Commentary on Romans — Peter Martyr Vermigli

Commentary on Romans · Peter Martyr Vermigli

But yet the gifte is not ſo, as is the ſinne.] Wherefore betweene Adam Betwene Chriſt and Adam is not a true ſimilitude but an analogy or proportion.and Chriſte is to be put rather a certaine analogye and proportion: then a true ſimilitude. But to make thoſe thinges which follow more playne we will deuide in to thrée partes, al this whole compariſon, which conſiſteth of ſimilitudes, of contraries, and of thinges compared together. Firſte the Apoſtle plainelye teacheth, that the ſinne of Adam is not ſo as is the gifte: for the gifte many wayes excelleth and paſſeth the ſinne. Secondly he expreſſeth wherin conſiſteth this victory: namely, in this, that whereas Adam had by one ſinne corrupted all mankinde, Chriſte hath not onelyonly aboliſhed that one ſinne, but alſo a greate many other ſinnes, whiche we hauehave ſince committed. Laſt of all he declareth, what that aboundāce of good things is, which Chriſt hath brought vntounto his elect. As touching the firſte, this we muſte know, that Chriſt is ſo compared with Adam, that he is alwayes made the ſuperiour. Neither is this to be paſſed ouer, that Paul expreſſeth ſinne by two names,Chriſt is ſo compared with Adā, that he is alwayes made the ſuperior. They which ſinne do firſt …re and afterward fall. foreign, & foreign. By which names this we learne, that they which ſinne, doo firſt erre, and afterward fall. For theſe two are thorowly knitte together. Wherefore the cōmon ſaying is, he that followeth a blind man muſt néedes fall. This alſo let vsus obſerue, that Paul in this compariſon continually in a maner vſeth theſe woordes foreign, & foreign, That is grace: foreign, & foreign: that is, gift, to declare, that our ſaluation commeth not vntounto vsus of any of our owne dignity, or of works, but onelyonly of the meere mercy of God. The wordes are thus:

For if thorow the offence of one, many be dead, muche more the grace of God, and the gifte by Grace, whiche is by one man Ieſus Chriſt, hath abounded vntounto many.

For if through the offence of one,] When he ſayth that thorow the ſinne of one man many hauehave died, he taketh not away or altereth that whiche he before wrote, namely, that death had gone ouer all. For this worde Many, oughte in thys place to be of aſmuch force, as if he had ſayd All, euen by the teſtimony of Origene alſo. Wherfore that abideth firme, which was before auouched, That all men hauehave ſinned: & that all are therefore ſubiecte vntounto death. By Grace he vnderſtandeth the fauour of God, whereby ſinnes are forgeuen. This woord Gift peraduentureWhat grace is with the ſcholemen. ſignifieth the holy Ghoſt, and other good thinges, which men by the holy Ghoſt obteyne. But the ſchoole men ſay that Grace is a quality powred into our hartes by God, whereby we lead an holy & godly life: and by this grace ſaye they is a man iuſtified. But that kind of iuſtification ſhoulde pertaine vntounto the law. For it ſhoulde conſiſt of thoſe thinges which are in vsus. Wherefore the true iuſtification, whereof is now intreated, commeth from Chriſte, of whome thorough fayth, and the grace or fauour of God we take holde: not that we deny the other kinde of grace. For we put both kinds: namely both the inſtauration of the beleuers to liue vprightly, and alſo the imputation of righteouſnes by Chriſt: whereunto whole and perfect iuſtification cleaueth: that that might be true which we reade in Iohn, that we hauehave receaued grace for grace: and by that grace, wherby Chriſt was of valew before the father, we are receaued into his grace. The nature of y^• Antitheſis required, y^• euen as he had ſayd, that thorow the offence of one mā, many hauehave died, ſo he ſhould on the other ſide hauehave ſayd, that through the righteouſnes of one, the fauor of God hath abounded vponupon many. But he would rather put Grace and gifte: for that theſe two thinges are the fountaines and rootes of righteouſnes, and of eueryevery good thinge, whiche we by righteouſnes obteyne. And he therefore ſaith, that it abounded (whiche in the Greeke is foreign) to geue vsus to vnderſtand, that thereWe hauehave more grace then is ſufficient to extinguiſhe ſinne. was more grace beſtowed vponupon men, then ſhould be ſufficient to extinguiſh ſinne. For, for that we hauehave obteyned forgeuenes of ſinnes, wee are alſo borne againe, and we riſe againe wyth Chriſte, and are ſanctified, and adopted into the children of God, and are made the bretherne of Chriſte, and fellow heyres wyth hym, & are grafted into his members, & are ioyned w^t hym as the body with the head: no otherwiſe, then if vntounto a man hauing a ſore wound, ſhould be geuē ſuch a plaiſterA ſimilitude or medicine, as ſhould not onelyonly heale the wounde, but alſo make the whole bodyAn other ſimi…itude. more ſtronger, and much fayrer then it was before. Chriſostome addeth an other ſimilitude of a man far indebted, which hauing not wherwithal to pay, is caſt into priſon with his wife, children, & all his familie: vntounto whom commeth ſome mighty monarch or emperour, and diſpatcheth not onelyonly the money which he aught to other men, but alſo taketh him out of priſon, leadeth him vntounto his courte, exalteth him to dignitie, placeth him in a kingdom, and heapeth him vp with all maner of riches: ſo hath Chriſt dealt with vsus miſerable mortall men. Farther he compareth theſe two thinges together, to merite vntounto others condemnation, and to merite vntounto others ſaluation. And he ſaith: that it ſemeth far more ſtrange from reaſon,It is mere ſtrange ſ…ō reaſon to merite vntounto an other cō demnation▪ then ſaluation. to merite vntounto an other condemnation, then to merite ſaluation. Wherefore, the conning handling of Paul is much to be commended, which declareth that that is done, which ſemed to be more abſurde, that we mighte the eaſelier vnderſtande that Chriſt hath merited vntounto vsus remiſſion of ſinnes. For we ſée this oftentymes to happen, that a man is deliuered out of miſery, at the requeſt or for fauor of ſome excellent and noble man.

Neither is the gift ſo, as is that which entred by one that ſinned. For the iudgement came of one offence vntounto condemnatiō: but the gift is of many offences to iuſtification.

Neither is the gift ſo, &c.] Here teacheth he that whiche was the ſeconde parte of our deuiſion: namely, that herein conſiſteth that excellēcy of Chriſt, wherby he farre paſſed Adam, for that he hath not onelyonly aboliſhed one ſinne which was brought in by Adam, but alſo hath taken away infinite other ſinnes. foreign, that is iudgement, ſignifieth in this place giltines. But that which is added, foreign, that is of one, it is doubtfull whither it ought to be referred vntounto the ſinne, or vntounto man. But bicauſe to which of either it be referred, it commeth all to one effect, it ſkilleth not much whether way it be expounded. Paul vntounto iudgement ſemeth to oppoſe y^• gift: and vntounto condemnation, iuſtification. Neither let vsus meruail, that he ſo long tarieth in this place, and doth with ſo great diligence handle, and as it were poliſhWhy Paul tarieth ſo long in this place. one and the ſelfe ſame thing. For it is an excellent foundatiō of our ſaluation. And therfore to the end it ſhould not ſlippe from vsus, it was requiſite, that it ſhoulde be plainly and exactly ſet forth. Howbeit, here ariſeth vntounto vsus a doubt not to be neglected. For ſeing that the ſinne of Adam hath ſo corrupted man, y^• our whole kind of his owne nature can now do nothyng els but ſinne, and whatſoeuer ſinnes hauehave afterward followed, are the fruites of that tranſgreſſion: the ſinne of Adam may ſeme to hauehave bene of no leſſe force to deſtroy, then the grace of Chriſte to reſtore. To diſſolue this doubt, we confeſſe that of the offence of the firſt parent, and of originall ſinne diſperſed abrode into eueryevery one of vsus, do ſpring other ſinnes. Howbeit,All other ſinnes are not of neceſſitie knit with originall ſinne. this is to be noted, that all wicked actes are not ſo of neceſſitie knit with originall ſinne, that they ſtreightway procede therof. For otherwiſe we ſhould all commit ſo many and the ſelfe ſame ſinnes. And that this is not true, both the thing it ſelfe, & alſo experience teacheth. Wherfore Paul conſidered, that thorough our counſels & deliberations, are after a ſort infinite ſinnes added vntounto that firſt fault, but y^• grace of God through Ieſus Chriſt hath not onelyonly remoued away that one ſinne, which is in vsus by nature, but alſo hath from (in a maner) infinite other ſinnes brought vsus vntounto righteouſnes, & hath after a ſorte for one ill turne, rendred vntounto vsus thrée good. For he hath both aboliſhed that one ſinne which is in vsus by nature, and hath remouedThe ſinne of Adam recheth to more then the righteouſnes of Chriſt. This cōpariſon is not as touching the nūber, but as touching the effectes. away infinite other ſinnes, which we hauehave committed ſince, and hath reſtored vsus to a righteous life. Howbeit there is again obiected, that the ſinne of Adam is deriued into more, then the righteouſnes of Chriſt. For we are all infected in Adam, but we are not all deliuered in Chriſt. For many ſhall be condemned vntounto euerlaſting deſtruction. Here is to be aunſwered, that Paul referred not his power to the number of them which ſhal either be damned, or be ſaued: but only vntounto the effects which hauehave come both from Adam and from Chriſt. Vnles we will ſay, that there are more ſaued by the grace of Chriſt, then hauehave periſhed by originall ſinne drawn from Adam. For only certaine infants periſh by meanes of it, but they which are of ful age, and condēned, periſh not by meanes of it only, but alſo by reaſon of actuall ſinnes, which they hauehave moreouer committed, neither hauehave they much wherofThe grace of Chriſt of his own nature is ſuffecient for all men. to complaine of Adam: but they which are ſaued, are ſaued only by the benefit and grace of Chriſt. Wherfore Chriſt ſaueth more, then Adam deſtroyeth. Farther, though all men are not brought to ſaluation, yet the merite and grace of Chriſte, was of it ſelfe ſufficient for all men. But why all men are not predeſtinate vntounto ſaluation, can not be rendred a reaſon perticularly. But we ought to iudge of that power which Chriſt hath to ſaue, not by the hidden counſell of God, which we can not vnderſtand, but by the forme of the promiſe whiche is had in the Scriptures. And that promiſe is generall, neither is it by y^• kinde of ſpeache drawen vntounto one man more then vntounto an other. Moreouer the Apoſtle for this cauſe with ſo manyThe benefit of Chriſt is of more might to ſaue thē the ſinne of Adā to deſtroy. wordes teacheth, that the benefite of Chriſt was of more might to ſaue, then the ſinne of Adam was to deſtroy, for that this doctrine is exceding neceſſary. And therfore let vsus beware, that we neuer ſuffer it to ſlip away from vsus: for this is continually to be oppoſed vntounto the greuouſnes of our ſinnes, and vntounto the infirmitie, wherby, as experience teacheth vsus, we continually fall. For there is none, whiche if he caſt his eyes vponupon his ſinnes, and vponupon the infirmitie wherewith he is infected, is not ſtraight way diſcouraged and vtterly in diſpaire, vnles he looke vppon the might and victory of Chriſt: for therein only he comforteth himſelfe, and conceiueth an aſſured hope of his ſaluation. And by two things chiefly is made manifeſt the power and efficacy of Chriſt againſt ſinne: Firſt, for that he bringeth to paſſe, that the haynous wicked actes which we hauehave committed are not imputed: Secondly, for that through the holy ghoſt he geueth vntounto vsus ſtrengths, wherby we are reſtored, and the rages of our naturall luſt are broken. Chriſt fought againſte ſinne, wherfore we muſt nedes make him either ſuperior vntounto ſinne, or equall, or els leſſe. To ſay that he was leſſe, is both falſe and impious: for then it ſhould follow that he was ouercome of ſinne. If we make him equall, then will it follow,Proues that Chriſt is of more might then ſinne. Two kingdomes to be conſidered. that ſinne is not yet vanquiſhed: for then ſhould they hauehave left, leuing the victory vncertaine. But ſeyng it is ſaid, that ſinne is ouercome, then followeth that which Paul ſaith: namely, that Chriſt was mightier then it. Two kingdomes are to be ſet before our eyes, y^• kingdom of Chriſt, & the kingdom of Sathan. That Chriſtes kingdome got the victory, Chriſt himſelf declareth in the Goſpel, where he ſayth: That the ſtrōg armed mā ſo long time liued quietly and peaceably, til ſuch time as a ſtronger then he came vpō him. For then was he ouercome, and the other which was mightier thē he, caried away his ſpoiles & armor. Wherfore we muſt warely take hede leſt being to much intentiue to thoſe ſins which we hauehave cōmitted, we deſperatly ſay w^t C…in. Our ſinne is greater thē that it can be forgeuen. For this were contumelious blaſphemy againſt Chriſt to ſay, that there is ſome ſinne to be found, which canThe deſperation of Cayn is cō tumelious blaſphemy againſt Chriſt. Here is not ſpoken of ſin againſt the holy ghoſt. The ſinne which remaineth in the regenerate declareth the might of Chriſt. not be ouercome of him But here is no mete place to declare, why ſinne againſt the holy ghoſt is not forgeuē, nether alſo maketh it any thing to the purpoſe: for we ſpeake of them which are conuerted vntounto Chriſt, which can hauehave no place in thoſe which ſinne againſt the holy ghoſt. Nether doth this a litle helpe to the acknowledging of the victory of Chriſt, that ſinne ſtill after a ſort abideth in the regenerate. For although there be ſinne in them, yet Chriſt by his power ouer whelmeth it, ſo that it can not hurt. For ſinne is now taken priſoner and brokē: as ſomtimes enemies are takē on liue of emperors or Captaines, & reſerued on liue againſt a triūph y^• one & the ſelfe ſame day may be both vntounto y^• Emperour for a triūph & vntounto the enemies cōquered, vtter deſtructiō. Chriſt ſhall come to iudge, & ſhal in y^• ſight of y^• whole world triumph. And as it is writtē vntounto y^• Cor. The laſt enemy death ſhall be deſtroyed, and together with him, ſinne his continuall companion. But that in the meane time we hauehave ſinne in vsus it is nothing preiudiciall vntounto our ſaluation. And it is the Goſple to beleue, that ſinne is remitted and forgeuen vsus, although it ſtill abide in vsus. Howbeit nether the wiſedome ofThe philoſophers vnderſtand not that there is ſin in vsus, and yet we are iuſt. the fleſhe nor philoſophy can attayne to the knowledge of this. For philoſophy pronounceth none to be iuſt, ſtrong, wiſe, and temperate, but he which hath gotten theſe vertues by often actions, and vpright workes. But we contrariwiſe in the kingdome of Chriſt affirme, that a ſinfull man, though he be neuer ſo wicked, ſo ſone an he is conuerted vntounto Chriſt, and with a true faith taketh hold of him, is ſtreaight way before God iuſt. By foreign, the Apoſtle in this place vnderſtandeth, iuſtification, of this verbe foreign, which ſignifieth, to be pronounced iuſt, & to be acquited. Although in this ſelfe ſame epiſtle in the 1. chapter we rede, which when they knew the righteouſnes of God, how that they which committe ſuch thinges are worthy of death yet doo not only the ſame, but alſo conſent vntounto them that do them. That which is there turned in latine, Iuſticiam, and in engliſhe Righteouſnes, is in the Greke foreign, and ſignifieth in that place a law preſcribed of God. Nether is it to be meruayled at, that theſe ſignificatious are ſo changed: for they are not vtterly differing one from the other. For ſome times they are compared together as the cauſe and the effect. For therefore amongſt men is a man acquited of the iudge, for that he hath done thinges iuſt, and hath bene obediēt vntounto the lawes. But thus can not we be before God. For we are not abſolued from him, for that we hauehave fulfilled his commaundements. Only Chriſt hath fulfilled them. Wherfore not only he himſelfe is iuſtified, but alſo his righteouſnes, & performance of the law is adiudged vntounto vsus, foraſmuch as we are counted amongſt his members. Here he beginneth to expreſſe y^• which was the third part of our diuiſion by what meanes Chriſt hath placed in his elect thoſe good thinges, which he hath brought vntounto vsus: and theſe good thinges are in them moſt plentifull, and alſo moſt firme and ſtable. This he gathereth of the Antitheſis: for euen as Adam brought in ſinne and death, and ſo brought them in, that they hauehave raigned: ſo Chriſt hath geuē vntounto his, life, grace, and righteouſnes, not after any common ſort, but moſt liberally and aboundantly.

