only He did shed his blood not onely to obtain a possibility for them but that they may be certainly and insallibly brought to glory Hence is it that he speaketh concerning his sheep for whom he dyed in a special manner My Father that gave them me is greater then all and none can take them out of my Fathers hands Joh. 10.29 And in another place who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods elect it is God that justifieth who is he that condemneth it is Christ that dyed Rom. 8 33 34. The death of Christ for the elect is not only to obtain salvation upon termes of repentance and faith or other general fruits of his death but it is certainly and infallibly to bring them to salvation In relation to this peculiar love the Apostle saith Who shall separate us from the love of Christ Rom. 8.35 And our Saviour John 10.28 I will give them eternal life and they shall never perish neither shall any man be able to take them out of my hand He speaketh these things of his sheep for whom he had layed down his life in that special sense mentioned before Having thus cleared all your Objections in this Chapter we proceed to the next CHAP. XI Whether Adams sinne or any other mans sinne doth produce death or condemnation in a natural way TOuching the manner of the thing how sinne doth cause death whether death be the natural fruit of sinne or whether it doth meerly depend upon the will of him who hath threatned to punish sinne with death is much disputed But Mr. Everard leaving that which may be supposed it is too too plain in this Chapter that you mainly drive at this to prove that sinne is not the meritorious cause of death and that Adams sinne was no cause of his condemnation And then afterwards going to discover the causes of judgment you tell us for the efficient cause God is onely the contriver who doth inflict punishments For the material cause the creatures are the onely instruments For the formal it is the manner of judgment coming upon men the fire by burning the water by drowning For the final it is the declaration of the justice of God upon the contemners of his grace And so you conclude That sin sinne is no cause of punishment neither efficient material formal nor final page 95. 96. And for the meritorious cause You say also that sinne doth not merit death but it doth onely prepare fit and qualifie a man for death as grace doth for eternal life page 106 107 108. You do not shunne to tell us in the last two lines of the Chapter speaking of eternal life and eternal death That God is as simply and entirely the Author of the one as of the other Page 108. In opposition to all this I do affirme that sinne is the meritorious cause of death and death is the fruit of sin Let us consider the Scriptures and let us vindicate them from your cavils First it is said the wages of sinne is death but the gift of God is eternal life Rom. 6.23 From hence it is plain that eternal life sanctification of the Spirit belief of the truth and all other things that tend to salvation are the meer gift of God but the wages of sinne is death If death be the wages of sin then sinne must be the meritorious cause of death But say you Though death be the wages of sinne yet it is not the fruit thereof page 91. Though in some cases we may call that the fruit which is not the wages yet in the sense of the text the wages and the fruit are all one Read but the words going before What fruit had you then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed the wages of sinne is death The fruit and the wages are all one and the sense of the whole text is this that sinne is the meritorious cause of damnation For the second Scripture Rom. 8.6 To be carnally minded is death but to be spiritually minded is life and peace Here say you If it be death it self it cannot be the cause of death But Sir you are to look to the sense and not to the strictnesse of the letter In strict termes you cannot say that to be spiritually minded is life and peace In this life many that are truly spiritual that have the reality of grace in their heart have not the peace of grace The meaning of the text is briefly this that as peace and life doth follow a spiritual mind so death doth follow the carnal mind as the wages and fruit thereof But here you shew your skill at catch-ball I confesse say you that he who walketh carnally to his end shall receive eternal death so he that lives a spiritual life shall enjoy everlasting life But neither the death nor the life were any branches produced by either for they came both from God And as God hath no desire that any man should sinne so sinne hath as little desire to receive punishment pag. 92. Still you go on in the same way of sophistry We willingly agree that he who walketh spiritually to the end shall receive eternal life because such walking is the way to eternal life But the carnal walking is not only the way that leadeth to death but by a Metonymie the effect being put for the cause it is death it self or in the way of causality a carnal mind is that which produceth death and death is the fruit thereof But whereas you affirme that neither death nor life are branches produced either by carnal or spiritual walking in this you erre For though a godly walking is not the meritorious cause of eternal life yet a carnal and sinful walking is the meritorious cause of eternal death Why else should it be said The wages of sinne is death Masters