Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	eternal_a	sin_n	wage_n	12,499	5	11.2125	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A11363	A treatise of Paradise. And the principall contents thereof especially of the greatnesse, situation, beautie, and other properties of that place: of the trees of life, good and euill; of the serpent, cherubin, fiery sword, mans creation, immortalitie, propagation, stature, age, knowledge, temptation, fall, and exclusion out of Paradise; and consequently of his and our originall sin: with many other difficulties touching these points. Collected out of the holy Scriptures, ancient fathers, and other both ancient and moderne writers.	Salkeld, John, 1576-1660.	1617 (1617)	STC 21622; ESTC S116515	126,315	368

had not eaten of the tree of life Againe if it was onely ad melius esse for a better preseruation of our immortalitie due vnto that estate and not absolutely necessary for that effect then consequently it was not the tree of life in the sense which the Scripture insinuateth but an antidote onely against death and not a necessary cause of eternall life I answer that though the argument of Nectar and Ambrosia doth euidently ouerthrow the deitie and immortalitie of the heathen gods yet doth not the simile or comparison any thing impeach the immortalitie and deitie of the true God as neither the immortalitie of our first parents due onely vnto them in their estate of innocencie and which did principally proceed from the true and only immortall God because that immortalitie of life proceeding from the fruit of life was to endure no longer with man then man perseuered in the grace of God which was giuen him as a pawne of eternall life Neither doth this contradict that of the Apostle the wages of sinne is death for though death be due vnto man euen without sinne according to nature yet this debt was to bee remitted by originall grace and the naturall pronenesse thereunto to be redressed by the fruit of life Wherefore though the immediate cause of our immortalitie in Paradise should haue beene the tree of life yet the primarie and principall of all to which the other was consequent was originall grace whose immediate effect was our spirituall life and thereto secondarily followed the freedome from any corporall harme or death yea and this for euer of his owne nature though wee had not beene translated thence to a better life for so it is said of Adam that therefore hee was banished out of Paradise and interdicted the entrance vnto the tree of life lest eating of it hee should liue for euer Genes 3. chap. 22. v. And the Lord God said behold the man is become as one of vs to know good and euill and now lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat and liue for euer therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the Garden of Eden to till the ground from whence he was taken Hence I conclude with Abulensis and others esum illius arboris sufficientem habuisse virtutem vt vitam homini praestaret aeternam that this tree of life had sufficient vertue to prolong a mans life for all eternitie The which also is the opinion of S. Austine Aug. li. 13. de ●iuitate Dei cap. 20. 23. Chrys hom ●3 in Gen. Rupertus ●ib 3. de Trinitate cap. 30. Chrysostome and Rupertus lib. 3. de Trinitate cap. 30. where hee addeth this more then other Doctors quòd semel sumptus vitam praestitisset immortalem that this fruit of life had beene sufficient to haue caused immortalitie of its owne nature though it had beene but once receiued the which though it may seeme improbable to humane reason yet considering the omnipotence of God and his infinite loue to man in that estate it cannot at leastway appeare impossible CHAP. X. Whether the vertue of the tree of life to preserue man immortall was naturall vnto it or supernaturall LEst wee erre in the resolution of this question by any equiuocation of words as it falleth out often in the like difficulties of naturall and supernaturall obiects I will first declare how the Diuines vse this distinction and then how it is to be taken here Naturall as farre forth as is necessarie for our present purpose is that which floweth from the principles of nature to wit matter and forme of which as of their only compacts all naturall and corporal substances are composed Supernaturall is that which is aboue all nature or rather cannot in any wise proceed from the principles of nature but as it is aboue all nature so it floweth from that sole principle which is aboue all nature if not only yet principally Secondly naturall oftentimes is taken pro congenito for that which is originally produced with any other thing though it flow not in any wise from the principles of nature or bee not due thereunto so no doubt but if an Angel were created with the light of glory or beatificall vision of Gods essence both the light of glory and the vision of God should be in that sense naturall or rather connaturall vnto the Angell because it was produced together with his naturall substance or essence And the same oftentimes is auerred by the Fathers of man in regard of his originall iustice in which