example sinned Infants dying prove the contrary Yet I cannot deny but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may have another signification than is given by some who would have it as much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in whom and not as our Translation hath it faithfully In as much This the Apostles doctrine is confirmed by what follows For until the Law sin was in the world but sin is not imputed when there is no v. 13. 14. Law Nevertheless sin reigning from Adam to Moses even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression These words as by very many and in diverse manners so by the same hand are thus hal'd to this erroneous construction St. Paul does not speak of all mankind as if the Evil occasioned by Adams sin did descend for ever upon that account but it had a limited effect and reached only to those who were in the interval between Adam and Moses But the more exact and literal enquiry into the Apostles meaning will quite overthrow this presumptuous conjecture which is occasioned from a mis-translation or mis-understanding of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both which signifying the same thing i. e. Until are thought to be intended exclusively of the time to come when they as the like do but intend such a tearm signally as a most considerable Period and not as the ultimate they drive at As 't is commonly understood of Josephs not Matth. 1. ult knowing Mary until she had brought forth her first-born And this will be evident to him that compareth the use of those words in the thirteenth and fourteenth verses and the drift of the Apostle which plainly to discover will satisfie any doubter and answer all objections and other glosses It is this here as generally to lay before the Jewes to whom St. Paul principally designs his discourse the imperfection of that Law which was by Moses delivered unto them and upon which they so confidently rest that neither the Law of God written in mens hearts before Moses nor the Law then lately delivered by Christ was of any account with them but Moses his Law must carry it from all Justification must be by that and the Vertue of the Messias himself depended on that So that in effect they thought nothing sin but what transgressed the Law of Moses St. Paul argues against this saying For until the Law sin was in the world but sin is not imputed when there is no Law which is as much as to have said Ye ought not so much to stand upon your Mosaical Law For that is not the only judge or tryal of sin seeing sin was in the world until the Law that is all the time from Adam to your Law but sin is not imputed when there is no Law but sin was imputed and punished too For v. 14. death reigned from Adam to Moses Now if there was such punishment as death then surely there must be a Transgression and if there be such a Transgression there must be also a Law which is so transgressed And therefore if such a Law then surely Moses his Law was not that only Law nor most ancient Now to draw nearer to our present Case on whom fell this punishment of death the Apostle answers On all without exception Even on them which could only be doubted of that had not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression What is meant by this That is saith our Authour Who sinned not so capitally For to sin like Adam is used as a tragical and high expression Hos 6. 7. They like men have sinned in the Hebrew it is Like Adam Of this I grant thus much That Adams sin was the greatest that ever was committed since all things duly weighed and therefore it may well stand for a most heinous sin and therefore Job likewise saith by way of abhorrence and purgation If I covered my sin as Adam Job 31 33. One main circumstance aggravating Adams sin was that he would have hid it as himself out of Gods eyes and defended himself when he was convinced but how he repented the Scripture is silent But that the degree of sin cannot be the ground of comparison but the very nature of sin and kind is plain from the subject thus punished by death For had they been only men of years who could choose the good and refuse the evil then indeed less might have been objected against that interpretation but it being manifest that death reigned over Infants also who committed no sin as did Adam therefore another sense must be found which answers the full intent of the Apostles argument and it can be no other than this That by similitude here he means the like in nature and not only in degree For Infants who are punished with death have not sinned as did Adam Adams sin was a sin properly so called and Actual but Children who dye sin not so but are subject to that we call Original sin which being such a corruption as defaceth the Image of God and as it were clips his Royal Coyn and allayes it with baser mettal than he ordained man to consist of may cause him justly to be rejected Nay which is much more and granted surely unadvisedly as inconsistently with the principles of this Authour the guilt of Adams Actual sin as in himself was such that it discended to the sons of him before the Floud For sayes he They indeed in rigour did themselves deserve it but if it had not been for that provocation by Adam they who sinned not so bad and had not been so severely and expresly threatened had not suffered so severely This is more than what the strictest defenders of Original sin dare affirm viz. That God should take an occasion of punishing one man for anothers fault when he did in no manner partake of the sin Surely if nothing of the Offence had descended to the Posterity of Adam nothing of the punishment should have touched them Next to the comparison here made by the Apostle between acts of Adam and the acts of Christ and the effects and events of one and the other is the comparison between the persons to whom these on both sides extended and sheweth that the remedy by Christ was proportionable altogether to the mischief occasioned by Adam For saith the Apostle As by the offense of One judgment came upon All men to condemnation even so by the Righteousness of One the free gift came upon All men unto justification Rom. 5. 18 19. of life For as by one mans disobedience many were made sinners so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous There seems in these two verses to be some contrariety in that first it is said that Judgment came upon all and the Free gift upon all and yet afterward there is a restriction unto many and not all concerned in the sin Therefore it is to be observed That in the first place the
works rites or Ceremonies of the Law delivered them by Moses as Saint Paul hath not only taught us but irrefragably proved against them in several places of his Epistles For the summ of his Argument and force may truly be reduced to this form as it is laid down more largely in his third Chapter to the Galatians Judaizing after the embracing of the Gospel of Christ Galat. 3. That way whereby Abraham Isaack Jacob and the most holy and renowned Patriarchs of the Jewish Line were justified before God must needs be it which God chiefly intended for the Justification of their Posterity to whom all the promises of God were made through them But neither Abraham nor Isanck nor Jacob were Justified by the Law of Moses so religious and rigorously now insisted on The first part of this reason will be easily granted by the Jews because they were the principal of the Jewish nation and honoured by God above any that succeeded them and therefore undoubtedly Justified by God But that this justification could V. 17. not be according to or by the Law of Moses Saint Paul in the forecited Chapter apparently proves where he shews that the Law was four hundred and thirty years after Abraham And how could that which then had no being be a cause of justification of Abraham Again the accounting of Righteous before God is to be justified before God But Abraham was accounted Righteous before God by Faith and Galat. 3. 6. Gen. 16. 6. Gal. 3. v. 7. not by Law For so saith the Scripture Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him for righteousness Therefore They that are of Faith they are children of Abraham that is They who believed and live as did Abraham are Abrahams spiritual seed and heirs apparent of all the Promises made to him whereby all nations not the Jewish only should be blessed Furthermore No man could ever be Justified by that law but may rather be said to be condemned and cursed by it which he nor no man else did ever Deut. 27. 26. keep And the law saith expresly Cursed be he that confirmeth not all the Gal. 3. 10. words of this Law to do them which Confirming is well explained by the Apostle by Continuing For who ever by disobedience breaketh it cannot be said to confirm it or continue in it Now seeing all flesh failed more or less in the due observation thereof there must be provision otherwise made by God if so be he would have any saved It will perhaps be here said That God in such cases had appointed Sacrifices for expiations and reconciliations with him But against this not so much the Auctority as the Argument of the same Apostle makes in his Epistle to the Hebrews saying In those Sacrifices there is a remembrance made of sins Heb. 10. once every year That is notwithstanding there were daily Sacrifices made according to the Law every day and upon special sins peculiar Sacrifices made by the offendor for an atonement yet every year to shew the insufficiencie of the Precedent Ceremonies mention was made of the sins of the People when the High Priest entred into the Holiest of Holie And the reason of this imperfection is given by the Author to the Hebrews when V. 4. he argueth First from the nature the Sacrifices themselves That it is impossible that the blood of Bulls and of Goats should take away sins or as one of their own Prophets before him intimateth saying Wherewith shall I Mic. 6. 6. come before the Lord and bow my self before the High God Shall I come before him with Burnt offerings and Calves of a year old Will the Lord be pleased 7. with thousands of Rams or with ten thousands of Rivers of oil Shall I give my first born for my transgression The fruit of my body for the sin of my Soul And so again in the book of the Psalms Sacrifices and offerings thou Psal 4. 