use to pay their servants their wages at night in relation to that which they have deserved in the day and for a weeks work they pay them commonly at the end of the week The payment of wages hath near relation to the labour of the hireling that hath deserved it And therefore the Scriptures do use this expression the wages of sinne is death shewing that sinne is the meritorious cause of death and death is the desart of sin And for that expression of yours that death is no branch produced by sin ☞ but it cometh meerly from God who inflicteth death this I think no pious man can look upon but with a great deal of horror What is this but to transfer the cause of death upon God onely But if to mend the matter you shall say that God doth inflict death as the just punishment of sin in so saying you contradict your self and blow up your own position For if God doth inflict death as the punishment of sin then it will follow that sinne is the meritorious cause of death and death doth not onely come from God but also from the sinner who hath
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
same spiritual drink for they drank of that rock which followed them and that rock was Christ 1 Cor. 10.4 5. Further after the fourty years pilgrimage were ended the Lord doth promise that their Convoy should not leave them but that he should go before them and drive out the Canaanites because it was not in their own power to bring the land into subjection This is the Lords promise and therefore in sense and substance the Angel must do the whole work Secondly let us consider what is the duty of the people and that is contained in these words Beware of him obey his voice provoke him not c. Because they did wholly depend upon him for all therefore they should be careful to observe him and to follow him in his leadings The force of the reason is the same in the words of the text work out your salvation with fear and trembling because God works in you the will and the deed because his Spirit is all in all the cause of mans salvation to carry on the work because his Spirit doth convince reprove teach comfort seal and guide the Saints therefore they should walk tenderly and carefully toward him The Apostle saith grieve not the Spirit of grace by which ye are sealed unto the day of Redemption Ephes 4.30 In case they do with him as disobedient children do with their parents when they give them good counsel the Spirit will neither comfort nor seal them any more but will leave them to a state of darknesse and discomfort And this is the true meaning of the text We may hereby understand how God doth carry on the whole work of salvation and this doth no way impair or diminish the endeavour of man In the close of all you tell us Let us say with the Apostle in our hearts that we desire to strive with dayly labourings according to the mighty workings whereby he worketh in us Col. 1.29 And do not say any more it is God that worketh our actions but be thankful to him that giveth us sufficient means Page 63. You have heard before that the Lord doth work in us the will and the deed and therefore the spirituality of the action is wholly from God though we are free workers by the help of his grace But let us take your words in the fairest construction If you will stand firmly to this principle that God gives sufficient means by a power working in us you need not fly to the purity of nature to natural free-will and to such like beggerly rudiments to salve the endevour of man In this place you seem to speak for grace when elsewhere through your whole treatise you drive the bargain altogether for the natural abilities of the will But seeing you have offered this text to our consideration we will endeavour to draw from it the concord betwixt the grace of God and the endeavour of man The words are these Whereunto I also labour striving according to his working which worketh in me mightily The Apostle speaketh of the work of the Ministery whom we preach warning every man and teaching every man in all wisdome that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus whereunto I labour according to the mighty workings that he worketh in us Here it is plain that the Apostle did work in teaching and instructing every one and it was not so much his work as the work of the Spirit in him and by him When he was at Athens his Spirit was stirred up in him when he saw the City wholly given to Idolatry Why are not the like excitations of spirit in men in there dayes who travell to Constantinople to Ligorn to Rome seeing hose people are wholly given either to Mahumetan superstition or Popish Idolatry The reason is manifest the same spirit doth not work so mightily in the hearts of men as it did sometime in the heart of Paul because he was filled with the Spirit he did shew abundant sympathy and bowells of affection towards all the lost sonnes of men But to come to instances in these last times when the Gospel was plucked down and the Mass was set up in Queen Maries dayes the Martyr being in a journey declared his intention that he would preach in his charg the next Lords day and when he that journeyed with him told him then he would certainly be cast into prison his answer was I am in prison till I am in prison He was bound in his spirit to preach the Gospel to the soules which he had taken charg of he could have no peace otherwise then in the discharge of his duty He did labour