they so appearing and speaking did alwayes represent the maiestie of their maker repeating for the most part Gods owne words which hee had immediately infused into their vnderstanding Againe if the aforesaid opinion of the assuming of our humane nature is to bee vnderstood by a personall vnion betweene God and man then questionlesse God hath beene twice incarnate and twice vnited to our humane nature which is contrary to the holy Scriptures Or if there was no reall vnion or assumption of our humane nature but only a shade or similitude of the same as wee reade that Angels haue oftentimes assumed humane bodies how then was it truly said let vs make man to our image and likenesse seeing that similitude of humane nature could not in any wise be the image of God neither could it be truly said that Adam was made to the image of God if so be that we vnderstand by the image of God not any true humane nature but the shade only and similitude of mans nature Hence I conclude the first opinion to be the best as which is most grounded in the sacred text and most followed of the holy Fathers and other expositours CHAP. XVI Whether the woman be made to the image of God or no. IT might seeme rashnesse to doubt of this if S. Paul did not giue vs some ground denying as some thinke that woman was made to the image and likenesse of God auerring her onely to be the image of man in that he contraposeth woman as the glory of man to man as the image and glory of God His words be these 1. Cor. 11. 6. Man ought not to couer his head forasmuch as hee is the image and glory of God but the woman is the glory of the man for the man is not of the woman but the woman of the man The woman therefore is not the image and glory of God but immediately only the glory of the man otherwise there could be no difference in this betweene the man and the woman contrary to the inference which S. Paul maketh in the precedent verse Neuerthelesse euen the text it selfe doth clearly confute this opinion for after that it had beene said let vs make man to our owne image and likenesse presently it is added hee made them both man and woman Wherefore as man was made to the image of God so likewise was the woman made to the same Aug li. 12. de trinitate cap 7. S. Austine is very large in giuing the reason of this conclusion but briefly this is the answer If wee consider the principall reason why man is said to be the image of God to wit as hee is an intellectuall creature and as he is indued with the properties therevnto annexed so is it euident that this word image doth equally signifie and may be equally attributed both to man and woman seeing that they both participate of reason and vnderstanding both bee indued with an immortall soule both partakers of free will both capable of supernaturall gifts both of grace and glory But againe if this word image be taken in a more large and improper signification as hath beene already explicated we may well say that man was made to the image of God woman framed to the image of man Because as God is the end to whom man is immediatly referred so likewise man in some sort is in regard of the woman because man is the head of the woman by whom shee ought to be directed vnto God This explication seemeth to be grounded in the afore-said place of Paul 1. to the Corin. 11. chap. for when hee had said that man was the image of God and woman the glory of the man he presently giueth the reason ver 8. For man saith he is not of the woman but the woman of the man ver 9. for the man was not created for the womans sake but the woman for the mans sake Neuerthelesse if the similitude of God in man and woman be considered not according to their naturall gifts but to the supernaturall of grace and glory then questionlesse it hapneth often-times that some women are more adorned with these supernaturall graces and gifts and consequently are more like vnto God then many men As wee piously beleeue of the blessed Virgin who as shee was pronounced by the Angell of God to bee blessed amongst all women so no doubt but shee hath receiued an eternall blessing aboue all Angells and men our Sauiour only excepted both God and man CHAP. XVII Whether man be made to the image of God euen according to his body and corporall proportion shape and lineaments or doth in any wise represent the diuine maiestie THE subiect of this question is so certaine of it selfe and without all coutrouersie that for the resolution thereof wee haue more neede of the subtlety of distinction then of any profound diuinitie or learning For seeing that the diuine maiesty is a most pure spirit as infinite in essence as in all and euery of his diuine attributes infinite how is it possible that there should be any comparison similitude or likenes with him in that which is altogether corporall limited and most base such as is our humane natute according to the body Neuerthelesse seeing the body doth in some sort represent the soule like as the soule also is the image of God hence peraduenture it may be inferred that the body may in some sort be said to be a representation or similitude of God in as much as the body if wee consider it in his full perfection is an immediate glasse similitude or representation of the soule the which most perfectly representeth Almighty God Wherefore though in regard of our corporall substance considered immediatly in it selfe without any relation vnto the soule wee be no better then bruite beasts yet if we consider it in regard of our soule and as it is the receptacle of the most excellent image of God it may after a remote manner and mediately be said to represent euen God himselfe Wherefore S. Austin propounding this question August lib. 6. de Gen. ad literam cap. 12. in what doth a man exceede the brute beasts seeing they are both made of earth he answereth in nothing but because he is made to the image of God not in body or corporall substance but according to his soule and spirituall powers Though true it is also that he hath euen in his body a certaine property which doth in some sort demonstrate the rectitude of his soule as that he is made vpright to the end that hee might vnderstand how hee ought not to abase himselfe to the terrene vile and base trash of the world like vnto the bruite beasts and other most base creatures who as they are framed prone and haue their bodies inclined towards the earth can neuer erect themselues to any spirituall or heauenly thing Hence Bernard well noteth that God made man vpright in stature and erected towards heauen to the
