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

A TREATISE OF Original Sinne. PART. IV.

CHAP. I.

Of that Propensity that is in every one by na∣ture to Sinne.

SECT. I.

This Text explained and vindicated from Socinian Exceptions.

JOB 15. 16.

How much more abominable and filthy is man, which drinketh iniqui∣ty like water?

THe last particular to be treated upon concerning original sinne, is the immediate effects thereof, which we now come to discover; and whereas they are many, some general and some particular, as the paines inflicted upon women▪ in child-bearing; the general are the curses that are brought upon the whole world, and every part thereof. I shall limit my self only to those that belong to man∣kind, and are inseparably annexed to every individium herein: Now these effects they are either spiritual or temporal.

I shall begin with the spiritual, and first pitch upon that propensity and vehement inclination which is in every one by nature to sinne: This plainly demonstrateth there is a sinful and corrupted principle within, else all mankind would not be so prone and inclining to evil as they are, and this Text will abundantly con∣firme us of the ready and delightfull propensity that is in every man (none exempted) to that which is evil; They are the words of Eliphaz one of Job's friends, who taketh an Argument from this proneness in mans nature to sinne to humble Job, and to make him more patiently silent under Gods heavy hand upon him. Job indeed acknowledgeth this very truth, Chap 14. 4. and doth from thence debase himself under Gods dealings with him, but Eliphaz repea∣teth this again, either because the most holy that are, though they sometimes affect their hearts with divine truths, and do make a blessed improvement of them, yet at other times when the temptation is violent, they need to have the same truths suggested to them again by others, or else though Job was convinced, that man being thus unclean, he might well be moral, and subject to diseases, yet happily he did not see the righteousness of God, in inflicting extraordinary judgements such as his were upon a godly man, delivered from the dominion of this original pollution, and walking with all integrity of heart, as Job was perswaded he did. Eliphaz therefore maketh use of this Truth about mans sin∣fulness, still to bring Job lower in his own eyes, and to make him exalt God, and indeed there is no truth so greatly accommodated to bring a man off, yea though godly in an high degree from all self-confidence, as also all repinings and murmuring under the severity of God, as this about original sinne. Now Eliphaz to aggravate this the more, doth at the 14. Verse speak interrogatively: What is man that he should be clean? and then exegetically explaining this he addeth, and he that is born of a woman that he should be righteous: So that by cleanness is meant righteousness, and there is also the reason given why none is righteous, even because born of a woman; So that it is plain all this sin∣fulness cometh by natural descendency from our parents. The first Hebrew word signifieth, that a man hath no innocency, so that he hath not any cause to complain or murmure under Gods judgments be they never so heavy, and the other denoteth that he hath no righteousness whereby he is able to answer God, if called to his Tribunal; and the word for man signifieth him a miserable wretched man incurably wretched. This proposition is aggravated à majori, Behold he putteth no trust in his Saints, yea the heavens are not clean in his sight. By Saints some have understood the godly Patriarches of old, but if we compare this with Job 4. 18. It is plain he meaneth Angels, and if we understand it of evil Angels, it is plain they proved Apostates, there was no trust in them, they forsook their habitation as if they did contemne it and were weary of it; or if of good Angels, then it is plain that God neither did put any trust in them as of themselves, for it was the power and grace of God which did confirme them, so that of themselves they would have apostatized as well as the rest; Eliphaz addeth for amplification sake, The heavens are not clean in his sight. By heavens we are to understand metonymically the Angels who dwell therein, and these are said to be not clean in his sight, comparatively to the purity and holiness of God, for as the being of the most noble creature is even nothing at all to his infinite Essence, so also is their righteousness; some understand the hea∣vens without any Trope, as if they were said to be not clean, because they are subject to vanish away, because they shall wax old as a garment, Psa. 102. 27. and there shall be made new heavens. 2 Pet. 3. 7. Cajetan as Pineda (in loc.) observeth from this place, and many others, alwayes taketh occasion to broach his opini∣on, That the heavens are animated and subject to sinne, but that opinion is rejected as absurd, though it seemeth to be Aristotle's opinion that caelum est animatum. If then it be thus with Angels, who are such glorious spirits, and

and have not the least blemish in their natures comparatively to God; no wonder that my Text is brought in with an how much more abominable is man, &c. wherein we have man described from his property and ••••ition be is in by nature. And secondly the effect, as a sign demonstrating of this: The property is two-fold, abominable, even as a carkass is abominable that hath lost the soul which did animate it, so is man being made carnal and natural, ha∣ving lost the Spirit of God and his image; Abhominable, that denoteth such loathsomeness that we cannot endure to behold or come near the object loa∣thed, that we cannot endure the sight of it; such a thing is man naturally in the eyes of God, the Hebrew word for man is the strongest man, or the most fa∣mous and best of men naturally; and indeed this is to be applyed even to regene∣rate men also, so farre as original corruption hath still any vigorous actings in them, (for so some think,) Job was not sensible enough, though otherwise godly, of the contaminating power of original sinne in him, whereby his best duties had some impurity, and so God might justly bring all that evil upon him he did; Thus man is abominable and loathsome in the eyes of God, and he ought to be so in his own eyes, to his own self, a natural man should not be able to bear or endure himself, because of that loathsome sinfulness that doth adhere to him: how much are Pelagian-Doctrines that cry up a purity in mans nature, contrary to this Text? Oh that God would mercifully do that to such corrupt Doctors, which God threatens in anger to the prophane secure sinner, Psal 50. 21. I will reprove thee, and set in order before thy eyes, the original doth not name what, the translator addeth his sinnes, some adde thy own self, which cometh all to one, I will set thy self before thy self, and all thy sinnes, in the several kinds and grievous aggravations of then; The Hebrew word is military and taken from setting a battell in aray against another; Thus God said he would do, and what a mercy is it to a man, when all our self-love, self-flattery, and self-fullness shall be removed, and God shall set our selves in all our loathsomeness and deformity before our selves; What burdens would we be to our own selves? but this is Gods work, humane speculations and moral instructions have no efficacy herein. The second propercy attributed to man is filthy: The Hebrew word is only used here, and Psal. 14. 3. and Psal. 53. 3. concerning the root of it, there is no certainty, only it is generally translated that which is putrid rotten and stinking, and because rotten and putrifying things are unusefull and unprofitable: Hence it is that, Rom. 3. 12. the word out of the Psalmist is rendered unprofitable; Thus man having lost the Image of God is become like unsavoury salt as he is noisome in Gods eyes, so he is unfit for any good thing, he is in a state of sinne, and so hath no ability to what is good, neither can he by any power abiding in him ever recover out of this lost estate, so that man is now become like Ezekiel's Vine, Ezek. 15. 2, 3, 4. It will not serve for any work, not so much as to make a pin of it to hang a vessel upon it, but is only suel for fire. Thus unusefull and unserviceable a man is become in respect of the least good, whereby the glory of God may be exalted. Thus we have the properties describing man by his natural principles.

In the next place he is described, by the immediate effect from this cursed cause being thus abominable and filthy, what doth necessarily flow from hence? even to drink iniquity like water. This expression sheweth the vehement inclina∣tion in man to sinne, and that with delight; as a man who is greatly thirsty doth earnestly desire to drink, that the heat within may be refrigerated; Of this expression more in the Doctrine; This is enough to shew, how it is with man relatively to sinne, even as with a feavourish, or hydropical person that is continually calling for some drink to cool the heat within.

Thus this Text sheweth us, what is one immediate and inseperable effect of mans nature through original corruption, that it doth propend and incline

with all greediness to evil, and only evil continually; Yet although this be so preg∣nant and clear a place, Socinians have laboured to obscure it. And

1. (They say) It is an Hyperbole; This is their constant refuge, whenso∣ever the Scripture saith any thing to exalt Christ, or deba••e man, they make it an Hyperbole, but how can that be accounted an Hyperbole, which experience doth confirme? And the Adversaries to original sinne grant, that mankind is very prone to sinne, and all are very ready to offend, though they attribute this to other causes rather then original sinne. This Answer of theirs hath been fully consuted, when we treated on Psal. 51.

2. (They say) Such an impurity is noted to be in man, as is in the Angels and the Heavens, but they have no original sinne: The Answer is, That there is more attributed to man, how much more abominable is man? So that the Ar∣gument is taken from the less to the greater.

3. (They say) These words are not to be taken universally, or understood of every man; but the expression is universal, it excludeth or exempteth no man: man, and born of a woman, are universals not particulars.

4. (They say) These are the words of Eliphaz, one of Jobs friends, and they did not alwayes speak right. It is true, they did not alwayes rightly apply the Doctrine they spake, they mistook about Job, but the Doctrine it self in the general was true, and therefore we see that quoted in the new Testament, as the word of God which Eliphaz spake, as that passage, 1 Cor. 3. 13. He taketh the wise in their own craftiness, is Eliphaz his speech, Job. 5. 13. but for this particular truth; you have heard Job also as well as Eliphaz confirming of it, Job. 14. 3. Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not one; Which is not to be understood of bodily filthiness, as the Pelagians of old, but spiri∣tual uncleanness, as appeareth by the opposite to it in other places, which is unrighteousness, for it is worth our observing that this natural pollution and sinfulness of man is mentioned four times in this Book of Job, with the aggra∣vation of it.

The first is, Chap. 4. 18, 19. Behold he put no trust in his servants, &c. how much less on them that dwell in houses of clay? whose foundation is in the dust, &c. This special truth Eliphaz saith he had in a Vision, and by special revelation from God, and therefore it was the more to be attended unto; if Angels are not able to stand in the presence of God, but cover even their very faces, the noblest part as conscious of their imperfection comparatively to God, then no wonder if sinful mortal man be affected with his distance from, yea and contra∣riety to God.

In the next place, We have this truth witnessed unto by Job, and that on purpose to debase himself under God, that if God do search into him, he can∣not find any thing but what is filthy and unclean, Chap. 14. 4. of which we have largely treated.

The third time we meet with, is here in my Text, where Eliphaz repeateth it again, making use thereof to Job, that he should acknowledge impurity and uncleanness adhering unto every thing he doth, though never so holy. And

The fourth or last time, is Chap 25▪ 45, 6. Where Bildad agreeth both with Job and Eliphaz in this truth, How can h•• be clean that is born of a woman?— The starres are not pure in his sight—how much less man that is a worme, &c.

Thus you see in the mouth of three witnesses we have this Doctrine assured to us, that man of himself is very abominable and filthy: we might think such clear Texts might for ever convince men, that they should not speak of such a thing, as natural is quaedem sanctitas, and probitas, a natural kind of holiness and probity, no though it were among deaf men, the matter is so abomi∣nable,

and grossely repugnant to Scripture-light.

The last exception put in against this place by the pure Naturalists is, That this Text speaketh of actual sinne, and therefore it maketh nothing for original To drink down iniquity like water, is (say they) nothing but the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 exer∣cising of impiety. But this is readily granted, for we bring this Text to declare the immediate issue of original sinne, because man is thus abominable by na∣ture, therefore he drinketh down iniquity like water; he doth not speak here of men, who by custom have habituated themselves in an evil way, which is become like a second nature to them, but of man originally and nakedly in himself, till the grace of God make a change upon him; So that as to drink, though an action, doth denote thirst, a natural appetite within; Thus the acting of iniquity with delight and content, doth necessarily suppose a corrupted and perverted principle within, from whence all actual evil doth flow.

Thus the Text being fully explained and vindicated from all exceptions, we may observe.

That man being originally corrupted, is therefore prone to all sinne with de∣light; Because he is abominable and filthy, therefore he swalloweth down iniquity like water; As in every mans body there is a mortal and corru∣ptible principle within, which exposeth to diseases, and at last death it self; So in the soul there is a vehement inclination unto every thing that is evil, it's most sutable and connatural to him; As the feavourish man with greedi∣nesse and delight doth swallow down cold liquour, thinking he never hath enough: Thus it is with man by nature. That there is in all mankind a propensity to sinne, not onely the Adversaries to original sinne, but even Heathens have acknowledged and bewailed, and we have the Scripture, Rom. 3. at large describing of it. Now if it were not by original sinne, How and whence should a sinfull inclination be in all men, if there were an innocency and neutrality meerly in man to good or evil, yea an incli∣nation rather to good, because (as they say) the seeds of vertue are na∣turally in all? How cometh it about that the greater part of mankind is not good rather than evil? Why should it not be, that to sinne is diffi∣cult, but to do good is easie? But besides experience, and many Texts of Scripture, that may confound this presumptuous opinion, I may insist upon one for all, Psal. 14. 2. The Lord locked down from Heaven upon the chil∣dren of men, to see if there were any that did understand. And vers. 3. There is none that doth good, no not one; Think not that this is spoken of the Jews only, it is spoken of all mankind, God looked down upon the children of men, and not on Judea only; So that this sext is too true, and all ages can give in their witness to it.

The Doctrinal Truth we are treating of, is, That man being by nature filthy and sinfull, is thereby carried out with all inclination and delight to sinne. Sinne is as sweet and as pleasant to a man by nature, as water to a man scorched with thirst. This expression is very emphatical, it is usual with the Scripture to apply the Metaphor from corporeal hunger and thirst to the soul; Hence Christ is compared both to bread, and water, and wine, and saith in the workings thereof is compared to eating and drinking of him, yea the graces of the soul, whereby we are carried out intensively to holy things, is compared to hunger and thirst, Matth. 5. 6 Hence our Saviour to expresse his delight in doing of Gods will, saith, It is his meat to do the will of him that sent him, John 4. 34. Thus then as the godly have a principle of grace within them, whereby they hunger and thirst after more enjoyment of God, so there is in a natural man a constant, vehement appetite to sinne, never being satisfied, but in obeying the lusts there∣of. This propensity to sinne is here expressed by thirst, provoking a man to

drink with delight; and abundantly you have the like expression used, Job 34. 7. What man is like Job, who drinketh scorning like water? that is, he delighteth in it, he doth it easily, he findeth no reluctancy, nor remorse upon his co••••••••ence.

SECT. II.

How much is implied in this Metaphor, Man drinketh iniquity like water.

TO illustrate this, Let us consider, first, how much is implied in the Metaphor that the Text here useth, Man drinketh iniquity like wa∣ter. And

First, Here is denoted a vehement and violent appetite to sinne; Thirst if ex∣tream is intollerable some say, worse then hunger; Hence Samson cried out of his thirst, though so strong a man, he was not able to bear it; and Christ him∣self, while upon the Crosse, complained of no pain, only said, I thirst, which denoteth the impetuousness of this appetite; It is usually defined to be appetitus humidi & frigidi, an appetite of that which is moist and cold, as hunger is ca∣lidi & sicci, of that which is hot and dry. But the learned Vossius (De Theol. Genili lib. 3. pag. 104.) thinketh this definition, though given by Aristrotle, ought to be corrected, because hungry men sometimes desire cold things to eat, and thirstly sometimes hot things to drink; Therefore he thinketh it more exact to define hunger an appetite, humidi pinguis, of that which is moist, but nou∣rishing, and thirst humids aquei, of that which is moist, but meerly so. For by satisfying of our thirst, we are not properly nourished, only thereby the meat we eat, is disposed better to nourishment, so that thereby the parts of the body, which were dried, are watered, and the food more easily conveyed to its proper places: yea he will not have hunger or thirst to be an appetite, but a grief or dolor, arising from the sense of feeling, which is in the stomack, though he granteth an appetite to follow this grief. Howsoever this be in Philosophy, yet we see thirst is an appetite, or hath it necessarily following it; There is also a kind of pain and grief, whereby every part that is needy calleth for relief, and thus it is in man by nature, he being destitute of the Image of God, and finding no happiness in him, doth earnestly crave for some relief from the creatures: he thirsteth after the pleasures and profits which are for bidden by Gods Words, and thereupon his whole endeavour and study is to fulfill the lusts of this sinfull inclination within him; That which is said of some particular sinners, as to some lusts only, Ephes. 4. 19. They have given themselves to work at uncleanesse with greedinesse; As also Jer. 8. 6. Every one turneth to his course (viz. of wicked∣nesse) as the horse rusheth into the battel, is true of all men naturally, in respect of some sinne or other. It is true, those mentioned in these Texts, had besides their natural inclination, superadded inveterate and habituated customs in im∣piety, and so they had their first and second nature also hurrying them away: but yet the pollution of our nature alone, is enough thus to precipitate us head∣long into every evil way; Do thou then consider thy self more, and be ac∣quainted with this pollution upon thee; Oh what a drought is upon thy soul! What vehement provocations from within to be continually doing that which is evil?

Secodly, From this vehement inclination thus to sinne, there is a restlesnesse and disquietnesse in us, till we be satisfied, we rage and oppose all those who will not give us to drink of this water; How discontented are men at those means

and wayes which God hath appointed to prevent sinne; They love not the Law of God, they love not the Word of God, because it is holy and threatneth sinne; They love not a faithfull and powerfull Ministry, because 〈◊〉〈◊〉 work is against sinne; They cannot endure the holy Orders and Discipl•••• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 hath appointed in his Church, because against sinne; And why is all this? but be∣cause there is a thirst within, a scorching heat after it, and therefore cannot endure to be hinred from the satisfying of it: Thus by this means a man is put into a miserable perplexity, if he doth not sinne he is mad and rageth, and if he doth sinne he is miserable and undone; As one in a Dropsie, if he doth not drink, he cannot bear it, and if he doth, he thereby increaseth his danger: Thus every man is a miserable, restlesse creature by nature, wretched if he doth not sinne, and wretched much more if he doth sinne; what misery it is to have a scorching heat within a man, and to have nothing to cool, is parabo∣lically represented by our Saviour in Divies while in hell, Luke 16. 24. who de∣sired Abraham to send Lazarus, that he might dip his finger in water, and cool his tongue, though it were but a drop of water, he was glad of it: Thus it is pro∣portionably with every man by nature, having a vehement appetite to sinne, and therefore much disquieted, till they do accomplish it; We read of a terri∣ble judgement God brought upon the Isralites, while in the wilderness, Deut. 8. 15 which was by fiery Serpents, that did sling them; The Hebrew word for a Serpent signifieth thirst, to which also the Greek name 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 doth answer, they are called so, because upon the stinging of a man, he hath immediately such an inflammation and heat upon him, that he doth thirst inordinately, and yet if he do drink, he dieth irrecoverably; so that a man then bitten was in a miserable condition; for if he did not drink the heat within him did burn him up, and if he did drink, he was sure to die; Original sinne is like this fiery Serpent, it hath poisoned mankind with its sting, so that a man hath an inor∣dinate thirst to sinne; if he do not sinne, he finds no rest, no comfort; if he do sinne, he damneth himself, and there is no way to cure this, till spiritual thirst put out this natural thirst, till our hearts be carried out with delight and complacency in heavenly things, then this sinfull tormenting drought that is upon the soul, will quickly be abated; As the disease called Bulimy, or Dogs∣hunger doth bring with it tormenting pains in the inward parts, so doth this impetuous propensity unto evil, till it be accomplished; It is like the wolf in the breast that consumeth continually. The Wiseman doth fully expresse this disquietnesse of soul, till the lusts of sinne be fullfilled, Prov. 4. 16. They sleep not, except they have done mischief, and their sleep is taken away, unless they have caused some to fall.

Thirdly, This similitude of drinking down iniquity like water, doth suppose the sweetnesse and delight that is in sinning; For although water, as such hath no savournesse, and therefore is not like wine or beer, yet because it is cooling, it doth with much delight refresh and refrigerate the hot thirsty appetite within: Hence Solomen expresseth desirable news by this similitude, As cold waters to a thirsty soul, so is good news from a farre Countrey, Prov. 25. 25. So that by this expression is denoted, the great delight and content that naturally is found in any evil way, when a man is sinning it is as he would have it: This is sutable and agreeable with that corrupt inclination that is within; David cannot ex∣presse greater joy, and delight in the Law of God, and in fulfilling of his will, then they do in obeying the lusts of the flesh, and this is that which maketh con∣version so difficult; This is that which doth so strongly hold men in their sinful wayes; Neither the words of God or the works of God are able to separate a man and his sinnes, till God put forth his conquering, and all subduing grace, because sinne is thus sweet to a man; Zophar the Naamathite, doth excellently inform us, how sweet sinne is to an evil man, and how much he delighte in

the sweetnesse of it, Job 20. 12, 13. Though wickednesse be sweet in his mouth, though he hide it under his tongue, though he spirit, and for sake not, but keep it still withi•• ••••outh, &c. By this we see, that sine to a natural man, is like some 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the mouth, which we roll up and down, being unwilling to swallow 〈◊〉〈◊〉, that so we may the longer enjoy the sweetnesse thereof. Cer∣tainly it would be an high degree of blasphemy to say, God made man with such a corrupt inclination at first, that sinne should be so connatural and suta∣ble to him: It was therefore by Adam's apostasie, when we lost the Image of God; then no wonder if every part and power of the soul were carried out in∣ordinately and violently to what is evil. By this also we see, that a necessity in sinning, and a delight and voluntariness in sinning may very well consist toge∣ther, one doth not destroy another: A corrupt man like a corrupt tree, cannot but bring forth corrupt fruit, yet all this is done with inward delight and con∣tent, as he cannot, so he will not do otherwise: This is much to be observed, because many do tragically exclaim against this Doctrine of original sinne, as that whereby we are necessitated and captivated unto evil, not at all remem∣bring, that this is a delightsome captivity, a pleasant necessity, insomuch that when converting grace doth make a change upon a man, it doth not only subdue the power of sinne, but taketh away the sweetness of it, putting a contrary delight and sweetness in the soul: Now they delight in God, in holy Ordinan∣ces; now their souls break with longing after those heavenly object, which once they did so much abhorre; That which was honey to them is now gall; The very thoughts of their former lusts are bitter, and full of wormwood to them. Thus David being made heavenly, professeth often, His soul thirsteth after God, Psalm 46. 2. Psalm 63. 1. Psalm 143. 6

Fourthly, This expression of drinking iniquity like water, doth suppose, as the delight, so the easinesse and facility thereof. Pineda observeth he compa∣reth it not to eating of pleasant meet, though that be sweet, because there is some labour in the chewing of it, but that is too argute onely the easinesse and facility in sinning may be declared herein; and truly if we apply it to the manner of a natural mans sinning, it will be very well accommodated; For doth a man by nature find any difficulty in sinning? Doth he find checks and gripes within him? Doth he find it an hard thing to obey the losts of sinne, yea they swallow down a Camel as easily as water? It is true, when a natural mans conscience is awakened and enlightned, when under conviction by Gods Word, then fear and guilt possesseth his soul, then he sinneth indeed, but horrible pangs and throbs of conscience do many times accompany their ini∣quities, they bring forth in sorrow and pain; but we are now speaking of a natural man meerly as so, left in that estate he was born in, and such a man fol∣loweth the lusts of his soul without any pain or trouble at all; There are no conflict and combats within, crying out, How can I do this and sinne against God? Do we not see this peaceable secure disposition upon most men? Though they have the Word of God to awaken their conscience, and so throughly to convince them, that you would think they should be as much afraid of sinne, as of hell it self. But as the Rule is, Elementa non gravi∣tant in suo loca, the elements are not heavy in their proper place; So a man in sinning being in his proper way findeth no molestation, no grief at all, but such are to be more pitied, by how much they cannot pity them∣selves.

Fifthly, This similitude doth inform us of the frequency and plenty also in∣sinning. It is not one vain thought, one evil action that will satisfie this corrupt principle within, but it emptieth it self into abundance; To drink iniquity like water, denoteth, abundance and plenty, be doth not sip of it, or tast of it, as

some are said to tast of the good Word of God, Heb. 6. or as Jonathan tasted of honey, but they drink it down fully and plentifully, never satisfying them∣selves therein: Hence if they were to live alwayes upon the ear•••• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 would never be weary thereof; Original sinne like the horsleech, Prod•••• 15. hath two daughters crying, Give, give which are never satisfied, these are igno∣rantis and concupiscentia, Ignorance and Concupiscence; Ignorance, by that we know not God the true and chiefest good, but every creature, yea every lust is represented as good and lovely; as in the dark night a white rotten post, or a glow-worm will shine and appear something: It is the not knowing of God, as revealed in the Scripture, which maketh us set up so many Idols in our hearts. The other daughter is Concupiscence, and this may be called Sheol, because it is alwayes asking and craving, insomuch that a man is insatibly carried out all his life long to one sinne or other, he still cryeth Give, give; Now what a misera∣ble creature is man, that is thus greedy of that which is destructive of him? If you should hear a man calling importunately for poison, he will eat nothing but poison, Is not such an one desperate set to ruine himself? Thus is with every natural man, he can never sinne enough, as if he thought he could never damn himself enough; How happy are the creatures comparatively herein to man? Their appetites are moderated, and they desire nothing that is hurtfull, but man never stayeth himself in his lusts, and withall he is wholly carried out to such things as will inevitably damn him.

Sixthly, A thirsty man drinking down water, doth it to refresh himself, never attending whether it be wholsom or destructive to him. How many have got their mortal bane by drinking to quench their raging heat within? The Hydropical man will call for his drink, though thereby he is ruined, and this doth fitly resemble that cursed appetite in us to sinne, though it damnus: We look onely to the bait, not to the hook, to the pleasures of sinne, the sweetness of sinne, not at all considering what buterness thus will bring at the later end: Is not this the miserable estate of man by nature? Doth he look any further then to sa∣tisfie this corrupt thirst within him? Doth he think, will thus be for my good, will this be in stead of God and Heaven to me? Hence also it is, that he is carried out to sinne from a voluntary principle within; Even as a thirstly man needeth not to be hired or compelled to drink, he hath that within him which will instigate him: Thus it is in every man by nature, though there should be no Devil to tempt him, yet that corrupt frame within would provoke him to all evil. It is from this, that though hell and damnation be threatned, though this sword of Gods anger hang over his head, yet he will drink of this water.

Lastly, There is denoted in this similitude, That a man by committing of sinne, is thereby inclined to sinne the more. It doth not satisfie, but increase the lust more; As a man in distempered heat doth not allay it by drinking, but en∣stameth it the more; as a little water thrown on the fire intendeth the heat thereof: Thus by drinking in of the water of sinne, a man becomes more thirstly after it, and so to his corrupt inclination there is added also a corrupt custom, and these two cords are not easily broken, it must be the grace of God alone, that can set us at liberty; Hence we have that expression concern∣ing a stubborn, obstinate man in his way of sinning, Deut. 29. 19. That he ad∣deth drunkennesse to thirst; And so again, Thirst to drunkennesse; thus he is al∣wayes in vehement motions after sinne, and the more he swalloweth it down, and is inebriated with it, the thirstier still he groweth, according to that known Rule,

Quò plus suxt potae, plus si••iuntur aquae.

It is true, that proverbial expression used, by Moses in the Text named, is very

obscure, and is greatly vexed. Delrio upon the place, giveth fifteen Inter∣pretations, and Bonfrerius offereth one of his own; Grotius goeth along with those that ••••••erstand the abstracts for concretes, and so apply it to two differ∣ent pers•••••• ut that of Calvins seemeth most probable, which I have men∣tioned, that it denoteth a man by custom in sinne, to be more vehemently in∣clined thereunto; Even as drunkennesse doth not quench the thirst, but ma∣keth a man more thirsty afterwards, and this agreeth wholly with my pur∣pose.

SECT. III.

Some Demonstrations proving that there is such an impetuous inclina∣tion in man to sin.

THat there is such an universal propensity in all manking, is confirmed by experience, and acknowledged by the adversaris to original sinne. Let us bring some few demonstrations à posteriori, that they may fully prove the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, That there is such an impetuous inclination in man to sinne. And

First, The testimony of the Scripture may be instar omnium in this point, that doth sufficiently attest the general pollution of all men by their evil doings. Not to bring in that fore-mentioned place, Psal. 14. 2, 3. where God is said to look from Heaven upon the children of men, and he could not behold one that did good, no not one. It was not upon Judea only, but upon the children of men, and he could not find one good. We may take in many other places to confirm this, How quickly had all mankind corrupted it self? as appeareth, Gen. 6. 12. God looked upon the earth, and behold it was corrupt, for all flesh had corrupt∣ed his way before God. Here we see, not long after the Creation, how all the world was quickly become abominable in his eyes; All flesh had corrupted his way every man had defiled himself; Yea so great it was, that vers. 5. Every imagination of man, was only evil, and that continually. Now whence should all this evil arise? Must not the fountain needs be bitter, from which so many bitter streams flow? Could so many thorns grow from men if they were grapes? If so be there were the seeds of virtue in men by nature (as they say) or at least man is by nature indifferent either to good or evil, yea more inclining to good; How cometh it about that alwayes evil should prevail? How is it that good doth not sometimes take place? Why is there not an age to be recorded, wherein we may say, all flesh had made their wayes holy, and that every ima∣gination of the thoughts of mans heart was onely good continually? Why should not there be some ages, wherein God might look from Heaven, and see none that did evil, no not one? The pure Naturalists are never able to answer this satisfactorily; for if man be by nature as well without vice or virtue, ready and capable to receive either, as his will shall carry him; Why is it, that this will of man doth never prevail universally in some age, to make all good? Why should sinne alwayes get the upper hand, and supplant virtue (as it were) so as to come out first? Neither can that be a refuge in this Text, which sometimes they runne unto; That long custom in sinning for many ages together, and evil examples so long confirmed from age to age, d•• cause such a torrent of impiety; For not to speak at this time of the cause of such evil customs and ex∣amples; How came they at first? Whence did they arise, but from polluted originals? This will not answer the Text in hand, for that speaketh of the first age before the drowning of the world, which yet is called the world of the un∣godly, 2 Pet. 2. 5. It was the world of ungodly in the first age, and still in the

later ages it is the world of ungodly: Yea this is still applied to that remnant of mankind which escaped the deluge, when there were but eight persons, Gen. 8. It's there said, That the imagination of mans heart was 〈◊〉〈◊〉 his youth, It is strange therefore, that if good seed was naturally sown in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 that nothing but tares should come up every where in stead thereof. But let us take notice of another place of Scripture confirming the universal overslowing of iniquity, and that is David's complaint, which he so sadly poureth forth, calling upon God to help and to redress it, Psal. 12. 1. Help Lord, for the godlyman ceaseth, the faithfull fail from among the children of man; They speak vanity every one with his neighbour; It is true, here are some supposed to be godly and faithfull, but they are few comparatively to the ungodly, as flowers to the weeds, as jewels to the sand on the seashore, and those that were so, it was not from na∣ture, but the grace of God that sanctified and prepared them: But if you do regard the general, the Psalmist is so affectionately moved with the overflowing of evil, that he seeth no help but in God himself, and this is the more to be aggravated, because the people of Israel were the Church of God, they had the Prophets of God, they had Gods wonderfull presence amongst them, and yet for all that, this garden so planted and dressed by God, did become a wilder∣nesse; If then where there are many external and powerfull means to subdue and conquer that innate corruption, yet it break out so violently; What if man were left to himself? How abominable and vile would he prove? And was not this the perpetual complaint of all the Prophets successively, that every one did turn aside to their evil wayes, that they did preach in vain. that there was no soundnesse amongst them; a sinfull Nation, a seed of evil-doers; The more they were stricken, the more they revolted; The whole head was sick, and the whole heart faint, as Isaiah most affectionately bewalleth it, Chap. 1. 4, 5. What a strong demonstration then is this of the imbred corruption of mankind, that under all the means of grace doth yet overflow in impicties? I shall not mention any more Texts for this purpose; The whole scope of the Scripture being to declare mans sinfulness, and extoll Gods grace.

Secondly, This universal propensity to sinne in all mankind, is likewise attested unto, even by the very Heathens. It's true, they knew nothing of Adams tall, nor of the propagation of this hereditary pollution, yet the sinfulness it self they perceived and groaned under it. Even Grotius himself, who would elude the pregnant Texts of Scripture for original sinne, by the Rhetoricians trope of Hyperbole, yet doth bring in many passages out of the Heathens, acknowledging such a depravation of mans nature, out of Heriocles the Philosopher & Jamblichus, that it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, it's implanted and ingraf∣fed in us to sinne, (Comment. in Luc. cap. 2. ver. 22. as also De Jure botli as paci lib. 2. Yea out of Aristotle, who held this indifferency in mans nature, he brings that expression, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, it is imbred in a man to gain-say reason. Thus the very Heathens, though they knew not the cause, yet could not but confess, that vitium ingenita infirmitatis, the vitious imbred infirmity that is in every man. Yea their Poets have acknowledged better Di∣vinity, then some later writers in the Church, witness those sayings, Quantuns mortalia peceatora coecae noctis habent? and another, Vitiis neme sine nascitur; A third, Terras Astraeae reliquit, fergning our originals to be of stones; Inde genus duri sumus: Homines suâ naturâ sunt malis, as Plato. We might be large also in bringing the witnesses of others, Nihil homine miserius & superbius (said Pliny) simul atque edi••i sumus; and Tully, In omni continuò pravitate versa∣mur, &c. And what is that saying, Humanum est errare, but according to Divinity, Humanum est peccare? Thus the light of nature, though but like that of the Owl to the Sunne, could perceive something in this kind. Now this testimony is the more to be regarded, because it is so imbred a desire in us, to

make our selves as lovely as may be, and to hide every thing that is de∣formed.

Thirdly, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 principle also in all Nations, to have Magistrates and Laws, to have prison•• ••••gibbets, whereby punishment may be inflicted upon offenders, doth palpably demonstrate what a pronenesse there is in man to sinne. For those provisoes do suppose that man doth restrain himself from evil, only for fear of punish∣ment; If so be that there were such a natural purity in man; Why should there be such jealousies, such fears of man, Homo homini lupus? Why are there pro∣vided such severe punishments to awe wicked men, but that mans nature is out of credit, it is supposed to do all the evil it can, if it have any impunity? Cer∣tainly it is not for good that Mastives are tied up, that Bears and Lions are kept up in grates; This argueth how cruel they would be if let loose; Thus also it is with mankind all the severe Laws and punishments which are in all estates established, do demonstrate how wild and outragious man is, if left alone to himself; In his younger yeares he hath the rod, when growne up, pri∣sons and gallows, and in his old age, death and hell to awe him against sinne.

Fourthly, The necessary of Education and Chastisement to young children, doth also declare, that they are prone to vice. It cannot be denied, but suppo∣sing Adam had continued in integrity and procreated children, they would have needed instruction and information, but then withall it must be granted, that this was a meer innocent nesciency in them, and therefore as the body had been prepared, so the soul without any difficulty would with all aptnesse and readinesse have received all the good seed sown into it, whereas now in young ones there is a difficulty to understand holy things, they are unteachable and untractable, yea there is also a contrariety and an aversnesse to that which is good. Now if they were in a meer purity of nature, as the Adversaries sug∣gest it, they were in such an equal indifferency and capacity of virtue or vice; Why should not they need education and Masters to teach them evil, as well as good? Yea, why should they not be more ready to good then evil, seeing they say there are igniculi virtutum, sparks of virtue lying hid in the soul, which by education and instruction are blown up into a flame? So that the Schools which are generally provided for youth, do declare, That the nature of man of it self, will bring forth weeds, but there must be much plowing and sowing, much cost and labour ere any good seed will grow up. That known Text of Scripture will for ever bear record against these patrons of nature, Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of correction will drive it away, Prov. 22. 15. No lesse powerfull is that counsel, Prov. 23. 13. With-hold not correction from the child, if thou beat him with the rod, he shall not die; if thou beat him, &c. thou shalt deliver his soul from hell. Doth not this proclaim, that every child is set to damn it self, if left alone? It is not more prone to runne into the fire, then it is to fall into hell, and this maketh chastisement so necessary. How necessary is it for parents to consider this, either education or hell, either chastisement or damnation? And whence is all this, but because of the impetuous nature in every child unto evil? As the horse and mule need the bridle, being carried out only by sense; Thus doth the child need admonition, being unteachable and untamable of himself, even like the wild Asses colt, Job 11. 12. Let parents then take heed of remisness, lest their children roaring in hell do continually curse them for their negligence. It's a known example of a young man carried to the place of execution, that cried out, Non Praetor, sed Mater, mea duxit ad furcam; It was not the Judge, but his mother brought him to that shamefull death. There was in the Tabernacle Aarons Rod, and the Manna, which some would have allegorically to signifie the sweetness and benefit of Discipline, Iniquity then breedeth within us, all the wisest and severest education can no

more free a child from its inherent filthiness, then Paracelsus could make himself immortal, as he fondly boasted, if he had had the first ordering and dieting of his body. Hence the duty of parents is set down, Ephes. 6. 4. To bring up their children in the nature and admonition of the Lord. And Solomon, who was so tender, and onely beloved in the sight of his mother, yet his parents were conti∣nually distilling wholsome precepts into him, as Prov. 4. 3, 4, 5, implying thereby, that none is without ignorance, without a proneness to evil; therefore is godly instruction so necessary. So that the Doctrine of original sinne should greatly provoke fathers and mothers to their duties; Every mother should be a Monica to her Austin, that we may say, It is not possible, that Filius tot lachrymarum pereat, a sonne of so many prayers and tears should perish.

Fifthy, The difficulty that is acknowledged by ali, to do that which is good and holy, doth also manifest our propensity to what is evil. We cannot apply the Text to that which is good, and say, Man drinketh down that like water. The very Heathens could say, Facilis discensus averni, and Virtus in arduo sita est. Virtue was placed upon an high mountain, it was hard climbing up unto it, but it was easie to tumble down; it is easie to fall down the hill. Sinne then be∣ing so easily committed, and that which is good so hardly performed, Doth not this speak plainly, that we are corrupted by nature? For certainly, if the word of God, neither in the threatnings or in the promises of it, can make us decline from evil, and do good, when neither hell can terrifie us, nor the glo∣rious joyes of Heaven invite us; This argueth we are immovably fixed in a way of sinning. Is there any command for holy duties? Is there any Law en∣joyning us to leave our lusts, of which we do not say, It is an hard saying, who can bear it? Hence it is that the wisdome of the flesh is said to be enmity in the very abstract against God, Rom. 8. 7. the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, whatsoever is either in mind or affections, is wholly opposite to the pure Law of God. So that this is an evident demonstration of mans vehement inclination to sinne, that though God hath set so many fiery flaming swords in the way to stop us from sinne; Though Heaven in the glory of it be on one side discovered, and hell in all the horrible and dreadfull torments of it on the other side; Though many Ministers of God meet thee at the Angel did Balaam, to stop thee in the way to sinne; yet for all this thou doest despirately and obstinately proceed. This maketh it appear, that there is a more flagrant appetite to sinne, then to any thing else: like Rachel, crying, Give me children, else I die: so let me have my lusts satisfied, else no life, no condition is comfortable.

Sixthly, The necessity of Gods grace both for the beginnings, progresse and con∣summation in every good work, doth evidently prove our polluted nature. We need grace to make us new creatures, of spiritually dead to quicken us and en∣liven us; we need grace to breath in the very first desires, and groans after any thing that is good. Now why is there such a necessity of a Physician? if we be not sick, Christ is in vain, grace is in vain: if original sinne with the effects thereof be denied. And therefore Austia said, Pelagians were but nomine te∣nus Christiani, Christians only in name: for they do in effect exclude Christ, and evacuate grace. Indeed the pure Naturalist (Vnam Necessarium, Chap 6. pag. 413.) affirmeth,

That the necessity of grace doth not suppose our na∣ture to be originally corrupted, for beyond Adam's meer nature, something else was necessary: and so it is in us.

