founded upon expresse Apostolical practise and implicite Apostolical precept which we are sufficiently able to prove and evince by the collation of foure Scriptures if we were put upon that argument But this would be too larg a digression from the matter in hand Next you come to shew the sense of the commination And here you tell us that Adam did not dye the same day if the day be taken for the space of twelve or twenty four houres This is in plain termes to contradict the scope and sense of the text For there it is expressely said in the very same moment and instant of time in which our first parents did eat the forbidden fruit their eyes were opened and they saw that they were naked Gen. 3.7 If you take this for the eyes of their mind it is most clear that their eyes were opened not onely to see their inward nakednesse in the losse of the image of God but also to feel the guilt of sinne as the just fruit of their disobedience If the opening of the eyes be taken for the eyes of the body then their eyes were opened to see that which they did not nor could see before Their nakednesse before was a nakednesse of honour innocency and righteousnesse but their nakednesse after was a nakednesse of dishonour of misery of sinne of provocation to sin And for the particular time it is expressed in the Comination in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt dye the death And accordingly in the same instant of time when they had eaten the forbidden fruit the eys of them both were opened they knew that they were naked Therefore death misery did seize upon them the same day according to the Commination But because you are so peremptory in it that Adam did not dye the same day if the day be taken for an ordinary day of twelve houres long For the clearing of this I would intreat you to answer me this question why did God appear to Adam in the evening in the cool of the day If you shall say it was to call the man and his wife to account for their disobedience I grant this to be true but it doth not satisfie the question for the particular time He might have called him to account at any other time and what necessity was there that it should be left upon record that he came to judgment the very same day The Lord had said in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt dye the death and the same day that the forbidden fruit was eaten at evening in the cool or wind of the day as the Hebrew hath it the Lord came to inquire after the fact to give sentence and to execute judgment In Scripture where promises or threats are declared to be fulfilled in such a particular time there the Holy Ghost is punctuall in the observation of the time The children of Israel should be in bondage soure hundred years according to the promise Gen 15.13 14. And when that time was fulfilled the very same day they came out of the land of Egypt with their Armies Exod. 12. 41 42. So our Lord and Saviour did signifie to his Disciples that he should be crucified and slain and the third day rise again Mat. 16.24 And how careful are all the Evangelists to repeat the time of the resurrection that it was on the first day of the week the third day after his passion And so in the present case when it is said in the day that thou eatest thereof shalt thou dye the death to the fulfilling of this the eyes of our first parents were opened the very first day And the Lord came to execute judgment upon them for their disobedience the evening of the same day After all this let us now hear what exposition you do give of the text Though Adam say you did not dye the same day as he did eat of the forbidden fruit yet he forfeited his life to the Lord of the great Charter of the world he was then in a capacity to dye he did then fall under the expectation of death As in the English such a man is a dead man because he is condemned by the sentence of the Law That which you say is true and it is in effect that which I teach but according to your sense it is not the whole truth For when the Lord saith in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt dye the death he doth not speak this onely of a capacity of dying but of an actual seizing of death for he was struck with spiritual death the very same day he sinned And for a temporal death likewise though there was not a present dissolution of the soul from the body yet presently he fell under the curse to conflict with Armies of diseases which should never leave him till they had brought him to his grave In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread untill thou return unto the ground for out of it was thou taken for dust thou art and unto dust thou shalt return Chap. 3. ver 19. But now you further adde If Adam had dyed the same day he could not have tilled the ground he could not have lived so long as to see a son of his own To all this I agree if you take death in the most strict sense for the actual dissolution of the soul from the body but what ground have we so to limit the words of the text I have said before that God did smite him the same day with spiritual death and for a temporal death he came under the dominion and reign of it In that famous place when the Apostle saith by one man sinne entred into the world and death by sinne and death hath passed over all men to condemnation Rom. 5.12 He doth here speak of the immediate reign of death Death reigned from Adam to Moses over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression ver 14. And in the close of all as sinne hath reigned to death so might grace reign thorough righteousnesseunto eternal life v. 21. Therfore the same day that Adam sinned though he lived to till the ground and to beget children after his own image yet he and all his fell immediately under the reign of death so that all who are now born into the world infants as well as others are under the reigne of death by the disobedience of the first man Having given the true sense of the Scripture we will take a view of your interpretation And here you say ☞ that Adam did dye the same day though he lived nine hundred thirty nine yeares after And to make good this strange glosse of yours you tell us that God did not prescribe any quantity of houres but hath declared that a thousand yeares are as one day in his account page 118. I must indeed acknowledge that a day is taken sometimes for a year sometimes for a greater revolution of time as may be seen
powers they cannot without a new grace and favour go to heaven But then it cannot presently be inferred that therefore they go to hell but this ought to be inferred which indeed was the real consequent of it therefore it is necessary that Gods grace should supply this defect if God intends heaven to them at all and because nature cannot God sent a Saviour by whom it was effected so far he pag. 15. Now I leave it to any man to judge whither the same mutatis mutandis may not be said of our opinion though infants are borne in Original sin and are by nature the children of wrath yet they may be saved by grace By all this it is evident that we are as faire for the salvation of infants as he is and by the same doore as he goes out we will go out at the same And for the sayings of our writers I have three things to answer First some speak more mildly in the point rather inclining to the salvation than the damnation of infants Junius in his collation de naturâ gratiâ hath these words Nemo nostrum it a fuerit aut furere compertus est c. There is none of ours that is so mad or was ever found so void of reason who would simply affirme infants to be damned They which teach otherwise let themselves look to it by what right they moy do it and by what authority it may be done For although in respect of their own selves and that common nature of ours they may be in a state lyable to damnation it follows not that we should passe the sentence of damnation upon them c. In the processe of his discourse he giveth sundry reasons First the promise of God to believers and their natural seed Secondly his mercy to thousands and that through many descents where the Ancestors have sometimes belonged to the Covenant Thirdly The judgement of charity seeing it is the Lords pleasure to take them away in their infancy we may presume that by that fatherly act of his he intends to receive them to mercy Other testimonies may be brought of such that have gone in the milder way but these shall suffice A second sort of our Expositiors there are that do pitch more hard They say that some infants may go to hell yet they moderate their sentence as Chamier Non abhorret a verisimilitudine paenas eorum esse mitissimas It is very probable their punishments are most mild A third sort leave the matter wholly in suspence they think it sufficient to believe that all infants are borne in a state lyable to damnation they have in them the seeds of all evil yet for all this they conceive that God may shew mercy in and through Christ specially to the infants of such that do belong to the Covenant specially where conscience is made to enter them into the outward visible Church by baptisme And this is all that we will say of this question Leaving this businesse of the state of infants and reserving to God the secrets of election or non-election we will come to the point that is more useful and more easie to be understood And here he questions whether Adam did debauch our nature and corrupt our will and manner by his fall And if he did it he further enquires after the manner how it was done First whether it was done by a natural or physical efficiency of sin it selfe Secondly whether was it because we are all in the loynes of Adam or Thirdly whether was the sentence and the decree of God the cause thereof he hath foure arguments