An essay of original righteousness and conveyed sin wherein the question is sightly stated, the latent venome of some of Dr. Jeremiah Tayler's heretical assertions detected, and accurately impugn'd. By [J.] Ford gentlemen.
Ford, John, Mayor of Bath.
Page  103


The former Doctrine proved out of the Fathers, shamefully corrupted by Dr. Tayler.

IS it possible that a man that pre∣tends not only to be a Christian, but a Minister, a Preacher of the Word, a Doctor, and such as is generally counted for a learned and spiritual writer among the Protestants, so far to forget him∣selfe, as most shamefully to bring Antiquity it selfe for his Doctrine, and particularly those very Au∣thors who were the greatest oppo∣sers of his Pelagian Heresie, as Chrysostom, S. Ignat. Martyr, S. Am∣brose,Page  104 &c. Sure the Dr. cannot gain but dishonour and infamy, in al∣ledging Authors for patronage of his Errors, the whole straine of whose writings are so directly op∣posite unto him and his Doctrine; and in producing these Doctors as of his minde and judgement, he doth but abuse them, and they rightly understood, accuse him: For not one of the passages quoted out of the Fathers by him that give the least shadow of an appro∣bation or countenance to any of those his heretical Assertions; nei∣ther do I find, to my remembrance, throughout his whole Treatise of Original Sin one quotation, ta∣ken either out of Scripture, Fa∣thers, or modern Interpreters, per∣tinently applied, nor any solid thing like an Argument to prove the thing he undertakes to shew, Page  105 as the ingenious Reader shall clearly perceive; and that all his Allegations out of Scripture and Fathers help him not at all, but ra∣ther expresly speak against him: Doe but take notice, with what Engines doth he draw his Conclu∣sion from the premisses of S. Dio∣is. Areopag. his doctrine; for no∣thing doth he say that looks his way, but rather against him; here are his words, lib. de Ecclesiast. Hierarch. c. 3 p. 3. where he doth ascribe Adams sin to all humane nature, and at last giveth a reason for it, Quia natura humana cedens fraudibus Satanae vitale jugum ex∣cussit. I refer the Reader to this place in the Author, where he will plainly finde all along the Doctor Tayler impugned; he brings S. Ig∣natius his doctrine to agree with his; but its observable that in him Page  106 there is no syllable to prove how or wherein; whereas in his Epistle ad Trallianos he hath thus. Christus dilexit nos dans semetipsum pro no∣bis ut nos sanguine suo mundaret ab antiqua impietate. Here lieth the miserable mistake of the Doctor Tayle, taking impiety for tempo∣ral death, which is most absurd and ridiculous: for impiety here by the Saint is taken for Adams sin conveyed to mankind, for which Christ died: S. Irenaeus; lib. 5. c. 17. hath these words: Delevit Chri∣stus Chirographum, viz. debita nostra affigens illud cruci uti quemamodum per lignum facti sumus debitores Deo, per lignum accipiamus debiti remis∣sionem. Are not these words ex∣presly against the Doctors doctrine; for out of this Author every relative from Adam descendant has contra∣cted a debt through Adams trans∣gression; Page  107 for every particular indi∣vidual had obligation in Adam to preserve original righteousnesse; and because it was not preserv'd, but lost by Adam for him and us his posterity, every of us becomes indebted to God for the same, which in effect is original sin, the which is remitted by the sacred blood of Christ in his Sacrament of Baptism. The Reader may finde more to this purpose in this Author, l. 3. c. 20. and in S. Aug. lib. 1. contra Julianum, c. 2. Tertul∣lian in his Book de anima, c. 40. hath Omnis anima eous{que} in Adam censeur donec in Christo recensea∣tur, tamdiu imunda quamdiu re∣censeatur; peccatrix autem quiae imunda. Is no this to make eve∣ry soule a sinner alwayes before Baptism, which taketh away the stain of original sin, contracted by Page  108 and in Adam, quite contrary to Dr Taylors judgement. Origines hom. 8. in Leviticum, saith, Quae∣cunque anima in carne nascitur, ini∣quitatis & peccati sorde polluitur, propter quod dictum est nemo mun∣dus a sorde, nec Infans cujus est u∣ui is diei vita super terram: By this Assertion every soule born from A∣dams flesh is counted polluted with sin and iniquity, and every Infant is proved to have the same sin in∣herent in him; which come quite opposit to Dr. Taylers deliration, in applying this iniquity and sin here meant by Origines, to effects of mortality. And S. Eyprian, quoted by the Dr. lib. 3. Epist. 