errour in faith contrary to holy Scripture and the generall approv'd Doctrine of the Church but to hold That Originall sin is not properly and formally but onely metonimically a sin is expresly contrary to holy Scripture and the generall approv'd Doctrine of the Church Ergo c. That it is contrary to the generall approved Doctrine of the Church is already proved out of the Doctrine of the primitive Fathers maintained by Beza de justifie lib. 1. cap. 13. where he saith Omnes homines plane reos nasci contracta jam inde à primo parâ—nte culpa and Calvin hath these expresse words Peccato Adae non per solam imputationem damnamur â—â—sed ideo quia culpae sumus rei quatenus natura nostra in illo vitiata iniquitatis reatu constringitur That it is contrary to Scripture any man that is not purblinde may see in many places especially in S. Paul's Epistle to the Romans c. 5. v. 18 19. Verse 18. As by the offence of one sin came on â—all men to condemnation so by the justifying of one the benefit abounded towards all men to the justification of life And v. 19. For as by one mans disobedience many were made sinners so by the obedience of one shall many also be made righteous The conclusion of Saint Paul's most profound Doctrine concerning his comparison betwixt Christ and Adam begun from the twelfth Verse is fully contained in these two Verses 18 and 19. and his Divine Apostolicall Antithesis perfectly ended and compleated which Apostolicall Antithesis our D. Taylor doth abominably endeavour to cross corrupt and quite overthrow in holding that Original sin conveyed to Adam's Posterity is only figuratively a fin for S. Paul saith expresly that by one mans disobedience many were made sinners which word made sinners cannot be understood figuratively by any solid unbias'd iudgement but rather tisnate And the second Milivetan Councel in the fift age c. 2. CHAP. VII The Objections against the former Doctrine waved FIrst objection S. Chrysostome in some place averreth that none by the sin of our proto parents can be made a sinner excluded from Heaven nor liable to eternal damnation I answer that the Saint did not here exclude absolutly the sin conveyed to mankinde through the transgression of Adam but only did advertise that Adam's posterity were not made sinners upon that account onely that our first parents have committed actual sins but that their posterity also in Adam and along with him have sinned whereas all by the participation of humane nature were one man with Adam and as nature to them is conveyed so is the vice and corruption in nature by them participated for if they had not really sinned in Adam in whom as in the original and seminal root they were vertually involved they could not be made sinners by Adam's actual sin Nullus enim ut recte aiâ— Chysosto ex alieno peccato a se non participato peccator existit Deus in regenerationis lavacro mentem gratia tang it radicale peccatum evellit hominem illustriâ—rem reddit here the Saint calls Original sin washed away by baptismal regeneration radicale peccotum Objection 2. S. August lib. 16. de Civit. dei c. 18. saith we are not properly but originally onely born sinners I answer that S. August is to be understood so as that we are not born sinners by a consented act of our will properly but by the sinful act of Adam's inobedience which had a moral influence on all mankinde to bring on them the guilt of sin Objection 3. Until the Law sin was in the world but sin is not imputed where there is no Law yet death reigned from Adam to Moses even over them that have not sinned after the similitude of Adam's actual transgression who is the figure of the Messias This place is ignorantly interpreted by our Doctor thus Death reigned upon them whose sins therefore would not be so imputed as Adam's sin was because there was no Law with an expresse threatning given to them as it was to Adam I answer the same Law that was given with expresse threatning to Adam in Paradise was likewise by interpretation given in him to all his posterity and because Adam transgressed that Law all his posterity with him have transgressed according to those words of S. Paul In quo omnes peccaverunt Hence our Doctor's mistake is detected in not indeavouring to understand how that the same Law that was given to Adam did extend it self to his relative descendants and that not only temporal but also eternal death was threatned both