that look upon the place that the Apostle to the end he might clear up the way how beleevers partake of the benefites of Christs death maketh a comparison betwixt Adam and Christ and so cleareth up how it is that all Mankinde is become Corrupt and that in and through the first Man Adam from whom this corruption is derived not by Imitation for they cannot imitate it who never heard of it and yet even they partake of this corruption therefore by real Participation of the guilt saying verse 12. as by one man sin entred into the world c. and that in him all sinned and afterward that upon this sin death passed upon all men and reigned even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgressions that is over infants that had not yet committed any actual sin and that judgment was by one to condemnation so that the fruit of this sin was Condemnation or Obnoxiousness to condemnation and that because by this one sin the posterity were made sinners 2. By Death here is meaned every kinde of death Temporal and Eternal and Spiritual for it is a death that reigned over Iâ—fants and is called Condemnation 3. we finde no person old or young that come of this first Adam by ordinary generation here excepted nay Infants are expresly enough included vers 14. 4. So that all the posterity of Adam young and old being in Adam their Natural and Federal Head partake of his sin having sinned in him and of the miseries or just punishment of that sin All this is so clear and manifest both from the very words and expressions of the Apostle and from his scope that who ever speak against this must do violence to the text and weaken the Apostles argueings This same passage did the ancients Augustine and others urge against the Pelagians as is to be seen in Vossij histor Pelag. Pag. 146 147. By this argument That sin which is so described to us by the Apostle that he sayeth is brought death upon all men that men sinned by it and were made sinners even they who could not as yet actually sin that thereby all became guilty of death and of condemnation that sin by imputation is the sin of the whole nature included in Adam and rendereth the whole nature obnoxious to death and to condemnation But the first sin of Adam is decribed to us by the Apostle c. Ergo That sin is the sin of nature because Adam did sustaine the person of all who potentially were in his Ioines and by vertue thereof all are liable to death the punishment thereof Vossius tels us moreover that the Ancients took much notice of Paul's calling Adam a Type and of the particle As and did hence gather that as the Obedience of Christ belongeth to all such as are spiritually begotten not by Imitation but by Imputation so the Disobedience of Adam is conveyed not by Imitation but by Imputation unto all such as corporally come of him They took notice also as he sheweth us of the particle By which did denote the Efficient cause of that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in whom which saith that the posterity did sin in Adam or if it be rendered because or in as much or for which it will shew what is the Adequate cause of death and that it hath also place in Infants 19. Thus we have seen the Argument of the orthodox Church and its ground let us next see what he sâ—ith against it As concerning the words of the Apostle saith he the reason of the condemnation in whom all did sin that is in that seed or by occasion of that seed for no man is said to sin but in his owne person But I pray By what warrand may he foist-in words at his owne pleasure into the tâ—xt Is there the least mention made of seed in all the text Is not this intolerable boldness to deal so with the Scripâ—ures of Truth But if Infants be condemned because they sinned in or by occasion of that seed then that seed was imputed to them Yes he will say but that was when they began to sin in their owne persons No say I that cannot be because the text importeth no such thing yea it saith the contrary viz. that death which is included in the condemnation passed upon all men and reigned even over such as had not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression that is had not as yet sinned actually So that his reason is directly against the Apostle and we have further above discovered its untruth He addeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aggreeth with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so sheweth how Adam by his sin gave entry to sin into the world and so death by sin entered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. by which viz. occasion or in which viz. death all others did sin i. e. actually in their persons viz. who were capable of sinning of which number Infants are not who are under no Law as was showne and where no Law is there is no transgression as the Apostle sayeth This upon the matter is the same that the old Pelagians said as Vossius sheweth us Hist. Pelag. Pag. 182.183 For they interpreted these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in whom all have sinned by sinning after example or Imitation and this man by sinning upon that Occasion when they become capable and the Socinians with Episcopius homologate with the Pelagians and have been abundantly answered by the orthodox who shew that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 out of Xenophon Aristophanes Demosthenes and other Greek Authors But For Answere unto this Quaker I would say 1. If 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 agree with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then the meaning must be this and so death passed upon all men in which death all men sinned and what sense can this make out May not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 agree as well to Man If not let him give us the least colour of reason either from the text or context 2. If Adam by his sin gave entry unto sin into the world this must be meaned of his first sin for the Apostle speaketh alwayes of one sin or of Offence in the singular number that Vers. 18. may be read by one offence And so sin entered not by Imitation nor yet by Occasion for his after sinnes might have laid the way for Imitation and have given Occasion as well as the first Yea more yea only for while the first sin was committed there were none to imitate him and if this had been the Apostles meaning he had spoken of sins in the plural number 3 If this had been the Apostles meaning he had not named One man and One man as a Type a Type of him that was to come for Eva's sin the Devils sin might also have been an Occasion 4. Hence it will follow thaâ— beleevers are made Righteous only upon Occasion of Christs Righteousness
