or successors of the injur'd person for in those sins very often the curse descends with the wrong So long as the effect remains and the injury is complained of and the title is still kept on foot so long the son is tied to restitution But even after the possession is setled yet the curse and evil may descend longer than the sin as the smart and the aking remains after the blow is past And therefore even after the successors come to be lawful possessors it may yet be very fit for them to quit the purchase of their fathers sin or else they must resolve to pay the sad and severe rent-charge of a curse 98. VI. In such cases in which there cannot be a real let there be a verbal and publick disavowing their fathers sin which was publick scandalous and notorious We find this thing done by Andronicus Palaeologus the Greek Emperor who was the son of a bad Father and it is to be done when the effect was transient or irremediable 99. VII Sometimes no piety of the children shall quite take off the anger of God from a family or nation as it hapned to Josiah who above all the Princes that were before or after him turned to the Lord. Notwithstanding the Lord turned not from the fierceness of his great wrath wherewith his anger was kindled against Judah because of all the provocations that Manasseh had provoked him withal In such a case as this we are to submit to Gods will and let him exercise his power his dominion and his kingdom as he pleases and expect the returns of our piety in the day of recompences and it may be our posterity shall reap a blessing for our sakes who feel a sorrow and an evil for our fathers sake 100. VIII Let all that have children endeavour to be the beginners and the stock of a new blessing to their family by blessing their children by praying much for them by holy education and a severe piety by rare example and an excellent religion And if there be in the family a great curse and an extraordinary anger gone out against it there must be something extraordinary done in the matter of religion or of charity that the remedy be no less than the evil 101. IX Let not the consideration of the universal sinfulness and corruption of mankind add confidence to thy person and hardness to thy conscience and authority to thy sin but let it awaken thy spirit and stir up thy diligence and endear all the watchfulness in the world for the service of God for there is in it some difficulty and an infinite necessity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said Electra in the Tragedy Our nature is very bad in it self but very good to them that use it well Prayers and Meditations THE first Adam bearing a wicked heart transgressed and was overcome and so be all they that are born of him Thus infirmity was made permanent And the law also in the heart of the people with the malignity and root so that the good departed away and the evil abode still Lo this only have I found that God hath made man upright but they have sought many inventions For there is not a just man upon earth that doth good and sinneth not Behold I was shapen in iniquity and in sin did my mother conceive me Purge me with hysop and I shall be clean wash me and I shall be whiter than snow create in me a clean heart O God and renew a right spirit within me The fool hath said in his heart There is no God they are corrupt they have done abominable works there is none that doth good The Lord looked down from Heaven upon the children of men to see if there were any that did understand and seek after God They are all gone aside they are all become filthy There is not one that doth good no not one O that the salvation of Israel were come out of Sion when the Lord bringeth back the captivity of his people Jacob shall rejoyce and Israel shall be glad Man dieth and wasteth away yea man giveth up the ghost and where is he For now thou numbrest my steps Dost thou not watch over my sin my transgression is seal'd up in a bag and thou sewest up iniquity Thou destroyest the hope of man Thou prevailest against him for ever and he passeth thou changest his countenance and sendest him away But his flesh upon him shall have pain and his soul within him shall mourn What is man that he should be clean and he that is born of a woman that he should be righteous Behold he putteth no trust in his Saints yea the Heavens are not clean in his sight How much more abominable and filthy is man which drinketh iniquity like water Trouble and anguish shall make him afraid They shall prevail against him as a King ready to battel For he stretcheth out his hand against God and strengthneth himself against the Almighty Let not him that is deceived trust in vanity for vanity shall be his recompence Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean thing no not one I have sewed sackcloth upon my skin and defiled my horn in the dust My face is foul with weeping and on my eye-lids is the shadow of death Not for any injustice in my hand also my prayer is pure Wretched man that I am who shall deliver me from the body of this death I thank God I am delivered through Jesus Christ our Lord. But now being made free from sin and become servants of God ye have your fruit unto holiness and the end everlasting life For the wages of sin is death But the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Let not sin reign in your mortal bodies that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof For sin shall not have dominion over you for ye are not under the law but under grace The PRAYER O Almighty God great Father of Men and Angels thou art the preserver of men and the great lover of souls thou didst make every thing perfect in its kind and all that thou didst make was very good only we miserable creatures sons of Adam have suffered the falling Angels to infect us with their leprosie of pride and so we entred into their evil portion having corrupted our way before thee and are covered with thy rod and dwell in a cloud of thy displeasure behold me the meanest of thy servants humbled before thee sensible of my sad condition weak and miserable sinful and ignorant full of need wanting thee in all things and neither able to escape death without a Saviour nor to live a life of holiness without thy Spirit O be pleas'd to give me a portion in the new birth break off the bands and fetters of my sin cure my evil inclinations correct my indispositions and natural averseness
after absolution they never impos'd or oblig'd to punishment unless it were to sick persons of whose recovery they despaired not of them indeed in case they had not finished their Canonical punishments they expected they should perform what was injoyn'd them formerly But because all sin is a blot to a mans soul and a foul stain to his reputation we demand In what does this stain consist in the guilt or in the punishment If it be said that it consists in the punishment then what does the guilt signifie when the removing of it does neither remove the stain nor the punishment which both remain and abide together But if the stain and the guilt be all one or alwayes together then when the guilt is taken away there can no stain remain and if so what need is there any more of Purgatory For since this is pretended to be necessary only lest any stain'd or unclean thing should enter into Heaven if the guilt and the pain be removed what uncleanness can there be left behind Indeed Simon Magus as Epiphanius reports Haeres 20. did teach That after the death of the body there remain'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a purgation of souls But whether the Church of Rome will own him for an Authentick Doctor themselves can best tell 3. It relies upon this also That God requires of us a full exchange of penances and satisfactions which must regularly be paid here or hereafter even by them who are pardon'd here which if it were true we were all undone 4. That the death of Christ his Merits and Satisfaction do not procure for us a full remission before we dye nor as it may happen of a long time after All which being Propositions new and uncertain invented by the School Divines and brought ex post facto to dress this Opinion and make it to seem reasonable and being the products of ignorance concerning remission of sins by Grace of the righteousness of Faith and the infinite value of Christ's Death must needs lay a great prejudice of novelty upon the Doctrine it self which but by these cannot be supported But to put it past suspicion and conjectures Roffensis and Polydor Virgil affirm That who so searcheth the Writings of the Greek Fathers shall find that none or very rarely any one of them ever makes mention of Purgatory and that the Latine Fathers did not all believe it but by degrees came to entertain opinions of it But for the Catholick Church it was but lately known to her But before we say any more in this Question we are to premonish That there are two great causes of their mistaken pretensions in this Article from Antiquity The first is That the Ancient Churches in their Offices and the Fathers in their Writings did teach and practise respectively prayer for the dead Now because the Church of Rome does so too and more than so relates her prayers to the Doctrine of Purgatory and for the souls there detaind her Doctors vainly suppose that when ever the Holy Fathers speak of prayer for the dead that they conclude for Purgatory which vain conjecture is as false as it is unreasonable For it is true the Fathers did pray for the dead but how That God would shew them mercy and hasten the Resurrection and give a blessed Sentence in the great day But then it is also to be remembred that they made prayers and offered for those who by the confession of all sides never were in Purgatory even for the Patriarchs and Prophets for the Apostles and Evangelists for Martyrs and Confessors and especially for the blessed Virgin Mary So we find it in Epiphanius Saint Cyril and in the Canon of the Greeks and so it is acknowledged by their own Durandus and in their Mass-book anciently they prayed for the soul of Saint Leo Of which because by their latter Doctrines they grew asham'd they have chang'd the prayer for him into a prayer to God by the intercession of Saint Leo in behalf of themselves so by their new doctrine making him an Intercessor for us who by their old Doctrine was suppos'd to need our prayers to intercede for him of which Pope Innocent being askâ—d a reason makes a most pitiful excuse Upon what accounts the Fathers did pray for the Saints departed and indeed generally for all it is not now seasonable to discourse but to say this only that such general prayers for the dead as those above reckon'd the Church of England never did condemn by any express Article but left it in the middle and by her practice declares her faith of the Resurrection of the dead and her interest in the communion of Saints and that the Saints departed are a portion of the Catholick Church parts and members of the Body of Christ but expresly condemns the Doctrine of Purgatory and consequently all prayers for the dead relating to it And how vainly the Church of Rome from prayer for the dead infers the belief of Purgatory every man may satisfie himself by seeing the Writings of the Fathers where they cannot meet with one Collect or Clause for praying for the delivery of souls out of that imaginary place Which thing is so certain that in the very Roman Offices we mean the Vigils said for the dead which are Psalms and Lessons taken from the Scripture speaking of the miseries of this World Repentance and Reconciliation with God the bliss after this life of them that die in Christ and the Resurrection of the Dead and in the Anthems Versicles and Responses there are Prayers made recommending to God the Soul of the newly defunct praying he may be freed from Hell and eternal death that in the day of Judgment he be not judged and condemned according to his sins but that he may appear among the Elect in the glory of the Resurrection but not one word of Purgatory or its pains The other cause of their mistake is That the Fathers often speak of a fire of Purgation after this life but such a one that is not to be kindled until the day of Judgment and it is such a fire that destroyes the Doctrine of the intermedial Purgatory We suppose that Origen was the first that spoke plainly of it and so Saint Ambrose follows him in the Opinion for it was no more so does Saint Basil Saint Hilary Saint Hierom and Lactantius as their words plainly prove as they are cited by Sixtus Senensis affirming that all men Christ only excepted shall be burned with the fire of the worlds conflagration at the day of Judgment even the Blessed Virgin her self is to pass through this fire There was also another Doctrine very generally receiv'd by the Fathers which greatly destroyes the Roman Purgatory Sixtus Senensis sayes and he sayes very true that Justin Martyr Tertullian Victorinus Martyr Prudentius Saint Chrysostom Arethas Euthimius and Saint Bernard did all affirm that before the day of Judgment the souls of men are
There was here no remedy no second thoughts no amends to be made But because much was not required of him and the Commandment was very easie and he had strengths more than enough to keep it therefore he had no cause to complain God might â—nd did exact at first the Covenant of Works because it was at first infinitely toleâ—â—ble But 2. From this time forward this Covenant began to be hard and by degrees beâ—â—â—e impossible not only because mans fortune was broken and his spirit troubled 〈◊〉 his passions disordered and vext by his calamity and his sin but because man upon â—â—e birth of children and the increase of the world contracted new relations and consequently had new duties and obligations and men hindred one another and their faculties by many means became disorder'd and lessen'd in their abilities and their will becoming perverse they first were unwilling and then unable by superinducing dispositions and habits contrary to their duty However because there was a necessity that man should be tied to more duty God did in the several periods of the world multiply Commandments first to Noah then to Abraham and then to his posterity and by this time they were very many And still God held over mans head the Covenant of Works 3. Upon the pressure of this Covenant all the world did complain Tanta mandata sunt ut impossibile sit servari ea said S. Ambrose the Commandments were so many and great that it was impossible they should be kept For at first there were no promises at all of any good nothing but a threatning of evil to the transgressors and after a long time they were entertain'd but with the promise of temporal good things which to some men were perform'd by the pleasures and rewards of sin and then there being a great imperfection in the nature of man it could not be that man should remain innocent and for repentance in this Covenant there was no regard or provisions made But I said 4. The Covenant of Works was still kept on foot How justly will appear in the sequel but the reasonableness of it was in this that men living in a state of awfulness might be under a pedagogy or severe institution restraining their loosenesses recollecting their inadvertencies uniting their distractions For the world was not then prepar'd by spiritual usages and dispositions to be governed by love and an easie yoke but by threatnings and severities And this is the account S. Paul gives of it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Law was a Schoolmaster that is had a temporary authority serving to other ends with no final concluding power It could chastise and threaten but it could not condemn it had not power of eternal life and death that was given by other measures But because the world was wild and barbarous good men were few the bad potent and innumerable and sin was conducted and help'd forward by pleasure and impunity it was necessary that God should superinduce a law and shew them the rod and affright and check their confidences left the world it self should perish by dissolution The law of Moses was still a part of the Covenant of Works Some little it had of repentance Sacrifice and expiations were appointed for small sins but nothing at all for greater Every great sin brought death infallibly And as it had a little image of Repentance so it had something of Promises to be as a grace and auxiliary to set forward obedience But this would not do it The promises were temporal and that could not secure obedience in great instances and there being for them no remedy appointed by repentance the law could not justifie it did not promise life Eternal nor give sufficient security against the Temporal only it was brought in as a pedagogy for the present necessity 5. But this pedagogie or institution was also a manuduction to the Gospel For they were used to severe laws that they might the more readily entertain the holy precepts of the Gospel to which eternally they would have shut their ears unless they had had some preparatory institution of severity and fear And therefore S. Paul also calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a pedagogie or institution leading unto Christ. 6. For it was this which made the world of the Godly long for Christ as having commission to open the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the hidden mystery of Justification by Faith and Repentance For the law called for exact obdience but ministred no grace but that of fear which was not enough to the performance or the engagement of exact obedience All therefore were here convinced of sin but by this Covenant they had no hopes and therefore were to expect relief from another and a better according to that saying of S. Paul The Scripture concludes all under sin that is declares all the world to be sinners that the promise by the faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe This S. Bernard expresses in these words Deus nobis hoc fecit ut nostram imperfectionem ostenderet Christi avidiores nos faceret Our imperfection was sufficiently manifest by the severity of the first Covenant that the world might long for salvation by Jesus Christ. 7. For since mankind could not be saved by the Covenant of works that is of exact obedience they must perish for ever or else hope to be sav'd by a Covenant of ease and remission that is such a Covenant as may secure Mans duty to God and Gods Mercy to Man and this is the Covenant which God made with mankind in Christ Jesus the Covenant of Repentance 8. This Covenant began immediately after Adams fall For as soon as the first Covenant the Covenant of works was broken God promised to make it up by an instrument of mercy which himself would find out The Seed of the woman should make up the breaches of the man But this should be acted and published in its own time not presently In the mean time man was by virtue of that new Covenant or promise admitted to Repentance 9. Adam confessed his sin and repented Three hundred years together did he mourn upon the mountains of India and God promised him a Saviour by whose obedience his repentance should be accepted And when God did threaten the old world with a floud of waters he called upon them to repent but because they did not God brought upon them the floud of waters For 120. years together he called upon them to return before he would strike his final blow Ten times God tried Pharaoh before he destroyed him And in all ages in all periods and with all men God did deal by this measure and excepting that God in some great cases or in the beginning of a Sanction to establish it with the terror of a great example he scarce ever destroyed a single man with temporal death for any nicety of the law but for long and great prevarications of it and when
fruitful in every good work and increasing in the knowledge of God * abounding in the work of the Lord. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are the words often used fill'd full and perfect 16. To the same purpose is it that we are commanded to live in Christ and unto God that is to live according to their will and by their rule and to their glory and in their fear and love called by S. Paul to live in the faith of the Son of God to be followers of Christ and of God to dwell in Christ and to abide in him to walk according to the Commandments of God in good works in truth according to the Spirit to walk in light to walk with God which was said of Enoch of whom the Greek LXX read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He pleased God * There are very many more to the same purpose For with great caution and earnestness the holy Scriptures place the duties of mankind in practice and holiness of living and removes it far from a confidence of notion and speculation Qui fecerit docuerit He that doth them and teaches them shall be great in the Kingdom and Why do you call me Lord Lord and do not the things I say to you and Ye are my friends if ye do what I command you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We must not only be called Christians but be so for not to be called but to be so brings us to felicity that is since the life of a Christian is the life of Repentance whose work it is for ever to contend against sin for ever to strive to please God a dying to sin a living to Christ he that thinks his Repentance can have another definition or is compleated in any other or in fewer parts must be of another Religion than is taught by Christ and his holy Apostles This is the Faith of the Son of God this is that state of excellent things which he purchased with his blood and as there is no other Name under Heaven so there is no other Faith no other Repentance whereby we can be saved Upon this Article it is usual to discourse of Sorrow and Contrition of Confession of sins of making amends of self-affliction and some other particulars but because they are not parts but actions fruits and significations of Repentance I have reserved them for their proper place Now I am to apply this general Doctrine to particular states of sin and sinners in the following Chapters SECT III. Descriptions of Repentance taken from the Holy Scriptures ¶ WHEN Heaven is shut up and there is no rain because they have sinned against thee if they pray towards this place and confess thy name and turn from their sin when thou afflictest them Then hear thou in Heaven and forgive the sin of thy servants and of thy people Israel that thou teach them the good way wherein they should walk and give rain upon thy land which thou hast given to thy people for an Inheritance ¶ And the Redeemer shall come to Zion and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob saith the Lord. As for me this is my Covenant with them saith the Lord My Spirit that is upon thee and my words which I have put in thy mouth shall not depart out of thy mouth nor out of the mouth of thy seed nor out of the mouth of thy seeds seed saith the Lord from henceforth and for ever Again when I say unto the wicked Thou shalt surely die If he turn from his sin and do that which is lawful and right If the wicked restore the pledge give again that he had robbed walk in the statutes of life without committing iniquity he shall even live he shall not die * None of his sins that he hath committed shall be mentioned unto him he hath done that which is lawful and right he shall surely live Knowing this that our old man is crucified with him that the body of sin might be destroyed that hence forth we should not serve sin Likewise reckon ye also your selves to be dead indeed unto sin but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. * Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof * Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin but yield your selves unto God as those that are alive from the dead and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God * Being then made free from sin ye became the servants of righteousness * I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness Wherefore my brethren ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ that ye should be married to another even to him who is raised from the dead that we should bring forth fruit unto God For when we were in the flesh the motions of sins which were by the law did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death * But now we are delivered from the law that being dead wherein we were held that we should serve in the newness of the spirit and not in the oldness of the letter And that knowing the time that now it is high time to awake out of sleep for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed The night is far spent the day is at hand let us therefore cast off the works of darkness and let us put on the armor of light * Let us walk honestly as in the day not in rioting and drunkenness not in chambering and wantonness not in strife and envying * But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ and make not provision for the flesh to fulfil the lusts thereof Having therefore these promises dearly beloved let us cleanse our selves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit perfecting holiness in the fear of God For godly sorrow worketh Repentance to salvation not to be repented of but the sorrow of the world worketh death * For behold this self same thing that ye sorrowed after a godly sort what carefulness it wrought in you yea what clearing of your selves yea what indignation yea what fear yea what vehement desire yea what zeal yea what revenge in all thing ye have approved your selves to be clear in this matter For the love of Christ constraineth us because we thus judge that if one died for all then were all dead Therefore if any man be in Christ he is a new creature old things are past away behold all things are become new That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts And be renewed in the spirit of your mind * And that ye put on that new man which after
of us from Heaven they that say that not every solution or breaking of them is exclusive from Heaven which are the words of Bellarmine and the doctrine of the Roman Church must even by the consequence of this very gloss of his fall under the danger of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the false teachers or the breakers of them by false interpretation However fearful is the malediction even to the breakers of the least 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that I may use the words of Theophylact he shall be last in the resurrection and shall be thrown into Hell for that is the meaning of least in the Kingdom of Heaven fortasse ideò non erit in regno coelorum ubi nisi magni esse non possunt said S. Austin least is none at all for into Heaven none can enter but they which are great in Gods account 19. VII Lastly God hath given us the perpetual assistances of his Spirit the presence of his grace the ministery of his word the fear of judgments the endearment of his mercies the admonition of friends the severity of Preachers the aid of Books the apprehension of death the sense of our daily dangers our continual necessities and the recollection of our prayers and above all he hath promised Heaven to the obedient which is a state of blessings so great and infinite as upon the account of them it is infinitely reasonable and just if he shall exact of us every sin that is every thing which we can avoid 20. Upon this account it is that although wise and prudent men do not despise the continual endearments of an old friend yet in many cases God may and doth and from the rules and proper measures of humane friendship to argue up to a presumption of Gods easiness in not exacting our duty is a fallacious proceeding but it will deceive no body but our selves 21. II. Every sin is directly against Gods law and therefore is damnable and deadly in the accounts of the Divine justice one as well though not so grievously as another For though sins be differenc'd by greater and less yet their proportion to punishment is not differenc'd by Temporal and Eternal but by greater and less in that kind which God hath threatned So Origen Vnusquisque pro qualitate quantitate peccati diversam mulctae sententiam expendit Si parum est quod peccas ferieris damnâ— minuti ut Lucas scripsit ut verò Matthaeus quadrantis Veruntamen necesse est hoc ipsum quod eâ—estitisti debitor solvere Non enim inde exibis nisi minima quaeque persolveris Every one according to the quantity and quality of his sin must pay his fine but till he hath paid he shall not be loosed from those fearful prisons that is he shall never be loosed if he agree not before he comes thither The smallest offence is a sin and therefore it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a transgression of the Law a violation of that band by which our obedience unites us unto God And this the holy Scripture signifies unto us in various expressions For though the several words are variously used in sacred and profane writers yet all of them signifie that even the smallest sin is a prevarication of the Holy laws 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so Damascen calls sin which we render well by Transgression and even those words which in distinction signifie a small offence yet they also signifie the same with the greater words to shew that they all have the same formality and do the same displeasure or at least that by the difference of the words no difference of their natures can be regularly observed Sins against God only are by Phavorinus called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the same word is also used for sin against our neighbours 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If thy brother sin against thee that is do thee injury and this is properly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 injustice But Demosthenes distinguishes injustice from sin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by voluntary and involuntary 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He that does wrong willingly is unjust he that does it unwillingly is a sinner 22. The same indistinction is observable in the other words of Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is by S. Hierome used for the beginnings of sin Cum cogitatio tacita subrepit ex aliquâ— parte conniventibus nobis nec dum tamen nos impulit ad ruinam when a sudden thought invades us without our advertency and observation and hath not brought forth death as yet and yet that death is appendent to whatsoever it be that can be signified by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we may observe because the sin of Adam that called death upon all the world is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and of the Ephesian Gentiles S. Paul said they had been dead 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in trespasses and sins and therefore it cannot hence be inferred that such little obliquities or beginnings of greater sins are only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 besides the law not against it for it is at least the word hinders not but it may be of the same kind of malignity as was the sin of Adam And therefore S. Austin renders the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 delictum or offence and so do our Bibles And the same also is the case of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is attributed even to concupiscence or the beginnings of mischief by S. Paul and by S. Hierome but the same is used for the consummation of concupiscence in the matter of uncleanness by S. James Lust when it hath conceived 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 peccatum is the Latin word which when it is used in a distinct and pressed sence it is taken for the lesser sins and is distinguished from crimen Paulus Orosius uses it to signifie only the concupiscence or sinful thoughts of the heart and when it breaks forth to action he calls it a crime peccatum cogitatio concipit crimen verò non nisi actus ostendit and it was so used by the ancient Latins Peccatus it was called by them quasi pellicatus that inticing which is proper to uncleanness So Cicero in A. Gellius Nemo ita manifesto peccatu tenebatur ut cum impudens fuisset in facto tum impudentior videretur si negaret Thus the indistinction of words mingles all their significations in the same common notion and formality They were not sins at all if they were not against a Law and if they be they cannot be of their own nature venial but must be liable to that punishment which was threatned in the Law whereof that action is a transgression 23. II. The Law of God never threatens the justice of God never inflicts punishment but upon transgressors of his Laws the smallest offences are not only threatned but may be punished with death therefore