to him and his posterity Objection 4. Taken out of those words of S. Paul By one mans disobedience many were made sinners c. Whence the Dr. Tayler doth strive to prove that if Adam's sin were imputed to his posterity as a guilt of an inherent sin then it should extend to all his posterity but out of this place it doth onely extend to many not to all Ergâ— not Original sin but temporal death is absolutely derived I answer that the B. Apostle doth use both words many and all whereas in the preceding Chapter he expresly averred that Adam's sin and Christs righteousnesse was derived and conveyed to all Adam's posterity and in this verse 19. he avers that only many were made sinners by Adam's inobedience and that by Christs righteousness many also are maderighteous Now I ask who be those that are born sinners from Adam and who be those that are regenerated in Christ through baptisme these are understood to be both all and many They were not all absolutely because Christ and Evae were not made sinners by Adam neither Infidels are by Christ justified but those onely that are in Christ regenerated and those only that are borne by seminal generation from Adam are here meant by the B. Apostle After this manner we may understand those words in Gen. 17. Patrem multarum gentium constitui te in semine tuo benedicentur omnes gentes c. 22. Where it 's most manifest that those who are promised to Abraham as children are counted in one place many and all in an other because they all are in some sense understood yet not absolutely all if considered in order to all humane kinde 5. Object From the 18th of Ezekel The childe shall not beare the iniquity of the father To this may be opposed another place in Exod the 20. I am a zealous God visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children c. I thus reconcile both these places in answer to the Objection that temporal punishment as the losse of meanes and estates banishment infamy and such like children as being secundum corpus pars patris may justly suffer by the Law for the sins of their parents but eternal punishment of the guilt of sin and an exclusion from Heaven is onely inflicted on them that are properly and really made sinners propria voluntate or aliâ—nae by interpretation
Saviour Christ by whose superabundant grace his faithfull children are cleansed from all sins original and actuall and rendred far more exceeding gratious and glorious then otherwisâ— they should have been Both which effects S. Paul teacheth Rom. 8. v. 12 13 14. concluding this first polâ— with an Appendix that Adaâ— waâ— a figure of Christ to come signifying that as by the sin of Adam we all dyed so by the grace of Christ all his children doe live Touching the other effect viz. abundance of grace by Christ he addeth the great difference saying But not as the offence so also the gifâ— For if by the one mâ—nâ— died much more the grace of God and the gift in the grace of one man Jesus Christ hath abounded upon many v. 15. And not as by one sin sâ— also the gift for judgement 〈…〉 of one â—â—condemnation but grace 〈◊〉 of mâ—â—y offeâ—cesâ—â— justification v. 〈◊〉 For if 〈◊〉 the â—â—â—ence of one death reigned by one much more they that receive the abundance of grace and of the donation of justice 〈◊〉 shall reign in life by one Jesus vers. 17. Thus by S. Pauls Doctrine in that place and ver. 18 19. is verified that which the â—ue Church so solemnly singeth in the great Festivity of our redemption O certe necessarium Adae peccacatum quod Christs mirtâ— deletum est And O 〈…〉 culpa 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—autum meritum habâ—re â—reâ—demptâ—rem Whereto agree many other passages in the rest of S. Paulâ— Doctrine and the same is brieâ—ly comprised in that which S. John Baptist denounc'd of our blessed Saviour saying Behold the Lamb of God behold him that taketh away the sin of the world That is principally Christ came to take away the general sin which being actual in Adam is original in the whole world and therefore is call'd the sin of the world And the same is the general doctrine of S. John Apost. Evangelist saying If wee walk in the light as God also is in the light and the blood of Jesus his son cleanseth us from all sin first from original then also from actual You may find moreover in S. Luke 10. v. 30. all mankinde devested of grace and wounded in natural faculties by Adams fall for