A defence of M. Perkins booke, called A reformed Catholike against the cauils of a popish writer, one D.B.P. or W.B. in his deformed Reformation. By Antony Wotton.

Obiections of Papists.

[speaker W. P.] The arguments which the Church of Rome al∣leadgeth to the contrary, are these. Obiect. I. In bap∣tisme men receiue perfect and absolute pardon of sinne; and sinne beeing pardoned is taken quite a∣way: and therefore originall sinne after baptisme ceaseth to be sinne. Answ. Sinne is abolished two waies: first in regard of b imputation to the person: secondly in regard of c existing and beeing. For this cause, God vouchsafeth to man two blessings in baptisme, Remission of sinne, and Mortification of the same. Remission or pardon abolisheth sinne wholy in respect of any imputation thereof vn∣to man, but not simply in regard of the being thereof. Mortification thereof goeth further, and abolisheth in all the powers of bodie and soule,

the very concupiscence or corruption it selfe, in re∣spect of the being thereof. And because mortificati∣on is not accomplished till death, therefore originall corruption remaineth till death,, though not im∣puted.

[speaker D. B. P.] M. Perkins answereth, that it is abolished in regard of imputation, that is, is not imputed to the person, but remaines in him still. This an∣swere is sufficiently (I hope) confuted in the Annotations vpon our con∣sent: In confirmation of our Argument, I will adde some texts of holy Scripture: First, He that is vvashed, needeth not but to vvash his feete, for be is vvholy cleane. Take with this, the exposition of S. Gregory the great, our Apostle; He cannot (saith he) be called vvhaly cleane in vvhom any part or parcell of sins remaineth: But let no man resist the voice of truth, who saith, he that is washed (in Baptisme) is wholy cleane: therefore there is not one dramme of the contagion of sinne left in him, vvhom the cleanser himselfe doth professe to be wholy cleane.

[speaker A. W.] Because you content your selfe with your former answer, I will make no further replie, but proceed to examine your reasons.

The place you bring is allegoricall, and therefore being not expounded in the Scripture, vnfit to prooue any matter in controuersie. But if wee take it as spoken of baptisme, it makes more against you, than for you: as appeares by this syllogisme.

• He that hath foule feete, is not wholy cleane:
• But he that is washed hath foule feete.
• Therefore he that is washed is not wholy cleane.

So that our Sauiours speech must be thus vnderstood: He that is washed, lackes but onely making cleane of his feete, and then he is wholy cleane. a Gregories speech (for it is more than I know that he is a Saint, and I am sure hee was none of our Apostle, that neuer bestowed any paines to teach vs) auowes the proposition of my syllogisme, that they which neede to haue their feete washt, are not wholie cleane. Now the assumption our Sauiour makes, affirming that hee which is washt, hath yet neede to haue his feete washt, that he may be wholy cleane: so that your proofes confirme my reason.

[speaker D. B. P.] The very same doth the most learned Doctor S. Ierome affirme: say∣ing. How are vve iustified and sanctified, if any ••inne be le••t remaining in vs? Againe if holy King Dauid say. Thou shalt vvash me, and J shall be vvhiter then snovv: how can the blacknes of hell still remaine in his soule?

[speaker A. W.] There is no such thing in the epistle; and if there were, it could make nothing for your purpose; because Hierome disputes there, not of originall, but of actuall sinne, viz. of that which was thought to be a sinne, but indeede, as hee plainly shewes, was none; the marying of a second wife af∣ter baptisme. Besides, he speakes not of rooting out sinne, but directly, as wee doe; of taking it away by pardoning of it. So also doth b Dauid, as it is manifest. Neither did hee meane, that God should wash by baptisme, and so clense him from originall sinne, but that he should take away the guilt and staine of the murther and adulterie that hee had committed.

[speaker D. B. P.] Briefly it cannot be but a notorious wrong vnto the precious blood of our Sauiour, to hold that it is not aswell able to purge and purifie vs from sinne, as Adams transgression was of force to infect vs. Yea the A∣postle teacheth vs directly, that we recouer more by Christs grace, then we lost through Adams fault, in these words: But not as the offence, so al∣so the gift, for if by the offence of one, many died; so much more the grace of God, and the gift in the grace of one, man Iesus Christ, hath abounded vpon many. If then we through Christ, receiue more abundance of grace, then we lost by Adam, there is no more sinne left in the newly Baptised man, then was in Adam in the state of innocency, albeit other defects, and infirmities doe remaine in vs, for our greater humiliation, and pro∣bation: yet all filth of sinne is cleane scoured out or our soules, by the pure grace of God powred abundantly into it in Baptisme: and so our first Argument s••ands insoluble.

