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

CHAP. VII.

Of the Souls inward filth and defilement by Adam's Sinne.

SECT. I.

TO explain this profound and weighty Truth, consider that expressi∣on in the Doctrine, That we are by Adam's disobedience, made tru∣ly and properly sinners: For there are those that hold, we receive much hurt, Yea, some say, we are guilty by Adam's disobedi∣ence, but not made truly and properly sinners, they deny there is any inward pollution upon the soul of man.

When I had proceeded farre in this Discourse of Original Sinne, there cometh out an English Writer (D^r J. Taylor Vnum Neces.) in a triumphing and scornfull style, like Julian of old, peremptorily opposing this Doctrine of inherent pol∣lution by nature. He is not meerly Pelagian, Arminian, Papist, or Socinian, but an hotchpotch of all; So that as there were a Sect of Philosophers, as Laer∣tius reports (Proem in fin) that was called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, because they would chuse out some opinions from all the Sects that were: So doth this man most unhappily sometimes select what is most deformed in those several parties. With this Writer we shall encounter as often as we find him throwing earth into the pure springs. Although the word Sinner in some places, is as much as to be an offender, to be obnoxious to punishment; yet in this place we must understand more, as is to be shewed.

For there are three things we are subject to by Adam's disobedience:

First, There is a participation of the very actual transgression of Adam, that very sinne he committed, is imputed to us.

Secondly, There is the guilt of this sinne, whereby Adam was obnoxious to death, and eternal condemnation, this also we partake of.

Lastly, There was the deprivation of Gods Image, the loss of that upon A∣dam's transgression, so that his soul, which was before full of light, and a glo∣rious harmony, upon this disobedience, became like a chaos and confusion. And in this state we are born, not succeeding Adam in the Image of God, he once had, but in that horrible confusion, and darknesse he was plung∣ed into.

These three things then, we partake of by Adam's disobedience; but that which is chiefly intended here, and which also my purpose is to treat of chiefly, is, That inward filth and defilement we are fallen into by Adam's sin.

SECT. II.

1. THerefore, when it is said, That we are made sinners by Adam, this is not all, as if thereby we were put into a necessity of dying, or that death is now made a curse to us: For thus much the Socinians grant, That Adam's sinne did hurt us thus farre, That although death was natural to Adam even in the state of integrity, yet it was not made necessary nor penal, but upon Adam's disobedience, But

1. This is false, That death would have been natural to Adam, though he had not sinned, as is to be shewed. And

In the second place, Death as a curse, or as made necessary, is not all that we are obnoxious unto by Adam's sinne, for the Apostle makes that a distinct effect of his disobedience: for he sheweth, That by Adam's offence sinne did first pass over the whole world, and after sin, death; So that to be a sinner is more than to be obnoxious to death, for the Apostle distinguisheth these two.

Besides, why should death fall upon all mankind for Adams sin, if so be that that offence was not made every mans, and all had not sinned in him? Indeed Chrysostom of old expounds this 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, subject to punishment and death; as if to be sinners, were no more than to be mortal. Though Chrysostom in some places seemeth not to hold original sinne, yet in other places he is expresly for it.

This Interpretation of Chrysostoms is received by the English Author above-mentioned, with much approbation, as if to be a sinner, were to be handled, and dealt with as an offender; But the Apostle maketh sinne and death two distinct things, the one a consequent from the other, because we are sinners, we do be∣come mortal. Besides, to be a sinner, is opposite to be righteous in the Text; If then, that signifie an inherent qualification, denominating truly righteous, this must also an inherent corruption, whereby we are truly made sinners: So that this Interpretation hath no probability. Yea from Chrystom himself on the place, we may have a Consutation of this Exposition: For (saith he) one to be made mortal by him of whom he is born, is not absurd, but by anothers disobe∣dience to be made a sinner, What congruity is there in that? Now what justice is there that one should be made mortal by another mans sinne, unless he partake of his sinne? Yea, he saith, a little before, For one to be punished for another mans sinne, it hath no reason, and yet all along the Chapter affirmed, That by Adam's sinne we are all made subject to death. This is no good Harmony.