against a physical efficiency which we have in part handled already and shall have occasion to speak afterwards And therefore to avoid repetition we will come to the second branch whether Adam did debauch our nature because we are all in his loynes Against this he hath sundry reasons that follow in order By the same reason saith he we are guilty of all the sins that he committed while we were in his loynes there being no imaginable reason why the first should be propagated and not the rest Answ As I have formerly shewed so I declare againe the pollution of nature can only be propagated from the first sin because in that only Adam did act as a publick man in which sence the Apostle calls him the figure of him that is to come But of this I have spoken already Secondly upon this account saith he all the sins of all our progenitours will be imputed to us because we were in their loynes when they sinn'd them Answ Not so neither for though we were in their loynes when they sinned yet in a strict sence they are only vehicula so many conduit pipes of the conveyances of the nature from the first root To speak properly there are only two roots of the nature Adam the root of corruption to all his branches Christ the root of grace and spiritual life to all his branches If any question be made of the truth of this there is every where in the doctrine of St. Paul an antithesis between the flesh and the spirit between the old man and the new betwixt generation and regeneration betwixt Adam and Christ Between these two there is a plaine opposition in three things in point of justification Secondly in point of sanctification Thirdly in point of the resurrection from the dead And therefore whereas the first man by his act brings us under the guilt of sin the second washes away the guilt of sin by his blood and whereas the first man pollutes our nature and is the root of the corruption of nature the second man sanctifies our nature and is the root of a new nature to all his branches And whereas the first man did bring in death and all the miseries of nature upon our bodies that lead to death the second man frees us from all these by the resurrection from the dead But he further alledgeth Thirdly Sin saith he is seated in the will it is an action and so transient and when it dwels or abides it abides no where but in the will by approbation and love to which is naturally consequent a readinesse in the inferiour faculties to obey and act accordingly and therefore sin doth not infect our meer natural faculties but the will only and not that in the natural capacity but in its moral only Answ Though it be true that sin is principally seated in the will yet we shall finde all along that the Scriptures do lay great weight upon the blindnesse and the perversity of the judgement and as in the old creation so it is in the new The first work that is done is the creation of light Besides the Christ-like disposition is begun and carried on by degrees and all this by the renovation of light The understanding is first enlightned and then the will comes to choose the things of God Further let it be supposed that sin is only seated in the will
Writings considering the greatnesse of his learning the Elegancy of his stile and the favour he beares to the Episcopal cause are like to passe with those that are Friends of that way They whatsoever their interests their Principles do not go in that streame He in many cases is too much for that which is old and they contrarily are too much for that which is new What reasons did first move him to enterprise the businesse he himselfe doth relate in his owne words These things saith he have I chose to say and publish because I finde that the usual Doctrines about original sinne are not onely false and presumed without any competent proofe but because as they are commonly believed they are no friends to Piety but Patrons to idlenesse and dishonourable to the reputation of Gods goodnesse and justice and more to that purpose he hath further explicated page 502. Here I do willingly agree with him that great circumspection ought to be used in the right handling of these things But then on the otherside he hath special cause to beware that he do not turn to the more dangerous extreame Original sinne in that sense as we define it cannot be denyed but upon the denyal many desperate absurdities will ensue We had a conference with the Brethren of the separation at a Neighbour-Towne Anno 1654. February the 22. Because they occasioned the dispute by disturbing the Minister of the place and were so tenacious of the point We did put it upon them to answer the question as followeth If all infants be born free from original sinne when do they beginne to be sinners that we may call them so They told us when they did act sinne We replyed then in all that space of time from the conception in the wombe to their acting of sinne they are all free They answered they are all free we demanded why is it then the peculiar prerogative of Christ if infants in all the forementioned space do partake of the same priviledge To this they said that infants are as free from all sinne as Christ himselfe We told them that we did much admire at the boldnesse of such an assertion They answered set his Godhead aside they are as pure as Christ himselfe was pure We rejoynd why was the Lord Christ conceived of the Holy Ghost and borne of the Virgin Mary To this they made no great Answer And the standers by did seeme to looke upon such a position with a kinde of horrour But as strange as the Tenet is I finde that Doctor Jeremy Taylor the Authour above named doth not shun to say the same thing in effect at least he seemes to go very neare to that coast For in his answer to the Bishops letter he bringeth the Bishop speaking after this manner If there be no such thing as original sinne transmitted from Adam to his posterity then all that sixth Chapter is a strise about a shadow a Non ens Answ It is true my Lord saith he The question as it is usually handled is so For when the Franciscan and the Dominican do eternally dispute about the conception of the Blessed Virgin whether it was with or without original sinne meaning by way of grace and special exemption this de non ente for there was no need of any such exemption And they supposing that commonly it was otherwise troubled themselves about the exception of a rule which in that sense which they supposed was not true at all she was borne as innocent from any impurity and formal guilt as Adam was created and so was her Mother and so was all her family In which words of his if he had said that his owne answer to the Bishops letter was a meere non ens he had spoken more truly for where there is no such thing as the Bishop of Rochester at all what answer can be given to his letter But whereas he stands upon it that the impurity of the natural birth from Adam the root of corruption is a meere non ens what will you make of regeneration and of Baptisme the washing of regeneration Where there is no sinfulnesse in the natural generation what need of Baptisme or regeneration at all Besides the Scriptures do speak abundantly of the putting off of the Old man and of the mortification of the sinne of the nature if there be no such sinne of the nature from Adam the root of corruption this whole work will be de non ente for that which is not true in any sense cannot be mortified at all And whither will this conceipt go at last Further the Saints have been deeply humbled for their birth sinne I was borne in iniquity and in sinne did my Mother conceive me What is man that he should be cleane and he that is borne of a woman that he should be righteons c If there be no such sinne at all these confessions and humiliations will be de non ente The Saints shall be humbled for a sinne and yet no such sinne is to be found In former times there were Thanksgivings for victories over enemies which indeed and in truth were de non ente But here we have Confessions and Humiliations of the same kinde innumerable other absurdities will ensue upon the denyall of such a truth which as I may so say is one of the first magnitude among the principles of the Faith It were good that this learned man and others that are concerned in the point would timely think upon it and be better advised before they go to farie Againe on the otherside I do not deny that the points of original sinne and free-will have been so handled in some systems of Divinity Commentaries and Polemical Discourses that maintaines there hath been a want of consideration sometimes a want of truth What they bring out of the Scriptures truly understood to prove the substance of the Doctrine is sound and good but what is alledged out of the Schoole-men to confirme the same is not alwayes authenick Pauls words do binde the conscience alwayes and at all times but not alwayes as they are delivered in the notions in the tearms and in the method of Aquinus Suppose that Saint Paul was now alive upon the earth and it were laid as a task upon him to reade the whole body of the controversie as it now lyeth between the Dominicans and the Jesuits the Jansenists and the Molinists such a case being imagined we may easily conceive what his judgement would be As he would condemne one part for their dangerous setting up of free-will in derogation to the grace of God so he would not altogether approve the other part for the mingling of spiritual truthes with strange speculations of Philosophy and with Metaphysical quiddities notions and conceptions of their own commenting Doubtlesse he would finde many things in them that would not hold weight with the shekel of the Sanctuary Among our selves also there are some passages that might have been uttered with