in the liberty which he hath vnto whatsoeuer particular good Thirdly in his naturall propension vnto eternitie and immortalitie Plato in Alcib in Phaedone Porph. l. 1. ad Boet. vide Euseb lib. 11. de praepar euangelica the which euen Plato and Porphirius thought to be sufficient arguments of the soules immortalitie Yea the immortalitie of the soule is euidently proued in that as Moyses saith God constituted man supreme Lord ouer all inferiour creatures yea in that he breathed into him a reasonable soule with full liberty ouer all his naturall actions according vnto that of the fourth of Genesis the 7. verse where GOD saith thus vnto Cain that his desire shall be subiect vnto him and hee shall rule ouer it but more particularly this is demonstrated out of the third of Exodus where God saith vnto Moises that he is the God of Abraham the God of Isaac and the God of Iacob and this not of the dead but of the liuing as our Sauiour added in the gospell Finally this may be deduced out of Deuteron 4 where it is said that God made the Sunne the Moone the starres and the planets for the seruice of man as for a more perfect creature and consequently participating a more perfect immortalitie then is the incorruption of those eternall globes and starres CHAP. XXVI Whether the soule of Adam was immortall by its owne nature or onely by grace SOphronius Ierome Sophronius in his 11. ep in the 6. Synode Hierom. l. 2. conâ—â— Pae. lag Damas l. 2. de fide orthod c. 3. 12. and Damascene are of opinion that the Angels and humane soules are not immortall of their owne nature but only by Gods grace To this also S. Paul in his first Epistle to Timothie and his last chapter may seeme to incline where hee saith that God onely hath immortalitie Plato plainely insinuateth the same of Angells much more then of humane spirits Neuerthelesse it is most certaine that mans soule is immortall euen of its owne nature for which reason our Sauiour commandeth vs Math 10. not to feare them that kill the body Math. 10. ver 28. but are not able to kill the soule Wherefore as the body is mortall and corruptible it followeth by the antithesis that the soule is immortall and incorruptible Againe this is most plaine out of diuers other places of scripture Psalme 29 16. Ecclesiasticus 12 and the 9. Matth. 10. 2. Sam. 23. 32. Phil. 1.23 1. Pet. 3. 19. Apoc. 9.6 7.9 CHAP. XXVII That Adam was not created in Paradise and why not and by what meanes was he placed there after his creation AS touching the first point that he was not created in Paradise it is manifest that though the woman was created in paradise yet the man was not for so it is said of him Gen 2. the 15. verse Then the Lord tooke the man and put him in the garden of Eden that he might dresse it and keepe it therefore he was not there before at his first creation though Eue was for so it was conuenient that shee should be produced of Adam in his most perfect state and being according to both body soule and habitation which is the opinion of Basil Aquinas Basil homil de paradyso Aquinas 1. parte q. 102 ar 4 plures in 2. sententiarum distinct 18. and the most of the ancient Diuines against Tertullian Iosephus and Rupertus As touching the second point that God tooke man and put him into the garden of Eden This may be vnderstood three wayes first by inward inspiration by which God might shew him that it was his pleasure that hee should haue that for his habitation in which sense many vnderstand that of Math. 4. that our Sauiour was caried of the spirit into the wildernes to wit by the inward inspiration of the Holy Ghost though he went also voluntarily of himselfe Secondly we may vnderstand it that he was caried by the spirit of God or rather conveighed by the immediate power of the Almighty as we read of Henoch Habacuck and Philip. Or lastly that he was transported by some Angell in the shape and forme of man who shewing him the way did lead him into paradise as wee read of the Angell Raphael how he lead Tobias and to this last I incline the rather because it is the opinion of S. Austine But now it may be demanded why God would not create man in paradise the reason may be to the end that hee might more manifestly vnderstand his goodnes and liberality towards him and that that place was rather giuen vnto him of meere grace then any wise due by nature But why then may some say were the Angels created in heauen yea all other liuing creatures created each in their owne place I answer that neither the puritie of the empyreall heauen did exceed the Angelicall puritie neither the grosnesse of this inferiour globe of the earth did exceed the nature of corporall creatures there liuing and therefore these two places were most apt for the creation and habitation of Angels and these inferiour creatures But such was the perfection of paradise that it was in no wise to bee deemed a conuenient place for humane habitation mans nature I meane only considered not the grace and bounty of God thereby manifested CHAP. XXVIII To what end was Adam placed in Paradise MOyses answereth Gen 2. ver 15. that the Lord tooke the man and put him into the garden of Eden that he might dresse it and keepe it or as the vulgar hath that he might worke in it to giue vs to vnderstand how much God abhorreth idlenesse seeing that euen in that place where there was no neede of labour God would not haue man idle not an ill item for our lazie gallants who thinke their gentilitie to consist in idlenes and a point of honour to liue of other mens labour but euen in this I am of opinion that God doth punish them that they haue more griefes and more discontent in their idle pleasures then others in their most wearisome toiles and labours which though it be a most voluntary bondage yet is it likewise the most base and cruell slauerie to the base appetites a tyranny of Satan a double bondage to a double tyrant to Satan to sinne for as S. Paul saith who committeth sinne is the slaue to sinne so who subiecteth himselfe to the suggestions of Satan is a slaue to Satan an intolerable slauery and an infinite misery the beginning miserable the proceedings damnable the end as which hath no end intolerable Now therefore lest Adam or his posteritie should by alluring idlenes come to this endles paine God of his mercy placed Adam in paradise vt operaretur custodiret illum that he might worke and keepe it to wit that hee working might keepe paradise and paradise by the same worke might keepe him from idlenes from sinne because that is the ordinarie cause of sinne for as it is
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