8. ad Fi∣dum, saith, Recens natus nil pecca∣vit nisi quod secundum Adam carna∣liter natus contagium mortis antiquae prima nativitate cntraxit; this Saint, and likewise all the rest, by Page  109 ancient death, do mean, sin, and eternal death, whereas from sin came death; according to S. Paul, stipendium peccati mors, the wages of sin is death, sin the precedent cause to death, the subsequent ef∣fect; quite contrary to the Do∣ctors dream, mistaking temporal death for the eternal. I refer the ingenious Reader to S. Athanas. in his Sermon upon those words, Omnia mihi tradicta sunt, &c. and to S. Hilarius, in explicatione, Psal. 32. diligis misericordiam & judici∣um: in which places Doctor Tay∣lor is confuted and impugned most manifestly as a pernicious Impo∣stor. The Doctor boldly avers that all Antiquity is on his side; set∣ting down barely two or three broken ends of Sentences, ground∣ing no Argument, as indeed he cannot, upon those passages for Page  110 his opinion. The Doctor seems ra∣ther ambitious to be accounted a∣ble to reade a piece of the Fathers Writings, then able to understand them; he cited the Fathers most impertinently and imperfectly; endeavouring to make his owne face and impure Doctrine clean, by throwing dirt in great Saints fa∣ces. He did not like an honourable Guest expect a meal from them, but like a beggar, their scraps aad fragments onely. I refer the Rea∣der to fol 483. in his Explication of Original sin, where he cites S. Ambrose sor him: est & alia mors quae secunda dicitur, &c. there is an∣otherdeath in hell, which is called the second death, which we suffer not for Adam's sin: this testimony of S. Ambrose is plain against the Doctor, for why doth he leave out that which goeth before, and Page  111 which followeth? for the illumi∣nated Doctor in his precedent words affirmed, that we all sinned in the masse of Adam; and his fol∣lowing discourse clearly states the question, and declares down-right, that Adam's sin is derived to his posterity: these are his words in Apologia David, cap. 11. antequam nascimur maculamur contagio, an∣tequam usuram lucis originis ipsius injuriam excipimus, in iniquitate con∣cipimur, quid clarius: and a little after, merito David deploravit in se inquinamenta naturae quod prius inciperet in homine macula quam vi∣ta: and further, lib. 1. de peniten∣tia, c. 2. omnes homines sub peccato nascimur quorum ipse ortus in vitio est. See many more manifest places in S. August. lib. 1. in Jul. c. 2. & lib. de nuptiis & concupiscentia, c. 35. & lib. 1. ad Bonifacium, c. 11: Thus Page  112 you see how manifestly Doctor Tay∣lor doth set down some lose frag∣ments of the Saints, as it wee for him, and conceals the rest that declares the Saints minde and tru sense▪ which he doth break and pitifully mangle; not understand∣ing what he reades or writes from Authous against his conscience and truth. And the Authour Co∣mentar▪ in Epistolas Pauli, which are attributed to S. Ambrose, Coment. in c. 5. ad Romanos holdeth forth thus, Manifest••• est omnes in A∣dam peccasse ut in mss, Doctor Taylor leaves out stolidly that which follows, because it makes expresly against his Doctrine. What doth follow is this, Ipse enim (meaning Adam) per peccatum corruptus, quos genuit, omnes nati sunt in pec∣cato, ex eo igitur peccatores quia 〈◊〉 ipso sumus omnes. Here S. AmbroseoPage  113 doth expresly teach Original sin derived from Adam to all his rela∣tive descendants; so that I can∣not but wonder at the new Doctors frontless boldness, in averring that all Antiquity is for him: when the Reader doth manifestly see all the ancient Doctors