6 7. didst not desire mine ears hast thou opened Burnt-offerings and sin-offerings hast thou not required Then said I Lo I come in the volume of the book it is written of me c. All which with many such like places do declare what esteem Good and Godly men had of the Legal Sacrifices that were but in themselves insufficient and unacceptable to Almighty God for either the expiating and satisfying for sins or the appeasing of God offended by the same and therefore some further remedie some more excellent means of reconcisiation were necessary And this appears from the ends of such Sacrifices instituted which principally were these First to declare a right that God had in all those Creatures which he had given man for his use and service Secondly to represent to man the guilt and punishment unto which he was subject by his sins as verily as that beast so slain and sacrificed before his eyes Thirdly to insinuate unto him the true means of becoming reconciled unto God offended which was A Second general end of the Old Law which was to prefigure the Messias and only true Saviour of the world who related not only to Abrahams seed but to all to whom the promise made to Abraham related viz. Gen. 22. 18. Galat. 3. 10. In thy seed shall all the Nations of the earth be blessed And therefore if such an objection be made Wherefore serveth the Law if not to such Ends Saint Paul answereth thus It was added because of transgressions to whom the Promise was made Because of Transgression First by reason that the Oral Covenant made with Adam and renewed to Abraham suffice not of it self to contain man in his dutie without the additional statute committed to writing by Moses called signally The Law Secondly this became to them under it a rule and direction until such time as the seed to whom it was promised should come i. e. The fulness of the Gentiles to whom through Adam and Abraham both the Messias was promised Whence appeareth the vanitie of the Jews imagination supposing that God by an immutable decree had affixed the priviledges and benefits of the Gospel entirely to the Jews And this inferrs another argument used by Saint Paul against the perfection and perpetuity of the Jewish Law For nothing was promised to Abraham and his seed peculiarly but upon the Covenant of Circumcision But Abraham was not reputed righteous before God by vertue of Circumcision but being Righteous was Circumcised and all the principal Promises made to Abraham as the Father of the Faithful were before Circumcision as the historie in Genesis assures us and Saint Paul to the Romans argueth and concludes against the Jews They which are the children of the Flesh are not the Children of God that is in that respect or for that cause because they were lineally descended from Abrahams flesh and blood but the Children of the Promise are counted for the Seed i. e. They were the persons comprehended in the Covenant and promises made to
or equity of it or not saying Nay but O man What art thou that replyest against God Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it Why hast thou made me thus Hath not the Potter power over the clay of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour and another unto dishonour No man that acknowledges and every Christian must acknowledge the like and greater power and prerogative in God over Man than the Potter hath of his clay can deny that God may order the work of his hands as he pleases neither can he deny but the drift of the Apostle in this comparison was to show the absolute power and dominion of God over all Creatures and therefore let them see how they aggravate matters of this nature and multiply fond ratiocinations which they cannot but know agree not with St. Pauls stating and decision of this Question I do freely grant the adverse Party that St. Paul doth not at all concern himself with that kind of Predestination Election or Vocation as very many confidently presume he doth in his Eighth and Ninth Chapters to the Romans I mean not particular or personal Prae-determination and the like the whole letter and the occasion of his discourse there being concerning the Election of the Gentile Church and the uncessant protection thereof against all threatnings and Oppositions and disputing the equity of Gods deserting the Jewish Church yet thus far his argument being general holds good in particular persons that if it be free to God without any just exceptions to choose and leave a Church or Nation at his pleasure and according to the counsel of his own will it is also reasonable and just for him to favour or show disfavour to any single person in like acts of his Providence without being called in question for what he doth or not doth CHAP. XIV Of Sin more particularly And first of the Fall of Adam Of Original sin wherein it consisteth and how it is traduced from Father to children The Proofs of it The Nature and Evils of it And that it is cured in baptism That Natural Concupiscence hath not the Nature of Sin after baptism BY what is said competent satisfaction may be had in that mystery of Gods Providence in the fall and sin of the first Man created as we have shewed in such perfection of natural Faculties and divine Grace the reason absolute and demonstrative whereof cannot be rendred by the witâ— of Man viz. Why God should make such a fine and exquisite piece and deliver it over presently to ruin and loss It may suffice that God was not the direct cause of such his Fall by impelling him though his Free-will embracing the Temptation he was privy to his errour As it was in that memorable case of the death of Benhadad King of Syria in the second of the Kings when Hazael was sent to enquire Whether he should recover 2 Kings 8. 10. of that Sickness The Prophet Elisha answered Go say unto him thou mayest certainly recover how be it the Lord hath shewed me that he shall surely dye And this was the true case of Adam whom God knew to have full power certainly to stand and yet he knew he would surely fall As therefore God in that case spake after the method and manner of mans apprehension so he here acted In that he first said the King might surely recover and this was according to the common order of natural Causes which then were upon him in his sickness which were such as were easily resisted and like to have no such effect But then God withal beholding that which was not seen of man perhaps not thought on by the Actour himself at that time he saw withal a necessary dependencie and connexion between another cause and that effect which followed and so declared surely the contrary to the other In like manner God beholding Adam in that integrity and vigour of gifts and Graces with which he had furnished him saw him in a certain condition to persevere in that state but seeing withal the future outward cause of Temptation he might well see the effect what it would be infallibly So that when we say a thing is contingent we cannot say so in respect of all causes but in respect of some special cause to which in our opinion and observation such an effect may seem properly to belong For it is a true Axiome amongst Logicians All causes accidental are reducible to proper and direct causes So that there was no necessity by Gods appointment of Adams Fall as he was framed of God but somewhat might occurr outwardly which by Gods permission might have as certain effect upon the will of Man though Free of it self and indifferent as had the wet cloath laid by Hazael 2 Kings 8. 15. upon the face of Benhadad this only excepted That what natures simple Act did in this the will of man combining freely against himself with those outward causes suffered in that The thing therefore principally to be here enquired after is rather about the Nature of this Sin in Adam and the Effects thereof And as to the former it is to be observed That what was in him an Actual sin became in us an Original and what was free to him to be subject to it or void of it becomes necessary to us and inevitable It might be called in some sense an Original sin in him as it was the first in nature and time he stood guilty of but not as if his Nature was from the beginning so corrupt as to dispose him unto it Again in him it was of it self purely sinful and a transgression of Gods Law upon which followed evil effects but in us it seems to partake originally of both sin and punishment but chiefly of this latter For though they speak truly in the larger sense who make three things proper and inseparable from Sin Guilt Stain and Punishment yet restraining our selves to the true Nation of it there are these two things only essential to it The matter it self which is the evil act committed against the Law of God or which commeth to the same omitted contrary to the same And the manner or formality of it which consisteth in the perversness and pravity of the will which is so essential to it that it both distinguishes the errours of rational men from them of beasts and mad-men and them of the same Man from one another so that what was done voluntarily and freely differs wholly from that done with incogitancie so not affected for then the will concurs with it and infects it and without any intention so to do as to point of moral Goodness or Evil. And according to the bent or averseness of the will to evil commonly are estimated the degrees of evil But though in Adam all these things concurred to the heightening of his Actual sin yet in those that inherit that evil from him the sin must needs be much less in Nature and lighter because
prove the same they meaning no more then Gods Election to the state of Grace that is the Faith and Profession of the Gospel Whence it is that the persons so called and converted to Christ are by St. Paul called the Election as Rom. 9. 11. For the children being not yet born neither having done good Rom. 9. 11. or evil that the purpose of God according to Election might stand not of works but of him that calleth Here the purpose of God is distinguished from the election of God meaning That what God had before-time purposed and resolved on he in time executed in electing the younger and relinquishing the elder and that rather from his own Free-will then my difference in the Persons so elected inducing him thereunto And so Chapt. 11. v. 5. The remnant according to his election is the remnant elected Chap. 11. v. 5. 7. 28. And again verse 7. he saith The election hath obtained And verse 28. Touching the election they are beloved In which three places it is to me plain That by election St. Paul doth mean the Persons elected from Jewish Superstition to Christian Profession As St. Peter also useth the same word saying of the Jewish Converts Elected together with you And 1 Pet. 5. 13. 1 Pet. 1. 2. Matth. 24. 