This Position is bottomed upon that false and absurd Doctrine invented at first by some Philosophers, brought into the Church by Pelagions, much insisted upon by Papists; That there is a mid∣dle state, a state of pure nature between sinne and grace; That Adam was crea∣ted in such a condition, God superadding the glorious ornaments of grace, which upon his fall, he was deprived of, and so fell into his state of pure nature

again, and in this middle estate, every Infant is now born; a state indeed (they say) of imperfection, but not of sinne; we need grace to carry us to those sublime and high things which are above nature, but otherwise there is no sinne is 〈◊〉〈◊〉 So that it's the Papists expression, That Adam standing, and Adam fallen, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 only as a man that was cloathed and naked; or as the late Author, as Moses face while the light did shine upon it, and when it was removed; As Moses face did remain with its naturals, though it had not the super-added lu∣stre: Thus (say they) man is in his state of nature not sinfull, neither godly. But this is a monstrous figment; and he that saith, Those who dispute of ori∣ginal sinne, do dispute, De non ente; How much rather may we say, that all those voluminous disputations of this state of pure nature is wholly De non ente, there being not the least title in Scripture to establish any such opinion upon it? It is true, the Author mentioned is often affirming and dictating Magisteri∣ally, concerning such an estate, but never yet hath any Scripture-proof been brought for it; some philosophical arguments happily may be. Now being this is the foundation, upon which many of the Adversaries to original sinne do build, I shall in its time and order (God assisting) raze up this foundation, and lay the Axe against the root of the Tree, proving that it is both against Scri∣pture and solid reason.

Lastly, That there is such an inclination naturally in a man to sinne, and repugnant to what is good, a mans own experience may teach him; were there no Bible, no Orthodox Teachers, a mans own heart may con∣vince him of such a perversnesse within him, though by natural light he could never discover the spring of it. Doth not Paul, even while regenerated, com∣plain of this Law of sinne within him? Rom. 7. Nazianzen maketh sad com∣plaining verses, about this constitution of his soul, Carmen quartum, pag. 69. The conflict with the flesh and spirit, which in a most excellent and affectionate manner, he doth there bewail. And certainly if the Adversaries to this Do∣ctrine, find not such a pronenesse in them, it is because they are blinded, they are benummed within, as the Pelagians of old bragged, That a man might be without passions and sinfull commotions; That they did not pati, they felt none of these things, but herein they were either horrible hypocrites, or stupid∣ly hardened.

SECT. IV.

Of the Causes or Fountain of the vehement proneness and inclination to sinne that is in all men by nature, and of the false Causes assign∣ed by the Adversaries.

THus you see this Text hath sufficiently informed us of this Truth, That there is in all men by nature a vehement proneness and inclination to sinne; To which we have also added many other Demonstrations of this Truth, not so much that it is doubtfull, and needeth to be proved; (For the Adversaries do confess it,) as that thereby we might the more deeply humble our selves under the consideration of it. If then there be such constant muddy streames, we are to enquire what is the fountain of them; And although this Text and many others of the like nature, do evidently proclaim it to be that corrupt and un∣clean heart of a man within, that he hath hereditarily and by natural propa∣gation, yet because the Adversaries to original sinne will by no meanes assent to this; let us consider what are the causes they assign, and herein we shall find they do not so much speak falshood, as blasphemy against God. But before we

come to the particular causes specified by them, let us in the general consider, How many wayes this propensity in mankind may be imagined to proceed, for some gave one head or spring to it; Others, another; so that there is not more dis∣pute in Philosophy about the cause of the ebbing and flowing of the sea, or about the rise and spring of Nilus that famous river in Egypt, then there is about the original of this impetuousness in man to sinne: The effect is acknow∣ledged by all, but the dispute is about the cause thereof.

In the first place therefore, Some do assign this inclination to sinne, to the souls operations before the body was made; For they conceit, that the soul had a being before the body, and according to the evil, or good they had, they were ad∣judged to proportionable bodies, and thereby it cometh to pass that some have better tempered bodies then others, according to that Rule, gaudeant b••••è nati, They are to rejoyce that have good and kindly constitutions. This was the opinion of the Platonists, and Origen, who was justly called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 〈◊〉〈◊〉; for the monstrous opinions he brought into the Church did pro∣•••••• absurd fancy. Yea it is thought that this opinion was amongst the Jewes▪ as seemeth to be implyed in that Question propounded by the Disciples to our Saviour concerning the man born blind, Did this man sinne, or his pa∣rents? Joh. 9. 2. as also a passage in the Apocryphal Writer inclineth thereunto; Wi•••• 8. 20. And being good I came into a body undifiled; which Grotius under∣stands of the pre-existency of the soul, adding that Synesius, though made Bi∣shop, yet did not retract this errour. But this being so gross a figment, it 〈◊〉〈◊〉 not any confutation, and the rather, because it is a wonder that no such pre-existent soules should behave themselves well, for which they should have assigned to them undefiled and immaculate bodies: for we believe not the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 mentioned Author in that boast he there maketh.

A second opinion of the Manichees, who feigned two principles of good and evil, and this evil principle they made the cause of man, whereupon they condemned marriage as unlawfull, and made man to be opus Diaboli, the work of the Devil. This Manicheism the Pelagians have alwayes endeavoured to fasten upon such as do affirme original sinne, but it is done maliciously and ignorantly; for we say, this evil came not into man at first by nature, but by the free and volun∣tary consent of Adam, and since man is fallen, we do not say, sinne is his na∣ture, or his substance, but that it is a vitious quality adhering thereunto, as lepro∣sie to the body.

3. There are others, who may be reduced to the Manichees, and they were He∣retiques called Materiaris, who feigned an eternall matter, that was so evil, that the wisdome and power of God could not subdue it, but that this malignancy did ad∣here to it, whether God will or no. And this they make the cause of that vicious inclination in man: It is (say they) from the evil matter man is made off, which is inseperable from it; but this doth grosly contradict the History of the Creation, as recorded by Moses, Wherein it is said, God made every thing ex∣ceeding good, Gen. 1. 31.

Fourthly, The Pelagian, many Papists, and the late Socinian Writers, all these attribute it to mans Creation and constitution at first, at least in part: for they tell us of a state of pure naturals, that man hath, whereby the appetite doth rebell against the mind, for man confisting of a soul and a body; hereby (say they) do necessarily arise contrary inclinations; The soul enclineth one way, and the body a∣nother way; and this conflict they are not afraid to say was in Adam himself, and therefore God gave him grace as a supernatural and superadded ornament, yea and as a remedy to keep the inferior appetite in its order: now man being fallen, he hath lost those superadditionals, but continueth in his meer naturals, and these being weak and imperfect are easily carried out to sinne, wanting the grace of God to elevate them. This is the mystery of their iniquity. This is

the fountain of all their poisonous impieties, and therefore (God assisting) is to be confuted most properly, when we come to speak of that immediate effect of original sinne, which is to make a conflict and rebellion in man between the mind and sensitive appetite in natural men, and between the flesh and spirit in regenerate men.

Fifthly, That which the Orthodox, following the light of the Scripture assign as a cause of that deluge of impiety amongst mankind, is the original depravation of eve∣ry mans nature through Adam's transgression. From this unclean principle none can bring forth that which is clean; and truly the Scripture is so evident, go∣ing alwayes to this head, making the lust within a man, a cause of all impiety flowing from us, that they seem to deny the Sunne at noon-day, who will not acknowledge this.

But let us in the next place examine, What causes ef this universall propensity in mankind, to sinne, are given by the late Heterodox Writer; for the weight of this Objection presseth him, and therefore he doth industriously set himself to answer it. (Vnum Necessar. Chap. 6. Sect. 4. It is certain (saith he) that there are many common principles, from which sinne deriveth it self into the manners of all men.

The first mentioned is,

That at first God made no promises of heaven, he had propounded not glorious rewards, to be as an Argument to support the su∣periour faculty against the inferiour, because there was no such thing in that period of the world: therefore almost all flesh had corrupted themselves: for want of this Adam fell, and all the world followed his example, and most upon this account; till it pleased God, after he had tryed the world with tem∣poral promises, and found them also insufficient to finish the work of his gra∣ciousness, and to cause us to be born anew by the revelations and promises of Jesus Christ.

Thus he; but I had almost said,

Oh monstrum horrendum, cui lumen ademptum!

Now the Socinian appeareth in his own ugly and deformed colours, let us see whether there be any validity in this reason or no. And

First, It is very frivolous, ridiculous and absurd; for we are asking for a reason of the general inclination of all men in all ages to evil, and he would assign one for that speciall age of the world before Christ. Is it not still true, even since Christs coming, that the heart of a man is desperately and incurably set upon evil, till the grace of God doth sanctifie it? So that though in the New Testa∣ment the glory of heaven, and the torments of hell, are evidently and power∣fully demonstrated, yet still there is the same torrent of impiety in the manners of men.

Secondly, This reason cannot be acquitted from blasphemy (in some sense) against God, for the cause of overflowing impiety in the Old Testament times, is reduced hereby to God himself. May not all the prophane ones in that age of the world take up this mans Argument to defend themselves? O Lord it is from thee we are thus universally wicked! Had the joyes of heaven been promised to us in wel-doing: had the torments of hell been manifested unto us; we had then been awakened; so that we are now wicked, because we wanted such efficaci∣ous meanes to prevent our impiety, that afterwards were vouchsafed to the world; so that the Israelites might have replyed to the Prophet Hosea, Chap. 13. 9. that he spake falsly: their destruction is not of themselves, but of God, who did not give them sufficient incouragements. Had the Asserters of origi∣nal sinne affirmed any such thing, that might so hainously have redounded to the dishonour of Gods justice, his mercy and goodness, what tragical exclama∣tions would have been raised up immediately? But thus it falleth out alwayes, that those who out of a preposterous fear sometimes to hold such things, that

have but an apparent tendency to dishonour God, do fall into such abominable positions, that do really reproach God, and his wayes, as may more be shew∣ed in this point.

Lastly, The very inward part of this reason: is very wickedness and falshood it self, for this Proposition, That heaven and hell were not used as Arguments in the Old Testament, but that temporall mercies and jugements were the only spurres and curbes in their conversation, is being reserved as the peculiar and proper glory of Christ, to reveal the promises of eternal life, is that notorious pure impure Socinianisns which our learned Writers do so evidently profligate.

This saith Smalcius (De Div Jes. Christi c. 7.) is so clear a truth, that they want no little thing to the true knowledge of Christ and his Office, who are ignorant of it, or doubt of it; yea he addeth Vnde appareat, &c. from whence it may appear, that our Congregations, though they are said to blaspheme Christ, yet do more rightly acknowledge Christ in this particular, Quam omnes alios Christiani nominis professores,

then all other professors of Christs name. Thus they tryumph in this enormious error, as their greatest glory, because they make it peculiar to Christ to reveal and promise eternal glory. It is not my intent to enlarge on this point, That eternal life was promised to Adam, as also to those who lived in the Old Testamentary dispensation. That the tree of life, was a Sacra∣mental symbole of eternal life, appeareth by that expression, Rev 2. 7. And certainly if the Jewes did not discover the resurrection of the dead, and eternal life, it was because they did not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as our Saviour telleth them, Mat. 22. 29, 30. and that is remarkable which is said, Joh. 5. 39. Search the Scrip∣tures, for in them ye think ye have eternal life; That same 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, ye think, is not spoken, as if it were a false perswasion to look for eternal life out of those Scriptures, but because they boasted in their own interpretation of them, ex∣cluding Christ thereby: It is therefore a detestable position which Smalcius in the same place hath,

That the promise of eternal life was wholly hidden from men for those ages which were before Christ, neither did it clearly appear to any one that such a thing would be bestowed upon mortal men;

for doth not Job proclaim the clean contrary, Job. 19. 25. I know that my Redeemer li∣veth,— he shall stand at the later day upon the earth, &. It is true, the learned Mercer would apply this to that temporal and blessed restitution of his external happiness, which God vouchsafed to him, but the Context doth necessitate us to understand it of a more glorious condition. We read also, Heb. 11. 13, 14, 15. That the Patriarchs acknowledged themselves pilgrims in this earth, and did declare plainly, they sought an heavenly country. It is not worth the while to examine the suggestions of Schlitingius the Socinian on those Texts, who would so miserably wrest them to his own purpose, and that the day of judgement was used as an Argument to bridle men from sinne, appeareth, Eccles. 11. 9. as also Chap. 12. 14. The Book concludeth with this, as a truth to stick in our mind alwayes, That God will bring every work unto judgement, and thus much for his first reason.

His second reason is no less nocent, The cause of iniquity is not, because na∣ture is originally corrupted, but because Gods Lawes command such things, which are a restraint to the indifferent, and otherwise lawfull inclinations of nature (Idem ibidem pag. 415) so that our unwillingness and averseness cometh by occasion of the law coming cross upon our nature, not because our nature is contrary to God, but because God was pleased to superinduce some Commandments contrary to our na∣ture; if God had commanded as to eat the best meats, and drink the richest wines, as long as they could please us, I suppose original sinne would not be thought to have hindered us from obedience. Thus he in a most prophane and unsavoury manner. For

First, Here again God is made the occasion of all the universal impiety in

mankind: man may plead, my nature is good, my inclinations are lawfull, but God hath superinduced austere commands, he maketh those things sinnes, which would not have been sinnes; Thus this man doth directly teach the world to lay all their wickedness upon God, he is an hard master, he is too severe, other∣wise our natures would do well enough. But

Secondly, He betrayeth much ignorance, or concealeth his knowledge, that he will not distinguish between moral precepts, and meer positive ones; or as Whitaker out of Hugo, Pracepta Naturae, and Praecepta Disciplinae (De pecato orig. lib. 1. cap. 14.) commands of Natural Duties, and prohibitions of In∣trinsecal evils; or such as are meerly Positive, and for Discipline-sake. Some things we grant are indeed meerly evil, because prohibited; some things are evil, and therefore prohibited. Although this must be remembred, That a man doth never break a positive command, but thereby also he doth a moral command likewise. Now let this Patron of Nature answer to this Question, Why is there in man-kind such inclinations to those sins, that are morally and intrinsically evil? Is he of that opinion, that nothing is good or evil internally? But as Mayro the Schoolman saith, God might have made a Law, that whosoever should praise him should be damned, and whosoever should dishonour him, should be saved. On mon∣strous Divinity, that maketh virtue and vice nothing in it self! If God had pleased, vices might have been virtues, and virtues vices; It is from God that maketh such things to be sins, that otherwise would be lawfull. This symboli∣zeth with Diagoras the Atheist, first called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and afterwards 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: for his opinion was,

That a wise man might,

as time served, give himself to theft or adultery, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (Hesych. de viris illustribus Titulo 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.) for none of such things, were in their nature filthy, if you take away popular opinions. But I will not charge this opinion on the Author, only he should not have spoken so confusedly. If this be true, it is not a vain wish with him, who addicted to a sinne, cryed out, Vtinam hoc non esset peccare!

Lastly, Even those inclinations that are in men to lawfull things, are vitiated and corrupted. No man desireth to eat, to drink; no man desireth health, or wealth naturally, as he ought to do: I doubt this Author, as all the Pelagians formerly, do not attend to the exactnesse of a good work. They forget Austin's old Rule grounded upon Scripture, That duties are to be esteemed not by the acts, but by their ends. Is there any man eateth or drinketh, or inclineth to do these things for the glory of God? as we are commanded, 1 Cor. 9. 31.

Lastly, He runneth to evil examples, the similitude of Adams transgression (as if that moved those to sinne, who happily never heard of him) errour, false principles, &c. And from the enumeration of many particulars, applieth that of Job, Chap. 14. Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? which Text might justly have affrighted him, in what he delivereth; for there Job speaks of one in his very first birth, and as is added, Ne infans unius diei, not an Infant a day old is free from this uncleannesse. What can evil examples and wicked customs do to pollute a child new born? It is true, the Socinians grant,

That where parents are habituated in evil customs, the children may derive from them an inclination also unto sinne.

But if so, then this very thing will puzzle them as much as they endeavour to perplex the Orthodox, with difficul∣ties about the transmission of original sinne: For, How do Parents accustomed to sinne convey this evil disposition? either by the soul, or by the body. And what they would answer themselves in such an asserted propagation, the same we may for all mankind in general. But

2. This is no sufficient answer, for still the Question is not satisfied;

Men (say they) are thus inclinded to evil, because of wicked customs and examples;

But how came these customs? Cain had no example before him of murder, yet

he committeth it. These evill examples then, and wicked customs, seeing they must have an original to come from it, cannot be any thing else but the depra∣ved nature of mankind. And certainly the Apostle James doth attribute all evil committed to that lust which is within a man, Jam. 1. 14. So that if there were no other occasion or temptation, this is enough to set the whole course of the soul on fire; And this is the next particular to be considered, which I shall handle as a second Immediate Effect of original sinne.

CHAP. II.

The second Immediate Effect of Original Sinne, is the Causality, which it hath, in respect of all other Sinnes.

SECT. I.

The Text explained, setting forth the Generation of Sinne.

JAM. 1. 14.

But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust and enticed.

THe next Immediate Effect of Original sinne, which cometh under consideration, is, The Causality that it hath in respect of all other sins. This is the dunghill in which the whole ser∣pentine brood of all actual sinnes is conveived, and brought forth: Insomuch that when you see all the abominable impie∣ties that fill the whole world with irreligion to God and inju∣stice to man: If you ask, whence ariseth this monster? How cometh all this wickedness to be committed? The Answer is easie: from that original concupiscence, that hot Aetna which is in a man, that never ceaseth from sending forth such continual flames of iniquity. Now this truth will ex∣cellently be discovered from the Text in hand; for it is the Apostles scope in this and the adjacent verses, to take off all men from that wicked way, they are so prone unto (viz.) to lay the blame of their iniquities, and to ascribe the cause of them to any, yea to God, rather than to themselves; They will rather make God then themselves the Author of all that evil they do commit. We have this from Adam, who at the beginning endeavoured to clear himself, and to charge his sinne upon God, The woman thou gavest me. And happily some even in the primitive times, by mis-understanding some places of Scripture, wherein God is said to give men up to their lusts to harden and blind men in their sinnes,

might occasion such a detestable Position, And although the Papists do ordina∣rily charge this damnable Doctrine upon the Calvinists, yet there needeth no more to justifie Calvin in this particular, then what he doth most excellently and solidly deliver upon this very Text. The truth is, our learned men shew expres∣sions from the Papists; yea, from Bellarmine himself, more harsh and incommo∣dious, then I believe can be found in any Protestant Writer. But this by the way.

The Apostle being to inform us of the true cause of all the sinne we do com∣mit, and that not God, no nor Devils, or wicked men are to be blamed compa∣ratively, but our own selves; sheweth, that all this evil cometh from that concupiscential frame of heart we have within us. And as for God, the Apostle expresly instanceth concerning him, prohibiting any one to think or say, it is from God that they do sinne, Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: and he giveth two reasons, whereof one is the cause of the other.

If you ask, How is it that God is said to tempt no man, seeing he tempted Abraham and the Israelites?

Austin's distinction is made use of, that there is a temptation probationis and seductionis, of probation or tryal; or of deceiving and enticing to sin. God in∣deed doth often tempt his people, the former way, not but that he knoweth what is in the heart of every man; but that hereby a godly mans graces may be the more quickned, as also a man have more experimental knowledge of himself. As for the other temptation of seduction; God doth not thus tempt, that is, he doth not encline or enrice to sinne. It is true, we read the Prophet Jeremiah, saying, O Lord, I am deceived, and thou hast deceived me, Jer. 20. 7. But that is spoken unadvisedly and rashly by the Prophet, who thought, because what he had prophesied, was not as yet fulfilled, and therefore his adversaries derided and scorned him, that therefore it would not at all be fulfilled, and so by con∣sequence, that God had deceived him.

Secondly, Divines distinguish temptation into external and internal. Ex∣ternal are afflictions and troubles, called often so in Scripture, and these tem∣ptations are from God. 2. Internal, which do immediately incline to sinne, and with these God doth not tempt. Now although the Apostle had in the for∣mer part spoken of external temptations, yet now he speaks of internal ones; though some think he continueth his discourse of externals, because these many times draw out hearts to sinne; but this ariseth not from God.

The reason why God cannot tempt to sinne, is from the infinite perfection of holiness, which is in God: he is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, He cannot be tempted by evil. It is true, men are said to tempt God many times, and so ex parte hominu, there is done what man could do, even to make God deviate from his own holy na∣ture and Law: but the Apostle meaneth ex parte Dei, that God is of such abso∣lute purity and transcendent holiness, that there cannot arise any motion in his nature to make him sinne. For so we expound the Greek word in a passive sense, Estius himself granting, that the use of it in an active signification, can hardly be found, though Popish Interpreters plead for the active sense; but then there would be no distinction of this from the following words, Neither tempteth he any man. The original word is used only here in the New Testament. The strength then of the Argument lieth in this, God doth not tempt any man to sin, because he hath no inward temptation, or motion in his own nature to sin: for that is the reason why the Devil is so impetuous and forward in tempting us to sin, because his nature is first carried out to all evil & so there is no man that doth draw on another to sin, but because he in his own heart, is drawn aside with it be∣fore. The Apostle having thus justified God, and removed all cause of evil from him; In my Text he directeth us to the true internal and proper cause of all the sinne that we do commit; and therein doth most excellently shew the several steps and degrees of sinne, whereby of an Embryo (as it were) at first,

it cometh to be a compleated and perfected sinne. This Text is much vexed by Bellarmine and Popish Authors to establish their distinction of a venial and mor∣tal sinne, though they cannot find any true aid from the Text.

Let us consider the particulars of this noble Text: The Cause of a mans sinne is said to be lust 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, this is the same with original sinne, the corrupti∣on of all the powers of the soul, whereby it is inordinately carried out to all things. Of which more in the Doctrine. This is described from the note of propriety, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, His own lust; This expression is used that we may not lay all upon the Devil, or other men, for this is ordinarily brought by men to excuse themselves. It is true, I was in such a fault, I have sinned, but the Devil moved me, or such wicked companions they enticed me, or I did it, because men compelled me, and terrified me: all this will not serve thy turn; It is thy own lust within, not men without that hath made thee thus to sinne. And this sheweth, That every man hath his own proper original sinne, by way of a lust within him.

3. This is further amplified from the Vniversality of the Subject, wherein this lust is seated, Every man; so that no man but Christ, who was God and man, is freed from this incentive to evil.

4. There is the Manner How, this lust doth tempt us to sinne, and that is ex∣pressed in, two words, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Drawn away, that is, as some, from God, from heavenly objects; because in all sinne there is an aversion from God, and a conversion to the creature: or else (as others) Drawn aside form the conside∣ration of hell, of the wrath of God, of eternal death and damnation. For we sinne continually, as Eve did at first; The Devil perswaded her she should not die, and then when this fear was removed, she presently falleth into the transgressi∣on, and thus before men fall into the pit of any sinne, they are drawn aside from those serious thoughts; This will offend God, this will damn me. The other word is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a Metaphor either from birds or fishes, which have baits to allure them, and thereby are destroyed: Thus lust appeareth with a bait, but the hook doth not appear.

In the next place, This original sinne is illustrated in the issue of it: the Apo∣stle sheweth, how sinne à primo ad ultimum cometh to be accomplished. So that as in other places, we read of the generations of men, the generations of Adam, of the Israelites; so here is the generation of sinne described. Now it is good to observe, that in this whole discourse the Apostle doth proceed meta∣phorically, comparing original sinne to a woman, like that whore in the Pro∣verbs, alluring and enticing man to sinne; or as Adam was at first tempted to sinne by Eve; so still we are drawn aside to sinne by this original corruption, which is like an Eve, or like a Daeliah, and a Joseph's mistress, importunately solliciting of us to what is evil: and as with the woman there is pleasure in con∣ception, but pangs and sorrows in bringing forth, so it is with sinne: while we do at first entertain it, there is pleasure and delight, but afterwards it leaveth a terrible sting in a man, depriving him of all comfort day and night; We may therefore observe the several steps and degrees of sinne before it cometh to be consummated.

1. There is the mother, or root of all, and that is called lust, which must not only be extended to the carnal sensual appetite of a man, but principally to the rational part: for there original sinne hath its chiefest dominion; that is the metropolis, as afterwards is to be shewed.

2. There are the motions to sinne, and titillations or delectations about it: this is implied in the word enticed, taken from the bird, who is allured by the bait; the meat it leeth, but observeth not the snare. Thus in man, there are sudden motions and delights arising in the soul towards sinfull objects, which do antecede all deliberation and consultation; There are pleasing motions to∣wards

sinne, and secret titillations of the soul, before the will doth give its per∣fect and full consent. I say perfect consent; for it may be in all the tick∣ling motions to sinne, though never so sudden, there may be some imperfect consent.

The third step or degree to the compleating of sinne, is expressed vers. 15, When lust hath conceived, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: This is applied to women conceiving, Luke 1. 24. Luke 1. 31. and by this is meant that consent and imbracement, which the soul giveth to sinne. For as it was with Joseph, though his mistress did so vio∣lently sollicit him, yet he not consenting fled away from her: So it falleth out sometimes with the godly, that though original sinne in the immediate moti∣ons thereof, may tempt, may delight and secretly please; yet grace being strong may refuse to consent, and then these Babylons brats are immediately killed before they grow up. Thus many sinnes to the godly prove abortive; original sinne hath a miscarrying womb, for by grace they are inabled to resist those temptations, and so sinne is killed as soon as ever it hath any life. Not but that these motions to sinne, though not consented unto, are truly and properly sins; but being withstood by grace, they are not imputed. And thus farre we admit that saying of Bernard, Non nocet sensus, ubi deest consensus. These motions and stirrings of lust within us, if resisted and refused, shall not be able to condemn us, but in all natural men for the most part, lust doth conceive; no sooner doth it entice, but presently there is consent given to it; No sooner doth it knock at the door, but presently it is opened to receive this lust in; and now when this consent is given, then as to the eyes of God, the iniquity is fully committed; then a man is a murderer and an adulterer before God, as appeareth Mat. 5. 28. Yet the Apostle addeth,

The fourth step, and that is, Lust thus consented unto, bringeth forth sinne, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, still continuing in the metaphor. By sinne is meant actual sinne, expressed in words and actions, so that sinne is first in the heart, in motions, in secret con∣sents and imbracements, before it cometh to be expressed actually. But why doth not the Apostle give it the name of sinne, till it be compleated in action? The Papists greedily lay hold on this, and would therefore conclude from hence, that the motions of the heart to sinne, if not consented unto, that the lusts which rise up in us to our grief and trouble, are not truly and properly sins. But

1. They themselves do acknowledge, that sinne consented unto, lusts yeeld∣ed unto, though in the heart only, are truly and properly sinnes; that those are damnable, though never actually committed; whereas this Text, if they rigidly urge it, would prove as well, that such lusts are not sin.

Besides, Though the Apostle James doth not here call such motions sinnes, yet Paul, Rom. 7. doth very often give them that name, and accounteth himself miserable, in respect of his captivity to them, though he doth utterly disallow them. Therefore the Answer is, That the Apostle taketh sinne here strictly, for only actual sinne, because this is onely visible to the eyes of the world: and because though motions consented unto, yea and unconsented unto, are truly and proper sinnes, yet because these are in a tendency to actual sinnes; actual sinne is the terminus ad quem, as it were; they are not fully compleated in the utmost of their iniquity, till actually committed. No won∣der if that be called only sinne, not by way of exclusion to the motions within, but by way of aggravation; to shew that then sinne when its actuated hath gone to its utmost.

Lastly, Here is the last step, and utmost end of sinne: and that is sinne thus finished, Bringeth forth death, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Now all the pleasure is turned into bit∣terness in death: in the torments of hell, all the delights of sinne will be for∣gotten, as the whorish woman in her pangs and troubles, when she labours to

bring forth, and cannot, doth then forget all her former wanton lusts. The damned in hell will cry out then: Oh if they had remembred into what doom the short pleasures of sinne have brought them; how that all their honey is now turned into bitter gall, they would never have given way to these evil lusts! So that we may metaphorically apply that to such sinners at the day of Judge∣ment, which our Saviour did to some, because of the day of Jerusalem's de∣struction, Woe be to those that are with child, and give suck (that thus conceive) and bring forth in those dayes.

And here again you may ask, Why is it said, that sinne thus finished bringeth forth death, if sin be entertained in the heart, though it go no further? It is not mortal and damnable?

The Papists therefore they would from hence also establish their distinction of venial and mortal sinne. But this Text will not help them; for as was said, they acknowledge that adultery in the heart is a mortal sinne, though not out∣wardly committed; and if these motions be truly and properly a sinne, as we shewed; then eternal death must needs be the wages of them, Rom. 6. 23. Therefore death is attributed to sinne finished, because therein the evil of sinne doth most palpably demonstrate it self. It is true, Calvin doth by sinne finished, or perfected, mean not so much the acting of any grosse sinne, as the custo∣mary continuance and perseverance in it; and no doubt this sense is not to be excluded: but the Text may very well be interpreted of any sinne, though but once committed, though it be not frequently iterated. And thus we have this full and excellent Text largely explained. From which we observe,

That original sinne is that lust within a man, from whence all actual sinnes do flow. That is, as there is not a man or woman, but he doth come from Adam: (Hence the Canonists have a saying, That if Adam were alive, he could not have a wise among all the women in the world, because of their discent from him) So it is true of every vain thought, every idle word, every ungod∣ly action: they all come from this original lust within a man; and there∣fore the Devil with all his fiery darts could do us no hurt, did not our lusts betray us, Nemo se palpet de suo. Satanas est, said Austin, Let no man flatter himself, he is a Devil to himself from his own lust, he is a tempter to himself. This truth is of special use to humble us, this will make us de∣base our selves, crying out, O Lord, I, even I alone am to be blamed; it is from my own vile self, that all this corruption doth thus overflow. This our Saviour confirmed, when he said, Matth. 15. 19. One of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, &c. So that whosoever would be kept free and unspotted from sinne, he must watch over his heart more diligent∣ly, there is the nest, there is the spawn of all those noisome sins, that may be seen in thy life.

SECT. II.

That Original Sinne is the cause of all Actual Evil, cleared by seve∣ral Propositions, which are Antidotes against many Errors.

¶. 1.

VVE proceed to clear this Truth in several Propositions, which also will be as antidotes for the most part, against so many respective errors in this Point. And

First, By lust here in the Text, we are not to understand that particular libidinous disposition in men, whereby they are carried out in a wanton or un∣clean manner, as we in our English phrase do for the most part limit it. For the Apostle doth comprehend farre more, Rom. 7. in that command, Thou shalt not lust, or covet; neither is this lust to be restrained only to the sensitive and carnal part of a man; as if lust were not chiefly in the reason, and the will of a man, according to Scripture-language. Lust doth comprehend the deor∣dination of the sublime and rational part in a man. Therefore those Papists who do limit lust only to the sensual part, are wholly ignorant of the extension of original sinne, and the diffusion of it self through the chiefest parts of a man. Hence it is justly to be censured, that the late Annotator on this Text, doth in his paraphrase joyn with the most erroneous of the Popish party: for by lust he understands our treacherous sensual appetite, which being impatient of sufferings, suggests some sensitive carnal baits, and so by them enticeth him. And in the verse following, he agin paraphraseth,

When consent is joyned to the invitation of the sensual part, against the contrary dictates of his rea∣son, and the Spirit, then that, and not the affliction or temptation, begetteth sinne.—Thus he.

But we may meet with a more sound and orthodox ex∣plication, I say not in Whitaker and other Protestant Authors, who conflict with the Papists in this point; but even in Estius the Papist, who doth ingenuously acknowledge,

That because the Apostle is here speaking of the original of all sinne, spiritual sinnes as well as carnal; it cannot be limited to the sensitive appetite. Do not the sins of the mind arise from our lusts within us?

Do not the Devils sinne from the lust within them, and yet they have no sensitive appetite? And when the Apostle, Gal. 5. 17. speaketh of that remarkable lusting which is between the flesh and the Spirit; he cannot mean the sensual inferiour part of a man only, for the works of this flesh are some of them said to be Idola∣try, Heresies; which must needs proceed from the rational part of a man. It is therefore too evident, that this lust which doth so greatly entice us, is not only in the inferiour part of the soul, but most predominantly in the superiour, and hence the understanding hath its peculiar enmity to the holy truths of God, and the will its proper obstinacy to the good duties, which God hath commanded. Therefore we read of that expression, Col. 2. 18. Puft up with a fleshly mind. So that heresie is a lust of the mind, envy a lust of the mind; for the Devil is full of envy, (though Philosophers referre envy to one of their mixed and com∣pounded passions;) unbelief, ambition, vain-glory, these are lusts of the rational part. Think not then that thy affections only do lust against the Spirit of God, but thy reason, thy will also doth; and these have the greatest evil in them, they are the greatest enemies to the wayes and truths of Christ. As the Publi∣cans sinnes were from the lust of the flesh, so the Pharises sinnes were from

the lusts of the mind. And thus the more superstitious, erroneous and devout any are in false wayes of Religion, the more dangerous are their lusts, because the more spiritual and immaterial. This kind of lusting followeth us in our prayers, in our preachings, in all spiritual performances; So that whereas carnal and bodily lusts are easily discerned, and are accounted very loathsome in the eyes of the world. These spiritual lusts are very difficulty discovered, and may then most reign over a man, when he thinketh himself most free from them.

Propos. 2. When we say, original sinne is the cause of all the actual evil that is committed, this is not to be understood, as if it did proximly and imme∣diately produce every actual impiety; onely this is the mediate cause, and the root of all. It is true, the learned Whitaker will not allow it to be called the remote cause of death, and other miseries, which Infants are obnoxious unto. As the root cannot be said to be the remote cause of fruit, because it doth nou∣rish it, though under ground, and at a distance from it: Or (as he instanceth) a fountain is a cause of that stream which is carried in a long course distant from the spring (De peccat. orig. l. 2. c. 9.) But we need not strive about words. No doubt when men through custom have contracted habits of sin upon them, habits are the immediate and proxim causes of the wicked actions, such persons do commit; but original sinne is the mediate: yet because original sinne is the causa causae, it may be called the causa causati, it being the cause of the customs and habits of sins, it may be also the cause of the sins themselves. But I see not why we may not call original sinne the remote cause only of some sins, because that is the seed and spawn only of all evil; there are many temptations and suggestions, which do ripen and quicken this monster to bring forth. So that although men have lust enough within them to make them, so many Cains, so many Judasses; to be as abominable in wicked wayes, as the vilest of men are; yet Nemo repente fit turpissimus, as the Poet said. There is time required to grow up into such foul abominations. This is like the Prophets little cloud, which at first, though no bigger than an hand, yet did afterwards biggen, till it covered the whole sky. The Apostle (you heard) compareth the production of sinne, to the child, that is first conceived in the mothers womb; and so through the warmth and nourishment thereof, doth lust bring forth: As it is with the Acorn, that is at first but little in quantity, yet being great in efficacy, doth in time enlarge it self into a great Tree. Conclude then all evil, even the most enormious impie∣ties, which for the present, it may be, thy heart doth tremble at, yet they are se∣minally and radically in thee; there are the sparks of fire, which if let alone will quickly set all on a flame. Hence

The third Proposition is, That whosoever would by the grace of God be deli∣vered from any actual sins, the best remedy is, to endeavour to quench the lust within. He that would dry up the streams, must look to the fountain, to have that dried up. He that would destroy the bad fruit of a Tree, must lay the axe to the root of it. And this is a very necessary Rule to be attended unto in pra∣ctical Divinity. Observe that the same way sinne comes to live, the same way thou must take to kill it. It beginneth at the heart first, before it's in the eyes, or hands; and therefore thou must look to crucifie it in the heart first. Thus the Wiseman adviseth, Prov 4. 23. Keep thy heart, for out of it are the issues of life. After this then he exhorteth to look to our mouth and lips, to our eyes and feet; but the foundation must be laid in the heart; if the heart be good, all is good. And this sheweth the preposterous way of the Casuists and Confessionists in Popery, from which the late Writer, so often mentioned, doth not much decline in his Treatise of Ecclesiastical Penance; for with such Writers, you have scarce one word to the penitent sinner about Regeneration, whereas ex∣ternal duties of alms, or restitution (which in their way are necessary by Gods

command) must flow from a spiritual and supernatural life within, as the foun∣dation of all: much lesse have you one icta or tittle, about faith, laying hold on Christ, by whom alone our persons are justified, and all our duties are ac∣cepted. This (I say) is the great neglect and unskilfulness in such writers, that they deal in externals, but for faith, by which the heart is purified, and whereby we please God in Christ, that they make no mention of at all. But the Scri∣pture is herein different from moral Philosophy and Aristotelical precepts, which those Casuists are wholly captivated unto: for that requireth, yea and promiseth first a tender and holy heart, a circumcised heart, and then to walk in the wayes of God: whereas moral Philosophers first begin with actions, and then go to acquired habits, Justè agendo sumus justs. This then is a golden Rule, and of perpetual use in Christianity, for a Christian to be mortifying lust within, to watch against the treacherous adversary in thy own breast, and then when the foundation is destroyed, the superstruction must needs fall to the ground.

Propos. 4. Because man is thus tempted, and enticed by lust within, there∣fore it is that man fallen, doth sinne farre otherwise, then Adam did in the state of integrity. We do not sinne now, as Adam at first; we have an internal cause and principle within us, whereas Adam did sinne, wholly from suggestion without; neither was it lust within, but his meer will, that made him consent to such suggestions. This Proposition is the more to be regarded, because Pela∣gian and Socinian Writers, they all agree in this, That we at first sinne in the same manner, as Adam did at first; the sensitive part, being enticed by sensible objects, and so rebelling against the rational part. But this is to be wholly ignorant of that holy estate and glorious Image, wherein God created Adam at first. Adam had all such external and internal helps, so freed from all igno∣rance, passion or lust, that nothing could destroy him, but the liberty and mu∣tability of his will. Whereas alas in man destitute of Gods Image, there is a lusting principle within him, carrying him out inordinately unto every object proposed. It is therefore a false and an absurd Position, which Molina the Jesuite, one of the meer Naturalists affirmeth (Quaest. 14. Disput. 4. de Con∣cord. lib. Arb.) where he saith, Adam had, Innatum appetitum excellentiae ac laudis quo ad intellectum & voluntatem, &c. That he had this temptation within him, viz. an innate appetite to his own excellency and praise. For how could this consist with that holiness and righteousness God created him in? In∣deed he saith in another place of the same book (Quaest. 14. Disp. 45.) Ex contemplation rei amabilis, &c) from the contemplation of any lovely object, and which is of concernment to be obtained, there doth naturally rise in the will a certain motion, whereby the will is affected to it; which motion is not a volition, but an affection of the will to that object, whose goodness it is allu∣red with. And this he maketh to be in men, yea in the Angels before they fell: But what is this but to say, that in men and Angels, even before their fall, there was a concupiscential inclination to delightsome objects: and so Adam and An∣gels must according to this Text be tempted away, and enticed by their own lusts? An horrible Position, highly derogating from Gods honour, who created them holy and righteous. Therefore Adam, and much more Christ, when they were tempted by Satan, it was not in the same way with us. The temptation was only external, not internal; there was no inward lust within; yea the ve∣ry external temptation of Adam and Christ was different from ours in a fur∣ther respect. For the Devil had not power by his suggestions to move or disturb their phansie, as he doth in us. Though the Devil cannot force our wils, yet he can make bodily commotions of the phantasie, and so thereby man is the more easily carried away to evil. But neither Christ or Adam had their imagi∣nation so disturbed. For although they might understand by phantasmes, yet

all was at the command of deliberate judgement. A mans imagination was then in his own power: so that those inferiour faculties in their ope∣ration could not hinder the superiour. Whether Adam in the state of in∣tegrity would have had dreames, is uncertain; but if he had, learned men conclude, they would alwayes have been good, and not without the pre∣sent use of reason, as Rivet thinketh (in cap. 3. Genes.) However this is enough for our purpose, to shew, that we are tempted to sinne in a different way from Adam.

