may rightfully incurre punishment seventy times seven-fold as it is if not in truth yet at the least in the swasive of Lamech to his wives Genes 4.24 There is a mote and there is a beam Matth. 7.3 This beam may be sawed into many boards or rafters and there is no verture nor vice but hath its latitude and degrees partaking of majus and minus There are funiculi vanitatis Esai 5.18 cords of vanity There are funes peccatorum ropes of sinnes Proverb 5.22 And there are funes plaustri as Vatablus rendereth it according to the Hebrew cart-ropes or vinculum plaustri according to the Vulgat the wain-rope Esai 5.18 differencing sinnes and being indebted to divers kindes of punishments Every sinne causeth a blot on the soul the greater sinne the greater blot A frequent sinner is compared to a spotted leopard Jerem. 13.23 and some notorious sinners are called spots in the abstract Jude vers 12. More testimonies I could heap but the point is cleared and the enquiry Wheter Adam or Eve sinned most is yet unanswered 6. And here both ancient and modern Divines do much varie * Chrys Hom. 7. ad Pop. Ant. Chrysostom saith expresly Eve sinned more then Adam and * In Rom. Homil. 25. in Morali elsewhere to this effect Eve was more punished then Adam but the punishment is answerable to the fault Therefore her sinne was greater Rupert followeth him * Triplicipoená mulier punitur quia triplo majus peccatum fuit ejus quà m Adami Rup in Gen. lib. 3. cap. 22. The woman is punished by a threefold punishment because her sinne was three times greater then Adams Hugo and Lombard untruly supposing that Eve onely beleeved the Serpents words promising them to be like unto God do rather think Eve sinned most The Shoolmen by troups follow them Cajetan is dubious commenting on Aquinas he would not differ from his Master the great Summist but condemneth the woman more then the man yet expounding the third of Gensis he brings five reasons to excuse Eve more then Adam S. Aug. is by both sides sometimes ascribing more fault to the man then to the woman sometimes to the woman rather then to the man and * De Gen. ad lit 11.35 De Civit. 14 11. twice he seemeth to hold That they sinned equally On the other side * Ambr. De Instit virginis cap. 4. Ambrose saith Adams sinne was greater And again * Eva magis mobilitate animi quà m pravitate peccavit Comment in Luc. 4.38 Eve sinned more by unstablenes of minde then by perversenes Isdore saith * Gravius est de industria peccare quo modo peccavit Adam quà m ignorantiâ quo modo peccavit Eva. Isid De Summo Bono 2.17 It is more hainous to sinne of set purpose as Adam then out of ignorance as Eve This point needing to be distinguished upon Aquine telleth us The greatnes of a sinne is two wayes considered either exipsa specie peccati from the especiall kinde of the sinne or according to the circumstances of place or person and he resolveth thus * Quantum adgenus peccati vtriusque peccatum aequale dicitur In regard of the kinde of sinne the sinne of them both is said to be equall Pride was in both but if we look ad speciem superbiae Eve sinned more for these three regards She was more proud then the man She not onely sinned herself but made her husband sinne Thirdly Adams sinne was lessened by the love he bore unto his wife Which last reason is grounded on the words of S. Augustine * Adam non carnaliconcupiscentiâ victus sed amicabili quâdam compulsus benevolentiâ quâ plerunque fit ut offendatur Deus nè offendatur amicus peccavit De Gen. ad lit 12. ult Adam sinned not being overcome by carnall concupiscence but being constrained by some friendly affection by which it cometh often to passe that God is offended lest a friend should be offended Yea the same S. Augustine is cited thus * Postquam mulier seducta manducavit eÃque dedit ut simul ederent noluit eam contristari quam credebat sine suo solatio contabescere à se alienatam omnino interire After the seduced woman had eaten and had given him that they should eat together he was loth to grieve her whom he thought ready to pine away without his comfort and altogether to die being estranged from him Lastly Aquine saith If we weigh the condition of both persons the mans sinne was greater because he was perfecter then the woman So Aquine 2.2 Quaest 163. Art 4. 7. Scotus thus opineth Because Adam was more circumspect more noble more strong to resist therefore by accident his sinne was more great * Formaliter tamen per se merè praecisè inse peccatum Evae fuit gravius Scotus in 2. Sent. dist 27. quaest 2. Yet formally in it self and precisely the sinne of Eve was greater But the learned Estius on the same distinction Paragraphe 7 thus The greatnes of sinne cometh many wayes principally from the object and the end then from the circumstances either of the person or the intent of him or of the frequencie of the act or the greatnes of harm that cometh by the sinne or of the ignorance or infirmitie or industrie of the person If we lay Adams and Eves sinne in the ballance respecting the object and the end it weighed alike both of them beleeved the Serpent both would be like God both ate of the fruit forbidden both excused their faults but weigh the