An exact collection of the works of Doctor Jackson ... such as were not published before : Christ exercising his everlasting priesthood ... or, a treatise of that knowledge of Christ which consists in the true estimate or experimental valuation of his death, resurrection, and exercise of his everlasting sacerdotal function ... : this estimate cannot rightly be made without a right understanding of the primeval state of Adam ...

CHAP. IV.

Of the manner how Sin found Entrance into the works of God, and did seize upon all mankind, The Man Christ Jesus only excepted.

1.* 1.1 THe highest Offer of any which I have read for the resolution of this Pro∣blem, is that inquisition made by some School-men, [An dari possit creatura impeccabilis, so they render the Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.] The problem in distinct and plain English is thus. [Whether it be possible according to the Rules of Reason, that any created substance should be from its creation totally se∣cured or absolutely freed from all possibility of falling into sin.] Some of the Ancient and most Orthodoxal Fathers of the Church, as their opinions are alledged by some School-men, stand for the Negative Part of this Problem, to wit, [That it is not possible for any meer Creature to be from the moment or first time of his creation altogether impeccable, or secured from all possibility of falling into sin.] But whether the reasons or expressions of these Ancient Fathers will reach home, or amount unto the Tenents of such School-men as avouch, not only their reasons, but Authority, is not so clear; but that the discus∣sion whether of their Authorities, Meanings, or Expressions, might breed more quarrels then the School-men have already begun. However; The disputes already moved about this Point, must in the first place be restrained to meere Creatures rationall, that is, to Angels and Men. The Rational Creature, or son of man, who is likewise the Son of God, must be exempted from this enquiry And this Additional must in the second place be admitted; [Whether it were possible that any man or Angel could be perpetually freed from all possibility of fal∣ling into sin, and have been withall from the first moment of his creation intrin∣secally just and righteous.

2. That Men and Angels might (by the power of God, or special contri∣vance of his Providence) have been secured from all possibility of falling into sin, is a Position amongst rationall men unquestionable: But it is not so, whether men or Angels being so secured from all possibility of sinning could have been intrinsecally or formally righteous, or by the eternall rules of Justice and Equity it self, truly capable of everlasting punishments or tor∣ments, or of joy and happinesse everlasting. The Negative part of this Pro∣bleme is in my judgment far more probable then the Affirmative. For if the First-man, or Angels which fell, had been either by the power of their Al∣mighty Creator, or by the undefeatable contrivance of his wisdome, abso∣lutely freed from all possibilitie of sin from the first creation unto this day, they could neither have deserved any great blame or praise by continuing after this manner righteous or conformable to the divine nature for integrity of life. The case of the First-man, if he had lived to this instant without sin by such contrivance or necessitating guidance of Gods providence, had been the same, as if the child whiles his master leads his hand should write a Faire Copie, being otherwise unable to cast a letter aright when his masters hand should betaken off from his. Now if the Child or young Clerk should not in good time learn to cast his letters or draw his lines aright, he could not pretend any title to commendation or reward, how well so ever his work were performed; the whole praise would of right belong unto the manu∣duction or guidance of his Master. But if the young Clerk growing stron∣ger, should disturb or wrest the hand of his guide awry, or not suffer him to rule his hand as before he had done: by thus doing he would deserve both blame and correction.

3. Our father Adam in his first Estate had a great deale more power to regulate his own thoughts and actions by the ordinary Guidance of Gods Providence, then a child hath either to cast his Letters or draw his Lines a∣right by the sight of a Copie or ordinary direction of his master. Yet this same First Man had a power withall to neglect the guidance, or slight the di∣rections of his Creator; a power much greater to do both these wayes a∣miss, then a child hath to refuse or resist the Manuduction of his writing∣Master. By the First womans ignorance or contempt, through her husbands negligence or inadvertence to that First and Great Commandement, which was given to both of them [Of the tree in the middle of the garden ye shall not eat &c.] that which we call Originall sin, or the maine roote of all sins, found en∣trance into the visible world, that is, into the nature of man. The extract of what we have said, or have to say, Concerning this point, is very well set down by St. Austine and some others of the Ancients; [That the First Man was truly endowed with a Free-will or power, not to have sinned at all: That if he had used this power aright, or implored the assistance of his Creator in competent time, for so using it; he should have been endowed with a perpetuall immunity from sin: that is; Albeit he was not from his Creation either by nature or by supernatu∣rall endowment utterly impeccable; yet by the assistance and benignity of his Grati∣ous Creator, he might have attained unto such a perpetuall estate or immunity from falling into sin.]