SECT. III.

IN the second place, To be a sinner, is more than some others have likewise explained it, which say, It's to be obnoxious to the eternal wrath of God. This way go Piphius, Catharinus, and Sal••••ero••s inclineth much that way, though in some things different. Yea, Arminius and the Remonstrants, they conceive, that to be a sinner by Adam's disobedience, implieth these two things, and no more: First, That Adam's actual sinne is truly and properly made ours, (and thus farre they say the truth.) But then secondly they affirm, That this is all the original sin we have. They grant, that by this there is a reatus, a guilt upon all, but not any thing inherent, that hath truly and properly the notion of sinne. They will there∣fore yeeled, That we are by nature the children of wrath; But (say they) not for any inherent pollution, but because of Adam's sinne imputed to us. But though these two must necessarily be granted, viz. the imputation of Adam's sinne, and the participation of that guilt thereby, yet this is not all, that the Apostle mean∣eth,

when he saith, We are by his disobedience made sinners; for he intends be∣sides this, the internal and natural depravation of the whole man, which now in ecclesiastical use, is for the most part called original sinne. And there are these Reasons to evince it:

First, That it's more than guilt, or an obnoxious condition to eternal wrath, because the Apostle having spoken of that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that judgement to condemnation, which cometh upon all, he doth in this verse declare the inward cause and demerit of this in our selves, and thereby declareth the justice of God: For, if we had no sinne in our selves inherent, but that only imputed, the ju∣stice of God would not be so manifest in condemning of us. It is true, we must not separate or dis-joyn this inherent sinne from that imputed sinne, yet we must not confound them, or make imputed sinne all the sinne we have by nature. The Apostle therefore doth in this Text, give a reason of that condemnation, which hath passed on all, because there is sin inwardly adhering to all.

Secondly, To be a sinner is more than to be onely guilty, Because (as you heard) of the opposition made between the first Adam and Christ. Now the Righteousness that we are invested with by Christ, is truly and properly a Righ∣teousness; It's not only a claim or title to eternal happiness, it is not only a free∣dom from guilt, but an inherent conformity to the Law of God: So that as in and by Christ there is an imputed Righteousness, which is that properly that ju∣stifieth, and as the effect of this, we have also an inherent Righteousness, which in Heaven will be completed and perfected: Thus by Adam we have imputed sin with the guilt of it, and inherent sin the effect of it.

Thirdly, If this should be granted, That we are only guilty by Adam's trans∣gression, and not inherently sinfull, then it would follow, that we had free-will to what is good, that we are not dead in sinne, That the natural man might per∣ceive the things of God; For by this opinion, Though we are made guilty by A∣dam's transgression, yet not inherently sinfull. And thus while they avoid Pela∣gianism in one sense, they are deeply plunged into it, in another sense. We must therefore necessarily conclude, That original sin is more than guilt, it denoteth also an inward contagion and defilement of soul.

SECT. IV.

IN the third place, Adam's sinne imputed to us, is not all our original sinne; for this is also affirmed by many, That Adam's actual transgression is made every mans sinne; So that there is but that one original sinne common to all, and every one that is born hath not a particular proper original sinne to himself. This opinion, they think, is only able to withstand those strong Objections, that are brought against the imputability of any thing inherent in us, as truly and proper∣ly sinne, while we are Infants, and cannot put forth any acts of reason or will; Yea hereby they say, that intricate and perplexed discourse about the propaga∣tion of original sinne, will be wholly needless; so that they conclude on this opi∣nion, as labouring with the least inconveniencies and difficulties. Their Asserti∣on is, That Adam's actual sinne is made ours by imputation, and that is all the ori∣ginal sinne we have, an Infant new born having nothing in it, that is truly and pro∣perly a sinne, it hath (they say) many things that have rationem poenae, but not culpae, a proneness to sinne, when it groweth up, is not a sinne, but a punishment; it is the effect of original sinne, not the sin it self.