Hence the fifth Proposition is, That because there is such an internal In∣sting principle within, a man is carried out to sinne, though there be no ex∣ternal temptations by Satan or wicked men. But even as the Devil, who sin∣ned first, had no tempter, but was carried out by his meer free-will to evil: So much more must man, who hath this corrupt principle within him, be carried out to sinne, though there be no Devil to tempt us, or wicked men. Hence the Apostle doth in this Text name lust onely, as the inward cause, not mentioning Devils or wicked men. But yet it is disputed, That although the lust of a man within, be a sufficient cause and principle to carry a man out to all evil, whether for all that, the Devil also doth not help to the committing of every sinne, They question: Whether original lust be the cause only, and that the Devil also doth not excite and stirre this up? Some think, because wicked men are said to do, what they see their father the Devil do, and because he is called the tempter, 1 Thess. 3. 4. That therefore, though we sinne alwayes of our selves, yet it is by the instigation of the Devil; but because the Scripture maketh the imagination of mans heart to be only evil, Gen. 8. 21. And because our corruption within, is generally said to be the cause of a mans sinne; therefore we cannot say, that the Devil tempteth to every evil action that we do commit, although in some particular hainous sins, as in Ju∣das, and Ananias, and Sapphira, he entered into their hearts, and filled them with his temptations; but at that very time, observe how Peter doth reprove Ana∣nias for letting Satan have such admission into his heart, Acts 5 3. Why hath Satan filled thy heart? So that the Devil doth not compell any man to sinne; it will be no excuse to say, Satan tempted me; for this could not be, if thy lust did not consent to him, and entetain him; he throweth his fiery darts, and thy heart is like thatch or straw, that quickly is inflamed.

The last Proposition is, That the effects of this inhere••t lust within us, are of two sorts, immediate and mediate. Immediate are those first motions and workings of soul to any evil object, though not consented unto; yea it may be abhorred and humbled for. The mediate effects are lusts consented unto in the heart, and many times externally committed in our lives. For that original sinne hath an influence into grosse sinnes, appeareth by David's confession, Psal. 51 when he bewails his birth-pollution in his penitential humiliation, for those foul sins committed by him. But I shall enlarge my self only concerning those sinfull motions and stirrings of the heart unto evil, which though the un∣godly man taketh no notice of, yet the constant and perpetual work of a godly man is to conflict with, as appeareth Rom. 7. They are those perpetual restlesse workings of his heart inordinately, one way or other, that make his condition so bitter; and therefore it is good to consider what may be said for our informati∣on herein.

¶. 2.

Of the Motions of the Heart to sinne not consented unto, as an imme∣diate Effect of Original Sin.

THe last Proposition we mentioned, contained a division of the effects of original sinne within us, which were either immediate, such as the motions of the heart to sinne with the pleasures therof, not consented unto. Or medi∣ate, which are lusts consented unto, and the external actings of sinne thus imbraced. I shall only enlarge my self upon the former, and for your informa∣tion therein, take these considerations.

First, That these motions to sinne may be divided according to the subject they are in. Now the powers of the soul are usually divided into the apprehen∣sive and appetitive; the cognitive and affective; that is, either such as know or under∣stand, or such as are carried out by love and desire. These are the Jachin and Beaz (as it were) the two pillars of the temple of the soul; and respectively to these two, so are the stirrings of sinne within us. In the mind, or knowing part of the soul, the workings of sinne are by apprehensions and thoughts; In the affective part, by way of delight and love. And in both these the heart of a godly man is many times sadly exercised. For thoughts, How many vain, idle, foolish ones do arise in his soul, like the sand upon the sea-shore? The flies and Locusts in Aegypt did not more annoy then these do molest and trouble a gra∣cious heart. These thoughts come like so many swarms upon thee before thou hast time to recollect thy self. They are got into the souls closet, before they were ever perceived knocking at the door. Nay these thoughts are not only roving, wandring and restlesse, but sometimes horrid black ones, blasphemous, atheistical, diabolical; which put the soul into an holy trembling, and they know not what to do; they think none like them, no such vile wretches in the world, as they are. Indeed there are blasphemous injections of Satan, such as are suggested to the soul importunately by him, to which the soul giveth no consent, but like the maid in the judicial Law, that was ready to be ravished, cry∣eth out against them; or as the people, when they heard Rabshakeh rail and blaspheme the God of Israel so horribly, They answered him not a word. Thus the people of God in such temptations give no consent or approbation to them; now these are afflictions not sinnes; they are sad exercises, but not our corruptions, because they are wholly external, and cast in upon us; as if we were in a room, where we could not get out, hearing men curse and bla∣spheme; this would torment our souls, but they do not make us guilty. They are compared to the Cup in Benjamen's sack; it was found there, but it was not his fault, it came there without his knowledge and consent. And although they be foul and loathsom to a gracious heart, yet God usually keepeth his people hereby humble and lowly; yea he maketh them more spiritual and fruitfull, as the black and noisom dung maketh the field more fertile and fruitfull; but I speak not of these. The thoughts we are treating of, are such as arise from our own hearts: for seeing original sinne is the seed of all evil, the most erroneous and flagitious that can be; therefore atheistical, blasphemous, lascivious, and other evil thoughts may come out of our own hearts. It is indeed a special part of heavenly skill and wisdom, experimentally to make a difference between what thoughts are our own, and what are meerly of diabolical ••••jections, to discover when our own corrupt nature worketh, and when the Devil doth only assault and annoy us: But that is not my business now. It is enough to know, That even from thy own unsanctified heart may arise vain thoughts, blasphe∣mous

thoughts. So that thy soul seemeth unto thee, to be not only like a dunghill, but an hell it self. To these evil stirrings of sinne, in the apprehen∣sive part, we may referre our sinful dreames: even for them God might damn us. Austin bewaileth and confesseth his dreames; and yet our understanding and will do not so properly work at that time. The other sort of workings of soul, are such as are by way of love, and desire, when there arise in the heart some motions, and affections to such an object. Our hearts being now wholly destitute of the Image of God, and sinne having full dominion over us; no sooner doth any sinful object present it self, but immediately the heart maketh towards it; there is a propensity to embrace it.

Secondly, These motions that do thus stirre in the heart, are either such as they call motus primo primi, or secundo primi, the absolute meer first, or first in a secondary order. There may be difference in the explaining of these; but the summe is this, These motions are either such, which do rise up in our hearts, antecedently to any actings of the reason, or will at all. It was not in our power to repress them, or to prevent them: for original sin in a man doth not lie slug∣gish and bound up, it is alwayes acting and moving; and the immediate mo∣tions or first born of the soul are these first stirrings of heart, preventing all deliberation and consultation. Such a state indeed Adam was not created in; nothing did rise up in him before his will, and consent: and so it was also with Christ. But since we are plunged into this corrupt condition, sinne hath got the whole mastery over us, we are in a Babel and spiritual confusion. Every sinful lust riseth in us before we have time to withstand it; although (if we had time) such is our impotency and corruption now, that we neither can, or will gainsay the torrent of these motions: It is true, the Papists, say, they are no sinnes, they are matter of exercise to us, but they are not sinnes if not con∣sented unto. But the Apostle, Rom. 7. doth often call them so, and they are such as are contrary to the Law of God; they are such as make a godly man groan under them, and judge himself miserable thereby; they are such as are to be crucified and mortified, all which shew they have the true and proper nature of sinne. So that it is a wonder those should deny these indeliberate mo∣tions to be sinne, who hold original sinne to be properly and not equivocally a sinne. For, as it is enough to make original sinne voluntary, because it is vo∣luntarium voluntate ejus à quo, not in quo est, with the will of Adam, from whence it descendeth, though not with the will of him in which it inhereth; Thus also it may be said of these involuntary motions, they are of the same nature with original sinne. For though they be actual, yet flowing necessarily from the mother sinne, and being withall a privation of that righteousness, which ought to be in us, they must be called sinnes, as well as original. And thus farre Henricus the Schooleman proceedeth, as Vasquez alledgeth him, (Tom. 10. disput. 106.) to say, That these first motions in persons, not baptized are sinnes, and that they want not such a voluntariness, as is requisite to the nature of sinne; partly because of the will of the first parents, and partly, be∣cause of the proper will of the man who hath them; not because he doth not hinder these motions, because he cannot alwayes do this; but because he will not by baptisme be expiated from original sinne, and consequently from the guilt of these sinnes. This later reason we matter not; the former hath good strength, and is the same in effect with what we say. Oh then that we were rightly considering of these things! Those millions of thoughts and stirrings of heart, which arise before reason and will are able to do any thing, these are all sinnes: these are contrary to the holy Law of God: Adam had them not, neither shall the glorified Saints in heaven be in the least manner molested with them. How low and debased must thou be in thy own eyes? For this it is that the godly go bowed down; for this they mourn and pray: these afflict them

more then gross loathsome sinnes do prophane men; the meer civil and formal man, the self-righteous and confident man, he knoweth none of these things; he feeleth not this evil impure frame of his heart: this maketh the way of god∣liness to be such a mystery, such an unknown thing, but to those that are belie∣vers indeed, as they have other joyes, other comforts then the world knoweth of; so they have other motives of sorrow and humiliation, then the natural man can understand. But as for the first motions of the second sort, they have some imperfect consent and complacency; and therefore acknowledged by Gerson, (Compend. Theol.) to be sinnes; yea the former kind of motions, though so suddain, are affirmed to be sinnes (by several Schoolemn upon different rea∣sons) but venial, as they call them. For Henricus held they were mortal; now to us all sinnes in their own nature are mortal. Therefore all these motions, which arise in the soul, whether first or second, being contrary to the holy Law of God, which requireth pure streames, and also a pure fountain; and also being opposite to the Image of God we were created in, must needs be truly sinnes: for which we are to humble our selves, and to pray continually for the mortification of them.

Thirdly, These motions though they flow from original sinne, as the universal cause, yet there are particular causes that do excite and draw them forth. And it is good to observe, how many wayes original sinne, being awakened doth pro∣duce these sinful motions thereof. And

1. Sometimes they arise from the present sensible object that doth affect us. Every object either of the eye, or ear, or touching, doth presently work upon the soul, not indeed efficiently (as some have thought) but only by way of alluring and enticing: so that it is almost impossible for us, either to hear or see any object, and not have the first motions of the soul, as suddain, so sinful, about them. Oh the miserable depravation of mankind, who hath sinne and hell en∣tring into the soul by evey sense it hath! there is not any sensible object, but it is a snare to thee, it stirreth up some sinful motion or other, either love, or anger, joy, or fear, and all this before grace can work: Hence the great work of Christianity is inward and spiritual; it is soul-work, to set a watch be∣fore eyes, eares, tongue, and all the outward parts of the body, that the soul be not sinfully disquieted. For every object is to our corrupt hearts one way or other, as the forbidden fruit was to Eve: not that God doth forbid us to see or hear such things, but because the soul cannot be excited by those objects and affected with them, but it is in a sinful manner. If then thy head were a foun∣tain of teares, it could not weep enough for the desolation that is upon thee: Thy eye maketh thee sinne; thy ear maketh thee sinne. Thus thou art com∣passed about with sinne, from evening and morning.

2. These suddain motions of sinne, sometimes arise from the imagination and fancy of a man. And truly, how often do displeasing and sinful imaginations disturb the peace and quiet of thy soul? Is it not thy fancy thou complainest of? how volatique and roving is that? It stayeth no where, it is not fixed in holy duties. It is like a market place, where there is a croud of people, so that the imagination doth very often help this original lust and sinne to bring forth. What a quiet, srene and blessed life should a man live, if his imagination could be kept in an holy fixed frame, if he could bid it go, and it goeth, do this, and it did it?

3. The perturbation of the body by distempers, that many times causeth this ori∣ginal sinne to be working in us: Though the body be corporeal, and the soul a spirit, and so cannot act physically upon it; yet because they are both the essential parts of a man immediately united together, there is by sympathy an acting and affecting of one another, especially the body being instrumental to the soul in many operations: Hence it is when that is disturbed and indisposed,

the soul also is hindred in its operations, and therefore from the distem∣per of the body we are easily moved to anger, to sorrow, to fear, to lusts: So that the motions of the soul are many times according to the motions of the body, as Gerson instanceth (Compend. Theol.) in a simile, which he saith some use concerning the water, when the Sunne-beams are upon it, as the water moveth or danceth up and down, so do the Sunne-beams which are upon the water. Thus as the body is in any commotion, so the soul which is more immediately united to the body, then the beams of the Sunne are to the water, doth work according as it finds this instrument dis∣posed.

Fourthly, This original lust is often stirred up to entice us by the sensitive appetite, by the passions and affections that are in us. This we told you some did limit lust to in the Text, but very unsoundly, yet it cannot be denied, but because the affectionate part of a man is so prevalent and operative, that very often sinne is committed here, even without the consent of the will. These affections doe suddenly transport us, and we can no more command them to be quiet, then we are able to compose the waves of the Sea. Now though we would withstand and gain-say them, yet they are our sinnes for all that, as we see Paul sadly complaining herein, Rom. 7. Austin delighteth (De Trinit. lib. 13.) to expresse our manner of sinning by allusion to the first sinne, When any object doth present it self, to allure and affect us, then the Serpent (saith he) sheweth us the for∣bidden fruit: When the sensitive appetite of a man is drawn out to consent unto it, then Eve doth eat of this forbidden fruit; when the rational part of the soul is enticed likewise to consent to this sinne, then Eve giveth of this fruit to Adam, and he eateth. Thus Reason is like Adam, Eve like the sensitive part; and as Eve, when she did eat the forbidden fruit alone, did thereby grow mortal, and would have died, though Adam had not consented to eat: Thus the affectionate part of a man carrying us away to sinne, though the superiour part of the soul will not agree thereunto, yet this maketh us to be in a state of damnation. This maketh the action to be damnable.

Lastly, When none of these wayes doe stirre up original sinne, then the thoughts and apprehensions of a man in the intellectual part they may. And indeed the former provoking causes were most conspicuous in grosse and carnal sinnes; but this is influential in spiritual sinnes; from the minde come vain thoughts, ambitious, proud, malicious thoughts; from the mind arise blasphemous, atheistical, and unbelieving thoughts. Thus you see how poor and wretched man is become in his soul, as Laezarus was in his body, all over with ulcers and sores, no place is free from sinne: Oh that God would deliver us from our blindnesse of minde, from our self-fulnesse, whereby we are so apt to fall in love with our selves, so as to think we want nothing, when we are without God, without Christ, with∣out the Image of God, without all holinesse and peace within, either of soul or body! How should it pity thee to see this glorious building thus lying in its own ruines and rubbidge? Now from all these particulars thus joyned together, you may observe how sinne carrieth us away in a plea∣sing enticing manner. So that although we cannot but sinne, yet this is very delightsome and satisfactory; insomuch that man is drawn aside to sinne, as he said,

—Trahit sua quemque voluptas.

And this is more to be observed, because the adversaries do so tragically

exclaim against us, in affirming, that we lie under a necessity of sinning, we cannot but sin. Why then say they, Why should God damn us for sinning, any more than for being thirsty or hungry, which do necessarily affect us? But the Answer is two-fold:

1. This necessity of sinning is voluntarily contracted, and brought upon us; it is not as hunger or thirst, which were necessary properties of man at his Creation, though without that grief and pain, which now we feel. And

2. This necessity is also voluntary and pleasing, it seizeth upon the mind, will, affections, and the whole man; and therefore as we can∣not help it, so neither will we help it. We love and delight to eat this poison.

Lastly, There are these three degrees, whereby it's said, Lust cometh to be accomplished: Though some differ in their expressions herein.

The first is Suggestion, and that is when any lust doth begin to arise in the soul: This is very imperceptible and undiscerned, but by those who are exact in the spiritual exercises of thier soul. It is true, some say this word Suggestion is not proper, because that doth properly come from without, the Devil, or the world; but this is internal, arising of our selves. But we need not strive about words.

The second is Delight, From this motion the soul presently findeth some secret pleasure, and accordingly thinketh of it with delight, receiveth it with delight.

Lastly, There is the consent unto these, to will them, to be joyned to them. And thus when sinne hath made this progresse, a man is an adul∣terer, a murderer before God, though not actually done in the eyes of men, as our Saviour witnesseth, Matth. 5. 28. for many do consent to sinne within their heart, which yet do not consent to the outward acting of it; sometimes because of the shame that it will bring; sometimes because of the punishment that it doth deserve, or for some unworthy respect, or other not because they fear and love God, not because they desire a pure, holy heart, as well as an unspotted life. And truly this is a good discovery of uprightnesse of our hearts, when we dare not own sin in our thoughts, when the we dare not respect iniquity in our hearts, when we labour to keep a pure soul, as well as a pure body.

¶▪ 3.

More Propositions concerning evil Thoughts and Motions that arise continually from the heart, as the Immediate Effect of Original Sinne: Shewing how many wayes the Soul may become guilty of sinne about them.

WE are now to finish this Discourse about that Immediate Effect of ori∣ginal sinne, in causing evil thoughts and motions to arise continually from the heart, as vapours do constantly from the earth; and as they in their first ascension are imperceptible, till they come to be congealed into clouds, which are plainly visible: Thus all sinne, while it is but in these motions and stirrings of the heart is difficulty discerned; but when it cometh to be formed by express consent, and accomplished in outward practice, then it is grosse and palpable. But to proceed in more Propositions.

First, These motions and stirrings of heart, they are either sudden and transito∣ry, [ I] 〈◊〉〈◊〉 abiding and mansory in the soul. Sometimes these sinfull stirrings of the heart are like a sudden whirlwind in the soul that presently vanisheth, though they be very troublesom for the time; or they come like a flash of lightning and thunder, which though terrible, yet is but of short continuance; now al∣though they make no longer abode in our soul, yet they pollute and defile it. We are not to give place to them, no not for an hour, as Paul would not to the false brethren, Gal. 2. 5. but we are with holy zeal and indignation to thrust them out, and bolt the doors upon them, as they did to Thamar. Thus in the very twinkling of an eye, if we do not watchfully attend thereunto, we may destroy our own souls over and over again. That is a prophane speech to say, Thoughts are free; no, God hath laid an holy command upon our very thoughts, and the first motions and stirrings of our hearts, that nothing should arise there, but what is agreeable to Gods holy Word. When water is in a pure glass, though it be moved and shaken often, yet no noisom thing ariseth thereby; but if in a soul one, then the more it is stirred, the more filthy are the bubbles thereof. Thus in man, while enjoying the Image of God, whatso∣ever did move or stir his heart, it was altogether holy and pure; but since man is thus corrupted, there cannot be any motions of his soul, but they are wholly defiled and sinfull one way or other.

Secondly, These mansory thoughts, which the Schoolmen call morosae, because they do morari abide some time in the soul, they are likewise divided, for they are so continning in us, either morâ temporis, or morâ consensus, as they expresse it. (Gerson Compend. Theol.) The continuance of time is, when they may for a long while infect, sollicit and annoy us, but yet we strive and gainsay; We do by no means give our consent thereunto, as Joseph's Mistress did often im∣portune him, yet all that while, he kept up the fear of God, and would not sinne in that way against him. So that although the people of God may be fol∣lowed from week to week with loathsom and perplexing thoughts; yet because they cry unto God, they go and pray to him, as Hezekiah did upon Rabsha∣keh's railing and blaspheming of God, they are not to be discouraged: Thou hast not betrayed thy strength to these Dalilahs all the while: Yea, from these spiritual exercises and conflicts, thou wilt increase thy glory. Hereby thou hast an opportunity to discover thy faith, thy self emptiness, and to get heavenly skill and compassion, whereby thou art able to succour those that are in the like manner tempt∣ed. But then

2. There are thoughts that are continuing morâ consensus, and these are farre more dangerous and damnable then the former; for if sinfull thoughts and motions arise in thy soul, though they are but for a very short time; yet if thou hast yeelded to them, then thy soul hath committed fornication. Consen∣sisti, said Austin, concubuisti in corde tuo; so that the consent to them is farre more dangerous then the length of time, they may afflict thee in. Any sinfull motion consented unto, though it be but for a moment, is more destructive, then such as follow thee from day to day, yea it may be from year to year, but thou givest no entertainment to them. This is good for the practical Christian to observe, it is the long time that troubleth them: Oh (say they) ever since God hath first wrought upon my soul, I have been exercised with these thoughts, such dreadfull suggestions, and to this day I am not yet delivered from them! Be of good comfort, though it be grievous to thee to feel such things in thy soul, yet because withstood, they shall not be im∣puted to thee. Those that have the like temptations, but for an hour, and imbracing of them, have more offended God, and endangered their own souls.

Propos. 3. It is good to take notice, how many wayes the soul may become guilty of sinne about these thoughts and motions within us. A truth ••••••deed it is) that no natural man, no civil or formal man doth understand, or can be affected with: Can a blind man that doth not behold the Sunne, see the atoms in the Sun-beams? They who are not affected or grieved about great and actual sins, will they find these inward motions to be burden? If they can swallow a Camel, will they not a mote?

1. Therefore we come to sinne by these motions and thoughts of soul, by the very being of them there. The very having of them there is contrary to the Image of God we were first created in: As in Heaven there is no unclean thing that can enter; so where the Image of God is full and compleat, the least vain thought, the least sinfull stirring can no more consist with it, then darkness with light: or as at the first creation we could not have found one weed or thistle on the ground, but these came by the curse for sinne; so at first in mans soul there would not have appeared the least irregular and inordinate motion of the heart, not one thought would have been out of its place: Adam was Gods book coming immediately from him, wherein no errata could be found; but now in stead of wheat come up cockles. Now what ever we think, we imagine, we move to all, doth become sinne unto us. Oh then let the godly soul mourn and humble it self, because such motions are there, as you see Paul doth, Rom. 7. Let it not be thought that thou art freed from all sinne, because thou doest withstand them, thou doest not own them: For although this will keep them from being imputed unto thee, yet in themselves they are sinnes, they are damnable; God might throw thee into hell for the meer having of them; God might justly say, I sowed good seed in thy soul, but how come these tares there? These thoughts, these motions are none of my planting, I created them not: Therefore the very having of them in thy soul, is a sinne against God, though never expressed in action; and the reason hereof is from the ex∣act spirituality of the Law of God: There is this great difference between God and all political Law-giver; these later forbid only the external action, they do not prohibit the inward will or desire: What Law-giver amongst men was ever so absurd as to say, you shall not cover or desire such a thing? But if men do outwardly offend, then they are obnoxious to punishment. But it is otherwise with God in his Laws, who is the Father of Spirits, and searcheth our hearts, therefore his Law doth principally reach to the heart, to make that a good treasure, to have the tree first good, and then to make the fruit answera∣ble thereunto.

2. We offend against God not only by having of these motions stirring in us, but much more when they delight us, when we find a complacency and sweetness in the thinking of them, when they affect us so, that we roll them like honey under the tongue. And truly in this respect the godly soul is even amazed and astonished to see how vile it is, and how abominable: For what innumerable, pleasing, delightsome motions do arise in thy soul all the day long, either about unlawfull objects, or if lawfull in an inordinate and sinfull manner? Are not these more then the hairs of thy head in number? Now concerning these delightfull pleasing motions of the soul in a sinfull way, ob∣serve these Rules,

1. That a man may be carried out in these delightfull objects, either by a meer affection of complacency and pleasure, or by an efficacious act, and purpose of the will to accomplish such a sinne, as in uncleannesse. The corrupt heart may delight it self in lascivious apprehensions, and defile it self exceedingly in that way, but yet have no efficacious will to commit the sinne; yea (as we told you) would not for a world commit it, either for shame, or for punishment,

or some other respects: For sinne hath then got strong power over us; and we are left by God, when we are boldly carried on to commit such leudness. It is therefore necessary for the spiritual and heart-Christian, to observe the for∣mer as well as the later. Do there not arise contemplative delightsome thoughts about sinfull objects? Are they not rolled up and down in thy heart, though thou hast no purpose to effect them? Oh be ashamed and blush to have such an impure soul! Is this soul fit for communion with God? Is this the temple of the holy Ghost?

Rule 2. The object of these delighting, pleasing motions, may either be the sinnes themselves desired and inclined after; or, They may be the meer thoughts and apprehensions of them. For the soul being a spiritual substance, hath power to reflect upon its own acts and operations, to know it knoweth, to think what it thinketh: And therupon, because as Aquinas saith, Delectatio sequitur operationem, Delight followeth operation; we may take great pleasure in our thoughts, and even be drunken with delight therein. This is especially to be seen in heretical and erroneous persons: Men who are proud of their opinions, their notions, their own conceptions and inventions; What infinite pleasure and content do such men take in the thoughts, about their, own thoughts, and apprehensions? More sometimes then the greatest Monarchs can do in their earthly greatness. It behoveth therefore men of parts and gifts, men of learning and extraordi∣nary activity of wit to take heed of lust within, carrying them out to pride and delight in their own selves.

Rule 3. These motions of delight and pleasure in the soul, are of a large extent. We are not to limit them only to bodily lusts, or ambitious desires, for as large as the command of God is, so large is this way of delightsome motions in the soul by contrariety thereunto. As the Law of God is divided into two Tables, and therein are required all the duties we own to God and man: So likewise hereby are forbidden all the pleasing lusts and thoughts of the soul which oppose these duties. And if a man be a searcher of his own heart, he cannot but take notice, how often these sinfull motions of his soul, sometimes empty themselves in reference to God, and sometimes towards our neighbour. Towards God, and thus we have delightfull motions in our own self-trusting and confidence in the creature; we love and rejoyce in humane comforts to the exclu∣ding and shutting out of God himself, especially in holy duties, in the obser∣vance of his own day and Ordinances; How many pleasing distracting and wandring motions do then seize upon us, so that commonly we never find our selves more molested by them, then when we are in a most heavenly and holy manner to approach unto him? And for the duties towards our Neighbour, there arise many pleasing evil motions of soul, to envy at his good, to be glad at the evil which befalleth him, to have uncharitable and suspitious thoughts towards him. Thus where ever any actual sin may be committed either against God or man, there may and do pleasing and delightfull thoughts arise before, and prepare the way for them.

Lastly, Cajetan giveth a good Rule (Summula Tit. Delectatio.) concerning these motions of delight within us, that in them we are to consider the Occasi∣on, the Liberty, and the Intention about them. The occasion: Thus if we do put our selves into such companies, go to see such sights, read such books, hear such unsavoury discourse, as may stirre up our hearts to these sinfull motions, then our sinne is the greater, and we shall be found the more guilty before God. Such is our corrupt nature, that we need not adde oil to that fire within us: Even in lawfull and just duties, yea in our most holy and heavenly performan∣ces, these sinfull motions arise to disturb and distract our souls, as if mens did come of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Moon, as some affirm, because of the divers shapes and vi∣cissitude

it is often put into. We ought therefore to be farre from adding fuel to this fire, by going to unlawfull sights, to wicked companions, thereby to provoke that corruption within us.

Again, We are to consider what Liberty and power we have to subdue them and represse them; some rise more suddenly then others, and some again ap∣pear so, that we have time to consider of the danger of them, the damnable nature of them. Now the more time we have to deliberate and to consider about the sinfulness and wickedness of them, how much God is offended, how loath∣som and abominable they are in his eyes, and yet we suffer them to lodge there, the greater is our condemnation.

Lastly, The Intention and end of such thoughts is to be considered; for al∣wayes cogitatio mali, is not mala cogitatio, the thought of evil is not an evil thought. When men think of sinne to repent of it, to detest it, to reform it, sinne is in their mind then; but because there are no delightfull motions to it, therefore it is not evil: So if a Minister preach against adultery, or any other sinne, he cannot but think of the nature of it, and what it is; yet because his intention in thinking of it is to make men abhorre and leave it, therefore it is good and lawfull: So that meer thoughts about sinne are not alwayes sinne, but when accompanied with some affections and inclinations thereunto. Onely it is good to inform you, That such is our deceitfulness of heart, that many times we think it lawfull to rejoyce and delight in some profit and emolument that may come by another mans sinne, or some evil upon him, when indeed we are glad of the sin, or evil it self. If a man by telling a lie should save thy estate, or life, How hard is it not to delight in the sinne, because thou hast profit by it? Thus unnatural children may rejoyce in the death of their parents, whereby they come to inherit their estates, and yet please themselves that they not rejoyce in their death, but the profit that cometh thereby to them. There are many practical instances in this case, and therefore we must look our hearts do not deceive us therein. For it is very difficult to have any advantage by another mans sinne or evil, and not to have a secret and tacit will thereof. And thus much for the Rules about delightfull motions to sin.

We proceed to a third particular, whereby we may sinne against God by these motions of sinne within us, and that is, When we are carelesse and negligent about them, they trouble us not, they grieve us not. How many are there that re∣gard the thoughts and motions of their soul, no more then the fowls that flie over their heads? It argueth an unregenerate heart, an heart not acquainted with the power of godliness, that doth not mourn and grieve under them. How greatly was the Apostle Paul, Rom. 7. afflicted by them? This made him long for Christ and Heaven, where he should be annoyed with them no more. This negligence about them, is that which maketh thee also careless to repress and conquer them. They may lodge whole dayes and nights in thy soul, and thou never seekest to expel them out. Thus thy heart is like the sluggards field full of bryars and thorns. Oh that God would give you seeing eyes and tender hearts! then you would find that even an hair hath its shadow, even the least motion to sinne hath its sting and bitterness with it; and above all sinfull motions, look to those that arise in thee, because good things are urged and commanded to thee. For this is the desperate incurable evil our souls, that good things stirre up sinfull lusts within us, not indeed properly and directly, but occasionally and by accident. Thus the Apostle bewaileth the motions of lusts within him from this account, Rom. 7. 8. Sinne taking occasion by the com∣mandment wrought all manner of concupiscence within him. Thus the good and spiritual Law made him more carnal and sinfull. And what is more often then to have powerfull preaching, godly and wholsome reproofs stirre up the evil

motions of men against them. Thus the more remedies are applied to us, the more corrupt we grow. We might be voluminous in this soul-searching point, but we must conclude.

Let the Use be, Seeing that a man is thus tempted from his own lust within him, we cannot lay the cause on the Devil himself, though he be a Tem∣pter; then it's our duty to look to what is within: Those embers within us will quickly set all on fire. Say not, this or that moved me, blame not this or that estate, but thy corrupt lust within. This is as Luther said (in Genes. Chap. 13.) to be like the fool that stood in the Sunne bowed down, and then complained his shadow was crooked. It is not thy riches, nor thy poverty, not thy health or sickness, no condition or temptation whatsoever; but the true proper cause is this maternal lust, which lieth in our bosoms. How little is this truth attendeth unto? with the Pharisees, we more regard to cleanse the outside, than the inside, Mat. 23. 25. The mistake herein brought those many rigid and ausiere disciplinary wayes in Popery, as if from the externals we must cure the heart, and not by curing the heart thereby cleanse the outwards. The Francis∣can will not so much as touch silver. The Carthusians will not eat a bit of flesh, though their lives depend upon it: What folly is this? Meat and money are the good creatures of God; if we do abuse them, they are not to be blamed, but our corrupt lusts within. If a whorish woman wear gold and precious stones to allure others, they are in themselves good, though she abuse them to an ill end: And thus all the comforts and mercies we enjoy are Gods good gifts, and it is not the actual abdication of the use of them, but the mortifying of our lust within that will make us please God.

CHAP. III.

Of the Combate between the Flesh and the Spirit, as the Effect of Original Sinne, so that the Godliest man cannot do any holy Duty perfectly in this life.

SECT. I.

The Text explained and vindicated from corrupt Interpretations.

GAL. 5. 17.

For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh, and these are contrary one to the other, so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.

THe Apostle in the verses before admonished them about the use of their liberty, that it should not be turned into licen∣tiousness, but that they make love the Rule thereof. For though in respect of the right of my Christian liberty, my conscience is to regard none but God, yet the use and exer∣cise of it must be regulated by love and prudence, according as the edification of our brother doth require.

As a remedy therefore to refrain from all excess therein, he giveth us an ex∣cellent precept, with an emphatical Introduction thereunto, [This I say then] that is, This is the summe, the main, the all in all in these cases.

Then you have the Antidote it self, Walk in the Spirit. The only way to prevent all those importunate temptations of the flesh, is to give up your selves to the Spirit, to obtain the direction and illumination thereof, as also the in∣clination and powerfull operation of it, whereby we may be established in that which is good, To know what is good, and then to be inabled to do it, which if done, he declareth the blessed effect and issue thereof, Ye shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh. Some (as Beza) readeth this imperatively, because of the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but the Text he instanceth in is not parallel to this. And Grotius bringeth in several places, where this 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 relateth to the future. This then is the happy issue of a man, who keepeth wholly to the Spirit of God inlightning and work∣ing by the Word, that he shall get dominion over the lusts of the flesh, He shall not fulfill them: He doth not say, he shall not have them, he shall not feel, and perceive them working in him, for that cannot be in this life; only he shall

not fulfill them, which is the same as to walk in the flesh, and to mind the things of the flesh, which those that live in the Spirit, and walk in the Spirit cannot do.

In the next place, The Apostle giveth a reason, why they are thus to give themselves up to the Spirit, else the flesh will quickly prevail, and that is from the contrary nature and inclinations of these two, expressed in that Propositi∣on, The flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh. By flesh and spirit we are not to understand the body and the soul, nor the spiritual sense and literal sense of the Scripture, as Origen most absurdly; nor as many Papists and others, the rational part, and the sensitive, as if the Apostle were here speaking no more then Aristotle doth about his incontinent person, as di∣stinct from an intemperant one. Therefore that is too frigid and dilute of the late Annatator on this place, in his paraphrase, as if the opposition were between the carnal and rational wils, between the carnal and rational part of a man in∣structed out of the Gospel, for this ariseth to no more then that ethical and moral conflict, which Heathen Philosophers describe; whereas the Apostle is here speaking of that which the godly find in themselves, and that from the two contrary principles of the flesh and spirit within them.

Neither are we to understand this with the Remonstrants, as if the Apostle spake in the general, or Idea only, making the sense to be no more, then the flesh of a man, opposeth the Spirit of God, putring it self forth in the powerfull preaching of the Word; for the context maketh it evident, that he speaketh of this opposition, as it is in the subject, by which no godly man can do the things that are holy with that perfection, as he desireth.

Lastly, Neither are we to understand this of persons, as if the Apostle meant the carnal man, and the spiritual man, as Isaacl did Isaac, will alwayes op∣pose one another: For it is clear, he speaketh of two principles within us, the one whereof is flesh, that is, our whole man so farre as it is unregenerate, the mind and the will as well as the affections; (for by sinne incarnavimus animas nostras, as the Ancient said, our souls are become flesh,) and the whole man so farre as he is regenerate: For this in several respects, a godly man is both flesh and Spirit.

This contrariety in their nature is declared by the effect thereof, They lust one against another: He doth not say, they work one against another, though that be true; but the Apostle would direct us to the head and spring of all out∣ward evil or good, and that is the desire within.

In the next place, the Apostle amplifieth this contrary motion between the flesh and the Spirit from the nature of them; They are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, immediately set one against another, even as darkness and light, as fire and water. Now although it be a Rule, That contraries do expell each other; yet it is also ano∣ther Rule, That contraries while they are in pugnâ, in fighting with one ano∣ther, they may be together, as also in remisse degrees: And thus it is with the godly, the flesh and the Spirit are alwayes in conflict; These are the twins in the womb, that by their opposition make the godly mourn, and long for Hea∣ven, where the flesh shall be wholly overcome.

Lastly, Here is the consequent and issue of this Combate, So that the things ye would not, those ye do; which words are subject to many interpretations: Some say, they are only to be interpreted as the end to which these contrary principles do encline, not that they do denote the event. By the flesh we are carried out to this end, not to do the good things we would do; yet this event doth not alwayes at least follow, because Gods Spirit worketh in us both to will and to do; This exposition they are the more confirmed in, because in the Greek it is not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which would denote the event, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: This seemeth to have no great strength, for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is taken eventually sometimes. But then if so,

still there is a difference among▪ Interpreters: Some understand it of the good will only, as if the meaning were those good things you would do, the flesh doth hinder and retard you therein. Grotius with others that follow him, un∣derstand it of the evil will, in this manner, The Spirit lusteth against the flesh, so that those evil things, which otherwise you would doe, if the flesh did prevail in you, now ye cannot do. And the late Writer (Vnum Necessa∣rium, cap. 7. pag. 482.) is so peremptory for this Exposition,

That (he saith) we cannot make it sense else with what had gone before: (being be∣holding to Arminius for this Argument) For the Apostle bid us, Walk in the Spirit, so we should not fulfill the lusts of the flesh; and this is the reason, Because the Spirit lusteth against the flesh, and so we cannot do what that would have us; whereas if by the flesh we were hindred from what the Spi∣rit would have us do, this would directly contradict what he had said before.

But to answer this, Some read all the former verse by a parenthesis, and make this clause to belong to the precept, vers. 16. Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfill the lusts of the flesh, so that ye cannot do those things, which the flesh would incline you unto: But this seemeth too much forced. Though therefore we understand it of the good will, as well as the bad, yet the sense runneth smoothly; neither is this brought as a reason of the later part, You shall not fulfill the lusts of the flesh, for so it would have some apparent con∣tradiction, but of the duty commanded, why they should walk in the Spirit. For if they do not, such is the contrariety of the flesh to every thing that is spi∣ritual, that if yeelded unto, it will carry you away to act those lusts, which otherwise you would not do, and so the connexion is very harmonious. But for my part, I think this must be understood generally, both of the good will, and bad also. For the Apostle having named two contrary principles, and their lustings one to another, there is no reason to limit it to one; but that we understand it thus, That even in had things a godly man is not carried out with the full command of the flesh, but the Spirit of God doth in a great measure check and prohibit it. And also in good things, though the Spirit of God doth enlighten and enlarge the soul, yet the flesh doth something retard, and by its opposition, causeth that we cannot do holy things with that fulness, purity and perfection as we would do.

Thus you have this noble Text explained, which will afford excellent practi∣cal matter, concerning that property of original sinne, that it remaineth in some measure even in the most holy, and that therefore there is no perfection in this life. None is all spirit without any flesh at all in them. Therefore the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the Text may have its emphasis, The same things ye cannot do, that ye would. For what godly man doth not feel, that it is not the same prayer, the same faith, the same repentance he desired? The duty like Jeremiah's vessel cometh to be marred upon the wheel in the very doing; so much deadness, di∣straction, lukewarmness and senslesness of spirit appeareth, that he wondereth to see how different the duty exercised is from the desire and purpose in his soul. From the words thus declared observe,

That original sinne remaineth in every man, though never so godly in some measure, whereby there is a combate between the flesh and the Spirit, so that we cannot do any holy duty perfectly in this life. I limit my Discourse only to the good will in the Text, not the bad, because that is most homogeneous with my subject. And besides, The Pelagians calumniated this Doctrine of original sinne, as a discouragement unto holiness, and that hereby perfection could never be attained, because this sinne is said to have some being and working in the most holy, though it have not dominion. It is from original sinne, that the most holy men find a combat within them more or lesse; that alwayes in this life they find a need both of pardon of sinne, and of the righteousness of

Christ, which if any deny, as the Pelagians did, we will not believe them with Austin, in that they say, but attribute it to their arrogancy and hypocri∣sie, pretending more holiness to the world then they have, for their self-ad∣vantage, or else to their stupidity and senslesness, not feeling what doth indeed annoy and oppose the Spirit of God; and truly they who have not the Spirit of God abiding in them, How can they discern of such a combate? That moral conflict which Aristotle speaketh of in the incontinent person, he may perceive within himself, but this of the Spirit and the flesh, He cannot know, because it is spiritually discerned.

SECT. II.

Several Propositions clearing the truth about the Combat between the Flesh and Spirit in a godly man.

¶. 1.

The Difference between Original and Actual Sinne.

THe only way to comprehend the latitude of this excellent truth about the Conflict between flesh and spirit in the true believer, because of origi∣nal sinne still adhering to him, is to lay down several Propositions, wherein we may at the same time assert truth, and obviate some error.

