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

SECT. II.

CHrist (we heard) had this peculiar prerogative alone to be the holy one, the contrary in the Text is true of every one born in a natural way; To every mother, we may say, that unholy thing which shall be born of thee, shall be called the child of the Devil, for it is by nature the child of wrath, only it may seem difficult to give the reason why he is exempted; for seeing he is a man ejusdem speciei of the same nature with us, and though he had his humane nature in an extraordinary manner by the over-shadowing of the Holy Ghost, yet that doth not hinder but he is a man as well as we are: Even as Adam was made a man after a different manner from his posterity, they by generation but he by won∣derfull production out of the earth in respect of his body, yet we are men of the same kind with him; seeing then Christ was a man though he had a different original from us, will not that necessarily involve him in Adam's sinne? And if it be said that the power of the Holy Ghost sanctified that corpulent mass of which Christs body did consist, that may happily free him from original inhe∣rent sinne, but how can it from original imputed sinne? Must not Christ be said to sinne in Adam though he had no inherent defilement because he was a man? yea the Scripture doth not only make him a man, but calleth him the seed of David and of Abraham, that he came out of their loynes, and which is more, Luke reckoning the genealogy of Christ by his humane nature doth carry it up to Adam making him the son of Adam, and if the son of Adam how could he not but sinne in Adam by imputation, though he had none by inhesion. This consideration hath so much strength, that Bellarmine though he is labo∣rious to prove that the Virgin Mary was exempted from original inherent sinne, that she had an immaculate conception, yet be confesseth she had origi∣nal imputed sinne that she sinned in Adam, because she was in Adam.

To answer then this Objection about Christ. The Arminians (as you heard) glory in their invention of Arminius, as if he only had found out the true answer to this, and not the Reformed Divines; The reason (saith he) of Christs immunity from all sinne by Adam, was because Christ had his being not by vertue of that original blessing, Increase and multiply, but by a special promise made after Adam's fall; so that Christs being is not supposed till Adam had fallen, and then upon a special promise (viz.) The seed of the woman to bruise the head of the Serpent, Gen. 3. 15. Christ is to become man; Thus Christ could not be any way included in him. This hath some truth in it though the answer be not every way cogent; for Isaac was born (as we argued formerly) by a special promise, there being no possibility for his existence in a natural way, yet he was born in original sinne; and although to me it seemeth most consonant to Scripture, that Christ would not have been made man, unless Adam had fallen, because the end of his coming into the flesh is said to be a Saviour and a Redeemer; yet there are men of great learning that hold, Christ would have been made man howsoever, though Adam had stood, and to such this reason would be of no great validity. But it must be confessed, that Christ could not be included in Adam, for the Scripture maketh him a publique per∣son, and head to believers as Adam was to all men; hence he is called the se∣cond Adam, so that Christ was a publique person and head as well as Adam, and one publique person especially in an opposite way could not be represented by another; Though this be so, yet we shall adhere to the Answer that is com∣monly given by Reformed Divines, That Christ therefore was free from sinne, because conceived in that miraculous manner, and though he had his being in respect of his corpulent substance from the Virgin Mary, yet this was ma∣terially only, not by way of efficiency, and any active disposition; so that

Christ could not be said by imputation to be in Adam, seeing there was no efficient disposition in Adam's posterity to cause his humane being. That is justly rejected as a fond conceit of Galatinus and others, who that they might maintain the flesh of Christ to be free from sinne, as well in himself as parents, affirm,

That God did in Adam design and seperate as it were some part of his substance, that it might be preserved from the law of sinne, and that this was successively transmitted even to the Virgin Mary, that so of it Christs more pure body might be formed; of which absurdity see Ferrins Sckolastic. orthodox spec. cap. 21.

Let us now consider this Doctrine as it is exclusive of all other of mankind, only Christ (we say) is free, all the rest born of mankind in a natural way are all over defiled with this native pollution. To clear this I shall proceed by se∣veral Propositions.