freely yet so as his labour was by the inward moving of the Spirit But of all other places that passage of our Saviour is most used by the Enthusiasts Ye shall be brought before Kings and Princes for my sake but when they shall deliver you up take no thought how or what you shall speak for it shall be given to you in that houre what you shall speak For it is not ye that speak but the Spirit of your Father that speaketh in you Mat. 10.18 19 20. Though this promise is made to the Martyrs and Confessors in times of persecution yet it is not made to them in that manner as to extinguish and drown all endeavour of their own as though God would do all and they should be discharged of their duty The promise is only made to such as should engage themselves for Christ and should humbly in the use of the means depend upon him for the supply of his Spirit And thus we see that the Spirit does all and yet in the most spiritual actions man himself is a free-worker It shall be given you in that houre what you shall speak This expression what you shall speak sheweth plainly that the Saints are free Agents Let us now consider that place Ephes 2.8 9. For by grace ye are saved through faith not of your selves it is the gift of God ☜ Here you yield that salvation as purchased by Christ is the gift of God but you will not have faith it self to be the gift of God you grant one part of the text to deny another If you consider the words you shall finde that not onely salvation but also faith it self is Gods free gift If this be not so how could the Ephesians come to beleeve The Apostle saith that they were dead in trespasses and sinnes they walked according to the course of the world they fulfilled the lusts of the flesh and of the mind Therefore they could not come to beleeve by any natural ability but meerly by the quickning work of the Spirit Further this expression is added ver 10. We are his work manship created of God unto good works By nature they were dead in trespasses and sinnes and if that now they could perform any spiritual act they were made able to do this by the new creation or workmanship of God Further if faith be not the
deserved it And so you lose your cause Thirdly the Apostle saith Lust when it hath conceived it bringeth forth sinne and sinne when it is finished bringeth forth death Jam. 1.13 14. To avoid the force of this Scripture you tell us That sinne doth not bring forth death as lust doth bring forth sinne sinne is lusts natural seed but death hath no conceptions by any seed of sinne page 94. But Sir I would entreat you to leave all windings and shifts deale plainly with the words of the text The Apostle saith sinne when it is finished bringeth forth death I do here put it upon you to give a down-right answer seeing the words of the Apostle are so plain If sinne doth any way bring forth death then we must needs conclude that sinne is the cause of death and this is the true meaning of the Apostle But seeing you bind so much upon the Lords institution who hath threatned death to the sinner let us come to the original text In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt dye the death And here setting the Lords prohibition aside I do willingly yield that there was no evil in the tree of knowledge of good and evil if we go to evil in the intrinsecal nature thereof but the Lord having forbidden it it was evil to go against his Command In this sense I say though death was threatned by God yet Adams own personal sinne was the meritorious cause of death to himself and to all his posterity And this is the ground of the Apostles speech By one man sinne entred into the world and death by sinne and death hath past over all men unto condemnation You labour in many pages together to prove that Adams sinne was no cause of his condemnation and when all comes to all This is your chief ground that the Lord in his institution did ordain to punish sin and sinners with death and therefore sinne is not the meritorious cause of death Good Sir may not both stand together as social causes what do you think of the two Malefactors that were hanged upon the Cross the one on the right hand and the other on the left hand of our Saviour Were they not both put to death by the sentence of the Law yet for all this they were the cause of their own condemnation The converted thief will tell you as much Doest thou not fear God seeing thou art in the same condemnation And we indeed justly suffer for we receive the due reward of our deeds Luke 23.40 41. In like manner I say though death was inflicted upon Adam as the just judgment of God yet Adams sinne was the cause of his own condemnation Now whereas you call death a righteous branch It is true if you look to the sentence of the just Judge who hath appointed death as the punishment of sinne yet if you look unto the nature of death he is an enemy The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death 1 Cor. 15.26 Further in the book of the Revelation we read that after the Beast the false Prophet and the Dragon were cast into the lake of fire then death it self was cast into the lake of fire Rev. 20.14 What is the meaning of this but that the Lord Christ is Head and King of the Church and will tread down all his enemies in the several and respective times appointed for their destruction and then last of all death it self shall come to be destroyed If death then be an enemy the last enemy