Selected quad for the lemma: death_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A39896
|
An essay of original righteousness and conveyed sin wherein the question is sightly stated, the latent venome of some of Dr. Jeremiah Tayler's heretical assertions detected, and accurately impugn'd. By [J.] Ford gentlemen.
|
Ford, John, Mayor of Bath.
|
1657
(1657)
|
Wing F1464; ESTC R222666
|
41,888
|
180
|
the Gospel But just as those inveterate Hereticks were confuted and convicted so is our modern Dr. Tayler For as in the Gospel we have these words I and my Father are one comes to be the same in substance as if homusion were expresly set down for where the real thing in sense substance is found there the name is included Thus what is more clearly express'd in Scripture then that our first Parent Adam was created upright viz. in a rectitude of vertues grace and faculties by which he was left capable of attaining to that final supernatural end for which he was created and likewise all his Posterity had a just title thereunto while Adam would have had continued in his obedience to God whence the word original justice is derived and evinced which may be called innated connatural native and genuine Justice Even so by S. Paul in many places All men have sinned in Adam and are denounc'd by nature children of wrath and perdition which in expresse significant terms is nothing else then that Adams actual sin has been the natural innated hereditary genuine and linâ—ally descending habitual sin of his posterity contracted by seminal generation from him which in effect is original sin superinduced and conveyed by natural generation by Gods occult decree CHAP. V. The former Doctrine proved out of the Fathers shamefully corrupted by Dr. Tayler IS it possible that a man that pretends not only to be a Christian but a Minister a Preacher of the Word a Doctor and such as is generally counted for a learned and spiritual writer among the Protestants so far to forget himselfe as most shamefully to bring Antiquity it selfe for his Doctrine and particularly those very Authors who were the greatest opposers of his Pelagian Heresie as Chrysostom S. Ignat. Martyr S. Ambrose c. Sure the Dr. cannot gain but dishonour and infamy in alledging Authors for patronage of his Errors the whole straine of whose writings are so directly opposite unto him and his Doctrine and in producing these Doctors as of his minde and judgement he doth but abuse them and they rightly understood accuse him For not one of the passages quoted out of the Fathers by him that give the least shadow of an approbation or countenance to any of those his heretical Assertions neither do I find to my remembrance throughout his whole Treatise of Original Sin one quotation taken either out of Scripture Fathers or modern Interpreters pertinently applied nor any solid thing like an Argument to prove the thing he undertakes to shew as the ingenious Reader shall clearly perceive and that all his Allegations out of Scripture and Fathers help him not at all but rather expresly speak against him Doe but take notice with what Engines doth he draw his Conclusion from the premisses of S. Dioâ—is Areopag his doctrine for nothing doth he say that looks his way but rather against him here are his words lib. de Ecclesiast Hierarch c. 3 p. 3. where he doth ascribe Adams sin to all humane nature and at last giveth a reason for it Quia natura humana cedens fraudibus Satanae vitale jugum excussit I refer the Reader to this place in the Author where he will plainly finde all along the Doctor Tayler impugned he brings S. Ignatius his doctrine to agree with his but its observable that in him there is no syllable to prove how or wherein whereas in his Epistle ad Trallianos he hath thus Christus dilexit nos dans semetipsum pro nobis ut nos sanguine suo mundaret ab antiqua impietate Here lieth the miserable mistake of the Doctor Tayle taking impiety for temporal death which is most absurd and ridiculous for impiety here by the Saint is taken for Adams sin conveyed to mankind for which Christ died S. Irenaeus lib. 5. c. 17. hath these words Delevit Christus Chirographum viz. debita nostra affigens illud cruci uti quemaâ—modum per lignum facti sumus debitores Deo per lignum accipiamus debiti remissionem Are not these words expresly against the Doctors doctrine for out of this Author every relative from Adam descendant has contracted a debt through Adams transgression for every particular individual had obligation in Adam to preserve original righteousnesse and because it was not