in her personall chastisement Eve was created in Paradise and for all her sin we had continued still in Paradise if Adam had kept in it but as Adam was made out of Paradise so out of it again by his fall he brought both himself us S. Ambrose saith * Fuit Adam in illo fuimus omnes periit Adam in eo perierunt omnes Ambr. in Lucam lib. 7. Adam was in him we were all he perished in him all perished Eve was onely a part of Adam till his fall he being till then the onely root after his sinne she is now also Eva mater viventium a root yet radix de radice we receive our sap bring forth fruit through both of them And for all this both Scripture and Fathers runne with a torrent ascribing that great sin which plunged mankinde into destruction not unto Eve save onely as the occasioner but unto Adam as the immediate causer And though Eve sinned before Adam and that in divers respects yet is he chiefly yea onely faultie for presenting vs by his fall to destruction Hosea 6.7 They like Adam have transgressed the covenant there or as the Vulgar hath it joyning Ibi to the latter clause Ibi praevaricati sunt in me Ibi saith Hierom that is in Paradise And Adam is excellently painted out Esai 43.27 Thy first father hath sinned Eve is not mentioned for her sinne considered by itself reached not to them nor hurt any but herself per se and us per accidens as Adam yeelded to her temptation When God had denounced severall punishments first to Eve then to Adam and proper to each by themselves he added this to Adam onely Dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return For even in him and by him was Eve to return to dust and by his offence formally Death cometh on all And therefore not from Eve but from Adam doth S. Luke draw our pedegree Luke 3.38 Which was the sonne of Adam which was the sonne of God And therefore as the Genealogies were ever drawn from the males perchance to shew that the woman was but accidentall to our first making and the first sinne reducing all up to the Protoplast Adam who derived originall sinne both to Eve and all us though in different manner so when they had drawn their Genealogies down to Christ who had no man to be his father nor had originall sinne but satisfied for it all other sinnes all Genealogies are ceased yea counted by the Apostle as foolish and vain Titus 3.9 Against one of these passages if it be objected that Joab is not termed after his father but full often yea alwayes after his mother The sonne of Zeruiah for she was the sister of David 1. Chron. 2.16 I answer that Zeruiah the mother of the three famous brethren Joab Abishai Asahel was perhaps married to some base ignoble groom before David came to his greatnes or she herself was an extraordinary Virago active in State plotting and furthering the plots of her children though she crost her brother David and therefore as I take it she is named not so much in honour as in dislike These men the sonnes of Zeruiah be too hard for me 2. Sam. 3.39 Or lastly the father of Joab had committed such a sinne or sinnes that the remembrance of him was odious and might resemble Judas Iscariot who deserved that in the next generation his name should be blotted out Psal 109.13 When Adam transgressed my statutes 2. Esdras 7.11 12. then were the entrances of this world made narrow full of sorrow and travel And in reference it may be to Adams especiall sinning both a man-childe was born before a woman-childe and a man-childe died before a woman-childe the males onely were circumcised and Adam himself died ten yeares before Eve as Salianus out of Marianus Scotus Genebrard Fevardentius collecteth though never a woman els except Eve from the creation til the Law of Moses is recorded to have outlived their good husbands As for Er Onan they were wicked for their sin cut off shortly Genes 38.7 c. Sure I am he had an especiall manner of transgression since some are punished who have not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression Rom. 5.14 Other sinnes we sinned are like to Adam but herein we are unlike His sinne hurt us aswell as himself our sinnes hurt not him but ourselves Bellarmin hath brought unto my hand the thre following authorities Tertullian * Omnis anima eousque in Adam censetur donec in Christo recenseatur Tert. lib. De Anima Every soul is counted in Adam untill it be reckoned in Christ Hierom * Vnusquisque nostrûm in Paradiso cum Adamo cecidit Hieron in Mich. 2. Every one of us fell in Paradise with Adam Cyprian derives the infants sin from Adam onely For we were in him tanquā in activo principio In him to stand or fall Adam is the figure of him that was to come Rom. 5.14 Was Eve a type of Christ was Christ ever resembled or compared or contra-opposed unto Eve The Apostle Rom. 5.15 16 * Cypr. lib. 3. Epist 8. Ad Fidum sheweth wherein Adam was like and unlike to Chirst of which hereafter And most divinely to our purpose verse 17 c. If by one mans offence death reigned by one much more the righteous shall reigne by one Iesus Christ No inkling no intimation of more sinnes then of one of more persons first sinning that one sinne then of one and that one was not Eve but Adam therefore as Christs Merits onely save us so Adams sinne onely did destroy us Cherubim faceth Cherubim Type and Antitype must agree When the Apostle saith of Adam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 illius futuri as the Interlinearie reades it not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not quae but qui proveth the exclusion of Eve But of the first man Adam and the last Adam is a noted sweet resemblance 1. Corinth 15.45 Where he holdeth it not enough to say The first Adam but lest Eve might seem to be included in the comparison he addeth The first man Adam and so compareth him to Christ Likewise verse 47 The first man is of the earth earthy the second man is the Lord from heaven Yet was not Christ the second man in number but in representation of mankinde being the substance of the first shadow Adam was the first the onely one who hurt us Christ is the second man the onely one who helpeth us Yea I think I may be bold to averre that Christ would have taken on him the feminine sex if by Eve we had fallen but since we fell by man by man onely therefore our Redeemer though he came of a woman yet was made a man And Christ having determined to be not a woman but a man I dare further avouch if he had been a stone cut out not * Et abscissus est
his Father and Mother and cleave to his wife and they two shall be one flesh and by the same words perhaps understand Christ and his Church and that mysterie explained by S. Paul Ephes 5.31 c. those being the words of Adam as †Epiph. Contr a Ptolemaîtas Epiphanius saith of Adam speaking unto God speaking the truth of God and in this respect as I conceive Christ saith Matth. 19.4 c. these words are the words of God of the Creator as all light is from the Sunne so all truth from God as on the contrarie all lies are from the Devill I say if Adam could foresee marriages generations cohabitations mysteries and future usances he could not be ignorant that that law was given him to keep to the blisse of all mankinde and the contempt thereof would draw on the destruction of his posteritie And I think I shall not erre if I collect from the correlative correspondencie which must be between the Type and the Antitype the shadow and the substance That the first Adam knew his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or disobedience was sufficient to bring destruction on all mankinde as the second Adam knew that his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or obedience was a sufficient redemption for the sinnes of all the World Durand foolishly presupposeth that the will of Adam sinning was ours onely concomitativè interpretativè because we lost originall justice when Adam finned beyond his thoughts or intentions * Stap. De Originali Peccato 1.9 Stapleton saith truly If Adam intended no such thing with an actuall intention yet he did it with a virtuall intention But I rather think that the word If may be cut off and we may say Adam did as Esau afterward prefer temporals before spirituals and as all the sonnes of Adam do at one time or other for he was not ignorant of the danger yet embraced it and he might say within himself Video meliora probóque Deteriora sequor * Aug. De Gen. ad lit 11.18 Augustine hath this wittie Quaere Whether Adam and Eve foreknew their fall For if he did before hand know that he should sinne and that God would revenge it whence could he be happie and so he was in Paradise yet not happie If he did not foreknow his fall then by this ignorance he was either uncertain of that blessednesse and how was he then truly blessed or certain by a false hope and not by a right knowledge and then how was he not a fool I answer They did not know that they should fall or sinne for there was no necessitie laid upon them and to know the unalterable certaintie of a thing contingent as their future estate was is to take away the nature of its contingencie and to make it unavoidable But for all this ignorance they were certain enough of blessednesse if they would themselves and their wills and persons were in Paradise blessed though changeable though not so wholy blessed as good Angels are or as the Saints shall be For if we say Nothing is blessed but what hath attained absolute certainty and the height of blessednesse the very blessed Spirits of heaven shall not be said to be blessed especially if they be compared with God who onely is blessed And so Adam and Eve were beati modo quodam inferiori non tamen nullo that I answer in Augustines words Again to the former part of this Question I answer That they knew before hand that they could sinne and that God would punish them if they did sinne and yet for all this they had the grace given to stand if they would and so to avoid both sinne and punishment and withall they knew that they had that grace But if before hand they had known or could have known that they should have sinned they could not have been happie in Paradise yet as they were in Paradise they were happie though they knew not that they should fall For if men on earth may be called Saints Saints of light Blessed as they are often and Spirituall Galat. 6.1 though they were in their bodies to passe through both temptations and tribulations and can not divers times but fall much more Adam might be termed Blessed in Paradise who though he saw he might fall yet he saw also he might have stood and so rejoyced saith Augustine himself for the reward to come that he endured no tribulation for the present Lastly to S. Augustines three-headed Dilemma I answer by distinguishing There is a threefold ignorance The first is pravae dispositionis when one is prepossessed with a false opinion excluding knowledge this may be called positive ignorance or plain errour The second is ignorantia privationis when a man knoweth not what he is bound to know neither of these can consist with blessednesse nor was in innocent Adam But there is a third viz. ignoratio simplicis nescientiae when we know not such things as we need not to know This was in Adam and is in good Angels yea Christ himself knew not some things This ignorance is not sinfull nor erronious not making either imaginarily happie or foolish This great law in Tertullians phrase is stiled * Lex primordialis generalis quasi matrix omnium praeceptorum Dei The mother-Mother-law breeding all other laws which had been sufficient for them if they had kept it saith he * Aug. De Civit. 14.12 Augustine and * Chrys Homil. 41. in Acta Apost Chrysostom agree in this That Adams first sinne onely maketh us culpable †Chrys in Ephes 6. Chrysostom calleth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The first sinne Augustin saith that * Prima duntaxat Adae transgressio transit in posteros quia illo primo peccato universa naturae corrupta est Cont. Julian 3.6 Onely the first transgression of Adam is passed upon the posteritie because the whole nature is corrupted by that first sinne Therefore when a childe is born he hath originall sinne and death the wages thereof annexed as due to it not because he is a creature not because he is a person not because he is a person of mankinde or humane nature not because he descended from his immediate or mediate parents not because they came from Eve not onely because he was in the loyns of Adam of sinning or sinfull Adam but because he was in Adam when he first sinned and implicitly gave his consent to the committing of that first transgression and that primarie aversion which hath led us astray ever since 4. Some have held that Eve sinned before she talked with the Serpent So * Rup lib. 3. De Operib Trinit in Gen. cap. 5. Rupertus and * Ferus in Gen. 3. Ferus But certainly she sinned before Adam being carried headlong with the Bonū apparens did little imagine to work so much mischief Had she known that her husbands yeelding should necessarily and infallibly bring forth death to him and all his posteritie and after
and involved in originall sinne which they either knew not or considered not Lastly when I had taken these pains to frame this chapter in defence of a point which I never held to be questioned it grieved me to heare my ingenious friend so much to defend the new Writers and to dance after the new pipe Candid and favourable expositions I shall love while I live and both use towards others and desire to be used towards me but violent forced farre-fetched interpretations as this hath been I can no way allow For since reformation hath been so sharp-sighted as to finde fault in all things to esteem the Schoolmen as dunses though they are thought dunses that so censure them to account the Fathers as silly old men or as children though they are but babes that admire them not to disregard Provinciall Councels yea Generall Councels as the acts of weak and sinfull men though they are the chiefest the highest earthly-living-breathing Judges of Scriptures controversed which cavils against former times I have heard belched forth by the brain-sick zealous ignorants of our times since we have hissed out the Papists and think they speak against their own consciences when they maintain the infallibilitie and inerrabilitie of the Pope May not Bucer and Martyr erre Must all new opinions needs be true and defended with might and main with wrested part-taking over-charitable defenses rather then a small errour shall be acknowledged If such milde dealing had been used against times precedent we could not have found as some now have done about two thousand errours of the Papists But thus much if not too much shall suffice concerning these men and this matter with this cloze That Zanchius himself in the place above cited saith thus against that new-fangled opinion t Neque enim aliud peccatum in posteros transfusum est quà m quod ipsius quoque fuit Adami fuit enim inobedientia cum privatione justitiae originalis totius naturae corruptione Deinde etiam non propter aliud peccatum nos sumus adjudicati morti quà m propter illud propter quod Adamus Ejusdem enim peccati stipendium fuit mors Illi autem fuit dictum Morte Morieris propter inobedientiam c. For no other sinne was transfused to posteritie then that which also was Adams for it was disobedience with a privation of originall justice and corruption of the whole nature Besides we are sentenced to death for no other sinne then for that for which Adam also was for death was the wages of the same sinne Now it was said to him THOU SHALT DIE THE DEATH for disobedience c. Now let them say if they can that Adam was sentenced to death for any sinne of predecessour or successour or any other sinne of himself but one onely I have maintained and do resolve Death was inflicted for his first sinne onely Therefore by Zanchius his true Divinitie against Bucer and Martyr and their peremptorie defenders Not all not many sinnes of all of many of any of our predecessours but the first sinne onely of Adam is transfused to posteritie nor are they guiltie or condemnable for any other preceding actuall sinne or sinnes of others whosoever O Father of consolation O God of mercies who knowest that every one of us have sinnes personall more then enow to condemne us lay not I beseech thee the sinnes of our fathers or fore-fathers or our own if it be thy holy will to our charge to punish us in this life present or our originall sinne in and by Adam or our own actuall misdeeds to trouble our consciences by despair or to damne us in the world to come but have mercy upon us have mercy upon us according to thy great mercy in Christ Jesus our alone Lord and Saviour Amen CHAP. VIII 1. Original sinne came not by the Law of Moses but was before it in the World 2. God hath good reason and justice to punish us for our original sinne in Adam Gods actions defended by the like actions of men 3. Husbands represent their wives The men of Israel represented the women Concerning the first-born of men and beasts The primogeniture and redemption of the first-born 4. The whole bodie is punished for the murder committed by one hand Corporations represent whole cities and towns and Parliaments the bodie of the Realm Their acts binde the whole Kingdome Battelling champions and duellists ingage posteritie 5. S. Peter represented the Apostles The Apostles represent sometimes the Bishops sometimes the whole Clergie The Ministers of the Convocation represent the whole Church of England The authoritie of Generall Councels National Synods must be obeyed 6. Private spirits censured Interpretation of Scripture not promiscuously permitted An Anabaptisticall woman displayed 7. An other woman reproved for her new-fangled book in print Scriptures not to be expounded by anagrams in Hebrew much lesse in English but with reverence How farre the people are to beleeve their Pastours 8. Saul represented an entire armie Joshua and the Princes binde the Kingdome of Israel for long time after 9. Christ represented us Christ and Adam like in some things in others unlike Christ did and doth more good for us then Adam did harm IT hath been plentifully evidenced that death entred into the world by sinne and that both Adam and we were sentenced to die for one sinne the first sinne onely of Adam onely and not for any other sinne or sinnes of him or any other our remote propinque or immediate parents and that death reigned from Adam to Moses even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression Rom. 5.14 I adde Death shall live fight and prevail though not reigne from Moses unto the end of the world For when this mortall shall have put on immortality then then and not till then shall be brought to passe the saying that is written Death is swallowed up in victory 1. Cor. 15.54 and the last enemy that shall be destroyed is death 1. Cor. 15.26 Aquine on Roman 5. lect 4. thus Because corporall death reigned from Adam by whom originall sinne came into the world unto Moses under whom the Law was given and death is the effect of sinne especially originall sinne it appeareth there was originall sinne in the world before the Law and lest we might say they died for actuall sinnes the Apostle saith Death reigned even over those who sinned not proprio actu as children So he 2. The things themselves then being unquestionable and before elucidated to the full That death is inflicted for originall sinne and that we all and every of us except Christ have contracted originall sinne it followeth justly by the judgement of God that death is appointed unto us for this sinne Tertullian lib. 1. contra Marcion a Homo damnatur in mortem ob unius arbusculi delibationem pereunt jam omnes quì nullum Paradisi cespitem nôrunt Man is condemned to death for tasting of a small
MISCELLANIES OF DIVINITIE Divided into three books Wherein is explained at large the estate of the Soul in her origination separation particular judgement and conduct to eternall blisse or torment BY EDVVARD KELLET Doctour in Divinitie and one of the Canons of the Cathedrall Church of EXON S. AUGUST serm nov 24. de S. Paulo ¶ Omnibus hominibus natis constituit Deus mortem per quam de isto seculo emigrent Exceptus eris à morte si exceptus fueris à genere humano Iam homo es venisti Quomodo hinc exeas cogita HINC LVCEM ET POCLA SACRA ALMA MATER GANTA BRIGIA Printed by the Printers to the Vniversitie of CAMBRIDGE and are to be sold by Robert Allot at the Beare in Pauls-Churchyard 1635. TO THE MOST REVEREND FATHER IN GOD MY VERY GOOD LORD THE LORD Archbishop of CANTERBURIE his Grace Primate of all ENGLAND and Metropolitane Most Reverend THE manifold graces which God hath plentifully poured on you enabling you even from your youth to be a fit instrument divers wayes to advance his glorie and blessing your great good labours with the favourable acceptance of our dread Soveraigne State and all who have well-wishing unto this our Sion have caused me a crazie old retired man who never saw you but once and that long since to leave behinde me a testimoniall to the world both of my heartie thanks to God that you have been of my humblest prayers that you may long continue a prop of our Church a favoured Ezra the prompt Scribe in the Law a powerfull Aaron to make an atonement for the people an Elijah zealous in your calling a provident guide to the Prophets to the sonnes and schools of the Prophets a father chariot horsemen of Israel as Elisha called Elijah as king Joash called Elisha May heavenly influences and divine irradiations say Amen Amen Your Graces in all dutie Edward Kellet The Contents of the first book CHAPTER I. Sect. 1. THe subject of the whole work The reason why I chose the text of Hebr. 9.27 to discourse upon The Division of it Fol. 1. c. 2. Amphibologie prejudiciall to truth Death appointed by God yet for Adams fault The tree of life kept from Adam not by phantasticall Hob-goblins but by true Angels and a flaming sword brandishing it self Leviticall ceremonies dead buried deadly Things redeemed dispensed with yet still appointed 2 3. The Kingdome of Death reigning over all Bodily death here meant and onely once to be undergone 4 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 implieth not necessarily the longinquitie of future times intercurrent but rather a demonstration that other things were precedent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 After doth often signifie an immediate succession Judgement here taken for an act of justice 5 5. The generall judgement here understood by OEcumenius and Bellarmine The second book of Esdras apocryphall and justly refused More then the generall judgement is meant Even the particular judgement also is avouched by many authorities Three questions arising from the former part of these words 6 CHAP. II. 1. HOw God is immortall how Angels and the souls of men how Adams bodie was mortall and yet immortall though compounded of contraries 10 2. Aristotles last words his death Holcot or the Philosophers pray for him Aristotle canonized by his followers Plato and Aristotle compared Vives taxed Adams bodie was not framed of the earth or dust of Paradise 12 3. Adam should not have been subject to any externall force he was lord of the creatures inward distemper he could not have Adams bodily temperature Christs who was fairer then the children of Adam the helps for Adams bodie meat drink and sleep 17 4. Divers opinions of the tree of life If Adam had eaten of the tree of life before or after his fall he had lived for ever If he had not sinned he had not died though he had not tasted of the tree of life To what use the tree of life should have served 20 5. The Councel of Millan Cardinall Cajetan Richeomus the Jesuit Julianus Pomerius and Saint Augustine think that Adam could not have died if he had not sinned The book of Wisedome Holcot Doctour Estius and two passages of Scripture Canonicall are authorities evincing that Adam had in the state of innocencie an immortall bodie 24 CHAP. III. 1. DEath is a bitter-sweet Enoch and Elias Raptures were not painfull to them Christs transfiguration and the manner of it That it was not painfull to him Adams translation to a life celestiall and a bodie spirituall should not have been painfull if he had not sinned They who shall be changed at Christs coming shall by it finde no pain Death is painfull 28 2. Man-kinde died the first minute of their sinne God draweth good out of evil Death in some regard is changed from a punishment to be a favour and blessing of God 31 3. Not many or more sinnes but one caused death One onely David begotten in lawfull wedlock That this one sinne is not lesse in the godly nor greater in the wicked Death was appointed for one sinne onely of one person onely 33 4. This one person onely was man this man that sinned that one sinne was Adam Strange and curious speculations that Eve sinned not that sinne for which mankinde was appointed to death 36 5. Two School speculations propounded The second handled at large as expounding the former and determined against the School-men themselves viz. That the children of innocent Adam had been born confirm'd in grace The censure of Vives upon these and the like points A part of his censure censured 43 CHAP. IIII. 1. ADams perfection in innocencie Our imperfection after his fall contrary to his both in understanding and will and in the parts concupiscible and irascible 55 2. Adam had other laws given him but one above all and one onely concerning posteritie 57 3. What this law was Adam knew the danger to himself and his off-spring The first sinne was against this law 58 4. Eve sinned before How she sinned the same and not the same sinne with Adam 60 5. Zeno the Stoicks and Jovinian confuted Sinnes are not equally sinfull 62 6. Adam sinned farre more and worse then Eve 65 7. This sinne of Adam was not uxoriousnesse as Scotus maintained but disobedience or pride The branches of Adams sinne 66 CHAP. V. 1. ORiginall sinne is an obscure point The errours of the Schoolmen concerning it The over-sight of Bellarmine 73 2. Originall sinne described by its causes Distinguished from Adams actuall sinne 77 3. In what sense Adam had and his posteritie hath Originall sinne We were in Adam He stood for us idealiter Every one of us would have done exactly as Adam did We did sinne in Adam and how 78 4. Whether Christ was in Adam and how 82 5. We sinned not that sinne in Adam by imitation onely 84 6. Adams sinne as personall was not imputed Adam is saved Adams actuall sinne as it was ideall and
of the souls of men saith The mercifull Father made them mortall bands Whether the particle Is aimeth at Plato or Plotinus appeareth not by Augustine Bartholomaeus * Barth Sib. Peregrin Quaest Decad. 1. c. 2. q. 2. Sibylla appropriateth the word Is to Plato I rather assigne it to Plotinus as the good Expositor of Plato Or it may be that S. Augustine taking some words from both of them into one sentence purposely left it doubtfull unto whom the Is must be referred Howsoever his collection as I said is ingenious and subtile * Ità hoc ipsum quòd mortales sint homines corpore ad misericordiam Dei Patris pertinere arbitratus est nè semper huâ—us vitae miseriâ teneantur So he thought that this very thing that men are mortall in body proceeds from the mercie of our divine Father lest they should be alwayes held with the miserie of this life Even as the very miserie of mankind from which no man is free could not pertain to the just judgement of the Almightie if there had been no originall sinne as Augustine saith otherwhere Gods judgement brought miserie and death for sinne yet in death God remembred mercie distilled good out of it I cannot omit this memorable speech of Gregory * Naz. Orat. 2. de Pasch Nazianzen Adam was expelled and extruded from this tree of life from Paradise at once by God for sinne And yet even in this case by death he gaineth the cutting off of sinne lest the evill should be immortall So was punishment turned into mercy He is excellently seconded by Rupert * Rup De Trinit 3.24 c. How should we turn away with deaf eares the care of the death of the soul and the generall judgement if we should never have died that are so proud to day dying to morrow Well therefore did our Lord God strike Man with the death of the flesh of the body lest he should be ignorant of the death of his soul and sleep securely in his pleasures till the dawning of the last day that at least Man might be waked even by the fear of the instantaneall death and that he might not like the immortall devil adde prevarication to prevarication but rather flee and avoid the pride height of sinne by humble repentance Let me adde Hence is the patience of the Saints Here are the crowns of the Martyrs saith Chrysostome This death causeth many vertues which had else never been * O munde immunde si sic me tenes breviter transeundo quid faceres diu permanendo O unclean World saith devout Bernard if thou holdest me so shortly passing what shouldest thou do long remaining If ye desire more proofs that death was appointed to Adam for sinne and that he was kept from the tree of life after he had sinned lest his miserable life should have been immortall consult with the authoritie of Irenaeus in his third book and 37. chap. of Hilarius in his commentarie on Psal 69.26 of Hierome on Esai 65. of Cyrill of Alexandria about the middle of his third book against Julian and they shall confirm you in this point That death is a bitter-sweet a compound of judgement and mercy a loathsom pill and a punishment yet wrapt up in gold and working out health and blessings for mankinde * A culpa natae sunt duae filiae Tristitia Mors quae duaefiliae pessimam matrem destruunt From the transgression two daughters are born Sorrow and Death which two daughters destroy their very ill mother Augustine against two Epistles of the Pelagians 4.4 * Quamvìs bonis conferatur per mortem plurimum boni unde nonnulli etiam DE BONO MORTIS Congruenter disputaverunt tamen hinc quae praedicanda est nisi misericordia Dei quòd in usus bonos convertitur poena peccati Although by death much good be bestowed on good men whereupon some have fitly discoursed even of the good of death yet what hence can we commend but Gods mercie that the punishment of sin is turned to good uses I will seal up all with the saying of Cicero in the beginning of his third book de Oratore where he spake wiser then he was aware of * Mihi non à diis immortalibus vita erepta sed mors donata est Life hath not been taken away from me by the immortall gods but death hath been given Death is a benefit though it was appointed unto Adam for sinne for one sinne onely which is the next point to be explained 3. It is true that the wages due to any one sinne is death and as true that we commit many sinnes which are rightly divided into originall and actuall Actuall sinnes are of a thousand kindes committed by us yet none of these our sinnes nor Adams after-sinnes but his first sinne onely produced death Likewise originall sin consisteth of two parts of Adams transgression of our corruption In Adams transgression were many sinnes involved our corruption consisteth both in the want of original justice in the positive ill-qualitie of our nature Adams sinne is imputed to us our corruption both inherent imputed His sin as a qualitie concerned himself as relation concerned us As he was an individual man it touched himself onely as a coÌ„mon person it drop't down upon us His actuall sin is not propagated his corrupting of our nature is deriv'd And this corruption is both a sin and a punishment of sinne Some late Divines have written Originall sinne is said to be twofold 1 Imputed which was inherently in Adam and charged upon his posteritie 2 Inherent which is naturally propagated to us So amongst others Scharpius pag. 463. But they speak improperlie for originall sinne is but one onely made up of two parts or branches indeed perchance parts constituent not ratione onely but re differentes yet not so natively to be call'd a double sinne as one sinne of two steps degrees sections composures parts or branches for originall sinne is not many not two but one onely viz for which death was inflicted And this is the point I must now insist upon and thus I prove it apodictically Rom. 5.12 Death entred by sinne and verse 21 Sinne reigned unto death Likewise Rom. 6.23 The wages of sinne is death and 1. Corint 15.56 The sting of death is sinne All in the singular number evincing it to be one onely sinne David complaineth Psal 51.5 I was shapen in iniquitie and in sinne did my mother conceive me In sinne not in sinnes both the Hebrew and the Vulgar Translation have all these places in the singular number Concerning David it is observable lest any one might imagine that Davids mother was lascivious and that therefore he complained and so this complaint concerned David himself onely and personally and not us that it was no part of Davids intent to disparage his mother and Aquinas saith David was born of a lawfull
wedlock and we are sure by a certaintie of faith that the lawfull use of marriage is no sinne To this let me superadde Rom. 5.18 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Per unam offensam as Montanus readeth it and this exposition is by our last Translation admitted into the margine But of this point more by and by Neither is it onely one but it is all alike not more in the evill not lesse in the good Rom. 3.9 Are we better then the Gentiles We have proved that Jews and Gentiles are all under sinne as it is written There is none righteous no not one Vers 19 All the world is become guilty or subject to the judgement of God Again vers 22. There is no difference for all have sinned and come short of the glorie of God And before he exactly describeth the corruption of every man Galat. 3.22 The Scripture hath concluded all under sinne Si parvuli nascuntur non propriè sed originaliter peccatores profectò eo modo quo sunt peccatores etiam praevaricatores legis illius quae in Paradiso data est agnoscuntur Augustine De Civitate Dei 16.27 If infants are born sinners not properly but originally certainly in the same manner that they are sinners they are acknowledged to be also transgressours of that law which was given in Paradise How could one infant transgresse the law in Paradise more then an other Genes 17.14 He hath broken my covenant Which words you are to interpret of breaking the covenant in Adam by originall sinne aswell as of breaking the covenant of circumcision Augustine in the place above cited when he had said * Cortum est de fide legitimum matrimonii usum non esse peccatum Aquin. Cont. Gert. lib. 4. cap. 50. Since it is not the fault of the infant whose soul God threatned to cut off neither hath he broken Gods covenant but his parents who took no care to circumcise him for such a childe discerneth not his right hand from his left Jonas 4.11 and such little ones have no knowledge between good and evil Deuter. 1.39 then he resolveth thus * Cùm haec nulla sit culpa parvuli cu us dixit animam perituram nec ipse dissipaverat Testamentum Dei sed majores qui eum circumcidere non curârunt Infants not in regard of their own life but in respect of the common source of mankinde have all broken Gods covenant in him in whom they have all sinned Again * Parvuli non secundum vitae suae proprietatem sed secundum communem generis humani originem omnes in ill o vno Testamentum Dei dissipaverunt in quo omnes peccaverunt In Adam he himself hath also sinned with all the rest My question here is Did not all children sinne alike in Paradise Aquinas answereth All are born equally sinners all equally obnoxious to originall sinne so that in them that die in originall sinne onely there is no difference in fault or punishment answering unto it See Estius 2. Sentent Distinct 33. Sect. 5. and before him Lumbard with his army of Schoolmen Three places there are most fully demonstrative both that it was one offence onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that this offence was of one person onely Rom. 5.15 By the sinne the single singular sinne of one for none of it is in the plurall number many are dead Death crept not in by more sinnes or by more sinners but for one onely offence of one person onely It is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 per peccatum unius He might have said as easilie if he could have said it as truly by the sinne of two if by Eves sin properly we had died This is also excellently secondedin the next verse Rom. 5.16 And not as it was by ONE that sinned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there is the singularitie of the person so is the gift for the judgement was of ONE to condemnation which you must not interpret of one Adam or one Person but of one sinne if you make the antithesis to have marrow and sinnews and so the Old Bishops Bible reades it but the free gift is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of many offences unto justification So to the singularitie of one person you see annexed the singularitie of one offence The same truth is confirmed and reiterated Rom. 5.17 18 19 every verse proving it was but one person and one sinne The Fathers joyn issue with us Chrysostom Homil. on 1. Corinth 9 Adam by one sinne did draw in death And again He by one onely sinne brought so much evil and death For if Adam had not sinned as he had not propagated his personall gifts graces acquisite vertues nor experimentall knowledge so after his first sinne which is derived to us his other sinnes were meerly personall and one onely is become naturall to all of us all his other sinnes were bound up in the sole reference unto himself none imputed or derived to his posteritie And therefore originall sinne hath no degrees nec suscipit magìs aut minùs or hath more branches or parts in any childe of Adam then in others but equally and alike extendeth unto all none free none more infected then others as I proved before Paulinus calleth it * In Adam cum omnibus etiam ipse peccavit Aquin. 1.2 q. 82. art 4. The fatherly poison by which the father having transgressed hath infected his whole kinde Others stile it The venime of the loyns Chrysostom on 1. Corinth 9. termeth it The radicall sinne Augustine saith * Virus paternum quo universitatem generis sui pater praevaricatus infecit Apud August Epist 106. There is one sinne in which all have sinned and therefore all men are said to have sinned in one Adam and by one sinne of Adam because all were that one man Item * Esse unum peccatum in quo omnes peccaverunt ideò dici omnes homines in uno Adamo uno Adae peccato peccâsse quia omnes ille unus homo fuerant De Peccat Merit Remis 1.10 That one sinne which is so great and was committed in a place and condition of so great happines that in one man originally and that I may say radically all mankinde should be damned is not done away but by Christ And often he beates on this point that it was one sinne which overthrew us * Illud unum peccatum quod tam magnum in loco habitu â—antae felicitatis admissum est ut in uno homine originaliter atque ut ità dixerim radicaliter totum genus hominum damnaretur non solvitur nisi per Christum Enchirid. cap. 48. One none but one transgression the Apostle will have to be understood saith he against Julian And again * Vnum non nisi unum delictum intelligi vult Apostolus Cont. Julian 1.6 Infants die guiltie onely of originall sinne men of yeares guiltie of
all sins which by a wicked life they have added to that one Ignatius calleth it The ancient impietie Irenaeus stileth it The hand-writing written by Adam All in the singular number pointing at one man onely and at one sinne onely Two points are cleared We are appointed to die for one sinne onely We are appointed to die of one person onely It followeth by the native and genuine method This person was one man * Parvuli moriuntur soli peceato originali obnoxâ—i adulti omnibus peccatis quae malè vivendo addiderunt ad illud unum Enchir. cap. 43. This one man was Adam And so by consequent it was not Eves sinne for which death was appointed to us And first of the first part 4. That this person sinning was one man seemeth evidenced Rom. 5.16 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 By one that sinned It is not said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 * Ignatius Epist ad Trallianos Yet if that proof reach not home but may suffer extension even to Angels or spirits others shall 1. Cor. 15.21 * Iren. lib. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 By man came death and by man the Resurrection of the dead You may as well deny the Resurrection by the Sonne of man as that sinne or death came not by man Again Rom. 5.12 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 By one man sinne entred into the World and death by sinne the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 demonstrating the humane nature and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 joyned with it necessarily pointing and signing out the masculine and not the feminine Rom. 5.19 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 By the disobedience of one man where most evidently not onely the humane nature is signed and marked out unto us but also the masculine sex the He and not the She. Having found that he was a Man for whose sinne death was appointed let us now follow the sent and we shall trace out who he was which is the main point of inquirie Searching the Scriptures even close to the former place occurreth this 1. Corint 15.22 As in Adam all die even so in Christ shall all be made alive He who confesseth the quickning power of the second Adam unto Resurrection must also confesse the weaknes of the first Adam and that In him all men die Indeed it is said Eccl. 25.24 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Accusative Of the woman came the beginning of sin and through her we all die But of Adam the phrase is used in the Genitive Rom. 5 three severall times Per illam non in illa morimur The Divines distinguish them two We die by her and in Adam We also die by the Devill as he was the tempter of her as well as by her she being the tempter of Adam by them both occasionally by him and onely in him effectually So for the former part of the words it is true * Ab Eva initium peccati ab Adamo complementum Eve began sinne but Adam made it compleat She was principium but principium principiatum Satan was the principium principians the mover primo-primus He was a murderer from the beginning John 8.44 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not from the first absolute beginning for then Satan had no being not from his own beginning for at his creation he was good as all things els were but so soon as ever man was he resolved to destroy man and with reference to that intention he was a man-slayer or a murderer of man from the beginning of man From Satan was the beginning of sin from Eve a seconding a middesse a continuation you may call it an other beginning secundo-primum But had not Adam sinned death had not reigned for in Adam all die it was never said of Eve in Eve we die Augustine saith * Aug. De Civit. 12.21 God made some certain creatures solitarias quodam modo solivagas solitarie and after a sort wandring alone as eagles kites lions wolves other creatures gregales that love to troupe fly shoal and herd together as pigeons stares fishes deere and made divers of them all at once of severall kindes and not onely two of each kinde by which the rest should be propagated but he made the man unum singulum one and single and would not create the woman when he created the man but made her of man himself * Vt omne ex homine vno diffunderetur genus humanum that all mankinde should be derived from one man He annexeth other where That originall sinne might come from one onely man The Apostle saith most divinely 1. Timoth. 2.14 Adam was not deceived but the woman being deceived was in the transgression From whence though the ignorant may think that Eve was the sinner and Adam was not yet they erre not understanding the Apostle His main intent is to prove that a woman ought to be silent and subject and not usurp authoritie over the man as a talking woman doth and this he effecteth by two reasons First Adam was first formed then Eve The reason holds of things of the same species Otherwise beasts and birds were created before Adam Secondly Adam was not deceived but Eve not first deceived not deceived by a beast and one of the worst of them a serpent Therefore she is unfit to be any longer a teacher Chrysostom thus The woman taught once and marred all therefore let her teach no longer Hence it appeareth it was no part of the Apostles meaning to handle Whether the sinne of Adam or of Eve caused mankinde to fall which is our main point for the transgression here mentioned was not that sinne that great sin but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 diverticulum transiens a peccadillo a little sinne in respect of that great 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which ingaged all mankinde much lesse did the Apostle intend to excuse Adam from that great presumptuous offence in which he onely was That sin of his being called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 5.19 which must needs be a crying sin and almost infinite since it is opposed to Christs obedience called there 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Adam was not deceived because no man is properly deceived but of him who hath an intent to deceive now the Devil onely had such an intent and thereupon deceived Eve Wherefore she complaineth saying the Serpent beguiled me Genes 3.13 the Apostle ratifieth it 2. Corinth 11.3 The Serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty And in this manner Eve onely being deceived was in the transgression For Satan set not upon Adam * Diabolus non est adorsus eum qui corà m acceperat coelesse mandatum sed eam quae à viro didicerat Ambr. lib. de Paradiso cap. 12. Dolo illo serpentino c Aug. De Gen. ad lit 11.42 The Devil set not upon him that had received in presence the heavenly commandment but upon her that had learned it of her husband saith Ambrose Yea S. Augustine
opineth * Tu es Diaboli janua tu es quae eum invasisti quem Diabolus aggredi non valuit Tert. lib. De Habitu muliebri That by that serpentine craft by which the woman was seduced Adam could not have been seduced Tertullian speaketh thus to womankinde * Probat quòd Diabolus non poterat seducere Adam sed Evam Hiero. lib. 1. adversus Jovinianum circa medium Thou art the Devils doore thou art she that hast invaded him whom the Devil could not set upon If he could not set upon him much lesse could he have overcom him Hierom saith * the Apostle doth prove that the Devil could not seduce Adam but Eve But then comes Eve in her simplicitie intending no hurt or deceit to her husband upon three other grounds specialized Genes 3.6 First she saw that the tree was good for food Secondly it was pleasant to the eyes Thirdly a tree to be desired to make one wise She I say upon these three motives did both eat and give Adam to eat So Adam was not deceived either first or immediately by the Serpent or serpentine deceit as Eve was neither doth Adam complain that the Serpent or Eve beguiled him but when he derived the fault from himself the worst that he said of Eve was this Genes 3.12 The woman whom thou gavest to be with me she gave me of the tree Neither doth the Scripture any where impute a malicious envious or guilefull intent to Eve in drawing Adam into the transgression Nor doth the Apostle say absolutely Adam was not in the transgression but Adam was not deceiv'd or brought into the transgression by fraud For the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to be deceived by art and craft so the Devill perswaded Eve That God of envy unto man forbad him that tree saith * Aug. De Gen. ad lit 11.30 Augustine and perhaps told her it was no sin for her to eat because she received no immediate commandement whereas Adam knew it was a sinne but therefore might think it easilie pardonable because he had formerly known no experience of Gods severitie saith the same * Aug. De Civit. 14.11 Augustine And yet for all this Adam might be in a transgression in the transgression and the greatest transgression though not in that transgression of being seduc'd And for his transgression death is appointed for us For in Adam all die Abel was the first who died the bodily death yet Abel died in Adam and if for Adams sinne death had not been appointed to him first Abel had not died yet since Morte morieris was spoken to Adam alone before Eve was created and it may be it implieth that upon his sinne all that any way came of him either by avulsion of some part as Eve did or by propagation should die in him And so though Eve had eaten if Adam had not sinned neither Adam nor perhaps Eve herself had died And if Adam had eaten and Eve forborn yet perhaps Eve should have died for Eve was in Adam as well as we 1. Corinth 11.8 The man was not of the woman but the woman of the man And in him was she to stand or fall live or die as well as we In Adam all die and she among the rest since she was one and a part of that all If my above mentioned speculations require further proof consider Rom. 5.14 Death reigned from Adam where he is expresly mentioned as being in my interpretation the Idea of mankinde and we being in him tanquam in principio activo Satan sinned against God in tempting the woman the woman sinned against God in eating and offering the fruit unto the man If thou O Adam hadst not consented neither of these sinnes had hurt thee or mankinde * Adam erat nos omnes Adam was we all Give me leave to say so since S. Augustine saith * Omnes eramus ille unus Adam De peâ—cat Merit Remis 1.10 We all were that one Adam Nor did God first challenge Eve but Adam nor her so punctually as he did Adam Genes 3.9 And vers 22 it is not said of Eve but of Adam ironically Adam is become like one of us for he was the root of mankinde Eve was but a branch of Adam before or when she sinned and no root of mankinde actuall but potentiall for she sinned when she was a virgin Justin Martyr in his dialogue with Triphon thus Eve being an intemerated virgin and conceiving by the Serpent brought forth disobedience and by consequent death Theodoret on those words of the Psalmist Psal 51.1 c. The transgression of the commandment went before Eves conception for after the transgression and the divine sentence and the privation of Paradise Adam knew Eve his wife and she having conceived brought forth Cain Had Adam carnally known Eve before he sinned yea after herself sinned she had conceived and then the issue had had no originall sin yea he is no worse Divine then Aquinas who holdeth that at this instant if one by miracle were created an humane creature body soul he should not have originall sin 1.2 Quaest 18. Art 4. * Art sequenti And if Adam had sinned not Eve we had fallen into originall sin and if she had eaten and not he we had not been stain'd with originall sinne Scharpius saith * The cause of originall sinne was Adam not Eve and Adams sinne not Eves doth passe to the posteritie Tertullian proveth that Eve was neverthelesse a virgin because being in Paradise she was called a woman * A woman saith he pertains to the sex it self not to the degree of the sex One may be call'd a woman * Mulier ad sexum ipsum non ad gradum sexûs pertinet Tertull. lib. De velandis Virginibus though not a wife but a non-mulier a no-woman can not either be or be call'd a wife I adde she was a wife so called Genes 2.25 and yet till after Adam sinned she was a virgin espoused married yet not known carnally She was termed Isha or Issa Virago before the fall Genes 2.23 because she was taken out of Ish or Is out of man She was also stiled The female and wife but she was never called Eve during her creation and innocency or in the interim between her fall and Adams But after Adams sin he first called his wives name Eve Genes 3.20 because she was the mother of all living Not as if any did then live as from her or were born of her when Adam so called her but the great Calculator of natures the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Onomastick or exact and true Nomenclator of all things brought before him thought fit to name her Eve that is The mother of all living not before but after his fall because in my opinion she had not been Mater viventium if she alone had sinned Her sinne might have had other punishment her personall fault had ended
maintain That Adams representation of us and his obedience should have done us equall good to our resisting of the first temptation More might pertinently be said of this matter but besides the precedent tediousnesse of it Ludovicus Vives aurem vellit endeavouring to restrain such speculations to modest bounds Thus he saith on Augustine De Civit. 13.1 Of things which might or might not have happened to man if Adam had not fallen * Quid factum sit magno nostro malo nemo ignorat quid fuisset nescio an ipsi Adam ostensum fuit quantò minùs nobis misellis Nam quid prodest uti conjecturis in re quae conjecturas omnes superat humanas What fell out to our great harm no man is ignorant of what should have befallen I know not whether it was revealed to Adam himself how much lesse to us poore wretches For what availeth it to use conjectures in a thing which is above all humane conjectures But Vives himself is to blame First for his nesciencie or timerousnesse as if Adam knew not what estate he and his should have had if he had persevered in innocency The ignorance of a point so nearely concerning him had argued imperfection which the fulnes of knowledge in which he was created did clearly dispell For if God said to the corrupted World Deut. 30.19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you that I have set before you Life and Death could uncorrupt Adam be ignorant of the life that was set before him Or did Adam understand the miseries and punishments the orts and effects of Morte Morieris expressely threatned against him in a future contingent estate and could he be ignorant of his present condition of blisse and certain blisse to be increased upon his obedience Did he know the natures of beasts and other creatures could he know the strange production of Eve could he prophetically intimate the strict union of Christ with his Church by his own conjunction with Eve and was it not shewed unto him what state he should have had and we in him Secondly though these things be taxed of nicetie yet the impartiall Reader overviewing this Book perhaps will say It was profitable and delightfull to problematize even upon this very point But other matters invite me hence forward to them and therefore having cleared That it was the sinne of Adam of onely Adam and not of Eve for which Death was appointed Let us proceed to examine Which and what this sinne of Adam was which is next and necessarily to be handled O Most glorious Creator who did'st make us in the First Adam excellent Creatures and wouldest have made us better if he who undertook for us had not brought upon us death and destruction Grant I beseech thee for thy mercies sake in the Merit and Mediation of the Second Adam Jesus Christ our onely Saviour That we may recover our lost Image and be made like unto him here and reigne in Life with him hereafter CHAP. IIII. 1. Adams perfection in Innocencie Our imperfection after his fall contrarie to his both in understanding and will and in the parts concupiscible and irascible 2. Adam had other laws given him but one above all and one onely concerning posteritie 3. What this Law was Adam knew the danger to himself and his of spring The first sinne was against this Law 4. Eve sinned before How she sinned the same and not the same sinne with Adam 5. Zeno the Stoicks and Jovinian confuted Sinnes are not equally sinfull 6 Adam sinned farre more and worse then Eve 7 This sinne of Adam was not uxoriousnesse as Scotus maintained but disobedience or pride The branches of Adams sinne 1 LOmbard saith * Quibusdam videtur quòd Adam ante lapsum non habuerit virtutem Lomb. Sent 2. dist 29. lit B. Some are of opinion that Adam before the fall had no vertue He had not justice say they because he despised Gods commandement nor prudence because he provided not for himself nor temperance for his appetite extended to the forbidden fruit nor fortitude for he yeelded to suggestion We answer saith Lombard He had not these vertues when he sinned but before and in sinning losed them For Augustine in a certain Homily saith Adam was made according to the Image of God armed with shamefastnesse composed with temperance splendent with charitie Otherwhere he saith Adam was endued with a spirituall minde Ambrose saith * Beatissimus erat auram carpebat aetheream He was most happy and led an heavenly life and addeth a good observation * Quando Adam solus erat non est praevaricatus When Adam was alone he transgressed not Which may teach us to fear the enticements of companie This point deserveth not to be so speedily cast off and therefore attend this further enlargement Many very many precepts were graven in the heart of Adam and every branch of the naturall Law was there written by the finger of God at his Creation nor was he ignorant what was to be done or omitted in any businesse Eccl. 17.1 The Lord created man of the earth and verse 2. he changeth the singular into the plural He gave them power over the things therein and verse 3. He endued them with strength by themselves and made them according to his image And then followeth an excellent description of their gifts I conceive and explain the matter thus Foure faculties he had and we have of our souls Two superior Two inferior The two superior are understanding and will The two inferior the part irascible and part concupiscible First the object of his understanding was truth the perfection of it was knowledge but now as we are in the state decaied this truth is darkned with ignorance 1 Corinth 2.14 The naturall man receiveth not nor can know the things of the Spirit of God Eph. 4.18 Their understanding is darkned and their hearts are blinde Psal 49.20 Man in honour understandeth not As Adam was in innocencie he was partaker of the truth The Apostle Ephes 4.23 24. saith Be renewed in the spirit of your minde New we were once in Adam and in him also we grew old we are commanded to be renewed as new as once we were and put on that new man which was created in righteousnesse and holinesse of truth therefore the first Adam was created in truth You have the object Truth the perfection was Knowledge Ecclesiasticus 17.7 God filled them with knowledge and understanding and this is seconded by the Apostle Colos 3.10 The new man is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him Renovation necessarily implieth precedent oldnes and oldnes precedent newnes of knowledge in the first Adam Secondly the object of mans will was and is Goodnesse the perfection Love In the decayed estate the will is infected with vanitie Genes 6.5 Every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was onely evill continually Ephes 4.17 We walk in the vanitie of our