greater caution The Treatise of Luther de servo arbitrio is questionlesse in it self a worthy work yet I think that Calvin in his answer to Albertus Pighins did not speak amisse This also is true some things which Luther wrote in a Scholastical kind of way and in a lesse popular style Philip Melancthon by his prudent and dextrous bending it to the milder part did more fitly apply to the ordinary capacity of men and to the common use of life Yet for all this in other places that great instrument of reformation doth so abundantly speak of the freenesse of the grace of Christ to every broken-hearted sinner that he doth satisfie all tender consciences and leave a solid foundation for the endeavour of man Now every one cannot do this for they that follow the asperity and the rigour of Luther in some positions of his cannot with the same spiritual evidence set forth the grace of the Gospel And so it comes to passe that the harshnesse and the incongruity imputed to the doctrine is indeed and in truth no other but the sole defect of the Teacher By right spiritual truths should have spiritual Teachers and spiritual hearers and then a true judgment may be made of the real excellency and worth of them These things considered I do intend to observe these rules in the ensuing discourse First laying aside all nice and curious speculations to retain so much of the termes of the School-men that will serve onely to explaine the doctrine of the Gospel that spiritual things may be set forth in a spiritual manner Secondly my scope the Lord enabling shall be as to speak the pure truth so likewise the whole truth of God When I speak of the impurity of the natural birth then I will take occasion to shew also how this doth referre immediately to the grace that doth regenerate and when I shall have occasion to speak of Adam as a root of corruption to all his branches I shall as carefully remember that this is a counterpane to Christ being a root of grace and spiritual life also to all his branches When it shall come in my way to mention the imperfection of man and the spirituality of the command I shall be as careful to inculcate that which doth answer to it viz. that all help is to be had from the Word of promise When I shall say that a man hath no free-will by nature to that which is spiritually good I shall be as willing to recite the true cause where the freedome is to be had to wit from the Son of God if the Sonne will make you free you shall be free indeed Further where I shall speak of a certain number of elect which the Lord doth decree curtainly and infallibly to bring to glory I shall demonstrate also that this necessity of infallibility doth not nor cannot whatsoever men may think overturne the liberty of the will For those that the Lord hath certainly appointed to salvation he will as certainly first or last sooner or later draw their wills so effectually that they shall freely choose the way and meanes that lead to salvation as the end Those and such liketruths that are usually misunderstood through inconsiderate handling I shall endeavour to represent them in their true beauty For as it is with the members of the body so it is with these myseries of salvation Being considered apart they seem to be deform'd but being put together there is an excellent correspondence and symetry in the whole Finally according to our Saviours rule I shall endeavour I hope without detriment to either part to give to grace that which doth belong to her and to the will that which doth belong to her I would not take the least dramme from the true grace of God so on the otherside I would have the will to work under the grace received These are the reasons of publishing the treatise in these times I rest thine in the Lord N. S. The Arguments of each Book The first Book in Mr. Everards Method Chap. 1. WHat were the causes that gave Adam his being Chap. 2. Wherein Adams abilities did consist Chap. 3. Whether righteousnesse and holinesse be Gods image Chap. 4. Wherein that image did consist that God did create Adam in Chap. 5. Concerning the power that God gave Adam and what is the definition thereof Chap. 6. Adams entertainment in the garden Chap. 7. Free-will in the nature thereof unfolded Chap. 8. How far God assisted Adam or assisteth other men that they might be such free-willers as hath been described Chap. 9. Though God gives power he gives not the actions of obedience Chap. 10. Concerning divers questions with their solutions Chap. 11. Whether Adams sinne or any other mans sinne doth produce death in a natural way Chap. 12. What Adam retained of his forfeiture till his death Chap. 13. Whether Adam did dye the same day that he eate of the forbidden fruit Chap. 14. Whether Adam did dye a spiritual death yea or no Chap. 15. Whether Adams posterity were guilty of his transgression This point is more fully debated The Second Book in the method of the Examiners Sect. 1. WHat places of Scripture they bring to prove the purity of the natural birth Sect. 2. What answer they endeavour to make to the texts alledged by us The third Book in the method of Dr. Taylor Sect. 1. OF Concupiscence and Original sin and whether or no and how far we are bound to repent of it Sect. 2. A consideration of objections against the former doctrine Sect. 3. How God punishes the fathers sinne upon the children Sect. 4. Of the causes of the universal wickedness of mankind Sect. 5. Of the liberty of election remaining after Adams fall The first Book containing the Answer to Master EVERARD concerning the Creation and fall of Man SIR OCcasion being given to me to read over your Treatise concerning the creation and the fall of Adam I shall now endeavour to give you an account what I judge of your doctrine I shall not stand upon every point but onely upon that which is of special moment In the end of your Introduction you signifie the cause of your undertaking in these words Whereby we may be the more enabled to vindicate the Righteous Creatour from many misconstructions which have been for a long time nourished for want of due consideration For the vindicating of the Righteous Creator I shall be no enemy to you so farre as you go according to the rule of the Word and the analogy of faith But I fear under the colour of this pretended Vindication you drive a designe to put Christ out of place Through the whole body of your Treatise you stand upon the purity of nature the denial of Original sin and the improvement of natural abilities We will go in your method and begin with your first Chapter CHAP. I. What were the causes that gave Adam his being HEre you debate the efficient material formal and final
so much light into the heart of the Gentiles to know that they must not steal that they must not defraud or oppresse the Lord also doth give them power to act according to their light in these and such like outward moralities This is clear from the first and second Chapter of the Epistle to the Romanes and it is evident also by that Scripture that God was indeed much dishonoured by their not emproving their abilities which he had bestowed upon them to the bringing forth of such actions of obedience as he had required of them He was angry with them because they did not walk after the light because they held the truth in unrighteousnesse because by oppression and other sinnes they did not answer the Law written in their heart Though in these externals the Gentiles had abilities some way proportionable to the Commands yet in the case of true repentance and turning to God the same Apostle doth drive the Gentiles from all confidence and dependance upon natural ability The whole tenour of his speech is to shew that the proper use of the light which God giveth is primarily and immediately to help a man to judge himself and in judging to see his owne emptinesse that so in the sense of his own misery he may make out for mercy The whole scope then of the Apostle is to shew that Jewes and Gentiles are all under sin that they have no ability of their own and the end is to drive them to a Christ to make up all Next you go to the Parable of the Talents Matth. 25. You reason Our Saviour comes and bears witnesse to the world that he desires no more encrease then the benefit of what he had first given means sufficient to bring forth no more then was answerable to the seed he had first sowen if one Talent then the encrease of one verse 18. The slothful man hides the Lords treasury but verse 30 the Lord presents to us what course he will take with such servants who use such kind of sayings as too many do in these dayes that God would be gathering where he scattereth not but that must needs be a lye for what pleasure could the Lord himself take in any such increase where himself is not the planter page 45. I have often found this Scripture cited by the Arminians yet among them all I never met with any that made so corrupt a use of it as you do Not many years since the learned Chamier treating of the point of free-will did endeavour to shew the difference betwixt the Philosophers and the Jesuites They saith he meaning the Jesuites do admit some kind of grace which never entered into the thought of Aristotle they acknowledge the corruption of nature by sinne which the Philosophe's did never so much as dreame of Tom. 3. lib. 3. cap. 2. sect 9. If this Author were now alive I would gladly know what difference he would set betwixt the Philosophers and the Brethren of the Separation who hold that infants are free from all natural corruption what difference he would set betwixt Aristotles Ethical Philosophie and your Moral Divinitie when you teach that Adams abilities were as good after the fall as they were before But now let us come to clear