[speaker A. W.]

• If we through Christ (say you) receiue more abundance of grace, than we lost by Adam, there is no more sinne left in the newly baptized man, than was in Adam in the estate of innocencie:
• But we through Christ receiue more abundance of grace, than we lost in Adam:
• Therefore there is no more sinne left in the newly baptized man, than was in Adam in the state of innocencie.

I denie the consequence of your proposition. For though

wee receiue more grace, yet it is not bestowed vpon vs at once, but growes by little and little, receiuing perfection at our death, and not before. Your assumption is true, in re∣spect of the assured continuance of grace, which Adam had not, but the measure is not greater. For Adam was created in true holines and righteousnes, perfect according to his, nature. But the place you alleage, proues not the point. The c Apostle speakes not there of inherent righteousnes, but of grace, that is, the fauour and mercie of God; and of the gift by grace, that is, forgiuenes of sinnes, as I will shew (if it please God) hereafter, vpon another occasion.

[speaker W. P.] Obiect. II. Euery sinne is voluntarie: but origi∣nall sinne in no man after baptisme is voluntarie: and therefore no sinne. Answ. The proposition is a politike rule pertaining to the courts of men, and must be vnderstood of such actions as are done of one man to another: and it doth not belong to the court of conscience, which God holdeth and kee∣peth in mens hearts, in which euery want of confor∣mitie to the law is made a sinne. Secondly I answer, that originall sinne was voluntarie in our first parent Adam: for he sinned, and brought this miserie vpon vs willingly; though in vs it be otherwise vpon iust cause. Actuall sinne was first in him, and then origi∣nall corruption; but in vs originall corruption is first, and then actuall sinne.

[speaker D. B. P.] Reply. Full litle knowes this man what belongeth to the Court of conscience: there secret faults in deed be examined, but nothing is ta∣ken for sinne by any one learned in that faculty, which is done without a mans free consent: all of them holding with S. Augustine. That sinne is so voluntary an euill, that it cannot be sinne, which is not voluntary: And to say with M. Perkins that any want of conformity to reason in our bo∣dy is sinne, is so absurd: that a man might (if that were true) be damned for a dreame, how well soeuer disposed he went to sleepe: if he chaunce to dreame of vncleannes, whereupon doth ensue any euill motion in his flesh. This paradoxe of sinning without a mans consent is so contra∣rie vnto both, naturall, and supernaturall reason that S. Augustine auer∣reth

Neither any of the small number of the learned, nor of the multitude of the vnlearned doe hold, that a man can sinne without his consent. What vnlearned, learned men then are start vp in our miserable age, that make no bones to deny this, and greater matters too?

[speaker A. W.] Master Perkins hath truly answered, that although men know no sinne, but that which is voluntarie, because they make all sinne to be in the act: yet in Gods iudgement it is otherwise, who condemnes all for sinne, that is any way a∣gainst his iust and holy law. The place you alleage out of Austin prooues no more, but that those actions that are not voluntarie, are not sinne: which wee easily grant. But d Ma∣ster Perkins addes a •…•…ond answere, which you craftily, ac∣cording to your custome, omit; because you know not what to say to it. The answere is, that originall sinne may be called voluntarie, because Adams sinne was voluntarie, and so ours in him: as e Austin truly affirmes. Those dreames that are occasioned by any fault of ours, or by our naturall cor∣ruption, are our sinnes, and to them that are not in Christ, damnable.

[speaker W. P.] Obiect. III. Where the forme of any thing is ta∣ken away, there the thing it selfe ceaseth also: but after baptisme in the regenerate, the forme of origi∣nall sinne, that is, the guilt, is quite remoued: and therefore sinne ceaseth to be sinne. Answ. The guilt, or obligation to punishment, is not the forme of originall corruption, but (as we say in schooles) an accident or necessarie companion thereof. The true forme of originall sinne, is a defect and depriuation of that which the law requireth at our hands in our minde, will, affections, and in all the powers both of soule and bodie. But they vrge this reason further, saying, where the guilt and punishment is taken a∣way, there is no fault remaining: but after baptisme the guilt and punishment is remoued: and there∣fore,

though originall corruption remaine, it is not as a fault to make vs guiltie before God, but onely as a weaknes. Answ. Guilt is remoued, and not remo∣ued. It is remooued from the person regenerate, which stands not guiltie for any sinne originall or actuall: but guilt is not remoued from the sinne it selfe; or, as some answere, there be two kindes of guilt, actuall, and potentiall. The actuall guilt is, whereby sin maketh man stand guiltie before God: and that is remoued in the regenerate. But the po∣tentiall guilt, which is an aptnes in sinne, to make a man stand guiltie if he sinne, that is not remooued: and therefore still sinne remaineth sinne. To this or like effect saith August. We say that the guilt of concu∣piscence, not whereby it is guiltie (for that is not a person) but that whereby it made man guiltie from the beginning, is pardoned, and that the thing it selfe is euill, so as the re∣generate desire to be healed of this plague.