thing which we inferre is manifest viz. the originated sin or the corruption of nature which here David calleth Sin And if this Quaker think that this came from another Original than from Adam let him tell us what it is and not joyn in with the Manichees nor make God the Author and cause of sin if he can 21. Another of our Arguments is from that word of Paul's the wages of sin is death And seing infants die they must have sin as a procuring cause That death was and is a Punishment of sin we cleared above and the Apostle asserteth it here so manifestly calling it the Wages and due Desert that it must argue wonderful impudence in any to question it What sayeth this Quaker He granteth that death is a Consequence of the fall but denyeth that hence we can necessarily inferre iniquity to be in all those that are subject to death That is in plaine termes but the mans modesty dar not speak it out to say the Apostle speaketh not truth who ever imagined that wages were no more but a Consequent of the workmans labour If Death be the Wages and Reward and just Punishment of sin it can certanely be inflicted by the Righteous Judge of the world upon none but such as are guilty of sin How oft doth the Apostle speak of death as the just Desert and Punishment of sin Rom. 5 12 death entred by sin death passed on all for all had sinned suppose that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should not signifie in whom as it doth Marc. 2 vers 4. Luk. 5 vers 25.2 Cor. 5 vers 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being several times put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 9 10 15 1â— but did only import the Cause as Socinians would have it it would sufficiently confirme this that death is inflicted because of sin so vers 15. through the offence of one many be dead and this is called vers 16. judgmnt to condemnation and vers 17. by one mans offence or by one offence death reigned And vers 21. sin reigned unto death And then againe Chap. 6 23. for the wages of sin is death So likewise 1 Cor. 15 21.22 by man came death for as in Adam all die He addeth as a reason of his denyal that it might appear he did not contradict the Apostle without reason For sath he all the outward creation suffered detriment and ruine in some respect by Adam's fall and yet the herbes and trees c. are not therefore sinners Ans. Is not this a valide reason wherefore to reject death as a punishment of sin Nay seing the vanity under which the world groaneth because of sin is a punishment to all Mankinde to Infants as well as to Adult persons it is hence manifest that all are guilty of sin that is all mankinde who are capable of sin as trees and herbes are not But yet more he addeth to Confront the Apostle and sayeth death is no wages of sin to the saints but is gaine Phil. 1 v. 21. Answ. Why is death called an enemy and the last enemy 1 Cor. 15 v. 26. wâ—at meaneth that that when corruptible hath put on incorruption and mortal hath put on immortality death shall be swallowed up in victory 1 Cor. 15 vers 54. Because the Lord by grace through Jesus Christ hath taken the sting of death away and made it a passage to glory unto his owne shall we therefore look upon it in it self as no punishment of sin or as not coming into the world because of sin This will tend as much to prove that Adult persons are not sinful as that Infants have no sin and that a womans paines in child birth or a Mans purchaseing his bread with the sweat of his face c. are no punishments of sin Original or Actual because all these Paines Troubles Afflictions c. worke together for good to such as love God Rom. 8 vers 28. And so the Godly have no Punishments Chastisements Visitations Corrections or the like for sin though the Scripture say so in hundereds of places Here this Quaker joineth with Antinomians 22. He mentioneth another argument which as he thinketh fools only make use of which is this If Infants have no sin they must all be saved Well what replyeth he to this argument We will rather saith he admit this supposed absurdity as a Consequent of our doctrine then say that innumerable Infants perish eternally not for their owne but only for Adams fault But though he should not value such Absurdities notwithstanding he therein run wilder than Papists and joine with Anabaptists and some Pelagians Yet me thinks he should take heed of contradicting his owne doctrine for afterward we will heare of his pleading for Christs dying for all Mankinde And sure if that be true he must say that he died also for Infants and yet here he granteth that they will be all saved without Christ for they have no sin they have no need of a Saviour to save them from their sinnes But how can they be all saved seing they have the Seed of sin â—n them and the Spring of all actual sinnes and that seed of sin which in Scripture is called death and the body of death the old man and the old Adam as he himself speaketh Pag. 62 When Paul speaketh of the body of death Rom. 7 24. he looks upon it as that from which Christ must deliver him How will this Quaker reconcile these things The old man must be put off or we cannot enter into glory and if Infants have the old man how can they enter into glory And beside All in glory must sing the song of the Redeemed and praise him that hath redeemed them by his blood Revel 5 9 10. How can Infants do this who have never been washen from their sinnes in the blood of the lamb as never having had sin And Pag. 55. he told us that none of Adam's posterity had any good in them which he had not from whom they descended Adam then being deprived of his Original Righteousness none of his Posterity no not Infants can lay claim to that Righteousness how I pray can Infants go to heaven who want a righteousness The heaven then which they go to must be a heaven wherein dwelleth no Righteousness and what can this be but some new Limbus But to be more plaine with him It is not enough for him to say he may grant such a Consequence from his doctrine for we must have sure Scripture grounds ere we beleeve that all Infants even of Turks and Heathens shall certanely go to heaven The Scripture giveth more ground of hope of those that are within the Covenant I am sure than of those who are without what thinks he of the Infants of Sodom See Iud. vers 7. and of Coreh and his company not to mention the Infants of the old world And why doth the Scripture call the children of such as are without the church 1 Cor. 7 14. unclean
he expresseth not in his Thesis and giveth but a short hinte thereof in his Apology of which afterward That Man at first was living and in a good state he insinuateth when he saith that he is now fallen and degenerate but wherein that good and happy condition consisted he explaineth not iâ— may be he forbeareth to do this lest thereby he should discover some secrets of their mystical Theology which either is not fit as yet to be made known or we are not in case to understand improve aright Some may possibly think that he forbeareth to give an Explication of this or to adde his Testimoâ—y to the orthodoxe Truth in this point because the Natural Light that is in every man cannot discover or comprehend it Natures Light I grant will never discover without the Revelation of the word the Time when the Manner how nor the Cause and Occasion upon which this inundation took its original I finde that Mr Hicks in his 3 Dial. Pag. 40 41. getteth no satisfaction as to this from Will. Pen speaking thus in his book Pag 29. Herein theâ— contradicts thy self abusest the Philosophers and blasphemest the light Thou grants the heathens knew there was sin If so how could they be ignorant of sins coming into the world This I say is no way satisfying for though Philosophers did see and could not but see that sin and misery had overflowed all yet by all their Common Light they couâ—d not understand how sin entered into the world and death by sin how Adam as a publick person was under a covenant obligation for himself