the Parable of the Talents First suppose by sufficient means you understand onely the supply of the Spirit of Christ how can you justifie this to be a true interpretation that Christ requires no more encrease then the benefit of what he had first given sufficient means to bring forth Will you say that it is absolutely necessary to have the ability in present possession before the command can be given If this be your opinion you must needs block up the right and the true way of bringing a soul to Christ We preach the Law in the spiritual nature of it to a natural man to what end is all this but that by the sight of his own emptinesse by the convictions of the guilt of sinne he may look after a Christ first to justifie and to pardon secondly to sanctifie and to cleanse the pollution of his nature We do not preach the Law to him supposing that he hath ability but the immediate end of our preaching is by and thorough the inward working of the Spirit to empty him of all ability that so he may look to the promise where true ability is onely to be had For the words of the Parable that he gave to every man according to his ability ver 15. We are not strictly to adhere to the letter as though the Lord doth give his grace according to every mans natural ability but it is spoken after the manner of men he giveth his grace in a different measure to some more and to some lesse yet all the ability is from Christ himself And therefore when he that received one Talent accused the Lord for an hard man for reaping there where he did not sowe the answer was thou shouldest have given my money to the exchanger that is though thou hadst no ability of thine own yet if thou hadst gone to the exchanger to the Promiser he was able to make profit of the money he was able to help thee with forreign supply where thine own natural and domestical ability was wanting Secondly whereas you affirm that there are many in these dayes that use such hard kinde of sayings that God would be gathering where he scattereth not and that one day he will call such servants to account I do acknowledge as heretofore so now there are more then too many who do neglect their talent and cast the blame upon God himself But your aime is not so much at these as against others who oppose free-will and your way of setting up the natural ability of man Though some passages in their writings are hard yet if you would compare one thing with another you should find that they do speak of abilities that do answer duties of a word of promise that answereth the word of command of the fulnesse of Christ set in opposition to the sinfulnesse and misery by Adam Doctor Twisse disputing against the Arminians lib. 3. errat 9. pag. 211. doth of all others seeme to tread something hard yet he doth shew many pithie reasons wherefore the Lord may give a command where there is a want of abiliy First saith he men are too apt to trust in their own work to bring them to salvation therefore that they may know the common contagion of Original sinne and thereupon the impotency and weaknesse that hath ensued to all good the Lord taketh this course to shew them their misery Secondly he addeth these words If by the grace of God we know our selves to be no way fit or able to do those things which the Lord commandeth yet by his just counsel he doth command us and by his commands he doth shew what we are indebted to him as Lord Creator and that which we are not able to performe our selves
in the Prophetical Scriptures But the scope of the text is plainly to be taken for a literal ordinary day as we have formerly proved And strange it is that the Lord in the denunciation of judgment should go to the typical and parabolicall expressions used in Daniel and the Revelation and Peters Epistle After this you come to enquire whether Christ by his suffering did not prevent the falling of death upon Adam And you resolve it in the negative For say you either Adam must suffer or the Word of God seeing God had once declared the sentence thou shalt surely dye In case then he should give his Son to prevent the death of Adam there had been a clear contradiction page 119. In the commination there are some things which I do acknowledge to be infallible as the Laws of the Medes and Persians which alter not and therefore to make good the sentence all that are now born into the world after the course of natural generation are borne in the state of spiritual death subject to the miseries of nature and shall inevitably be brought to temporal death at last All these things do hold by vertue of the first sentence yet you must take heed that you go no further because the second man hath all fulnesse of grace to repair the losses brought in by the first By his intervening patience and long-suffering is extended to all the sonnes of men And therefore whatsoever you suggest to the contrary there is indeed and in truth no contradiction between the sentence in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt dye the death and the delay thereof in a qualified sense In some particulars long-suffering may be extended and yet in others there may be a speedy execution of the sentence But you go on seeing God would not have Adam to come near the tree of life therefore he would not have him to be free from death that way page 119. Neither do we maintain that it was the purpose of God to free Adam in that manner that he should not taste of a temporal death He came under the dominion of that death the same day he sinned and the most holy Saints that are must all dye before they can be raised again to set forth the truth and certainty of the Lords commination Yet for all this at present the stroke was stayed by the Mediators blood and long-suffering was extended to men that salvation might be had by the Covenant of grace As for the tree of life it is most true that God did forbid Adam accesse to that tree not absolutely because he would not have him to recover life but because he had provided another way for the restoring of man by Christ the promised seed He would not come to the most extream and final execution of the sentence because his purpose was to have a posterity upon the earth and a seminary for the Church Further you argue there was a necessity for Adam to dye otherwise Christ could not make him alive page 119. Here you mistake the state of the question we agree that Christ did not dye simply to free man that he should not fall into the dust but only to raise him from the dust again It was necessary to fulfill the truth of the commination that Adam should return to dust but it was not necessary that he should return to dust the very same day It was necessary that he should fall under the reign of death and under a necessity of dying the same day he sinned and this to continue to the resurrection of the just Then this mortal shall put on immortality and this corruptible shall put on incorruption 1 Cor. 15.53 The Apostle also saith when he shall change these vile bodies that they may be made like his glorious body Phil. 3.21 All the bodies of the Saints shall be made like the body of Christ as now it is in glory But how did the bodies of the Saints begin to be vile bodies By vile bodies he doth mean these corruptible tabernacles of the soul lyable to diseases and to all the miseries of nature But when did this vilenesse and misery begin seeing they were not made vile by creation They began to be vile bodies the same day that Adam did sin they have been so ever since and they must continue such unto the resurrection and then the bodies of the Saints shall be made conformable to the bodie of Christ in glory Philip. 3 Vlt. CHAP. XIV Whether Adam did dye a spiritual death yea or no IN the discovery of this point you observe this method First you shew what spiritual life is Secondly you resolve upon the question For your description of spiritual life though you miserably confound the Scriptures we will take it in the best sense for such a life as hath the Spirit for the cause Gal. 4.19 John 6.63 Col. 33. But you erre in your application when you use such an expression as this that Adam had not such a cup of water in all his foure Rivers You say also that he could not savour the voice of the resurrection from the dead for the goodnesse of a Saviour must be resented by those that are lost but Adam knew no such need page 122. Your argument is fallacious because Adam had not spiritual life in the same way as the Saints now have therefore he had no spiritual life at all He might have ability to love Christ as Lord Creator Further you say that the voice of forgivenesse of sinne was a stranger to him Well let this be admitted it doth not prove the point neither Sicknesse it self was a stranger to Adam before his fall will you inferre then that there were no herbs for medicine and that the Lord did not create the herb of the field with a medicinal vertue So in the like case what if remission of sinne and the way of pardon of sinne by Christs blood was a thing hidden from Adam as being not compatible with his condition will you inforce from hence a want of capacity in him to understand the mystery of salvation by Christ or will you affirme from hence that he was a meere carnal man before his fall Take heed that by these and such like positions you do not reflect upon God himself The Apostle saith the carnal mind is enmity against God for it is not subject to the Law of God neither indeed can be Rom. 8. ver 6 7. If you go to the Original of this enmity or non-subjection and say it did proceed from the fall of Adam you do agree with us But if you go higher and stand upon it that Adam was a meere natural man by the condition of his creation then you will lay the blame upon God that set him in such a state of enmity and whither will you go in the issue if you maintain such positions as these But to make good your assertion you argue The first man is of the earth earthy the
