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 18, 2025.

Pages

SECT. IX.
Of the state of Infants that die in their Infancy, before they are ca∣pable of any Actual Transgressions, and that die before Bap∣tisme.

THe next particular in order to be treated upon is, concerning the state of those Infants, who die in their Infancy, before they are capable of any actual trans∣gression. These having only original sinne upon them, what may we conclude about their final estate? for we will take for granted, that the Doctrine of the Lutherans is to be exploded, who hold that Infants have actual sinnes, and that some do partake of actual grace; this is repugnant to reason and experience. Now to proceed more orderly in this point, we are to take notice of these ensu∣ing particulars.

First, That it is one thing to be a child of wrath by nature, and another thing to be reprobated for ever by God, never to be admitted into his favour. When the Apostle calleth us children of wrath, the meaning is not, as if there were a final and total rejection from all grace; for then the meaning would be, that all men are damned, which is manifestly contradicted by many places in Scripture. Though therefore all Infants are by nature the children of wrath, yet all are not reprobated; though all deserve to be damned, yet all are not actually dam∣ned.

Secondly, We are to know that those, who hold some Infants dying in their original sinne to be damned, do yet acknowledge that it is (as Austin calleth it) mitissima omnium poena, the mildest of all punishments, because they have no actual sinnes joyned with their original, to encrease the torments of hell. It is true, we told you original sinne in the nature of it is very great and hainous, even so great, that none are able to express the loathsomness thereof; yet be∣cause it hath this diminishing circumstance, that it is not voluntary personally in an Infant, therefore we may conclude, that they have lesser torments in hell, then Adult persons. For that there are degrees of torments in hell, some punished more extreamly then others, is acknowledged by all, though some learned men question, whether there be any degrees of glory in heaven.

Thirdly, As for the Doctrine of the learned about the state of Infants dying in their Infancy, there are several opinions; Some hold that all Infants dying so, whether in the Church, or out of the Church, whether of believing, or un∣believing parents, are saved. They think this opinion doth most suit with the goodness and mercy of God: of this opinion are not only the Heterodox Do∣ctors, but even learned Junius in his answer to Puccius; Zuinglius also is alledged for this. Others they make a distinction of Infants dying in their Infancy. For either they die without Baptisme, or with Baptisme; if without Baptisme, then they conclude of their damnation; and in this rigid way Austin went, and many follow him; yea Austin thought, that if they died without the Sacrament of the Lords Supper also: for at that age it was generally held that both the Sacra∣ments were necessary to salvation, and therefore both to be applyed to Infants:

Page 547

But then for these Infants, who die partakers of Baptisme, they concluded un∣doubtedly of their salvation, this being their Doctrine, that Baptisme doth wash away original sinne: The Papists they all agreeing in this likewise, that Baptism is necessary necessitate medii to salvation, either really, or in voto, in desire; and because an Infant dying without Baptisme, cannot have a desire thereunto; Hence they conclude of eternal death, as a punishment unto such; yet Elisius a Papist in his piorum clypeus, &c. (Quest. 10. Art. 3.) is very bold, saying that opinion which many Divines and the Church holdeth, concerning the state of Infants dying without Baptisme according to the ordinary law, est sa••••dura & onerosa, is very hard and burdensome, and not conformable to the precepts of Christ, which are sweet and easy; and therefore he alledgeth Gerson and Caje∣tan for this opinion, which he is so farre from judging heretical, that he calls it pietati conformis; but generally the Papists go otherwise: But then they differ amongst themselves. Some of them, as Catharinus, place Infants so dying, in a terrestrial Paradise, where they have a natural, though not a supernatural hap∣piness, (Opus de statu parv) Others make their condition more miserable, viz. that they have the privative part of eternal death, though not the positive; they have the poena damni, the punishment of loss, though not of sense, they are shut out from enjoying God, but yet they say this will not work any sorrow in them, because they know, that they were not in a capacity for enjoying the face of God, as (say they) a Country Peasant is not grieved, because he is not a King, because he never was in any probability for such a dignity. But, as a Po∣pish Writer, (Flor. Conrius Archip. Thuani.) observeth, confuting his own par∣ty, and rigidly following Austin, in a Tractate joyned to Jansenius his Works: These Infants (saith he) knowing that they are shut from the face of God, must needs be exceedingly grieved; because in Adam they had a capacity to enjoy God, even as a poor man may mourn that he is not a King, when his ancestors had a right to it, but sinfully lost it, and this is the case of all Infants; so that it is a meer figment that many Papists have, to make an half hell, and a semi-damnation, as if we might be deprived of Gods favour, and not be positively damned. It is true, here also the Papists are divided; Bellarmine maketh five divers opinions concerning the state of dying Infants, and he joyneth with those that hold they have inward sorrow in that eternal death, but yet not so great as to be called hell fire, or the worm of conscience. For this end they write and speak so much of a limbus Infantum, a border or fringe as it were in hell; where Infants are all disposed, being without the Vision of God, yet not tormented with boddy pain; but there is no Scripture for such a place: and therefore we leave this limbus to these limbatis pontificiis, who love to enlarge their limbos, and simbrias, as one saith. Lastly, There are others, and they distinguish of Infants dying: either they are such as are within the Covenant, and are of be∣lieving parents; and of such they conclude their salvation: for they look upon their federation, as an external sign of their election; but then for all such as die without the Covenant, the children of Pagans; they say, that by the Scrip∣ture, they cannot conclude of any hope of salvation for them. Thus you see in∣to how many divers wayes they go, who handle this Question: I might adde another opinion mentioned by Vorstius, (Anti Bellar. in Qurt. Tom. Censur. ad Thes. Duodes) of some, who affirm Infants do wholly perish as beasts; but (saith he) these are not to be accounted inter Evangelicos, amongst the Evange∣lical Churches; yet within a little while after, he reproveth Bellarmine for not touching upon all the opinions of others about Infants, saying, That there are not wanting some amongst Christians, who think either some or all Infants are through death wholly abolished, as beasts; whose Arguments (saith he) Bellarmine should have answered, but herein Vorstius seemeth to manifest his good will to the Socinian party, and though he excludeth them from the Evan∣gelici,

Page 548

yet he acknowledgeth them Christiani. All that I shall speak to it shall be comprehended in these particulars:

First, That concerning Infants, there are many difficulties in Divinity, for the Scripture speaking for the most part of persons growen up, hence it is that we cannot so clearly discover the truth about them, as how Infants are justified, seeing they have no actual faith to lay hold upon Christ; as also how the Spirit of God doth work in them regeneration, and make them new creatures; for seeing it is plain that of such Infants is the kindome of heaven, and Gods pro∣mise is to the believer, and his seed; it necessarily followeth, that they are justi∣fied, and they are sanctified, though we know not how the Spirit of God doth this in them. Thus in the matter of the Resurrection and the day of Judgment, we must necessarily acknowledge, that Infants will then be raised with perfect bodies, all imperfections being then to be removed from glorified bodies, as also that they will be called to Judgement: Though the judicial process men∣tioned by the Evangelist instanceth only in actual sinnes and duties, we must then be sober in this inquisition, seeing the Scripture speaketh not so expresly of Infants, neither is the Question necessarily to be known, and therefore if we be over curious in enquiting what God will them: Let us 〈…〉〈…〉 we deserve not Peter's reproof, Joh. 20. busily asking about John, What is 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to thee? follow thou me; so God say, What is that to thee, how I will 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of Infants? thou art an adult person, do thou follow me.