our Saviour in a Parable saith How a certain man went down from Jerusalem unto Jericho and fell among the 〈◊〉 who spoiled him and giving him wounds went away leaving him halfe dead Of no particular man can this Parable be so properly expounded as of all mankinde in general contained in Adam our first Parent who being indued with all necessary gifts narural and supernatural going from Gods commandement yeelded to false imaginations of bettering his state as it were descending from Jerusalem the Vision of peace to Jericho signifying the Moon which is unconstant and mutable fell among theeves the Devils who spoyled and wounded him and left him halfe dead for Adam by sinning and all men in him were spoyled of original justice and all supernatural graces and wounded in natural powers of understanding and fâ—eâ—willâ— not wholly deprived of all but spoyled of the best part and wounded in the rest spiritually dead and subâ—ect both to temporal and eternal death 〈…〉 relicto leâ—t halfe dead and halfe alive though left without help by the Priest and Leviâ—e the Sacrifices and other Ministeries The result of all is this Original sin is no inherent substantial thing in man but a privation of original justice and after the laver of Regeneration and Justification by Baptism sin properly so called is no longer remaining in the regenerate yet still there remaines an inclination unto sin called concupiscence out of which sin notwithstanding cannot be produced but by our negligence and free consent All this is affirmed by many Saints and especially by S. Basil in oratione quod Deus non sit Author malorum S. Epiphanius S. Ambrose Cyprian S. Hierom S. Hilarius S. John Chrysostom c. This Doctrine was decreed in severall general Councels as hereafter shall appear But that Infants were holy from their mothers wombe and may be saved without Baptism and that therefore there is no necessity of the Laver of Regeneraon to wash away original sin was the exprest heresie of Pelagiâ—s this day held forth boldly though covertly by Dr. Tayler which perverse Doctrine was condemned by several Councels First in the East at the first Palestine Councel it was solemnly condemn'd After in the West in Efrick in the Milevitâ—â— Councel it was decreed Can. 2 That whosoever deny Baptism to new-borne Infants or aver that they contract not Original staine and sin from Adam which needeth a Regeneration Anatheâ—ia sit In the 〈◊〉 Councel turned out of Greec◠〈…〉 Pisanus and in the first Constantinople Councel in Simbolo This was decreed in the fourth Councel of Carthage where there met 217. Prelates and most learned Doctors And in the fifth Constantinople Councel Zoara Sâ—us Monachus Severus Anâ—icher Petrus Antichenus and Antymus were as Parabaptists condemned You may read in the sixth Tolletan Councel Can. 2. of the three Divine persons onely the Son of God became man for the Redemption of mankind from the debt of sin originally contracted from Adams inobedience In the second Arausâ—câ—n Councel in France Can. 2. you have what doth follow If any man shall hold that Adams sin hurted him alone and not his Posterity or that only it brought corporal 〈◊〉 not eternal death which is 〈◊〉 the cause of temporal death upon all mankind this man doth great in justice to God and downright contradicts the Apostle S Paul who teacheth that by one man sin came into the world and by sin death and so death was derived to all men Iâ— the Maguntine Councel in Germany Can. 5. we read thus The sin of our first Parent has been conveyed to all men by seminal propagation and draweth along with it punishment so as all men are guilty of Gods enmity and eternal damnation and all are become prone to sin All which Decrees were renewed in the two last general Councels Florentinum Tridentinum which in literis vniouis teacheth thus The soules of those that departed in actual or original sin only doth descend into hell there to be punished though not all alike Therefore neither our Dr. Tayler nor the Anabaptists can without impudent temerity renew or maintain this most pernicious venom of Heresie so often and so solemnly condemned From this uniform ancient Doctrine of the Primitive Fathers Saints and holy Doctors is discover'd that manifest grosse error of Doctor Tayler who doth acknowledge no inlâ—â—â—ent sin but that which is comâ—â—tted by a real proper consent of the will which is such another pitiful mistake as that this word original sin was not used or mentioned in Scripture or Fathers before by S. Augustine invented which is notoriously false whereas this is such another meer illusion as the same of the Arians who denied absolutely the word homusion to be found in