pardon till he be reconciled to his Father but if he be yet his Father may chastise his little misdemeanors or reserve some of his displeasure so far as may minister to discipline not to destruction and therefore if a son have escaped his Fathers anger and final displeasure let him remember that though his Father is not willing to dis-inherit him yet he will be ready to chastise him And we see it by the whole dispensation of God that the righteous are punished and afflictions begin at the House of God and God is so impatient even of little evils in them that to make them pure he will draw them through the fire and there are some who are sav'd yet so as by fire And certainly those sins ought not to be neglected or esteemed little which provoke God to anger even against his servants We find this instanc'd in the case of the Corinthians who used undecent circumstances and unhandsome usages of the blessed Sacrament even for this God severely reprov'd them for this cause many are weak and sick and some are fallen asleep which is an expression used in Scripture to signifie them that die in the Lord and is not used to signifie the death of them that perish from the presence of the Lord. These persons died in the state of grace and repentance but yet died in their sin chastised for their lesser sins but so that their souls were sav'd This is that which Clemens Alexandrinus affirms of sins committed after our illumination 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These sins must be purged with a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the chastisements of sons The result of this consideration is that which S. Peter advises that we pass the time of our sojourning here in fear for no man ought to walk confidently who knows that even the most laudable life hath in it evil enough to be smarted for with a severe calamity 52. IX The most trifling actions the daily incursions of sins though of the least malignity yet if they be neglected combine and knit together till by their multitude they grow insupportable This caution I learn from Caesarius Arelatensis Et hoc considerate Fratres quia etiamsi capitalia crimina non subreperent ipsa minuta peccata quae quod pejus est aut non attendimus aut certè pro nihilo computamus si simul omnia congregentur nescio quae bonorum operum abundantia illis praeponderare sufficiat Although capital sins invade you not yet if your minutes your small sins which either we do not consider at all or value not at all be combin'd or gathered into one heap I know not what multitude of good works will suffice to weigh them down For little sins are like the sand and when they become a heap are heavy as lead and a leaking ship may as certainly perish with the little inlets of water as with a mighty wave for of many drops a river is made and therefore ipsa minuta vel levia non contemnantur Illa enim quae humanae fragilitati quamvis parva tamen crebra subrepunt quasi collecta contra nos fuerint ita nos gravabunt sicut unum aliquod grande peccatum Let not little sins be despised for even those smallest things which creep upon us by our natural weakness yet when they are gathered together against us stand on an heap and like an army of flies can destroy us as well as any one deadly enemy Quae quamvis singula non lethali vulnere ferire sentiantur sicut homicidium adulterium vel caetera hujusmodi tamen omnia simul congregata velut scabies quo plura sunt necant nostrum decus ita exterminant ut à filii sponsi speciosi formâ prae filiis hominum castissimis amplexibus separent nisi medicamento quotidianae poenitentiae dissecentur Indeed we do not feel every one of them strike so home and deadly as murder and adultery does yet when they are united they are like a scab they kill with their multitude and so destroy our internal beauty that they separate us from the purest embraces of the Bridegroom unless they be scattered with the medicine of a daily repentance For he that does these little sins often and repents not of them nor strives against them either loves them directly or by interpretation 53. X. Let no man when he is tempted to a sin go then to take measures of it because it being his own case he is an unequal and incompetent Judge His temptation is his prejudice and his bribe and it is ten to one but he will suck in the poyson by his making himself believe that the potion is not deadly Examine not the particular measures unless the sin be indeed by its disreputation great then examine as much as you please provided you go not about to lessen it It is enough it is a sin condemned by the laws of God and that death and damnation are its wages 54. XI When the mischief is done then you may in the first days of your shame and sorrow for it with more safety take its measures For immediately after acting sin does to most men appear in all its ugliness and deformitty and if in the days of your temptation you did lessen the measure of your sin yet in the days of your sorrow do not shorten the measures of repentance Every sin is deadly enough and no repentance or godly sorrow can be too great for that which hath deserved the eternal wrath of God 55. XII I end these advices with the meditation of S. Hierom. Si ira sermonis injuria atque interdum jocus judicio concilióque atque Gehennae ignibus delegatur quid merebitur turpium rerum appetitio avaritia quae est radix omnium malorum If anger and injurious words and sometimes a foolish jest is sentenc'd to capital and supreme punishments what punishment shall the lustful and the covetous have And what will be the event of all our souls who reckon these injurious or angry words of calling Fool or Sot amongst the smallest and those which are indeed less we do not observe at all For who is there amongst us almost who calls himself to an account for trifling words loose laughter the smallest beginnings of intemperance careless spending too great portions of our time in trifling visits and courtships balls revellings phantastick dressings sleepiness idleness and useless conversation neglecting our times of prayer frequently or causlesly slighting religion and religious persons siding with factions indifferently forgetting our former obligations upon trifling regards vain thoughts wandrings and weariness at our devotion love of praise laying little plots and snares to be commended high opinion of our selves resolutions to excuse all and never to confess an error going to Church for vain purposes itching ears love of flattery and thousands more The very kinds of them put together are a heap and therefore the so frequent and almost
advices with the saying of Josephus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is as damnable to indulge leave to our selves to sin little sins as great ones A man may be choaked with a raisin as well as with great morsels of flesh and a small leak in a ship if it be neglected will as certainly sink her as if she sprung a plank Death is the wages of all and damnation is the portion of the impenitent whatever was the instance of their sin Though there are degrees of punishment yet there is no difference of state as to this particular and therefore we are tied to repent of all and to dash the little Babylonians against the stones against the Rock that was smitten for us For by the blood of Jesus and the tears of Repentance and the watchfulness of a diligent careful person many of them shall be prevented and all shall be pardoned A Psalm to be frequently used in our Repentance for our daily Sins BOW down thine ear O Lord hear me for I am poor and needy Rejoyce the soul of thy servant for unto thee O Lord do I lift up my soul. For thou Lord art good and ready to forgive and plenteous in mercy unto all them that call upon thee Teach me thy way O Lord I will walk in thy truth unite my heart to fear thy Name Shall mortal man be more just than God shall a man be more pure than his Maker Behold he put no trust in his Servants and his Angels he charged with folly How much less on them that dwell in houses of clay whose foundation is in the dust which are crushed before the moth Doth not their excellency which is in them go away They die even without wisdom The law of the Lord is perfect converting the soul the testimony of the Lord is sure making wise the simple Moreover by them is thy servant warned and in keeping of them there is great reward Who can understand his errors Cleanse thou me from my secret faults keep back thy servant also from presumptuous sins let them not have dominion over me then shall I be upright and I shall be innocent from the great transgression O ye sons of men how long will ye turn my glory into shame how long will ye love vanity and seek after leasing But know that the Lord hath set apart him that is godly for himself The Lord will hear when I call unto him Out of the deep have I called unto thee O Lord Lord hear my voice O let thine ears consider well the voice of my complaint If thou Lord wilt be extreme to mark what is done amiss O Lord who may abide it But there is mercy with thee therefore shalt thou be feared Set a watch O Lord before my mouth and keep the door of my lips Take from me the way of lying and cause thou me to make much of thy law The Lord is full of compassion and mercy long-suffering and of great goodness He will not alway be chiding neither keepeth he his anger for ever Yea like as a Father pitieth his own children even so is the Lord merciful unto them that fear him For he knoweth whereof we are made he remembreth that we are but dust Praise the Lord O my soul and forget not all his benefits which forgiveth all thy sin and healeth all thine infirmities Glory be to the Father c. The PRAYER O Eternal God whose perfections are infinite whose mercies are glorious whose justice is severe whose eyes are pure whose judgments are wise be pleased to look upon the infirmities of thy servant and consider my weakness My spirit is willing but my flesh is weak I desire to please thee but in my endeavours I fail so often so foolishly so unreasonably that I extreamly displease my self and I have too great reason to fear that thou also art displeased with thy servant O my God I know my duty I resolve to do it I know my dangers I stand upon my guard against them but when they come near I begin to be pleased and delighted in the little images of death and am seised upon by folly even when with greatest severity I decree against it Blessed Jesus pity me and have mercy upon my infirmities II. O Dear God I humbly beg to be relieved by a mighty grace for I bear a body of sin and death about me sin creeps upon me in every thing that I do or suffer When I do well I am apt to be proud when I do amiss I am sometimes too confident sometimes affrighted If I see others do amiss I either neglect them or grow too angry and in the very mortification of my anger I grow angry and peevish My duties are imperfect my repentances little my passions great my fancy trifling The sins of my tongue are infinite and my omissions are infinite and my evil thoughts cannot be numbred and I cannot give an account concerning innumerable portions of my time which were once in my power but were let slip and were partly spent in sin partly thrown away upon trifles and vanity and even of the hasest sins of which in accounts of men I am most innocent I am guilty before thee entertaining those sins in little instances thoughts desires and imaginations which I durst not produce into action and open significations Blessed Jesus pity me and have mercy upon my infirmities III. TEACH me O Lord to walk before thee in righteousness perfecting holiness in the fear of God Give me an obedient will a loving spirit a humble understanding watchfulness over my thoughts deliberation in all my words and actions well tempered passions and a great prudence and a great zeal and a great charity that I may do my duty wisely diligently holily O let me be humbled in my infirmities but let me be also safe from my enemies let me never fall by their violence nor by my own weakness let me never be overcome by them nor yet give my self up to folly and weak principles to idleness and secure careless walking but give me the strengths of thy Spirit that I may grow strong upon the ruines of the flesh growing from grace to grace till I become a perfect man in Christ Jesus O let thy strength be seen in my weakness and let thy mercy triumph over my infirmities pitying the condition of my nature the infancy of grace the imperfection of my knowledge the transportations of my passion Let me never consent to sin but for ever strive against it and every day prevail till it be quite dead in me that thy servant living the life of grace may at last be admitted to that state of glory where all my infirmities shall be done away and all tears be dried up and sin and death shall be no more Grant this O most gracious God and Father for Jesus Christ his sake Amen Our Father c. CHAP. IV. Of Actual single Sins and what Repentance is proper to them SECT I. 1. THE
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a root of bitterness such as was in Esau when he undid himself and repented too late an evil heart in turning from the living Lord a sear'd conscience a walking according to the Prince of this world enemies of the cross of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as cannot cease from sin enemies that will not have Christ but the Devil to reign over them for this is the true state and constitution of vicious habits This is more than an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or hindrance of doing our duty it is a direct 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a disorder and corruption inherent in all our faculties 22. This is signally describ'd by S. Paul who calls it a concupiscence wrought by sin For sin saith he wrought in me all manner of concupiscence it is called by him a law in the members fighting against the law in my mind and the man he calls carnal sold under sin dead killed and the sin it self inhabitants peccatum sin dwelling in me and flesh in which dwelleth no good 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the carnal mind These things as is evident cannot be spoken of the single actions of sin but of the law the power the dominion the reign the habit of sin It is that which was wrought by sin viz. by the single actions of sin and therefore he does not mean single actions neither can he mean the remanent guilt of the past action but he speaks of a direct state of sinfulness which is prolifical and productive of sin For sin wrought this concupiscence and carnal-mindedness and this carnal-mindedness is such a propensity and desire to sin and hath in it such easiness to act that it bringeth forth many sins and they bring forth death and therefore the Apostle says expresly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this carnal mindedness is death and enmity against God this is that state in which whosoever abides cannot please God To the same purpose are those other expressions of Scripture calling this state Vias Balaam the ways of Balaam the son of Bosor a walking perversly with God a being sold under sin and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hearts excercised or imployed and used to covetousness and it follows 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sons of cursing The fault or charge is more than that of single actions and the curse is greater than ordinary as the sin is so is the curse the one is apportion'd to the other and appropriate 23. III. But I consider further A single act of sin does not in all cases denominate a man vicious A man is not called a drunkard for having been once drunk but for being often for repeating the act or continuing the affection Every single act provokes God to anger but that anger can be as soon rescinded as the act is past if it remains not by something that is habitual Indeed he is called a thief or an adulterer that does one action of those crimes because his consent in such things is great enough to equal a habit in lesser things The effect is notorious the prohibition severe the dangers infinite the reasons of them evident they are peccata vastantia conscientiam quae uno actu perimunt as S. Austin says they kill with one blow and therefore God exacts them highly and men call the criminal by the name of the vice But the action gives denomination but in some cases but the habit in all No man lives without sin and in the state of regeneration our infirmities still press upon us and make our hands shake and our foot to stumble and sometimes the enemy makes an inroad and is presently beaten out again and though the good man resolves against all and contends against all Pauca tamen suberunt priscae vestigia fraudis there will be something for him to be humbled at something to contest against to keep him watchful and upon his guard But if he be ebriosus or petulans if he be a drunkard or wanton an extortioner or covetous that is if he have a habit of any sin whatsoever then he is not the son of God but an heir of death and hell That therefore which in all cases denominates a man such both before God and before men when the actions do not that must needs have in it a proper malignity of its own and that 's the habit 24. IV. This we may also see evidently in the matter of smaller sins and the trifles of our life which though they be often repeated yet if they be kept asunder by the intercision of the actions of repentance do not discompose our state of grace but if they be habitual they do though it may be the single instances by some accident being hindred do not so often return and this is confess'd on all hands But then the consequent of this is that the very being habitual is a special irregularity 25. V. This also appears by the nature and malignity of the greater sins A vicious habit is a principle of evil naturally and directly And therefore as the capital sins are worse than others because they are an impure root and apt to produce accursed fruits as covetousness is the root of all evil and pride and envy and idolatry so is every habit the mother of evil not accidentally and by chance but by its proper efficacy and natural germination and therefore is worse than single actions 26. VI. If natural concupiscence hath in it the nature of sin and needs a laver of regeneration and the blood of Christ to wash it off much more shall our habitual and acquir'd concupiscence For this is much worse procur'd by our own act introduc'd by our consent brought upon us by the wrath of God which we have deserved springing from the baseness of our own manners the consequent of our voluntary disobedience So that if it were unreasonable that our natural concupiscence should be charged upon us as criminal as being involuntary yet for the same Reason it is most reasonable that our habitual sins our superinduc'd concupiscence should be imputed to us as criminal because it is voluntary in its cause which is in us and is voluntary in the effect that is it is delighted in and seated in the will But however this argument ought to prevail upon all that admit the article of original sin as it is usually taught in Schools and Churches For upon the denial of it Pelagius also introduc'd this opinion against which I am now disputing And lest concupiscence might be reckon'd a sin he affirm'd that no habitude no disposition nothing but an act could be a sin But on the other side lest concupiscence should be accounted no sin S. Austin disputes earnestly largely affirming and proving that a sinful habit is a special sinfulness distinct from that of evil actions malus thesaurus cordis the evil treasure of the heart out of which proceeds all mischief and a continual defluxion of impurities 27. VII And therefore as God
rendred In him it is violent and hard a distinct period by it self without dependence or proper purpose against the faith of all copies who do not make this a distinct period and against the usual manner of speaking 2. This phrase of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used in 2 Cor. 5.4 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Not for that we would be unclothed and so it is used in Polybius Suidas and Varinus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is eâ conditione for that cause or condition and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad quid ades are the words of the Gospel as Suidas quotes them 3. Although 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may signifie the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in whom or in him yet it is so very seldom or infrequent that it were intolerable to do violence to this place to force it to an unnatural signification 4. If it did always signifie the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or in him which it does not yet we might very well follow the same reading we now do and which the Apostles discourse does infer for even 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 does divers times signifie forasmuch or for that as is to be seen in Rom. 8.3 and Heb. 2.18 But 5. supposing all that can be and that it did signifie in whom yet the sence were fair enough as to the whole article for by him or in him we are made sinners that is brought to an evil state of things usually consequent to sinners we are us'd like sinners by him or in him just as when a sinner is justified he is treated like a righteous person as if he had never sinned though he really did sin oftentimes and this for his sake who is made righteousness to us so in Adam we are made sinners that is treated ill and afflicted though our selves be innocent of that sin which was the occasion of our being us'd so severely for other sins of which we were not innocent But how this came to pass is told in the following words 11. For until the law sin was in the world but sin is not imputed when there is no law Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression who is the figure of him that was to come By which discourse it appears that S. Paul does not speak of all minkind as if the evil occasion'd by Adams sin did descend for ever upon that account but it had a limited effect and reach'd only to those who were in the interval between Adam and Moses This death was brought upon them by Adam that is death which was threatned to Adam only went forth upon them also who indeed were sinners but not after the similitude of Adams transgression that is who sinn'd not so capitally as he did For to sin like Adam is used as a Tragical and a high expression So it is in the Prophet They like men have transgressed so we read it but in the Hebrew it is They like Adam have transgressed and yet death pass'd upon them that did not sin after the similitude of Adam for Abel and Seth and Abraham and all the Patriarchs died Enoch only excepted and therefore it was no wonder that upon the sin of Adam death entred upon the world who generally sinn'd like Adam since it passed on and reigned upon less sinners * It reigned upon them whose sins therefore would not be so imputed as Adams was because there was no law with an express threatning given to them as was to Adam but although it was not wholly imputed upon their own account yet it was imputed upon theirs and Adams For God was so exasperated with Mankind that being angry he would still continue that punishment even to the lesser sins and sinners which he only had first threatned to Adam and so Adam brought it upon them They indeed in rigour did themselves deserve it but if it had not been for that provocation by Adam they who sinn'd not so bad and had not been so severely and expresly threatned had not suffer'd so severely * The case is this Jonathan and Michal were Sauls children it came to pass that seven of Sauls issue were to be hanged all equally innocent equally culpable David took the five sons of Michal for she had left him unhandsomly Jonathan was his friend and therefore he spar'd his son Mephibosheth Here it was indifferent as to the guilt of the persons whether David should take the sons of Michal or of Jonathan but it is likely that as upon the kindness which David had to Jonathan he spar'd his son so upon the just provocation of Michal he made that evil to fall upon them of which they were otherwise capable which it may be they should not have suffered if their Mother had been kind Adam was to God as Michal to David 12. But there was in it a further design for by this dispensation of death Adam was made a figure of Christ So the Apostle expresly affirms who is the figure of him that was to come that as death pass'd upon the posterity of Adam though they sinn'd less than Adam so life should be given to the followers of Christ though they were imperfectly righteous that is not after the similitude of Christs perfection 13. But for the further clearing the Article depending upon the right understanding of these words these two things are observable 1. That the evil of death descending upon Adams posterity for his sake went no further than till Moses For after the giving of Moses's law death passed no further upon the account of Adams transgression but by the sanction of Moses's law where death was anew distinctly and expresly threatned as it was to Adam and so went forward upon a new score but introduc'd first by Adam that is he was the cause at first and till Moses also he was in some sence the author and for ever after the precedent and therefore the Apostle said well In Adam we all die his sin brought in the sentence in him it began and from him it passed upon all the world though by several dispensations 2. In the discourse of the Apostle those that were nam'd were not consider'd simply as born from Adam and therefore it did not come upon the account of Natural or Original corruption but they were consider'd as Sinners just as they who have life by Christ are not consider'd as merely children by title or spiritual birth and adoption but as just and faithful But then this is the proportion and purpose of the Apostle as God gives to these life by Christ which is a greater thing than their imperfect righteousness without Christ could have expected so here also this part of Adams posterity was punish'd with death for their own sin but this death was brought upon them by Adam that is the rather for his provocation of God by his great transgression 14. There is now remaining no difficulty but
unless they were his at his death If therefore they be confiscated before his death ours indeed is the inconvenience too but his alone is the punishment and to neither of us is the wrong But concerning the second I mean that which is superinduc'd it is not his fault alone nor ours alone and neither of us is innocent we all put in our accursed Symbol for the debauching of our spirits for the besotting our souls for the spoiling our bodies Ille initium induxit debiti nos foenus auximus posterioribus peccatis c. He began the principal and we have increas'd the interest This we also find well expressed by Justin Martyr for the Fathers of the first ages spake prudently and temperately in this Article as in other things Christ was not born or crucified because himself had need of these things but for the sake of mankind 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which from Adam fell into death and the deception of the Serpent besides the evil which every one adds upon his own account And it appears in the greatest instance of all even in that of natural death which though it was natural yet from Adam it began to be a curse just as the motion of a Serpent upon his belly which was concreated with him yet upon this story was changed into a malediction and an evil adjunct But though Adam was the gate and brought in the head of death yet our sins brought him in further we brought in the body of death Our life was left by Adam a thousand years long almost but the iniquity of man brought it quickly to 500 years from thence to 250 from thence to 120 and at last to seventy and then God would no more strike all mankind in the same manner but individuals and single sinners smart for it and are cut off in their youth and do not live out half their days And so it is in the matters of the soul and the spirit Every sin leaves an evil upon the soul and every age grows worse and adds some iniquity of its own to the former examples And therefore Tertullian calls Adam mali traducem he transmitted the original and exemplar and we write after his copy Infirmitatis ingenitae vitium so Arnobius calls our natural baseness we are naturally weak and this weakness is a vice or defect of Nature and our evil usages make our natures worse like Butchers being used to kill beasts their natures grow more savage and unmerciful so it is with us all If our parents be good yet we often prove bad as the wild olive comes from the branch of a natural olive or as corn with the chaff come from clean grain and the uncircumcised from the circumcised But if our parents be bad it is the less wonder if their children are so a Blackamore begets a Blackamore as an Epileptick son does often come from an Epileptick father and hereditary diseases are transmitted by generation so it is in that viciousness that is radicated in the body for a lustful father oftentimes begets a lustful son and so it is in all those instances where the soul follows the temperature of the body And thus not only Adam but every father may transmit an Original sin or rather an Original viciousness of his own For a vicious nature or a natural improbity when it is not consented to is not a sin but an ill disposition Philosophy and the Grace of God must cure it but it often causes us to sin before our reason and our higher principles are well attended to But when we consent to and actuate our evil inclinations we spoil our natures and make them worse making evil still more natural For it is as much in our nature to be pleased with our artificial delights as with our natural And this is the doctrine of S. Austin speaking of Concupiscence Modo quodam loquendi vocatur peccatum quòd peccata facta est peccati si vicerit facit reum Concupiscence or the viciousness of our Nature is after a certain manner of speaking called sin because it is made worse by sin and makes us guilty of sin when it is consented to It hath the nature of sin so the article of the Church of England expresses it that is it is in eâdem materiâ it comes from a weak principle à naturae vitio from the imperfect and defective nature of man and inclines to sin But that I may again use S. Austins words Quantum ad nos attiâ—et sine peccato semper essemus donec sanaretur hoc malum si ei nunquam consentiremus ad malum Although we all have concupiscence yet none of us all should have any sin if we did not consent to this concupiscence unto evil Concupiscence is Naturae vitium but not peccatum a defect or fault of nature but not formally a sin which distinction we learn from S. Austin Non enim talia sunt vitia quae jam peccata dicenda sunt Concupiscence is an evil as a weak eye is but not a sin if we speak properly till it be consented to and then indeed it is the parent of sin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so S. James it brings forth sin 85. This is the vile state of our natural viciousness and improbity and misery in which Adam had some but truly not the biggest share and let this consideration sink as deep as it will in us to make us humble and careful but let us not use it as an excuse to lessen our diligence by greatning our evil necessity For death and sin were both born from Adam but we have nurs'd them up to an ugly bulk and deformity But I must now proceed to other practical rules 86. II. It is necessary that we understand that our natural state is not a state in which we can hope for heaven Natural agents can effect but natural ends by natural instruments and now supposing the former doctrine that we lost not the Divine favour by our guilt of what we never did consent to yet we were born in pure naturals and they some of them worsted by our forefathers yet we were at the best born but in pure naturals and we must be born again that as by our first birth we are heirs of death so by our new birth we may be adopted into the inheritance of life and salvation 87. III. It is our duty to be humbled in the consideration of our selves and of our natural condition That by distrusting our own strengths we may take sanctuary in God through Jesus Christ praying for his grace entertaining and caressing of his holy Spirit with purities and devotions with charity and humility infinitely fearing to grieve him lest he leaving us we be left as Adam left us in pure naturals but in some degrees worsted by the nature of sin in some instances and the anger of God in all that is in the state of flesh and blood which shall never inherit the
World by Adam's sin was Death Eternal that is God then decreed to punish sinners with the portion of Devils It is likely he did so but that this was the death introduced for the sin of Adam upon all Man-kind is not at all affirmed in Scripture but temporal death is the effect of Adam's sin in Adam we all die and the Death that Adam's sin brought in is such as could have a remedy or recompence by Christ but Eternal Death hath no recompence and shall never be destroyed but temporal death shall But that which I say is this that for Adam's sin alone no man but himself is or can justly be condemned to the bitter pains of Eternal Fire This depends also upon the former accounts because meer Nature brings not to Hell but choice Nihil ardet in inferno nisi propria voluntas said S. Bernard and since Original sin is not properly ours but only by imputation if God should impute Adam's sin so as to damn any one for it all our good we receive from God is much less than that evil and we should be infinitely to seek for justifications of God's justice and glorifications of his mercy or testimonies of his goodness But now the matter is on this side so reasonable in it self that let a man take what side he will he shall have parties enough and no prejudices or load of a consenting authority can be against him but that there shall be on the side of reason as great and leading persons as there are of those who have been abused by errour and prejudice In the time of S. Augustine Vincentius Victor and some others did believe that Infants dying without Baptism should never the less be saved although he believed them guilty of Original sin Bucer Peter Martyr and Calvin affirmed the same of the children of faithful Parents but Zuinglius affirmed it of all and that no Infant did lose Heaven for his Original stain and corruption Something less than this was the Doctrine of the Pelagians who exclude Infants unbaptized from the Kingdom of Heaven but promised to them an eternal and a natural beatitude and for it S. Augustine reckons them for Hereticks as indeed being impatient of every thing almost which they said But yet the opinion was imbraced lately by Ambrosius Catherinus Albertus Pighius and Hieronymus Savanarola And though S. Augustine sometimes calls as good Men as himself by the Name of Pelagians calling all them so that assign a third place or state to Infants yet besides these now reckoned S. Gregory Nazianzen and his Scholiast Nicetes did believe and reach it and the same is affirmed also by S. Athanasius or whoever is the Author of the Questions to Antiochus usually attributed to him and also by S. Ambrose or the Author of the Commentaries on S. Paul's Epistles who lived in the time of Pope Damasus that is before 400. Years after Christ and even by S. Augustine himself expresly in his third Book de libero arbitrio cap. 23. But when he was heated with his disputations against the Pelagians he denied all and said that a middle place or state was never heard of in the Church For all this the opinion of a middle state for unbaptized Infants continued in the Church and was expresly affirmed by Pope Innocent the third who although he says Infants shall not see the face of God yet he expresly denies that they shall be tormented in Hell and he is generally followed by the Schoolmen who almost universally teach that Infants shall be deprived of the Vision Beatifical but shall not suffer Hell torments but yet they stoop so much towards S. Augustin's harsh and fierce Opinion that they say this deprivation is a part of Hell not of torment but of banishment from God and of abode in the place of torment Among these they are also divided some affirming that they have some pain of sense but little and light others saying they have none even as they pleased to fancy for they speak wholly without ground and meerly by chance and interest and against the consent of Antiquity as I have already instanced But Gregorius Ariminensis Driedo Luther Melancthon and Tilmanus Heshusius are fallen into the worst of S. Augustine's opinion and sentence poor Infants to the flames of Hell for Original sin if they die before Baptism To this I shall not say much more than what I have said otherwhere But that no Catholick Writer for 400. Years after Christ did ever affirm it but divers affirmed the contrary And indeed if the Unavoidable want of Baptism should damn Infants for the fault which was also unavoidable I do not understand how it can in any sence be true that Christ died for all if at least the Children of Christian Parents shall not find the benefit of Christ's Death because that without the fault of any man they want the ceremony Upon this account some good men observing the great sadness and the injustice of such an accident are willing upon any terms to admit Infants to Heaven even without Baptism if any one of their Relatives desire it for them or if the Church desires it which in effect admits all Christian infants to Heaven Of this opinion were Gerson Biel Cajetan and some others All which to my sence seems to declare that if men would give themselves freedom of judgment and speak what they think most reasonable they would speak honour of God's mercy and not impose such fierce and unintelligibe things concerning his justice and goodness since our blessed Saviour concerning infants and those only who are like infants affirms that of such is the Kingdom of Heaven But now in the midst of this great variety of Opinions it will be hard to pick out any thing that is certain For my part I believe this only as certain That Nature alone cannot bring them to Heaven and that Adam left us in a state in which we could not hope for it but this I know also that as soon as this was done Christ was promised and that before there was any birth of Man or Woman and that God's Grace is greater and more communicative than sin and Christ was more Gracious and effective than Adam was hurtful and that therefore it seems very agreeable to God's goodness to bring them to happiness by Christ who were brought to misery by Adam and that he will do this by himself alone in ways of his own finding out And yet if God will not give them Heaven by Christ he will not throw them into Hell by Adam if his goodness will not do the first his Goodness and his Justice will not suffer him to do the second and therefore I consent to Antiquity and the Schoolmens opinion thus far that the destitution or loss of God's sight is the effect of Original sin that is by Adam's sin we were left so as that we cannot by it go to Heaven But here I differ Whereas they