First, That the only way by which original sinne as inherent is communicated to Adaems posterity is by natural generation; Not indeed by generation simply, for that is by Gods institution, and a good thing in its kind, but by the genera∣tion of a man that is fallen and corrupt; some few have thought that if Adam had not fallen, Adams posterity would have been multiplyed not by gene∣ration but by some other way, which is a most irrational conceit: If then Adams children abiding in integrity had been by generation, then thereby would have been conveyed original righteousness, and an holy nature, as there is now a sinful and impure nature; original sinne cometh then to us by gene∣ration from sinful parents; so that if God should miraculously create some men de novo, make children to Abraham out of stones, these would have no ori∣ginal sinne; neither if they should beget children would original sinne be trans∣fused to them, because these would not be in Adam as a corrupt root; as for such a Question, What if God should make a man or woman out of the rib, or shoulder, or any other part of man now fallen, as Eve was at first made of a rib, whether such a person would have original sinne? It is a question of needless cu∣riosity, and so no Answer is to be formed to it: This is enough, That the or∣dinary way and meanes whereby we become polluted in sinne is, because we are begotten and born of sinful parents, as David acknowledgeth, Psal 51. Austin indeed limiteth it to the libidinous disposition of mankind in begetting of children, he seemeth to lay the whole cause upon that, but he is carried out too immoderately in that point against the Pelagians; for though parents should have no sinful actual lust, yet because they are sinful originally, this is enough to infect their posterity; and if this were so, it would follow, That godly parents the more sanctified and mortified they were, they would have children less infected with original sinne, then the children of those who are grossely wicked and unclean; It is then because we are born of parents pollu∣ted by Adam, that we also are polluted; as for that famous Question how ori∣ginal sinne should be communicated to the soul of a man by generation, seeing that is created? we have already spoken to that: The summe whereof is, That though we are to conceive of the soul, as pure, while coming from God, yet considering it in termino, as the part of man who descended from Adam, so it is polluted, not by any physical cause for that sinne cannot have, but a moral one, which is the first trangression of Adam; for although that hath had no being these thousand yeares, yet it is not requisite that a moral cause should exist to produce its effect. Because then the soul in the same instance it is created, it is also united, as a forme to the compositum, which is man, Therefore it is deprived of its primitive purity, not by any positive efficiency, but meerly ne∣gatively, God denying his image to it, because the soul is part of a man, it is corrupted; therefore if the soul were only an assistant form not inwardly compounding man, it would not receive pollution by generation. Hence

The second Proposition is, That the children even of holy and sanctified persons, who have their original sinne in the guilt of it quite taken away, and in the filth and power of it much subdued, yet they beget children in original sinne, and such chil∣dren are by nature the children of wrath as well as of the most profligate and wicked men. It is usuall with Papists and Lutherans to charge upon the Calvinists, that they deny original sinne in part (at least) because they affirm, That the children of believers are holy; but herein they do either ignorantly or malici∣ously calumniate, for they say no more then what the Apostle speaketh in that famous place, 1 Cor. 7. 15. Else were your children unclean, but now are they holy; on the sense of which place I shall not here inlarge, having insisted upon it before; The summe of which then delivered is, That they are called holy, because of that external Covenant, whereby God takes believers and their seed into his family, so that they have not that uncleanness upon them which the children of Heathens have, but have a right of admission into Church-Com∣munion; so that this outward Covenant [holiness] may and doth consist with that inherent natural pollution that they bring with them into the world. And although parents be never so eminent in holiness, yet their children are full of sinne, and so obnoxious unto the wrath of God; and the reason is, be∣cause they are fathers to their children, not as godly, but as men, and original sinne is the consequent of mans nature, whereas the parents grace is a personal excellency, and so cannot be transmitted: Even as learned parents do not con∣veigh learning to their children, but they are born in ignorance as well as others; Those known similies of Augustine are full to this purpose, A Jew that was circumcised, be begat children not circumcised, but uncircumcised and the seed in the ground, though sewen without huskes, yet it produceth corn with huskes; seeing then holiness is a personal qualification of the parent, and original sinne the common consequent of mans nature inseperable from it, no wonder if parents, who are the children of God by grace, beget children of wrath by nature. Hence