For if thorough the offence of one, death raigned thorough one, much more ſhall they, which receaue the aboundance of grace, & of the gifte of righteouſnes, raigne in life thorough one Ieſus Chriſt.

For if thorough the offence &c.] This reaſō is thus to be declared: If Adam could ſo poure in ſin & death into men, that they raigned in them: much more isThis amplification is to be noted. the ſame to be graunted vntounto Chriſt. And the amplification of the woordes is in this ſort. It is a greater matter, & of more efficacy to ſay plēty & aboundance of grace, thē ſimply to ſay, grace. And this hath a greater emphaſis, to ſay, y^• gift of righteouſnes, thē if he had ſayd, righteouſnes ſimply. For whē it is called y^• gift of righteouſnes, there is ſignified, that it cōmeth freely. Farther it is of more efficacy to raigne in life, then after a ſort to obteyne life. But what force this word of raigning hath one eche ſide, may thus be vnderſtand. Let vsus ſet before our eyes a man that is a ſtrāger from Chriſt. In him doth ſinne not only abide,Sinne to raigne, what it ſignifieth. but alſo mightely raigne: that although he ſometimes hauehave excellent endeuors, and now and then doth ſome morall workes in ſhew moſt goodly, yet he can by no meanes ſhake of that tirrany: but whatſoeuer he doth, it worketh vntounto him vntounto death and condemnation. This is, ſinne and death to raigne in a mā. On the other ſide let vsus ſet before vsus a godly man and one grafted into Chriſt. ThisRighteouſnes to raigne what it ſignifieth. Life a companion of righteouſnes. man hath life and righteouſnes, and ſo hath them, that they raigne in him: wherfore although his nature be vncleane, and his affections corrupted, and he ſome times falleth, yet notwithſtanding ſtandeth he agaynſt all theſe thinges, and is brought to ſaluation. Moreouer by this place we are tought, that life followeth righteouſnes: as before we learned, that death followeth ſinne. And thereof it cō meth, that the ſcriptures very oftentimes ioyne life with faith: for by faith we take hold of righteouſnes. And this order of the ſcripture Paul confirmeth; whē he ſo often reherſeth this ſentence of Abacuck the Prophet. The iuſt man liueth by fayth. Chriſt alſo ſayth, He that beleueth in the ſonne of God, hath eternall life. And this is eternall life to acknowledge thee to be the true God, & Ieſus Chriſt whom thou haſt ſent. The Apoſtle hath now in a maner in theſe wordes finiſhed the compariſon which he ſet forth betweene Adam and Chriſt. In which place this is not to be paſſed ouer, to put you in minde of a certaine reaſon, which the Greke Scholies vſe, to proue that Chriſt was of more might to helpe men, then Adam was to deſtroy men. Bycauſe death, ſay they, taking his begininng at Adam, had as a fellow worker with it the ſinne of vsus all, to preuaile againſt vsus all, for otherwiſe it could not hauehave preuayled, if men had kept themſelues pure from all vncleanes. But the grace of Chriſt hath come vntounto vsus all, euen without our helpe of working. And they ſay, that this thing is made playne by the grace of the Reſurrection: which ſhall extend his effect, not only vponupon the faithfull, which may ind…d… ſeme to hauehave brought fayth, but alſo vponupon the vnbeleuers: namely, vponupon Iewes and Grecians, which had no fayth. But that is of greater force, which requireth no helpe at our handes, then that which nedeth vsus to worke therewithall, to make it of efficacy. Theſe thinges are ſet forth vnderunder the name of Oecomenius, but they are in any wiſe to be auoyded. For it is falſe, that y^• ſinne of Adā ſhouldThe ſinne of Adam hurteth euen without our working together with it. not hurte mākinde, vnles men had wrought together by reaſon of theyr ſinnes. For an infant when he is borne, by what meanes can he helpe that original ſinne which cleaueth vntounto him? But if he dy in y^• ſinne he incurreth dānatiō, and periſheth euerlaſtingly. Farther whereas they ſay, that y^• grace of Chriſt pertayneth vntounto mē, although they worke not together w^t it, this may after a ſort hauehave place in y^• cōuerſiō of a ſinner. For a ſinner calleth not vntounto himſelfe y^• grace of god, but rather by his impiety reſiſteth it. But whē grace is once come, he is not moued of it agaynſt his wil. For of an vnwilling perſō, he is made willing. But the Greke Scholies wreſt not this ſentence this way, but apply it to the laſt reſurrectiō, wherein y^• vngodly ſhall without any their merite or working together be rayſed vp from the dead. But this if it be rightly waighed of vsus, pertayneth vntounto the moſt gréeuous puniſhment of them, and not to a benefite or grace. For ſeing Chriſt ſayd truly of Iudas, It had ben good for him, that he had neuer ben borne, It ſhould be good for the wicked that they neuer riſe agayne.we alſo of them may ſay moſt truely, that it ſhould be good for them, that they neuer riſe agayne from the dead. Wherefore let vsus leaue this reaſon, and follow that which Paul bringeth as a reaſon moſt firme, and moſt true.

Wherefore euen as by the offence of one man, euill came on all men to condemnation. So by the righteouſnes of one, good was ſpred abroade on all men to the iuſtification of life. For as by one mans diſobedience many were made ſinners, ſo by the obedience of one ſhall many alſo be made righteous.

Here he bringeth a concluſion of thoſe thinges which he before ſpake. Nether doth he only cōclude, and repete the thinges which he had before ſpokē, but alſo expreſſedly declareth, what that one ſinne is, which was brought in by one man: and one the other ſide what that righteouſnes is, by which Chriſt hath made vsus iuſt. And hereunto tend all theſe thinges, to make vsus to vnderſtād that we are iuſtified, not by workes, but by faith, and by that meanes are we made more certaine and aſſured of our ſaluation. And in this ſētence there is a want, which muſt be ſupplied. For thus he ſpeaketh. Euē as by the offence of one man, on all men to condemnatiō, here is to be vnderſtād, euill or hurt was ſpred abroade. And when he addeth, So by the righteouſnes of one, on all men to the iuſtification of life, here alſo is to be vnderſtand, Good was ſpread abroade, or ſaluation. Here againe we hauehave theſe cōtraries foreign & foreign, that is, offence, & righteouſnes. Of which the one pertaineth vntounto Adam, and the other vntounto Chriſt. Nether wāteth this an emphaſis, that he ſayth, Iuſtification of life. For it is as much as if he had ſayde, The vitall or liuely iuſtification. For the Hebrues vſe oftentimes to pronounce nownes adiectiues by the genitiue caſe of the ſubſtantiue. This thing alſo is to be noted in this ſentence, that Paul expreſſedlye ſayth, that ſinne hathreddunded vponupon all men vntounto condemnation. Wherebye it is manifeſt, that when he before ſayd, That thorough the ſinne of one man, many hauehave died, by this word many, he vnderſtoode, All men: Which word alſo he did expreſſedly put in the beginninge of this compariſon. Whiche I therefore ſpeake, becauſe Ambroſe and Origene, ſeme to affirme, that death and ſin hauehave not raigned ouer all thoſe that hauehave come of Adam: for that many of them acknowledged God, and were deliuered from the tiranny of ſinne. But this is to confound the benefite of Chriſt with the hurt of Adam. For in that ſome were deliuered from death, that could not hauehave happened vntounto thē, but by the death of Chriſt which they beleued ſhould come: which benefite although they obtayned, yet doth it not thereof follow, that they before they were deliuered by Chriſt, had not as touching their nature and themſelues, periſhed in Adam. But theſe fathers ſéeme therefore to hauehave inclined this way, for that they weighed the matter according to the number of men. For when they ſaw, that all men are not ſaued by Chriſt, leaſt he ſhould ſéeme inferior vntounto Adam, they denyed that in Adam all had periſhed. Therfore they held, that on ech ſide are ſome to be exempted, that both Chriſt may hauehave his number apart by himſelfe, and alſo Adam his by himſelfe. And it is poſſible, that this alſo moued them, that Paul hath before and alſo in this place ſayd not, All, but many, But this maner of expoſition is vtterly agaynſt Paules ſentence: for he, euen as he putteth death common vntounto all men that are borne of Adam, ſo alſo maketh he ſinne common vntounto them. Nether doth Paul to proue the might or power of Chriſt lene vntounto the number of thoſe men which ſhalbe ſaued, but to the weight of the effect. For he ſayth, that it is a greater matter to blot out infinite ſinnes, then it is to bring in one ſinne. Oftentymes alſo he expreſſedly vſeth that particle of vniuerſality. And as touching that which moued them, we anſwere with Auguſtine, that the meaning of the Apoſtle is, that all that are borne of Adam do periſhe: and contrariwiſe that all that are regenerate by Chriſt are ſaued. And euē as no man is brought forth as touching the fleſhe, but by Adam: ſo is no man borne agayne but by Chriſt. If after this maner theſe wordes of vniuerſality be applied, the analogyHow this analogy may be made plaine betwene Chriſt and Adam ſhalbe clere and playne.