the holy One of Israel page 126. Sir I would intreat you not to make the doctrine of salvation odious by picking quarrels against words For we do not peremptorily define that there was no other way possible to save man unlesse Christ had stepped in we leave it onely to the Lord himself to judge of the several possibilities of the salvation of man This onely we affirme so far as it is revealed to us the present is the most excellent way to satisfie the justice of God and to shew abundant mercy And though you now as others before you go about to cast an hatred upon the doctrine of the Church in the points of the fall of Adam original sinne free-will and the like I must tell you if you and they would not tear those things asunder which should be joyned together if you would compare one thing with another you should find that there is nothing so deformed in the state of the first man but there is that in the second which will answer all But here is the misery you look upon the mystery of salvation in some broken pieces and parts onely and do not consider the whole compages or sum of the truth in one body We will now proceed to your next Chapter CHAP. XV. Whether Adams posterity were guilty of his transgression IN this Chapter you endeavour to make good the purity of nature and the freedome of all infants from original sin you do not as the Jesuites and Arminians extenuate the matter but after the manner of the ancient Pelagians you deny the sinne of the nature And here you do not go alone The Confession of faith lately set forth by the thirty separate Congregations doth not speak one word of this sin of the nature If we go to the beginning of their book where all other Chatechismes do shew the misery of man by nature they are altogether silent in the point of original sinne In the middle where they speak of the grace of Christ there is not one syllable concerning the grace that doth regenerate or purge out the sinne of the nature In the third and last part of the book when they come to duties after regeneration they speak nothing of the great work of the mortification of the Old man and the putting on of the New man but onely of dipping and baptizing Disciples and of the manner of living in their way of Church-membership And thus one great errour at the foundation doth in a manner overthrow the whole building of the Christian faith And this is the wofull state of the separate Congregations with us Neither are these Churches in so bad a condition but the Examinors and Censors of the late Confession of faith set forth by the Assembly of Divines these clancular Authours whosoever they be have further swarved from the truth ☜ For they in their late Examen do not onely maintain the purity of the natural birth but also have many other positions and damnable tenents I will therefore take the liberty to joyn all together And therefore Mr. Everard where you and they do agree one answer shall serve both and where they have any thing which you have not touched I shall begin with them as assoon as I have ended with you Before I come to answer your arguments let me put both you and them in mind of your sophystical dealing ☞ For neither you in your treatise nor they in their Examen do mention our chiefest argument drawn from Job 3. These are the words of our Saviour to Nicodemus Jesus answered and said unto him verily verily I say unto thee except a man be born again he cannot see the Kingdome of God Nicodemus saith unto him how can a man be born when he is old can he enter the second time into his mothers womb and be borne Jesus answered verily verily I say unto thee except a man be born of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdome of God That which is born of the flesh is flesh and that which is born of the Spirit is Spirit Marvail not that I said unto thee you must be borne again verse 3.4 5 6 7. These words are most plain and significant to prove the impurity of the natural birth and the necessity of the new birth as every one that readeth may easily understand I do marvell then that you should overpasse this place in silence But let us now come to the meaning of the text to prove the necessity of Regeneration our Saviour doth use this medium that which is borne of flesh is flesh Because man is polluted in his natural birth therefore he needs have a new birth By flesh we do not understand that masse and lump of the body which we carry about us for in it there is neither good nor evil but our Lord Christ doth here intend the corruption of nature as it is opposed to the sanctifying work of the Spirit for so flesh and Spirit are commonly opposed in Scripture This may more particularly be seen in Rom. 8. in the beginning of the Chapter Therefore our Saviours argument is much in effect because the nature of man is defiled with original sinne from the very birth the remedy must be proportionable to the disease ☞ it is necessary that every one that shall enter into the Kingdome of heaven must be new born There be divers cause that do bring men to a habit of sinne and there are divers means to be used to break of such habits First men are brought to a custome in sinning by example and therefore the Word commands that we should turn away from such evil communications as will corrupt good manners Secondly men are brought to a habit in sinne by long custome which is as it were a second nature and therefore the Scripture speaks that we should break off such kind of customes by a kind of violence Thirdly men come to a practise of sinne by temptation as Achan saw the wedge of gold and the babylonish garment and coveted it and therefore the Scriptures do every where say that we should resist the temptations of the world the allurements of the flesh and to pray unto the Lord that he would not lead us into temptation These are in part the causes of the habit and practise of sin but they are not the original the principal cause that lies higher in the natural birth There is a necessity of Regeneration by the Spirit because all that are borne in the natural way are defiled with sinne They then who maintain the purity of the natural birth as the Examiners Mr. Everard and the separate Churches do overthrow the doctrine of the foundation of Christ Now Mr. Everard ☞ let us come to your arguments First you say we could not sinne in Adam our souls and bodies were not together in him and how we could commit sinne you know not therefore believe not page 127. But Sir if you would seriously consider
the words of the Apostle Rom. 5.12 by one man sinne entred into the world c. You should finde that all then were in one publick man and sinned in him and this is the reason which the Apostle giveth why death passed universally upon all men because in one all have sinned his one act was the act of all But for more abundant confirmation let us consider the scope of the text The drift of the Apostle is to draw a parallel between both the Adams Frist in those points wherein they do agree Secondly in those wherein they do disagree For the points of agreement the most remarkable to the purpose in hand are these First the two Adams are described as two persons which are the roots to their several and respective posterities The first Adam is a root to all his branches and the second Adam is a root to all branches I marvail then what delusion hath seized upon the Examiners who do positively maintain that the first Adam is not here intended as he was the Father of us all Secondly they are described by the plurality of branches as the first Adam had a multiplicity of branches out of him so the second Adam had a plurality of branches out of him And therefore the Apostle doth elegantly proceed in the collation as by the offence of one many be dead so the gift of grace which is by one man Jesus Christ hath abounded unto many As by one mans offence death reigned by one much more they which receive abundance of grace shall reign in life by one Jesus Christ And so the Apostle doth compare one Adam to one Christ Adam the root of all his branches Christ the root of all his branches Thirdly they are set forth by the passage of the common sap out of each root into its branches respectively And therefore the Apostle speaketh concerning the first Adam by one man sinne entred into the world and death by sinne and death passed over all men The common sap then that passed out of the first man into all his branches is first sinne and then death by sinne By sinne is here principally meant original sinne and all other sinnes that flow from this as the fountain But if further enquiry be made concerning the passage of sin death into all the branches that come of Adam the passage is not all at one and the same instant It is now five thousand six hundred years since the fall of Adam and in all this time original sinne hath been in continual flux and succession As in several generations men come to be born so they actually participate of the sap that comes from the first root The like may be said of the second Adam and of his branches They which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousnesse shall reigne in life by one Jesus Christ ver 17. The sap then that cometh from Christ as the common root is grace and spiritual life this doth flow out of him into all his branches And for the passage thereof it is not all at one time but as men come to receive the gift of righteousnesse and to be born anew they come to the actual fruition thereof For let the death of Christ be never so largely tendred to the lost sonnes of men there