the Gospel But just as those inveterate Hereticks were confuted and convicted so is our modern Dr. Tayler For as in the Gospel we have these words I and my Father are one comes to be the same in substance as if homusion were expresly set down for where the real thing in sense substance is found there the name is included Thus what is more clearly express'd in Scripture then that our first Parent Adam was created upright viz. in a rectitude of vertues grace and faculties by which he was left capable of attaining to that final supernatural end for which he was created and likewise all his Posterity had a just title thereunto while Adam would have had continued in his obedience to God whence the word original justice is derived and evinced which may be called innated connatural native and genuine Justice Even so by S. Paul in many places All men have sinned in Adam and are denounc'd by nature children of wrath and perdition which in expresse significant terms is nothing else then that Adams actual sin has been the natural innated hereditary genuine and linâ—ally descending habitual sin of his posterity contracted by seminal generation from him which in effect is original sin superinduced and conveyed by natural generation by Gods occult decree CHAP. V. The former Doctrine proved out of the Fathers shamefully corrupted by Dr. Tayler IS it possible that a man that pretends not only to be a Christian but a Minister a Preacher of the Word a Doctor and such as is generally counted for a learned and spiritual writer among the Protestants so far to forget himselfe as most shamefully to bring Antiquity it selfe for his Doctrine and particularly those very Authors who were the greatest opposers of his Pelagian Heresie as Chrysostom S. Ignat. Martyr S. Ambrose c. Sure the Dr. cannot gain but dishonour and infamy in alledging Authors for patronage of his Errors the whole straine of whose writings are so directly opposite unto him and his Doctrine and in producing these Doctors as of his minde and judgement he doth but abuse them and they rightly understood accuse him For not one of the passages quoted out of the Fathers by him that give the least shadow of an approbation or countenance to any of those his heretical Assertions neither do I find to my remembrance throughout his whole Treatise of Original Sin one quotation taken either out of Scripture Fathers or modern Interpreters pertinently applied nor any solid thing like an Argument to prove the thing he undertakes to shew as the ingenious Reader shall clearly perceive and that all his Allegations out of Scripture and Fathers help him not at all but rather expresly speak against him Doe but take notice with what Engines doth he draw his Conclusion from the premisses of S. Dioâ—is Areopag his doctrine for nothing doth he say that looks his way but rather against him here are his words lib. de Ecclesiast Hierarch c. 3 p. 3. where he doth ascribe Adams sin to all humane nature and at last giveth a reason for it Quia natura humana cedens fraudibus Satanae vitale jugum excussit I refer the Reader to this place in the Author where he will plainly finde all along the Doctor Tayler impugned he brings S. Ignatius his doctrine to agree with his but its observable that in him there is no syllable to prove how or wherein whereas in his Epistle ad Trallianos he hath thus Christus dilexit nos dans semetipsum pro nobis ut nos sanguine suo mundaret ab antiqua impietate Here lieth the miserable mistake of the Doctor Tayle taking impiety for temporal death which is most absurd and ridiculous for impiety here by the Saint is taken for Adams sin conveyed to mankind for which Christ died S. Irenaeus lib. 5. c. 17. hath these words Delevit Christus Chirographum viz. debita nostra affigens illud cruci uti quemaâ—modum per lignum facti sumus debitores Deo per lignum accipiamus debiti remissionem Are not these words expresly against the Doctors doctrine for out of this Author every relative from Adam descendant has contracted a debt through Adams transgression for every particular individual had obligation in Adam to preserve original righteousnesse