preserv'd but lost by Adam for him and us his posterity every of us becomes indebted to God for the same which in effect is original sin the which is remitted by the sacred blood of Christ in his Sacrament of Baptism The Reader may finde more to this purpose in this Author l. 3. c. 20. and in S. Aug. lib. 1. contra Julianum c. 2. Tertullian in his Book de anima c. 40. hath Omnis anima eousque in Adam censeâ—ur donec in Christo recenseatur tamdiu imunda quamdiu recenseatur peccatrix autem quiae imunda Is noâ— this to make every soule a sinner alwayes before Baptism which taketh away the stain of original sin contracted by and in Adam quite contrary to Dr Taylors judgement Origines hom. 8. in Leviticum saith Quaecunque anima in carne nascitur iniquitatis peccati sorde polluitur propter quod dictum est nemo mundus a sorde nec Infans cujus est uuiâ— is diei vita super terram By this Assertion every soule born from Adams flesh is counted polluted with sin and iniquity and every Infant is proved to have the same sin inherent in him which come quite opposit to Dr. Taylers deliration in applying this iniquity and sin here meant by Origines to effects of mortality And S. Eyprian quoted by the Dr. lib. 3. Epist. 8. ad Fidum saith Recens natus nil peccavit nisi quod secundum Adam carnaliter natus contagium mortis antiquae prima nativitate câ—ntraxit this Saint and likewise all the rest by ancient death do mean sin and eternal death whereas from sin came death according to S. Paul stipendium peccati mors the wages of sin is death sin the precedent cause to death the subsequent effect quite contrary to the Doctors dream mistaking temporal death for the eternal I refer the ingenious Reader to S. Athanas in his Sermon upon those words Omnia mihi tradicta sunt c. and to S. Hilarius in explicatione Psal. 32. diligis misericordiam judicium in which places Doctor Taylor is confuted and impugned most manifestly as a pernicious Impostor The Doctor boldly avers that all Antiquity is on his side setting down barely two or three broken ends of Sentences grounding no Argument as indeed he cannot upon those passages for his opinion The Doctor seems rather ambitious to be accounted able to reade a piece of the Fathers Writings then able to understand them he cited the Fathers most impertinently and imperfectly endeavouring to make his owne face and impure Doctrine clean by throwing dirt in great Saints faces He did not like an honourable Guest expect a meal from them but
errour in faith contrary to holy Scripture and the generall approv'd Doctrine of the Church but to hold That Originall sin is not properly and formally but onely metonimically a sin is expresly contrary to holy Scripture and the generall approv'd Doctrine of the Church Ergo c. That it is contrary to the generall approved Doctrine of the Church is already proved out of the Doctrine of the primitive Fathers maintained by Beza de justifie lib. 1. cap. 13. where he saith Omnes homines plane reos nasci contracta jam inde à primo parâ—nte culpa and Calvin hath these expresse words Peccato Adae non per solam imputationem damnamur â—â—sed ideo quia culpae sumus rei quatenus natura nostra in illo vitiata iniquitatis reatu constringitur That it is contrary to Scripture any man that is not purblinde may see in many places especially in S. Paul's Epistle to the Romans c. 5. v. 18 19. Verse 18. As by the offence of one sin came on â—all men to condemnation so by the justifying of one the benefit abounded towards all men to the justification of life And v. 19. For as by one mans disobedience many were made sinners so by the obedience of one shall many also be made righteous The conclusion of Saint Paul's most profound Doctrine concerning his comparison betwixt Christ and Adam begun from the twelfth Verse is fully contained in these two Verses 18 and 19. and his Divine Apostolicall Antithesis perfectly ended and compleated which Apostolicall Antithesis our D. Taylor doth abominably endeavour to cross corrupt and quite overthrow in holding that Original sin conveyed to Adam's Posterity is only figuratively a fin for S. Paul saith expresly that by one mans disobedience many were made sinners which word made sinners cannot be understood figuratively by any solid unbias'd iudgement but rather tisnate And the second Milivetan Councel in the fift age c. 2. CHAP. VII The Objections against the former Doctrine waved FIrst objection S. Chrysostome in some place averreth that none by the sin of our proto parents can be made a sinner excluded from Heaven nor liable to eternal