First, Original sinne doth greatly differ from actual sinne in this particular, that when an actual sinne is committed, there remaineth no more but the guilt of it, which upon repentance by justification is wholly removed away, and thus an actual sinne is as if it had never been; but in original sinne, although the guilt of it be taken away, yet the nature of it abideth still, though not with such dominion as for∣merly it did. It is true the Schoolmen, except Biel and some others, say, actu∣al sinnes leave a macula, a blot or defilement upon the soul, as well as a reatus, or guilt; and what this macula is, they are different in their explication of: but we must necessarily grant, that every actual sinne doth defile the soul, de∣priving it either of the beauty it hath, or ought to have, but yet still the act of sin is passed away, whereas in original sin, the sin it self doth still continue, by which it is, that though to those who are in Christ, there is no actual condemnati∣on, yet there is that which is damnable in them; insomuch as without Christ there is a wo to their most holy and praise-worthy actions. It is true, the Papists and o∣thers look upon this as non-sense, or a contradiction, that sin should be in a man, and not make him guilty; as if actual condemnation might not be separated from sinne, though indeed the desert of condemnation cannot. It cannot be but wheresoever sinne is it doth deserve hell, it hath enough in it to provoke God to wrath, but yet when humbled for and withstood, then through the bloud of Christ, this actual guilt, though not the potential one, is taken away. Yea original sinne doth not only differ from actual sinne, but also habitual, be∣cause though habitual sinnes do abide in a man, yet when a man is regenerated, and made a new creature, all the habits of sinne are expelled; for if the habits of sinne and grace should abide together, then a man might at the same time be holy and unholy, the sonne of God, and the sonne of the Devil, seeing our denomination is from the habits that are within us; therefore that cannot be. But though in our Regeneration the habits of sinne are removed, yet it is not so with original corruption, that is not an acquired, but an innate habit of

sinning within us. Thus our original corruption is farre more pertinaciously cleaving unto us, then any habits or customs of sinne can be, though of never so long continuance.

¶. 2.

IN the second place, That is a false position which the Remonstrants have (Ex∣am. Censurae cap. 11. pag. 128.) that the difficulty which new converts have to leave their former lusts, doth arise chiefly from their former custome and exer∣cise in wayes of impiety, not from original sinne. For they distinguish of godly men such as are incipients, new beginners, that are but newly converted unto Christ, and these they say have a great conflict within them, they have much ado to leave their former lusts and impieties they have been accustomed unto: and then there are the Adulti, such who are proficients, and grown up; now these they say may arise to such a measure of holiness, as to be without any con∣flict at all between flesh and spirit, or to feel it very rarely: but that is directly to contradict this Text, which speaketh it universally of all that have the Spirit of God in them while in this life, they do meet with opposition not only from the devil without, but the flesh within: Therefore they would elude this Text, as if it did not mean an actual reluctancy or lusting against one another, but only po∣tential, that it is the nature of the flesh and Spirit thus to oppose one another, for this is say they against the nature of habits, seeing it is the property of ha∣bits to make the will readily and willingly will and do those things, which for∣merly were grievous and troublesome, but the Scripture speaketh of the actual reluctancy; it doth not say it may or it can, but it doth lust; and as for habits, though we grant when these supernatural habits of grace are infused into the soul, we are carried out with readiness, delight, and willingness in those holy duties which formerly were tedious and grievous unto us; yet because neither the habits of grace are perfect within us, nor the acts that flow from them, therefore it is that there is a mixture of our dross with the spirits gold. For al∣though the habits of grace are immediately inspired or infused from God, and so as they come from him are perfect; yet because that is a true rule, Quicquid recipitur, recipitur ad modum recipientis; whatsoever is received, is received according to the capacity and qualification of the subject: Hence it is, that these habits of grace are imperfect as received and seated in us; and whereas again they reply, that suppose this Text be understood of actual reluctancy, yet it is not generally to be extended to all, but limited to the Galathians, who were but new converts, but beginners, and therefore had this fight within them; that is also false: The Apostle saith the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh in the general: It is an universal Proposition, neither is it any more to be limited to the Galathians, then the duty enjoyned, which is to walk in the Spirit; so that as the duty belongeth to every godly man, the reason likewise must, and therefore the Apostle doth not say, the flesh lusteth against the Spirit in you, (they put (in vobis) into the Text) but speaketh uni∣versally of all that have the Spirit of God: Besides this Text opposeth them, for grant these Galathians were new converts, yet the cause of the combate within them, is not attributed to their former custome of impiety as they would have it, but to the flesh, which is original sinne within them, when therefore a man is truly converted, that difficulty to leave his former lusts doth not arise because the habits of sinne do still abide in him, but because original sinne is still living in us; and therefore according to the greater or lesser measure of grace healing and sanctifying of us, so we find the greater opposition in parting with the sinnes we formerly committed.

¶. 3.

WE are to lay it down for a certain foundation to build upon (as hath formerly been delivered) That this spiritual conflict was not in the state of integrity. Adam before his fall could not find such a rebellion in him; for if so, this would greatly have interrupted all his blessedness; and withall such a duell within him, and that necessarily flowing from his creation, would have redounded to the great dishonour of God his Maker. Now the Adversaries of original sinne, whether Papists, Remonstrants or Socinians, who do usually traduce the orthodox Doctrine about it, as if horribly injurious to God, do in this particular farre transcend all such supposed reflections, either upon the justice or mercy of God. For they do boldly affirm, That by the very natural consti∣tution of man, there is a necessary conflict between the rational and sensitive part; only say the Papists, original righteousness (which the Socinian deri∣deth as much as original sinne) did keep down this repugnancy, so that Adam had not any actual rebellion within, though it was there potentially and radically. Thus Soto (though Stapleton fluctuateth, and seemeth to be his Adversary therin) expresly affirmeth (Lib. de Naturâ & Gratiâ, c. 3.) that the conflict mentioned by the Apostle, Gal. 5. 17. is Homini â naturâ ingenita, inbred in the very nature of a man, which he would prove from a philosophical Discourse out of Aristotle, who divideth man into two parts: his rational and sensitive, adding that the sen∣sitive part obeyeth the rational, not despotically, as servants who have no right of their own do to their masters (for so the members of the body only do serve the mind) but politically and civilly, as a Citizen doth his Prince, in whose power it is to disobey. But as Aristotle knew nothing of mans creation, or the Image of God put upon him, nor of his fall, and the utter depravation of mans soul thereby, so it would be absurd to runne to his darkness to fetch light about these things. Hence also it is, that the same Author (Cap. 13.) in another place, compareth man fallen with man standing to some weighty piece, that hangeth on high, but is hindred that it cannot fall; and the same piece, when the impediment is removed. For as such a piece of timber had the same proneness to fall to the ground, while it was hindred, as when the obstacle was removed, only it did not actually fall: Thus man abiding in his state of inte∣grity had this principle within, to carry him more affectionately to sensible things then spiritual; only original righteousness did stop and hinder the actual motions thereof. It is true, that all Papists do not assert this repugnancy from our primitive constitution: For Cajetan upon the place doth note truly, Sermo est, &c. saith he. The speech is of the flesh, as infected with original sinne, for thence the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, not from the primary Creation. Yea their admired Thomas a Kempis, (Pag. 77.) for his practical devotion, confes∣seth that Adam in the state of innocency had not this conflict. And no wonder that Papists thus dogmatize, when Arminius, who useth to be very wary, be∣ing he was the first that was to broach those dangerous errours, the Devil de∣lighting to use a Serpent, not an Ass, because he was more subtil then other beasts of the field, yet asserteth that the inclination to sinne was in Adam be∣fore his fall, Licet non ita vehemens & inordinata ut nunc est, although not so vehement and inordinate as now it is. It is true, the whole Paragraph is put by way of question, but in the procedure thereof, this is spoken affirmatively, (Articul. perpendendi, cap. de peccato originis.) And with the Socinians nothing is more ordinary then to affirm such a rebellion in man, and that so perempto∣rily, that from this they conclude, Adam did sinne, it was from his concupi∣scence that he did break the Law of God; Yea some are not afraid to attribute this repugnancy and conflict to Christ, as if when he prayed, Father, if it be

possible let this Cup passe away, that this came from the Agony between the ra∣tional, and sensitive part within him. It is wonder that these do not also hold, that it will continue in Heaven also: so that as long as man hath a soul and a body, this opposition cannot be removed; but surely the naming of this to tender hearts and ears is confutation enough. For is not this truly and properly to make God the Author of sinne, that he put a rebellious thorn in our sides at first, and that because we are his creatures, made of a soul and a body, there∣fore we must necessarily be divided within our selves. Thus those who charge original sinne with Manichism do herein exceed the Manichees themselves; for they attribute this evil in a man to an evil principle; but these make the good and holy God to be the Author of this rebellion. Neither is it any evasion to say, This rebellion of the sensitive part is no sinne, unless it be consented unto; for it is such which is contrary to the Law of God, it is to be resisted and fought against. And certainly that demonstrateth the evil nature thereof. Luther in∣deed speaks of a Franciscan, which maketh this concupiscence to be a natural good in a man, as it is in the fire to burn, or the Sunne to shine: But certainly such qualities or actions are not to be resisted, or fought against, as these are; How can that be good, which is confessed to be a sinne, if consented unto?

¶. 4.

VVHen we say the flesh and the Spirit do thus conflict with one ano∣ther, you must not understand it of them as two naked bare qua∣lities in a man, but as actuated and quickned from without. For the gracious ha∣bit in a man, is not able to act and put it self forth vigorously without the Spi∣rit of God exciting and quickning of it. And although inherent sinne of it self be active and vigorous, yet the Devil also he continually is tempting and blow∣ing upon this fire to make it flame the more impetuously: So that we are not to look upon these simply as in themselves, but as subservient to the Spirit of God, and the Devil. The Spirit of God by grace in the heart doth promote the Kingdom of God, and the Devil by suggestions, doth advance the king∣dom of Satan in our hearts: So that grace and sinne are like the Deputies and Vicegerents in our souls to those Champions that are without us. Now because the Spirit of God is stronger, and above the Devil, therefore it is that the flesh shall at last surely be conquered. Nay, if the godly at any time fail, if sinne at any time overcome, it is not because the Spirit of God could not overcome it, but because he is a free agent, and communicateth his assistance more or lesse, as he pleaseth; only in this combat the godly are to assure themselves, that they shall overcome all at last, that the very root of sinne will be wholly taken away, never to trouble or imbitter the soul any more.

¶. 5.

FIfthly, In natural and corrupt men, there is no sense or feeling of any such conflict. They never groan and mourn under such wrestlings and agonies within them, and the reason is, because they are altogether flesh, and flesh doth not oppose flesh; neither is Satan set against Satan. It is true, there is in some natural vicious men, sometimes a combate between their conscience and their appetite; their hearts carry them on violently to sinne, but their consciences do check them, and they feel a remorse within them, but this is farre different

from that spiritual conflict, which the Apostle doth here describe, and is to be found only in such men, who have the Spirit of God: No wonderthen if there be so many who look upon this as a figment, if so many even learned men write and speak so ignorantly and advisedly about it; for this truth is best ac∣knowledged by experience: It's not the Theologia ratiocinativa, but experimen∣talis, as Gerson divideth Divinity, that will bring us to a full knowledge of this, It cannot then but be expected that you should see men live at ease, and have much quietness and security in their own breasts, thanking God, as if their souls, hearts, and all were good within them, all were as they desire it; for the strong man the Devil keepeth all quiet; flesh would not oppose flesh: It is true, one sinne may oppose another, covetoufness; drunkenness; and so a man who would commit them both be divided within himself; one sinne draweth one way, and another sinne the other way: but still in the general here is an agreement; all is sinne, all tendeth one way still, and therefore is not like this combate in the Text; but of this more in its time.

¶. 6.

SIxthly, In all regenerate persons though never so highly sanctified, there is a conflict more or less: It is true, some are more holy then others; some are babes, and some are strong men; some are spiritual, some in a comparative sence are carnal; some are weak, some are strong; and according to the mea∣sure of grace they have received, so is this conflict more or less, Amyraldus a much admired Writer by some, (neither do I detract from that worth, which is due to him,) doth industriously set himself. (Constd. cap. 7. ad Rom.) to ex∣pound the 7^th of the Romans of a person not regenerated, but in a legal state, yet disclaiming Arminianisme and Socinianisme: which Exposition being offen∣sive and excepted against, (as justly it might) by William Rivet; he maketh a replication thereunto, wherein he delivereth many novel assertions. Among which this may be one;

That making four ranks, or classes of Christians, he apprehendeth the first, to be such who have attained to so high a degree of sanctification, that they consult, and deliberate of nothing, but from the habit of grace that is within them; and that this conflict within a man, is ra∣ther to be referred to the legal work upon a man, then the Evangelical con∣dition we are put into: hence he understands this Text not universally, but particularly of the Galathians, who were then in that state, viz. a legal one, not Evangelical, which he thinketh the next Verse will confirme, where the Apostle saith, If ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law: now of this sort, who may be apprehended ordinarily to live without such a combate; he placeth the Apostles, especially when plentifully endowed with the Spirit of God, after Christs resurrection: and for Paul he is so far ravished with the Idea of godliness represented in his life, that he saith, (Consid. in cap. 7. ad Rom. cap. 74.) if God had pleased so to adorne Paul, with the gifts of the Spirit, that in this life, he should attain to that perfection, which other believers have only in heaven, none might find fault herein. The general rules he go∣eth upon (and others though disclaimed by him,) is, because there are many places of Scripture, which shew that some godly persons are victorious and tryumphing above this conflict; as when this Apostle saith afterwards, ver. 24. They that are Christs have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts thereof, and Rom. 8. 2. The law of the Spirit of life in Jesus Christ, hath made me free from the law of sin and death: So that they conclude it injurious and con∣tumelious to Paul, reproachfull to the grace of the Gospel, and a palpable in∣couragement to sinne and wickedness, to interpret the 7^th of the Rom. of a

regenerate person:

But because this is a truth of so special concernement, we shall take these things in a more particular consideration; for it would be found an heavy sinne lying upon most orthodox Teachers in the Reformed Church, if they have constantly preached such a Doctrine, as is injurious to Gods grace, and an incentive to sinne, as also slothfulness and negligence in holy duties: for the present this Text will bear us out sufficiently, that where ever the Spirit of God is in persons while in the way to heaven, they have a contrary prin∣ciple of the flesh within them, whereby they are more humbled in themselves, and do the more earnestly make their applications to the throne of grace; and that all have such a conflict within them, may appear by these following Rea∣sons: yea we may with Luther say, so farre is it that any do attain to such a measure of grace, as to be without this combate, that the more holy and spi∣ritual any are, the more sensible they are of it; for they have more illumination, and so discover the exactness and spiritual latitude of the law, more then for∣merly they did, and also their hearts are more tender, whereby they grow more sensible even of the least weight of any sinful motion, though never so transient. It is true the godly do grow in grace, they get more mastery and power over the lustings of sinne within, yet withall they grow in light and dis∣covery about holiness, they see it a more exact and perfect thing then they thought of, they find the Law of God to be more comprehensive then they were aware of; and therefore they are ready to cry out, as Ignatius when ready to suffer, Nunc incipio esse Christians: Oh me never godly, but beginning to be godly; I believe, but how great is my unbelief! This Paul declareth, Phil. 3. 12. Not as if I had already attained, either were already perfect, but I follow after, &c. Thus Paul is farre from owning such commendations which happily others may put upon him. It is true indeed Amyraldus denyeth, that any are absolutely perfect; but yet he goeth beyond the bounds of truth, in attri∣buting too much to Paul, or other Apostles, which will appear,

First, Because the most holy that are, have used all. meanes to mortifie and keep down the cause of these sinful motions; If they did not continually throw water as it were upon those sparks within, the most holy man would quickly be in a flame. Even this Apostle Paul, doth not he confess this of himself, 1 Cor. 9. 27. I keep down my body, and bring it into subjection, &c. He doth not mean the body, as it is a meer natural substance; for the glorified Saints will not keep down their bodyes. but as it is corrupted, and made a ready instrument to sin: for though the Apostle call it not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, yet these are not opposite, but suppose one another, as Rom. 6. 12. Let not sinne reign in your mortal body, and it is a very frigid and forced Exposition of Amyraldus, as if the Apostle did understand it of the exposing his body to hunger and thirst, and all dangerous persecutio••s for the Gospels sake. For this was not Paul's voluntary keeping down of his body; those persecutions and hardships to his body, were against his will, though he submitted to them, when by Gods providence he was called thereunto; but he speaketh here of that, which he did readily and volun∣tarily, lest from within should arise such motions to sinne, as might destroy him; yea it is plain that even in Paul there was a danger of the breakings forth of such lusts, because 2 Cor. 12. God did in a special manner suffer him to be buffetted and exercised by Satan, that he might not be lifted up through pride: neither is this any excuse to say with Amyraldus, That such sinnes are apt to breed in the most excellent dispositions; for it is acknowledged by all, that such sinnes have more guilt in them then bodily sinnes, though not such infamy and disgrace amongst men; Luther calleth them the sublimia peccat; the sublime and high sins, such the Devil was guilty of, and they were the cause of his final overthrow and damnation: If then the most godly have used all means to mor∣tifie sinne within them; it is plain they found a combate; and that if sinne

were let alone, it would quickly get the upper hand.

Secondly, That there is a conflict of sinne appeareth in those duties enjoyned to all the godly, that they watch and pray, that they put on the whole armour of Christ. Yea the Disciples are commanded to take heed of drunkenness and sur∣fetting, and the cares of this world, Luke 21. 34. and generally Paul's Epistles are full of admonitions and exhortations to give all diligence in the wayes of holinesse: especially that command is very observable, 2 Cor. 7. 1. Having these promises, let us cleanse our selves from all filthinesse of flesh and spirits, perfect∣ing holinesse in the fear of God. Here you see both flesh and spirit, that is the rational and sensitive part, have filthiness; and that those who are truly godly are to be continually cleansing away this filthiness, and to perfect what is out of order. What godly man is there, that can say, This command doth not be∣long to me, I am above it, I need it not? No lesse considerable is that command of Peter, 1 Pet. 2. 11. Dearly beloved, I beseech you as pilgrims and strangers, abstain from fleshly lusts, which warre against the soul. Not as if this were wholly parallel with my Text, as Carthusian is said to bring it in, thereby proving that by flesh is meant the body, and by spirit the soul; but onely it sheweth, that no godly man in this life is freed from a militant condition, and that with his own flesh, his own self, which maketh the combate to be the more dangerous. For this cause David, though a man after Gods own heart, though Gods servant in a special consideration, yet prayeth Psal. 19. 13. Keep back thy servant from presumptuous sins; which expression denoteth, that even a godly man hath lust within him, that would carry him out like an untamed horse to presumptuous sins, did not the Lord keep him back. But we need not bring more reasons to confirm that which experience doth so sadly testifie.

SECT. III.

A Consideration of that part of the seventh Chapter to the Romans, which treats of the Conflict within a man: Shewing (against A∣myraldus and others) that it must be a regenerate person onely, of whom those things are spoken.

¶. 1.

THe next Proposition that may give light to the weighty truth about the spiritual conflict that is in the most regenerate persons is this, That be∣sides the reasons formerly produced, and many others which might be named, there are two famous places of Scripture, which do most signally and eminent∣ly declare such a combate in the most holy men. The first is this of my Text, which hath sufficiently been explained and vindicated from corrupt Interpreta∣tions. And truly the light of this Text shineth so clearly, that there are very few who are not convinced that this speaketh of the fight which regenerate per∣sons find in themselves between those two contrary principles of the Spirit and flesh which are within them. The second place, which doth so firmly establish such a conflict in those who by grace are made new creatures, is Rom. 7. from v. 14. to the end of the Chapter, where we have a most palpable delineation of this duel that is fought in the inwards of a godly man; but that place is not so freely consented unto, as this Text I am upon.

Now because the clearing of that is of special use, and because it is of such affinity with my Text, I shall inlarge my self (for I will not call it a digression) in the full explication of that part of the Chapter, shewing, How that it must be a regenerate person, and him only of whom those things are there spoken. And you will find that the distinct opening of that portion of Scripture will afford us many necessary things both for Instruction, Consolation and Admonition, and all immediately adhering to this point I am now upon. This I intend to di∣spatch in several particulars, which will be as so many branches growing from the flock of that Proposition I have already named. And

First, You are to know, that the Discourse which Paul there useth concern∣ing the combate within himself, is by some interpreted, as if Paul, though he name himself, Yet doth not mean himself, while regenerated, but while unregene∣rated. So that (say they) Paul doth therein take upon himself the person of one that is not yet in the state of grace. This they conceive must necessarily be so, because such a person is said to be carnal and sold under sinne. The flesh is alwayes said to have the better, whereas regenerate persons they have crucified the flesh and the Spirit; And the Law of the Spirit of life hath freed them from the Law of sinne and death, Rom. 8. 2. Onely when they expound it of an unregenerate person, they distinguish of such,

1. One who is grosly ignorant and prophane, wallowing in his sinnes in a most senslesse and stupid manner, whose conscience are wholly dead within them; and such are carried out to sinne with all impetuousness, having no check or re∣morse of conscience within them, of such the Apostle doth not speak. But

2. There are others who are in a Legal state, under the powerfull convictions and operations of the Law, as Amyraldus expresseth it: Men who besides the meer knowledge of the Law have by the efficacy of Gods Spirit the convincing power of it so set home, that now their inlightned minds do greatly incline them to that which is good; but because their hearts are not sanctified, their affections are not mortified, therefore these lusts do hurry them away against those legal convictions that are upon them; or as Arminius expresseth it (in cap. 7. ad Rom.) not in a much different way, the Apostle speaketh of one, who is in some preparatory way to conversion. By the Law he is so farre wrought upon, that he is afraid because of his sinnes, he cryeth out of them, mourneth because of them, hath many wishes and desires: Oh that I could leave these lusts, I do not like or consent to such evil things that I do! Thus this person is supposed to have a servile fear, which is initial to the work of conversion. And this frame of spirit, although it be not regeneration, yet is to be reckoned among the good and spiritual gifts of God.

This (say they) is the direct case of that person, who is here described by Paul; and it can∣not be denied, but that many of the Ancients, and some later Writers have ex∣pounded it of a man under such legal convictions.

And although the Pelagi∣ans boasted,

That all Ecclesiastical Writers did interpret it of such a person, yet Austin opposeth them therein, instancing in some, who did understand it of a person regenerated.

It is true, Austin himself, while younger, did ex∣pound it of an unregenerate person;

I understood it (saith he) in that manner, or rather I did not understand it.

But when he came to be elder and more exercised in the Scripture & other Writers, then he was compelled to yeeld to the truth, and to interpret it of a person regenerate; so that they caluminate Austin, who make him flie to this Interpretation out of the heat of his Disputati∣ons with Pelagians, taking this sense (though formerly he had done the other) as being more subservient to his present interest; for he attributeth his change of mind to the truth of God in other Scriptures, as also to the light he had from the tractates of other learned men. Especially those places compelled and for∣ced

him, as he saith, (viz) Now I no longer do it, but sinne within me, and I delight in the Law of God in the inward man. He that delighteth doth it not for fear of punishment, but love of righteousness. Vide August. lib. 1. Retract. c▪ 23. &c. 26. & l. 3. contra Julianum. c. 26. & lib. 6. contra Julianum. cap. 11. We grant indeed that there is such a legal state in which some men are, that there are some who are miserably divided between their enlightned consciences, and their corrupt lusts, so that they do the they would not do. Yea the godly themselves, though they have a superiour and more subline combate; yet because they have an unregenerate part within them, therefore they some∣times have even this conflict between their consciences, and some importu∣ning corruptions; but this is not remarkable in them comparatively to the other.

In the second place, There are others who do zealously contend, that that discourse cannot be applied to any, but a regenerate person; and to understand it otherwise would be to plunge the godly in a deep gulph of discouragements, and to attribute such things to unregenerate persons, which those that are truly sanctified cannot go beyond; And this way Austin, and others of old do, wil∣lingly go. Yea most of the Popish Interpreters, Estius, Contzen, Pererius, Sasb••lt, &c. Tolet is taken notice of, as the most eminent dissenter. The Lu∣therans also generally, and the Calvinists, yea most Protestant Writers. Even Musculus, whom the adversaries of this Interpretation do so much alledge in this point, and labour to decline all suspicion by his name, yet doth clearly and fully expound it of a man truly regenerated and converted, but in the lowest degree and initials of grace; although in the lowest form, yet sanctified and regenerated he confesseth him to be. Arminius and Amyraldus have indeed in a peculiar manner set themselves against this Exposition. Yea there is an Eng∣lish Writer, who goeth so high, as to call the explication of this portion of Scripture, as spoken in the person of a regenerate man, An encouragement of an evil life, and a scorn cast upon the holy Ghost; yea that it is verbum dictum contra Spiritum sanctum. (Vnum Necessarium, chap. 7. pag. 456.) But here∣in he followeth Arminius, out of whom also he seemeth to borrow all that he hath in this point of any appearing strength and validity. In cap. 7. ad Rom. where he would have it considered, whether this fight described here in the Text, can be attributed to the Spirit of God, Citra apertam gratiae Christi, & ejus Spiritus contumeliam & ignominiam. And a little after, Constabit diligenter inspicienti, citra enorme Spiritus sancti dedecus, illi luctam istam attribui non posse. Thus Aristotles speech is very true, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Ethi••. lib. 7. cap. 10. Yea the late Annotatour is so farre from thinking, That doing the ill we would not, and the not doing the good we would, to be a fit ingredient in the character of a regenerate man, that he maketh it the aggravation of a wic∣ked man. Thus he saith, The Heathens made the highest pitch of villany in Me∣deas person, when she is said to see and like that which was good, and do the direct contrary. So that it should seem by this, That the Annotatour would think Arminius, and those who think this Discourse to be understood of a man in a preparatory way to conversion, and as it were not farre from the kingdom of God, to yeeld too much: We must rather look upon it as spoken in the person of some enormious and transcendent sinner: but I think herein he is primus and solus. Besides his assertion is against Aristotle, who writing of the incon∣tinent person, that in some respects knoweth the actions to be sinnes, yet doth them, saith notwithstanding, that he is not a wicked man, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a se∣mi-wicked man, Ethic. lib. 7. cap. 9. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. But concerning this sin∣ning against knowledge in a regenerate person, as also the collation of him with an incontinent person more hereafter. Only by the way we may wonder, why

the above mentioned Annotatour in his Annotations on this place, is so industri∣ous to prove this passage cannot be meant of a regenerate person, from verse the eighth and the ninth in this Chapter, where it's said, Sinne wrought all man∣ner of concupiscence in him, that sinne revived and he died. For surely he cannot but know, That none of the Dissenters from him in this Exposition, do apply those verses to a regenerate man; but that the application to such a person begin∣neth at the fourteenth verse, or else as Calvin, at the fifteenth verse; But it is not so material to know what men say, as what may be evinced out of the Chapter it self. Only we may adde, That the Socinian is likewise very stiff and zealous in the Interpretation of this Chapter concerning a non-regenerate person. Yea the Polonian Knight, that writeth the life of Socinus, would have us take no∣tice of a wonderfull work of God, convincing an eminent man of this Expositi∣on; for thus he relateth, Pag. 21.

That anno 1585. in the Synod of Lub∣lin, the opinion of Socinus concerning the seventh of the Romans, was ex∣ceedingly agitated; and that one Nicolaus Zitinius, being one of those Pa∣stors, who opposed the Socinian Exposition, was desired to explain that Cha∣pter contrary to the mind of Socinus; which he stoutly managed, till he came to those words, I thank God through Jesus Christ, and then standing like a man amazed; What is that benefit (saith he) which drew from the Apo∣stle so great thanks? Was it that he was of necessity detained in such a servi∣tude of sinne? Certainly, I cannot believe such a thing; and thereupon gave thanks to God, for the light shining upon him, and freeing him from his errour, and afterwards entred upon a contrary way of explaining it to the amazement of his own party.

But it had been well, if this writer had set down the reasons which made such a change in that man.

Thirdly, We cannot say it is heresie and an errour in fundamentals, to expound this place of an unregenerate person; yet as the grounds and reasons may be, such an exposition may be either heretical, or bordering thereupon. For there are two prin∣ciples, which may be supposed, upon which the Exposition of this Discourse concerning an unregenerate person may be built; for either some will not un∣derstand it of a regenerate person, Because they think it opposeth perfection in this life, whereas they think a man may and ought to be altogether pure and without sinne in this life; or else they do acknowledge the imperfection of out regeneration, and the reliques of original sinne abiding in us, whereby we are not able to answer the purity and holiness of the Law: Only they think this is not a proper place to prove such a truth, but is rather injurious to the grace of God work∣ing in believers. And in the number of these later Arminius doth acknowledge himself: Now if such men be real in what they say, and do not secretly nourish some monster within, till they have a fit time to bring it forth, they are not much to be blamed. For as long as they agree in the true Doctrine, though they differ in the Texts, that do prove it, that is not so material. Certainly Cal∣vin was most unjustly traduced by Hunnius the Lutheran, for Judaizing and de∣nying the Trinity; yet he did not think that Doctrine was to be proved out of every Text, that the Ancients did make use of. But then to deny the exposition of this place concerning a regenerate person, Because they hold perfection in this life, and an immunity from sinne, for which end the Pelagians of old did seem to oppose it; yea and that this perfection was to be obtained by our own free-will, this may justly be looked upon as heretical, Upon which account Castalio is inexcusa∣ble, for he interpreteth it of an unregenerate man, only subject to the Law, meerly to establish perfection; affirming, that the old man is wholly crucified in this life, denying Christs imputed righteousness, and affirming men may be without sinne. (De Justific. pag. 67. & frequenter alibi.) This is certain that the true Exposition of this place doth powerfully overthrow the Doctrine of perfection in this life: For if a Paul doth find this civil warre within himself; if

Paul creep thus upon the ground comparatively to the admirable holiness requi∣red in the Law, who then may not have cause to be humbled for that spiritual agony he feeleth within himself?

Fourthly, Although we affirm this later part of the Chapter is to be under∣stood of a regenerate person, yet we also acknowledge, that a Minister is to manage this truth with much wisdom and dexterity, that so the Doctrine of imper∣fection in regenerate persons, may not be an occasion to ••ull men a sleep in their lazinesse, that hereby they do not content themselves with incompleat and sluggish wishes in the wayes of holinesse. If any do abuse this Doctrine to lukewarmness or indulgence in sinfull wayes, saying, their estate is like Paul's the evil they would not do, they do: This is not the fault of the Doctrine, but either of the Minister, who doth not wisely dispense it; or of the hearer, who doth wilfully suck poison out of the sweet herb: Even as the whole Doctrine of the Gospel, and Gods grace, may be abused to licentiousness. It is true, that the proper character of Christianity is, That it is an acknowledgement of the truth, which is after godlinesse, Tit. 1. 1. And certainly there is no point may more quicken up to godliness, s••ur on the most holy to greater growth in piety, then this truth about the imperfection of the graces, that are in the best; and also that we have a treacherous enemy within us (the reliques of original sinne) which without daily watching and praying, will quickly plunge us into confusion, Now the Minister of Christ will so handle this Exposition, though of a regene∣rate person, very profitably and advantagiously to the increase of godliness, if he adde these qualifications to his Interpretation:

1. That the evil which this person is said to do, is not to be understood of grosse and enormieus crimes, but partly of the very motions to sinne within us, and sometimes a consent thereunto, and (it may fall out so, as to be) an acting of them in our lives; but this is not of grosse sinnes, or if of a foul sinne, yet not continued in, but with repentance and greater hatred recovered out of it. Unlesse the Preacher do thus limit his Exposition, he leaveth the battlements without rails, he doth not fence against the pit wherein some may fall. Let no man therefore think that this passage of Pauls is to be extended to grosse sinnes, as if many prophane sinners, who sinne, and their consciences check them, and then they sinne again and have remorse again, could take any comfort from these places, as if they might say with Paul, It is not I, but sinne that dwelleth in me; The evil that I would not, that I grieve for, in the temptation, I do: Oh take heed of abusing the holy Word of God to such corrupt ends! Austin some where speaketh to this occasion, when this part of Paul's Epistle was read, I fear (saith he) left this may be ill understood, but let none think, as if Paul's meaning was, he would be chaste, but he was an adulterer, he would be mercifull, but he was cruel, &c. Thus it would be very dangerous to interpret this passage of grosse sinnes, and yet it cannot be denied, but that men who sinne grosly, yet with some remorse and grief of conscience are apt to cover themselves with these fig-leaves, and think this is sanctuary safe enough to runne unto, that though they do sinne, yet it is not with full consent and delight. Arminius affirmeth (in cap. 7. ad Rom. pag. 753. as he saith, Verè & sanctè)

That he had sometimes the experience of this, that when some have been admonished, that they would take heed of committing such a sin, which they knew was forbidden by the Law; They would answer with the Apostle. To will was present with them, but they knew not how to perform what they willed: Yea he addeth, He had this answer from one, not when the sinne was committed, but when he was fore∣warned that he should not commit it. But the same Author goeth on, and saith, he knew both men and women, young and old, who when he had ex∣plained this Chapter in the sense he defendeth, did plainly confess to him, that they hitherto had been in this opinion, that if they committed any sinne with

reluctancy of their mind, or omitted any duty, the same regreeting of them, they were not greatly to trouble themselves, or grieve in this matter, seeing they thought themselves like Paul therein, and therefore gave him hearty thanks that he delivered him from that errour by his interpretation.

But what needeth all this, if any read Calvins, or other Expositions upon this place, might they not have been fully satisfied, that such persons offending in that manner (viz.) sinning, having only terrour and contradiction from their conscience against the sinne they commit, but their hearts otherwise carry them out to it, do no wayes agree with the person here described, whose heare and will is said to be against sinne, as well as his mind and conscience? We must not therefore understand it of gross sins, especially of a continual custom therein. No doubt but David did commit the adultery and murder, he would not have done. No doubt when Peter denied Christ, he could say, the evil that he would not do, that he did; but this was in suddain temptations. This was not often or customa∣ry, therefore they did recover out of them with bitter tears and sorrow. We must therefore understand it chiefly of the motions and lustings of the heart to sinne, and oftentimes a consenting thereunto; yea and in lesser sinnes an acting thereupon; so that it is no more in sense then what the Apostle Jam's saith, In many things we offend all, Chap. 3. 2. So that howsoever the Jesuites and Ar∣minians would make Austins, and the later Expositions to differ, as if Austins were more innocent, because he understood it only of motions to sinne, which the godly man did suffer against his will within him; but the later apply it even to actions; yet who so diligently compareth them together, cannot find any real difference; for the summe of their Exposition is, That the Law requiring such a perfect and pure holiness, that is doth not allow of the least spot, or ble∣mish, the most godly do find themselves so depressed and weighed down with that remainder of corruption that is within them, that they come exceeding short of that excellent and perfect holiness, and therefore do abhorre and loath themselves, and judge themselves miserable, while they carry about with them such a body of sinne.

Secondly and lastly, This Exposition will be advantagiously managed for godliness, 〈…〉〈…〉 also inform, That Paul doth not here speak of every particular temptation, as if in every conflict he had the worse, and the flesh had the better; but he speaks of good and evil in the general, and that in the whole course of his con∣versation. In the general his heart was set upon the good commanded, and against the evil forbidden, but yet he could never attain to his fulness of desire, though in several combars, the spirit might and did conquer the flesh. And certainly the Arminians, who will hold us to the rigid letter, as if this person never had he better, no not at any time in any sinne, must take heed of that fault they charge upon us (viz.) that they be not injurious to the grace of God, even according to their own Exposition; for they acknowledge those workings of the Law in this person against sinne, are from the Spirit of God: These are the good gift of God, and although they come not from the Spirit, as regenerating, yet as moving and preparing the heart for Regeneration. Now will it not be derogatory to say, that in this conflict the Spirit of God is over∣come in every conflict, that at no time he cannot do the good he would? This is to make the conflict of a man in this legal estate inferiour to Aristotle's incontinent person, who hath only the meer light of natural reason to help him; for he compareth (Lib. 7. Ethic. cap. 9.) intemperance to the disease of a Dropsie or Consumption, because incurable, but incontinency to the falling-sickness, because curable. And then because the former is continual, the later some∣times only. If then in very Heathens, whose conflict is only between a natu∣ral conscience, and their lusts, conscience doth sometimes prevail, their lusts do not alwayes overcome; Shall we think lesse is done by the Spirit of God in

them, who are in this legal conflict? It is true, if we speak of perfect obedi∣ence to the Law of God: so at all times in all things, the Law of sinne within a godly man doth retard and make him to come short; but then in particular combates, there the flesh doth not alwayes prevail; only the Apostle instanceth in the tyranny of sinne, and not the dominion of grace, because hereby he would inform the Jews how much they were to sigh and groan under this bur∣den, and thereupon to have higher thoughts of Christ. For seeing there were two things that did keep them off from Christ, The ignorance of the power of original sinne, and a desire to find out a righteousness by the works of the Law: The Apostle doth take an excellent way to cure them of these two evils, by shew∣ing what deep root original sinne hath in the most holy, and how opposite and fighting it is against the grace of God within us, insomuch that we cannot have our full comfort but in Christ alone.

¶. 2.

Reasons for this Exposition.

THat there is no godly man living free from this spiritual combate, because of the flesh which still abideth in him, hath been proved by Reasons and Scripture. To this Text we have joyned Paul's Discourse, Rom. 7. which you heard was to be understood of no other then a regenerate person. But because such an Exposition, as also the Doctrine of the imperfection of Regeneration may be abused; You heard with what limitations that Chapter was to be inter∣preted, though of a godly man.

It is remarkable what Austin saith in defence of himself, expounding this place of a regenerate person, whereas he had interpreted it otherwise former∣ly, Non ego primus aut solus, &c. (Lib. 6. contra Julianum. lib. 11.) He was not the first, or only man that did interpret it so. Yea he confesseth he under∣stood it of unregenerated persons once himself; and his greatest reason was, because he thought Paul could not say of himself, That he was carnal and sold under sinne; but afterwards (saith he) Melioribus & intelligentioribus cessi, vel potius ipsi veritati, &c. The example of this excellent man might much con∣vince, but that prejudice doth blind mens eyes.

Let us see what Reasons are cogent for this Exposition.

First, This is very considerable, That the Apostle in the former verses speaking of himself, useth the Preterperfect tense, speakth of that which was past: onely at the fourteenth verse, there he changeth the tense, and speaketh of the present time; which may perswade us, that he speaketh of himself, what he was once, before regenerated, and what he hath experience of in himself, though sanctified. This changing of the time, argueth a change also in the person; for so his Discourse run∣neth from the seventh verse to the fourteenth, I had not known lust, and sinne wrought in me all manner of concupiscence, I was alive without the Law once, and sinne deceived me, &c. All these expressions are concerning what was done in him. Then at the fourteenth verse, with the rest following, he speaketh of the present time, I am carnal, I do that which I allow not, &c. This altering of the time may incline us to think, that it is very probable the Apostle doth compare his former estate of unregeneracy with the present of sanctification that he is now in. It is true indeed, we grant that the Apostle doth sometimes assume the person of another man; he supposeth such a thing in himself, which yet we must not conclude to be in him, as Rom. 3. 7. For if the truth of God hath abounded more through my life unto his glory, why yet am I judged as a sinner?

Here it is certain, he personateth a wicked object or and caviller. So 1 Cor. 13. 2. If I have all faith, and not charity, &c. As also Gal. 2. 18. If what I have destroyed, I build the same again, I make my self a transgressor. But who doth not see a vast difference between these expressions and Paul's Discourse in this Chapter? For they are spoken hypothetically by way of supposition. And therefore every one may perceive that the Apostle doth not intend an absolute speech of him∣self. Had the Apostle used such conditional expressions here, then there had been some colour, If I do the evil I would not, if I do not the good I would, if I delight in the Law, if the Law of God, &c. then we might have doubted whether he spake of himself or no. Or had the Apostle as absolutely and peremptorily spo∣ken in those places, as he doth here, we should have wondred at it. Should he after a large Discourse to that purpose have concluded, So then I my self distroy what I have built, it would have greatly amazed us? As for that place insisted upon by so many, 1 Cor. 4. 6. These things I have in a figure transferred to my self and Apollo, &c. and from thence gathering, That it is ordinary with Paul by a figure to assume another habit (as it were) then his own. Suppose it be grant∣ed, Doth it therefore follow he doth here in this place? What, doth the Apo∣stle never speak in his own person? If we will not take this as spoken of him∣self, Why do the Dissentients take the second verse in the next Chapter, as to be understood of his own person? The Law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus, hath freed me from the Law of sinne and death. Besides this very place maketh against them: for when the Apostle doth thus assume a person, he plainly dis∣covereth he doth so; you see he doth expresly say, that what he did, he did by a figure, but here is not the least hint given of any such thing, there is not a syllable by which we may gather any such transfiguration: So that it is a won∣der that the Apostle should continue in such a long discourse, and that with so much vehemency, and yet give no discovery that he doth not mean it of him∣self, especially when the Adversaries to this Exposition say, That to understand it of Paul, is so contumelious to the Spirit of God, and so destructive to all godliness. Certainly if so, the Apostle would have manifested something to remove this stumbling block. Although I may adde that even that very Text, I have in a figure transferred to my self and Apollo, &c. doth not necessarily allude, to that mention made of th••••, 1 Cor. 2. 12. where speaking of their factions, some said they were of Paul, others of Apollo; as if the Apostle did by figure, use their names, intending thereby the false Apostles; for (say they) The Corinthians made their divisions by occasion of the false Apostles glorying in them, and exalting them against those that were faithfull. But if so, what argument could there be in Paul's words? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Paul? If he did mean false Apostles, and not him∣self, why should he thank God that he had baptized so few? Therefore Pareus acknowledgeth, that the common Interpretation of that Text, as if Paul by a figure use his name and Apollo for the false Apostles, is no wayes agreeable with the scope of the place: For how could that be an example to teach them humility, as he there enlargeth himself. Heinsius also doth not like the translation of the Greek word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, for such a transmutation of names and persons, but maketh it the same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but enough of this.