circumstances saith he the mans sinne was simply greater First he had more power to resist Secondly he dealt with a lesse subtile enemy a simple woman but she had to do with an evill Angel of an higher nature then herself Thirdly he had the precept from God himself she but from her husband Fourthly he was to be head over his wife and not she over him and he was to reduce her into the right way when she strayed Fifthly his excuse cast part of the fault as it were upon God himself Sixthly indeed he was worse punished and so saith Augustine truly Seventhly the better things are the worst in their corruption The best wine turnes to the sharpest vineger the best of government a Monarchie proves the worst if it degenerate into a Tyranny But the man exceeded the woman as well in naturals as in gratuitous So farre in effect Estius Bellarmine compareth their acts and per sons together Bell. De Amis Gratiae Statu Peccati 3.9 and concludeth that both in regard of acts and persons Eve sinned least Adam worst His observations are not onely passable but commendable save in two things First that he makes the excusation of their sinne to be one act of the seven in Adam and Eves sinne when as in truth their excuse was no part or branch of their first sinne but a distinct and severall sinne by it self For
may seem probable certain it is Christ wanted no comelines nor beautie though he had no womanish or effeminate shape Tom 4. Disput 1. quaest 14. punct 2. but such as was most befitting a man saith Gregorie de Valentia Thou art beautifull O my love as Tirzah comely as Jerusalem Cant. 6.4 and Thou art all fair there is no spot in thee Cant 4.7 In which regard perhaps it was that though the humors of Christs body did increase with the increase of his bodie and grew up from infancie to puerilitie from it to juvenilitie thence to virilitie yet there was so harmonious a proportion if not of weight yet of justice that we read not any one part of Christs bodie to have been out of tune excepting in his Agonie and Passion when his very bones were out of joint nor is he recorded to have been sick at any time nor so much as inclining to sicknes all his life Non suscepit infirmitates individui sed speciei He took not upon him the infirmities of particular men but of mankinde as to be weary to mourn to weep to be hungry thirstie to suffer to die As for sinne and diseases flowing from sinne he was subject to none nor to personall defects but onely to the generall defects of humane bodies Indeed it is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bas in Reguâ—is breviorâ—â—us quaest 177. Esai 53.4 Surely he took our infirmities and bare our sicknesses but Basil expounds it thus He bare our sicknesses not that he did transferre them upon himself but because he healed those that were sick Where he semes to remove all sicknes from Christ Besides Adam his excellent temper consider his food he had all the trees of the garden for meat except the forbidden one The healthie waters about Paradise he had for drink Wholsome things he knew from hurtfull if any hurtfull things were His giving them names doth prove that he was acquainted with their natures As for taking too much or too little it could not be whilest his soul was innocent and spotlesse For he had originall justice which in the use of lawfull meats should subject his senses and his appetite unto reason As for clothing he needed it not Innocency apparelled him till he put off the robe of righteousnes and so it should have continued Lastly as Adam in Paradise had a deep sleep which fell upon him Genes 2.21 which I confesse was extraordinarie so Augustine Aug. De Civ t. 14.16 Tertul. De Anima cap. 24. Tertullian and the School after them do yeeld that ordinarie sleep was not excluded out of Paradise but in the night he was allowed sleep So that Adam enjoying all things necessarie delightfull or convenient which concerned his bodie we may safely conclude the first reason That since neither outward force nor inward distemper could befall Adams body if he had continued in innocencie his body should never have tasted of death and so was and so should have been immortall And this will yet more plainly appeare if we will weigh the reasons following 4. Among the trees of the garden there was the tree of life which Adam had libertie freely to eat of Some think it was appointed as a means to translate Adam to immortalitie without sicknes or death Others say it would hinder the losse of naturall heat and radicall moisture whereby though yeares or age yet weaknes or de crepitnes should not come nigh him Others say that it being once tasted should bring perfect immortalitie even such immortalitie as we should have after the Resur rection See Bellarmine de Gratia primi hominis cap. 28. and Mr. Salkeld in his Treatise of Paradise where in some whole Chapters he hath laboriously collected and copiously explained the various opinions concerning the tree of life Take my gleanings after their full vintage and taste what I have gathered Though Lumbard Sent. 2. Dist 29. Lit. F. questioneth Whether Adam before his sinne did eat of the tree of life and out of Augustine concludeth