no actual transgression And for this reason we say that all Infants are exempt from the guilt of actual sinne because they are not capable of the knowledge of a Law But this is not our question the point in hand is concerning the guilt of original sinne Suppose there were no Law given personally and individually to infants yet the Law once given to Adam is sufficient to involve all his children in the sin of the nature till they come to be freed by Christ Therefore in sense we affirme that not onely the Ephesians but also all others are dead in trespasses and sinnes But let us further enquire into the meaning of the words and were by nature the children of wrath as well as others Doth not the Apostle go here to the corruption of nature as to the Fountain and whereas you say that the Ephesians by the course of their lives living in rebellion against God were naturally the children of wrath Do not you by this affirmation yield the cause For admit that the Ephesians did by their own free act live in disobedience against God yet all comes to one issue when they did it by a natural propension received from Adam the common root of the corruption of nature But you further say It cannot be expected that those who never committed any actions of disobedience should have this text applied to them but infants neither did nor could commit any acts of rebellion Therefore this will not prove that infants were so the children of wrath by nature page 152. This expression that infants were not so the children of wrath by nature is as Logicians call it an ignorance of the elench For we do not say that Infants in every respect are so the children of wrath as those Ephesians who lived in wilful disobedience It is enough for us to affirme that they are any way the children of wrath so farre at least as they do partake of the corruption of the nature For the clearing of the point let us distinguish three sorts of men that are lyable to wrath The first are such as reject Christ in the publick tenders of the Gospel If I had not come and spoken unto them they should have had no sinne but now they have no cloak for their sinne Joh. 12.48 In this sense we say that not onely Infants but also the natural Ephesians themselves were free from the guilt of sinne For if infants as you affirme cannot sinne nor men neither if they can truly maintain that they rceived no Law In this sense the Ephesians themselves who served divers lusts and pleasures could not sinne because the Gospel was not preached and Christ was not tendered to them The Apostle saith they were at that time strangers from the Common-Wealth of Israel and aliens from the Covenant of promise Secondly they are lyable to wrath who though they never had the Gospel preached yet do wilfully hold the truth in unrighteousnesse Rom. 1.19.20 21. In this sense the Ephesians before their conversion did serve divers lusts and were by nature the children of wrath as well as others The sinnes of their lives though they were their own voluntary acts yet they were the proper and genuine fruit of their sinful and depraved nature In this as in the former sense I do willingly yield that infants cannot sinne as those that disobey the Gospel because they have no discoveries of Christ in the publick Ministry of the Word Neither can they sinne as did the Gentiles which went against the general convictions of the Godhead in the conscience and wilfully held the truth in unrighteousnesse Thirdly they are lyable to wrath who though they never committed actual sinne yet do partake of the sinne of the nature and of the guilt of that sinne If this be not so what is the meaning of the words and were by nature the children of wrath as well as others In a sense then it is true that so farre as men are by nature so far they are the children of wrath Here then two objections come to be answered the one in respect of infants the other in respect of them who live out of the bounds of the visible Church First in the case of infants some may say they must unavoidably lie under wrath if this once be admitted that by nature they are the children of wrath I answer the consequences is not good for though by nature they are lyable to wrath yet they do not unavoidably lie under a necessity of perishing As for example David by his murther and adultery Peter by the denial of his Master and Paul by persecuting of the Church did fall under wrath yet wrath did not seize upon them So infants though by nature they are the children of wrath yet that wrath due unto the sinne of the nature doth not lay hold upon them because Christ hath satisfied the justice of God Secondly if it be further alledged that they which live out of the bosome of the visible Church must lie under a necessity of perishing not onely because by nature they are the children of wrath but because they want the Gospel the means of their salvation Here I answer though they want the most effectual outward means yet they do not simply want all the means Nay I may affirme there is no man whose eyes are truly opened thorough the conviction of the Spirit to see his lost condition who is under an absolute necessity of perishing For God who is a God of grace and mercy is ready to help them that come to him in a sense of their misery We have a proof for this in the words of Hanain the Prophet to Asah the King the eyes of the Lord run to and fro through the whole earth to shew himself strong in the behalf of them whose heart is perfect towards him 1 Chr. 16.9 He doth not speak in the case of Asah or of the family of David alone but the words are more general the eyes of the Lord go thorough the whole earth to help all those whosoever they be that have perfect hearts toward him From whence I gather that men are not left under an unavoidable necessity of perishing Thus I have gone thorough all the arguments brought by Mr. Everard to prove the purity of the natural birth and where the Examiners have pitched upon the same reasons I have taken them in for company What is proper and peculiar to them alone shall be handled in the ensuing discourse The second Book containeth the Answer to the Examiners of the late Assemblies Confession SECT 1. IN the Chapter concerning Original sinne they do first endeavour to bring such Scriptures as seem to make for their own purpose And here they pitch upon that image of God that man is said to retain since his fall Gen. 9. Our answer is though men may be said to have that image and may carry the resemblance thereof yet this doth not disprove their being born in original sinne Notwithstanding
none have the guilt of Adams sinne but such onely that partake of his nature For in the next Chapter when the Apostle cometh to speak of sanctification he hath these words know ye not that our Old man is crucified with him that the body of sinne might be destroyed Rom. 6.6 By the old man he means the sinful disposition of the flesh derived from Adam the root of corruption So then the Scripture plainly doth shew that the opposition between both the Adams doth not onely stand in imputation of guilt but also in the propagation of the nature And it is a great wonder that any exception can be made against so plain a truth Thus I have passed through all the material objections and we have seen all of moment that can be said if it might be possible to take this Scripture out of our hands Now he comes to forme the state of the question to shew how farre he allowes original sinne and where he differs from us Because this is the foot of the work let him deliver himselfe in his own words Adams sinne saith he was punished by an expulsion out of Paradise in which was a tree appointed to be the cure of diseases and the conservatory of life There was no more told as done but this and its proper consequents He came into a land lesse blessed a land which bore thistles and bryars c. And then he addeth thus death came in not by any new sentence or change of nature for man was created mortal and if Adam had not sinned he should have been immortal by grace that is by the use of the tree of life and now being driven from the place where the tree grew was left in his own natural constitution that is to be sick and dye without that remedy And he further explaineth himselfe pag. 372. This evil which is the condition of all our natures viz. to dye was to some a punishment to others not so It was a punishment to all that sinned both before Moses and since upon the first it fell as a consequent of Gods anger upon Adam upon the latter it fell as a consequent of that anger threatned in Moses his law But to those that sinned not at all as infants and innocents it was meerly a condition of their nature and no more a punishment than to be a child is It was a punishment of Adams sin because by his sin humane nature came to be disrobed of their preternatural immortality and therefore upon that account they dye But as it is related to the persons it was not a punishment not an evil inflicted for their sake or any guiltinesse of their own properly so called And then going on he saith we finde nothing else in Scripture exprest to be the effect of Adams sin and beyond this without authority we must not go Turning his style against us he addeth other things are said but I finde no warrant for them in that sence as they are usually supposed and some of them in no sence at all Then he cometh to particularize The particulars saith he commonly reckoned are that from Adam we derive an original ignorance a pronenesse to sin a fomes or nest of sin imprinted and placed in our souls a losse of our wills liberty and nothing else left but a liberty to sin which liberty upon the summe of affaires is expounded a necessity to sin and the effect of all is we are borne heires of damnation These are the particulars which he excepts against and these he endeavours with all his might to oppugne we will go in the same method as he doth beginning with original ignorance he thus speaketh It is true saith he that we derive it from our Parents I meane we are borne with it but I do not know that any man thinks that if Adam had not sinned that sin Cain should have been wise as soon as his navel had been cut Answ We cannot so precisely determine what Adams children should have been in innocency because he did not continue so long to beget a child in that pure estate yet I think none may doubt had he begotten children in that estate he had conveied the same image of God the same knowledge respecting the kind of it that himselfe was created in And though in respect of actual knowledge Cain should not have been wise as soon as his navel was cut yet in respect of potential knowledge he should have been borne in a capacity and by degrees should have attained the same knowledge as Adam himselfe was created in But he further argues If he had so great knowledge saith he it is likely that he would not so cheaply have sold himselfe and all his hopes out of a greedy appetite to get some knowledge Answ The Apostle St. Jude tells us The Angels that left their first habitation are kept in chaines of darknesse to the judgement of the great day v. 6. Shall we say then because they did so cheaply leave their first habitation was there no such dignity or excellency in it The way of reasoning is one and the same in substance He goeth on The state of ignorance we do derive from Adam as we do our nature which is a state of ignorance and all manner of imperfection but whether it was not imperfect and apt to fall into forbidden instances we may best guesse it by the event Answ We may guesse by the event that he was made in a state from which he might fall but this doth no way hinder his being a spiritual man or that endowment of spiritual knowledge which he had before his fall First by his fall he did lose in his judgement he and all mankind did fall from faith to unbelief and hence it is that ever since for happinesse all men rely upon their own wit learning beauty strength friends riches nobility c. This plainly sheweth that Adam at the first was made in a state of dependance upon the true God which could not be but he must be endued with a great measure of spiritual knowledge and in his judgement at least he must discerne that excellency that is in God Further the Apostle speaketh ye have put on the new man which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him Col. 3.10 By knowledge he doth not point so much to that which is literal hystorical and textual but to that which is spiritual by which the Saints come to be cloathed with a new nature Secondly he saith is renewed which importeth the restitution of that knowledge that man once had but had lost by his fall In a sence therefore we may say that the knowledge of the Saint is a kinde of remembrance and that saying of Plato is not to much out of the way Thirdly is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him This plainly sheweth that in the old and the new creation a man is made after the image of God and this image doth
whether it be traduced or which way soever it be conveyed we must necessarily affirme in the continuall flux of original sinne from father to child each father doth propagate it to his child as Adam did to the whole posterity If this be not a real truth what shall we make of the speech of our Saviour that which is born of the flesh is flesh Joh. 3.6 The Father then doth propagate the corruption of nature to his child as he himself did first receive it by propagation We must needs then yield the truth of the thing though there be some difficulty in the discovery of the manner But that which doth very much satisfie me in this point is the consideration of that speech to Adam and in him to all mankind be fruitful and multiply replenish the earth and subdue it Gen. 1.28 From whence I gather that the propagation of mankind doth chiefly depend upon this promise established in the beginning And therefore suppose that be true which you say that the soul doth come immediately from God the question is whether in matter of generation in matter of union of the soul with the body in matter of propagation of the kind the child doth not depend upon the father as the branch doth upon the root And doth not the Lord continue still to performe that promise that he made in the beginning Surely by what power the earth doth continue to bring forth herbs and every thing doth fructifie according to its kind by the same ordinance blessing and promise of God doth the father beget the child to continue a posterity upon the earth To the right solution of the question then we must give a double answer For if it be demanded in the first place why a man doth generate a man It is from the Ordinance and blessing of God and from that fundamental Law increase and multiply But if it be further inquired why a sinful father doth continue to beget a sinful child the traduction of original sinne is from Adam the common root of the corruption of nature ever since the fall For the fountain being corrupted the corruption doth go down the stream and is in perpetual flux and succession from the Spring head But to make the matter good you go on If the soules and spirits of all that stock that came from Adam should have been lineally derived then they must have returned again to him page 228. This doth not follow for by the like reason why do you not argue concerning the branches and leaves of all the trees and forests in the world because they have their derivation from