hee was created for though this original iustice did not flow from the principles of nature yet neuerthelesse because it was produced with nature by Almightie God and infused into mans nature as due vnto it in that happy estate therefore it is and may well be termed naturall though in its owne essence it was supernaturall Now by these two distinctions of things naturall wee may euidently inferre what is supernaturall namely that which is aboue both these kindes of acceptions or distinctions of naturall obiects that is which neither floweth from the principles of nature neither is any way due vnto nature as originall iustice was due vnto vs in Adam before our fall and corruption of nature This distinction presupposed the difficultie consisteth in this whether the vertue of the tree of life for to preserue man from corruption may bee called naturall or rather is to bee deemed supernaturall Strabo answereth Strab● in Gen. Lignum vitae hanc naturaliter habuisse virtutem that the tree of life had naturally this vertue that he who did eat of that fruit should be endued with perpetuall health neither should bee touched with any infirmitie wearinesse or irksomenesse which are wont to be the companions of age Hugo de Sancto Victore addeth Lignum vitae habuisse in se naturam vt perpetuaret homini vitam si competentèr ederetur that the tree of life had that vertue in it to perpetuate our life if it were taken competently For man saith he was made mortall and immortall immortall because hee could not die by reason of that immortall food mortall because he might haue died by outward violence But God had so inwardly fortified him by the tree of life and outwardly by his diuine power that hee could not die Againe because hee had shut vp within him the gate of negligence by the vigilance of humane reason outwardly also the gate of violence by the diuine protection insomuch that vnlesse man abusing his reason should open the gate of negligence neuer any harme should enter into him by the gate of violence But because hee was not carefull to keepe the charge committed vnto him God therefore forsooke the custodie and care he had ouer him S. Austine on the contrary side thinketh that the vertue of this tree of life was supernaturall for so he saith in his 8 booke de Gen ad literam cap. 5. That though

eternall God not carnally as carnall men dreame but spiritually in the bread of life as hee himselfe doth affirme of himselfe As therefore he who is the tree of life or rather the author of life or to speake more properly life it selfe euen as he is in the Sacrament of life doth heere truly in this miserable life produce in vs the life of grace as a present pawne of our future glory so it seemeth most probable that the other tree of life as a most perfect figure of this planted in the terrene Paradise had the like inherent vertue for to perpetuate or at least to prolong the liues of Adam and his posteritie as long as they were to liue in that terrene Paradise But whether this fruit of the tree of life was sufficient to perpetuate our life or only to prolong it for some determinate time Abulensis super Genes c. 13. quaest 175. Scotus li. 2. sent dist 19 quaest 1. Aquinas 1 p. q. 9.7 art 4 Caiet ibid. many dispute probably for both opinions Tostatus vpon the 13. chapter of Genesis q. 175. is most peremptorie for this perpetuitie Scotus Thomas Caietan and Durand for a very long time but not for eternitie because that is the naturall measure of nature this the supernaturall of him who is aboue all nature Secondly seeing the power of the tree of life was a naturall power and cause the effect could not bee supernaturall for though effects be often inferiour to their causes yet neuer the causes vnto the effects the reason because no cause can giue that which it hath not neither any effect haue any excellencie or perfection not proceeding from the cause wherefore if the tree of life was as without question it was a naturall tree as the Laurell Cypresse and other trees be it could not haue as connaturall the supernaturall effect of making eternall the life of man Moreouer it is a principle euen in naturall philosophie that omne agens physicum in agendo patitur debilitatur that euery naturall cause doth suffer some detriment euen in and by his owne action consequently therefore though our naturall heat and vigour might bee very long conserued by the vertue of this excellent fruit yet at length it should haue failed and thence finally mortalitie should haue followed as a necessary effect of so forcible a cause Lastly it is not likely that God who is the author and first rule of nature doth produce any thing frustrate in nature seeing therefore the fall of man was patent vnto him euen from all eternitie to what end should he prouide an eternall cause for a temporary effect But if this argument had any force it should force also our aduersaries to the like if not a greater inconuenience for who doubteth but that God knew also the little time that man was to persist in his grace and yet neuerthelesse he gaue him that fruit which was sufficient for the preseruation of his life