Secondly, We must necessarily make a distinction between such as 〈…〉〈…〉 under the Covenant, and such whose parents and their seed are strangers 〈◊〉〈◊〉 it, and therefore with the Remorstrants to conclude, That all Infants 〈◊〉〈◊〉 born of Pagans, are surely saved, is to put no difference between 〈…〉〈…〉 Covenant of grace, and to be without, which yet the Scripture doth; 〈◊〉〈◊〉 it saith of the children of unbelievers that they are unclean, 1 Cor. 7. and Hea∣thens they are said to be without; and therefore according to the Rule of the Scripture, we see no more visible way for the children of Heathens, then for Heathens themselves to be saved; but yet the Orthodox do adde, that they leave these things to the judgement of God, and content themselves 〈◊〉〈◊〉 that which Paul saith, 1 Cor. 5. 12. What have I to do to judge those that are without: although the Apostle doth not there speak of a Doctrinal Judgement, but a Judgement of Jurisdiction, which Church Officers cannot exercise upon those that are without the Church, though this be so, we must alwayes remember to put a difference between that general love of God to mankind, and that special grace of his to his Church, and therefore we must needs be injurious to this grace of God, if we make children without the Covenant to be partakers of the same special priveledge which others within do receive, then the Gospel is no such extrordinary mercy, then the Covenant of grace is no such signal favour, then believing parents have no such cause to bless God for his mercifull dispen∣sations towards them, if Heathens children are in as prepared a way for recon∣ciliation with God, as their posterity is.

3. Therfore the fountain and spring head of the salvation of children dying in their Infancy, is the election of God as well as in grown persons, it holdeth in them, as well as in adult persons, that election doth obtain, and he hath mercy on whom he will have mercy, election and reprobation is amongst Infants dying, so as well as of those that are men, though this Doctrine be rejected by Ar∣minians, yet believing parents who lose their children while in the blossom, are greatly to comfort their souls concerning their children so early deceased; for although they are not able to look into the Book of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 which is in heaven, and thereby know which childs name is written there, and which not; yet in that they are externally brought under the Covenant of grace, and so in prox∣ime capacity to Church-Communion; they may well satisfie themselves in

Page 549

this, as an effect of their election, and that because God hath chosen them to eternal glory, therefore are they in time received into this grace and favour, as to be of the reputed members of Christ, and in this we must rest, not doubt∣ing but that God doth internally go along with the Ordinance; and that if the child be taken away in its Infancy, it is done both in mercy to the child, and to the parents: Of this subject it is good to peruse Peter Martyr, Comment. 1 Cor. 7.

Lastly, Therefore in this great business of the salvation of children dying in Infancy, it is election, and the Covenant of greace that maketh the difference, and not Baptisme: This was Austin's mistake of old, and the Popish errour in these latter dayes, to lay too much upon Baptisme, as if that by its very work done, opere operato, (as they say) did take away original sinne, and put us into a state of grace, from which men by actual impietis might afterwards fall away; so that the errours about Baptisme are extream, either such as think it only a temporary Ordinance for the initiation of the Church at first, as the Socinians, or else such as make it to be the efficacious instrument of grace, and that from the meer work done, though there be no good actual motion, or stirring of the heart at the time, though administred to an adult person: Hence it is that by some the Ordinance of Baptisme is exalted too much, as if the outward washing would save a man, not at all looking to the inward grace represented thereby, and by others it is wholly rejected as not being commanded us now in these times, or if it be so, is only commemorative of our duty not seating and ob∣signative of any grace of God to us, for which cause the Remonstrants say, That the Doctrine of the Sacraments as it is now delivered by Protestant Au∣thors, is vehemently suspected by them, but we are to sail between these two rocks, neither giving it too much or too little, for we may observe that the Scripture speaketh two wayes of Sacraments. First when men do rest on them, never at all attending to that grace they signifie, then the Scripture doth de∣base them, attributeth no glory at all to them, making Sacraments to be no Sacraments, if they be not received in a right manner; Thus the Apostle saith, Circumcision is become uncircumcision to him that keepeth not the Law: and 1 Cor. 11. This is not to eat the Lords Supper, yea unworthy receivers eat and drink their own salvation: Thus the Scripture when it attends to mens either resting upon them as if they could save, or the sinful abuse of them, by not attending to the grace signified doth speak in an undervaluing way of them; But then at other times, when it doth respect the institution of Christ, and the effects thereof, then glorious and great things are spoken of them; yet though the Scripture commends and commandeth them as the institution of Christ for supernatural effects, notwithstanding that old Rule is to be received, that not the privation, but the contempt of Sacraments doth damn; so that the after ages of the Church which came to idolize Baptisme, and to put so much vertue even in the very external act done, can no wayes be justified, yea so greatly did superstition grow in this kind, that they thought Baptisme did also work some wonderfull temporal effects; for whereas there is a traditon, (though it be justly reckoned among the vulgar errours) that the Jewes have by way of punishment an offen∣sive smell or stink inflicted upon their body, they instance in Jewes baptized, that therby were cleansed from this filthiness. The Poet Fortunatus said, Sanct. Comment. in Jer. 31. 29.

