common-wealth another and that which the Church designed for the exercise of Christian vertues may be embraced by Secular Politicians to promote Secular benefits to the Publick Nothing is so manifest to him that knows any thing in Church History as that such a reason was never dreamt of by the Propounders of such Fastings in our Church nor in any part of the Christian world before that Act. And if the words of that Act were intended for an ease to the tender Consciences as those of dissenters are mis-called and to draw them by little and little upon consideration of Civil ends which they less hated than the Ecclesiastical to some good order and submission this is not to be drawn to a perpetual Rule nor made the only universal end of such a Constitution For the Church still keeps to the most ancient and general sense received amongst Christians A third Precept of the Church is The Observation of the Ecclesiastical Canon 6. Preface of Ceremonies c. Customs and Ceremonies of the Church and that without frowardness and contradiction as appears from her Canons and the Preface before the Common-Prayer Of which obligation that which we have before spoken of the Power of the Church and even now of Fasting may here be applyed and suffice A fourth Precept is Constantly to repair to the Publick Service of the Preface to the Book of Common-Prayer Church for Mattens and Evening Song with other holy Offices at times appointed unless there be a just and unfeigned cause to the contrary And this we have before also treated of extending it to the worship of God in his House especially when there is an assembly of Christian people together to that purpose though there be no Sermon and also to the humbling a mans self and putting up his private Devotions there alone when occasion and opportunity shall be offered so to do according to the most ancient and godly custom of good Christians ever since there were Temples built for Gods Service For the disuse of which excellent acts not the least reason hath been or can be alledged by those that would be thought to be the only Rule of Reformation which we have not sufficiently refuted before Lastly To receive the blessed Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ Second Exhortation to be read before the Communion with frequent Devotion but at least Thrice a year whereof Easter is to be one And in order hereunto as occasion shall be to open our souls by due Confession and disburden and quiet our troubled Consciences by some learned and discreet Minister of God from whom Ghostly counsel and comfort may be received with the benefit of Absolution Of the use of which we have also before spoken where we shewed that such Confession was not of such absolute Divine Right either of Precept or Means that Salvation could not be otherwise obtain'd but as an Ecclesiastical Expedient very effectual as well for the bringing Impenitent sinners to repentance as for the due restoring of them that are Penitent to a comfortable assurance of Gods favour towards them and direction and encouragement in holy living which the foul abuses in those Churches where it is excessively magnified should by no means abolish For besides them above noted doubtless it is no mean abuse to make that which undoubtedly should be an act of Judgment in Gods Minister discerning between the hopeful state of some and desperate of others and accordingly suspending or applying the Free Grace of the Gospel and the Power left by Christ to his Church an act of custom formality and course or perhaps common civility which kind of rashness and profuseness the ancient Churches were altogether ignorant of When grievous offenders against God and the Church had fallen justly under the censures of the Church it was permitted to absolve them at the point of death so far as concerned their restitution to the Communion of
the Church before they departed this life but not so far as to remit the offences against God or that without actual demonstrations of their hearty sorrow for their sins and steadfast purposes and professions of future amendment they should have pronounced over them the Absolution of all their sins and that perhaps when they could no more desire than deserve such a Sentence CHAP. XIX A Preparation to the Explication of the Decalogue by treating of Laws in General What is a Law Several kinds of Laws Of the obligation of Laws from Justice not Force only Three Conditions required to obliging Of the Ten Commandments in special Their Authour Nature and Use BUT because a general Opinion as well amongst Christians as Exod. 34. 28. Deut. 4. 