Treatise of the Passions and Faculties of the Soul, Chapter 32
CHAP. XXXII. Of the Originall of the Reasonable Soule, whether it be immediatly Created and Infused, or derived by Seminall Traduction from the Parents. Of the Derivation of Originall sinne.
THe dignity of Man in respect of his Soule alone, may be gathered from a consideration either of the whole, or of the par…s therof. Cōcerning the whole, we shall consider two things; Its Originall, and its Nature. Concerning the Originall of the Soule, divers men have diversly thought; for, to let passe the Opinion ofaPhila…ri de Haeres. Sel…uci, &c. Seleucus, who affirmed that it was educed out of the Earth, and that b… Tract. ad Menam contra Orig. Hieron. Epist. ad M… cell. & … Theophyl. Alex. Ep. Pasc. …. Anasta…. … Anagog. contemp. lib. 11.of Origin and the Plato…ists who say that the Soules of men were long agoe created, and after detruded into the Body as into a Prison: There are three Opinions touching this question. The first of those who affirm the Traduction of the Soule by genera…, some of which so affirm because they judged … a Corporeall substance, as did cAug. de …. 86. cp. 157 de Gen. ad lit. l. 10. c. 25. Tertull. de … c. 5. 6. 7. 22. 25. 27.Tertullian. Others because they beleeved that one spirit might as easily proceed from another, as one fire or light be kindled by another: as dHieron. Epist. ad Marcelli…um. … de … … l. 2. Iuciferian apud Aug. …. 81.Apollinarius, Nemesi…, and divers in the Westerne Churches, as St. Hierome witnesseth. The second, of those who deby the naturall Traduction, and say that the Soule is … …ion infused into Bodies, organiz'd and praedisposed to receive them; of which Opinion among the Ancients were eHieron. cp. …d …am. contra Ioan▪ Hi…us.St. Hierom, fHilar. de Trin. l. 10.Hilarie, gAmbros. de Noah & Arc…. c. 4.Ambrose, hLactant. de …. Hom. c. ….Lactantius, iTheod. de curand …gr. affect. ser. 4.Theodoret. kAeneas Gaz. in su… ….Aeneas Gaz…us, and of the moderne Writers the major part. The third is of those who doe haesitare, stick betweene both, and dare affirme nothing certaine on either side, which is the moderation of lAug …p. 7. 18. 157. & …. l. 1 c. 1. de Gen. ad li…. 10. & de ….St. Augustine and Gregory mGreg. l. 7. cp. 53.the great, who affirme that this is a question incomprehensible, and unsolvable in this life. Now the only reason which caused St. Austin herein to haesitate, seemeth to have been the difficulty of traducing Originall sinne from the Parents to the Children. For saith he (writing unto St. Hierome touching the Creation of the Soule) If this Opinion doe not oppugne that most fundamentall faith of Originall sinne, let it then be mine, but if it doe oppugne it, let it not be thine.
Now since that Opinion which denieth the Traduction, seemeth most agreeable to the spirituall substance of the soule, I shall here produce some few reasons for the Creation, and solve an argument or two alledg'd for the Traduction of the Soule, reserving notwithstanding unto my selfe, and others, the liberty and modesty of St. Austins haesitation, which also I finde allowedEccles. 11. 5. by the Holy Ghost himselfe.
Two things there are of certainty in this point. 1. That the soule is not any corporeall Masse or substance measurable by quantity, or capable of substantiall augmentation. 2. That the Traduction of one thing out of another, doth connotate these two things, That the thing traduced doth derive Being from the other, as from its original principle; & that this derivation be not any other manner of way, but Ratione semi…ali, & per modum decisionis, by a seminall way, and the decision, seperation, or effluxion of substance from the other: which things being laid, The Arguments against Traduction are these.
First, the testimonies of Holy Scripture, calling God the Father of spirits, as our naturall Parent the Father of our bodies, Iob 33. 4. Eccles. 12. 7. Esa 57. 16. Num. 16. 22. 27. 16. Heb. 12. 9. Zach. 12. 1. which though they doe not according to the judgement of St. Aug. conclude the point by infallible consequence, yet doe they much favour the probability of this Opinion.
2. To have Being by Traduction, is, when the soule of the Child is derived from the soule of the Parent, by the meanes of Seed: but the Seed of the Parent cannot reach the Generation of the soule, both because the one is a Corporeall, the other a Spirituall substance, uncapable of Augmentation, or Detriment. Now that which is spirituall, cannot be produced out of that which is corporeall: neither can any Seed be discinded or issue out from the soule, being substantia sim…lex, & impartibilis, a substance simple, and indivisible.