Abluitur Judeus odor Baptismate divo.

Thus absurd did many grow in their thoughts about the efficacy of Baptisme; but the truth is, That although Baptism be an Ordinance appointed by God for the sealing of the remission of original sinne, yet it hath not this effect in all, neither is the benefit of Baptisme to be limited to that time only, but it extend∣eth

Page 550

it self to our whole life; so that we are daily to make an improvement of it both for duty and comfort. And thus much may suffice for the deciding of this Question with sobriety and modesty.

Now if any shall say upon the hearing of this damnable estate that we are plunged into by sinne, as the Disciples in another case, It is good not to marry; yea that it is good to have no children; it is good to be no Parents, because our Infants do thus come into the world upon worse terms then the young ones of bruit beasts, because they are the children of Gods wrath, whereas the creatures are not the creatures of Gods wrath. To such as shall thus conclude, I shall propound these ensuing particulars:

First, That it is just and righteous with God, to continue the propagation of man∣kind, though man hath thus corrupted his nature. Because Adam fell, and so all his postcrity would be propagated in a damnable estate, shall he therefore destroy the whele species of men, and raze out every individuum? Seeing then its Gods will, that men should increase and multiply, that there should be parents and children; for which end he hath instituted marriage, we are to regard the will of God in this way more than the adherent corruption; and the rather, be∣cause this damnable guilt doth adhere to our natures, not from Gods primitive Institution, but by Adam's voluntary transgression. It being then a duty to some to marry, it being by God appointed a remedy against sinne; for thee to ab∣stain from that way, and to desire no children under pretence of original sinne, is a meer delusion.

Secondly, You are to know, That though children be born in this defiled and cursed estate, yet they are in themselves mercies and comforts, which mace our Sa∣viour say, That a woman, because of the joy that a man child is born, she forgetteth all her sorrow and pangs that she was in, John 16. 21. So that at the same time, they may be by nature children of wrath, and yet in another respect comforts and mercies in themselves; for which end God promiseth children as a mercy, and threatneth it, as a punishment, to be barren and childless.

Thirdly, Thou that art a believing parent, and hast thy child dying in its infan∣cy, thou hast cause to assure thy self of the mercy of God to thy child, because he ta∣keth parents and children into the same promise. Oh but I know not that God hath elected him; So neither canst thou thy own, à priori I you must begin at the lower round of the ladder, in Gods Election; The effects and fruits thereof; And now what greater pledge and argument canst thou have of his salvation, then being born under the Covenant of grace? You cannot expect actual ex∣pressions of regeneration and grace from a dying Infant; therefore thou must runne to the Covenant of grace, whereby God doth receive such, as his mem∣bers; yea thou hast cause to admire the goodness of God to thy child, and his mercy, when so many thousands, and thousands of Pagans children dying, have no visible way of salvation; we cannot by the Scripture (as you heard) see any Ark provided for them, as God in mercy hath done for thee.