and because it was not preserv'd but lost by Adam for him and us his posterity every of us becomes indebted to God for the same which in effect is original sin the which is remitted by the sacred blood of Christ in his Sacrament of Baptism The Reader may finde more to this purpose in this Author l. 3. c. 20. and in S. Aug. lib. 1. contra Julianum c. 2. Tertullian in his Book de anima c. 40. hath Omnis anima eousque in Adam censeâ—ur donec in Christo recenseatur tamdiu imunda quamdiu recenseatur peccatrix autem quiae imunda Is noâ— this to make every soule a sinner alwayes before Baptism which taketh away the stain of original sin contracted by and in Adam quite contrary to Dr Taylors judgement Origines hom. 8. in Leviticum saith Quaecunque anima in carne nascitur iniquitatis peccati sorde polluitur propter quod dictum est nemo mundus a sorde nec Infans cujus est uuiâ— is diei vita super terram By this Assertion every soule born from Adams flesh is counted polluted with sin and iniquity and every Infant is proved to have the same sin inherent in him which come quite opposit to Dr. Taylers deliration in applying this iniquity and sin here meant by Origines to effects of mortality And S. Eyprian quoted by the Dr. lib. 3. Epist. 8. ad Fidum saith Recens natus nil peccavit nisi quod secundum Adam carnaliter natus contagium mortis antiquae prima nativitate câ—ntraxit this Saint and likewise all the rest by ancient death do mean sin and eternal death whereas from sin came death according to S. Paul stipendium peccati mors the wages of sin is death sin the precedent cause to death the subsequent effect quite contrary to the Doctors dream mistaking temporal death for the eternal I refer the ingenious Reader to S. Athanas in his Sermon upon those words Omnia mihi tradicta sunt c. and to S. Hilarius in explicatione Psal. 32. diligis misericordiam judicium in which places Doctor Taylor is confuted and impugned most manifestly as a pernicious Impostor The Doctor boldly avers that all Antiquity is on his side setting down barely two or three broken ends of Sentences grounding no Argument as indeed he cannot upon those passages for his opinion The Doctor seems rather ambitious to be accounted able to reade a piece of the Fathers Writings then able to understand them he cited the Fathers most impertinently and imperfectly endeavouring to make his owne face and impure Doctrine clean by throwing dirt in great Saints faces He did not like an honourable Guest expect a meal from them but
like a beggar their scraps aad fragments onely I refer the Reader to fol 483. in his Explication of Original sin where he cites S. Ambrose for him est alia mors quae secunda dicitur c. there is anotherdeath in hell which is called the second death which we suffer not for Adam's sin this testimony of S. Ambrose is plain against the Doctor for why doth he leave out that which goeth before and which followeth for the illuminated Doctor in his precedent words affirmed that we all sinned in the masse of Adam and his following discourse clearly states the question and declares down-right that Adam's sin is derived to his posterity these are his words in Apologia David cap. 11. antequam nascimur maculamur contagio antequam usuram lucis originis ipsius injuriam excipimus in iniquitate concipimur quid clarius and a little after merito David deploravit in se inquinamenta naturae quod prius inciperet in homine macula quam vita and further lib. 1. de penitentia c. 2. omnes homines sub peccato nascimur quorum ipse ortus in vitio est See many more manifest places in S. August lib. 1. in Jul. c. 2. lib. de nuptiis concupiscentia c. 35. lib. 1. ad Bonifacium c. 11 Thus you see how manifestly Doctor Taylor doth set down some lose fragments of the Saints as it weâ—e for him and conceals the rest that declares the Saints minde and truâ— sense which he doth break and pitifully mangle not understanding what he reades or writes from Authouâ—s against his conscience and truth And the Authour Comentar in Epistolas Pauli which are attributed to S. Ambrose Coment. in c. 5. ad Romanos holdeth forth thus Manifestâ—â—â— est omnes in Adam peccasse ut in mâ—ssâ— Doctor Taylor leaves out stolidly that which follows because it makes expresly against his Doctrine What doth follow is this Ipse enim meaning Adam per peccatum corruptus quos genuit omnes nati sunt in peccato ex eo igitur peccatores