and Fathers rather against him. S. Chrysostom hom. 10. in Roman is quoted by the Doctor most maimedly and shamefully pag. 484. it seems to have in it no small question that it is said, that by the disobedience of one man many becaue sinners; for sinning and be∣ing made mortal, it is not unlike∣ly that they which spring from him should be so too: but that an∣other should be made a sinner by his disobedience, what agreement or consequent can it have? &c. here the Saint makes many interiogati∣ons, all which are expressed by Page  114 our Modern Doctor; but leaves out quite the ancient Doctors an∣swer, minde, and sound conclusi∣on: these words are omitted, quod autm in questionem cadit est qua de causa id factum est? the Saint in∣quires the cause of the punishment of death derived from Adam to all mankinde, qua de causa nondum addidit exquirit mortis radicem quae igitur est mortis radix? suppli∣cinm ex uno in omnes derivatum fu∣isse Paulus ostendit: quae radix mor∣tis? the Saint answers and resolves his own quaere, that it was sin. Propterea art ut sicut regnaverat peccatum in mortem it a & gratia re∣gnaret per justitiam ad vitam eter∣nam per Christum; hoc dixit osten∣dens peccatum loco Regis fuisse, mor∣tem autem loco militis sub peccato in acies tantem & ab illo armatam: now comes in the Saints Conclusi∣on Page  115 expresly against D. Taylor: Ergo s••peccatum mortem armavit clarum est quod justitia per gratiam ad ve∣cta que peccatum tollt & mortem spo∣liat & dissolvit. And a little after he saith, Quod igitur Christi Crux & Sepulchrum hoc nobis Baptisma fuit; ille enim carni & nortuus & se∣pultus; nos autem peccato & mortui & sepulti ubi peccatum ibi mors nam & suplicio liberati sumus & vitium deposuimus & de integro regenerati sumus & resurreximus, sepulto vetere homine, & redempti & sanctificati & adopti Filii & justificati, & Fratres effecti in eandem corporis unitatem redacti & ut corpus capiti fic illi u∣niti sumu. Hence the ingenious Reader may infer, how that the Saint doth alleadge that temporall death is the effect of sin; and that if we derive no sin from Adam, death we cannot derive, which is Page  116 the punishment of sin: and for this reason it was decreed in the Aravsican Councell, Can. 2. Non posse mortem sine peccato ad hominem transire nisi injustitia Deo daretur & contra dicatur Apostolo dicenti per unum hominem peccatum intravit in mundum. I deliver it in English thus: Temporall death (allowed by D. Taylor) cannot be conveyed as punishment to Adam's children without sin, unless great injustice be offered to God, and a contra∣diction to S. Paul's Doctrine, vz. By the sin of one man death entred, &c. This is the express down∣right Doctrine of S. John Chryso∣stom, who vigorously holds forth Baptisme as a laver and sepulcher of sin; saying, Peccato mortui & sepulti, &c. and that beside the bare imputation and communication of Adam's sin, deam'd of by Dr. Page  117Taylor, there is in every Infant newly born Original sin inherent, which is a privation of Originall justice, a guilt of eternall death, a stain, spot, enmity with God, the guilt of punishment: which is an obligation or ordination to pu∣nishment: where the Saint con∣demns Dr. Taylor's folly in aver∣ring that Original sin is nothing other then Adam's actual sin barly imputed to his Posterity. For fur∣ther declaration hereof, S. Cirillus Herosolimitan, Cathechesi 2. hath most important Doctrine, to him I remit the Reader—S. Gregory Na∣zian, Orat. 3. de pace, saith to our purpose, Totus lapsus sum atque ex primigenii hominis inobedientia & diaboli fraude condemnatus sum: S. Herom. in Commentario Oseae, c: 6. in paradiso omnes prevaricati sunt in similitudinem prevaricationis Adam, Page  118non enim est mirum quod in parente precessi hoc in fiis condemnetur this Doctor and S. Cyprian doth admonish Infants to be baptized. The Reader may finde much more to our purpose in S. John Chrysostom in homilia ad Neop••tos. Look Ru∣finus in Comentario in Psal. 20. S. Si∣ricius in Eist. 1. ad Himer. cap. 2. with many more in S. August. lib.. in ulianum.