and posterity and how he did violate that Covenant by transgressing the commandement and thus brought-in sin and misery And that which Will. Pen addeth Ibid. saying If thou meanest a clear and distinct account that Adam and Eva were beguiled by the serpent who tempted them 't is no wayes to the purpose not only helpeth not the matter but discovereth also some further latent designe for who seeth not how necessary the knowledge hereof is unto the right understanding of the fall and of the true cause thereof If this were not so as Mr Hicks well saith why did the sacred Penmen give such a full and distinct account hereof in the Scriptures But it may be they have a Parabolical sense and meaning to put upon that whole matter as it is historically related and upon all the passages of Scripture relating thereunto It is also observable that Will. Pen in the forecited page insinuateth that the knowledge of this is not necessary unto salvation for he saith That which is sufficient to that faith which concerns salvation is to know that God is and that he hath given Mâ—n the knowledge of himself and his will concerning him by some inward law Mr Stâ—lham also showeth in his book against the Quakers Pag. 96 9â— 100. that I Nailer and R. Farnworth deny That Adam was under a Covenant of works and that he stood by the moral law written in his heart and by the observation of the positive branches given him in command acoâ—rding to that law as we mentioned above And if the matter stand thus how can they give us a distinct account of the manner and cause of the fall and degeneration 3. He sayeth that this Death and Degeneration is befallen all the race of mankinde quoad primum Adam seu hominem terrestrem that is or I know not what it is concerning or in respect of the first Adam or earthly man By which words it is manifest that he pointeth out and declareth in what respect it is true that all mankinde is become dead and degenerate to wit in respect of the first Adam or the Earthly man and hereby he seemeth to point out the extent of this fall death and degeneration or rather a restriction and limitation of its extent as if he had said It reacheth all Mankinde only as to the Earthly man or the first Adam But what he meaneth by this first Adam and terrestial man I cannot well tell His manner of expression will not give us ground to think that he meaneth our forefather Adam because of whose transgression this death came upon all his posterity but rather that he meaneth something in every man going with them under this name and this thing what ever it be is the only Subject of this Death and Degeneration and so in opposition to this there must be some thing in man which with them will go under the name of the Secâ—nd Adam and of the heavenly man and this whatever it be is not obnoxious to this death nor is it degenerated and lapsed This to me must be the native import of his words But how we shall come to a right uptaking of his true meaning I wish he had showne us If we consider what other Quakers have said it may be that thereby we shall be able to make some proâ—able conjecture concerning his meaning Mr Hicks Dial. 1. Pag. 16. tels us that Georg Fox a man eminent among the Quakers and accounted by them infallible in his book called the great mystery Pag 6 8 and 100. affirmeth the soul to be part of God and of Gods being And that it is without beginning Pag. 91. and also infinite Pag. 29. And when Will. Pen accuseth Mr Hicks of false dealing in this Mr Hicks Dial. 3. vindicateth himself by citeing Pag. 20. c. George Fox's owne words thus Geâ—rg Fox in his Great mystery Pag. 90. speaks thus is not the soul without beginning coming from God returning unto God againe who hath it in his hand and Christ the power of God the Bishop of the soul which brings it up into God which came out from him hath this a beginning or ending And is not this infinite in it self Againe says he Georg Fox tels us Pag. 2 that Magnus Byne saith the soul is not infinite in it self but it is a creature and R. Baxter saith it is a spiritual substance Whereunto Georg Fox replyeth Consider what a condition these called Ministers are in They say that which is a Spiritual substance is not infinite in it self but a creature That which came out of the Creator and is in the hand of the Creator which brings it up to the Creator againe that is infinite in it self The same Mr Hicks saith further The Quakers are accused for saying there is no Scripture that speaketh of an humane soul and for affirming that the soul is taken up into God Hereunto Georg Fox thus answereth Pag 100. God breathed into the man the breath of life and he â—ecame a living soul and is not this which cometh out from God which is in Gods hand part of God from God and to God againe Which soul Christ the power of God is the Bishop of Is not this of his being Yea Will. Pâ—n in vindication of Georg Fox Pag. 66. as Mr Hicks sheweth Dial. 3. Pag. 22. saith That all that can be concluded from Georg Fox's words
are they in capacity to joyn themselves to this seed of sin Is it when they are in capacity to commit actual sin But of this the question may be renewed when may we judge them in this capacity shall we suppose that they are not in case to sin actually or to adjoyn themselves to this seed untill they come to the full use of reason then it will follow that Idiots can sin none at all that the Envy Selfishness Pettedness and the like that appeare very early in Infants shall be no sinnes and yet Augustin was of another mâ—nde And there were some of the Old Pelagians who to evite the force of arguments against them alleiged that the Infants committed actual sin so soon as they were born and therefore came under death as a punishment against whom August wrote Serm. 7. de Verb. Apost saying what do you think to say and whose eares can heare it did they sinne themselves where I pray did they sin when and how did they sin They know neither good nor evil shall they sin that are under no command Prove that Infants are sinners prove what is their sin Is it because they weep that they sinne do they sin because they take pleasure or repel trouble by motions as dumb â—nimals if these motions be sin they becoâ—e greater sinners in baptisme for there they resist most vehemently But I say another thing you think they have sinned otherwayes they had not died but what say you of such as die in their Mothers womb will you say they have sinned also you lie or are deceived c. Whether this man will be of this judgment or not I know not but it is like he will not owne it for he looketh not upon death as a punishment of sin 9 I would gladly have him explaining to me what that is to joyne themselves to this seed of sin and that so much the rather because it is a piece of their proper dialect and is no where else to be found so far as I know Is this Seed lying within them as a stranger or as a tempter alluring them to sin in which they have no concerne until they submit to the temptation and consent then why may we not suppose that such a seed of sin might have been in Adam before he fell from the very minute of his creation seing it could not have dammaged him if he had not actually consented But why should this Seed of Sin be more looked upon as a stranger so as by vertue thereof they in whom it is shall not be