end that his corporall rectitude and vprightnes of his shape might stirre him vp to preserue the spirituall rectitude and righteousnes of the inward man who was made to the image of God and that the beauty of our corporall substance and outward proportion and right disposition of the lineaments of our body might correct the inward deformitie of our soules and the powers thereof For what can be more vgly deformed and abominable in the eye of that all-seeing God then a sinfull and defiled soule in a beautifull body Is it not a shamefull and detestable thing that an earthly and corrupt vessell such as the body is should contemplate the heauens view the Planets and be delighted with the aspect of the incorruptible spheares and motions of the starres and that on the contrary side the spirituall and celestiall creature far more perfect then all the celestiall globes and heauens the soule I meane of man should alwaies haue her eyes that is hir inward powers and affections debased and cast downe to the terrene trash and basest creatures of this world Consider therefore ô man thy dignitie of nature the perfection of thy powers thy priuiledges of grace the immortalitie of thy soule the excellencie of thy creation the nothing of thy selfe and lastly the infinite price of thy redemption by the most precious blood and death of the Lambe thy Creator and Redeemer and let not this so base and transitorie trash of this world so alienate thy minde and bewitch thy vnderstanding that thou preferre the filthy and base pleasures of the body before the spirituall and eternall of thy spirituall and immortall soule CHAP. XVIII Whether the image of God may be wholy lost and blotted out of the soule of man ORigenes Epiphanius ep ad Iohannē Hierosel Aug lib. 2. contra Adamantiam Manich. l. 83. quaest q. 66. lib. 6. de Gen. ad literam cap. 27.28 and S. Austine do seeme to affirme that man lost the image of God Epiphanius and diuers other of the Fathers doe peremptorily deny it out of Gen the Psalmes and S. Paul but I thinke this controuersie rather to arise by reason of the diuers vnderstanding of the image of God which is in man then of any true difference in their opinions for who can doubt but if wee consider man according to the supernaturall gifts first infused into the soule of Adam but that he lost the diuine similitude or likenesse of God and that wholy nothing remayning but onely the deformity of sinne Gen. c 9. Psal 38. 1. ad Cor. cap. 11. in the deformed and sinfull soule but if we consider him againe according to the naturall substance of the soule and her naturall faculties consequent therevnto it is equally indubitable that shee retained this likenesse of God though not in the same perfection which shee possessed before but rather much defaced blemished and deformed My reason is because there proceeded a more excellent beauty and perfection vnto this naturall substance by reason of the supernaturall qualitie of originall iustice and consequently the depriuation of this supernaturall gift which was also a sufficient cause of natures greater perfection and more admirable beauty was a depriuation and defacing of the said beauty of nature which otherwise had beene a perfect type and portraiture of the diuine nature and being CHAP. XIX Why God made man to his image and similitude MAny and most excellent reasons may be giuen of this but which I must needs confesse are rather morall congruencies grounded in the infinite goodnesse of God then in any other forcible convincing reason plainely deduced out of the sacred Text. The first whereof may be this that God therefore made man like vnto himselfe that thence it might be manifest how much the infinite goodnesse of God exceedeth the malignitie enuy and malice of man for God being infinite in his goodnesse yea in all other his attributes infinite yet doth he not disdaine our of his infinite goodnesse that that which in vs is limited and finite should be compared and likened to that which in him is infinite and beyond all comparison he enuieth not the perfection of our nature he maketh it more perfect by grace and by a sacred league and vnion he combineth both that by both we may be like vnto him in both who is the author of both And this with such a degree of participated perfection that man doth not only become like vnto God but also may bee called and is truly the adopted Sonne of God So that all men may now participate of the grace which one onely possessed by nature insomuch that as he being the naturall Sonne of God is a perfect patterne of his eternall Father by nature so wee also be a participated likenes and similitude in some degree by nature but most perfectly by grace The second reason may be this if so be that we may compare these inferiour things of this world to those supreme and infinite of God like as a temporall Prince hauing for to shew his power magnificence and maiestie built furnished beautified adorned and deck'd some excellent Citty in which hee himselfe doth meane to remaine doth there erect in some principall part thereof his owne image or statue in some precious porphire marble or other more excellent matter euen so Almighty God hauing out of his infinite wisdome made this maine Machina and beautifull Citty of the world for the manifestation of his glory to the end that it might be knowne and acknowledged who was the only author and architect of all hee was pleased to place in the midst thereof in the garden of paradise his owne image and similitude man I meane who by his soule and the three principall powers thereof should represent the vnitie and trinitie of his maker yea and by his outward shape and forme in some sort likewise represent the inward and consequently though not immediately euen God himselfe Insomuch that as it is said of the portrature of Venus painted by Apelles that none could perfect it but onely Apelles who first began it so likewise was it not possible that any should bring our soule to her first perfection but only God who was her first Creator Hence it is that like as he who defaceth the image or statua of an earthly Prince is iustly condemned of high treason so a fortiori who depraueth his owne nature and by offending his maker depriueth it of grace the which is the seale signe and similitude of the diuine power nature and maiestie is worthily condemned of high treason against the same power and maiestie The third motiue why God created man to his image and similitude may be this to the end that all corporall things might be subiect and each after their manner seruiceable to man as who of all other creatures was the expresse similitude of their lord and maker vnto which it seemeth that God did allude when he said vnto Noe the feare of you and the
