Therefore pass we both from the one and the other to that Heavenly thing to which it relates the manner of its relation to it and the foundation of that relation Now as the first of these hath been before defin'd to be an inward and Spiritual Grace as that again declar'd to be such a Grace or favour of God as conduceth in an especial manner to the welfare of our inward Man or Spirit so I must now add for the farther Explication of it that it is moreover such a Grace as conduceth immediately to the welfare of it Whether as purifying the soul from the filth of sin and introducing the contrary affections or as delivering it from that guilt which the filth of sin had brought upon it A notion which stands confirm'd to us not only by the Doctrine of our own Catechism but by the account the Scripture gives us both of Baptism and the Eucharist and the confesons of the Romanists themselves Witness for the first its declaring the inward and Spiritual Grace of Baptism to be a death unto sin and a new birth unto Righteousness as the inward grace of the Eucharist to be the Body and Blood of Christ and by which as it afterward follows our Souls are strengthened and refreshed as our bodies are by the outward elements thereof Witness for the second its representing Baptism as a thing which sanctifies (b) Eph. 5.26 and saves (c) 1 Pet. 3.21 and both that (d) Act. 2.38 and the Eucharist (e) Matt. 26.28 as things which tend to the remission of Sins Witness for the third their great Schoolman Aquinas (f) Sum. 3. Part. quaest 60. Art 2. representing a Sacrament as a sign of such a Sacred thing as procures the sanctification of us Which is the rather to be noted because of the use it will hereafter be of toward the determining the Number of those things which are to be accounted of as Sacraments of our Religion Concerning the relation a Sacrament bears to the object of it and particularly to that Grace to which it especially referrs I have nothing to add and shall not therefore bring it again under consideration I shall only observe from what hath been before said concerning it that it is an instrument of Grace as well as a pledge of it that it is a moral instrument thereof and not a physical one that it is such a moral instrument thereof as is rather apt to convey or produce it than that which actually and infallibly doth The actual conveying of that Grace depending upon the due disposition of the party receiving it and who as St. Paul speaks if he be not rightly qualified for it will rather reap Damnation by it than either the Divine Graces or the rewards of them Which things I have this second time made mention of not because they were not before sufficiently clear'd but because they lay dispersedly in my former account of this relation and so would have been less useful toward the forming a distinct conception of it That which will especially require our second thoughts is the foundation of that and other the relations of a Sacrament The which as I have affirm'd in the general to be the Institution of Christ so the farther consideration of that Institution will both lead us to a more distinct knowledge of the nature of a Sacrament and inform us concerning the necessity and efficacy thereof Now as there are two things which that Institution doth manifestly import that is to say a Command and a Promise so that Command again respects the elements of a Sacrament either as being to put on that relation or as actually invested with it In the former of these regards it commands the setting them apart for that purpose but more especially because that is the principal design of a Sacrament for their becoming a means of conveying the Divine Graces to us Which as was before observ'd it either prescribes particular rules for or remits men for them to the general precepts of Christianity so far as they are applicable thereto And I shall only add because those rules were before declar'd that to make the elements put on the relation of a Sacrament there is a necessity of applying that part of the Institution to them by the execution of those Commands which it enjoyns Because the setting them apart for that purpose is by the Institution it self put into the hands of men But of what men and how qualified I have not as yet declar'd and shall therefore now set my self to enquire And here in the first place it is easie to see by what is deliver'd in the general concerning the power of remitting sins or in particular concerning the power of Baptism that the Separation or Consecration of the elements is the proper work of the Ministers of the Gospel and ought accordingly to be left to them to perform Because as both the one and the other were by Christ committed to his Apostles so none can therefore pretend to the power of either but those who deriv'd it from them which none but the Ministers of the Gospel have It is no less easie to see secondly that as the Separation or Consecration of the elements is the proper work of the Ministers of the Gospel even by the Institution of Christ so it cannot therefore ordinarily at least be attempted without sin by others because a deviation from his Institution And thus far all who acknowledge a Ministerial Function are at an accord in this particular and the farther prosecution thereof no way necessary to be intended I say therefore thirdly that as the Separation or Consecration of the elements cannot ordinarily at least be attempted without sin by other