the root therefore they must return into the root again But you adde further admit say you we had such a being in Adam as the branches had in the tree and produce actions in a natural way being prone thereunto yet that which is to be expected must have been such fruits as were natural to the tree and no other but sinne was no natural fruit but an accident page 129. Indeed if you take nature in its first essence and institution it is good and all sinne is unnatural and accidental but if you take nature in its vicious qualities as it is since the fall then it is depraved in Adam and our immediate parents are so many conduit-pipes of the corruption of nature If this be not so what can be the meaning of our Saviours words that which is born of flesh is flesh This sheweth plainly that Adam is not onely the root of nature but also since the fall a root of the corruption of nature and upon this ground lyes a necessity of regeneration or having a new nature from Christ the second Adam Thirdly you say If we must own all Adams actions sinful as our acts then pray give me leave to appropriate as large a portion in all his good actions For why should I not plead for as much propriety in all his good actions as some will perswade me I have in all his evill actions seeing I was as much in him before the fall as since And then I might say as well that I walked in the Garden and drest it and gave names to all creatures page 129. If this will give you content I know nothing to the contrary but we may affirme that all mankind were in Adam when he walked in the Garden and gave names to all cattell And without question you should have had as great a part in his good actions if he had stood as now you have a share in the evil of that action by which he fell To make this appear in that state as we are now restored by Christ Man hath Lordship and Dominion over the creature If you will fetch this dominion from that great Charter Let them have dominion over the fish of the Sea the fowle of the aire c. Gen. 1.26 Then you must needs conclude that the priviledge which was given to Adam was given to all his posterity Yea in that particular case when the Lord brought all creatures to Adam to see what names he would give them he did bring the creatures to him as to the head of all mankind and he not onely in his own private but in their publick right did give names to all cattell The like may be said of the institution of marriage in the beginning of a mans leaving his father and mother and cleaving to his wife This did not so immediately concern Adam in his own person as all mankind that should come of him in succeeding generations Mat. 19.4 Fourthly you say If all men did sinne in Adam when he did eate the forbiden fruit why might it not as well be said when Adam beleeved I beleeved when Adam repented I repented page 130. I answer the case is not equal for when Adam did eate the forbidden fruit he did this as a publick person as the root of all mankind but when he did believe he did that as a particular member of Christ I may say on the other side when Christ suffered upon the Crosse to satisfie the justice of God this was all one as if Adam and Paul themselves had satisfied the justice of God What Christ did he did for them and when he did it they did it in him and by him The like answer may be given to that question why do not the regenerate propagate grace as well as original sinne The answer is plain piety is not hereditary as original sinne is neither doth holinesse come into us by nature but by grace not generation but regeneration doth intitle us to salvation And therefore in the aforementioned case when Adam did beget Cain in his own likenesse he did not beget him as the sonne of his faith but the sonne of his corrupt nature The same may be said of the natural Progeny of all believers they are born in original sinne as well as the children of Infidels The Jew that was circumcised himself begat one that was
too much and to these the exhortation is given in special that they should be humbled and become as little children There lyeth then a palpable and grosse fallacy in your whole discourse when you take the words absolutely that all infants are free from sinne when our Saviour speaketh in a particular sense only of the act and execution of this or that particular evil Now you proceed and tell us it was never heard that children had any sinne by way of act and by way of omission you cannot make it good that they ever received a command or were capable of any command from God page 138. Answ What we have learned we are willing to acknowledge and though we never heard that infants had any sinne in them by any act of their own yet we have learned from Scriptures yea from the very first principles of the faith that they have it by contagion and the disobedience of the first man The words of our Saviour are plain Joh. 3.8 That which is born of the flesh is flesh And that of the Apostle Rom. 5.12 By one man sinne entred into the world and death by sinne And many such places there are to prove infants to be guilty of sinne by the disobedience of the first man and to be involved in the pollution of nature by hereditary contagion But because you and the Examiners are so strict upon the point I pray you resolve me in this one case When the promise was made the seed of the woman shall break the Serpents head was not this the promise of Christ to Adam after his fall If infants therefore are absolutely acquitted from the guilt of Adams sinne as being another mans act if they be free from the pollution of nature to what end was the promise of Christ How did he come in the nature of a Physician to cure when there was no disease Where there is no malady there needs no remedy And whereas you go about to free infants from the sinne of omission because they are not capable of a command I pray you shew the reason why the Lord was so strict in his command to the Jewish infant that he should be circumcised upon the eighth day and that the uncircumcised man-child should be cut off from his people Gen. 17.11.12 c. For my part I know no reason of the strictnesse of this Law but that the Lord would signifie to beleevers under this dispensation that there infants were born in original sinne and that it was not safe to omit the remedy for that disease And though in strictnesse of termes we will yeeld so farre to Corvinus and to Julian the Pelagian that there is no particular command that forbids an infant to be born in original sinne yet for all this they must needs allow that the Law was given to reveal to convince and to discover the sinne of the nature and by the discovery thereof to drive a man to Christ to look to him onely for sanctifying and regenerating glrace S. Paul saith the Law is spiritual and I am carnal sold under sinne And in the same text I had not known sinne except the Law had said thou shalt not covet Rom. 7. You go on for this sinne called original if infants had committed it God would have called them to repentance for it when they had come to years at least wise but I can safely say that there is no man living that to this day ever made it appear to be the mind of God for any man to repent of that sinne Truly Sir your confidence is very great and you have more boldnesse than truth on your side For we may beleeve that you never heard of the promises nor the commands mentioned in Scripture when you dare affirme such things as these When the Lord promiseth in the new Covenant I will take out of their bowels a heart of stone and will give them a heart of flesh Ezek. 36. By the heart of stone he means a hard heart and a sinful nature that every infant did bring into the world he doth promise to take away the corruption of nature and that he will sanctifie his people by his Spirit So for the commands of God we read every where that men are exhorted to put off the Old Adam-like disposition That ye put off concerning the former conversation the Old man which is corrupt according to the deceivable lusts Ephes 4.22 By the Old man he doth mean the carnal disposition which we have from Adam by natural generation This corrupted disposition of the flesh he would have the beleeving Ephesians and in them all others to subdue and mortifie And further if you look to the right use of Baptisme now as of circumcision of old you shall finde that the institution of these things doth primarily intend the doing away of the sinne of the nature as I have already shewed in my Treatise of Infant Baptisme Therefore I cannot but admire at your boldnesse when you stand so much upon it that you can safely say that God never called men to repentance for original sinne I am so farre from your judgment that I think the greatest part of repentance lyes in the mortification of the sinne of the nature But you have an evasion this sinne called original sinne if infants had committed it God would have called them to repentance Here you put that upon us which we do not speak and I know no solid Writer in the world that doth use such an expression of committing original sinne It is proper onely to men of ripe years to commit sinne For original sin we say that is onely by propagation thorough the disobedience of the first man and when men come to be sanctified by the Spirit of God they are qualified with inward principles to purge out the sin of the nature Neither doth your argument drawn from the example of Christ any whit promote your cause You say If this principle should finde a being in the world that every infant was born in sinne because lineally derived from Adam then where will you get water to wash your hands of that grand absurdity to wit that Jesus Christ was not free from original sinne for then he must have a share because he came from the loynes of a woman the Daughter of Adam page 139. To this I answer if you will make Christ and all Infants to run parallel in the purity of their natural birth then why did Christ die for them why did he sanctifie their nature There is no need of salvation by the merit of Chri st where there is no guilt of sinne There needs no sanctification of the Spirit where there is no pollution of nature Why do not you exclude all Infants from these as you do from the water of baptisme For your Argument drawn from the example of Christ If you build so much upon that I would entreat you to consider two things First why he did assume our nature Secondly assuming our
nature how came he to be exempt from original sinne For the first he did assume our nature with all the miseries thereof sinne onely excepted that he might make expiation of sin in that nature that had sinned He did not take the nature of Adam before his fall nor that humane nature which the Saints shall have in the state of glory but meerely the nature of man clothed with all the infirmities thereof to sanctifie that nature and to satisfie divine justice To this purpose the Apostle speaketh Rom. 8.3 What the Law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh God sent his Son in the similitude of sinful flesh and for sinne condemned sinne in the flesh In these words we may note that because Christ came in the similitude of sinful flesh all flesh besides his of infants as well as others was sinful flesh onely Christ came in the similitude of sinful flesh He had the reality of our nature with all the miseries thereof onely he was born in the similitude of our sinfulnesse that he might satisfie the justice of God And for the second point how he came to be free from original sinne this is plainly expressed in the articles of the Creed He was conceived by the Holy Ghost born of the Virgin Mary For his conception that part of the Virgins flesh was so sanctified by the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit that it might be free from the natural contagion and that the nature of God and the nature of man together might make one person And that which may further amplifie the truth of this Christ was not born by vertue of that promise increase and multiply for this since the fall hath filled the world with sinners but he was born by vertue of the special promise the seed of the woman shall break the Serpents head And this is the true reason for though Christ was born of the Virgin Mary a Daughter of Adam though he had the common nature of all mankind for truth and substance yet he was made free from original sinne by the mean of a wonderful generation And in this matter by way of retortion we may turn your own weapons upon your self and upon the Examiners For if that be true that all infants are free from natural pollution what need was there that the Son of God should be conceived by the Holy Ghost and be born of the Virgin Mary His conception needed not to have been by the Holy Ghost in case the natural generation did not necessarily inforce the propagation of original sinne These extraordinary means would have been superfluous in case he might have been exempt from all sinne in the ordinary way The arguments which you further alledge are as invalid as the former You say If we were in the transgression assoon as Adam himself how come we to derive it from him page 139. To the satisfying of this doubt I would entreat you to distinguish between the things that are attributed to Adam as a publick man and the things that are ascribed to him as a particular person If you speak of his publick relations as the root and head of all his posterity It is true what he did we did in him we were in the transgression assoon as himself was his sin was not so much his own as the sin of the humane nature But if you speak of him as a particular person according to the order of existence he is the first of the race and so in succession of generations all that were in the corrupted masse as they come to be born severally and individually to derive from him In a sense therefore it is true that we were in the transgression assoon as himself was It is the Apostles own expression in whom all have sinned Yet in flux and succession of generations it is as true that he did go before and all others did follow after in their respective times Next you argue If we sinned in him why might not we have sinned without him how came we all to be of one mind page 139. You may I confesse make such a supposition and a thousand more of the like kind and there will be no end of your cavilling But the Scriptures tell us plainly that one man was made in the beginning he was the root of all mankind and by this one man sinne entred into the world If this seem harsh to you to the Examiners and to others that all should be brought under a necessity of sinning and perishing by the disobedience of one man this should pacifie your minds that all are brought under a possibility of salvation by the obedience of the second man This is the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles Take heed then lest by diminishing the sinne of the first man you do not take away from the grace and the blessing brought in by the second If your nature was never defiled what need have you of a Christ What need of a new nature What need of regeneration of the Spirit I hope the Examiners and you will not say that these are onely for the purging out of actual sinne or the habit of sin got by imitation Let us now come to hear your admirations I strange say you at your hard thoughts of Adam that he had more pronenesse to sinne after the fall than before If you can bring no proof for what you say for this or for the like case then you must excuse my infidelity in the point You proceed after that manner as your brethren do they desire to have their infidelity excused because they do not read in so many letters and syllables of the Baptisme of infants in the new Testament And so here you do not read of such and such particular sinnes which Adam did commit after his fall and therefore you desire to be excused for your unbeleef in that point But Sir If you would look to the harmony of Scripture you should finde that this testimony is not onely given of Adam but also of all his posterity God saw the wickednesse of man that it was great in the earth and that every imagination of the thought of his heart was onely evil from his childhood Gen. 6.5 If every imagination of his heart was evil from his childhood then there must be some particular time assigned where this universal corruption and depravation of nature did begin If it did begin at the fall as there begin it must then you must also necessarily conclude that Adam had a greater pronenesse to sin after the fall than he had before But say you If it could be proved that Adam sinned ten thousand times afterward must we therefore set all his sinnes upon the first sinnes score page 142 As difficult a point as you make of it the Apostle doth set all upon the disobedience of the first man as he doth put all upon the obedience of the second man As by the disobedience of one many were made sinners so by the