and shall be destroyed as an enemy how can you affirme that it is a righteous Branch Further you argue That death cannot be the fruit of sinne seeing God hath pleased to punish sinne with death sinne and punishment for sinne agree no more than light and darknesse page 91. If this be your opinion I pray you tell me what do you think of that case where God doth punish one sinne with another He gave up the Gentiles to vile affections that they might receive in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet Rom. 1.23 24. If one sinne may be the punishment of another why do you put such a difference betwixt sinne and punishment as betwixt light and darknesse you have another evasion to help you our you say The very voice or death is enough to scare a sinner from his sinnes therefore death is not the natural fruit of sinne page 95. Give me leave to observe the same way of reasoning The Devil if he should visibly appear the very sight of him would be enough to scare a sinner from his sins Therefore a wicked sinner when he doth commit sinne doth not fulfill the lusts of his father the Devil which is to go point blank against the Scripture John 8.44 After this you come to answer a weak and incongruous objection of your own making you feign an adversary to reason in this wile If there had been no sinne there had been no punishment therefore pun shmext must be produced by sinne page 949. In this you deceive your self we do not argue so loosely to make every antecedent a necessary cause of that which cometh after for then by the like reason you might argue as you do If there had been no Law there had been no transgression therefore transgression is produced by the Law We say that sin doth not go before death as a meet antecedent or occasion only but as the meritorious cause of death the Apostle saith sinne bringeth forth death as the cause doth the effect and the wages of sinne is death when the work is done the wages is to be paid Last of all you come to the particular examples of Corah of Herod of Ananias and Sapphira and from thence you reason If death be the natural fruit of sinne why are not all Rebels punished as Corah all proud men as well as Herod all guilty of the sinne of equivocation as well as Ananias This is the substance of your argument page 99 100. To all which I make this answer unlesse they repent they shall meet with the same righteous judgment of God The Lord is free in the execution of judgment as upon those eighteen on whom the Tower in Siloah fel yet that it may appear to you that death is the natural fruit of sinne and that sinne is the meritorious cause of death our Saviour shuts up the matter with these words unlesse you repent you shall all likewise perish Luke 13.1 2 3 4 5. But you go on and strike still upon the same string If I should allow as much demerit in Adams disobedience to bring death as Christ had merit in his obedience both active and passive to bring life into the world yet it would not amount to such a pitch to be the onely cause For though the obedience of Christ was the cause of the coming of life into the world yet the appointment of God was as principal a cause as the obedience of Christ And so though sinne
a sense as he understands it the old Pelagians may make good that position of theirs that original sinne is by imitation they that come after do onely imitate the ensample of him that went before Of the entrance of death by sin he speaketh as followeth Death by sinne that is death which at the first was the condition of nature became a punishment upon that account just as it was with the Scrpent to creep upon his belly and the woman to be subject to her husband Answ In these words of his he doth distinguish between death as a meere condition of nature and death as a punishment The former he will have to be in the state of innocency latter only to be introduced by the fall But against this I have many things to alledge First if Adam should have dyed in innocency and that meerely by the condition of his nature what can we possibly make of the sense of that commination in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt dye the death what propable interpretation can we give of those Scriptures by one man sinne entred into the world and death by sinne The wages of sinne is death Rom. 6. Vlt Surely all this plainly sheweth that death came into the world meerely by the sinne of man and if he had not sinned he had not dyed Further the Apostle said the last enemy that shall be destroyed is death 1 Cor. 15.16 The question is when did death begin to be an enemy and from what time are we to fetch the date thereof If Adam should have dyed in innocency than the enmity of death must begin in Paradise we must fetch the date of it from the creation and not from the fall And so consequently death will be rather the work of God than the fruit of sinne But let it be supposed in this low and dimunitive sense that death came into the world as a punishment and began to be penal at the fall onely If we take the matter in this sense it will not serve his turn neither nor will other passages of his doctrine abide the rigour of this interpretation For how often doth he plead after this manner In other cases saith he Lawes be not given to Ideots infants and persons uncapable why should they be given here In all cases of the world it is unjust to lay the sinne of the father upon the children and is it