Euen as by the diſobedience of one man.] Here the Apoſtle expreſſedly declareth what that one ſin was, which he ſaid entred into the world by one man, and by meanes whereof death went ouer all men, and this, ſayth he, was theThe diſobedience of Adam is communicated vntounto all his poſterity▪ The obedience of Chriſt is communicated vntounto the elect. A compariſon betwene the obedience of Adam & the obedience of Chriſt. diſobedience of the firſt man, which he ſignifieth to hauehave bene communicated vntounto all in, whē he ſayth, that by it many are made ſinners. And contrariwyſe he teacheth, what that good thing was, which through one Ieſus Chriſt recouered health vntounto men. And this he ſayth was the obedience of Chriſt. Of which writing vntounto the Phillippians, he ſayth, that Chriſt humbled himſelfe, and became obedient vntounto the father to the death, euen to the death of the croſſe. How obedient alſo he was vntounto the eternall father, thoſe thinges likewiſe declare, which he ſpake when he finiſhed vp his prayers in the garden, being now at the very poynt to be taken of the Iewes, ſaying, Not my will be done, but thine. But Adam did far otherwiſe: for he would not geue credite vntounto the words of God, nether cōtēted he himſelfe with his prouidence, as his duty was: for he deſired to know good and euill, as though he ment to preſcribe thoſe thinges vntounto himſelfe, and to follow thoſe thinges which he knew to be ether good or euill. But he ought to hauehave done farre otherwiſe, to hauehave counted thoſe thinges only for good or euill, which God by his word had preſcribed vntounto him. Of which thing Chriſt hath left vntounto vsus an example to looke vponupon, when as he wholy ſubmitted hymſelfe vntounto the will and prouidence of God. For when he ſhould ſuffer death, and that a moſt greeuous and moſt cruell and moſt ſhamefull death, he had fixed before his hys eyes only the worde of God, which pronounced, that that death ſhould be gratefull and acceptable vntounto God, and alſo healthfull vntounto mankynde. Obedience is (as we now ſpeake of) a faculty or power whereby godlyWhat obedience is. men doo wyth a wylling mynde execute the commaundements of God, although as touching the cōſideratiō of this world they iudge, that the ſame will not be profitable vntounto thē, nether do they throughly vnderſtād the reaſon of thē. But contrariwiſe diſobedience is a vice, which cauſeth vsus not to execute the commaundementes of God, either becauſe they are troubleſome, or els becauſe we can not attaine vntounto the reaſon of them. And that which is in this place ſaid:What diſobedience is.

That by the obediēce of one man, many are made iuſt] very wel agréeth with y^• which is had vntounto the Ephe. That we are acceptable vntounto God in the beloued. And y^• beloued is Chriſt. After the ſelfe ſame maner Eſay ſaith in his 53. chapiter, when he prophecieth of Chriſt: And if he geue his ſoule for ſinne, he ſhall ſee his ſeede a farre of, that is, his poſteritie for a long tyme. Which wordes teach euen the ſelf ſame thing that the Apoſtle here ſaith, that through the obedience of Chriſt, whereby he hathThe faithfull are called the poſteritie of Chriſt. for our ſakes ſuffred death, is ſpred abrode the multitude of the faithful, which are called Chriſtes ſéede and poſteritie long to continue. And the Prophete addeth, My righteous ſeruaunt ſhall instifie many, for he ſhall beare their iniquitie. Wherfore this obedience of Chriſt hath merited vntounto him, to be made the captayne of the elect of God vntounto eternall life. As on the contrary ſide, Adam by reaſon of his diſobedience leadeth to deſtruction all thoſe that are borne of him according to the fleſh. Here let vsus note, that foraſmuch as the Apoſtle ſaith: that by y^e diſobedience of oneOriginall ſinne proper vntounto eueryevery man. man, many are made ſinners, by theſe wordes is gathered an argument agaynſte thoſe, which thinke that originall ſinne is not proper vntounto eueryevery man: but that it was but one onelyonly ſinne, and that the ſame was in Adam, wherby we are obnoxious and bound vntounto death and damnation. For ſeyng it is ſaid, that they are made ſinners, it muſt nedes be, that they themſelues either hauehave ſinne, or els at the leſt wayes had ſinne. For no man is called a ſinner for an other mans fault. Although Chriſostome vponupon this place interpretateth theſe wordes more hardly, thē can wel and aptly be vnderſtanded. For thus he writeth: But that by his diſobedience an other man ſhould be made a ſinner, what conſequence can it hauehave? For there canne be no paynes due vntounto him, as one which is not guiltye, vnles he become a ſinner of himſelfe. What meaneth it then, that he ſayth in this place, many are made ſinners? I thinke it ſignifieth, that they are obnoxious to puniſhment, and condemned to death. In this ſentēce this I lyke not, that he interpreteth this worde ſinners, for obnoxious to puniſhment and condemned to death; as though he ſhould by the way ſignifie, that they hauehave in themſelues nothing that is vile or vncleane, which can either offend God, or be called ſinne. And a litle afterward, We will not thinke it muche (ſaith he) to declare, that of this death and condemnation, we hauehave not onelyonly not receiued any loſse, if we liue ſoberly and chaſtly, but alſo we hauehave therby gotten much gayne. That alſo is harde, to ſay that we hauehave gotten no hurt of originall death and condemnation. For luſtIt is an excellent gift to liue chaſtly and holily in this mortall body. and the great corruption of nature, hath thorow the tranſgreſſion of Adam brokē into all mankinde. I graunt in dede, that which he addeth: namely, that it is an excellent gift, in this mortall body, to liue holily and chaſtly: and farther alſo, that by the diſcommodities of our mortalitie, we hauehave occaſions of martirdome, and of other vertues. But this I conſider, that theſe thinges are the benefites of the goodnes of God. Of which benefites, although Adam thorow his fall ſometymes gaue occaſion, yet it doth not therof follow, that he hath not hurt vsus, or that we being by him made ſinners, hauehave not felt great loſſe. Now foraſmuch as thoſe things which follow, pertayne vntounto the law, before we come vntounto them, it ſhall not be amiſſe frō our purpoſe, to declare what is to be thought touching originall ſinne.