Fourthly, The consideration of Gods just and severe proceedings against Pagans and their children, may make thee the more admire the grace of God in saving of thee. For how many Heathens perish in hell, who it may be never committed such gross and soul sins in their life time, as thou hast done? To be sure their In∣fants never committed such actual inquities, as thou hast done; yet they appear according to Gods ordinary way of proceedings, to be left in that lost estate of nature. And therefore that is a good quickning meditation which Vedlius 〈◊〉〈◊〉, (Hilar. cap 3. pag. 119.) To make a godly man thankfull for Gods

grace, seeing by nature we deserve otherwise. Ah quot sunt, erunt in inferno miselli infantuli, &c. Ah how many little Infants are, and shall be in hell, who never had the knowledge of good and evil, and might not God have left thee in the same misery?
This (I say) is a pious meditation. Though

Page 551

that scoffing Remonstrant prefix this expression amongst others in the front of his Book, as if it were no lesse then blasphemy, Vedel. Rhapsod.

Fifthly, Thou who art a parent exercised with this temptation about thy chil∣dren, it grieveth thee to think thou bringest them forth to be Gods enemies, and the Devils children: Let not this discourage thee, but provoke thee the more earnestly to be much in prayer for them, and to be more carefull in their education. Let them be the children of thy prayers and tears, the children of thy care and godly discipline, and thou mayest comfort thy self that such shall not perish; however thou hast done thy duty, and so art to leave all to the wise and righteous God, who is not accountable to man for any of his proceedings.

That the encouragement and hopes of parents are great in the faithfull dis∣charge of their duties, notwithstanding the guilt of original sinne, may further appear, as to the woman, in that famous and noble Text, 1 Tim. 2. 14, 15. But the woman being deceived was in the transgression; Notwithstanding she shall be sa∣ved in child-bearing, if they continue in the faith &c.

The Apostle having strictly charged, That women should not usurp authority over the man, for two reasons,

1. From the primitive Creation, even before sinne; Adam was first formed, then Eve: So that in the state of integrity, the wife was to have been subject to her husband, even as children to parents; but it would have been without that difficulty and reluctancy which sinne hath now brought upon mankind.

The other reason is, Because the woman was first in the transgression, and thereby through her original sinne infected all. Now lest this should afflict women too much, and they conceive their estate desperate; the Apostle ming∣leth honey with this gall, he informeth them of comfortable considerations, even from that very particular; wherein they see the evident displeasure and wrath of God; and that is the sorrows and pangs they bring forth children with, She shall be saved in child-bearing.

How this is to be understood seemeth difficult. For may not maids, or such married persons that never have children be saved? How shall they do that have no children, if the woman be saved in child-bearing?

To this it is easily answered, That the Apostle doth not speak of the meritorious cause of salvation, which is Christ; for in him all believers are one; there is neither male or female, Jew or Gentile, married or unmarried, that do differ, as to justifi∣cation and salvation through him. Therefore the Apostle speaketh here only of such women, as are married, and have children. Now because such might be discouraged, because of the curse laid upon the woman at first, in bringing forth of children, he addeth, That notwithstanding this she shall be saved; Those pangs and sorrows do not exclude her from salvation; therefore the Greek Preposition 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as Rom. 2. 27. compared with 29. it doth not signifie, she is saved by that, as a cause. For how many women are there, who through their impenitency in wicked wayes will be damned, though they be the mothers of many children? It signifieth only the way and means wherein she may ob∣tain salvation. So that what was at first in it self a curse, may now be sanctified, and so prove no impediment to their salvation. It is true, some would have this 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to be meant of the Virgins bearing of Christ, as if the meaning were, She shall be saved▪ by Christ born of a woman. Erasmus on the place, saith, Theophilact mentioneth this, but rejecteth it. The late Annota∣tour mentioneth it with approbation; but the Context doth no wise agree with this; for he speaketh of every woman in the Church bearing her children; therefore addeth, If they abide in faith and charity; neither can any argument be put upon the Article 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as if the Apostle meant that signal and emi∣nent bearing of a child, when Christ was born; for if this were so, none but the Virgin Mary, and no other woman could take comfort from this palce.