accounted sinners than the Seed of Grace of which the Scripture speaketh and by vertue of which they in whom it is are denominated gracious even when they are not actually exerceing grace But it seemeth this man looketh upon the seed of sin and the seed of grace as two contrary solicitors attending man with their contrary motions and solicitations so that man abideth still in puris naturalibus till he hearken to the one or other and yeeld his consent But then 10 I would ask if it be in mans power to withhold his consent from the urgent soliciting of this seed of sin If this be in his power than he can live all his dayes and never once sin and act his part better than Adam did And how cometh it seing this is in every ones power that there was never one such found borne of a woman and begotten of a man that lived and died without sin If it be not in mans power than his soul hath gote a sinful byasse which Adam's soul had not when first created and shall this sinful byas and inclination be no Deformity no Sin no Imperfection no Contrariety to the law which prohibiteth all inclinatioâ— to sin 11. Let him explaine to me how the childe 's actual sin can make him really guilty of Adam's eating of the forbidden fruit and to deserve hell fire upon that account doth he think that the first actual sin of the châ—lde maketh him really guilty of all his fathers faults doth he think that the fiâ—st actual sin of the childe maketh him as guilty and as obnoxious to the wrath of God for all Adam's after sinns as for his first sin This must be cleared by Him who putteth no difference betwixt Adam and other parents in this matter and it must be cleared so as no staine of Injustice be put upon our Maker and with all he will do well to consider that maine argument of the Socinians and Arminians against us for though it doth not reach us yet I see not how he shall evite it It is this one act cannot make an habite one act of sin could not have that force to corrupt the whole nature of Adam for here this mans judgment is that one act of sin consenting to the seed of sin corrupteth that mans whole nature which was pure before one act of sin can deprive a man of Integrity and of Original Righteousness and bring on an Inclination to all sin but these evils are not sinfull in this mans account therefore he is concerned to loose his friends Objection 12 The ground of this mans mistake though he be not that ingenuous as to declare it is that no guilt can be imputed to a person who doth not actually consent thereto by an act of his owne personal Free Will for this was the maine Objection of the Pelagians and of others But then what will he say of sinnes of Ignorance and the like How cometh it that sins are divided into Voluntary and Involuntary What will he say to Psal. 19 13 14. But we have told him that even Originals in was fully voluntary in our nature and in the Fountain when first committed for it was not as to us a personal sin and so the personal consent of such as are contaminated therewith is not requisite thereto but a sin of our Nature and to this no more consent or will is required than the will and consent of him who was the head of this nature whose will was not extrinsick to us we being in him as members of that Body whereof he was Head Beside that this Voluntariness â—elongeth not to the Essence and Forme of sin Scripture defineth sin otherwise calling it a transgression of the Law 1 Ioh. 3 4. and who say otherwayes joyne with Bellar. de Amiss Grat. C. 1. 13. By this meanes he must say That infants are neither Righteous nor Unrighteous neither Holy nor Sinful indued neither with Good nor Evil qualities and consequently neither heires of Hell nor of Glory and thus make them mere Stocks or Brutes and not Rational Creatures 18. Next he speaketh to our Argument from Rom. 5 12. c. and because this place iâ— the proper seat of this doctrine which we hold the Apostle treating there of it professedly and maintaining it we shall premise some things to clear our Argument and then shall examine what he saith And 1. It is obvious to all
and have â—othing of it Imputed unto them which though this man may account no way absurd yet all Orthoeox Christians will be of another minde 5 He speaks dubiously concerning the Import of these two words and knoweth not whether their meaning be by which occasion or in which death and we have seen that the meaning cannot be by which Occasion And it will further appear from this that Adams sin could be no Occasion to such as never heard of it and our nearest Parents sins should be a greater Occasion and further what could Paul's meâ—tioning an Occasion contribute to his designe 6. Paul asserts that death passed upon all men and giveth this as a ground thereof that all men had sinned but this Man perverteth the Apostles words and meaning and maketâ— the Apostle speak thus death passed upon all men because all men will sin actually when they become capable 7. The Apostle sheweth that death passed upon all men and reigned even over Infants and so supposeth that Infants had sinned otherwayes his argument vers 12. had been of no value for the Instance of Infants who are a great part of Mankinde had destroyed the Apostles reasoning if they bad not been included under all men 8. He is angry at the Orthodox as we sâ—all hear afterward for restricting the particle all or the words all men though it be according to the exigence of the context But here he excludeth a great part of Mankinde contrary to the whole scope and disigne of the Text yea and to the Apostles expresse including of Infants and making use of their Case as a confirmation of his point 9 If he exclude Infants from this sin he must exclude them also from all benefite in Christs Obedience and then where is his Universal Redemption and his Universal Grace whereof he speaketh in the following Theses 10 That Infants are capable of sinning in their Head is as clear as they are capable of dying for the sin of the Head this the Apostle proveth from their death and from death reigneing over them 11. But sayes he Infants are under no Law But the Apostâ—e sayes the contrare viz. that there was both Sin and Law before Moses dayes because death reigned even over Infants and consequently that Infants were under sin and therefore also under a Law for where there is no law there is no transgressiâ—n But this was the Law given to Adam as head of Mankinde which Law all transgressed when Adam transgressed because the whole Nature transgressed it Adam representing all as their Natural Root and by vertue of the Covenant in which he stood And thus we see how this Man perverteth and inverteth the Words and Arguments and Scope and All of the Apostle 12 If death was inflicted on old Persons because of their actual sins wherefore was death inflicted upon Infants Sure the Apostle maketh no distinction of Deaths nor doth he speak of distinct causes of Death but only mentioneth an universal Cause of an universal Effect sin the cause and death the effect and therefore if the effect come upon infants the cause must also come upon them or the Apostle argueth very loosly and he must impute cruelty injustice to his Maker 13. This addition of his to the text viz. who were capable of sinning is the same that Castalio made saying these to wit who in regaird of age could have