say this may be a final event I find no warrant for that and think it only to be an intermedial event that is though Adam's sin left us there yet God did not leave us there but instantly gave us Christ as a remedy and now what in particular shall be the state of Unbaptized infants so dying I do not profess to know or teach because God hath kept it as a secret I only know that he is a gracious Father and from his goodness nothing but goodness is to be expected and that is since neither Scripture nor any Father till about Saint Augustine's time did teach the poor Babes could die not onely once for Adam's sin but twice and for ever I can never think that I do my duty to GOD if I think or speak any thing of him that seems so unjust or so much against his goodness And therefore although by Baptism or by the ordinary Ministery Infants are new born and rescued from the state of Adam's account which metonymically may be called a remitting of Original sin that is a receiving them from the punishment of Adam's sin or the state of evil whither in him they are devolved yet Baptism does but consider that grace which God gives in Jesus Christ and he gives it more ways than one to them that desire Baptism to them that die for Christianity and the Church even in Origen's time and before that did account the Babes that died in Bethlehem by the Sword of Herod to be Saints and I do not doubt but he gives it many ways that we know not of And therefore S. Bernard and many others do suppose that the want of Baptism is supplied by the Baptism of the H. Ghost To which purpose the 87 Epistle of S. Bernard is worth the reading But this I add that those who affirmed that Infants without actual Baptism could not be saved affirmed the same also of them if they wanted the H. Eucharist as is to be seen in Paulinus epigr. 6. The writer of Hypognosticon lib. 5. S. Augustin Hom. 10. Serm. 8. de verbis Apostoli 107 Epistle to Vitalis And since no Church did ever enjoyn to any Catechumen any Penance or Repentance for Original sin it seems horrible and unreasonable that any man can be damned for that for which no man is bound to repent SECT V. The Doctrine of Antiquity in this whole matter The summe of all is this 18. I. ORiginal Sin is Adam's sin imputed to us to many evil effects II. It brings death and the evils of this life III. Our evils and necessity being brought upon us bring in a flood of passions which are hard to be bridled or mortified IV. It hath left us in pure naturals disrobed of such aids extraordinary as Adam had V. It deprives us of all title to Heaven or supernatural happiness that is it neither hath in it strength to live a spiritual life nor title to a heavenly VI. It leaves in us our natural concupiscence and makes it much worse Thus far I admit and explicate this Article But all that I desire of the usual Propositions which are variously taught now adays is this I. Original sin is not an inherent evil not a sin properly but metonymically that is it is the effect of one sin and the cause of many a stain but no sin II. It does not destroy our liberty which we had naturally III. It does not introduce a natural necessity of sinning IV. It does not damn any Infant to the Eternal Pains of Hell And now how consonant my explication of the Article is to the first and best antiquity besides the testimonies I have already brought here concerning some parts of it will appear by the following authorities speaking to the other parts of it and to the whole Question S. Ignatius the Martyr in his Epistle to the Magnesians hath these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If a man be a pious man He is a man of God if he be impious he is of the Devil not made so by nature but by his own choice and sentence by which words he excludes nature and affirms our natural liberty to be the cause of our good or evil that is we are in fault but not Adam so as we are And it is remarkable that Ignatius hath said nothing to the contrary of this or to infirm the force of these words and they who would fain have alledged him to contrary purposes cite him calling Adam's sin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the old iniquity which appellative is proper enough but of no efficacy in this question Dionysius the Areopagite if he be the Author of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy does very well explicate this Article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 When in the beginning humane nature foolishly fell from the state of good things which God gave it it was then entred into a life of passions and the end of the corruption of Death This sentence of his differs not from that of S. Chrysostome before alledged for when man grew miserable by Adam's fall and was disrobed of his aids he grew passionate and peevish and tempted and sick and died This is all his account of Adam's story and it is a very true one But the writer was of a later date not much before S. Austin's time as it is supposed but a learned and a Catholick believer 19. Concerning Justin Martyr I have already given this account that he did not think the liberty of choice impaired by Adam's sin but in his Dialogue with Tryphon the Jew he gives no account of Original sin but this that Christ was not crucified or born as if himself did need it but for the sake of Mankind which by Adam fell into death and the deception of the Serpent besides all that which men commit wickedly upon their own stock of impiety So that the effect of Adam's sin was death and being abused by the Devil for this very reason to rescue us from the effects of this deception and death and to redeem us from our impiety Christ was born and died But all this meddles not with any thing of the present Questions for to this all interests excepting the Pelagians and Socinians will subscribe It is material which is spoken by him or some under his name in the Questions and Answers to the Orthodox 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There is no man who is by nature born to sin and do wickedly but hath sinned and done wickedly But he is by nature born to sin who by the choice of his free-will is author to himself of doing what he will whether it be good or bad But an infant as being not indued with any such power it appears sufficiently that he is not by nature born to sin These words when they had been handled as men pleased and turned to such sences as they thought they could escape by at last they appear to be the words of one who understood nothing
Chrysostome even when he differs from others and in this Article he consents with him and the rest now reckoned when God made Adam and adorned him with reason he gave him one commandement that he might exercise his reason he being deceived broke the commandement and was exposed to the sentence of death and so he begat Cain and Seth and others but all these as being begotten of him had a mortal nature This kind of Nature wants many things meat and drink and cloaths and dwelling and divers arts the use of these things often-times provokes to excess and the excess begets sin Therefore the divine Apostle saith that when Adam had sinned and was made mortal for his sin both came to his stock that is death and sin for death came upon all inasmuch as all men have sinned For every man suffers the decree of death not for the sin of the first man but for his own Much more to the same purpose he hath upon the same Chapter but this is enough to all the purposes of this Question Now if any man thinks that though these give testimony in behalf of my explication of this Article yet that it were easie to bring very many more to the contrary I answer and profess ingenuously that I know of none till about S. Austin's time for that the first Ages taught the doctrine of Original sin I do no ways doubt but affirm it all the way but that it is a sin improperly that is a stain and a reproach rather than a sin that is the effect of one sin and the cause of many that it brought in sickness and death mortality and passions that it made us naked of those supernatural aides that Adam had and so more lyable to the temptations of the Devil this is all I find in antiquity and sufficient for the explication of this question which the more simply it is handled the more true and reasonable it is But that I may use the words of Solomon according to the Vulgar translation Hoc inveni quod fecerit Deus hominem rectum ipse se infinitis miscuerit quaestionibus God made man upright and he hath made himself more deformed than he is by mingling with innumerable questions 23. I think I have said enough to vindicate my sentence from Novelty and though that also be sufficient to quit me from singularity yet I have something more to add as to that particular and that is that it is very hard for a man to be singular in this Article if he would For first in the Primitive Church when Valentinus and Marcion Tatianus Julius Cassianus and the Encratites condemned marriage upon this account because it produces that only which is impure many good men and right believers did to justifie marriages undervalue the matter of Original sin this begat new questions in the manner of speaking and at last real differences were entertained and the Pelagian Heresie grew up upon this stock But they changed their Propositions so often that it was hard to tell what was the Heresie But the first draught of it was so rude so confused and so unreasonable that when any of the followers of it spake more warily and more learnedly yet by this time the name Pelagian was of so ill a sound that they would not be believed if they spake well nor trusted in their very recantations nor understood in their explications but cryed out against in all things right or wrong and in the fierce prosecution of this S. Austin and his followers Fulgentiâ—â— Prosper and others did excedere in dogmate pati aliquid humanum S. Austin called them all Pelagians who were of the middle opinion concerning infants and yet many Catholicks both before and since his time do profess it The Augustan confession calls them Pelagians who say that concupiscence is only the effect of Adam's sin and yet all the Roman Churches say it confidently and every man that is angry in this Question calls his Enemy Pelagian if he be not a Stoic or a Manichee a Valentinian or an Encratite But the Pelagians say so many things in their Controversie that like them that â—â—lk much they must needs say some things well though very many things amiss but if every thing which was said against S. Austin in these controversies be Pelagianism then all Antiquity were Pelagians and himself besides For he before his disputes in these Questions said much against what he said after as every learned man knows But yet it is certain that even after the Pelagian Heresie was conquered there were many good men who because they from every part take the good and leave the poyson were called Pelagians by them that were angry at them for being of another opinion in some of their Questions Cassian was a good and holy man and became the great rule of Monastines yet because he spake reason in his exhortations to Piety and justified God and blamed man he is called Pelagian and the Epistle ad Demetriadem and the little commentary on S. Paul's Epistles were read and commended highly by all men so long as they were supposed to be S. Hierom's but when some fancied that Faustus was the author they suspect the writings for the Man's sake and how-ever S. Austin was triumphant in the main Article against those Hereticks and there was great reason he should yet that he took in too much and confuted more than he should appears in this that though the World followed him in the condemnation of Pelagianisme yet the World left him in many things which he was pleased to call Pelagianisme And therefore when Arch-Bishop Bradwardin wrote his Books de causâ Dei against the liberty of will and for the fiercer way of absolute decrees he complains in his Preface that the whole World was against him and gone after Pelagius in causa liberi arbitrii Not that they really were made so but that it is an usual thing to affright men from their reasons by Names and words and to confute an argument by slandering him that uses it Now this is it that I and all men else ought to be troubled at if my doctrine be accused of singularity I cannot acquit my self of the charge but by running into a greater For if I say that one Proposition is taught by all the Roman Schools and therefore I am not singular in it They reply it is true but then it is Popery which you defend If I tell that the Lutherans defend another part of it then the Calvinists hate it therefore because their enemies avow it Either it is Popery or Pelagianisme you are an Arminian or a Socinian And either you must say that which no body sayes and then you are singular or if you do say as others say you shall feel the reproach of the party that you own which is also disowned by all but it self That therefore which I shall choose to say is this that the doctrine of Original sin as
I explicate it is wholly against the Pelagians for they wholly deny Original sin affirming that Adam did us no hurt by his sin except only by his example These Men are also followed by the Anabaptists who say that death is so natural that it is not by Adam's fall so much as made actual The Albigenses were of the same opinion The Socinians affirm that Adam's sin was the occasion of bringing eternal death into the World but that it no way relates to us not so much as by imputation But I having shewed in what sence Adam's sin is imputed to us am so far either from agreeing with any of these or from being singular that I have the acknowledgment of an adversary even of Bellarmine himself that it is the doctrine of the Church and he laboriously endeavours to prove that Original sin is meerly ours by imputation Add to this that he also affirms that when Zuinglius says that Original sin is not properly a sin but metonymically that is the effect of one sin and the cause of many that in so saying he agrees with the Catholicks Now these being the main affirmatives of my discourse it is plain that I am not alone but more are with me than against me Now though he is pleased afterwards to contradict himself and say it is veri nominis peccatum yet because I understood not how to reconcile the opposite parts of a contradiction or tell how the same thing should be really a sin and yet be so but by a figure onely how it should be properly a sin and yet onely metonymically and how it should be the effect of sin and yet that sin whereof it is an effect I confess here I stick to my reason and my proposition and leave Bellarmine and his Catholicks to themselves 25. And indeed they that say Original sin is any thing really any thing besides Adam's sin imputed to us to certain purposes that is effecting in us certain evils which dispose to worse they are according to the nature of error infinitely divided and agree in nothing but in this that none of them can prove what they say Anselme Bonaventure Gabriel and others say that Original sin is nothing but a want of Original righteousness Others say that they say something of truth but not enough for a privation can never be a positive sin and if it be not positive it cannot be inherent and therefore that it is necessary that they add indignitatem habendi a certain unworthiness to have it being in every man that is the sin But then if it be asked what makes them unworthy if it be not the want of Original righteousness and that then they are not two things but one seemingly and none really they are not yet agreed upon an answer Aquinas and his Scholars say Original sin is a certain spot upon the soul. Melancthon considering that concupiscence or the faculty of desiring or the tendency to an object could not be a sin fancied Original sin to be an actual depraved desire Illyrious says it is the substantial image of the Devil Scotus and Durandus say it is nothing but a meer guilt that is an obligation passed upon us to suffer the evil effects of it which indeed is most moderate of all the opinions of the School and differs not at all or scarce discernibly from that of Albertus Pighius and Catharinus who say that Original sin is nothing but the disobedience of Adam imputed to us But the Lutherans affirm it to be the depravation of humane nature without relation to the sin of Adam but a vileness that is in us The Church of Rome of late sayes that besides the want of Original righteousness with an habitual aversion from God it is a guiltiness and a spot but it is nothing of Concupiscence that being the effect of it only But the Protestants of Mr. Calvin's perswasion affirm that concupiscence is the main of it and is a sin before and after Baptism but amongst all this infinite uncertainty the Church of England speaks moderate words apt to be construed to the purposes of all peaceable men that desire her communion 26. Thus every one talks of Original sin and agree that there is such a thing but what it is they agree not and therefore in such infinite Variety he were of a strange imperious spirit that would confine others to his particular fancy For my own part now that I have shown what the Doctrine of the purest Ages was what uncertainty there is of late in the Question what great consent there is in some of the main parts of what I affirm and that in the contrary particulars Men cannot agree I shall not be ashamed to profess what company I now keep in my opinion of the Article no worse Men than Zuinglius Stapulensis the great Erasmus and the incomparable Hugo Grotius who also says there are multi in Gallia qui eandem sententiam magnis same argumentis tuentur many in France which with great argument defend the same sentence that is who explicate the article intirely as I do and as S. Chrysostome and Theodoret did of old in compliance with those H. Fathers that went before them with whom although I do not desire to erre yet I suppose their great names are guard sufficient against prejudices and trifling noises and an amulet against the Names of Arminian Socinian Pelagian and I cannot tell what Monsters of appellatives But these are but Boyes tricks and arguments of Women I expect from all that are wiser to examine whether this Opinion does not or whether the contrary does better explicate the truth with greater reason and to better purposes of Piety let it be examined which best glorifies God and does honour to his justice and the reputation of his Goodness which does with more advantage serve the interest of holy living and which is more apt to patronize carelesness and sin These are the measures of wise and good men the other are the measures of Faires and Markets where fancy and noise do govern SECT VI. An Exposition of the Ninth Article of the Church of England concerning Original sin according to Scripture and Reason 27. AFter all this it is pretended and talked of that my Doctrine of Original sin is against the Ninth Article of the Church of England and that my attempt to reconcile them was ineffective Now although this be nothing to the truth or falshood of my Doctrine yet it is much concerning the reputation of it Concerning which I cannot be so much displeased that any man should so undervalue my reason as I am highly content that they do so very much value her Authority But then to acquit my self and my Doctrine from being contrary to the Article all that I can do is to expound the Article and make it appear that not only the words of it are capable of a fair construction but also that it is reasonable they should be expounded so
temptation but he offends God and then how we should understand S. James's rule that we should count it all joy when we enter into temptation is beyond my reach and apprehension The Natural inclination hath in it nothing moral and g. as it is good in Nature so it is not ill in manners the supervening consent or dissent makes it morally good or evil 34. In every person born into the world it deserveth Gods wrath and damnation Viz. When it is so consented to when it resists and overcomes the spirit of grace For we being devested of the grace given to the first Adam are to be renewed by the spirit of grace the effect of the second Adam which grace when we resist we do as Adam did and reduce our selves back into the state where Adam left us That was his sin and not ours but this is our sin and not his both of them deserve Gods wrath and damnation but by one he deserved it and by the other we deserve it But then it is true that this corrupted Nature deserves Gods wrath but we and Adam deserve not in the same formality but in the same material part we do He left our Nature naked and for it he deserved Gods wrath if we devest our Nature of the new grace we return to the same state of Nature but then we deserve Gods wrath so that still the object of Gods wrath is our mere Nature so as left by Adam but though he sinned in the first disrobing and we were imperfect by it yet we sin not till the second disrobing and then we return to the same imperfection and make it worse But I consider that although some Churches in their confessions express it yet the Church of England does not they add the word Eternal to Damnation but our Church abstains from that therefore Gods wrath and damnation can signifie the same that damnation does in S. Paul all the effects of Gods anger Temporal Death and the miseries of mortality was the effect of Adams sin and of our being reduc'd to the Natural and Corrupted or worsted state Or secondly they may signifie the same that hatred does in S. Paul and in Malachi Esau have I hated that is lov'd him less or did not give him what he was born to he lost the primogeniture and the Priesthood and the blessing So do we naturally fall short of Heaven This is hatred or the wrath of God and his Judgment upon the sin of Adam to condemn us to a state of imperfection and misery and death and deficiency from supernatural happiness all which I grant to be the effect of Adams sin and that our imperfect Nature deserves this that is it can deserve no better 35. And this infection of Nature Viz. This imperfection not any inherent quality that by contact pollutes the relatives and descendants but this abuse and reproach of our Nature this stain of our Nature by taking off the supernatural grace and beauties put into it like the cutting off the beards of Davids Embassadors or stripping a man of his robe and turning him abroad in his natural shame leaving him naked as Adam and we were But the word infection being metaphorical may aptly signifie any thing that is analogical to it and may mean a Natural habitude or inclination to forbidden instances But yet it signifies a very great evil for in the best Authors to be such by Nature means an aggravation of it So Carion in Aristophanes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This man is very miserable or miserable by Nature and again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Do you believe me to be such a man by Nature that I can speak nothing well 36. Doth remain yea in them that are regenerated That is all the baptized and unbaptized receive from Adam nothing but what is inclined to forbidden instances which is a principle against which and above which the spirit of God does operate For this is it which is called the lust of the flesh for so it follows whereby the lust of the flesh that is the desires and pronenesses to Natural objects which by Gods will came to be limited order'd and chastis'd curb'd and restrain'd 37. Called in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Here it is plain that the Church of England though she found it necessary to declare something in the fierce contention of the time in order to peace and unity of expression yet she was not willing too minutely to declare and descend to the particulars on either side and therefore she was pleas'd to make use of the Greek word of the sence of which there were so many disputes and recites the most usual redditions of the word 38. Which some do expound the wisdom some the sensuality some the affection some the desire of the flesh is not subject to the law of God These several expositions reciting several things and the Church of England reciting all indefinitely but definitely declaring for none of them does only in the generality affirm that the flesh and spirit are contrary principles that the flesh resists the law of God but the spirit obeys it that is by the flesh alone we cannot obey Gods law naturally we cannot become the sons of God and heirs of Heaven but it must be a new birth by a spiritual regeneration The wisdom of the flesh that is Natural and secular principles are not apt dispositions to make us obedient to the law of God Sensuality that signifies an habitual lustfulness Desires signifie actual Lustings Affections signifie the Natural inclination now which of these is here meant the Church hath not declar'd but by the other words of the Article it is most probable She rather inclines to render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by desires and sensuality rather than by affection or wisdom though of these also in their own sence it is true to affirm that they are not subject to the law of God there being some foolish principles which the flesh and the world is apt to entertain which are hindrances to holiness and the affection that is inclination to some certain objects being that very thing which the laws of God have restrained more or less in several periods of the world may without inconvenience to the Question be admitted to expound 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 39. And although there is no condemnation to them that believe and are baptized That is this concupiscence or inclination to forbidden instances is not imputed to the baptized nor to the regenerate that is when the new principle of grace and of the spirit is put into us we are reduced to as great a condition and as certain an order and a capacity of entring into Heaven as Adam was before his fall for then we are drawn from that mere natural state where Adam left us and therefore although these do die yet it is but the condition of nature not the punishment of the sin For Adams sin brought in Death and baptism and regeneration does not hinder
and ordinarily and the evil which I hate I do avoid sometimes indeed I am surpris'd and when I do neglect to use the aids and strengths of the spirit of grace I fall but this is because I will not and not because I cannot help it and in this case the man is not a servant or captive of sin but a servant of Christ though weak and imperfect But if it means I do it commonly or constantly or frequently which is certainly the complaint here made then to be a regenerate person is to be a vile person sold under sin and not Gods servant For if any man shall suppose these words to mean only thus I do not do so much good as I would and do sometimes fall into evil though I would fain be intirely innocent indeed this man teaches no false doctrine as to the state or duty of the regenerate which in this life will for ever be imperfect but he speaks not according to the sence and design of the Apostle here For his purpose is to describe that state of evil in which we are by nature and from which we could not be recovered by the law and from which we can only be redeemed by the grace of Jesus Christ and this is a state of death of being killed by sin of being captivated and sold under sin after the manner of slaves as will further appear in the sequel 12. III. Every regenerate man and servant of Christ hath the Spirit of Christ. But where the Spirit of God is there is liberty therefore no slavery therefore sin reigns not there Both the propositions are the words of the Apostle The conclusion therefore infers that the man whom S. Paul describes in this Chapter is not the regenerate man for he hath not liberty but is in captivity to the law of sin from which every one that is Christs every one that hath the Spirit of Christ is freed 13. IV. And this is that which S. Paul calls being under the law that is a being carnal and in the state of the flesh not but that the law it self is spiritual but that we being carnal of our selves are not cured by the law but by reason of the infirmity of the flesh made much worse curbed but not sweetly won admonished but assisted by no spirit but the spirit of bondage and fear This state is opposed to the spiritual state The giving of the law is called the ministery of death the Gospel is called the ministery of the Spirit and that is the ministration of life and therefore if we be led by the Spirit we are not under the law but if we be under the law we are dead and sin is revived and sin by the law brings forth fruit unto death From hence the argument of the Apostle is clear The man whom he here describes is such a one who is under the law but such a man is dead by reason of sin and therefore hath not in him the Spirit of God for that is the ministration of life A regenerate person is alive unto God he lives the life of righteousness but he that is under the law is killed by sin and such is the man that is here described as appears verse 9. and I shall in the sequel further prove therefore this man is not the regenerate 14. V. To which for the likeness of the argument I add this That the man who can say I do that which I hate is a man in whom sin is not mortified and therefore he lives after the flesh but then he is not regenerate for if ye live after the flesh ye shall die saith S. Paul but if ye through the Spirit do mortifie the deeds of the body ye shall live These arguments are taken from consideration of the rule and dominion of sin in the man whom S. Paul describes who therefore cannot be a regenerate person To the same effect and conclusion are other expressions in the same Chapter 15. VI. The man whom S. Paul here describes who complains That he does not the good which he would but the evil that he would not is such a one in whom sin does inhabit It is no more I but sin that dwelleth in me But in the regenerate sin does not inhabit My Father and I will come unto him and make our abode with him So Christ promised to his servants to them who should be regenerate and the Spirit of God dwelleth in them the Spirit of him that raised Jesus from the dead and therefore the Regenerate are called the habitation of God through the Spirit Now if God the Father if Christ if the Spirit of Christ dwells in a man there sin does not dwell The strong man that is armed keeps possession but if a stronger than he comes he dispossesses him If the Spirit of God does not drive the Devil forth himself will leave the place They cannot both dwell together Sin may be in the regenerate and grieve Gods Spirit but it shall not abide or dwell there for that extinguishes him One or the other must depart And this also is noted by S. Paul in this very place sin dwelleth in me and no good thing dwelleth in me If one does the other does not but yet as in the unregenerate there might be some good such as are good desires knowledge of good and evil single actions of vertue beginnings and dispositions to grace acknowledging of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ some lightnings and flashes of the holy Ghost a knowing of the way of righteousness but sanctifying saving good does not dwell that is does not abide with them and rule so in the regenerate there is sin but because it does not dwell there they are under the Empire of the Spirit and in Christs Kingdom or as S. Paul expresses it Christ liveth in them and that cannot be unless sin be crucified and dead in them The summ of which is thus in S. Paul's words Reckon your selves indeed to be dead unto sin but alive unto God through Jesus Christ. Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof For sin shall not have dominion over you because we are not under the law but under grace 16. VII Lastly the man whom S. Paul describes is carnal but the regenerate is never called carnal in the Scripture but is spiritual oppos'd to carnal A man not only in pure naturals but even plac'd under the law is called carnal that is until he be redeemed by the Spirit of Christ he cannot be called spiritual but is yet in the flesh Now that the regenerate cannot be the carnal man is plain in the words of S. Paul The carnal mind is enmity against God and they that are in the flesh cannot please God To which he adds But ye are not in the flesh but in the Spirit if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you