2. A second Argument is, In that this person is said to hate evil, not to will what is evil, not to know or approve of it, and then he is said to will that which is good. Now this is the Description of godliness, to love good, and to hate evil. It is true, that in convinced men, who yet retain their lusts, as also in legal men, they would not do the evil that they do, but yet they cannot be said to hate it: No they love their lusts; therefore when any fear doth abate, they presently fall unto those sinnes again, but this man doth hate sinne; So that

in this property two things discover a regenerate person, 1. That not only his conscience and his judgement is against sinne, but his will, his heart and affecti∣ons also, whereas in all unregenerate men, their judgements, and their conscien∣ces being enlightned and terrified, maketh them afraid to commit sinne; but their will, then affections 〈◊〉〈◊〉 not against it. And then secondly, The Apostle speaketh generally of evil and good, he doth not say, I do this evil, I would not, or I do not this good that I would, but evil and good indefinitely, and this is only proper to the regenerate, he only hateth all evil, be only loveth all good, whereas the unregenerate person doth hate only some evil, and it is some good only that he would do, though if a man truly hate any sinne, he hateth all sin, because odium is circa genus.

Thirdly, This person must be a regenerate person, because there are two distinct principles in him, Sinne and He are made two different things, vers. 17. It is no more I that do it, but sinne that dwelleth in me: And ver. 18. I know that in me (that is my flesh) dwelleth no good thing; Here then are (as it were) two distinct persons; this person hath two selfs, which doth necessarily demonstrate that this is a sanctified person. For can a man under legal convictions say, It is not I, but sinne within me? Can he that hath only errors upon his soul say, It is not I, but sinne within me? How absurd and false were that, for their hearts are set upon evil, only the terrours of the Law restrain them? Now a man is, what his heart is, not what his conviction is. It is true, the Libertines did abuse this Doctrine, and would thereby acquit themselves, it was not they, but the flesh: Yea some blasphemously would attribute it to God himself; but till a man be regenerated, he hath but one self, and that is the flesh. But (saith

Ar∣minius) those legal preparatory workings by the Law, are the good gift of God, and are to be reckoned among the works of the Spirit, and therefore the Apostle may oppose them and sinne together.

To this it is answered, Though those legal operations are from Gods Spirit, yet because the person is not regenerated, he is still in the state of the flesh, he is still without Christ, and therefore cannot distinguish himself from the flesh within him. As long as those good gifts of God are not in a subject regenerated, the same person and the flesh are all one. Yea though those good effects come from Gods Spirit, and so are in themselves spiritual, yet as they are in a person unregenerated, they are improved carnally, they are managed only to self-respects; and thus tem∣porary believers, though they do enjoy the good and common gifts of Gods Spirit, yet as they are in them, they are carnally improved, spiritual things being prostituted to temporal ends. It is plain then, that onely a godly man may say, It is not I, but sinne in me; and thus Aquinas on the place saith, it may be easily understood of a man in the state of grace, and of a sinner, it can be only interpreted extortè, by violence: His reason he goeth upon is, because that a man is said to do, which his reason doth, not which his sensitive appetite in∣clineth unto, because homo est id quod est secundum rationem; By reason we must understand sanctified reason, otherwise a mans reason is corrupted, as well as his sensual part. Besides, there is a further Argument used by the Apostle in this distinction he maketh, It is no more I that do it. No more, that implieth, once it was he that did it, formerly he could not make such a distinction as now he doth.

Fourthly, The person here spoken of must needs be a regenerate person, Because it is said, He delighteth in the Law of God after the inward man, ver. 22. This is one of the places that compelled Austin to change his former opinion. Certainly to delight in the Law of God, is an inseparable property of a regene∣rate person: David expresseth his holy and heavenly heart thereby; yea the Greek word is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, I delight with. Arminius doth well observe the em∣phasis of the word, for he maketh the Preposition 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 not redundant, but signi∣ficant.

So that the meaning is, he delighteth in the Law of God, that is, he delighteth in Gods Law, and Gods Law delighteth in him; there is a mutual sympathy and delight (as it were) which maketh the reason the stronger for a regenerate person. For can any but he delight in Gods Law, and Gods Law (as it were) delight in him again? It is true, it is 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in the inward man, but that is not a diminution, but a specification of the cause, whereby he doth de∣light in Gods Law. I will not say that the inward man doth alwayes signifie the regenerate man, and so is the same with a new-creature. For although some understand that place so, 2 Cor. 4. 16. The outward man perisheth, but the in∣ward man is renewed daily; yet happily the context may enforce it another way, yet here it must be understood of the mind as regenerated, because it is opposite to the flesh, and so signifieth the same with the hidden man of the heart, in which sense a Jew is called one inwardly, because of the work of grace upon his soul.

Fifthly, The sad complaint he maketh concerning his thraldom, doth evidently shew, that it is a regenerate person: O wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from the body of this death! If we take body for the material body, which is mortal, and so sinfull; or else for that body of sinne, which abideth in the godly, it cometh much to one point. It argueth that the person here spoken of, feeling this weight, this burden upon him, is in sad agonies of soul, judgeth himself miserable and wretched in this respect, and thereupon doth earnestly groan for a total redemption; he longs to be in heaven, where no longer will evil be present with him, where he shall do all the good, and as perfectly as he would. It is true, a godly man cannot absolutely be called a wretched and mi∣serable man, but respectively quoad hoc, and comparatively to that perfect holi∣ness we shall have hereafter. So we may justly account our selves miserable, not so much from external evils, as from the motions and stirrings of sinne within us, that do press us down, and thereby make our lives more discon∣solate. Hence it is that Austin calleth this Gemitum saactorum, &c. the sighs and groans of holy persons fighting against concupiscence within them.

Sixthly, The affectionate rejoycing and assured confidence that he hath, about the full deliverance of him from this bondage expressed in those words, I thank God through Jesus Christ, doth greatly establish this exposition also of a regenerate ate per∣son. It is true, there is variety about reading of this passage; however this plainly cometh from an heart affected with assurance of Gods grace to give him a full redemption, though for the present he lie in sad conflicts and agonies. This is so palpable a conviction, that some of the Dissentients will make Paul here to speak in his own person, as if he did give God thanks for that freedome which the person spoken before had not obtained. Neither is it any wonder to see such a sudden change in Paul from groaning under misery, presently to break forth into thanks and praises of God: For we may often observe such ebbings and flowings in David's Psalms, that we would hardly think the same Psalm made by the same man, at the same time; one verse speaking dejection and disconso∣lateness, the next it may be strong confidence, and rejoycing in God.

Lastly, The conclusion which Paul maketh from this excellent experimental Discourse, is fully to our purpose, So then I my self serve the Law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin. To serve God, and to serve the Law of God is all one, and this none but a godly man doth. Yea to serve him with the mind and the spirit is a choice expression of our grace. But because this is not perfect and compleat, he addeth, He serveth also the flesh, and the law of sin. It is true, None can serve God and mammon, Christ and sin, but yet where there is not a perfect freedom from thraldom to sin, there, though in the principal and chief manner we are carried out to serve God, yet the flesh retardeth, and so snatcheth to it some service: you heard contraries might be together, while they are in fight. Neither is our redem∣ption from sin full and total. It is to be done successively and by degrees, that so

we may be the more humbled and grace exalted. Besides that expression 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, is emphatical; this is used when Paul expresseth himself in some remarkable manner, I the same, and no other man, as it is used in other places, 2 Cor. 10. 1. Now I Paul my self beseech you, &c. 2 Cor. 12. 13. except it was, because I my self was not burdensom to you. Rom. 9. 3. I could wish that myself were accursed, &c. which is enough to convince such as are not refractory.

¶. 3.

Objections Answered.

I Shall now consider what is objected against this Interpretation, and shall not attend to the general objections, such as that, That who are Christs and rege∣nerated have higher things attributed to them; They have crucified the flesh, they have mortifiedeth old man, &c. As also this seemeth to be injurious to Gods grace, it will encourage men in slothfulness and negligence, &c. for these shall be answered in the general. I shall therefore only pitch upon two objections, which the Adversaries insist upon.

The first is, That this person here spoken of, is said to be once without the Law, which (say they) is the description of a Gentile in Paul's language; therefore he assu∣meth some other person then his own; for Paul alwayes lived under the Law. Austin indeed expounds it thus, I did live once without the Law. that is, saith he, when he was a child, before he had the use of reason. This is too harsh. Therefore it is better answered, The person here spoken of, is not said to be without the Law, which is indeed the description of a Gentile, but that he was alive without the Law once, that is, he, as all the Pharisees understood the Law of God, as forbidding only external sins, and Paul living unblameably as to that respect, thought to have life and righteousness by the Law, but when the commandment came in power to him, and he was convinced that it did prohibit not only outward sins, but inward lustings of heart, then he began to find himself a greater sinner than he was aware of; then he found the Law to be death to him, so that he lived with∣out the Law, because he was not affected with the full and exact obligation therof.

The second thing much insisted upon is, That the person here spoken of, is said to be carnal and sold under sinne, which (they say) is made by the Scripture a certain property of a wickedman. Thus it is said of Ahab, Thou hast sold thy self to do wickedly, 1 Kin. 21. 10. yea of all the children of Israel, 2 Kin. 17. 13. They caused their children to pass through the fire, and sold themselves to do evil in the sight of the Lord. But first, Calvin doth grant, that this is spoken of Paul, while unrege∣nerate, and therefore beginneth his Exposition at the 15^th verse of a sanctified person: yet that cannot well be, because there the Apostle beginneth to alter the tense; There he saith, I am carnal, I am sold under sinne, whereas before he had used the past time. We grant it therefore, that Paul saith this of himself, though regenerated, that he was sold under sin. But then we say, The expressions above named, and this is not a like; here it is in a passive sense, there in an active sense; of those wicked men it is said, They sold themselves, which denoteth their wilfulnes and obstinacy; of this, he was sold, which implieth it to be done against his will, as captives are; there it is absolutely, here it is limited to the flesh: And if this phrase did denote a wicked man in an high degree, then how can they apply it to a man under legal convictions, and in a preparatory way to conversion? It would be ve∣ry hard to say of such men, that they sold themselves to do evil. Besides, there is a two-fold bondage and captivity under sin, even as the Israelites had a two-fold one they were born in, that of Egypt, and another they voluntarily by their sin sell into, which was that of Babylon. Thus there is a bondage unto sin, we are all

born in; for in Adam we were all sold to sinne, and so needed a Christ, Reder∣mer. And secondly there is a bondage unto sinne, by our own voluntary transgressions; It is true a regenerate person cannot be sold under sinne in this later sence, but he is in the former, and so it is no more injurious unto the grace of God, as Austin noteth, then that he is yet mortal and corruptible. Thus you have this great and necessary truth established: Paul speaketh here of a regenerate person, and that not only of him, as he is in the lowest estate, and initials of grace, as Musculus thinketh; but of every godly person while in this life, even the most perfect that is, though this conflict be more applica∣ble to some then others; yea if we do regard the exact purity of the law, the most holy do most humble themselves under it.

¶. 4.

The several Wayes whereby Original Sinne doth hinder the godly in their Religious Progress, whereby they are sinful and imperfect.

THe next Proposition in order is, That this flesh, this original sinne in a man doth several wayes hinder the godly in their religious progress, whereby they are sinful and imperfect, whereby every one is forced to cry out, as he; O me nunquam sapientem! so, O me nunquam pium! Oh me never godly, never believing, never answering the holy Law of God! This treacherous enemy within us is so multi∣forme, putteth it self Chamelion-like into so many shapes, that the most holy men have cause to be alwayes on their guard, to keep continual watch, lest sometime or other this Daliah betray them into the hands of the Philistines. How were it possible that some eminent servants of God, as David and Peter, have fallen so grievously, and committed such sinnes which some Heathens by the light of nature would have abhorred? but that there is this fuel and spawn of sinne abiding in every regenerate person. It may well be affirmed, that the reliquiae peccati originalis; the reliques of original sinne are in the most holy: for as when an house hath been for the greatest part consumed, but at last the fire is quenched, yet there remains some little sparks and embers, which cause a constant watch, lest they kindle and consume whatsoever is left yet unde∣stroyed: Such care and fear ought the godly to have, lest the remaining cor∣ruption break out suddainly, and so destroy them.

I shall instance in some particulars whereby original sinne doth thus hinder and retard the work of grace in us. As

First, This flesh within the godly maketh us imperfect in this life by its strong op∣position; and contrary thwarting it hath to the grace of God within us. These two saith the Text are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, they are two adversaries daily combating with one another; Insomuch that what the Spirit saith, do, the flesh saith do it not. Thus original corruption is like Solomons brawling woman, whose contentions are a continual dropping, Prov. 19. 13. What rest can such a man have? no more then he that lyeth in his bed, and hath constant droppings of rain upon him: Such a disturber, and farre more troublesome inmate is original sinne to a believer, grace hath no rest, no quietnes, but the flesh is alwayes raising up oppo¦sitions against it, alwayes crossing it, what the Spirit would not, that the flesh would. Therefore Rom. 7. 23. the Apostle expresseth the violent actings thereof by military termes, it warreth, and it bringeth into captivity; In this sence we may say, the flesh is Satan, for that is an adversary in our way, that riseth up and stoppeth us in our spiritual progress: It is true, the natural and carnal man findeth no such opposition; he never cryeth out, Oh how hard a

thing is it to be heavenly minded, to be godly indeed, to live a life of faith? how difficult to live and die upon Scripture and spiritual grounds? for all is flesh within, dead men feel no pain, they find no opposition; Mortuus non belligerat, is the Proverb, but the godly are in continual exercises, no sooner doth grace begin to work, but the flesh presently beginneth to counter∣work.

Secondly, The flesh doth retard and hinder the work of grace by subtil al∣lurements and enticements: Thus as the Devil sometimes appeareth as a roaring Lion, and sometimes again as a glistering Serpent, and in this latter way is most dangerous; so it is with this flesh within us; sometimes it grosly, and violently opposeth the grace of God, at other times it craftily insinuateth, It rea∣dily interposeth, it propounds many sweet baits; thus what it cannot do as a Lion, it accomplisheth as a Fox, so that what counsell is given, Mis. 75. Keep the doors of thy mouth from her that lyeth in thy bosome, implying there would be treachery in the nearest relations: This is much more to be observed against original sinne that lyeth in thy own bosome, yea it is thy own self; and therefore how easily may it perswade thee, yea no temptations without could do thee any hurt, did not this flesh within betray all: Thus it craftily insinua∣teth, and surprizeth the strongesth holds of the soul, before we are aware: so you heard from that of James 1. 17. Every man is tempted and drawen aside with his own lust. Sweet poison doth more easily destroy, white powder that giveth no noise more certainly kills; and this is the Reason, why the godly may be carried away to sinne of profit, and pleasure, and not judge them to be so, their hearts may not condemne them, and all because the flesh can so bewitch us; it doth cast such mists before our eyes, that we are not able to dis∣cern between things that differ.

Thirdly, The flesh within us doth keep off grace from its perfect work, by depressing it and weighing it down; that when grace would lift up the soul to heaven, that is like a milstone about our neck, and pulleth us back again, it is lime to the birds wings, it is the string to her feet: This made Paul cry out of it as a weight lying upon him, Rom. 7. O wretched man that I am who shall de∣liver me from the body of this death? yea Heb. 12. 1. it is called a weight; now as that must needs be an impediment to any who run in a race, no less burden∣some is original sinne to a godly man in his way to heaven.

Fourthly, It hinders the perfection of grace, cooling and remitting the fervour and zeal thereof; and herein chiefly the mischievous effect of original sinne is discovered, it maketh the soul halt in his progress, it allayeth the heat of grace, it is like smoak to put out the fire. The adversaries to this Truth say, it is not intelligible how the Spirit can make us will one thing, and the flesh another, seeing a man hath but one will, and he cannot velle & nolle, will and nill at the same time about the same object; But they may know that by such expressions are chiefly meant, That the hearrt of a man through this flesh within him, is very faint and remiss in all its actions about that which is good; when he doth will it, it's so inefficaciously, so slluggishly, so imperfectly, that it may be called a nilling as well as a willing; and this is the sad issue of original sinne, it maketh us go hal∣ting to the grave, it abateth that activity and zeal of spirit, which ought to be in holy things.

Fifthly, The flesh hindereth absolute compleatness of grace, by soiling, de∣basing, and infecting our holy duties; It is as some mud cast into a pure stream, it is as some poison mingled with wine; and for this it is, that the most holy have prayed, God would not enter into judgement with them, because in his sight no flesh could be justified, Psal. 143. 2. For this, the Scripture compareth even our righteous actions to a menstruous cloath, Isa. 30. 22. This is the frog that is drawen up with the pure water out of the well; though our godly duties

are not sinnes, yet they are sinful, they are damnable in themselves, and there∣fore need the mercy of God to forgive the imperfections adhering to them.

Lastly, The flesh is an hindrance in the way of grace, by dividing and di∣stracting of the heart. In the stare of integrity when there was no such intestine warre, then the whole strength of the soul emptied it self one way; but now though grace hath for the main setled our hearts upon God, yet the flesh inter∣poseth, that propoundeth other objects, and thus because the pool runneth into divers streams, it is not so full and plentifull, so that it is impossible there should be any perfection, where there is any distraction or division; and there∣fore we may justly expostulate with all those, who plead they are without sin, Whether they never have so much, as one wandring thought in any holy duty they go about. If they should say they have not, it is our duty to flee from such per∣sons as are puffed up with such self-love, and self-confidence, that they know not, or feel not what they are, or do: Such are like those distracted persons, that conceit themselves Kings and Emperours, when at the same time they are miserable and indigent. Now by these several actings of the flesh within us, the godly man may perceive what little cause he hath to trust in himself: thou canst not be secure, while in this mortal body; the wound original sinne hath given thee is not wholly cured; sometime or other this close secret enemy may rob thee of thy Pearls and Jewels, if thou art not diligent in praying and watch∣ing over thy self.

In the next place, I shall proceed to a second Proposition, and therein shall answer such general Objections that may plausibly be urged against the actings of original sinne within us, and thereby against the imperfection of regenera∣tion: for some have thought it no dangerous errour to plead for a perfection even in this life: Therefore Arminius his heires (Epistola dedecati. ad cap. 7. ad Rom.) say that the unseasonable and excessive urging of the constant imperfe∣ction of regenerate persons, and the impossibility of keeping the Law in this life, without adding what the godly might do by faith and the Spirit of Christ, such a thought as this might easily enter into the hearts of the hearers, that they can do no good at all; and they adde, the ancient Church thought not the question about the impossibility of the law, to be reckoned among capital ones, which is apparent (say they) from Austin, which wisheth the Pelagians would acknowledge it might be performed by the grace of Christ, and then there would be peace between them. But certainly Austin may best explain himself, (De perfectione justitiae ad Caelestiam, ad finem) where he saith, he knoweth some who hold there either have been, or are some, that were with∣out sinne: Quorum sententiam de bâc re non audeo reprehendere, quanquam nec defendere valeam; as he dared not reprove it, so he could not defend it. This is his modest expression, but if Austin could not defend it, I do not know who in that age could, seeing Austin by the gloss in the Canon law, hath justly the preheminence above all the Ancients for Disputations, as Hierom for the Tongues, and Gregory for Morals; and certainly the places brought to prove this point, do argue that no man is without sinne, that none can be justified, if God enter into judgement: It was also Pelagins boast in that Epistle ad De∣metriadem, (for it's taken to be his) That in the first place he doth enquire what men are able to do, how farre their own power extendeth as if this foundation were not laid, there could be no exhortation to godliness. Hence the Pelagians charged it as a consequence upon the Doctrine of original sinne, that it would work in men a despair about perfect righteousness, (lib secundo coutra Julianum in initio) But of late Writers setting aside Papists, Castellio, (for we must not call him Castalio, seeing he bewaileth his pride, (Castel. De∣fens. page. 356.) for assuming that name to him from the fountain of Muses)

doth with the greatest earnestness propugn the perfection of regenerate per∣sons and immunity from sinne, understanding that prayer for pardoning of sinne, like as that duty to forgive our enemies, viz. when we have them: This Writer calleth that question, Whether a man may by the Spirit of God perfectly obey the law, a very profitable question, but addeth that the errour on the right hand, viz. that we are able perfectly to fullfill it, is farre less dan∣gerous then the contrary; for God will never find fault with that man, who doth endeavour for a perfect obedience, and that by the help of God, (De obe∣dientiâ Deo praestandâ pag. 227, 228.) but his arguments are as weak as his af∣fections are strong in this point.

¶. 5.

Objections against the Reliques of sinne in a regenerate man answered.

LEt us examine what is usually objected against this truth. And

First, The command of God requiring we should not lust, and that we should love God with all our heart, and all our soul, and might: From hence they argue, if these two commands cannot be perfectly fullfilled, why are they required of us.

To this it is answered, that it must be granted, no man living is able to answer the perfection and exactness of this law:

who can say he loveth God, as much as the command requireth? that he never faileth in the least degree? who can say that he never finds any sinful motions? any irregular workings of heart? though he do not consent to them; suppose that were alwayes true, which is not to be granted, yet such motions being in the heart, the very ha∣ving of them maketh us to fall short of the exactness of the law; But yet these commands are necessary; for the rule must alwayes be perfect, not wanting or fail∣ing in any thing. The command doth represent the perfect Idea of compleat righteousness, as Statues that are erected up in high and eminent places, are commonly of greater length, then the ordinary stature of men is. Thus it is one thing the righteousness commanded in the law, and the participation of it in the subject, that receiveth it according to its proper capacity; The law then is perfect, but we are imperfect, true obedience and imperfect must not be con∣founded, as Castellio most ignorantly doth, and therefore abandoneth that opinion (De Justificat. pag. 46.) which maketh imperfection a sinne: but he ca∣lumniateth the orthodox, when he saith, we hold nothing a vertue, but what is chiefest (ibid. pag. 43.) neither do we call that imperfection, which may have a greater degree; Adam was not imperfect, because he had not so much ho∣liness, as the Angles have; In heaven it may be judged, that one Saint shall have more grace then another, yet every one perfected in their measure; and though it be so, he that hath not so much holiness as the chiefest, shall not be judged sinfully imperfect; there is a negative imperfection, and a privative; this later is, when the subiect doth not partake of what degrees it ought to do, and then it is alwayes a sinne: The starre hath not as much light as the Sunne, but this is no privative imperfection, because it is not bound to be the Sunne: Now the command of God requireth of us the chiefest love that we can by grace put forth, not the highest degree of love, which is possible, but what we are bound to do, and any defect herein is a sinne; We admit that all graces are not alike, no more then all sinnes, one may be more holy then another; yet he that is the highest attainer doth not reach to the utmost of the command; and therefore whatever falleth short of that, is damnable deserving wrath of God.

Secondly, When we say no man is able to fullfill the Law of God in this life, because the flesh doth still abide in us; We mean not as if this were so, because God could not subdue it, or sinne and the Devil were more potent then Christ, but he hath in his Word declared, that he will not give such a measure of grace in this life, by the righteousness whereof we should be justified. So that Ca∣stellio's exclamations in this case are ridiculous; here is no injury done to the Spirit of God; we do not make Christ a semi-Saviour; for we readily grant, That the Spirit of God could make us absolutely free from sinne in the twink∣ling of an eye. In the hour of death we are immediately purged from all evil. So that it's plain, the Spirit of God could make us thus compleat, but he will not; neither doth this tend to his dishonour, no more than that we die, that we are ••••ck, and carry about with us corruptible bodies. For did not Christ die that we might have glorious bodies, that we might be redeemed from this corruption? Yet this is not done immediately. Seeing then Christ hath assured us, that both soul and body shall be made perfectly holy and happy in time, though it be not done as soon as we would have it; we are not to cavil herein, but satisfie our selves with the wisdom of God, who doth every thing beautifull in his season, It is true, Christ when he cured bodily diseases, he did perfectly cure them; but doth it therefore follow, that he must do so in soul-diseases, as Castellio urgeth? No certainly, but rather as Christ, though he healed some perfectly of their diseases, yet he did not take away their mortality from them: So though by the grace of God, we have strength to overcome gross sinnes, yet we are not made impeccable, as the glorified Saints in Heaven are, but there remaineth the fuell of sinne still within us; not but that God could remove it, as he could have inabled the Israelites to have conquered all the Canaanites, but because he will not; God could have made all the world at once, but he proceeded by degrees; and thus he doth in our sanctification. So that herein we are daily taught to be humble in our selves, and to depend alone upon the grace of God. It is true, if all sinne were removed, and we confirmed in a state of grace, then there would be no danger of pride, as there is not in those who are made glo∣rious in Heaven: But were were we made perfect and delivered from all sinne, yet abiding still in a mutable condition, we should quickly be drunken with the thoughts of our own excellencies; so that perfection, while we are in the way, would not be so advantagious unto us, unless to perfection God should also add confirmation, and this would be to confound Heaven and earth together. And thus much for the first Objection.

¶. 6.

I Shall onely name a second Objection made in the general against the reliques of original corruption in a man, though regenerated, and thereby the im∣perfection of our renovation, because this doth more properly belong to ano∣ther head in Divinity, which is much disputed, viz. De Perfectione Justitia, Of the Perfection of righteousness in this life.

The Objection which is plausibly and speciously urged against this truth is, That this Doctrine is an enemy to a holy life, it is pernicious to godlinesse, that it is a pleading for sinne, and an encouragement to men to content themselves in their formal and sluggish way, because they cannot be perfect.

Thus it is thought we bring up an ill report about the way to Heaven, as those Spies did about Canaan, we discourage people, making their hearts faint, because of great Gyants that we say are in the way. In this manner Julian the Pela∣gian old of calumniated Austin, that he did in naturae invidiam malae conversatio∣nis

sordes refundere, that he did Peccantibus metum demere quorum obscenita∣tum Apostolorum & sanctorum omnium injuriis, he did consolari, because he made Paul to speak those words, The evil that I hate, that I do, of his own person: Yea (he saith) Austin's purpose was ad infereadum virtu∣tibus bellum, ad excidium civitatis Dei, &c.

(Lib. 3. contra Julianum, cap. 26.)

What a boasting Goliah is here, or a railing Rabshaheb, as if the holding of this corruption adhering to a man, though godly, did proclaim war against all godli∣ness, and did overthrow the City of God. Cassalio also maketh such preaching as this, to be to sow thistles that we may reap figs,

It is to make God accept of blind and same Sactifices, saith he (Quin{que} Impedim. pag. 11. & 12. & 19.) that we are like children holding a bird whose legs are tied by a thred, and letting her flie a little, we presently pull her back again: Thus we bid people obey 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Law of God, and when a man endeavoureth to do it, then they tell him he cannot. Therefore (saith he) spend as much time to get perfect obedience, as thou doest to get learning, the knowledge of the tongue, or as thou dost to get wealth, and then thou wilt see, we are not perfect, be∣cause we do not spend so much time in this, as in other things.

But this is to speak like a Philosopher rather than a Christian.

To the Objection we answer, There is no injury to godlinesse offered by this truth.

First, Because we say it is every mans sinne that he is not perfect, therefore we ought to humble our selves under all our failings. As it was the Israelites disobe∣dience, that they were not active to destroy every Canaanite; whatsoever cometh short of the exact Rule of the Law is sinfull, and thereby damnable: Hence God is angry, not only with gross sinnes, but the imperfect graces of his people, Revel. 3. 2. I have not found thy works perfect 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 before God. I here was much emptiness, much vacuity, the Church wanted solidity and fulness in her duties: For this it is that the godly are subject to many af∣flictions and temptations, they are under divers chastisements, because all the drosse of corruption is not yet purged from them. So that the godly man is so farre from delighting and contenting himself in these imperfections that he mourneth and groaneth under them.

Secondly, Here is no impediment to godliness, because we press it as a duty upon the godly, to be pressing forward every day, to be perfecting holinesse con∣stantly, and that they are to take heed of self-fulness, or to rest contented in low principles. Hence the Apostle, Heb. 5. 11, 12, 13. and Chap. 6. 1. speak∣eth very terrible to such as remain in their rudiments (as it were) and are not carried out to perfection. The Corinthians also, 2 Cor. 7. 1. are commanded to perfect holinesse in the fear of God. It is therefore our duty to endeavour after perfection, as Paul professeth he did, Phil. 3. though he had not attained unto it; but yet when all is done, Our perfection will be to bewail our imperfection; we shall find absolute purity is Res voti magis quam eveniûs, as Ambrose of old. Hence the most godly have failed in the exercise of those graces, which they have been most eminent in; Abraham is called the father of the faithfull, whose steps we are to follow; yet through fear in his lying or equivocating, he manife∣sted unbelief. Sarah is noted for obedience to her husband, and propounded as a patern to all wives; yet in what a sinfull and sad passion did she break out against Abraham, when he was innocent, and she was in all the fault that was about Hagar? The Lord (saith she) judge between me and thee, Gen. 16. 5. Thus David for his sincerity, called a man after Gods own heart; but how false and hyporitical in the matter of Ʋriah? Here then is no encouragement to stand still; we are not come to our races end, we are to grow every day, there is more to be done, then yet we have performed; and this

striving after further holiness will be while we are in this life.

¶. 7.

The Objection return'd upon the Perfectionists.

THirdly, Those that plead for perfection, they hinder the progress of godliness; they perswade men with foolish and ablurd conceits, that they ••ay attain to perfection; for when men do believe, they are perfect; What ••••ed they labour more, if they be at the races end? What need they runne still? Nothing doth more destroy the life and power of godliness, than such arrogant and proud conceits: So that as Seneca said, Many had been learned men, if they had not been conceited of their learning; so many might profitably proceed in the mortifying of sinne, if they were not perswaded, it was mortified already. Thus these Perfectionists preach men into arrogant perswasions of their own righteousness, and thereby hinder them from a true progress in holiness. Be∣sides such Doctrine is in an high degree injurious to the grace of the Gospel, to our Evangelical Justification; if we be whole, we do not need the Physician. Though God vouchsafe inherent grace to us, so farre as to be delivered from the dominion of sin, and also to be subduing of it daily, yet the grace of God exal∣ted in this life is by imputation. The grace without us, not the grace within us is that which doth justifie. This is the grace so frequently spoken of in the New Testa∣ment, and to which all the godly make their recourse under the guilt of sinne, and the accusations of the Law; whereas the Doctrine of Perfection wholly evacuateth this admirable and precious way of Gospel-grace. But enough of this.

¶. 8.

The several Conflicts that may be in a man.

I Come to another Proposition, which is, That we may conceive of three con∣flicts and contrary lustings that may be in a man; not at all naming that which is for the most part in every sinner, that he would have the profit of a sinne, the pleasure of a sinne, but not the bitterness of it. Such a conflict is in most sinners, they would have the advantage by sinne, but not the damage by it. Thus Arianus (Epictetus lib. 2. cap. 26.) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Every sinne hath division in it self, and so goeth on saying, That every rational soul is obnoxi us to this fight. The thief would not steal, as it is a sinne, but as it is profitable. Hence it is, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that what he would that he doth not, and what he would not do, that he doth, which are almost the same words with the Apostle. But this I do not insist on.

The first combate is, That which may be in Heathens, between their conscience and their appetite. The light of nature inclining one way, and their lust another way, which is notably taken notice of by Aristotle; a man in such a conflict is called by him an incontinent person, as distinct from an intemperate, who having the habit of sinne, is carried out to the actings thereof without any remorse or regretings of conscience or reason. To clear this, he speaketh of a two-fold

part of the soul, the rational, and that which hath not reason, or which doth re∣pugn reason. The rational part (saith he, Lib. 1. Ethic. cap. 13.) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, doth provoke and incite to what is good; but the rebellious part gain-sayeth. Even as in the paralytical parts of the body, when a man would move such to the right side, they fall to the left side. Now this Discourse of Aristotles we acknowledge, as having some truth, for even Heathens have by nature their consciences accusing or excusing of them, Rom. 2. 15. But Papists and others do horribly perve••t this, when they bring it into Divinity, and so put a new piece of garment into the old, thereby making a rent, because there is no agreement with them; otherwise we grant such a combate: yea it is in too many men, whose convictions are strong, but their lusts stronger; and no doubt this is in a regenerate person so farre, as nature still abideth in him; but such mens dislike and renitency of conscience doth not excuse them, though they be not such great sinners, as those that sinne without any remorse, yet their condition is damnable. Though such have many good sentences, and you shall hear many good speeches come from them, yet they are still under the bondage of sinne; for though they have a knowledge condemning their sinne, yet it is but universal; when they come to the particular, then they are carried away, or their knowledge is but habitually in them, not actually; as with drunken men, or men in a sleep; so that the good sayings they utter, they have no practical application of them, and therefore compared by Aristotle (Lib. 7.) to a City, which was derided by this saying, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, The City consulteth and adviseth, that yet regardeth not Laws, or like such who did utter Empedocles his grave sentences. A sad thing it is: And oh how often is it for some men to speak excellent religious truths in discourse, of which they have no practical power? Solomon hath two excellent expressi∣ons to this purpose, Prov. 26. 7. The legs of the lame are not equal, so is a pa∣rable in the mouth of fools. As the legs of a lame man being not equal, make the going uncomely; so it is when a man hath good speeches, but evil actions. Again vers. 9. As a thorn goeth up into the hand of a drunkard, so is a parable in the mouth of fools; As a drunkard feeleth not the sharpness of a thorn running into his hand; so neither doth such an incontinent person, the power and effi∣cacy of the most excellent and savoury truths which he speaketh: yet all the while such convictions of light are upon man, there is the more hope, and he may be the more easily cured, insomuch that he is not as evil, as a man habituated and sensless in his sinne. Hence Aristotle saith, That though an incontinent person doth the same things with an intemperate, yet he is not an intemperate person, as was said of the Milesians, They are not fools, but they do the things that fools do, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Lib. 7. Ethic. cap. 9.

¶. 9.

Another Combate in those within the Church, which yet may not be godly.

IN the second place, There is a second Conflict that is in those who are in the Church of God, and are in a preparatory way to conversion: These besides the natural light of conscience, have the supernatural light of the Word, which doth powerfully awaken them, enlighten and humble them; so that they feel a trouble∣some warre within themselves, yet for the present obtain not that grace which setteth

them at full freedom. Many men before their conversion have been in this soul-fight a long time. Prudentius the Christian Poet hath his Psycomachia, wherein some sins and virtue, as chastity and uncleanness, covetousness and liberality are brought in combating with one another. And thus many times some godly persons in their unregenerate time have been entangled in some special lust or other. There are many assaults and skirmishes ere the work of grace doth take full possession. Austin doth excellently declare this in his own experience (lib. 8. Confess.) Velle meum tenebat inimicus meus, &c. My enemy did take hold of my will, and made a chain thereof, whereby he was fast bound; and hereupon he did sigh and groan to be delivered, being ligatus non ferro alieno, but ferreâ meâ voluntate, bound with his iron will. In these aestuations of spi∣rit he lay wearying himself, till at last the grace of God came in with full power upon him, making a through change, cutting off the fetters that were upon his soul.

¶. 10.

Of the Combate in the godly between the Flesh and the Spirit, and how it may be discerned from the former.

IN the third place, There is the Combate in regenerate persons between the work of grace, and the flesh in them. The former was only between the natural conscience and lust; The second between the Spirit of God, but moving and working only in a man, and his corruption; The last between the Spirit of God inhabiting and dwelling in a man, and the flesh in him. So that if a Christian ask, How shall I know whether the combate I feel be between the Spirit and the flesh, or conscience, and my lust? Though practical Divines give many differences, yet briefly in these three particulars, one conflict may be discovered from the other.

1. From the principle and root. In the godly this ariseth from a total renova∣tion, or the Image of God placed in a man: In the other it is only from partial illumination or natural light.

2. In the motive. This combate in the godly is upon holy grounds, out of hatred to sinne, out of love to that which is holy. In the other it is out of ter∣rour and slavish fear, it is because they would not be damned, it is because of horrour upon them, not any delight in God.

3. In the manner. In the other the fight is between two parts of the soul, only the mind against the appetite; or if there be any work upon the heart, it is but transitory and vanishing; whereas in the godly man this combate is univer∣sal, he hath will against will, love against love, as well as his mind against these. Thus Austin (ibidem.) speaketh of the two wils he had, his carnal will, and his spiritual will; his meaning is, that because his will was not so full and effica∣cious as it should, therefore he had two wils, as it were, Non igitur monstrum, &c. saith he: It is not therefore a monster partly to will, and partly to will; but the sickness of the mind that cannot rise up fully to what is good; and therefore there are two wils, because one is not wholly and fully carried out to that which is good. This expression of Austin fully answereth that Objection, when they demand, How can the will, will and nill at the same time? It is a con∣tradiction to say so. But Austin answereth, It's therefore called two wils, or therefore it is said to will and nill, because it doth will sickly and faintly, It's

not so throughly and totally carried out to God as it ought to be; and this halt∣ing like that of Jacobs thigh will go with us to the grave. Thus we are as weak men that are partly well, and partly sick, as the twy-light, when it is partly light, and partly darkness, or as wine mingled with water; not that in such a mixture we are able to say, this part is water, and the other part is meer wine: So we must not think that in a regenerate man, one part is meerly spiri∣tual, the other meerly carnal, but the corruption in a man doth adhere to every part that is sanctified; and therefore as the principle is mixed, so are the actions which flow from it. But it is time to hasten to the last Proposition, which is,

¶. 10.

Of the Regenerates Freedome from the Dominion of sinne; And whether it be by the Suppression of it, or by the Abolishing part of it.