is no actual participation of him till he be received by faith The words of the text are most emphatical and significant They which receive abundance of grace and the gift of righteousnesse shall reigne in life As who would say in plainer termes they only shall reign in life by one Jesus Christ who do particularly receive the gift of righteousnesse which is generally offered This is the undoubted meaning of the text And therefore for you to say that we could not sinne in Adam our soules and bodies not being in him how do you answer the scope of the text by the disobedience of one many were made sinners by one man sinne entred into the world Adam is here set forth as the root of all his branches and al the branches were in him as the first publick man What can you or the Examiners say to this 2ly you say that we had no Law in Adam Now where there is no Law there is no transgression if we had received any Law it must have been made known to us but there was none made known to us and therefore there was no Law page 127. To this I rejoyn ☜ if there was no Law given to us in Adam how come we to be guilty of his transgression how come we to bear the burden of his sinne why doth the Apostle speak so plainly by the disobedience of one many were made sinners We must then necessarily come to affirme this for a truth that the Law was given to Adam as a publick man and in him to all his posterity And whereas you say that there was no Law made known to us at that time therefore we had no interest in the Law why do not you infer by the like reason when the second Adam the Lord Jesus Christ suffered death upon the Crosse because at that very time the merit of his death was not made known you had no part or portion in that death which was one thousand six hundred years before you were born If you will be loth to stand to the latter to lose your priviledge by the second Adam I pray you give us leave to maintain the dammage that was brought in by the first Adam And yet further to take away all scruples from tender consciences if it might seem harsh for all the sonnes of men to perish by the disobedience of one man especially when the Law was not made known to them in their own individual persons but in the common root of all mankind let us consider how the second man came as a remedy to free the same miserable sonnes of men from the state of sinne and death especially when they neither thought nor knew any thing concerning the means of their salvation The greatnesse of our misery by Adam doth amplifie and set forth the merrit of Christ in the fulnesse thereof Now then when the Examiners and you both go about to extenuate the misery of the fall you do rob Christ of the glory of his grace You say The branch hath not any thing but what it hath by dependance upon the tree Now it is not so with us for that which we call the Principal part of man his soul or spirit was not dependant upon Adam but had his dependancy from the very same fountain from whence Adam received his even from God himself p. 128. Here I confess there is a great question concerning the manner of the propagation of Original sin and men do wearie themselves very much to find out whether the soul be by infusion or by traduction But I see no cause why we should intangle our selves in that difficultie ☞ For whether the soul be infused or
none have the guilt of Adams sinne but such onely that partake of his nature For in the next Chapter when the Apostle cometh to speak of sanctification he hath these words know ye not that our Old man is crucified with him that the body of sinne might be destroyed Rom. 6.6 By the old man he means the sinful disposition of the flesh derived from Adam the root of corruption So then the Scripture plainly doth shew that the opposition between both the Adams doth not onely stand in imputation of guilt but also in the propagation of the nature And it is a great wonder that any exception can be made against so plain a truth Thus I have passed through all the material objections and we have seen all of moment that can be said if it might be possible to take this Scripture out of our hands Now he comes to forme the state of the question to shew how farre he allowes original sinne and where he differs from us Because this is the foot of the work let him deliver himselfe in his own words Adams sinne saith he was punished by an expulsion out of Paradise in which was a tree appointed to be the cure of diseases and the conservatory of life There was no more told as done but this and its proper consequents He came into a land lesse blessed a land which bore thistles and bryars c. And then he addeth thus death came in not by any new sentence or change of nature for man was created mortal and if Adam had not sinned he should have been immortal by grace that is by the use of the tree of life and now being driven from the place where the tree grew was left in his own natural constitution that is to be sick and dye without that remedy And he further explaineth himselfe pag. 372. This evil which is the condition of all our natures viz. to dye was to some a punishment to others not so It was a punishment to all that sinned both before Moses and since upon the first it fell as a consequent of Gods anger upon Adam upon the latter it fell as a consequent of that anger threatned in Moses his law But to those that sinned not at all as infants and innocents it was meerly a condition of their nature and no more a punishment than to be a child is It was a punishment of Adams sin because by his sin humane nature came to be disrobed of their preternatural immortality and therefore upon that account they dye But as it is related to the persons it was not a punishment not an evil inflicted for their sake or any guiltinesse of their own properly so called And then going on he saith we finde nothing else in Scripture exprest to be the effect of Adams sin and beyond this without authority we must not go Turning his style against us he addeth other things are said but I finde no warrant for them in that sence as they are usually supposed and some of them in no sence at all Then he cometh to particularize The particulars saith he commonly reckoned are that from Adam we derive an original ignorance a pronenesse to sin a fomes or nest of sin imprinted and placed in our souls a losse of our wills liberty and nothing else left but a liberty to sin which liberty upon the summe of affaires is expounded a necessity to sin and the effect of all is we are borne heires of damnation These are the particulars which he excepts against and these he endeavours with all his might to oppugne we will go in the same method as he doth beginning with original ignorance he thus speaketh It is true saith he that we derive it from our Parents I meane we are borne with it but I do not know that any man thinks that if Adam had not sinned that sin Cain should have been wise as soon as his navel had been cut Answ We cannot so precisely determine what Adams children should have been in innocency because he did not continue so long to beget a child in that pure estate yet I think none may doubt had he begotten children in that estate he had conveied the same image of God the same knowledge respecting the kind of it that himselfe was created in And though in respect of actual knowledge Cain should not have been wise as soon as his navel was cut yet in respect of potential knowledge he should have been borne in a capacity and by degrees should have attained the same knowledge as Adam himselfe was created in But he further argues If he had so great knowledge saith he it is likely that he would not so cheaply have sold himselfe and all his hopes out of a greedy appetite to get some knowledge Answ The Apostle St. Jude tells us The Angels that left their first habitation are kept in chaines of darknesse to the judgement of the great day v. 6. Shall we say then because they did so cheaply leave their first habitation was there no such dignity or excellency in it The way of reasoning is one and the same in substance He goeth on The state of ignorance we do derive from Adam as we do our nature which is a state of ignorance and all manner of imperfection but whether it was not imperfect and apt to fall into forbidden instances we may best guesse it by the event Answ We may guesse by the event that he was made in a state from which he might fall but this doth no way hinder his being a spiritual man or that endowment of spiritual knowledge which he had before his fall First by his fall he did lose in his judgement he and all mankind did fall from faith to unbelief and hence it is that ever since for happinesse all men rely upon their own wit learning beauty strength friends riches nobility c. This plainly sheweth that Adam at the first was made in a state of dependance upon the true God which could not be but he must be endued with a great measure of spiritual knowledge and in his judgement at least he must discerne that excellency that is in God Further the Apostle speaketh ye have put on the new man which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him Col. 3.10 By knowledge he doth not point so much to that which is literal hystorical and textual but to that which is spiritual by which the Saints come to be cloathed with a new nature Secondly he saith is renewed which importeth the restitution of that knowledge that man once had but had lost by his fall In a sence therefore we may say that the knowledge of the Saint is a kinde of remembrance and that saying of Plato is not to much out of the way Thirdly is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him This plainly sheweth that in the old and the new creation a man is made after the image of God and this image doth