for many a yeere as our aduersaries hold why then might hee not likewise for all eternitie is it because of the impossibilitie at non impossibile Deo omne verbum to God nothing is impossible which doth not imply contradiction but what contradiction is in this is it that here naturall philosophie is contradicted omne agens in agendo patitur debilitatur euery agent doth decay euen by his owne action but seeing the author of nature is aboue nature why might hee not here worke that which is aboue nature or though in the compasse of nature yet beyond our naturall capacitie which is so small that wee scarcely or very imperfectly vnderstand things of farre inferiour degree yea such as are within our selues why therefore shall wee deny vnto God that which we doe not vnderstand in our selues My resolution therefore is that of Abulensis Propterea dictam esse arborem vitae quòd fructus eius vim haberet seruandi hominem à morte in omne tempus faciendi eum immortalem that this tree was therefore called the tree of life because it had vertue to perpetuate our naturall life and the vnion of the body and soule for euer if we had not lost the supernaturall grace which was the vnion of our soules with God but seeing wee wilfully separated our selues from our supernaturall life it was most iust that wee should also be depriued of the naturall hence therefore is that which Paul so often preacheth mortem in mundum intrasse propter peccatum that death entred into the world by the doore of sinne which doore if we had debarred to sinne the grace of God should haue beene a perpetual vnion betweene God and vs and the tree of life should haue caused the like betweene our bodies and soules and this of his owne nature eternally though de facto wee needed it but only temporally both supposing our fall as likewise not supposing any at all for if we had not fallen or sinned in our first father wee should certainly after some number of yeeres haue been translated from that terrene Paradise which was our first though temporary habitation vnto a more excellent and perpetuall in the kingdome of heauen and this should haue heene without any assault of death because we had alwaies liued in God who as hee would then haue preserued vs by his grace from the corruption of sinne would also haue preserued vs from this corruption which was only the effect of sinne according to that of the Apostle The wages of sinne is death the wager being the deuill our soules are bought and sold sold away for nothing sinne being nothing but a priuation of being but bought againe by the death of the most precious of mortall liues which in no wise should haue beene necessary if wee had not beene lost or fallen from our first grace and innocencie But as that poeticall fiction of the Nectar and Ambrosia seemed to Aristotle of small ground so this for the like reason may seeme to bee as fabulous for as Aristotle argueth against the former either the Gods vsed this Ambrosia and Nectar for pleasure only or also for necessitie if only for pleasure how then could Ambrosia and Nectar be any necessary cause of their immortalitie againe if for necessitie certainly the Gods then had not beene immortall by nature and consequently no Gods seeing that that which hath need of any thing for his preseruation must necessarily be mortall After the same manner we may argue against this fruit of this tree of life which is said to be sufficient to cause an eternitie of life à parte post as the Philosophers speake for if our immortalitie was onely to be from the tree of life then questionlesse without it wee had beene mortall and subiect to death contrary to that of the Apostle Stipendium peccati mors the wages of sinne is death for whether wee had sinned or persisted in our primatiue grace all had beene one wee should naturally haue tasted of death if wee

that he did not only giue vnto him what was necessary or conuenient for his naturall estate there but also added other most extraordinarie meanes and helpes both naturall and supernaturall conuenient and necessarie for both his estates of nature and grace such was this of the tree of life which as some well note according to the originall text was called the tree or wood not of life onely in the singular but in the plurall of liues because it was so to lengthen the life of euery man that euery singular and particular mans life might well seame the life not of one onely man but of many Whereby we may first admire the power of Almighty God secondly his goodnesse towards man his power in the creating of such a fruite his goodnesse in bestowing it vpon him whom he knew was in so short a time after to be so vngratefull for that and many other most excellent as well naturall as supernaturall gifts The second reason why it is tearmed the tree of liues is because as a man hath three liues virtually if not really distinct the sensitiue vegetatiue and rationall so this fruite of the tree of liues should haue had vertue to fortified all three in which also we may note the wisedome of God but more againe his mercy his wisedome in that hee knew to produce incorruption at least way