quia 〈◊〉 ipso sumus omnes Here S. Ambroseo doth expresly teach Original sin derived from Adam to all his relative descendants so that I cannot but wonder at the new Doctors frontless boldness in averring that all Antiquity is for him when the Reader doth manifestly see all the ancient Doctors and Fathers rather against him S. Chrysostom hom. 10. in Roman is quoted by the Doctor most maimedly and shamefully pag. 484. it seems to have in it no small question that it is said that by the disobedience of one man many becauâ—e sinners for sinning and being made mortal it is not unlikely that they which spring from him should be so too but that another should be made a sinner by his disobedience what agreement or consequent can it have c. here the Saint makes many interiogations all which are expressed by our Modern Doctor but leaves out quite the ancient Doctors answer minde and sound conclusion these words are omitted quod autâ—m in questionem cadit est qua de causa id factum est the Saint inquires the cause of the punishment of death derived from Adam to all mankinde qua de causa nondum addidit exquirit mortis radicemâ— quae igitur est mortis radix supplicinm ex uno in omnes derivatum fuisse Paulus ostendit quae radix mortis the Saint answers and resolves his own quaere that it was sin Propterea art ut sicut regnaverat peccatum in mortem it a gratia regnaret per justitiam ad vitam eternam per Christum hoc dixit ostendens peccatum loco Regis fuisse mortem autem loco militis sub peccato in acies tantem ab illo armatam now comes in the Saints Conclusion expresly against D. Taylor Ergo sâ—â—peccatum mortem armavit clarum est quod justitia per gratiam ad vecta que peccatum tollâ—t mortem spoliat dissolvit And a little after he saith Quod igitur Christi Crux Sepulchrum hoc nobis Baptisma fuit ille enim carni nortuus sepultus nos autem peccato mortui sepulti ubi peccatum ibi mors nam suplicio liberati sumus vitium deposuimus de integro regenerati sumus resurreximus sepulto vetere homine redempti sanctificati adopti Filii justificati Fratres effecti in eandem corporis unitatem redacti ut corpus capiti fic illi uniti sumuâ— Hence the ingenious Reader may infer how that the Saint doth alleadge that temporall death is the effect of sin and that if we derive no sin from Adam death we cannot derive which is the punishment of sin and for this reason it was decreed in the Aravsican Councell Can. 2. Non posse mortem sine peccato ad hominem transire nisi injustitia Deo daretur contra dicatur Apostolo dicenti per unum hominem peccatum intravit in mundum I deliver it in English thus Temporall death allowed by D. Taylor cannot be conveyed as punishment to Adam's children without sin unless great injustice be offered to God and a contradiction to S. Paul's Doctrine vâ—z By the sin of one man death entred c. This is the express down-right Doctrine of S. John Chrysostom who vigorously holds forth Baptisme as a laver and sepulcher of sin saying Peccato mortui sepulti c. and that beside the bare imputation and communication of Adam's sin dâ—eam'd of by Dr. Taylor there is in every Infant newly born Original sin inherent which is a privation of Originall justice a guilt of eternall death a stain spot enmity with God the guilt of punishment which is an obligation or ordination to punishment where the Saint condemns Dr. Taylor's folly in averring that Original sin is nothing other then Adam's actual sin barâ—ly imputed to his Posterity For further declaration hereof S. Cirillus Herosolimitan Cathechesi 2. hath most important Doctrine to him I remit the Reader S. Gregory Nazian Orat. 3. de pace saith to our purpose Totus lapsus sum atque ex primigenii hominis inobedientia diaboli fraude condemnatus sum S. Herom in Commentario Oseae c 6. in paradiso omnes prevaricati sunt in similitudinem prevaricationis Adam non enim est mirum quod in parente precessiâ— hoc in fiâ—is condemneturâ— this Doctor and S. Cyprian doth admonish Infants to be baptized The Reader may finde much more to our purpose in S. John Chrysostom in homilia ad Neopâ—â—tos Look Rufinus in Comentario in Psal. 20. S. Siricius in Eâ—ist 1. ad Himer cap. 2. with many more in S. August lib. â— in â—ulianum CHAP. VI That Original sin is properly and not metonimically a sin proved by Reason and Dr. Taylor's contrary Doctrine prov'd heretical HEresie is an adhesion to some private and singular opinion or