Firſt, we will conſider whether there be any originall ſinne or no: for there areWhat are the chiefe matters that ſhalbe intreated of. ſome which vtterly deny that there is any ſuch thinge. Then wil we declare, what it is. Laſtly what proprieties it hath, and howe it is by ſucceſſion traduced to our poſterity: and alſo by what meanes it is forgeuen. As touching the firſte, we muſte remember, that both in the holy ſcriptures, and alſo among the fathers, it is called by ſondry names. For in this epiſtle the 7. chap. it is called ſinne, and the law of theNames of originall ſinne. mēbers, and luſt. Of others it is called, The want of originall righteouſnes, a corruption of nature, an euell inclination, a nouriſher of euell, a weaknes of nature, the lawe of the fleſhe, and other ſuche like. The Pelagians long ſince denied this ſinne: and ſo do the Anabaptiſtes euen nowe in our dayes. Theſe in a manner are the argumentes, which they alleadge againſt it: Firſt, they ſay, that the fall of Adam The Pelagians and Anabaptiſtes denye originall ſinne. Argumēts againſt original ſinnewas ſufficientlye puniſhed in himſelfe: and that there is no cauſe, why God ſhoulde reuenge it in his poſterity: ſpecially ſeing it is written in Naum the Prophet, That God doth not puniſh one and the ſelfe ſame thing twiſe. For it ſuffiſeth him that he hath once puniſhed. Againe it is alſo written, That the ſonne ſhall not beare the iniquitye of the father: but the ſoule, which ſinneth, the ſame ſhall dye. Moreouer, the bodye, when it is formed in the wombe, is the woorkemanſhippe of God, and hath nothing which ought to be reproued: yea rather which is not woorthy of high admiracion: and the ſoule alſo is either created or powred in of God. And the manner of propagation cannot be counted euell, becauſe matrimony is commended in the holy ſcriptures, and from the beginninge God cōmaunded mā to procreat children. Wherefore among ſo many aides of innocency, they demaund thorow what chinckes or hoales ſinne could creepe in. They alleadge moreouer, that Paul in his firſte epiſtle to the Cor: when he exhorteth the faithfull wife, to abide with the vnfaithfull huſband, if he will abide with her, among other thinges ſaith, your childrē are holy. But they could not be holy, if they wer born in ſinne. Wherfore (ſay they) they which are borne of faithfull parentes cannot contract vntounto themſelues originall ſinne. Farther they affirme that it is a common ſayinge, that ſinne is a thinge ſpoken, done, or luſted contrarye to the lawe of God, and that there is no ſinne except it be voluntary. And as Iohn ſaith in his 1. epiſtle the 4. chapt: Sinne is iniquity: vntounto which is oppoſite, equity, or right, and there can be no other equity or right aſſigned, then that which is contained in the law: and ſo is finne a trāſgreſſion of the law: all which thinges cannot happen in infantes when they are borne. And they ſay moreouer that it ſemeth not agreable, whiche ſome ſay, namely, that this ſinne is powred in through the fleſh or body. For the fleſh and the body are of theyr owne nature thinges inſenſible, nether can they be counted a ſubiect mete for ſinne. And to eſtabliſh theyr fained inuencion, they adde, that thoſe thinges whiche Paul ſpeaketh in this place, are to be drawen to thoſe ſinnes whiche are called actuall. And where it is ſaid that by one man ſinne entred into the world, it is to be vnderſtand (ſay they) becauſe of imitacion and example, whiche the poſterity followed. With theſe and like argumentes were they led to deny that there is any originall ſinne. But as for death and afflictions of this life, whiche are commonly alleadged for tokens to confirme originall ſinne, they ſay that they conſiſt of natural cauſes: as are the temperatures of the elementes and humors. And that therfore it is a vaine inuention to draw them to the fall of Adam. And they thinke it to be a thinge moſte abſurde, to counte that for ſinne, whiche can by no meanes be auoyded. Laſtly they ſay, if by that meanes it ſhould be ſaide, that we hauehave ſinned in Adam, becauſe we were in his loynes, euen as in the Epiſtle to the Hebrues it is ſayde of Leui, that he paide tenthes in the loynes of Abraham: after the like and ſelfe ſame mannec we may ſay that we were in the loynes of other our elders, from whome we hauehave by procreation diſcended: wherefore there is no cauſe why the ſinne of Adam ſhoulde more flow abroade into vsus, then the ſinne of our graundfathers, greate graundfathers, and of all our elders. And by that meanes theyr eſtate ſhould ſéeme moſt vnhappy, which ſhould be borne in the latter times. For they ſhould beare the iniquities of all their elders. Theſe thinges alleadge they to proue, that there is no originallIt is proued by teſtimontes of the ſcripture that there is original ſinne. ſinne. But we on the contrarye parte will by manye teſtimonies of the ſcriptures proue that there is ſuch a ſinne. In the boke of Gen: the vi. chap: God ſpeaketh thus: My ſpirite ſhall not alwaies ſtriue in mā, becauſe he is but fleſh. Againe, The imagination of the thoughtes of theyr hartes is onelyonly euell alwayes. And in the viii. chapter, The imagination of theyr hart is euell, euen frō their childhode. Theſe words declare, that there ſticketh ſome vice in our nature, whē we are brought forth. Dauid alſo ſaith, Beholde in iniquities was I conceaued, and in ſins hath my mother conceaued me: then which teſtemony there can be nothing more euident. Ieremy alſo in his 17. chap: ſaith, that the hart of man is wicked, peruerſe, and ſtubburne. And the ſame Ieremy. and alſo Iob doo curſe that day, wherein they were borne into the world: bycauſe they ſaw that together with them was brought forth the originall and fountaine of all vices. And Iob hath a moſt manifeſt teſtimony of the vncleanes of our natiuity: For this he ſayth: Who can make that clene, which is cōceaued of vncleane ſeede? And our ſauiour ſayth Except a man be borne againe of water, and the holyghoſt, he ſhall not enter into the kingdome of heauen. And euen as a potter doth not make new agayne any veſſel, vnles he ſe that the ſame was ill made before: So Chriſt would not hauehave vsus generated agayne, except he ſaw that we were before vnhappely generated. Which thing he teſtifieth alſo in an other place ſaying: That which is borne of fleſh, is fleſhe: and that which is borne of ſpirite, is ſpirite. By which words he would hauehave vsus to vnderſtand that therefore the regeneration of the ſpirite was neceſſary, bycauſe we had before but only a carnall generation. Paul in the 6. chap to y^e Rom. ſayth: That therefore we muſt not abide in ſinne, bicauſe we are now dead vntounto it. And that thing he proueth by Baptiſme. For whatſoeuer we be (ſayth he) that are baptiſed in Chriſt Ieſu, we are baptiſed in his death, to this end that we ſhould dye vntounto ſinne: and that our old man ſhould be crucified, and the body of ſinne aboliſhed. And for as much as children are baptiſed, euen thereby we hauehave a teſtemony that there is ſinne in them. For otherwiſe the nature of Baptiſme, as it is there deſcribed of Paul, ſhould not conſiſt. The ſame reaſon hath he alſo in his epiſtle to the Coloſſians, where he ſayth, that we are Circumciſed with circumciſion not made with handes, in making cleane the ſinfull body of the fleſh, beinge buried together with Chriſt in Baptiſme. He compareth Baptiſme with Circumciſiō: & ſaith, that they which are baptiſed, are made cleane frō y^e body of ſinne. Nether is it to be doubted, but y^• they which are baptiſed, are baptiſed into y^e remiſſion of ſinnes. And aſſuredly the circumciſion, which in the old law was geuen vntounto Children, was correſpondent vntounto our Baptiſme. And as touching circū ciſion, it is written, The ſoule whoſe fleſh of the foreſkinne is not circumciſed the eight day, let it dye the death. Wherefore ſeing children hauehave nede of the ſacrament of regeneration, it followeth of neceſſitye, that they are borne ſubiect vntounto ſinne. Paul to the Epheſians ſayth, That we are by nature the children of wrath. But our nature could not be odious vntounto God, vnles it were contaminated with ſinne. And in the ſame place Paul doth with moſt greuous wordes deſcribe the ſharpnes of this wrath: how that we walke after the prince of this world, who is of efficacy in our harts bycauſe of ſtubbernes, and for that cauſe we do the will of the fleſh, and of our mynde. Auguſtine, alſo citeth a place out of the firſt epiſtle to the Corrinthi. that Chriſt died for all men. Wherefore it followeth that all men were dead, and had nede of his death. But it is a wicked thing, to exclude childrē out of the nomber of them, for whome Chriſt dyed. If thou demaund what maner ones they were for whome Chriſt died, the Apoſtle hath ſufficiently declared that in this epiſtle, when he ſayd, that they were weake, enemies of god, vngodly, and ſinners. Amongeſt whome alſo we ought to reken young children, if we will ſay that Chriſt died for them. Farther it ſemeth, that Originall ſinne is moſt manifeſtly taught by the 7. chap. of this epiſtle. For there it is thus written: The law is ſpirituall, but I am carnall, ſold vnderunder ſinne. And it is added: The good thing which I would, I doo not, but the euill which I would not, that I doo. Neither doo I worke that, but ſinne which dwelleth in me. He maketh mencion alſo of the law of members, wherewith he complayneth that he was drawen captiue and agaynſt his will. And in the 8. chap. he ſayth, that the wiſdome of the fleſhe is enmity againſt God: neither is it ſubiect vntounto the law of God: yea neither can it be. The death alſo which young children dye, doth ſufficientlye teſtefye, that there ſticketh ſinne in them, except we will ſay that God puniſheth them without deſert. Farther this ſelfe place, which we are now in hand with, conteyneth a moſt manifeſt teſtemony of Originall ſin. For thus it is written, that by one man ſinne entred into the world, & that all mē hauehave ſinned, none excepted, and that the ſinne of one man is ſpred abrode amongſt all men: and that for the diſobedience of one man, many are made ſinners. Farther, they which are grafted in Chriſt, are toward the latter end of this epiſtle, called wild oliue trees: by which metaphore is ſignified, that man had degenerated from y^• good inſtitution of nature. And if ſo be that we hauehave departed from our nature, vndoubtedly we are ſpotted with originall ſinne. And before, Paul ſo accuſed all mankind, that he ſayd: There is none iuſt, there is none that vnderſtandeth, or ſeketh after God: All hauehave declined, and ther with all are become vnprofitable, there is none that doth good, no not one. &c. All which thinges ſufficiently declare the corruptiō of mans nature. By theſe teſtimonies of ſcriptures it is manifeſt inough, as I thinke, that there is Originall ſinne.

Now in order I ſhould confute the argumentes of the aduerſaries. But firſt I thought it good to declare the definition of originall ſinne. For it being diligently marked and knowen, many thinges ſhall by the way be vnderſtanded, which ſerue much to confute their reaſons. Firſt we will recite the opinions of other men: then will we declare, what we thinke thereof. The Pelagians The Pelagians ſay that the ſ…n of Adam was ſpred abroade only by imitation. Adam brought not forth the firſt example of ſinning but the deuill.affirmed, that the ſinne of Adam hath not ſpred abroade into his poſterity, but only by imitation. Auguſtine ſtriued vehemently agaynſt theſe men, and proueth by many argumentes, that originall ſinne is not only the imitation of the ſinne of Adam. For if Paul would hauehave ſayd, that the firſt ſinne was after that maner ſpred abroade, he would not hauehave ſayde, that it came frō Adam, but rather from the deuill. For he was the firſt, that gaue a forme and example to ſinne. Wherefore Chriſt in Iohn ſayth, that the Iewes, which boaſted that they came of their father Abraham, were rather the children of the deuill, becauſe they did his workes. For the deuill was a manqueller euen frō the beginning: and they ſought to kill hym which had not euill deſerued at their handes. And to this Auguſtine citeth that which is written in the 2. chapter of the booke of wiſedome, that through enuy of the deuill, death entred into the world: and that they do imitate him, which are on his ſide. VntoUnto which ſentence neuertheles I do not much attribute: partly becauſe that booke is not Canonicall: and partly becauſe in the Greke text there is ſome ambiguity. For this verbe, do imitate, is not there written, but foreign, that is, hauehave experience of that death. Howbeit the reaſon is firme, that of the deuill came the fyrſt example of ſinning. Farther this opinion is hereby cōfuted, becauſe Paul maketh an Antitheſis, betwene Chriſt and Adam. But the righteouſnes of Chriſt is not only ſet forth vntounto be to be imitated: butThe righouſ…es of Chriſt is not only ſet forth to be imitated. alſo that they which beleue in hym, ſhould be changed in mynde, corrected in ſpirite, and amended in all their ſtrengthes. Wherefore it is agayne required on the other ſide by the nature of the Antitheſis, that beſides the euill example, which Adam gaue vntounto his poſterity, he hath alſo corrupted their nature, and as Auguſtine writeth in his booke of the merites and remiſſion of ſinnes, tabe quadam tabificauerit, that is, hath with a certayne corruption corrupted it. Thirdly this alſo maketh agaynſt the Pelagians, namely, that euen the very infantes do dye. For as Paule ſayth vntounto the Romanes in the 6. chapter: The reward of ſinne is death: but the gift of God is eternall life, through Ieſus Chriſt our Lord. And in the 15. chapter of the firſt epiſtle to the Corrinthyans. The weapon (ſaith he) of death is ſinne. Laſtly the baptiſme which is geuen to little ones, can not blotThe ſinne of imitatiō can not be blotted out of young children. out of them the ſinne of imitation. Wherefore of neceſſity, we ought to affirme that there is ſome other kinde of ſinne in them, except we will hauehave them to be baptiſed in vayne.