minde In the state of integritie it was farre otherwise Adam was new in his minde and holy and righteous as was proved before in which regard * Chrys Hom. 16. in Gen. Chrysostom saith Adam was a terrestriall Angel * Bas Homil. Quòd Deus non sit author malorum Basil reckoneth up as Adams chief good in Paradise His sitting with God and conjunction by love As all things els so Adams will was good and tended unto good there is the object his love in innocencie was entire and united to God there was his perfection Thirdly the object of his and our part concupiscible is moderate delight the perfection and felicitie of it was contentment As now this part is gauled with insatiable itchings and given over to lasciviousnesse to work all uncleannesse with greedines Ephes 4.19 But at the first Adam was free Augustine saith * Gratia Dei ibi magna erâ—t vbi terrenum animale corpus besâ—ialem libidinem non habebat There the grace of God was great where an earthy and sensuall body had no beastly lust The place he was in was a Paradise of pleasure a garden of delight nothing was wanting which might give true content Fourthly the object of his and our irascible part may in a sort be called Difficulty or rather Constancy whose glory of endeavours end and felicitie was Victorie This part now is much weakned with infirmitie In the best of us the Flesh lusteth against the Spirit and alas we are often vanquished as being weak by nature But Adam was strong and could have overcome any temptation Augustine saith * Felices erant primi homines nullis agitabantur perturbatio ibus animorum nullis corporis laedebantur incommodis De Civit. 14.10 Our first parents were happy being neither shaken with any trouble of minde nor hurt with any infirmitie of body * Adam non opus habebat eo adjutorio quod implorant isti cùm dicunt Video aliam legem in membris meis c. Lib. De Corrept Gratia Adam had no need of that help which these crave when they say I see another law in my members c. Yea he is more bold there saying * Adam in illis bonis in quibus creatus est Christ morte non â—guit Ibid. Adam in those good things wherein he was created had no need of Christs death He had with libertie and will grace sufficient whereby he might have triumphed over all difficulties and temptations Augustine thus * In Paradiso etiamsi omnia non poterat Adam ante peccatum quicquid tum non poterat non volebat ideo poterat omnia quae volebat De Civit. 14.15 In Paradise before sinne although Adam could not do all things yet he then would not do whatsoever he could not and therefore could do all that he would Adam having these excellent endowments of nature and grace had also necessarily certain objects about which they should be conversant These objects were all the parts and branches of the Law of nature whereby he fully knew his dutie And all and every one of these he did for a while or at the least not break and he and his posteritie should and ought to fulfill as they were private persons and for the performance and non-performance thereof both he and we should and shall answer unto God at the high Throne and Tribunall of the just and righteous Judge 2. But there was one precept and onely one given to Eve perhaps to all Adams posteritie as private persons who if they had eaten of the tree of knowledge of good and evill can not be imagined that they could have ruinated all mankinde but commanded to Adam onely as the publick person as the Idea of humane nature as the stock and root by whose obedience or disobedience all mankinde was to be happie or unhappie as the figure of Christ to come And this sin was not to be a sin of thought onely as the sin of the Angels who each of them sinned by his own expressed will but such a sinne as might bring a deserved blot and punishment upon all his posteritie who were in him which could not be unles it had been committed both by his soul and his body and thereby had power to infect all the parts and faculties both of souls and bodies Again the body of Adam could not sinne without the soul neither could this be a sinne of the soul alone without some concurrents of the bodily parts for then Adams sinning soul should have been damned and his innocent bodie saved but it was to be a sinne compounded of inward aversion and outward transgression So that if Adam had seen Eve eat and had himself lusted after the fruit and yet before the orall manducation had disliked his liking had feared the punishment and not proceeded to eat of it or touch it I do not think his posteritie had been engaged as they are Augustine citeth this out of S. Ambrose and approveth it * Si anima Adami appetentiam corporis refranâsset in ipso ortu extincta esset origo peccati Cont. Julian Pelag. lib. 2. If Adams soul had bridled the bodily appetite in the very beginning the originall of sinne had been quenched Catharinus thinketh there was an expresse covenant between God and Adam that Adam and his posteritie should be blessed or cursed according to the breaking or keeping of that one law What Catharinus saith is probable and may be most true though it be not so written For first if the prohibition had concerned Adams person onely since the precept was given before Eve was created Adam onely should have tasted of death and not Eve Secondly questionlesse that law and covenant included posteritie as is verified in the event When Morte Morieris was threatned unto Adam he was then Rectus in Curia and stood as a publique person representing all his branches If it concerned him as a private person he onely should personally have died and we escaped but our dying in him evinceth that he was reputed if I may so say a generall universall feoffee or person to whose freewill the happie or unhappie future estate of all his descendants was intrusted conditionally to live for ever upon the observance of one law or to die the death for the breach of it Life and death was propounded †Non uni sed universitati Not to one man but to all mankinde 3. And this law is registred and recorded Genes 2.17 Of the tree of the knowledge of good and evill thou shalt not eat for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die Which words I verily beleeve that Adam understood either by his naturall wisedome which was very great or by divine conference or revelation which to him was not unfrequent to involve his posteritie as well as himself For if immediatly upon the creation of woman Adam could foresee and prophesie Genes 2.24 That a man shall leave
having ended their first sinne they were ashamed and had time to gather figleaves and sew them and make themselves aprons or things to gird about them after this they heard God speak and hid themselves after this was their examination de facto and their confession after all this begins Adams excuse Genes 3.12 and Eves vers 13. The diversitie of these severall actions and the distance of time interceding shew it was no part of their first sinne to excuse themselves An other especiall sinne it was aggravating the former and in this sinne Adam sinned worst as accusing God indirectly for giving such an helper to him as had hurt him Who will see things more at large let him consult with Estius and Bellarmine unto whom for the main I do subscribe though I make the last part and act of Adam and Eves sinne to be their reall orall manducation The second scape of Bellarmine is that whereas in true Divinitie the fall of mankinde is a consequent of our first parents transgression Bellarmine makes it one of the seven acts of their sinne confounding the cause with the effect and not sufficiently distinguishing the fault from the punishment May I adde these things Out of the words of Scotus I thus argue Originall justice was given to Adam as to the worthier abler and wiser person yea it was so given that if he lost it he was to lose it for himself and his whole posteritie But it was not so given or infeoffeed to Eve therefore since he failed when the trust of the whole World was reposed on him his sinne must needs be much more hainous then hers If the first sinning Angel was the greatest delinquent though none of the other Angels sinned in him but each of himself by his own proper will then Adam certainly sinned worse who bare our persons and being the Referre to whom our blessednesse or cursednesse was intrusted drew us all into unhappinesse For the woman was but the incompleat principle of offending saith Gorran But by Adams first sinne we lost the good of nature * Bonum naturae quod erat per originem naturae traducendum Aquin in Rom. 5. Lect. 3. which was to be transmitted by the spring of nature saith Aquine By Adams other transgressions the good of personall grace was diminished and might be recovered but the Naturall good traducible could not be regained by any repentance The greatnesse of Adams sinne appeared in that he might so easily have kept the precept * Quanta erat iniquitas in peceando vbi tanta eratnon peceandi facilitas Aug. De Civit. 14.15 How great iniquitie was there in sinning where such facilitie was of not sinning saith Augustine Indeed to eat of the apple seemeth a small matter to the carnall eyes of men but in the least thing to be disobedient is not the least offence for as to obey is better then sacrifice so disobedience is as the sinne of witchcraft and transgression is wickednesse and idolatrie 1 Sam. 15.22 23. Naaman who would have performed a greater matter should much more willingly have been ruled by the Prophet in a trifle it was the well-poised argument of his servants 2. Kings 5.13 and his correspondent obedience was justly rewarded with health But Adam besides the smallnes of the matter it self erred grosly in the manner for God did not appoint him any hard work no laborious task to perform Omission is of an easie and pliable nature more facile it is for one not to wash a thousand times then to wash once Now the precept unto Adam was inhibitive meerly of omission negation or preterition easier to be kept then broken and therefore to break it was a sinne of an high hand a presumptuous sinne which may be aggravated in him by this circumstance that he received the restraint from God which Eve did not They who think otherwise of Adams sinne do judge of it as the common people do of the fixed starres who imagine them to be no greater then a candle But if you truly take the height and breadth of Adams sinne it will be found as the starres in heaven of greatnes almost incredible divers of them in their severall stations being greater then the whole earth Perhaps one of the reasons why the Apostle Heb. 11. nameth not Adam among the old faithfull Heroes was this because he committed a greater sinne then any of them For his offence hath been the cause of death of sicknes of all punishments inflicted on men in this life or in the life to come Not Satans temptation not Eves seduction but Adams wilfull disobedience cost the bloud of the Sonne of God And all the despighteous sinnes of mankinde wherewith the Father blessed for ever the gracious Redeemer and the sanctifying Spirit are grieved and do as it were grone under and at which the holy Angels are offended and do in their sort mourn proceed originally from that sinne of Adam and but for that had never been Therefore was his offence greater then Eves Moreover God first summoned Adam though Eve sinned first and questioned Adam particularly for that sin and not Eve Genes 3.9 and at the censure perchance with an emphasis God said unto Adam which he did not unto Eve Gen. 3.17 Thou hast eaten of the tree of which I commanded THEE saying THOV shalt not eat of it and denounced more punishments against him then against Eve and worse and this among the rest ratifying the former threatning Dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return inflicting death on Adam on Eve on us for Adams sinne and not for Eves Lastly the Spirit of God seemeth to derive the fault from Eve unto the Serpent 2 Cor. 11.3 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in astutia sua 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his craft and her simplicitie he deceived her Now let Scotus lessen Adams offence as much as he can let him say * Esus ligni vetiti non fuit piccatum nisi quia prohibitum The eating of the forbidden tree was no sinne but because it was forbidden and he might well and lawfully have eaten of it if he had not been forbidden and he erred not against any naturall law but a law positive and in a thing otherwise indifferent I answer The same and more excuses are for Eve Again in regard of its spreading infection and the myriads of evils thence ensuing the blessed estate of many millions by him betrayed to the lake of fire and brimstone which never shall be quenched contrarie to the trust to him concredited I shall alwayes think Adams sinne the worst of all sinnes that ever any one of mankinde committed not excepting the sinne of Judas or the sinne against the Holy Ghost For these hurt but few and if they were worse intensively they were not so bad extensively and therefore I must account it one of Scotus his errours when he saith * Peccato Adae non debebatur maxima
Velle before the Nolle and the first motion was to the unlawfull love of himself Now what the Serpent said to Eve questionlesse she related to Adam And her pride also might first arise from the said fountain and his uxoriousnesse followed thereupon and the immoderate love of himself was before the immoderate love unto his wife I say questionles because it is both true in it self and others yeeld unto it and * Aug. De Gen. ad â—t 11.34 S. Augustine observeth it What Adam received from God he told to Eve what Eve heard from Satan she told to Adam To conclude * De Civit. 14.13 Augustine saith Adam and Eve were first turned from God to please themselves and thence and after that to grow cold and dull that she either beleeved the Serpent or he preferd his wives will before the will of God Where he maketh both Adams and Eves sinne to be the same inordinate love to themselves and this is against Scotus Prosper in the 358 Sentence picked out of Augustine saith concerning Adam * Primum animae rationalis vitium est voluntas ea faciendi quae vetat summa intima veritas The first vice of the reasonable soul is the will of doing those things which the supreme and most intimate truth forbids Neither hath Scotus his argutation rather then argumentation his usuall subtiltie in it * Duplexest Velle aut est Velle aliquid amore amicitiae qui est propter se vel propter amatum velamore commodi qui est propter aliud Primum peccatum Adae non fuit ex immoderato amore sui sicut fuit primum peccatum Angeli nec potuit esse quia Angelus intelligit seprimò per suam essentiam homo intelligit alia priùs quà m se There is a twofold will either that will by which one desires a thing with the love of friendship which is for himself or for the thing loved or that will by which one desires a thing with the love of profit which is for another The first sinne of Adam was not out of an immoderate love of himself as the first sinne of Angels neither could be because the Angels know themselves first by their own essence but man knowes other things before himself For did not Adam know himself ere he knew Eve or Angels or hath it any necessarie consequence if he knew her first that therefore he must love her content first rather then please himself Yea if he had a desire to please her might not this arise out of a desire to please himself Lastly did the Angels and Eve sinne out of an immoderate desire of love toward themselves Then how saith Scotus that Adams first sinne neither was nor could be an immoderate and inordinate love of himself What was in Eve could and might have been and was in Adam The discourse of Aquinas in this point seemes more agreeable to Scripture and Fathers then that of Scotus And this it is That unto one sinne many motions do concurre amongst which that is to be accounted the first sinne in which first of all inordination deviation disorder or aberration from the Law is found Now it is apparent that exorbitancy or deordination is sooner in the inward motion of the soul then it is in the bodie and among the interiour motions of the soul the appetite is first moved toward the end it self then toward the means leading toward the end and therefore there was the first sinne of Adam where was the first desire of an unlawfull and disordered end The summe is Man desired an illicit seeming spirituall good namely to subsist of himself as God doth Which first act or motion of pride or inward disobedience being all one with the first inclination to break the Law of God and to eat the forbidden fruit and being accompanied with that chain of other evill motions actions before mentioned was consummated by the outward disobedience in the orall eating the food inhibited And the time was so short between the sinfull motus primo-primus in the soul and the various continued difformitie of other ebullitions which were coherent and bound up in that unhappie knot of outward disobedience that we may safely say it was one sinne aggregativè and every particular evill thought act or motion from his fare-well given unto innocency unto his plain down-fall from the last of his inward obedience unto his first outward disobedience compleat and ended was a parcell or branch of that one great sinne which was against that Law divine Genes 2.17 As our Saviour saith Matth. 5.28 Whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adulterie with her already in his heart So so soon as ever Adam looked on the apple to lust after it the first inward motion tending to this lust of pride or disobedience was averse from the Law though the externall trespasse made the sinne to be full and the breach to be palpable and evident And as it is but one consummate adulterie though divers evil thoughts multae morosae cogitationes many wilde motions concurre unto it so may Adams sinne be said to be but one though consisting of divers parts and branches from the primative spirituall inclination of aversion to the hindmost bodily formalitie or coÌ„summation of his disobedience Est Dist 22 Paragr 1. Estius hath these arguments to evidence that pride which is unseparably annexed to disobedience was the first sinne of man First our parents Adam and Eve were first tempted with the sinne of pride by these words Ye shall be like Gods therefore by that they fell first Secondly the Devil would draw man to perdition by the same sinne by which he fell But he fell by pride 1 Tim. 3.6 Lastly Christ by humilitie and obedience recovered us therefore Adam by pride and disobedience hurt us And this is Augustines reason De Civit. 14.13 If any man desire more curiosities trenching upon this point let him consult with Doctor Estius in the place above cited who hath handled such things apertissimè satiatissimè most plainly and fully as Augustine said of Ambrose against Julian the Pelagian And now at length I am come to that second position which I resolved to unfold and handle in giving answer unto the first Question How and why death was appointed unto us The first part of the answer is already handled here I considered originall sinne principally as it was acted by Adam That Adam for sinne was appointed to die The second now followeth towit Adams sinne was propagated to us and so by just consequent We shall die for this sinne And first concerning the propagation of his sinne of originall sinne as it was an emanation from Adam and as it lodgeth and abideth in us ALmightie and most Gracious Father grant unto us that we which fell by pride may be humilitie and obedience be raised up through Jesus Christ our onely Advocate and Redeemer Amen CHAP. V. 1. Originall sinne
sinne were his Corruptio personae Reatus Poena as he was considered by himself till he repented but as he was the Referree and Representor of mankinde the effects were The corruption of our nature our fault our guiltines our punishment till we be freed The effects of our originall sinne are sinnes actuall with all the penalties or punishments due to them Moreover that we may more distinctly enlarge this point and remove the doubtfulnesse of termes know that in a larger sense the actuall sinne of Adam may in a sort be said to be originall sinne it may be called Adams originall sinne as it was first and originally in him It may be originall sinne both of Adam and all his posterity because our naturall defects and all manner of sinnes flowed originally from this onely sinne as from a defiled fountain Yet properly this sinne was in him actually in us potentially in him explicitly in us implicitly in him personally in us naturally in him perse in us per accidens And that his first sinne or aversion from God may both be said to be his originall sinne and the cause also of our originall sinne the cause not physicall or naturall for he doth not traduce by the vertue of that sinne any real thing which is properly sinfull unto his posterity but it was and is the morall cause of our originall sinne As originall sinne is by some described namely to be propagated to be in all alike and to be in the humane creature at the beginning of his being or to be an hereditarie transgression so Adam had not originall sinne but onely his posterity As originall sinne is defined to be That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or transgression that totall aversion of mankinde from God whereby we incurre death and damnation so was Adams sinne our originall sinne and he had originall sinne 3. Which the fuller to demonstrate let me insist on this point namely That sinne of Adam we sinned this way as we were in him materialiter though not formaliter As the severall members of a mans body united to his soul make one individuall person so all the branches of Adams posteritie with himself make one humane nature and are as it were but one by participation of the species * Fuerunt omnes in Adam quando peccavit fuerunt quidem in illo sed nondum nati erant ipsi All were in Adam when he sinned they were indeed in him but they were not yet born themselves saith Augustine De Civit. 13.14 and more punctually in the same Chapter * Nondum erat nobis singillatim creata distributa forma in qua singuli viveremus sed jam natura erat nobis seminalis ex qua propagaremur The form in which every one of us should live was not yet created and distributed to us but the seminall nature was alreadie of which we were to be propagated Anselm saith * Infans qui damnatur pro peccato originali non damnatur pro peccato Adam sed pro suo nam si ipse non haberet suum peccatum non damnaretur Aâ—sel De Partu Virginis cap. 26. The infant that is damned for originall sinne is not damned for the sinne of Adam but for his own for if he himself had not his own sinne he should not be damned And therefore Augustine Retractat 1.13 * Originale peccatum in parvulis cùm adbuc non utantur libero arbitrio voluntatis non absurdè vocatur voluntarium Originall sinne in infants though they have not yet the use of freewill is not absurdly called voluntary And Confess 1.7 * Imbecillitas membrorum infantilium innocens est non animus infantium The weaknes of infantine members not the soul of infants is innocent Lastly De Peccat Meritis Remiss 3.8 as he calleth originall sinne oftentimes Alienum peccatum to shew it began not in us alone but was delivered to us came from without so in the same place he termeth it Peccatum proprium our selves sinning in and with Adam and having corruption in us by him It can not sink into my head that God would have imputed unto us Adams fault by his absolute irrespective decretory will of good pleasure but that he whose foresight reacheth to things that are not yea to things that shall never be much more to things certainly future of which in another place did foreknow and preconsider that every one of mankinde if they had been in Adams state and place would have done as Adam did Therefore let us not accuse God or lay the fault onely on Adam our selves would have done so For as one said concerning the thief on the Crosse confessing Christ when Christ was on the Crosse nailed naked pained reviled scorned dying and forsaken of his own Disciples Profectò ego non sic fecissem I should not have made so glorious a confession as the penitent thief did at that time So on the contrary I say and am fully perswaded I should have done as Adam did Let God be just and all men faulty for it would have been the fault of all men Yea I must go one step further and without boldnes justifiably say by verdict of Scripture it was the fault of all men all men did sinne that sinne in Adam It is not said Propter hominem but Per hominem Mors 1 Cor. 15.21 and Rom. 5.12 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In quo in whom all sinned Of the first man Adam are all these words By man and in whom to be understood and by him and in him all died and sinned saith the Apostle and sinned that sinne by which death came into the world Though the father of the faithfull payed tithes of all unto Melchisedec before Leviwas born and Abraham alone personally discharged that duty yet for all this the Apostle saith Hebr. 7.9 Levi also who receiveth tithes payed tithes in Abraham for he was yet in the loyns of his father So on the contrary though Adam the universall father of mankinde did actuate that great offence long before we were created yet we also concurred in our kinde and were partakers in that iniquity For he stood Idealiter for us and we were in him our will in his our good and hurt in his and so farre as he received a law for us so farre as he represented us so farre when he sinned did we sinne in him with him and by him And if the worthy S. Augustine may say as is before cited * De Peccat Merit Remiss 1.10 Omnes eramus ille unus Adam I hope I may as well say Adam ille erat nos omnes I am sure Prosper in his Sentences pickt out of Augustine saith that * Primus homo Adam sic oâ—im defunctus est ut tamen post illum secundu homo sit Chrisius cum tot hominum miilia inter illum hunc orta sint idâ—ò manifestum est pertinere ad illum omnem qui ex
in her without the help of man or sinne and was even then Lord of all things 5 Another point followeth towit We sinned that sinne in Adam not by imitation onely For Adam sinned and in a sort imitated Eve who sinned first and ate of the forbidden fruit before him yet it is not said That in Eve Adam died or many died in Eve or Adam sinned through Eve So likewise the Devill offended before Adam was and Adams sinne did nearly in many particulars resemble the Devils yet Adam died not by the sin of the Devil though after a fashion he did imitate it But it is said Rom. 5.15 Through the offence of Adam many be dead and thereabouts In Adam all die Therefore this sinne of ours must needs be more then by imitation And this is S. Augustines argument against Pelagius If it had been by imitation onely * Apostolus peccati principium non fecisset Adamum sed Diabolum The Apostle had not made Adam the beginning of sinne but the Devill Against Julian 6.10 he useth this other argument in effect Who almost yea who at all thinketh of Adam when he sinneth whereas the imitator propoundeth himself a pattern to follow and imitate Or what is Adams eating of an apple like unto witchery blasphemy murder lying or the like and how there have been yea are yet many millions in the world who never heard of Adam much lesse of his sinne and did they intend to imitate or did they imitate him Thirdly * De Peccat Merit Remiss 1.9 Augustine thus argueth As the second Adam besides this that we are to follow him and imitate him giveth hidden grace unto the faithfull so contrarily we are faulty and die not by the imitation onely of the first Adam but by the secret blot and spot by which he hath infected us Fourthly he thus disputeth in his 89 Epistle to Hierome The Apostle saith Rom. 5.16 The fault is of ONE offence to condemnation but he must have said It had been of MANY offences and not of ONE if all are condemned for their actuall personall imitation of Adam since the offences of many men must needs be more then the ONE offence spoken of by the Apostle Lastly let me reason thus Rom. 5.14 Death reigned from Adam to Moses even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression But death was the wages of sinne Therefore some died who did not resemble Adam in finning And there is a sinne not like to his for Adams sinne was actuall most voluntary and personall Children in sinning of originall sinne do not imitate Adam for their sinne was onely implicit in and with him and they have not that absolute freedome of will that he had and their sinne is rather naturall then personall Yet children die for sinne and for such a sinne as is not after the similitude of Adams transgression and so originall sinne cleaveth unto us not by imitation onely * Aug. De Peccat Merit Remiss 1.15 Augustine thus If imitation onely make sinners by Adam onely imitation should make us just by Christ and then not Adam and Christ but Adam and Abel should be compared For Adam was the first wicked man and just Abel Hebr. 11.4 the first just man But these things are not thus Therefore we sinned not onely by imitation of Adam 6 I come to a new point namely to prove That this sinne of Adam is not ours by imputation onely as if Adam alone had offended and we were wholly cleare from that great sinne Indeed Adams actuall first sinne or his other sinnes after his repentance as they were personall and private are not imputed to us For he was to answer for himself as well as we are If we repent what doth our repentance help him If he had not changed his minde and turned to God himself alone should have been condemned as himself alone was saved by his own repentance That Adam was by divine wisdome brought out of his fall is said Wisd 10.1 * Veniae redditus est He hath been restored to pardon saith S. August And in the Tribe of Judah there is to this day a den or hole called Spelunca Adam The Cave of Adam in it a rock in which are two stony beds of Adam Eves and here they mourned as is delivered by Tradition saith Adrichomius an hundred yeares for the murdered Abel why not rather for their own sinnes say I This place is not farre from either Ager Damascenus where they say Adam was made of that Red earth which is mire tractabilis saith Adrichomius or from that place which to this day is shewen and recorded to be the plat of ground which drank up Abels bloud when Cain slew him And though I deny not but they might mourn for the death of Abel yet they were more bound to mourn for that sinne of theirs which brought death both upon Abel and themselves and all their posterity That Adam was a Type of Christ is expressed Rom. 5.15 and unfolded in many excellent particulars by * Sal. Ad annum 930◠Salianus That the more eminent Types of Christ should be saved is evinced because of their resemblance and conformitie unto the Antitype nor can it be proved that ever any of his figures were condemned For the shadow must follow the substance and Christ that Proto-type being not onely saved but called Jesus because he shall save his people from their sinnes Matth. 1.21 They are his people especially who in principal things resembled him and wherein can they better resemble him then in being blessed and saved as he was But I return to Adam Concerning Adam Augustine saith thus * De illo quidem primo homine patre generis humani quòd eum ibidem solverit Ecclesia ferè tota conseutit Aug. Epist 99. Ad Euodium As for that first man the father of mankinde almost the whole Church agreeth that Christ being in hell he there delivered him Concerning his body that it arose if other Saints of the Old Testament arose and that it was besprinkled with the bloud of Christ dying shall be shewed hereafter And if God had such care of Adams body or part of it he shall be impudently unreasonable that shall say his soul is not in blessednesse Now as his personall repentance saved himself onely and not one of his ofspring so if he had died unrepentant his sinne or sinnes as they were personall should not have prejudiced one of his posterities salvation Bellarmine * Bell. De Amiss Gratiae 3.12 saith It was one of Tatianus his errours That our first parents were damned Indeed Irenaeus 1.30 ascribes this opinion to Saturninus and Marcion and chap. 31. to Tatianus the first founder of it Tertullian in his book De Haeresib towards the end taxeth Tatian for the same opinion and confuteth him thus * Quasi non si rami salvi fiunt radix salva sit As if
yet his repentance could not wipe out the sinne of his posteritie because his repentance was by an act personall which could not extend it self beyond his person So farre Aquinas But let discourse give way to Scripture Jer. 31.29 30. They shall say no more The fathers have eaten a sowre grape and the childrens teeth are set on edge but every one shall die for his own iniquitie every man that eateth the sowre grape his teeth shall be set on edge They had occasion to use this proverb in reference to Adam who ate one sowre grape in whom we sinned and are punished But as I live saith the Lord God ye shall not have occasion any more to use this proverb in Israel Ezek. 18.3 Behold all souls are mine as the soul of the father so also the soul of the sonne is mine the soul that sinneth it shall die vers 4. And when God said Exod. 20.5 I visit the sinnes of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me I answer First the place speaketh not of the sinnes of children for the fathers personall iniquitie maketh not the sonne inique or wicked it is onely spoken of punishments Secondly even punishment eternall doth not reach from the father to the sonne unlesse the sonne communicate with the sinne of the father for if a wicked father beget a sonne that seeth all his fathers sinnes which he hath done and considereth and doth not such like he shall not die for the iniquitie of his father he shall surely live Ezek. 18.14 17. In this sort you may object A man shall not be punished at all for the sinnes of his forefathers but for his own sinnes onely I answer He may be punished temporally but not eternally for in temporall chastisements as there be many causes producing one effect so many sinnes even of diverse men may be corrected by one punishment and the father is often more grievously punished in his sonne then in himself Now having spoken what I thought convenient concerning the propagation of originall corruption unto all the posteritie of Adam I am in the last place to shew the just consequent That as he did die for that his sinne so we his offspring for having that sinne should die and in regard of this sinne It is appointed for men to die and to undergo that punishment For original sinne is in one regard a fault of transgression and the same originall sinne in a different respect is also a punishment b Aug. de baptismo parvulorum As every man was in Adam and his corrupted nature was propagated to us it is a sinne as originall sinne is considerable in every man without reflecting on the common nature it is a punishment It is so a sinne or such a sinne that it is also a punishment and we have spoken of it as a sinne let us now descend to handle it as it is a punishment MOst Prepotent Eternall and onely Wise God I a poore dejected sinner with an humble and contrite soul devoutly beg pardon at thy Mercie-seat confessing from the bottome of my heart my manifold personall and actuall sinnes from all which if thy Grace had prevented me yet my offence in Adam and with him had justly condemned me But I meekly beseech thy Divine Majestie that I may be one of those many to whom the bloud of thy deare Sonne shall do more good then the fault of Adam did hurt Grant this I beseech Thee for the Al-sufficient merit of thy onely Sonne our onely deare and gracious redeemer Jesus Christ Amen CHAP. VII 1. A review of the last point Zanchius not against it Bucer and Martyr are but faint and rather negative then positive 2. Bucer and Martyr make the state of the question to be voluble not fixt and setled Their objections answered The place of Exodus 20.5 examined 3. S. Augustine appealed unto and defended 4. God justly may and doth punish with any temporall punishment any children like or unlike unto their parents for their parents personall sinnes 5. God doth and may justly punish some children eternally and all temporally for originall sinne whether they be like their parents in actuall aversion yea or no. 6. God justly punisheth even eternally wicked children if they resemble wicked parents 7. God oftentimes punisheth one sinne with an other 8. The personall holinesse of the parent never conveyed grace or salvation to the sonne 9. God never punished eternally the reall iniquities of the fathers upon their children if the children were holy 10. No personall sinnes can be communicated The point handled at large against the errour of Bucer and Martyr 11. The arguments or authorities for my opinion The new Writers not to be overvalued Zanchius himself is against Bucer and Martyr 1. HAving thus farre proceeded and as I thought without the contradiction of any I found by the discourse of a loving learned friend that diverse late Writers were otherwise minded in the point last handled in the former chapter whereupon I betook my self to review it Zanchius in locis commun Theolog. upon the second chapter of the Ephes loc prim toward the end bringeth this objection against one part of his definition of originall sinne Some say that if therefore Adams sinne was transferred to posteritie because we were in his loyns by the same reason the other sinnes of Adam and our other parents should be likewise traducted which is absurd and cometh not alwayes to passe since of evil parents oftentimes the best children are born He answereth first The reason is not alike for the first sinne was not so proper and personall to Adam as common to humane nature his other sinnes and others after him are truely personall Which answer is excellent and he confirmeth it at large Then cometh he to a second answer which is not his own but onely barely related without his approving or open disproving of it a Deinde negant multi viri docti absurdum esse si dicatur peccata pronimorum parentum communicari liberis ità ut similes parentibus nascantur filii vitiosi vitiosis Besides many learned men denie that it is absurd to say that the sinnes of the next parents are communicated to the children so that sonnes are born like their parents vicious and perverse sonnes of vicious and perverse parents which they confirm by experience by examples of Scripture by Exod. 20.5 And Augustine truely in Enchirid. cap. 46. saith it is probable for that place of Exodus For saith he if the sonne shall not beare the iniquitie of the father but the soul that sinneth shall die and yet God visit the sinnes of the fathers upon the children it seemeth to follow that the sinnes of the parents passe over to the sonnes and the sonnes follow the sinnes of the parents that those sinnes may be justly punished in them which are not so proper to the parents as common both to parents and children And for this
opinion he citeth Bucer and Martyr All this cloud for it is but a cloud and an empty one also will quickly be dispersed First in the generall replication observe that Zanchius himself never specializeth this as his own judgement Secondly note how cautelously Bucer and Martyr carry it on the negative Many learned men denie that it is absurd to say c. Themselves see no convincing demonstration but are content if their opinion be not absurd Errours there are that are absurd if this be not absurd all is well Thirdly of those many are but two named by him Bucer and Martyr learned men indeed yet not more learned then many that herein differed from them Fourthly many words are homonymous and they themselves slide back from them by varying the state of the question as will appeare by and by Lastly let the grounds by me set down in the last chapter be well weighed and the truth will appeare on my side 2. Now let me descend to the matter of their objections b Peccata proximorum parentum communicantur liberis The sinnes of the next parents are communicated to the children say they Here they should have been punctuall and I desire to be satisfied what they mean Whether the sinnes of the father and mother be transfused into all the sonnes and daughters and into all of them alike or not alike And if the father be vertuous and the mother wicked or contrariwise the mother vertuous and the father wicked what is communicated to the childe Secondly what sinnes be communicated all or some Whether Atheisme and profanenesse of thoughts or onely such sinnes as the bodie is much imployed in performance of Thirdly whether the sinnes of grand-fathers and grand-mothers be derived and if so whether if there be a good grand-father and a good grand-mother and a good father the children shall inherit no goodnesse but the sinne of their wicked mother onely Or if two of them be good and two bad the males good and the females bad or contrariwise what sinne shall be communicated to their children Fourthly whether the sinnes of the great-grand-father and of his parents our more remote progenitours be derived and where beginneth the derivation of these sinnes and why from such determinate persons and generations rather then from others Or whether they must reach up from all the descendants of Adam to his actuall and personall sinnes Fifthly whether such actuall and personall sinnes as are repented of by our parents and all our forefathers be derived unto us or onely such as they were not repentant of or both sorts of them Sixthly let noveltie know Peccata proximorum communicantur liberis in stead of Propagantur ad liberos is an unknown phrase to antiquitie and it is better to speak plainly according to the dayes of the Fathers then in terms covert and dubious and then in defence of such riddles to say no more then the old Tenet c In universalibus latet dolus Deceit lieth hidden in universals The second branch of pendulous new-fanglednesse is this d Peccata proximorum parentum communicantur liberis ità ut similes parentibus nascantur liberi vitiosi vitiosis The sinnes of the next parents are communicated to the children so that children are born like unto their parents vicious of vicious First it is petitio principii that the vicious childe being like to his vicious father proceedeth from the fathers multiplied transgressions for if he be like to his father in sinne he is also in that regard as like and more like to many other actuall sinners from whom there could proceed no generative communication of iniquitie Secondly what is naturall is ordinary is oftenest is alwayes so without some notable hinderance but the childrens being like the parents are not thus therefore the communication is not naturall Thirdly suppose a wicked sonne curseth his father or wisheth him dead or mocks at him he also begetteth a sonne which sonne doth the like to him as he did to his father shall we say if the generation had descended after many from Cham who laught or mockt at his father Gen. 9.22 that this sinne of Cham was traduced derived or did passe over to this last mocker or shall we say it was derived unto him from the personall sinne of his immediate last father No we must rather say it was derived unto him from his last parents in and by that originall sinne onely which was traduced That this may the better be manifested consider these points First that Adams first sinne though it were one onely yet more sinnes were involved in it Augustine saith e In illo uno peccato quod per unum hominem intravit in muâ—dum in omnes homines pertransâ—it possunt intelligi plurapeccata si unum ipsum in sua quasi membra dividatur singula Aug. Enchir. cap. 43. In that one sinne which by one man entred into the world and passed over to all men more sinnes may be understood if that one sinne be divided into all its parts or members And he found there many branches of Adams sinne and denieth not but more may be found in hoâ— uno admisso in that one committed Secondly he maketh that one to be transfused unto all mankinde Thirdly none in the world were ever more eager then some of these latter times to aggravate the greatnesse of original sinne Illyricus is almost frantick on the point Zanchius and others are truely peremptory that all faculties of body and soul are infected Let me adde There never was sinne nor can be but the seed of it was couched in the sinne originall So that every man hath just cause to blesse God for withholding him from every sinne great or small since every man hath a naturall inclination to every sinne even unto that sinne which by Gods grace he most detesteth Therefore if wicked children be like their parents it proceedeth not from their parents personall transgressions but from that one infectious root of the first sinne of Adam strengthened by connivence ill breeding or custome or ill company Fourthly an holy man and woman who never mocked their parents have a sonne who mocks at them shall his mocking proceed from his parents or his parents parents who never personally did the like or shall Chams sinne be communicated to him Then why do they instance in this sinne of the next parents If they mean it is communicated in originall sinne they mean what I say and contrary to their own words Lastly sinne originall is alike in all and every one and alike remitted in Baptisme of infants yea though the parents should be infidels and send their childe for fashion-sake or by way of jesting to be baptized if the Church know not so much and if the childe be offered unto God by the wel-meaning devotion and faith of Priest and people present and be baptized with true matter and form it receiveth spirituall regeneration as I read long since if my memory
contracting of sinnes and undergoing punishment for them Fourthly weigh this strong inconvenience which he toucheth at That the latter born in time is still the worse in nature worse then any that went before as followeth necessarily if the sinnes of our forefathers are communicated to us Fifthly he seemeth to conclude the unreasonablenesse That they who were never regenerated should be overburdened with eternall damnation if they should be compelled from the beginning of mankinde to contract the sinnes of all their progenitours and be punished for them And therefore he questioneth Whether it reacheth onely to the third and fourth generation I would also question Whether if the threat reach onely to the third and fourth generation upon supposall that from Adam all the predecessours of a man were wicked till the fourth generation that man shall have none of those sinnes imputed to him before his progenitours in a fourth ascent Or if an others progenitours were all good from Adam till the foure last generations and from it all and every of his parents in a lineall descent were stark-naught till we come to himself who is good Whether he shall have communicated to him the sinnes of these foure last progenitours and no goodnesse for a thousand generations of holy and repentant forefathers himself also being a holy man since God sheweth mercy unto thousands that love him that is more mercy to more good men then severitie which extendeth even towards his haters but to the third and fourth generation which number is short of thousands The last objection from the place of Exodus is this q Consequi videtur Deum permittere ut pâ—ccata parentum in filios transeant It seems to follow that God doth permit that the sinnes of parents passe unto their children and the sonnes imitate the sinnes of their fathers that God may justly punish sinnes which are not so proper to the parent as to the parent and childe I answer He doth well to mince it with It seems to follow But Quaedam videntur non sunt Some things seem to be and are not Bucer and Martyr do float too much in generalities they neither mention what sinnes all or some neither what parents good bad or all nor what they mean by passing when they say r Peccata parentum in filios transeunt The sinnes of parents passe unto the children There are also nets and ginns in these their words Å¿ Peccatorum labes cou contegium redundat in patris corpus per ejus sanguinem semen in filios The spot and as it were contagion of sinne overspreadeth the fathers body and by his bloud and seed redoundeth upon the children Before they said sinnes now the spot of sinnes though there be a great difference between them two for the sinne is past before the spot cometh and the latter is the effect of the former Again because it is easie to prove that t Macula patris non redundat in filios the stain of the father redoundeth not on the children it is added u Labes ceu contagium the spot and as it were contagion Moreover how unaptly do they bring the place of Exodus to prove the sinnes of the next parents to be communicated if by them they understand onely the immediate father and mother when in that place there is expresse mention of the third and fourth generation If they stretch the words of the next parents to the third and fourth generation onely why not to the fifth sixth and so upward Sixteen generations since Christs time are the next parents if you compare them to the thirty nine generations which in the law of Nature and of Moses preceded Christ Lastly note their wilde inference God permits the fathers sinne to passe unto the childe and the childe to imitate the father that he may punish as if God could not justly punish the sinnes of the fathers in the children unlesse they be like them in personall transgressions as if the communication of original sinne onely were not cause enough to punish children for the sinnes of their parents as if the evil of sinne were ordained to justifie the evil of punishment Away then with this fishing in troubled waters this delighting in amphibolous terms Which censure that I may the rather justifie I will endeavour to explain all things necessary to the knowledge of this point to salve all doubts to unfold all intricacies in these seven propositions 4. God justly may and doth punish with any temporall punishment any children like or unlike to their parents for their fathers personall sinnes Horat. Epod. 7. Immerentis fluxit in terram Remi Sacer nepotibus cruor And Carminum 3. Ode 6. Delicta majorum immeritus lues Romane For the children are a part of the fathers and in the childes punishment the father himself is punished For as a sonne receiveth under God life and the things of this life by the father so it is no injustice if he lose the same for him The widow of Zarephath her sonne was in her apprehension dead for her sinne 1. King 17.18 So 2. Sam. 12.15 God stroke the childe that Uriahs wife bare to David and it was sick and died Both father and childe endured a punishment of seven dayes the father in sorrow fasting a fast lying on the earth in a holy sordiditie weeping and praying the childe by sicknesse tormenting him to death Ahabs children were punished for his offence 1. King 21.21 and among the rest Jehoram his sonne who although he wrought evil in the sight of the Lord yet was not so bad as his father or mother 2. Kings 3.2 The passage is very observable Jer. 16.3 4. For thus saith the Lord concerning the sonnes and daughters that are born in this place and concerning their mothers and fathers They shall die of grievous deaths Both the great and small shall die vers 6. The punishment of Gehazi his posterity is more exemplarie for though they sinned not nor could sinne the sinne of Gehazi yet the leprosie of Naaman did cleave unto him for that his personall simonie and unto his seed for ever 2. Kings 5.27 The case of Jobs children surpasseth this for they were not stricken with death for their own sinnes or the sinnes of their father Job so much as for the triall of his patience and for the experimentall confutation of Satan yet was it not unjust that they should lose their lives for their fathers good which they had by him since he also suffered in their sufferings and might easily see Gods especiall hand against himself For the greatest winde in the world naturally cannot smite the foure corners of an house and if it should yet one corner would uphold the other but this whirlwinde did so and the house fell Job 1.19 1. Sam. 15.6 the Kenites are spared because they shewed kindenesse to the children of Israel when they came out of Egypt but because Amalek had fought with