excellency of the Divine grace and S. Austin needed not to have been put to his shifts in this Question it is considerable that his first Exposition had done his business better For if these words of S. Paul be as indeed they are to be expounded of an unregenerate man one under the law but not under grace nothing could more have magnified Gods grace than that an unregenerate person could not by all the force of nature nor the aids of the law nor the spirit of fear nor temporal hopes be redeem'd from the slavery and tyranny of sin and that from this state there is no redemption but by the Spirit of God and the grace of the Lord Jesus which is expresly affirmed and proved by S. Paul if you admit this sence of the words And therefore Irenaeus who did so cites these words to the same effect viz. for the magnifying the grace of God Ipse Dominus erat qui salvabat eos quia per semetipsos non habebant salvari Et propter hoc Paulus infirmitatem hominis annuncians ait Scio enim quoniam non habitat in carne meâ bonum significans quoniam non à nobis sed à Deo est bonum salutis Et iterum Miser ego homo quis me liberabit de corpore mortis hujus Deinde infert liberatorem Gratia Jesu Christi Domini nostri S. Paul's complaint shews our own infirmity and that of our selves we cannot be saved but that our salvation is of God and the grace of our Redeemer Jesus Christ. But whatever S. Austins design might be in making the worse choice it matters not much only to the interpretation it self I have these considerations to oppose 19. I. Because the phrase is insolent and the exposition violent to render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by concupiscere to do is more than to desire factum dictum concupitum are the several kinds and degrees of sinning assigned by S. Austin himself and therefore they cannot be confounded and one made to expound the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is also used here by the Apostle which in Scripture signifies sometimes to sin habitually never less than actually and the other word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies perficere patrare to finish the act at least or to do a sin throughly and can in no sence be reasonably expounded by natural ineffective and unavoidable desires And it is observable that when S. Austin in prosecution of this device is to expound those words to will is present with me 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but to perform what is good I find not he makes the word to signifie to do it perfectly which is as much beyond as the other sence of the same word is short What I do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I approve not Therefore the man does not do his sin perfectly he does the thing imperfectly for he does it against his conscience and with an imperfect choice but he does the thing however So 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must signifie to do the good imperfectly the action it self only for such was this mans impotency that he could not obtain power to do even imperfectly the good he desir'd The evil he did though against his mind but the good he could not because it was against the law of sin which reigned in him But then the same word must not to serve ends be brought to signifie a perfect work and yet not to signifie so much as a perfect desire 20. II. The sin which S. Paul under another person complains of is such a sin as did first deceive him and then slew him but concupiscence does not kill till it proceeds further as S. James expresly affirms that concupiscence when it hath conceived brings forth sin and sin when it is finished brings forth death which is the just parallel to what S. Paul says in this very Chapter The passions of sins which were by the law did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death peccatum perpetratum when the desires are acted then sin is deadly the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the passions or first motions of sin which come upon us nobis non volentibus nec scientibus whether we will or no these are not imputed to us unto death but are the matter of vertue when they are resisted and contradicted but when they are consented to and delighted in then it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sin in conception with death and will proceed to action unless it be hindred from without and therefore it is then the same sin by interpretation Adulterium cordis so our blessed Saviour called it in that instance the adultery of the heart but till it be an actual sin some way or other it does not bring forth death 21. III. It is an improper and ungrammatical manner of speaking to say Nolo concupiscere or Volo non concupiscere I will lust or I will not lust i. e. I will or I will not desire or will For this lust or first motions of desire are before an act of will the first act of which is when these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 these motions and passions are consented to or rejected These motions are natural and involuntary and are no way in our power but when they are occasion'd by an act of the Will collaterally and indirectly or by applying the proper incentives to the faculty Vellem non concupiscere every good man must say I would fain be free from concupiscence but because he cannot it is not subject to his Will and he cannot say volo I will be free and therefore S. Paul's Volo and Nolo are not intended of Concupiscence or desires 22. IV. The good which S. Austin says the Apostle fain would but could not perfect or do it perfectly is Non concupiscere not to have concupiscence Volo non perficio but Concupiscere is but velle it is not so much and therefore cannot be more So that when he says to will is present with me he must mean to desire well is present with me but to do this I find not that is if S. Austins interpretation be true though I do desire well yet I do lust and do not desire well for still concupisco I lust and I lust not I have concupiscence and I have it not which is a contradiction 23. Many more things might be observed from the words of the Apostle to overthrow this exposition but the truth when it is proved will sufficiently reprove what is not true and therefore I shall apply my self to consider the proper intention and design of the Apostle in those so much mistaken periods SECT IV. 24. COncerning which these things are to be cleared upon which the whole issue will depend 1. That S. Paul speaks not in his own person as an Apostle or a Christian a man who is regenerate but in the person of a Jew one under the law one that is not regenerate 2. That
this state which he describes is the state of a carnal man under the corruption of his nature upon whom the law had done some change but had not cured him 3. That from this state of evil we are redeemed by the Spirit of Christ by the Grace of the Gospel and now a Child of God cannot complain this complaint 25. I. That he puts on the person of another by a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or translation as was usual with S. Paul in very many places of his Epistles is evident by his affirming that of the man whom he here describes which of himself were not true I was alive without the law once Of S. Paul's own person this was not true for he was bred and born under the law circumcised the eighth day an Hebrew of the Hebrews as touching the law a Pharisee he never was alive without the law But the Israelites were whom he therefore represents indefinitely under a single person the whole Nation before and under the law I was alive once without the law but when the Commandment came that is when the law was given sin revived and I died that is by occasion of the law sin grew stronger and prevailed 2. But concerning the Christian and his present condition he expresly makes it separate from that of being under the law and consequently under sin But now we are delivered from the law that being dead wherein we were held that we should serve in newness of the spirit and not in the oldness of the letter We are delivered It is plain that some sort of men are freed from that sad condition of things of which he there complains and if any be it must be the regenerate And so it is For the scope of the Apostle in this Chapter is to represent and prove that salvation is not to be had by the law but by Jesus Christ and that by that discipline men cannot be contain'd in their duty and therefore that it was necessary to forsake the law and to come to Christ. To this purpose he brings in a person complaining that under the discipline of the law he was still under the power of sin Now if this had been also true of a regenerate person of a Christian renewed by the Spirit of grace then it had been no advantage to have gone from the Law to Christ as to this argument for still the Christian would be under the same slavery which to be the condition of one under the law S. Paul was to urge as an argument to call them from Moses to Christ. 26. II. That this state which he now describes is the state of a carnal man under the corruption of his nature appears by his saying that sin had wrought in him all manner of concupiscence that sin revived and he died that the motions of sin which were by the law did work in the members to bring forth fruit unto death and that this was when we were in the flesh that he is carnal sold under sin that he is carried into captivity to the law of sin that sin dwells in him and is like another person doing or constraining him to do things against his mind that it is a State and a Government a Law and a Tyranny For that which I do I allow not plainly saying that this doing what we would not that is doing against our conscience upon the strength of passion and in obedience to the law of sin was the state of them who indeed were under the law but the effect of carnality and the viciousness of their natural and ungracious condition Here then is the description of a natural and carnal man He sins frequently he sins against his conscience he is carnal and sold under sin sin dwells in him and gives him laws he is a slave to sin and led into captivity Now if this could be the complaint of a regenerate man from what did Christ come to redeem us how did he take away our sins did he only take off the punishment and still leave us to wallow in the impurities and baser pleasures perpetually to rail upon our sins and yet perpetually to do them How did he come to bless us in turning every one of us from our iniquity How and in what sence could it be true which the Apostle affirms He did bear our sins in his own body on the tree that we being dead unto sin should live unto righteousness But this proposition I suppose my self to have sufficiently proved in the reproof of the first exposition of these words in question only I shall in present add the concurrent testimony of some Doctors of the Primitive Church Tertullian hath these words Nam etsi habitare bonum in carne suâ negavit sed secundum legem literae in quâ fuit secundum autem legem Spiritus cui nos annectit liberat ab infirmitate carnis Lex enim inquit Spiritus vitae manumisit te à lege delinquentiae mortis Licet enim ex parte ex Judaismo disputare videatur sed in nos dirigit integritatem plenitudinem disciplinarum propter quos laborantes in lege per carnem miserit Deus filium suum in similitudinem carnis delinquentiae propter delinquentiam damnaverit delinquentiam in carne Plainly he expounds this Chapter to be meant of a man under the law according to the law of the letter under which himself had been he denied any good to dwell in his flesh but according to the law of the Spirit under which we are plac'd he frees us from the infirmity of the flesh for he saith the law of the Spirit of life hath freed us from the law of sin and death Origen affirms that when S. Paul says I am carnal sold under sin Tanquam Doctor Ecclesiae personam in semetipsum suscipit infirmorum he takes upon him the person of the infirm that is of the carnal and says those words which themselves by way of excuse or apology use to speak But yet says he this person which S. Paul puts on although Christ does not dwell in him neither is his body the Temple of the holy Ghost yet he is not wholly a stranger from good but by his will and by his purpose he begins to look after good things But he cannot yet obtain to do them For there is such an infirmity in those who begin to be converted that is whose mind is convinc'd but their affections are not master'd that when they would presently do all good yet an effect did not follow their desires S. Chrysostom hath a large Commentary upon this Chapter and his sence is perfectly the same Propterea subnexuit dicens Ego verò carnalis sum hominem describens sub lege ante legem degentem S. Paul describes not himself but a man living under and before the law and of such a one he says but I am carnal Who please to see more
it before a sinner can be tied to it For to have displeased God is a great evil but what is it to me if it will bring no evil to me It is a Metaphysical and a Moral evil but unless it be also naturally and sensibly so it is not the object of a natural and proper grief It follows therefore that the state of a repenting person must have in it some more causes of sorrow than are usually taught or else in vain can they be called upon to weep and mourn for their sins Well may they wring their faces and their hands and put on black those disguises of passion and curtains of joy those ceremonies and shadows of rich widows and richer heirs by which they decently hide their secret smiles well may they rend their garments but upon this account they can never rend their hearts 7. For the stating of this Article it is considerable that there are several parts or periods of sorrow which are effected by several principles In the beginning of our repentance sometimes we feel cause enough to grieve For God smites many into repentance either a sharp sickness does awaken us or a calamity upon our house or the death of our dearest relative and they that find sin so heavily incumbent and to press their persons or fortunes with feet of lead will feel cause enough and need not to be disputed into a penitential sorrow They feel Gods anger and the evil effects of sin and that it brings sorrow and then the sorrow is justly great because we have done that evil which brings so sad a judgment 8. And in the same proportion there is always a natural cause of sorrow where there is a real cause of fear and so it is ever in the beginning of repentance and for ought we know it is for ever so and albeit the causes of fear lessen as the repentance does proceed yet it will never go quite off till hope it self be gone and passed into charity or at least into a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into that fulness of confidence which is given to few as the reward of a lasting and conspicuous holiness And the reason is plain For though it be certain in religion that whoever repents shall be pardoned yet it is a long time before any man hath repented worthily and it is as uncertain in what manner and in what measures and in what time God will give us pardon It is as easie to tell the very day in which a man first comes to the use of reason as to tell the very time in which we are accepted to final pardon The progressions of one being as divisible as the other and less discernible For reason gives many fair indications of it self whereas God keeps the secrets of this mercy in his sanctuary and draws not the curtain till the day of death or judgment 9. Add to this that our very repentances have many allays and imperfections and so hath our pardon And every one that sins hath so displeased God that he is become the subject of the Divine anger Death is the wages what death God please and therefore what evil soever God will inflict or his mortality can suffer and he that knows this hath cause to fear and he that fears hath cause to be grieved that he is fallen from that state of divine favour in which he stood secured with the guards of Angels and covered with Heaven it self as with a shield in which he was beloved of God and heir of all his glories 10. But they that describe repentance in short and obscure characters and make repentance and pardon to be the children of a minute and born and grown up quickly as a fly or a mushrome with the dew of a night or the tears of a morning making the labours of the one and the want of the other to expire sooner than the pleasures of a transient sin are so insensible of the sting of sin that indeed upon their grounds it will be impossible to have a real godly sorrow For though they have done evil yet by this doctrine they feel none and there is nothing remains as a cause of grief unless they will be sorrowful for that they have been pleased formerly and are now secured nothing remains before them or behind but the pleasure that they had and the present confidence and impunity and that 's no good instrument of sorrow Securitas delicti etiam libido est ejus Sin takes occasion by the law it self if there be no penalty annexed 11. But the first in-let of a godly sorrow which is the beginning of repentance is upon the stock of their present danger and state of evil into which by their sin they are fallen viz. when their guilt is manifest they see that they are become sons of death expos'd to the wrath of a provoked Deity whose anger will express it self when and how it please and for ought the man knows it may be the greatest and it may be intolerable and though his danger is imminent and certain yet his pardon is a great way off it may be Yea it may be No it must be hop'd for but it may be missed for it is upon conditions and they are or will seem very hard Sed ut valeas multa dolenda feres So that in the summ of affairs however that the greatest sinner and the smallest penitent are very apt and are taught by strange doctrines to flatter themselves into confidence and presumption yet he will have reason to mourn and weep when he shall consider that he is in so sad a condition that because his life is uncertain it is also uncertain whether or no he shall not be condemned to an eternal prison of flames so that every sinner hath the same reason to be sorrowful as he hath who from a great state of blessings and confidence is fallen into great fears and great dangers and a certain guilt and liableness of losing all he hath and suffering all that is insufferable They who state repentance otherwise cannot make it reasonable that a penitent should shed a tear And therefore it is no wonder that we so easily observe a great dulness and indifferency so many dry eyes and merry hearts in persons that pretend repentance it cannot more reasonably be attributed to any cause than to those trifling and easie propositions of men that destroy the causes of sorrow by lessening and taking off the opinion of danger But now that they are observed and reproved I hope the evil will be lessened But to proceed 12. II. Having now stated the reasonableness and causes of penitential sorrow the next inquity is into the nature and constitution of that sorrow For it is to be observed that penitential sorrow is not seated in the affections directly but in the understanding and is rather Odium than Dolor it is hatred of sin and detestation of it a nolition a renouncing and disclaiming it whose expression is a resolution never
praesunt tempora poenitentiae ut fiat etiam satis Ecclesiae in quâ remittuntur ipsa peccata Extra eam quippe non remittuntur The times of penance are with great reason appointed by Ecclesiastical Governours that the Church in whose communion sins are forgiven may be satisfied For out of her there is no forgiveness 45. For in this case the Church hath a power of binding and retaining sins and sinners that is a denying to them the priviledges of the faithful till they by publick repentance and satisfaction have given testimony of their return to Gods favour and service The Church may deny to pray publickly for some persons and refuse to admit them into the society of those that do pray and refuse till she is satisfied concerning them by such signs and indications as she will appoint and chuse For it appears in both Testaments that those who are appointed to pray for others to stand between God and the people had it left in their choice sometimes and sometimes were forbidden to pray for certain criminals Thus God gave to the Prophet charge concerning Ephraim Pray not thou for this people neither lift up cry nor prayer for them neither make intercession for them for I will not hear thee Like to this was that of S. John There is a sin unto death I say not that ye pray for him that sins unto death that is do not admit such persons to the communion of prayers and holy offices at least the Church may chuse whether she will or no. 46. The Church in her Government and Discipline had two ends and her power was accordingly apt to minister to these ends 1. By condemning and punishing the sin she was to do what she could to save the criminal that is by bringing him to repentance and a holy life to bring him to pardon 2. And if she could or if she could not effect this yet she was to remove the scandal and secure the flock from infection This was all that was needful this was all that was possible to be done In order to the first the Apostles had some powers extraordinary which were indeed necessary at the beginning of the Religion not only for this but for other ministrations The Apostles had power to bind sinners that is to deliver them over to Satan and to sad diseases or death it self and they had power to loose sinners that is to cure their diseases to unloose Satans bands to restore them to Gods favour and pardon 47. This manner of speaking was used by our blessed Saviour in this very case of sickness and infirmity Ought not this woman a daughter of Abraham whom Satan hath bound loe these eighteen years be loosed from this band on the Sabbath day The Apostles had this power of binding and loosing and that this is the power of remitting and retaining sins appears without exception in the words of our blessed Saviour to the Jews who best understood the power of forgiving sins by seeing the evil which sin brought on the guilty person taken away That ye may know that the Son of Man hath power on earth to forgive sins He saith to the man sick of the Palsie Arise take up thy bed and walk For there is a power in Heaven and a power on Earth to forgive sins The power that is in Heaven is the publick absolution of a sinner at the day of Judgment The power on Earth to forgive sins is a taking off those intermedial evils which are inflicted in the way sicknesses temporal death loss of the Divine grace and of the priviledges of the faithful These Christ could take off when he was upon Earth and his Heavenly Father sent him to do all this to heal all sicknesses and to cure all infirmities and to take away our sins and to preach glad tidings to the poor and comfort to the afflicted and rest to the weary and heavy laden The other judgment is to be perform'd by Christ at his second coming 48. Now as God the Father sent his Son so his holy Son sent his Apostles with the same power on Earth to bind and loose sinners to pardon sins by taking away the material evil effects which sin should superinduce or to retain sinners by binding them in sad and hard bands to bring them to reason or to make others afraid Thus S. Peter sentenc'd Ananias and Saphira to a temporal death and S. Paul stroke Elymas with blindness and deliver'd over the incestuous Corinthian to be beaten by an evil spirit and so also he did to Hymenaeus and Alexander 49. But this was an extraordinary power and not to descend upon the succeeding ages of the Church but it was in this as in all other ministeries something miraculous and extraordinary was for ever to consign a lasting truth and ministery in ordinary The preaching of the Gospel that is faith it self at first was prov'd by miracles and the Holy Ghost was given by signs and wonders and sins were pardon'd by the gifts of healing and sins were retained by the hands of an Angel and the very visitation of the sick was blessed with sensible and strange recoveries and every thing was accompanied with a miracle excepting the two Sacraments in the administration of which we do not find any mention of any thing visibly miraculous in the records of holy Scripture and the reason is plain because these two Sacraments were to be for ever the ordinary ministeries of those graces which at first were consign'd by signs and wonders extraordinary For in all ages of the Church reckoning exclusively from the days of the Apostles all the graces of the Gospel all the promises of God were conveyed or consign'd or fully ministred by these Sacraments and by nothing else but what was in order to them These were the inlets and doors by which all the faithful were admitted into the outer Courts of the Lords Temple or into the secrets of the Kingdom and the solemnities themselves were the Keys of these doors and they that had the power of ministration of them they had the power of the Keys 50. These then being the whole Ecclesiastical power and the summ of their ministrations were to be dispensed according to the necessities and differing capacities of the sons and daughters of the Church The Thessalonians who were not furnished with a competent number of Ecclesiastical Governours were commanded to abstain from the company of the brethren that walk'd disorderly S. John wrote to the Elect Lady that she should not entertain in her house false Apostles and when the former way did expire of it self and by the change of things and the second advice was not practicable and prudent they were reduced to the only ordinary ministery of remitting and retaining sins by a direct admitting or refusing and deferring to admit criminals to their ministeries of pardon which were now only left in the Church as their ordinary power and ministration For since in this world all our
because they could not put to death Sejanus's daughters as being Virgins defloured them after sentence that by that barbarity they might be capable of the utmost Cruelty it makes God to be all that for which any other thing or person is or can be hated for it makes him neither to be good nor just nor reasonable but a mighty enemy to the biggest part of mankind it makes him to hate what himself hath made and to punish that in another which in himself he decreed should not be avoided it charges the wisdom of God with solly as having no means to glorifie his justice but by doing unjustly by bringing in that which himself hates that he might do what himself loves doing as Tiberius did to Brutus and Nero the Sons of Germanicus Variâ fraude induxit ut concitarentur ad convitia concitati perderentur provoking them to rail that he might punish their reproachings This opinion reproaches the words of the Spirit of Scripture it charges God with Hypocrisie and want of Mercy making him a Father of Cruelties not of Mercy and is a perfect overthrow of all Religion and all Laws and all Government it destroys the very being and nature of all Election thrusting a man down to the lowest form of Beasts and Birdâ— to whom a Spontaneity of doing certain actions is given by God but it is in them so natural that it is unavoidable Now concerning this hoâ—rid opinion I for my part shall say nothing but this That he that says there was no such man as Alexander would tell a horrible lie and be injurious to all story and to the memory and same of that great Prince but he that should say It is true there was such a man as Alexander but he was a Tyrant and a Blood-sucker cruel and injurious false and dissembling an enemy of mankind and for all the reasons of the world to be hated and reproached would certainly dishonour Alexander more and be his greatest enemy So I think in this That the Atheists who deny there is a God do not so impiously against God as they that charge him with foul appellatives or maintain such sentences which if they were true God could not be true But these men Madam have nothing to do in the Question of Original Sin save only that they say that God did decree that Adam should fall and all the sins that he sinned and all the world after him are no effects of choice but of predestination that is they were the actions of God rather than man But because these men even to their brethren seem to speak evil things of God therefore the more wary and temperate of the Calvinists bring down the order of reprobation lower affirming that God looked upon all mankind in Adam as fallen into his displeasure hated by God truly guilty of his sin liable to Eternal damnation and they being all equally condemned he was pleased to separate some the smaller number far and irresistibly bring them to Heaven but the far greater number he passed over leaving them to be damned for the sin of Adam and so they think they salve Gods Justice and this was the design and device of the Synod of Dort Now to bring this to pass they teach concerning Original Sin 1. That by this sin our first Parents fell from their Original righteousness and communion with God and so became dead in sin and wholly defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul and body 2. That whatsoever death was due to our first Parents for this sin they being the root of all mankind and the guilt of this sin being imputed the same is conveyed to all their posterity by ordinary generation 3. That by this Original corruption we are utterly indisposed disabled and made opposite to all good and wholly inclined to all evil and that from hence proceed all actual transgressions 4. This corruption of nature remains in the regenerate and although it be through Christ pardoned and mortified yet both it self and all the motions thereof are truly and properly sin 5. Original sin being a transgression of the righteous Law of God and contrary thereunto doth in its own nature bring guilt upon the sinner whereby he is bound over to the wrath of God and curse of the Law and so made subject to death with all miseries spiritual temporal and eternal These are the sayings of the late Assembly at Westminster Against this heap of errors and dangerous propositions I have made my former discoursings and statings of the Question of Original sin These are the Doctrines of the Presbyterian whose face is towards us but it is over-against us in this and many other questions of great concernment Nemo tam propè proculque nobis He is nearest to us and furthest from us but because I have as great a love to their persons as I have a dislike to some of their Doctrines I shall endeavour to serve truth and them by reproving those propositions which make truth and them to stand at distance Now I shall first speak to the thing in general and its designs then I shall make some observations upon the particulars 1. This device of our Presbyterians and of the Synod of Dort is but an artifice to save their proposition harmless and to stop the out-cries of Scripture and reason and of all the World against them But this way of stating the Article of reprobation is as horrid in the effect as the other For 1. Is it by a natural consequent that we are guilty of Adams sin or is it by the decree of God Naturally it cannot be for then the sins of all our forefathers who are to their posterity the same that Adam was to his must be ours and not only Adams first sin but his others are ours upon the same account But if it be by the Decree of God by his choice and constitution that it should be so as Mr. Calvin and Dr. Twisse that I may name no more for that side do expresly teach it follows that God is the Author of our Sin So that I may use Mr. Calvins words How is it that so many Nations with their Children should be involved in the fall without remedy but because God would have it so And if that be the matter then to God as to the cause must that sin and that damnation be accounted And let it then be considered whether this be not as bad as the worst For the Supralapsarians say God did decree that the greatest part of mankind should perish only because he would The Sublapsarians say that God made it by his decree necessary that all we who were born of Adam should be born guilty of Original Sin and he it was who decreed to damn whom he pleased for that sin in which he decreed they should be born and both these he did for no other consideration but because he would Is it not therefore evident that he absolutely decreed Damnation to these Persons
so that now although a comparison proportionate was at first intended yet the river here rises far higher than the fountain and now no argument can be drawn from the similitude of Adam and Christ but that as much hurt was done to humane nature by Adams sin so very much more good is done to mankind by the incarnation of the Son of God 16. And not as it was by one that sinned so is the gift for the judgment was by one to condemnation but the free gift is of many offences unto justification And the first disparity and excess is in this particular for the judgment was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by one man sinning one sin that one sin was imputed but by Christ not only one sin was forgiven freely but many offences were remitted unto justification and secondly a vast disparity there is in this that the descendants from Adam were perfectly like him in nature his own real natural production and they sinned though not so bad yet very much and therefore there was a great parity of reason that the evil which was threatned to Adam and not to his Children should yet for the likeness of nature and of sin descend upon them But in the other part the case is highly differing for Christ being our Patriarch in a supernatural birth we fall infinitely short of him and are not so like him as we were to Adam and yet that we in greater unlikeness should receive a greater favour this was the excess of the comparison and this is the free gift of God 17. For if by one offence so it is in the Kings MS. or if by one mans offence death reigned by one much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one Jesus Christ. And this is the third degree or measure of excess of efficacy on Christs part over it was on the part of Adam For if the sin of Adam alone could bring death upon the world who by imitation of his transgression on the stock of their own natural choice did sin against God though not after the similitude of Adams transgression much more shall we who not only receive the aids of the spirit of grace but receive them also in an abundant measure receive also the effect of all this even to reign in life by one Jesus Christ. 18. Therefore as by the offence 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 of life Therefore now to return to the other part of the similitude where I began although I have shown the great excess and abundance of grace by Christ over the evil that did descend by Adam yet the proportion and comparison lies in the main emanation of death from one and life from the other judgment unto condemnation that is the sentence of death came upon all men by the offence of one even so by a like Oeconomy and dispensation God would not be behind in doing an act of Grace as he did before of judgment and as that judgment was to condemnation by the offence of one so the free gift and the grace came upon all to justification of life by the righteousness of one 19. For as by one mans disobedience many were made sinners so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous The summ of all is this By the disobedience of one man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 many were constituted or put into the order of sinners they were made such by Gods appointment that is not that God could be the Author of a sin to any but that he appointed the evil which is the consequent of sin to be upon their heads who descended from the sinner and so it shall be on the other side for by the obedience of one even of Christ many shall be made or constituted righteous But still this must be with a supposition of what was said before that there was a vast difference for we are made much more righteous by Christ than we were sinners by Adam and the life we receive by Christ shall be greater than the death by Adam and the graces we derive from Christ shall be more and mightier than the corruption and declination by Adam but yet as one is the head so is the other one is the beginning of sin and death and the other of life and righteousness It were easie to add many particulars out of S. Paul but I shall chuse only to recite the Aethiopick version of the New Testament translated into Latin by that excellent Linguist and worthy Person Dr. Dudly Loftus The words are these And therefore as by the iniquity of one man sin entred into the world and by THAT SIN death came upon all men therefore because THAT SIN IS IMPUTED TO ALL MEN even those who knew not what that sin was Until the Law came sin remained in the world not known what it was when sin was not reckoned because as yet at that time the Commandment of the Law was not come Nevertheless death did after reign from Adam until Moses as well in those that did sin as in those that did not sin by that sin of Adam because every one was created in the similitude of Adam and because Adam was a type of him that was to come But not according to the quantity of our iniquity was the grace of God to us If for the offence of one man many are dead how much more by the grace of God and by the gift of him who did gratifie us by one man to wit Jesus Christ life hath abounded upon many Neither for the measure of the sin which was of one man was there the like reckoning or account of the grace of God For if the condemnation of sin proceeding from one man caus'd that by that sin all should be punished how much rather shall his grace purifie us from our sins and give to us eternal life If the sin of one made death to reign and by the offence of one man death did rule in us how much more therefore shall the grace of one man Jesus Christ and his gift justifie us and make us to reign in life eternal And as by the offence of one man many are condemned Likewise also by the righteousness of one man shall every son of man be justified and live And as by one man many are made sinners or as the Syriack Version renders it there were many sinners In like manner again many are made righteous * Now this reddition of the Apostles discourse in this Article is a very great light to the Understanding of the words which not the nature of the thing but the popular glosses have made difficult But here it is plain that all the notice of this Article which those Churches derived from these words of Saint Paul was this That the sin of Adam