There is alſo an other opinion (which the Maſter of the Sentences reciteth in the 2. diſt: the 30.) which was of ſuch which thought that originall ſinne is only a guiltines, or blame for an offence, or obligation whereunto we are bound by reaſon of the ſinne of Adam. So theſe men do not acknowledge, that there is truly and in very dede any fault or ſinne in thoſe which are borne: but only a certayne guiltines and obligation, that they ſhould dye and be condemned for the ſinne of Adam. This opinion ſemeth Pigghius in a maner to hauehave reniued.Pigghius maketh originall ſin rather an obligation then a fault. He maketh death to come of the principles of nature. For he denieth that originall ſinne is in very dede ſinne, becauſe it is nether tranſgreſſion of the law, nor yet voluntary. Wherefore he affirmeth it to be nothing els, then the ſinne of Adam: for which we that are his poſterity are made guilty of damnation, and death, and are become exiles from the kingdome of heauē. But as for death and affictions of this life, and luſtes of the fleſh, and other ſuch like affections, he ſaith that they come of y^e principles of nature: ſo that he is ſo farre of from ſaying, that all theſe thinges are ſinnes, that he doth affirme them to be the workes of God. For he ſayth, that God is the author of nature: and that theſe thinges follow the humors & temperature of y^• body: and that thing which we ſée happeneth in brute beaſtes, happeneth alſo in men as touching the fleſhe and groſſer powers of the mynde: as to deſire thoſe thinges which are preſeruatiue, pleaſant, and profitable, whether they be agréeable to reaſon, or agaynſt it: and to auoyde thinges contrary. WhereforeHe maketh originall ſinne to be only the trſāgreſſiō of Adam. He beleueth that this ſinne is puniſhed without ſenſible payne. he maketh original ſinne to be only y^e trāſgreſſiō of Adam. VntoUnto which one trāſgreſſion he will hauehave all vsus to be borne obnoxious, not for any ſinne, or fault, or corruptiō which we hauehave in our ſelues. And he ſaith moreouer that thoſe which dye, being obnoxious only to this ſinne of Adam, ſhall not be afflicted in an other life with ſenſible payne. For he imagineth (although he dare not openly affirme it) that they ſhall ether in this world, or els in ſome other very delicious place, be happy through a certayne naturall bleſſednes, wherein they ſhall lyue prayſing God, and geuing thankes, although they be baniſhed from the kingdome of heauen: of whiche diſcommodity neuertheles (as he dreameth) they ſhal nothing complaine, or be ſad therefore. For this were to ſtriue againſt the will of God, which a man can not doo without ſinne. But foraſmuch as whileſt they liued here, they had no wicked will, it is not to be thought that theyNote two reaſons of Pigghius. He will hauehave ſinne to be taken, but after one onelyonly maner. ſhall hauehave ſuch a wicked will in the lyfe to come. And that they ſhall not ſuffer any ſenſible paine, he thinketh he proueth very well, and that by two reaſons. Firſt, becauſe they hauehave committed no euill, neither hauehave they cōtaminated themſelues with any frowardnes. Secondly, bicauſe in this life is required no repentance or contritiō for originall ſinne. And of this fained deuiſe, this pretence hath he, bicauſe ſinne ought not to be taken, but after the true and proper maner: that is, that it be a thing ſpoken, done or luſted againſt the law of GOD: and that it be voluntary, and not obtruded to any againſt their will, but ſuche whiche may be eſchued. But foraſmuch as theſe thinges hauehave not place in little infantes, there can therfore be no ſinne in them. Howbeit, he ſaith, that he denieth not, but that there is original ſinne: for he ſaith, that it is the ſinne of Adam, for which all we are condemned, & muſt die. But therfore I ſaid y^• he ſought pretēſes, bicauſe in very dede I ſée, that hePigghius thinketh thus, wherby to defend free will. was moued to ſpeake theſe thinges for an other cauſe. For he, attributing ſo much vntounto frée will, and hauing of that matter written ſo many things againſt vsus, and conſidering alſo that the ſame could not conſiſt, if he ſhould apertly graunt Originall ſinne, as it is ſet forth of all the godly, hath for that cauſe founde out this new deuiſed ſentence: which yet (as I hauehave ſaid) is not vtterly ſo new, for it is both touched and alſo reiected by the maiſter of the ſentences. But to colour his fond deuiſeA ſimilitude of Pigghius. more beautifully, he bringeth a ſimilitude of a noble and liberal prince, which doth not onelyonly ſet at liberty ſome one of his ſeruantes, but alſo geueth vntounto him great authority, and enricheth him with poſſeſſions, which alſo ſhall come vntounto his poſteritie: and the Prince geueth him in charge this thyng onelyonly, that he faithfully obſerue ſome certaine commaundementes: which if he tranſgreſſe, then he to be aſſured, that all his riches and poſſeſſions ſhall be taken from him: and himſelfe to returne to his olde bondage. This ſeruant being vnwiſe and vngrate, violateth y^• commaundements of his prince: and by that meanes is not onelyonly himſelfe made a ſeruant as he was before, but alſo bringeth forth children to bondage. But thoſe children hauehave nothing wherof to complain of the ſeuerity of the prince: but rather to geue thankes, bicauſe he delt ſo liberally with their father. But for their father they may be excedingly ſory, bicauſe he loſt thoſe ornamentes both from himſelfe, and alſo from his poſteritie. Yea, what if this alſo be added, that the liberalitie of y^• prince was ſo great, that he alſo allured the poſteritie of the vngrate ſeruaunt to thoſe ſelfe ſame benefites, and alſo to farre greater, and ſo allured them, that of his owne accorde, he ſent his ſonne to prouoke them? So (ſaith he) is it with vsus. Adam was ſo created of GOD, that he ſhoulde be pertaker of that ſupernaturall felicitie. Who yet when he contemned the commaundementes of GOD, was ſpoiled of all thoſe ſupernaturall giftes, and left to the olde eſtate of his nature. And in that eſtate alſo are we procreated, and ſo bicauſe of his ſinne we are condemned and do die, and are made exiles from the kingdome of heauen, ſuffring many diſcommodities, which are deriued from the groundes of our nature. Wherefore we may cōplaine of our firſt parent, but not of God. For he was moſt liberal towards him: eſpecially, ſeyng he called vsus againe vntounto himſelfe (which is the chiefe felicitie) by hys onelyonly ſonne, and would hauehave hym to ſuffer death for our ſaluation.

But againſt this opinion maketh that chiefly which we hauehave already twiſe beforeDeath h…th no right where no ſinne is. reherſed: namely, that infantes do die. For death hath no right where as is no ſinne: vnles we will ſay, that God puniſheth the innocent. And this reaſon is confirmed by that argument of Paul, wherby he proued, that ſinne was before the law. Becauſe death (ſaith he) raigned from Adam euen to Moſes. But by Pigghius opinion this might be counted a very weke reaſon. For a mā might ſay, although they died, yet therby it followeth not, that they had ſinne. For death happened vntountoThe Apoſtle confeſſeth that ſin dwelleth in himſelfe. We hauehave not the principles of natu…e perfect but vitiated. The conſideration of man and of brute beſts is not alike them thorough Adam, for whoſe ſinne they became mortall. Farther doth not Paul confeſſe, that there is ſinne in nature, when he affirmeth, that ſinne dwelleth in himſelf, and confeſſeth, that the law of the members draweth him captiue, and ſuch other like? And that is nothing which Pigghius obiecteth: namely, that thoſe thinges come of the principles of nature: for theſe principles are not of nature being perfect, but of nature corrupte and vitiated. Neither ought he in this thyng to bring a ſimilitude from brute beaſtes. For man is created, to be farre excellenter then brute beaſtes, & to beare rule ouer thē. Man had in dede in himſelfe principles to deſire things pleaſāt & profitable: but not againſt reaſon & the worde of God. For to hauehave thoſe affections outragious and violent, belongeth not to men, but to brute beaſts. Farther our ſoule being immortal & geuen by y^e inſpiratiō of God, required a body méete for it, namely, ſuch which mighte be preſerued for euer: that the ſoule ſhould not any time be compelled to be without it. Wherfore we ought not to flyeThe bodye ought to be agreable vntounto the ſoule. It is blaſphemy to make God the author of wicked affections. vntounto the principles of nature: for it was not framed ſuch as now we hauehave it. Now if Pigghius do fayne that God created in vsus theſe luſtes and wicked affections, thē is he blaſphemous and contumelious againſte him: whiche faultes he vnworthely goeth about to lay to our charge. For foraſmuche as God is good, and moſte wiſe, and moſte iuſte, and hath alſo created man vntounto the higheſt felicity, he woulde not hauehave geuen him thoſe thinges, whereby he ſhould be withdrawen from that felicitie: which ſhould entiſe him to do againſt his commaundementes: whiche of theyr owne accord are filthy, and ſhould lead vsus captiues into the law of ſinne & of death. For theſe thinges if they ought to be mortified and crucified, as vndoubtedly they ought, we muſt néedes graunt, that they are vices and hatefull vntounto God. NeitherE…l affections foraſmuch as they ought to be mortified, at ſins. is that of ſo great force, that he fayth, that they are not properly ſinnes: vnles euen as colde is called ſlouthfull, becauſe it maketh menne ſlouthfull: ſo theſe thinges becauſe they allure men to ſinne, may therefore after a ſort be called ſinnes. Or euen as the ſcripture calleth that a hand, which is made with the hand: or ſpeach is called the tonge, becauſe it is pronounced by the miniſtery of the tounge: ſo theſe thinges may be called ſinnes, becauſe they proceede from ſinne. Theſe ſimilitudes do nothinge helpe Pigghius cauſe: for althoughe Auguſtine vſed ſometimes ſo to ſpeake, yet he would hauehave it to be vnderſtand of thoſe defaultes and vices, which are in mā after Baptiſme. In which thing how farre we agrée with him, we hauehave els where declared: and peraduenture afterward will farther declare.