communicateth sinnes actuall to the third and fourth generation because God punisheth the sinnes of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generation unlesse they can prove Whatsoever God punisheth man doth communicate unto man which is impossible for God sometimes punisheth such sinnes of the childe as the father never had and of such a childe as never had childe after to whom he might communicate them The third and last branch of the seventh and last Proposition is this That the immediate parents personall transgressions are not communicated to us They may by way of punishment by way of offence or sinne they cannot No one sinne actuall is traducted propagated transfused communicated If any one actuall sinne be derived why not more why not all and every one Why should the communication of sinnes rest in the father and mother ascendendo when many children are liker their grand-fathers both in shape and feature and in minde and in vices then to their father and mother who were void of such personall transgressions Thirdly it is a true and old distinction That original sinne viciateth our whole nature and actuall sinnes infect the person But this distinction is taken away and removed if actuall sinnes do viciate our nature and are propagated by the seed which is proper to sinne-originall It is not called originall sinne for being the root of all sinne for Satan sinned first but as it is in our nature originally In this point Whitaker agreeth with Stapleton De originali peccato 1.4 And there Stapleton worthily observes that l Originale peccatum differentiam specificam notat quae opponitur personali designans causam peccati naturam esse non personam Original sinne noteth a specificall difference which is opposed to personal intimating that the cause of sinne is the nature not the person As when we mention actuall sinnes we make an opposition to sinnes habituall or to sinnes of omission or to sinne original If personall sinnes do passe over unto the children then Adams sinne did so to his children But not so For it is but one single singular sinne which we sinned in Adam If Adams personall vices were propagated to Cain were all or part propagated if part what were those and why those above others if all what did Adam traduce to Abel Seth c. Did he propagate onely those sinnes which were committed between the generation of one and the other And what sinnes did Seth propagate to his posteritie Are personall sinnes propagated alike to all the children How is it that of one mans children I have known one naturally exceeding angry an other naturally stupid Again if a naturall fool begetteth one wise what sinnes doth he communicate or on the contrary a Machiavel begetteth a naturall fool shall the fool be damned for his politick fathers malengin If actuall sinne be traduced then is it in the seed ere the soul come in the seed in the fathers bodie in the seed at the emission at the reception and retention Then millions of seeds spent in lawfull matrimonie when women do not conceive or what they have conceived yet having no soul shall have sinne actuall and if they have sinne they must come to account But such fruitlesse disburdenings do not appeare in judgement Again if personall sinnes be propagated are they remitted in Baptisme or not if remitted how are they so like their parents afterwards How can the seed which is not so much as an humane body actually but onely potentially be actually sinfull If personall sinne be communicated from the next parents how is it that experience teacheth us that very godly mens children are given to such enormities as their parents in their youth middle-age and old age have detested It cannot come by communication of actuall sinnes You will say it doth arise from sinne original So we say and so do all sinnes whatsoever arise from that corrupted fountain that ever-bubbling wel-spring of evil and not from a phantasticall communication of actuall transgressions If a meer Pagan and heathen an idolatrous worshipper of devils beget two twinnes shall they be alike wicked We have heard and known the contrary Gods discriminating saving grace doth not difference them as you may say it doth in Christians Lot committed actuall sinne and knew it not was that sinne propagated to his sonnes That actuall sinne should be in the seed which is but a superfluity of nature is very strange If Job had presently after that God had commended him to Satan saying There is none like him in the earth a perfect and upright man one that feareth God and escheweth evil Job 1.8 betook himself to the act of generation or David at those times when he was a man according to Gods own heart what personall iniquities had they propagated Isa 56.5 unto holy eunuchs God will give a place better and name better then of sonnes and daughters yet by this opinion they of all other are most miserable for they receive all the actuall sinnes of their fathers and cannot waft-over either them or their own sinnes into their children by their feed for they have none but all must rest in their souls in their bodies in their bloud and upon themselves onely If God should miraculously create a man and woman not of the seed of Adam and they blaspheme God and beget children shall they transfuse actuall sinne which have not original sinne or shall their children blaspheme naturally Or if they be innocent themselves from that great offence shall they be damned for their parents blasphemy If personall sinne be propagated then the habits or acts But neither Not acts for they are transient and glide away Not habits for then first why should not habits of knowledge or goodnesse or the like be transfused as well as of evil especially the habits of knowledge of evil Secondly then a childe is not onely originally sinfull by froward inclinations but habitually by multiplied actions Thirdly habits belong to the person individuall not to him as he is a species of mankinde but propagation is according to the kinde or species not according to the individuals If ye object Ezek. 16.3 God chargeth them of Jerusalem thus Thy father was an Amorite thy mother an Hittite whereby he upbraideth them with their fathers sinnes I answer These words are not spoken of naturall descent but of parents and children by imitation For the Amorites and Hittites were idolaters and the Israelites who succeeded them in their inheritance as children do fathers inherited also their sinnes as appeareth in the whole chapter especially vers 44. Behold every one that useth proverbs shall use this proverb against thee saying As is the mother so is her daughter Thou art thy mothers daughter that loatheth her husband and her children and thou art the sister of thy sisters which loathed their husbands and their children your mother was an Hittite and your father an Amorite And thine elder sister is Samaria she and her daughters that
dwell at thy left hand and thy younger sister that dwelleth at thy right hand is Sodom and her daughters The whole kindred is by imitation not by nature But our question is of true consanguinitie and reall generation Further if the immediate parents of those of Jerusalem were idolaters like to Amorites and Hittites yet their sinnes are related as arguments the rather to deterre their children from the like and to keep them from the temporall punishments which might justly be inflicted on them but no way do the words intimate that they should be damned for their predecessours offences unlesse they continued in the same A second objection may be this Gen. 9.22 25. C ham the father of Canaan saw the nakednesse of Noah and Noah cursed his grand-childe Canaan I answer That Cham or Ham had divers other children to wit Cush Mizraim and Phut Gen. 10.6 and Noah cursed none of Chams children save Canaan onely Upon which I conclude one of these two things either that the curse extended onely to things of this life or that Canaan was partaker of his fathers sinne For otherwise the rest of Canaans brethren must have been equally involved both in his guilt and in his punishment Concerning the first the words are Gen. 9.25 Cursed be Canaan a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren The other two might perchance at distinct times rule the one over the other but Canaan shall be a servant both to Shem v. 26. and to Japheth v. 27. To be a servant of servants indeed was the curse of Canaan and it was really accomplished when the Canaanites were made tributary and overcome and the Gibeonites a part of them were made vassals to the meanest Israelites which were the ofspring of Shem. Witty Epigrams and Pasquils have been made both against the citie of Rome and its Popes Aversum coluit quia Roma infamis Amorem Nomen ei averso nomine fecit Amor. Which name of Rome if it had been first given when not onely the Apostle S. Paul taxed them Rom. 1.26 c. but even their fellow-heathen Petronius Arbiter in Satyr might have had some colour for that denomination But since it was called Rome when the sinnes of that kinde were not hatcht or heard of I say the inverted and averted name was rather witty and posthumous then sound Likewise they have this crochet against the Papal title of Servus Servorum Roma tibi quondam fuerant Domini Dominorum Servorum servi nunc tibi sunt Domini And Calvin derideth that Gregorian title But the Abbot Rupertus well doth difference that the Pope is not called absolutely Servus servorum The servant of servants but Servus servorum Dei The servant of the servants of God to which I adde that he is not said to be Servus servorum fratribus suis A servant of servants unto his brethren which was the exact curse of Canaan but that he makes himself to be called Servus servorum filiis suis in Christo A servant of servants unto his sonnes in Christ from whom he imagined he took his name of Pater and Papa The second branch of my answer is that Canaan was partaker of his fathers sinne That it might be so is demonstrable For though Canaan was not born while Noah was in the ark wherein few that is eight souls were saved by water 1. Pet. 3.20 And those eight souls were Noah and his wife Shem Ham and Japheth and their three wives Genes 7.13 yet Canaan was born unto Ham not long after the floud Genes 10.1 and 6 verses The Rabbins say Canaan was ten yeares of age and first saw his grandfathers nakednesse and in derision shewed it to his father whereupon the father was cursed in that sonne more then others But that the innocent sonne should be cursed eternally for the fathers offence was never intended A third objection may be this Joh. 9.2 the Disciples asked Christ Who did sinne this blinde man or his parents that he was born blinde From whence is inferred that the Apostles beleeved that the sinne of parents is prejudiciall to the childe I answer The Apostles interrogation was grounded on knowledge yet perhaps mixt with some ignorance They truely did know both that bodily punishments are sent of God upon men for their offences and that a childe might justly be punished corporally for the parents iniquitie But their ignorance is seen in this that they thought no punishment was inflicted but for some singular singled noted offence But for whose offence or what offence there is the doubt which Christ thus untieth Neither this man sinned nor his parents where he meaneth not that they had no particular sinne but not such sinne or sinnes as for which this man was made blinde but that the works of God should be made manifest in him Secondly this instance is so farre from proving the sinnes of the fathers to be derived to their sonnes that it excuseth both parents and children from such and such sinnes Thirdly it hath apparent reference to corporall punishments which neither the Apostles nor I do deny but they may justly be inflicted on the bodies or goods of children for their parents transgressions 11. It followeth in my method that I shew the authorities on our side Bellarmine De Amissione Grat. Statu peccati 4.18 proveth at large m Non transire ad po steros per generationem omnia peccata parentum sed primum tantùm primi hominis lapsum That all the sinnes of parents do not passe unto their posteritie by generation but onely the first sinne of the first man Trelcatius and Willet crosse him not in this point Scharpius pag. 487. in Cursu Theologico upon that point of Bellarmine maketh this Quaere n An peccata proximorum parentum originaliter in posteros transecunt Whether the sinnes of the next parents originally passe unto their posteritie and he answereth That Augustine moved the matter yet determined it not but we saith he agree with Aquinas that it is impossible so to be And he alledgeth divers sound reasons for that purpose Augustine himself indeed somewhere is somewhat doubtfull and though he saith against Julian 6.3 That Fundanus a Rhetorician of Carthage o Cùm accidenti vitio luscus esset luscum filium procreavit being by an accidentall hurt blinde of one eye begat a sonne likewise blinde of one eye where he seemeth to patronize the transfusion of personalls yet the case is above ordinarie as experience sheweth and much may be ascribed to the imagination of the mother rather then to the imperfect generation of the father Though Augustine also in Enchirid. be somewhat cautelous and timerous yet otherwhere as I have proved before he is confident that we shall stand forth to judgement for one onely sinne of Adam our originall sinne which truth he confirmeth in one particular thus against Julian the Pelagian 6.12 p Propter hoc itaque id est quâ—niam peccavit Adam
together and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus Ephes 2.5 6. Our conversation is in heaven Philip. 3.20 From which positive proofs and doctrine that Christ stood in our stead and that almost all if not all his actions and passions as he was the Mediatour between God and man were representative of us let us descend to the comparative and shew that Christ hath done and will do more good unto us then Adam hath done harm Which point I have more enlarged in my Sermon at the re-admitting into our Church of a penitent Christian from Turcisme being one of the two intituled A return from Argier where these five reasons are enlarged First that Adam conveyed to us onely one sinne but Christ giveth diversities of grace and many vertues which Adam and his posterity should never have had as patience virginity repentance compassion fraternall correction martyrdom Secondly Adams sinne was the sinne of a meer man onely but the Sonne of God merited for us Thirdly by Adams offence we are likened to beasts by the grace of Christ our nature is exalted above all Angels Fourthly Adams disobedience could not infect Christ Christs merit cleansed Adam saving his soul and body Fifthly as by the first Adam goodnes was destroyed so by the second Adam greater goodnes is restored and all punishments yea all our own sinnes turned to our further good To which I will annex these things following By Adams sinne we were easily separated from God Satan the woman and an apple were the onely means But I am perswaded saith the Apostle Rom. 8.38 that neither death nor life nor Angels nor principalities nor powers nor things present nor things to come nor height nor depth nor any other creature shall be able to separate us from the love of God Again Rom. 5.13 c. the Apostle seemeth to divide the whole of time in this world into three parts under three laws the law of Nature of Moses of Christ In the first section of time sinne was in the world Neverthelesse death reigned from Adam to Moses saith the Apostle In the law of Moses though death was in the world yet sinne chiefly reigned and the rather for the law Nitimur in vetitum semper cupimúsque negatum This the Apostle confirmeth often especially Rom. 7.8 Sinne taking occasion wrought in me all manner of concupiscence The third part of times division is in the dayes of grace under Christ and now not so much death not so much sinne as righteousnes and life do reigne or rather we in them by Christ and the power of both the other is diminished and shall be wholly demolished If Adam hurt all mankinde one way or other Christ hath helped all mankinde many wayes In this life he giveth many blessings unto the reprobate his sunne shineth on all his rain falleth both upon good and bad and I do not think that there ever was the man at least within the verge of the Church but had at some time or other such a portion of Gods favour and such sweet inspirations put into his heart that if he had not quenched by his naturall frowardnes the holy motions of the Spirit God would have added more grace even enough to have brought him to salvation For God is rich in mercy Ephes 2.4 The Father of mercies 2. Corinth 1.3 Thou lovest all things that are and abhorrest nothing that thou hast made for never wouldest thou have made any thing if thou hadst hated it Wisd 11.24 What thou dost abhorre or hate thou dost wish not to be what thou dost make thou dost desire it should be saith Holcot on the place In our Common-prayer-book toward the end of the Commination this is the acknowledgement of our Church O mercifull God which hast compassion of all men and hatest nothing that thou hast made which wouldest not the death of a sinner but that he should rather turn from sinne and be saved c. God is intituled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Amator animarum A lover of souls Wisd 11.26 Holcot on the place confirmeth it by Ezek. 18.4 All souls are mine saith God Men commonly love the bodies saith Holcot but God the souls b Amat Deus animas non singulariter sic quòd non corpora amet sed privilegialiter quia eas ad se in perpetuum fruendum praeparavit God loveth the souls not onely as if he did not love the bodies but principally because he hath fitted them for the eternall fruition of himself It is not the best applied distinction for whose soever souls shall enjoy God their bodies also shall and that immortally for ever If he had said that God had loved humane souls privilegialiter because man had nothing to do in their creation or preservation he had spoken more to the purpose Nor think I that God forsaketh any but such as forsake him but Froward thoughts separate from God Wisd 1.3 c. For into a malicious soul wisdome shall not enter nor dwell in the body that is subject unto sinne For the holy spirit of discipline will flee deceit and remove from thoughts that are without understanding Concerning the souls of infants dying without the ordinary antidotes to originall sinne baptisme and the pale of the Church though they may most justly be condemned yet who knoweth how easy their punishment may be at least comparatively as some imagine For that some drops of mercy may extraordinarily distill upon them they cannot deny who say That the rebellious spirits of actually sinfull men and Angels are punished citra condignum But to leave these speculations I dare boldly affirm that if there be any mitigation of torments in any of them it is not without reference to Christ Moreover the redeeming of man was of more power then the very creation for this was performed by a calm Fiat but the redemption was accomplished by the agony passion and death of the Sonne of God c Aug. in Joan. Tractatu 72. post medium Augustine on those words John 14.12 Greater works then these shall he do saith thus It is a greater work to make a wicked man just then to create heaven and earth Therefore much more doth Christs merit surmount the fault of Adam In the first Adam we onely had posse non peccare posse non mori A possibility of not sinning a possibility of not dying We should have been changed though we had not died posse bonum non deserere A possibility of not forsaking goodnesse and should by his integrity and our endeavours have attained at the utmost but bene agere beatificari To do well and be blessed By Christ we have not onely remission of sinnes and his righteousnes imputed but rich grace abundance of joy and royall gifts Not a more joyfull but a more powerfull grace saith d Non laetiorem sed potentiorem gratiam Aug. de Correp Gratia cap. 11. Augustine and we shall have non posse peccare non posse
after death excluding judgement in this life and placing death rather before judgement then any great distance betwixt death and judgement according to the native use of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of which before The second exposition is of Gregory de Valentia * Tom. 4. Disp 1. quaest 22. punct 9. who applieth the words to the particular judgement immediately upon death So doth Ludovicus de ponte Vallis Oletani * Part. 1. Meditat. medit 9. who sets it down as a veritie of faith * De particulari judicio animae quod sit proximè post mortem judicium singulorum exerceri invisibiliter statim post eujusque mortem Concerning the particular judgement of the soul which is done immediately after death every one is judged invisibly presently after his death and evinceth it by this Text. So doth Joannes * Viguer Instit pag. 692. Viguerius * Bus initio Panarii Antidotorum spiritual Busaeus the Jesuite likewise accounteth * Secundum novissimum est judicium particulare mortem proximè consequens the second last thing to be the particular judgement following death immediately the severitie whereof saith he Job the holy patient feared Job 31.14 What shall I do when God riseth up and when he visiteth what shall I answer him S. Ambrose on this place hath it thus * Post mortem judicabitur unusquisque â—uxta userita sua Every one shall be judged after death according to their own deservings Which words do point at the particular judgement saith Suarez Lastly lest I may seem too eager against the second book of Esdras let me borrow a testimony or two from thence 2 Esdr 9.11 12. They that lothed my law while they had yet libertie and place of repentance open unto them must know it after death by pain And 2. Esdr 7.56 While we lived and committed sinne we considered not that we should BEGIN to suffer for it AFTER DEATH Whence we may probably collect That the beginning of punishment is immediately after death upon the particular judgement and the increase or additament at the generall judgement 2 That some are in torments before the generall day of retribution 3 That the beginning to suffer is not after a long time GOD onely knoweth how long but after death yea presently after it All these proofs on each side make way for the third and best interpretation That the Apostle meaneth not onely either of these judgements but both of them Benedictus Justinian on these words thus * Post eujusque obitum sequitur judicium privatum in quo quisque suarum actionum reddit urus estrationem post finem mundi erit judicium omnium tum hominum tum daemonum After every ones death private judgement follows in which every one is to give an account of his actions after the end of the world shall be the judgement of all both men and devils Of both the Apostle may be understood saith he So also Salmeron and Hugo Cardinalis and Carthusianus Oecolampadius thus * Sive speciale judicium intelligas sive generale uihil refert Whether you understand the speciall judgement or the gener all it matters not Thus have I brought you back to the point where I first began That this text is fitted to my intentions affording me just liberty to write whatsoever may be conceived or expressed concerning the estate of humane souls in their animation or in death or after it in the life future because the words must be expounded of both judgements And now the text being cleared from ambiguities the termes explained the state being made firm and sure not rolling and changeable and being fixed upon its basis and foundation three questions do seem to arise from the first words of the text and each of them to crave its answer before I come to my main intendment First How and when Death came to be appointed for us Secondly Whether Adam and his children all and every one without priviledge or exception must and shall die It is appointed for men to die Thirdly Whether they that were raised up from the dead at any time did die the second time It is appointed to men once to die O Gracious LORD who orderest all things sweetly and who dost dispose whatsoever man doth purpose I humbly implore thy powerfull guidance and enlightning assistance in all this work for his sake who is Alpha and Omega the Way the Truth and the Life thy onely SONNE my blessed SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST Amen CHAP. II. 1 How GOD is immortall how angels and the souls of men how Adams body was mortall and yet immortall though compounded of contraries 2 Aristotles last words his death Holcot or the Philosophers pray for him Aristotle canonized by his followers Plato and Aristotle compared Vives taxed Adams body was not framed of â—he earth or dust of Paradise 3. Adam should not have been subject to any externall force he was Lord of the creatures inward distemper he could not have Adams bodily temperature Christs who was fairer then the children of Adam the helps for Adams body meat drink and sleep 4. Divers opinions of the tree of life If Adam had eaten of the tree of life before or after his fall he had lived for ever If he had not sinned he had not died though he had not tasted of the tree of life To what use the tree of life should have served 5. The Councel of Millan Cardinall Cajetan Richeomus the Jesuite Julianus Pomerius and S. Augustine think that Adam could not have died if he had not sinned The book of Wisedome Holcot Doctor Estius and two passages of Scripture Canonical are authorities evincing that Adam had in the state of innocency an immortall body 1. TO the full answering of the first question how or why Death was appointed for us I shall need to cleare but these two points That Adam for sinne was appointed to die That Adams sinne and punishment was propagated to us Thus sinne was the mother of death thus we were appointed to die because of sinne As a preparative to the first of these two points I hold it fit to demonstrate that Adam at first was made an immortall creature Concerning Adams soul and the spirits of all men descended from him that they are immortall I hope to prove it so soundly in an other part of this tractate that I will fear no other reproof but this that I bring too much proof for it Therefore supposing or rather borrowing that truth which by GODS grace shall be repayed with interest I now come to shew that Adams bodie was created immortall Immortall I say not as GOD is immortall who neither had beginning nor shall have end with whom is no shadow of change much lesse any reall substantiall change who hath as all other good things else so immortalitie eminently and so eminently that our Apostle in some sort excludeth all others and appropriateth it to him saying 1.
Tim. 6.16 GOD onely hath immortalitie Neither was the body of Adam immortall as the Angelicall spirits and souls of men which had a beginning but shall have no end Nor immortall as the counsels of GOD which had no beginning but shall have an end His bodie was not eternal but eviternal or immortall not absolutely immortall but conditionally it should never have tasted death if he had not first tasted of the forbidden fruit Immortall not as if it could not die but because it might and could have lived ever He had not non posse mori and so he was mortall he had posse non mori and so was immortall As mortall is taken for earthly animall and contra-distinct to spirituall so his bodie was mortall and terrene not spirituall or celestiall As he could not possibly die unlesse he had sinned his very bodie was immortall In the Schoole-phrase thus both mortall and immortall are taken two waies Mortall for one who must needs die thus Adam was not mortall in innocency but by sinne was made mortall who can die thus was he mortall yet onely in sensu diviso because he could sinne therefore could die Immortall for one who cannot die so Adam in innocency was not immortall save onely in sensu conjuncto * Adam in natura sua habuit mortalitatem quandam scilicet aptitudinem moriendi it à aliquam immortalitatem in natura sua habuit id est aptitudinem quâ poterat non mori he was immortall and could not die unlesse he sinned upon whom there is no necessity laid that he should die thus was he simply immortall Lumbard thus Adam had in his nature some mortalitie an aptnes to die so he had in his nature some immortality that is * Pet. Diac. de Gratia Christ lib. 1. cap. 6. Fulg. lib. 2. cap. 13. Max. Profess Fidei snae cap. 8. to wit an aptnes by which he might not die 2. Sent. dist 19. lit F. Further as some have said Adam was neither mortall nor immortall for thus wrote Petrus Diaconus and Fulgentius * Corpus Adae ante peccatum mortale secundum aliam immortale secundum aliam causam dici poterat De Genesi ad literam lib. 6. cap. 25. and Maxentius so others have written that Adam was made both mortall and â—â—mortall and all and every one of these in some sense is most true Augustine saith that Adams body before sinne may be said to be mortall in one respect and immortall in another as he there proveth at large Hierome hath a different strain and an unusuall phrase in one of his * Epist ad Paulum Concordiensem epistles wherein he maketh the body to be eternall till the serpent by his sinne prevailed against Adam and ascribeth a second kinde of immortality to the body because some of the first ages lived so long a time as about or above 900 yeares Even they who say Adams body was mortall agree in sense with me They distinguish thus It is one thing to be mortall and another thing to be subject to death If they grant to us that he was not obnoxious to death and could not die without finne I will not be offended much though they say he was mortall As this our flesh which now we have is not therefore not to be wounded because there is no necessitie that it should be wounded so the flesh of Adam in paradise was not therefore not mortall because there was no necessitie that it should die De peccat Meritis Remis l. 1. c. 3. saith Augustine So that this is but a meer logomachy They who call him mortall expound themselves that he could not mori unlesse he had sinned and I mean no more when I say he was immortall that is he could not have died in the state of innocencie without a precedent transgression he could not have been subject or obnoxius to death They say though he should not have died yet he was mortall I say he was therefore onely immortall because in that blessed estate he could not die Whether of these two contraries Mortall or Immortall do best fit Adam before he sinned let the reader judge As bodies are compounded of contrarieties they are subject to dissolution to the evidencing whereof let me recount what Holcot saith on Wisedome 12.22 upon these words We should look for mercy 2 Aristotle saith Holcot spake these his last words IREIOYCE THAT I GO OUT OF THE WORLD WHICH IS COMPOUNDED OF CONTRARIES BECAUSE BACH OF THE FOURE ELEMENTS IS CONTRARY TO OTHER AND THEREFORE HOW CAN THIS BODY COMPOUNDED OF THEM LONG ENDURE Then he dyed and the Philosophers prayed for him saith Holcot And because he did scorn to be behinde the Philosophers in love to Aristotle Holcot himself secondeth their prayers thus * Ille qui suscipit auimas philosophorum suscipiat animam tuam He that receiveth the souls of Philosophers let him receive thy soul This he speaketh to Aristotle by a part of that little Rhetorick that Holcot had or was used in his dayes or otherwise it might be the prayer of the Philosophers related by Holcot for the words are doubtfull No marvell therefore if after this our Christian Peripateticks the Divines of Culleyn have made Aristotle a Saint as they did if we beleeve * Corn. Agr. De Vanit Scient Cornelius Agrippa and perhaps prayed to him as devoutly as others prayed for him * Dinis annumerant They count him among the Gods saith Agrippa in his 45 Chapter though Agrippa himself be of a contrarie opinion for he saith * Ipsis Daemouibus dignum factus sacrificium Aristotle killed himself being made a sacrifice worthy of the Devils Sure I am I have read in a book Of the life and death of Aristotle in the beginning whereof the Poët prayeth to GOD from heaven to help him to write concerning Aristotle acceptable things and to speak in his words De sapiente viro cujus cor lumine miro Lustrâsti Divae super omnes Philosophiae Quem si non fractum lethi per flebilis actum Adventus prolis Divae veri quoque Solis Post se liquisset fidei qui vi micuisset Creditur à multis doctoribus artis adultis Quòd fidei lumen illustrans mentis acumen Defensatorem vix scivisset meliorem From whence the commenting questionist examineth Whether Aristotle would have been in an high degree the great champion of the Christian faith if he had lived after Christs time And he resolveth affirmatively because Aristotle had the best intellect among all the creatures under the sunne for supernaturals saith he are given according to the disposition of naturals * Cum conatu hominum with mens endeavour grace distilling on man according as he well useth the talent of nature But at the end of that book the Expositor strikes all dead in these words * Concludendo finaliter cum veritate dico c. Concluding
was reserved for him and fore-promised Genes 1.26 so soon as he was created the dominion was assigned over to him verse 28. And if no beast hurt Noah or his familie in the Ark though everie Creature imitated Adam and rebelled against him their Lord as he did against his Lord God much lesse could they have hurt Adam persevering in innocencie During which estate the lambe and the wolf the lion and the dragon would not have hurt one another much lesse would they have hurt Man least of all would the issue of Adam have done him violence or have said as the wicked in the Gospell This is the heir let us kill him and divide the inheritance Matt. 21.38 For then there had been no distinction of Lord Heir and Servant nor strife for inheritances It is too too true that the higher bodies and the heavenly powers do now besides their ordinarie influences sometimes dart down among us hurtfull and noxious qualities the workers of sicknes and destruction so that in divers Regions have been Epidemical popular diseases which in the great conjunction of Planets falleth out saith Prolemee Alcabitius with other Astronomers But then the heavens should have dropped plentie poured down health and no bane-full qualitie could have descended from them As for lightning and thunder and the now-right-ayming thunderbolts the armies of Gods wrath and messengers of death either there should have been none the aire then needing no purifying or at least not hurtfull or dangerous Lastly if Satan could have used outward violence and destroyed Adam or his posteritie that way perhaps he would never have brought in Death by the back-doore of sinne and never have undermined him by such hidden baits and lurking temptations Likewise inward distemper he had none nor could have and thus it appeareth There is a twofold temperature Vniformis all humours being exactly in the same degree Difformis one humour ruling prevailing over the rest The first may be called temperamentum ad pondus which is proportion Arithmetica when all the foure qualities are equally weighed and tempered so that there is no predominancie no superioritie nor can be but all parts are equipondiall and even The second is termed temperamentum ad justitiam which is Geometrica proportio when the foure qualities hang unevenly in the balance yet fitted to the best service and use of the body Whether of these two tempers was in Adam I will not define But if there were in his bodie difforme temperamentum it was so perfect yea equal in in equalitie as was fit for such a bodie as might be fit for such a soul such was the mixture of humours by the divine hand of God compounding them that both he and we should have lived in the flower of youth for ever if Adam had not offended What the bodilie constitution of the first Adam was may be thought to be the same or the like of the second Adam to whom the Psalmist singeth Psal 45.2 Pulchruisti prae filijs hominum Thou art fairer then the children of men Perpulchruisti as Vatablus rendereth it which can not be so properly understood of Solomon as of Christ who not onely superabounded in all vertues and vertue is fairer then the morning-starre saith Aristotle but also in all comely proportion and bodilie beautie * Prae filiis hominum quare non prae Angelis quid voluit dicere prae filiis hominum nisi quia homo Then the children of men why not then the Angels What means he by saying Then the children of men but because he is a man as S. Augustine on the place reasoneth most acutely inferring that not Christs divinitie but even his humane nature is in this place commended for beautie Though the Prophet saith of him Esai 53.2 He had no form nor comelines yet he speaketh it in the person of the Jews and as they thought saith Hierome on the place Or he had no comelines in his own apprehension as Christ himself in great humilitie might undervalue his own worth Thirdly I may expound all passages seeming to vilifie Christs bodily shape onely comparatively with reference unto his divinitie thus the bodily beautie of Christ is not to be nam'd or to stand in competition with the Deitie Fourthly and most properly in my opinion Esa◠describeth Christ as he was to be in his Agonie and Passion his body rent and torn with rods so rufully that David in the first and literal sense if not in that sense onely compareth the tormentors to plowers and the dintes impressions and the bruised bloudy concavities and slices to furrows The plowers plowed upon my back and made deep furrows his face spit upon his temples gored and bleeding by the Crown of thorns which was not onely platted on his head but fastned in it by the beating with canes his body black-and-blew by their striking his hands and feet digged throughout with great nails that I may use the metaphor of the Psalmist rather digged foderunt then pierced to shew the latipatencie of his wounds his side so rent a sunder so broad and wide that Thomas thrust his hand into it Take Christ as bearing our griefs as wounded for our transgressions as bruised for our sinnes as weltered in his streaming blood I will say as Esai said of him or as the Psalmographist I am a worm and no man a reproach of men and despised of the people Psal 22.6 But consider him before his Passion * In ejus facie syderéum quiddam illuxit Totum ejus corpus fuitspeciosum quia formatum virtute Spiritus Sancti in cujus opere non potest esse error aut defectus Lyran. in Ps 45. There shined some starrie thing in his face saith S. Hierome and his whole body was beautifull because formed by the power of the holy Ghost in whose work there can be no errour nor defect saith Lyranus Thou art fairer then the children of Adam so it is in the Originall Augustine Cassiodorus on the place and Chrysostom Homil. 18 on Matth expound it of Christs corporeall feature I think I may say if Christ exceeded not Adam yet he was equall to him The first Adam was made out of virginall dust the second out of virginal flesh and bloud both of them being framed by the miraculous hand of God but miracles do more exceed naturalls then naturalls do artificialls What is thy beloved more then another beloved O thou fairest among women say the daughters of Jerusalem to the Church their Mother Cant. 5.9 She answereth in the next verse My beloved is white and ruddy a goodly person as the Bishops Bible readeth it or as the late Translation hath it the chiefest among ten thousand * Partium congruentia cum quadam coloris suavitate Aug. De Civit. 22.19 Whether beautie be to be defined Aptnesse of parts with some pleasantnesse of colour as S. Augustine opineth or A convenient medly of white and red especially as from this place
may seem probable certain it is Christ wanted no comelines nor beautie though he had no womanish or effeminate shape Tom 4. Disput 1. quaest 14. punct 2. but such as was most befitting a man saith Gregorie de Valentia Thou art beautifull O my love as Tirzah comely as Jerusalem Cant. 6.4 and Thou art all fair there is no spot in thee Cant 4.7 In which regard perhaps it was that though the humors of Christs body did increase with the increase of his bodie and grew up from infancie to puerilitie from it to juvenilitie thence to virilitie yet there was so harmonious a proportion if not of weight yet of justice that we read not any one part of Christs bodie to have been out of tune excepting in his Agonie and Passion when his very bones were out of joint nor is he recorded to have been sick at any time nor so much as inclining to sicknes all his life Non suscepit infirmitates individui sed speciei He took not upon him the infirmities of particular men but of mankinde as to be weary to mourn to weep to be hungry thirstie to suffer to die As for sinne and diseases flowing from sinne he was subject to none nor to personall defects but onely to the generall defects of humane bodies Indeed it is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bas in Reguâ—is breviorâ—â—us quaest 177. Esai 53.4 Surely he took our infirmities and bare our sicknesses but Basil expounds it thus He bare our sicknesses not that he did transferre them upon himself but because he healed those that were sick Where he semes to remove all sicknes from Christ Besides Adam his excellent temper consider his food he had all the trees of the garden for meat except the forbidden one The healthie waters about Paradise he had for drink Wholsome things he knew from hurtfull if any hurtfull things were His giving them names doth prove that he was acquainted with their natures As for taking too much or too little it could not be whilest his soul was innocent and spotlesse For he had originall justice which in the use of lawfull meats should subject his senses and his appetite unto reason As for clothing he needed it not Innocency apparelled him till he put off the robe of righteousnes and so it should have continued Lastly as Adam in Paradise had a deep sleep which fell upon him Genes 2.21 which I confesse was extraordinarie so Augustine Aug. De Civ t. 14.16 Tertul. De Anima cap. 24. Tertullian and the School after them do yeeld that ordinarie sleep was not excluded out of Paradise but in the night he was allowed sleep So that Adam enjoying all things necessarie delightfull or convenient which concerned his bodie we may safely conclude the first reason That since neither outward force nor inward distemper could befall Adams body if he had continued in innocencie his body should never have tasted of death and so was and so should have been immortall And this will yet more plainly appeare if we will weigh the reasons following 4. Among the trees of the garden there was the tree of life which Adam had libertie freely to eat of Some think it was appointed as a means to translate Adam to immortalitie without sicknes or death Others say it would hinder the losse of naturall heat and radicall moisture whereby though yeares or age yet weaknes or de crepitnes should not come nigh him Others say that it being once tasted should bring perfect immortalitie even such immortalitie as we should have after the Resur rection See Bellarmine de Gratia primi hominis cap. 28. and Mr. Salkeld in his Treatise of Paradise where in some whole Chapters he hath laboriously collected and copiously explained the various opinions concerning the tree of life Take my gleanings after their full vintage and taste what I have gathered Though Lumbard Sent. 2. Dist 29. Lit. F. questioneth Whether Adam before his sinne did eat of the tree of life and out of Augustine concludeth there That they did eat as it was commanded that they should eat of every tree fave one yet I can no way agree with him This his errour is grounded on an other which he hath cited Distinct 9. of the same book in the letters B and C That Adam was commanded to eat of the tree of life and that he should have sinned if he had not used it For first It was not a command but a permission God gave the use of the tree no otherwise to man Genes 1.29 then to the beasts and fowls the green herbs verse 21 but this was by way of indulgence not of command Secondly Genes 2.16 Of every tree of the garden thou may'st freely eat And though it be in the Hebrew Eating thou shalt eat yet it implieth no absolute precept Thirdly Genes 3.2 the woman saith We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden she saith not We musteat or We are charged much lesse presently so soon as we see them or before we do other things Fourthly Genes 9.3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you even as the green herb have I given you all things Are we commanded to eat every beast and every herb then whosoever forbeareth any one sinneth Or was there in this a difference between the grant unto Adam and the grant unto Noah and their posterities The second errour is of Lumbard That Adam did eat of the tree of life His proof out of Augustine falleth short even as it is cited though the place is mistaken by him and the words maym'd Indeed Augustine thus * Rectè profectò intelliguntur primi homines ante malignam persuasionem abstinuisse à cibo vetito atque usi fuisse concessis ac per hoc caeteris praecipuè ligno vitae De peccat Meritis Remis 2.21 Certainly it is well thought that our first parents before that malicious persuasion did abstain from the forbidden food and used such things as were granted them and consequently the rest specially the tree of life * Note first He saith granted not commanded as Noah ate not of every thing granted to him yet Noah spent many hundred yeares more time after the Floud then Adam did in Paradise Neither can I think Adam in that estate so addicted to his belly that he in so short a time would cat of so many of all and every tree Secondly Rupertus saith The eating of the tree of life but once Rup in Genes l. 3. cap. 30. had made them live for ever Augustine moreover addeth It is no where read in Genesis Aug. Cont. Adversar Legis Prophet 1.15 that Adam in Paradise did not eat of the fruit of the tree of life of which place by and by Now as Augustine is directly against me in the second point he is as directly against them in the first point * Vtendi ad escam omni ligno quod in Paradiso erat
acceperant potestatem Ibidem They had received power to eat of every fruit that was in Paradise To strengthen their side Augustine annexeth this reason What is more absurd then to beleeve that he would eat of other trees and not of that saith Augustine I answer perchance Adam thought that he had no need of that tree as yet as knowing both that he should not die if he did not sinne and that the time of his translation was not come Nor did those or the like thoughts savour of sinne or ignorance Augustine in this point is incoherent to himself saying * Gustus arboris vitae corruptionem corporis inhibebat The taste of the tree of life did hinder the corruption of the body Again * Vitae arbor medicinae modo corruptionem omnem prohibebat The tree of life by way of physick did prevent all corruption But say I if corruption seised not on Adam till he sinned what needed Adam till he sinned use that medicine since the sick have need of physician and physick and not the whole If Adam had eaten of the tree of life before he had eaten the forbidden fruit God would have kept him from the forbidden fruit as after he kept him from the tree of life or els the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good evill had not caused destruction the apple had not been deadly but Adam should have lived immortally This will not seem strange if you weigh what followeth If after Adam had sinned he had taken of the tree of life and eaten the fruit he had lived for ever Genes 3.22 for els what needed God to have placed such a watch and ward against him Again if Adam might have lived everlastingly for all Gods threat yea though he had now a dead body when God debard him from the tree of life if he had but eaten of it he should also have lived for ever if he had eaten of it before he sinned But saith Augustine * Post peccatum Adam potuit indissolubilis manere si à Domino permissum il li esset edere de arbore vitae Aug. lib. quaest Vet. Novi Testam c. 19. Tom. 4. After sinne Adam might have remained indissoluble if God had given him leave to eat of the tree of life The conclusion reacheth home against Augustine That Adam ate not of the tree of life before he ate of the forbidden fruit I think the malice of Satan egged Adam on to taste first of the unlawfull fruit the usher of death though the tree of life stood next unto it for both the tree of life was in the midst of the garden Genes 2.9 and the tree of knowledge of good and evill was also in the midst of the garden as appeareth in the same place and more plainly Genes 3.3 If any be so curious as to enquire what was the form and figure of the garden of Eden when two trees are just in the midst of it I answer We must not take the word Midst strictly or Mathematically but at large or Rhetorically When the Shunamite said 2. Kings 4.13 In medio populi ego habitans sum it is well rendred by our late Translatours I dwell among mine own people not as if the words inforced that she dwelt exactly in the midst of them The like Hebraism is used by Abraham Genes 18.24 Si fortè fuerint quinquaginta justi in medio civitatis that is Fiftie righteous within the citie not as if all the fiftie dwelt together in the exact middle of the citie David also useth the like phrase Psal 102.24 Take me not away in the midst of my dayes in which place as well as in the propounded difficultie we must not be too strict or rigorous upon the letter The like is in Esay 5.8 The last touch we will give at this point is thus God turned Adam and Eve out of Paradise and by Cherubims and a sword kept away the tree of life so that neither Adam nor his posteritie should be able to approach it And perhaps the Cherubims were purposely placed to confront Satan and his evill Angels lest they might bring to Adam and Eve or to their posteritie the fruit of the tree of life for if we had been immortally miserable cursed as Satan himself is was as much as he desired So great a vertue had the tree of life if once it had been eaten Let me adde in the third place If Adam had not sinned at all nor at all eaten of the tree of life yet he had not died for death was appointed for sinne and for nothing els Bonaventure saith * Impossibile est ' ut simul consistant innocentia corruptionis poena Bonav in 2. Sent. dist 19. art 2. It is impossible that innocencie and the punishment of corruption should stand together But to what use was then the tree of life The question was made of old by an adversarie to the Law and the Prophets * Ista arbor quae in Paradiso fructus vitae ferebat cui proderat That tree which bare fruit of life in Paradise to whom was it profitable I confesse Augustine answereth To whom but first to our first Parents the man and the woman placed in Paradise But that is the point to be proved Again Augustine there saith Enoch and Elias eat of that tree but saith he we must not hastily say that any other eateth of it but how unlikely are these things The adversarie of the Law and the Prophets might better have been answered That there was no more use of that tree then of others which were untasted for no man can think that they tasted of every one in so short a time Or what inconvenience ariseth if we say A profered curtesy not accepted came to nothing What can the adversarie conclude from thence for God profereth salvation and the means thereof to many who do not accept of it the fault being on Mans part and not on Gods To finish this point I resolve There was no use made of the tree of life as it fell out If it be further questioned What might have been the use thereof I answer That the exact specialties can not punctually be known Probable it is that the tree of life might have conferred much to the existence of life though not to the essence Adam should have lived howsoever and that immortally if he had not transgressed Gods commandement the tree of life might have been conducible to his better being yea to his best being by it he might have been changed from his terrestriall not-dying estate or immortall life to a celestiall and not onely an immortall but an unchangeable eternall life In which regard perchance the tree of life is stiled Genes 3.22 The tree 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hachajim of lives as profitable if tasted both to Adams present life which was in time to have its consummantem finem though not consumentem its end though not
its death and also to his future and more happie life which should never have end I summe up all with Augustines words * Cibus aderat nè Adam esuriret potus nè sitiret lignum vitae nè illum senecta dissolveret nullus intrinsecus morbus nullus ictus metucbatur extrinsecus De Civit. 14.20 There was meat lest Adam should hunger drink lest he should thirst a tree of life lest old age should dissolve him no inward disease no outward blow was feared A new Quaere may be made Whether if Adam after his sin had eaten of the tree life his posteritie as well as himself had lived for ever My answer setleth on the negative because Adams action had been personall not representative or ideall and his posteritie was neither to answer for his second sinne or after-offences nor to have received any benefit by his good deeds succeeding his fall but he stood alone for us and we were in him onely as he had power to keep or break the first commandement And now am I come to the second Topick place by which I undertook to prove that Adams body had been immortall if he had not sinned and that is Authoritie 5. Not S. Augustine alone but a whole Councell where he was present to wit the Milevitan Councell is strong on our side * Quicunque dixerit Adam primum hominem mortalem factum it à ut sive peccaret sive non peccaret moreretur in corpore hoe est de corpore exiret non peccati merito sed necessitate naturae Anathema sit Whosoever shall say that the first man Adam was made mortall so that whether he had sinned or no he should have died in body that is gone out of the body not for the desert of sinne but by the necessitie of nature let him be accursed And this curse fell heavy upon the Pelagians who did think that Adam should have died though he had not sinned for so they held saith * Lib. de Haeresibus cap. 88. Augustine Cajetan thus * In 1. Cor. 15.53 In the state of innocencie Adam had a corruptible body in regard of the flux of naturall moisture but not mortall Richeomus a Jesuit saith * In statu innocentiae Adam corpus habebat corruptibile quantum ad fluxum humidi naturalis sed non mortale If man was created mortall those threatnings where by God did denounce death unto him were unprofitable for Adam might have answered I know well enough that I shall die although I neither taste nor touch the tree of knowledge of good evill And again God in the production of every one of his works kept an exact and most beautifull symmetry between the matter and the form the body and the soul and such a symmetrie as was most fit and accommodate to * Si komo mortalis creatus fuit inutiles crant illae minae quibus ' Deus mortem illi intendebat poterat namque respondere c. In Valedictione animae devotae Colloq 32. obtain the end of everie creature furnishing the matter with qualities and instruments most apt and pliable to serve the vertues and faculties of the form Therefore the soul of man being immortall and the faculties and operations proportioned to the essence the body also then must needs be immortall Item In every good marriage two things are observed at least the qualities of the parties and their age Therefore unto the soul which is free from the tyranny of death God married the body which was free also from the grave-clothes and bands of death Death is the brood of sinne saith Julianus Pomerius Adam was so created * Colloq 34. that having discharged his duty of obedience without the intervention of death he should have been followed of Angelicall immortality and blessed eternity He had immortalitie * Etiam ipsam nobis corporis mortem non lege naturae sed merito inflictam esse peccati De Civit. Dei 13.15 yet changeable not Angelicall and eternall As I began with S. Augustine so with him will I end It is a constat among Christians holding the Catholick Faith * Adâ—ujusque creaturae finem consequendum that even the death of the body hath been inflicted upon us not by the law of nature but by the desert of sinne * Peccatum est pater mertis Otherwhere he saith * Colloq 35. Sinne is the father of death Again * Vt perfunctus obedientiae munere sine interventu mortis Angelica eum immortalitas aeteinitas sequeretur beata If Adam had not sinned he was not to be stripped of his body but clothed upon with immortalitie that mortalitie might be swallowed up of life that is that he might passe from a naturall to a spiritual estate from an earthly to an heavenly from a mortal to an immortall as I truly interpret his meaning For he taketh not Mortall for that which must die And Again * Si non peccâsset Adam non erat expoliandus corpore sed supervestiendus immertalitate ut absorberetur mortale à vita id est ab animali ad spirituale transiret à terreuo ad coeleste à mortali ad immortale De peccat Merit Remis l. 1. cap. 2. It was not to be feared if Adam had lived longer that he should have been troubled with age or death For if God was so gracious to the Israëlites that for fourty yeares their clothes waxed not old upon them nor their shoes waxed old upon their feet Deutero 29.5 what marvell were it if God granted to obedient Adam * Ibid. cap. 3. that having a naturall and mortall body he should have in it some state and condition that he might be old without imperfection and at what time it pleased God he should come from mortalitie to immortalitie * Vt animale ac mortale habens corpus haberet in eo quendam statum without passing through death Where though S. Augustine seemes to say Adam had a mortall body and should have passed from mortalitie yet he taketh Mortale for all one with Animale and opposeth it to Spirituale So that I confesse Adam in Paradise had not a spirituall body not such a bodie as he and we shall have after the Resurrection And thus the body which he had may be called Animale or Mortale and yet S. Augustine with us and we with him acknowledge this truth that the body of Adam could not have died if he had not sinned and in that regard Adams body may be justly termed immortall not with reference to that heavenly and spirituall bodie which he shall have hereafter but immortall therefore because except for sinne his body as it was was free from death And the same Augustine hath a whole Chapter intituled thus * Sine media morte Against the doctrines of those that beleeve not that the first men had been immortall if they had not sinned Among such a