than the Ministers of the Gospel so there is reason enough to believe even from thence that those elements cannot ordinarily have the relation of a Sacrament by any others Consecration than theirs For beside that the Promise of Christ is not to be suppos'd to extend any farther than those Commands to which it is annexed are observ'd Neither can we think he will vouchsafe his benediction to that Action which without any necessity at all varies from his own Institution This being to encourage men to go against his own Institution which no wise Institutor can be suppos'd to give way to All therefore that can be suppos'd to admit of a dispute in this affair is whether in extraordinary Cases and where a lawful Minister cannot be had other Persons may take upon them to Consecrate and Administer it And whether if they do so what they do is so far valid as to make that which they pretend to Consecrate and Administer to have the relation of a Sacrament But as it would be consider'd whether it were not equally advisable for such Persons to let alone altogether the Consecration and Administration thereof Because Christ may as well supply to men the want of the Sacraments themselves as the defects of those who
power of his to the indisposition of the matter so it makes Original Sin to be natural and unavoidable and consequently also those actual sins that slow from it By which means it not only renders all our endeavours against them useless but casts a blemish upon those divine Laws which pretend to forbid them and upon those divine judgments which pretend to punish them For neither can God without great unreasonableness forbid what is not to be avoided nor punish it without the imputation of injustice But it may be though Original Sin had not its beginning either from some evil spirit or the pravity of the matter which are the two first opinions which pretend to give an account of it yet it might as is suggested in the third arise from such evil habits as Men's souls contracted before their descent into this World and into those bodies wherewith they are invested That indeed might yet more reasonably be believ'd that I say not also abstracting from the Authority of the Scripture much more reasonably than the account that is given of it from Adam if there were but equal reason to believe that Men's Souls had any separate existence antecedently to their conception in the Womb. But as that is a thing for which there is not any solid ground either in reason or Scripture and the supposition of it therefore the meer issue of fancy and conjecture So it is sufficiently confuted by the ignorance Men's Souls are under of any such previous estate For why if Men's Souls had any such previous existence should they not be conscious of it and of the things that were performed by them in it Nay why should not God take care to fix such a remembrance in them that so what was wanting in their former estate might be supply'd by them in their following one For as it is not easie to suppose that the corruptible body should so far stupefie the Soul as to hinder it from emerging in time out of sleep in which it may seem to have been cast and accordingly from calling to mind what had been before transacted within it Because though the Body may be some hindrance to the faculties of the Soul yet it doth not hinder them from coming in time to exert their proper operations So it is much less easie to suppose that God should not however bring to it's memory its past State and Actions by which it offended against him Partly to make it sensible of its former guilt and God's choosing to punish it by thrusting it into a Body and partly to make it so much the more careful to break off from those sins by which it had before offended him These as they are the only imaginable ends why God should thrust an offending Soul into such a Body so being perfectly lost to that Soul in which there is no consciousness of it's former state and of those enormities which were contracted in it I conclude therefore that whatever may be said as to this particular concerning Original Sin yet it did not take its rise from the evil acts or habits of the Soul in any praexistent estate and nothing therefore left to us to resolve it into but the depravedness of those from whom we all descended and from whom it is transmitted to particular Souls and Persons I deny not indeed that even this Account is not without its difficulties and such as it will be hard if not impossible perfectly to assoile I deny not farther that those difficulties are much enhanc'd by the ignorance we are under concerning the Original of humane Souls and which whilst we continue under it will not be easie for us to shew how that depravedness of Nature should pass from them to us But as those difficulties are no ways comparable to the difficulties of two of the former even those which resolve Original Sin into the malignity of some evil spirit or the pravity of matter So they can much less be thought to be of force against the testimony of the Scripture if that as I shall afterwards shew favour its arising from the pravity of our first Parents Partly because the thing in question is a matter of fact and therefore to be determin'd rather by testimony than the force of reason and partly because the testimony of Scripture is the most Authentick one as being no other than the testimony of God Now that there wants not sufficient evidence from thence that