there That they did eat as it was commanded that they should eat of every tree fave one yet I can no way agree with him This his errour is grounded on an other which he hath cited Distinct 9. of the same book in the letters B and C That Adam was commanded to eat of the tree of life and that he should have sinned if he had not used it For first It was not a command but a permission God gave the use of the tree no otherwise to man Genes 1.29 then to the beasts and fowls the green herbs verse 21 but this was by way of indulgence not of command Secondly Genes 2.16 Of every tree of the garden thou may'st freely eat And though it be in the Hebrew Eating thou shalt eat yet it implieth no absolute precept Thirdly Genes 3.2 the woman saith We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden she saith not We musteat or We are charged much lesse presently so soon as we see them or before we do other things Fourthly Genes 9.3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you even as the green herb have I given you all things Are we commanded to eat every beast and every herb then whosoever forbeareth any one sinneth Or was there in this a difference between the grant unto Adam and the grant unto Noah and their posterities The second errour is of Lumbard That Adam did eat of the tree of life His proof out of Augustine falleth short even as it is cited though the place is mistaken by him and the words maym'd Indeed Augustine thus * Rectè profectò intelliguntur primi homines ante malignam persuasionem abstinuisse à cibo vetito atque usi fuisse concessis ac per hoc caeteris praecipuè ligno vitae De peccat Meritis Remis 2.21 Certainly it is well thought that our first parents before that malicious persuasion did abstain from the forbidden food and used such things as were granted them and consequently the rest specially the tree of life * Note first He saith granted not commanded as Noah ate not of every thing granted to him yet Noah spent many hundred yeares more time after the Floud then Adam did in Paradise Neither can I think Adam in that estate so addicted to his belly that he in so short a time would cat of so many of all and every tree Secondly Rupertus saith The eating of the tree of life but once Rup in Genes l. 3. cap. 30. had made them live for ever Augustine moreover addeth It is no where read in Genesis Aug. Cont. Adversar Legis Prophet 1.15 that Adam in Paradise did not eat of the fruit of the tree of life of which place by and by Now as Augustine is directly against me in the second point he is as directly against them in the first point * Vtendi ad escam omni ligno quod in Paradiso erat
opineth * Tu es Diaboli janua tu es quae eum invasisti quem Diabolus aggredi non valuit Tert. lib. De Habitu muliebri That by that serpentine craft by which the woman was seduced Adam could not have been seduced Tertullian speaketh thus to womankinde * Probat quòd Diabolus non poterat seducere Adam sed Evam Hiero. lib. 1. adversus Jovinianum circa medium Thou art the Devils doore thou art she that hast invaded him whom the Devil could not set upon If he could not set upon him much lesse could he have overcom him Hierom saith * the Apostle doth prove that the Devil could not seduce Adam but Eve But then comes Eve in her simplicitie intending no hurt or deceit to her husband upon three other grounds specialized Genes 3.6 First she saw that the tree was good for food Secondly it was pleasant to the eyes Thirdly a tree to be desired to make one wise She I say upon these three motives did both eat and give Adam to eat So Adam was not deceived either first or immediately by the Serpent or serpentine deceit as Eve was neither doth Adam complain that the Serpent or Eve beguiled him but when he derived the fault from himself the worst that he said of Eve was this Genes 3.12 The woman whom thou gavest to be with me she gave me of the tree Neither doth the Scripture any where impute a malicious envious or guilefull intent to Eve in drawing Adam into the transgression Nor doth the Apostle say absolutely Adam was not in the transgression but Adam was not deceiv'd or brought into the transgression by fraud For the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to be deceived by art and craft so the Devill perswaded Eve That God of envy unto man forbad him that tree saith * Aug. De Gen. ad lit 11.30 Augustine and perhaps told her it was no sin for her to eat because she received no immediate commandement whereas Adam knew it was a sinne but therefore might think it easilie pardonable because he had formerly known no experience of Gods severitie saith the same * Aug. De Civit. 