sinned And in this he was no lesse bold with the text then our Quaker is for as we have seen and the text is clear it is not all these only that die but even such as come not to that age and the Apostle alwayes speaks of death as the wages of sin And when he here sayeth of Infants that they sinned not after the similitude of Adam's transgression he clearly intimateth that they sinned some other way viz. in Adam which also the 19. verse manifestly proveth 20. He taketh notice Next of our argument from Psal. 51 5. behold I was shapen in iniquity and in sin did my mother conceive me where the Psalmist is exaggerating his iniquity before the Lord as all true penitents will do traceth his sin to the very Spring and Fountaine as to him viz. that Original Corruption which he brought into the world with him and shewing that even while he was a forming and warming as the word importeth in the womb this corruption did adhere to him so that the very masse out of which he was framed was corrupt and what greater proof could we desire of the originaâ—ed part of this Original Sin than is here The Ancient Fathers made use of this passage for the same end as Vossius sheweth us Hist. Pelag. Pag. 144.145 And some Jewes such as Aben Ezra Sal. Iarchi expound it of innate Concupiscence Now what saith this Quaker to this He cannot see our Infâ—rence and why so It seemeth to me sayes he that this iniquity and sin is rathâ—r ascribed to the parents than to the Infants for he sayeth in sin did my mother conceive me not my mother conceived me sinning Ans. Is not this a quick observation and worthy of a Quaker But the misery is it quite crosseth Davids designe This man must think that it was a great argument of Davids Sorrow and Repentance to lay iniquity upon his Parents now in all appearance dead but I should look upon this as no argument of a true penitent heart What could his upbraiding of his Father and Mother after this manner contribute to the aggravating of his own sin And that this is David's designe I think this Quaker will not deny if he but look upon the place and read over the Psalm or the first part of it Is not David about the confessing of his owne sin Read the title of the Psalm the preeceeding verse and see Is he not seeking pardon and remission of his own sin Or shall we suppose that he is praying for remission to the dead all Confession of sin to God is in reference to Remission and if David speak here only of his Parents sin he is tacitely seeking Remission If he speak of his Parents sin in begetting and warming him in the womb it must be as including himself at least as shareing thereof and this will prove that David had sin upon him from his very conception And by his answere he would seem to make marriage duties unlawful contrare to 1 Cor. 7 2 3 4 5. Heb. 13 4. He addeth another answere thus Such an interpretation would contradict the Scriptures formerly cited while it maketh infants to he hurt by their immediat parents sin And there is no mention here of Adam Answ. I do not prove hence that David was guilty of his immediat Parents sins but that original contagion doth so cleave to every ordinary Infant unless we could suppose some singular thing in David without all ground that in his very warming in his Mothers womb he is corrupted and albeit David make no mention here of Adam the
may also obtaine the salvation which is in Christ Iesus with eternal glory And shall we think that the Lord cannot send out his servants to call-in the Elect but he must point them out unto them by name and sirname What if God willing to shew his wrath and to make his power known shall endure with much long suffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction Rom. 9 22. Shall we quarrel with the Most High If God make the chiefe Corner stone that is Elect and Precious unto Beleevers a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence even to them which stumble at the word being disobedient whereunto also they were ordained 1 Pet. 2.6 7 8. must we impute folly unto our God and say that He is mocking 4. The whole of this discourse is founded upon this grand Errour that Faith and Repentance is not the free gift of God contrare to Ephes. 2 8. 6 23. Phil. 1 29. 1 Cor. 4 7. Act. 5 31. 11 18. 2 Tim. 2 25. For if Paul may plant and Apollos water but God only must give the increase 1 Cor. 3 5 6.7 Then the giving of success unto the preaching of the Gospel must be Gods free gift otherwise what can Quakers pray for or Ministers say when they are praying to God for a blessing on their labours Nay it seemeth Quakers are against all such prayers being pure Pelagians and so asserte that Man of himself may Believe and Repent If not will they not grant God liberty to distribute his owne gifts as he will 1 Cor. 12 11 Is God under any Obligation to give grace to all that heare the Gospel This were pure Pelagianisme to say that grace is conferred according to works 5. This mans owne doctrine is exposed to the same Inconvenience for he telleth us afterward as we shall heare that there is a time and date prescribed to every man after which their salvation is not possible now I suppose he will grant that the Word or at least the Light within may continue exhorting such to repent and returne yet all is in vaine for the door is shut will he say that God thereby is but mocking them Let him first liberate his owne doctrine and then returne upon us 23. In the fift place he tels us that our doctrine is injurious to the coming and propitiatory sacrifice of Christ. Why so Because it makes it a great judgment plague unto many c. Ans. And must not Christ be for the fall of many in Israel Luk. 2 34. Why else is he called a stone of stumbling Esai 8 14. Rom. 9 33. 1 Pet. 2 6. Why doth Christ say that it shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of judgment then for Chorazin and Bethsaida And for the land of Sodom than for Capernaum Mat. 11 21 22 23 24. And why saith he Ioh 15 22 24 25 If I had not come and spoken unto them they had not had sin but now they have no cloak for their sin If I had not done among them the works which no other man did they had not had sin but this cometh to passe that the word might be fulfilled that is written in their Law they hated me without a cause Why saith he Ioh. 9 39 for judgment I am come into this world that they which see might be made blinde Let the Quaker answere these passages and then rant according to his owne minde And let him tell me how it will fare with those that do not repent before their day of visitation goeth over It is this mans had to wound himself out of a keenness in pursueing us 24. In the Sixt place he saith that it is injurious to mankinde making mans condition worse then the Devils Ans. This were an injury indeed but the Challenge is neither True nor Honest for we look upon Devils as already under the Execution of the decree of Reprobation and in the same state as to this matter that Reprobates are into after death and we suppose it is far otherwise with men though Reprobate before death than it is with Devils Devils are under no offer of mercy now Men are Devils know themselves to be damned men do not Devils are damned irrecoverably for their first sin man that cometh to age sinneth himself more and more unto damnation Man that heareth the Gospel is punished because