true that which the Poët saith that labour blunteth the arrowes of Cupid so doth it no lesse other darts of the deuill But hence peraduenture some patron of idlenes may inferre that labour was contrary to that blessed state of Paradise as which required all quiet rest and content no rather I say that it was consequent or necessarily pertaining to that blessed state seeing that labour was not any toile or paine but rather a pleasure and a voluntary effect of his well disposed minde as it is now likewise to men not so ill affected quorum otium as Seneca said maximum negotium so as S. Austine saith l. 8. de Gen ad lit cap. 8. non esset laboris afflictio sed voluntatis exhilaratio cùm ea quae Deus creauerat humani generis adiutorium laetius seraciúque provenirent that it should not be a toile or affliction of the body but a recreation and reioycing of the will and minde CHAP. XXIX Whether the precept of not eating of the tree of knowledge of good and euill was giuen aswell to Eue as to Adam and how that was THe difficultie of this question proceedeth of the diuers readings of the precept because some with Greg. l. 35. moral cap. 10. do read it according to the Greeke in the plurall the Hebrue Caldaean with the vulgar Latin and English are in the singular Gen. 21.16 and the Lord God commanded the man saying thou shalt eat freely of euery tree of the garden but of the tree of knowledge of good euill thou shalt not eat of it for in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt dye the death Whereby wee see that this commandement was directed to the man only not to the woman seeing shee as yet was not created as is apparent out of the 18 verse the 21 22 23 where the creation of Eue is described Neuerthelesse it is manifest that the same commandment was extended to Eue also for so shee answered the serpent according to the vulgar edition de ligno quod est in medio paradysi praecepit nobis deus ne comederemus but of the tree which is in the midst of Paradise God commanded vs wee should not eat wherfore though this precept was principally giuen to Adam yet was it also to be obserued of Eue for as they were conioyned in nature so were they not to be separated in regard of their precept and grace But why then may some say was the name onely of Adam expressed I answer with Rupertus lib. 2. de Trinitate operibus eius c. 32. because the precept was principally giuen vnto him as vpon whose obedience or breach his and his posterities happinesse did solely depend not vpon Eues CHAP. XXX Why God commanded Adam that he should not eate of the tree of knowledge of good and euill TErtullian in the beginning of his booke against the Iewes saith that this commandement was giuen to Adam as the first principall foundation and ground from whence all other lawes were deriued and in which all the ten Commandments be virtually included so that as Adam was the first beginning of mankinde so this was the first ground of all other lawes But though this cannot be reiected as an improbable speculation yet certainely it is not so firmely grounded in the sacred text as Tertullian imagined The reasons therefore in my opinion why God so strictly prohibited the eating of the aforesaid fruit was first that thereby as God had declared vnto vs his power ouer vs so wee should shew our obedience towards him not that as S. Austine noteth God hath neede of our seruice Augustin l. 8. de Gen. ad literam cap. 11. but that wee haue neede of his power protection rule and dominion ouer vs according to that of the Psalmist who speaking in the person of God saith constitue super eos legislatorem vt sciant gentes quoniam homines sunt Constitute a ruler ouer them as the vulgare translateth that the heathen may know that they are but men so that as it is a token of vassalage and subiection to receiue lawes so is it of power dominion and authority to command constitute ordaine and set downe lawes to bee obserued Yea secondly God gaue this law vnto man that thereby he might exercise his obedience towards God a vertue as necessary to man as acceptable in the sight of God Aug. lib. 8. de Gen ad literā cap. 8. and therefore as S. Austine well noteth God gaue not this law in any obiect of it selfe otherwise euill or of its owne nature good to the end that the vertue of his obedience might be the more illustrious because it deriueth not his excellencie from the materiall obiect but from the formall the sole subiection to Almighty God It may seeme peraduenture not improbable to some that the law of nature which God had infused into the nature of man might haue sufficed to lay open try and manifest mans obedience towards God to what end then should the second law of abstayning from the tree of the knowledge of good and euill be added as a second tryall of that which otherwise might sufficiently bee manifest by the law of nature and obedience therevnto I answer that the law of nature would not haue beene a sufficient tryall of Adams obedience because it is not altogether manifest by the law of nature that God is sole and supreme Lord ouer all mankinde for some doe imagine that the law of nature is a propertie onely due vnto a reasonable creature as euery species or kinde of liuing creatures hath their particular propertie agreeing to their nature Againe some are of opinion that those things which are contained in the law of nature are to be imbraced or reiected in as much as they agree or disagree with naturall reason not as they are commanded or forbidden by God as supernaturall agent So that although it be prescribed by God vnto all men yet doth it not sufficiently manifest his most ample absolute power ouer all mankinde seeing that by this law there is not any thing commanded or forbidden but onely that which is according to humane reason either good or euill of its owne nature Wherefore Gods absolute dominion and extent of his diuine power were not sufficiently knowne onely by this law of nature but onely as it is agreeable to the instinct of nature the which as it was but onely in things within the spheare of nature could not possible shew the extent of the absolute power of God in things both with in the compasse of nature and aboue nature Hence Gregorie well noteth Lib. 33 moralium cap. 10. that the forbidden fruit was not euill of its owne nature but was forbidden to the end that man being created vpright by nature might increase in righteousnes by the subiection of his nature and perfection of his obedience to the author of nature CHAP. XXXI Why God commanded Adam that he should not touch the tree