22 24 32. and several other places in which nothing more is intended by the Holy Ghost than they who were in outward communion of Faith So that being sure of a mans Election as every ordinary Christian is he becomes in proportionable manner surâ— of his Justification and Salvation that is sure that the Faith he professes is altogether sufficient to lead him infallibly to salvation which neither the Religion of the Jew or Gentile can assure him of Yet to the reapinâ— of the fruit hereof it must alwayes be supposed That such conditionâ— as God requires on the Party stipulating be not wanting Now of this sort of Assurance I make no doubt but the word of God is more genuinely interpreted and applyed than of that personal assurance peculiar to some who frame another notion of being elected which is of being signally chosen out of the former Elect to an infallible assurance of their Justification and Salvation which though I willingly grant o be true viz. That God hath his peculiar ones amongst Christians too as Christians amongst Heathen yet I find little or nothing spoken of under the said Appellations of Elect Elected Election in Scripture but of the first sense generally My appeal shall be to the indifferent judge by laying the testimonies before him which are principally these many coming nothing near the point St. Paul saith to the Romans of Abraham That he did not doubt of the promise of God through unbelief but was strong Rom. 4. 20 21. in saith giving glory to God And being fully perswaded that what he had promised he was able also to perform How far this is beside the matter every sober man will easily see that shall consider seriously That these Promises were made directly and expresly to Abrahams person and not in common with other persons And can any man be so unadvised as to conclude That because Abraham having such a particular and personal Promise made to him by God and indeed absolute and inconditionate that he should have a Son by Sarah his wife which he believed and without staggering was assured of therefore they who have no such personal assurances given of God but only general and alwayes conditional of their Justification and Life Everlasting can be in like manner assured of the same or ought to believe that they shall be saved as much as Abraham did that God would send him a Son as he promised The sum of Gods infallible Promise to Christians is this in St. Matthew He that believeth Matth. 16. 1â— and is baptized shall be saved where it must of necessity be granted that Believing is a very comprehensive word according to our distinction of Faith above given and consequently that it cannot be so evident to a man that he believeth according to the Tenour and intent of the Covenant of Grace as it was to Abraham that God himself made such a Promise to him and therefore hath not the like footing for his Faith assuring him that he believeth aright as that he should have a Son when his common sense told him that God had promised he should It is said that Faith is opposite to doubting For Christ said to Peter Matth. 14. 31. O thou of little Faith wherefore didst thou doubt This is very true and therefore we say It is no article or object of our Faith to believe that we shall be infallibly saved but it is rather an object of our Fear and more properly of our Hope For though it be said in the Apostles Creed I believe the remission or forgiveness of sgins it is not meant that any man should thereby stand obliged to believe as an Article of Faith the actual forgiveness of his own sins but that his own sins and all other Christian peoples are remissible and that in the Catholick Church there is forgiveness to all that repent and believe And this is no more then that General Assurance that by being baptized we are in a state of Salvation as is above-said To multiply many Texts to infer this from Gods faithfulness who promiseth and from his gifts being without repentance and such like are not worth their time that use them nor would it be worth mine to examine them any farther then to say That they are a great deal too large to have any particular relation to a mans personal state As if God must needs change if a man falls from his stedfast purpose Or God when he in his own counsel determines to save any man infallibly must inseparably annex thereunto this Evidence of his will to the Party any more then it is necessary that all men who leave others their Estates should tell them so much and require at their hands that they make no question of the same under the penalty of forfeiting all The surest grounds therefore for this seem to be taken from revelation which no Christian can absolutely oppose For not only may God but God hath revealed this to others by the testimony of his Spirit or other sufficient Evidence for to beget an assurance But two exceptions are made against this way the one That the dispute is only about the Ordinary dispensations common to all true believers The other That these places alledged prove no more than the common Justification of believers and their Adoption As for instance John 1. 12. As many as received him John 1. 12. to them gave he power to become the Sons of God even as many as believe in his name Here say they believing is put for receiving so that true faith receiveth Christ and this it doth by a particular application of general promises unto a mans self Therefore a man ought to be
confession to the Priest or Minister Some indeed very ignorant and no less superstitious persons are offended at the word Auricular from the common use of it amongst them whose Doctrine and Practice have corrupted it But the ancient use thereof was quite otherwise than now adayes it is as it is thus expressed by Bishop Jewel It is learnedly noted by Bishop Rhenanus the Sinner when he began to mislike Jewell Defence p. 156. himself and to be penitent for his wicked life for that he had offended God and his Church came first unto the Bishop and Priest as unto the mouths of the Church and opened unto him the whole burden of his heart Afterward he was by them brought into the Congregation and there made the same confession openly before his brethren and farther was appointed to make satisfaction by open Penance which being duly and humbly done he was restored again openly unto the Church by laying on of the hands of Priests and Elders Perkins on the Galatians speaketh thus This must farther admonish Perkins on Gal. 5. 19 20. us never to hide or excuse our sins but freely to confess them before God and before men also when need requires Whether we confess them or not they are manifest and the ingenuous confession of them is the way to cover them Psal 32. 1 4. Luther in his Colloquies delivers his opinion of Confession in these words â—â—ther Coll. Com. p. 257. English The chiefest Cause why we hold the Confession is this that the Catechism may be rehearsed and heard particularly to the end they may learn and understand the same However I for my part will never advise Confession to be intermitted for it is not a man that absolveth me from my sins but God himself And see pag. 258. How sins are to be confessed Another of our Church speaketh thus No kind of Confession either publick Archbishop 〈◊〉 Ansâ—â—â— to the 〈◊〉 p. â—â— or private is disallowed by us that is any ways requisite for the due execution of that ancient power of the Keys which Christ bestowed on his Church the thing that we reject is that new Pick-lock of Sacramental Confession obtruded upon mens consciences as a matter necessary to salvation by the Canons of the late Council of Trent Sess 14. c. 6. The Canon here intended I suppose is the Fifth of the Fourth Session under Julius the Third Mr. Perkins again in another place saith In troubles of conscience it is Cases of Conscience lib. 1. cap. 1. meet and convenient that there should be always used private Consession For James saith ch 5. v. 16. Confess yoou faults one to another and pray one for another c. For in all reason the Physician must first know the Disease before he can apply the remedy and the grief of the heart will not be discerned unless it be manifested by the confession of the Party diseased In private Consessions these Caveats must be observed First It must not be urged as a thing absolutely necessary without which there can be no satisfaction Again It is not fit that Confession should be of all sins but only of the Scruple it self Here Perkins's assertion is meerly of his own pleasure and against his own rule which requireth that the Spiritual as well as Corporal Physician should understand all Diseases and are not all sins diseases and of all diseases that the greatest which we are not sensible of 3. Though yet it is specially to be made to the Prophets Ministers of the Gospel Lastly He must be a person of fidelity able to keep secret things that are revealed Many more suffrages for the usefulness of Confession might be alledged of men of unquestioned authority in such cases as this but now I shall come briefly to declare what is to be received and what rejected in this Confession 1. In speaking of the Original or Institution 2. The Necessity 3. The Tradition concerning it 4. The due Practise of it And the Church of Rome however the Council of Trent hath determined it of Divine institution to whose servile Canons we ascribe not so much as to the less servile judgment of some of the Learned Doctors of that Church being divided in its opinion concerning the institution of it the ancienter of them generally denying any such Divine Precept and they who come after the Council being obliged to hold up its Credit affirming we may without great danger or difficulty affirm that Christ hath not in particular and precisely required any such Sacramental Confession but by general Rules of Piety and Prudence inferring so much as a Council and holy direction to assure our Salvation which possibly may be obtained without and more possibly be lost for want of it For the Priest under the Gospel being the same to the uncleanness of the Soul as was the Levitical Priest to the uncleanness and leprosie of the Body it agreeth exactly with the Analogy between the Old and New Testament that the like power be allowed to him in his Sphere as was to the other in his and the like real though not formal and express command Yea I could shew were it a place Scholastically to handle this matter here how according to the opinion of the Learned ancient Jews the people under the Law did practise this Confession and that upon opinion of a Precept in their Law But I do not rest upon any other than what the Gospel affords either in Letter or Inclusively under those duties which it prescribes a Christian Yet what Solomon hath in the Proverbs I take not to be so much Legal as Evangelical He that covereth his sins shall not prosper Prov. 28. 13. but who so confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy And that of Job cleering himself from the concealing of his sins as a great crime commends the revealing them as a necessary act If I covered my transgression Job 31. 33. as Adam by hiding mine iniquity in my bosom seem to be counsel in common with the Gospeâ— as having nothing ceremonial in them And though that of Leviticus was truly Legal as concerning outward absolutions and Levit cap. 13. 14. pollutions yet I see not how they who allow any weight in the Type to infer the thing signified under the Gospel can deny the like obligation in spiritual matters upon us as was on the Jews in respect of matters carnal By that Law the polluted and diseased person was to appear before the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys in c. 1. ad Rom v. 26. Levit. 5. v. 6. Prâ—eâ—t he was to be examined by him judged and sentenced for clean or unclean whole or unsound Sin is certainly the Leprosie of the soul and 't is because men are led more by Sense than Faith or by a monstrous Faith rather than truly Evangelical which dispatches compendiously more than safely all duties of Religion in a word or single act that they apprehend not the like