that Original Sin whereof we speak ariseth from the pravity of those from whom we first descended will appear if these three things can be made out First that the sin of all mankind enter'd in by Adam Secondly that it enter'd in by Adam not meerly as the first that committed it or tempted other Men by his ill example to do the like but as more or less the cause of all their sins by his own Thirdly that he became the cause of all their sins through his by depraving thereby his own Nature and then communicating that depravation to those that descended from him That the Sin of all Mankind enter'd in by Adam will need no other proof than that known Text of S. Paul (p) Rom. 5.12 even that by one Man sin enter'd into the World and death by sin and so death passed through unto all Men for that all have sinned For as we cannot well interpret the word sin of any other than the sin of all Men because there is nothing in the Text to limit it to any particular Man's so much less when S. Paul doth afterwards affirm that that death which enter'd in by it passed thorough unto all Men for that or because all had sinned by the means of him That as it makes death to pass upon all Men with respect to their several sins and consequently their several sins to be the immediate door by which it enters so making those several sins therefore to be included in that sin which he before affirmed to be the cause of that death and together with it to have enter'd in by Adam But because among those at least by whom the Scripture is acknowledg'd the question is not so much whether all sin enter'd by Adam but after what manner it enter'd by him And because till that be known we cannot speak with any certainty concerning the derivation of the corruptness of our Natures from that of our first Parents or Parent Therefore pass we on to shew according to the method before laid down that as the sin of all Mankind enter'd in by Adam so it enter'd in by him not as some have vainly deem'd meerly as one who first committed it or tempted others by his example to do the like but as one also yea especially who by the malignant influence of his sin was more or less the cause of all those sins that followed it That the sin of all Mankind enter'd not in by Adam either meerly or principally as one who first committed it will need no other
therefore there can be any doubt concerning the Law we speak of it must be as to its having been given to Adam in his publick capacity and as he may be suppos'd to have been the representative of all Mankind Which I shall endeavour to evince first by shewing what I mean by his publick capacity secondly by shewing that Adam was set in such a capacity and thirdly that the Law we speak of was given to him as considered in it By the publick capacity of Adam I mean such a one whereby as he was design'd to be the Father of all Mankind so God made him a kind of Trustee for it In order thereunto both giving him what he did for their benefit as well as his own and obliging him for their sakes as well as his own to see to the preservation of it and act agreeably to it Which if he did his Posterity as well as himself should have the benefit thereof and God's favour together with it but if not forfeit together with him what God had so bestow'd upon him and incurr the penalty of his displeasure Now that Adam was set in such a capacity which is the second thing to be demonstrated will appear from the Scriptures making him the cause of all Men's death by his offence and disobedience For the effects of another disobedience being not otherwise chargeable upon any Man than as that other may be suppos'd to be appointed to act for him If the effects of Adam's disobedience were to fall upon all his Posterity he also must be supposed to have been appointed to act for them and consequently to have been set in that publick capacity whereof I speak Which will leave nothing more for us to shew upon this Head than that that Law which requires a pious and innocent temper was given to Adam in that capacity But as we can as little doubt of that if his contracting a contrary temper was as fatal to his Posterity as to himself So that it was will need no other proof than his producing the like temper in them and that temper 's proving as deadly to them The former whereof is evident from what I before said to shew that Original Sin had its beginning from Adam the latter from S. Paul's (p) Rom. 7.24 calling it a Body of Death or a Body that brings it The Genitive Case (q) Grot. in loc among the Hebrews and Hellenists being usually set for such Adjectives as betoken a causality in them Even as the Savour of Death is us'd for a deadly one or that which bringeth death and the Tree of Life for a life-giving one or that which was apt to produce or continue it I deny not indeed that I may now pass to those Exceptions that are commonly made against it that it may seem hard to conceive how Adam should be set in such a capacity as to involve all mankind in happiness or misery according as he either continued in or fell from that integrity wherein God created him I deny not therefore but that it is equally hard to conceive how God should give him such a Law the observation or transgression whereof on his part should redound to the account of his Posterity But as every thing that is hard to be conceiv'd is not therefore to be deny'd if it be otherwise strengthen'd with sufficient proofs So it would be consider'd