this may be well suppos'd without inferring their suffering the pains of Hell But this sentence of theirs I admit and explicate with some little difference of expression For so far I admit this pain of loss or rather a deficiency from going to Heaven to be the consequence of Adam's sin that by it we being left in meris Naturalibus could never by these strengths alone have gone to Heaven Now whereas your Lordship in behalf of those whom you suppose may be captious is pleas'd to argue That as loss of sight or eyes infers a state of darkness or blindness so the loss of Heaven infers Hell and if Infants go not to Heaven in that state whither can they go but to Hell and that 's Damnation in the greatest sence I grant it that if in the event of things they do not go to Heaven as things are now ordered it is but too likely that they go to Hell but I add that as all darkness does not infer horror and distraction of mind or fearful apparitions and phantasms so neither does all Hell or states in Hell infer all those torments which the School-men signifie by a poenaseâ—sus for I speak now in pursuance of their way So that there is no necessity of a third place but it concludes only that in the state of separation from Gods presence there is a great variety of degrees and kinds of evil and every one is not the extreme and yet by the way let me observe that Gregory Nazianzen and Nicetas taught that there is a third place for Infants and Heathens and Irenaeus affirm'd that the evils of Hell were not eternal to all but to the Devils only and the greater criminals But neither they nor we nor any man else can tell whether Hell be a place or no. It is a state of evil but whether all the damned be in one or in twenty places we cannot tell But I have no need to make use of any of this For when I affirm that Infants being by Adam reduc'd and left to their mere natural state fall short of Heaven I do not say they cannot go to Heaven at all but they cannot go thither by their natural powers they cannot without a new grace and favour go to Heaven But then it cannot presently be inferred that therefore they go to Hell but this ought to be inferr'd which indeed was the real consequent of it therefore it is necessary that Gods Grace should supply this defect if God intends Heaven to them at all and because Nature cannot God sent a Saviour by whom it was effected But if it be asked what if this grace had not come and that it be said that without Gods grace they must have gone to Hell because without it they could not go to Heaven I answer That we know how it is now that God in his goodness hath made provisions for them but if he had not made such provisions what would have been we know not any more than we know what would have followed if Adam had not sinned where he should have liv'd and how long and in what circumstances the posterity should have been provided for in all their possible contingencies But yet this I know that it follows not that if without this Grace we could not have gone to Heaven that therefore we must have gone to Hell For although the first was ordinarily impossible yet the second was absolutely unjust and against Gods goodness and therefore more impossible But because the first could not be done by nature God was pleased to promise and to give his grace that he might bring us to that state whither he had designâ—d us that is to a supernatural felicity If Adam had not fallen yet Heaven had not been a natural consequent of his obedience but a Gracious it had been a gift still and of Adam though he had persisted in innocence it is true to say That without Gods Grace that is by the mere force of Nature he could never have arriv'd to a Supernatural state that is to the joys of Heaven and yet it does not follow that if he had remain'd in Innocence he must have gone to Hell Just so it is in Infants Hell was not made for man but for Devils and therefore it must be something besides mere Nature that can bear any man thither mere Nature goes neither to Heaven nor Hell So that when I say Infants naturally cannot go to Heaven and that this is a punishment of Adam's sin he being for it punished with a loss of his gracious condition and devolv'd to the state of Nature and we by him left so my meaning is that this Damnation which is of our Nature is but negative that is as a consequent of our Patrialous sin our Nature is left imperfect and deficient in order to a supernatural end which the School-men call a poena damni but improperly they indeed think it may be a real event and final condition of persons as well as things but I affirm it was an evil effect of Adam's sin but in the event of things it became to the persons the way to a new grace and hath no other event as to Heaven and Hell directly and immediately In the same sence and to the same purpose I understand the word Damnation in the Ninth Article But the word Damnation may very well truly and sufficiently signifie all the purposes of the Article if it be taken only for the effect of that sentence which was inflicted upon Adam and descended on his posterity that is for condemnation to Death and the evils of mortality So the word is used by S. Paul 1 Cor. 11.29 He that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh Damnation to himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the word but that it did particularly signifie temporal death and evils appears by the instances of probation in the next words For for this cause some are weak amongst you some are sick and some are fallen asleep This also in the Article Original Sin deserves damnation that is it justly brought in the angry sentence of God upon Man it brought him to death and deserv'd it it brought it upon us and deserv'd it too I do not say that we by that sin deserv'd that death neither can death be properly a punishment of us till we superadd some evil of our own yet Adam's sin deserv'd it so that it was justly left to fall upon us we as a consequent and punishment of his sin being reduc'd to our natural portion In odiosis quod minimum est sequimur The lesser sence of the word is certainly agreeable to truth and reason and it were good we us'd the word in that sence which may best warrant her doctrine especially for that use of the word having the precedent of Scripture I am confirm'd in this interpretation by the second Section of the Article viz. of the remanency of Concupiscence or Original Sin in the Regenerate All the sinfulness of
Original Sin is the lust or concupiscence that is the proneness to sin Now then I demand whether Concupiscence before actual consent be a sin or no and if it be a sin whether it deserves damnation That all sin deserves damnation I am sure our Church denies not If therefore concupiscence before consent be a sin then this also deserves damnation where-ever it is and if so then a man may be damned for Original Sin even after Baptism For even after Baptism concupiscence or the sinfulness of Original Sin remains in the regenerate and that which is the same thing the same viciousness the same enmity to God after Baptism is as damnable it deserves damnation as much as that did that went before If it be replied that Baptism takes off the guilt or formal part of it but leaves the material part behind that is though concupiscence remains yet it shall not bring damnation to the regenerate or Baptized I answer that though baptismal regeneration puts a man into a state of grace and favour so that what went before shall not be imputed to him afterwards that is Adam's sin shall not bring damnation in any sence yet it hinders not but that what is sinful afterwards shall be then imputed to him that is he may be damn'd for his own concupiscence He is quitted from it as it came from Adam but by Baptism he is not quitted from it as it is subjected in himself if I say concupiscence before consent be a sin If it be no sin then for it Infants unbaptized cannot with justice be damn'd it does not deserve damnation but if it be a sin then so long as it is there so long it deserves damnation and Baptism did only quit the relation of it to Adam for that was all that went before it but not the danger of the man * But because the Article supposes that it does not damn the regenerate or baptized and yet that it hath the nature of sin it follows evidently and undeniably that both the phrases are to be diminished and understood in a favourable sence As the phrase the Nature of sin signifies so does Damnation but the Nature of sin signifies something that brings no guilt because it is affirm'd to be in the Regenerate therefore Damnation signifies something that brings no Hell but to deserve Damnation must mean something less than ordinary that is that concupiscence is a thing not morally good not to be allowed of not to be nurs'd but mortifi'd fought against disapprov'd condemn'd and disallowed of men as it is of God And truly My Lord to say that for Adam's sin it is just in God to condemn Infants to the eternal flames of Hell and to say that concupiscence or natural inclinations before they pass into any act could bring eternal condemnation from Gods presence into the eternal portion of Devils are two such horrid propositions that if any Church in the world would expresly affirm them I for my part should think it unlawful to communicate with her in the defence or profession of either and to think it would be the greatest temptation in the world to make men not to love God of whom men so easily speak such horrid things I would suppose the Article to mean any thing rather than either of these But yet one thing more I have to say The Article is certainly to be expounded according to the analogy of faith and the express words of Scripture if there be any that speak expresly in this matter Now whereas the Article explicating Original Sin affirms it to be that fault or corruption of mans nature vitium Naturae not peccatum by which he is far gone from Original righteousness and is inclin'd to evil because this is not full enough the Article adds by way of explanation So that the flesh lusteth against the spirit that is it really produces a state of evil temptations It lusteth that is actually and habitually it lusteth against the spirit and therefore deserves Gods wrath and damnation So the Article Therefore for no other reason but because the flesh lusteth against the spirit not because it can lust or is apta nata to lust but because it lusteth actually therefore it deserves damnation and this is Original Sin or as the Article expresses it it hath the nature of sin it is the fomes or matter of sin and is in the Original of mankind and deriv'd from Adam as our body is but it deserves not damnation in the highest sence of the word till the concupiscence be actual Till then the words of Wrath and Damnation must be meant in the less and more easie signification according to the former explication and must only relate to the personal sin of Adam To this sence of the Article I heartily subscribe For besides the reasonableness of the thing and the very manner of speaking us'd in the Article it is the very same way of speaking and exactly the same doctrine which we find in S. James Jam. 1.14 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concupiscence when it is impregnated when it hath conceiv'd then it brings forth sin and sin when it is in production and birth brings forth death But in Infants concupiscence is innocent and a virgin it conceives not and therefore is without sin and therefore without death or damnation * Against these expositions I cannot imagine what can be really and materially objected But my Lord I perceive the main out-cry is like to be upon the authority of the Harmony of Confessions Concerning which I shall say this That in this Article the Harmony makes as good musick as Bells ringing backward and they agree especially when they come to be explicated and untwisted into their minute and explicite meanings as much as Lutheran and Calvinist as Papist and Protestant as Thomas and Scotus as Remonstrant and Dordrechtan that is as much as pro and con or but a very little more I have not the book with me here in prison and this neighbourhood cannot supply me and I dare not trust my memory to give a scheme of it but your Lordship knows that in nothing more do the Reformed Churches disagree than in this and its appendages and you are pleased to hint something of it by saying that some speak more of this than the Church of England and Andrew Rivet though unwillingly yet confesses De Confessionibus nostris earum syntagmate vel Harmonia etiamsi in non nullis capitibus non planè conveniant dicam tamen melius in corcordiam redigi posse quà m in Ecclesia Romana concordantiam discordantium Canonum quo titulo decretum Gratiani quod Canonistis regulas praefigit solet insigniri And what he affirms of the whole collection is most notorious in the Article of Original Sin For my own part I am ready to subscribe the first Helvetian confession but not the second So much difference there is in the confessions of the same Church Now whereas your Lordship adds that though they
it and in opposition to this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to be rendred that is guilty criminal persons really and properly This is all which the wit of man can say from this place of S. Paul and if I make it appear that this is invalid I hope I am secure To this then I answer That the Antithesis in these words here urg'd for there is another in the Chapter and this whole argument of S. Paul is full and intire without descending to minutes Death came in by one man much more shall life come by one man if that by Adam then much more this by Christ by him to condemnation by this man to justification This is enough to verifie the argument of S. Paul though life and death did not come in the same manner to the several relatives as indeed they did not of which afterwards But for the present it runs thus By Adam we were made sinners by Christ we are made righteous As certainly one as the other though not in the same manner of dispensation By Adam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 death reigned by this man the reign of death shall be destroyed and life set up in stead of it by him we were us'd as sinners for in him we died but by Christ we are justified that is us'd as just persons for by him we live This is sufficient for the Apostles argument and yet no necessity to affirm that we are sinners in Adam any more than by imputation for we are by Christ made just no otherwise than by imputation In the proof or perswasion I will use no indirect arguments as to say that to deny us to be just by imputation is the Doctrine of the Church of Rome and of the Socinian Conventicles but expresly dislik'd by all the Lutheran Calvinist and Zuinglian Churches and particularly by the Church of England and indeed by the whole Harmony of Confessions This I say I will not make use of not only because I my self do not love to be press'd by such prejudices rather than arguments but because the question of the imputation of righteousness is very much mistaken and misunderstood on all hands They that say that Christs righteousness is imputed to us for justification do it upon this account because they know all that we do is imperfect therefore they think themselves constrain'd to flie to Christ's righteousness and think it must be imputed to us or we perish The other side considering that this way would destroy the necessity of holy living and that in order to our justification there were conditions requir'd on our parts think it necessary to say that we are justified by inherent righteousness Between these the truth is plain enough to be read Thus Christ's righteousness is not imputed to us for justification directly and immediately neither can we be justified by our own righteousness but our Faith and sincere endeavours are through Christ accepted in stead of legal righteousness that is we are justified through Christ by imputation not of Christs nor our own righteousness but of our faith and endeavours of righteousness as if they were perfect and we are justified by a Non-imputation viz. of our past sins and present unavoidable imperfections that is we are handled as if we were just persons and no sinners So faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousness not that it made him so legally but Evangelically that is by grace and imputation And indeed My Lord that I may speak freely in this great question when one man hath sinn'd his descendants and relatives cannot possibly by him or for him or in him be made sinners properly and really For in sin there are but two things imaginable the irregular action and the guilt or obligation to punishment Now we cannot in any sence be said to have done the action which another did and not we the action is as individual as the person and Titius may as well be Cajus and the Son be his own Father as he can be said to have done the Fathers action and therefore we cannot possibly be guilty of it for guilt is an obligation to punishment for having done it the action and the guilt are relatives one cannot be without the other something must be done inwardly or outwardly or there can be no guilt * But then for the evil of punishment that may pass further than the action If it passes upon the innocent it is not a punishment to them but an evil inflicted by right of Dominion but yet by reason of the relation of the afflicted to him that sinn'd to him it is a punishment But if it passes upon others that are not innocent then it is a punishment to both to the first principally to the Descendents or Relatives for the others sake his sin being imputed so far How far that is in the present case and what it is the Apostle expresses thus It was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vers 18. or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vers 16. a curse unto condemnation or a judgment unto condemnation that is a curse inherited from the principal deserv'd by him and yet also actually descending upon us after we had sinn'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is the judgment passed upon Adam the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was on him but it prov'd to be a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or a through condemnation when from him it passed upon all men that sinn'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometimes differ in degrees so the words are used by S. Paul otherwhere 1 Cor. 11.32 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a judgment to prevent a punishment or a less to fore-stall a greater in the same kind so here the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pass'd further the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was fulfilled in his posterity passing on further viz. that all who sinn'd should pass under the power of death as well as he but this became formally and actually a punishment to them only who did sin personally to them it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vers 17. the reign of death this is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 verse 21. the reign of sin in death that is the effect which Adams sin had was only to bring in the reign of death which is already broken by Jesus Christ and at last shall be quite destroyed But to say that sin here is properly transmitted to us from Adam formally and so as to be inherent in us is to say that we were made to do his action which is a perfect contradiction Now then your Lordship sees that what you note of the meaning of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I admit and is indeed true enough and agreeable to the discourse of the Apostle and very much in justification of what I taught 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies a punishment for sin and
this sin to be theirs upon whom the condemnation comes I easily subscribe to it but then take in the words of S. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by one sin or by the sin of one the curse passed upon all men unto condemnation that is the curse descended from Adam for his sake it was propagated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to a real condemnation viz. when they should sin For though this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the curse of death was threatned only to Adam yet upon Gods being angry with him God resolved it should descend and if men did sin as Adam or if they did sin at all though less than Adam yet the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the curse threatned to him should pass 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto the same actual condemnation which fell upon him that is it should actually bring them under the reign of death But then my Lord I beseech you let it be considered if this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must suppose a punishment for sin for the sin of him his own sin that is so condemn'd as your Lordship proves perfectly out of Ezek. 18. how can it be just that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 condemnation should pass upon us for Adam's sin that is not for his own sin who is so condemn'd but for the sin of another S. Paul easily resolves the doubt if there had been any The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the reign of death passed upon all men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in as much as all men have sinned And now why shall we suppose that we must be guilty of what we did not when without any such 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there is so much guilt of what we did really and personally Why shall it be that we die only for Adam's sin and not rather as S. Paul expresly affirms 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in as much as all men have sinned since by your own argument it cannot be in as much as all men have not sinned this you say cannot be and yet you will not confess this which can be and which S. Paul affirms to have been indeed as if it were not more just and reasonable to say That from Adam the curse descended unto the condemnation of the sins of the world than to say the curse descended without consideration of their sins but a sin must be imagined to make it seem reasonable and just to condemn us Now I submit it to the judgment of all the world which way of arguing is most reasonable and concluding You my Lord in behalf of others argue thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or condemnation cannot pass upon a man for any sin but his own Therefore every man is truly guilty of Adam's sin and that becomes his own Against this I oppose mine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or condemnation cannot pass upon a man for any sin but his own therefore it did not pass upon man for Adam's sin because Adam's sin was Adam's not our own But we all have sinned we have sins of our own therefore for these the curse pass'd from Adam to us To back mine besides that common notices of sense and reason defend it I have the plain words of S. Paul Death passed upon all men for as much as all men have sinned all men that is the generality of mankind all that liv'd till they could sin the others that died before died in their nature not in their sin neither Adam's nor their own save only that Adam brought it in upon them or rather left it to them himself being disrobed of all that which could hinder it Now for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which your Lordship renders clear from sin I am sure no man is so justified in this world as to be clear from sin and if we all be sinners and yet healed as just persons it is certain we are just by imputation only that is Christ imputing our faith and sincere though not unerring obedience to us for righteousness And then the Antithesis must hold thus By Christ comes justification to life as by Adam came the curse or the sin to the condemnation of death But our justification which comes by Christ is by imputation and acceptilation by grace and favour not that we are made really that is legally and perfectly righteous but by imputation of faith and obedience to us as if it were perfect And therefore Adam's sin was but by imputation only to certain purposes not real or proper not formal or inherent For the grace by Christ is more than the sin by Adam if therefore that was not legal and proper but Evangelical and gracious favourable and imputative much more is the sin of Adam in us improperly and by imputation * And truly my Lord I think that no sound Divine of any of our Churches will say that we are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in any other sence not that Christs righteousness is imputed to us without any inherent graces in us but that our imperfect services our true faith and sincere endeavours of obedience are imputed to us for righteousness through Jesus Christ and since it is certainly so I am sure the Antithesis between Christ and Adam can never be salved by making us sinners really by Adam and yet just or righteous by Christ only in acceptation and imputation For then sin should abound more than grace expresly against the honour of our blessed Saviour the glory of our redemption and the words of S. Paul But rather on the contrary is it true That though by Christ we were really and legally made perfectly righteous it follows not that we were made sinners by Adam in the same manner and measure for this similitude of S. Paul ought not to extend to an equality in all things but still the advantage and prerogative the abundance and the excess must be on the part of Grace for if sin does abound grace does much more abound and we do more partake of righteousness by Christ than of sin by Adam Christ and Adam are the several fountains of emanation and are compar'd aequè but not aequaliter Therefore this argument holds redundantly since by Christ we are not made legally righteous but by imputation only much less are we made sinners by Adam This in my sence is so infinitely far from being an objection that it perfectly demonstrates the main question and for my part I mean to relie upon it As for that which your Lordship adds out of Rom. 5.19 That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies sinners not by imitation as the Pelagians dream but sinners really and effectively I shall not need to make any other reply but that 1. I do not approve of that gloss of the Pelagians that in Adam we are made sinners by imitation and much less of that which affirms we are made so properly and formally But made sinners signifies us'd like sinners so as justified signifies healed like just persons In
to be refused as being the increaser of sin rather than of children and a semination in the flesh and contrary to the spirit and such a thing which being mingled with sin produces univocal issues the mother and the daughter are so like that they are the worse again For if a proper inherent sin be effected by chaste marriages then they are in this particular equal to adulterous embraces and rather to be pardoned than allowed and if all Concupiscence be vicious then no marriage can be pure These things it may be have not been so much considered but your Lordship I know remembers strange sayings in S. Hierome in Athenagoras and in S. Austin which possibly have been countenanced and maintained at the charge of this opinion But the other parent of this is the zeal against the Pelagian Heresie which did serve it self by saying too little in this Article and therefore was thought fit to be confuâ—ed by saying too much and that I conjecture right in this affair I appeal to the words which I cited out of S. Austin in the matter of Concupiscence concerning which he speaks the same thing that I do when he is disingaged as in his books De civitate Dei but in his Tractate de peccatorum meritis remissione which was written in his heat against the Pelagians he speaks quite contrary And who-ever shall with observation read his one book of Original Sin against Pelagius his two books de Nuptiis Concupiscentia to Valerius his three books to Marcellinus de peccatorum meritis remissione his four books to Boniface contra duas epistolas Pelagianorum his six books to Claudius against Julianus and shall think himself bound to believe all that this excellent man wrote will not only find it impossible he should but will have reason to say that zeal against an error is not always the best instrument to find out truth The same complaint hath been made of others and S. Jerome hath suffer'd deeply in the infirmity I shall not therefore trouble your Lordship with giving particular answers to the words of S. Jerome and S. Ambrose because besides what I have already said I do not think that their words are an argument fit to conclude against so much evidence nor against a much less than that which I have every where brought in this Article though indeed their words are capable of a fair interpretation and besides the words quoted out of S. Ambrose are none of his and for Aquinas Lombard and Bonaventure your Lordship might as well press me with the opinion of Mr. Calvin Knox and Buchannan with the Synod of Dort or the Scots Presbyteries I know they are against me and therefore I reprove them for it but it is no disparagement to the truth that other men are in error And yet of all the School-men Bonaventure should least have been urg'd against me for the proverbs sake for Adam non peccavit in Bonaventura Alexander of Hales would often say that Adam never sinn'd in Bonaventure But it may be he was not in earnest no more am I. The last thing your Lordship gives to me in Charge in the behalf of the objectors is that I would take into consideration the Covenant made between Almighty God and Adam as relating to his posterity To this I answer That I know of no such thing God made a Covenant with Adam indeed and us'd the right of his dominion over his posterity and yet did nothing but what was just but I find in Scripture no mention made of any such Covenant as is dreamt of about the matter of Original Sin only the Covenant of works God did make with all men till Christ came but he did never exact it after Adam but for a Covenant that God should make with Adam that if he stood all his posterity should be I know not what and if he fell they should be in a damnable condition of this I say there is nec vola nec vestigium in holy Scripture that ever I could meet with if there had been any such Covenant it had been but equity that to all the persons interessed it should have been communicated and caution given to all who were to suffer and abilities given to them to prevent the evil for else it is not a Covenant with them but a decree concerning them and it is impossible that there should be a Covenant made between two when one of the parties knows nothing of it I will enter no further into this enquiry but only observe that though there was no such Covenant yet the event that hapned might without any such Covenant have justly entred in at many doors It is one thing to say that God by Adam's sin was moved to a severer entercourse with his posterity for that is certainly true and it is another thing to say that Adam's sin of it self did deserve all the evil that came actually upon his children Death is the wages of sin one death for one sin but not 10000 millions for one sin but therefore the Apostle affirms it to have descended on all in as much as all men have sinn'd But if from a sinning Parent a good child descends the childs innocence will more prevail with God for kindness than the fathers sin shall prevail for trouble Non omnia parentum peccata dii in liberos convertunt sed siquis de malo nascitur bonus tanquam benè affectus corpore natus de morboso is generis poenâ liberatur tanquam ex improbitatis domo in aliam familiam datus qui verò morbo in similitudinem generis refertur atque redigitur vitiosi ei nimirum convenit tanquam haeredi debitas poenas vitii persolvere said Plutarch De iis qui serò à Numine puniuntur ex interpr Cluserii God does not always make the fathers sins descend upon the children But if a good child is born of a bad father like a healthful body from an ill-affected one he is freed from the punishment of his stock and passes from the house of wickedness into another family But he who inherits the disease he also must be heir of the punishment Quorum natura amplexa est cognatam malitiam hos Justitia similitudinem pravitatis persequens supplicio affecit if they pursue their kindreds wickedness they shall be pursued by a cognation of judgment Other ways there are by which it may come to pass that the sins of others may descend upon us He that is Author or the perswader the minister or the helper the approver or the follower may derive the sins of others to himself but then it is not their sins only but our own too and it is like a dead Taper put to a burning light and held there this derives light and flames from the other and yet then hath it of its own but they dwell together and make one body These are the ways by which punishment can enter but there are evils which are no