obedience of one many were made righteous Rom. 5.19 The comparison would be of no value at all if that which is peculiarly spoken to Adam might be applied to any other parent whatsoever in respect of his posterity And of the sinnes which Adam did commit we are not to admire why all are set upon the score of the first sinne When he received original righteousnesse in the beginning he received it not onely for himself but also for his whole posterity And therefore if he had stood he had conveyed it to all his branches but falling he lost it from himself and all his off-spring And this is the reason why all is charged upon the first sinne because that was the sinne of a fiduciary or trustee The parent was entrusted with the whole stock which was not only his own peculiar but also the publick losse of all his posterity If we might suppose that Adam did commit ten thousand sinnes afterward the hurt could not redound to any other but to himself onely For how could he bring dammage to small or great by any disobedient act seeing he was trusted no more You now come to declare your judgment why say you might we not have thought it more safe that that which gave the first occasion to sinnes being was yet the original cause of all other sins committed by him What need we yet to say that sin had any other father or mother than its first parents viz the Devil and temptation Joh. 8.44 Answ I do not deny but in a sense the Devil and temptation may be called the parents of sinne because wicked men are led by the temptations of Satan and do imitate his example But strange it is that you would have no other parents but the Devil and temptation This is in plain termes to excuse men and to make them without blame when any sinne is committed The Apostle doth otherwise state the true cause of sinne every man is drawn away with his own lust and enticed and lust when it hath conceived bringeth forth sinne Jam. 1.13 The sinful will of man and the lust of his heart may be a cause that doth procreate sinne as well as the Devil and temptation And more specially to speak in the case we are now upon concerning the sinne of the first man and the traducing of original sinne to all posterity I do not doubt but the Devil and temptation had a great stroak in the fall of man but we must go to other causes as well as to them Adams own defective will was a chief cause And therefore we read of the great judgments that were inflicted upon him for his disobedience to the command And for that place of Scripture which you alledge Joh. 8.44 He that committeth sinne is of the Devil it is most true that men commit sin by the temptation of the Devil but how doth this prove the point which you undertake that the Devil is the onely parent of sinne and that we need go to no other but to him onely Besides in the case of original sinne as the corruption of nature doth passe by propagation the Apostle saith we must go to one man as the fountain by one man sinne entred into the world and death by sinne c. And therefore if to salve your Tenet you shall alledge that speech you are of your Father the Devil the lusts of your father will you do By this I do confesse that the Devil is proved the first parent of sinne by infusion and suggestion but he is not the father by generation And therefore when the Apostle saith put off as concerning the former conversation the Old man which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts Ephes 4.22 Here by the Old man we are to understand the Old Adam like disposition as it hath passed from Adam to all his posterity This old disposition the Saints are to put off and they are to endeavour to put on the Christ-like nature So then if you will say that the Devil was the first father of sinne by temptation and seduction we will not gain-say it Onely we do intreat you to remember that Adam is the cause of the conveying of original sinne to all his posterity by generation and traduction You have yet more evasions if it might be possible to illude the truth If Adam say you had sinned afterwards how can we say that he had a way to communicate it to all his posterity It is more then the Devil can do to infuse sinne into any man without a mans consent page 142. This is true if you speak in the case of actual sinne onely but for the derivation of original sinne the case is otherwise The corruption of nature is derived from the disobedience of the first man His personal disobedience was sufficient to deprave and vitiate the whole nature ☞ This may be proved by the harmony of Scripture and there is no harshnesse in the point so long as there is such an effectual remedy prepared by the second man for the lost sonnes of men And yet further though the first man by his fall did vitiate the nature without any individual or personal consent of ours yet the lying and living in the sinfulnesse of nature is not without our deliberate and free consent This is the condemnation that light is come into the world and men love darknesse more than light Joh. 3.18 19 20. God doth at sundry seasons open the eyes of men that they may see their natural pollution but they have not a desire to see that which they may see Further you adde some say the want of pure nature is the cause of our sinne but it is plain that the purity of nature exempts not a man from sinne for if it had then Adam had not sinned page 142. We would not have you to mistake our meaning we do not stand so much upon the want of the purity of nature as upon the pollution and depravation of nature And this since the fall is no onely the cause of sinning but also is the true cause why we can do nothing else but sinne And this begins to appear to those who are sanctified by the Spirit and therefore the Apostle saith in me that is in my flesh dwelleth no good thing For other kind of men they do not feel the burden of a carnal mind As a bucket of water weighs nothing in the Well but when it is removed from its proper element then the weight thereof is discerned Pride of heart and other secret lusts are not burdensome to a carnal man who is in his proper element but a spiritual man feels the enmity of these against the command of God and sees by experience that according to the flesh he can do nothing else but sin Further you alledg that it is like that Adam would not have sinned again because he sped so ill page 142. I beleeve it was with him after his fall as it was with David after
his two sinnes of murder and adultery David when he had committed those sinnes did look to the fountain of his misery as it did lye in the pollution of the natural birth I was shapen in iniquity and in sinne did my mother conceive me Hereupon he did pray unto the Lord that he would create in him a new heart Even so Adam after his fall was able to see his miserie when his eyes were opened but he was not as you suggest like a burned child able of himself to take heed of the fire All the ability that he had was by looking to the promise and the same ability we now have to help us out of our natural corruption Our Saviour told the Jewes if the Sonne will make you free ye shall be free indeed Joh. 8.36 By freedome we are to understand not such a civil immunity as Emperors and Kings do give but a freedome from the bondage and vassalage of corruption And therefore when the Jewes made him this answer that they were Abrahams children and never in bondage to any man his reply was he that committeth sin is the servant of sin v. 33 34. The slavery of sin is the bondage that is here meant and there is no other way to be freed but by Christ onely Further you say we cannot prove that Adam did subject himself to any temptation after the fall pag. 143. What if we do not read in so many letters and syllables that he did subject himself to temptation can you therefore probably collect that he was free from all sinne and that he did resist all temptations Again suppose that after his fall he did resist many temptations yet as the strongest Christian may fall when God doth leave him and the weakest may stand when the Lord will uphold him with his supporting grace Even so Adam being without all original sinne being left to himself to try what free-will could do might fall in a state of natural purity And being supported by the Spirit to shew what grace could do might be able to stand in a state of natural corruption Therefore all that you have said doth not any way inforce an equality of the states or that a mans ability was as great after as it was before the fall Now let us go to the third Scripture and were by nature the children of wrath as well as others Ephes 2 3. Here to support the purity of nature and to avoid the force of this text you have many evasions and shifts let us hear them as they come in their order There are say you natural men that discern not the things of God neither can do for a man cannot go East and West at one and the same time neither serve two Masters to be true to them both page 145. I confesse it is true that a man cannot go East and West at one and the same time but our question is whether any natural man meerely as natural without the inspiration of the Spirit can go any other way but that which is meerely enmity against God The Apostle saith the natural man perceiveth not the things of the Spirit of God because they are foolishnesse to him neither can he perceive them because they are spiritually to be discerned 1 Cor. 2.14 He speaketh this of the Philosophers and other Grecians who had improved nature to the highest To these the preaching of the Crosse was foolishnesse They could discern the wisedome of Plato and the depth of Aristotle but the wisedome of Christ they were not able to discern Hereupon in the three first Chapters of the Epistle the Apostle doth largely dispute that the knowledge of these things doth meerely come by the inward teaching and revelation of the Spirit And then he shutteth up the dispute with this coronis If any man seem to be wise in this world let him become a fool that he may be wise A fool is one that hath no wit he is not able to speak for himself or to help himself The way then to know Christ is not by the advancement of natural abilities but rather by the true sight of inability and the lost condition we are fallen into Aristotle was a Philosopher of great name amongst the Grecians yet of all the books that he wrote of all the speeches that he spake in none of them all he came nearer to God than in that speech which he is reported for to speak O ens entium miserere mei O thou being of beings have mercy upon me The first step to salvation doth beginne with the sight of misery and the next is to looke after the free grace and mercie of God But you go on and tell us nature simply so considered as it is created of God cannot oppose any spiritual light but comply with those things which God holds forth unto it page 146. Here we desire you to keep to the state of the question we are not upon the debate of nature in its purity but of nature as it is since the fall If you speak of nature created in the beginning nature is good nature cannot oppose any spiritual light and it is serviceable to those ends for which God made it But as strictly as both you and the Examiners stand for such a natural purity I would entreat you to shew the man in all Asia Africa Europe or America that hath this purity this integrity of nature But if you speak of nature vitiated and corrupted the Scriptures do every where make mention of such a nature that it is enmity against God that it is not subject to the Law of God nor can be And therefore when the Examiners in the Chapter of free wil do plead so strongly that there are some good things in natural men as in Herod and Balaam and that all natural men are not equally corrupt what of all this this doth not prove the goodnesse of nature For that some natural men have some inward workings in them it is from the convictions of the Spirit and that some are lesse evil then others it is from the bar of restraining grace Otherwise take a natural man as meerly natural he is not subject to the Law of God nor can be Rom. 8.7 As it may be seen in this familiar instance When men are enemies to the State and will not have them to reign over them all the money horses armour Cities Castles that they can get into their power are employed to set up another Law and to supplant the power that is over them So all the endeavours of a natural man all his principles and his reasonings are to pluck down Christ and to set up his own excellency And therefore the natural mind is enmity against God Next you cite two Scriptures concerning sins against nature Backbiters haters of God despitefull proud boasters inventors of evil things disobedient to parents without understanding Covenant-breakers without natural affection Rom. 1.30 31. 2 Tim. 3.3 From hence you draw this conclusion to be