he will not accept of the offer but doth willingly reject it He doth not beleeve and he will not beleeve can this be said of Devils Devils are reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day Iud. 6. This cannot be said of the Reprobat yet alive Many of the Reprobats have common graces and favours of God and are restrained from many sinnes which cannot be said of Devils But what is the matter The Devils had once a possibility of standing But many millions of men had never any opportunity of salvation but because of Adams sin of whom they never knew any thing were to be perpetually tormented But did not all mankinde by our doctrine stand in Adam fall with him They are not then punished for anothers sin but for their owne as we manifested in the foregoing Chapter How doth this reach all mankinde when God according to his everlasting good pleasure hath chosen a goodly number whom he will glorifie for ever will the Lord do so with any of the Devils Belike that their condition may not be every way worse then mans this Quaker will give them hopes that some of them at least may be saved provideing they hearken well to the Light within they have thâ— conviction faith of a God know that he is Merciful Holy Just c. as well as men Are of as sharpe Understanding in knowing what is right wrong as many men are But if all this will not satisfy this Quaker let me speak to him in the words of the Apostle for it may be he will carry some respect to them the words are to be found Rom. 9 20. Nay but O man who art thou that replyest against God Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it why hast thou made me thus c. But he addeth that we put man in a worse condition than the beasts are in Why so Because their owners require no more of them than they are able to do and when they are dead there is an end of their misery but by our doctrine man is perpetually tormented because he doth not that which he cannot and thus God dealeth with man worse than Pharaoh did with the Israelites for though he withheld straw from them they could get it with a little more industry Answ. What shall we say unto this Man who thus barketh and belcheth out against God He supposeth that he is spewing out this gall against us alas what are we that he should thus bark against us His barkings will be found against the Lord and
others who performe not the condition and so obtaine nothing but to Ourselves only who make ourselves to differ and so may we sing praises to ourselve and put the crown upon our owne heads and give no song of praise to the Redeemer but what such as go to hell are bound to give contrary to all Christian Religion If Christ hath purchased this Condition then iâ— is done either Absolutly or Conditionally If Aâ—soâ—utely tâ—an all shall Absolutely have it if Conditionally we enquire what is the Condition And whatever it be we may move the same questions concerning it 5. By this meanes the act should creat â—ts owne object for Faith in the death of Christ is ordinarily given as the Condâ—tâ—on and this faith maketh the death of Christ valide which otherwayes would not be 6. This maketh all the vertue of Christs death to depend upon mans act so that if man will all shall be saved if not no man shall be saved notwithstanding that Christ died for them 7. This makes Christ but at most a half Mediator doing one part of the work and man coming in to compleete it must be the other half mediator and so at least must have the halfe of the Praise 8. where saith â—he Scripture that if we beleeve Christ died for us or that Christ died for all or for any Conditionally It is true some of the effects of Christ's death are bestowed conditionally â—aking the word conditionally not properly as it the performance of that condition did in proper law â—ense procure a right to these mercies for through the merites of Châ—ist's blood have we a right properly to alâ— but improperly as denoteing nothing but the Methode and way of Goâ—'s bestowing the blessings purchaâ—ed fiâ—st this and thâ—n upon the souls acting oâ— that another as for examâ—le fiâ—st faith then upon the souls acting oâ— Faith Iustâ—fication then Saâ—ctification c. and upon the souls acting of Sanctification Gloâ—ification but the deâ—th of Christ cannot therefore be called Conditional more than thâ— will or purpose of God can be called conditional because some of the things willed may depend â—pon other as upon a condition 9 Then by performing thâ— Condition man should â—rocure to himself a Legal Right and Title not only to the dâ—aâ—h of Christ buâ—â—o Iustification Adoption Sanctification yea and to Glorification yea and that a more near and effectual Title and right than what was had by Christ's death for the Title had by Christ's death if it can be called a Title was far Remote Common to such as shall never have any pâ—ofiâ—e by it but the other is Câ—rtain Particular Proxime and giveth possession jus in re 10. Then Christ's blood as shed upon the crosse was but a Potential thing hâ—ving no power or vertue in it self to redeem any it was but a poor Potential price and all its vertue of actual purchasing and procureing is from mans performing the Condition this and this only giveth it Power and Efficacy and so Christ is beholden to man for giving vertue unto his Blood and making it effectual which before was a dead ineffectual thing Then let any judge who should have the greatest share of the glory of Redemption Man or Christ 11. was Christ's death Absolute in no respect or was it as to some things I mean belonging to Grace and Glory Absolute if in nothing then Man must certanely have a great share of the glory if it was Absolute as to any thing what was that and why was it more Absolute as to that than as to other things And why should it then be simply and without limitation said that Christ died for all Conditionally 12. what will this Quaker say as to infants did Christ die for them Conditionally But he must say that Christ died not for them at all because they have no sin where is then his Universal Redemption Infants sure make a great part of mankinde and therefore the Redemption from whâ—ch they are excluded and of which they have no need can not be called Universal 32. For Further confirmation of our 19. Argument and confutation of our Adversaries position we adde 21 That Christ Iesus is heard of the Father in all that he asketh Psal. 2 8. Ioh. 11 41 42. and as an High Prist he entred into heaven Hâ—b 9 11.12 â—ow to appear in the presence of God for us vers 24 to prepare a plaâ—â— Iob. 14 2. to act the part of an Advocat inteâ—ceding with the Father in the behalfe of all such for whom he died 1 Ioh. 2 1 2 If then Christ whom his Father heareth alwayes intercedeth in the behalfe all these for whom he died either he did not die for all or all must certainly be saved That Christ's Intercession and Death are so the same persons will be and must be denyed by our Adversaries But to us it is most manifest from these grounds 1. To Inteâ—cede and pray are as Essential and Necessary Acts of the Priestly office as to offer sacrifice and the Apostle Heb. 9 cleareth up how Christ did in truth what the High priest among the Jewes did in the type for as the High priest alone went once every yeer into the second tabernacle or holy of holies notwithout blood which