danger or necessity in the case of their Souls as Bodies and therefore neglect the proper means conducing to their everlasting health And this is yet more expresly propounded to us in the fifth Chapter of Leviticus where we read of many Errors and Offences to be redressed and omitted And that by bringing a Trespass-offering for the sin that he hath committed a female from the flock a Lamb or a Kid of the Goats for a Sin-offering and the Priest shall make an attonement for him concerning his sin Now the manner how and the terms upon which this attonement was to be made are expressed in the words before viz. He shall confess that he hath sinned Ego ut efficacibus scripturae testimonus argumentis irrefutabilibus non pâ—ssum à 〈◊〉 vincere hanc confessionem hanc inquam qualis nune in usu est à Christo aut etiam ab Apostolis esse institutam ita piis omâ—ibus religiose observandam censâ—o veluti saltem ab Ecclesiae proceribus non sine afflatu Spiriâ—ûs Divini inductam Erasm in Exomologesi apud Gesnerum Tom. 5. in that thing And to whom to God privately or to the Priest also who was upon his Confession to make an attonement for him There can be no doubt of the latter And in the Gospel though I dare not nor Erasmus affirm any particular direct Procept purposely delivered to enjoyn this yet by consequence and implication it seems to be required especially in some cases of apparent and grievous errors committed against the Faith and Holiness of the Gospel For hither may the words of Christ well be drawn whereby he commissioned his Apostles to act in his stead himself leaving this world * John 20. 23. Whosoever sins ye remit they are remitted unto them and whosoever sins ye retain they are retained Which words some Modern Interpreters restraining to the power of preaching the Gospel though I confess that to be true must patiently suffer others to leave them as they have their Predecessours in that gloss For first the Gospel might be preached by others as well as the Apostles And next whatever Remission of sins attends the publication of the Gospel is to be imputed not simply and barely either to the Preaching or Hearing or Believing the same but to the admitting by an effectual Faith all the things the Gospel requireth to be done by us And as by the preaching of the Gospel in general and common a general remission is also published So by a particular application of the same unto the particular and private Case of some one Person is confirmed in particular the state of Grace or Impenitency to particular persons according to the judgment of the Priest And to this also pertaineth what Christ saith in the person of St. Peter to all bearing this Office I will give unto thee the Keys Matth. 16. 19. of the Kingdom of Heaven and whatsoever thou bindest on Earth shall be bound in Heaven and whatsoever thou loosest on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven Implying indeed a Power communicative of persons scandalous to the Faith and Church of Christ But of the same power it is a branch which is in every single Priest proceeding judiciously in the Court of Conscience to the binding that is declaring bound a sinner or loosening declaring him at least absolved from his sins upon his repentance manifested to him Now the Reasons obliging a man to this Confession upon Scripture grounds are these First That the Minister of God being according to his office not only to preach Christ and Repentance and Faith and remission of sins to all in general but to apply and accommodate himself to the particular exigencies of men receiving and diversly affected with the Gospel which cannot possibly be but by a particular revelation made to him either from heaven or the party to be judged So that although it should be a sufficient discharge of the Priests part and office to make a general promulgation of the Gospel and so declare that whosoever believeth and repenteth shall be saved but whosoever believeth not shall be damned Yet the hearer or receiver doth not thereby fully discharge his part unless he understands more satisfactorily than ordinarily men can of themselves their condition under the Gospel For secondly By this Confession to another a man comes better to understand and judge himself as to his Faith and Manners As no man can naturally without the help of Art see his own face nor those eyes which see all things see themselves but by looking stedfastly in the eye of another may So can no man so well at least no not by the glass of Gods word discern those things in himself which are to be seen by anothers eye and therefore it must needs be a means to bring the presumptuous to repentance and the distrustful to a comfortable serenity of mind and consolation Thirdly Confession is not only a sign or an act of Contrition but a proper means thereunto For some there are who come to confess their sins and have no true sense of them others have a real sense which is commonly called Attrition being well assured and convicted by their own Consciences they have done wickedly and broke Gods sacred Laws but there wanting the grace of ingenuous sorrow and an affection out of Charity or Love to God this sense will not avail to obtain pardon at Gods hands wherefore by the wise Ministry of the Confessour as he is called he is to be wrought to a sorrow of love and such as is conceived as well for the evil of sin in it self as the evil of punishment it subjects him unto Whence Chrysostome in a certain place speaketh thus I would have you have a sense of Chrys Tom. 1. pag. 139. your errors by Confession and shew your ingenuity of your selves For though it be a foul errror to hold as many of the Church of Rome do that the very coming to Confession or the customary sentence of the Priest turneth Attrition into Contrition i. e. imperfect and of it self unprofitable sorrow into saving yet the joynt exhortations not to be separated in such cases do tend naturally to the more sincere conversion of a sinner unto God upon the account of vertue it self and the love of Good and of God Fourthly Such Confession is a very notable aw and restraint upon the offender it being too common with us here to fear the eyes and ears of men more than of God And infinite sins we daily commit which if we were thoroughly perswaded should come to the knowledge of Man we would not dare to do though we be assured in general that they must be known to God And 't is an extream folly and direct untruth which some have entertained That we must do things only upon the most perfect principles to the most perfect ends For 't is better a man should abstain from drunkenness to save his purse than not at all And that a child
doth not distinguish there men ought not to distinguish or limit For if it be alleadged that Instruction and Faith ought to go before this Sacrament according to Christs Intention and institution in St. Matthew It is sufficiently answer'd that seeing the Law General by which baptism is made necessary to Salvation hath no exception or condition annexed to it which may concern Infants Infants are therein contained And this implies an exemption from that naturally impossible preparation of Instruction and Faith properly so called And as Calvin well notes Believing Calvin Institut to infant-Baptism is no more requisite than working to their eating and drinking by vertue of the Apostles precept If any will not work neither 2 Thes 3. 10. should he eat Faith and repentance both are required necessarily of such who are capable of them or able to oppose them but of them who are not capable and have no actual sin to be repented of the Act of them who have the Care of them and Tuition joyned with the passiveness or non-remitency of the Infants found a capacity in them But where a Personal power of Willing is found there is exacted a personal knowledge and consent to that Sacrament This will appear from those several reasons built upon the Scriptures First That the Primest antiquity ever so understood the Scripture and practised accordingly Not that Baptism was presently as now administred to Children at their coming into the world seeing Antiquity gives us many instances of such who were not baptized till they came to years of discretion though they were born of Christian Parents For some continued Catecheumenes together with them who were young and Converted from Heathenism unto Christianity Others of purpose and design protracted the time of their baptism upon an opinion that all their Actual as well as Original sins were washed away in Baptism and concluded they had the less to answer for if they were baptized towards the latter end of their dayes Yet though this abuse of Baptism prevailed not upon that opinion only but upon the occasion which was taken of educating and instructing Infidels in the Faith for some good time before they were baptized which custome divers born of Christian Parents imitated yet we find none that the Church wilfully suffered to die without Baptism who were descended of true believers or had been competently instructed in the Faith of Christ which was alwayes according to Christs words intended towards them who had None to resign them up to God and compromise for their due perseverance in the Faith So that there is not the least evidence of Autority ancient in the Church rejecting the baptism of children or denying them to be subjects capable of it And none opposed the same until the year 1030 when Guimund Bishop of Aversa in Campania accused Berengarius Deacon of Anjou for denying Infant-baptism though that opinion was not found directly to be Berengarius's But about the year 1130 this Heresie began to discover it self in France and Germany and was Headed by Peter Bruis and Henricus his Scholar From whom that Faction was called Petrobrusians and Henricians denying withal a Capacity of Childrens entring into the Kingdom of Heaven affirming That only they who were baptized and believed could enter into Heaven But the Waldenses who succeeded them in many of their opinions