3. That which is separable from the body, and can subsist and work without it, doth not depend in its Being or making upon it; for if by the Generation of the Body the soule be generated, by the corruption of the Body it would be corrupted; for every thing that is generable, is corruptible. But the Soule can subsist and work without the Body; therefore it doth not from corporeall generation derive its Being.
4. If the Soule be seminally traduced, it must he either from the body, or from the soule of the Parents▪ not from the Body, for it is impossible for that which is not a body, to be made out of that which is a Body, no cause being able to produce an effect out of its owne spheare, and more noble than it selfe; not from the soule, because that being a spirituall and impartible substance, can therefore have nothing severed from it by way of substantiall seed unto the constitution of another soule.
5. If there be nothing taken from the Parents, of which the soule is formed, then it is not traduced by naturall generation: but there is nothing taken from the Parents, by which the soule is formed; for then in all Abortions and miscarrying Conceptions, the seed of the Soule would perish, and by consequence the soule it selfe would be corruptible, as having its Originall from corruptible seed. These and diversH…eron. ad Pammach. & in l. 32. Eccles. 12. Co…tr. Ruffiaum l. 2. c. 1. 2. & dialog▪ de Orig…n. Anim▪ inter …peracjus Tom. other the like arguments are used to confirme the doctrine touching the Creation of the Reasonable Soule. Unto which may be added the judgement and testimony of some of the forecited Fathers. St. Hierome telleth us that the Originall of the soule in mankinde is not as in other living creatures. Since as our Saviour speaketh, The Father worketh hitherto. And the Prophet Esat telleth us, That hee formeth the spirit of m…n within him, and fram…th the hearts of all men; as it is in the Psalmes. And so Lactamius (whom I doe wonder to finde numbred amongst the Authors that affirme the Traduction of the soule, by Ruffinus, and the Author of the Dialogue amongst the works of Hierome). It may be questioned (saith he) whether the soule be generated out of the Father, Mother, or both. Neither of all three is true; Because the seed of the Soule is not put into the Body by either, or both of these. A Body may be borne out of their Bodies, because something may be out of both contributed; but a Soule cannot be borne out of their Soules, in as much as from so spirituall and incomprehensible a substance nothing can issue forth or be severed for that use. So also St. Hilary, The Soule ofHilar. de T…in. l▪ 10. & in p. 62▪ man is the work of God; the generation of the flesh is alwayes of the flesh. And againe, It is inbred and an impress'd Beliefe in all; that our Soules have a divine Originall: And in like manner Theodoret, God (saith he) frameth the Bodies of living creatures out of Bodies subsisting before; but the Soules, not of all creatures, but of Men only hee worketh foreign out of nothing that had beene before.
Against this Doctrine of the Soules Originall,At …ag. d… Res…r. G…d. de Eccles. dog. …. 23. The principall argument is drawn from the consideration of Originall sinne, and the propagation thereof, which alone was that which troubled and staggerd S. Augustine in this point. For if theAug. cp. 28. Soule be not naturally traduced, how should Originall sinne be derived from Adam unto it? And if it were not in the loynes of Adam, then neither did it sinne in his loynes; whereas the Apostle expresly telleth us, that by one Man sinne came into the world, and that in one all have sinned; and that not only by imputative participation, but by naturall Propagation, deriving an inhaerent habituall pollution, which cleaveth inseparably to the soule of every man that entreth into the world, and is the fruit of Adams loynes.
Unto which Argument to omit the different resolutions of other men touching the pollution of the Soule by the immediate contact of the flesh, and the Parents attinging the ultimate disposition of the Body, upon which naturally followeth the Union of the Soule, (God being pleased to work ordinarily according to the exigence of second causes, and not suffering any of them to be in vain for want of that concurrence, which he in the vertue of a first and supreame cause is to contribute unto them.) I shall set downe what I conceive to be the Truth in this point.
First then, it is most certaine that God did not implant Originall sinne, not take away Originall righteousnesse from Man, but man by his PraevaricationAug. de …ivit. De…. l. 13. …. 14. and Fall did cast it away, and contract sin, and so derive a defiled nature to his posterity. For as Ma…arius excellently speaketh, Adam havingMa…ar. Ho. 1…. transgressed, did lo… the pure pos…esion of his Nature.