for many yeares if not eternall as many hold by a continuall repairing of nature by the eating of the said apple but more againe I say may we admire his mercy and bountie by which he sought meanes to eternize him whom he knew by his fall was to bee his owne death yea the death of his most deare and eternall sonne which was the true tree of life prefigured by this tree of life or liues so also called because it was not to giue or prolong the life of Adam only but also the liues of his posteritie vntill such time as it should please their Maker to translate them from that earthly beatitude vnto a more perfect and supernaturall estate Man 17. where as Saint Austine saith they were to possesse in a more perfect measure and that through all eternity ioy without sorrow rest without labour honour without feare wealth without damage health without sicknesse aboundance without care life with all security immortalitie without corruption all happinesse with no miserie at all Where all perfection is in the highest degree and all imperfections remote where sight is face vnto face where perfect knowledge and nothing vnreuealed of which humane nature can be capable where Gods soueraigne goodnesse raigneth super omnia aboue al things and the light enlightening is glorified of the Saints where the present maiestie of the Almightie is perpetually beholden and the minde of the beholders eternally filled with this fruit of life Fourthly it was called the tree of life or liues because it did after a double manner sustaine and renew the life of man first in restoring our naturall moisture by which wee liue which consumeth euery day more and more by our naturall heat which was a proprietie common also to all other fruits of Paradise Secondly in that which was proper to this tree only and for which it was particularly tearmed the tree of life because it was of such qualities and excellent proprieties that being eaten it did renew our humidum radicale our naturall humiditie and moisture whereby wee should haue liued with the like or equall puritie and perfection which had beene in man at his first creation yea it should haue so fortified our naturall heat that although it did naturally suffer some detriment and losse by continuall action yet should it haue beene so strengthned by that fruit of life that it could neuer haue decaied or perished and consequently man could neuer die corporally in that happy estate vnlesse hee had first killed himselfe spiritually by being partaker of the forbidden fruit insomuch that the disobedience of one brought in by concupiscence was the cause of all our misery and mortalitie that so God of his meere goodnesse through his infinite wisedome might thereby take occasion of shewing his mercy vpon those who after Adams fall were nothing but miserie and by the obedience of his dearest Sonne might repaire and redeeme the disobedience of vs most accursed caitifes so that wee participating of the fruit of the tree of life communicated vnto vs in the sacred communion by vertue of that tree of life prefigured in this Paradise might thereby be reuiued from a temporall death to an eternitie of blessednesse and perpetuitie of a most blessed life yea so by occasion of our first sinne gaine more then euer we had obtained if we had not sinned seeing hereby we obtained that fruit of life to be prepared for vs vpon the tree of the crosse yea and thence communicated vnto vs in the sacred communion and bread of life which doubtlesse wee should not haue obtained at leastway after that manner and measure if wee had not transgressed Or at leastway Christ prefigured in this tree of life should not haue appeared passible as one of vs if wee by our sinne had not needed his passion Wherefore we being astonished at so great mercy shewne vnto vs in so infinite miserie and that so lamentable a losse should be an occasion of so ioyfull and infinite gaine we may well exclaime with Gregory the great O foelix culpa quae talem tantum habere meruit Redemptorem O happy fall and happy vnhappinesse which was occasion of so great happinesse Lastly the aforesaid tree was worthily called the tree of life or liues because it did not only preserue our naturall being by the repairing of our naturall forces but also did so renew them by a supernaturall vertue proceeding thence that thereby we might haue liued a life free from all kinde of feares of death or of any griefes vexations or torments now necessarily annexed to both deaths corporall and spirituall temporall and eternall now I say annexed to both deaths vnlesse wee haue applied vnto vs the vertue of another tree of life by whole life all things being haue their being and by whose influence all things liuing haue their life Hence it is that the former was a most perfect patterne or representation of the latter but the latter a more perfect forme then could bee fully represented by the former or by any other possible Neuerthelesse the tree of life was created in the terrestriall Paradise to the end that it might be a type and in some sort represent that which should be fully represented or seene in the celestiall kingdome by the eternall light of glory according to the diuine oracle In lumine tuo videbimus lumen in thy light wee shall see light that is by and through thy light of glory which is a supernaturall habit infused into our vnderstandings wee shall see the glorious light of thy essence not comprehensiuely which is impossible but most perfectly and essentially which