damnation I answer that the Saint did not here exclude absolutly the sin conveyed to mankinde through the transgression of Adam but only did advertise that Adam's posterity were not made sinners upon that account onely that our first parents have committed actual sins but that their posterity also in Adam and along with him have sinned whereas all by the participation of humane nature were one man with Adam and as nature to them is conveyed so is the vice and corruption in nature by them participated for if they had not really sinned in Adam in whom as in the original and seminal root they were vertually involved they could not be made sinners by Adam's actual sin Nullus enim ut recte aiâ— Chysosto ex alieno peccato a se non participato peccator existit Deus in regenerationis lavacro mentem gratia tang it radicale peccatum evellit hominem illustriâ—rem reddit here the Saint calls Original sin washed away by baptismal regeneration radicale peccotum Objection 2. S. August lib. 16. de Civit. dei c. 18. saith we are not properly but originally onely born sinners I answer that S. August is to be understood so as that we are not born sinners by a consented act of our will properly but by the sinful act of Adam's inobedience which had a moral influence on all mankinde to bring on them the guilt of sin Objection 3. Until the Law sin was in the world but sin is not imputed where there is no Law yet death reigned from Adam to Moses even over them that have not sinned after the similitude of Adam's actual transgression who is the figure of the Messias This place is ignorantly interpreted by our Doctor thus Death reigned upon them whose sins therefore would not be so imputed as Adam's sin was because there was no Law with an expresse threatning given to them as it was to Adam I answer the same Law that was given with expresse threatning to Adam in Paradise was likewise by interpretation given in him to all his posterity and because Adam transgressed that Law all his posterity with him have transgressed according to those words of S. Paul In quo omnes peccaverunt Hence our Doctor's mistake is detected in not indeavouring to understand how that the same Law that was given to Adam did extend it self to his relative descendants and that not only temporal but also eternal death was threatned both to him and his posterity Objection 4. Taken out of those words of S. Paul By one mans disobedience many were made sinners c. Whence the Dr. Tayler doth strive to prove that if Adam's sin were imputed to his posterity as a guilt of an inherent sin then it should extend to all his posterity but out of this place it doth onely extend to many not to all Ergâ— not Original sin but temporal death is absolutely derived I answer that the B. Apostle doth use both words many and all whereas in the preceding Chapter he expresly averred that Adam's sin and Christs righteousnesse was derived and conveyed to all Adam's posterity and in this verse 19. he avers that only many were made sinners by Adam's inobedience and that by Christs righteousness many also are maderighteous Now I ask who be those that are born sinners from Adam and who be those that are regenerated in Christ through baptisme these are understood to be both all and many They were not all absolutely because Christ and Evae were not made sinners by Adam neither Infidels are by Christ justified but those onely that are in Christ regenerated and those only that are borne by seminal generation from Adam are here meant by the B. Apostle After this manner we may understand those words in Gen. 17. Patrem multarum gentium constitui te in semine tuo benedicentur omnes gentes c. 22. Where it 's most manifest that those who are promised to Abraham as children are counted in one place many and all in an other because they all are in some sense understood yet not absolutely all if considered in order to all humane kinde 5. Object From the 18th of Ezekel The childe shall not beare the iniquity of the father To this may be opposed another place in Exod the 20. I am a zealous God visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children c. I thus reconcile both these places in answer to the Objection that temporal punishment as the losse of meanes and estates banishment infamy and such like children as being secundum corpus pars patris may justly suffer by the Law for the sins of their parents but eternal punishment of the guilt of sin and an exclusion from Heaven is onely inflicted on them that are properly and really made sinners propria voluntate or aliâ—nae by interpretation