he offered for himself and the errours of the people vers 7. So Christ being come an High priest of good things to come by a greater and more perfect tabernacle by his owne blood he entered in once into the holy place having obtained eternal Redâ—mption vers 12. Hence he is said to Live for ever to make Intercession for us Heb. 7 25. and he is an Advocat with the Father 1 Ioh. 2 1 Hence then it is manifest that Christ must Intercede for such as he did Offer up himself for or he shall not be a Perfect and Compleet High Priest or not faithfull to performe all the Oâ—fices of the High Priest neither of which can be said 2. The ground of his Intercession is held forth to be his Oblation as the High Priest went into the holy of holies with the blood of the sacrifices which he had offered so Christ entered into the holy place having first obtained by the sacrifice of himself an Eternal Redemption Heb. 9 12. So he is an Advocate with the Father being first a Propitiation for sinnes 1 Ioh. 2 1 2 3. Both his Death Intercession make up one Compleet Medium and are intended and designed as one Medium for the end designed viz the bringing of many sones unto glory saving to the uttermost all that come to God through him c. 4. How unreasonable is it to think that Christ would refuise to Pray for such whom he loved so dearly as to lay down his life for yet he saith expresly thâ—t he prayeth not for the world but for others distinguished from the world Ioh. â—7 9. 5. As His Death was for such as the Father had given him as we saw above so his
Vossius ubi Supra Pag. 150. taking that by nature c. to import as none with any shew of reason can otherwise think all carnally borne and partaking of the nature of Adam and so to be verified of all borne by the conjunction of man and woman so that by nature is as much as naturally And Calvin on the place sayeth that it is a notable passage against the Pelagians for saieth he what is naturally in every one is in them from their very original therefore if all be children of wrath or obnoxious to wrath by nature they are so from their very original But what way doth this Man evade The Apostle sayeth he assigneth evil actions not any thing that is not yet reduced into act for an argument proveing them to be children of wrath By which we see how backwardly this man readeth the Scriptures for the Apostle to commend the riches and power of the grace of God towards these Ephesians whom the Lord had quickened showeth what persons they were and all are before grace take hold of them He saith not that these Ephesians were children of wrath because walking according to the course of this world c. but that they had so walked were moreover children of wrath by nature and it is observable though this Man putteth out his owne eyes that he may not see it how the Apostle changeth the person from the second to the first vers 3. saying among whom also we all had our conversation in times past and were by nature the children of wrath even as others And thereby sheweth that this was not the condition of the Ephesians and other Gentiles only but of the Jewes also himself not excepted because nature corrupted in Adam is one and the same common to all both Jewes and Gentiles so that all as soon as they partake of Nature come under this guilt and are Children of wrath He himself immediatly before told us that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mentioned 1 Cor. 2. the Carnal man was not the Animal man but the Rational man so that this is true not only of the beastly man who by his actual sinnes bâ—utifieth himself and maketh himself a meer Animal but even of the Rational man who hath a rational soul and so soon as he hath a rational soul. The usual import of the word Nature and Natural in Scripture confirmeth this Rom. 2 27. 11 24. Gal. 2 15. 4 8. 1 Cor. 15 44 46. 10. We need not then regaird what he addeth saying that the Gospel condemneth nor threatneth no man but him that hath actually sinned for in some sense the Gospel condemneth no man that heareth it but the final unbeleever but offereth life pardon to all to whom it is preached of all their sins actual original upon condition of accepting of Christ offered therein And as for the New Test. we have seen enough in it already and will see more to evince our point and albeit this were not we Judge that the Old Test. could prove the point as we shall also see The Gospel moreover tels us that except a man be born againe he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God and so that as long as he hath but the first birth of the flesh he is under the wrath of God Infants are not capable of threatnings but they are capable of death which we proved in the preceeding Chapter to be the punishment of sin 11. Nor is that which followeth much worth the noticeing when he sayeth God will visite the iniquities of the fathers upon their childeren who abide in sin and so homologate and follow thir fathers iniquities For there is a vast difference betwixt Adam's first sin and the sinnes of other Parents Adam's first sin or breach of the Covenant was not a personal sin as the sinnes of other Parents are and his after sins were but the sin of the whole Nature whereof he was the Head and Representative therefore all that partake of that Nature participate of the guilt of Nature when Infants have a being they partake of the nature of Adam immediatly and though they have this nature by meanes of generation of their immediat parents yet they have not this nature from them but from Adam as I said And though they have their personality from their immediat parents yet they do not partake of their Fathers personality but have their owne humane personality not being a thing propagable therefore they cannot in strick sense be guilty of their parents personal sinnes And yet if it were of moment to debate the matter we might shew from Scripture how the holy Lord who is Just Righteous punisheth even children for their Fathers faults and though the children be sometimes found guilty of actual sinnes and so homologate their Fathers transgression yet it is not found alwayes to be so It was not so I suppose with the infants of Careh Dathan and Abiram and the rest of that conspiracy nor with the Children of Achan nor with the Infants of Sodome and Gomorrah and of the Old world nor with these that were carried away captive by the Assyrians and Babylonians and several other instances to speak nothing of the Children of Cain Ismael Esau and of the Jewes when cut off the Old and Natural stock Rom. 11. And further the very expression of God Command 2. of visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon the Children sheweth that whatever sinnes they may have of their owne yet it is the fathers guilt that bringeth on that punishment else it could not be a visiting of their fathers iniquities but only of their owne 12. It seemeth more considerable that he sayeth our opinion is contrary both to the mercy and justice of God if he had given any proof But he must follow the footsteps of Socinians and Arminians who Assert this also but will not much trouble us with their probations He told us just now himself That God can and doth visite the Iniquities of Fathers on their Children and how can this comport with his goodness and justice seing their fathers sins are not properly their owne because they were personal when he thinketh it Incongruous to God's Iustice and Goodness to impute the sin of Nature to all that partake of that nature though it be their owne by vertue of their partaking of Nature And strange it is that men will be that bold as to call God to their bar and accuse him as Unrighteous because he taketh vengeance when upon a far unlike account they will not impute iniquity unto Men we see that for crimes of â—ese Majesty or the like one man is not only punished but all his posterity after him though not yet borne are forfeited When a person representing others which cometh neareâ— to our case committeth any fault as such a person representing all whom â—e representeth must beare the guilt and the inconvenience following there upon and no man will account this unjust or iniquous