[speaker D. B. P.] M. Perkins shifteth in assigning a wrong forme: affirming vs to say that the forme of Originall sinne is the guiltines of it: which we hold to be neither the forme, nor matter of it, but as it were the proper passi∣on following it. S••e S. Thomas: who deliuereth for the forme of Ori∣ginall sinne, the priuation of Originall iustice, which iustice made the will subiect to God.

The deordination then of the will, Mistres and commaunder of all o∣ther points in man, made by the priuation of Originall iustice: is the forme of Original sinne, and the deordination of all other parts of man, (which by a common name is called concupiscence, as that learned Doctor noteth,) is but the materiall part of that sinne, so that the will of the regenerate being by grace through Christ rectified, and set againe in good order towards the law of God, the forme of originall sinne, which consist••d in deordination of it, is taken quite away by Baptisme, and so consequently the sinne it selfe, vvhich cannot be vvithout his proper forme, as the argument doth conuince.

[speaker A. W.] The forme of originall sinne (as I shewed before) is not onely the absence of righteousnes, but also an habi∣tuall

inclination to euill; which is not wholy taken away in this life, but onely by degrees diminished, and in death vt∣terly abolished.

[speaker W. P.] Obiect. IV. Lastly, for our disgrace they alleage that we in our doctrine teach, that originall sinne af∣ter baptisme is onely clipped or pared, like the haire of a mans head, whose rootes still remaine in the flesh, growing and increasing after they are cut, as before. Answ. Our doctrine is abused: for in the pa∣ring of any thing, as in cutting of the haire, or in lop∣ping a tree, the roote remaines vntouched, and ther∣upon multiplieth as before. But in the mortification of originall sinne after baptisme, wee hold no such paring: but teach, that in the very first instant of the conuersion of a sinner, sinne receiueth his deadlie wound in the roote, neuer afterward to be recoue∣red.

[speaker D. B. P.] Conferre this last answere with his former Doctrine (good Reader) and thou maist learne what credit is to be giuen to such Masters: no more constant then the wind. Here sinne is deadly vvounded in the roote, there it remaineth still vvith all the guiltines of it, although not imputed, there it still maketh the man to sinne, intangleth him in the punishment of sinne, and maketh him miserable: All this he comprehended before in this first reason, and yet blusheth not here to conclude, that he holdeth it as at the first: Neither clipped nor pared, but pulled vp by the rootes: Indeed they doe him a fauour, who say that he holdeth sinne to be clipped, and as it were razed, for albeit haire razed grow out againe, yet is there none for a season: but this Original sinne of his is alwaies in his regenerate, in vigour to corrupt all his workes, and to make them deadly sinnes. But let this suffice for this matter.

[speaker A. W.] This is a meere cauill of yours, and no contradiction of Master Perkins; originall sinne hath all these effects, and yet is not wholy rooted vp, as you falsely make him speake, but wounded in the roote so deadly, f as that it neither shal, nor can recouer, though it liue and bring forth fruites of sinne, for the time of our continuance in this mortall carcasse.

Notes

• b

  Quoad im∣putationem.
• c

  Quoad ex∣istentiam.
• And I hope suf∣ficiently de∣fended. A smal summe. Ioh. 13. Neither ours, nor any Apostle a•• all. Lib. 9. epist. 39
• a

  This Gregory vvas next neighbour to Boniface the third, the first Pope, in vvhom Antichrist vvas discoue∣••ed.
• Epist. ad O∣ceanum. Psal. 50.
• b

  Psal. 32. 1. 2. Rom. 4. 6, 7. 8.
• Rom. 5.
• c

  Rom. 5. 16.
• Lib. 3. de lib. arb. cap. 17.
• Lib. de vera Relig. cap. 14.
• d

  A second an∣svvere of Ma∣ster Perkins omitted.
• e

  Retract. lib. 1. cap. 15. Bellarm. de amiss grat. lib. 4. cap. 10.
• Contra Iul. lib. 6. c. 6.
• 1. 2. q. & art. 3
• Originall sinne is in all parts of the ••inde.
• Wounded in the ••oot••, not plucked vp by the rootes.
• f

  See 12. Art. part. 1. art. 4. 〈◊〉〈◊〉