Page 552

Heinsius by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 understandeth marriage, She shall be saved in the way of marriage, which is called so (saith he) from the end of marriage, which is to have children; for (as he affirmeth) the Grecians have not one word to ex∣presse marriage by, and therefore in stead thereof they use 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and so here 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; but this hath no probability: We adhere therefore to the former Exposition; the sense whereof is, That notwithstanding Eve did through ori∣ginal sinne bring a sad curse upon child-bearing, yet to those women that are godly, the curse is taken off; yea and doth become a sanctified meanes of their salvation; not of it self to every one (for then no child-bearing woman could be damned) but if they do walk in those wayes God hath commanded. Therefore it followeth, If they abide, &c. which denoteth the necessity of abi∣ding and continuing in all holy duties. Some indeed referre this to the children, If the children continue in what is good. And if it be said, When a godly mo∣ther doth her duty, she may have notwithstanding wicked and ungodly children, and shall that prejudice her salvation? To this they answer, That for the most part the wickedness of children is laid upon the parents neglect; but if it be not, then God will accept of the mother faithfully discharging her duty, though the chil∣dren do wickedly miscarry; but it is farre more probable to referre it to the woman. And though the number be changed into the plural, If they abide, yet that is ordinary in Scripture, especially when the word is a collective, as in the 5th Chapter of this Epistle vers. 4. where 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the singular number, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the plural relateth to it. The qualification then that is necessary to all women, that would find the curse in child-bearing taken away, and ori∣ginal guilt accompanying that sorrow removed, is to abound in all saving gra∣ces, and to continue therein; and then that woman who is a wife and a mother of many children, let her not torment her self about the state of her children, and the condition they are born in, but quiet her soul with this Text of Scripture.

The last particular, that may satisfie the souls of such parents who may be exercised in these particulars about original sinne, is to remind themselves, That the whole matter about original sinne in reference to Adam, and all his poste∣rity, is not without the wise and holy appointment of God, who would never have suf∣fered this evil to be, could he not have raised out thereby a greater good. For al∣though it be true, That Adam did sinne from his meer internal liberty, there being no decrees or execution thereof that did necessitate him to do so; yet all this could not be without the Decree of God permitting, as also wisely ordering all things for his own glory. No doubt but God could have confirmed Adam in his holiness; yea he might have so ordered it, that every man and woman should stand or fall upon their personal account, as the Angels did: yet such was his will and Covenant, that in Adam all his posterity should be involved, and the same issue should attend both them and him. This then being the ap∣pointment of a just, wise and mercifull God, we ought wholly to acquiesce, knowing that the business of mans life and death, his salvation and damnation, could not have been ordered better otherwise, though all the wisdome of men and Angels had been put together. And therefore when thou who art a parent, but tempted about the state of thy children thou hast brought forth, art tur∣moiling thy self in these disputes, shake off these vipers, and conclude, That God regardeth his own glory and honor, more then thou canst do; he hath taken that way wherein he will magnifie his own glorious Attributes. And truly this should presently silence all thy disputations. For wouldst thou have God lose part of his glory? Wouldst thou have his honour in any degree laid in the dust, that thy will and desires may be accomplished? Farre be this from thee. Surely the great and high thoughts we ought to have of Gods wisdom, goodness and holiness ought to keep us from opening our mouths any more in this point, say∣ing,

Page 553

As I leave my self, so my children in the hands of God, who disposeth all things according to his own will. And as we say of the nature of God, he is that Bonum quo nihil melius cogitari potest; The same must we apply to all his dis∣pensations likewise.

Furthermore we are to remember, That whatsoever the first Adam hath brought upon mankind, the second Adam will totally and fully remove in all that are his members: Insomuch that at the last, there shall not remain (as it were) an hoof of any of these calamities. That original corruption within thee shall no longer tempt thee incessantly like Joseph's Mistress, saying, Come, and lie with me; we shall then in the issue of all have more cause to rejoyce, because of Christ, and the benefits by him, then ever we were cast down and dejected, because of the transgression of the first Adam, and the unspeakable evil that came by him. So that if these particulars be duly considered, every believer may with comfort and quietness sit down under this truth, while men of phari∣saical and self-justifying spirits rage and revile at these things.