THat though original sinne be in a regenerate person, yet it is not in its domini∣on there, it is in part abolished. For there are these things to be consider∣ed in this inbred defilement; there is,

1. The Guilt.

2. The Dominion, and both these are removed in a regenerate person.

3. There is the sense or presence of it, and that is not taken away but by death.

4. Some adde the Root of it, and that (they say) is not destroyed till the body be consumed to ashes. For although it be true, that death put∣teth an end to all sinne, yet that must be understood of an ultimate and final death; otherwise if it be a dispensatory death, as it was to Lazarus and some others; as that did not put a period to their bodily miseries, when they lived again, so neither did it to sinfulness in their souls. But even Lazarus and such like persons raised upon a special economy were regenerated but in part; and this conflict of flesh and Spirit was in them, and so they needed to pray for forgiveness of sinne. But though we must acknowledge, that original sinne hath not the power in a godly man it once had. All the difficulty is, Whether it be by suppression of it one∣ly, or abolishing part of it; and if original sinne be in part diminished, How can the whole of it be propagated to the child? Or why may not the last part of it be consumed in this life? It may be this Question may be more subtil then profitable. Scotus, as Pererius alledgeth him (in Rom. cap. 7.) thinketh that in a godly man original sinne is not at all a∣bated, onely grace is every day augmented, and so that cannot weigh us down, as it did before: As (saith he) if an Eagle should have any weight upon her, but the strength of her wings be increased, then though the weight were not diminished, yet because her strength is increased, it would not hinder her in flying. But to answer this Question, we must conclude, that in regeneration original sinne is more then suppressed, there is a qualitative change, and so a diminishing of darknesse in the mind, by light; of evil in the will by holinesse: So that the encreasing of

these graces do necessarily argue the decreasing of original sinn. And For this purpose the Scripture useth those termes of crucifying and morti∣fying; onely when we say, original sinne is diminished: You must not understand it hath quantative parts, as if they were cut off by degrees, but potestative, that is, the power and efficacy of original sinne is not so lively, so vehement as it was once, yet where it is thus weakned, a regenerate person begetteth a sonne in an unregenerate estate, because he is the sonne of Adam fallen, and is not a father as he is godly, but as he is a man. Now though it doth thus tenaciously adhere unto us, yet death will give it a final and full blow: not death meerly, as it is a dissolution in a na∣tural way (so that Castellio doth absurdly endeavour to perplex this Do∣ctrine with curious interrogatories) but as the nature of it is altered by Christ, the Spirit of God putting forth its greatest efficacy at that time: Yea though a godly man should be so overcome by a disease, that he were not able to act faith in Christ at that time, for the utter sub∣duing of sinne in him, yet his faith formerly put forth on Christ for that pur∣pose, and the promise of God at that time will effectually conquer all. This being so, how ought the godly gladly to submit to death? The terrible vi∣zour of it is now taken away. No vain thoughts, no wordly or distempered affections shall ever molest thee more. It is not death to thee, but to thy sinne. It is not a death to thy graces and comforts, but to thy corruptions, Miseria non home moritur, said the Martyr, when he was to die. It is misery not man that dieth.

CHAP. IV.

Of Death coming upon all men, as another Effect of Original Sinne.

SECT. I.

The Text explained.

1 COR. 15. 22.

For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

THe chief scope of the Apostle in this Chapter (as was former∣ly declared from the 49^th verse) is to establish that funda∣mental and necessary Article of the Resurrection of the dead; which because of the incredibility of it to meer humane rea∣son, was much derided by the Heatheus, and Paul for the preaching thereof, was called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Acts 17. 18. A trifling babler. Hence because of the difficulty to receive this truth, Synesius was ordained Bishop, though as yet not perswaded of the Doctrine, which afterwards by the grace of God towards him, he did ac∣knowledge. Yea it's observed, That the Philosophers when made Christians, received this as the last Article of their Christian faith, because so contrary to those Philosophical principles they had been accustomed unto. The Sadduces also denied this main Article, but they might be supposed to do it upon corrupt grounds futable to their lusts; for being (though not so numerous, nor so applauded for piety by the people, as the Pharisees were, yet) for the most part the richest and most wealthy, they imbraced that opinion, which denied the Resurrection, as being more convenient for their carnal hearts, and that they might with more delight and security give themselves up to this present world. But the Apostle doth here most industriously and powerfully confirm this Doctrine, which if not true, all our Christian Religion would be in vain.

The principal Argument to prove this Doctrine is from the Resurrection of Christ: For the rising as our Head, it necessarily followeth his members should also rise to such glory and immortality. So that Christs Resurrection doth necessarily inferre outs, which made the primitive Christians so affected with it, that in their ordianry salutations, whenmeeting with one another, they did use to say. Christus resurrexit, Christ is risen. For this end, Christ is cal∣led, The first fruit of them that slept, vers. 20. As the first fruits did sanctifie the whole harvest of corn that was afterwards to be gathered: So did Christ

rising, all his members by his Resurrection, assuring them of theirs. Hence it is that the Apostles Arguments are not to prove the Resurrection of wicked men (for they arise upon another account) but onely of the godly who are his members, and have an interest in his mediation.

It is indeed a Dispute, Whether even wicked men do not rise by the virtue of Christs merit, and his Resurrection. Baldwine for determining the negative (in locum.) is traduced by another Lutheran for Popery and Calvinism, as in∣troducing that Doctrine of the particularity of Christs death. But certainly, The wicked mans resurrection is not to be accounted in the number of any mercies, and therefore not merited by Christ. Hence it followeth necessarily, that they rise not by any relation to Christ, but by the power and justice of God, because of that immutable and unchangeable Decree, that every sinner unrepenting shall die both temporally and eternally, which later could not be accom∣plished, unlesse the bodies of wicked men were raised up to life again out of the dust.

Now our Apostle to prove Christ the cause of our Resurrection, draweth an Argument from a comparison between Adam and him, making them two originals and fountains, but of contrary effects, the one of death, the other of life; For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all shall be made alive. Not that all men universally shall be saved by Christ; but the universal particle must be limited according to the subject matter in hand; All that are in Christ, all that are his members shall be made alive by him. And therefore in the next verse it is so limit∣ed, Christ the first-fruits, and afterwards they that are Christs at his coming; So that the sense is, That as all Adams posterity die, because of him, so all that are Christs seed shall live by him. For the expression in Adam, and in Christ, do denote a causality in them, the one of death, the other of life. Therefore we must not think, that the Apostle doth here only make a bare similitude and comparison, shewing that as by Adam we die, so by Christ we shall be made alive, but it's an Argument from the power and causality that is in one to the other.

The Apostle doth in the fifth of the Romans make the like comparison, only there is this difference, as Calvin observeth. In that place the Apostle maketh the comparison chiefly in respect of spiritual effects, death as it brings condem∣nation, and life as it is accompanied with justification here, and glorification hereafter. This Text is greatly agitated in the controversie between Puccius and Socinus, (Vide Disput. de statu primi hominis ante lapsum.) The former holding truly (though he superaddeth many gross errors) that Adam was not made mortal, and that death came in only by sinne: only he goeth absurdly beyond his bounds, when he holdeth the beasts were also made immortal. The later on the contrary he holdeth, That Adam was made mortal, that death in natural, that though by sinne we are under a perpetual necessity of death, (which is an ambiguous phrase he useth) yet death it self is natural; He granteth, That immature and violent death cometh by sinne; but death as it is a meer dissolu∣tion of a person, so it is from his primitive creation and constitution. Therefore be would have this difference between the Text I am upon, and Paul's Discourse in the fifth of the Romans, viz. That there indeed he speaketh of the sinne of Adam, by which we come to die; But here he would have the Apostle consider Adam as he is by Creation, and that being mortal from the beginning we also are mortal from him. But who can perswade himself, that these passages concern∣ing the change of the body hereafter to what it is now? It is sown in corruption, it's raised in corruption, it is sowen in dishonour, it is raised in glory, it is sowen in weaknesse, it is raised in power, are to be understood of our bodies, as at the first Creation, and not as they are now by Adam's fall? Our bodies are made corruptible and vile bodies by reason of sinne. We must then understand the

Apostle as speaking of Adam sinning, though sinne be not here named. So that the fifth of the Romans will excellently illustrate this place; and that ma∣keth the sense to be, That Adam sinning, by his sinne death entered upon all man∣kind, so that death is not natural, neither doth it arise from our first constitution, but it cometh in wholly by sinne.

SECT. II.

Death an Effect of Original Sinne, explained in divers Proposi∣tions.

HAving then heretofore spoken of some spiritual effects of original sinne, (and more might be named, such as a necessity to sinne, an impotency to all good, senslesness and stupidity therein, the aldom to Satan; but I shall pass them by, (as being very proper to the Common-place of Divinity, which is of the grace of God, and mans free-will) and shall proceed to the effects of original sinne that are of another nature, and that is temporal and eternal death. The former effects did so slow from original sinne, as that also they are sinfull proper∣ties in a man, but these are meerly punishments. It is not our sinne that we are sick, that we die, but it is the effect. From the words then we observe this truth and doctrine,

That death cometh upon all mankind, because of our sinne we have originally from Adam. It is true, the Socinian will say, We put more in the Doctrine, then is in the Text; but you heard the comparison used by the Apostle in the fifth of the Romans compared with this, doth necessarily suppose death to be, because of Adam's sinne, not only as imputed unto us, but because thereby we are made inherently sinfull. This truth is of a very vast compasse, but I shall con∣sine my self within as narrow bounds as may be; I shall follow my usual method to explicate this in several Propositions.

¶. 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

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.

¶. 2.

How many wayes a thing may be said to be Immortal; and in which of them man is so.

SEcondly, When we say, God made Adam immortal, and that upon his transgression both himself and his posterity are subjected to a necessity of death, We must rightly understand in what sense he is said to be so. For

1. A thing may be said to be immortal absolutely and essentially, having no principles of death within, nor cannot be destroyed by any cause without. Thus 1 Tim. 6. 16. God is said only to have immortality. This is that comfortable attribute which the people of God make use of under all changes and vicissitudes, God is alwayes the same. Though father die, though mother die, yet God doth not; as one in the Ecclesiastical Story said, when word was brought him, that his father was dead, Desine (saith he) blasphemias loqui, pater enim meus immortalis est, Cease to speak blasphemy for my father is immortal.

2. That may be said to be immortal, which is so by some singular dispensation of God, either in respect of mercy, or of justice; and thus it is with the glori∣fied bodies of the Saints, and the damned bodies of wicked men; for the Saints their vile bodies shall be made like Christs glorious body, they are raised to in∣corruptibility and glory; and as for the bodies of damned persons, though they be raised to reproach and dishonour, yet by Gods justice they are preser∣ved immortal; so that the fire cannot consume them to ashes, neither shall length of time ever destroy them. For if God could make the Israelites cloaths and shoes to last so many years without being consumed, no wonder if he do a greater matter upon the bodies of men.

3. That may be said to be immortal, which by the will of the Creator is so con∣stituted, that being separated from all matter, it hath no principles of dissolution from within. And thus the Angels are immortal, they have no principle of corruption within, yet they are annihilable by the power of God; should God withdraw his preservation of them they would cease to be, but from within they have no cause of dissolution. The Devils also in this sense are immortal, and that is the reason, though many wicked and bloudy persecutors of Gods Church have died, yet the Devil being immortal hath stirred up new ones, which made a good man say to one who did greatly rejoyce at the death of a cruel persecutor, At diabolus non moritur, but the Devil doth not die.

Lastly, A thing may be said to be immortal, Conditionally supposing such and such conditions he performed, and in this sense only we say, God made Adam im∣mortal; for 〈◊〉〈◊〉 had a power to sinne, and so a power to die, he had a power to stand, and to a power to be freed from death. So that we do not say, Adam had such an immortality as the glorified bodies have that cannot die, but con∣ditionally onely. As he had in him power to sinne, so he had a power to de∣prive himself of all happinesse and immortality, which fell out also to our utter undoing. Autin's expression of Posse non mori, and Non posse mori, is known by all. It is not then an absolute, but a conditional immortality we speak of.

¶. 3.

Propos. 3. ALthough we say that God made man immortal, yet we grant, that his body being made of the dust of the earth, and compounded of contrary element, it had therefore a remote power of death. It was mortal in a remote sense, only God making him in such an eminent manner, and for so glorious an end, there was no proxim and immediate disposition to death. God indeed gave Adam his name (whereas Adam imposed a name upon all other creatures, but not himself) and that from the originals he was made of, to teach him humility even in that excellent estate, yet he was not in an immediate disposition to death, When Adam had transgressed Gods Law, though he did not actually die upon it, yet then he was put into a mortal state, having the prepared causes of death with∣in him; but it was not so, while he stood in the state of integrity, then it was an immortal state, now it is a mortal one; I say state, because even now, though Adam hath brought sinne and death upon us, yet in respect of the soul a man may be said to be immortal, but then there was immortality in respect of soul and body, the state he was created in, did require it. So that although death be the King of terrors, yet indeed original sinne, which is the cause of it, should be more terrible unto us. Now man by sinne is fallen, the beasts could they speak would say; Man is become like one of us, yea worse, for he carrieth about with him a sinfull soul, and a mortal body.

¶. 4.

Distinctions about Mortality, and that in several respects Adam may be said to be created mortal and immortal.

THe fourth Proposition is, That from the former premisses, it may be deducted, that in several respects Adam may be said to be created mortal, and immor∣tal; yet if we would speak absolutely to the question, when demanding how Adam was created, we must return, Immortall. Some indeed, because mans mortalilty and immortality depended wholy upon his will, as he did will to sinne, or not to sinne; so they have said he was neither made mortal, or immor∣tal, but capable of either; but that is not to speak consonantly to that excellen∣cy of state which Adam was created in; for as Adam was created righteous, not indifferent, (as the Socinians say,) neither good or bad, but capacious of either qualification; so he was also made immortal, not in a neutral or middle state between mortal and immortal; so that he had inchoate immortality upon his creation, but not consummate or confirmed, without respect to perseverance in his obedience: for the state of integrity was, as it were the beginning of that future state of glory. Again Adam might be called mortal in respect of the or∣ginals of his body being taken out of the dust of the earth, but that was only in a remote power, so God did so adorne him with excellent qualifications in soul and body, that the remote power could never be brought into a proxime and immediate disposition, much less into an actual death, for a thin•• may be said to be mortal, 1. In respect of the matter, and thus indeed Adams body in a remote sence was corruptible.

2. In respect of the forme. Thus Philosophers say sublunary things are cor∣ruptible because the matter of them hath respect to divers formes, whereas they call the heavens incorruptible, because the matter is sufficiently actuated

by one forme, and hath no inclination to another; and thus Adam might truly be said to be immortal, for it was very congruous that a body should be united to the soul that was sutable to it; for that being the form of a man, and having an inclination or appetite to the body, if man had been made mortal at first, the natural appetite would in a great measure have been frustrated, it being for a little season only united to the body, and perpetually ever afterwards sepera∣ted from it: Surely as an Artificer doth not use to put a precious Diamond or Pearl into a leaden Ring; so neither would God at first joyn such a corrupti∣ble body to so glorious and an immortal soul.

3. A thing may be said to be mortal in respect of efficiency: and thus it is plain Adam was not made mortal: for he might through the grace of God assisting have procured immortality to himself; that threatening to Adam, In the day he should eat of that forbidden fruit, he should die the death, Gen. 2, 17. doth plainly demonstrate, that had he not transgressed Gods command, he should never have died.

4. A thing may be said to be mortal in respect of its end; Thus all the beasts of the field, (whatsoever Puccius thought) are mortal, because their end was for man, to serve him; so that it is a wild position to affirm, as he doth, that there shall be a resurrection of beasts, as well as of men, for they were made both in respect of matter, form, and end, altogether mortal, whereas Adam was made after the Image of God, to have communion and fellowship with God, and that for ever, which could not be without immortality.

¶. 5.

Prop. 5. THe true causes of death are only revealed in Gods Word. All Philo∣sophers and Physitians they searched no further then into the prox∣im & immediate causes of death, which are either external or internal; they look∣ed no further; and knew of no other thing, but now by the Word of God, we Christians come to know that there are three principal causes of death; so that had not they been, those intermedious and proxime causes of death had never been: The first cause is only by occasion and temptation, and that was the De∣vil: he tempted our first parents, and thereby was an occasion to let death into the world: for this cause the Devil is called, Joh. 8. 44. a murderer from the beginning; it doth not so much relate to Cain, as to Adams transgression; yet the Scripture Rom. 5. doth not attribute death to the Devil, but to one mans disobedience, because Adams will was not forced by Satan, he had power to have resisted his temptations, only the Devil was the tempting cause. The se∣cond and most proper cause of death was Adams disobedience; so that death is a punishment of that sinne, not a natural consequent of mans constitution. The History of Adam as related by Moses doth evidently confirme this, that there was no footstep of death, till he transgressed Gods Law, and upon that it was most just, that he who had deprived himself of Gods Image, which is the life of the soul. should also be deprived of his soul, which is the life of the body; that as when he rebelled against God, he presently felt an internal rebellion by lusts within, and an external disobedience of all creatures, whom he did rule over before by a pacifical dominion; so also it was just, that he who had de∣prived himself of spiritual life, should also be divested of his natural life. Hence it is that the Apostle informeth us of that, which all the natural wise men of the world were ignorant of, Rom 5. 12. That by one mans sinne, death entred into the world, where the Greek word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, is observed to have its peculiar Empha∣sis, pertransiit sicut lues, even as the rot doth destroy an whole flock of sheep; and therefore at the 14^th Verse the Apostle useth another emphatical ex∣pression,

Death reigned, and that upon those who had not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression: Seeing then by Adams transgression death cometh thus to reign over all mankind, and there would be no justice to have 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in∣flicted, where there is no sinne; it followeth necessarily that every child beco∣meth inherently sinful because internally mortal and corruptible. Thirdly, The third and last cause, is the anger of God justly inflicting this punishment of death upon us; death may be considered in respect of the meritorious cause, and so it is not of God, but of sinne. Secondly in respect of the decre••ing and punishing cause; and this death is from God, as an evil justly inflicted upon man for his sinnes; God inflicts the sentence of death upon us, but sinne de∣serveth it; not that death can properly be caused by God, for that is a priva∣tion, but by removing life, God in taking away life, is thereby said to cause death: Even as when the Sunne is removed from our Hemispere, then darkness doth necessarily follow. These then are the causes of death, but oh how little are they attended unto•• men attributing death to many other causes besides this.

¶. 6.

Prop. 6. VVHen we say that death cometh by original sinne, in that we com∣prehend all deseases pains and miseries, which are as so many inchoate deaths, yea all labour and weariness; for so God threatned Adam, Gen. 2, 17. Cursed is the ground for thy sake: in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the dayes of thy life. In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground: for out of it wast thou taken. In this sentence there is matter enough to humble us; there is not a thistle in thy corn, not a weed in thy gar∣den, but it may put thee in mind of original sinne; yea there is not the least pain or ach of thy body, but this may witness it to thee: so that Austin saith truly, we do circumferre testimonium, &c. We carry about with us daily full evidence to confirme this Doctrine of original sinne: for such evils and cala∣mities as do necessarily follow our specifical nature, accompanying us as men, they cannot be attributed unto any other cause but original sin; which considera∣tion viz. of mankind being universally plunged into miseries, and not knowing the cause thereof, made the Platonists, and some Heretiques conclude, that the soules of men had sinned formerly, and by way of punishment were therefore adjudged to these mortal and wretched bodyes. Though death be only men∣tioned, because that is most terrible, and all other miseries tend thereunto; yet they are necessarily included. Some ask the Question, Why God did not threaten hell, rather then death; but no doubt eternal death is understood in this commination, for temporal and eternal death are the wages of sinne, only death is mentioned as being most terrible to sense, men being more affected with that, then with hell which is believed by faith. The Scripture then men∣tioning death only, how absurd and preposterous are the Socinians, who in that threatning will comprehend any thing but death; death they say cometh from the necessity of that matter we are constituted of, but sickness, labour, and such miseries, as also eternal death, these are the proper fruit of sinne: Thus men delivered up to errour, are hurried from one dangeous precipice to another. But let Christians in all deseases, miseries, and death it self, look higher then the Philosopher, or the Physitian: Let them acquaint themselves with original sinne, and thereupon humble themselves under Gods hand.

¶. 7.

The several Grounds assigned by Schoolmen of Adam's immortality rejected, and some Causes held forth by the Orthodox.

Propos. 7. ALthough it be agreed upon by all, except Socinians and their ad∣herents, that Adam was made immortal at least by grace, and the favour of his Creator; yet there is difference among the Popish Writers, upon what to fasten the ground of his immortality: What was the cause of it, therein they disagree. Some place it in a certain vigor and excellency that was then in the soul, whereby it was able to preserve the body from death: Moli∣na liketh not this, (De opere sex dierum Disput. 28.) and therefore he doth affirm, that the body of Adam was made immortal and impassible, by an habitual gift bestowed upon it, which he saith was a corporeal quality extended through the whole body; Because, saith he, this immortality was not a transient thing, but an en∣during gift, sutable to that state; and God is used to give permanent gifts, not immediately, but by some inherent principle: Even as the glorified bodies are made immortal by some intrinsecal quality accommodated to that state; yea and the bodies of the damned also, though they are immortal, yet they are not impassible, because they are tormented in the flames of hell fire. But Suarez (Lib. 3. de hominis Creatione cap. 14.) doth upon good grounds reject any such supposed corporeal quality, as being without any foundation from the Scrip∣ture, and introducing a miraculous way without necessity. For who can think, that Adam had such an intrinsecal quality in his body, that fire would not burn him? that if he went upon the waters, his body would not sink? Others they attribute his immortality to the tree of life, that was (say they) both alimentum, & medicamentum; as it was both nourishment, so it preserved life; and as it was medicinal, so it did repair that partial abating of natural strength in concoction, which would otherwise in time have come upon man: But this opinion taketh that for granted, which yet is greatly controverted, viz. that it was called the tree of life, as if there had been some active physical power in the fruit thereof to continue a mans life, either for a long time, as some think, or for ever, as others; whether indeed once eating of it, or constant eating was necessary, as opportunity did require, is also debated by curious Authors; for some make it to be called a tree of life, onely Symbolically, as being a signe of eternall life, which Adam should have enjoyed had he continued in obedience. And truly though it should be granted, that there was such a virtue in the tree, yet when Adam had sinned, it would no wayes have helped him, or preserved him from death, because the wages of sinne is death, and therefore would not have produced that in him, which it is supposed that it might have had in Adam's obedience; yet God would cast him out from Para∣dise, lest he should eat of that tree: For it was just that he who had incurred the sentence of death by his transgression, should be deprived of all the signs of life, and symbols of Gods favour. Furthermore this tree of life, was not it self immortal; Would that alwayes have continued? Was not that subject to alterations as well as other trees? How then can mans immortality be attributed to that? Seeing then there is so much uncertainty amongst Schoolmen upon what to place Adam's immortality, the Orthodox do consonantly to Scri∣pture, put it upon these things, concurring as causes to preserve him from death.

The first is, That excellent constitution and harmony of his body, whereby there could not be any humour peccant or excessive. So that from within there would not have sprung any disease. And although in Adam's eating and drinking, being

nourished thereby, there would necessarily have been some alteration in him, by deperdition and restauration, which is in all nourishment; yet that would have been in part onely, not so as to make any total change upon his body.

2. The second cause was, That original righteousnesse which God made him in. For seeing sinne only is the meritorious cause of death, while Adam was thus holy and absolutely free from all sinne, death had no way to enter in upon the body.

3. There was the providence of God in a special manner preserving of him, so that death could not come by any extrinsecal cause upon him. No doubt but Adam's body was vulnerable: a sword if thrust into his heart, would have taken away his life; but such was the peculiar providence of God to him in that condition, that no evil or hurtfull thing could befall him.

Lastly, and above all, Gods appointment and divine ordination, was the main and chief cause of his immortality. For if the Scripture say, (Deut. 8. 3.) in the general, That man liveth not by bread alone, but by every word that com∣eth from the mouth of the Lord, then this was also true in Adam: And if we read of Elias, that he went fourty dayes in the strength of a little bread that he did eat, Is it any wonder, that the appointment of God should work such immunity from death in Adam? Whereas then there are three things about death considerable, the potentia or power, the actus, or death it self, and the necessity, Adam was free from all these; unlesse by power we mean a remote power; for if he had not had this power of dying, then he could not have fal∣len into the necessity of death. Thus you see the excellent constitution of his body, original righteousness, a divine providence, and Gods order and de∣cree therein did sufficiently preserve Adam, not only from actual death, or the necessity of death, or death as a punishment; but also from any disposition, or habitual principle within him of death and it may be from this state of im∣mortality Adam was created. The Poets by 〈◊〉〈◊〉 obscure tradition, had their figments of some meats and drinks which made men immortal; as their Nectar, called so, say some, because when drunk, did make them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, young again; or as others, from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as that which did not suffer them to die. There was also their 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as much as sine mortalitate, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is mortalis. They had also their 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, luctus, because it did expell all sorrow and grief. But to be sure when we compare our mortal, sinfull and wretched estate we are in, with this glorious estate of Adams: What cause have we to humble our selves, to see the sad change that is now come upon us? By this we may see how odious that first transgression was unto God, that for the guilt thereof hath made this world to be a valley of tears, to be like a great Hospital of diseased and miserable men.

SECT. III.

Arguments to prove that through Adam's sinne we are made sinners, and so mortal.

¶. 1.

LEt us proceed to prove our Doctrine, That through Adam sinning we are made sinners, and so mortal, which necessarily supposeth that Adam was made immortal, and that death had nothing to do with mankind, till sinne came into the world.

The first Argument is, From that glorious condition Adam was made in, and also the excellent end he was created for. All which would have been horribly ob∣scured, if death or mortality had then been present. The fears and thoughts of death are a bitter herb in the sweetest dish that is; when of any comfort we have, we may say as the young Prophets to their master, there is mors in ella, death in the pot; death in this or that mercy thou enjoyest, this doth greatly abate our delight. Therefore we read of one of the Kings of France, a Lewis, that forbad all those who attended him, ever to make any mention of death in his ears; that prophane man thought, such a speech would damp his delights. Seeing then Gods purpose was to make a man such an excellent and blessed crea∣ture, can we think he was made mortal, and that it might have been said to him, This night thy soul shall be taken away, and then whose shall this Paradise, and all these goodly enjoyments be? It is the Scriptures designe to aggravate the goodness of God towards man, and to shew the excellency and honour God put upon him. Whereas the Socinians directly oppose this purpose of Gods Spirit, and would make man as miserable as may be. Hence they say, he was created like a meer innocent, that he had not much more knowledge than an Infant, that he had no original righteousness, that he was made mortal. Yea Socinus, (Resp. ad Puc. cap 14 pag. 106.) cavils at the explication of that place, Genes. 2. 8. which is owned by all Interpreters, about the garden in Eden. which God placed Adam in; he would not have any such place of pleasure or delight under∣stood thereby. But although the word may be retained as a proper name, Eden, for so our English Translators do, yet because it cometh of a word that signifieth to delight, Gen. 18. 12. The Church of God hath alwayes intepre∣ted it of a place of delight, yea that Heaven is called Paradise allusively there∣unto; and therefore it's horrible impudency in Socinus to say, that place was not called Eden, when God planted it at first, but in following ages it received that appellation. Thus whereas the Psalmist doth admire the goodness of God, for the honour put upon man at the Creation. This Heretique laboureth to de∣base and diminish it as much as may be.

¶. 2.

ANd if Adam had been made so righteous and glorious, yet subject to death he would have been like that building Paul supposeth, 1 Cor. 3. Whose foundation was of gold and precious stones, but the superstructure hay and stubble: Or like Nebuchadnezzar's Image, which was partly of gold, with other addita∣ments,

and partly of clay; all which would have redounded to the dishonour of God his maker; neither could it so well be said, By one man, (or by the De∣vil) death came into the world, as by God who is supposed to make man in such a mortal and frail estate.

But I proceed to a second Argument, and that may be drawn from the commi∣nation made by God to Adam upon his disobedience, compared with the execution of this sentence afterward, which might be enough to convince any, though never so refractory. The threatning to Adam we have recorded, Gen. 2. 17. where God prohibiting him to eat of the Tree of knowledge of good and evil, con∣firmeth this Law with a penalty (viz.) That in the day he did eat thereof, he should surely die: dying thou shalt die; The gemination is to shew the certainty, as also the continuance or it. So that Socinus and others, who would not un∣derstand corporal death in this place, as being from the natural constitution of a man, and so would have been, had there not been this commination, doth joyn too much with the Devil in this business; for his endeavour was to per∣swade the woman that this threatning was false, and that she should not die, death should not be the punishment of her transgression: But what need we any clearer place then this divine commination? Doth not this necessarily sup∣pose, that if Adam had not transgressed, he should not have died, and so by con∣sequence have been immortal, it being not possible for death to come in at any other door, but that of sinne? To threaten a mortal man with mortality had been absurd, or to make his natral condition a punishment, for then it would have been a punishment to be made a man, if made mortal. The Socinians therefore to elude this, would not understand by death, the separation of the soul and body, but eternal death; or as they say at other times, a necessity of dying; but a necessary death and eternal death are absurdly made parallel by them. For beasts are under a necessity of death, yet cannot be said to partake of eternal death, especially the godly they cannot but die, yet they are abso∣lutely delivered from eternal death. We must therefore take death for corporal death, not but that the death of the soul by sinne here, and eternal separation from God hereafter, is to be included herein, yet this temporal death is also a great part of the penalty here threatned, which may be evinced by these three reasons:

1. Moses is relating in an historical manner, what was done to man in the beginning. Now in an historical Narration, we are not to go from the literal meaning, unless evident necessity compel, much lesse may we do so here, when we have the Apostle acted by the same Spirit of God, as Moses was in being Penman of the Scripture, attributing our corporal death to Adam; For no doubt when Paul wrote this Text, In Adam we all die, he had this historical relation made by Moses in his mind.

2. The sentence and execution of it must be understood in the same manner. Now it's plain, that in the execution of it, mentioned Chap. 3. 19. corporal death is meant, because Adam is thus told, That dust he was, and unto dust he should return.

3. It must be meant of temporal death, because this alone, and not eternal death doth belong to all mankind. For although at the day of judgement, it is said, some shall not die, yet that suddain change made then upon them, will be equivalent to death. Thus you see the threatning made to Adam at first doth abundantly confirm this truth. There is one doubt only to be answered, If death be meant in that sentence, how then is it that Adam did not immediately die? How is it that he lived many hundred years afterwards? To this some say, That the restriction of time, viz. the day, is not to be made to the time of eat∣ing, as if at that day he should die, but to death; as if the sense were, thou shalt die one day or other, thou shalt be in daily fear of death. But if this be

disliked, then we may understand it of a state of death, that day he did eat there∣of he became mortal, for every day is a diminution of our life. As a man that hath received a deadly wound, we say he is a dead man, because though he did linger it out, yet all is in a tendency unto death. Now this will appear the more cogent, if you take notice of the execution of this sentence mentioned, Gen. 3. 17, 18, 19. where the ground is cursed, and man also adjudged to labour and wearness all the dayes of his life, even till he return to the ground out of which he was made. But here the Socinian thinketh he hath an evasion, Death (saith he) is not here made a curse, but only it's the term how long mans curse shall be upon him. It is not poena, but terminus (saith he) for it is said, he should be under this labour, till he did return to the ground; but if we consi∣der the sentence before-mentioned, it is plain, it is a curse. So that in this place it is both a curse, and a terme putting an end to all the temporal miseries of this life, though to the wicked it is the beginning of eternal tor∣ments.

¶. 3.

THe third Argument for our mortality, and also actual death by original sinne, is taken from those assertory places, which do in expresse words say so. Not to mention my sext, which hath said enough to this truth already. We may take notice of other places affirming this. And certainly that passage of Pauls, Rom. 5▪ 12. may presently come into every mans mind, By one man sin entred into the world, and death by sinne, and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned. It is true, we told you Calvin maketh the Apostle to speak of spiritual death here, as in my Text of temporal death, which the coherence also doth confirm; but though that be principally intended, yet not totally. Even temporal death is likewise to be understood, as being the beginning and introduction to eternal death, if the grace of God doth not prevent. We have then the Apostle attributing death not to mans creation at first, but to his diso∣bedience: Neither is this death upon men, because of their actual sinnes, but because of Adam's disobedience by whom we are made sinners, yea in whom we have sinned; That 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is diversly translated, and much contention about it, viz. whether it should be rendred in whom, or causally, for as much? It is true, the Preposition 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as learned men observe, is used in the New Testament vari∣ously, sometimes for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Luke 5. 5. sometimes for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Luke 10. 9. sometimes for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Acts 3. 16. and otherwise; but for ought I can observe it may very well be understood for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as Mark 2. 4. & Luke 2. 25. The Scripture useth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for quatentus, as Rom. 11. 13. And indeed this is most consonant to the Apostles scope; for why should Adam's sinne be brought in rather than other parents? Were it not that we were considered in him under a common respect, as one with him. It is true Erasmus saith, he doth not remember that ever he read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 with a Dative case; but Heb. 9. 17. may confute him. And among prophane Authors, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, neither can 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Matth. 26. 50. be said by most men to signifie in as much. For as De Dieu observeth the postpositive, is for the demonstrative, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Art thou come for this? as the other Evangelists, Dost thou betray the sonne of man with a kisse? Although if we should render it causa••ly, as the adversaries contend, it would no wayes prejudice the truth we plead for; seeing that the sinne here charged upon all mankind, is, because of Adam. And therefore if we will make any rational coherence in the Apostles discourse, it must be after this manner, As by one man sinne entered into the world, and death by sinne, and so death passed upon all men,

as much as all have sinned, that is, all sinned in that one man, for what sense it is to say, That by one man sinne and death entred upon all, because all sinned in themselves? This would be a contradiction to lay the death of mankind upon Adam's sinne, and upon all mens actual sinnes likewise: Yea, it is wholly re∣pugnant to the Apostles scope, who is comparing Adam and Christ not simply as two originals and beginnings, but as two causes of death and life. In∣deed I would not much contend with any, that would render the word causally, and so make the verse an whole entire proposition in it self, without any defective expression at all; so that we understand all mens sinning to be interpreted of that which they are guilty of in Adam. It is not worth time to take notice of the wild Divinity imposed upon this Discourse of Pauls, by the late Writer, (Ʋnum Necessar. pag. 365) who would have Death come upon mankind occasionally onely by Adam's sinne, and that but till Moses his time, and after Moses to come upon a new account, by the Law promulged through his ministry. The mentioning of this is confutation enough: for here in this Text the Apostle doth make all mankind to die, because of A∣dam: And why may not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 here be the same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the Text.

Another Text witnessing this truth is, Rom. 6. 23. The wages of sinne is death Here death is not taken only for eternal death as the Socinians say, because the opposite unto it is made eternal life, but for both kinds of death eternal and tem∣poral; temporal death being the in-let of eternal, and so contrary to eternal life. Neither is that cavil of their worth any thing, who would make the wa∣ges of sinne to be the Subject, and not the Predicate, because the Article 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is put to it; but that is no sure Rule. Sometimes the Article is put to the Predicate, for some emphasis sake, and not the Subject, as I Cor. 9. 1. Are not ye 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 my work in the Lord? Are ye not that eminent and conspi∣cuous singular work of mine in the Lord? We see then, what it is that sinne deserveth, even temporal and eternal death; it cometh not from mans primi∣tive constitution, but Adam's transgression. Therefore it is that we deserve many thousand deaths, if it were possible; for original sinne deserveth death, every actual sinne deserveth death, yea and hell also: Oh how miserable is man, who thus deserveth to die, and to be damned over and over again! Therefore the Apostle useth the plural number, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to signifie the manifold evils that are in this death. The word properly signifieth that meat, which was allowed souldiers for their service in warre. We see then how fearfull we all are to be of sinne; What wages wilt thou have for every pleasant, every profitable sinne? even death temporal and eternal.

The last Text I shall mention is, that which Austin so much urgeth in this point, Rom. 8. 10. The body is dead because of sinne, which is chiefly to be un∣derstood of our mortal body; now he saith it's dead, because of the sentence of death passed it, so that there is no way to escape it. It is sinne then that maketh the body in a state of death, that deserveth the whole harmony and good temperament of the body should be dissolved, and therby follow a disso∣lution of the whole man. For though sinne deserve death, yet there must be thereby some ataxy or disorder made in the body of a man, otherwise death would not follow. So that though sinne be the meritorious cause, yet several diseases the effect of sinne, do actually cause death. Not that sinne maketh a substantial change in a man, but an accidental only. Thus you see the Scripture constantly attributing death, yea and our mortality and corruptibility to sinne onely, and not to our natural constitution. Therefore those are strange posi∣tions we meet with (Ʋnum Necessar. cap. 6. Sect. 1. pag. 371, 372.)

That death came in not by any new sentence or change of nature, for man was created mortal, and that if Adam had not sinned, he should have been immortal by grace, that is by the use of the tree of life. That to die is a pu∣nishment

to some, to others not. It was a punishment to all that sinned be∣fore Moses and since, upon the first it fell as a consequent of Gods anger upon Adam, upon the later it fell as a consequent of that anger which was threatned in Moses Law; but to those who sinned not at all, as Infants and Ideots, it was meerly a condition of their nature, and no more a punishment, then to be a child, is.

But seeing he professeth himself to be of the same judgement with his incomparable Grotius, let him consider how these positions agree with him, who doth against Socinus industriously and solidly prove, (De∣fens. fid. de satisfac. cap. 1. pag. 19, 20, 21.) that death hath alwayes some re∣spect of a punishment, instancing in the Texts I have mentioned, using such words, Quidclarius? Quis vel verba legens non videat hanc sententiam, and Corinthians (the words of my Text) and an ad anussim respondereisti ad Romanos? Yea he concludeth,

That it were easie to prove, that it was the perpetual judg∣ment of the ancient Jews and Christians, that death of whatsoever kind it be, (viz. whether with violence, or without violence) was the punishment of sinne, adding, that the Christian Emperors did deservedly condemn, beside other things, this opinion of Pelagians, that they held mortem non ex insidiis fluxisse peccati, sed exegisse eam legem immutabilis constituti.

And indeed, if death were not the effect of sinne, but consequent of mans nature it would be no evil, whereas the Scripture accounteth it of that nature, as Deut. 30. 15. See I have set before thee this day, life and good, and death, and evil.

SECT. IV.

Arguments brought to prove, that Adam was made mortal, an∣swered.

THe next work to be done, is to consider those Arguments which they bring to prove, that Adam was made mortal, and so had a proxim principle of death in him, which would have taken effect, if God did not provide some way against it, and that which is used by all Adversaries to this truth, is, Because Adam was created in such a condition, that be must necessarily eat and drink, yea and was also to propagate children; all which actions do contradict immortality. For he that eateth and drinketh, must by degrees have a decay in nature; and our Savi∣our seemeth to prove immortality from this argument, Luk. 20. 35, 36. because in heaven they shall not marry, so that to procreate children is not consistent with such a blessed estate.

But these Objections are easily answered, if we remember the distinction at first given in this point, that there is an immortality absolute and immutable, or conditional and changeable upon supposition. Now it's true, neither eating or marrying can consist with unchangeable mortality with immortality of glo∣ry, But it may very well consist with conditional immortality, that is in tendency to that which is absolute. Eating and drinking in the state of integrity was a means subserving to keep up the state of immortality, so farre was it from repugning of it, This therefore is the root of his errour, that men apprehend no other immortality, but what is compleat; that unless Adam had been made in the same estate, that the glorified Saints are put into, he could not be said to be immortal.

Secondly, They say, Adam is said to be earthly, and of the earth, to have a natural body, and so opposite to that immortal body, we shall have in heaven, 1 Cor. 15. 47. But first when the Apostle giveth those names to our bodies of vile,

corruptible, and to be in dishonour, this is to be understood of our bodies after the fall, they are made so through sinne. It would be derogatory to God, to say they were made such at first. It is true, the first man is said to be earthy, but that expression denoteth only the original of his body, whence it was first made; not the state he was created in, as appeareth by the opposite; the second man is said to be the Lord from Heaven. It is one thing then to speak of Adam's body in respect of its original, and another to speak of the whole person in respect of his condition.

Thirdly, They say, All the internal causes of death were in Adam, while standing, as well as fallen; and therefore he was mortal as well as we. To this we answer, there were indeed the causes of death in him materially, but not formally, for the bodily humours were not peccant, either in quality, or quan∣tity; the natural heat would not have consumed the radical moisture, so that in that estate there would never have been formally existent the proxim causes of death: besides the adequate and principal causes of death, are the Devils suggesti∣ons and mans transgression, as you heard.

Fourthly, They ask, If man were not made mortal, why should immorta∣lity be promised as a reward, if he had it already? Why should it be promi∣sed him upon his obedience? The answer is easie, Adam's immortality was inchoate onely; the consummation of it was promised as a reward to his obedience.

Lastly, They object, If death be the punishment of sinne, then Christ hath freed believers from this death, which is against experience. But

1. The Socinians grant, That a necessity of death is the fruit of sinne, yet Christ hath not freed us from the necessity of it, no more than the natura∣lity of it.