also whether it be not much more hard to conceive how God should otherwise involve Infants and Children in those calamities into which they often fall especially in National Judgments It being certainly more agreeable to the divine Justice to conceive those to have some way or other offended and consequently thereto to have fallen under the displeasure of it than to conceive them to suffer it without any offence at all For why then should we not think especially when the Scripture hath led the way that God oblig'd them in Adam to a pious and innocent temper and which they losing in him they became obnoxious with him to the same sad effects of his displeasure And though it be true that there is this great imparity between the cases that the effect of God's displeasure upon occasion of Original Sin is made to reach to eternal misery as well as to a temporal one whereas the case we before instanc'd in concerns only a temporal punishment Yet as they do thus far agree that a punishment is inflicted where there is no actual sin to deserve it which is sufficiently irreconcileable with the understanding we otherwise have of the divine Justice So that great imparity may be much abated by considering that God hath provided a Plaster as large as the Sore even by giving his Son to dye for all Mankind and appointed the Sacrament of Baptism to convey the benefit of it For as the consequents of Original Sin will be thereby taken off from so many Infants at least as are admitted to that Sacrament so that mercy of his to those and the assurance we have from the Scripture of his giving his Son to dye for all may perswade us to believe that though he hath not reveal'd the particular way to us yet he hath some other way to convey the benefit of that death to those who are not admitted to the other But it will be said it may be which is a no less prejudice against the being of Original Sin that all sin to make it truly such must have the consent of the will of those in whom it is as well as be the transgression of a Law A thing by no means to be affirm'd concerning that which we call Original Sin because not only contracted before we had a being and therefore also before we had so much as the faculty of willing but moreover conveyed to us when we had neither reason to apprehend it nor any power in our wills either to admit or reject it And indeed how altogether to take off the force of that Objection is beyond my capacity to apprehend or satisfie the understandings of other Men Because as I cannot see how any thing can be a sin which hath not also the consent of the will of those in whom it is so I am as little able to conceive how Original Sin should have the consent of ours either when it was first contracted or when it was transmitted to us But as I am far less able to conceive how Infants and Children should come to be so severely dealt with without any offence at all or therefore without having some way or other consented to one So I think first that that difficulty may well be laid in the ballance against the other yea alledged as a bar to the supposed force of it For why should my inability to apprehend how Infants and Children could consent to Original Sin prevail with me to deny the being of it when a far greater inability to apprehend how the same persons should come to be so severely dealt withal
without it doth not prevail with me to deny that severe usage of them Neither will it avail to say which is otherwise considerable enough that we have for the belief of this last the testimony of our Senses which is not to be alledged as to the other For the question is not now whether the severe usage of Infants and Children may not more reasonably be believ'd than their Original Sin upon the account of the greater evidence there may be of it But whether we can any more deny the Original Sin of Infants and Children upon the account of our inability to apprehend how they should consent unto it than we can deny the severe usage of the same persons upon the account of our inability to apprehend how they should come to be so dealt with without the other Which that we cannot is evident from hence that we are equally at a loss in our apprehensions about the one and the other that I say not also more at a loss about the latter than about the former And indeed as we find it necessary to believe many things notwithstanding our inability to apprehend how they should come to pass and ought not therefore to deny the being of any one thing upon the sole account of that inability So our apprehensions are so short as to the modes of those things of the being whereof we are most assured that it will hardly be deemed reasonable to insist upon the suggestions of them against the affirmations of the Scripture Partly because of the Authority of him from whom it proceeded and partly because we cannot so easily fail in our apprehension concerning the due sense of the affirmations of it as in the deductions of our own reason concerning the things affirmed Nothing more being required to the understanding of the one than a due consideration of the signification of the words wherein they are expressed whereas to the right ordering of the other there is requir'd a due understanding of the Nature of those things about which we reason which is both a matter of far greater difficulty and in many cases impossible to be attain'd Whatever difficulty therefore there may be in apprehending how Original