14.11 Augustine And yet for all this Adam might be in a transgression in the transgression and the greatest transgression though not in that transgression of being seduc'd And for his transgression death is appointed for us For in Adam all die Abel was the first who died the bodily death yet Abel died in Adam and if for Adams sinne death had not been appointed to him first Abel had not died yet since Morte morieris was spoken to Adam alone before Eve was created and it may be it implieth that upon his sinne all that any way came of him either by avulsion of some part as Eve did or by propagation should die in him And so though Eve had eaten if Adam had not sinned neither Adam nor perhaps Eve herself had died And if Adam had eaten and Eve forborn yet perhaps Eve should have died for Eve was in Adam as well as we 1. Corinth 11.8 The man was not of the woman but the woman of the man And in him was she to stand or fall live or die as well as we In Adam all die and she among the rest since she was one and a part of that all If my above mentioned speculations require further proof consider Rom. 5.14 Death reigned from Adam where he is expresly mentioned as being in my interpretation the Idea of mankinde and we being in him tanquam in principio activo Satan sinned against God in tempting the woman the woman sinned against God in eating and offering the fruit unto the man If thou O Adam hadst not consented neither of these sinnes had hurt thee or mankinde * Adam erat nos omnes Adam was we all Give me leave to say so since S. Augustine saith * Omnes eramus ille unus Adam De peâ—cat Merit Remis 1.10 We all were that one Adam Nor did God first challenge Eve but Adam nor her so punctually as he did Adam Genes 3.9 And vers 22 it is not said of Eve but of Adam ironically Adam is become like one of us for he was the root of mankinde Eve was but a branch of Adam before or when she sinned and no root of mankinde actuall but potentiall for she sinned when she was a virgin Justin Martyr in his dialogue with Triphon thus Eve being an intemerated virgin and conceiving by the Serpent brought forth disobedience and by consequent death Theodoret on those words of the Psalmist Psal 51.1 c. The transgression of the commandment went before Eves conception for after the transgression and the divine sentence and the privation of Paradise Adam knew Eve his wife and she having conceived brought forth Cain Had Adam carnally known Eve before he sinned yea after herself sinned she had conceived and then the issue had had no originall sin yea he is no worse Divine then Aquinas who holdeth that at this instant if one by miracle were created an humane creature body soul he should not have originall sin 1.2 Quaest 18. Art 4. * Art sequenti And if Adam had sinned not Eve we had fallen into originall sin and if she had eaten and not he we had not been stain'd with originall sinne Scharpius saith * The cause of originall sinne was Adam not Eve and Adams sinne not Eves doth passe to the posteritie Tertullian proveth that Eve was neverthelesse a virgin because being in Paradise she was called a woman * A woman saith he pertains to the sex it self not to the degree of the sex One may be call'd a woman * Mulier ad sexum ipsum non ad gradum sexûs pertinet Tertull. lib. De velandis Virginibus though not a wife but a non-mulier a no-woman can not either be or be call'd a wife I adde she was a wife so called Genes 2.25 and yet till after Adam sinned she was a virgin espoused married yet not known carnally She was termed Isha or Issa Virago before the fall Genes 2.23 because she was taken out of Ish or Is out of man She was also stiled The female and wife but she was never called Eve during her creation and innocency or in the interim between her fall and Adams But after Adams sin he first called his wives name Eve Genes 3.20 because she was the mother of all living Not as if any did then live as from her or were born of her when Adam so called her but the great Calculator of natures the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Onomastick or exact and true Nomenclator of all things brought before him thought fit to name her Eve that is The mother of all living not before but after his fall because in my opinion she had not been Mater viventium if she alone had sinned Her sinne might have had other punishment her personall fault had ended
minde In the state of integritie it was farre otherwise Adam was new in his minde and holy and righteous as was proved before in which regard * Chrys Hom. 16. in Gen. Chrysostom saith Adam was a terrestriall Angel * Bas Homil. Quòd Deus non sit author malorum Basil reckoneth up as Adams chief good in Paradise His sitting with God and conjunction by love As all things els so Adams will was good and tended unto good there is the object his love in innocencie was entire and united to God there was his perfection Thirdly the object of his and our part concupiscible is moderate delight the perfection and felicitie of it was contentment As now this part is gauled with insatiable itchings and given over to lasciviousnesse to work all uncleannesse with greedines Ephes 4.19 But at the first Adam was free Augustine saith * Gratia Dei ibi magna erâ—t vbi terrenum animale corpus besâ—ialem libidinem non habebat There the grace of God was great where an earthy and sensuall body had no beastly lust The place he was in was a Paradise of pleasure a garden of delight nothing was wanting which might give true content Fourthly the object of his and our irascible part may in a sort be called Difficulty or rather Constancy whose glory of endeavours end and felicitie was Victorie This part now is much weakned with infirmitie In the best of us the Flesh lusteth against the Spirit and alas we are often vanquished as being weak by nature But Adam was strong and could have overcome any temptation Augustine saith * Felices erant primi homines nullis agitabantur perturbatio ibus animorum nullis corporis laedebantur incommodis De Civit. 