children So that this Argument though sligthly passed over by the Anab. yet is of very great perswasion in this Article and so us'd and relied upon by the Church of England in her office of Baptism and for that reason I have the more insisted upon it Ad. 5. the next Argument without any alteration or addition stands firm upon its own basis Adam sinn'd and left nakedness to descend upon his posterity a relative guilt and a remaining misery he left enough to kill us but nothing to make us alive he was the head of mankind in order to temporal felicity but there was another head intended to be the representative of humane nature to bring us to eternal but the temporal we lost by Adam and the eternal we could never receive from him but from Christ onely from Adam we receive our nature such as it is but grace and truth comes by Jesus Christ Adam left us an imperfect nature that tends to sin and death but he left us nothing else and therefore to holiness and life we must enter from another principle So that besides the natural birth of Infants there must be something added by which they must be reckoned in a new account they must be born again they must be reckon'd in Chrst they must be adopted to the inheritance and admitted to the Promise and intitled to the Spirit Now that this is done ordinarily in Baptism is not to be denied for therefore it is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Font or Laver of regeneration it is the gate of the Church it is the solemnity of our admission to the Covenant Evangelical and if Infants cannot goe to Heaven by the first or natural birth then they must goe by a second and supernatural and since there is no other solemnity or Sacrament no way of being born again that we know of but by the ways of God's appointing and he hath appointed Baptism and all that are born again are born this way even men of Reason who have or can receive the Spirit being to enter at the door of Baptism it follows that Infants also must enter here or we cannot say that they are entred at all And it is highly considerable that whereas the Anab. does clamorously and loudly call for a precept for childrens Baptism this consideration does his work for him and us He that shews the way needs not bid you walk in it and if there be but one door that stands open and all must enter some way or other it were a strange perverseness of argument to say that none shall pass in at that door unless they come alone and they that are brought or they that lean on crutches or the shoulders of others shall be excluded and undone for their infelicity and shall not receive help because they have the greatest need of it But these men use Infants worse then the poor Paralytick was treated at the pool of Bethesda he could not be washed because he had none to put him in but these men will not suffer any one to put them in and untill they can goe in themselves they shall never have the benefit of the Spirit 's moving upon the waters Ad. 15. but the Anab. to this discourse gives onely this reply that the supposition or ground is true a man by Adam or any way of nature cannot goe to Heaven neither men nor Infants without the addition of some instrument or means of God's appointing but this is to be understood to be true onely ordinarily and regularly but the case of Infants is extraordinary for they are not within the rule and the way of ordinary dispensation and therefore there being no command for them to be baptized there will be some other way to supply it extraordinarily To this I reply that this is a plain begging of the question or a denying the conclusion for the Argument being this that Baptism being the ordinary way or instrument of new birth and admission to the Promises Evangelical and supernatural happiness and we knowing of no other and it being as necessary for Infants as for men to enter some way or other it must needs follow that they must goe this way because there is a way for all and we know of no other but this therefore the presumption lies on this that Infants must enter this way They answer that it is true in all but Infants the contradictory of which was the conclusion and intended by the argument For whereas they say God hath not appointed a rule and an order in this case of Infants it is the thing in question and therefore is not by direct negation to be opposed against the contrary Argument For I argue thus Whereever there is no extraordinary way appointed there we must all goe the ordinary but for Infants there is no extraordinary way appointed or declared therefore they must goe the ordinary and he that hath without difference commanded that all Nations should be baptized hath without difference commanded all sorts of persons and they may as well say that they are sure God hath not commanded women to be baptized or Hermaphrodites or eunuchs or fools or mutes because they are not named in the precept for sometimes in the Census of a nation women are no more reckoned then children and when the Children of Israel coming out of Egypt were numbred there was no reckoning either of women or children and yet that was the number of the Nation which is there described But then as to the thing itself whether God hath commanded Infants to be baptized it is indeed a worthy inquiry and the summe of all this contestation but then it is also to be concluded by every Argument that proves the thing to be holy or charitable or necessary or the means of Salvation or to be instituted and made in order to an indispensable end For all commandments are not expressed in imperial forms as we will or will not thou shalt or shalt not but some are by declaration of necessity some by a direct institution some by involution and apparent consequence some by proportion and analogy by identities and parities and Christ never expresly commanded that we should receive the Holy Communion but that when the Supper was celebrated it should be in his memorial And if we should use the same method of arguing in all other instances as the Anabaptist does in this and omit every thing for which there is not an express Commandment with an open nomination and describing of the capacities of the persons concerned in the Duty we should have neither Sacrament nor Ordinance Fasting nor Vows communicating of Women nor baptizing of the Clergy And when Saint Ambrose was chosen Bishop before he was baptized it could never upon their account have been told that he was obliged to Baptism because though Christ commanded the Apostles to baptize others yet he no way told them that their Successors should be baptized any more then the Apostles themselves were
received 1004. Alexander III. in a Council condemned Pet. Lombard of Heresy from which sentence without repentance or leaving his opinion after 36 years he was absolved by Innocent III. 1005. Infallible The Romanists hold the Scripture for no infallible rule 381. No man affirms but J.S. that the Fathers are infallible 373 374 375. Whether the representative Church be infallible 389. General Councils not infallible 392. Bellarmine confesseth that for 1500 years the Pope's judgement was not held infallible 453. Infants What punishment Adam's sin can bring upon Infants that die 714 n. 29. It was the general opinion of the Fathers before Saint Augustine that Infants unbaptized were not condemned to the pains of Hell 755 756 n. 16 17. The reason on which the Baptism of Infants is grounded 718 n. 42. Infirmity What is the state of Infirmity 771 n. 3. It excuses no man ibid. That state which some men call a state of Infirmity is a state of sin and death 777 n. 26. What are sins of infirmity 789 n. 47. Sins of infirmity consist more in the imperfection of obedience then in the commission of any evil 790 n. 51. A sin of infirmity cannot be but in a small matter 791 n. 54. What are not sins of infirmity 792 n. 55. Violence of passion excuseth none under the title of sins of infirmity 792 n. 56. Sins of infirmity not accounted in the same manner to young men as to others 793 n. 59. The greatness of the temptation doth not make sin excusable upon the account of sins of infirmity 793 n. 60. The smallest instance if observed ceases to be a sin of infirmity 794 n. 61. A man's will hath no infirmity 794 n. 62. Nothing is a sin of infirmity but what is in some sense involuntary 794 n. 63. Sins of inculpable ignorance are sins of infirmity 794 n. 64. There is no pardonable state of infirmity 797 n. 98. Job Chap. 31. v. 18. explained 721. Gospel of Saint John Chap. 3. v. 5. Vnless a man be born of water and of the holy Spirit explained 5 6 b. Chap. 6. v. 53. Vnless ye eat the flesh of the Son of God and drink his bloud 8 b. Chap. 8. 47. He that is of God heareth God's word 679 n. 62. Chap. 9.34 Thou wast altogether born in sin and dost thou teach us 721 n. 49. Chap. 14.17 The world cannot receive him explained 785 n. 37. Chap. 20.23 Whosoever's sins ye remit explained 816 n. 66. 1. Epistle of Saint John Chap. 5. v. 17. There is a sin not unto death explained 643 n. 31. and 809 810. Chap. 3.9 He that is born of God sinneth not nor can he explained 810. Chap. 1.9 If we confess our sins God is faithful to forgive our sins explained 830 n. 34. Chap. 5.7 The Father the Word and the Spirit and these three are one explained 967 n. 4. Irenaeus He mentions an impostor that essayed to counterfeit Transubstantiation long before the Roman Church decreed it 228 § 10. Isaiah Chap. 53. v. 10. explained 712 n. 15. Judgment That of man and God proceed in several methods and relie upon different grounds 614 615 n. 15. Jurisdiction Mere Presbyters had not in the Church any Jurisdiction in causes criminal otherwise then by delegation 82 § 21. What persons are under that of Bishops 123 § 36. Justice God's Justice and Mercy reconciled about his exacting the Law 580. Justification Of our Justification by imputation of Christ's righteousness 901 902. Guilt cannot properly and really be traduced from one person to another 902 915. Of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 903. K. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 WHat it signifieth 636 n. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of that word and its use 638 n. 12. Keys Wherein that kind of power consisteth 841 n. 58. Kings The Episcopal power encroacheth not upon the Regal 120 § 36. The seal of Confession the Romanists will not suffer to be broken to save the life of a Prince or the whole State 343 c. 3. § 2. An excommunicate King the Romans teach may be deposed or killed 344 c. 3. § 3. The Pope takes upon him to depose Kings that are not heretical 345. The Roman Religion no friend to Kings 345. Their opinions so injurious to Kings are not the doctrines of private men onely 345. Father Arnald Confessor to Lewis XIII of France did cause that King in private confession to take such an oath as did in a manner depose him 489. L. Laiety NO Ecclesiastical presidency ever given to the Laiety 114 § 36. The Oeconomus of the Church might not be a Lay-man 164 § 50. The Laiety sometime admitted to vote in Councils 394 395. Lay-Elders never had authority in the Church 165 § 51. Latin Photius was the first authour of the Schism between the Greek and Latin Church 109 § 33. Law The Papists corrupted the Imperial Law of Justinian in the matter of Prayers in an unknown Language 304 c. 1. § 7. The difference between the Law and Gospel 574. Of the possibility of keeping the Law 576. Arguments to prove that perfect obedience to God's Law is impossible 576 577 n. 15. ad 19. In what sense it is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 574. It s severity made the Gospel better received ibid. Difference between it and the Gospel 673 n. 46. and 574 575. and 580 581. Of the difference between Saint Augustine and Saint Hierome concerning the possibility of keeping the Law of God 579 n. 30 31. In what measures God exacteth it 580 581. His mercy and justice reconciled about that thing 580 581. To keep the Law naturally possible but morally impossible 580 n. 34. No man can keep the Law of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but he may 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 585 n. 50. The Law of works imposed on Adam onely 587 n. 1. The state of men under the Law 778. A threefold Law in man flesh or members the mind or conscience the spirit 781 n. 29. The contention between the Law of the flesh and conscience is no sign of Regeneration but the contention between the Law of the flesh and spirit is 782 n. 31. The Law of Moses and of the Gospel were not impossible of themselves but in respect of our circumstances 580 n 33. All that which was insupportable in Moses's Law was nothing but the want of Repentance ibid. Laws indirectly occasion sin 771 n. 6. Lawful Every thing that is lawful or the utmost of what is lawful not always 〈◊〉 to be done 856 857. Life The necessity of good life 799 n. 25. The natural evils of man's life 734 n. 82. Loose What in the promise of Christ is signified by binding and loosing 836 n. 45 46 47. Saint Luke Chap. 22.25 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 explained 153 § 48. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that Text what it meaneth ibid. 154. Chap. 15.7 explained 801 n. 5. Chap. 11.41 explained 848. Chap. 13.14 explained 786 40. Lukewarmness How it comes to be a
his natural body then it was naturally broken and his bloud was actually poured forth before the passion for he gave 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his body was delivered broken his bloud was shed Now those words were spoken either properly and naturally and then they were not true because his body was yet whole his bloud still in the proper channels or else it was spoken in a figurative and sacramental sence and so it was true as were all the words which our blessed Saviour spake for that which he then ministred was the Sacrament of his Passion 3. Secondly If Christ gave his body in the natural sence at the last Supper then it was either a sacrifice propitiatory or it was not If it was not then it is not now and then their dream of the Mass is vanished if it was propitiatory at the last Supper then God was reconciled to all the world and mankind was redeemed before the Passion of our blessed Saviour which therefore would have been needless and ineffective so fearful are the consequents of this strange doctrine 4. Thirdly If Christ gave his body properly in the last Supper and not only figuratively and in sacrament then it could not be a representment or sacrament of his Passion but a real exhibition of it but that it was a Sacrament only appears by considering that it was then alive that the Passion was future that the thing was really to be performed upon the Cross that then he was to be delivered for the life of the world In the last Supper all this was in type and sacrament because it was before and the substance was to follow after 5. Fourthly If the natural body of Christ was in the last Supper under the accidents of bread then his body at the same time was visible and invisible in the whole substance visible in his person invisible under the accidents of bread and then it would be inquired what it was which the Apostles received what benefits they could have by receiving the body naturally or whether it be imaginable that the Apostles understoood it in the literal sence when they saw his body stand by unbroken alive integral hypostatical 6. Fifthly If Christs body were naturally in the Sacrament I demand whether it be as it was in the last Supper or as upon the Cross or as it is now in Heaven Not as in the last Supper for then it was frangible but not broken but typically by design in figure and in Sacrament as it is evident in matter of fact 2. Not as on the Cross for there the body was frangible and broken too and the blood spilled and if it were so now in the Sacrament besides that it were to make Christs glorified body passible and to crucifie the Lord of life again it also were not the same body which Christ hath now for his Body that he hath now is spiritual and incorruptible and cannot be otherwise much less can it be so and not so at the same time properly and yet be the same body 3. Not as in Heaven where it is neither corruptible nor broken for then in the Sacrament there were given to us Christs glorified body and then neither were the Sacrament a remembrance of Christs death neither were the words of Institution verified This is my body which is broken besides in this we have Bellarmines confession Neque enim ore corporali sumi potest corpus Christi ut est in coelo But then if it be remembred that Christ hath no other body but that which is in Heaven and that can never be otherwise than it is and so it cannot be received otherwise properly it unanswerably follows that if it be received in any other manner as it must if it be at all it must be received not naturally or corporally but spiritually and indeed By a figure or a sacramental spiritual sence all these difficulties are easily assoiled but by the natural never 7. Sixthly At the last Supper they eat the blessed Eucharist but it was not in remembrance of Christs death for it was future then and therefore not then capable of being remembred any more than a man can be said to remember what will be done to morrow it follows from hence that then Christ only instituted a Sacrament or figurative mysterious representment of a thing that in the whole use of it was variable by heri and cras and therefore never to be naturally verified but on the Cross by a proper and natural presence because then it was so and never else at that time it was future and now it is past and in both it is relative to his death therefore it could not be a real exhibition of his body in a natural sence for that as it could not be remembred then so neither broken now that is nothing of it is natural but it is wholly ritual mysterious and sacramental For that this was the sacrament of his death appears in the words of Institution and by the preceptive words Do this in remembrance of me And in the reason subjoyned by S. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. For so often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup ye shew the Lords death till he come Therefore when Christ said This is my body given or broken on my part taken eaten on yours it can be nothing else but the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the sacramental image of his death to effect which purpose it could not be necessary or useful to bring his natural body that so the substance should become his own shadow the natural presence be his own Sacrament or rather the image and representment of what he once suffered His body given in the Sacrament is the application and memory of his death and no more that as Christ in Heaven represents his death in the way of intercession so do we by our ministery but as in Heaven it is wholly a representing of his body crucified a rememoration of his crucifixion of his death passion by which he reconciled God and man so it is in the Sacrament after our manner This is my body given for you that is This is the Sacrament of my death in which my body was given for you For as Aquinas said in all sciences words signifie things but it is proper to Theology that things themselves signified or expressed by voices should also signifie something beyond it This is my body are the sacramental words or those words by which the mystery or the thing is sacramental it must therefore signifie something beyond these words and so they do for they signifie the death which Christ suffered in that body It is but an imperfect conception of the mystery to say it is the Sacrament of Christs body only or his blood but it is ex parte rei a Sacrament of the death of his body and to us a participation or an exhibition of it as it became beneficial to us that
be asham'd of it and in the Missal reformed by order of the Council of Trent it is put out again and the prayer for Saint Leo put in again That by these offices of holy attonement viz. the celebration of the Holy Sacrament a blessed reward may accompany him and the gifts of thy grace may be obtain'd for us Another Argument was us'd in the Dissuasive against the Roman Doctrine of Purgatory viz. How is Purgatory a Primitive and Catholick Doctrine when generally the Greek and many of the Latin Fathers taught that the souls departed in some exterior place expect the day of judgment but that no soul enters into the supreme Heaven or the place of Eternal bliss till the day of judgment but at that day say many of them all must pass through the universal fire To these purposes respectively the words of very many Fathers are brought by Sixtus Senensis to all which being so evident and apparent the Gentlemen that write against the Dissuasive are pleas'd not to say one word but have left the whole fabrick of the Roman Purgatory to shift for it self against the battery of so great Authorities only one of them striving to find some fault sayes that the Dissuader quotes Sixtus Senensis as saying That Pope John the 22. not only taught and declar'd the Doctrine that before the day of judgment the souls of men are kept in certain receptacles but commanded it to be held by all as saith Adrian in 4. Sent. when Sixtus Senensis saith not so of Pope John c. but only reports the opinion of others To which I answer that I did not quote Senensis as saying any such thing of his own Authority For besides that in the body of the discourse there is no mention at all of John 22. in the margent also it is only said of Sixtus Enumerat S. Jacobum Apostolum Johannem Pontif. Rom. but I add of my own afterwards that Pope John not only taught and declar'd that sentence but commanded it to be held by all men as saith Adrian Now although in his narrative of it Adrian begins with novissime fertur it is reported yet Senensis himself when he had said Pope John is said to have decreed this he himself adds that Ocham and Pope Adrian are witnesses of this Decree 2. Adrian is so far a witness of it that he gives the reason of the same even because the University of Paris refus'd to give promotion to them who denied or did refuse to promise for ever to cleave to that Opinion 3. Ocham is so fierce a witness of it that he wrote against Pope John the 22. for the Opinion 4. Though Senensis be not willing to have it believed yet all that he can say against it is that apud probatos scriptores non est Vndequaque certum 5. Yet he brings not one testimony out of Antiquity against this charge against Pope John only he sayes that Pope Benedict the Eleventh affirms that John being prevented by death could not finish the Decree 6. But this thing was not done in a corner the Acts of the University of Paris and their fierce adhering to the Decree were too notorious 7. And after all this it matters not whether it be so or no when it is confessed that so many Ancient Fathers expresly teach the Doctrine contrary to the Roman as it is this day and yet the Roman Doctors care not what they say insomuch that Saint Bernard having fully and frequently taught That no souls go to Heaven till they all go neither the Saints without the common people nor the spirit without the flesh that there are three states of souls one in the tabernacles viz. of our bodies a second in atriis or outward Courts and a third in the House of God Alphonsus à Castro admonishes that this sentence is damn'd and Sixtus Senensis adds these words which thing also I do not deny yet I suppose he ought to be excus'd ob ingentem numerum illustrium Ecclesiae patrum for the great number of the illustrious Fathers of the Church who before by their testimony did seem to give authority to this Opinion But that the present Doctrine of the Roman Purgatory is but a new Article of Faith is therefore certain because it was no Article of Faith in Saint Austin's time for he doubted of it And to this purpose I quoted in the margent two places of Saint Austin The words I shall now produce because they will answer for themselves In the 68. Chapter of his Manual to Laurentius he takes from the Church of Rome their best Armour in which they trusted and expounds the words of Saint Paul He shall be saved yet so as by fire to mean only the loss of such pleasant things as most delighted them in this world And in the beginning of the next Chapter he adds That such a thing may also be done after this life is not incredible and whether it be so or no it may be inquir'd aut inveniri aut latere and either be found or lie hid Now what is that which thus may or may not be found out This that some faithful by how much more or less they lov'd perishing goods by so much sooner or later they shall be sav'd by a certain Purgatory fire This is it which Saint Austin sayes is not incredible only it may be inquir'd whether it be so or no. And if these be not the words of doubting it is not incredible such a thing may be it may be inquir'd after it may be found to be so or it may never be found but lie hid then words signifie nothing yea but the doubting of Saint Austin does not relate to the matter or question of Purgatory but to the manner of the particular punishment viz. Whether or no that pain of being troubled for the loss of their goods be not a part of the Purgatory flames sayes E. W. A goodly excuse as if Saint Austin had troubled himself with such an impertinent Question whether the poor souls in their infernal flames be not troubled that they left their lands and money behind them Indeed it is possible they might wish some of the waters of their Springs or Fish-ponds to cool their tongues but Saint Austin surely did not suspect that the tormented Ghosts were troubled they had not brought their best clothes with them and money in their purses This is too pitiful and strain'd an Answer the case being so evidently clear that the thing Saint Austin doubted of was since there was to some of the faithful who yet were too voluptuous or covetous persons a Purgatory in this world even the loss of their Goods which they so lov'd and therefore being lost so grieved for whether or no they should not also meet with another Purgatory after death that is whether besides the punishment suffered here they should not be punish'd after death how by grieving for the loss
can be understood where it is said who shall endure the day of his coming c. 3. Saint Austin speaks things expresly against the Doctrine of Purgatory Know ye that when the soul is pluck'd from the body presently it is plac'd in Paradise according to its good deservings or else for her sins is thrown headlong in inferni Tartara into the hell of the damned for I know not well how else to render it And again the soul retiring is receiv'd by Angels and plac'd either in the bosom of Abraham if she be faithful or in the custody of the infernal prison if it be sinful until the appointed day comes in which she shall receive her body pertinent to which is that of Saint Austin if he be Author of that excellent Book de Eccles. dogmatibus which is imputed to him After the ascension of our Lord to the Heavens the souls of all the Saints are with Christ and going from the body go unto Christ expecting the resurrection of their body But I shall insist no further upon these things I suppose it very apparent that Saint Austin was no way confident of his fancy of Purgatory and that if he had fancied right yet it was not the Roman Purgatory that he fancied There is only one Objection which I know of which when I have clear'd I shall pass on to other things Saint Austin speaking of such who have liv'd a middle kind of an indifferent pious life saith Constat autem c. but it is certain that such before the day of judgment being purg'd by temporal pains which their spirits suffer when they have receiv'd their bodies shall not be deliver'd to the punishment of Eternal fire here is a positive determination of the Article by a word of confidence and a full certificate and therefore Saint Austin in this Article was not a doubting person To this I answer it may be he was confident here but it lasted not long this fire was made of straw and soon went out for within two Chapters after he expresly doubts as I have provâ—d 2. These words may refer to the purgatory fire at the general conflagration of the world and if they be so referred it is most agreeable to his other sentiments 3. This Constat or decretory phrase and some lines before or after it are not in the old Books of Bruges and Colein nor in the Copies printed at Friburg and Ludovicus Vives supposes they were a marginal note crept since into the Text. Now this Objection being remov'd there remains no ground to deny that Saint Austin was a doubting person in the Article of Purgatory And this Erasmus expresly affirm'd of him and the same is said of him by Hofmeister but modestly and against his doubting in his Enchiridion he brings only a testimony in behalf of prayer for the dead which is nothing to the purpose and this is also sufficiently noted by Alphonsus à Castro and by Barnesius Well! but suppose Saint Austin did doubt of Purgatory This is no warranty to the Church of England for she does not doubt of it as Saint Austin did but plainly condemns it So one of my Adversaries objects To which I answer That the Church of England may the rather condemn it because Saint Austin doubted of it for if it be no Catholick Doctrine it is but a School point and without prejudice to the Faith may be rejected But 2. I suppose the Church of England would not have troubled her self with the Doctrine if it had been left as Saint Austin left it that is but as a meer uncertain Opinion but when the wrong end of the Opinion was taken and made an Article of Faith and damnation threatned to them that believed it not she had reason to consider it and finding it to be chaff wholly to scatter it away 3. The Church of England is not therefore to be blamed if in any case she see more than Saint Austin did and proceed accordingly for it is certain the Church of Rome does decree against divers things of which Saint Austin indeed did not doubt but affirm'd confidently I instance in the necessity of communicating Infants and the matter of appeals to Rome The next Authority to be examin'd is that of Otho Frisingensis concerning which there is a heavy quarrel against the Dissuasive for making him to speak of a Purgatory before whereas he speaks of one after the day of Judgment with a Quidam asserunt some affirm it viz. that there is a place of Purgatory after death nay but you are deceiv'd sayes E. W. and the rest of the Adversaries he means that some affirm there is a place of Purgatory after the day of judgment Now truly that is more than I said but that Otho said it is by these men confess'd But his words are these I think it ought to be search'd whether the judgment being pass'd besides the lower hell there remain a place for lighter punishments for that there is below or in hell a Purgatory place in which they that are to be savâ—d are either affected afficiantur invested punish'd with darkness only or else are boiled in the fire of expiation some do affirm What is or can be more plainly said of Purgatory for the places of Scripture brought to confirm this Opinion are such which relate to the interval between death and the last judgment Juxta illud Patriarchae lugens descendam ad inferos illud Apostoli ipse autem salvus erit sic tamen quasi per ignem I hope the Roman Doctors will not deny but these are meant of Purgatory before the last day and therefore so is the Opinion for the proof of which these places are brought 2. By post judicium in the title and transacto judicio in the Chapter Otho means the particular judgment passing upon every one at their death which he in a few lines after calls terminatis in judicio causis singulorum 3. He must mean it to be before the last great day because that which he sayes some do affirm quidam asserunt is that those which are salvandi to be sav'd hereafter are either in darkness or in a Purgatory fire which therefore must be meant of the interval for after the day of judgment is pass'd and the books shut and the sentence pronounc'd none can be sav'd that are not then acquitted unless Origen's Opinion of the salvation of Devils and damned souls be reintroduc'd which the Church before Otho many Ages had exploded and therefore so good and great a person would not have thought that fit to be then disputed and it was not then a Question nor a thing Undetermin'd in the Church 4. Whether Otho means it of a Purgatory before or after the day of the last judgment it makes very much against the present Roman Doctrine for Otho applies the Question to the case of Infants dying without Baptism now if their Purgatory be before the day of judgment