Sin could have the consent of those in whom it is supposed to be and consequently how it should be truly and properly a sin Yet ought not that to be a bar against our belief of it if the Scripture hath represented it as such and which whether it hath or no I shall leave to be judg'd by what I have before observ'd from it From such Objections as are level'd more immediately against the being of Original Sin pass we to those which impugne the derivation of it from Adam and from whom we have affirmed it to proceed Which Objections again do either tend to shew that it had its Original from something else or that it cannot be suppos'd to have its Original from Adam An opinion hath prevail'd of late years that that which we call Original Sin took its rise from the sins of particular Souls in some praexistent estate and from those evil habits which they contracted by them And certainly the opinion were reasonable enough to be embrac'd if the praeexistence of Souls were but as well prov'd as it is speciously contriv'd For that suppos'd it would be no hard matter to give an account of the rise of that Corruption which is in us nor yet of God's afflicting those on whom no other blame appears That corruption as it is no other than what particular Souls have themselves contracted so making them as obnoxious to the vengeance of God as any after sins can be supposed to do But do they who advance this hypothesis think the plausibleness thereof a sufficient ground to build it on Or are problems in Divinity no other way to be determin'd than those of Astronomy or other such conjectural Arts are I had thought that for the resolution of these we ought rather to have had recourse to that word of God which was design'd to give us an understanding of them to have examin'd the several assertions of it and acquiesced in them how difficult soever to be apprehended I had thought that we ought to have done so much more where the Scripture professeth to deliver its opinion and doth not only not wave the thing in question but speaks to it Which that it doth in the present case will need no other proof than the account it gives of the Original of Mankind and then of the Original of Evil. For as it professeth to speak of Adam not only as created by God but as appointed by him (r) Gen. 1.28 to give being by the way of natural Generation to all that after him should replenish the Earth which how he should be thought to do if he were only to be a means of furnishing them with a Body who had the better part of their being before is past my understanding to imagine so it professeth to speak of the same Adam as one by whom sin and death (Å¿) Rom. 5.12 1 Cor. 15.21 22. enter'd into the World as well as the persons of those on whom it seizeth And can there then be any place for a precarious hypothesis about the Original of Mankind or the evils of it Can there be place for advancing that hypothesis not only beside but against the determinations of the Scripture Do not all such hypotheses proceed upon the uncertainty of the matter about which they are conversant Do they not come in as a relief to the understandings of Men where they cannot be satisfied any other way But how then can there be place for such a one where the Scripture hath determin'd How can there be any place even for the most specious and plausible For as that cannot be suppos'd to be uncertain which the Scripture hath determin'd So no plausibility whatsoever can come in competition with the determinations of God such as those of the Scripture are But such it seems is the restlesness of some Men's minds that if they cannot satisfie their scruples from what the Scripture hath advanced they will be setting up other Hypotheses to do it by Wherein yet they are for the most part so unlucky as to advance such things themselves as have nothing at all of probability in them For who can think it any way probable that if mens Souls had an existence antecedent to their conception in the Womb they should not in the least be conscious of it nor of any of those things which were transacted by them in it Is it as one hath observ'd who seems to have been the first broacher of it in this latter Age is it I say for want of opportunity of being reminded of their former transactions as it happens to many who rise confident that they slept without dreaming and yet before they go to bed again recover a whole series of representations by something that occurr'd to them in the day But who can
of what he hath so purchas'd The belief of these and the like Articles of our Faith being as manifestly presuppos'd to the belief of those Promises which in this place we are required to intend III. That which will it may be more concern us to enquire is what our Catechism means by a stedfast belief of them For my more orderly resolution whereof I will enquire first what it means by belief and then by a stedfast one Now by belief may be meant either a simple assent of the mind and in which fense there is no doubt it is oftentimes taken in Christian Writers Or there may be meant also a belief with affiance and such as beside the assent of the mind or understanding to them doth also connote a trust in them or in God because of them By vertue of which as I have elsewhere discours'd (k) Expl. of the Decal Com. 1. Part 3. concerning the grace of trust the heart or will is prompted to desire as well as assent to the matter of the divine promises and acquiesce in those