otherwise in this case onely And if the answer may be admitted any man may suffer for the sinne of any father because it may be said here as well as there that although the innocent must not perish for anothers fault yet the son is not innocent as being in the fathers loynes when the fault was committed and the Law calls him and makes him guilty Many such Aphorismes he hath where he sheweth or at least endeavours to shew how contrary it is to the justice and mercy of God any way to burthen the posterity of Adam with the guilt of his sinne And yet here he confesses plainly and openly that death quatenus a punishment in the penalty of it came into the world by the disobedience of the first man How he can make one part of his doctrine to agree with the other it passeth all understanding of mine to discerne In his answer to the Bishops letter he seemeth to me to let fall a strange contradiction I have saith he the plain words of Saint Paul death passed upon all men forasmuch as all have sinned all men that is the generality of mankind all that lived till they could sinne Others that dyed before dyed in their nature not in their sinne neither Adams nor their own save onely that Adam brought it upon them or rather left it to them himself being disrob'd of all that could hinder it Answ let page 49. Here in the former part of his words he saith that infants dye in their nature not in their sinne neither Adams nor their own and yet he tells us again that Adam brought in death upon them and through his disobedience they were disrobed of all that could hinder it If he did bring in death upon them then they did not dye purely in their own nature they must some way die in or by his sinne Again if they dyed purely in their own nature and not at all in his sin how can he be said to bring in death Can he bring in death and can he not bring in death and all this upon one sort of people at one and the same time Neither can I see how he will acquit himself if it should be put upon him to shew the true reason why infants are lyable to burning feavours convulsion fitts and passe through the pangs of death at last Are these the infelicities of nature Then God hath made them in this state and their misery will be purely the work of his own hands Are these the punishment of Adams sinne then the innocent child will bear the burden of his fathers iniquity in such a case where it is not possible for the son to follow the fathers ensample which is plainly to give up the cause Now let us consider what he saith of the quality of the persons upon whom there hath been such a passage of death Death saith he passed upon all men that is upon all the old world who were drowned in the flood of divine vengeance and who did sinne after the similitude of Adam and therefore the Apostle St. Paul addes that for a reason inasmuch as all men have sinned Ans Though the word all in it self hath an ambiguity in it yet the scope of the text the condition of the subject doth plainly demonstrate that the passage of death from Adam as a common root must be absolutely upon all men as men so farre forth as they are his sonnes and not upon all to the flood only But concerning this matter we have his meaning more fully in the next passage If all men saith he have sinned upon their own account as it is certaine they have then these words can very well mean that Adam first sinned and all his sonnes and daughters sinned after him and so dyed in their own sinne by a death which at the first and in the whole constitution of affaires is natural and a death which their own sinne deserved but yet was hastned and ascertained upon them for the sin of their Progenitor Answ In these words of his as plausibly as he seems to speak of the cause of death he puts that for the cause which is not the cause and where he speaks of the true cause it doth not answer the sense of the text First he puts that for the cause that is not the cause For from what Scripture or from what consequence of Scripture doth he prove it that Adam and his sonnes in the whole constitution of affiaires should have dyed a death that is natural The Scripture doth every where make death to be the fruit of sinne
conversation of evil customes of evil acts of evil desires he must come to an evil nature that lies at the bottome and that which is worst of all he will find it to be the very root and cause of the the mischief The Apostle doth very elegantly call all lusts the works and effects of the flesh because they are the effects that the flesh doth produce in opposition to the effects and fruits of the Spirit Gal. 5.19 20 21. This ground being laid let us come to his exceptions as they follow in their order First saith he I know Saint Paul reckons concupiscence to be one of the works of the flesh and consequently such as excludes from heaven Col. 3.5 Evil concupiscence concupiscence with something superadded but certainly that is nothing that is natural for God made nothing that is evil and whatsoever is natural and necessary cannot be mortified Repl. That which is natural and necessary by creation we confesse cannot nor ought not to be mortified Of this kind is the lust after meat drink sleep c. but that which is natural and necessary by corruption ought chiefly to be mortified nay it is the prime work of Christianity to put off the Adam-like and by degrees to put on the Christ-like disposition Gal. 5.24 He proceedeth I