the body, and while preexistent before it, they deserved to be put into this
dark prison of the body, There was one Vincentius Victor, according to his name,
bold and audacious, who disliked Austin for his cunctation and deliberation in
the point of the traduction of the soul, which occasioned Austin to write four
Books De origine animae, Now this Vincentius he affirmed, That the soul was
created before the body, and did deserve to be made part of that man, who is a sin∣ner,
yea that it did deserve to be made peccatrix a sinner. Some have also thought,
that this was a general received opinion amongst the Jewes; and they proove
it from that question proposed to Christ, concerning the man born blind, yea
they were Christs Disciples that did make that question; so that it seemeth they
were still infected with that vulgar error, for Joh. 92, They say, Master, who
did sinne, this man, or his parents, that he should be born blind? They ask, whe∣ther
the sinnes of the mans parents, or his own sinnes made him to be born blind,
now he could not have any sinnes before he was born, unless his soul did preexist before
his body, and it seemeth the Pharisees concluded, that they were his own sinnes,
for they say ver. 34. Thou wast altogether born in sinnes. They did not (happily)
mean original sinne, for they say sinnes, which must be actual sinnes, either his
own, or his parents.
But this opinion is so wicked and absurd, that to name it is enough to refel it;
and for this monstrous figment might Origen be called Centaurus, as well as for
others. Only two things are to be said to it.
First, If souls for sinnes acted were adjudged to their bodies, how is it that
the Scripture giveth that command of, Increase and multiply? how is it that
children, and life are made blessings? certainly to be kept in a prison, or adjudg∣ed
thereunto is a curse not a blessing, But
Secondly, This opinion doth not at all heal the wound, that the mentioned
Objection giveth; for the doubt is how our souls are infected, because of Adam,
if they were not causally in him? And this speaketh to another matter, that they
sinned before they were incarnated, and therefore have such a troublesome and
noisome lodging.
Again this contradicts the Apostle, and doth indeed take away the subject of
the question, for Rom. 5. The Apostle maketh Adam's disobedience to be the
cause of all the sinne that we have as soon as we are born, It is not then the souls
sinning before its union to the body, but Adam the first man, and the common
head in whom we all sinned; and seeing the souls of men were 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Adam, as
their bodies are, the stone still remaineth unremoved.
In the next place, Therefore there are those, of a later hatch, but few, yet
would be, if not in the number of the first worthies, yet of the second, Papists
I mean; Pighius and Catharinus, against whom the Papists do as largely dispute
in this controversie of original sinne almost, as they do against the Protestants.
These lay down their opinion in two things.
First, That the soul of a man cometh into the world pure and holy without any
inherent filth of sinne, and that till there be actual sinnes, there is nothing in man
but what is of God, and for this they bring all the Arguments, which the Pelagi∣ans
of old use to do, But then
In the second place, That they may not be anathematized as pelagianizing.
They say, Adams actual disobedience is made our sinne by imputation, so that they
deny any original sinne inherent in us, only all the original sinne we have is
Adams first sinne of disobedience, which is made ours, hence they deny that every
one hath his proper original sinne, as if there were as many original sinnes as persons
born; but they say, Adams actual disobedience, being made ours, is the one origi∣nal
sinne of all mankind. Thus as one sun serveth to inlighten all the starres, and
as some Philosophers say, that there is one intellectus agens, common and uni∣versal
to all men, so they make one original sinne to be common to all, and