13. according to the Hebr. and Septuag And Josephus Antiquit l. 4. c. 8 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 appellat Jews hath prevailed that those Ten Commandments or as they are otherwise called Ten Words which God spake to the Children of Israel by Moses on Mount Sinai are an absolute Compendium and Rule of Obedience to God as well in our immediate Service towards him as our mediate in our duty towards our Neighbour a brief inquiry into the Decalogue will neither be unseasonable nor impertinent and the better to accomplish this first to speak of Laws in General before we treat of these more signal and eminent Laws of God A Law then to begin with the Definition seems to be nothing else but The rational and just will of a Soveraign Power declared and manifested to its Subjects for the better informing directing and regulating them according to truth and justice This Description though I find not entirely and absolutely in others yet is found in its several parts of which it consisteth in divers Authours and comprehends not only Humane but Divine Laws equally and not only written but unwritten also For it were a very fond and weak imagination in a man to conceive that the Writing Printing or Graving in Stone as the Ten Commandments are said to be can contribute any thing toward the force and due vigour of a Law any further than that thereby it becomes better known to all therein concerned Promulgation indeed is essential to all Laws but the Promulgation or Publication by the foresaid means is not so but any other notice given thereof may suffice But while a thing lyes hid in the mind and breast only of the proper Legislatours or Governours it cannot in reason obtain the nature or force of a Law but then only it doth when it either is known or might and ought to be known according to the manner of publication And this declared will must not be the act of any inferiour or subordinate person who of himself hath no right to will or require the observation of his Dictates or Orders but of the Supream originally at least though not immediately The universal and absolute Soveraign of all things is God alone and his Power alone and right of Dominion of which we have spoken in the beginning abundantly suffices to justifie all demands of service and obedience from his Creatures and that according to his absolute will without any exception or limitation it being intrinsecally good whatever shall appear to be the Will of God even because it is the Will of God who is nothing but Goodness in the most absolute sense And hence it is that notwithstanding Laws are divided into Divine Humane and Ecclesiastical yet in truth and upon due search it will be found that they all are Divine really though not formally and mediately though not immediately as Tully excellently and little less than divinely hath defined Lex est nihil aliud nise recta à numine deorum tracta ratio imperans honesta prchibens contraria Cicero Philipp 11. Clem. Alex Strom. l. 1. p. 350. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hierocles in Carm. Pyth. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Demosthen in Anst The Law of Man which sometimes is called the Law Positive is derived by reason as a thing which is necessarily and probably following of the Law of Reason and of the Law of God And therefore in every Law Positive well made is somewhat of the Law of Reason and of the Law of God and to discern the Law of God and the Law of Reason from the Law Positive is very hard Dâ—ctâ—ur and Student cap 4. saying A Law is nothing else but right Reason drawn from the Gods themselves commanding honest things and forbidding the contrary And to the same effect writeth Clemens Alexandrinus and Hierocles saying Law is that Operative mind and Divine will which perpetually advances and preserves all things So that whatever Law be it Civil or Ecclesiastical which can not draw in some remote manner at least its descent from Heaven and God Almighty is not just or reasonable and by consequence not properly a Law but the private Lust of Tyrants But then in deducing Laws of Humane birth from God there must not be such a rigorous course taken as that whatever is not contained expresly in his revealed Word or obvious to the eye of Nature should be condemned as spurious and illegitimate and having no right to oblige men to observance and submission thereunto For some things are more clearly and some more obscurely some things more nearly and some more remotely deducible from their first fountain some Laws natural and the like may be said of Divinely revealed and Ecclesiastical are sufficiently apparent to all or most intelligent men as just and reasonable others as Thomas hath observed are evident so to be to the more understanding and searching Wits this being to be received as a plain and undoubted Rule in doubtful Cases that the professed Authours and Interpreters of Laws are generally better seen into the Natural Divine and Moral reason and obligation of a Law and the common benefit and expediencie thereof than inferiour and ignorant persons who are prone to judge of the reasonableness and usefulness of it as it best agrees with their own private judgments none of the certainest or Interests none of the justest many times not considering which is most necessary the common good claiming prerogative above particular So that there can be no more unnatural Rule than that which would have every man a Law and Rule and Reason to himself or definitively and finally to judge for and of himself in all things what is just and reasonable This is altogether lawâ—ess and repugnant to the revealed Will of God which hath ordained several orders and ranks of men whereof some are to be in Power and Authority others in subjection and obedience And from hence it proceedeth that Magistrates who are the only Law-givers and true Interpreters of Laws given have had somewhat more of the Image of God ascribed to them than other common men because as it is Gods primary power and prerogative to give Laws to all the world as his Subjects so is it the