troup may I put in somewhat unthought of by others Some have said truly that the divine providence and preserving power which extendeth to the least things in our declined estate as to the lives of birds and beasts and the fall of every hair God not being * Contra eorum dogmata qui primos homines si non peccâssent immortales futuros fuisse non credunt De Civit. 13.19 lesse in the least things then he was in the greatest and governing all things in number weight and measure would have much more watcht over Adam and his ofspring continuing perfect But this is that which I propose Whether the good Angels did immediatly minister unto Adam in his integritie and should have done unto us to keep mankinde from harm To which I answer That since the Prophet Psal 91.11 describing the blessed estate of the godly maketh this one especiall branch He shall give his Angels charge over thee to keep thee in all thy wayes and verse 12. They shall bear thee up in their hands lest thou dash thy foot against a stone I can not but think that the same Angels should have watcht over us and friendly conversed with us in our innocencie For God reduceth * Deus non minor est in minimis quâ—m in maximis the lowest things to the highest by the middle working by subordination of causes Yea * Infima ad suprema per media grant that this is spoken of the Sonne of God onely which by the Evangelists Matt. 4.6 and Luke 4.9 seemeth to be the Devils argute inference yet it excludes not their watching over us and their ministerie if we had not fallen whose very office and name consist in being ministring Spirits All being sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation Heb. 1.14 which out of doubt both Adam and his issue continuing in perfection should have been But leaving these things Christs answer to Satan proves that unto whom these words were said He shall give his Angels charge over thee c. unto the same was also said Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God Matt. 4.7 which was not spoken to Christ alone or principally but in the plurall number to the Israëlites and others succeeding them as appeareth Deuter. 6.16 Ye shall not tempt the Lord your God as ye tempted him in Massah They are deceived whosoever imagine the ministerie of Angels should not have been any way necessarie if Adam had not sinned since Christ the immaculate Lambe of God who sinned not nor could sinne refused not their ministerie Matth. 4.11 and comfort or strength Luke 22.43 and since one Angel strengthneth himself with an other Dan. 10.21 and Revel 12.7 and since they might have ministred more matter of joy unto us by their most familiar conversation in assumed bodies Unto these authorities let me adde two memorable places out of the Apocrypha The first is Wisd 1.13 God made not death Satan begot it sinne brought it forth Adam and Eve nurst it The other passage is in Wisd 2.23 God created man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be immortall made him an image of his own eternity On which words Holcot thus Corporeall creatures have onely a footstep of God Man is the image of God Again * Quantum fuit ex parte Dei creavit hominem inexâ—crminabile msecundum corpus On Gods part he created him unperishable according to the body And there he hath a large discourse proving howsoever Aristotle Metaph. 8. defineth Man to be a reasonable creature mortall that the opposite is true and he resteth in it For Aristotle knew not Adams innocencie but spake of us as we are in the state of sin Whosoever desireth to read more curiosities strange and learned concerning the bodily immortalitie of Adam at the Creation let him read Estius on the second of the Sent. Distinct 19. But to confirm the truth delivered in the book of Wisdome the last and the best kinde of authoritie shall be produced out of the unquestionable Canon death is stiled our Enemy 1. Corinth 15.26 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inimicus as Hierome on the 27. of Esai readeth it hostis saith Valla therefore death is not naturall or kindly to us but rather a consort and fellow-souldier of Satan and sinne who fight against us But the sharp-pointed places are in Genes 2.17 In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die or dying thou shalt die Mortalis eris as Symmachus well translates it or morti obnoxius as Augustine well expounds it and Genes 3.3 Ye shall not touch it lest ye die therefore they should not have died if they had not touched the forbidden fruit And so they both were and ever might have been immortall When the woman of Sarepta said to Eliah * 1. Kings 17.18 Art thou come unto me to call my sinne to remembrance and to slay my sonne doth she not secretly intimate that sinne is a murtherer And if there had been no sinne there had also been no death * In 2. Sent. dist 19. quaest 1. in and by her evident confession that her sinne was the cause of his death Scotus shall determine the point Punishment can not be without fault but death is the punishment of sinne and during the state of innocency there could be no sinne therefore no death I have dwelt the longer on this part because every reason authoritie by which I have proved that Adams bodilie estate in the time of innocency was immortall affordeth also by way of preparative a binding argument to evince that Adam for sin was appointed to die which is the first of the two Propositions which I propounded In which words we intend to handle these things First somewhat concerning death Secondlie that Adam was appointed to die for one sinne onely Thirdly that it was for Adams own sinne onely and not for Eves Fourthly we will enquire what that sinne was O Onely-wise God who createdst Man in thine own likenes and madâ—st him the Image of thine own eternitie I beseech thee to renew in me that decaied Image make me like unto thee give me the favour to taste of the Tree of Life which is in the midst of the Paradise of God and to drink of the pure River of the Water of Life clear as Crystall proceeding out of the Throne of God and of the LAMBE Heare me O blessed SAVIOUR for thine infinite Merit and mercies sake Amen CHAP. III. 1. Death is a bitter-sweet Enoch and Elias Raptures were not painfull to them Christs Transfiguration and the manner of it That it was not painfull to him Adams translation to a life celestiall and a body spirituall should not have been painfull if he had not sinned They who shall be changed at Christs coming shall by it finde no pain Death is painfull 2. Man-kinde died the first minute of their sinne God draweth good out of evill Death in some regard is changed from a
punishment to be a favour and blessing of God 3. Not many or more sinnes but one caused death One onely David begotten in lawfull wedlock That this one sinne is not lesse in the godly nor greater in the wicked Death was appointed for one sinne onely of one person onely 4. This one person onely was Man this Man that sinned that one sinne was Adam Strange and curious speculations that Eve sinned not that sinne for which man-kinde was appointed to death 5. Two Schoole-speculations propounded The second handled at large as expounding the former and determined against the Schoolmen themselves viz. That the children of innocent Adam had been born confirm'd in grace The censure of Vives upon these and the like points A part of his censure censured 1. COncerning Death I mean in this place to touch onely the strange medly that is mixed in it of Sower Sweet The sowernes or bitternes of death is discerned because that manner of secession or departure is onely painfull whereas all other approaches unto glorie all other stairs steps and means inducing to blessednes are void of pain Let us see it exemplified in Enoch He walked with God and was not for God took him Genes 5.24 His manner of not-being as he was before whatsoever it were or howsoever was never held painfull Secondly the chariot of fire and the horses of fire which parted Eliah and Elisha both asunder 2. Kings 2.11 hurt neither of them Elijah saith the place went up by a whirlwinde into heaven the very form of words implying a willing-easie ascent nor did the whirlwinde molest him or pain him though Ecclesiasticus 48.9 it is said it was a whirlwinde of fire Christs Transfiguration comes next to be considered It was a true representation of that bodilie glorie which at the recollection retribution of all Saints God will adorn and cloth the faithfull withall Christ shewing them the mark at which they ought to shoot for we also are to be fashioned or configured to his transfiguration Philip. 3.21 * Qualis futurus est tempore judicandi talis Apostolis apparuit As he is to be at the time of judging such did he appeare to the Apostles saith Hierom on Matth. 17. And let not man think he lost his old form and face saith he or took a body spirituall or aëriall the splendor of his face was seen and the whitenes of his vestments described * Non substantia tollitur sed gloria commutatur The substance is not taken away but the glory is changed Or that I may utter it in Theophylacts words on Mark 9.2 By the transfiguration so Oecolampadius should translate it understand not the change of character and lineaments but the character remaining such as it was before an increase was made of unspeakable light This admirable light not coming from without to him as it did to Moses but flowing from his divinitie into his humane soul from it into his body and from it into his very clothes will you say his clothes were changed saith S. Hierom His raiment became shining exceeding white as snow so as no fuller on earth can white them Mark 9.3 And his face did shine as the Sunne Matth. 17.2 What S. Chrysostom saith of the spirituall bodies of the Saints I will much more rather say of Christs body transfigured for if starre differeth from starre in glorie man from man much more shall Christ shine above all other men by infinite degrees They shall shine as the Sunne not because they shall not exceed the splendor of the sunne Aquin part 3. q. 45. art 2. but because we see nothing more bright then the sunne he took the comparison thence And this shining saith Aquinas * Fuit gloriae claritas essentialiter licèt non secundum modum cùm suerit per modum transeuntis passionis was essentially a claritie of glory though not in the manner seeing it was by way of a transient passion as the aire is inlightned of the sunne whereas * Ad corpus glorificatum redundat claritas ab anima sicut qualitas quaedam permanens to a glorified body claritie from the soul doth accrue as some permanent qualitie Which essentiall claritie Christ had from his nativitie yea from his first conception yet by dispensation he ecclipsed it ever till he had accomplished our redemption except at this time when appeared a brightnes of glory though not a brightnes of a glorious body not imaginary unlesse you take imaginary as synonymall with representative but reall though transitorie Can any one think that herein was any pain or rather not infinite pleasure The beholders rejoyced they could not do so at the pain of Christ If there were any pain or grief it would rather have been so at the withdrawing of his unusuall claritie which not being likely the manifestation of this claritie at this transfiguration was lesse likely to be painfull The fourth and last kinde of degree to happines is translation not onely as Enoch was translated from one life to an other kinde of life but such a translation as should have been of Adam if he had not sinned and shall be of such as shall be alive at Christs coming Adams translation had been sine media morte Nor was his slumber painfull nor solutio continui at the drawing out of his rib nor the closing of the flesh again nor is it likely there was in Adams side any scar the badge of pain and sorrow much lesse should he have had pain at his translation Pain is the grand-child of sinne the daughter of punishment from both which the estate of innocency was priviledged Every thing in the Creation was very good Genes 1.31 Every tree was pleasant to the sight and good for food Genes 2.9 and could the tree of life cause pain By tasting the fruit thereof Adam and his ofspring had come to an higher and more unchangeable happines The middesse was then proportionate to the beginning and to the end Sorrow was part of the curse innocency could not feel pain much lesse shall eternall happines and should the tree of life have caused pain Then were there little difference between it and the tree of knowledge of good and evill Or what difference in that point would there be between Adams death which was painfull and his translation if it should have been painfull As concerning the translation of them that shall be found alive at the last day I am thus conceited That there shall be no true and reall separation of their souls from their bodies at least so much as concerneth the righteous That they shall be changed That they shall put on immortalitie If it be delightfull now to our bodies to receive ease shall it be painfull to be clothed with incorruptibility It shall be done in a moment in the twinkling of an eye 2. Cor. 5.4 Nolumus expoliari saith the Apostle shewing the unwillingnes of men to die sed supervestiri
lapis Dontinus Salvator sine manibus id est absque coitu humano semine de utero virginali Hâ—eron in Dan. 2.34 Quid est Praecisus de monte sine manibus Natus de Gente Judaeorum sine opere hominum Omnes enim qui nascuntur de opere maritali nascuntur ille de Virgine natus sine manibus natus est per manus enim opus humanum significatur quò manus humanae non accesserunt ubi maritalis amplexus non fuit foetus tamen fuit Aug. in Psal 99.5 ipsi 70 secuto 98 sub finem a stone cut out without hands Daniel 2.34 without the help of man as he was if he had not been conceived by the Holy Ghost if the Blessed Virgin had not been over-shadowed by the power of God onely if Christ had been begotten by one of the sonnes of Adam with an ordinarie and naturall generation even Christ himself had had both originall and actuall sinne and had died for himself by and through Adam and had wanted a Redeemer for himself much lesse could he be our Redeemer But Christ was that STONE This Stone which the builders refused is become the head-stone of the corner Psal 118.22 A tried stone a precious corner-stone asure foundation Esai 28.26 Let me adde a little Since Adam was made without the help of man or woman and Eve came of man without woman since all the whole world of rationall people proceed from both man and woman it was convenient enough that there should be a miraculous and fourth kinde of generation different from all the rest namely that Christ should come of a woman alone without the assistance of man that he might be free from originall sinne which was first committed by Adam and his masculine brood and not without his seed and the artifex spiritus in it In which regard without derogation to the thrice-blessed Mother of our Lord that holy-aeviternally Virgin Mary now next to her Sonne the greatest Saint in heaven and placed deservedly above Angels and Archangels Cherubims and Seraphims great Divines do make this difference She who was not begotten but by man was subject to originall sinne but her sonne the Sonne of God was free even in his humane Nature from all infection originall and actuall because in his framing there was no admisture of virile and masculine cooperation For the poisoning of our nature arose from Adams sinne and not from Eves Moreover if by miracle God should preserve a man from any touch or tickling smach of lustfull sinne in the act of generation the fathers personall holines should not discharge his childe from originall mire for the traducted nature is corrupt * Bell. De Amiss gratiae Statu peccati 4.12 Bellarmine goes one step further thus If both man and woman the children of Adam by Gods singular priviledge were exempted from lust in the generation of their children yet should they transmit sinne to their ofspring For though S. Augustine saith expresly * Non generationem sed libidinem esse quae propriè peccatum traducit De peecat Merit Remis 1.9 that it is not the generation but the lust which properly transmits sinne yet S. Augustine may be interpreted to speak of generations meerly usuall and wholy naturall not priviledged or extraordinarie Cursed therefore are the Pelagians who say Sinne and death entred by Eve Sinne personall did but not originall nor death Grosse is the ignorance of the Pelagians who when the Apostle saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 think to delude it with this silly shift that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth either man or woman and say it is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which must needs have been understood of Adam onely I answer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is fully equivalent to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 since 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not and can not be understood of the feminine Secondly the Apostle maketh the Antithesis between that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Christ which can not be between Eve and Christ Thirdly a little after the Apostle twice expresseth Adam but never nameth or meaneth Eve Lastly it is said remarkably concerning Abraham Hebr. 11.12 There sprang even of one and him as good as dead many And more approaching to our purpose Act. 17.26 God made all mankinde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of one bloud with apparent reference to Adam onely Therefore as the naturall generation is ascribed to Adam and Abraham onely though Eve and Sara in their sort concurre to the materiall part of the embryon because the Men do conferre the formall so the degenerating unto vice is justly imputed to Adam onely though Eve did minister the occasion because his consent and action onely could give form and shape to that prodigious sinne which overthrew mankinde 5. From this point more questions may yet arise First If Adam Eve had not sinned but Cain or some other of their children whether that sinne had been derived to their posteritie * Aquin. quaest 5. De Malo art 4. Aquinas is for the affirmative others for the negative Because the first man onely represented our whole nature all other mens sinnes are particular and personall can not infect others Thus farre Scharpius I make a second Question If Adam and Eve had continued in innocencie and had been confirmed in grace whether any of their children could have sinned Augustine embraceth the affirmative of this Question saying * Aug. De Civit. 14.10 As happie as Adam and Eve were so happie had been the whole companie of mankinde if they nor no stirp of them committed sinne which should receive damnation The same * De Gen. ad lit 9.3 elsewhere The children which should have been begotten of innocent Adam and Eve * Ad eundem perducerentur statum si omnes justè obedienterque vixissent had been led to the same state if they all had lived justly and obediently * Est in 2. Sent. dist 20. paragr 5. Estius seconds him alledging these reasons First Adam and Eve had not begotten children in better condition then themselves were created of God therefore they should have begot just children but not confirmed in justice Secondly Angels were not ordained to blessednes but by the merit of their free-will to good or evill and we are to think the like of men * Non priùs erantin termino constituendi quà m viae hujus curriculum quod est tempus merendi peregissent They were not to be settled in the end till they had finished the course of this way which is the time of meriting Thirdly Hugo and Lumbard say God propounded to Adam and Eve invisible goods and eternall to be sought by their merits and ordained that by merit they might come to reward Aquinas * Aquin. part 1. quaest 100. art â— determineth That children born in the state of innocencie had not been confirmed in justice yae * Non videtur possibile
quòd pueri in statu innocentiae nascerentur in justitia confirmati it seems not possible that in the state of innocencie children should be born confirmed in justice So Aquine and Gregorie de Valentia on him A second way is taken by * Abul in Gen. 3. quaest 6. 7. Abulensis and followed by * Cath. in locum Catharinus viz. That if Adam had not sinned his posteritie should have been confirmed in originall justice but not in gratia gratum faciente in saving grace Where they do very ill to set such inward friends so much at odds for originall justice and gratia gratum faciens differ onely ratione not re and none could have one that had not both they being in the state of innocencie glued inseparably but they had been born in gratia gratum faciente saith * Aquin. part 1. quaest 100. art 1. ad 2. Aquine Therefore do I conclude both with Aquine against them that the posteritie of innocent Adam had been born in gratia gratum faciente and with them against Aquine that they had been confirmed in originall justice Scotus seeing the inconveniences of Aquin's position takes a third way namely That the posterity of just Adam should have been born both in justice and grace but not confirmed till they had overcome their first temptation Before I come to grapple with Scotus I must first trie my strength against Aquinas from whose position these three consequences do necessarily flow as * Est in 2. Sent. dist 20. Parag. 5. Estius his great disciple confesseth First that some of Adams children might have continued obedient others might have been disobedient to God Secondly That the just children of innocent Adam should have been tempted by Satan not once onely but often Thirdly That without temptation they might have sinned by their own will onely Against the first consequence I thus argue If some of innocent Adams children had sinned should they have had any children or none Not none for the blessing of Crescite Multiplicamini reached to all Should their children then naturally have been good or bad Not good and innocent for that is not the issue of actually disobedient offenders If they had been born wicked then had their generations so been and the generations from them to the Worlds end and millions of souls had perished which fell not in Adam but in and by their other parents which crosseth the main current of Divinitie For Adam onely represented all mankinde and in him onely were we to stand or fall Adam in Paradise even before his sinne was a Type of Christ compare Genes 2.24 with Ephes 5.30 c. and stood idealiter for us all See Rom. 5.12 c. He was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Adamerat nos omnes nos omnes eramus ille unus Adam By Aquins consequence more first Adams are set up by which mankinde might have fallen and so more second Adams to restore them But by one man came death and by the bloud of onely one are we redeemed Again if innocent Adams just children though unconfirm'd had begot just unconfirmed children yet after that generation these unconfirm'd fathers had sinned what children should they have begot after their sinne should the same father have brought forth life and death good children and bad and seen some of his children happie and himself and other children miserable And suppose the mothers had sinned and not the fathers should the mothers have been in the stead of the first Adam should the children have fallen in them or no A third absurditie followeth from Aquins position namely That the righteous should have begotten not one constantly righteous from the beginning to the Worlds end but everie one that had sinned should have begotten sinfull children for ever And so for one that had continued righteous and been tranlated millions might have been sinners and died Lastly no one man had been certain of his salvation any time of his life though he had lived never so long and never so justly which yet even in statu lapso hath been granted to some few Against the second consequence from Aquins doctrine viz. That even the just children of innocent Adam should have been tempted by Satan not once but often I oppose these demands How many times are included in the word often or when should there have been an end of tempting If at any set time of their life why at that time and never before nor after If they should have been tempted all the dayes of their life the felicitie of Eden might have been more troubled and fluid then the waters of it and I might justly say O poore Paradise unsetled integritie provoked or tempted innocence tremulous estate where Satan the stronger had power alwaies to tempt and malice enough to charge home with cunning and man the weaker had power alwaies to fall The third consequence is somewhat questionable as inferring that all and every of Mankinde even without any temptation might have sinned by their own will onely making the happines of Paradise worse then our present unhappines where man sinneth not but being tempted either by Satan or his own concupiscence Jam. 1.14 For all the evill thoughts of our will are truly divided into * Immissas ascendentes injected and ascending and none of the ascending have been in the will before they were in the understanding and nothing hath been in the understanding that hath not been in the senses Besides death was to be inflicted not for the sinne of the will onely or meerly but for the eating of the forbidden fruit These or the like or worse inconveniences perhaps made Scotus to varie from Aquine and more probably to defend That upon triumph over their first temptation every one of the children of innocent Adam had been confirmed in grace We may not yeeld this saith Estius And it is not true and there is no reason for it and it little agreeth with the commination In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die Genes 2.17 saith Gregorie de Valentia I answer That the words In the day may prove that they might not have been tempted the first or second day or in a short time but they hinder not but upon overcoming of their first temptation they might every day after have been confirmed Again the commination was not spoken to Adam as an individuall person but to him as the Feoffee of mankinde If every one should have stood for himself and his posteritie what is Adams sinne more to me then Cains or my last and immediate fathers first actuall sinne if neither Adam nor any of his children had sinned before mine own father But since we did fall not personally in our selves not in our immediate parents not in any but Adam by the breach of that commination so on the contrarie not by any other parents obedience not by our own obedience but by the obedience of that one man unto that one
commination we should have stood yea have been confirmed Thus have you mine opinion against Scotus much more against Aquinas and this is my reason Naturally by the blessing of ordinarie generation every creature was to beget its like according to kinde the branch was to partake of the vertue and nature of the root and so without Adams representing us he should have begot us in such an estate as he himself was with a libertie to good and evill with a power to fall or not fall But as Gods infinite wisdome chose him out with expresse or tacit compact that if he stood all his posteritie should live in him and if he sinned they should all die in him it seemeth reasonable that we should have had as much good by him as we have had harm from him and he being to have been confirmed in grace upon the overcoming of the first suggestion should have begot us his children not voluble deambulatory and pendulous but like himself confirm'd in grace For as the Angels were confirm'd in grace so soon as they had declar'd them-selves to adhere to God or els when were they confirm'd or are they not confirmed yet * Statim post unum actum charitate informatum Angelus beatus fuit Aquin. part 1. quaest 62. art 5. Presently after one act informed with charitie the Angels were blessed saith Aquine so should Adam have been confirmed presently if he had powerfully adhered to God Yea I think if he had but at that first suggestion disliked Eves eating or rather kept her and himself from consenting to the eating that nor they nor any of their posterity should ever have eaten of the forbidden fruit But as it was placed at first in Paradise to be their Shibboleth of triall so ever after it should have continued as a Symbol onely of their obedience Again by this my opinion That all Adams issue should have been confirmed in his confirmation Gods justice is defended from aspersions cast upon it for damning some little children for the sinne of Adam which sinne they did neither commit nor could avoid And the fault of not avoiding it was no way arising from them because they who can not avoid certain damnation by Adam might also have received as certain salvation by him without their own victorie over any temptation which could not be unlesse by his confirmed innocency every one of his issue had been confirm'd in grace Anselmus cometh home to my thoughts saying thus * Anselm lib. 1. Cur Deus homo cap. 18. The first men yeelding to the temptation have subjected all mankinde that was to be born of them * Primi homines succumbentes temptationi totum genus humanum ex ipsis nasciturum subjecerunt necessitati peccati Quare si eam temptationem superâssents ipsi statim illius victoriae merito fuissent in justitia confirmati idem confirmatae justitiae beneficium ad totam posteritatem transmisissent to the necessitie of sinne Therefore if they had overcome that temptation they had both themselves been presently confirmed in righteousnes by the merit of that victorie and had also transmitted to the whole posteritie the same benefit of confirmed righteousnes Estius answereth Anselm thus The way is easier to the necessity of evill then of good as to incurable diseases rather then to a stable health I reply thus on Estius That his instances are in decaied nature which reach not to our point That the way was equally alike at first to Adam or rather easier to goodnes in which he was then to sin in which he was not yea in this our present infeebled estate one habitually grounded in vertue shall finde the passage over unto sinne more difficult perplexing thorny and laborious then the continuing in goodnes Out of Scotus his doctrine let me observe three points First he confesseth * Omnes nati servâssent justitiam non quia non servare non potuissent All their children had kept their righteousnes not because they could not but keep it So they could have sinned but should not in his opinion But are not they confirm'd who though they could sinne yet should not be suffered to sinne Secondly this confirmation in grace being a supernaturall gift had not been transfused by Adam but superadded by God unto every one as well as the gift of originall justice and grace I should have asked no more of Scotus if he had said it should have been given to us of God not for our personall vanquishing the first temptation but for our obedience in Adam according to Gods compact with him Thirdly confirmation in grace is of two sorts one fitting to the state of a Comprehensor or of supreme glorification This confirmation at its height and in its excellence nor Adam himself if he had stood nor his innocent issue should have had till their terrene bodies had been translated into spirituall The other confirmation agreeth with a Viator which is not without a possibilitie of sinne but having infallible custodie that he shall not sinne mortally This saith Scotus and the Scholium on him Adams innocent issue should have had But could they being confirm'd have sinned venially Let me adde two speculations more First God could not make a creature in which there should not sometime be a peccabilitie since that is a propertie onely of the Almightie If that tying of Gods hand seem harsh to any unconversant in the Schools I mitigate it thus by the like instance out of * Scal. Exercit. 249. in fine Scaliger When unto any thing God by his infinite powerfull perfection doth adde perfection he must at last surcease from bettering it and come to a NIL VLTRA for he can not make ENS ESSENTIA INFINITVM a thing of infinite essence for he should make another God Which words you must not understand as if we stinted Gods Almightie power but rather thus That God can alwayes better any thing even to infinitie but the creature and thing it self is not susceptible of that infinitie the imperfection resting not in God but in the creature To that effect Scaliger and it may be aptly applied to the making of a creature simply impeccable Secondly God did make Adam with a full free-will and a power to sinne or not to sinne Our will was in his and without offence to the Schools as in him we were in a sort and in one kinde Viatores before his fall so if he had stood wee had been as he himself should in a lesser degree Comprehensores For though Aquine maketh but simply singlie one confirmation in grace yet Scotus maketh a twofold confirmation and though Scotus saith Viator Comprehensor distinguuntur sicut esse circa terminum esse in termino yet there is a just distinction between Esse in termino completè esse in termino incompleté Christ in some sense may be said to have been both Viator and Comprehensor If Adam had been confirmed ere he
children confirmed in grace and yet generate which he denieth Because the supposed priviledge of the All-gracious Virgin doth not derogate from the glorie of our most blessed Redeemer I will not contradict it though it maketh her more perfect then God made Adam and Eve in their integritie Lastly why might not generating parents be confirmed in grace when in the act there should have been no turpitude no salacious motion no lascivious titillation and those members might have been used without any itch of ticklish pleasure as our hands and feet and some other parts are now Reade S. Augustine De Civit. 14.24 and 26. most fully of these things Unto Estius his second reason which is this Angels were not ordained to blessednes but by the merit of their free-will and man was not first to be placed at the goal or end but in the way I answer Every Angel was to stand or fall by his own proper actuall free-will Man was unlike to them therein Adams actuall consent for us stood exactly for the actuall consent of each Angel for no Angel fell in Lucifer as we did in Adam But to the second branch of his argument I confesse with Aquine * Anim a hominis Angelussimiliter ad bea titudinâ—m ordinantur The soul of man and an Angel are alike ordained to blessednes The way was necessarie before the goal the means before the end But I must adde Adam was in the way and we in the way by him and in him and as he brought us out of the way by his straying by-path so by his undeviation we had been kept in the way More might be added but the Question hath swollen above its banks already I must be brief though I be obscure What Hugo and Lombard require was performed by Adam for us Though Estius in this point maketh God like an hard task-master and man a meer journy-man yet much was given to him who deserved little even for one onely and the easiest houres work So might God have done to us for his promise unto Adams obedience for us In that estate perhaps he needed no merit challenging due reward as there shall be no new recompense for desert after we are glorified But if merit had had place it might after confirmation in grace have procured speedier translation to an unchangeable life the accidentals of beatitude might have been increased in us as they shall be in the Angels of light though long since they were confirmed in grace Scotus objecteth The children of innocent Adam should have been Viatores in the way to happines therefore they might have been sinners I answer Viator is considered according to a twofold estate First for him that walketh in a slippery and dangerous way where he may be in or out Thus was Adam Viator thus were we Viatores in Adam before his fall and thus we could have sinned yea did sinne which is more then Scotus his argument evinceth Secondly Viator is taken according to the estate of him who walketh in a good sure way where no by-path can be made Thus we being confirmed should have been Viatores and yet could not have been sinners and herein we had been like to blessed Angels yea the same man might have been Viator in one regard and Comprehensor in an other respect at the same time So was Christ so had Adam and his children been upon confirmation in goodnes not that they should have had that plenitude of comprehension which is to be enjoyed after the generall judgement but such a comprehension which had been agreeable to that present estate though susceptible of degrees and capable of more perfection where Comprehensor is synonymous with beatus onely but not beatissimus The same Scotus further reasoneth thus The grace confirmed by the Merit of Christ in Baptisme or other Sacraments confirm not the receiver Therefore much lesse should any Merit of any parent or childe have confirmed us in justice I answer The confirmation had rather been from Gods gracious promise to Adam and his seed then from any merit properly so called Secondly The graces of Christ exhibited in the Sacraments of initiation and corroboration shall draw us up to an infallible confirmation in the estate of glorie where we shall have more comfort delight and good by Christ then we had harm by Adam if he had not fallen of which hereafter To some arguments and authorities for my opinion some answers are shaped by the Schoolmen I will loose the argument from S. Gregorie because it ingendereth more questions when this is too copiously handled already Anselm speaketh home for me if ever man spake Aquinas saith He did it opining not affirming Yet he saw the reason which induced Anselm to that Assertion Scotus also slubbereth over the authoritie of Anselm winking as it seemeth when he should have read the direct words * Dion De Divinis Nominibus cap. 4. Dionysius saith Bonum est potentius malo Good hath more power and vertue then evill But say I for the sinne of the first man came a necessitie of sinning upon all his children Therefore if he had stood there should have been a necessitie of not sinning Scotus answereth in the first place as if Dionysius were to be understood of a great Evill and a little Good which plainely that Father never meant Secondly he jumpeth in sense with Aquine and both do answer That we are not so necessitated to sinning that we can not return to justice and Adams sinne was not cause of our confirmation in evill I reply we are so necessitated by our nature that of our selves and from our selves we can not return to justice We are obstinate and confirmed in evill in regard of our own disabilities though not confirmed in evill nor obstinate if we consider the powerfull mercy of God And this is enough to make the argument hold good There should have been a necessitie of not sinning of our part otherwise Evill should have been more powerfull then Good which is the contradictorie to Dionysius For we can not but sinne of our selves and are obstinate though we are not so obstinate as the damned nor should have been so confirmed by Adam as the glorified shall be Unto our argument drawn from the similitude of Angelicall reward Aquinas answereth Men and Angels are not alike I reply We were both like in some things and unlike in other but in this we had been like That as the Angels were confirmed presently upon their first obedience so had Adam been confirmed and we in him For God loved not Man worse then the Angels For Christ verily took not on him the nature of Angels but he took on him the seed of Abraham Heb. 2.16 Scotus yeeldes himself captive to the force of this reason save onely that he opineth That every one of Adams children should as well as Adam have been confirmed in grace upon their actuall overcoming of the first temptation suggested unto them whereas I
that have offered him the forbidden fruit she had been full of deceit and her intentions had been stained with the just aspersion of seducement But she might think her sinne was little or none and perswade herself she should not die and relate that perswasion to her husband or think onely of Gods mercy who had never tasted of his judgements And perhaps he seeing that she had touched the fruit and was not dead sunk under her enticements and did eat Before I part with this point two questions more must needs be answered First Whether Eve sinned the same sinne with Adam Secondly Whether of their sinnes were the greatest Concerning the first I answer In regard that both of them knew that to eat of the forbidden fruit was unlawfull and displeasing to God and yet did eat they sinned the same sinne but as the commandment was given to Adam before Eves creation as Adam was the root of mankinde and as his posterity was to stand or fall in him onely and not in Eve so she sinned not the same sinne with Adam She sinned the same sinne in respect of the outward eating not in regard of the inward obligation She sinned the same sin in se so much as concerned her own person she sinned not the same sinne extensivè erga alios For as her good actions considered by themselves should not have been the rule or square according to which our humane natures should have been framed but for all her uprightnes if Adam had sinned we had died so her sinne or sinnes setting Adam apart had not extended to the corruption or destruction of mankinde Though in innocencie they did see much yet they could then see no deformitie nay though Eve had sinned and sinned divers sinnes before Adam sinned any for she beleeved the Serpent distrusted God fell to unlawfull desires and did eat yet they were both blinde and neither Eve herself did consider her own faults as she should nor Adam Eves faults but immediately so soon as Adam had eaten Genes 3.7 The eyes of them both were opened and they knew that they were naked For their nakednes came by Adams sinne and not by Eves the same sinne of hers and his was not the same neither Adam nor we nor she herself by her sinnes were bare and naked of goodnes or had lost Bonum naturae but onely gratiae personalis but when once he had sinned he she and we were all naked our natures corrupt and to be ashamed of and both of them knew it Their eyes opened themselves so Tremellius hath it differing from the Hebrew and the Septuagint The truth is she sinned the same sinne twice for she ate first by herself and then her eyes were not opened Neither was she spoiled of originall justice saith Franciscus Aretinus as it was gratia gratis data nor did she feelthe motions of concupiscence or knew her own nakednes till Adam had sinned For if she had been deprived of grace so soon as she sinned she should have been ashamed of her nakednes neither durst she to have gone naked to her husband but for modestie would have sought some covering or fled into corners So farre Aretinus or Cornelius à Lapide who citeth him But after this her eating and this her sinne she cometh to her husband and offereth him some to eat and eateth with him the second time and perchance began to eat the second time ere he ate once and suffered him to see her eat Sure I am the Hebrew runneth thus She did eat and gave also unto her husband with her and he did eat but the 70 say of Eve first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where they are peremptorie that Adam and Eve or rather Eve and Adam are both together And Vatablus well expoundeth the SECVM id est vt unà cum ipsa ederet and the proof is pertinent enough though we do not reade with the Septuagint They did eat but with the Hebrew He did eat namely with her or after he had seen her eat The summe is she ate first she ate again with him she sinned the same sinne And further though she sinned the same sinne the third time in his eating and by it aswell as we did who also were in him ratione principii yet was it not her sinne but his sinne that overthrew both him her and us and in this sense we may truly say she sinned not the same sinne with Adam So much for the first question It cometh secondarilie to be enquired Whether Adams or Eves sinne was the greater 5. To say that no sinne is greater then other is one of the grossest errors that have been Me thinks a Stoick should be ashamed to say that Nero Heliogabalus and the grand Epicure sinned not worse then Cato the Utican Aristides the Just or Zeno the Cittien of Cyprus the great upholder of their own sect or that unmatchable Titus the Emperour who lamented the day in which he did not good to some man was no better then Timon the Man-hater No other Philosophers ever joyned hands with them in that folly * Hoc de parilitate peccatorum soli Sioici ausi sunt disput are nam sic fecerunt contra emnem sensam generis humani Aug. Epist 29. Ad Hieronymum This of the equalitie of sinnes the Stoicks onely have dared to dispute for they did so against all the sense feeling and opinion of mankinde saith S. Augustin Yet Jovinian sided with them but S. Hierom confuted him * Quam corum vanitatem in Joviniano illo qui in hac sententia Stoicus erat in auâ—upandis autem defensand is voluptatibus Epicurâ—us de Scripturis Sanctâ—â— diiucidissimè convicisiâ— Which opinion of theirs in that Jovinian who in this tenent was a Stoick but in pursuing and defending pleasures an Epicure out of the sacred Scriptures thou hast most clearely convinced as S. Augustine in the same place testifieth of S. Hierom to S. Hierom. The same in effect saith S. Hierom himself of himself against Jovinian * Nullam inter justum justum peccatorem peccato em esse distantiam veterémque Zenenis sententiam tam communi sensa quà m divinâ lectionecontrivim us Hieron Cont. Jovin lib. 2. We have crusht both by common sense and by divine Scripture the error of Jovinian who would prove that there is no difference between just and just a sinner and a sinner and also the old opinion of Zeno. And indeed so he did in the same book both by answering all Jovinians objections and overlaying him with sound proofs I omit whatsoever S. Hierom hath laboriously acutely and truly collected against the Stoicall equalitie of sinnes and against Jovinians wilde inferences Let him that thirsteth have recourse to the fountain in the said second book of S. Hierom against Jovinian Fons vincet sitientem Yet suffer me to cast my mite into the Treasurie First Elencticè upon the by then Didacticè on the main Concerning the first unto one of the
witlesse positions of Jovinian viz. * Omnia membra aequaliter diligimus nec oculum praeponimus digite nec digitum auriculae We love equally all our members neither do we preferre the eye before the finger nor the singer before the eare by which he would inferre a parilitie of sinnes besides what S. Hierom excellently answereth I can not chuse but oppose what Moses saith Deuteron 32.10 God kept the Israelites as the apple of his eye it being more guarded with the double coverlids of skins and hairs and more curiously then any other outward part which proverbiall similitude being also taken up both by David Psal 17.8 and by the Prophet Zecharie 2.8 significantly intimateth that one part of the body is more tender to us then any other Neither needed there such exact retaliation as is required Exod. 21.24 Eye for eye tooth for tooth hand for hand foot for foot if all members were of like worth for a tooth might have been pluckt out for an eye and the foot might have stood for the hand Yea whatsoever Jovinian opineth or rather raveth Dives being in torment had more regard to the cooling of his tongue Luk. 16.24 then to the tip of his eare Where sinne is there is punishment also saith S. Chrysostom and Dives his tongue spake many proud things saith he and Dives was full of loquacitie as the Interlineary Glosse observeth even from his very speech to Abraham and perchance his tongue was most tortured as having been most delighted and addulced with his daily delicious fare If any of Zeno or Jovinian his partisans will not beleeve that one bodily member is better then an other I could wish it might be beaten into them and that they might endure sound raps or blows on their heads which any other man yea naturall fools by naturall instinct would rather beare off upon the arms as objecting unto danger the member of lesse worth to save and defend the part more principall which hourely experience ratifieth I passe by all other his objections because I have stood too long on this and I come to the main Question Whether all sinnes are equall The answer is plainly negative Reasons are these First diversitie of sacrifices prove the inequalitie of offences the greater offence being usually expiated with the most costly sacrifice The sinne of the Priest was in the estimate of God as the sinne of the whole congregation and the offering of his sinne was a young bullock without blemish Levit. 4.3 If a Magistrate sinned he was to offer a kid of the goats a male without blemish vers 23. If an ordinarie man offended a female served the turn vers 28. and 32. whether it were of goats or lambes Where the best greatest and costliest of oblations doth not prove that the estate or the person of the Priest was better and more noble then the estate or person of the King or supreme Civill Magistrate which the Papists impertinently would prove from thence but the Priests greater sacrifice evinceth his sinne to be greater by reason of his greater knowledge For the Priests lips should keep knowledge and they should seek the Law at his mouth for he is the Messenger of the Lord of hosts Malachi 2.7 A second Reason may be this Greater punishments both criminall and capitall are ordained by the Law for some people more then for others But this can not be justly appointed unlesse there be degrees of sinne Therefore sinnes are not equall Concerning the Major view it evinced in these instances He that stealeth a man shall die Exod. 21.16 If he steal an ox or a sheep he shall restore five oxen for anox and foure sheep for a sheep Exod. 22.1 He that kills a man unwillingly shall be protected Exod. 21.13 if willingly the very Sanctuarie at the horns of the Altar shall not save him he shall die vers 14. The adulterie of common people was punished with common death Levit. 20.10 But the daughter of any Priest if she profane her self by playing the whore she profaneth her father she shall be burnt with fire Levit. 21.9 that is she shall be burnt alive The Minor is proved because God is just and rewardeth every man according to his works Revel 22.12 Thirdly the Scripture saith some are more wicked then others Jerem. 3.11 The back-sliding Israel hath justified her self more then treacherous Judah Aholibah was more corrupt in her inordinate love then Aholah Ezek. 23.11 And some shal have sorer punishment then others Heb. 10.29 There is a sin remissible a sin irremissible Matth. 12.31 Tyre and Sidon were more inclining to repentance then Chorazin and Bethsaida Matth. 11.21 Accordingly It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom then for them vers 24. There are some sinnes of infirmitie some of presumption and great transgressions Psal 19.13 Reward Babylon even as she rewarded you and double unto her double according to her works in the cup which she hath filled fill to her double How much she hath glorified her self and lived deliciously so much torment and sorrow give her Revel 18.6 7. Not double asmuch as she hath deserved that were injustice but double asmuch as others drink of the wrath of God The proselyte of the Pharisees is twofold more the childe of hell then themselves Matth. 23.15 and some shall receive greater damnation vers 14. Genes 4.15 Vengeance shall be taken seven-fold on him who slayeth Cain Not seven-fold more then such a deed as murder deserveth but seven-fold more then is taken on some other men perchance seven-fold more then was taken on Cain himself For though it be a greater sinne to kill an innocent then a bloud-guilty wretch or murderer and more offensive to slay a brother then one of lesse kindred or acquaintance which may seem to be the case between Cain and Abel on the one side and Cain and his murderer on the other side yet if we consider that God after an especiall manner forbad any man to kill Cain that God ordained life as a punishment to Cain that to kill Cain had been a courtesie saith Hierom that Cain was to live to be a terrifying example to all murderers Lastly if we remember that to deterre all men from the murder of Cain God set a notorious mark upon him such a oneas never any untill this day had the like by reason of the extraordinarines thereof whether it were a brand or stamp in his forehead or that the earth quaked under him wheresoever he went or a preternaturall and unusuall shaking of his head or dreadfull tremors or convulsions over all his body of which the particular is as uncertain as the generall can not be doubted of namely that unto his terrors of conscience and a vagrant unsetled minde some outward evident mark was annexed distinguishing him from other men and in a sort forbidding any to murder him I say he that now should have killed Cain might justly seven-fold deserve Cains punishment and an other