But you will say, Grant that there is such a thing as Original Sinne, and that we have delivered nothing but Scripture truth in this point, yet may we not be too tragical in exclamations about it? As there are those who erre in the defect, so are there not many that do offend in the excess, that make it more hainous then it is? This is the last Question, wherewith I shall conclude this Subject. And

First, All the Popish, Arminian, Socinian party with their adherents, look upon the Calvinists, as excessive in this point; hence are there several com∣plaints of them about this matter in all their works. But certainly, if we do re∣gard the scope of the Scripture, it is wholly to debase man, and exalt Christ; To discover our incurable and sinfull estate, that thereby Christ may be the more magnified, which is done by nothing so much, as to make known that horrid pollution, which is upon all by nature. And certainly that one Text, Genes. 6. 5. affirming, The thoughts of the imagination of a mans heart to be only evil, and that continually, speaketh more emphatically the deplored and sinfull estate of man, then ever any Calvinist hath yet exprest. Yet though this be so, we grant, that some may go too farre in their opinions, and expressions about original sinne, though for the most part such is a mans self-fulness and self-righ∣teousness, that Pelagianism is likelier to poison the world, then Flacci••••ism. We must know therefore that one Illyricus a Lutheran in opposition to Victori∣nus Strigelius a Lutheran also, but a Synergist, holding the will of man to con∣curre actively with the grace of God to a mans conversion, and thereby exte∣nuating original sinne. This Illyricus (I say) out of a vehement opposition to that party, and the School-Doctrine about original sinne, making it to be an accident in a man, did fall into another extream, saying,

That original sinne was a substantial evil in a man, and that the very substantial form of a man was now made sinfull.
This Illyricus was a man of a very turbulent and unquiet spirit, a desperate enemy to Melancthon, whose heart it is said he broke. (Melch. Adam in vita Illyrici.) At first he was well reputed of by the Ortho∣dox, and being sadly tempted in his spirit about sinne, and the wrath of God, but afterwards delivered from it; it was judged so great a mercy, that thanks was given to God in the publick Congregation for his behalf; but afterwards among other erroneous assertions, he maintained,
That original sinne was a substantial evil in a man.
We may read his whole opinion with the declarati∣on of himself and his Arguments, in his Tractate on purpose concerning this point (Clavis Script. 2d parte Tractat. 6. de originali peccato.) wherein he hath many absurd and monstrous expressions. Although it must be acknowledged, that with that dung and filth he hath, there is also some gold. Some there are that wholly excuse him, saying,
That his words only were improper, but that his sense was orthodox; and that out of hatred to that Doctrine, which extenu∣ateth