for the obtaining of it And indeed if we may judge any thing by our Homilies to which the Articles (l) Art 11. of our Church do also particularly referr us in the point of justifying Faith this latter belief must be here intended Because a belief which hath for its end the remission of sins in Baptism and consequently a justifying one For the right and true Christian Faith saith one of our (m) Homily of Salvation Part 3. Homilies is not only to believe that the Holy Scripture and all the forecited Articles of our Faith are true but also to have a sure trust and confidence in God's merciful promises to be saved from everlasting damnation by Christ And it is not only saith another (n) Hom. of Faith the common belief of the Articles of our Faith but it is also a sure trust and confidence of the mercy of God through our Lord Jesus Christ and a stedfast hope of all good things to be receiv'd at God's hands In fine saith the same (o) Ibid. Homily the very sure lively Christian faith is not only to believe all things of God which are contained in holy Scripture but also to have an earnest trust and confidence in God c. Which suppos'd as we may because we can have no more Authentick interpretation of it to be the sense of the belief here intended it will not be difficult to shew what our Catechism means by a stedfast one For considering the belief of these Promises as an Assent of the mind to them so a stedfast belief will imply that which is free from all doubts and which the mind of man gives to those Promises without any the least fear of there being any Collusion in them Which the mind of man may well give considering whose those Promises are and that they have both God and Christ for the Authors of them On the other side if we consider the belief intended as including in it also an affiance or trust and by vertue of which the heart or will is prompted to desire as well as believe the matter of those Promises and acquiesce in those Promises for the attaining of it So this stedfast belief will also imply such a one as is firmly rooted in the heart or will and can no more be rooted out of it by the force of temptations than the other by doubts or scruples And indeed as I do not see how any other belief than that can answer such glorious promises as are made to us in the Sacrament of Baptism so I see as little reason to doubt IV. What evidence there is of that being the Faith or belief which is pre-requir'd by Christianity to the receiving of it For though S. Luke may seem to intimate by the account he gives of the Baptism of the Samaritans (p) Acts 8.12 that they were baptiz'd upon a simple belief of what Philip preach'd concerning the things of the Kingdom of God Yet he doth much more clearly intimate afterward that Christianity requir'd another sort of belief and such as was accompani'd with an adherence of the will unto them He making it the condition of the Eunuch's Baptism afterward that he should believe with all his heart (q) Acts 8.37 Which is an expression that in the language of the Scripture referrs rather to the will and affections than to the understanding but however cannot well be thought not to include them there where the believing with all the heart is requir'd And indeed as I do not see considering the Doctrine of our First Reformers why this notion of Faith should be so exploded as it seems to me lately to have been As I do much less see why men should so boyle at that Justification which was wont to be attributed in an especial manner to it So if I live to finish the work I am now upon I will in a Comment upon the Epistle to the Philippians which I have almost gather'd sufficient materials for endeavour to clear both the one and the other that men may neither take occasion from thence to discard good works as unnecessary nor yet stay themselves upon any other than the promises of Christ and on which the holiest men upon earth when they have been approaching near God's tribunal have found themselves oblig'd to cast themselves In the mean time a little to repress the youthful heats of those who can hardly forbear smiling at such antiquated notions I will set before them the advice which was order'd to be given to sick persons when good works to be sure were not without their just repute It is among the Interrogatories which are said (r) Field of the Church Append. to the 3d. Book p. 303. to have been prescrib'd by Anselme Archbishop of Canterbury and particularly after that which prompts the Priest to ask Dost thou believe that thou canst not be sav'd but by the death of Christ and the sick persons Answer that he did so Go too therefore as the Priest was taught to proceed and whilst thy soul remaineth in thee place thy confidence in this death alone and in no other thing commit thy self wholly to it cover thy self wholly with it immerse fix and wrap thy self wholly in it And if the Lord God will judge thee say I put the death of our Lord Jesus Christ between me and thy judgment otherwise I contend not with thee And if he say that thou art a sinner say Lord I put the death of our Lord Jesus Christ between me and my sins If he say to thee thou hast deserv'd damnation say Lord I put the death of our Lord Jesus Christ between me and my evil deserts and I offer the same death for that merit which I ought to have had and have not If he continue as yet to say that he is angry with thee say Lord I oppose the death of our Lord Jesus Christ between me