unnatural and anticque motions at their set times and solemnities which are here spoken of But I wonder whence this power of darkness cometh unto them to cause this inward battel and occasion this quaking we heard before that he said they were freed from the body of death and it was taken away so that they were made free from the Suggestions and Temptations of Satan and from actual sinning See his Eight Thesis and our Chap. XIV of Perfection or he must say that the immaculate birth he spoke of is not yet produced in them and consequently that they are not yet Justified nor Sanctified and so not yet Church-members according to his former doctrine But seing he will not acknowledge this But rather that they are the purest and only Church of Christ and are Justified and Sanctified yea and Perfected whence I say can this power of darkness come to oppose the workings of life and that when they are most devote turning-in unto themselves to waite upon God and upon the light and never but then when they are about this their solemne worshipe for we hear not much of their quakings at other times or is there alwayes a battel but they feel it not till they be about this Introversion And cometh this trembling alwayes upon their retireing inward or if not whence is it that it cometh more at one time that another Is it from the greatness of the opposition made by the power of darkness or from the greater sense thereof or both And whence doth the one or the other come more at one time than at another These things I would have cleared if he thought fit Againe is there no striveing betwixt light and darkness grace and corruption flesh and the Spirit in any beside them If not then all others must eitheir be all flesh or all Spirit and if this last these must be more perfect then they are If yea how cometh it that that combate in others causeth not such trembling and quaking as in them Is it because corruption in them is more violent then in others then their perfection is less Or is it because they are more sensible and their life is more quick their mindes more agitated and their spirits more stirred Yet I am sure there might be trembling and quaking of limbes and joynts more or less proportionably to the opposition or to the sense of it in others But the truth is whatever he feigne this trembling and quaking hath another cause and may confirme all rational men that their way is more of the Devil than of God let themselves think what they please 11. We have now heard of all the parts of their solemne Worshipe 1. Silence which is alwayes necessary and beginneth the action 2. speaking praying or singing as is immediatly suggested but this is not necessary for it may be wanting yet the whole solemne Worshipe be performed to edification neither is their speaking praying or singing such as is used in the Churches as we will hear afterward 3. Their Trembling Quaking though this it may be is not alwayes necessary yet it is peculiar unto them Let us hear how he explaineth or confirmeth these for it may be no other confutation will be necessary He saith § 9. p. 23. That their worshipe doth not consist in silence as silence Wherein then but in an holy and humble dependance of soul on God from which necessarily floweth silence in the first place Ans. Dependance on God is good and necessary and is a part of inward worshipe but we are here speaking of Outward and solemne worshipe and this silence must make a necessary part thereof for he sayes afterward we judge in the first place that there is a necessity of silence for some time both for speaker and hearer And he told us before that this silence may be continued all the time and not one word spoken and yet the worshipe be solemne and edifying and he saith the same immediatly thereafter Must not this be a fruitless and unedifying silence to others at least present But when he calleth it thus necessary there must be some thing more in it then we can at the first see or he will think fit to acquant us with as yet What more life saith he Pag. 232. might flow in every one and be increased so as words may also well be spoken by the influence of life and yet because it was imposed upon none necessarily they might all for the time rather choose to possesse God in quietness Ans. What this life is and what the flowings and increasings of it are we have seen But as to this Silence we say how cometh it that such in whom this life floweth do not speak Is not this a call sufficient how then dar they sit and disobey this call how dar they follow their owne choise Or is it no call that because a necessity was not imposed why then saith he that words might well be spoken by the influence of life Might words be spoken without an inward impulse and call no certainly according to his principles Where are we then 12. He goeth about to prove this their silence § 10. And for this end he tels us that to attend and waite upon God is a duty incumbent upon all and is a part of Worshipe And who denieth it Yet he citeth a number of Scriptures whereof none speak of such a waiting as he hath before pointed forth unto us accompanied with silence in the publick Worshipe of God for Ps. 27 14. speaketh of a waiting opposite to fainting through unbeleef or doubting to see the goodness and deliverance of God in the land of the living Psal. 37 7 34. speaketh of a waiting opposite to freting because of the prosperity of the wicked and a freting to do evil and so is a waiting for Gods pleading the oppressed mans cause is accompanied with a keeping of Gods way v. 34. not his waiting that layeth aside Gods way and Ordinances Prov. 20 22. speaketh of a waiting opposite to recompensing of evil Esai 30 18. is meant of a waiting for Godâ—s coming with redemption to Zion Hos. 12 6. speaketh of a waiting accompanied with keeping mercy judgment which is more than doing nothing Zach. 3 8. speaketh nothing of waiting These are out of the Old T. whereby I see that O. T. Scriptures will prove N. T. worshipe Now follow passages out of the New Test. Mat 24 42. 25 13. 26 41. Mark 13 33 35 37. Luk. 21 36. 1 Cor. 16 13. 1 Thes. 5 6. 2 Tim. 4 5. 1 Pet. 4 7. which speak of Watching of and such a Watching as is accompanyed with Prayer and all Christian Duties Col. 4 2. speaketh of a watching in Prayer and not of a waiâ—ing that puteth away Prayer Act. 1 4. is a waiting at Ierusalem till the promise of the Father came Act. 20 31. is a watching over the flock that it miâ—ht be keept from wolves The same line