of knowledge of good and euill especially seeing he fore-knew his fall THe answer is easie to wit that by the tryall of his obedience in this one commandment hee might subiect the whole man vnto himselfe in all things and that man by the breach or keeping of the said commandement might know by wofull experience as he truely did in his wofull fall the difference betweene good and euill so that whereas before hee knew it onely by contemplation now he should find it by a lamentable experience yea in this his sinne was the greater in that the obiect of his obedience was so facile and the commandement so easie to be kept Aug. li. 14. de ciu Dei cap. 15. For as S. Austine saith like as the obedience of Abraham is highly extolled because the slaying of his sonne with his owne hands was of such difficultie euen so the disobedience of Adam in Paradise was the more hainous by how much the precept which he had imposed was the more facile to haue beene fulfilled Againe as the obedience of the second Adam was so much the more admirable because hee was obedient euen vnto death so the disobedience of the first Adam was the more detestable by which he became disobedient euen vnto death for where the punishment of the disobedience is great and the thing commanded easie who can expresse how great an euill it is not to obey and how great an iniurie to so great a power especially threatning so great punishments Now as touching the second point I answer that therefore God as absolute in his will science and power would create Adam and giue him the aforesaid precept which hee knew neuerthelesse hee would so presently violate to the end that his vnhappy fall might bee an occasion of our most happy Redeemer for as the Schooles commonly hold if Adam had not sinned the Sonne of God had not beene incarnated so that as Gregory saith in regard of this it was a happy fall which deserued or rather required to haue such a Redeemer O foelix culpa quae talem ac tantum habere meruit Redemptorem in which I know not whether I should more admire the goodnesse of God in the creation and restauration of man or the ingratitude of man towards God in and after both his creation redemption and infinite offences and falles but that as it is the nature of that infinite goodnesse to effectuate the greatest good of the greatest euill so is it no lesse consequent to mans naturall propension and of himselfe as it were an infinite of euill of the greatest good to worke the greatest euill a thing not easily beleeued if our daily and wofull experience did not so manifestly proue it for as God by our greatest and originall euill did worke our greatest and originall good and this onely out of his infinite goodnesse the incarnation I meane of his eternall Sonne so man out of his infinite malice did by occasion of this so infinite a benefit worke the most wicked outrage that could bee imagined against his benefactour by seeking his dishonour and death who so abased himselfe to giue him life so that I know not whether I should more admire God shedding his bloud for man or man spilling the bloud of God mans ingratitude towards God or Gods infinite bountie towards man And hence it is that as faith teacheth vs this euill and sinne of Adam was foreseene and permitted of God so is it no lesse a blasphemous heresie to auerre that this or any other sinne is wrought by God wrought I meane by his particular command or concourse not by his vniuersall which is due vnto all entitie and being yet in some sense neither due vnto this of sinne as which in it selfe hath neither entitie nor being but rather if wee speake formally is a priuation of all rectitude goodnesse and being CHAP. XXXII What death that was which God threatned to inflict vpon Adam for his transgression AS it is certaine that the mortalitie of Adam and consequently of all mankinde did proceed of sinne so it hath no small difficultie to declare what instant death that was which God so instantly threatned should follow mans sinne for so saith the text Gen. 2. the 17. verse In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt die the death What day is this what death is this seeing that he neither first sinned the last day of his life nor yet died the first day of his sinne true it is that as death was due at his last day for his first sinne so was it not inflicted in the first houre for his first dayes sinne Was this death peraduenture the priuation of grace by which his soule supernaturally liued for as the body liueth by the soule so Adams soule liued by grace consequently as the body is said to die by the absence of the soule so the soule spiritually by the priuation of grace but yet though this be true yet it cannot bee the sole meaning of the aforesaid words so that then no other death