But Auguſtine plainely affirmeth, that before baptiſme they are ſinnes: Yea the holy Ghoſte alſo in Paul calleth thē ſinnes: and the nature of ſinne agreeth wythThe nature of ſinne is extended to al things that are againſt the law of God▪ Wherein iniquity cō … ſiſteth. them. For ſo we hauehave defined ſinne, that it pertayneth to all thoſe things, whatſoeuer they be, that are againſte the lawe of God. For as Iohn ſayth, ſinne is iniquitie. And who ſeeth not, that it is a thing vniuſte, that the fleſhe ſhould hauehave the ſpirite ſubiect vntounto it: and that our ſoule ſhould not be obediente vntounto the woorde of God. Wherefore foraſmuch as all theſe thinges do ſtirre vsus vp to tranſgreſſe, and to rebell againſt the woord of God, they are both vniuſt, & alſo ought to be called ſinnes: Farther the wordes of Dauid are moſt plainely againſt Pigghius, when he ſayth: Beholde I was conceaued in iniquityes, and in ſinnes hath my mother conceaued me If wicked luſt, and theſe vices were the woorkes of nature, vndoubtedly that holy mā woulde not hauehave complained of them. And what other thinge mente the Apoſtle Paul, when he wrote vntounto the Epheſians, That we are by nature the childrē of wrath. but that there is ſinne in eueryevery one of vsus Howbeit Pigghius doth by a peruerſe interpretacion go about to wreſt this teſtimonye from vsus. For he ſaith, that, to be by nature the children of wrath, is nothinge els but to be the children of wrath by a certayne courſe of birth: becauſe we are ſo borne into the worlde. And he bringeth this ſimilitude that ſome are called bondmen by nature: which is nothing els, then that they were borne in that ſtate to be bond. But we neither can nor oughte to be contente with this fained deuiſe: for the anger of God is not prouoked, but iuſtly. For it is not ſuch, that it can be incenſed either raſhely or by chaunce. WhereforeThe anger of God is not prouoked but iuſtly. there muſt nedes be ſome wicked thinge in our nature, to the auengement wherof the anger of God is ſtirred vp. And that ſimilitude of his, ſerueth not to hys purpoſe: for they which are ſayd to be borne bondmen by nature, hauehave alſo by nature ſome thing in them, which is apt for bondage. For if we geue credite vntounto Ariſtotle Seruantes by nature hauehave ſomething in thē that is apte for ſeruitude.writing in his politiques, bondmen by nature are they, which excell in ſtrength of body, but are dull and ſlow in reaſon, and thereof it commeth, that they are more meete to ſerue, then to beare rule ouer others, or to liue at liberty. The Apoſtle alſo ſufficiently declareth, why he calleth vsus by nature the children of wrath: namely becauſe by nature we ſéeme prone and readye to ſtirre vp the anger of God, and walke according to the prince of this world, and becauſe the Deuell is of efficacy in our hartes by reaſon of incredulitie, and alſo becauſe we do the will of the fleſhe and of our minde. Theſe are the thinges, which make vsus by nature the children of wrath. And how can it be denied that there is ſinne in our nature, when as Chriſt will hauehave vsus to be regenerated? For vnles we were broughte foorth wicked, what ſhould we nede to be made new again? Farther in the 8. chap: of the booke of Geneſis it is manifeſtly ſaid, That the imagination of mans harte is euell, euen from hys verye childehoode. And how dare Pigghius ſay, that that is the woorke of God, and a goodThat which the holy Ghoſt calleth euell is not the worke of God. thynge, whyche the holy Ghoſte expreſſedly calleth euell? But leaſt he ſhoulde ſeme to ſay nothing, he fayneth that God ſpake that of mercy: as thoughe he would by that meanes excuſe men, and teſtefye that he would no more deſtroy the earth with water, bycauſe men were ſo brought forth and theyr cogitations tended to euill, and that euen from theyr very childhode. But in taking this for an excuſe, he is much deceaued. For the better and more natiue ſence of thysA declaration of a place of Geneſis. place is thought to be this, that God would make a couenant with Noah, that he would neuer deſtroy the world agayne with water, although otherwiſe men were ſuch, that they deſerued it, and the imagination of theyr hartes is euill euen from theyr childhode. Theſe wordes excuſe not mans nature from ſinne, but rather note it to be vicious and corrupt: which yet God of his mercy would ſpare. Laſtly we learne of Paul, that by the diſobedience of one man, many are made ſinners: which declareth, that in thoſe which are borne of Adam there is ſinne, by reaſon of which they ought to be caled ſinners. But Pigghius thinketh to auoyde this, bycauſe they are ſometimes called ſinners by reaſon of the guiltines, although the acte of the ſinne be paſt, and be no more extant. Although itHe that is called a ſinner either hath ſinne actually in him or els he hath before committed ſin. Pigghius maketh a middle eſtate betwene the damned & the bleſſed. be ſo, yet he can neuer ſhew out of the ſcriptures, that any is caled a ſinner, but ether he hath ſinne in himſelfe, or ells vndoubtedlye he hath before committed ſin: vnles he will ſay, that God maketh men guilty without any ſin committed of them. Farther Pigghius conſidereth not, that by this his fayned inuencion is brought in a middle ſentence touching the ſtate of them, which dye only in the guiltines of dAam: when as the ſcriptures doo manifeſtly teach vsus, that in the laſt iudgement there ſhalbe no meane: But men ſhalbe ether committed to eternall fire, or ells hauehave the fruition of eternall felicity. And it is raſhenes to procede farther in thoſe thinges, then is reueled in the holy ſcriptures. Wherefore they deale more moderately, and worke more wiſely which leaue all this matter to the deuine prouidence. But it is a ſporte to ſe, what ſolemne reaſons they are which moue Pigghius. They ſhall not be puniſhed (ſayth he) with any ſenſible payne: bycauſe they hauehave not contaminated themſelues with any wicked will in this life. What is this to the purpoſe? For it is ſufficient that they hauehave a wicked nature: for they were prone to ſinne, although by reaſon of age they could in acte not ſinne. The young wolfe is killed of eueryevery man: who yet might excuſeTo condemnation it is mough to hauehave a corrupt nature if a man be without Chriſt. it ſelf, for that it hath not yet killed any ſhepe, or done any harme vntounto the flock. Yet is it iuſt that it ſhould be killed, bycauſe it hath the nature of a wolfe, and would doo theſe thinges, if it were permitted to liue. To this, Pigghius addeth an other argumēt: for y^•, for original ſin, grief, or contritiō is not required. But how can he proue this? For all holy men hauehave greuouſly mourned, for that they were oppreſſed with this vice. Dauid the ſelfe ſame time when he was moſtThe ſaints do greueſly ſigh and morne for that they a… oppreſſed with this ſinne. Examples. repentant, did burſt forth into theſe wordes: Behold I was conceaued in iniquities. Paul ſo bewailed this vice, that he cried out: O vnhappye man that I am: who ſhall deliuer me frō this body ſubiect vntounto death? & whē Pigghius ſaith, y^• theſe ſhalbe cōtent with theyr eſtate, he bringeth none other reaſon, then that if they ſhould ſtriue againſt the will of God, and be ſory for the ſentence denounced vponupon them: they ſhould ſinne, which thing we ought not to deme of them, foraſmuch as in thys life they committed no ſinne. But here ought to be demaunded of Pigghius, whether infantes hauehave an vpright will in this life. This muſt he of neceſſity deny, foraſmuche as by reaſon of age they coulde not hauehave it. Which if it be ſo, how dare he aſcribe it vntounto them in the life to come? It is much more probable that they ſhall there hauehave an euell will, wherof there was here in them a beginning: thē that they ſhall hauehave there a good will of whiche there was here in them no ſparcke at all. But that ſimilitude which he bringeth of the liberal prince, which did not only make his ſeruant free, but alſo exalted him to great honours, is not of his owne inuention. For Egidius of Rome a ſchole deuine hath the ſame: who yet together with vsus acknowledgeth the vice of nature, & the wickednes that isEgidius a ſchole deuine. planted in vsus from the beginning. Howbeit this thing we ought to examine and try out, leſt like as coſtly hangings couer the faultes of a wal, ſo this argument by his ſhew and outward payneture doo hide ſome error, & dangerouſly deceaue vsus. He ſetteth forth vntounto vsus Adam as a bondeman, who from the beginning was made free by God, and enriched with moſt excellent giftes, and ſo enriched, that they ſhould come alſo to his poſterity if he had obeyed the commaundement of God and the law: but if he neglected to doo that, he himſelfe with all his poſterity ſhould returne to his old eſtate of ſeruitude. In this lieth hid the error of Pigghius: for he faineth vntounto himſelfe a man, which from the beginning had a natureMan had not at the beginning a corrupt and vicious nature. ſubiect to corruptions, and bound to the ſeruitude of vnreaſonable affections which thing is not true. For God made man perfect: not that he ſhould be like a brute beaſt. He had in dede luſts to thinges pleaſant and preſeruatiue: but yet not ſuch as ſhould allure him agaynſt the worde of God, and right reaſon. And he had a body geuen him, which mought hauehave endured for euer. Wherefore when he ſinned, he fell not into his olde eſtate but broughte vntounto himſelfe a new infelicity. This ſhall ſuffice at this preſent as touching that ſecond opinion. The thirde opinion is, that the luſt or concupiſcence whiche is ſpreade abroadeAuguſtines opinion. in the fleſh and members, is originall ſinne. Of which opinion was Auguſtine, as appeareth by his booke of the merites and remiſſion of ſinnes, and by many other places: whome the Schoolemen hauehave interpreted to hauehave ment not onelyonly of the concupiſcence of the groſſer partes of the mind, but alſo of y^e frowardnes of the will. But Pigghius repugneth and ſaith, that Auguſtine appointed only the concupiſcence of the fleſh and of the members to be originall ſinne: as though Auguſtine ment not, that by the wickednes of the affections both the minde is blinded, and the will corrupted. For forasmuch as all theſe vices are ioyned togetherAuguſtine comprehended all ſins by this word iuſt. one with an other, he would by one word comprehend them all. And he vſed the name of concupiſcence, bycauſe in it doth more plainelye appeare and ſhine forth the power of this diſeaſe. Wherefore Hugo de ſacramentis writeth, that originall ſinne is that, which we drawe from our natiuity thorough ignorance into our minde, and thorough concupiſcence into our fleſh. Laſtly Chriſt when he ſayth, that none can be ſaued, except he be regenerated, ment not only of the fleſh, or luſting part of the minde. For our reaſon and will, ought chiefely to be borne a new. Then followeth regeneration of the affects and of the body: wherby all thinges are made ſubiect vntounto the ſpirite, and word of God, as it is mete.What Auguſtine vnderſtod by luſt. A ſimilitude. Nether did Auguſtine by luſt, vnderſtād the acte of luſting: but the ability, prones and redy diſpoſition to doo euill. Which vices are not alwayes knowen in children, but ſo farre forth as theyr age doth vtter it. For ſo is there no difference betweene one that can ſe being in a deepe darke place, and betweene one that is ſtarke blind. But as ſone as euer ether light cometh, or that it is day, the blinde mans fault is eaſely ſene. The woolfe before he come to age declareth not hys nature and capacity. The ſcorpion ſtingeth not alwayes: howbeit he alwayes beareth the ſtinge, wherewith to ſting. The ſerpent ſo long as he is froſen with colde in the winter, is handled without danger: not bycauſe he then hath no venome, but bycauſe he is not then able to powre it out. And he ſaith, that this concupiſenceAll mankind in Adam as in a lompe. is drawen by generation, bycauſe we hauehave all ſinned in Adam. For he thinketh that all mankinde was in Adam as in one lompe. And bycauſe in him nature is corrupt by reaſon of ſinne, we can not drawe thereof but onelyonly a corrupt nature. For of thorns are not gathered grapes, nor of brambles, figges. But he chiefely thinketh that this concupiſcence is traduced into Adams poſterity by the feruentnes of the pleaſure, which happeneth in procreation. HowbeitThe opinion of certain Scholmen. ſome of the Schoolemen of the wiſer ſorte iudged, that although there ſhould happen no wickednes of luſt in the accompanieng of the parentes, yet the child ſhould not want originall ſinne, bycauſe it was in the firſt man, as it were in ſe minali ratione (as they ſpeake) that is, in the nature of the ſede. If thou demaundWhither this luſt be volumtary. of Augustine, whither he thinketh that this concupiſcence, which he ſaith is original ſinne, be voluntary, he anſwereth, that it may be caled voluntary, bicauſe the ſinne which our firſt parentes committed was voluntary: but in vsus it can not be called voluntary, bycauſe we hauehave not taken it vponupon vsus by our owne election, excepte paraduenture it may ſo be called, bycauſe it is not put into vsus violently. Pigghius inueigheth againſt this opiniō: for thus he ſaith, If the ſinne ofPigghius againſt Auguſtine. the firſt man hath corrupted mans nature, ſuch an effect ought to be naturall vntounto ſin. For there was nothing in that firſt tranſgreſſiō, which had the meane to corrupte nature, more then other ſinnes. Wherefore wee ſhall of neceſſitye graunt, that our nature is corrupted, not only by the faulte of the the firſt parentes, but alſo by the ſinnes of all our progenitors: which thing