highest punishment such as are idle words and the like Now first I suppose that the two latter will be sound to be both one For either God hath not forbidden idleness or falseness or he hath made no restraint at all upon words but left us at liberty to talk as we please for if he hath in this case made a law then idle words either cannot pretend to an excuse or it must be for the smalness of the matter or else it must fall in with the first and be excused because they cannot always be attended to 29. Now concerning the first sort of venial sins it is not a kind of sins but a manner of making all sins venial that is apt for pardon for by the imperfection of the agent or the act all great sins in their matter may become little in their malice and guilt Now these are those which Divines call sins of infirmity and of them I shall give an account in a distinct Chapter under that title 30. Concerning the second i. e. sins venial for the smalness of the matter I know none such For if the matter be a particular that God hath expresly commanded or forbidden respectively it is not little but all one to him as that which we call the greatest But if the particular be wholly relating to our neighbour the smalness of the matter does not absolutely make the sin venial for amongst us nothing is absolutely great or absolutely little but in comparison with something else and if a vile person had robb'd the poor woman that offered two mites to the treasury of the Temple he had undone her a farthing there was all her substance so that the smalness of the matter is not directly an excuse If a man had robb'd a rich man of a farthing he had not indeed done him so great a mischief but how if the rich man was not willing to part with his farthing but would be angry at the injury is it not a sin because the theft was small No man questions but it is It follows therefore that the smalness of the matter cannot make a sin venial but where there is a leave expresly given or justly presumed and if it be so in a great matter it is as little a sin as if the matter were small that is none at all 31. But now concerning the third which the Roman Schools dream of sins venial in their own nature and in their whole kind that is it which I have been disputing against all this while and shall now further conclude against by arguments more practical and moral For if we consider what are those particulars which these men call venial sins in their whole kind and nature we shall find that Christ and they give measures differing from each other The Catalogues of them I will take from the Fathers not that they ever thought these things to be in their nature venial for they that think so of them are strangers to their writings and to this purpose Bellarmine hath not brought one testimony pertinent and home to the question but because they reckon such Catalogues of venial sins which demonstrate that they do mean sins made venial by accident by mens infirmity by Gods grace by pardon by repentance and not such which are so in their own nature But the thing it self will be its own proof 32. S. Austin reckons Vanas cachinnationes in escis aviditatem immoderatiorem appetitum in vendendis emendis rebus charitatis vilitatis vota perversa usum matrimonii ad libidinem judicia apud infideles agitare Dicere fratri Fatue Vain laughter greediness in meat an immoderate or ungovern'd appetite perverse desires of dearness and cheapness in buying and selling commodities the use of marriage to lustfulness and inordination to go to law before the unbelievers to call our brother Fool. S. Hierome reckons jestings anger and injurious words Caesarius Arelatensis the Bishop reckons excess in eating and drinking idle words importune silence to exasperate an importunate begger to omit the fasts of the Church sleepiness or immoderate sleeping the use of a wife to lustfulness to omit the visitation of the sick and of prisoners and to neglect to reconcile them that are at variance too much severity or harshness to our family or too great indulgence flattery talkings in the Church poor men to eat too much when they are brought rarely to a good table forswearings unwary perjury slander or reproaches rash judgment hatred sudden anger envy evil concupiscence filthy thoughts the lust of the eyes the voluptuousness of the ears or the itch of hearing the speaking filthy words and indeed he reckons almost all the common sins of mankind S. Bernard reckons stultiloquium vaniloquium otiosè dicta facta cogitata talking vainly talking like a fool idle or vain thoughts words and deeds These are the usual Catalogues and if any be reckoned they must be these for many times some of these are least consented to most involuntary most ready less avoidable of the lightest effect of an eternal return incurable in the whole and therefore plead the most probably and are the soonest likely to prevail for pardon but yet they cannot pretend to need no pardon or to fear no damnation For our blessed Saviour says it of him that speaks an angry word that he shall be guilty of hell fire Now since we find such as these reckon'd in the Catalogue of venial sins and S. Austin in particular calls that venial to which our blessed Saviour threatned hell fire it is certain he must not mean that it is in its own nature venial but damnable as any other but it is venial that is prepared for pardon upon other contingencies and causes of which I shall afterwards give account In the mean time I consider 33. VI. When God appointed in the Law expiatory Sacrifices for sins although there was enough to signifie that there is difference in the degrees of sin yet because they were eodem sanguine eluenda and without shedding of blood there was no remission they were reckon'd in the same acounts of death and the Divine anger And it is manifest that by the severities and curse of the Law no sin could escape For cursed is he that continues not in every thing written in the law to do them The Law was a Covenant of Works and exact measures There were no venial sins by vertue of that Covenant for there was no remission and without the death of Christ we could not be eased of this state of danger Since therefore that any sin is venial or pardonable is only owing to the grace of God to the death of Christ and this death pardons all upon the condition of Faith and Repentance and pardons none without it it follows that though sins differ in degree yet they differ not in their natural and essential order to death The man that commits any sin dies if he repents not and he that does
repent timely and effectually dies for none The wages of sin is death of sin indefinitely and therefore of all sin and all death for there is no more distinction of sin than death only when death is threatned indefinitely that death is to be understood which is properly and specifically threatned in that Covenant where the death is named as death temporal in the Law death eternal under the Gospel 34. And thus it appears in a very material instance relating to this question for when our blessed Saviour had threatned the degrees of anger he did it by apportioning several pains hereafter of one sort to the several degrees of the same sin here which he expresses by the several inflictions passed upon Criminals by the Houses of Judgment among the Jews Now it is observable that to the least of these sins Christ assigns a punishment just proportionable to that which the gloss of the Pharisees and the Law it self did to them that committed Murther which was capital He shall be guilty of judgment so we read it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so it is in the Greek He shall be guilty in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is in the Court of Judgment the Assembly of the twenty three Elders and there his punishment was death but the gentlest manner of it the decapitation or smiting him through with the sword and therefore the least punishment hereafter answering to death here can mean no less than death hereafter * And so also was the second 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he that calls Racha shall be guilty that is shall be used as one that stands guilty in the Sanhedrim or Council meaning that he is to die too but with a severer execution by stoning to death this was the greatest punishment by the houses of judgment for Crucifixion was the Roman manner These two already signifie Hell in a less degree but as certainly and evidently as the third For though we read Hell-fire in the third sentence only yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no otherwise signifies Hell than the other two by analogy and proportionable representment The cause of the mistake is this When Christ was pleased to add yet a further degree of punishment in hell to a further degree of anger and reproach the Jews having no greater than that of stoning by the judgment of the Sanhedrim or Council he would borrow his expression from that which they and their Fathers too well understood a barbarous custome of the Phoenicians of burning children alive in the valley of Hinnom which in succession of time the Hellenists called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not much unlike the Hebrew word and because by our blessed Lord it was used to signifie or represent the greatest pains of hell that were spoken of in that gradation the Christians took the word and made it to be its appellative and to signifie the state or place of the damned just as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the garden of Eden is called Paradise But it was no more intended that this should signifie Hell than that any of the other two should The word it self never did so before but that and the other two were taken as being the most fearful things amongst them here to represent the degrees of the most intolerable state hereafter just as damnation is called death the second death that because we fear the first as the worst of present evils we may be affrighted with the apprehensions of the latter From this authority it follows that as in the Law no sins were venial but by repentance and sacrifice so neither in the Gospel are they not in their own nature not by the more holy Covenant of the Gospel but by repentance and mortification For the Gospel hath with greater severity laid restraint upon these minutes and little particles of action and passion and therefore if in the law every transgression was exacted we cannot reasonably think that the least parts of duty which the Gospel superadded with a new and severer caution as great and greater than that by which the law exacted the greatest Commandments can be broken with indemnity or without the highest danger The law exacted all its smallest minutes and therefore so does the Gospel as being a Covenant of greater holiness But as in the law for the smaller transgressions there was an assignment of expiatory rites so is there in the Gospel of a ready repentance and a prepared mercy 37. VII Lastly those sins which men in health are bound to avoid those sins for which Christ did shed his most precious blood those sins which a dying man is bound to ask pardon for though he hopes not or desires not to escape temporal death certain it is that those sins are in their nature and in the Oeconomy or dispensation of the Divine threatnings damnable For what can the dying man fear but death eternal and if he be bound to repent and ask pardon even for the smallest sins which he can remember in order to what pardon can that repentance be but of the eternal pain to which every sin by its own demerit naturally descends If he must repent and ask pardon when he hopes not or desires not the temporal it is certain he must repent only that he may obtain the eternal And they that will think otherwise will also find themselves deceiv'd in this * For if the damned souls in hell are punish'd for all their sins then the unpardon'd venial sins are there also smarted for But so it is and so we are taught in the doctrine of our great Master If we agreee not while we are in the way we shall be cast into the eternal prison and shall not depart thence till we have paid the uttermost farthing that is ever for our smallest sins if they be unremitted men shall pay in hell their horrible Symbol of damnation And this is confessed on all hands that they who fall into hell pay their sorrows there even for all But it is pretended that this is only by accident not by the first intention of the Divine justice because it happens that they are subjected in such persons who for other sins not for these go to hell Well! yet let it be considered whether or no do not the smallest unremitted sins increase the torments of hell in their proportion If they do not then they are not at all punished in hell for if without them the perishing soul is equally punished then for them there is no punishment at all But if they do increase the pains as it is certain they do then to them properly and for their own malignity and demerit a portion of eternal pains is assigned Now if God punishes them in hell then they deserv'd hell if they be damnable in their event then they were so in their merit for God never punishes any sin more than it deserves though he often does less But to say that this is
to that sad state let the man hope as much as he can God forbid that I should be Author to him to despair The purpose of this discourse is that men in health should not put things to that desperate condition or make their hopes so little and afflicted that it may be disputed whether they be alive or no. 4. But this objection is nothing but a temptation and a snare a device to make me confess that the former arguments for fear men should despair ought to be answered and are not perfectly convincing I intended them only for institution and instruction not to confute any person or any thing but to condemn sin and to rescue men from danger But truly I do think they are rightly concluding as moral propositions are capable and if the consequent of them be that dying persons after a vicious life cannot hope ordinarily for pardon I am truly sorrowful that any man should fall into that sad state of things as I am really afflicted and sorrowful that any man should live vilely or perish miserably but then it ought not to be imputed to this doctrine that it makes men despair for the purpose and proper consequent of it is that men are warned to live so that they may be secur'd in their hopes that is that men give diligence to make their calling and election sure that they may take no desperate courses and fall into no desperate condition And certainly if any man preach the necessity of a good life and of actual obedience he may as well be charged to drive men to despair for the summ of the foregoing doctrine is nothing else but that it is necessary we should walk before God in all holy conversation and godliness But of this I shall give a large account in the Fifth Section Obj. 3. But if things be thus it is not good or safe to be a criminal Judge and all the Discipline of War will be unlawful and highly displeasing to God For if any one be taken in an act of a great sin and as it happens in War be put to death suddenly without leisure and space of repentance by the measures of this doctrine the man shall perish and consequently the power by which he falls is uncharitable I answer That in an act of sin the case is otherwise than in an habit as I have already demonstrated in its proper place It must be a habit that must extirpate a habit but an act is rescinded by a less violence and abode of duty and it is possible for an act of duty to be so heroical or the repentance of an hour to be so pungent and dolorous and the fruits of that repentance putting forth by the sudden warmths and fervour of the spirit be so goodly and fair as through the mercies of God in Jesus Christ to obtain pardon of that single sin if that be all II. But it is to be considered whether the man be otherwise a vicious person or was he a good man but by misfortune and carelesness overtaken in a fault If he was a good man his spirit is so accustomed to good that he is soon brought to an excellent sorrow and to his former state especially being awakened by the sad arrest of a hasty death and if he accepts that death willingly making that which is necessarily inforc'd upon him to become voluntary by his acceptation of it changing the judgment into penance I make no question but he shall find mercy But if the man thus taken in a fault was otherwise a vicious person it is another consideration It is not safe for him to go to war but the Officers may as charitably and justly put such a person to death for a fault as send him upon a hard service The doing of his duty may as well ruine him as the doing of a fault and if he be repriev'd a week he will find difficulty in the doing what he should and danger enough besides III. The discipline of war if it be only administred where it is necessary not only in the general rule but also in the particular instance cannot be reprov'd upon this account Because by the laws of war sufficiently published every man is sufficiently warned of his danger which if he either accept or be bound to accept he perishes by his own fault if he perishes at all For as by the hazard of his imployment he is sufficiently called upon to repent worthily of all his evil life past so is he by the same hazardous imployment and the known laws of war caution'd to beware of committing any great sin and if his own danger will not become his security then his confidence may be his ruine and then nothing is to be blam'd but himself IV. But yet it were highly to be wish'd that when such cases do happen and that it can be permitted in the particular without the dissolution of discipline such persons should be pitied in order to their eternal interest But when it cannot the Minister of justice is the Minister of God and dispenses his power by the rules of his justice at which we cannot quarrel though he cuts off sinners in their acts of sin of which he hath given them sufficient warning and hath a long time expected their amendment to whom that of Seneca may be applied Vnum bonum tibi superest repraesentabimus mortem Nothing but death will make some men cease to sin and therefore quo uno modo possunt desinant mali esse God puts a period to the increase of their ruine and calamity by making that wickedness shorter which if it could would have been eternal When men are incorrigible they may be cut off in charity as well as justice and therefore as it is always just so it is sometimes pity though a sad one to take a sinner away with his sins upon his head 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 When it is impossible to have it otherwise this is the only good that he is capable of to be sent speedily to a lesser punishment than he should inherit if he should live longer But when it can be otherwise it were very well it were so very often And therefore the customs of Spain are in this highly to be commended who to condemned criminals give so much respite till the Confessor gives them a benè discessit and supposes them competently prepared But if the Law-givers were truly convinced of this doctrine here taught it is to be hoped they would more readily practise this charity 57. Obj. 4. But hath not God promised pardon to him that is contrite A contrite and broken heart O God thou wilt not despise And I said I will confess my sins unto the Lord and so thou forgavest the wickedness of my sin And the prodigal was pardon'd immediately upon his confession and return Coeperat dicere mox illum pater complectitur said S. Basil His Father embraces him when he began to speak And S.
penitents and hath given an excellent indication of a true Repentance and conversion from sin to God Let old men if there be need be apt to learn and so mortifie that pride and morosity that usually do attend their age who think their gray hairs title enough to wisdom and sufficient notices of things Let them be gentle to others patient of the evil accidents of their state bountiful and liberal as full of good example as they can and it is more than probable that if they yield not to that by which they can then be tempted they have quit all their affections to sin and it is enough that they are found faithful in that in which they are now tried 20. IX Let old men be very careful that they never tell the story of their sins with any pleasure or delight but as they must recolligere annos in amaritudine call to mind their past years in the bitterness of their soul so when they speak of any thing of it they must not tell it as a merry story lest they be found to laugh at their own damnation Mutatus Dices Heu quoties te in speculo videris alterum Quae mens est hodie cur eadem non puero fuit Vel cur his animis incolumes non redeunt genae Trouble and sorrow will better become the spirit of an old sinner because he was a fool when he was young and weak when he is wise that his strengths must be spent in sin and that for God and wise courses nothing remains but weak hands and dim eyes and trembling knees 21. X. Let not an old sinner and young penitent ever think that there can be a period to his Repentance or that it can ever be said by himself that he hath done enough No sorrow no alms no affliction no patience no Sacraments can be said to have finish'd his work so that he may say with S. Paul I have fought a good fight I have finish'd my course nothing can bring consummation to his work till the day of his death because it is all the way an imperfect state having in it nothing that is excellent or laudable but only upon the account of a great necessity and misery on one side and a great mercy on the other It is like a man condemn'd to perpetual banishment he is always in his passive obedience but is a debtor to the Law until he be dead So is this penitent he hath not finish'd his work or done a Repentance in any measure proportionable to his sins but only because he can do no more and yet he did something even before it was too late 22. XI Let an old man in the mortification of his vicious habits be curious to distinguish nature from grace his own disability from the strengths of the Spirit and not think that he hath extirpated the vice of uncleanness when himself is disabled to act it any longer or that he is grown a sober person because he is sick in his stomach and cannot drink intemperately or dares not for fear of being sick His measures must be taken by the account of his actions and oppositions to his former sins and so reckon his comfort 23. XII But upon whatever account it come he is not so much to account concerning his hopes or the performance of his duty by abstaining from sin as by doing of good For besides that such a not committing of evil may be owing to weak or insufficient principles this not committing evil in so little a time cannot make amends for the doing it so long together according to the usual accounts of Repentance unless that abstaining be upon the stock of vertue and labour of mortification and resistance and then every abstinence is also a doing good for it is a crucifying of the old man with the affections and lusts But all the good that by the grace of God he superadds is matter of choice and the proper actions of a new life 24. XIII After all this done vigorously holily with fear and caution with zeal and prudence with diligence and an uninterrupted observation the old man that liv'd a vile life but repents in time though he staid as long as he could and much longer than he should yet may live in hope and die in peace and charity To this purpose they are excellent words which S. Austin said Peradventure some will think that he hath committed such grievous faults that he cannot now obtain the favour of God Let this be far from the conceits of all sinners O man whosoever thou art that attendest that multitude of thy sins wherefore dost thou not attend to the Omnipotency of the Heavenly Physician For since God will have mercy because he is good and can because he is Almighty he shuts the gate of the Divine Goodness against himself who thinks that God cannot or will not have mercy upon him and therefore distrusts either his Goodness or his Almightiness The proper Repentance and usage of sinners who repent not until their death-bed The inquiry after this Article consists in these particulars 1. What hopes are left to a vicious ill liv'd man that repents on his death-bed and not before 2. What advices are best or can bring him most advantage 25. That a good life is necessary * that it is required by God * that it was design'd in the whole purpose of the Gospel * that it is a most reasonable demand and infinitely recompensed by the very smallest portions of Eternity * That it was called for all our life and was exacted by the continual voice of Scripture of Mercies of Judgment of Prophets * That to this very purpose God offered the assistance of his holy Spirit and to this ministery we were supplied with preventing with accompanying and persevering grace that is powers and assistances to begin and to continue in well doing * That there is no distinct Covenant made with dying men differing from what God hath admitted between himself and living healthful persons * That it is not reasonable to think God will deal more gently with persons who live viciously all their lives and that at an easier rate they may expect salvation at the hands of God whom they have so provoked than they who have serv'd him faithfully according to the measures of a man * or that a long impiety should be sooner expiated than a short one * That the easiness of such as promise heaven to dying penitents after a vicious life is dangerous to the very being and constitution of piety * and scandalous to the honour and reputation and sanctity of the Christian Religion * that the grace of God does leave those that use it not * That therefore the necessity of dying men increases and their aids are lessen'd and almost extinguished * that they have more to do than they have either time or strength to finish * That all their vows and holy purposes are useless and ineffective as to their natural
moved God to smite would also move him to forbear which were a strange Oeconomy The words therefore are not a reason of his forbearing but an aggravation of his kindness as if he had said Though man be continually evil yet I will not for all that any more drown the world for mans being so evil and so the Hebrews note that the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometimes signifies although 49. But the great out-cry in this Question is upon confidence of the words of David Behold I was shapen in wickedness and in sin hath my mother conceived me To which I answer that the words are an Hebraism and signifie nothing but an aggrandation of his sinfulness and are intended for an high expression meaning that I am wholly and intirely wicked For the verification of which exposition there are divers parallel places in the holy Scriptures Thou wert my hope when I hanged yet upon my mothers breasts and The ungodly are froward even from their mothers womb as soon as they be born they go astray and speak lies which because it cannot be true in the letter must be an idiotism or propriety of phrase apt to explicate the other and signifying only a ready a prompt a great and universal wickedness The like to this is that saying of the Pharisees Thou wert altogether born in sin and dost thou teach us which phrase and manner of speaking being plainly a reproach of the poor blind man and a disparagement of him did mean only to call him a very wicked person but not that he had derived his sin originally and from his birth for that had been their own case as much as his and therefore S. Chrysostome explaining this phrase says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is as if they should say Thou hast been a sinner all thy life time To the same sence are those words of Job I have guided her the widow from my mothers womb And in this expression and severity of hyperbole it is that God aggravated the sins of his people Thou wast called a transgressor from the womb And this way of expressing a great state of misery we find us'd among the Heathen Writers for so Seneca brings in Oedipus complaining Infanti quoque decreta mors est Fata quis tam tristia sortitus unquam Videram nondum diem jam tenebar Mors me antecessit aliquis intra viscera Materna lethum praecocis fati tulit Sed numquid peccavit Something like S. Bernards Damnatus antequam natus I was condemn'd before I was born dead before I was alive and death seised upon me in my mothers womb Somebody brought in a hasty and a too forward death but did he sin also An expression not unlike to this we have in Lucian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pardon me that I was not born wicked or born to be wicked 2. If David had meant it literally it had not signified that himself was born in original sin but that his father and mother sinn'd when they begat him which the eldest son that he begat of Bathsheba for ought I know might have said truer than he in this sence And this is the exposition of Clemens Alexandrinus save only that by my mother he understands Eva 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Though he was conceived in sin yet he was not in the sin peccatrix concepit sed non peccatorem she sinn'd in the conception not David And in the following words he speaks home to the main article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let them tell us where an infant did fornicate or how he who had done nothing could fall under the curse of Adam meaning so as to deserve the same evil that he did 3. If it did relate to his own person he might mean that he was begotten with that sanguine disposition and libidinous temper that was the original of his vile adultery and then though David said this truly of himself yet it is not true of all not of those whose temper is phlegmatick and unactive 4. If David had meant this of himself and that in regard of original sin this had been so far from being a penitential expression or a confessing of his sin that it had been a plain accusation of God and an excusing of himself As if he had said O Lord I confess I have sinn'd in this horrible murder and adultery but thou O God knowest how it comes to pass even by that fatal punishment which thou didst for the sin of Adam inflict on me and all mankind above 3000. years before I was born thereby making me to fall into so horrible corruption of nature that unless thou didst irresistibly force me from it I cannot abstain from any sin being most naturally inclin'd to all In this sinfulness hath my mother conceived me and that hath produc'd in me this sad effect Who would suppose David to make such a confession or in his sorrow to hope for pardon for upbraiding not his own folly but the decrees of God 5. But that David thought nothing of this or any thing like it we may understand by the preceding words which are as a preface to these in the objection Against thee only have I sinned and done this evil in thy sight that thou mightest be justified in thy saying and clear when thou art judged He that thus acquits God cannot easily be supposed in the very next breath so fiercely to accuse him 6. To which also adde the following words which are a sufficient reproof of all strange sences in the other In sin hath my mother conceived me But loe thou requirest truth in the inward parts as if he had said Though I am so wicked yet thy laws are good and I therefore so much the worse because I am contrary to thy laws They require truth and sincerity in the soul but I am false and perfidious But if this had been natural for him so to be and unavoidable God who knew it perfectly well would have expected nothing else of him For he will not require of a stone to speak nor of fire to be cold unless himself be pleased to work a miracle to have them so 50. But S. Paul affirms that by nature we were the children of wrath True we were so when we were dead in sins and before we were quickned by the Spirit of life and grace We were so now we are not We were so by our own unworthiness and filthy conversation now we being regenerated by the Spirit of holiness we are alive unto God and no longer heirs of wrath This therefore as appears by the discourse of S. Paul relates not to our Original sin but to the Actual and of this sence of the word Nature in the matter of sinning we have Justin Martyr or whoever is the Author of the Questions and Answers ad Orthodoxos to be witness For answering those words of Scripture There is not any one clean who is born of a woman
that but it takes away the formality of it it is not a punishment to such but a Condition of Nature as it is to Infants For that even to them also there is no condemnation for their Original Concupiscence is Undeniable and demonstratively Certain upon this account Because even the actual desires and little Concupiscences of children are innocent and therefore much more their natural tendencies and inclinations For if a principle be criminal if a faculty be a sin much more are the acts of that faculty also a sin but if these be innocent then much more is that 40. Yet the Apostle does confess that Concupiscence and Lust hath of it self the Nature of sin Of it self that is it is in the whole kind to be reproved it is not a sin to all persons not to unconsenting persons for if it be no sin to them that resist then neither is it a sin to them that cannot consent But it hath the Nature of sin that is it is the material part of sin a principle and root from whence evil may spring according to S. Austins words Modo quodam loquendi vocatur peccatum quod peccato factum est peccati si vicerit facit reum S. Aug. lib. 1. de nup. Concup c. 23. Just as if a Man have a Natural thirst it may tempt him and is apt to incline him to drunkenness if he be of a sanguine disposition it disposes him to lust if cholerick to anger and is so much a sin as the fuel is a part of the fire but because this can be there where damnation shall not enter this Nature of sin is such as does not make a proper Guiltiness for it is a contradiction to say the sin remains and the guilt is taken away For he that hath a sin is guilty of punishment for that is he is liable to it if God pleases he may pardon if he please but if he pardons he takes away the sin For in the justified no sin can be inherent or habitual Quomodo justificati sanctificati sumus si peccatum aliquod in nobis relinquitur Hieron ad Oceanum If Concupiscence be an inherent sin in us before baptism it must either be taken away by baptism or imputed to us after baptism for if the malice remains the guilt cannot go away for God will by no means justifie the remaining sinner 41. These things I have chose to say and publish because I find that the usual doctrines about Original sin are not only false and presum'd without any competent proof but because as they are commonly believ'd they are no friends to piety but pretences of idleness and dishonourable to the reputation of Gods goodness and justice for which we ought to be very zealous when a greater indifference would better become us in the matter of our opinion or the doctrine of our sect and therefore it is not to be blam'd in me that I move the thoughts of men in the proposition for it is not an useless one but hath its immediate effects upon the Honour of God and the next upon the lives of men And therefore this hath in it many degrees of necessary doctrine and the fruits of it must needs do more than make recompence for the trouble I put them to in making new inquiries into that doctrine concerning which they were so long at ease But if men of a contrary judgment can secure the interests and advantages of piety and can reconcile their usual doctrines of Original sin with Gods justice and goodness and truth I shall be well pleased with it and think better of their doctrine than now I can But until that be done they may please to consider that there is in Holy Scripture no sign of it nor intimation that at the day of Judgment Christ shall say to any Go ye cursed sons of Adam into everlasting fire because your Father sinn'd and though I will pardon millions of sins which men did chuse and delight in yet I will severely exact this of you which you never did chuse nor could delight in this I say is not likely to be in the event of things and in the wise and merciful dispensation of God especially since Jesus Christ himself so far as appears never spake one word of it there is not any tittle of it in all the four Gospels it is a thing of which no warning was or could be given to any of Adams children it is not mention'd in the old Testament for that place of David in the 51. Psalm Clemens Alexandrinus and others of the Fathers snatch from any pretence to it and that one time where it is spoken of in the New Testament there is nothing said of it but that it is imputed to us to this purpose only that it brought in death temporal and why such Tragedies should be made of it and other places of Scripture drawn by violence to give countenance to it and all the systemes of Divinity of late made to lean upon this Article which yet was never thought to be fundamental or belonging to the foundation was never put into the Creed of any Church but is made the great support of new and strange propositions even of the fearful decree of absolute reprobation and yet was never consented in or agreed upon what it was or how it can be conveyed and was in the late and modern sence of it as unknown to the Primitive Church as it was to the Doctors of the Jews that is wholly unknown to them both why I say men should be so fierce in their new sence of this Article and so impatient of contradiction it is not easie to give a reasonable account For my own particular I hope I have done my duty having produced Scriptures and Reasons and the best Authority against it Qui potest capere capiat For I had a good spirit yea rather being good I came into a body undefiled Wisd. 8.19 20. CHAP. VIII Of Sins of Infirmity SECT I. 1. ALL Mankind hath for ever complain'd of their irremediable calamity their propensity to sin For though by the dictates of Nature all people were instructed in the general notices of vertue and vice right reason being our rule insomuch that the old Philosophers as Plutarch reports said that vertue was nothing else but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a disposition and force of reason And this reason having guided the wisest was form'd into laws for others yet this reason serv'd to little other purposes but to upbraid our follies and infelicities and to make our actions punishable by representing them to be unreasonable for they did certainly sin and they could no more help it than they could prevent their being sick or hungry or angry or thirsty Nature had made organs for some and senses for others and conversation and example brought in all So that if you reprov'd a Criminal he heard and understood you but could not helpt it as Laius in the Tragedy 〈◊〉
