A treatise of original sin ... proving that it is, by pregnant texts of Scripture vindicated from false glosses / by Anthony Burgess.

SECT. XI.

Their Deformity and Contrariety to the Rule and exemplary Pat∣terne.

IN the next place, Herein doth their depravation appear. Because they are so full of deformity and contrariety to their rule and exemplary pattern which is in God himself, for we are to love as God loveth, to be angry as God is angry. It is disputed by the learned, Whether affections be properly in God? Now it must be, As affections do denote any passions, or imperfections intermixed with them, so they cannot be attributed to him, who is the fountain of perfection, yet because the Scripture doth generally attribute these affections unto God, he is said to love, to grieve, to hope, to be angry: Hence it is that Divines do in their Theological Tractates, besides the attributes of God, handle also of those things, which are (as some expresse it) analogical affections in him; They treat of his love, his mercy, his anger, which are not so properly Attributes in God, as analogical affections; As when the Scripture saith, God hath eyes and hands, these are expressions to our capacity, and we must conceive of God by those words according to the supream excellency that is in him: Thus it is also in affe∣ctions; There is an 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in the former, and an 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the later. It was of old disputed by Lactantius, Whether anger was truly and properly in God? Some denied it, some affirmed it; But certainly the difference did arise from the different use of the Word; for take anger, as it signifieth an humane imperfection, so it cannot be said to be in God, but as it is a Will to revenge an impenitent sinner, so it is in God; Hence these things are said to be in God per modum effectus, rather than affectus; And some learned men like this expression better than of analogal affections, saying that metaphorical speech applied to

God (viz. about desire, hope, &c.) is rather equivocal then analogical, con∣cerning desire, hope and fear in God: Some Arminianizing or Vorstizing have spoken dangerously: Yea some Socinians, as Crellius (Vide Horndeeck. Socin. Confut. lib. 2.) doe positively maintain affections to be properly in God; And although to mollifie their opinion, they sometimes have fair explications of themselves, yet they grant the things themselves to be in God, which we call affe∣ctions; Hence they call them often, The commotions of Gods will, which are sometimes more, sometimes lesse; Yea they are so impudent, as to say the de∣nial of such affections in God, is to overthrow all Religion: But this opinion is contrary to the pure simplicity and immutability of Gods Nature, as also to his perfect blessednesse; and by the way observe the wickednesse of these Heretiques who take from the Divine Nature, the persons thereof, as also some glorious Attributes, such as Omniscience, &c. and yet will give to the same such things, as necessarily imply imperfection.

To return, Affections are not in God as they imply any defect, yet we are by Scripture to conceive of some transcendent perfection in God eminently con∣taining them; and this being laid for a foundation, we may then bewail the great deformity that is upon our affections, the unlovelinesse of them, if comp••••ed to the Rule; Do we love as God loveth? He doth infinitely love himself, and all things in subordination to his own glory. But the love of our selves, and all things in reference to our own selves, is that which doth most formally exclude and oppose the love of God: The poison and sinfulnesse of all the affections doth arise from the sinfulnesse of our love. It is corrupt love that causeth corrupt anger, corrupt hatred, corrupt sorrow, and therefore the way to crucifie all other affe∣ctions is to begin with love: But oh the irreconcilable and immediate opposition that is between our love, and his love, our love is to be copied out after his; We are to imitate God in our love, but we place our selves in Gods room, and are carried out to love our selves, not rationally, but according to a bruitish appetite. as it were, hence whereas in the love of others, we require some presupposed good∣nesse, in the love of our selves we look for none at all. The vilest and most prophane sinner, who ought to judge himself worthy of the hatred of God and all creatures; yet he doth intensively love himself even to the hatred of God: Had we in∣finite holinesse, infinite purity and perfection as God hath, then we might love our selves principally; but because the goodnesse we have is a rivolet from that Ocean, a beam-line from that Sun, therefore we are to love our selves in reference to God; Our love to God should make us love our selves; but how impossible and paradoxal is this to our corrupt natures? As our love is thus distantial from Gods love, so our hatred and anger also is, for the hatred of God is only against sinne; It's sinne he punisheth, it is sinne that he hath decreed to be avenged of to all eternity; Wicked men and Devils are damned, because of sinne in them, could that be taken out of their natures, they would be the good and acceptable creatures of God: But oh the vast difference between Gods hatred and ours, for that is not against sinne, but that which is truly godly and holy; so desperately and incurablely are we corrupted herein!