Great difference is to be made between the will of other sinners and the will of the first man The will of other sinners doth only redundare in personam it doth encrease the habit of sin in their own persons alone the will of the first man did redundare in naturam it did vitiate and deprave the whole nature as we have formerly shewed And yet thirdly whereas he saith that sin doth infect the will not in its natural capacity but in its moral only This expression of his must under favour be taken with a graine of salt We do willingly yield that the will is morally or rather spiritually corrupt because she wents that holinesse that purity and righteousnesse which the law requires yet if we look to the reasons of things the corruption was brought into the will by the fall of Adam They then do not speak improperly that call the corruption of the will pravitatem physicomoralem It is a moral depravation because it is against the rectitude of the moral law it is a natural depravation because it flows from the first man as the root of corruption For the proofe of the latter let us have recourse to that place of the Apostle ye have put off the old man with his deeds and have put on the new man In these words of his there is a direct opposition between the old man and the new By the old man he meaneth the pravity and corruption of nature which though it hath had its being in hundreds thousands and millions of men yet originally all comes out of one root In this regard the whole nature is called by the title of the old man So proportionably the Christ-like disposition though it hath been diffused into infinite persons who have lived in several ages of the Church yet the whole nature doth originally proceed out of one root and therefore in this regard is elegantly called by the title of the new man Secondly the opposition is between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their being uncloathed and their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their being cloathed upon By this way of expression the Apostle doth insinuate the corrupt disposition of the flesh is that which the soul is cloathed upon which cloathing she had from Adam the root of corruption Now the believing Colossians because they had a living principal within and had begun to put off and did so continue in putting off the old man he speaks of it as a work already done ye have put off the old man with his deeds So likewise the new nature or the Christ-like disposition is here resembled to a garment with which they were cloathed upon because they had begun and did so continue to put it on by degrees he doth speak of it as a matter already effected ye have put on the new man From all which we gather the pravity of the will though it be in its own nature a moral or rather spiritual obliquity Yet respecting the cause it proceeds from Adam the root of corruption If this truth be not admitted we shall crosse and hinder the very chief designe of the Gospel For the corruption of nature being laid in the first Adam it doth cast us all upon the seeking longing desiring the new nature that is to be had from the second Fourthly saith he to him that considers it it will seem strange and monstrous that a moral obliquity in a single instance should make an universal change in a natural suscipient and in a natural capacity Answ This is no more strange then true we say that Adams disobedience was a moral obliquity and he by that single act of his did cause an universal change in the whole nature of man By it the souls of men come to be cloathed upon with the habit of sin and their bodies with corruption And if he or any man else shall marvel at this they must upon this account wonder at the chiefe foundations of the Gospel For we will not doubt to say in the parallel case as the Lord Christ did humble himselfe to the death of the crosse it was in genere moris a moral obedience he did obey the command of his Father Yet by this one act of his he did make a change not only in a moral but also in a natural suscipient he did a thing by and through which the souls of the Saints may be freed from inward pravity and corruption and their bodies raised from the dead at the last day Phil. 3. ult Fifthly He reasons no man can transmit a good habit a grace or a virtue By natural generation as a great Scholars son cannot be borne with learning c. and how can it be that a naughty quality should be more apt to be disseminated than a good one when it is not in the goodnesse or badnesse of the quality that hinders his dissemination but its being an acquired and superinduced quality that makes it cannot naturally descend Answ We willingly yield that a good quality is as apt to be disseminated as a bad and therefore had Adam stood he had disseminated the image of God to the posterity that did come of him But seeing that he fell by his fall he doth now disseminate Original corruption to all his branches Further though Adam doth disseminate corruption by natural generation mankind is not left under an absolute necessity of perishing as long as a second Adam is prepared to disseminate grace and spiritual life by regeneration Excellent is that speech of Hillary upon the fourty eighth Psalm Quoniam animarum medicus non venit vocare justos c. Because the Physitian of souls came not to call the just but sinners to repentance therefore he ordained that whatsoever was worst in every company should be soonest called Of all men living upon the earth the heathen were the worst yet they were the soonest called Further whereas our Author saith that a great Schollars son cannot be borne with learning and the child of a Judge cannot upon his birth-day give wise sentences the reason is plaine personal priviledges and acquired habits do not naturally descend But with the two Adams the case is far otherwise for they have a nature to communicate to all their branches The first doth communicate it by generation the second by regeneration as we have formerly proved And whereas he argues How can a quality morally bad be directly and regularly transmitted by an action morally good and since that neither God that is the Maker of all doth amisse and the Father that begets sins not and the child that is begotten cannot sin by what conveyance can any positive evil be derived to posterity To this we say that the body and the soul are both the workmanship of God yet both may be made the subject and the seat of sin through the temptation of Sathan and a vitious propagation Neither is the evil any way to be ascribed to the Creatour but to the temptation of Sathan and the
disobedience of the first man Augustine speaks to good purpose Sic ego tibi rectissime dico malum cum quo nascitur homo c. Thus I do most rightly say to thee that the evil with which a man is borne is not of the fruits bodies sexes conjunctions of which goods the Lord is the Author but of the first sin which is to be ascribed to the devil Here he doth distinguish between the work of creation and so God is the Author of all that good that was made in the beginning and the sinfulnesse of nature that he will have to spring only from the devils temptation and the disobedience of the first man Sixthly how can it be saith he that the Father that contributes nothing to the production of the soul should contribute to her pollution and he that did not transmit life how should he transmit his sin Answ Though the Father doth not contribute to the soul in her production yet he doth contribute to the soul in her union with the body So by this account the action of God is terminated in the simple being of the soul The action of the Parent is her being in the body that is in her union with the body But if it be here alledged that a man is principally a man in respect of his soul and therefore if the Parent doth not contribute to the soul he doth not contribute to the being of a man the answer is plaine A man is not a man neither by the soul apart nor by the body apart but by the whole humane nature which doth consist in the union of both we see in ordinary experience as children derive their inheritances priviledges nobility and such like from their Parents so also their Parents miseries infelicities poverty and ignobility do naturally descend In the present case I demand how do they descend will any man be so curious to hold a dispute whether they do descend from the body or the soul of the Parent Or whether is the soul the first seat or receptacle of nobility or ignobility or doth the right to the fathers inheritance descend from the fathers body or the soul In the affaires of this life it is not usual with men to spin out themselves with such philosophical niceties The skilful in the laws conceive it is enough in the general to say that such a Son did come out of the loynes of such a Father Why then should the learned man with whom we have to do be more curious in the conveyance of original sin why should it not be enough for us to say that that which is borne of flesh is flesh Joh. 3.6 Suppose for the manner of the thing we are not able to satisfie the doubt shall we deny the thing because we are not able to explaine every punctilio why by the same reason doth not he himselfe deny the motion of the Sun the ebbing and the flowing of the sea the organizing of the infant in the mothers womb in these and a thousand more the thing is cleare when the manner doth lye in the dark Seventhly saith he If in him we sinned then it were just that in him we should be punished for as the sin is so ought the punishment to be Answ If he will stand to this rule he both doth and will make good that which is asserted by us The disobedience of the first man must be imputed to all his posterity