The third Proposition is, That if any Infants should be converted even in the womb, yet we may truely say of them, that they are by nature polluted with sinne, and deserve the wrath of God, for what they have by meer grace, doth not take away, but suppose they have sinne by nature: There are two instances in Scripture of Infants, that might be thought to be freed from original sinne; The first is of Jeremiah cap 1. 5. where the Lord saith to Jeremiah, Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee, and before then camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a Prophet to the Nations. But

First, Every one may easily see this is nothing to the Prophets conception or birth in sinne, for what is said here in the Text, is attributed to Jeremiah before any of these; so that all that could be prooved from hence would be, that Je∣remiah had no original sinne, either before he was conceived or born, and who saith a man hath original inherent sinne before he hath a being? But

Secondly, There is a two-fold sanctification, the one by setting a part to an office, and the other by making internally holy through renovation: now the Context is clear, that this Verse speaketh of the former sanctification, (viz.) That God had from his very beginning, while in the womb, purposed and de∣creed, that he should in time be a Prophet to preach to the people of Israel, for that is expresly added, to shew what kind of sanctification he meaneth, I ordained thee to be a Prophet to the Nations; we have two expressions like this, one to the Prophet Isa. 49. 1, 5. which though in an eminent manner is to be ap∣plied to Christ, yet was in some sense also true of the Prophet, The Lord hath called me from the womb, from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name: And again, The Lord formed me from the womb to be his servant: This is spoken of the office he was set apart unto; The other instance is, Gal. 1. 15. Paul saith of himself, That God had seperated him from his mothers womb, that

was not surely from original sinne, for he speaketh immediately before of the sinfulness he had once been guilty of; but his meaning is, he was separated from the womb in Gods Decree to be an Apostle of Jesus Christ, though for a long while he was a persecutor of his Church; Thus you see it is the former sanctifi∣cation the Apostle speaketh of, and not the latter, and if we do suppose that Jeremiah even in his mothers womb was then also sanctified in the later way (for none can deny, but that even then God might renew his nature by grace) yet that will not exclude him from sinne but necessarily suppose it, for he that needed to be made holy in the womb, it is plain he was sinfull in the womb; Ludovicus de Tena. who handleth this Question about Jeremiah (lib. 2. Isa. scrip. diffic. 12^a) concludeth, That by this expression is meant the cleansing of Jere∣miah from original sinne in the womb of his mother, and in debating arguments pro & con, doth refuse that interpretation of the deputation of the Prophet to his ministerial office, because otherwise here would be no more peculiar thing promised to Jeremiah: And making an Objection to himself from Austin, Renasci per gratiam supponit nasci per naturam, whereas Jeremiaeh is thus sancti∣fied before he was born, therefore we cannot understand it of regeneration; He answereth it thus, That their is a nativity in the womb, for the person hath a being before his local egress, and such a birth is enough for regeneration; by which it appeareth, that if this should be interpreted of Jeremiah's purgation from original sinne, (which is not probable) it doth not incommodate us. And so we come to the second example, and that is, John the Baptist, while in his mothers womb, of whom we read this admirable thing recorded by the E∣vangelist Luke, cap. 1, 41. that when Elizabeth was saluted by the Virgin Ma∣ry, The babe leaped in the womb, which is repeated again, v. 44. Assoon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in my eares, the babe leaped in my womb for joy; now you must know, that this great motion of the child was not in a meer na∣tural way, as sometimes children may do in the womb, when the mother is greatly affected, but it was in a divine and supernatural way, even as Rebeckah, when her twinnes did strive in the womb; this was an extraordinary progno∣stick caused in a supernatural way by God. And although Calvin on the place saith,