not break Mat. 12.20 Come unto me all ye that are weary and heavy laden Mat. 11.28 Will not your heavenly Father give his Spirit to them that ask it Luk. 11.13 and many more places of the like nature This is the whole answer which our Divines do commonly give when they speak of the necessity of sinning and of the inability which is brought upon man by the fall of Adam In this case they do not simply and absolutely deny all abilitie for then of what use would exhortations reproofes and commands be Only they deny a natural ability and such an ability which our Author seems to plead for Next he tells us It is all one with the case of voluntary and affected ignorance He that refuseth knowledge lest he should understand his duty and he that disables himselfe that he may not do it may be punisht not only for not doing it but for making it impossible to be done But that was not Adams case so far as we know it is certaine that it was not ours in the matter of his sin Answ We confesse that we did neither personally nor individually disable our selves in the matter of his sinne but he that stood in our stead did voluntarily disable himself and us too And therefore his will doth interpretively virtually and potentially go for the will of the whole nature as we have formerly proved Perhaps he will say how can we be justly punished if we are disabled by the act of another This would have some colour provided that there were no Christ no grace no mercy to be had Our great fault is that we do not seek for help where help is to be found But saith he If a man commits a fault that doth accidentally disable him as if he eate too much and be sick the next day and fall into a fever he may indeed and is justly punished for his gluttony but he is not punishable for omitting that which in his present weaknesse he can no way performe Answ Here he speaks as if we did leave men to strive with an unavoidable necessity whereas the necessity of sinning is not absolute for that which is unavoidable by nature may be avoidable by grace And to the particular case suppose a centinal drink too much and through his default a great party of the Army come to have their throats cut will he say that he is onely to be punished for his drunkennesse but is not punishable for the omitting of that which in his present weaknesse he was not able to performe By the laws of the land he should onely pay five shillings Next he saith In lawes to be imposed afterwards the case is otherwise because the persons are not capable of any such law and God knowing they cannot performe cannot intend they should and therefore cannot justly punish them for not doing which himselfe did never heartily intend they should do because he knew they could not Ans If this be so let him give a reason why the old world was drowned in the waters of the flood All flesh had corrupted their way and if he himself may beleived the reason was not so much from the corruption of nature but because Gods laws did command such things which were a restraint to the indifferent and otherwise lawful inclinations of nature Besides he tells us that they had no spiritual promises in those times The commands were heightned above all natural abilities spiritual promises were denyed God never intended if he speak true that his Laws should be obeyed he knew they could not Let him fairly tell us the reason then why the old world was drowned Now on the contrary we say no such thing the commandment was given to Adam in proportion to the abilities he had in possession he falling all ability is to be had from Christ in the covenant of grace And there was a covenant of grace sutable to the times that were before the flood Jesus Christ yesterday and today and the same for ever Heb. 13.8 But now in the close of this Section we will speak a little practically to the purpose in hand You will say why doth God give commands above natural ability It is to this end that in the sense of their own emptinesse men should go to Christ when they so come they shall be graciously received You will say how doth that appear I answer As by the general tenders of the Word so specially by that place Ho every one that thirsteth come ye to the waters and he that hath no money come ye buy and eat yea come by wine and milk without money and without price Isaiah 55.1 Here many things are to be observed First by wine and milk are understood the spiritual comforts and excellencies of the Gospel for as wine and milk are truely refreshing to the bodies of men So are these really sweet to their spiritual taste Secondly by buying of wine and milk is meant the earnest seeking after these things in all those wayes that the Lord hath sanctified and in all those means where they may be found Thirdly without money or price It would be thought a solecisme in merchandizing to buy a Cow and Horse and a parcel of Sheep and give no money for them Usually men buy when they give an equivolent price But in matter of salvation we have no ability of our own all ability is to be had from the freenesse and fulness of the promise Fourthly the persons invited Ho every one that thirsteth come to the waters c. In matters of the world men may have a great desire after riches long life honours favour of Princes popular applause and yet they may never attain what they desire nay the thing desired as their own shadow may flee from them But in matters of salvation the case is otherwise If men truly desire and continue desiring praying longing waiting they cannot misse what they desire The greatest part of the work is done already and all the residue doth remain upon the fidelity and the truth of the Promiser to make good Lastly it is spoken to every one that thirsteth There are divers degrees and kinds of spiritual thirsting some that are scorched with the feeling of the wrath of God earnestly desire salvation and remission of sinne by Christs blood and these commonly are the first desires of those that are babes in Christ Others feeling the bondage of corruption do as earnestly long for that spiritual freedome that is to be had from the Son A third sort go higher they desire the excellency of Christ purely for that excellency that is in himself they do not love him so much for his portion as for his person I count all things but losse for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord Phil. 3.8 A fourth sort go to the highest point They love the appearing of the Lord Jesus which others do tremble at and the Spirit and the Bride say come and let him that heareth say
bondage of the soul under the tyranny of a carnal mind Sixthly He addeth that David thought nothing of this or any thing like it we may understand by the preceding words which are a preface to these in the objection against thee only have I sinned Reply We willingly yield that it was the purpose of David to cleare the justice of God but here is no need to call his justice in question for though David was borne in sin the act of murther and adultery were the deeds of his own will besides the lust of his heart might have been cured by the grace of God Seaventhly saith he if this had been natural and unavoidable God who knew perfectly well would have expected nothing else of him For he will not require of a stone to speak nor a fire to be cold unlesse himself be pleased to work a miracle to have them so Repl. The case is not all one It is not in the nature of stones to speak but men may avoid many outward acts of sinne and the evil of their natural disposition may be mortified by the Spirit The Apostle speaking of certain that had eyes full of adulery that cannot cease from sinne 2 Pet. 2.14 Our Authour in his answer to the Bishops letter doth expound 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 eyes full of the adulteresse therefore they cannot cease from sin This sheweth how hard it is to escape adultery when men have received the beauty of the adulteresse into their eye Why then are Laws made against this sinne It is in their power outwardly to fly such occasions that lead thereto The wise man saith remove thy way farre from her and come not neare the doore of her house Is not this too precise and strict a point No some mens natures are like tinder to the fire they must not onely fly sinnes but all occasions that lead thereto Now it is plain that in these things men have a power to forbear the evil and therefore the wise man accordingly doth temper his exhortation And for the lust of the heart though a man cannot flee from it yet God is able to give more grace which he is alway ready to do to those who in the sense of their own emptinesse do flee to him for help Where is the man that did ever truely desire and continue desiring helps against his infirmities that God did ever neglect If this could be proved then something may be said to the purpose Now we go to the next Scripture Among whom we in all times past had our conversation in the lusts of the flesh fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind and were by nature the children of wrath as well as others He hath many observations upon the words of this text This therefoore saith he as appears by the discourse of the Apostle relates not to riginal sinne but to actual Repl. It relates to both as the Ephesians had their conversation in the lusts of the flesh and did fulfill the lusts of the flesh and minde so it doth relate to actual sinne But as they were by nature the children of wrath this is with reference to original sinne And whereas he doth bring in Justin Martyr arguing upon this ground that therefore it cannot be extended to Christ we willingly yield that Christ is an exempt person by reason of his extraordinary birth and conception but then in Justines sense all else infants as well as others will partake of the sinne of the nature But he further addes Heires of wrath signifies persons liable to punishment heires of death It is an usual expression among the Hebrewes So sons of death in the holy Scripture are those that deserve death or are condemned to dye Repl. It is true that the Hebrews call a man the son of death that hath deserved death specially when he is condemned to die Though all this be granted it doth not void the force of our reason for we do not argue so much from the Apostles words that the Ephesians before conversion were the children of wrath but from those words were by nature the children of wrath The scope of all which is to shew that they were not onely subjected to wrath through a sinful conversation but through an evil nature the root of that evil conversation If therefore our Authour or any man else will make use of the Hebrew Idiotisme the words will go fairely in this sense that the beleeving Ephesians both by the condition of the natural birth and the whole course of their conversation as they did serve divers lusts and pleasures were liable to wrath and the onely mean by which they did escape was the quickning and enlivening work of the Spirit by and through which they were brought out of that estate in which they were born But he hath another evasion By nature is here most likely to be meant that which Galen calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an acquisite nature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 customes and evil habits Repl. If we would apply our selves to authours and to the ordinary speech of men custome and nature are usually opposed each to other In some cases a man may be said to have a thing both by nature and custome very rarely or never we say that custome is nature Sometimes men speak in a more general sense that custome is as it were a second nature But because he stands upon it that it is most likely that the words of the Apostle are meant onely of custome and acquired nature for so he desires to speak then by this rule we must say that the beleeving Ephesians before conversion were by ill custome onely the children of wrath If this be so why doth the Apostle say you hath he quickned who were dead in trespasses and sinnes What need of the infusion of a new life to bring them off off an ill custome In such a case it were onely requisite to reduce nature to her original purity and to amend that by good usuages which ill customes had marred Besides seeing several Nations have their customes was it a peculiar custome to the Ephesians Or was it common to all Nations to be the children of wrath It was peculiar to the Ephesians then they onely had need of the infusion of a new life If it was common to all Nations How did they all generally agree in such a custome And what was the cause of the agreement Besides seeing there are some in their tender years of whom we may presume that they are neither quickned by grace nor hardened by ill custome whether such may be saved without the infusion of a new life yea or no If they may be saved without the infusion of a new life this will be against the scope of the Apostle who tells us they were saved from wrath by the inward quickning But if he will say that such cannot be saved without the infusion of a new life then 't is plain that by nature must be meant more than acquired
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the world of ungodly but that there were no spiritual promises in those times this we utterly deny What shall we make of that promise the seed of the woman shall breake the Serpents head What shall we make of the sacrifices were they not all figures of the blood of Christ to come Saint Peter also plainly tells us That the spirits of the fathers were disobedient in the times of the old world In what sense then doth he call them disobedient Their disobedience must be expounded in reference to the teachings convictions that they had by and through the Spirit of Christ whether in Noahs Ministry or otherwise Many more reasons might be alledged to prove that the fathers were not altogether destitute of spiritual promises If our Author will prove it let him shew how they were too blame for their disobedience But he is as strange in assigning that which he tearmes the second cause of the general impiety A second cause saith he of the general iniquity of the world is because our nature is so hard put to it in many instances Not because nature is originally corrupted but because Gods laws command such things which are a restraint to the indifferent and otherwise lawful inclinations of nature And then going on he doth in the same page explain himself more fully Our unwillingnesse and aversenesse came by occasion of the Law coming crosse upon our nature not because our nature is contrary unto God but because God was pleased to super-induce some commandments contrary to our nature For if God had commanded us to eate the best meats and to drink the richest wines as long as they could please us and were to be had I suppose it will not be thought that original sinne would hinder us from obedience But because we are forbidden to do somethings which naturally we desire to do and love therefore our nature is hard put to it and this is the cause of the difficulty So farre he page 413. 