ſemeth verye abſurd vntounto Pigghius, that we ſhould be ſo much the more corrupt, how much we are after them. But this chiefe point, whether the ſinnes of all parentes be traduced into their poſterity, I omitte at this preſent, and will ſpeake thereof toward the ende, ſo much as ſhalbe thought méete. In the meane tyme I denyCorruption is not the naturall effect of ſin. that, which this man taketh for a grounde, namely, that corruption is the naturall effect of ſin. For the reaſon thereof is rather taken of the iuſtice of GOD: whereby the grace of the ſpirite and heauenly giftes, wherewith man was endewed before hys fall, were remoued from hym when he had ſinned. And thys wyth drawing of grace, came of the iuſtice of GOD, althoughe the blame bee to bee aſcribed to the tranſgreſſion of the fyrſtGrace being taken a way corruption followed of his own accord. man: leaſt a man ſhoulde ſtraight way ſay that God is the cauſe of ſinne. For when he had once withdrawen his giftes, wherewith he had adorned man ſtraight way vices and corruptions followed of their owne accord, which were before farre from the condicion of man. Pigghius alſo demaundeth howe ſinne hath the power to corrupt nature: whither it be for that that it is a priuation, or els by reaſon of the matter or ſubiecte of priuation. But it ſéemeth that it can not be for that it is priuation: for foraſmuch as it is nothing, it can worke nothing: nether can it be by reaſon of that action, which is ſubiecte vntounto priuation, as was the wicked election thoroughe will of the firſte man: for Adam when he did eate the forbidden fruite, deſired not this, neither was this his will, to corrupt his owne nature and the nature of his poſterity. This is a very weake argument. For we ſée that oftentimesMany thinges follow men againſt their will. A ſimilitude many thinges follow men againſt their will and vnwares: which thinges though they would not, are yet ioyned together with theyr actions. They which immoderately gorge themſelues with meate and drinke, do it not with this mind and purpoſe, to bring vntounto themſelues the goute. But it followeth of his owne accorde. So although Adam woulde not hauehave theſe thinges to happen, yet when he had ſinned, they happened of theyr owne accord. But ſaith he, ſeing that this luſte hapeneth by a certaine neceſſity of birth, and not by choice or election, it cannot hauehave the nature of a fault or ſinne. But this therfore he ſaith, for that he taketh ſinne more narroly and ſtraightly then he ought to do, for he will hauehave ſin to be a thing voluntary, and a thinge ſpoken, done, or luſted, againſt the law of God. But if he take ſinne for iniquity (as Iohn hath deſcribed it) he ſhall ſée that in luſt, may be found the nature ofIn naturall luſt there is the nature of ſinne. ſinne. For it is vniuſt, that the body ſhould not obey the minde in honeſt thinges, & that luſtes ſhould be againſt the mind, and beare dominiō ouer it, and that reaſon, ſhould be againſt God, and abhorre from his cōmaundements. Theſe things ſeinge they are vniuſte, whether they happen vntounto vsus with our wils or of neceſſitye, vndoubtedly they are ſinnes. But this man which obiecteth theſe thinges, doth he not ſée, that he muſt alſo of neceſſity graunt, that the poſterity of Adam is guilty of his ſinne, and that not willinge and againſt their mind: which thinge is moſt of all againſt the word of God? For it is written in the Prophet: The Sonne ſhall not beare After Pigghius opinion the Son beareth the iniquitie of his father & not his owne.the iniquity of the father: alſo, The ſoule which ſinneth, it ſhall dye: Which ſayinge vndoubtedly were falſe if we beleue Pigghius: foraſmuche as children do dye and are guilty of eternall damnation, although they hauehave not ſinned. VntoUnto which abſurdity we are not compelled: which do put in eueryevery man that is born ſinne, and a cauſe why he ſhoulde die and be condemned. Pigghius alſo thinketh it contumelious and blaſphemous againſt God, for that he ſuffreth ſinne to be planted in them that are borne, when as they can do no otherwiſe, but to be borne in ſuche ſorte affected, as we ſée all other menne that are borne to be affected. But let Paul anſwere to this obiection: who in this Epiſtle ſaith: O man what art thou, which anſwereſt vntounto God? Hath not the potter power ouer his clay, to make of one and the ſelfe ſame lompe one veſsel for honor, and an other for contumely? Let Eſay alſo aunſwere: who ſaith, that it is not mete that an erthē pot ſhould diſpute with other erthē pots of the worke of his maker. God is not ſuch a one to be brought into order by our reaſō: which ſhould come to paſſe if we ſhould meaſure his iuſtice by y^e rule of our iudgemēt And foraſmuch as there paſſeth no day, wherin happeneth not ſomwhat in y^e gouernmēt of worldly things which we find fault with & accuſe, & fatiſfieth not our wiſdome, whē then ſhall we confeſſe God to be iuſt? For who can aſſigne a cauſe, why ſo much grace is not geuē vntounto him whiche peariſheth for euer, as is to an other which is ſaued? I know that theſe men are accuſtomed to ſay, that God doth therein no vniuſtice, becauſe he by no law is bound to deſtribute one & the ſelf ſame and equal grace vntounto al men. But vndoubtedly humane prudence will not there ſtay. For it wil complaine and ſaye, that although he be not bound by the preſcripte of mans law: yet by the law of his goodnes he ought to be one and the ſelfe ſame vntounto al men. Farther what humane wiſedome can ſée, what that iuſtice of God is, that ſome are taken away being yet infants and children, that theyr hartes ſhould not be peruerted with malice, and ſo to attain to ſaluation: wheras other are kept ſafe till they come to ripe age, wherin to deſerue vntounto themſelues diſtruction: when as otherwiſe they mought hauehave beneWe oughte to hauehave in reuerence the ſecretes of God and not to correct them. A ſaying of Cato. they had bene taken away in theyr infancy? Here we ought to hauehave in reuerence & to worſhip the ſecretes of the iudgement of God: and not to deſire to correct them, or to amende them, accordynge to the preſcripte of our lawes. Cato beinge an Ethnike when he tooke Pompeius parte, becauſe he iudged it iuſter then Ceſars, at the laſt the victory declining, and Pompey being diſcomfited & put to flight, looked vp to heauen, and cried out, that in thinges deuine there is greate obſcurenes. For he thought it a thing vnworthy, that the prouidēce of God ſhould ſuffer Ceſar to hauehave y^e vpper hād. And I my ſelfe whē I conſider theſe things am much delighted whith Auguſtines anſwere which he vſeth agaynſt the Pelagians, Two argumentes of the Pelagians.when he was in hand with this ſelfe ſame cauſe, which we are now in hand with. For the Pelagians obiected vntounto him two argumentes ſomewhat ſubtle and hard. One was, how it can be, that God, which of his goodnes forgeueth vsus our owne ſinnes, will impute vntounto any other mens ſinnes? An other was, if Adam by originall ſinne condemneth men vnwares, and agaynſt their will, why doth not Chriſt alſo, to y^e ende he might in no part be inferior vntounto Adam, ſaue the vnbeleuers? To theſe thinges Auguſtine anſwereth, what if I were ſo An excellēt ſentence of Auguſtine.dull, that I could not ſtraight way confute theſe reaſons, ſhoulde I therefore geue euer a whit the the les credit vntounto the holy ſcripture? Yea rather it is much more conuenient, for me to acknowledge myne owne rudenes, then to aſcribe vntruth vntounto the holy ſcriptures. But afterward he diſſolueth both the arguments. For to the firſt he anſwereth,God imputeth not to vsus an other mans ſinne but our owne. Chriſt to ſaue his wayteth not for their will. The iuſtice of God hath no nede of our defence. that God is the chiefe good thing, nether doth he (as theſe men alleadge) in originall ſinne impute vntounto vsus an other mans ſinne, but our owne iniquity, which ſticketh vntounto our nature, euen from the very beginning. To the other he ſaith, that Chriſt ſaueth alſo thoſe that are vnwilling: for he wayteth not for them to will, but of his owne accord commeth vntounto ſinners, both vnwilling, and reſiſting. And he alſo bringeth many infants to felicity, which as yet beleue not, neither by reaſon of age can hauehave fayth whereby to beleue. Therefore do I alleage theſe thinges, to ſhewe that it is lawfull for me if I will to vſe the ſame anſwere, which this father vſed firſt, and to ſay vntounto Pigghius: Let vsus ſuffer God to defend himſelfe: he nedeth none of our defence, that he ſhould not be counted vniuſt or cruell. Let vsus beleue the ſcriptures, which crye eueryevery where, that we are borne corrupt and vitiate. Which thing alſo both death and an infinite heape of miſeryes do manifeſtly declare vntounto vsus: which thinges vndoubtedly God would not lay vponupon the childrē of Adam, vnles there were in them ſome ſinne deſeruing puniſhement. But they which diſcend not into themſelues, neither behold their owne nature, how redy it is to all wickednes, thoſe (I ſay) know not what this concupiſence meaneth. Howbeit manyEuen the Ethnikes wondred at the corruption of our nature. of the Ethnike Philoſophers ſaw it. For they do meruayle how in ſo excellent a nature there can be ſo greate wickednes, ſelfe louelove, and deſire of pleaſures. And they ſo acknowledge theſe euils, that they iudged it very nedefull that children ſhould hauehave correction and diſcipline: and to corect this naturall malice they gaue counſell to ſuſtaine labours, and excerciſes, and many other hard and gréeuous thinges. But they ſaw not the cauſe and fountayne of theſeThe Ethnikes ſaw the euil, but vnderſtoode not the fountayne thereof. euils. For that can be perceaued only by the word of God. Farther this Pigghius reaſoneth and ſayth, that this deſire which Auguſtine calleth concupiſence is a worke of nature and of God: and therefore it can not be counted ſinne. But we hauehave before anſwered, that it commeth not from the groundes of nature as it was inſtituted by God, but of nature corrupted. For man, when he was created, was made right, and (and as the ſcripture ſayth) to the Image of God. Adam whē he was created had affectiōs geuē him which were gentle and moderate. Iulianus Pelagians praiſed luſt.Wherefore that deſire of thinges pleaſant and preſeruatiue in Adam, when he was firſt created, was not outragious or vehement, to be againſt right, reaſon, and the word of God: for, that followed afterward. Wherefore we ought not to call it the worke of God (as Pigghius ſayth) but the wickednes of ſinne, and corruption of affections. Wherefore Auguſtine calleth Iulianus the Pelagian an vnſhamfaſt prayſer of concupiſcence. For he (which thing Pigghius alſo doth) commended it as a notable worke of God. Moreouer Pigghius is agaynſt Auguſtine for this cauſe, namely, becauſe he ſayth that concupiſence is ſinne before baptiſme, but after baptiſme he denieth it: when as (ſayth he) the concupiſence is one, and the ſelfe ſame, and God, is the ſelfe ſame, and his lawe the ſelfe ſame. Wherefore he concludeth, that ether it muſt be ſinne in both or els in neither. But here Pigghius excedingly erreth two maner of wayes: firſt becauſeWhat mutation commeth by regeneration. he thinketh, that in regeneration is made no mutation: eſpecially ſeing that he can not deny, but that in it commeth the remedy of Chriſt, and his righteouſnes is applied, and the guiltines taken away. For that God imputeth not that concupiſence which remayneth after regeneration. Moreouer alſo the holy ghoſt is geuen, that the might of concupiſence myght be broken, ſo that although it abide in vsus, yet it ſhoulde not beare rule in vsus. For to thys thynge Paul exhorteth vsus, when he ſayth, Let not ſinne raigne in your mortall body. OnAuguſtine affirmeth that thoſe thinges which remaine after regeneratiō are ſinne. If at any time he deny it to be ſinne, the ſame muſt be vnderſtād as touching the guiltines therof. That luſt is not actuall ſinne. Why original ſinne is called luſt. Whither this ſinne be the wāt of originall righteouſnes. What the ſcholemen vnderſtand by originall righteouſnes. Not eueryevery defect or want maketh the thing euill. the other ſide alſo he is deceaued, in that he ſuppoſeth, that Auguſtine thinketh, that the concupiſence which remayneth after baptiſme, is vtterly no ſinne and eſpecially if it be conſidered alone and by it ſelfe. For by moſt expreſſe wordes he ſayth, that of hys owne nature it is ſinne, becauſe it is diſobedience, againſt which we ought continually to ſtriue. But when he denieth it to be ſinne, the ſame is to be vnderſtand, as touching the guiltines therof: for that is without doubt taken away in regeneration. For ſo it comth to paſſe, that God, although it be in very dede ſinne, doth yet not impute it for ſinne. Farther Augustine, compareth concupiſcence with thoſe ſinnes, are called actuall, & being compared with them it may be ſaid, that it is no ſinne. For it is far from the haynouſnes of them. But I meruaile how Pigghius could be ſo bold to ſay, that Auguſtine without teſtimony of the ſcriptures, affirmeth luſt, to be Originall ſinne, when as he, in his diſputations againſt the Pelagians, doth mightely defend his ſentence by the holye ſcriptures. But why he calleth Originall ſinne concupiſcence, this is the cauſe, for that Originall doth moſt of all declare it ſelfe by the groſſer luſtes of the mynde & of the fleſh. Now I thinke it good to ſée, what other men hauehave thought touchyng this. For beſides this opinion there is alſo an other ſentēce, which is of thoſe, which ſay, that Original ſinne, is the want of Originall iuſtice. Anſelmus was of this opinion in his booke de