may rightfully incurre punishment seventy times seven-fold as it is if not in truth yet at the least in the swasive of Lamech to his wives Genes 4.24 There is a mote and there is a beam Matth. 7.3 This beam may be sawed into many boards or rafters and there is no verture nor vice but hath its latitude and degrees partaking of majus and minus There are funiculi vanitatis Esai 5.18 cords of vanity There are funes peccatorum ropes of sinnes Proverb 5.22 And there are funes plaustri as Vatablus rendereth it according to the Hebrew cart-ropes or vinculum plaustri according to the Vulgat the wain-rope Esai 5.18 differencing sinnes and being indebted to divers kindes of punishments Every sinne causeth a blot on the soul the greater sinne the greater blot A frequent sinner is compared to a spotted leopard Jerem. 13.23 and some notorious sinners are called spots in the abstract Jude vers 12. More testimonies I could heap but the point is cleared and the enquiry Wheter Adam or Eve sinned most is yet unanswered 6. And here both ancient and modern Divines do much varie * Chrys Hom. 7. ad Pop. Ant. Chrysostom saith expresly Eve sinned more then Adam and * In Rom. Homil. 25. in Morali elsewhere to this effect Eve was more punished then Adam but the punishment is answerable to the fault Therefore her sinne was greater Rupert followeth him * Triplicipoená mulier punitur quia triplo majus peccatum fuit ejus quà m Adami Rup in Gen. lib. 3. cap. 22. The woman is punished by a threefold punishment because her sinne was three times greater then Adams Hugo and Lombard untruly supposing that Eve onely beleeved the Serpents words promising them to be like unto God do rather think Eve sinned most The Shoolmen by troups follow them Cajetan is dubious commenting on Aquinas he would not differ from his Master the great Summist but condemneth the woman more then the man yet expounding the third of Gensis he brings five reasons to excuse Eve more then Adam S. Aug. is by both sides sometimes ascribing more fault to the man then to the woman sometimes to the woman rather then to the man and * De Gen. ad lit 11.35 De Civit. 14 11. twice he seemeth to hold That they sinned equally On the other side * Ambr. De Instit virginis cap. 4. Ambrose saith Adams sinne was greater And again * Eva magis mobilitate animi quà m pravitate peccavit Comment in Luc. 4.38 Eve sinned more by unstablenes of minde then by perversenes Isdore saith * Gravius est de industria peccare quo modo peccavit Adam quà m ignorantiâ quo modo peccavit Eva. Isid De Summo Bono 2.17 It is more hainous to sinne of set purpose as Adam then out of ignorance as Eve This point needing to be distinguished upon Aquine telleth us The greatnes of a sinne is two wayes considered either exipsa specie peccati from the especiall kinde of the sinne or according to the circumstances of place or person and he resolveth thus * Quantum adgenus peccati vtriusque peccatum aequale dicitur In regard of the kinde of sinne the sinne of them both is said to be equall Pride was in both but if we look ad speciem superbiae Eve sinned more for these three regards She was more proud then the man She not onely sinned herself but made her husband sinne Thirdly Adams sinne was lessened by the love he bore unto his wife Which last reason is grounded on the words of S. Augustine * Adam non carnaliconcupiscentiâ victus sed amicabili quâdam compulsus benevolentiâ quâ plerunque fit ut offendatur Deus nè offendatur amicus peccavit De Gen. ad lit 12. ult Adam sinned not being overcome by carnall concupiscence but being constrained by some friendly affection by which it cometh often to passe that God is offended lest a friend should be offended Yea the same S. Augustine is cited thus * Postquam mulier seducta manducavit eÃque dedit ut simul ederent noluit eam contristari quam credebat sine suo solatio contabescere à se alienatam omnino interire After the seduced woman had eaten and had given him that they should eat together he was loth to grieve her whom he thought ready to pine away without his comfort and altogether to die being estranged from him Lastly Aquine saith If we weigh the condition of both persons the mans sinne was greater because he was perfecter then the woman So Aquine 2.2 Quaest 163. Art 4. 7. Scotus thus opineth Because Adam was more circumspect more noble more strong to resist therefore by accident his sinne was more great * Formaliter tamen per se merè praecisè inse peccatum Evae fuit gravius Scotus in 2. Sent. dist 27. quaest 2. Yet formally in it self and precisely the sinne of Eve was greater But the learned Estius on the same distinction Paragraphe 7 thus The greatnes of sinne cometh many wayes principally from the object and the end then from the circumstances either of the person or the intent of him or of the frequencie of the act or the greatnes of harm that cometh by the sinne or of the ignorance or infirmitie or industrie of the person If we lay Adams and Eves sinne in the ballance respecting the object and the end it weighed alike both of them beleeved the Serpent both would be like God both ate of the fruit forbidden both excused their faults but weigh the circumstances saith he the mans sinne was simply greater First he had more power to resist Secondly he dealt with a lesse subtile enemy a simple woman but she had to do with an evill Angel of an higher nature then herself Thirdly he had the precept from God himself she but from her husband Fourthly he was to be head over his wife and not she over him and he was to reduce her into the right way when she strayed Fifthly his excuse cast part of the fault as it were upon God himself Sixthly indeed he was worse punished and so saith Augustine truly Seventhly the better things are the worst in their corruption The best wine turnes to the sharpest vineger the best of government a Monarchie proves the worst if it degenerate into a Tyranny But the man exceeded the woman as well in naturals as in gratuitous So farre in effect Estius Bellarmine compareth their acts and per sons together Bell. De Amis Gratiae Statu Peccati 3.9 and concludeth that both in regard of acts and persons Eve sinned least Adam worst His observations are not onely passable but commendable save in two things First that he makes the excusation of their sinne to be one act of the seven in Adam and Eves sinne when as in truth their excuse was no part or branch of their first sinne but a distinct and severall sinne by it self For
poena imò si ipse damnatus fuisset pro illo peccato non fuisset itá graviter punitus pro isto peccato sicut multi alii The greatest punishment was not due to Adams sinne yea if he had been damned himself for that sinne he had not been so grievously punished for it as many others The ancient Fathers did not so lightly prize the first sinne of Adam Augustine saith * Tam leve praeceptum ad observandum tam breve ad memoriâ retinendum tantò majore injustitiâ violatum est quantò faciliori possit observantiâ custodiri De Civit. 14.12 A Precept so light for keeping so short for remembring was broken by so much greater injustice by how much more easily it might have been kept And though Scotus holdeth it did consist in immoderate love and friendship to his wife yet I say his uxoriousnesse was but a branch a piece a quarter a rafter of that beam a part a member of that body of sinne * Tert. Cont. Marcion lib. 2. Tertull. doubts not to call Adams sinne Heresie and Adam a very rude Heretick Ambrose on Rom. 5.14 * Peccatum Adae non longè est ab idololatria Adams sinne is not farre from idolatrie And in his 33. Epistle to his sister Marcellina he findes infidelitie in Adam for not beleeving in Gods word Augustine in his Enchirid. chap. 45. imputes unto him Pride Sacriledge for it was sacrilegious pride to impropriate usurp the fruit separated from common use He was a murderer destroying himself all mankinde guiltie he was of spirituall fornication committed with the Serpent He may be further charged for felony in stealing the fruit which was not his Rupertus on Genes 2.39 saith Ingratitude was his first sinne He fell by covetousnes saith Augustine for God could not suffice him and having much more then he needed yet he would need more then he had Any one may blot him with curiositie for seeking to know what did him hurt His gluttony was manifest in loosing the reins to his beastly appetite His want of naturall affection toward his posteritie by him decaying is justly blameable Brentius hath one newfangle on John 8 That Adams sinne was rebellion or defection because he would not be subject to Christ He might rather have accused him for contempt of his Creator for his folly in venturing the losse of heaven for an apple for his credulity in beleeving Satan before God The Apostle chargeth him with disobedience Rom. 5.19 Bellarmine saith * Actu primus superbiae est â—olle subjici imperio praeceptis alterius quae proprie dicitur iâ—nbedientia Bell. De Amiss Gratiae 3.4 The first act of pride is to refuse to be subject to the command and precepts of another which properly is called disobedience as contrarily the first of humility is to be subject to another But Scotus doth better set down the order of the acts of our will * Est in communi duplex actus voluntatis VELLE NOLLE omne nolle praesupponit aliquod velle nullum nolle est primus actus deordinatus voluntatis quia non posset habere nolle nist respectu vel in virtute alicujus velle Scot. iâ—â— 2. Sent. dist 6. quaest 2. There is commonly a double act of the will LIKING and DISLIKING and every disliking presupposeth some liking and no disliking is the first inordinate act of the will because it could not have a disliking but in regard or by vertue of some liking In this I preferre Scotus before Bellarmine and Estius because the first act of pride or disobedience is self-complacencie from whence issueth the dislike or nolle of subjection as in humilitie the first act is Velle placere alteri whence ariseth the groundwork of obedience Secondly Augustine saith * In occulto mali esse coeperunt Aug. De Civit 14.13 They began in secret to be evil the ill will preceded the ill work self-love was the bait the Devil could not have caught Adam * Nisi jam illo sibi placere coepisset unles he had begun alreadie to be self pleased they were tickled with those words YE SHALLBE LIKE GODS Gen. 3.5 From whence I marvel Bellarmine observed not that Velle sibi placere is the first step of pride and therefore the Nolle subjici is the second act or act concomitant Thirdly * Bellarm ibid. cap. 5. Bellarmine himself interfeering saith The pride of our parents began not from this act I VVILL NOT BE UNDER THE POVVER OF GOD but after the hearing of these words YE SHALL BE LIKE GODS they began to consider within themselves it was a goodly thing not to depend of an other and at the same time they began to be delighted with their own power and to desire it and vehemently to please themselves Here he maketh three or foure acts to beginne together and maketh some ill act or acts precede this I will not be under the power of God Lastly * Bell. De Amiss Gratiae 3.9 Bellarmine hath it thus * Primus actus malus in peccato viri superbia fuit quâ in sua potiùs essc quà m in Dei potestate dilexit The first ill act in the sinne of the man was pride by which he loved to be in his own power rather then in Gods And he citeth Augustine in Enchirid. chap. 45. Therefore the beginning of Adams iniquitie consisted in a VELLE rather then in a NOLLE Now though Scotus his Discourse and Philosophie sideth thus farre with truth that an evil Nolle necessarily presupposeth an evil Velle which is expressely against the opinion of Bellarmine and Estius yet it crawleth on lamely towards * Scot. Dist 22. Scotus his conclusion That Adam did first sinne in inordinate love of friendship towards his wife for I will place in Adam another Velle a former Velle a malum Velle and a pejus Velle before his uxoriousnesse Augustine in his 21 Sermon upon Psal 118. which we account the 119 Psal saith thus * Quòd homo suuâ— esse voluit id est inobedientiae primum maximum malum That man would be his own that is the first and greatest evil of disobedience And * De Civit. 14.13 dâ— Gen. ad lit 8.14 elsewhere he takes pride and disobedience for all one Again * Homo clatus superbiâ suasioni Serpentis obediens praecepta Dei contempsit Ep. st Ad Orosium Manbeing lift up with pride obeying the persuasion of the Serpent despised Gods precepts And * Praecedit in voluntate hominis appetitus quidam propriae potestatis vt fiat inobediens per superbiam De peccat Meriâ— Rem 2.19 In the will of man there goes before some desire of his own power to be made disobedient through pride Eves pride out of doubt arose from those words Genes 3.5 Your eyes shall be opened and ye shall be as Gods Where the hint was given to the
is an obscure point The errors of the Schoolmen concerning it The oversight of Bellarmine 2. Originall sinne described by its causes Distinguished from Adams actuall sinne 3. In what sense Adam had and his posteritie hath originall sinne We were in Adam He stood for us idealiter Every one of us would have done exactly as Adam did VVe did sinne in Adam and how 4. VVhether Christ was in Adam and how 5. VVe sinned not that sinne in Adam by imitation 6. Adams sinne as personall was not imputed Adam is saved Adams actuall sinne as it was ideall and representative is imputed to us 1 COncerning originall sinne though it be most true what S. Augustine saith de Morib Eccl. 1.22 * Nihil est peccato originali ad praedicandum notius nihil ad intelligendum secretius There is nothing to preach of more known nothing to understand more hidden then originall sinne And * Vltra radicem nihil quaerere oportet De lib. Arbitrio 3.17 We ought to seek nothing beyond the root Yet let us search till we finde this root And since the Apostle hath broken the ground and opened the way let us joyfully follow so blessed a guide S. Paul Rom. 5.12 hath a large Tractate of originall sinne as it is propagated unto us by Adam and Rom. 6. he speaketh of it as it is in the Regenerate The present questioned point hath nothing to do with this latter consideration and it is pertinently excluded from this discourse But of originall sinne as it is conveyed unto us by Adam divers things must be explained First you are to know that the Schoolmen are blindly led in this point You may see it at large in Beatissimo * Whitak De Originali Peccato lib. 1. cap. â— Whitakero for even that title is given to him by the learned Albericus Gentilis in the tenth Chapter of his Disputation on the first Book of the Maccabees And certainly none of late time hath so tripped them up as he hath done in his canvasse of Stapleton The errors of singular Schoolmen are various too many to be here confuted severally yet not so many as are imagined Holcot in his Question Whether every sin be imputable to the will proveth out of Augustines Book De Haeresibus Chap. 8. that some Hereticks have denied originall sinne or that there is any such thing But he resolveth That the Church hath determined the opinion to be erroneous And Augustine Gregorie Bede and all Authentick Doctors have spoken fully and expresly hereof and I saith he presuppose it as one Article of Faith Then cometh he to the diversitie of opinions Some saith he have held that originall sinne is not culpa but poena or obligatio ad poenam Anselm and Lombard dislike this saith he And indeed * Lomb. 2. Sent. dist 3. lit E F. Lombard proveth soundly both that according to this opinion originall sinne is neither culpa no nor poena and by excellent arguments establisheth that it is culpa Some saith Holcot who say it is culpa hold it is nothing els but the actuall sinne of our first parent imputed to us and this Tenet Anselm disliketh But Anselms dislike hath not hindered Catharinus and Pighius from embracing that error Yea Stapleton himself acknowledgeth three great errors in this by-path of Pighius First That he makes originall sinne no sinne but an obnoxietie to punishment Secondly That children want all sinne and yet are by him made sinners Thirdly That he makes no inherent originall sinne in every one Whitaker addeth a fourth absurdity That he teacheth children are damned who yet have no sinne I return to Holcot who addeth Others say Originall sinne is the pure privation of justice originall or injustice which is nothing in nature but a pure privation and want of justice in subjecto apto nato Yet saith Holcot as I have said otherwhere it appeareth not to me that any such pure privation is either originall or actuall sinne At last Holcot professeth to follow Lombard holding that originall sinne is an evill habit with which we are born and which we contract from the beginning of our nativitie This habit is concupiscence this concupiscence is a vice quod parvulum habilem concupiscere facit adultum verò concupiscentem reddit and this he fathereth on Augustine But this opinion is no better then the rest if by concupiscence they mean as they do onely the sensuality lust and brutish appetite of things sensitive You shall see it further confuted when I have disclosed the erronious doctrine which Lombard and his partisans hold to uphold this That originall sinne is the vice of concupiscence * Lomb. 2. Sent. dist 30. lit N. Lombard maintaineth that every one of our bodies were in Adam and whereas it was before objected That all flesh which descended from Adam could not be at once and together in him because it is farre greater then the body of Adam in which there were not so many as it were motes of flesh as men who have descended from him Lombard answereth All flesh was in him materially and causally though not formally and all that is in humane bodies naturally descendeth from Adam and in it self is increased and multiplied and this is that which shall arise at the Resurrection That no outward substance doth passe into that substance That it is fomented by meats but no meats are turned into that substance humane which by propagation descended from Adam For Adam transmitted a little of his substance into the bodies of his children when he begat them that is a little MODICVM was divided from the masse of his substance and thereof was the body of his sonne formed and by multiplication of it self is increased without the adjection of any outward thing And of that Modicum being augmented somewhat is separated whereby the bodies of posterities are in the like sort still formed His proofs were easie to be answered but there is a veru or an obelisk set on that opinion in the margin Magister hîc non approbatur And more at large among the errors condemned in England and in Paris for so go the words of the Preface not in England and France not alone in Oxford and Paris but in both the Universities of England and in that of Paris you shall finde him forsaken in these opinions pag. 985. 1 Quòd in veritatem humâ—nae naturae nihil transit extrinsecum That no externall thing passeth into the truth of humane nature 2 Quod ab Adam descendit per propagationem auctum multipliâ—atum resurget in judicio pag. 985. That which descendeth from Adam and is increased and multiplied by propagation shall arise in the day of judgement These singular opinions being now rejected and confuted by Estius Sentent 2. Distinct 30. Paragraph 13. and whatsoever Lombard bringeth for himself answered in his next Paragraph let us grapple with Holcot who is a second unto Lombard and let
us prove That originall sinne is not the concupiscence of the flesh See this confuted by * Bell. De Amiss Gratiae 4.12 Bellarmine by this argument If LVST were the cause of originall sinne he should have the greater sinne who was conceived in greater LVST which is manifestly false since originall sinne is equall in all men See other arguments well used to that purpose by Bellarmine in that place yet is he amisse * De Sacramento Baptismi 1.9 elsewhere in the answer unto the tenth argument of the Anabaptists For saith he * Originale peccatum non est materia poeniten tiae nemo enim rectè poe uitentiam agit ejus peccati quod ipse non commisit quod in ejus potestate non suit Originale autem peccatum non ipsi commisimus sed trahimus ab Adam per naturalem propagationem undâ— diâ—itur de insantibus Rom. 9 11. Originall sinne is no matter of repentance for a man doth not well repent of that sinne which he hath not committed himself and which was not in his power Now we have not our selves committed originall sinne but we draw it from Adam by naturall propagation whereupon it is said Rom. 9.11 of Esau and Jacob THEY HAD DONE NEITHER GOOD NOR EVIL First I answer to the place of Scripture confessing it is spoken of Esau wicked Esau that he had done no evill and of Jacob good Jacob that he had done no good Again it is spoken of both of them before they were born But secondly it is spoken of actuall sinnes and actuall goodnes that neither did Jacob good actuall good any good in the wombe nor Esau any actuall evil For the bodily organs are not so fitted that they exercise such actions as produce good or evil The words do evince so much 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 practically working no good nor evil Yet though God depended not upon their works as the Apostle there argueth for all that they might and did commit originall sinne and in it were conceived and the promise was made to Rebecca after she conceived Genes 25.23 It being then manifest that the place of the Apostle affordeth no patrociny to Bellarmine I say originall sinne is in part the matter of Repentance otherwise David in his chiefest penitentiall Psalme 51.5 would not have charged himself with that sinne nor needed not so vehemently to call for mercy Again we may be said to commit originall sinne and originall sinne to have been in our power as we were in Adam as we would have done the like and the like against Adam as Adam did against us if we had stood in Adams place as he did stand in our stead Thirdly our will was in his will what he did we did Bellarmines Philosophie here swalloweth up his Divinitie Fourthly he must not take committere strictly for a full free deliberate action of commission nor trahere strictly for a meer passion but as I shall make it appear there is some little inclination from the matter to the form of the body to the soul as also of the soul to the body and that the soul is neither as a block or stone on the one side to receive durt and be integrally passive nor yet so active as to make the originall sinne to be actuall So that it neither properly committeth nor properly contracteth draweth or receiveth originall sinne and yet in a large sense may be said both to commit and to receive Fifthly if Bellarmine be punctilious for the terms himself is faultie For he saith * Trahimus ab Adam originale peccatum We do attract originall sinne from Adam Is there any attraction on our part if there be no action Or is action or attraction without some kinde of commission Sixthly hath the whole Church of God prayed for the remission aswell of originall sinne as of actuall if it be not the matter of repentance Or needeth not one unbaptized till he come of age repent before Baptisme for his originall sinne Lastly why are children baptized but that originall sinne is matter of repentance To set all things better in order and to cleare all mists you are to know that there is wonderfull mistaking and ambiguitie whil'st originall sinne is confounded with Adams actuall sinne and one taken for another whil'st the cause is undistinguished from the effect when indeed there is a great traverse between them 2 Somewhat according to the new Masters of method the efficient cause of Adams sinne was both outward and inward Outward Remote Outward Propinque Remote Principall Satan Remote Instrumentall the Serpent Outward propinque was Eve the principall Outward propinque was The apple was the instrumentall cause The inward efficient cause was first the faculties of the soul which we may terme the principium activum and was more remote then the ill use of these faculties the misimploying of his free-will which you may stile principium actuale and was the more propinque cause But the cause efficient of originall sinne was outwardly the actuall sinne of Adam inwardly the conjunction of the soul after the propagation of nature The matter of Adams sinne subjectivè was the whole person and nature of Adam and his posteritie descending from him per viam seminalem objectivè the liking touching and eating of the forbidden fruit The matter of originall sinne subjectivè is all of our nature and every one of mankinde secundum se totum totum sui coming the ordinarie way of generation in so much that all and every of the faculties of the soul and bodie of all and every one of us is subject to all and every sinne which hath been or may ever hereafter be committed and this cometh onely from this originall sinne and the inclination wrapped up in it The matter objectivè is both carentia justitiae originalis debitae inesse and the vices contrarie unto it now filling up its room and stead Formalis ratio of Adams first sinne was aversion from God the ratio materialis was his conversion to a changeable good saith * Stapl. De Originali Peccato 1.12 Stapleton both these are knit up in one disobedience And so the formall cause of Adams sinne was disobedience the formall cause of our originall sinne is the deformitie and corruption of nature falne and propagated inclining to sinne so soon as is possible and without a divine hand of restraint as much as is possible The end of Adams sinne was in his intention primarily To know good and evill secundarily to prefer temporals before spirituals whil'st indeed he esteemed the Bonum apparens before the Bonum verum revera or reale In mankinde after him no end can be found of originall sinne since we contract it when we have nullum verum aspectum respectum intuitum vel-sinem For Finis bonum convertuntur There is no end of evill per se sed ex accidenti and so Gods Glory is the supreme end of all sinne The effects of Adams actuall
illa successione propagatus nascitur sicut ad istum pertinet omnit qui gratiae largitate in illo renascitur unde fit vt totum genus kumannm quodam modo sint homines duo PRIMUS SEâ—VNDUS Prosp Sent. 299. The first man Adam so died in time past that yet after him Christ is the second man although so many thousands of men be born between that and this and therefore it is evident that every one who is born propagated from that succession belongs to that former as whosoever is born again by the liberalitie of grace pertains to this latter whence it comes to passe that all mankinde in some sort consist in two men THE FIRST and THE SECOND Yea the whole world except Christ onely as men are the first Adam and the first Adam as he beleeved in Christ to come is not now the first but a branch of the second Adam What Christ did for us we are said to do what Adam did misdo as he represented us we may justly be said to misdo with him Genes 4.10 The voice of thy brothers bloud crieth unto me Sanguinum yea Seminum saith the Chaldee Paraphrase and the Rabbins whom howsoever the Jesuit Cornelius à Lapide faulteth yet I will commend for their witty invention That God seemed as it were to heare the cries of all those many little ones which ever might have descended from Abel and them Cain killed and their bloud he shed even ere they were and their bloud cried in Abels So we consented with Adam and in him all sinned saith our Apostle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our latest Translation hath it For that all have sinned The Bishops Bible in as much as we have all sinned So Erasmus and some others yet our latest Translation alloweth a place in the margin for in whom it is rendred by the Vulgat In quo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not here taken for a Preposition of whose various constructions see the Grammarians none of which constructions afford so full and punctuall a sense to this place as if we render the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in whom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being a Preposition by it self and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being the Dative of the subjunctive relative article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Genevian readeth it in whom and interprets the words in whom to be in Adam and so indeed it may be read and must be meant for though the Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be otherwise rendred and used yet divers times it is confounded with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and necessarily is so to be understood View in one Chapter two places Hebr. 9.10 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Solummodo in cibis potibus Which stood onely in meats and drinks as our very late Translatours have it And vers 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Testamentum enim in mortuis ratum est so word for word is it construed So Demosthenes hath it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In his acquiescere Basil in his Epistle to Nazianzen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In hac solitudine So we usually say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In nobis and the like This reading being established let us search the meaning of these words In whom or in which and to what they are referred There are but foure things to which these words can possibly have relation First unto the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and then the sense is By one man sinne entred into the world in which world all have sinned This exposition is very absurd For first it is nothing to the intent of the Apostle who proveth that we fell in Adam and are raised by Christ but how conduceth this unto that sense Secondly the senselesnesse of the words is most ridiculous being thus read As by one man sinne entred into the world and death by sinne and so death passed upon all men in which world all have sinned The Spirit of wisedome would not speak so nor the God of order so disjointedly The second exposition is as unlikely and that readeth it In which death all have sinned but as * In peccato moriuntur homines non in morte peccant Aug. Cont. duas Epist Pelag. 4.4 S. Augustine saith Men die in sinne not sinne in death The phrase is improper yet grant that some sinne in death yet it is most untrue That in death all sinne The third word to which In whom or which may be referred is Sinne In which sinne all have sinned and thus * Aug. De Peccat Merit Remis 1.10 Augustine did interpret it once And if it were so to be read it is all one in effect to say In Adam all sinned and In which sinne of Adam all sinned But * Vide Aug. Cont. 2. Epist Felag 4.4 Augustine afterward more accuratly examining the place rejecteth that exposition and confirmeth another by the authority of S. Hilarie And indeed Grammaticall construction overthroweth the sense for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the feminine gender to which the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 can have no good reference Therefore the last exposition is best which renders it In quo In which Adam all have sinned So it is expounded by Hilarie Augustine and Ambrose by Origen Chrysostom Theophylact Oecumenius and generally both by the Greek and Latine Fathers and the Apostle strongly argueth for this sense verse 19. By one mans disobedience many were made sinners In him we sinned And whoso shall throughly weigh both the precedent and subsequent dependances must needs acknowledge that the words In whom or In which do point at Adam onely in whom as in a masse we were contained and in him sinned Photius thus * In hoc ipsi Adam commorimur quòd ipsicompeccavimus ille initium dedit peccato nos adjutores illi fuimus In this we our selves die with Adam that our selves have sinned with him he gave the beginning to sinne we have been helpers to him And Neither by the Devill who sinned before the woman nor by the woman who sinned before her husband but by Adam from whom all mortality draweth its beginning did sinne truly enter into the world and death by sinne So farre Origen Augustine likewise * In Adamo omnes peccaverunt quando omnes ille unus homo fuerunt Aug. De Baptismo parvulorum 1.10 In Adam all have sinned when all were that one man So punctually speaketh he For we were in Adam radically seminally representatively Adam was our head he did lead the whole body into evill he was our parent all the issue of him were disinherited by him Augustine thus * Peccavimus omnes in Adamo voluntariè non voluntate nostrâ propriâ— sed voluntate illius cum quo in quo eramus unus homo atque vna omnium voluntas Aug. Epist 23. Ad Bonifacium We have all sinned in Adam willingly not by our own will but by his will with whom and in whom we were one man and one will
of all As the King represents the Kingdome and the chief Magistrate the Citie and the Master of the house the houshold so did Adam represent us and in him and with him we sinned 4. I can not part with this second point till I answer the objection Whether Christ were in Adam The doubt will be cleared by these two Positions First Christ may be said to be in Adam some kinde of way Therefore the Evangelist derives Christs Genealogie from him and he is said to be The Sonne of Adam Luke 3.38 And if he be called The Sonne of David as often he is Matth. 21.9 Mark 10.47 Rom. 1.3 He was made of the seed of David according to the flesh if he took on him the seed of Abraham as he did Hebr. 2.16 and is flesh of our flesh and bone of our bones and we of his Ephes 5.30 it must needs be confessed He was in Adam Paracelsus talketh of Non-Adami such as descended not from Adams loyns these if such are monsters in nature and as great a monster in Divinitie is it to say that Christ was no way in Adam I will enlarge this by a distinction Christ was not in Adam no nor we neither so that our substances or any part thereof were really or materially in him Yet both Christ and we were in him First because mediatly we were born of him and because he was the efficient cause of generation not the immediate propinque and proximous cause thereof which necessarily communicateth some matter to that which is begotten but he was the remote mediate yea the furthest and most distant efficient naturall cause of all from which it is not necessary that its matter reach to the hindermost effects Secondly be cause if he had not begotten children neither Christ in his humane nature nor we now long after him had ever been born Thirdly Christ took flesh of the thrice-blessed Virgin Mary and she was in Adam as all others are except Christ she was begotten by the concurrence and cooperation both of man and woman and so inasmuch as his holy Mother was in Adam Christ in a sort may be said to be in Adam * Christus fuit de genere Adae Holâ—â—t De Imputabintate peccati Christ was of Adams kindred saith Holcot The second Position is this Christ was not in Adam every manner of way as we were For we differed in this peculiar sort and manner because we were in Adam secundum seminalem rationem quâ per communionem vtriusque sexûs fit generatio For Adam could beget no childe without a femal sex which was one main reason of Eves creation neither did ever daughter of Eve conceive without a different sex except onely that stupendious miracle of our Saviours Incarnation And after this manner Christ was not in Adam He had true flesh from Adam but it was onely the listenes or similitude of sinfull flesh that he had Rom. 8.3 All other flesh except his is the flesh of sinne Had he come from Adam every way exactly as wee do he had had not onely true flesh as he had but true sinne also but because he had not Patrem naturalem as Scotus phraseth it therefore neither did he sinne in Adam nor was in Adam as we were Lombard * Lomb. lib. 3. dist 3. enquireth Why Levi was tithed in Abraham and not Christ when each of them was in the loyns of Abraham in regard of the matter He answereth * Leviticus ordo qui in Abraham secundum rationem seminalem erat ex eo per concupiscentiam caruis descendiâ— Sed Christ us non descendit secundum lâ—gem communem aut carâ—is libidinem The Leviticall order which was in Abraham according to the seed descends from him by the concupiscence of the flesh But Christ came not according to the common law or lust of the flesh And he resolveth thus When Levi and Christ according to the flesh were in the loyns of Abraham when he was tithed therefore was Levi tithed and not Christ because Christ was not in the loyns of Abraham after some manner or other that Levi was Moreover how could Christ be tithed to Christ how could the same in the same regard both pay and take Melchisedec was a figure of Christ and tithes by an everlasting law were due to the priesthood of Melchisedec as is unanswerably proved by my reverend friend now a blessed Saint Doctor Sclater against all sacrilegious Church-robbers Therefore Christ was not to be tithed in Abraham though Levi was Yea if Aaron or Melchisedec himself had lived till Christ had come in the flesh and lived with him perhaps they would have resigned up as it were their Office and no more have taken tithes or continuing in Office Sacerdotall under him they would have taken tithes in his name and for him Aquine out of Augustine thus * Quomodocunque Christus fuit in Adam Abraham in aliis Patribus alii homines etiam ibi fuerunt Aquin part 3. quaest 31. art 6. ex Aug. De Gen. ad lit 10.19 After what manner soever Christ was in Adam and Abraham and in other Fathers other men were there also but not contrariwise And Aquine himself setteth his conclusion When the body of Christ windeth up to the Fathers and so to Adam mediante Matris suae corpore Christ was not in them secundum aliquid signatum determinatum sed secundum originem Which I imagine he establisheth against such as Lombard saith did hold That from Adam descended by way of generation some such part or parcell as of it Christ was made Against which Aquine argueth thus whether modestly enough and truly let others judge The matter of Christs body was not the flesh and bone or any other actuall part of the Ever-blessed Virgin but onely her bloud which was potentiâ caro * Corpus Christi non seminaliter conceptum est sed ex castissimis purissimis sanguinibus Aquinas ex Damasceno But what she received from her parents was actually part of her but not part of Christs body Nor was Christs body in Adam and the other Fathers secundum aliquid signatum so that any part of Adams body or of the other Fathers could determinatly be pointed out and be said to be the very exact individuall matter out of which Christs body was framed but Christ was in Adam secundum originem as others were Whil'st Christ was in the wombe of the most happy Virgin Mary even many moneths before her delivery she was called Luke 1.43 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The mother of my Lord which words in part Elisabeth took from Davids speculation Psal 110.1 The Lord said unto my Lord. Never woman was truly called or to be called a Mother before she were delivered except onely the Al-gracious Virgin Mary who could not possibly suffer abortion nor lose that Blessed Fruit of her wombe by the sinne of man or the punishment of mankinde for sinne which was conceived
the branches being saved the root also should not be saved But in his book De praescript advers Haereticos as it is cited by Bellarmine there is no mention of Tatian in Rhenanus his Edition Augustine saith of the Tatians and Encratites * Quòd contradicunt primorum hominum saluti Aug. De Haeresib cap. 25. That they gainsay the salvation of the first men Where Bellarmine used another Edition then Erasmus his or was mistaken in the collation He who will see more into this point let him consult with Bellarmine in the place above cited and Salianus ad Annum Mundi 930. where he justly taxeth Rupert for saying in this third book on Genes chap. 31. * Salvationem Adami à multit liberè negari à nullo satìs firmiter defendi That the salvation of Adam is freely denied by many and by none strongly enough defended And he bringeth many authorities and proofs to the contrary From Irenaeus he bids them blush for saying Adam was not saved and more vehemently That by saying so they make themselves Hereticks and Apostates from the truth and Advocates for the Serpent and Death God cursed not Adam and Eve but the earth and the Serpent Yea before God pronounced any punishment against Eve or Adam even in the midst of his cursing of the Serpent with the same breath he both menaced Satan and comforted Adam and Eve with the gracious promise of the Messiah Genes 3.15 Now there was never any unto whom God vouchsafed a speciall promise of Christ but they were saved Indeed the Apostle reckoneth not Adam among the faithfull ones Hebr. 11. but one reason of this omission is because he entreateth of such faithfull ones onely as were much persecuted which Adam was not so farre as is recorded If it be further objected That God is called THE GOD OF ABRAHAM ISAAC AND JACOB Exod. 3.6 Matth. 22.32 and is no where called THE GOD OF ADAM let it be answered That Adam is called THE SONNE OF GOD Luke 3.38 And I think he is too severe a judge who saith a sonne of God is damned The Targum or Chaldee Paraphrase set forth by Rivius on the Canticles chap. 1. vers 1. saith * Et veuit dies Sabbati protexit eum aperuit os suum dixit Psalmum Cantici diei Sabbati That the first song that ever was made was indited by Adam in the time when his sinne was forgiven him Damianus à Goes De Moribus Aethiopum makes this the belief of Zagazabo and the Ethiopians for whom he negotiated That Christs soul descended into Hell for Adams soul pag. 93. and that Adam was redeemed by Christ from Hell pag. 55. How glorious was it for Christ to save his first sheep and how would the Devil glorie if it were otherwise Adams fig-leaves may be thought to be sharp afflictive and penitentiall Epiphanius Haeres 46. calleth Adam Holy and saith We beleeve he is among those Fathers whom Christ reckoneth alive not dead God is not the God of the dead but of the living Irenaeus saith Adam humbly bare the punishment laid upon him Can humility be damned then may pride be saved Josephus 1.2 recordeth That Adam foretold the universall destruction of the World one by the floud the other by fire And can the first of Mankinde the first King Priest and Prophet of the World be condemned Others probably conjecture that before his death he called the chief of his children grand-children and their descendants and gave them holy and ghostly counsel as Abraham did Genes 18.19 and Jacob Genes 49.1 c. and Moses Deuteron 31.1 c. Salianus fits him a particular speech at his death and a witty Epitaph Feuardentius on Irenaeus thus relateth Nicodemus Christs Disciple in the History ascribed to him OF THE PASSION AND RESVRRECTION OF THE LORD reporteth That our Lord Jesus Christ when he descended into Hell in his soul spake thus to Adam and held his hand PEACE BE VNTO THEE VVITH ALL THY SONNES MY IVST ONES But Adam falling on his knees such spirituall knees as before his spirituall hand which Christ held while both their bodies were in the grave weeping-ripe thus prayed with a loud voice * Exaltabo te Domine quoniam suscepisti me nec delectâsti inimicos meos super me Domine Deus clamavi ad te sanâsti me eduxisti ab inferis animam meam salvâstime à descendentibus in lacum I will magnifie thee Lord because thou hast received me and hast not made glad mine enemies over me Lord God I have cried unto thee and thou hast healed me Thou hast brought up my soul from Hell thou hast saved me from those that go down to the pit Thus Salianus in his Scholia ad Annum 930. Another ancient Apocryphal book affirmeth that Adam repented Didacus Vega in his second Sermon on the fifth penitentiall Psalme pag. 443. thus Leonardus de Vtino in his Book De Legibus Sermon de Poenitentia saith That Adam repented not of his sinne but remained obstinate till the death of Abel but when he saw him lye dead at his feet wallowed in his bloud and yet pale and as in a glasse saw the deformity of death he began to repent Strabo saith He was so sorrowfull that he vowed chastity for ever and would have performed it if an Angel had not injoyned him the contrary And from the authority of Josephus he saith Adam was so sorry for Abel that he wept an whole hundred yeares But I beleeve saith Vega He rather wept for the cause which was sinne then for the very death of Abel Ludovicus Vertomannus in his sixth Book fourth Chapter of his journey to India hath recorded that a Mahumetan Merchant told him that at the top of an high mountain in the Iland of Zaylon subject to the King of Narsinga there is a den in which Adam after his fall lived and continued very penitently And though their tradition rests on an idle conjecture because there is yet seen the print of the steps of his feet almost two spannes long for how should they know they were his feet rather then some giants and because how Adam should come to this Iland and why cannot be shewed yet so farre as is probable we will joyn issue with their beleef to wit That he was penitent and so saved Thus much be spoken concerning the salvation of Adams soul Concerning Adams actuall sinne though I said truly before That as it was private and personall it was not imputed to us yet I must needs say as it was ideall and representative it was and is imputed to us He who denieth this let him also deny that Christs active and passive Merits are imputed to us Neither can the Divine providence be taxed with rigour much lesse with injustice for imputing Adams sinne unto us For first he imputeth not our own actuall and personall iniquities but forgiveth us both this sinne of Adam and all manner of
our own sinnes Secondly he imputeth Christs Merits unto us as if we our selves had done them For as by one offence of one judgement came upon all to condemnation even so by the righteousnesse of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life Rom. 5.18 We are then not so accursed by the imputation of the first Adams transgression as we are blessed by the imputation of the second Adams holines Yet is this sinne originall not absolutely and simply imputed unto us if we take imputation for laying to our charge the sinne of another without any reference to any offence of our own but it is imputed to us as being both his sinne and ours though we concurred in our kinde and he in his he by an explicit act of his will we by an implicit of ours In vertue of the masters will the servant willeth yea performeth many things He saith to one servant Go and he goeth and to another Come and he cometh and to a third Do this and he doth it Matth. 8.9 In all transactions and negotiations the wifes will is included in her husbands The father selleth away lands of inheritance for ever from the sonne and though the children be unborn the childrens will was in the fathers and bindeth them that yet are not But of this much more hereafter So are we by Adam sold under sinne Rom. 7.14 Which hath reference to the originall sinne of Adam saith Augustine in his Retract By one mans disobedience many were made sinners Rom. 5.19 Not as Bath-sheba said 1 Kings 1.21 We shall be counted offenders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 say the Septuagint Ero ego filius meus saith the Hebrew that is in others estimate but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Constituti sunt Were made which is more then onely esteemed sinners more then this That Adams sinne was imputed to us as excluding our own unrighteousnesse For this originall sinne is not meerly extraneall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but a sinne that dwelleth in me saith the Apostle Rom. 7.20 and peccatum circumstans Hebr. 12.1 which doth so easily beset us called also there a weight as depressing us That I may avoyd amphibologie and open the point plain conceive me thus as original sinne is taken actively for that sinne of Adam to which our will involvedly concurred and which caused sinne in us it is called Originale peccatum originans and again as it is taken passively for corruption traduced unto us it is called Originale peccatum originatum and both these wayes sinne may be said to be imputed to us though somewhat differently The former more properly is said to be imputed the latter more properly is said to be propagated yet both what Adam did bearing our persons what we did in his loyns by a kinde of implicit blinde obedient disobedience and what he propagated to mankinde is all but onely one original sinne partly imputed partly inherent O Judge most righteous ô Father most mercifull grant I beseech thee that all of us who have been made Sinners by the Disobedience of one may likewise be made Righteous and Sanctified and Justified and presented blamelesse before thee by the Obedience of one of one thy onely Sonne in whom thou art well pleased our onely sweet Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ Amen CHAP. VI. 1. Originall sinne is propagated unto vs. Originall sinne properly is not in the flesh before the union with the soul 2. Bishop Bilson Mollerus Kemnitius and Luther in an errour Bishop Bilsons arguments answered Conception taken strictly by Physicians c. VVe are not conceived in originall sinne if we respect this conception Conception taken largely by Divines Thus we were conceived in sinne 3. A Physicall Tractate of conception clearing the point 4. A Discourse touching aborsives and abortives Balthasar Bambach answered The Hebrew vowels not written at first when the consonants were Never any wrote till God had written the Two Tables 5. The manner how the soul contracteth originall sinne pointed at Bodily things may work upon the soul 6. Righteous men have unrighteous children The contagion of originall sinne is quickly spread 7. No sinne or sinnes of any of our parents immediat or mediat do hurt the souls of their children but onely one and that the first sinne of Adam 1 AT length we are come to shew that original sinne is traduced and propagated unto mankinde and this is evident For since Adams aversion remained and was rooted in the nature of him as an habit and since we have our nature from him as he had it not before he sinned but after sinne this aversion is left in nature And this nature is conveyed unto us by generation conveyed I say as corrupt not as sinfull and so corrupt as flesh and bloud can be before a reasonable soul be united to it So that we being in Adam secundum causam seminalem propagandi virtutem our first father transmitted after his fall some corruption unto all his children And this corruption was mingled with the whole nature of his posterity neither could a man single out any part of any one in which there was not some deal of that primitive corruption And Adams offpring ever since hath made such a transmission as they received As if one do throughly mingle a little leaven with a whole unleavened lump not onely that masse may be said to be perfectly leavened but whatsoever is afterward incorporated into that masse Such a leaven of corruption was mingled by Adam and spread or dispersed unto and by his posteritie or as a needle toucht by a loadstone imparteth its received vertue to other needles depending on it From the will of every one of us actuall sinne is derived to all the other parts and faculties both of our bodies and souls so from the will of the first parents by generation is original sinne conveyed to all mankinde Or rather thus in Aquinas his words * Actus peccati exercitus per manum vel pedem non habet rationem culpae ex voluntate manûs vel pedis sed ex voluntate tetius hominis Aquin. in Rom. 5. Lect. 3. The act of sinne exercised by the hand or foot is not made sinne by the will of the hand or foot but by the will of the whole man From which as from a certain head or fountain the motion of sinne is derived to every member so from the will of Adam who was the fountain of humane nature the whole aberration of nature is found culpable in us And the means he thus there describeth Though the soul be not in the seed yet in it is a dispositive vertue apt to receive the soul which when it is infused is conformed to it so farre as it is capable because * Quicquid recipitur est in recipiente per modum recipientis every thing received is in the receiver according to his capacitie I need not doubt to say That the corruption which the fleshly part draweth from our