rejected this their Dogme and so the controversy ceased until the year 1522. when one Nicolas Stork and Thomas Muncer two desperately Phanatical men stirred Sleiden Comment up this opinion and other wicked fancies concerning Civil Government wherein this Latter perished miserably Yet this error was not so soon or easily suppressed but spread farther and continued by the great industry and zeal of Melchior Rinck and Balthazar Hebmaier until about the year 1532 it received its complement from the tongue and hand of Melchior Hofman a Leather-dresser of Germany and so hath been propagated to other places and to this day But not only did none of the ancients oppose Pedobaptism but have declared and proved the use of it As did Irenaus Tertullian Origen Cyprian Augustine and others downward were this a proper place to shew so much We shall rather proceed to those Scriptural reasons inferring this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athan. cont Arium pag. 147. Tom. â— Secondly either all Children must be damned dying unbaptized or they must have baptism The consequent is plain from that Principle in Christian Religion which Anabaptists have been constreined to deny to uphold their other That all sin not washed away or expiated exposes to damnation and the Principle in Christian Religion is That Children come into the world infected with Originalâ—sm and therefore if there be no remedy against that provided by God all Children of Christian Parents which St. Paul sayes are Holy are liable to eternal death without remedy Now there is no remedy but Christ and his death and Passion are not communicated unto any but by outward Signs and Sacraments And no other do we read of but this of Water in Baptism And the invitation of Christ of infants in St. Mathew doth imply a capacity in them of Grace For Mat. 19. when Christ saith Suffer little Children to come unto me and forbid them Mar. 13. 14. not for of such is the Kingdome of God he doth not mock meaning literally that Infants who are not able to go or stand should come unto him on their own leggs So neither doth he mean in the spiritual sense that Children who have neither reason nor Faith should come unto him by Faith before they be baptized but be brought to him by the Faith of others which may profit them who resist not though they seek not that Grace Thirdly They that are of the Covenant and of the Body of the Church really ought also to be formal partakers of that Body and this they only can obtain by being admitted solemnly into the congregation of Christs Faithful and Elect Church As the children of the Israelites were of necessity to be admitted into the number of that Church by circumcision Gen. 17. 14. or be cut off in wrath from them For St. Paul telleth us how the children of the Believers are sanctified by their Parents And how are they 1 Cor. â—7 14. holy but by being separated from unbelievers and solemnly dedicated to God by the Laver of Regeneration And as in the same place the Apostle saith to the Romans If the first fruit be holy the Lump is holy and if the root be holy so are the branches drawing this Literal to an Evangelical sense and meaning thereby that the Parent being of the Election the Child is so and being so ought to receive the sign of Evangelical circumcision Fourthly The Analogy and apt correspondence between the Sacrament of the Law called Circumcision and that of the Gospel warranteth this For that is not true which they say against this That the Precepts of the New Testament
necessary to Salvation are as clear as those under the Old But this is not so clear as Circumcision To which we answer That this is as true taking in the whole manifestation of Gods will For the clearness of the Sacraments enjoyned in the Old Testament do conduce to the clearness of them signified by them And there needs nothing more be said for the clearing of the necessity of these than to admit them to have succeeded those two in the Old Testament And we find not such necessity particularly imposed upon us of receiving the Eucharist as was upon the Israelites of receiving the Paschal Lamb but general necessity without determination of time or place the Gospel expresseth unto us upon the hope of salvation which is sufficient The vertue and Efficacie of this Sacrament above-touched proves this farther but it needs it self be proved according to those extravagant opinions brought by Modern Divines into the Church that it is only a seal of our Faith and eternal Favour of God in Predestinating us to Glory As if First all according to their judgements that were baptized were ordained to Glory and this were assured them by that Seal Or Secondly that God had Predestinated any to Life without the necessary means to it Or that remission of sins Actual and the expiation of Original were not necessary to the entring into Life or that God had so simply and absolutely ordained us to heaven that he had not ordained these two as Means to obtain Perkins on Gal. 2. v. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod Haret Fabul 5. c. 2. this For what can be a more horrible prophanation of this Sacrament then to say with one upon the Galatians We are born Christians if our Parents believe and not made so in Baptism Which is contrary to the Doctrine of our Catechism and the whole stream of Primitive Doctors of the Church from whom we may Gather this threefold Effect of Baptism First it is not only a sign as the same Persons say of our Covenant but it is the Covenant it self made between God and Man For God indeed doth make a Promise but he maketh no Covenant otherwise than by Baptism God made a Promise to Abraham that his seed should be blessed before Circumcision but he made no Covenant with him but by Circumcision nor is any actually in the Covenant of Faith but by being baptized Doth not the Scripture expresly say that God gave Abraham the Covenant of Act. 7. 8. Circumcision Circumcision then was not only a Sign of that Covenant though that it were but an Essential part of it Circumcision therefore was a sign in a twofold sense First in respect of the Covenant under the Law as words whereof the Covenant consists are signs of the Will of the Covenanters to the ear and works outward are in like manner signs of the same to the Eye which sort of signs are not distinct from the thing it signifies For God Covenanted with Abraham that he should use those Ceremonies Now this outward visible Covenant was a sign of an inward and invisible relating to the righteousness of Faith as St. Paul saith of Abraham And he received the Sign of Circumcision a Seal of the Righteousness Rom 4. 11. of Faith So that is the Second way in which Circumcision may be said to be a sign viz. As the whole Sacramental Covenant of which it was a part signified the Covenant of Faith into which we are entred by Baptism as the Jews into the other by Circumcision A Second effect of Baptism is to wash away all sins as well Original as Actual of which that Prophesie of Zacharie is generally understood In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and Zechar. 13. 1. to the inhabitants of Jerusalem For sin and for uncleanness To which St. Paul agrees in his Epistle to the Ephesians speaking of the Church That Eph. 5. 26. he might sanctifie it and cleanse it by the washing of water by the word Where the Word sanctifieth the Water and the water sanctifieth the Person which it can no otherwise do then by washing off the sins of the Soul As St. Peter hath it Not the putting away of the filth of the flesh but the answer 1 Pet. 3. 21. of a good Conscience towards God That is at the time of baptism whereby the filth of the Spirit necessarily implied to make up the correspondence is put away And St. Paul telleth the Corinthians They were washed 1 Cor. 6. they were Sanctified viz. By Baptism But whether Original sin be so far extinguished in the baptized as no more remains should be found is much doubted to which we briefly and clearly answer from the distinction of Sins For sometimes the Cause of sin is termed sin Sometime the Effect of Sin is called Sin whereas Sin is properly the Evil Act it self or the omission of an act due from us Original Sin in us is not so properly called Sin as it was in Adam who actually sinned and that with a consent of his own will But it is rather the Effect of his Actual transgression which doth originally adhere to us and is called sin upon this threefold account First because it is the necessary effect or consequence of Adams Sin as we find Moses to speak in Deuteronomy And I took your sin the Calfe which ye made The Calfe was the fruit of their Sin and Deut. 9. 21. not their sin it self So is that evil Effect the Sin Original because it is the evil consequence of it Secondly It is Sin because it doth partake of the nature of sin in one of the principal parts making up sin They are two The Obliquity of the Act or Deformity and disagreement to the accurate Law of God and the disobedience of the will and pravity thereof This latter original sin as it was actual in Adam had as well as the former but so is it not with us There can be no such disobedience in the Will where there is no Will. There is no will in Infants besides the remote faculty it self and therefore all sin yea all humane acts requiring consent of the Will original sin cannot be sin in this sense But taking sin for a dissonancy from 1 Joh. 3. 4. the Law and Rule as St. John doth and that conformity as is justly required by the Law certainly that Original depravation and corruption found generally in our natures at our first entrance into the World may truly be called sin because it makes us to differ so much from that God made us and intended us to be Thirdly Original sin hath this likewise denominating it sin that it is the cause of sin that original inclination to sin being that which moves us all unto the actual commission of sin which St. Paul surely aimeth at where he saith Now then it is no more I that do Rom. 7. 17. it but sin that dwelleth in