should haue beene due vnto man but only the death of the soule the separation from God who as he had sinned both in body and soule was iustly to be punished in body and soule which the effect afterward shewed that God had before accordingly decreed so that the sentence of his death as it was executed both in body and soule so it is to bee vnderstood to haue beene decreed as well in regard of the body as of the soule because the corporall death is a necessary consequent of the spirituall now then the spirituall being inflicted in the very instant of mans sinne how chanced it that the corporall also did not befall him in the day of his sinne especially seeing that though God threatned not death in the instant of his sinne for the instant of his sinne yet at least God saith that man shall die in the day of his sinne Is it peraduenture threatned and not truly decreed or if really decreed how is it not absolutely performed God threatned his death in the day of his eating Adam eateth and yet liueth long after his eating Could Adam change the decree of God or could God decree that hee meant not to performe Hee performed not therefore he decreed not if he decreed not how then was it said In the day that thou eatest thou shalt die the death not of the soule only for that was instantly but of the body principally seeing that is said to be in tempore in the day not in instanti or momentarily Was it a threat only as wee reade of the Niniuites but they changed their minde they repented their sinne therfore as the sentence was conditionall the condition being changed the sentence of God though eternall is said to be reuoked not changed in act but immuted in obiect the act being immutable the obiect mutable according to the decree of the immutable act But here in this of Adam the cause is altered God

threatneth the sinne is committed why then is not the sentence presently executed In the day that thou eatest thou shalt die the death Iustinus the Martyr Iustinus in dialogo cum Triphone Iren. lib. 5. aduersus haereticos in this more acute then Catholike answereth that euen the very same day that Adam was depriued of the spirituall life of his soule he was no lesse also of the other of his body for though he died not the same day according to the naturall reuolution of the heauen yet seeing that a thousand yeeres as Dauid and Peter speake are but as one day in regard of Gods eternitie Adams death being within the compasse of the thousand yeeres may well be said according to Gods and the Scriptures phrase to haue died euen the same day that he was created But seeing true histories doe seldome admit any such subtilities I rather incline to the interpretation of Ierome and S. Austine who vnderstand that sentence of death not of death then instantly inflicted but of the necessitie of death then forthwith contracted Ierome therefore commendeth Symmacus who for that which our translation hath morieris thou shalt die translateth mortalis eris thou shalt become mortall so that whereas hee had beene created to an eternitie of life now he is made subiect to the penaltie of death or as our interpretation seemeth to insinuate euen to death it selfe seeing that euen from thenceforth hee began to be mortall who by grace before was altogether immortall So that as according to true Philosophie wee may say that the alteration of qualities or the dispositions vnto generation are in some sort generation so likewise by this phrase of Scripture that Adam should die in the day of his sinne we may well vnderstand that he began to die dispositiuè by way of disposition in the day of his sinne seeing sinne was the immediate disposition or cause of his mortalitie and death sinne I say being the cause of his mortalitie his mortalitie consequently prepared forthwith the way vnto death For so it is said in the second booke of the Kings We all die and slide away as water for though at the present while we liue we be not iointly dead yet because wee slide away towards death as the flouds towards the Ocean wee are all said to die instantly because our life euen from the first instant thereof is nothing else but a swift sliding towards death yea our temporall life as Gregory the great well noteth compared to the eternall is rather to be called a present death then a continued life seeing that our continuall corruption and declining towards death may rather be tearmed a long or continuall death then euen a very momentarie life CHAP. XXXIII Of the creation of the woman and to what end she was created AS it is most certaine that the principal end of the creation of Adam was to serue loue honour and obey his Lord and maker so the same likewise was the womans principal end Againe as Adams secondary end was to bee the father of mankinde so was it also Eues to be the mother of all and to bee a comfort and helpe vnto her husband Gen. 2. vers 18. It is not good that man should be alone I will make him an helper meet for him good neither in regard of God of man nor of the world of God for his seruice of man for his helpe of the world for procreation for though this was not absolutely necessary