414 415 416. Reply From these and such like speeches of his I would entreat him that is so apt to condemne others to observe the rigour and the severity of his own principles First he tells us that there was no proposal of spiritual promises to the old world and then Secondly God laid such commands upon them that were altogether above their natural abilities and from the position of these two he sheweth us that the world did so generally overflow with all kind of wickednesse These things are so extreame hard that I do not finde their parallel in any of our writers They do indeed say that God giveth commands farre above natural abilities but not farre above that natural ability that Adam was furnished withall in the beginning neither above that gracious ability which God hath engaged himself to bestow in the Word of promise But to amplifie commands upon feeble flesh and to make no spiritual promises answerable to the command is plainly to make the Lord himself extreamely severe to the sons of men None of our Authours ever would allow such a severity Of all the Ancients Augustine is the Authour that seems to be most rigorous in the points of original sinne and the natural servitude of the will yet if we consider the whole scope of his doctrine he doth not come near to the severity of the position above mentioned when some did reason with him If there be no free-will to what purpose exhortations and commands I answe this he purposely wrote his book de correptione gratia the effect of which is to this purpose In commands know what thou oughtest to do in reproof know what thou hast not done through thine own default in prayer know whence thou mayst receive what thou wouldst have And when the Pelagians did vehemently inculcate that which our Authour doth so much stand upon Peccatum voluntatis an necessitatis est si necessitatis est peccatum non est si voluntatis vitari potest Sinne say they is either of the will or of necessity If it be of necessity it is no sinne if it be of the will it may be avoided To this he hath a double answer First saith he Vt sanemur in vccamus eum cui dicitur in Psalmo de necessitatibus educ me That we may be healed we call upon him to whom it is said in the Psalme bring me out of my necessities His second answer is vitari posse peccatum si natura vitiata sanetur gratiâ Dei per Jesum Christum Dominum nostrum Sinne may be avoided in case our corrupt nature may be healed by the grace of God through Jesus Christ our Lord. There would be no end if we should cite all the passages that he hath to this purpose In which he doth acknowledge that we lie under a natural necessity of sinning but yet that necessity is not absolute and irrecoverable where there is a want of ability to keep the command there he doth referre us to the ability to be had from the word of promise Of all our Authours in these latter times Luther in his treatise de servo arbitrio seemeth to speak most hard yet for all this in the case of commands above natural abilities he alwayes incourages men to go to free grace He alwayes testifies that the Law is to be preached to kill and undo a sinner to put him under the curse and under wrath that so he may come to Christ To let passe all ensamples we will come to that one instance in the beginning of the book when Erasmus did argue in this wise What profit or necessity is there to divulge such things seeing from thence so many evils may seem to arise To this he hath a double answer Prima est humiliatio nostrae superâ—â—â—â—â—â— cognitio gratiae Dei alteraipsa fides Christiana c. The first is the humiliation of our Pride and the knowledge of the grace of God the other is the Christian faith it self First God certainly hath promised his grace to the humble that is to those that are cast down and are without hope Now a man cannot be throughly humbled untill he know as wholly out of his own abilities councels studies wills workes so his salvation altogether to depend upon the disposal councell will work of another that is of God alone For as long as he is perswaded that he can do the least for his salvation he doth remaine in the trust of himself neither doth he wholly dispaire of himself Therefore is not humbled before God but presumeth upon place time or some work for himself either doth hope or at least wish for that by which he may come to salvation He therefore that doubteth not wholly to depend upon the will of God altogether dispaires of himself chooses nothing but expecteth God to work it in him and for him he is nearest to salvation More he hath to the same purpose Concerning the second reason he hath these words therefore
the Spirit So in the present case the creatures were free from sin as well as Adam but their freedom was meerly from incapacity because they were not able to receive a spiritual Law And Adams freedome was from the holinesse of that state in which the Lord had made him Therefore in the point of nontransgression Adam was put into such a state as none of the creatures could come to Next you enquire Whether the Image of God did consist in light These are your words If the light that Adam had was the Image then it must be a light spiritual or natural or both Now that it was not the light of the Gospel that Adam had is clear there being neither malady nor remedy which were in being in the time of this light page 15. Though there was neither malady nor remedy at that time yet he might have spiritual light in the substance thereof and the Image of God might principally consist in this The Apostle speaking of the regenerate hath this expression renewed in knowledge after the Image of him that created him Col. 3.10 This sheweth plainly that man in the beginning was created after the Image of God and that Image did chiefly consist in the spiritual light that was in the understanding But because there is a great controversie between the Arminians and us about the nature of this light viz. Whether Adam had a power before his fall to beleeve in Christ and because this is a point pertinent to our purpose I will briefly recite three Arguments used by Corvinus in his Answer to Du Moulin First saith he Adam was not bound to beleeve in Christ therefore he did not receive ability to beleeve in him such an ability would be unnecessary and unprofitable where there was no use of it at all Chap. 11. sect 4.5 page 156. Answ The Argument doth not hold God did not require Adam to beleeve the Stories written in the five Books of Moses the Books of Josbua Judges Samuel c. But will any man be so void of reason to argue that he had no power to beleeve these Stories in case they had been revealed to him so God did not require Abraham to beleeve in Christ as he was revealed and exhibited in the last dispensation of the promise shall we therefore argue that he had not ability to beleeve or that he had not the same spirit in substance which the Saints now have He that doth so judge let him answer the meaning of this Scripture We having the same spirit of faith according as it is written I beleeved and therefore have I spoken we also beleeve and therefore speak 2 Cor. 4.13 It is clear from hence that the Patriarchs Prophets and Apostles had all of them the same spirit of faith in substance yet all of them have not the same revelation of the promise in the circumstances thereof Secondly Corvinus saith that before the fall the Gospel was not credible because in the Gospel a sinner is commanded to believe himself to be a sinner and that by himself and his own works he cannot be saved and that all salvation is placed in Christ the Mediatour And further he addeth It was so far from man to be able to believe all these things that he was then bound rather to believe the contrary to wit himself to be upright and that he should be blessed if he did persist in his uprightnesse p. 154 162 164 165. Answ To this we willingly agree That the way to salvation as now it is doth differ very much from that state wherein Adam stood But the question is not concerning the diversitie or contrariety of the states but concerning the power and ability that Adam had whether it be one and the same in substance with that which the Saints now have White and black are two contrary colours yet the same eye doth see both Heat and cold are two qualities in the extream yet they are tangible objects to one and the same sense of seeling So in the like case though the Word of the Law and the Word of the Gospel are two contrary wayes to salvation yet there is nothing doth exclude but they may be apprehended by one and the same spirit of faith The Word may be one and the same in the general notion and nature of the Word and it may be apprehended by one and the same spirit of faith yet it may differ in circumstance But because the force of the Argument doth lie in the contradictory nature of the two states we will come to instance in a case or two Adam before his fall could not shew mercie if we look to the outward act or the performance of the duty for where there is no misery what mercy can be shewed shall we therefore argue that he had no such affection in him as mercy So in the like case it is not compatible with the state of the blessed Angels to beleeve in a Christ to recover them out of their fall for they that never fall have no need of a recovery what then shall we say that they have no ability to understand the Mysterie of the Gospel This cannot be for so the Apostle reasoneth By them which have preached the Gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from Heaven which things the Angels desire to look into 1 Pet. 1.12 Though the blessed Angels have no need of salvation by grace held out in the Gospel yet they have ability to understand it they have a desire to pry and gaze into it So in the like case though Adam had no need of salvation before his fall by the Mediatour yet he might have ability to understand that way of salvation in case it had been revealed Thirdly Corvinus saith that greater abilities are required to faith in Christ then that ability which Adam bad before his fall Answ I cannot see possibly how he can consist with his own principles For seeing he doth stand upon it in his Treatises against Moulin page 159.165 that God doth proportion abilities to commands and seeing also he saith that God did promise life to Adam under the condition of most perfect and absolute obedience By the position of these two he must necessarily affirme Adams abilities to be exceeding great before his fall For seeing the work required was to yield such a perfect obedience as none else can perform since the fall but Christ alone it must necessarily follow that Adam must have a large portion of spirit fitted for such an employment As in some Monuments of Antiquity we do argue how strong such a Prince was that died many hundred yeares ago from the greatnesse and weight of his sword so from the spirituality of the Law given to Adam before his fall we do infer his abilities to have been exceeding great And thus much out of Corvinus his own principles Now Mr. Everard let us return back again to you And here to deal plainly with you and the Churches that do
so much light into the heart of the Gentiles to know that they must not steal that they must not defraud or oppresse the Lord also doth give them power to act according to their light in these and such like outward moralities This is clear from the first and second Chapter of the Epistle to the Romanes and it is evident also by that Scripture that God was indeed much dishonoured by their not emproving their abilities which he had bestowed upon them to the bringing forth of such actions of obedience as he had required of them He was angry with them because they did not walk after the light because they held the truth in unrighteousnesse because by oppression and other sinnes they did not answer the Law written in their heart Though in these externals the Gentiles had abilities some way proportionable to the Commands yet in the case of true repentance and turning to God the same Apostle doth drive the Gentiles from all confidence and dependance upon natural ability The whole tenour of his speech is to shew that the proper use of the light which God giveth is primarily and immediately to help a man to judge himself and in judging to see his owne emptinesse that so in the sense of his own misery he may make out for mercy The whole scope then of the Apostle is to shew that Jewes and Gentiles are all under sin that they have no ability of their own and the end is to drive them to a Christ to make up all Next you go to the Parable of the Talents Matth. 25. You reason Our Saviour comes and bears witnesse to the world that he desires no more encrease then the benefit of what he had first given means sufficient to bring forth no more then was answerable to the seed he had first sowen if one Talent then the encrease of one verse 18. The slothful man hides the Lords treasury but verse 30 the Lord presents to us what course he will take with such servants who use such kind of sayings as too many do in these dayes that God would be gathering where he scattereth not but that must needs be a lye for what pleasure could the Lord himself take in any such increase where himself is not the planter page 45. I have often found this Scripture cited by the Arminians yet among them all I never met with any that made so corrupt a use of it as you do Not many years since the learned Chamier treating of the point of free-will did endeavour to shew the difference betwixt the Philosophers and the Jesuites They saith he meaning the Jesuites do admit some kind of grace which never entered into the thought of Aristotle they acknowledge the corruption of nature by sinne which the Philosophe's did never so much as dreame of Tom. 3. lib. 3. cap. 2. sect 9. If this Author were now alive I would gladly know what difference he would set betwixt the Philosophers and the Brethren of the Separation who hold that infants are free from all natural corruption what difference he would set betwixt Aristotles Ethical Philosophie and your Moral Divinitie when you teach that Adams abilities were as good after the fall as they were before But now let us come to clear the Parable of the Talents First suppose by sufficient means you understand onely the supply of the Spirit of Christ how can you justifie this to be a true interpretation that Christ requires no more encrease then the benefit of what he had first given sufficient means to bring forth Will you say that it is absolutely necessary to have the ability in present possession before the command can be given If this be your opinion you must needs block up the right and the true way of bringing a soul to Christ We preach the Law in the spiritual nature of it to a natural man to what end is all this but that by the sight of his own emptinesse by the convictions of the guilt of sinne he may look after a Christ first to justifie and to pardon secondly to sanctifie and to cleanse the pollution of his nature We do not preach the Law to him supposing that he hath ability but the immediate end of our preaching is by and thorough the inward working of the Spirit to empty him of all ability that so he may look to the promise where true ability is onely to be had For the words of the Parable that he gave to every man according to his ability ver 15. We are not strictly to adhere to the letter as though the Lord doth give his grace according to every mans natural ability but it is spoken after the manner of men he giveth his grace in a different measure to some more and to some lesse yet all the ability is from Christ himself And therefore when he that received one Talent accused the Lord for an hard man for reaping there where he did not sowe the answer was thou shouldest have given my money to the exchanger that is though thou hadst no ability of thine own yet if thou hadst gone to the exchanger to the Promiser he was able to make profit of the money he was able to help thee with forreign supply where thine own natural and domestical ability was wanting Secondly whereas you affirm that there are many in these dayes that use such hard kinde of sayings that God would be gathering where he scattereth not and that one day he will call such servants to account I do acknowledge as heretofore so now there are more then too many who do neglect their talent and cast the blame upon God himself But your aime is not so much at these as against others who oppose free-will and your way of setting up the natural ability of man Though some passages in their writings are hard yet if you would compare one thing with another you should find that they do speak of abilities that do answer duties of a word of promise that answereth the word of command of the fulnesse of Christ set in opposition to the sinfulnesse and misery by Adam Doctor Twisse disputing against the Arminians lib. 3. errat 9. pag. 211. doth of all others seeme to tread something hard yet he doth shew many pithie reasons wherefore the Lord may give a command where there is a want of abiliy First saith he men are too apt to trust in their own work to bring them to salvation therefore that they may know the common contagion of Original sinne and thereupon the impotency and weaknesse that hath ensued to all good the Lord taketh this course to shew them their misery Secondly he addeth these words If by the grace of God we know our selves to be no way fit or able to do those things which the Lord commandeth yet by his just counsel he doth command us and by his commands he doth shew what we are indebted to him as Lord Creator and that which we are not able to performe our selves