Page 554

original sinne; he would, pretending the Scripture for his Rule, use substantive expressions,
to declare the nature of it. But whatsoever his end may be, certainly his sense and opinion, as declared in his words, is justly to be condemned and exploded. For by Adam's fall he maketh a substantial change to be made upon a man; That the Image of God is turned into the image of the Devil, not accidentally, but substantially; as when wine is made vinegar, or when the parts of a statue, or house that were built in some comely harmony, representing some glorious thing, they should be pulled down, and built into another deformed shape. As suppose the Image of some comely person should be pulled in pieces, and made the image of an horrible Dragon or Serpent. He distinguisheth of the material substance of a man, and his formal; He grant∣eth, That the matrial substance of a man, still remaineth our body, and parts thereof, but the formal substance is altered. As when a vessel that was once made a vessel of honour, is afterwards made a vessel of dishonour; the material substance is the same, but not the formal. He doth no wayes endure, that we should call original sinne an accident; for he saith, This sinne is a tran∣scendent, and is in all predicaments; it's sometimes a quality, sometimes an action, &c. sometimes a substance. Neither will he distinguish between the sub∣stance, of a man, and his sin adhering thereto, between the subject and the privation in it, between the abstract and concrete: God (he saith) is angry with concretes, punisheth concretes, not abstracts; and therefore he saith, Those that distinguish be∣tween the substance of a man and his sinne, do as the Alchimists separating from the oyl, oleity; from a stone, lapideity; so these from Adam, Adameity. Thus he, and much more. But certainly herein he betrayeth horrible ignorance in Phi∣losophy and Theology; for both these will necessitate us to distinguish between the substance of a man, and the sinfull privation in him; otherwise Christ could not have taken the same nature with us upon him, sinne only excepted; and re∣generation would be a substantial change, not a qualitative: Neither by this opinion could the same substantial bodies be said to be glorified in Heaven. So that as the Leprosie in the body, is not the body; neither is original sinne in man, the nature of man; and therefore when we read, that the flesh and spirit are opposite, that opposition must be understood in praedicamento qualitatis, not substantiae. The greatest support that this man hath for this errour, is, because the Scripture useth substantive expressions, it is called an evil heart, a stony heart, &c. But this is because of the corruption adhering to it: As we say, a rotten tree, or a poisoned fountain; The heart as it is a fleshly substance is not evil, but as it is the principle of our motions and actions, not in a physical, but moral sense. It is true, we say, That through original sinne man cometh short of his end: And so as the hand when its dead cannot do the works of an band; or salt, when it hath lost its seasoning is good for nothing: Thus it is with man in regard of any supernatural actions, yet he hath not lost any thing that was substantial and essential; Only the power of the soul want the primitive recti∣tude they once had; and therefore whensoever they act, it is with deordinati∣on. Indeed we will grant, That Illyricus his adversary Victorinus Strigelius, did not fully express original corruption, in the Disputation between them; who compared a man to a Loadstone, of which (they say) when rubbed with Gar∣lick, it will not draw iron; but if that be wip'd off by Goats bloud, it will be as attractive as before. For this similitude is not full enough: because original sin doth not only hinder the doing of good actions, but infecteth the very powers and principles of them. It is true, there are those, (as Contzen in Rom. 5.) that say, because the Calvinists hold, That concupiscence is sinne, they cannot avoid Flaccianism but that is a meer calumny. We alwayes distinguish between the nature and substance of a man; and the ataxy and disorder that doth now accompany it. Neither when we call it an accident do we thereby extenuate the

Page 555

nature of original sinne; for we do not make it a light superficial one, but which is inbred with us, and doth diffuse it self over all the parts and powers of the soul. Neither do we say, it is a transient, temporary accident, but that which is fixed and permanent in us. Thus we see in what sense, there may be excessive expres∣sions about original sinne; otherwise we cannot say enough to affect our hearts with the loathsomness of it, provided we keep close to the Scripture directions herein.

Thus at last by the good hand of God we are come out of these deeps into the haven; we have waded through all the several parts of this vast Subject, and are now come to the shore. It remaineth as a duty upon every one, to ha∣sten out of this captivity and bondage, not to stay a day or hour in this damna∣ble estate, and above all things to take heed of such opinions, that do either lessen or nullifie this sinne; for this is to erre in the foundation; Christ and grace, and regeneration can never be built thereupon. This Doctrine hath stood as a firm 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in all ages, upon which the contrary errors have dashed and broken themselves; and without this we are never able to performe those two necessary duties, To know our selves, and to know Christ. This hath alwayes been the Catholique Doctrine of the Church of God. Neither did the Fathers before Austin's time generally speak otherwise, as late Writers would make us believe: Even as the Socinians say, the Ancients affirmed otherwise about Christ, than after Athanasius his time, and the Coun∣cil of Nice, was usually done in the Church: Scripture, the Consent of the Church, and every mans own experience doth proclaim this truth, Quis ante prodigiosum dicipulum Pelagii Coelestium reatu praevaricationis Adae omne genus humanum negavit astrictum? Lyr. cont. Haeres. c. 24.

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