first parent before the soul be united is not sinne but a punishment of sinne a debilitie of nature an effect of sinne For if the Embryo should die or suffer abortion before the infusion and unition of the reasonable soul as such a time there is such a thing may be it must appeare in judgement and without extraordinarie mercy be damned if there were sinne in it but that a lump of flesh which onely lived the life of a plant at the utmost the life of a brute creature for indeed some abortions seeming livelesse lumps being pricked have contracted themselves and shewed they had sense which never had reasonable soul or spirit or life of man for those three severall lives are not onely virtually but really distinguished I say that such a rude masse of flesh should be lyable to account and capable of eternall either joy or pain is strange Divinitie which yet followeth necessarily if sinne be in the seed or unformed Embryo But you may ask When sinne beginneth I answer So soon as the soul is united * Subest rationale peccati susceptibile There is a reasonable subject susceptible of sinne and then sinne entreth Original sinne is in the reasonable soul as in the proper subject and is there formally the fleshly seed is the instrumentall means of traduction both of humane nature and originall sinne Originall sinne in a large sense may be said to be in the flesh and fleshly seed virtually as in the cause instrumental and to be in it originally causally materially and in such sort to be sooner in the body then in the soul by the order of generation and time but exactly and in most proper terms sinne is sooner in the soul by the order of nature and hath its first residence in the substance of the soul then in the faculties of it and last of all in the body 2 In Bishop Bilsons Survey pag. 173. this Position following is produced and maintained against him by his opposers Pollution that is sinne and reall iniquity is not in our flesh without the soul The Bishop answereth very copiously The soul cometh not to the body presently with the conception Mothers and Midwives do certainly distinguish the time of quickning from the time of conceiving neither doth the childe quicken presently upon conception That the body is not straightway framed upon the conception many thousand scapes in all females and namely women do prove Physicians and Philosophers interpose many moneths between the conception and the perfection of the body Job saith we were first as milk then condensed as cruds after clothed with skinne and flesh lastly compacted with bones and sinews before we received life and soul from God Job 10.10 The New Testament noteth three degrees in framing our bodies Seed bloud flesh Upon the premisses he thus argueth If nothing can be defiled with sinne as by your doctrine you resolve except it have a reasonable soul of necessitie we either had reasonable souls at the instant of our conception which is a most famous falshood repugnant to all learning experience and to the words of Job or els we were not conceived in sinne which is a flat heresie dissenting from the plain words of the Sacred Scriptures and from the Christian Faith So farre Bishop Bilson If company may excuse his opinion I adde these First Mollerus accordeth with him that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to be referred to the time of conception so soon as ever it was conceived in the wombe and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the time that the Foetus lieth hid is carried in the wombe signifying the seed was impure the conception was not without the flames of concupiscence and all the masse of bloud that nourisheth the Embryo was defiled with vices in the wombe and lastly the masse of the Embryo when in the first ardor of conception it first began to be warmed by the wombe was contaminated with sinne Enough of Mollerus Kemnitius in his Examen de Peccato Originali pag. 167. thus * Cùm mossa Embryonis in primo ardore conceptionis primùm inciperet uteri calore foveri jam erat peccato contaminata quae contaminatio juxta Davidis confessionem habebat veram rationem peccati cùm nondum formata essent vel mentis vel voluntatis vel cordis organa When the masse of the Embryo in the first ardor of conception began to be warmed and cherished by the heat of the wombe it was already defiled with sinne which defilement according to Davids confession was truly a sinne when the instruments of the minde or of the will or of the heart were not yet framed Luther on the words In iniquitatibus conceptus sum thus * Non loquitur David de ullis operibus sed simpliciter de materia ipso esse dicit Semen humanum id est massa ex qua conceptus sum tota est vitio peccato corrupta Materia ipsa vitiata est lutum illud ex quo vasculum bee fingi coepit damnabile est foetus in utero antequam nascimur homines esse incipimus peccatum est David speaks not of any works but simply of the matter and being and he saith The humane seed of which I have been conceived is all corrupted with vice and sinne The matter it self is infected that clay of which this little vessel hath begun to be fashioned is damnable the fruit in the wombe before we be born and beginne to be men is sinne Hierom in his Commentary on the words * Concipitur nascitur in originali peccato quod ex Adam trahitâ—r Whatsoever is drawn and derived from Adam is conceived and born in originall sinne Cajetan thus * Hic est textus unde trâ—kitur originale peccatum quo scilicet ex commixtione maris foeminae conceptus dicitur in originali peccato This is the Text from which originall sinne is deduced wherein every one is said to be conceived in originall sinne by the conjunction of male and female All this shall not make me beleeve that there is sinne and real iniquity without a reasonable soul Illyricus is justly deserted for saying The very substance of the soul is sinfull And these deserve as few followers who say That the substantiall bodily soul-wanting masse is sinfull And I professe in this latter to take part with others rather then with the otherwise most Reverend and learned Bishop For * Culpa non potest esse in re irrationali There can be no sinne in a thing reasonles Unto Bishop Bilson I thus answer That all his premisses are true that I subscribe to his opinion in the first member of his disjunction The second part of it I do wholy deny nor do I fear his aspersion of heresie To the place of the Psalmograph I answer with reverence by distinguishing First that the words sinne and iniquitie are taken rather for inclinations to sinne then for sinne
properly so called thus we were conceived in sinne that is so soon as ever we were conceived we had a propension and aptitude to sinne such and as much as the flesh was then capable of Augustine thus * Etiam jumenta quamvissunt rationisexpertia tamen plerumque dicimus debere vapulare cùm peccant Aug. De Adultermis Conjugiis lib 1. circa medium Albeit cattell be void of reason yet even of them we say oft that they ought to be beaten when they sinne But let us leave the vulgar forms of speech The said Father annexeth * Propriè peccare non est nisi ejus qui utitur rational is voluntatis arbitrio Holcot De Imputabilitate Peccati mendosè legit argumento To sinne properly is but of him that useth the pleasure and liking of a reasonable will Secondly If you will needs take sinne according to its true definition then I distinguish of conception which is used either strictly and properly or at large and extensively The first way is followed by Naturalists Anatomists Physicians and Philosophers the second way by Divines The first way they make conception to be an action of the wombe for when the wombe hath begun its work with attraction Nam sitiens haurit Venerem interiúsque recondit and continued it both by permixtion thereof and immuring retention in the fourth and last place it ends the operation by the suscitation of the inclosed sperms which is properly called * Vide Laurentii Histor Anatomicam lib. 8. quaest 12. pag. 619. conception The spiritus artifex and the foetus onely formeth nourisheth and increaseth what is done afterwards the wombe onely containeth and therefore conserveth because the place is the conservation of the thing placed in it To say that we did sinne properly when our mother thus conceived us is to say we sinned before we had life and we may aswell be said to sinne while we were in our fathers seed before their conjunction and commixture with our mothers which is not an houre before conception and so in their bloud before seed and in their meat ere it was bloud Thus I dare say the Spirit of God never meant that we were conceived in sinne and the traducted matter is not properly full of sinne or sinneth at all But take we conception largely and as Divines do use the word for the preparatorie formation or a degree of it is a kinde of conception as the exact formation unto the full grown measure a little before the nativitie may be called the completorie conception we may be said to be conceived in sinne conception being taken for the time of our perfecter formation extendible almost to our nativitie In iniquitatibus conceptus sum saith Lyra * Quia homo descendens ab Adam per carnalem generationem in unione animae ad corpus contrabit peccatum originale quod est ad actualia peccata inclinativum Because man descending from Adam by carnall generation in the union of the soul with the body contracts original sinne which inclineth to actuall sinnes Tremellius hath it In iniquitate formatus sum in peccato fovit me mater mea and expounds it in this manner * Iniquitat is peccati reus sum in utero formatus fotus haecenim non ad formam conceptûi formationis foâ—ûs sâ—dad foetûs constitutionem pertinent I am guiltie of iniquitie and sinne being framed and warmed in the wombe for these pertain not to the form of the conception shaping and warming but to the constitution of the fruit Vatablus rendreth it In iniquitate genitus sum and interprets it * Fictus sum formatus sum natus sum I have been fashioned framed born * Concepit me id est peperit Conceived me that is brought forth saith Emanuel Sà out of Hierome though I finde it not so in Hierom on the place S. Augustine following the Septuagint with Theodoret and others for the reading In iniquitatibus conceptus sum hath these passages * Ipsum vinculum mortis cum ipsa iniquitate concretum est nemo nascitur nisi trahens poenam trabens meritum poenae The very band of death is grown together with sinne it self None is born without drawing punishment without drawing the merit of punishment and he doth in a sort parallel this place with an other place of the Prophet and it is in Job I ghesse who may well be stiled a Prophet Nemo mundus in conspectu tuo nec infans cujus est unius diei vita-super terram Job 15.14 Our English late Translatours vary thus I was shapen in iniquitie and in sinne did my mother conceive or warm me as it is in the margin which shaping and warming is also after the union of the reasonable soul to the body Not one of all these doth take conception strictly and physically but largely and significantly enough both to the Scripture and to our purpose Stapleton thus * Anima non caro st subjâ—ctum virtutum vitiorum Stapl. De Orig. Pecc to 1.4 The soul not the flesh is the subject of vertues and vices Augustine * Semen vitiat mest non vitium Aug. Hypognost 2. initio The seed is infected not infection Godfridus Abbas Vindocinensis * Non ex carnis corruptione animae mors pracessit nec Diabolus priùs carnem noâ—ram infecit quà m animam Godfridus Abbas Vind. Epist 39. The death of the soul went not before from the corruption of the flesh neither doth the Devil infect the flesh before he defile the soul Augustine * Non caro corruptibilis animam peccatricem sed anima peccatrix facit esse carnem corruptibilem De Civit 14.3 circa medium The corruptible flesh doth not make the soul sinfull but the sinful soul makes the flesh to be corruptible Thus it was in Adam is in us our flesh is not properly sinfull or defiled before the soul inhabit it Reason also is of our side for if so soon as there is conception in the wombe there is true sinne how many thousand conceptions miscarry and never come to perfect formation as in the Mola where the forming of the parts being begun can not be perfected but the weak workman being drowned in abundance of bloud in stead of a living creature is ingendred an ill-shaped hard and idle lump of flesh oppressing the wombe with its ponderousnes saith * Fernel De Hominis Procreatione 7.8 one as the stomach is loaded with indigestible meats Is there sin in this conception sin before life sin when there is no motion as there is none in the lumpish Mola sin in a Moon-calf But put we the case in a perfect conception which without mischance may come to formation birth and casually suffereth abortion before the soul be united yet it can never be proved that it sinned In At the conception The arguments that trendle that way are these The very seed of which we
were begotten and conceived was an unclean thing saith Bishop Bilson as Job calleth it saying Who can make a clean thing of an unclean Job 14.4 It is also corruptible that is saith he full of corruption as Peter nameth it when he saith Born again not of corruptible seed 1 Peter 1.23 of which we were born of our parents Thirdly The Apostle calleth our flesh The flesh of sinne Rom. 8.3 If by these places he takes uncleannesse corruption and sinne improperly for such ill dispositions as seed bloud and livelesse flesh is capable of the Question is ended I confesse all But he understandeth uncleannesse corruption and sinne properly The title of his pages 174. and 175. is this Mans flesh is defiled in conception before the soul is created and infused And in the body of his Discourse he enlargeth it as in his Conclusion to the Reader at the end of his Sermons pag. 252. he first propoundeth it and citeth Ambrose to assist him saying * Priùs incipit inhomine macula quà m vita Amnr. Apolog. David cap. 11. Pollution sooner beginneth in man then life Now the soul is the life of the body then if pollution cleave to the flesh before life come and consequently before the soul come whencesoever it cometh it is evident that Adams flesh defileth and so condemneth us So farre he None of these proofs reach home to cleare this That sinne true sinne proper sinne originall sinne or actuall is in the seed or bloud or flesh before the reasonable soul be united Neither did that learned Bishop consider that it can not be called our originall uncleannesse pollution or sinne till we have originem that is till our soul hath its first being in the body He erreth to say Pollution cleaveth to the flesh before life cometh and more erreth saying Adams flesh defileth and condemneth us if he make the flesh subject to condemnation before its life and union of the soul For then many thousand abortions should be damned which never had rationall soul annexed to them As for Ambrose * Whitak De Origin Peccato 1.4 Whitaker thus citeth him from the same Book and Chapter * Antequam nafcimur maculamur contagio antequam usuram lucis originis ipsiut accipimus injuriam Before we be born we are stained with contagion before we enjoy the light we receive the injurie of our verie beginning Ambrose saith not We have sinne ere we have life but We are conceived in iniquity which is true and confest if we take conception largely so Ambrose taketh macula for such inclination to evill as is in the seed potentially maculative Concerning the place of Job First Job saith not The seed is unclean but Quis dabit mundum ex immundo Which may have reference to the person or the nature of the unclean father Secondly it may be a parallell with that of Job 25.4 How can he be clean that is born of awoman yea the starres are not pure in his sight vers 5. Lastly things may be said to be unclean that have no sinne Ask the unclean beasts and they will justifie it and the trees will send forth this truth as leaves Levit. 19.23 24. The fruit of the trees planted shall be as uncircumcised or unclean unto you three yeares it shall not be eaten of but in the fourth yeare it shall be holy to praise the Lord withall yet was not the fruit sinfull it self but quoadusum The place of S. Peter is answered by the same Apostle 1 Pet. 1.18 Silver and gold are things corruptible yet these creatures as creatures are good in themselves though they are causes of most sinnes yet have no sinne many other corruptible things as heaven earth are void of all sinne As concerning the place of the Apostle S. Paul I answer it is apparent he speaketh of flesh after the soul is united which is nothing to our Question and therefore a most impertinent proof of the Bishop Lastly the Reverend Bishop bringeth this objection against himself How could David say he was conceived in sinne when at the conception he had neither soul nor body His main answer is With God nothing is more frequent then to call those things that are not as though they were Rom. 4.17 and speaketh in Scriptures of things to come as if they were past or present David and Job call that seed which was prepared to be the matter of their bodies by the names of themselves because it could not be altered what God had appointed But the void conceptions of women which miscarry before the body be framed never had either life or soul and so neither name nor kinde but perish as other superfluous burdens and repletions of the body So he I reply that I may not question the worthy Bishop about the meaning of that place Rom. 4.17 He hath made a great stirre to little purpose since he maketh many conceptions void of finne or punishment like superfluous burdens and repletions of the body which none ever said to have sinned Secondly which is the better answer to the place of the Psalmist to say as the Bishop doth Conceptions which come to nothing are not sinfull but such as may have souls are sinfull before they have souls whereby he splitteth himself on this rock That a perfect conception susceptible of a soul and aborsed casually before the unition with the soul is sinfull and liable to account or to answer with me That sinne and iniquity in the place of the Psalmist is taken for the aptitude to sinne which is in the matter or els conception is taken in its latitude for our time in the mothers wombe and so true original sinne not to be in the body without a soul Aquine saith * Quum sola creatura rationalis sit susceptiva culpae ante infusionem animae rationalis proles concepta non est peccato obnoxia Aquin. part 3. Quaest 27. art 2. in corp art Sith none but the reasonable creature is susceptible of fault the childe conceived is not subject to sinne before the infusion of a reasonable soul Whitaker saith well * Carnem nihil concupiscere sine anima nec doctus nec doctus dubitat ut loquar cum Augustino Quid enim caro iâ—animis a trunco differt Whitak De Origin Peccato 3.1 That the flesh covets nothing without the soul neither the learned nor the unlearned doubts that I may speak with Augustine For what doth the inanimate flesh differ from a stock And I hope the Bishop will not say A block or a stock hath sinne Moreover after thousands of sinnes committed in the body and by and with the body yet the body separated from the soul hath no sinne is not sinfull much lesse is sinne and shall the seed in the wombe be called sinfull or sinne as Kemnitius or Luther calleth it before it is warmed with life or enlivened with a soul Lastly in our very Creed conception is used with libertie and
our own implicit will we may draw on us a necessitie of after-sinning which most justly may be imputed to us and we may tie our selves with our own bonds To the former part this may give satisfaction That against the will of the soul the soul it self can not be corrupted for then the will should be forced and so no will at all but Noluntas and not Voluntas It is not necessary saith Bellarmine that our soul must needs come from Adam because we draw sinne from him if but one part come from him it is enough For a father doth not per se produce originall sinne in the childe but per accidens namely as by the act of generation it cometh to passe that his sonne is a member of mankinde which was overtaken in Adams corruption and that the propension unto evill of the earthly part traducted meeting with a soul not much resisting causeth this originall sinne to result thencefrom and death by this original sinne So that no sooner is the soul united to its body and the matter glewed to the form but the infant deserveth to be and is the childe of death by reason of the primigeneall corruption If you enquire after what manner the body worketh the soul unto this evill we may truly say * Corpus non agit in animam actione physicâ immediatâ The body worketh not upon the soul by a naturall and immediate action You heard what Hugo Eterianus said It is stricken or cast down onely by fellowship He enlargeth himself in the same Chapter thus * Vitium languor corruptio ante animae conjunctionem in carne persistunt ex qua tabe anima maculatur sicut si testa odore malo imbuta sit quemcunque liquorem susceperit suâ corruptione inficit Imperfection languishing and corruption abide in the flesh before the souls conjunction from which disease the soul is infected as if a vessel be tainted with an ill odour it infects therewith whatsoever liquour it receiveth Gerson thus * Anima ex conjunctione ad corpus contrabit illud vitium sicut quandoquis cadit in lutum foedatur maculatur Gers in Compend Theolog. The soul by the conjunction with the body contracteth that infection as when one falleth into the mire he is besmeared and stained Felisius thus * Pomum mundum in manu immunda positum foedatur Vinum bonum tranâ—fusum in vas acetosum suum naturalem perdendo saporem centrabit alienum sic anima quando incipit esse in carne unita suum naturalem amittit vigorem A clean apple put in an unclean hand is soiled Good wine poured into a fustie vessel contracts a strange taste and loses its own naturall so the soul loses its naturall vigour when it is united in the flesh Another thus Anima cum labente simul labitur frustra nititur dum innititur To the same effect another saith thus As the purest rain-water falling on dust is turned with the dust into a lump of mire so at the coadunation of the soul unto the earthly part both spirit and flesh are plunged in the durt of corruption Augustine against Julian the Pelagian 4.15 preferreth the very Heathen before Julian for he held That nothing was conveyed unto us from Adam and they held * Nos oh antiqua scelera suscepta in vita superiore poenarum luendarum causâ esse natos That we were born to be punished for old crimes committed in a former life And saith Augustine it is true which Aristotle relateth That we are punished like to those who fell among the Hetrurian robbers * Quorum corpora viva cum mortuis adversa adversis accommodata quà m optissimè colligabantur necabantur Whose living bodies being coupled face to face with dead mens carcases were so killed Of the Hetrurian Tyrant Mezentius Virgil Aeneid 8. recordeth the like Mortua corporibus jungebat corpora vivis Componens manibúsque manus at que oribus ora Tormenti genus sanie tabóque fluentes Complexu in misero longâ sic morte necabat But I return from this Digression The Heathen say as S. Augustine relateth * Nostros animos cum corporibus copulatos ut vivos cum mortuis esse conjunctos That our souls united to our bodies are like the living coupled with the dead They saw somewhat saith he and commendeth their wisedome in discerning the miseries of mankinde to be for somewhat before committed in acknowledging the power and justice of God though without divine revelation they could not know that it was Adams offence which brought such a wrack both on our souls and on our bodies What hath been hitherto related seemeth too much to encline to the naturall physicall immediate working of the soul upon the body Others are as faultie who say The soul receiveth no annoyance from the body but by way of IMPEDITION onely where the spirituall faculties are hindered and the Musick spilt by reason of the untuneablenes of the organes But they wil not seem to heare That a spirituall substance can receive infection from a nature corporeall Both opinions may rest contented in the middesse or mean That as the body cannot go beyond the sphere of its activitie and work properly and physically upon the soul so by the interposition as it were of a middle nature the body not onely hindereth the faculties of the soul from working but sometimes worketh upon the soul Thus the naturall vitall and animall spirits do binde and unite the soul to the body that neither part can part from other though it would Thus bodily objects work on the minde but it is by the mediation of the outward and inward senses Shall corporeall outward and remote objects by degrees draw the soul into sinne even in our perfect age when our naturall reason is most vigorous and may not the corrupted seed having as great a propension to evill as Naphtha to take fire at the conjunction infect the soul with a participation of uncleannes though the operation be not physicall or immediate By Adams soul sinning was Adams flesh infected may not our soul be infected as well by our flesh A spirituall substance can produce a bodily effect Boëtius saith excellently Forms materiall came from forms immateriall Our will was moved by our intellect our appetite by our will and a bodily change conformable to our appetite And may not a bodily species work by the same degrees backward on the soul it self The reason is alike in the contrarietie Doth the corporeall fire of Hell torment and affect the incorporeall spirits of evill Angels and shall it of wicked men as most certainly it doth and must which shall be proved God willing otherwhere and may not the matter make some impression on the form the body upon the soul when there is such a sympathie in nature betwixt them If the soul do no way suffer from the body how doth it follow the
temperature of the body How doth madnes foolishnes anger and love with other affections work upon the minde Yea how cometh it to passe that not onely strength and nimblenes of body but even goodnes of wit is propagated if nature be strong and children resemble their fathers both in manners and understanding The flesh it self without the soul if it be beaten hurt or cut is no way sensible Reunite the separated soul to the wronged body the soul feeleth and is much affected nor is the grief in the incision onely but in the soul Yea in apoplexies and deep sleeps cast upon men by stupefactive ingredients and compounded by art while the soul is in the body wounds have been given unto the earthy part and it never felt them when those fits are vanished the soul feels the pain of the discontinuity and division of the flesh as well as the body Doctor * Praelect 51. De Libris Apocryphis Rainolds thus God by nature hath ordered that the soul naturally united to the body * Compatiatur corpori afflicto corpore vexetur recreato exhilaretur corpere occiso condolescat ut quodam medo ratione corpor is patiatur Should suffer with the body and be grieved the body being afflicted and rejoice it being refreshed and be sorrowfull the body being killed so that some way it suffers by reason of the body Permit me but the use of his modification some way and I dare say The body drawes the soul its way some way to sinne Aquinas on Rom. 5. Lect. 3. It should not seem that sinne which is an accident of the soul can be produced by the originall of the flesh It is answered saith he with reason Though the soul be not in the seed yet there is in the seed a vertue disposing the body to receive the soul which soul being poured or infused into the body is after a sort conformable to the body because every thing received is in the receiver according to the capacitie of the receiver To him let me adde If a new created soul should be put into a body not descending from Adam it should not have originall sinne but meeting with a body disposed to corruption after its kinde it yeeldeth and contracteth originall sinne 6. Yea but the act of Adams sinne passed quickly away and the guiltines was forgiven how could it infect us I answer * Persona primùm infecit naturam pòst natura infecit personam The person did first infect the nature afterwards the nature did infect the person The speedy gliding act poisoned our nature and we have not uncorrupted Adams nature or any part of it but his corrupt nature propagated corrupteth our persons The forgivenes of that his guilt and sinne joyned with subsequent holines of life is no priviledge of innocency to his posterity who were not made of his perfect but vitiated nature Accordingly since that time they who are cleansed with the laver of regeneration sealed with the spirit justifyed by faith presented blamelesse to God by Christ precious in the eyes of the Lord just among men elect and pure even such do beget children over whom this gangren of corruption creepeth and the babes are infected with originall sinne If it be objected If the root be holy so are the branches Rom. 11.16 therefore holy mens children are better in their generation then wicked mens children I answer the fallacie is in the word Holy which in the place to the Romanes signifieth not inward holines in the sight of God but outward holines whereby they might be distinguished from other prophane people Thus the wicked Jews were as holy as the righteous Abraham even the traytour Judas himself If any further insist and alledge The children of a beleever are holy 1. Cor. 7.14 It is also truly further answered That the same word Holy is homonymous not being all one with justified regenerate exempt or free from sinne but they are said to be holy in regard of the communion with the Church for that covenant sake I will be thy God and the God of thy seed So Holines signifieth a relation not a qualitie saith * Sanctitas significat relationem non qualitatem Scharp Curs Theol. pag. 461. Scharpius Augustine thus * Sicut gignatur ex oleasir◠semine oleaster ex oleae semine non nisi oleaster cùminter oleast um oleam plurimum distat Aug. De Nuptiis Concupijcentia 1.19 2.34 As a wilde olive-tree is brought forth out of the seed of a wilde olive-tree and out of the seed of an olive-tree nothing but a wilde olive-tree although there be a great difference between a wilde olive-tree and an olive-tree The seed both of the wilde-olive and also of the garden true good olive-tree bringeth forth a wilde-olive so a sinner is begotten of the flesh of a sinner and also of the flesh of a righteous man though there is a great difference between a sinner and a just person Hast thou ground fallowed manured fit to be sowen hast thou seed of the best picked winnowed or tried is it clear from tares chasse or dust though thou hast thy desire for a seasonable time of sowing though the heavens drop fatnes and the earth conspireth with them to yeeld thee a plentifull and good crop yet shall thy corn arise grow up and be reaped with weeds at least with husk chasse and dust so doth a just man beget an unjust Christianus non Christianum A Christian an Vnchristian the circumcised Hebrews beget children uncircumcised for the generation is naturall and not spirituall Wicked Ahaz begat good Hezekiah wicked Ammon good Josiah good not by generation but regeneration Those wicked Fathers had no more priviledge then just Lot who begat wicked daughters or David who had Absalom or Abraham who had Ismael or Isaac who had Esau or Noah who had Ham or to winde it up to the highest Adam whose first-begotten was the accursed Cain A whole family may be bound to some speciall service for some disloyalty they have shewed to their King If the King be so gracious as to make proclamation That whosoever in a battell fighteth valiantly shall be himself freed from such servitude and bounden service shall his children expect to be freed likewise Personall acceptance is no necessary signe of generall successive manumission We betrayed God for a little pleasure Those that fight a good fight under Christ are freed yet do the children of the just grone under that yoke out of which their fathers by speciall grace have plucked their necks Yea but he sinneth not that is begotten for neither body is framed nor soul united he sinneth not that begetteth for the bed is undefiled and in matrimony the act of generation lawfull yea commanded yea meritorious say some of the School He sinneth not also that createth the soul By what crany crank or chink shall originall sinne creep in It was the objection of Julian the Pelagian saith
Augustine who answereth * Quid quaeris latentem rimam cùm habeas apertissimam januam Nam secundum Apostolum Per unum hominem peccatum intravit Aug. De Nuptiis Concupisc 2.28 Why do you seek a secret chink sith you have an open doore for according to the Apostle By one man sinne entred And the manner how the soul is made sinfull is described at large before to wit That by the union it is infected and so soon as it is infused it tasteth of corruption But this seems strange if not impossible That the soul so soon as it is tied to the body should be caught like a bird with a lime-bush and bound up in corruption as in a bundle Let him that objecteth remember the Angels higher of nature then men Created they were in the truth but they did not abide in the truth John 8.44 God found no stedfastnes in the Angels Job 4.18 Did not Satan fall like lightning from heaven or rather according to the Greek Satan fell from heaven like lightning Luke 10.18 and lightning is gone ere we can say it is come The Angels kept not their first estate but left their own habitations Jude vers 6. Do not some of the School say They fell the second instant of their creation and Aquine and his fellows maintain it was * Statim post primum instans presently after the first instant So that what Seneca said of the burning of Lyons * Diutiùs illam tibi periisse quà m periit narro Sen. Epist 91. I am longer in telling thee that it perished then it was in perishing we may well apply to the evil Angels not standing or beginning to fall And alas what a short time was there between Adams perfection and imperfection how suddenly did he conceive and bring forth corruption So quickly doth the soul of a young childe sink under corruption though it be not speedily discerned The seed of a stote fox or serpent hath dangerous and desperate inclinations in it though they break not forth long after For as in the dark night you can not difference distinguish or know the blindnes of a blinde mans eye from the eye of him who is not blinde but when the light cometh it is easily discerned so in infants originall sinne appeareth not but in processe of time it groweth manifest Humours putrifying and putrified are long in the body ere they come to their height and shew themselves outwardly so is sinne in the soul of every childe it lurketh in our nature which was derived unto us from our Fore-fathers Yet let me not be mistaken as if I held that we are answerable for the sinnes of our Forefathers or that Adams future sinnes after his first sinne and fall were propagated or the iniquities of any other our immediat mediat or remote progenitours shall lie heavy on us For man begetteth man like to himself as he is Species hominis not as he is Individuum and Accidents belonging to the individuall person of the Father passe not over to the childe but those things that pertain to the specificall nature Therefore what belongeth to man as he is Individuum he doth not propagate As for example A Musician begetteth not a Musician but a man an Astrologer an earthly a wiseman a fool a Divine a carnall a holy man an unclean person Should we propagate as we are Individua we should also convey and communicate to our posteritie our knowledge our arts our sciences and our Fathers holy inclinations and mortified dispositions For good is more diffusive and spreading of it self then evil can be and God extendeth Mercy further then he doth his Justice Exod. 20.6 Which vertuous good since we do not derive unto our posteritie neither do we or shall we partake of our predecessours sinnes or of any one sinne except of the onely first sinne of our first predecessour 7. There was not given either to Adam or to the sonnes of Adam any one precept which belonged to all mankinde I mean such a precept by the breach of which we might have fallen in their fall or in Adams fall without our own actuall consent save onely one of which I spake so much before neither do the acts of any fathers necessarily binde all his descendents Jonadab the sonne of Rechab commanded his children saying Ye shall drink no wine neither ye nor your sonnes for ever neither shall ye build house nor sow seed nor plant vineyard nor have any Jerem. 35.6 7. They are commended because they performed the commandment of their father vers 16. and are blessed for obeying and keeping all his precepts vers 18. but therefore in my opinion more commended and more blessed because the performance was more of voluntary devotion then of binding necessitie or a meer imperious charge for his precepts could not lay so great a tie upon all his descendents but certainly the obedience was of free condescent not coactive command unlesse we say by immediate divine revelation he was commanded to put that yoke upon his posteritie for ever It is a true maxime in School-divinitie a Purè personalia non propagantur Meerly personals are not transmitted Of this sort is holinesse and sinne and therefore not tranducted unto others After Zacharie was dumbe Luk. 1.24 he begat John Baptist a crier the voice of one crying Mark 1.3 And John 9.20 the blinde man had parents which could see Halting Jacob Genes 32.32 begat the lion Judah the lusty-lovely Jonathan the lame Mephibosheth But there are others which may be called mixt-personals and these are oftentimes hereditarily derived Thus through the noisome qualitie of the seed one leper begetteth an other and a father subject to the stone or gout transmitteth those diseases full often to his children and it hath been the wish of some Physicians and if I be not much mistaken I have read it as the practise of some countries or commonwealths that they that are naturally subject to contagious diseases or evils hereditary as Apoplexies Epilepsies Consumptions or the like are forbidden to sow their seed in wholsome ground yea are forbidden marriage to avoid future danger But these diseases reach not to infect the soul with sinne Aquinas on Rom. 5. Lect. 3. goeth one step further The sonnes are like the fathers even in the defects of the soul Angry and mad men are begotten of angry and mad men Yet in the end he closeth thus It is manifest that though the first sinne of the first Adam be traducted to posterity by the originall yet Adams other sinnes or the sinnes of other men are not derived to their children because by the onely first sinne sublatum est bonum naturae that naturall good was taken away which should have been traducted per originem naturae by the originall of nature By other sinnes the good of personall grace is withdrawn which passeth not over to posteritie Hence it is that though Adams sinne was blotted out by his repentance
fail me not in S. Augustine The personall offences or holinesse of parents are not communicated to their children Again they object that they confirm this by experience These are words of winde and nothing else That wicked ones beget often children like to them who denieth That their children have their fathers personall sinnes transmitted is the begging of the question Yea but they prove it by examples of Scripture How or where By the place Exod. 20.5 I visit the sinnes of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me I answer He doth not say I transmit or communicate sinnes which is our onely question Even Illyricus himself among all his expositions of visitare hath none for communicare propagure transfundere transferre and particularly of this place of Exodus he saith f Visitans iniquitatem patrum id est puniens posteros ob majorum suorum enormia delicta Visiting the iniquitie of the fathers that is punishing the posteritie for the enormious sinnes of their ancestours Yet if to visit had been to propagate actuall sinnes it had been his best proof That the substance of the soul is corrupt by originall sinne and hath in it the image of Satan They alledge S. August who saith it is probable by that place of Exodus The words of S. August are these in the place by them cited g Parentum quoq peccatis parvulos obugari non solùm primorum hominum sedetiam suorum de quibus ipsi nati sunt non improbabiliter dicitur It is not improbably said that children are liable to the sinnes of their parents not onely of their first parents but also those of whom they are immediately born And at the end of that chapter h In illo uno quod in omnes homines pertransiit atque tam magnum est ut in â—o mutaretur converteretur in necessitatem mortis humana natura reperiuntur plura peccata alia parentum quae etsi non possunt mutare naturam reatu tamen obligant filios In that one sinne which passed over to all men and is so great that in it humane nature was changed and turned to a necessitie of death more sinnes are found and other of parents which albeit they change not our nature yet by their guilt they binde children where he makes an apparent distinction between that one sinne which changed our nature and was propagated unto us and those other personall sinnes of our fathers which change not our nature but binde us over unto punishment for that is his meaning of reatu obligant He doth no where say such sinnes are communicated unto us or that they binde us with the guilt of offence but he is to be understood of the guilt of punishment And so Bellarmine expounds him De amission grat statu peccati 4.18 Indeed he doth it somewhat timerously towards the beginning of the chapter with a i Fortasse non de contagione culpae sed de communicatione poenae locuti sunt Augustinus perchance But he is more positive and fully assertive at the latter end of the same chapter that Augustine and the Fathers spake onely of the communication of punishment which Bellarmine proveth because they instance in Exod. 20.5 which hath apparent reference to punishment and indeed so the word visit is most-wise used in Scripture viz. for to punish and sometimes in love mercy grace and goodnesse to visit but never is used for the communicating or propagating trajecting or transmitting of sinnes Nay k Greg. Mor. 15.22 Gregorie goeth further as he is cited by Bellarmine teaching that the place of Exodus is to be understood of those children who imitate the sinnes of their parents and so the Chaldee Paraphrase hath it saith Vatablus Lastly to cleare this truth that Augustine in that place meant onely the binding over unto punishment see his own words Chap. 47. which I marvel that Bellarmine passeth over l Sed de peccatis aliorum parentum quibus ab ipso Adam usque ad patrem suum progeneratoribus suis quisque succedit non immeritò disceptari potest utrùm â—mnium malis actibus multiplicatis delictis originalibus qui uascitur implìcetur ut tantò pejùs quantò posteriùs quisque nascatur Aâ— propterea Deus in tertiam quartam generationem de peccatis câ—rum posteris comminâ—â—ur quia iram suam quantum ad progenitorum suorum culpas non extendit ulteriùs moderatione miserationis suae nè illi quibus regenerationis gratia non confertur nimiâ sarcinâ in ipsa sua aeterna damnatione premerentur si cogerentur ab initio generis humeni omniuÌ„ praecedentium parentum suorum originaliter peccata contrabere poenas pro iis debitas pendere An aliud aliquid de re tanta in Scripturis sanâ—â—is diligentiùs perscrutatis tractatis vakat vel non valeat reperiri temerè non audeo affirmare But touching the sinnes of other parents by which every one from Adam himself to his own father succeeds his ancestours it may well be disputed Whether he that is born be involved in the evil acts and multiplied original sinnes of all so that how much the later any man is born so much the worse Or whether God doth therefore threaten the posterity unto the third and fourth generation for their parents sinnes because through his mercifull moderation he extends his wrath no further for the faults of progenitours lest they to whom the grace of regeneration is not given should be pressed with too great a burden in their eternall damnation if they were forced to contract the original sinnes of all their forefathers from the beginning of mankinde and to undergo the punishments due to them Or whether some thing else concerning so weighty a matter may be found in the holy Scriptures diligently searched and perused I dare not rashly affirm You have the whole chapter word for word out of S. Augustine In which observe First the adversative particle Sed distinguishing the question from the other which also Erasmus in the margin hath thus diversified comprising the meaning of the 46 chapter in these words m Peccâ—â—is parentum obligari filios That the children are bound by the sinnes of their parents and of the 47 chapter n Quousque majorum peccata prorogcutur non temerè desiniendum We ought not rashly to determine how farre the sinnes of ancestours be extended Secondly in the former chapter he said exactly o Non improbabiliter dicitur parentum peccatis parvulos obligari It is not improbably said that infants are bound by the sinnes of their parents He changeth the phrase in the latter p Non immeritò disceptari potest Non audeo temerè affirmare It may well be disputed and I dare not rashly affirm Thirdly his phrases in the former chapter are not so distinct as in the latter where he mentioneth both the
Israel Exod. 17.8 though they were presently punished by being vanquished in battell yet God said vers 14. Write this for a memoriall in a book I will utterly put out the remembrance of Amalek under heaven And the Lord did swear he would have warre with Amalek from generation to generation Exod. 7.16 And above foure generations after about 400 yeares Saul destroyed them A Quaere indeed may be made Whether God can justly punish the fathers for the childrens actuall delinquencies And this resolution is easie That he may do it if the father hath doted on the children not duely corrected them for so did God to * 1. Sam. 2.29 Eli or if wicked children do tenderly love their parents which though it be not usuall yet it hath been so and in this case the punishment of the father is indeed a punishment also of the childe But if an holy father do his duty and hate his sonnes courses and thereupon the childe loveth not his father if God can punish the father with temporall punishments for the notorious faults of his sonne yet he will not punish him eternally Nay I will go yet further and truely avouch that the sinnes of predecessours which are not of consanguinitie with us but are fathers onely by our imitation fully may be punished on their children First the word father is taken two wayes in Scripture for either there are fathers by imitation or fathers by nature from whose loyns we lineally descend The Jews though they came not of Cain whose posterity ended at the floud yet may be said to be his sonnes by imitation yea they are called the sonnes of Satan Joh. 8.44 because they followed his steps and did the work of their father vers 41. which is one degree more remote Those who thus take a pattern for themselves out of example of wicked ancestours God justly punisheth Satan having been a murderer from the beginning John 8.44 Cain being as it were the head of murderers among men and the Jews treading in their steps to an inch they may justly be cast into the same fire prepared for the devil and his angels Matth. 25.41 And the Apostle S. Jude justly pronounceth vers 11. Wo to them that have gone in the way of Cain Yea our blessed Saviour himself foretelleth the Jews that for their bloudy proceedings Vpon them shall come all the righteous bloud shed upon the earth from the bloud of the righteous Abel unto the bloud of Zacharias whom they slew c. Mat. 23.35 Where first the distinct deaths of severall martyrs or just ones as the Syriack hath it is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one just bloud secondly they are said to slay Zacharias whom others slew thirdly the bloud is not said in the preterperfect tense to have been shed but in the present tense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is shed or is now a shedding as Jerusalem is called vers 37. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quae occidisti occîdis occisura es as Erasmus well expounds it All these circumstances concurre to make as it were one continued act of murder from the beginning of the world till the destruction of Jerusalem repayed with one and the same punishment upon the father and all the sonnes of imitation Now as the punishment of the fathers by imitation may in an extended sense be communicated to posterity so their sinnes cannot be said to be communicated For how can the sinne of Cain be communicated unto him who last of all killed his brother and unto the Jews who descended not from him but from the younger brother Or can we think that God will inflict damnation upon men for others personall transgressions Temporall chastisements he may justly inflict for the ungracious perpetrations of parents x Non est tibi Israel ultio in qua non sit uncia de iniquitate vituli There is no vengeance taken on thee Israel wherein there is not an ounce of the iniquitie of the calf saith Rabbi Moses Ben Nachman whom they call Ramban or Gerundensis See an excellent place for both points together Jerem. 32.18 19. And eternall torment can he rightly adjudge the soules and bodies of men unto for original sinne which is our second proposition 5. God may and justly doth punish some children eternally and all temporally for originall sinne whether they be like their parents in actuall aversion and back-sliding yea or no. For the most righteous sonnes of Adam endure pain labour sicknesse death which are the orts and effects of the primogeneall offence and the death both of soul and body was inflicted in Morte moriemini and this shall hereafter be fully proved 6. God justly inflicteth eternall punishment on wicked children if they resemble their wicked parents y Malorum imitatio facit ut non solùm sua sed etiam eorum quos imitati sunt merita sortiantur August in priori Enarrat Psal 108. The imitating of wicked men makes a man to be punished not onely for his own sinnes but for theirs also whom he imitates This is a truth so apparent that it needeth no further proof 7. God oftentimes punisheth one sinne with an other And in my opinion this manner of punishing if it continue all a mans life is worse then the torment of hell-fire which were better to be speedily undergone then to be deferred with the increase of sinne Psal 69.27 Adde punishment of iniquitie or Adde iniquitie unto their iniquitie Thus God gave the Gentiles over to a reprobate minde Rom. 1.28 and then such offenders do but treasure up wrath against the day of wrath Rom. 2.5 But this happeneth not for the foregoing offences of our progenitours but for our own transgressions 8. The personall holinesse of the parent never conveied grace or salvation to the sonne Abraham the father of the faithfull prayed for his sonne Gen. 17.18 Oh that Ishmael might live in thy sight yet was he a cast-away Temporall blessings indeed he had for Abrahams sake vers 20. Isaac had an Esau David an Absalom and often the like 9. God never punished eternally the reall iniquities of fathers upon their children if the children were holy Let an instance be given to the contrarie Indeed it is said Psal 109.14 Let the iniquitie of his fathers be remembred with the Lord and let not the sinne of his mother be done away But he speaketh first of a very wicked man equalling if not exceeding his parents in sinne And the New Testament applieth it to Judas Act. 1.20 to Judas the monster of men Secondly the remembrance mentioned hath reference rather to penalties consequent then onely to sinnes precedent z Memoratur quantum ad poenam quoniam puncti sunt filii pro iniquitate patrum qui occiderunt Christum It is remembred in regard of the punishment because the children were pricked for the iniquitie of their fathers who slew Christ saith Cajetan on the place And this is not our question Thirdly why may there not
be a change of number as Vatablus stileth it And though the Interlinearie bible readeth it patrum eorum and Vatablus so expounds it but reads it patrum ejus why may it not be expounded patris ejus being accordant to that following peccatum matris ejus and whether it be patrum eorum or patrum ejus or patris ejus I see not but originall sinne may be meant in both places as being expressed onely in the singular rather then the many actuall transgressions especially since our singular originall sinne came to him by many fathers and it was not the intent of Gods Spirit in this Psalme to extenuate the sinnes of the wicked one's forefathers and to plaister this over with the title of one single iniquitie Indeed Theodoret on the place saith thus a Paterna virtus saepe siliis peccantibus prosuit ut fides Abrahae Judaeis Davidis pietas Solomoni The fathers vertue hath often profited the transgressing children as Abrahams faith did the Jews and Davids pietie Solomon So Cesar at his pardoning of those in Marseil and in Athens who took part with Pompey in the civill warres said They were excused for their ancestours sake as contrarily b Pravitas pattum filiis similibus poenam adauget The wickednesse of parents increaseth the punishment of like children saith Theodoret. I answer That all this speaketh of temporal chastisements none of eternall horrour infligible upon good children for the sinnes of their parents When God saith I will visit the sinnes of the parents if it implyed the visiting them with like sinnes as it doth not yet it is of them that hated him also and by their personall hating him deserved to have one sinne punished with an other for the hatred of the sonnes is meant as annexed to the sinnes of the fathers This any one may see that will read Ezekiel 18.14 Lo if a wicked man beget a sonne that doth not like his father he shall not die for the iniquitie of his father he shall surely live vers 17. God hath no pleasure that the wicked should die vers 23. And hath he delight that the righteous shall perish eternally for his wicked ancestours The drift of the whole chapter is against it and proveth his wayes to be equall because a wicked man repenting shall not die for his own transgressions vers 25. c. And shall a righteous man die or be condemned for he meaneth the death of the soul for the offences of others Who ever perished being innocent Even as I have seen they that plow iniquitie and sow wickednesse reap the same Job 4.7 8. and God rewardeth every man according not to the works of his forefathers but according to his own works Rom. 2.6 Mat. 16.27 which seemeth to be taken from the Psalmograph who ascribeth to the Lord not injustice not severitie but grace and mercie in his judicature Vnto thee O Lord belongeth mercy for thou rewardest every man according to his work Psal 62.12 And Every one shall give account of himself Rom. 14.12 Every one shall receive the things done in his bodie according to that he hath done whether it be good or evil 2. Cor. 5.10 If this be not enough more may be added with an easie hand to the strengthening of this sixth Proposition now chiefly questioned God never damned a good childe for the fathers personall wickednesse I now come to the seventh Proposition 10. No personall sinnes can be communicated Indeed they who maintain the traduction of souls may if that be granted better defend the propagation of actuall iniquities But that opinion being false ridiculous exploded and hereticall of which otherwhere in this Tractate the superstructive is founded on slippery ice and these terms To propagate communicate derive transmit and transfuse sinnes personall are meerly amphibologicall and dubious phrases If they mean as the words do signifie let them say that the matter of sinne actuall is transfused or the form or both The matter is the action the form is the obliquitie thereof both these do vanish Doth the guilt of punishment passe over c Reatus est vinculum inter poenam peccatum quasi medium interjectum Guilt is a band joyning punishment sin as a thing coming between them And this band is rather in God then in man to tie or untie at his pleasure d Actus qui jam transiit dicitur manere quoad reatum non quia rectus sit aliquid sed quia à tali actu denominatur quis reus Reatus peccati non est aliqua res cùm non sit substantia vel accidens sed solùm maneat in occultis legibus Dei mentibus Angelorum An act that is past already is said to remain in regard of the guilt not that the guilt is any thing but because a man is denominated guiltie from such an act The guilt of sinne is not any thing since it is neither a substance nor an accident but onely remains in the secret laws of God and mindes of Angels as Holcot De Imputab pec truely gathereth from S. Augustine The guilt is not the personall sinne it self but the effect thereof and our question is not now of the descent of punishments Doth the guilt of sinne take hold of the childe they cannot say so unlesse here also they confound the effect with the cause and this is but Petitio principii in other terms Again how heterodoxall is it to say A man begetteth a sonne guiltie of all his actuall iniquities For then though the father may be saved by his after-repentance yet the sonne who knoweth not perchance nor ever heard inckling of his fathers horrid and secret sinnes according to their position may be damned for them Do they mean the stain and spot is communicated I answer The stain and spot is not the actuall sinne but the fruit of it inherent in the soul of the offender and not transmissible by the bodie and is onely metaphorically termed the stain having no positive realitie transmissible Zanchius himself relates their opinion thus e Peccatorum quae aliquis parens committit labem ceu contagium justo Dei judicio redundare in ejus corpus sanguinem per ejus porrò sanguinem semen in filios quos ex illo semine it à vitiosè affecto gignit transfundi That the spot and as it were contagion of the sinnes which any parent committeth doth redound by Gods just judgement upon his bodie and bloud and is further transfused by his bloud and seed into the sonnes whom he begets of that seed thus viciously affected I answer That justo Dei judicio is brought in tanquam Deus aliquis è machina to make things vast improbable seem likely passable but the vain impertinencie of these words is easily observable by any who knoweth that no manner of Gods judgements are any way unjust Secondly are not sinnes of omission personall sinnes and are they communicated