me meaning by that sin dwelling in him the pronity natural which impelled him to sin with such particular dissent and reluctancy of judgment that he could scarce be accounted the principal author of it To these we may add a fourth general event of this original pravity Viz. An hatred and indignation conceived in God against the person so depraved contrary to his institution and mind Now Baptisms efficacy may have relation to all those but not in like manner For it washes away the filthiness of the soul original and actual Secondly It reconciles to God and obtains remission of sin Thirdly It doth not remove or wholly redress the depravation of the soul and the evil tendencies and disposition of it to sin which is the effect of Adams sin and cause of our own actual transgressions This is not destroyed by Baptism but lurks in the soul and like fewel is apt to take fire upon the least spark of temptations which shall be cast into it from outward objects and occasions And though it be so far done away that until such new risings and agitations of the mind it be not imputed yet upon such kindlings it putteth on a new guilt Another effect it hath in reference to actual sins For first by weakning though not destroying absolutely the principle of sin in us a stop and curb is put to sin in its future progressions And not only so but proper means of which by and by are provided in Baptism for the resisting and putting away all actual sins too For repentance being according to the Doctrine of the Ancients a second Plank to save such as are shipwrackt after Baptism either in their holy Faith or holy Life doth effect this no otherwise than by vertue of that principle of life remaining in the soul infused at first by Baptism For as Baptism hath no power to procure mercy at the hands of God towards them that sin after they are so washed and sprinkled without repentance So neither hath repentance sufficient vertue to restore us to innocency and Gods favour unless Baptism goes before because all remission of sins depends upon the Covenant made in Baptism which on our part is either to absolute holiness without sinning after Baptism or to true Repentance for the same A third Effect of Baptism is our Regeneration and new birth or being born again by this Water and the Holy Ghost For as St. Paul saith According Joh. 3. Tit. 3. 5. to his mercy he saved us by the washing of regeneration and renuing of the Holy Ghost A fourth Effect is an incorporating into the body of Christ as well visible as invisible which together with the former is declared in the form of baptism contained in our Liturgy where it is said Seeing now dearly Beloved that this Child is regenerate and grafted into the body of Christs Church let us give thanks c. Which the Apostle intimates when he saith For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Gal. 3. 27. Christ And upon both these followeth a Fifth Effect which is an intitling the Baptized unto an inheritance in heaven For as St. Paul saith If Children Rom. 8. 17. then heirs heirs of God and joint heirs of Christ Lastly As we in baptism are all baptized into one body of Christ so are we into one Spirit For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body saith St. Paul And again There is one body and one Spirit 1 Cor. 12. 13. Eph. 4. 4. 5. even as ye are called in one body of your calling One Lord One Faith One Babtism For the Baptism of our Saviour Christ being the Patern of ours what in a more glorious and visible manner followed upon his Baptism in an inferiour manner attendeth our Baptism It is said by St. Mark And straitway coming up out of the water he saw the Heavens opened and the Spirit like a dove descending upon him Which Spirit doth likewise upon the moving of those waters of New Life descend and inspire the person Baptized In which sense is St. Paul to be understood when he saith If any Rom. 8. 9. man have not the Spirit of Christ he is none of his That is if he be not partaker of the Spirit given in common to all Christians at the time of their Baptism From the foresaid necessity of Baptism is inferred the opinion of the Minister of Baptism making it a work in it self common to all Christians For all things most necessary as in Nature so in Grace are most easie and common As therefore Water is the most necessary thing in the world next to air without which no man can live so long as without water to mans natural substance and therefore is made by God most common to all persons and cheapest of all things to mans Life so doth it agree well with Gods divine Goodness in Religion to make that most common and freest to be attain'd which he hath made so necessary to Life and Salvation The first thing that is necessary to our Salvation is the breath of Gods mouth as the Scripture teaches us to speak the word of God which Psal 33. 6. sanctifies both the person and the Element of Baptism Water which is the Second Therefore I make no great question but as it was free at the very first Publication of the Gospel and so at this day is still in some Cases and in some manner for those called Lay-men to declare the word of God and instruct Unbelievers in the truth of the Gospel which afterward it was restrained to the Sacerdotal Office So upon the foundation of Faith before laid by preaching in all capable persons and incapable by others in whose power they are that it is lawful for them who are no Priests to baptize And the answer to this doth rather explain and confirm than deny it For the Opposers of Lay-mens baptizing say That Preaching is twofold Private and Ministerial and that a man may in Private as Master of a Family instruct others but not Ministerially The distinction it self is ill set together for surely both are Ministerial Acts and more especially that which is denied to be so Private Baptism as having less of Visible power so to do or authority and therefore of an inferiour Ministration But this is just the Case of Baptism For we say not that Lay-men may baptize as Publick and Legal Ministers out of Office but as Private ministers and in extraordinary Cases We bring the example of Zipporah circumcising Moses his son justifying the like power Exod. 4. 28. of Baptizing under the Gospel And they reply nothing hereunto but what makes more against themselves For if she did it as they say in the presence of her husband when there was no need she did it in haste that she might prevent her husband she did it in anger And yet this Circumcision held good and was accepted How much more might it have been
Apostle speaks of the state of Evil or Condemnation in the next of the state of Restitution and Justification For as all persons were included in the Condemnation of Adam so were all included in the Justification of Christ But as of all them only some many were through his disobedience made Sinners that is became such sinners as not to return to actual Righteousness and Salvation so by the obedience of Christ not all who were called and chosen came to Life and Holiness but many only were made Righteous actually and not all Or if we take the word Sin as he of whom we speak doth not so much for the real inward vitiousness of the soul but for any outward defect and which is yet more for the Punishment of Sin in which sense the Sacrifice for sin was called Sin in the Old Law and Christ in the New Testament is said to be made Sin for us that is a Sacrifice for Sin so that to be made sinners should import as much as to be made lyable to the punishment of sin the matter is the same But because this Authour not only inclines to the Opinion of Pelagius and of Socinus after him making the corruption of nature nothing and therefore exempting Infants from any such natural infection as we here suppose but uses the same evasion of Imitation of Adams sin and not propagation as the original of all Evil to us therefore let us hear what St. Austins argument was against that Opinion If saies he the Apostle spake Aug. Epist 87. of Sin by imitation and not propagation entring into the world he could not have said that by one Man Sin entred into the world but rather by the Devil for he sinned before man and as the Wiseman saith Through envie Wisd 2. 24. of the Devil came death into the world And Christ tells us how aptly the Devil may be said to propagate sin by imitation as well as Adam thus reprehending the Jews Ye are of your Father the Devil and the Lusts of John 8. 44. your Father ye will do he was a murderer from the beginning and abode not in the truth because there is no truth in him when he speaketh a lye he speaketh it of his own for he is a lyar and the Father of it And when St. Paul saith We were by nature the children of wrath as well Ephes 2. 3. Psalm 51. 5. as others And the Psalmist Behold I was shapen in iniquity and in Sin did my mother conceive me that these places must be accounted hyperbolical and not to have a proper sense is the special evasion of Modern Wits not comparable to Ancienter Judgments more simply understanding them I know a more colourable interpretation is made by others who interpret Conceiving in sin as relating to the Parents and not to the Children But this is less probable than the ordinary and obvious sense applying it to David For though it may be probable enough that Parents may offend in acts of Procreation and so the child may be said to be conceived by them in sin yet David being at the speaking of these words in deepest repentance for his own sins cannot be said to leave off that subject and to confess the sins of others and charge his parents with that which concerned him not Again when he says He was shapen in iniquity nothing could he say more intimately to signifie his proper state at the time of his first conception But the Scriptures do not only barely say we are originally thus infected and sinful but by the effects and certain other indications declare the same The first and chiefest of which may be Death and punishments sticking close to infants at their birth and even before they come into the world Now the Law of God being unalterable that punishment should follow and not go before sin it must be that somewhat of the nature of sin must prepare the way for such sufferings Secondly That all men come to years of discretion are effected with Actual sin few of the opposers of Original sin deny But according to Reason and Scripture both the fountain being so infected and corrupted whatever flows from it must of necessity partake of the same evil For Job 14. 4. Jam. 3 11 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Anâ—ae Gazaei Thâ—â—â—hrastus Biblioth P P. pag. 392. To. 8. Non eniâ— es ex â—â—lis qui modo nova quaedam gannire câ—perunt dicentes nullum reatum esse ex Adam tractum qui per baptisâ—um in infante sâ—lvatur Aug. Epist 28. Hieronymo Ad neminem ante bona mens â—enit quam mala Omnes prâ—â—ccupati sumus Sen. Ep. 50. Nemo difficulter ad naturam reducitur nisi qui ab â—a defecit ibid. who saith Job can bring a clean thing out of an unclean not one And St. James Doth a fountain send forth at the same place sweet water and bitter Can a fig-tree my brethren bear olive-berries either a vine figs so can no fountain yield both salt water and fresh From whence it follows by way of just Analogy That the Fountain being corrupt there must be derived to the Rivolets the like unsoundness And thirdly we see this by experience that both bodily and mental infirmities and disorders are traduced from Father to Son in actual Evils as the Gout Stone and Leprosie are transinitted to posterity from the Father and Anger and other passions in like manner It may as well be said That the Son hath the Gout and halts by imitation and not by propagation as that such other affections which are common to Father and Son so proceed Fourthly The Argument which St. Augustine could never by the Pelagians be answered taken from Baptism For this they could not deny but the Church universally practised Paeda-baptism that is held an opinion manifested in practise that Children were capable of that Sacrament and received the benefit of it however some particular persons deferred the same and held it of use unto them for the entring into the Kingdom of Heaven Therefore surely there must be some impediment and that impediment could be nothing but what hath the nature of sin in it therefore they bring sin with them into the World Pelagius had a good mind indeed as Austin observed to have denyed the use of Baptism but as bold as he and his great second Julian of Capua was the general Judgment of the Church declared in the practise of it put a stop to his inclinations but Socinus bolder than any Heretick before him sticks at no such thing but flatly denyes the use of it to all but such as are converted newly to the Christian Faith as in the times of the Apostles This was freely and roundly invented and uttered and which suffices alone to convince us of the former errour denying Original Sin which was alwayes held a principal cause of Baptism Lastly Thus much may be observed by natural Reason to the confirmation of Original Sin