here also they are not to be confuted and as for the particular Scriptures unless we have the advantage of essential reason taken from the Divine Attributes they will oppose Scripture to Scripture and have as much advantage to expound the opposite places as the Jews have in their Questions of the Messias anâ— therefore si meos ipse corymbos necterem if I might make mine own arguments in their Society and with their leave I would upon that very account suspect the usual discourses of the effects and Oeconomy of Original sin 8. For where will they reckon the beginning of Predestination will they reckon it in Adam after the Fall or in Christ immediately promised If in Adam then they return to the Presbyterian way and run upon all the rocks before reckoned enough to break all the world in pieces If in Christ they reckon it and so they do then thus I argue If we are all reckoned in Christ before we were born then how can we be reckoned in Adam when we are born I speak as to the matter of Predestination to salvation or damnation For as for the intermedial temporal evils and dangers spiritual and sad infirmities they are our nature and might with Justice have been all the portion God had given to Adam and therefore may be so to us and consequently not at all to be reckoned in this enquiry But certainly as to the main 9. If God looks upon us all in Christ then by him we are rescued from Adam so much is done for us before we were born For if this is not to be reckoned till after we were born then Adams sin prevailed really in some periods and to some effects for which God in Christ had provided no remedy for it gave no remedy to children till after they were born but irremediably they were born children of wrath but if a remedy were given to Children before they were born then they are born in Christ not in Adam but if this remedy was not given to Children before they were born then it follows that we were not at first looked upon in Christ but in Adam and consequently he was caput praedestinationis the head of predestination or else there were two the one before we were born the other after So that haereâ—leâ—hâ—lis arundo The arrow sticks fast and it cannot be pulled out unless by other instruments than are commonly in fashion However it be yet methinks this a very good probable Argument As Adam sinned before any child was born so was Christ promised before and that our Redeemer shall not have more force upon children that they should be born beloved and quitted from wrath than Adam our Progenitor shall have to cause that we be born hated and in a damnable condition wants so many degrees of probability that it seems to dishonour the mercy of God and the reputation of his goodness and the power of his redemption For this serves as an Antidote and Antinomy of their great objection pretended by these learned persons for whereas they say they the rather affirm this because it is an honour to the redemption which our Saviour wrought for us that it rescued us from the sentence of damnation which we had incurred To this I say that the honour of our blessed Saviour does no way depend upon our imaginations and weak propositions and neither can the reputation and honour of the Divine goodness borrow aids and artificial supports from the dishonour of his Justice and it is no reputation to a Physician to say he hath cured us of an evil which we never had and shall we accuse the Father of mercies to have wounded us for no other reason but that the Son may have the Honour to have cured us I understand not that He that makes a necessity that he may find a remedy is like the Roman whom Cato found fault withall he would commit a fault that he might beg a pardon he had rather write bad Greek that he might make an apology than write good Latin and need none But however Christ hath done enough for us even all that we did need and since it is all the reason in the world we should pay him all honour we may remember that it is a greater favour to us that by the benefit of our blessed Saviour who was the Lamb slain from the beginning of the world we were reckoned in Christ and born in the accounts of the Divine favour I say it is a greater favour that we were born under the redemption of Christ than under the sentence and damnation of Adam and to prevent an evil is a greater favour than to cure it so that if to do honour to Gods goodness and to the graces of our Redeemer we will suppose a need we may do him more honour to suppose that the promised seed of the woman did do us as early a good as the sin of Adam could do us mischief and therefore that in Christ we are born quitted from any such supposed sentence and not that we bring it upon our shoulders into the world with us But this thing relies only upon their suppositions For if we will speak of what is really true and plainly revealed From all the sins of all mankind Christ came to redeem us He came to give us a supernatural birth to tell us all his Fathers will to reveal to us those glorious promises upon the expectation of which we might be enabled to do every thing that is required He came to bring us grace and life and spirit to strengthen us against all the powers of Hell and Earth to sanctifie our afflictions which from Adam by Natural generation descended on us to take out the sting of death to make it an entrance to immortal life to assure us of resurrection to intercede for us and to be an advocate for us when we by infirmity commit sin to pardon us when we repent Nothing of which could be derived to us from Adam by our natural generation Mankind now taken in his whole constitution and design is like the Birds of Paradise which travellers tell us of in the Molucco Islands born without legs but by a celestial power they have a recompence made to them for that defect and they always hover in the air and feed on the dew of Heaven so are we birds of Paradise but cast out from thence and born without legs without strength to walk in the Laws of God or to go to Heaven but by a power from above we are adopted in our new birth to a celestial conversation we feed on the dew of Heaven The just does live by faith and breaths in this new life by the spirit of God For from the first Adam nothing descended to us but an infirm body and a naked soul evil example and a body of death ignorance and passion hard labour and a cursed field a captive soul and an imprisoned body that is a soul naturally apt to comply with the
Rom. 5.12 As by one man sin entred into the world and Death by sin and so death passed upon all men for that all have sinned i. e. As by the disobedience of Adam sin had its beginning and by sin death that is the sentence and preparations the solennities and addresses of death sickness calamity dâ—â—inution of strengths Old age misfortunes and all the affections of Mortality for the destroying of our temporal life and so this mortality and condition or state of death passed actually upon all mankind for Adam being thrown out of Paradise and forced to live with his Children where they had no Trees of Life as he had in Paradise was remanded to his mortal natural state and therefore death passed upon them mortally seized on all for that all have sinned that is the sin was reckoned to all not to make them guilty like Adam but Adams sin passed upon all imprinting this real calamity on us all But yet death descended also upon Adams Posterity for their own sins for since all did sin all should die But some Greek copies leave out the second 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which indeed seems superfluous and of no signification but then the sence is cleareâ— and the following words are the second part of a similitude As by one man sin entred into the world and death by sin So death passed upon all men for that all have sinned But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies neutrally And the meaning is As Adam died in his own sin So death passed upon all men for their own sin in the sin which they sinned in that sin they died As it did at first to Adam by whom sin first entred and by sin death so death passed upon all men upon whom sin passed that is in the same method they who did sin should die But then he does not seem to say that all did sin for he presently subjoyns that death reigned even upon those who did not sin after the similitude of Adams transgression but this was upon another account as appears in the following words But others expound 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie masculinely and to relate to Adam viz. that in him we all sinned Now although this is less consonant to the mind of the Apostle and is harsh and improper both in the language and in the sence yet if it were so it could mean but this that the sin of Adam was of Universal obligation and in him we are reckoned as sinners obnoxious to his sentence for by his sin humane Nature was reduced to its own mortality 13. For until the law sin was in the World but sin is not imputed where there is no law And marvel not that Death did presently descend on all mankind even before a Law was given them with an appendant penalty viz. With the express intermination of death For they did do actions unnatural and vile enough but yet these things which afterwards upon the publication of the Law were imputed to them upon their personal account even unto death were not yet so imputed For Nature alone gives Rules but does not directly bind to penalties But death came upon them before the Law for Adams sin for with him God being angry was pleased to curse him also in his Posterity and leave them also in their mere natural condition to which yet they disposed themselves and had deserved but too much by committing evil things to which things although before the law death was not threatned yet for the anger which God had against mankind he left that death which he threatned to Adam expresly by implication to fall upon the Posterity 14. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression who is the figure of him which was to come And therefore it was that death reigned from Adam to Moses from the first law to the second from the time that a Law was given to one man till the time a Law was given to one Nation and although men had not sinned so grievously as Adam did who had no excuse many helps excellent endowments mighty advantages trifling temptations communication with God himself no disorder in his faculties free will perfect immunity from violence Original righteousness perfect power over his faculties yet those men such as Abel and Seth Noah and Abraham Isaac and Jacob Joseph and Benjamin who sinned less and in the midst of all their disadvantages were left to fall under the same sentence But it is to be observed that these words even over them that had not sinned according to some Interpretations are to be put into a Parenthesis and the following words after the similitude of Adams transgression are an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and to be referred to the first words thus Death reigned from Adam to Moses after the similitude of Adams transgression that is as it was at first so it was afterwards death reigned upon men who had not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression that is like as it did in the transgression of Adam so it did afterward they in their innocence died as Adam did in his sin and prevarication and this was in the similitude of Adam As they who obtain salvation obtain it in the similitude of Christ or by a conformity to Christ so they 〈◊〉 die do die in the likeness of Adam Christ and Adam being the two representatives of mankind For this besides that it was the present Oeconomy of the Divine Providence and Government it did also like Janus look 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it looked forwards as well as backwards and became a type of Christ or of him that was to come For as from Adam evil did descend upon his natural Children upon the account of Gods entercourse with Adam so did good descend upon the spiritual Children of the second Adam 15. But not as the offence so also is the free gift for if through the offence of one many be dead much more the grace of God and the gift by grace which is by one man Jesus Christ hath abounded unto many This should have been the latter part of a similitude but upon further consideration it is found that as in Adam we die so in Christ we live and much rather and much more therefore I cannot say as by one man vers 12. so by one man vers 15. But much more for not as the offence so also is the free gift for the offence of one did run over unto many and those many even as it were all except Enoch or some very few more of whom mention peradventure is not made are already dead upon that account but when God comes by Jesus Christ to shew mercy to mankind he does it in much more abundance he may be angry to the third and fourth generation in them that hate him but he will shew mercy unto thousands of them that love him to a thousand generations and in ten thousand degrees
brought death into the world That it was his sin alone that did the great mischief That this sin was made ours 〈◊〉 by inherence but by imputation That they who suffered the calamity did not know what the sin was That there was a difference of men even in relation to thiâ— sin and it passed upon some more than upon others that is some were more miserable than others That some did not sin by that sin of Adam and some did that is some there were whose manners were not corrupted by that example and some were that it was not our sin but his that the sin did not multiply by the variety of subject but was still but one sin and that it was his and not ours all which particulars are as so many verifications of the doctrine I have delivered and so many illustrations of the main Article But in verification of one great part of it I mean that concerning Infants and that they are not corrupted properly or made sinners by any inherent impurity is clearly affirmed by S. Peter whose words are thus rendred in the same Aethiopick Testament 1 Pet. 2.2 And be ye like unto newly begotten Infants who are begotten every one without sin or malice and as milk not mingled And to the same sence those words of our Blessed Saviour to the Pharisees asking who sinn'd this man or his Parents John 9. the Syriack Scholiast does give this Paraphrase some say it is an indirect question For how is it possible for a man to sin before he was born And if his Parents sinn'd how could he bear their sin But if they say that the punishment of the Parents may be upon the Children let them know that this is spoken of them that came out of Egypt and is not Universal And those words of David In sin hath my Mother conceived me R. David Kimchi and Abeâ—esra say that they are expounded of Eve who did not conceive till she had sinned But to return to the words of S. Paul The consequent of this discourse must needs at least be this that it is impossible that the greatest part of mankind should be left in the eternal bonds of Hell by Adam for then quite contrary to the discourse of the Apostle there had been abundance of sin but a scarcity of grace and the access had been on the part of Adam not on the part of Christ against which he so mightily and artificially contends so that the Presbyterian way is perfectly condemned by this discourse of the Apostle and the other more gentle way which affirms that we were sentenced in Adam to eternal death though the execution is taken off by Christ is also no way countenanced by any thing in this Chapter for that the judgment which for Adams sin came unto the condemnation of the world was nothing but temporal death is here affirmed it being in no sence imaginable that the death which here S. Paul says passed upon all men and which reigned from Adam to Moses should be eternal death for the Apostle speaks of that death which was threatned to Adam and of such a death which was afterwards threatned in Moses's Law and such a death which fell even upon the most righteous of Adams posterity Abel and Seth and Methuselah that is upon them who did not sin after the similitude of Adams transgression Since then all the judgment which the Apostle says came by the sin of Adam was sufficiently and plainly enough affirmed to be death temporal that God should sentence mankind to eternal damnation for Adams sin though in goodness through Christ he afterwards took it off is not at all affirmed by the Apostle and because in proportion to the evil so was the imputation of the sin it follows that Adams sin is ours metonymically and improperly God was not finally angry with us nor had so much as any designs of eternal displeasure upon that account his anger went no further than the evils of this life and therefore the imputation was not of a proper guilt for that might justly have passed beyond our grave if the sin had passed beyond a metonymy or a juridical external imputation And of this God and Man have given this further testimony that as no man ever imposed penance for it so God himself in nature did never for it afflict or affright the Conscience and yet the Conscience never spares any man that is guilty of a known sin Extemplo quodcunque malum committitur ipsi Displicet Authori He that is guilty of a sin Shall rue the crime that he lies in And why the Conscience shall be for ever at so much peace for this sin that a man shall never give one groan for his share of guilt in Adams sin unless some or other scares him with an impertinent proposition why I say the Conscience should not naturally be afflicted for it nor so much as naturally know it I confess I cannot yet make any reasonable conjecture save this only that it is not properly a sin but only metonymically and improperly And indeed there are some whole Churches which think themselves so little concerned in the matter of Original sin that they have not a word of it in all their Theology I mean the Christians in the East-Indies concerning whom Frier Luys di Vrretta in his Ecclesiastical story of Aethiopia says That the Christians in Aethiopia under the Empire of Prestre Juan never kept the immaculate conception of the Virgin Mary no so entremetieron en essas Theologias del peccato Original porque mâ—nca tuvieron los entendimientes muy metafisicos antes como gente afable benigna Llana de entendimientos conversables y alaguenos seguian la dotrina de los santos antiguos y de los sagrados Concilios sin disputas ni diferencias nor do they insert into their Theology any propositions concerning Original Sin nor trouble themselves with such Metaphysical contemplations but being of an affable ingenuous gentle comportment and understanding follow the Doctrine of the Primitive Saints and Holy Councils without disputation or difference so says the story But we unfortunately trouble our selves by raising Ideas of Sin and afflict our selves with our own dreams and will not believe but it is a vision And the height of this imagination hath wrought so high in the Church of Rome that when they would do great honours to the Virgin Mary they were pleased to allow to her an immaculate conception without any Original Sin and a Holy-day appointed for the celebration of the dream But the Christians in the other world are wiser and trouble themselves with none of these things but in simplicity honour the Divine attributes and speak nothing but what is easie to be understood And indeed Religion is then the best and the world will be sure to have fewer Atheists and fewer Blasphemers when the understandings of witty men are not tempted by commanding them to believe impossible Articles and unintelligible propositions when every thing is
pleasing of men is his best reward and his not being condemned and contradicted all the possession of a Truth SECT XIV Of the practice of Christian Churches towards persons Disagreeing and when Persecution first came in AND thus this Truth hath been practised in all times of Christian Religion when there were no collateral designs on foot nor interests to be served nor passions to be satisfied In Saint Paul's time though the censure of Heresie were not so loose and forward as afterwards and all that were called Hereticks were clearly such and highly criminal yet as their crime was so was their censure that is spiritual They were first admonished once at least for so Irenaeus Tertullian Cyprian Ambrose and Hierom read that place of Titus 3. But since that time all men and at that time some read it Post unam alteram admonitionem reject a Heretick Rejection from the communion of Saints after two warnings that 's the penalty Saint John expresses it by not eating with them not bidding them God speed but the persons against whom he decrees so severely are such as denied Christ to be come in the flesh direct Antichrists And let the sentence be as high as it lists in this case all that I observe is that since in so damnable Doctrines nothing but spiritual censure separation from the communion of the faithfull was enjoyned and prescribed we cannot pretend to an Apostolicall precedent if in matters of dispute and innocent question and of great uncertainty and no malignity we should proceed to sentence of Death 2. For it is but an absurd and illiterate arguing to say that Excommunication is a greater punishment and killing a less and therefore who-ever may be excommunicated may also be put to death which indeed is the reasoning that Bellarmine uses For first Excommunication is not directly and of itself a greater punishment then corporal Death because it is indefinite and incompleat and in order to a farther punishment which if it happens then the Excommunication was the inlet to it if it does not the Excommunication did not signifie half so much as the loss of a member much less Death For it may be totally ineffectual either by the iniquity of the proceeding or repentance of the person and in all times and cases it is a medicine if the man please if he will not but perseveres in his impiety then it is himself that brings the Censure to effect that actuates the judgement and gives a sting and an energy upon that which otherwise would be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Secondly but when it is at worst it does not kill the Soul it onely consigns it to that death which it had deserved and should have received independently from that sentence of the Church Thirdly and yet Excommunication is to admirable purpose for whether it refers to the person censured or to others it is prudentiall in itself it is exemplary to others it is medicinal to all For the person censured is by this means threatned into piety and the threatning made the more energeticall upon him because by fiction of Law or as it were by a Sacramental representment the pains of hell are made presentiall to him and so becomes an act of prudent judicature and excellent discipline and the best instrument of spiritual Government because the nearer the threatning is reduced to matter and the more present and circumstantiate it is made the more operative it is upon our spirits while they are immerged in matter And this is the full sense and power of Excommunication in its direct intention consequently and accidentally other evils might follow it as in the times of the Apostles the censured persons were buffeted by Satan and even at this day there is less security even to the temporal condition of such a person whom his spiritual parents have Anathematiz'd But besides this I know no warrant to affirm any thing of Excommunication for the sentence of the Church does but declare not effect the final sentence of damnation Whoever deserves Excommunication deserves damnation and he that repents shall be saved though he die out of the Churche's externall Communion and if he does not repent he shall be damned though he was not excommunicate 3. But suppose it greater then the sentence of corporal Death yet it follows not because Hereticks may be excommunicate therefore killed for from a greater to a less in a several kinde of things the argument concludes not It is a greater thing to make an excellent discourse then to make a shoe yet he that can doe the greater cannot doe this less An Angel cannot beget a man and yet he can doe a greater matter in that kinde of operations which we term spiritual and Angelicall And if this were concluding that whoever may be excommunicate may be kill'd then because of Excommunications the Church is confessed the sole and intire Judge she is also an absolute disposer of the lives of persons I believe this will be but ill doctrine in Spain for in Bulla Coenae Domini the King of Spain is every year excommunicated on Maunday-Thursday but if by the same power he might also be put to death as upon this ground he may the Pope might with more ease be invested in that part of Saint Peter's Patrimony which that King hath invaded and surprized But besides this it were extreme harsh Doctrine in a Roman Consistory from whence Excommunications issue for trifles for fees for not suffering themselves infinitely to be oppressed for any thing if this be greater then Death how great a tyranny is that which doth more then kill men for lesse then trifles or else how inconsequent is that argument which concludes its purpose upon so false pretence and supposition 4. Well however zealous the Apostles were against Hereticks yet none were by them or their dictates put to death The death of Ananias and Sapphira and the blindness of Elymas the Sorcerer amount not to this for they were miraculous inflictions and the first was a punishment to Vow-breach and Sacrilege the second of Sorcery and open contestation against the Religion of Jesus Christ neither of them concerned the case of this present question Or if the case were the same yet the Authority is not the same For he that inflicted these punishments was infallible and of a power competent but no man at this day is so But as yet people were converted by Miracles and Preaching and Disputing and Hereticks by the same means were redargued and all men instructed none tortured for their Opinion And this continued till Christian people were vexed by disagreeing persons and were impatient and peevish by their own too much confidence and the luxuriancy of a prosperous fortune but then they would not endure persons that did dogmatize any thing which might intrench upon their reputation or their interest And it is observable that no man nor no Age did ever teach the lawfulness of putting
Apostle here speaks of sin imputed therefore not of sin inherent and if imputed only to such purposes as he here speaks of viz. to temporal death then it is neither a sin properly nor yet imputable to Eternal death so far as is or can be implied by the Apostles words And in this I am not a little confirmed by the discourse of S. Irenaeus to this purpose lib. 3. cap. 35. Propter hoc initio transgressionis Adae c. Therefore in the beginning of Adams transgression as the Scripture tells God did not curse Adam but the Earth in his labours as one of the Ancients saith God removed the curse upon the Earth that it might not abide on man But the condemnation of his sin he received weariness and labour and to eat in the sweat of his brows and to return to dust again and likewise the woman had for her punishment tediousness labours groans sorrows of child-birth and to serve her husband that they might not wholly perish in the curse not yet despise God while they remained without punishment But all the curse run upon the Serpent who seduced them and this our Lord in the Gospel saith to them on his left hand Go ye cursed into everlasting fire which my Father prepared for the Devil and his Angels signifying that not to man in the prime intention was eternal fire prepared but to him who was the seducer but this they also shall justly feel who like them without repentance and departing from them persevere in the works of malice 5. The Apostle says By the disobedience of one many were made sinners By which it appears that we in this have no sin of our own neither is it at all our own formally and inherently for though efficiently it was his and effectively ours as to certain purposes of imputation yet it could not be a sin to us formally because it was Vnius inobedientia the disobedience of one man therefore in no sence could it be properly ours For then it were not Vnius but inobedientia singulorum the disobedience of all men 6. Whensoever another mans sin is imputed to his relative therefore because it is anothers and imputed it can go no further but to effect certain evils to afflict the relative and to punish the cause not formally to denominate the descendant or relative to be a sinner for it is as much a contradiction to say that I am formally by him a sinner as that I did really do his action Now to impute in Scripture signifies to reckon as if he had done it Not to impute is to treat him so as if he had not done it So far then as the imputation is so far we are reckoned as sinners but Adams sin being by the Apostle signified to be imputed but to the condemnation or sentence to a temporal death so far we are sinners in him that is so as that for his sake death was brought upon us And indeed the word imputare to impute does never signifie more nor always so much Imputare verò frequenter ad significationem exprobrantis accedit sed ciâ—râ— reprehensionem says Laurentius Valla It is like an exprobration but short of a reprooâ— so Quintilian Imputas nobis propitios ventos secundum mare ac civitatis opulenâ—ae liberalitatem Thou dost impute that is upbraid to us our prosperous voyages and a calm Sea and the liberality of a rich City Imputare signifies oftentimes the same that computare to reckon or account Nam haec in quartâ non imputantur say the Lawyers they are not imputed that is they are not computed or reckoned Thus Adams sin is imputed to us that is it is put into our reckoning and when we are sick and die we pay our Symbols the portion of evil that is laid upon us and what Marcus said I may say in this case with a little variety Legata in haereditate sive legatum datum sit haeredi sive percipere sive deducere vel retinere passus est ei imputantur The legacy whether it be given or left to the heir whether he may take it or keep it is still imputed to him that is it is within his reckoning But no reason no Scripture no Religion does inforce and no Divine Attribute does permit that we should say that God did so impute Adams sin to his posterity that he did really esteem them to be guilty of Adams sin equally culpable equally hateful For if in this sence it be true that in him we sinned then we sinned as he did that is with the same malice in the same action and then we are as much guilty as he but if we have sinned less then we did not sin in him for to sin in him could not by him be lessened to us for what we did in him we did by him and therefore as much as he did but if God imputed this sin less to us than to him then this imputation supposes it only to be a collateral and indirect account to such purposes as he pleased of which purposes we judge by the analogy of faith by the words of Scripture by the proportion and notices of the Divine Attributes 7. There is nothing in the design or purpose of the Apostle that can or ought to infer any other thing for his purpose is to signifie that by mans sin death entred into the world which the son of Sirach Ecclus. 25.33 expresses thus A muliere factum est initium peccati inde est quod morimur from the woman is the beginning of sin and from her it is that we all die and again Ecclus. 1.24 By the envy of the Devil death came into the world this evil being Universal Christ came to the world and became our head to other purposes even to redeem us from death which he hath begun and will finish and to become to us our Parent in a new birth the Author of a spiritual life and this benefit is of far more efficacy by Christ than the evil could be by Adam and as by Adam we are made sinners so by Christ we are made righteous not just so but so and more and therefore as our being made sinners signifies that by him we die so being by Christ made righteous must at least signifie that by him we live and this is so evident to them who read S. Pauls words Rom. 5. from verse 12. to verse 19. inclusively that I wonder any man should make a farther question concerning them especially since Erasmus and Grotius who are to be reckoned amongst the greatest and the best expositors of Scripture that any age since the Apostles and their immediate successors hath brought forth have so understood and rendred it But Madam that your Honour may read the words and their sence together and see that without violence they signifie what I have said and no more I have here subjoyned a Paraphrase of them in which if I use any violence I can very easily be reproved