neither in regard of God man or the world yet supposing the decree of God that hee would be preserued by the beautifull disposition and order of this world it was not only most conuenient but in some sort necessary that he should make man a helper and a helper meet for him for though hee could otherwise haue disposed of things by immediate creation yet was it more agreeable to the nature of things and for the sweeter disposition of the course of nature that mankinde should rather be multiplied by naturall course of generation then by supernaturall power and immediate creation Hence peraduenture it may be inferred that seeing God saith it is not good that the man should be himselfe alone that consequently it must be euill if hee bee alone and therefore as by this sentence lawfull matrimonie is confirmed so virginitie by the contrary consequence is condemned for whatsoeuer is opposite to that which is good must necessarily bee condemned as bad as which is nothing else but the priuation of good To this I answer as our Sauiour did to the Sadduces in their obiection touching mariage Matth. the 22.29 verse Yee are deceiued not knowing the Scriptures for as Christ is not against Moses neither the new Testament contrary to the old neither the greater perfection to the lesse so neither is virginitie contrary to matrimonie both are laudable both in their degree excellent but virginitie more laudable more excellent most admirable as by which wee rather imitate the angelicall state and perfection then follow our owne depraued nature and corruption This is the definition of Paul not any humane inuention for thus doth Paul determine this controuersie the 1. to the Corinthians ch 7. vers 25. Now concerning virgins I haue no command of the Lord but I giue mine aduice as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithfull Loe here virginitie is not commanded but commended not exacted by force but commended through grace neither counselled to all because it cannot be performed of all counselled therefore onely to some and those but few seeing few can attaine to this perfection 1. Cor. c 7. vers 27. My counsell therefore is that of Saint Paul Art thou bound vnto a wife seeke not to be loosed lest loosing the knot which God hath knit thou loose thy selfe Art thou loosed from a wife seeke not a wife here Paul counselleth hee commandeth not neither is his counsell extended to all seeing all cannot be capable of this counsell not onely by nature because this is not any gift of nature but also euen by a lesser measure of grace for though the Sunne of iustice doth shine ouer the iust and vniust and send downe the dew of his grace vnto all yet not with equalitie vnto all but according vnto his good pleasure and will Wherefore as S. Paul prosecuteth If thou takest a wife thou sinnest not and if a Virgin marie she sinneth not verse 37. He that standeth firme in his heart that he hath not neede but hath power ouer his owne will and hath so decreed in his heart that he will keepe his virgin he doth well so then hee that giueth her to mariage doth well but he that giueth her not to mariage doth better the wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liueth but if her husband be dead she is at libertie to marie with whom she will only in the Lord but she is more blessed if she abide in my iudgement and I thinke

doe most blasphemously accuse the wisdom of God as touching the fore-said commandement of abstaining from the tree of good and euill for saith he doubtles when God did giue this law vnto our first fathers hee thought that they would obey it which seeing they did not God as Manes obiecteth was deceiued Secondly he accuseth God of vniust wrath and indignation in that he condemned man for so small a matter as the eating of an apple Finally he accuseth him of ignorance mutabilitie and contradiction to himselfe in that ignoring his future compassion towards man hee did frustrate the law which hee himselfe had made yea and contradicted the sentence of death as rashly pronounced by himselfe against Adam Here we may see how as Tertullian saith God of his infinite goodnes and mercy suffereth himselfe to bee dishonoured in his other infinite attributes and dietie but that it may bee apparent that these blasphemies haue not any ground euen in naturall reason we answer that though all things and consequently the disobedience of Adam was perfectly fore-knowne by God Almighty yet neuerthelesse it was conformable to reason that Adam being a reasonable creature should haue this law of obedience prescribed vnto him so conformable to reason first for to manifest the absolute power dominion and authoritie of God the Creator ouer his creature and the due subiection of the creature towards his Creator Secondly this law of obedience was most profitable vnto man though foreknowne that it was to be violated by man most profitable I say it was both in regard of the manifestation of Gods iustice and mercy as also for the exercise and tryall of the good and bad righteous and vnrighteous a necessarie obiect of the afore-said attributes Now if this law should therefore haue beene