Mr. Blount's oracles of reason examined and answered in nine sections in which his many heterodox opinions are refuted, the Holy Scriptures and revealed religion are asserted against deism & atheism / by Josiah King ...

Pag. 12.

I must ingeniously confess, Original Sin, was ever a difficult Pill with me to swallow; my Reason stopping it in my throat, and not having Faith enough to wash it down.—And p. 15. never did any Church enjoyn Penance, or Repen∣tance for Original Sin: wherefore it seems preposter∣ous and unreasonable, that any Man should be Damned for that, which no Man is bound to Re∣pent.

ANSWER.

That Mr. Blount hath not Faith to wash down Original Sin, which sticks in his Throat, is a thing to be lamented; this truth being so plain∣ly laid down in Holy Writ, that no Man (who hath any regard for the Scriptures) but will be offended with him, for Writing so contempta∣bly of this Doctrine.

The chief Argument which he brings for his opinion, taken from Penance and Repentance is of no force But because I think tis new, I will consider it.

In the Primitive Church Penance was only imposed for Three Crimes, viz. Idolatry, Ho∣micide, and Adultry; which is proved at large by Morinus in his fifth Book de Penitentia, cap. 3. out of Fathers and Councils; and he con∣cludes the Chapter thu — To••••ig••••ur & tantis

Testimonis freti, recte nobis videmur Colegere, quadringentis prope annis a Christo nato, Patres haec sola tria crimina Penitenta Cassigasse.

Trusting to so many Testimonies, we think we may truly conclude, that for almost Four Hundred Years after our Saviour, no Penance was Imposed, but only for these Three Crimes.

Now if Mr. Blount's Negative Argument, with relation to the Practice of the Church be valid; how many Men have lived in the World without Actual Sin? So that his Argument proves too much, a most certain sign of its Weakness.

As for the Second part of his Argument; That no Church ever required Repentance for Origi∣nal Sin, is a mistake, and proceeds from not knowing the Churches Practice.

In the Primitive Church, Repentance was required of all adult Persons, who desired Baptism; which must relate to Original as well as Actual Sin.

Tertullian in his Book de Baptismo, says, In∣gressuras Baptismum, orationibus crebris, jejuniis, & geniculationibus crebris & pervigiliis orare apor∣tet, & confessione omnium retro delectorum. Such as intend to be Baptized, must prepare them∣selves by frequent Prayers, Fastings, frequent Humiliations, Watchings, with Confession of all their Sins.

Agreeable to this ancient Practice; our Church begins its Office of Baptism with the Confession of Original Sin; in these Words, Dearly beloved, for as much as all Men are concei∣ved

and born in Sin— and our Church prays for the Pardon of the same in these Words, We call upon thee for these Infants, that they com∣ing to this Holy Baptism, may receive Remission of their Sins by spiritual Regeneration: And to the same purpose, before Tertullian, we have Justin Martyr, in his second Apology, where he says, That those who were to be Baptised; jejunare do∣centur, nobis una, cum illis, & orantibus, & jejunantibus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. They are required to Fast, the Congre∣gation also praying and fasting together with them.

Now the Church requiring all Catechumens to renounce all Sin, the Devil, and all his Works, to confess all their Sins, to fast and pray for God's Pardon, in order thereunto; What is this but Repentance, as well with re∣lation to Original, as Actual, Sins? Besides, he promises amendment in this particular, Ne∣ver to be lead by his corrupt Affections.

Agreeable hereunto, is that in the Larger Creed in Epiphanius's Ancorate, where Baptism is call'd Baptism of Repentance, and in the Creed of the Church of Jerusalem, I believe one Baptism of Repentance for the Remission of Sins.