2. We must distinguish between an actual abolition of death, and the right to do it. Christ hath purchased for us a right to immortality, yet the actual investing of us into it, is to be done in its time, Death will be swallowed up in vi∣ctory; and for the present, the nature of death is changed, as to a godly man; it's no more a curse to him, the sting of death is taken away, as when a Ser∣pent or Wasp have lost their sting, they can do no more hurt, Thus to the godly it cannot do any hurt. It is like Elijah's fiery chariot, to carry them to Heaven, It's like passing through the red Sea into the Land of Canaan; thus as the cloud was full of darkness to the Aegyptian, but light to the Israelite; so is death full of terrour, and of curses to an ungodly man, but pleasant and lovely to a godly man; it is his gain to die; To live in this world is his losse and disadvantage.

SECT. V.

Q. Whether Adam's sinne was only an occasion of Gods punishing all mankind, resolved against D. J. T.

I Shall conclude this Text with answering a two-fold Question; The full dis∣cussing whereof may inform us about the most secret and mysterious truths that are in this point. And

First, It may be demanded, That suppose it be granted, that by Adam we die, may not this be understood any more than occasionally? God was so displeased with Adam for his transgression, that thereupon he insticts the curse threatned to him upon his posterity. Even as we read often in Scripture, that God for Magistrates sins,

or for parents sins doth take an occasion to punish a people or children for their own sinnes. Thus it may be thought, that God by occasion from Adam's transgression, did impose on us for our sinnes the same curse that was denounced to Adam; not that we were sinners in him, not that we come into the world with any inherent sinne, but because of our actual impieties, God punisheth us with Adam's curse.

In this manner the late adversary to original sinne doth explicate himself. (An Answer to a Letter, pag. 30, 31, 32.) as if this were all the evil by Adam, that for his sake our sinnes inherit the curse. Insomuch (saith he) that it is not so properly to be called original sinne, as an original curse upon our sinne. That we may not be deceived in his mean∣ing (though it is very difficult to reconcile himself with himself) For at ano∣ther time he saith, The dissolution of the soul and holy should have been, if Adam had not sinned: for the world would have been too little to have entertained the ••yriads of men, which would have been born, (An Answer to a Letter p. 86, 87) Now how Adam's sinne should bring in the sentence of death, as he saith in another place, (Vnum Necessar. cap. 6. sect. 1. pag. 367.) and yet he have died, though he had not sinned, is impossible to reconcile.) He giveth us two similitudes or parallel expressions, which may demonstrate how it stands between Adam and as.

The first is, Psal. 106. 32, 33. They angred him also at the waters of strife, so that it went ill with Moses for their sakes. Because they provoked his Spirit, so that he spake unadvisedly with his lips. Here was (saith he) plainly a traouction of evil from the Nation to Moses their relative; for their sakes he was punished, but yet forasmuch as Moses himself had sinned. But surely we may here say, Behold a new thing under the Sunne. This was scarce ever heard of before in the Church of God, so that it 〈◊〉〈◊〉 too much honour to it, to confute it; yet some∣thing must be said, lest words prevail, and similitudes, when reasons cannot. Not to meddle with any large explication of that passage in the Psalm; If we consult with Bellarmize and Genebrard, this place will no wayes serve his turn. For Bellarmine (inlocum.) would have the 33. verse not to contain any sinne of Moses, as it he spake unadvisedly with his lips, but referreth that to Gods Decree or Purpose pronounced by his mouth, which was to destroy the Nations, as it followeth in the next verse; which they did not do, affirming the Hebrew word cannot be applied to an unadvised speaking, or as it is rendred by some, ambiguous and doubtfull: Neither is it in the Text that God punished Moses for their sakes, but as our Translators, It went ill with Moses for their sakes; And this translation Genebrard taketh notice of, as following the Hebrew, ad∣ding, that some expound it, not of any punishment God inflicted upon Mo∣ses, but of that vexation, trouble and grief which he had, because of their murmurings and rebellings against him. And it this be so, then here is not so much room for his opinion, as to set the sole of its feet. But let it be granted, That Moses was occasionally punished by the Israelites rebellion for his own sinne: For who can deny but that God doth sometimes take an occasion from some mens sinnes to punish others for their own sinnes, as the Hebrews have a saying, especially when related to one another, That in every punishment they undergo, there is an ounce of that Calf, which Aaron made, as if God did from that, take an occasion to punish the Israelites for their other transgressions; yet this is no parallel to our case in hand; for here the Israelites were an occasion to make Moses sinne, for which God was so angry with him, that he was not suffered to enter into the Land of Canan. But we are now speaking of men, who are punished by death, that yet never were occasioned to sinne by Adam, in the Adversaries sense. For the people of Israel were present with Moses, and by their froward carriages did provoke him to that sinfull passion; but A∣dam hath been dead some thousands of years since. Who can say, It is Adam

that stirreth me up, it is Adam that will not let me alone, but compelleth me to sinne? Yea, how can Heathens and Pagans be said to sinne occasionally by Adam, when they (happily) never heard that there was such a man in the world? Besides, Infants they are subject to death, What actual sinne doth Adam produce the occasion of to them? If then Adam were now alive, and Infants could be tempted to actual sinnes, as Meses was by the Israelites, then there had been more probability of his instance.

But it may be his second example will be more commensurated to our pur∣pose, and that is from 1 King. 14 16. where it's said, God would give Israel up, because of the sinnes of Jeroboam, who did sinne, and made Israel to sinne. Thus saith he, alluding to the words of the Apostle, By one man (Jeroboam) sinne went out into all (Israel) and the curse, captivity or death by sinne; and so death went upon all men (of Israel) inasmuch as all men (of Israel) have sinned. But this is wholly to give up the cause to Pelagians, whose glosse yet of imitation he utterly rejecteth, though much more that which affirmeth, we are made pro∣perly and formally sinners by him. (Answer to a Letter, pag. 54.) For how did Jereboam make all Israel sinne? was not by his example, and in the fame sinne of Idolatry, as he did? Now do we follow Adam in eating of the for bidden fruit, and so offend God in the same sinne as he did? So that this was wholly by imitation; and therefore one generation did transmit this sinne to anotherly example, till at last there was no more mention of it. But did Adam thus offend, and then Cain and others follow him in the like sinne? He cannot then wash his hands from the Pelagian Doctrine of original sinne from Adam, only by imitation, if he adhere to this inftance. Again Jeroboam is said to make Israel sinne for some time only, while his memory and example had some influence, and it was the sinne of the Israelites only, for many separated themselves from him, and went into the kingdom of Judah, that so they might not be polluted with that worship, as appeareth, 1 Chron. 11. 14. 16. whereas Adam's sinne bringeth death upon all mankind, and this will endure to the end of the world; for the Apostle saith in the Text, In Adam all die. Besides, This Author gresly contradicts himself; for at one time, he saith,

God was s•• angry for Adam's sinne, that he indeed punished men with death, yet but till Moses his time, and then death came upon a new accout. At other times he makes it a punishment of all men, because of Adam's sinne.

And indeed the Text we are upon doth evidently enforce this.

Furthermore, Death is said to reign over all markind, to passe on all; and are not Infants part of the world? It is true, he saith, Children and Ideots that cannot commit actual sinnes, death is no punishment to them, they die in their nature; but if there had been no sinne, how could there have been ideots, and children that die in their Infancy? Certainly, that must be an immature death. Now although it be said, That death is a conlequent of nature, yet immature death must needs be a punishment of sinne; for so this Auther an∣swereth that Text, Death is the wages of sinne;

The Apostle (saith he) pri∣marily and ••terally means the solemn••••es, and causes, and infelicines, and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of temporal death, and not meerly the dissolution, which is direct, no evil, but an in let to a better state.

(Answ. to a Letter, pag. 87▪)

〈…〉〈…〉 this discourse of the occasionality of death by Adam's sinne, is 〈…〉〈…〉 meer non-us, and fancy of his own, will appear by the opposite to Adam 〈◊〉〈◊〉 comparision with Christ. What was Christ onely the occasion of our righteousness and life? Did God from Christs obedience take the occasion only 〈…〉〈…〉 us for our own obedience? who seeth not the absurdity of this? Though therefore he doth super••••••usly overlook Calvin, Knox and the Scoich Presbyterics in this point; yet I suppose he will bearken with more reve∣rence

to what the late Annotatour saith in this matter, Annotat in cap. 5. of the Romans.) for in his paraphrase on the 12 Verse, he makes death and mortality to come upon all men by Adam's disobedience, because all that were born after were sinners, that is born after the likeness and image of Adam; And again on Verse 14, death came on the world, because all men are Adam's posterity, and begotten after the image and similitude of a sinful parent. By this we see the cause of death is put upon that image and likeness we are now born in, to our sinful parent, which is nothing els but our original corruption. Let not this consideration of our sinful soules and mortal bodies, pass away before it hath wrought some af∣fectionate influence upon our soules; Cogita temcrtuum brevi moriturum: Every pain, every ••ch is a memento to esse hominem. That is an effectual ex∣pression of Job cap. 17. 14. I said to corruption thou art my father, and to the worm thou art my mother and sister: You see your alliance and kindred, though never so great; it is your brother-worm your sister-worm: Job giveth the wormes this title, because his body was shortly to be consumed by them, and thereby a most intimate conjunction with them would follow; Post Genesim sequitur Exodui, was an elegant allusion of one of the Ancients; yea the life that we do live, is so full of miseries, that Solomon accounteth it better not to have been born; and the Heathen said, Quem Deus amat moritur juvenis, which should humble us under the cause of this sinne.

SECT. VI.

Q. Whether Death may not be attributed to mans constitution conside∣red in his meer naturalls.

I Proceed to the second and last Question, which is; May not death be attri∣buted to mans constitution considered in his meer naturals? Is there not a mid∣dle state to be conceived between a state of grace and sinne, viz. a state of pure natu∣rals; by which death would have come upon mankind, though there had been no sinne at all? This indeed is the sigment of some Popish Writers, who make Adam upon his transgression to be deprived of his supernaturals, and so cast into his naturals; although generally with the Papists, this state of pure naturals is but in the imagination only; they dispute of such things as possible, but de facto, they say man was created in holiness, and after his fall he was plunged into ori∣ginal sinne. Now the Socinians they do peremptorily dispute for this condition of meer naturals, de facto, that Adam was created a meer man without either sinne or holiness, but in a middle neutral way, being capable of either as his free will should determine him. This state of meer nature is likewise a very pleasing Doctrine to the late Writer so oftern mentioned, it helpeth him in many difficul∣ties;

Death passed upon all men, that is the generality of mankind, all that lived in their sinne: The others that died before, died in their nature, not in their sinne, neither Adam's nor their own, save only that Adam brought it upon them, or rather lest it to them, himself being disrobed of all that which could hinder it.

Thus he. (Answer to a Letter pag. 49.) This is consonant to those who say (as Bellarmine and others) that man fallen and man standing differ as a cloathed and and naked man; Adam was cloathed with grace, and other supernatural endowments, but when sinning, he was divested of all these, and so left naked in his meer natural. Thus they hold this state of meer naturals to be a state of negation, not privation, God taking from man, not that which was a connatural perfection to him, but what was meerly gratuitous: The late Writer useth this comperison of Moses his face shining, and then afterwards the with∣drawing of this lustre.

Now as Moses his face had the natural perfection of a

face, though the glorious superadditaments were removed; thus it is with man, though fallen, he hath his meer naturals still, and so is not in a death of sinne, or necessity of transgressing the Law of God; but though without the aid of supernaturals he cannot obtain the kingome of heaven, yet by these pure naturals he is free in his birth from any sinful pollution, saith the known Adversary to this truth.

Thus he that calleth original sinne a meer non ens, he layeth the foundation of his Discourse upon a meer non entity; Now if you ask what cometh to man by these meer naturals, he will answer death,

Yea that which is remarkable, is the long Catalogue of many sad imperfections con∣taining three or four Pages that is brought in by him, (Vnum Necessar. cap. 6. Sect. 7.) a great part whereof he saith is our natural impotency, and the other brought in by our own folly; As for that which is our natural impotency, man being thereby in body and soul so imperfect, it is (he saith) as if a man should describe the condition of a Mole, or a Bat;

concerning whose imper∣fections no other cause is to be enquired of, but the Will of God, who giveth his gifts as he pleaseth, and is unjust to no man, by giving or not giving any certain proportion of good things.

To the same purpose he speaketh also in another place, (further explicat. pag. 475.) Adam's sinne left us in pure naturals, dis∣robed of such aides extraordinary as Adam had:

But certainly there are few Readers, who shall consider what is by him made to be the natural impotency of man in soul and body; but must conclude he is most injurious to the goodness, wisdomè, and justice of God, in making man of such miserable pure naturals; yea that it is a position worse then Manicheisme; for the Manichees seeing such evils upon mankind, attributed them to some evil principle: but this man lay∣eth all upon the good and most holy God; It is Gods will alone, not mans in∣herent corruption, that exposeth him to so many unspeakable imperfections. It is well observed by Jansenius, who hath one Book only de statu purae nature, opposing the Jesuites and old Schoolmen in their sigment upon a state of meer naturals, that this opinion was brought into the Church of God, out of Ari∣stotle, and that it is the principles of his Philosophy, which have thus obscured the true Doctrine of original sinne. I shall breifly lay down some Arguments against any such supposed condition of meer nature; from whence they say we have ignorance in the mind, rebellion against the Spirit, and also death it self, but without sinne. And

Arg. 1. The first is grounded upon a rule in reason, That every subject capable of two immediate contraries, must necessarily have one, or the other. A man must either be sick or well, either alive or dead, there is no middle estate between them; thus it is with man, he must either be holy or sinful, he must either be in a state of grace, or a state of iniquity: The Scripture giveth not the least hint of any such pure naturals. Indeed a man may in a metaphysical manner have abstracted thoughts of man, neither considering him as good or evil: in which sense it is disputed between Junius and Arminius, whether man in his meer naturals, or in a common consideration, as man, neither looked upon as good or evil, be the object of predestination: but if we speak of existency, then there ne∣ver was, or will be a man, but either must be a good tree or bad: for in such a susceptive subject, one of the immediate contraryes must needs inexist.

Secondly, The Scripture speaketh of mans condition since Adam's fall, as a state of privation not negation; When David confessed he was born in sinne, Credo (saith learned Davenant on Col. cap. 2. 2.) hac verba non ferent commentum Jesuiticum, in pur is naturalibus conceptus sum, &c. for the Word of God descri∣beth us as blinded in our mind, that we are dead in sinne, that we have a stony heart: all which argue that we have only impure naturals.

Thirdly, To hold death, diseases, and soul miseries, such as grief, ignorance, difficulty to do good, &c. consequentiall of nature is to attribute cruelty and injustice

to God. This Austin of old urged the Pelagians with, How can an Infant new born be exposed to such miseries, if there be no sinne deserving of it? What God may do to an innocent creature, how farre he may afflict him per modum simplicis cruciatus, though not poenae, by his sovereign dominion, is not here to be disputed? It is certain all these miseries of mankind are by the Scri∣pture attributed to sinne; and shall we have such hard thoughts of God, that the world shall be full of miseries before sinne?

4. Man as he is a man hath an inward desire to be happy, and God onely can be the happiness of a rational soul. There is by nature an imbred desire to an ultimate end, and therefore that God at first planted in man such an appetite, vouchsafed him also a power to obtain this end. So that as we cannot conceive a man made at first without an inclination to this happiness, so neither without inherent qua∣lifications that would dispose him thereunto; and this maketh any such state of pure naturals to be an impossible thing: for then God would not be the ultimate end of such a man. And whereas the Schoolmen have brought in a distinction of finis naturalis and supernaturalis, of amor naturalis and supernaturalis, that God is the natural end, but not supernatural; that he may be loved with a na∣tural love or supernatural: These are meer cobwebs and niceties; for God is the ultimate end of man from his creation; and as the creatures were made for man, so man for God: neither can man love God, but by the help of Gods Spirit; even Adam in his integrity was inabled to love God, by his grace assisting of him, and he that doth not love God upon such motives, as the Scripture re∣quireth, sinneth, and so this amor naturalis is no more than a sinne; it is cupidi∣tas, not charitas; it is not a loving of God, as he ought to be loved.

Lastly, This opinion of a third estate of meer naturals between holiness and sinne, must necessarily infer a third place after death, that is neither heaven or hell. For I would ask this Writer, whether one dying in his nature doth go to Heaven? he cannot, for he hath no holiness; to hell he cannot, because he hath no sin. This puzzleth him exceedingly (Furth. Explic. p. 471.) for though he is favourable to that opinion of a third place, yet he dare not determine of any such thing. To be sure the Scripture is clear enough, that there are only two places after a mans death, that are our receptacles, either heaven or hell. This may suffice to inform our judgements herein.

Let us hear something from this that may affect our hearts; for more is to be spoken to this point in the ensuing Discourse. Is all mankind thus sentenced to death? Are we as so many dead corpse? This should humble us, and make us low in our eyes; though a rich man, though a great man, yet a mortal man. Xerxes that potent King, looking from an high hill upon his numerous Army, fell a weeping, while he thought that within an hundred years there would not be one of them left: Oh (saith Hicrom in allusion to this) that we could get up into some high Tower, and behold all the Kingdoms and Nations in the world, with every Inhabitant therin, and then consider that within a short time, there will not be one left! Mankind runneth in a torrent, one generation passeth away, and another succeedeth, yet how do these Ants busie themselves upon the earth, as if they were immortal? As men in a ship, whether they sit or stand, they are still draw∣ing nigh to the haven. Thus it is with us, whether eating, drinking, buying or selling, we are hastening to the grave. Hence

In the second place, prepare and provide for death; happy is that man upon whom it may be said, he doth patienter vivere & delectabiliter mori, live patient∣ly, but die with delight. Think every day, yea hour, that is said to thee, which was to Hezekiah, Set thy house (and much more thy soul) in order, for thou shalt die, and not live; for though we die, yet our sins, nor our good and holy works die not, but will go to the grave with us, will go to hell, or to Heaven with us.

CHAP. V.

Eternal Damnation, another Effect of Original Sinne.

SECT. I.

What is meant by Wrath in this Text.

EPHES. 2. 3.

And were by nature the children of wrath as well as others.

AS I began this Subject of original sinne with the Text in hand, so I shall conclude with it. My purpose in re-assuming of it, is to treat of the last and most dreadfull effect of our native polluti∣on, which is, The desert of everlasting damnation. From this alone had we no actual sins, we are made heirs of Gods wrath, as this verse doth fully evince.

I shall not insist upon the Coherence and Explication of the words, that work is done already. I shall only adde some observable particulars that were not formerly taken notice of, and that will be done in answering of two Que∣stions,

1. What is meant by wrath here? And

2. What is meant by nature?

For the first, no doubt we are to mean Gods wrath; Therefore Tertullian's Exposition of this place is singular and much forced; he understands wrath here subjectively, as if it were mans wrath, making the sense to be. We are all by nature subject to passions, especially that of anger is predominant. When it is said (Lib. 3. de anima, cap. 16. saith he) that we were by nature the children of wrath, ••rationale indignativum suggillat, &c. he reproveth that irrational anger we are subject to, which is not nature, as it cometh from God, but of that which the Devil hath brought in. Tertullian affirming these three parts or powers of the soul, the rational, the irascible, and the concupiscible, which he calleth indignativum & concupiscentivum. In the irascible, he speaketh of a good indignation, and an evil one, applying this Text to the later. Cerda his Commentator illustrating this, saith, Tertullian's meaning is,

That we are by nature children to our passions, we are not at our own disposing, we are under their power; adding, That Paul mentioneth wrath rather than any other affection, because of that anger and fury, by which he once persecuted the Church of God. Thus he mentioning also another Exposition, That by anger is to be understood the Devil, who may so be called, because of the

cruelty he exerciseth upon men:

but this is so improbable that it needeth no refutation. The wrath then, is Gods wrath, which like himself is infinite, and the effects thereof intollerable; So that it is as much as to be Children of hell, children of everlasting damnation, even whatsoever the wrath of God may bring upon a man in this world, and the world to come.

SECT. II.

What is meant by Nature.

THe second Question is, What is meant by Nature? As for those who would have it to signifie no more then prorstus and vere, altogether or indeed, we have heretofore confuted; yet granting that this is part of the lease, but not the principal. For we are to take nature here for our birth-descent, as ap∣peareth partly, because the Apostle useth the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which doth more properly relate to our nativity, whereas before he calleth the children of diso∣bedience 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 partly, because the Apostles order is observable; for in the ori∣ginal it is, We were children by nature of anger, that is, natural children oppo∣sed to adopted ones; and partly, because the Iews pretended holiness by their nativity, because they were the seed of Abraham; which pride the Apostle would here abate, making them equal herein to the Heathen Idolaters. Nei∣ther by nature are we to understand custome only, as if the Apostle meant by it the constant custome of our actual iniquities, which useth to be called a second nature, we are made children of wrath; for the Apostle doth no where use the word so, no not in that place, 1 Cor. 11. 14. Doth not nature 〈◊〉〈◊〉 you? &c. For nature is taken both for the first principles, and also the immediate conclu∣sions deduced from them, which later the Apostle doth call nature. Therefore it is matter of wonder, that the late Annotator in his paraphrase on Ephes. 2. should take in the orthodox sense (viz. And were born, and lived, and continu∣ed in a damning condition, as all other Heathens did (observe that, born in a dam∣ning condition) should yet referre to his notes, on 1 Cor. 11. where he seem∣eth to contradict any such birth-damnation, from this of the 2^d to the Ephesians: For he would understand 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of the national custome of Idolatry amongst the Heathens; and if so then 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is not to relate to our nativity or birth, as some translate it, which he also noteth in the margin. But though custome may be called nature, yet there is commonly some limiting expression; as when he quoteth out of Galen, that customs are acquired natures, or out of Aristotle, custome is like nature: Here are restrictive expressions, whereas Paul speaketh absolutely. And as for that instance which the learned Annotator hath out of Suidas, which the late Writer maketh use of for the corrupting of this Text, (Ʋnum Necessar. cap. 6. Sect. 2.) it doth very fairly make against them. For Suidas upon the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 inlarging himself, and particularly making it to sig∣nifie the principle of motion, and rest of a thing, essentially and not by acci∣dent (alluding happily to Aristotles definition) doth after this, adde, But when the Apostle saith we we were by nature the children of wrath, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, he doth not speak of nature in this sense, because this would be the fault of him that created us. All which is very true, and doth di∣rectly oppose Manicheism; We do not say, there is any evil nature, or that the primordials of our nature were thus corrupted. They that hold pure natu∣rals cannot answer this reason of Suidas, it doth militate against them. But we affirm this corruption of our nature came in by Adam's voluntary transgressi∣on. So that in this sense we call it naturale malum, as Austin; and quodammod••

naturale, as Tertullian. So Suidas his meaning seemeth to be, That the wrath of God is not naturally due to us, as the creatures have their natural principles of motion and rest within them; but that Suidas doth not by nature wholly mean an evil custome, appeareth, in that he saith, two things are implied in this expression:

The first is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, an in dwelling abiding evil affection (by which we may very genuinely understand; that innate corruption in us, that sinne which dwelleth in us.) And

The second is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, A continual and wicked custome. These are not to be confounded as the same thing, but one is the cause of the other. Original sinne is that evil, in-dwelling affection; from whence proceedeth evil customs in sin. But it is not worth the while to examine, what the opinion of Suidas was in this particular. Varinus doth better discourse upon the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, making it to be the individual property of a thing, as the fire to burn, and saith, it differeth from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: for this is the essence of a thing, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the power or efficacy of a thing; and thus from him we may say, ori∣ginal sinne is not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, though still we must remember, that it is not a primordial, but a contracted property. It's made so upon Adam's trans∣gression.

SECT. III.

That by nature through the original sinne we are born in, all are heirs of Gods wrath, all are obnoxious to eternal damnation.

NOw my purpose is to insist chiefly upon the Predicate in ths Propositon, We are children of Wrath, and that by nature, even of Gods wrath. So that thus Text doth contain the heavy doom of all mankind. For it's observed to be the form of speech, which the Jewish Judges used, when they passed sentence upon any capital offenders, to pronounce, That such were the sons of death. From hence we may observe,

That by nature, through the original sinne we are born in, all are heirs of Gods wrath, all are obnoxious to eternal damnation. This is the most bitter herb in all this discourse of original sinne. Here all the adversaries to it, seem to be most impatient, when you utter such words as these, by nature deserving damnation as soon as ever we are born, before any actual sinne committed, it is just with God to throw us into hell, that every Infant is obnoxious to this vengeance: At these words they are ready to rend their garments, and to say, we have spo∣ken blasphemy. The late Writer will in some sense (though in effect it be none at all) grant that Adam's sinne may be imputed to us for some temporal evils, but that the effect of it should be to put us into a state of eternal condemnation: This seemeth horrid to him. But who may let his heart work in pitifull thoughts against Scripture affirmations? Why should not all say, it agreeth not with the mercy of God, that men should for ever lie roaring in hell, for the sins com∣mitted here in a transient manner? But of this in its time. We must judge of God by Scripture-light, not by our humane affections. And as Gregory saith well, He that cannot find out a reason of Gods doings, may easily find in himself a reason, why he cannot find it out. This Text doth clearly declare the condition of all mankind by nature, and therefore it must be for original sinne, and not actual, we have also the Apostle Rom. 5. 16. in that comparison between the first Adam and the second fully establishing this, The judgement was of one

(saith he) to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences to justification: here we see attributed to this sinne, not onely 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, judgement and condemnation, which cannot be limited onely to temporal curses, because condemnation is opposite to justification, and to eternal life through Christ: Yea that Text Rom. 3. 19. may like an oath, put an end to all controversies and strifes in this matter; where the Apostle proving all men both Jew and Gentile to be under sinne, maketh this the consequent of it, That every mouth may be stopped, and all the world become guilty before God. Here we see all man∣kind is guilty before God: They are all so many damned men, if the grace of God doth not interpose; so that what is naturally ours, whether original or actual, is wholly damnable. Therefore to the sense of the word nature, alrea∣dy given, we may take in Erasmus his Interpretation also, who maketh nature to be opposed to the grace and mercy of God, mentioned in the following ver∣ses. So that from this Text we may conclude, Every man in his naturals, whe∣ther originally or actually considered, is exposed to Gods vengeance, which might take hold upon him as soon as ever he hath a being. Therefore Chryso∣stome explaineth the Text thus, We are by nature the children of the wrath of God, and nothing else; for as he, who is the sonne of a men, is by nature a man, so are we the children of wrath. Thus he. And the Apostle addeth, as others, to shew, That no Church-priviledges which the Jews enjoyed, made them any wayes bet∣ter in this respect, then the Heathens.

SECT. IV.

What is comprehended in this Expression, Children of wrath.

BUt let us see the wonders of God in this deep point. And

First, What is comprehended in this expression, Children of wrath? And

1. There is implied, That we all by nature have inherent corruption in us, that we are unclean and filthy in the eyes of God, for Gods wrath is not any where, but where sinne is. Gods anger doth suppose sinne, what God indeed may do by absolute Sovereignty in afflicting of an innocent creature, is disputed by Di∣vines; but all agree, de facto, that now God doth not make any miserable, but who are sinfull: And if this be true of temporal miseries, much more doth it hold of eternal. It doth not stand with the goodness and justice of God to damn any, but sinners: If then Infants new born are by nature the children of wrath, it followeth, there is such an internal defilement in them, whereby they do deserve it. Therefore they who hold, God punisheth man for Adam's sinne, though it be but temporally, when we have no sin by nature inherent in us, are injurious to the goodness and justice of God: we must be children in sin before we can be children of wrath.

2. Here is implied, That for this pollution of nature, we bring with us into the world, God is greatly offended with us and displeased. Let Infants be accounted never so pretty and innocent babes, yet when we think Scripture-thoughts, we must conclude, they are children of wrath, that they are part of that world, which is guilty before God. God (I say) is offended with them, not simply, because born, or because the children of men, but because born in sinne, and the children of corrupt sinfull men. Let not then our humane and carnal rea∣sonings argue saying, They have no understanding or will, they have no actual consent to any iniquity, why should such a severe curse be inavoidably laid upon

them, who know not the right hand from the left? For this is plain, we cannot be by nature the children of Gods wrath, unless he be greatly offended and displeased with us; How sad then is it to consider, upon what terms every child cometh into the world? Gods wrath is against it, he is offended with it, as not having his Image, but the Devils; and hereby mans condition is worse and more miserable then the young ones of beasts, even the vilest of them, Toads and Serpents: for though man hateth such, yet God doth not.

3. This wrath is Gods wrath, not mans, which maketh our estate to be farre more dreadfull. Now Gods wrath is like himself infinite, and that which a crea∣ture is never able to stand under. Hence it is that we can never sufficiently ap∣prehend his wrath; for if the wrath of all the great men of the world were put together, (and yet the wrath of a King is (said to be) like the roaring of a Lion, Prov. 19. 12.) it is but as a spark to a great fire in comparison of Gods anger. The Scripture representeth it in a more dreadfull manner, then we are able to think of. Hence the Psalmist crieth out, Who knoweth the power of thy anger? according to thy fear, so is thy wrath. Psal. 90. 11. where by fear may be meant Gods word, that teacheth us to fear, as Psal. 19. 9. The fear of the Lord is clean, enduring for ever; by which we are taught, that no man till he apply himself to the word of God, can rightly apprehend Gods wrath. It is in∣deed disputed by the Schoolmen, Whether anger be properly in God, or no? And some do conclude, That it is as properly in him, as love; onely we must not understand it to be in him, as it is in us, with passion and imperfections. It is an act of Gods holy will, whereby he abhorreth sinne, and decreeth to pu∣nish it.

4. This wrath being thus great and unspeakable, hence there is no evasion of it, but by the bloud of Christ, for he onely who was God and man could remove this; and therefore it is, that Infants do need Christ a Saviour, which could not be, if they were not children of wrath; for if he be a Saviour, it is to such who are lest. Neither is that any better than Adam's fig-leaves to cover his naked∣ness, which the Pelagians of old, and others of late would runne unto,

That Infants indeed need Christ to carry them to Heaven, though they have no sinne in them; for this they suppose without the grace of Christ (though that they distinguished into nature at last) was not of it self able to bring to Heaven; though it had no sinne in it, yet it had imperfection (say they) But this is to make Christ, a Christ, to whom he was not a Saviour; for he is a Saviour, Because he did save his people from their sinnes, Mat. 1. 21.

If then he bringeth Infants to eternal glory, he must do it as a Christ, not as a Saviour; which distinction can no wayes be founded upon Scripture.

5. From this wrath of God there ariseth an obligation to eternal damnation. For you may say, If God be angry with man thus by nature, doth it follow therefore that man must be obliged to eternal death? Will not temporal death, and the miseries of this life be enough? No, from Gods wrath thus against us, there is a debt and obligation lying upon us to everlasting misery: And the rea∣son is, Because this corruption we are born in, is truly and properly a sin and to every sin there is adhering the merit of utter destruction. So that the Schoolmen and some Papists, who dispute, Whether original sinne deserve everlasting damnation in hell; and concluding upon the negative, that it hath some lesse punishment, is frivolous and absurd. For if it have truly and properly the nature of sinne in it, then it cannot be denied, according to Scripture-grounds, but hell is the proper reward of it.

Lastly, This wrath may be considered either immanently, as it is in God, viz. his will abhorring all sinners, or transiently in the effects thereof. For that it is of great use in Divinity to distinguish between the Attributes and Effects of them;

for the Attributes as they are in God, cannot receive any intension or remissi∣on, but the effects may and do. Now the godly they were the children of wrath by nature, as the Apostle speaketh here, but they are not so now. For though original sinne doth still abide in some measure, yet it is not imputed unto a godly man; so that they are not for the present under Gods wrath, though once they were, not that any change is made in God, but in man, who is the object. The effects of this wrath are partly in the temporal miseries of this life, and partly in those eternal torments which shall be in the world to come. The child cometh weeping into the world, as prognosticating it's misery, thus it is miserable before it hath any actual sinne; So that whereas the Infant can∣not without teaching learn to speak or go, of it's own self it inclineth to weep. Cerda upon Tertullian (De animâ lib. 3. cap. 19.) speaketh of some that thought Infants by these complaints did accuse our first parents, and that the male children cry A, as if they intended Adam; and the females E, as if they meant Eve, though he saith others attribute it to their different strengths of nature: But this is a foolish and ridiculous fancy. It is certain, that these weepings and complaints do argue the misery of our natures, though but new born, and so by consequence the sinfulness of them. The other effect is eter∣nal damnation in hell, which God might inflict upon every child new born; so that he might go weeping hence, into that place of weeping in hell, of which we have many more things as yet to speak.

SECT. V.

Some Propositions in order to the proving, That the wrath of God is due to all mankind because of Original Sinne.

NOw because this curse seemeth cruell and unjust to humane reason, till by actual sinnes men have procured wrath upon their own heads; It is good to establish it upon Scripture-grounds, which is so sure a rock, that though the stormes and tempests of mens rage do arise against it, yet it will abide im∣moveable. But before we do that we are to premise something, by way of Ob∣servation tending thereunto. As

First, In deciding of the doctrinal truths of Religion, we are not to attend to our own humane affections, but meerly to the voice of God in the Scriptures. Gods dispensations are not to be regulated according to our pitifull affections; most of the Arminian Tenents are suited to humane compassions, rather then com∣mensurated to Scripture-regulations: But if men will give way to that, why shall not Origen's position of the salvation of all the damned; yea Devils and all at last be received as most commending of Gods mercy, and most suitable to our pittifull affections? And why should not all embrace the pleasing and pitiful Doctrine of one Georgius Siculus, mentioned by Crakanthorpt? (Defens. Eccles. Anglic. contra Spalat. cap. 37.) by whose Books he saith many were be∣witched. His opinion was, that neither this or that particular man was prede∣stinated to salvation, but that God had appointed a time when he would save the whole world, and quicquid de pradestinatione tradimus, philosophicâ tantum argutiâ niti; and what was delivered (by learned orthodox men as we must suppose) was grounded onely upon philosophical niceties. Is not this absolute salvation of all men very agreeable to humane desires and af∣fections; yea and why doth not God vouchsafe not only the immediate offers of grace to all men, and effectually bless the same to all, so that all men shall be converted and saved, for he can as easily save all men as one if he please? Nay

if we do consult with our own pitifull estates, how offensive would several passa∣ges of Gods providence in many outward temporal judgements be unto us: As in the drowning of the world, where many children had not corrupted their wayes, as men of the world had; yet they were all miserably destoyed: thus also in the terrible destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, all the little children therin who could not be guilty of such hainous transgressions, as the Sodomistes were, yet did partake of that dreadful judgment, wheras at another time God in his conviction of Jonah, why he would not destroy that great City of Nineveh, useth this Argu∣ment. Jonah 4. 11. to spare that place, because there were more then sixscore thousand persons, that could not discern between their right hand and lest: If then a man should give liberty to his humane affections, to expostulate why these tender babes that knew nothing of their fathers sinnes, should be involved in such sad calamities, with their ungodly parents, how hardly would he keep within the bounds of so∣briety and modesty? Thus it is about this Doctrine of original sinne, whereby we are all in our very birth exposed to eternal damnation; Some call it a rigid and cruel Doctrine, and all because they judge of God according to their own affections: But as Bellarmine well observeth in the dispute about the state of Infants dying in their original sinne without Baptisme, (Lib. 6. de Amissione, grat.) naming five several opinions, some whereof are more rigid, others more favourable, That our opinions cannot at all alter or change the state of Infants so deceased; The rigid opinion doth not hurt them, neither doth a favourable opinion do them any good, but the Word of God that will stand; our favoura∣ble and pitifull opinions will not make the natural estate of any man the better; yea when such Doctrines are found to be contrary to the Word of God, they may do a great deal of hurt, plunging of them into dangerous consequences, that may flow therefrom. Therefore to such Disputants, we may well reply that which Acosta the Jesuite (Lib. 5. de procur. Indorum salute cap. 3.) saith to some of his own Religion, that held even Heathens might be saved without the knowledge of Christ; and that the contrary Doctrine was inhumane and severe: Non hic agitur (saith he) durumne hoc & severum sit, an benignum & liberale; sed utrum verum necne.

Secondly, As we are not to attend to humane affections in this point; so neither to humane and natural reasonings; Why God should impute Adam's sinne to us. and we all be accounted as sinners in him, and from him the cursed root we the cursed branches do spring, ariseth from the just proccedings of God, though happily the causes the thereof be unknowen to us: When therefore the Scripture of God doth plainly affirm such a sinful, and cursed estate, let not philosophical Arguments obstruct our faith, lest if we do so in other mysteries of Religion, as well as in this, at last we fall into plain Atheisme; Let us be content with our own measure of understanding, not invading the secrets of God, lest we herein betray notoriously our original sinne, while we labour to deny it. For Luther speaking against these Curislae and Quaeristae as he calleth them, (In Gen.) whereby men will demand a reason of Gods proceedings, and affect to be like God in knowledge as Adam did, hath this expression, Fieri Deorum est origi∣nale peccatum, original sinne is the affection of a Deity.

Thirdly, We are alwayes in this controversy to distinguish between the merit of condemnation, and the actual condemnation it self: It is unquestionably true, that all by nature do deserve this eternal damnation; but then concerning the actual damnation thereby, there are different opinions; Some have delivered positively, that none is ever damned for original sinne only; as some Papists, and the Remonstrants; yea there are many say, that this actual condemnation by original sinne, is universally taken off all mankind by Christ; so that as by the first Adam all were put into a state of Gods anger, so by the second Adam all are put into a state of actual reconciliation by Christ, till by their actual sins

they do refuse Christ, and so procure to themselves damnatation, not upon any account of Adam's sinne, but their own voluntary transgresson; Concerning Infants also dying in their infancy, great Disputes there are; Some concluding all that die so, though of Unbelievers and Pagans, that they are saved; original sinne not damning any others; they conclude otherwise: but then they are divi∣ded into several opinions amongst themselves; of which in time more is to be said. For we are not as yet come to that point, concerning the actual condemna∣tion of any by original sinne meerly, but the merit and defect of it, what every man doth deserve by it as soon as he is born; though every sinne deserveth 〈◊〉〈◊〉, yet this obligation to eternal punishment may be taken off, yea and that while the sinne abideth; as original sinne doth in some measure in a godly man. There are indeed some who make the reatus poenae, the guilt of punishment to be the forme of a sinne, and if this were true, then they could not be 〈◊〉〈◊〉: Others make it a proprium to sinne, but this cannot be understood of actual guilt, but potential guilt. Every sinne, and so original doth, deserve that those who are infected therewith, should perish in hell torments eternally; but yet the actual obligation hereunto may be removed by the grace of God, the sinne still remaining in some degree, as the fire had a power to burn the three Wor∣thies, though the actual working thereof was hindered.

SECT. VI.

Arguments to prove, that by Nature we are all as so many dam∣ned men; That Damnation belongs to the Sinne we are borne in.

THis being premised, let us now consider those Arguments, which may firmly establish us in this truth, That by nature we are all as so many damned men; that of our selves we can expect no other; and that though we were free from actual transgression, It is the grace of God only, that delivereth us: All mankind is like that wretched Infant, Ezek. 16. spoken of by the Prophet, wallowing in bloud, filthy and loathsome, necessarily perishing, unlesse the grace of God speak unto us, to live; we all lie like Ezekiel's any bones, of whom we may say, Can these live? Can these be saved? Not one, unlesse God give life. And

First, All deserve eternal damnation by original contagion, Because it is a state of sinne and spiritual uncleannesse we are born in. And therefore if once it be granted to be a sinne, the wages thereof must be hell and damnation: Inso∣much that some Popish Writers are very absurd, who disputing against Pelagi∣ans. That our birth-sinne is properly and univocally sinne, yet afterwards question. Whether children dying therein do go to hell or no? Some assign them a Paradise, wherein they have a natural happiness, as Catharinus (Opusc. de statu pucrorum, &c.) Others, as Bellarmine, that they have poena damni, but not sensus, as if there were half an hell, or that one might be shut out from the beatifical fruition of God, and yet not be tormented with sensible pain. This is certain, if it be truly and directly a sinne, as the Scripture so often calleth it; then without the grace of God, there is no possibility of escaping hell thereby. why then should damnation because of it be thought so horrid, when it is ac∣knowledged to be a sinne? Job (you heard) saith, Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Job 14. 4. here we are all unclean. Now what doth the Scripture pronounce of such, Revel. 21. 29. There shall not in any wise enter into the heavenly Jerusalem, any thing that is unclean, or that defileth. No unclean thing can enter into the kingdom of heaven; and if they do not enter in there,

they must enter into the kingdom of hell; There is no middle place, Qui in∣ducis medium recede de medio, as Austin. The Scripture also calleth it sinne, Psal. 51. 5. Behold in sinne did my mother conceive me; and what is the wages of sinne but death? Rom 6. 23. not only bodily death, but that eternal death, which is opposite to everlasting life; and the Apostle saith, The sting of death is sinne, 1 Cor. 15. 56. which Austin expounds in this sense, as that by sinne death is caused, as that is called Poculum mortis, a cup of death, which causeth death; or as some say, The Tree of life is called so, because it was the cause of life. If then original sinne be a sinne, it must have a sting, and this sting is everlasting death. So that if we attend to what the Scripture speaketh concern∣ing us, even in the womb and the cradle, that we are in a state of sinne; we must conclude, because it is a sinne, therefore it deserveth damnation. Hence you heard the Apostle Rom. 5. expresly saith, Judgement came by one to con∣demnation; and Rom. 3. That the whole world is guilty before God.