heaven page 110. I do fully agree with you in this that the employment which God had to do for Adam after the fall was as spiritual as before But then consider the ability does not lie in man but onely in the Lord Christ and in the Word of promise The true Church doth hold and ever hath held that the imployment which God hath now for every true believer is a spiritual imployment Yet they hold it also as a truth of the foundation that Adam lost all ability to spiritual good But here you think you have an unanswerable argument for say you in that service which Adam bad to do if he was compleatly furnished by God why should I judge that he would employ him in a more hard service and not afford him sutable accommodation Had God no other way to give Adam and his posterity sutable accommodation to obey his commands but there must be a necessity in it for him to retain the same abilities after which he had before the fall when you thus endeavour to proportion abilities to commands in a natural way you overthrow the scope of the Gospel and the main sense of the Scriptures which shew that all ability is to be had from Christ God hath tempered salvation and hath so put it into the hands of Christ that all that want abilities should go to him in the sense of their own misery And to this end he hath suffered the first man to fall and to lose all natural abilities that supply and help may be had from Christ onely in the Covenant of grace This is the main scope of the Scriptures And judge you now whether you do not go against the main foundation of the doctrine of Christ when you teach such things as these The Examiners of the late Synods confession of faith in the Chapter of free-will Sect. 2. are in a manner as foule as you For the Synod having laid down this truth concerning Adam in the state of innocency that then he had a power and freedome to will that which was good and pleasing to God but yet mutably the Censors are not contented with this but they seem to plead for the same liberty still in man after the fall These are their words That man in the state of innocency had freedome and power to will and do that which was good seems to us in some sort to hold true still of all men as they are now borne till they have personally and actually sinned If this be so what need is there of a Christ to sanctifie and to regenerate and to take away the sinne of the nature But now we will go along with you You say I judge the work that God set Adam about before the fall he had an ability to do after the fall if God had but given him a command to return into the garden again page 110. By this account then he had an ability to keep the Covenant of works after his fall The Covenant of works was that wherein life was promised to Adam and in him to his posterity upon condition of perfect and personal obedience Will you say then that he had ability to keep this Covenant if God had given him liberty to return into the garden Let us hear what ground you have for this God say you knew well enough that Adam had not lost his understanding nor his memory for he could tell the use of the tree and where it stood that should have cured him of his deadly wound otherwise the Lord would not have made so strong provision to prevent him page 111. True indeed we read that the Lord placed at the East of the garden of Eden Cherubims and a flaming Sword which turned every way to keep the way of the tree of life This Provision in the general sheweth that Adam knew the particular place where the tree of life stood and in general what was the use of the tree yet for all this he might be bereaved of his spititual knowledge Natural men may altogether be destitute of the knowledge of the Spirit yet judge of external objects represented to the senses A Temporary believer who hath lost his feeling may tell the time when the place where and the instrument by whom he was first wrought upon Therefore if we take it as granted that Adam knew the way to the tree of life and the general use of the tree this doth not prove him to retaine the same spirituall and internall knowledge which he had before his fall Let us heare the Inventory of Adams losses as you make the account You tell us that Adam forfeited his body and his limbes and that God would bereave him of all after that nine hundred thirty years were expired And you further adde that God cast him out of that pleasant place of accommodation that neither he nor his posterity had power to do the will of God in the garden any longer page 111 112. This is the total which you bring in of his losses and this is a very short reckoning As for Adams being cast out of the Garden it was a part of his misery to be deprived of that earthly mansion but it is the least part of his losse The principal damage which he met withall was internal in his soul which was more than the losse of a thousand gardens But we go to your next question CHAP. XIII Whether Adam did dye in the same day that he did eat the forbidden fruit TO the clearing of this point you begin with the divers acceptions of the word day And then you come to eavil against the Lords day in these words ☜ This day some affirme that it was the first day of the week but there is little to be shewn for that It is a very private Interpretation because there is no publick manifestation by the Word but that men are willing to strengthen the opinion and practise of a first dayes Sabbath with a reference to the changing of Gods Commands and setting up of their own thoughts page 114 115. By this it is clear what your judgment is concerning the Christian Sabbath but we will briefly clear the point First it is of the Law of nature that a due proportion of time be set apart for the worship of God Also the Lord in his Word by a positive and perpetual Command binding all men in all times hath appointed one day in seven to be kept wholly unto him Exod. 20 8 10 11. Now this from the beginning of the world to the resurrection of Christ was the last day of the week and from the resurrection and so downward it is changed into the first day Upon these grounds therefore if the question be put to us wherefore do you keep one in seven we plead the morality of the Command And if it shall be surther alledged why keep ye the particular first day in memory of the resurrection of the Lord Our ground is the perpetual use of the Church
in the Prophetical Scriptures But the scope of the text is plainly to be taken for a literal ordinary day as we have formerly proved And strange it is that the Lord in the denunciation of judgment should go to the typical and parabolicall expressions used in Daniel and the Revelation and Peters Epistle After this you come to enquire whether Christ by his suffering did not prevent the falling of death upon Adam And you resolve it in the negative For say you either Adam must suffer or the Word of God seeing God had once declared the sentence thou shalt surely dye In case then he should give his Son to prevent the death of Adam there had been a clear contradiction page 119. In the commination there are some things which I do acknowledge to be infallible as the Laws of the Medes and Persians which alter not and therefore to make good the sentence all that are now born into the world after the course of natural generation are borne in the state of spiritual death subject to the miseries of nature and shall inevitably be brought to temporal death at last All these things do hold by vertue of the first sentence yet you must take heed that you go no further because the second man hath all fulnesse of grace to repair the losses brought in by the first By his intervening patience and long-suffering is extended to all the sonnes of men And therefore whatsoever you suggest to the contrary there is indeed and in truth no contradiction between the sentence in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt dye the death and the delay thereof in a qualified sense In some particulars long-suffering may be extended and yet in others there may be a speedy execution of the sentence But you go on seeing God would not have Adam to come near the tree of life therefore he would not have him to be free from death that way page 119. Neither do we maintain that it was the purpose of God to free Adam in that manner that he should not taste of a temporal death He came under the dominion of that death the same day he sinned and the most holy Saints that are must all dye before they can be raised again to set forth the truth and certainty of the Lords commination Yet for all this at present the stroke was stayed by the Mediators blood and long-suffering was extended to men that salvation might be had by the Covenant of grace As for the tree of life it is most true that God did forbid Adam accesse to that tree not absolutely because he would not have him to recover life but because he had provided another way for the restoring of man by Christ the promised seed He would not come to the most extream and final execution of the sentence because his purpose was to have a posterity upon the earth and a seminary for the Church Further you argue there was a necessity for Adam to dye otherwise Christ could not make him alive page 119. Here you mistake the state of the question we agree that Christ did not dye simply to free man that he should not fall into the dust but only to raise him from the dust again It was necessary to fulfill the truth of the commination that Adam should return to dust but it was not necessary that he should return to dust the very same day It was necessary that he should fall under the reign of death and under a necessity of dying the same day he sinned and this to continue to the resurrection of the just Then this mortal shall put on immortality and this corruptible shall put on incorruption 1 Cor. 15.53 The Apostle also saith when he shall change these vile bodies that they may be made like his glorious body Phil. 3.21 All the bodies of the Saints shall be made like the body of Christ as now it is in glory But how did the bodies of the Saints begin to be vile bodies By vile bodies he doth mean these corruptible tabernacles of the soul lyable to diseases and to all the miseries of nature But when did this vilenesse and misery begin seeing they were not made vile by creation They began to be vile bodies the same day that Adam did sin they have been so ever since and they must continue such unto the resurrection and then the bodies of the Saints shall be made conformable to the bodie of Christ in glory Philip. 3 Vlt. CHAP. XIV Whether Adam did dye a spiritual death yea or no IN the discovery of this point you observe this method First you shew what spiritual life is Secondly you resolve upon the question For your description of spiritual life though you miserably confound the Scriptures we will take it in the best sense for such a life as hath the Spirit for the cause Gal. 4.19 John 6.63 Col. 33. But you erre in your application when you use such an expression as this that Adam had not such a cup of water in all his foure Rivers You say also that he could not savour the voice of the resurrection from the dead for the goodnesse of a Saviour must be resented by those that are lost but Adam knew no such need page 122. Your argument is fallacious because Adam had not spiritual life in the same way as the Saints now have therefore he had no spiritual life at all He might have ability to love Christ as Lord Creator Further you say that the voice of forgivenesse of sinne was a stranger to him Well let this be admitted it doth not prove the point neither Sicknesse it self was a stranger to Adam before his fall will you inferre then that there were no herbs for medicine and that the Lord did not create the herb of the field with a medicinal vertue So in the like case what if remission of sinne and the way of pardon of sinne by Christs blood was a thing hidden from Adam as being not compatible with his condition will you inforce from hence a want of capacity in him to understand the mystery of salvation by Christ or will you affirme from hence that he was a meere carnal man before his fall Take heed that by these and such like positions you do not reflect upon God himself The Apostle saith the carnal mind is enmity against God for it is not subject to the Law of God neither indeed can be Rom. 8. ver 6 7. If you go to the Original of this enmity or non-subjection and say it did proceed from the fall of Adam you do agree with us But if you go higher and stand upon it that Adam was a meere natural man by the condition of his creation then you will lay the blame upon God that set him in such a state of enmity and whither will you go in the issue if you maintain such positions as these But to make good your assertion you argue The first man is of the earth earthy the