the principall lest shee should be too impudent neither of the baser lest shee should be too much debased shee was therefore created of the ribbe and of that ribbe which was next to the heart the one to signifie the mediocritie of her condition the other to insinuate the esteeme and respect which both shee should haue towards Adam and Adam towards her as also to signifie the heart loue and fidelitie which he should beare vnto her who had her being from so neere his heart Now the difficultie is how Eue being of so perfect stature as she was created could be created out of a ribbe of so little quantitie seeing either shee was equall in stature with the man or not farre inferiour in greatnes vnto him was there any matter added vnto the ribbe or was the same matter of the ribbe multiplied surely it might be as Lombard and Gabriel said by the multiplication of the same matter or by rarefaction of the same ribbe or rather which I deeme more probable by addition of new matter as the Diuines hold it happened in the multiplication of the fiue barly loaues of which wee read in the gospell Neither may it be inferred hence that then it should rather haue beene said that the woman was framed of other matter then of the ribbe of Adam because the more principall part beareth the name not alwaies the greater especially when the principall part is not only the principall but also the first of the whole compound or worke Wherefore seeing the ribbe of Adam was the first and principall matter of which the woman was created and vnto the which the other was but an addition it is therefore rightly and absolutely said that Eue was made of the ribbe of Adam without the expressing of any other matter because though the new assumed matter was the greater in quantitie yet lesse in perfection so likewise in the muitiplication of the fiue loaues though that which was added was much more then the precedent quantitie of bread yet because it was but an addition vnto the former therefore the name was deriued of the more principall part according to the common axiome of the Philosophers denominatio sequitur principaliorem partem the name must follow the more principall part CHAP. XXXVII Whether the ribbe of which Eue was created was requisite to the perfection of Adams body or no. BOth the Phisitians and Philosophers doe agree in this that euery man according to his naturall constitution and perfection hath 24 ribbes twelue of each side wherefore if our first father had thirteene on the leaft it may bee thought that this was rather monstrous then agreeable to nature which neither admitteth want nor superfluitie either therefore this ribbe was super-abundant in him and so he monstrous by super-abundance or it is wanting in vs and so we monstrous by defect I answer that though it were monstrous in any of vs to haue 13 ribbes yet was it in no wise in respect of Adam it were in regard of vs because none is to be created of vs but in regard of him the defect were rather monstrous because Eue was to be created of it so that neither was Adam a monster when he had that which we haue not neither yet deficient when he wanted that of which Eue was created because the name of monster is not so much in regard of superabundance or want as in regard of the ends and purposes intended by the author of nature grounded in that which is most connaturall Wherefore though in regard of the particular nature of Adam as hee was but one particular man this ribbe was superfluous and so consequently in an other person might be thought monstrous yet in regard of him of whom the rest of mankinde was to proceed it was most naturall Neither doe these two sorts of considerations imply contradiction seeing that euen in nature we haue infinite examples of this for so the heauiest drosse and massiest matter hath a naturall and particular inclination to descend to the center which neuerthelesse will ascend for the preseruation of the course of nature ne detur vacuum when there is any danger of vacuitie of aire or want of any other body which naturally should fill all places so that as to descend is proper to heauy things considering their particular inclination and nature so to ascend is no lesse agreeable vnto their nature considering their vniuersall propension for the preseruation of the vniuersall good of nature In like manner if we consider Adam as one particular man not as first parent of our humane nature it were monstrous that hee should haue more ribbs on the leaft side then on the right or more then any of his posteritie haue but if we consider him as he was to be the first father of mankinde after that particular manner that God hath determined it was most necessarie and agreeable to his nature that hee should haue more ribbs then any other of the same specificall nature seeing that our first mother Eue was to haue her being of this ribbe of his and we all ours by her CHAP. XXXVIII How mankinde should haue beene multiplied if Adam had not sinned GRegory Nisene Damascene Chrysostome Procopius Gazeus and diuers others were of opinion that if Adam had not sinned there should haue beene no such naturall generation of mankinde as is now but rather an immediate multiplication and production of men by the immediate power of God So that as we shall be like vnto the Angels in the coelestiall Paradise through our vnion vnto Christ so wee should not haue beene vnlike vnto them in the terrestriall by the immediate production of God wherefore as sinne was the cause of our dissimilitude from the Angelicall life so was it according to these Fathers the cause also of the dissimilitude of our production the Angells being by creation immediately from God wee not immediately but by mediate generation and hence it is that Austine saith that consanguinities and affinities proceed of sinne not of nature The ground peraduenture of these Doctors may be the impure and corrupt manner of our generation and the deformitie of lust together with the immoderate pleasure thereof proceeding the which our first fathers as S. Austine saith presently vpon their sinne experimented and thence were ashamed and couered themselues Neuerthelesse I cannot but deeme it most certaine but that so long as mans superiour powers were subiect to God so long also should mans inferiour powers haue beene obedient to man wherefore whiles there was no deformitie by sin in the will neither should there haue beene any filthines or abomination in the actions of nature But as our eyes and other senses be as yet subiect to our will so also all other now rebelling inferiour powers should haue beene subiect to their superiour lastly as all deformities and disorder should haue beene taken away so all conformitie and order should haue beene left The sensitiue appetite should haue been subiect to the