Secondly, The Scripture doth not only speak of this birth-pollution as a sinne, but as an hainous sinne in its effects, whereby it doth admis of many terrible aggra∣vations, (as you have heard.) It is the Law in our members, it's the flesh, tho body of sin, the sin that doth so easily beset us, the sin that warreth against the mind and the Spirit of God, that captivateth even a godly man in some measure, which maketh Paul groan under it, and cry out of his miserable condition thereby; so that it is not meerly a sinne, but a sinne to be aggravated in many respects, and therefore necessarily causing damnation, unlesse God in his mercy prevent. Let Bellarmine and others extenuate it, making it lesse then the least sinne, that is (of which more afterwards) let them talk of venial sinnes, that do not in their own nature deserve hell; yet because all sinne is a transgression of Gods Law, the curse of God belongeth thereunto, therefore it hath an infinite guilt in re∣spect of the Majesty of God, against whom it is committed; and they who judge sinne little, must also judge the Majesty of God to be little also. What shall one respect of involuntariness, which is in original sinne, make it lesse then others, when 〈…〉〈…〉 so many other respects (some whereof do more immediately re∣late to the nature of sinne, then voluntariness can do) farre exceed other sinnes?

Thirdly, Original sinne must needs deserve damnation, because it needeth the bloud of Christ to purge away the guilt of it, as well as actual sins. Christ is a Saviours to Infants, as well as to grown men, and if he be a Saviour to them, then they are sinners; if he save them, then they are lost. As for that old evasion of the Pelagian,

Infants need Christ, not to save them from sinne, but to bring them to the Kingdom of Heaven, it's most absurd and ridicu∣lous; for the whole purpose of the Gospel is to shew, That Christ came into the world to bring sinners to Heaven through his bloud; his death was expia∣tory and by way of atonement, therefore it did suppose sinne: hence he is sad to be the Lamb of God that taketh away the sinne of the world, John 1. 29. which is both original and actual.

Fourthly, That eternal damnation belongeth to the sinne we are born in, appear∣eth by those remedies of grace, and Ordinances of salvation which were appointed by God both in the Old and New Testament, for the taking away of this natural guilt. Circumcision in the Old Testament did declare, that by nature the heart was uncircumcised and that every one was destitute of any inherent righte∣ousnesse; hence circumcision is called, The seal of the righteousnesse, which is by faith, Rom. 4. 11. To this Baptism doth answer in the New Testament, the ex∣ternal never whereof with the formal Rite of Administration doth abundantly convince us of our spiritual uncleanness, as also the need we have of the bloud of Christ, and also of his Spirit for our cleansing.

Now because the known Adversary to this truth, affirmly, That he knoweth

of no Church that in her Rituals doth confesse and bewail original sinne:

As also that we might see the Judgement of our first Reformers in England about Baptism, as relating to original sinne; It is good to observe, what is set down in the Publique Administration of Baptism, as by the Common-Prayer-Book was formerly to be used; there the Minister useth this Introductory, Forasmuch as all men be conceived and born in sinne; adding from hence, That none can enter into the kingdom of Heaven, unlesse he be born again. It is the sinne he is born in (not pure Naturals, as the Doctor saith) that inferreth a necessity of regene∣ration.

Again, In the Prayer for children to be baptized, there is this passage, That they coming to thy holy Baptism may receive remission of sins. Now what sinnes can children have but their original? It is spoken in the plural number, because more than one child is supposed to be baptized. Again in the same Prayer, we meet with this Petition, That they being delivered from thy wrath; What can more ashame the Doctors opinion then this? That which he accounteth so horrid, is here plainly asserted, That children are born under Gods wrath; there∣fore prayer is made, that they may be delivered from it.

Lastly, In another Prayer after the Confession of Faith, we have this Petition, That the old Adam in these children may be so buried, that the new man may be raised up in them. Why doth he not seoff at this expression, saying, (as he doth upon another occasion) That they change the good old man with these things; that he never thought of? No doubt but he will force these passages by some violent Interpretation, as he doth the 9^th Article; but certainly it would be more ingenuity in him to flie to his principles of liberty of prophesying, rather then to wrest these publick professions of original sinne. It is true, the Anci∣ents, and so the Papists put too much upon Baptism. For Austin thought, every child dying without Baptism; yea and without the participation of the Lords Sup∣per was certainly damned. But of this extream more afterwards. It is enough for us, That Christs Institution of such a Sacrament, and that for Infants, doth evidently proclaim our sinfulnesse by nature, and therein our desert of eternal wrath.

Fifthly, To original sinne there must needs belong eternal wrath, because of the nature of it, and inseperable effects flowing from it. The nature of it is the spiri∣tual death of the soul; by this a man is alienated from all life of grace; and therefore till the grace of God appear, it's true of all by nature, as followeth in the Chapter where this Text is, vers. 12. Without Christ alient from the Com∣monwealth of Israel, strangers from the Covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world. Thus Davenant upon that Text, Dead in sinne, Col. 2. 13. saith,

All the sons of Adam are accounted dead; first, because they lie in a state of spiritual death, having lost the Image of God: and part∣ly, because they are under the guilt of eternal death, being obnoxious to the wrath of God, for by nature we are the children of wram.

If then original sinne put us into a spiritual death, if thereby we be deprived of all spiritual life, How can it be avoided but that eternal damnation must fo••••ow thereupon by the desert thereof? And as for the inseparable effects of it, which are to carry us on necessarily to sinne in all that we do, to make us utterly impotent and unable for any thing that is good; What can this produce but everlasting misery to our souls?

Sixthly, Original sinne is of a damnable nature, because of that spiritual bondage and vassalag; we are thereby put into even to the Devil himself. For not being the children of God, we are necessarily the children of the Devil: And therefore to be children of Gods wrath in the Text, is no more then to be the children of hell, and of the Devil; for which reason he is called, The Prince of the World. Seeing then the Devil hath power over all mankind,

they are in his bondage, and Christ came as a Redeemer to deliver us from him. This doth argue in what a wofull and dreadfull estate we are left in by this original filthinesse. To have the Devil possesse our bodies, how terrible is it? But he possesseth the souls of every one by nature, till Christ doth destroy him, and cast him out. Hence the Apostle celebrateth that powerfull grace of God, whereby we are delivered from the power of darkness into the kingdom of his dear Sonne, Col. 1. 13. from which children are not to be excluded.

Seventhly, That original sinne hath merit of demnation, is plain, Because by it we are in an unregenerate, estate, John 3. Whatsoever is born of the flesh is flesh, and therefore unlesse a man be born again of the Spirit, and from above, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven: yea none that are in the flesh can please God, Rom. 8 8. If then no unregenerate man can be saved, and by original sinne we come to be in that state of carnality, it is plain, that by nature we are prepa∣red fuel for eternal flames in hell.

Eighthly, That original sinne deserveth damnation, appeareth, in the conse∣quents of it. For when Adam fell into this spiritual death, which is the same with original sinne in us, (though it could not be called so in him, because he had not it from his first being, neither was it derived to him from any other) we may take notice of two sad and terrible effects thereof, besides many others. The first whereof was the terrour and fear upon his conscience, when God called him by name, saying, Adam, where art thou? He then flieth from God, and would have hid himself from his face: How cometh Adam thus to be afraid, thus to tremble, who had such peaceable enjoyment of God before? Was it not because he had now lost the Image of God? And this impression is still up∣on all men by nature. There is an inward terrour and fear of God, knowing he is an holy, just and omnipotent God, who cannot but hate and punish sin, and therefore we being conscious of that sinfulness and pollution which is in us, are afraid of him, dare not think of him, or draw nigh to him, horror is ready to surprize us, when we think of God, while in our natural estate. The other consequent upon Adam's pollution, was the casting him out of Paradise, and in him all his posterity was likewise ejected. Now this was a type (as it were) of our being cast out of Heaven. This is like that solemn curse at the last day, Depart from me ye cursed. So that if all these Arguments be duly considered, we cannot any longer resist the light of this truth, That to us belongeth hell and damnation, as soon as ever we are born, even before we have committed any actual sinne at all.

SECT. VII.

Some Conclusions deduceable from the Doctrine of the damnableness of Original Sinne.

THe Doctrine of our native impurity, and the damnable consequent thereof being thus established upon the Scripture rock, which will dash in peices all errours that beat upon it: I shall proceed to some Conclusions deduceable thence from. As

First, That position of some, though of different principles, is wholly contrariant to the word of God, that none are damned for original sinne; For seeing this sinne hath the same damnable guilt with it as actual sinne hath, there is no more rea∣son for the non-damnation of persons in one more then in another, neither can

we conceive God obliged to forgive one more then another; why then should it thus universally be acknowledged, that for actual sinnes God may and doth damn men, but not for original sinne? It is true, when we speak of persons growen up, we cannot seperate their actual sinnes and original, because origi∣nal sinne is alwayes acting and conceiving, putting it self forth into many divers lusts; and thereupon we cannot say of any adult person, that he is damned meerly for original sinne, because to this original hath been superadded many actual transgressions; and thereupon all impenitent persons dying so, are con∣demned for both; yea their condemnation is inhanced thereby; for the desert of damnation by original and actual sinne both, is greater then by original or actual severally. Seeing then many die in the guilt of their natural and actual uncleanness, it is an unsavoury Doctrine to affirm, that no man is damned for original sinne. It is true, some men do dogmatize, that original sinne in re∣spect of the guilt of it, is universally taken off all, and that all mankind is put into a state of reconciliation by the second Adam, as they were into a state of wrath by the first; but this over-throweth the Doctrine of special election, and doth confound nature and grace together; yea it maketh Christ to have died in vain, of which more fully in its time. For the present, seeing that so many die un∣converted in their state of unregeneracy, it must necessarily follow, that many are damned both for their original, and actual sinne also. For shall the root be less damning, then the branches or fruit? actual sinnes demonstrate the effect and power or original sinne, and the aggravation of the effect doth necessarily, aggravate the cause: As they said to Gideon desiring he should slay them, Judg. 8. 21. As is the man, so is his strength: Thus it is here, as a mans corrupt nature is, so are his actions; the one is actus primus, and the other is actus secundus: Thus as life though an actus primus, yet is alwayes expressed in second acts, and the effects thereof: so it is with original sinne; it is by way of a fountain in us, yet alwayes emptying it self into streames. It is then a subtle devise of Bellar∣mine, who being unwilling to make damnation, as it comprehends the punish∣ment of sense, to be the consequent of original sinne, to say, that one dying in his original sinne, is not damned by reason of his original sinne, but ratione subjecti, it bringeth damnation, because such a subject is destitute of spiritual life and grace: But this is to confront the Scripture, which attributeth con∣demnation and 〈…〉〈…〉 to this sinne, because of the intrinsecal evil and hainousness thereof. The essence is of one to condemnation saith the Apostle Rom 5. and the Text saith we are by nature the children of wrath. Besides this is a ridiculous and absurd 〈◊〉〈◊〉; for original sinne is nothing but the spiritual death of the soul; and doth wholly destroy that respect and habitude, which the soul had unto God. Father, this Popish evasion is of no strength with us, who hold no veni∣al sinnes in their sense. For they say a man may be damned in hell for venial sins, not because they, of their own nature, deserve so; but because of the subject sometimes, who may die destitute of all grace; and then his venial sinnes encrease his condemnation. But this Doctrine of a venial sinne, in the Popish sence is im∣mediately opposite to Scripture, and contrary to the Majesty of the most holy God.

Conclus. 2. In that original sinne is thus meritotious of eternal damnation, Those learned men who hold the corrupt Mass of mankind to be that state, out of which God chooseth, some to eternal life, leaving others in this wretched and sinfull condition they have by Adam, do thereby affirm nothing injurious to God, or any thing that may justly be complained of by sound reason. It is not my intent to launch into that vast Ocean of the dispute about the object of election and reprobation, no not as it is confined among the orthodox; they themselves disputing whether it be Massa para, or Massa corrupta, from whence ariseth that distinction of

Supralapsarians, and Sublapsarians. It is enough at the present to affirm, that if the corrupt Mass of mankind be made the object of election and reprobation, the justice of God is abundantly cleared against all Papists, Arminians, and others in this particular, because original sinne doth deserve eternal damnation. This was the opinion of Austin and many moderate learned men; think this opinion less obnoxious to cavils and more consonant to Scripture, then that of those, who hold Gods decrees herein to be, supposing Massa pura, or man con∣sidered as man, meerly in a common sense: Thus God speaketh of hating Esau, and loving Jacob in respect of his purpose according to election, and that before they had done good or evil, Rom 9 11. which relateth to their actual evil: Yea this was Calvins opinion, as appeareth, (Lib 1. de eterna Dei predestinatione con∣tra Pighium, alledged by Crakanthorpe, Defens. Eccles. Anglic. cap. 37.) where Calvin saith, when we treat of predestination, Vnde exordiendum esse semper do∣cui, at{que} bodie doceo, jure in morte relinqui omnes reprobos, qui in Adam mortui sunt & damnati, jure parice qui naturâ sunt filii irae; ita nemini causam esse cur de nimio Dei rigore qu••ratur, quando reatum in se omnes inclusum gestant: Thus Calvin. And how orthodoxly and vehemently doth Crakanthorpe, (though of the Episcopal judgement) defend this? Potestne quisquam (saith he) te Spal••∣to, quisquam ex vestris Dei justitiam in damnandis reprobis luenlentiùs asserere? In Adamo in massâ perditirei omnes mortis, eorum alios ex istâ Massâ per mise∣ricordiam liberat, alios in eâdem Massâ per justitiam damnandos relinquit. For Gods election and reprobation is about Infants, as well as Adult persons; nei∣ther may we think it any cruelty or injustice of God, if he leave an Infant in his natural impure estate, seeing grace is free if it be grace, and God is not bound to adde a new favour where the former is lost; and although such an Infant had no voluntary personal acting to this corrupt estate he is born in, for which God eternally passeth him by with a negative preterition, as some Divines express it; yet because sinnes in the Scripture-language are called debts, that which is just between man and man, may be much more between God and man, who cannot be any wayes obliged to shew favour to him, and that is amongst men; children are liable to their parents debts, and what their parents did wickedly and voluntarily contract by their prodigality and luxury, that the children stand engaged to pay, though they had no influence into those supposed debts. Thus all mankind stands engaged for Adam's debt, (I mean as the consequent corruption of his nature by his voluntary disobedience, doth hereditarily de∣scend to all his posterity,) and the rather, because it is both aliena, and nstra culpa, as Bernard, both Adam's debt and our own also: No wonder then if mankind lying in this bloud, God spake to some, to live, and leaveth the restin their undone estate; but I must not enlarge on this. When that mutable Euri∣pus, and miserable Ecebolius, (though not crying out afterwards as he did, Culcate me insipidum salem; Spalatensis had objected this as a puritanical opini∣on, (and also the Doctrine of the Church of England,) That Infants dying with Baptisme may yet be damned; Crakanthorpe defendeth the Church of Eng∣land herein, (Defens. cap. 40) yet with such assertions that cannot please the late Antagonist of original sin: Vbi è Scripturis habes Infantes, morientes cum Baptismo non posse damnari, (saith he:) An tu à Dei consili••s es, ut sine Scrip∣turâ hoc scias? ut scias tales omnes Infantes electos esse? You see he putteth their salvation upon election that are saved, concluding indeed that in the judgement of charity, we think such may be saved, but as for a judicium certitudinis & ve∣ritatis, he doth leave that to God, but you must remember he speaketh not of all Infants, though of Infidels.

SECT. VIII.

A Consideration of their Opinion that hold, a Universal Removal of the Guilt of Original Sinne from all mankind by Christs Death: Answering their Arguments, among which, that from the Antithesis or Opposition which the Apostle maketh Rom. 5. between the first Adam and the second Adam.

THirdly, In that original sinne is meritorious of eternal condemnation, yea and doth produce this effect actually in some, Hence that Doctrine so confi∣dently avouched by some, that by Christ the guile of original sinne is wholly taken off stom all mankind, and every one by nature is now born in a state of Gods love and reconciliation, till by actual sinnes be doth exclude himself from this mercy, is also an unsavoury opinion, and contrary to the Word of God. But because this Doctrine is very plausible, and hath had confident avouchers of it, let us through∣ly search into all the recesses of it. And

First, We may take notice, that Puccius wrote a book for this purpose, to prove, that as by Adam we were truly, properly, and de facto put into a state of sinne and wrath, and that antecedently to our knowledge or consent; so by the second Adam all mankind in the same latitude is put into a state of savour and reconciliation with God, properly actually, and de facto; and that ante∣cedently to any faith, or knowledge that they have Christ; but as Adam's sinne was efficacious in men, as men, quatenus homines, to their condem∣nation, so was Christs obedience efficacious for their justification to all men, as men. This opinion he proveth by an hundred and twenty Reasons, and con∣cludeth with excessive confidence of truth on his side, that he hath it by the Spirit of God; and that though for the present it seemeth not to be approved, yet he is confident the whole world will at last entertain it. Insomuch that his boastings and presumptions are such, that you would think not much learning, but much pride had made him mad. This man considering the diversity of Sect; and Opinions in Religion, for two and twenty years wandered up and down to Jews, Manumetans, Arians, and others, that having knowledge of all kind of opinions, he might at last judge which was the true Religion; but this is not the way to find the truth; God rather in just judgement leaveth such to errors. In this universal road Jacobus Andraas and Hube••ius are said also to go, though with some little variation. The man foundation they all build up 〈◊〉〈◊〉 is, the com∣parison made by the Apostle Rom. 5. between the first and second Adam, wherein the extent of justification to life by Christ, seeme 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to be as universal, as that of condemnation by Adam, the Apostle using the same words of many and all. This opinion saith Puccias is most consonant to that 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of God, which the Scripture commends, and removeeth from God 〈◊〉〈◊〉 all suspi∣cion of cruelty and injustice. By this instance we may see, there is no stop or bounds can be put to mens errours, when once they will judge of Gods love and mercy according to humane compassionate principles. And therefore let such, who deny original sinne, or extenuate it, pleading the awe they have in their hearts respectively to God, that men may have no hard thoughts of him; Let such (I say) consider, whether Puccius and his followers do not farre tran∣scend them in this kind; yea, whether by their principles they must not ne∣cessarily come off to his way. For although he doth assert original sinne, yet he maketh it wholly taken away by Christs death, and that to all mankind, so that now we are not born in a state of wrath and enmity against God.

Secondly, There are others that do not receive this opinion of Gods graci∣ous love in Christ to men, as they are men, but as they are believers, that yet affirm, The guilt of original sinne wholly taken away by Christ, as to all man∣kind, so that no man lieth under this guilt; and thereupon conclude, That all Infants, though of Heathens and Pegans, are certainly saved; for ha∣ving no actual sinne, and their original being removed, the doore is set open for them to enter into Heaven, which is afterwards to be consi∣dered.

Thirdly, There are yet some who deservedly are reputed as more honoura∣ble for learning and orthodoxy then the former, who though they hold origi∣nal sinne, and Gods special election of some persons to eternal glory, do yet withall maintain a possibility of salvation to every one lying in the corrupt masse of mankind. Thus Crocius (Duod••c. Dissert. Dissert. 1^a. de peccato origin.) al∣though he denieth the Huberian way of assuming all men into a state of favour, so that no man is obnoxious to damnation by original sinne, yet affirmeth, That none is necessarily damned for it, without the accession of new sins, and that therefore there is a way of possibility of salvation for every one. This opinion hath many learned Abettors, but if it be throughly pursued, it must either fall into the old known orthodox way, or empty it self into the Arminian chanel. Yea it seemeth to be of so brittle subtilty, that it doth not avoid any of those incon∣ven••ercies, which they labour to do; neither doth it practically give any com∣fort to a man rationally doubting in his conscience about his interest in Christs death, or stirre up and provoke to obedience unto those Commands and Exhor∣tations that are pressed upon us. But this Controversie belongeth not so pro∣perly to my subject.

I shall conclude against the former opinions mentioned, That by original sinne we are children of Gods wrath; yea and for that, as well as their actual sinnes, some are eternally condemned; which Doctrine hath received witness and testimony to its truth from the most eminent Guides and Pastors in Gods Church in all Ages. Insomuch that Fulgentius cometh with his Firmissime tene & nullatenus dubita, &c. Believe most firmly, and doubt not in the least man∣ner, but that every one by nature is obnoxious to the wrath of God, that person cannot be saved. It is true, he addeth without the Sacrament of Baptism; of which opinion in its time (De incarnatione ad Petrum Diacon.)

The Synod of D••ri also rejecteth the errour of such, who teach,

All men are assumed into a state of reconciliation, so that none is either damned, or obnoxous to eternal damnation for original sinne, but all are free from its guilt; which opinion (they adde) repugneth the Scripture, affirming us to be by nature children of wrath. (Acta Synod. Dordr••ct. cap. 2 de morte Christi reject Erro. 5.)

But let us consider, What Arguments are brought to prove this univer∣sal removal of the guilt of original sinne, from all mankind by Christs death. And

First, They urge the love of God to mankind, so often mentioned in the Scri∣pture: Insomuch that they say, it doth not stand with the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and mercy of God, when man is plunged thus into an undone estate, there to leave him, and not deliver him out of it. But to this many things may be said. As

First, We grant, that notwithstanding our original sinne, yet God loveth mankind, and demonstrateth much mercy to men, even because they are his creatures. And it must be granted, That the Scripture doth often celebrate this mercy of God to man, though in a sinfull condition: But then we must distinguish between the general love of God, and his special love, between his

love of benevolence and love of complacency, as some express it. God doth love all mankind with a general love, or love of benevolence, so as to do good in a liberal manner to them. This love of beneficence is demonstrated both to the good and the bad; yet this doth not remove the guilt of sinne, we may be children of wrath for all this. Therefore there is the other special love and grace of God, a love of complacency and acceptance of us in Christ; and this is only to some of mankind, as the Scripture in many places doth shew: And yet we must adde, that when any are damned, we cannot say it is for any defect of Gods particular love and grace, as if the fault were to be laid there, but upon the original and actual sinfulness of the person so condemned; for every mans perdition is of himself.

Secondly, It is no injustice in God, if he let men alone in their lost estate by Adam; for he did at first endow him with all heavenly ability to stand in that glorious estate, and thereby to bring happiness to his posterity also. Now when Adam by his voluntary disobedience, had deprived himself of all this excellency, was God bound to restore him a second time? If a Debtor by his own prodi∣gality make himself unable to pay his Creditor, is the Creditor bound to bestow money upon that man, and to put him into his former condition again? Now if man own not this to man, much lesse doth God to man.

Lastly, The condition of the apostate Angels, and Gods dispensation to∣wards them, doth abundantly discover, what God might do in this case; for there is no reason in man, why he should be more kind to him, then an apo∣state Angel, seeing all are sinfull. Now when the Angels fell, was God bound to recover theme? Did he deliver any one of them out of that wretched estate? No more would God have been unjust, if he had not saved any one out of all mankind.

Let us therefore admire at the goodness of God in choosing of some, and tremble under his justice in passing by of others, taking heed of pride and cu∣riosity in searching into these mysterious wayes of God, especially of his pre∣science and providence in this particular, which heads in Divinity are full of comfort, as well as excellent in dignity: but to be wise in them according to so∣briety is operae pretium, to erre periculum, to acquiesce miraculum, as Junius excellently in his close of his dispute with the foresaid Puccius.

In the next place, let us conflict with their Goliah, the chiefest support of their cause, and that is from the Antithesis or Opposition which the Apostle ma∣keth Rom. 5. 15. between the first man Adam, and the second man Jesus Christs, wherein the Excellency and Preheminence is given to Christ, that his grace doth much more abound to life and justication then Adam's sinne can to condemna∣tion; Yea the Apostle useth the same note of Vniversality for the subject of either; sometimes all, and sometimes many, plainly declaring hereby, That as there is by Adam a Catholical enmity and offence that we are plunged into, in re∣spect of God towards us, so there is also as Catholical and Vniversal Reconci∣liation and favour with God, that we are instated into, through Christ our Mediater; otherwise it seemeth much to derogate from the honour and glory of Christ, that his favour and love should be more straitned and limited than Adam's efficacy to our condemnation.

To this many things are to be considered by way of answer:

First, That if they will rigidly and severely urge the collation made between A∣dam and Christ, then they must conclude of the actual salvation of every man, not one excluded. For it Adam's sinne did de facto, put all into a state of condem∣nation; so that if Gods grace had not wrought an evasion for some, all had actually perished. Thus it followeth much more than on Christs part, that all must be de facto saved, and delivered from Adam's transgression with the con∣sequents thereof. But the Scripture doth clearly evidence this, That in respect

of the event, the greater part of mankind will be damned. The way to hell is a broad way, and many enter therein; So that Christ is not actually a cause of sa∣ving more than Adam is of damning; if you respect the event and issue, farre more through Adam's disobedience go to hell, then through Christs obedience are admitted into Heaven, and yet the Adversaries themselves must confess, here is no derogation to the honour and glory of Christ, And if it be said, That it is mans actual unbelief and impentency, whereby he doth wilfully and fro∣wardly refuse Christ the Physician of his soul: Christ hath put him into a state of favour; but he doth voluntarily cast himself out again, and so is made unwor∣thy of the grace, which cometh by Christ. It is answered, that is true. But

1. How cometh it about that men have such an actual rebellion against Christ? Whence is it that they have such an inclination within them, to refuse him that is a Saviour, though he come for their good? Though their sinnes and the Devil will never be that help to them, which Christ would be, yet they im∣brace the later, and refuse the former; Is not all this from the polluted nature we receive from Adam? So that hereby Adam may be thought more universal∣ly to destroy, then Christ to heal.

Again, In the second place, Why is it that through Christ they are not deli∣vered from this rebellion? Why is it that he doth not vouchsafe a more tender and pliable heart? for condemnation cometh by one sinne, but the Apostle aggrava••eth the free gift by Christ, that it is of many offences unto Justification; If then of many, why is there any stint or limit of this free gift? It is plain, that rebellious disposion by some against Christ, is wholly subdued and con∣quered by him, and the same power he could put forth in others also, if he pleased, but he will not do it; and therefore the state of reconciliation by Christ, is not as extensive, as of condemnation by Adam; if then for the event it is plain, that Adam's condemnation is larger than Christs reconciliation (all wicked men being damned in hell both for their original and actual sinnes and) then the purpose or decree about this event, was no wayes tending to the disho∣nour of Christ.

Secondly, It is to be considered more diligently, in what method the Apostle doth here speak of the Vniversality of the Subject relating to Adam and Christ. For the Apostle twice speaking in the general of our condemnation, doth use the word all, vers. 12 Death passed upon all men, in that all have sinned. And vers. 18. Judgement came upon all men to condemnation; but to these generals, he doth presently subjoyn a distribution of this all, and then useth the word many: By which it is apparent, that the Apostle on purpose altering his speech, and distributing this all afterwards into many of two kinds, he doth understand the word all, not universally, but commonly and indifinitely; e••se why should he immediately upon the word all, presently interpret it distributively? So that if the Apostles expression, and the Coherence of his Discourse be more exactly searched into, it will be found not to patrocinate any such supposed Catho∣lical reconciliation; For the Apostle divideth the all, into the many con∣demned by Adam eventually, and the many justified and saved by Christ ef∣fectually.

Thirdly, When the Apostle maketh this comparison between the first Adam to condemnation and Christ to Justification, giving the superiority 〈…〉〈…〉 This is not to be understood in respect of the number of men, but of the nature of these gracious effects we hate by Christ. This comparison is not for expresse in quantity but quality. The Apostle doth not say, O, how many more (as the P••l••gians of ••••d applying Christs benefits to Infants bringing them to the Kingdom of Heaven, who yet (they said) received no polu•••• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 hurt by Adam) but how much more shall the grace of God abound through Christ to many? The how much more lieth not in the number, but in the nature of these gracious

effect; which come by Christ, though to some onely; for that the Apostle doth not intend an excess of Chriss grace, in respect of the number, it is plain, be∣cause that had been impossible, there could have been but an equality at most: If it should be granted, That Christ hath reconciled all those that Adam lost, this would be an equality only, we could not say, Christ redeemed more than Adam destroyed, for that could not have been; therefore it is plain, that the superabundance attributed by the Apostle to Christ, in respect of Justification, is to be understood intensively, not extensively, in respect of the nature of those blessed effects we receive by him, and so indeed there is a great transcendency in Christ in respect of Adam. For

1. By Christ we have vivification and quickning to grace and glory, whereas by Adam we have sinne and condemnation. Now it is farre easier to occasion the damnation of many, then to procure the salvation of one. To justifie and save one man, is more than to destroy all mankind. As we see amongst men, it's easier to destroy a thing, then to build it up; one man may kill many men, but yet the same man cannot bring any one of those to life again. If therefore Christ had saved but one of all mankind, he was infinitely to be exalted above Adam, by whose disobedience mankind was plunged into a perishing estate. So that if we do compare Death with Life Heaven with Hell, Damnation with Salvation, and that the one cometh from a deficient cause, the other from an efficient; we must necessarily conclude, that Christ hath infinitely the prehemi∣nence above Adam.

2. There are some that distinguish between the sufficiency and worth that is in Christs mediation, and the actual application of it,

Now (say they) the se∣cond Adam was infinately more able to save, then Adam to destroy, and that if we respect the number of men, for Christ is able to save a thousand of worlds besides this, if there were so many; and therefore if we speak of Christ in respect of his sufficiency, Adam in a destructing way is no more comparable to Christ in a saving way, then a drop to the ocean, or a sinite to an infinite.

For the obedience of Christ is the obedience of God and man. Now though this answer may in a good explained sense be received, yet I shall not so much avouch it, partly because the distinction is made use of to a farre other end, then the Orthodox do intend; and then partly, because the Apostle doth not here attend, in his comparison, so much to what is sufficient in Christ, as to what is actual; not so much to what he is able to do, as what he will do. It's efficacy not sufficiency the Apostle aimeth at; therefore we stick to the former answer, though in many other respects, the excellency of the second Adam to the first, night be declared, which are not here to be repeated; only that one the Apostle instanceth in, is not to be passed over, which is, that it is but one of∣fence to condemnation, whereas the grace of Christ extendeth to the abolishing of many offences, that one sinne is enough to damn, but the grace of Christ appear∣eth, not only to the abolition of that, but also all offences that do actually flow from it. Thus every godly soul may comfortably improve this truth, that there is more in Christ to save, then is in all sinne, whether original or actual to damn; Christ is more able to justifie, then Adam is to condemn. Therefore some School∣men deny, that Adam's sinne did demerit the death and damnation of all man∣kind, it deserved his own damnation, and his own death only. All other mens deaths, and other mens damnation have for their meritorious cause their original sin inherent in them. Adam did not meritoriously deserve these; but when fallen, then his posterity descending from him, did naturally fall into such a corrupted estate, as he himself was plunged into; and the reason they give of this is, be∣cause no meer man can either m••rer•••• or demereri, for the whole nature of man∣kind; if Adam had stood, all his posterity would have been holy and happy: but we cannot say, Adam would have merited this for all mankind; for that is a

peculiar thing to Christ only, which is incommunicable to a meer man, to merit; for the whole race of mankind. And although there is a great difference between merit and demerit; (a man may put himself into a demerit of eternal glory, but not into a merit) yet in this they are alike. This reasoning of some Schoolmen admitted (which seemeth very plausible) then it necessarily followeth, that Christs power to save is superlative, more than Adams to destroy.

Lastly, That Christ in his efficacy of grace, doth exceed Adam in his condemn∣ing guilt, appeareth, In that at last, he will utterly remove original sin from all, that are his members; and so totally vanquish it, that it shall not remain in the least spot thereof. Although Christ came into the world to take away all sin, yet some School∣men conclude, that principally it was to deliver us from original sin; Because (saith Suarez, De Incar. Christi) this is the cause and the root of all actual iniquities. It is not enough for Christ to purge us from our actual impieties, but he also intends to heal our natures. Now because original sin infecteth the nature, chiefly as it is in persons, so also doth Christ principally intend the sanctification of our natures. And although this be not presently and immediatly done, yet it wil at last be done, in that good time he hath appointed for that end. Those indeed that limit the ef∣ficacy of Christs grace to original sin only, as if actual sins were to be removed by our voluntary penances and satisfaction, they make Christ but a same. Saviour, and a semi mediator. But yet it may well be affirmed, because this original corru∣ption is the pollution of the nature, and is the cause of all actual defilements, ther∣fore the bloud of Christ doth in the most principal place cleanse from this. And therefore this should exceedingly comfort the godly, who groan under the re∣liques of this defilement upon them, that Christ will never leave them, till he hath restored them perfectly to their primitive integrity; for this end he came into the world, so that he would be but an impefect Saviour, if he should not at last cure thee of this nature-defilement; for this lieth upon him to do, that he bring al things to their for∣mer, yea a better perfection; that so all may admire the goodness, wisdom and mercy of God in Christ; and that all cavillers may stop their mouths, who usually demand, Why did God suffer Adam to fall? Why did he not prevent sin, when it was in his pow∣er? Now when all the world shall see, that a greater good is wrought by the se∣cond Adam, than evil was by the first; this will make us break out into holy ex∣clamations, saying, Oh the wisdom of God, how unsearchable are his wayes? And this may suffice for the razing of that foundation they build so much upon.

In the third place, I find that urged for an universal cleansing of all mankind, and that none is in a state of wrath now by nature; Because in that vision which Pe∣ter had, Act. 10. 28 he saith, God had shewed him, that he should not call any man com∣mon, or unclear. But this doth not any way contradict this Doctrine o•• spiritual uncleanness, which Job saith is upon all men; but uncleannes is there understood of that Jewish sanctity, which was vouchsafed to the nation of the Jews; whereby that people alone were intituled to Church-priviledges (and all Heathens abiding stran∣gers from this Covenant of grace, were as dogs not children; they were accounted as unclean, unto whom the word of grace was not to be preached) called therefore Gal. 2. 15. Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, until Christ came, and broke down this parition wall: So that the meaning is, We are not now to include the Gospel within the Jews, but every nation is as clean in this respect, as they are: Insomuch that we are not to forbear preaching unto any people under the hea∣vens; otherwise if we regard this spiritual filthiness, we are to call every man un∣clean, as being the child of Gods wrath. Hence Austin of old did urge that phrase, He that believeth not, the wrath of God abideth on him. Joh. 3. 36. he doth not say, it cometh upon him, it will fall upon him, but it abideth on him, implying, that it was there before, even in respect of his natural pollution, though he had never com∣mitted those actual sins of unbelief and disobedience to the Gospel of Christ.

But that I may come out of this controversie I shall instance in one Objection

more, and that is, the promise made by God to Adam after his fall. For Gen. 3. 15. when Adam had cast himself into this cursed estate, and through the fear and horrour that was upon him he aid flee from the presence of God; God did in mercy look upon him, and made: but gracious promise concerning the seed of the woman, which should bruise the head of the serpent: hereby (some conceive) is a re-assuming of all mankind into Gods favours again and that the promise is made to Adam and Eve, as the two prin∣ciples and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of mankind, and that hereby they are made an holy root, wherein all branches 〈…〉〈…〉 made holy. This place is indeed mentioned by Puccius (but Sneanus Method des. cons. sal. & dam. c. 3. &c. 4.) out of whose loins came Armi∣nius and his followers, doth much insist on this place; whereby he maketh it a blasphemy to think, that Adae maleficium should extend further than Christi bene∣ficium not indeed in the Huoerian or P••••cian sense, who hold an absolute reconci∣liation antecidently to mans faith and repentance; but conditional, or conciliabilty, or salvability of all, it they do repent and believe. But this Text cannot be a foundation for such a Doctrine. Indeed it is very difficult, and many grammatical and real doubts there are upon the place; only we must take it for granted, that there is de∣clared the first promise of a Chris: till Adam heard this from God, he could have no more hopes for his salvation, than the devils have. Therefore we are to abomi∣nate the Socinian Doctrin, who make this to be only a malediction of the serpent, or a cu••se upon that creature, putting a natural enmity between that and a man; affirming also, That Adam and Eve understood no more from God then that thing. But we see other Scriptures plainly alluding to this, as when Christ is said to be made of a wo∣man, Gal. 4. 4. and that he came into the world to destroy the works of the devil. 1 Joh. 3. 8. and in other places we find the devil called the old serpent, and the red dragon, which seduced the whole earth, Rev. 12. 9, 10. Yea Paul did allude to this promise, when he useth that expression, Rom. 16. 20. The God of peace shall shortly tread or bruise Satan under your feet. And whereas the Socinian asketh, How it can be a pro∣mise, seeing it is a curse? Can cold and hot come out of the same month? The answer is easie: therefore there is a promise, because of the curse; for in that the devil and his seed is in a mystical sense cursed by God, thereby is a promise made concerning Christ and his seed for victory over the devil; so that the promise is of excellent use and comfort; no godly man ought to fear either devil or wicked men, as long as he remembreth this promise. If Satans head be not yet bruised, if he have some life still, if he sometimes sting thee, be not discouraged; for though this promise was made long ago, yet God hath not forgotten it. But although this be so, yet we cannot from hence conclude, that God is become reconciled with all mankind; or that all after Adam's fall are received into equal grace. For we see plainly, there are two kinds distinguished in the Text, there is the Womans seed, and there is the serpents seed; and between these there is an enmity placed; The womans seed is Christ and his members (as we will here take for granted) The serpents seed are all wicked men reprobated in their sins; for by nature we are all the serpents seed; but here it speaketh of such a seed as shall continue in opposition to Christ and his people: That therefore some are the womans seed, some the serpents seed; on one part it cometh from the meer grace of God, and on the other part from the justice of God. So that this Text, if rightly considered, doth rather overthrow than establish such an uni∣versal Reconciliation of all mankind. It is true, for those who are made Christs by free discriminating grace, both this promise, and that discourse of Pauls, Rom. 5. do proclaim admirable comfort and consolation. For that condition thou wert so irrecoverably plunged into; that sinne and devil thou wert so afraid of, is wholly conquered by Christ. Hold up thy head therefore thou member of Christ and be exceeding glad, for the second Adam hath taken off that sinne, that wrath, that vengeance which the first Adam had brought upon thee. And alas! how free was this grace of God to thee? What did God

see in thee more then in the sonnes and daughters of Adam? Wast not thou in the same filth with them? Wast not thou wallowing in the same blood with them? Had not Adam infected thee, condemned thee, as well as others? Oh stand for ever admiring the unsearchable wayes of Gods grace to thee, who of a child of wrath, hath made thee a child of such special favour and mercy!

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:

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 Qu••rt. 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,

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

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

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 Ved••lius 〈◊〉〈◊〉, (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

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.

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 5^th 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,

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. 2^d 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

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

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 di••cipulum Pelagii Coelestium reatu praevaricationis Adae omne genus humanum negavit astrictum? Lyr. cont. Haeres. c. 24.

FINIS.

Notes

• Quest.
• Answ.
• Prop. 4.