Secondly, Originall injustice as it is a sinne, by the default and contraction of Man, so it is also a punishment by the ordination, and disposition of Divine Justice. It was mans sinne to cast awayAug. contr. Iul. l▪ 5. c▪ 3. the Image of God; but it is Gods just judgement (as hee hath that free dispensation of his owne Gifts) not to restore it againe in such manner as at first he gave it unto that nature which had so rejected and trampled on it.
Thirdly, In this Originall sinne, there are two things considerable, The Privation of that Righteousnesse, which ought to be in us; and the lust or Habituall concupiscence, which carrieth Nature unto inordinate motions. The Privation and want of Originall justice is meritoriously from Adam, who did voluntarily deprave, and reject that Originall rectitude which was put into him, which therefore God out of his most righteous and free disposition is pleased not to restore unto his Nature in his posterity againe. In the habituall lust are considerable these two things foreign The sinfull disorder of it, And foreign the Punishment of sinne by it. Consider it is as a Punishment of Adams first Praevarication; and so, though it be not efficiently from God, yet it falls under the Order of his Justice, who did most righteously forsake Adam, after his wilfull fall, and leave him in the Hand of his owne Counsell, to transmit unto us that Seminary of sinne which himselfe had contracted.
But if we consider it as a sinne, we then say that the immediate and proper cause of it, is lapsed nature whole and entire by Generation and Seminall Traduction derived upon us. But the Re…ter cause is that, from which wee receive and derive this Nature. Nature I say first fallen; for unto Nature Innocent belonged Originall Righteousnesse, and not Originall sinne.
2. Nature derived by ordinary generation as the fruit of the loynes, and of the womb. For though Christ had our Nature, yet hee had not our sinne.
3. Nature whole and entire. For neither part (as some conceive) is the Totall spring and fountain of this sinne. For it is improbable that any staine should be transfused from the Body to the Soul, as from the foule vessell to the cleane water put into it. The Body it selfe being not Soly and alone in it selfe corrupt and sinfull; else, all Abortions and miscarrying conceptions should be subject to damnation. Nothing is the seat of sin which cannot be the seat of Death the wages of sinne.
Originall sinne therefore most probably seemeth to arise by Emanation, partiall in the parts, totall in the whole; from Mans Nature as guilty, forsaken, and accursed by God for the sinne of Adam. And from the parts not considered absolutely in themselves, but by vertue of their concurrence and Vnion, whereby both make up one compounded Nature. Though then the Soule be a partiall subject or seat of Originall sinne; yet wee have not our sinne and our soule from one Author; because sinne followes not the part, but the Nature whole and entire. And though we have not from our Parents Totum naturae, yet we have totam naturam, wee have our whole nature, though not every part of our nature. Even as whole Christ was the Son of Mary, who therefore by vertue of the Communication of properties in Christ, is justly called foreign, the Mother of God, against the Nestorians in the Councell of Chalcedon. Though in regard of his divine Nature, he was without beginning; & the reason is, because the integrity of Nature ariseth from the Vnion of the two parts together, which is perfected by Generation; so then wee say that Adam is the Originall, and meritorious cause. Our next Parents, the instrumentall and immediate cause of this sinne in us, not by way of Physicall Emission or Transmigration of sinne from them to us, but by secret contagion, as S. Augustine speaks.Contr. Iulian. l. 5. c. 14. For having in the Manner aforesaid from Adam by our Parents received a nature, most justly forsaken by God, and lying under the Guilt and Curse of the first praevarication, from this Nature thus derived, as guilty and accursed doth immediately and intimately flow Habituall pollution. So then Habituall Concupiscence is from Adam alone meritoriously by reason of his first praevarication. From Adam by the mediation of our Parents seminally by naturall generation. And from Nature generated not as Nature, but as in Adam guilty, forsaken and accursed, by secret and ineffable Resultancy and Emanation. This is that which I conceive of this Great difficulty, not unmindfull in the meane time of that speech ofNihil peccato originals ad praedicandum notius, nihil ad intelligendum secretius. Au…. dc morb. Eccles. cap. 22. S. Augustine, That there is nothing more certaine to be knowne, and yet nothing more secret to be understood than Originall sinne. For other Arguments to prove the Traduction of the Soul, they are not of such moment; And therefore I passe them by, and proceed to the consideration of the Soule in its Nature.