partu virginis, and he drew many ſcholaſticall authors into this his ſentence. And theſe men by Originall iuſtice vnderſtand nothing elles, then the right conſtitucion of man, when the body obeyeth the ſoule, and the inferiour partes of the ſoule obey the ſuperiour partes, & the mind is ſubiect vntounto God & to his law. In this iuſtice was Adam created: & if he had abode, all we ſhould hauehave liued cōtinually in it. But foraſmuch as he fell, all we are depriued of it. The want of this righteouſnes they affirme to be Originall ſinne. But to make their ſentēce more plaine, they ſay, that not eueryevery defect or want is ſinne or euill. For although a ſtone want iuſtice, yet ſhall not therfore the ſtone be called vniuſt or euill. But when the thing is apte & mete, to receiue that which it wanteth, then ſuch a defect or want is called euill: as it happeneth in the eye, when it is depriued of y^• faculty of ſeing. And yet we do not therfore ſay, y^t in the eye is blame or ſinne: for then cō meth ſinne, when, by reaſon of ſuch a want, followeth a ſtriuing and reſiſtyng againſt the law of God. Pigghius condemneth this ſentence alſo. For he ſaith it isAn obiectiō of Pigghius. no ſinne, if a man kepe not the gift which he hath not receiued. For it may be, that he which is borne hauing his health and being whole of body and limmes, may fal into a diſeaſe, or loſe one of his members, or become maymed: which defectes or wantes, yet there is no man will call faultes or ſinnes: but this ſimilitude ſerueth not to the purpoſe. For a diſeaſe or lamenes of the body ſerueth nothing, eyther to the obſeruyng or violating of the law of God. But that which they call the wante of original iuſtice, bringeth of neceſſitie with it, the breach of the law of God. More ouer he contendeth, y^• the loſſe of originall iuſtice, in children is not ſinne: bicauſe it was not loſt thorough their default, But this agayne is to call God to accompt. But God is foreign: that is, not to be compelled to order, neither ought he to beGod is not to be broght to order. ordered by humaine lawes. But let Pigghius conferre that his opinion wyth thys which he impugneth. This affirmeth that God condemneth vice and corruption, which it putteth to be in children newly borne. But Pigghius maketh children gilty, and condemneth them of that fault and ſinne, which is not in them: But onelyonly is that which Adam our firſt parent committed. For otherwiſe he counteth thoſe children moſt innocent. But whether of theſe is more farre from reaſon, & more abhorreth euen alſo from humane lawes: to puniſh an innocent for an other mās ſinne, or to condemne him, which hath in himſelfe a cauſe why to be condemned? Vndoubtedly they that conſider the thing it ſelfe diligently, will ſay that the ſentence of Anſelmus is for many cauſes better, then this opiniō of Pigghius. For we know that to be true, which Eccleſiaſtes ſaith: namely, That God made man right. The ſentence of Anſelmus better then the opinion of Pigghius.But when he had once ſinned, ſtreight way followed crookednes. For he doth no more now behold God and heauenly thinges: but is perpetually made crooked to earthly and carnall thinges, and is made ſubiect vntounto the neceſſity of concupiſcence. And this is to want Originall iuſtice. For actions or doinges are not taken away from men, but the power to vſe them well is taken away. As we ſée happeneth in thoſe that hauehave the palſey. They do in dede moue the hand, but bicauſe y^• power is hurt, wherby to gouerne that motion, they moue it deformedly, and weakely. This hapneth alſo in vsus. For, foraſmuch as the deuine righteouſnes is wanting in vsus, theA ſimilitude groūd is corrupt, wherby our workes ought to be rightly ordred & accōpliſhed. But (ſaith Pigghius) to want this gift, cannot be ſinne in yong childrē. For they are not bound by any debt or bond to hauehave it. And if the aduerſaries (ſaith he) wil ſay otherwiſe, let them ſhew ſome law, wherby we that are borne are bound. Which thing (ſaith he) ſeing they cannot do, let them ceaſe to ſay, that this wante of Originall iuſtice is ſinne. But we canne alledge not one lawe onelyonly, but alſo thrée lawes The firſt is, the inſtitution of man. God made man after his owne image and ſimilitude.By what law they that are borne are bound to hauehave originall righteouſnes. What is the nature of the image of God. Wherefore we ought to be ſuch. For God doth iuſtly require that in our nature, which he made. And the image of God doth herein chiefly conſiſt, to be endewed with deuine proprieties: namely, with iuſtice, wiſedome, goodnes, and patience. But contrarywiſe Pigghius crieth oute, that this is not the nature of the image of God: for he ſayth that it conſiſteth in vnderſtanding, memory and will: as Auguſtine hath taught in his bookes de Trinitate, and in many other places. Theſe thinges in deede do the Scholemen teach: but we wil proue that the matter is far otherwiſe, both by the ſcriptures, and by the ſentences of the fathers. Firſte in the Epiſtle to y^• Epheſians it is thus written. Put away the old man cōcerning the conuerſatiō in time paſt, which is corrupted though the concupiſcenſes of error: but be renued in the ſpirite of your mind & put on the new mā which after God is created in righteouſnes & holines of truth. And to the Colloſians the 3. chap. Ye hauehave put on the new man, which is renued in knowlege after the image of him that created him. And a little afterwarde,A trimme reaſon concerning the image of God. he expreſſeth y^• cōditions of this image ſaying, Put ye on tēder mercy, goodnes, modesty kindnes, gentlen…s, long ſuffering, forbearing one an other, & forgeuing one an other. And in y^• 8. chap. to the Rom. Thoſe which he foreknew, he alſo hath predestinate to be made like vntounto the image of his ſon. All theſe things ſufficiētly declare, what that image of God is, which the holy ſcriptures ſet forth vntounto vsus, in the creation & inſtauraciō of man. Neither abhorred the fathers from this ſentence. Ireneus in his 5. booke ſaith, that by the powring into vsus of the holy ghoſt, man is made ſpirituall, euen as he was created of God. And Tertullian againſt Marcian ſaith, that that is the image of God, which hath the ſelfe ſame motious and ſenſes with God. And the reaſon which perſwadeth vsus therunto is, that man was therefore at the beginning made like vntounto the image of God, to be ruler ouer all things created, as it were a certaine vicar of God. And no man can doubt, but that God will hauehave his creatures well gouerned. For he continually commaundeth vsus not to abuſe them: and we are bound by a lawe to referre all thoſe thinges, whereby we are holpen, vntounto God, as from whome all things do flow. But the good vſe, and right adminiſtration of thinges, can not be had, vnleſſe we be endued wyth thoſe condicions, whiche we hauehave ſayde are required vntounto the Image of God. But in that Augustine aſſigneth the Image of GOD to bee in the vnderſtandynge, memorye and wyll, wee ſaye that he thereforeAuguſtine is defended The faculties of the minde are the image of God, but not when they are ſpoyled of vertues. The law of nature requireth originall righteouſnes. did it, to ſetforth vntounto vsus ſome form or example of the deuine perſons, in what caſe they are one to an other. But he oughte not ſo to be vnderſtanded, as thoughe he would make theſe faculties of the mind, being naked and ſpoyled of theſe vertues, which we hauehave declared, the image of God. Wherfore we hauehave a law geuen vntounto vsus either by the inſtitution, or by the reſtitutiō of man, which Paul commandeth, and by this bond we are bound to hauehave originall iuſtice, whiche we hauehave loſte. We hauehave alſo the law of nature, & to liue agreably vntounto it (as Cicero ſaith in his 3. booke de finibus) is the principall and laſt end of mans eſtate. And this lawe dependeth of that other law which we before put: For it commeth of no other thinge, that we hauehave in our mind cogitatiōs, accuſing, and defēding on an other, but onelyonly for that they are taken of the worthines of nature, as it was inſtituted of God. For whatſoeuer Philoſophers, or lawgeuers hauehave written of the offices of mannes life, the ſame wholy dependeth of the fountaines of our conſtitution. For thoſe preceptesThe offices of the law of nature ar had of the inſtitution of man. cannot come out of a corrupt nature, out of ſelfe louelove, and malice, whereby we are prone to euil: but they come of that forme of vpright nature, which they imagine is required of the dignity of man, and which we know by the ſcriptures was inſtituted of God, and commaunded of vsus to be renued. And to this pertaineth (as ſome ſay) that law of the mind, againſt which the law of the members reſiſteth. There is alſo a third law, which God would hauehave put in writing: namely, Thou ſhalte not lust. Which precept, although our aduerſaries wreſt vntounto actual ſinnes, yet we wilBy this precept, thou ſhalte not luſt, is condemned the want of originall righteouſnes. Infantes feele not theſe lawes in the 7. chapt. of this Epiſtle declare, that it alſo belongeth to originall ſinne: and that God would by the commaundement hauehave all manner of wicked luſt vtterlye cutte of from men, Wherefore we hauehave now lawes, whyche ſo longe as they be in force, wyll perpetuallye bynde vsus, and make vsus debitors, all our lyfe tyme to performe that ryghteouſnes whyche they require. It is true in déede, that infantes féele not theſe lawes, and by that meanes ſinne lyeth a ſléepe in them as Auguſtine ſayth in his 2. booke of the merites and remiſſion of ſinnes, following y^• which is ſpoken of. Paul ſayth: I liued ſometimes without a law: not y^• there was at any time no law preſcribed vntounto Paul: but bycauſe in his childhode, by reaſō of age, he felt it not. Wherefore ſinne (ſayth Paul) was dead, which Auguſtine interpreteth, was on ſlepe. But when the commaundement came, y^• is, when I began to know y^• law, ſinne reuiued. He had ſin in him before: but foraſmuch as it was not felt, it ſemed dead. Now appeareth how thoſe thinges which we hauehave ſpoken agree with the holye ſcriptures. Yet ſtill Pigghius vrgeth, that theſe thinges nothingAn obiection of Pigghius. pertaine vntounto infantes: for they oughte not to hauehave a law preſcribed vntounto them which can not be auoyded. But in ſo ſaying, he vnderſtandeth not the meaning of the holy ſcriptures: for they ſufficiently declare, that thoſe things whichA law may be geuen euē …or thoſe thinges which can not be performed. are commaunded in the law, can not perfectly be performed of vsus: when as yet they are moſt ſeuerely commaūded. Paul ſaith in this epiſtle, That which was impoſible vntounto the law, foraſmuch as it was weakened through the fleſh, God ſending his ſonne &c. By theſe words it moſt manifeſtly appeareth, that we cānot performe the law, …s it is commaunded. For if we could, we ſhould be iuſtified by works nether had Chriſt neded to hauehave ſuffred death for vsus. There ar alſo other officesVtilities of the law. of the Law, for which it is written. For it is profitable to direct the actions of y^e godly, but it is moſt profitable to declare ſin. For by the law (ſayth Paul) cōeth the knowledg of ſin. Again I was ignorāt of luſt, vnles the law had ſayd, Thou ſhalt not luſt. Farther by the law, ſinne is alſo increaſed, & doth more lead vsus, & greuouſlier oppreſſe vsus. For the law …ed in, that ſin ſhould abound: & to the Corrint. The power of ſin is the law. And al theſe things tēd to this end, y^• mā ſhould as it were by a Scholmaſter be brought vntounto Chriſt, and implore his ayd, and deſire to hauehave ſtrēgth geuen him: whereby at the leaſt in ſome part, and with an obedience now begon to performe thoſe thinges which are commaunded: and that thoſe things wherin he fayleth might not be imputed vntounto him, but might be made whole by the righteouſnes of Chriſt. Auguſtine in his firſt boke againſt Iulianus reproueth theThe pelagians boaſted that God commaundeth not thoſe things which can not be done. Auguſtine reherſeth the ſinnes of infantes. Pelagians, for that they thoughte that they had taught ſome great point of doctrine, when they taughte, that God commaundeth not thoſe thinges, whiche can not be doone: and he declareth thoſe to be the endes of the lawe whiche we hauehave now expreſſed. Yea and Auguſtine alſo in his bookes of confeſſions maketh mencion of thoſe ſinnes, which euen ſuckinge infantes doo committe. Agaynſt which no mā cā ſay they could reſiſt. And they ſhould not be ſins, vnles they wer referred to ſome law, which is by them violated. Nether doth y^• any thing helpe Pigghius, or put away their ſinnes, for that they vnderſtand them not. For that which is filthy, although it ſeme not ſo to vsus, yet of his owne nature is it filthyThinges filthy although they ſeme not filthy yet ar they neuertheleſſe of their owne nature fylthy. The opiniō of Auguſtine and Anſelmus differ not in very deede. The definition of Original ſinne. foreign (as he ſaith) foreign. y^• is, That which is filthy is filthy whither it ſeme ſo or no. This opinion of Anſelmus concerning the lacke and want of originall iuſtice, doth in very dede nothing differre from the ſentence of Auguſtine, wherein he calleth originall ſinne luſte: but that whiche in Anſelmus is ſpoken ſomewhat more expreſſedlye is more obſcurely wrapped in the word concupiſcence. But bycauſe this want of originall iuſtice may ſo be taken, as though we vnderſtoode onelyonly the priuation of the giftes of God, with out any vice of nature, therefore it ſhall be good to ſet forth a more full definition of originall ſinne.

Commentary on Romans, Chapter 5 (3 of 5)