to the bodie Thirdly what say you to pride of heart and secret Atheisme Is the proud mans and Atheists bodie and bloud infected with these prodigies Again If such people be wholly forgiven and their sinnes by repentance blotted out are they now in their bodie seed and bloud which are wiped out of their soul and suppose he beget a sonne between the Atheisme and repentance shall his childe be damned while the repentant Atheist is saved should not he rather communicate his later repentance then his former Atheisme But let us weigh the words a little nearer f Peccatorum quae aliquis parens committit labes ceu contagium redundat in ejus corpus sanguinem per ejus sanguinem semen in filios The blot and as it were contagion of sinnes which the father commits redounds upon his bodie and bloud and by his bloud and seed to the sonnes What bloud is corrupted all or onely that which was made seed and of seed what seed all seed or onely that which is fruitfull Suppose a father begets a sonne with the seed which was in his bodie yer his sinne was committed how doth his sinne viciate his bloud or his bloud the preformed seed If seed and bloud be properly vicious then any ejaculation of seed or letting of bloud should emptie people of their sinnes or stains in them inherent and sinne should no longer be a privation but a positive thing Moreover when they say That by the fathers bloud and seed the blot and as it were contagion is transfused into the sonnes they speak without reason or sense For the blot and as it were contagion are transfused if transfused at all into the wombe of their mother which hath a preexistence and not into the children themselves who have no preexistence The vessell is before any thing can be poured into it how then can sinne be yoted by the fathers bloud seed into the childe that had no being The last passage is this The childrens bodies are first infected by these stains or actuall sinnes their souls after defiled by their bodies If by the word infected they mean really truly properly and actually infected I remit them to the place where I have proved that the Embryo without a reasonable soul is not cannot be sinfull If they would be expounded of a pronitude to evil or inclinations tending that way when the soul is united they have made much ado about nothing a meer logomachy retaining the old sense and using noveltie of terms Again if I should yeeld That the seed of one man is proner to one vice then an other according to the vivid strength and able disposition of the parents as they say bastards are more healthie and more salacious then other people as retaining part of that spiritfull vigour in which they were begotten yet is originall sinne the same in every one alike in all parts and every way and the likenesse to the parents in wickednes is most remotely ascribed to the seed but properly to originall sinne as to the inward cause and to the parents ill breeding them or to bad companie or custome or to the remembrance of their parents sinne which is a powerfull president in corrupt nature as to the outward cause For a wicked childe is as like a thousand other wicked men if not more like in behaviour then to his father yet this proceedeth not from their seed but from originall sinne But to the more distinct handling of this point this seventh and last Proposition First I will prove That the personall sinnes of all our forefathers are not derived to us Secondly That not the sinnes from the third and fourth generation are propagated Thirdly That the personall sinnes of our immediate parents are not transfused And so it will arise of it self that no personall sinnes are communicated In the second place I shall bring to light the authorities on our side But before I begin either let me briefly remove an objection Bucer and Martyr teach saith Zanchius that by this doctrine the transfusion of originall sinne is more confirmed I answer That Gods truth hath no need of mans lie to uphold it Cicero said well g Perspicuitas argumentatione elevatur Perspicuitie is lessened by argumentation For what is more beleeved more known to Christians then that originall sinne is traduced Weak arguments do often prejudice a good cause and while Bucer and Martyr would seem to confirm that truth which neither Jew Turk nor Christian doubt of let them take heed lest when they say actuall sinnes are traduced they give occasion to the world to think that humane souls are not created but traducted so by consequent bring in the mortalitie of the soul For it hath been confidently averred by learned men That if the souls be traducted they are mortall But of this hereafter Concerning the first branch these arguments confirm it If the actuall sinnes of all our forefathers be communicated to their posteritie then they that are the more ancient are still the better and the last people of this world shall absolutely by nature be worst But it is not so for Pagans and Infidels now should be many thousand times worse then the first infidels which is not so as is seen by experience Secondly then we might truely say O happy Cain happier by nature then Abel the righteous since Adam and Eve did manifoldly sinne between Cains and Abels generations yea happier then Abraham and the Patriarchs just Job and the Prophets the Apostles and Evangelists since thou hast fewer sinnes to answer for then any in the world Happier is all the drowned world in this regard then the dayes since Christ But to say so is new Divinity Therefore all sinnes of actually transgressing parents are not communicated Secondly God dealeth not so rigourously with mankinde as he did with the devils Verily he took not on him the nature of Angels but took on him the seed of Abraham Heb. 2.16 whereby he magnifieth Gods mercy to man above that to the rebellious spirits but he should or did deal worse with mankinde at least with the damned then with them if all the personall sinnes of our progenitours be communicated to all us For each of them bare onely but their own sinnes and none did beare one anothers sinne further then they actually partaked with it And this can not be otherwise for both their sinne was pride and their nature uncapable of propagation or communication of sinne unlesse it be by reall and present consenting or partaking Lastly They all fell together the second or third instant of their creation saith the School Suddenly the devil of Lucifer became Coluber of Oriens Occidens of Hesperus Vesper He abode not in the truth Joh. 8.44 Satan fell from heaven like lightning where lightning is not said to fall from heaven but he saw 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luk. 10.18 Satan falling as suddenly from heaven as
lightning doth from the clouds on us which is gone ere we can say it is come Yea not Satan alone but the rest of the Angels kept not their first estate Jude vers 6. which Job thus varieth God found no stedfastnesse in his Angels Job 4.18 Seneca might well say of materials h Nulla res magna non aliquod habuit ruinae suae spaâ—ium Epist 91. No great thing but had some space of time in its ruine and destruction yet in spirituals he was blinde or mistaken For there was no succession of times in the sinnes of any sinning Angels but as at once they were punished and their place found no more in heaven so at once almost they sinned nor did succeeding Angels beare their predecessours sinnes or punishments Therefore mankinde shall not do so neither Thirdly S. Augustine in his Enchiridion chap. 47. toucheth at this argument as unreasonable if they who have not the grace of regeneration should contract the sinnes and beare the punishment of all their progenitours from the beginning of the world saying i Premerentur nimiâ sarcinâ in aeterna sua damnatione They should be overburdened in their eternall damnation But God punisheth rather citra then ultra condignum rather lesse then more then we deserve and his mercie is above all his works And as his wrath is to three or foure descents so his mercie extendeth unto more unto thousands but his mercie is not shewed unto more if all our forefathers sinnes lie upon us unlesse we can finde that there is somewhat more then all Therefore mankinde contracteth not the sinnes nor suffereth the eternall punishments due to the sinnes of all our parents Fourthly The justice of God will not permit the same sinne a million of times among many millions of persons to be punished but thus it must be if Seth answer for Adam and Eves actuall sinnes and all Seths posteritie to this day for every one of their predecessours sinnes Therefore all sinnes of progenitours are not communicated This first branch receiveth strength and confirmation from the second which is this Personall sinnes of our progenitours are not derived or communicated unto us from the third or fourth generation much lesse do they reach up to our first parents Indeed the great S. Augustine in his Ench. chap. 47. makes this Quaere Whether God threaten posteritie with the sinnes of their fathers from the third and fourth generation or threaten the fathers with punishing their posteritie because his wrath extendeth no further lest posteritie should be overburdened Or whether some other thing concerning this businesse may or may not be found by diligent search of Scriptures I dare not rashly affirm But I hope without rashnesse I may be bold to affirm that God threatneth not to punish sinne with sinne in that place but with other punishment Secondly nor menaceth eternall punishments for the onely sinnes of parents preceding but onely the commination is of temporall punishments if they be unlike their wicked parents eternall if they be like in sinne unto them This being the apparent meaning of the place and the word visito being ever taken to be synonymous with punio or castigo whensoever it is contraopposed to facere misericordiam as here it is whereupon Gods judgement is called the visitation of souls Wisd 3.13 Psal 89.32 I will visit their transgression with the rod and their iniquitie with stripes or scourges Let me in the third place affirm That though God punish posteritie temporally for the onely sinnes of parents and eternally if wicked children resemble their parents yet it followeth not that sinnes are communicated to the third and fourth generation For the temporall punishment may be justly inflicted on good children of wicked parents and eternall is as justly inflicted on the evil ofspring of an evil man yet rather as himself is evil then as his parents were evil Again both the threat and the mercie are onely conditionall Lastly if God should stint the punishment alwayes at the end of the third or fourth generation which he needeth not and doth not yet it followeth not that sinnes are stinted at the third or fourth generation or that that is the prefixed period of time to which the communication of sinnes may be extended But as in the words unto thousands there is the uncertain for the certain the indefinite for the definite for it is not expressed how many thousands either of men or yeares or generations so in the words the third and fourth generation there is the certain for the uncertain the definite for the indefinite And as God doth not tie himself to shew mercie unto the exact numbers of hundreds thousands so is he not restrained from punishing beyond foure generations But therefore the third and fourth generation is named rather then any other because many a man now liveth to see his third or fourth generation flourish or decay And therefore in our Liturgie in the solemnization of marriage the Priest prayeth that the couple united may see their childrens children unto the third and fourth generations And indeed Job lived after his great afflictions to see his sonnes and his sonnes sonnes even foure generations Job 42.16 Again Gregor Moral 15.22 interprets this of originall sinne and not onely the Vulgat but the Hebrew hath it iniquitatem patrum in the singular and the third and fourth generation if so understood hath reference to the ages of the world saith k Aug. Cont. Adamantum cap. 7. Augustine from whom Procopius Gazeus little differeth upon the second commandment thus Our Saviour said somewhere This generation shall not passe till all these things be fulfilled the place is Mat. 24.34 accordingly Mat. 23.36 All these things shall come upon this generation and truely he spake of the end So he makes the fourth generation from Christs time to the end of the World the third from the Law to Christ the second from Abraham to the Law he should have said from the Floud to Abraham for was not Noah and all his till Abraham part of humane generations the first from Adam to the Floud And the opposite member shewing mercie unto thousands may be understood of millions of actuall offences forgiven So much by the way for that exposition I return to the second branch Sinnes are not communicated to the third and fourth generation For why not aswell to the fifth and sixth generations and so downwards to the worlds end Let some reason be shewed why the force of communication of sinnes should rest there The place of Exodus intimateth not the communication of sinnes but the punishments and the punishments so farre because many live so farre and few farther and the exemplarie sinnes of fathers may be seen and remembred and followed by their fourth generation and not further and fathers dote not so much on their children as grand-fathers and great-grand-fathers nor cocker them up so much in evil It is a senselesse consequence That man
nec ipse Cain peccasse dicendus est qui eundem patrem suum noverat Therefore neither can Cain himself though he knew his father Adam be said to have sinned because his father sinned And more fully De peccat Meritis Remiss 1.13 q Ab Adam in quo omnes peccavimus non omnia nostra peccata sed tautùm originale traduximus We have not derived from Adam in whom we all sinned all our sinnes but onely originall Thus much be said to prove the divine S. Augustine to be of our side Onely Vorstius of all the canvasers of Bellarmine that I have met with differeth from him and us and maketh a double propagation Generall and Speciall and saith If Bellarmines drift be against the generall propagation it is false because nature teacheth and experience witnesseth r Corruptiores ex corruptioribus ordinariè generari that ordinarily worse children are begotten of worse men If he speak of the speciall traduction our men easily assent unto him saith Vorstius I reply on Vorstius First who ever before him talked of a double propagation Not Scriptures nor Fathers nor Councels Secondly is this generall propagation done at the same time that the speciall is accomplished Is this general propagation better or worse then originall sinne Is this generall propagation of all sinnes and of all parents up to Adam and of sinnes repented of and of sinnes of omission and of transient sinnes or of such as Atheisme in the soul which hath small or no participation with the bodie Let him define or describe this trimtram of generall propagation contra-opposed to the propagation of sinne originall But saith he Nature and experience say Worse children are begotten of worse men I answer I never knew any worse then some children of some good men Secondly he puts non causam pro causa ascribing the wickednesse of children to the propagation of actuall sinne of their immediate parents when he may better impute it to their hearing or beholding of their parents wickednesse or to ill breeding and ill custome Thirdly the vices of the immediate parents and of the remoter yea of the remotest even from Adam yea all the sinnes that ever were committed yea which yet never were committed but shall be or may be hereafter differing either in kinde or number from all sinnes precedent all have been are shall be in regard of the beginning root and fountain in originall sinne Fourthly none ever that handled this controversie as Augustine or the School did ever take actuall sinnes for inclinations to sinnes Fifthly in Vorstius his distinction there is a fallacie viz. Petitio principii while he without good proof taketh that for granted which is the onely thing denied namely That there is an other propagation besides the propagation of sinne originall Sixthly how inconsequentiall is this Wicked men have ordinarily wicked children Therefore personall sinnes are propagated But indeed we denie the antecedent and say The sonnes of the wicked are as righteous by naturall generation as the sonnes of the righteous If Vorstius reply that every age groweth worse and worse and Aetas parentum pejor avis tulit Nos nequiores mox daturos Progeniem vitiosiorem And again Aurea prima sata est aetas subiÃtque argentea proles Auro deterior fulvo pretiosior aere Tertia post illam successit ahenea proles de duro est ultima ferro The answer is expedite These are but poeticall fictions fictions of those who knew no propagation of originall sinne and ascribed this growing worse and worse to the depravation of manners then present in use and to evil customes rather then to the propagation of personall iniquities Laudamus veteres sed nostris utimur annis Much there is to the like purpose in heathen authours Lastly Vorstius himself after his seeking to finde a knot in a bulrush after his needlesse opposition in this point concludeth thus Hoc transeat quia parvi momenti est Let this passe because it is of small moment So that even in his judgement this controversie is small and indeed I think it not worth the name of a controversie When I had come thus farre labouring to prove that no actuall or personall sinnes are propagated I casually again conferred with that learned loving friend of mine who formerly brought to my hand the opinions of the new Writers and upon some discourse he setled on this exposition which otherwise he gave over as indefensible That they do mean by actuall sinnes that inclinations unto sinnes are communicated I answered That I used to gather mens meanings by their words and that neither their words nor the words of Zanchius the relatour do incline to these inclinations Again never did any authour of any time before expound personalia and actualia peccata for of these must the question be necessarily understood by the inclinations unto sinne Moreover if by peccata they did mean the pronenesse unto sinne to avoid doubtfulnesse they should and as readily and easily they could if they would have written peccatorum inclinationes as peccata in generall or might have signified in some other words and in some other passages that they had meant so This I know They talk of peccata peccata proximorum parentum of labes peccatorum ceu contagium they have words enow doubtfull and obscure enough which I dare say themselves understood not when they writ viz. peccatorum labes ceu contagium yet make they no mention of inclinations But I would further know whether their inclinations are derived unto their children and punished in them which rest onely as inclinations and never come into act Or such inclinations as begin to come into act but are resisted and overcome by Gods grace Or onely such inclinations as breed actuall and personall iniquitie If thus then the inclinations are not punished but the actuall aversions Or are no inclinations derived from grand-father c I but since originall sinne is alike in all and some are more like to parents whence doth this likenesse to them proceed more then to others I answer A drunkards childe is as like in that sinne to all other drunkards as to his father But why hath a drunken father more commonly a drunken sonne then a sober man First that is not yet proved Object Secondly parents sinnes seen or heard of easily invite the children to do the same Thirdly too many parents bring up their children to do as themselves do Fourthly if a most drunken sonne hath most sober parents then it comes from sinne originall Why not so also from drunken parents If inclination of drunkennesse be more in the seed of drunken men then of sober then the children of drunkards should naturally be more drunk and deeper drunk then any other drunkards whose parents were temperate But that is not so at least not so naturally because not alwayes no nor perchance commonly Let me once more repeat That all possible inclinations unto sinne are inveloped
the male Levites were taken for the male first-born of Israel and at the most righteous massacre of the first-born males of Egypt the Israelites escaped by the bloud of a lambe without blemish a male of the first yeare or a sonne of the first yeare Exod. 12.5 From whence you may see the grosse errour of Cornel. Cornelii à Lapide who thinketh That if a woman had had a daughter first and sonnes after her first sonne had not been her first-born but her daughter because she opened the matrix first when it is evident that if a woman had had many daughters before one sonne yet her first sonne was her first-born in the Law And God saith Exod. 12.24 Ye shall observe this thing for an ordinance to thee and to thy sonnes for ever viz. the ordinance of keeping the Passeover I recollect apply these things thus The men of Israel represented the women The first-born sonne and not the daughter was the Lords due The male Levites were in stead of the first-born sonnes All first-born males were redeemed Women received good by the mens circumcision and by mens redemption which was in one kinde or other whether they were first-born or not first-born And though the devilish superstition of the Turks now circumcise women as Joannes Leo reporteth yet by Gods appointment women were neither to be circumcised nor redeemed but as they were in men and as men represented them 4. Let me come yet nearer to the main purpose The Apostle saith 1. Corinth 12.26 Whether one member suffer all the members suffer with it or one member be honoured all the members rejoyce with it From whence I thus argue As at the committing or deed-doing in murder the murderers hand may be said to will the murder not because there is any will strictly taken belonging to the hand or because there is sinne properly in the right hand which doth but its duty in obeying the souls domineering disposition or dominium despoticum but because the hand is part of that man in whose soul the will was that commanded the murder and because the soul is principium totius individui the fountain from which all members take life and use motion and by the soul the motion was derived to all the other parts of the body So were we and every one of man-kinde willing to commit the sinne with Adam not as if we had been there actually to agree or disagree but as we were parts of him who was the fountain of humane nature which conveyed corruption unto all mankinde Semblably in the punishment though the right hand onely give the blow and actuate the murder yet upon the delinquents apprehension both hands are pineoned both feet fettered the neck is haltered and the whole body rueth it yea soul and all without repentance So though Adam onely sinned that first great sinne yet because he did it representing us Adam alone is not punished for it but we that are bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh all that are members of the first Adam are guilty of the fault and condignely are punished if we be unrepentant For as the divers members of a body are part of the person of one man so all and every man is as it were a part and member of humane nature And thus by the participation of the species more men are one and one more we Adam and Adam was we But let us go out of man himself and look to other fashions of the world in matters politicall Do not the severall men in a Township or Corporation make one body thereof and the whole Corporation is as it were but one man and what a few do is it not the act of all of which he complained who said That Mr. Maior for his own particular was an honest man and so were all the brethren who promised him fairely but because contrary to their promise they pinched upon him the Corporation was a knave Doth not the House of the Commons represent the Body of the Realm in the Parliament time though the thousand part of the subjects be not present and what they enact the absent enact what they deny the absent deny and what immunities and priviledges they obtain for succession as well as for themselves they obtain them and what services tributes subsidies or taxes they yeeld unto all the rest of the Realm must yeeld unto and pay yea by the trust reposed in them they binde or loose the whole Kingdome sometimes in such things as others would never have consented unto and yet must undergo and see performed In the fifth book of the Historie of Portugal the Universitie and Divines of Alcala among other things truely decreed and religiously guided Philip the second towards the attaining of the crown of Portugal in these words saying that When as Common-wealths do choose their first King upon condition to obey him and his successours they remain subject to him to whom they have transferred their authority no jurisdiction remaining in them either to judge the realm or the true successour seeing in the first election all true successours were chosen Every man is considered doubly First as a singular person so onely his own proper actions belong to him Secondly as a member of a society so what the Prince or the whole citie or the greater part do doth concern him For so saith the Philosopher saith Scharpius the Divine Much more did Adam represent our persons when what he willed and performed we willed and performed we being in him as many waters in a fountain all to be corrupted if he were corrupted all to be pure if he continued pure all to live by his righteousnes all to die by his iniquity Furthermore in the famous battell between the three Horatii and the three Curiatii did not they represent both the armies and both the people the Horatii of the Romanes the Curiatii of the Latines Did not their wills their strength their fortune depend on the wills strength and fortune of those combatants did not the Latines fall into subjection by the death of the Curiatii and did not the Romanes thrive and prosper by the valour of their superviving Horatius Yea in the Scripture long before this battell there went out a champion out of the camp of the Philistines Goliath of Gath 1. Sam. 17.4 with a proud challenge and bold defiance Am not I a Philistine and you servants of Saul Then he articleth Choose you a man for you and let him come down to me If he be able to fight with me and to kill me then we will be your servants but if I prevail and kill him then you shall be our servants and serve us It should seem the Philistines referred themselves to his successe for when David had undertaken the duel and when the Philistines saw their champion dead they fought not a stroke they fled And the men of Israel and of Judah pursued wounded and killed them vers 51 52. Yea in our own
h Sentent 3. Distinct 13. Artic. 2. Marsilius i In illud Psal 102. BENEDICITE DOMINO OMNIA OPERA BIUS Jacobus de Valentia k Lib de Regno Christi Melchior Flavius l Theosophiae 3.13 Arboreus And again the same Suarez pag. 65.8 m Christus Dominus meruit sanctis Angelis omnia dona gratiae exceptis iis quae ad remedium peccati pertinent meruit iis electionem praedestinationem vocationem auxilia omnia excitantia adjuvantia sufficientia efficacia denique omne meritum augmentum gratiae gloriae The Lord Christ hath merited for the holy Angels all gifts of grace except those which belong to the remedy of sinne He hath merited for them election predestination vocation all means exciting helping sufficient and effectuall Lastly all merit and increase of grace and glory As the precious ointment upon the head of Aaron ran down upon his beard and thence descended to the skirts of his garments Psal 133.2 so all vertue distilleth from Christ the Head upon every member of his Church Angelicall or Humane Triumphant or Militant neither have they ought but what they received and from him onely In brief we have exchanged and bartred our brasse for gold n Periissâ—mus nisi periassemus We had perished if we had not perished as Themistocles said of old o O felix culpa quae tantum talem meruit Redempterem O happy fault that hath obtained so great and excellent a Redeemer Christ hath done us more good then Adam did himself or us hurt If these my humble private speculations or rather relations of other mens opinions give not satisfaction I desire you to have recourse unto the Apostle who hath put the first and second Adam into the balances and behold the first Adam is found too light In which comparative being like in the genus and unlike in the species as Origen soundly and wittily observed First let us see the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the things wherein they are like Rom. 5.12 As by one man sinne entred into the world and death by sinne the Apodosis is not expressed but thus to be conceived So by one man grace came into the world and life by grace See the same confirmed v. 19 20. Secondly As by one mans disobedience many were made sinners so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous The third thing wherein they were like is set down in the 18. verse of which hereafter Concerning the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the things wherein they differ they are set down in the 15 verse and so downward Not as the offence so also is the free gift For if through the offence of one many be dead much more the grace of God and the gift by grace which is by one man Jesus Christ hath abounded unto many An other dissimilitude is in the 16 verse And not as it was by one that sinned so is the gift for the judgement was by one to condemnation but the free gift is of many offences unto justification And verse 17 If by one mans offence death reigned by one much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousnesse shall reigne in life by one Jesus Christ After this he returneth to the third point of their comparison the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the things wherein they differ being involved in a Parenthesis which indeed may seem at the first sight more strange Therefore as by the offence of one judgement came upon all men to condemnation even so by the righteousnes of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life vers 18. But the true meaning is this according to the way of S. Augustine As none cometh to death but by Adam and none to Adam but by death so none cometh to life but by Christ nor to Christ but by life Thus the free gift came on al as the offence came on all As when we say All entred into the house by one doore it is not intended or included that all that ever were farre or nigh came thither into the house but that no man entred into the house save by the doore So though the Apostle saith Omnes in the application he meaneth not that all and every one are justified but that all that are justified are not otherwise justified then by Christ and this is S. Augustines exposition against Julian the Pelagian 6.12 As if he had said Christ is the Α and Ω the beginning means and end There is none other name by which we must be saved Acts 4.12 He perfecteth them for ever who are sanctified Hebr. 10.14 And they are Christs and Christ is Gods 1. Cor. 3.23 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He is my love delight said Ignatius And I professe I desire not heaven or the blessednes of heaven without him as I undeserving ill-deserving poore I hope to reigne in life by him onely who giveth spirituall birth life and increase till he bring us unto blessednesse even all them who are saved even the universality of the chosen in Christ The limitation of the word Omnis is frequent in Scriptures not comprehending generally or universally every one in all and all with every one but being put for a great number for many Luke 6.26 Wo unto you when all men shall speak well of you where All must not be tentered and stretched to its utmost extent for all and every did never do never and never shall speak well of them So Acts 22.15 Thou shalt be witnesse unto all men saith Ananias to S. Paul which was not accomplished if All have no restraint Again Titus 2.11 The grace of God which bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men and yet there were then and now are many who never saw or knew that salutiferous or saving grace So here you are to reduce the word Omnes to omnes sui All that are in Christ saith the Glosse Again why may not All be aswell taken for Many in this our 18 vers as Many is taken for All in the 19 verse where it is said By one mans disobedience many were made sinners when all and every one that descended ordinarily and naturally from Adam sinned in him and by him as is expressed verse 12. and proved before Genes 17.4 Thou shalt be a father of many nations which is repeated word for word Rom. 4.17 and is thus varied Genes 22.18 In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed and this is confirmed Galat. 3.8 where Many and All differ not in sense and substance By Omnes homines All men you may understand Humanum genus Mankinde and because all mankinde must be distinguished into two sorts goats and sheep and considered according to two estates fallen and repaired and their different receptacles the two cities the one the city of God the other of the Devil in the first member the word All must be interpreted generally without
number weight and measure which the School-men call Meritum siecum a drie merit and I Meritum candidum a white merit which actions and performances of his are as the fine linen with which the Saints are properly clothed and apparelled when they are imputed to us And thus to return to my old matter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the place of the Revelation is taken for the merits of Christ clothing us with fine linen as Jacob was with his elder brothers clothes when he was to receive the blessing Genes 27.15 so we with his righteousnesse which is ascribed unto us as if it were our own and now called ours because it was given unto us by Him Yet thirdly and lastly besides these two words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Apostle useth another verball differing from both and that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which under correction I opine is not to be translated either with the Bishops Bible righteousnesse of life for that is coincident with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor yet justification or Christs righteousnesse for then it were all one with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was immediately before ascribed to Christ But what is then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 how is it to be translated It is but twice used in the New Testament First Rom. 4.25 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He was raised again for our justification But some Greek Copies have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in stead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that place and then the sense altereth of it self Beza saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the fifth to the Romanes signifieth more then it doth in the fourth and seemeth thus to difference it That in Romanes the fourth the passive obedience imputed is understood and in Romanes the fifth the active obedience imputed is meant And though in both places he doth Latinize it Justificatio yet the new coined words of Justificamen or Justificamentum seem better in his judgement to expresse the sense in the latter place In this he saith wittily that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is opposed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And this is the onely argument of worth against the following opinion Yet thus it may be answered That though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be expounded damnation or condemnation or a sentence damnatorie as Beza calleth it yet Beza himself will not translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p Sententia absolutoria vel salvifica a sentence absolutorie or saving For there is no necessitie that a direct opposition in all parts should be between those terms neither doth the nature of the antithesis necessarily require such an exact contradiction But how doth Tolet render and interpret these words q Putat justificationem vitae bîc appellari actionem eperationem quâ Deus ex justitia merito Christi omnes homines etiam reprobos à morte suscitabit ad vitâ—m perpetuò duraturam He thinks saith Cornelius à Lapide of him that by the words jusTIFICATIO VITae The justification of life which in the Vulgat is the exposition of our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is here meant that action or operation whereby God through the righteousnesse merit of Christ will raise up all men even the reprobate from death to a life for ever to endure And so the similitude between Adam Christ is every way compleat for as by Adams sinne all every one die so by Christs merit all every one shall be made alive And certainly for the truth of Tolets opinion it is a part of our Creed denied of none it is expresly avouched even in the same comparative form 1. Cor. 15.22 As in Adam all die even so in Christ shall all be made alive But my opinion herein differeth from Tolets That I do make not onely Gods power the merits of Christ concurring to this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but also make 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is more commonly then properly rendred justificatio to be an act of man defending and pleading for himself at the resurrection As if the Apostle had thus balanced Adam and Christ As by the offence of the one judgement came upon all to condemnation so by the righteousnesse of the other the free gift came upon all that they shall all without exception be raised up to know the cause why they deserve wrath to excuse themselves if they can to plead in their own defence if they can justifie their lives and free themselves from condemnation For God condemneth no man without reason nor without suffering him to come to his answer nor without letting him see and know the just cause of his condemnation The substantiall truth whereof is confirmed Rom. 14.10 We shall all stand before the judgement-seat of Christ and every one of us shall give an account of himself to God vers 12. The end is specialized 2. Corinth 5.10 That every one may receive the things done in the body according to that he hath done whether it be good or bad As for the objection of our adversaries and their demand where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is so used in Scripture I first retort it thus Let them prove the use of the word in Scripture as they apply it Secondly I say It is iniquum postulatum An unjust demand on either side since the word is onely once onely here in the New Testament without variation of reading so farre as I remember Thirdly I think that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is opposed to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 crosse-pleading and all one with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as * Apud Lysiam Suidas expounds it and what is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but causificatio causae suae defensio juris sui in medium prolatio 2. Maccab. 4.44 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They pleaded the cause before him Yet nearer to the purpose Psal 43.1 Plead thou my cause 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Litiga litem meam as it is in the Interlineary Disceptando tuere causam meam as Vatablus interprets it And Psal 35.23 Awake to my judgement even unto my cause The Septuagint have it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Symmachus readeth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Where David makes God a Judge and Umpire between David himself pleading his own cause and Davids adversaries who pleaded against him and opened their mouth wide against him vers 21. So that with Symmachus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is exactly the pleading of ones own cause as here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the defence of a mans thoughts words and deeds in this world and may in a good sense be called a justification of his life Moreover it is said Exod. 12.49 Lex una erit indigenae peregrino One law shall be unto him that is home-born and unto the stranger Which is diversified Levit. 24.22 Ye shall have one manner of law Judicium unum erit vobis as the Interlineary readeth it it being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here whereas in the place of Exodus it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Also in the Septuagint the first place is thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in Leviticus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may well be expounded one manner of pleading their causes as there was one law This I am sure of the verb is so used Micah 7.9 I will bear the indignation of the Lord because I have sinned against him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 untill he plead my cause Why may not then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be the pleading of ones cause And why may not the meaning of our Apostle be That as Adam was ostium mortis The doore of death so Christ is clavis resurrectionis The key of the resurrection as Tertullian sweetly calleth him And as by Adam all and every one was guilty of death and damnation so by Christs merit every one shall arise to free himself from it if he can and to plead wherefore he should not be condemned to defend himself and answer for himself as Paul did Acts 26.2 to apologize And herein Adam and Christ to be like That as every one was made guilty by one of condemnation so every one for Christs all-sufficient condignity shall be permitted yea enabled to speak for himself why the sentence shall not be executed But these things I leave to the Professours of the Greek tongue and suo quisque judicio abundet So much for the second exposition of the words and for the similitudes and dissimilitudes between Adam and Christ from which resulteth That Adam representing us did not so much hurt us as Christ representing us did do good unto us And therefore since we are acquitted from sinne from all sinnes originall and actuall since we are acquitted from eternall death and have grace and abundance of grace and the gift of righteousnesse and shall have life eternall and shall reigne in life by ones obedience by one onely Jesus Christ who in his life and on the altar of the crosse merited all these things for us it is no hard measure no iniquity of God if for Adams sinne and disobedience when he sustained our persons both himself and his posterity in his loyns implicitly consenting with him be appointed to die And thus much shall suffice for the first generall Question upon the words of the Text. The second followeth Drusius towards the end of his Preface before his book called Enoch thus * Haec alia quae hoc libro continentur ut in aliis omnibus à me unquam editis aut edendis subjicio libens Ecclesiae Catholicae judicio à cujus recto sensu si dissentio non er◠pertinax These and other things which are contained in this book as also in all other books which have been or shall be set forth by me I willingly submit to the censure of the Catholick Church from whose right judgement if I dissent I will not be pertinacious O Deity incomprehensible and Trinity in Unity in all respects superexcellent and most admirable with all the faculties of my soul and body I humbly beg of thee to shew thy mercy upon me for Jesus Christ his sake and O blessed Redeemer accept my prayer and present it with favour to the throne of grace where thou canst not be denied If thou O gracious Jesu art not able to help me and to save my sinfull soul let me die comfortlesse and let my soul perish but since thy power is infinite I beseech thee to make me one of those whom thou bringest to more happinesse then all our enemies could bring to miserie Heare me for thy tender mercies sake and for thy glorious name O great Mediatour Jesu Christ AMEN AMEN MISCELLANIES OF DIVINITIE THE SECOND BOOK CHAP. I. Sect. 1. THe question propounded and explained 2. Armenius or rather his sonne Zoroaster dead and revived 3. Antillus dead and living again because the messenger of death mistook him in stead of Nicandas Nicandas died in his stead 4. A carelesse Christian died and recovered life lived an Anchorite twelve yeares died religiously SECT 1. THe second Question which from the words of my Text I propounded is this Whether such as have been raised from the dead did die the second time yea or no because it is said It is appointed for men once to die I speak not of those who have been thought to be dead and have been stretch't out and yet their soul hath been within them though divers for divers daies and upon severall sicknesses have had neither heat nor breathing discernable but onely of such who have suffered a true separation of their souls from their bodies Whether these have again delivered up the ghost and died I make my question 2. Before I come to mention those whom the Scripture recordeth to be truly raised I hold it not amisse to propound to your view a few stories out of other authours Theodoret lib. 10. de fine judicio hath two strange relations The first is out of Plato of one Armenius but Clemens Alexandrinus Stromat 5. relateth from Zoroaster himself that it was Zoroaster the sonne of Armenius He who onely of all the world laughed so soon as he was born saith Plin. 7.16 and was so famous a Magician One of these two either father or sonne the twelfth day after he and others fell in the battell and was to be buried ante pyram constitutus revixit and being come to himself told what he had seen apud inferos namely that his soul being divided from his bodie came with many others who died with him to an admirable and incredible place in which there were two gulfs opes or ruptures of the earth and two open places of heaven right over them In the midst of these hiatus or gulfs judges did fit who when judgement was ended bade the just souls ascend by the heavenly opennes and gaps the judges sowing on their breasts the notes of their judgement But the souls of the wicked men were commanded to go on the left hand and to be hurried to hell carrying with them on their backs the memoriall of their passed life But as for himself being now come in fight the judges bade him diligently heare and see all things and tell all those things which were done when he revived These are sayings worthy of Philosophy saith Theodoret. 3 A second storie is cited in the same place by Theodoret from Plutarch among those things which he wrote De anima Sositiles Heracleon and I saith Plutarch were present when Antillus told us this of himself The Physicians thought Antillus to be dead but he came to himself as one out of a deep sleep and neither said nor did any other thing * Quod emetae mentis signum possit censeri which might argue him to be crazy or light-headed but he told us that he was dead and that he was again revived and that his death upon that sicknesse
by the Evangelist Matth. 27.52 and 53 verses The graves were opened and many bodies of Saints which slept arose and came out of the graves after his resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared unto many So farre the text Of the various pointing of which words see more hereafter opening two windows for two expositions On which words divers worthy men both modern and ancient conclude That those Saints died not again k Sed apparuerunt multis etiam cum Christo nunquam ultrà morituri abierunt in coelum But appeared to many and with Christ never after were to die but went into heaven saith Jacobus Faber Stapulensis And Mr. Beza on this place opineth that they did not rise that again they might live among men and die as Lazarus and others did but that they might accompany Christ by whose power they rose into eternall life The late Writers saith Maldonate think that they went into heaven with Christ and with them doth himself agree So Pineda on Job 19.25 So Suarez a third Jesuit So Anselm So Aquinas on the place and on the Sentences So if Suarez cite them truely Origen in the first book to the Romanes about those words of the first chapter By the resurrection of Jesus our Lord and Clemens Alexandrinus Strom. 6. and Justinus Quaest 85. Ambrose in his Enarration on the first Psalme and Eusebius Demonst 4.12 and of modern Authours and of our Church Bishop Bilson in the effect of his Sermons touching the full redemption of mankinde by the death and bloud of Jesus Christ pag. 217. So Baronius ad annum Christi 48. num 24. concerning those Saints whom Christ piercing the heavens carried with himself on high leading captivitie captive Ephes 4.8 More reserved and moderate is Mr. Montague that indefatigable Student sometime my chamber-fellow and President in the Kings Colledge in Cambridge now the Reverend Lord Bishop of Chichester who in his answer to the Gag of the Protestants pag. 209. saith of these Saints They were Saints indeed deceased but restored to life and peradventure unto eternall life in bodies as well as souls MOst cleare Fountain of Wisdome inexhaustible wash I beseech thee the spots of my soul and in the midst of many puddles of errour cleanse my understanding that I may know and embrace the truth through Jesus Christ Amen CHAP. V. 1. Who were supposed to be the Saints which were raised by such as maintain that they accompanied Christ into heaven 2. A strange storie out of the Gospel of the Nazarens 3. Adams soul was saved Adams bodie was raised about Christs Passion saith Pineda out of diverse Fathers Thus farre Pineda hath truth by him That the sepulchre of Adam was on mount Calvarie so say Athanasius Origen Cyprian Ambrose Basil Epiphanius Chrysostom Augustine Euthymius Anastasius Sinaita Germanus Patriarch of Constantinople 4. It was applauded in the Church in Hieromes time 5. Theophylact thought Adam buried in Calvarie Drusius unadvisedly taxeth the Fathers Tertullian consenteth with other Fathers and Nonnus who is defended against Heinsius 6. At Jerusalem they now shew the place where Adam his head was found Moses Barcepha saith that Sem after the floud buried the head of Adam 7. The Romane storie of Tolus and Capitolium much resembling the storie of Adam 1. TO the clearing of this cloud and that we may carry the truth visibly before us I think it fit to enquire First Who these Saints were which thus miraculously arose and then secondly to determine Whether their bodies were again deposited in the earth till the resurrection or Whether in their bodies with Christ they ascended into heaven 2. For the first Hugo Cardinalis on Matth. 27.53 hath an old storie It is said saith he in the Evangelisme of the Nazarens that two good and holy men who were dead before about fourty yeares came into the Temple and saying nothing made signes to have pen ink and parchment and wrote That those who were in Limbus rejoyced upon Christs descent and that the devils sorrowed Though the rest be fabulous yet herein the Gospel of the Nazarens agreeth with our Gospel That the names of the raised are not mentioned Others have been bold to set down both the names and the order of them who arose 3. Augustine Epist 99. ad Euodium thus a De illo quidem primo homine patre generis humani quòd eum ibidem Christus ad inserna descendens solverit Ecclesia ferè tota conseutit Almost the whole Church agreeth That Christ descending into hell freed the first Adam thence That the Church beleeved this non inaniter not vainly but upon some good ground we are to beleeve from whence soever the tradition came though there be no expresse Scripture If this be true of Adams soul yet is it nothing to our question of his bodily resuscitation Proceed we therefore to those that think his very bodie was raised Adam then arose saith Athanasius in his Sermon of the Passion and the Crosse saith Origen in his 35 Tractate on Matthew saith Augustine 161 quest on Genesis and others also if Pineda on the fore-cited place wrong them not And he giveth this congruentiall reason That Adam who heard the sentence of death should presently also be partaker of the resurrection by Christ and with him who had expiated his sinne by death To which may be added That as S. Hierom reports the Jews have a tradition that the ramme was slain on mount Calvarie in stead of Isaac as also Augustine Serm. 71. de Tempore ratifieth And to this day they say they have there the altar of Melchisedech So Athanasius reports from the Jewish Doctours that in Golgotha was the sepulchre of Adam This is true but it is not certain that Adam was raised and not true that he ascended bodily into heaven Mr. Broughton in his observations of the first ten Fathers saith thus Rambam recordeth that which no reason can deny how the Jews ever held by Tradition that Adam Abel and Cain offered where Abraham offered Isaac where both Temples were built on which mountain Christ taught and died And as the place was called Calvaria because the head or skull of a man was there found and found bare without hair and depilated saith Basil so divers Fathers have concluded that Adam was there buried and that it was his head See Origen tractat 35. on Matth. Cyprian in his sermon on the resurrection Ambrose in his tenth book of his commentaries on Luk. 23. Basil on the fifth of Esay Epiphanius contra Haeres lib. 1. Chrysostome Homil. 84. in Joannem Augustine Serm. 71. de Tempore and de Civitat 16.32 Euthymius on Matth. So Athanasius Sinaita lib. 6. in Hexam in Tom. 1. Bibliothecae Patrum and Sanctus Germanus Patriarch of Constantinople in Theoria rerum Ecclesiast as you may see in Tom. 6. Biblioth Patrum besides abundance of new writers with whose names I delight not to load my page 4 Hierom on