That it is natural to the fruit of the womb to leap or move, when the mother is moved with joy, yet he acknowledgeth that Luke doth here note some extraordinary thing, and that this leaping was by the secret motion of the Spirit of God;

which doth detect the horrible impudence and slander of Maldonate, who is not ashamed to say,

That Calvin doth own nothing be∣sides what is natural in this,

for which (in derision) he calleth him pius autor, we see by this, how little we may trust such men. We must then conclude even the babe at that time was affected with joy upon the Virgin Mary's coming to his mother; and this supposeth, that the child also was filled with the Holy Ghost; yea v. 15. it is expresly said of John, That he should be filled with the holy Ghost from the womb: But if this be granted, then it is greatly controverted, Whether the babe did this with sense and knowledge that Christ was present; or whether it was by the motion of the Spirit of God in the child, that knowing nothing at all? There are probable arguments on both sides; The Lutherans they do greedily imbrace that opinion, that maketh the child, while in the womb to have actual faith and knowledge of Christ, and from thence they do peremptorily conclude, That Infants have actual sinnes, and that they may have actual faith and other graces; but this is against experience, and if we do grant, that John had such actual knowledge of Christ, yet this was extraordina∣ry and miraculous, and must no more be attributed to all children, then speak∣ing to all Asses, because Balaam's once did. Many Authors conclude that John did rejoyce with some sense and apprehension, and for this reason he is said to be filled with the Holy Ghost, and joy must arise from some knowledge and

apprehension: neither (say they) will it follow from hence that he did not loose this actual knowledge afterwards, but had it alwayes while an In∣fant, for we see the Prophets (though men grown up) yet had not the spirit of prophecy at all times. But come we to our business, Let it be granted, that John had actual faith, that he was filled with the Holy Ghost, that doth not hinder, but that by nature he was a child of wrath and full of sinne; for this grace is bestowed upon him when by nature sinfull, and doth no more argue he had no sinne in him before, then persons grown up have not, when the Holy Ghost was poured on them: And although it be said, He was filled with the Holy Ghost, that doth not imply, that all sinne was wholly taken out of him, no more then the Apostles and all others were quite purged from sinne, when they are said to be filled with the Holy Ghost. Besides the Scripture (as Calvin considereth well) doth not say, John was filled with the Holy Ghost in the womb, but from his mothers womb, which he thus expounds,

That John the Baptist did betimes, even from his Infancy manifest what an excellent Prophet he was like to be, because the Spirit of God did even then give many Demonstrations thereof,

and thus (though not so extraordinarily) God sometimes doth give to some his sanctifying Spirit even from the cradle almost, they begin betimes to put forth many excellent signs of that grace, which will flourish more in their elder yeares. Timothy from a child is said to have the knowledg of the Scriptures from a Child, 2 Tim. 3. 15. And some have the fear of God planted so early in their hearts, that they cannot know any remarkable time of their conversion, yea they cannot remember but that alwayes they had such a tenderness about sinne, and love to good things, yet we must not think for all this, they were not born in sinne; we must not say of them, as was said of Bonaventure for his hope∣fullness in his youth, In hoc homine non peccavit Adam; No, these have by nature the same seed of all impiety, and their younger yeares would have demonstrated this poison, as well as it doth in others, but the grace of God doth prevent: Oh let such Obadiah's that can say, They feared God from the youth, admire the goodness of God to them! he might have suffered that original sinne in thee, to make thee wallow in such mire and filthy lusts, as other young persons do: Oh take heed of thinking thou hast a better nature then they, that thou hast not so much original sinne in thee as others! but walk humbly, lest God sometime or other leave thee to let thee see what is in thy heart, that all the sparkes of original sinne are not put out, and then, though to thy great grief thou be con∣vinced there is a such a thing in thee.