natural say you were to have acted such actions as might have testified to the world that they had been lovers of God because those actions were wanting they are said to be unnatural So it may appear that nature was not improved to those ends to which God assigned it page 146. It is true that in these Scriptures the word nature is taken in the better sense yet not in such a sense as will furnish your intention First I do acknowledge that God hath left reliques or remainders of his Law in the hearts of the Gentiles This is commonly called the Law of nature and by this men know that God ought to be worshipped that parents ought to be honoured and that every man is to have his own c. Secondly I yield also that they who go against this Law may rightly be called unnatural because they go against the dictates or principles of of nature Thirdly they who do thus deviate from natural principles do not improve nature to those ends which God hath made it All these things I do allow so far I wil go along with you But how do you prove from hence the purity of nature and that a meer natural man as such is able to understand the things of the Spirit of God You do in the next page distinguish natural men into two kinds these are your words Who requireth no other way to be glorified but by those principles that he had furnished them withal And because they opposed their own nature resusing the counsel of God they are called unnatural because they imployed their nature wholly to satisfie their lusts Such natural men percieve not the things of God The same matter in substance is spoken by the Examiners in the Chapter of free will for the Synod having rightly determined according to the Scriptures that a natural man being altogether averse from that good and dead in sinne he is not able by his own strength to convert himself or prepare himself thereunto Against this passage the men take great offence and as their manner is accuse the Synod for their defects and falshoods For their defects they blame them because they do not distinguish the several kinds of natural men and for their falshoods they accuse them for saying that the fallen man hath lost all ability to spiritual good They distinguish also several kinds of will and tell us in the third place as the will of our first parents so of all men else doth stand in a kind of aequilibrium pag. 128.129 130. Now to take off these several Objections I would entreat both you and them to consider these two points First if you look to the better sort of natural men to those who are no Backbiters no Covenant-breakers c. Whether may not many of these in the most essential vital and spiritual parts of the Law be great enemies against God and be lovers of themselves more than lovers of God If the most refined natural men may be secret enemies why do you and they speak of pure nature and of the improvement of natural abilities when it is certain that men can do no good without the help of the Spirit Natural men may be distinguished into a thousand kinds according to the different circumstances of time and place yet all of them do agree in this that they are natural and without the help of the Spirit they are not able to judge of the things of God Secondly when the Apostle speaketh of the Gentiles who having no Law do by nature the things contained in the Law their thoughts in the mean while accusing or else excusing one another Romans 2.14 When the Gentiles do make use of the Law written in their heart as they do at certain seasons to judge themselves doth not this proceed from the general convictions and workings of the Spirit If the act of self-judging be from the conviction of the Spirit this is no praise to natural abilities but the glory belongs to the grace of God And the words of the Confession are very sound that a natural man cannot convert himself or prepare himself thereunto In which words they do distinguish between conversion it self and the antecedaneous works before conversion In neither of these they say that a natural man is able to do any thing of himself but all his ability is from the help of the Spirit I wonder then what reason the Examiners had given them to cavil at such an innocent expression But if you shall stand upon the letter of the text that the Gentiles do by nature the things contained in the Law Here you may observe that the Apostle doth onely oppose the natural Law to the Law written in tables of stone and communicated to the Church by revelation He never meant that any of the Gentiles meerly by their own strength were able to keep that Law which was made known to them Only at seasons the Spirit did excite and stirre up strong convictions in their consciences to apply those principles and dictates which they had by the light of nature The most common and universal maxime of all men in the world is this that there is a God Why then doth the consideration of the Godhead so forcibly and powerfully awake at some intervals of time more than at others We can give no other reason but this that the truth in the hearts of the Gentiles is like a cinder in the Smiths forge which by the operations and stirrings of the Spirit is enlivened and being once enlivened men have more power to judge themselves and to look after God in those seasons than at others And from hence also we might take occasion to answer that great difficulty in the Epistle to the Romans The Apostle in the first Chapter speaking of the knowledge of the Gentiles and how naturally they hold the truth in unrighteousnesse and that for this cause the Lord doth give them up to a reprobate sense yet in the next Chapter he doth shew that the Gentiles do by nature the things contained in the Law and do shew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the work of the Law written in their hearts when their thoughts do at sundry times accuse or excuse one another To the resolution of the difficulty we say that the Gentiles so farre forth as they are principled by the corruption of nature are prone to no other but to imprison the light but as they are under and do submit unto the convictions of the Spirit they are helped sometimes to go so farre as to judge themselves and to cry out in their misery O being of beings have mercy upon us The main drift of the Apostle is to shew that Jewes and Gentiles are both under sinne and how by the sight of the misery of nature such of them as are saved come to be saved onely by looking after the grace and the free-mercy of God If this be the meaning of the Spirit what shall we think of pure nature or
this Scripture First seeing they will not have the nature of man to be defiled in Adam how is this common nature called by the title of one man seeing it containeth such an infinite number of men Secondly how did sin by this one man enter into the world For this common nature of one man must either be nature pure or nature impure If they will have this to be meant of nature pure then this necessarily must be the meaning of the text by one common pure natural man sin entered into the world and death by sin c. As this is a strange and wild interpretation in it self so it doth cast the blame only upon God for making such a nature that by it generally death should passe upon all men to condemnation But if to amend the matter they shall say that he made the nature of Adam in creation and the nature of every man pure in natural generation but it is their own fault that they corrupt themselves Here the plaister is not wide enough for the sore for the Apostle gives the reason why death passeth upon all men because in one all have sinned But now if it be true as these Censors say that in one common nature all have not sinned but those only that fall through their personal disobedience Here I would have them to shew why doth death passe upon all men and how will this satisfie the sense of the Apostle By their account then only they should be lyable to death who were guiltie of disobedience in their pure nature But let us suppose that they say by one common nature impure sin entred into the world and then this will be a grosse tautologie Besides if the whole nature of man be impure there must be some cause of the general depravation of nature which will bring us to the disobedience of the first man and so they will lose their cause Further I demand if by one man they understand the common nature of all how will they preserve the Emphasis of the Apostle in opposing one man to all men He plainly saith that death hath passed upon all men but how thorough the means of one man Again how will they make it good that by the disobedience of one many were made sinners in case they take one man for the common nature of men The acts of obedience or disobedience are usually attributed to particular persons that live under some Law But they have a better faculty to cavil at the truth than positively to maintain their own heterogeneal doctrines Let us hear then what cavils they have against the true interpretation of the words First say they this one by whom sinne entred into the world is not meant by our first parent Adam for the Apostle shews that he was not the original or first sinner 1 Tim. 2.14 For Adam was not deceived but the woman being deceived was in the transgression According to your doctrine then the Apostle should have said by one woman sinne entred into the world page 78. Indeed the scope of his doctrine in that text is to shew that the woman was more immediately tempted by Satan and she was first in the transgression yet in the matter of propagating original sinne it is as true also that by one man sinne entred into the world For Adam and Eve make but one root in the propagation of the kind and therefore in the institution of marriage it is said for this cause shall a man leave father and mother and cleave to his wife and they twain shall be one flesh Gen. 2 24. In the case then of Propagation Adam and Eve go but for one and Adam is here immediately opposed to Christ so farre forth as he is the root of all his posterity Secondly say they these words And death passed upon all men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are thus to be rendred in as much or so farre forth as all have sinned page 78. Well let the words be rendred which way they will the scope of the text and the connexive particle for do plainly shew that they contain the reason of the general passage of death upon every individual man And therefore we must necessarily and unavoidably come to the disobedience of the first man in whom as in the common root all have sinned Thirdly they thus except If the Apostle had beleeved any such thing as the reigning of death upon all men by the first mans sinne he would not have omitted that and onely mentioned from Adam to Moses page 81. Though he doth speak of the reign of death from Adam to Moses he doth not hereby restrain it to that particular time onely For he plainly saith that death passed upon all men absolutely and universally in all times but he doth mention the time from Adam to Moses in special because then it seemed to be more rational and congruous that sinne should not be imputed because no Law was then publickly delivered yet in this time he affirmeth that all universally were under the reign of death not onely Cain the builders of Babel the people of the old world and the Cities of Sodom all which were destroyed for their personal sinnes but he plainly affirmeth that death reigned over infants in all that interval of time though they never sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression If infants be under the raign of death we must necessarily suppose that sinne must be the cause thereof but infants cannot commit any sinne personally Therefore they must be supposed to be guilty of sinne through the disobedience of Adam And this makes good the main argument of the Apostle by one man sinne entred into the world he doth argue from the effect to the cause because death hath universally past upon all by the disobedience of one therefore all were involved in the guilt of that disobedience Fourthly say they the nineteenth verse is more plain against universal corruption by the first mans disobedience for there the Apostle useth the word many and saith by one mans disobedience many not all were made sinners therefore all did not fall in the first individual Adam page 82. Though the word many be equivocal yet in the sense of the text it must necessarily be meant of every individual man because death hath absolutely passed upon every man no one excepted therefore it necessarily followeth that this passage by the disobedience of one many were made sinners must be meant of every individual man But here they have a cavil the word many in the latter part of the verse must have the same latitude allowed for the Apostle setteth down a full comparison of equals in that verse Here the verse must be thus interpreted that as by one mans disobedience all were made sinners so by one mans obedience all were made righteous page 82. Neither will this help the matter for it is not necessary that there should be the same latitude in the collation betwixt the first and the second
and the depravation of his nature as afterwards shall be shewed Next he seemeth to speak more fairely Man being left in the state of pure naturals could not by his own strength arrive to a supernatural end for eternal life being an end above our natural proportion cannot be acquired by any natural means Answ In this and such like passages of his he doth seem to me to crosse his whole undertaking One chief end of entitling his book as may appear by the preface The Doctrine and Practice of repentance rescued from popular errours is the scandal offence that he seemes to take at our Doctrine of original sinne For thinks he if the nature be depraved a necessity of sinning will be introduced and the natural liberty of the Will will be taken away and therefore in much compassion and tendernesse he seemeth to himself at least to vindicate the truth to make Religion more reasonable and intelligible and to rescue the Schooles and Pulpits from the rigour and austerity of the doctrines of such a nature But when all is done he speaks the same in effect that we do For if man being in his natural condition by his own strength cannot arrive to a supernatural end but needs the help of the Spirit This being suppos'd I will put it upon him seriously to consider whether the same Spirit that helps a man out of this imaginary deficiency privation and imperfection is not as able also to rescue him from that inherent defilement pravity and corruption of the natural birth The Spirit can do as much in the one as in the other And exhortations will be as useful in the one case as in the other What need then hath our Authour to raise up all this dust But he further addeth What gifts and graces or supernatural endowments God gave to Adam in his state of innocency we know not God hath no where told us Answ Though he hath no where told us in so many letters yet by collation of circumstances we may gather that Adam had the Spirit and was a spiritual man before his fall In the creation it is expressely said come let us make man after our own image Gen. 1. The Apostle doth declare wherein this image doth consist That concerning the former conversation ye put off the Old man which is corrupt according to deceitful lusts and that ye be renewed in the Spirit of the mind and that ye put on the New man which after God is created in righteousnesse and true holinesse Ephes 4.22 23 24. In these words there are four particulars that seem to speak faire for Adam that he had the Spirit and was a spiritual man before his fall First it is said that they should put off the Old man corrupt according to deceitful lusts Corruption is of a different nature according to the condition of the subject-matter there is a corruption of seeds of graines of metals of the members of a mans body but here the Apostle must needs speak of the corruption of that which is spiritual From whence we collect that the Old man or the disposition of the flesh is but the corruption of that holy and spiritual state n which Adam was made Secondly it is said be ye renewed in the spirit of your minds The word renewed doth import the restoring of a thing to that perfection which sometime it had in its first institution An house is renewed not when it is built new from the ground but when it is amended When an infant is born into the world it is not proper to say that he is renewed but a man doth renew his strength when he doth recover it by degrees after a long sicknesse So in the present case when the Apostle saith be renewed in the spirit of your mind he speaketh of the renovation of that knowledge holinesse and righteousnesse that Adam sometimes had but lost it by his fall Thirdly it is said after the image of him that created him Though this is specially meant of the new creature yet it is with respect also to that passage in the old creation let us make man after our own image For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 secundum Deum according to God is as much in effect as after the likeness similitude and image of God who upon this account must needs be the pattern in both creatio'ns Fourthly to put all out of question it is expressely said which after God is created in righteousnesse and true holinesse What difference soever there may be between Adam in innocency and the Saints in the state of regeneration certain it is that holinesse and righteousnesse must needs be the morality of the Law and none can rationally deny but that Adam was endued and invested with these two before his fall By his righteousnesse he was enabled to deale justly with man and by his holinesse he was carried out to know God to love him to delight in him to fear him and to take him as his chiefest good All these particulars expressing the spirituality and purity of the Law do signifie to us that Adam had the Spirit and was a spiritual man before his fall Now let us go on Receiving more by the second Adam than we lost by the first the sons of God are now spiritual which he never was that we can finde Answ That which he writes here doth manifestly contradict what he speaks elswhere for page 383. He plainly sheweth that original righteousnesse in Adam and habitual righteousnesse in the Saints are all one These are his own words if one sinne saith he could naturally and by a physical causalty destroy original righteousnesse then every ones sinne in the regenerate can as well destroy habitual righteousnesse because that and this differ not but in their principle not in their nature and constitution And why should not a righteous man as easily and as quickly fall from grace and loose his habits as Adam did naturally it is all one so farre he To which we answer Adam fell from original righteousnesse because he stood onely by the covenant of workes the Saints do not fall from habitual righteousnesse because they have their standing by the covenant of grace But as to the point in hand original righteousness in Adam and habitual righteousnesse in the Saints he tells us that both are one and the same in essence and constitution and then again he tells us the sons of God are spiritual which Adam never was that he could finde So great a faculty he hath to blow hot and cold in the same breath Now he comes to explicate that Scripture by one man sin entred into the world Rom. 5. c. That sinne saith he entred into the world by Adam is therefore certaine because he was the first man It must needs enter in him because it first comes in by the first Answ It is true that sinne entred into the world by Adam as the first man but it is not the whole truth for in such