whom the citie might be called Civitas quatuor hominum The citie of foure men if from men it had its denomination of Kiriath-arba For Josuah gave unto Caleb Hebron for an inheritance Josh 14.13 and because he drove thence the three famous giants the grand-children of Arba the sonnes of Anak Sheshai Ahiman and Talmi Josh 15.14 for Conquerours left their names unto the cities which they overcame 2. Sam. 12.28 Neither is it unlikely but Caleb might call his sonne Hebron after the name of the citie bequeathed him rather then the citie after his sonnes name especially since there is mention of a citie Hebron before there is any mention of a man Hebron or of Caleb himself Moreover I reade of an other exposition given by Solomo Trecensis that it might be called Civitas quatuor virorum The citie of foure men from Anak and his three monstrous before-recited sonnes who dwelt there For both cities and lands have been called after the names of giants as Ashtarosh aliàs Hashtaroth Aseroth and Astaroth-Carnaim and Carnaim-Astradoth in the confines of the land of Hus was a great citie inhabited by giants called Carnaim or Rephaim and the place saith Adrichomius was called TERRA GIGANTUM whom Chedorlaomer killed when in the time of Abraham he led an armie and fought against the king of Sodom Genes 14.5 And there was a valley of giants not farre from the cave of Adullam saith Vatablus on 2. Sam. 23.13 and the Seventie reade in that place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the cave or den of giants and so both the Interlinearie and Genevans have it in the margine which others reade in valle Rephaim So much be said to shew it might be called Kiriath-arbee from other foure men and not from the foure Patriarchs if from foure men it had its appellation 7. Grant we yet once again more then we need that it was called Kiriath-arbee from foure Patriarchs yea and from the buriall of foure Patriarchs in that place which can never be proved yet it is not evinced nor will follow necessarily that Adam was one of these foure Patriarchs there buried S. Hierom in Epitaph sanct Paulae saith Kiriath-arbee was h Oppidum quatuor virorum The town of foure men of Abraham Isaac Jacob and the great Adam whom the Jews say to be there buried according to the book of Joshua Though saith he i Plerique Caleb quartum putant cujus ex latere memoria monstratur most think Caleb was the fourth man whose rib is a memoriall And Adrichomius himself makes the sepulchre of Caleb not farre from Hebron The opinion of Adams being there buried is fathered on the Jews the common Tenet was that Caleb was the fourth man Probabilitie also consorteth therewith for if Adam had been there buried as Abraham could not have been ignorant thereof so he would in that regard have the rather bought that place and perhaps would have given intimation of it to the children of Heth. But as it should seem Abraham stood indifferent at the first and said onely Give me a possession of a burying-place with you Genes 23.4 And when they offered him any of their sepulchres he chose the cave of Machpelah To conclude the objection of Adrichomius is thus answered Kiriath-Arbee may signifie the citie of Arbee or the citie of foure things noted and memorable or the citie of foure angles sides or parts the citie sited on foure hills and if it be to be interpreted Civitas quatuor hominum A citie of foure men the foure men may be Heth Mambre Arbe and Caleb or Anak and his three monstrous sonnes Howsoever the word proves not that foure men were there buried and if it proved so much yet Adam was none of these foure for Adam was not buried in Hebron but in mount Calvarie as I proved before to the full and yet shall adde more by and by 8. To the last and fourth objection of S. Hierom being a demand why others even theeves were there buried I answer Though Adam were there buried yet what hindered but it might be a fit place for malefactours to be executed especially being on high and without the walls of the citie and both theeves might there suffer as in a place appointed for such use by the Magistrate and Christ might there die as appointed by the secret providence of God beyond the reach of man that the bloud of the second Adam might fall on the sepulchre of the first Adam and other sinners to signifie that the water and bloud flowing from Christ did purge even the greatest malefactours Adam and the notorious sonnes of Adam Divinely saith S. Augustine Serm. 72. detempore k Et verè fratres non incongruè creditur quia ibi erectus sit Medicus ubi jacebat Aegrotus diguum erat ubi occiderat humana superbia ibi se inclinaret divina Misericordia ut sanguis ille pretiosus etiam corporaliter puiverem antiqui peccatoris dum diguatur stillando contingere redemisse credatur Truely brethren with good reason we beleeve that there the Physician was lifted up where the sick man lay and it was well worthy that divine mercie should there stoop where humane pride fell that Christs precious bloud vouchsafing corporally to touch and moisten the ashes of old Adam may be beleeved to redeem him To conclude either the two learned women Paula and Eustochium or Hierom rather himself whose style it seems to be in Epist 17. ad Marcellam saith l In hoc tunc loco habitâsse dicitur mortuus esse Adam unde locus in quo crucifixus est Dominus noster CALVARIA appellatur quòd ibi sit antiqui hominis Calvaria condita ut secundi Adam id est Christi sanguis de Cruce stillans primi Adam jacentis Protoplasti peccata dilueret In this place then Adam both dwelt and died From whence that place where our Lord was crucified is called CALVARIA because there was buried the head of the old Adam that the bloud of the second Adam namely Christ distilling from the crosse might blot out the sinnes of the first-formed Adam thereunder lying 9. An objection more Franciscus Lucas Brugensis toucheth at against this opinion namely that if the Jews had known that Adams sepulchre was on that mount Calvarie they would have had the place in farre greater esteem they would have deckt it with some stately monument and never have suffered the malefactours inordinately there to be executed The former part of which objection as I do strengthen by Matth. 23.29 Ye build the tombes of the Prophets and garnish the tombes of the righteous saith Christ to the Scribes and Pharisees so to it I answer thus That there is not the least touch in Scripture nor in any Authour that I remember that the Jews ever regarded or honoured Adam or held him righteous or gloried in him above others nay they thought ill of him 2. Esdr 3.21 c. and 2. Esdr 4.30
and finde fault with him 2. Esdr 7.48 O thou Adam what hast thou done for though it was thou that sinned thou art not fallen alone but we all that come of thee And a little before namely verse 46. This is my first and last saying that it had been better not to have given the earth unto Adam or else when it was given him to have restrained him from sinning Mark also the Antithesis used Ecclesiasticus 49.16 Sem and Seth were in great honour among men and so was Adam above every living thing in the creation where he remarkably extolleth Sem and Seth but praiseth Adams excellencie onely at the creation And so Vatablus expounds it Howsoever after his fall he was not so highly esteemed as others were No more did the multitude shew any extraordinary estimate of Noah though as Adam was the fruitfull root the protoplast so Noah was the restorer of mankinde under God For these were the founders as well of Gentiles as Jews But Abraham and the Patriarchs and the Prophets since them they reverenced above measure for the extraordinary blessings vouchsafed by God unto the Jews above the Gentiles for their sakes and in them and by them Now to such indeed their posteritie builded tombes Matth. 23.30 though their fathers had killed some of them To the second part of the objection Why they did suffer malefactours to be there punished I answer that it is a doubt undecided whether the ordinary delinquents were put to death on mount Calvarie before the Romanes overcame the Jews If not then patience perforce they could not remedie it if the other appointed it If so yet the Jews might be ignorant of Adams sepulchre and how could they grace and beautifie his tombe when they knew not where he lay Again what if I say That like as Gods eternall decree and determinate counsel being that Christ should die for our sinnes the Jews and Gentiles Priests Scribes and Pharisees yea the devils themselves were for a while and a time blinded that they knew not or would not know Christ to be the Messiah though they had more evident miraculous proofs of his working then could be of a buriall-place so long fore-passed as Adams was but put him to death Act. 2.23 and chap. 3.17 So Gods eternall decree that Christ should be crucified in the execution-place of malefactours and in the place of Adams sepulchre being perhaps to this end to manifest that Christs bloud did wash and purge sinne originall sinne actuall Adam and notorious offenders with all and all manner of persons and all and all kinde of sinnes the people were also blinded that either they did not know or not respect the place of Adams buriall especially since God often casts in their teeth Adams disobedience and compared their sinnes to his They like Adam have transgressed the covenant Hos 6.7 Where Drusius preferreth this reading with us with Hierom with Pagnine and with Rabbi Solomon the ordinarie Interpreter of the Hebrews before the reading of Junius and Tremellius and the Genevans And Jerem. 32.19 Gods eyes were open to all the wayes of the sonnes of Adam Which is also confirmed Isa 43.27 2. Esdr 7.11 Thus much in love of truth against all opposites with Pineda for the common opinion of the Fathers that Adam was buried on Golgotha I adde that if any of the Patriarchs arose bodily Adam was one For upon other reasons hereafter to be shewen I dare not be so assertive as the Liturgies of divers Churches and as divers Fathers who are expresse that Adam was raised from his grave See them cited by the learned James Usher Bishop of Meath in his answer to a challenge made by a Jesuit pag. 324. which is the next point to be handled O Light inaccessible O Ancient of dayes O Fulnesse of knowledge govern me walking in the paths of darknes in things of old in ambiguities and uncertainties of opinion and keep me from singularitie of self-presuming that I may keep the unitie of truth in the bond of peace through him who is both our Truth and our Peace even Jesus Christ the Righteous Amen CHAP. VII 1. Though Adam was buried on Calvarie as Pineda saith yet his proofs are weak that Adam was raised with Christ and went bodily into heaven with him The cited place of Athanasius proveth onely Adams buriall there Origen in the place cited is against Pineda Augustine is palpably falsified 2. Adams skull shewed lately at Jerusalem 3. Dionysius Carthusianus saith Eve then arose His opinion is without proof 4. Nor Abraham then arose 5. Nor Isaac then arose whatsoever Pineda affirmeth 1. BUt the second part of Pineda his opinion on Job the 19.25 I cannot like though he laboureth to prove it partly by authoritie partly by reason That those many who arose about the time of Christs Passion ascended bodily into heaven with him As Authours he citeth Athanasius in his Sermon on the Passion and the Crosse Origen c. That Adam was buried on Golgotha Athanasius saith but that Adam arose not long after Christs resurrection I cannot finde in him or cited by any other out of him As for Origen his second Authour in the same Tractate cited by Pineda he maketh directly against him for he maintaineth from Tradition that the first Adam was buried where Christ was crucified that as in Adam all die so in Christ all should be made alive that in the place of a skull the head of mankinde namely Adam Resurrectionem inveniat cum populo universo Should partake of the generall resurrection by the resurrection of our Lord and Saviour who there suffered and rose again But the last and best Authour the divine S. Augustine is palpably and apparently falsified for he hath no such word in the quoted place Lastly the reason that Pineda alledgeth is shallow That Adam who heard the sentence of death should presently be partaker of the resurrection by him and with him who had satisfied for the sinne What likelihood is there of inference or coherence I dare say not one of the Fathers cited at large by Baronius Salianus and Maldonate to prove that Adam was buried in Golgotha do give the least touch at this reason of Pineda but many other ends of Adams being there buried do they muster up 2. And the Jesuite Pineda either knew it not or forgot it or sleeked it over as little imagining we should have notice that the cheating priests who kept the sepulchre and the Church built over it at Jerusalem did shew to the devout Christians a skull which they said was the skull of Adam of which they said also the mountain was called Golgotha as saith the eye and eare-witnesse Mr. Fines Morison in his first part 3. book 2. chap. pag. 230. and pag. 233. Thus according to them Adam either arose not hitherto or arose without a head at least without his skull or with an other mans head which three latter wayes destroy the truth of the resurrection
you expound this of the Fathers of the Old Testament and of the stola animae the robe of honour for the minde yet you shall finde Revel 6.11 that in regard even of stola corporis the glorious garment of the bodie the Saints themselves are commanded to rest yet for a little season untill their fellow-servants also and their brethren either then alive or perchance not then born that should be killed as they were should be fulfilled Now against this generall rule you must not make a particular exception without expresse warrant from the word of God But there is no testimony at all from the word of God either direct or inferentiall that any of those Many who arose arose to glorie or immortalitie or ascended into heaven Therefore we may boldly conclude They died again This argument is of such force that Suarez leaveth it unanswered and untouched Lastly if the bodies of these Saints ascended into heaven either they ascended after Christ or before him or with him If after him When and how long after and why after him They ascended not presently after him for the Apostles who looked stedfastly toward heaven even after he was taken out of their sight might have then perceived their bodily ascent If you say So soon as the Apostles left their serious viewing and hearkened unto the Angels then they ascended I answer I would say so also if I saw any proof or if I could think that God sent the Angels just at that moment to hinder the Apostles from seeing the Saints mount up to heaven which would have been so joyous a sight Briefly there is no reason to say they ascended long after Christ ascended and certainly lesse reason is there to think they ascended before him 4. Moreover Christ as man shall be Judge at the last day and God hath given assurance of it to all men in that he hath raised him from the dead Act. 17.31 If any other were raised up in the same manner before him or with him to an eternall resurrection what assurance doth God give by this place of S. Paul that Christ shall be the Judge rather then others But indeed the raising of Christ was more then ordinary was more then temporarie Let him have the preeminence in all things Christ is the first-fruits of them that slept 1. Cor. 15.20 The first-fruits of them that are raised vers 23. He is Primitiae mortuorum Revel 1.5 resurgentium Act. 26.23 Christ is the first who shall arise from the dead viz. to an eternall resurrection his bodie opening as it were the gates of heaven for our bodies which if Enoch and Elias did by priviledge especiall anticipate though these were not properly raised but rather taken up yet if more if so many should before him arise to an everlasting resurrection it destroyeth the nature of a generall rule b Gratia quae omnibus datur non est gratia sed natura privilegium gaudet paucitate Grace given alike to all is no longer grace but nature and a priviledge is properly confined to a few That they ascended not with Christ I proved before and for a Corollarie do repeat this That if assumed and Angelicall bodies were to be seen and were seen and heard at Christs ascension out of doubt the bodies of Saints had been visible yea seen if they had then ascended 5. If any desire to see more reasons let him reade S. Augustine Epist 99. ad Euodium de Mirabilibus Sacrae Scripturae whose reasons c In tertia parte Summae quaest 53. artic 3. Aquinas preferreth and subscribeth unto You may now perceive that I am gently fallen upon the second head in vertue of which I undertook to prove That the Saints who miraculously arose and here arose did not ascend into heaven but died again for the second head was Authoritie Among Authours you have alreadie two of the chiefest for depth of learning Augustine and Aquinas Hierom is of their minde on Matth. 27. Chrysostom Hom. 89. on Matth. compareth those Saints resurrection unto Lazarus his rising to a mortall life though Beza directly contradicteth it The same Hierom Epist 150. ad Hedibiam again confirms it To the same purpose Theophylact on the place and Euthymius chap. 67. on Matth. so Prosper in his book de promissionibus praedictionibus Dei. In the middle school you have Soto in 4. lib. Sentent Distinct 43. quaest 2. artic 1. Yea even among Jesuites Salmeron and Barradius are on this side and Pererius on the 6 chapter of the Revelation Disput 24. and Gregorie Valentian Tom. 4. Disput 2. Quaest 5. where he sleighteth Cajetans arguments and saith that our is the more probable opinion and that Aquin from Augustine doth most excellently confirm it In the last place cometh that learned Franciscus Lucas Brugensis who having set down the ends why these Many were raised to wit To be praecones criers or trumpetters of Christs resurrection which was experimentally evidenced by their own and that Jesus was that Saviour and that he ought thus to suffer and thus to enter into his glorie closeth in these words d Hoc officio quando isti defuncti fuerant verisimile est cos iterum dormivisse in sepulchris suit quievisse quemadmodum Aloses When they had performed this duty it is likely that they slept again and rested in their sepulchres like Moses Yea say I much rather did they sleep in their graves then Moses for though he was buried yet being raised he appeared in glorie Luk. 9.31 which apparition being in bodie principally for his soul was not seen we may not imagine that a glorified bodie is so subject to corruption or a second dying which Brugensis himself will not say of these raised Many for he hath an odde crotchet and singular conceit That those Many were raised neither to an immortall nor to a mortall life but to a middle and mean betwixt both not to a perpetuall one nor yet to a terrene life but heavenly without the use of meats or drinks without fear or pain of death O Fountain of mercie inexhaustible sweet Jesu who being the Sonne of God didst become Man that we the sonnes of Men might be the sonnes of God who didst die that we might live suffering for our sinnes and rising again for our justification Have mercie O have mercie upon me passe by my transgressions I beseech thee and present me blamelesse to the Throne of Grace for thine own merit sake to which I ascribe all power and from which I expect all my glorie So be it CHAP. XVIII 1. The arguments of the contrary opinion answered Suarez and especially Cajetan censured 2. That by the holy Citie Jerusalem below was meant proved at large Josephus and the Jews erring about the name of Jerusalem Hierom uncertain 3. How the raised appeared A difference between appearing as men and appearing as newly raised men Franciscus Lucas Brugensis rejected 4. An argument of Maldonat
supposall should have a certain accomplishment but that this and all other controverted points of moment concerning Enoch or Elias may be the better cleared let us examine these questions 1. Whether Enoch in his life-time was ever any great sinner 2. Whether Enoch did ever die 3. Whether Enoch and Elias now live in and with their bodies in Paradise 4. Whether ever they shall die or do live with glorified bodies in the highest heavens Concerning the first Whether Enoch in his life-time was ever any grievous sinner First I answer and say I speak not of the first Enoch the sonne of Cain the grand-childe of Adam and Eve in honour and memoriall of whom Cain built a citie and called the name of the citie after the name of his sonne Enoch Genes 4.17 but of the second and younger Enoch the sonne of Jared Genes 5.18 of the posteritie of Seth. Secondly I question not but that this latter best Enoch was a sinner and in his own estimate a great sinner and he might have said and doubtlesse did say in effect as David did and as Adam and all his of-spring except Christ Have mercie upon me O God Psal 51.1 and Create in me a clean heart O God Psal 51.10 O Lord pardon mine iniquitie for it is great Psal 25.11 And in the ballance of God setting aside mercie he might have been weighed found light and accounted for a main delinquent But this is the Quaere Whether comparatively and in respect of other men even of such whose lives ends also pleased God he was so notorious a sinner that he alone was the fittest example of repentance to succeeding generations My answer is negatively for I am sure Adam and as I think Noah and Lot and divers other holy Patriarchs might as well yea rather be an example of repentance to future times then Enoch especially if we measure sinnes by the records of Scripture for the holy Writ hath more amply insisted upon their sinnes then upon Enochs and no part of the Canonicall Scripture toucheth at any thing that was extraordinarily offensive in Enoch but magnifieth his goodnesse Gen. 5.22 and his faith Heb. 11.5 Yet because the divine Writ might omit the offences of Enoch and because I cannot think that Ecclesiasticus wrote without some ground let us search what other Authours have conceited or written for or against Enoch Some think that Enoch all the course of his conversation amongst men in this world lived unblameably and walked with God Some Jews held that Enoch was an incarnate Angel e Vixit dum vixit laudabiliter Whilest he lived he lived worthy of praise saith Drusius Others write that in his youth he was very wicked but after repented and turned heartily to God redeeming the time Drusius proveth that Enoch was a good man still by these arguments Josephus Antiq. 1.5 at the end saith Seth was a vertuous man and left f Nepotes sui simileâ— issue like himself and they were all good men therefore Enoch was so The posteritie of Seth according to the best Interpreters are called Filii Dei the sonnes of God Genes 5.2 g Filii Dei sunt judicio Augustini qui secunditm Deum vivunt Augustine accounteth that they were called the sonnes of God who pleased God Hischuni also an Authour cited by Drusius saith Because Enoch was just the Scripture h Honoris cauâ—â to dignifie him used a new phrase concerning him saying HE WAS NOT. And It is a probable reason that Enoch was not any time so ill as some imagine because he lived with Adam 308 yeares and ministred so long unto him as it is in libro JOH ASIN saith Drusius On the other side i Sunt qui insimulan eum levitatis inconstantiae nam aiunt modò justum modò improbum fuisse Id relatum in Genesi magno Some say he was light and inconstant sometimes just sometimes wicked as is recorded in the great Genesis a book called in Hebrew BERESITH RABBA made by one Ibbo so relateth Drusius in his book called Henoch chap. 5. If Ibbo had said Henochum fuisse modò improbum modò justum That Enoch was now and then wicked now and then just I should farre rather have consented for every just man except Christ was sometime wicked But that Enoch after he was once just turned to be extraordinarily wicked I can never beleeve For the Spirit would never have given him this testimonie that he pleased God and walked with him if he had after returned as the dog to his vomit or as the sow to her wallowing in the mire Rabbi Levi the sonne of Gersom thus k Enoch ambulavit in viis Domini postquam genuit Methusalem annos 300. Enoch walked with God after he begat Methusalem 300 yeares whereby he intimateth that he walked l Non in viis domini sed in viis seculi sui Not in the narrow paths of the Lord but in the high wayes of the world and by that account he might be wicked sixtie fiye yeares of his age or thereabouts The arguments of either side are but weak and may be easily answered Seths posteritie might do some notable wicked acts and most heartily repent and be both holy and accounted the sonnes of God The phrase used concerning his being taken out of this world evinceth not that all the former passages of his life were just Thirdly he might live in Adams time yet not neare him and he might live with him and yet not minister unto him and he might minister unto him and yet be wicked before he ministred yea even for a time whilest he ministred unto Adam Many godly parents have lived to see wicked ones of their of-spring and it may be that Adam converted him not till after some time that he ministred unto Adam and had seen evident signes of Adams own great repentance and holinesse On the other side Ibbo writeth like a fabler and his words were before rejected as improbable Rabbi Levi alledging nothing but conjecture wanteth weight for an argument Now as there is nothing certain either pro or contra so if my opinion be asked I shall manifest my self to think that Enoch was sometimes a grievous sinner and after a most contrite repentant and a most holy man My reason is Because I ascribe more to the books called Apocryphall then to any humane Authour for they alone are and have been many hundreds of yeares joyned with the Canonicall Scripture and read in all Churches except the Jewish at set times as well as the Canonicall as no other writings of any other are And if no part of them were divinely inspired yet were the men that wrote them both holy and learned and the Churches of God have dignified them above all other writings Now though the undoubted Canon mentioneth not any evill act or acts of Enoch as millions of millions of matters are omitted both in the Old and New Testament yet some passages of
made quick But as I said the specializing of two sorts quick and dead evinceth that some shall not die and some have died These words of the Creed did much move Cajetan as himself confesseth and they are brought by S. Augustine to establish this point That some shall not die but shall be changed though I confesse the definitions Ecclesiasticorum Dogmatum cap. 8. leave it doubtfull For thus they say a Quod dicimus in symbolo in adveÌ„tu Domini vivos mortuos judicandos non solùm justos peccatores significari credimus sed vivos eos qui in carne invenienâ—i sunt qui adhuc morituri creduntur vel immutandi sunt ut alii volunt ut suscitati continuò vâ—l reformati cum antè mortuis judicentur What is said in the Creed That Christ at his coming shall judge the quick and the dead we beleeve doth signifie that not onely the just but the sinners also shall be judged And even those also who shall be found alive in their bodies of flesh of whom our belief is that they shall yet die or as others think be changed that being raised immediately or changed they may be judged with those who died before And yet me thinks another exposition of Ruffinus is as bad for quick and dead he understandeth of souls and bodies As if the souls were not sentenced before in the particular judgement as if the bodies were then dead or to be dead when they are judged 3. I have not yet ended with the words of the great S. Augustine but from the phrases used by him out of the Holy Writ of Expoliari Superindui To be unclothed and clothed upon I thus frame another argument S. Paul saith 2. Corinth 5.4 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We would not be unclothed but clothed upon that mortalitie might be swallowed up of life He who is not unclothed but clothed upon holdeth what he had layeth down nothing and hath somewhat added to him But by this garment Metaphorically is the bodie meant which shall not be cast off from the soul or the soul from it but in the change shall be arayed with immortalitie Now if there be not an expoliation if there be not a separation of the soul from the bodie there is no death But there is no such expoliation therefore they who have other clothing put upon them shall not die Cajetan upon the words SVPERINDVI CVPIENTES DESIRING TO BE CLOTHED VPON c. saith The same shall truly befall us b Si in die Domini vestiti corpore non nudi inventi fuerimus id est si tunc residui futuri sumus nondum mortui if at Christs coming we shall be found clothed with our bodies and not naked that is if we shall then remain alive and not be dead before And the same Cajetan confuteth Aquinas his exposition on the place Doctour Estius approveth Cajetan and so doth Cornelius Cornelii à Lapide on the words Lorinus on Act. 10. and Justinian upon these passages of S. Paul will by no means censure our opinion as Catharinus and Soto do and this they professe though they be Jesuits For indeed our opinion is confirmed by S. Augustine de peccatorum meritis remiss 1.2 c Si non peccâsset Adam non erat expoliandus corpore sed supervestiendus immortalitate incorruptione ut abscrberetur mortale à vita id est ab animali in spirituale transiret If Adam had not sinned his soul had never been disunited from his bodie but he had been clothed upon with immortalitie and incorruption so that the mortall part should have been swallowed up of life that is should be changed from a carnall life into a spirituall Otherwhere S. Augustine saith Adam had a state by which he might passe from mortalitie to immortalitie without tasting or partaking of death Bellarmine speaking of Adam citeth this and liketh it Why therefore may not they that shall be residui left be also without death translated into glorie If the Jesuits had had such an argument they would have said It were convenient for God so to do it yea necessarie that by plain demonstration mankinde might see and know what estate they had and what estate sometimes they lost in Adam and that all mankinde should have been so translated if sinne had not hindered and thrust death among us I will onely say It may be that some are therefore kept to be translated to shew the manner how Adam without death should have been changed Salmeron objecteth Children found alive at that time if they die not shall continue in the same stature which may not be beleeved I answer he derogateth from the power of God as if he were not able to make children to be men by the change as he is able by death Can God make children of stones and can he not make men of children Did he create Adam to be a full grown man of earth and will his hand be shortned in the immutation God out of the little dust of little children raiseth up by Salmerons confession intire perfect bodies of men therefore the same God may as well as easily and perhaps more easily if God doth such things more easily then other of the same living bodies of little children by that mysterious change produce and ampliate every member to the full growth of perfect men God caused the rod of Aaron to bud and it brought forth buds and bloomed blossomes and yeelded almonds Numb 17.8 and yet it was severed from the root and laid up in the Tabernacle of the Congregation before the testimonie free from water or earth to nourish it and this was done the morrow after it was there laid though it would not have born almonds if it had been still united to the stock perhaps for many moneths after Did the same God restore unto Jeroboam his hand which was dried up before so that he could not pull it back to him again 1. Kings 13.4 and that on a sudden at the prayer of the Prophet And will Salmeron think that if children do not die they shall continue still children although they be changed Who knoweth not that the change is as great a part of Gods power as the resurrection Salmeron again objecteth If the living or quick at that day shall not die The wicked ones d Ignem conflagrationis evadent shall avoid the fire of conflagration I answer first That the fire of conflagration shall be after judgement Secondly if they should escape that fire they cannot flee from the fire of hell Thirdly the wicked ones shall arise with the just all together The wicked ones may be changed also at the same instant that the just are and that is at the same instant of the resurrection Christ is the resurrection and the life John 11.25 The resurrection to them that are dead perhaps the life to them that are changed and die not The resurrection of the dead
raised incorruptible and we shall be changed For this corruptible must put on incorruption c. What coherence subsequent then shall you make unto these words None at all The coherence must be with the antecedent words But say I take the antecedent words as the Vulgat hath them and reade as you must the connexion in this sort We shall indeed all arise but shall not all be changed in a moment in the twinkling of an eye at the last trump For the trumpet shall sound c. I say even in this reading there is little sense also yea much untruth Is it not certain that we shall be changed in a moment Or how long shall the time of change be There is no way to avoid this foul absurditie which cometh by the Vulgat edition unlesse it be by a greater that is by saying that you will make an Hyperbaton and include these words We shall not all be changed in a Parenthesis and then the sense will be We shall arise in a moment c. For though it be true that we shall arise in a moment yet there is no ground that we shall not be changed in a moment In all likelihood a change may rather be more speedie which is without death then that change which is made through death and resurrection If they may be and shall be raised and changed in a moment they may in a moment be changed and not raised Secondly no authoritie that I know runneth for such a needlesse Parenthesis and I deem it as a violence offered to the Text so to strain it when the sense will runne fairly otherwise according to the best Greek copies We shall not all sleep but we shall all be changed in a moment in the twinkling of an eye at the last trump Let this also serve to have been spoken against the Latin Vulgat edition and its bad reading Omnes quidem resurgemus sed non omnes immutabimur In momento in ictu oculi in novissima tuba canet enim tuba mortui resurgent incorrupti c. By how much the lesse sense is in this by so much the more are we bound to adhere to the Originall and the most common and best copies of it This I may be bold to averre That if some shall not die and yet be changed there shall be an infallible yea demonstrative proof unto sense That the very self same bodie which man had shall inherit eternall glorie For if they die not they must needs keep and have the same bodies from which they are not parted by immutation Yea the identicall resurrection of the same very bodies which were dead may thus farre be proved That if the changed bodies shall be still the same in substance though differing in qualities the raised bodies also shall be no otherwise nor any way different and Pythagoras will then disprove his * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 transmigration of souls into diverse bodies and his heathenish * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 regeneration to which Nicodemus seemed to have an eye Joh. 3.4 when every soul cometh arayed with its own bodie and when they who by change put not off their bodies shall come alive to judgement 5. The Pelagians were wont thus to argue If sinne came in by Adam then all must needs die But some shall not die namely those y Qui reperientur vivi who shall be found remaining alive Therefore sinne came not into the world by Adam S. Augustine answereth this argument very sufficiently otherwise and it may easily and briefly be answered All shall die reatu though not actu Yet that holy Father and that great just enemie of the accursed Pelagians z In majorem cautelam for the greater and better securitie and safetie would seem to rest doubtfull of their assumption which he needed not Whereupon de Civitat 20.20 he saith a Dormitio praecedit quamvìs brevissima non tamen nulla Death goeth before a most short and speedie one yet a death And in the same place b Per mortem ad immortalitatem mirâ celeritate transibunt They shall slip sail or passe over by death to immortalitie with wonderfull speed Again de peccat merit remiss 2.31 c Hoc quibusdam in sine largietur Deus ut mortem istam repentiuâ commutatione non sentient God at the end of the world shall grant this priviledge unto some That by reason of their sudden change they shall not feel death And Retract 2.33 d Aut non morientur aut de vita ista in mortem de morte in aeternam vitam celerrimâ commutatione tanquam in ictu oculi transeundo mortem non sentient Either they die not or otherwise they glide from this life into death and from death into eternall life as it were in the twinkling of an eye by a most speedie alteration taking no notice or sense of death He leaves it doubtfull as you see in these his last books though sometimes before he thought That all should die and otherwhere as ad Dulcitium quaest 3. That they should not die The Master of the Sentences saith concerning the question Whether the change be by death or without it e Horum quid sit verius non est humani judicii definire Man cannot determine certainly which of these is truest Rabanus lib. 4. de sermon proprietat having alledged the consent of divers Fathers to establish his own opinion That all must die yet annexeth this Because there are others alike Catholick and learned men who beleeve That the soul remaining in the bodie those shall be changed to immortalitie who shall be found alive at the coming of our Lord f Et hoc eis reputari pro resurrectione ex mortuis quòd mortalitatem immutatione deponant non morte c. and that it stands them in stead of rising from the dead that they cast away mortalitie by change not by death Let any man rest on which opinion he pleaseth c. Which very words also you shall finde in the book de Ecclesiast Dogmat. cap. 7. Now though S. Augustine was dubious and some with him and though some also have imbraced the contrary opinion yet equally Catholick and learned men have been constant to maintain That some shall not die but be changed as you have heard confessed If you please you may take a view of some more particularly The afore named Theodorus Heracleotes cited by Hierom in his epistle to Minerius and Alexander hath it thus i Sancti qui in die judicii in corporibus reperiendi sunt non gustabunt mortem erúnt que cum Domino gravissimâ mortis necessitate calcatâ The Saints who in the day of the last judgement shall be found to be alive and remain in their earthly bodies shall not see death or taste of it and shall be with the Lord kicking and spurning at death and the greatest inforcing necessitie thereof Apollinaris cited in
the same epistle said Some shall not die but be snatcht out of this life that with changed and glorified bodies they might be with Christ Chrysostom on the 10. to the Romanes and on 1. Thess 4. and upon this place to the Corinthians saith Some shall escape death With him agreeth Epiphanius Haeresi 64. saying k Qui rapitur nondum mortuus est Who is suddenly snatched up is not yet dead And before them Origen lib. 2. contra Celsum so opineth Theophylact on 1. Corinth 15. thus l Etiam qui non morientur ad incorruptibilitatem transferentur Even they who shall not die shall be transchanged out of this corruptible life to incorruptibilitie And again m Nonnulli nè morientur quidem Some indeed shall not die at all To that effect S. Hierom in his epistle to Marcella quaest 3. num 148. and in his epistle to Minerius and Alexander bringeth the saying of Christ Matth. 24.37 c. of the dayes of Noah when the floud swept them away as they were eating and drinking to prove that at the last judgement some shall not die Theodoret evinceth the same truth producing the passage of Matth. 24.40 of two in the field one assumed the other rejected And Chrysostom in his Sermon de Ascensione Domini instanceth in the verse following of two in a mill one refused the other accepted which proofs aim at this That all shall not die Cajetan is rich in proofs That all shall not die See him on Act. 10. upon Timoth. 4. upon 1. Corinth 15. upon 1. Thessal 4. Tertullians words must not be omitted in his book de resurrectione carnis n Hujus gratiae privilegium illos manet qui ab adventu Domini deprehendentur in carne propter duritias temporum Antichristi merebuntur compendio mortis per demutationem expunctae concurrere cum resurgentibus This gracious priviledge belongs unto those who at the coming of our Lord and Saviour to judgement shall be found alive upon earth and for the grievous afflictions and pressures of the times under Antichrist they shall have granted unto them this indulgence That they shall not die but shall be suddenly changed and so go to meet Christ together with those which shall then be raised from the dead Salmeron being peremptorie That all and every one shall die properly upon 1. Thessal 4. hath a wilde crotchet That all who shall be alive toward the end of the world shall be consumed with the fire of conflagration which shall go before Christ and so dead and raised shall be snatched up But S. Augustine de Civitat Dei 20.16 setting down the order of the last judgement saith The fire of conflagration shall be after the last judgement I will close this point with the sound and learned words of Calvin which fully accord with what I rested on in the beginning of this chapter upon 1. Corinth 15. o Cùm mutatio fieri nequeat quin aboleatur prior natura ipsa mutatio meritò censetur species mortis sed cùm non sit animae à corpore solutio non reputatur in morte ordinaria Since there cannot be a change saith he but the former nature must be abolished the very change on good grounds may justly be accounted a kinde of death but since there is not a separation of the soul from the bodie it is not to be reputed as if it were the common and ordinarie death Upon 1. Thessal 4. he wittily observeth that they p Qui dormiunt aliquo temporis spatio exuunt corporis substantiam qui innovabuntur non nisi qualitatem who are dead or do die for some space of time or other longer or shorter their souls put off the substantiall clothing of the bodie or flesh but they who shall be changed shall put off onely the qualitie not the substance The summe of all is this The third main question by me at first propounded was Whether all and every one without exception must and shall die The Papists are obstinate for the affirmative I have proved the negative That some may be some have been and some others shall be excepted and not die And so I end my third and last Chapter of my third book of Miscellanies O Most gracious Lord God who hast committed all judgement to thy onely sonne our onely Lord and Saviour I beseech thee to have pitie upon me and for Jesus Christ his sake receive me into thy especiall favour O blessed JESU accept of these my poore and weak endeavours and receive my prayers and present them with mercie to the throne of Grace hasten thy coming and thy kingdome Come sweet JESU come quickly and prepare my soul to meet thee with joy If it be thy holy will let me be one of them that shall be changed and changed to the better from pain to comfort from sicknesse sorrow and labour to rest and blessednesse eternall Amen Amen Amen VNI-TRINO DEO LAVS ET GLORIA FINIS An Alphabeticall Table of the principall things contained in these three Books of Miscellanies A ABortion is a curse Book 1. pag. 103. Two kindes of Abortives ibid. pag. 98 99. Adams body was created immortall and how ibid. p. 11. Adams body was framed of other dust then the dust of Paradise ibid. p. 16. viz. out of the red earth of ager Damascenus ibid. p. 85. Book 2. p. 23. The contrarie disposition of Elements had not caused a dissolution of Adams body had Adam stood Book 1. p. 17 to 28. The naturall temper and constitution of Adams body in state of innocencie ibid. p. 18 and 20. Whether if Adam and Eve had stood confirmed in innocencie any of their children could have sinned ibid. p. 44 to 54. The endowments of Adam in state of innocencie ib. p. 55 56. Whether Adam and Eve foreknew their fall ibid. p. 59. Whether Adam and Eves sinne were the same ibid. p. 61. Whether of their sinnes were the greater ibid. p. 62 65 to 73. where also of Adams first sinne by which he fell ibid. Adam mourned 100 yeares for the murdered Abel ibid. p. 85 87. Adam was a type of Christ therefore saved ibid. Adam was buried in Golgotha and his skull found upon mount Calvary Book 2. from p. 13 to 29. Whether Adam could naturally understand all languages ibid. p. 47 48. Amphibologie prejudiciall to truth Book 1. p. 2. Angels fell the second instant of their creation ib. p. 108 and 126. Christ merited for Angels ib. p. 189 190. Angels representing men are called men in the Scripture Book 2. chap. 16. Apocryphall books too much slighted Book 2. p. 145. They are to be preferred before any other humane Authours Book 3. p. 183. Of the diverse Appointment of things by God Book 1. p. 2 3. The Apostles represented the whole body of Christs Ministers ibid. p. 147 148. The Apostles were none of them learned before their calling Book 2. p. 87 88. Aristotle and Plato
compared Book 1. p. 13 14 15. The Ascension of Christ represented in the assumption of Enoch and Elias Book 3. p. 191 to 195. B BEauty desired Book 1. pag. 19. The Being or not Being of a thing may be said divers wayes Book 2. p. 77. Bristoll built of old by Brennus ibid. p. 23 24. C WHence the Capitol in Rome had its name B. 2. pag. 18. Ceremonies Leviticall died at first by degrees and now they are not onely dead but deadly Book 1. p. 3. There is no Chance where Providence reigneth Book 2. p. 71 72. Cherubims with reall flaming swords were placed in Paradise Book 1. p. 2 3. and why ibid. p. 23. Christs beautie in his humanitie described together with his Passion B. 1. p. 18 19 20. compare ibid. p. 193. Christ doth us more good then Adam did us harm ibid. p. 185 to 188. Christ saved more in number then Adam condemned ibid. p. 188 189. c. Whether Christ were in Adam and how ibid. p. 82 83. The judgement of the essentiall Church of Christ is infallible ibid. p. 148. Circumcision of women by the Turks ibid. p. 144. A wicked Companion is very dangerous Book 3. p. 184 185. Conception what it is and how B. 1. p. 93 to 99. Confirmation in grace is of two sorts ibid. p. 48. Generall Councels are the highest earthly Judges of Scriptures controversed ibid. p. 136 148. D DEath is threefold Book 1. p. 4. Death is common to all ibid. Death Naturall and Violent ibid. p. 17. Sinne is the onely cause of Death ibid. p. 26 27. Death is bitter because painfull ibid. pag. 28 31. Death is sweet to some men because God makes it beneficiall unto them ibid. pag. 32 33 c. Death was inflicted on Adam for one sinne ibid. Death was inflicted for the sinne of the man Adam not of the woman Eve ibid. pag. 36 to 44. Speedy death by some is accounted best Book 3. pag. 187. Whether all Adams posteritie without priviledge or exception must and shall die Book 3. Chap. 1 2 3 throughout The difference between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Book 1. pag. 192 193 c. Disciples of Christ were none of them Noble at least not Nobly bred Book 2. pag. 86. E OF the East-Indians and their language Book 3. p. 204. Of Elias and Enoch whether they be yet living or dead Book 3. Chap. 2. throughout Divers questions about Enoch more especially ibid. p. 181 182 c. Equivocation in what sense and in what cases it may be allowable Book 1. pag. 165 167. The second book of Esdras was never held Canonicall ibid. p. 7. Eve remained an intemerate virgin untill after the sinne of Adam ib. p. 39 40. Whether Eve sinned before she talked with the serpent ibid. pag. 60. Excommunication was of three sorts in the Jewish politie Book 2. pag. 48 49. F THe word Father is diversly taken in the holy Scripture Book 1. pag. 120. and Book 2. pag. 113 c. G GEnealogies were ever drawn from the Males Book 1. page 40 41. H THe Healed by Christ were never a second time cured of any disease Book 2. p. 8. Heavenly influences which are noxious are the causes of much sicknesse and destruction Book 1. p. 17. All languages have some words retaining the foot-steps of the Hebrew Book 2. p. 45. When the Hebrew points were first used Book 1. p. 100 101 102. Hebron the citie Book 2. page 19 to 29. Humilitie ibid. p. 161 162. The humilitie of S. Paul Book 2. p. 84 85. The Husband represents the wife Book 1. p. 140. I JEr 10.11 was the onely verse of his whole prophesie that was written in Chaldee which every captive Jew was commanded to cast in the teeth of the Babylonians Book 1. p. 180. Jerusalem the holy citie Book 2. p. 154 155 156. Ignorance threefold Book 1. p. 60. Interpretation of Scriptures is the Pastours right with whom the Laitie must consult ibid. p. 149 150 156 181 182. Book 2. p. 63. Interpretation of Scriptures by Anagrams is profane B. 1. p. 152 153. Whether interpretation of Scriptures or judgement of doctrine do in any sort belong unto the people and how farre ibid. p. 157 159. Helps and cautions prescribed unto the people for interpretation of Scriptures ibid. pag. 160 to pag. 169 c. John the Apostle his death Book 3. p. 187 188 189. Joseph was the first-born of Jacob. Book 1. p. 142 143. Joseph was a type of Christ Book 2. p. 33. A twofold acception of the word Judgement Book 1. p. 6. Judgement after death is private of souls publick of bodies and souls ibid. K. KIngs represent the people under them Book 1. p. 183 184. Of the honour due unto the King ibid. Whether Korah Dathan and Abiram descended with all their goods truly into hell Book 3. p. 214 215 to p. 221. L WHerein the confusion of Languages consisted Book 2. p. 45 46. Orientall languages conduce much to the understanding of Scriptures therefore necessarie to be studied ib. p. 48. Of the same languages also B. 3. p. 204 205. Of Lazarus raised by Christ Book 2. p. 7 8 9. Humane Learning is an handmaid to Divinitie ib. p. 88 89. Literall sense of Scripture is hardest to be found Book 1. p. 149. M MAgistrates not to be reviled Book 1. p. 168 169 170. Maran-atha expounded Book 2. p. 48 to p. 54. Of Melchisedech and why he is said to be without father and mother Book 3. p. 201 202 c. to p. 206. Members of the bodie are not all of equall worth Book 1. p. 63. God is very Mercifull unto all ib. p. 186 187. Whether Moses at the Transfiguration appeared in his own true person or not Book 3. p. 208 209 c. O IN Oaths we must be warie of mentall reservations and unlawfull equivocations Book 1. p. 166 167. Opinion Book 2. p. 83. Originall sinne See Sinne. P OF Paradise Book 3. pag. 194 195 196 197. The Pastours wisdome both for the matter and manner of his doctrine Book 1. p. 158. The Patriarchs were buried in Sychem Book 2. chap. 10. Meerly Personalls are not propagated B. 1. p. 109 to p. 138. S. Peter represented all the Apostles Joh. 21.15 16. Book 1. p. 147. The Pope is servus servorum Dei ibid. p. 132. The Priviledges of a few make not a law Book 2. p. 160. Whether God may justly Punish the Fathers for the childrens actuall delinquencies B. 1. p. 119 120. In what cases God may and doth punish the children for their Parents faults either with temporall or eternall punishment ib. p. 118 to p. 124. Every individuall man is justly punished for originall sinne in Adam ib. p. 145 146 147 c. R REdemption was of a double kinde in the Leviticall law Book 1. p. 143. Of Reliques Book 2. chap. 12. and the Authours esteem of a true choice Relique ibid. p. 130 131. The Resurrection was typified in
Samson and how Book 2. p. 31. Compare Book 3. p. 220. at the bottome of the page Why all men shall rise again at the last day Book 1. p. 195. Whether such as have been raised from the dead did die the second time Book 2. p. 1 to p. 12. Of holy men there is a double resurrection ib. p. 4. The raising of the dead was an act appropriated unto Christ himself no way communicated to his Apostles in his life time ib. p. 6 9 10. Who they were that rose at Christs death ib. p. 12. wherwith compare ib. chap. 8.11 12 13 14. throughout The raised Saints ascended not into heaven with Christ ib. ch 15 16 17 18. throughout Christs resurrection was typified in Elias 2. King 2.13 ib. p. 146. The figure of Rome at its first building ib. p. 24. S THe whole Scripture is but one though penned by divers Book 2. p. 38 39. The Penmen of the holy Scriptures as such could not forget ibid. p. 40 41 c. Whether how it was necessarie that the Scripture should be written for mens instruction ibid. p. 68 69 70 c. Whether the holy Penmen of the Scriptures understood all that they wrote ibid. p. 80 to p. 86. Whether they read profane Authours ibid. p. 86 to p. 90. They did cite Poets or profane Authours ibid. p. 89 to p. 93. Whether they studied the things they wrote before-hand ib. p. 92 to p. 96. There was no difference between the Penmen of the divine Writ of the Old and New Testament in the point of conceiving and writing in different languages ib. p. 96. We must have recourse unto the allusions of Scripture which are not rest on what the Apostles conceived in their mindes onely ibid. p. 97. The Pen-men of Scripture had no libertie to put in their own conceits or in writing to adde or blot out what they had done ib. p. 98 to p. 104. They had no power to clothe their inward apprehensions with words of their own ib. p. 104 105 106. The Penmen of Scripture wrote their heavenly dictates in the same language in which they conceived them ibid. p. 107 to p. 112. Whether the holy Penmen of Scripture wrote the Scripture casually ibid. p. 71 72. When the New Testament began first to be written and upon what occasion ibid. pag. 73. Whether the Penmen of Scripture were commanded to write ibid. p. 73 to page 76. Whether the Prophets Evangelists and Apostles were compelled to write ibid. 76 to p. 80. Whether Christ wrote any part of Scripture himself immediately ibid. p. 64 65 c. Why Sinne is called Originall Book 1. p. 129. Styles given to originall sinne ib. p. 36. Some sinnes are greater then other ibid. p. 62 63 64. The greatnesse of a sinne is two wayes considered ibid. p. 66. Of originall sinne as conveyed unto us from Adam ib. p. 74 to pag. 90. Originall sinne is matter of repentance ib. p. 76. How we sinned originall sinne in Adam ib. p. 78 79 80. Not by imputation onely nor onely by imitation p. 84 85. Originall sinne is propagated to mankinde ib. p. 90 91. p. 129. When originall sinne beginneth ib. p. 91 92 93. The manner how the soul is by it made sinfull ib. p. 103 to p. 109. Adams actuall sinne was private and personall ideall onely and representative therefore not imputed unto us ib. p. 88 89. p. 129. The foure principall faculties of our Souls with their severall objects Book 1. p. 56. T A Twofold kinde of Temperature the one of weight the other of justice Book 1. p. 18. Tithes are by an everlasting law due to the Priesthood of Melchisedech ibid. p. 83. Curses that follow those who sacrilegiously rob the Church of Tithes Book 2. p. 50 51. The Transfiguration of Christ with the manner of it and how it was not painfull to him B. 1. p. 29. Of the Translation of them who shall be found alive at the last day ibid. p. 30. The use of the Tree of life in Paradise unto Adam ibid. p. 20 23. Whether Adam did eat of the tree of life before he fell ibid. p. 21 22. V VIator is considered according unto a twofold estate Book 1. page 51 52. FINIS The severall places of Scripture explained in these three Books of Miscellanies The first book GEn. 3.20 pag. 40. Gen. 4.15 64 65. Exod. 13.2 140. Exod. 20.5 110 116 127 128. Job 14.4 95 96. Ps 51.5 92 93 94. Ps 91.11 25 26. Ps 109.14 121 122. Ps 131.1 161 162. Isa 53.2 18. Vers 4. 20. Jer. 25.26 153 unto 157. Matt. 15.14 174. Joh. 8.44 37. Joh. 9.2 132. Act. 23.5 168 169. 170 c. Rom. 5.12 79 80. vers 13. 186. ver 18. from page 190 to the end of the first book Rom. 11.16 106. 1. Cor. 3.1 2. 158. 1. Cor. 7.14 106. 1. Cor. 15.47 42. Ephes 4.23 24. 56. Heb. 9.27 from the 1 to the ninth The second book GEn. 22.5 p. 83. Gen. 31.53 32. John 8.56 30 31. Joh. 20.7 146 147. 1. Cor. 9.16 78. 1. Cor. 16.22 48 49 c. 2. Cor. 5.14 78. Gal. 6.11 67 68. Heb. 11.35 4. The third book EXod 34.29 p. 210. Mal. 4.5 6. 174 175 c. Matt. 17.11 177 178 c. ¶ Faults escaped in the first Book thus to be corrected Page 18 line 11 for proportion reade proportio Page 20 line margin for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reade 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Page 24 line 2 for tree life reade tree of life Page 29 line 13 for not reade no. Page line 39 for ecclipsed reade eclipsed Page 30 line margin for tran-seuntis reade trans-euntis Page 32 line margin for laborantos reade laborantes Page 44 line 20 for yae reade yea Page 57 line 20 for he did for a while reade he did fulfill for a while Page 62 line 22 for Cittien reade Citizen Page 65 line 30 for Wheter reade Whether Page line 43 for Gensis reade Genesis Page 82 line 41 for lisienesse reade likenesse Page 86 line 20 for this reade his Page 96 line margin for doctus nec doctus reade doctus nec indoctue ¶ In the second Book Page 2 line 39 for istance reade instance FINIS