come saith he to consider that by concupiscence either must be meant the first inclinations to their object or the proper acts of Election which are the second acts of concupiscence If the first inclinations be meant then certainly that cannot be a sinne which is natural and necessary Repl. We do willingly admit such a distinction concupiscence is sometime taken for the habit or the root it self and sometimes for those second acts that do flow from the root Now in such a case it is to me a great wonder that any should own the second acts of concupiscence to be sinne and yet own no sinfulnesse in the concupiscence that is more radical and fundamental Acts do flow from the nature and therefore where acts be bad the nature cannot be good It is our Saviours own argument Men do not gather grapes of thornes nor figs of thistles And whereas he stands upon this subtilty that the first inclinations are unavoidable therefore they are not sinful If he means that they are absolutely unavoidable this we deny For that which is unavoidable by nature may be avoided by grace The guilt of concupiscence may be taken away that it be not imputed the power of it may be broken by the Spirit and the remainders of it may be clean extinguished in the life of glory Now he proceedeth To desire that to which all men tend naturally is no more a sin than to desire to be happy is a sin Desire is no more a sin than joy or sorrow is Repl. If he speak of the natural tendency of desire as it is by creation We willingly subscribe and so it is no sinne to desire to eat drink or to long after an happy estate But if he speak of natural desires as they are now since the fall The desires of the flesh do wholly rend to evil The flesh lusteth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against the Spirit and the works of the flesh are manifest adultry fornication c. Gal. 5.18 c. He further argues Then there can be no reason told why it is more a sin to will evil than to understand it and how doth that which is moral differ from that which is natural For the understanding is first and primely moved by his object Rep. The Scripture doth testifie of the blindnesse of the minde and the perversity of the judgement as well as of the pravity of the will Not to go far for an instance the words of the text are plaine The Ephesians are said to be the children of wrath under this title and formality because they did fulfill the lusts of their minde or according to the original the wills of their cogitations and their reasonings They are tearmed the wills of the cogitation because the choise of the will and the disorder of that choise doth arise commonly from the blindnesse of judgement As for his question how doth that which is natural differ from that which is moral We need not trouble our selves in the businesse For the blindnesse of the judgement and the perversity of the will are natural and moral both They are natural so far forth as they come by propagation from the first root they are moral in respect of the anomy and irregularity as being contrary to the spiritual holy and pure law of God He goeth on I cannot but wonder saith he why men are pleased where-ever they finde the word concupiscence in the new Testament presently to dreame of original sinne and make that to be the summe total of it whereas concupiscence if it were the product of Adams fall is but one small part of it Rep. There is a double reason may be given as I conceive where men finde mention made of concupiscence they do thereby understand original sinne First because that sinne is commonly called by the title of concupiscence Secondly Those derivative concupiscences as I may so say which are by choice and election do all flow from the mother concupiscence and do exceedingly symbolize with her As in that famous passage of the Apostle Every man is drawn away with his own lust and enticed and lust when it hath conceived it bringeth forth sinne and sinne when it is finished bringeth forth death Jam. 1.14 15. By sinne he must needs meane the open act of sinne as it is in the publick view of man After this he speaks of finishing of sinne when men have filled the measure of their iniquity then death comes at last as the wages of sin Though this be so in the end yet at the first all sin is brooded in the lust of the heart All secondary acts of concupiscence do spring from the original concupiscence which is the cause of all Upon these grounds The sinful disposition of the nature may well passe under the name and notion of concupiscence because the operations within do chiefly consist in lusting and all the acts of sinne do flow from the lust of the heart within Concupiscence saith he is but one of the passions and in the utmost extension of the word it can be taken but for one halfe of the passions for not only all the passions of the concupiscible faculty can be a principle of sinne but the irascible doth more hurt in the world that is more sensual this more devilish pag. 94. Rep. It is true in moral Philosophy the usual distinction is into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 et 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the irascible and concupiscible faculty but what need is there of such a difference in the case that we now speak for the Apostle reckons up the lusts of the flesh adultery fornication uncleannesse hatred variance emulation c. Gal. 5.19 There is no man will