14.10 Our first parents were happy being neither shaken with any trouble of minde nor hurt with any infirmitie of body * Adam non opus habebat eo adjutorio quod implorant isti cùm dicunt Video aliam legem in membris meis c. Lib. De Corrept Gratia Adam had no need of that help which these crave when they say I see another law in my members c. Yea he is more bold there saying * Adam in illis bonis in quibus creatus est Christ morte non â—guit Ibid. Adam in those good things wherein he was created had no need of Christs death He had with libertie and will grace sufficient whereby he might have triumphed over all difficulties and temptations Augustine thus * In Paradiso etiamsi omnia non poterat Adam ante peccatum quicquid tum non poterat non volebat ideo poterat omnia quae volebat De Civit. 14.15 In Paradise before sinne although Adam could not do all things yet he then would not do whatsoever he could not and therefore could do all that he would Adam having these excellent endowments of nature and grace had also necessarily certain objects about which they should be conversant These objects were all the parts and branches of the Law of nature whereby he fully knew his dutie And all and every one of these he did for a while or at the least not break and he and his posteritie should and ought to fulfill as they were private persons and for the performance and non-performance thereof both he and we should and shall answer unto God at the high Throne and Tribunall of the just and righteous Judge 2. But there was one precept and onely one given to Eve perhaps to all Adams posteritie as private persons who if they had eaten of the tree of knowledge of good and evill can not be imagined that they could have ruinated all mankinde but commanded to Adam onely as the publick person as the Idea of humane nature as the stock and root by whose obedience or disobedience all mankinde was to be happie or unhappie as the figure of Christ to come And this sin was not to be a sin of thought onely as the sin of the Angels who each of them sinned by his own expressed will but such a sinne as might bring a deserved blot and punishment upon all his posteritie who were in him which could not be unles it had been committed both by his soul and his body and thereby had power to infect all the parts and faculties both of souls and bodies Again the body of Adam could not sinne without the soul neither could this be a sinne of the soul alone without some concurrents of the bodily parts for then Adams sinning soul should have been damned and his innocent bodie saved but it was to be a sinne compounded of inward aversion and outward transgression So that if Adam had seen Eve eat and had himself lusted after the fruit and yet before the orall manducation had disliked his liking had feared the punishment and not proceeded to eat of it or touch it I do not think his posteritie had been engaged as they are Augustine citeth this out of S. Ambrose and approveth it * Si anima Adami appetentiam corporis refranâsset in ipso ortu extincta esset origo peccati Cont. Julian Pelag. lib. 2. If Adams soul had bridled the bodily appetite in the very beginning the originall of sinne had been quenched Catharinus thinketh there was an expresse covenant between God and Adam that Adam and his posteritie should be blessed or cursed according to the breaking or keeping of that one law What Catharinus saith is probable and may be most true though it be not so written For first if the prohibition had concerned Adams person onely since the precept was given before Eve was created Adam onely should have tasted of death and not Eve Secondly questionlesse that law and covenant included posteritie as is verified in the event When Morte Morieris was threatned unto Adam he was then Rectus in Curia and stood as a publique person representing all his branches If it concerned him as a private person he onely should personally have died and we escaped but our dying in him evinceth that he was reputed if I may so say a generall universall feoffee or person to whose freewill the happie or unhappie future estate of all his descendants was intrusted conditionally to live for ever upon the observance of one law or to die the death for the breach of it Life and death was propounded †Non uni sed universitati Not to one man but to all mankinde 3. And this law is registred and recorded Genes 2.17 Of the tree of the knowledge of good and evill thou shalt not eat for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die Which words I verily beleeve that Adam understood either by his naturall wisedome which was very great or by divine conference or revelation which to him was not unfrequent to involve his posteritie as well as himself For if immediatly upon the creation of woman Adam could foresee and prophesie Genes 2.24 That a man shall leave