omitted because God fore-knew the transgression thereof by the same reason or rather no reason no other law should haue beene prescribed vnto man seeing there is no law either of nature or grace which God in his fore-knowledge did not foresee would be often-times violated by man Furthermore as touching the blasphemie against the wrath of God I answer that it is not to be attributed to God as signifying any passion or mutation in the immutable or impassible God but that this shadow of change or shew of mutabilitie is attributed vnto him who in his nature is altogether immutable because hee seeing the wickednesse of man he worketh those effects which in vs bee euident tokens and signes of mutabilitie and change Nay secondly I adde that after Adam had transgressed the commandement of God God pronounced against him the afore-said sentence of death more moued by mercy then of any anger or wrath which wee may euidently see in that hee did not die the same day of his transgression according as the sentence which God pronounced against him seemed to threaten so that whether wee respect the sentence giuen before Adams disobedience or the execution of the same after his sinne we may admire the infinite mercy of the Almighty in both both in regard of Adam and his posteritie as also in regard of the sentence threatned to be inflicted so immediatly after their sinne so that euen in his iustice wee may magnifie his mercy and say with the Psalmist misericordia eius super omnia opera eius that his mercy aboundeth in all his workes yea and is aboue all his works because as the Diuines say remunerat vltra condignum punit citra condignum he rewardeth our workes farre beyond their worth which is none at all vnlesse it bee in Christ and punisheth our sinnes much lesse then they deserue To the other blasphemie which Manes vseth against the Almighty God in accusing him of repentance and mutabilitie I answer that we must first suppose what it is to repent or to be sorry for any thing which wee haue done For repentance or sorrow supposeth ignorance in vs of future euents yea of such as are noxious or hurtfull to those who are affected with the afore-said passion both which are farre vnfitting the all-seeing science and omnipotent power of God who did not remit the rigour of this sentence moued by sorrow or repentance as it happeneth in vs but rather as we haue said before by his infinite mercy and clemencie to the end that his infinite goodnesse and mercy might bee the more manifest vnto vs. In like manner wee may say that when any sinner doth turne from his former being in sinne God Almightie in some sort may bee said to remit the rigour of his sentence pronounced against him and this not by reason of any ignorance or mutable repenting himselfe of the former fact or threatning as Manes blasphemously obiecteth but rather hee remitteth out of his infinite clemencie the sentence of damnation which conditionally hee had decreed to wit if the sinner had not repented himselfe of his sinne an example of which wee finde in the commination of doome and vtter destruction threatned not absolutely but conditionally against the Niuiuites Ionae 3. that they should vtterly bee destroied within forty dayes 4. Reg. 20. likewise against Ezechias that hee should die for his sinnes whom neuerthelesse God pardoned vpon their repentance and the like also wee finde in others most hainous offenders against whom God hauing denounced his wrath neuerthelesse pardoned vpon their sorrow contristation and humiliation Now as touching the lie which this hereticke obiecteth against God in that hee threatned death vnto man in the day of his transgression which neuerthelesse was not inflicted I answer that as man is composed of body and spirit so likewise the death threatned against him was both corporall and spirituall which both were in some sort inflicted euen in the very instant of his transgression the spirituall in the separation of his spirit from God and his grace wherein consisted his spirituall and supernaturall life the corporall in the perturbation of his affections and powers both spirituall and corporall which was a kinde of beginning of a neuer dying death beginning in this life and which according to the present iustice of God if it had beene executed was to haue beene consummated in the other life or rather eternall death if so be that this first lapse and fall had not been remitted not of mans merit but by Gods mercy CHAP. LXVI The obiections of Theodorus and Nestorius THeodorus Bishop of Laodicea and Nestorius Patriarke of Constantinople with diuers others of the Greeke Church were of opinion that sinne was not the occasion of death but that man should haue died though hee had not sinned because mortalitie is consequent to nature as immortalitie proceedeth only of grace How then is it possible vnlesse God can contradict and denie himselfe or that one of the diuine decrees can be opposite to another that God should first decree the immortalitie of man then presently vpon his transgression the obiect being changed God also should be changed in his decree for either God fore-knew