because he is the head the root and the representative of the whole nature But if he thinks this to be a meer non-ens then let him say that the obedience of the second man as the head-root and the representative of the whole nature is a non-ens and a nullity also and so he will raise the Gospel to the foundation thereof Now we come to the third question to enquire whether Adam did debauch our nature by the sentence and the just judgement of God and here he layeth down this for a sure ground He and all his posterity were left in the meer natural estate that is in a state of imperfection in a state that was not sufficiently instructed and furnished with ability in order to a supernatural end whether God had secretly designed mankind Answ In this expression of his we know no such state of meer imperfection which is not also a state of corruption Againe in this expression he seemeth to me to pluck down that natural ability of the will which he endeavours to set up For if a man since the fall is not instructed and furnished with abilities in order to a supernatural end he must come to Christ only for the supply of all Why then doth he raise all this dust against the rigour and severity of our doctrine when he himselfe doth here plainly teach that the will can do nothing without the help of the Spirit He goeth on It cannot be supposed saith he that God did inflict any necessity of sinning upon Adam or his posterity because from that time even unto this day he by new laws had required innocency of life or repentance and holinesse Answ The consequence is not good for now since the fall the Lord doth not give laws in proportion to natural ability but in relation to his own word of promise and his free mercy in the Covenant of grace So far then it is a testimony of divine favour that God will employ us and require more service of us that where we have no strength of our own we may in the sence of our own natural weaknesse go to him for help And whereas he bringeth us speaking in this wise that it is just with God to exact the law of man even where he is unable to keep it because God once made him able but he disabled himselfe True indeed this is an answer given by us but it is not the whole nor the principal part of that answer which may be given For secondly where God doth require subjection to his law man being not able to performe it his demand is not irrational For though man is not subject nor in himselfe can be subject to the law Rom. 8.7 This non-subjection doth not so much arise from the want of judgement will or any other natural faculty as from a perverse sinful habit that doth reside in the faculty That a drunkard cannot stand walk nor performe acts of reason as an other man is not simply for want of ability as from an evil distemper that doth suspend the operations of the faculties so it is in the present case men need no new faculties but they need new habits to set the faculty aright But our third answer is though a man naturally cannot be subject to the law respecting the evil habit that disorders the faculty yet if he go to Christ in the sence of his own misery all ability is to be had from him God is so infinitely gracious that he is ready to help all that come to him A bruised reed he will
cannot understand the justice of it because we were not personally guilty why by the same reason doth he not wholly exclude us from having any part of share in the benefit of the death of Christ For what personal act or concurrence have we to the suffering of that death And whereas he alledgeth the ensamples of Pausanias the Grecian General Avidius Cassius and others that would not punish the children for the fathers offence We acknowledge the rationality and the equity of such proceedings but what is this to the case in hand The Law was so given to Adam that was never given to any else but to Christ alone It was given to him as the Headman and the root of the nature If he fell all must fall with him Neither is there any hardnesse or harshnesse in this doctrine as long as the misery by one doth open a door for the grace by the other He goes on If God saith he inflicts this evil upon Adams posterity by using his own right of power and dominion which he hath over his creatures then it is a strange anger which God had against Adam that he still retaines so fierce an indignation as not to take off his hand from striking after five thousand six hundred years and striking him for that of which he repented him and which in all reason we beleeve he then pardoned or resolved to pardon when he promised the Messiah to him Answ If he would but remember himself what he speaks elsewhere he shall finde that he saith the same in effect as we do For though in his further explication page 453. He affirmeth that Adam was made mortal and proves it by his eating and drinking his sleep and recreation by ingestion and egestion by breathing generating and the like which immortal substances never do Though by these and such like mediums he endeavours to prove the mortality of the state in which he was made yet in the same and other places he doth acknowledge that the untimelinesse and infelicity of death came in by the fall By the fall he tells us that Adam was cast into a place of labour and uneasinesse of bryars and thornes ill aire and violent chances The woman was condemned to hard labour and travell and that which troubled her most obedience to her husband c. Now let us take the misery brought in by the fall in such a low and diminutive sense that he would take it It is now above five thousand six hundred yeares that mankind hath been under the miseries and infelicities of death all this while they have continued in a place of labour and uneasinesse of ill aire and hard chances the woman also besides the paines and peril of child-birth hath been subject to her husband for five thousand six hundred years and yet she knows no end of her apprentiship As strange as the anger is against Adam and his posterity he must needs say the same in effect as we do But to give a positive answer These miseries brought in by the fall of Adam have continued and must continue to the end of the world Neither is it a strange thing that the Lord should continue his anger seeing by the continuation thereof he doth continue to drive men to Christ If he pleased he could immediately take away all these miseries brought in by the fall But for most excellent ends to humble men to pluck down their pride to beat them out of their carnal security he doth rather suffer them to abide And for the case of the woman The Apostle doth not deny her pains and perill of child-birth to come in by the fall but then he addeth they shall be saved in child-bearing if they continue in the faith 1 Tim. 2. last Notable to this purpose is that speech of Augustine to Julian the Pelagian est enim aliquid in â—bdito alto ejus consilio c. There is therefore a reason in his hidden and deep counsel why so long as we live in this mortal flesh there is something in us against which our mind may conflict there is something that we may say forgive us our trespasses And a little after therefore it is done in the place of our infirmity that we should not live proudly but should live under a daily need of remission of sinnes Much more to the same purpose What he addes is monstrous false It is not easily saith he to be imagined how Christ reconciled the world unto his Father if after the death of Christ God is so angry with mankind so unappeased that the most innocent part of mankind may perish for Adams sinne and the other are perpetually punished with a corrupted nature a pronenesse to sinne a servile will a filthy concupiscence and an impossibility of being innocent that no faith no Sacrament no prayers no industry can obtain pardon from this punishment Answ It were a very happy thing if this learned man would once think that there were a ninth commandment and that he would make conscience of bearing false-witnesse against his neighbour We say as the case now standeth men are pestred with a corrupted nature with a pronenesse to sinne with a servile will but that there is no remedy to bring us out of this evil this was never affirmed by us There is in the blood of Christ that which will take away the guilt of sinne in the Spirit of Christ to free us from the bondage of corruption and also in his power to raise our bodies at the last Onely it is the good will and pleasure of God in the whole Oeconomy of the salvation of man that we should wait till all these things be fulfilled That is a most sweet passage of Bede taken from some ancienter Authour No man saith he taketh away sinne which the Law although holy and just and good could not take away but he in whom there was no sin Now he taketh away sinnes by pardoning those that are done and by assisting us that they may not be done and by bringing of us to the life where they cannot at all be done and so we are come to an end of this Section SECT 4. Of the causes of the universal wickednesse of mankind In the beginning he doth take upon him to propound an objection If there were not some common principle of evil introduced by the sinne of our parents upon all his posterity how should all men be so naturally inclined to be vicious To this he endeavours to frame many answers First saith he if we will suppose that there must be a cause in our nature determining us to sinne by an unresistible necessity I desire to know why such a principle should be more necessary to us than it was to Adam Repl. As I have said before Adam had onely a possibility to sinne he did sinne so that he had liberty and freedome not to sin But as the case now standeth we can do nothing else but sin It is true in the particular