nature it cannot be denied but that it was grace as which was not consequent vnto nature but aboue all nature Wherefore as now in the law of grace all that are regenerated by baptisme in Christ doe in and by baptisme according to the opinion of many Diuines receiue the grace of Christ so likewise in the state of innocency all that should haue been borne of the loines of Adam should in and at the very instant of their naturall conception and first moment of naturall life haue receiued the first influence of their spirituall birth and supernaturall life Now the difficultie is whether if Adam had persisted in the state of innocencie all we his posteritie should then haue beene confirmed in grace insomuch that as wee should haue beene borne in the grace and fauour of God so wee should neuer haue fallen from the same Anselmus lib. 1. Cur Deus home cap. 38. Gregorius lib. 4. Moraliū c. 36. Anselmus and Gregorie the great answer that if Adam had not sinned then all his posteritie should haue beene confirmed in the grace and fauour of God for who saith Anselmus dare presume to affirme plus valere iniustitiam that iniustice should haue beene of more force to binde vnto bondage in mans first perswasion then his iustice to confirme him in liberty if he had persisted in his first temptation for euen as all humane nature was ouercome by Adams sinne so by him all should haue ouercome if he had not sinned Neuerthelesse I resolue with S. Austine that the posteritie of Adam should not at least way in the instant of their generation beene confirmed in grace though Adam had persisted in his originall iustice for how is it credible that they should haue receiued more abundant grace then their first head and father at his first creation Wherefore like as Adam though created in grace could fall from that happy estate of grace so it seemeth most probable that his posteritie might also seeing that wee read of no particular prouidence grace promised to them which was not profferd to their first father For though Adam could as many Diuines hold haue increased in grace yet none but Paelagians hold that hee could merit vnto himselfe the infusion of the first grace much lesse vnto others CHAP. XLIV Whether Adam before his sinne was mortall or immortall SAint Austine in his 7. booke de Gen. ad lit cap. 25. answereth most excellently that the body of Adam before his sinne was both mortall and immortall mortall because he could die immortall beause hee could not haue died For it is one thing not to be able to dye another to be able not to dye that belongeth only to the Angells this is agreable euen vnto man not by the constitution of his nature but by the benefit of the tree of life from which tree hee was banished as soone as hee sinned that hee might dye who if he had not sinned might not haue died wherefore he was mortall by the nature of his corruptible body but yet immortall by the benefit of his Creator for if the body was mortall because it could dye by the like reason it was immortall because it could not haue died for that is not immortall onely which cannot dye at all vnlesse it be spirituall which is promised to vs in our resurrection Now therefore the difficultie is whether this gift of immortalitie due to the perfect state of Paradise was due also and connaturall vnto man persisting there Many of the best learned of this age are of opinion that this originall iustice which did bring with it a power of immortalitie and a perfect subiection of the flesh and senses vnto the rule of reason was a gift due euen vnto nature granted vnto man as not only agreable but likewise belonging and consequent vnto his naturall integritie and perfection insomuch that mans nature being now depriued thereof may iustly bee deemed in a manner maimed imperfect and monstrous especially seeing it was to proceed of naturall causes such as was the eating of the tree of life Againe euen naturall reason doth require that the minde and reason should rule and gouerne the whole man and consequently that the flesh and senses should be ruled by reason and obey the superiour power wherefore as it is without all question that the rebellion of the flesh against reason is contrary to mans nature so originall iustice which did restraine the rebellion did questionlesse pertaine to the naturall state integritie and perfection of man yea how were it otherwise agreable to the diuine wisdome to make a creature partly immortall and incorruptible partly againe mortall and corruptible Neuerthelesse vnlesse the question be more de nomine then dere I deeme it most certaine and out of all question that that gift of immortalitie was supernaturall as which was in no wise due or consequent to nature for neither this immortalitie could proceed of the qualities proportionate to the body seeing these tend rather to corruption then immortalitie as which are each contrary to other and after a sort consuming one another and these tending to the disvniting of the body and soule neither could this immortalitie be ab externo agente from some outward principle and cause for then if it were so it were rather to bee deemed in some sort opposite to the inclination of nature the which of it selfe as we haue already said tendeth to corruption yet as that which is congenitum or produced ioyntly with nature may in some sort be said to be naturall or rather connaturall so I will not deny of this quality of immortalitie though of it selfe it be altogether aboue nature yet respectiuely and in regard of the first infusion into nature I will not I say deny but that it may be deemed naturall CHAP. XLV What kinde of serpent that was which tempted Eue. IOsephus in his first booke of Antiq. chap. 1 holdeth that as it was a true and naturall serpent which tempted our first fathers so it was naturall vnto it to speake vnderstand yea and to goe vpright like vnto man and that vnderstanding mans felicitie moued with enuie hee sought his ouerthrow maliciose persuadens mulieri vt de arbore scientiae gustaret maliciously perswading the woman that shee should taste of the tree of knowledge Ephraim the Syrian as Barsalas relateth in his booke of Paradise the 27. chap. held that the serpent which spake with Eue was a true corporall serpent and that Satan had obtained of God the facultie of speech to be giuen vnto the serpent for a time so that as in Balaams reprehension God gaue the vse of speach vnto the Asse for his iust reprehension and punishment so likewise here saith Ephraim God gaue not only speach but euen intellectuall power and vnderstanding vnto the serpent for a tryall of our first fathers obedience Cyrillus in his third booke against Iulian the apostata and Eugubinus in his Cosmopoeia are of opinion that this was not