Though this may seem specious and plausible, yet this will not satisfie the Scri∣pture expressions, which, besides that original imputed sinne, doth plainly ac∣knowledge an inherent one. And

First, When we have plain Texts that do assert any Divine Truth, we are in∣inseparably

to adhere to that, though the wit of man may raise up such subtil Ob∣jections, that it may seem very difficult to answer them; Is not this seen in the Doctrine of the Trinity, of the eternal Deity of Christ, of the Resurrection of the Body, of Justification by Faith alone? In all, or most of these points here∣tical heads have raised up such a soggy mist before our eyes, that sometimes it is hard to see the Sunne that should guide us: And thus it is confessed, That in maintaining of original inherent sinne, as truly and properly a sinne, there are some weighty difficulties, but yet not such as should preponderate or weigh down clear Scripture; And therefore Austin doth sometimes confess, That though he were not able to answer all the Objections could be brought against this original de∣filement, yet we were to adhere to the clear places of Scripture. Hence it is that by Epistles he consulted with Hierom in this case, acknowledging the many straits he was intangled in.

In the second place, there are clear Texts of Scripture, affirming this inward pollution in all, and that as sinne; for the Apostle in this discourse of his doth distinguish sinne and punishment, yet both these, he saith, come by Adam's sinne: If then by sinne were meant only punishment, as some would have it, then the Apostle in saying, Death came by sinne, should mean, that God punish∣ed punishments with punishments, for one punishment he should inflict another. Thus whereas the Adversaries make it absurd, that a sinne should be a punish∣ment of a former sinne, they fall into a greater absurdity, making one punish∣ment the punishment of another. Besides, that it is sinne inherent in us, and not only imputed, appears by David's acknowledgement, Psal. 51. In sinne! was I born, and in iniquity did my mother conceive me. But of this more in time. You see by what hath been said, That our original sinne is more than meer guilt, or Adam's actual sinne imputed to us, it denoteth withall an inherent contagion of the whole man. Therefore it is absurdly and falsly said by that late Writer, It may be called original guilt, rather than original sin.

SECT. V.

IN the fourth place, there are those yet who draw a more narrow line in this mat∣ter, than the former: For when this Question is put, Whether original inherent sin be truly and properly a sin? They then distinguish between Peccatum and Vitium; It is vitium (say they) but not peccatum, or when it is called peccatum, it is in a large sense, not strictly and properly; For with these, nothing is a sinne properly, but some action repugning to the word of God; and because original sinne can∣not be an action, therefore (say they) it's not properly a sinne; In which sense they deny habits of sinne to be peccata, but only vitia. Though this be to play with words, seeing the same thing is intended; And although Austin abstaineth much from the word peccatum, as if that alwayes did suppose a reatus, yet that is a needless scrupulosity, men may use words as they please; Therefore Hierom thought, (Vide Whitak. de peccato orig. lib. 3. cap 6.) vitium was more than peccatum, contrary to Austins notion, when he said, Some man might be found without vice, but not without sinne. They say indeed a thing may repugn the Law of God three wayes; Either, Efficienter, so the Devils and wicked men do, yet they are not sinnes. 2. Materially, and thus the act of every sinne doth. 3. Formally, and so the obliquity in the act only doth; and this they make only truly and properly a sinne; But whether this will stand good or no, will be examined in the Objections; As also that Assertion of a learned man, (Molinaus, vide infra.) That original sinne is condemned by the Law, but not prohibited, it being absurd (as he thinks) to appoint a Law for one grown up, that he should have been born without sinne. It is true, in assigning the proper notion

of sinne to it, hath some great difficulty; Neither doth it become us to be over∣curious in this point above what is written, remembring that original sinne came in, by desiring too much knowledge. I shall therefore treat of it so farre, as it may tend to edification, not to satisfie curiosity. For when Austin was puzled with such doubts, he brings that known Apologie, (Epist. 29.) of one who fell into a deep pit, and being ready to be suffocated, he crieth out to one passing by, to help him out; The man asketh him, How he came in? Do not, saith he, stand disputing of that, but help me out. Thus (saith he) every man being fallen into this deep pit of original sinne, it's not for us to be curiously and te∣diously inquiting how we came in, but speedily seek for the grace of God, to deliver us our.