which Seneca noted but could give no reason of No man saith he is of a good mind before he is of a bad one we are all prevented And in the same place he saith No body is with difficulty reduced to Nature but he that hath made a defection from it Now supposing that God made all things perfect and instituted the nature of man more inclinable to acts agreeable to that perfection than to the contrary whence can it come that contrariwise Man naturally inclineth to that which is base and unworthy and is hardly taken off that corrupt way of acting contrary to reason and vertue and reduced to a perfection becoming his Institution and End but that the very principle of his nature is hurt and the root corrupt And because nothing can be Author of its own Principles by which it subsists no man can be said by his own act to have corrupted them Indeed we say a Man is of corrupt Principles when he hath contracted some evil habits disposing to wickedness but that is accessorie and not innate to him And if it be farther urged That no man can be guilty by anothers fault nor corrupted by anothers principle it is answered as before so long as it is only that others and not his own in some degree For as Thomas hath distinguished There is a Principle of Nature and a Principle of a Person and a Sin of Nature and a Sin of a Person Adam had not only principles whereby he himself subsisted but also was the principle of all his Successours So that Original sin was as well the sin of the one as the other So that from the depraved will of Adam as the first principle of all came the corruption of the Will of all Whereupon speaking strictly as we have said this Original sin is not properly sin in the Infant but a want of Original Justice seizing him and exposing him to destruction as Thomas and Catharinus also have taught which two are the effects of the sin of Adam upon himself and children but the very formal Reason of sin in his Posterity For where as some say It is natural Concupiscence moving to Evil and others That it is the absence of Divine Justice and Grace they differ rather in the niceties of speech than in the matter it self For to me it seems that the loss of Divine Perfection and Grace superadded to the nature of Man whereby he was abundantly able to secure himself and glorifie God in that state of happiness most neerly expresses the nature of it as in the sons of Adam For in Adam himself it was actual disobedience but Concupiscence inordinate doth rather express the consequence of it For upon that desolation in the soul of Man quickly arose a disorder of the inferiour Affections which by a general name is called Concupiscence or Lust by the Apostle in his Seventh Chapter to the Romans And Natural it is called because as out of the cursed ground sprang up briers thorns weeds and thistles where more useful fruit of the earth was intended so upon this curse of mans soul Evil motions arose to the hurrying him to Actual sin being themselves really sinful Again it is observable for the true resolution of the Question That there is commonly an ambiguity in this tearm Concupiscence it being sometimes taken for the act and exercise of that vitious principle in man fallen and sometimes for the Pravitie and degenerate temper of the soul making it prone to actual sins This latter is that which is properly called Original Sin though more properly Original unholiness or want of that instituted Integrity with which man was at first endowed and in it three things are to be considered First the privation of Supernatural Good Secondly Proneness to unnatural Evil against God Thirdly Odiousness and Culpableness before God who must needs be offended at the sight of so much deformity in his Creature contrary to his first Institution of it and Intention though this evil habitude should never break out into actual Rebellion against him by the exercise or putting it in execution by actual Concupiscence against the Law of God St. James seemeth Jam. 1. 14. to justifie this distinction where he saith Every man is tempted when he is drawn away of his own lusts and enticed This gives us the original Lust or Concupiscence which inclines and moves to sin and to this is it to be imputed that a man so easily is withdrawn from truth and righteousness and noble acts becoming his high nature He goeth on Then when Lust hath conceived it bringeth forth Sin c. that is when the Radical Concupiscence or Concupiscibleness in man becomes impregnated and matured by outward opportunities and occasions of sinning it bringeth forth into outward act sin and the event and consequence of this sin is death So that the innate Lust lurking in the Soul and not actuated by outward occasions either inwardly to effect and desire or outwardly to act sin is not properly sin but metonymically only either as it is the effect of Adams sin or the cause of our sins but it is properly odious to God and exposing us to his heavy wrath so far at least as is seen in the deprivation of that be atitude to which man was at first designed And this exactly agrees with the nature of that sin For as that which was in Adam was actual disobedience in his Posterity is only want of that perfection which was due to their nature So Adam not only incurred the loss of that bliss he was capable of and in the ready way to enjoy but likewise the punishment of Sense answerable to his Sin of Commission and his Posterity was made subject to the punishment and loss of Gods favour and that bliss they were in Adam once ordained unto But when their Sins become Actual they are subject to punishment of Pain and torment for the same And by this the way is well prepared to make answer to that common doubt concerning the effect of Baptism and the state of the Regenerate in reference to Original sin and Concupiscence viz. whether Concupiscence remaining after Baptism in the Regenerate be sin or not Scriptures are alledged with great colour on both sides It is observed by Bishop Davenant that St. Paul calls Original Concupiscence sin in fourteen Davenant Deâ—â—rm â— several places in his sixth seventh and eighth Chapter to the Romans which if so Original sin it self must needs be oftner mentioned in Scripture than will be granted by many For mine own particular I see none of those places so exprest in the description of it that the law of Sin the Body Lex Peccati est violentiâ— consuctudinis qua trabit tenetur etiam invitus animus â—â— merito quo in cam volens illabitur Aug. in Confess Lib 3 c. 5. of Sin the Law of the Members the Lust of the Mind and Flesh and some other expressions to the same effect may not be
all modesty and moderation but what fear of their necks may suggest is laid aside and all become a prey to them that fall into their hands To which may be referred all unjust and unreasonable and tyrannical Laws extorting from Subjects that which no cause requires of which Esay complaineth Thy Princes are rebellious and companions of Thieves Esay 1. 23. And probably may intend to condemn all excessive Fees of Lawyers and Physicians who though they directly rob not men of what is theirs yet discover such unsatisfiedness and ravenousness in their Offices that unless they find unconscionable consideration for their pains they will neglect the trust put in them Secondly to clandestine frauds and cousenages which are committed sundry wayes 1. By direct stealing from another his Goods which being privily acted is called properly Thievery against which God hath specially declared in Exodus 2. v. 2. c. And it is either against the Publick and is called Peculatus or Pillaging when a man robs the Common Stock or uses artifices to refuse to pay those legal dues of Custom or Tribute or other just Taxes made legal by good Authority Many men think it scarce any sin which in truth is a notorious one to cheat the Civil Powers of what is due to them but Solomon implyeth the contrary when he Prov. 28. 4. saith Whose robbeth his Father or his Mother and saith it is no transgression the same is companion of a destroyer And Christ commandeth by St. Paul Rom. 13. to all their dues tribute to whom tribute is due custom to whom custom fear to whom fear honour to whom honour So that there seems to be and really is a justice in giving outward reverence and honour to our Superiours and rudely and stoutly to deny them this is to rob them of their dues before God and to offend against this Commandment Thirdly not to pay what we owe and according to the Circumstances we owe any thing to another and especially to detain the wages of the hireling or labourer from him Lev. 19. 13. James 5. 