shall he only be punished and never survive or live so long as to see the punishment againe the words of the Apostle are cleare as by the offence of one judgement came upon all men to condemnation ver the 18. If it came upon all men it came upon infants as well as others and if it came upon all to condemnation then infants beare the guilt of sin the infelicities miseries and paines of death not by way of sovereignty but as a punishment and judgement laid upon them for their sin and disobedience of the first man But to colour the matter he hath a restriction in his answer to the Bishops letter Now then your Lordship saith he sees that what you note of the meaning of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I admit and is indeed true enough and agreeable to the scope of the Apostle and very much in justification of what I taught The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies a punishment for sin and this sin to be theirs upon whom the condemnation comes I easily subscribe to it but then take in the words of St. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by one sinne or by the sin of one the curse passed upon all men to condemnation that is the curse descended from Adam for his sake it was propagated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to a real condemnation viz. when they should sin for though this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or curse of death was threatned only to Adam yet upon Gods being angry with him God resolved it should descend and if men did sin as Adam or if they sin at all though lesse than Adam yet the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the curse threatned to them should passe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto the same actual condemnation which fell upon him that is it should actually bring them under the reigne of death pag. 45 46. By these words of his it is cleare that the curse doth descend upon infants not when they are borne in sin for he doth own no such sin of the nature but it descends only to their real condemnation when they come to act sinne Here I would entreat him to consider the words of the Apostle so by the righteousnesse of one man the free gift came upon all men to justification of life If it came upon all men it came upon infants if the blessing of Christ doth come upon infants surely the curse also must descend upon them For we cannot imagine any to be made partakers of the blessing benefit grace and life by the second man but he must be some way involved in the guilt misery death and condemnation brought in by the first On the contrary if he will say that the curse doth not descend upon infants by the rule of proportion it will follow that infants shall have no part in the comforts priviledges and blessings that come by the Gospel And truely this must be the upshot of this dismal doctrine Now let us consider what exposition he giveth of those words by the disobedience of one many were made sinners But that saith he which I dwell and rely upon is this sinne is often used in Scripture for the punishment of sinne and they that suffer are called sinners though they be innocent so it is in this case by Adams disobedience many were sinners that is the sinne of Adam passed upon them and sate upon them with evil effect Answ We do not deny but the word sinne may be taken for the punishment of sinne and to that purpose what he speaketh of Bathsheba I and my sonne Solomon shall be sinners but more especially that of our Saviour he made him sinne for us that knew no sinne These and such like passages which he hath page 368 c. We do not deny the truth of them in the general Only this we say that we are not onely made sinners by imputation but also we derive a sinful nature from Adam by propagation and by contagion For First If there were onely an imputation of guilt and no inherent corruption men would bear the burthen and punishment of sinne without cause and God would punish sinne where none is Our Saviour indeed was made sin who knew no sinne because he came in the nature of a Surety But the sonnes of Adam are no sureties they must be some way sinners themselves if they will righteously bear the burthen of Adams sinne Again the words of the Apostle are most emphatical by the disobedience of one many were made sinful for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth note one that hath the habit of sinne that is a sinful man as I have proved in the former part of the Treatise from whence we collect that the sonnes of Adam are not onely made sinners by imputation but sinful also by hereditary contagion Further the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are constituted sinners or sinful This expression if it be seriously considered is set in immediate opposition to the constitution of things in the creation If a reason be demanded concerning the Sun Moon and Starres of the ebbing and the flowing of the Sea of the vicissitude of Winter and Summer The answer is easie all these things have their being because God made them and constituted them so in the beginning But if a reason be demanded how all men came to be sinners by imputation and sinful by propagation the answer is as easie They are made and constituted as by the disobedience of the first man so by the just judgment of God upon that disobedience If the sinfulnesse of nature be not by the fall it must come by creation or some other reason must necessarily be assigned to make all men so unanimous and universal in matter of sinning Lastly the Apostle draweth a parallel between both the Adams as by the disobedience of one many were made sinners so by the obedience of one many shall be made righteous Now it is evident none are made righteous by imputation in the ordinary way but they do in some measure or other partake of the life and spiritual nature of Christ as the seccond Adam Therefore we say on the contrary part there are none that have the guilt of the sinne of Adam imputed to them but they must also derive the pollution of nature from him as the root of corruption But to this he hath a solution as he pretends at least in his answer to the Bishops letter This is sufficient saith he for the Apostles argument and yet no necessity to affirme that we are sinners any more than by imputation for we are by Christ made just no other wise than hy imputation page 38 c. To which we reply the question is not about the formal reason of our justification which we acknowledge to be by the alone imputation of the righteousnesse of Christ But the point in hand is whether any be justified by the blood which are not sanctified by the Spirit So in the present case we say
cannot understand the justice of it because we were not personally guilty why by the same reason doth he not wholly exclude us from having any part of share in the benefit of the death of Christ For what personal act or concurrence have we to the suffering of that death And whereas he alledgeth the ensamples of Pausanias the Grecian General Avidius Cassius and others that would not punish the children for the fathers offence We acknowledge the rationality and the equity of such proceedings but what is this to the case in hand The Law was so given to Adam that was never given to any else but to Christ alone It was given to him as the Headman and the root of the nature If he fell all must fall with him Neither is there any hardnesse or harshnesse in this doctrine as long as the misery by one doth open a door for the grace by the other He goes on If God saith he inflicts this evil upon Adams posterity by using his own right of power and dominion which he hath over his creatures then it is a strange anger which God had against Adam that he still retaines so fierce an indignation as not to take off his hand from striking after five thousand six hundred years and striking him for that of which he repented him and which in all reason we beleeve he then pardoned or resolved to pardon when he promised the Messiah to him Answ If he would but remember himself what he speaks elsewhere he shall finde that he saith the same in effect as we do For though in his further explication page 453. He affirmeth that Adam was made mortal and proves it by his eating and drinking his sleep and recreation by ingestion and egestion by breathing generating and the like which immortal substances never do Though by these and such like mediums he endeavours to prove the mortality of the state in which he was made yet in the same and other places he doth acknowledge that the untimelinesse and infelicity of death came in by the fall By the fall he tells us that Adam was cast into a place of labour and uneasinesse of bryars and thornes ill aire and violent chances The woman was condemned to hard labour and travell and that which troubled her most obedience to her husband c. Now let us take the misery brought in by the fall in such a low and diminutive sense that he would take it It is now above five thousand six hundred yeares that mankind hath been under the miseries and infelicities of death all this while they have continued in a place of labour and uneasinesse of ill aire and hard chances the woman also besides the paines and peril of child-birth hath been subject to her husband for five thousand six hundred years and yet she knows no end of her apprentiship As strange as the anger is against Adam and his posterity he must needs say the same in effect as we do But to give a positive answer These miseries brought in by the fall of Adam have continued and must continue to the end of the world Neither is it a strange thing that the Lord should continue his anger seeing by the continuation thereof he doth continue to drive men to Christ If he pleased he could immediately take away all these miseries brought in by the fall But for most excellent ends to humble men to pluck down their pride to beat them out of their carnal security he doth rather suffer them to abide And for the case of the woman The Apostle doth not deny her pains and perill of child-birth to come in by the fall but then he addeth they shall be saved in child-bearing if they continue in the faith 1 Tim. 2. last Notable to this purpose is that speech of Augustine to Julian the Pelagian est enim aliquid in â—bdito alto ejus consilio c. There is therefore a reason in his hidden and deep counsel why so long as we live in this mortal flesh there is something in us against which our mind may conflict there is something that we may say forgive us our trespasses And a little after therefore it is done in the place of our infirmity that we should not live proudly but should live under a daily need of remission of sinnes Much more to the same purpose What he addes is monstrous false It is not easily saith he to be imagined how Christ reconciled the world unto his Father if after the death of Christ God is so angry with mankind so unappeased that the most innocent part of mankind may perish for Adams sinne and the other are perpetually punished with a corrupted nature a pronenesse to sinne a servile will a filthy concupiscence and an impossibility of being innocent that no faith no Sacrament no prayers no industry can obtain pardon from this punishment Answ It were a very happy thing if this learned man would once think that there were a ninth commandment and that he would make conscience of bearing false-witnesse against his neighbour We say as the case now standeth men are pestred with a corrupted nature with a pronenesse to sinne with a servile will but that there is no remedy to bring us out of this evil this was never affirmed by us There is in the blood of Christ that which will take away the guilt of sinne in the Spirit of Christ to free us from the bondage of corruption and also in his power to raise our bodies at the last Onely it is the good will and pleasure of God in the whole Oeconomy of the salvation of man that we should wait till all these things be fulfilled That is a most sweet passage of Bede taken from some ancienter Authour No man saith he taketh away sinne which the Law although holy and just and good could not take away but he in whom there was no sin Now he taketh away sinnes by pardoning those that are done and by assisting us that they may not be done and by bringing of us to the life where they cannot at all be done and so we are come to an end of this Section SECT 4. Of the causes of the universal wickednesse of mankind In the beginning he doth take upon him to propound an objection If there were not some common principle of evil introduced by the sinne of our parents upon all his posterity how should all men be so naturally inclined to be vicious To this he endeavours to frame many answers First saith he if we will suppose that there must be a cause in our nature determining us to sinne by an unresistible necessity I desire to know why such a principle should be more necessary to us than it was to Adam Repl. As I have said before Adam had onely a possibility to sinne he did sinne so that he had liberty and freedome not to sin But as the case now standeth we can do nothing else but sin It is true in the particular