euill euen of their owne nature it would follow I say that God were the author of sinne seeing he is the author of nature Therefore as S. Austine saith of the Angell so I of man Diabolus natura est Angelus sed quod natura est Dei opus est quod verò diabolus est vitio suo est vtendo male naturae suae bono opera verò eius mala quae vitia dicuntur actus sunt non res The Deuill by nature is an Angel and this is Gods worke but that hee is a Deuill commeth of his owne sinne by the euill vse of his good nature so that his euill workes which are called vices are the actions of his nature not nature it selfe or his Angelicall substance After the same manner God of his infinite goodnes created man good in substance in nature excellent in his powers perfect and in essence of all inferiour creatures the most eminent but he by his will abusing Gods gifts depraued his powers and depriued his nature of these supernaturall gifts which were made connaturall vnto his first creation not that either his nature became formally sinne or that his sinne was transformed in substance and nature least that he who is the author of nature should also be iudged the author of sinne but that man freely subiecting himselfe vnto the breach of Gods commandement voluntarily depriued himselfe of those supernaturall graces which according to the former decree of God were due vnto his happy estate of innocencie Insomuch that all the goodnes beauty and graces which before were connaturall vnto him were bestowed by God and all the euill which was preternaturall vnto him and accidentary vnto his nature was deriued from himselfe according to that of the Prophet Hosea chap. 13. vers 9. Thy perdition is of thy selfe but in me is thy helpe Hence it is most euident that our nature depraued with sinne must needs be distinguished from that sinne which depraueth nature as the man infected with any maladie or sicknesse is distinguished from the qualitie or maladie infecting the man CHAP. LIII In which diuers other opinions of many Diuines touching the essence of originall sinne are declared and refuted Lombard 2. dist 33. LOmbard the master of the sentences Driedo Ariminensis Parisiensis and Altisiodorensis Greg. 2 dist 30. q. 2. art Gabr q. 2. ar 1. 2. Hen quod l. 2. q. 11. Guliel Paris tract de vitijs peccatis cap 2. 4. Altisiod lib. 2. tract 27. cap. 1. 2. Driedo lib. 1. de gratia libero arbitrio p. 3 confider 4. Holcottus q. de imputabilitato peccati ad primuÌ„ principale with diuers other schole Diuines are of opinion that the essence of originall sinne consisteth in morbida quadam qualitate in a certaine infectious qualitie not of the body but of the soule deriued from the corruption of the carnall appetite yea S. Austine may seeme to allude vnto this in his first booke de nuptijs concupiscentijs cap. 25 where he saith that originall sinne doth not remaine substantially in vs as a body or spirit but that it is a certaine affection of an ill qualitie as a disease or languishing and in his 13 chap. hee calleth it morbidum affectum a sickly qualitie affection or disposition though more spirituall then corporall Againe in his sixt booke against Iulian chap. 7. hee explicateth himselfe more plainely oppugning others in this wise some Philosophers said that it was the vitious part of the minde by which the minde or any part of it becommeth vitious that so all being healed the whole substance may be conserued so as it seemeth the Philosophers by a figuratiue kind of speach called that vitious part of the minde libidinem lust in which the vice which is called lust is inherent after the manner that those who are contained in the house are called the house Ambrosius in cap. 7. ad Romanoâ— Mâ—gister sent lib. 2. distinct 31. cap. 8. S. Ambrose likewise seemeth to bee of the same opinion in the 7. chap. of the epistle of S. Paul to the Romanes where propounding this question how sinne doth dwell in the flesh seeing it is not any substance but the priuation of goodnes he answereth ecce primi hominis corpus corruptuÌ„ est per peccatuÌ„ c. Behold saith this Father the body of the first man was corrupted by sinne and the corruption by reason of the offence remaineth in the body retaining the force of Gods sentence denounced against Adam by whose fellowship and society the soule is spotted with sinne But certainely if wee duely ponder the aforesaid places we shall easily find that neither Austine nor any other of the Fathers is of this opinion wherefore the meaning of S. Austine in the places aboue alleadged is that concupiscence is not any substance or part of substance but rather a qualitie or affection or effect of an ill qualitie and therefore it is most fitly compared to a disease not because it is distinguished from the sensitiue appetite but because it is the very appetite and power it selfe now depraued which is a qualitie and as the Diuines tearme it affectio morbida a sickly corrupt or infected affection or inclination First because it doth preuent or ouersway reason which ought to bee the gouernesse and rule ouer all humane actions Secondly because it is depriued of originall iustice which in our first Parents was a power aboue nature yet connaturalized if I may so tearme it vnto their nature as well for their direction in matter of nature as for their helpe and furtherance in actions of grace insomuch that while their wills were ruled by reason they were alwaies subiect to their Creator and likewise directed in all things belonging both to nature and grace True it is as St. Austin doth often repeat that the soule is corrupted by the flesh as the liquour by the corrupt and vncleane vessell not because that there was any such quality as the forementioned deriued into the soule by the sinne of Adam but rather because the soule is infused into the body which descended of the defiled seede of Adam and therefore doth contract this sinne by which it is truly said to be polluted And according to this interpretation wee are also to vnderstand that which the Master of the Sentences aboue alleadged doth falsely cite out of St. Ambrose being rather the words of the ordinary glosse vpon that of Rom. chap. 7. But that sinne which dwelleth in me for the Author of the glosse addeth vnto the rest of Ambrose his word cuius consortio anima maculatur peccato by whose society the soule is defiled with sinne which by no wise can bee vnderstood by reason of any infectious quality deriued from the body and thence transfused into the soule but accordingly as hath beene partly explicated already and shall bee heereafter more declared And this may be further demonstrated euen by reason for first either this morbida qualitas this