4. which will cry against the hard Master who delayeth to pay what is earnt according to agreement For as Casuists hath observed He that payeth not exactly according to the known custom and rule though he afterwards payeth all in kind yet in effect he doth not pay all was due seeing many inconveniencies do commonly happen to the dammage of the Creditour upon such delays But that which is most intolerable and unjust is the too common craft of covetous and wicked minds to withold or refuse due payment of debts upon many vain and unconscionable pretences so long till the Credit our becoming almost desperate of that debt shall be wrought upon by fear to abate of his due least he should loose all They who do not pay according to the agreed time ought rather to adde for satisfaction of so long detaining to their debt than to make new capitulations whereby the principal sum should be impaired to the loss of the Creditour Fourthly to use adulterations in Commodities contrary to the common rule and expectations of men is a sort of stealing and unjustice here condemned as to mix and corrupt Wines Siders Money Bread or after the manner of Druggists and Apothecaries to sophisticate any Drugg or Liquor or to counterfeit any more precious thing with a viler and baser is to commit an offence against this Command and no better than stealing in the eyes of God how customary soever this may be and with a seared Conscience and bold face carried on Nay frequently this is worse a great deal than simple filching and stealing in that the bodies of men are often by such sophistications if not poysoned yet corrupted and so ends in a degree of murder and if not for the present and particular mischief yet for the general and gentle deserves the halter and hell no less than direct Thieves and Murderers Fifthly Sacriledge and open or subtile or private alienation of what is devoted to sacred and common ends of Religion and usurping the same to a mans private secular use against the intention of the thing hath this double aggravation above common simple theft First in that what was designed for publick uses and ends is perverted to particular For example Endowments and Donations made to Churches serve not only to the maintenance of that Person who in that capacity possesses them but to the benefit and comfort of all in that district communicating in Spiritual things wrong is done unto all them who upon the withdrawing of such due support want their due ministrations Secondly in ordinary thefts or injustice the matter passes but from secular to secular ends but in Sacrilegious Thefts it passes from one kind to another from Spiritual to Secular or Temporal besides the particular injury done to the Person to whom it is due And whereas it is said in defense of Sacriledge that the owners of such Spiritual Maintenances abuse them themselves by lazy luxurious and other vitious courses contrary to the true end of them all this may be granted and lamented But they who preach up vertue out of such wicked principles and ends should withal consider how this involves the secular as well as spiritual Person For no man hath any legal temporal Right to any estate so far as that it should prejudice the common good And if upon vitiousness of the one the estate he owneth may be alienated will it not hold good in the other And have not the King and Judicial Courts as great power over Temporal estates as Ecclesiastical We can give many instances sacred and humane whereby it should seem he hath greater And would these zealous men for vertuous and sober life hold it reasonable the Estates of Spendthrifts and Drunkards and Whoremasters should be taken from them by violence and given to soberer men I would fain see the disparity This scarce any but sees to the advantage of Ecclesiastical revenues above Secular That if the Party possessing them committeth Treason against his Soveraign neither Religion nor Common Laws do adjudge such Estates to be confiscated to the Crown as they do others which argues that Ecclesiastical Estates are put more out of the Kings power than are Secular and therefore more unreasonably are seized on than these It is true the King is in a more immediate way a Guardian and Protectour of Church-estates than of the Secular but Guardians have no more Interest or intrinsick Right to the Estate they dispose of to the true owner than they have of other mens Or does it at all extenuate the crime that frequently it is committed against such persons as cannot help themselves Yet even cold Friends to the Churches Right in such Cases hath observed and been constrained to confess that the displeasure or to speak without mincing the Curse of God hath pursued those more then ordinary and egregiously frustrated their hopes and expectations who have fingered or
grasped Church possessions great usurpations of this kind serving no farther and doing no more good than a Jugg of Beer doth a good Fellow I will favour mine own Country so far as to forbear all instances might here be given and only mention that I find in Paggius Petrus de Vineis an Italian and prudent Counseller and Secretary to Frederick the Emperour called Barbarossa who had wars with Pope Alexander the Third and advanced far into Italy against him was by the calumnies of the Barbaria Faction intimate and prevalent with the Emperour turned out of office and had for his punishment both his eyes put out But the Emperour afterward being convinced of the wrong he had done him received him to favour again and being at Pisa onwards of his way against the Pope and much pressed with straits how to pay his Army took this Peter into Counsel what he should do to raise moneys Peter answered Your war being against the Church it is good policie and reason to make use of the wealth of it against it self and therefore should do well to seize on the rich plate and wealth of the Churches of Pisa and convert them to your service The Emperour liked the advice very well and accordingly spoiled the Churches of their riches and so raised an Army Which when Peter heard he came boldly to the Emperour and said Now I am revenged sufficiently of you for my two eyes You stirred up to your self the hatred of men but I have made God your enemy through your Sacriledge From this time forward all things will go worse and worse with you And so it fell out for Alexander at length brought down his pride and him to great shame and misery even to be kicked by the Pope But thirdly he that would understand the heinousness of the sin of Theft and the heinousness of all Thefts Sacriledge may for his satisfaction find infinite examples of saddest nature of Gods vengeance against it and the Scriptures thus declareth against them Ecclesiasticus 34. 11. Habakkuk 2. 6. Proverbs 10. 2. Esay 61. 8. Habakkuk 2. 9. c. There yet remains one more abomination to God under this Commandment and that is abuse and injustice in weights and measures contrary to the Law of Nature God and common Commerce which is thereby destroyed God saith in Deuteronomie Thou shalt not have in thy bagg diverse Deut. 25. 13 14 15. weights a great and a small Thou shalt not have in thine house divers measures a great and a small But thou shalt have a perfect and a just weight a perfect and a just measure shalt thou have that thy days may be lengthened in the Land which the Lord thy God giveth thee For all that do such things and all that do unrighteously are abomination unto the Lord thy God And so in Leviticus Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment in meteyard in weight or Lev. 19. 35. in measure Just weights just balances c upon which words Paulus Fagius notes out of Jewish Doctours a fivefold iniquity committed by him that offends in weights and measures 1. He pollutes the Land 2. He abuses or prophanes the name of God 3. He causes Gods Majesty Glory and Presence to forsake the place 4. Causes Israel to fall by the Sword 5. Causes them to be driven into Exile in a strange Land Adde hereunto what Solomon saith against this wicked practise Proverbs 11. v. 1. and Prov. 20. 23. as abominable in the eyes of God above other sins This kind of cheating hath more aggravations of villany than I can stand here to enumerate It is worse then downright common filching stealing and robbing upon the High-way because it extends to innumerable persons more than they do and is seldomer a great deal repented of and consequently more damnable For as the Psalmist saith he flattereth himself in his own eyes till his iniquity Psal 36. 2. be found to be hateful And being infatuated with the stupifying charm of present gain supposeth too often that if he civilly hears Sermons and hath recourse at the last to the Doctrine of Justifying Faith all scores between him and God will be quitted But how much happier how much honester how much holier are they who loose their ears in the publick Pillory than such solemn and grave Cheats in their Shops who loose their souls customariness and commonness extenuating the sin and the course of trading and art of growing rich apace as requiring so almost justifying such abominations But no more though not enough of this We are now briefly to touch and recommend to the true Christian practise not only justice in doing right to all men but doing good to all men Gal. 6. 10. as the Apostle exhorteth and the Rule of Contraries in expounding the Commandments which is that where a Sin is forbidden expresly there implicitly is a vertue commanded as where a vertue is enjoyned there the contrary vice is much more interdicted And surely the first place is here to be given to repentance and repentance of such sin as this doth indispensably require restitution or satisfaction without which if men did not tacitly hold they might be saved by the common false notion of Justifying Faith so many would not shipwrack their Souls and Consciences in acting living and dying in such unjust wayes as are above mentioned Of Satisfaction and Restitution we have already spoken as necessary to Repentance as Repentance is necessary to Salvation and this satisfaction not as relating to God but unto Man wronged And therefore I shall more fully give Saint Augustine's judgment in the Case and so leave it In his Epistle to the Macedonians he writeth thus If what belongs to another Aug. Ep. 54. ad Macedon the ground of the sin be not restored when it may be restored Repentance is counterfeited and not real But if it be real the sin will never be forgiven unless there be a restitution of the thing ill gotten but as I said where it can be restored But besides and above this acts of Mercy and Charity are here required of all good Christians and not only to keep our hands from any open or clandestine violence to others but to extend and open our hands to the benefit and comfort of others Not only are we forbidden to take what is not our own but to keep what is our own so to our selves that the exigencies of our brother and neighbour requiring we should withhold it from him Withhold not good from them to whom it is due saith God when it is in Prov. 3. 27. the power of thine hand to do it And in case of the distress of thy brother that thou hast is in some measure due to him in the eyes of God and by his Law of Charity though not by the Law of the Land In the Ninth Commandment it is said Thou shalt not bear false witness against § IX Luâ—e 1â— thy Neighbour What is meant by Neighbour