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

About this Item

Title
A treatise of original sin ... proving that it is, by pregnant texts of Scripture vindicated from false glosses / by Anthony Burgess.
Author
Burgess, Anthony, d. 1664.
Publication
London :: [s.n.],
1658.
Rights/Permissions

To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.

Subject terms
Sin, Original.
Link to this Item
http://name.umdl.umich.edu/A30247.0001.001
Cite this Item
"A treatise of original sin ... proving that it is, by pregnant texts of Scripture vindicated from false glosses / by Anthony Burgess." In the digital collection Early English Books Online. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/A30247.0001.001. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed June 16, 2024.

Pages

¶. 1.

FIrst, This controversie about mans mortality is very famous in the Church, and hath been of old solliciously disputed. The Pelagians as they denied original sinne, so consonantly to that falshood they affirmed, That death was not the punishment of sinne, but did arise by the necessity of our natural constitution; Which Assertion was condemned by some Councils, and the Laws of Empe∣rours, as injurious to God the Creator of men. For this experience, that In∣fants new born are subject to many miseries, and death it self, was a thorn in their sides, which they could not endure in, nor yet possibly pull out. Some∣times with the Stocks they would deny death to be an evil. Sometimes they would say, Children in the womb are guilty of actual sinnes, for which they de∣served death: but that which they did most constantly adhere unto, was, That Adam was made mortal, and would have died, if he had not sinned, death being a necessary consequence (as they say) from a mans corporal constitution. The Papists, especially the Schoolmen of old, and the Jesuites of late (to whom Jansenius doth vehemently oppose in this point, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as the Greek ex∣pression is) say, That Adam was indeed by nature mortal, but by grace and superadded favour, he was immortal. So that both Papists and Protestants

Page 508

agree in this, That Adam was made immortal in his Creation: Only the dif∣ference is, Whether as original righteousness, so immortality may be said to be natural or supernatural to Adam; We say it's natural, they say it's superna∣tural; and yet Bellarmine (De gratiâ primi Hom. lib. cap. 5.) in his explication of himself in this point cometh very near us, or at least speaketh contradictions to himself: For (he saith) if natural be taken for that which was put into man from his nativity, if natural be taken for that which was to be propagated to Adam's posterity; if natural be taken for that which is convenient, to perfect and prepare a man for his end, then they say original righteousness, and so by consequence immortality would have been natural to Adam's posterity; but if we take natural for that which doth internally constitute nature, or necessarily flow from the principles of nature, then (they say) immortality was superna∣tural, even as original righteousnesse. But the Protestants, when they call original righteousnesse natural, they doe not meane effectivè, as if it were not the gift of God bestowed upon us, as if it did flow from the principles of nature; but subjectivè, that is, original righteous∣nesse and immortality were not supernatural to Adam, as they are now to us, being we are corrupted, but connatural, or a due perfection to man, supposing God created him for such an end, as to enjoy himself. So that it is due not so much to the nature of man, as to Gods Order and Decree concern∣ing man. Thus as in birds, supposing God would have them to flie, it was ne∣cessary they should have wings, (though they come from a natural principle) so in man, supposing God made him for communion with, and enjoyment of himself, it was necessary that he should be indewed with holiness (Though flowing not from nature, but concreated by God with man.) Thus that which is the gift of God, and cometh only from him, may be in respect of the subject a due perfection. It was thus with Adam in respect of his soul, that was crea∣ted immediately by God, it did not flow from any natural causes; yet supposing God would make him a rational creature, then this became a due perfection to him. Adam then was immortal by nature in a well-explained sense, as he had a reasonable soul by nature. But however it be, Protestants and many Papists agree in the thing, that he was made immortal; only they differ in the manner How. Now the Socinian differeth from all; for he dogmatizeth, That Adam was made mortal, that death was natural, and denieth any original righteousnesse or immortality that was bestowed upon Adam any way. It is true, sometimes he saith, That though Adam was made mortal, yet God might have preserved him from actual death by some way or other; only that he was made immortal, that he denieth. So that what the Papists dream about their imaginary pure naturals, saying, God might have created man so: Socinians affirm defacto, it was so. The late Writer Dr. T. is also positive for Adam's mortality by nature, That Adam was made mortal by nature (saith he) is infinitely certain, and proved by his eating and drinking, &c. (Further Explicat. pag. 453.) instancing in those Arguments the Socinians use to bring. All which Assertions do directly and evi∣dently oppose the word of God.

Do you have questions about this content? Need to report a problem? Please contact us.