parent Adam neither our immediate parents now regenerated in Christ haue in any wise the guiltinesse of originall sinne at the time of our generation how can it therefore possibly come to passe that any such guilt of originall sinne should proceed from them vnto vs Certainly this could not proceed from any matrimoniall act seeing that was and is lawfull in all lawes both of nature Moses and grace how therefore could that which is a sinne and consequently vnlawfull proceed from that which is altogether lawfull Thirdly the actions of our externall powers as of seeing smelling tasting and the like are in no wise voluntary or so tearmed but outwardly only or as the Philosophers tearme is by an extrinsecall denomination or name deriued from our will and this because they haue no freedome or libertie in themselues inwardly but only as they are directed from the inward facultie of the will and therefore as they haue no libertie or free will but only by an externe denomination so neither haue they any sinne inwardly inherent but onely as they are commanded or proceed from the will Therefore after the same manner seeing the soules and willes of the infants haue no libertie or freedome of choice but only by an externe denomination outwardly deriued from the will of Adam now altogether past and of his sinne now forgiuen it must needs follow that they cannot in any wise bee said to haue contracted any sin but only by an externe denomination proceeding from the sin of Adam Fourthly that which in it selfe is according to Gods law neither in any wise contradicting the same cannot be the cause of that which is against the law of God wherefore seeing that matrimonie or the matrimoniall act is according to Gods law it cannot bee the cause or occasion of originall sinne in the infant which is against Gods law Fiftly originall sinne cannot proceed from Adam vnto his posteritie neither as from the morall cause thereof neither as from a physicall naturall or reall cause not morally because as death did proceed from sinne so life if he had perseuered should haue proceeded from grace and originall iustice which was a gift giuen vnto all our nature in Adam not per modum meriti by way of merit as some haue dreamed but gratis otherwise as the Apostle argueth Romans the 11. chapter grace should haue been no grace Now therefore consequently neither doth originall sinne passe vnto vs his posteritie by way of demerit or as a morall effect of sinne seeing that the same reason which doth vrge for the transfusion of this demerit or sinne vnto vs doth also vrge for the transfusion of grace Wherefore seeing he could not be the meritorious cause of our grace because it doth implie contradiction to be deserued and yet to be grace a free gift and graciously giuen neither can he be consequently the morall cause of our originall sinne Neither finally can the sinne of Adam bee the reall or physicall cause of our sinne seeing that his sinne whereof ours should proceed is now neither actuall nor virtuall not actuall because it is forgiuen not virtuall for that then it should be latent in the generatiue power or seed which cannot possibly bee because then it should be attributed to God who is cause of the generatiue power seeing as the Philosophers say causa causae est causa effectus illius secundae causae the cause of any second cause is the cause of the effect proceeding from the second cause Lastly there cannot bee assigned any time or moment in which the sonnes of Adam doe or can contract this originall sinne therefore both according to true Diuinitie and Philosophie it cannot be that we doe really and inwardly in our soules contract any such sinne but rather wee are called sinners in Adam and are said by the Apostle to haue sinned in Adam by reason onely of his fall who was our head The antecedent seemeth certaine because this sinne can neither infect our soules in the first instant of their creation or infusion otherwise the soule should haue it from her creation and consequently it might bee attributed to Almightie God as to the author thereof seeing that as true Philosophie teacheth operatio quae simul incipit cum esse rei est illi ab agente à quo habet esse the action which beginneth iointly with the being of the effect is from that cause from which it hath being And hence Aquinas holdeth as impossible Aquinas 1 parte q. 63. art 15 in corpore Angelum in primo instante creationis suae peccasse quoniam peccatum illud tribueretur Deo that Lucifer sinned in the first instant of his creation because that sinne should haue beene attributed to God which were blasphemous Neither could this sinne bee contracted by vs in the instant in which our soules were infused into our bodies seeing that the immediate subiect of sinne is not the body but the soule or some of the powers of the soule seeing therefore no instant can be assigned in which the sonnes of Adam are infected with this originall crime it followeth necessarily both according to the grounds of reason and Scripture that there is no such infection or corruption inherent in our soules For the better vnderstanding of this fundamentall point so controuerted in all ages we must note first that originall sinne is called peccatum naturae the sinne of nature according to that of Paul Ephesians 2. Wee were by nature the sonnes of wrath because sinne did spot defile or rather corrupt the whole masse of humane nature in our first father Adam from whom as first head and fountaine it hath beene and is deriued Secondly this sinne is called the sinne of the world Iohn chap. 1. Behold the Lambe of God which taketh away the sinne of the world because all men were defiled with this one onely excepted God and man by whom al others were redeemed Thirdly it is also tearmed peccatum humanae conditionis the sinne common to all humane nature because there is not any Christ only excepted which doth not vndergoe this yoke So Ierome explicating that of the 50. Psalme Behold I am conceiued in iniquities saith Hieron super cap. 4. Ezechiel not in the iniquities of my mother but in the iniquities of humane nature which are generall to all humane nature or which hath defiled all mankinde Fourthly the sinne of Adam is called peccatum radicale the radicall sinne or root of sinne because wee being now depriued by it of originall iustice which as it was in Adam so should it also haue beene in vs an antidote against all inordinate desires but now our inordinate appetite and concupiscence which is the root of all euill is let loose to the ouerthrow of all true libertie Lastly wee must note this difference betweene the originall and the actuall sinne of euery particular man besides Adam that the actuall sinne is committed by the actuall will and consent of euery sinner but the