4.* 1.2 Suppose he had preserved or imployed the Talent concredited unto him at his first creation, aright: should the superaddition or crowning of his First Estate with perseverance, have been a meer gift of grace, or rather a kinde of merit? This is a Question not very pertinently moved by some Schoole-men, and the Contradictory to their determination more inconsi∣derately maintained by some modern Disputants or Logical Criticks. For seeing Adam received that great Talent concredited to him in his creation, not absolutely, or to use it as he pleased, but at his perill or under express pe∣nalty, that if he misimployed it, or contemned his Commandement which bestowed it upon him, he should dye the death: it is no way improbable, that if he had improved his Talent for some competent time, that the state wherein he was created should have been hereditary to him and his; not by such free Grace as is bestowed upon us under the Gospell, but by way of Merit de congruo; though not according to Commutative, yet to Distributive Justice, rather then by meere Mercy or benignity. But this opinion I vent not with any intention to move or abett disputes or controversies already moved about this curious Question; but rather to perswade the Reader, that all questions concerning the Merits of works, or of perseverance in that Grace by which all good works are wrought, must be reduced, or confined to the estate or condition of mankinde since Adams Fall. Of which Questi∣on thus stated or limited, I shall (I hope) be able to give the Reader, or any that will soberly dispute or conferr with me in it, better satisfaction, Vivâ voce, then this Treatise without digression will permit me to do. The prin∣cipall Points in it, or which I had in my thoughts either to prosecute or propose,* 1.3 are these following.

First, That albeit the First man were by vertue of Creation righteous and just, yet were neither his perseverance or non-perseverance in this righteousnesse absolutely necessary; both of them possible. That both were possible hath been declared at Large before in the sixth book of Commenta∣ries upon the Creed:* 1.4 unto which I referr the Ingenuous Reader, where he may finde this proposition (as I take it) demonstrated; [That to decree or

appoint a mutual or reciprocal Possibility between our First Parents perseverance or non-perseverance was Facible to the Omnipotent Creator, because it neither im∣plies nor presupposeth any Contradiction in Terminis.] And whatsoever ef∣fect or praenotion answerable unto it implies no Contradiction either in it self or to the Goodnesse of the Divine Nature or Deity, is Facible by Pow∣er Omnipotent: that is, The Almighty Creator might have decreed, or yet may decree it when he pleaseth.

The Second Principle or supposition in this place to be handled is; [Whe∣ther the Almighty Creator did de Facto decree or ordain that neither the Perseve∣rance or non-perseverance of the First Man or of our First Parents, should be ab∣solutely Necessary, but contingent.] Or, in other terms thus; [That the Estate or condition wherein they were created might have continued to this day for them and their successors undefeatable.] That their Perseverance or the perseve∣rance of their Posterity in the state of Righteousnesse wherein they were created, was not necessary by any Divine Ordinance or decree, is clear from the Event; because the First man and the First woman did fall de Facto from that Estate wherein they were created, which neither of them could have done, if their First Estate had been by vertue of the Almighties Decree or any ordinance from him Immutable, or absolutely Necessary. But can it be as strong∣ly proved, That the fall of our first Parents, or their eating of the Forbidden Fruit did not proceed from any necessitating Decree, or undefeatable con∣trivance of the Almightie Creators Wisdom? To perswade men which have not their senses exercised in points of Logical or Scholastick disputes, that the Fall of our First Parents was not necessary, no, not in respect of the Divine Decree or ordinance, would be a harder task, then to prove that their Per∣severance was not in respect of that Decree, necessary. That our First Pa∣rents did fall from their Estate, is a Question of Fact of which every honest good man may be a competent Judge, at least able enough to resolve himself. But whether it was as possible for them not to have fallen, as it was to fall, is Questio Juris, or more then so, a point of Metaphysical or Theological disquisition; wherein it would be very hard to find a Grand-Jury of Profest Divines in any one County almost throughout this Kingdom, which could be competent Judges or fit Inquisitors: Not that they want either skill or in∣dustry for interpreting sacred Scripture, which is the only true rule of Faith and manners, aright; but for want of skill or memory in Secular Arts, how to examine or determine what Consequences or inferences are consonant or dissonant to the undoubted Rule of Faith, or to the unquestionable Maxims contained in it. For deciding or waiving such Controversies as are emergent not so much out of the sence of Scriptures, as out of such Inferences or Conse∣quences (whether negative or affirmative) as contentious or unresolved spi∣rits would fasten upon it, Recta ratio, that is, Reason regulated by Rules of unquestionable Arts or Sciences, is the most competent Judge. That there is but one God and one Lord; That the only God is a God of Goodness and willeth no wickednesse, are positive points of Faith and Christian Belief; Fundamental Maxims in Theologie. To dispute or move any question directly about the truth or limitation of these Maxims, would be a branch of Infidelity, or, which perhaps is worse, an approach to Blasphemy.

Notes

• * 1.1

  No Creature from the first moment of its Creation was altoge∣ther impec∣cable.
• * 1.2

  The question about merit of works, no way concerns the First man in his primae∣val Estate.
• * 1.3

  The First man was neither necessitated to continue good, nor to become Evil.
• * 1.4

  In the 2 Part, 2 Sect. Chap. 13. &c. of the Attributes.